Readings for Ancient Greece 2 -- Unit 11, Delian
League
Table
of Contents 1
Delian League -- Wikipedia
2
Delian League -- Livius 3 Ancient Athens, the Delian
League and Corruption -- From The Logical Place
4 Delos University
of Texas at San Antonio | UTSA
5 Peloponnesian League -- Wikipedia
6 Pericles -- Wikipedia
7 Delos Island
8 From the Delian League to the
Athenian Empire
9 Pausanius -- Spartan General
10 Kimon of Athens
11 Aristides
The Delian
League, founded in 478 BC,[1]
was an association of Greekcity-states, members numbering
between 150[2]
to 173,[3]
under the leadership of Athens, whose purpose was
to continue fighting the Persian Empire after the
Greek victory in the Battle of Plataea at the
end of the Second Persian
invasion of Greece. The League's modern[4]
name derives from its official meeting place, the island
of Delos, where congresses were held in
the temple and where the treasury stood until, in a
symbolic gesture,[5]Pericles moved it to Athens in 454
BC.[6]
Shortly after
its inception, Athens began to use the League's navy for
its own purposes. This behavior frequently led to conflict
between Athens and the less powerful members of the
League. By 431 BC, Athens' heavy-handed control of the
Delian League prompted the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War; the
League was dissolved upon the war's conclusion in 404 BC.
The
Greco-Persian Wars had their roots in the conquest of the
Greek cities of Asia Minor,
and particularly Ionia,
by the Achaemenid Persian Empire
of Cyrus the Great shortly
after 550 BC. The Persians found the Ionians difficult to
rule, eventually settling for sponsoring a tyrant in each Ionian city.[7]
While Greek states had in the past often been ruled by
tyrants, this was a form of arbitrary government that was
on the decline.[8]
By 500 BC, Ionia appears to have been ripe for rebellion
against these Persian clients. The
simmering tension finally broke into open revolt due to
the actions of the tyrant of Miletus, Aristagoras. Attempting to save
himself after a disastrous Persian-sponsored expedition in 499
BC, Aristagoras chose to declare Miletus a democracy.[9]
This triggered similar revolutions across Ionia, extending
to Doris
and Aeolis, beginning the Ionian Revolt.[10]
The Greek states
of Athens and Eretria allowed themselves to be
drawn into this conflict by Aristagoras, and during their
only campaigning season (498 BC) they contributed to the
capture and burning of the Persian regional capital of Sardis.[11]
After this, the Ionian revolt carried on (without further
outside aid) for a further five years, until it was
finally completely crushed by the Persians. However, in a
decision of great historic significance, the Persian king
Darius the
Great decided that, despite successfully subduing
the revolt, there remained the unfinished business of
exacting punishment on Athens and Eretria for supporting
the revolt.[12]
The Ionian revolt had severely threatened the stability of
Darius's empire, and the states of mainland Greece would
continue to threaten that stability unless dealt with.
Darius thus began to contemplate the complete conquest of
Greece, beginning with the destruction of Athens and
Eretria.[12]
In the next two
decades there would be two Persian invasions of Greece,
occasioning, thanks to Greek historians, some of the most
famous battles in history. During the first invasion,
Thrace, Macedon and the
Aegean Islands were added to
the Persian Empire, and Eretria was duly destroyed.[13]
However, the invasion ended in 490 BC with the decisive
Athenian victory at the Battle of Marathon.[14]
Between the two invasions, Darius died, and responsibility
for the war passed to his son Xerxes I.[15]
Xerxes then
personally led a second Persian
invasion of Greece in 480 BC, taking an enormous
(although oft-exaggerated) army and navy to Greece.[16]
Those Greeks who chose to resist (the 'Allies') were
defeated in the twin simultaneous battles of Thermopylae on land
and Artemisium at sea.[17]
All of Greece except the Peloponnesus
thus having fallen into Persian hands, the Persians then
seeking to destroy the Allied navy once and for all,
suffered a decisive defeat at the Battle of Salamis.[18]
The following year, 479 BC, the Allies assembled the
largest Greek army yet seen and defeated the Persian
invasion force at the Battle of Plataea, ending
the invasion and the threat to Greece.[19]
The Allied fleet
defeated the demoralized remnants of the Persian fleet in
the Battle of Mycale— on the
same day as Plataea, according to tradition.[20]
This action marks the end of the Persian invasion, and the
beginning of the next phase in the Greco-Persian wars, the Greek counterattack.[21]
After Mycale, the Greek cities of Asia Minor again
revolted, with the Persians now powerless to stop them.[22]
The Allied fleet then sailed to the Thracian
Chersonese, still held by the Persians, and besieged
and captured the town of Sestos.[23]
The following year, 478 BC, the Allies sent a force to
capture the city of Byzantion
(modern day Istanbul). The siege was
successful, but the behaviour of the Spartan general Pausanias alienated many
of the Allies, and resulted in Pausanias's recall.[24]
Formation
of the League
After Byzantion,
Sparta was eager to end its involvement in the war. The
Spartans were of the view that, with the liberation of
mainland Greece, and the Greek cities of Asia Minor, the
war's purpose had already been reached. There was also
perhaps a feeling that establishing long-term security for
the Asian Greeks would prove impossible.[25]
In the aftermath of Mycale, the Spartan king Leotychides
had proposed transplanting all the Greeks from Asia Minor
to Europe as the only method of permanently freeing them
from Persian dominion.[25]
Xanthippus, the
Athenian commander at Mycale, had furiously rejected this;
the Ionian cities were originally Athenian colonies, and
the Athenians, if no-one else, would protect the Ionians.[25]
This marked the point at which the leadership of the Greek
alliance effectively passed to the Athenians.[25]
With the Spartan withdrawal after Byzantion, the
leadership of the Athenians became explicit.
The loose
alliance of city states which had fought against Xerxes's
invasion had been dominated by Sparta and the Peloponnesian
league. With the withdrawal of these states, a
congress was called on the holy island of Delos
to institute a new alliance to continue the fight against
the Persians; hence the modern designation "Delian
League". According to Thucydides, the official aim of the
League was to "avenge the wrongs they suffered by ravaging
the territory of the king."[26]
In reality, this
goal was divided into three main efforts— to prepare for
future invasion, to seek revenge against Persia, and to
organize a means of dividing spoils of war. The members
were given a choice of either offering armed forces or
paying a tax to the joint treasury; most states chose the
tax.[26]
League members swore to have the same friends and enemies,
and dropped ingots of iron into the sea to symbolize the
permanence of their alliance. The Athenian politician Aristides would spend the rest of
his life occupied in the affairs of the alliance, dying
(according to Plutarch) a few years later in
Pontus, whilst determining what the tax of new members was
to be.[27]
In the first ten
years of the league's existence, Cimon/Kimon
forced Karystos in Euboea to join the league, conquered
the island of Skyros and sent Athenian colonists
there.[28]
Over time,
especially with the suppression of rebellions, Athens
exercised hegemony over the rest of the
league. Thucydides describes how Athens's
control over the League grew:
Of all the
causes of defection, that connected with arrears of
tribute and vessels, and with failure of service, was
the chief; for the Athenians were very severe and
exacting, and made themselves offensive by applying the
screw of necessity to men who were not used to and in
fact not disposed for any continuous labor. In some
other respects the Athenians were not the old popular
rulers they had been at first; and if they had more than
their fair share of service, it was correspondingly easy
for them to reduce any that tried to leave the
confederacy. The Athenians also arranged for the other
members of the league to pay its share of the expense in
money instead of in ships and men, and for this the
subject city-states had themselves to blame, their wish
to get out of giving service making most leave their
homes. Thus while Athens was increasing her navy with
the funds they contributed, a revolt always found itself
without enough resources or experienced leaders for war.[29]
Rebellions
Naxos
The first member
of the league to attempt to secede was the island of Naxos in c.
471 BC. After being defeated, Naxos is believed (based on
similar, later revolts) to have been forced to tear down
its walls, and lost its fleet and its vote in the League.
In 465 BC,
Athens founded the colony of Amphipolis on the Strymon river.
Thasos, a member of the League, saw
her interests in the mines of Mt. Pangaion threatened and
defected from the League to Persia. She called to Sparta
for assistance but was denied, as Sparta was facing the
largest helot revolution in its history.[30]
An aftermath of
the war was that Cimon
was ostracised, and the relations
between Athens and Sparta turned hostile. After a
three-year siege, Thasos was recaptured and forced back
into the League. The siege of Thasos marks the
transformation of the Delian league from an alliance into,
in the words of Thucydides, a hegemony.[31]
After two years
Thasos surrendered to the Athenian leader Cimon. In
result, the fortification walls of Thasos were torn down,
their land and naval ships were confiscated by Athens. The
mines of Thasos were also turned over to Athens, and they
had to pay yearly tribute and fines.
Policies
of the League
In 461 BC, Cimon
was ostracized and was succeeded in
his influence by democrats such as Ephialtes and Pericles. This
signaled a complete change in Athenian foreign policy,
neglecting the alliance with the Spartans and instead
allying with her enemies, Argos
and Thessaly. Megara deserted the Spartan-led Peloponnesian League
and allied herself with Athens, allowing construction of a
double line of walls across the Isthmus of Corinth and
protecting Athens from attack from that quarter. Around
the same time, due to encouragement from influential
speaker Themistocles, the Athenians
also constructed the Long Walls connecting their city
to the Piraeus, its port, making it
effectively invulnerable to attack by land.
In 454 BC, the
Athenian general Pericles moved the Delian League's
treasury from Delos to Athens, allegedly to keep it safe
from Persia. However, Plutarch indicates that many of
Pericles' rivals viewed the transfer to Athens as usurping
monetary resources to fund elaborate building projects.
Athens also switched from accepting ships, men and weapons
as dues from league members, to only accepting money.
The new treasury
established in Athens was used for many purposes, not all
relating to the defence of members of the league. It was
from tribute paid to the league that Pericles set to
building the Parthenon on the Acropolis, replacing an
older temple, as well as many other non-defense related
expenditures. The Delian League was turning from an
alliance into an empire.
War with the
Persians continued. In 460 BC, Egypt
revolted under local leaders the Hellenes called Inaros and Amyrtaeus, who requested aid from
Athens. Pericles led 250 ships, originally intended to
attack Cyprus, to their aid because it would
further damage Persia. After four years, however, the
Egyptian rebellion was defeated by the Achaemenid general
Megabyzus, who captured the
greater part of the Athenian forces. In fact, according to
Isocrates, the Athenians and their allies lost some 20,000
men in the expedition. The remainder escaped to Cyrene and thence returned
home.
This was the
Athenians' main (public) reason for moving the treasury of
the League from Delos to Athens, further consolidating
their control over the League. The Persians followed up
their victory by sending a fleet to re-establish their
control over Cyprus, and 200 ships were sent out
to counter them under Cimon,
who returned from ostracism in 451 BC. He died
during the blockade of Citium, though
the fleet won a double victory by land and sea over the
Persians off Salamis, Cyprus.
This battle was
the last major one fought against the Persians. Many
writers report that a peace treaty, known as the Peace of Callias, was
formalized in 450 BC, but some writers believe that the
treaty was a myth created later to inflate the stature of
Athens. However, an understanding was definitely reached,
enabling the Athenians to focus their attention on events
in Greece proper.
Wars in Greece
Soon, war with the
Peloponnesians broke out. In 458 BC, the Athenians
blockaded the island of Aegina, and simultaneously defended
Megara from the Corinthians by sending out an army
composed of those too young or old for regular military
service. The following year, Sparta sent an army into Boeotia, reviving the power of Thebes
in order to help hold the Athenians in check. Their return
was blocked, and they resolved to march on Athens, where
the Long Walls were not yet completed, winning a victory
at the Battle of Tanagra.
All this accomplished, however, was to allow them to
return home via the Megarid. Two months later, the
Athenians under Myronides invaded Boeotia, and
winning the Battle of Oenophyta
gained control of the whole country except Thebes.
Reverses
followed peace with Persia in 449 BC. The Battle of Coronea,
in 447 BC, led to the abandonment of Boeotia. Euboea and Megara both revolted, and
while the former was restored to its status as a tributary
ally, the latter was a permanent loss. The Delian and
Peloponnesian Leagues signed a peace treaty, which was set
to endure for thirty years. It only lasted until 431 BC,
when the Peloponnesian War broke
out.
Those who
revolted unsuccessfully during the war saw the example
made of the Mytilenians, the principal people
on Lesbos. After an unsuccessful revolt,
the Athenians ordered the death of the entire male
population. After some thought, they rescinded this order,
and only put to death the leading 1000 ringleaders of the
revolt, and redistributed the land of the entire island to
Athenian shareholders, who were sent out to reside on
Lesbos.
This type of
treatment was not reserved solely for those who revolted.
Thucydides documents the example of Melos, a small island, neutral
in the war, though originally founded by Spartans. The
Melians were offered a choice to join the Athenians, or be
conquered. Choosing to resist, their town was besieged and
conquered; the males were put to death and the women sold
into slavery (see Melian
dialogue).
The
Athenian Empire (454–404 BC)
By 454, the
Delian League could be fairly characterized as an Athenian
Empire; at the start of the Peloponnesian War, only Chios
and Lesbos were left to contribute ships,
and these states were by now far too weak to secede
without support. Lesbos tried to revolt first, and failed
completely. Chios, the greatest and most powerful of the
original members of the Delian League save Athens, was the
last to revolt, and in the aftermath of the Syracusan
Expedition enjoyed success for several years,
inspiring all of Ionia
to revolt. Athens was eventually still able to suppress
these revolts.
To further
strengthen Athens' grip on its empire, Pericles in 450 BC
began a policy of establishing cleruchiai— quasi-colonies
that remained tied to Athens and which served as garrisons
to maintain control of the League's vast territory.
Furthermore, Pericles employed a number of offices to
maintain Athens' empire: proxenoi, who fostered good
relations between Athens and League members; episkopoi
and archontes,
who oversaw the collection of tribute; and hellenotamiai,
who received the tribute on Athens' behalf.
Athens' empire
was not very stable and after only 27 years of war, the
Spartans, aided by the Persians and internal strife, were
able to defeat it. However, it did not remain defeated
long. The Second Athenian Empire,
a maritime self-defense league, was founded in 377 BC and
was led by Athens. Athens would never recover the full
extent of her power, and her enemies were now far stronger
and more varied.
Martin,
Thomas (2001-08-11). Ancient Greece: From
Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times. Yale University
Press. ISBN978-0-300-08493-1.
TheComplete
Idiot's Guide to Ancient Greece By Eric D. Nelson,
Susan K. Allard-Nelson, Susan K. Allard-Nelson. Page
197.
Streams of
Civilization: Earliest Times to the Discovery of the
New World By Mary Stanton, Albert Hyma. Page 125
A history of
the classical Greek world: 478-323 BC By Peter John
Rhodes Page
18ISBN
1-4051-9286-0 (2006) In ancient sources, there
is no special designation for the league and its
members as a group are simply referred to with phrases
along the lines of "the Athenians and their allies".
See Artz, James. 2008. The Effect of Natural Resources
on Fifth Century Athenian Foreign Policy and the
Development of the Athenian Empire. Saarbrücken, VDM
Verlag. P.2
Eva C. Keuls, The
Reign of the Phallus: Sexual Politics in Ancient
Athens (Berkeley: University of California
Press) 1985:18.
Jack Martin
Balcer (ed.): Studien zum Attischen Seebund.
Konstanz 1984.
Ryan Balot:
The Freedom to Rule: Athenian Imperialism and
Democratic Masculinity. In: David Edward
Tabachnick - Toivo Koivukoski (eds.): Enduring
Empire. Ancient Lessons for Global Politics.
London 2009, pp. 54–68.
Christian Meier:
Athen. Ein Neubeginn der Weltgeschichte. Munich
1995.
Russell
Meiggs: The Athenian empire. Repr., with corr.
Oxford 1979.
Delian
League: modern name of the Athenian
alliance, founded after the Persian Wars as a military
organization directed against the Achaemenid
Empire, but converted by the Athenian politician
Pericles
into an Athenian empire. The Spartans launched the Peloponnesian
War (431-404) to force the Athenians to give up
the Delian League.
Origin
Map of the Delian
League
In 480, the
Persian king Xerxes
invaded Greece, defeated his enemies at Artemisium
and Thermopylae,
and sacked Athens.
Although his navy was severely damaged in the naval
battle of Salamis,
it was obvious that the Persians were the strongest. So,
the great king recalled many troops. This gave the
Greeks the breathing space they needed, and they
defeated Xerxes' right-hand man Mardonius
at Plataea.
More or less at the same time, a Greek expeditionary
force attacked the remains of the Persian navy at Mycale,
and started to liberate the Greek towns in Asia Minor.
In 478, the
Spartan prince Pausanias
led a Greek expeditionary force to Byzantium.
If he would take the city, the Greeks would control the
Bosphorus
and could keep the Persians out of Europe. However,
Pausanias lost authority when rumors were spread that he
wanted to collaborate with the satrap
of nearby Hellespontine
Phrygia, Artabazus.
He was recalled by the Spartan authorities, and the
Athenian Aristides, who may have been behind the rumors,
took over the command of the Greek army.
Although
Pausanias was cleared of all accusations, the Spartans
now decided to remain outside the war against Persia.
For Sparta, the main war aims had been reached now that
a cordon sanitaire had been created in Asia
Minor. If the Persians wanted to return to Europe, they
first had to occupy the towns of the liberated Ionian
Greeks. The Athenians had a different perspective. They
felt related to the Ionians, and in their view, security
could only be reached when their compatriots were safe
as well. Therefore, they continued the struggle and
founded the Delian League.
From the very
first beginning, there appears to have been an element
of rivalry with Sparta, as is suggested by the author of
the Constitution of the Athenians, a little
treatise that is (probably incorrectly) attributed to Aristotle
of Stagira:
Aristides
saw that the Spartans had gained a bad reputation
because of Pausanias and urged the Ionians to break away
from the Spartan alliance. For that reason it was he who
made the first assessment of the tribute of the cities,
in the third year after the battle of Salamis, in the
archonship of Timosthenes, and who swore the oaths to
the Ionians that they should have the same enemies and
friends, to confirm which they sank lumps of iron in the
sea.note
This is an
interesting quote. It does not refer to Persia, as we
should have expected. It is also absent from the History
of the Peloponnesian War by the Athenian historian
Thucydides,
who says that the war against the Persians was just a
pretext. It appears that from the very beginning, the
allies wanted more: the Delian League, as it is called,
was a pact of mutual assistance against all
possible enemies, and this implied Sparta and the Peloponnesian
League. In fact, the members were embarking upon
something bigger and perhaps their alliance should be
called "the Ionian League".
In any case,
the Ionian card was played. The oaths were sworn at
Delos, the little island on which the Ionian Greeks
venerated the god Apollo. (Dorians preferred Delphi.)
Delos also was to be the treasury, and the Ionians
recognized Athens as metropolis, a word that can
be translated as "mother city" and was often used to
describe the native country of the founder of a colony.
The metropolis always had some informal, religious (and
sometimes even formal, political) rights in the
"daughter city". For example, centuries after Potideia
had been founded by Corinth, the Corinthians still sent
magistrates to their colony.
The creation
of "Ionianism" was the most important aspect of the
Delian League, and the more formal conditions of
membership were not very elaborate. The allies were to
have the same enemies, were to refrain from violence
against each other, took a seat in the League's council,
and had to take a share in the common wars. The
strongest allies provided ships; towns that were unable
to maintain ships provided the Athenians with money, so
that they could build extra ships and protect them. This
was an attractive option, because Athens demanded less
money than the towns would have spent on their own
defense. (This was the phoros, a word translated
as "tribute" in the quotation above.)
Inspiration
Paying tribute
was a novelty. The Spartan alliance, the Peloponnesian
League, did not ask money, only soldiers, and we hear
nothing about financial contributions in other Greek
political (con)federations. However, they were all
land-based, and the Athenian alliance was not. Maritime
political organizations demand another kind of
organization.
We must not
underestimate the originality of the new alliance, but
neither must we close our eyes for the fact that there
was a well-known example: the western part of the Achaemenid
empire, with its maritime lines of communication
and active navy, must have been an important source of
inspiration. The system of financial tribute had been
designed by king Darius
I the Great (522-486), who understood that his
kingdom was too large to ask only soldiers and presents
from his subjects. To control the western territories --
Libya, Egypt, Phoenicia, Cilicia,
Cyprus, Lycia,
Caria,
Ionia -- he needed a fleet, and to pay the rowers, he
needed cash. The result was the monetarization of the
tribute.
There are
other parallels between the Persian empire and the
Delian League. The crews of the galleys of the Persian
navy were from various parts of the empire, and in fact,
for many towns on Cyprus and in Phoenicia, manning ships
was a way to earn the money they needed to pay the
tribute. The Athenians did the same: their ships were
partly manned by the allies, who received fair wages,
spent their money at home, where the authorities
obtained their share and paid tribute.
Another aspect
that the Athenians copied from the Persians was the
appointment of an overseer, the episcopus. This
Athenian magistrate kept an eye on the town where he
resided, controlled the payment of the tributes, was
supposed to prevent insurrections, had to investigate
evils, and reported them to the government at home. The
Achaemenid model is the "eye
of the king". He was appointed by the king to
inform him of what was going on in the empire, had more
powers than the satraps, was responsible for a
well-defined region, supervised the policy of the
satraps and the payment of tribute, oversaw how
rebellions were suppressed, and reported evils to the
king. The Persian title of this official is unknown, but
may have been spasaka ("seer"). If so, episkopos
(which also has an association with "to see") is a
translation that remains close to the sound of the
original.
It is also
interesting to take a look at the division of the League
into five fiscal districts:
Thrace
(the northern Aegean): 62 towns, of which Ainos,
Argilos, Mende, Potideia, Samothrace, Scione,
Sermylia, Strepsa, Thasos, and Torone paid more than
five talents.
Hellespont:
45 towns, Abydus,
Byzantium, Chalkedon, the Chersonese, Cyzicus,
Lampsacus, Perinthus, and Selymbria paying more than
five talents.
Ionia
(the eastern Aegean): 35 towns, including Cyme, Ephesus,
Erythrae, Miletus,
and Teos.
Caria:
81 towns, including Camirus, Cnidus, Cos, Ialysus,
Lindus, Phaselis, and Telmessus.
and the islands:
29 towns, including Andros, Carystus, Chalcis,
Eretria, Naxos, and Paros.
Thrace, the
Hellespont, Ionia, Caria, and the Greek islands are not
self-defined areas. There's no natural border between
Thrace and the Hellespont or between Caria and Ionia,
nor are these districts ethnic unities. However, they
neatly correspond with five units that were
distinguished by the Persian government: Skudra,
Hellespontine Phrygia, the Yaunâ
on this side of the sea, Karka, and the Yaûna
across the sea.
Development
As long as a
Persian attack remained possible, the members of the
League had good reasons to remain united, but king
Xerxes accepted the loss of peripheral countries that
were too expensive to occupy. Instead, he preferred to
consolidate his grip on rich satrapies like Babylonia
and Lydia. Already in 472, when the Athenian playwright
Aeschylus
wrote his tragedy The Persians, it was believed
that the Greeks had won the war and that the battle of
Salamis had been decisive. If it had not been clear from
the very beginning that the Delian League was not only
directed against Persia, it must have been recognized in
the late 470's.
Naxos and
Carystus were the first to segregate, but were visited
by the Athenian navy and forced into surrender (470).
Five years later, Thasos suffered the same fate. There
were other insurrections in the course of the next
decades. The defeated towns were forced to remain in the
League and if they had not been democratic yet, they
were obliged to change their constitution. On several
places, Athenian colonies (clerurchies) were
founded. Defeated towns also lost some autonomy, had to
disband their navies, and were to pay tribute in cash.
The last-mentioned measure made a second revolt almost
impossible, because the defeated town that was dreaming
of an insurrection was actually paying the army that
would come to suppress the rebellion.
Slowly, Athens
was converting the league into an empire. In 461, war
broke out with Sparta, a conflict that almost naturally
implied an ideological struggle between Ionianism and
Dorianism, concepts that focused on leadership by Athens
and Sparta. At the same time, the Delian League
supported Inarus, an Egyptian who led a revolt against
the Persians. The League lost an expeditionary force,
and the Athenians immediately said that in this crisis,
the treasury should be removed from the little island of
Delos to a stronger citadel - the acropolis of Athens.
In 446, Athens
and Sparta signed a peace treaty, and recognized each
other as leaders of an alliance. (Perhaps the Athenians
had signed a similar treaty with the Persian king in
449.) After this, the Athenians started to speak about
"the cities which the Athenians rule". The transition of
the League from a mutual defense organization into an
empire was complete, and in the next ten years, we see
an increasing Athenian involvement in local affairs.
Trials involving an Athenian were to be held in Athens,
the Athenians controlled the economy of the member
states, represented them in negotiations with Sparta or
Persia, and felt free to use the tribute for its own
purposes. The splendid Parthenon temple, with its
remarkable Ionian influences, is but one example to
illustrate that Athens behaved like an imperialistic
power that felt free to use war contributions for other
purposes.
By the 430's,
the Athenian empire had become very unpopular. The Greek
historian Herodotus
of Halicarnassus, who described the Persian War,
felt that he had to apologize for saying that the
Athenians had once defeated the Persians. The
implication is that by then, it was widely believed that
Sparta alone had defended Greek liberty, and that Athens
had become an oppressor like Persia. It was in this
climate that the Corinthians convinced the Spartans that
they had to liberate the Greeks for the second time. In
the spring of 431, the Archidamian
War broke out, in which Sparta, Corinth, and
Thebes tried to force Athens to give up the Delian
League.
This
Livius page was created in 2005; last modified on
4 August 2015.
After the final defeat of the Persians in the
mid-fifth century BCE, the Delian League was gradually
transformed into an Athenian empire. The
transformation was accompanied by an accumulation of power
over other city states by Athens; associated with certain
claims of political corruption. This essay describes
the transformation process, how Athenians justified it,
and how they responded to the claims of corruption.
It also examines the claims in terms of the different
ancient and modern perspectives of corruption.
Formation of the
Delian League
A coalition of
Greek city states defeated the Persians at Salamis in 480
BCE and at Plataea in 479 BCE, led by Athens and Sparta
respectively (Martin 2000, 104). Following these
victories, there was a brief attempt to continue a broad
coalition, including both Athens and Sparta, as a naval
operation to drive out Persian outposts in far northern
Greece and Ionia. However, there was strong
criticism of the arrogant behaviour of the Spartan
commander, Pausanias, and in 477 BCE he was replaced by an
Athenian commander, Aristides (Martin 2000, 106; Roberts
2005, 207; Hornblower 2002, 10). According to
Thucydides, the Spartans wanted to be rid of the war
against the Persians, and they were satisfied of the
competency and friendship of the Athenians (Thucydides
1.96).
Thucydides then
describes how Athens formed a new anti-Persian alliance
(known as the ‘Delian League’ in modern descriptions):
“The
Athenians having thus succeeded to the supremacy by
the voluntary act of the allies through their hatred
of Pausanias, determined which cities were to
contribute money against the barbarian, and which
ships;…Now was the time that the office of ‘Treasurers
for Hellas’ was first instituted by the Athenians.
These officers received the tribute, as the money
contributed was called. The tribute was first fixed at
four hundred and sixty talents. The common treasury
was at Delos, and the congresses were held in the
temple.”
The Aegean
island of Delos was chosen because it was an ancient
religious meeting place, it was centrally located, easy to
defend and too small to pose a threat in itself (Bowra
1971, 26). The member states of the Delian League
were predominately those most exposed to Persian attack,
located in northern Greece, Ionia and the islands of the
Aegean Sea (Martin 2000, 106; Hammond 1967, 256; Bury
1963, 328; Waterfield 2004, 89). They swore a solemn
oath never to desert the alliance (Martin 2000, 106); and
to have the same friends and enemies (Aristotle 23, 4-5).
However, League policy was executed by an Athenian
high command that also controlled the Treasury, thus
concentrating power in Athenian hands from the outset
(Pomeroy et al 1999, 205).
View of Delos today
Transformation
to Athenian Empire
There was a
gradual process of transformation from a voluntary mutual
defence pact into an Athenian empire. Although each
member state in theory had only one vote, in practice
Athens exerted the major influence in the League (Roberts
2005, 207-208; Hammond 1967, 257). An Athenian
general commanded every military expedition (Roberts 1998,
88). Over time, more and more member states
contributed money rather than warships. Athens had
superior shipyards and skilled workers to build triremes
in large numbers, as well as a large population of thetes
willing to serve as rowers. However, this also meant
that rebellious member states such as Thasos, Naxos and
Mytilene were unable to defend themselves against naval
attack by Athens (Martin 2000, 107). There is no
evidence that Athens consulted other members of the League
in suppressing rebellions (Waterfield 2004; 90).
The Battle of
Eurymedon in either 469 or 466 BCE was an important final
victory for the Delian League over the Persians; and which
left Athens free to build its empire (Bury 1963, 338; Bury
and Meiggs 1975, 210; Finley 1981, 43). To keep
Athens’ other enemies out of the field during the
dangerous process of establishing the empire, cleruchies
(external Athenian colonies) were established (Hammond
1967, 306; Lendering undated).
In 454 BCE the
League’s treasury was relocated from Delos to Athens.
Ostensibly, this was for security from Persians and
pirates; but Delos was probably at no more at risk than
previously. This event marks a turning point at which many
historians stop referring to the Delian League (Pomeroy et
al 1999, 214). Athenians themselves began using the
phrase ‘the cities which the Athenians rule’ in their
inscriptions (Hornblower 2002, 17). After the
Kallias Peace Treaty with Persia in 450 BCE, the removal
of the original justification for the League completed
this transformation process (Roberts 2005, 208). Yet
the allied tributes continued to be ruthlessly extorted by
Athenian warships (Wartenberg 1995, 19; de Bois and van
der Spek 2008, 93). Athens was also motivated by the
necessity of securing a reliable source of grain from the
Black Sea area (Waterfield 2004, 92). The Athenian
Empire at this stage included most of the islands of the
Aegean (except for Crete, Melos and Thera), plus of the
cities on or near the coast of mainland Greece (Bury and
Meiggs 1975, 211). The League’s territory had become
Athenian territory. Athenian colonies had become
military bases (de Blois and van der Spek 2008, 93).
Between 450 and
447, Athens made the use of Athenian silver coins and
weights mandatory (Meiggs and Lewis 1969, 45; Bury 1963,
366) which further infringed the autonomy of the allies
(Hammond 1967, 306). The single currency made
commercial transaction easier, especially for Athens, and
reinforced perceptions of Athenian dominance over a
uniform culture (Wartenberg 1995, 27; Waterfield 2004,
93). Athenians may also have hoped make money from
fees charged for reminting non-Athenian coins (Wartenberg
1995, 27). Athens also controlled shipments of corn,
ostensibly to prevent it from being supplied to the
Peloponnese (Finley 1981, 57; Hornblower 2002, 16).
Trials involving an Athenian had to be held in Athens
(Lendering undated); and foreign defendants in law cases
were obliged to come to Athens (Hornblower 2002,
16). These assertions of Athenian power over her
allies, coupled with her interference in their affairs,
constitute clear evidence of her imperialism (French 1971,
99); although imperialism does not in itself constitute
corruption, as will be discussed later.
In the winter of
446-445, the Athenian leader Perikles engineered the ‘Thirty
Years Peace’ treaty with Sparta, which although it lasted
only until 432, did bring peace between Athens and Sparta,
and preserved Athenian dominance of its empire (Martin
2000, 115). Meetings of the Delian League ceased
around 435, by which time they had become nonsensical
(Waterfield 2004, 92).
Athenian
justification for empire
The whole idea
of domination and empire ran counter to the ingrained
Greek ideals of autonomy and self-sufficiency; and also to
the Olympic ideal of the equality of city states
(Waterfield 2004, 90). Athenian domination aroused
great resentment in other Greek city states, including
Sparta (Lendering undated).
On the other
hand, the Athenian Empire did bring benefits to some of
the poorer states. There was security from further
Persian attack; and piracy was suppressed to the great
advantage of trade (Hornblower 2002, 17). The Ionians
recognised Athens as their metropolis or colonial
mother-city (Hornblower 2002, 13). The Athenian navy
provided well-paid employment opportunities to the
islander population (Roberts 2005, 208). The
cessation of war against Persia would otherwise have
confronted Athens with a considerable problem of
unemployment (Burn 1948, 98).
Expenditure was
incurred by Athens as head of the empire in building and
maintaining ships and fortifications, paying military
wages and supporting war-orphans. During peacetime,
there was a large excess of imperial income over
expenditure, but in wartime the balance was reversed
(Hammond 1967, 326). There were also efficiency
gains from economies of scale: the maintenance of a
permanent navy would have been too costly for Athens alone
(Roberts 1998, 95); and Athens demanded less money that
the city states would have spent on their own defence
(Lendering undated).
The presence in
Athens of large numbers of slaves was a constant reminder
that only Athenian naval and military power stood between
its citizens and a similar fate. The chasm between
slave-owners and slaves was so wide as to explain the
attitudes of Athenians towards their subject allies
(Roberts 1998, 39). Athenians maximised their own
freedom by restricting the freedom of other Greeks
(Roberts 1998, 85).
In his Last
Speech (Thucydides 2.63.1), Perikles warned Athenians
against giving up its empire:
“Again,
your country has a right to your services in
sustaining the glories of her position. These are a
common source of pride to you all, and you cannot
decline the burdens of empire and still expect to
share its honours. You should remember that what you
are fighting against is not mere slavery as an
exchange for independence, but also the loss of empire
and danger from the animosities incurred in its
exercise.”
In Greek
thought, power was one of the prime sources of glory
(Roberts 1998, 85). According to Thucydides,
(Thucydides 2.64.3) Perikles said:
“…even if
now, in obedience to the general law of decay, we
should ever be forced to yield, still it will be
remembered that we held rule over more Hellenes than
any other Hellenic state, that we sustained the
greatest wars against their united or separate powers,
and inhabited a city unrivalled by any other in
resources or magnitude.”
Corruption
Lord Acton’s
famous quotation ‘Power tends to corrupt, and absolute
power corrupts absolutely’ (Dalberg-Acton 1907) is
obviously referring to political corruption. Most
modern definitions of political corruption tend to
emphasise the subversion of the public good by private
interest (Bratsis 2003, 8-9). Imperialism in itself
is generally seen as an act of state rather than as
political corruption. We also need to consider the
temporal context: that which may be considered corruption
today may not have been regarded as corruption in ancient
times.
The initial
financial arrangements of the Delian League were equitably
worked out by Aristedes and incorporated in a formal
agreement to avoid disputes later (French 1971, 79).
There was also a general move towards financial
accountability in Athenian affairs by better record
keeping (Thomas 1994, 48-49).
During wartime,
allied tributes were primarily spent on shipbuilding and
other military purposes (Hammond 1967, 326).
However, during the peacetime surpluses of League revenue
over expenditure, Athens tended to use allied tributes for
its own purposes. Perikles built popular support for
this by practical measures such the rebuilding of the
Akropolis, the improvement of state festivals, the payment
of trireme crews for eight months of the year, the
establishment of cleruchies and colonies (Hammond 1967,
312) and the payment of jurors (Aristotle, 27).
From a reading
of the literature related to the fifth century Athenian
empire, there appear to be two main claims of possible
corruption:
the use of
League tributes funds for solely Athenian purposes, for
example the rebuilding of the Akropolis; and
the
acquisition of confiscated land and property by private
Athenian citizens.
Neither of these
activities would be possible without the power accumulated
by Athens in converting the Delian League into its own
empire. So there is an implied connection here
between power and corruption. I will now examine
these two claims of corruption in more detail.
Firstly, the
conservative aristocratic politician Thucydides, son of
Melesias (not Thucydides the historian) censured the
transfer of the allied treasury to Athens and the use of
the money to extravagantly adorn the city of Athens
(Hammond 1967, 312). According to Plutarch, the
people in the assemblies cried out:
“The
people has lost its fair fame and is in ill repute
because it has removed the public moneys of the
Hellenes from Delos into its own keeping, and that
seemliest of all excuses which it had to urge against
its accusers, to wit, that out of fear of the
Barbarians it took the public funds from that sacred
isle and was now guarding them in a stronghold, of
this Pericles has robbed it. And surely Hellas is
insulted with a dire insult and manifestly subjected
to tyranny when she sees that, with her own enforced
contributions the war, we are gilding and bedizening
our city, which, for all the world like a wanton
woman, adds to her wardrobe precious stones and costly
statues and temples worth their millions.”
Although the
tribute money was used for public rather than private
purposes, such trenchant criticism can be interpreted as
implying a form of corruption, in the sense of misuse of
the money for purposes other than originally intended.
According to
Plutarch, Perikles responded to this criticism by
proposing to reimburse the city for all the expenses from
his private property, under the term that he would make
the inscriptions of dedication in his own name (Plutarch
14). Perikles also defended the use of the tribute
money by Athens (Plutarch 12.3) as a ‘fee for service’:
“For his
part, Pericles would instruct the people that it owed
no account of their moneys to the allies provided it
carried on the war for them and kept off the
Barbarians; ‘not a horse do they furnish,’ said he,
‘not a ship, not a hoplite, but money simply; and this
belongs, not to those who give it, but to those who
take it, if only they furnish that for which they take
it in pay. And it is but meet that the city, when once
she is sufficiently equipped with all that is
necessary for prosecuting the war, should apply her
abundance to such works as, by their completion, will
bring her everlasting glory…”
So according to
the standards of the time, it was debateable whether
Athenian use of allied tribute funds constituted
corruption. There were arguments for and against, as
illustrated by those of Thucydides, son of Melesias, and
Perikles. But in modern times, if for example
Belgium started using NATO contributions for public
buildings in Brussels, that would almost certainly be
viewed as corruption.
Secondly, land
and property confiscated after the defeat of rebel states
were often allocated to landless Athenian citizens as
colonists in the defeated territory. Finley
estimates that around 10,000 Athenian citizens may have
benefited from this practice (Finley 1981, 51).
Finley appears to regard these private allocations of
property as a form of corruption (Finley 1981, 53).
Whilst this would probably be regarded as corruption in
modern times, it is doubtful whether it would have been
regarded as corruption in ancient times, given the common
practice after a battle victory against a city of killing
the men, consigning the women and children to slavery and
confiscating land and property. These would have
been viewed as legitimate acts of the victor rather than
as corruption.
In conclusion,
although the use of allied funds and confiscated property
for Athenian purposes may be viewed as corruption by
modern day standards, it was not necessarily seen as
corruption by the standards of the time.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Ancient Sources
Aristotle, Constitution
of Athens, trans. F.G. Kenyon. R.W.J. Clayton
(ed.) Athenian Politics, 1973 London Association
of Classical Teachers: The Classical Association, London.
Available-: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/athenian_const.html Accessed
24 May 2012
Plutarch, The
Life of Pericles in The Parallel Lives by Plutarch
published in Vol. III of the Loeb Classical Library
edition,1916. Available-:
Thucydides, A
Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War, R.B.
Strassler (ed), The Landmark Thucydides, Free
Press, New York, 1996.
Modern Sources
Bowra,
C.M., 1971 Periclean Athens,
The Dial Press, New York.
Bratsis,
P., 2003 Corrupt Compared to
What? Greece, Capitalist Interests, and the Specular
Purity of the State Discussion Paper No. 8, The
Hellenic Observatory/The European Institute, London School
of Economics and Political Science
Burn,
A.R., 1948 Pericles and Athens
The English Universities Press Ltd, London.
Bury,
J.B., 1963 A History of Greece,
Macmillan, London and New York.
Bury, J.B., and
Meiggs, R., 1975 A History of
Greece 4thedition, Macmillan, London and
New York.
Dalberg-Acton,
J.E.E. (Lord Acton)., 1907
Appendix, in J. N. Figgis and R. V. Laurenceeds,
Historical Essays and Studies, Macmillan, London.
Available-: http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/2201/203934
accessed 23 May 2012.
de Blois, L. and
van der Spek, R.J., 2008 An
Introduction to the Ancient World (2nd
edition) Routledge, London and New York.
French,
A., 1971 The Athenian
Half-Century 478-431 BC Thucydides i 89-118
Translation and Commentary, Sydney University Press,
Sydney.
Finley,
M.I., 1953 Economy and Society
in Ancient Greece, Chatto & Windus, London.
Hammond,
N.G.L., 1967 A History of
Greece (2nd edition), Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Hornblower,
S., 2002 Chapter 2, The beginnings
of the Delian League , in The Greek World 479-323,
9-17.
Lendering,
J., Undated
Delian League. Ancient Warfare Magazine.
Available-:
Martin, T.
R., 2000 Ancient Greece – From
Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times, Yale University
Press, New Haven and London.
Meiggs, R. and
Lewis, D. eds, 1969 A Selection of
Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth
Century BC: To the End of the Fifth Century B.C. Vol 1
Oxford University Press, New York.
Pomeroy, S.B.,
Donlan, W., Burstein, S.M., and Roberts,
J.T., 1990 Ancient Greece – A
Political, Social and Cultural History Oxford
University Press, New York.
Roberts, J.,
(ed) 2005 Oxford Dictionary of
the Classical World, Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Roberts,
J.W., 1998 City of Sokrates: An
Introduction to Classical Athens (2nd
edition), Routledge, London.
Thomas,
R. 1994 Literacy and the city-state
in archaic and classical Greece, in A.K. Bowman and G.
Woolf (eds), Literacy and Power in the Ancient World.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wartenberg,
U. 1995 Chapter 3, After
Marathon: war, society and money in fifth-century
Athens, British Museum Press, London.
Waterfield,
R., 2004 Athens – A History,
Macmillan, London, Basingstoke and Oxford.
4 Delos From Roadrunners Guide
To the Ancient World (University
of Texas at San Antonio | UTSA) http://roadrunnersguidetotheancientworld.com/delos/ Delos is one of the most important
mythological, historical and archaeological sites in
Greece. Delos had a position as a holy sanctuary, as
well as the distinction of being the birthplace of
Apollo and Artemis. As the myth goes, Leto had lain with Zeus, and
became pregnant with his children, as was often the case
in Greek Mythology. Hera, in her jealous nature,
punished Leto by forcing her to wonder the world
searching for a safe place to give birth to her
children, Artemis and Apollo. Leto finally settled on
Delos. c.f., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GR_Delos.PNG According to
archaeologists and ancient scholars, Delos has been
inhabited since the 3rd millennium BC (Kent 1948).
Thucydides (2004) identifies the original inhabitants as
piratical Carians who were eventually expelled by King Minos
of Crete. Delos was a major cult center, acquiring
Panhellenic religious significance, and becoming a site for
religious pilgrimage (Kent 1948). The greatest influences
for the general public to travel were: tourism and
pilgrimage. The city of Delos served both as a tourist
attraction and a sacred city. It would be the equivalent of
Mecca in modern day. Since the city of Delos was once open
to the public, everyone would travel and leave offerings,
and wealth, at this famous sanctuary. Eventually, Delos
became much more exclusive, yet remained a very wealthy
city. It had the three largest temples dedicated to Apollo,
all on the same small island (Kent 1948). This island became
an unbelievable source for revenue from the tourism and
pilgrimages made to the temples on Delos, the abundance of
natural resource, and the distinction of this site as the
center of the Delian League (Kent 1948). It was for these
reasons that the entire city was purged and purified. During
the Peloponnesian War, it became a law that no one was
allowed to die or give birth on the island (Thucydides
2004). All dead bodies were removed as well (Thucydides
2004). This would protect the sanctity of the site and
preserve its neutrality, since the island became the
treasury of Greece in the Peloponnesian Wars (Thucydides
2004). During the Peloponnesian War, the city saw an
enormous amount of revenue, although there are no clear
records as to just how much (Kent 1948). After the Persian
Wars, the island became the center for the Delian League,
founded in 478 BC (Trumper 2009). The League’s treasury was
kept at Delos until 454 BC when Pericles had the treasury
moved to Athens for safekeeping (Trumper 2009). The island,
despite being abundant in natural resources, produced no
finished goods. However there were multiple agoras, or
marketplaces on the island (Trumper 2009). It became the
center of the slave trade, due in large part to the Italian
traders that came to Delos to purchase slaves captured by
the Cilician Pirates, or prisoners of war (Trumper 2009).
This meant that Delos became one of the largest slave trade
centers of the time (Trumper 2009). The greatest advantages
of being a religious center in the ancient Greek world are
the security and wealth. Delos, like many other religious
sites was considerably wealthy, and because of this wealth
and popularity, it was also heavily protected. Delos not
only held monetary wealth, but cultural and religious wealth
as well. The Greeks saw it as a matter of personal pride,
patriotism, and nationalism to protect this city. This was
evident during the Persian War, when Delos became the
capital of the Delian League and during the Peloponnesian
Wars when the entire city was heavily purified and
protected. Terrace of the Lions and
Temple of Apollo The two most
famous monuments found at Delos, the Terrace of the Lions
and the Temple of Apollo. Another famous temple at Delos is
the Temple of the Delians. The Temple of the Delians was
done in the same Doric column design as the Parthenon
(Summerson 1963). The vertical shafts of the columns
were fluted with parallel concave grooves, and the top of
the column flared out to meet a square abacus at the
intersection with a horizontal beam (Summerson 1963). The
basic features of a Greek Doric column are the orders
alternating triglyphs and metopes (Summerson 1963). The triglyphs
are rectangular blocks that project outward and are
decoratively grooved with three vertical grooves (Summerson
1963). The triglyphs are between two metopes. Metopes
function simply to fill in the space of a Doric frieze
(Summerson 1963). Under each triglyphs are pegs that serve
no only to add support to the entire structure but to
eliminate rainwater runoff (Summerson 1963). The original
design came from wooden temples and so the triglyphs were
arranged in a way so that each column had to bear a beam
which lay across the center of the column (Summerson 1963).
This style became so popular that it was regarded as the
ideal way for temple construction. However, changing to
stone cubes instead of wooden beams required full support of
the architrave load at the last column (Summerson 1963). In
order to reach this perfect harmonious design that we
associate with the Temple of Apollo and the Parthenon, the
Greeks had to employ a lot of trial and error. In fact, the
first temples had the final triglyph moved, which disrupted
the sequence, and left a gap in the order of columns
(Summerson 1963). Also the last triglyph was not centered
with the corresponding column, which further disrupted the
order and stability of the structure (Summerson 1963). The
resulting problem is called the Doric corner conflict
(Summerson 1963). With the metopes, since they are somewhat
flexible in their proportions, the space between columns can
be adjusted by the architect (Summerson 1963). Often the
last two columns were set slightly closer together to give a
subtle visual strengthening to the corners (Summerson 1963).
Triglyphs could be arranged in a harmonic manner again, and
the corner was terminated with a triglyph (Summerson 1963).
However, final triglyph and column were often not centered
(Summerson 1963). The Temple of the Delians is the largest
of three dedicated temples of Apollo on the island of Delos
(Kent 1948). It was begun in 478 BC and never completely
finished (Summerson 1963). All the columns are centered
under a triglyph in the frieze, except for the corner
columns (Summerson 1963). This temple, just like the Temple
of Apollo and the Terrace of the Lions, is significant for
its religious association with Apollo, but also for its
significance to the history of Greece. Temple of the
Delians Delos is an
incredible source for archaeological evidence. The fact that
it was a famous religious site is reason for its
preservation and relevance. In modern days, people visit
Delos to see the remnants of the beautiful temples and to
see the history and culture of ancient Greece. In ancient
Greek times, this reason for tourism was also true. People
travelled to see Delos and to seek spiritual help. It gives
historians and archaeologists a clear insight into ancient
Greek travel and culture. The combination of tourism,
religious center, and a political and economic center under
the Delian League makes Delos an extremely provocative site. Works Cited Kent, John
Harvey 1948 The Temple Estates of Delos, Rheneia, and
Mykonos. The Journal of the American School of Classical
Studies. 17(4):243-338. Summerson,
John 1963 The Classical Language of
Architecture. BBC. Thucydides
2004 The History of the Peloponnesian War. Richard
Crawley trans. Dover Publications. Trumper,
Monika 2009 Graeco-Roman Slave Markets- Fact or
Fiction. Oxbow Books Limited.
The
Peloponnesian League was an alliance in the Peloponnesus
from the 6th to the 4th centuries BC. It is known mainly
for being one of the two rivals in the Peloponnesian War
(431–404 BC).
By the end of
the 7th century BC Sparta had become the most
powerful city-state in the Peloponnese and
was the political and military hegemon over Argos,
the next most powerful city-state. Sparta acquired two
powerful allies, Corinth and Elis
(also city-states), by ridding Corinth of tyranny, and
helping Elis secure control of the Olympic Games. Sparta
continued to aggressively use a combination of foreign
policy and military intervention to gain other allies.
Sparta defeated Tegea
in a frontier war and offered them a permanent defensive
alliance; this was the turning point for Spartan foreign
policy. Many other states in the central and provincial
northern Peloponnese joined the league, which eventually
included all Peloponnesian states except Argos and Achaea.
League
organization
The league was
organized with Sparta as the hegemon, and was
controlled by the council of allies which was composed of
two bodies: the assembly of Spartiates and the Congress of
Allies. Each allied state had one vote in the Congress,
regardless of that state's size or geopolitical power. No
tribute was paid except in times of war, when one third of
the military of a state could be requested. Only Sparta
could call a Congress of the League. All alliances were
made with Sparta only, so if they so wished, member states
had to form separate alliances with each other. And
although each state had one vote, League resolutions were
not binding on Sparta. Thus, the Peloponnesian League was
not an "alliance" in the strictest sense of the word (nor
was it wholly Peloponnesian for the entirety of its
existence).
The league
provided protection and security to its members. It was a
conservative alliance which supported Oligarchies and opposed tyrannies
and democracies.
Later
history of the League
After the Persian Wars
the League was expanded into the Hellenic League and
included Athens and other states. The Hellenic
League was led by Pausanias and, after he
was recalled, by Cimon
of Athens. Sparta withdrew from the Hellenic League,
reforming the Peloponnesian League with its original
allies. The Hellenic League then turned into the
Athenian-led Delian League. This might have
been caused by Sparta and its allies' unease over Athenian
efforts to increase their power. The two Leagues
eventually came into conflict with each other in the Peloponnesian War. Under
Spartan leadership, the League defeated Athens and its
allies in 404 BC.
Following the
disastrous Spartan defeat by Thebes at the Battle of
Leuktra in 371 BC, Elis and the Arcadian states seized the
opportunity to throw off the yoke of Spartan hegemony; the
Arcadians formed themselves into their own league to preserve
their independence. The size of the Peloponnesian League
was then further reduced by the Theban liberation of Messenia from Spartan control in
369 BC. The states of the north-eastern Peloponnese,
including Corinth, Sicyon and Epidauros,
adhered to their Spartan allegiance, but as the war
continued in the 360s BC, many joined the Thebans or took
a neutral position, though Elis and some of the Arcadian
states realigned themselves with Sparta. In 338 BC, the
Peloponnesian League was disbanded when Philip II of Macedon,
father of Alexander the Great,
formed the League of Corinth after
defeating Thebes and Athens, incorporating all the
Peloponnesian states except Sparta.
Pericles had
such a profound influence on Athenian society that Thucydides, a contemporary
historian, acclaimed him as "the first citizen of
Athens".[1]
Pericles turned the Delian League into an
Athenian empire, and led his countrymen during the first
two years of the Peloponnesian War. The period during
which he led Athens, roughly from 461 to 429 BC, is
sometimes known as the "Age of
Pericles", though the period thus denoted can
include times as early as the Persian Wars,
or as late as the next century.
Pericles
promoted the arts and literature; it is principally
through his efforts that Athens holds the reputation of
being the educational and cultural center of the ancient Greek world. He
started an ambitious project that generated most of the
surviving structures on the Acropolis (including
the Parthenon). This project
beautified and protected the city, exhibited its glory,
and gave work to the people.[2]
Pericles also fostered Athenian democracy to
such an extent that critics call him a populist.[3][4]
Our polity does not copy the
laws of neighboring states; we are rather a
pattern to others than imitators ourselves. It is
called a democracy, because not the few but the
many govern. If we look to the laws, they afford
equal justice to all in their private differences;
if to social standing, advancement in public life
falls to reputation for capacity, class
considerations not being allowed to interfere with
merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a
man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered
by the obscurity of his condition.
Pericles was
born c. 495 BC, in the deme
of Cholargos just
north of Athens.α[›]
He was the son of the politician Xanthippus, who, though ostracized in 485–484 BC, returned
to Athens to command the Athenian contingent in the Greek
victory at Mycale just five years
later. Pericles' mother, Agariste, a member of the
powerful and controversial noble family of the Alcmaeonidae, and her familial
connections played a crucial role in kickstarting
Xanthippus' political career. Agariste was the
great-granddaughter of the tyrant of Sicyon, Cleisthenes, and the
niece of the Athenian reformer Cleisthenes.β[›][6]
According to Herodotus and Plutarch, Agariste dreamed, a few
nights before Pericles' birth, that she had borne a lion.
Interestingly, legends say that Philip II of Macedon had a
similar dream before the birth of his son, Alexander the
Great.[7][8]
One interpretation of the dream treats the lion as a
traditional symbol of greatness, but the story may also
allude to the unusually large size of Pericles' skull,
which became a popular target of contemporary comedians
(who called him "Squill-head", after the Squill or Sea-Onion).[8][9]
(Although Plutarch claims that this deformity was the
reason that Pericles was always depicted wearing a helmet,
this is not the case; the helmet was actually the symbol
of his official rank as strategos (general).[10]
Pericles
belonged to the tribe
of Acamantis (Ἀκαμαντὶς
φυλή). His early years were quiet; the
introverted young Pericles avoided public appearances,
instead preferring to devote his time to his studies.[11]
His family's
nobility and wealth allowed him to fully pursue his
inclination toward education. He learned music from the
masters of the time (Damon or Pythocleides could have
been his teacher)[12][13]
and he is considered to have been the first politician to
attribute importance to philosophy.[11]
He enjoyed the company of the philosophersProtagoras, Zeno of Elea, and Anaxagoras. Anaxagoras, in
particular, became a close friend and influenced him
greatly.[12][14]
Pericles' manner
of thought and rhetorical charisma may have been in part
products of Anaxagoras' emphasis on emotional calm in the
face of trouble and skepticism about divine phenomena.[6]
His proverbial calmness and self-control are also often
regarded as products of Anaxagoras' influence.[15]
Political
career until 431 BC
Entering
politics
In the spring of
472 BC, Pericles presented The Persians of Aeschylus at the Greater
Dionysia as a liturgy,
demonstrating that he was one of the wealthier men of
Athens.[6]
Simon Hornblower has argued that Pericles' selection of
this play, which presents a nostalgic picture of Themistocles' famous victory at
Salamis, shows that the
young politician was supporting Themistocles against his
political opponent Cimon,
whose faction succeeded in having Themistocles ostracized
shortly afterwards.[16]
Plutarch says
that Pericles stood first among the Athenians for forty
years.[17]
If this was so, Pericles must have taken up a position of
leadership by the early 460s BC- in his early or
mid-thirties. Throughout these years he endeavored to
protect his privacy and to present himself as a model for
his fellow citizens. For example, he would often avoid
banquets, trying to be frugal.[18][19]
In 463 BC,
Pericles was the leading prosecutor of Cimon, the leader
of the conservative faction who was accused of neglecting
Athens' vital interests in Macedon.[20]
Although Cimon was acquitted, this confrontation proved
that Pericles' major political opponent was vulnerable.[21]
Ostracizing
Cimon
Around 461 BC,
the leadership of the democratic party decided it was time
to take aim at the Areopagus, a traditional council
controlled by the Athenian aristocracy, which had once
been the most powerful body in the state.[22]
The leader of the party and mentor of Pericles, Ephialtes,
proposed a reduction of the Areopagus' powers. The Ecclesia (the
Athenian Assembly) adopted Ephialtes' proposal without
opposition.[19]
This reform signaled the beginning of a new era of
"radical democracy".[22]
The democratic
party gradually became dominant in Athenian politics, and
Pericles seemed willing to follow a populist policy in
order to cajole the public. According to Aristotle, Pericles' stance can be
explained by the fact that his principal political
opponent, Cimon, was both rich and generous, and
was able to gain public favor by lavishly handing out
portions of his sizable personal fortune.[20]
The historian Loren J. Samons II argues, however, that
Pericles had enough resources to make a political mark by
private means, had he so chosen.[23]
In 461 BC,
Pericles achieved the political elimination of this
opponent using ostracism. The accusation was that
Cimon betrayed his city by aiding Sparta.[24]
After Cimon's
ostracism, Pericles continued to promote a populist social
policy.[19]
He first proposed a decree that permitted the poor to
watch theatrical plays without paying, with the state
covering the cost of their admission. With other decrees
he lowered the property requirement for the archonship in 458–457 BC and bestowed
generous wages on all citizens who served as jurymen in
the Heliaia (the supreme court of
Athens) some time just after 454 BC.[25]
His most controversial measure, however, was a law of 451
BC limiting Athenian citizenship to those of Athenian
parentage on both sides.[26]
“
Rather, the admiration of the
present and succeeding ages will be ours, since we
have not left our power without witness, but have
shown it by mighty proofs; and far from needing a
Homer for our panegyrist, or other of his craft
whose verses might charm for the moment only for
the impression which they gave to melt at the
touch of fact, we have forced every sea and land
to be the highway of our daring, and everywhere,
whether for evil or for good, have left
imperishable monuments behind us.
Such measures
impelled Pericles' critics to hold him responsible for the
gradual degeneration of the Athenian democracy. Constantine
Paparrigopoulos, a major modern Greek historian,
argues that Pericles sought for the expansion and
stabilization of all democratic institutions.[28]
Hence, he enacted legislation granting the lower classes
access to the political system and the public offices,
from which they had previously been barred.[29]
According to
Samons, Pericles believed that it was necessary to raise
the demos, in which he saw an untapped source of Athenian
power and the crucial element of Athenian military
dominance.[30]
(The fleet, backbone of Athenian power since the days of
Themistocles, was manned almost entirely by members of the
lower classes.[31])
Cimon, on the
other hand, apparently believed that no further free space
for democratic evolution existed. He was certain that
democracy had reached its peak and Pericles' reforms were
leading to the stalemate of populism. According to
Paparrigopoulos, history vindicated Cimon, because Athens,
after Pericles' death, sank into the abyss of political
turmoil and demagogy. Paparrigopoulos maintains that an
unprecedented regression descended upon the city, whose
glory perished as a result of Pericles' populist policies.[28]
According to
another historian, Justin Daniel King, radical democracy
benefited people individually, but harmed the state.[32]
On the other hand, Donald Kagan asserts that the
democratic measures Pericles put into effect provided the
basis for an unassailable political strength.[33]
After all, Cimon finally accepted the new democracy and
did not oppose the citizenship law, after he returned from
exile in 451 BC.[34]
Leading Athens
Ephialtes'
murder in 461 BC paved the way for Pericles to consolidate
his authority.δ[›]
Without opposition after the expulsion of Cimon, the
unchallengeable leader of the democratic party became the
unchallengeable ruler of Athens. He remained in power
until his death in 429 BC.
Pericles made
his first military excursions during the First
Peloponnesian War, which was caused in part by Athens'
alliance with Megara and Argos
and the subsequent reaction of Sparta. In 454 BC he
attacked Sicyon and Acarnania.[35]
He then unsuccessfully tried to conquer Oeniadea on the Corinthian
gulf, before returning to Athens.[36]
In 451 BC, Cimon returned from exile and negotiated a five
years' truce with Sparta after a proposal of Pericles, an
event which indicates a shift in Pericles' political
strategy.[37]
Pericles may have realized the importance of Cimon's
contribution during the ongoing conflicts against the
Peloponnesians and the Persians. Anthony J.
Podlecki argues, however, that Pericles' alleged change of
position was invented by ancient writers to support "a
tendentious view of Pericles' shiftiness".[38]
Plutarch states
that Cimon struck a power-sharing deal with his opponents,
according to which Pericles would carry through the
interior affairs and Cimon would be the leader of the
Athenian army, campaigning abroad.[39]
If it was actually made, this bargain would constitute a
concession on Pericles' part that he was not a great
strategist. Kagan believes that Cimon adapted himself to
the new conditions and promoted a political marriage
between Periclean liberals and Cimonian conservatives.[34]
In the mid-450s
the Athenians launched an unsuccessful attempt to aid an
Egyptian revolt against Persia, which led to a prolonged
siege of a Persian fortress in the Nile
Delta. The campaign culminated in disaster; the besieging
force was defeated and destroyed.[40]
In 451–450 BC the Athenians sent troops to Cyprus. Cimon defeated the Persians
in the Battle of Salamis-in-Cyprus, but
died of disease in 449 BC. Pericles is said to have
initiated both expeditions in Egypt and Cyprus,[41]
although some researchers, such as Karl Julius Beloch, argue
that the dispatch of such a great fleet conforms with the
spirit of Cimon's policy.[42]
Complicating the
account of this period is the issue of the Peace of Callias, which
allegedly ended hostilities between the Greeks and the
Persians. The very existence of the treaty is hotly
disputed, and its particulars and negotiation are
ambiguous.[43]
Ernst Badian believes that a peace between Athens and
Persia was first ratified in 463 BC (making the Athenian
interventions in Egypt and Cyprus violations of the
peace), and renegotiated at the conclusion of the campaign
in Cyprus, taking force again by 449–448 BC.[44]
John Fine, on
the other hand, suggests that the first peace between
Athens and Persia was concluded in 450–449 BC, due to
Pericles' calculation that ongoing conflict with Persia
was undermining Athens' ability to spread its influence in
Greece and the Aegean.[43]
Kagan believes that Pericles used Callias, a
brother-in-law of Cimon, as a symbol of unity and employed
him several times to negotiate important agreements.[45]
In the spring of
449 BC, Pericles proposed the Congress Decree, which led
to a meeting ("Congress") of all Greek states in order to
consider the question of rebuilding the temples destroyed
by the Persians. The Congress failed because of Sparta's
stance, but Pericles' intentions remain unclear.[46]
Some historians think that he wanted to prompt a
confederation with the participation of all the Greek
cities; others think he wanted to assert Athenian
pre-eminence.[47]
According to the historian Terry Buckley the objective of
the Congress Decree was a new mandate for the Delian League and for the
collection of "phoros" (taxes).[48]
“
Remember, too, that if your
country has the greatest name in all the world, it
is because she never bent before disaster; because
she has expended more life and effort in war than
any other city, and has won for herself a power
greater than any hitherto known, the memory of
which will descend to the latest posterity.
During the Second Sacred War Pericles
led the Athenian army against Delphi and reinstated Phocis in its
sovereign rights on the oracle.[50]
In 447 BC Pericles engaged in his most admired excursion,
the expulsion of barbarians from the Thracian peninsula of
Gallipoli, in order to establish
Athenian colonists in the region.[6][51]
At this time, however, Athens was seriously challenged by
a number of revolts among its subjects. In 447 BC the
oligarchs of Thebes conspired against the
democratic faction. The Athenians demanded their immediate
surrender, but after the Battle of Coronea,
Pericles was forced to concede the loss of Boeotia in
order to recover the prisoners taken in that battle.[11]
With Boeotia in hostile hands, Phocis and Locris became
untenable and quickly fell under the control of hostile
oligarchs.[52]
In 446 BC, a
more dangerous uprising erupted. Euboea and Megara revolted. Pericles crossed
over to Euboea with his troops, but was forced to return
when the Spartan army invaded Attica. Through bribery and
negotiations, Pericles defused the imminent threat, and
the Spartans returned home.[53]
When Pericles was later audited for the handling of public
money, an expenditure of 10 talents was
not sufficiently justified, since the official documents
just referred that the money was spent for a "very serious
purpose". Nonetheless, the "serious purpose" (namely the
bribery) was so obvious to the auditors that they approved
the expenditure without official meddling and without even
investigating the mystery.[54]
After the
Spartan threat had been removed, Pericles crossed back to
Euboea to crush the revolt there. He then punished the
landowners of Chalcis, who lost their properties.
The residents of Histiaea,
meanwhile, who had butchered the crew of an Athenian trireme, were uprooted and replaced
by 2,000 Athenian settlers.[54]
The crisis was brought to an official end by the Thirty Years' Peace
(winter of 446–445 BC), in which Athens relinquished
most of the possessions and interests on the Greek
mainland which it had acquired since 460 BC, and both
Athens and Sparta agreed not to attempt to win over the
other state's allies.[52]
Final battle with
the conservatives
In 444 BC, the
conservative and the democratic factions confronted each
other in a fierce struggle. The ambitious new leader of
the conservatives, Thucydides
(not to be confused with the historian of the same name),
accused Pericles of profligacy, criticizing the way he
spent the money for the ongoing building plan. Thucydides
managed, initially, to incite the passions of the ecclesia
in his favor, but, when Pericles, the leader of the
democrats, took the floor, he put the conservatives in the
shade. Pericles responded resolutely, proposing to
reimburse the city for all the expenses from his private
property, under the term that he would make the
inscriptions of dedication in his own name.[55]
His stance was
greeted with applause, and Thucydides suffered an
unexpected defeat. In 442 BC, the Athenian public
voted to ostracize Thucydides from the city
for 10 years and Pericles was once again the unchallenged
ruler of the Athenian political arena.[55]
Pericles wanted
to stabilize Athens' dominance over its alliance and to
enforce its pre-eminence in Greece. The process by which
the Delian League transformed into an Athenian empire is
generally considered to have begun well before Pericles'
time,[56]
as various allies in the league chose to pay tribute to
Athens instead of manning ships for the league's fleet,
but the transformation was speeded and brought to its
conclusion by Pericles.[57]
The final steps
in the shift to empire may have been triggered by Athens'
defeat in Egypt, which challenged the city's dominance in
the Aegean and led to the revolt of several allies, such
as Miletus and Erythrae.[58]
Either because of a genuine fear for its safety after the
defeat in Egypt and the revolts of the allies, or as a
pretext to gain control of the League's finances, Athens
transferred the treasury of the alliance from Delos
to Athens in 454–453 BC.[59]
By 450–449 BC
the revolts in Miletus and Erythrae were quelled and
Athens restored its rule over its allies.[60]
Around 447 BC Clearchus [61]
proposed the Coinage Decree, which imposed Athenian silver
coinage, weights and measures on all of the allies.[48]
According to one of the decree's most stringent
provisions, surplus from a minting operation was to go
into a special fund, and anyone proposing to use it
otherwise was subject to the death penalty.[62]
It was from the
alliance's treasury that Pericles drew the funds necessary
to enable his ambitious building plan, centered on the
"Periclean Acropolis", which included the Propylaea, the Parthenon and the
golden statue of Athena, sculpted by Pericles' friend, Phidias.[63]
In 449 BC Pericles proposed a decree allowing the use of
9,000 talents to finance the major rebuilding program of
Athenian temples.[48]
Angelos Vlachos, a Greek Academician, points out the
utilization of the alliance's treasury, initiated and
executed by Pericles, as one of the largest embezzlements
in human history; this misappropriation financed, however,
some of the most marvellous artistic creations of the
ancient world.[64]
The Samian War
was one of the last significant military events before the
Peloponnesian War. After Thucydides' ostracism, Pericles
was re-elected yearly to the generalship, the only office
he ever officially occupied, although his influence was so
great as to make him the de facto ruler of the
state. In 440 BC Samos
went to war against Miletus over control of Priene, an ancient city of Ionia
on the foot-hills of Mycale. Worsted in the war, the
Milesians came to Athens to plead their case against the
Samians.[65]
When the
Athenians ordered the two sides to stop fighting and
submit the case to arbitration in Athens, the Samians
refused.[66]
In response, Pericles passed a decree dispatching an
expedition to Samos, "alleging against its people that,
although they were ordered to break off their war against
the Milesians, they were not complying".ε[›]
In a naval
battle the Athenians led by Pericles and nine other
generals defeated the forces of Samos and imposed on the
island an Athenian administration.[66]
When the Samians revolted against Athenian rule, Pericles
compelled the rebels to capitulate after a tough siege of
eight months, which resulted in substantial discontent
among the Athenian sailors.[67]
Pericles then quelled a revolt in Byzantium and, when he returned to
Athens, gave a funeral oration to honor the soldiers who
died in the expedition.[68]
Between 438–436
BC Pericles led Athens' fleet in Pontus and
established friendly relations with the Greek cities of
the region.[69]
Pericles focused also on internal projects, such as the
fortification of Athens (the building of the "middle wall"
about 440 BC), and on the creation of new cleruchies, such as Andros, Naxos and Thurii (444 BC) as well as Amphipolis (437–436 BC).[70]
Personal attacks
Aspasia of Miletus (c. 469
BC – c. 406 BC), Pericles' companion.
Pericles and his
friends were never immune from attack, as preeminence in
democratic Athens was not equivalent to absolute rule.[71]
Just before the eruption of the Peloponnesian War,
Pericles and two of his closest associates, Phidias and
his companion, Aspasia, faced a series of personal
and judicial attacks.
Phidias, who had
been in charge of all building projects, was first accused
of embezzling gold meant for the statue of Athena and then of impiety, because,
when he wrought the battle of the Amazons on the shield of Athena, he
carved out a figure that suggested himself as a bald old
man, and also inserted a very fine likeness of Pericles
fighting with an Amazon.[72]
Aspasia, who was
noted for her ability as a conversationalist and adviser,
was accused of corrupting the women of Athens in order to
satisfy Pericles' perversions.[73][74][75][76]
The accusations against her were probably nothing more
than unproven slanders, but the whole experience was very
bitter for Pericles. Although Aspasia was acquitted thanks
to a rare emotional outburst of Pericles, his friend,
Phidias, died in prison and another friend of his,
Anaxagoras, was attacked by the ecclesia for his
religious beliefs.[72]
Beyond these
initial prosecutions, the ecclesia attacked Pericles
himself by asking him to justify his ostensible profligacy
with, and maladministration of, public money.[74]
According to Plutarch, Pericles was so afraid of the
oncoming trial that he did not let the Athenians yield to
the Lacedaemonians.[74]
Beloch also believes that Pericles deliberately brought on
the war to protect his political position at home.[77]
Thus, at the start of the Peloponnesian War, Athens found
itself in the awkward position of entrusting its future to
a leader whose pre-eminence had just been seriously shaken
for the first time in over a decade.[11]
The causes of
the Peloponnesian War have been much debated, but many
ancient historians lay the blame on Pericles and Athens.
Plutarch seems to believe that Pericles and the Athenians
incited the war, scrambling to implement their belligerent
tactics "with a sort of arrogance and a love of strife".στ[›]
Thucydides hints at the same thing, believing the reason
for the war was Sparta's fear of Athenian power and
growth. However, as he is generally regarded as an admirer
of Pericles, Thucydides has been criticized for bias
towards Sparta.ζ[›]
Prelude to the
war
Anaxagoras and Pericles by Augustin-Louis
Belle (1757–1841)
Pericles was
convinced that the war against Sparta, which could not
conceal its envy of Athens' pre-eminence, was inevitable
if unfortunate.[78]
Therefore, he did not hesitate to send troops to Corcyra to
reinforce the Corcyraean fleet, which was fighting against
Corinth.[79]
In 433 BC the enemy fleets confronted each other at the Battle of Sybota and a year
later the Athenians fought Corinthian colonists at the Battle of Potidaea; these
two events contributed greatly to Corinth's lasting hatred
of Athens. During the same period, Pericles proposed the Megarian Decree, which
resembled a modern trade embargo. According to the
provisions of the decree, Megarian merchants were excluded
from the market of Athens and the ports in its empire.
This ban strangled the Megarian economy and strained the
fragile peace between Athens and Sparta, which was allied
with Megara. According to George Cawkwell, a praelector in ancient history, with this
decree Pericles breached the Thirty Years' Peace
"but, perhaps, not without the semblance of an excuse".[80]
The Athenians' justification was that the Megarians had
cultivated the sacred land consecrated to Demeter and had given refuge to
runaway slaves, a behavior which the Athenians considered
to be impious.[81]
After
consultations with its allies, Sparta sent a deputation to
Athens demanding certain concessions, such as the
immediate expulsion of the Alcmaeonidae family including
Pericles and the retraction of the Megarian Decree,
threatening war if the demands were not met. The obvious
purpose of these proposals was the instigation of a
confrontation between Pericles and the people; this event,
indeed, would come about a few years later.[82]
At that time, the Athenians unhesitatingly followed
Pericles' instructions. In the first legendary oration
Thucydides puts in his mouth, Pericles advised the
Athenians not to yield to their opponents' demands, since
they were militarily stronger.[83]
Pericles was not prepared to make unilateral concessions,
believing that "if Athens conceded on that issue, then
Sparta was sure to come up with further demands".[84]
Consequently, Pericles asked the Spartans to offer a quid
pro quo. In exchange for retracting the Megarian
Decree, the Athenians demanded from Sparta to abandon
their practice of periodic expulsion of foreigners from
their territory (xenelasia) and to recognize the
autonomy of its allied cities, a request implying that
Sparta's hegemony was also ruthless.[85]
The terms were rejected by the Spartans, and with neither
side willing to back down, the two cities prepared for
war. According to Athanasios G. Platias and Constantinos
Koliopoulos, professors of strategic studies and international
politics, "rather than to submit to coercive
demands, Pericles chose war".[84]
Another consideration that may well have influenced
Pericles' stance was the concern that revolts in the
empire might spread if Athens showed herself weak.[86]
In 431 BC, while
peace already was precarious, Archidamus II, Sparta's
king, sent a new delegation to Athens, demanding that the
Athenians submit to Sparta's demands. This deputation was
not allowed to enter Athens, as Pericles had already
passed a resolution according to which no Spartan
deputation would be welcomed if the Spartans had
previously initiated any hostile military actions. The
Spartan army was at this time gathered at Corinth, and,
citing this as a hostile action, the Athenians refused to
admit their emissaries.[87]
With his last attempt at negotiation thus declined,
Archidamus invaded Attica, but found no Athenians there;
Pericles, aware that Sparta's strategy would be to invade
and ravage Athenian territory, had previously arranged to
evacuate the entire population of the region to within the
walls of Athens.[88]
No definite
record exists of how exactly Pericles managed to convince
the residents of Attica to agree to move into the crowded
urban areas. For most, the move meant abandoning their
land and ancestral shrines and completely changing their
lifestyle.[89]
Therefore, although they agreed to leave, many rural
residents were far from happy with Pericles' decision.[90]
Pericles also gave his compatriots some advice on their
present affairs and reassured them that, if the enemy did
not plunder his farms, he would offer his property to the
city. This promise was prompted by his concern that
Archidamus, who was a friend of his, might pass by his
estate without ravaging it, either as a gesture of
friendship or as a calculated political move aimed to
alienate Pericles from his constituents.[91]
In any case,
seeing the pillage of their farms, the Athenians were
outraged, and they soon began to indirectly express their
discontent towards their leader, who many of them
considered to have drawn them into the war. Even when in
the face of mounting pressure, Pericles did not give in to
the demands for immediate action against the enemy or
revise his initial strategy. He also avoided convening the
ecclesia, fearing that the populace, outraged by the
unopposed ravaging of their farms, might rashly decide to
challenge the vaunted Spartan army in the field.[92]
As meetings of the assembly were called at the discretion
of its rotating presidents, the "prytanies", Pericles had
no formal control over their scheduling; rather, the
respect in which Pericles was held by the prytanies was
apparently sufficient to persuade them to do as he wished.[93]
While the Spartan army remained in Attica, Pericles sent a
fleet of 100 ships to loot the coasts of the Peloponnese and charged the
cavalry to guard the ravaged farms close to the walls of
the city.[94]
When the enemy retired and the pillaging came to an end,
Pericles proposed a decree according to which the
authorities of the city should put aside 1,000 talents and
100 ships, in case Athens was attacked by naval forces.
According to the most stringent provision of the decree,
even proposing a different use of the money or ships would
entail the penalty of death. During the autumn of 431 BC,
Pericles led the Athenian forces that invaded Megara and a
few months later (winter of 431–430 BC) he delivered his
monumental and emotional Funeral Oration,
honoring the Athenians who died for their city.[95]
Last military
operations and death
“
For heroes have the whole
earth for their tomb; and in lands far from their
own, where the column with its epitaph declares
it, there is enshrined in every breast a record
unwritten with no tablet to preserve it, except
that of the heart.
In 430 BC, the
army of Sparta looted Attica for a second time, but
Pericles was not daunted and refused to revise his initial
strategy.[97]
Unwilling to engage the Spartan army in battle, he again
led a naval expedition to plunder the coasts of the
Peloponnese, this time taking 100 Athenian ships with him.[98]
According to Plutarch, just before the sailing of the
ships an eclipse of the sun
frightened the crews, but Pericles used the astronomical
knowledge he had acquired from Anaxagoras to calm them.[99]
In the summer of the same year an epidemic broke out and
devastated the Athenians.[100]
The exact identity of the disease is uncertain,
typhus or typhoid fever are suspected, but this has been
the source of much debate.η[›]
In any case, the city's plight, caused by the epidemic,
triggered a new wave of public uproar, and Pericles was
forced to defend himself in an emotional final speech, a
rendition of which is presented by Thucydides.[101]
This is considered to be a monumental oration, revealing
Pericles' virtues but also his bitterness towards his
compatriots' ingratitude.[11]
Temporarily, he managed to tame the people's resentment
and to ride out the storm, but his internal enemies' final
bid to undermine him came off; they managed to deprive him
of the generalship and to fine him at an amount estimated
between 15 and 50 talents.[99]
Ancient sources mention Cleon,
a rising and dynamic protagonist of the Athenian political
scene during the war, as the public prosecutor in
Pericles' trial.[99]
Nevertheless,
within just a year, in 429 BC, the Athenians not only
forgave Pericles but also re-elected him as strategos.θ[›]
He was reinstated in command of the Athenian army and led
all its military operations during 429 BC, having once
again under his control the levers of power.[11]
In that year, however, Pericles witnessed the death of
both his legitimate sons from his first wife, Paralus and Xanthippus,
in the epidemic. His morale undermined, he burst into
tears and not even Aspasia's companionship could console
him. He himself died of the plague in the autumn of 429
BC.
Just before his
death, Pericles' friends were concentrated around his bed,
enumerating his virtues during peace and underscoring his
nine war trophies. Pericles, though moribund, heard them
and interrupted them, pointing out that they forgot to
mention his fairest and greatest title to their
admiration; "for", said he, "no living Athenian ever put
on mourning because of me".[102]
Pericles lived during the first two and a half years of
the Peloponnesian War and, according to Thucydides, his
death was a disaster for Athens, since his successors were
inferior to him; they preferred to incite all the bad
habits of the rabble and followed an unstable policy,
endeavoring to be popular rather than useful.[1]
With these bitter comments, Thucydides not only laments
the loss of a man he admired, but he also heralds the
flickering of Athens' unique glory and grandeur.
Pausanias (c.
150 C.E.) records (I.29) seeing the tomb of Pericles along
a road near the Academy.
Personal life
“
For men can endure to hear
others praised only so long as they can severally
persuade themselves of their own ability to equal
the actions recounted: when this point is passed,
envy comes in and with it incredulity.
Pericles,
following Athenian custom, was first married to one of his
closest relatives, with whom he had two sons, Paralus and Xanthippus,
but around 445 BC, Pericles divorced his wife. He
offered her to another husband, with the agreement of her
male relatives.[104]
The name of his first wife is not known; the only
information about her is that she was the wife of
Hipponicus, before being married to Pericles, and the
mother of Callias from this first
marriage.[105]
The woman whom
he really adored was Aspasia of Miletus. She became
Pericles' mistress and they began to live together as if
they were married. This relationship aroused many
reactions and even Pericles' own son, Xanthippus, who had
political ambitions, did not hesitate to slander his
father.[106]
Nonetheless, these persecutions did not undermine
Pericles' morale, although he had to burst into tears in
order to protect his beloved Aspasia when she was accused
of corrupting Athenian society. His greatest personal
tragedy was the death of his sister and of both his
legitimate sons, Xanthippus and Paralus, all affected by
the epidemic, a calamity he never managed to overcome.
Just before his death, the Athenians allowed a change in
the law of 451 BC that made his half-Athenian son with
Aspasia, Pericles the Younger, a
citizen and legitimate heir,[107]
a decision all the more striking in consideration that
Pericles himself had proposed the law confining
citizenship to those of Athenian parentage on both sides.[108]
Assessments
Pericles marked
a whole era and inspired conflicting judgments about his
significant decisions. The fact that he was at the same
time a vigorous statesman, general and orator makes more
complex the objective assessment of his actions.
Political
leadership
An ostracon with Pericles' name
written on it (c. 444–443 BC), Museum of the ancient Agora of
Athens
Some
contemporary scholars call Pericles a populist, a
demagogue and a hawk,[109]
while other scholars admire his charismatic leadership.
According to Plutarch, after assuming the leadership of
Athens, "he was no longer the same man as before, nor
alike submissive to the people and ready to yield and give
in to the desires of the multitude as a steersman to the
breezes".[110]
It is told that when his political opponent, Thucydides,
was asked by Sparta's king, Archidamus, whether he or
Pericles was the better fighter, Thucydides answered
without any hesitation that Pericles was better, because
even when he was defeated, he managed to convince the
audience that he had won.[11]
In matters of character, Pericles was above reproach in
the eyes of the ancient historians, since "he kept himself
untainted by corruption, although he was not altogether
indifferent to money-making".[17]
Thucydides, an
admirer of Pericles, maintains that Athens was "in name a
democracy but, in fact, governed by its first citizen".[1]
Through this comment, the historian illustrates what he
perceives as Pericles' charisma to lead, convince and,
sometimes, to manipulate. Although Thucydides mentions the
fining of Pericles, he does not mention the accusations
against Pericles but instead focuses on Pericles'
integrity.ι[›][1]
On the other hand, in one of his dialogues, Plato
rejects the glorification of Pericles and quote as saying:
"as I know, Pericles made the Athenians slothful,
garrulous and avaricious, by starting the system of public
fees".[111]
Plutarch mentions other criticism of Pericles' leadership:
"many others say that the people were first led on by him
into allotments of public lands, festival-grants, and
distributions of fees for public services, thereby falling
into bad habits, and becoming luxurious and wanton under
the influence of his public measures, instead of frugal
and self-sufficing".[19]
Thucydides
argues that Pericles "was not carried away by the people,
but he was the one guiding the people".[1]
His judgement is not unquestioned; some 20th-century
critics, such as Malcolm F. McGregor and John S. Morrison,
proposed that he may have been a charismatic public face
acting as an advocate on the proposals of advisors, or the
people themselves.[112][113]
According to King, by increasing the power of the people,
the Athenians left themselves with no authoritative
leader. During the Peloponnesian War, Pericles' dependence
on popular support to govern was obvious.[32]
Military
achievements
“
These glories may incur the
censure of the slow and unambitious; but in the
breast of energy they will awake emulation, and in
those who must remain without them an envious
regret. Hatred and unpopularity at the moment have
fallen to the lot of all who have aspired to rule
others.
For more than 20
years Pericles led many expeditions, mainly naval ones.
Being always cautious, he never undertook of his own
accord a battle involving much uncertainty and peril and
he did not accede to the "vain impulses of the citizens".[115]
He based his military policy on Themistocles' principle that
Athens' predominance depends on its superior naval power
and believed that the Peloponnesians were near-invincible
on land.[116]
Pericles also tried to minimize the advantages of Sparta
by rebuilding the walls of Athens, which, it has been
suggested, radically altered the use of force in Greek
international relations.[117]
During the
Peloponnesian War, Pericles initiated a defensive "grand strategy" whose aim was
the exhaustion of the enemy and the preservation of the status
quo.[118]
According to Platias and Koliopoulos, Athens as the
strongest party did not have to beat Sparta in military
terms and "chose to foil the Spartan plan for victory".[118]
The two basic principles of the "Periclean Grand Strategy"
were the rejection of appeasement (in accordance with
which he urged the Athenians not to revoke the Megarian
Decree) and the avoidance of overextension.ια[›]
According to Kagan, Pericles' vehement insistence that
there should be no diversionary expeditions may well have
resulted from the bitter memory of the Egyptian campaign,
which he had allegedly supported.[119]
His strategy is said to have been "inherently unpopular",
but Pericles managed to persuade the Athenian public to
follow it.[120]
It is for that reason that Hans Delbrück called him one
of the greatest statesmen and military leaders in history.[121]
Although his countrymen engaged in several aggressive
actions soon after his death,[122]
Platias and Koliopoulos argue that the Athenians remained
true to the larger Periclean strategy of seeking to
preserve, not expand, the empire, and did not depart from
it until the Sicilian Expedition.[120]
For his part, Ben X. de Wet concludes his strategy would
have succeeded had he lived longer.[123]
Critics of
Pericles' strategy, however, have been just as numerous as
its supporters. A common criticism is that Pericles was
always a better politician and orator than strategist.[124]Donald Kagan called the
Periclean strategy "a form of wishful thinking that
failed", Barry S. Strauss and Josiah Ober have stated that
"as strategist he was a failure and deserves a share of
the blame for Athens' great defeat", and Victor Davis Hanson
believes that Pericles had not worked out a clear strategy
for an effective offensive action that could possibly
force Thebes or Sparta to stop the war.[125][126][127]
Kagan criticizes the Periclean strategy on four counts:
first that by rejecting minor concessions it brought about
war; second, that it was unforeseen by the enemy and hence
lacked credibility; third, that it was too feeble to
exploit any opportunities; and fourth, that it depended on
Pericles for its execution and thus was bound to be
abandoned after his death.[128]
Kagan estimates Pericles' expenditure on his military
strategy in the Peloponnesian War to be about 2,000 talents
annually, and based on this figure concludes that he would
only have enough money to keep the war going for three
years. He asserts that since Pericles must have known
about these limitations he probably planned for a much
shorter war.[129][130]
Others, such as Donald W. Knight, conclude that the
strategy was too defensive and would not succeed.[131]
On the other
hand, Platias and Koliopoulos reject these criticisms and
state that "the Athenians lost the war only when they
dramatically reversed the Periclean grand strategy that
explicitly disdained further conquests".[132]
Hanson stresses that the Periclean strategy was not
innovative, but could lead to a stagnancy in favor of
Athens.[129]
It is a popular conclusion that those succeeding him
lacked his abilities and character.[133]
Oratorical skill
A painting by Hector Leroux (1682–1740),
which portrays Pericles and Aspasia, admiring the
gigantic statue of Athena in Phidias' studio
Modern
commentators of Thucydides, with other modern
historians and writers, take varying stances on the issue
of how much of the speeches of Pericles, as given by this
historian, do actually represent Pericles' own words and
how much of them is free literary creation or paraphrase
by Thucydides.ιβ[›]
Since Pericles never wrote down or distributed his
orations,ιγ[›]
no historians are able to answer this with certainty;
Thucydides recreated three of them from memory and,
thereby, it cannot be ascertained that he did not add his
own notions and thoughts.ιδ[›]
Although
Pericles was a main source of his inspiration, some
historians have noted that the passionate and idealistic
literary style of the speeches Thucydides attributes to
Pericles is completely at odds with Thucydides' own cold
and analytical writing style.ιε[›]
This might, however, be the result of the incorporation of
the genre of rhetoric into the genre of historiography.
That is to say, Thucydides could simply have used two
different writing styles for two different purposes.
Ioannis Kakridis
and Arnold Gomme were two scholars who debated the
originality of Pericles’ oratory and last speech. Kakridis
believes that Thucydides altered Pericles words. Some of
his strongest arguments included in the Introduction of
the speech, (Thuc.11.35).[134]
Kakridis proposes that it is impossible to imagine
Pericles deviating away from the expected funeral orator
addressing the mourning audience of 430 after the
Peloponnesian war.[134]
The two groups addressed were the ones who were prepared
to believe him when he praised the dead, and the ones who
did not.[134]
Gomme rejects Kakridis position, defending the fact that
"Nobody of men has ever been so conscious of envy and its
workings as the Greeks, and that the Greeks and Thucydides
in particular had a passion for covering all ground in
their generalizations, not always relevantly.".[134]
Kagan states
that Pericles adopted "an elevated mode of speech, free
from the vulgar and knavish tricks of mob-orators" and,
according to Diodorus Siculus, he
"excelled all his fellow citizens in skill of oratory".[135][136]
According to Plutarch, he avoided using gimmicks
in his speeches, unlike the passionate Demosthenes, and always spoke in
a calm and tranquil manner.[137]
The biographer points out, however, that the poet Ion reported that Pericles'
speaking style was "a presumptuous and somewhat arrogant
manner of address, and that into his haughtiness there
entered a good deal of disdain and contempt for others".[137]
Gorgias, in Plato's homonymous
dialogue, uses Pericles as an example of powerful oratory.[138]
In Menexenus, however,
Socrates (through Plato) casts aspersions on Pericles'
rhetorical fame, claiming ironically that, since Pericles
was educated by Aspasia, a trainer of many orators, he
would be superior in rhetoric to someone educated by Antiphon.[139]
He also attributes authorship of the Funeral Oration to
Aspasia and attacks his contemporaries' veneration of
Pericles.[140]
Sir Richard C. Jebb
concludes that "unique as an Athenian statesman, Pericles
must have been in two respects unique also as an Athenian
orator; first, because he occupied such a position of
personal ascendancy as no man before or after him
attained; secondly, because his thoughts and his moral
force won him such renown for eloquence as no one else
ever got from Athenians".[141]
Ancient Greek
writers call Pericles "Olympian" and extol his talents;
referring to him "thundering and lightening and exciting
Greece" and carrying the weapons of Zeus when orating.[142]
According to Quintilian, Pericles would always
prepare assiduously for his orations and, before going on
the rostrum, he would always pray to the Gods, so as not
to utter any improper word.[143]
Legacy
Pericles' most
visible legacy can be found in the literary and artistic
works of the Golden Age, most of which survive to this
day. The Acropolis, though in ruins, still stands and is a
symbol of modern Athens. Paparrigopoulos wrote that these
masterpieces are "sufficient to render the name of Greece
immortal in our world".[124]
In politics,
Victor L. Ehrenberg argues that a basic element of
Pericles' legacy is Athenian imperialism, which denies
true democracy and freedom to the people of all but the
ruling state.[144]
The promotion of such an arrogant imperialism is said to
have ruined Athens.[145]
Pericles and his "expansionary" policies have been at the
center of arguments promoting democracy in oppressed
countries.[146][147]
Other analysts
maintain an Athenian humanism illustrated in the Golden
Age.[148][149]
The freedom of expression is regarded as the lasting
legacy deriving from this period.[150]
Pericles is lauded as "the ideal type of the perfect
statesman in ancient Greece" and his Funeral Oration is
nowadays synonymous with the struggle for participatory
democracy and civic pride.[124][151]
^ α: Pericles'
date of birth is uncertain; he could not have been born
later than 492–1 and been of age to present the Persae in 472.
He is not recorded as having taken part in the Persian Wars
of 480–79; some historians argue from this that he was
unlikely to have been born before 498, but this argument
ex silentio has also been dismissed.[22][152] ^ β: Plutarch
says "granddaughter" of Cleisthenes,[8]
but this is chronologically implausible, and there is
consensus that this should be "niece".[6] ^ γ: Thucydides
records several speeches which he attributes to
Pericles; however, he acknowledges that: "it was in all
cases difficult to carry them word for word in one's
memory, so my habit has been to make the speakers say
what was in my opinion demanded of them by the various
occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to
the general sense of what they really said."[153] ^ δ: According
to Aristotle, Aristodicus of Tanagra killed Ephialtes.[154]
Plutarch cites an Idomeneus as saying that Pericles
killed Ephialtes, but does not believe him—he finds it
to be out of character for Pericles.[39] ^ ε: According
to Plutarch, it was thought that Pericles proceeded
against the Samians to gratify Aspasia of Miletus.[105] ^ στ: Plutarch
describes these allegations without espousing them.[72]
Thucydides insists, however, that the Athenian
politician was still powerful.[155]
Gomme and Vlachos support Thucydides' view.[156][157] ^ ζ: Vlachos
maintains that Thucydides' narration gives the
impression that Athens' alliance had become an
authoritarian and oppressive empire, while the historian
makes no comment for Sparta's equally harsh rule.
Vlachos underlines, however, that the defeat of Athens
could entail a much more ruthless Spartan empire,
something that did indeed happen. Hence, the historian's
hinted assertion that Greek public opinion espoused
Sparta's pledges of liberating Greece almost
uncomplainingly seems tendentious.[158]Geoffrey
Ernest Maurice de Ste Croix, for his part, argues
that Athens' imperium was welcomed and valuable for the
stability of democracy all over Greece.[159]
According to Fornara and Samons, "any view proposing
that popularity or its opposite can be inferred simply
from narrow ideological considerations is superficial".[160] ^ η: Taking
into consideration its symptoms, most researchers and
scientists now believe that it was typhus or typhoid fever and not cholera, plague or measles.[161][162] ^ θ: Pericles
held the generalship from 444 BC until 430 BC without
interruption.[71] ^ ι: Vlachos
criticizes the historian for this omission and maintains
that Thucydides' admiration for the Athenian statesman
makes him ignore not only the well-grounded accusations
against him but also the mere gossips, namely the
allegation that Pericles had corrupted the volatile
rabble, so as to assert himself.[163] ^ ια: According
to Platias and Koliopoulos, the "policy mix" of Pericles
was guided by five principles: a) Balance the power of
the enemy, b) Exploit competitive advantages and negate
those of the enemy, c) Deter the enemy by the denial of
his success and by the skillful use of retaliation, d)
Erode the international power base of the enemy, e)
Shape the domestic environment of the adversary to your
own benefit.[164] ^ ιβ: According
to Vlachos, Thucydides must have been about 30 years old
when Pericles delivered his Funeral Oration and he was
probably among the audience.[165] ^ ιγ: Vlachos
points out that he does not know who wrote the oration,
but "these were the words which should have been spoken
at the end of 431 BC".[165]
According to Sir Richard C. Jebb, the Thucydidean
speeches of Pericles give the general ideas of Pericles
with essential fidelity; it is possible, further, that
they may contain recorded sayings of his "but it is
certain that they cannot be taken as giving the form of
the statesman's oratory".[141]
John F. Dobson believes that "though the language is
that of the historian, some of the thoughts may be those
of the statesman".[166]
C.M.J. Sicking argues that "we are hearing the voice of
real Pericles", while Ioannis T. Kakridis claims that
the Funeral Oration is an almost exclusive creation of
Thucydides, since "the real audience does not consist of
the Athenians of the beginning of the war, but of the
generation of 400 BC, which suffers under the
repercussions of the defeat".[167][168]
Gomme disagrees with Kakridis, insisting on his belief
to the reliability of Thucydides.[161] ^ ιδ: That
is what Plutarch predicates.[169]
Nonetheless, according to the 10th century encyclopedia
Suda, Pericles constituted the first
orator who systematically wrote down his orations.[170]Cicero speaks about Pericles'
writings, but his remarks are not regarded as credible.[171]
Most probably, other writers used his name.[172] ^ ιε: Ioannis
Kalitsounakis argues that "no reader can overlook the
sumptuous rythme of the Funeral Oration as a whole and
the singular correlation between the impetuous emotion
and the marvellous style, attributes of speech that
Thucydides ascribes to no other orator but Pericles".[11]
According to Harvey Ynis, Thucydides created the
Pericles' indistinct rhetorical legacy that has
dominated ever since.[173]
Plato, Menexenus.
See original text in Perseus
program(translation)
from Plato (1925). Plato
in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 9. W.R.M. Lamb
(trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
ISBN0-674-99185-0.
Plato, Phaedrus,
See original text in Perseus
program(translation)
from Plato (1903). Platonis
Opera. John Burnet (ed.). Oxford University
Press.
Aird, Hamish (2004). Pericles:
The Rise and Fall of Athenian Democracy. The
Rosen Publishing Group. ISBN0-8239-3828-X.
Badian, E. (1987). "The
Peace of Callias". "Journal of Hellenic
Studies" (The Society for the Promotion of
Hellenic Studies) 107: 1–39. doi:10.2307/630067.
JSTOR630067.
Beloch,
K.J. (1884). Die Attische Politik seit Perikles
. Leipzig (in German).
Beloch,
K.J. (1893). Griechische Geschichte. Volume
II (in German).
Blois de, Lukas (1997). An
Introduction to the Ancient World. Routledge
(UK). ISBN0-415-12774-2.
Buckley, Terry (1996). Aspects
of Greek History 750–323 BC. Routledge (UK).
ISBN0-415-09957-9.
Butler, Howard (2005). The
Story of Athens. Kessinger Publishing. ISBN1-4179-7092-8.
Cawkwell, George (1997). Thucydides
and the Peloponnesian War. Routledge (UK). ISBN0-415-16552-0.
Delbrück,
Hans (1920): History of the Art of War,
University of Nebraska Press; Reprint edition, 1990.
Translated by Walter, J. Renfroe. Volume 1.
Dobson, J.F. (July 1919).
"Pericles as an orator". The
Greek Orators. London: Methuen. Retrieved 2007-01-12.
Encyclopaedic
Dictionary The Helios. Volume VIII.
article: The Funeral Speech over the Fallen.
Volume XV. article: Pericles (in
Greek).
Ehrenberg, Victor L. (1990).
From Solon to Socrates. Routledge (UK). ISBN0-415-04024-8.
Fine, John V.A. (1983). The
Ancient Greeks: A critical history. Harvard
University Press. ISBN0-674-03314-0.
Fornara Charles W., Loren J.
Samons II (1991). Athens from Cleisthenes to
Pericles. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Gomme, A. W.;
A. Andrewes; K. J. Dover (1945–1981). An
Historical Commentary on Thucydides (I-V).
Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-814198-X.
Hanson, Victor Davis
(2007) [English Edition 2005]. How the
Athenians and Spartans fought the Peloponnesian
War (translated in Greek by Angelos Philippatos).
Athens: Livanis Editions. ISBN978-960-14-1495-9.
Henri, Madeleine M. (1995).
Prisoner of History. Aspasia of Miletus and her
Biographical Tradition. Oxford University
Press. ISBN0-19-508712-7.
Hornblower, Simon (2002). The
Greek World 479–323 BC. Routledge (UK). ISBN0-415-15344-1.
Hurwit, Jeffrey M. (2004). The
Acropolis in the Age of Pericles. Cambridge
University Press. ISBN0-521-82040-5.
Just, Roger (1991). Women
in Athenian Law and Life. Routledge (UK). ISBN0-415-05841-4.
Kagan, Donald (1996).
"Athenian Strategy in the Peloponnesian War". The
Making of Strategy: Rules, States and Wars by
Williamson Murray, Alvin Bernstein, MacGregor
Knox. Cambridge University Press. ISBN0-521-56627-4.
Kagan, Donald (1989). The
Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. Ithaca:
Cornell University Press. ISBN0-8014-9556-3.
Kagan, Donald (2003). "War
aims and resources (432–431)". The
Peloponnesian War. Viking Penguin (Penguin
Group). ISBN0-670-03211-5.
Kakridis,
Ioannis Th. (1993). Interpretative Comments on
the Pericles' Funeral Oration. Estia (in
Greek).
Katula, Richard A. (2003).
"The Origins of Rhetoric". A Synoptic History
of Classical Rhetoric by James J. Murphy,
Richard A. Katula, Forbes I. Hill, Donovan J.
Ochs. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN1-880393-35-2.
Libourel, Jan M. (October
1971). "The Athenian Disaster in Egypt". "American
Journal of Philology" (The Johns Hopkins
University Press) 92 (4): 605–615. doi:10.2307/292666.
JSTOR292666.
Loraux, Nicole (2003).
"Aspasie, l'étrangère, l'intellectuelle". La
Grèce au Féminin (in French). Belles
Lettres. ISBN2-251-38048-5.
Mattson, Kevin (1998). Creating
a Democratic Public. Penn State Press. ISBN0-271-01723-6.
McGregor, Malcolm F. (1987).
"Government in Athens". The Athenians and
their Empire. The University of British
Columbia Press. ISBN0-7748-0269-3.
Mendelson, Michael (2002). Many
Sides: A Protagorean Approach to the Theory,
Practice, and Pedagogy of Argument.
Springer. ISBN1-4020-0402-8.
Monoson, Sara (2000). Plato's
Democratic Entanglements. Princeton
University Press. ISBN0-691-04366-3.
Morrison, J.S.; A. W.
Gomme (1950). "Pericles Monarchos". Journal of
Hellenic Studies (The Journal of Hellenic
Studies, Vol. 70) 70: 76–77. doi:10.2307/629294.
JSTOR629294.
Ober, Josiah (1991).
"National Ideology and Strategic Defence of the
Population, from Athens to Star Wars". Hegemonic
Rivalry: From Thucydides to the Nuclear Age.
Westview Pr. ISBN0-8133-7744-7.
Ober, Josiah (1996). The
Athenian Revolution. Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press. ISBN0-691-01095-1.
Paparrigopoulos,
Konstantinos (-Karolidis, Pavlos)(1925), History
of the Hellenic Nation (Volume Ab).
Eleftheroudakis (in Greek).
"Pericles". Oxford
Classical Dictionary edited by Simon Hornblower
and Antony Spawforth. 1996.
"Pericles". Encyclopaedia
Britannica. 2002.
Podlecki, A.J. (1997). Perikles
and His Circle. Routledge (UK). ISBN0-415-06794-4.
Power, Edward J. (1991). A
Legacy of Learning. SUNY Press. ISBN0-7914-0610-5.
Rhodes, P.J. (2005). A
History of the Classical Greek World.
Blackwell Publishing. ISBN0-631-22564-1.
Ruden, Sarah (2003). Lysistrata.
Hackett Publishing. ISBN0-87220-603-3.
Samons, Loren J. (2004).
"The Peloponnesian War". What's Wrong with
Democracy?. Los Angeles, California:
University of California Press. ISBN0-520-23660-2.
Sealey, Raphael (1976). "The
Peloponnesian War". A History of the Greek
City States, 700-338 B. C. University of
California Press. ISBN0-520-03177-6.
Shrimpton, G. (1991). Theopompus
The Historian. McGill-Queen's Press – MQUP.
ISBN0-7735-0837-6.
Smith, William (1855).
"Death and Character of Pericles". A History
of Greece. R. B. Collins.
Starr, Chester G. (1991). A
History of the Ancient World. Oxford
University Press US. ISBN0-19-506628-6.
Ste Croix de, GEM
(1955–1956). The Character of the Athenian
Empire. Historia III.
Ober Josiah, Strauss Barry
S. (1990). The Anatomy of Error: Ancient
Military Disasters and Their Lessons for Modern
Strategists. St Martins Pr. ISBN0-312-05051-8.
Tuplin, Christopher J.
(2004). Pontus and the Outside World.
Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN90-04-12154-4.
Vlachos,
Angelos (1992). Remarks on Thucydides' History
of the Peloponnesian War (Α΄-Δ΄). Volume I.
Estia (in Greek).
Vlachos,
Angelos (1974). Thucydides' bias. Estia (in
Greek).
Wade-Grey, H.T.
(July–September 1945). "The Question of Tribute in
449/8 B. C". "Hesperia" (American School
of Classical Studies at Athens) 14 (3): 212–229.
Wet de, B.X. (1969).
"This So-Called Defensive Policy of Pericles". Acta
classica 12: 103–119.
Yunis, Harvey (1996). Taming
Democracy. Cornell University Press. ISBN0-8014-8358-1.
Further reading
Abbott, Evelyn (1898). Pericles
and the Golden Age of Athens. G. P. Putnam's
Sons.
Azoulay, Vincent; tr Lloyd,
Janet (2014). Pericles of Athens.
Princeton.
Brock Roger, Hodkinson
Stephen (2003). Alternatives to Athens:
Varieties of Political Organization and
Community in Ancient Greece. Oxford
University Press. ISBN0-19-925810-4.
Gardner, Percy (1902). Ancient
Athens.
Grant, Arthur James (1893).
Greece in the Age of Pericles. John Murray.
Hesk, John (2000). Deception
and Democracy in Classical Athens. Cambridge
University Press. ISBN0-521-64322-8.
Kagan, Donald (1991). Pericles
of Athens and the Birth of Democracy. The
Free Press. ISBN0-684-86395-2.
Lummis, Douglas C. (1997). Radical
Democracy. Cornell University Press. ISBN0-8014-8451-0.
Ober, Josiah (2001). Political
Dissent in Democratic Athens: Intellectual
Critics of Popular Rule. Princeton
University Press. ISBN0-691-08981-7.
Rhodes, P.J. (2005). A
History of the Classical Greek World: 478–323 BC.
Blackwell Publishing. ISBN0-631-22565-X.
Whibley, Leonard (1889). A
History of the Classical Greek World: 478–323 BC.
University Press.
Delos
is a Greek
island in the Cyclades
archipelago which was both an influential
political force and, with its sanctuary to the god
Apollo,
an important religious centre in the Archaic and
Classical periods. The island was also a major
commercial and trading centre in the 2nd and 1st
centuries CE.
Delos in Mythology
Delos, measuring a mere 3 km², is a small island
without any particular advantages for habitation
due to its barrenness and lack of water. In Greek
mythology, this is precisely why Leto,
escaping the wrath of Hera, was
able to find sanctuary here in order to give birth
to Apollo and Artemis.
In some versions of the myth, Zeus
(Leto’s lover) called on his brother Poseidon
to create the island with a thrust of his trident,
hence the name Delos, which signifies ‘appearance’
or ‘apparent’ in ancient Greek. The ancient Greeks
also considered the island the centre of the
Cycladic group and as the last resting place of
the Hyperboreans - a legendary northern race of
Apollo-worshippers.
The
ancient Greeks considered the island the
birthplace of Apollo and the centre of the
Cyclades islands.
Historical Overview
The island was first inhabited in the early Bronze
Age, and Mycenaean tombs have been excavated
dating from the late Bronze
Age. Colonised from Ionia in
the mid-10th century BCE, it was not, however,
until the 8th century BCE that the site began to
take on a religious significance in the wider
Greek world. Athens,
under Pisistratus, took a greater interest in the
island in the 6th century BCE and attempted to
purify the island by a ‘catharsis’ - removing and
prohibiting burials on the island from c. 540 BCE.
Delos further increased its importance when it was
chosen as the meeting place and treasury for the Delian
League in 478 BCE. In 454 BCE the treasury
was moved to Athens and the Athenians also took
over administration of the site. Administration
changed hands when Antigonus established the
League of Islanders in 314 BCE, which included
Delos.
Following the Chremonidean War
(266-229 BCE), Delos became an independent polis
for the next 150 years or so and was administered
by a religious council of hieropoioi. In
this period, the island enjoyed the generous
patronage of various Hellenistic
kings. The island’s independence came to an end in
166 BCE when the Romans gave control of Delos back
to Athens, also making it a free trade
port. This brought another period of prosperity,
and the island became an important centre for the
slave trade whilst its population greatly
increased in size and ethnic diversity, a fact
reflected in the adoption of diverse religious
cults on the island, such as those to Sarapis and
Isis. Things took a turn for the worse, however,
when the island was sacked first by Mithradates
VI’s general, Archelaus, in 88 BCE and then again
by pirates in 69 BCE, events which brought about
the island’s gradual and permanent decline.
The Sanctuary of Delos
The island was first excavated by a team of French
archaeologists from 1873 CE, revealing the true
extent of the religious site. The island once had
temples dedicated to Apollo (the Artemission),
Leto (the Letoon), Artemis, Hera (the Heraion),
Zeus, Athena,
Hercules,
and Asclepius.
The Temple
of Apollo housed, from the 6th century BCE, an 8 m
high cult statue of the god made of wood and
covered in gold.
There was also a temple dedicated to the twelve
Olympian gods (the Dodekatheon). Several other
sacred buildings have also been identified but
their exact purpose is unclear.
The Panēgyris,
an Ionian festival in honour of Apollo, was held
every year on the island and in the late 5th
century BCE, a spectacular (Athenian inspired)
festival - the Delia - was held every
five years. The accompanying athletic games and
musical and dancing contests attracted visitors
from across the Aegean.
Victors in the Delian games climbed the island’s
Mt. Kynthos in order to be crowned.
As with other major sanctuaries, Delos had a
diverse complex of buildings, including a
monumental gateway entrance (propylaea)
to the site, a theatre (c. 300 BCE, capacity:
5,000 spectators), stadium,
several stoas (for example, of Antigonus),
gymnasium, hippodrome, palaestras (3rd and 2nd
centuries BCE), a hippostyle hall (constructed in
the 3rd century BCE) an agora
(built under Theophrastus in the 2nd century BCE),
and even a sacred lake, guarded by marble lions.
Beyond the sanctuary of Apollo, there were also
sanctuaries testimony to the city’s
one-time cosmopolitan make-up, with temples to
Isis, Serapis and Cabeiri. Commercial buildings on
the island included markets and warehouses, and
the residential area dating from the 2nd century
BCE displays grid street plans and large houses,
which, with their mosaics, wall
paintings, and colonnades, are testimony to the
islands one-time prosperity.
Notable archaeological finds at the site are the
famous marble lions, much weather-worn but still
retaining a regal air. Of these, five lions
survive from the original nine dedicated by the
Naxians in the 7th century BCE. In addition,
several fine mosaics have been uncovered,
including one depicting Dionysos
seated on a panther.
Bibliography
Ananiades
D, Ancient Greece: Temples & Sanctuaries
(Toubis, Athens, 2010)
Hornblower,
S. (ed), The Oxford Classical Dictionary
(OUP, Oxford, 2012)
Kinzl,
K.H. (ed), A Companion to the Classical Greek
World (Wiley-Blackwell, London, 2012)
Tsakos,
K, Delos-Mykonos A Guide to the History &
Archaeology (Hesperos, Athens, 1998)
Mark holds an M.A. in Greek
philosophy and his special interests include the
Minoans, the ancient Americas, and world
mythology. He loves visiting and reading about
historic sites and transforming that experience into
free articles accessible to all.
When Athens
began to emerge as a Greek city state in the ninth
century, it was a poor city, built on and surrounded
by undesirable land, which could support only a few
poor crops and olive trees. As it grew it was forced
to import much of its food, and while it was near the
centre of the Greek world, it was far from being a
vital trading juncture like Corinth. Its army was, by
the standards of cities such as Sparta, weak. Yet
somehow it became the most prominent of the Greek city
states, the one remembered while contemporaries such
as Sparta are often forgotten. It was the world's
first democracy of a substantial size (and, in some
ways, though certainly not others, one of the few true
democracies the world has ever seen), producing art
and fine architecture in unprecedented amounts. It
became a centre of thinking and literature, producing
philosophers and playwrights like Socrates and
Aristophanes. But most strikingly of all, it was the
one Greek city that managed to control an empire
spanning the Aegean sea. During the course of this
essay I will attempt to explain how tiny Athens
managed to acquire this formidable empire, and why she
became Greece's most prominent city state, rather than
cities which seemed to have more going for them like
Sparta or Corinth.
An Athenian coin
showing a trireme, the type of ship
Athens used to build a formidable empire
The Persian Invasions and Birth
of the Delian League
While we tend to
think of Greece as the most important nation of the
ancient world before Rome, it was in fact a haphazard
collection of autonomous city states, which, even when
their forces were combined, were on paper no match for
mighty empires like that of Persia. So, when the
Persian King Darius I invaded, the Greeks must have
been more than a little alarmed. Infuriated by an
Athenian-backed revolt in Ionia (the stretch of
Turkey's west coast colonised by Ionian Greeks, a
historic group which included the Athenians), Darius
had demanded tokens of submission from the Greek
states. While most of the smaller cities gave in,
Athens and Sparta refused to do so, killing the
foreign King's heralds as a gesture of defiance.
Athens' actions showed a great deal of pluck, given
it's relative military weakness, and enraged Darius.
He put together a mighty expeditionary force and set
sail in 490 B.C.
The Spartan army
proceeded to the plain of Marathon near Athens. The
Spartans could not help as news of the Athenians'
plight reached them on a religious holiday. However,
the Athenians managed to win a convincing victory,
faced with an army three times the size of theirs.
When Darius' son, Xerxes, amassed one of the greatest
armies of antiquity to exact revenge for his father's
humiliation, fewer than 400 Greek vessels defeated the
1,200 strong Persian fleet thanks to the clever
command of the Athenian statesman Themistocles. This
caused Xerxes to flee to Asia, and in 479 B.C. his
army followed him, pulling out of Greece.
By this time
Athens had won the friendship of many Greek states,
both because of their defeat of the Persians and
because of the unpopularity of the Spartan regent,
Pausanias, who, according to Thucydides[1],
had "begun to reveal the true arrogance of his
nature... [and] appeared to be trying to set himself
up as dictator." Thucydides tells us that for these
reasons the city states "had gone over to the side of
the Athenians", which proceeded to take over
leadership of the Delian League, a confederacy of
cities determined to protect themselves from Persian
attack and "compensate themselves for their losses by
ravaging the territory of the king of Persia." Sparta
was happy to cede leadership of the league as
(according to Thucydides) "they were afraid any other
commanders they sent abroad would be corrupted, as
Pausanias had been, and they were glad to be relieved
of the burden of fighting the Persians.... Besides, at
the time they still thought of the Athenians as
friendly allies." Also, Sparta wished to keep its army
at home to deal with helot revolts (and also to
prevent its soldiers from becoming corrupted).
Initially the
Delian League was a fairly loose coalition of states,
each one independent and sharing a common interest
with the others. Members of the league were numerous:
Thucydides[2]
tells us that they included "Chios, Lesbos, Plataea
... most of Acarnania ... Ionia, the Hellespont,
Thrace and the islands between the Peloponnese and
Crete towards the East, and all the Cyclades except
for Melos and There" as well as Aegina and most of the
Euboean cities. Together, these states constituted a
formidable force capable of achieving it's objectives.
A map showing the
Athenian empire and the extent of discontent
(Courtesy 'The Ancient Source' - address given)
While Athens was
the leader of the league, all its member states had an
equal vote in the ruling council. Initially the
league's actions were only for the well being of its
members. Under the command of the Athenian Cimon, the
Persian fortress of Eion on the Thracian coast was
captured in 476 B.C. After this, Persian power in the
North began to diminish. In 473 B.C Cimon crushed a
group of Dolopian pirates who had been terrorising the
central Aegean from the island of Scyros. An allied
colony was established in their place. In 468 B.C. the
Persian fleet was annihilated on the river Eurymedon
in southern Turkey, again by Cimon, while at some
point in the 460s, Cimon liberated the Southern Aegean
and Caria from Persian control.
Meanwhile,
Sparta was in trouble. Two of the states in the
Peloponnesian League, a Spartan-led collection of
states far looser than the Delian league, became
democratic, while Argos revolted against her
leadership. After a devastating earthquake and helot
revolt, the stricken Spartans appealed to Athens for
help. This was only given with reluctance after Cimon
begged the Athenians "not to allow Greece to go lame,
or their own city to be deprived of its yoke-fellow".
However, Sparta grew alarmed by growing Athenian
imperialism and asked that the Athenian presence in
their city be withdrawn.
From a league to an empire
While freeing
the southern Aegean from Persian control, Cimon
succeeded in convincing more states to join the
league. According to Diodorus[3],
having persuaded "the cities of the sea coast [and]
the cities of Lycia" to revolt, he "took them over in
the same way". This, along with further evidence,
suggests that these cities were forced to join whether
or not they wanted to. Plutarch tells us "Phaselis ...
refused to admit [Cimon's] fleet or to fight against
the King, and so he devastated their land." In 480
B.C. the Athenians attempted to force impoverished
Andros to pay a sum to the league:
"the Greeks
... surrounded Andros with a view to capturing it.
Andros was the first island to reject
Themistokles' requests for money."
(Herodotus VIII.111)
Further evidence
of expansionistic Athenian policy can be seen in the
case of Carystus, the one city in Euboea which
declined membership of the Delian League. After
refusing to join a second time in 472 B.C., they were
paid a visit by the league's fleet and promptly
conquered. In both these cases the Athenian's actions
were at least partially justifiable. The Athenians had
secured Greek control of the Aegean and Carian. At the
time of the Carystian incident the Persians still
controlled these regions, and thus Carystus could
become a stepping stone to mainland Greece and
encourage other Euboean cities to leave the league.
A less
justifiable incident was the way the Athenians dealt
with Naxos' attempted secession from the league. The
Naxians had seen the Persian threat in the North
decline as a result of the league's actions, and saw
no reason to continue contributing money to the
league. The Athenians and the other allies, however,
did not see it that way. The Naxians' resources were
needed in the South and the Naxians had, after all,
sworn to remain in the league forever, as symbolised
by the sinking of lumps of metal in the sea: a
permanent, irreversible action. Athens also had
reasons of its own, which I gesture at in my
conclusion. Naxos was subjugated and the allies
decided to take its fleet and change the naval
contributions it made into a regularly-given tribute.
A garrison was left behind: Naxos effectively became
an imperial subject. Similarly, Erythrai, which
rebelled in the 450's B.C. was the subject of a harsh
and authoratitive decree.
By now the
Persian threat had more or less dissolved and so the
league had achieved its purpose. However the Athenians
chose to enforce the league's oath and force all
members to remain in it. One member to revolt was
Thasos, a rich and navally powerful island which
controlled parts of nearby Thrace. The Athenians
clearly had their eyes set on natural resources in
Thrace, and when they started to dispute the Thasian
possession of a gold mine, the Thasians grew worried,
and threatened to withdraw from the league.
Because of this
the league overcame the Thasian fleet in 465 B.C.
capturing 33 ships and laid seige to Thasos. The
Spartans were sufficiently concerned with Athenian
expansionism (and while the Delian League acted as one
unit, it was clear that the Athenians were behind this
action) to sign a secret pact with the Thasians under
which they would invade Attica. As it happened Sparta
could not do this due to internal strife, but the pact
shows how transparent the Athenian imperialism was.
At the same time
as besieging Thasos the Athenians established an
allied colony in Thrace, where they were clearly
anxious to establish a foothold. In 462 B.C. Thasos
had to capitulate, and lost her fleet, gold mint and
city walls. Like Naxos, it was forced to pay tribute
rather than making contributions to the navy. The
disputed gold mine and some other valuable settlements
in Thrace were annexed by the Athenians (it is notable
that the Athenians took these over without even a
pretence to them being under control of all the
league).
Athens embarked
on an aggressive new foreign policy, aimed against
Sparta, Athens' major rival in Greece. Athens allied
with Argos, Sparta's traditional antagonist in the
Peloponnese, and proceeded to attack Corinth, Sparta's
most important ally. Vast operations were launched on
both land and sea, and the result was that by 457 B.C.
Athens had control of the whole of central Greece
(although this control had collapsed by the time of
the Thirty Year Truce's signing in 445 B.C.). Athens'
eagerness to build an empire (and the fact that the
sometimes-foolish boldness with which it acted was
partly caused by its being a democracy) was evident in
its decision to send a vast fleet of 200 triremes to
aid an Egyptian revolt against the Persian empire.
This served little practical purpose, and more sober
minds would doubtless have kept to their own affairs.
Athenian cleruchies (colonies) were set up at
strategic points throughout Greece, the Mediterranean
and even the Black sea, where Athens maintained a good
relationship with Cimmerians as it grew more and more
dependent on the import of grain from this tribe.
Amphipolis was built at a strategic junction on the
northern Aegean coast road; Thourioi was founded as an
Athenian stronghold in Magna Graecia; and a fleet was
sent to the Back Sea simply as a demonstration of
Athenian power and to keep the vital trade routes
open. An Athenian empire was now well and truly
established.
The Resultant Empire
The Athenian
Empire at its height (450 B.C.)
Athens had by
now obtained a mighty empire. Of the more than 200
members (membership of the league had increased
because Athens' friendship was an important asset for
many Greek cities), only a few allies remained largely
autonomous. According to Aristotle:
"After the
Athenians had gained their empire, they treated
their allies rather dictatorially, except for
Chios, Lesbos and Samos. These they regarded as
guardians of the empire, allowing them to keep
their own constitution and rule over any subjects
they happened to have."
(Consitution of Athens XXIV)
However, the
majority had ceased to contribute ships and instead
gave Athens tribute. The change can be seen in the
transmutation of the word phoros' meaning.
Originally it meant 'contribution', but as the Delian
League changed into the Athenian Empire, it came to
mean 'tribute.' In around 448 B.C. Athens issued a
controversial decree:
"If anyone
in the cities strikes silver coins and does not
use the currency, weights and measures of the
Athenians, but foreign currency, weights and
measures ... exact penal retribution"
(Klearkhos Decree)
As well as using
the tribute it received to build ships, Athens
embarked on an ambitious building program under
Pericles. The Acropolis was rebuilt, with magnificent
buildings such as the Parthenon (shown below) and
Erechtheum contributing to the beautification of the
city. Some warned that by doing this, the Athenians
gave up any pretence of working for the good of the
League. The allies were indeed furious at the way
their money was spent, but Pericles replied that so
long as Athens protected her allies from the Persians
it was not their concern how their money was spent.
The Parthenon
(Courtesy Department of Archaeology, Boston
University)
After the
incidents at Carystus, Naxos and Thasos, a new type of
member emerged: a subject state. These states would at
the very least be dominated by an Athenian garrison,
and served as Athenian puppets in the league's
assembly. When these votes were counted together with
those of the small states which were clearly
intimidated by Athens, the assembly became irrelevant:
whatever Athens wanted would always be done. It fell
into disuse an was abolished between 440 and 432.
After this, Athens ruled over the league by decree.
Earlier, in 454 B.C., the treasury of the league had
been moved from the small, neutral island of Delos to
Athens. So great was Athenian control of the League
that allied troops were used in conflicts where only
Athens' interests were involved.
Athens
maintained it's leadership by a number of means. It
possessed a magnificent navy, as the League's ships
became part of the Athenian navy. This consisted of
300 triremes, and was by far the largest in the Greek
world. At least 60 triremes were kept in the Aegean at
any one time. The trireme was the predominant warship
of the time, a narrow vessel built for speed. Each one
required 180 oarsmen in three tiers, and fought by
ramming enemy ships or boarding them with marines. As
Pericles said to the Athenians:
"The whole
world is divided into two parts, the sea and the
land... Of the whole of one part you are in
control"
(Thucydides II.62)
Thucydides
also tells us of the extent of the Atenians' power
over their discontented but impotent allies:
"The
subject states of Athens were especially eager to
revolt, even though it was beyond their
capability."
(Thucydides VIII.2)
"They
learned nothing from the fate of those of their
neighbours who had already revolted and been
subdued."
(Thucydides III.39)
"The
Athenian fleet grew strong with the money which
the allies had themselves contributed, whilst
whenever they revolted they were ill-prepared and
inexperienced."
(Thucydides I.99)
Athens
maintained a tight grip over all their allies, never
letting a hint of dissent go unpunished. For example,
the Chalkians had to swear not to "follow anyone who
revolts, and if any person causes a revolt, [to]
denounce him to the Athenians." Often, constitutions
that were models of Athens' were imposed on allies,
and serious cases were placed under the jurisdiction
of Athens. Law courts often prosecuted anti-Athenian
elements. Control became so absolute that eventually
no ally could sentence someone to death without first
obtaining Athenian permission. We are told that:
"...the
Athenians sail out and bring false charges against
the respectable elements among [their allies] and
hate them, because they realize that the ruler is
always hated by the subject"
(Old Oligarch I.14)
It is worth
noting that many Athenians viewed this as an
altruistic arrangement, and could not understand the
anger at lost independence it caused. As Athenian
delegates to Sparta complained:
"In law
suits with our allies arising out of contracts, we
have put ourselves at a disadvantage, and when we
arrange to have such cases tried by imperial
courts at Athens, people accuse us of being
over-fond of going to law."
(Thucydides I.77)
Colonies
established on confiscated land were useful in the
control of troublesome allies:
"Pericles
sent out one thousand settlers to the Khersonese,
five hundred to Naxos, 250 to Andros, one thousand
to Thrace to make their homes with the Bisaltai
... and, by setting up garrisons among the allies,
to implant a fear of rebellion." (Plutarch, Pericles XI)
Athens
opportunistically exploited religion and idealism.
Land was claimed because it had belonging to Athena,
the patron of Athens, or, in the case of Scyros,
because Theseus' bones were claimed to have been found
there. Athens encouraged the belief that she was the
mother of all Ionian cities, and propagated the myth
that the Athenian Demeter had granted corn to mankind.
While Athens usually supported democrats against
oligarchs, she would occasionally support oligarchs
when the situation demanded it. In short, she was
willing to do practically anything to maintain her
empire, and went to extreme lengths. The Delian League
had been intended to keep Greece from becoming a part
of the Persian empire. Instead, it was the means by
which Athens established an empire in Greece.
Conclusion
When she assumed
leadership of the Delian League, Athens' intentions
were for the most part honourable. In the first few
years of her hegemony she accomplished extraordinary
feats, forcing the Persians from Greece. However, she
also experienced a huge influx of money from the
league's members intended to pay for its naval forces.
The Athenians grew used to a higher standard of
living, due to the money and food now flowing into the
city. The prestige and power of their city was
advantageous to them all. Athens was reliant on
imported corn to support her growing population: the
money now flowing into her coffers enabled her to
obtain it. Income from tributes and pillaging from the
empire came to more than a thousand talents a year,
while confiscated land and colonies provided
livelihoods for many Athenians. The money from the
empire was used to support the navy, construct
magnificent public buildings, and support the city's
poor. Jobs were created by the empire as well: almost
everyone served in the navy at one point or another.
Everyone in the
city benefited, so it is not surprising that
democratic Athens elected to keep the money flowing in
when the league succeeded in eliminating the Persian
threat. While justifying their actions to the
Peloponnesians, Athenian representatives said:
"We have
done nothing surprising, nothing contrary to human
nature, if we accepted leadership when it was
offered and are now unwilling to give it up."
(Thucydides I.76)
"So far as
the favour of the gods is concerned, we think we
have as much right to that as you ... it is a
general and necessary law of nature to govern
wherever one can ... we know that you or anybody
else with the same power as ours would be acting
in precisely the same way." (Thucydides V.105)
It is also worth
noting that while the tributes became more oppressive
after the Peace of Callias, they were never seen as
being far too high. In fact the only dramatic rise in
their level took place in 425 B.C., and this was both
because of the political tension that year and to
correct for recent inflation. Athens' preference for
monetary rather than naval contributions was also at
least partially justified by the fact that it was
beyond the capabilities of many of the states in the
Delian League to build triremes and train crews in the
complicated art of manoeuvring a triple-banked rowing
boat in battle. Athens had plenty of men eager to earn
money as oarsmen, and also the shipyards and skilled
craftsmen required to build triremes. Indeed, many in
the league were happy to let Athens take care of
building ships.
However, by
doing this they were signing away their independence.
The fleet which was meant to be the league's became
Athens', and with it she could overcome any ally who
complained about the tribute it had to pay. It could
be argued that Athens' rashness, its self-confidence
and the notorious "busy-bodyness" of which the
Spartans complained were partly due to its democratic
status. While oligarchs might not have taken such
risks, the assembly was pushed into adventurism time
and again by the potential rewards it held for the
city's people. They knew their empire for what it was,
but were naturally loath to give up the prosperity,
wealth, prestige and security that came with it. The
latter concern in particular provided a
self-perpetuating rationale, as each exercise in
imperialism infuriated the city's traditional enemies,
and its erstwhile allies, further. As Pericles said to
his countrymen:
"Your
empire is now a tyranny: it may have been wrong to
take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."
(Thucydides II.63)
Endnotes
Thucydides I.95
Thucydides II.9
Diodorus XI.60
Bibliography
Athens Ascendant, George
Dent Wilcoxon (Iowa State Press/1979)
History of the
Peloponessian War, Thucydides (Primary
source)
A History of Greece,
Bury & Meiggs (MacMillan, 1975)
The Athenian Empire, Meiggs
(OUP, 1972)
The Athenians And Their
Empire, McGregor (University of British
Columbia Press, 1987)
These Were the Greeks,
Amos & Lang (Stanley Thornes, 1979
Tom Ash is the webmaster of
Big Issue Ground and Atheist Ground. He studied
philosophy at Oxford and Cambridge, where he was
president of the University Atheist and Agnostic
Society. He currently does non-profit work and
freelance web development.
9
Pausanius -- Spartan General
Encyclopedia Britannica
Pausanias, (died probably between 470 and 465 bc ,
Sparta [Greece]), Spartan commander during the
Greco-Persian Wars who was accused of treasonous dealings
with the enemy.
A member of the Agiad royal family, Pausanias was the son
of King Cleombrotus I and nephew of King Leonidas. He
became regent for Leonidas’ son after the father was
killed at Thermopylae (480). Pausanias commanded the
allied Greek army that defeated the Persians at Plataea
(479), and he led the Greeks in the capture of Byzantium
(478).
While Pausanias was at Byzantium, his arrogance and his
adoption of Persian clothing and manners offended the
allies and raised suspicions of disloyalty. Recalled to
Sparta, he was tried and acquitted of the charge of
treason but was not restored to his command. When the
Athenians separated from the Spartans to form the Delian
League, Pausanias returned to Byzantium privately and held
the city until expelled by the Athenians (probably in
477). He retired to Colonae near Troy but was later again
recalled to Sparta to face charges of conspiracy.
Suspected of plotting to seize power in Sparta by
instigating a helot uprising, he took refuge in the Temple
of Athena of the Brazen House to escape arrest. The
Spartans walled in the sanctuary and starved to death [tkw
note -- him bringig him out of the temple just before he
died to avaid poluting the Temple to death.]
Although Herodotus doubted that Pausanias had colluded
with the Persians, Thucydides, writing years after the
events, was certain of his guilt. It is conceivable that
the Spartans had made Pausanias a scapegoat for their
failure to retain the leadership of Greece.
Cimon (/ˈsaɪmən/;
Greek: Κίμων, Kimōn;
510 – 450 BC), was an Athenian
statesman and strategos in mid-5th century BC
Greece, the son of Miltiades, the victor of the Battle of Marathon. Cimon played a key
role in creating the powerful Athenian
maritime empire following the failure of the Persian
invasion of Greece by Xerxes
I in 480-479 BC. Cimon became a celebrated
military hero and was elevated to the rank of admiral
after fighting in the Battle of Salamis. One of Cimon’s greatest exploits was
his destruction of a Persian fleet and army
at the Battle of the
Eurymedon river in 466 BC. In 462 BC, he led an
unsuccessful expedition to support the Spartans during the helot uprisings.
As a result, he was dismissed and ostracized
from Athens in 461 BC; however, he was recalled from his
exile before the end of his ten-year ostracism to broker
a five-year peace treaty in 451 BC between Sparta and
Athens. For this participation in pro-Spartan policy, he
has often been called a laconist. Cimon also led the
Athenian aristocratic party against Pericles and opposed the
democratic revolution of Ephialtes seeking to retain
aristocratic party control over Athenian institutions.
Early years Cimon was born into Athenian nobility
in 510 BC. He was a member of the Philaidae clan, from the deme
of Laciadae
(Lakiadai). His father was the celebrated Athenian
general Miltiades
and his mother was Hegesipyle, daughter of the Thracian king Olorus and a relative of the
historian Thucydides. While Cimon was a young man, his
father was fined 50 talents after an
accusation of treason by the Athenian state. As
Miltiades could not afford to pay this amount, he was
put in jail, where he died in 489 BC. Cimon inherited
this debt and had to look after his sister Elpinice. According to Plutarch, the wealthy Callias took
advantage of this situation by proposing to pay the sum
if Elpinice would marry him, to which Cimon agreed.[1][2][3] Marriage Cimon later married Isodice, Megacles' granddaughter and a
member of the Alcmaeonidae family. Their
first children were twin boys named Lacedaemonius
(who would become an Athenian commander) and Eleus.
Their third son was Thessalus (who would become a
politician). Military career During the Battle of Salamis, Cimon
distinguished himself by his bravery. He is mentioned as
being a member of an embassy sent to Sparta in 479 BC. Between 478 BC and 476 BC, a number of
Greek maritime cities around the Aegean Sea did not wish to
submit to Persian control again and offered their
allegiance to Athens through Aristides at Delos. There, they formed the Delian League (also known as
the Confederacy of Delos), and it was agreed that Cimon
would be their principal commander.[4]
As strategos, Cimon commanded most of the League’s
operations until 463 BC. During this period, he and
Aristides drove the Spartans under Pausanias out of Byzantium. Cimon also captured Eion
on the Strymon from the Persian
general Boges and established an Athenian colony nearby
called Amphipolis with 10,000
settlers.[citation needed]
He also conquered Scyros and
drove out the pirates who were based there.[1][5]
On his return, he brought the “bones” of the
mythological Theseus back to Athens. To
celebrate this achievement, three Herma statues were erected around
Athens.[1] Battle of the Eurymedon Around 466 BC, Cimon carried the war
against Persia into Asia Minor and decisively
defeated the Persians at the Battle of the
Eurymedon on the Eurymedon
River in Pamphylia. Cimon's land and sea
forces captured the Persian camp and destroyed or
captured the entire Persian fleet of 200 triremes manned by Phoenicians. Many new allies of
Athens were then recruited into the Delian League, such
as the trading city of Phaselis on the Lycian-Pamphylian border. There is a view amongst some
historians that while in Asia Minor, Cimon negotiated a
peace between the League and the Persians after his
victory at the Battle of the Eurymedon. This may help to
explain why the Peace of Callias
negotiated by his brother-in-law in 450 BC is sometimes
called the Peace of Cimon as Callias’ efforts may have
led to a renewal of Cimon’s earlier treaty. He had
served Athens well during the Persian Wars
and according to Plutarch: "In all the qualities
that war demands he was fully the equal of Themistocles and his own
father Miltiades".[1][4] Thracian Chersonesus After his successes in Asia Minor,
Cimon moved to the Thracian colony Chersonesus.
There he subdued the local tribes and ended the revolt
of the Thasians between 465 BC and 463 BC. Thasos had revolted from the Delian
League over a trade rivalry with the Thracian hinterland
and, in particular, over the ownership of a gold mine.
Athens under Cimon laid siege to Thasos after the Athenian
fleet defeated the Thasos fleet. These actions earned
him the enmity of Stesimbrotus
of Thasos (a source used by Plutarch in his writings about
this period in Greek history). Trial for bribery Despite these successes, Cimon was
prosecuted by Pericles for allegedly accepting bribes from Alexander I of Macedon.
During the trial, Cimon said: "Never have I been an
Athenian envoy, to any rich kingdom. Instead, I was
proud, attending to the Spartans, whose frugal culture I
have always imitated. This proves that I don't desire
personal wealth. Rather, I love enriching our nation,
with the booty of our victories." As a result, Elpinice
convinced Pericles not to be too harsh in his criticism
of her brother. Cimon was in the end acquitted.[1] Helot revolt in Sparta Cimon was Sparta's Proxenos at Athens, he strongly advocated a
policy of cooperation between the two states. He was
known to be so fond of Sparta that he named one of his
sons Lacedaemonius.[6][7]
In 462 BC, Cimon sought the support of Athens’ citizens
to provide help to Sparta. Although Ephialtes maintained
that Sparta was Athens' rival for power and should be
left to fend for itself, Cimon's view prevailed. Cimon
then led 4,000 hoplites to Mt. Ithome to help the Spartan
aristocracy deal with a major revolt by its helots.
However, this expedition ended in humiliation for Cimon
and for Athens when, after an attempt to storm Mt.
Ithome failed[clarification
needed], the Spartans
expelled Cimon and his army on suspicion of
“revolutionary tendencies”. Exile
Pieces of broken pottery (Ostracon) as voting tokens
for ostracism. The persons nominated are Pericles, Cimon and Aristides, each with his patronymic (top to
bottom).
This insulting rebuff caused the
collapse of Cimon's popularity in Athens. As a result,
he was ostracised from Athens for ten
years beginning in 461 BC. The reformer Ephialtes then
took the lead in running Athens and, with the support of
Pericles, reduced the power of the Athenian Council of
the Areopagus (filled with ex-archons and so a stronghold of oligarchy). Power was transferred to the people,
i.e. the Council of Five Hundred,
the Assembly, and the popular law courts. Some of
Cimon’s policies were reversed including his pro-Spartan
policy and his attempts at peace with Persia. Many ostraka bearing his name
survive; one bearing the spiteful inscription: "Cimon,
son of Miltiades, and Elpinice too" (his haughty
sister). In 458 BC, Cimon sought to return to
Athens to assist its fight against Sparta at Tanagra, but was rebuffed. Return to Athens Eventually, around 451 BC, Cimon
returned to Athens. Although he was not allowed to
return to the level of power he once enjoyed, he was
able to negotiate on Athens’ behalf a five-year truce
with the Spartans. Later, with a Persian fleet moving
against a rebellious Cyprus, Cimon proposed an
expedition to fight the Persians. He gained Pericles'
support and sailed to Cyprus with two hundred triremes
of the Delian League. From there, he sent sixty ships to
Egypt to help the Egyptians
under Amyrtaeus, in the Nile Delta. Cimon used the
remaining ships to aid the uprising of the Cypriot Greek
city-states. Rebuilding Athens From his many military exploits, and
money gained through the Delian League, Cimon funded
many construction projects throughout Athens. These
projects were greatly needed in order to rebuild Athens
after its destruction by the Persians. He ordered the
expansion of the Acropolis and the
walls around Athens, and the construction of public
roads, public gardens, and many political buildings.[8] Cyprus and death of Cimon Cimon laid siege to the Persian
stronghold of Citium on the
southwest coast of Cyprus; however, the siege failed
and Cyprus remained under Phoenician
(and Persian) control. It was during this siege that
Cimon either died or was killed. He was later buried in
Athens where a monument was erected in his memory. See
also
Aristides son of Lysimachus was a
supporter of the democratic reformer Cleisthenes,
and a political opponent of Persian War leader Themistocles.
He was noted for his sense of justice and often
referred to as Aristides the Just.
Aristides the Just
The story goes that one time when
the Athenians were voting on whom to ostracise, to
send into exile for ten years, by writing names on
potsherds (ostraka
in Greek), an illiterate farmer who did not know
Aristides asked him to write a name down for him on
his piece of pottery.
Aristides asked
him what name to write, and the farmer replied
"Aristides". Aristides dutifully wrote his own name,
and then asked the farmer what harm Aristides had ever
done him. "None at all," came the reply, "but I'm sick
and tired of hearing him being called 'the Just' all
the time."
PersianWar
During the first Persian invasion
(490), Aristides was one of the ten Athenian generals,
but when his turn to command came, he gave up his turn
to Miltiades,
thinking him to be a better commander. The other
generals then followed his example. After the battle
of Marathon, Aristides and his tribe were left in
charge of the plunder taken from the Persians, and
Aristides made certain that nothing was stolen.
Three years after Aristides'
ostracism, the Persians invaded again (480). Aristides
offered his services to Themistocles, his political
rival, and the main force behind his ostracism, and
helped persuade the other Greeks that Themistocles'
strategy of fighting a naval battle at Salamis was a
sound one. After the battle of Salamis, Themistocles
wanted to cut the bridge Xerxes, the Persian king, had
built across the Hellespont, but Aristides dissuaded
him, pointing out that it was in their interest to
leave Xerxes a route for his retreat so that the
Greeks would not have to fight with a Persian army
trapped in Greece itself.
At the battle of
Plateae (479), Aristides was one of the Athenian
commanders, and was instrumental in keeping the Greek
alliance together despite its internal disagreements
between the forces of the different city states. The
five-yearly games to be held at Plateae in
commemoration of the Greek victory and the levy of
weapons from all the Greek states to provide for
continuing the war against the Persians were
Aristides' ideas.
After the war, Aristides was
instrumental in making the archonships
open to all male citizens. When Themistocles told the
Athenian assembly that he had an idea which could be
of great benefit to Athens, but which had to be kept
secret, the assembly ordered him to explain the idea
to Aristides.
The idea was to
destroy the Greek arsenal in order to make Athens the
master of Greece. Aristides told the assembly that
nothing could be more expedient than Themistocles'
advice, and nothing would be more unjust. The assembly
then dropped the idea.
As one of the Athenian
commissioners for the continuation of the war,
Aristides won over the other Greek cities, who were
becoming restive under the harsh and selfish command
of Pausanias, the Spartan commander (477). It was
Aristides who was fixed the rate for each city when
the levy was changed from weapons and manpower to
money. He managed to do so with his reputation for
incorruptibility and justice remaining intact. Indeed,
when he died (468?) he did not even leave enough to
pay for his funeral, or a dowry for his daughters. The
city bestowed a dowry of 3000 drachmas on each of
them, and an estate and pension for his son,
Lysimachus.