The Tribute Lists and the Non-Tributary Members of the Delian League

1930 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Brown West
Keyword(s):  
1943 ◽  
Vol 63 ◽  
pp. 21-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Meiggs

By 446/5 the Delian League had become the Athenian empire. Peace had been made with Persia, but Athens had firmly retained her hold over the allies. More important, Sparta recognised the Athenian claim in the Thirty Years' Peace. ‘We will allow the cities their independence,’ Pericles could say on the eve of the Peloponnesian War, ‘if they were independent when we made peace.’ So much is clear, but the chronology and nature of the development of Athenian imperialism are both uncertain. We are coming to know or reasonably to guess considerably more of the decisive transition to empire following the Peace of Callias, but the imperial measures of those crowded years can only be appreciated in true perspective if we have a right understanding of the preceding period. The main purpose of this study is to re-examine the development of Athenian imperialism in the fifties.In his concise summary of Athens' rise to power, Thucydides emphasises the significance of the reduction of Naxos: to contemporaries Athenian action may have seemed less questionable. The Persian danger was still serious, and history had shown that the largest of the Cyclades might be a menace to the Greek cause, if it got into the wrong hands. Certainly the League was still popular after the collapse of Naxos, as Cimon's Eurymedon campaign clearly shows. From Caria to Pamphylia the Greek cities welcomed freedom from Persia and gladly entered the League: only at Phaselis was the show of pressure needed.


Arts ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 52
Author(s):  
Bennett

This paper analyzes the trends in depictions of women in Athenian vase-painting during the 5th century BCE through an examination of approximately 88,000 vases in the Beazley Archive Pottery Database. It found a 15% increase in depictions of women during the 5th century BCE and a diversification in subject matter in which women appear. By considering these trends within the historical context of the hegemonic position of Athens in the Delian League and its wars, this paper proposes that the changes in representations and subject matter denote an expanded marketability of vases to female viewers. As targeted imagery, the images give perceptible recognition to an increased valuation of women’s work and lives at a time when their roles in Athenian society were essential for the continued success of the city-state. This paper suggests that these changes also point to the fact that a greater share of the market was influenced by women, either directly or indirectly, and successful artists carefully crafted targeted advertisements on their wares to attract that group. This paper provides new insights into the relationships between vases and their intended audiences within the context of the cultural changes occurring in Athens itself.


1952 ◽  
Vol 2 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 57-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. Woodhead
Keyword(s):  
The Real ◽  

The Athenian expedition led against Macedonia by Archestratos, son of Lykomedes, early in 432 was not diverted from its destination by the revolt of Poteidaia. Archestratos had received additional instructions to enforce the Poteidaia ultimatum if he could, but, this being already impossible, he continued with the real object of his mission, the attack on Perdikkas II of Macedon. The widespread revolt among the Chalkidians had deprived the Athenians of the bases for this attack on which they might have reckoned, and Archestratos had at the outset to make good this loss by recapturing Therme, at the head of the gulf to which it gave its name. Therme, or Serme, had been a tributary member of the Delian League since 450/449:2 it need not necessarily be said that it lay within Macedonia, as Poppo and Bergk inferred from Thucydides 1. 61. 2, but it is at least likely that it lay on the boundary, as it was handed over to Perdikkas under the agreement of 431 (Thuc. 2.29.6).3 However, that the Athenians could include in their Empire a city within Macedonian territory is shown from the position of Berge (tributary since 452/451), and is likely in other cases, e.g. Haison. From Therme, Archestratos moved on to Pydna, presumably by sea, and laid siege to it. Here he was joined by substantial reinforcements, while at the same time the situation in Chalkidike became increasingly embarrassing, so that a peace and a reinsurance alliance were seen by both sides to be ‘imperative’ (Thuc. 1. 61. 3). When these had been concluded, the Athenians moved against Poteidaia.


1960 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. 194-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael Sealey

At the end of book X of thePhilippikaTheopompos gave a digression on die Athenian demagogues. In book XXV he gave a digression on Athenian lies. This, which may have been a shorter digression, specified two lies and questioned the accepted account of the battle of Marathon; perhaps Theopompos discussed these problems alone in full and contented himself with a general reference to other lies. One lie was the oath allegedly taken by the Greeks before the battle of Plataea; today many people believe, with Theopompos, that this oath was not authentic. The other lie was the peace of Callias. Today some people believe, against Theopompos, that the peace was authentic. It is not always easy to discover their reasons. Some of them claim to produce nebulous allusions to the peace from the text of Thucydides. This search in Thucydides for references to the peace is not likely to carry conviction; it simply draws attention to the silence of Thucydides about the peace in his account of the Pentecontaetia. In fact the positive evidence for the peace is flimsy, but there is one good reason for believing in the peace; that is the fact that no major fighting is recorded between Persia and the Delian League after 450. Whether this outweighs the reasons against authenticity is a question for judgement.


1985 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 5-11
Keyword(s):  

Thuc. 1.95–97.1 begs many questions. (95) The violent conduct of the Spartan regent Pausanias, continuing the war against Persia in 478, angered ‘the Greeks, especially the Ionians and those who had recently been liberated from the King; they kept approaching the Athenians and asking them to become their leaders’, and the Athenians agreed; Pausanias was recalled, and when the Spartans sent Dorcis in his place the allies would not let him assume the command; the Spartans sent no further commanders, ‘withdrawing from the war against Persia, and reckoning that the Athenians were competent to lead and at that time friendly to them.’ Can we accept that the initiative was taken not by Athens but by the allies, and that Sparta was happy to let Athens take over the leadership? (Contrast, on the first question, Her. 8.3.2, Ath. Pol. 23.4; on the second, Ath. Pol. 23.2 (unemended and taken in its natural sense), Diod. Sic. 11.50, and the story of the rebuilding of Athens’ walls in Thuc. 1.90–2 and elsewhere). (96) ‘In this way the Athenians took over the leadership, the allies being willing because of their hatred of Pausanias’: what was the alliance of which Athens became the leader, and what became of the anti-Persian alliance of 481–478, led by Sparta, which Athens renounced in 462/1 (1.102.4)? ‘They determined which of the cities should provide money against the barbarian and which ships’: was this decision, at the foundation of the League, made simply by Athens? ‘For the pretext was to obtain revenge for their sufferings by ravaging the King’s land’: why pretext (proschema), and was this the only declared objective of the League? ‘This was when the office of Greek treasurers (hellenotamiai) was first instituted among the Athenians, to collect the tribute (phoros) (that was the name given to the cash payments); the first assessment of tribute was 460 talents’: were the hellenotamiai Athenian officials from the start, and is it credible that the original assessment of tribute payable in cash (which is what Thucydides seems to mean) was as much as 460 talents? ‘Delos was their treasury, and their councils met in the sanctuary there’: the treasury was moved to Athens in 454/3 (cf. pp. 15, 23), but did the councils move too or were they abolished? (97) ‘The Athenians were leaders of allies who were autonomous at first and who deliberated in common councils’: how much freedom does ‘autonomous’ denote, and was it guaranteed? What part did Athens and her allies play in the councils?


2011 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
VINCENT ROSIVACH

In the course of its history of the Athenian constitution, the Aristotelian Athēnaiōn Politeia describes Aristeides' leading role in organizing the Delian League, including his initial assessment of the contributions (phoros) paid by the League's members (Ath. Pol. 23.4–5). It then recounts his subsequent advice to the Athenians (24.1):Afterwards, as the polis was already growing bold and much money had been accumulated, his advice was to take over the leadership [of the League], and to come in from the fields and dwell in the urban centre [astu]; for there would be a living [trophē] for all – for those soldiering, for those standing guard, for those conducting public business – then in this way they would firmly hold onto their leadership.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document