Examples of arbitration. Between Athens and which, as a rule, also stipulated a definite period within which the award was to be made. The litigant States despatched representatives to expound and plead their respective causes. Such delegates (called σúvdiko,' and sometimes σvyopo2) acted, on the one hand, in a diplomatic capacity, and, on the other, as advocates appealing to the principles of equity, or to such appropriate provisions of law as existed, in support of their claims. After taking a solemn oath that he would faithfully and impartially perform his function, the arbitrator investigated the affair, heard the claims of both sides, and received evidence. The award, κpiois,3 (or éπITроn, a word also used to indicate the reference; the term άróparis is also employed in the sense of 'declaration'), which the parties had engaged on oath to abide by, and the observance of which was sometimes further guaranteed by the furnishing of definite security or the imposition of a fine," was then given, and a carefully written record made (often engraved on marble steles), of which a copy was deposited in some temple or public place. 3 By way of enlarging and illustrating the above considerations, it will be well to mention some of the leading arbitral cases, which will further exemplify the extent and applications of this peaceful mode of settling international and intermunicipal disputes amongst the ancient Greeks. In the time of Solon there was a case of arbitration between Athens and Megara, as to the possession of 1 Demosth. De corona, 134; Corp. inscrip. Graec. 2353. 2 Newton, Collection of ancient Greek inscriptions, pt. ii. no. 299, p. 86, 1. 19; Bull. de corr. hellén. vol. x. p. 241. See infra, p. 149. 8 Cf. Pausan. vii. 11. 4-5, quoted infra, p. 146 n. 2. 4 Cf. Thuc. v. 31, quoted infra, p. 144 n. 1; and Thuc. v. 41, quoted supra, p. 132 n. 3. 5 Corp. inscrip. Graec. 2265; Bull. de corr. hellen. vol. iii, p. 292, for which see infra, pp. 147, 148 n. 1. the island of Salamis. Plutarch says that as the Megaraeans still continued the war with the Athenians to the great misery of both sides, they agreed to make the Lacedaemonians arbitrators and judges between them. Five Spartans were accordingly chosen. It appears that in the course of the hearing of the respective claims, Solon's representative cited the authority of Homer in support of his city's contention; and the arbitrators, who were further influenced by the Pythian oracles, ultimately decided in favour of Athens. Athens and In the dispute between Athens and Mytilene re- Between garding the possession of the promontory of Sigeum, Mytilene. Periander, the tyrant of Corinth, officiated as arbitrator. As Herodotus relates: Periander, the son of Cypselus, reconciled the Mytilenaeans and the Athenians, for they referred to him as arbitrator; and he reconciled them on these terms, that the contending parties should retain what they held respectively; and thus Sigeum became subject to the Athenians.' 2 Athens and Before the battle of Marathon, the Plataeans having Between been hard pressed by the Thebans appealed to the Thebes. Lacedaemonians for help; but the latter, animated by ulterior motives, advised them to seek the protection of Athens. Whereupon the Thebans marched against the Plataeans, and the Athenians went to their assistance. As they were about to engage in battle, says Herodotus, the Corinthians intervened; for happening to be present and acting as mediators between them at the request of both parties, they prescribed the limits of the country to the effect that the Thebans should not interfere with those peoples of Boeotia, who did not 1 Plut. Solon, c. 1o: τῶν Μεγαρέων ἐπιμενόντων, πολλὰ κακὰ καὶ ὁρῶντες ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ καὶ πάσχοντες ἐποιήσαντο Λακεδαιμονίους διαλλακτὰς καὶ δικαστάς. Herodot. v. 95: Μυτιληναίους δὲ καὶ ̓Αθηναίους κατήλλαξε Περίανδρος ὁ Κυψέλου τούτῳ γὰρ διαιτητῇ ἐπετράποντο κατήλλαξε δὲ ὧδε νέμεσθαι ἑκατέρους τὴν ἔχουσι. Σίγειον μέν νυν οὕτω ἐγένετο in 'Aonvalowi.-Cf. Diog. Laert. i. 74; Strabo, xiii. 38. Between wish to be ranked among the Boeotians,—ἐν Θηβαίους Βοιωτῶν τοὺς μὴ βουλομένους ἐς Βοιωτούς τελέειν.1 Hippocrates, the tyrant of Gela, in the course of Hippocrates. extending his dominions, having vanquished the Callipolitae, the Naxians, the Zanclaeans, and the Leontines, was about to reduce also the Syracusans to subjection. But the Corinthians and Corcyraeans, as Herodotus relates, saved the Syracusans, after the defeat of the latter at the river Eleorus, by effecting a reconciliation, whereby Camarina which originally belonged to the Syracusans was to be given up to Hippocrates. This was not, however, a case of arbitration proper. Between The proposed arbitration between Corinth and Corcyra involved the question of the alleged right of the mother-state over its colony. The city of Epidamnus had been founded as a colony by Corcyra -herself a colony of Corinth-under the leadership of a Corinthian, in pursuance of long-established custom. It flourished rapidly; but in consequence of civil strife and barbarian attacks, it appealed to her mother-city, Corcyra, for assistance, which was, however, refused.3 Accordingly, acting under the advice of the Delphian oracle, the Epidamnians placed themselves under the protection of the Corinthians, their original founders. The latter took up their cause, partly because they themselves had been slighted by Corcyra, and partly because they considered that Epidamnus belonged as much to them as to Corcyra. In view of the extensive preparations of Corinth, Corcyraean ambassadors were despatched to summon the Corinthians to withdraw their troops, and to insist that they had nothing to do with Epidamnus. But if they made any claim to it, the Corcyraeans offered to submit the cause for arbitration to such Peloponnesian States as both parties would 1 Herodot. vi. 108. 2 Herodot. vii. 154 : ἐῤῥύσαντο δὲ οὗτοι ἐπὶ τοῖσδε καταλλάξαντες, ἐπ ̓ ᾧτε Ιπποκράτεϊ Καμαρίναν Συρηκουσίους παραδοῦναι. agree upon, and their decision was to be final; or, they were ready to refer the matter to the pronouncement of the Delphian oracle.1 Corinth, however, rejected the overtures, and declared war. On another occasion, according to Plutarch's report, when Corcyra was at variance with Corinth, Themistocles had been chosen to arbitrate between them, and effected a reconciliation. His award was to the effect that the Corinthians should pay down twenty talents, and that each State should have an equal share in the city and island of Leucas, as being a colony of both.2 Cimolos. In the conflict between Melos and Cimolos, 338 B.C., Between with regard to the possession of some small islands Melos and (viz. Polyaegos, Heteria, and Libia) situated near Cimolos, Argos acted as arbitrator at the invitation, and in accordance with the decree, of the common council of the Greeks, κοινὸν συνέδριον, instituted in 338 B.C. The Argive functionaries, who appear to have included a president, a secretary (γραφεύς), and an assessor (πεδιών = μετεών, in the inscription), decided in favour of Cimolos.3 1 Thuc. i. 28: εἰ δέ τι ἀντιποιοῦνται δίκας ἤθελον δοῦναι ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ παρὰ πόλεσιν αἷς ἂν ἀμφότεροι ξυμβῶσιν· ὁποτέρων δ' ἂν δικασθῇ εἶναι τὴν ἀποικίαν, τούτους κρατεῖν. ἤθελον δὲ καὶ τῷ ἐν Δελφοῖς μαντείῳ ἐπιτρέψαι. 2 Plut. Themistoc. 24: γενόμενος γὰρ αὐτῶν κριτὴς πρὸς Κορινθίους ἐχόντων διαφορὰν, ἔλυσε τὴν ἔχθραν εἴκοσι τάλαντα κρίνας τοὺς Κορινθίους καταβαλεῖν καὶ Λευκάδα κοινῇ νέμειν ἀμφοτέρων ἄποικον. 3 Hicks, 150; Michel, 14.-Cf. Sonne, op. cit. pp. 34 seq.-The following is the inscription on a marble slab found in Cimolos, and now in Smyrna : Θεός. Ἔκρινε ὁ δᾶμος ὁ τῶν Between There was a dispute between Corinth and Epidaurus (c. 250 B.C.) as to some territory situated in the mountainous region on the Saronic Gulf. Both towns were members of the Achaean league,1 and were, on that account, debarred from referring their difference to a third city. According to the constitution of the league, the general assembly alone had jurisdiction in the case of controversies arising between the confederates. A reference to a third city would necessarily involve the despatch of ambassadors, which was a privilege exercised by the Achaean towns only by the sanction of their federal council. Hence the disputants were obliged to apply to the congress. By the order of the Achaeans, states the inscription,3 the Megaraeans pronounced judgment. The latter appointed a tribunal consisting of 151 judges, who repaired to the contested territory, and declared that it belonged to the Epidaurians. The Corinthians not ἦμεν Πολύαιγαν, Ετήι- 1 See supra, pp. 26 seq. 2 Cf. Dubois, op. cit. p. 143; and supra, p. 27. 8 Michel, 20; Dareste, Haussoullier, and Reinach, Inscrip. jurid. grecques, pp. 342-9.--Cf. Sonne, op. cit. p. 30; and J. F. and T. Baunack, Studien auf dem Gebiete des griechischen und der arischen Sprachen (Leipzig, 1886), vol. i. pp. 219-236.-This inscription on a marble slab was found at Epidaurus in 1886. The following gives the substance of the judgment (apart from the detailed delimitation) as above stated:" κατὰ τὸν αἶνον τὸν τῶν Α χαι]ῶν δικαστήριον ἀποστείλαντες ἄνδρας ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα ἕνα], καὶ ἐπελθόντων ἐπ ̓ αὐτὴν τὴν χώραν τῶν δικαστῶν καὶ κρινάντων] Ἐπιδαυρίων εἶμεν τὴν χώραν, ἀντιλεγόντων δὲ τῶν Κορινθί ων τῷ] τερμονισμῷ, πάλιν ἀπέστειλαν τοὶ Μεγαρεῖς τοὺς τερμον[ιξ]οῦ[ν]τας ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν δικαστῶν ἄνδρας τριάκοντα καὶ ἕνα και τὰ τὸν αἶνον τὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν. Οὗτοι δὲ ἐπελθόντες ἐπὶ τὰν χώραν ἐ]τερμόνιξαν κατὰ τάδε. |