« IndietroContinua »
far-reaching importance. From time to time, it even considered claims which were apparently outside its enlarged sphere, as, for example, the request of the Delians to be liberated from the Athenian hegemony, 344 B.C.
And, again, more than a century earlier, in 470 B.C., when some Thessalian traders had been plundered and imprisoned by the piratical inhabitants of Scyros, the Council took cognizance of the matter, and ordered the accused to make due restitution. Further, Cicero relates that on one occasion when the Thebans had defeated Sparta they raised a trophy' of brass to commemorate the victory, whereupon the Spartans brought an accusation before “the Amphictyons, that is, the General Council of Greece."2 The arguments on both sides proceeded at full length, but Cicero does not state the result of the deliberations. Quinctilian cites another case. After Alexander had destroyed Thebes, he discovered a document whereby it appeared that the Thebans had lent the Thessalians a hundred talents; and, in recognition of the services of the latter in the siege, Alexander delivered the said document to them. But subsequently, when Thebes was restored by Cassander (315 B.c.), the Thebans demanded the settlement of the debt, and laid their claim before the Council. 3 And since, as Quinctilian says, considerations of equity exerted the highest influence with the Amphictyons—“sed vel potentissima apud amphictionas aequi tractatio est "—it is probable that the verdict was in favour of the creditors.5
1 As to erecting trophies, see infra, chap. xxv.
2 Cic. De invent. ii. 23: “Accusantur apud Amphictyonas, id est, apud commune Graeciae concilium.”
3 Quinctil. Inst. Orat.v. 10.111.: “Cum Thebas evertisset Alexander invenit tabulas, quibus, centum talenta mutua Thessalis dedisse Thebanos, continebatur. Has, quia erat usus commilitio Thessalorum, donavit his ultro; postea restituti a Cassandro Thebani reposcunt Thessalos. Apud amphictionas agitur."
4 Ibid. v. 10, 118. 5 Cf. on the cases mentioned by Cicero and Quinctilian, C. Bétant, An fuerint apud Graecos judices certi litibus inter civitates componendis (Berlin, 1862), $10.
Accordingly, it is clear that the Delphic amphictyony, Its influence on in spite of the contentions of most writers that it was affairs. purely a religious body, exercised a great influence directly or indirectly in the promotion of international comity, and in the regularization of, and insistence on, many principles of interstatal practice,—though, of course, its authority was sometimes weakened and its political action hampered through the machinations of this or that State which happened to have acquired a predominance. But in any case we see—and this is of profound significance—the application of the positive sanction issuing from human authority expressly established by compact, in addition to that of the divine sanction arising from the acceptance of the supremacy of the gods, and from an interpretation of their will. Grote thus briefly sums up the position of the Amphictyonic Council in Hellenic affairs: “It is thus that we have to consider the Council as an element in Grecian affairs—an ancient institution, one amongst many instances of the primitive habit of religious fraternisation, but wider and more comprehensive than the rest—at first purely religious, then religious and political at once, lastly more the latter than the former -highly valuable in the infancy, but unsuited to the maturity of Greece, and called into real working only on rare occasions, when its efficiency happened to fall in with the views of Athens, Thebes, or the king of Macedon.”1
Apart from the amphictyonies, there were other Alliances and examples of congresses and confederations. There confederawere, for instance, international congresses to regulate religious. certain common interests of a sacred nature, or to secure the permanent enjoyment of certain commercial rights. Thus Plutarch relates that in order to awaken the spirit of the people—in view of the growing and menacing jealousy of Lacedaemon-and make them
1 History of Greece, vol. ii. p. 176. 2 Cf. E. A. Freeman, op. cit.
feel capable of immense operations, should necessity arise, Pericles issued a decree inviting all the Greeks, whether dwelling in Europe or in Asia, in large cities or small ones, to send delegates to a meeting at Athens for the purpose of deliberating on the restoration of the Greek temples which had been destroyed by the barbarians, on the sacrifices which
which were due in pursuance of the vows that had been made to the gods before going to battle, and on the rights of maritime navigation. Assemblies
Assemblies were frequently convoked also for the establishment of alliances for purposes of immediate mutual defence or of offensive warfare, or with a view to secure balance of power on a permanent footing. There is no doubt that, apart from these motives, industrial and economic considerations also exercised much influence in the promoting of alliances and federal relationships. As a French writer observes: “Pendant toute l'histoire grecque, les rapports de peuple à peuple dépendirent frequemment de l'état des terres et des exigences de la classe agricole." In treaties of this kind the object was explicitly stated, the various casus belli enumerated, the duties of the allies or confederates laid down, regulations as to mutual assistance specified, the religious sanction imposed by virtue of the oath, the positive sanction implied in the understanding that on breach of any of the essential conditions the whole treaty was to be considered dissolved, and the infringing States vested with enemy character, and, lastly, provision was usually made for referring 1 Plut. Per. 17:... πάντας "Έλληνας τους οπήποτε κατοικούντας
1 . . : Ευρώπης και της Ασίας παρακαλείν και μικράν πόλιν και μεγάλης είς σύλλογον πέμπειν 'Αθήναζε τους βουλομένους περί των Ελληνικών ιερών, και κατέπρησαν οι βάρβαροι, και των θυσιών, ας οφείλουσιν υπέρ της Ελλάδος ευξάμενοι τους θεούς ότε προς τους βαρβάρους εμάχοντο, και της θαλάττης, όπως πλέωσι πάντες άδεως και την ειρήνην άγωσιν.
2 P. Guiraud, La propriété foncière en Grèce jusqu'à la conquête romaine (Paris, 1893), p. 615.-Cf. especially liv. ii. chap. iii. pp. 614
“ La propriété foncière et la politique extérieure des états
disputed matters arising out of the interpretation of the treaty to an arbitral tribunal mutually agreed upon. In some instances such engagements were entered into with a solemn stipulation that the alliances were to be perpetual;—and if these undertakings proved vain in actual practice, they were at least of great importance in the evolution of theoretical principles which, at one time or another, exercised a reactionary influence of greater or lesser efficacy on the determination of interstatal relationships.
The most important cases of Greek confederacies Chief cases of were the first and the second Athenian leagues, and the Peloponnesian confederacy under the leadership of Sparta. First, as to the earlier Athenian league. After the First Athenian
. discomfiture of the Persians at Mycale, 479 B.C., the Greek islanders, including the inhabitants of Samos, Chios, and Lesbos, were received into the pan-Hellenic confederacy that had been established to cope with the Persian power. The Ionian and Aetolian cities of Asia Minor were not accepted as members of the league, so that they were obliged to throw themselves on the protection of Athens. After the subjugation of the greater portion of Cyprus by Pausanias, the inhabitants of the other Greek islands joined the confederacy, whilst at Byzantium, which was captured by the Greek fleet, Pausanias offended the allies by his imperious and supercilious conduct, and his alleged medism; whereupon the Greeks of the Hellespont and Ionia appealed to Aristides and Cimon to assume the
Cf. Grote, Hist. of Greece, vol. iv. pp. 379 seq., chap. xlv. ; Köhler, Urkunden und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des delisch-attischen Bundes (in Abhandlungen d. Kgl. Akad. d. Wissensch. Zu Berlin, 1869, vol i. pt. ii. pp. 1-211); H. Nöthe, Der delische Bund, seine Einrichtung und Verfassung (Magdeburg, 1889); G. Gilbert, Hanab. d. gr. Staatsalterthümer (Leipzig, 1893), vol. i. pp. 468 seq. ; P. Guiraud, De la condition des alliés pendant la première confédération athénienne (in Annuaire de la faculté des lettres de Bordeaux, vol. v. pp. 168 seq.).
command of the fleet.' In the meantime the Spartans had despatched Dorcis to supersede Pausanias. By the year 478-477 B.C. the Athenian league, called the
Confederacy of Delos' (from the arrangement that the allies' delegates should meet periodically for deliberation in the temple of Apollo in Delos), comprised Samos, Chios, Lesbos, Rhodes, Cos, and Tenedos, as well as Miletus, the Greek towns on the peninsula of Chalcidice, and Byzantium; and, after the victory of Cimon over the Persians at the river Eurymedon in Pamphylia, 466 B.C., the Greeks of the Carian, Lycian, and Pamphylian coasts were also admitted into the league. The assessment of each
.? State in a certain contribution either of ships or of funds (pópos) was confided to Aristides. By the first apportionment, the sum was fixed at 460 talents (about £106,000 sterling). Certain officials called Hellenotamiai ('EXnvotauiai), Hellenic treasurers, were now appointed for the first time to collect and administer the contributions, which were deposited in the treasury at Delos (afterwards transferred by Pericles to Athens).
The original objects of the confederacy were to effect a thorough emancipation of the allies from Persian supremacy, επ' ελευθερώσει από του Μήδου τους "EXXn01, 4 and to combine against
to combine against any subsequent invasions. To further this purpose there were to be periodical meetings of the Federal Council in the sanctuary of Apollo at Delos. It was incumbent on
Objects of the league.
1 Thus Aristotle (Ath. Pol. xxiii. 4) says of the counsels of Aristides and the advantage he took of the opportunity which presented itself by the discredit cast on the Laconians owing to the conduct of Pausanias : επί δε την απόστασιν την των Ιώνων από της των Λακεδαιμονίων συμμαχίας 'Αριστείδης ήν και προτρέψας, τηρήσας τους Λάκωνας διαβεβλημένους διά Παυσανίαν.
2 Cf. Herodot. ix. 106; Thuc. i. 89, 94, 95, 96, 128; Plut. Aristid. 23; Aristot. Ath. Pol. xxiii. 5; Diod. xi. 60.
3 Arist. Αth. Pol. xxiii. 5 : διό και τους φόρους ούτος ήν ο τάξας ταϊς πόλεσι τους πρώτους, έτει τρίτω μετα την εν Σαλαμίνι ναυμαχίαν.... + Thuc. iii. Io.
5 Thuc, i. 96 ; iii. IO.