Ancient Greek World - Chapters 9 & 10 PDF

CHAPTER 9 THE ARCHAIC PERIOD, (c. 750--c. 500 bc) CHAPTER OUTLINE Introduction\_ Demographic and economic changes\_ The 'polis'\_ Colonisation\_ Social changes\_ Military changes\_ Cultural changes\_ The alphabet\_ Literature\_ The visual arts\_ Architecture\_ Religion\_ Philosophy\_...

CHAPTER 9 THE ARCHAIC PERIOD, (c. 750--c. 500 bc) CHAPTER OUTLINE Introduction\_ Demographic and economic changes\_ The 'polis'\_ Colonisation\_ Social changes\_ Military changes\_ Cultural changes\_ The alphabet\_ Literature\_ The visual arts\_ Architecture\_ Religion\_ Philosophy\_ Political changes\_ Tyranny\_ Sparta\_ Athens\_ INTRODUCTION The eighth century bc saw the first of a series of important changes which marked out a new course in the history of the civilisation of Greece. What was to follow was not a revival of the former Mycenaean culture but the emergence of an entirely new culture, with a character all of its own. The individual character of this culture does not imply that Greece was at this time an isolated area, cut off from contacts with the outside world. The Archaic period in Greece coincides with the era of the great empires of Western Asia with their age-old cultures -- the Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian and Persian empires, all of which lay fairly close to Greece. It was in the Archaic period, too, that the Greek trading post Naukratis was established in Egypt (c. 650 bc) and that the Greeks in Asia Minor came into contact with Lydia and Phrygia. In this same period the Greek cities in Asia Minor were to come under Persian control, when Cyrus conquered that area in 547 bc (see p. 50). As we know from Assyrian and Greek sources, seaborne trade in the Mediterranean was dominated by Phoenicians since the beginning of the first millennium. They traded their goods in Greece, too. Greeks on Crete and Euboea also played their part in interregional trade. From 900 onwards Greeks called in at ports along the Phoenician coast (Tyre, Al Mina) and on Cyprus. Seen against this background, it is not surprising that Greek religion, art, science and material culture betray various eastern influences. As mentioned earlier, the Archaic period was a time of new developments and great changes -- cultural changes, but also demographic, economic, social and military changes. These developments and changes, which were all closely related and influenced one another, were ultimately to bring about the peculiarly Greek constitutions of the succeeding Classical period. DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC CHANGES Archaeological research has shown that the eighth century in Greece was characterised by a broad recovery of settlements and material culture, reflected by a certain monumentalisation in construction. Huts evolved into houses, wooden temples were replaced by stone structures and villages grew into towns, which were surrounded by walls. There is more large-scale evidence of a distinct elite -- for example in the burial culture. This suggests an increase in population. The growth in question was probably a gradual development, spanning the period from the tenth to the fifth century, rather than the explosive expansion in the eighth century once assumed on the basis of a substantial increase in the number of burials found. But, especially in a primitive economy, even a gradual increase in populations meant that more mouths had to be fed and that necessitated great changes in farming practices. Wasteland was brought under cultivation and the range of crops was expanded. This led to a gradual decline in stock keeping. Some Greeks took to the sea, hoping to make a living through piracy or trade. Noteworthy in this context is that whereas in Homer's works seafaring traders and traffickers are frequently Phoenicians, the slightly younger poet Hesiod already mentions overseas trade contacts maintained by Greeks (e.g. his own father).We should be wary, however, of taking this as evidence of a historical development in economic behaviour: Homer's world is that of idealised large-landowning heroes -- later Greeks (and Romans, too) also saw commerce as an inferior enterprise -- whereas Hesiod's work is a much closer representation of everyday life. A third consequence of the growth in population was the development of cities, as a result of the fusion of expanding villages. These cities were ideal outlets for the landowners' increased agricultural produce. It was via these cities, too, that the luxury goods from the Near East which were coveted by the wealthy elite were imported into Greece. Many noblemen consequently took up residence in the cities. THE 'POLIS' Many cities in the Archaic period developed into independent self-governing city states. Such a city state (Greek polis, pl. poleis) was a community with its own political organisation; the word 'political' is in fact derived from polis. The term 'polis' is usually translated as 'city state' because a city was generally the key element of a polis, but it should be noted that these 'cities' could be small settlements. A polis was in principle always a city with its surrounding land, but more important than the city were the 'citizens', the politai. The polis was the community of the politai. Greek authors speak of 'the Athenians' rather than of 'Athens'. It should be stressed, however, that in Greek texts the word polis by no means always has this specific 'political' meaning, but may simply stand for a 'city' in general, even a non-Greek city. A typical polis comprised a relatively small territory with an administrative centre, usually urban, which contained the chief sanctuary and a meeting place, the agora, where the magistrates and the people assembled when decisions were to be taken. Later on the agora came to serve as a marketplace, too. The town usually contained a fortified hill (akropolis), on which the occupants could take refuge in times of danger. The polis was governed by officials with specific responsibilities, such as military leadership, jurisdiction or the supervision of religious practices, who were appointed in some kind of election. This does not mean that all poleis had the same form of government or that a polis had the same form of government all the time. What they did have in common was that only very few were ruled by kings (Sparta was one of the few poleis where kingship was not abolished). In most poleis the noble landowners monopolised the political offices. We refer to them as 'noble' because they claimed their privileges by reason of birth; such a constitution is called an aristocracy (see Box 9.1). The strong emphasis on high birth was probably connected with the increased importance of land tenure. In the ancient world, ownership of land was often justified by family claims to ancestral land. In Greece this led to an outlook revolving around an oikos (household comprising parents, children, grandchildren and sometimes also dependent farmers and slaves), which preferably belonged to an important lineage that could boast descent from a famous ancestor. A principal concern of all poleis was 'freedom and autonomy' -- the freedom from domination by a great power or by a different polis, which implied autonomy -- that is the possibility of making one's own laws. The polis was of supreme importance to its occupants, who gradually became true polis citizens (politai). The Greeks regarded life in a polis as the most ideal and most humane form of existence. The idea of being incorporated in a large empire was intolerable to them and they did everything within their power to prevent the risk of that ever happening. Even so, it did happen quite often. Until 479 the poleis in Asia Minor formed part of the Persian empire, and in 387 they returned to Persian control. In between they were confronted with Athenian imperialism. After 338 almost all poleis came under foreign control -- first Macedonian and later Roman (see pp. 133 and 231). Even in these cases they did try to preserve their autonomy in local affairs where possible and their efforts were often quite successful. BOX 9.1 DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT MONARCHY: 'Sole rule'. The rule of a single, usually hereditary king with a legitimate claim to power. TYRANNY: 'The rule of a tyrant'. A tyrant is an autocratic ruler who has seized control without having a legitimate claim to that control. ARISTOCRACY: 'Rule of the best' (Greek: aristoi). The 'best' are usually understood to be the members of noble families. In an aristocracy birth is hence the criterion for power. OLIGARCHY: 'Rule of a few' (Greek: oligoi). The rule of a small group of -- mostly rich -- politicians, who do not necessarily have to be of noble birth. TIMOCRACY: Forms of government in which property criteria are the qualifications for access to the administrative offices. DEMOCRACY: Rule of the deˉmos = the (male) population with citizen rights. In a democracy the popular assembly has decisive power. Note the difference with the modern term 'democracy'. The polis was not the dominant political unit in the whole of Greece. In less-developed areas, so-called ethnē (plural of ethnos, which literally means 'nation') prevailed: groups of small communities that joined forces in special circumstances, in particular in military operations. Sometimes cities were formed within these ethnē, which later developed into poleis. Ancient Greece never achieved political union. The Greeks did, however, feel united by their common language (even though it included various dialects, such as Doric in Sparta and the south-west of Asia Minor, and Ionic in Athens and the western part of Asia Minor), by their worship of the same gods and by their communal traditions, such as the Olympic Games, which were organised at Olympia in honour of Zeus, the supreme god of the Greek pantheon. The Greek world showed a marked resemblance to Phoenicia, whose towns were also independent, autonomous city states, which were in competition with each other, and whose occupants likewise shared a common language and religion. The Greeks in fact borrowed much from the Phoenicians, including their alphabet and many of their artistic motifs. Something else in which the Phoenicians showed the Greeks the way was colonisation. The settlements that the Phoenicians founded in the western Mediterranean (see p. 40) served as good examples to the Greeks in their search for new trade contacts overseas. COLONISATION The period from the eighth until the sixth century was the time of the second Greek migration (the first having taken place around 1100): the well-known Greek colonisation. There are very few Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts where the Greeks didn't found colonies. Not all Greek cities sent out colonisers. Athens did not, which marked her insignificant status in this period. The main colonisers were cities in Asia Minor (esp. Phocaea and Miletus) and Corinth. Different theories have been put forward to explain this colonising movement. Some associate the phenomenon with the problems caused by the growth of the population. Others see it as a solution to internal conflicts within the elite of a certain Greek city and an opportunity for a threatened group to create a new existence for itself. It must also have been caused partly by the fact that more and more Greeks were venturing onto the sea, following the example set by the Phoenicians. The very fact of the foundation of the Greek colonies presupposes a certain amount of experience in trade and shipping and knowledge of the geography of the Mediterranean. It is therefore believed that the first of the Greeks' overseas settlements were established for commercial reasons. Such a settlement is known as an emporion; well-known examples are Al Mina in Syria, Naukratis in Egypt and possibly also Pithecusae on the island of Ischia in the Gulf of Naples. The majority of the colonies were, however, agricultural settlements, founded in fertile areas and occupied by farmers. That's why so many colonies were founded along the shores of the Black Sea, in Sicily and southern Italy. It is good to note that the archaeological remains testify to a gradual settlement of Greeks in cohabitation with indigenous people. Southern Italy and Sicily became known as Magna Graecia ('Greater Greece') in antiquity, because large, flourishing cities arose in those areas that boasted their Greek origins. Some of these are still important towns today, preserving the relics of their glorious past. Impressive remains of Greek architecture can be admired for example in Syracuse, Agrigento and Paestum (Poseidonia; see Map 9.1b) Influence of Greek culture in the Archaic and Classical periods, c. 600--330 bc. Note: During the Greek colonising movement Greeks spread over large parts of the Mediterranean and many peoples came into contact with Greek civilisation. The term 'colonisation' is actually misleading. A Greek colony (apoikia) was not a foreign territory governed by the city that founded the colony but a new, independent polis, which was bound to its mother city only by moral and religious ties. It is hence not surprising that the Greek colonists, in their search for suitable locations for these independent poleis, steered clear of areas containing well-organised states, such as the Levant, Egypt and Etruscan Italy (see p. 192). The settlements that the Greeks did establish in the latter areas, such as Naukratis in Egypt and Al Mina in Syria, were not independent poleis. The colonising expeditions to some areas such as southern Italy were incidentally small-scale enterprises at first, with the colonists living side by side with the native population. Only in the sixth century did some of these colonies grow into cities proper, with a predominantly Greek identity. Although most colonies were not founded for commercial reasons, they did encourage trade. In the fifth century it enabled them to obtain grain, which was in short supply in Greece, from areas where it grew in great abundance. Corinth imported most of her grain from her colonies in Sicily, while Athens, which founded only very few colonies, obtained her grain mainly from the regions surrounding the Black Sea. Once food could be imported from overseas, the impulse to further colonisation slackened. The Greeks' quest for new land came to an end almost completely around 550 bc, when their colonisation campaigns met with increasing opposition from the Persians, Carthaginians and Etruscans. The wasteland that was brought under cultivation in Greece was used to grow new crops, mainly olives. Sealed in earthenware vessels, the products of these crops -- that is, mostly olive oil -- could be exported. Trade greatly boosted industry in the cities: ships had to be built and earthenware vessels had to be produced to enable the transport of the new products. The young poleis also vied with each other in building bigger and bigger temples. All this activity implied a good deal of extra work for those not involved in agriculture. It did not, however, lead to a contrast between an urban and a rural population. Most city dwellers were farmers whose land lay outside the town. They left the town every morning to till their fields or they had a member of their families, a slave or a tenant do the work for them. Yet, in literature a debate about the appreciation of an urban or rustic way of life is detectable. Throughout the whole history of the ancient world there were only very few cities that were dependent on imports from regions with surplus grain because of the majority of their inhabitants were not engaged in agriculture. This was the case only in extremely large cities, such as Athens in the fifth century, Alexandria (Egypt) and Antioch (Syria) in the Hellenistic period (see pp. 106, 124, 131) and Rome and a few other cities in the Roman empire around the beginning of the common era. SOCIAL CHANGES The economic and demographic developments described earlier had social consequences too. In the first place, they led to the emergence of a group of nouveaux riches -- people who managed to make a fortune in one way or another. Some grew rich through trade; they would often invest their profits in land. Others had the foresight to start growing the new crops and products in the relatively infertile soil of their land. Those crops were more profitable per unit of land. For the old-fashioned small farmers struggling to remain self-sufficient, however, things became increasingly difficult. Their family property had to be split up among their children with every new generation, and as the population expanded the lots became smaller and smaller until they were ultimately too small to support a farmer and his family. The small farmers were moreover unable to switch to the new crops: olive trees do not bear fruit for the first few years after they have been planted and the farmers did not have the necessary resources to tide themselves over the years without income. Nor did they have any surplus land on which they could have grown other crops besides cereals. Many small farmers had to take out loans as they did not produce sufficient surplus grain to sow their next crop. But as their crops didn't become any bigger and they nevertheless had to repay their loans, most of them were reduced to debt bondage, having secured their loans on their person as was customary in those days. Figure 9.1 Proto-Corinthian pitcher (olpeˉ) found in an Etruscan tomb on the estate of Mario Chigi (now known as the 'Chigi Vase'), c. 650--640, showing hoplites in combat. Villa Giulia, Rome, 22679. MILITARY CHANGES In the Dark Ages the noble elite were the leading force in warfare, aided by lightly armed followers. The possession of chariots and horses was important for these nobles to reach the battlefield and at the same time it conveyed status (see p. 84). This changed gradually in the course of the Archaic period, when the nouveaux riches and middling farmers could also afford to equip themselves with armour. That armour comprised a helmet, a breast plate, greaves, a spear and a shield. The latter, which was in this period attached to the (left) arm at two points -- at the hand and the elbow -- was of particular importance. At first we see on vase paintings that warriors on horseback go to the battlefield and dismount for battle. Gradually the role of horses diminished, and at the end of the sixth century a more sophisticated battle formation had emerged, known as the phalanx. The soldiers were later called 'hoplites' after hoplon, the Greek word for this heavy armour. In the developed phalanx the hoplites had to ensure that their ranks remained closed so that the unprotected right sides of their bodies were covered by their neighbours' shields. This called for a strong sense of solidarity (cf. Figure 9.1). At first the hoplites came from the richest social classes, but after c. 500 the middle classes began to supply hoplites too. Wars in the Archaic period were nothing more than small-scale border conflicts. As the main objective was usually plunder, they were over after one or two clashes. Sometimes there were long periods without any actual fighting in wars between poleis. CULTURAL CHANGES It was in the Archaic period, too, that the foundations for Greece's great cultural achievements were laid. Greek painting, architecture and sculpture, the literary genres, religious imagery and cult practices and Greek philosophy all have their roots in the Archaic period. It is in these cultural achievements that Greece's indebtedness to the Near East is particularly evident. THE ALPHABET A first major cultural asset that originated in the Near East is the alphabet, which the Greeks borrowed from the Phoenicians in the tenth or ninth century bc. The exact date is not certain: the earliest surviving Greek characters date from the early eighth century (see p. 40). The Greeks, however, introduced an important innovation: they adapted this alphabet, which consisted exclusively of consonants and included a few characters that could in certain circumstances indicate vowels, for their own language by using some of the existing characters exclusively for vowels and adding a number of new characters. The resultant alphabet proved extremely efficient. After only a few minor modifications it was adopted by the Etruscans and later also the Romans, who ultimately passed it down to us. Today, the Latin version of that same alphabet is still used for writing in numerous different languages all over the world. For what purpose the alphabet was introduced into Greece is not entirely certain. It may well be that the Phoenicians were the people with whom the Greeks first came into contact when they ventured overseas in search of trade, and that the alphabet was introduced for business purposes. LITERATURE Whatever the reason for the introduction of the alphabet may have been, the oldest pieces of Greek writing known to us are literary texts. These texts were, however, not intended to be read by a wide public; they were written down so that they could be memorised and recited. That is why the oldest texts are all in verse, whether they are epics, like the works of Homer and Hesiod, political pamphlets, such as those of Solon (see p. 110), or the works of the earliest philosophers (see p. 104). Homer was of tremendous importance to the Greeks. His epics, the Iliad (approx. 15,600 lines) and the Odyssey (approx. 12,000 lines; see also p. 83), were regarded as a kind of Bible. The study of those epics was a compulsory part of Greek education until well into the Hellenistic era. The world that is described in these works is that of the nobility in the Dark Ages and the early Archaic period (insofar as his poetry describes a clearly identifiable era and not some idealised past). Homer's representation of the competitive mentality of the nobles and his portrayals of the gods as superior anthropomorphic beings with the same mentality as the aristocracy had a profound influence on Greek thought and religion. Homer's work is strongly reminiscent of the Epic of Gilgamesh (see pp. 60). In both cases we are dealing with major epics based on stories that were after a long oral (and in the case of the Epic of Gilgamesh also written) tradition collected in a single composition. In both cases the works are set in a mythical past with a historical element and feature heroic deeds, adventurous journeys and eternal fame. And in both cases there are direct contacts between gods and humans. All three epics remained tremendously popular for many centuries and were taught at schools. Thanks to Hesiod we know something about the other classes of early Greek society. His epic Works and Days presents a picture of contemporary farming practices and describes the harshness of a farming existence. In this poem we may detect a view from the countryside as opposed to the life of the nobles who cherished an urban lifestyle. In this work we also learn about the injustice that the farmers suffered at the hands of the nobles, whose bribery and extortion Hesiod criticises. In his Theogony Hesiod systematised the legends about the gods of the Greek pantheon (see p. 102 for a further discussion). Greek literature after Homer is characterised by a trend towards greater individualism. Whereas we know nothing whatsoever about the man who wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey, the later author Hesiod already tells us something about his personal circumstances. But it was not until the seventh century that Greek poetry began to strike a truly personal note, with short lyrical poems conveying personal feelings. That is also when the first Greek love lyrics were written. Other poems express views on society, varying from criticism of the aristocratic way of life to fear of the aristocracy losing its power. A striking difference with respect to the ancient Near East, where literature (including the Old Testament) and art were usually anonymously produced, is that Greek authors of literary works -- and works of art, too -- made their names known, presenting themselves as artists. THE VISUAL ARTS Our knowledge of Greek painting is almost entirely restricted to vase painting. The Mycenaean art of fresco painting disappeared within a very short time in the Dark Ages. The ninth century saw the birth of a new style of vase painting in Athens, characterised by zigzags and swastikas, to which stylised human figures were later added (see Figure 9.2a). The mythical creatures and plants of the style that began to take shape in Corinth around 725 bc betray affinities with the art of the east. Yellow is the predominant colour of this style, which is known as the Orientalising style (see Figure 9.2b). In the sixth century Athenian vase painters started to decorate their vases with figures painted in black silhouette. This 'black-figure' style was later superseded by the 'red figure' style (see Figure 9.2c and d). The advantage of this style was a greater precision in executing detail. The Attic vases depicting scenes from Greek mythology and everyday life were distributed over a very wide area, especially southern Italy and Etruria. Thousands of these vases (very often from Italy) can still be admired in museums today. The poses of the free-standing statues that have survived from the Archaic period suggest that the earliest Greek sculpture owed much to the art of Egypt (see Figures 9.3a and 9.3b). However, it did not take the Greeks long to shake off these influences and develop an entirely original style of their own. ARCHITECTURE Greek architecture also acquired many of its distinctive features in the Archaic period. The most impressive buildings were the temples, which, being the dwellings of the gods (and of their statues), were modelled initially on the dwellings of mortals. The most conspicuous aspect of their plans is the lavish use of Doric, Ionic and -- from the fourth century onwards -- Corinthian columns (see Figures 9.4a--9.4c). The best-preserved Greek temples are to be found in southern Italy and Sicily RELIGION Greek religion had much in common with ancient Near Eastern religion (Chapter 5). In the first place it was a polytheistic religion. The gods, especially after Homer had described them in his epics, were seen as anthropomorphic beings; there was no official dogma; rites played an important part in establishing a good relationship with the gods; each city (polis) had its own patron god or -- very often -- goddess, whose temple stood on the akropolis, where the polis's religious ceremonies took place. The Greeks' views on death and the afterlife showed close similarities with the Mesopotamian notion of a shadowy, sombre underworld, where more or less the same dire fate awaited all the souls of the deceased. Of a somewhat different nature was the movement in Greek religion known as Orphism. The term 'Orphism' comes from a collection of Orphic literature ascribed to the mythical singer Orpheus, the son of Apollo. This mystery religion was based on the assumption that the body and the soul were separate entities. The soul was believed to be imprisoned within the body, from which it could free itself after death, via reincarnation, asceticism and purification rites. This principle of the disunion of body and soul -- and the resultant depreciation of the body -- had a profound influence on the philosophers Pythagoras (c. 530) and Plato (c. 429--347), and eventually became an important doctrine in Christianity, too. Figure 9.2a Attic geometric wine pitcher (oinochoeˉ) from Athens (750-- 700 bc). J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, object no. 82.AE.56.12.1. Figure 9.2b Corinthian oil flask (aryballos), c\. 615 bc; Orientalizing style. Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam, inv. no. APM 693. Note: Sphinxes are winged mythical creatures, part man and part beast, and were common motifs all over the ancient Near East. A well-known example is the large sphinx near the pyramids of Giza in Egypt. The sphinx was also represented in Phoenicia. See also the winged bull colossi of Assyria and Persia shown on p. 52, Fig. 4.5a and b. The belief in a blissful life after death, at least for the initiates of the secret religious rites, held a central place in the mystic cult of the corn goddess Demeter at Eleusis (Demeter means 'mother earth'; she was already worshipped in the Mycenaean period). This cult celebrated the release of Persephone, Demeter's daughter, from Hades (the underworld), where she was imprisoned for one third of the year. Her rebirth symbolised the sprouting of the ear of corn from the dying corn grain. A similar belief was associated with the death of Osiris in Egypt (see p. 55 and Fig. 5.2). A different natural phenomenon, the death of nature during the dry season, was symbolised in the cult of Adonis, a god inspired by Phoenician gods who spent part of the year in the underworld. 'Adoni', meaning 'My Lord', was the term used by the Phoenicians to address their gods, just like Adonay is the name by which the Jews address their god Yahweh. Figure 9.2d Red figure oil flask (lekythos) depicting man holding a lyre made of a tortoise shell, c\. 480 bc, by the Eucharides Painter. J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 73.AE.23. Note: Vase 9.2c depicts the four-horse chariot race, one of the most prestigious events in the games. The winner was not the chariot driver, but the owner of the horses and chariot. Filled with olive oil, this amphora was one of the prizes that could be won at the Panathenaic Games. The Greek pantheon, whose gods featured in Greek myths and in sculpture and were worshipped in the official polis religion in the major temples, was essentially Homer's creation. Homer had represented the pantheon as a sublimated aristocratic society. The gods were formidable, beautiful, strong, immortal men and women with both the good and the bad qualities of mortals. In the Trojan War they assisted heroes in both camps. The best-known gods were, first of all, the supreme god Zeus, the god of thunder, who resided on Mount Olympus in northern Greece together with the other gods. His main sanctuary was at Olympia in the Peloponnese, where the Olympic Games were held in his honour every four years. He was the patron god of justice and law. His wife was Hera, the patroness of marriage. Zeus had a daughter, Athena, the goddess of war and the arts and crafts, who was worshipped in Athens in particular. Apollo was the god of light, order and reason. His oracle at Delphi attracted many people, and also poleis, who would ask him for advice or divine sanctioning before undertaking any action. Dionysus was the passionate god of wine, intoxication and the wild forces in nature. Sometimes the gods had sexual intercourse with mortals. Heracles (Roman Hercules) was born out of such a union between Zeus and a mortal. He was venerated for his strength and his courageous twelve labours, with which he made the world a better place for mortals. Our knowledge of the legends on the origins of the Greek gods we owe to Hesiod's Theogony, which has notable analogies in Mesopotamian, Phoenician and Hurrian- Hittite succession models. The legends of these models explain how the supreme god -- Marduk, Baal and Teshup, respectively (Zeus in the Greek pantheon) -- acquired his supremacy in struggles with the primordial deities (see p. 63). As no such genealogy is to be found in Homer, it is most likely that Hesiod got the idea of recounting the history of the deities from eastern examples, in particular from Anatolia. This Anatolian influence can also be detected in the famous temple of Artemis in Ephesus. There were, however, also marked differences between the religious world of the Greeks and that of the ancient Near East. In the first place, the Greek temples never played such a central part in economic, cultural and administrative affairs as did for example the Sumerian temples. Nor did the Greek temples have large estates or a priesthood with the power to manipulate politics. The Greek myths that have come down to us did not originate in the temples either. Homer and Hesiod were laymen, who gave their personal interpretations of the gods on their own authority, although they do claim to have been inspired by the 'Muses', the daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne, who presided over the arts and literature. The Greek temples did, however, contain many valuable goods, because many people would donate gifts to the gods. Temples were important pawnshops and their treasures were emergency reserves for the poleis. BOX 9.2 MAJOR GREEK AND ROMAN GODS Greeks and Romans considered twelve 'Olympian' gods to be the most important, though there is no unanimity as to who should belong to this list. Due to intensive contacts between Greeks and Romans, their pantheon converged into one system. Greek god Major cult centres Function Roman equivalent Zeus Olympia King of the gods; god of thunder. Hera Samos; Argos Wife of Zeus; goddess of marriage Jupiter Juno Greek god Major cult centres Function Roman equivalent Poseidon Corinth, Boeotia, Cape Sounion God of the sea, earthquakes and Neptunus (Neptune) pestilence Demeter Eleusis Goddess of germinating Ceres grain, fertility and seasons Athena Athens Goddess of wisdom and Minerva strategic warfare Phoibos Apolloˉ n Delphi, Delos Oracular god (Delphi, Phoebus Apollo Didyma); god of poetry and music Artemis Delos, Sparta, Goddess of hunt, wild Diana Ephesus animals and chastity Aphrodite Cyprus, Athens, Goddess of sexual love Venus Corinth and desire Hephaistos Lemnos, Athens Blacksmith of the gods; god of fire and Vulcanus (Vulcan) volcanoes Goddess of the hearth Vesta Hestia In the prytaneion of any Greek city Hermes Peloponnese; Athens (represented as 'herms') Dionysos; Bakchos Hades, Ploutoˉ n Herald of the gods; god of travellers Mercurius (Mercury) and merchants; psychopompos, who guides the souls to the netherworld (Hades) Many places God of grape harvest, Bacchus wine, ecstasy \- King of the underworld Pluto Ares Rare God of the destructive forces of war Heracles Thebes (place of birth), Athens, Sparta and many places; the god of Tyre, Melqart, was equated with Heracles Divine hero, son of Zeus and human Alcmene; performed twelve labours; strong fighter, represented with lion- skin and club; ancestor of Spartans Mars Hercules PHILOSOPHY Natural philosophy and physical science arose in the seventh century bc in Ionia in Asia Minor (at the periphery of the eastern world) and in the Greek colonies in the west (southern Italy and Sicily). Some original minds in those areas no longer accepted the explanations for physical phenomena given in the myths (see p. 55). Instead, they tried to fathom the nature of the primal substance from which everything (e.g. earth, water, fire and air) had evolved and to analyse processes in the natural world via logical reasoning. Very little of what these early philosophers committed to writing has come down to us. We would probably find their ideas rather naive today. They are, however, important in that they represent the first steps towards a new, rational way of analysing and explaining natural phenomena, which was to become the basis of western scientific thought. These thinkers did not repudiate the deities of their religion, but simply placed their findings alongside the traditional religious beliefs or tried to combine their ideas with the ancient myths. This approach brought the philosopher Xenophanes of Colophon in Asia Minor, who moved to Sicily (sixth century), to a more or less monotheistic (see p\. 63), logically reasoned theology. Xenophanes believed that the gods of the myths were only helpers and different embodiments of the one supreme god. He criticised Homer's accounts of the gods' deeds, which he considered quite ribald. This view was to find increasing support among later Greeks and Romans, especially their elites. It was only in the fifth century that a few philosophers approached a theology that denied the existence of the gods of the Greek pantheon. Anaxagoras of Clazomenae (c. 500--c. 428), who lived in Athens 455--436, and Democritus of Abdera in Thrace (c. 460--c. 370\) believed that everything ultimately consisted of indivisible parts, which Democritus called 'atoms'. Anaxagoras maintained that the movement of those parts was controlled by a divine spirit, the mover of the cosmos, but whether Democritus shared that opinion we do not know. Anaxagoras, then, came quite close to a mechanical, materialistic conception of the universe. The most renowned philosopher in the west was Pythagoras (c. 570--c. 490 bc). He was born on the island of Samos, but emigrated to Croton in southern Italy at the end of the sixth century (c. 530 bc). He believed that the cosmos was logically composed of seven spheres according to certain numerical ratios; the lowest sphere was that of the earth. Knowledge of numbers and measures (mathematics) was the key to understanding the cosmos and nature. Pythagoras's belief that the human soul, which he saw as a separate entity, was imprisoned in a body at birth and moved on to another body after death was inspired by Orphism. Later authors attributed the 'Pythagorean theorem' to him, a theorem already known to the Babylonians in the beginning of the second millennium bc. Pythagoras not only was interested in studying order in nature but also aspired to create order in the Greek cities in southern Italy. His followers, the Pythagoreans, developed a political philosophy which they attempted to implement in practice. Some Greek cities in southern Italy, such as Tarentum (present-day Taranto) in the fourth century bc, were indeed ruled by Pythagoreans for some time. They believed that the business of government was best left to wise, philosophically trained experts. The well-known Athenian philosopher Plato (see p. 147) counted several Pythagoreans among his friends. POLITICAL CHANGES The economic, social and military changes brought about political changes, too. The Archaic period saw the rise of new forms of government and of what was to become one of the most important legacies of the ancient world: Greek political thought. The gradual crumbling of the economic and military basis on which the power of the nobility was founded ultimately led to the fall of the aristocracy in most poleis. This process started with demands for: 1 Written legislation that would put an end to the aristocracy's arbitrary rule by laying down regulations (that is at least what the literary tradition tells us; according to surviving legal texts the primary aim was to regulate power relations within the aristocracy); 2 Admission to the offices (this was demanded by the non-aristocratic wealthy citi- zens; they were in a position to make this demand when they had military power as hoplites); 3 Cancellation of debts, abolition of debt bondage and redistribution of land (demanded by the impoverished farmers and debt bondsmen). TYRANNY Almost everywhere in Greece the fall of the aristocracy went hand in hand with the appearance of tyranny. The Greeks borrowed the word tyrannos from one of the languages of Asia Minor. It was originally used for an autocrat who had seized absolute control to which he was not officially entitled. A king could also become a 'tyrant' by assuming powers that transcended those of a primus-inter-pares king. This happened for example in Argos. The Greek tyrants were almost all members of aristocratic families who had come into conflict with other nobles and somehow managed to seize power. Exactly how they succeeded in their endeavours is in many cases unclear to us. A case in point concerns Corinth. After several decades under the sway of the Bacchiad family a fairly insignificant member of that family called Cypselus (c. 657--625) assumed sole control in the city. One of the most successful tyrants was Polycrates of Samos (c. 535--522). He created a strong navy and subjected a number of islands in the Aegean; he sided first with Amasis of Egypt, but later with Persia when Cambyses conquered Egypt. Polycrates, however, at the same time posed as a rival to Persian aspirations in the Aegean and especially schemed against the satrap of Sardes, who ruled Lydia and Ionia. When he was invited at the court in Sardes, he was assassinated (522 bc). Samos was a prosperous island, where a huge temple of the goddess Hera was built and where artists, craftsmen and poets resided. Originally, 'tyranny' was a fairly neutral term. We have both positive and negative accounts of tyrants' acts. But as the situation was humiliating for both the old aristocracy and the emerging elite not belonging to the tyrant's supporters, a tyrant -- and especially his successor -- would usually soon lose support. 'Tyrannical' then acquired a pejorative meaning. Very few city states were ruled by tyrants for longer than two generations. Their form of government was then replaced by an oligarchy or a democracy. SPARTA In Sparta the hoplites put an end to the rule of the aristocracy. Sparta had evolved into a hoplite state par excellence in the sixth century. Nevertheless, Sparta -- unlike other Greek states -- did not institute a tyranny but maintained hereditary kingship. To be able to understand this we must first consider the unique composition of the population of the Spartan polis. Sparta was dominated by a group of Dorians. According to the literary tradition these 'descendants of Heracles' invaded the Peloponnese about a century after the Trojan War and subjected the autochthonous Achaean population. Archaeological evidence, however, gives no support to this contention. Of these Dorians, who were referred to by the Homeric term 'Lacedaemonians', the occupants of Sparta (also called Lacedaemon), or Spartiates, enjoyed full civil rights, whereas the occupants of the cities around Sparta, the perioikoi, had only local autonomy in their cities. The subject population of the area ruled by Sparta (Laconia) had no rights whatsoever; they were called 'helots'. The helots belonged to the state and are therefore also referred to as 'state slaves', but 'serfs' is a better term (see Box 6.2). Their land had been split up and assigned to individual Spartiates, for whom they had to till that land. The Spartiates themselves did not work, but spent their entire lives in military training. Like Athens, Sparta founded not many colonies in the west apart from Tarentum (Taras). Instead, she stilled her hunger for land by conquering Messenia in two wars, between 700 and 600 bc. The Spartiates reduced the inhabitants of Messenia, who were also Dorians, to helots. This, however, meant that they then faced the difficult task of having to control a group of people who outnumbered them. This, and the constant threat of the fairly powerful Dorian neighbour state of Argos, with which the Spartiates were frequently at war over the hegemony of the Peloponnese, induced them to devote their full attention to military training. Spartan boys were taken from their mothers at the age of 7. From then onwards they were raised by the state. They were rigorously trained in the endurance of hardship and were turned into tough, strong men. When they reached manhood they joined a mess, whose members ate, trained, slept and fought together. Each Spartiate had to pay a contribution to his mess. The Spartiates were hence entirely dependent on a powerful militia for the preservation of their privileged position. As the aristocracy had not been very successful in the wars against Messenia and Argos, the hoplites had been able to get their own way in Sparta at a very early stage. Sparta's reforms are attributed to the lawgiver Lycurgus, a man about whom nothing is known with any certainty. It is generally assumed that he introduced his political reforms in the seventh century. After Lycurgus, the Spartiates were referred to as homoioi, 'equals' or 'peers'. This equality referred to their equal position in the hoplite phalanx and to their equal vote in the assembly (locally known as apella because they met monthly at the time of the Apollo festival \[Apellai\]) to which only they had access. They may also have been assigned equal lots of land with groups of helots in Laconia and later Messenia. But in other respects the Spartiates were not entirely equal. For example, in addition to their assigned land they owned private lots of land, and those lots differed in size. What also led to inequality was that some Spartiates neglected their farms by failing to keep their helots under strict control. Others on the contrary made a fortune from bribes, taxes and booty obtained abroad. Another popular way of becoming rich was by marrying an heiress of a well-to-do Spartan family that had produced no sons. These wealthy Spartiates forced up the contributions to the messes until the poorer ones could no longer afford to pay them. They were then reduced to the status of second-class citizens. Sparta's public assembly never evolved into a truly democratic body. The real power was in the hands of the gerousia, a council of elders of at least 60 years of age who were chosen for life by the assembly. The readiness with which the assembly accepted the gerousia's supremacy is understandable in a state in which military discipline was more highly esteemed than a critical mind. Sparta's two kings (for whom the age requirement of course did not apply) also ranked among the gerousia's thirty members. To return to the question of why kingship was retained in Sparta: as the two co-regent kings, who belonged to different royal families, balanced one another, there was never any risk of the kingship becoming very powerful. The kings' sole task was to command the army in wartime. In later times an additional magistracy was created alongside the monarchy. This was held by five 'ephors' (ephoroi=overseers), who were chosen annually by the assembly. They were responsible for the city's day-to-day administration. The creation of this additional magistracy probably helped to prevent calls for further democratic reforms because the ephors, who were supposed to represent the citizens' interests, counterbalanced the kings. In the ancient world the Spartan constitution was highly esteemed for being a 'mixed constitution', comprising a monarchy (two kings), an aristocracy (the gerousia) and a democracy (the assembly and the ephors). The strict Spartan lifestyle, which appeared to be the key to the city's success, was also greatly admired. In the sixth and the early fifth centuries bc Sparta was indisputably the most powerful city state in Greece. Sparta was anxious to corroborate her hegemony in the Peloponnese but did not like the idea of doing so by conquering more cities and then having to control even more helots. In the mid-sixth century she solved this problem by creating the Peloponnesian League, in which she united most city states in the Peloponnese, including Corinth, under her leadership. Argos did not join this league. Outside Greece, Sparta established relations with Lydia and Egypt, which were then both in conflict with Persia (see p. 50). With this act Sparta showed herself to be hostile towards tyranny, for Persia's custom was to rule over conquered Greek city states by placing local pro-Persian tyrants in control. The Greek cities in Asia Minor (Ionia) were governed by such tyrants. Sparta was a flourishing and powerful state (hardly a 'city' state, as the core was a cluster of five villages) that had contacts with the outside world. In the temples oriental objects were found and Phoenician influence can be detected in the cult of Artemis. In the sixth century the Spartans maintained contacts with Tarentum, Samos and Lydia. The poets Tyrtaeus and Alcman lived there and were well known outside Sparta. This changed, however, in the fifth century, when the cultural life declined. Yet many classical and later admirers praised Sparta as an exemplary state, as it had devoted all its attention to military training and stuck to old austere traditions. Indeed, Sparta always remained more of a village than a city. BOX 9.3 THE CONSTITUTION OF SPARTA Two kings (hereditary in two royal houses; war leaders). Five ephoroi (ephors; elected annually, not eligible for re-election; day-to-day administration). Gerousia (council of elders, thirty members: two kings and twenty- eight gerontes, 'elders', aged over 60; served for life; elected literally by acclamation; proposed and controlled bills; could overturn decisions by the assembly; supreme court). Assembly of all male Spartiates, met during the Apellai, Apollo festival, the 7th of each month, hence possibly called Apella locally. Elected ephors and members of the gerousia, voted laws proposed by ephors or gerousia, appointed military commanders. No right of initiative or amendment. **BOX 9.4 THE POPULATION OF SPARTA** SPARTA - Spartiaˉtai or Lakedaimonioi, homoioi: 'equals', 'peers', citizens with full political rights. - Perioikoi: 'dwellers around'; inhabitants of semi-autonomous cities (poleis) around Sparta, but with no political rights in Sparta. Served in the army as 'Lacedaemonians'. - Heilotes: 'helots, serfs' (state property). Lived in their own communities on ancestral farms, but were obliged to pay half of their yield to assigned Spartan overlords. **The population of Athens** - Politai, Atheˉ naioi: 'citizens', 'Athenians' with full political rights. - Metoikoi: 'metics, resident foreigners', free residents (e.g. from other Greek city states), but with no political rights; no access to landed property;obligation to pay a tax: metoikion. - Douloi: 'slaves', private property of citizens and metics. ATHENS The city of Athens was not an important city in the Archaic period, but it deserves attention as it evolved into the most important city state in the fifth century, as a political power (next to Sparta) and as a centre of economic and cultural growth. In addition, Athens underwent a fairly unique development that culminated in the famous Athenian democracy. It is this democracy that made Athens the bearer of Greek culture par excellence. Athens, in contrast to Sparta, was for some time ruled by tyrants. Athens had remained inhabited after the fall of Mycenaean civilisation and was not affected by the Dorian invasion. The development of the geometric pottery style (see Figure 9.2a) around 900 marked the beginning of a period of prosperity and cultural achievement. By c. 850 trade contacts had been established with Al Mina in Syria. Around 730, however, Athens's progress came to a temporary standstill while other city states, such as Corinth, began to flourish. The growth of her population did not induce Athens to found colonies. Apparently Attica was large enough to accommodate the greater part of the increased population. Some peasant families, however, must have met with difficulties when the family property became too small to be divided among the next generation. Athens was ruled by an aristocracy. Kingship had been abolished fairly smoothly some time during the Dark Ages and the king had been replaced by three -- later nine -- archons ('rulers'), who exercised the former king's functions of army commander, high priest and supreme judge. Only the members of the old-established aristocratic families (eupatridai -- families with noble fathers) were eligible for these functions. After their one-year term of office they became members of the council of nobles, the Areopagus or 'Council of the Hill of Ares', so called after the place where they held their assemblies. The Areopagus had considerable effective political power. However, in Athens too, the position of the aristocracy was undermined by the economic, social and military changes outlined earlier. Around 632 bc, one Cylon tried to make himself tyrant, but his attempt was unsuccessful because the aristocracy could then still rely on sufficient support. Some ten years later, however, the aristocrats' unrestrained power suffered its first blow when Draco codified the prevailing customary law. He put an end to blood feuds. But as his law code did not entail any true reforms the feelings of discontent remained. These conditions were conducive to tyranny, but in 594 Athens averted that danger for some time by granting an archon, Solon, special powers to settle the conflicts between the nobility and the rest of the population. Solon had to find solutions for the dissatisfaction of two groups. The first comprised the wealthy citizens who demanded a share in the political power from which they had hitherto been excluded because they did not belong to the nobility. The second group consisted of the peasants who had fallen into debt and now demanded the cancellation of their debts and a redistribution of land. Solon belonged to a noble family of moderate means. He had spent some years of his life earning his own living by engaging in overseas trade. Around 600 he had participated in the conquest of the island of Salamis from the neighbouring city of Megara. Because of all this he was highly respected by all classes. Solon's first step was to divide the Athenian citizens (politai) into four property classes. The first two classes (the pentakosiomedimnoi \['500 bushel men'\] and the hippeis \['knights'\]) comprised the wealthiest nobles and the nobles one level below them plus the nouveaux riches. The third class consisted of the common peasants, the zeugitai. The thētes (\~ 'hired labourers'), who had very little or no property, constituted the fourth class. It should be borne in mind that this classification applied to Athenian citizens only. Apart from Athenian citizens, Athens's population also included metics (metoikoi), or resident aliens, many of whom had lived in Athens for several generations already. They were free, but did not enjoy civil rights. There were also slaves in Athens. In Solon's system the two highest classes had access to the office of archon. The three highest classes were allowed to serve on a newly created Council of Four Hundred (whose establishment was a blow to the Council of the Areopagus). All four were admitted to the general assembly (it was not all that common for people without landed property to be admitted to assemblies in Greece). Solon, then, replaced birth with wealth as the criterion for political influence (see Box 9.5). BOX 9.5 SOLON'S REFORMS - Classification of the citizens, 'politai', into four classes based on their wealth (thus not birth) -- that is the assessment of their minimal annual produce in capacity measures of cereal production, the medimnos = c. 50 litres, 'bushel'. The measures betray an agricultural society in which landedproperty was the norm. - Pentakosiomedimnoi: ('500-bushel-men': income of 500 medimnoi of cere-als annually) - Hippeis: ('horsemen', 'knights': 300 medimnoi) - Zeugitai: ('yoke-men', who could afford a yoke of oxen: 200 medimnoi) - Theˉ tes: (poor people, etymology uncertain: below 200 medimnoi) - Seisachtheia, 'shaking off of burdens'. Solon abolished debt bondage, the status of hekte ˉ moros, 'sixth-parter', i.e. serfs who had to pay one-sixth part of their produce to landlords. - The constitution of Solon. Nine archontes: archoˉ n epoˉ nymos ­ ('eponymous ruler', chief magistrate, who gave his name to the year in which he held office), archo ˉ n basileus ('king ruler', overseer of religious rites), archonpolemarchos ('war leader'; commander of the army); 6 thesmothetai ('­ lawmakers', judicial officers, supervisors of proceedings). Elected for oneyear by the ekkleˉ sia from classes 1 and 2. - Boule ('Council') has four hundred members. Elected for one year by the ekkle sia from classes 1--3. - Ekklesia ('Assembly'). Assembly of all male citizens from classes 1--4. - Areopagus (Areios pagos, 'Ares Rock'), council of elders of the city turned to council of ex-archons, who sat in the court for life. Tasks: review of laws; homicide court. Although reduced, the aristocracy's power was not yet broken. Most of the rich were still nobles and retained their prestige at a local level. They still had a function in jurisdiction too. For the impoverished farmers and debt bondsmen Solon proclaimed the seisachtheia, the 'shaking off of burdens': he cancelled all their debts, freed debt bondsmen, bought back Athenians who had been sold as slaves abroad and forbade Athenian citizens to offer their own person as security in obtaining loans. There were in those days also Athenian citizens who were known as hektēmoroi -- 'sixth parters'. They had to give one sixth of the produce of their land to a nobleman. We do not know the origin of this obligation. Some believe it was some form of payment of debts, while others regard it as payment for protection by the nobleman. Whatever the case may be, Solon also abolished the status of the hektēmoroi. Solon's measures had far-reaching consequences. From then onwards, Athenian citizens could no longer become slaves to other Athenians. However, that did not mean the end of slavery, for Athenian landowners and proprietors of craft centres simply purchased foreign slaves whenever they needed more labour. Athenians -- like many other Greeks -- regarded wage labour as a form of slavery. There was in their eyes only a marginal difference between selling one's labour and selling one's person. And as they made every effort to avoid having to do such demeaning work themselves, a major part of the need for labour had to be met by slaves. Solon also took measures to secure sufficient food supplies. He forbade the export of agricultural products except olive oil and encouraged farmers to grow olive trees, whose product -- olive oil -- could be exported. It was indeed under Solon that the associated industry of pottery production started to flourish in Athens (black-figure painting: see Figure 9.2c). Another of Solon's reforms involved the replacement of Draco's law code by a new code and the establishment of the hēliaia, the people's (jury) court. Every year, a list was drawn up of six thousand citizens, from among whom a certain number of jurors (often 501) would then be chosen by lot to pass judgement in a particular case. There is one important demand which Solon did not satisfy -- namely that for a redistribution of land, which he considered too radical. In conceding to cancel all debts, Solon was actually tackling the problems' symptoms instead of their causes. For some farmers his measures were satisfactory (hektēmoroi were not necessarily small farmers and they now became independent landed farmers), but they did not solve the problems of farmers with insufficient land. As those farmers and their families were now moreover forbidden to secure loans on their person, it had become virtually impossible for them to borrow money. Many of them no longer managed to make ends meet and moved to the city of Athens. Peisistratus, a scion of a noble family of modest means, took advantage of the discontent among the poor in Athens and the small farmers in Attica. With their support, he seized power and made himself tyrant. Peisistratus remained in control for only one year (561) after this first attempt, but in 546 he made a more successful bid to power. Having built up considerable resources by exploiting gold mines in Thrace he was able to hire a good bodyguard, with which he defeated the aristocrats and their supporters. The members of this bodyguard, who came from the lower classes, he armed as hoplites. Peisistratus did not abolish Solon's constitution, but he did make sure that things went the way he wanted them to. He reduced the power of the aristocracy even further by making men who were not aristocrats hoplites and instituting a system of travelling judges, which meant that the common people were no longer exclusively at the mercy of noblemen in local disputes. He even showed the population that the aristocrats were not as omnipotent as they seemed by banning many nobles and confiscating their property; that property he used to help small farmers switch to cultivating more profitable crops, in particular olives. He also embellished the city of Athens. He promoted national religious festivals, the Panathenaia, in honour of Athena, Athens's patron goddess, and the Dionysia, in honour of Dionysus. His aim in all this was to strengthen the bonds between the population and their polis at the expense of local ties and aristocratic traditions. Whether Peisistratus organised land distributions we do not know. It is not very likely that he did, because contemporary authors descended from noble families would not have remained silent about such a burning issue, for the land owned by the elite would have been at stake. But even if he did not distribute land, Peisistratus did improve conditions for the common people. The commissions for the construction of new temples and the increased industrial activity provided the necessary employment. The small farmers in Attica benefitted greatly from his relief measures. It was thanks to Solon and Peisistratus that the majority of the Athenian citizens were able to support themselves as small farmers in the Classical period. After his death (528), Peisistratus was succeeded by his sons, Hippias and Hipparchus. As elsewhere, the tyranny did not outlast this second generation. In 514 Hipparchus was killed by Harmodius and Aristogeiton following a private feud. Although this murder was actually of little consequence, the murderers were celebrated as heroes -- 'tyrannicides' -- in literature and sculpture. In 510 the aristocrats collectively put an end to the tyranny with the support of Sparta, which shared their hostility towards tyrants. Hippias fled to the Persian empire. As was customary after the abolition of a tyranny, a struggle then broke out between rival members of the aristocracy. In 508 Cleisthenes, a member of the Alcmaeonid family -- in those days the leading aristocratic family in Athens -- emerged triumphant from this struggle. He owed his success to the fact that he had allied himself with the common citizen people, the dēmos. The consequence of this was that he had to grant the dēmos a share in political power, to which end he had to curtail the aristocracy's power even further. This made Cleisthenes the founder of the famous Athenian democracy. He made the dēmos of male citizens the backbone of the government and the army, which now became a citizen army of hoplites. Cleisthenes divided the territory of the Athenian polis (i.e. Attica) into ten 'tribes' or districts (Greek: phylē, pl. phylai, the word for the four tribes that constituted together the Athenian citizenry, but now also received the meaning of district, like tribus in Latin; see p\. 220). Each of these tribes (districts) consisted of three trittyes (a coastal trittys, an inland trittys and an urban trittys). The smallest unit was the deme (Greek: dēmos, not to be confused with demos citizen body), a village or parish, of which there were 139 (see Map 9.2). This division became the foundation of the Athenian polity. Fifty men from each tribe were granted seats in the Council of Five Hundred (boulē). A list of candidates was set up for each tribe, from among whom the fifty were chosen by lot. In Athens, drawing lots was considered the most democratic procedure, for elections involved the risks of demagogy or of popular leaders becoming too powerful. The members of the Council (boulē) of Five Hundred were appointed for one year. It was not permitted to sit on the Council more than twice, and not in consecutive years. This meant that many Athenian citizens had an opportunity to become members of the Council and gain political experience. The Council was responsible for day-to-day administration and for preparing the agenda and decisions for the public assembly (ekklēsia). The public assembly consisted of all the male citizens of the polis of Athens, collectively the dēmos (hence dēmokratia= rule of the (male) citizen body). The bills forwarded by the boulē were by no means binding. The public assembly had the right of amendment and the right to accept strongly deviating proposals or to reject a proposal altogether. The public assembly voted by call and took the final decisions. All this made Athens a 'demo-cracy': the dēmos took decisions of policy (i.e. the male citizens (politai) -- women, metics and slaves had no share in the decision process). Cleisthenes's system meant a blow to the aristocrats, who still enjoyed considerable power on a local level. The boundaries dividing the tribes, trittyes and demes cut right across the noble families' spheres of influence. The deme was moreover a small-scale democracy, with its own chosen administrators, council and public assembly. All the inhabitants of the deme were equal and they all had ample opportunity to gain administrative experience on a local level. Nevertheless, the nobles still had considerable prestige and often managed to get themselves appointed to the important offices. But they too had to abide by the rules of the democracy. Moreover, until 461, the Council of the Areopagus still exercised some control over local administration, although we do not know exactly how much power it had. As this council consisted of ex-archons, there were still many aristocrats among its members. The archons were still the highest magistrates and they were still chosen from the highest two property classes of Solon's class system, which had not been abolished. Although the nouveaux riches now also qualified for the archonship it was usually members of the old aristocratic families who were appointed to this office. The archonship lost much of its former esteem in 487 bc, when it was decided to appoint archons by drawing lots. The prestige of the office of stratēgos, or general, on the other hand increased, because the ten generals who commanded the army and the fleet continued to be elected from among the most suitable candidates. They could be re-elected any number of times after their one year's term of office. The generals were to acquire considerable political power after 487 (see p. 138). Map 9.2 Cleisthenes's division of Attica into trittyes. Note: Each tribe comprised an urban, a coastal and an inland trittys. So each tribe consisted of three trittyes. Some historians have taken the fact that the trittyes were all situated along the main roads to the centre of Athens to imply that they were created specifically to facilitate the mobilisation of citizens: the recruits from the individual trittyes would have been able to quickly make their way to Athens when an army was to be formed. The last measure that Cleisthenes is believed to have introduced is 'ostracism', but the measure may well be of a later date. Once a year, the public assembly was asked whether there was any need for an ostracism. If there was, those present at the next meeting had to write the name of a person they considered a threat to the state on a potsherd (ostrakon). The person whose name occurred on most sherds was then banned for ten years. However, he retained possession of his property. Several politicians fell victim to this practice in the fifth century. Some managed to regain their prominent position after returning from their exile, but for most it meant the end of their careers. BOX 9.6 THE REFORMS OF CLEISTHENES - Division of Attica into ten phylai, 'tribes' (actually districts!), each subdivided into three trittyes ('thirds') and c. 140 deˉ moi, demes, rural or urban districts. - Constitution of Cleisthenes and after Archontes ('rulers'). Nine in total: one archo ˉ n eponymos (who gave his name to the year); one archoˉ n basileus ('king archon'; religious duties); one archonpolemarchos ('war leader'); six thesmothetai ('lawmakers'). The office became gradually titular, ritual and judicial. From 487 bc they were chosen by lot for one year. One re-election was allowed but not consecutively. The polemarchos lost his primary position to ten new officers: the strate goi. One secretary for the thesmothetes was added. [Strategoi] ('generals'). Ten generals were chosen by the assembly, one per phyleˉ ; they could be re-elected indefinitely. Their prestige increased in respect to archons. [Boule]('council') of 500. Fifty per phyleˉ were chosen by lot. One re-election was allowed but not consecutively. Task: Introducing bills (probouleumata) in the assembly and day-to-day administration. The members met in the building called prytaneion. [Ekklesia] ('assembly'). All male citizens are allowed to attend and vote (one man one vote). There were forty sessions per year. Task: Voting bills of the Council. Decisions of the assembly had force of law and were binding. Citizens had the right of amendment and of initiative. [Areopagus]. Council of ex-archons. In 461 bc it lost the right to review laws. Homicide court remained its main function. [Ostracism] ('potsherd judgement', from ostrakon, 'potsherd'). This was a procedure in the assembly by which any citizen could be sent into exile. The name of the candidate was written on potsherds. The measure might be post- Cleisthenic. **CHAPTER 10** **THE CLASSICAL PERIOD** **(c. 500--c. 330 bc)** CHAPTER OUTLINE The Persian Wars\_ 119 Sparta and Athens after 479 bc\_ The Delian League (477--404 bc)\_ Athenian leaders in the fifth century\_ Athens's state income\_ The Great Peloponnesian War (431--404 bc)\_ The years between 404 and 336 bc\_ The Second Athenian League (377--355)\_ Social and military changes\_ The rise of Macedonia\_ Philip II (359--336): the end of the Classical period in Greek history\_ The Athenian population in the fifth and fourth centuries bc\_ The metics\_ The slaves\_ Women in Athens and Sparta\_ Further development of the Athenian democracy\_ The Council of the Areopagus in 462/1\_ Pericles\_ The democracy and the fleet\_ Old and new politicians\_ The stability of the Athenian democracy\_ Criticism of the Athenian democracy\_ Athens as the centre of Greek culture in the Classical period\_ Attic drama\_ Philosophy\_ The sophists\_ Rhetorical education\_ Socrates and Plato\_ Aristotle (384--322)\_ Historical writing\_ Herodotus\_ Thucydides\_ Historical writing after Herodotus and Thucydides\_ 151 The Greeks in the western Mediterranean\_ 152 The economy of the Greek city states\_ 154 **THE PERSIAN WARS** Around the middle of the sixth century bc the expanding Persian empire reached the western coast of Asia Minor. In 547 the Persian king Cyrus the Great (559--530) conquered Lydia and, in so doing, gained control over the Greek cities on the western coast of Asia Minor, which the Lydians had captured shortly before. In most of these cities the Persians selected local aristocrats who were favourably disposed towards them and appointed them as tyrants. They were to govern the cities under the supervision of the Persian satraps (see p. 51). In 499 bc the Greeks of Asia Minor tried to depose their tyrants and break away from the Persians. But their attempts were unsuccessful: in 495--494 the Persians squashed their revolt in a series of battles on land and at sea. Shortly after, in 490, the Persian king Darius I (522--486) sent out an expedition to punish Athens, which had sent a small fleet to assist the rebels. The Persians sailed across the Mediterranean and landed at Marathon in Attica (Map 10.1), where they were defeated by the Athenian hoplites and a small contingent of hoplites from neighbouring Plataea under the command of Miltiades (490). This battle won Athens fame throughout the entire Greek world. In spite of her fifty-year-old hostility towards Persia (p. 108) and her reputation as the strongest military power in Greece, Sparta did not take part in the Ionian revolt or in the battles of 490. Ten years later, in 480, Darius's successor, Xerxes, resumed the hostilities. In the belief that the only way of securing his control over the west of Asia Minor was by subjugating the Greeks of the Greek mainland, he set out to Greece with a large army and a fleet. The army marched along the coast so that it could be provisioned by the fleet sailing alongside it (see Map 10.1). Many Greek states had in the meantime united in a league which was led by Sparta, but in which Athens also had much influence. In 483 Athens had followed the stratēgos Themistocles's advice and had begun to create a large navy. In that year, a fresh rich vein of silver had been discovered in the mining area of Laurium in southern Attica (see Map 10.3). The profits of this silver were not divided among the citizens as some Athenians had wished, but were spent on building warships of a new, fast and more manoeuvrable type known as 'triremes' (Figure 10.1). Some Athenians, especially among the higher classes, failed to see the need for a strong navy. In their opinion, the battle at Marathon had shown that an army of hoplites was all that was required to defeat the Persians. Themistocles did not share this opinion. He believed that a powerful navy was vital for Athens, in particular in view of the city's heavy reliance on the import of grain (see p. 92): only with a powerful navy would Athens be able to repel the Persians and secure her trade routes against Greek rivals at sea. In 480, along the coastal road near Thermopylae and in the adjacent bay of Artemisium (see Map 10.1), the Greeks made an unsuccessful attempt to stop the Persians advancing by land and sea. The naval battle was important, too, because if the Greeks were to defeat the Persian navy, it would no longer be able to provision the large Persian army via its ships. Throughout antiquity, transport by land was slower and more difficult. The Spartan king Leonidas and three hundred Spartan hoplites attempted to hold up the Persian land forces at the pass at Thermopylae for as long as possible and fought themselves to death, but in doing so they did succeed in covering the retreat of the Greek army and navy. The Athenians evacuated their city and took their cattle along with them to the island of Salamis opposite Athens. Xerxes ordered the abandoned city to be destroyed, but his navy was defeated by the Athenians and their allies in the bay of Salamis. Xerxes was now no longer in a position to swiftly subject Greece and was forced to reduce the Persian army, which remained in Greece, as he was unable to secure adequate provisions. One year later \(479) the Greeks, under the command of the Spartan regent Pausanias, defeated the Persian army at Plataea. The Persians retreated from Greece and the fighting shifted to the west coast of Asia Minor, where the Athenian fleet liberated the Greek cities from the Persians -- a fact which the latter refused to acknowledge until 449, when the hostilities came to an end. The battles against the Persian army and navy were to appeal to Greek imagination for many centuries. In later European thinking these battles became symbols of the triumph of the free Greek states over Asia, thanks to which Greek culture, the source of western civilisation, was saved from suffocation by eastern despotism. Territory already captured by the Persians c. 480 Neutral states and Persian allies (e.g. Thebes in Boeotia) States at war with Persia The route followed by the Persian fleet in 490 BC The route followed by the Persian army overland in 480 The route followed by the fleet in 480 1 = Marathon 2 = Thermopylae 3 = Artemision 4 = Salamis (island in crescent form) 5 = Plataea Map 10.1 Persian campaigns against the Greeks, 490--479 bc. Note: The Persian expedition of 490 passed straight across the sea to Marathon and that of 480 comprised an army marching along coastal roads and a fleet sailing alongside it, so that the ships could supply the land forces with provisions. The army that the Persians composed for their expedition of 480 was very large by contemporary standards (approx. eighty thousand men according to a reliable estimate). As transport by land was slow and of insufficient capacity for such a large army, provisions had to be supplied by sea. Greece was relatively poor in resources, so some provisions had to be supplied from the Persian hinterland. When the Persian fleet was defeated off Salamis (480), the Persian army, which stayed behind in Greece, had to be reduced in size. That made it easier for the Greeks to defeat the Persian land forces, too. SPARTA AND ATHENS AFTER 479 bc After 479 Sparta left the command of the battle against the Persians to Athens. The Spartans had no fleet to speak of and the theatre of war, the west coast of Asia Minor, border of the city state Athens occupied lay overseas. The Spartans moreover didn't like the idea of having large forces fighting battles far away from home for long periods of time because they were constantly afraid that the helots would rise against them. A helot revolt did indeed break out in Messenia in 464 bc, after a severe earthquake, and it took the Spartans almost four years -- and a great deal of effort -- to suppress it. In 462/1 Sparta desperately appealed to Athens for help, but when the Athenian general Cimon, who sympathised with Sparta, arrived with his troops he was sent back home again. The Athenians responded to this rebuff by waging war on Sparta and her allies from 461 until 446. For twelve years (461--449) both Persia and Sparta were Athens's enemies. Sparta, however, had by this time entered a period of stagnation. The class of Spartiate full citizens had dwindled as a consequence of a fall in birth rate and the degradation of impoverished Spartiates to second-class citizens (see p. 107). The privileged Spartiates had come to represent an even smaller minority among the perioikoi and the helots. Figure 10.1 A modern reconstruction of an Athenian trireme. Source: Photo © Paul Lipke, The Trireme Trust. Note: The ship's most dangerous weapon was its ram (right). Such a ship was usually manned by 100--150 or even more rowers, 10--20 marines (hoplites) and a few seamen (steersman, captain, sailors). The Athenian fleets sometimes included transport ships bearing soldiers, weapons and horses, which enabled them to sail to their destination and then fight the enemy both on land and at sea. THE DELIAN LEAGUE (477--404 bc) In 477 Athens founded her own league against Persia: the Delian League. Most Greek islands, the Greeks on the west coast of Asia Minor and some other Greek cities joined this league. Only a few large islands supplied ships and soldiers; most member states contributed money to the league's treasury (kept on the island of Delos), which largely financed the league's fleet and army. In the fifth century the league became an instrument of Athens's power politics, especially after 460, when Pericles became the leading politician in the city. Although the Delian League had originally been founded for a specific purpose -- the war against the Persians -- it was not dissolved in 449, when the hostilities against the Persians came to an end. The league's territory (Map 10.2) had in fact become Athenian territory. Allies who wished to secede from the league were forced to remain members and to continue to pay the tributes. Athens started to interfere in her allies' internal affairs: she meddled in their legal and financial matters and brought friendly democratic governments to power in several member states. The Athenians also established a network of colonies (cleruchies) at various strategic points (usually islands) in the league territory. These colonies were not new, independent city states as the colonies of the Archaic period had been, but were regarded as additions to the Athenian polis; the colonists kept their Athenian citizenship. In actual fact, these colonies were Athenian military bases. This form of colonisation led to an increase in the number of Athenian hoplites. Most of the colonists were citizens without property (thētes), for whom this was a way of obtaining land and rising to a higher property class -- that of the zeugitai. This was to Athens's benefit for it was the zeugitai who provided the lion's share of both the heavy infantry and the naval forces. The thētes who became zeugitai could no longer be used as rowers, but that was no problem for Athens, because the city could recruit plenty of rowers and sailors from among volunteers from the league member states. Most of those volunteers were lured by the pay and the prospect of booty, though some may have wished to join the navy for idealistic reasons, for many of the poor citizens of the member states of the Delian League were great admirers of the Athenian democracy. Almost all of the states that wanted to resign from the league and deserted Athens were led by oligarchic regimes. In the course of the fifth century a polarity emerged in Greece: Greeks in favour of a democracy supported Athens while those with an oligarchic disposition (usually the rich) sympathised with Sparta. ATHENIAN LEADERS IN THE FIFTH CENTURY In the fifth century Athens was led by a number of capable statesmen who knew how to address the assembly and who were also competent army and fleet commanders: Themistocles (c. 490--470), Cimon (c. 470--461) and Pericles (460--429). They were all members of the aristocratic elite but their loyalty was with the democracy. The Athenian citizens elected them generals time and time again. Themistocles and Pericles realised that their objective, which was for Athens to acquire hegemony over the whole of Greece, would ultimately bring them into conflict with Sparta. They therefore built long walls around Athens and her port Piraeus (see Figure 10.2). The idea was that the Athenians would then be able to import everything they needed via the sea, while Sparta's land forces idly besieged the city, because the Athenian fleet still retained the supremacy over the seas surrounding Greece that it had acquired in the Persian Wars. The policies of Themistocles and Pericles were characterised by expansionism in external affairs and a democratic disposition in internal affairs (see p. 141). The more conservative Cimon wanted to avoid conflicts with Sparta, but he lost his popularity and was ostracised when a war broke out between Athens and Sparta in 461 (p. 122). Athens's aim in that war was to extend her influence over central Greece and the Peloponnesian coast opposite Attica. At the same time, the Athenians supported the Egyptians' revolt against Persia (c. 455). All this proved too much: in 454 Athens suffered a crushing defeat in Egypt and in 446 the city found herself forced to conclude a compromise peace agreement with Sparta and abandon her ambition to extend her sway over central Greece. By this time peace had been made with the Persians (in 449). After their failure in Egypt (454) the Athenians, allegedly out of fear of a Persian expedition to Delos, transferred the league treasury from Delos to Athens and assumed control over the league's financial affairs. The years between 446 and 431 marked a summit in Athens's history in terms of the growth of her power, her prosperity and her cultural achievements. This greatly alarmed Sparta, which had managed to recover somewhat from the blows inflicted on her and was still the unrivalled supreme power in the Peloponnese. Other Greek states also viewed Athens's success with growing anxiety. They began to look to Sparta to defend the autonomy of the Greek city states against Athens's imperialistic ambitions. Most Greek city states that were not members of the Delian League were moreover ruled by aristocratic or oligarchic leaders, who dreaded the spread of democracy. ATHENS'S STATE INCOME Athens's power politics and her magnificent achievements in the visual arts, architecture and literature rested on a sound financial basis. The city had a regular income consisting of her allies' tributes, which were paid into the league treasury, but of which Athens was the main beneficiary, the profits of the exploitation of the silver mines at Laurium and the tolls and harbour dues that were levied at Piraeus. On top of this there were the head taxes and market dues paid by foreigners who worked in Athens and Piraeus (the metics). Those taxes and the harbour dues brought in large sums of money, because after the Persian Wars Athens had become the most important market and commercial centre in Greece. Large numbers of Ionians and other Greeks had settled in Athens as merchants and craftsmen. Athens had in fact inherited the trade and industry of the Ionian cities that had suffered such hard blows in the Ionian revolt and the Persian Wars. Athenian citizens were not required to pay direct taxes on a regular basis. Taxation was imposed only incidentally, in times of financial emergency. Wealthy citizens were occasionally expected to equip a warship or to finance a building project or a theatrical performance. These financial services to the state were called 'liturgies'. In the fifth century Athens also derived revenues from the gold mines in Thrace (see Map 10.2). Thrace also yielded the timber for Athens's ships. Another -- indirect -- source of financial benefit was Athens's powerful political position. Thanks to her large navy, Athens could virtually monopolise the trade with the cereal- producing areas in southern Russia, and could consequently keep grain prices low within the city. Athens managed to retain this advantageous position until the end of the fourth century bc, when the loss of the city's naval power (p. 130) spelled the beginning of hard times for Athens's poor. **THE GREAT PELOPONNESIAN WAR** **(431--404 bc)** After a short period of peace (446--431), a new war broke out between Athens and Sparta in 431, when Athens came into conflict with Sparta's maritime allies Corinth and Megara. This war was far more intensive than the previous one (461--446). The Greek historian Thucydides, who described this conflict, was of the opinion that the Peloponnesian War (431--404) was the fiercest war ever fought in Greek history. The Athenians and the Spartans both rallied their allies behind them. Most of the Greek states that had hitherto remained neutral now took sides with Sparta (see Map 10.2). In the past, wars between Greek city states had been minor skirmishes and plunderings, with only one or two pitched battles, after which peace had been made. In the Peloponnesian War, however, the entire Greek world, from Ionia in the east to Sicily in the west, was engaged in constant fighting involving large land and naval forces. Pericles developed a strategy that was controversial in his own time and is still a matter of debate. He had created a treasury of six thousand talents (see Appendix 2). His aim was to launch a series of brief attacks on Sparta from the sea and to entice the Spartans into a vain attempt to besiege Athens and Piraeus, which would use up all their resources and exhaust their men. To that end he concentrated the population of Attica within the long walls surrounding those cities. Pericles had no faith in pitched battles on land because Sparta still had the best hoplites in the whole of Greece and, as she had so many allies, her troops would moreover vastly outnumber those of Athens. Sparta's weakness was her war fund: the city could not afford to finance a protracted war. Athens suffered several major setbacks during the war. Its leader Pericles died in 429 and between 429 and 427 a severe plague killed about one third of the city's population. Moreover, Athens did not adhere strictly to Pericles's plans and launched several risky expeditions after all. Nonetheless, in spite of all this, the city held its own in the first stage of the war (431--421). In 421 Athens concluded a peace treaty on reasonable terms (the Peace of Nicias). Athens's enemies had not succeeded in breaking the city's power. However, due to a combination of factors, Athens lost the second stage of the war (413-- 404). One of these factors was the loss of the best part of the city's army and navy in a reckless and totally vain attempt to gain control of Sicily. Between 415 and 413 Syracuse, which was at that time the most densely populated Greek city after Athens, defeated the Athenians with the help of Sparta. The next decade was marked by an intriguing aristocratic politician, whose name was Alcibiades (c. 450--404). His mother was a member of the influential but controversial family of the Alcmaeonids, like Pericles, in whose house he grew up after his father had died. He was a flamboyant young man and pupil of Socrates, but often created scandals and was not averse to changing sides in political conflicts. He schemed against the Spartans after the Peace of 421 and against Nicias, who had arranged the peace. Later he persuaded Athens's assembly to embark on the Sicilian expedition, much to the dismay of Nicias. Nevertheless both were elected generals (stratēgoi). Alcibiades, however, was accused of taking part in a religious scandal: the mutilation of the 'herms'. Herms are statues in the form of a square column with the head of the god Hermes, but also of other gods and even humans, and male genitals at the appropriate height on the column (Figure 10.5). Alcibiades was also accused of profaning the Eleusinian mysteries. He denied everything, but was recalled for trial when he arrived in Syracuse. He then defected to Sparta. He advised the Spartans to establish a permanent military base in Attica, to help Syracuse and to open up relations with Persia. Persia was ready to respond to this, as it was provoked by Athenian support for a rebellious satrap of Lydia. Around 415 this satrap was killed by Tissaphernes, who was sent by the Persian king Darius II, but Athens continued to support his rebellious son. Sparta followed his advice and in 413 the war flared up again, opening the second phase of the Peloponnesian War. Persian support proved decisive. The Spartans occupied the fort Decelea (Greek: Dekeleia) in Attica, some 10 miles from Athens (see Map 10.3), from where they obstructed agriculture all over Attica and prevented access to the silver mines at Laurium. Thousands of slaves escaped and Athens was cut off from major food supplies and sources of income. Persia sided with Sparta from 412 bc and gave the Spartans the financial means they needed to build up a strong fleet. This induced many of Athens's allies to defect to Sparta. Alcibiades himself stirred this up by sailing to the Greek cities in Ionia. On this critical point, however, Alcibiades changed sides again. He came into conflict with Spartan authorities. It was rumoured that the son that was born to King Agis II was in fact Alcibiades's son. So he defected again and sought contact with Tissaphernes, now the Persian satrap of Lydia and Caria and commander-in-chief of the Persian army in Asia Minor. He advised Tissaphernes to take a middle position between Athens and Sparta so as to wear them out, a policy that became standard Persian policy in the fourth century. He then schemed a return to Athens. First he tried to do this by contacting generals of the fleet at Samos, by proposing to change the constitution of Athens into an oligarchy. He suggested that in that case Tissaphernes was willing to help the Athenians. A conspiracy to overthrow the democracy was concocted, but finally the conspirators distrusted Alcibiades. The oligarchic coup succeeded, a regime of 'Four Hundred' was installed in Athens, but Alcibiades had no part in it (411 bc; see also p. 140). The coup, however, was short-lived. The rowers of the fleet in Samos disobeyed the oligarchic conspirators and turned to Alcibiades. They still hoped that Alcibiades could secure help from Tissaphernes (which was not the case) and elected him general. He was accepted by a new, more moderate oligarchic regime (of the five thousand) that had replaced the Four Hundred. Alcibiades was able to win victory at sea against the Spartan fleet first, and was welcomed in Athens. A following naval battle he lost. He went into exile in Thrace and later went to Persia. He died in 404 in Phrygia. In 405 the Athenian fleet was decisively defeated by the Spartan admiral Lysander off the mouth of the small river Aigospotamoi in the Dardanelles (see Map 10.2). In 404, lack of food forced Athens to surrender. Athens had suffered severe losses. It is believed that the number of adult male citizens in Athens decreased from about fifty thousand to about twenty-five thousand between 432 and 400. The Delian League was dissolved, the long walls were pulled down and a pro- Spartan oligarchic government (the rule of the Thirty) was installed in Athens, which began a reign of terror. That government was not to last long, though, for after only one year it was overthrown and democracy was restored. The Spartans resigned themselves to this restoration. THE YEARS BETWEEN 404 AND 336 bc In the years after 404 no Greek state was powerful enough to unite the whole of Greece under its leadership. Between 404 and 338 coalition wars kept flaring up between Sparta, which still led the Peloponnesian League, Thebes, which was steadily acquiring considerable power and led a league of city states in Boeotia (see Map 10.4), and Athens, which had managed to recover surprisingly rapidly from the devastating defeat it had suffered in 404. Athens had not lost all its maritime power, and was still the most important market town, the most densely populated city and the leading cultural centre in Greece. Sparta found itself faced with an increasing shortage of Spartiates. It is believed that by 371 Sparta counted no more than about two thousand Spartiates, as opposed to at least twenty thousand adult male helots -- and that is a low estimate of the number of helots. The Persians had meanwhile started to stir up dissension between the Greek poleis and leagues to prevent the risk of them uniting and then turning on Persia -- something which they greatly feared because they had begun to lag behind the Greeks in military tactics and experience. The Persians' interference in Greece can be split into two phases: in the first half of the fifth century they launched attacks on the Greeks, but between 413 and 340 they reverted to divide-and-conquer tactics and tried to play the Greek states off against one another by constantly subsidising different states. The following example illustrates their strategy. In what is known as the Corinthian War of Thebes, Athens, Corinth and Argos against Sparta (395--386), the Persians first supported Athens and some of Sparta's defected allies (Corinth, Thebes) because Sparta had prevented the Persians from reasserting their authority over the west coast of Asia Minor after 404. Around 394, the Persians granted Athens financial support to restore its fleet and rebuild the long walls, but when Athens consequently threatened to become too powerful, the Persians helped Sparta instead. King Artaxerxes II summoned the Spartan admiral Antalcidas and the satrap Tiribazus to Susa and negotiated peace terms. Antalcidas blockaded the Hellespont with a fleet, so that famine threatened Athens, which acceded to peace terms imposed by the Persian king at the palace of the satrap in Sardes in 387 bc. The warring parties accepted the terms of the king: King Artaxerxes thinks it just that the cities in Asia should belong to him (...), and that the other Greek cities, both small and great, should be left independent (...). But whichever of the two parties does not accept this peace, upon them I will make war, in company with those who desire this arrangement, both by land and by sea, with ships and with money. (Xenophon, Hellenica V 1.31) The rest of the Greek states were forced to accept the terms at a conference in Sparta in the next year. Where Xerxes failed with armies and fleets, Artaxerxes succeeded with tactics and money. Sparta was the virtual winner and hegemon ('leader') of Greece. CHALCIDICE Thebes Chaeronea Sparta and her allies Macedonia Thebes (Boeotia) and her allies Athens and her allies Chalcidian League Map 10.4 Greece c. 360 bc, just before the rise of Macedonia. THE SECOND ATHENIAN LEAGUE (377--355) But Sparta's hegemony was soon to be challenged again. In 377, while Thebes was also acquiring considerable military power, Athens established the Second Athenian League, in which she united her anti-Spartan allies. Athens was not as dominant as it was in the first league. The allies were not required to pay tributes to the federal treasury, they retained their autonomy in internal affairs and they had a say in the league's foreign politics in the league's own assembly. This league was to have a short life. When, after 362, Athens began to show imperialistic tendencies and started to plant colonies of Athenian citizens (cleruchies) in the league's territory, her chief allies revolted (357--355) and the league collapsed. SOCIAL AND MILITARY CHANGES A new development in all these wars was the increasing use that was made of mercenaries, of whom there was no lack anywhere in Greece. In the Peloponnese in particular, many impoverished peasants became the victims of the concentration of land in the hands of the wealthy. There was little that could be done to stop this process in the oligarchic states in that region, for the wealthy landowners were also the rulers of the states and only citizens above a certain property qualification had political power; the mass of poor citizens didn't have full citizen rights in those states. Moreover, it may well be that the peaceful conditions that Sparta had been maintaining in the Peloponnese since about 546 bc had led to overpopulation. It was incidentally not only landless farmers' sons who became mercenaries; men driven into exile would likewise often join the army -- as their property was usually confiscated at the time of their exile, they needed a livelihood. The year 371 marked a turning point in the coalition wars between Thebes, Sparta, Athens and their allies. In that year the Theban Epaminondas, a genius in military tactics, destroyed the Spartan army at Leuctra (see Map 10.4). He then marched on to the Peloponnese, where he freed the helots in Messenia (but not those in Laconia) and dissolved the Peloponnesian League. Sparta lost over half of her citizens with full citizen rights, her league, which had been her main weapon for almost two centuries, and one of her principal helot territories. The city was reduced to a second-class power of no more than regional importance. This led to a series of in