The Peloponnesian war and Delian League

[Benedict Lloyd-Jones]

If any body has information on any of these two subjects could they plese
post something about them especially if you have opinions of how the Delian
League became littl more than an Athenian empire

thanks
Benedict Lloyd-Jones

[Neville Lindsay]

"Benedict Lloyd-Jones" <B...@lordlimpet.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:95jsfe$13c$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...

Plenty in Thucydides *Peloponnesian War* - the Penguin paperback is a good
translation. Read it - you might learn something and even enjoy it.

NL

[Benedict Lloyd-Jones]

Thank you but I have already read it (one of the set texts of the course)
any other sources?

thanks
Benedict Lloyd-Jones

Neville Lindsay wrote in message ...

[Neville Lindsay]

"Benedict Lloyd-Jones" <B...@lordlimpet.cjb.net> wrote in message

news:95mud8$vt5$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...

> Thank you but I have already read it (one of the set texts of the course)
> any other sources?
>
> thanks
> Benedict Lloyd-Jones

Anti-Persian League:
When the threat of Persia receded, so did the willingness by many cities to
keep up the supply of resources. Most anyway had opted for the easy way out
to pay money rather than provide ships and troops, so the Athenian fleet not
only retained its dominance (only Samos, Chios and Lesbos provided ships)
but became overwhelmingly so, paid for by the cities, who were also
defenceless against this fleet. Athens rightly took harsh action against
free-loaders starting with Thasos, and continued tribute collection by force
(which also gave employment to the fleet). After the settlement with Persia
in 449, the threat subsided and the treasury was relocated from Delos to
Athens, and Pericles' party was able to start using the money for
Athens-only purposes, and back this up with force as necessary, to which the
cities had no practical response other than to pay the tribute. The
Athenians made no bones about calling it an empire, and few apologies about
using the tribute for their own purposes, as they considered that they took
most of the risk and work in providing security. There are side-angles to
all this - supporting democratic governments, additional impositions on
cities, trade bias, inter-city judicial matters, religious matters etc.
All this is available from reading Thucydides. For in-depth treatment, look
up scads of articles in Journal of Hellenistic Studies for the last 60
years - a couple of the older ones are the best.

NL

[Benedict Lloyd-Jones]

But don't you see it as more of a protection racket, for example Mytilene
and the rest of Lesbos try and secede from the Delian league as they are
sending money to Attica for them to go and build new court house and temples
whilst there is no sight of Persian, Pirate or fleet payed for by these tax
levies that were set by Athens and no one else had any say. So the Athenians
send a trireme filled with 1000 hoplites and engage on there own piracy on a
huge scale so really Athens was not acting in a manner of security because
the Persians just did not rear their heads at all and in the end league
funds went to funding Athens in the Pelopennesian war.

Benedict Lloyd-Jones

[Ned Latham]

Benedict Lloyd-Jones wrote in <95ro15$rf3$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>:

>
> But don't you see it as more of a protection racket, for example
> Mytilene and the rest of Lesbos try and secede

Read the history a bit more carefully. That attempt to secede was
organized by the aristovrats, not the people of Mytilene. When the
Athenians pressed hard, they armed the citizens, who took over and
surrendered.

Remember that the aristocrats were Medizers throughout Greece and
Ionia, and in the end, pro-aristo Sparta won the Peloponnesian War
because of massive Persian support (as well as Athens' mistakes).

> from the Delian
> league as they are sending money to Attica for them to go and build
> new court house and temples whilst there is no sight of Persian,
> Pirate or fleet payed for by these tax levies that were set by
> Athens and no one else had any say. So the Athenians send a trireme
> filled with 1000 hoplites and engage on there own piracy on a huge
> scale so really Athens was not acting in a manner of security because
> the Persians just did not rear their heads at all and in the end league
> funds went to funding Athens in the Pelopennesian war.

The Persians were quiet *because* the League was active. Have you
forgotten the expeditions to Egypt? And the raids on Phoenician
(Persian controlled) seaports? Executed almost entirely by Athens
because many League members contributed only money?

Many moderns have criticised the Athenians for their Administration
of the Delian League, but there's not so much criticism from ancient
sources. The contributions were fixed by Athens, but no-one complained
of those; disputes between persons of different poleis in the League
had to be tried in Athens, before Athenians juries, but no-one
complained of any injustice there, either.

To call the League a protection racket, even after the Athenians
openly viewed it as their empire, is to misinterpret it, rather
grossly in my opinion. Remember that at the beginning of the
Peloponnesian War, the Spartans put themselves forward as the
"liberators of Greece", but the League stuck together with what
by your description we would have to classify as *astonishing*
loyalty through even the worst times.

Ask yourself why there was no revolt after the disaster at
Syracuse.

----snip----

--
Ned ++++++ Democracy means "the people rule".
Forget the republic: fight for the power of assent.
To reply, cut out my nose and make the met a net.

[rafaelro...@gmail.com]

Happens like clockwork: Iran’s media, parliament and proxies ratchet up their efforts to discredit the IAEA just before the quarterly Board of Governors meeting– this time set for early June. As far as we can tell, the heat’s usually turned up 10 days or so before the meeting– apparently to pre-empt publication of Amano’s report, disseminated to member states (and usually leaked) beforehand.
Read more about persian league http://goo.gl/AyvDR