The Delian League Essay

In the early fifth century BC, Greece consisted of many city-states allied in various factions or leagues. The alliances between these cities are difficult to understand. The alliances created a patchwork where

The besiegement of Thasos revealed Athens' true motivations behind the League and the future plans for her allies. According to _Ancient Greece Using Sources_ Thasos was one of the largest and richest members of the Delian League, and a conflict broke out between Athens and Thasos over the gold mining on the island. Thasos then attempted to withdraw from the League, as the Persians were no longer a threat in the Aegean, and Athens was demanding too much for too little in return.

Promoting Greek unity gave the Greeks greater strength in numbers during the wars. Plutarch states “The greatest of all his achievements was to put an ending to all the fighting within Greece, to reconcile the various cities with one another and persuade them to lay aside their differences because of the war with Persia”. Themistocles’ relationship with naval commander Eurybiades also was very important. With Themistocles’ great foresight and decision making, the value of this working relationship with Eurybiades was the ability of Eurybiades to trust in Themistocles and his opinions. This proved very effective in the battles of Artemisium and Salamis. Thucydides praises this: “This man was supreme at doing precisely the right thing at precisely the right moment.” All of these pre-war efforts are contributions to which Themistocles played a great role in Greek victory.

The exiting of Sparta from this alliance at the conclusion of the war gave way for Athens to rise as the power which controlled the alliance. This gave Athens control of much of the coast, and allowed them to control and build up great commercial power. This would lead to the creation of the Athenian Empire. Athens would hold power until war breaks out between them and Sparta. Athens would eventually fall to Sparta with the defeat of her navy at

A reading of Thucydides’, Pericles’ Funeral Oration and The Melian Dialogue uncovers both contrasting and comparable viewpoints on Athenian politics, power, aims of war, and empire. Thucydides presents two differing characteristics of Athens, one as the civilizer in Pericles’ funeral oration and the other as an tyrant in the Melian dialogue. In the funeral oration delivered by Pericles during the first year of the war, the Athenian leader emphasizes the idealized personal image of the Athenians in regard to their constitution and good character. Pericles goes on to praise the Athenian democratic institution of Athens that contributes to their cities greatness; in Pericles’s own words, “The Athenian administration favors the many instead of few… they afford equal justice to all of their differences” (112, 2.37). This quote emphasizes the good character of the Athens’ to coax and encourage the Athenians to preserve and better their great empire into the future. On the other hand, in the Melian dialogue, this notion of justice and equality is irrelevant; one, because Athens compared to Melos, is the stronger of the two and thus, is more powerful. Further, Athens, will continue to acquire absolute power and build its empire by conquering Melos and whomever else stands in its way. Through Pericles’ funeral oration and the Melian dialogue, the following conclusions/themes will demonstrate both the changing and somewhat stable nature of Athenian policy with regards to empire,

The Greeks closest to the Persian Empire after the war created the Delian League to protect them from the Persians. The Greeks chose the Athenians to lead them. The Spartans were originally asked to lead them, but the kind was very arrogant, so they retracted their offer. The Spartans then created the Peloponnesian League because they didn’t think the Athenians should lead the Delian League because they were getting too much credit for defeating the Persians in the war. The two leagues didn’t get along at all. This rivalry eventually turned into the Peloponnesian War. This war went on for about 30 years. After the war, the government changed in Athens.

After the onset of the Persian War most Greek city states chose to submit to Persia save for a few including Athens and Sparta. The city-states that did choose to agree to a Persian rule did so because of the damage they faced during the first Persian invasion. The other city-states that chose to resist joined Athens in 478 B.C. and formed what is known as the Delian League. The purpose of the Delian League was to defend city-states from invasions and to get revenge against Persia. City-states could gain membership to this league by means of paying a tax or offering its military to fight for the League. The leader of this group of city-states quickly became Athens due to the money it was receiving in the form of a tax from the other city-states to build its already massive navy.

In ancient Greece there were two major polises which allowed the Greek culture to achieve greatness during the 400-500 B.C.E. era. These two polises were Athens and Sparta; both city states differed in many ways before the start of the Persian War. There were low rugged mountains that separated these two city states so communication and travel were difficult. The government of these two city states can be seen as a primary difference between the two. Draco, Solon, Pisistratus, and Cleithenes were four leaders that greatly influenced the political development of Athens. Athens and Sparta differed primarily in their political, social, and economical aspects. But there were other difference that Athens and Sparta share which I will examine in this essay.

Once Sparta created his own rival league, the Peloponnesian League, feelings of jealousy accumulated towards the people of Athens and those feelings increased with competitive notions for power. Then when Athens attacked an ally of Sparta’s Peloponnesian League, Sparta decided

Persia, under King Darius’ rule expanded its level of influence into Western Europe with hopes of conquering Athens, Greece between 522-486 B.C. Attempting to, “quell once and for all a collection of potentially troublesome rebel states,” Darius desire to conquer Greece would ultimately lead to one of the most influential battles of ancient history (Cartwright, Marathon,

Thucydides' account of the Peloponnesian war served as a window into Athenian societal culture. Carrying the reader from Pericles' moving speech to the assembly, through Cleon and Diodotus' oratory battle over the fate of Mytilene, and finally to the Athenian proposal to the Melians, Thucydides detailed the transformation of Athens from a state based on justice and freedom to a empire with a corrupted soul. This corruption did not occur over night, but was the result of increasing tyrannical behavior by the part of Athens in its interactions with other Greek city states. The stages of this development can be analyzed into three parts: Pericles' war speech, the dialogue on Mytilene, and the Melian debate.

Investigating Athens' Treatment of Her Allies During the period of 478-431, Athens’ treatment of her allies changed dramatically as she rose to become the leader of an empire. The establishment of the Delian League marked the beginning of a significant series of events, which lead to Athens’ rise to extreme power. From the evidence of Thucydides and the inscriptions, it is possible to track the progress of these events and the rapidly changing treatment that Athens enforced upon her allies.

Pericles was an important man for Athenians. Indeed, he was so influential to Athens that Thucydides claimed him as “the first citizen of Athens”. He, Pericles, led countrymen for the first two years of the war and made the “Delian League into an Athenian empire”. Pericles’ thoughts regarding the war were more obvious after his death than while he was still alive. He had said that Athens in one-way or another forgot to take care the most important things. For example, he said, “Athens will be victorious if she bided [Athens] and took care of her navy” meaning that during the course of the war Athens as a city itself forgot how to take care of the things that made Athens an influential and precious city. In addition, Thucydides claimed that Pericles’ successors were a big factor of the position of Athens while approaching the war. His successors instead of helping Athenians confront the war as an important case of matter, did the opposite. Instead, they took care of “private business”, which were only beneficial for their private ambition. However, such bad decisions and

The Peloponnesian War was the turning point in Athenian hegemony in Ancient Greece. It was fought in 431 B.C. between the Delian League, led by Athens, and the Peloponnesian League led by Sparta. According to Thucydides, Athens’ imposing hegemonic status and its overwhelming quest for more power made the Peloponnesian War and Athens’s eventual fall from power inevitable. Despite the Athenians having a far more superior navy and being considerably wealthier, they were defeated and made subjects of Sparta. In this paper, I will discuss Thucydides’ and Socrates’ reasons for why

This essay examines the evolution of the Athens strategy from the beginning to the end of The Peloponnesian War (431 to 404 BCE). The Strategy will be evaluated in the context of the relationship of ends, means, and ways by testing the suitability, acceptability, feasibility, and risk.