[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

alliance as a whole.
[25] This is Thucydides' view (1.95.7, 102.1-4), although he is aware that an undercurrent of friction
began almost immediately (1. 101.3). Herodotus (8. 3) and later sources (e.g., Arist. Ath. Pol . 23.4;
Diod. 11. 50.1-8) suggest that the schism was more immediate.
[26] P. A. Brunt, "The Hellenic League against Persia," Historia 2 (1953-54): 158, based primarily on
Thuc. 1. 102.1-4; 3. 54.5.
 101 
participants in the Greek defense may have also influenced the diplomatic and military events of the
period in ways that have never been properly appreciated.
We know that Aegina and Melos belonged to the Hellenic alliance. They did not, however, join the
Athenian Confederacy in 478/477 and were not coerced into joining.[27] One reason for this may have
been that they were protected by the pledges exchanged between the states of the earlier alliance
(see Hdt. 7. 148). It may also simply be that their decision to remain aloof was respected, since Thera
was also left unmolested, although the Therans had not been members of the Hellenic alliance.
Carystus, on the other hand, was attacked by the Athenians and compelled to join the new alliance.
But before we conclude that this was a naked act of Athenian imperialist aggression (especially since
the Carystians controlled the port of Geraestus, which was critically important for any power seeking
to dominate the Aegean), it is worthwhile to remember that the recent policy of the Carystians invited
reprisal. In fact, the Carystians had medized. The very fact that they controlled a strategically vital
port and had not been loyal to the Greek cause offered plenty of justification for hostility on the part of
Athens, if not the league as a whole.
The island of Scyros also remained outside of the Delian League and was attacked, in this case by
the full alliance.[28] We know nothing of the island's formal policy or even of its activities during the
Persian Wars, and Thucydides provides no details about the motives for the league's attack. Plutarch,
however, offers the explanation that international indignation over the islanders' predatory piracy was
the chief cause of the Athenians' move against them (Cim . 8.3-4).
Here then are at least two states whose independent position outside of the Delian League was
clearly violated. But despite Thucydides' silence, justification for the attacks can be found in the
previous pro-Persian conduct of the Carystians and the piracy practiced by the Dolopians of Scyros.
Since we have already seen that proposed reprisals against states that had remained neutral during
Xerxes' invasion were rejected by the Delphic Amphictyony and that, furthermore, there existed states
that had not belonged
60 of 236 7/9/2006 11:49 AM
The Concept of Neutrality in Classical Greece http://content-backend-a.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft4489n8x4&chunk.i...
[27] Thuc. 2. 9.2; on 480, see Meiggs and Lewis, no. 27; Bengtson, SVA no. 130.
[28] Thuc. 1.98.3; cf. Hdt. 9. 105; see Gomme, HCT , vol. 1, 281-82; M. B. Wallace, "Herodotus and
Euboia," Phoenix 28 (1974): 36 n. 34; 44.
 102 
to the earlier Greek alliance and were not coerced into joining the Delian League (e.g., Thera), there is
no compelling reason to believe that the attacks on Scyros and Carystus represented blatant
imperialistic disregard for the independence and nonalignment of these states. Where no such
justification existed, it appears that restraint continued to be observed and the position of
uncommitted states tolerated. This situation becomes clearer, however, when we examine the
evidence (scant though it is) concerning diplomacy surrounding the First Peloponnesian War (ca.
460-446/445).
B. The First Peloponnesian War (ca. 460-446/445)
For about fourteen years in the middle of the fifth century the Athenian alliance was at war with a
loose coalition of Peloponnesian states (including the island of Aegina). This conflict, known as the First
Peloponnesian War, ended about 446/445 with the ratification of a peace treaty effective for thirty
years.[29]
While the war as a whole is one of the most obscure in Greek history, several details point to the
existence of successfully neutral states. It should be emphasized immediately that when Athens
repudiated the Hellenic alliance of 481 just prior to the outbreak of this war, whatever protection that
old pact may have afforded states like Aegina and Melos against Athenian aggression came to an end. [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]