were so completely worsted, as to be forced to evacuate it under
capitulation. A body of mercenaries under Chares contributed to the
Athenian success. Yet it seems not clear that the success was so easy
and rapid as the orators are fond of asserting.[458] However, their
boast, often afterwards repeated, is so far well-founded, that Athens
fully accomplished her object, rescued the Eubœans from Thebes, and
received the testimonial of their gratitude in the form of a golden
wreath dedicated in the Athenian acropolis.[459] The Eubœan cities,
while acknowledged as autonomous, continued at the same time to be
enrolled as members of the Athenian confederacy, sending deputies
to the synod at Athens; towards the general purposes of which they
paid an annual tribute, assessed at five talents each for Oreus (or
Histiæa) and Eretria.[460]
[452] Xenoph. Hellen. vi. 5, 23. Εὐβοεῖς ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν πόλεων:
also vii. 5, 4. Βοιωτοὺς ἔχων πάντας καὶ Εὐβοέας (Epaminondas),
etc.
Winiewski, in his instructive commentary upon the historical
facts of the Oration of Demosthenes de Coronâ, states erroneously
that Eubœa continued in the dependence of Athens without
interruption from 377 to 358 B. C. (Winiewski, Commentarii
Historici et Chronologici in Demosthenis Orationem de Coronâ, p.
30).
[453] Xenoph. Hellen. vii. 4, 1; Diodor. xv. 76; Demosthen. de
Coronâ, p. 259. s. 123.
[454] Demosthenes, Orat. de Chersones. p. 108. s. 80. τοὺς
Εὐβοέας σώζειν, ὅτε Θηβαῖοι κατεδουλοῦντ᾽ αὐτοὺς, etc.: compare
Demosthen. de Coronâ, p. 259. s. 123. Θηβαίων σφετεριζομένων τὴν
Εὔβοιαν, etc.; and Æschines cont. Ktesiphont. p. 397. c. 31.
ἐπειδὴ διέβησαν εἰς Εὔβοιαν Θηβαῖοι, καταδουλώσασθαι τὰς πόλεις
πειρώμενοι, etc.
[455] Demosthen. Orat. de Chersones. p. 108. s. 80. Εἶπέ μοι,
βουλεύεσθε, ἔφη (Timotheus), Θηβαίους ἔχοντες ἐν νήσῳ, τί
χρήσεσθε, καὶ τί δεῖ ποιεῖν; Οὐκ ἐμπλήσετε τὴν θάλασσαν, ὦ ἄνδρες
Ἀθηναῖοι, τριηρῶν; Οὐκ ἀναστάντες ἤδη πορεύσεσθε εἰς τὸν Πειραιᾶ;
Οὐ καθέλξετε τὰς ναῦς;
[456] See, in illustration of these delays, Demosthenes,
Philippic i. p. 50 s. 42.
Any citizen who thought that he had been called upon out of his
fair turn to serve a trierarchy or other expensive duty, and
that another citizen had been unduly spared, might tender to
this latter an exchange of properties, offering to undertake
the duty if the other’s property were made over to him. The
person, to whom tender was made, was compelled to do one of
three things; either, 1. to show, at legal process, that it was
not his turn, and that he was not liable; 2. or to relieve the
citizen tendering from the trierarchy just imposed upon him; 3.
or to accept the exchange, receiving the other’s property, and
making over his own property in return; in which case the citizen
tendering undertook the trierarchy.
This obligatory exchange of properties, with the legal process
attached to it, was called Antidosis.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account