Amidst such apparent dispositions on the part of Athens to
neglect the interests of the confederacy for purposes of her own
and to tolerate or encourage the continued positive depredations
of unpaid armaments—discontent naturally grew up, manifesting
itself most powerfully among some of the larger dependencies
near the Asiatic coast. The islands of Chios, Kos, and Rhodes,
together with the important city of Byzantium on the Thracian
Bosphorus, took counsel together, and declared themselves detached
from Athens and her confederacy. According to the spirit of the
convention, sworn at Sparta, immediately before the battle of
Leuktra, and of the subsequent alliance, sworn at Athens, a few
months afterwards[465]—obligatory and indefeasible confederacies
stood generally condemned among the Greeks, so that these islands
were justified in simply seceding when they thought fit. But their
secession, which probably Athens would, under all circumstances,
have resisted, was proclaimed in a hostile manner, accompanied with
accusations of treacherous purposes on her part against them. It was
moreover fomented by the intrigues, as well as aided by the arms,
of the Karian prince Mausôlus.[466] Since the peace of Antalkidas,
the whole Asiatic coast had been under the unresisted dominion
either of satraps or subordinate princes dependent upon Persia,
who were watching for opportunities of extending their conquests
in the neighboring islands. Mausôlus appears to have occupied both
Rhodes and Kos; provoking in the former island a revolution which
placed it under an oligarchy, not only devoted to him, but farther
sustained by the presence of a considerable force of his mercenary
troops.[467] The government of Chios appears to have been always
oligarchical; which fact was one ground for want of sympathy between
the Chians and Athens. Lastly, the Byzantines had also a special
ground for discontent; since they assumed the privilege of detaining
and taxing the corn-ships from the Euxine in their passage through
the Bosphorus[468]—while Athens, as chief of the insular confederacy,
claimed that right for herself, and at any rate protested against the
use of such power by any other city for its own separate profit.
[465] Xenoph. Hellen. vi. 3, 18; vi. 5, 2.
[466] Demosthenes, De Rhodior. Libertat. p. 191. s. 3. ᾐτιάσαντο
γὰρ ἡμᾶς ἐπιβουλεύειν αὑτοῖς Χῖοι καὶ Βυζάντιοι καὶ Ῥόδιοι, καὶ
διὰ ταῦτα συνέστησαν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς τὸν τελευταῖον τουτονὶ πόλεμον·
φανήσεται δ᾽ ὁ μὲν πρυτανεύσας ταῦτα καὶ πείσας Μαύσωλος, φίλος
εἶναι φάσκων Ῥοδίων, τὴν ἐλευθερίαν αὐτῶν ἀφῃρημένος.
[467] Demosthen. de Rhodior. Libert. p. 195. s. 17. p. 198 s. 34;
de Pace, p. 63. s. 25; Diodor. xvi. 7.
[468] Demosthen. de Pace, p. 63. s. 25. (ἐῶμεν) τὸν Κᾶρα τὰς
νήσους καταλαμβάνειν, Χίον καὶ Κῶν καὶ Ῥόδον, καὶ ~Βυζαντίους
κατάγειν τὰ πλοῖα~, etc.
Compare Demosthenes adv. Polykl. p. 1207 s. 6. p. 1211. s. 22;
adv. Leptinem, p. 475. s. 68.
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