The great Persian War and its preliminaries : $b A study of the evidence, literary and topographicalGrundy, G. B. (George Beardoe)
History
The great Persian War and its preliminaries : $b A study of the evidence, literary and topographical
Grundy, G. B. (George Beardoe)
Greece -- History -- Persian Wars, 500-449 B.C.
The situation of the democratic party had been very unstable. Its
sympathies had been balanced on a razor’s edge, ready to incline to
the one side or the other on the slightest shifting of the weights in
the political scale. The severities of the last years of the rule of
Hippias, after the murder of Hipparchos, had been sufficient to make
it passively acquiesce when the intrigues of the Alkmæonidæ against
the tyrant were brought to a successful termination by the agency of
Sparta; but they had not wholly blotted out the memory of the fact that
the triumph of Peisistratos had been in a very real sense the triumph
of democracy.
By the reforms of Kleisthenes, however, the Alkmæonidæ had made a
strong and successful bid for popular favour; and from 509 onward the
fortunes of the democratic party were closely linked with those of this
powerful clan.
The opposition, backed by the influence of the repentant Sparta, was
dangerously strong. First one side and then the other held the upper
hand; but, in the years immediately preceding Marathon, the political
fortunes of the democrats seem to have been at a low ebb. There had
been one great trial of strength. Miltiades had arrived in Athens in
493, an exile from his tyranny in the Thracian Chersonese, driven
out by the Persians. #POSITION OF THE DEMOCRATS IN 490.# He was not
likely to sympathize with any party which had shown leanings towards
Persia; he seems, indeed from the moment of his return, to have
set himself up and to have been recognized as the champion of the
aristocratic and anti-Persian party. As such he was attacked by the
democrats, being prosecuted on a charge of “tyranny” in the Chersonese.
His acquittal was a great victory for the aristocrats, and a severe
blow for their opponents.
From 493 to 490 his party seems to have been in power. It is quite
evident, at any rate, that he was the foremost man in Athens at the
time of Marathon.
The outlook for the democrats was gloomy. It is not strange if they
began to regret the past. The “golden age” of Peisistratos gained in
glory from its being far. His tyranny had been more of a blessing than
a curse to the mass of the people. The yoke it had laid upon them
had been light; and, in return for their submission to it, they had
attained to a prosperity they had never before enjoyed.
The present was full of possibilities in great contrast to that past.
The reforms of Kleisthenes, that great measure, or series of measures,
which had purchased their oblivion of a beneficent tyranny, seemed
likely to be undone. The Demos was not bound any longer to forget, if
it was like to be robbed of the price of forgetting.
Thus, not unnaturally, the thoughts of a section of the Athenians,
headed by the Alkmæonidæ, turned to Hippias. His restoration would be
a lesser evil than a return to the old oppressions of the days before
Peisistratos.
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