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.
(1) Omissions;
(2) Lack of chronological data;
(3) Anti-Ionian bias.
The main chronological difficulty is to attribute the events recorded
to the years in which they actually took place. ◆H. vi. 18.◆ The only
fact obtainable from Herodotus is that the outbreak took place in the
sixth year before the capture of Miletus. It is possible to calculate
with satisfactory certainty that the latter event took place in 494
B.C.; and therefore the revolt must have broken out in 499.
#THE AFFAIR OF NAXOS.#
The actual outbreak of the rising was brought about in a somewhat
indirect way by an event or series of events which appear in Herodotus’
narrative as wholly independent of what had happened in the previous
years. It may, however, be seen that these events could hardly have
taken place had they not promised an issue such as would have been in
accord with the tentative policy which Artaphernes had been following
for some time past in his relations with European Greece.
He had already on two occasions shown a wish to interfere in the
internal affairs of Athens. On both occasions he had made demands
which aimed at the establishment of an area of Persian influence west
of the Ægean; but on both occasions also he had omitted to back up
those demands by even the display of force, unless,—which is, indeed,
possible,—the demand for the reinstatement of Hippias was made at the
time that the Persian expedition was preparing to start for Naxos, if
not on its way thither.[16]
The affair at Naxos, which afforded Artaphernes the prospect of being
able to forward his policy towards Greece, arose from circumstances
which were but too common in Greek communities. The island was at
the time the most opulent in the Ægean. When Samos lost its position
as the easternmost land of the free Greeks on the great trade route
which followed the line of islands which all but bridge the middle
of that sea, ◆H. v. 28.◆ much of its trade must have passed to the
most important of the islands which now became the outworks of Greek
liberty. Prosperity did not bring peace in its train. Political
dissension was rife; and certain of the wealthier inhabitants were
driven out from the island, and sought refuge at Miletus.
There ruled at this time in Miletus Aristagoras, a cousin and
son-in-law of that Histiæus whom Darius had taken up to Susa. To him
the exiles applied for assistance. He told them that he could not
unaided supply them with a force powerful enough to cope with the eight
thousand hoplites which Naxos could put into the field, but that he
would get help from Artaphernes. ◆H. v. 31.◆ To Artaphernes at Sardes
he accordingly went. The great satrap required but little persuasion to
induce him to enter upon an undertaking so promising for the fulfilment
of his designs upon Greece; for Aristagoras held out the prospect of
the acquisition not merely of Naxos, but of the other Cyclades and of
the great island of Eubœa.
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