To what extent was the Delian League unpopular? Due to Athenian misbehavior, the popularity of the Delian League deteriorated over time due to the Athenians’ abuse of power for their own interests. The dissatisfaction of allies, such as revolts and eventual outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, is noted in Thucydides.
While Thucydides acts as a good primary source of accounts of the Delian League, it is undoubtedly an Atheno-centric primary source that may not fully capture all sides of the story. Thucydides shows only his perceived point-of-view; as an elite Athenian citizen, his perspective of the popularity of the Delian League almost certainly differs from the perspective of, for example, a citizen of a small island ally. As such, when arguing …show more content…
Discrepancies between the narrative makes it difficult to know for certain what the general attitude towards this leadership transfer was. Our primary source of the Delian League, Thucydides, presents that Athens was asked to take over leadership as the Spartans were weary of sending more officers over fears of Persian corruption. (Thucydides 1.95) In contrast, Herodotus presents the narrative that Athens forcibly took over leadership of the Delian League (Herodotus 8.3.1-2). Despite this, it is sound to assume that the members of the Delian League were content with Athens taking leadership from Sparta in the beginning. Many were dissatisfied with Pausaunias, the Leader of the Greek Forces at the end of the Persian War, for wearing Persian dress and eating Persian food (Thucydides, 1.94 -95). Considering the Greeks’ desire for “revenge against the Persians”, it seems reasonable that League members would be more content with a non-Spartan leader. The members of the Delian League were also likely to be content with the Athenians as leaders, as “the Athenians were leaders of allies who were at first autonomous and they reached their decision in general congress” (Thucydides, 1.97) and tributes for all allies was fixed at 460 talents (Thucydides, 1.96).
The negative aspects of the Delian League became more obvious overtime. As the Athenians took more control …show more content…
Instead of maintaining system of alliance, equality and autonomy across all member poleis, the Athenians ruled over the Delian League however they saw fit. Member poleis that the Athenians favoured were often given additional “benefits” while poleis out of favour suffered from a wide array of consequences and punishments. For example, the Phaselites were granted access to Athenian Courts. This can be seen as a privilege not extended to other foreigners or a way for Athens to attempt to spread their very developed legal system. However, it is also highly likely that the Athenians are playing favourites and attempting to generate more revenue through levies (Old Oligarch). In contrast, the Athenians accused Megara “of cultivating consecrated ground, of cultivating land that did not belong to them, and of giving shelter to slaves who had escaped from Athens” (Thucydides 1.139). As a result, the Megarians were banned from using ports and harbours of Athens and other Delian League members, effectively placing a trade embargo on Megara. Similarly, after an attempted revolt by the Mytilene, the Athenians wanted to kill all men and sell all women into slavery, but changed their mind at the last minute to only punish the leaders of the revolt (Thucydides, 3.36-49). The treatment
While Thucydides acts as a good primary source of accounts of the Delian League, it is undoubtedly an Atheno-centric primary source that may not fully capture all sides of the story. Thucydides shows only his perceived point-of-view; as an elite Athenian citizen, his perspective of the popularity of the Delian League almost certainly differs from the perspective of, for example, a citizen of a small island ally. As such, when arguing …show more content…
Discrepancies between the narrative makes it difficult to know for certain what the general attitude towards this leadership transfer was. Our primary source of the Delian League, Thucydides, presents that Athens was asked to take over leadership as the Spartans were weary of sending more officers over fears of Persian corruption. (Thucydides 1.95) In contrast, Herodotus presents the narrative that Athens forcibly took over leadership of the Delian League (Herodotus 8.3.1-2). Despite this, it is sound to assume that the members of the Delian League were content with Athens taking leadership from Sparta in the beginning. Many were dissatisfied with Pausaunias, the Leader of the Greek Forces at the end of the Persian War, for wearing Persian dress and eating Persian food (Thucydides, 1.94 -95). Considering the Greeks’ desire for “revenge against the Persians”, it seems reasonable that League members would be more content with a non-Spartan leader. The members of the Delian League were also likely to be content with the Athenians as leaders, as “the Athenians were leaders of allies who were at first autonomous and they reached their decision in general congress” (Thucydides, 1.97) and tributes for all allies was fixed at 460 talents (Thucydides, 1.96).
The negative aspects of the Delian League became more obvious overtime. As the Athenians took more control …show more content…
Instead of maintaining system of alliance, equality and autonomy across all member poleis, the Athenians ruled over the Delian League however they saw fit. Member poleis that the Athenians favoured were often given additional “benefits” while poleis out of favour suffered from a wide array of consequences and punishments. For example, the Phaselites were granted access to Athenian Courts. This can be seen as a privilege not extended to other foreigners or a way for Athens to attempt to spread their very developed legal system. However, it is also highly likely that the Athenians are playing favourites and attempting to generate more revenue through levies (Old Oligarch). In contrast, the Athenians accused Megara “of cultivating consecrated ground, of cultivating land that did not belong to them, and of giving shelter to slaves who had escaped from Athens” (Thucydides 1.139). As a result, the Megarians were banned from using ports and harbours of Athens and other Delian League members, effectively placing a trade embargo on Megara. Similarly, after an attempted revolt by the Mytilene, the Athenians wanted to kill all men and sell all women into slavery, but changed their mind at the last minute to only punish the leaders of the revolt (Thucydides, 3.36-49). The treatment