Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain how successful the Delian League was
Explain how successful the Delian League was
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Road to self-destruction
Many circumstances led to the end of the Athenian golden age. Ironically, the formation of the Delian league marked the beginning stages of the end of the Athenian golden age. The same league that would prove instrumental in pulling up Athens from state to empire, eventually played a role in its destruction.
Athens harsh treatment towards other weaker states served as an instigator for hatred and resentment. No one state was strong enough to defend themselves against Athens’ pressures, as it had a very fortified navy. As Athens grew stronger, it also grew harsher and unintentionally isolated itself from all other Greek states. I say unintentionally because they did it for their own benefit and because of their power,
I imagine in their first meeting-the Peloponnesian league- , there would be an uproar of resentment, hatred and fire for revenge against Athens.
Consider that Athens, even after resigning member states from the Delian league from member status to subject status, was still charging them yearly tributes. States were contributing part of their economic output to Athens and this was in no way benefitting them. We could say that by strengthening Athens (and its navy) they were buying protection for themselves from invasion of foreign potential threats, but it must have been hard for them to just see it that way, when Athens was building expensive temples and architectural wonders using the leagues treasury. Athens was taking advantage of these states and they all had that feeling of resentment In common. It must have been very easy for Sparta to persuade other Greek states to join them in forming the Peloponnesian league. So now, think of the first meeting of the Peloponnesian league. What do you see? I see anger, hatred, a will for revenge and lots and lots of energy to uproot the Athenians from their
Let’s delve deeper into some details of the war.
Athens had the gold, they had the ships, and they had it all. To their disadvantage however, the Spartans and the Peloponnesian league would win the favor of a new rival to Athens; the plague.
When Sparta launched their attack, there was a huge migration of people deeper into Athens. Due to the congestion that must have caused, a massive plague spread killing almost a quarter of its army, sailors, thirty thousand citizens and its military leader Pericles. The chaos and loss of proper direction to lead the military in my opinion was most likely the factor that led to the Athenian defeat. Spartans were known for being great warriors, and I don’t doubt they used that opportunity to their full advantage. A disease-struck city with a leaderless army would have been a training exercise for the Spartans.
At the end of it all… Empire to
According to Thucydides, t... ... middle of paper ... ... henian who had lead the siege against Samos, realised this but also appreciated the dangers of changing this tactic all together – ‘Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go’. To this extent, it is reasonable that Athens should use such extreme measures, as it seemed to be the only way in which she could uphold her power and keep her allies close. Yet by doing so she had transformed the original aims of the Delian League entirely, which had a purpose to promote freedom and independence.
"It might be suggested the ability of the allies to pay tribute is the strength of Athens" (The Old Oligarch, I, 15). Indeed. It is this characteristic in particular of the Delian League that leads it to be rightfully called the Athenian Empire. If each state had maintained its own fleet, and sent it to join the League in its expeditions, they would have held on to a significant measure of independence. Instead, a critically large enough portion of the league members abdicated control over their own military (by their own choice or by force) and simply paid cash to Athens, giving that city the ability to maintain an empire through the use of military might.
In the book, Hanson presents how the Peloponnesian war was started and so savagely pursued by Sparta and her allies due to their fear of Athens’ military strength and idealism. This fear caused the cataclysmic collapse of the Greek world. Athens lost the war and all ideas of the Athenian culture were destroyed. Hanson spends very little time addressing the true purpose of writing the book.
And it was the most successful alliance during that period because they successfully overthrown their enemy. Since then, Persia had stop threatening the entire Greek peninsula. For the next fifty years Athens did experience peace and prosperity in the absence of threat from external forces (Gill, n.d) During this period Athens had started to accumulate tremendous wealth. Part of those were precious possessions they had collected from the fallen Persian outposts. In addition it continue to receive dues from members of the Delian League, despite there was no war anymore (Gill,
The Delian League was an empire that included most of the island and coastal states around the northern and eastern shores of the Aegean Sea. As a result of this, Athens had a strong navy. Athens was also financially prepared for war, owning a large fund they had amassed from the regular tribute paid to them from their empire.
...ssert that it is just to expand their empire because they are stronger, and it has always been established that the weaker are to be ruled by the stronger. Those with power to use force, "have no need to go to law," and the weaker must give in to the stronger. The Athenians felt that their intentions were just, and according to Thrasymachus, they were.
As time passed, Athens grew stronger and the League became a machine for expansion of Athenian imperialism. Athens demanded high taxes and tributaries from the other member of the League. They started to bully their allies into doing what was good for Athens and not for the League. In 470, after the League thought their job was done and Persia was out of Greece, the city-st...
The roots of the Peloponnesian war can be traced long before 431 BCE, when it officially started. It can be traced back to as early as the Persian Wars, where the Athenians had found their home burned by the hands of the Persians. That disaster left the Athenians with no home and no sanctuary. Even though that was a defeated battle amidst a victorious war, they still had reason to believe that the Persians will come back for more. Apprehensive at the thought of having their city burned yet another time, the Athenians knew they had to do something. Naturally, they chose to get help. Gathering up the neighboring city-states around them, the Athenians formed the Delian League; an alliance working directly to defend the whole of Greece from Persian attacks (Kagan 8). In the beginning, this worked out well; everybody got their say on what went on in the league, and everybody was satisfied. However, the Athenians saw that if they were to take more power, the members of the league would not be strong enough to resist. Therefore, that was exactly what they did; they took more and more power until what was the Delian League became the Athenian Empire (Kagan 8). As they grew even more powerful and wealthy, their neighbors of Sparta and the Peloponnesian League, Sparta's alliance, could not help but notice (Kagan 13). In 431 BCE, lighted b...
...fically, the Athenians – already demographically disadvantaged—lost an approximate 4400 hoplites and 300 Calvary men due to the plague . It means that they lost some of their available forces for battle which was a great loss for Athens. They also lost a lot more men because of the Peloponnesian war that was happening. For example, the Athenian army – being a powerful naval polis—started with approximately 150 triremes, hoplites, and horsemen in order to attack Peloponnesus states . The Athenians were forced to retreat due to the fact that they had lost a lot of men. It illustrates how events such as the plague had a consequence – not really proven by historians—on how they fought the rest of the war. Even if they went on to later win the Sicilian expedition – 415 B.C. — they were only able to do so because they gained some “strength” few years after the plague .
When examining the causes for the Peloponnesian War, which was between 431-404 B.C., there are a number of causes that factored into the cause of this war. However, one of the most important causes to this war was largely due to the fact that the Spartans feared the growing power and success of Athens. The Spartans were “particularly alarmed at the growing power of Athens” (Cartwright, “Peloponnesian War”). During the Persian war in 479 BC, Athens grew fiercely strong with power with help of its many allies and continued with their no mercy attacks on Persian territories. When the Persians left Greece, Athens further enraged Sparta when they built large and tall walls around its empire in the event of an attack, which was mostly thought to be from Sparta if it happened.
Around the year 500 BCE many poleis existed in ancient Greece. Two of the main poleis, or city states in Greece, were Sparta and Athens. Although both of the city states were located in the same area of the world; they had different ways of living. Sparta and Athens had many differences in how they ran their city states. There were many political, economic, and social differences between the two city states. Sparta and Athens may have had their differences but they fought side by side against the Persian invaders. The city states fought off the Persians and brought in the “Golden Age” of Greece. The fate of Greece would be very different if they wouldn’t have fought together against the Persian Empire. In today’s world some countries share a few similarities to the ancient polis of Sparta and Athens.
Pericles ascended to power at the empire’s height and was, according to Thucydides, the city’s most capable politician, a man who understood fully the nature of his city and its political institutions and used his understanding to further its interests in tandem with his own. After Pericles, however, Thucydides notes a drastic decline in the quality of Athenian leaders, culminating in Alcibiades, the last major general to be described in The Peloponnesian War. While he is explicit in this conclusion, he is much more reticent regarding its cause. What changed in Athens to produce the decline in the quality of its leadership? The development of an empire is a change strongly emphasized in the Archeology as a radical departure from the Hellenic tradition, and consequently a major source of conflict among the Greeks.
The Greeks were able to repel the overwhelming and seemly unstoppable Persian Empire. They were able to do so because of the victories won thanks to the Athenian navy in the Aegean Sea, the hard fought and strategically important battles that the Spartans just would not give up during and they were able to put aside their differences in order to face the greater threat for the good or their culture. Each major city/state contributed what it was good at. It was a nice display of teamwork.
As can be expected from pioneer governmental institutions, Athenian democracy was not perfect. In fact it was far from it. It resulted in the establishment of poor policies by aggressive populists who sought "...private ambition and private profit...which were bad both for the Athenians themselves and their allies." (Thucydides). These self interested populist leaders with personal gain in mind established extensive internal political instability "...by quarrelling among themselves [and] began to bring confusion into the policy of the state." (Thucydides). Repeated opportunities to accept terms of peace after the battles of Pylos (425), Arginusae (406) and Aegospotami (405) were ignored by the inefficient Athenian demos eventually resulting in the devastation of the once dominant city-state. Internal political strife can also be attribu...
However, being in a weakened state caused the Greek city- states (mainly Athens against Sparta) to fight amongst themselves in order to have more influence over the rest of the city-states. This type of war was termed the Peloponnesian War and continued from 431 B.C. to 404 B.C. in the year. History of Greece:The Golden Age of Greece and Muntone. The Peloponnesian War began around 431 B.C. and persisted for twenty-seven years.