rather than original statements. 35 Whilst this individually is not too offensive, this idea
combined with de Ste Croix’s suggestion that the ‘introduction’ of democracy should be
considered, as Isocrates suggests, “a sign of good will and friendship” not “Athenian
bullying” in most if not all instances is quite shocking. 36 He argues that “the Many in an
oligarchical state [would be] too delighted to copy the democratic state of Athens” and that
they would be “glad to have an Athenian garrison on hand as they learnt their new
constitution”. 37 Whilst the newly established demos would, certainly, be thrilled by these
developments, de Ste Croix’s dismissal of the Few as instigators in every scenario, and then
erasure of them as citizens, feels uncomfortable in a post-imperial academic setting. This is
the explanation for approaching Hansen’s ideas with caution also. To suggest that most
members of the Athenian empire were content in their hypekooi status is not necessarily
wrong but- particularly for smaller states- this mindset created an illusion of choice that was
not readily available. This is highlighted by the idea of phoros imposed by consent. To say
that the imposition of tribute could be consensual, when the alternative for smaller poleis
was domination by a larger state is again uncomfortable. Negotiation could be considered a
type of consent, but this is not made particularly explicit by Hansen. In the same way,
smaller states of the Delian league likely needed Athenian military protection and could not
risk losing it in favour of the possibility of achieving autonomia when the alternative was
Persian dominance. This follows through to the Second Athenian Confederation, where
even in the fallout of Leuctra and the rise of Thebes, states remained loyal and continued to
pay syntaxeis rather than risk being overrun by pirates. 38 Additionally, Cawkwell highlights
35 De Ste Croix, p. 6. 36 De Ste Croix, p. 39. 37 De Ste Croix, p. 39. 38 G.L Cawkwell, ‘Notes on the Failure of the Second Athenian Confederacy’, Journal of Hellenistic Studies , 101 (1981), 40-55, (pp. 47-48).
20
Made with FlippingBook HTML5