Hide browse bar Your current position in the text is marked in blue. Click anywhere in the line to jump to another position:
chapter:
chapter 1-5chapter 3chapter 4chapter 5chapter 6-17chapter 6chapter 7chapter 8chapter 9chapter 10chapter 11chapter 12chapter 13chapter 14chapter 15chapter 16chapter 17chapter 18-21chapter 18chapter 19chapter 20chapter 21chapter 22-5chapter 22chapter 23chapter 24chapter 25chapter 26-30chapter 26chapter 27chapter 28chapter 29chapter 30chapter 31-2chapter 31chapter 32chapter 33-41chapter 33chapter 34chapter 35chapter 36chapter 37chapter 38chapter 39chapter 40chapter 41chapter 42chapter 43-5chapter 43chapter 44chapter 45chapter 46-50chapter 46chapter 47chapter 49chapter 50chapter 51-60chapter 52chapter 53chapter 54chapter 55chapter 56chapter 57chapter 58chapter 59,chapter 60chapter 61-70chapter 61chapter 62chapter 63chapter 64chapter 65chapter 66chapter 67chapter 68chapter 69chapter 70chapter 71-2chapter 71chapter 72chapter 73chapter 74-84chapter 74chapter 75chapter 76chapter 77chapter 78chapter 79chapter 80chapter 81chapter 82chapter 83chapter 84chapter 85-93chapter 85chapter 86chapter 86Achapter 86Bchapter 86Cchapter 87chapter 88chapter 89chapter 90chapter 91chapter 92chapter 93chapter 94-101chapter 94chapter 95chapter 96chapter 97chapter 98chapter 99chapter 100chapter 101chapter 102-8chapter 102chapter 103chapter 104chapter 105chapter 106chapter 107chapter 108chapter 109-17chapter 109chapter 110chapter 111chapter 112chapter 113chapter 114chapter 115chapter 116chapter 117chapter 118-20chapter 118chapter 119chapter 120chapter 121-4chapter 121chapter 122chapter 123chapter 124chapter 125-31chapter 125chapter 126chapter 127chapter 128chapter 129chapter 130chapter 131chapter 132-6chapter 132chapter 133chapter 134chapter 135chapter 136chapter 137-40chapter 137chapter 138chapter 139chapter 140
This text is part of:
φόρους: cf. iii. 89, 90. The statement as to the tribute is defective and difficult. Doubtless the arrangement of Artaphrenes applied to other revolted tributaries as well as to Ionians, but H. mentions only the most important, just as the whole rebellion is usually called the Ionic revolt. Again, the words ἔτι καὶ ἐς ἐμέ cannot bear the natural meaning that tribute was still paid to Persia in accordance with this assessment at the time when H. wrote his history, but must be explained in one of the following ways: (1) Grote (v. 194-5) thinks that the Persian king still maintained his claim to the old tribute, though it was not really paid. The satrap was still responsible to the king for the money, though unable to exact it. As soon as the Athenian power seemed broken in 412, the great king pressed Tissaphernes for payment (Thuc. viii. 5). The claim had been for years in abeyance but never withdrawn. We may compare the grants of Myus and Lampsacus to Themistocles (Thuc. i. 138), and of Myrrhina and Gryneium to Gongylus the Eretrian (Xen. Hell. iii. 1. 6). The latter were held by Gongylus' descendants in 399 B. C., but all four cities were included in the Athenian empire in its palmy days. (2) Some suggest that the unlucky states on the Asiatic seaboard paid tribute both to Athens and to the Great King. Some such arrangement seems certainly to have prevailed on the coast of Thrace under the Odrysian kings (Thuc. ii. 97), but the cases are not really parallel. (3) Another suggestion is that the assessment of Artaphrenes was the basis of the Athenian φόρος, which was certainly paid by these cities before 450 B. C., and probably from 465. If, however, H. meant that the Athenian τακταί used the old valuation, he has failed to express himself clearly, and the frequent alterations of the Phoros on the existing quota lists seem inconsistent with this explanation. (4) The simplest explanation is that H. uses ἐς ἐμέ loosely, meaning merely till the Persian power was overthrown, i. e. between 479 and circ. 465 B. C. Some of the states were still paying tribute when H. was a boy; in all he could (and doubtless did) talk with those to whom the claims of the Persian tax-collector were familiar. So a septuagenarian Bengalee might well write to-day: ‘The rule of John Company lasted down to my time,’ although it really ended in 1858. It should further be noticed that Diodorus (x. 25. 2) ascribes not only this regulation of taxes, but also the restoration of constitutional government in Ionia (cf. ch. 43 n.) to Artaphrenes, acting on the suggestion of Hecataeus. Was H. unwilling to allow credit to his great predecessor for the conciliatory and successful reorganization of Ionia?
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
Purchase a copy of this text (not necessarily the same edition) from Amazon.com
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.