This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
The antithesis to κατ᾽ ἄλλο μέν is never directly given; but is implied in § 3, i.e. ‘these twelve cities formed the Pan-Ionium’. H., in explaining the reason for this separate policy, loses his construction. ἀσθενέστατον. H. is accused of anti-Ionian bias (cf. v. 69. 1; vi. 13. 1 n.), as a Dorian and as an admirer of Periclean Athens. But he especially limits his statement here to the second half of the sixth century (τότε), of which it is true, if we except Samos; the greatness of Miletus in trade and in politics was already largely a thing of the past. Meyer (F. i. 129 seq.) denies that in the fifth century there was any inferiority attached to the name ‘Ionian’; he says (p. 131) that H. is simply trying to explain why the Athenians, who are the representatives of the Ionian race (cf. Solon in Ἀθ. Πολ. quoted on c. 142), are never called so as a people. It is clear, however, that there was some contempt in ‘Ionians’ in the fifth century [cf. iv. 142; Thuc. v. 9. 1 (Brasidas), vi. 77. 1 (Hermocrates), viii. 25. 5, with Hauvette, R. E. G. 1888, 257 seq.], no doubt because, as Hermocrates says, they had been subject to barbarians, and because of their increasing Oriental admixture; so the Ionian dress is imposed on the Athenian ladies as a punishment (v. 87. 3). The name too was being specialized for the inhabitants of the Lydian and north Carian seaboard [cf. the ‘Ionian’ circle in the Athenian Empire, and the inscription as to Tanagra (Paus. v. 10. 4), which distinguishes Athenians from Ionians. Athens was playing a double and inconsistent part; on the one hand she was championing Ionism (ix. 106. 3; Thuc. iii. 86. 3-4, vi. 82); on the other she was enslaving her Ionian kinsmen; but it must be remembered that the Ionic Apaturia was always celebrated at Athens (c. 147. 2 n.), and that the Athenians retained the ‘Ionic’ tribes, at least for religious purposes.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.