This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
Θεσσαλοί: in the narrow sense, the tribe that, migrating from Thesprotia (ch. 176. 4), seized the valley of the Peneius, and compelled the peoples round about to acknowledge its suzerainty, so that the whole country within the limits given in ch. 129 was called Thessaly. Δόλοπες: an ancient people living in the mountain region on both sides of Mount Pindus, from the upper Achelous (Thuc. ii. 102） to Lake Xynias. They are known as early as Homer (Il. ix. 484), and remained distinct till the Roman conquest (Liv. xxxviii. 3 f.; xli. 22). South-east of them, at the north of Mount Oeta in the upper valley of the Spercheius (ch. 198. 2), were the Ἐνιῆνες (so also Il. ii. 749) or Aenianes (Thuc. &c.), while the Malians (Μηλιέες, cf. ch. 198. 1) lived round the mouth of the Spercheius, at the western end of the Maliac Gulf, reaching as far as Thermopylae. On the coast, to the east of Thermopylae, were the Locrians (Epicnemidian and Opuntian), while in Pthiotis round Mount Othrys to the north dwelt the Ἀχαιοί (ch. 173. 1, 196 f.), the old Hellenic stock who followed Achilles, surnamed Φθιῶται to distinguish them from the Achaeans of Peloponnese. All these tribes belonged to the Pylaic Amphictyony (ch. 213. 2).
ἔταμον ὅρκιον: Homeric, probably from the cutting up of the victim; cf. iv. 201. 2, and in middle iv. 70. This famous oath, said by Diodorus (xi. 3) to have been taken by the σύνεδροι assembled at the Isthmus, must either have been general in its terms, and have been directed against οἱ μηδίζοντες without naming them individually, or must be placed after the battle of Thermopylae. Thebes was not openly on the Persian side till that time (ch. 205), and the Opuntian Locrians seem to have resisted stoutly till after Artemisium (ch. 203. 1; viii. 1. 2; ix. 31. 5); even the Thessalians did not Medize till Tempe was evacuated (ch. 172). Yet the indicative ὅσοι ἔδοσαν (not ὅσοι ἂν δῶσι) would seem to refer to a definite list of states, such as that given just above. Abicht would therefore identify this oath with that said to have been sworn before the battle of Plataea (Polyb. ix. 39) and given by Diodorus (xi. 29) and Lycurgus (in Leoc. 81). But this oath before Plataea seems to be a later invention. (1) It is not mentioned by H. (2) It is attributed by Diodorus (xi. 29) to the Greeks assembled at the Isthmus, whereas the Athenians did not join the army till it reached Eleusis. (3) Theopompus (fr. 167, F. H. G. i. 306) declared it to be an Athenian invention, an assertion supported by the fact that its formula seems borrowed from the ephebic oath at Athens. (4) The clause forbidding the restoration of temples destroyed by the barbarians is most improbable. It seems better therefore to hold that the oath of the confederates, whose reality is supported by the proverbial phrase τὸ πάλαι λεγόμενον δεκατευθῆναι Θηβαίους (Xen. Hell. vi. 3. 20, 5. 35), was taken just before the invasion as H. and Diodorus (xi. 3. 2) state. H. may have committed a slight anachronism in giving at this point a definite list of Medizing states, and not a general formula, or possibly the Thebans and Locrians were added later to the list of the ‘proscribed’ made just before the invasion. If we could believe Diodorus (xi. 3), the hill-tribes—i.e. the Aenianes, Dolopes, Malians, Perrhaebians, Magnetes—Medized while the Greek force was still at Tempe (and so caused its withdrawal), whereas the Achaeans, Opuntian Locrians, Thessalians (proper, cf. § 1), and Boeotians only Medized when the Greeks withdrew. But the silence of H. shows that this was unknown to him. δεκατεῦσαι cannot mean merely to exact a tithe from (Abicht, Bähr), as even if a tenth of the population was dedicated to the god, as Strabo relates of the Mysians (572) and of the Chalcidian colonists of Rhegium (257), as well as of their property, the penalty would be far milder than was usual in such cases. No doubt the original meaning of a δεκατεύειν is to ‘tithe’ exact a tenth of goods, revenue, or produce (Xen. Anab. v. 3. 9 f.), and the most usual occasion for exacting such a tithe was the dedication to god of a tenth of the booty won in war (cf. v. 77. 4; viii. 27. 5; ix. 81. 1). Here, however, the meaning is surely the total destruction of the cities, involving the sale of the population into slavery and the confiscation of all goods and lands: from the proceeds a tenth would be dedicated to the god. This was the doom of traitors at Athens (cf. the Hermokopids, Hicks, 72; the generals condemned after Arginusae, Xen. Hell. i. 7. 10, 20); this is the procedure of Camillus at Veii (Liv. v. 21, 23, 25), and is implied in the tale of the capture of Sardis (i. 89). This seems a better way of accounting for the total confiscation implied than merely to take δεκατεῦσαι in the vague sense = ‘dedicate’ (Stein). And that total destruction was vowed against the traitors can hardly be doubted; in the case of Thebes it became proverbial; cf. Polyb. ix. 39. 5; Xen. Hell. vi. 3. 20, 5. 35 νῦν ἐλπὶς τὸ πάλαι λεγόμενον δεκατευθῆναι Θηβαίους. This is also supported by the proposal to evict the Medizers and take their lands for the Ionians (ix. 106). Doubtless it was not carried out as most of them could shelter themselves under the proviso μὴ ἀναγκασθέντες, and the Aleuadae saved themselves by bribery (cf. vi. 72).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.