This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
Μηλιεύς from Trachis (cf. ch. 214. 2).
Πυλαγόρων. The representatives of the various states or tribes which composed the Amphictyony were charged with the whole jurisdiction of the league. They, along with the Hieromnemones, who administered the Delphic temple, met twice a year, in spring and autumn, at Thermopylae and Delphi (Hyperides, Epitaph. 8; Aesch. in Ctes. § 126; Strabo 420). The Pylagorae seem to have been replaced after 280 B. C. by ἀγορατροί (C. I. A. ii. 551). That Thermopylae was the original meeting-place is shown by the names Pylagorae, Pylaea, which are applied to the deputies' meetings at both places, and by the existence of a shrine there to the eponymous hero Amphictyon (ch. 200 ad fin.). It is also confirmed by the geographical position of the twelve ‘surrounding’ (Ἀμφικτίονες = περικτίονες) tribes who belonged to the Amphictyony. To the incomplete list in Herodotus (vii. 132. 1 n.) we may add from Aeschines (de Fals. Leg. 116) Dorians, Ionians, Phocians (cf. Paus. x. 8. 2; Diod. xvi. 29; Busolt, i. 681 f.). As the Amphictyons were primarily concerned with religion, the treachery of Ephialtes may have been regarded as an offence against the gods; it may, however, be the earliest instance of Amphictyonic intervention in politics, later so ruinous. A meeting may possibly have been held immediately after the battle of Plataea (Bukatios, August-Sept.) 479 B. C., but the spring meeting of 478 B. C. is probably the one meant. For a full account of the Amphictyonic Council cf. Busolt, Griech. Staats. ii. 1292-1310. κατῆλθε: returned home (v. 30. 4; cf. i. 60. 5), since Anticyra was a Malian city (ch. 198. 2 n.).
The omission to fulfil this promise is the strongest argument for the view (Stein, Curtius, Kirchhoff) that H. intended to continue his work beyond 479 B. C. E. Meyer has, however, shown (F. i. 189 f.; cf. ii. 217) that a continuation beyond the transference of hegemony is impossible, and even one so far as this unlikely, in spite of Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, A. and A. i. 26 f.; Wachsmuth, Einl. 513. The omission is due not to any incompleteness but to forgetfulness; cf. Introd. § 14; Hauvette, p. 56 f.; Busolt, ii. 614.
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.