Download KIST KIST The Changing of the Guard Turnar Kist Dr. Stuart HIS 480

The Changing of the Guard
Turnar Kist
Dr. Stuart
HIS 480
December 15, 2015
KIST 1
Table of Contents
Introduction
2
Background Greece
2-3
Causes
3-4
The War
4-6
Results
6-7
Decline of Athens
7-9
Decline of Sparta
9-12
Thebes
12- 14
Rise of Macedon
14-19
Conclusion
19-20
Bibliography
21-22
KIST 2
The Changing of the Guard
From 431 to 404 BC, the Greek powers of Athens and Sparta battled to show superiority
within Greece. Greece fought due to the protection of the great empire it had while Sparta was
tired of being the second in command. Ultimately, Sparta won, but the question must be raised as
to how Greece was changed after the Peloponnesian War. This paper argues that Greece was
changed due to the Peloponnesian War because it led to Athens losing its great empire, the fall of
Sparta, the rise of Alexander the Great with Macedon, and the rise of Thebes.
Background
Dating back to the first Persian War, before the power of Athens was truly realized, it
was clear that there were two powers within Greece. Athens and Sparta coexisted, but had a deep
hatred for each other throughout their histories. In Sparta, life was very different. The Spartans
were a laconic people, which meant they did not use their words often, but when they did, they
knew how to use them. The best example is from Herodotus’s Histories in which they were
listening to some exiles from the island of Samos that were appealing to bring about their
restoration, but the Spartans just replied that the speech was too long and too complex.1 For the
Spartans, it was deeds, not words that counted, which explains why there is less written evidence
for Spartan history compared to the Athenian history.2 Athens on the other hand was Democratic
and was a political, philosophical, art, and architectural centre of the ancient world.3 They fought
side by side against the Persians, and even had memorable battles such as the Battle of Marathon
and the Battle of Thermopylae. These were fought separately from each other, but showed the
ancient world how powerful they were respectively. The lowly Athenians that were known for
art and philosophy had defeated the Persian, while the great and mighty Spartan warriors held off
1
George Rawlinson, trans., Histories of Herodotus, (Hertfordshire: Wordsworth, 1996)
Paul Cartledge. Ancient Greece:A History in Eleven Cities, (Oxford: Oxford Press, 2009), 71.
3
Ibid., 91.
2
KIST 3
forces of 10,000 and more with just 300 men4. The first time in these battles that the hatred was
starting to be seen was the Battle of Marathon. Sparta did not join to help Athens because of the
excuse of being in a festival an out of this grew a sense of spite from Athens.5 The next stage in
the development of fear was after Thermopylae and after the war had ended, the Athenians
started the Delian League, which was stated to have been formed to stop the Persians from
attacking again, when in reality it was to try and stop the Spartans from growing in their power.6
The Delian League led to the Athenians gaining tribute and allies in return for protection from
Athens.7 The tribute gained went towards developing a strong naval power, the Parthenon and
other advancements which led Athens to reaching its golden age under the rule of Pericles.8 In
this golden age, Pericles reconstructed the walls that led to the Piraeus port.9 These walls, of
course, would play a large role in the defense of Athens during the war with the Spartans since it
was the way that the Athenians would guard themselves against the siege and destruction at the
hands of the Spartans.
Causes
It is argued that the Peloponnesian War had a few primary causes. The primary cause was
the Delian league.10 When the League’s treasury was transferred to Athens, the alliance had
become an empire in all except the name. Over the next two decades, it began treating members
as ruled subjects rather than partners, and fought several short wars to force members who
wanted to leave the League to rejoin it.11 Then in 433 BC, Athens signed a treaty of mutual
protection with Corcyra, a town with a major navy. The Spartans interpreted the move as an act
4
Rawlinson, Histories, 250.
Ibid., 603.
6
Raphael Sealy, A History of the Greek City States: 700-338 BC, (Berkeley: University of California, 1976).
7
Ibid., 243.
8
Donald Kagor. Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy, (New York: Free Press, 1991).
9
Ibid., 156.
10
Ibid., 52.
11
Ibid., 53.
5
KIST 4
of provocation and then, a year later, Sparta cancelled its peace treaty with Athens.12 Then, in
433 BC, Theban soldiers tried to seize control of Potidaea only to be caught and imprisoned then
put to death13. After message of this was heard in Athens, Athens declared war and got ready for
the battle of a lifetime with the Spartans.
The War
Beginning in 431 BC, the Peloponnesian War would change the landscape of Greece as a
whole forever. The causes vary, but after Athens violated the Thirty Years’ Treaty, Sparta and its
allies accused them of aggression and they threatened war.14 Pericles advised not to back down,
and the first bit of fighting would last 10 years and began with a Spartan invasion of Attica.
15
The Athenians and their allies were an empire that focused mainly along the island and coastal
states, while Sparta was in charge of the land powers of central Greece and the Peloponnese, as
well as Corinth.16 In other words, the Athenians were a much stronger naval force while the
Spartans had the stronger army on land, and the Athenians were also much better prepared
financially than their enemies, which was due to the regular tribute their received from their
empire in the Delian league.17 Athens abandoned its countryside to the Spartan invaders in an
attempt to refuse pitched battle with the Peloponnesian and Theban alliance.18 The strategy
developed by Pericles depended on increased importation of food and material into the port at
Piraeus, all the while sending out Athens’s magnificent fleet to stabilize its maritime empire and
to prevent Peloponnesian infiltrations.19 Sparta found it strategy of ravaging the countryside
ineffective as its hoplites in Attica could neither draw the Athenian army out nor reduce the
12
Ibid., 53.
Ibid., 53.
14
Ancient Greece: A History in Eleven Cities. 104.
15
Ibid., 104.
16
W. S. Ferguson, “Greek Imperialism,” The American Historical Review 23(1918): 765.
17
Ibid., 766.
18
Ibid., 766.
19
Ibid., 766.
13
KIST 5
city’s economy.20 Sparta’s best ally was the unforeseen outbreak of plague inside the cramped
wall of Athens, which killed Pericles and nearly one quarter of the citizens.21 The reason the
plague spread so quickly too was the fact that all of the Athenians were inside the walls and in
close quarters together which led to easy spread of disease. It also did not help that people were
dying in the water supplies and in the streets which led to the plague to go even further. This hurt
the Athenian cause since it did kill their leader.
For the first 10 years, it seemed as though the Athenians were in control as they were
having decisive victories repeatedly while the Spartans fell behind.22 Ultimately this led to a
truce between the two sides in 421 BC, but it would not last.23 The peace was destroyed in 415
BC, when the Athenians launched an assault against Sicily, and for the next 11 years, there was
constant fighting between the two sides.24 The Sicilian campaign in Syracuse was a devastating
one for her and her empire. Nearly forty thousand Athenian allies perished a thousand miles from
Athens. The result was Sparta now systematically leading Attica with a permanent fort at
Decelea to encourage desertions and local disruptions in commerce, all the while applying steady
pressure to pry away tribute-paying Athenians and their allies in the Aegean, the lifeblood of the
city and military reserves.25 After the slaughter of the Athenians while fighting in Sicily, the tide
finally turned. By 411 BC, Athens was in turmoil as a whole. Democracy was being overthrown
and the leaders were refusing Spartan peace offerings.26 After the disaster, Athens was unable to
replace the troops and citizens from the plagues and the disaster at Sicily which led to the
Athenian army and navy now being outnumbered by the combined alliance of Sparta, Thebes
20
Ibid., 767.
Ibid., 767.
22
Martin Hammond, trans., The Peloponnesian War of Thucydides(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 203.
23
Ibid., 276.
24
Ibid., 332.
25
Ibid., 332.
26
Sarah Pomeroy. et al., Ancient Greece: A Political, Social and Cultural History ( Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1999), 314.
21
KIST 6
and Syracuse.27 Persian subsidies to this coalition now surpassed the financial reserves of Athens
and the end ultimately came in 405 BC when an Athenian fleet was destroyed at Aegospotami by
a Spartan naval fleet under the charge of Lysander.28 Lysander did so by first attacking Athenian
allies at their homes so as to weaken the defense that would have come to the aid of the
Athenians.29 Lysander initially received the surrender of the entire fleet, except for twelve ships
and the walls of Athens, so he threatened them until they gave in.30 after the final Athenian sea
defeat off Aegospotami, the Long Walls down to the Piraeus were razed, and a Spartan garrison
occupied the city.31 Nearly three decades of constant fighting left Athens bankrupt, exhausted
and demoralized.32 Sparta and its allies were in no position to maintain an even hasher military
hegemony over Greece.33 The war officially came to an end in 404 BC when the Athenians could
no longer hold off the Spartan blockade and siege which starved them and this would result in
the surrender of the great Athenian empire as it started its decline.34 Now that the war was over,
the question remained of how it would affect the Greek empire and its surrounding area. Put
quite simply it cause decline of two empires while it let others rise, just as the cycle of power
would continue.
Results
Before examining how Greece changed after the war, it is important to see who
benefitted the most immediately after. Immediately following the war, not only did Sparta
benefit, but so did Persia. Persia actually fought in the war as a Spartan ally when Sparta wanted
it to end. Ultimately they had three treaties within the war and all were dealing with how they
27
Ibid., 315.
Ibid., 316.
29
Ian Scott-Kilvert, trans., The Rise and Fall of Athens by Plutarch (London: Penguin Books, 1960),294.
30
Ibid., 300-301.
31
Ibid., 316.
32
Ibid., 316.
33
Ibid., 316.
34
Ibid., 318.
28
KIST 7
would fight together to defeat the Athenian forces.35 Without the Persians and poor decision by
Athens, Sparta would not have been able to win. It was much easier with the help of the allies
and it also did not hurt when the Spartans were able to gain riches from an allied force. The only
downside to the treaties with the Persians was the fact that the Spartans had to forfeit land to the
Persians in payment for the assistance.36 Even after the war, the effect was seen. In 401, there
was a request to Sparta for aid in collecting mercenary troops, and then in 394, a Persian General
defeats a Spartan army which showed the end of their alliance and the rise of Persia once again.37
This rise to power though was crushed quickly by Alexander after he took power.
Another result was the change in warfare in Greece. The Greek genius was freed to apply
capital, technology, and manpower to war without ethical restraint, but in the process the old idea
of a city-state was lost.38 Although there was little innovation in warfare during the war itself,
there does appear to have been an increase in the use of light infantry and many of these would
have been mercenary troops, hired from outer regions of Greece.39 The warfare did change
though when Macedon took over because it led to the end of the hoplite era due Macedon being
ruled by an autocratic king, and being a tribal kingdom that covered a large area.40
Decline of Athens
After the defeat at the hands of the Spartans in the Peloponnesian War, the once
great power that Athens had would slip through its hands like grains of sand like the grains
of sand on the beaches of Sicily. First, the immediate result of the war and its treaty must
be examined. Athens had to tear down the Walls of the Piraeus, was only allowed to have
35
Ibid., 318.
Ibid., 320.
37
Ibid., 320.
38
Ibid., 320.
39
Ibid., 320.
40
Ibid., 320.
36
KIST 8
12 ships and was now a junior ally of Sparta instead of a primary41. The first sign that
Athens was on its way to decline was the increase in civil strife amongst its citizens. The
poor were frustrated over how the wealthy held onto their land after the war while they lost
all of theirs and this would result in riots and uprisings.42 Virtually all of Greece was in a
frenzy after this, and people were trying to bring in Spartans and Athenians to calm it
down, but it failed due to the fact that both sides were falling apart as well.43 The cause of
all this was the pursuit of power from greed and personal ambition, which led to
entrenchment and the lack of leadership desired to keep a polis running properly.44 The
most notable proof that post-war strife was a reason for Athenian decline was when the
Athenians needed a scapegoat and Socrates was picked to represent the frustration of the
Athenians through being put to death as a traitor of the Athenian state.45 The main reason
for this was the fact that he did not support the democratic government and was therefore
seen as an enemy to the Athenian government, even though he did serve within the war and
as the leader of the assembly.46 Ultimately, Socrates received the penalty of death for
opposing the democracy of Athens and he took the blame for the horrendous defeat and
strife that now occupied Athens.47
The second way that the decline of Athens was impacted by the Peloponnesian War
was the economic decline that was caused by the war. Athens lost the war, and with it, her
empire and the Delian League. This, however, was not the immediate worry of the
Athenians when the war ended. Livestock and farms were destroyed all over the country
41
Ibid., 318.
Ibid., 319.
43
Ibid., 320
44
Ibid., 320.
45
Ibid., 323.
46
Ibid., 324.
47
Ibid., 325.
42
KIST 9
side. Vineyards took several years before they would be able to produce a rich crop of
grapes and olives trees were even harder and longer to grow back.48 Commerce by land
was disrupted even further and so was commerce by sea.49
After losing everything, the Spartans took over many Greek city-states, including
Athens. The Spartans put into place the thirty tyrants which would rule under the
instruction of the Spartans.50The thirty were sympathetic to Sparta and were willing to
sacrifice democracies. 51 They abolished the organs of a democratic government such as
popular courts and appointed a new boule of five hundred antidemocratic citizens, and in
worry of an uprising, they requested many troops to come defend them.52The thirty were
luckily undone by their actions, but this was a complete demonstration as to how the
Athenians had lost their government and many of their own people due to the defeat.53
After losing money and the war, the Macedonians also saw their opportunity and took it by
taking over Athens under the reign of Philip, the father of Alexander the Great.54 Many
Athenians wanted to change to Macedonian ways of life because they were tired of the way
things were going in Athens, while many rose against the Macedonian forces, only to be
crushed back down.55 Athens would be able to survive and even build its empire back up,
but even then, it was not as great as it once was and the end was on its way for the great
empire.
Fall of Sparta
48
Cartledge, Ancient Greece, 101.
Ibid., 102.
50
Pomeroy et al., Ancient Greece, 321.
51
Ibid., 321.
52
Ibid., 322.
53
Ibid., 322.
54
William Scott Ferguson, “Athens and Hellenism,” The American Historical Review 16 (1910): 5.
55
Ibid., 7.
49
KIST 10
After winning a great war, it would not have been guessed that the victory could have
possibly led to the decline of Sparta, but it sadly did. After the victory, Lysander brought back a
great wealth, consisting of large amounts of silver and gold money.56 The consequences are not
entirely clear, but a strain was placed on the economy of Sparta, which had traditionally
excluded coinage in the precious metals.57 In other words, Sparta was greedy and the greed
would lead to the decline.
The first reason for the fall of Sparta is the lack of success that the promised liberation
had on the Greek populous. As seen, the implementation of the Thirty completed backfired in the
quest for gaining love from the other Greek city-states. Many of the states wanted Athens to
come back to power due to the lack of quality from the oligarchical system and the loss of
traditional values and the democratic way of life which they were accustomed to.58 In less than a
year, Greece was able to restore its democracy and get away from the Spartan rule.59 Sparta
struggled during this time period because of the fact that they were built to fight. The Spartans
were a war-like people and when war was not there to be fought, it meant that the Spartans did
not know what to do.60 Athens did well because it was built to sustain an empire without
fighting, while the Spartans were unable to handle the treasury and wealth that was gained.61
Sparta would end up trying to fight and this would lead to its decline. The domination of Sparta
throughout Greece would not last long though. It was over so quickly that it was like Sparta
never gained the power in the first place. Her violence against other city-states in Greece led to
what was known as the Corinthian War.62 The Persian king eventually brought peace within
56
Sealey, A History of the Greek City States, 386.
Ibid., 386.
58
H.T.F. Kitto, The Greeks (Middlesex: Pelican Books, 1960), 153.
59
Ibid., 153.
60
Ibid., 153.
61
Ibid., 154.
62
Ibid., 154.
57
KIST 11
Greece in 387 BC, but the Greeks were happy for the fact that they were back under Greek
rule.63 Sparta ended up ceding her empire to Persian control while still being left to dominate
Greece.64
In 371 BC though, the decline of Sparta finally hit a new low. An army of Thebans
defeated the mighty Spartan warrior in a straight fight at Leuctra.65 This battle left the
distribution of power between the leading Greek states unclear. Sparta lost control of its allies
and would end up losing more battles in 369 BC. Luckily, the immediate effects were not truly
seen, but would be seen later. The population started to dwindle as more people were going into
the expanded Hellenistic Greece since the government was new and Alexander was winning in
his campaigns, unlike the Spartans.66 Alexander was seen as a true leader, unlike the leaders of
the Spartan forces that were being driven into the dirt after even losing to the Macedonians in
campaign battles when trying to rise against them.67 The many uprisings and the many defeats
that followed the win against Athens, proved that Sparta was unfit to have an empire and that
they were unfit to rule, especially when they were not able to fight for power and flex their
muscles against the other Greek states.68 The other reason for people leaving was because of the
complete lack of rights the Spartan men and women had at the time.69 The loss of Spartans
occurred so quickly that it is actually seen as the main reason as the defeat at the hands of the
Thebans.70 The numbers declined so much so that a single defeat was enough to put an end to the
Spartan supremacy.
63
Ibid., 154.
Ibid., 154.
65
Ibid., 154.
66
Ibid., 155.
67
Ibid., 155.
68
Ibid., 155.
69
Ibid., 155.
70
Ibid., 155.
64
KIST 12
Sparta also failed because of the ideologies that Sparta consisted of. As a country that
was depended on Helots to help the citizens, it became much harder to operate a functioning
country when it was being torn apart from the inside.71 The Helots had to work and do the
agriculture, but when many would escape and fight back, Sparta had to put more time and
resources into doing it themselves. The Spartans, for the first time ever, had to truly police the
Helots and ensure that peace and conformity stayed because they didn’t have the man power
anymore to keep them under wraps.72 In doing so, the Spartans would wage war on the Helots
yearly and this just led to a dwindling of numbers. The result of this was the Spartans realizing
that their army could not be a proper full force without the Helots, but by this time it was too
late.73 Sparta failed to produce enough numbers when it came to fighting the Thebans and it
resulted in a terrible defeat and ultimately the fading away of the once great warrior people. They
were no longer feared and no longer had the force they had, which resulted in the disappearance
of the culture from the Greek mainstage.
Thebes
The fall of Sparta led to one big change in Greece as well, other than just the loss of the
Greek superpower. Before examining the effects, it is important to look at the Theban history
briefly. It was the birthplace of the god Dionysus and of Heracles and of King Oedipus.74 In
history, they were seen as swine by the Athenians.75 Thebes also developed and controlled a
flourishing federal state, which offered an original and alternative mode of political organization
to the single polis.76 For some decades in the 4th, Thebes was actually the most powerful city in
71
Pomeroy et al, Ancient Greece, 317.
Ibid., 317.
73
Ibid., 318.
74
Ancient Greece, 131.
75
Ibid., 132.
76
Ibid., 132.
72
KIST 13
mainland Greece and a forcing-house of the political transformation that eventuated through the
reigns of the Macedonian kings Philip II and his son Alexander the Great.77
The fall also led to the rise of Theban hegemony which was especially demonstrated in
the victory over Sparta. The battle of Leuctra left the distribution of power between the leading
Greek states unclear. The Athenians tried to take advantage of this situation by calling a new
peace conference, and envoys from the Greek city states gathered in Athens and swore to abide
by the terms of common peace already accepted.78 The Spartans were opposed to the peace and
sent a force to Arcadia.79 The Theban force arrived in 370 BC and easily defeated the Spartan
tribes.80 This was the first Theban expedition to the Peloponnese and it achieved some changes
which had lasting effects. First, it freed Messenia from Spartan control.81 Messenia was made
into an independent and fully organized state, and although the Spartans continued to claim it
until 330, they never in fact recovered it.82 The loss of Messenia was the crucial blow to Spartan
power and the Spartans could no longer draw on the rich agricultural produce of the Messenian
plain; so there was a drastic decline in the number of Spartan citizens could enjoy full civic
rights and devote themselves to military exercises and the Spartan way of life.83
335 BC marked the endpoint of Thebes’s most brilliant four decades, the origins of which
may be traced back to the mid-fifth century.84 Having recovered first from the humiliation of
medism in 480 and then from the humiliation of occupation by Athens between 457 and 447,
Thebes re-established federal state on new lines, with their own city clearly in the driving seat
77
Ibid., 132.
Sealey, History of Greek city States, 423.
79
Ibid., 424.
80
Ibid., 424.
81
Ibid., 424.
82
Ibid., 424.
83
Ibid., 424.
84
Ancient Greece, 134.
78
KIST 14
from the start, that flourished down to 386. 85 During Philip’s reign Macedon was first unified,
then began to urbanize and finally not only achieved control of all mainland Greece to its south,
defeating the coalition of Athens and Thebes in 338 at the Battle of Chaeronea in Boeotia and
neutralizing Sparta along the way, but also embarked on the conquest of Asia too.86 This was the
death-knell of the traditional polis as a power-unit in Greek history, through there is later
exceptions, such as the island-city of Rhodes, in the third and even the early second century.87
Although Thebes would be rebuilt after being destroyed in 335 BC by Alexander, it was on a
much smaller scale, and though a comfortable place to live in under the Roman dispensation, it
never returned to its Classical-era political and military significance.88
The Rise of Macedon
After the Peloponnesian War ended, it seemed that Greece was on the decline, generally
speaking. One polis that took advantage of this falling out was Macedon. Led by Philip II, the
Macedonians started to gain territory around the Greek peninsula. Philip became the first foreign
king to control the cities of mainland Greece, and these cities that he had arranged were to be his
allies who shared in a common peace and acknowledged him as leader.89 He did not mean to stay
and oppress the cities he occupied, but rather wanted to march with the Greeks against the
Persians.90 Unfortunately, Philip was killed before this could come to fruition and it left
Macedon in turmoil. The question was raised about who would take over and if he would be able
to lead as well as Philip, but the answer came quickly after amidst the turmoil. His son,
Alexander took the reins and made it his plan to bring greatness to Greece.91 Alexander loved
85
Ibid., 134.
Ibid., 140.
87
Ibid., 141.
88
Ibid,, 141.
89
Robin Lane Fox, Alexander the Great: A Biography,(London: Allen Lane, 1973), 17.
90
Ibid., 17.
91
Ibid., 34.
86
KIST 15
Greek culture and this could be traced back to his tutoring at the hand of Aristotle when he was a
young boy.92 Alexander actually believed that he was related to Hercules and Achilles and this
was due to the teaching done by Aristotle.93 One major interest for Alexander, which is ironic
based on the topic being discussed, was the difficulty of turning a militaristic state into a
peaceful one.94 The example Aristotle was given was Sparta because once they established an
empire, they began to decline.95
Alexander, the king, took over the throne at age 20, and his first act was to kill the man
who murdered his father. After the death of Philip and this act, the Greek city states, including
Athens, were swept into a frenzy of liberty and were talking of revolting.96 The Greeks rose in
the hopes of getting rid of the Macedonian rule. King Darius of Persia sent large envoys to Greek
cities with large bags of gold for the purpose of causing trouble to ruin the Greek alliance97. As
soon as Alexander heard of this, he immediately put himself in charge of the army and entered
Greece by force to fight for his right to the throne.98 His presence nipped the rebellions in the
bud for the most part as many nations, including the Thessalians, recognized him as the true
king.99 The Athenians, at news of Alexander marching towards them, decided against fighting,
and decided to ask their ambassadors to request a pardon from him for their actions.100 Alexander
pardoned the Athenians because of his affection he had for them due to Aristotle and his
teachings.101 This event was also further proof of the decline of Athens since they did not stand
up and fight for their rights and city back, but rather accepted that Alexander would have
92
Ibid., 56.
Ulrich Wilcken, Alexander the Great, (Toronto: George J. Macleod, 1967), 64
94
Ibid., 64.
95
Ibid., 64.
96
Ibid., 65.
97
Ibid., 65.
98
Ibid., 65.
99
Ibid., 65.
100
Ibid., 65.
101
Ibid., 65.
93
KIST 16
defeated them. The people of Athens welcome Alexander with open arms and overwhelmed him
with honours, even more numerous than those which they had bestowed unto Philip.102 One
interesting thing to consider about his relationship with his father is that everything his dad did,
Alexander felt the need to do better than. This is especially seen in the fact that Alexander had
many more cities named after him and while his father was able to lead an army to the
Hellespont, Alexander was able to cross it.103
In 334 BC, now that he was recognized as king, Alexander crossed the Hellespont that
separated Europe and Asia in 334 BC.104 His biggest accomplishment was his defeat of Darius
when he only lost 280 men, while killing as many as 70,000 Persians.105 The humour in this and
the display of his power is seen when Darius offers to rule Persia together and ruling one half
each, but Alexander responds by saying that he and Darius were not equals, and therefore had to
be recognized as the one true king, and if Darius wanted to dispute claims to the throne, then he
had to stand and fight for it.106 Next, Alexander wanted to eliminate the threat of Darius from the
ocean so he and his men marched on the fortress of Tyre. At first, they were welcomed with open
arms, but it became clear that they had no intention of submitting to his rule which was seen
when they refused to allow Alexander to make offerings to Melkart, the god of the city.107 The
siege then began in 332 BC in this area of now southern Lebanon.108 The siege would last seven
months and it took many siege techniques and engineering innovations to conquer the city.
Alexander kept marching until Egypt, had victories there and then went back to hunting Darius.
When he finally caught up to him, Darius was dead so he sent him back to Persia for a proper
102
Ibid., 65.
Ibid., 65.
104
Ibid., 66.
105
Ibid., 65.
106
Ibid., 65.
107
Ibid., 65
108
Ibid., 65
103
KIST 17
burial. Alexander’s troops thought that the campaign and adventure were over, but Alexander
kept his men on the move reaching as far as the Beas River, but his men now viewed this as the
end of the world so their urge to fight had disappeared.109 His men marched 11,250 miles in 8
years and killed at least 750,000 Asians.110 A soldier once said to Alexander, “Sir, if there is one
thing above all others a successful man should know, it is when to stop.”111 The expedition ended
a mere 600 miles from the ocean and then, on the way back, Alexander died in Babylon in 323
BC.112
Throughout his time as ruler Alexander had many great impacts on the Greek world, but
perhaps his biggest was bringing about the Hellenistic age. Coming from the Hellenic Age,
which was classic Greece, Alexander led them to the Hellenistic Age, which meant Greek like.
The Hellenistic age was the period between the death of Alexander and the conquest of Egypt by
Rome in 30 BC. The Hellenistic style of life influenced Roman culture especially when it was
building its empire.113 The Hellenistic Age also marked the transformation of Greek society from
the localized and introverted city-states to an open, cosmopolitan, and at times exuberant culture
that permeated the entire eastern Mediterranean and Southwest Asia.114 While the Hellenistic
world incorporated a number of different people, Greek thinking, mores and way of life
dominated the public affairs of the time.115 All aspects of the culture took more a Greek look to
them, with the Greek language being established as the official language and this led to proper
transformation of art and literature.116 Depictions of man in both art and literature revolved
109
Ibid., 65.
Ibid., 65.
111
John Langhorne and William Langhorne, trans., Plutarch: Life of Alexander (New York: Applegate, 1874),
230.
112
Ibid., 270.
113
Athens and Hellenism, 4.
114
Bernard Bosanquet, A Moral from Athenian History, International Journal of Ethics, 9 (1898), 17.
115
Ibid., 17.
116
Ibid., 17.
110
KIST 18
around exuberant and often amusing themes that for the most part explored the daily life and the
emotional world of humans, gods and heroes alike.117 The biggest change overall was the change
to Alexandria as the centre of commerce and culture of the Hellenistic world under the
Ptolemies.118 Within it, there was the tomb of Alexander the Great, the lighthouse of Alexandria
and the famed Library of Alexandria that had aspirations to host the entire knowledge of the
known world.119 The Hellenistic Age also became a time of substantial maturity of the sciences,
specifically in geometry where Euclid’s elements became the standard all the way up to the 20th
century CE, and the work of Archimedes became legendary.120 One very revolutionary thought
within the Hellenistic World was that the world was a sphere and not flat as many believed.121
The Hellenistic Age ended because of the Romans though in 31 BCE. Rome had risen to power
and by 200 BC occupied not only Italy, but also the entire coastal Adriatic Sea and Illyria.122
During the second Punic War, when Hannibal of Carthage managed to establish a successful
campaign against the Romans in Italy, Philip V of Macedon allied with him and annexed Illyria,
starting a series of wars with Rome that led to the eventual annexation of Greece by the
Romans.123 In the end, the large part of the Hellenistic kingdoms disintegrated by constant
incursions by tribes of the fringes, many parts were simply given to Rome through the will of
past rules, and others won brief independence through revolution.124
Alexander also had many other major impacts which have been seen for quite a long time
after. The first impact was the movement of Greeks abroad. This led to accelerated Greek
conquest, a further spread of the Greek language, spread of Greek deities and cults, and the
117
Ibid., 18.
Ibid., 18.
119
Ibid., 18.
120
Ibid., 18.
121
Ibid., 20.
122
Ibid., 21.
123
Ibid., 21.
124
Ibid., 23.
118
KIST 19
emergence of philosophy as a way of life.125 In doing this, the world was becoming more united
under one language and way of life, which also led to the Greeks having positions of influence
all around the Mediterranean to further spread Greek influence.126 The influence also led to the
emergence of one world economically to make trade even easier since the same currency would
be utilized throughout large regions.127 Alexander also led the world to a higher level of
education and literacy in the regions which led to an easier spread of the ideas that were
presented due to Alexander. Ironically, Alexander also led to an increase in individualism.128
This is ironic because Alexander led to people taking more pride in them, but also in being a
member of the city state further. If it was not for the great influence Alexander had, it is hard to
imagine many ideals and philosophies would have been able to succeed, especially in a world
that would not have been united under one leader, one language, one system, one economy, and
one power.
Conclusion
The Peloponnesian War was one that involved almost all of Greece and ultimately led to
many shifts in the dynamics of Greek life. From 431 to 404 BC, the Greek powers of Athens and
Sparta and their allies battled to show superiority within Greece. Greece fought due to the
protection of the great empire it had while Sparta was tired of being the second in command. The
question was raised as to how Greece changed after the Peloponnesian War. This paper argued
that Greece changed after the Peloponnesian War leading because Athens lost its great empire
and began to decline, the fall of Sparta, and the rise of Alexander the Great with Macedon. In
125
Ibid., 340.
Ibid., 340.
127
Ibid., 341.
128
Ibid., 341.
126
KIST 20
other words, the mighty fell, the meek inherited the earth, and the changing of the guard was
completed.
KIST 21
Bibliography
1. Bosanquet, Bernard. "A Moral from Athenian History." International Journal of
Ethics 9, no. 1 (October 1898). Journal 1.
2. Cartledge, Paul. Ancient Greece. N.p.: Oxford University, 2009. Book 1
3. Ferguson, William Scott. "Athens and Hellenism." The American Historical Review
16, no. 1 (October 1910). Journal 2
4. Forde, Steven. "Thucydides on the Causes of Athenian Imperialism." The American
Political Science Review 80, no. 2 (June 1986). Journal 3
5. Hammond, Martin, trans. Thucydides- the Peloponnesian War. N.p.: Oxford, 2009.
Primary Source 2
6. Kagor, Donald. Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy. N.p.: Free
Press,1991. Book 2
7. Kitto, H.D.F. The Greeks. N.p.: Pelican, 1951. Book 3
8. Lane Fox, Robin. Alexander the Great. London: Dial, 1974. Print. Book 4
9. Langhorne, John, and William Langhorne, trans. Plutarch: Life of Alexander. N.p.:
Applegate, 1874. Primary Source 3
10. Meiggs, Russell. The Athenian Empire. Oxford: Clarendon, 1972. Book 5
11. Pomeroy, Sarah, Stanley Burstein, Walter Donlap, and Jennifer Robert. Ancient Greece:
A Political, Social, and Cultural History. N.p.: Oxford University, 1999. Book 6
12. Rawlinson, George, trans. Herodotus Histories. Hertfordshire: Wordsworth, 1996.
Primary Source 4
13. Robinson, C.A., ed. Selections from Greek and Roman Historians. N.p.: Tenth, 1957.
Primary Source 5
KIST 22
14. Scott-Kilvert, Ian, trans. Plutarch- the Rise and Fall of Athens. N.p.: Penguin,
1960. Primary Source 4
15. Sealey, Raphael. A History of the Greek City States. N.p.: California University, n.d.Book
7