No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Problem of Classical Ionia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2013
Extract
The sixth century B.C. was a brilliant age in Ionia. Milesian academic research and Samian opportunism set the bounds for intellectual and mechanical progress, the Chians made money and the Phocaeans sailed the seven seas. The surviving fragments of Ionic sculpture and architecture, the massive relics of the biggest-ever temples, and engineering feats like those of Polycrates in the town of Samos still demonstrate the scale on which the Ionic achievement was conceived. But when the archaeologist turns his attention to the fifth century in Ionia he seeks in vain for comparable creations. Sculpture has virtually disappeared, while painting seems to have come to an end with the Clazomenian sarcophagi and the schools of vase decoration that were associated with them. There are no new city layouts rivalling that of Samos; and only one small temple at Miletus stands out as a meagre creation of this century. The minor arts also were virtually at an end; and—whether in excavation or in surface reconnaissance—the archaeologist discovers scarcely any recognizable testimony of Ionic culture, or even of habitation, on the sites of the Ionic cities in this epoch. In material civilization the fifth century seems to have been the Dark Age of Ionia.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 1961
References
page 10 note 1 In both cases the tribute was one-sixth of a talent.
page 10 note 2 Xen, . Hell. III, 1, 6Google Scholar.
page 10 note 3 Loc. cit.; Anab. VII, 8, 8Google Scholar.
page 10 note 4 Hdt. v, 26, where (in the last years of the sixth century) Otanes is said to have captured Antandrus and Lamponion.
page 10 note 5 Xen, . Hell, III, 1, 10 ff.Google Scholar
page 11 note 1 97 (98 Müller, in GGM, 1Google Scholar).
page 11 note 2 Hell. III, 4, 27Google Scholar.
page 11 note 3 Xen., Hell. III, 1, 7Google Scholar. Larisa and Cyllene in fact had settlements of Greco-Egyptian mercenaries who had come to terms with Cyrus the Great.
page 12 note 1 For a detailed discussion of the topography of Clazomenae see Arch. Eph. (1953–1954), pp. 149 ff.Google Scholar
page 12 note 2 The general phenomenon of juxtaposition in the quota lists is, of course, not to be confused with the well-known Nesselhauf twins, which, in astronomical terms, represent binary systems and not clusters.
page 14 note 1 Thuc. VIII, 14 and ff.
page 14 note 2 See especially Meiggs, R., J.H.S. LXIII, 28Google Scholar. Since the present paragraph was drafted a radical rearrangement of the dating of a number of fifth-century Athenian decrees has been proposed by Mattingly, H. B. in Historia, x (1961), 148 ff.Google Scholar; and this could weaken the argument for Athenian intervention at Colophon in the middle of the century.
page 14 note 3 Thuc. III, 34.
page 14 note 4 Pol. 1303 b.
page 15 note 1 Hdt. IX, 99, 104; Thuc. VIII, 79.
page 15 note 2 Hell, III, 2, 17Google Scholar.
page 15 note 3 I, 115, 2.
page 14 note 4 In the Ionic panel of list 12 (of 443/2); the sum paid is unfortunately lost.
page 15 note 5 In other Ionic cities which owned a peraea (Chios at Atarneus, Samos at Anaea, as also Mytilene in the Troad) it was the normal procedure for the oligarchs to dominate the peraea when democracy was established at home. Since the bottom end of the Maeander plain was a peraea of the Milesians and was certainly in their possession c. 390, it may well be that the Maeandrii of the lists were Milesians, and possibly exiled oligarchs. They seem to have been either incorporated or eliminated by c. 444, when their name disappears from the lists.
page 15 note 6 Anab. VII, 8, 8–19Google Scholar.
page 16 note 1 Xen., Hell. 1, 1, 4Google Scholar.
page 16 note 2 Cf. Xen., Anab. VII, 8, 21Google Scholar, where Asidates, with his household and stock, 
.
page 16 note 3 Ath. Mitth. XIV (1889), 317Google Scholar.
page 16 note 4 Harvard Studies, suppl. vol. 1 (1940), 132–4Google Scholar (now also H. T. Wade-Gery, , Essays in Greek History, pp. 212 f.Google Scholar).
page 17 note 1 Pygela was not independent after the Meliac War, and neither Pygela nor Aerae took part at Lade or is mentioned in Heorodotus' list of the Ionic cities. They did not participate in the Hellenion at Naucratis or strike coins in early times. Thus they have no claim to rank as cities before the time of the Athenian empire.
- 8
- Cited by