This volume includes nineteen investigations of some of the most intractable problems of Greek history by one of the most influential Greek historians of the post-war era. C. is best known for his studies of the fourth century, but his versatility over the whole range of Greek history is amply manifested by this selection. These essays, all previously published, are directed at the more experienced student of Greek history. The neophyte should be steered first to his books The Greek Wars: the Failure of Persia (2005), Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War (1997) and Philip of Macedon (1978).
In his preface, C. reflects on the sources of his affection for Xenophon and explains the decision to omit his articles on the Peace of Philocrates. In his introduction, S. Hornblower highlights some of the perennial themes of C.'s published work and how the emphases have shifted in more recent years. Hornblower had earlier contributed a more wide-ranging appreciation of C. to his Festschrift, Georgica (1991), on which see the review by H.D. Westlake, CR 42 [1992], 416–8.
The first four chapters deal with problems of the archaic period. In ‘Early Colonisation’ (1992), C. takes issue with the easy generalisation of ‘overpopulation’ as the motive for the colonisation movement, which leads into the fiercely contested area of demographics. C. makes judicious use of archaeological reports and evidence from other eras to posit recurring droughts as a major incentive for sending out colonies. In ‘Early Greek Tyranny and the People’ (1995), C. exposes the weakness of the ‘hoplite theory’ of early tyranny. The notion that the tyrant began as a demagogue seems to be inspired by the career of Dionysius of Syracuse; contrast Gelon's view of the demos (Hdt. 7.156.3). On the position of the tyrant it may be unsafe to generalise from Thucydides' effort to downplay the power of the Pisistratids at Athens. Herodotus at least believed that tyrants had real power.
The related articles ‘Sparta and Her Allies in the Sixth Century’ and ‘Cleomenes’ (both 1993) are must reading for anyone interested in the origins of the Peloponnesian League or in Sparta's most controversial king. C. argues that the Peloponnesian League of the sixth century was a set of defensive alliances and that the full-scale symmachic League emerges only in the 450s.
In ‘The Fall of Themistocles’ (1970), C. chops an inviting pathway through some of the thorniest thickets of fifth-century history, where virtually nothing is secure beyond the facts of Themistocles' ostracism and later flight to Persia. C. sees the Alcmeonids as the instigators of the attacks on Themistocles in real life and as the originators of the anti-Themistoclean traditions in the sources. Since the charges against Themistocles are linked to the accusations against the regent Pausanias, C. seeks to explain that figure's downfall, which he attributes to his helot policy. C. accepts the Hetoimaridas debate at Sparta as historical (Diod. 11.50) and the allegations of Themistocles' mother's foreign birth, both possibly later inventions.
Virtually all of our knowledge of Ephialtes comes from sources written at least a century after his death, yet the significance imputed to his reform of the Areopagus has inspired numerous attempts to ascertain the content of his reforms. In ‘Nomophulakia and the Areopagus’ (1988), C. rejects E. Ruschenbusch's scepticism about Ath. Pol. 35.2 and accepts that the Thirty were consciously undoing Ephialtes' work and also the reality of an Areopagite cura morum in early Athens.
In ‘Thucydides’ Judgment of Periclean Strategy' (1975), C. concludes that Thucydides was right to endorse Pericles' strategy. Had the Spartan peace offer of 425 led to a lasting peace, Pericles' strategy would have been vindicated, but we cannot know if Pericles would have urged acceptance of the offer. C. deftly seeks to tease out the conflicting opinions at Sparta; Diodorus may correctly report the Spartan peace offer of 410, but Endius' speech (Diod. 13.52.3–8), whether by Ephorus or from his source, was composed by someone familiar with Thuc. 1.140–4 (as I argued in CPh 80 [1985], 320–1). C. sees the Spartan peace offer of 425 as an ‘appalling betrayal’ of their commitment to liberate Greece (p. 139) – but after the Spartan failure to save the Mytilenaeans in 427 we hear very little of the liberation theme (only as a cynical catchword in Thuc. 3.63.3), and the Spartans had not hesitated to betray their allies before (Thuc. 3.109.2).
No question in fifth-century history has evoked more controversy than whether there was a formal peace treaty between Athens and Artaxerxes, usually placed about 449 b.c. In ‘The Peace between Athens and Persia’ (1997) C. comes down firmly in favour of a formal peace, rejecting E. Badian's arguments for a treaty after Eurymedon (From Plataea to Poteidaea [1993], pp. 1–72), while accepting A.B. Bosworth's argument that Callisthenes did not deny the existence of the treaty (JHS 110 [1990], 1–13). An appendix defends the historicity of Pericles' Congress Decree, known only from Plutarch (Per. 17). C. offers further reflections on the topic in an appendix to Greek Wars. The debate will undoubtedly continue.
The King's Peace of 387/6, with its later reincarnations, and the Second Athenian Confederacy of 377 present a host of complicated problems which C. addresses in ‘The King's Peace’ (1981), ‘The Foundation of the Second Athenian Confederacy’ (1973) and ‘Notes on the Failure of the Second Athenian Confederacy’ (1981). C. adroitly exploits four words in Xenophon (Hell. 5.4.20) about the Piraeus gates in 378 (p. 202) to make a small detail speak to larger issues.
Two related articles, ‘Agesilaus and Sparta’ (1976) and ‘The Decline of Sparta’ (1983), reject moral causes or a shortage of manpower as explanations for the defeat at Leuctra in favour of Epaminondas' genius. In ‘Epaminondas and Thebes’ (1972), C. accepts Diodorus' report (15.78.4) of Epaminondas' plan for a Theban naval hegemony. His vindication of R. Sealey's dating of IG II2 1609, promised in n. 97 (p. 325), appeared in Historia 22 (1973), 759–61 (cf. p. 399 n. 5).
In ‘Eubulus’ (1963) and ‘The Defence of Olynthus’ (1962), C. sought to rescue Eubulus from the obscurity and obloquy to which Demosthenes' malice and the paucity of other evidence had consigned him, plausibly arguing that Eubulus' strategic vision may have surpassed Demosthenes'. The paper by D.M. Lewis mentioned in an unnumbered note (p. 334) finally appeared in a revised form in his Selected Papers in Greek and Near Eastern History, edited by P.J. Rhodes (1997), pp. 212–29.
In ‘Athenian Naval Power in the Fourth Century’ (1984), C. seeks to dispel the notion of a decline in the zeal and skill of Athenian trierarchs and steersmen from the halcyon days of the fifth century. ‘Orthodoxy and Hoplites’ (1989) merits careful study by anyone interested in the heatedly-debated issues of hoplite warfare. In ‘The Crowning of Demosthenes’ (1969), C. shows why Demosthenes received such overwhelming support from his fellow citizens in 330 despite the ruinous failure of his foreign policy.
This volume is a fitting tribute to an exceptionally accomplished scholar. These are essays which repay repeated readings. There are countless places where a contrary view may be respectable, but even the reader who dissents from some of the conclusions will profit from C.'s unsurpassed mastery of the evidence, his unfailingly sound reasoning and his refreshing iconoclasm. A well-constructed index completes the volume.
