X. onic meet ings at Delphi and Thermo pyla. seems to have been one in Argolis distinct from that CHAP. of Calaurea1; and another, of which Delos was the centre, attained to considerable celebrity.2 But of all such institutions the most celebrated and important was the one known, without any other local distinction, as the Amphictyonic League or Council. This last appellation refers to the fact, that the affairs of the whole Amphictyonic body were transacted by a congress, composed of deputies sent by the several states according to rules established from time immemorial. One peculiar feature of this congress was, that its meetings were held at two different places. There Amphictywere two regularly convened every year; one in the spring, at Delphi, the other in the autumn, near the little town of Anthela, within the pass of Thermopylæ, at a temple of Demeter. This diversity of the places of meeting suggests a great variety of difficult questions as to the origin of the league. It is very improbable that they were selected together, and it is not easy to determine which of them was appointed first. The ancients seem to have considered Delphi as the original centre of the union; and this opinion is confirmed by its ancient sanctity and the early renown of its oracle; whereas the choice of Thermopylæ could only have been dictated by its peculiar position, the importance of which was not connected with any of the ordinary objects of the league. On the other hand, the name of Pylæa, which was applied as well to the assembly held at Delphi, as to that of Thermopyla, seems strongly to indicate the priority of the latter place of meeting; nor, if Delphi had been the earlier, is it easy to imagine why the other should ever have been chosen. The readiest mode of reconciling these conflicting arguments may be to suppose that there were originally two distinct confederations; one perhaps formed of inland, the CHAP. X. Tribes posed the league. This other of maritime, tribes; and that, when these were The more important part of the subject is that which com- which relates to the constitution, functions, and authority of the council. It is said to have been originally composed of deputies, sent by twelve tribes or nations, each of which might incl ide several independent states. The confederate tribes are variously enumerated by different authors. A comparison of their lists enables us to ascertain the greater part of the names, and to form a probable conjecture as to the rest; but it also leads us to conclude, that some changes took place at a remote period in the constitution of the council, as to which tradition is silent. The most authentic list of the Amphictyonic tribes contains the following names:-Thessalians, Boeotians, Dorians, Ionians, Perrhæbians, Magnetes, Locrians, Etæans, or Enianians, Phthiots, or Achæans of Phthia, Malians, or Melians1, and Phocians. The orator Æschines, who furnishes this list, shows, by mentioning the number twelve, that one name is wanting. The other lists supply two names to fill up the vacant place; the Dolopes, and the Delphians. It seems not improbable that the former were finally supplanted by the Delphians, who appear to have been a distinct race from the Phocians.2 CHAP. X. the com The mere inspection of this list is sufficient to Changes in prove at once the high antiquity of the institution position of and the imperfection of our knowledge with regard the league. to its early history. It is clear that the Dorians must have become members of the Amphictyonic body before the conquest, which divided them into several states, each incomparably more powerful than most of the petty northern tribes, which possessed an equal number of votes in the council. It may however be doubted, whether they were among the original members, and did not rather take the place of one of the tribes which they dislodged from their seats in the neighbourhood of Delphi, perhaps the Dryopes. On the other hand the Thessalians were probably not 1 It is not certain whether these are names of two different races, or variations of the name of one tribe, nor, in the former case, which is the right name. From Diodor. xviii. 11. it would seem that the Melians included the Malians, who were seated more to the north of the Malian gulf. 2 They disclaimed the name of Phocians (Paus. iv. 34. 11.), and appear, before the Peloponnesian war, distinct from them in their interests and political relations, connected by the latter with Sparta, as the Phocians with Athens (Thuc. 1. 112.). Hence, and from other indications, it has been inferred that the Dorians formed the ruling class at Delphi, a suspicion which is confirmed by the local dialect. 3 C. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch, § 12. 4., suspects that the Dryopes were supplanted by the Thessalians. CHAP. X. Effect of conquests received into the league, before they made their appearance in Thessaly, which is commonly believed to have taken place only twenty years before the Dorian invasion of Peloponnesus.1 It is therefore highly probable that they were admitted in the room of some other tribe, which had lost its independence through the convulsions of this eventful period. And this may have been one of those which inhabited Boeotia, before the Æolians from Arne gave their name to the country -the Minyans of Orchomenus, or the Cadmeans of Thebes. But so scanty is our information, that it has been conjectured 2, perhaps with equal probability, that they did not gain entrance into the league before the sixth century B. C., when they took an active part in a war, which will be hereafter mentioned, between the Amphictyons and the town of Crissa. Hence it would appear that, before the Return of the Heracleids, the Amphictyonic body comprehended most of the Greek states north of the Isthmus; but probably notwithstanding the mention of Acrisius, none of those within it. It may already at that time have been considered as a Hellenic confederacy; and this may have been the cause from which the Achæans of Phthia were not designated, in the proceedings of the council, by the name of Hellenes, which is peculiarly applied to them in the Homeric poems: but there seems to be no reason for referring a title which is sometimes given to the council in later times, of a general congress of the Hellenes, to the period when the Hellenic name was confined to a few northern states, the original members of the confederacy. After the Return of the Heracleids, the number the Dorian of the Amphictyonic tribes-then perhaps already on the state hallowed by time-continued the same; but the geographical compass of the league was increased by of the league. 1 Schoemann, Ant. J. P. G. p. 387. 2 By Wachsmuth, i. 119. X. tion in the onic council. all that part of Peloponnesus which was occupied by CHAP. the new Dorian states. And though a considerable part of Greece was still not included in it, for Arcadia, Elis, Achaia, Ætolia, and Acarnania never belonged to it, the power of the league, if measured by the extent of its territory, or unanimously exerted, would have been sufficient to command the obedience of the other states; and it might therefore have been looked upon as a national confederation. The causes which prevented it from really acquiring this character will be evident, when we consider the mode in which the council was constituted, and the nature of its ordinary functions. The constitution of the Mode of council rested on the supposition, once perhaps not representa very inconsistent with the fact, of a perfect equality Amphictyamong the tribes represented by it. Each tribe, however feeble, had two votes in the deliberation of the congress: none, however powerful, had more. The order in which the right of sending representatives to the council was exercised by the various states included in one Amphictyonic tribe was perhaps regulated by private agreement; but, unless one state usurped the whole right of its tribe, as seems to have been the case with Athens, it is manifest that a petty tribe, which formed but one community, had greatly the advantage over Sparta, or Argos, which could only be represented in their turn, the more rarely in proportion to the magnitude of the tribe to which they belonged.1 This right would have been of still less value, if it had been shared among all the colonies of an Amphictyonic tribe; and this was the case with the Ionians 2: but the Eolian and Dorian colonies See Tittmann, Ueber den Bund der Amphiktyonen, p. 75. Hüllmann, Würdigung des Delphischen Orakels, p. 54. • Æschines, De Fals. Leg. p. 43. ἔδειξα ἕκαστον ἔθνος ἰσόψηφον γενόμενον (see Tittmann, u. s. p. 74.) τὸ μέγιστον τῷ ἐλάττονι, τὸν ἥκοντα ἐκ Δωρίου καὶ Κυτι νίου ἴσον δυνάμενον Λακεδαιμονίοις (δύο γὰρ ψήφους ἕκαστον φέρει ἔθνος), πάλιν ἐκ τῶν Ἰώνων τὸν Ἐρετριέα καὶ Πριηνέα τοῖς ̓Αθηναίοις. |