Sparta's Bitter Victories: Politics and Diplomacy in the Corinthian War

Abstract

PREFACEA Spartan admiral dealt the deathblow to Athens and her empirenat the battle of Aegospotami in 405 b .c ., and in the wake of Athens'nsurrender Sparta regulated affairs throughout the Greek world.nBut the era that opened with one Spartan victory and closed withnanother brought more bitterness and enmity than peace or happinessnto victors and vanquished alike. This book is concerned withnthe changes in the political structure of the Greek world, the challengesnand opportunities produced by the fall of Athens, and thenresponses to them, in the early fourth century.During my research on the Corinthian War, I became convincednthat an examination of the years between the battle of Aegospotaminand the Peace of Antalcidas would provide a key to the understandingnof the entire fourth century. Victor Ehrenberg and othernscholars have recently recognized the importance of this period,nbut while particular questions have been discussed in articles andnmonographs, no comprehensive study of the crucial decades fromn405 to 386 exists.1 The focus of this book is on questions of statecraft,nof politics and diplomacy, for these lay at the heart of thenproblems the Greek world faced after the defeat of Athens. Socialnand economic topics are also important in any attempt to understandnpolitical history, as are military events, particularly in thenCorinthian War. These have necessarily claimed much of my attention.nI have followed a narrative format, while analyzing both historicalnand historiographical questions. For the historian of thenearly fourth century, the use of sources raises such difficulties thatnthis book is necessarily an essay in historiography as well as anninvestigation of the period under consideration.It is a pleasant task to convey my gratitude to those who havenhelped me, in one way or another, to write this book. First andnforemost, I owe a larger debt than I can express to Donald Kagan,nwho not only suggested this topic to me and did much to bring it tonfruition but also has been a constant source of inspiration, throughnhis teaching, his scholarship, and his enthusiastic interest in mynwork. To Brian Tierney and Gordon M. Kirkwood, who read annearly draft of the manuscript and gave me much helpful advice,nboth general and specific, I record my thanks. My colleagues at thenUniversity of Chicago, Karl J. Weintraub and Eric Cochrane, tooknan interest in my work and provided valuable advice at an earliernstage of the book, and two graduate students there, Robert J. Bergnand Michael McKillip, not only read the manuscript with care andnattention but also demonstrated the progress of their studies bynoffering valuable insights and calling my attention to matters I hadnoverlooked. I owe a special debt to I. A. F. Bruce, S. Perlman, andnH. D. Westlake, who read the manuscript carefully and criticallynand shared their special knowledge of the subject with me. Theirndetailed comments saved me from many an error or embarrassingnstatement, provided helpful references to literature I had overlooked,nand forced me to clarify my thinking on some points. AlthoughnI may not always have taken their advice, the book is thenbetter for it nonetheless. It is a pleasure to acknowledge their contributions,nboth in their publications and in their comments, to thisnbook. n