Athenian Power in the Fifth Century BC

Leah Lazar, Athenian Power in the Fifth Century BC (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). 9780198896265.

Reviewed by Christine Downton, University of Leicester, cad38@leicester.ac.uk.

The overall aim of this monograph is to re-examine the concept of Athenian power in the fifth century BCE. Whilst Athenian power has been the subject of considerable scholarship in the past, Leah Lazar presents a more nuanced view, arguing that Athenian power was flexible, negotiated, and engaged in two-way dialogue through both local communities and select individuals. The first part of the book looks at Athens’s political and fiscal relationship with its allies and its allies’ participation in Athenian festivals, using Athenian-specific evidence. The second part of the book moves on to examine three regional studies of Athenian relations with allied communities and contested regions on the fringes of empire, using both Athenian and local evidence. Throughout these chapters, Lazar teases out evidence of flexibility and negotiation in these interactions.

The introduction is used to outline the aims and objectives of the book, summarises the contents, and explains the reasoning behind using regional studies to demonstrate her point. Lazar discusses the sources she will use, primarily fifth- and fourth-century epigraphic and literature, and defines the terminology she uses throughout. Importantly, Lazar highlights which allies will be the focus of the study – primarily those who were Greek and paid tribute – and which are excluded, such as overseas Athenian territories and Greek communities beyond the empire. She also firmly establishes her intention with this work to conduct a reassessment of Athenian power, one which moves away from the “dominant orthodoxy of twentieth-century scholarship” with its often colonialist and western-centric focus (p. 5). Finally, the author devotes a section of her introduction to positioning her work within the extensive and broader scholarship on the subject, in which she is clearly well versed and widely read.

Chapter one begins with an overview of the relationships between Athens and allied communities as well as between Athens and the network of well-placed individuals who aided in these community-wide negotiations. Lazar focuses on negotiations with communities through an examination of thirty-five selected inscribed Athenian decrees concerning community-level interactions with cities, primarily those which contributed tribute to identify evidence of diplomatic processes. By thoroughly analysing these examples, Lazar convincingly argues that we can identify negotiations and even direct dialogue between Athens and its allies in these texts.

The discussion next moves on to look at individual negotiators within allied communities, arguing that Athens used pre-existing networks of wealthy elites to achieve their aims and examining the tensions that arose between these individuals and the wider communities they represented. Through Athenian decrees concerning community-level interactions, Lazar notes that descriptions of Athenian by common scholarly assumptions interference are not often borne out by the epigraphic evidence. Instead, she identifies both direct dialogue and evidence of two-way negotiation and reciprocal expectations. Lazar moves on to question how these negotiations were conducted, that is, whether Athens took the lead role or responded to these other communities. To answer this, she divides Athenian decrees into three distinct categories to analyse what they say about the negotiation process: documents of incorporation into the empire, documents recording measures for those already in the empire (mostly privileges), and honorific decrees. Lazar delves into the context of these as sources of diplomacy through an analysis of language and form. Although this is a necessary step to contextualise the sources, the discussion contains a level of detail that may be more than required to make the point. Following this is an examination of individual negotiators and, noting the limitations of the epigraphic evidence, Lazar turns to Thucydides to compensate. The evidence from Thucydides is used to outline the type of person who would become such an ambassador, and the argument is made for these being wealthy elites with network connections and appropriate experience, who were increasingly honoured by the demos in decrees. Overall, the chapter convincingly argues for Athenian flexibility and open, two-way dialogues as shown through inscribed decrees.

The second chapter focuses on Athens’s financial situation to highlight its flexibility and ability to support allied agency until the Peloponnesian War necessitated a different approach. Through examination of inscribed tribute lists, Lazar discusses the flexibility in the tribute system (with regard to payment types) and its adaptation to meet changing demands put upon Athens during times of conflict: the city increased its control of all negotiations until finally exchanging the tribute system for a harbour tax. Lazar argues that despite the fragmentary nature of the inscribed evidence, the tribute lists indicate that the allies had the ability to negotiate their contributions and that Athens was amenable to this. It is also noted, however, that this amenability was fluid, and restrictions were employed as Athens’s financial requirements grew. One particularly interesting aspect of this discussion concerns the evidence for separate courts to deal with contested tribute assessments from allies, indicating a willingness on the part of Athens to be flexible and enter into dialogue with allies.

From here the discussion moves on to the increasing financial pressures put on Athens during the course of the Peloponnesian War and the changing interactions these pressures created with regard to the collection of tribute, ultimately resulting in less negotiation and more imposition by Athens. Further discussions centre on the limited and tightly controlled use of individual representatives in the tribute system, primarily from a sense of general distrust and suspicion of bribery and corruption, evidenced mainly through the plays of Aristophanes. Lazar also uses Thucydides and fourth-century epigraphic sources to examine the replacement of the tribute system with a harbour tax. The chapter concludes that the tribute system had flexibility but was subject to regulation during times of war and necessity. It also provides evidence of the concerns about the potential corruptibility of individuals and highlights how the implementation of a harbour tax served to limit the agency of individual allied states.

The final chapter to focus on Athens explores the various Athenian festivals and allied attendance of and response to these cultural and religious occasions. Lazar surveys the numerous ways in which Athens encouraged, or even mandated, allied representatives to interact, network, and participate in these festivals, particularly the Great Panathenaia and the City Dionysia. This includes allied religious participation in rituals and dictation by Athens of the offerings to be made by various states. Lazar acknowledges the limitations of the fifth-century epigraphic sources and uses both later fourth-century epigraphy and evidence in Thucydides in response. Lazar argues that allies would have engaged with Athenian honorific culture through the festivals as spectators to the awarding of honours for foreigners and allies.

The discussion moves on to look at festival attendance by individual allied representatives and the interactions between them and resident Athenians, and, furthermore, how these festivals aided negotiations through networking and the ways in which they encouraged allied reception of Athenian culture. Finally, Lazar contemplates how allies may have felt during their attendance at these occasions and questions whether they would have identified with Athenians through shared religious belief. Overall, the chapter concludes that allies shared in various aspects of Athenian festivals as spectators and participants, and that festivals provided opportunities for “inter-polis elite networking en masse” (p. 108).

The final three chapters are regional studies of three distinct areas: the North Aegean, the island of Rhodes, and the Hellespont, Bosporos, and Asiatic Propontis in northwestern Anatolia. Each study analyzes how Athens adapted its negotiations to suit the individual geopolitical regions, the existing allied communities, and those powers that lay beyond the reach of the Athenian empire, such as the Thraco-Macedonians. Further discussion examines the responses of the regions to these interactions and the ways in which Athenian and local power structures adapted to one another. Again, the importance of the network of elite negotiators in engaging with those both in and out of the empire is highlighted. Overall, the conclusions drawn from the studies are that Athens took a “light touch” approach to these three regions, utilising allied communities to exploit commercial opportunities in areas beyond their control, and encouraged compliance through negotiation and allowances for local variations. However, Lazar points out that Athens was ready to directly intervene and establish control by force when it deemed it necessary or advantageous. The first two of these chapters are founded primarily on epigraphic evidence, though literature in the form of Thucydides and Herodotus is also utilised. The final chapter also includes the local coinage of the allied city of Kyzikos as a source of evidence. Each of these chapters clearly represents a great deal of research and interpretation, and they are interesting stand-alone studies of regional variations. However, the overall conclusions drawn from them are significantly similar, and perhaps two studies would have had the same effect as three. 

In her conclusion, Lazar recaps her arguments from each chapter and draws together the themes of the monograph through a brief discussion of the cities of Keos in the fourth century.

This book takes a detailed look at Athenian power in the fifth century and presents a number of convincing arguments for Athens’s flexibility, two-way dialogue, and negotiation with its allied states, albeit within certain pre-determined parameters. It successfully presents Athens as using a light touch when it suited their purposes, whilst being willing to respond with violence and rigid controls when required or when circumstances allowed for exploitation. By using detailed discussions and definitions of terminology, Lazar makes her arguments clear. There are occasions where the amount of detail contained within the text makes for slightly more challenging reading, but such detail is often required to contextualise the arguments. Lazar’s arguments are based on a solid understanding and examination of her sources, predominantly epigraphic, but also literary. She is, however, acutely aware of the limitations of some of this evidence and compensates for this with other sources where required. In addition, Lazar has a clear understanding of where her work sits within the wider framework of scholarship and critically engages with relevant scholarship throughout. Overall, this book comfortably achieves the aims set out by the author in the introduction and would be a worthwhile read for anyone looking to challenge traditional perspectives on Athenian power and empire. 

Table of Contents

Introduction (1–27)
1. Athenian Decrees, Negotiation, and Negotiators (28–64)
2. Negotiation, Flexibility, and Corruption in the Athenian Tribute System (65–93)
3. Athenian Festival Culture and Allied Integration (94–127)
4. From the Thermaic Gulf to Thasos: Athenian Power in the North Aegean (128–70)
5. Athens, Rhodes, and the Eastern Mediterranean (171–209)
6. Athens, Daskyleion, and Kyzikos: Athenian Power between the Aegean and the Black Sea (210–48)
Conclusion: Revolt and Ruddle on Fourth-Century Keos (249–54)