Competition And The Pan-Hellenic Identity Between The Greek Poleis - Essay Example

Competition and the Pan-Hellenic Identity between the Greek Poleis Introduction From the ideas of pure art right into the merit extremes of governance control systems found in democracy as practiced in modern day politics, Greece forever finds its place in modern history as the birthplace of Western civilization, and so to the world at large. A world admired for creating a way of life that went far beyond its borders, with numerous ideas such as the Olympics, basic science, and more so on philosophical thinking still standing in the 21st century, the ancient Greek world also had its share of troubles influenced deeply by politics. And so as people from elsewhere the world over struggled to consolidate governance under single, unified governments, the Greeks adopted liberalized forms of monarchies, oligarchies, democracies and/or tyrannies, with all systems of government borrowing heavily from each other. With a background of the Bronze Age that had divided Greece into kingdoms, each with a demarcated territory and own kings claiming to rule under divine authority, the Greek’s Dark Ages destruction of the hitherto existing political order and the devolution of power to minor officials almost on a tribal structure heralded some form of freedom that the Greeks themselves weren’t prepared to give up for whatever reason, thus, the development of the city-states, or the poleis, as a fundamental political unit in the ancient Greek world (Budin 58). So important were the city-states and their newly acquired independence that even though each had independent governance structures, they all struck a working relationship that could help them ward off the conquest aspirations of other aggressive neighboring empires. Factors that Encouraged Competition between the Poleis As the Greeks slowly emerged out of the dark ages, they expanded their world, developing unique versions of communal engagements within their spheres of influence, known as the polis. A polis was generally made up of a major city and the surrounding countryside lands as buffer zones. Typically, the polis was layered into two: the high city [Acropolis] built on top of a hill, consisting of marble temples in honor of the different gods and goddesses, and the main city located on the flatter surfaces where marketplaces, public buildings, and people’s homes existed. With populations that were much freer than their predecessors, the triumphs and defeats of the city-states were fully the responsibility of the city dwellers, who went ahead to create social identities which differentiated each polis from all others. The practice of polis-specific religious festival on specific dates in the year reinforced the idea of uniqueness among the existing policies, hence drifting them as apart as people with different beliefs (Nightingale 41). Over and above the believes fortified by the freedom that leveraged the peoples’ choices, the city-states had numerous differences that more than encouraged competition among the more than 1000 poles that formed as a result of the crises of the Dark Ages. Athens, for instance, had a democratic form of government, and so were a number of cities that imitated it. Other cities, as alluded above, developed along the lines of oligarchic, tyrannical or aristocratic governance structures, with each city-state striving to defend itself and their existing government from any outside interference. Aside from the obvious differences, the competition was the only assured way of remaining relevant among the great city-states. For several cities, particularly the powerful ones such as Sparta, merging their governance with other city-states only signaled diminished dominance. In many cases, disputes over which side of any two or more cooperating cities would lead alliances and/or take decisions, or simply whether smaller cities considered inferior should obey superior, bigger cities raised the stakes even higher, with bigger ones always harboring aspirations to overshadow all the other shadows. Such was the causal factor of the conflict between Achilles and Agamemnon. The Peloponnesians and Athenians also had their superiority fights over their naval strengths against the Persians, with the former proposing Isthmus of Corinth as Athenians preferred Salamis as the official league’s preventive barrier against the common enemy from reaching their respective cities. City-specific or even personal interests several times came to the fore to prevent any meaning corporation; for this was more of a developmental model for city states against each other: “Accounts of the Persian wars, most probably written in the early years of the Peloponnesian War show that the Greeks allies not only fought against their Persian enemies but jostled among themselves for position come the peace” (Kinzl 512). A time period marked by the danger of conquest by outside forces, it was only fair that each city-state treats the other with mutual respect to keep their freedom, which they so valued, afloat. The competition was, therefore, a way of earning respect from other city-states, which in essence, prevented all others from acting unilaterally on behalf of the other city-states and/or prevent misuse of other's resources in case of an emergency attack. Again, the example of the conflict between Achilles and Agamemnon applies. Centuries later after this conflict, Athens would start treating their allies as subjects rather than as equals: “The policy of Sparta was not to exact tribute from her allies, but merely to secure their subservience to her interests by establishing oligarchies among them; Athens, on the contrary, had by degrees deprived hers of their ships, and imposed instead contributions in money on all except Chios and Lesbos. Both found their resources for this war separately to exceed the sum of their strength when the alliance flourished intact” [Strassler 14]. As Strassler continues to note, that competition would constantly afford the weak and the stronger city states a chance to engage one another, either in strengthening ties against aggressive sister city-states or in asking for assistance in cases of imminent danger, and at least an opportunity to practice, lean and/or share military techniques (13-14). Factors that fostered Pan-Hellenism Although each of the existing poleis had own, unique identities, with differing cultural practices as well as different elements of political governance, such poleis shared a lot of features that always ensured a sense of connectedness between them, with the most common being the language and the broader religious beliefs amongst them. Greeks from all cities shared similar traditions, religious beliefs concerning gods and goddesses of their land; they enriched each other’s architecture and art; and most importantly, many cities as they were, were founded by run-away individuals with “blood bonds” with other founding cities. Perhaps the most important factor that kept the competition on the check, and in a sense played a greater role in fostering the Panhellenic identity among the Greeks was conquest danger posed by the Persians. Indeed, the formation of the Hellenic League consisting of the Greek city-states coming together to defend themselves in Marathon, Salamis, and Plataea finds its origin in the very danger from the Persians; a danger that kept the city-states in touch for any eventuality even in times of peace. It is significant to note that the city-states were not only preoccupied with the sudden attack from the Persians, also from within themselves. The fears contributed to Sparta, for instance, widening their network friendship as large as possible against the Persians and all other alliances that may have existed within; like-minded poleis often made overtures towards one another for mutual protection in case of attacks on friendly allies. The convergence of Greeks at the Pan-Hellenic festivals such as the Olympic and the Pythian Games held at Olympia and Delphi every four years respectively were in themselves landmark events that forever nurtured a sense of common identity among the Greeks (Wohlfarth 40). Participation in these events provided the different poleis opportunities to advertise their successes, and more importantly, to spread unique skills to other city-states. Alongside the Olympics and Pythian Games were the Nemean Games held at Nemea, Isthmian Games at Corinth, both held after every two years. All these common elements motivated an early sense of Panhellenic identity among the Greeks, and thus the formation of alliances that would further identify them as one people. Work cited Budin, Stephanie Lynn. The Ancient Greeks: An Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print. Kinzl, Konrad H. A Companion to the Classical Greek World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2010. Print. Nightingale, Andrea Wilson. Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy: Theoria in Its Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print. Strassler, Robert B. The Landmark Thucydides. New York: Free Press, 2008. Print. Wohlfarth,   John W. Elysium. Bloomington: AuthorHouse, 2001. Print. Read More