Wandering Greeks (15 page)

Probably the best option for deportees was to find accommodation in the countryside surrounding the
polis
from which they had been
evicted—in other words, to become what we would call today “internally displaced”—as many Athenians did to escape the rule of the Thirty Tyrants, though whether this was a common ploy at other times is impossible to gauge. The next best option was to seek refuge with others of the same political persuasion in a neighboring
polis
. This would have been feasible, however, only if their political allies were sufficiently powerful and secure to admit them. The decision to provide refuge to a group of exiles, perhaps numbering in the hundreds, would hardly have been uncontroversial, so the deportees needed to make a powerful appeal to the self-interest of their hosts. Aristocrats presumably had the best chance of finding refuge abroad by claiming guest-friendship, an institution that was still very much alive in the classical period (see later,
chapter 7
).

How the deportees were accommodated inside the receiving
polis
is unclear. It might have been possible to distribute a small group of individuals in existing dwellings, but a large group would have had to live in tents or their equivalent, perhaps outside the city walls. If numerous, they posed a serious threat to the political and social stability of the
polis
, not least because they would have imposed a heavy burden on the city's infrastructure. And the longer the deportees remained, the more likely they were to incur resentment—a phenomenon known today, somewhat euphemistically, as “compassion fatigue.”
¹

Unless a preexisting tie existed or unless they could demonstrate their usefulness to the receiving community, their chances of survival were slim. When
stasis
broke out in Arcadia in 370/69, more than 1,400 fled, some to Pallantium, others to Sparta. Those who fled to Pallantium were slaughtered, whereas those who sought refuge in Sparta prevailed upon their hosts to come to their assistance (D.S. 15.59). Another striking example involves a Gallic tribe called the Mandubii, who, after being deported from Alesia, tearfully appealed to Julius Caesar to receive them inside his fortifications, even offering to become slaves
in perpetuity in return for food (
Gal
. 7.78). Caesar responded by setting guards on the ramparts to prevent the Alesians from entering—an example of
refoulement
—namely, the expulsion of a refugee “to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened” (Article 33, paragraph 1, of the 1951 Refugee Convention). In consequence of their rejection, they probably starved to death, and the fact that Caesar does not refrain from mentioning the incident indicates that he expected his readers to accept it as routine.

Whether or not deportees stayed together in one group depended on circumstances. A large group is more able to defend itself, but its size becomes a risk when food is in short supply. At times it would have been in the best interests of deportees to break up into small groups. When the Athenians deported the Samians in ca. 365, some settled on the mainland opposite, some took refuge in cities along the coast of Asia Minor, and others probably served as mercenaries under the Persian king, since Philip II of Macedon had recognized the Athenian claim to their island (D.S. 18.56.7). The few Samian deportees who survived—probably no more than a handful—returned to their homeland a generation later (see
chapter 11
).

Deportees were vulnerable not only to predators, but also to any unscrupulous individual who might want to exploit them. A case in point involves “the thick” as they are called literally, or “men of substance” as we might translate the term, who were expelled from the island of Naxos by their democratic opponents in ca. 500 (Hdt. 5.30). The deportees appealed to Aristagoras, deputy tyrant of Miletus, in the hope that he would support their bid to return home. Sensing an opportunity to advance his own agenda, Aristagoras agreed. He then requested military backing from Persia. The Persian king Darius likewise agreed, and with a similarly self-serving agenda. He calculated that by seizing Naxos he would be able to conquer all the Cyclades and thereby acquire a vital stepping-stone for an invasion of Greece. The Milesians and Persians laid siege to the island, but to no avail, and after four months they departed. The sole benefit that the deportees derived from the expedition was the construction of a wall that their supposed allies built to give them protection.

Conversely, deportees might sometimes exploit those whom they petitioned for help. One such instance of double-dealing on the part of deportees involves the Colophonians, who, after they had been granted asylum by the Smyrnaeans, plotted to seize control of their city (Hdt. 1.150). When their hosts left the city to celebrate a festival in honor of Dionysus, the Colophonians barred the gates to prevent them from reentering. Luckily for the Smyrnaeans, their neighbors came to their rescue, and eventually an agreement was struck by which the Colophonians were permitted to retain control of the city on condition that they restored their property to the Smyrnaeans. The ousted Smyrnaeans were subsequently dispersed among eleven neighboring cities, where they were accorded full citizen rights.

Deportees who found accommodation abroad were viewed with suspicion in wartime. The fourth-century military tactician Aeneas Tacticus recommended that every effort should be made to prevent them from communicating with traitors living within the city, viz from becoming what we would call a “fifth column.” He wrote (10.6):

If there are exiles, issue a pronouncement about what to do in the case of any citizen or foreigner or slave who absconds to them. In addition, anyone who makes contact with any of the exiles or with anyone they send, or who sends a letter to them or who receives a letter from them, should face either danger or a penalty. Both outgoing and incoming letters must be submitted to a board of inspectors before they are delivered (trans. Whitehead 1990, 53).

Aeneas further advised that the state should “draw up a register of everyone who owns more than one set of arms and armor, and not allow anyone to remove arms [that is from the city] or accept them as security” (10.7). Foreign vagrants, styled
talapeirioi
(much-suffering ones), were to be expelled at regular intervals (10.10). To thwart any attempt by exiles to repossess the city, a price should be put on the head of any monarch or general or ruler in exile, with the further incentive that if the assassin died in the attempt the money should be paid to his children or next of kin (10.16). Similar suspicions in wartime were directed
toward economic migrants who lived permanently abroad, as they have been throughout history.

Deportations by the Sicilian Tyrants Gelon, Hieron, and Theron

Mass deportation was a tactic employed by a number of Sicilian tyrants to gain control over territory that they considered vital for their national interests. The Deinomenid tyrant Gelon (r. ca. 491–478/7), who ruled Gela, seized control of Syracuse in 485 at the invitation of some exiles. He then deported the inhabitants of Gela, Camarina, Megara Hyblaea, and Euboea (again not the island but an unlocated town in Sicily) to Syracuse, which even before this development was the greatest city in Sicily. He did so both to consolidate his power base and to counter the rising power of the Carthaginians, who were posing a threat to Greeks in the eastern part of the island.

The first of these deportations involved “more than half” the population of Gela. Our sources do not tell us which half was deported—it may have been either the rich or the poor, since there are arguments for proposing both. The rich half would have helped Gelon to consolidate his political support, whereas the poor half would have provided him with military assistance. The next to be relocated were the inhabitants of Camarina, who had unsuccessfully tried to rebel against his rule. Instead of massacring the prisoners whom he had captured, as was common practice after a siege (see later in this chapter), however, he gave them Syracusan citizenship. After quelling a revolt by the oligarchs of Megara Hyblaea, he again spared the survivors. On this occasion, however, he awarded Syracusan citizenship only to the oligarchs, even though they had led the revolt, whereas the poor were enslaved, even though they were innocent. He followed the same course with regard to the population of Euboea, granting citizenship to the wealthy but enslaving the poor. In each of these four cases we should probably be thinking of deportation rather than transfer, despite the liberal grants of Syracuse citizenship. Gelon also settled over 10,000 mercenaries in Syracuse (D.S. 11.72.3). As a result of all these relocations the population of Syracuse doubled
in size. How he tackled the many problems involved in enlarging the city is unrecorded. Clearly he must have initiated a massive building program to provide housing for the new residents. In addition, he had to introduce measures to increase the food and water supply. All in all, it was an extremely ambitious program. And yet it seems to have succeeded. Herodotus, who was his contemporary, states that Syracuse “immediately grew and flourished” (7.156.2).

Gelon died in 478 and was succeeded as tyrant of Syracuse by his brother Hieron, who likewise used mass deportation to consolidate his power. Unlike Gelon, however, his primary objective was to settle his mercenaries. To this end he deported the populations of Naxos and Catania to Leontini and then some four years later resettled Catania with 10,000 mercenaries. Half of these were drawn from the Peloponnese and half from Syracuse. (Naxos seems to have remained abandoned.) Hieron then renamed the city Aetna in honor of the eponymous volcano that had erupted the year he had come to the throne. He even pressed into service court poets such as Pindar (
Pyth
. 1.60–62) and
Bacchylides (fr. 20C Campbell) to commemorate the city's refoundation, and he commissioned Aeschylus to write a play titled the
Women of Aetna
, which the Athenian playwright duly performed in Sicily (
Vit. Aes
. 8–11). The unpalatable fact remains that the resettlement of Catania involved the displacement of a large number of the indigenous population, for whom it was little short of a catastrophe. According to Diodorus Siculus, Hieron's primary motivation was self-interest: he wanted a loyal base of supporters available in an emergency and to be heroized as Aetna's oikist after his death (11.49.1–3).

In 466 Hieron was succeeded by his brother Thrasybulus, who was soon forced into exile owing to his unpopularity and ineptitude. Democracy was now restored to all the Greek cities that had been ruled by tyrants. Furthermore an agreement was reached whereby the mercenaries who had taken up residence in these cities should depart with their possessions and settle in Messenia. As Diodorus Siculus (11.76.6) reports,
“Stasis
and disorder among the cities in Sicily was brought to an end, and the cities, having ejected the forms of government that had been introduced by foreigners, apportioned out their lands in allotments among all their citizens.”

Gelon's contemporary Theron of Acragas (r. 489–73) also employed mass deportation. Discovering in 483 that a number of conspirators in Himera were plotting against him, he slaughtered the guilty ones and replaced them with settlers from abroad. Diodorus reports that these new settlers henceforth lived amicably with those among the Himerans who had not joined the conspiracy (11.48.6–8, 49.3–4)—aptly characterized as “a remarkable example of peaceful coexistence in a century marked by cruel episodes of ethnic antagonism” (Asheri 1992, 151).