Episode 51. How Trade Chokepoints Forged Greek Power

Imagine needing five calm months to feed your entire city—and watching enemies line up along the only two gates you can use. That was Athens. With thin soil at home and hungry mouths at scale, we leaned on silver from Laurium and the labor that mined it to build triremes, hire sailors, and wrest control of the Aegean, the Hellespont, and the Bosphorus. Our survival hinged on turning wealth into ships and ships into grain, while rivals tried to shut the door.

We unpack how grain dependence shaped Greek politics, from Megara’s footholds at Byzantium to Themistocles’ bold decision to invest a silver windfall into a navy that could outmaneuver Persia. Marathon, Salamis, and Plataea get fresh context as logistics victories as much as battlefield triumphs. We explore the Delian League’s creation, its sacred treasury and public audits, and the uncomfortable truth that Athens’ transparency relied on coercive systems—including enslaved auditors—before the league’s funds and fleets morphed into an Athenian empire.

The story doesn’t stop at strategy. We track the social pivot from part-time hoplites to professional sailors, how price controls and grain regulations stabilized the city, and why a blockade could break Athens faster than a breach in its walls. From plague and the Thirty Tyrants to Theban resurgence and Macedon’s advance under Philip, the map keeps moving—but the lesson stays put: chokepoints decide futures. Along the way we confront the moral costs—slavery, exposure, tribute—and the civic experiments that still echo, from audits and accountability to the limits of direct democracy under pressure.

Join us for a clear, fast-paced guide to how trade routes, silver, and statecraft built Athenian power and then unraveled it. If this deep dive into ancient political economy hits the mark, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review so more curious minds can find us.

Transcript

Setup: Greeks, Trade, And Conflict

SPEAKER_00 0:02

I am Mike D. This is the History of Money Banking and Trade Podcast. My goal is to expand your knowledge of the history and evolution of trade along with money banking and credits from ancient civilizations to present-day market innovations. The ancient Greeks could be viewed as cousins who were sometimes close family and in other periods were at each other's throats. This dynamic molded and shaped the various Greek city-states. Some cities were able to thrive as they could take advantage of economies of scale through cooperation with fellow Greeks on the mainland and with fellow Greeks in far-off colonies. But also, the conflicts that the Greeks were often involved in meant that the cities would need to develop defensive and offensive measures, which therefore stimulated their local economies through massive state investments. But also, their survival often hinged on their ability to innovate or at least adapt to the latest technologies. This is nothing new in war, as conflict has always had a major effect on engineering and innovation. Look no further than both world wars and then the subsequent Cold War as recent examples. Much of their cooperation and conflict comes back to the fact that trade was in their lifeline. Without trade, the people faced the real threat of famine. Therefore, they had to import much of their food supplies and other materials from abroad. This meant that they would need cooperation with people in faraway places, whether that cooperation was voluntary or not. In addition, each city-state was essentially in the same predicament, except for maybe the Macedonians. However, their southern Greek cousins didn't even consider them Greek to begin with. Even though they were adept at cooperation, much of the history of ancient Greece had documented stories of continuous wars or conflicts waged between the various city-states. This included the cities and their colonies between Greeks and non-Greeks alike. These wars were able to be funded largely due to their ability to accumulate vast sums of wealth to pay their troops and other investments, and it was thanks to their natural silver supplies in the region and just as important, the vast army of slaves that mined and refined the silver. The institution of slavery in ancient Greece evolved when aristocratic warriors ceased executing prisoners of war and their families. Instead, they figured out that they can enslave these people to boost productivity and their personal wealth. Consequently, a major early source of slaves were captives from conflicts with non-Greeks or the barbarian peoples. The Greeks used this term to denote those who were not Greek, who spoke a foreign language and had a different culture. A distinction that helped justify enslavement by framing them as naturally inferior and outside the bounds of civic equality. It is important to note, however, that slaves originated from diverse backgrounds beyond warfare. Others were born into slavery, or captured by pirates, or even sold into servitude to settle debts, a practice later outlawed in Athens in 594 by Ceylon. Another fact that may or may not be 100% accurate, but has been talked about in many ancient societies, including Athens, was the practice of infant abandonments in the ancient world. According to some, it had been reported that poor families facing hardship would sometimes take a newborn baby, especially the girls, and leave them in a public place like a hillside or a crossroad or even a nearby dump, with the hope or understanding that someone might take it. It appears that girls were exposed more frequently than boys due to the economic burden of a dowry and the higher social value placed on male heirs. Obviously, many of these infants would have died from the elements. However, others were taken. Their fates varied. Some might be adopted into another family formally or informally, but many were raised to become slaves, prostitutes, or even beggars. It wouldn't have been uncommon for the Finders to use this as an opportunity to make a bit of coin by selling the baby to slave traders who gave them food and shelter to be sold later as slaves. In Greece, slavery combined with long distance trade was the economic engine of the region. Since Greece had poor soil, inadequate rain, and didn't have a river system that could bring the alluvial soil and fresh water, they relied heavily on imported grain to feed its population. Long distance sea trade was complex as much as it was dangerous. For example, their trade with fellow Greeks and Carthaginians on Sicily meant that they would need to run the gauntlet of enemies and pirates to export its silver for grains and other goods. Grain supplies destined to Athens and its allies that were coming from the north may have been even more vulnerable. The route to the northern breadbasket in the Pontus weaved through two dangerously confined corridors between the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea. The first was the Dardanals, which was originally known as the Hellespont, which translates to the Bridge of the Greeks, and then through the even tighter Bosphorus Strait. The Bosphorus Strait is north and east of the Dardnaus, with both waterways forming the Turkish Straits that connect the Black Sea to the Mediterranean Sea via the Sea of Mamara. The Dardnaus links the Aegean to the Mamara, and then the Bosphorus links the Mamara to the Black Sea, running through modern Istanbul and dividing Europe and Asia. These straits obviously would have provided a natural choke point that one could use to conquer the sea trade. This is also the region that would represent one of the UK's greatest military blunders when they sent the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps to the infamous land invasion at Gallipoli in 1915. As such, whether it's modern or ancient war, this region has played a vital role in linking up Asian and European interests. This was the region and trade route which Athens depended on for its very survival. Worse yet, turbulent seas and cloud cover meant that the sea route was virtually closed for most of the year. This implied that Athens needed to get its trade done from the beginning of May through the end of September. Therefore, they'd have just five months at best to import most of their food from the region. This was done before the invention of the magnetic compass. So sailing in overcast skies, especially at nights, meant that they were sailing blind. So open water navigation was extremely risky. And since most of the ships were backed by investors, they had a duty to reduce the risk as much as possible. It also didn't help that Athens' arch rival and neighbor, Megara, who was allied with Sparta, founded Byzantium and Chalcedon around 600 BCE. Among other things, they were determined to be the guardians of the Bosphorus. This was well before Athens had become a democracy, but the reforms by Cylon had put Athens on a path towards democracy. After completing his work of reform, Cylon relinquished his authority and traveled abroad for ten years. It was commonly believed he got away from Athens so that the Athenians could not persuade him to repeal any of his laws. Within a few years of Cylon's departure, the old social cracks reappeared, but with some new problems. There were flaws in the new governmental procedures. Some elected officials exploited this, and sometimes declined to resign from their posts. Worse yet, on occasion, important posts were left vacant. Despite his reforms that stopped the debt bondage and allowed ordinary citizens to actively participate in governments, some people blamed Ceylon for their troubles. Eventually, one of Ceylon's relatives, Pisitrutus, ended the various divisions that had developed by force, thus instituting an unconstitutionally gained tyranny. According to Plutarch, Ceylon accused Athenians of stupidity and cowardice for allowing this to happen. But his popularity was justified. Pisatutris' rise to power started when he was the Athenian general who captured the port of Nicaea in the nearby city states of Megara in 565 BCE. This victory may have saved many people who lived in and around Athens because it opened up the unofficial trade blockade that had been contributing to food shortages in Athens during the previous several decades. This type of situation is a common recurrence throughout history. It's not uncommon to see an economic shock due to some kind of food shortage or some other shortage. And some strong person comes into play and says, hey, I can fix your problems, and oftentimes does. So some people feel that it is justified to give up some of your rights or lose a bit of the previous democracy that had been put in place. But oftentimes it's kind of just the opposite. A strong leader comes into play or takes over, sets in massive reforms, and ends up being the destruction of the society. Ultimately, Pisa Chutras was able to fund his rise to power. This was accomplished when he was in fact in exile, as he established connections and exploitation of silver and gold mines in Thrace, which provided the revenue for his return to power in Athens. But this was a personal venture, not an Athenian state-sponsored colonization of the Black Sea coast. While he had control of Athens, Pisotruchus' foreign policy focused on establishing Athenian control over key points that facilitated trade routes, particularly in the Hellespont area, rather than founding new colonies around the distant Black Sea coast itself. This was the first process. He established a protectorate over Delos and Naxos and the Syclades, which provided access to important maritime routes. This was well before Athens had become a democracy. In fact, Pisitruchus began a widespread and aggressive agenda of colonization around the Black Sea, which was designed in large part as a means to fortify their trade routes through the straits. While his foreign policy contributed to food security for his fellow Athenians, his control over Athens had its ups and downs as he assumed his control over Athens and held power for three different periods of time. Then he was ousted from political office and exiled twice during his reign. Before taking command of Athens for the third and final and also longest period of time from 546 to 528 BCE. In the end, his rule is largely characterized by internal reforms, such as land redistribution to poor farmers, infrastructure improvements, including roads and water supply, and the promotion of Athenian festivals and arts. Just like Ceylon prior to him, he encouraged the cultivation of crash crops like olives for export, which boosted the Athenian economy. The problem with olives is they generally only grow once every two years. So in the meantime, he also focused on the pottery industry that was also used for exports. When Pisogetris died in 527 BCE, his son Hippias took over. He continued his father's focus on security and trade and appeared to be liked as Athens continued in its prosperity. However, things changed in 514 BCE when his brother was assassinated. Hippias changed and became very heavy-handed. As such, talks of removal began to be whispered throughout Athens. In 510 BCE, with Spartan help, a group led by Claistones overthrew Hippias, forcing him into exile. Claistones is widely known as the father of democracy for his fundamental political reforms in Athens around 508 BCE, which shifted power from the aristocracy to its citizens. Ceylon had made the initial reforms nearly 100 years prior that were the first steps in developing a democracy. But the fact remains, even his reforms still put the aristocrats at the top of the Athenian political machine. Claistones finally rid them of absolute power. Claistenes also created a system based on geographic units and empowered the citizen assembly and councils, where they wrote the laws and set foreign policy. The system he developed became the blueprint for Athens' direct democracy and also influenced future representative systems internationally. In the meantime, when Hippias was in exile, he went straight to the Achaemenid Persian Empire, hoping to build an alliance with King Darius I. It appears that he promised the Persians control of Athens if they helped him return to power. Apparently, Greek aristocrats had some serious loyalty issues because this was a common practice for exiled Greek aristocrats. The Persians knew this all too well because the aristocrats were often welcomed by the Achaemenid kings with land grants and positions of authority in Persian-controlled Asia Minor. Nearly two decades later, in 490 BCE, Hippias returned with the Persian invasion force. He hoped a Persian victory would lead to his reinstatement as a tyrant of Athens. He served as a consultant and as such advised the Persians to land at Marathon. However, before landing in Marathon in 490 BCE, it's worth noting that by 506 BCE, Athens' navy and army had grown in size and strength, of which they used this to seize the plentiful western coast of the western Aegean island of Eubea from the city-state of Chalcus. This successful acquisition had a twofold effect. For one, it increased its grain supply and completed a maritime superhighway as described by William Bernstein's book, A Splendid Exchange. This allowed Athens to scale up their import operations as they could now sail undisturbed between Pirius and the Hellespont. Nevertheless, no independent state is going to just roll over and allow any state to bully them into taking over trade routes. Accordingly, Pirius fought back on numerous occasions for the next hundred years or so. This caused a massive disruption to the long-distance grain trade into Athens. So you can kind of see throughout Athens' history, even when things appear to be kind of stable, there's always something kind of on the periphery that they have to deal with in one way or another. Because ultimately, Athens could not feed its population. They had to import grains. If not, the city and its surrounding region would face a potential famine. Greece and Attica were sparsely populated after the late Bronze Age collapse, which had occurred sometime between 1200 and 1100 BCE. As the Greek mainland's population rebounded, cities started to get overpopulated in comparison to their food production capacity. Furthermore, as population increases, some sort of organization is required to handle the growth. This organization evolves into a government, which each city, especially Athens, developing their own governments with strict rules and regulations. Citizenship in Athens was restricted to men born to both an Athenian father and Athenian mother. Additionally, only citizens could participate in Athenian democracy. As such, these citizens could speak before the assembly and vote directly on legislation. The system was a direct democracy, meaning the people themselves governed without intermediaries. Prior to Athens becoming a full democracy around 508 BCE, the oligarchs did not have a system of financial accountability. There were no systemic procedures for public scrutiny or auditing of official financial dealings in a way that became standard in the later democracy that had systems of accountability. Their new system required accounts of all Athenian public officers to be subject to audits. This also included priests as well. By contrast, modern nations like the United States are not direct democracies, but representative democracies. Citizens do not vote on laws themselves, instead, they elect representatives who debate and vote on legislation in Congress. This distinction highlights a fundamental difference. In Athens, citizens enacted laws directly, while in the United States, they entrust power to their local elected officials. Women in ancient Athens could not participate in democracy or serve as jurors. They were excluded from voting and holding office. As Athenian democracy was limited to free, adult, native born men with women's roles confined to the household and religious life, though they held a form of citizenship by birth that passed to their children. While they couldn't vote, they had indirect influence through male relatives that participated in religious roles, but they lacked direct political power in the assembly or the courts. Not getting the right to vote for women has almost always been the standard throughout history. New Zealand was the first Western country to grant women the right to vote in 1893. Russia and Canada allowed women the right to vote in 1917, and the UK allowed women that right in 1918, and the US followed in 1920. Despite the fact that women were locked out of the Athenian democracy, their democracy expected that the Athenian men Show up to vote on just about any decision made by the society. In addition, the Athenians voted on military leaders. Therefore, their generals were elected officials. The reason why direct democracies really aren't in play in modern societies is because there are major downsides to direct democracy. It wouldn't be uncommon for a major crisis that needed a vote, but half the citizens either failed to show up to vote or were completely confused as to what kind of action to take. As great as direct democracy might sound, it soon takes on the trappings of an unintelligent, squabbling multitude with no idea what should be done and who should do it. Imagine if the Greeks had social media back then, whose algorithms pump out hateful misinformation designed to cause rage baiting, and then those people then share crazy stuff like QAnon information to get a vote in government matters. It would have been a disaster, just as social media is turning out to be a disaster in political life nowadays. But at least nowadays we don't have direct democracy. George Conlin really said it best when he said, think about how stupid the average person is and realize half of them are stupider than that. And uninformed or poor decision making or even indecision could be destructive. It would not be good to have a heated debate among citizens while enemy troops were on the verge of beating down the doors of the assembly hall. While the Persians weren't necessarily bearing down on Athens at the time, a major debate broke out regarding what to do about the Ionians who were living on the coast of Anatolia. In 499 BCE, the Ionians staged a rebellion against their Persian overlords while they begged their Greek cousins on the mainland for help. The Spartans were further away and flat out refused, since, as far as they were concerned, the Persians posed no direct threat to them. In addition, the Spartans were very concerned that if they sent troops to Anatolia, their homeland would be left undefended. And who knows what the Athenians might do. Athens and the city-state of Eutrea were more cooperative and agreed to come to the Ionians' aid. Athens may have had some ulterior motives besides looking out for their fellow Greeks, because Athens was dependent upon shipments of grains and other supplies from Anatolia. Furthermore, Athens was dead side on revenge with Persia since their aggressions in 514 under King Darius, who had disrupted Greek coastal communities and overseas trade. The Ionians persisted in their rebellion against Persian rule until their defeat in 494 BCE. In the wake of this outcome, the Athenians grew frustrated with the tepid support offered by Greek city-states to the Ionian cause. This sense of failure was sharply reinforced in 490 BCE when Persia launched a direct assault on the Greek mainland itself. So in the past, the Greeks only had to worry about Persia on Anatolia.

SPEAKER_01 25:43

Now they're at their doorstep.

SPEAKER_00 25:53

They were only able to hold off for a week or so before they were forced to submit to their new Persian overlords. And during their struggle, no other Greek state came to their aid. This was in part due to the fact that the Athenians remained confused and indecisive in their assembly halls. Their direct democracy slowed down their decision-making process, and a stalemate ensued as they were unsure what to do. While they were doing nothing, in 490 BCE, Hippius returned with the Persian invasion at the Bay of Marathon, which threatened Athens itself. Athens realized then that they were in trouble and sent for help to rebuff the Persians. As such, they sent emissaries to nearby Sparta to request aid. The Spartans refused the request on the grounds that they were celebrating a religious holiday, which was kind of absurd.

SPEAKER_01 27:01

The Spartans basically said that they had better things to do at the time.

From League To Empire: Controlling Choke Points

Peloponnesian War And Naval Blockade

Collapse, Exile, And Flickers Of Democracy

Thebes, Sparta, And Shifting Hegemons

Macedon Rises And The World Tilts

Closing And Support Links

SPEAKER_00 27:20

While they were outnumbered, the Greek navy, led by Miletiades, weakened their center and strengthened their wings. Therefore, as the Persians pushed forward, they were effectively encircled by their Greek flanks. The Greeks also had heavy bronze armor, shields, and long spears that were far more effective in close quarter combat than the lighter Persian gear. Their fan link formation, combined with the swift charge to minimize arrow exposure, overwhelmed the Persians in hand-to-hand fighting that acted as an ancient tank moving forward. The victory at Marathon boosted Greek morale and confidence, proving the seamlessly invincible Persian Empire could be defeated. This laid the groundwork for future victories. The victory is still celebrated to this very day, as the Greek soldier by the name of Phippides ran about 25 miles from Marathon to Athens to deliver the message that the Persian forces had been beaten battle. As such, we celebrate this victory with the 26.2 mile marathon in events that are held internationally. According to the legend, the messenger was so out of breath that the only words that he shouted to the Athenians was Nikki, Nikki, which in Greek is for victory. You may notice that there is a major similarity between Niki and a certain brand of sneakers called Nike. So yes, Nike did take its name from the Greek word for victory. But if you look at it from a geographic standpoint, Athens was fortunate enough to be built within close proximity to silver mines. They had also built up a massive slave labor force that could extract and purify the silver to create vast sums of coinage. Having immense sums of money and resources is great, but if it's wasted, it does no one any good. Then in 483 BCE, a massive new vein of silver was discovered in the state-owned mines in Laurium. Luckily for Athens, the statesman, Themostocles, pleaded with his citizens that the Persians would be back, and its naval power was Athens' best defense. Themistocles convinced the assembly to invest a surplus into building 200 new warships, which were the triremes, instead of redistributing the wealth back to the citizens. Athens already had a navy, but it was manned by older, slower ships like the Pentaconer. Whereas the Trirem was an advanced warship with three banks of rowers that excelled in ramming maneuvers. These triremes were a superior upgrade. But it wasn't new technology either, as they were developed by the Phoenicians centuries prior. But it was the Greeks, especially the city-state of Corinth, who had first built them in significant numbers around the 7th century BCE. It's also important to note that the Phoenicians had developed these, but one thing the Phoenicians had done is they had basically developed an assembly line on building these. So they can build triremes extremely fast, right? So they had it already pre-established where certain people would work on certain parts of the trireme. It would kind of get passed down to the quote-unquote assembly line, and someone else would assemble their part to it. The Phoenicians and the Carthaginians, for that matter, were able to build triremes extremely fast. And this technology was kind of really passed on to the Greeks in Corinth, and they were also able to build these triremes in quite vast numbers quite quickly. In 480 BCE, Xerxes I personally led the second Persian invasion of Greece at the head of an immense ancient army. After overcoming the legendary Greek stand at Thermopylae, Persian forces proceeded to sack a deserted Athens and then seize control much of the mainland. Their momentum was shattered, however, by a devastating naval defeat at the Battle of Salamis. The following year, a unified Greek force took on the offensive and delivered a final and decisive blow to the Persian army at the Battle of Plataea, conclusively ending the Archaemenid Persian's invasion of Greece. This period of time is also referred to as the start of the classical Greece period, as it generally started around 480 BCE following the Persian Wars and ended with the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE. Though some historians place the beginning slightly earlier, around 500 BCE, with the rise of the Athenian democracy under Claystones. But either way, this is commonly referred to as the start of the classical Greek period. This newly formed democratic process allowed Athens to form the Delian League in 478 BCE. It was designed to be a voluntary military alliance of Greek city-states, led by Athens, primarily to protect against future Persian invasions after the Greco-Persian Wars. The League was designed to provide funds to seek revenge and manage spoils of war. Each member in the League was to contribute ships or money to a common treasury and Delos for a shared naval defense force. Furthermore, accounting practices became a crucial duty as it provided a snapshot of their current assets and was used as a tool for compliance. From its inception, accounting was fundamentally linked to political accountability with a sophisticated system of bookkeeping and public auditing services as a cornerstone to Athenian democracy. The treasury, considered sacred, was housed at Delos under the vigilant supervision of appointed treasurers. Notably, the work of recording and checking public finance was entrusted not only to educated citizens, but it was also entrusted to slaves. In fact, Athenians often preferred public slaves for the roles as comprollers and auditors, as they could be subjected to judicial torture, a legal practice not permitted against free citizens. This entire financial apparatus was overseen by higher magistrates and specialized officials responsible for scrutinizing the public accounts. Some prominent Athenians struggled with this concept of accountability. Aristanes, who lived from 530 to 468 BCE, complained that it was bad to make strict audits. A certain level of fraud was expected and tolerated, with aggressive audits seen as threatening the status quo. In Jacob Sowell's book, The Reckoning, Financial Accountability, and The Rise and Fall of Nations, he included the fact that historian Polybus noted that the clever could always cook the books. So it appears that even though accounting shenanigans are typically viewed as a modern phenomenon, they have likely been present in financial systems since the earliest forms of recording economic transactions. In other words, it's been around forever and will continue. His writings suggest that the challenge of ensuring transparency and preventing fraud is an enduring aspect of financial management. While Athens was secure and safe for now, Athens continued its democratic practice of ostracism. This was a process for exiling a citizen for 10 years, which was designed to prevent potential tyranny by removing an overly powerful or divisive figure, not as a punishment of crime. It was essentially a political safety valve by using pottery shards for voting on a yearly basis. If a person received the most votes, they were banished, though they can return after a decade with their property and rights intact. The man who may have been the biggest reason why they were able to fend off the Persians was the Athenian general and statesman Thermostocles, who had enough political clout that he was able to get Athens to build a powerful navy by using the excess silver reserves as payment. However, the man who saved Athens was exiled through the astracism process around 471 BCE after victories like the Battle of Salamis, which was led by Athenians who feared that he might become a tyrant. Aristocrats and rivals, including the Spartans, orchestrated his downfall, accusing him of treason and complicity with Persia, which is odd because he may have been the main reason Athens fended off the Persians in the first place. Like many aristocrats prior, he fled to Persia, where he was granted governorship by the Persian king Artaxerxes I, living out his final years in honor under his former enemies. Artaxerxes was the son of Xerxes, whom Thermostocles had defeated. Despite being heartbroken and probably angry with Athens, Thermostocles refused to lead a Persian expedition against his native land. The ancient historian Plutarch wrote that when the Persian king eventually commanded him to take the field against the Greeks, Thermostles chose to end his own life by taking poison rather than to betray his country who had betrayed him. This act cemented his legacy not as a traitor, but as a patriot, who, even when cast out by his own people, ultimately refused to help their greatest enemy conquer Greece. His family was later allowed to return to Athens. Around 460 BCE, the Acropolis underwent a massive rebuilding project that lasted about 50 years under the statesman Pericles, transforming it with the iconic structures like the Parthenon, the Proper Leah, and the Erechtion after Persian destruction, showcasing Athens' power with funds from the Delian League. However, having this money kind of led to corruption because in 454 BCE, Athens officially stole the money from all the other members and moved the League's treasury from Delos to Athens using funds for its own city's glory like the Parthenon. It was built with a special chamber called the Opis Thedonymus, which means the back room or treasury at the rear of the ancient Greek temple. This chamber was divided from the original temple as a place for the storage of gold and silver vaults. Athens uses naval power to enforce tribute collection, suppress revolts, and interfere in members' internal affairs, turning allies into subjects. The Italian League was now the Athenian Empire, eventually leading to conflicts like the Peloponnesian War. In 450 BCE, Athens fully implemented a strategy to main control of the crucial sea lanes connecting the Aegean to the Black Sea. This control ensured the steady flow of grain necessary to feed its large and expanding population. In doing so, Athens created a permanent, professional navy, which was a departure from the part-time soldier tradition in the Greek world. Up until then, most Greek city-states, except for maybe Sparta, relied on citizen soldiers, primarily hoplites, who served seasonally or when they were needed for specific campaigns, and then returned to their farms and civilian life. Athens, however, needed to make sure grain was flowing into the region or famine and revolts could quickly take hold. As such, they continued to develop their large fleet of triremes that required constant manning and highly skilled rowers. This ultimately created a path to a middle class life as a large faction of mostly poor citizens signed up to become professional sailors who depended on naval service for their livelihood and were available for year-round service. This fundamentally changed the nature of Athenian military power and society. Prior to this, in Athens, one would have to come from some minimal amount of means to be a hoplite, as being a hoplite meant that you had to pay for your own armor and weapons, as they were citizen soldiers, not a standing army. This tradition held that providing equipment was a sign of civic duty and social status, with wealthier citizens affording more while the poorer ones served as light troops. Their gear, including helmet, breastplate, shield, spear, and sword, were expensive and were often passed down in families and reflected the individual's means, though some cities later provided basic gear. As far as individual costs go, being a soldier was a major investment for the middle class citizen, who was typically either a farmer or artisan. It would have cost anywhere from 50 to 100 drachmas for a full display. Around 20 drachmas were just for the vital shield, which equated to many months of wages or prices of livestock, making them a symbol of status and a substantial personal commitment to warfare. So becoming a full-time sailor made sense if one came from a poor family, as they wouldn't need to rely on expensive gear handed down through the generations, because there wouldn't be any since they were poor. They wouldn't be able to buy any protective equipment or weapons because they were just too poor to afford them, and these were very expensive. So joining the Navy just made sense. They couldn't earn a nice living, get fed. Every day and do their patriotic duty to protect the polis. This was completely unheard of at the time, especially by the Greeks, as being a soldier was always just a part-time job, who was called to duty when the city needed them. Therefore, by 506 BCE, Athens' navy and army had grown in size and strength, of which they were able to use this to seize the plentiful western coast of the western Aegean island of Eubia from the city-state of Chalcus. By 450 BCE, Athens had almost no choice but to enlarge its navy for the sole purpose of protecting their trade routes in the Black Sea region. As such, the Athenian Navy began a continual patrol of its seas, of which they can do now because they had a full-time navy, which other city-states didn't have. Then Athens took this a step even further, as it concluded the naval power in isolation was inadequate to guarantee safety. This strategic imperative to secure its vital maritime corridors from blockade drove the city to establish direct political domination over key choke points along those valuable routes. The Straits of the Aegean, the Hellespont, and the Bosphorus. In addition, it wasn't just Athens that needed to import grain from the Black Sea region. Other cities needed access to those sea lanes, and therefore they needed to ensure they weren't cut off from the choke points as well. Consequently, they needed to contribute men and resources to police them. The only way to accomplish this was through a centrally planned approach composed of like-minded city-states. This development kickstarted the origins of the Athenian Empire. Athens used its muscle to help its friends in the regions of the Aegean and the Black Sea. This was done primarily to fend off pirates patrolling those waters and even land attacks from local barbarians. Now, Athens didn't do this out of the kindness of their hearts. The friends of the Athenians were required to pay tributes and implement tax cuts for Athenian traders through the reduction or outright forgiveness of export duties on grain bound for Athens. There was also a more sinister motive for controlling these shipping lanes, as they could punish its long-term rivals like Sparta, Corinth, and Megara. As Athens grew stronger, they grew bolder. They also established a base at Naptaktos, which was located at the north coast of the Corinthian Gulf near the narrow Strait of Rheon, which commands the western entrance to the Gulf. All maritime traffic, including trade and military vessels bound for Corinth and Megura, which were Spartan allies, had to pass through the strait. Athens seized the port in 456 BCE and settled Mesenoron helots, who had rebelled against Sparta after the Third Mesterean War in 455 BCE. These Mesterians provided a local garrison and recruiting ground for Athenian hoplites, willing to fight their former masters. This turned out to be a great use of resources because during the Peloponnesian War, which started in 431 BCE, the Admiral Formio used the base of Naptaktos to hamper Corinthian trade and confront enemy fleets, winning crucial navy battles such as the Battle of Naptaktos in 429 BCE. So, in the end, this location served two purposes. It allowed Athens to secure trade routes in and out of the region, which ultimately fed its population and soldiers and sailors, and it proved to be a vital choke point against their adversaries. Controlling the various shipping lanes meant that they could effectively manipulate the price of grain. Just as important, this was a time when plagues would just suddenly strike certain cities and regions, which would have resulted in extreme supply shocks. Therefore, Athens' ability to have a certain element of control over grain supplies meant that they could build up a reserve in case of a plague, or if a blockade were to occur, or any other shocks to the supply of grain. These shocks could have included things like a poor growing season in a region that exports grains to Athens. Furthermore, it was made clear to any merchants, whether they were Athenian or foreign, that they better not try to execute a corner of the market or any other manipulative process because the government has strict regulations on the supply and price that was brought into Attica. With the control and regulation of grain supplies, Athens also had to keep a close eye on its neighbors and rivals. Things were pretty quiet, but in 431 BCE, a minor conflict occurred on the coast of modern day Albania between oligarchs. The Democrats on the modern day coast of Albania asked for help from an Athenian ally, but the Athenian ally refused and therefore they turned to Corinth for aid. This in turn angered the ally of Athens. Athens then got concerned that Corinth would ally with Sparta. Next thing they know, a web of alliances that had been built up had triggered the Peloponnesian War, which was a Greek World War. This is not unlike the origins of World War I, a relatively minor incident occurred in Sarajevo when Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated by Gavriel Princep. This triggered the alliances that had been building up since the formation of Germany in 1871, triggering the First World War. Initially, things started out positive for Athens, with early victories over Sparta. At that point, Athens could have negotiated a peace deal from a position of strength. But for whatever reason, they let the war go on. It's sort of similar to Germany's success early in 1914. However, France may not have been in the position or mood to negotiate as they still wanted revenge for the Franco-Prussian War from July 1870 to January 1871, in which France lost El Sas Lorraine. So there were some minor resemblances to World War I, but there were many differences, obviously. By mid to late summer of 405 BCE, the Spartan Admiral Lysander decided the best strategy wasn't attacking Athens directly, but instead attacked the Hellespont, the region that was the source of much of their grain supplies. Athens couldn't produce enough food for its population, so without the importation of grain, the people would just starve. Just as the largest number of grain ships were preparing to head south with their valuable and life-saving cargoes, they had to sail south soon because the sea lanes would be closed as rough weather and overcast conditions would soon dominate the seas. So at exactly the right moment, the admiral fell on the remains of the Athenian fleet inside the Hellespont near Cestos.

SPEAKER_01 52:03

The Spartans sank or captured almost all the Athenian ships and killed thousands of troops.

SPEAKER_00 52:11

By this point, Athens was damaged so severely that Sparta had no need to attack the city of Athens directly. This points to the fact that trade was so vital to Athens that all an enemy needed to do was damage its ships and trade routes so severely that it would be the near equivalent to damaging the city itself. In other words, instead of a land army surrounding a walled city and just starving it into submission, the Spartans and their allies could use their navies and set up a blockade to keep food from entering Athens and its allied cities. This also meant that the Athenian enemies didn't need to waste lives and resources attacking a walled city like Athens. This was a strategy that the British Navy would successfully use over and over. Athens lost and was humiliated, but it was able to retain its independence. However, it had to abandon its remaining naval fleet, it had to tear down its walls and destroy its major port for the city. But worse yet, it was forced to become an ally with Sparta. In the aftermath of Athens' defeat, the democratic institutions that had flourished in Athens was dismantled. In its place rose a puppet oligarchy, which was controlled by just a few landed elites, who in turn were probably controlled by the Spartans, who had an encampment stationed right in the middle of Athens' Acropolis. This ushered in a period that would become known as the time of the Thirty Tyrants. Many of Athens' best and brightest pro-democracy minds left the city and began to form a sort of exiled resistance. These rebels found a home in Attica and were protected by the Thebans who were also unhappy with the heavy-handedness of the Spartans. After a short period of time, the oligarchy, with the support of the Spartans, got wind of this resistance and planned to mobilize in order to purge any of these dangerous democratic-like views that could potentially come back to Athens. The oligarchy was able to crush the resistance, but in doing so, it alienated many of its residents. They in turn organized a pushback against this heavy-handedness, and therefore this allowed some moderate forms of democracy to take hold in the city of Athens. Athens was in a serious state of transition and instability. In fact, it was around 399 BCE that Socrates was persecuted and ultimately executed by Greek authorities. Socrates wasn't known to write anything down, but much of what we get from his teachings comes from his student Plato.

SPEAKER_01 55:28

Socrates was believed to have said that the people should think freely, and of course, this wouldn't work out too well for the oligarchy.

SPEAKER_00 55:38

It was shortly after the death of Socrates that the Spartans decided to take more control of Athens and thereby reduce the oligarchy powers. By 394 BCE, Thebes and Corinth aligned with Athens to take on the Spartans, in which became known as the Corinthian War. Sparta initially held its own and a gigantic stalemate ensued. The irony of this war was that it came to an end because of a truce that was negotiated by the Persians in 387 BCE.

SPEAKER_01 56:21

So the Greek longtime rival was the one that ended the chaos in Greece.

SPEAKER_00 56:30

It wasn't long after the treaty that was negotiated by Artaxerxes II that Athens would join a new alliance known as the Second Athenian League. This would include Athens and a bunch of smaller city-states and the Ionians on the coast of western Anatolia. Athens had learned its lesson because it did not lord over other city-states like it had done in the past. However, because Athens wasn't a dominant figure per se, the alliance was ineffective because certain decisions that needed to be made quickly and decisively were never made. So the alliance was not very effective in its mission. In the meantime, around 371 BCE, a general peace was being hashed out by Athens, Spartans, and the Persians. However, around the same time, Sparta and Thebes were in disagreement of who should be the hegemon in central Greece, which happened to be in the Theban territory. Thebes believed that since this was their territory, they should have the right to rule it as needed. Sparta disagreed and decided to march in and control the region for itself. Thebes was able to put down the Spartan aggression, marking the end of Sparta domination in the region. Once again, it was one of those instances of history whereas if a group of people would have just been happy with what they had, everything would have been just fine. But instead, they reached too far and were utterly destroyed in the process and were never able to regain its former glory. Sparta wouldn't be the same, but they still had some fight in them, and they realized that their best course of survival would be to align with their old-time rivals in Athens.

SPEAKER_01 58:28

So now Thebes was potentially the most dominant player in all of Greece.

SPEAKER_00 58:36

So, as a recap, because this feels kind of like Charlie Kelly trying to explain to Mac about Pepe Silva with his confusing charts, the meme that you may see. During the Peloponnesian War, which lasted from 431 to 404 BCE, Thebes and Sparta aligned against Athens because they viewed Athens as the threat to the regional power. Before Athens could be dominated by outside forces, it faced its biggest threat as a plague of Athens hit from about 430 to 426 BCE. This was a devastating plague that hit shortly after the Peloponnesian War started. This was possibly caused in large part by the extreme overcrowding in the walled city, leading to a massive amount of deaths around a quarter of the population, or an estimated 75 to 100,000 Athenians perished, including the leader Pericles. Symptoms included fever, inflammation, violent coughing, blisters, and extreme thirst. This significantly weakened Athens and caused a societal breakdown in laws, morality, and religious observances, as people focused on short-term pleasures, believing life was temporary. Its exact cause is unknown, but it possibly could have been typhoid fever or smallpox. It's generally believed to have arrived via Athens' port Piraeus from Africa or the east. Therefore, Athens was in a bad position whereas they had to deal with both biological as well as foreign threats. The Thebans fought alongside Spartans and even defeated the Athenian forces at the Battle of Delum in 424 BCE. After the Peloponnesian War, Thebes grew aggrieved with Sparta's policies and became a bitter rival, leading to the Corinthian War from 395 to 387 BCE, in which Thebes allied with Athens, Corinth, and Argos to challenge Sparta's hegemony. Sparta thought they could bully Thebes in the region, which led to Sparta trying to crush Thebes, leading to the Theban-Spartan War from 378 to 371 BCE. However, in the Battle of Lactrua in 371 BCE, a brilliant Theban general overwhelmingly defeated the Spartans, crushing the myth of Spartan invincibility and ending the Spartan dominance in Greece. Thebes became Greece's leading power, but the hegemony was short-lived due to internal conflicts and the rise of Macedon. Thebes took control of the straits near the Black Sea in 360 BCE. However, Athens was able to wrestle away control of the shipping lanes three years later. But just as Athens felt that things would revert back to the good old days, a barbarian, who claimed to be Greek, but the Athenians didn't really think he deserved that moniker, consolidated power in the north. And now, Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great, attacked the Hellespont and then Byzantium. But the Athenians rallied and just barely held on to the shipping lanes from the Black Sea. However, things were just heating up. And Greece and the rest of the known world at the time would be forever altered. If you like what you hear and want to donate to the show, you can visit us at patreon.com/slash history of money banking trade. Or visit our website at money bankingtrade.com. Thank you very much. Talk to you soon.