Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
14
0.Introduction
Cconstitutionalstructure)
,restrictedtoacommonassembly.Fromthattimeon,the
decisionsaboutthesymmachy)sparticipationinSparta)swars(andmostprobably
aboutendingthewars)requiredtheconsentoftheassemblyofallies.
7
Temem-
bersofthesymmachyacquiredtherightofrefusaltoparticipateinSparta)sof-
fensivewarswiththirdpartiesiftheallies)participationhadnotbeenapprovedby
themajorityoftheassemblyofalliancemembers,witheachallycastingonevote.
Sucharesolutionwasbindingforeveryone,withthereservationthatahindrance
ofreligiousnaturecouldexcuseparticularalliesfromcompliance.Ifthedecision
tostartawarwasmadethroughavote,thecommandofmilitaryoperationslay
entirelywiththeSpartans.Teintroductionoftheinstitutionoftheassemblyof
alliesbroughtaboutthedistinctionbetweenthepermanentallies,orthemembers
oftheCPeloponnesianLeague)
,andtheoccasionalallies,whoremainedoutsidethe
structuresofthesymmachy.Atleastfromtheendofthesixthcentury,theSpartan
symmachycanbeconsideredaBündnissystem,butnotaStaatenbundoraleague
(whichdoesnotdiscouragethepromotorsofsuchconceptionfromusingthe
convenientnamesCPeloponnesicherBund)orCPeloponnesianLeague)
,seeabove).
Tismodelremainedalmostunchallengedintheliteratureuntilthe1990s;
almost,becauseoftwodissentingvoices.TefirstobjectionwasthatofHans
Schaefer,astudentofHelmutBerve,whoputforwardahypothesisofaCpre-
political)characteroftheSpartansymmachywithinhissystematicpresentation
ofthetheoryofinterstaterelationscontainedinhishabilitationthesispublished
in1932.ForSchaefer,aslateasthefhcenturythesymmachywasmerelyakind
ofephemeralCagonisticbrotherhoodinarms)(
agonaleKampfündnis
),actualised
onlyincaseofarmedconflict.Correspondingly,theSpartanleadershipwasan
Cagonistichegemony)(agonaleHegemonie)basedonSparta)sprimacy(Prostasie),
7
TeradicaldiferencebetweenthestanceofLarsen,whowasanextremeCconstitutional-
ist)
,andtheCanti-constitutionalist)Kahrstedtisonlyapparent,foreventhelatteracknowledged
theexistenceofakindofaconstitutionfortheleague,onlytohimitconsistedmerelyinthe
bondsbetweenSpartaandparticularallies([1922]81-82).Kahrstedt)santi-constitutionalism
wasinconsistent,asthescholarrecognisedatleastoneconstitutionalrule,namelytheexistence
oflegalfoundationsoftheassemblyofallies(p.92).ItwasalsoKahrstedtwhoputforwardthe
mostrigid,legalistimageoftheSpartansymmachy.Busolt&Swoboda(1926)spokenotof
aconstitutionbutofBundesrecht,bywhichtheyunderstoodboththeresolutionsoftheassembly
ofalliesandthetreatyprovisions.Someamongtheconstitutionalistsseeintheeventsof504the
momentwhentheconstitutionofthePeloponnesianLeaguewascreated,whileothersclaimthat
itisonlyfromthismomentonwardsthatwecanspeakaboutthePeloponnesianLeagueatall.
Tis,however,isratheraquestionofnomenclature,sinceitisotherwiseuniversallyacknowl-
edgedthattheSpartansymmachyhadexistedbefore504,andthisyearwasthemostimportant
turningpointinitsfunctioning.