ELIS AND HER DEPENDENCIES 19 Hie Eleians. The latter loudly protested against this proceeding, and pronounced the Lacedaemonians as having robbed them of one of their dependencies, contrary to that agreement which had been adopted by the general confederacy when the war began, to the effect that each imperial city should receive back at the end of the war all the dependencies which it possessed at the beginning, on condition of waving its title to tribute and military service from them so long as the war lasted. After fruitless remonstrances with Sparta, the Eleians eagerly embraced the op- portunity now offered of revolting from her, and of joining the new league with Corinth and Argos. 1 That new league, including Argos, Corinth, Elis, and Manti- neia, had now acquired such strength and confidence, that the Argeians and Corinthians proceeded on a joint embassy to Tegea to obtain the junction of that city, seemingly the most 1 Thucyd. v, 31. TJJV ZVV&TJKTJV Trpo^t'povref kv y slprjTo, a t^ovrer gf TOV 'A.TTIKOV 7r6Ae / uoj> KadiGTavTO rivef, ravra e%ovTa<; KOI e^eMeiv, wf OVK laov Ijovref uQiaravTai, etc. Of the agreement here alluded to among the members of the Peloponne &ian confederacy, we hear only in this one passage. It was extremely impor- tant to such of the confederates as were imperial cities ; that is, which had subordinates or subject-allies. Poppo and Bloomfield wonder that the Corinthians did not appeal to this agreement in order to procure the restitution of Sollium and Anaktorium. But they misconceive the scope of the agreement, which did not relate to 'aptures made during the war by the common enemy. It would be useless for the confederacy to enter into a formal agreement that none of the mem- KTS should lose anything through capture made by the enemy. This .fould be a question of superiority of force, for no agreement could bind the enemy. But the confederacy might very well make a covenant among themselves, as to the relations between their own imperial immediate mem- bers, and the mediate or subordinate dependencies of each. Each imperial state consented to forego the tribute or services of its dependency, so long as the latter was called upon to lend its aid in the general effort of the con- federacy against the common enemy. But the confederacy at the same time gave its guarantee, that the imperial state should reCnter upon these suspend- ed rights, so soon as the war should be at an end. This guarantee was clearly violated by Sparta in the case of Elis and Lepreum. On the contrary, in the case of Mantineia, mentioned a few pages back, p. 19, the Mantineiana had violated the maxim of the confederacy, and Sparta was justified in in tcrfering at the icquest of their subjects to maintain the autonomy ofth
latter.
