I do not know, however, on what authority he affirms that this was “the heaviest tax then known in the world;” and that “it caused much discontent among the subject commonwealths.” The latter assertion would indeed be sufficiently probable, if it be true that the tax ever came into operation; but we are not entitled to affirm it.
Considering how very soon the terrible misfortunes of Athens came on, I cannot but think it a matter of uncertainty whether the new assessment ever became a reality throughout the Athenian empire. And the fact that Thucydidês does not notice it as an additional cause of discontent among the allies, is one reason for such doubts.
[535] Thucyd. vii, 29, 30, 31. I conceive that οὔσῃ οὐ μεγάλῃ is the right reading, and not οὔσῃ μεγάλῃ, in reference to Mykalêssus. The words ὡς ἐπὶ μεγέθει, in c. 31, refer to the size of the city.
The reading is, however, disputed among critics. It is evident from the language of Thucydidês that the catastrophe at Mykalêssus made a profound impression throughout Greece.
[536] Thucyd. vii, 30; Pausanias. i, 23, 3. Compare Meineke, ad Aristophanis Fragment. Ἥρωες, vol. ii, p. 1069.
[537] See above, vol. vi, ch. xlix, p. 196 of this History.
[538] See the [preceding chapter].
[539] Thucyd. vii, 31. Compare the language of Phormion, ii. 88, 89.
[540] Thucyd. vii, 34.
[541] Plutarch, Nikias, c. 30. He gives the story without much confidence, Ἀθηναίους δέ φασι, etc.