weakness. But as the determined enemy of the narrow Spartan spirit, he worked mainly in the right direction; and his death at Mantinea in 362 B.C. deprived the Greeks of the only leader capable of dealing successfully with the dangerous man of genius who three years later ascended the throne of Macedon.
To sum up: in this period we find the Greek States much more ready than in the previous one to coalesce into leagues of real political importance. They combine, it is true, only under pressure from without; at first against the Persian enemy, and later against the leading cities which successively convert their own leagues into powerful empires. Leagues, imperial States, and Persian arms and diplomacy, all have their share in wearing out the vitality of the individual cities; the free and self-sufficing πόλις seems to be fading away, and it is hard to see what new political combination can be found to take its place.
3. A new period opens with the growth of the Macedonian power under Philip (359-336 B.C.). We are here chiefly concerned to notice the effect on the City-State, not only of the strength and policy of this new power, but also of the efforts of the Greeks themselves to counteract it.
At the time of Philip's accession the so-called Theban supremacy had just practically ended with the death of Epaminondas. There was now a kind of balance of power between the three leading States, Sparta, Athens, and Thebes, no one of which was greatly stronger than the others; and such a balance could easily be worked upon by any great
