CIMON (c. 507-449 B.c.), Athenian statesman and general, was the son of Miltiades (q.v.) and Hegesipyle, daughter of the Thracian prince Olorus. Cimon's first task in life was to pay the fine (about £12,000) which had been imposed on Miltiades after the Parian expedition. After winning a high reputation in the second Persian invasion, he served under Aristides with the Athenian fleet and later (477, see Comb. Anc. Hist., vol. v. App. B) became sole commander. His first success was the ex pulsion of Pausanias from Byzantium. Having captured Eion (at the mouth of the Strymon), he expelled the Persian garrisons from the entire seaboard of Thrace with the exception of Doriscus, and, having captured Scyros (470), confirmed his popularity by transferring thence to Athens the supposed bones of Theseus. In 466 Cimon proceeded to liberate the Greek cities of Lycia and Pamphylia, and at the mouth of the Eurymedon he defeated the Persians decisively by land and sea.
The Persian danger was now over, and the immediate purpose of the Delian League was achieved. Already, however, Athens had introduced the policy of coercion which was to transform the league into an empire, a policy which, after the ostracism of Themistocles and the death of Aristides, must be attributed to Cimon, whose fundamental idea was the union of the Greeks against all outsiders (see DELIAN LEAGUE) . Carystus was com pelled to join the league; Naxos (c. 469) and Thasos which had revolted, were compelled to accept the position of tributary allies. In 464 Sparta was in difficulties, owing to the revolt of her Helots. Cimon persuaded the Athenians to send aid, on the ground that Athens could not "stand without her yoke fellow" and leave "Hellas lame." The expedition was a failure, and Cimon was attacked by the democrats led by Ephialtes. The history of this struggle is not clear. The ordinary account is that Ephialtes during Cimon's absence in Messenia overthrew the Areopagus (q.v.) and then obtained the ostracism of Cimon, who tried to reverse his policy. It may be pointed out that when the Messenian expedition started, Cimon had twice within the pre ceding year triumphed over the opposition of Ephialtes, and that presumably the Cimonian party was predominant until after the expedition proved a failure. It is therefore unlikely that, im mediately after Cimon's triumph in obtaining permission to go to Messenia, Ephialtes was able to attack the Areopagus with success. The chronology would thus be : ostracism of Cimon, spring, 461; fall of the Areopagus, summer, 461.
A more difficult question is involved in the date of Cimon's return from ostracism. The ordinary account says that he was recalled after Tanagra (45 7) to negotiate the Five Years' Truce or 45o). Some writers, maintaining that Cimon did return soon after 457, say that the truce which he arranged was really the four months' truce recorded by Diodorus (only). To this there are two main objections : (1) if Cimon returned in 457, why does the evidence of antiquity connect his return specifically with the truce of 451? and (2) why does he after 457 disappear for six years and return again to negotiate the Five Years' Truce and to command the expedition to Cyprus? It seems much more likely that he returned in 451, at the very time when Athens returned to his old policy of friendship with Sparta and war against Persia (i.e., the Cyprus expedition).
Cimon died in Cyprus (449), and was buried in Athens. Later Attic orators speak of a "Peace" between Athens and Persia, which is sometimes connected with the name of Cimon and some times with that of Callias. If any such peace was concluded, it cannot have been soon after the battle of the Eurymedon as Plutarch assumes. It can have been only after the evacuation of Cyprus (i.e., c. 448). There are weighty reasons which render it improbable that any formal peace can have been concluded at that period between Athens and Persia (see further Ed. Meyer's Forschungen, ii.).
Cimon's services in consolidating the empire rank with those of Themistocles and Aristides. He is described as genial, brave and generous. The one great principle for which he is memo rable is that of the balance of power between Athens and Sparta, as respectively the naval and military leaders of a united Hellas. It has been the custom to regard Cimon as a man of little cul ture. The truth is that, as in politics, so in education and attitude of mind, he represented the ideals of an age which, in the new atmosphere of democratic Athens, seemed to savour of rusticity and lack of education.