DOCSLIB.ORG

Community, to Its in Frogs, a Brief Reference Is Made to Cleon and Hyperbolus, Who of the Ancient Coimentators on Aristonh

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Community, to Its in Frogs, a Brief Reference Is Made to Cleon and Hyperbolus, Who of the Ancient Coimentators on Aristonh otherwise) ot poets in . is the freedom (or Athens to wished. What constraints, legal or:social, explicit or ite what they ot tantasy and icit, existed to limit the dramatists play their critiques the Atheniawillingr mess to again. There is no record of arny legal or other interactions with ag- particular or general of offer grieved individuals outside the theater, as there had been for Cleon. its policies? It is hard to ow how leaders, and muchcommunity, to its In Frogs, a brief reference is made to Cleon and Hyperbolus, who of the ancient coimentators on Aristonh. trust the evidence are now apparently the ace lawsuit-bringers in the Underworld other sources that reter to "decrees." a plays (the scholia) and its, and fines (569-70), and plenty of living individuals are named in passing with Aristophanes and other involving Athenian playwrights and brief mockery and abuse: Cleisthenes (48. 57. 422). Callias contents of their plays. But on the whole it appears thas (428), the Cleigenes (709), Clitophon (967). etc. All ot this appears to be stan- restrictions existed. formal dard comic procedure. But not even against the slippery Theramenes were indeed to or the Comic poets expected reter to topical e (540, 967-70) populist anti-Spartan leader Cleophon (678, and issues, and also to mock prOminent individuals events I504, I532) 1s any serious or sustained criticism mounted. Outside the text of the been a tradition within iambos and comic drama. And wheraalways plays themselves, we are told (again, by the that at some a in our Suda) point charge was Aristo- erence is occasionally made sources to actual brought against censOrei. someone , in phanes by (implicithy Cleon) that he was a the form of laws being introduced "foreigner," special forbidding certain t a topics that is, noncitizen, apparently because ot his tamily's connection or types of performance-particularly the by "ridiculing name" with Aegina. This prosecution seems not to have been successful, of individual (onomasti kómôidein) citizens-and whereas the and other too text o "accusations apparently tailed. Altogether, close ex- Aristophanes' plays also contains references to citizens (mainly Cle- amination of all of this evidence, together with a number of other on) reacting vigorously and publicly to being lampooned by him mostly quite unbelievable-remarks in scholia and elsewhere about laws and on stage and thus making a great deal of trouble for the playwright. particular decrees being passed at various points during the fifth the evidence overall is spotty and inconclusive. Indeed, the rules century banning mockery by name completely, leads to the conclusion that Cleon's attacks on may well have changed at different times. Aristophanes were probably not based on any law about or Here is what we can reconstruct with a fair particular comedy festival invective, but (briefy) degreeof were simply an infuriated to In his earliest Aristo- attempts by victim find some recourse certainty. plays, especially Babylonians (426), on the basis of general social norms of had attacked Cleon. He mentions this in Achar- decency. Aristophanes gen phanes virulently had a erally very free hand to criticize whom he wished. nians (425), stating that Cleon had retaliated: "Because of last year's comedy, he dragged me before the Council and slandered me (die the and made a . In balle) up bunch of lies. "(Ach. 378-80). follow Athenian Politics, the War and Frogs ing year his Knights (424) was a full-blast attack on Cleon from start to finish. he Athenian But two years later, in Wasps (422), he states (1284-91) that political system was a direct democracy-the first Cleon had in history, the whole "bitten" him quite severely and "caused him| alotu involving citizen body of 30,00o to 40,000 nmen. Then as trouble" so that he (Aristophanes) had recently made some kmd ot now, not all members of the dêmos ("people") he saw to concession or compromise with him (1290o)-mainly becausc always eye eye with one another about policy, about their 9).No leaders, about the had not found interpretation of what itself should anyone else to stand up on his behalf (1286-89). "democracy" foes not really entail, even about whether or not it after made sense at all as a long this, Cleon was killed in battle, and Aristophanes olitician political system. Athenian were volatile and appear to have politics often violent. engaged so fiercely with any particular po Aristophanes and His Athenian Audience 37 36 ARISTOPHANES' FroGS the Cleisthenic democracy had first been Between 508 (when of over a around the Helles- and the performance rogs just hundred Aegean and especially introduced) years presence throughout the several extremes of sIC since this was the means of had experienced to be as strong as ever, later, the Athenians and pont continued aboutout their city and its constitut and other crucial supplhes and despair, access to nmuch of Athens grain failure, optimism securing and disastrous expedition to Sic1ly eight back with pride to the and men lost in the Athenians looked nostalgia . of The ships and month month. their briet a vivid by and Salamis (480), to period ofco-le ad- previously were still memory; Marathon (490) years that a the Athenian lived with the reality Spartan- world with >parta (1n early 460s), and to every Greek to day by day, Attica. of the on the northern of ership fortress sat in Decelea edge ot increasing domination over the la decades occupied orchards, and their subsequent large to the fields and the "Delian League'"y out raiding parties ravage of (originally , i.e., sending the confederation their "alhes" both agriculture and travel throughout which came severely curtailing islands and cities ot the Aegean under their fields, work- the many Thousands Athenians whose homes -house, which mas region. of the to 440-decades during the demes Attica had been control during 460s mag- in one of the rural of were built shops, shrines lay on the being and visitors in the cen- new Acropolis last years cooped up city nificent temples living most ofthe twenty-tive the and admire the monuments else in the to Athens to watch plays in the Piraeus, or temporary focked ter of Athens itself or port of and self-contidence were thus based both corridor land between the Athenian self-image housing constructed in the narrow of with the ran between Athenians' military successes-along freedom defensive walls (the Walls") that on the past two parallel "Long on their and fear had been endemic and independence that these guaranteed-and continuing them. Overcrowding, deprivation, long Persian Athens had become cultural preeminence. Since the Wars, to Athenian life. torce over 100 artistic hub of the Greek world summer an Athenian of unquestionably the intellectual and Just the previous (406), a built for all of Greece" Thuc. won a critical sea-battle over Spartan navy (largely (as Pericles claimed, the "school (paideusis) ships had islands near Lesbos (Xen. the time however, much had changed-mostly for from Persian funding) off the of Arginusae 2.41).By of Frogs, several collective this victory was in the worse, in terms of material comforts, self-confidence, Hell. 1.6.24-38). Inspirational though the immediate current a defeat would have spelt and military outlook-and opinions differed radically about respects, since probably means which it was achieved, and its political and leadership. Much of the empire (or the end of the war, the by policies, prospects, tor controversial and in some demoral1zing "allies") had been lost, forever. Athens was hated by a high propor- aftermath, were ways clear the text of tion of the other Greek city-states. The Persiansalways likely to be the Athenian population at large, as is made very by a decree a major player in Greek politics given their much greater financial Frogs. Before the battle, the Athenians had passed offering but even freedom and resources and centralized and better organized foreign poicies- not only citizenship to metics and foreigners service. Slaves to slaves who would volunteer for were now paying close attention to the task of helping the Pelopon- citizenship any of the official Athenian war ettort (in con- nesians build an effective navy, a task which, if successful, inevitably were not normally part where the were rou- spelled defeat for Athens. Several of the most talented, or most rea- trast, for instance, to Roman practice, galleys decree was an sonable and of the manned slaves and convicts); so this sensible, Athenian politicians had died, or were in tinely by exile. trom usual and not every Athe- Consensus on anything was hard to achieve. extraordinary departure practice, In of a extension of their jealously guarded early spring 405, the Athenians were in the twenty-sixth nian felt that such sweeping of an had the battle of Arginusae year agonizing and seemingy never-ending war.Their rights of citizenship was justified. Nor was in empire Athenian had tatters, with only the island of itself been an success. Twenty-five ships large Samos still a loyal and unmitigated significant ally in the war effort. Yet the had lost seventy-five), and thousands of need for a powerful naval been lost (the Spartans 38 ARISTOPHANES FROGS Aristophanes and His Athenian Audience 39 the biggoei in seasprobably had drowned stormy loss of crewmen of the Pelo Athenian campaign Peloponnesian ar, in any single a similar to what we tind in F'rogs: the Athe life In the attermath,aftermath, somsome said play) conveys message Sicilian expedition. from the that nian democracy ("the people") needs to be selective, yet inclusive apart the fieet were to blame for commanding failin to generals and well-integrated.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Clitophon's Challenge and the Aporia of Socratic Protreptic* Teruo Mishima
    Clitophon’s Challenge and the Aporia of Socratic Protreptic* Teruo Mishima Before I discuss the text in detail, I would like to briefly sketch the main line of arguments in the Clitophon which I am going to take up, just for the sake of anamnēsis of the readers : In the opening scene Socrates speaks to Clitophon in the third person and tells him that he heard from somebody else that Clitophon, in his conversation with Lysias, has criticised Socratic diatribai (pursuits), whereas he has lavishly praised his synousia (association) with Thrasymachus. Taking Socrates’ words as a sort of disguised criticism or complaint, Clitophon answers that the story was only half true, because although he did on the one hand criticise Socrates, he also on the other hand highly praised him. Then, he explains to Socrates why he must take such an ambiguous attitude towards him. In the first half of his speech he focuses on the aspect of Socratic teaching which he admires unreservedly, namely Socrates’ protreptic speech towards virtues. Here he refers to a lot of Socratic dicta which remind us of well known passages in the early dialogues of Plato. By contrast, in the latter half Clitophon explains where his deep frustration with Socrates lies. He says that, being already converted by Socratic protreptic and resolved to pursue virtues, what he expects now from Socrates is “what comes next”, that is a detailed account of the essence of virtues to be acquired and a piece of concrete advice on how to acquire them. But to these - Clitophon complains - neither Socrates’ company nor Socrates himself gives any convincing answer.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prosecutors of Socrates and the Political Motive Theory
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 2-1981 The prosecutors of Socrates and the political motive theory Thomas Patrick Kelly Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Intellectual History Commons, and the Political History Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Kelly, Thomas Patrick, "The prosecutors of Socrates and the political motive theory" (1981). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2692. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2689 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Thomas Patrick Kelly for the Master of Arts in History presented February 26, 1981. Title: The Prosecutors of Socrates and The Political Motive Theory. APPROVED BY MEMBERS OF THE THESIS CO~rnITTEE: ~~varnos, Cha1rman Charles A. Le Guin Roderlc D1man This thesis presents a critical analysis of the histor- ical roles assigned to the prosecutors of Socrates by modern historians. Ancient sources relating to the trial and the principles involved, and modern renditions, especially those of John Burnet and A. E. Taylor, originators of the theory that the trial of Socrates was politically motivated, are critically 2 analyzed and examined. The thesis concludes that the political motive theory is not supported by the evidence on which it relies. THE PROSECUTORS OF SOCRATES AND THE POLITICAL MOTIVE THEORY by THOMAS PATRICK KELLY A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in HISTORY Portland State University 1981 TO THE OFFICE OF GRADUATE STUDIES AND RESEARCH: The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Thomas Patrick Kelly presented February 26, 1981.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Athenian Democracy.Pdf
    Rethinking Athenian Democracy A dissertation presented by Daniela Louise Cammack to The Department of Government in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Political Science Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts January 2013 © 2013 Daniela Cammack All rights reserved. Professor Richard Tuck Daniela Cammack Abstract Conventional accounts of classical Athenian democracy represent the assembly as the primary democratic institution in the Athenian political system. This looks reasonable in the light of modern democracy, which has typically developed through the democratization of legislative assemblies. Yet it conflicts with the evidence at our disposal. Our ancient sources suggest that the most significant and distinctively democratic institution in Athens was the courts, where decisions were made by large panels of randomly selected ordinary citizens with no possibility of appeal. This dissertation reinterprets Athenian democracy as “dikastic democracy” (from the Greek dikastēs, “judge”), defined as a mode of government in which ordinary citizens rule principally through their control of the administration of justice. It begins by casting doubt on two major planks in the modern interpretation of Athenian democracy: first, that it rested on a conception of the “wisdom of the multitude” akin to that advanced by epistemic democrats today, and second that it was “deliberative,” meaning that mass discussion of political matters played a defining role. The first plank rests largely on an argument made by Aristotle in support of mass political participation, which I show has been comprehensively misunderstood. The second rests on the interpretation of the verb “bouleuomai” as indicating speech, but I suggest that it meant internal reflection in both the courts and the assembly.
    [Show full text]
  • Silencing the Female Voice in Longus and Achilles Tatius
    Silencing the female voice in Longus and Achilles Tatius Word Count: 12,904 Exam Number: B052116 Classical Studies MA (Hons) School of History, Classics and Archaeology University of Edinburgh B052116 Acknowledgments I am indebted to the brilliant Dr Calum Maciver, whose passion for these novels is continually inspiring. Thank you for your incredible supervision and patience. I’d also like to thank Dr Donncha O’Rourke for his advice and boundless encouragement. My warmest thanks to Sekheena and Emily for their assistance in proofreading this paper. To my fantastic circle of Classics girls, thank you for your companionship and humour. Thanks to my parents for their love and support. To Ben, for giving me strength and light. And finally, to the Edinburgh University Classics Department, for a truly rewarding four years. 1 B052116 Table of Contents Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………….1 List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………3 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………….4 Chapter 1: Through the Male Lens………………………………………………………6 The Aftertaste of Sophrosune……………………………………………………………….6 Male Viewers and Voyeuristic Fantasy.…………………………………………………....8 Narratorial Manipulation of Perspective………………………………………………….11 Chapter 2: The Mythic Hush…………………………………………………………….15 Echoing Violence in Longus……………………………………………………………….16 Making a myth out of Chloe………………………………………………………………..19 Leucippe and Europa: introducing the mythic parallel……………………………………21 Andromeda, Philomela and Procne: shifting perspectives………………………………...22 Chapter 3: Rupturing the
    [Show full text]
  • The Spell of Achilles Tatius: Magic and Metafiction in Leucippe and Clitophon
    The Spell of Achilles Tatius: Magic and Metafiction in Leucippe and Clitophon ASHLI J.E. BAKER Bucknell University Eros is “…δεινὸς γόης καὶ φαρμακεὺς καὶ σοφιστής…” (Plato, Symposium 203d) Introduction In the beginning of Book Two of Achilles Tatius’ Leucippe and Clitophon, the clever but thus far failed lover Clitophon witnesses a remarkable – and useful – scene. He passes by just as Clio, Leucippe’s slave, is stung on the hand by a bee. He sees Leucippe soothe Clio’s pain by singing incantations (ἐπᾴδω) she says she learned from an Egyptian woman.1 When Clitophon, determined to woo Leu- cippe, finds himself alone with her on the following day, he pretends that he too has been stung by a bee. Leucippe approaches, asking where he has been stung. In reply, Clitophon says, ————— 1 παύσειν γὰρ αὐτὴν τῆς ἀλγηδόνος δύο ἐπᾴσασαν ῥήματα· διδαχθῆναι γὰρ αὐτὴν ὑπό τινος Αἰγυπτίας εἰς πληγὰς σφηκῶν καὶ μελιττῶν. Καὶ ἅμα ἐπῇδε· καὶ ἔλεγεν ἡ Κλειὼ μετὰ μικρὸν ῥᾴων γεγονέναι. (2.7 - “…she would, she said, stop her pain by chanting two spells; she had been taught by an Egyptian woman how to deal with wasp- and bee-stings. As she had chanted, Clio had said that the pain was gradually relieved.”). All Greek text of Leu- cippe and Clitophon is that of Garnaud 1991. All translations are cited, with occasional alterations, from Whitmarsh 2001. I want to give special thanks to Catherine Connors for her insightful comments throughout the drafting of this paper. Thanks too to Alex Hollmann and Stephen Trzaskoma for feedback on earlier versions of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Classical Studies
    s View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Illinois Digital Environment for Access to... Andron and the Four Hundred GEORGE PESELY Shortly after the fall of the Four Hundred in 411, the Athenian Council of Five Hundred resolved to prosecute Archeptolemos, Onomakles, and Antiphon for treason. The motion was proposed by Andron.' Most scholars have identified this Andron with the father of Androtion, the fourth-century politician and Atthidographer.^ For those who believe that Androtion was a major source of historical information for the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia? Andron assumes a role of some significance as a shaper of his son's supposedly "moderate-conservative" political ideology and as a possible supplier of information about the oligarchic movements of late fifth-century Athens. This view of Androtion' s political outlook has recently come under attack, notably from Phillip Harding,'* and I have considered elsewhere the question of whether Aristotle used Androtion' Atthisr' Here I propose to examine three points: Was the Andron of the ' The text of the decree is given in ps. -Plutarch, Life of Antiphon, in the Vitae Decern Oratorum = ps.-Plut. A/or. 833e-f, along with the verdict (834a-b). ^ E.g. H. Bloch, "Studies in Historical Literature of the Fourth Century B.C.," HSCP, Suppl. 1 (1940) 352; C. Hignett, A History of the Athenian Constitution (Oxford 1952) 12; G. E. M. de Ste. Croix, "The Character of the Athenian Empire," Historia 3 (1954/55) 27 n. 1; E. Ruschenbusch, "OATPIOZ OOAITEIA: Theseus, Drakon, Solon und Kleisthenes in Publizistik und Geschichtsschreibung des 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Euanthes and the World of Rhetoric in Achilles Tatius' Leucippe And
    Euanthes and the World of Rhetoric in Achilles Tatius’ Leucippe and Cleitophon KATHERINE A. MCHUGH The University of Edinburgh In Book Three of Achilles Tatius’ Leucippe and Cleitophon there is an ekphrasis of a painting, one of three within the entirety of the novel. The description takes place after the protagonists’ arrival at Pelusium, as they happen upon the Temple of Zeus and come across “double images” (εἰκόνα διπλῆν, 3,6,3) which have been signed by the artist Euanthes (3,6,3).1 The main aim of this article is to consider the name of this artist, as opposed to the painting itself; it seeks to prove that Euanthes was not a real figure, but a name created by Achilles which is imbued with rhetorical references in keeping with the intellectual climate of 2nd Century AD Greek literature. The name Euanthes and its possible rhetorical connotations will be explored in conjunction with a detailed consideration of Achilles’ use of ekphrasis throughout Leucippe and Cleitophon and his interest in rhetorical edu- cation in order to assert that some of the author’s playful in-jokes have been un- derstudied, and that they can provide us with a clearer picture of how the author strives to appeal to his reader; that is, a reader who is steeped in a rhetorical edu- cation himself. The article also considers the other two ekphraseis of paintings in Leucippe and Cleitophon (which occur in Books One and Five) in order to aid with an understanding of Achilles’ use of the rhetorical technique and how sig- nificant rhetoric is to his novel as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Clitophon and Socrates in the Platonic Clitophon
    Ancient Philosophy 32 (2012) ©Mathesis Publications 1 Clitophon and Socrates in the Platonic Clitophon Christopher Moore The Clitophon shows us a man similar to Socrates in analytic skill, social ease, frankness, and avowed interest in justice. He praises Socrates for bringing people to desire to be just, but criticizes Socrates for not helping them be just, the object of their desire. H gives his experience as an example: having listened to Socrates he desires justice, but does not know how to be just. Readers have often accepted both the cogency of and warrant for Clitophon’s criticism. But details of the dia - logue undermine both. Its characterization of Socrates shows that desiring to be just, considered robustly—recognizing one’s ignorance, listening to other views, and trying to learn about the good—is much the same as being just, and so Socrates cannot be faulted for merely inculcating the desire. And though Cli - tophon has heard Scorates speak and is interested in justice—especially in find - ing some apt formula—he has not listened closely to Socrates, and therefore has not allowed himself to be brought fully into desiring to be just. Therefore, he fails, both theoretically and personally, to understand Socrates’ efforts, and so his criticism fails too. The dialogue begins with Socrates reporting a rumor. He heard that Clitophon disparaged their time together but raved about his time with Thrasymachus. Cli - tophon calls this rumor mistaken. Far from disparaging their time together, Cli - tophon says, he lauded much about Socrates. He asks leave to speak frankly. He wants to give a fuller report about what he actually said to Lysias, the source of the rumor.
    [Show full text]
  • Leon and Timagoras: Co-Envoys for Four Years? Mosley, D J Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1968; 9, 2; Proquest Pg
    Leon and Timagoras: Co-envoys for Four Years? Mosley, D J Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1968; 9, 2; ProQuest pg. 157 Leon and Timagoras: Co-envoys for Four Years? D. J. Mosley N HIS SPEECH against Aeschines, II€pt rijs 7Tapa7Tp€U/3€las, Demos­ I thenes asserted (19.191) that in bringing a charge against his former colleague on the embassies to Macedon in 346 he was doing nothing unprecedented, for even Leon, he said, had denounced his fellow-envoy Timagoras on their return from Persia in 367 al­ though they had been fellow-envoys (aVf.L7TE7Tp€U/3€VKWS) for four years. The prosecution of Timagoras is mentioned elsewhere,! but no­ where else do we find the statement that he and Leon served together for four years. Perhaps Demosthenes' statement ought to be dis­ missed as an unwarranted assertion, but it has been defended, and the circumstantial evidence which may be of interest has not been sufficiently discussed. In the first place it appears strange in a world where there were no permanent extra-territorial diplomatic agencies and where envoys were chosen to go on specific and individual missions that an envoy should be described as having been the colleague of another for four years. From Xenophon's account (Hell. 7.1.33ff) it is plain that the one mission which occasioned the accusations was of limited duration and was confined to 367. Leon and Timagoras are not known to have fulfilled any other specific mission to Persia or to any other state before 367. Grote, who attempted to combine the accounts of Demosthenes and Xenophon,2 pointed out that four years before the episode of 367 occurred the battle of Leuctra and the renewal of the King's Peace; and he supposed that the significant four years were those from 371 to 367 in relations between Athens and Persia.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato and Socrates
    Book Notes Plato and Socrates CHRISTOPHER ROWE Simon Slings’s Plato: Clitophon 1 has an introduction of 234 pages, a new text with facing translation (pp. 240-59), 72 pages of commentary (in a smaller font), two short appendixes, bibliography and indexes. It is a fuller treatment than this tiny text has ever received, and probably will ever receive; some might say that it also fuller than the Clitophon deserves, but if they did, they might well change their mind afterinspecting the volume itself, which covers amultiplicity of issues whether grammatical, syntactical, historical, philosophical, or more generally interpretative in meticulous detail, providing a mass of material that will bene t (or at any rate interest) anyone working on the Platonic corpus and/or fourth cen- tury Greek literature. The Commentary in Plato: Clitophon is not quite, as its dust-jacket claims, ‘the rst ever to be published in English’: the volume as a whole is still, as Slings says, recognizable as A Commentary on the Platonic Clitophon , his doctoral dis- sertation, privately published in 1981 (he generously sent me my copy years ago, in response to a letter out of the blue). One of the major di erences is obvious from the change of title: ‘... I now feel that the grounds for my doubts [about the authenticity of the Clitophon] are rather weak, and I have no compunction in presenting this revised version as Plato: Clitophon ’ (pp. x-xi). 2 But Slings is at 1 S.R. Slings, Plato,Clitophon. Edited with Intr oduction,Tra nslationa ndComment- ary by S.R.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Xaphz Aiteah0en: Biography of a Fourth-Century Athenian Strategos
    XAPHZ AITEAH0EN: BIOGRAPHY OF A FOURTH-CENTURY ATHENIAN STRATEGOS By RICHARD WAYNE PARKER B.A., The University of California, Santa Barbara, 1973 M.A., The University of California, Santa Barbara, 1978 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY . in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Classics, Faculty of Arts) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1986 <£> Richard Wayne Parker, 1986 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. CLASSICS Department of The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date -7Q ^ ii ABSTRACT Khares of Angele was an Athenian military magistrate and mercenary soldier for over forty years in the mid-fourth century B.C. For two decades between the outbreak of the Social War and the battle of Khaironeia he was Athens' pre-eminent military leader. The ancient sources dealing with this era of Greek history mention him with great frequency and his role in the events of his times provoked strong comments and vivid portraits from contemporary writers.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation
    DISSERTATION Titel der Dissertation „Studies in the Prosopography of the Four Hundred Oligarchy in Athens 411 B.C.” Verfasser Nikolaos Karkavelias angestrebter akademischer Grad Doktor der Philosophie (Dr. phil.) Wien, 2014 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 792 310 Dissertationsgebiet lt. Studienblatt: Alte Geschichte und Altertumskunde Betreuer: ao. Univ.-Prof. Doz. Mag. Dr. Herbert Heftner Contents Acknowledgements 3 Abstract 4 Introduction 5 Alexicles 25 Andron 42 Archeptolemus 57 Aristarchus 79 Aristocrates Skelliou 89 Cleitophon 124 Dieitrephes 147 Laispodias Andronymios 162 Melesias 178 Onomacles 181 Phrynichus Stratonidou Deiradiotes 188 Theramenes Hagnonos Steirieus 250 Thymochares 272 Appendix 1: Was Hippodamus of Miletos Archeptolemus father? 279 Appendix 2: The prytany and archon year of 412/11 295 Appendix 3: The chronology of Peisander’s mission to Athens re-visited: Thucydides 8.53-54 297 Appendix 4: εύθύς in Thucydides 316 Appendix 5: Beyond the Four Hundred 317 Afterthought: The social origin of the known members of the Four Hundred and their motives for joining the movement 319 Bibliography 324 Vita 354 2 Acknowledgements I am extremely grateful to Dr. Christos Zapheiropoulos for his warm support and encouragement back in 1997 to undertake the long project that this thesis has proven to be. During my studies at the University of Vienna I was fortunate enough to attend classes of professors Fritz Mitthof, Thomas Corsten, Bernhard Palme and Walter Pohl; they became my mentors and guides to the marvellous world of antiquity and I very much thank them for this unforgettable experience. I am deeply indebted to my supervisor Herbert Heftner for the enthusiastic welcoming and all the unconditional support and help which he so lavishly has offered to me all these years.
    [Show full text]