DOCSLIB.ORG

Spartan Foreign Policy in the Third Century BC Thesis Submitted to The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spartan Foreign Policy in the Third Century BC Thesis Submitted to The Spartan Foreign Policy in the Third Century BC Thesis submitted to The University of Leicester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Andrea Scarpato School of Archaeology and Ancient History 2017 Abstract – Spartan Foreign Policy in the Third Century BC – Andrea Scarpato Spartan foreign policy in the third century BC is a neglected topic of Spartan history. This work explores this issue and argues for Spartan proactive participation in the interstate interactions of the third century BC. In doing so, it explains the reasons which drove Sparta to interact with other states and the extent of such interaction. It demonstrates that decision-making power was distributed between particular Spartan individuals and institutions, and that the changing distribution of power across these networks (to include ephors, gerousia, and kings) had a crucial impact on the articulation of foreign (military and diplomatic expeditions) and domestic (appointment of the Spartan kings) political decisions. As shown in this work, in the formulation of Spartan foreign policy, important efforts to avoid conflict without recourse to warfare and the presence of cooperation and interstate dialogue, facilitated by tools such as kinship ties and embassies, were central. These were utilised by the Spartan governing bodies to facilitate interactions with smaller (Taras, some Cretan poleis) and larger (Achaean League, Macedonia, Egypt, Rome) Mediterranean states. In adopting its foreign policy, Sparta could cultivate relations with these states and was highly regarded on the international stage. In interstate interactions, certain Spartan individuals were paramount: they were deployed by the Spartan governing bodies (gerousia, ephors) or could act by themselves in important military and diplomatic expeditions. By articulating a proactive foreign policy, Sparta could exercise influence on many locales situated inside and outside the Peloponnese and could even compete for hegemony with superpowers of the century such as Macedonia and Rome. In addressing these issues, it will be shown that the third century was a period characterised by a remarkable Spartan continuity of interest in certain locales inside and outside the Peloponnese. Acknowledgements During the four years of my Doctoral research I had the fortune to meet and work with many inspiring people. It is difficult for me to enumerate and thank them for their invaluable contribution to my intellectual growth. My first debt of gratitude goes to my first supervisor, Dr Daniel Stewart, whose ability to get me to think about historical and other issues from a different and fresh perspective has been incredibly beneficial not only to my approach to the ancient sources, but also to the modern theories. My work has enormously benefited from his constructive criticism. His comments and insights have allowed me to push my limits further and reach this stage of my academic career. Another significant debt of gratitude goes to my second supervisor, Professor Graham Shipley. Throughout my PhD journey he has provided me with great advice on numerous occasions. His availability and diligence in looking over my renderings and his discussions and comments on parts of my work have offered much food for thought. In the last two years, I have greatly benefited from the discussions with colleagues who share the same interest in the Hellenistic world and in Sparta more particularly. Much gratitude goes to fellow PhD students of Ancient History (Manolis Pagkalos, Jane Ainsworth) with whom I organised the Hellenistic Peloponnese Conference, and to other PhD researchers that I had the pleasure to meet during my journey at The University of Leicester. I could have not completed this project without the financial help for conferences and trainings offered by the College of Arts and Sciences, the School of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Thomas Wiedemann Fund and the Classical Association. My parents have also greatly supported me financially and emotionally. List of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Types of Ancient Interstate Interactions ............................................................................. 6 2.2 The Latest Studies on Hellenistic Interstate Interactions .................................................. 10 2.3 Studies on Spartan Interstate Interactions ......................................................................... 18 3. Approaches to the Evidence ................................................................................................ 24 3.1 The Sources and their Issues ............................................................................................. 24 3.1.1 The Literary Evidence ......................................................................................... 25 3.1.2 The Epigraphic and Numismatic Evidence ................................................................ 26 3.2 Approaches ........................................................................................................................ 30 3.2.1 First Case Study (Embracing the Mediterranean: Cleonymus) .................................. 30 3.2.2 Second Case Study (A de facto king: Cleonymus) .................................................... 31 3.2.3 Third Case Study (Areus and the Hellenistic World)................................................. 32 3.2.4 Fourth Case Study (The Peloponnesian Bipolarity) ................................................... 32 3.2.5 Fifth Case Study (Nabis and the Wider World) ......................................................... 33 4. Embracing the Mediterranean: Cleonymus ......................................................................... 34 4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 34 4.2 Appointing the King .......................................................................................................... 37 4.3 Cleonymus Abroad ........................................................................................................... 38 4.4 Spartan relationships with western Cretan poleis ............................................................. 45 4.5 Continuity of Spartan relations in southern Italy and Crete .............................................. 54 4.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 56 5. A de facto king: Cleonymus ................................................................................................ 57 5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 57 5.2 Cleonymus in Boeotia ....................................................................................................... 61 5.3 The Alliance against the Aetolians ................................................................................... 63 5.4 Cleonymus in Messenia and Argolis ................................................................................. 70 5.5 A de facto king .................................................................................................................. 76 5.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 81 6. Areus and the Hellenistic World ............................................................................................ 83 6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 83 6.2 Pyrrhus’ Expansionism ..................................................................................................... 86 6.3 Sparta’s relationships with Cretan poleis .......................................................................... 91 6.4 The Origins of Two Alliances ........................................................................................... 96 6.5 The Anti-Macedonian Coalition ..................................................................................... 101 6.6 King Areus I .................................................................................................................... 104 6.7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 111 7. The Peloponnesian Bipolarity ............................................................................................... 113 7.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 113 7.2 Agis IV and The Peloponnese ......................................................................................... 116 7.2.1 Agis in Pellene ......................................................................................................... 120 7.2.2 Agis in Megalopolis ................................................................................................. 122 7.2.3 Agis in Mantinea ...................................................................................................... 124 7.3 Cleomenes III and Peloponnesian Bipolarity .................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Who Freed Athens? J
    Ancient Greek Democracy: Readings and Sources Edited by Eric W. Robinson Copyright © 2004 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd The Beginnings of the Athenian Democracv: Who Freed Athens? J Introduction Though the very earliest democracies lildy took shape elsewhere in Greece, Athens embraced it relatively early and would ultimately become the most famous and powerful democracy the ancient world ever hew. Democracy is usually thought to have taken hold among the Athenians with the constitutional reforms of Cleisthenes, ca. 508/7 BC. The tyrant Peisistratus and later his sons had ruled Athens for decades before they were overthrown; Cleisthenes, rallying the people to his cause, made sweeping changes. These included the creation of a representative council (bode)chosen from among the citizens, new public organizations that more closely tied citizens throughout Attica to the Athenian state, and the populist ostracism law that enabled citizens to exile danger- ous or undesirable politicians by vote. Beginning with these measures, and for the next two centuries or so with only the briefest of interruptions, democracy held sway at Athens. Such is the most common interpretation. But there is, in fact, much room for disagree- ment about when and how democracy came to Athens. Ancient authors sometimes refer to Solon, a lawgiver and mediator of the early sixth century, as the founder of the Athenian constitution. It was also a popular belief among the Athenians that two famous “tyrant-slayers,” Harmodius and Aristogeiton, inaugurated Athenian freedom by assas- sinating one of the sons of Peisistratus a few years before Cleisthenes’ reforms - though ancient writers take pains to point out that only the military intervention of Sparta truly ended the tyranny.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    Index Note: page numbers in italics denote tables, maps, or illustrations Abdera 74 Cleomenes 237 ; coins 159, 276 , Abu Simbel 297 277, 279 ; food production 121, 268, Abydos 286 272 ; imports 268 ; Kleoitas 109 ; Achaea/Achaeans: Aigialos 213 ; Naucratis 269–271 ; pottery 191 ; basileus 128, 129, 134 ; Sparta 285 ; trade 268, 272 colonization 100, 104, 105, 107–108, Aegium 88, 91, 108 115, 121 ; democracy 204 ; Aelian 4, 186, 188 dialect 44 ; ethnos 91 ; Aeneas 109, 129 Herodotus 91 ; heroes 73, 108 ; Aeolians 45 , 96–97, 122, 292, 307 ; Homer 52, 172, 197, 215 ; dialect group 44, 45, 46 Ionians 50 ; migration 44, 45 , 50, Aeschines 86, 91, 313, 314–315 96 ; pottery 119 ; as province 68 ; Aeschylus: Persians 287, 308 ; Seven relocation 48 ; warrior tombs 49 Against Thebes 162 ; Suppliant Achilles 128, 129, 132, 137, 172, 181, Maidens 204 216 ; shield of 24, 73, 76, 138–139 Aetolia/Aetolians 20 ; dialect 299 ; Acrae 38 , 103, 110 Erxadieis 285 ; ethnos 91, 92 ; Acraephnium 279 poleis 93 ; pottery 50 ; West Acragas 38 , 47 ; democracy 204 ; Locris 20 foundation COPYRIGHTED 104, 197 ; Phalaris 144 ; Aëtos MATERIAL 62 Theron 149, 289 ; tyranny 150 Africanus, Sextus Julius 31 Adrastus 162 Agamemnon: Aeolians 97 ; anax 129 ; Aegimius 50, 51 Argos 182 ; armor 173 ; Aegina 3 ; Argos 3, 5 ; Athens 183, basileus 128, 129 ; scepter 133 ; 286, 287 ; captured 155 ; Schliemann 41 ; Thersites 206 A History of the Archaic Greek World: ca. 1200–479 BCE, Second Edition. Jonathan M. Hall. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons,
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy and the Foreigner in Plato's Dialogues
    Philosophy and the Foreigner in Plato’s Dialogues By Rebecca LeMoine A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Political Science) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON 2014 Date of final oral examination: 06/20/2014 The dissertation is approved by the following members of the Final Oral Committee: Richard Avramenko, Associate Professor, Political Science Alex Dressler, Assistant Professor, Classics Daniel Kapust, Associate Professor, Political Science Helen Kinsella, Associate Professor, Political Science John Zumbrunnen, Professor, Political Science i ABSTRACT The place of foreigners in Plato’s thought remains understudied despite the prevalence of foreign characters, myths, and practices throughout his dialogues. Attending to this gap in the scholarly literature, this dissertation challenges conventional depictions of Plato as hostile to diversity by showing that Plato makes a compelling case for why we should engage with foreigners: the epistemological benefits of cross-cultural engagement. Through exegetical readings of the Republic, Laws, Phaedrus, and Menexenus, I argue that Plato finds cross-cultural dialogue epistemologically beneficial owing to its ability to provoke us to philosophize together, an activity at once conducive to the quest for wisdom and generative of friendship. Put simply, conversations with foreigners perform the same role as the Socratic gadfly of stinging us into consciousness. This finding has major implications for the field of political theory and, specifically, for the role of the new subfield commonly referred to as comparative political theory. By demonstrating the centrality of cross-cultural dialogue to Plato’s conception of political theory, this dissertation suggests that comparative political theory is not a deviation from the tradition of Western political theory, but a restoration of it.
    [Show full text]
  • Female Property Ownership and Status in Classical and Hellenistic Sparta
    Female Property Ownership and Status in Classical and Hellenistic Sparta Stephen Hodkinson University of Manchester 1. Introduction The image of the liberated Spartiate woman, exempt from (at least some of) the social and behavioral controls which circumscribed the lives of her counterparts in other Greek poleis, has excited or horrified the imagination of commentators both ancient and modern.1 This image of liberation has sometimes carried with it the idea that women in Sparta exercised an unaccustomed influence over both domestic and political affairs.2 The source of that influence is ascribed by certain ancient writers, such as Euripides (Andromache 147-53, 211) and Aristotle (Politics 1269b12-1270a34), to female control over significant amounts of property. The male-centered perspectives of ancient writers, along with the well-known phenomenon of the “Spartan mirage” (the compound of distorted reality and sheer imaginative fiction regarding the character of Spartan society which is reflected in our overwhelmingly non-Spartan sources) mean that we must treat ancient images of women with caution. Nevertheless, ancient perceptions of their position as significant holders of property have been affirmed in recent modern studies.3 The issue at the heart of my paper is to what extent female property-holding really did translate into enhanced status and influence. In Sections 2-4 of this paper I shall approach this question from three main angles. What was the status of female possession of property, and what power did women have directly to manage and make use of their property? What impact did actual or potential ownership of property by Spartiate women have upon their status and influence? And what role did female property-ownership and status, as a collective phenomenon, play within the crisis of Spartiate society? First, however, in view of the inter-disciplinary audience of this volume, it is necessary to a give a brief outline of the historical context of my discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient History Sourcebook: 11Th Brittanica: Sparta SPARTA an Ancient City in Greece, the Capital of Laconia and the Most Powerful State of the Peloponnese
    Ancient History Sourcebook: 11th Brittanica: Sparta SPARTA AN ancient city in Greece, the capital of Laconia and the most powerful state of the Peloponnese. The city lay at the northern end of the central Laconian plain, on the right bank of the river Eurotas, a little south of the point where it is joined by its largest tributary, the Oenus (mount Kelefina). The site is admirably fitted by nature to guard the only routes by which an army can penetrate Laconia from the land side, the Oenus and Eurotas valleys leading from Arcadia, its northern neighbour, and the Langada Pass over Mt Taygetus connecting Laconia and Messenia. At the same time its distance from the sea-Sparta is 27 m. from its seaport, Gythium, made it invulnerable to a maritime attack. I.-HISTORY Prehistoric Period.-Tradition relates that Sparta was founded by Lacedaemon, son of Zeus and Taygete, who called the city after the name of his wife, the daughter of Eurotas. But Amyclae and Therapne (Therapnae) seem to have been in early times of greater importance than Sparta, the former a Minyan foundation a few miles to the south of Sparta, the latter probably the Achaean capital of Laconia and the seat of Menelaus, Agamemnon's younger brother. Eighty years after the Trojan War, according to the traditional chronology, the Dorian migration took place. A band of Dorians united with a body of Aetolians to cross the Corinthian Gulf and invade the Peloponnese from the northwest. The Aetolians settled in Elis, the Dorians pushed up to the headwaters of the Alpheus, where they divided into two forces, one of which under Cresphontes invaded and later subdued Messenia, while the other, led by Aristodemus or, according to another version, by his twin sons Eurysthenes and Procles, made its way down the Eurotas were new settlements were formed and gained Sparta, which became the Dorian capital of Laconia.
    [Show full text]
  • Nabis and Flamininus on the Argive Revolutions of 198 and 197 B.C. , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 28:2 (1987:Summer) P.213
    ECKSTEIN, A. M., Nabis and Flamininus on the Argive Revolutions of 198 and 197 B.C. , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 28:2 (1987:Summer) p.213 Nabis and Flamininus on the Argive Revolutions of 198 and 197 B.C. A. M. Eckstein N THE SUMMER of 19 5 a. c. T. Quinctius Flamininus and the Greek I allies of Rome went to war against N abis of Sparta. The official cause of the war was Nabis' continued occupation of Argos, the great city of the northeastern Peloponnese. 1 A strong case can be made that the liberation of Argos was indeed the crucial and sincere goal of the war,2 although the reasons for demanding Nabis' with­ drawal from Argos may have been somewhat more complex.3 Nabis was soon blockaded in Sparta itself and decided to open negotiations for peace. Livy 34.3lfprovides us with a detailed account of the sub­ sequent encounter between N abis and Flamininus in the form of a debate over the justice of the war, characterized by contradictory assertions about the history of Sparta's relations with Rome and the recent history of Argos. Despite the acrimony, a preliminary peace agreement was reached but was soon overturned by popular resis­ tance to it in Sparta. So the war continued, with an eventual Roman 1 Cf. esp. Liv. 34.22.10-12, 24.4, 32.4f. 2 See now E. S. GRUEN, The Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome II (Berkeley/Los Angeles [hereafter 'Gruen']) 450-55, who finds the propaganda of this war, with its consistent emphasis on the liberation of Argos as a matter of honor both for Rome and for Flamininus, likely to have some basis in fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Art and Royalty in Sparta of the 3Rd Century B.C
    HESPERIA 75 (2006) ART AND ROYALTY Pages 203?217 IN SPARTA OF THE 3RD CENTURY B.C. ABSTRACT a The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that revival of the arts in Sparta b.c. was during the 3rd century owed mainly to royal patronage, and that it was inspired by Alexander s successors, the Seleukids and the Ptolemies in particular. The tumultuous transition from the traditional Spartan dyarchy to a and to its dominance Hellenistic-style monarchy, Sparta's attempts regain in the P?loponn?se (lost since the battle of Leuktra in 371 b.c.), are reflected in the of the hero Herakles as a role model promotion pan-Peloponnesian at for the single king the expense of the Dioskouroi, who symbolized dual a kingship and had limited, regional appeal. INTRODUCTION was Spartan influence in the P?loponn?se dramatically reduced after the battle of Leuktra in 371 b.c.1 The history of Sparta in the 3rd century b.c. to ismarked by intermittent efforts reassert Lakedaimonian hegemony.2 A as a means to tendency toward absolutism that end intensified the latent power struggle between the Agiad and Eurypontid royal houses, leading to the virtual abolition of the traditional dyarchy in the reign of the Agiad Kleomenes III (ca. 235-222 b.c.), who appointed his brother Eukleides 1. For the battle of Leuktra and its am to and Ellen Millen 2005.1 grateful Graham Shipley Paul Cartledge and see me to am consequences, Cartledge 2002, and Ellen Millender for inviting der for historical advice. I also 251-259.
    [Show full text]
  • The Imperial Republic
    HISTORYHISTORY — ROME The Imperial Republic Once a republic reluctant to fight wars except in selfdefense, Rome became an imperial colossus capable of annihilating an entire nation out of sheer spite. by Steve Bonta Romans, who had deployed extra infantry Rome by brute experience that imperial in the center of the formation in hopes of expansion has a high price. This is the third installment in a series of breaking through the Carthaginian lines, Rome had never been a peaceful state. articles on the rise and fall of the Roman found themselves outflanked by elite In the early centuries of the republic, how- Republic. North African cavalry units. Hannibal’s ever, many of Rome’s conflicts were pro- cavalry overwhelmed the Roman cavalry voked by jealous neighbors like the Vols- n all of human history, there have been on both flanks and then swept behind the cians and the Aequans. The early Italian few spectacles to rival the great battles Roman forces to attack from the rear. In peninsula was a tough neighborhood, with I of the ancient world, with their pag- short order, the Romans were completely rival Etruscan and Latin states, including eantry, color — and awful carnage. And hemmed in by the Carthaginians. Han- Rome, jostling for control, and the Gauls, few battles of that age could match the nibal’s numerically inferior forces then who occupied parts of northern Italy, fre- drama that unfolded under the hot Ital- slaughtered the Romans on the field al- quently making incursions southward. ian sun one August morning in 216 B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Greece • Crete • Turkey May 28 - June 22, 2021
    GREECE • CRETE • TURKEY MAY 28 - JUNE 22, 2021 Tour Hosts: Dr. Scott Moore Dr. Jason Whitlark organized by GREECE - CRETE - TURKEY / May 28 - June 22, 2021 May 31 Mon ATHENS - CORINTH CANAL - CORINTH – ACROCORINTH - NAFPLION At 8:30a.m. depart from Athens and drive along the coastal highway of Saronic Gulf. Arrive at the Corinth Canal for a brief stop and then continue on to the Acropolis of Corinth. Acro-corinth is the citadel of Corinth. It is situated to the southwest of the ancient city and rises to an elevation of 1883 ft. [574 m.]. Today it is surrounded by walls that are about 1.85 mi. [3 km.] long. The foundations of the fortifications are ancient—going back to the Hellenistic Period. The current walls were built and rebuilt by the Byzantines, Franks, Venetians, and Ottoman Turks. Climb up and visit the fortress. Then proceed to the Ancient city of Corinth. It was to this megalopolis where the apostle Paul came and worked, established a thriving church, subsequently sending two of his epistles now part of the New Testament. Here, we see all of the sites associated with his ministry: the Agora, the Temple of Apollo, the Roman Odeon, the Bema and Gallio’s Seat. The small local archaeological museum here is an absolute must! In Romans 16:23 Paul mentions his friend Erastus and • • we will see an inscription to him at the site. In the afternoon we will drive to GREECE CRETE TURKEY Nafplion for check-in at hotel followed by dinner and overnight. (B,D) MAY 28 - JUNE 22, 2021 June 1 Tue EPIDAURAUS - MYCENAE - NAFPLION Morning visit to Mycenae where we see the remains of the prehistoric citadel Parthenon, fortified with the Cyclopean Walls, the Lionesses’ Gate, the remains of the Athens Mycenaean Palace and the Tomb of King Agamemnon in which we will actually enter.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Greek Society by Mark Cartwright Published on 15 May 2018
    Ancient Greek Society by Mark Cartwright published on 15 May 2018 Although ancient Greek Society was dominated by the male citizen, with his full legal status, right to vote, hold public oce, and own property, the social groups which made up the population of a typical Greek city-state or polis were remarkably diverse. Women, children, immigrants (both Greek and foreign), labourers, and slaves all had dened roles, but there was interaction (oen illicit) between the classes and there was also some movement between social groups, particularly for second-generation ospring and during times of stress such as wars. The society of ancient Greece was largely composed of the following groups: male citizens - three groups: landed aristocrats (aristoi), poorer farmers (periokoi) and the middle class (artisans and traders). semi-free labourers (e.g the helots of Sparta). women - belonging to all of the above male groups but without citizen rights. children - categorised as below 18 years generally. slaves - the douloi who had civil or military duties. foreigners - non-residents (xenoi) or foreign residents (metoikoi) who were below male citizens in status. Classes Although the male citizen had by far the best position in Greek society, there were dierent classes within this group. Top of the social tree were the ‘best people’, the aristoi. Possessing more money than everyone else, this class could provide themselves with armour, weapons, and a horse when on military campaign. The aristocrats were oen split into powerful family factions or clans who controlled all of the important political positions in the polis. Their wealth came from having property and even more importantly, the best land, i.e.: the most fertile and the closest to the protection oered by the city walls.
    [Show full text]
  • Mediterranean Divine Vintage Turkey & Greece
    BULGARIA Sinanköy Manya Mt. NORTH EDİRNE KIRKLARELİ Selimiye Fatih Iron Foundry Mosque UNESCO B L A C K S E A MACEDONIA Yeni Saray Kırklareli Höyük İSTANBUL Herakleia Skotoussa (Byzantium) Krenides Linos (Constantinople) Sirra Philippi Beikos Palatianon Berge Karaevlialtı Menekşe Çatağı Prusias Tauriana Filippoi THRACE Bathonea Küçükyalı Ad hypium Morylos Neapolis Dikaia Heraion teikhos Achaeology Edessa park KOCAELİ Tragilos Antisara Perinthos Basilica UNESCO Abdera Maroneia TEKİRDAĞ (İZMİT) DÜZCE Europos Kavala Doriskos Nicomedia Pella Amphipolis Stryme Işıklar Mt. ALBANIA JOINAllante Lete Bormiskos Thessalonica Argilos THE SEA OF MARMARA SAKARYA MACEDONIANaoussa Apollonia Thassos Ainos (ADAPAZARI) UNESCO Thermes Aegae YALOVA Ceramic Furnaces Selectum Chalastra Strepsa Berea Iznik Lake Nicea Methone Cyzicus Vergina Petralona Samothrace Parion Roman theater Acanthos Zeytinli Ada Apamela Aisa Ouranopolis Hisardere Elimia PydnaMEDITERRANEAN Barçın Höyük BTHYNIA Dasaki Galepsos Yenibademli Höyük BURSA UNESCO Antigonia Thyssus Apollonia (Prusa) ÇANAKKALE Manyas Zeytinlik Höyük Arisbe Lake Ulubat Phylace Dion Akrothooi Lake Sane Parthenopolis GÖKCEADA Aktopraklık O.Gazi Külliyesi BİLECİK Asprokampos Kremaste Daskyleion UNESCO Höyük Pythion Neopolis Astyra Sundiken Mts. Herakleum Paşalar Sarhöyük Mount Athos Achmilleion Troy Pessinus Potamia Mt.Olympos Torone Hephaistia Dorylaeum BOZCAADA Sigeion Kenchreai Omphatium Gonnus Skione Limnos MYSIA Uludag ESKİŞEHİR Eritium DIVINE VINTAGE Derecik Basilica Sidari Oxynia Myrina Kaz Mt. Passaron Soufli Troas Kebrene Skepsis UNESCO Meliboea Cassiope Gure bath BALIKESİR Dikilitaş Kanlıtaş Höyük Aiginion Neandra Karacahisar Castle Meteora Antandros Adramyttium Corfu UNESCO Larissa Lamponeia Dodoni Theopetra Gülpinar Pioniai Kulluoba Hamaxitos Seyitömer Höyük Keçi çayırı Syvota KÜTAHYA Grava Polimedion Assos Gerdekkaya Assos Mt.Pelion A E GTURKEY E A N S E A &Pyrrha GREECEMadra Mt. (Cotiaeum) Kumbet Lefkimi Theudoria Pherae Mithymna Midas City Ellina EPIRUS Passandra Perperene Lolkos/Gorytsa Antissa Bahses Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • An Esoteric Study on the Days of the Week
    An Esoteric Study on the Days of the Week T. Antoni Grabiec Sunday 14 March 2010 1 Table of Contents Introduction 3 Origins of the Seven Day weekly Cycle 5 The Seven Day week in History 9 Sunday - the day of the Sun 13 Monday – the day of the Moon Tuesday – the day of Tyr Wednesday – the day of Odin Thursday – the day of Thor Friday – the day of Freya Saturday – the day of Saturn Size Comparison of Celestials 36 Ancient Order of the Planets 37 Language Comparison of Days 39 Psychology and the Cycle of Seven 46 Etymology of words 47 Deities Symbolizing the Sun 48 Research Sources 49 2 Introduction Understanding our own unique place in the world and journey of life is of paramount importance and having knowledge of the cycles, particularly those that we live within, is a great benefit to our own personal discernment of reality. The Seven Day Week remains as the primary cycle for the majority of people on our beautiful Planet Earth, its very concept is rooted within society and spurred on by the global elite through the channels of big business, religion and government. People wake and journey through life, catch the tube, stare out the window of a bus, walk and run down the road, flying free in the thoughts of the one moment. Seated deep within the conscious mind, exist the archetypal forces that serve these great cycles, governed by Chronos¹, Father of Time. Allegory of Time (Chronos and Eros) Johann Heinrich Schönfeld (1630) ¹ Chronos is imagined as an incorporeal god, serpentine in form, with three heads, that of a man, a bull and a lion.
    [Show full text]