DOCSLIB.ORG

Philip II of Macedonia in Fourth Century Athens by Dina S. Guth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Philip II of Macedonia in Fourth Century Athens by Dina S. Guth Character and Rhetorical Strategy: Philip II of Macedonia in Fourth Century Athens by Dina S. Guth A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Studies) in the University of Michigan 2011 Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Sara L. Forsdyke, Chair Professor David S. Potter Professor Ruth S. Scodel Assistant Professor Ian S. Moyer Acknowledgements I would like to thank, first and foremost, my advisor Sara Forsdyke, for her mentorship and unfailing support. My first steps in uncovering the fascinating world of Greek oratory were taken under her guidance, and as my passion for that field has continually grown, so has my gratitude. I wouldn’t be where I am now, or doing what I am doing, without her. I am equally grateful to David Potter, whose insights on pretty much all topics have been a constant challenge and whose (good)humor has always been a support, both in research and in teaching. I would also like to thank Ruth Scodel for her advice in my research and in all matters professional, as well as Ian Moyer for his help on the peculiarities of Macedonian royalty. My thanks also to Julia Shapiro for all the long, late night discussions of matters Demosthenic and Aeschinean. And, speaking of late night discussions, I would like to thank Cashman Prince for keeping his door open and for humoring an undergraduate; I’m not sure how you managed, but I’m eternally grateful that you did. I also would thank the late Prof. Gagos, not only for his mentorship in the world of papyrus but for his example in all respects. Of course, none of this would have been possible without my family and my husband, who never had any doubts, and without Katya and Keesa, who proved that even cats can write dissertations. Finally, I would like to thank Shonda Tohm, Joe Groves, Jen Finn, Cassie Borges, Richard Persky, Amanda Regan, Evelyn Adkins, Karen Acton, Leah Long, Brian Calabrese, and Kathryn Seidl Steed, along with all the graduate students in ii Classics, IPGRH, and IPCAA, who made my graduate experience at Michigan an enjoyable one and whose collective wisdom never fails. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................... ii Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Models of Macedonian Monarchy............................................................................. 22 Chapter 3: Philip in the Political Discourse before 346 BCE................................................ 72 Chapter 4: Philip in the Political Discourse from 346‐330 BCE .......................................134 Chapter 5: Isocrates and Philip.......................................................................................................188 Chapter 6: Conclusion.........................................................................................................................229 Bibliography............................................................................................................................................232 iv Chapter 1: Introduction Philip II, the man who conquered the Greek world and initiated a new age in the history of the Mediterranean, remains something of a mystery despite the breadth and variety of source material concerning his life. Indeed, in some ways the plethora of sources has complicated rather than clarified assessments of Philip. The ancients themselves came to widely differing conclusions in attempting to understand what kind of a man could take Macedonia from a backwater kingdom to the verge of being the most powerful nation in the known world. Modern scholarship has largely followed suit. Assessments of Philip’s character and abilities have ranged from claims that he was the greatest king of Europe to comparisons with Hitler.1 Evaluations of his historical importance in relation to his more famous – but perhaps no more singular or brilliant – son Alexander have only exacerbated the problem.2 1 The former was the assessment of Diodorus Siculus; Diod. 16.95.1; a more measured but in principle similar conclusion was recently reached by Worthington: see Ian Worthington, Philip II of Macedonia (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008): 187-203 and Nicholas G. L. Hammond, Philip of Macedon (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994): 188-91. On Philip as Hilter (or perhaps more properly on Hilter as Philip) see A. M. Adam, “Philip alias Hitler,” Greece & Rome 10 (1941). That paper was only written in 1941; it is by no means, however, alone in seeing parallels between the two: see John Buckler and Hans Beck, Central Greece and the Politics of Power in the Fourth Century B.C. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008): 253. The question of Philip’s motives in his dealings with Greece have largely centered around his sincerity in negotiating peace with Athens in 346 BCE, which has been portrayed as either a sincere attempt to establish peace or a backhanded way of assuring Athens’ unreadiness for Philip’s incursion into central Greece. See for example T. T. B. Ryder, “The Diplomatic Skills of Philipp II,” in Ventures into Greek History: Essays in Honour of N. G. L. Hammond, ed. Ian Worthington (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994) and M. M. Markle, “The Strategy of Philip in 346 B.C.,” Classical Quarterly 24 (1974). 2 So for example Worthington, Philip II, 203: “Philip was a charismatic leader whose merits far outweighed his faults, though the latter were plentiful… he deserves to live beyond the shadow of his more famous son.” 1 This study turns away from the traditional questions posed by biographers of Philip and historians of late 4th century Macedonia.3 I focus instead to the responses elicited by Philip’s unprecedented career in the Athenian world, the same impressions from which our own interpretations of Philip are largely derived. I examine these responses as the product of a complex interaction between culturally-loaded symbolic categories and historical reality. For Philip - Macedonian but also Hellenic; king but also member of the Amphictyony; political outsider but also conqueror of Greece – was, above all, an individual who broke culturally-assigned identity categories.4 How then did Philip fit – or not - into the Greek, and specifically Athenian, cognitive framework? How, in short, did Athenians understand Philip’s rise to power? The study of the political response to Philip’s rise is made possible, but also inevitably delimited by, the source material available. The late 4th century is rich with evidence for the Athenian political discourse concerning Philip’s Macedonia. It includes speeches delivered by Demosthenes, Aeschines, and Hyperides as well as Isocrates’ and Speusippus’ pamphlets and letters. The variety of approaches the orators employed in discussing Macedonian policy allows us to develop a coherent picture of the political and 3 For biographies of Philip see most recently Worthington, Philip II; also Hammond, Philip of Macedon; Gerhard Wirth, Philipp II (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1985); G. Cawkwell, Philip of Macedon (London: Faber & Faber, 1978); J. R. Ellis, Philip II and Macedonian Imperialism (London: Thames & Hudson, 1976); Paul Cloché, Un Fondateur d’empire: Philippe II, roi de Macédoine (Saint Étienne: Éditions Dumas, 1955); A. Momigliano, Filippo il Macedone (Firenze: Le Monnier, 1934). 4 On the construction of Greek identity against the image of a barbarian “Other” see especially Lynette Mitchell, Panhellenism and the Barbarian in Archaic and Classical Greece (Swansea: Classical Press of Wales, 2007); Thomas Harrison, ed., Greeks and Barbarians (New York: Routledge, 2002); Jonathan Hall, Hellenicity. Between Ethnicity and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002); Irad Malkin, ed., Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001); Jonathan Hall, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Pericles Georges, Barbarian Asia and the Greek Experience. From the Archaic Age to the Age of Xenophon (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press: 1994); Jacqueline de Romilly, “Les Barbares dans la Pensée de la Grèce Classique,” Phoenix 47 (1993): 283-292; Edith Hall, Inventing the Barbarian. Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989); François Hartog, The Mirror of Herodotus. The Representation of the Other in the Writing of History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988). 2 sociological framework within which the ‘problem’ of Philip was addressed. Notably, both a popular view – as articulated in the speeches of Demosthenes, Aeschines, and Hyperides, all delivered before a popular audience – and an elite view - as articulated by Isocrates and Speusippus – are represented. I will show that the popular and the elite views of Philip had much in common in terms of the rhetorical resources upon which they drew; what primarily separated their views of Philip’s rise was their approach to national versus panhellenic ideals. The public orators spoke to a body of Athenians, and thus their rhetorical framework was Athenian; the philosophers, on the other hand, addressed themselves to a panhellenic audience and therefore preferred to emphasize the shared elite values of the Hellenic aristocracy, whose close personal ties had never quite been subsumed by local political loyalties.5 At the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alexander the Great and Hephaestion
    2019-3337-AJHIS-HIS 1 Alexander the Great and Hephaestion: 2 Censorship and Bisexual Erasure in Post-Macedonian 3 Society 4 5 6 Same-sex relations were common in ancient Greece and having both male and female 7 physical relationships was a cultural norm. However, Alexander the Great is almost 8 always portrayed in modern depictions as heterosexual, and the disappearance of his 9 life-partner Hephaestion is all but complete in ancient literature. Five full primary 10 source biographies of Alexander have survived from antiquity, making it possible to 11 observe the way scholars, popular writers and filmmakers from the Victorian era 12 forward have interpreted this evidence. This research borrows an approach from 13 gender studies, using the phenomenon of bisexual erasure to contribute a new 14 understanding for missing information regarding the relationship between Alexander 15 and his life-partner Hephaestion. In Greek and Macedonian society, pederasty was the 16 norm, and boys and men did not have relations with others of the same age because 17 there was almost always a financial and power difference. Hephaestion was taller and 18 more handsome than Alexander, so it might have appeared that he held the power in 19 their relationship. The hypothesis put forward here suggests that writers have erased 20 the sexual partnership between Alexander and Hephaestion because their relationship 21 did not fit the norm of acceptable pederasty as practiced in Greek and Macedonian 22 culture or was no longer socially acceptable in the Roman contexts of the ancient 23 historians. Ancient biographers may have conducted censorship to conceal any 24 implication of femininity or submissiveness in this relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • PLATO's SYMPOSIUM J
    50 ccn~ PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM j - - -- ________j e Library of Liberal Arts PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM Tran lated by BENJAMIN JOWETT With an Introduction by FULTON H. ANDERSON Professor of Philosophy, University of Toronto THE LIBERAL ARTS PRESS NEW YORK CONTENTS SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .. .... ................................... ......... ... ........... 6 EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION ................... ............................................. 7 SYMPOSIUM APOLLODORUS 13 THE SPEECH OF PHAEDRUS ...... .......................... .......................... .. 19 THE SPEECH OF PAU ANIAS ................. ... ................................. ... .. 21 THE SPEECH OF ERYXIMACHUS 27 THE SPEECH OF ARISTOPHAN E .. ............................... .................. 30 THE SPEECH OF AGATHON ............ .............................................. .. 35 THE SPEECH OF SocRATES ................................ .. ................... ..... .. 39 THE SPEECH OF ALCIBIADES ................. ............... ... ........... ...... .... .. 55 8 PLATO INTROD CTION 9 crescendo, and culminates in the report by Socrates on wi dom and epistemology, upon all of which the Symposium ha bearing, learned from the "wi e" woman Diotima. are intertwined, we m ay set down briefly a few of the more general The dialogue i a "reported" one. Plato himself could not have principles which are to be found in it author's many-sided thought. been present at the original party. (What went on there was told The human soul, a cording to Plato, is es entially in motion. time and time again about Athens.) He was a mere boy when it It is li fe and the integration of living functions. A dead soul is a con­ took place. Nor could the narrator Apollodorus have been a guest; _lladiction in terms. Man throughout his whole nature is erotically he was too young at the time. The latter got his report from motivated. His "love" or desire i manifest in three mutually in­ Aristodemus, a guest at the banquet.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Marginalia and Commentaries in the Papyri of Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes
    Nikolaos Athanassiou Marginalia and Commentaries in the Papyri of Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes PhD thesis / Dept. of Greek and Latin University College London London 1999 C Name of candidate: Nikolaos Athanassiou Title of Thesis: Marginalia and commentaries in the papyri of Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes. The purpose of the thesis is to examine a selection of papyri from the large corpus of Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes. The study of the texts has been divided into three major chapters where each one of the selected papyri is first reproduced and then discussed. The transcription follows the original publication whereas any possible textual improvement is included in the commentary. The commentary also contains a general description of the papyrus (date, layout and content) as well reference to special characteristics. The structure of the commentary is not identical for marginalia and hy-pomnemata: the former are examined in relation to their position round the main text and are treated both as individual notes and as a group conveying the annotator's aims. The latter are examined lemma by lemma with more emphasis upon their origins and later appearances in scholia and lexica. After the study of the papyri follows an essay which summarizes the results and tries to incorporate them into the wider context of the history of the text of each author and the scholarly attention that this received by the Alexandrian scholars or later grammarians. The main effort is to place each papyrus into one of the various stages that scholarly exegesis passed especially in late antiquity. Special treatment has been given to P.Wurzburg 1, the importance of which made it necessary that it occupies a chapter by itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Law: Ancient Law Fall 2016 Course
    Lanni, Adrian Comparative Law: Ancient Law Fall 2016 course Comparative Law: Ancient Law Fall 2016 Thurs.-Fri. 10-11:30 Hauser Hall rm. 102 Adriaan Lanni Griswold 500 Assistant: Jennifer Minnich, [email protected]; (617) 384-5428 Email: [email protected] Office hours: Fridays 12-2. There is a link to a sign-up sheet on my HLS website. Sign up for a slot by 5pm on Thursday for the following day’s office hours. General: This course examines topics in ancient law of interest to modern lawyers, including ancient approaches to crime and punishment, the regulation of sexuality (rape, adultery, prostitution, homosexuality), constitutional law, the trial jury, court procedure, international law, and commercial law. The focus will be on the legal systems of classical Athens and Rome. We will also look at other ancient legal systems where relevant to a particular topic. The broader goal will be to explore the role of law in a democratic society. Prior knowledge of ancient history or ancient languages is not required; all readings are in translation and the course is designed to be of interest to those without a background in the ancient world. The focus of the class will be on comparing various ancient and modern approaches to problems faced by all legal systems. Readings and Handouts: The required text is Carey, Trials from Classical Athens (2nd Edition), which should be available at the coop. Two additional required readings-- Aeschylus, Eumenides, and Brickhouse & Smith, The Trial and Execution of Socrates —are on reserve in the library, and can be purchased from amazon or ordered from the COOP if you would like to own them (any translation of Aeschylus will do for our purposes).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction: Oratory and Law at Athens
    Introduction: Oratory and Law at Athens One of the many intriguing (and unique) aspects of Athenian law is that our information about it comes very largely from speeches composed for delivery in court. These date to the period 420-320,1 and reflect in part the high value the Greeks in all periods placed on effective speaking. Even Achilles, whose fame rested primarily on his martial superiority, was brought up to be “a speaker of words and a doer of deeds” (Iliad 9.443). Great Athenian leaders like Themistocles and Pericles were accomplished public speakers; and epic poetry, tragedy, comedy, and history all made frequent use of set speeches. The formal pleadings of the envoys to Achilles in Iliad Book Nine, the messenger speeches in tragedy reporting events like the battle of Salamis in Aeschylus’ Persians, and Pericles’ funeral oration in Thucydides’ History are but a few indications of the Greeks’ never-ending fascination with the spoken word, and with formal public speaking in particular, which reached its height in the public oratory of the fifth and fourth centuries. I. Oratory2 Originally, oratory was not a specialized subject of study but was learned by practice and example. The formal study of rhetoric as an “art” (technē) began, we are told, in the middle of the fifth century in Sicily with Corax and his pupil Tisias.3 These two are scarcely more than names to us, but another Sicilian, Gorgias of Leontini (c. 490-390), developed a dazzling new style of speech and argument. Gorgias initiated the practice, which continued into the early fourth century, of composing speeches for mythical or imaginary occasions.
    [Show full text]
  • Download The
    THE CONCEPT OF SACRED WAR IN ANCIENT GREECE By FRANCES ANNE SKOCZYLAS B.A., McGill University, 1985 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Classics) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1987 ® Frances Anne Skoczylas, 1987 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. Department of CLASSICS The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date AUtt-UST 5r 1Q87 ii ABSTRACT This thesis will trace the origin and development of the term "Sacred War" in the corpus of extant Greek literature. This term has been commonly applied by modern scholars to four wars which took place in ancient Greece between- the sixth and fourth centuries B. C. The modern use of "the attribute "Sacred War" to refer to these four wars in particular raises two questions. First, did the ancient historians give all four of these wars the title "Sacred War?" And second, what justified the use of this title only for certain conflicts? In order to resolve the first of these questions, it is necessary to examine in what terms the ancient historians referred to these wars.
    [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]
  • Middle Comedy: Not Only Mythology and Food
    Acta Ant. Hung. 56, 2016, 421–433 DOI: 10.1556/068.2016.56.4.2 VIRGINIA MASTELLARI MIDDLE COMEDY: NOT ONLY MYTHOLOGY AND FOOD View metadata, citation and similar papersTHE at core.ac.ukPOLITICAL AND CONTEMPORARY DIMENSION brought to you by CORE provided by Repository of the Academy's Library Summary: The disappearance of the political and contemporary dimension in the production after Aris- tophanes is a false belief that has been shared for a long time, together with the assumption that Middle Comedy – the transitional period between archaia and nea – was only about mythological burlesque and food. The misleading idea has surely risen because of the main source of the comic fragments: Athenaeus, The Learned Banqueters. However, the contemporary and political aspect emerges again in the 4th c. BC in the creations of a small group of dramatists, among whom Timocles, Mnesimachus and Heniochus stand out (significantly, most of them are concentrated in the time of the Macedonian expansion). Firstly Timocles, in whose fragments the personal mockery, the onomasti komodein, is still present and sharp, often against contemporary political leaders (cf. frr. 17, 19, 27 K.–A.). Then, Mnesimachus (Φίλιππος, frr. 7–10 K.–A.) and Heniochus (fr. 5 K.–A.), who show an anti- and a pro-Macedonian attitude, respec- tively. The present paper analyses the use of the political and contemporary element in Middle Comedy and the main differences between the poets named and Aristophanes, trying to sketch the evolution of the genre, the points of contact and the new tendencies. Key words: Middle Comedy, Politics, Onomasti komodein For many years, what is known as the “food fallacy”1 has been widespread among scholars of Comedy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Phocian Betrayal at Thermopylae
    historia 68, 2019/4, 413–435 DOI 10.25162/historia-2019-0022 Jeffrey Rop The Phocian Betrayal at Thermopylae Abstract: This article makes three arguments regarding the Battle of Thermopylae. First, that the discovery of the Anopaea path was not dependent upon Ephialtes, but that the Persians were aware of it at their arrival and planned their attacks at Thermopylae, Artemisium, and against the Phocians accordingly. Second, that Herodotus’ claims that the failure of the Pho- cians was due to surprise, confusion, and incompetence are not convincing. And third, that the best explanation for the Phocian behavior is that they were from Delphi and betrayed their allies as part of a bid to restore local control over the sanctuary. Keywords: Thermopylae – Artemisium – Delphi – Phocis – Medism – Anopaea The courageous sacrifice of Leonidas and the Spartans is perhaps the central theme of Herodotus’ narrative and of many popular retellings of the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BCE. Even as modern historians are appropriately more critical of this heroizing impulse, they have tended to focus their attention on issues that might explain why Leo- nidas and his men fought to the death. These include discussion of the broader strategic and tactical importance of Thermopylae, the inter-relationship and chronology of the Greek defense of the pass and the naval campaign at Artemisium, the actual number of Greeks who served under Leonidas and whether it was sufficient to hold the position, and so on. While this article inevitably touches upon some of these same topics, its main purpose is to reconsider the decisive yet often overlooked moment of the battle: the failure of the 1,000 Phocians on the Anopaea path.
    [Show full text]
  • Ba-350Te/350Ste
    1 ” ” BA-350TE/350STE /2 -2 BRONZE BALL VALVE MSS SP-110 THREE-PIECE, FULL-PORT 600 WOG / 150 SWP EXTENDED TUBE ENDS INLINE REPAIRABLE* MATERIALS LIST AVAILABLE 15 6” FEMALE 6” MALE 14 ITEM PART MODEL MATERIALS ASTM SPEC. END END 1 Body 350 & 350S Bronze B584 2 End Cap 350 & 350S Bronze B584 B’ 350 Brass B16 3Stem 350S 316 Stainless Steel B276 4 Packing Nut 350 & 350S Brass B16 5 Packing 350 & 350S PTFE RPTFE 6 Thrust Washer 350 & 350S (25% Glass Reinforced) 13 12 350 CP Brass B16 9 7Ball OPEN 350S 316 Stainless Steel B276 11 MILWAUKEE VALVE BA-350 L RPTFE 8 Seat 350 & 350S (15% Glass Reinforced) 9 Handle 350 & 350S Steel w/ Zinc Plating B633 R 10 Handle Nut 350 & 350S Steel w/ Zinc Plating B633 11 Handle Grip 350 & 350S Vinyl 12 Body Bolt 350 & 350S Steel (Gr 8) w/ Zinc Plating B633 13 Body Nut 350 & 350S Steel (Gr 8) w/ Zinc Plating B633 14 Stub End, 6"M 350 & 350S Copper Tube, Type "K" 15 Stub End, 6"F 350 & 350S Copper Tube, Type "L" 10 3 Pressure temperature charts contain valve seat 5 4 7 and body ratings for standard valves. Solder 8 6 end valves are de-rated by the limitations of the 2 2 H joint as specified in ASME 16.18. Brazing installations can be likewise derated. Consult ASME 16.18 and the American Welding Society for the actual joint ratings of the material being used for the specific application. Pressure and Temperature ratings may be further derated in accordance with the pressure rating associated with the type of copper tube 1 A used for the stub end.
    [Show full text]
  • Sage Is , Based Pressure E Final Out- Rned by , : Hearts, Could Persuade
    Xerxes' War 137 136 Herodotus Book 7 a match for three Greeks. The same is true of my fellow Spartans. fallen to the naval power of the invader. So the Spartans would have They are the equal of any men when they fight alone; fighting to­ stood alone, and in their lone stand they would have performed gether, they surpass all other men. For they are free, but not entirely mighty deeds and died nobly. Either that or, seeing the other Greeks free: They obey a master called Law, and they fear this master much going over to the Persians, they would have come to terms with more than your men fear you. They do whatever it commands them Xerxes. Thus, in either case, Greece would have been subjugated by the Persians, for I cannot see what possible use it would have been to to do, and its commands are always the same: Not to retreat from the fortify the Isthmus if the king had had mastery over the sea. battlefield even when badly outnumbered; to stay in formation and either conquer or die. So if anyone were to say that the Athenians were saviors of "If this talk seems like nonsense to you, then let me stay silent Greece, he would not be far off the truth. For it was the Athenians who held the scales in balance; whichever side they espoused would henceforth; I spoke only under compulsion as it is. In any case, sire, I be sure to prevail. It was they who, choosing to maintain the freedom hope all turns out as you wish." of Greece, roused the rest of the Greeks who had not submitted, and [7.105] That was Demaratus' response.
    [Show full text]