DOCSLIB.ORG

Alexander the Great in His World

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alexander the Great in His World Alexander the Great in his World Carol G. Thomas Alexander the Great in his World Blackwell Ancient Lives At a time when much scholarly writing on the ancient world is abstract and analytical, this series presents engaging, accessible accounts of the most influential figures of antiquity. It re-peoples the ancient landscape; and while never losing sight of the vast gulf that separates antiquity from our own world, it seeks to communicate the delight of reading historical narratives to discover “what happened next.” Published Alexander the Great in his World Carol G. Thomas Nero Jürgen Malitz Tiberius Robin Seager King Hammurabi of Babylon Marc Van De Mieroop Pompey the Great Robin Seager Age of Augustus Werner Eck Hannibal Serge Lancel In Preparation Cleopatra Sally Ann-Ashton Constantine the Great Timothy Barnes Pericles Charles Hamilton Julius Caesar W. Jeffrey Tatum Alexander the Great in his World Carol G. Thomas © 2007 by Carol G. Thomas BLACKWELL PUBLISHING 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK 550 Swanston Street, Carlton,Victoria 3053, Australia The right of Carol G. Thomas to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. First published 2007 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1 2007 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Thomas, Carol G., 1938– Alexander the Great in his world / Carol G. Thomas. p. cm. — (Blackwell ancient lives) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-631-23245-2 (hardback : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 0-631-23245-1 (hardback : alk. paper) ISBN-13: 978-0-631-23246-9 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 0-631-23246-X (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Alexander, the Great, 356–323 b.c. 2. Greece—History—Macedonian Expansion, 359–323 b.c. 3. Greece—Kings and rulers—Biography. 4. Generals—Greece—Biography. I. Title. II. Series. DF234.T47 2007 938′.07092—dc22 2006006914 A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. Set in 11.5 on 13.5 pt Bembo by SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd, Hong Kong Printed and bound in Singapore by Markono Print Media Pte Ltd The publisher’s policy is to use permanent paper from mills that operate a sustainable forestry policy, and which has been manufactured from pulp processed using acid-free and elementary chlorine-free practices. Furthermore, the publisher ensures that the text paper and cover board used have met acceptable environmental accreditation standards. For further information on Blackwell Publishing, visit our website: www.blackwellpublishing.com Contents List of Figures vi List of Maps viii Preface ix Introduction 1 1 Basic Facts, Generally Uncontested, of Alexander’s Life 9 2 Being Macedonian 22 3 Being an Argead 55 4 Being a Neighbor of Greece 98 5 Surviving by Might 132 6 Meeting the Distant Threat 159 7 Reconstructing Alexander 191 Bibliography 224 Index 237 Figures 1.1 Ivory head, thought to be Alexander III 14 2.1 Upper reaches of the Haliakmon River 25 2.2 Upper Macedonia 26 2.3 Deer still haunting upper Macedonia 27 2.4 Looking west across the Pindos Range 29 2.5 The Pydna coast along the Thermaic Gulf 30 2.6 Throne of Zeus atop Olympos 31 2.7 Herding is a continuing occupation 49 2.8 Mineral wealth: gold ivy wreath from a male burial 51 3.1 Argead genealogy 58 3.2 Herakles, paternal ancestor of the Argeads 63 3.3 Achilles, Alexander’s ancestor in his mother’s line 64 3.4 Ivory head, believed to be Amyntas III 69 3.5 Ivory head, believed to be Philip II 73 3.6 Ivory head, believed to be Olympias 89 4.1 Coin of Alexander I 105 4.2 Northern Thessaly 114 4.3 Plan of the theater at Vergina 122 Figures vii 4.4 Modern statue of Aristotle 125 4.5 Site of the Nymphaion at Mieza 128 6.1 Cylinder seal of Dareios 166 7.1 Reconstruction of the Hunt Fresco 196 7.2 The Petra Pass 206 7.3 Battle of the Granikos 210 7.4 Battle of Issos 210 7.5 Indos River at the junction of Indos and Gilgit rivers 211 Maps 2.1 Regions, Natural Features and Sites of Macedonia 37 4.1 Major Regions and Sites in the Greek Sphere 100 5.1 Expansion of the Macedonian Core under Philip II 151 6.1 Achaemenid Persia 162 7.1 Alexander’s empire 219 Preface Teachers and writers of ancient Mediterranean history are drawn, if not willingly then by the interests of their students and readers, to the subject of Alexander III of Macedon. People have an ardent desire to know as much as possible about this man who altered the course of history in his brief lifetime. He has held a prominent place in courses of mine and I admit to two minor publications examin- ing particular aspects of his career. However, I do not belong to the cadre of Alexander specialists nor was it my intent to write an account of his career and nature. That is, it was not even a latent plan until serendipity intervened. A few years ago,I made the acquaintance of Al Bertrand,now senior commissioning editor at Blackwell Publishing, in the course of appraising several proposals for possible publications. Some dealt with Macedonian matters, which eventually provoked a question from Al to me. Might I think of an interesting new approach for a biography of Alexander for the Blackwell biography series? His question asked for suggestions not authors. A fascinating orientation would be the examination of Alexander’s career from the Persian perspective, but since sources for this approach were even more limited than Greek and Roman sources for Alexander, that avenue was not pursued. Having exhausted more traditional possibilities, I mentioned a direction that I regularly follow in my own area of research, x Preface pre- and proto-historical Greece, where the nature of evidence makes an understanding of the larger context essential. Would an examination of the world into which Alexander was born and raised provide insight into the nature of the person himself? I had followed this path in my seminars titled “Alexander’s Conquests: Why?” in which students investigated a variety of “explanations” for Alexan- der’s success: his Macedonian identity,the nature of Macedonia itself, membership in the royal line, the parentage of Philip and Olympias, relations with neighboring peoples, the condition of the Persian Empire during his lifetime. Perhaps, I suggested to Al, someone might employ such an approach for a Blackwell biography. About two weeks later, Al invited me to write a concise biogra- phy of Alexander for us around the theme of my course. While the invitation was flattering I demurred on the grounds that I am not an “Alexander-specialist.”Al’s rebuttal was that it might be an advan- tage to come to the subject without a fixed idea of Alexander’s motives, character, wishes, and dreams. This study, therefore, comes with an apologia to all who are “Alexander-specialists,” whose research and publications are essen- tial to any understanding of Alexander III of Macedon. It seeks to look deeply into the circumstances of his world in the belief that we cannot understand individuals apart from the cultures that con- dition their lives. It does not engage in source criticism nor is it an attempt to solve specific issues of fact or interpretation. Conforming to other books in this series, there are no footnotes but all the works mentioned are given in the bibliography. Cita- tions such as VII.56 from Herodotos refer to classical authors for whom no edition need be cited, since the citation provides infor- mation for readers to find the source of quotations in any edition. References to scholarly collections of evidence, such as IG II2,are cited in fuller form parenthetically in the text. It has been an exciting adventure both to read the evidence with a different aim and to explore the land of Alexander’s birth from the Pindos mountain range in the west to the Thermaic Bay and beyond in the east. Travel under the expert guidance of Theo Preface xi Antikas and Laura Wynn Antikas yielded essential new insights about how the land of Macedonia was at once a subject and a source for conquest. Their knowledge of the region and of scholars working to enhance evidence of Macedonia’s past opened many doors, intel- lectual as well as physical. The illustrations owe much to their friendships with present-day inhabitants of the land of Alexander, as the credits will reveal. The assistance of many people has been essential. Theo Antikas read the manuscript three times, providing welcome suggestions and corrections. My husband and colleague, Richard Rigby Johnson, was the photographer of our Macedonian adventure. Lance Jenott, currently a doctoral student at Princeton University, created the maps. Ryan Boehler, a doctoral student in ancient history, made some changes to those maps and prepared many of the illustrations. My colleague and friend Daniel Waugh donated his considerable expertise and time to editing a majority of the illustrations. A grant from the Royalty Research Fund of the University of Washington provided a quarter of release from teaching in which to investigate the land of Macedonia and to devote time to research and writing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Monopteros in the Athenian Agora
    THE MONOPTEROS IN THE ATHENIAN AGORA (PLATE 88) O SCAR Broneerhas a monopterosat Ancient Isthmia. So do we at the Athenian Agora.' His is middle Roman in date with few architectural remains. So is ours. He, however, has coins which depict his building and he knows, from Pau- sanias, that it was built for the hero Palaimon.2 We, unfortunately, have no such coins and are not even certain of the function of our building. We must be content merely to label it a monopteros, a term defined by Vitruvius in The Ten Books on Architecture, IV, 8, 1: Fiunt autem aedes rotundae, e quibus caliaemonopteroe sine cella columnatae constituuntur.,aliae peripteroe dicuntur. The round building at the Athenian Agora was unearthed during excavations in 1936 to the west of the northern end of the Stoa of Attalos (Fig. 1). Further excavations were carried on in the campaigns of 1951-1954. The structure has been dated to the Antonine period, mid-second century after Christ,' and was apparently built some twenty years later than the large Hadrianic Basilica which was recently found to its north.4 The lifespan of the building was comparatively short in that it was demolished either during or soon after the Herulian invasion of A.D. 267.5 1 I want to thank Professor Homer A. Thompson for his interest, suggestions and generous help in doing this study and for his permission to publish the material from the Athenian Agora which is used in this article. Anastasia N. Dinsmoor helped greatly in correcting the manuscript and in the library work.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study of Ancient Greek City Walls in North-Western Black Sea During the Classical and Hellenistic Times
    INTERNATIONAL HELLENIC UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES MA IN BLACK SEA CULTURAL STUDIES A comparative study of ancient Greek city walls in North-Western Black Sea during the Classical and Hellenistic times Thessaloniki, 2011 Supervisor’s name: Professor Akamatis Ioannis Student’s name: Fantsoudi Fotini Id number:2201100018 Abstract Greek presence in the North Western Black Sea Coast is a fact proven by literary texts, epigraphical data and extensive archaeological remains. The latter in particular are the most indicative for the presence of walls in the area and through their craftsmanship and techniques being used one can closely relate these defensive structures to the walls in Asia Minor and the Greek mainland. The area examined in this paper, lies from ancient Apollonia Pontica on the Bulgarian coast and clockwise to Kerch Peninsula.When establishing in these places, Greeks created emporeia which later on turned into powerful city states. However, in the early years of colonization no walls existed as Greeks were starting from zero and the construction of walls needed large funds. This seems to be one of the reasons for the absence of walls of the Archaic period to which lack comprehensive fieldwork must be added. This is also the reason why the Archaic period is not examined, but rather the Classical and Hellenistic until the Roman conquest. The aim of Greeks when situating the Black Sea was to permanently relocate and to become autonomous from their mother cities. In order to be so, colonizers had to create cities similar to their motherlands. More specifically, they had to build public buildings, among which walls in order to prevent themselves from the indigenous tribes lurking to chase away the strangers from their land.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 a B C D E
    STREET REGISTER ARRIVING & GETTING AROUND ARRIVING & GETTING AROUND ARRIVING & GETTING AROUND WHAT TO SEE WHAT TO SEE WHAT TO SEE Amurskaya E/F-2 Krasniy Spusk G-3 Radishcheva E-5 By Bus By Plane Great Mitridat Stairs C-4, near the Lenina Admirala Vladimirskogo E/F-3 Khersonskaya E/F-3 Rybatskiy prichal D/C-4-B-5 Churches & Cathedrals pl. The stairs were built in the 1930’s with plans Ancient Cities Admirala Azarova E-4/5 Katernaya E-3 Ryabova F-4 Arriving by bus is the only way to get to Kerch all year round. The bus station There is a local airport in Kerch, which caters to some local Crimean flights Ferry schedule Avdeyeva E-5 Korsunskaya E-3 Repina D-4/5 Church of St. John the Baptist C-4, Dimitrova per. 2, tel. (+380) 6561 from the Italian architect Alexander Digby. To save Karantinnaya E-3 Samoylenko B-3/4 itself is a buzzing place thanks to the incredible number of mini-buses arriving during the summer season, but the only regular flight connection to Kerch is you the bother we have already counted them; Antonenko E-5 From Kerch (from Port Krym) To Kerch (from Port Kavkaz) 222 93. This church is a unique example of Byzantine architecture. It was built in Admirala Fadeyeva A/B-4 Kommunisticheskaya E-3-F-5 Sladkova C-5 and departing. Marshrutkas run from here to all of the popular destinations in through Simferopol State International, which has regular flights to and from Kyiv, there are 432 steps in all meandering from the Dep.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Waterworks in Roman Greece Aqueducts and Monumental Fountain Structures Function in Context
    Great Waterworks in Roman Greece Aqueducts and Monumental Fountain Structures Function in Context Access edited by Open Georgia A. Aristodemou and Theodosios P. Tassios Archaeopress Archaeopress Roman Archaeology 35 © Archaeopress and the authors, 2017. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78491 764 7 ISBN 978 1 78491 765 4 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress and the authors 2018 Cover: The monumental arcade bridge of Moria,Access Lesvos, courtesy of Dr Yannis Kourtzellis Creative idea of Tasos Lekkas (Graphics and Web Designer, International Hellenic University) Open All rights Archaeopressreserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by Oxuniprint, Oxford This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com © Archaeopress and the authors, 2017. Contents Preface ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� iii Georgia A. Aristodemou and Theodosios P. Tassios Introduction I� Roman Aqueducts in Greece �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������1 Theodosios P. Tassios Introduction II� Roman Monumental Fountains (Nymphaea) in Greece �����������������������������������������10 Georgia A. Aristodemou PART I: AQUEDUCTS Vaulted-roof aqueduct channels in Roman
    [Show full text]
  • Andrea F. Gatzke, Mithridates VI Eupator and Persian Kingship
    The Ancient History Bulletin VOLUME THIRTY-THREE: 2019 NUMBERS 1-2 Edited by: Edward Anson ò Michael Fronda òDavid Hollander Timothy Howe ò John Vanderspoel Pat Wheatley ò Sabine Müller òAlex McAuley Catalina Balmacedaò Charlotte Dunn ISSN 0835-3638 ANCIENT HISTORY BULLETIN Volume 33 (2019) Numbers 1-2 Edited by: Edward Anson, Catalina Balmaceda, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Alex McAuley, Sabine Müller, John Vanderspoel, Pat Wheatley Senior Editor: Timothy Howe Assistant Editor: Charlotte Dunn Editorial correspondents Elizabeth Baynham, Hugh Bowden, Franca Landucci Gattinoni, Alexander Meeus, Kurt Raaflaub, P.J. Rhodes, Robert Rollinger, Victor Alonso Troncoso Contents of volume thirty-three Numbers 1-2 1 Kathryn Waterfield, Penteconters and the Fleet of Polycrates 19 John Hyland, The Aftermath of Aigospotamoi and the Decline of Spartan Naval Power 42 W. P. Richardson, Dual Leadership in the League of Corinth and Antipater’s Phantom Hegemony 60 Andrea F. Gatzke, Mithridates VI Eupator and Persian Kingship NOTES TO CONTRIBUTORS AND SUBSCRIBERS The Ancient History Bulletin was founded in 1987 by Waldemar Heckel, Brian Lavelle, and John Vanderspoel. The board of editorial correspondents consists of Elizabeth Baynham (University of Newcastle), Hugh Bowden (Kings College, London), Franca Landucci Gattinoni (Università Cattolica, Milan), Alexander Meeus (University of Mannhiem), Kurt Raaflaub (Brown University), P.J. Rhodes (Durham University), Robert Rollinger (Universität Innsbruck), Victor Alonso Troncoso (Universidade da Coruña) AHB is currently edited by: Timothy Howe (Senior Editor: [email protected]), Edward Anson, Catalina Balmaceda, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Alex McAuley, Sabine Müller, John Vanderspoel, Pat Wheatley and Charlotte Dunn. AHB promotes scholarly discussion in Ancient History and ancillary fields (such as epigraphy, papyrology, and numismatics) by publishing articles and notes on any aspect of the ancient world from the Near East to Late Antiquity.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimea______9 3.1
    CONTENTS Page Page 1. Introduction _____________________________________ 4 6. Transport complex ______________________________ 35 1.1. Brief description of the region ______________________ 4 1.2. Geographical location ____________________________ 5 7. Communications ________________________________ 38 1.3. Historical background ____________________________ 6 1.4. Natural resource potential _________________________ 7 8. Industry _______________________________________ 41 2. Strategic priorities of development __________________ 8 9. Energy sector ___________________________________ 44 3. Economic review 10. Construction sector _____________________________ 46 of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea ________________ 9 3.1. The main indicators of socio-economic development ____ 9 11. Education and science ___________________________ 48 3.2. Budget _______________________________________ 18 3.3. International cooperation _________________________ 20 12. Culture and cultural heritage protection ___________ 50 3.4. Investment activity _____________________________ 21 3.5. Monetary market _______________________________ 22 13. Public health care ______________________________ 52 3.6. Innovation development __________________________ 23 14. Regions of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea _____ 54 4. Health-resort and tourism complex_________________ 24 5. Agro-industrial complex __________________________ 29 5.1. Agriculture ____________________________________ 29 5.2. Food industry __________________________________ 31 5.3. Land resources _________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • History of Phanagoria
    Ассоциация исследователей ИНСТИТУТ АРХЕОЛОГИИ РАН ФАНАГОРИЙСКАЯ ЭКСПЕДИЦИЯ ИА РАН PHANAGORIA EDITED BY V.D. KUZNETSOV Moscow 2016 904(470.62) 63.443.22(235.73) Утверждено к печати Ученым советом Института археологии РАН Edited by V.D. Kuznetsov Text: Abramzon M.G., PhD, Professor, Magnitogorsk State Technical University Voroshilov A.N., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Voroshilova O.N., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Garbuzov G.P., PhD, Southern Scientific Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Rostov-on-Don) Golofast L.A., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Gunchina O.L., conservator-restorer, Phanagoria Museum-Preserve Dobrovolskaya E.V., PhD, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Academy of Sciences Dobrovolskaya M.V., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Zhukovsky M.O., Deputy Director of the Phanagoria Museum-Preserve Zavoikin A.A., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Zavoikina N.V., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Kokunko G.V., Historical and Cultural Heritage of Kuban Program Coordinator Kuznetsov V.D., PhD, Director of the Phanagoria Museum-Preserve, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Kuzmina (Shorunova) Yu.N., PhD, Curator of the Phanagoria Museum-Preserve, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Olkhovsky S.V., Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Pavlichenko N.A., PhD, Institute of History, Russian Academy of Sciences Saprykina I.A., PhD, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences Published with financial support from the Volnoe Delo Oleg Deripaska Foundation All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission of the copyright owners.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shaping of the New Macedonia (1798-1870)
    VIII. The shaping of the new Macedonia (1798-1870) by Ioannis Koliopoulos 1. Introduction Macedonia, both the ancient historical Greek land and the modern geographical region known by that name, has been perhaps one of the most heavily discussed countries in the world. In the more than two centuries since the representatives of revolutionary France introduced into western insular and continental Greece the ideas and slogans that fostered nationalism, the ancient Greek country has been the subject of inquiry, and the object of myth-making, on the part of archaeologists, historians, ethnologists, political scientists, social anthropologists, geographers and anthropogeographers, journalists and politicians. The changing face of the ancient country and its modern sequel, as recorded in the testimonies and studies of those who have applied themselves to the subject, is the focus of this present work. Since the time, two centuries ago, when the world’s attention was first directed to it, the issue of the future of this ancient Greek land – the “Macedonian Question” as it was called – stirred the interest or attracted the involvement of scientists, journalists, diplomats and politicians, who moulded and remoulded its features. The periodical cri- ses in the Macedonian Question brought to the fore important researchers and generated weighty studies, which, however, with few exceptions, put forward aspects and charac- teristics of Macedonia that did not always correspond to the reality and that served a variety of expediencies. This militancy on the part of many of those who concerned themselves with the ancient country and its modern sequel was, of course, inevitable, given that all or part of that land was claimed by other peoples of south-eastern Europe as well as the Greeks.
    [Show full text]
  • Persian Imperial Policy Behind the Rise and Fall of the Cimmerian Bosporus in the Last Quarter of the Sixth to the Beginning of the Fifth Century BC
    Persian Imperial Policy Behind the Rise and Fall of the Cimmerian Bosporus in the Last Quarter of the Sixth to the Beginning of the Fifth Century BC Jens Nieling The aim of the following paper is to recollect arguments for the hypotheses of a substantial Persian interference in the Greek colonies of the Cimmerian Bosporus and that they remained not untouched by Achaemenid policy in western Anatolia. The settlements ought to have been affected positively in their prime in the last quarter of the sixth century, but also harmed during their first major crisis at the beginning of the fifth century and afterwards. A serious break in the tight interrelationship between the Bosporan area and Achaemenid Anatolia occurred through the replacement of the Archaeanactid dynasty, ruling the Cimmerian Bosporus from 480 onwards, in favour of the succeeding Spartocids by an Athenian naval expedition under the command of Pericles in the year 438/437.1 The assumption of a predominant Persian influence to the north of the Caucasus mountains contradicts the still current theory of V. Tolstikov2 and the late Yu.G. Vinogradov,3 who favour instead a major Scythian or local impact as a decisive factor at the Bosporan sites.4 To challenge this traditional posi- tion, this paper will follow the successive stages of architectural development in the central settlement of Pantikapaion on its way to becoming the capital of the region. The argumentation is necessarily based on a parallelization of stratigraphical evidence with historical sources, since decisive archaeological data to support either the Persian or the Scythian hypothesis are few.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chora of Nymphaion (6Th Century BC-6Th Century
    The Chora of Nymphaion (6th century BC-6th century AD) Viktor N. Zin’ko The exploration of the rural areas of the European Bosporos has gained in scope over the last decades. Earlier scholars focused on studying particular archaeological sites and an overall reconstruction of the rural territories of the Bosporan poleis as well as on a general understanding of the polis-chora relationship.1 These works did not aim at an in-depth study of the chora of any one particular city-state limited as they were to small-scale excavations of individual settlements. In 1989, the author launched a comprehensive research project on the chora of Nymphaion. A careful examination of archive materials and the results of the surveys revealed an extensive number of previously unknown archaeological sites. The limits of Nymphaion’s rural territory corresponded to natural bor- der-lines (gullies, steep slopes of ridges etc.) impassable to the Barbarian cav- alry. The region has better soils than the rest of the peninsula, namely dark chestnut černozems,2 and the average level of precipitation is 100 mm higher than in other areas.3 The core of the territory was represented by fertile lands, Fig. 1. Map of the Kimmerian Bosporos (hatched – chora of Nymphaion in the 5th century BC; cross‑hatched – chora of Nymphaion in the 4th‑early 3rd centuries BC). 20 Viktor N. Zin’ko stretching from the littoral inland, and bounded to the north and south by two ravines situated 7 km apart. The two ravines originally began at the western extremities of the ancient estuaries (now the Tobečik and Čurubaš Lakes).
    [Show full text]
  • About Thessaloniki
    INFORMATION ON THESSALONIKI Thessaloniki is one of the oldest cities in Europe and the second largest city in Greece. It was founded in 315 B.C. by Cassander, King of Macedonia and was named after his wife Thessaloniki, sister of Alexander the Great. Today Thessaloniki is considered to be one of the most important trade and communication centers in the Mediterranean. This is evident from its financial and commercial activities as well as its geographical position and its infrastructure. As a historic city Thessaloniki is well – known from its White Tower dating from the middle of the 15th century in its present form. Thessaloniki presents a series of monuments from Roman and Byzantine times. It is known for its museums, Archaeological and Byzantine as well as for its Art, Historical and War museums and Galleries. Also, it is known for its Churches, particularly the church of Agia Sophia and the church of Aghios Dimitrios, the patron Saint of the city. Thessaloniki’s infrastructure, which includes the Universities campus, the International trade, its port and airport as well as its road rail network, increases the city’s reputation; it is also famous for its entertainment, attractions, gastronomy, shopping and even more. A place that becomes a vacation resort for many citizens of Thessaloniki especially in the summer and only 45 minutes away is Chalkidiki. Chalkidiki is a beautiful place, which combines the sea with the mountain. Today, Chalkidiki is a summer resort for the people of Thessaloniki. It is really a gifted place due to its natural resources, its crystal waters and also the graphical as well as traditional villages.
    [Show full text]
  • Bosporos and Chersonesos in the 4Th-2Nd Centuries BC
    Bosporos and Chersonesos in the 4th-2nd Centuries BC Evgenij A. Molev The political relations between the two leading states in Taurica – Bosporos and Chersonesos – have for long attracted the attention of scholars. However, the conclusions reached about the nature of the relations during various historical periods differ widely due to the almost complete lack of evidence from the literary sources. This paper will consider once again the character of the political contacts between Bosporos and Chersonesos during the Hellenistic period, beginning from the moment when “Crimea was in fact divided”1 between these two states until they both became subjects to the Kingdom of Pontos. Only one written document contains direct evidence about the political contacts between Bosporos and Chersonesos during this period – namely the Chersonesean decree in honour of Syriskos of the 3rd century BC (IOSPE I2, 344). Nevertheless, indirect information can be obtained from epigraphy, numismatics and material from archaeological excavations. On the basis of this, a number of researchers have come to the conclusion that the first con- tact concerned the struggle for Theodosia where they opposed each other. In favour of this view, the following arguments have been put forward: 1) Theodosia, Phanagoria, and Chersonesos borrowing the coin types of Herakleia suggests that some sort of alliance existed between these cities.2 2) Theodosia issuing coins with Chersonesean types at the Chersonesean mint, may indicate open participation of Chersonesos in the war against Bosporos.3 This hypothesis, put forward by M.I. Zolotarev, has been supported by S.Ju. Saprykin and Ju.G. Vinogradov.4 3) The majority of Herakleian imports in Bosporos belong to the second half of the 4th century BC, i.e.
    [Show full text]