DOCSLIB.ORG

The Cambridge Ancient History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE CAMBRIDGE ANCIENT HISTORY SECOND EDITION VOLUME VII PART I The Hellenistic World Edited by F. W. W ALBANK F.B.A. Emerit1u Projeuor, former!J Profmor of Anrienl History and C!t111ieal Ar<haeology, Univmi!J of Live~pool A. E. ASTIN Profmor of Antient History, The Q11een'1 Univtr.ri!J, Btlfast M. W. FRED ERIKSEN R. M. OGI LVIE CAMBRIDGE -~ UNIVERSITY PRESS CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, S:io Paulo, Delhi Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Bujlding, Cambridge, CB2 8Ru, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org [nformacion on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521234450 ©Cambridge University Press i984 This publication is in copyright. Subject to smurory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the wrircen permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1928 Second edition 1984 Eleventh printing 2008 Primed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Library ofCongress catalogue card number; 75-85719 British Library Cataloguing in Publication data The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol. 7 Pt. I: The Helleniscic World, r. History, Ancient 1. Walbank, F. W . .930 D57 ISBN 978-0-521-23445-0 hardback ISBN 978-0-521-85073-5 set Cambridge U niversity Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy ofURL; for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guraranree that any content on su~ websites is, or will remain, a.ccurare or appropriate. CONTENTS List of maps page x List of text-figures x Preface Xl Sources for the period . 1 by F. W. WALBANK, Emeritus Professor, former!J Professor of Ancient History and Classical Archaeology, University of Liverpool r Lost writers z 11 Surviving writers 4 m Other sources: (a) Inscriptions 10 (b) Papyri and ostraca r 6 (c) Coins 18 (d) Archaeology 21 2 The succession to Alexander ~ EDOUARD WILL, Professor of Ancient History, University of Nancy II r From the death of Alexander to Triparadisus (323- 321) z3 n The period of Antigonus Monophthalmus (3zr- 30I) 39 (a) From Triparadisus to the death of Eumenes (32 1-3 16) 40 (b) The first phase of the struggle against Antigonus (316- 31 I) , 46 (c) The second phase of the struggle against Aotigonus (311- 301) 52 3 Monarchies and monarchic ideas 62 ~F. w. WA L BANK r The new political pattern II The character of Hellenistic monarchy m The machinery of monarchical government rv Sources for the concept of the ideal king v The HellenistiC picture of the king VI Monarchy and religion VII Ruler-cult vn1 Dynastic cult 1x Conclusion ~ CONTENTS 4 The formation of the Hellenistic kingdoms page 101 by EDOUARD WILL r The adventures of Demetrius Poliorcetes (301- 286) 101 u From the apogee of Lysimachus to the re-establishment of Antigonus Gonatas ( 286-276) 110 5 Ptolemaic Egypt 11 8 by S 1 R ER I c Tu RN ER, formerly Emeritus Professor of Papyrology, University College London Preliminary note on the papyrus sources 1 1 8 T Ptolcmy I n9 n Administration, economy and society under Philadelphus and Euergetes i 3 3 m From Euergetes I to Euergetes II 159 1v Religion, literature, act 167 6 Syria and the East 17 5 by DOMENICO Musn, Profeuor of Greek History, University of RMJe I (La S apienz.a) 1 Organization, the monarchy, the court 175 n Geographical description of the Seleucid kingdom 181 ur Administrative divisions and personnel 184 1v Military and naval aspects I 89 v Tax system and economic life 193 vr Relanons with the Greek cities 204 vu Relations with Iran. Retreat from further Asia. Growth of the Panhians. Greeks in Bactria and India 21 o vm Conclusion 2 1 6 Appendix: The date of the secession of Bactria and Parthia from the Seleucid kingdom 21 9 7 Macedonia and Greece 221 by F. w. WA LliANK r Antigonus Gonatas and Pyrrhus 221 If Ancigonus and Macedonia 2.24 Ill Macedonia and Greece in 2 7 2 2.29 TV The rise of Actolia 232 v The Chremonidean War 236 Vl The results of the Chremonidean War 140 VII Aratus of Sicyon and the Achaean League 243 Vtll Antigonus, Corinth and Aratus 246 IX Agis IV of Sparta 252 x Antigonus' last years 255 CONTENTS vii 8 Cultural, social and economic features of the Hellenistic world page 15 7 by J. K. D A v t Es, Rathbone Professor of Ancient History and Classical Archaeology, University of Liverpool 1 Sources and approaches 157 H Demographic problems 164 m T he degree of economic interplay: artefacts and institutions 170 tv Piracy and irs ramifications z.8 5 v Change and continuity 190 v1 RoyaJ policies and regional diversities 196 vu T he po/is transformed and revitalized 304 vm The limits of the po/is 3 1 5 9 Hellenistic science: its application in peace and war 311 9a Hellenistic science 321 by G. E. R. LLOYD, Fellow of King's College a11d Professor of Ancient Philosophy and Science, University of Cambridge Introduction 3 2. l t Physics 3 2. 3 n Mathematics and its applications HO 111 Geography and astronomy 3 37 IV Medicine and the life sciences 347 9b War and sicgccraft 3 n by YvoN GA R LAN, Professor of Ancient History, University ofHaute ­ Bretagne, Rennes 1J 9c Agriculture 363 by DOROTHY J. THOMPSON, Fellow of Girton College, University of Cambridge 9d Building and townplanning 371 by F. E. WINTER, Profes.ror of Fine Art, University of Toronto (a) Hellenistic townplanning 371 (b) Hellenistic building materials an<l techniques 371 (c) Hellenistic buildings 375 10 Agathocles 384 by K. MEISTER, Professor of Ancient HisJory, Technische Uni11ersitiit1 Berlin 1 Agathocles' rise and seizure of power 384 II Developments in Sicily between 3 I 6/ q and 3 10 390 m The African campaigns (3 10-307) 393 iv Events in Sicily (3 10-304) 400 v Agathocles' reign as Icing (304- 189/ 8). H is policies towards ItaJy in the East. His plan for a new Carthaginian war 405 VJ General assessment 409 Viii CONTENTS 11 The Syrian-Egyptian Wars and the new kingdoms of Asia Minor page 4 1 1 by H. H EINEN, Professor of Ancient History, University of Trier 1 Introduction 41 2 rr Ptolemy II and the first Syrian Wars (282.- 246) 413 m Ptolemy III and the Third Syrian War (z.46- 241) 410 rv The rise of the states of Asia Minor 42 1 (a) The Celts 422 (b)Bitbynia 425 (c) Fontus 416 (d) Cappadocia 426 (e) Pergamum 416 (f) Rhodes 43 2. v Antiochus III, Ptolemy IV and the Fourth Syrian War 4 33 vr Ptolemaic rule in Coele-Syria 440 vu The aims of Ptolemaic policy towards the Seleucid empire 442 r 2 Macedonia and the Greek leagues 446 /iji.F. W. WALBANK l The reign of Demetrius II 446 rr Antigonus D oson: the first years 45 3 m Cleomcnes' revolution 4 58 rv The Cariao expedition 459 v The Achaean approach to Macedonia 461 v1 The Achaean disintegration 463 vn Cleomenes' defeat. The Hellenic League. The death of Antigonus Doson 467 vm The Social war 473 Hellenistic dynasties Genealogical tables Chronological table (323-117 B.c.) BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbreviations 5I 3 A General P9 B Sources p 1 a. Ancient authors and works on these 52 1 b. Epigraphy 523 c. Excavation reports: descdptions of sites 528 d. N umismatic publications 5 30 e. Art, monuments, ceramics, jewellery and other objects 5 33 C The Diadochi and the establishment of the kingdoms 53 ~ D Greece, Macedonia, the Balkans, Thrace and the Black Sea 538 a. Macedonia, Epirus and lllyria 538 CONTENTS lX b. Greece and the wars with Macedonia page 540 c. Thessaly, Boeotia and central Greece 541 d. Athens 541 e. Achaea and Aetolia 542 f. Sparta and Messenia 54; g. The Aegean, Crete and Cyprus 544 h. Thrace and the Black Sea 544 E The Seleucid kingdom, Asia Minor, the Middle East, the Far East, the wars of Syria and Egypt 54 5 a. General 545 b. Asia Minor 548 c. The Celts (Galatians) 549 d. Pergamum 5 50 e. Rhodes 55 t f. Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, the Syrian-Egyptian Wars 5 5 1 g. Iran, Parthia, the Persian Gulf, Bactria, India 5 5; F Egypt 554 a. Bibliographjcs of Egyptologists 5 54 b. Papyri and ostraca 5 5 5 c. Inscriptions 562 d. General 56; c. Pre-Ptolemaic Egypt 563 f. Religion 564 g. Army and navy 565 h. Administration, society, economjc structure 566 i. Law and the admjnistration of justice 572 l· Art and literature 573 k. Coins 57; l. Chronology 574 G Agathocles 574 a. Sources i. Literary 5 74 11. Coins 575 iii. Archaeological material 575 b. General 5 75 H Social, cultural and economic features 577 I Monarchy 587 J Hellenistic science, warfare, agriculture, building 59 I a. Science i. Ancient authors and works on these 59 r ii. Modern works 595 b. Warfare 598 c. Agriculture 599 d. Building and townplanruog 599 Addenda 602 Index .
Recommended publications
  • Royal Power, Law and Justice in Ancient Macedonia Joseph Roisman

    Royal Power, Law and Justice in Ancient Macedonia Joseph Roisman

    Royal Power, Law and Justice in Ancient Macedonia Joseph Roisman In his speech On the Crown Demosthenes often lionizes himself by suggesting that his actions and policy required him to overcome insurmountable obstacles. Thus he contrasts Athens’ weakness around 346 B.C.E. with Macedonia’s strength, and Philip’s II unlimited power with the more constrained and cumbersome decision-making process at home, before asserting that in spite of these difficulties he succeeded in forging later a large Greek coalition to confront Philip in the battle of Chaeronea (Dem.18.234–37). [F]irst, he (Philip) ruled in his own person as full sovereign over subservient people, which is the most important factor of all in waging war . he was flush with money, and he did whatever he wished. He did not announce his intentions in official decrees, did not deliberate in public, was not hauled into the courts by sycophants, was not prosecuted for moving illegal proposals, was not accountable to anyone. In short, he was ruler, commander, in control of everything.1 For his depiction of Philip’s authority Demosthenes looks less to Macedonia than to Athens, because what makes the king powerful in his speech is his freedom from democratic checks. Nevertheless, his observations on the Macedonian royal power is more informative and helpful than Aristotle’s references to it in his Politics, though modern historians tend to privilege the philosopher for what he says or even does not say on the subject. Aristotle’s seldom mentions Macedonian kings, and when he does it is for limited, exemplary purposes, lumping them with other kings who came to power through benefaction and public service, or who were assassinated by men they had insulted.2 Moreover, according to Aristotle, the extreme of tyranny is distinguished from ideal kingship (pambasilea) by the fact that tyranny is a government that is not called to account.
  • The Manumission of Greece at the Isthmian Festival of 196 BCE1

    The Manumission of Greece at the Isthmian Festival of 196 BCE1

    FEDERICO FAVI The Manumission of Greece at the Isthmian Festival of 196 BCE1 The proclamation of Greece’s freedom at the Isthmian festival of 196 is a most famous episode in ancient history. Among the many significant issues involved, this proclamation appealed to the traditional political sloGan of Greek freedom2, and the actual assessment of its function and meaning in this particular event lies at the heart of our overall understanding of the Romans’ politics and policies in Greece3. Any treatment of such issues would clearly require discussing a large array of controversial aspects. But my concern in the present paper is much narrower in its primary scope. What I aim to show is that the very way in which Greece’s freedom was announced was meant to turn this event, in the eyes of the Greek audience, into a symbolic large-scale replica of so-called Greek ‘civic’ manumissions. Thus, the episode would best be put on a par with the recurrence of the concepts and imagery of freedom and slavery within the diplomatic vocabulary of the time. 1. The Manumission of Greece The momentous event of the Isthmian festival of 196 is described in virtually the same way by a number of sources, all of which ultimately rely on Polybius’ account of the episode4. 1 I wish to thank Albio Cesare Cassio, Donatella Erdas, Anna MaGnetto, and Peter J. Wilson, who read and commented on this article at different staGes of its development. Special thanks are due to John Thornton for his insiGhtful remarks. I also wish to thank SerGio Knipe, who has improved the EnGlish of this article.
  • 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. , 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.
  • Art and Royalty in Sparta of the 3Rd Century B.C

    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.
  • Illinois Classical Studies

    Illinois Classical Studies

    i 11 Parallel Lives: Plutarch's Lives, Lapo da Castiglionchio the Younger (1405-1438) and the Art of Italian Renaissance Translation CHRISTOPHER S. CELENZA Before his premature death in 1438 of an outbreak of plague in Ferrara, the Florentine humanist and follower of the papal curia Lapo da Castiglionchio the Younger left behind three main bodies of work in Latin, all still either unedited or incompletely edited: his own self-collected letters, a small number of prose treatises, and a sizeable corpus of Greek-to-Latin translations. This paper concerns primarily the last of these three aspects of his work and has as its evidentiary focus two autograph manuscripts that contain inter alia final versions of Lapo's Latin translations of Plutarch's Lives of Themistocles, Artaxerxes, and Aratus. In addition, however, to studying Lapo's translating techniques, this paper will address chiefly the complexities of motivation surrounding Lapo's choice of dedicatees for these translations. The range of circumstances will demonstrate, I hope, the lengths to which a young, little-known humanist had to go to support himself in an environment where there was as yet no real fixed, institutional place for a newly created discipline. Lapo and Translation: Patronage, Theory, and Practice Of the three areas mentioned, Lapo's translations represent the most voluminous part of his oeuvre and in fact it is to his translations that he owes his modem reputation. But why did this young humanist devote so much energy to translating? And why were Plutarch's Lives such an important part of his effort? An earlier version of this paper was delivered as an Oldfather Lecture at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign on 8 November 1996.
  • Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult

    Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult

    ΑΡΣΙΝΟΗ ΕΥΠΛΟΙΑ Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult Carlos Francis Robinson Bachelor of Arts (Hons. 1) A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2019 Historical and Philosophical Inquiry Abstract Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult By the early Hellenistic period a trend was emerging in which royal women were deified as Aphrodite. In a unique innovation, Queen Arsinoë II of Egypt (c. 316 – 270 BC) was deified as the maritime Aphrodite, and was associated with the cult titles Euploia, Akraia, and Galenaië. It was the important study of Robert (1966) which identified that the poets Posidippus and Callimachus were honouring Arsinoë II as the maritime Aphrodite. This thesis examines how this new third-century BC cult of ‘Arsinoë Aphrodite’ adopted aspects of Greek cults of the maritime Aphrodite, creating a new derivative cult. The main historical sources for this cult are the epigrams of Posidippus and Callimachus, including a relatively new epigram (Posidippus AB 39) published in 2001. This thesis demonstrates that the new cult of Arsinoë Aphrodite utilised existing traditions, such as: Aphrodite’s role as patron of fleets, the practice of dedications to Aphrodite by admirals, the use of invocations before sailing, and the practice of marine dedications such as shells. In this way the Ptolemies incorporated existing religious traditions into a new form of ruler cult. This study is the first attempt to trace the direct relationship between Ptolemaic ruler cult and existing traditions of the maritime Aphrodite, and deepens our understanding of the strategies of ruler cult adopted in the early Hellenistic period.
  • The Romanization of Attic Ritual Space in the Age of Augustus

    The Romanization of Attic Ritual Space in the Age of Augustus

    The Romanization of Attic Ritual Space in the Age of Augustus Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Benavides, Makayla Lorraine Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction, presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 14:30:47 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/633170 THE ROMANIZATION OF ATTIC RITUAL SPACE IN THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS by Makayla Benavides ____________________________ Copyright © Makayla Benavides 2019 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF RELIGIOUS STUDIES AND CLASSICS In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2019 1 7 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Master's Committee, we certify that we have read the thesis prepared by Makayla Benavides titled The Romanizationof Attic Ritual Space in the Age ofAugustus and recommend that it be accepted as fulfillingthe dissertation requirement for the Master's Degree. Date: .r- / - :.?CJ/ 5f David Soren Date: S - I - 2..o I � Mary E Voyatzis David Gilman Romano Date: ----- [Committee Member Name} Final approval and acceptance of this thesis is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copies of the thesis to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this thesis prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfillingthe Master's requirement.
  • Ancient Greek Political Thought in Practice Paul Cartledge Index More Information

    Ancient Greek Political Thought in Practice Paul Cartledge Index More Information

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-45595-4 - Ancient Greek Political Thought in Practice Paul Cartledge Index More information Index Achilles 30, 36–7 on aristocracy 51 shield of 38–9 on citizenship 8, 80 Aegina 53 on the city state 9, 14 Aelius Aristides, Publius 130 on democracy 57–8, 102–3 Aeschylus 2, 66, 71–2 Ethics 15, 21 Oresteia 66, 67, 71 on freedom and slavery 20, 103 Persians 2, 66, 71 on the ideal statesman 102–3 Seven against Thebes 66 method 102–3 Suppliant Women 63, 71 on politeiai 21–2, 61, 103 Agamemnon 25, 30–1, 35, 37 prejudices 103 Agesilaus II of Sparta 100, 118 on Sparta 113 Agis IV of Sparta 113–17 on ta politika 14–15 agora 12, 15 Arrian of Nicomedia 104 see also space, civic and political Assembly, Athenian 49, 50, 58, 60–2, 72, 78, 80, akropolis 12, 15 142 Alcibiades 23, 82, 88, 97 Homeric 33–6 Alcmaeon of Croton 70 Spartan 10 Alexander III ‘the Great’ of Macedon 12, 54, Athenian Constitution (Ath. Pol.) 48, 50–1, 140 93–5, 103–5, 107, 126 Athens 5, 17, 19–20, 26, 47, 65–8, 92–3, 104, 106, as (ideal) king 95, 103–4, 126 108 and philosophers 104–5 as (ab)normal polis 78–81 amnesty, Athens 85, 88 as Aristotle’s ‘ultimate democracy’ 102 Anaxagoras of Clazomenae 83 and Attica 52 Anaxarchus of Abdera 104 avoidance of stasis 23 andreia (courage, pugnacity) 19 as birthplace of democracy 46–7, 65 anti-democratic 36, 59–60, 63, 76, 88–9, 96, 99, as ‘city of words’ and debate 72–3 100, 102, 110, 140 classes in 50 see also democracy, critics of democracy and documentation 3, 49 Antigonid dynasty 107, 108 democracy as best
  • The Ptolemaic Sea Empire

    The Ptolemaic Sea Empire

    chapter 5 The Ptolemaic Sea Empire Rolf Strootman Introduction: Empire or “Overseas Possessions”? In 1982, archaeologists of the State Hermitage Museum excavated a sanctu- ary at the site of Nymphaion on the eastern shore of the Crimea. The sanctu- ary had been in use from ca. 325 bce until its sudden abandonment around 250 bce.1 An inscription found in situ associates the site with Aphrodite and Apollo, and with a powerful local dynasty, the Spartokids.2 Built upon a rocky promontory overlooking the Kimmerian Bosporos near the port of Panti- kapaion (the seat of the Spartokids), the sanctuary clearly was linked to the sea. Most remarkable among the remains were two polychrome plastered walls covered with graffiti depicting more than 80 ships—both war galleys and cargo vessels under sail— of varying size and quality, as well as images of animals and people. The most likely interpretation of the ship images is that they were connected to votive offerings made to Aphrodite (or Apollo) in return for safe voyages.3 Most noticeable among the graffiti is a detailed, ca. 1.15 m. wide drawing of a warship, dated by the excavators to ca. 275–250, and inscribed on its prow with the name “Isis” (ΙΣΙΣ).4 The ship is commonly 1 All dates hereafter will be Before Common Era. I am grateful to Christelle Fischer-Bovet’s for her generous and critical comments. 2 SEG xxxviii 752; xxxix 701; the inscription mentions Pairisades ii, King of the Bosporos (r. 284/3– 245), and his brother. Kimmerian Bosporos is the ancient Greek name for the Chan- nel now known as the Strait of Kerch, and by extension the entire Crimea/ Sea of Azov region; see Wallace 2012 with basic bibliography.
  • SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII 'Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid

    SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII 'Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid

    SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII ‘Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid Kingdom’ (Sunday, 28 July to Sunday, 4 August 2019) Abstracts Almagor, Eran, Jerusalem, Israel ([email protected]) Plutarch (Life of Demetrius) and Others on the Battles of Ipsos and Kyrrhestika This paper aims to re-discuss the depiction of the Battles of Ipsos (301) and Kyrrhestika (285) as they are found in Plutarch’s Life of Demetrios (chs. 28–29 and 48–49 respectively), the main or only source for both military engagements. It purports to explore the information provided by Plutarch and to offer a reconstruction of the battle’s stages, in particular with regard to the feasible role (and number) of elephants employed. This conjecture will be made also with relation to proposals concerning Plutarch’s ultimate source as a means to better understand the battles. A comparison will be made with the descriptions of Ipsos by Diodoros (and scattered details found in other authors) and of Kyrrhestika by Polyainos. One of the points to be made is the extent to which Plutarch’s depictions echo each other and serve as a literary closure in his work: the first battle saw the end of Antigonos, the second the political end of Demetrios, his son. As the winner in both battles, Seleukos plays the role of the protagonist’s rival and limit. Berzon, Catherine, Moscow, Russia ([email protected]) The War between Demetrios I and Alexander Balas in the Light of Classical and Cuneiform Evidence The paper is concerned with the chronology and crucial events of the war between King Demetrios I Soter and the usurper Alexander Balas.
  • Contesting the Greatness of Alexander the Great: the Representation of Alexander in the Histories of Polybius and Livy

    Contesting the Greatness of Alexander the Great: the Representation of Alexander in the Histories of Polybius and Livy

    ABSTRACT Title of Document: CONTESTING THE GREATNESS OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT: THE REPRESENTATION OF ALEXANDER IN THE HISTORIES OF POLYBIUS AND LIVY Nikolaus Leo Overtoom, Master of Arts, 2011 Directed By: Professor Arthur M. Eckstein, Department of History By investigating the works of Polybius and Livy, we can discuss an important aspect of the impact of Alexander upon the reputation and image of Rome. Because of the subject of their histories and the political atmosphere in which they were writing - these authors, despite their generally positive opinions of Alexander, ultimately created scenarios where they portrayed the Romans as superior to the Macedonian king. This study has five primary goals: to produce a commentary on the various Alexander passages found in Polybius’ and Livy’s histories; to establish the generally positive opinion of Alexander held by these two writers; to illustrate that a noticeable theme of their works is the ongoing comparison between Alexander and Rome; to demonstrate Polybius’ and Livy’s belief in Roman superiority, even over Alexander; and finally to create an understanding of how this motif influences their greater narratives and alters our appreciation of their works. CONTESTING THE GREATNESS OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT: THE REPRESENTATION OF ALEXANDER IN THE HISTORIES OF POLYBIUS AND LIVY By Nikolaus Leo Overtoom Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts 2011 Advisory Committee: Professor Arthur M. Eckstein, Chair Professor Judith P. Hallett Professor Kenneth G. Holum © Copyright by Nikolaus Leo Overtoom 2011 Dedication in amorem matris Janet L.
  • University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan LINDA JANE PIPER 1967

    University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan LINDA JANE PIPER 1967

    This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 66-15,122 PIPER, Linda Jane, 1935- A HISTORY OF SPARTA: 323-146 B.C. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1966 History, ancient University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan LINDA JANE PIPER 1967 All Rights Reserved A HISTORY OF SPARTA: 323-1^6 B.C. DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Linda Jane Piper, A.B., M.A. The Ohio State University 1966 Approved by Adviser Department of History PREFACE The history of Sparta from the death of Alexander in 323 B.C; to the destruction of Corinth in 1^6 B.C. is the history of social revolution and Sparta's second rise to military promi­ nence in the Peloponnesus; the history of kings and tyrants; the history of Sparta's struggle to remain autonomous in a period of amalgamation. It is also a period in Sparta's history too often neglected by historians both past and present. There is no monograph directly concerned with Hellenistic Sparta. For the most part, this period is briefly and only inci­ dentally covered in works dealing either with the whole history of ancient Sparta, or simply as a part of Hellenic or Hellenistic 1 2 history in toto. Both Pierre Roussel and Eug&ne Cavaignac, in their respective surveys of Spartan history, have written clear and concise chapters on the Hellenistic period. Because of the scope of their subject, however, they were forced to limit them­ selves to only the most important events and people of this time, and great gaps are left in between.