DOCSLIB.ORG

THE ANTIGONID CAMPAIGN in CYPRUS, 306 BC* One of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE ANTIGONID CAMPAIGN in CYPRUS, 306 BC* One of The THE ANTIGONID CAMPAIGN IN CYPRUS, 306 BC* One of the crucial turning points in the continual ebb and flow of power which characterises the decades following the death of Alexander the Great is the campaign fought in Cyprus between the Antigonids and Ptolemy Soter in 306 BC. The centrepiece of the campaign is, naturally, the great sea-battle fought near Salamis, but the lead-up to this momen- tous engagement, and the historical ripples which emanated from it, are arguably of far greater importance, although they have received much less scrutiny from scholars of the epoch. Consequently, several aspects of the affair amply repay further investigation. These include the actual timing and preliminary phases of the campaign, some source anomalies concerning the battle of Salamis itself, and the short- and long-term historical repercussions of the overwhelming victory achieved by Demetrius Poliorcetes on behalf of his father, Antigonus Monophthal- mus. The campaign also enables analysis of a crucial transitional stage in the career of Demetrius himself, and it is these matters which the pre- sent paper seeks to address. The events of the Cypriote campaign may be summarised as follows: at some stage soon after establishing an Antigonid foothold in Greece at Athens and Megara with a large expeditionary force in summer 307, Demetrius received orders from his father to embark on a campaign to drive Ptolemy from his base on Cyprus. He landed on the island in early 306, and after some preliminary sparring, crushed Ptolemy at sea. Imme- diately afterward, Antigonus assumed the title of basileus for himself and his son, thus becoming the first of the Hellenistic kings. The battle of Salamis was arguably the most significant naumachia since its homonymous predecessor of 480, and was a watershed in the careers of Antigonus and Demetrius. It enabled them not only to arrogate the royal title, but also to assert themselves as the new Macedonian dynasty * Note the following abbreviations: R.A. BILLOWS, Antigonos: Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State, Berkeley 1990. H. HAUBEN, Vlootbevel: Het vlootbevelhebberschap in de vroege Diadochentijd (323-301 vóór Christus). Een prosopografisch en instutioneel onderzoek, Brussels 1975. G. HILL, Cyprus I: A History of Cyprus, vol. I, Cambridge 1940 [repr. 1972]. J. SEIBERT, Ptolemaios: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Ptolemaios’ I., Munich 1969. 134 P. WHEATLEY replacing the Argeads, and their propaganda machine was to use the vic- tory to enhance the Antigonid image for decades1. Diodorus Siculus is the chief literary source for the Cypriote cam- paign, devoting seven chapters of his Library of History to it, mainly focussed on the military narrative. There are some problems with his tallies of Antigonid ship numbers, but aside from this, he supplies us with a sharp, precise, and detailed account in the Hieronymean tradi- tion. Indeed, it is generally agreed that Hieronymus of Cardia, a con- temporary Antigonid official who later compiled a history of his times, must be Diodorus’ immediate authority2. Much of the account of the Cypriote campaign has the appearance of being first-hand, and Hiero- nymus would have found ample court records and eye-witnesses of the great sea battle, even if he was not a participant himself3. Our other major literary source, Plutarch, compresses his account into only two chapters of his Life of Demetrius. While digesting the actual battle of Salamis itself, he nevertheless supplies some information not provided by Diodorus, perhaps indicating that he is employing an Atthidographic source rather than using the Hieronymean tradition4. He includes 1 Sources for the Cypriote campaign: Diod. XX 46.5-53.2, 82.1; Plut., Demetr. 15.1- 17.1; Pausanias I 6.6; Polyaenus, Strat. IV 7.7; Justin XV 2.6-9; Trogus, Prol. 15; Appian, Syr. 54; Parian Marble, FGrHist 239 F B21; Alexis ap. Athen., Deip. VI 254a. The literary tradition is unanimous regarding the brilliance and significance of the vic- tory, but the numismatic evidence perhaps best epitomises how effectively it was used to publicise the Antigonid cause in the following decades. Demetrius usurped the royal pre- rogative of issuing coins from the mint of Salamis after 306, culminating in the famous series depicting the winged Nike alighting on a warship’s prow; for full discussion, see E.T. NEWELL, The Coinages of Demetrius Poliorcetes, London 1927, ch. III, esp. p. 24ff. & Pl. II; O. MØRKHOLM, Early Hellenistic Coinage from the Accession of Alexander to the Peace of Apamea (336-188 B.C.), Cambridge 1991, p. 77-78, Pl. X, nos. 162-165 & 171. 2 J. HORNBLOWER, Hieronymus of Cardia, Oxford 1981, is still the best treatment of the historiography; see also R.A. BILLOWS, Antigonos, p. 327-352. 3 The account of Demetrius’ aristeia at Salamis, for instance, must either be propa- ganda or an eye-witness account, and is reminiscent of the description of the young man prior to the battle of Gaza in 312 (Diod. XX 52.1-3, cf. XIX 81). The description of the approach of Ptolemy’s fleet to Salamis is certainly from an eye-witness: toÕ dè Ptole- maíou pléontov êpì t®n Salam⁄na kaì t¬n üpjretik¬n ploíwn sunepoménwn pór- rwqen katapljktikòn ör¢sqai sunébaine tòn stólon dià tò pl±qov (Diod. XX 49.6). See J. SEIBERT, Ptolemaios, p. 190-192; H. HAUBEN, Vlootbevel, p. 108-109. 4 See W.E. SWEET, Sources of Plutarch’s ‘Demetrius’, CW 44 (1951), p. 177-181. Plutarch’s interest in military detail in the Demetrius is minimal. He devotes very little space to the critical battles of Gaza, Salamis or Ipsus, being absorbed in his biographical agenda of chronicling Demetrius’ and Antony’s moral and mental deterioration (see, for instance, Demetr. 1.7; Synkrisis 4.2-3, 5.2, 6.2.). If an Athenian source is being used, as ANTIGONID CAMPAIGN IN CYPRUS 135 details from the aftermath of the engagement, and a full account of Antigonus’ response to the news. The significant detail which strongly suggests Plutarch’s use of an Athenian source at this point is the record, nowhere else attested, of Demetrius’ gift of 1,200 panoplies to the city after Salamis5, presumably as a reward for the naval aid6. Numerous peripheral sources also record the battle, but they are extremely abbreviated, and tend thematically to contrast the first con- frontation between Demetrius and Ptolemy at the battle of Gaza (312 BC) with the second at Salamis, severely compressing the intervening years in the process7. The only useful detail added to Diodorus and Plutarch is a chronological pointer in Pausanias. The final source, Polyaenus, con- tains some helpful data, but also a wildly divergent account of the main battle. To these writers we shall return. I. THE TIMING OF THE CAMPAIGN It is difficult to ascertain exactly when Demetrius was ordered to Cyprus by his father, as his precise movements after his triumphal entry into Athens in August 307 are not easy to trace. The chronographic and liter- ary sources are inspecific regarding the date of the campaign: it is only generally recorded by Diodorus and the Parian Marble as being within the archon year of 307/068. However, an extremely compressed excerpt from Pausanias contains a specific chronological pointer: dielqóntov dè toÕ xeim¬nov Djmßtriov pleúsav êv Kúpron Menélaon satrápjn Ptolemaíou naumaxíaç kaì aŒqiv aûtòn Ptolema⁄on êpidiabánta êníkjse· is likely, the detail would perhaps decrease while Demetrius was not in Athens itself, even if the account was ultimately derived from an eye-witness on, for instance, one of the Athenian quadriremes in the battle. 5 Plut., Demetr. 17.1. C. HABICHT, Athens from Alexander to Antony, transl. D.L. Schneider, Cambridge (MA) 1997, p. 77, further suggests this may have been meant to imitate (and outdo) Alexander’s gift of 300 Persian panoplies to the city after the Grani- cus (Arrian, Anab. I 16.6-7). 6 Thirty Athenian quadriremes fought with Demetrius at Salamis: Diod. XX 50.3, with W.S. FERGUSON, Hellenistic Athens: an Historical Essay, London 1911, p. 112; W.K. PRITCHETT, A Decree of the Year of Koroibos, AJP 58 (1937), p. 329-333, 333. 7 Paus. I 6.6; Appian, Syr. 54; cf. Justin XV 1.6-2.6. 8 Diod. XX 47-53; Parian Marble, FGrHist 239 F B21. 136 P. WHEATLEY When the winter was over, Demetrius sailed to Cyprus and overcame in a naval action Menelaus, the satrap of Ptolemy, and afterwards Ptolemy himself, who had crossed to bring help9. The excerpt is too abbreviated to be of much help, but does place Demetrius’ arrival in Cyprus «after winter», and taken in conjunction with the Parian Marble entry, this narrows it down to spring or early summer of 306. But it is impossible to know whether Pausanias refers to the direct embarkation for Cyprus from Cilicia, or is speaking generally of Demetrius’ sailing from Athens to initiate the campaign. However, most scholars assume he spent the autumn and winter of 307/06 in Athens10. This is corroborated to some degree by Plutarch, who reveals at the beginning of a digression on Demetrius’ conjugal habits, that he lingered (sxoláhwn) in Athens for a while, and that when his father’s summons came, he was enmeshed in negotiations with the other Greek states11. These exchanges were no doubt time-consuming, and while the sources do not allow a detailed reconstruction, it may safely be surmised that he spent several months in Athens, but probably not the whole win- ter. The timing of his father’s apparently unilateral decision and sum- mons, which appear to have been driven by concern over the proximity of the Ptolemaic naval base to his new capital in Upper Syria12, is also unclear.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4, Section 1
    Hellenistic Civilization 324 - 100 BC Philip II of Macedonia . The Macedonians were viewed as barbarians. By the 5th century BC, the Macedonians had emerged as a powerful kingdom in the north. In 359 BC, Philip II became king, and he turned Macedonia into the chief power in the Greek world. Philip II Philip II of Macedonia . The Macedonians were viewed as barbarians. By the 5th century BC, the Macedonians had emerged as a powerful kingdom in the north. In 359 BC, Philip II became king, and he turned Macedonia into the chief power in the Greek world. Philip was a great admirer of Greek culture, and he wanted to unite all of Greece under Macedonian rule. Fearing Philip, Athens allied with a number of other Greek city-states to fight the Macedonians. In 338, the Macedonians crushed the Greeks. After quickly gaining control over most of the Greek city-states, Philip turned to Sparta. He sent them a message, "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city." . Their reply was “if", both Philip and his son, Alexander, would leave the Spartans alone. By 336 BC, Philip was preparing to invade the Persian Empire when he was assassinated. The murder occurred during the celebration of his daughter’s marriage, while the king was entering the theater, he was killed by the captain his bodyguards. Alexander the Great . Alexander III was born in 356 BC. When Alexander was 13, his father Philip chose Aristotle as his tutor, and in return for teaching Alexander, Philip agreed to rebuild Aristotle's hometown which Philip had razed.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Egypt Under the Ptolemies
    UC-NRLF $C lb EbE THE HISTORY OF EGYPT THE PTOLEMIES. BY SAMUEL SHARPE. LONDON: EDWARD MOXON, DOVER STREET. 1838. 65 Printed by Arthur Taylor, Coleman Street. TO THE READER. The Author has given neither the arguments nor the whole of the authorities on which the sketch of the earlier history in the Introduction rests, as it would have had too much of the dryness of an antiquarian enquiry, and as he has already published them in his Early History of Egypt. In the rest of the book he has in every case pointed out in the margin the sources from which he has drawn his information. » Canonbury, 12th November, 1838. Works published by the same Author. The EARLY HISTORY of EGYPT, from the Old Testament, Herodotus, Manetho, and the Hieroglyphieal Inscriptions. EGYPTIAN INSCRIPTIONS, from the British Museum and other sources. Sixty Plates in folio. Rudiments of a VOCABULARY of EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS. M451 42 ERRATA. Page 103, line 23, for Syria read Macedonia. Page 104, line 4, for Syrians read Macedonians. CONTENTS. Introduction. Abraham : shepherd kings : Joseph : kings of Thebes : era ofMenophres, exodus of the Jews, Rameses the Great, buildings, conquests, popu- lation, mines: Shishank, B.C. 970: Solomon: kings of Tanis : Bocchoris of Sais : kings of Ethiopia, B. c. 730 .- kings ofSais : Africa is sailed round, Greek mercenaries and settlers, Solon and Pythagoras : Persian conquest, B.C. 525 .- Inarus rebels : Herodotus and Hellanicus : Amyrtaus, Nectanebo : Eudoxus, Chrysippus, and Plato : Alexander the Great : oasis of Ammon, native judges,
    [Show full text]
  • Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Hellenic League
    DEMETRIUSPOLIORCETES AND THE HELLENIC LEAGUE (PLATE 33) 1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND D JURING the six years, 307/6-302/1 B.C., issues were raised and settled which shaped the course of western history for a long time to come. The epoch was alike critical for Athens, Hellas, and the Macedonians. The Macedonians faced squarely during this period the decision whether their world was to be one world or an aggregate of separate kingdoms with conflicting interests, and ill-defined boundaries, preserved by a precarious balance of power and incapable of common action against uprisings of Greek and oriental subjects and the plundering appetites of surrounding barbarians. The champion of unity was King Antigonus the One- Eyed, and his chief lieutenant his brilliant but unstatesmanlike son, King Demetrius the Taker of Cities, a master of siege operations and of naval construction and tactics, more skilled in organizing the land-instruments of warfare than in using them on the battle field. The final campaign between the champions of Macedonian unity and disunity opened in 307 with the liberation of Athens by Demetrius and ended in 301 B.C. with the Battle of the Kings, when Antigonus died in a hail of javelins and Demetrius' cavalry failed to penetrate a corps of 500 Indian elephants in a vain effort to rescue hinm. Of his four adversaries King Lysimachus and King Kassander left no successors; the other two, Kings Ptolemy of Egypt and Seleucus of Syria, were more fortunate, and they and Demetrius' able son, Antigonus Gonatas, planted the three dynasties with whom the Romans dealt and whom they successively destroyed in wars spread over 44 years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coins from the Necropolis "Metlata" Near the Village of Rupite
    margarita ANDONOVA the coins from the necropolis "metlata" near the village of rupite... THE COINS FROM THE NECROPOLIS METLATA NEAR THE VILLAGE "OF RUPITE" (F. MULETAROVO), MUNICIPALITY OF PETRICH by Margarita ANDONOVA, Regional Museum of History– Blagoevgrad This article sets to describe and introduce known as Charon's fee was registered through the in scholarly debate the numismatic data findspots of the coins on the skeleton; specifically, generated during the 1985-1988 archaeological these coins were found near the head, the pelvis, excavations at one of the necropoleis situated in the left arm and the legs. In cremations in situ, the locality "Metlata" near the village of Rupite. coins were placed either inside the grave or in The necropolis belongs to the long-known urns made of stone or clay, as well as in bowls "urban settlement" situated on the southern placed next to them. It is noteworthy that out of slopes of Kozhuh hill, at the confluence of 167 graves, coins were registered only in 52, thus the Strumeshnitsa and Struma Rivers, and accounting for less than 50%. The absence of now identified with Heraclea Sintica. The coins in some graves can probably be attributed archaeological excavations were conducted by to the fact that "in Greek society, there was no Yulia Bozhinova from the Regional Museum of established dogma about the way in which the History, Blagoevgrad. souls of the dead travelled to the realm of Hades" The graves number 167 and are located (Зубарь 1982, 108). According to written sources, within an area of ​​750 m². Coins were found mainly Euripides, it is clear that the deceased in 52 graves, both Hellenistic and Roman, may be accompanied to the underworld not only and 10 coins originate from areas (squares) by Charon, but also by Hermes or Thanatos.
    [Show full text]
  • Περίληψη : Antigonus Monophthalmus (382-301 BC) Was a General of Alexander the Great, the Most Important of the Successors and Founder of the Antigonid Dynasty
    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Παναγοπούλου Κατερίνα Μετάφραση : Καλογεροπούλου Γεωργία , Καριώρης Παναγιώτης Για παραπομπή : Παναγοπούλου Κατερίνα , "Antigonus I Monophthalmus (One- Eyed)", Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=7285> Περίληψη : Antigonus Monophthalmus (382-301 BC) was a general of Alexander the Great, the most important of the successors and founder of the Antigonid dynasty. He was the governor of Phrygia and possibly Lydia in Asia Minor. He was appointed ruler of Asia Minor for a short period of time (311 BC) and he was the first of the Diadochoi to assume the royal title along with his son Demetrius I (306 BC). He was killed in the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC. Τόπος και Χρόνος Γέννησης 382 BC, Macedonia Τόπος και Χρόνος Θανάτου 301 BC, Ipsus Κύρια Ιδιότητα General of Alexander the Great, King 1. Family-Education-Early Years Contemporary to the Macedonian kings Phillip II (359-336 BC) and Alexander the Great (336-323 BC), like all the Diadochoi, Antigonus Monophtphalmus was born in 382 BC and lost his life in the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC.1 His father was called Philip2 and he had three brothers, but only the names of the two are known (Demetrius, Ptolemy).3 His family belonged to the Macedonian aristocracy and he was raised in the wider area of Pella, the capital of Macedonia.4 Hence, he was very well educated and had studied Euripides, Homer, tragic and lyric poetry, rhetoric and philosophy.5 His father lost his life during the defeat of the Macedonian army by the Illyrian invaders, which left Macedonia without a king in 359 BC.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar of Roman Events
    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
    [Show full text]
  • Περίληψη : Demetrius Poliorcetes (337 B.C.-283 B.C.) Was One of the Diadochi (Successors) of Alexander the Great
    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Παναγοπούλου Κατερίνα Μετάφραση : Βελέντζας Γεώργιος Για παραπομπή : Παναγοπούλου Κατερίνα , "Demetrius Poliorcetes", Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=7727> Περίληψη : Demetrius Poliorcetes (337 B.C.-283 B.C.) was one of the Diadochi (Successors) of Alexander the Great. He initially co-ruled with his father, Antigonus I Monophthalmos, in western Asia Minor and participated in campaigns to Asia and mainland Greece. After the heavy defeat and death of Monophthalmos in Ipsus (301 B.C.), he managed to increase his few dominions and ascended to the Macedonian throne (294-287 B.C.). He spent the last years of his life captured by Seleucus I in Asia Minor. Άλλα Ονόματα Poliorcetes Τόπος και Χρόνος Γέννησης 337/336 BC – Macedonia Τόπος και Χρόνος Θανάτου 283 BC – Asia Minor Κύρια Ιδιότητα Hellenistic king 1. Youth Son of Antigonus I Monophthalmos and (much younger) Stratonice, daughter of the notable Macedonian Corrhaeus, Demetrius I Poliorcetes was born in 337/6 B.C. in Macedonia and died in 283 B.C. in Asia Minor. His younger brother, Philip, was born in Kelainai, the capital of Phrygia Major, as Stratonice had followed her husband in the Asia Minor campaign. Demetrius spent his childhood in Kelainai and is supposed to have received mainly military education.1 At the age of seventeen he married Phila, daughter of the Macedonian general and supervisor of Macedonia, Antipater, and widow of Antipater’s expectant successor, Craterus. The marriage must have served political purposes, as Antipater had been appointed commander of the Macedonian district towards the end of the First War of the Succesors (321-320 B.C.).
    [Show full text]
  • Spies (Kataskopoi, Otakoustai)
    ch3.qxd 10/18/1999 2:12 PM Page 103 Chapter 3 Beyond the Pale: Spies (Kataskopoi, Otakoustai) It is almost as dif‹cult to de‹ne a spy as to catch one. The most common word among the Greeks for spies was kataskopoi, but throughout the classical era they did not use this term for spies alone: an author might employ it in one context where we would say “spy,” in another where we would understand “scout,” in a third where we would have dif‹culty translating it at all.1 Otakoustai were consistently used as covert agents, but they were rarely sent abroad.2 Is it then anachronistic to distinguish spies from other agents? The answer to this problem can perhaps be found in a distinction in the social perception of different types of kataskopoi (et al.). Some kataskopoi (i.e., spies) were perceived by their victims as treacherous and seem to have been subject to legislation concerning treachery; others (i.e., scouts et al.) were not.3 Whereas spies were normally interrogated under 1. Thucydides, e.g., used kataskopoi for spies at 6.45.1 (they were not named but were distinguished from other sources reporting to the Syracusans) and 8.6.4 (the perioikos Phry- nis, discussed shortly); mounted scouts at 6.63.3; and of‹cial investigators at 4.27.3–4 (Cleon and Theagenes, chosen by the Athenians to investigate matters at Pylos) and 8.41.1 (men appointed to oversee the Spartan navarch Astyochus). The word kataskopos is not found in Homer—he instead used episkopos or skopos indiscriminately for spies, scouts, watchers, and overseers.
    [Show full text]
  • Synoikism, Urbanization, and Empire in the Early Hellenistic Period Ryan
    Synoikism, Urbanization, and Empire in the Early Hellenistic Period by Ryan Anthony Boehm A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Emily Mackil, Chair Professor Erich Gruen Professor Mark Griffith Spring 2011 Copyright © Ryan Anthony Boehm, 2011 ABSTRACT SYNOIKISM, URBANIZATION, AND EMPIRE IN THE EARLY HELLENISTIC PERIOD by Ryan Anthony Boehm Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology University of California, Berkeley Professor Emily Mackil, Chair This dissertation, entitled “Synoikism, Urbanization, and Empire in the Early Hellenistic Period,” seeks to present a new approach to understanding the dynamic interaction between imperial powers and cities following the Macedonian conquest of Greece and Asia Minor. Rather than constructing a political narrative of the period, I focus on the role of reshaping urban centers and regional landscapes in the creation of empire in Greece and western Asia Minor. This period was marked by the rapid creation of new cities, major settlement and demographic shifts, and the reorganization, consolidation, or destruction of existing settlements and the urbanization of previously under- exploited regions. I analyze the complexities of this phenomenon across four frameworks: shifting settlement patterns, the regional and royal economy, civic religion, and the articulation of a new order in architectural and urban space. The introduction poses the central problem of the interrelationship between urbanization and imperial control and sets out the methodology of my dissertation. After briefly reviewing and critiquing previous approaches to this topic, which have focused mainly on creating catalogues, I point to the gains that can be made by shifting the focus to social and economic structures and asking more specific interpretive questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Judea/Israel Under the Greek Empires." Israel and Empire: a Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism
    "Judea/Israel under the Greek Empires." Israel and Empire: A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism. Perdue, Leo G., and Warren Carter.Baker, Coleman A., eds. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015. 129–216. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 30 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9780567669797.ch-005>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 30 September 2021, 15:32 UTC. Copyright © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker 2015. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 5 Judea/Israel under the Greek Empires* In 33130 BCE, by military victory, the Macedonian Alexander ended the Persian Empire. He defeated the Persian king Darius at Gaugamela, advanced to a welcoming Babylon, and progressed to Persepolis where he burned Xerxes palace supposedly in retaliation for Persias invasions of Greece some 150 years previously (Diodorus 17.72.1-6). Thus one empire gave way to another by a different name. So began the Greek empires that dominated Judea/Israel for the next two hundred or so years, the focus of this chapter. Is a postcolonial discussion of these empires possible and what might it highlight? Considerable dif�culties stand in the way. One is the weight of conventional analyses and disciplinary practices which have framed the discourse with emphases on the various roles of the great men, the ruling state, military battles, and Greek settlers, and have paid relatively little regard to the dynamics of imperial power from the perspectives of native inhabitants, the impact on peasants and land, and poverty among non-elites, let alone any reciprocal impact between colonizers and colon- ized.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF Datastream
    A Dividing Sea The Adriatic World from the Fourth to the First Centuries BC By Keith Robert Fairbank, Jr. B.A. Brigham Young University, 2010 M.A. Brigham Young University, 2012 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Program in Ancient History at Brown University PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND MAY 2018 © Copyright 2018 by Keith R. Fairbank, Jr. This dissertation by Keith R. Fairbank, Jr. is accepted in its present form by the Program in Ancient History as satisfying the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date _______________ ____________________________________ Graham Oliver, Advisor Recommended to the Graduate Council Date _______________ ____________________________________ Peter van Dommelen, Reader Date _______________ ____________________________________ Lisa Mignone, Reader Approved by the Graduate Council Date _______________ ____________________________________ Andrew G. Campbell, Dean of the Graduate School iii CURRICULUM VITAE Keith Robert Fairbank, Jr. hails from the great states of New York and Montana. He grew up feeding cattle under the Big Sky, serving as senior class president and continuing on to Brigham Young University in Utah for his BA in Humanities and Classics (2010). Keith worked as a volunteer missionary for two years in Brazil, where he learned Portuguese (2004–2006). Keith furthered his education at Brigham Young University, earning an MA in Classics (2012). While there he developed a curriculum for accelerated first year Latin focused on competency- based learning. He matriculated at Brown University in fall 2012 in the Program in Ancient History. While at Brown, Keith published an appendix in The Landmark Caesar. He also co- directed a Mellon Graduate Student Workshop on colonial entanglements.
    [Show full text]