DOCSLIB.ORG

The Double Axe and Approaching the Question of Karian-Kretan Interaction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Karia and Krete: a study in social and cultural interaction Naomi H Carless Unwin UCL DPhil History 1 I, Naomi H Carless Unwin, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Abstract My thesis focuses on social and cultural interaction between Karia (in south western Anatolia) and Krete, over a long time span; from the Bronze Age to the Roman period. A persistent tradition existed in antiquity linking the Karians with Krete; this was mirrored in civic mythologies in Karia, as well as in cults and toponyms. My research aims to construct a new framework in which to read these traditions. The way in which a community ‘remembered’ its past was not an objective view of history; traditions were transmitted because they were considered to reflect something about a society. The persistence of a Kretan link within Karian mythologies and cults indicates that Krete was ‘good to think with’ even (or especially) during a period when Karia itself was undergoing changes (becoming, in a sense, both ‘de-Karianized’ and ‘Hellenized’). I focus on the late Classical and Hellenistic periods, from which most of our source material derives. The relevance of a shared past is considered in light of actual contacts between the two regions: diplomatic, economic, cultural and military. Against the prevailing orthodoxy, which maintains that traditions of earlier contacts, affinities and kinship between peoples from different parts of the Mediterranean were largely constructs of later periods, I take seriously the origins of such traditions and explore how the networks that linked Minoan Krete with Anatolia could have left a residuum in later conceptualisations of regional history. That I am able to do so is mainly thanks to developments in recent archaeological and linguistic research into Bronze Age western Anatolia. Such a diachronic approach throws up obvious questions of methodology: one cannot draw straight lines between the late Bronze age and the second century BC, and so must develop a way of analysing how, and in which contexts, traditions survived. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 6 Abbreviations 7 List of Maps 13 List of Figures 14 Introduction: Approaching the Question of 15 Karian-Kretan Interaction - The Labrys and the Labyrinth 25 - Constructing Networks in the Ancient World 35 - Contact and Cultural Interaction 43 Chapter 1: Articulating a ‘Karian’ Identity 48 - ‘The Karians of Barbarian Speech’ 50 - Language and Identity 58 - Delimiting ‘Karia’ and the ‘Karians’ 63 Chapter 2: The role of Krete in the Mythologies, 73 Local Histories and Cults of Karia - Miletos and Kaunos 76 - The ‘Minoan’ Ports of Anatolia 80 - The ‘Kretinaion’ of Magnesia-on-the-Maeander 84 - The Karian Kouretes 89 - Karia and Lykia 97 Chapter 3: Interaction between Karia and Krete during 105 the Hellenistic period - Mylasa and Krete 106 - Interaction with Krete during the Hellenistic Period 116 - Contextualising the Mylasan Inscriptions 131 Chapter 4: Interaction as a Generator of Cultural 136 Exchange - Mechanisms of Cultural and Religious Interaction 137 - A ‘Kretan-born’ Zeus in Karia 155 - ‘Remembering’ the Past/Reflecting the Present 170 Chapter 5: Early Interaction between Karia and Krete 191 - Minoan and Mycenaean Contacts in Western Anatolia 194 - Karia on the Interface 216 - Reading Mythological Traditions 224 Conclusion 242 4 Appendices 245 Bibliography 261 Maps 284 Figures 290 5 Acknowledgements First and foremost I would like to thank Riet van Bremen for her patience and precision in supervising this thesis. Hans van Wees and Simon Hornblower have also provided valuable comments on early drafts, and I have appreciated their insights. The opportunity to participate in the Labraunda excavations over the last three years has enhanced my research, and I would like to thank Lars Karlsson for welcoming me as a member of the team; also Pontus Hellström, for sharing his knowledge about the region, and Olivier Henry, for answering all my archaeological questions. Grants from UCL and the British School at Ankara made such trips possible, and my knowledge of the history and geography of Karia has improved vastly as a result. The Jacobi scholarship at the Kommission für Alte Geschichte und Epigraphik, München, gave me the opportunity to pursue my research in a stimulating environment, and I would like to thank everyone there for making it a profitable stay. My friends deserve special mention for their support over the last four years, especially Laura and Esther, and my sister Abbie. Also Patrick Finn, who introduced me to the ancient world, and Genevieve, for first suggesting we take a trip to Turkey. Most of all I would like to thank my parents, for everything along the way. 6 Abbreviations ABSA Annual of the British School at Athens Achaie 3 A.D. Rizakis (2008), Achaie III. Les inscriptions de cite achéennes. Épigraphie et histoire (Athens). Ager Interstate Arbitrations S. L. Ager (1996), Interstate Arbitration in the Greek World, 337-90 BC (Berkeley – Los Angeles – London). AJA American Journal of Archaeology ala2004 C. Rouché (2004), Aphrodisias in Late Antiquity. The Late Roman and Byzantine Inscriptions, revised second edition, available at http://insaph.kcl.ac.uk/ala2004 AM A. Goetze (1933), Die Annalen des Mursilis (MVAG 38) (Leipzig). Austin M.M. Austin (2nd ed. 2006), The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest: a selection of ancient sources in translation (Cambridge). Bagnall & Derow R. S. Bagnall & P. Derow (eds.) (2004), Historical Sources in Translation: The Hellenistic Period (2nd ed. Oxford). BCH Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique BE Bulletin Épigraphique, pub. in Revue des Études Grecques BICS Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies BMC Greek (Caria, Cos, Rhodes) B.V. Head (1897), Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Caria, Cos, Rhodes &c. (London, 1897). BMC Greek (Ionia) B.V. Head (1892), Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Ionia (London). BMCR Bryn Mawr Classical Review, http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu Bresson I. Pérée A. Bresson (1991), Recueil des inscriptions de la Pérée rhodienne (Pérée intégrée) (Paris). Callimachus (Pfeiffer) R. Pfeiffer (1949), Callimachus Vol. I: Fragmenta (Oxford). 7 CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum (Berlin, 1845- 1853). Clara Rhodos Clara Rhodos. Studi e materiali pubblicati a cura dell' Istituto storico-archeologico di Rodi. 10 vols. (Rhodes 1928-1941). CPG E. von Leutsch & F. W. Schneidewin (eds.) (1839), Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum (Göttingen). CTH E. Laroche (1971), Catalogue des texts hittites (Paris). EA Epigraphica Anatolica. Zeitschrift für Epigraphik und historische Geographie Anatoliens. FD 3 G. Daux & A. Salac (1932-43), Fouilles de Delphes, III. Epigraphie 3. Depuis le trésor des Athéniens jusqu’aux bases de Géelon, 2 vols. (1 (1932): nos. 1-178; 2 (1943): nos. 179-441) (Paris). FGrHist F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. GIBM Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum (Oxford 1874-1916). GRBS Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies. HTC P. Debord & E. Varinlioğlu (eds.) (2001), Les hautes terres de Carie (Bordeaux). IAph2007 J. Reynolds, C. Rouché, G. Bodard (2007) Inscriptions of Aphrodisias, available at: http://insaph.kcl.ac.uk/iaph2007. IC M. Guarducci (1935-50), Inscriptiones Creticae, 4 vols. ID F. Durrbach, P. Roussel, M. Launey, J. Coupry & A. Plassart (1926-72), Inscriptions de Délos, 7 vols. (1 (1950): nos. 1-88; 2 (1972): nos. 89-104.33; 3 (1926): nos. 290-371; 4 (1929): nos. 372-509; 5 (1935): nos. 1400-1496; 6-7 (1937): nos. 1497- 2879) (Paris). IG Inscriptiones Graecae. I. Didyma A. Rehm, R. Harder (1958) Didyma, II. Die Inschriften (Berlin). 8 I. Ephesos H. Wankel, Ch. Börker, R. Merkelbach, H. Engelmann, D. Knibbe, R. Meric, S. Şahin, J. Nollé (1979-1981), Die Inschriften von Ephesos, 7 vols. Inschriften griechischer Städte Kleinasien Band 11- 17 (Bonn). I. Erythrai H. Engelmann & R. Merkelbach (1972-1973), Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai, 2 vols. Inschriften griechischer Städte Kleinasien Band 1 & 2 (Bonn). I. Iasos W. Blümel (1985), Die Inschriften von Iasos, 2 vols. Inschriften griechischer Städte Kleinasien Band 28, 1&2 (Bonn). I. Kaunos C. Marek (2006), Die Inschriften von Kaunos. Vestigia: Beiträge zur Alten Geschichte. Band 55 (München). I. Knidos W. Blümel (1992), Die Inschriften von Knidos. Inschriften griechischer Städte Kleinasien. Band 41 (Bonn). I. Labraunda J. Crampa (ed.) (1969 &1972), Labraunda: Swedish Excavations and Researches 3 (I & II): The Greek Inscriptions (Stockholm). I. Magnesia O. Kern (1900), Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Maeander (Berlin). I. Mylasa W. Blümel (ed.) (1987-1988), Die Inschriften von Mylasa, 2 vols. Inschriften griechischer Städte Kleinasien. Band 34 & 35 (Bonn). I. Priene F. Hiller von Gaertringen (1906), Inschriften von Priene (Berlin). I. Rhod. Per. W. Blümel (ed.) (1991), Die Inschriften der Rhodischen Peraia. Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien. Band 38 (Bonn). I. Stratonikeia M. Ç. Şahin (ed.) (1981-1982), Die Inschriften von Stratonikeia. Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien. Band 21 & 22. (Bonn). Iscr. di Cos M. Segre, M. (ed.) (1993), Iscrizioni di Cos, 2 vols (Rome). JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies. 9 JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies. JRS Journal of Roman Studies. KBo Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi (Leipzig & Berlin). Konuk, Coinage of the Hekatomnids K. Konuk (1998), The Coinage of the Hekatomnids of Caria (PhD Thesis Oxford). KUB Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi (Berlin). Le Rider Monnaies G. Le Rider (1966), Monnaies crétoises du VIe au Ier siècle av. J.-C. (Paris). Lindos 2 C. Blinkenberg (1941), Lindos. Fouilles et recherches,1902-1914. Vol II, Inscriptions. 2 vols. (Copenhagen & Berlin). Maiuri NSER A. Maiuri (1925), Nuova silloge epigrafica di Rodi e Cos (Firenze). Meiggs & Lewis R. Meiggs & D. Lewis (eds.) (1969), A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the end of the fifth century BC (Oxford). Milet 1. 3. A. Rehm (1914), Milet. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre 1899. Band 1, Heft 3. Das Delphinion in Milet (Berlin).
Recommended publications
  • Rome Redeems Athens? Livy, the Peloponnesian War, and the Conquest of Greece David S

    Rome Redeems Athens? Livy, the Peloponnesian War, and the Conquest of Greece David S

    Rome Redeems Athens? Livy, the Peloponnesian War, and the Conquest of Greece David S. Levene To cite this version: David S. Levene. Rome Redeems Athens? Livy, the Peloponnesian War, and the Conquest of Greece. KTÈMA Civilisations de l’Orient, de la Grèce et de Rome antiques, Université de Strasbourg, 2017, 42, pp.73-84. halshs-01669255 HAL Id: halshs-01669255 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01669255 Submitted on 21 Dec 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Les interprétations de la défaite de 404 Edith Foster Interpretations of Athen’s defeat in the Peloponnesian war ............................................................. 7 Edmond LÉVY Thucydide, le premier interprète d’une défaite anormale ................................................................. 9 Tim Rood Thucydides, Sicily, and the Defeat of Athens ...................................................................................... 19 Cinzia Bearzot La συμφορά de la cité La défaite d’Athènes (405-404 av. J.-C.) chez les orateurs attiques .................................................
  • Seven Churches of Revelation Turkey

    Seven Churches of Revelation Turkey

    TRAVEL GUIDE SEVEN CHURCHES OF REVELATION TURKEY TURKEY Pergamum Lesbos Thyatira Sardis Izmir Chios Smyrna Philadelphia Samos Ephesus Laodicea Aegean Sea Patmos ASIA Kos 1 Rhodes ARCHEOLOGICAL MAP OF WESTERN TURKEY BULGARIA Sinanköy Manya Mt. NORTH EDİRNE KIRKLARELİ Selimiye Fatih Iron Foundry Mosque UNESCO B L A C K S E A MACEDONIA Yeni Saray Kırklareli Höyük İSTANBUL Herakleia Skotoussa (Byzantium) Krenides Linos (Constantinople) Sirra Philippi Beikos Palatianon Berge Karaevlialtı Menekşe Çatağı Prusias Tauriana Filippoi THRACE Bathonea Küçükyalı Ad hypium Morylos Dikaia Heraion teikhos Achaeology Edessa Neapolis park KOCAELİ Tragilos Antisara Abdera Perinthos Basilica UNESCO Maroneia TEKİRDAĞ (İZMİT) DÜZCE Europos Kavala Doriskos Nicomedia Pella Amphipolis Stryme Işıklar Mt. ALBANIA Allante Lete Bormiskos Thessalonica Argilos THE SEA OF MARMARA SAKARYA MACEDONIANaoussa Apollonia Thassos Ainos (ADAPAZARI) UNESCO Thermes Aegae YALOVA Ceramic Furnaces Selectum Chalastra Strepsa Berea Iznik Lake Nicea Methone Cyzicus Vergina Petralona Samothrace Parion Roman theater Acanthos Zeytinli Ada Apamela Aisa Ouranopolis Hisardere Dasaki Elimia Pydna Barçın Höyük BTHYNIA Galepsos Yenibademli Höyük BURSA UNESCO Antigonia Thyssus Apollonia (Prusa) ÇANAKKALE Manyas Zeytinlik Höyük Arisbe Lake Ulubat Phylace Dion Akrothooi Lake Sane Parthenopolis GÖKCEADA Aktopraklık O.Gazi Külliyesi BİLECİK Asprokampos Kremaste Daskyleion UNESCO Höyük Pythion Neopolis Astyra Sundiken Mts. Herakleum Paşalar Sarhöyük Mount Athos Achmilleion Troy Pessinus Potamia Mt.Olympos
  • The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks

    The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks

    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2017 The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Eyal Meyer University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons Recommended Citation Meyer, Eyal, "The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks" (2017). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2473. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Abstract This dissertation explores the extent to which Persian policies in the western satrapies originated from the provincial capitals in the Anatolian periphery rather than from the royal centers in the Persian heartland in the fifth ec ntury BC. I begin by establishing that the Persian administrative apparatus was a product of a grand reform initiated by Darius I, which was aimed at producing a more uniform and centralized administrative infrastructure. In the following chapter I show that the provincial administration was embedded with chancellors, scribes, secretaries and military personnel of royal status and that the satrapies were periodically inspected by the Persian King or his loyal agents, which allowed to central authorities to monitory the provinces. In chapter three I delineate the extent of satrapal authority, responsibility and resources, and conclude that the satraps were supplied with considerable resources which enabled to fulfill the duties of their office. After the power dynamic between the Great Persian King and his provincial governors and the nature of the office of satrap has been analyzed, I begin a diachronic scrutiny of Greco-Persian interactions in the fifth century BC.
  • Macedonian Kings, Egyptian Pharaohs the Ptolemaic Family In

    Macedonian Kings, Egyptian Pharaohs the Ptolemaic Family In

    Department of World Cultures University of Helsinki Helsinki Macedonian Kings, Egyptian Pharaohs The Ptolemaic Family in the Encomiastic Poems of Callimachus Iiro Laukola ACADEMIC DISSERTATION To be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Helsinki in auditorium XV, University Main Building, on the 23rd of September, 2016 at 12 o’clock. Helsinki 2016 © Iiro Laukola 2016 ISBN 978-951-51-2383-1 (paperback.) ISBN 978-951-51-2384-8 (PDF) Unigrafia Helsinki 2016 Abstract The interaction between Greek and Egyptian cultural concepts has been an intense yet controversial topic in studies about Ptolemaic Egypt. The present study partakes in this discussion with an analysis of the encomiastic poems of Callimachus of Cyrene (c. 305 – c. 240 BC). The success of the Ptolemaic Dynasty is crystallized in the juxtaposing of the different roles of a Greek ǴdzȅǻǽǷȏȄ and of an Egyptian Pharaoh, and this study gives a glimpse of this political and ideological endeavour through the poetry of Callimachus. The contribution of the present work is to situate Callimachus in the core of the Ptolemaic court. Callimachus was a proponent of the Ptolemaic rule. By reappraising the traditional Greek beliefs, he examined the bicultural rule of the Ptolemies in his encomiastic poems. This work critically examines six Callimachean hymns, namely to Zeus, to Apollo, to Artemis, to Delos, to Athena and to Demeter together with the Victory of Berenice, the Lock of Berenice and the Ektheosis of Arsinoe. Characterized by ambiguous imagery, the hymns inspect the ruptures in Greek thought during the Hellenistic age.
  • Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Hellenic League

    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.
  • The Herodotos Project (OSU-Ugent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography

    The Herodotos Project (OSU-Ugent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography

    Faculty of Literature and Philosophy Julie Boeten The Herodotos Project (OSU-UGent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography Barbarians in Strabo’s ‘Geography’ (Abii-Ionians) With a case-study: the Cappadocians Master thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Linguistics and Literature, Greek and Latin. 2015 Promotor: Prof. Dr. Mark Janse UGent Department of Greek Linguistics Co-Promotores: Prof. Brian Joseph Ohio State University Dr. Christopher Brown Ohio State University ACKNOWLEDGMENT In this acknowledgment I would like to thank everybody who has in some way been a part of this master thesis. First and foremost I want to thank my promotor Prof. Janse for giving me the opportunity to write my thesis in the context of the Herodotos Project, and for giving me suggestions and answering my questions. I am also grateful to Prof. Joseph and Dr. Brown, who have given Anke and me the chance to be a part of the Herodotos Project and who have consented into being our co- promotores. On a whole other level I wish to express my thanks to my parents, without whom I would not have been able to study at all. They have also supported me throughout the writing process and have read parts of the draft. Finally, I would also like to thank Kenneth, for being there for me and for correcting some passages of the thesis. Julie Boeten NEDERLANDSE SAMENVATTING Deze scriptie is geschreven in het kader van het Herodotos Project, een onderneming van de Ohio State University in samenwerking met UGent. De doelstelling van het project is het aanleggen van een databank met alle volkeren die gekend waren in de oudheid.
  • Bibliography

    Bibliography

    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com10/07/2021 01:02:10PM Via Free Access 332 Chapter 6

    Downloaded from Brill.Com10/07/2021 01:02:10PM Via Free Access 332 Chapter 6

    chapter 6 Building Urban Community on the Margins: Stratonikeia and the Sanctuary of Zeus at Panamara While Lagina was a local shrine that grew and expanded with Stratonikeia to become its religious center, the sanctuary of Zeus Karios at Panamara was already recognized as an important regional cult center in southern Karia.1 However, it, too, was gradually drawn into the orbit of Stratonikeia to become the next major urban sanctuary of the polis. This case study explores yet another kind of dynamic in the transition to polis sanctuary, one that entailed a major lateral shift in scope for Panamara, from the wider region of southern Karia with diverse communities towards the urban center in the north and its demographic base (Figure 6.1, and Figure 5.1 above). Through an examination of this transition it will become apparent how Stratonikeia came to replace, or absorb, the administering body of the sanctuary, but also how Panamara was used to achieve the same kinds of goals of the emerging polis as was Lagina: territorial integrity, social cohesion, and global recognition, albeit in a different way. Panamara and its environment have unfortunately not been subject to the same systematic archaeological investigations as Lagina, and much of the orig- inal landscape in the area has already been lost in the exploitation of lignite, or brown coal, through strip-mining. Our sources for this sanctuary and its envi- ronment are therefore severely limited, especially with regard to architecture and processional routes. Fortunately, however, the communities involved with the sanctuary at Panamara left hundreds of inscriptions behind that provide valuable insights into the way in which the sanctuary and cult of Zeus Karios were gradually realigned to meet the needs of Stratonikeia.
  • Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aiolian Migration

    Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aiolian Migration

    hesperia yy (2008) SEPARATING FACT Pages399-430 FROM FICTION IN THE AIOLIAN MIGRATION ABSTRACT Iron Age settlementsin the northeastAegean are usuallyattributed to Aioliancolonists who journeyed across the Aegean from mainland Greece. This articlereviews the literary accounts of the migration and presentsthe relevantarchaeological evidence, with a focuson newmaterial from Troy. No onearea played a dominantrole in colonizing Aiolis, nor is sucha widespread colonizationsupported by the archaeologicalrecord. But the aggressive promotionof migrationaccounts after the PersianWars provedmutually beneficialto bothsides of theAegean and justified the composition of the Delian League. Scholarlyassessments of habitation in thenortheast Aegean during the EarlyIron Age are remarkably consistent: most settlements are attributed toAiolian colonists who had journeyed across the Aegean from Thessaly, Boiotia,Akhaia, or a combinationof all three.1There is no uniformityin theancient sources that deal with the migration, although Orestes and his descendantsare named as theleaders in mostaccounts, and are credited withfounding colonies over a broadgeographic area, including Lesbos, Tenedos,the western and southerncoasts of theTroad, and theregion betweenthe bays of Adramyttion and Smyrna(Fig. 1). In otherwords, mainlandGreece has repeatedly been viewed as theagent responsible for 1. TroyIV, pp. 147-148,248-249; appendixgradually developed into a Mountjoy,Holt Parker,Gabe Pizzorno, Berard1959; Cook 1962,pp. 25-29; magisterialstudy that is includedhere Allison Sterrett,John Wallrodt, Mal- 1973,pp. 360-363;Vanschoonwinkel as a companionarticle (Parker 2008). colm Wiener, and the anonymous 1991,pp. 405-421; Tenger 1999, It is our hope that readersinterested in reviewersfor Hesperia. Most of trie pp. 121-126;Boardman 1999, pp. 23- the Aiolian migrationwill read both articlewas writtenin the Burnham 33; Fisher2000, pp.
  • Archaeology and History of Lydia from the Early Lydian Period to Late Antiquity (8Th Century B.C.-6Th Century A.D.)

    Archaeology and History of Lydia from the Early Lydian Period to Late Antiquity (8Th Century B.C.-6Th Century A.D.)

    Dokuz Eylül University – DEU The Research Center for the Archaeology of Western Anatolia – EKVAM Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea Congressus internationales Smyrnenses IX Archaeology and history of Lydia from the early Lydian period to late antiquity (8th century B.C.-6th century A.D.). An international symposium May 17-18, 2017 / Izmir, Turkey ABSTRACTS Edited by Ergün Laflı Gülseren Kan Şahin Last Update: 21/04/2017. Izmir, May 2017 Websites: https://independent.academia.edu/TheLydiaSymposium https://www.researchgate.net/profile/The_Lydia_Symposium 1 This symposium has been dedicated to Roberto Gusmani (1935-2009) and Peter Herrmann (1927-2002) due to their pioneering works on the archaeology and history of ancient Lydia. Fig. 1: Map of Lydia and neighbouring areas in western Asia Minor (S. Patacı, 2017). 2 Table of contents Ergün Laflı, An introduction to Lydian studies: Editorial remarks to the abstract booklet of the Lydia Symposium....................................................................................................................................................8-9. Nihal Akıllı, Protohistorical excavations at Hastane Höyük in Akhisar………………………………10. Sedat Akkurnaz, New examples of Archaic architectural terracottas from Lydia………………………..11. Gülseren Alkış Yazıcı, Some remarks on the ancient religions of Lydia……………………………….12. Elif Alten, Revolt of Achaeus against Antiochus III the Great and the siege of Sardis, based on classical textual, epigraphic and numismatic evidence………………………………………………………………....13. Gaetano Arena, Heleis: A chief doctor in Roman Lydia…….……………………………………....14. Ilias N. Arnaoutoglou, Κοινὸν, συμβίωσις: Associations in Hellenistic and Roman Lydia……….……..15. Eirini Artemi, The role of Ephesus in the late antiquity from the period of Diocletian to A.D. 449, the “Robber Synod”.……………………………………………………………………….………...16. Natalia S. Astashova, Anatolian pottery from Panticapaeum…………………………………….17-18. Ayşegül Aykurt, Minoan presence in western Anatolia……………………………………………...19.
  • The Ptolemies: an Unloved and Unknown Dynasty. Contributions to a Different Perspective and Approach

    The Ptolemies: an Unloved and Unknown Dynasty. Contributions to a Different Perspective and Approach

    THE PTOLEMIES: AN UNLOVED AND UNKNOWN DYNASTY. CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND APPROACH JOSÉ DAS CANDEIAS SALES Universidade Aberta. Centro de História (University of Lisbon). Abstract: The fifteen Ptolemies that sat on the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (the date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII) are in most cases little known and, even in its most recognised bibliography, their work has been somewhat overlooked, unappreciated. Although boisterous and sometimes unloved, with the tumultuous and dissolute lives, their unbridled and unrepressed ambitions, the intrigues, the betrayals, the fratricides and the crimes that the members of this dynasty encouraged and practiced, the Ptolemies changed the Egyptian life in some aspects and were responsible for the last Pharaonic monuments which were left us, some of them still considered true masterpieces of Egyptian greatness. The Ptolemaic Period was indeed a paradoxical moment in the History of ancient Egypt, as it was with a genetically foreign dynasty (traditions, language, religion and culture) that the country, with its capital in Alexandria, met a considerable economic prosperity, a significant political and military power and an intense intellectual activity, and finally became part of the world and Mediterranean culture. The fifteen Ptolemies that succeeded to the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII), after Alexander’s death and the division of his empire, are, in most cases, very poorly understood by the public and even in the literature on the topic.
  • Ptolemaic Foundations in Asia Minor and the Aegean As the Lagids’ Political Tool

    Ptolemaic Foundations in Asia Minor and the Aegean As the Lagids’ Political Tool

    ELECTRUM * Vol. 20 (2013): 57–76 doi: 10.4467/20800909EL.13.004.1433 PTOLEMAIC FOUNDATIONS IN ASIA MINOR AND THE AEGEAN AS THE LAGIDS’ POLITICAL TOOL Tomasz Grabowski Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków Abstract: The Ptolemaic colonisation in Asia Minor and the Aegean region was a signifi cant tool which served the politics of the dynasty that actively participated in the fi ght for hegemony over the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea basin. In order to specify the role which the settlements founded by the Lagids played in their politics, it is of considerable importance to establish as precise dating of the foundations as possible. It seems legitimate to acknowledge that Ptolemy II possessed a well-thought-out plan, which, apart from the purely strategic aspects of founding new settlements, was also heavily charged with the propaganda issues which were connected with the cult of Arsinoe II. Key words: Ptolemies, foundations, Asia Minor, Aegean. Settlement of new cities was a signifi cant tool used by the Hellenistic kings to achieve various goals: political and economic. The process of colonisation was begun by Alex- ander the Great, who settled several cities which were named Alexandrias after him. The process was successfully continued by the diadochs, and subsequently by the follow- ing rulers of the monarchies which emerged after the demise of Alexander’s state. The new settlements were established not only by the representatives of the most powerful dynasties: the Seleucids, the Ptolemies and the Antigonids, but also by the rulers of the smaller states. The kings of Pergamum of the Attalid dynasty were considerably active in this fi eld, but the rulers of Bithynia, Pontus and Cappadocia were also successful in this process.1 Very few regions of the time remained beyond the colonisation activity of the Hellenistic kings.