DOCSLIB.ORG

Alexander's Ὑπομνήματα And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Alexander's ὑπομνήματαand the 'World-Kingdom' Author(s): W. W. Tarn Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 41, Part 1 (1921), pp. 1-17 Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/624793 . Accessed: 08/09/2014 04:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 24.118.117.36 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 04:28:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ALEXANDER'S AND THE 'WORLD-KINGDOM' bwro/uvqj/aTa So far as authority goes, Kaerst founded his theory of Alexander's world- kingdom on two passages in Diodorus and on nothing else. The first, 17, 93, 4, alludes to Ammon having conceded to Alexander the power .over the whole world, r?v crdar-yao7Ti y7~ fovoav; the reference is to 17, 51, 2, where Alexander says to the priest of Ammon, Et77E /1ot •L / ot1t&o&4e 7,v •d7wav<i r'>Y-q apxYv, and the priest replies that the god grants this. The second passage is 18, 4, 4, the story of Alexander's supposed plan to conquer Carthage, etc., and go to the Pillars, from his alleged b7ro1wnqua-'a. Every one will agree with Kaerst when he says that the political information in the Arrian tradition is imperfect, and that it is very desirable to supplement it; but the real question, which has to be faced, is, are we in a position to supplement it ? It is no good using unsound material as a supplement; it is better to say we do not know, if it comes to that. My object here is to examine the Diodorus passages and see what kind of material they offer. The Ammon oracle may be briefly dealt with; for it is only Egyptian ritual. , No doubt the oracle, as we have it, came through Cleitarchus, as is shown by the agreement of Diodorus, Justin, and Curtius; Cleitarchus may or may not have got it from Callisthenes, who may or may not have been at Siwah with Alexander. Against Callisthenes' authorship is the fact that Strabo (17, 814), the only writer who professedly cites Callisthenes' account, though he gives much detail, gives only part of the Diodorus oracle, the item that the priest hailed Alexander as son of the god. This item is true, for the priest could not do otherwise; but the other items of the oracle, including the promise of world-dominion, are more than doubtful. Callisthenes possessed in fullest measure the vice of writing for effect; 1 and in his history he added to the Ammon oracle an oracle from Didyma (Strabo i.c.) which was certainly a pure invention. For, first, the Didyma oracle is based on a story that Didyma was sacked by the Branchidae in Xerxes' time, which is simply untrue (Herod. 6, 19); and, secondly, it prophesied the battle of Arbela and the death of Darius, i.e. it was composed after 330. Consequently, the promise of world- dominion, if from Callisthenes, does not necessarily stand on any better footing than the Didyma oracle. But if it be not from Callisthenes, the case is even worse; for Cleitarchus is poorer authority and was not even contemporary 1 See e.g. Strabo 17, 814 (possibly Didymos, M6m. de 1'Acad. des Inscr. 1907, Eratosthenes' criticism), and the very 136 seq., on Callisthenes' panegyric on just remarks of P. Foucart, Etude sur Hermeias. J.H.S.-VOL. XLI. B This content downloaded from 24.118.117.36 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 04:28:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2 W. W. TARN with Alexander.2 As Callisthenes is quite clear that Alexander went into the oracle alone, and as the same thing is implied in Arrian's account, then, if the world-dominion promise were not invented by Callisthenes or Cleitarchus, it can only have come from one of two sources, Alexander or the priests. But Arrian and Plutarch both say that Alexander told nothing. If, then, it were not invented, it came from the priests. And if it were invented, the material was equally supplied by Egyptian priests. For in fact the ultimate source of the Ammon oracle is not history but Egyptian ritual. In one of the hymns to Amon which formed part of Amon's daily service, Pharaoh (i.e. the priest representing him) thus addresses the god (Moret's translation): Le Pharaon est venu vers toi, Amon-RA, pour que tu lui donnes qu'il soit a la tAte des vivants.3 This is precisely Alexander's supposed question. The god, of course, accepted the appeal, and there are many references to his conferring the gift sought. E.g., when Khnum fashions Hatshepsut, he repeats the instructions he has received from Amon: 'I have given to thee all countries, all peoples.' 4 The hymn of victory of Thutmoses III (Amon speaks): 'I have come, causing thee to smite the uttermost ends of the lands; the circuit of the Great Circle (Okeanos) is enclosed in thy grasp.' 5 In the Harris papyrus, Ramses III says: 'Thou didst assign to me all the lands as far as the circuit of the sun.' 6 This is the supposed answer to Alex- ander. Sir G. Maspero, though he did not give the details, long ago pointed out with great emphasis the exact agreement of the story of the Ammon-oracle with the ritual,' and Mahaffy followed him.8 Certainly Maspero believed that Alexander did in fact go through the ritual; but that is another matter. Neither Callisthenes nor Cleitarchus is good enough evidence to prove this; all they prove is that some one knew what might be expected to happen, i.e. knew the Egyptian practice. Besides, Alexander, some years later, did tell one thing that passed, and it has no connection whatever with Diodorus' story; he said that Ammon had told him to what gods to sacrifice (Arr. 6, 19, 4). Personally, therefore, I do not believe that Alexander went through the ritual; but that is not the real point. The point is, that once we see that we are dealing with a ritual, with its roots far down the centuries, it matters nothing whether the thing happened or not, or what Greek historian first 2 F. Reuss, Rh. Mus. 57 (1902), 581 Egypte, 1897; republished in his Etudes de seq.; 63 (1909), 58 seq.; P. Schnabel, mythologie et d'archeologie egyptiennes, vol. 6 'Berossos und Kleitarchos,' 1912; and see (1912). See esp. p. 265, " C6r6monial et Th. Lenschau, 'Bericht uiber griechische discours, tout y est conforme au rituel des Geschichte 1907-14,' p. 191, in Bursian- temples pharaoniques," etc.; and p. 274, Kroll's Jahresbericht, 1919. " I1 serait difficile de rencontrer roi si 3 A. Moret, 'Le rituel du culte divin pietre que les dieux ne lui eussent fait la journalier en Egypte;' Annales du Mu8de' m6me promesse " (world-rule) " a sati6t6; Guimet, Bibliotheque d'Etudes, 14 (1902), Amon terminait son entretien avec Alex- p. 128. Moret mentions other hymns to andre comme il l'avait commenc6, par un the same effect. compliment emprunt6 au rituel en usage 4 Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, II. depuis le commencement de la monarchie 203. egyptienne, et qui n'avait rien que d'ordin- 5 Ib. II. 265. aire dans son esprit." 6 Ib. IV. p. 142. 8 A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic 7 Comment Alexandre devint dieu en Dynasty, 1899, p. 16. This content downloaded from 24.118.117.36 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 04:28:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ALEXANDER'S o/ivyara AND THE 'WORLD-KINGDOM' 3 related it; for it has ceased to have any bearing on what we want to know- what did Alexander intend or plan or claim ? Because a Pope granted to a series of monarchs the title of 'Most Christian King,' we do not deduce there- from the personal attitude of this or that one toward religion; and if an Egyptian liturgy promised Alexander, as it promised many other Pharaohs, world- dominion, we must not on this ground attribute to him claims to world-dominion or plans for world-conquest. The promise of world-dominion was of no more importance, outside of Egypt, than the claim attributed to the McNeils of Barra was of importance outside Barra.9 In this respect, it is very important to note that what Alexander asks for, and what the god grants, is not 'authority a over all men,' but 'the authority,' Tyv a'ppXr,T27v ovalav (twice repeated), known thing; 10 it had been known in Egypt for many centuries. The other passage, Diod. 18, 4, 4, goes to the root of the whole matter; and the first thing any one has to do, in considering Alexander, is to make up his mind about the vital matter of Alexander's is he, with LTrova4,7uara; the majority-e.g.
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.
  • Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion Milns, R D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; Proquest Pg

    Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion Milns, R D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; Proquest Pg

    Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion Milns, R D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; ProQuest pg. 159 Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion R. D. Milns SOME TIME between the battle of Gaugamela and the battle of A the Hydaspes the number of battalions in the Macedonian phalanx was raised from six to seven.1 This much is clear; what is not certain is when the new formation came into being. Berve2 believes that the introduction took place at Susa in 331 B.C. He bases his belief on two facts: (a) the arrival of 6,000 Macedonian infantry and 500 Macedonian cavalry under Amyntas, son of Andromenes, when the King was either near or at Susa;3 (b) the appearance of Philotas (not the son of Parmenion) as a battalion leader shortly afterwards at the Persian Gates.4 Tarn, in his discussion of the phalanx,5 believes that the seventh battalion was not created until 328/7, when Alexander was at Bactra, the new battalion being that of Cleitus "the White".6 Berve is re­ jected on the grounds: (a) that Arrian (3.16.11) says that Amyntas' reinforcements were "inserted into the existing (six) battalions KC1:TCt. e8vr(; (b) that Philotas has in fact taken over the command of Perdiccas' battalion, Perdiccas having been "promoted to the Staff ... doubtless after the battle" (i.e. Gaugamela).7 The seventh battalion was formed, he believes, from reinforcements from Macedonia who reached Alexander at Nautaca.8 Now all of Tarn's arguments are open to objection; and I shall treat them in the order they are presented above.
  • The Court of Alexander the Great As Social System

    The Court of Alexander the Great As Social System

    Originalveröffentlichung in Waldemar Heckel/Lawrence Tritle (Hg.), Alexander the Great. A New History, Malden, Mass. u.a. 2009, S. 83-98 5 The Court of Alexander the Great as Social System Gregor Weber In his discussion of events that followed Alexander ’s march through Hyrcania (summer 330), Plutarch gives a succinct summary of the king ’s conduct and reports the clash of his closest friends, Hephaestion and Craterus (Alex. 47.5.9-11).1 The passage belongs in the context of Alexander ’s adoption of the traditions and trap ­ pings of the dead Persian Great King (Fredricksmeyer 2000; Brosius 2003a), although the conflict between the two generals dates to the time of the Indian campaign (probably 326). It reveals not only that Alexander was subtly in tune with the atti­ tudes of his closest friends, but also that his changes elicited varied responses from the members of his circle. Their relationships with each other were based on rivalry, something Alexander - as Plutarch ’s wording suggests - actively encouraged. But it is also reported that Alexander made an effort to bring about a lasting reconcili ­ ation of the two friends, who had attacked each other with swords, and drawn their respective troops into the fray. To do so, he had to marshal “all his resources ” (Hamilton 1969; 128-31) from gestures of affection to death threats. These circumstances invite the question: what was the structural relevance of such an episode beyond the mutual antagonism of Hephaestion and Craterus? For these were not minor protagonists, but rather men of the upper echelon of the new Macedonian-Persian empire, with whose help Alexander had advanced his con ­ quest ever further and exercised his power (Berve nos.
  • MAC II in General, All Greek Troops “Constitutionally

    MAC II in General, All Greek Troops “Constitutionally

    ALEXANDER’S FINAL ARMY An Honors Thesis for the Department of History By Jonathan A. Miller Thesis Advisor: Steven Hirsch Tufts University, 2011 AKNOWLEDGMENTS Alexander the Great is a man with whom many great leaders throughout history have been compared, a model of excellence whose achievements can never quite be matched. 2 My introduction to his legacy occurred in the third grade. Reading a biography of Julius Caesar for a class project, I happened across Plutarch’s famous description of Caesar’s reaction to reading a history of Alexander: “he was lost in thought for a long time, and then burst into tears. His friends were astonished, and asked the reason for his tears. ‘Do you not think,’ said he, ‘that it is a matter of sorrow that while Alexander, at my age, was already king of so many peoples, I have as yet achieved no brilliant success?’”1 This story captivated my imagination and stuck with me throughout my middle and high school years. Once at college, I decided to write a thesis on Alexander to better understand the one man capable of breeding thoughts of inadequacy in Caesar. This work is in many ways a tribute to both Caesar and Alexander. More pointedly, it is an exploration into the designs of a man at the feet of whom lay the whole world. This paper has meant a lot to me. I want to thank all those who made it possible. First and foremost, my undying gratitude goes to Professor Steven Hirsch, who has helped me navigate the difficult process of researching and writing this thesis.
  • Copyrighted Material

    Copyrighted Material

    Index Note : Geographical landmarks are listed under the proper name itself: for “Cape Sepias” or “Mt. Athos” see “Sepias” or “Athos.” When a people and a toponym share the same base, see under the toponym: for “Thessalians” see “Thessaly.” Romans are listed according to the nomen, i.e. C. Julius Caesar. With places or people mentioned once only, discretion has been used. Abdera 278 Aeaces II 110, 147 Abydus 222, 231 A egae 272–273 Acanthus 85, 207–208, 246 Aegina 101, 152, 157–158, 187–189, Acarnania 15, 189, 202, 204, 206, 251, 191, 200 347, 391, 393 Aegium 377, 389 Achaia 43, 54, 64 ; Peloponnesian Aegospotami 7, 220, 224, 228 Achaia, Achaian League 9–10, 12–13, Aemilius Paullus, L. 399, 404 54–56, 63, 70, 90, 250, 265, 283, 371, Aeolis 16–17, 55, 63, 145, 233 375–380, 388–390, 393, 397–399, 404, Aeschines 281, 285, 288 410 ; Phthiotic Achaia 16, 54, 279, Aeschylus 156, 163, 179 286 Aetoli Erxadieis 98–101 Achaian War 410 Aetolia, Aetolian League 12, 15, 70, Achaius 382–383, 385, 401 204, 250, 325, 329, 342, 347–348, Acilius Glabrio, M. 402 376, 378–380, 387, 390–391, 393, Acragas 119, COPYRIGHTED165, 259–261, 263, 266, 39MATERIAL6–397, 401–404 352–354, 358–359 Agariste 113, 117 Acrocorinth 377, 388–389 Agathocles (Lysimachus ’ son) 343, 345 ; Acrotatus 352, 355 (King of Sicily) 352–355, 358–359; Actium 410, 425 (King of Bactria) 413–414 Ada 297 Agelaus 391, 410 A History of Greece: 1300 to 30 BC, First Edition. Victor Parker.
  • The Making of the Hellenistic World

    The Making of the Hellenistic World

    Part I THE MAKING OF THE HELLENISTIC WORLD K2 cch01.inddh01.indd 1111 99/14/2007/14/2007 55:03:23:03:23 PPMM K2 cch01.inddh01.indd 1122 99/14/2007/14/2007 55:03:23:03:23 PPMM 1 First Steps 325 300 275 250 225 200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 June 323 Death of Alexander the Great; outbreak of Lamian War 322 Battle of Krannon; end of Lamian War 320 Death of Perdikkas in Egypt; settlement of Triparadeisos 319 Death of Antipater 317 Return of Olympias to Macedonia; deaths of Philip Arrhidaios and Eurydike 316/15 Death of Eumenes of Kardia in Iran 314 Antigonos’ declaration of Tyre; fi rst coalition war (Kas- sander, Lysimachos, and Ptolemy against Antigonos) 312 Battle of Gaza; Seleukos retakes Babylon 311 Treaty ends coalition war 310 Deaths of Alexander IV and Roxane I From Babylon to Triparadeisos The sudden death of the Macedonian king Alexander, far away from home at Babylon in Mesopotamia on June 10, 323, caught the world he ruled fully unprepared for the ensuing crisis. Only two of the men who founded the dynas- ties of kings which dominated the history of the Hellenistic world were even present at Babylon when he died, and only one of them was suffi ciently promi- nent among the offi cers who assembled to debate the future to be given an independent provincial command: Ptolemy, now in his early forties, was appointed to distant Egypt (though with Alexander’s established governor, Kleomenes, as his offi cial deputy). Seleukos, also present at Babylon, but some K2 cch01.inddh01.indd 1133 99/14/2007/14/2007 55:03:23:03:23 PPMM 14 PART I THE MAKING OF THE HELLENISTIC WORLD ten years younger, became cavalry commander in the central government, a post which under Alexander had been equivalent to the king’s deputy but now was envisaged as being purely military.
  • Denver Graninger, Late Argeads in Thrace: Religious Perspectives

    Denver Graninger, Late Argeads in Thrace: Religious Perspectives

    The Ancient History Bulletin VOLUME THIRTY-ONE: 2017 NUMBERS 3-4 Edited by: Timothy Howe òEdward Anson ò Michael Fronda David Hollander òJoseph Roisman ò John Vanderspoel Pat Wheatley ò Sabine Müller òAlex McAuley Catalina Balmacedaò Charlotte Dunn ISSN 0835-3638 ANCIENT HISTORY BULLETIN Volume 31 (2017) Numbers 3-4 Edited by: Edward Anson, Catalina Balmaceda, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Alex McAuley, Sabine Müller, Joseph Roisman, John Vanderspoel, Pat Wheatley Senior Editor: Timothy Howe Assistant Editor: Charlotte Dunn Editorial correspondents Elizabeth Baynham, Hugh Bowden, Franca Landucci Gattinoni, Alexander Meeus, Kurt Raaflaub, P.J. Rhodes, Robert Rollinger, Victor Alonso Troncoso Contents of volume thirty-one Numbers 3-4 70 Timothy Doran, Nabis of Sparta: Heir to Agis IV and Kleomenes III? 92 Christopher Tuplin, The Great King, his god(s) and intimations of divinity. The Achaemenid hinterland of ruler cult? 112 Michael Kleu, Philip V, the Selci-Hoard and the supposed building of a Macedonian fleet in Lissus 120 Denver Graninger, Late Argeads in Thrace: Religious Perspectives NOTES TO CONTRIBUTORS AND SUBSCRIBERS The Ancient History Bulletin was founded in 1987 by Waldemar Heckel, Brian Lavelle, and John Vanderspoel. The board of editorial correspondents consists of Elizabeth Baynham (University of Newcastle), Hugh Bowden (Kings College, London), Franca Landucci Gattinoni (Università Cattolica, Milan), Alexander Meeus (University of Leuven), Kurt Raaflaub (Brown University), P.J. Rhodes (Durham University), Robert Rollinger (Universität Innsbruck), Victor Alonso Troncoso (Universidade da Coruña) AHB is currently edited by: Timothy Howe (Senior Editor: [email protected]), Edward Anson, Catalina Balmaceda, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Alex McAuley, Sabine Müller, Joseph Roisman, John Vanderspoel and Pat Wheatley.
  • Aus: Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 87 (1991) 39–41 © Dr

    Aus: Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 87 (1991) 39–41 © Dr

    W. HECKEL HEPHAISTON “THE ATHENIAN” aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 87 (1991) 39–41 © Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 39 HEPHAISTION "THE ATHENIAN" IG ii2 405, a decree of Demades, records the granting of Athenian citizenship to a certain Amyntor son of Demetrios (Kirchner, PA 750) and his descendants in 334 B. C.: Dhmãdhw | [Dhm°ou Pa]i[a]nieÁw e‰pe|[n: §pain°sai] ÉAmÊntora, [§|peidØ eÎnoi]an §nde¤kn|[utai per‹ ÉAy]hna¤ouw, e‰|[nai dÉ ÉAmÊntor]a D[hm]htr¤o|[u ÉAyhna›on a]ÈtÚn ka‹ §k|[gÒnouw aÈto]Ë ...1 This man has, as far as I know, not been identified with any known historical individual. All we know about him is that he was a foreigner and that he performed some service to the Athenians which merited Demades’ proposal that he and his descendants receive citizenship. C. Schwenk (Athens in the Age of Alexander [Chicago 1985], 134), however, pre-empts one line of inquiry by arguing that "the appearance of Demades as proposer does not require that Amyntor be Macedonian or have Macedonian connections." Indeed not. But the names of both Amyntor and his father, Demetrios, do point strongly towards Macedonia, and it is tempting to see in Amyntor the father of Alexander’s boyhood friend Hephaistion. On the face of it, the connection is a tenuous one: Hephaistion’s father was named Amyntor (Arr. 6. 28. 4; Ind. 18. 3), but nothing is known of his career or family- background. Presumably, he belonged to the Macedonian aristocracy; for his son was educated by Aristotle along with Alexander (Curt.
  • Fantasy and Metaphor in Meleager

    Fantasy and Metaphor in Meleager

    TAPA 145 (2015) 233–251 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 2015 New Orleans, Louisiana Fantasy and Metaphor in Meleager KATHRYN GUTZWILLER University of Cincinnati MELEAGER OF GADARA IS ONE OF THOSE INCREASINGLY RARE GREEK AUTHORS whose works are somewhat known to many classicists but whose influence on ancient and later literature remains underappreciated. Meleager’s anthol- ogy of Greek epigrams called the Garland produced Latin imitations shortly after its creation in the early first century B.C.E., and allusions to Meleager’s own, mostly erotic poems are found in prominent programmatic passages of Latin poetry. Examples include the first three poems and the last poem of the Catullan liber, the opening of Propertius’s Monobiblos, the first speech in Vergil’s Eclogue 1, and the opening lines of Tibullus 1.2.1 I would assert that as a model for Latin erotic poetry Meleager rivals Callimachus in both direct allusions and as a source of topoi and imagery. Alessandro Barchiesi has spo- ken of the Garland as a model for elegant poetry books because of its careful arrangements,2 but what was it about Meleager’s own poetry that appealed to Roman poets? Pointing toward an answer to that question, I here examine 1 Catull. 1 and 116, the beginning and end of the liber as we have it, contain a com- plicated and interrelated series of allusions to the proem and concluding epigram of Meleager’s Garland (Anth. Pal. 4.1, 12.257). The paired sparrow poems (Catull. 2–3) owe much to Meleager’s paired insect epigrams (Anth. Pal. 7.195–96), while Verg.
  • Περίληψη : Seleucus I Nicator Was One of the Most Important Kings That Succeeded Alexander the Great

    Περίληψη : Seleucus I Nicator Was One of the Most Important Kings That Succeeded Alexander the Great

    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Σκουνάκη Ιουλία Μετάφραση : Κόρκα Αρχοντή Για παραπομπή : Σκουνάκη Ιουλία , "Seleucus I Nicator", Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=9750> Περίληψη : Seleucus I Nicator was one of the most important kings that succeeded Alexander the Great. Originally a mere member of the corps of the hetaeroi, he became an officer of the Macedonian army and, after taking advantage of the conflict among Alexanderʹs successors, he was proclaimed satrap of Babylonia. After a series of successful diplomatic movements and military victories in the long‑lasting wars against the other Successors, he founded the kingdom and the dynasty of the Seleucids, while he practically revived the empire of Alexander the Great. Άλλα Ονόματα Nicator Τόπος και Χρόνος Γέννησης Europos, 358/354 BC Τόπος και Χρόνος Θανάτου Lysimacheia, 280 BC Κύρια Ιδιότητα Officer of the Macedonian army, satrap of Babylonia (321-316 BC), founder of the kingdom (312 BC) and the dynasty of the Seleucids. 1. Biography Seleucus was born in Macedonia circa 355 BC, possibly in the city of Europos. Pella is also reported to have been his birth city, but that is most likely within the framework of the later propaganda aiming to present Seleucus as the new Alexander the Great.1He was son of Antiochus, a general of Philip II, and Laodice.2 He was about the same age as Alexander the Great and followed him in his campaign in Asia. He was not an important soldier at first, but on 326 BC he led the shieldbearers (hypaspistai)in the battle of the Hydaspes River against the king of India, Porus (also Raja Puru).
  • The Successors: Alexander's Legacy

    The Successors: Alexander's Legacy

    The Successors: Alexander’s Legacy November 20-22, 2015 Committee Background Guide The Successors: Alexander’s Legacy 1 Table of Contents Committee Director Welcome Letter ...........................................................................................2 Summons to the Babylon Council ................................................................................................3 The History of Macedon and Alexander ......................................................................................4 The Rise of Macedon and the Reign of Philip II ..........................................................................4 The Persian Empire ......................................................................................................................5 The Wars of Alexander ................................................................................................................5 Alexander’s Plans and Death .......................................................................................................7 Key Topics ......................................................................................................................................8 Succession of the Throne .............................................................................................................8 Partition of the Satrapies ............................................................................................................10 Continuity and Governance ........................................................................................................11
  • THE HELLENISTIC RULERS and THEIR POETS. SILENCING DANGEROUS CRITICS?* I the Beginning of the Reign of Ptolemy VII Euergetes II I

    THE HELLENISTIC RULERS and THEIR POETS. SILENCING DANGEROUS CRITICS?* I the Beginning of the Reign of Ptolemy VII Euergetes II I

    Originalveröffentlichung in: Ancient society 29.1998-99 (1998), S. 147-174 THE HELLENISTIC RULERS AND THEIR POETS. SILENCING DANGEROUS CRITICS?* i The beginning of the reign of Ptolemy VII Euergetes II in the year 145 bc following the death of his brother Ptolemy VI Philometor was described in a very negative way by ancient authors1. According to Athenaeus Ptolemy who ruled over Egypt... received from the Alexandrians appropriately the name of Malefactor. For he murdered many of the Alexandrians; not a few he sent into exile, and filled the islands and towns with men who had grown up with his brother — philologians, philosophers, mathematicians, musicians, painters, athletic trainers, physicians, and many other men of skill in their profession2. It is true that anecdotal tradition, as we find it here, is mostly of tenden ­ tious origin, «but the course of the events suggests that the gossip-mon- * This article is the expanded version of a paper given on 2 November 1995, at the University of St Andrews, and — in a slightly changed version — on 3 November 1995, during the «Leeds Latin Seminar* on «Epigrams and Politics*. I would like to thank my colleagues there very much, especially Michael Whitby (now Warwick), for their invita­ tion, their hospitality, and stimulating discussions. Moreover, I would like to thank Jurgen Malitz (Eichstatt), Doris Meyer and Eckhard Wirbelauer (both Freiburg/Brsg.) for numer­ ous suggestions, Joachim Mathieu (Eichstatt/Atlanta) for the translation, and Roland G. Mayer (London) for his support in preparing the paper. 1 For biographical details cf. H. V olkmann , art. Ptolemaios VIII.