DOCSLIB.ORG

Women in Antiquity Fall 2007 (190:320 = 510:320 = 988:320)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Women in Antiquity Fall 2007 (190:320 = 510:320 = 988:320) WOMEN IN ANTIQUITY FALL 2007 (190:320 = 510:320 = 988:320) Dr. Thomas J. Figueira Dept. of History, Van Dyck Hall, CAC Dept. of Classics, Ruth Adams Bldg. DC Rm. 202, Phone: 932-7450 (no voice mail) 932-9797 (messages/general information) History Off. Hrs. M1:05-1:55 (VD 202) LSH-312, LC: Phone: 445-6372 (voice mail) Cl. Off. Hrs.: Th. 11:45-12:30 (LSH 312) Meetings: MW 2:50-4:10, VH 105, CAC E-mail: [email protected] I. Nature of the Course This course will provide an introduction to the social experiences, cultural accomplishments, and status of women in ancient Greek and Roman societies. After introductory lectures that will survey ancient Greek and Roman political and social history, we shall adopt a synthetic approach in which various categories of behavior and experience both among the Greeks and among the Romans will be treated in comparison and contrast. The content of the classes may include lectures, slide lecture (s), discussions of assigned readings, and opportunities for questions. Students will be expected to participate in classroom discussion as much as reasonably possible, given the size of the class. The readings will include two general books on women in the ancient world (Pomeroy and Cantarella) and a collection of ancient sources (Fant & Lefkowitz). This material may be supplemented periodically with handouts. When feasible, class outlines may be circulated. The students are not only responsible for the readings and circulated materials, but also for the material presented in the lectures. Please note that the source passages are more demanding than an equivalent number of pages of other works and time should be reserved for reading them. In the dialogues in this class, students are expected to maintain the proper academic demeanor in their comments. Students are advised to consult the Department of History web page, which provides a good summary of student responsibilities. You must have a functioning Rutgers email account to take this course. II. Grading and Requirements A. 30%: Midterm (October 31) 30%: Paper (due November 28) 40%: Final (cumulative and comprehensive, with an emphasis on the second half of the course). (December 19, 12:00-3:00) B. The midterm is an inclass exam, testing material to that date; the format of the test, which will include short and written answers, will be announced. C. The paper is a research paper of 812 pages to be submitted by the beginning of class on November 28. The research paper should be an analysis of the interpretation of a specific facet of the general topic of the history of women in antiquity. A list of suggestions will be circulated. A topic is to be chosen by October 31, which may be discussed in an individual meeting with the instructor. A handout with a format of the paper, and suggestions on how it should be researched and written, will also be made available. III. Required Texts Eva Cantarella, Pandora’s Daughters: The Role and Status of Women in Greek & Roman Antiquity, trans. by M.B. Fant (Baltimore 1987: ISBN: 080183385X) = Cantarella Mary R. Lefkowitz & M.B. Fant, Women’s Life in Greece & Rome3 (Baltimore 1992: ISBN: 0801883105) = Lefkowitz Sarah B. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity (New York 1975: ISBN: 080521030X) = Pomeroy. IV. Outline of Lectures and Readings Sept. 5: Introduction to the Course The Background on Greek and Roman Society Sept. 10 (1): Survey of Greek Political History Sept. 12 (2): Survey of Greek Social History: Cantarella xiiiv, 17, 17779. Sept. 17 (3): Survey of Roman Political History; Survey of Roman Social History Sept. 19: No Class Sept. 24 (4): Women in GrecoRoman Mythology; Matriarchy: Pomeroy 115; Cantarella 1123; 10112. Sept. 26 (5): Women in Homeric Epic, and in Bronze Age Reality: Pomeroy 1631; Cantarella 2433. Oct. 1: Film: First part of “300” Oct. 3 (6): Film: Second Part of “300” Oct. 8 (7): Women in Dark Age and Archaic Greece: Lefkowitz ##5458 (pp. 2327); #76 (pp. 5558), ##95100 (pp. 8389); ##16063 (pp. 12930), #234 (p. 178), #164A (p. 375); Pomeroy 3256; Cantarella 3443. Oct. 10 (8): Female voices in Greek/Latin Poetry: Lefkowitz ##127 (pp. 110); ##6A, 27A (p. 367); Cantarella 7176. Oct. 15 (9): The Legal Status of Women in Classical Athens: Lefkowitz ##7788 (pp. 5870), ##9194 (pp. 8283), #225 (p. 170), #235 (17879), ##65A, 79A, 87A (pp. 371-72), #212A (p. 377); Pomeroy 5768; Cantarella 4351. Oct. 17 (10): Women in Classical Literature I (esp. Tragedy): Lefkowitz ##2834 (pp. 1014), ##5961 (pp. 2729), #164 (pp. 13031), ##27B-C, 32 A (pp. 367-69); Pomeroy 93112; Cantarella 6371. Oct. 22 (11): Women in Classical Attic Literature II (especially Comedy): Lefkowitz #35 (pp. 1415), ##6267 (pp. 2931), #238 (p. 180), #65A (p. 371); Pomeroy 11219. Oct. 24 (12): Daily Life of Nonelite Women in Classical Greece I: Lefkowitz ##3638 (p. 16), #207 (p. 162), ##22626 (pp. 170); #237 (p. 180), ##27375 (pp. 2056), #303 (p. 215), ##31718 (pp. 21819), ##32225 (pp. 21920), ##32932 (p. 221), #275A (pp. 378-79). Oct. 29 (13): Daily Life of Nonelite Women in Classical Greece II: Lefkowitz ##8990 (pp. 7182), #236 (pp. 17980), #242 (pp. 18284), #267 (pp.196203), ##28688 (pp. 20910), #285A (pp. 379-80). Oct. 31: MIDTERM Nov. 5 (14): Women in Republican Rome and Status in Roman Law: Lefkowitz ##10748 (pp. 94119), #233 (pp. 17678), ##25860 (pp. 19092), #270 (pp. 2045, #111A (p. 374); Pomeroy 14963; Cantarella 11332. Nov. 7 (15): Legal Status of Roman Women II (esp. Roman Egypt): Lefkowitz ##14859 (pp. 119128), #154A (pp. 374-75). Nov. 12 (16): Female Sexuality in GrecoRoman Society: Lefkowitz ##228 (pp. 17072), #23032 (pp. 17476), ##24041 (pp. 18182), ##28694 (pp. 20913); ##285D, 287A-B, 288A-D, 289A-B (pp. 380-83); Cantarella 7789. Nov. 14 (17): Philosophical Opinions on Women & Female Philosophers: Lefkowitz ##7275 (pp. 3854), #208 (pp. 16364); ##21619 (pp. 16768); Cantarella 5262. Nov. 19 (18): The Status of Women in the Hellenistic Period: Lefkowitz ##1016 (pp. 8993), #213 (p. 166); #229 (pp. 17273), ##3047 (pp. 21617, ##32728 (p. 220), #333 (pp. 221222); #53A (pp. 369-71), ##100A-B (pp. 372-74), #203A (pp. 376-77), #248A (pp. 377-78), ##275C-E (p. 379), 318A (p. 383); Pomeroy 12148; Cantarella 9098. Nov. 26 (19): Women in the Public Sphere (mainly Roman): Lefkowitz ##165206 (pp. 12962), ##182A, 196A-B, 201A-B (pp. 375-76); Pomeroy 17689. Nov. 28 (20): Social Attitudes toward Women in the Late Republic and Early Empire: Lefkowitz ##6871 (pp. 3137), ##20912 (pp. 16465), ##21415 (p. 165), ##22024 (pp. 16869), #239 (p. 181), ##27382 (pp. 2057), #326 (p. 220). Dec. 3 (21): Roman Women: Members of the Elite and General Legal Status during the Roman Empire: Lefkowitz ##24348 (pp. 18687), ##26166 (pp. 19296); Cantarella 13570. Dec. 5 (22): Nonelite Women during the late Roman Republic and Roman Empire: Lefkowitz ##25457 (190), ##26869 (pp. 2034), ##27172 (205), ##28385 (pp. 2089), ##289302 (pp. 21015), ##30816 (pp. 21718), ##31921 (p. 219), ##33437 (pp. 22224), ##282A-B, 285B- C (p. 379-80), ##321A, 331A, 337A (p. 383); Pomeroy 16476, 190204; Cantarella 13233 Dec. 10 (23): Women in Ancient Medicine: Gynecology and Medical Practice: Lefkowitz ##24953 (pp. 18789), ##33882 (pp. 22572), ##340A, 350A, 357A-B, 362A-B, 363A-B, 364A, 382A (pp. 384-87). Dec. 12 (24): Women in Greek Religion: Lefkowitz ##383416 (pp. 27396), ##399A, 404A, 411A, 413A-C, 423A-C, 425A-B, 437A (pp. 387-89); Pomeroy 7578. FINAL EXAMINATION: Wednesday, December 19, 12:00-3:00 V. Recommended Readings (available on reserve) S. Blundell, Women in Ancient Greece (Cambridge, Mass. 1995) HQ 1134.B58 1995 A. Cameron & A. Kuhrt, eds., Images of Women in Antiquity (Detroit 1983): HQ 1127.I43 1983 S. Dixon, The Roman Mother (Norman OK, 1988): HQ 759.D59 1987 H. Foley, ed., Reflections of Women in Antiquity (New York 1981): HQ 1134.R4 1981 J. Hallett, Fathers and Daughters in Roman Society (Princeton 1984): HQ 1136.H35 1984 Natalie Kampen & Elizabeth G. Grossmann, Feminism and Methodology: Dynamics of Change in the History of Art and Architecture (Wellesley MA, 1983): HQ1180.W674 no.122 E. Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus: Sexual Politics in Ancient Athens (Berkeley 1993): HQ 1134.K48 1993 M. Lefkowitz, Heroines and Hysterics (New York 1981): PA 3016.W7L4 1981 ____, Women in Greek Myth (Baltimore 1986): BL 795.W6L44 1986 Marjorie Lightman, Biographical Dictionary of Ancient Greek and Roman Women: Notable Women from Sappho to Helena (New York 2000): HQ1136.L54 2000 N. Loraux, The Tragic Ways of Killing a Woman (Cambridge MA, 1987): PA 3136.L6713 1987 C. Patterson, The Family in Greek History (Cambridge, MA 1998): HQ 662.5 A25 1998 Sarah Pomeroy, Women's History and Ancient History, ed. by S.B. Pomeroy (Chapel Hill 1991): HQ1127.W6525 1991 ____, Women in Hellenistic Egypt: from Alexander to Cleopatra (Detroit 1990): HQ1137.E3P65 1990 ____, Families in Classical and Hellenistic Greece: Representations and Realities (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1996): HQ510.P66 1996 ____, Spartan Women (Oxford 2002): HQ1134.P66 2002 Joyce E. Salisbury, Encyclopedia of Women in the Ancient World (Santa Barbara 2001): HQ1127.S25 2001 D. Schaps, Economic Rights of Women in Ancient Greece (Edinburgh 1979): KBB.S32 R.I. Sealey, Women and Law in Classical Greece (Chapel Hill NC, 1990): KLG.S43 1990 S. Treggiari, Roman Marriage (Oxford 1991): KJA 2233.T74 1991 The History Department has a statement on plagiarism on our website at: http://history.rutgers.edu/undergrad/plagiarism.htm History Department Policy on Mutual Responsibilities and Classroom Etiquette: http://history.rutgers.edu/undergrad/policy.htm PAPER WORKSHEET I. Pick three possible paper topics: 1)__________________________________________________________________ 2)__________________________________________________________________ 3)__________________________________________________________________ II.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Taking Sides: the Political Economy of Solon's Law for Civil Wars*
    Taking sides: The Political Economy of Solon’s Law for Civil Wars* Soeren C. Schwuchow**, Brandenburg University of Technology, Germany George Tridimas***, Ulster University, Northern Ireland This version: 18 June 2019 Abstract In 594 BCE the Athenian statesman Solon defused a grave social crisis by introducing wide- ranging constitutional, political and economic reforms which granted various rights to a nas- cent ‘middle class’ and reduced the power of the wealthy birth aristocracy. Solon’s reforms included a law which perhaps counter-intuitively banned citizens from staying neutral in cas- es of civil conflict. After reviewing aspects of the law against neutrality debated by historians, the present paper employs the methodology of the economics of conflict to investigate the implications of the law for the stability of the constitutional order initiated by Solon. We ex- amine a stylised model of three social classes, Rich, Middle and Poor, where the former two compete for control of the government, and the Poor may decide to stay neutral or side with either the Middle or the Rich. By solving the model we identify conditions for the Rich to ac- cept the Solonian order or reject it and mount a coup. Key words: Ancient Athens; Solon; social conflict; neutrality; social stability; constitution- al choice. JEL Classification: D7: Analysis of Collective Decision making; D72: Political Processes D74: Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; N4: Economic History– Government; N93 - Europe: Pre-1913 Regional and Urban History * Paper in early stage of progress, preliminary and incomplete. Please do not circulate. ** Soeren C. Schwuchow (corresponding author), Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus-Senftenberg, Chair of Microeconomics, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery, Freedom and Citizenship in Classical Athens: Beyond a Legalistic Approach
    Slavery, Freedom and Citizenship in Classical Athens: Beyond a Legalistic Approach Kostas Vlassopoulos* In a seminal article written over four decades ago M. I. Finley made the memo- rable statement that ‘one aspect of Greek history is the advance, hand in hand, of freedom and slavery’.1 Finley explained that Greek communities, and in par- ticular places like Athens, passed during the archaic period through a process whose endpoint was a social division into two exclusive categories, the slave and the free. It was not that the distinction between slave and free did not exist in earlier periods or in other, earlier or contemporary, societies. But ear- lier Greek communities, and the older civilisations of the Near East, usually incorporated this distinction within a wider spectrum of statuses, with varying degrees of freedom and dependence from the monarch at the top to the lowest slave at the bottom. It was only in certain Greek communities that the interme- diate statuses were abolished and the social body divided into two polar oppo- sites. Finley offered his own interpretation for this unique development. It was the result of a struggle between the aristocracy and the peasantry during the archaic period, in which the lower classes were victorious and destroyed the bonds of dependency on the aristocracy by political means: the lower classes were incorporated into the body politic as citizens with equal rights. Athens was, for Finley, the case par excellence in this development. The leg- islation of Solon in the early sixth century bc cancelled previous debts and prohibited the enslavement of Athenian citizens for debts incurred.2 This cre- ated a significant manpower problem for the elite, which could no longer count on exploiting the peasants to produce the necessary surplus.
    [Show full text]
  • Law and Economy in Classical Athens: [Demosthenes], “Against Dionysodorus”
    is is a version of an electronic document, part of the series, Dēmos: Clas- sical Athenian Democracy, a publicationpublication ofof e Stoa: a consortium for electronic publication in the humanities [www.stoa.org]. e electronic version of this article off ers contextual information intended to make the study of Athenian democracy more accessible to a wide audience. Please visit the site at http:// www.stoa.org/projects/demos/home. Law and Economy in Classical Athens: [Demosthenes], “Against Dionysodorus” S is article was originally written for the online discus- sion series “Athenian Law in its Democratic Context,” organized by Adriaan Lanni and sponsored by Harvard University’s Center for Hellenic Studies. (Suggested Read- ing: Demosthenes , “Against Dionysodorus.”) Sometime around a man named Dareius brought a private action in an Athenian court against a merchant called Dionysodorus. Dareius and his business partner Pamphilus had made a loan to Dionysodorus and his part- ner Parmeniscus for a trading voyage to Egypt and back. In his opening words of his speech to the court, Dareius describes the risks confronting men who made maritime loans. Edward M. Harris, “Law and Economy in Classical Athens: [Demosthenes] ‘Against Dionysodorus,’” in A. Lanni, ed., “Athenian Law in its Democratic Context” (Center for Hellenic Studies On-Line Discussion Series). Republished with permission in C. Blackwell, ed., Dēmos: Classical Athenian Democracy (A.(A. MahoneyMahoney andand R.R. Scaife,Scaife, edd.,edd., e Stoa: a consortium for electronic publication in the humanities [www.stoa.org], . © , E.M. Harris. “We who decide to engage in maritime trade and to en- trust our property to other men are clearly aware of this fact: the borrower has an advantage over us in every re- spect.
    [Show full text]
  • Athenian Democracy and Popular Tyranny
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Athenian democracy and popular tyranny Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4dj5x065 ISBN 9781107130401 Author Hoekstra, K Publication Date 2016-03-24 DOI 10.1017/CBO9781316418024.002 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Athenian Democracy and Popular Tyranny Kinch Hoekstra I An account of popular sovereignty that begins with the fifth century BCE may seem to be off to a false start.1 Foundational works in the history of political thought have taught us that the very notion of sovereignty, and thus of popular sovereignty, emerged from the particular historical circumstances of the early modern era. One might thus believe that fifth-century Greeks could not be discussing popular sovereignty some two thousand years before this concept’s emergence.2 Leading ancient historians and classicists have adopted this view, deeming ‘sovereignty’ a misleadingly anachronistic way of thinking about Athenian democracy in the classical period.3 For the concept of sovereignty seems 1 By agreement, my primary focus is on the fifth century BCE (esp. its second half) and Melissa Lane’s in her contribution is on the fourth. Earlier versions of this chapter were presented at Queen Mary, University of London (Popular Sovereignty Project); Stanford University (Workshop on Ethics and Politics, Ancient and Modern); and UCLA (a combined meeting of the Legal Theory Workshop and the Political Theory Workshop). I am grateful to the audiences on each of these occasions, and for comments from Mark Greenberg, Amanda Greene, Tim Hoekstra, Seth Jaffe, Kathryn Morgan, Seana Shiffrin, and Quentin Skinner.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography Listing - Ancient Greece Project ======292 FIS Fisher, Leonard Everett
    Bibliography Listing - Ancient Greece Project ========================================================================= 292 FIS Fisher, Leonard Everett. The Olympians : great gods and goddesses of ancientGreece. Holiday House, [1984]. Note: Offers brief biographical sketches of the twelve gods and goddesses that reside on Mount Olympus including such information as their Roman names, their parents, and the symbols that represent them. 292 GRE Green, Jen. Myths of ancient Greece. Austin, TX: Raintree Steck-Vaughn, [2001]. 292 OLD Oldfield, Pamela. Tales from ancient Greece. New York: Doubleday, [1988]. 292.1 GRE Green, Jen. Ancient Greek myths. New York, NY: Gareth Stevens Pub, [2010]. Note: Briefly describes the history, geography, and society of ancient Greece; explains concepts found within the folklore and mythology; and presents several myths. 292.1 ORR Orr, Tamra. Achilles. Hockessin, Del: Mitchell Lane Publishers, [2008]. Note: Provides not only a background and history of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, but also describes the emerging civilizations that gave rise to each culture's myths, which explained their complex group of deities that pervaded their literature, art, and daily lives. 292.1 TRA Tracy, Kathleen. Theseus. Hockessin, Del: Mitchell Lane Publishers, [2008]. Note: Provides not only a background and history of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, but also describes the emerging civilizations that gave rise to each culture's myths, which explained their complex group of deities that pervaded their literature, art, and daily lives. 305.5 MAC Macdonald, Fiona and Antram, David. You wouldn't want to be a slave in ancient Greece! : a life you'd rather not have. New York: Franklin Watts, [2001]. 394.1 DAW Dawson, Imogen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Position of the Hoplites in Classical Athens: a Historical Study
    Athens Journal of History - Volume 1, Issue 2 – Pages 135-146 The Social Position of the Hoplites in Classical Athens: A Historical Study By Ahmed Ghanem Hafez This paper sheds light on the emergence and the growth of the Athenian hoplite class. It deals with the several types of the hoplites which the political and economic circumstances of the archaic and classical Athenian society led to their existence, such as the hoplite citizens and the farmer hoplite. I try through this paper to clarify the relation between the military role of the hoplites and their deserved social rights as citizens, in order to show their real social position in the Athenian society. Introduction During the time of the Greek wars in the classical period which extended from the Greek victories over the Persian Empire at the beginning of the 5th century B.C to the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C, many city states appeared such as Athens and Sparta which challenged the Persian hegemony. Although the warfare between these new states weakened the Greeks, it also gave them a very well - organized strong army during this period 1 while those political circumstances were a significant force in strengthening the Greek army as a whole, the increasing role of the state in taking responsibility for arming and equipping its citizens was another important factor.2 We know from the Athenian constitution that the ephebes were all trained as hoplites3 and were lightly armed, and Each ephebe especially those who had reached puberty was issued with a hoplite shield and spear after the first year of their ephebian life.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is “Classical” About Classical Antiquity? Eight Propositions
    What Is “Classical” about Classical Antiquity? Eight Propositions JAMES I. PORTER 1. “classical antiquity” is not consistently classical In 1930 classical studies experienced an insurrection. Werner Jaeger, in apostasy from his teacher Wilamowitz, convened a conference in Naumburg called “The Problem of the Classical” (Das Problem des Klassischen). The apostasy was open and calculated. Thirty years earlier Wilamowitz had boasted that he helped put paid to the word classical, which he found meaningless, and in his Geschichte der Philologie from 1921 he notoriously (and audibly) omitted the time- honored epithet of his discipline.1 (In English the title ought to read, History of [ ] Philology. The published English and Italian translations spoil the title’s symbolism by reinserting the missing word Classical.) Das Klassische was a problem indeed, and Jaeger’s conference aimed at making classics a classical discipline again, one firmly rooted in classical and humanistic values true for all time, as against its being a compilation of dry historical data. We have a good idea of what the conference was about because Jaeger published its proceedings a year later.2 But what went on behind the scenes? Luckily, in the days before tape recorders there was Alfred Körte, who offers an in- valuable first-hand account of what he saw and heard: “A number of speakers in the discussion at Naumburg sharply disputed the claim that Aeschylus was a classical author of the first rank (ein Klassiker). As the discussion went on, it turned out that actually none of the first-class luminaries of world literature had any rightful claim to the label classical, or at most they had only a qualified claim to it—neither Homer nor Aeschylus nor Shakespeare nor even the young Goethe.
    [Show full text]
  • WHI SOL 5.Pdf
    WHI SOL 5 Ancient Greeks • The physical geography of the Aegean Basin shaped the economic, social, and political development of Greek civilization. • The expansion of Greek civilization through trade and colonization led to the spread of Hellenic culture across the Mediterranean and Black seas. Locations and places • Aegean Sea • Balkan and Peloponnesus peninsula, Europe, Asia Minor • Mediterranean Sea • Black Sea, Dardanelles • Athens, Sparta, Troy • Macedonia Welcome to Greece! Economic and social development • Agriculture (limited arable land) • Commerce and the spread of Hellenic culture • Shift from barter to money economy (coins) Political development • Mountainous terrain both helped and hindered the development of city-states. • Greek cities were designed to promote civic and commercial life. • Colonization was prompted by overpopulation and the search for arable land. Greek mythology • Many of Western civilization’s symbols, metaphors, words, and idealized images come from ancient Greek mythology. • Offered explanations of natural phenomena, human qualities, and life events • based on a polytheistic religion that was integral to culture, politics, and art in ancient Greece. Greek gods and goddesses • Zeus • Hera • Apollo • Artemis • Athena • Aphrodite • (Symbols and images in Western literature, art, and architecture) • Classical Athens developed the most democratic system of government the world had ever seen, although not everyone could participate in decision making. It became a foundation of modern democracies. • Contrasting philosophies of government divided the Greek city-states of Athens (democracy) and Sparta (oligarchy). Social structure and citizenship in the Greek polis • Citizens (free adult males) had political rights and the responsibility of civic participation in government. • Women and foreigners had no political rights.
    [Show full text]
  • The Growth of Greek Cities in the First Millennium BC
    Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics The growth of Greek cities in the first millennium BC Version 1.0 December 2005 Ian Morris Stanford University Abstract: In this paper I trace the growth of the largest Greek cities from perhaps 1,000- 2,000 people at the beginning of the first millennium BC to 400,000-500,000 at the millennium’s end. I examine two frameworks for understanding this growth: Roland Fletcher’s discussion of the interaction and communication limits to growth and Max Weber’s ideal types of cities’ economic functions. I argue that while political power was never the only engine of urban growth in classical antiquity, it was always the most important motor. The size of the largest Greek cities was a function of the population they controlled, mechanisms of tax and rent, and transportation technology. © Ian Morris. [email protected] 1 The growth of Greek cities in the first millennium BC Ian Morris (Stanford) 1. Introduction Greece in 1000 BC was a world of villages. Most people lived in communities of just a few dozen souls; even the largest settlement, Athens (Figure 1), was probably just 3,000 to 4,000 strong. But at the millennium’s end, the Greek east Mediterranean boasted some of the largest cities in pre-industrial history. Alexandria, Antioch, and Seleucia-on-the- Tigris probably each had 250,000-500,000 inhabitants. Figure 1. Sites in the Aegean mentioned in this chapter In this chapter I discuss the size of Greek cities and the implications of their growth. I identify three major transitions: 2 Figure 2.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 HIST3105 War and Society in Ancient Greece, 750-350 BC This
    HIST3105 War and Society in Ancient Greece, 750-350 BC This course investigates all aspects of war in its social context in archaic and classical Greece – from the causes of conflict, via the question of how to train, raise, maintain, and control citizen and mercenary armies, to the range of forms of warfare from ritual clashes to campaigns of annihilation. In particular, the course tackles some of the myths current in modern scholarship: the notions that war was the ‘normal’ state of international relations in Greece; that the citizen army was an essentially ‘middle-class’ body; that warfare was restricted to a game-like competition in the archaic period and became a destructive ‘total’ conlict only in the classical period; that the Athenian navy drove the development of radical democracy; and that the ‘mercenary explosion’ of the fourth century was a result of economic and political crisis in the Greek city-states. How the Greeks fought has been much-debated in recent research, and this too will be the subject of detailed study. A crucial aim of the course is to provide an understanding of how Greek warfare was shaped by the social, economic, and cultural constraints of its time, how it developed, and why wars were so common in ancient Greece. Our main sources are long narrative accounts of wars which cannot be divided up into thematic sections corresponding to the main topics set out above: a single paragraph of Thucydides or Xenophon will contain information on several different topics. One of the challenges of studying Greek warfare is to assemble such disparate bits of evidence from a variety of passages and sources while still paying due attention to the context in which this material appears.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rhetoric of Athenian Identity in Demosthenes' Early Assembly Speeches
    The Rhetoric of Athenian Identity in Demosthenes’ Early Assembly Speeches Sarah Bremner EMOSTHENES’ DELIBERATIVE SPEECHES consistently engage with the rhetoric of identity to confront an D internal crisis in the Athenian Assembly. While the speeches have been traditionally viewed as anti-Macedonian, this approach has at times overlooked a more immediate focus on Athenian internal dynamics and more nuanced rhetorical strategies.1 Although the immediate context of the speeches is issues of Macedonian expansion (such as Amphipolis, Olyn- thus, or individuals such as Diopeithes), most of Demosthenes’ comments are on the Athenians, their past achievements, and their current failings.2 His focused and sustained criticism of the Athenians, particularly in Philippic 1, has not gone un- noticed in recent scholarship, with the latest commentaries of Herrman, Wooten, and Karvounis3 all noting Demosthenes’ frustrated castigations of the Assembly in this speech. 1 E.g. R. Ellis and R. D. Milns, The Spectre of Philip (Sydney 1970) 2; S. Usher, “Symbouleutic Oratory,” in I. Worthington (ed.), A Companion to Greek Rhetoric (Malden 2010) 230–234. J. Roisman, The Rhetoric of Conspiracy in Ancient Athens (Berkeley 2006) 124, discounts the deliberative corpus from his consideration. J. Herrman, Demosthenes: Selected Political Speeches (Cambridge 2019) 2, views Dem.1–4 as “a series of Assembly speeches against Philip.” For further discussion see S. Bremner, Athenian Ideology in Demosthenes’ De- liberative Oratory: Hailing the Dēmos (diss. Birmingham 2017) 1–3. 2 Cf. Dem. 4.2 and 9.4. Demosthenes’ harshest call for punishment in the corpus (apotumpanismos, 8.61) is reserved for the rhetors in Athens, not Philip.
    [Show full text]