DOCSLIB.ORG

Persian Political Propaganda in the War Against Alexander the Great*

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Persian Political Propaganda in the War Against Alexander the Great* Iranica Antiqua, vol. XLVI, 2011 doi: 10.2143/IA.46.0.2084417 PERSIAN POLITICAL PROPAGANDA IN THE WAR AGAINST ALEXANDER THE GREAT* BY Maxim M. KHOLOD (St. Petersburg State University) Abstract: The article deals with political propaganda, aimed at the Greeks, which the Persians practiced in their struggle against Alexander the Great. The author clarifies the goals, contents and forms of propaganda as well as the time of the beginning of such an activity of the Persians against the Macedonian king. The attention is also paid to the results of the Persian propagandistic work amongst the Greeks and the reasons for its failure. Keywords: propaganda, Persia, Greece, Darius III, Alexander the Great, King’s Peace It is well known that propaganda (or psychological warfare as it is often called) plays a vital role in the conduct of modern wars. The term propa- ganda is relatively new: it appears to become a part of the modern lexicon after 1622 when Pope Gregory XV established the Sacra Congregatio de propaganda fide charged with the spread of Catholicism and with the reg- ulation of Catholic ecclesiastical affairs in non-Catholic countries. How- ever, there is no doubt that the phenomenon itself is actually very old; it existed in the ancient East as well as in ancient Greece and Rome1. Although there is every reason to believe that the Persians practiced prop- aganda, too, this theme has not almost interested scholars2. Therefore, the aim of the present essay is not only to examine the political propaganda of the Persians in Alexander’s time, but also to try to attract more historians’ attention to the phenomenon of Persian propaganda as a whole. * * * * In this essay, I develop the ideas I had set out in an article written in cooperation with Prof. Dr. Eduard V. Rung, see Rung & Kholod 2006: 27–66. 1 On the history of propaganda, see Taylor 2003. See also literature cited in Kelly 2003: 173–174. 2 The recent paper of Kelly 2003: 173–219, is amongst the exceptions. 994066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd4066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd 114949 221/06/111/06/11 111:541:54 150 M.M. KHOLOD In the war that the Macedonian king Philip II launched against the Persian Empire in 336 B.C. and which was resolutely continued by his son Alexander the Great in 334, both sides used more than just their military forces. Besides those, the enemies also employed the powerful weapon of political propaganda. Both Persian and Macedonian propaganda3 was aimed mainly at the Greeks, and the reason for this is clear: the outcome of the campaign as a whole, especially at the beginning of military opera- tions, largely depended on the Greeks’ position. Unfortunately, it is to be admitted that there is an extremely small amount of evidence allowing us to judge Persian propaganda of that time (it is very likely that mainly this is the key reason why modern historians tend to be silent on the matter4). Yet, we do have some data on the subject. The fact of the Persians having used political propaganda in their struggle against the Macedonian monarchy, together with separate hints in our literary tradition, seems to be definitely confirmed by Arrian. He cites Alexander’s letter (written at Marathus in 333/2), which was an answer to Darius III’ first peace offer5. The letter contains, amongst other accusations, the one according to which the Persian king sent to the Greeks letters that called 3 Note that Alexander’s propaganda is described, to a varying extent, in many modern historical works; see recently Faraguna 2003: 107 ff.; Olbrycht 2004: 21 ff.; Cartledge 2004: 190 ff.; Heckel 2008: 38 ff.; Poddighe 2009: 99 ff. For Panhellenism in propa- ganda, see particularly Seibert 1998: 6 ff.; Flower 2000: 96 ff., both with detailed bibli- ography; also see Mitchell 2007: 191 ff. 4 Apart from separate phrases appearing from time to time in the works dealing with Alexander’s history (e.g. Schachermeyr 1973: 113 ff.; Green 1991: 37 ff.; Blackwell 1999: 51), slightly more attention to Persian usage of propaganda in the war against the Macedonian king is provided by Bosworth (Bosworth 1980: 74–75, 181–182). Further- more, it should be pointed out that there is no special study of the theme under considera- tion here, to my knowledge or to the knowledge of such authoritative experts on the Achaemenid Empire as Prof. Muhammad A. Dandamaev (St. Petersburg) and Prof. Pierre Briant (Paris). I wish to thank both scholars for this information. I also wish to express my gratitude to Prof. Andreas Mehl and PD Dr. Christian Mileta (Halle) with whom I had an opportunity to discuss the present essay. Likewise, I am grateful to Prof. Frank L. Holt (Houston) for having gone to the trouble to read a draft of this text and for his helpful comments on substance and on style. 5 In general for the number of Darius’ peace offers to Alexander and their contents, see Bosworth 1980: 227 ff. The letter’s text as a whole: Arr. Anab. 2.14.4–9; cf. Diod. 17.39.1–2; Curt. 4.1.7–14; Just. 11.12. On the dating, cf. Bloedow 1995: 93. There is disagreement about the letter’s authenticity in the modern historiography: while some scholars treat it as genuine, others do not. At any rate, it should be emphasized that the historical value of the data it contains has been recognized not only by the former (although they do not usually deny some tendentiousness of the data as a result of the propagandistic 994066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd4066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd 115050 221/06/111/06/11 111:541:54 PERSIAN POLITICAL PROPAGANDA IN THE WAR AGAINST ALEXANDER THE GREAT 151 for war against Alexander (kaì üpèr êmoÕ pròv toùv ÊElljnav grámmata oûk êpitßdeia diapémpontov, ºpwv próv me polem¬si). It also men- tions as a fact that Darius, besides sending money to the Spartans and some other Greeks (the Spartans alone accepted the money6), also sent to the Greeks his envoys who, in addition to instructions to bribe the Macedonian adherents, sought (evidently by the appropriate calls supported by bribing individual politicians) to destroy the Peace established by Alexander character of the letter, e.g. see Schachermeyr 1973: 223 ff.; and see, still valuable, Pridik 1893: 39 ff.; cf. Kovaliov 1946: 53–54). Most of the latter who treat the letter as false, have also adhered to the similar position in that case (however, not without reservation) suggesting that either it was written by a contemporary (one or another person of Alexander’s circle) or, at least, drawn up later based on the material preserved in the original sources (e.g. Pearson 1955: 449–450; Hamilton 1969: 77; Bosworth 1980: 231 ff.; cf. Bosworth 1988: 64, 299). Besides, the authors of books on the history of Alexander have, as a rule, given credence to the contents of the letter as well (e.g. see Berve 1926: 121–122; Wilcken 1931: 97; Tarn 1948: 36–37; Lane Fox 1973: 180, 520; Shifman 1988: 80; Green 1991: 240–241; Hammond 1994: 113; Nawotka 2004: 256–257; Heckel 2006: 67, 103, 264; cf. Heckel 2008: 73–74). The opposite opinion has been expressed by Badian who has claimed that the information the letter contains cannot be treated as historical at all (Badian 2000: 257). In my view, such a claim is unnecessarily critical: indeed, other than several, insignificant in principle, misrepresentations of the facts in the letter’s text that can be explained by its propagandistic character, there appears to be nothing here that would clearly demonstrate unreliability of the evidence as a whole. For analysis of the points of the letter in this connection, see Bosworth 1980: 227 ff.; Bloedow 1995: 98 ff.; cf. Briant 2002: 689, 770 ff. 6 This statement is supported by Aeschines’ evidence for Athens: according to him, Darius sent 300 talents to Athens, probably in 334 (see below), to organize a revolt against Alexander; but the Athenians refused to accept the money (Aesch. 3.239). The outcome in other Greek cities to which the Persian king offered gold, too, is uncertain, since, besides the information the letter contains, there is no further evidence. However, there appears to be no reason to reject the letter’s information. Most likely all these Greek states, except Sparta, renounced officially Persian money at that time really. Nevertheless, there was probably one more exception amongst them, namely Thebes: indeed, it is hard to imagine that this city, stirring up against Macedonia in 335 and demonstrating clearly its favor to Persia (Diod. 17.9.5), would not have accepted Persian gold, if it had been offered. Cf. Bosworth 1980: 232. For Agis III of Sparta’s receipt of 30 talents from Persia, see Arr. Anab. 2.13.6. Taking into account Aeschines’ report that Darius sent to Athens 300 talents, it is reasonable to suppose that Persian subsides to Sparta were not limited to these 30 talents; it is likely that this sum of money was only a regular payment given to the Spartans by the Persians for fighting against Macedonia. In general on the relations between Sparta and Persia in the time of Alexander, see Badian 1967: 174 ff. (who, I think, suggests a slightly understated date — not before 333 — for the beginning of the anti-Macedonian contacts between Persia and Sparta); Atkinson 1980: 101, 261–262, 290–291, 373–374; Bosworth 1980: 223–224, 233–234, 353; Bosworth 1988: 198 ff.; Marinovich 1993: 141 ff.; Cartledge & Spawforth 2002: 18–19. 994066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd4066_Iran_Antiqua_46_06.indd 115151 221/06/111/06/11 111:541:54 152 M.M.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alexander the Great and Hephaestion
    2019-3337-AJHIS-HIS 1 Alexander the Great and Hephaestion: 2 Censorship and Bisexual Erasure in Post-Macedonian 3 Society 4 5 6 Same-sex relations were common in ancient Greece and having both male and female 7 physical relationships was a cultural norm. However, Alexander the Great is almost 8 always portrayed in modern depictions as heterosexual, and the disappearance of his 9 life-partner Hephaestion is all but complete in ancient literature. Five full primary 10 source biographies of Alexander have survived from antiquity, making it possible to 11 observe the way scholars, popular writers and filmmakers from the Victorian era 12 forward have interpreted this evidence. This research borrows an approach from 13 gender studies, using the phenomenon of bisexual erasure to contribute a new 14 understanding for missing information regarding the relationship between Alexander 15 and his life-partner Hephaestion. In Greek and Macedonian society, pederasty was the 16 norm, and boys and men did not have relations with others of the same age because 17 there was almost always a financial and power difference. Hephaestion was taller and 18 more handsome than Alexander, so it might have appeared that he held the power in 19 their relationship. The hypothesis put forward here suggests that writers have erased 20 the sexual partnership between Alexander and Hephaestion because their relationship 21 did not fit the norm of acceptable pederasty as practiced in Greek and Macedonian 22 culture or was no longer socially acceptable in the Roman contexts of the ancient 23 historians. Ancient biographers may have conducted censorship to conceal any 24 implication of femininity or submissiveness in this relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient History
    2003 HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION Ancient History Total marks – 100 Section I Pages 2–5 Personalities in Their Times – 25 marks • Attempt ONE question from Questions 1–12 •Allow about 45 minutes for this section Section II Pages 9–22 Ancient Societies – 25 marks • Attempt ONE question from Questions 13–25 General Instructions •Allow about 45 minutes for this section • Reading time – 5 minutes Section III Pages 25–31 •Working time – 3 hours •Write using black or blue pen Historical Periods – 25 marks • Attempt ONE question from Questions 26–44 •Allow about 45 minutes for this section Section IV Pages 33–45 Additional Historical Period OR Additional Ancient Society – 25 marks • Attempt ONE question from Questions 45–63 OR ONE question from Question 64–76 • Choose a different Ancient Society from the one you chose in Section II, or a different Historical Period from the one you chose in Section III •Allow about 45 minutes for this section 104 Section I — Personalities in Their Times 25 marks Attempt ONE question from Questions 1–12 Allow about 45 minutes for this section Answer the question in a writing booklet. Extra writing booklets are available. Page Question 1 — Option A – Egypt: Hatshepsut ................................................................. 3 Question 2 — Option B – Egypt: Akhenaten .................................................................. 3 Question 3 — Option C – Egypt: Ramesses II ................................................................ 3 Question 4 — Option D – Near East: Sennacherib ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Who Freed Athens? J
    Ancient Greek Democracy: Readings and Sources Edited by Eric W. Robinson Copyright © 2004 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd The Beginnings of the Athenian Democracv: Who Freed Athens? J Introduction Though the very earliest democracies lildy took shape elsewhere in Greece, Athens embraced it relatively early and would ultimately become the most famous and powerful democracy the ancient world ever hew. Democracy is usually thought to have taken hold among the Athenians with the constitutional reforms of Cleisthenes, ca. 508/7 BC. The tyrant Peisistratus and later his sons had ruled Athens for decades before they were overthrown; Cleisthenes, rallying the people to his cause, made sweeping changes. These included the creation of a representative council (bode)chosen from among the citizens, new public organizations that more closely tied citizens throughout Attica to the Athenian state, and the populist ostracism law that enabled citizens to exile danger- ous or undesirable politicians by vote. Beginning with these measures, and for the next two centuries or so with only the briefest of interruptions, democracy held sway at Athens. Such is the most common interpretation. But there is, in fact, much room for disagree- ment about when and how democracy came to Athens. Ancient authors sometimes refer to Solon, a lawgiver and mediator of the early sixth century, as the founder of the Athenian constitution. It was also a popular belief among the Athenians that two famous “tyrant-slayers,” Harmodius and Aristogeiton, inaugurated Athenian freedom by assas- sinating one of the sons of Peisistratus a few years before Cleisthenes’ reforms - though ancient writers take pains to point out that only the military intervention of Sparta truly ended the tyranny.
    [Show full text]
  • De Theognide Megarensi. Nietzsche on Theognis of Megara. a Bilingual Edition
    FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE De Theognide Megarensi Nietzsche on Theognis of Megara – A Bilingual Edition – Translated by R. M. Kerr THE NIETZSCHE CHANNEL Friedrich Nietzsche De Theognide Megarensi Nietzsche on Theognis of Megara A bilingual edition Translated by R. M. Kerr ☙ editio electronica ❧ _________________________________________ THE N E T ! " # H E # H A N N E $ % MM&' Copyright © Proprietas interpretatoris Roberti Martini Kerrii anno 2015 Omnia proprietatis iura reservantur et vindicantur. Imitatio prohibita sine auctoris permissione. Non licet pecuniam expetere pro aliquo, quod partem horum verborum continet; liber pro omnibus semper gratuitus erat et manet. Sic rerum summa novatur semper, et inter se mortales mutua vivunt. augescunt aliae gentes, aliae invuntur, inque brevi spatio mutantur saecla animantum et quasi cursores vitai lampada tradiunt. - Lucretius - - de Rerum Natura, II 5-! - PR"#$CE %e &or' presente( here is a trans)ation o* #rie(rich Nietzsche-s aledi!tionsarbeit ./schoo) e0it-thesis12 *or the "andesschule #$orta in 3chu)p*orta .3axony-$nhalt) presente( on 3epte4ber th 15678 It has hitherto )arge)y gone unnotice(, especial)y in anglophone Nietzsche stu(- ies8 $t the ti4e though, the &or' he)pe( to estab)ish the reputation o* the then twenty year o)( Nietzsche and consi(erab)y *aci)itate( his )ater acade4ic career8 9y a)) accounts, it &as a consi(erab)e achie:e4ent, especial)y consi(ering &hen it &as &ri;en: it entai)e( an e0pert 'no&)e(ge, not =ust o* c)assical-phi)o)ogical )iterature, but also o* co(ico)ogy8 %e recent =u(ge4ent by >"+3"+ .2017<!!2< “It is a piece that, ha( Nietzsche ne:er &ri;en another &or(, &ou)( ha:e assure( his p)ace, albeit @uite a s4a)) one, in the history o* Ger4an phi)o)ogyB su4s the 4atter up quite e)o@uently8 +ietzsche )ater continue( his %eognis stu(ies, the sub=ect o* his Crst scho)ar)y artic)e, as a stu(ent at Leip,ig, in 156 D to so4e e0tent a su44ary o* the present &or' D a critical re:ie& in 156!, as &e)) as @uotes in se:eral )e;ers *ro4 1567 on.
    [Show full text]
  • 306 Paola CECCARELLI, Ancient Greek Letter Writing. a Cultural
    306 COMPTES RENDUS Paola CECCARELLI, Ancient Greek Letter Writing. A Cultural History (600 BC- 150 BC). Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013. 1 vol., 464 p. Prix: 95 £. ISBN 978- 0-19-967559. The aim of this monumental study is not only to contextualise Greek letter writing betWEEn 600 and 150 BC within communicative practices, but also to look at docu- mentary letters and letters Embedded in a narrative. An important part of Ceccarelli’s bibliography focusEs on lEttErs of the Classical and HEllEnistic period. ThE book starts with discussing somE problems related with ancient epistolography, such as typology of lEttErs, or anciEnt GrEEk tErminology (p. 1-19). ThE author points out in thE sEcond chapter (p. 23-58) that letter writing, as a communication across a spatial distance was not among thE earliest uses of Greek writing. Examining thE oldEst extant documEn- tary letters (she counts 42 letters that have been preserved), the author arguEs that for thE fifth and EvEn partly thE fourth cEntury BC it is impossible to spEak of a codified epistolary style. A survey of (contemporary) curses shows the original affinity between both curses and letters. In the next chaptEr (p. 59-99), CEccarElli analysEs thE traditions on the invEntion of writing. The early narratives that represent writing as an import from outside the GreEk World, did not focus on the function of this new art, whereas the traditions that attributed the invEntion to a Greek hEro, pointed to the ability of the written word to preservE information or to its potential for creativity. FurthEr, the author goes on to discuss storiEs that date from the classical pEriod and deal With the difficultiEs of Epistolary communication.
    [Show full text]
  • Kings & Events of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek Dynasties
    KINGS AND EVENTS OF THE BABYLONIAN, PERSIAN, AND GREEK DYNASTIES 612 B.C. Nineveh falls to neo-Babylonian army (Nebuchadnezzar) 608 Pharaoh Necho II marched to Carchemesh to halt expansion of neo-Babylonian power Josiah, King of Judah, tries to stop him Death of Josiah and assumption of throne by his son, Jehoahaz Jehoiakim, another son of Josiah, replaced Jehoahaz on the authority of Pharaoh Necho II within 3 months Palestine and Syria under Egyptian rule Josiah’s reforms dissipate 605 Nabopolassar sends troops to fight remaining Assyrian army and the Egyptians at Carchemesh Nebuchadnezzar chased them all the way to the plains of Palestine Nebuchadnezzar got word of the death of his father (Nabopolassar) so he returned to Babylon to receive the crown On the way back he takes Daniel and other members of the royal family into exile 605 - 538 Babylon in control of Palestine, 597; 10,000 exiled to Babylon 586 Jerusalem and the temple destroyed and large deportation 582 Because Jewish guerilla fighters killed Gedaliah another last large deportation occurred SUCCESSORS OF NEBUCHADNEZZAR 562 - 560 Evil-Merodach released Jehoiakim (true Messianic line) from custody 560 - 556 Neriglissar 556 Labaski-Marduk reigned 556 - 539 Nabonidus: Spent most of the time building a temple to the mood god, Sin. This earned enmity of the priests of Marduk. Spent the rest of his time trying to put down revolts and stabilize the kingdom. He moved to Tema and left the affairs of state to his son, Belshazzar Belshazzar: Spent most of his time trying to restore order. Babylonia’s great threat was Media.
    [Show full text]
  • Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards
    MARATHON 2,500 YEARS EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SUPPLEMENT 124 DIRECTOR & GENERAL EDITOR: JOHN NORTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLICATIONS: RICHARD SIMPSON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARATHON CONFERENCE 2010 EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 2013 The cover image shows Persian warriors at Ishtar Gate, from before the fourth century BC. Pergamon Museum/Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin. Photo Mohammed Shamma (2003). Used under CC‐BY terms. All rights reserved. This PDF edition published in 2019 First published in print in 2013 This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. More information regarding CC licenses is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Available to download free at http://www.humanities-digital-library.org ISBN: 978-1-905670-81-9 (2019 PDF edition) DOI: 10.14296/1019.9781905670819 ISBN: 978-1-905670-52-9 (2013 paperback edition) ©2013 Institute of Classical Studies, University of London The right of contributors to be identified as the authors of the work published here has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Designed and typeset at the Institute of Classical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory note 1 P. J. Rhodes The battle of Marathon and modern scholarship 3 Christopher Pelling Herodotus’ Marathon 23 Peter Krentz Marathon and the development of the exclusive hoplite phalanx 35 Andrej Petrovic The battle of Marathon in pre-Herodotean sources: on Marathon verse-inscriptions (IG I3 503/504; Seg Lvi 430) 45 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander's Empire
    4 Alexander’s Empire MAIN IDEA WHY IT MATTERS NOW TERMS & NAMES EMPIRE BUILDING Alexander the Alexander’s empire extended • Philip II •Alexander Great conquered Persia and Egypt across an area that today consists •Macedonia the Great and extended his empire to the of many nations and diverse • Darius III Indus River in northwest India. cultures. SETTING THE STAGE The Peloponnesian War severely weakened several Greek city-states. This caused a rapid decline in their military and economic power. In the nearby kingdom of Macedonia, King Philip II took note. Philip dreamed of taking control of Greece and then moving against Persia to seize its vast wealth. Philip also hoped to avenge the Persian invasion of Greece in 480 B.C. TAKING NOTES Philip Builds Macedonian Power Outlining Use an outline to organize main ideas The kingdom of Macedonia, located just north of Greece, about the growth of had rough terrain and a cold climate. The Macedonians were Alexander's empire. a hardy people who lived in mountain villages rather than city-states. Most Macedonian nobles thought of themselves Alexander's Empire as Greeks. The Greeks, however, looked down on the I. Philip Builds Macedonian Power Macedonians as uncivilized foreigners who had no great A. philosophers, sculptors, or writers. The Macedonians did have one very B. important resource—their shrewd and fearless kings. II. Alexander Conquers Persia Philip’s Army In 359 B.C., Philip II became king of Macedonia. Though only 23 years old, he quickly proved to be a brilliant general and a ruthless politician. Philip transformed the rugged peasants under his command into a well-trained professional army.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander Essay Hints
    Alexander Essay Hints Writing an introduction An introduction needs to overview the key ideas of the essay. You should try to answer all the questions in a general fashion within one paragraph The Question: At the end of 333 BC, Alexander defeated the Persian king, Darius III, on the field of battle at Issus, in the south of modern Turkey. Discuss: • the events leading up to the battle of Issus • the tactics used by each of the commanders in this battle • the reasons for Alexander’s victory. How costly was defeat in this battle for Darius? Various introductions: In this essay I will discuss the reasons why Darius III lost the battle of Issue. It was a costly defeat for Darius. On a sunny day in 333 BC on a coastal plain somewhere in Persia a great battle was fought. Alexander the Great destroyed and humiliated the rabble of a Persian army despite having massive odds against him. The battle of Issus in 333 BC was a significant point in Alexander’s campaigns in the Persian Empire. It was here that for the first time, he defeated the Great King, Darius III in open battle. A key reason for the defeat lay in the events that led to the battle being fought on a narrow coastal plain. This meant that Darius was unable to use his superior numbers to gain any sort of tactical advantage. But it was also Alexander’s ability to seize on these advantages that led to such a decisive defeat. It could be argued that Darius and his people never fully recovered from the psychological blow inflicted by at the battle of Issus.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Postal Service Mail Addressing Guidelines
    U.S. Postal Service Mail Addressing Guidelines Address Placement Placement of the address on the face of an envelope should conform to the following U. S. Postal Service specifications. • The address should be in an area, one inch from each side of the envelope. • The top of the address should be no more than 2 3/4 inches from the bottom of the envelope and the bottom no more than 5/8's of an inch from the bottom of the envelope. • The area 4 1/2 inches by 5/8 's of an inch in the lower right hand corner of the envelope MUST remain empty for bar code placement for any maul that is processed by the Mail Center. Enclosures Correspondence Mail of any kind for transport by the U. S. Postal Service must be enclosed in an appropriate envelope or parcel and sealed. The type of enclosures determine the mailing classification. Non-mailables Several items are listed by the U. S. Postal Service as non-mailable in envelopes: • paper clips • metal pieces • glass, chips • sand. These can jam or damage the mailing machines and can cause serious injury to Mail Center and Postal employees. The following are also classified as non-mailables and subject to return to sender: envelopes and cards less than 3 1/2 inches in height or 5 inches in length. It is recommended that when mailing questionable items to U. S. or foreign destinations, the mailer should contact the Mail Center for assistance. All foreign countries also impose various restrictions. Brochures, letters and newsletters being mailed without an envelope must be folded consistently and must be tabbed with the recommended number of tabs.
    [Show full text]
  • Solon and His Πόλις: the Afterlife of an Archaic Personage in Late Democratic Athens This Paper Investigates the Afterlif
    Solon and his πόλις: The Afterlife of an Archaic Personage in Late Democratic Athens This paper investigates the afterlife of archaic literary legacy in political discourses of fourth-century Athens. It does so through juxtaposition of two literary tradition concerning Solon: Solonian fragments, and the courtroom speeches of Demosthenes and Aeschines. This paper argues that in Sol. 4, Solon perceives the populace as threat to the πόλις and its constitution: both the elites and the general public are source of moral corruption that puts the polis in danger, and both suffer the consequences of civil strife when Dike enacts the divine revenge. The word choices of Sol. 4 form parallels between the fate of the commoners and that of the elites, while the dichotomy between the πόλις and its populace is established through the scenes such as the private citizens plundering public property and the divine revenge entering the private household (Irwin, 2006; Noussia-Fantuzzi, 2010). Next, this paper discusses the implications of this reading of Sol. 4. First, I point out that the overlap of the divine and the mortal forms the political hub of the Solonian Weltanschauung: the people live in the physical space of πόλις; the gods maintain their presence with their sanctuary and ensure the survival of the πόλις with Dike’s revenge as a deterrent. This answers the long-debated question of whether the political realm in Sol. 4 is secular or supernatural (Anhalt, 1993; Blaise, 2006). I also argue that the dichotomy between the πόλις and its populace undermines the legitimacy of “the people” (Ober, 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Who Succeeded Xerxes on the Throne of Persia?
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (Spring 2001): 83Ð88. Article copyright © 2001 by William H. Shea. Who Succeeded Xerxes on the Throne of Persia? William H. Shea A standard interpretation of ancient Persian history in the mid-5th century B.C. is that Artaxerxes I followed his father on the throne after Xerxes was murdered. This interpretation has been developed from the classical writers, the king lists, and the datelines on contract tables from Babylonia which follow this order. Since there is a late Hellenistic astronomical text which dates the murder of Xerxes in the fifth Persian-Babylonian month, or August, the transition be- tween these two kings has been dated in the summer of 465 B.C., about forty days before the Jewish New Year of 1 Tishri. If the Jews, like Ezra, used a fall- to-fall calendar and accession year reckoning, those forty days would have served as ArtaxerxesÕ accession period or Year 0, and his first full year of reign would have begun on 1 Tishri in 465 B.C. That would also make his seventh year extend from the fall of 459 to the fall of 458, not from the fall of 458 to the fall of 457, as Adventist interpreters have held. But this problem is complicated by two factors. First, there was the politi- cal turmoil after the murder of Xerxes. Second, there is the lack of any sources dated to Artaxerxes in the last half of 465 B.C. The Artaxerxes sources can be reviewed as follows: 1. Persian sources.
    [Show full text]