humanities

Article Citizenship as Barrier and Opportunity for Ancient Greek and Modern Refugees

Benjamin Gray

Department of History, Classics and Archaeology, Birkbeck College, University of London, London WC1B 5DQ, UK; [email protected]



Received: 24 May 2018; Accepted: 21 June 2018; Published: 19 July 2018


Abstract: Some dominant traditions in Refugee Studies have stressed the barrier which state citizenship presents to the displaced. Some have condemned citizenship altogether as a mechanism and ideology for excluding the weak (G. Agamben). Others have seen citizenship as an acute problem for displaced people in conditions, like those of the modern world, where the habitable world is comprehensively settled by states capable of defending their territory and organised in accordance with interstate norms, which leaves very limited space for the foundation of new communities with their own meaningful citizenship (H. Arendt). This paper engages with these prominent approaches, but also with more recent arguments that, when handled and adapted in the right way, the practices and ideology of citizenship also present opportunities for the displaced to form their own meaningful communities, exercise collective agency, and secure rights. It is argued that the evidence from ancient Greece shows that ancient Greek citizenship, an early forerunner of modern models of citizenship, could be imaginatively harnessed and adapted by displaced people and groups, in order to form effective and sometimes innovative political communities in exile, even after opportunities to found new city-states from scratch became quite rare (after c. 500 BC). Some relevant displaced groups experimented with more open and cosmopolitan styles of civic interaction and ideology in their improvised quasi-civic communities. The different kinds of ancient Greek informal ‘polis-in-exile’ can bring a new perspective on the wider debates and initiatives concerning refugee political agency and organisation in the ‘provocations’ in this special issue.

Keywords: Refugees; exile; city-state; polis; Ancient Greece; citizenship; agency; cosmopolitanism

1. Introduction Both ancient and modern refugees have suffered or enjoyed a very complex relationship with the ideal and practice of citizenship: citizenship has sometimes been a barrier to security or political participation, and sometimes an opportunity for exercising agency and rediscovering communal life. Since the European refugee crises of the mid-twentieth century, analysts of the refugee predicament have tended to concentrate on the problematic dimensions of citizenship for refugees. This trend in twentieth-century thinking is the subject of Section2 below. Most influentially, H. Arendt stressed that their exclusion from national citizenship deprived twentieth-century refugees even of supposedly universal and unconditional human rights, which became meaningless without the protections and mutual obligations arising from citizenship in a settled state.1 Arendt’s arguments were developed and intensified by G. Agamben (e.g., Agamben 1995, 1998), in his argument that refugees exist in a state of ‘bare life’, excluded from the ‘good life’ of citizenship in a way which reinforces the privileges, security,

1 (Arendt 1943); compare (Arendt [1951] 1968, pp. 290–302). For recent analysis see (Douzinas 2007; Stonebridge 2011).

Humanities 2018, 7, 72; doi:10.3390/h7030072 www.mdpi.com/journal/humanities Humanities 2018, 7, 72 2 of 19 and self-understanding of citizen insiders at the expense of refugee outsiders.2 In his view, citizenship is so intertwined with exclusion and oppression that refugees must lead the way in developing new, truly just forms of identity and interaction which transcend citizenship as a model altogether. Recent work in Refugee Studies has underscored how treatment of refugees by settled citizens and states, even apparently benevolent granting of asylum or aid, often expresses and entrenches unequal power relations, including historical inequalities between different parts of the world.3 There has, however, also been an interesting recent reaction in Refugee Studies against the dominant paradigm. Relevant new contributions do not downplay the challenges and exploitation which refugees face, but they do stress refugees’ capacity to respond to them. The historical work of Gatrell (2013), for example, has brought into focus the degree of political agency and participation which many modern groups of refugees have succeeded in exercising, from German Jews to Palestinians, especially through imaginative and determined harnessing of their own cultural history and traditions. Some political theorists have even called into question the uncompromising suspicion of citizenship which has been championed by Agamben. In reaction against Agamben’s picture of the modern refugee camp as a depoliticised space, which deprives refugees of political agency, Sigona(2015) has argued that refugee camps can in fact be centres of complex forms of political participation and agency: he coins the word ‘campzenship’ to describe the new types of cosmopolitan, flexible quasi-citizenship possible in refugee camps.4 For his part, Grbac(2013) even explicitly appeals to the ancient categories of civitas (‘citizenship’) and polis (‘city-state’) as metaphors to describe what he sees as the underestimated political complexity of some refugee camps. These new theoretical models cohere with many of the practical examples in the other contributions to this collection, which discuss improvised political and communal activities on the part of contemporary refugees, who sometimes even adopt and adapt civic forms, even when subject to numerous severe pressures. The adaptations of citizenship norms and practices which are discussed in this collection include what Ligia Nobre and Anderson Kazuo Nakano (Nobre and Nakano 2017) call ‘urban citizenship’: the flexible adaptation of citizen activities among the varied residents of large cities, including refugees, in order to create new forms of democratic participation. They also include examples which fit very directly the new models of the refugee camp proposed by Sigona and Grbac: improvised shared institutions for regulating conflict and sustaining community life in Palestinian refugee camps. Alessandro Petti(2017) admits that the Dheisheh Refugee Camp in the West Bank is not a ‘city’, but insists that it has paradoxically still succeeded in becoming ‘civic’: the refugees live in a ‘suspended condition’, but have ‘developed distinctive systems of civic management outside of state and municipal institutions’, through which shared problems are resolved through ‘informal processes and interpersonal negotiations’. These include ‘constant internal debate’ about shared problems, such as the building of houses and roads. Samar Maqusi’s (2017) study of refugee camps in Jordan and Lebanon also brings out this collective concern with the shaping of space and architecture within the refugee camp, partly as a way of asserting collective authority over shared space. This includes adaptation of the standard spatial models for a refugee camp stipulated from above. Such local initiative within refugee camps can lead, in Petti’s (2017) words, to a distinctively ‘civic form of cohabitation’ among refugees with multiple identities. As the studies here make clear, these adapted civic forms cannot, of course, compensate fully for the lack of the protections and rights of regular citizenship; but they can provide opportunities for internal political participation and even redress, as well as an effective basis for claiming external recognition from powerful settled states. This development in Refugee Studies also coheres well with recent trends in the study of refugees in Ancient History: recent studies have shown that refugees and other mobile groups

2 Compare (Zetter 1991) for the way bureaucratic labels and procedures can serve to disadvantage, and constrain the agency of, the stateless; compare (Fassin 2010, esp. chp. 5). 3 See, for example, (Bhambra 2015); compare earlier (Said 1984). 4 Compare (Redclift 2013; Pasquetti 2015). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 3 of 19 in the ancient Mediterranean were tenacious and resourceful in finding ways to retain or reinvent communal links or political agency.5 To give some broad background to ancient Greek conditions, the focus of this contribution, the ancient Greek world was made up of a wide range of autonomous or semi-autonomous city-states (poleis).6 This complex network of poleis took shape in the Archaic period (c. 750–480 BC). In that period, the partly voluntary, partly forced movement of Greeks from the Aegean around the Mediterranean, where they participated in new city foundations in (for example) Sicily and South Italy, was an important factor in creating and consolidating the polis as the dominant political and cultural form. The Mediterranean-wide network of Greek poleis, each with their own traditions and constitutions, was sustained through the subsequent Classical (c. 480–323 BC), Hellenistic (c. 323–31 BC), and Roman Imperial (after 31 BC) periods. Both the Hellenistic and Roman periods saw the polis model expand further beyond its traditional reach, including further into Asia, Africa, and Western Europe. The exiles and refugees whose lives and activities can be reconstructed from our evidence for ancient Greece were usually former citizens of a particular city-state (polis) who had been driven out through war or civil war. The existence of a wide range of competing poleis led to incessant warfare between them, at least until the Romans established a single controlling authority across the whole Greek world (and beyond) to regulate disputes. Ongoing wars led to frequent large-scale displacement. Inter-city disputes in turn sharpened the intrinsic tendencies of many Greek cities to fission through civil war, which very often led to exiling of the defeated faction and its supporters.7 To these man-made expulsions through war and civil war, it is necessary to add refugee crises resulting from natural disasters, which could create whole ‘wandering poleis’ of refugees.8 In this contribution, I explore how the ancient Greek evidence can provoke thought among, and offer complex practical precedents to, modern theorists and others interested in how those who have been displaced have through time developed their own political and cultural institutions and activities, seizing the opportunities of citizenship in order to overcome some of the barriers it presents. The ancient Greek exiles and refugees studied below (especially in Section3) were particularly adept at harnessing citizen roles and institutions to assert power and agency. The ways in which they did so are very relevant to modern debates about the possible potential of ‘campzenship’ as a model for refugees, which can also point towards new forms of political life for non-displaced communities. Some major differences between ancient and modern refugees should be borne in mind throughout the discussion. For example, non-Greek exiles and refugees are not at all prominent in our evidence for ancient Greek history. Refugees from beyond the narrow Greek world feature quite prominently in Greek myth and tragedy, whether as quite sympathetic victims of war (Euripides’ Trojan Women) or as more dangerous outsiders (such as the Danaids, from Egypt, in Aeschylus’ Suppliant Women and the other lost parts of its trilogy). However, their real-life counterparts, fleeing into the Greek cities from a different cultural or ethnic area, probably slipped relatively invisibly into the subordinate categories of metics (resident, registered foreigners) or even slaves in their host Greek cities, without leaving many marks on the historical record. The direct surviving evidence results from the efforts of Greek exiles and refugees who were sufficiently recognised and politicised to make a mark on interstate diplomacy or internal city politics. The groups discussed here, were, therefore, exiles and refugees who remained within a relatively homogeneous world, in which Greek ethnicity and language were dominant. This meant that the exiles and refugees we can study in detail in ancient Greece did not have to confront a challenge faced by many modern refugees: that of gaining recognition and political agency

5 See, for example, (Garland 2014; Gray 2015; Isayev 2017b). 6 For detailed evidence and an overview: (Hansen and Nielsen 2004). 7 On expulsions of citizens of Greek poleis through war and civil war, see, for example, (Balogh 1943; Seibert 1979; Garland 2014; Gray 2015, chp. 5–6); on outsiders in the Greek cities more generally, see (Whitehead 1977; McKechnie 1989); on ancient literary representations of exiles, see (Gaertner 2007). 8 See (Mackil 2004). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 4 of 19 as a new ethnic and linguistic group living alongside a much more numerous and well-established ethnic and linguistic group (or several), membership of which is usually closely bound up with citizenship and political participation in the host nation. Nonetheless, the divisions even within the ancient Greek-speaking world should not be underestimated: each city had its own separate citizenship, representing membership of a particular descent-group with ties to particular gods, myths, and traditions.9 Whether this can be compared to modern versions of ‘racialised citizenship’ is open for debate,10 but the sharp divisions of identity between different Greek communities created similar potential as in modern cases for tensions between insider citizens and outsider refugees.

2. Ancient Greek Citizenship and the Refugee in Agamben and Arendt Since Arendt and Agamben have drawn the most explicit links between ancient Greek citizenship and refugee crises, ancient and modern, it is worth exploring their arguments in detail, and how recent research in Ancient History can help to question and modify them. Agamben has probably done most among influential modern theorists to call into question the attractions of ancient Greek citizenship as a model or inspiration for modern refugees. He sees the ancient Greek polis, and ancient Greek political theory, at the root of the modern dynamics of exclusion through citizenship. He draws particular attention to Aristotle’s idea, which is designed to capture wider Greek thinking, that, in order to qualify as a true polis, a community must be dedicated to the good life for all: it must enable all members to flourish through the kind of civic education which enables them to develop their aptitudes and virtues to the full. A polis may come into being for the sake of ‘bare life’ or mutual survival—mutual non-aggression and basic co-operation to secure the necessities of life—but it endures for the sake of the good life (Aristotle Politics 1252b27–30; 1280a7–1281a10). Agamben takes this position to have a sinister corollary, not spelled out by Aristotle: a good city has to be insulated against any sign of ‘bare life’, or basic humanity without the trappings of a privileged education and lifestyle. According to Agamben, this category of ‘bare life’, or humanity stripped to its raw core, was represented in the ancient world by the outlaw, deprived of all the protections and shared bonds of communal life and condemned to roam in the interstices between cities. In the modern world, for Agamben, this category of ‘bare life’ is occupied by refugees confined to camps, whose practical and symbolic exclusion from mainstream society preserves the stability and privileges of the settled states which supervise the camps, usually through transnational organisations.11 States and their citizens can define themselves against this ‘bare life’, confined to camps and stripped of dignity, identity, and civilisation, including any political identity or autonomy. The refugees in question suffer a degrading condition, but Agamben thinks that they can also help to develop a utopian future in which the status distinctions, exclusivity, and exploitation intrinsic to ancient and modern citizenship will be overcome. Agamben’s particular reading of Aristotle is open to question. Even though Aristotle clearly does value the collective pursuit of the good life over mere co-existence and survival, a true polis for Aristotle in fact comes into being in the first place for the sake of mere ‘life’. It then builds upon, rather than merely excluding or denying, shared activities that are focussed on collective survival, such as military co-operation, agriculture, and trade.12 However, Agamben’s broader picture of the exclusivity at the heart of the Greek polis is difficult to dispute: even though ancient historians have recently stressed that status categories, including barriers between citizens and outsiders, were often more permeable in practice than previously thought,13 Greek poleis tended to give centre stage and

9 See recently (Blok 2017). 10 For a careful argument for the relevance of the modern concept of race (and racial exclusivity) to ancient Athenian citizenship, see (Lape 2010). 11 See (Agamben 1998); the ‘Introduction’ sets out the basic thesis, including the relevance of Aristotle. 12 Compare (Finlayson 2010, esp. pp. 106–16), developing this and other objections based on Aristotle’s text. 13 See (Cohen 2000; Vlassopoulos 2007). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 5 of 19 most political power to male citizens. This left at a disadvantage much of the resident population, including women, slaves, and immigrants, let alone transient refugees and other migrants. Nonetheless, Agamben’s uncompromising rejection of the whole tradition of Greek or Greek-inspired citizenship neglects the fact that Greek citizenship ideals and practices were double-edged: they could empower the incumbent male elite to organise themselves effectively to marginalise outsiders, but they could also, by the same token, enable those outsiders themselves to develop their own political and communal identities, activities, and institutions. For example, some scholars have stressed how those on the margins of polis life could find an alternative focus of co-operation, power and identity in the multiple voluntary associations of the Greek world, in which diverse people came together to worship a shared god. Such groups were often based on a shared identity, such as that of workers in the same trade or expatriates of the same origin living in a particular place. These associations could be composed of citizens of the host poleis or of immigrants; there was increasing mingling of the two groups within a single association after around the second century BC. Tellingly, these associations often imitated the institutions and the ideology of a polis in microcosm, including a decision-making assembly, officers who were appointed by the community, and collective practices, including cult and the honouring of benefactors. The resulting honours were often inscribed on stone, which makes the life of many of these associations accessible to modern historians.14 Most of the rest of this article (especially Section3) will explore how the basic approach developed by these associations—the co-option of polis ideas, institutions, and practices by outsiders as a source of power, protection, and pride—was also harnessed by ancient Greek exiles and refugees, who often formed their own informal ‘poleis-in-exile’, retaining agency and dignity, even in the most difficult conditions. For her part, H. Arendt, Agamben’s inspiration on refugee questions, was much more ambivalent about the Greek polis, recognising its double-edged, simultaneously emancipatory and exclusive character. Especially in The Human Condition (Arendt 1958), Arendt even sees the participatory Greek polis of active citizens as a model for the good society, a crucial corrective to the deficits of modernity: Greek citizens succeeded in engaging in true politics, by coming together in agora and assembly to act and deliberate in common and develop a shared understanding of the world, unconstrained by pre-conceived, fixed ideas or socio-economic interests. On the other hand, Arendt was also very sensitive to the exclusivity and injustices of the Greek polis world. Prefiguring Agamben, she argues in The Origins of Totalitarianism (see Arendt [1951] 1968), that complex states, such as the Greek polis or modern nation-states, tend by their very nature to find it difficult to accommodate differences between individuals within the population. Such differences and marks of individuality are hallmarks of the private sphere, but they cannot easily be accommodated in the public sphere of equal citizens: The reason why highly developed political communities, such as the ancient city-states or modern nation-states, so often insist on ethnic homogeneity is that they hope to eliminate as far as possible those natural and always present differences and differentiations which by themselves arouse dumb hatred, mistrust, and discrimination because they indicate all too clearly those spheres where men cannot act and change at will, i.e., the limitations of the human artifice. The “alien” is a frightening symbol of the fact of difference as such, of individuality as such, and indicates those realms in which man cannot change and cannot act and in which, therefore, he has a distinct tendency to destroy. (Arendt [1951] 1968, p. 301) Like Agamben, Arendt thus sees the ‘alien’ as posing an existential threat to citizen-states, which can be partly defused through exclusion. In Arendt’s picture, the intrinsic exclusivity of citizen-states did not have such devastating consequences in the ancient Greek Mediterranean as in the modern world. According to her, much of even the accessible world was still open, unclaimed territory at the time of the ancient Greeks: it was

14 For detailed discussions of such voluntary associations, and their crucial role for outsiders, see, for example, (Arnaoutoglou 2003, 2011; Gabrielsen 2007; Ismard 2010). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 6 of 19 possible for the excluded to migrate and establish a new community elsewhere, in which they could exercise the natural human propensity, recognised by Aristotle, to life in common in a polis, governed by speech and reason. They did so by forming so-called ‘colonies’ or ‘homes-from-home’ (apoikiai) in different parts of the Mediterranean. However, in Arendt’s view, things already began to change at the time of the Roman Empire. The Romans came to conceptualise their whole empire, spanning the Mediterranean and beyond, as almost an extension of the city of Rome itself, ‘as though the whole world were nothing but Roman hinterland’. Arendt sees this as a result of conceptual differences between the Greeks and the Romans. Whereas the Greeks were prepared to entertain the idea of starting afresh on new territory, provided that they could build meaningful communal life there, the Romans saw themselves as inextricably tied to the soil of Rome: unlike the Greeks, they [the Romans] could not say in times of emergency or overpopulation, “Go and found a new city, for wherever you are you will always be a polis.” Not the Greeks, but the Romans, were really rooted in the soil, and the word patria derives its full meaning from Roman history. The foundation of a new body politic, to the Greeks an almost commonplace experience, became to the Romans the central, decisive, unrepeatable beginning of their whole history, a unique event (Arendt [1961] 2006, pp. 120–21) Like all such broad generalisations, Arendt’s thinking here, as she traces the origins of notions of authority and tradition in her essay ‘What is Authority?’, can be questioned: it would be equally, or more, plausible to present the Greeks as often more fixated on particular territory occupied by a particular descent-group, and the Romans as more openly welcoming of wandering and the kind of mixed city population which results. Moreover, groups of Roman soldiers and citizens frequently established communities or coloniae around the Mediterranean, which were themselves partly microcosms of Rome itself.15 Nonetheless, there is a grain of truth in Arendt’s analysis. There had never been quite so much free, unoccupied territory as Arendt’s presentation implies: Archaic Greek wandering founders of new cities more often had to defeat or collaborate with a pre-settled non-Greek population. However, Arendt’s narrative captures well the fact that it became much more difficult for wandering refugees to establish their own new cities ab initio once the Mediterranean and surrounding regions became more intensively settled by states militarily strong enough to deter new foundations on their territory by wandering refugees. The obstacles to new foundations by wandering Greeks on the model of the apoikia became even more unassailable once the Mediterranean and its hinterland became quite uniformly subject to overarching imperial control, first by the different Hellenistic kingdoms and eventually by the lone Roman hegemon. For Arendt, Roman developments set European civilisation on a decisive path, which she spells out in her late (posthumously published) essay ‘Introduction into Politics’: Whatever Rome’s limitations in this respect, there is no doubt that the concept of foreign policy—of politics in foreign relations—and consequently of the idea of a political order beyond the borders of one’s own nation or city is solely of Roman origin. The Roman politicization of the space between peoples marks the beginning of the Western world—indeed, it first created the Western world as world. (Arendt 2005, pp. 189–90) Although she does not spell out the development in the same work, Arendt probably saw this Roman legacy as one of the factors which led, in the very long term, to twentieth-century refugee

15 On mobility as key to Roman identity, and the various consequences summarised here, see, for example, (Purcell 1990; Dench 2005; Isayev 2017a). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 7 of 19 crises. In her much earlier work, The Origins of Totalitarianism, Arendt was clear that a large part of the problem lay in the fact that there was now no available territory in which the displaced could establish new communities. This deprived them of the opportunity to build the self-governing institutions necessary to make their ‘human rights’ practically meaningful, because they would create a space in which they could assert and exercise their ‘right to have rights’:

We became aware of the existence of a right to have rights (and that means to live in a framework where one is judged by one’s actions and opinions) and a right to belong to some kind of organized community, only when millions of people emerged who had lost and could not regain these rights because of the new global political situation ... The trouble is that this calamity arose not from any lack of civilization, backwardness, or mere tyranny, but, on the contrary, that it could not be repaired, because there was no longer any ‘uncivilized’ spot on earth, because whether we like it or not we have really started to live in One World. Only with a completely organised humanity could the loss of home and political status become identical with expulsion from humanity altogether. (Arendt [1951] 1968, pp. 296–97)

For Arendt, the lack of available space for new autonomous settlements leaves refugees reduced to their bare humanity, unable to adopt a meaningful political identity or exercise rights, unless they can gain acceptance in some pre-established community. This passage immediately provokes the objection that there had for a long time been no truly vacant (‘uncivilised’) territory for refugees to settle; earlier foundations had usually involved clashes with existing inhabitants. Nevertheless, the practical obstacles to twentieth-century refugees establishing their own independent states are clear. Arendt’s reflections in The Origins of Totalitarianism recall the argument which she originally developed at the height of the refugee crisis in 1943. She argued then that Jewish refugees in the USA were resorting, or having to resort, to one of two unsatisfactory identities: on the one hand, that of the ‘parvenu’, seeking to integrate passively into the host American society; or, on the other, that of the ‘pariah’, insisting on a separate Jewish identity. In the absence of political structures corresponding to such a separate Jewish identity, this latter approach was tantamount, in Arendt’s view, to falling back on a claim to recognition on the basis of mere humanity. Such a reliance would always be problematic because human rights can never be more than formal or theoretical for those without citizen membership of a political community capable of upholding them. Arendt’s own preference was that refugees should become an ‘avant-garde’ of their societies, crafting new ways of approaching life in common which would transcend the failed nation-state model, without lurching to the other extreme of purely formal cosmopolitanism.16 Arendt’s diagnosis was partly a reaction to the particular situation of the 1940s, but subsequent studies have shown a similar dynamic in other modern refugee crises: the nature of modern citizenship often makes it difficult for refugees to find some middle way between, first, assimilation to a host society and, second, insistence on their lost or threatened ethnic-religious identity without the protection of corresponding political institutions with international recognition, which leaves refugees reliant on humanitarian support. Malkki(1995a, compare (Malkki 1995b)), for example, considers broadly similar contrasting options to be available to later twentieth-century Hutu refugees from Burundi who sought refuge in Tanzania: some Hutu refugees adopted mobile, fluid identities in the cities of Tanzania, where they had often had to give great weight to the dictates of instrumental economic rationality; but others settled in refugee camps, where they preserved and developed familiar Hutu rituals and customs which laid stress on purity. Close empirical analysis of the evidence for ancient Greek exiles and refugees can help to allay some of the pessimism of Arendt, as well as the deeper pessimism of Agamben, about Greek-inspired citizenship as an inspiration for modern refugees. As noted in the introduction and earlier in this

16 (Arendt 1943, especially the closing parts). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 8 of 19 section, the explosion in Greek city foundations around the Mediterranean in the period c. 750–500 BC, which included foundations by groups of refugees,17 was not so easily sustained after c. 500 BC. It became ever more difficult, in an increasingly densely settled Mediterranean of states with the military capacity to defend their territory from outsiders, for mobile groups to find unclaimed (or conquerable) economically sustainable territory on which to found a new independent city. As also noted above, the conquests of Alexander the Great in the second half of the fourth century BC launched a new wave of Greek city foundations, especially in Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa, but those were almost always under the supervision of the new large kingdoms, with their complex armies and administrative systems. This period after c. 500 BC when it was no longer straightforward for displaced groups to make spontaneous city foundations was also, not coincidentally, a period of intensification in interstate rules and structures, developed among densely packed states:18 it was not, contra Arendt, the Romans who first established complex rules and institutions binding different states and created genuine interstate politics, even if the Roman imperial peace raised the integration of the Mediterranean to a new level. These changes after c. 500 BC did not, however, curtail forever the capacity of the displaced to co-opt the ideal of citizenship in order to develop their own exile communities, with meaningful agency. In other words, this change did not force new refugees to choose between full assimilation in existing settled communities or a depoliticised identity as human beings in need. On the contrary, as explored in the rest of this contribution, Greek exiles and refugees found imaginative and effective ways to act and interact as ‘citizens-in-exile’ even when they were hosted on the territory, or sometimes in the urban centre, of a pre-existing polis. They developed improvised, flexible versions of civic institutions and activities, partly inspired by the voluntary associations introduced above, which they could sustain even while participating in their host community. That is to say, ancient Greek civic models and institutions were not as monolithic and tied to territorial possession as Arendt, let alone Agamben, suggests: even when the displaced could not found their own new polis, and the interstate sphere was no political or institutional vacuum, they could still reproduce, adapt, and reinvent the polis template to suit their own needs. This made it possible for them to engage in political participation internally, resolving internal disputes and forging collective policy. Equally importantly, it enabled them to participate meaningfully in interstate diplomatic and religious structures; this gave them a political voice with which to claim powerful settled states’ recognition and protection from below, rather than relying solely on benevolence from above. As in similar modern cases, these tendencies could not secure as many protections and entitlements as would be guaranteed by regular citizenship in a settled polis. However, they went some way in that direction, as well as opening up opportunities for new forms of political participation and agency in defence of entitlements. Contrary to what Arendt suggests, therefore, the usefulness of Greek citizen ideals and practices for the displaced was not exhausted once they could no longer relatively straightforwardly slip outside established state and interstate structures and found a new city; Greek citizenship also offered a rich resource to displaced Greeks in a much more comparable situation to many of the contemporary refugees who feature in this collection, with no option but to reside in pre-established states or camps, under the supervision of the more powerful and subject to established interstate rules and structures. In other words, ancient Greek citizenship has something to offer in refining models of ‘campzenship’ (compare Introduction).

17 Consider Thucydides 6.5.2 on the participation of a group of exiles driven out in civil war from the city of Syracuse, called the Myletidai, in founding another Sicilian city, Himera. Compare Herodotus 1.165–8, on the citizens of Phocaia in Western Turkey who fled their home city to escape the Persian commander Harpagos, after which some of them founded a short-lived new city in Corsica, together with some earlier Phocaian arrivals who had founded an earlier settlement there; after the failure of that first new settlement in war, some of the remaining refugees founded a new settlement at Hyele/Elea in South Italy. 18 See, for example, (Low 2007; Mackil 2013). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 9 of 19

3. Citizenship and ‘Poleis-in-Exile’ in the Classical Greek and Hellenistic Worlds The institutions of a Greek polis could be endlessly adapted and revised in order to suit different communities. Settled poleis themselves could experiment with improvised, scaled-down versions of their institutions: for example, when the Athenians in the fourth century BC established a controversial cleruchy (a settler community of Athenian citizens with continuing strong links to Athens itself)19 on the previously independent island of Samos, this new community was endowed with a Council of 250 members, a literal halving in size and structure of the central Athenian Council of 500.20 Even within a settled polis local sub-divisions (for example, Athenian demes or ‘villages’) were often structured as a microcosm of the polis as a whole.21 In a phenomenon which is crucial for the argument here, communities of displaced citizens could craft their own adaptations of civic institutions to form ‘poleis-in-exile’, without any direction from a settled polis—and often even as a challenge to a settled regime at home. I have analysed this phenomenon, also identified by earlier scholars,22 in detail elsewhere.23 I try to offer here a summary of some of the most interesting cases, more accessible to non-specialists. The densely packed Greek state system meant that exiles often had to form their ‘poleis-in-exile’ in the interstices between states, especially border regions or other marginal territory which could not easily be controlled by settled poleis. Their adaptation to these unpromising environments provides a striking case of Isayev’s (2017b) ‘compelled agency’ by displaced people. Perhaps most famously, when a Spartan-backed oligarchy took power in Athens after Athenian defeat in the Peloponnesian War (404–3), some of the resulting Athenian exiles established a stronghold at Phyle, on the margins of Athenian territory, from which they fought against the incumbent regime, with quite rapid success.24 Their internal political organisation is not very well recorded. However, after the re-establishment of democracy, the Athenians commemorated the Phyle-exiles as part of a broader Athenian ‘demos-in-exile’ which had preserved the Athenian democratic spirit, and also some of its structures, while the city itself was in oligarchic hands.25 As part of this broader movement, the larger community of Athenian democratic exiles in the Athenian port of the Piraeus probably held assemblies and raised funds collectively.26 Like the democratic Athenians at Phyle, exiles from other cities, oligarchic as well as democratic, are known to have exploited strongholds in marginal locations to attack a hostile incumbent regime, through raiding27 or even siege.28 Such groups could also demonstrate disciplined, complex organisation, on a civic model: oligarchic exiles from the city of Phlius in the north-eastern Peloponnese organised themselves, with Spartan help, into well-drilled communal dining groups, on the model of Spartan syssitia (common messes), which were crucial to the organisation of the settled Spartan polis. This impressed the Spartans to such an extent that they offered further aid.29 In another example of oligarchic exile organisation on the margins, a band of mobilised oligarchic exiles from the island of Siphnos, roving the Aegean in the early fourth century, is known to have appointed formal magistrates-in-exile to lead a military attempt to recapture their home city.30

19 Compare (Moreno 2007, p. 94). 20 See (Hallof and Habicht 1995). 21 Compare (Osborne 1990). 22 (Seibert 1979, pp. 312–14; Gehrke 1985, pp. 224–29). 23 (Gray 2015, chp. 6, with many further details, including on earlier scholarship). 24 Xenophon Hellenica 2.4.2–7. 25 E.g., Rhodes and Osborne 2003 = Rhodes-Osborne, GHI 4; Plato Apology 20e8–21a2; Lysias 25 and 31, esp. 31.9; Demosthenes 20.48; Aeschines 3.181, 187, 208. Cf. (Forsdyke 2005, pp. 262–63). 27 Thucydides 4.75.1 (pro-Spartan Samian exiles harrying their island polis from a stronghold on the mainland, Anaia); Diodorus 13.65.4 (anti-Spartan Chian exiles harrying the incumbent regime in their island polis, also from a stronghold on the mainland, Atarneus). 28 Xenophon Hellenica 5.3.16–17. 29 Xenophon Hellenica 5.3.17. 30 Isocrates 19.38. Humanities 2018, 7, 72 10 of 19

Other ‘poleis-in-exile’ on the margins are best attested for us from their recorded diplomatic interactions with favourable settled poleis, which themselves must have played a crucial role in securing the exile community’s stability and wider recognition. For example, when the Athenians set up a new naval confederacy of poleis for mutual aid, concentrated around the Aegean islands and coastline, in 378/7 BC, they set up an inscription recording its terms and institutions, partly in order to stress that this was a less imperialistic venture than the fifth-century Delian League had been. The monument included a comprehensive list of the members of the confederacy. Among them were ‘the Zacynthians on the Nellos’, clearly a pro-Athenian dissident group which had broken away from the main island polis of Zacynthos (allied with the rival Spartans at this point) and established a competing stronghold in a place called the Nellos.31 Their participation in the confederacy presupposes sophisticated political agency and organisation, though we have no further information about their precise structure. The Athenian reference to them as still ‘Zacynthians’ represents a rejection, presumably shared with the exiles, of any suggestion that they had lost their legitimate Zacynthian citizenship through their exile. It was often the case that the tensions between settled city-states opened up opportunities for displaced groups to establish poleis-in-exile on territory which neither side could conclusively claim. A smaller-scale rivalry than that between Athens and Sparta was that between the neighbouring middling poleis of Ephesos and Priene on the west coast of modern Turkey and Samos on the nearby Aegean island. There lay at the intersection between their territories on the Aegean coast32 a contested mountainous region known as ‘the Karion’, the subject of an interstate arbitration process between Priene and Samos in the second century BC. As the record of that arbitration process inscribed at Priene shows, it was in this interstitial location that, at the beginning of the third century BC, some Prienian exiles established a stronghold.33 These Prienian exiles were dissidents hostile to an incumbent regime which was led by a certain Hieron, identified by his opponents as a tyrant. They are known to have constituted themselves as a polis-in-exile: they sent copies of their collective decisions (decrees), probably carried by envoys from their exile community, to the polis of Rhodes.34 It was quite probably the same group of Prienian exiles who sent an embassy to the neighbouring polis of Ephesos around this time, which successfully secured help. The picture is, however, complicated by the fact that this latter development is recorded in a decree of Ephesos, which identifies these Prienian exiles as having successfully fought to secure ‘the Charax’ or ‘the Fort’ for the benefit of the Ephesians.35 This does not, however, exclude the possibility that this is the same group; the Ephesians could even have been using their own distinctive name for what was otherwise known as ‘the Karion’, which would be a further indication that it was part of a contested landscape, claimed by different poleis, which by consequence offered a refuge for exiles. The Ephesians took pains to identify these exiles as still legitimate citizens, rather than exiles lacking in civic identity and entitlements: they were the ‘citizens (politai) from Priene in the Charax’. Another way in which ‘poleis-in-exile’ and other displaced groups could participate in Greek interstate relations, gaining recognition and credibility, was to make themselves visible at the great shared centres of Greek religious life, especially the sanctuaries and athletic festivals at Delphi and Olympia, which were themselves noted as places of refuge and asylum. Settled poleis and other states commonly used these sanctuaries and their activities as an opportunity to advertise their achievements, piety, and interests and to communicate with other states. Certain exile groups are known to have imitated these characteristic activities of settled states, successfully reintegrating themselves into

31 (Rhodes and Osborne 2003 = Rhodes-Osborne, GHI 22, ll. 131–34; Seibert 1979, p. 117; Gehrke 1985, p. 198). 32 On the importance of the Aegean coast, especially the mainland territories of the neighbouring island poleis (peraiai), as marginal territory hospitable to exiles, compare (Constantakopoulou 2007, pp. 250–51). 33 (Magnetto 2008, pp. 34–45 (new edition of I.Priene 37, a record of the second-century Rhodian arbitration between the Samians and Prienians concerning the Karion), ll. 87–105, with analysis on pp. 113–18). 34 (Magnetto 2008, pp. 34–45, ll. 95–98, 101–2). 35 I.Ephesos 2001, ll. 3–5. Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19 Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEWHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanitiesHumanities 2018 2018 2018 2018 20182018 2018 20182018,, , 7, 7, 7, ,7 ,7 ,7, x, , x, x ,7 x 7x7FOR x,FOR FOR, , FOR x FORxFORx FOR FORFOR PEER PEER PEER PEER PEERPEER PEER PEERPEER REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEWREVIEW REVIEW REVIEWREVIEW 12 of 19 111111111111 of 11of of11 11of ofof 19 19 of19 of19 of1919 19 19 19 Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19 achievements, piety, and interests and to communicate with other states. Certain exile groups are achievements,achievements,achievements,achievements,achievements,achievements, piety,piety,piety, piety,piety,piety, andandand andandand interestsinterestsinterests interestsinterestsinterests andandand andandand tototo to tocommunicatetocommunicatecommunicate communicatecommunicatecommunicate withwithwith withwithwith otherotherother otherotherother states.states.states. states.states.states. CertainCertainCertain CertainCertainCertain exileexileexile exileexileexile groupsgroupsgroups groupsgroupsgroups areareare areareare (ἀπέδωκε) the region of Skiris.knownachievements, achievements,achievements,SinceHumanities to thishave is2018 imitated thepiety, ,piety,piety,7 ,formal 72 and andandthese diplomatic interests interestsinterests characteristic and andlanguageand toachievements, toto communicate activitiescommunicatecommunicate of restitution of piety, settledwith withwith ofand otherrightful otherotherstates, interests states. states.states. successfully and Certain CertainCertain to communicate exile reintegrating exileexile groups groupsgroups with are 11 areare other of 19 states. Certain exile groups are 38 knownknownknownknownknownknown tototo to totohavehavehave havehavehave imitatedimitatedimitated imitatedimitatedimitated thesethesethese thesethesethese characteristiccharacteristiccharacteristic characteristiccharacteristiccharacteristic activitiesactivitiesactivities activitiesactivitiesactivities ofofof of ofofsettledsettledsettled settledsettledsettled states,states,states, states,states,states, successfullysuccessfullysuccessfully successfullysuccessfullysuccessfully reintegratingreintegratingreintegrating reintegratingreintegratingreintegrating territory, these exiles werethemselves claimingknownknownknownHumanities toto intototo behave have2018have thelegitimate, 7 imitated interstate, imitatedximitated FOR PEER recipients these community,theseREVIEWthese characteristic characteristiccharacteristic of disputed despiteknown activitiesterritory toactivitiestheiractivities have otherwise which,imitatedof ofof settled settledsettled tomarginal these their states, states,states, characteristic andsuccessfully successfullysuccessfully interstitial activities reintegrating reintegratingposition.reintegrating11 of 19 of settled states, successfully reintegrating themselvesthemselvesthemselves into into into the the the interstate interstate interstate community, community, community, despite despite despite their their their otherwise otherwise otherwise marginal marginal marginal and and and interstitial interstitial interstitial position. position. position. minds, rightfully belongedTheir tothemselves themselvesthethemselvesthemselves themselvesthemselvesthemselvesactivities enlarged into into intoincludedinto intoAchaianintointo thethe thethe thethe the interstateinterstate interstateinterstate interstatethe interstateinterstateLeague establishment community,community, community,community,(by community,community,community, nowthemselves includingof despitedespite despitedespitemonuments despitedespitedespite their theirintoArcadia), theirtheir theirtheirtheir the otherwise otherwise atotherwiseotherwise otherwise otherwise otherwiseinterstateDelphi of which marginal marginal andmarginalmarginal community, marginalmarginalmarginal Olympia. andand andand andandand interstitialdespiteinterstitial interstitialinterstitial The interstitialinterstitialinterstitial preserved their position.position. position. position.otherwise position.position.position. marginal and interstitial position. theachievements, interstate community,piety, and interests despite and their to communicate otherwise marginal with other and states. interstitial Certain position.exile groups Their are activities they were legitimate representatives.inscriptionsTheirTheirTheirTheirTheirTheirTheirTheirTheir activities activities activities activitiesactivitiesactivities activities activitiesactivitiesSincefrom theincluded included thoseincluded includedincludedincluded included includedincludedAchaian monuments the the the thethethe thethe the League establishment establishment establishment establishmentestablishmentestablishment establishmentestablishmentestablishment offerby Theirnow rare of of of of ofof activities had of monumentsof monumentsof monumentsdirect monumentsmonumentsmonuments monumentsmonuments monumentsonly glimpsesincluded one at at at atprincipalatat atDelphi atDelphiat Delphi Delphi DelphiDelphi the intoDelphiDelphiDelphi establishment theand and and andandand andand and politicalOlympia. Olympia. Olympia. Olympia.Olympia.Olympia. Olympia.Olympia.Olympia. of rhetoric monuments The The The TheTheThe TheTheThe preserved preserved preserved preservedpreservedpreserved preservedpreservedpreservedand at Delphi and Olympia. The preserved included the establishment of monuments at Delphi and Olympia. The preserved inscriptions from 39 inscriptionsinscriptionsinscriptionsknown to fromfromhave from imitatedthosethose those monuments monuments thesemonuments characteristic offeroffer offer rareactivitiesrare rare directdirect direct of settledglimpsesglimpses glimpses states, intointo intosuccessfully thethe the politicalpolitical political reintegrating rhetoricrhetoric rhetoric andand and magistrateHumanities 2018(strategos, 7, x FOR), PEER theyself REVIEW inscriptionscouldinscriptions‐inscriptionspresentationinscriptionsinscriptionsinscriptionsinscriptions even havefrom from fromoffrom fromfromfrom Greek intendedthose those thosethose thosethosethose exile monuments monuments monumentsmonuments monumentsgroups.monumentsKleopatrosmonuments offer offer inscriptions offeroffer to offerofferoffer be rare rare rarerare seenrarerarerare direct direct directdirect fromasdirectdirectdirect a glimpses glimpsesrivalthose glimpsesglimpses glimpsesglimpsesglimpses tomonuments 12 theinto intoof intointo into19intointo the the thethe thethe the offerpolitical political politicalpolitical politicalpoliticalpolitical rare rhetoric rhetoricdirect rhetoricrhetoric rhetoricrhetoricrhetoric glimpses and and andand andandand into the political rhetoric and thosethemselves monuments into the offerinterstate rare community, direct glimpses despite into their the otherwise political marginal rhetoric and and interstitial self-presentation position. of Greek incumbent Achaian strategos:selfself selfselfselfasselfInselfselfself‐ ‐‐ presentation‐presentationthepresentation‐‐presentationpresentationpresentation‐‐‐presentationpresentationpresentation fifthtruly century legitimate ofof of of ofof of GreekGreek ofGreekof Greek GreekGreekBC, Greek GreekGreek certain defender exileexile exile exile exileexile exile exileexile groups.groups. groups. groups. groups.groups.residents groups. groups.groups. of Achaian self of‐presentation Messenia, interests. theof ItGreek neighbouring is worth exile groups. region to Sparta which exileTheir groups. activities included the establishment of monuments at Delphi and Olympia. The preserved pointing(ἀπέδωκε out) thethat region the Achaian of hadSkiris. long LeagueSinceInInInInIn In been In theInthe Inthe thethethe thisthe the the fifthfifth fifth was fifthfifthunderfifth fifth fifthisfifth centurycentury thecentury centuryitselfcenturycentury century centurycenturydirect formal based BC,BC, BC, BC,BC,BC,Spartan BC,BC,diplomaticBC, certaincertain certain certaincertaincertainon certain certaincertain continuingrule, residentsresidents residents residentsresidentsresidents residents languageresidents residentswereIn forcedofof idealsof ofoftheof of Messenia,Messenia,of Messenia,of Messenia,Messenia,Messenia, fifthMessenia, restitutionMessenia,Messenia, intoand century exilepractices thethe the thethethe the the theof neighbouringneighbouring afterneighbouringBC, neighbouringneighbouring neighbouring rightful neighbouring neighbouringneighbouring certain ofattempting residents regionregion region regionregionregion region regionregionto revolt of toto to toto to Messenia, toSpartaSparta toSpartato SpartaSpartaSparta SpartaSpartaSpartaagainst whichwhich which whichwhichwhich thewhich whichwhich neighbouring region to Sparta which inscriptionsIn the fifth from century those monuments BC, certain residentsoffer rare ofdirect Messenia, glimpses the into neighbouring the political region rhetoric to Spartaand which citizenship:territory,38 individualthese exiles member wereSparta,hadhadhad hadclaiminghadhadhadhad had cities long longpresentinglong longlonglong longlonglong been been beento retainedbeenbeenbeen been beenbeenbe under under underlegitimate underthemselvesunderunder underunderunder their direct direct direct directdirectdirect direct directdirect traditionalrecipients asSpartan Spartan Spartan SpartanSpartanSpartan SpartanSpartantheSpartan legitimate of rule, rule,citizenships, rule, rule,rule, rule, disputed rule,hadrule,rule, were were were werewerewerelong werewerewere heirs forced forcedterritory forced beenforcedforcedforced forcedforcedbutforced of under intothe intothe into intointo into which, intointo into ancient exilemodel exileexile direct exileexileexile exileexileexile to after afterafter after afterSpartanafter theirMessenians of afterafterafter attempting attemptingattempting attempting attemptingattempting attemptingattemptingattempting rule, enslavedwere to to to tototo torevolt toforcedrevoltto revolt revoltrevoltrevolt revoltrevoltrevolt by against against intoagainst againsttheagainstagainst againstagainstagainst exile after attempting to revolt against hadself‐ longpresentation been under of Greek direct exile Spartan groups. rule, were forced into exile after attempting to revolt against Sparta, citizenshipminds, rightfully was also belongedco‐optedSpartans Sparta,Sparta,andSparta,toSparta,Sparta,Sparta,Sparta, Sparta,Sparta,the adapted centuries enlarged presentingpresenting presenting presentingpresenting presenting presentingpresentingpresenting at theearlier.Achaian themselveslargerthemselves themselves themselvesthemselves themselves themselvesthemselvesthemselves The Leaguefederal Athenians asas as asas as level(by as as theasthe the thethe the thethe thenow legitimatehelpedlegitimateitself. legitimate legitimateSparta,legitimate legitimate legitimatelegitimatelegitimate including This these presenting heirsheirsunusual heirs heirsheirs heirs exilesheirs heirsheirsArcadia), ofof of ofof of of toof thethemselvesoftheexile the thethe the establish thethe the ancientancient ancient ofancientancientgroup ancient ancient ancientancientwhich a as MesseniansMessenians Messenians strongholdMessenians Messenians Messenians the MesseniansMesseniansMessenians legitimate in enslavedenslaved enslaved enslavedenslaved enslaved theenslavedenslaved enslavedheirs polis of byby by by by byof theby by by thethe the thethe the theancientthe the Messenians enslaved by the presentingIn the fifth themselves century BC, as thecertain legitimate residents heirs of Messenia, of the ancientthe neighbouring Messenians region enslaved to Sparta by which the Spartans wasthey thus were itself, legitimate like the representatives.othersNaupaktos,SpartansSpartansSpartansSpartansSpartans SpartansdiscussedSpartansSpartansSpartanshad long centuriesacenturies centuries centuries centuries centuriesposition Sincecenturies centuries centurieshere,been theunder co earlier. earlier. earlier.on earlier. earlier.earlier.‐ earlier. optingearlier.Achaianearlier. the direct Gulf TheThe The The TheThe Thefor The TheSpartan AtheniansAthenians LeagueAtheniansof Athenians AtheniansAtheniansits Athenians AtheniansCorinthAthenians own rule, bySpartans ends helpedhelped strategicallyhelped helped werehelpednowhelped helped helpedhelped a forced had political centuries thesethese these these thesethese these thesethese only into crucialexilesexiles exiles exiles exilesexiles exiles identityexiles exilesearlier.exileone toto to to into to principal toafterestablishestablish toestablishto establishthe establishestablishThe establish andestablishestablish fifthattempting Athenians ‐ aacentury a a a a stronghold stronghold stronghold astronghold astrongholdastronghold stronghold strongholdstronghold to helped rivalryrevolt inin inthese in inagainstin betweenin thethe inthein the thethe the the the exiles polispolis polis polis polispolis polis polispolis oftoof of of ofof of establish ofof a stronghold in the polis of centuries earlier. The Athenians helped these exiles to establish a stronghold in the polis of Naupaktos, modelmagistrate that was (strategos based ),on39 theycitizenship—inAthenianNaupaktos,Naupaktos,Naupaktos,Naupaktos,Naupaktos, Naupaktos,Naupaktos,couldNaupaktos,Naupaktos,Sparta, and even presentingSpartan aa a thisa a a position position position aposition ahavepositionaposition position position positioncase, power. intendedthemselves onon onan on onon on on theonthe the alreadythe thetheDuring the the the GulfGulf Gulf Gulf GulfGulfKleopatros Gulf GulfGulfas ofof ofexperimental ofthe theofof ofCorinth Corinth ofCorinthof Corinth Corinth Corinth Peloponnesian legitimateCorinth CorinthCorinthNaupaktos, to strategicallystrategically strategically strategically bestrategicallystrategically strategically strategically strategically andheirsseen a position adapted Warofas the crucialcrucial cruciala crucial crucialthesecrucial crucial rivalcrucialancientcrucial on form the Messenians inin in in intoin inthe theGulf intheMesseniansin ofthe thethethe the the the fifthfifth fifth fifth fifth offifth fifth fifthfifth Corinth‐‐‐century‐century century‐‐atcenturycenturycentury‐‐ ‐century centurycenturyenslavedNaupaktos strategically rivalryrivalry rivalry rivalry rivalryrivalry rivalry rivalry rivalryby set the betweenbetween between between betweenbetween between up betweenbetweencrucial in the fifth‐century rivalry between a position on the Gulf of Corinth strategically crucial in the fifth-century rivalry between Athenian citizenship.incumbent Achaian strategosvictoryAthenianAthenianAthenianAthenianAthenianAthenian:Athenian AthenianAthenianasSpartans monuments, the and and and and trulyandand and centuriesandand SpartanSpartan Spartan Spartan SpartanSpartan Spartan legitimateSpartanSpartan together earlier. power.power. power. power. power.power. power. power.power. Thedefenderwith DuringDuring During During DuringDuringAthenians During During Duringtheir thethe ofthe the thethe AthenianNaupaktian the the the Achaian helpedPeloponnesianPeloponnesian Peloponnesian Peloponnesian PeloponnesianPeloponnesian Peloponnesian PeloponnesianPeloponnesian these and interests. hosts,exilesSpartan WarWar War War WarWar to War War Warat It establish power. thesethese these these theseboththeseis these thesethese worth Messenians Messenians Messenians Messenians DuringMesseniansOlympiaMessenians a Messenians MesseniansMessenians stronghold the and Peloponnesian atat at at at at in Naupaktosat Naupaktos atNaupaktos at Naupaktos Naupaktos NaupaktosDelphi,the Naupaktos NaupaktosNaupaktos polis ofwith setset Warset set setset set set set upup up up upupthese up up up Messenians at Naupaktos set up and Spartan power. During the Peloponnesian War these Messenians at Naupaktos set up victory pointingThere were,out that therefore, the Achaianaccompanying multiplevictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryvictoryNaupaktos, League monuments, monuments, monuments,waysmonuments, monuments,monuments, monuments,monuments,monuments, inscriptions, was ain position whichitself together together togethertogether togethertogether ontogether together togetherbasedtoClassical the celebrate Gulf with with withwithon withwith withwith with of and continuing theirCorinth their theirtheirsuccesses theirtheir theirvictorytheirtheirHellenistic Naupaktian Naupaktian NaupaktianNaupaktian Naupaktian Naupaktianstrategically NaupaktianNaupaktianNaupaktian monuments,overideals refugees the and crucialhosts, hosts, hosts, hosts, hosts,Spartanshosts, hosts,hosts, hosts, practicestogether roughly in at at atat atat the at atbothat both bothbothandboth both fifthboth bothboth with of theirOlympia‐ Olympia Olympia centuryOlympia OlympiaOlympia Olympia OlympiaOlympiatheir allies. rivalry Naupaktian and and andand and and The andandand between Delphi, Delphi, Delphi, Delphi, Delphi,OlympiaDelphi, Delphi,Delphi,Delphi, hosts, with with withwith withwith withwithwith at both Olympia and Delphi, with monuments, together with their Naupaktianaccompanying hosts, atinscriptions, both Olympia to celebrate and Delphi, successes with over accompanying the Spartans and their allies. The Olympia correspondingcitizenship: individualto Arendt’s membermonumentfirstaccompanyingaccompanyingaccompanyingaccompanying accompanyingaccompanyinggroup—thoseaccompanyingaccompanyingaccompanyingAthenian cities included retainedand inscriptions, inscriptions,inscriptions, who inscriptions, inscriptions,inscriptions,Spartan inscriptions, inscriptions,inscriptions,the survived their famous power. traditionalto toto toto to on to celebrateDuring tocelebratetocelebrate celebrate‘Nikecelebratecelebrate the celebratecelebratecelebrate margins, the ofcitizenships, successes successessuccesses Peloponnesian successesPaionios’,successessuccesses successessuccessessuccesses insisting over overover overover over preserved overbutoverover Waron the thethe thethethe the the the the the these Spartans SpartansSpartans Spartans Spartans Spartans identity modelSpartans SpartansSpartansin Messenians fragments and and and of andandand and andand their theirtheir their theirattheir theirtheir their Naupaktoswhich allies. allies.allies. allies.allies.allies. allies.allies.allies. haveThe TheThe TheTheThe set TheTheThe Olympia OlympiaOlympia up OlympiabeenOlympiaOlympia OlympiaOlympia Olympia inscriptions,victory monuments, to celebrate together successes with overtheirmonument theNaupaktian Spartans included andhosts, their atthe both allies. famous Olympia The ‘Nike Olympia and of Delphi,Paionios’, monument with preserved included in fragments which have been thatcitizenship was denied was to also them co ‐byoptedreconstructed othersmonumentmonumentmonumentmonumentmonumentmonument monumentandmonumentmonument through adapted by included included includedincluded included included exile—couldincludedmodernincluded includedat the larger the the thethearchaeologists. thethe thethe the famous famous famousadaptfamous famousfamous federal famousfamousfamous citizen ‘Nike ‘Nike ‘Nikelevel‘Nike ‘Nike‘Nike ‘Nike‘Nike36‘Nike The practices itself. of of ofof ofof of of ofPaionios’,exiles Paionios’, Paionios’,Paionios’, Paionios’,Paionios’, ThisPaionios’,Paionios’,Paionios’, and styled unusual citizen preserved preserved preservedpreserved preservedpreserved themselvespreservedpreservedpreserved exile identity group in in inin inin in inasinfragments fragments fragmentsfragments fragmentsfragments fragments‘thefragmentsfragments Messenians’, which which whichwhich whichwhich whichwhichwhich have have havehave havehave inhavehavehave the been been beenbeen beenbeen beenbeenbeen 36 theaccompanying famous ‘Nike inscriptions, of Paionios’, to celebrate preservedreconstructed successes3636 36 in fragments over by the modern Spartans which archaeologists. haveand their been allies. reconstructed TheThe exilesOlympia styled by modern themselves as ‘the Messenians’, in the was thus itself, like the sameothersreconstructedreconstructedreconstructedreconstructedreconstructedreconstructed reconstructedreconstructedreconstructedstyle discussed as incumbent by byby here, bybyby by by bymodern modernmodern modernmodernmodern modernmoderncomodern ‐citizensopting archaeologists. archaeologists.archaeologists. archaeologists.archaeologists.archaeologists. archaeologists.archaeologists.archaeologists. forof aits home own363636 36 endsThepolis36The The 3636TheThe The TheTheThe exiles exiles exiles exilesawouldexilesexiles exilesexilespoliticalexiles styled styledstyled styledstyled styled do styledstyledstyled identity(e.g., themselves themselvesthemselves themselvesthemselvesthemselves themselvesthemselvesthemselves ‘the and Athenians’), as asas asasas as ‘theas ‘theas‘the ‘the‘the‘the ‘the‘the‘the Messenians’, Messenians’,Messenians’, Messenians’,Messenians’,Messenians’, Messenians’,Messenians’,Messenians’,a strong and in inin ininin inthe inthe inthe thethethe thethe the to exercise agency and gain recognition.monument includedInterestingly,36 the famous it was ‘Nike equally of Paionios’, true for preserved Classical in and fragments which have been samesamesamearchaeologists. stylestyle style asas as incumbentincumbent incumbentThe exiles citizenscitizens citizens styled ofof of aa themselves samehomeahome home style polispolis polis asas wouldwould ‘the incumbentwould Messenians’, dodo do (e.g.,(e.g., citizens(e.g., ‘the‘the ‘the in of Athenians’), theAthenians’), aAthenians’), home same polis style aa stronga aswouldstrong strong incumbent anddoand and (e.g., ‘the Athenians’), a strong and Hellenisticmodel that refugees was based approximately onself citizenship—insamesame‐sameconfidentsamesamesamesame style style correspondingstylestyle stylestylestyle claimas as asas as asincumbentas incumbentthis incumbentincumbent incumbenttoincumbentincumbent case,legitimacy to an Arendt’scitizens citizens citizens citizens alreadycitizenscitizenscitizens as citizens of of secondof of experimental ofaofof a aa home ahome aa home36home of homehome home group—thosea (notpolis polis polispolis polispolispolis yetand would would would would physically would wouldwouldadapted who do do dodo do do do (e.g., (e.g., found (e.g.,(e.g.,form existing) (e.g.,(e.g.,(e.g., ‘the ‘the ‘the‘theof ‘the‘the‘the Athenians’), Athenians’),polis. Athenians’),Athenians’), Athenians’),Athenians’),Athenians’), a a aa strong astrong aastrongstrong strongstrongstrong and and andand andandand reconstructed by modern archaeologists.self ‐Theconfident exiles styledclaim themselvesto legitimacy as as‘the citizens Messenians’, of a (not in yetthe physically existing) polis. selfselfselfcitizens‐‐confidentconfident‐confident of a claim claim home claim to to polis tolegitimacy legitimacy legitimacy would doas as as (e.g.,citizens citizens citizens ‘the of of Athenians’), ofa a (not a(not (not yet yet yet physically physically a physically strong40 and existing) existing) existing) self-confident polis. polis. polis. claim to legitimacy refugecitizenship. in a host society in an selfurbanselfselfselfTwoselfselfself‐‐sameconfidentconfident‐‐confidentconfident‐ ‐ ‐confidentcontext,centuriesconfidentconfident style claim asclaim assimilatingclaimclaim claim laterclaimclaimincumbent toto toto(c. legitimacytotolegitimacyto legitimacy legitimacy 220–217 legitimacy legitimacylegitimacy citizensto some BC), asas asasof as citizensasdegreeascitizens citizens citizensa a citizens citizenscitizens homesimilar to ofof ofpolisof the aof ofaofintervention aa (not (not a a(nota (nothost would (not (not(not yetyet yet yet culture yet yet yet physicallyphysically do physicallyphysically physically physically physicallywas(e.g.,—that made‘the existing)existing) existing)existing) Athenians’),existing) existing) existing)by a group polis.polis. polis.polis. polis. polis.polis. a of strong exiles and from as citizens of a (not yet physically existing)Two polis. centuries later (c. 220–217 BC), a similar intervention was made by a group of exiles from Achaia, TwoTwoTwoaTwoTwoTwo regionTwoTwoTwo centuriescenturies centuries centuriescenturiescenturies centuries centuriescenturies in the laterlater later laternorthlaterlater later laterlater (c.(c. (c. (c.(c. (c. of (c. (c.220–217(c.220–217 220–217 220–217 220–217220–217the 220–217 220–217220–217 Peloponnese BC),BC), BC), BC),BC),BC), BC), BC),BC), aa a a a a similar similar similar a similarasimilarasimilar similar similar similarwhich interventionintervention intervention interventioninterventionintervention intervention wasinterventionintervention the traditional waswas was waswaswas was waswas mademade made mademademade made mademade centre byby by bybyby by by abya a a a a group group ofgroup a groupagroupagroup groupgroupagroup confederacy, ofof of ofofof of exilesexilesof ofexiles exilesexilesexiles exiles exilesexiles fromfrom from fromfromfrom from fromfrom citizenshipThere offered were, an therefore, effective modelmultipleself‐ confidentfor waysimprovised claimin which to adaptation. legitimacy Classical as Indeed, citizensandAchaia, Hellenisticdisplaced of a a(not region yet groups refugees physically in the settled north roughly existing) inof the polis. Peloponnese which was the traditional centre of a confederacy, Achaia,Achaia,Achaia,Achaia,Achaia,Achaia, Twoa aa region region aregionaa regionregion centuriesregion in in37in inthe ininthethe thethethe later north northnorth northnorthnorth (c. of ofof 220–217 oftheof ofthethe thethethe Peloponnese PeloponnesePeloponnese PeloponnesePeloponnesePeloponnese BC), a similar which whichwhich whichwhichwhich intervention was waswas waswaswas the thethe thethethe traditional traditionaltraditional was traditionaltraditionaltraditional made centre centrecentre by centrecentrecentre a groupof ofof ofaof ofaa confederacy, confederacy, aconfederacy,aa of confederacy,confederacy,confederacy, exiles from thecorresponding urban centres to of Arendt’s host thecities firstAchaia, AchaianAchaia,Achaia, could group—those aTwo aexploitaregionLeague, regionregion centuries incitizen whoinin thequickly the thelater survivednorth northmodelsnorth (c. coming 220–217of ofof the on tothethe the Peloponnesepreserve to BC), PeloponnesePeloponnese dominatemargins,the a similar Achaian or developinsisting whichtheintervention whichwhich League, whole was wasaonwas distinctive37 Peloponnese. the was quicklythethe identitytraditional made traditionaltraditional coming by aLike groupcentre centrecentreto mostdominate of of ofexilesof ofa aa confederacy, the confederacy,confederacy, fromthe other whole Peloponnese. Like most of the other Achaia, a region in3737 the37 north of the Peloponnese which was the traditional centre of a confederacy, groupsthethethethethethethethe the Achaian AchaianAchaia, Achaian AchaianwhichAchaianAchaian AchaianAchaianAchaian ahave League, League,regionLeague, League,League,League, League,League,League, been in3737 the37 mentioned37 quickly37quickly quickly 3737quicklyquickly quickly northquicklyquicklyquickly of coming comingcoming comingcoming coming the so comingcomingcoming far,Peloponnese to toto thesetototo todominate todominatetodominate dominatedominatedominate dominatedominatedominate exiles which hadthe thethe thethethe was thethe the whole wholebeenwhole wholewholewhole wholethewholewhole forcedtraditional Peloponnese. Peloponnese.Peloponnese. Peloponnese.Peloponnese.Peloponnese. Peloponnese.Peloponnese.Peloponnese. into centre marginal Like LikeLike LikeLikeofLike LikeLikeLike a most mostconfederacy,most and mostmostmost mostmostmost contested of ofof ofofof ofthe oftheofthe thethethe thethe the other otherother otherotherother otherotherother identity,that was as denied a basis to themfor significantby others through agency, exile—could rather37 than adapt simply citizen groupsdisappearing practices which and have into citizen been the mentioned identityhost so far, these exiles had been forced into marginal and contested groupsgroupsgroupsthethe Achaian Achaianwhich which which have haveLeague, have been been been37 quicklymentioned mentionedquickly mentioned coming coming so so so far, tofar, far,dominate to these these dominatethese exiles exiles theexiles wholehad thehad had wholebeen beenPeloponnese. been forced forced Peloponnese. forced into into Like into marginal marginal mostmarginal Like of the mostand and and other contested contested of contested the other environment.to exercise Suchagency cases and territory: providegaingroupsgroupsgroupsgroupsgroupsgroups groupsrecognition. theour whichwhich whichwhich whichregionwhichwhichbest havehave havehave evidence havehavehaveInterestingly,of beenSkirosbeen beenbeen beenbeenbeen mentionedmentioned mentionedmentionedforor mentionedmentionedmentioned Skiritis theit wascomplex so so insoso so far,so sofar, territory:theequally far,far, far,far,far, these thesedisputed thesethese internal thesethesethese trueexilestheexiles exilesexiles exilesexilesexiles region borderlandsfororganisation hadhad hadhad hadhadhadClassical ofbeenbeen beenbeen Skiros beenbeenbeen forcedforced forcedbetweenforced forcedforced forcedoforand Skiritis intointo intointo into intointoSparta marginalmarginal marginal marginal in marginalmarginalmarginal the and disputed and and the andand andandand contestedregioncontested contestedcontested contestedcontestedborderlandscontested between Sparta and the region groupsgroups which have have been been mentioned mentioned so far, so far,these these exiles exiles had been had forced been forced into marginal into marginal and contested and contested ‘poleisHellenistic‐in‐exile’. refugees approximatelyof Arcadiaterritory:territory:territory:territory:territory:territory:territory:territory:territory: (now thecorrespondingthe the thethethe the the the region regionregion part regionregionregion region regionregion of ofof of oftheofof of SkirosSkiros ofSkirosof Skiros SkirosSkiros to AchaianSkiros SkirosSkiros Arendt’s oror or ororor or SkiritisorSkiritis orSkiritis SkiritisSkiritisSkiritisLeague). Skiritis SkiritisSkiritis second of inin in ininin Arcadiain thethe intheinTheir thethethe the the thegroup—those disputeddisputed disputed disputeddisputeddisputed disputed homedisputeddisputed (now state, partborderlandsborderlands borderlands borderlandsborderlandsborderlands borderlands borderlandsborderlands ofwho the the federal foundAchaian betweenbetween between betweenbetweenbetween between betweenbetween Achaian League). SpartaSparta Sparta SpartaSpartaSparta Sparta SpartaSparta League, Their andand and andandand and andand thehome the the was thethethe the the the regionregion region regionregionregionin state,region regionregion the federal Achaian League, was in territory:territory: the the region region of of Skiros Skiros or orSkiritis Skiritis in the in disputed the disputed borderlands borderlands between between Sparta and Sparta the region and the region refugeIn most in a knownhost society cases, in these‘poleis anofofofofofof urbanof ArcadiaArcadiaof Arcadiaof years ArcadiaArcadia‐Arcadia in Arcadia ArcadiaArcadia‐exile’ context,at (now(now (now (now(nowwar(now in(now (now(now host partpart partwithassimilating partpartpart part partpart cities ofof of ofoftheof of thethe oftheof thethethe the involvedtherival the AchaianAchaian Achaian AchaianAchaian Achaian to Achaian AchaianAchaian powerfulsome fellow League).League). League). League). League).League).degree League). theseLeague).League). confederacyexiles years TheirtoTheir Their TheirTheirTheir Their the TheirTheirand at homehome homehost home home home refugees warhome home homefrom culture state,state, state, with state,state,state, state, state,state,north from thethe 40the thethethe—that the the the federal federal rivalfederalof a federalfederalfederal federal federalfederalthe powerful AchaianGulfAchaian Achaian AchaianAchaianAchaian Achaian AchaianAchaian of confederacy Corinth, League,League, League, League,League,League, League, League,League, waswas wasthe waswaswas was wasfromwas inin in ininin in in in north of the Gulf of Corinth, the ofof Arcadia Arcadia (now (now part part of of the the Achaian Achaian League). League). Their Their home home state, state,the federal the federal Achaian Achaian League, was League, in was in citizenship offered an effectiveAetolianthesethesethesethesethesethesethesethese thesemodel yearsLeague.years years yearsyears years yearsyearsyears for atat at atimprovisedat at These at waratwarat war warwar war warwarwar with with with Achaianwithwith with withwithwith adaptation. thethe the thethe the thethe the dissidents rivalrival rival rivalrival rival rivalrivalrival powerfulpowerful powerful powerful powerful powerfulIndeed, powerfulpowerfulpowerful set up displaced confederacy confederacyconfederacy aconfederacyconfederacy confederacy monumentconfederacyconfederacyconfederacy groups from fromfrom atfromfrom from from fromDelphi,from settled northnorth north northnorth north northnorthnorth ain ofcentreof of ofof of of oftheofthe the thethe the thethe the of GulfGulf Gulf GulfGulf Gulf Aetolian GulfGulfGulf ofof of ofof of of ofCorinth,ofCorinth, Corinth, Corinth,Corinth, Corinth, Corinth,power,Corinth,Corinth, thethe the thethe the thethe the single polis congregating in an improvisedthese years quasiat war‐civic with community the rival powerful inAetolian the confederacynew League. city centre, Thesefrom Achaianusuallynorth of dissidentsthe Gulf of set Corinth, up a monument the at Delphi, a centre of Aetolian power, AetolianAetolianAetolianAetolianAetolianAetolianthese years League. League.League. League. League.League. at war These TheseThese These TheseThese with Achaian AchaianAchaian Achaian Achaian theAchaian rival dissidents dissidentsdissidents dissidents powerfuldissidentsdissidents set setset confederacy set set set up upup up up up a aa monument monument amonument aa monument monumentmonument from northat atat atDelphi, Delphi,atatDelphi, Delphi, Delphi,Delphi, of the a aa centre Gulf centre acentre aa centre centrecentre of of ofof Corinth, of Aetolianof AetolianofAetolian Aetolian AetolianAetolian the power, power,power, Aetolian power, power,power, withoutthe urban the centreslevel of of direct hostto citiesmilitaryhonourAetolianAetolianAetolianAetolian could theirmobilisation League. League.League. exploit League.Aetolian These These These citizenThese shownbenefactor, Achaian Achaian AchaianAchaian models by dissidentsthe dissidentscalled dissidentsdissidents to marginalised preserve toSimos: honour set setset upup uporup a a their monument groupsdevelopaamonument monumentmonument Aetolian I a discussedat distinctive atDelphi, benefactor, atat Delphi, Delphi,Delphi, a centre a aacalledcentre centrecentre of Aetolian Simos:of ofof Aetolian AetolianAetolian power, power, power,power, toto tohonour League.honour honour their their These their Aetolian Aetolian AchaianAetolian benefactor, benefactor, dissidents benefactor, called setcalled called up Simos: aSimos: monumentSimos: at Delphi, a centre of Aetolian power, to honour above,identity, but generallyas a basis with for a similar significanttotototo honourtotohonourto honourhonourto honour levelhonourhonour honour theiroftheir theiragency,their their politicaltheirtheir AetolianAetolian AetolianAetolian Aetolian AetolianAetolian rather engagement. benefactor,benefactor, benefactor,benefactor, benefactor, benefactor,benefactor,than simplyIn calledcalled 348calledcalled called calledcalled BC, Simos: disappearingSimos: Simos:Simos: Simos: PhilipSimos:Simos: II of Macedon,into the thehost their Aetolian benefactor, called Simos: fatherenvironment. of Alexander Such the cases Great,[ Κλεόprovide who]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον was our in best the evidenceprocess of for entrenching the[ Σίμcomplex?][Κλεόου Macedonian ]internalπατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον Kleopatros organisationpower and acrossthe exiles of honoured[Σίμ?]ου Simos,Kleopatros son and the exiles honoured Simos, son northern‘poleis ‐Greece,in‐exile’. destroyed Αἰτωλὸν the[[ [Κλεό[ΚλεόuncooperativeΚλεό[[ΚλεόΚλεόΚλεό[[[Κλεό[KΚλεόΚλεό[Κλεόλε]]][πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ]ἐσ]ó]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ]]]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον πατρ]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι oς cityκα ofo ϕυγOlynthos,δες Σ theµoν centre[[[Σίμ[ΣίμΣΣίμ[[ΣίμΣίμΑἰτωλὸν Σίμ[[µ[ΣίμΣίμΣίμ?]?]o?]?]?]?]ου ?]ου ου ofου ?]υου ?]ου ?]ου ου ου aου of hostileKleopatros[ Simos,ἐσKleopatrosKleopatrosKleopatrosKleopatrosKleopatrosKleopatros]Kleopatrosτεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι KleopatrosKleopatrosKleopatros confederacy, an andAetolian, andand and and and andthe and and andand thethe the exilesthe thethe the the the exileswithexiles exiles exiles exiles exiles exiles honouredexilesexiles a honoured honoured honouredbronze honoured honouredhonoured honoured honouredhonoured Simos, statue Simos, Simos,Simos, Simos, Simos, Simos,of Simos,son Simos, Simos,Simos, Simos, son sonson son son sonson son of sonsonan Aetolian, with a bronze statue the ChalcidianIn most League.known cases,The resultingχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν ‘poleisΑἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν Αἰτωλὸν AΑἰτωλὸν ‐τωλin Olynthian‐exile’[[[ἐσ[ἐσνἐσ[[ἐσἐσἐσ[[[[]ἐσ[]ἐσ]ἐστεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι Σ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι στεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ]]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι inτεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ]]]]τεϕκ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε hostor ‘Chalcidian’νωσαν cities involvedν ∆ελϕ refugeeso ςfellowεχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν κ ówereνι exiles because,dispersedofof ofofand ofofSimos,of of Simos,Simos,of Simos,of Simos, Simos,Simos, [Simos, refugeesSimos, ΣSimos,having] anκarounḍίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε an an an Aetolian,an anan an Aetolian,an anAetolian, Aetolian, Aetolian,captured Aetolian,Aetolian,from Aetolian, Aetolian,theAetolian, with a with with with with Skiros, withwithawith with withbronzewith a bronze aa a a a a bronze bronze bronze abronze ahebronzeabronze bronze statuebronzebronze gave statue statuestatue statuebecause, statue statue statue it statue statuestatue because, having captured Skiros, he gave it χαλκηι τι τ ν κ ρ ν λαβ ν π δωκεΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι [τ]οῖς ἐξ back to Kleopatros and the exiles from Achaia Aegeansingle andpolis beyond, congregating but could Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι in χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν anχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν stillχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν improvisedχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν congregatee [[quasi[ Σ[ΣΣ[in[ΣΣ[]Σ[]Σ][κ[Σ]κ κ]Σ]Σκgroups.]̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε κ]̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε κ]̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε .]κ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ]κ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ‐̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ̣κκ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε civic̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ̣ ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε o community[Oneτ]οῖς ἐξ such group in the found newbackbecause,because,because,because,because, because,because, cityrefugetobecause,because,because,having Kleopatros centre, having athavinghaving having having capturedhavinghaving havingMyrina havinghaving usuallycaptured and capturedcaptured captured captured capturedcaptured Skiros, captured capturedcaptured the Skiros, exiles he Skiros,Skiros, Skiros, Skiros, Skiros,Skiros, gave Skiros, Skiros,heSkiros, from gave it hehe he back he hehe he Achaia hegaveithegave gave gave gave gave togave gavegave Kleopatros itit it it it it it it it KΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι λεoπ τρωι κα τo ς φυγ σι[[ττ]]oοῖς ἐξ ς ἐξ Ἀχαιίαςχαι ας. back andto Kleopatros the exiles fromand the Achaia exiles (FD fromIII Achaia 4.239).(FD III 4.239). onwithout the north the‐ easternlevel ofAegean directἈχαιίας Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι islandmilitaryΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι . of mobilisation Lemnos, which shown at by[[the[τ[ττ[[τ]τ]τ] [οῖς ἐξ ]οῖς ἐξ [οῖς ἐξ []τthe]οῖς ἐξ ττοῖς ἐξ οῖς ἐξ ]time]]οῖς ἐξ οῖς ἐξ οῖς ἐξ marginalised hosted( FDanbackbackback back backIIIbackgroupsAthenianbackbackback 4.239). toto to to toto toKleopatrosKleopatros toKleopatrosto Kleopatros KleopatrosKleopatros I Kleopatros Kleopatros Kleopatrosdiscussed settler andand and and andand and andand thethe the the thethe the the the exilesexiles exiles exiles exilesexiles exiles exilesexiles fromfrom from from fromfrom from fromfrom AchaiaAchaia Achaia Achaia AchaiaAchaia Achaia AchaiaAchaia Ἀχαιίας. (FD III 4.239). above, but generally with a similarἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίαςἈχαιίας levelThough...... of political it is clear engagement. that these exiles In 348 were BC, usingPhilip(((FD(FDFD((FDFDFD( the ((IIFDFD FD IIIIII III ofIII IIIIII setting III 4.239).III4.239).III 4.239).Macedon, 4.239). 4.239).4.239). 4.239). 4.239).4.239). and interstatethe prominence of Delphi to community (cleruchy) like the one on Samos (compare above). ThisThough exile itcommunity is clear that thesewas exiles were using the setting and interstate prominence of Delphi to Thoughgain recognition it is clear that for theirthese politicalexiles were identity, using legitimacy, the setting and or even interstate autonomy, prominence their nature of Delphi as a politicalto sufficientlyfather of Alexanderorganised theand Great, recognised whoThough was to inreceive it theis clear process a that grant these of entrenchingof exiles land weregain from using recognitionMacedonian the the settingAthenian for powerandtheir interstate settlerpolitical across prominence identity, legitimacy, of Delphi toor even autonomy, their nature as a political gain recognitionThoughThoughThoughThoughThoughThoughThoughThoughThough itit it itfor it it is is isit isit itisis clear clearis theirclearis clearis clearclear clear clearclear thatthat politicalthat that thatthat that thatthat thesethese these these thesethese these thesethese identity, exilesexiles exiles exiles exilesexiles exiles exilesexiles werewere were were werewerelegitimacy, were werewere usingusing using using usingusing using usingusing thethe the the the the or the the the settingsetting setting setting evensettingsetting setting settingsetting autonomy, andand and and andand and andand interstateinterstate interstate interstate interstateinterstate interstate interstateinterstate their prominenceprominence prominence prominence prominenceprominencenature prominence prominenceprominence as a ofof of ofpolitical ofof of Delphi Delphi ofDelphiof Delphi DelphiDelphi Delphi DelphiDelphi toto to to toto to to to community,northern Greece, and to passdestroyed a decree the groupin gainuncooperative honour recognition is much of a benefactor forcity more their of complexOlynthos, political from thatidentity, and the community:group hybridcentre legitimacy, is of thanmuch a hostile or inmore even the confederacy,complex autonomy, other examples and their hybrid nature which than as ina I politicalthe have other discussed, examples which I have discussed, where groupgaingaingaingaingaingaingaingaingain is recognitionrecognition recognition recognitionmuchrecognitionrecognition recognition recognitionrecognition more forfor for forcomplexforfor for for for theirtheir their theirtheirtheir their theirtheir politicalpolitical political politicalpoliticalandpolitical political politicalpolitical hybrid identity,identity, identity, identity, identity,identity, identity, identity,identity, than legitimacy,legitimacy, legitimacy,in legitimacy,legitimacy,legitimacy, legitimacy, legitimacy,thelegitimacy, other oror or orexamplesoror or evenoreven oreven eveneveneven even eveneven autonomy,autonomy, autonomy, autonomy, autonomy,autonomy, autonomy, autonomy,whichautonomy, I have theirtheir their theirtheirtheir their theirtheir discussed, naturenature nature naturenaturenature nature naturenature asas as as asas as a asa asa wherea a a political political political a politicalapoliticalapolitical political politicalpolitical the Chalcidian League. The resultingwheregroup polisOlynthianis muchidentity more or complex‘Chalcidian’ seems axiomatic.and hybrid refugeespolis than These identitywere in the exiles dispersed other seems identified examples axiomatic. around which with the These a I have whole exiles discussed, region, identified where Achaia, with rather a whole region, Achaia, rather than a polisgroupgroupgroupgroupgroupgroup groupidentitygroupgroup isis is is isis much muchis muchis ismuch muchmuch much seemsmuchmuch moremore more more moremore more moremoreaxiomatic. complexcomplex complex complex complexcomplex complex complexcomplex These andand and and andand and andand hybridhybrid hybrid hybrid hybridhybridexiles hybrid hybridhybrid thanthan thanidentified than thanthan than thanthan inin in in inin in thethe inthein the thethe the the the with otherother other other otherother other otherother a examplesexamples examples examples exampleswholeexamples examples examplesexamples region, whichwhich which which whichwhich which whichwhich Achaia, II I I IhaveIhave have have I haveIhaveI have havehave discussed, discussed, discussed, discussed, ratherdiscussed,discussed, discussed, discussed,discussed, than wherewhere where where where where a where wherewhere [...... Aegean and beyond, ἐ] πbuṭειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ couldthan polisstill [ acongregateidentityμος ὁ single] seems polis. in axiomatic.groups. They also One These gave such exilessingle special group identified polis. prominencefound They with refuge also a whole in atgave their Myrina region,special self-presentation Achaia, prominence rather here inthan their toa aself single‐presentation here to a single leader, singlepolispolispolispolispolispolispolispolis polispolis. identity identity identity identityidentityidentity identityidentityidentity They seems seems seems seems seemsseems also seemsseemsseems gaveaxiomatic. axiomatic.Since axiomatic. axiomatic.axiomatic.axiomatic. axiomatic.axiomatic.axiomatic. special the demos These These These These TheseThese prominence TheseTheseThese of exiles exiles exiles exilestheexilesexiles exilesexilesexiles Athenians identified identified identified identified identifiedidentified in identifiedidentifiedidentified their living selfwith with with withwithwith withwithwith‐presentation in a a a a a a whole whole wholea wholeaawholewhole wholewholewhole region, region, region, region,region,region, region,region,hereregion, Achaia, Achaia,to Achaia, Achaia,Achaia,Achaia, Achaia,Achaia,Achaia,a single rather rather rather ratherratherrather rather ratherratherleader, than than than thanthanthan thanthanthan a a a a a a a aa Ἀoṇθ̣[ ηνthe]αίων ὁ ἐ north‐eastern[ν Μυρ ]Aegeanίνει οἰκῶν ἔ leader,islandsingle[δ] ωκεν polis. Kleopatros,of Lemnos, They also probablywhich gave specialat a the rebel prominencetimeKleopatros, Achaian hosted leaderin probablytheiran Athenian whoself‐ presentationa had rebel defectedsettler Achaian here to leaderto the a Aetolians’single who leader, had cause defected with to the Aetolians’ cause with some singlesinglesinglesinglesinglesingleKleopatros, polis.polis.polis. polis.polis.polis. TheyTheyThey probably TheyTheyThey alsoalsoalso alsoMyrinaalsoalso agavegavegave rebel gavegavegave gavespecialspecial specialAchaian specialspecialspecial a plot prominenceprominenceprominence leader prominenceprominenceprominence of land who to hadinin inthe in intheirintheir theirdefected Chalcidians, theirtheirtheir selfselfself selfselfself ‐‐to‐presentationpresentationpresentation‐ ‐‐presentationthepresentationpresentation Aetolians’ hereherehere herecauseherehere tototo to towithatoaa single asingleasinglea singlesinglesomesingle leader,leader,leader, leader,leader,leader, χωρίον τοῖς Χcommunity (cleruchy)̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν likeKleopatros,, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην single singlesinglethesome polis.one polis.polis. followers.probably on They They TheySamos alsoa Thisalso alsorebel (comparegave suggestsgavegave Achaian special specialspecial thatabove). leader prominence prominenceprominence theyfollowers. whoThis were had exile consciousThisin inin theirdefected theirtheirsuggestscommunity self selfself of ‐topresentation the ‐that‐presentationpresentation the model they wasAetolians’ were of here a herehereconscious royal cause to toto ora a asinglewith mercenary singleofsingle the some leader, model leader,leader, army of a royal or mercenary army with a Kleopatros,Kleopatros,Kleopatros,Kleopatros,Kleopatros,Kleopatros,followers. probablyprobably probablyThis probablyprobablyprobably suggests set aaa rebel rebelarebelaupa that rebelrebelrebel the AchaianAchaiantheyAchaian inscription AchaianAchaianAchaian were leader leaderleaderconscious leaderleaderleader concerning whowhowho who whowhoof hadthehadhad hadhadhad modelthe defecteddefecteddefected defectedepimeletesdefecteddefected of a royal tototo to tothetothethe orthethethe Aetolians’ Aetolians’Aetolians’mercenary Aetolians’Aetolians’Aetolians’ armycausecausecause causecausecause with withwithwith withwithwith a somesomesome somesomesome τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν sufficiently organised andfollowers.Kleopatros, Kleopatros,Kleopatros,recognisedwith This a single probably suggests probablyprobablyto unquestionedreceive thata aarebel rebelrebel athey grant Achaian leader,AchaianwereAchaian of conscious aslandleader singleleaderleader opposed from who unquestionedofwhowho the to thehad hadhad the model Atheniandefected civic defecteddefected ofleader, model a royalto settlertoto theas ofthethe or sharedopposedAetolians’ Aetolians’Aetolians’mercenary command to cause thecause causearmy civic with and withwith model collective some asomesome of shared command and collective followers.followers.followers.followers.single unquestionedThis This This This suggests suggests suggests suggests[magistrate leader, that that that that they theyas they they of opposedwere were thewere were Athenianconscious conscious conscious toconscious the civiccleruchy] of of of the of themodel the the model model model andmodel of of letsharedof of a ofa royal a royala royal royalcommand or or or mercenary ormercenary mercenary mercenary and collective army army army army with with with with a a a a κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι community, and to pass asingle decreefollowers.followers.followers.followers.followers.followers. sovereignty.unquestioned in honour ThisThis ThisThis ThisThis suggests It suggests of suggestssuggests is suggests suggestsaleader, also benefactor interesting thatthat thatthat asthatthat theythey opposedtheythey fromtheythey werewere thatwerewere werethatwere theyconscioustosovereignty.conscious consciousconsciouscommunity: consciousconsciousthe explicitly civic ofof ofof It oftheofmodelthe the acknowledgedthe is thethe modelmodel also modelmodel modelmodel of interesting ofsharedof ofof ofaofa aa royal royal a a theirroyalroyal royal royalcommand that oror dissident oror or mercenaryor mercenary theymercenarymercenary mercenarymercenary explicitlyand and armycollective marginalarmy armyarmy armyarmy acknowledged withwith withwith withwith status: aa aa a a their dissident and marginal sovereignty.singlesinglesinglesinglesinglesinglesinglesinglesinglesovereignty. unquestioned unquestioned unquestionedunquestionedunquestioned unquestioned unquestionedunquestionedunquestionedIt is alsoIt is interestingalso the leader, leader, leader,leader,leader, leader, leader,leader, interestingleader,herald as as asas as as that asannounce as asopposed opposed opposedopposedopposed opposed thatopposed opposedopposedthey they explicitly atto to to toto toexplicitly the to totheto the thethethe the thecontestthe the civic civic civiccivic civic civic acknowledged civic civiccivicacknowledged model model formodelmodelmodel model modelmodelmodel tragedies of of ofofof of of ofsharedofshared sharedsharedtheirshared shared sharedsharedshared dissident dissident command command commandcommandcommand command commandcommandcommand and and and andmarginal andandand and andmarginalandand collective collective collectivecollectivecollective collective collectivecollectivecollective Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες theystatus: did they not did style not themselvesstyle themselves as ‘the asstatus: ‘the Achaians Achaians they indid in Skiros’ not Skiros’ style (compare (compare themselves ‘the‘the as ZacynthiansZacynthians ‘the Achaians in in the thein Skiros’ Nellos’ (compare ‘the Zacynthians in the status:sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty.sovereignty. they did It It Itnot ItIt It is Itis Itis Itisis is styleisalso alsois alsois alsoalsoalso alsoalsoalsoat interesting interestingthemselves interesting interestingtheinterestinginteresting interestinginterestinginteresting Dionysia that that that asthatthatthat thatthat thatthat‘the they they they theytheythey thethey theytheyAchaians explicitly explicitly explicitly Chalcidiansexplicitlyexplicitlyexplicitly explicitlyexplicitlyexplicitly in acknowledged acknowledged acknowledged Skiros’acknowledgedacknowledgedacknowledged acknowledgedacknowledgedlivingacknowledged (compare in their their their theirtheirtheir theirtheir‘thetheir dissident dissident dissident dissident dissidentdissident Zacynthians dissidentdissidentdissident and and and andandand andandand marginal marginalin marginal marginalmarginalmarginal marginalmarginalthemarginal στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν [...... ἐ]π̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆabove),Nellos’ [above), butμος ὁ rather] but rather as ‘the as exiles ‘the exiles from fromNellos’ Achaia’. Achaia’. above), but rather as ‘the exiles from Achaia’. status:status:status:status:status:status: theytheythey theytheythey diddiddid diddiddid notnotnot notnotnot stylestylestyleMyrina stylestylestyleSince themselvesthemselvesthemselves themselves themselvesthemselvescrownthe demos with asasas of as as ‘theas‘the this‘thethe ‘the‘the‘the AchaiansAtheniansgarlandAchaiansAchaians AchaiansAchaiansAchaians the inin inliving epimeletes in inSkiros’inSkiros’Skiros’ Skiros’Skiros’Skiros’ in (compare(compare(compare (compare(compare(compare ‘the‘the‘the ‘the‘the‘the ZacynthiansZacynthiansZacynthians ZacynthiansZacynthiansZacynthians ininin in intheinthethe thethethe ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον ΜελίτωνοἈ̣θ̣[ην]αίων ὁ ἐ[ν Μυρ]Nellos’ίνει οἰκῶν ἔstatus:status:status: above),[ς they] This Thistheythey[δ] ωκεν didbutdoes diddid rathernot not,notnot not, style however, stylestyle however,as ‘thethemselves themselvesthemselves exilesindicate indicate from thatas asas that‘the Achaia’. they‘the‘theThis theyAchaians wereAchaiansAchaians does were abstaining not, in abstaining inin however,Skiros’ Skiros’Skiros’ from (comparestaking from (compare(compareindicate staking a claim that‘the ‘the‘the they ato Zacynthians claim ZacynthiansrepresentZacynthians were to abstaining represent the in inin the thethe thefrom staking a claim to represent the Nellos’Nellos’Nellos’ above), above), above), but but but rather rather Theophilos,ratherMyrina as as as‘the ‘the ‘the gave exiles exilesson exiles a of plotfrom from Meliton, from of Achaia’. Achaia’.land Achaia’. of to Alopeke, the Chalcidians, on Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κχωρίον τοῖς Χ̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν,Nellos’ στῆσαι τὴν στήλην Nellos’Nellos’Nellos’ThisNellos’Nellos’Nellos’truetrue does above), above), interests [interests above),above),α above), above),]above),ὶ not, but but however, ofbutbut of but but but the ratherrather the ratherrather rather ratherratherAchaian Achaian asindicateas asas as ‘theasas‘the ‘the‘the League. ‘the ‘the‘the exiles League.exiles exilesexilesthat exiles exilesexiles It fromtheyfrom true fromfromis from Itfrom fromstriking were is Achaia’.interestsAchaia’. Achaia’.Achaia’. striking Achaia’. Achaia’.Achaia’. abstaining that of they that the claimedAchaian they from claimed staking that League. Simos thata claim It ‘restored’ Simosis strikingto represent ‘restored’ to thatthem theythe to themclaimed that Simos ‘restored’ to them ThisThisThis does does does not, not, not, however, however, however,accountset up indicate indicate ofthe indicate his inscription virtue that that that they andthey they concerning justicewere were were abstaining abstaining towards abstaining the epimeletes the from from from staking staking staking a a claim aclaim claim to to torepresent represent represent the the the δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκιτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν true interests([δThisThisπ]ThisThisέας τοὺς ἐν ThisThisδωκεThis doesdoes doesdoesof does doesdoes) the the not,not, not,not, not, not,Achaiannot, region however,however, however,however, however, however,however, of League. Skiris. indicateindicate indicateindicate indicate indicateindicate Since It thatisthat thatthat that strikingthat thisthat theythey theythey they istheythey were thewere werewerethat were werewere formal abstaining abstaining theyabstainingabstaining abstaining abstainingabstaining diplomaticclaimed fromfrom fromfrom from fromfrom that stakingstaking language stakingstaking staking stakingstakingSimos aa a a claim claim‘restored’ a ofaclaimaclaim claim claimclaim restitution toto toto representto torepresentto representrepresent torepresent representrepresent them of rightful the the thethe the the the [magistrate of the Athenian cleruchy] and let truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue interests interestsinterests interestsinterestsinterests interestsinterestsinterests38 of ofof ofofof of theof theofthe thethethe thethe the Achaian AchaianAchaian AchaianChalcidiansAchaianAchaian AchaianAchaianAchaian League. League.League. League.League.League. League.League.League. living It ItIt ItIt It in is Itisis It Itisisis Myrina. strikingis strikingstrikingis is strikingstrikingstriking strikingstrikingstriking (that thatthat IG thatthatthat thatthat thatXII they theythey theytheythey 8theytheythey 4) claimed claimedclaimed claimedclaimedclaimed claimedclaimedclaimed that thatthat thatthatthat thatthatthat Simos SimosSimos SimosSimosSimos SimosSimosSimos ‘restored’ ‘restored’‘restored’ ‘restored’‘restored’‘restored’ ‘restored’‘restored’‘restored’ to toto tototo tothem tothemtothem themthemthem themthemthem Μυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςκήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι . territory,36 these exiles were claiming36 to be legitimate recipients of disputed territory which, to their Olympia: IvO 259; Meiggs the herald ‐ Lewis announceGHI 74; Delphi:Olympia: at the FD contest IIIIvO 4.1; 259; SEG for Meiggs 32.550.tragedies‐Lewis On these GHI monuments74; Delphi: andFD IIItheir 4.1; SEG 32.550. On these monuments and their Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες 36 contexts: (Luraghi 2008, esp. pp. 191–94). For a guide to epigraphic abbreviations such as those in this note, Olympia: contexts: IvO 259; (Luraghi Meiggs 2008, at ‐ Lewis the esp. Dionysia pp. GHI 191–94). 74; Delphi:that For athe guide FD Chalcidians III to epigraphic4.1; SEG living 32.550. abbreviations in On these such monumentsas those in this and note, their στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν 363636 363636 see the list published in the Supplementum Epigraphicumsee the list Graecumpublished. in the Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. 38 Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf.36contexts: 36 36 28, Olympia:Olympia:Olympia: Olympia: Olympia:Olympia: 35.Olympia:Olympia:Olympia: (Luraghi IvO IvOIvO IvOIvOIvO IvOIvOIvO 259; 259;259; 2008,259;259;259; 259;259;259; Meiggs MeiggsMeiggs Meiggs MeiggsMeiggsesp. MeiggsMeiggsMeiggs pp.‐‐‐LewisLewis‐Lewis‐‐LewisLewis Lewis‐191–94).‐‐LewisLewisLewis GHI GHIGHI GHIGHIGHI GHIGHI GHIFor 74; 74;74; 74;74;74; 74; a 74; 74;Delphi: Delphi: Delphi: Delphi:guideDelphi:Delphi: Delphi:Delphi:Delphi: to FD FDFD FD FDFDepigraphic FD FD FD III IIIIII IIIIIIIII III 4.1;III 4.1;III4.1; 4.1;4.1;4.1; 4.1;4.1; 4.1; SEG SEGSEG SEG SEGSEGabbreviations SEGSEGSEG 32.550. 32.550.32.550. 32.550.32.550.32.550. 32.550.32.550.32.550. On OnOn OnOnOn On On suchOn these thesethese thesethesethese thesethesethese as monuments monumentsmonuments monumentsthosemonumentsmonuments monumentsmonumentsmonuments in this and andand andnote,andand andandand their theirtheir theirtheir their theirtheirtheir 37 On Greek federal states,Myrina see recently crown (Mackil with37 On 2013).this Greek garland federal the states, epimeletes see recently (Mackil 2013). 39 ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνοsee 36contexts:thecontexts:contexts:contexts: list[ς ]published (Luraghi (Luraghi (Luraghi (Luraghi in 2008, 2008, the2008, 2008, Supplementumesp. esp. esp. esp. pp. pp. pp. pp. 191–94). 191–94). 191–94). 191–94). Epigraphicum For For For For a a guide aguide a guide guide Graecum to to toepigraphic toepigraphic epigraphic epigraphic. abbreviations abbreviations abbreviations abbreviations such such such such as as as those asthose those those in in inthis inthis this this note, note, note, note, Polybius 2.43.2. contexts:contexts:contexts:contexts:contexts:contexts:Olympia: (Luraghi(Luraghi (Luraghi(Luraghi (LuraghiIvO(Luraghi259; 2008,2008, 2008, Meiggs-Lewis2008, 2008,2008,Theophilos, esp.esp. esp.esp. esp.esp. pp.pp. pp.pp. pp.pp. 191–94).GHI191–94). 191–94).191–94). 191–94). 191–94).son74; Delphi: of ForFor ForFor Meliton, ForFor aa a aguideFD guide a guideaguide guideIIIguide 4.1; toofto toto epigraphicSEGtoepigraphicAlopeke,to epigraphicepigraphic epigraphicepigraphic32.550. Onon abbreviationsabbreviations abbreviationsabbreviations abbreviations theseabbreviations monuments suchsuch suchsuch suchsuch and asas asas thoseasasthose their thosethose thosethose contexts: inin inin thisinthisin thisthis thisthis note,note, ( note,Luraghinote, note,note, 40 IἈλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ have discussed in (Gray37 2017)On seeseeGreekseeancientseeseeseesee see see the2008the the the thethe the the federalthe listlist, list [list list esp.debateslistα list list ]list publishedpublished publishedὶ published publishedpublished pp. published publishedpublishedstates, 191–94).about see inin in in inin the asyluminthe thein inrecentlythe Forthethe the the the SupplementumSupplementum Supplementum Supplementum aSupplementumSupplementum Supplementum guideSupplementumSupplementum and (Mackil torefuge epigraphic 2013). EpigraphicumEpigraphicum Epigraphicum Epigraphicum EpigraphicumEpigraphicum and Epigraphicum EpigraphicumEpigraphicum abbreviationstheir modern GraecumGraecum Graecum Graecum GraecumGraecum Graecum GraecumGraecum such resonance,...... as.. . those in this note, see the list published in the Supplementum Epigraphicumaccount Graecum of his virtue and justice towards the 373737373737373737 . citingδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι there much earlier bibliography On37OnOn On OnOnOn On [On GreekGreek δGreek Greek GreekGreek]on έας τοὺς ἐν Greek GreekGreek this federalfederal federal federal federalfederal question; federal federalfederal states,states, states, states, states,states, states, states,states, see seesee see see seeseeearlier see see see recentlyrecently recently recently recentlyrecently recently recentlyrecently especially (Mackil(Mackil (Mackil (Mackil (Mackil(Mackil (Mackil (Mackil(Mackil (Lonis 2013).2013). 2013). 2013). 2013).2013). 2013). 2013).2013). 1993). On Greek federal states,Chalcidians see recently (livingMackil 2013in Myrina.). (IG XII 8 4) Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντας. 38 Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf. 28, 35.

38 Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf. 28, 35. 39 Polybius 2.43.2. 40 I have discussed in (Gray 2017) ancient debates about asylum and refuge and their modern resonance, citing there much earlier bibliography on this question; see earlier especially (Lonis 1993).

Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19

(ἀπέδωκε) the region of Skiris. Since this is the formal diplomaticHumanities language 2018, 7of, x restitutionFOR PEER REVIEW of rightful 12 of 19 territory,Humanities38 these 2018 exiles, 7, xwere FOR PEERclaiming REVIEW to be legitimate recipients of disputed territory which, to their 12 of 19 minds, rightfully belonged to the enlarged Achaian League (by(ἀπέδωκε now including) the region Arcadia), of Skiris. of Sincewhich this is the formal diplomatic language of restitution of rightful Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19 (ἀπέδωκε) the region of Skiris. Since this is the formal diplomatic38 language of restitution of rightful Humanities 2018, 7, x FORthey PEER were REVIEW legitimate representatives. Since the Achaian Leagueterritory, by now these 12had of exiles 19only wereone claimingprincipal to be legitimate recipients of disputed territory which, to their HumanitiesHumanities38 20182018,,Humanities 77,, xx FORFOR PEERPEER 2018 ,REVIEWREVIEW 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 1212 ofof 1919 12 of 19 territory, these39 exilesHumanities were2018 claiming, 7, 72 to be legitimate recipientsminds, rightfully of disputed belonged territory to which,the enlarged to their Achaian League (by 12now of 19including Arcadia), of which magistrate (strategos), they could even have intended(ἀπέδωκε Kleopatros) the region to ofbe Skiris. seen Sinceas a rivalthis isto the the formal diplomatic language of restitution of rightful minds, rightfully belonged Humanitiesto the enlarged 2018, 7, x Achaian FOR PEER League REVIEWthey were (by nowlegitimate including representatives. Arcadia), of whichSince the Achaian League 12by of now 19 had only one principal (ἀπέδωκε) the regionincumbent of Skiris.((ἀπέδωκεἀπέδωκε Achaian Since ))this thethestrategos(ἀπέδωκε is regionregion the :formal asofof) theSkiris.Skiris.the diplomaticregion truly SinceSince oflegitimate thisthisSkiris. language isisterritory, the theSince defender formalformal of this38 restitution these isdiplomaticdiplomatic ofthe exilesAchaian formal of wererightful languagelanguage diplomatic interests. claiming ofof restitution restitutionlanguage Itto isbe worth legitimate of ofof restitution rightfulrightful recipients of rightful of disputed territory which, to their 38 theyHumanities were 2018 legitimate, 7, x FOR PEERrepresentatives. REVIEW Since the Achaianmagistrate League (bystrategos now ),had39 they only could one principaleven12 ofhave 19 intended Kleopatros to be seen as a rival to the territory, these exilespointing were territory,territory,out claiming that3838 the tothesethese territory, beAchaian legitimate exilesexiles38 were wereLeaguethese recipients claimingclaiming exiles was were of itselftoto disputed bebe claimingminds, legitimatelegitimatebased territoryrightfully onto be recipientsrecipientscontinuing legitimate which, belonged ofof to idealsdisputedrecipientsdisputed their to the and territoryenlargedterritory of practices disputed which, which,Achaian ofterritory toto theirLeaguetheir which, (by to now their including Arcadia), of which magistrate (strategosminds,),39 they rightfully(ἀπέδωκε could belongedeven) the haveregion to intended theof Skiris. enlargedincumbent Kleopatros Since Achaian this Achaian isto the Leaguebe formal strategosseen (by asdiplomatic: nowaas rivalthe including truly tolanguage the legitimate Arcadia), of restitution defender of which of rightfulof they Achaian interests. It is worth minds, rightfully citizenship:belongedminds,minds, to individualthe rightfullyenlargedrightfullyminds, member Achaian belongedbelonged rightfully cities League toto thethebelongedretained (byenlargedenlarged now theirtothey including theAchaianAchaian traditional wereenlarged League legitimateLeagueArcadia), Achaian citizenships, (by(by ofrepresentatives. now now Leaguewhich includingincluding but (by the now Arcadia),SinceArcadia),model including the of ofofAchaian whichwhichArcadia), League of which by now had only one principal incumbent Achaianwere strategos legitimate: as the representatives.38 truly legitimate Since defenderHumanities the Achaian of 2018 Achaian, 7 League, x FOR interests. PEER by REVIEW now It had is worth only one principal magistrate 11 of 19 they were legitimatecitizenship representatives.(ἀπέδωκε was also) the coSince ‐regionopted the andof Achaian Skiris. adaptedterritory, Since League at this thethese bylargeris theexilesnow formalfederal hadwere pointing onlydiplomatic levelclaiming oneitself. out 39principalto languageThis bethat legitimate unusual the of Achaian restitution exile recipients group League of of rightful disputed was itself territory based which, on continuing to their ideals and practices of theythey werewere legitimatelegitimatethey were representatives.representatives. legitimate39 representatives. SinceSincemagistrate thethe AchaianAchaian Since (strategos theLeagueLeague Achaian), theybyby nownow Leaguecould hadhad even byonlyonly nowhave oneone had intendedprincipalprincipal only one Kleopatros principal to be seen as a rival to the 39 pointingterritory, 38out these that exiles( strategosthe Achaianwere),minds, claimingthey League rightfully could to bewas even legitimate belongeditself have based recipientscitizenship: intended to the on enlarged continuing of Kleopatros individualdisputed Achaian ideals territory to member be League and seen which, practices ascities(by a rivalnowto retained their ofincluding to the their incumbent Arcadia), traditional Achaian of whichcitizenships, but the model of magistrate (strategoswas), thus theymagistrate magistrateitself, could like even (the(strategosstrategosmagistrate haveothers ),),intended39 39discussed theythey(strategos couldcould Kleopatros here,),39 eveneventhey co ‐ incumbentopting havehavecouldto be intended intended forevenseen itsAchaian haveas ownachievements, KleopatrosKleopatrosa rivalintendedends strategos toa political the toto :Kleopatrospiety, asbebe theseenseen andidentity truly asinterestsasto aa legitimatebe and rivalrival seen and toto as to thethedefender acommunicate rival toof theAchaian with other interests. states. It Certainis worth exile groups are citizenship:minds, rightfully individual belonged member theyto the werecities enlarged legitimateretained Achaian theirrepresentatives. League citizenshiptraditional (by now was Sincecitizenships, alsoincluding the co Achaian‐opted butArcadia), and theLeague adaptedmodel of whichby atofnow the hadlarger only federal one levelprincipal itself. This unusual exile group incumbent Achaianmodel strategos thatincumbentincumbent :was as thebased trulyAchaianAchaian onstrategos legitimatecitizenship—in strategosstrategos: as defender the:: asas truly thisthethe case,truly legitimatetrulyof pointingAchaian anlegitimatelegitimate already defender interests.out experimentaldefenderdefenderthat of theIt Achaian is Achaianof ofworth AchaianAchaianand interests. adaptedLeague interests.interests. It formwas is worth ItItitselfof isis pointing worthworthbased on out continuing that the Achaian ideals and practices of incumbent HumanitiesAchaian 2018strategos, 7, x FOR: as PEER the39 REVIEW truly known legitimate to have defender imitated of Achaianthese characteristic interests. It activities is worth of settled11 of 19 states, successfully reintegrating pointing out thatcitizenship. the Achaiancitizenshipthey were League waslegitimate alsowasLeague coitselfHumanities ‐representatives.opted wasbasedmagistrate 2018 and itself, 7 , xadaptedon FOR based continuing PEER (Sincestrategos REVIEW at on thethe continuing ), largerAchaianideals theywas federal andcould Leaguethus ideals practices level evenitself, andby itself. havelikenow practicesof This the intendedhad othersunusual only of citizenship: Kleopatrosdiscussedone exile principal group 12here, toof individual 19 be co seen‐opting as member fora rival its own citiesto the ends a political identity and pointingpointing outout pointing thatthatHumanities thethe outAchaianAchaianHumanities 2018HumanitiesthatHumanities, 7 , thex League2018League FOR 2018 Achaian2018, 7PEER,, x7 , ,FOR7 wascitizenship:wasx, REVIEWxFOR FOR PEER Leagueitself itselfPEER PEER REVIEW REVIEWbasedbased REVIEWindividualwasthemselves onitselfon continuingcontinuing basedmember into theon idealscitiesideals interstatecontinuing retainedandand community, practicespracticesideals their and traditionalofof despite practices their citizenships, 11of otherwise of 19 11 11of11 19ofmarginalbut of 19 19 the modeland interstitial of position. citizenship: individualThere memberwasmagistrate were,thus cities itself,therefore, (strategos retained like the),multiple39 theirotherstheyincumbent traditionalcould waysdiscussed evenin Achaian which citizenships,here,have Classicalcointendedstrategos‐optingmodel but : andforasKleopatros the that theitsHellenistic model own trulywas endsto basedlegitimateof be refugees a seenonpolitical citizenship—in as defenderroughly a identity rival ofto and Achaianthethis case, interests. an already It isexperimental worth and adapted form of Humanities 2018, 7, xcitizenship: citizenship:FOR PEER REVIEW individualindividualcitizenship:retained (ἀπέδωκε achievements,member member theirindividual) the traditional region citiescities member of piety, Skiris.retainedretainedcitizenship citizenships, Sinceand cities theirtheirthisinterests retainedwasis thetraditionaltraditionalTheir but alsoformal and the coactivitiestheir diplomaticto‐opted model communicatecitizenships, citizenships,traditional andincluded language of citizenshipadapted11 of citizenships,ofbutwith but19the restitution at the theestablishmentother the was modelmodel larger ofstates. also rightfulbut offederalof co-opted theCertain of modelmonuments level exile and itself.of adaptedgroups atThis Delphi are unusual at and exile Olympia. group The preserved modelincumbent that wasAchaian based strategos on citizenship—inpointing: as the out truly thatthis legitimate case,the Achaian ancitizenship. alreadydefender League experimental of Achaianwas itself andinterests. based adapted on It continuingisform worth of ideals and practices of citizenship was alsocorresponding co‐optedcitizenshipcitizenship and to adapted Arendt’s waswascitizenship alsothealsoatachievements, first theHumanities largerterritory,coco group—thoselarger‐‐optedopted knownachievements,wasachievements, federal38achievements, 2018federalalsothese andand piety,to, 7 co exiles , adaptedadapted xhave level‐ FORleveloptedwho andwerepiety, PEER imitated itself. piety,surviveditself.was piety,andatinterestsclaimingat REVIEWtheandthe thus adapted Thisand andlarger larger theseinterests toon itself, andinterestsbe unusual unusual intereststhe legitimate federalfederal atcharacteristicinscriptionsto margins, likethe andcommunicate exileand larger exilethe and recipientslevel levelto to othersgroup communicateinsistingto group itself.federalitself.communicatefrom communicateactivities of disputeddiscussedwith ThisThis was those onlevel the other unusualunusual of thus with territoryitself.monuments identitywithsettled here, withstates. itself,other This exilewhich,exileother otherco states, ‐Certain likestates.unusual opting group group to states. offer states.their the successfully Certain forexile othersexilerareCertain Certain its groups group directownexile discussed exile reintegratingexile ends groups11areglimpses groupsof groups 19a here, politicalare are intoare identitythe political and rhetoric and citizenship.pointing out that the Achaiancitizenship: League individual was itself member based Thereon cities continuing were, retained therefore, ideals their andtraditionalmultiple practices ways citizenships, of in which butClassical the model and Hellenisticof refugees roughly was thus itself,achievements, likethat the was otherspiety, wasdeniedwas thusdiscussedthusand to interests itself,itself,themwas here, byco-optinglikelike knownthus andothers minds, thetheco itself,to‐ optingthemselvesknownothersothersto throughcommunicaterightfullyknown forknownhave like its fordiscusseddiscussedto imitatedthe own tobelonged exile—couldhaveits tointo have othersownhave ends withtheimitated model here,tohere, theseimitated ends interstateimitatedthediscussed aother political enlargedadaptco co thatcharacteristic a‐these ‐opting optingpolitical states.these thesewas community,citizen here,Achaian characteristicself identity forbasedcharacteristicforCertain characteristic‐identity presentation co practices its itsLeagueactivities‐opting onown andown despiteexile citizenship—inand(by model activitiesends endsandfor nowgroupsactivities ofofactivities their its citizen settledaGreekincludinga thatpoliticalownpolitical otherwiseareof of wasexileidentity settled states,endsof this Arcadia),settled settledidentityidentity basedgroups. case,a marginal successfullystates,political ofstates, states,an on which andand already citizenship—insuccessfully andsuccessfullyidentity successfully reintegrating interstitial experimental and reintegrating reintegrating reintegrating thisposition. case,and adapted form of citizenship:There were, individual therefore,they member werecitizenship multiple legitimate cities ways was representatives.retained also in whichco their‐opted Since Classicaltraditional andthe Achaian adapted and citizenships,League Hellenistic at the by larger now butrefugeeshad federal onlythe onemodellevelroughly principal itself. of This unusual exile group model thatknown was based toto exercisehave on citizenship—inimitated agency theseHumanities and thischaracteristicgain 2018achievements,case, recognition., 7, xan FOR alreadyactivities PEER piety, Interestingly,REVIEW experimental of and settled interests states,it and correspondingwas and adapted successfullyequally to communicate form true to reintegratingArendt’sof for withClassical first other group—those and states. Certain who exilesurvived11 of 19groups on theare margins, insisting on the identity modelmodel thatthat waswasmodel anbasedbasedthemselves alreadymagistratethat onon Theirthemselveswas themselvescitizenship—incitizenship—inthemselves experimental into ( basedstrategosactivities the intoon ),interstate 39into intotheycitizenship—in includedthe citizenship. thisthethis and thecouldinterstate interstatecommunity,case, case, adaptedinterstate eventhe anan establishmenthavecommunity, this alreadyalreadycommunity, formcommunity, intended despitecase,In of theexperimentalexperimental an citizenship. Kleopatrosdespite their fifth of alreadydespite despite monuments centuryotherwise their to theirexperimental theirandandbe otherwise BC, seen otherwise adapted adapted marginalotherwiseat certain asDelphi a rivalmarginal and form form residentsmarginaland marginal andto adapted interstitialtheofof Olympia. and ofand and interstitialMessenia,form interstitial interstitialposition. The of preserved theposition. position. position.neighbouring region to Sparta which citizenship. Hellenisticcorrespondingcitizenship refugees was approximately to also Arendt’s co‐opted firstwas corresponding and group—those thus adapted itself, atlike to whothe Arendt’sthe larger survived othersthat federal second was discussedon the deniedlevel group—those margins, itself. here, to them This coinsisting‐opting byunusualwho others on foundfor the exile throughits identity own group exile—couldends a political adapt identity citizen and practices and citizen identity themselves intoHumanities citizenship.thecitizenship. interstate 2018 , 7 citizenship.community,, x FORTheir knownPEERincumbentThere activitiesinscriptionsTheir REVIEW despiteTheir toTheir were, Achaianactivitieshave activitiesincluded activitiestheir therefore, imitatedstrategosfrom otherwiseincluded includedthe thoseincluded: asthese Thereestablishment the multiple marginalthemonuments truly characteristicthe thewere,establishment legitimateestablishment hadestablishment ways andtherefore, longof offer interstitialmonumentsdefender in activitiesbeen whichofrare ofmultiple monuments underof of monuments position.direct monumentsAchaianof Classicalat settleddirect Delphi waysglimpses interests. at Spartan atstates, Delphiin andat Delphi whichDelphi It intoOlympia. Hellenistic11is successfully rule, and ofworth and19 theClassicaland Olympia.were Olympia. political TheOlympia. forced refugees reintegratingpreservedand The rhetoric The intoHellenisticThe preserved roughly preserved exilepreserved and after refugees attempting roughly to revolt against There Theirwere, activities refugetherefore, inthat wasincluded a multiple hostwas thus societydenied itself,theachievements, ways establishment intolike anthemin themselvesthe urbanwhich byothers piety, modelothers context, ofClassical monumentsdiscussed intoand thatthrough assimilatingtheinterests wasand interstate here, exile—could basedHellenisticat andDelphi co to ‐oncommunity,optingto some communicatetocitizenship—in and refugeesadaptexercise degreefor Olympia. its citizendespite owntoroughlyagency withthe Thethis practices endstheir host other case,preservedand a otherwiseculture political andstates.angain already citizen40 —thatrecognition. Certainmarginalidentity identityexperimental exile and and Interestingly, groups interstitial and are adapted position. it was form equally of true for Classical and ThereThere were,were,corresponding inscriptions Theretherefore,therefore,pointing selfinscriptionswere,inscriptions ‐inscriptions out presentation multiplemultiplefrom therefore,that to Arendt’sthe thosefrom wayswaysAchaian fromfrom of correspondingmultiple monuments those Greek inin first thoseLeague those whichwhich monuments group—those exile ways monuments wasmonuments ClassicalClassicalgroups.offer Sparta, toitselfin Arendt’s which rarebased offer presentingandand offer who offer directon Classicalfirst rare Hellenistic Hellenisticcontinuing survived rare rare group—those glimpsesdirect themselves direct directand ideals onglimpsesrefugees refugees Hellenistic glimpses theintoglimpses and whoas margins, the practices theroughly roughlyintosurvived intopoliticalrefugeeslegitimateinto the of insisting the the politicalon politicalrhetoric roughlythepolitical heirs margins, on rhetoric of the and rhetoric rhetoricthe identity insisting ancientand andand onMessenians the identity enslaved by the tomodelachievements, exercise that agencywas piety, based and citizenship:and on gain interestscitizenship—incitizenship. recognition.individual and tomember thiscommunicate Interestingly, case, cities anretainedHellenistic already with it theirwas other experimental refugeestraditionalequally states. citizenships,approximatelyCertaintrue and for adaptedexile Classicalbut groupsthe corresponding form model and are of of to Arendt’s second group—those who found correspondinginscriptions to Arendt’scitizenship from correspondingfirstcorresponding offeredthose group—those monumentsanknown effectivecorresponding toto self Arendt’sArendt’s towhoTheir ‐havepresentation modeloffer survivedself activities self firstimitatedfirst ‐selfto presentationforrareIn‐ Arendt’spresentation ‐group—those group—thosethepresentationimprovised on directof fifthincluded the theseGreek margins,firstcentury glimpses ofthatcharacteristic exile of adaptation.Greek group—thoseof the who whoGreekwas Greek BC,groups.insistingestablishment survivedexilesurviveddeniedinto exilecertain exile groups.Indeed, Spartansactivitiesthe groups. ontowho groups. ononresidents politicalthemthe the the survivedofdisplaced identity centuries ofmargins,monuments margins,by settled ofothersrhetoric Messenia, on groups earlier. insisting theinsisting states,through atandmargins, settledDelphi Thethe successfully on onexile—could neighbouringAthenians the the in insistingand identityidentity Olympia. reintegrating helpedon adapt regionthe Theidentity citizenthese to preserved Spartaexiles practices towhich establish and citizen a stronghold identity in the polis of Hellenisticcitizenship. refugees that approximatelycitizenship was denied wasThere also to corresponding themco were,‐opted by andtherefore, others adapted to refuge throughArendt’s atmultiple the largerin exile—coulda second hostfederalways society levelingroup—those which itself. adaptin anThis Classical urban citizen unusual who context, exile practicesandfound group Hellenistic assimilating and citizen refugees to some identity roughly degree to to the host culture40—that that was deniedself‐presentation tothe them urban byknownthatthat of otherscentres Greek waswas to through denieddenied ofexilehavethemselves host groups.imitated to toexile—couldcities themtheminscriptions Ininto could the bytheseby the othersfifthothers adapt interstateexploitcharacteristic In fromcentury throughthethrough citizen citizen thosefifth community, BC,to practicesexile—couldcenturyexile—could exerciseactivitiesmonumentsmodelscertain BC, despite residentsandto agencyof certain preserveadapt adapt citizensettledoffer their and of citizen citizenresidents rareidentity Messenia, states,otherwiseor gain develop direct practicespractices successfullyofrecognition. theMessenia,marginalglimpses a neighbouring anddistinctiveand citizencitizen reintegrating andtheInterestingly,into neighbouringinterstitial identityidentitythe region political toitposition. Sparta wasregion rhetoric equally which to Sparta and true which for Classical and that waswas denied thushad itself,long Into In thethem like thebeen fifth the fifthby under otherscentury others century discussed direct throughBC, BC, certainSpartan here, certain Naupaktos,exile—could co residents‐ optingrule, residents werefor a itsofadaptposition ofownMessenia,forced Messenia, citizenends on into a the political thepractices exile theGulf neighbouring neighbouring identity after40of Corinthand attempting and citizen regionstrategically region identity to to revolt toSparta Sparta crucial against which which in the fifth‐century rivalry between to exercise agencyidentity, and refugegainthemselves as Therea recognition.in basis a host Theirwere,into for society the exercise activities therefore,Interestingly,significant interstate in an agencycorrespondingincluded multipleurban community,agency, it and context, wasthe ways gain ratherestablishmentequally todespite assimilatingArendt’sin recognition. thanwhich truetheir citizenshipfirstsimply Classicalofforotherwise to monuments group—those Interestingly, someClassical disappearing offeredanddegree marginal andHellenistic at whoan to itDelphi theeffectiveand wasinto survived host interstitial equally andrefugeesthe culturemodel Olympia. onhost truethe position.for roughly—that margins, forimprovised The Classical preserved insisting adaptation. and on Hellenistic the Indeed,identity displaced groups settled in In the fifth centurytoto exerciseexercise BC, certainagencyagencyto exercisehad residentsself modeland andlong‐presentation Sparta,had agencythatgain gainhadbeenhad long ofwas long recognition. recognition.Messenia,presentinglongunder basedandbeen been ofbeen on gaindirectGreekunder citizenship—in Hellenisticunder the under themselvesrecognition.Interestingly, Interestingly, Spartanexileneighbouringdirect direct direct groups. Spartanrefugees this rule, Spartan asAthenianSpartan case,Interestingly, the itit wereregion rule, wasanwaslegitimate approximatelyrule, alreadyrule,forced and wereequallytoequally were Sparta wereSpartan experimental itintoforced heirs forced was trueforcedtrue whichexile corresponding power. ofinto equally for forinto theandafter into exileClassical Classical adaptedDuringancientexile exileattemptingtrue after after afterform theto for Messeniansattemptingandand Arendt’s attemptingPeloponnesian ofClassicalattempting to revolt secondtoenslaved and toagainst revoltto revolt Warrevolt group—those againstby theseagainst againstthe Messenians who foundat Naupaktos set up citizenshipcorresponding offered to refugeesArendt’s an effective first approximatelythat model group—thosewas denied for improvised correspondingto who them survived byadaptation.the others urban toon through Arendt’s the Indeed,centres margins, exile—could displaced secondof hostinsisting group—thosecities groups adapt on could the settled citizen identity exploit who in practices citizen found and models refuge citizen into identity apreserve host or develop a distinctive Hellenistichad refugees longenvironment. beenapproximately underTheirHellenistic activitiesSuchdirect correspondinginscriptions casesrefugeesSpartan included providecitizenship. rule,approximately from In the to were theour Sparta, Arendt’sestablishment those fifth bestforced presentingcentury monumentscorresponding evidence secondintorefuge of exileBC, monuments group—thosethemselvesfor certain inofferafter a the tohost attempting rareresidentsArendt’scomplex society atas direct who Delphithe of secondinternal inlegitimate tofound glimpses Messenia,an andrevolt urban group—those Olympia.organisation against heirs intocontext,the neighbouring ofthe The the assimilating political whoofpreserved ancient found regionrhetoric Messenians to some to Spartaand degree enslaved which to the by host the culture 40—that Hellenistic refugeesHellenisticSparta, approximately SpartansSparta,refugeespresentingSparta, presenting centuriesapproximatelypresenting themselvescorresponding earlier.themselves themselves as corresponding The theto AtheniansArendt’slegitimateasvictory asthe the legitimate monuments,legitimate secondto helpedheirs Arendt’s of thesegroup—thoseheirs theheirs togethersecond exilesancientof ofthe theto group—those ancient establishwithMessenianswho ancient foundtheir Messenians40 aMessenians strongholdNaupaktian enslavedwho foundenslaved enslavedbyin hosts, thethe polis by atby the of boththe Olympia and Delphi, with thethatinscriptions urban was denied centres from tosociety of themthose host Thereby in monumentscitiesto anothers exercisewere, urban could throughtherefore, context, exploitofferagency exile—could multiplerare citizen assimilatingand direct ways gainidentity,models adaptin glimpses recognition.which to to somecitizenas preserveClassical 40 ainto degree basispractices Interestingly, theand or for toHellenisticpoliticaldevelop theandsignificant host citizen aitrefugeesrhetoric distinctive culturewas identityagency, roughlyequally and—that rathertrue citizenship forthan Classical simply offered anddisappearing into the host refuge in aSparta, host society ‘poleispresenting in‐in anrefugerefuge‐exile’. urbanthemselves inin context,aaself hosthostrefuge‐ presentationas societysocietySpartans assimilatingthe hadin legitimatea ininNaupaktos,Spartanslonghost centuriesSpartansanan ofSpartans society beenurbanurban Greekto heirssomecenturies under centuries earlier. acontext, context,exilecenturiesin position ofdegreean citizenshipgroups.directthe urban earlier.The assimilatingassimilating earlier. ancientonearlier.to AtheniansSpartan context,the the The TheofferedhostGulf TheMessenians Athenians accompanying rule, Athenians to toassimilating cultureofAthenianshelped some someanCorinth were effective helped thesedegreedegree—thatenslaved helpedforced strategicallyhelped to exilesinscriptions, model somethesetoto intothese thethebythese to exiles degree for exilehostthehostestablish exiles crucial exilesimprovised toculturetocultureafter to tocelebrateestablish toin theaestablish attempting establishthestronghold4040 host—that—that adaptation.fifth asuccesses culture strongholda‐ century astronghold stronghold toin 40revoltthe —that Indeed,over rivalry polis in against in the in displacedof thebetween thepolisSpartans polis polis of of groups of and their settled allies. in The Olympia identity,to exercise as agencya basis andcorrespondingfor gainsignificantHellenistic recognition. to Arendt’s agency,refugees first Interestingly, group—those ratherapproximately environment.than who it simplysurvivedwas corresponding equally Such ondisappearing the margins,cases true to providefor insistingArendt’s intoClassical ontheour thesecond identityhostbestand evidencegroup—those for thewho complex found internal organisation of citizenshipSpartans offered an centuries effectiveIn mostselfcitizenshipcitizenship earlier.‐presentation modelknown The for offeredofferedcases, improvisedAtheniansIn anofNaupaktos, the‘poleis anGreekan effectiveSparta, fifth effectiveeffective ‐ helpedinexile adaptation.century ‐presentingNaupaktos,exile’ modela groups.modelpositionmodel these inBC, forhost for forIndeed, exilescertain themselves ona improvised improvised improvisedpositioncitiesthe the to urbandisplacedGulfresidents establishinvolved on ofas centresadaptation. adaptation.the adaptation.Corinththe ofgroups aGulffellow strongholdlegitimateMessenia, of ofstrategically hostsettled exiles Corinth Indeed,Indeed, Indeed, cities theheirs in andin the strategically displacedneighbouringdisplaced crucialcouldrefugeesof displacedpolis the exploit ofinancient groupsgroups fromthe crucial groupsregion fifth citizen a Messenianssettled settled ‐incentury to the settled modelsSparta inin fifth rivalry ‐ inenslaved century whichto the preserve between urban rivalry by the centresor between develop a distinctive citizenshipthat was AthenianNaupaktos,offeredNaupaktos, denied an toand effective them a positionSpartana positionby others model onpower. through on the for the Gulf improvisedDuring exile—couldGulfmonument of ofCorinth the Corinth adaptPeloponnesianadaptation. includedstrategically citizenstrategically practices Indeed,the War crucialfamous crucialand displacedthese citizen in inthe‘NikeMessenians identitythe fifth groups fifthof‐ century Paionios’,‐century settledat Naupaktos rivalry rivalryin preserved between betweenset40 up in fragments which have been the urban centressingle of host polisenvironment.Hellenistic cities congregatingIn could the hadfifthrefugees exploitSuch longcentury in cases anapproximatelybeencitizen improvisedBC, provideunderrefuge modelscertain directin our residents quasiacorrespondingto host preserveSpartanbest‐civic society evidenceof community Messenia,rule,or in developto an‘poleiswere Arendt’sfor urban the forcedthe ‐inina neighbouring ‐ thedistinctivecontext,exile’. complexsecond intonew exileassimilating city group—those internal centre,regionafter attemptingorganisation to usuallyto Sparta somewho degree foundwhichto ofrevolt to theagainst host culture —that Naupaktos, a positionthethe urbanurban on the centrescentres Gulfthe ofurbanAthenian of of hostofSpartans toCorinth host hostexercise centres citiesvictoryAthenian AtheniancitiesandcitiesAthenian strategicallycenturies agency could Spartanof monuments,couldcould andhost andand exploitand Spartanearlier. exploitexploitpower.cities Spartangaincrucial identity,Spartan citizenrecognition. couldThetogether power.citizenDuringcitizen in power. power. Atheniansthe asexploit models Duringmodelsfifthmodelsthe awith Interestingly,reconstructed During Duringbasis Peloponnesian‐ centurycitizen helpedtheir to thetoto the preservefor preservethepreservePeloponnesian Naupaktian modelsrivalryitPeloponnesian these significantPeloponnesianwas by Warmodernequally exiles orbetween ororto develop develop developpreservethese hosts, toagency,trueWar archaeologists. establish War MesseniansWarfor these aat a theseor Classical distinctive distinctivethesebothrather developMessenians a Messeniansstronghold Messenians Olympia atand36than Naupaktos Thea identity, distinctive atsimplyexiles in andatNaupaktos at theNaupaktos Naupaktos assetstyled Delphi, polisdisappearing a up basis ofthemselvesset with set upset for up up into as ‘thethe Messenians’,host in the ‘poleisrefugehad long‐ inin‐ exile’.abeen host under society direct in ancitizenship Spartan urban context, rule, offered were assimilating an forcedeffective into tomodelIn someexile most for afterdegree known improvised attempting to cases, the hostadaptation. ‘poleis to culture revolt‐in‐exile’ Indeed,40against—that in host displaced cities groupsinvolved settled fellow in exiles and refugees from a identity, asAthenian a basiswithout and for Spartan theidentity,identity,significant level power. asasSparta,of agency, identity, directaaDuring significantbasisbasisvictory presenting Naupaktos, militaryHellenistic rathertheforasfor accompanyingvictory Peloponnesianmonuments, victoryasignificantsignificant victory agency, mobilisationthanbasisrefugeesthemselves amonuments, position monuments, simplyformonuments, rather approximately togetheragency,agency,inscriptions, significantWar environment.as onshown thandisappearing the thesetogether rathertogetherwith rather simplyGulf legitimatetogethercorrespondingby Messenians agency, to theoftheir celebratewith thanthanCorinth sameSuch disappearing marginalisedwith into with Naupaktianheirs rathertheir simplytosimply style casesattheir the strategicallyArendt’stheir successesNaupaktosof Naupaktian as hostthe thanprovide Naupaktian disappearingNaupaktiandisappearingincumbent intogroups second ancienthosts, simplyover the crucialset our group—those I hostat hosts,theupdiscussedMessenians hosts, citizensbestboth disappearing hosts, inSpartans environment.intointo the at evidenceOlympia at both fifth thewhoattheof both enslavedboth and a ‐found hostcenturyhostOlympiahome Olympia intofortheirandOlympia Such thepolis byDelphi,rivalrytheallies. casesand thecomplex and hostwouldand TheDelphi,between providewith Delphi, Delphi, Olympia dointernal with(e.g., ourwith with ‘theorganisation Athenians’), of a strong and citizenshipSparta,In most presenting offered known an themselvescases,refuge effective ‘poleisinthe a hostmodel urbanas‐ insocietythe‐exile’ for centreslegitimate in improvised anin urban hostof host heirscitiescontext, adaptation. singlecities ofinvolved assimilating the couldpolis ancient Indeed,fellow congregatingexploit to some Messenians exilesdisplaced degreecitizen and toin models the groupsanrefugeesenslaved host improvised cultureto settled frompreserveby40 —thatthe in aquasi or‐ civicdevelop community a distinctive in the new city centre, usually environment.victory Such above,monuments, cases but environment.environment.provide generally together ourSpartans with environment. bestSuchSuchwithbest aaccompanying similar evidence centuriesAthenian casestheircases evidencemonumentaccompanying level accompanyingNaupaktianprovideprovideSuchaccompanying earlier.andfor of for inscriptions, politicalthecasesSpartan the ourincludedourThe complex complexhosts,inscriptions, provide best Atheniansbest ‘poleisinscriptions,power.engagement. inscriptions, toevidencetheatevidence internal celebrate‐ internalin ourboth Duringfamous‐ exile’.helped to best to Olympia celebrateIn toselfforfor organisation the celebrate organisationsuccesses 348 celebrate these‘Nikeevidence ‐theconfident thePeloponnesian BC, complexexilessuccessesandcomplex ofPhilip successes over successes Paionios’, for Delphi,claim ofto of II the the establish ‘poleis-in-exile’.ofinternalinternalover War to Macedon,Spartansover complex withover legitimacy preservedthe these the a organisationtheorganisation Spartansstronghold Spartansand Messenians theinternalSpartans as intheir citizens andfragments and in allies.organisationandof of their theat theirof Naupaktos their polis Theaallies. (not whichallies. allies.Olympiaof yet Theof The have setphysicallyThe Olympia up Olympia Olympiabeen existing) polis. singletheSpartans urban polis centuries centres congregating ofearlier. citizenshiphost in Thecitiesidentity, an offered Atheniansimprovised could anas effective exploita helped basisquasi model citizen these‐forcivic for withoutimprovised significantmodels exilescommunity to theto adaptation.establish preserve agency, levelin the aIndeed,of newstrongholdor ratherdirect develop displacedcity militarythan centre, in a groups thedistinctivesimply usually mobilisationpolis settled disappearingof in shown intoby the the marginalised host groups I discussed ‘poleis‐in‐exile’.accompanying father of inscriptions, ‘poleis‘poleisAlexander‐‐inin‐‐exile’.exile’.Naupaktos, theto‘poleis celebrate Great, monument‐victoryinIn ‐awhoexile’. positionreconstructed mostmonumentsuccessesmonument monumentmonuments, was included known onin over theincluded byincluded cases, theGulfprocessincludedthe togethermodern famousSpartans of ‘poleis-in-exile’ theInCorinth of themost the archaeologists.famouswith entrenching ‘Nike famous and famous knownstrategically their their of‘Nike Two ‘Nike Paionios’,Naupaktian cases,‘Nike inallies.Macedonian 36 hostofcenturies Thecrucial of ‘poleis Paionios’,ofThe cities Paionios’, exilesPaionios’,preserved Olympiain ‐hosts,later in powerthe involved ‐styled exile’preserved (c.fifth preserved at preserved220–217in across inthemselves‐bothcentury fragmentshost fellow Olympiain citiesBC), in rivalryfragmentsin exiles fragments as a fragmentsinvolvedwhich similar‘the andbetween and Messenians’, whichhaveDelphi, intervention refugeesfellowwhich which been have withexileshave have from inbeen was theandbeen been a made refugees by a from group a of exiles from without the level of thedirect urbanenvironment. military centres of mobilisation host Such cities couldcases shown exploit provide bycitizen the our modelsmarginalised best to evidencepreserve groups or fordevelop Ithe discussed a complexdistinctive internal organisation of In most knownnorthern cases,identity,Naupaktos, ‘poleisGreece,‐ in destroyedas‐exile’Athenian a aposition basis in hostthe and onfor uncooperative cities Spartan thesignificant Gulf involved power.of Corinth cityagency, fellow During of strategically Olynthos, exilesrather the Peloponnesianandabove, thanthe crucialrefugees36 centre butsimply generallyin fromofthe War 36adisappearing fifthhostile athese with‐century Messeniansconfederacy, a similar rivalryinto level theat between Naupaktos ofhost political setengagement. up In 348 BC, Philip II of Macedon, the monument included InInthe mostmost famous knownknownsinglereconstructed In‘Nikeaccompanying identity, mostcases,cases, polissamereconstructed ofknown reconstructed ‘poleis‘poleis reconstructedasPaionios’, congregating style aby basis‐cases,‐ ininmodern inscriptions,as‐‐ exile’exile’ for byincumbent preserved ‘poleis by singlesignificantmodernby in inarchaeologists.modern in modernhosthost‐ in antopolis‐ exile’ citizensarchaeologists.citiesincelebratecities improvisedagency, archaeologists. fragmentsarchaeologists.congregating inAchaia,involvedinvolved hostratherof Thesuccesses a citieshome quasi-civicathanexileswhich 36 fellowfellowregion 36Thein involved simplyThe polis overanThestyled exiles have exilesexiles in improvisedexiles exilesthethewoulddisappearing community themselves styledbeen fellow and andSpartansnorth styled styled dorefugeesrefugees themselves exilesof quasi (e.g.,themselves into thethemselves andas in ‐ and Peloponnesecivicthefrom‘thefrom thetheir host refugees asMessenians’,Athenians’), newcommunity a a asallies. ‘theas ‘the city‘the Messenians’, whichThefrom Messenians’, Messenians’, centre, inOlympiaa ina was strong thethe usually newthe in andin thetraditional incity the the centre, centre usually of a confederacy, above,environment. but generally Such withcases a36 similar‘poleisprovide‐ levelin our‐exile’. of best political evidence engagement.father for ofthe Alexander Incomplex 348 BC, Philipinternalthe Great, II oforganisation Macedon,who was thein of the process of entrenching Macedonian power across single polisreconstructed congregatingthe Chalcidian by Athenianin modern an improvised League. and archaeologists.victory Spartan The quasi monuments,resultingmonument power.‐civic The Olynthian communityDuring exilesincludedtogether the styled or Peloponnesian inwiththe‘Chalcidian’ thethemselves famous their new Naupaktiancity refugees‘Nike Waras centre, ‘the theseof wereMessenians’, Paionios’, usually hosts,Messenians dispersed at preservedboth 37in at aroundthe NaupaktosOlympia in the fragments and set upDelphi, which with have been singlesingle polispolis congregatingcongregatingsinglewithoutsame polisenvironment. styleselfsame thecongregating insamein‐same confident asan levelan style incumbentSuchimprovisedstyleimprovised style of ascases direct asclaim incumbentinas incumbent withoutprovideanincumbent citizens militarytoquasi quasiimprovised legitimacy our ‐‐citizensthecivic civic of citizensbest mobilisation citizensa level community communitythehome evidence quasias of Achaian citizens of a of‐ polis civichomeadirect forahome shownhome in ofinthewouldcommunityLeague, polis militarythe athe complex polis(not polis new by new woulddo yet would the quickly wouldmobilisationinternal(e.g.,citycity physicallyin marginalised do thecentre, centre, ‘thedo doorganisation(e.g., comingnew (e.g., Athenians’),(e.g., existing) usually usually ‘theshowncity ‘the to‘the groups Athenians’),centre, ofdominate Athenians’), bypolis.Athenians’), athe usually Istrong discussed marginalisedthe a wholestrongaand astrong strong above, Peloponnese.and groupsand and I discussed Like most of the other without thesame level styleAegean of asdirect fatherincumbent ‘poleisvictoryand military beyond, of‐ in monuments,Alexander‐exile’. citizens accompanyingmobilisation but could ofthereconstructed ‘poleis togethera stillGreat,home shown ‐inscriptions,in congregate‐exile’. poliswhowithIn by mostby thewaswouldtheir modern toinknownmarginalised in celebrategroups.Naupaktian dothe archaeologists. (e.g.,cases,process One successes ‘the northern‘poleisgroups suchhosts,of Athenians’), entrenching ‐group in36 Iover atGreece,‐discussedTheexile’ both the foundexiles in a destroyedSpartansOlympiaMacedonian hoststrong refugestyled cities and and atandthemselvesthe involvedMyrina power theiruncooperativeDelphi, allies. across fellowas with ‘the The exiles cityMessenians’, Olympia of and Olynthos, refugees in the the from centre a of a hostile confederacy, withoutwithout thethe withoutlevellevelbutself ofof generally‐ confident thedirectdirectself selflevel‐self confidentmilitaryTwomilitary‐confident with ‐claim confidentof centuries direct a tomobilisation similar mobilisationclaim legitimacy claim above,claimmilitary later to level tolegitimacy to but(c.legitimacy legitimacy asmobilisationshown ofshown220–217 generally citizens politicalgroups as byby asBC),citizens asof the thewithcitizens engagement. awhichcitizensshown a (notmarginalisedmarginalised similara of similar yet haveof a byof (not aphysically aintervention(notthe been (notlevel yet In marginalised yetgroups 348 groups yetphysically mentionedof physically BC,politicalphysicallyexisting) wasII Philip discusseddiscussed existing) made soengagement.groups polis.existing) existing)far, II ofby these Macedon, polis.Ia discussedpolis.group polis. exiles In 348 of had the exilesBC, fatherbeen Philip from forced of II of Macedon,into marginal the and contested above, but selfgenerally‐confidenton withthe claimnorthern anorthaccompanying similar Into‐eastern legitimacymost Greece,levelmonument known ofAegean inscriptions, politicaldestroyed as samecases,citizens islandincluded Inengagement. style single‘poleismostthe toof of uncooperativecelebrate aknownas (nottheLemnos,‐polis inincumbent‐ exile’ cases,famousyet In congregating successes348physically ‘poleisinwhich BC, host city‘Nikecitizens‐ inPhilip ‐ atcitiesofexile’over existing) ofOlynthos,inthethe of in II anPaionios’,theinvolved Chalcidianofhosttimea improvised Macedon,homeSpartans polis.cities hostedthe fellowinvolved polis preservedcentre League. and the an quasi wouldexiles fellowtheirofAthenian ‐a Thecivic in hostile andexilesallies.do fragmentsresulting community(e.g.,refugees andsettler confederacy,The refugees ‘the OlympiaOlynthian fromwhich Athenians’), fromin thea ahave ornew ‘Chalcidian’ been acity strong centre, and refugees usually were dispersed around the above,above, butbut generallygenerallyabove, but single withwithTwo generallyAchaia, polisaa centuries similarsimilarTwo congregatingTwo aTwo withcenturiesregion levellevel centurieslater centuries a ofofsimilar in father(c. political political anlaterthe 220–217 improvisedlater later northlevel of(c. engagement.(c. Alexanderengagement. 220–217(c. of BC), of220–217 220–217political quasiterritory:the a similar‐PeloponneseBC),civic BC),the BC), engagement. InIn community a the Great, 348similar348interventiona a similarregion similar BC,BC, whichwho interventioninPhilipPhilip ofintervention theIn intervention wasSkiros 348newwas IIII of ofinBC, city themade Macedon,orMacedon,the wascentre,Philip traditionalSkiritis was processwasby made usually amadeII made grouptheinofthe by ofMacedon,the centre by aentrenchingby ofdisputed groupa aexilesgroup ofgroup athe of confederacy, from ofborderlands exiles of Macedonianexiles exiles from from from between power Sparta across and the region father of Alexandercommunity the Great,thesinglemonument Chalcidian (cleruchy) whopolis reconstructedwas congregatingincluded League. inlikeAlexander the the theTheprocess byoneinfamous withoutresulting themodernan onof improvised Great, entrenching Samos‘Nikethe Olynthian archaeologists. who level of(compare quasi wasPaionios’, of Macedonianor indirect ‐‘Chalcidian’civic the36 Aegeanabove).The processcommunitypreservedmilitary exiles power and Thisrefugees of mobilisationstyled beyond, entrenching inacross inexile fragmentsthe werethemselves community newbut dispersedshown could Macedoniancity which ascentre, stillby ‘the was around have thecongregate Messenians’,usually marginalised power been the across in groups.in groupsthe northern One I discussedsuch Greece, group found refuge at Myrina Two centuriesfatherfather later ofof (c. AlexanderAlexander 220–217fatherAchaia, selfofBC), without thethe Alexander‐confident theAchaia, aGreat,Great,a Achaia,similarregionthe Achaia,Achaian level whowhoa claimthe ininterventionregiona ofa region the League,was wasregionGreat,direct to north innorthern ininlegitimacy militaryin the inthewho37the the of was quicklythenorth processprocess the northwasmobilisation northGreece,made Peloponnese asof in coming citizensof of the of oftheby theArcadia destroyed theentrenchingentrenchingPeloponnese ashown process Peloponnesegroup toPeloponneseof dominatewhich a by(now (not oftheof exiles Macedonianyet entrenchingMacedonian marginalisedwaspartwhichuncooperative which physicallythewhich theoffrom wholewasthe traditional was wasgroups Achaian the Macedonianpowerpower theexisting)Peloponnese. thecitytraditional Itraditional discussed traditional centreofacrossLeague).across Olynthos,polis. power of centre Like centreaTheir centreconfederacy, themostacrossof home ofa centreof confederacy, aof aconfederacy, confederacy,thestate, of other a the hostile federal confederacy, Achaian League, was in Aegeanwithoutreconstructed and the beyond, levelby destroyedmodern of but direct could archaeologists.above, themilitary still uncooperative but congregate mobilisationgenerally36 The in citywithexiles groups. shown of a on styled Olynthos,similar the Oneby themselves northlevelthe such themarginalised ‐of easterngroup centrepolitical as found‘the ofAegean engagement. a groupsMessenians’, hostile refuge island confederacy,I atdiscussed MyrinaInof in348 Lemnos, the BC, the Philip which Chalcidian II of at Macedon, the League. time the hosted an Athenian settler northern Greece,Achaia, destroyedsufficiently a regionnorthern northern inthe theorganised uncooperative north Greece,Greece,same northernof and thestyle thedestroyeddestroyed Peloponneserecognisedabove,city Achaian asGreece, groupstheTwoofincumbent butthe Olynthos, thetheAchaianthe generally centuries League,Achaiandestroyed Achaianwhichuncooperativeuncooperative towhich receive citizenswith League,the37 have laterLeague,was quickly League, athecentre thesimilar been a (c.the 37uncooperativeof Chalcidian grantcity 37cityquickly220–217 aleveloftraditionalcoming37 mentionedquickly home quickly aofof ofhostile of Olynthos,Olynthos,political coming BC), thesetopolis League.landcoming comingdominate centre cityconfederacy, so aengagement. wouldyearssimilar from far, to ofthethe The toof dominate Olynthos,tothese centrecentredominate a at thethe doresultingdominate interventionconfederacy, Inwar exileswhole(e.g., Athenian348 ofof thewith BC, theaa the ‘the hadOlynthian hostile hostilethePeloponnese.Philipwhole centre the whole was beenAthenians’),wholesettler II rival confederacy, ofconfederacy,Peloponnese. madeof forcedMacedon, Peloponnese.or aPeloponnese. powerfulhostile‘Chalcidian’ byLike into a athe groupstrongmost confederacy,marginal Like confederacy Like Like of refugeesof andmost the exilesmost mostand otherof ofcontestedfrom werethe fromof the theother dispersed other northother of aroundthe Gulf the of Corinth, the onabove,same the 37 style butnorth generally as‐eastern incumbentThe with fatherAegean resulting a citizensof fathersimilar Alexander island Olynthian of levelof Alexander atheof homeof Lemnos,Great, political or poliswho ‘Chalcidian’the which was engagement.Great,wouldcommunity in theat who do processthe refugees (e.g., wasIntime (cleruchy)of348 ‘theinentrenching hostedBC, werethe Athenians’), Philip process dispersedlike anMacedonian II Athenian the ofof Macedon, aentrenching onestrong aroundpower settleron across andtheSamos the Macedonian Aegean (compare and power above). beyond, across This exile community was the Chalcidianthe Achaian League.community, League,Thethethe resulting andChalcidianChalcidian quickly to selfpassOlynthianthe‐ confident coming League.League.a ChalcidiangroupsdecreeAchaia, or to The The ‘Chalcidian’ territory:ingroupsclaimwhich dominate groupshonour groupsaresultingLeague.resulting region to havewhich legitimacy thewhich of which the The inrefugees been aOlynthianregionOlynthian have benefactor thewhole haveresulting Aegeanhavementioned north asbeenof were been citizensPeloponnese. Skirosbeen oror of mentioned fromand Olynthian ‘Chalcidian’ ‘Chalcidian’ dispersedmentionedthe mentioned so or beyond, of that Peloponnese far,Aetolian Skiritisa (not community: these soLike oraround so butfar, refugeesyet refugees‘Chalcidian’soin League.far,mostexiles far,thephysicallythesecould whichthesethe disputedtheseof had were were exiles stillThesethe exileswas beenexilesrefugees existing)othercongregatedisperseddispersed had Achaianborderlandsthe hadforced had beentraditional werebeen polis.been aroundintoarounddissidentsforced in forceddispersed groups.forced betweenmarginal centre into thethe into intoset marginalOne around Spartaof marginalupand marginal a sucha confederacy, contestedmonument and theand group and andthe contested contested regionfoundcontested at Delphi, refuge a centreat Myrina of Aetolian power, Aegean andgroups beyond, which but havecommunitycouldfatherself‐ confidentbeen stillof Alexander mentionedcongregate (cleruchy) claimTwobut to thethesonortherncenturies couldin legitimacy far,like Achaiangroups.Great,northern thesestill Greece,the later who congregateOne exilesoneLeague,as destroyed (c. citizensGreece, wassuch on220–217 had 37in Samos group quicklythe beenofdestroyedthe in uncooperative aBC), groups. (notprocess forcedfound(compare cominga yet sufficientlysimilar the into refugephysicallyof One city uncooperative entrenchingto marginal above). intervention ofdominate suchat Olynthos, Myrinaorganised existing) group Thisand theMacedonianthe city wascontested centreexile found wholepolis.and of made Olynthos,of community recognised a refugePeloponnese. hostile bypower a groupconfederacy, atthe across Myrina wastocentre ofLikereceive exiles ofmost on a from thehostilea ofgrant north-eastern the confederacy, other of land from the Athenian settler AegeanAegean andand beyond,Aegeanbeyond,territory:the andbutbut Chalcidianofterritory: couldcouldbeyond, territory:theArcadiaterritory: region stillstillLeague. the but (now thecongregatecongregate theofregion couldThe regionSkiros regionparton resulting ofstill theof ofor Skiros in inof the congregateSkiros Skiritisnorth Olynthiangroups.Skirosgroups. Achaian or‐ eastern orto Skiritis inor orOnehonourSkiritisOne the Skiritis ‘Chalcidian’inLeague). groups.disputedsuch suchAegeanin intheirthe in groupgroupthe Theirthe disputedrefugees One Aetolian disputedislandborderlands disputed found found homesuch were ofborderlands benefactor, group refugeborderlandsstate,dispersedrefuge Lemnos,borderlands between thefound atat around Myrina federalMyrina calledwhichbetween Spartabetweenrefuge between the Simos: Achaianat andSparta atthe Sparta MyrinaSparta the time League,and region and and hostedthe the thewasregion region region anin Athenian settler on the north‐eastern[...... Aegeansufficientlynorthern Twoisland Greece, centuries Achaia, organisedof ἐ ]πLemnos, ̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆdestroyed alater region and (c.which the 220–217theinrecognised[ Chalcidianμος ὁthe uncooperativeat north theBC),] time toofa League. similarthereceive hosted cityPeloponnese interventionThe of a an community,Olynthos, resultinggrant Athenian whichof was theOlynthianland and wassettler madecentre tofrom the pass by of ortraditional thea ‘Chalcidian’a group hostiledecree Athenian of confederacy,centrein exiles honour refugees settler of from a of confederacy, werea benefactor dispersed from around that community: the territory: the regiononon thetheof Skiros northnorth on‐or‐easterneastern AegeanSkiritistheof groupsArcadia Aegeannorth AegeanAegean intheseof island of‐the andArcadiaeasternwhich of(now Arcadia disputed Arcadiabeyond,yearsislandisland of havepart Lemnos,(nowAegean at but (now of of (now beenwarborderlands could parttheLemnos,communityLemnos,Since part island withmentionedpart Achaian whichstillof theof the congregateof the the which whichofdemos theAchaianbetween at League).rivalAchaianLemnos,(cleruchy) theAchaianso of inatfar,at time powerful thegroups. League).Spartathethe these TheirLeague). Athenianswhich League). hostedtimetimelike One exilesand home confederacy Their suchthehostedathosted Theirthe an Their hadthe livinggroupstate, one home Athenianregion hometimebeen an anhome foundoninthe state,AthenianAthenian from forced hostedstate,Samosfederal refugestate, settler thenorth theinto atthe federalan Achaian(comparesettler settler Myrinafederal communityofmarginalfederalAthenian the Achaian League, Achaian GulfAchaianabove). andsettler of (cleruchy)League, contestedwas League, Corinth, League, This in wasexile was likethewas in incommunity in was community (cleruchy)Ἀ̣θ̣[ην likecommunity,]theAchaia,αίων ὁ ἐ Chalcidianthe onea[ ν Μυρregion andon League. ]to ίνει οἰκῶν ἔinSamos pass the Thenortha (comparedecreeAegean resulting[ δof]ωκεν 37thein honourand above).Peloponnese Olynthian beyond, of This a benefactor orbut which exile‘Chalcidian’ could wascommunity from still the congregaterefugeesthat traditional community: was were in centre groups.dispersed of a One confederacy, around such groupthe found refuge at Myrina of Arcadia (nowcommunity communitypart of thethe Achaian(cleruchy)community(cleruchy) Achaianthetheseterritory: oneonLeague). theLeague, yearsAetoliantheselike onlike (cleruchy)thesenorththese Samos the theattheTheiryears‐ eastern war years regionLeague.quicklyyearsoneone (compare home at withlike Aegean aton onwarofat comingThese sufficientlywar state,MyrinatheSkirosthewarSamosSamos withisland above).with onerival Achaianthewith or to gavethe of (compare (compare federalSkiritisonthedominate powerful Lemnos,theorganisedrival Thisa Samosrival dissidents plot[rivalΚλεό Achaianinpowerful exile whichof above).powerfulabove). thethe confederacypowerful ](compareland πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον and community disputedwhole atset League, tothe confederacyupThisrecognisedThis the confederacy time Peloponnese. confederacya above). monumentChalcidians,borderlands fromexile wasexilehosted was in north community communityto fromanThis sufficiently from Athenianreceive fromatLike betweenof Delphi,northexile norththe mostnorth settlera[wascommunityGulfofwasΣίμ organised a Spartagrant of centretheof ?] the ofου theGulf Corinth,ofandother Gulfof Gulf KleopatrosAetolianland and ofwasthe of Corinth,of recognisedregiontheCorinth,from Corinth, power, and thethe the the theAthenian exiles honoured settler Simos, son sufficiently organisedχωρίον τοῖς Χ andAegeanthe recognised Achaiaṇα anḍλκιδεῦσιν beyond,League, to ,receive στῆσαι τὴν στήλην 37communitybut quickly could ona grant the coming(cleruchy)still north congregateof toland‐likeeastern dominate thefrom inone Aegean groups. thetheon [...... SamoswholeAthenian islandOne (compare Peloponnese.such of settler Lemnos,group above). ἐ found ]Like πThiswhicḥειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ mostexilerefuge at community ofthe at the [Myrinaμος ὁtime other was]hosted an Athenian settler these years at warsufficientlysufficiently with thegroups organised organisedsufficientlyrivaltoAetolian which receivepowerfulof Arcadia andand toAetolianhaveorganised League. Aetolianhonour a Aetolian recognised grantrecognised confederacybeen (now League. Thesetheir mentioned League. of partLeague.and land Aetolian Achaian tooftoThese community,recognisedsetfrom Thesethe from receivereceive Theseup so Achaian norththe benefactor, far,dissidents theAchaian Achaian inscription athesea Athenian toand ofgrantgrant League).dissidents Αἰτωλὸν receivethe todissidentsexiles setdissidentscalled passGulfofof upconcerning settler had landTheir landa a Simos:[set ofdecreeἐσmonumentgrant setbeen ]up setCorinth,τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι fromhomefrom community,up aup forcedinmonument theofa a monumenthonourstate,the the monumentland epimeletesatthe intoDelphi,AthenianAthenian thefrom of and marginalat federala at Delphi, benefactor aat to theDelphi,centre Delphi,settlersettler pass Achaian Athenianand a of centre a contestedaAetolianfromcentre decree centre SinceLeague, of thatsettler ofAetolian inof power,the AetolianSimos,community: Aetolian honour was demos power,anin power, of Aetolian, ofpower, the a Athenians with a bronzeliving in statue community, and to τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν pass a ongroupsdecree[...... the inwhichnorth honour‐ easternhave of beena ἐsufficiently benefactor]Aegeanπ̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ mentionedcommunity organisedisland from so [ μος ὁthatof far,(cleruchy)and Lemnos, community:these ]recognised exiles whichlike to Ἀhad thẹθreceive ̣[at ηνbeen one]theαίων ὁ ἐ a forced granttimeon Samos[ ofhostedν Μυρinto land marginal ] (comparefromίνει οἰκῶν ἔan Athenianthe and Athenian above). contested[δ ]settlerωκεν settler This exile community was Aetolian League.community,community, These Achaianterritory: andandcommunity, benefactordissidents toto passhonourthesepassthe region toaa and yearsdecree decreetosethonour theirto from honour upto honourof atpass Aetolian inaSkirosin that theirmonumentwar honourhonour their a their community: decree Aetolianwithor benefactor,Aetolian[magistrate Skiritis Aetolianofof the ainata benefactorbenefactor Delphi, honourbenefactor,Sincerival in benefactor, benefactor, thecalled of powerfulthe atheofdisputed χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν centre fromfromdemosa Simos: Athenian calledbenefactor called called thatthat ofofconfederacy borderlands Simos:Aetolian the community:community:Simos: cleruchy]Simos: Atheniansfrom[ Σ] power,κ thaṭίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε frombetween and community:living letnorth Spartain of the and Gulf the regionofMyrina Corinth,because, gave thehaving a plot ofcaptured land to Skiros,the Chalcidians, he gave it κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι communityterritory:Ἀ̣θ̣[ην]αίων ὁ ἐ the (cleruchy)region[ν Μυρ ofcommunity, Skiros]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔlikesufficiently theor and Skiritisone to [passδ ] ωκεν onorganised ina decree theSamos disputed in honourand(compare χωρίον τοῖς Χ ofborderlandsrecognised a benefactor above). from tobetweeṇα ̣λκιδεῦσινThisreceive that community:exile Sparta a, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην communitygrant and theof landregion was from the Athenian settler to honour their Aetolian benefactor,of Arcadia Aetoliancalled (now[ ΚλεόSimos: part League. ]ofπατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον the These Achaianthe [...... Achaian herald League).Myrina dissidents announce Their gaveΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι home seta ἐat[Σίμ plot] π theup̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ?] state,ofacontestου monument land theKleopatros tofor federal the [tragediesμος ὁ at Chalcidians, Delphi, Achaian ]and [τ ] οῖς ἐξ the a centre exilesLeague, ofhonoured Aetolianwasset upbackin the Simos, power,to inscription Kleopatros son concerning and the exiles the fromepimeletes Achaia χωρίον τοῖς Χ̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν Since the demos of theSince Athenians the demos living of in Myrinathe Athenians living in [...... Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες ἐ]π̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆsufficientlyof Arcadia these(now[organisedμος ὁ partyears] to of[...... honouratand the warcommunity, Achaianrecognised theirwith Aetolian League).the ἐ ]and π ̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆtorival toreceive benefactor, Theirpasspowerful a[ μος ὁhome adecree grant ]calledconfederacy state, in of honourSimos: the land federal from offrom a benefactor Achaiannorth the Athenianof League, thefrom Gulf that wassettler ofcommunity: inCorinth, the [...... [...... [...... [...... [Κλεό ἐ ἐ]]ππSince]̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆπατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆΑἰτωλὸν [Κλεό[Κλεό[ Κλεόthe]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ]demos ἐπατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ][]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ἐσπ]πειδ[̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ][μος ὁτεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι μος ὁ of attheκαἈ ]]thẹθ ̣[Atheniansην Dionysiaδ]setαίων ὁ ἐ[[µμος ὁ oupς [the] Σίμliving ]Ἀχαιίαςthat .[ θν Μυρ.inscription?][Sinceην ου the [in]Σίμα [the]Chalcidians.Σίμων [ίνει οἰκῶν ἔΣίμ?]Kleopatros demosου ?] ?]concerningου ου of ofKleopatrosthe Kleopatros Simos, livingAthenians[Kleopatros δand]ωκεν the the inan epimeletes and living exilesAetolian, and and the in thehonoured theexiles exiles with exiles honoured ahonoured [magistrateSimos,honouredbronze(FD son Simos,IIIstatue Simos, 4.239). Simos, of theson son son Athenian cleruchy] and let Ἀ̣θ̣[ην]αίων ὁ ἐ[ν Μυρστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν ]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔcommunity,theseτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν years[ δ andat]ωκεν war to passwithἈ̣θ ạ[ ην thedecree]αίων ὁ ἐ rival in[ ν Μυρhonourpowerful]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ of confederacya benefactor[δSince]Sinceωκεν κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι the thefromfrom demosdemos thatnorthSince ofof community: the thetheof Athenians Atheniansthedemosgave Gulf a of plot the of living ofliving AtheniansCorinth, land inin to Myrina the the Chalcidians,living gave in a plot set up of the land to the Chalcidians, [Κλεό]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ἈἈ̣θ̣θ̣[̣[ηνην]]αίων ὁ ἐαίων ὁ ἐAetolianἈ̣θ[[̣[ν Μυρν ΜυρηνΑἰτωλὸν [ νLeague.]Mαίων ὁ ἐ[υρΣίμ]]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν Αἰτωλὸν νει?] Αἰτωλὸν These[ἐσου Αἰτωλὸν o[ν Μυρ]κτεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι AchaianνKleopatros[ἐσ[[]δδίνει οἰκῶν ἔἐσ]][]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ]ωκενἐσωκεν ωκεν ][τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ]Σ τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι dissidentsχωρίον τοῖς Χ]κ χωρ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ando[magistrate[ νtheδ] τωκεν oset exilesς Xup.̣αα.̣λκιδεῦσινλκιδε a honoured Myrinamonumentof theσιν gaveAthenianof,, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην Simos, a atplot because,Delphi,of of cleruchy]ofansonSimos, landof Simos, Aetolian,Simos, toa having thecentrean an and Chalcidians, Aetolian,an Aetolian,with ofAetolian,letcaptured Aetolian a bronze with with withSkiros, apower, the bronzestatuea abronze herald bronzehe gavestatue statue announce statue it at the contest for tragedies κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι χωρίον τοῖς ΧMyrina[...... gavẹα̣λκιδεῦσιν a plot, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην Myrina of land ἐ] πcrown Myrinạειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆtoMyrina theΧαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες with Chalcidians, gavegave this Myrina[aaμος ὁ plotplotgarland ]ofof gave landlandinscription the a toepimeletesto plot thethe of concerning Chalcidians,Chalcidians, land toset the the up Chalcidians,epimeletes the inscription[magistrate concerning of the epimeletes χωρίον τοῖς ΧΑἰτωλὸν ̣α̣λκιδεῦσινἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο[ἐσ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι Aetolian, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην χωρίον τοῖς Χ League.to honouṛα Thesẹλκιδεῦσινστησαι their[Κλεό Achaian τ ην`Aetolian[]ς, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ] στ χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν ηλην´ dissidents ofbenefactor, τ ην`Simos, περ setτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν anτ[ Σupo called ]Aetolian,κ ạίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε πιµελητthe monument Simos:herald owith[Σίμκα announcesetThough ata?] upbronzeDelphi,ου the inscriptionit atKleopatros statueis a the clearcentre contest concerningbecause,that of and Aetolian these for the tragediesthehaving exiles exilesepimeletes power, werecaptured honoured using Skiros, theSimos, setting he son gave and it interstate prominence of Delphi to χωρίον τοῖς Χχωρίον τοῖς Χ̣α̣λκιδεῦσινχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν e τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν setΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν , στῆσαι τὴν στήλην χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν up̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν the[ inscriptionΣ]κ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε , στῆσαι τὴν στήλην [ΣTheophilos,[]Σκ ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε ]concerningκ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε son[τ the] οῖς ἐξ of Meliton,epimeletesbecause, of Alopeke,thebackbecause, AthenianhavingSincebecause, to on Kleopatrosthe havingcaptured cleruchy] havingdemos captured of capturedSkiros, and the let theAthenians theSkiros,he exiles Skiros, heraldatgave the hefrom it living announce Dionysiahe gave gaveAchaia init it atthat the Chalcidians living in τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κΧαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες [...... νειπε ἐ]π̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆν τἈν[̣θα κ̣[]ηνηρυκαὶ ]αίων ὁ ἐ[μος ὁι νυσ[]ν Μυρ ων τ ]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔsetsetι γστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν upupνι thethe τραγωιδ [magistrate inscriptioninscription[δset]ωκεν up ofthe theconcerningconcerning inscription Athenian cleruchy] thethe concerning epimeletesepimeletes and[magistrate let the epimeletes of the Athenian cleruchy] and let χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν to[ τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν Στὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν honour]κ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε theirτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν AetolianΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Αἰτωλὸν κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι benefactor,ἈχαιίαςΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι [ἐσ´ ]. τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι because, called∆ o Simos:κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι having [τatSince] capturedοῖς ἐξ the Dionysia[thegainτ][οῖς ἐξ τ [demos]τ οῖς ἐξ Skiros, ]recognitionοῖς ἐξ that of o hebackthe ςthe ofgave Athenians Simos,forChalcidiansto( back KleopatrosFD ittheirMyrinaback back III anto political 4.239). to livingKleopatrosAetolian, to Kleopatrosgaveliving Kleopatros and in aidentity, the inplot with and exiles andof anda the landlegitimacy,bronze thefrom theexiles Myrina toexiles exiles theAchaiastatue from Chalcidians, fromor crownfrom Achaiaeven Achaia Achaia with autonomy, this garland their naturethe epimeletes as a political στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Ἀ̣θ̣[ην]αίων ὁ ἐ[ν Μυρ]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ[magistrateχωρίον τοῖς Χ [ofδ] ωκεν thẹα accountAtheniaṇλκιδεῦσιν of[magistrate[magistrate cleruchy] ,his στῆσαι τὴν στήλην ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο virtuethe and ofandof herald[magistrate thethe let justice AthenianAthenianannouncethe towards of contest at the cleruchy] cleruchy]the Athenian contestthe for tragedies[ forςandand] tragedies cleruchy] theletlet at herald the Dionysia and announce let that theat the contest for tragedies κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι[Κλεό[τ]]οῖς ἐξ πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον τι Xχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες αλκιδ[δ]έας τοὺς ἐν ες o νbackM[Συρ] κtoνει̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε Kleopatroso κo ντε[Σίμς στεϕαν?]andου group theo Kleopatrosexiles isσι much τ fromιδεbecause, more and Achaia thecomplex having exiles and honouredcaptured hybrid Skiros, Simos, than in he son the gave other it examples which I have discussed, where κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι ἈχαιίαςtheἈχαιίας. ἈχαιίαςheraldἈχαιίας. announce. . ChalcidiansΧαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες at theMyrinaMyrina contest living crown gave for inat tragedies theaMyrina. with plot Dionysia(FD thisof (landIIIIG thatChalcidiansgarland 4.239).(XIIFD thetoset(FD ( 8FDIII theChalcidians up4) III the4.239). IIIChalcidians, the living4.239). epimeletes4.239). inscription living in Myrina in concerning crownTheophilos, with thisthe garlandepimeletes son of Meliton, of Alopeke, on Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες ἈχαιίαςΜυρίνει οἰκοῦντας. ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνοχωρίον τοῖς Χ[Κλεό]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον Αἰτωλὸν . ̣α̣λκιδεῦσιντ ιΚλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν [ στεϕἐσ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι , στῆσαι τὴν στήλην τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν νωι τ [νς(]FD πιµελητ[ ΣίμIII 4.239).?]ηνου Θε óKleopatrosϕιλthe[theτ]oοῖς ἐξ Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ νheraldheraldMελ των of andannounceannounce Simos,theo[ theς ]herald exiles backan atat Aetolian, thetheannounce honouredto contestcontestKleopatros with at for forSimos, the atragediestragedies and bronze [contestα at]son ὶ the the exilesstatue forDionysia tragedies from that Achaia the Chalcidians living in Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες at theThough Dionysia it is that clearστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν e the that ChalcidiansTheophilos,set these up polistheexiles livinginscriptionMyrina sonidentity were of in crown usingMeliton, seems concerning withthe the epimeletesthis[magistrateofaxiomatic. setting Alopeke, garland the andTheophilos, theepimeletes These ofon interstateepimeletes the exilesAthenian son prominence of identified Meliton,account cleruchy] of ofwithof Alopeke, Delphi hisand a virtue wholelet to and region, justice Achaia, towards rather the than a Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν λωπεκἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνοηθενκήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι νδραγαθ[α]ὶ ας νεκα[ς κ] [atαat] thetheδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκιδικαι DionysiaDionysiaoσ νηatς thethatτthatης Dionysia thethe ChalcidiansChalcidians that the[ δliving livingChalcidians]έας τοὺς ἐν Myrina inin living crown in with this garland the epimeletes στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Αἰτωλὸν [ἐσχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι ἈχαιίαςThoughgaine [Σ recognition.] itκ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε isThough clear that itfor is these theirclear exilespoliticalthatof Simos, these weresingle identity, anexiles Theophilos,usingbecause, Aetolian,polis. were thelegitimacy,e They having (sonsetting FDusing with of IIIalso Meliton, acaptured4.239).theand or bronzegave settingeven interstate of Alopeke,special statueSkiros,autonomy, and prominence oninterstateprominence he gave their itprominence nature of in Delphi their as a toself ofpolitical Delphi‐presentation to here to a single leader, στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ MyrinaThoughThough crown it withisit clearisἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο clear this that garlandthataccount[magistrate[ αthese] ὶ these theexiles of exiles hisepimeletes of were virtue the were Athenianusing andusingon thejustice accountthe[the ςcleruchy]setting] setting herald towards of and his andandannounce virtueinterstate the interstatelet and at justiceprominence the prominence Chalcidianscontest towards forof the ofDelphi tragedies livingDelphi to in to Myrina. (IG XII 8 4) ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον ΜελίτωνοThough it isδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκικήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν clear that[ς ]these Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι [exilesΣε]κς ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε τo wereς Xαλκι Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες using[δ[δ] ]theαέας τοὺς ἐν ς τsettingo ς [τν] οῖς ἐξ Mandυρ interstateνειbecause,MyrinaMyrinaoΜυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςκo ντα prominencecrownhavingcrownaccountbackς. Myrina with withtocaptured of Kleopatros his thisthisof crownvirtue .Delphi garlandgarland Skiros, and with and tojustice hethe thethis the gave towards epimeletesepimeletes garlandexiles itTheophilos, the from the Achaiaepimeletes son of Meliton, of Alopeke, on 38 Compareἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνοἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο [Demosthenes]ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο 7.6,gain cf.δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι recognition 28,groupgainTheophilos, 35.gaingain recognition isrecognition recognitionmuch for[[ς ςson ]]their more offor politicalἈλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κMeliton,for fortheircomplex their[ δtheir[]ςέας τοὺς ἐν Chalcidianspolitical]the identity, ofpolitical political herald andAlopeke,Kleopatros, hybrididentity, legitimacy,announceidentity, livingidentity, on than legitimacy, inprobably legitimacy, Myrina.inatlegitimacy, or theChalcidians even contestotherat a (or the[IGautonomy,rebelα or]even orὶ XIIexamplesDionysia evenfor living even Achaian8 autonomy, tragedies4) autonomy, inautonomy, their Myrina.thatwhich leader nature the their I ( theirChalcidiansIGhave whotheir XIIasnature nature discussed,a 8hadnature 4)political asdefected aslivinga as politicala awherepolitical political in to the Aetolians’ cause with some Μυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςΧαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι . στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν [τ]οῖς ἐξ backTheophilos,Theophilos, to KleopatrosChalcidians sonsonTheophilos, ofof and Meliton,Meliton, living the inson exiles Myrina. ofof of Alopeke,Alopeke, Meliton,from (IG XII Achaia 8 onon of4)account Alopeke, of hison virtue and justice towards the Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κgain recognition39 Polybius forἈλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κἈλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ 2.43.2. their political[Ἀχαιίαςα]ὶ Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κgroup identity,. Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντας ispolisgroupThough muchgroup legitimacy,group identity is more itismuch isis much much.clear [complex [seemsorα αmore]] ὶ ὶ evenmore that moreδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι complexaxiomatic. these autonomy,andcomplex complexat [hybrid α exilesthe ] ὶ and Dionysiafollowers.andThese and theirwerehybridthan hybrid ( hybridFD exiles nature usingin IIIthat than theThis than 4.239). thanidentified the otherthe as in suggests in asettingthe Chalcidians in political [ theexamplesδ the ]Myrinaother έας τοὺς ἐν other with andotherthat examples interstate crownaexamples they which living exampleswhole were with inIwhich haveregion, prominencewhich conscious which this discussed,I havegarland Achaia,I Ihave have ofdiscussed, of discussed,the theDelphidiscussed,whererather model epimeletes tothanwhere ofwhere where aa royal or mercenary army with a It wasaccount a characteristic of his virtue and practice justiceaccount of towards ancient of his thevirtue Greek and settled justice states, towards including theChalcidians confederacies living in Myrina. as well (IG XII 8 4) δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκιgroup is40 much moreστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Ἀχαιίας complex[δ]. έας τοὺς ἐν and hybridgain recognition thanἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο in the forother their examples political(FDaccount which38 identity,III 4.239). Iof have[ hisς legitimacy,] account virtue discussed, andof orhis justice whereeven virtue autonomy, towards and justice the their towards nature the as a political I have discussed δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκιδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι in (Gray δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι polis 2017) identity singlepolisChalcidians ancient polis polis identity polis. seems debates identity identity[ [ δδ ]] έας τοὺς ἐν έας τοὺς ἐν living They axiomatic. seems about seems seems Μυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςinalso axiomatic. asylumMyrina. [ δaxiomatic.gave ] axiomatic.έας τοὺς ἐν TheseMyrina and special (IG exilesCompare singleThese refuge XII crownThese These 8prominence identified . 4)exilesunquestionedand [Demosthenes] withexiles exiles their identified this identified withidentifiedmodern ingarland their Theophilos, aleader, 7.6, with wholeresonance, withcf.selfthe with 28, a ‐asepimeletes presentation region,whole a35. a opposedwholeson whole of region,Achaia, Meliton,region, region, to here theAchaia, rather Achaia, of toAchaia,civic Alopeke,a thansinglerather modelrather rather a leader,onthan thanof than shareda a a command and collective 38 ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον ΜελίτωνοThoughas poleis38 it is above Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κclear that all,[ς] these to pass exiles honorary wereChalcidiansChalcidians39 using decrees the living living[Chalcidianssettingα] forὶ inin benefactors and Myrina.Myrina. interstate living ((IGIG in like XIIXII Myrina.prominence 88 this 4)4) one,(IG XIIof as Delphi 8 a 4) way to of expressing Μυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςpolis identity.citing seems thereΜυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςΜυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςCompare muchaxiomatic. [Demosthenes]earlierΜυρίνει οἰκοῦντας These bibliographysinglegroup.. exilesCompare polis.Kleopatros,single7.6, issingle singlecf. muchonidentified [Demosthenes] They 28, polis.this polis.35. . polis.more question; alsoprobably They withThey complexTheygave7.6, also cf. see a also 28, aspecialalsowhole earlier gaverebel35. andTheophilos,gave gave especiallyspecialregion,Achaianhybrid prominence specialPolybius sovereignty.special thanprominenceAchaia, son (Lonisleaderprominence 2.43.2.prominence inofin the1993).Meliton, Ittheir ratherwho is other in alsohadself inthan theiraccount in of examples‐ theirinterestingpresentation defected theirAlopeke, aself self of‐selfpresentation ‐his whichpresentationto ‐ onpresentationthat virtuethe here ItheyAetolians’ have toand hereexplicitlya discussed,herejustice singlehere to cause to ato towardsleader, singlea acknowledged a single wherewithsingle leader, the some leader, leader, their dissident and marginal 39 39 Polybiusδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι 2.43.2. 40 [ δ ] έας τοὺς ἐν single polis. They Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κPolybius alsoThough gave 2.43.2.gain itspecial is recognition sharedclearKleopatros,polis prominence that ethical identity these forKleopatros, probably their exiles values inseems politicaltheir[ αwere a ]ὶ probably and axiomatic.rebel self using identity, publicising‐ presentationAchaian thea rebelThese setting legitimacy, leaderI Achaianhave incentivesexiles here and discussedwho interstate toidentifiedor leader aevenhad single for indefected autonomy,who civic prominence (Graywith leader, had contributions. a2017) to whole defected thetheir ancientof Aetolians’ Delphi region,nature to debates the The toasAchaia, Aetolians’ causea ‘Chalcidians aboutpolitical ratherwith asylum cause some than and living with a refuge some in and their modern resonance, 40 I havefollowers.Kleopatros,Kleopatros, discussed This in probably (Gray probably suggests38 2017) a ancient rebelathat accountrebel debates theyAchaian Achaianstatus: were ofabout his leader theyasylumconscious virtueleader did andwho and who notrefuge of hadjustice thestyleChalcidianshad and defectedmodel theirdefectedtowardsthemselves modern of to livinga the to royaltheresonance, the as Aetolians’in ‘theor Aetolians’Myrina. mercenary Achaians cause(IG cause XII armyin with 8 Skiros’with 4) with some some (comparea ‘the Zacynthians in the 40gain δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι I have recognition discussed Myrina’ for in their (Gray political thus 2017) Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντας successfully ancient [ δidentity, ] έας τοὺς ἐν debates legitimacy, imitated Compare .about asylum [Demosthenes]or oneciting even of and there the autonomy, refuge principal much 7.6, andcf. earlier their28, their activities 35. bibliographynature modern as and resonance,a onpolitical forms this question; of expression see earlier associated especially (Lonis 1993). 38 Kleopatros, probably a rebelgroup Achaian is muchsingle leader more polis.followers. who complex They had This alsodefected and suggestsgave hybrid tospecial the thanthat Aetolians’ prominencetheyin the were other cause conscious examplesin theirwith ofsomeself which the‐presentation model I have of discussed, a royalhere toor awheremercenary single leader, army with a Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6,3838 cf. 28, 35. followers.citingsinglefollowers.followers. thereThis muchunquestioned suggests This earlier This suggests bibliography that39suggests leader,they that Chalcidianson thatwere this theyas theyquestion; Nellos’consciousopposed were were livingsee consciousabove), earlier conscious toof in the theespecially Myrina.but model civicof rather ofthe (Lonis the (model ofmodelIG as1993).modela XII royal‘the 8of 4) exiles of aorshared royala mercenary royal from orcommand or mercenaryAchaia’. mercenary army and with army armycollective a with with a a CompareCompare [Demosthenes][Demosthenes]38 Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6,7.6, cf.cf. 28,28, 35.35. 7.6, cf. Polybius28, 35. 2.43.2. 39 followers. This suggestsgroupΜυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςciting is there muchthatpolis muchthey more withidentity earlierwere Kleopatros,.complex ancient conscious bibliographyseems and Greek axiomatic.probably hybridof onthe citizenship, this model thana Thesequestion; rebel in of the exiles inAchaiana royalsee orderother earlier identified or examples toleader mercenary especially assert whowith politicalwhich (Lonis hadarmya whole Idefected have 1993).with agency. region, discussed, a to It the isAchaia, interesting Aetolians’ where rather that,cause than like witha the some Achaian Polybius 2.43.2. 3939 single unquestionedsovereignty.single single single unquestioned unquestioned unquestioned It leader, is 40also leader, as interesting leader, leader, opposed as as opposedas thatopposed toopposedThis thethey doestocivic explicitly to theto not, the model thecivic however,civic civic acknowledged modelof model sharedmodel indicate of of sharedofcommand shared thatsharedtheir theycommand dissidentcommand commandand were collective abstaining andand and and collectivemarginal collective collective from staking a claim to represent the PolybiusPolybius 2.43.2.2.43.2.39 Polybius 2.43.2. I have discussed in (Gray 2017) ancient debates about asylum and refuge and their modern resonance, 40 single unquestionedpolis identityleader,single asseems opposedpolis. followers.axiomatic. They 38to alsothe This These civicgave suggests exiles modelspecial thatidentified ofprominence they shared were with command conscious ina wholetheir selfand region,of ‐the presentationcollective model Achaia, of ratherahere royal to than or a mercenarysingle a leader, army with a I have discussed in (Gray 4040 2017) ancient 40 debates exiles sovereignty. about which status:sovereignty. sovereignty. asylumsovereignty. Compare I It discussed they is andalso didIt [Demosthenes] refugeItis interestingnotIt is above,also is alsostyle citing alsoand interesting interesting they theirthemselvesthereinteresting that 7.6, tapped modern muchcf.truethey 28,that thatearlierinterests35. explicitlyasthat intoresonance,they ‘thethey theybibliography a explicitly specificallyAchaians of explicitly acknowledgedexplicitly the Achaian acknowledgedonin acknowledged federalthisSkiros’acknowledged League.question; their (Chalcidian)(compare dissident theirItsee theiris theirearlier striking dissident‘the dissident anddissident identity, especiallyZacynthians marginalthat and andthey which and(Lonis marginal marginal claimedinmarginal 1993). wasthe that Simos ‘restored’ to them II havehave discusseddiscussed I have inin (Gray (Graydiscussed 2017)2017) in ancientancient (Gray debates2017)debates ancient aboutabout debatesasylumasylum aboutandand refugerefuge asylum andand and theirtheir refuge modernmodern and resonance,theirresonance, modern resonance, citing theresovereignty. much earlier It bibliography38singleis also polis.interestingKleopatros, on They this question;alsothatsingle probablytheygave 39seeunquestioned explicitlyspecial Polybiusearlier a rebel especiallyprominence 2.43.2.acknowledged Achaian leader, (Lonis inleaderas 1993). theiropposed their who self dissident ‐ hadpresentationto thedefected andcivic marginal heretomodel the to Aetolians’ ofa singleshared leader, causecommand with someand collective Comparecitingciting therethere [Demosthenes] muchmuchcitingstatus: earlierearlier there Nellos’status:they 7.6, bibliographybibliography status:muchstatus: cf. did 28, theyabove), earlier theynot35. they did onstyleon bibliographydid but did thisthisnot notthemselves rather question;notquestion;style style style as themselveson themselves ‘thesee seethisthemselves as earlier earlier exiles question;‘the asAchaiansespecially especiallyfrom as ‘the assee ‘the ‘theAchaia’. earlierAchaians (LonisAchaians(Lonis inAchaians Skiros’especially 1993).1993). in in Skiros’(comparein Skiros’(Lonis Skiros’ (compare 1993). (compare ‘the(compare Zacynthians ‘the ‘the ‘the Zacynthians Zacynthians Zacynthians in the in in thein the the 40 status: they did39Kleopatros, notPolybius style themselves followers.2.43.2. probably Nellos’sovereignty. This aas rebel ‘theabove), suggests Nellos’ AchaianAchaiansI have butIt that isabove), discussedrather alsoleader inthey Skiros’ interesting asbut were who in‘the rather (Gray (compareexilesconscioushad as 2017)thatdefected from‘the they ancient‘the ofexiles Achaia’. the toZacynthiansexplicitly modelfromthedebates Aetolians’ Achaia’. of acknowledgedabout a inroyal the asylum cause or mercenary andwith their refuge some dissident army and theirwith and moderna marginal resonance, Nellos’Nellos’This above), doesabove), not, but but however,rather rather as as ‘theindicate ‘the36 exiles exiles that from from they Achaia’. Achaia’.were abstaining from staking a claim to represent the Nellos’ above), 40butfollowers. I ratherhave discussed asThissingle ‘the suggests exilesunquestioned instatus: (Gray from that they2017) Achaia’.theyciting didleader,ancient were there not conscious debatesmuchasstyle opposed earlierthemselves about of thebibliography toasylum modelthe as Olympia: civic‘theand of on aAchaiansrefugemodel thisroyal IvO question; and or259;of in mercenary their shared MeiggsSkiros’ see modern earlier ‐Lewiscommand (compare army especiallyresonance, GHI with 74;and‘the a(LonisDelphi: Zacynthianscollective 1993). FD III 4.1; in SEGthe 32.550. On these monuments and their 39 PolybiusThistrue does 2.43.2. ThisinterestsThis not,This does doeshowever, does of not, thenot, not, however, Achaian however,indicate however, indicateLeague. that indicate indicate they that It werethat isthat they striking they abstainingthey were were were that abstaining abstaining abstainingfromthey claimedstaking from from from staking athat stakingclaim staking Simos ato claima represent aclaim ‘restored’claim to torepresent to represent the represent to them the the the singleciting unquestioned there much earlier leader, bibliography as opposed on this to question; the civic see modelearliercontexts: especiallyof shared (Luraghi (Lonis command 2008, 1993). esp. and pp. 191–94).collective For a guide to epigraphic abbreviations such as those in this note, This does not, however,sovereignty. indicate40trueINellos’ have thatinterests Ittrue discussedtheyistrue above), true alsointerests wereofinterests interests interestingthe in but abstaining ( Gray Achaianof rather of the of2017 the thethatAchaian as ) League.fromAchaian ancient ‘theAchaian they stakingexiles League. debates explicitly ItLeague. League.is from strikinga aboutclaim It Achaia’. Itisacknowledged It asylumis striking to isthat striking representstriking they and that refuge thatclaimed that thetheytheir they andthey claimeddissident that theirclaimed claimed Simos modern that andthat that ‘restored’Simos resonance, marginalSimos Simos ‘restored’ ‘restored’ to citing‘restored’ them there to to them muchto them them sovereignty. It is also interesting that they explicitly acknowledged see the list publishedtheir dissident in the Supplementumand marginal Epigraphicum Graecum. true interests of the Achaianstatus: League. theyearlier Itdid isThis bibliography strikingnot does style not,that themselves on however, they this question; claimed asindicate ‘the see that earlierAchaians37 that Simos especiallythey ‘restored’in were Skiros’ (Lonis abstaining to 1993(compare them). from ‘the staking Zacynthians a claim toin representthe the 36 On Greek federal states, see recently (Mackil 2013). status: theyNellos’ did not above), true style interests themselves but Olympia: rather of asthe IvO as ‘the ‘theAchaian 259; exiles Achaians Meiggs League.from ‐ Lewis inAchaia’. Skiros’ It GHI is striking74; (compare Delphi: that FD ‘thethey III 4.1;Zacynthians claimed SEG 32.550. that in Simos Onthe these ‘restored’ monuments to them and their 36 36 3636 Nellos’ above), butThis rather doesOlympia: asnot, contexts:Olympia: ‘the IvOhowever,Olympia:Olympia: exiles 259; (Luraghi IvO Meiggs from IvOindicate IvO259; 259; Achaia’. 259; 2008,‐MeiggsLewis Meiggs thatMeiggs esp. GHI‐ theyLewis pp.‐Lewis ‐74;Lewis 191–94).were GHIDelphi: GHI GHI abstaining74; For74; Delphi:74;FD Delphi:a Delphi:IIIguide 4.1; FDfrom to FD SEGFDIII epigraphic staking III 4.1; III32.550. 4.1; 4.1;SEG SEG a SEG On abbreviations32.550.claim 32.550. these32.550. toOn monumentsrepresentOn Onthese thesesuch these monuments asmonuments the monuments thoseand their in andthis and andnote,their their their 36 Olympia: IvO 259; Meiggs‐Lewis GHI contexts: 74; Delphi: see (Luraghi thecontexts: FD list III 2008, published 4.1; (Luraghi esp. SEG pp. in 32.550.2008, the 191–94). Supplementumesp. On pp. Forthese 191–94). a guidemonuments Epigraphicum Forto epigraphic a guide and Graecum theirto abbreviationsepigraphic . abbreviations such as those such in this as those note, in this note, This doestrue not, interests however, of thecontexts: indicatecontexts: Achaian (Luraghi that (Luraghi League. they 2008, were2008, It esp. is abstainingesp. strikingpp. pp. 191–94). 191–94). that from For theyFor staking a guide a claimedguide ato claim toepigraphic epigraphicthat to Simos represent abbreviations abbreviations ‘restored’ the such to such them as asthose those in inthis this note, note, contexts: (Luraghi 2008, esp. pp. 191–94).36see the 37For list Ona guide published Greeksee the to federal epigraphiclist in published the states, Supplementum abbreviations see in therecently Supplementum Epigraphicum such(Mackil as those2013). Epigraphicum Graecum in this. note, Graecum . true interests of the Achaian Olympia:see League.see the IvO the list 259;list publishedIt published isMeiggs striking in‐Lewis inthe that the Supplementum GHI Supplementum they 74; claimed Delphi: Epigraphicum Epigraphicum FDthat III Simos 4.1; Graecum SEG Graecum ‘restored’ 32.550.. . Onto themthese monuments and their see the list published in the Supplementum 37 On contexts: Greek 37 Epigraphicum 37 On 37 federalOn GreekOn (Luraghi Greek Greek states, federalGraecum federal 2008, federal see states, .esp. recentlystates, states, pp. see see 191–94). recentlysee(Mackil recently recently For(Mackil2013). (Mackil a(Mackil guide 2013). 2013). to2013). epigraphic abbreviations such as those in this note, 37 On Greek federal states, see 36 recently Olympia: (Mackil IvO see the 259; 2013). list Meiggs published‐Lewis in GHIthe Supplementum 74; Delphi: FD Epigraphicum III 4.1; SEG Graecum 32.550. . On these monuments and their 36 Olympia: IvOcontexts: 259; 37Meiggs (LuraghiOn Greek ‐Lewis 2008, federal GHI esp. 74; states, pp. Delphi: 191–94). see recentlyFD For III a4.1; (Mackilguide SEG to 32.550.2013). epigraphic On these abbreviations monuments such and as thosetheir in this note, contexts: (Luraghisee the 2008, list published esp. pp. 191–94). in the Supplementum For a guide to Epigraphicum epigraphic abbreviations Graecum. such as those in this note, see the list37 publishedOn Greek in federal the Supplementum states, see recently Epigraphicum (Mackil Graecum 2013). . 37 On Greek federal states, see recently (Mackil 2013).

Humanities 2018, 7, 72 13 of 19

already an improvised adaptation of the civic model on a new scale and for new purposes. They also had close at hand another model of improvised, adaptable, and in this case mobile, citizenship: as noted above, the institutions and ethos of an Athenian cleruchyHumanities (like 2018 the, one 7, x FOR at Myrina) PEER REVIEW represented 12 of 19 an experimental reproduction and adaptation of traditional civic institutions to suit new conditions. (ἀπέδωκε) the region of Skiris. Since this is the formal diplomatic language of restitution of rightful A polis which had earlier suffered a similar fate to Olynthos was the city of Plataea in Boeotia territory,38 these exiles were claiming to be legitimate recipients of disputed territory which, to their in Central Greece, which was destroyed by the Spartans and Thebans after a long siege in 427 BC, minds, rightfully belonged to the enlarged Achaian League (by now including Arcadia), of which near the beginning of the Peloponnesian War. The Plataeans had long been close allies of the Athenians. they were legitimate representatives. Since the Achaian League by now had only one principal After their exile, the Athenians took the unusual step of extending Athenian citizenship to all the magistrate (strategos),39 they could even have intended Kleopatros to be seen as a rival to the Plataeans who found refuge with them in Athens.41 This mustHumanities have 2018 strongly, 7, x FOR encouraged PEER REVIEW the Plataean 12 of 19 incumbent Achaian strategos: as the truly legitimate defender of Achaian interests. It is worth community at Athens to assimilate to Athenian culture. Nonetheless, the Plataeans at Athens also (ἀπέδωκεpointing) theout region that theof Skiris. Achaian Since League this is thewas formal itself diplomaticbased on languagecontinuing of idealsrestitution and ofpractices rightful of maintained an identity and consciousness apart. When in the early fourth century a man called Humanities 2018, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW territory,citizenship:12 of 1938 these individual exiles were member claiming cities to be retainedlegitimate their recipients traditional of disputed citizenships, territory but which, the tomodel their of Pancleon was suspected of making an illegitimate claim to Athenian citizenship, his first line of minds,citizenship rightfully was belonged also co‐opted to the and enlarged adapted Achaian at the larger League federal (by now level including itself. This Arcadia), unusual ofexile which group defence was to claim to be one of the enfranchised Plataeans: he must have calculated on the jury’s (ἀπέδωκε) the region of Skiris. Since this is the formal diplomatic language of restitution ofthey rightfulwas were thus legitimate itself, like representatives. the others discussed Since here,the Achaian co‐opting League for its by own now ends had a onlypolitical one identityprincipal and familiarity with apparent outsiders who turned out to be genuine Athenians by virtue of being Plataean. territory,38 these exiles were claiming to be legitimate recipients of disputed territory which,magistrate tomodel their that (strategos was based),39 they on citizenship—incould even have this intended case, an Kleopatrosalready experimental to be seen and as aadapted rival to form the of The community of Plataeans at Athens was, however, still sufficiently cohesive and organised to offer minds, rightfully belonged to the enlarged Achaian League (by now including Arcadia),incumbent ofcitizenship. which Achaian strategos: as the truly legitimate defender of Achaian interests. It is worth checks on such claims to membership. they were legitimate representatives. Since the Achaian League by now had only one pointingprincipalThere out thatwere, the therefore, Achaian multiple League wayswas itselfin which based Classical on continuing and Hellenistic ideals and refugees practices roughly of The speaker of Lysias’ speech 23, prosecuting Pancleon as an illegitimate citizen, claims to have magistrate (strategos),39 they could even have intended Kleopatros to be seen as a rivalcitizenship: correspondingto the individual to Arendt’s member first citiesgroup—those retained who their survived traditional on the citizenships, margins, insisting but the on model the identity of undermined his credentials by checking with the Plataean community at Athens itself: first with incumbent Achaian strategos: as the truly legitimate defender of Achaian interests. It citizenshipis thatworth was wasdenied also to co them‐opted by and others adapted through at the exile—could larger federal adapt level citizen itself. practices This unusual and citizen exile group identity a well-known Plataean elder, then with other Plataeans, and finally with the rest of the Plataean pointingHumanities out that 2018 , 7the, x FORAchaian PEER REVIEW League was itself based on continuing ideals and practiceswasto thusexercise of 11 itself, of 19 agency like the and others gain discussed recognition. here, Interestingly,co‐opting for itits wasown equallyends a politicaltrue for identityClassical and and community, which, he was told, gathered on the last day of every month in the Athenian cheese citizenship: individualHumanities member 2018 cities, 7, x FOR retained PEER REVIEW their traditional citizenships, but the modelHellenistic thatof was refugees based onapproximately11 citizenship—in of 19 corresponding this case, an toalready Arendt’s experimental second group—those and adapted who form found of market. One of the Plataeans who was present in the cheese market did, however, claim to have citizenshipachievements, was also copiety,‐opted and and interests adapted and at tothe communicate larger federal with level other itself. states. This unusual Certain exileexilecitizenship.refuge group groups in area host society in an urban context, assimilating to some degree to the host culture40—that lost a runaway slave matching Pancleon’s name and description.42 Respectable Plataeans were thus was thusknown itself, to likehave the achievements,imitated others thesediscussed piety, characteristic here, and interestsco‐ optingactivities and for toofits communicate settledown ends states, a political withsuccessfully other identity states. reintegratingcitizenshipThere and Certain were, offered exile therefore, groups an effective aremultiple model ways for improvised in which Classicaladaptation. and Indeed, Hellenistic displaced refugees groups roughly settled in expected to gather regularly as a collective body, with a distinctive Plataean identity and sense of modelthemselves that was based into knownthe on interstate citizenship—in to have community, imitated this case, thesedespite an characteristic alreadytheir otherwise experimental activities marginal ofand settled and adapted interstitial states,corresponding formthe successfully urbanposition. of centres to Arendt’s reintegrating of host first cities group—those could exploit who citizen survived models on the to margins, preserve insisting or develop on the a identitydistinctive Plataean civic community which they could combine with their new role as Athenian citizens. citizenship.Their activities includedthemselves the into establishment the interstate of community, monuments despite at Delphi their and otherwise Olympia. marginalthat Theidentity, was preserved and denied interstitialas ato basisthem position. byfor others significant through agency, exile—could rather adapt than citizensimply practices disappearing and citizen into identity the host It is impossible to tell exactly what happened at the monthly cheese-market meetings of Plataean Thereinscriptions were, therefore,fromTheir those activitiesmultiple monuments includedways offerin thewhich rareestablishment Classicaldirect glimpses andof monuments Hellenistic into the at refugeespolitical Delphito roughly andrhetoricenvironment.exercise Olympia. andagency TheSuch andpreserved cases gain provide recognition. our bestInterestingly, evidence forit wasthe equallycomplex true internal for Classicalorganisation and of exiles in addition to socialising, but it is suggestive that many settled poleis, like Athens itself, had an correspondingself‐presentation to Arendt’sinscriptions of Greek first group—those exile from groups. those who monuments survived onoffer the margins,rare direct insisting glimpses on the intoHellenistic identity‘poleis the ‐political in refugees‐exile’. rhetoric approximately and corresponding to Arendt’s second group—those who found obligatory monthly meeting of the civic assembly (kyria ekklesia), at which the most important decisions that was deniedIn the tofifth them selfcentury by‐presentation others BC, certain through of Greekresidents exile—could exile of groups. Messenia, adapt citizen the neighbouring practices and region citizen torefuge identitySparta inIn which amost host knownsociety cases,in an urban‘poleis context,‐in‐exile’ assimilating in host cities to involved some degree fellow to exilesthe host and culture refugees40—that from a were taken. A more unambiguously political assembly of exiles who had found refuge in a host to exercisehad long agency been andunder gainIn direct the recognition. fifth Spartan century rule, Interestingly, BC, were certain forced residents it intowas exile equallyof Messenia, after trueattempting thefor neighbouring Classical tocitizenship revoltsingle and against regionpolis offered congregating to Sparta an effective which in model an improvised for improvised quasi ‐adaptation.civic community Indeed, in displaced the new groupscity centre, settled usually in polis comes from the third century BC: the citizens of Megalopolis in the Peloponnese, expelled from HellenisticSparta, refugees presenting approximatelyhad themselves long been correspondingunderas the directlegitimate Spartan to heirsArendt’s rule, of the weresecond ancient forced group—those Messenians into exile after whoenslavedthe without attemptingfoundurban by centres thethe to level revolt of hostof againstdirect cities military could exploit mobilisation citizen shownmodels by to thepreserve marginalised or develop groups a distinctive I discussed their polis by their traditional enemies, the Spartans, in 223 BC, held an assembly in their host city of refugeSpartans in a host centuries societySparta, in earlier. an presentingurban The context,Athenians themselves assimilating helped as these the to someexileslegitimate degreeto establish heirs to the of a hoststrongholdthe ancient cultureidentity, in40Messeniansabove,—that the polis butas ofagenerally enslaved basis for with by significant thea similar level agency, of political rather engagement. than simply In 348disappearing BC, Philip IIinto of Macedon, the host the Messene to reject Spartan peace overtures, a decision which was much praised by the second-century citizenshipNaupaktos, offered a anposition Spartanseffective on modelcenturiesthe Gulf for of earlier.improvised Corinth The strategically Atheniansadaptation. crucialhelped Indeed, inthese displacedthe exilesfifth‐century togroups establish rivalryenvironment. settledfather a stronghold between in of Alexander Such in thecases thepolis provideGreat, of who our wasbest in evidence the process for ofthe entrenching complex internalMacedonian organisation power across of BC Megalopolitan historian Polybius.43 This was a much more improvised assembly, not regularised the urbanAthenian centres and of Spartan hostNaupaktos, cities power. could a positionDuring exploit the on citizenthePeloponnesian Gulf models of Corinth Warto preserve strategically these Messenians or develop crucial at in aNaupaktos thedistinctive‘poleis northernfifth‐‐incentury ‐set exile’. Greece,up rivalry destroyed between the uncooperative city of Olynthos, the centre of a hostile confederacy, like those of the Chalcidians and Plataeans, but it did represent the constitution of a more fleeting identity,victory as amonuments, basis Athenianfor significanttogether and Spartanwith agency, their power. ratherNaupaktian During than the hosts,simply Peloponnesian at disappearing both Olympia War these into and Messeniansthe Delphi,the Inhost Chalcidian most with at known Naupaktos League. cases, set The ‘poleis up resulting ‐in‐exile’ Olynthian in host citiesor ‘Chalcidian’ involved fellowrefugees exiles were and dispersed refugees around from a the ‘polis-in-exile’ at the heart of a host polis. environment.accompanying Such casesinscriptions,victory provide monuments, to ourcelebrate best together evidencesuccesses with forover their the the Naupaktiancomplex Spartans internaland hosts, their organisationat allies. bothsingle The AegeanOlympia Olympiapolisof and congregatingand beyond, Delphi, but inwith couldan improvised still congregate quasi ‐incivic groups. community One such in thegroup new found city centre,refuge usuallyat Myrina The Chalcidians in Myrina, the Plataeans in Athens and the Megalopolitans in Messene formed ‘poleismonument‐in‐exile’. includedaccompanying the famous inscriptions, ‘Nike of toPaionios’, celebrate preserved successes inover fragments the Spartans whichwithout andon have theirthe the northbeen allies. level ‐eastern The of directOlympia Aegean military island mobilisation of Lemnos, shown which by at the the marginalised time hosted groups an Athenian I discussed settler their exile communities after the destruction of their home cities. It was, however, also possible for an Inreconstructed most known bycases,monument modern ‘poleis archaeologists. ‐includedin‐exile’ inthe host36 famousThe cities exiles involved‘Nike styled of fellow themselvesPaionios’, exiles preserved asand ‘the refugees Messenians’, inabove, fragments communityfrom but a in generally thewhich (cleruchy) withhave abeen likesimilar the level one of on political Samos engagement. (compare Inabove). 348 BC, This Philip exile II of community Macedon, the was exiled faction from a still existing city based in a host city’s urban centre to take the more controversial singlesame polis stylecongregating as incumbentreconstructed in an citizensimprovised by modern of a quasihome archaeologists.‐civic polis community would36 doThe in(e.g., exiles the ‘thenew styled Athenians’), city themselves centre,father ausuallysufficiently strongas of ‘the Alexander andMessenians’, organised the Great, inand the recognisedwho was in tothe receive process a ofgrant entrenching of land Macedonian from the Athenianpower across settler step of forming an obviously temporary and provisional ‘polis-in-exile’ to deny the legitimacy of the withoutself the‐confident level ofclaim samedirect to style legitimacymilitary as incumbent mobilisation as citizens citizens of shown a (not of byyeta home thephysically marginalised polis existing)would groups do polis. (e.g., I northerndiscussed‘thecommunity, Athenians’), Greece, and destroyeda tostrong pass a andthe decree uncooperative in honour ofcity a benefactor of Olynthos, from the that centre community: of a hostile confederacy, incumbent regime at home. Legal speeches and historical accounts portray exiled factions with their above, but Twogenerally centuries withself ‐ lateraconfident similar (c. 220–217 level claim of BC),to political legitimacy a similar engagement. as intervention citizens In of 348 awas (not BC, made yetPhilip physically by II aof group Macedon, existing)the of Chalcidian exiles the polis. from League. The resulting Olynthian or ‘Chalcidian’ refugees were dispersed around the base in Athens in the fourth century BC behaving in this way. Plutarch, a much later source, reports the fatherAchaia, of Alexander a region the in Great,theTwo north centurieswho of was the laterPeloponnesein the (c. process220–217 which of BC), entrenching was a similar the traditional interventionMacedonian centre was power of madeAegean a confederacy,across[...... by and a group beyond, of exiles but ἐ ]could πfroṃειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ still congregate[μος ὁ] in groups. One such group found refuge at Myrina community of exiles from Thebes resulting from the Spartan seizure of their city in 382 BC imitating Since the demos of the Athenians living in northernthe Greece,Achaian destroyed League,Achaia,37 thequickly a regionuncooperative coming in the tonorth city dominate of Olynthos,the Peloponnesethe whole the centrePeloponnese. which of awas hostile theLike traditionalconfederacy, moston oftheἈ ̣θthe ̣[centreηνnorth other]αίων ὁ ἐ‐ easternof a confederacy,[ν Μυρ Aegean]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ island of[δ ]Lemnos,ωκεν which at the time hosted an Athenian settler and co-opting democratic institutions during their stay in Athens: they listened to speeches by their Myrina gave a plot of land to the Chalcidians, the Chalcidiangroups which League. havethe The beenAchaian resulting mentioned League, Olynthian so37 quicklyfar, orthese ‘Chalcidian’ coming exiles hadto refugeesdominate been forced were the into wholedispersed marginal Peloponnese. aroundcommunity andχωρίον τοῖς Χ contestedthe Like (cleruchy) most ̣α ̣λκιδεῦσινof the like other the, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην one on Samos (compare above). This exile community was leading figure, Pelopidas, in an improvised assembly and took formal decisions by vote, as a settled set up the inscription concerning the epimeletes Aegeanterritory: and beyond, the region butgroups couldof Skiros which still or havecongregate Skiritis been in mentioned inthe groups. disputed soOne far, borderlands such these group exiles between found had been refuge Sparta forced atsufficiently and Myrina intoτὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν the marginal region organised and contested and recognised to receive a grant of land from the Athenian settler polis would do.44 Interestingly, these exiles succeeded in establishing a long-lasting democracy in [magistrate of the Athenian cleruchy] and let on theof northArcadia‐eastern (now territory: Aegeanpart of the islandthe Achaian region of Lemnos, ofLeague). Skiros which orTheir Skiritis homeat thein state,the time disputed the hosted federal borderlands an Achaian Athenian community, League,between settlerκήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι was Sparta and in andto pass the aregion decree in honour of a benefactor from that community: the herald announce at the contest for tragedies communitythese years(cleruchy) at warof Arcadialike with the the (nowone rival parton powerful Samosof the Achaian (compareconfederacy League). above). from Their northThis home exileof thestate, community Gulf the federalof Corinth,Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες was Achaian the League, was in at the Dionysia that the Chalcidians living in sufficientlyAetolian organised League.these Theseand years recognisedAchaian at war dissidents towith receive the set rivalupa agrant monumentpowerful of land confederacy at Delphi,from thea centrefrom Athenian northof Aetolian[...... ofsettlerστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν the power, Gulf of Corinth, ἐ]π̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ the [μος ὁ] 41 SinceMyrina the demos crown of with the Athenians this garland living the epimeletesin community,to honour and their to pass AetolianAetolian a decree benefactor,League. in honourSee especiallyThese called of Achaian a Thucydidesbenefactor Simos: dissidents 3.24; from [Demosthenes] thatset up community: a monument 59.104–106. at Delphi,Ἀ̣θἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο ̣[aην centre]αίων ὁ ἐ of Aetolian[ν Μυρ ]power,ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ [δ[ς]ωκεν ] 42 Lysias 23.6–8; compare (Garland 2014, p. 184). MyrinaTheophilos, gave a plotson ofof Meliton,land to the of Alopeke,Chalcidians, on to honour their43 Aetolian benefactor, called Simos: χωρίον τοῖς ΧἈλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν, στῆσαι τὴν στήλην [α]ὶ Polybius 2.61.4–12. setaccount up the inscription of his virtue concerning and justice the towards epimeletes the [...... [Κλεό]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον ἐ]π̣ειδὴ καὶ ὁ δῆ44 Plutarch[μος ὁPelopidas][ Σίμ?]7.1–8.1.ου Kleopatros Note the reference and tothe an exiles assembly honoured (plethos)τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν and Simos,δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι to formal, son polis-like decisions (τ δεδo[γµδ]έας τοὺς ἐν να; Since the demos of the Athenians living in [magistrateChalcidians of the living Athenian in Myrina. cleruchy] (IG XII and 8 4) let Ἀ̣θ̣[ηνΑἰτωλὸν ]αίων ὁ ἐ[[ἐσν Μυρ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι [Κλεό]ίνει οἰκῶν ἔ]πατρος καὶ οἱ φυγάδες Σῖμον δ[δoξε]ωκεν τo σ φυγ σι). of Simos,[Σίμ?] anου Aetolian,Kleopatros with aand bronze theκήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι exiles statueΜυρίνει οἰκοῦντας honoured Simos,. son Myrina gave a plot of land to the Chalcidians, the herald announce at the contest for tragedies χωρίον τοῖς Χχαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν ̣α̣λκιδεῦσιν[Αἰτωλὸν Σ]κ,̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε στῆσαι τὴν στήλην [ἐσ]τεφάνωσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς εἰκόνι because, having ofcaptured Simos, anSkiros, Aetolian, heΧαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες gave with it a bronze statue set up the inscription concerning the epimeletes at the Dionysia that the Chalcidians living in τὴν περὶ τοῦ ἐπιμελητοῦ καὶ ἀνειπεῖν τὸν Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι χαλκῆι ὅτι τὸν [τ[]Σοῖς ἐξ ]κ̣ίρον λαβὼν ἀπέδωκε back to Kleopatrosbecause, and the having exiles captured fromστεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Achaia Skiros, he gave it [magistrate of the Athenian cleruchy] and38 let Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf. 28, 35. Myrina crown with this garland the epimeletes κήρυκα Διονυσίων τῶι ἀγῶνι τραγωιδοῖς ὅτι Ἀχαιίας. Κλεοπάτρωι καὶ τοῖς φυγάσι [τ]οῖς ἐξ (FD III 4.239). back to Kleopatrosἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνο and39 the exiles from Achaia [ς] the herald announce at the contest for tragedies Polybius 2.43.2. Theophilos, son of Meliton, of Alopeke, on Χαλκιδέες οἱ ἐν Μυρίνει οἰκοῦντες Ἀχαιίας. (FD III 4.239). Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κ40 [α]ὶ at the Dionysia that the Chalcidians living in I have discussed in (Gray 2017) ancient debates accountabout asylum of his and virtue refuge and and justice their towards modern theresonance, στεφανοῦσι τῶιδε τῶι στεφάνωι τὸν Though it is clear that these exiles were using the setting and interstate prominenceδικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκι of citingDelphi there to much earlier bibliography[δ]έας τοὺς ἐν on this question; see earlier especially (Lonis 1993). Myrina crown with this garland the epimeletes Chalcidians living in Myrina. (IG XII 8 4) ἐπιμελητὴν Θεόφιλον Μελίτωνοgain recognition for theirThough political it[ς is] clear identity, that theselegitimacy, exiles wereor even using autonomy, the setting their and nature interstateΜυρίνει οἰκοῦντας as a prominencepolitical of. Delphi to Theophilos, son of Meliton, of Alopeke, on Ἀλωπεκῆθεν ἀνδραγαθίας ἕνεκα κgroup is much moregain complexrecognition and[ forα hybrid]ὶ their thanpolitical in the identity, other exampleslegitimacy, which or even I have autonomy, discussed, their where nature as a political account of his virtue and justice towards the δικαιοσύνης τῆς εἰς τοὺς Χαλκιpolis identity seemsgroup axiomatic. is much[δ]έας τοὺς ἐν more These complex exiles identified and hybrid with than a inwhole the other region, examples Achaia, which rather I thanhave adiscussed, where Chalcidians living in Myrina. (IG XII 8 384) Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf. 28, 35. Μυρίνει οἰκοῦνταςsingle polis. They. polis also identity gave special seems prominenceaxiomatic. These in their exiles self identified‐presentation with here a whole to a singleregion, leader, Achaia, rather than a 39 Polybius 2.43.2. Kleopatros, probablysingle apolis. rebel TheyAchaian also leader gave specialwho had prominence defected to in the their Aetolians’ self‐presentation cause with here some to a single leader, 40 I have discussed in (Gray 2017) ancient debates about asylum and refuge and their modern resonance, followers. This suggestsKleopatros, that probably they were a consciousrebel Achaian of the leader model who of a hadroyal defected or mercenary to the armyAetolians’ with acause with some 38 Compare [Demosthenes] 7.6, cf. 28, 35. citing there much earlier bibliography on this question; see earlier especially (Lonis 1993). single unquestionedfollowers. leader, This as suggests opposed that to theythe civicwere modelconscious of ofshared the model command of a royal and orcollective mercenary army with a 39 Polybius 2.43.2. 40 I havesovereignty. discussed Itin issingle(Gray also 2017)interestingunquestioned ancient thatdebates leader, they about explicitly as asylumopposed acknowledged and to refuge the civic and their theirmodel dissidentmodern of shared resonance, and commandmarginal and collective citingstatus: there they much did earlier sovereignty.not bibliographystyle themselves It ison also this as question;interesting ‘the Achaians see thatearlier theyin especially Skiros’ explicitly (compare(Lonis acknowledged 1993). ‘the Zacynthians their dissident in the and marginal Nellos’ above), butstatus: rather they as did‘the notexiles style from themselves Achaia’. as ‘the Achaians in Skiros’ (compare ‘the Zacynthians in the This does not,Nellos’ however, above), indicate but rather that theyas ‘the were exiles abstaining from Achaia’. from staking a claim to represent the true interests of the AchaianThis does League. not, however, It is striking indicate that that they they claimed were abstaining that Simos from ‘restored’ staking to a claimthem to represent the true interests of the Achaian League. It is striking that they claimed that Simos ‘restored’ to them

36 Olympia: IvO 259; Meiggs ‐ Lewis GHI 74; Delphi: FD III 4.1; SEG 32.550. On these monuments and their contexts: (Luraghi36 Olympia: 2008, esp. IvO pp. 259;191–94). Meiggs For‐ Lewisa guide GHI to epigraphic 74; Delphi: abbreviations FD III 4.1; SEG such 32.550. as those On in these this note,monuments and their see the list publishedcontexts: in the (LuraghiSupplementum 2008, Epigraphicumesp. pp. 191–94). Graecum For a. guide to epigraphic abbreviations such as those in this note, 37 On Greek federal states,see the see list recently published (Mackil in the 2013). Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. 37 On Greek federal states, see recently (Mackil 2013).

Humanities 2018, 7, 72 14 of 19

Thebes after their return home,45 which was partly inspired by their exile experiences. In a source closer to the time, Aeschines reports in a speech of 343 BC that later exiles from Thebes’ region of Boeotia held a meeting to elect advocates to speak on his behalf.46 This is another interesting case, like those of the Chalcidians and Achaians, of an exile group forming improvised institutions based on a federal, rather than single-polis, identity. Perhaps federal identities and improvised federal institutions provided a source of unity for quite disparate refugees from the same region, among whom no single polis had enough representatives to construct a more particularist ‘polis-in-exile’. Classical and Hellenistic exiles’ adaptations of civic institutions and community could also be more original than the imitation of polis or federal features by a group of fellow exiles from one polis or region who had found refuge together somewhere. Fellow exiles from the same place could also maintain connections at a distance, forming something that was closer to a ‘diaspora polis’ than a local ‘polis-in-exile’. The early fourth-century oligarchic exiles from Siphnos mentioned above maintained lines of communication across different parts of the Aegean.47 Similarly, the wide diaspora of Samian exiles dispersed around the Mediterranean by the Athenian capture of their island in 365 BC, the prelude to the establishment of the Athenian cleruchy (compare above), maintained a cohesive identity as a Samian demos, which they put back into practice on their return after 322 BC. The returned Samians collectively commemorated the services of benefactors in different parts of the Mediterranean to the ‘demos when it was in exile’.48 Perhaps an even bolder step, which chimes with some of the modern case-studies discussed elsewhere in this collection, was to adapt civic identity and institutions in a more cosmopolitan way: to imagine and construct quasi-civic communities which cut across traditional divisions of origin and status.49 The original cosmopolitan thinkers of fourth-century Athens, the early Cynics and Stoics, included several displaced philosophers. These included Diogenes the Cynic, exiled from his home polis of Sinope on the south coast of the Black Sea for some offence, perhaps corrupting the city coinage for which he was responsible,50 and his fellow Cynic Crates, a refugee from the destruction of his home city of Thebes by Alexander the Great in 335 BC.51 These outsider philosophers devised the ideal of a literal ‘cosmopolis’ or world city, the natural home of all wise and virtuous men, who recognise that territorial and status distinctions are arbitrary and contrary to nature. To this way of thinking, no-one can become an exile merely through physical expulsion; true ‘citizenship’ depends on recognising nature’s requirements of justice and virtue, and recognising one’s affinity (across space and time) with like-minded people.52 As well as developing these intellectual consolations for outsider status, these philosophers formed in practice a mixed, vibrant community of debate and critique in fourth-century Athens,53 which gave birth to the long-lasting Cynic and Stoic schools. Displaced and migrant Greeks who were not philosophers also experimented with forms of sociability which retained some of the meaningful communal interaction of the polis while embracing some of the openness of a cosmopolis. Plutarch, for example, alludes to a mixed community of refugees from war and unrest in the Greek mainland and islands who found refuge in third-century Alexandria in Egypt, where they benefited from funds passed on to them from the Ptolemaic government by the exiled Spartan king Cleomenes.54

45 See Plutarch Pelopidas 13; (Buckler 1980). 46 Aeschines 2.142. 47 See Isocrates 19.21–4, 40. 48 IG XII 6 1 17–40 (cf. 42–43), with (Shipley 1987, pp. 161–64). 49 Compare (Joly 2002) for a similar distinction between categories of modern refugees. 50 Diogenes Laertius 6.20–1. 51 Compare Diogenes Laertius 6.93. 52 See esp. Diogenes Laertius 6.49, 63. On these fourth-century innovations and the tradition they launched, see recently (Murray 2004; Rohde 2011; Hamon 2011; Müller 2014). 53 Compare the story of solidarity between Zeno of Kition and Crates of Thebes in Diogenes Laertius 7.2–3. 54 Plutarch Agis and Cleomenes 53.5. Humanities 2018, 7, 72 15 of 19

In this context, a crucial phenomenon was one already sketched in Section2, which becomes increasingly visible through epigraphy in the course of the Hellenistic period: the tendency of migrants or visitors of mixed origins to form, or participate in, voluntary associations bound by cult or professional interests (compare above) in their host cities, sometimes in collaboration with local citizens.55 In a way crucial to the concerns of this section, these cosmopolitan associations, with their quasi-civic institutions binding together individuals of different origins, could count exiles among their members. Around 300 BC, an exile from Olynthos in northern Greece (destroyed in 348 BC, compare above), resident and enjoying privileges at Athens, but still identified as ‘Olynthian’, played a prominent role as secretary in a cult association (thiasos) at Athens.56 More thoroughly mixed quasi-civic associations in Hellenistic Athens included the heterogeneous, improvised communities of soldiers and mercenaries who came together at Athenian forts to honour their benefactors. One such community listed its disparate members in the inscription of an honorary decree. The list included a man called Theodoros whose ethnic affiliation (‘Achaian’) was erased.57 Perhaps he wished to signal that he was declaring himself an exile from the Achaian League, with which Athens was at war at the time of the inscription (c. 235 BC);58 he had found a new focus of civic membership and belonging in this more informal mixed community of fellow fighters. These last examples of ‘citizens-in-exile’ came closest in the Greek world to meeting Arendt’s challenge of achieving an ‘avant-garde’ refugee identity, which transcends traditional exclusive citizenship without moving to the other extreme of purely abstract, formal and impersonal cosmopolitanism. These examples are thus particularly well-suited to comparison with the experiments in status- and identity-crossing forms of improvised community that are discussed in contemporary refugee studies, including in Sigona’s model of ‘campzenship’, and also elsewhere in this collection, especially in the discussion of cosmopolitan interaction within Dheisheh refugee camp by Petti. Members of such associations resident in major urban centres, such as Athens, must have been adept at mingling and balancing different identities and affiliations, something that was already evident in the case of the Plataean exiles who were naturalised at Athenians, but persisted in holding a monthly Plataean meeting in the Athenian cheese-market. Their host cities thus partly prefigured the pluralist modern cities, hosts to refugees (Johannesburg, Berlin), which Katharina Richter(2017) discusses in this collection. The ancient examples reveal the opportunities offered by the citizen model to outsiders who wished to build their own, more open outsider communities, but also the tenacity of the exclusive citizenship regimes of their host cities. Indeed, it was partly the power inequalities and exclusions which resulted from strict rules of citizenship which provoked outsiders to develop these alternative models of civic community, defined in opposition to them. It might be thought that these cosmopolitan outsider communities simply brought consolation and a brake on outsiders’ discontent, rather than exercising genuine political influence: cosmopolitan associations of philosophers and migrants could not influence the course of politics to the extent that the more traditional ‘poleis-in-exile’ from particular poleis did. It is true that there was no dramatic overthrow of traditional citizen exclusivity. Nonetheless, change over centuries is visible: it is striking that, by the later Hellenistic period and early Roman Empire, the citizenship regimes in Greek city-states did tend to become more fluid and open to outsiders.59 The cosmopolitan ideas and practices of certain exiles and refugees can be counted among the many social and cultural factors which helped to bring this change about.

55 See especially (Ismard 2010, chp. 5); (Arnaoutoglou 2011). 56 IG II2 1263. 57 I.Eleusis 196, l. 117. 58 Compare Plutarch Aratus 33–4. 59 See the papers in (Heller and Pont 2012). Humanities 2018, 7, 72 16 of 19

4. Conclusions Citizenship was not merely a force of exclusion or oppression in the case of the displaced of ancient Greece; its processes and ideals could also be harnessed by the displaced themselves to build effective improvised communities in exile. It is clear from the examples in Section3 that relevant displaced groups almost always relied on support from powerful settled states. Displaced groups’ adoption of quasi-civic forms might sometimes have rendered them more susceptible to control from these outside powers; it also kept them embedded within the normative consensus, focussed on the polis as the best form of society, in the Greek civic world. Nonetheless, it is difficult to dispute that adoption and adaptation of civic forms also gave displaced groups agency and autonomy, especially when it enabled them to make interventions in interstate diplomacy and war as if they were settled states. Reproducing civic models in new forms also gave outsiders an alternative focus of pride, dignity, and community, as is particularly evident in the record of associations and communities of the marginalised at Athens. This all suggests that the model of ancient Greek citizenship need not be straightforwardly rejected in search of entirely new models of political community (Agamben); ancient Greek citizenship was, in fact, double-edged rather than straightforwardly oppressive, since it could itself be a resource for outsiders. It is true, as Arendt argued, that the most spectacular examples of co-option of citizenship by the displaced were new foundations of cities by exiles, mainly attested for the Archaic Greek world (before c. 500 BC). Nonetheless, even after the exhaustion of new opportunities for spontaneous city foundation, in a densely packed world of states protective of their territory in which sophisticated interstate norms were in play, ancient Greek displaced individuals and groups still found new ways to adapt civic principles and institutions in improvised ‘poleis-in-exile’. These phenomena encourage a re-thinking of modern citizenship, which is partly descended from the Greek form: in its roots it is much more flexible, mobile, and open to reinvention than often allowed, and need not be tied to any particular place or even ethnicity. A more complex and open-ended understanding of citizenship can, as in the ancient Greek case, open a rich variety of opportunities for political interaction and agency on the part of both the displaced and their hosts.

Funding: This research was assisted by a Research Fellowship from the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung, which I held at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Acknowledgments: I am very grateful to Elena Isayev and Evan Jewell for the opportunity to participate in this collection and for their very helpful guidance with this paper. Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

Adak, Mustafa. 2003. Die epidosis-Aktion der Piräuspartei im Bürgerkriegsjahr 403 (Lysias 31.15f.). Klio 85: 304–11. [CrossRef] Agamben, Giorgio. 1995. We Refugees. Symposium: A Quarterly Journal in Modern Literatures 49: 114–19. [CrossRef] Agamben, Giorgio. 1998. Homo Sacer. In Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Arendt, Hannah. 1943. We Refugees. Menorah Journal 31: 69–77. Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Arendt, Hannah. 1968. The Origins of Totalitarianism. New Edition with Added Prefaces. San Diego, New York and London: Harcourt, Brace and World. First published 1951. Arendt, Hannah. 2005. The Promise of Politics. Edited and with an Introduction by Jerome Kohn. New York: Schocken Books. Arendt, Hannah. 2006. Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought. Edited and with an Introduction by Jerome Kohn. London: Penguin. First published 1961. Arnaoutoglou, Ilias N. 2003. Thusias Heneka kai Sunousias: Private Religious Associations in Hellenistic Athens. Athens: Academy of Athens. Humanities 2018, 7, 72 17 of 19

Arnaoutoglou, Ilias N. 2011. “Ils étaient dans la ville, mais tout à fait en dehors de la cite”. Status and Identity in Private Religious Associations in Hellenistic Athens. In Political Culture in the Greek City after the Classical Age. Edited by Onno van Nijf and Richard Alston. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 27–48. Balogh, Elemér. 1943. Political Refugees in Ancient Greece: from the Period of the Tyrants to Alexander the Great. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. Bhambra, Gurminder. 2015. The Refugee Crisis and Our Connected Histories of Colonialism and Empire. Available online: http://www.sicherheitspolitik-blog.de/2015/10/01 (accessed on 13 July 2018). Blok, Josine. 2017. Citizenship in Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Buckler, John. 1980. The Theban Hegemony, 371–362 BC. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Cohen, Edward E. 2000. The Athenian Nation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Constantakopoulou, Christy. 2007. The Dance of the Islands: Insularity, Networks, the Athenian Empire, and the Aegean World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dench, Emma. 2005. Romulus’ Asylum. Roman Identities from the Age of Alexander to the Age of Hadrian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Douzinas, Costas. 2007. Human Rights and Empire. The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism. Abingdon: Routledge-Cavendish. Fassin, Didier. 2010. La raison humanitaire. Une histoire morale du temps présent. Paris: Gallimard-Seuil. Finlayson, James Gordon. 2010. “Bare Life” and Politics in Agamben’s Reading of Aristotle. The Review of Politics 72: 97–126. [CrossRef] Forsdyke, Sara. 2005. Exile, Ostracism, and Democracy: the Politics of Expulsion in Ancient Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gabrielsen, Vincent. 2007. Brotherhoods of Faith and Provident Planning: The Non-Public Associations of the Greek World. Mediterranean Historical Review 22: 183–210. [CrossRef] Gaertner, Jan Felix, ed. 2007. Writing Exile: The Discourse of Displacement in Antiquity and Beyond. Leiden: Brill. Garland, Robert. 2014. Wandering Greeks: The Ancient Greek Diaspora from the Age of Homer to the Death of Alexander the Great. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gatrell, Peter. 2013. The Making of the Modern Refugee. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gehrke, Hans-Joachim. 1985. Stasis: Untersuchungen zu den inneren Kriegen in den griechischen Staaten des 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Munich: C. H. Beck. Gray, Benjamin. 2015. Stasis and Stability: Exile, the Polis, and Political Thought, c. 404–146 BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gray, Benjamin. 2017. Exile, Refuge and the Greek Polis: Between Justice and Humanity. Journal of Refugee Studies 30: 190–219. [CrossRef] Grbac, Peter. 2013. Civitas, Polis, and Urbs: Reimagining the Refugee Camp as a City. Refugee Studies Centre Working Paper Series 96; Oxford: Refugee Studies Centre. Hallof, K., and Chr. Habicht. 1995. Buleuten und Beamten der attischen Kleruchie in Samos. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Ankara) 110: 273–304. Hamon, Patrice. 2011. Gleichheit, Ungleichheit und Euergetismus: die isotes in den kleinasiatischen Poleis der hellenistischen Zeit. In “Demokratie” im Hellenismus: Von der Herrschaft des Volkes zur Herrschaft der Honoratioren? Edited by Christian Mann and Peter Scholz. Mainz: Antike Verlag, pp. 56–73. Hansen, Mogens Herman, and Thomas Heine Nielsen, eds. 2004. An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Heller, Anna, and Anne-Valérie Pont. 2012. Patrie d’origine et patries electives: les citoyennetés multiples dans le monde grec d’époque romaine. Bordeaux: Ausonius. Isayev, Elena. 2017a. Migration, Mobility and Place in Ancient Italy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Isayev, Elena. 2017b. Between hospitality and asylum: A historical perspective on displaced agency. International Review of the Red Cross 99: 1–24. [CrossRef] Ismard, Paulin. 2010. La cité des réseaux. Athènes et ses associations VIe-Ier Siècle av. J.-C.. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne. Joly, Danièle. 2002. Odyssean and Rubicon Refugees: Towards a Typology of Refugees in the Land of Exile. International Migration 40: 3–24. [CrossRef] Lape, Susan. 2010. Race and Citizen Identity in the Classical Athenian Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Humanities 2018, 7, 72 18 of 19

Lonis, Raoul. 1993. La condition des réfugiés politiques en Grèce: statut et privilèges. In Mélanges Pierre Lévêque. 9 vols (1988–1995). Edited by Marie-Madeleine Mactoux and Evelyne Geny. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, pp. 209–25. Low, Polly. 2007. Interstate Relations in Classical Greece: Morality and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Luraghi, Nino. 2008. The Ancient Messenians: Constructions of Ethnicity and Memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mackil, Emily. 2004. Wandering Cities: Alternatives to Catastrophe in the Greek Polis. American Journal of Archaeology 108: 493–516. [CrossRef] Mackil, Emily. 2013. Creating a Common Polity: Religion, Economy, and Politics in the Making of the Greek Koinon. Berkeley: University of California Press. Magnetto, Anna. 2008. L’arbitrato di Rodi fra Samo e Priene. Edizione Critica, Commento e Indici. Pisa: Edizioni Della Normale. Malkki, Liisa H. 1995a. Purity and Exile: Violence, Memory and National Cosmology among Hutu Refugees in Tanzania. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Malkki, Liisa H. 1995b. Refugees and Exile: from “Refugee Studies” to the National Order of Things. Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 495–523. [CrossRef] Maqusi, Samar. 2017. ‘Space of Refuge’: Negotiating Space with Refugees inside the Palestinian Camp. In Displacement and the Humanities: Manifestos from the Ancient to the Present. Edited by Elena Isayev and Evan Jewell. Special issue, Humanities 6: 60. Available online: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/6/3/60 (accessed on 15 October 2017). McKechnie, Paul. 1989. Outsiders in the Greek Cities in the Fourth Century BC. London: Routledge. Moreno, Alfonso. 2007. Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Müller, Christel. 2014. La (dé)construction de la politeia. Citoyenneté et octroi de privilèges aux étrangers dans les démocraties hellénistiques. Annales HSS 69: 753–75. [CrossRef] Murray, Oswyn. 2004. Zeno and the Art of Polis Maintenance. In The Imaginary Polis. Edited by Harmen Hansen Mogens. Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy, pp. 202–21. Nobre, Ligia and Nakano, Anderson Kazuo. 2017. On the Slab, Our Architecture under Construction. In Displacement and the Humanities: Manifestos from the Ancient to the Present. Edited by Elena Isayev and Evan Jewell. Special issue, Humanities 6: 62. Available online: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/6/3/62/htm (accessed on 1 September 2017). Osborne, Robin G. 1990. The Demos and its Divisions in Classical Athens. In The Greek City from Homer to Alexander. Edited by Oswyn Murray and Simon Price. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 265–93. Pasquetti, Silvia. 2015. Negotiating Control. Camps, Cities and Political Life. City 19: 702–13. [CrossRef] Petti, Alessandro. 2017. Refugee Heritage. Part III Justification for Inscription. In Displacement and the Humanities: Manifestos from the Ancient to the Present. Edited by Elena Isayev and Evan Jewell. Special issue, Humanities 6: 66. Available online: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/6/3/66 (accessed on 1 September 2017). Purcell, Nicholas. 1990. Mobility and the Polis. In The Greek City from Homer to Alexander. Edited by Oswyn Murray and Simon Price. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 29–58. Redclift, Victoria. 2013. Abjects or Agents? Camps, Contests and the Creation of “Political Space”. Citizenship Studies 17: 308–21. [CrossRef] Rhodes, Peter John, and Robin Osborne. 2003. Greek Historical Inscriptions 404–323 BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richter, Daniel S. 2011. Cosmopolis: Imagining Community in Late Classical Athens and the Early Roman Empire. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rohde, Katharina. 2017. Collaborations on the Edge. In Displacement and the Humanities: Manifestos from the Ancient to the Present. Edited by Elena Isayev and Evan Jewell. Special issue, Humanities 6: 59. Available online: http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/6/3/59 (accessed on 1 September 2017). Said, Edward. 1984. Reflections on Exile. Granta 13: 159–72. Seibert, Jakob. 1979. Die politischen Flüchtlinge und Verbannten in der griechischen Geschichte: Von den Anfängen bis zur Unterwerfung durch die Römer. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Shipley, D. Graham. S. 1987. A History of Samos, 800–188 BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Humanities 2018, 7, 72 19 of 19

Sigona, Nando. 2015. Campzenship: Reimagining the Camp as a Social and Political Space. Citizenship Studies 19: 1–15. [CrossRef] Stonebridge, Lyndsey. 2011. Refugee style: Hannah Arendt and the Perplexities of Rights. Textual Practice 25: 71–85. [CrossRef] Vlassopoulos, Kostas. 2007. Free Spaces: Identity, Experience and Democracy in Classical Athens. Classical Quarterly 57: 33–52. [CrossRef] Whitehead, David. 1977. The Ideology of the Athenian Metic. Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society. Zetter, ROGER. 1991. Labelling Refugees: Forming and Transforming a Bureaucratic Identity. Journal of Refugee Studies 4: 39–62. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).