Summary:The paper deals with the cults of Alexander the Great in the Greek cities of Asia Minor (on the coast and the nearby islands). The author argues that although some cults in these cities could be set up after the Macedonian king's death, at least most known to us (or supposed) cults of Alexander in them were instituted still in his lifetime, in all likelihood, in 324–323 BC. It seems that the cults of the king were established only in a certain, probably far from overwhelming, number of the Greek cities of Asia Minor in this period. In turn, it should be believed that the
Summary The article deals with a complex of issues connected with the campaign waged by the Macedonian expeditionary corps in Asia Minor in 336–335 BC. The author clears up the aims set for the advance-guard, its command structure, strength and composition. He also describes the relevant military operations and reveals the reasons both for the Macedonians’ successes in 336 and their failures in 335. The idea is argued that despite the final failures, it is hardly possible to say that the campaign the expeditionary corps conducted ended in its total defeat. Besides, it is noted that those military operations had major significance for Alexander’s campaign in Asia Minor in 334, because a number of preconditions for its full success had been created right in their course.
В настоящей статье оцениваются с точки зрения исторической достоверности два пассажа-Плутарха (Adv. Colot. 32. 1126d) и Флавия Филострата (Vitae soph. 485-486), в которых фигурируют соответственно Делий и Диас. Первый из них, как постулируется, оказал особое влияние в вопросе войны против Персии на Александра Великого, а второйна Филиппа II. Автор доказы вает, что, в отличие от рассказа Филострата, сообщение Плутарха может быть вполне признано, хотя и не без оговорок, достоверным.
The article analyzes a poetic dedication to Heracles, found during the archaeological dig in northwestern Greece, in Epirus. The dedication was made by three warriors from a small city of Buchetion, who having joined the Roman army participated in the suppression of Aristonicus’ revolt in the kingdom of Pergamon (133–129 BC). The inscription supplements our knowledge of Aristonicus’ revolt. In particular, the new fact is that warriors from Balkan Greece took part in the war against Aristonicus, which is not mentioned by the extant narrative tradition. It is possible that the three warriors were conscripted into the Roman army headed by the consul of 130 BC Marcus Perperna by means of a treaty that the Romans had concluded with the cities of Cassopa and Buchetion, similarly to a number of other Greek states. In the dedication, Aristonicus is referred to by name alone, although it is known that he took the royal title. In all likelihood, the warriors who left the dedication to Heracles served in a wagon train, fulfilling the duties of transporting military goods and, at the same time, guarding them. They apparently belonged to a wealthy segment of society in their small city because they went to war with wagons and horses. It can be assumed that during the devastation the Romans brought to Epirus in 167 BC, the coastal Greek cities, such as Cassopa and Buchetion, did not suffer. The devastation may have affected only the inner areas of the region. The dedication to Heracles was made because Heracles as a savior was popular among Greeks. In addition, he was considered an ancestor of Oxylus, one of the Heraclids who after their return to Peloponnesus became ruler of Elis. Afterwards, colonists from this region founded Buchetion, the home city of the warriors who left the dedication.
Summary The author is of the opinion that as a result of Alexander the Great’s conquest of Syria (late 333–332 BC), which had been a single administrative entity under the Achaemenids, it was divided into two satrapies – the northern and the southern one. He believes that Menon, son of Cerdimmas, was appointed as the first head of the northern satrapy (winter 333/332), to be replaced by Arimmas (early spring 331), who, in his turn, was succeeded by Asclepiodorus, son of Eunicus (late summer 331). Besides, it seems that Andromachus became the first head of the southern satrapy (shortly before winter 332/331), and after he was killed, Menon, transferred from the north to the south, took his place (early spring 331). Already in Alexander’s lifetime, probably in 329/328, Syria was once again merged into one satrapy. It is unclear who was installed as satrap of the unified region. At any rate, it could not have been Menes, son of Dionysius: the hypothesis that in winter 331/330 he was made satrap of the new province including Syria and Cilicia does not stand scrutiny. In the author’s view, the main task Alexander assigned to Menes was to take control and then to keep open and organized the sea communications with the coast of Syria, Phoenicia and Cilicia, and in the matters concerning these activities Menes was fully independent of the local satraps.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.