The Histories of Polybius Book Six translated by Evelyn S ...
Polybius and his World. Essays in Memory of F.W. Walbank.pdf
Transcript of Polybius and his World. Essays in Memory of F.W. Walbank.pdf
Title Pages
Page 1 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
TitlePages
PolybiusandhisworldEssaysinmemoryofF.W.WalbankPolybiusandhisWorld
(p.iv)
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP,UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.ItfurtherstheUniversity'sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,andeducationbypublishingworldwide.OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
Title Pages
Page 2 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
©OxfordUniversityPress2013
Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted
FirstEditionpublishedin2013
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographicsrightsorganization.EnquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherformandyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationDataDataavailable
ISBN 978–0–19–960840–9
PrintedinGreatBritainbyMPGBooksGroup,BodminandKing’sLynn
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Title Pages
Page 3 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
[UNTITLED]
Page 1 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
[UNTITLED]
(p.v)
Sleeptothenoiseofrunningwater
To-morrowtobecrossed,howeverdeep;
ThisisnoriverofthedeadorLethe,
To-nightwesleep
OnthebanksoftheRubicon—thedieiscast;
Therewillbetimetoaudit
Theaccountslater,therewillbesunlightlater
Andtheequationwillcomeoutatlast.
FromLouisMacNeice,
[UNTITLED]
Page 2 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AutumnJournalXXIV(1938–9)
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Acknowledgements
Page 1 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.vi) Acknowledgements
The2007conferencewassupportedgenerouslybytheBritishAcademyaswellasbytheSchoolofArchaeology,ClassicsandEgyptologyoftheUniversityofLiverpool.DrGeorginaMuskettorganizedallaspectsoftheconferencewithgreatefficiency.WearealsogratefultoHilaryO’SheaandhercolleaguesatOxfordUniversityPressfortheircontinuingassistance,andtotheanonymousreadersfortheirreports.Chapter14waspreviouslypublishedinJ.Pastor,M.Stean,andM.Mor(eds.),FlaviusJosephus:InterpretationandHistory,SupplementstotheJournalfortheStudyofJudaism,146(Leiden,2011),149–62,andisprintedherebykindpermissionofBrill.Finally,weshouldliketoexpressourthankstooforthesupportandadviceofDorothyThompson,MitziWalbank,andChristopherWalbank.
B.J.G
T.H.
Liverpool
March2011
Acknowledgements
Page 2 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Abbreviations
Page 1 of 4
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.ix) Abbreviations
CAHCambridgeAncientHistoryCILCorpusInscriptionumLatinarum(Berlin,1853–)FGrHistF.Jacobyetal.,FragmentedergriechischenHistoriker(BerlinandLeiden,1923–)FHGC.MüllerandT.Müller,Fragmentahistoricorumgraecorum(Paris,1841–70)FRHH.BeckandU.Walter,DieFrühenRömischenHistoriker(Darmstadt,2001–)FWWFrankWilliamWalbankGGMC.Müller,GeographiciGraeciMinores(Paris,1855–61)GlockmanandHelmsG.GlockmanandH.Helms,PolybiosLexicon,Band2.1(Berlin,1998).
Abbreviations
Page 2 of 4
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
HCPF.W.Walbank,AHistoricalCommentaryonPolybius(Oxford,1957–79)IAGL.Moretti,Inscrizioniagonistichegreche(Rome,1953)IGInscriptionesGraecae(Berlin,1873)I.LindosC.Blinkenberg,Lindos:Fouillesdel’acropole1902–1914,II.Inscriptions(BerlinandCopenhagen,1941)ILSH.Dessau,InscriptionesLatinaeSelectae(Berlin,1892–1916)Inscr.It.InscriptionesItaliaeI.MagnesiaO.Kern,DieInschriftenvonMagnesiaamMaeander(Berlin,1900)I.PeraiaW.Blümel,DieInschriftenderRhodischenPeraia(Bonn,1991)I.PéréeA.Bresson(ed.),RecueildesinscriptionsdelaPéréerhodienne(Besançon,1991)I.PrieneF.HillervonGaertringen,InschriftenvonPriene(Berlin,1906)ISEL.Moretti,Iscrizionistoricheellenistiche(Florence,1967–76).K-AR.KasselandC.Austin(eds.),PoetaeComiciGraeci(Oxford,1983–)LSJH.G.LiddellandR.Scott,AGreek—EnglishLexicon,9thedn.rev.byH.S.Jones(Oxford,1940)LSSF.Sokolowski,Loissacréesdescitésgrecques.Supplément(Paris,1962)MauersbergerA.Mauersberger,Polybios-Lexicon(1956–75);2ndedn.rev.byC.-F.Collatz,M.Gützlaf,andH.Helms(Berlin,2000–2004)(p.x)MRRT.R.S.Broughton,MagistratesoftheRomanRepublic(NewYork,1951–2;suppl.1986)NSA.Maiuri,NuovasillogeepigraficadiRodieCos(Florence,1925)P.KölnB.Krameretal.,PapyriKöln(Opladen,1976–)P.Mil.Vogl.A.Voglianoetal.,PapiridellaR.UniversitàdiMilano(Milan,1937–2001)P.Schubart
Abbreviations
Page 3 of 4
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
W.Schubart,GriechischeliterarischePapyri(Berlin,1950)SCAUniversityofLiverpoolSpecialCollectionsandArchivesSEGSupplementumEpigraphicumGraecum(Leiden,1923–)SERG.PuglieseCarratelli,Supplementoepigraficorodio,AnnuariodellaScuolaArcheologicadiAtene,n.s.14–16(1952–4),247–316StaatsverträgeH.BengtsonandH.H.Schmitt,DieStaatsverträgedesAltertums(Munich,1962–75)Syll.3W.Dittenberger,SyllogeInscriptionumGraecarum,3rdedn.,4vols.(Leipzig,1915–24)T.Cam.M.SegreandG.PuglieseCarratelli,TituliCamirenses,AnnuariodellaScuolaArcheologicadiAtene,n.s.11–13(1949–51),141–318TGrFB.Snelletal.,TragicorumGraecorumFragmenta(Göttingen,1971–2004)TLGThesaurusLinguaeGraecaeTLLThesaurusLinguaeLatinae(Munich,1900–)
AbbreviationsforancientauthorsfollowLiddelandScott’sLexiconforGreekauthorsandtheOxfordLatinDictionaryforLatinauthors,withthefollowingexceptions:
Aesch.AeschylusDem.DemosthenesDioCassiusDioDiod.DiodorusSiculusDion.Hal.A.R.DionysusofHalicarnassus,AntiquitatesRomanaeEur.EuripidesJos.JosephusPlb.PolybiusPlut.Plutarch
Abbreviations
Page 4 of 4
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Soph.SophoclesStrab.StraboThuc.ThucydidesXen.Xenophon
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
List of Illustrations
Page 1 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.xi) ListofIllustrations
F.W.Walbank,Bassae(1936)6Period1:TheAgeoftheTelchines287Period2:TheAgeoftheHeliadae(sonsof‘Helios’)289Period3:TheAgeoftheArchegetae(‘Founders’)292Period4:TheAgeoftheHeroes295
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
List of Illustrations
Page 2 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Notes on Contributors
Page 1 of 5
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.xii) NotesonContributors
HansBeckisProfessorofAncientHistory,JohnMacNaughtonChairofClassics,andDirectorofClassicalStudiesatMcGillUniversityinMontreal.SomeofhismostrecentbooksincludeKarriereundHierarchie(2005)andatwo-volumeeditionoftheearlyRomanhistorians(2001,2004).Heistheco-editorof(amongothervolumes)ResPublica:HoldingHighOfficeintheRomanRepublic(2011).JohnBriscoewasReaderinLatinintheUniversityofManchesterfrom1982to1996andisnowanHonoraryResearchFellow.HeistheauthoroffourvolumesofcommentaryonLivy,coveringbooks31−45(1973,1981,2008,2012),aswellascriticaleditionsofthosebooks(1986,1991),andofValeriusMaximus(1998).Heisamemberoftheteamproducinganewedition,withEnglishtranslationandcommentary,ofthefragmentsoftheotherwiselostRomanhistorians.CraigeChampionisAssociateProfessorofAncientHistoryandClassicsintheMaxwellSchool
Notes on Contributors
Page 2 of 5
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ofCitizenshipandPublicAffairsatSyracuseUniversity.HeistheauthorofCulturalPoliticsinPolybius’sHistories(2004),editorofRomanImperialism:ReadingsandSources(2004),GeneralEditoroftheWiley-BlackwellEncyclopediaofAncientHistory(2012),andco-editor(withA.M.Eckstein)oftheLandmarkeditionoftheHistoriesofPolybius(forthcoming).J.K.DavieswasFrankWalbank’ssuccessorasRathboneProfessorofAncientHistoryandClassicalArchaeologyattheUniversityofLiverpoolfrom1977to2003.HeistheauthorofAthenianPropertiedFamilies600–300BC(1971),DemocracyandClassicalGreece(1978),andWealthandthePowerofWealthinClassicalAthens(1981).Hehasjointlyeditedsixfurthervolumes,mostrecentlyTheEconomiesofHellenisticsocieties,ThirdtoFirstCenturiesBC(2011),andhasbeenEditoroftheJournalofHellenicStudiesandArchaeologicalReports.BorisDreyerisProfessorofAncientHistoryattheUniversityofErlangen-Nürnberg.HeistheauthorofUntersuchungenzurGeschichteAthensinspätklassischerZeit(1999),StädtischePolitikunterdenAttalidenundimKonfliktzwischenAristonikosundRom(2003),InnenpolitikderRömischenRepublik(2006),DierömischeNobilitätsherrschaftundAntiochosIII.(2007),AlsdieRömerfrechgeworden:Varus,HermannunddieKatastropheimTeutoburgerWald(2008),ArminiusundderUntergangdesVarus—WarumdieGermanenkeineRömerwurden(2009),andPolybios:LebenundWerkimBanneRoms(2011).Hehasalsoco-editedLokaleElitenundhellenistischeKönige:Zwischen(p.xiii) KooperationundKonfrontation(2011)andForschungenzurAltenGeschichte.KleineSchriftenvonGustavAdolfLehmann(2011).AndrewErskineisProfessorofAncientHistoryattheUniversityofEdinburgh.HeistheauthorofTheHellenisticStoa:PoliticalThoughtandAction(1990),TroybetweenGreeceandRome:LocalTraditionandImperialPower(2001),andRomanImperialism(2010).HeisalsotheeditorofanumberofvolumesincludingACompaniontotheHellenisticWorld(2003),ACompaniontoAncientHistory(2009),andmostrecently(withLloydLlewellyn-Jones)CreatingaHellenisticWorld(2011),andisaGeneralEditoroftheWiley–BlackwellEncyclopediaofAncientHistory(2012).BruceGibsonisProfessorofLatinattheUniversityofLiverpool.HispublicationsincludeStatius,Silvae5.EditedwithIntroduction,TranslationandCommentary(2006)andPlinytheYoungerinLateAntiquity(Arethusa,forthcoming,co-editedwithRogerRees).ErichS.GruenisGladysRehardWoodProfessorofHistoryandClassics,EmeritusattheUniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.AmonghispublicationsareTheLastGenerationoftheRomanRepublic(1974),TheHellenisticWorldandtheComingofRome(1984),CultureandNationalIdentityinRepublicanRome
Notes on Contributors
Page 3 of 5
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(1992),HeritageandHellenism:TheReinventionofJewishTradition(1998),Diaspora:JewsamidstGreeksandRomans(2002),andRethinkingtheOtherinAntiquity(2011).EditedvolumesincludeImagesandIdeologies:Self-DefinitionintheHellenisticWorld(1993),HellenisticConstructs:EssaysinHistory,Culture,andHistoriography(1997),CulturalBorrowingsandEthnicAppropriationsinAntiquity(2005),andCulturalIdentityintheAncientMediterranean(2011).ThomasHarrisonisRathboneProfessorofAncientHistoryandClassicalArchaeologyattheUniversityofLiverpool.HeistheauthorofDivinityandHistory.TheReligionofHerodotus(2000),TheEmptinessofAsia:Aeschylus’PersiansandtheHistoryoftheFifthCentury(2000),andWritingAncientPersia(2011),andtheeditorof(amongothervolumes)GreeksandBarbarians(2002).JohnHendersonwasProfessorofClassicsattheUniversityofCambridgeandisaLifeFellowofKing’sCollege.Hehaspublishedacrosstherangeofclassicaltopics,includingAPlautusReader(2009),TheMedievalWorldofIsidoreofSeville(2007),‘OxfordReds’(2006),TheTriumphofArtatThorvaldsensMuseum(2005),andHORTVS:TheRomanBookofGardening(2004).JohnMarincolaisLeonGoldenProfessorofClassicsatFloridaStateUniversityinTallahassee.HeistheauthorofAuthorityandTraditioninAncientHistoriography(1997),GreekHistorians(2001),and(withMichaelFlower)Herodotus:HistoriesIX(2002).HehaseditednumerousvolumesandiscurrentlyatworkonabookonHellenistichistoriography.(p.xiv) BrianMcGingisRegiusProfessorofGreekandaFellowofTrinityCollege,Dublin.HispublicationsincludeTheForeignPolicyofMithridatesVIEupatorKingofPontus(1986),GreekPapyrifromDublin(1995),TheLimitsofAncientBiography(2006,editedwithJ.Mossman),andPolybius’Histories(2010).AndrewMeadowsisDeputyDirectoroftheAmericanNumismaticSociety(ANS).Hehaswrittenandeditednumerousbooksandarticlesonthehistory,numismatics,andepigraphyoftheGreekworld,includingthreevolumesintheSyllogeNummorumGraecorumseriesandCoinHoardsIXandX,andisEditorofthejointANS–CambridgeUniversityPressSeriesGuidestotheCoinageoftheAncientWorld.ChristelMüllerisProfessorofGreekHistoryattheUniversityofParisOuestNanterreLaDéfense.SheistheauthorofD’OlbiaàTanaïs:Territoiresetréseauxd’échangesdanslaMerNoireseptentrionaleauxépoquesclassiqueethellénistique(2010),theco-authorofArchéologiehistoriquedelaGrèceantique,2ndedn.(2006)andtheco-editorofLesItaliensdanslemondegrec(2002),Identitésetculturesdanslemondeméditerranéenantique(2002),andCitoyennetéetparticipationàlabasseépoquehellénistique(2005).
Notes on Contributors
Page 4 of 5
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
JosephineCrawleyQuinnisFellowandTutorinAncientHistoryatWorcesterCollege,Oxford.ShewritesaboutPhoenician,Greek,Roman,andNorthAfricanhistory,co-directstheTunisian–BritishexcavationsatUtica(Tunisia),andhasco-editedvolumesonTheHellenisticWestandThePunicMediterranean.RobinSeagerisHonorarySeniorFellowinClassicsandAncientHistoryattheUniversityofLiverpool.HeistheauthorofPompeytheGreat(1979,2ndedn.,2002),Tiberius(1972,2ndedn.,2005),andAmmianusMarcellinus:SevenStudiesinhisLanguageandThought(1986),andeditor/translatorofTheCrisisoftheRomanRepublic(1969),M.Gelzer,TheRomanNobility(1969),andPlutarch,FalloftheRomanRepublic(1972,rev.edn.,2005).MichaelSommerisProfessorofAncientHistoryattheCarlvonOssietzkyUniversityofOldenburg.HispublicationsincludeTheCompleteRomanEmperor:ImperialLivesatCourtandonCampaign(2010),DieSoldatenkaiser(2010),DieArminiusschlacht:SpurensucheimTeutoburgerWald(2009),DiePhönizier:GeschichteundKultur(2008),RomsorientalischeSteppengrenze:Palmyra—Edessa—Dura-Europos—Hatra:EineKulturgeschichtevonPompeiusbisDiocletian(2005).JohnThorntonisAssociateProfessorofRomanHistoryatSapienzaUniversitàdiRoma.HeistheauthorofLostoricoilgrammaticoilbandito.Momentidellaresistenzagrecaall’imperiumRomanum(2001),andhaswrittenmanyarticlesonHellenisticandRomanhistoryandhistoriography.(p.xv) MitziWalbankistheyoungerdaughterofF.W.Walbank.ShewasauniversityadministratorattheOpenUniversity,withwhomshetookherfirstdegree.Nowretired,shelivesnearherdaughterandgrandchildreninEastLothian.Sheisapublishedpoet.Hans-UlrichWiemerisProfessorofAncientHistoryattheUniversityofErlangen-Nürnberg.HeisauthorofLibaniosundJulian,StudienzumVerhältnisvonRhetorikundPolitkimviertenJahrhundertn.Chr.(1995),RhodischeTraditioneninderhellenistischenHistoriographie(2001),Krieg,HandelundPiraterie:UntersuchungenzurGeschichtedeshellenistischenRhodos(2002),andAlexanderderGrosse(2005),andhaseditedStaatlichkeitundpolitischesHandelninderrömischenKaiserzeit(2006),FeiernundErinnern:GeschichtsbilderimSpiegelantikerFest(withHansBeck,2009),andJohannGustavDroysen:PhilosophieundPolitik—HistorieundPhilologie(withStefanRebenich,2012).
Notes on Contributors
Page 5 of 5
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Welcome to the Liverpool Conference
Page 1 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.xvi)WelcometotheLiverpoolConference
Goodmorning—andwelcometotheconference.IwishIcouldbewithyouinperson,butthisimpressivepieceoftechnologywillhavetodoforbothyouandme.IamgratefultomyLiverpoolcolleaguesforsettingitup.ItisformeagreatandmuchappreciatedhonourthatthisconferenceistakingplaceandespeciallythatitistakingplaceinLiverpool,wheremyworkonthePolybianCommentarywasinitiatedandcarriedthrough;thoughVolume3onlyappearedin1979,twoyearsafterIhadretired.
Theyear2007seemstherightdatetocelebratetheCommentary—ifindeeditistobecelebrated.But2007isalsoasignificantdateforquiteanotherreason.Itisthe80thanniversaryofmyfirstintroductiontoPolybius.AndIshouldatthispointliketopayalong-duetributetoE.H.Goddard,lateralifelongfriendandanoutstandingteacherofClassicsatBradfordGrammarSchool,wherein1927IwasjuststartingonmylastyearbeforegoinguptoPeterhouse.SoletmetellyouhowfirstImetPolybius.
TosaveusfromrepeatingthenormalprescribedperiodofRomanHistory,NedGoddardhadarrangedfortheJointMatriculationBoardtoprescribe,justforBradfordGrammarSchool,aspecialpaperontheperiod200–133BC.Tohelpusprepareforthis,hecameupwithasmallGermaneditionofPolybius—Idon’trecallwhoseitwas—which
Welcome to the Liverpool Conference
Page 2 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
hehandedtoanotherboyandmyselfwiththeinstructiontotranslateanumberofchosenpassages,toprécisthemandreproducetheresult,usingakindofjellystainedwithpurpleink,fortherestoftheform,whichattheexpenseofseveralfreeperiodswedid.TherewasofcoursenoquestionofusingaLoebinthisoperation.Idon’tthinkweknewwhataLoebwas!
WhenIlastheardoftheotherboy,hewaslecturinginEconomicsattheUniversityofLeeds,soitseemslikelythatPolybiusdidn’tplayagreatpartinhislaterlife.Formeitwasobviouslygoingtobeadifferentstory.Ijustwonderhowmanygrammar-schoolboysinthelate1920swerereadingPolybius:notmany,Ifancy!Iwastheluckyone.
Wehaveasplendidrangeofparticipantsinthecongress:Iamreallymovedthatsomanyhavechosentocomelongdistancestotakepart.AndI’mgratefultoTomHarrison,BruceGibson,andtheircolleagueshereinLiverpoolfortheorganizationithassurelyinvolved.ButIhavealreadytakenenoughofyourtime;solettheworkbegin.
FrankWalbank
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 1 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
Introduction:F.W.Walbank,Polybius,andtheDeclineofGreece
BruceGibson
ThomasHarrison
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0001
AbstractandKeywords
Thischaptertakesasitsstarting-pointWalbank'swritingsonGreekdecline.FarfromhavingrenouncedhispoliticalinterestsinordertowritehiscommentaryonPolybius,Walbank'sexaminationofthedeclineofancientsocieties(bothGreekandRoman)isdeeplyembeddedwithinWalbank'swiderpoliticalandsocialconcerns.Thoughthe1930sand1940swastheperiodwhereWalbank'shistoriographyismostobviouslyengagedwithcontemporaryconcerns,echoinghisinterestinhistorianssuchasRostovtzeffandDeSanctis,engagementwiththecontemporaryworldremainsasignificantbutunderratedelementofhisscholarshipthroughouthiscareer.DrawingextensivelyonWalbank'sunpublishedpapers(nowheldinLiverpool),thischapterseekstosetthepoiseandobjectivityofWalbank'sachievementasanancienthistorianincounterpointwithapervasiveandlong-lastingelementofhiswork,thecontinuingtopicalityofancienthistory
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 2 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
inthemodernworld.
Keywords:F.W.Walbank,Polybius,Greekdecline,Romandecline,DeSanctis,Rostovtzeff,Commentaries
Thisbookderivesfromaconference,‘Polybius1957–2007’,heldinLiverpoolinJuly2007tomarkthefiftiethanniversaryofthepublicationofthefirstvolumeofFrankWalbank’sHistoricalCommentaryonPolybius.Itmightinsteadhavecommemoratedothermilestones:thecompletion(ifnotthepublication1)seventy-fiveyearsbeforeofWalbank’sAratosofSicyon;or—stillfurtherback—hisintroductiontoPolybius,whenasan18-year-oldschoolboyin1927hewasaskedbyhisteacher,NedGoddard,totranslateandprécis‘asmall,rathergrubbyGermanschooledition’(inthephraseusedinWalbank’sownunpublishedmemoir,theHypomnemata).2Aboveandbeyondanysuchdates,ofcourse,theconferencewasintendednottohonouranyparticularvolumebutratherthemanbehindthem.FrankWalbankwasunabletoattendtheconferenceinperson,buthediscussedwithusourplansfortheconference,heopenedtheproceedingswithavideomessage(printedbeforethisintroduction),andhewasabletoreadanumberofthepapers.Hediedon23October2008.Togetherwiththecontributorstothisvolume,andmanymore,weremainhugelygratefulforhissupport,forhisexample,andforhisscholarlylegacy.
TherecanbenomodernscholarmorecloselyassociatedwithanancientauthorthanWalbankwithPolybius.AsPolybiusmadehislife’sworkthetellingofthestoryof‘bywhatmeansandunderwhatformofconstitutiontheRomansinlessthanfifty-threeyearssucceededinsubjectingthewhole(p.2) inhabitedworldtotheirsolegovernment’(Plb.1.1.5),PolybiusandhisworldwereWalbank'slifeandwork.3Inadditiontothe2,357pagesofdistilledscholarshipwhichmakeupthethree-volumeCommentary,themonographsonAratusandonPhilipVwhichwerethestepping-stonestoit,andhisrevisionstoPaton’sLoebedition(nowemerging,butwhichforalongtimeseemedtohave‘runintothesand’4),hisnumerousarticleswhichrangeoverHellenistichistoryandGreekhistoriography,eveniftheydonotfeaturethenameofPolybiusintheirtitles,5arefrequentlyrootedininterpretationsofhistext.‘Perhapsthedaywillcome’,wroteoneapprovingreviewerofPhilipV,6‘whenMrWalbank,ashematures,willattemptageneralview,andgivetothegeneralpublic(whathislearningqualifieshimtogive)apictureofthatHellenizedeasternMediterraneanintowhichRomemoved,andwithwhichRomefused,duringthesecondandfirstcenturiesB.C.’Thattoohedulyaccomplished,throughhisFontanaHistory,TheHellenisticWorld,and(formorescholarlyreaders)throughhiscontributionstothehistoriesofMacedoniaandtheHellenisticvolumesoftheCambridgeAncientHistorywhichheco-edited.7
Whateverdisagreementsmightbehadoverdetails,andnomatterthatsomeofhisearlierpublications—written,itshouldberemembered,aroundthree‐quartersofacenturyago—reflecttheconcernsandagendasoftheirtime,8itisclearthat,ifanyscholar’soutputcanbesaidtorepresentmorethanthesumofitsparts,Walbank’scan.Hisachievement,inthewordsofonerecentassessment(thatofJohnDavies),wasto‘[bring]Polybiosoutofthespecialistside-channelsintothemainstreamofhistoriography…tomakehisthemeandperiod…intooneofthecentralstoriesofClassical
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 3 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Antiquity,and…tosetthegoldstandardforahistoricalcommentaryonaClassicaltext’.9InassessingWalbank’scareerin1984,ArnaldoMomiglianolistedhim,withRonaldSymeandA.H.M.Jones,asoneofthethree‘PersonsoftheGreatTrinityofcontemporaryBritishancienthistorians’.10AlthoughWalbank’s(p.3) laterwritingsarepepperedwithmodestacknowledgementsofhowhisviewshadbeenalteredbysubsequentwork,orofhisappreciationofthegreatercomplexityofagiventopic11—for,ashesaysofPolybius,‘nomancanremainentirelythesameforfiftyyears’12—,thereisalsoanextraordinaryconsistencyinhiswork,bothintermsofthethemesaddressedandthemanneroftheirtreatment,aconsistencywhichconveysthesensealmostofasustainedprogramme.
Howdidheachieveallthis?Inpart,ofcourse,suchproductivityistheresultoflongevity.AsJohnHendersonhasputit,‘melodramatically,wecouldsaythatittookRomelesstime,accordingtoPolybius,toachieveworldhegemony—fifty-threeyears—thanFWWhashadtopolishofftheHistories’13,andthesamepointwasmadebyWalbankhimselfinthecontextofBook6.14Itwasalsotheresultofanextraordinarydoggedness,aneyefordetail,and‘ship-shapeorganization’—traitsreflectedalsoinhisdealingswithpublishers,andtheorganizationofhispapers15—aswellasthedifficultpersonalcircumstancesfromwhichPolybiusprovidedarefuge.16
Italsorequiredimagination—theimagination,first,eventoconceiveofascholarlyenterprise,suchasthecommentary,onsograndascaleandwithsuchaconsistentformat.(AlthoughthefirstvolumeofA.W.Gomme’scommentaryonThucydideswaspublishedin1945,onlyayearafterWalbankhadagreedtoundertakePolybius,hisostensiblemodelinearlydiscussionswasHowandWells’Herodotus.17)Theleapofimaginationrequiredwasallthemoreextraordinarygiventhewartimecontext.AsKennethSisamofOxfordUniversityPresswrotetohiminannouncingthatthedelegates‘haveagreedtoencourage’thecommentary,‘Itisgoodtothinkthatinthesetimesscholarscanstillsettledowntosuchlong-distancetasks’.18
(p.4) ImaginationwasalsorequiredtosetPolybiusandhisHistoriessopainstakinglywithintheirsetting.Anunderstandingofthephysicalcontextofancienthistory,first,wasfundamentalbothtoWalbank’sownevolutionasahistorianandtohishistoricalapproach.ThecruiseonwhichWalbankfirstvisitedGreeceandSicilyinthespringof1930wastheprizeforaHellenicTravellers’Clubessaycompetitionwhichhadcaughthiseye,onthetopicoffederalismintheGreekworld.19‘[S]tudents[ofancienthistory]’,hewrotelater,‘shouldall(ideally)havemadetheirownperiegesisofsomeMediterraneanland.’20Hisearliestwork,AratosofSicyon,isrepletewithreferencestothegeographyofmodernGreece,theresultofaLeafTravellingStudentshipawardedbyhisCambridgecollegein1932.21(‘Fromthetop[ofPentelicon]’,hewroteinhisreportonhistravels,‘thereisasmuchtobelearntaboutGreekhistoryasfromweeksofBury.’22)Inhisreviewsofothers’work,sketch-mapsandillustrationsoftopographyarealwayswelcomed,though‘carelessnessinmattersoftopographymayseemmorevenial’.23Asheenjoinedhisstudents,‘UnlessoneknowsGreeceasis,constantlymakingfalsepictures.Needofaconsciousefforttocorrectthis.’24Atthesametime,however,heneededtoputPolybius(andhisaudience)withintheirintellectualsetting.AshisdiscussionofPolybiangeography
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 4 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
makesclear,heknewnottomakeunrealisticassumptionsofeither:25
Wehabituallyaskfromancienthistorianswhatwehavenorighttoask—namelythattheirtopographyshallbeadequatetopermitofpin-pointinganactiononthe(p.5)contoursofalarge-scaleAustrianStaffMap.Polybiushadnottheadvantageofsuchamap,norhisreaderseither.Forthem,alonglistofbarbarousplacenamescouldhavelittlemeaning
Thereisadanger,however,ofrenderingWalbankastoocoollydetached,hisscholarshipasmerelytheresultofalonggrindofhistoricalreconstruction.Justasacentralthemewithinhispublishedworkistheblindnessofhistoricalactorstothebroadermovementstowhichtheywerecontributing(discussedbelow),soWalbankwashighlysensitivetothecontextualcharacterofhistoricalworkitselfandofthecapacityofthehistoriantofailtoappreciatethis.Reviewing,halfacenturylater,hisearlierworkontheideaofGreekhistoryasa‘struggleforGreekunity’,hesupposedthat‘today…suchanapproachtoGreekhistorymustseemstrangelyout-of-date…mainlyimportanttoustodayasareminderofhowmuchourpreoccupationsashistoriansmaylaterbeseentohavereflectedcontemporaryissues’.26(Hisownapproachtothequestion,thoughitwasindeedcolouredbycontemporaryconcerns—asweshallsee—neverthelessinmanywaysanticipatedmuchsubsequentscholarshiponGreekidentity.27)Walbankalso—asbefitsahistorianworkingonPolybius—hadaclearvisionofhistoryasadialecticalprocess;orasheputitmoregraphically:‘Studyinghistorydoesnotmeanabsorbingthepastasifoneweredrinkingcoffee.’28Withretrospect,itiseasytoseehowthethemesofGreekfederalism,ofAchaeanresistancetothelooming‘cloudinthewest’,orafocusontheroleofgreatmeninhistory,spoketocontemporaryconcerns.29Insomeofhisearliestwork,however,aswillbecomeapparent,heshowedawillingnesstodevelopanalogiestocontemporaryhistory,ortorevealhisownpoliticalcommitment,30explicitly.AshisHypomnematamakeclear,hewas‘(p.6)
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 5 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
F.W.Walbank,Bassae(1936)
(p.7) oftenworriedbytheproblemofreconcilingthesubjectofmyworkwiththeworldwewerenowlivingin’.31
Theworkinquestioncovers,atleastprimafacie,awidehistoricalrange:inchronologicalorder,anunpublishedpaper‘SocialRevolutionatSparta’(1935),ashortpiecepublishedunderthepenname‘Examiner’asking‘IsourRomanHistoryTeachingReactionary?’(1943a),‘TheCausesofGreekdecline’(1944),hisshortbookTheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest(1946a),andacontributiontoTheCambridgeEconomicHistoryofEuropeonthelateRomaneconomy,completedinthesameperiodasTheDeclineoftheRomanEmpire,butpublishedonlyin1952.32Itisquicklyapparent,however,thatthesepiecesalldevelopacommonapproachandacommonhistoricalthesis—anapproachandathesiswhichdrewon(hisresponseto)contemporaryeventsandtoawholediscourseoncivilizationanditsdeclinewhichdominatedtheinter-waryears.33‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’maylookprimarilyatthereasonsforGreekimpotenceinthefaceofRomanexpansion,butitsoonturnsintoabroaderthesisofthedeclineofantiquity:‘ForinfacttheGreekandtheRomanfailuresareinessenceone.’34
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 6 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
History,first,ispressingly,urgentlyrelevant—orinWalbank’sterm‘topical’.‘[To]themenofWesternEuropetheproblemofwhyRomefellhasalwaysbeenatopicalquestion’(hisitalics)—evenif‘theanswerstothis(p.8) problemthemselvesformacommentaryupontheagesthatproposedthem’.35‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’beginswithSer.SulpiciusRufus’evocationofthedeathofthecitiesofGreeceinhisletterofconsolationtoCiceroonthelossofhisdaughter(Fam.4.5.4)before,withamagnificentfilm-likesweep,pressingtheurgencyofthequestioninacontemporarycontext:36
TheSaronicGulf,oncethecentreoftheworld,wasnow,forallthatGreecemeant,adeadlakelappingaboutthefoundationsofdeadcities.Inthattragicdecay—whichwasnotconfinedtomainlandGreece—weareconfrontedwithoneofthemosturgentproblemsofancienthistory,andonewithaspecialsignificanceforourgeneration,whowerealreadylivinginanageofeconomic,politicalandspiritualupheaval,evenbeforethebombsbegantoturnourowncitiesintoshatteredruins.37
Thecausesofdecline,whetherGreekorRoman,liedeeplyinthestructureofsociety:the‘socialrelationoftheclasses’,the‘contrastwhichunderlayancientcivilization,betweentheleisuredclassofthecityandthemultitudelabouringtosupportitontheland’,andthefailureofthemiddleclassestoextenddemocracy.38Thefoundationofclassicalcivilizationonslaveryandexploitationallowedfor‘brilliantminoritycivilization[s]’:so,forexample,the‘citizenoffifth-centuryAthensfelthimselftobethememberofacompact,brilliant,exclusive,andhighlyconsciouscommunity,whichwas,infact,livinglargelyattheexpenseoftheresidentalien,theslaveandthesubjectally’.39Buttherewasapricetopay.
Thepatternofclassdivisionled,first,toanideologicalcleavage,acontrastinGreekculturebetweenthe‘thingsofthehandandthethingsofthemind’.40IntheGreekcase,itledalsotoafailuretoachieveunity,‘theunitywhichalonemighthaveenabledthemtopreservetheirfreedomfromoutsideconquest’.41Andtheclasssystemalsobroughtaboutastagnationinthekindoftechnicaldevelopmentthatcouldhavetriggeredanindustrialrevolution—andwhich,inturn,wouldhaveallowedfor‘masscivilisation,andalsotheconcentration(p.9) oftheproletariatinfactoriesandminesunderconditionswhichenabledittoattainacommunityofpurposeandarealisationofitsownstrength’.42
Thereweresparksthroughoutantiquityofsocialrevolution43—atermwhichhejustifiesatlengthinhis1935lecture.44These,however,werecomfortablysuppressed.First,throughbreadandcircuses,inotherwordsbyputtingaplasteroverthesituation.Secondly,throughmoreaggressiveaction:by‘strengthen[ing]theinstrumentsoftheState’—whatherefersto(inthecontextoflaterRomanempire)asthe‘CorporativeState’.45(‘Rigidstatecontrol’thenunderminedthesuccessfullaissez-faireapproachtoeconomicactivityoftheearlyprincipate—withtheDiocletianicpriceedictstandingasasymbolofthetransformation.46)And,finally,throughwhatWalbankreferstoasa‘culturalfailure’,by‘theimplantingofbeliefsandattitudesconvenienttoauthority’.Platoisaparticularvillainhere,guilty—forhisrecommendationofreligionasameansofsocialcontrolintheLaws—of‘theblackesttreasontothatfloweringofthehumanspiritwhich
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 7 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
wecallHellenism’.Butsubsequentphilosophyislikewisecondemnedfornarrowingitsfocuswith‘acommonnoteofdefeat’.47
Thereisonewordwhichsumsupthisresponsetosocialinequality:fascism.The‘corporativestate’oflaterempirerevealsa‘completepolitical,socialandculturalcorrespondence’withmodernfascism:48
Bothinstitutionsrepresentanattempttoforceadecayingsocialsystemtocontinueworkingattheexpenseofthehappinessandfreedomofthemassesofthepeople.Bothcaterfortheluxuryneedsofafortunateminority,whileforcingtheresttoacceptscarcityandhardshipastheirnaturalportion.Bothgotogetherwithculturaldecay,adeclineinrationalismandscientificthought,andthefosteringofsuperstitionandnewmyths,whetherofthesavinggraceofMithras,orofthesavinggraceofAryanbloodandsoil.
‘TheSocialRevolutionatSparta’—apiecerichwithparallelstoLordRothermere,DrGoebbels,andEnglishpublicschools—likewisecaststheSpartan(p.10) reformerCleomenesIIIas‘unconsciously…foreshadowingthedevelopmentandmethodsofthefascistdictatorship’:49
Establishthecultofthenationaliststate,winapositionofunquestionedcommandbyacoupd’etat,andmaintainitbyforceofarmsandkeenpropaganda;letfreedombedefinedastherighttodoasoneistold…itisnomereaccidentthatwefindbothhereandinmodernGermanyappealstoanimaginarygoldenageunderLycurgosortheancientGermanicheroes;emphasisonagricultureasafirmbasisforthestate;marshallingoftheyounginmilitaryfashion;carefulorganisationofthoughtthroughpropagandaandcensorship;rootingoutofunsympatheticelementsfromthestatebytheemploymentofproscriptionsandassassinations;thesubordinationoftheindividualtothestateandanaggressivenationalismwhichrejectstheclaimsofanygreaterunitthanthenationalstate.
Wasthispatternofdecline—firstintofascism,thenatrophy—aninevitableone?Whenitcomestotheancientworld,theanswerisuncertain.‘TheSocialRevolutionatSparta’suggeststhattherewasanantidotetoGreekdecline(addressingtheunderlyingsocialproblem,extendingdemocracy)butthatitwasonewhichwasoutoftheirreach.(‘Whatno-oneoffered,becauseno-oneknewhowtoofferit,wasasolutionthatwouldhavegiventheworkmanafairreturnforhislabour,thatwouldhaveremovedthegapbetweentherichandthestarving,andwouldhaveenabledaunitedandcontentedGreecetofaceRomewithoutclass-warfareforeverstrikingherintherear.’50)‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’suggestsmoreemphaticallythatasolutionwasimpossibleinantiquity,projectingitshopesontothelateradoptionofaclassicallegacy.EveninthewesternhalfoftheRomanempiretherewasneveracompletebreak,inturnallowingforanancientlegacytobethebasisofaformofliberationinthemodernworld(butatwhatpoint?):51
Consequently,whenthebarbarianinvasionswerethemselveseventsinthedistant
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 8 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
past,andnewtownsbegantospringupinEurope,inhabitedbyneitherserfsnorslaves,thetechniquesoftheancientworldwerethereformentobuildon.Unobtrusivelythecraftsmengroupedaroundmanorormonasteryhad(p.11)passedtheirknowledgedownfromfathertoson.Andsooncemore,inanatmospherefreefromthedeadeningeffectoftheevermorerigidclass-systemoflateantiquity,mencouldgoforwardtothemasteryofnature.Withthemtheyborethefullculturallegacyoftheancientworld,adaptednowtoataskfromwhichantiquityitselfhadnecessarilydrawnback,butwhichgavepromiseofeasyaccomplishmenttothenewandfruitfulpartnershipbetweenmindandhand.
Inthemodernworld,bycontrast,therewasnoinevitabilitytofascismanddecline,apointhammeredrepeatedlyinDeclineoftheRomanEmpire.Fascismhadcloseditselfofftothechangingworld,butthedifferentcircumstancesofthemodernworld—industrialization,the‘unlimitedpossibilities’ofeconomicgrowth,andaboveall‘thewillandthecapacity[oftheworkingclass]totakeovertheorganizationofsocietyinordertotransformitintoanequalitariancommunity’—wereallentirelynew.52‘Hencewehavenoreasontoregardasourinexorablelotastagnating,latter-worldByzantinism,restingonarigidifiedindustry,withindustrialbaronsoffering,gangster-like,theonlyresistancetoanall-powerfulStateandcommonmencreepinghumblybeneaththeprotectionofbandsofrivalexploiters.Thefutureoffersussomethingbrighterthanthat.’53
Thisunshakeablebeliefinprogressextendsalsotohistoricalmethodology.‘Todaytheperiodistakingonamoredefiniteshape:graduallytheoldproblemsarebeingsolved.’54Inparticular,theexplosionofmaterialevidenceremovesthehistorian’sdependenceonliterarysources,makingitpossible‘forthefirsttime…toturnamicroscopeontheancientworld’.Theeffectsofthisonknowledgeofthe‘socialmanofantiquity’are‘thegreatestrevolutionintheclassicalstudiesofthelastsixtyyears’.55When‘Examiner’askedthequestion‘isourRomanhistoryteachingreactionary?’,itwasnotaquestionwhichlookedlongforananswer.‘Threeyearsofwarhaveclarifiedagoodmanyissues…Thewarhasforcedustotakesides.’56AndsoitiscrucialthatschoolboysshouldbeabletodistinguishintheirunderstandingofRomanhistorybetween‘intellectualassent’—understanding,forexample,thatAugustus’religiousrevivalwasa‘ “good”measureforhim,inthosecircumstances’hefaced—and‘moralapprovalandemotionalenthusiasm’.57Ifweonly‘turnoutthecramberepetitaofourgrandfathers,then,Isuggest,our(p.12)schoolsmightdobettertosticktomathematics.’58Anditisnotthecasethatschoolteachersareinadvertentlyfailingtopickuponamoreenlightenedconsensus:‘Ourpresentattitudetowardsthehistoryofthelaterepublicandearlyempireislargelyalegacyfromanageandaclasswhicharenowthemselvespartofhistory’.Historyneedstoberewrittenfromaperspectivefreeofclassdivisions—and,ashewroteintheaftermathofwar,thehumanistandthehistorianbroughttogether,inanallianceboth‘offensiveanddefensive’,withinarenewedClassicsinwhich‘wedrawnofrontiers’.59‘CiceromustnolongerbeforcedintothepatternoftheVictorianstatesman.Wemuststudyhimandreadhimagainsthisownbackgroundandtrytojudgehimbyhisownstandardsandcriteria.WemustbeconsciousofhowstrangetheGreeksandRomanswere,howdifferentfrom,aswellashowlikeourselves.’60
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 9 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thedriveheretoresolvethevariousdissonancesbetweenworkandworldisveryclear.Ifweallespousevaluesofdemocraticopenness,wemustteachaccordingly.Itisnotjust,however,thatthestudyofthepastshouldbealignedwithcontemporaryvalues.TheconclusionofDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWestisthat‘itisourduty…toexerteverysinewagainstthetendenciesinourownsocietywhichresemblethosepredominatinginthelateEmpire…’.61Theuniqueproblemsofthecontemporaryworlddemandedaneducationtailoredtothem.AsWalbankaskedinapost-warlecture‘Science,HistoryandtheAtomicBomb’,writteninthecontextofthenewEducationAct:‘Whatkindoftrainingwillcreatethekindofpeoplewhocanstabiliseworldsociety?i.e.WHATISANEDUCATIONfortheageofATOMICPOWER?’Theanswer:‘Mustbeacombinationofscienceandhumanestudies’.62Scienceprovidedthemeansforsociety’sdevelopment(aswellasforitsdestruction)(p.13) —oneshouldresistanobscurantistreactionagainstscientificculture—andyetsciencealsohaditslimits.63
Atthesametime,however,tensionsemergewhichareworthhighlighting.Theconclusionthatweshouldputourenergiesintorightingthewrongsofourowncivilizationisconceivedasanalternativeto‘solacingourselveswiththepassingofmoraljudgementsonthosewhoarenowlongsincedead’:64
itisanhistorian’sbusinesstounderstand,nottomoralize,todiscovercausesandresults,nottopassethicaljudgementsonindividualsandpolicies.Andletusavoidliketheplaguesuperficialanalogieswiththefundamentallydifferentcircumstancesofthemodernworld.(1943a:61)
AndyetitcanscarcelybeclaimedthatWalbankhereavoidsmoralizinghimself.‘Letusremindourclassesofthetruism—exemplifiedinEuropeto-day—thatnonationcanenslaveothersandyetremainfreeitself’;Romehad‘apricetopay’foritsexpansion;‘theprovincesfoundthemselvesobligedtoshoulderthewholeburdenofanextravagantoligarchyandanunnaturallyswollenanddegradedpopulace’:65itishardtoseethesestatementsasreflectingonlythedispassionateidentificationofhistoricalpatterns.
TheremightappeartobeacontradictionalsoinWalbank’sdisavowalofanalogiesbetweenancientandmodern.Butthereasonshegives(inafootnote)forthisposition—ontheonehand,thepresenceofslavery,ontheother,the‘completelychangedmaterialbasisofmodernsociety’,inotherwordsthetechnicalprogressthatoffersthemodernworlditsdefenceagainstfascism—suggestananswer:youranalogiesaresuperficial,minearenot.Asimilarcontradictionappearswhenitcomestotheideaofthe‘topical’.Thecontributionsto(thefirsteditionof)theCambridgeAncientHistoryofOertel‘conformtoanold-establishedtraditionfordiscussingthedeclineofRome…hehasapproacheditasatopicalquestion,relevant(asallhistorymustinthelongrunberelevant)totheissuesconfrontingusinourtimes’.66ItisnotclearwhereOertel’sfaultlies:wouldthelessonsonlyemergelater?InapproachingthefallofRomeasatopicalquestion,howwasheactingdifferentlyfromWalbank?Orwashisfaultnotinfactintheapproachbutintheanswersitgenerated?HadOertelfailedtotranscendhisowncontext?
(p.14) Finally,thereisperhapsanaporiainWalbank’smodelofthe‘masscivilisation’
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 10 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thatindustrialtechniquescanunleash.‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’takesasitsstarting-pointRostovtzeff’squestion:67‘Isitpossible…toextendahighercivilisationtothelowerclasseswithoutdebasingitsstandardanddilutingitsqualitytothevanishingpoint?…Isnoteverycivilisationboundtodecayassoonasitpenetratesthemass?’Itisaquestionheanswersbyinvertingit:68itisonlybypenetratingthemassthatcivilizationscansurvive.Andyetwhatwouldthisidealcivilization,basedona‘partnershipofmindandhand’,looklike?Itwouldbebasedfirstonvalues‘towhichto-day…weallnecessarilysubscribe’:69
Webelieveinthevirtueoffreethoughtanddiscussion,incomingtoconclusionsonthebasisofobjectiveevidence,indecidingourcoursesofactionthroughtheoperationofaninformeddemocracy:weareagainsttheautocraticruleofagrouporanindividual,werejectdogmas(suchasracialteaching)basedonemotion,aprioriassertionsthatmustnotbetested,‘inspired’truthasthecontrollerofscientificinvestigation.Ifanyonedoubtsthatwehavemadeupourmindsaboutthesevalues,lethimconsiderthefactthat99.99percent.ofthepeopleofthiscountryarereadytofightoninanincreasinglyconsciousstruggleagainsttheFascistenemywhodeniesthemall.
Atthesametime,thereisalsoaharshness—bornofharshtimes—inboththerhetoricofscientific(andhistoriographical)progressandinthepictureofsocietythatisconjuredup.‘Inonewayoranother’,Walbankclaims,‘ourownsocietyhasincorporatedwithinitstextureallthatmattersofclassicalculture…’.70Butwhenonelooksforculture,theemphasisthroughoutisonthepractical,suggestingperhapsanuneaseoverhighculture:‘Buses,bicyclesandtrainsbringthevillagestothetown;thepostalcatalogue,thewireless,thevan,andthecinemabringthetownandcitytothevillage.’71Ifthisfailuretorealizeaculturedmasscivilizationcountsasanaporiaitisonesharedbyhiscontemporaries.Onthethresholdofwar,LouisMacNeiceaskedandansweredRostovtzeff’squestioninsimilarterms:72
…Itissohardtoimagine Aworldwherethemanywouldhavetheirchancewithout(p.15) Afallinthestandardofintellectualliving Andnothingleftthatthehighbrowcaredabout.Whichfearsmustbesuppressed.Thereisnoreasonforthinking That,ifyougiveachancetopeopletothinkorlive,Theartsofthoughtorlifewillsufferandbecomerougher Andnotreturnmorethanyoucouldevergive.
Thiswartimeperiodwas,unsurprisingly,thehigh-watermarkofWalbank’seffortstofinddirectpoliticallessonsinantiquity.AsJohnHendersonhasdiscussed,73notwithstandingthefactthathisworkonPolybius‘alwaysturnedontheassumptionthatthelifeandtimesofthehistory-writermustinteractivelyengagewiththeproductionofthework’,Walbanksoonlearnedtoeffacehisownpoliticalengagement,anengagementwhichhadhadtheironiceffectofdisqualifyinghimfromactiveserviceinthewaragainstfascism.74JustasPolybiuswas‘kidnapped,forHistory’,75soWalbankchosehenceforthto‘[abide]bythe
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 11 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
depersonalizingregimeofthecommentarywithintheasceticorderofScholarship’.76Inhismemoir—whichendsitsnarrative,significantly,in1946,thedateatwhichhewasappointedtotheLiverpoolChairofLatin—WalbankdistanceshisDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWestasatractforthetimes,‘notobjectivehistoryasthehistorianunderstandsit’.77Healsoappearstoundercuthisown‘politicaleffusion[s]’,byjuxtaposingreportsofhislecturesorpublicationswithmoremomentoushistoricalevents,VEDayorthebombingofHiroshimaandNagasaki.78AsHendersoncharacterizesWalbank’sownnarrative,‘FWWasgoodasmarriesintoa…politicalradicalismthatimplodesbeforeitcanchargeupacrusade,andinsteadendsupdeprivinghimofawar,ofallthehistrionicrushandprovingofself.His(substitutive)effortstomobilizehistoricalwritingandClassicsgetneatlymockedbytheplanetaryenormitiesofthermonucleardetonation…’.79
ThisnarrativeofWalbank’srejectionofanearliermoredirectpoliticalengagementthroughhistory-writing,ofhis‘[smoothing]awayobsolescentandlapsedinvestmentsandintellections’,80needstobequalified,however.First,itisclearthatinthefirstdecadeofhiscareer,hewaswritingin,experimentingwith,avarietyofstylesandapproaches.Manyofthethemesof‘SocialRevolutionatSparta’featureinAratos,althoughtheretheyare(p.16) subordinatedtoaconventionalhistoricalnarrativefreeofmorethanpassingreferencestocontemporaryevents.81Whatwasappropriateforthelecturehallwasnotappropriateforafirstmonograph.TheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWestwasadifferentkindofbookforadifferentaudience.(Andthesameholdstrueofhislaterwork:retrospectiveessaysallowforakindofreflectionnotpossiblewithincommentary.)
AnotherwayofputtingthiswouldbeWalbank’sown:academicwork,ontheonehand,andpoliticalactivityontheotherweretwoworlds—‘almostliketwoseparateformsofexistence’‘temporarilybroughttogether’:throughthefigureof(theSwanseaprofessor)BenjaminFarrington,orthroughthecorrespondencewithPieroTreveswhichmovedeffortlesslybetweenthetwo.82Inaletterof30May1942,forexample,Trevesdreamedofapost-warItaly:‘—afree,liberated,decentandEuropeanItaly—,whereFrankwillbecomingtolectureatourUniversitiesonthingsGreek,MarytoinquireintotheconditionsoftheItalianworkers,andthechildrentoenjoyItalianlandscape,artandcooking.’Asthismiragesuggests,however,itwasMaryWalbankwhowasthemoreactivelypoliticalofthetwo:he‘hadtheacademic’sinclinationtotalkanddiscussandthentoleaveitatthat:forMaryaconclusionwasthefirststeptoaction.’83Withgradualpoliticaldisillusionment,Mary’speriodicill-health,andanacademiccareerthatbecameincreasinglyengrossing,thetwoworldsofacademicworkandpoliticalactivitymaywellhavedivergedfurther.84
Atthesametime,itisworthemphasizingthattherootsofWalbank’slaterworkliepreciselywithinthisexplicitlypoliticalphase.ThisismostclearlytrueofWalbank’slong-standinginterestinfederalism:aconcernwhichreachesbacktothe1930prizeessaywhichlaunchedhimontheM.V.ThéophileGauthiertoGreece,andontohiscareer.ThiswastheveryyearthathehadjoinedtheLeagueofNationsUnion,85andthe‘FederalideainGreece—with(p.17) specialreferencetoitsdevelopmentinHellenistictimes’alreadydirectlyexploitstheparallelbetweenancientandmodern:86
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 12 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
TothemodernstudentthisconceptionofFederalismanditspracticalapplicationisofintenseinterest,sinceitistoaformofFederalismthatEuropeistodaylookingasaremedyforitsmisfortunes…AndsoitiswellthatweshouldatthesametimerecognisethatitistoGreecethatweoweouroriginalconceptionoffederalgovernment;thatitwasintheAchaeanLeaguethatmenwhosepatriotismwasfarmorelocal,andsofarmoreintensethanours,firstlearnedtosacrificethatpatriotismforthegoodofagreaterbody.
Walbank’ssubsequentreadinginthethirtiesincludedresearchesintothewidestvarietyofformsofpoliticalorganization:inCelticIreland,Polynesia,andpre-RomanItaly,amongothersocieties.87Afterthewar,however,thestudyofancientfederalismbecamenolongerjustasearchforabetteralternativebutalsoaformofinquest.So,intheconcludinglectureofhis1945–6courseonWorldAffairs:88‘Theproblemofpeace.Whydidwefail1918–39?GrowthofNaziGermany!Yes,butwhywastheLNinadequate?Becausethebignationswouldnotshelvenationalauthority.’Whatofthefuture?‘Towardsworldorganisation?Isaworldstatepossibleordesirable?Whatwouldbethetransition?Federation?InAchaea,Switzerland,USA.’Atthispoint,amarginalnoteshoutsout:‘valueofancienthistory!’
TherootsofWalbank’sleastdirectlytopicalwork,thePolybiancommentarycanalsobeseentoliewithinthispoliticalphase—andnotonlyinthelimitedsensethatitwasinthisperiodthatthecommentarywasinitiated.Walbank’smemoirgivestheimpressionthatthechoiceofPolybiusasthesubjectofacommentarywasalmostserendipitous.89Butthisisprobablymisleading.
Walbank’sreviewsofothers’workintheperiodrunningupto1944suggestthattheideaofanoutsizedscholarlyprojectthatmighttakealifetimehadbeenplayingonhismind.‘Thepublicationofvol.xiiofthe[Cambridge]AncientHistoryon20April,1939,bringsthisvastworktocompletion’;90aproject,headds,thedesignofwhichwasbasedon‘rigidexclusionofallprejudice,whetherofrace,creed,orparty’.‘Initscomprehensiveframework’,hiscritiqueofRostovtzeffconcludes,‘itsvastlearning,itscarefulweighingof(p.18) evidence,itslivelystyle,andaboveallinitsessentialhumanity,itstandsoutasatriumphantassertionofthatEuropeanscientifictraditionwhichadmitsnofrontiersofrace,language,orcreed’.91
Asisclearfromtheseexamples,suchprojects—andwemaysuppose,theideaofthePolybiancommentary—wereattractivebecausetheyembodiedvalues,notbecausetheywerefreefromthem.AshisreviewsofwartimeGermanscholarshipmakeclear,theideaofascholarshiptaintedbyideologyisnotjustanabstractconstruct.‘ItissincerelytobehopedthatG.willeventuallypublishhisproposedcontinuationofthisstudyunderconditionswhichnolongerencouragetheperniciousirrelevanciesofRassentheorie.’92SimilarlyhelampoonstheunderlyingnarrativeofStier’sGrundlagenundSinndergriechischenGeschichte:93
Ultimately,S’sinterpretationofGreekhistoryrestsonamystique,thatoftheindogermanic-nordicsoul,withitsuniquecollectionofvirtues…thechiefamong
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 13 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thembeingloveoffreedom.GreekhistoryisthestoryoftheclashbetweentheinnateEuropeanideaoffreedomandtheideaoforder,whichtheGreekstookoverfromtheAryansofAsia,whohadabsorbeditfromthesoulofthatcontinent.Thisconflictbetweenfreedomandorder,aftermanyvicissitudes,waseventuallyresolvedbyChristianityontheinnerplaneoftheindividualconscience.
Atthesametime,however,evenaworkwhichtookamoreenlightenedcuefromcontemporaryevents(Schachermeyr’sAlexanderderGrosse),modellingitshistoricalprotagonistnegativelyinthelightoftherecentphenomenonofNationalSocialism,wasstillsubjecttocriticism:as‘perhapsover-schematic,toomuchinfluencedbyrecentexperiences’.94
Inotherwords,justasthewartimecontextencouragedthequestforahistorythatworeitstopicalityonitssleeve,italsoexertedacontraryforce:heightening,ratherthandiminishing,theappealofascholarshipconductedforitsownsake,thatcouldexpresshumanevaluesuntaintedbyideology.(Torespondappropriatelytothetopicalityofone’ssubjectwastotreadaperilouslynarrowpath.)Thismodelofhumanescholarship,however—thoughitmayhavebeenidealistic—wasneverwoolly.WalbankrevealedaninstinctivedistrustofabstractgeneralizationasearlyasAratos,butthistendencywas(p.19) onlyreinforcedinthisperiod.95Intheaftermathofthewar,forexample,hethrewhimselfintotherebuildingofscholarlylinksacrossEurope,96butashedidsoheresolutelydistancedhimselffromanybombast.‘Aconferenceon“theuniversalvalueofhumanism” ’,hebeganapapertotheRomemeetingoftheSodalitasErasmianain1949,‘cannotescapedefinitions’;hiswasaplea‘forthehumanist…tocomeoutofhisseclusionandadapt…tonewconditions’.97‘Onefeatureoftheold[humanistic]classicaltraining’,heinsistedlater,‘wastocreatecanonsofclarityandrelevance,andtodisciplinethewriter’.98Withoutthisfaithinscholarship,howelsecouldWalbankhavegoneonwritingandpublishing,inthedepthsofwar,suchdistilledscholarlypiecesas‘OlympichusofAlindaandtheCarianExpeditionofAntigonusDoson’?99Atthesametime,thegrandertheplannedprojectthegreatertheactoffaithinhumanescholarship.Toaskhowhecouldhaveconceivedsuchaplaninwartimeisononelevelmisconceived:thewaritselfhelpedtogeneratethescaleofhisambition.
WhyPolybius?GiventhescaleofhispreviousworkonHellenistichistory,thisisperhapsthewrongquestion.Thequestionthatneedstobeanswerediswhyheeverthoughttosuggestanyotherwork(Tacitus’Histories)?TheminimalistexplanationisthatTacitus’Historieswassuggestedtohimasatopic(in1943)byhismentor,andatthetimeHeadofDepartment,JamesMountford.DespiteMountford’spowerfulinfluence,however,thisminimalistexplanationforachoiceoftopicispartofapatterninWalbank’snarrativewherebyallhisacademicchoicesaresubjecttochance—apatternbeliedbytheintensityofhisacademicinterests.100Hisotherwritingsinthesameperiod(p.20) suggestsomealternativeanswers.AlthoughthedeclineofGreeceandthedeclineandfallofRomeareenvisagedaspartsofthesamestory,Greekdeclineisnomorethanthefirstact;inturningtotheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest,ontheotherhand,hewouldturnhisattentiontotheendofthestory.Secondly,althoughthismayseemremarkablein
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 14 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thelightofhissubsequentachievement,hemaywellhavehadanintrinsicpreferencefortheprincipateovertheHellenisticworldasahistoricalperiod.Althoughitcontainedwithinitselfthegermsofitsowndestruction—andsoacommentaryonTacituswouldstillhavebeenacontributiontothecentralquestionofancienthistory,thequestionofdecline—Walbankconceivedoftheearlyempireinmostlypositiveterms,thehigh-pointofalaissez-faireapproachtoeconomicactivity,asuccessfulpoliticalcompromise.101Bycontrast,‘AnythingthatfollowsDemosthenes’,hewroteofHellenistichistoryin1943,‘mustseemananti-climax—thoughnot,ofcourse,withoutitsowninterestandsignificance’.102WhenTacituswasthoughttobespokenfor,herevertedtoPolybius,thehistorianofGreekdeclineandfall,sothatwhenwordcamefromSyme,inneutralTurkey,thatTacituswasinfactfree,hischoicewasirreversible.103Walbank’s1943piece‘PolybiusontheRomanConstitution’showsveryclearlythebridgebetween‘TheCausesofGreekdecline’,ontheonehand,andthecommentaryontheother:Polybiuswasunabletoseethe‘contradictionintheverystructureofsecond-centurysociety…;hiswholeupbringingcombinedtopreventhiscomingtotermswithit’.Hewasattractedtotheideaofanacyclosisashestruggledtodealwiththe‘shadowofcomingdisasterthrownalreadyovertheinternalhistoryofRomebytheaccumulationofforeignconquests…’.104Withonlyalittlehindsight,thechoiceofPolybiuscouldeasilyberationalized:asWalbankwrotein1950(inareviewofavolume(p.21) published,ashenoted,inaseriesentitledProblemid’oggi),‘therearefewancientwriterswhoseworkhasthesameimmediateclaimuponourintereststoday.POLYBIUSwritesaboutthingswehaveallknown,Italiansnotleast…’.105
Evenafterthispoint,evenastheurgenttopicalityofthe‘causesofGreekdecline’becomessublimatedincommentary,itisclearthatWalbank’sconcerntorelatehisworkwiththeworlddidnotevaporate.AsMomiglianolaterobserved,ofthethreePersonsoftheTrinity(Syme,Jones,andWalbank)‘eveninJonestheconcernforthemodernworldwaslesspressingandexplicitthanitwasandisforWalbank’.106
Farfrombeinglefttomoulderontheshelves,forexample,TheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWestwasreissuedinexpandedandrevisedformin1969asTheAwfulRevolution,atitlethatconsciouslyechoedGibbon.107‘[T]hestridentimmediacyoftheoriginalgavewaytoamorescholarlytone’;108furtherreadingsectionsareadded,andthecorporativeStateisrebrandedastheAuthoritarianState.Itisworthpausing,however,overwhatremained:thebook’sopeningdeclarationoftheperennialtopicalityoftheperiod(p.11)orofthepowerofnewapproachesinturningamicroscopeonsociallife(pp.16–18);itscharacterizationofthe‘minoritycivilization’ofAthens,basedonexploitation;itsfinalinjunctiontothereadertofocushisorherenergiesontheameliorationofmodernsociety,and—ingeneral—thewholethesisofsocialinequalityand‘stagnationoftechnique’leadingtoauthoritarianismandcollapse.ThequestionofwhetherasavagefascisminevitablyawaitsmodernEuropeisbroadened(pp.114–15).ThecommontrendintheLateEmpireandthemodernworldisnottowardsfascismperse,but
fromanageoflaissezfairetooneofcontrolandstateplanning.Fromthispointof
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 15 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
view—whatevertheirotherdifferences—thereisacommonelementintheregimesofnaziGermany,communistRussia,‘capitalist’U.S.Aandthe‘welfare’statesofGreatBritainandseveralotherEuropeancountries.Arewethen(itissometimesasked)witnessinganewandominousstageinourcivilizationinwhichwemustallgraduallysinkintoastateofregimentationsimilartothatwhichheraldedtheendofwesternRome…?
(p.22) Itmaybesaidquitedecisivelyandatoncethatthereisnosuchnecessitywhatsoeverdrivingtheworldofthetwentiethcenturytowardsauthoritariantyranny.
Thereasonagainisfoundinthedifferenteconomicconditionsofancientandmodernsociety.Inshort,thepoliticalcalloftheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWestisnotmutedbutrefreshed.Aslateas1983,hedescribeddeSteCroix’sClassStruggleintheAncientGreekWorldasabook‘whichgoestotheheartofsomeofthemostimportantproblemsconfrontingstudentsoftheancientworld’—whilstmaintainingpositionsfromhisDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest.109
ThesamepatternisevidentinWalbank’sadaptationofhisoriginalremarksonthe‘barbarianperil’inthemodernworld.In1946amoreconfidentpictureispresentedofbarbarismatbay,withamemorablequotationfromanotherpassageinGibbon’s‘GeneralObservationsontheFalloftheRomanEmpireintheWest’:‘Theplough,theloomandtheforgeareintroducedonthebanksoftheVolga,theObyandtheLena,andthefiercestoftheTartarhordeshavebeentaughttotrembleandobey.’110Ifbarbarianpeoplesstillposeadanger,itisonlybyvirtueoftheirgainingmaterialcivilizationandsothetechnicalmeansofthreateningcivilization—withJapancitedasanexampleofthedangersof‘tooreadilyassumingthattechnicalcivilisationnecessarilyinvolvesall-roundculture’.111By1969faithincivilizationislesspronounced,andthepotentialforbarbarismis,itisemphasized,withinallpeoples,thoughWalbankturnsoncemoretothesamepassagefromGibbon:112
Canwebesurethatthepossessionoftheplough,theloomandtheforge—tosaynothingofthejetfighterandthehydrogenbomb—aresufficientguaranteethattheirownerswillalsoautomaticallyexhibitahighdegreeofcivilization?…Asalutaryandpainfullessonhastaughtusthatbarbarisminthissenseremainsadangeratalltimes,andinallsocieties,andthatthepriceofcivilization,likethatoffreedom,iseternalvigilance.113
WalbanknomorerecantshisviewsoninequalitiesintheGreekworldthanonthefallofRome.SomuchismadeexplicitinWalbank’s1970Presidential(p.23) AddresstotheClassicalAssociation(CA),alecturewhichreturnedtothepaperwithwhichhehadfirstaddressedaCA‘AnnualAssembly’,atStAlbansin1944,‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’.114Hiscaptatiobenevolentiaegentlymockshisyouthfulself,explainingthegenesisoftheoriginalpaperintermsofitswartimecontext.QuotingtheresponseofFrankAdcock,thenProfessorofAncientHistoryatCambridge,tohisStAlbanspaper(‘perhapsalittleone-sided’),hesoughtthento‘atone’bygivingtheotherside,by
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 16 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
discussinga‘fieldinwhichtheHellenisticagecanbejustlysaidtohavemadeamorepositivecontribution’,theexperimentinGreekunionoftheAchaeanLeague.Andyethestudiedlyfailstorecantthepositionofthatearlierpaper:115
TheV2attackswerestillattheirheight;andwiththemanifestsignsofcatastropheoneveryside,ithadseemedtome—forIwasanearnestyoungman—thatthecausesofGreekdeclinemightbeanappropriatesubjectonwhichtoexpatiate.Mypaperwasdevoted,Iremember,toadiscussionoftheexclusivenessofGreekcivilisation,thetechnicalstagnationoftheHellenisticage,andthefailureoftheGreeksgenerallytoextendtheirculturedownwardstoreachthemassesofthepoor…[ProfessorAdcock]wasperfectlyright:itwasone-sided—thoughIthought(andIstillthink)itwasanimportantside.
InanearlierversionofthePresidentialAddress,apaper‘ThePoliticalContributionoftheAchaeanConfederacy’giveninJune1967,heinvokesanargumentreminiscentof‘TheSocialRevolutionatSparta’:byleavingthesocialproblem‘suppressedandunsolved’,theAchaeanLeague‘hadthussaddleditselfwithaliabilitywhichwastoplayasignificantpartinthefinaldebâcle’.116
Moreover,whenWalbankturnedbacktoGreekhistoricalnarrative,inhisFontanahistoryoftheHellenisticworld(firstpublishedin1981),itisstrikinghowmuchofthepatternofideasofhisearly‘political’phaseshinesthrough.TheFontanahistoryachieves,arguably,akindofmarriagebetweenthepoliticalandapoliticalstylesofthemid-thirtiestomid-forties.Long-standingsocialproblemswere‘endemicinGreeceformanycenturies’:‘alowlivingstandard,theabsenceofanymargintomeetleanyearsorupsetsduetomobilizationandwarwillhaveplayedalargepartinreducingpeasantstoaconditionofdependencefromwhichitwasvirtuallyimpossibletoemerge’.117Economicdistressandclassconflictledtothethreatof‘socialrevolution’,thoughtheupperclasseswere‘fairlysuccessfulintheiruseofpalliatives’.118(p.24) Here,inshort,istheessentialnarrativeof‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’,Walbank’sMarxisttheoryofdecline.119HisportrayalofthedecadentendofPtolemaicEgyptsignificantlyalsomakestheconnectionwiththeconditionsofthelaterRomanempireand—withoutinvokingthespectreoffascism—isclearlyreminiscentofthecorruptobscurantistCorporativeState:120
ThepowerthattheCrownhaslosthasfallenintothehandsofthepriestsandofcertaininfluentialindividuals,whoseabilitytoofferprotection…torunawaysandothersindistressseemstoanticipatetheconditionsofthedecliningRomanempirehalfamillenniumlater.ForthiscollapseofPtolemaicruletherearemanycauses,someofwhichhavebeenexaminedabove,buttothosemustbeaddedadisastrousforeignpolicy,thelossofmarketsabroad,thewastagecausedbyinternalunrestandcivilwars,incompetentgovernmentathome,bureaucraticcorruptionandcurrencydepreciation.InconsideringthewholesorrytaleitisdifficultnottoechothejudgementofE.WillthatPtolemaicEgyptfellavictimtoitsownwealthemployedintheserviceofinterestswhichwerenotitsown.
Bycontrastto‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’,however(butinlinewithotherearlier
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 17 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
formulations121),Walbankseekstobalancethepicture,justashehaddoneinhisCAPresidentialAddress.‘[The]flameofrationalenquiryhadbeguntoburnlowandwecandetectagrowthintheattractionofmysteryreligionsandeasterncults’,thoughtheHellenisticageisalsosaid(inthesamesentence)tohave‘remainedatimesingularlyfreefromobscurantismandcensorship…’.122Creditisgivenforthescientificdiscoveriesoftheage,but—forallthereasonswehavealreadyseen(thecheappriceofhumanlabour,whetherfreeorslave,thecontemptformanuallabour123)—theGreekcities‘nevertookadecisivestepinthedirectionofharnessingscientificdiscoveriestothepracticaluseofhumancommunitiesandtheachievementofmaterialprogress’.124Asinhisearlierworkalso,thedeclineofGreeceissetwithinagrander,historicalcanvas.Romeisbothdestroyerandheirof‘thisfertileage’;empireledtothecreationofa‘singleculturalcontinuuminwhichmany(p.25) aspectsoftheHellenisticworldlivedon’,toenjoya‘ghostlyexistenceinByzantium’.125Andtheissueofwhethertherewasanotherwayislefthanging.Walbankspeculateswhether,‘givenanothercenturywithoutRome,federalismmighthavedevelopedfreshandfruitfulaspects…Federalismofferedthepossibilityoftranscendingthelimitationsofsizeandrelativeweaknessoftheseparatecity-state.Buttimeranout.’126
Walbank’sconcernwiththetopicalsurvivesintherepeatedanalogiestothemodernworldscatteredthroughhiswork:inreferencestoChairmanMao,Smuts,theVietnampeacetalks,RedSquaremarch-pasts,workingmen’sclubs,or(lesspassingly)tocomparisonsbetweenancientandmodernfederalism(‘NoambassadorstravelabroadfromPennsylvania,Wyomingsignsnotreaties’127).Suchanalogiesaremorethanjustdecorative.The1970CAPresidentialAddressjustifiesthetopicoffederalismintermsofitscontemporaryimportance,albeitmoreguardedlythaninthegrandopeningofTheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest(‘SoperhapsitsroleintheGreekworldmayseemtobenotentirelywithouttopicalinterest’128).Hemakesthisclaimdespiteknowing,headds,that‘itisunpopularandeventhoughttobeslightlydisreputableforahistoriantopointtomodernanalogies’.
Forthemostpart,however,thetopicalaspectofWalbank’swork,andthesenseofthehistorian’scommitmentthatrelatestoit,fromnowonappearmoreobliquely.Acommonpatternisforsuchcontemporaryrelevancetobeprojectedontoothers—evenasWalbankguardshimselfagainstsimplisticassociationsbetweenancientandmodern.HissurveyofPolybianstudiesinthelastquarterofthetwentiethcentury,forexample,foundthat‘itishardtodissociate[theremarkablepost-warsurgeofinterestinPolybius]entirelyfromthecontemporaryclashofpowersandtheriseoftheUnitedStatestopre-eminence,whichweretodominatethenextfiftyyears’.129Similarly,theopeningwordsofWalbank’sprefacetothefirstvolumeoftheCommentary,throughcomparisonwithSchweighauser’seighteenth-centurycommentary,maketheimplicitclaimthathiscontemporarieswill,self-evidently,identifywiththethemesofPolybius’Histories:130
(p.26) ThelastfullcommentaryonPolybius,thatofIohannesSchweighauser,waspublishedduringtheFrenchRevolution;buthiseightmassivevolumes…arefundamentallyuntouchedbythestirringeventsgoingonatthetime.…His
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 18 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
commentaryisprimarilyphilological;whereasmostpeoplewhoreadPolybiustodayturntohimasthemainsourceformuchHellenistichistory,asthehistorianofthePunicWars,and,aboveall,asthefirstmanwhoreallycametogripswiththeproblemoftheriseofRometoworldempire—whichisequivalenttosayingthathisreaderstodayarepre-eminentlythosewhosharehisinterests.
Itisthesereaderswhoseneedsthepresentworkisintendedtomeet.
AsJohnHendersonhasputit,‘ “we”are“today”self-reflexivelyalivetotheRevolutions,thestirringevents,theproblemofworldempires,whichentitlesustoclaimtosharePolybius’interests’.131Hereistheclaimof‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’,thattheeventsofthedeclineofGreecehave‘aspecialsignificanceforourgeneration’,recapitulated.History-writingisnotovershadowedbytheenormityofsurroundingevents;itdrawsitspowerfromthem.
Nevertheless,itisparticularlyinthecontextofdiscussionsofthehistorian’srolethatasenseofthehistorian’spropercommitmentrevealsitself.Acrucialfigureinthisprocessofself-definitionasahistorianisGaetanoDeSanctis,whomhefirstreadasastudentin1930–1132andcitedasamodelasearlyas1943intheconclusionto‘IsourRomanHistoryTeachingReactionary?’‘Properlytold’,theRomanrepubliccouldbeatale‘damningtotheenemiesoflibertyanddemocracy’:133
ItisnomereaccidentthatGaetanodeSanctis,perhapsthemosteminentRomanhistorianofourgenerationandagreatliberalthinker,brokeoffhisStoriadeiRomaniabruptlyat167B.C.,nevertocompleteit.Hislastvolume,publishedin1923,whenFascismhadbeeninpowerforayear,isdedicated—whocanreadthewordsto-dayunmoved?—‘tothosefewwhodisdainaliketobeoppressedandtomakethemselvesoppressors’.ThestorythatDeSanctiscouldnotfinishinMussolini’sItalyitisourtaskasteachersofRomanhistoryinademocraticcountrytotell.
TheimplicitcontrastherebetweenDeSanctis’abrupthaltat167BCandPolybius'owndecision(3.4)tocontinuewritingRomanhistoryafter167BCisapowerfulone,butitismitigatedbyWalbank’sownclaimthatsuchhistoryisstillastorythatmustbetold.DeSanctisisalsothesubjectofalateressay,writtenin1983tocommemoratethefiftiethanniversaryofhisrefusaltoswearthefascistoath,publishedinEnglishonlyinWalbank’ssecondvolumeof(p.27) collectedpapersin2002.TheessayisinpartadefenceofPolybiusfromDeSanctis’chargethathewasaquislingofRome—clearlyachargeforDeSanctisbornfromhispersonalcircumstances,andarecurrentconcernforWalbank.134Atthesametime,however,itisdifficulttoresisthearingechoesofWalbank’sownpositioninwhathesaysoftheparallelsbetweenDeSanctis’andPolybius’careers(forboth‘analternativemeansofself-expression’).135AndevenasWalbankregretsthatDeSanctiscouldnothavebeenmoreforgivingofPolybius,evenashepointstowardsthedangersofusingendstojustifymeans,healignshimselfwithDeSanctis’moralperspectiveonhistory:136
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 19 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
HisdeepsenseofhumanityandhatredofinjusticeandoppressionwouldhavepreventedDeSanctisfromeversupposingthatends—whetherregardedasaimsor,retrospectively,astheresultsofthehistoricalprocess—canjustifymeans.Buttotalkofhistoricaljustificationistoruntheriskofseeinghistoryinthoseterms;andwhenwespeakofimperialconquestleadingtothespreadofhumanityandcivilisation,weshould,Ithink,notforget—asDeSanctisdidnotforget—thecruelfateofNumantiaandtheseveredhandsofUxellodunum.
DeSanctisisalsoakeyinspirationbehindoneofWalbank’smostemphaticmethodologicalstatements(fromhismuchcitedarticle,‘TheProblemofGreekNationality’)—astatement,ifnotofthehistorian’sdutytomakemoraljudgements,atleastofhisorherdutytomakefulluseoftheadvantageofhindsight.Walbankmakesadistinctionbetweentwolevelsofhistoricalinterpretation.Thefirstlevelofinterpretationisto‘investigatethevariouspoliciesandaimsofGreekandnon-Greekstatesmen,theinterestslikelytoinfluencethem,theactionsofthevariousstates,andtheiroutcome,intermsoftheconceptsandidealsandknowledgeactuallyavailabletothepeopleconcerned’.137Itisessential,hecontinues,however,thatthehistoriangoesbeyondthisfirstlevel:
(p.28) [He]isalsolivinginhisownage,withalltheadvantagesofknowinghowtheplayended;andhecanseeeachactinrelationtothewhole.138NowbecauseofwhatDeSanctishascalledthe‘creativityofhistory’itsprocessisnotamereseriesofpermutationsandcombinationssimilartothatofshufflingcardsorshakingdice.Outoftheclashofdeedsandpolicies,thegeniusorthemaliceofoutstandingindividuals,theunthinkingobedienceortherevulsionofthemass,thevictories,defeats,migrations,conquests,andsettlements,thesocialstruggles,theshiftingcurrentsoftrade,andalltheinfinitevarietyofathousandandoneotherfactors,somethingnewisconstantlycomingtobirth;andwhatisborninthiswayisneitherahaphazardnoranarbitrarycreationbutstandsinalogicalsequencetoallthatprecededit.
ThereisalsoaninterplaythroughWalbank’sworkbetweenPolybius’methodology,perspective,evenpersonalnarrative,andhisown.Atonelevel,weseeinWalbankanidentification—howeverunwitting—withthepracticalPolybius.Afunctionoftheprevailingideologyofcontemptformanualworkwas,accordingto‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’,‘thediversionofscientificthoughtawayfrompracticalexperiment…intonotionalandmetaphysicalchannels’.139Walbank’slaudatoryaccountoftheAchaeanLeague,inhisCAPresidentialAddress,climaxeswiththeobservation‘Andallthiswasdonebypracticalpoliticianswhoowedvirtuallynothingtopoliticaltheorists’.140Similarly,justasPolybiusresiststhetemptationtoarouseanemotionalresponseinhisreader,141sohelatersummarizesthestrengthsandweaknessesof(alaterstudyby)Stierbydescribingitasan‘extremelyinteresting,ifsomewhatemotionallycharged,study’.142Atthesametime,the‘disingenuousness’with(p.29) whichPolybiusclaimsto‘defendhighprinciple’,Polybius’identificationwithRomanimperialexpansion,his‘ruthless’acceptanceofthemeansemployed(‘successwasapttobehismaincriterion’),andhislackofsympathyforthosecaughtupinitsprogressareplainlyaconcern:143
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 20 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Onethingworriesmealittle.Polybius’commitmenttothedoctrineof‘thepossible’isnodoubtapraiseworthyqualityinastatesman—eventhoughthereally‘great’statesmanisthemanwhomakeshisowndefinitionofthepossible.ButhadthiscommitmentperhapsaslightlycorruptingeffectonPolybiusasahistorian?WithhisincreasingsympathyforRome,thesuccessfulsuper-power,goesamarkedlackofsympathyforthosewhohadresistedher.144
Movingbeyondsuchexcathedrastatementsonmethodologyandapproach,andatriskofbeingfanciful,itisalsopossibletotraceamoredelicate,implicitrelationshipbetweenthesetwoco-dependenthistorians.GivenPolybius’famousopeningstatement,itisstrikinghowfrequentlythefigureoffiftyyearsfeaturesinWalbank’sownwork.DeSanctis’‘greatactofcourage’,theworkofSchwartz,hisownstudyofGreeknationality,thedevelopmentofHolleaux’sthesis,areallreviewedafterhalfacentury—ineachcasetoconsider(inaparalleltoPolybius’extension?)‘howfar[theyhave]stoodthetestoftime’.145Walbank’sreflection(quotedabove)onthecoincidenceofthepost-warsurgeininterestinPolybiusandcontemporaryaffairs—‘thecontemporaryclashofpowersandtheriseoftheUnitedStatestopre-eminence,whichweretodominatethenextfiftyyears’146—suggeststhatthisfifty-yeartropeismorethan,asitwere,aPolybiantick:eversotentatively,WalbankpointstothenewRomeandtoitsinevitableeclipse.147Therecurrenceofthismotif,moreover,isnotjusttheproductofWalbank’sunusualopportunityforhindsight,‘ofknowinghowthe[scholarly]playended’.Inanotherpassageofhis‘ProblemofGreekNationality’,heinfactanticipateshisownsubsequentreview:
(p.30) thoughthehistorianisapttobelievethatthesubjecthehaschosenforstudyisonewhichhecametobychance,orbecauseitseemedtohavebeenneglected,orbecauseitaroseoutofsomeearlierwork,orforsomeotherwhollypersonalreason,fiftyyearshenceitwillbequiteobviousthatthethemeschosenbyhistorianstoday,andthetreatmentaccordedtothem,weredirectlyrelatedtocontemporaryproblems,or,touseDeSanctis’words,tothespiritualneedsofmenandwomenlivinginthemiddleofthetwentiethcentury.(1951:60)
Walbank’snarrativeofhisownearlycareerintheHypomnematacontainsfurtherPolybianparallels.148Itplaysrepeatedlyonthetensionbetweenhis‘twolevelsofinterpretation’:thereconstructionofhisownlimitedvisionasanagentinhisownstory;andhisownvantage-pointfrombeyondthestory’send.149InWalbank’saccount,hisearlycareerturnsonasmallnumberofcrucialchances:hisknowledgefromacigarettecardthatPeterhousewastheoldestCambridgecollege,forexample;orhiswritingofanarticleelucidatingsomelinesoftheGeorgicsonweaving,latercitedasevidencethathewasnotan‘historianindisguise’whenhewasappointedtotheLiverpoolChairofLatin.150‘Inowknow’,hewrotelaterofthetwistthatledhimtotaketheClassicalsideatBradfordGrammarSchool,‘thatchanceanderrorplayagreatpartatalltimesinshapingone’slifeandIdonotregretatallthatmyparents’ignoranceturnedmeintoaclassicalscholar’.151ThispatterncanbeseeninpartinthecontextofHenderson’sthesisofhisself-effacement,Walbank’s‘coolantironyfortheactor-self’seffortstostringtogetherachosenpathtowardasettledgoalorrationalobjective’.152TheparallelwithPolybius
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 21 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
mightsuggest,however,amoreprovidentialformofTycheguidinghiscareer—nomatterhowknowingorironictheanalogymighthavebeen.153Inastrikingpassageofalatearticle,WalbankfindsthatPolybius’personalnarrative,thegenesisofhisgreatwork,islikewisefoundedonasmallnumberof‘arbitraryandidiosyncraticfeatures’:‘anAristotelianphilosopher’sobiterdictumontheriseofMacedonia154…agenerally(p.31)acceptedHellenisticbeliefinTyche,and,probably,hisfamilyinvolvementwithPtolemaicEgypt’.155
History,forWalbank,waslikewiseamatterofunintendedconsequences,ofswirlingmovementstheshapeofwhichwouldonlybecomeapparenttothehistorian,andofpracticalmendoingtheirbestinthemidstofthesegreatcurrents.Histwoearliestbooks,bothbiographicalinfocus,havestrikinglyironicendings.PhilipVistheunwittingvehicleforGreekculture‘tospreadalongthepathsofthelegionstoRome,andsotothewesterncivilisationthatgrewupafterher’.156Hislifehadbeen‘necessarilyading-dongstruggle,demandingaconstantreadaptationofbothendsandmeans,inwhichchangingcircumstancesagainandagainsuggestednewobjectives’.157Aratosseestherolesofitstwochiefprotagonistsreversed:‘Cleomenestheidealistandmanofactionbecomesamereexpressionofoneaspectofhisage,withoutsignificanceforthefuture;Aratos,bykeepingclosetoactualeventsandsituations,andlettingtheseconditionhisacts,shapesthehistoryoftheGreekpeopleforahundredyearsafterhisdeath.’158Thevalueofhistoryisnotjustageneralizedone,‘theenrichmentofexperiencewhichcomesfromanaddedunderstandingofallthatispastinthepresent’,andnorcanitbenarrowedtoasearchforinsightsintoaspecificcontemporaryobjective159—forthecontextforactionchangesfromhistoricalmomenttomoment160—but(p.32) ‘alsothatwisdomwhichisthefruitofmenpartlylikeandpartlyunlikeourselvesmeeting,andeithersolvingorfailingtosolve,problemsthatarepartlylikeandpartlyunlikethosewhichweourselveshavetoface’.161Inthisbroadercontext,inthe‘ding-dong’strugglewithitscountlesscontingencies,moraljudgementsarenecessarilyshaded.162Thehistorianbalancesdelicatelyabovethefray,awarethathisownworkishistoricallycontingent,thatitsmeaningandmotiveswillonlybeclearinretrospect—andisthereforewaryofbeingover-harshinjudgingpreviouswriterssimilarlyblindtotheirowncontext.163
Thehistorian’srole—asreflectedherethroughPolybius,DeSanctis,andtheidealhistorianofthe‘ProblemofGreekNationality’—isclearlylessdirectlypoliticalthaninWalbank’searlier‘politicaleffusions’.Itisarguablynolesspowerful,however:akindofromantic,moralcalling.Thechoiceofsuchhigh-flownlanguagemightseematoddswiththepracticalorientationofmuchofWalbank’swriting.(Though,asmanyofthepassagescitedabovereveal,Walbankwasnotabovehigh-flownlanguagehimself.)Critically,however,thereneedbenooppositionbetweenthedown-to-earth,thepractical,ontheonehand,andtheloftilyromanticontheother.ForWalbank,theromanticconsistsinthepractical:themenwhopioneeredfederalismwithoutanyphilosophicalguide;theitinerantcraftsmenwhokeptalivethelegacyoftheancientworld;thebuses,vans,andpostalcataloguesthatbringthetownandcountrytogetherandmarkprogress.Thehistorian(intheconsistentpatternofhisreviews)mustbebalancedandobjectiveinhisjudgements,hiswork(p.33) ‘anchoredinfacts,freefromabstractionand
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 22 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
generalization,andwithnoaxetogrind’.164Butheshouldalsotakepositions,‘[feel]passionateand…notshrinkfrombattle’.165
Inaseriesofpassagesthroughhiswork,WalbankidentifiedsimilaraspectstoPolybius.‘Whenonehasclearedawaythejejunemoralising,thedidacticismandthestiltedandcreakingmetaphysics’,hewroteinapaperin1946,‘thereissomethingsolidandvaluablebeneath…afirmconvictionthathistoryisathingthatmatters,arationalstudyinwhichoneasksquestionsandobtainsanswers,andusestheknowledgegainedtoenrichandinformone’sownexperience.’166Polybius’,unlikeHerodotus’,wasonlyan‘apparentcandour’,thatofaman‘whohaspersuadedhimselfofthetruthaboutmattersinwhichhehasastrongpersonalcommitment,andisnotpreparedeventoenvisagethepossibilitythattheremaybeanotherpointofview’.167ComparinghimselfwithOdysseus—‘agrand,ifslightlyhumourless,comparison’168—reveals‘disguisedbeneaththedidacticismofthepracticalhistorian…aglimpseofaromantic’.169Polybius’polemicsalsorevealhiddendepths:170
WeareapttothinkofPolybiusasadidacticandevenprosywriter.Hislongpassagesofpolemic,properlyread,enableustocorrectthatpictureandtoseesomethingofthestrongemotionalbackgroundwhichcolouredhisattitudesandprobablygavehimtheimpetustocarrythroughhisgreatenterprisetoasuccessfulconclusion.
Itmustremainanonliquet,butitishardtoresisttheconclusionthatforWalbanktooanequivalentemotionalbackgroundwassimilarlyfundamental,inallowinghimtoconceiveandtocarrythroughhisgreatenterprise.
AfterWalbank,whatnowforPolybius?Recentyearshaveseenanewsurgeofinterest:withawaveofnewvolumes(bothspecialiststudiesonparticularthemesandworksofsynthesisorintroduction),andaseriesofimportant(p.34) conferencesleadingtopublishedcollections.171Althougholderproblems,asWalbankhimselfobservedin2002,have‘remaineduppermostindiscussion’,itispossibletodivineanumberoftrendsinrecentwork.172Itisclear,first,thatinterestinRomanimperialismhasrarelybeenmoreintense.173WithhispositionbetweenGreeceandRome,asanimperialsubjectwhocametoidentifywithimperialpower,Polybiusprovidesasingularcasestudyforfurtherwork,forexampledrawingonpost-colonialapproaches,orrelatingourcharacterizationofancientimperialismtomoderndebates.174AsWalbankhimselfrecognizedinhis2002reviewof(latetwentieth-century)Polybianscholarship,recentworkhasshownanincreasinginterestinrhetoricandnarrative—thoughheaddedthebalancingnotethatthisnewapproach,‘isbasicallylessnovelthanitmightappeartobe’.175
Thisvolumelooksbothback,inappreciationofpastscholarship;andforward,lookingfornewanswerstooldquestions.Anumberofcontributions,forexample,examinetheintertextualrelationshipofPolybius’workwithothers—Phylarchus(Marincola),AratusofSicyon(Meadows),ZenoofRhodes(Wiemer),orXenophon(Gibson)—orLivy’suseofPolybiusasasource(Briscoe).OtherstakeafreshapproachtoPolybius’positionbetweenGreeceandRome(Thornton,Sommer),followWalbankincontrastingthe
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 23 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
responsesofJosephusandPolybiustoRomanpower(Gruen),oroffercontrastingapproachestooneofthemostfamiliarPolybianquestions,thatofPolybius’accountoftheRomanconstitutioninBook6(Erskine,Seager).176Stillfurthercontributions,influencedbynarratologicalperspectives,tracenarrativepatternsinPolybius’workthroughcloseanalysisofparticularsections:theMamertinecrisis(Champion),theyouthandlastyearsofPhilip(p.35) V(McGing,Dreyer),theroleoftheRomanprokataskeuēinBooks1and2(Beck),orPolybius’characterizationofBoeotiainBook20(Müller).TwochapterslookatPolybiusthroughawideMediterraneancontext,exploitingthewealthofsourcematerialPolybiusofferstotheeconomichistorian(Davies)ordrawingonBenedictAnderson’sideaof‘imaginedcommunities’toreconsiderPolybius’useofsynchronismsandthegeographicalcomingtogetherofMediterraneanhistory(συμπλοκή).177OneareaofpotentialresearchnotcoveredistherichreceptionhistoryofPolybius—withoneexception,thereceptionofPolybiusbyFrankWalbankhimself.Beyondthisintroductorychapter,twoverydifferentcontributionsbookendthevolume:thefirstadetailedaccountofthegenesisofthePolybiancommentary,byJohnHenderson;thesecondaninsightintothepersonalcontextinwhichthecommentarywasdeveloped,byFrank’sdaughterMitzi.
WhatofthefuturedirectionofPolybianscholarship?Basedonthedirectionofcurrentwork,wecanspeculatewithsomeconfidence:thattheemphasisonPolybiannarrativestrategieswillintensify,perhapswithliterarycommentariesonsomeindividualbooks;thattheremightbeagreaterconcentrationonPolybius’intellectualcontext,hisengagementwithcontemporarydebates;178thatthereligiousideasoftheHistories,Polybius’‘creakingmetaphysics’mightbereassessed,inthelightofnewapproachestoGreekreligiousbelief;179orthattheremightbearenewedinterestinissuesofidentityandtherepresentationofculturaldifferencewithinthetext.180Givenrecentexplorationsofthecommentaryasagenre,andgiventheextensivearchiveofpapersthatmightsupportsuchaproject,afulleranalysis(ascalledforbyJohnHendersonbelow)of‘theresearchmethods,rhetoricalstrategies,orarchivaleconomyembodied’inWalbank’scommentarymightalsobelikely.181
Howourcurrentinterestsareshapedbycontemporaryconcernsbeyondacademewemayonlyguess.However,witharecentexperimentinpoliticalunionreeling,thegapbetweenthe‘richandthestarving’extendingeverfurther,andtheidealofahumanescholarshipfacingrenewedthreat,fiftyyearshencewecanexpectthatreaderswillhavecontinuedtolook,withprofit,tobothPolybiusandWalbank.
Notes:
(1)Thefollowingyear,1933.AllreferencesinthischapteraretoWalbank’sownpublicationsunlessspecified;Walbank’spapersarereferredtobytheirfirstdateofpublicationinEnglish.
(2)1992a:76–7.ThememoircoversWalbank’slifeuntil1946;Walbank’sextensivepapers,lodgedintheUniversityofLiverpool’sSydneyJonesLibrary,includenotespreparatorytoasubsequentmemoir,‘Summaryofyears1946–1977’:SCA
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 24 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
D1037/2/3/21/57.
(3)ExploredbyHenderson2001a.
(4)2002:2.Fivevols.oftherevisedLoebhavenowbeenpublished.
(5)Cf.Davies2011:348–9.Manyofthesearticlesareincludedintwocollections:Walbank1985(whichincludesafulllistofWalbank’spublicationsuptothatpoint)and2002.
(6)DrErnestBarker,Observer,29Dec.1940.
(7)1984a,1984b,HammondandWalbank1988.
(8)SeeDavies’dispassionatecritiqueofesp.Walbank’sDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest,2011:330–1,343,ofWalbank’sventureintotheeconomyoftheLaterRomanEmpire(Walbank1952),2011:331–2,orhisremarksonAratos(Walbank1933),an‘apprenticework’,2011:327.Cf.Plb.3.59.2‘Weshouldnotfindfaultwithwritersfortheiromissionsandmistakes,butshouldpraiseandadmirethem,consideringthetimestheylivedin,forhavingascertainedsomethingonthesubjectandadvancedourknowledge',Walbank1962:1.
(9)Davies2011:349–50.
(10)Momigliano1984.ForWalbank’saccountofhisrelationshipwithMomigliano,andoftheimpactoftheirfirstmeeting(‘Ifoundthewholeweekend…acompletelynewworld’),seeSCAD1037/2/3/9/46,alettertoOswynMurraydated24Aug.1988.
(11)Seee.g.2000:21,2002:ix,12,18,140,153,154,andn.10,156,260andn.11,266n.46.
(12)1972a:26.
(13)Henderson2001a:221.Workonthecommentaryitself,however,beganin1944andendedinsubmissiontothepressofvol.iiiin1977.
(14)1998b:46:‘Ihavebeeninterestedinthisbookforoverfiftyyears—aslongasittooktheRomanstorisetoworlddominion!’
(15)SeeHendersoninthisvolume.Note,however,thecontrastdrawnbyDorothyThompson(inherfuneraladdress,SCAD1037/1/1/10/2)betweenWalbankwithinandoutsidehisstudy:‘Frankdideverythingatarush…Hecutourgrassinalatherandaflurry.Beingdrivenbyhimwasnotarestfulexperience.Whenhesatathisdeskthatoutpouringofenergybecamementalfocusandmayhelptoaccountforhisastonishingrecordofpublications.’
(16)SeeMitziWalbank’smemoirinthisvolume.
(17)SeefurtherHendersoninthisvolume.Note,however,thatthefirstvolumeof
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 25 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Gomme’scommentary,likethatofWalbank(HCPi.vii),openswithanunderestimateofthenumberofvolumesofcommentaryrequired:‘Thisworkisplannedtobeinthreevolumes’(Gomme1945:v).
(18)Seebelow,p.53.SubsequentlyWalbankhimselfexpressedregretthatthepressureimposedforimmediatepublications‘makesscholarslessinclinedtotakeonworklikelytooccupyseveralyears’(2002:2).
(19)Seefurther1992a:103–6.Seebelow,pp.41–2,forWalbank’sfederalismessay.
(20)1949a:101;‘sincethisisnowrarelyfeasible’,hecontinues,‘itisessentialthattheyshouldhavesomealternativewayofgainingapictureofthosepermanentfeaturesoftheMediterraneanlandscapethatcontrolthewayoflifeofitsinhabitants’.Cf.Polybiusownemphasisontheneedforhistorianstostudytopography(12.25e.1).
(21)1933:ix;seefurther1992a:123–4.
(22)SCAD1037/2/5/3,p.6,continuing:‘Atticaliesspreadoutlikeamap,andonecantracethevariousroutesbywhichitcouldbeinvaded—DaphnionthepassthroughAegaleos,andtheeasierrailwayroutetothenorthofthemountain,throughAcharnae;theimportanceofDecelea,nowtheairstationofTatoi,duringthePeloponnesianWar,isatonceevident;andthestoryoftheshieldatMarathonisliftedfromtherealmoffable,andbecomesapossibility,ifnothingmore.’Walbankalsogaveamoreanecdotalaccountofhistravelsinalecture‘ModernGreece’,fromthesameperiod:SCAD1037/2/4/8/1/4.
(23)Seee.g.1947a(witha‘collectionofAlpineviewssufficientlycatholictosuitalltheoriesofHannibal’sroute’,p.109),1960b(onHammond),1950a(ontopographicalerrors).
(24)Lecturenoteson‘GeographicalbackgroundtoGreekhistory’,SCAD1037/2/3/18/125p.4.See,inparticular,1956a,ontherouteofHannibal’spassthroughtheAlps,andhisrecurrentconcernwiththerouteoftheViaEgnatia,e.g.1977c,1983a,1986(seealso‘TheViaEgnatia:itsroleinRomanstrategy’,SCAD1037/2/3/9/19/1).
(25)1948a:164,foreshadowedinanunpublishedlecture‘TheReliabilityofPolybius’,delivered18June1946,p.7(SCAD1037/2/1/5/1–2);cf.1943c:79(‘todemandcompleteconsistencyinPolybius’useoftechnicallanguageistoinvitedisappointment’),1972a:117–24.SeealsohiscritiqueofJ.O.Thomson,1949b:361,forhislackofsympathyforhissubject-matter,‘littlepatienceforthepastmythsandfolliesofmankind,foritsconfusionsofthoughtanderrorsofjudgement…heseemsalmosttoapologizeformentioningsuchobviousnonsense’.
(26)2000:19;muchoftheargumentofWalbank1951isanticipatedin1933:e.g.2(thoughcf.p.21).Cf.hiscommentsonRostovtzeff1941:Walbank1944:10(‘hisviewofancienthistoryappearstohavebeeninfluencedbyhisownvividapprehensionofcertaincontemporaryeventsinEurope’),orontheinterestofSouthAfricanhistorians,1953a,inthe‘broadquestionofhowmenofdifferingrace,nationality,religion,andpoliticsgotontogetherintheancientworld’.
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 26 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(27)Seealso1972b:146–7.
(28)1993a:15:‘itisadynamic,dialecticalprocessinvolvinginvestigation,selectionandinterpretation.Ateachstagethehistorianinteractswithhismaterial.Thepastisinsomesenserecreatedafreshforeachpersonwhoconcernshimselfwithit.’Cf.theprefaceto1940a:xi(‘Historicalscience,nolessthanhistoryitself,representsacontinuousprocessofintegration’).
(29)Cf.Henderson2001a:228.Forgreatmen,seee.g.1933:1,28,165–6;seefurtherpp.9–10below,onCleomenesIII.
(30)Byhisownaccount,WalbankhadbeenaLaboursympathizersince‘atleast1922,when[he]feltstronglyonthesideoftheminers’,1992a:120;hehadjoinedtheSocialistSocietyandtheLeagueofNationsUnionin1930–1atCambridge,1992a:108.Duringaseven-weekstayinJenain1931he‘hadbecomeveryconsciousofthedangerspresentedbytheNazimovement’,1992a:121(cf.pp.115,128–9);reinforcedbyMary’smorepracticalcommitment(p.132),laterinthe1930s,hejoinedtheCommunistparty,wasHon.Sec.oftheMerseysidebranchoftheNationalCouncilforCivilLiberties(activeinwritingtolocalpaperstocounterNationalUnionofFascistspropaganda),andwasChairmanofthelocalbranchoftheLeftBookClub.Forhisreadinginthisperiod,seebelow,n.33.
(31)1992a:188,citedbyHendersonbelow.
(32)Theargumentof1944canbeseenanticipatede.g.inWalbank1943d,andespecially1942c(areviewofRostovtzeff1941).ForWalbank’sextensivenotesonthelateRomaneconomy,seeSCAD1037/2/3/15.ByWalbank’saccount,1992a:97,acrucialroleinintroducinghimtotheideasofRostovtzeffwasplayedbytheundergraduatelecturesofMartinCharlesworth.
(33)ApointgivenprominencebyMomigliano1984:‘Firstofall,itisimpossibletothinkof[Walbank]asamanandasahistorianwithoutbearinginmindthepre-waratmosphereofdiscussiononancientandmodernproblemsofcivilization.’ForWalbank’sreading,seee.g.1992a:76(indoctrination,byNedGoddard,withtheideasofOswaldSpengler’sDeclineoftheWest:‘later,ofcourse,weallthrewofftheseideasandmanyothersemi-mysticalnotionstowhichGoddardwaspartial’),p.121(G.B.Shaw).Anearlynotebook,SCAD1037/2/3/22,containstwopagesofreactionstoToynbee,AStudyofHistoryIV.58 ff.SpenglerandToynbeefeatureinhisdiscussionofthereceptionofthemixedconstitutioninhisthird1957GrayLecture,SCAD1037/2/1/11/9,p.332(Polybius‘amongthedistantprogenitorsofOswaldSpenglerandDr.Toynbee’),thoughcf.itspublishedversion,1964a:34–5.TheintensityandbreadthofWalbank’sengagementwithcontemporaryeventscanbegaugedbyhisyear-longWorkers’EducationalAssociation(WEA)courseonWorldAffairs,runatLytham,in1945–6,SCAD1037/2/1/4;lectures(mostlycountrybycountry)areinterspersedwithweeklyupdatesoneventsacrosstheglobe;seebelowfortherangeofWalbank’smodernanalogiesinlaterwritings,p.25.
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 27 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(34)1944:11;forthepairingofGreekandRomandecline,cf.1983b:199,whereWalbanklocatestheachievementofdeSteCroix’sTheClassStruggleintheAncientGreekWorldin‘itstreatmentoftwodevelopmentsofmagnitude—thedestructionofGreekdemocracyfrom400BConwardsandthecausesofthedeclineandfalloftheRomanEmpire'.Walbankbrackets1943a,1944,and1946atogetherinhismemoir,1992a:188–9.
(35)1946a:1.
(36)1944:10.
(37)Aphrasesharpened,perhaps,bydirectexperience:Walbank’sserviceintheUniversityFireWatch,‘tak[ing]abearingonanyfirethatmightbestartedbyincendiarybombs’.Seefurther1992a:175–7.
(38)1944:12,1946a:23.
(39)1946a:67,1944:12.Cf.his‘violentdissent’fromthepositionofJ.L.Myres,1946b:‘Forinstance,if“eveninthemostadvancedand…progressiveculturesoftheMediterraneantheconfessedgoalwasstaticalequilibrium”,thestoriesoffifth-centuryAthens,republicanRome,Dandolo'sVenice,andMussolini’sItalysuggestthatthisconfessedgoalhadlittlerelevancetoactualpolicies.’
(40)1946a:24.ContrastRostovtzeff1941:1311–12,seeingthelackofGreekunityasputtingastoponcreativity.
(41)1944:11:‘…wheretheartisticachievementoftheAthenianAcropoliswasmadepossibleonlybyatyrannousimpositionexactedfromunwillingsubjects,whathopewasthereofunity?Andwhatmeaningwasthereinfreedom?’
(42)1944:19,1946a:68.Walbank’suseofthephrase‘masscivilisation’caninpartbeseenasarejoindertothemuchmorenegativeandconservativeuseofthetermbyF.R.Leavis,authorofthenotoriousMassCivilisationandMinorityCulture(Cambridge,1930).WalbankwastakenforteawiththeLeavises,in1930–1:see1992a:123.
(43)1946a:71–2.
(44)Theuseofthetermis,verylikely,duetothestronginfluenceatthetime—onbothFrankandMaryWalbank—ofPalmeDutt’sFascismandSocialRevolution:AStudyoftheEconomicsandPoliticsoftheExtremeStagesofCapitalisminDecay(London,1934):see1992a:128.
(45)1946a:46–7;cf.p.68fortheaggressionoftheCity-State(which‘preciselybecauseitwasaminorityculture,tendedtobeaggressiveandpredatory,itsclaimtoautonomyslidingoverinsensibly,ateveryopportunity,intoaclaimtodominateothers’).
(46)1952:33.
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 28 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(47)1944:15,1944:12;cf.1946a:68.ContrastRostovtzeff’scharacterizationofthe‘buoyantoptimism’oftheage,1941:1095.
(48)1946a:76.
(49)1935:16,continuing(pp.16–17):‘Theanalogymustnotofcoursebepressedtoofar;thereareforcesofcapitalandlargescaleindustrybehindmodernfascismthatsimplydidnotexistin3rdcenturySparta.’TheportrayalofCleomenesinWalbank1933ismarkedlylessnegative;seealso1966afortheargumentthatPolybiussawCleomenesastyrannicallyundoing,ratherthanreturningto,theLycurganconstitution;hisaccountofCleomenes’revolution,1984b:458–9,alsocontainsnofascistovertones.
(50)1935:29–30.
(51)1944:20.Cf.1946a:82–4,1952:85(‘Withthecollapseoftheimperialstate,thatlargesectionoftheeconomywhichdependedonitsimplydisappeared.Theresidue—smallartisansandtradersinthetowns,localmarkets,itinerantcraftsmen,thevillagesaroundthemanororthemonastery,and,fortherich,anirregulartradeinluxuriesfromallpartsoftheMediterranean—wasleftastheeconomicfoundationofmedievalEurope’).Forasimilartropeoflong-termtransmissionofaclassicalheritage(theideaofmonarchy)see,withvariations,1983d:20,1984a:100.
(52)1946a:76–9.Walbankdoesconceivedangersinindustrialization,e.g.thetendencyofindustryto‘exportitself’,1946a:28,78,exemplifiedbythemigrationofcottonmanufacturefromLancashiretoBombay.
(53)1946a:80;cf.p.76.
(54)1937:224,continuing‘butthereareunfortunatelystillenoughtomakeasimpleexpositionwellnighanimpossibility’.Cf.1954b:51onHolleaux.
(55)1946a:5–6;seealso1945b.Walbankwasclearlythinking,inlargepart,ofRostovtzeff:see1991/2:90.
(56)1943a:57.
(57)1943a:60–1.
(58)1943a:60;adelayedresponseperhapstothedomineeringheadofClassicsatBradfordGrammarSchool,L.W.P.Lewis,forwhomsee1992a:65(citedbelowbyHenderson,pp.39–40).
(59)1950d:117;cf.hisInaugurallectureasProfessorofLatin(1946),‘TheRomanHistoriansontheRomanRepublic’,SCAD1037/2/1/7/1/1,p.3(‘TheHumanitiesareoftheiressencethewholestoryoftheclassicalworldanditsheritage,andwithinthemwedrawnofrontiers’).
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 29 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(60)1950d:116–17.ThepassageisreminiscentofWalbank1951:58(quotedbelow,p.28)aswellasofthefamouspassageofMacNeice’sAutumnJournal,sectionIX.
(61)1946a:80;cf.pp.84–5.Thesameurgencyisreflectedinanearlierlecture,givenaspartofaseriesoncitizenship(thoughhistory)fortheDurhamCountyCommunityServiceCouncilinSept.1938.Thefinallectureconcludeswithquestionsover‘thefutureofourliberties’,SCAD1037/2/1/3/1:
Conclusion:
—thereisanattackonourliberties
Defence—vigilanceandagitation:unity.
Context:thatofwide-spreadfascism[illegiblereferencetoUlsterUnionists,1913]
BurningofPapers—Hitler
Chamberlain—?
DutyofCitizentosafeguardhisrights,towatchoverthoseonwhomauthorityisconferred.
(62)SCAD1037/2/1/9/1/7.
(63)BrashandWalbank1946:80,85(‘[Lascience]…estimpuissanteàcréeruncodedemoraleetuneéchelledesvaleurs,àresoudrelesproblèmesd’organisationsocialeetàdeterminerlesprincipesd’unevieraisonable,toutesquestionssurlesquelleslacultureclassiqueatoujourssonmotàdire’);thewar,foughtforwesternhumanisticvalues,hadhadtheironiceffectofsubordinatingthehumanitiesto‘desétudesayantunrapportplusimmediateaveclesbesoinsdelaguerremécanique’(p.73,reprisedat1950d:113).
(64)1946a:85.
(65)1943a:60,1946a:ix,17;seealso1942c:82onRostovtzeff’sbourgeoisie.
(66)1946a:69,74–5.
(67)1944:10onRostovtzeff1926:436,484;cf.Rostovtzeff1941:1125.
(68)Cf.Davies2011:331.
(69)1943a:57.ThereisacloseparallelagainherewithWalbank’sdirectlypoliticalwritings.Seee.g.hisletterstotheWallaseyNews,inanswertoaMissCollinsoftheBritishUnionofFascistsandNationalSocialists,SCAD1037/1/8/6(e.g.aletterof27Nov.1937:‘Letusbequiteclear:Fascismisamovementwhichdeniesdemocracyintheoryandoutragesitinpractice;anditclaimslibertyofspeechto-dayonlyinorderthatitmaydestroyitthemomentitachievesthepowertodoso.’)
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 30 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(70)1946a:84.
(71)1946a:73.Ontheinterpenetrationoftownandcountry,seeWalbank’sobservations,1991/2:94.
(72)LouisMacNeice,AutumnJournal,sect.III,written1938.
(73)2001aand2001b.
(74)SeeDavies2011:329–30forthecircumstances;fortheHansBaueraffair,Walbank1992a:161–5,170–2.
(75)Henderson2001b:37(‘Thealiensgoodasflewhimofftoanotherplanet,andmadePolybius“ours”’).
(76)Henderson2001a:222.
(77)1992a:187–8.
(78)1992a:191;onVEday,Walbank‘wastalkingtotheStAnne’sRotaryClubon“IsHistoryBunk?”’.Cf.hisaccountofKoestler’sstay,1992a:146–7,revealingthattheywerereallyliberals.
(79)Henderson2001a:227.
(80)Ibid:229.
(81)1933:e.g.49–51,86–7,95,notablygivingCleomenescreditforbeing‘largelypromptedbyagenuineidealism’(p.86).
(82)Twoworlds:1992a:153,166;cf.p.187forFarrington’sinvitationtoWalbankin1943towritetheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest.Trevescorrespondence:SCAD1037/2/3/1/55–6,59–63,121.
(83)1992a:132.
(84)AcrucialmomentinWalbank’sownnarrativeistheMolotov–Ribbentroppact:‘thispoliticalreversalcoincidedwithMary’sbreakdownandseemedtobepartofashatteringofallpreviouspointsofreference’(1992a:173);cf.p.188(‘IwasstillaMarxist(ofsorts)’,inthecontextofthelatest‘contemptible’shiftofCommunistpolicy,theirreversaloftheirattitudetothewarafterHitler’sattackontheSovietUnioninJune1941).
(85)1992a:108;ClassicsandtheLeagueofNationshadcoincidedforWalbankinthefigureofGilbertMurray,whohadspokentotheBradfordGrammarSchool‘SixthClassical’whenhewasinBradfordforaLeagueofNationsUnionmeeting(1992a:74),andwholecturedontheHellenicTravellers’Cruise,1930(1992a:105).ForMurray’sLeagueofNationsactivities,seeStray2007:esp.pp.217–37.
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 31 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(86)SCAD1037/2/4/1/2,pp.11–12;seeD1037/2/4/1/1fornotesfortheessay,D1037/2/4/1/3–5forassociatedpaperwork.ComparethesecondlectureofWalbank’s1938DurhamCountyseriesoncitizenship,SCAD1037/2/1/3/1,askingwhetherthe‘voluntaryliquidationofstates’waspossible.Seealso1935,‘SocialRevolutionatSparta’,p.3(onthedebtofmodernfederalorganizationstotheAchaeanLeagueandAratus),p.9(ontheAchaeanLeagueas‘theinstrumentoftheupperclasses,aconsolidationandguaranteeagainstsocialrevolt’).
(87)SCAD1037/2/3/18/8,10;D1037/2/3/21/1,23.
(88)SCAD1037/2/1/4/32,entitled‘FormsofWorldOrganization’.
(89)SeefurtherHendersoninthisvolume,pp.46–53.
(90)1939/40:54.
(91)1942c:84.Cf.1945bonTaubenschlag,TheLawofGreco-RomanEgyptintheLightofthePapyri(‘Thepresentvolumeisamonument…totheintegrityofpurposewhich,attheoutsetofthewar,broughtthissixty-year-oldprofessorfromCracowtoAix-en-Provenceandsubsequently,in1940,toColumbiaUniversity,sothathemightcrownalife’sworkwiththisstudy…’).
(92)1942b:88.FortheemphasisonracialdiscriminationinWalbank’spoliticalactivity,seee.g.hisanti-fascistletterstotheWallaseyNews,SCAD1037/1/8/6,orhislectureonanti-semitism,‘oneofthegreatestdangersandtricksinthereactionaries’pack’,foraWEAWorldAffairscourserunatLytham,1945–6,SCAD1037/2/1/4/29.
(93)1948b:161.
(94)1950c:188.FortheparticularrelationshipbetweenGermanscholarshipandtheHellenisticworld,see1991/2:91.
(95)Seealsothepatternofhisdistrustofmetaphorsmasqueradingasexplanation:e.g.1946a:66,1959b:245.
(96)Seee.g.BrashandWalbank1946,Walbank1950d,andtheevidenceofhiscorrespondencewithLouisRobert,SCAD1037/2/6/1/20/52,54,55,56,inwhichRobertgavealistofwartimeFrenchscholarship.
(97)1950d:112,116,continuingtoask:‘inshort,ifwecannot—asweassuredlycannot—havethewholecake,whetherwecannothaveahalf,aquarter,oratleastsomefragment,whichmayawakenatastehereandthereforadisciplinewhichwecannotaffordtolose’.
(98)1953b:49.Cf.hispuncturing,1966c:197,ofthe‘inflatedandbombasticclaims’ofahistorysponsoredbyaspecialInternationalCommissionforaHistoryoftheScientificandCulturalDevelopmentofMankind.Itwasperhapsthistendencytoundercutgrandclaimsthat—forallhispoliticalpassion—preventedhimfromeverbeinga‘partyman’.Ashe
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 32 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
warnedthestudentsoftheSocialistSocietyinapost-warlecture,SCAD1037/2/1/9/1/2,‘Warning:Don’tbecome“party”maninanarrowsense(—ofanyparty!).Joinpartiesifyouthinktheyarerightbut—don’tpretendtheyareinfallible.Infallibilityisareligiousclaimnotapoliticalone.Don’tsurrenderyourpowerofjudgement.’
(99)1942a;anarticleappreciatedbyLouisRobertintheirpost-warcorrespondence(‘précieuxpourmoi’),letterdated4Nov.1945(SCAD1037/2/6/1/20/54).
(100)Mountford’ssuggestion:1992a:186.Cf.hischoiceofAratus(asopposedtotheDelphicoracle)ashisfirstresearchtopic(p.109),orhissettlingonabiographyofPhilipV(after‘recallingastatementbyW.W.TarnthataseriesofmonographsontheAntigonidkingsofMacedoniawasadesideratum’,p.151).WalbankundertookconsiderablepreliminaryresearchonTacitus’Historiesinthisperiod,althoughitisnotclearwhetherthisantedatesMountford’ssuggestion(aterminuspostquemisprovidedbya1942exampaperusedasscrap):SCAD1037/2/3/18/5–6.WalbankwasclearlystillentertainingthepossibilityofworkingontheDelphicoracleaslateas1939:aletterfromBenjaminFarrington,29Jan.1939,SCAD1037/2/6/1/20.
(101)Seee.g.hisreviewofvonFritz,1955b:154:‘Itisclearlyquiteunrealistictominimizetheweaknesseswhichlaybeneaththefaçadeofearlyimperialprosperity.ButitisequallyunrealistictoneglecttheachievementsofthefirsttwocenturiesoftheprincipateandtherelativesuccessofAugustus’compromise.’
(102)1943b:91.
(103)1992a:186.
(104)1943c:89,88,continuing‘InaflashofinspirationthebourgeoishistorianofMegalopolisbegantorecognizeinthefirstsignsofpopularunrest,inthefirstsystematicchallengefromwithintotherulersofanempirenowunchallengeablefromwithout,theheraldofapproachingochlochracy’.Cf.McDonaldandWalbank1937onRomanimperialism,‘PolybiusandtheGrowthofRome’(summarizedasWalbank1946d),SCAD1037/2/3/21/3,pp.30–1:‘Polybiuswasblindtosomeofthemostessentialfeaturesofthescene,becausehewasobsessedwiththepresuppositionsofthecirclefromwhichhesprang,anditscounterpartamongwhichhelivedatRome;hisblacksweretooblackandhiswhitestoowhite.Andwhenatlastthefactsofchangeintrudeduponhisnotice,hissolutionwastosuperimposethepessimistictheoryoftheanacyclosis,tosubstituteperpetualmovementforperpetualimmobility—butinaformwhichequallyruledouttheideaofprogressivedevelopment.’
(105)1950b:273.
(106)Momigliano1984;‘Walbank’,hecontinued,‘wouldnotbethehistorianheiswithouthisdeepcommitmenttorationality,socialjusticeandinternationalunderstanding’,beforespeculatinghowmuchofthatisowedtofamilybackground.
(107)1992a:189.Seethe‘GeneralObservationsontheFalloftheRomanEmpireinthe
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 33 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
West’inch.38ofGibbon2004:iv.175–6:‘Thisawfulrevolutionmayusefullybeappliedtotheinstructionofthepresentage.’
(108)Davies2011:343;itwasstill,headds,‘aseriousessayinhistoriographicaltheory,offeringafullyworked-outMarxistanalysisofthe“DeclineandFall” ’.
(109)1983b:200.ForhisextensivenotesondeSteCroix1981,seeSCAD1037/2/3/21/22.SeealsohiscommentsonMarx’sdistinctionbetweenAsiaticandClassicalmodesofproduction(andondeSteCroix’sunderestimationofserfdom),1991/2:92–3andn.12.Seealso1956b:esp.p.293,takingissuewithKatz’sTheDeclineofRomeandtheRiseofMedievalEurope,forfailingtodojusticetotheimportanceofslaveryasacauseofdecline,reiteratingtheargumentsofWalbank1946a,butthenconceding‘thisismerelyonepoint,singledoutlargelybecauseitintereststhereviewer’.
(110)Gibbon2004:iv.177.
(111)1946a:78.
(112)1969:118–19.
(113)Comparehiscallforvigilanceina1938lecture,SCAD1037/2/1/3/1,quotedabove,n.61.
(114)PublishedasWalbank1970b;seealsoWalbank’senthusiasticreceptionofClaudeMossé’sMarxistthesisofthedeclineoftheGreekcity-state,1963b.
(115)1970b:13–14;WalbankreturnstothethemeoftheStAlbanslecture(‘thefailureoftheAchaeanconfederacytosolvethesocialproblem’)inconclusion,1970b:26,buttheninsistsonfinishingonapositivenote.
(116)SCAD1037/2/3/21/38,p.28;cf.1935:29–30(quotedabove,p.10).
(117)1992b:166.
(118)1992b:167–75,170.
(119)ThoughcontrasttheopeningofMomigliano1984:‘Itmusthavebeenin1947or1948whenItoldFrankWalbankthat(Soviet)Russianreviewersofhisbooks,thoughthinkingthathisattemptsatbeingacoherentMarxistwerenotverysuccessful,hadahealthyrespectforhisscholarship.’
(120)1992b:122.
(121)Seee.g.thesynopsis,SCAD1037/2/1/6/1,ofalecture‘TheHellenisticAge’,readtotheSheffieldBranchoftheCA,6Nov.1946,opening‘AjustappreciationoftheGreekcontributiontoWesternEuropecannotomittheachievementsoftheHellenisticAge’,orthepositivedefinitionoftheHellenisticworld(focusingontheexchangeofideas,prosperity,andthelinguistickoine)at1935:3–4.Cf.thebolderdescriptionofthe
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 34 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Hellenisticage,1991/2:113,as‘oneofthemostdynamicinMediterraneanhistoryandperhapsoneofthemostinfluentialinrespectofwhatwastofollowafterwards’.
(122)1992b:250;cf.p.209ontraditionalreligionasahusk.
(123)1992b:192–4.
(124)1992b:184;cf.194–5.
(125)1992b:251,249,28;notably,itisprimarilythroughthecities,‘vitalunitsofcivilizedlife’,thattheHellenisticlegacywastransmitted(p.249).
(126)1992b:157–8.
(127)1976/7:35,1964a:244,1977b:85,1984c:54;cf.1972b:148,1967:135,1991/2:96,1992b:63.
(128)1970b:14.Cf.1966b:388onToynbee’suseof‘enlivening’parallels,1949b:360(onJ.O.Thomson),1954a:18,reviewinganeditionofPlutarch’sDion:‘noneofPlutarch’sLivesismoreimmediatelyrelevanttothesepost-waryears,whenDionandHeracleidesarestillfamiliarfiguresinaliberatedEurope’.
(129)2002:1.Forasimilarlitotes,see1964a:260(therolesoftheUSandRome‘notaltogetherdissimilar’).Cf.Walbank’sobservation(1944:10)onRostovtzeff1926:‘ThecomparisonwithBolshevikRussiaandtheancientworldindecayisconstantlyimplicitinhisnarrative,andfrequentlyhepausestodrawadirectanalogy’.
(130)HCPi.vii.
(131)Henderson2001a:230–1.
(132)1992a:108(hisreadingofDeSanctiswasatfirstlimitedtoalargeportionontheHannibalicWar);seehereDavies2011:327.DeSanctisacknowledgedacopyofPhilipVinapostcarddated10Nov.1945,SCAD1037/2/6/1/20/58;WalbanksubsequentlywenttoDeSanctis’doorinRome(andmethimbriefly),inSept.1949(pers.comm.,April1998).
(133)1943a:61.
(134)Cf.1970a:305,1995:274,284.
(135)2002:320,continuing‘ItwasasadirectresultofhisownpersonaldisasterthatPolybiusproducedhisgreatwork’.
(136)2002:313.
(137)1951:58.Theitalicsareours.ThetensionbetweentheselevelsofinterpretationisexploredearlierthroughWalbank’snarrativeofAratus,e.g.initsironicconcludingcomparisonofCleomenesandAratus(1933:166)orhisanalysisofSicyon’sadmissionto
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 35 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theAchaeanLeague(‘thereisnoevidencethat[Aratus]envisagedanyoftheconsequencesofthestephewastaking’),intheconclusionofPhilipV,1940a:275,orinhiscritiqueofStier1948b:160:‘Notonlythefacts,butthecriteriabywhichtojudgethemmustsometimesbedrawnfromtheknowledgeoflatergenerations.OneneednotmakeananachronistictheoryofGreekunityone’stouchstoneinordertoassesstheoverwhelmingpricewhichGreecepaidfortheluxuryofinter-poliswarfare,andtoseeinthislossoneofthecausesofherdownfall;norisitunhistoricaltocharacterisethenationalismwhichcouldnotadvancebeyondthecity(justassofarwehavefailedtoadvancebeyondthenationstate)asparticularist.Ifthehistorianisconcernedwiththewholestoryhemustassignresponsibilityinthisway:ifontheotherhandhistaskismerelytoassessthepositivecontributionoftheGreeks(asS.seemstosuggest),hemayprefertolimithimselftotheirownstandards.’
(138)Walbank’sanalogyofhistoryanddramagoesbacktohisprizeessayonfederalism,SCAD1037/2/4/1/2:oneresultofthemoderninterestinfederalism(p.1)isthat‘thecurtainhasceasedtofalluponthespectacleofGreekhistorywiththedeathofAlexander,buttheplayhasbeenprolongedtoatrueriflessdramaticclimaxintheroutofScarpheiaandtheburningofCorinth’.
(139)1944:15;healsoportraysexpenditureonfestivals,asopposedto‘capitalistandindustrialexpansion’,as‘goingintounproductivechannels’.Cf.Plb.9.20.5–6,citedat1972a:124:‘Istronglydisapprove…ofanysuperfluousadjunctstoanybranchofknowledgesuchasservebutforostentationandfinetalk…andIamdisinclinedtoinsistonanystudiesbeyondthosethatareofactualuse.’
(140)1970b:27.Cf.1947b:658(‘Thielwritesoftheseaasonewhoknowsit…’).
(141)Cf.1938:64:‘Polybiusmakesnoattempttoinvolvethereaderemotionallyinthedevelopmentofthesituation’.Walbankwouldreturntothecontestedtopicoftragichistoryin1960a:seenowMarincolainthisvolume.
(142)1963a:7,discussingStier1957.Statesmentoo,notleastPhilipV,areregularlyassessedforthedegreetowhichtheyaremasteredbytheiremotions,e.g.1940a:260,HammondandWalbank1988:219(‘DemetriusoccupiedthethroneofMacedonia…withouteverdisciplininghisrestlessnaturetothepursuitofasingleconsistentpolicy,ordecidingwhethertoconcentraterealisticallyonrulingMacedoneffectivelyortofollowthewill-o’-the-wispofauniversalempire’).
(143)1963a:11,1974b:28–9,1970a:301,1972a:54,86–7,178,andesp.180–1.Thecharacterizationofa‘great’statesmanrecallsWalbank’sopeningdescriptionofAratus,1933:1(‘hissignificanceheattainednotbyforcingeventsintotheshapeheplanned…’).
(144)Cf.Walbank’sdiscussion(HCPiii.669–70)ofthemuch-debatedpassageonGreekviewsofRomanpolicytowardsCarthageintheThirdPunicWar(Plb.36.9–10).
(145)Walbank1963a:1,1960a:216,1962:8,11.‘Greatactofcourage’:2002:321.See
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 36 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
alsoWalbank’sreflectiononthefiftyyearsseparatingthefirstandsecondeditionsoftheCambridgeAncientHistory,1991/2:113.
(146)Walbank2002:1.
(147)ThesameanalogybetweentheUSandRomeisdrawnintheconclusionof1964a,alecture(adaptedfromthethirdofhis1957GrayLecturesatCambridge:SCAD1037/2/1/11/9)withwhichWalbanktouredanumberofUSuniversities:‘Forthisfeature[theinheritanceofthemixedconstitution],goodorill,wemust,Isuggest,reserveatleastapartofourthanksorexecrationforPolybius,whoseessayontheconstitution…hasthusbyastrangeandunexpectedchanneloftransmissionhelpedtoshapethedestinyofapeoplewhoseroleinthemodernworldisperhapsnotaltogetherdissimilartothatoftheRomansintheirs’(p.260).
(148)SeeHendersoninthisvolume,pp.37–8andn.2.Itstitle,ofcourse,refersfurtherbackinhisowncareertotheHypomnemataofAratus,thoughWalbank’sowngrandfather’smemoirwasacrucialmodel:SCAD1037/1/1/9.
(149)Cf.1994:29–30:‘Itisanobservedfactthatmanyhistorianshaveastronginclinationtocreatesomesortofoverallstructureorpatternfortheeventswithwhichtheyaredealing’.
(150)1992a:85,149.Georgicsarticle:1940b.
(151)1992a:65.
(152)Henderson2001a:227.
(153)Cf.hisremarkonPolybiantyche,1972a:65(cf.1972a:165):‘itishardtoresisttheimpressionthatashelookedbackontheremarkableandindeeduniqueprocessofRome’sswiftrisetopower,andrecollectedthewordsofDemetriusofPhalerum,hewasledtoconfusewhathadhappenedwithwhatwasdestinedtohappen,andsotoinvesttheriseofRometoworldpowerwithateleologicalcharacter’.
(154)DemetriusofPhalerum,citedatPlb.29.21.4–6,observingthatnoonewouldhavebelievedthewarningthatinfiftyyearsthenameofthePersianswouldbeobliterated;referredtoalsoatWalbank1970a:291,1980:41,1993a:22,1994:34–5.
(155)Walbank1994:42;cf.1972a:2–3,1963a:6,8,12:‘Butahistoryisnotnecessarilytheworsebecauseitissustainedbyaconvictionthatitrevealsapurpose;andperhapswithoutDemetriusofPhalerumandPolybius’beliefthathehadwitnessedtheunfoldingofasuperhumanplantherewouldhavebeennoHistories—certainlynoHistoriesintheformwehavethemintoday’(p.12).
(156)1940a:275:‘Buttheclearlogicofworldmovementsemergesonlyfromoutofaninfinitevarietyofminorstreams,ahostofcontingencies,conflictingambitionsandcross-currents:whatinthelightofcenturiesprovesall-importantmayberegardedaslittle
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 37 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
morethananaccident,ormayevenpassunnoticedbytheuncomprehendinggazeofitscontemporaries’.Cf.theironicconclusion,1984a:100,that‘theveryprocessof[theRomans’]annihilatingtheHellenistickingdomshadaccentuatedtheconditionswhichmadethesurvivaloftherepublicimpossible’,ortheconclusionofWalbank’s1946inaugurallectureasProfessorofLatin,‘TheRomanhistoriansontheRomanRepublic’,SCAD1037/2/1/7/1/1,p.36(‘historyhadbecomeaprofessiondivorcedfrompolitics.Itgainedautonomyatamomentwhenitceasedtobepossibleforrealpoliticalhistorytobewritten’).
(157)1940a:258.Cf.1958a:271onthecareerofDio(‘oneofthemoststrikingillustrationswithinthefieldofancienthistoryoftheextenttowhichanygivenpoliticalendlayslimitationsuponthemeanswhichcanbeemployedtoachieveit,andfurtheroftheextenttowhichtherealitiesofpoliticallifeandhumannaturethemselvesrestrictthefieldofprofitableaction’),1946c:43,onPhilipV.
(158)1933:166(ouritalics).
(159)SeeWalbank’scritique,1954c:102,ofMichaelGrant’sfocusonthepreventionofwar:‘Itisalsoarguablethatthegreatestservicethathistorycanrendertothoseseekingtounderstandthepresentliesinthegeneralincreaseofawarenessthatcomesfromthestudyofanyrealhistoricalproblem,ratherthaninauniversalconcentrationononeselectedissue.Inshort,topreventwarsweshouldstudynotmerelypastwars,buthistoryingeneral.’
(160)Cf.1984a:71–2onHellenistickings’useof‘acombinationofforceandcajoleryinaproportionwhichvariedaccordingtothelocationandstrengthofthecityandthepoliticalconstellationofthemoment’.
(161)1951:60.Cf.hischaracterizationoftheutilityofhistoryaccordingtoThucydides,1990:254–5(historywasuseful,‘not,itistrue,inprovidingaseriesofformulaeorblue-printsforfuturegeneralsandstatesmen,butcertainlyingivinghisreadersanextensionofthatgeneralisedexperiencewhich,asvonFritzputsit,enablesaship’scaptain—or,onemightsay,thedriverofacar—toknowtherightthingtodoinaparticularemergency’),orinalecture,‘HowDemocracyBegan’givenSept.1957,SCAD1037/2/1/10/1,p.18(‘noonewouldbesofoolishastouseourexperienceofdemocracyatAthenstoprovideablue-printformodernpracticeoraprognosticationastohowmoderndemocracyislikelytoturnout.…But,evenso,thestoryofGreekdemocracyisvaluabletous,notperhapstoinciteuslikecertainpoliticiansoftheeighteenthcenturytorevolutionaryaction,butrathertoemphasiseandillustrateinasmallercontextwhatarestillimportantproblemswhichdemocracyhastosolve…itremainsoneoftheessentialobjectsofstudyforanyonewhoisconcernedwiththeproblemsthatconfrontmoderndemocracy.’).
(162)Seee.g.2002:321,1984b:224onPyrrhus;cf.hisearlycharacterizationofPolybius’‘moralist’sviewofhistory’,1938:58:‘tohimhistoryisastorehouseofmoralexamples,atrainingforlife’svicissitudes.Sensationalismobscuresthemoralissues,
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 38 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
inaccuracyofdetailputsthelatereventsintheirwrongperspective,neglectofcauseandeffectruinsthewholemoralscheme.PolybiuswasafirmbelieverinthepowerofFortune(Tyche)tobringamanthedestinyhehadearned;thehistorianhadonlytosiftthedetailscarefullyandpatiently—thebaldrecordofwhatwassaidanddone—bringoutthenexusofcauseandeffectandthemorallessonwouldemerge,clearforalltosee.’
(163)Seee.g.hisjudgement,1967:692–3,ofPlutarch,‘thiswarm,shrewd,butmediocrewriter’,whose‘enviablemyopia[concerningRomeandthepossibilityofhistoricalchange]…goesalongwaytowardsaccountingfortheunruffledkindlinessthatishismostattractivecharacteristic’;cf.1964a:241onPolybius,1983conHieronymusofCardia.
(164)1959a:217onSyme’sColonialElites;seealso1954b:51onHolleaux;contrast1968:253(‘L.isnotthekindofscholarwhobelievesthatagoodwaytoexercisehistoricalobjectivityistoholdthebalancelevelbetweengoodandevil’).
(165)1964b:211–12onGomme;cf.1963a:2onHolleaux’spassion.Contrast1958b:157onCloché(‘Hishonestyisexceededonlybyhiscaution;andthiscombinationcansometimesbesomewhatparalysing’).
(166)‘PolybiusandthegrowthofRome’,SCAD1037/2/3/21/3,pp.30–1,continuing‘Polybiussaw—andsaid—thatifhistorywasnotthis,itwasnothing.Itisinthisthathisclaimtogreatnesslies.’
(167)1972a:6.
(168)1972a:52,includingthesuggestionthatCato’smockeryofPolybius’attemptstorestorehonourstotheAchaeanexilesasakintoOdysseusgoingbackforhishatfromtheCyclops’cave(Plb.35.6.4)mayhavebeenapointedrejoindertosuchself-comparisons.
(169)1948a:171–2;Walbankhimselfcompiledalistofhistravels,yearbyyear:SCAD1037/2/5/15.
(170)1962:12.
(171)GuidoSchepensandJanBollansée’s2001Leuvenconference,leadingtoShadowofPolybius(2005);the2008conferenceinmemoryofPeterDerow,whichsoughttocompletehisunfinishedprojecton‘RomeandtheGreeks’,SmithandYarrow2012;animportant2010conferenceonPolybius,organizedintheHelmut-Schmidt-UniversitätinHamburgbyVolkerGriebandClemensKoehn.Forconferencesbefore2000,seethebriefsurveyofWalbank2002:3–4.
(172)Walbank2002:1:‘ontheonehandPolybius’viewsofhisowncraft,hismethodsofcompositionandthecontentandpurposeofhisworkand,ontheother,hisexplanationofhowandwhyRomehadbeensosuccessful,togetherwithhisownattitudetowardsRomeandherdominationsince168B.C.’
(173)StudiesofRomanimperialismwhichhavedrawnonPolybiusincludevolumesby
Introduction: F. W. Walbank, Polybius, and the Decline of Greece
Page 39 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Champion2004a,Erskine2010,andmostrecentlyBaronowski2011,publishedtoolateforconsiderationinthisvolume.
(174)Forasurveyofrecentcomparativework,seeVasunia2011.Cf.theemphasisonimperialismintheeditedcollectionofSmithandYarrow2012.
(175)2002:9,continuing(pp.9–10):‘Thegoodcritichasalwaysknownthatbehindahistorian’saccountlieassumptionsandaimsdirectlyrelatedtohispredecessors,tohiscontemporarysituationand(ifheisapublicfigurelikePolybius)tohisownpoliticalcareer,hispresentstanceandhisfutureambitions;alsothatliterarypresentationcanaffecttheemphasisofhisnarrative.’Arecent,innovativeapproachtoPolybiannarrativeisMcGing2010.
(176)ForasurveyofearlierworkonBook6,seeWalbank2002:14–17.
(177)On‘imaginedcommunities’,seeAnderson2006,andQuinninthisvolume.Ontheσυμπλοκή,thestarting-pointisofcourseWalbank1975.WalbankreservedparticularpraisefortheapproachofClarke1999(2002:8,25).
(178)Cf.1948a:175–81.
(179)SeeWalbank’scomments,2002:7.
(180)Seeesp.Erskine2000.
(181)Seebelow,p.39.Davies2011:346n.44notestheabsenceofdiscussionofWalbankfrome.g.GibsonandKraus2002,Most1999.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 1 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
‘Apieceofworkwhichwouldoccupysomeyears…’OxfordUniversityPressArchiveFiles814152,814173,814011
JohnHenderson
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0002
AbstractandKeywords
ThischapterexaminesthehistoryofWalbank'sengagementwithPolybiusandsubsequentlywithhiscommentaryonPolybius,whoseoriginsanddevelopmenttowardspublicationischartedagainstthematerialsheldinthearchivesofOxfordUniversityPress,andagainstWalbank'scareerandhisunpublishedmemoir,Hypomnemata.Aswellasshowinghowthehistoryofscholarshipcanbeilluminatedbythestudyofpublicationpractice,thesustainedexaminationofcorrespondencebetweenthePressandWalbank(andinvolvingotherscholarsaswell)demonstrateshowWalbank'sinitialplanofwritingonTacitus'HistoriescametometamorphoseintoacommentaryonPolybius.HisskilfulcorrespondencewiththePressoverdecadesthusenabledhimtoensurethathiscommentaryhadthenecessaryscaleandphysicalscopeofthreesubstantialvolumesthatsuchaprojectof'long-distancewriting'needed.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 2 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:F.W.Walbank,Polybius,Commentaries,OxfordUniversityPress,historyofscholarship,historyofpublishing
CoincidencebetweentwoverydifferentprojectsconcentratedmyfireonPolybiusattheturnofthemillennium:theinvitationtocontributetoacollaborativeOxonconferenceorganizedaroundstand-off/co‐operationbetween‘scholarship’and‘theory’;andaCantabessaycollectiononbipolarity/integrationinHellenicculturalidentityunderimperialRome.ForthefirstIlinedupona‘Historicism’panel,anddeterminedtoexploreparallelisminthenarrativesofthewritingofPolybius’HistoriesandofFrankWalbank’sgreatcommentaryonsame,knowingbeforehandthatFWW(asIhadknownhimsinceIdid‘Greats’RomanHistory:‘EarlyPeriod’)hadbegunhismarathonamemberoftheBCP[BritishCommunistParty],andhadnotshirkedthefraughtissueofhisauthor’spoliticsthroughtheirhalfcenturiesofongoingproductivity.Forthesecond,IjoinedthepreponderantbandofUKPolybiansrecruitedfromWadhamCollegeandoutlinedmytakeonPolybius’fighttorespondtohistorythroughhis,andHellas’,switchbackslideintosubjection/conversiontoRome;whichmeantre-readingandcatchingupwithWalbankonsame,fromgiantcommentarythroughdefinitivepaperuponclassicarticle.WhatmadetheseforaysspecialformewasFrank’sinvolvement;hereadwhatIwrote,promptlyandwithembarrassingclarity,andgavemeagoodlongchatovertheattemptI’dmadeto‘situate’hisowninvestmentinPolybius.1Inparticular,FrankmadesureIgottoreadhisstillunpublishedmemoir,from(p.38) birthtoappointmenttotheLatinchairatLiverpoolin1946(–1951),Hypomnemata(Walbank1992a).2
WhenIlearnedoftheplantocelebrate‘Polybius1957–2007’,IcheckedtheUniversityofLiverpoolLibraryholdings,andwasatoncechuffedtofindFrankhadin1996contributedArtsatLiverpool:TheFirstHundredYears(intheLibrary’sSpecialCollection:TomHarrisonkindlylentmehiscopyattheconference),butnotraceofthememoir.3Myplantoputthatrightandsharethestraight-twinklingfranknessofthisvividlydetailedaccountofascholar’snegotiationoftheinter-wareraandthewaryearswithhistroopofadmirerswaswellandtrulyupstagedattheoutset,whentoday’scd-romvideotechnologybroughtusarenderingfromthehorse’smouthintheformofaprofessionallypolishedfive-minutetasterthatleftnooneindoubtthatthey’dbeenmissingatreatofprecisenarrativeinbesthumour.
MysecondplanwastoinvestigatethepublishinghistoryofthegreatPolybiuscommentaryasdocumentedintheOUPArchives,wheretheDirector,MartinMaw,andhisstaffhavegotusedtomyirregularrepeatvisitstoinspectfilesonclassicalbooksbythedozen,andhelpedmesecurefromtheSecretarytotheDelegatespermissiontouseandcitetellingrecordsandcorrespondence.Sinceconfidentialityextendstoeven‘dead’filesoflivingauthors,IfirstexplainedtoFWWwhatIwasupto,andgothimtoOKmyrequesttobeallowedtoconsulttheCommentaryfilesonhisbehalf.Myreckoningthathewasn’tagainstfindingoutiftheremightbeanythinginterestingtherehe’dneverseenwaslargelybutnotentirelydeflatedwhenhegentlyobservedthattherewouldbenoskeletonsinthecloset—‘I’mnotconsciousofanysecrets’—andofferedtosendoverthecomplete‘archive’ofpublishinghistoryfortheCommentaryashehadconserveditfromhisend,parcelledinabulgingpaperbagtiedupwithstring.Didn’ttakelongformeto
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 3 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
twighowhecouldbe‘quite’so‘happyfor[me]todiganduseanythingthatturnsup’.Asitchanced,IsetaboutgleaningtheOxoncropfirst;andsettledtocollatewiththeCantabcounterpartthereafter:thetwocachesweretheproductofratherdifferentmotivesandfilters,butwiththeexceptionofoneortwoitemsbywayofpreliminaryadviceontheproposalfortheCommentaryanditscommissiontoFWW—equivalentsoftoday’s‘readerreports’—I(p.39) found,tomydelight,thattherewasvirtuallynodivergenceatallbetweenthetwinparadoses:more,FWWhadnotonlykepteachtypescriptmissive4asreceivedmatchedtoeachreplyincarbon-copy,buthadclippedthestuffchronologicallyorderedincoherentbatches/meaningfulphasesofactivity.Nodoubttheshipshapeorganizationwasitselfasymptomofthemindsetrequiredfor,andtrainedby,thesuccessfulnegotiationofaneditiomaiorlonghaul;andtheretirementshotatself-appraisalrealizedasHypomnematahadbeenfacilitatedbytheorderlyaccumulationofpapers,andhadthensuperimposeditsownsupplementarydiscipline,chapterbyposteventumchapter.
IfIhadbeenouttodigupdirtordiscovergemstotickleFrankpink,heknewtheoddsstackedupagainstthelikelihood.Butno—IthoughtthatmemoirandfilecombinedwouldsupplyanarrativeofthepublicationhistoryoftheCommentary.Ihadgotusedtorummagingthroughthegestationofmoreorlessmodestworkingeditionswithcommentary,butrealizedfromtheoutsetthattheeditiomaiorsetsitsownagenda:Iwasn’tgoingtopresumeto‘systemsanalyse’,5letaloneappraisetheresearchmethods,rhetoricalstrategies,orarchivaleconomyembodiedinthesedoorstoptomes:Vol.I(1957),(then)xviii+776,Vol.II(1967),xvi+684,Vol.III(1979),xxi+834.Rather,Imeanttostickwithtwoquestionstoputtothese(now802+700+855 =)2,357pagesofpreciselygraduatedandunwaveringlycondensedmassesofeditorialdivisionesbossingtheirmyriadadnotationessectionbysection,thenfragmentuponfragment.
Howcomethatnovicethoughthecouldbigitup,andpullitoff?
Howdidhegetawaywithitinthefirstplace,andthereafter?
LittledidIforeseethatthesnoopwouldblunderbigtimeintothehistoryofpublication,thoughitshould’vehitmethatthisisthewaytheseriallifeworkgenre,themaiusopus,isboundtocathect.Ireckonthatthedocumentswritemystoryforme,clearandsharp:you’llfindIneedonlyplayscrivener.MovingfromHypomnematatoCorrespondencewiththePress.Forthelatter,IputlettersfromthePressinitalics.[Butallemphases,whethertoorfro,aremebeinghelpful.]
IntoClassicsThememoirisnotshyofironyandenthymeme:‘Ioptedfortheclassicalsideowingtoacompletemisunderstandingofwhatwasinvolved.[Thesituation]shouldhavebeenasplainasapikestaff,butitjustwasnot;anditwasneverexplainedtomyparents,largely,Ibelieve,becauseL.W.P.Lewis,a(p.40) domineeringandratherarrogantman,whowasheadofclassics,exploitedsuchconfusiontocaptureanybrightboysfortheclassicalside.Oneofhismostdismissiveinsultstoanyonewhohadfailedtomeethisacademicdemandswastosay:“Ifthat’sthebestyoucando,you’dbettergooffandread
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 4 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
mathematics(pronouncedinthemostcontemptuousmanner)”.Inowknow,however,thatchanceanderrorplayagreatpartatalltimesinshapingone’slifeandIdonotregretatallthatmyparents’ignoranceturnedmeintoaclassicalscholar.Indeed,IshallalwaysbeintenselygratefulthatIfoundmyselfataschoolwhereIwasabletolearnLatinandGreek.Todaysuchopportunitiesareofcoursemuchrarerandhardertocomeby.’(1992a:65)
IntoPolybiusFirstbase,andthehistoric-didacticmode,atBradfordGrammarSchool(1924–28):‘OurotherclassicsmasterwasE.H.Goddard.…Ned,manyyearsinadvanceoftheacceptanceof“generalknowledge”asasubject,usedtodevoteonehouraweektowhathecalled“gas”,whenhewouldcomealongandtalktousaboutsay,theatomictheory,thetableofelements,thebackgroundofthegeneralstrike(1926),philosophicalproblems,Nietzschianoppositesoranythingelsethatcameintohismind.OnethingthatwasalwaysverymuchinhismindwasOswaldSpenglerandwewereallindoctrinatedwiththecyclicalviewsofTheDeclineoftheWest,atheorytowhichhefullysubscribed…|[O]neyearNedhadtheJointMatriculationBoard(theJ.M.B.)approveaspecialperiodofRomanhistoryforourschoolalone(thiswaspermittedundertheregulations).TheperiodhechosewasRomanHistory200–133B.C.;andthisledtoapieceofinitiativeonhispart,whichwastobedecisiveformywholelife’swork—littlethougheitherheorIcouldhaveforeseenthisatthetime.PointingoutthatthemainGreeksourcefortheperiodweweretostudywasthesecondcenturyAchaeanhistorianPolybius,heproducedasmall,rathergrubbyGermanschooleditionofthisauthor(Idonotknowtothisdaywhateditionitwas)andinstructedanotherboyinmyyear,PhilipSheard—hewaslatertobecomealecturerineconomicsatLeedsUniversity—andmetotakethisuptotheprefects’roominfreeperiods,translateandmakeaprécisofit,writethisoutandduplicateitonajelly—theprimitiveformofduplicationthenused—fortherestoftheform.Thesecondcenturywasadifficultperiodtostudy(apartfromthemainwars)andIdon’tthinkIever,atthisstage,quiteunderstoodhowthehistoriangotfromthescatteredevidence(apartfromPolybiusandLivy)tothestraightnarrativecontainedinthetext-books(norindeedwhydifferenttext-booksgavedifferentdatesforsomelawsandminorincidents).Tohavegraspedthatwouldhavebeenamajorstepinmytrainingasahistorian.Butevenwithoutthatillumination,toreadchunksofPolybiusintheoriginal(Iforgetnowhow(p.41) fardownwewent)andtosetoutthegistofhisaccount,includingtheconstitutionalsectioninBook6,wasaveryenlighteningexperienceand,asIhavesaid,firedmewithaninterestinthatauthorwhichwaslatertobearunexpectedfruit.’(1992a:75–7)
IntoOxbridgeSecondbase,moreconcentratedcoincidence,andingrainedpennywisdom;backingandshuntingtheboyintohisshoo-indestiny:‘(T)herestofuswereencouragedtochooseoneofthelessformidableinstitutions.MyownchoicewasbasedonwhatIlaterrealisedwereveryunsubstantialreasons.Fromasetofcigarettecards,whichIhadcollectedsomeyearsearlierwhenIwasinthethirdform,IhaddiscoveredthattheoldestcollegeinCambridgewasPeterhouse,foundedin1284.Iknewabsolutelynothingofits
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 5 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
reputationorwhowouldbeteachingme,shouldIgothere.…IheardthatIhadbeenelectedtoaMinorScholarshipatPeterhouseworthsixtypoundsperannum.AlongwiththeCountyMajorScholarship,worthahundredpounds,itnowputmewithinreachofthetwohundredandtwentypoundsestimatedasnecessarytocoverayearatCambridge;andlateranOldBoysFoundationmademeanadditionalgrantofthirtypounds,bringingthetotaltoonehundredandninety,andleavingonlyasmallamountformyfathertofind.…FromtheoutsetIregardedmyselfasprimarilyahistorianandIneverhadanydoubtthatIshouldtakeGroupC(AncientHistory)inPartII,adecisionstrengthenedbythefortuitousadvantagethatBertrandHallwardwashimselfahistorianandcouldprovidethenecessaryteachingwithintheCollege.…[M]ostofourRomanhistorylectureswereconcentratedontherepublic—perhapsbecausethatwasthesubjectoftheCambridgeAncientHistoryvolumeswhichwerebeingwrittenatthattime.TheexceptionherewasMartinCharlesworth,wholecturedontheearlyempire.…DuringtheMichaelmastermofmysecondyearatCambridge(1929)IreadintheTimesEducationalSupplementthattheHellenicTravellers’Clubwasofferingfourprizes,twofor‘undergraduatesatOxfordorCambridge’andtwofor‘sixthformboysatpublicschools’foressaysonspecifiedsubjects;theseweretotaketheformoffreeplacesonClubcruises.…Whatinterestedmewasthefirstsubject,‘FederalismintheGreekWorld’,andIatoncedecidedtohaveashotatit.SointheChristmasvacationIdidsomereadingofFreeman,Tarnandoneortwootherbooksandwrotemyessay(usingthereferenceroominthelocalPublicLibraryasaquietplaceinwhichtowrite).SomeweeksintotheLentTermIheardtomygreatdelightthatIhadwontheprizeforthatsubject.TheexaminerwasT.R.GloverandIwenttoseehimandgottheessaybackfromhim.…ThecruisetookplaceinMarch–April1930;andthiswasthefirsttimethatIhadbeenoutofGreat(p.42) Britain.…IshouldperhapsaddthatinthepreviousLentTermIhadattendedHallward’smodernGreekcourseandthesmatteringofthelanguageIacquiredwasquiteusefultomewhenIgottoGreece.…Myfinalyear,1930–1931,Ienjoyedgreatly.Iwashappytoberidofthecompositionsandabletospendthebulkofmytimeonmymaininterest,ancienthistory.Thetwospecialsubjectswere,inGreekhistorythesixthcentury,andinRomanhistorytheSecondPunicWar.ButtherewerealsolongishprescribedperiodsofGreekandRoman(republican)historyforthemoregeneralpapers.…OntheeveningofJune19thIreceivedatelegramfromHallwardsummoningmebacktoCambridgeandreturnedthenextmorningtolearnthatIhadgotagoodfirstwithdistinctioninboththegeneralpartoftheexaminationand(moreimportant)inthespecialAncientHistorypapers.WouldIcaretostayonforafourthyearanddoa‘pieceofresearch’?…Hallward’ssuggestionwasveryattractivetomeandatonceIagreed…InowhadtodecidewhatIshoulddomyresearchon;andsincetheCommitteewhichdealtoutscholarshipsandawardswasmeetingthatafternoon,anearlydecisionwasessential.IretiredtotheWardLibrarytoponderandwritedownideas.Onlytwostickinmymind.OnewastheDelphicOracle;butwhenIsawHallward,hesaidtoomanypeoplehadalreadyworkedonthat(notquitetrue,Ithink,thoughlaterParkeandWormellcertainlycorneredthatmarket).However,Ihadabetteridea.InmyessayonGreekfederalismfortheHellenicTravellers’Clubcompetition,IhadcomeacrossanAchaeanstatesmancalledAratus,whohadplayedanimportantpartintheriseoftheAchaeanLeagueinthethirdcentury.WouldastudyofAratusdo?BertrandHallwardgavehis
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 6 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
approvalandsolaterdidAdcock,sothatthiswasputforwardasthesubjectofmyresearch.IwasgivenaUniversitygrantfromtheGeorgeCharlesWinterWarrfundandbytheCollegeaHugodeBalshamResearchStudentship;andlater,withaWestRidingCountyStudentshipandaDrummondStudentshipfromtheBradfordGrammarSchoolOldBoys’AssociationImademyincomefor1931–2uptoover£300,whichwasuntoldwealth.’(1992a:85,96,100,103–4,107–8,109–10)
OnintoresearchOnekeyafteranother,toaworkinglifetimeofdedicatedgrit:‘IreturnedfromJenatostartuponayear’sresearch.HavinggotmysubjectacceptedbytheappropriateUniversityCommittee,Ihadacleargoal:toproduceanessayofabout60,000wordsontheAchaeanpoliticianandgeneral,AratusofSicyon,andsubmititthefollowingsummerfortheThirlwallPrize.…AtsomepointinthesummerIsubmittedmyAratusfortheThirlwallPrize.Ihadtypeditoutmyself,havingboughtasecond-handtypewriterinBradford(for,Ithink,about£5)andhavingbeentaughtbyJosietouseallfingersintyping—alesson(p.43) forwhichIamstillgrateful.Thetypewriter,incidentally,aportableRemington,remainedingoodshapeuntilabouttwoyearsago,soIhadoverfiftyyears’useofit.’(1992a:119,125)
HirepoliticsandovertoLiverpoolWherelivesaremade,betweenkairosandwangle:‘InSeptember1933anAssistantLectureshipwasadvertisedatLiverpoolUniversitytofillthevacancycreatedbytheappointmentofR.B.OnianstotheAberystwythChairofLatin.IdecidedtoapplyandinduecoursewascalledforinterviewonSeptember19th.AratosofSicyon(inthisbookIusedthe—osformsforGreeknames)hadbeenpublishedtendaysbeforeandIwasthereforeabletosendacopytoProfessorJ.F.Mountford,theHeadoftheDepartment,insupportofmyapplication.Meanwhilewedecidedtocelebratethepublicationinamorefestiveway….AtLiverpooltwoofuswereinterviewed,theotherbeingStanleyF.Bonner,whohadthatsummergraduatedatPembrokeCollege,Cambridge.Hetoohadnouniversityteachingexperience,buthehadreadtheliteratureoptioninthetripos;alsohecamefromthemidlands,whichmayhavesubconsciouslyinfluencedMountfordinhisfavour,forhetoocamefromthatpartofthecountry.Anyhow,thesmallsub-committeechoseBonnerandIassumedthatMountford’sexpressionofregretthattherewerenottwovacancieswasjustaformalpieceofconsideratepoliteness.However,fortunewaswithmeafterall.ForonSaturday,November25th,Igotaletterfromhimtosaythatanothermemberofhisdepartment,C.G.Cooper,hadbeenappointedtoachairinNewZealandandofferingmethejob,asAssistantLecturer,at£200fortheperiodJanuarytoSeptember1934.Thisletterstandsoutinmymemoryasoneoftheturning-pointsinmylife.…[T]heregulationsatLiverpool(asinmanyuniversitiesatthattime)hadnoprovisionforpromotionfromAssistantLecturertoLecturer.Unlessavacancyatthehighergradeoccurred,howeverhardyouhadworkedandhowevercompetentyouhadbeen,attheendofthreeyearsoutyouwent.…[I]nthenextyear(1934–5),whenhewasduetolosebothBonnerandmyself,[Mountford]usedhisveryconsiderablediplomaticandadministrativeskillstogettheregulationschanged,sothatwebothmoveduptofulllectureships(withathreeyearprobationaryperiodinGradeII)withoutahitch.’(1992a:
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 7 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
129–30,136)
IntoprintHere’showspecializingsomehowemerges,onewayandanother:‘WealsoranaLatinReadingCircle…LaterwewentontotheGeorgics,andasaresult(p.44) Iwroteanarticle,laterpublishedintheClassicalQuarterly,inwhichIwasgivenconsiderablehelpbyMary.Itwasentitled“Liciatelaeaddere”anddealtwithapassageintheGeorgicsdescribingthesettingupofaloom;mosteditorshadshownadeplorableignoranceofwhatthewordsmeantandhowaloomactuallyworked.Thisarticlewassubsequentlytobeofquiteunforeseenimportanceinmycareerforwhen,manyyearslater,IwasacandidatefortheChairofLatin,itwasquotedtomyadvantageasevidencethatIwasagenuineLatinistandnotsimplyahistorianindisguise(whichofcourseIreallywas).TheseminarwhichgaverisetothearticlelaterstuckinbothmymindandMary’sbecauseIhadconstructedasmallmodel“loom”toillustratethetechnicalpointsinvolvedandMountfordhadbeensoimpressedbythisthathesuggested(notwhollyseriously)thatwekeptitintheDepartment;butIhadreluctantlytorejectthisproposal,sincethemainbeamhadbeenborrowedfromourbathroom,whereitnormallysupportedtherolloftoiletpaper.…SoonafterIarrivedinLiverpoolIbegantoaskmyselfonwhatsubject,followingthepublicationofAratos,Ishouldnowwork;andrecallingastatementbyW.W.TarnthataseriesofmonographsontheAntigonidkingsofMacedoniawasadesideratum,IdecidedtowriteabiographyofPhilipV,whohadalreadyengagedmyinterestwhileworkingonthesecondhalfofthelifeofAratus.Thisconstitutedmymainresearchprojectfrom1934to1938,whenIpresenteditfortheHarePrizeintheUniversityofCambridge.ButinthecourseofmyworkonthisIalsowroteseveralarticles,oneonthedateofaccessionofPtolemyV,whicheventuallyappearedintheJournalofEgyptianArchaeology.…IalsowroteanarticleontheoriginsoftheSecondMacedonianWarinconjunctionwithAlexMcDonald,anAustraliannowlecturingatNottingham,aftertakingadoctorateatCambridge.WewerebroughttogetherbyAdcock,whosuggestedthatwemightcombinetwoarticleswhichwehadsubmittedatthesametimetotheJournalofRomanStudies.IhadalreadymetMcDonaldwhenwewerebothcandidatesfortheancienthistoryjobatNottingham,whichhegot,butwenowhadaclosecollaboration,whichwasthebeginningofalongfriendship.Muchlater,in1969,wewroteanotherjointarticleonclausesoftheRomantreatywithAntiochusIII;andintheJRSfor1979Ihadthemelancholytaskofwritingashortobituaryforhim.AthirdarticleduringthisperiodconcernedPolybius’“tragic”treatmentofPhilip’slastyearsandthisappearedintheJournalofHellenicStudiesfor1938.’(1992a:149,151–2)
TowarIntopoliticalcommitment,throughtheNationalCouncilforCivilLiberties(Hon.Sec.),theSpanishMedicalAidCommittee,theLeftBookClub…—and(p.45) aconvictionforaidingandabetting,andfailingtoreport,anillegalalientotheauthorities….TherewasthisothersidetotheWalbanks:‘InNovember1939thetwoworldsIwaslivinginweretemporarilybroughttogether,whenweputupProfessorBenjaminFarringtonofSwanseaandafteralittleprobingonbothsides,hewasabletoringuphiswifetosaythathehad“fallenamongcomrades”.BenwasadelightfulsouthernIrishmanfromCork,whosebookson
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 8 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ancientscience,thoughtheyoftenmissedthemarkordrewunsustainableconclusions,wereimportantfortheirconvictionthatscienceandphilosophyhadtobeseenagainstthebackgroundofthesocietyinwhichtheysprangup.HewasaMarxistand(asIshallexplainlater)wastoberesponsibleformywritingmymostcontroversialbook,TheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest.…Thespringof1939wasalsomarkedbyanothereventwhichsticksinmymemory—aperformanceofAeschylus’AgamemnoninthetranslationofA.Y.Campbell,whohimselftookthepartoftheleaderofthechorus.Wejuniorlecturers,includingHarriHudson-Williams,whohadrecentlyreplacedFletcherintheGreekDepartment,weremembersofthechorus.6…[I]nMarchwewenttoCambridge,stayingwithRobertandMargaretGettyinGilbertRoad,inordertoseetheGreekPlaythere.ItwastheAntigone.TheGreekambassadorattendedandIthinkeveryonefeltthetensionintheair,sincethisplayembodiedsomuchofwhatwefeltwasatstakeintheEuropeof1939.InthecourseofthisvisittoCambridgeIcalledonS.C.RobertsattheCambridgeUniversityPress,fortowardstheendofJanuaryIhadheardthatIhadwontheHarePrizewithmystudyofPhilipVofMacedon,sothatitwasprettycertainthatthePresswouldpublishit.…ThePressagreedtopublish,butrathermeanlyrequiredmetoputdownonehundredpounds.SincetheHarePrizewasatthattimewortheightypounds,itleftmetwentypoundsoutofpocket.However,LiverpoolUniversitycameupwiththirty-fivepoundstocoverthecostoftheillustrations,soIendedupwithaboutfifteenpoundsinhandoverthewholeaffair.Jumpingahead,ImayaddherethatIgotmyhundredpoundsbackin1968(muchdiminishedinvalue),whenthebookwasreprintedbyafirminAmerica.…[T]heworst[bombingraids]occurredinMarchandMay1941,twointensiveperiodsofaboutaweekeach,inthecourseofwhichthecentreofLiverpoolwasalmostcompletelydestroyed.…AboutthistimeIstartedlecturingtotroops,anextremelyusefulexperience,sincetohavetocaptureandholdtheinterestofatiredgroupofsoldiers,manyofwhomhavenointellectualinterests,isgoodpracticeforlecturinganywhere.OverthenextfewyearsIlecturedwidelyon“CampaigningwithAlexander”(p.46) (actually“theGreat”,thoughanofficeratoneunitthoughtIwasgoingtotalkaboutcampaigningunderGeneralAlexanderinNorthAfrica),“ThesituationinGreece”,“TheProblemofAlbania”andeventuallyawholeseriesoftalkscalled“BritishWayandPurpose”,organisedthroughABCA(ArmyBureauofCurrentAffairs)anddesignedtogetsmallgroupstalkingandthinking,notleastaboutpost-warEngland.’(1992a:166–7,176,178)
TotheCommentaryBuyingintotheevitable,ourauthorbaresthejokeofnecessity:‘OncePhilipVwasbehindmeandthetaskofseeingitthroughthePressover(itwaspublishedinDecember1940witharatherpusillanimousprintnumberofonly500),Iwroteseveralarticlesratherthanembarkonalargeprojectwhilethefutureseemedsouncertain.Butin1943Ibegantofeeltheneedforsomethingmoresubstantial.MountfordsuggestedthatImightundertakeacommentaryonTacitus’HistoriestotaketheplaceofSpooner.ThiswouldbeofinteresttomeasahistorianandwouldalsobeasuitabletaskforalecturerinLatin.ItwasagoodideaandIhadsomecorrespondencewithMartinCharlesworthaboutit;hewasenthusiastic.SoIwrotetoKennethSisamattheOxfordUniversityPresswiththisproposal,’—
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 9 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
January16th,1943
DearSir,
IhaverecentlybeenworkingonTacitus’sHistories.andIamconsideringwritingacommentaryonthem.TheonlyworkofthiskindinEnglish,theeditionofW.A.Spooner,nowoutofprint,waspublishedoverfiftyyearsago,in1891,andeventhenleftmuchtobedesired.However,Idonotwanttospendalotoftimeonthisproject,ifthereisnolikelihoodofitsbeingeventuallypublished,andIamthereforewritingtoyounow,beforeinvolvingmyselffurtherinthework.
WhatIhaveinmindisasinglevolume,containinganintroductiontoTacitus’sHistoriesandafullcommentary,stylisticandhistorical,basedontheOxfordClassicalTextofC.D.Fisher,andarrangedinsuchawaythatthecommentarycouldalsobesplitupandpublishedseparatelywiththevariousbooksforuseinschoolsanduniversities.Ihavediscussedtheschemewithvariousscholarsandteachers,includingProfessorJ.F.MountfordofLiverpoolUniversity,andtheyagreethattheworkwouldfilladefinitegap.
Irealiseofcoursethatyoucannotmakeanyprecisestatementatthisstage,particularlyunderpresentconditions.ButasTacitus’sHistorieshave[unreadable]forsolong,{it}ispossiblethatasimilarprojecthasbeenalreadyenvisagedorundertakenbysomeotherscholar.I{t}wouldbeofgreathelptomethereforeifyoucouldinformmewhethertheDelegatesarewithoutpriorcommitmentsasregardsTacitus’sHistories,andwhether,whentimesaremorenormalandthe(p.47) workisfairlywelladvanced,theywouldbelikelytoconsidermyproposalsympathetically.
Yoursfaithfully,
—‘butwasalittledisappointedtobetoldthatRonaldSymewassupposedtobedoingthatverything.’—
19thJanuary1943
DearSir,
Thankyouforyourletterof16thJanuarysuggestingacommentaryonTacitus’sHistories.Imustexplainthatwearepreoccupied.ThisworkwasundertakenforthepressbythelateW.W.How,whomadeconsiderableMS.collections.Onhisdeath,Mr.R.SymeofTrinityCollegeundertookthecommentary,and,thoughheisnowengagedonwarworkintheMiddleEast,wehaveeveryreasontobelievethatheintendstocontinuetheworkwhenhereturnstoOxford.
Wedorecognisethegap,andIamverysorrytohavetoreportthatwearepre-committed,asthereisfartoolittlecentralworkonbookscalebeingdoneinclassicalsubjects.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 10 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Yourstruly,
—‘However,Sisam(whointhemeantimehadconsultedArnaldoMomigliano,whowasnowinOxford,saidhewouldgetintouchwithSyme,whowasatthattimeholdingaBritishCouncilpostatAnkarainneutralTurkey,andenquirewhetherhestillproposeddoingtheTacitus.Inthemeantime,incasehedid,hadIanyotheralternativeprojectinmind?…’—thatis,todocumentthiscrucialforeplayindetail,onreceiptofpolitethanksfromFWW(plus(?)positivenoisesfrome.g.Charlesworth—whohadencouragedFWWtoapproachOUPinanoteof15thJanuary1943),theultimatelydecisivefollow-upnote:
3rdFebruary,1943
DearSir,
Thankyouforyourletterof23rdJanuary.Inthesedays,whensofewbooksarebeingwritten,Idonotliketoleaveasuggestionwithareasonthatmustbefinalagainstitfromourpointofview.SomayIaskwhetheryouhaveanyothersubjectorpossiblesubjectsinmindwhichyouwouldbepreparedtomentioninformally,sothatwemightconsiderencouragingthemi.e.acceptingforpublicationinprinciple,subjecttotheworkbeingfinishedonapproximatelythelineslaiddownandthestandardweshouldexpectfromyou?Frankly,welikecentralbooks,nottoonarrowinfield,becausetoomuchclassicalworkisbeingdoneonthefringe;butyoursuggestionindicatesthatyouarethinkingofamajorworkforthenextfewyears.
—‘Iponderedandremembered,firsthavingreadPolybiuswithPhilipSheardintheSixthFormatBradfordGrammarSchool,andthenmyconstantuseofPolybiusinmyworkforAratosandPhilipV.Moreover,Ihadrecentlywritten(p.48) anarticleonPolybius’discussionoftheRomanconstitution.SoIboldlyreplied:Yes,acommentaryonPolybius.’(1992a:186)—
February8th,1943.
DearSir,
ImustthankyouforyourletterofFebruary3rd,withitsenquirywhetherIhaveanyothersubjectinmindwhichIwouldbepreparedtoputbeforetheDelegates.Apieceofworkwhichwouldoccupysomeyears,andwhichIshouldbegladtoundertakeontheconditionsyousuggest,wouldbeahistoricalcommentaryonPolybius’sHistories.IhavebeenworkingwithPolybiusconstantlyforthelasttenyears,andIhavefrequentlyfelttheneedofaworksuchasHowandWellshaveprovidedforHerodotus.WhatIhaveinmindisabookonthoselines,whichwouldassistanyonecomingtoPolybiuseitherasasourceforthehistoryofthe3rdand2ndcenturiesorforhisideasonhistoriographyandhispoliticalphilosophy.Thereisalreadyanadequatetext(Büttner-Wobst),andIshouldnotproposetodiscusstextualorlinguisticquestionsexceptwheretheyareessentialtoanunderstanding
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 11 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ofhistoricalorhistoriographicalproblems.Specialtopicswouldprobablybestgointoappendices.Astothelengthofsuchabook,Ishouldbeinabetterpositiontoestimatethisafterworkingonitforsometime.
Ithinksuchacommentarywouldfallwithinyourdefinitionofa‘centralbook’,sincealthoughPolybiusliesoutsidethemain‘classicalperiod’,andisnotreadforhisGreek,heisthemainsourceforavitalperiodofbothGreekandRoman—indeedonemustsayGraeco-Roman—history,andisplacedanunchallengedthirdamongtheGreekhistorianswhoseworkssurviveinanybulk.IshouldbegladthereforetohearifyouwouldbeinclinedtoencouragesuchaprojectasIhaveoutlined.
Yourstruly,
On12FebruarySisampushedArnaldoMomigliano’sbutton:‘Hedoesn’tindicatethelengthofhisproposedbookonPolybius,whichIsupposewouldbeuseful,thoughdifficultandcontroversial.Ishouldn’texpectittosellverymuch,butwelldoneandnottoobigitwoulddeservetheDelegates’consideration.Ishouldlikeyourveryshortviewofhissuggestion’.L’uomotooknearlyaweektooblige—definitively:
18Feb.1943
DearSisam,
IamsorrythatafewdaysofabsencehavedelayedmyansweronWalbank.IencloseashortmemorandumwhichismeanttointegratewhatIwrotebefore.IagreewithyouthatacommentaryonPolybiuswillnotbeaveryremunerativeaffair,buttheClarendonPresscouldnotchooseamoreusefulsubjectinthefieldofancienthistory.Walbankseemstometohavetherightblendofyouthandwisdomforsuchamagnificententerprise.
Yourssincerely,
(p.49) I—AcommentaryonPolybiusisanotorious‘desideratum’inanylanguage.WearestillleftwithCasaubon(1609)andSchweighaeuser(1789).ALexiconPolybianumtoreplaceSchweighaeuser’sappendixtohiseditionwould,too,beveryuseful.7
II—Mr.WalbankisingeneralqualifiedforacommentarytoPolybiusbyhispainstakingandhighlyaccuratemethodofresearch.Asforthespecialqualificationsnecessaryforthiskindofwork—a)competenceinthemilitaryanddiplomatichistoryoftheHellenisticperiod;b)understandingofstylec)soundjudgmentinhistoryofhistoriography—somuchcanbesaid:
—Onpointa)Mr.Walbank’scompetenceisestablishedbeyondanydoubt.
—Onpointb)Mr.Walbank’sgoodjudgmentseemstomeprovedwellenoughbythewholeofhiswork.AnarticleinClass.Quart.1940seemsalsotogiveevidence
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 12 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thatW.hascapacitytounderstandminutephilosophicalinterpretation.That,ofcourse,doesnotnecessarilymeanthathecandooriginalworkonPolybius’linguisticside,butsomuchdoesnotseemtomeimplicitinahistoricalcommentary.
—Onpointc).TheobservationsonsourceswhicharetobefoundinW’stwobooksarenotalwaysthosewhicharelikelytobeapprovedbyspecializedstudentsofhistoriography,buttheywerewrittenbeforeMr.Wbecameinterestedinthiskindofresearch.TwoarticlesonPolybiuswrittenlater(onepublishedinJHS1938andtheotheronP.’sconstitutionaltheorieswhichIhaveseeninMS)representdefiniteprogress.
ApainstakingworkerofMr.W’sclasswilllearnmuchasheproceedswiththeworkand,inmyopinion,cansafelybetrustedwiththecommentary.PerhapsDr.Jacobymightbeaskedattherightmomenttogivesomeadvice.
Sisamatoncepoppedthequestion,ofscale(22February1943):‘Thankyouforyourletterof8thFebruarysuggestingacommentaryonPolybius.Youmustgivemealittletime,asweareveryshortofhistoriansinOxfordnow,butIparticularlyneedaroughindicationofthelengthofthecommentaryyouhaveinmind:HowandWells’Herodotuswouldserveasabasisof(p.50) comparison.Inthepost-warperiod,wemustreckononhighcosts,whichwillhardlybeequalledbyincreasedmoneyinthehandsofscholarsorstudents.SoIthinkthatconcisenesswillbecalledfor…’.FWWneverflinched,butinstantlyquantified—preciseanddecisive:
February24th,1943
DearMr.Sisam,
ThankyouforyourreplytomysuggestionofacommentaryonPolybius.Iappreciateyourneedforsomekindofindicationoflength,andIhaveattemptedwhatmustnecessarilybearatherrough-and-readycalculation.
HowandWells’commentaryonHerodotuscontains869pages,foratextcovering799,say800Teubnerpages.Polybiussetupinthesametyperequires1716pages,butthelastvolumehasacriticalapparatusatthepagebottoms:subtract116pagesforthis,leaving1600pagesinall,whichisdoublethelengthofHerodotus.However,IthinkitmightbepossibletodealmoreconciselywithPolybiusthanHerodotus…
Onthebasisofthesecalculations,itlooksasifIshouldrequirerathermorespacethanHowandWells;withtheirformat,say1000–1200pagesinall.Infact,onceIgotdowntothework,Imightfinditcameoutatsomethingconsiderablyless.Butofcoursecompressionbeyondacertainpointcanonlybeacheivedveryundesirablyattheexpenseoftheusefulnessofthecommentary.
Yourssincerely,
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 13 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Meantime,asecondopinionwassought,fromtheGomme(1March1943,enpassant,hookedintosizingupproofs):‘Bytheway,F.W.WalbankofLiverpoolrecentlyproposedtousacommentaryontheHistoriesofTacitus.…Ididnotliketoleaveanybodyreadyforbigworkswithablanknegative,soIaskedifhehadanythingelseinmind.HenowproposesacommentaryonPolybius,whichmightmake1,200pagesintheusualstyle.Itwould,ofcourse,beanexpensivework,onwhichanypublisherwouldloseagooddeal,butIshouldbegladofafriendlyhintfromyou;firstonthedesirabilityandusefulnessofsuchabook,andsecondlyonWalbank’squalificationsforit,whichare,Igather,notnegligible,thoughtomakeafirstratejob,hewouldhavetoshowdevelopmentinsomedirections’.
March17
DearSisam,
[MemoryofFWW’stwoarticles‘refreshed’]…Heshowscareandgoodsense(in,perhaps,acautioussortofway).IhopeIamnotdampeningtheproject;ontheGreekhistorysidethereisademandforafirstratecommentary.Itisaworkwhichwd.needbothhistoricaljudgmentandimagination;and,asfarasIknow,Walbankhashardlyyetshownthathepossessesthese.Butdon’ttakethisformorethanthenegativeopinionthatitis.(ItispossiblethatRomanhistorians,suchasLast,knowmoreabouthim.)…
MeantimeSisamhadruntheproposalbytheDelegates,‘inapreliminaryway’,andwrotethesameday(5March1943),keepingFWWdangling,since(p.51) ‘Tacitushasthebetterclaims,andifforanyreasonMr.Symehasdecidednottogoon,theDelegateswouldliketoreconsideryouroriginalsuggestion.IshallwritetoIstanbul,andIhopeyouwon’tmindalittledelayorthinkthatitindicatesanydisinclinationtoundertakethecommentaryonPolybius.’Ayear(someyear!)passes,andSyme’sreplydeterminesthefatesofbooks:
Extractfromletterof17thMarch1944fromProfessorR.Syme
NowletmeanswerasclearlyandbrieflyaspossibleyourquestionabouttheHistoriesofTacitus.Atpresent,andforanumberofyears,letussayfourorfive,Iseenoprospectofbeingabletoproduceaneditionofthatwork.ThereforeIshouldresigninterestinit:itwouldbewrongtoblockanybodyelse.ThisdoesnotmeanthatIhavenoprojectstosubmittothePress.
NowaboutPolybius.Aproperannotatededitionismuchneeded.Thetimeissuitable—itwoulddigestinanaccessibleformtheresultsoftheintensive(anddispersed)studyofHellenistichistoryinthelastgeneration.ThereisnocommentaryinanyEuropeanlanguage.AsforTacitus,imperialhistoryinthelastthirtyyearshasbeenabletogetalongverywellwithoutanexhaustivecommentaryontheHistories.Theycoverashortperiodoftime,ayearandahalfatthemost.Few,ifany,newdiscoverieshavesupervened.One’sopinionsabout
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 14 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
eithertheeventsortheauthorhavenotbeenmuchmodified.Almostanyprofessionalhistorian,whateverhis‘period’,wouldwelcomeaneditionofPolybius—andespeciallythosewhohithertohavefoundthatauthorratherforbidding.
Thequestionofsalesisanothermatter.TacitusfindsmorereadersthanPolybius—fortunately.Hewouldsellbetter—buthowmuchbetter?Thefuturewillseeadeclineinthenumberofreadersoftheclassicsfortheirliterarymerits.Ontheotherhand,institutionssuchasAmericanlibrarieswillpresumablypurchaseeditionsofancientauthors,whoevertheymaybe,iftheyissuefromyourPress.And,ifthereiseveraEuropeanmarket,universitiesandlibrarieswill,Ifancy,benotlessattractedbyanOxfordPolybiusthananOxfordTacitus.
Thisisallapartfromthepersonaltastesandqualificationsofanyeditorsincontemplation.Inanycasepleaserulemeout.
AmonthlaterandSisamwasapologizingfordelayandrelayingonSyme’sdecision:
18thApril,1944
…IhadtorepeatmyenquiriesaboutTacitus…severaltimes,becausehisletterstomeshowedthattheyhadnotreachedhim.…Iamsurethat,ifhehasanymaterialshere,hewouldbewillingtotransferthemtoyouwithHow’spapers.
PerhapsyouwillletmeknowwhetheryouwouldprefertodotheTacitus’Historiesasyouoriginallyproposed,treatingPolybiusasasecondaryormoredistantproject.Asapublisher,Ishouldslightlyfavourcontinuingouroldplan.ThereisprobablylesstobedoneonTacitus,butfarmorepeoplehereandinAmericawillreadhim;theDelegateshavethatprojectinbeing,asitwere;andtheyareboundforsometimeafterthewartothinkofmakinggoodnecessaryuniversitytextbooks,ofwhichtheshortagewillbeacute.Butbysayingthis,Idonotwantto(p.52) ruleoutPolybiusasalearnedprojectwelldeservingyourtimeandourconsideration.
Iamsorrytohavebeensolong,butyouwillunderstandthatIhavenocommandoverthevagariesofthepostinthesedays.
FWWsawatoncehowtoturnthisaround:
April22nd,1944
…Ifullyappreciatethereasonsforthedelay,andalsothepreferencethattheDelegateshaveforTacitus.SinceourlastexchangeoflettersinMarchoflastyear,however,IhavebeenputtingallmyworkintoPolybius,withtheresultthatIhavenowassembledagooddealofgeneralmaterialandhavealmostfinishedmyfirstdraftofthecommentaryonBook1.Ishouldthereforeprefertogoonwiththis,iftheDelegatesarestillwillingtoconsiderit.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 15 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ThisdoesnotmeanthatIhavelostinterestintheHistories,andIhopetocollectmorematerialduringthecomingsessionwhenIshallbelecturingonBookII.IshouldthereforebegratefulifyouwouldkeepmeinformedifanythingisplannedfortheHistories,sinceafterthePolybiusisfinishedImightwellfeelinclinedtoreverttomyoriginalplan.MeanwhileIshouldbegladifyouwouldputtheschemeforacommentaryonPolybiusasadefiniteproposaltotheDelegates.
AstheMemoirnotes‘adloc.’(1992a:187):‘littledidIrealisethenthatPolybiuswasgoingtooccupythenextthirty-fouryearsofmylife’.Sisamtookthereinsstraightback,tantalizingwiththeprospectofCapitalizationwhilenicelybrandishingthepowerratiowithhiscrucialpun:
24thApril,1944
…Attheirnextmeeting,IshallasktheDelegateswhethertheycanencourageyourCommentaryonPolybius.Butclearlythequestionoflengthwillbulklargeintheirconsideration:onehastothinkofthepriceofabookandhowmanycanafforditinthenewworld.Inyourletterof24thFebruaryyouthoughtitmightrequire1,000–1,200pagesofHowandWells.AfterdraftingtheCommentaryonBookI,canyoutellmehowthisestimatestands?
Onthechin,andrightbackathim,stealthfoldsinwiththebravura:
April25th,1944
ItisnotveryeasytobecertainabouttheultimatelengthofthefullcommentaryonPolybius,asIhaveworkedsofarontheprincipleofmakingitasfullaspossibleinthefirstdraft,withaviewtocuttingdownbulklater.ButmyimpressionisthatmyestimateofayearlastFebruarystillstands,viz:1,000to1,200pp.ofthesizeofHowandWells.CertainlyIdon'tthinkIcouldsaveanythingonthis;andtokeeptothatfigurewillmeanpublishingsome‘appendixmaterial’separately,asindeedIproposedoing.
Thissufficedtoopensesame.Evidentlyaready-reckonedpound-a-pagetabwasthegoingrateinmindattheoutset:
(p.53) 1stJune1944
DearMr.Walbank,
TheDelegateshaveconsideredyourplanforaCommentaryonPolybius,andhaveagreedtoencourageabook(presumablyintwovolumes)of1,000pagesmoreorless,inthestyle(Imeantypographicalstyle)ofGomme’sCommentaryonThucydidesnowinthePress.Isendyouastylesheetofthisinproof,sothatyoumayseewhatwehaveinmind.Theythinkgreaterlengthwouldbeundesirable,butmustnotbeunderstoodtosay‘Onnoaccount1,050pages’,oranythingsonarrow,forsomemarginisessentialtoyourpurpose.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 16 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
InthesetimesImustmakeareservation,whichIdon’tlikemaking:assumingafirst-ratebookonthissubject,presentcostsandthelimitednumberofspecialistswhoreadPolybiussuggesttousadebitbalanceofsomethinglike£1,000–£1,200.ThattheDelegatesarewillingtoundertake,butinthesetimes,whenweareparticularlyunluckyintaxation,wecannotguaranteethatitwouldbeconvenienttoprovideitinanyfutureyearwhenyourMS.isready.Ihopeitwillbeallright,becausewearecarefulofourcommitments,anddealwiththeminsomeorderofpriority,butiftimesareawkwardwhenyouhavefinishedwemighthavetoaskfordelay.
Idon’tthinkIshouldattempttogointomoredetailatpresentbeyondsayingthatweshouldbeverygladtogivetechnicaladviceonanyquestionofpreparingthecopy,andthatitisofthegreatestimportancetousthatthecopyshouldbefinishedandpolishedinalldetailswhenitcomesin,andthatawholeMS.shouldbefinishedbeforewebeginprinting.Solongaworkmakesitdifficulttomaintainregularityinallthedetailsofpunctuation,reference,etc.,butperhapsyouhadadoptedwhatMr.H.W.Fowlerusedtocalla‘stylebook’,i.e.anotebookinwhichheenteredalldecisionsofformashemadethem,tosecurethathehadnotforgottenbythetimehehadreachedthelastpagewhathehaddoneatthebeginning.
Pleaseputanyquestionsthatoccurtoyouastheyoccur,bearinginmindthatIcangiveyounohelpwithPolybius,butonlywiththetechnicalquestionsofproduction.Itisgoodtothinkthatinthesetimesscholarscanstillsettledowntosuchlong-distancetasks.
FWWtookallthisonboardinstanter(3June1944).Hehadjustbeen‘inOxfordoverWhitweekend,readingapaper(onPolybius)tothePhilologicalSociety’andregrettedtherewasnochancetomeetup(andshakehandsonit—‘becomepersonallyacquainted’).
TopeaceandtheLatinchair‘[I]n1943IwasapproachedbyBenFarringtontowriteabookonthedeclineoftheRomanempireinthewestforaseriesplannedbytheCobbettPress,aleft-wingpublishingfirm.…Thesubjectfascinatedmeandthebook,whenwritten,waslivelyand,Ithink,quiteexciting.IwasstillaMarxist(ofsorts)(p.54) thoughIhadsplitdecisivelyfromtheC.P.,whoseshiftsofpolicymadeitcontemptible.(ForwhenHitlerattackedStalin,thewarhadintheirviewoncemorebecomeajustoneandtobesupported.)Moreover,especiallyduringtheearlywaryears,Iwasoftenworriedbytheproblemofreconcilingthesubjectofmyworkwiththeworldwewerenowlivingin—thatconstantlyrecurringproblemof“relevance”.ThisbookonthedeclineofRomeseemedtoofferanopportunitytomakeastatementabouthowIsawthepresentandthefuture.Itwasgoingtobeatractforthetimesandmyfirstsentencespeaksof“turningtotherecordsofthepastforlightupontheproblemsofthefuture”.Thiswasnotobjectivehistoryasthehistorianunderstandsit;butitsuitedverymuchmymoodaroundtheendofthewar.Bythetimethebookappearedin1946thewarwasalreadyoverandtheatomicbombhadbeendroppedonJapan.8
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 17 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
…MyconcernwiththerelevanceoftheClassicsalsosurfacedintwootherthingsIwroteaboutthesametime.ThefirstwasashortarticlepublishedinGreeceandRomeinJune1943,entitled“IsourRomanHistoryTeachingReactionary?”Itdealtwiththeinstitutionoftheprincipateasasolutiontotheproblemsofthefirstcenturyandthetendencyofteachers(asrevealedinanswersservedupinH.S.C.scripts)toapplaudthisautocraticsolutionandtoechotheRomanoptimatecondemnationoftheGracchi.Isignedit“Examiner”,asIthought(unnecessarily)thattheBoardmightobjecttomyusingmaterialobtainedasanexaminertodrawwhatwerereallypoliticalconclusions.Myother“political”effusionwasapaperIreadtotheClassicalAssociationatitsAnnualGeneralMeeting,heldatStAlbans,in1944andpublishedintheJournalofHellenicStudiesthatyear,entitled“TheCausesofGreekDecline”.IthadgrownoutofareviewIhadwritten(intheClassicalReviewfor1942)ofRostovtzeff'sSocialandEconomicHistoryoftheHellenisticWorldanditwas,amongotherthings,anattackontheroleofPlato.…InMaycameVEday—8May,tocelebratevictoryinEurope;thatdayIwastalkingtothe[Lytham]StAnne’sRotaryclubon“IsHistoryBunk?”ShortlyafterwardscamethedroppingoftheatombombsonHiroshimaandNagasakiandthecapitulationofJapan.’(1992a:187–191)
‘AtLiverpooltheVice-Chancellor,ArnoldMcNair,nowresignedtogotoCambridgeand…MountfordacceptedandasaresultIwasappointedActingHeadoftheLatinDepartmentfor1945/6.Itwasanobviousappointment,(p.55) sinceBonnerhadonlyrecentlyreturnedfromtheforces,havingbeeninvalidedoutafterabreakdown,andhewasoutoftouchwithaffairsinLiverpool.Beforeweknewofthisfurtherdevelopment,wehadinvitedtheMountfordsovertoStAnne’sfortheweekend9andwethoughtthattheyoughtnottobedeprivedoftheexperienceofvisitingBlackpool.ItgaveJFMgreatsatisfactiontoespyontheSouthShoreaboothcontainingProfessorXandhisFleaCircus.‘Now’,heobserved,‘IrealisethetruevalueofthetitleofProfessor’(whichhewas—thoughIdidnotyetknowit—onthepointofrelinquishing).
Thewarwasover,butwestayedoninStAnne’sforthetimebeing,sincetherewerelikelytobeseniorpostsgoingandwedidnotknowwherewemightfindourselves,ifIwerefortunateenoughtobeappointedtoone.Nothinghappenedintheautumnterm,butthenchairswereadvertisedatUniversityCollege,King’sCollege,andRoyalHollowayCollege,allintheUniversityofLondon.InApril1946IwasinterviewedontwosuccessivedaysinLondonfortheKing’sandRoyalHollowayposts;andatthefirstinterviewIlearntthattheU.C.L.chairhadbeenfilledinternally.Igotneither;norwasIsuccessfulatReading,whereCormack,theactingheadofthedepartment,waspreferred.ThiswasallratherdiscouragingandIrememberfeelingalittledisconsolatewhen,aweeklater,IspentanightwithGordonRawcliffe(mytowerwatchcompanion)atBristol,wherehehadbeenelectedtoachairtheprevioussummer.ThiswasonmywaytotheClassicalAssociationA.G.M.atExeter[where]Ireadapaper…on“PolybiusandtheGrowthofRome”.AsaresultofMountford’sappointment,theLatinChairatLiverpoolwasnowadvertisedand,afteraskinghisadvice,Iputinanapplicationandwascalledforinterviewon28May.Thisinterviewcameastheclimaxofasomewhathecticfourdays.AttheweekendIhadbeeninvitedtoaratherexclusivegatheringofancienthistoriansat
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 18 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Bedford,runonasortofpatronagebasisbyNormanBaynes,F.E.Adcock,andHughLast.…OntheSundaynightIwentonfromBedfordtoCambridgeandspentitwithmyoldfriendsRobertandMargaretGetty—aratherpiquantsituation,sinceGettywasalsoacandidate,andIbelievedaverystrongone,fortheLiverpoolLatinChair.OntheMondayIwentuptoBirmingham,whereIhadpromisedtolectureattheUniversityontheHellenisticage;andthatnightIreturnedtoLiverpool,whereforthefirsttimeinmylifeIstayedatanhotelinthatcity.NormallytheMountfordswouldhaveputmeup,butinthecircumstancesthatwouldnothavebeenappropriate.SoIbookedinattheShaftesburyHotelatthebottomofMountPleasant(whichfiguresinthefilm‘LettertoBrezhnev’astherendezvousforthetwoscouselassesandtheirRussianpickups).Theinterviewstookplacein(p.56) theoldSenateRoomintheVictoriaBuildingandtherewerefourcandidatesontheshortlist,allwithLiverpoolconnections.TheotherthreewereRobertGetty,StanleyBonner,andG.B.A.Fletcher.IknewalltheCommitteemembers,includingMauriceBowraandW.B.Anderson,thetwoexternaladvisers.Theinterviewwentreasonablywell,butIwasalittledisturbedwhenMountford,whowasinthechairasVice-Chancellor(somewhatanomalously,sinceitwashischairthatwasbeingfilled),askedmewhatmyreactionwouldbeifIwereappointednowandlaterachairweretocomevacantinthenearfuturein,forexample,AncientHistory.Thiswasnohypotheticalsituation,sinceOrmerodwasduetoretireinaboutfiveyears’time.Apparentlymynon-committalanswertothisquestionwasthoughttobesatisfactory.Buttherewasofcoursenoindicationofthelikelyresult.IntheearlyafternoonIhadtoattendtheFacultyApplicationsCommittee,sittingalongsideseveralofthecolleagueswhohadbeeninterviewingmethatmorning.No-onegavetheslightestcluetotheirdecisionandIfeltveryuncertain.But,onmyreturntomyroom,IfoundanotefromtheVice-Chancellor’ssecretary,MissKay,askingmetogoatoncetohisoffice.WhenIgotthereinastateofsometrepidationheatoncethrustouthisrighthandandtoldmethatIhadbeenappointedtotheChair.Itwasoneofthegreatmomentsofmylife.’(1992a:192–4)10
Therest—therestisHistor…icalCommentary.Throughtoretirementage,andonintotheThirdMillennium.11
VolumeI;oftwoThefileismuteuntil1948,12bywhichtimeFWWhadoutlastedhiseditor.D.M.DavinwrotetosaytheretiredSecretarySisamhadpoppedinand(p.57) remindedhimto‘askifthereisanythingwecandotohelp’withtheCommentaryonPolybius(8October1948).NewSecretaryP.J.Spicer(Peter,butitstays‘(Mr.)Spicer’and‘(Professor)Walbank’inthiscorrespondence)enters,inatizz:
22ndSeptember,1950
ItislongtimesinceweheardfromyouaboutPolybius.Howishegoing?Wearestillanxioustohavethisedition,andouranxietyhasrecentlybeensharpenedbytheimpatienceoftheUniversity,forofcoursePolybiusisasetbookintheearlypartoftheRomanHistorySchoolinGreatsanduntilyoureditionisavailabletherecanbenothingverysatisfactoryfortheundergraduatetouse.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 19 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Here,onasaucer,wasthebridgeheadtowardsseparatingandsequencingVolumesIandII:
September27th,1950
ThankyouforwritingtomeaboutPolybius.YourletterleadsmetoraiseapointIhavehadinmindforsometime.TheHistories,assurviving,fallintotwoparts.BooksI–Vwhicharecomplete,andBooksVI–XLwhicharefragmentary.Inbulk,I–VwiththefragmentsofVI,VII,andVIIIoccupythreeoutofthesixLoebvolumes.SinceIbeganmycommentaryaboutthemiddleof1943IhavefinishedthefirstdraftdowntoBookV,chapter30.Itistruethatthesesevenyearshavenotbeendevotedexclusivelytothiswork;Ihaveatvarioustimesbeeninvitedandhaveacceptedinvitationstodooneortwosmallerthings,andIhavepublishedaseriesofarticlesdevotedmainlytomattersarisingfrommyworkonthecommentaryitself.Butsince,asyouinformme,thereissomeimpatiencetohavetheworkforuseinGreats,Iwonderifitwouldnotbeagoodideatoaimatpublishingthefirstvolumeseparately,AsGommehasdoneinthecaseofhisThucydides,andtocarryonwiththefragmentarybooksafterwards.
Ifyouthinkthisisagoodplan,asecondpointwhicharisesis:shouldtheveryimportant,butfragmentaryBookVIontheRomanconstitutionandarmyorganizationgowithI–V,orwiththelaterbooks?IcouldfinishBookVduringthecurrentacademicyear,butBookVIwillobviouslybeoneofthemostdifficult,perhapsthemostdifficultofall,andwoulddelaypublicationconsiderably.Inanycase,ImustworkasecondtimeoverwhatIhavewritten,sincemycommentaryonI–IV,excludingthepartofBookValreadycompleted,amountstobetween650and700quartopagesinhandwriting,andIshallhavetoreducethisbulkconsiderablytogetitwithinthescopeenvisagedforthewholework.
Perhapsyouwouldletmehaveyourcommentsonthissuggestion.
ThePressjumpedattheoffer:
(p.58) 4thOctober,1950
…TheanswertoyourfirstquestionisIthinkquiteclear.IfwehadnoobjectiontoproducingGomme’sThucydidesintwoparts,oneaftertheother,weshouldhavemuchlessreasonforobjectingtoproducePolybiusinthesameway.SoletushaveyourfirstvolumeassoonasitisreadyforthePrinter.
Asforyoursecondquestion,wethinkitwouldbebettertokeepbookVIwithbooksI–V.Itwouldbebetter,wefeel,fromthepointofviewofcontent,thatitshouldbegroupedwithI–Vinthisway,andalsoitwillmakeamoresatisfactorydivisionfromthepointofviewoflength.Ifmycalculationsarerightthefirstvolumewouldinthiswaycontainratherlessthanhalfthewhole,perhapsmaking400outofthethousandpagesenvisagedforthewhole.ToputbookVIwiththe
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 20 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
laterbookswouldmeanvolumesofverydisproportionatesize,ortheveryunsatisfactoryalternativeofgoingtothree.Mycalculationsassumeofcoursethatyourcommentariesonthebooksareofasizeproportionatetotheirlength—anassumptionwhichIperhapshavenorighttomake.Anyhow,Ishouldbegratefulifyouwouldletmeknowifthefactslooklikebeingverydifferentfromthis,andinparticular,ifyouthinkyouaregoingtoexceedgreatlytheestimatedlengthof1,000pagesofthesizeofGomme’sThucydideswhichwereoriginallylaiddown.
IfyoudoputbookVIwithbooksI–Vweshallhavetoacceptthenecessarydelayinpublishingthefirstvolume.Ishallbegladofanyestimateoftimeyoucanusefullymake;istheadditionofbookVItowhatyouhavealreadydonegoingtomeanthatwedonotgetcopyforthefirstvolumeuntil1952?Iaskoutofcuriosityratherthananydesiretopressyou;naturallywewanttopublishassoonaspossible,butIshouldnotlikethedesireforspeedtodeteryoufromgoingoverthecopyascarefullyaspossiblebeforeitissentinforprinting,asalterationsintheproofstageareoneofthemosttroublesomeobstaclestoswiftandsatisfactorypublishingthatthereare.
FWWwas‘glad’VolumeIcouldgoaheadwithoutwaitingfortherest;butheatonceputupasimultaneousbarrageofcaveats,blinds,andsomeofthequestionsthatshouldhavebeensettled‘at’any‘outset’:
October8th,1950
…MyimpressionisthatBooksI–VI,thoughnotquitehalfthetextwillbeabouthalfthecommentary,sincemanyofthegeneralproblems—dateofcomposition,objectsinwritingetc.—tendtobediscussedinconnectionwiththeearlierbooks;andthoughBooksXIIandXXXIVpresentspecialproblems,thereisnothingquitelikeBookVIinthesecondhalf.Thismeans,Ithink,thatIcanaimatmakingthetwovolumesapproximatelythesamesize.
YouenquirewhetherIamlikelytoexceedtheoriginal1,000pages,whichweestimatedattheoutset.Itisdifficulttoanswerthisatthepresentstage,asIhaveworkedontheprincipleofputtingasmuchasIcouldintothefirstdraft,andbeingpreparedtobefairlyruthlessinrevision.My650–700MSpagesforBooksI–IVcanundoubtedlybecutdownagooddeal;butjusthowmuchIshantknowtillIstartdoingthatparticularjob.Andofcoursetherewillnodoubthavetobeanallowanceforintroductoryremarksanddiscussionofgeneralquestions,aswellasforindices.Idoappreciatetheneedontheonehandtokeepthething(p.59)withinassmallacompassaspossible;ontheotherhand,itisimportantnottoomitanythingessential,whichmightleadtojustifiablecriticismsofthebook,anddetractfromitsusefulness.Entirelyasanimpression,notbasedonanycalculations,IshouldsaythatIamlikelytoover-runthe1,000pagestosomeextent;buthowmuchIcantyetsay.IshallcertainlytrytohavethecopyascompleteasIpossiblycanbeforesendingittoyou.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 21 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Aboutdates.WiththeadditionofBookVIIshouldsaythatlate1952istheearliestIcanhopetohavecopyready.…
Whatevertheirsalt,allRomanhistoriansknowperfectlywellthataVolumeIwithBooks1–6waswhatwaswanted—andnotjusttogiveGreatsstudentssomethingtobegoingonwith.HellenistichistoriansandLatinistsworkingonLivymightbecryingoutforhelpforBooks1–5,but6istheprize:thedecisiontocutthewholeCommentaryintotwoequalpage-countswasentirelysuperficial,comparedwiththeconsequentialweightinginfavourofthefirst,andimpending,publishedvolume,overagainstwhatwouldbeleftastheresidueforVolumeII,wherethefragmentarinesstookpermanenthold,andtherewastobenocompensatorymainattractiontorivaltherichesofbook6.Tosell,VolumeIIwouldhavetotrusttobuyerswhohatetohave‘Vol.I’solitariaontheirshelves—particularlyonceVolumeIwasdesignedtostandfree,readysuppliedwithitsownindicespendingcompletiontobook40.Ontheotherhand,nowitsextentwassettled,VolumeIpromisedtobagcustomersa-plenty,and,withafairwind,soon:
9October,1952
IseethatitistwoyearssincewecorrespondedlastaboutyourgreatcommentaryonPolybius,andIhopeyouwon’tmindagentleenquirynowhowthingsaregettingon.…
ThereisonepointwhichIcannotseehaseverbeendiscussed,thequestionoftext.Isupposeyouhavenointentionofpreparinganewoneyourself?IaskbecauseIbelievetheTeubnerisverydifficulttoget,sothatanewtextwouldsurelyaddgreatlytothevalueofyourbook.
The‘How&Wells’modelofthe‘HistoricalCommentary’,amplifiedinGomme’sThucydides,hadneverenvisagedtheproductionofatext:recentlyinstalledasChairofAncientHistory(1951),andsoslowedbyafreshload,FWWshutthisterrorsomedoorinatrice:
October11th,1952
ThankyouforwritingtomeaboutPolybius.IhavenowcarriedmyfirstdraftdowntoVI,15,whichleavesonlyVI,19–58stilltobedone.…OnreturningtotheproblemsofBookVI,IfoundmyselfrevisingviewswhichIhadputforwardinClass.Quart.1943,withtheresultthat,incollaborationwithmycolleagueC.O.Brink,Ihaverecentlyplannedandwrittenmostofasubstantialarticlewhichwehopewillputtheproblemonabetterfooting.Thiswasessential,andinthelongrunshouldreducetheamountwhichneedstobesaidinthe(p.60) commentary;butnaturallyithastakentime.…AssoonasBookVIisfinished,Ishallbegintheworkofrevisingandcompressing.HowlongthispartwilltakeitisalittlehardtosayuntilIgetdowntoit;butIshallwritetoyouassoonasIhaveanideaofthis,andalso,ofhowfaritispossibletokeepwithinthelimitsoriginallyenvisaged.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 22 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Ihadalwaysassumedthattoprintatextalongwiththecommentarywouldsendthecostuptoaprohibitivefigure.…Indeedthiswouldbesobigataskthatitcouldhardlyhavebeencombinedwiththewritingofahistoricalcommentary.ItistruethattextsofPolybiusarehardtocomebynow;butIhaveassumedthatatanyrateaLoebeditionwillbereprintedfromtimetotime.…Ofcourseanewtext,forinstanceintheO.C.T.series,wouldbeasplendidthing;butIfeelthatitwouldbebetterdonebysomeonewhoseinterestsweremorephilologicalthanmyown.MayIaddthatifatanytimeyoufoundanyonepreparedtoundertakeatext,IshouldbeveryhappytogiveanyhelpIcouldfromthehistoricalside.
IntoproductionThevolumebehaveditselfinthewritingup,didit?Therewasjusttheproblem,occurringasifunforeseeable,ofgettingamajorcommentary,anymajorcommentary,toliedownstillandgetdone…inthepre-xeroxera:
March22nd,1953
…Compressionisnotprovingtoohard,andasfarasIcanestimateitshouldbepossibletogetI–VI(withintroductionandextras)into500pagesthesizeofGomme’sThucydides.
InJanuary[atameetinginOxford]yousuggestedthatbeforegoingveryfarwiththerevisionIshouldsubmitaspecimenforgeneralcommentandadviceasto‘style’inreferences,lay-out,etc.SinceInowhaveabout60pagesofrevisedcopyready,IamwonderingwhenIoughttosendit.WhatIhadn’tforeseen(thoughitwasperhapsobvious)wastheextenttowhichasIgoforwardIhavetokeepreferringbacktowhatIhavewritten.Consequently,whileyouhavetheMSSIamlikelytobeatastand-still.SoIshouldliketosenditatatimewhenIamnotlikelytohavemuchleisureforPolybius.…IfIsentyouasmuchasIhavewrittenonApril20th,doyouthinkyoucoulddowhatyouwanttodowithitbyMay11th?Ifyouthinkyoucould,Iwillsenditthen.
Therewasevidently(tobe)noquestionofrefereereportsonthescholarlyqualityofthesubmittedcopy:bynow,thedébutantcommentatorhadturnedmuch-publishedprofessor.Sothiswasbornalreadya‘greatwork’,thankstolengthofgestation.AndthePressjumpedtoit,too,preciselyoncommand:
7May1953
We’venowhadagoodlookatyourspecimenchunkofcopy,andsohasthePrinter,andIappendourcommentsandsuggestionsonaseparatesheet.Thankyouvery(p.61) muchforgivingustheopportunityofseeingitatthisstage:Iamsureyouwillfindthatattentiontotheselittlepointsnowsavesanawfullotoftime,troubleandmoneywhenwestarttoprint.
ThePrinterestimatesthatthese143foliosofcopywillmake101printedpagesin
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 23 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thestyleofGomme’sThucydides.Icalculatethereforethat900folioswillmakeacommentaryof635pages.CanyougivemeanyideaofhowlongVolumeIIislikelytobe?TheDelegateswouldnotinsiston1,000pagespreciselyforthewholework,butIoughttoreporttothemifthediscrepancyisgoingtobemorethanabout200.
Iamsogladthatthegreatworkreallyismakingprogress,andlookforwardkeenlytothedaywhenyoucansendusallyourcopyforthePrinter.
Theshuntingofchunksofcopybetweenauthorandpresswasunderway,withfewhitches,butmore(wemighthavesupposed)bigdecisionstrippedoverobiter,asandwhentheycroppedup:
16December1954
ItseemstomethatthemethodadoptedbyGommewilldoverywellforyourownproblemofthebibliographyandabbreviations.…
RathertomysurpriseIseethatGommehasacompletesetofindexesforthisvolume,oneforsubjects,oneforauthorsandpassagesdiscussed,andoneforGreekwords.Idon'tknowwhetherhecontemplatesconflationwhenallhisvolumesarepublished,butIseenoreasonwhyyoushouldnotadoptthesameplan.
28January1955
IwritemerelytoacknowledgereceiptoftheninepagesofMS.thatyouhavereturned,andyourletterof25January.Wewillnowpressaheadwithcomposition.
18October1955
IamsendingyousomesheetsofyourPolybiuswhichSymehaslookedthrough.Asyouwillsee,hehasfoundverylittletochange;Isupposeweshouldbegratefulforthat.[!]
18thMay1956
DearSpicer,
IhavejustrealisedthataninconsistencyhascreptintotheprintingofmyPolybius,inrelationtotheuseofvanduinrepresentingLatinwords.…IfyouagreethatweshouldtrytogetthevformsIwillmakesureoftheminsubsequentrevises.
Myonlyotherpointisthis.Iamatpresentreceivingrevisesattherateoftwosheetsafortnight.ThismeansthatitwilltakeafurthersixmonthsbeforeIhavethelast,whichdoesn'tlookveryhopefulfortheappearanceofthebookthisautumn!Isthereanypossibilityofspeedingup?…
22May1956
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 24 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
DearWalbank,
ὠ̑πόποι:IhearthatsheetsB–Ohavejustgonetothemachineroomforprinting.Itwillmeangettingthemback,and(Ifear)readingthemrightthroughagain.Butnodoubtweoughttodoit:‘Seru.’atleastrevoltsme.IwillaskthePrinter,and(p.62)meantimepleasedocarryonontheassumptionthatweshallusetheconsonantalvforpropernamesinfuture.
IexpectthePrinterwouldsaythatitisexaminationpapersthathavesloweduptherevises.Theymustbeoutofthewaynow,andweoughttobeabletomakebetterprogressinfuture.
12July1956
IdonotthinkthatanythinghaseverbeensaidabouttermsforyourPolybius.Youwillnotexpectthebooktobeamoneymaker,thoughweregarditasagreatcontributiontoscholarship,andIhopeyouwillnotbeinsultedifIsuggestafeeof£100tobepaidonpublication,withafurther£100ifandwhenourcondensedaccountshowsthatwehaveitstandingtoourbalance.
Iamafraidthatthepricewillhavetobe84/-.
Allthisapplies,ofcourse,toVolumeIonly.
16August1956
ThePresshasjustsentmeacopyofyourAutumnBookslistandIampleasedtoseethat‘Polybius’figuresinit.Thereis,however,aprinter’serrorinitwhichIamwritingtocorrect,asIunderstandthatthesameblurbwillappearonthedust-cover.ThisisthespellingofSchweighaeuser.Hespellsitlikethat,butwiththeAandEjoinedtogether.Ihaveusedtheform‘Schweighaeuser’throughout,andpreferit.Butifachangeistobemade,thenitmustbexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSchweighäuser,andnot(asinyourlist)Scheighaüser.
Wehaveneverdiscussedthebinding.IsittheintentiontogiveitasimilarbindingtoGomme,orhaveyouanyotherColourinmind?
Kindregards,
30thOctober1956
DearSir,
Wearepleasedtosendtoyoutoday,underseparatecover,anadvancecopyofPolybius:Vol.I,whichwehopetopublishon3rdJanuary,price84/-net.…
x
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 25 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thefinishedcopieswill
have‘Vol.I’onthespine.
1November1956
Warmestcongratulationsontheappearanceofyourgreatwork(VolumeI).Ihopeyoulikeitsform,andthinkthatitisworthyofthecontents.
5November1956
Verymanythanksforyourgoodwishes.Itwascertainlypleasanttoseethevolumeaftersolong(my‘solong’,notyours,forIthinkthePresshasreallybeenmostexpeditiousingettingthroughaconsiderablejob).Ifindtheformatattractive,andhavenothingtodetractfromtheadmirationIhavefeltallthroughfortheworkofthePressandespeciallyitscompositorsandproof-readers.Inevitablythereareafewmisprintswhichhaveslippedpast,butveryfewforthenumberofpages(atleastIhavespottedveryfewsofar).Themainslip-upisthesketch-maponp.536,wherethekeyhasbeenomittedandthelettersA,B,(p.63) andCarenowhereexplained.Itisntveryimportant,however,forIthinkmycommentarymakesthesenseoftheplanclear.
However,pleasedontregardthisasacriticism!I’mreallyverywellpleasedwiththebookandonlyhopeitwillgetareceptiontojustifyallthecarefulworkthathasgoneintoitsproduction.
ThetoneforreceptionwassetbythatcomradeAlexMcDonald(inJournalofRomanStudies,48(1958),179–83):‘AfteracenturyandahalfwehaveaworthysuccessortoSchweighaeuserinProfessorWalbank.…Wemaycongratulatehimuponamodelofscholarship.…Thisreviewhasdonescantjusticetoadistinguishedandusefulworkofscholarship.…Wemayexpectfreshactivitywherehehasrakedthesand.Buthewillbebusyontheotherhalf,performingthesameservice,andwemaywishhimwellinhissecondvolume’.
By25March1959SpicerwasabletoinformFWW‘thatourtotalsalestodatemustbealittlemorethan750.Iwouldsaythatthiswasveryreasonableforabookofthissizeandcomplexity,andIthinkthisisaboutwhatweshouldhaveexpected.Ihopeyouwillnotconsideritdisappointing’.
AndVolumesII?TheCommentarytookholdofitsfragmentedtextintothe1960squietlyenough.1965maderipplesintheformofnegotiationswithJ.M.Moore,‘whowasapupilofMcDonald’satCambridge,andisnowteachingatRadley’for‘apossibleO.C.T.ofPolybius’(J.K.Cordy,8July1965).Giventhreeweekstocomeupwithreactionstoaspecimen,FWW’s‘generalreactionisfavourable.HisapproachseemsworkmanlikeandasfarasIcanjudgeaccurate.’Hecomesupwithasetofpointedquestionstopress,andwindsupalltoodamply(28July1965):
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 26 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
…ItwouldbeagreatthingtohaveanOCTPolybiusandIhopeMoorewillbeencouragedtoproduceone.Anewtextofthisauthorisadesideratum.ButIshouldaddthatIdonotexpectthatthehistorianisgoingtogetanythingsubstantialoutofthiswork.Pédech’sexcellentversionofbookxiiintroducedmanychanges(mainlyrestoringtheMSreading)butIthinkonlyabouttwohadsignificanceforthesubstanceofwhatPolybiussaid.Thisisajobthatneedsgreatdevotion,andIhopeMoorewilldoitandseeitthrough.
Nothingcameoftheidea.Andbynowthesecond,orthird,grandcouphadwellandtrulycomeoff,backin1962,justwhenSpicerwasmovingawaytolookafter‘theschoolside’(11April1962).FWW’sbigdare(déjàvu),blitzingthePresswithablindinghailoffiguresandcalculations,wasaccordinglypassedontothenewclassicalsupremo,Cordy:
(p.64) 8thApril1962
DearSpicer,
IthinkthetimehascometodiscussPolybiusagain,sincethecommentaryhasnowreachedapointtwothirdsofthewaythroughbookxvi,andIhaveenoughmaterialtomakesomecalculationsabouttheprobablelengthofthewhole.
WhatIhavealreadywrittenamountsto693pagesofquartoMSrepresentingcommentaryon414sidesofTeubnertext.FrombookviitotheendoftheHistoriescomesto1,042Teubnersides.IfthereforeIcontinuetokeepthesameratio(andthisseemslikely),thefirstdraftofmyMSwillamounttoabout1750pages,whichwouldprobablybereducedinthereviseddraftto1,450–1,500pages.Thisworksoutaboutthesameasthefiguresforvol.1,where672Teubnersidesproducedacommentaryof900MSpages.
WhatIhavegraduallycometorealise(andperhapsshouldhaverealisedearlier)isthattheoriginalplantocompletetheworkinonemorevolumewastoooptimistic.Invol.1900pagesofMScameto708printedpages(Iamspeakinghereoftheactualcommentary,andignoringintroduction,abbreviations,indices,appendices,addendaandcorrigendaetc.,perhapsanother75–100pages,makingsay1250inall.
Iamafraidthisbeginstolookliketwovolumes;andif,asIhope,thePressiswillingtoacceptthisinprinciple,thequestionariseswherethebreakshouldcome.Ifafterxviiiweshallhavethecommentaryon497Teubnersidesinvol.2andthaton545invol.3;ifafterxxi,vol.2wouldcontainthecommentaryon685Teubnersidesandvol.3thaton457.Asplitafterxx(therearenosurvivingfragmentsfromxix)wouldnotbesuitablesinceitwouldcomeinthemiddleofthewarwithAntiochus;whereastheendofxviiiortheendofxxiwouldmakeareasonablebreak.Myownpreferenceistohavethebreakafterxviii.Thiswouldhavetheadvantagethatitwouldallowustogetvol.2outearlier,andalthoughitwouldleaveaslightlylargervolumeforthelastone,Ishouldfindthepsychologicaleffect
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 27 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ofreachingthelastlapearlierquiteconsiderable!Asitis,therewouldbemorethantwoyearswork,togetdowntotheendofxxi[onretainedcopy,laternoteinpenbelow:‘shouldbexviii’]andthentorevisethewholething,rewriting,checkingreferencesandlookingupoddthingsIhaventyetbeenabletosee.
Ishouldbegratefultohearyourviewsaboutthis,forIrealisethatitimpliesaratherbiggercommitmentthanwehadoriginallythoughtof;butIderivesomeencouragementfromtheprecedentofGomme’sCommentary,whichalsoworkedoutlongerthanwasexpected,andalsofromtheunanimityofthereviewersthatvolume1atleastavoidedprolixity.
Withkindregards,
CordynotesonthePresscopy,forSecretarytotheDelegates:‘Idon’tseehowwecanresisthisdivision’,towhichColinRobertsresponds:‘Iagreewecan’tresistonthepointofdivision,somethingwillturnonwhethereachVol.istohaveitsownindex,appendices,etc.ornot?’SotheCordyeraopenswithinstantcave-in,andbutacrackofthewhipforsavinggrace:
(p.65) 16April1962
Spicerhaspassedonyourletterof8April.ThefiguresyougiveareirresistibleanditisquiteobviousthatyoumusttaketwovolumestofinishPolybius.IfyouhadbeenkeepingalltheindexesfortheendtheremighthavebeenacaseformakingthebreakafterBookXXIsoastoleaveroomfortheminthelastvolume.ButpresumablyyouwillfollowthepatternofVolumeIandhaveindexesinbothoftheothertwovolumes,sothatabreakafterBookXVIIIwouldbeperfectlyacceptable.Likeyou,wearestronglytempted[superscriptbyhand:influenced]bythethought,ofgettingVolumeIIpublishedtwoyearsearlierthanwouldbepossibleifthebreakcamefurtheron.
Sothedo-or-diewascast:
17thApril1962
IamimmenselyrelievedthatyouhavebeenabletoaccepttheideaoftwomorevolumesforPolybiussoreadily.SinceIwroteIhavefinishedthedraftofxvi,somynextboutwilltakemeintothelastbookforvol.2,bookxviii.
Ihavenotedamistakeintypinginmylastletter.Twolinesfromtheendofp.1whatImeanttosaywasthat‘downtotheendofxviii’wouldinvolvemorethantwoyearswork.Itistruethattogetdowntotheendofxxiwouldmeanaconsiderabletimeonthetopofthat,thoughnot,Iwouldhope,twoyears.Anyhow,IshallaimatlettingyouhavetheMSofvolume2bytheendof1964.
15March1965
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 28 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
…MyeightmonthsinPittsburgh[asMellonVisitingProfessor]gavemethechancetowriteoutthedefinitiveversionofbooksvi–xviii,whichformvol.2.SinceIreturnedinSeptemberIhavebeencheckingthereferencesandgotthesedowntoalittleunder300.…IshouldbeabletohandovertheMSsometimethissummer.ImaybedelayedbyalargeFrenchbookonPolybius’historicalmethod(pp.644),butIhopeitwillbedealtwithfairlyquickly.
13August1965
UnderseparatecoverIamsendingyouthemanuscriptofvolumeiiofmycommentaryonPolybius.LikevolumeiitisliterallymanuscriptandIhopethatitwillnotworryyoutoomuchtohaveitthatway.Icouldnotfacethetaskofhavingittypedandcorrectingit,andIrememberedwhatasplendidjobyourcompositorsdidfrommanuscriptwithvolumei.
Ithinkeverythingisself-explanatory.Buttwothreepointsneedwatching:wheremypaginationwentwrong…
2November1965
IamafraidyourmanuscriptwasavictimofwhatIsuspectisanaturallawinthiskindofpublishing:thatwhenweareonholidayourauthors,beingonlyonvocation,[sic]areunusuallyactive,sothatwhenwegetbackthereisaparticularlyrichcropofscriptswaitingaswellastheaccumulationofroutineproblems.However,itisonthemovenowandIhopewillgosmoothly.ItisjustpossiblethatthePrinterwillbeindifficultiesoverthefactthatyourcopyishandwritten;Ihopenotbecausehedidafterallcopewiththefirstvolume,andinallformalmattersitlooksadmirablyprepared,butastheamountofworkcomingintohim(p.66)increasesyearbyyearitgetsharderforhimtofindtheextratimethatevenclearhandwritingtakestocomposeascomparedwithatypescript.…
Therewasonethinglefttosort.Nothingagentlemanwouldhavenoticed:
24December1967
IlearnfromMr.HorsemanthatPolybiusistobepublishedonDecember28th;judgingfromtheadvancecopysenttomeabouttwomonthsagothePresshasmadeitsusualexcellentjobofwhatcannothavebeenaneasybooktoproduce.MayIsaymythank-yousthroughyou!
ThearrivalofaninvoicefromyourLondonofficeforhalfadozenextracomplimentarycopieswhichtheyarekindlysendingoutformeremindsmethatwehavenotyethadanydiscussionaboutthetermsofpublicationforVol.2.ForVol.1Ireceived£100paidonpublication,withafurther£100tobepaidifandwhenthecondensedaccountshowedthatitwasstandingtothebalanceofthePress.Iassumethatthisdesirablepointhasnotyetbeenreached,butIshouldbeinterestedtoknowhowsalesstandatpresent;inMarch1959whenIlastenquired
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 29 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theywerealittleunder750,accordingtoSpicer.IdonotknowatwhatnumbersoldthePresswouldbreakeven.
IimagineyouwouldwishtosuggestsomesimilararrangementforVol.2;certainlyneitheryounorIhaveeverthoughtofPolybiusasamoney-spinnerforauthororPress.However,moneyvalueshavechangedagooddealsince1957,andthisispartlyreflectedintheincreasedpriceofVol.2,whichis25%[correctedto50%]higherthanthatofVol.1,thoughVol.1wasalittlelarger.Iwonderifyouwouldfeelthatthisfactorshouldalsofindsomereflectioninthepaymentduetotheauthor.
Withseasonalcomplimentsand
bestwishesfor1968,
29December1967
Manythanksforyourletterof24December.Itrytopersuademyselfthatweareunworldlyratherthanmean,butthereisalimittotheunworldlinessweoughttopractiseatotherpeople’sexpense.SoIamgladofthereminderthatweareindangerofoversteppingthelimitinyourcase.ForVolume2letusputtheinitialfeeat£250,withafurther£100whenthevolumebreakseven.OfVolume1wehadsold1,480copiesat31March1967andwerestill£175inthered.Wehaveprobablysoldenoughcopiessincethentohavepaidthisoff,andsoarereadytopayyour£100wheneveryoulike;Iwonderwhetheryouwouldlikeitnoworwhetheryouwouldprefertowaituntilafter5April.
Bestwishes,
Asecondvolume,andasecondreviewfromMcDonald;allasyouwere(JRS,58(1968);232–5):‘…nolessdistinguishedthenthefirst…foritsmethodandthevarietyofitsdetail.Thereisanartofhistoricalcomment…W.isamasteroftheart.ServingPolybiusheremainsautonomousinhisjudgment;inelucidatingthehistorianhewritesancienthistoryhimself.…Nosinglereviewercandofulljusticetothisbook…Wecanbegratefulthathehasbeenallowedathirdvolumeinwhichtocompletehiswork.’
(p.67) Volume3(or,rather,III)‘TwotermsattheInstituteforAdvancedStudyatPrincetonin1970/1enabledmetomakesubstantialheadwaywiththefinalvolume’(1992a:187).Workingtowardsprivatelyhardeningupaprivatedeadline,progresswas—silent:
20June1967
Itseemsalongtimesincewewerelastintouch.Canyougivemeanyidea,Iwonder,ofwhenyouexpecttofinishPolybius,Vol.III?
Ihopealliswellwithyou.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 30 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
24June1973
…Brieflythen,Ihavestilltowritethecommentaryon130pagesoftextandthenImustrevisethewholeofvol.IIIandcheckthereferences.IwouldaimatlettingyouhavetheMSinthreeyears,butthisisboundtodependonwhatothercommitmentsarise.However,canIsaythatIamatlastbeginningtoseethelightattheendofthetunnel?
Infact,progresswentaheadofschedule:
27December1975
AtthesametimeasIsendthisletterIamdispatchingtoyoubyparcelpost,withrecordeddelivery,themanuscriptofVolumeIIIofmyCommentaryonPolybius.IshallberelievedtohearthatithasarrivedsafelyandIhopethatyouwillhaveitbefore1975isout.AsImentionedtoyouearlier,ithasworkedoutalittlelongerthanthefirsttwovolumes;butthistimeitisunquestionablythelast.Thelay-outwillpresumablyfollowthatofVols.IandII;butIhopethatthespinewillresemblethatofVol.IIratherthantheheavierletteringofVol.I.…
Ifthereareanyqueries,pleasewriteandraisethem.Ihopeourestimatethatitcanbedoneby1977isstilltrue.Oughtwenowperhapstohaveacontract?
8January1976
Manythanksforyourletterof27December,andforthetypescript,forwhichIhopeyouhavealreadyreceivedtheacknowledgement.Ihaven’thadachancetolookthroughthematerialyet,butfrompreviousexperienceIimaginethatyouwillhavegotthewholethinginexcellentshape.
Youarequiterighttoraisethequestionofacontract,thoughIdon’tbelievewehadonefortheearliervolumes.Onvolume2thearrangementwasthatweshouldpayyou£250onpublicationandafurther£100whentheaccounthadbrokeneven.Thatdoesn’tnowseemtomeaverysatisfactoryarrangement.…Theplanthatwouldsuitusbestwouldbetopayyouaroyaltystartingafteracertainnumberofcopieshadbeensold,say,500.Wouldthatsortofpatternsuityou,Iwonder?Thereissomethingtobesaidforleavingthedetailsunsettleduntilwehavehadaprinter’sestimate,butifyouwouldpreferacommitmentnowIwillbequitehappytosendyouadraftagreement.
(p.68) 13January1976
ItwasarelieftohearthatthemanuscriptofPolybiusIIIhadreachedyousafely.
Thesortofarrangementyousuggestwouldsuitme…
Itwouldalsobehelpful,whenyouareinapositiontodoso,ifyoucouldgivemea
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 31 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
likelytime-tableforthearrivalofproofs,sothatIcanfitincommitmentshere.
20January1976
…Becauseoftheeffectofinflationontheflowofcashwearehavingtospaceoutourproductionoveralongerperiodthanusual.AsthingsstandatthemomentIamhopingwecanaimtopublishbetweenAprilandJuly1977.Buttheoutlookisabituncertainandwemighthavetowaitabitlonger.AsfarasIcanjudgenow,though,thereisatanyrateagoodchanceofpublicationin1977—whichisobviouslydesirabletocompletethepatternofvolumescomingoutattenyearintervals.
True,halftrue,thiswashalftheplan.TheotherhalfeludedthePress,andthelonghaulnowimposeditsowndebenture:
9June1976
PolybiusIII
…Therearecertainproblemsinournegotiationswiththeprintersarisingoutofthefactthatthematerialishandwritten,butIexpectweshallbeabletoresolvethem:inanycaseIwillwriteagainaboutthis.Wecertainlyhavenotputthemanuscriptontoashelf,andlikeyouIhopethatweshallbeabletopublishitduring1977.ItwouldbehelpfulifyoucouldletushaveyourcorrigendatowardstheendofJuly.
TheMS.—allc.350,000wordsofit—wasin1976ahandwrittenproblem:P.P.A.,acopy-editor,hadservednoticeontheclassicseditor:
5May1976
…apartfromtheprelims,thewhole1,000-pageMS.ishandwritten.…Iwouldbefrightenedtotryandcopy-editthiscopy,forfearofmakingitharderforthecomp.toreadcopy.
…Iamatalosstoestimatethetimeneededforthisone.Inawayitisperhapsunnecessary/unwisetoattempttocopy-edititinitspresentform—,—wecouldperhapstryitontheprinterasitis?
TowhichCordyhad,moreorlesspromptly,memoedDavin:
13July1976
…Iwouldbegrateful,though,tohavearulingfromyouonwhat,ifanything,shouldbechargedtotheauthor.Noquestionswereraisedabouttheearliertwovolumes,whichwerealsohand-written(thoughforallIknow,thePrintersilentlyincludedachargeforclarificationinhisbill);andinordinarytimesIshouldnotthinkofchargingWalbank—thisisafterallaconsiderableanddisinterested
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 32 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
contributiontoknowledge,notamerethesis.
(p.69)…[hand-writtenadcalcem]Ifforcedintoacorner,Idon’tthinkwecdinsistthatW.pay,giventhekindofscholarheis.
21July1976
PolybiusIII
Imentionedinanearlierletterthatwewerehavingsomeproblemswithyourhandwrittencopy.Thetroublemainlyisthattherearen’tanylongerkeyboardoperatorswithexperienceofsettingfrommanuscript.Yourwritingisunusuallyclear,butinanyhandthereislikelytobesomedifficultyinreadingunfamiliarwords.InyourcopyInoticethisinthenamesofsomeGermancommentatorsIdon’tknow,soIcanimaginethedifficultiesthatmightfaceanoperatorwithnoknowledgeofLatinorancienthistory(theGreek,overwhichyouhaveobviouslytakenspecialpains,doesn’tseemtobeaproblem).SowhenthePrintersaysthatnamesandLatinwordsneedclarifyingbeforesettingstartsIthinkwehavetoacceptthat.…
ThePrintercouldhavetheclarificationdonebyoneofhisgraduatereadersandheestimatesthathischargeforthiswouldbeabout£530.…A…possibilitywouldbetohavethewholeworktyped,whichforallIknowcouldbedonefor£500;thedisadvantageofthis,apartfromthedelay,wouldbethedangerofmistakescreepingin.
Themainconsiderationistogettherightresultwithoutwastingtime.Butthereisalsothequestionofthecost.Imentionthisfortworeasons.First,inpresentconditionswemustnotincuranyavoidableexpense(£500evennowadayswouldnearlypayforthereprintofasmallOCT).Second,youwererashenoughtosuggesthavingaformalagreement,andthatagreementprovidesthat‘theAuthorshalldeliver…inafitstatefortheprinterthecompletetextandillustrationsoftheworkfreeofcharge’.Letmesaystraightoutthatwehavenointentionoftryingtoenforcethisclause,butitdoesjustifyourinvolvingyouintheproblem—andofcourseweshouldn’tactuallyrejectanyofferoffinancialorpracticalhelp.
28thJuly,1976
…ClearlythesituationinyourprintinghousehaschangedsincetheysetupvolumesIandII…Thetypingandcheckingofover1,000A4sheetsislikelytobeslowanddelayastartyetfurther.
SoIcomebacktotheideaofclarification,andreluctantlyreachtheconclusionthatthesimplestandquickestsolutionisformetodoitmyself.IfyoucanassuremethattheonlyproblemfortheprinterliesinnamesandLatinwords(andcouldoneaddtitlesinforeignlanguages?),Iwouldbepreparedtogothroughitputting
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 33 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theseincapitalsaboveorinthemargin;andatthesametimeif,onre-reading,InoticedanywordthatseemedobscureIwouldclarifythat.
Doesthissoundafeasiblesolution?…
31August1976
PolybiusIII
Thankyouforreturningthemanuscriptofthis.Itisareliefthattheprinterissatisfiedwithmyclarification,andIamgoingaheadwithitashardasIcan;Iamuptoaboutp.350now,butitisahorriblejob!
(p.70) YourremarkabouttheletterLwasveryhelpful—thekindofthingonecanveryeasilymiss,withbadresultsallround.
IshallletyouhavethewholethingbackassoonasIcan.
Thenextletter’saddresstellsplainwhat1977meanttoFWW:Septemberbroughtinanewacademicyear,butPolybiusIIIhadnowmissednotjustitsdecadebuthisretirement,andapermanentmovesouthtoCambridge:
64,GrantchesterMeadows,
CambridgeCB39JL
7November1977
PolybiusIII
Ireturnfirstproofsofpp.63–86…
IreceivedmyfirstbatchofproofsthethirdweekinJune;thissetarestamped21Octoberandwehavereachedp.86.AmIrightinthinkingthattheyarecomingratherslowly?
28December1977
Herearepp.116–154;butIhopetosendyouanother150pagesverysoon,indeedwhenIhavehadmydaughter’scomments(sheisreadingasetofproofsbutcantgoasquicklyasIcan,sinceshehasotherclaimsonhertime).Myindexisonslipstop.300andmypileisgettingdangerouslylow.Canyousendmeanotherbatchofslips,please,sinceIamnotyetathirdofthewaythrough.
Withbestwishesfor1978(andmayitseethepublicationofPolyb.III!)
11September1978
PolybiusIII
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 34 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Isitpossibletoimprovethespeedwithwhichrevisedproofsarebeingprocessed?TodayIcorrectedthirtypages(pp.289–320),receivedthismorning;pp.241–288cametowardstheendofJuly.Revisesfirststartedtoreachmeinmid-December1977,soinninemonthsIhavehadrathermorethanathirdofthebook.AtthisrateIcanhardlyexpecttohaveseenthewholeoftherevisesbeforeearlyin1980.SinceIamnotreadytoreturnsheetsapprovedasforfinalprintingbeforeseeingthewholetext—inabookofthiskindthingsareapttoturnuplaterwhichinvolvegoingbacktoearlierpages—prospectsforpublicationdateseemtoberecedingtolate1980!SurelyitcannotberightthatamanuscriptwhichIpostedtothePresson27December1975shouldstillbesofarfrompublication.
…Idohopethatyoucandosomethingaboutit.
25October1978
PolybiusIII
Itwasmarvelloustogetthosetwoparcelsthismorningcontainingtherevisesasfarasp.792(apartfrompp.vii–x).Sotheprinterhastosomeextentredeemedhimself,thoughitwouldhavebeenmuchmoresatisfactoryforyouifhehadkeptupasteadyflow.
Iwillaskforyoutobeshownafurtherproofofthebitsyouwant,andIwillcheckthewhereaboutsoftheaddendatoVolumeIII.
(p.71) 18April1979
PolybiusIII
Hereatlastisanadvancecopy.IhopethatyouwillagreethatifthePrinterhastakenhistimeaboutithehasatleastproducedaworthyresult.Publicationisscheduledfor24May.…
P.S. IwasdelightedtohearfromHammondthatyouhadagreedtocollaboratewithhimonMacedoniaIII.IshallhavetothinktwiceaboutdistractingyoubyaskingyouradviceasfrequentlyasIhavelately.
21April1979
ThankyouforsendingmetheadvancecopyofPolybiusIII,whicharrivedthismorning.Expectatusdiu,itiscertainlyabeautifulpieceofworkofrealClarendonPressqualityandIamverygladtoseeitandhaveitonmyowndesk,whereitcantaketheplaceofthepileofproofsIhavebeenusinguptonow.…
ThankyouforallyourhelpovertheyearswithPolybius.Itishardtobelievethatitisatlastatanend;Ibeganitin1942.
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 35 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Jobdone.Deskneatandtidy:readytoroll!Withthat,andthefollowing1-linerfromtheRoyaltyManager,thecorrespondenceisclosed(…soonwith‘aFontanabookandtwochaptersandanintroductiontoCamb.Anc.Hist.VIIPartI(ed.2)’,plusMacedoniaIII.):
16July1980
Thankyouforyourletterof11July.
WeconfirmthattotalsalesofyourCommentaryonPolybiusduringtheyearended31March1980,amountedto1,026copies,andthatthesalesrecordedonourroyaltystatementare,therefore,correct.
It’seasytobesure,inlargeterms,thatMegalopolitanPolybiusprovidedFWWwiththerich,multifaceted,scholarlylongevitythattheGreeknameportends.TheshiftingproblemsofhandlingHellenisticintoRomanhistoricalnarrative,compoundedbytheaccidentsoftransmissionhighlightedbythelapsefromfulltextthroughmajortableautoconcurrentflightsofexcerption,madeforanevolvingchallengetoadaptmethodsandfocusundertheshelterofamarvellouslylevelandmeasuredrhythmofexegesissecuredintheshrinkageoffirstdraftintorevisedcopyforthefirstvolume.Astimespedby,steady-as-you-gotendingoftheCommentaryanchoredthecumulatingyears’workroundaself-justifying‘projectforlife’,whileateveryturnprovoking,requiring,demanding,spin-offsalliesintomajorproblemsobiter.Papersforconferences,turningtoarticlesforjournals,turnedtocollectedpapers,alwayssupplyingregenerativereinforcementforthemainchance,andinturndrawingrenewedenergyfromthegatheringtroopofcommittedfellowspecialistsunitedbytheinspirationoftheworkachievedandtheirneedformore,fortherest,forcompletion.From‘wall’to‘bank’:IbetFrankwasn’tabitsurprisedtofindhecouldpenhisnotescleanandclearacrosssomanyunlinedsheets,andregretsofewcorrigendanomatterhowlonghelived;but(p.72) thathisvocationbroughthimsomanycontactsworldwideandstirredhimintoevermoreurgentencounterswithhisauthorthroughhistorymusthavewowedhimeverynextnewstepoftheway.Polybiusdoesn’tneedheralding:he’sabigenoughdealtoobligeandrepaysomuchexpenditureoflabour.Butwhathiscommentatorneededwasthemotivation,temperament,andopportunitytofindthenecessarystickability—plustheabilitytomaketheluckthatkepthimatit,smoothingthelongpathaheadandtearinguptheleasttrackbehind.Thetrickwasn’t,afterall,verymuchtodowithhowthethinggotofftheground,with‘chanceanderror’.Itwasmuchmoreaboutbeinggoodenoughtotakeacceleratingprogressofresearchinhisstride,whilecontributingtoandcompoundingit.Andofcourseitallboilsdowntolong-distancewriting,mechanicallyunassistedpen-pushing,topulloffanorganiccontinuityintheteethoftimeandtechnology.Writingwhichrequired,asitfed,astronglyabsorbentandelasticapproachtothesynthesisofmaterialintoproduct,throughcommitmentto‘getfromthescatteredevidencetoastraightnarrative’:nonmihisilinguaecentumsint.13
Notes:
(1)Henderson2001aand2001b.Theprojectontheclassicalcommentarywhichbecame
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 36 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
GibsonandKraus2002spurredmetoexploreseveralbooksthatIlearnedwith,fromVictoriansthroughElizabethans,toing-and-froingbetweenthebooksandpertinentrecords,especiallyfilesintheOUParchives,asinthecaseofWalbank’sPolybius:seepublicationslistedinmyfinalfootnotebelow.I’msogladIgottohearfromFrankfirsthand.
(2)These‘memoirs’willhavebeensotitledafterAratus’ownwork,whereintheauthorplayedeyewitnessandparticipant,providingPolybiuswithhisown‘starting-point’bothchronotopicallyandgenerically,andprovidingFWWwithhisfirstbookand,inthesememoirs,hisown‘starting-points’inandonautobiography:thisishowcomePolybiusattheoutsetdubshisownworkhupomnemata(1.1.1,etc:seen.adloc.,withMarincola1997:180).OnPolybiusandAratus,seefurtherMeadows,ch.4,inthisvolume.
(3)Walbank1998a:118.Cf.Walbank1996:101–5,‘1940s–1980s’—fromarrivalin1934‘(at£250p.a.)’.ThevolumetitlerecyclestheretirementtributetothefounderoftheUniversity’sArtsFaculty,JohnMacdonaldMackay,1884–1914incumbentintheRathboneChairofHistory(laterofAncientHistoryandClassicalArchaeology)heldbyFWW1951–77.
(4)TS:Thiswilltakeonsignificanceasthestoryunfolds.
(5)Someoneshould.SomeproperPolybian.
(6)ThisisHarriLlwydHudson-Williams,theself-styled‘monoglottWelshmanuntiltheageoffour’andmodestlymacrobioticKingsman(1911–98:matric.1932),whowentonpost-wartobecomeReader,thenProfessor,inGreekTyne-side,beforeasDeanofArtshelpingtofoundtheUniversityofNewcastle:‘hisonebookonIsocrateswasrejectedbyOUPandHarrididnotbothersendingitanywhereelse’(King’sCollege,AnnualReportfor1999,p.73).
(7)AtthisthesolepointofcontextualizationoftheproposalfortheCommentarywithinthehistoryofPolybiusscholarship,Ishouldmention(asthePressdidnot)thecuriosityofthegrandeditionwithErnesti’stextplusparallelLatintranslation,apparatus,andcriticalannotationes,bytheRevd.PhilipWilliams(1742–1830)whichwasprintedbutneverpublishedbyOUP’spredecessor:pp.1–642,BooksI–XVII;645–8,Prooemium;649–808,EPolybiihistoriisexcerptaelegationes;809–888,ExcerptaexPolybiodevirtutibusetvitiis;889–998,Polybiifragmenta;989–1008,HistoriaeUniversaePolybiisynopsischronologica.ThecopyinWinchesterCollege,broughttooureditors’attentionbyBarryShurlock(cf.his1986)aseditorof‘TheWilliamsPapers’,isbeingstudiedbyStray(forthcoming),fromwhomIbutgarblethisnote.WilliamshadbeenatworkonhisfolioPolybius(originallyusingCasaubon’stext)sincewellbefore1772whenthePressenquiredintohisprogresssofar,withnegotiationsatOUPhottingupthrough1783,butascompletionnearedin1798(whenWilliamswasthenewprebendaryofWinchesterandhisfirst-bornjustupatNewCollege),withdiscussionfocusingonsingleormultiplevolumeformattingandthelike,thepublicationofSchweighäuser’sIndexin700+pages(1795;volume1:1789)intervened:despiterepeatoutlaytowardsafarmed-outindex
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 37 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theDelegatespulledtheplugon2April1804.
(8)‘In1962IwasapproachedbyIwanamiShotentoauthoriseaJapaneseeditionandItoldthemthatIhad…additionalmaterial,whichtheycoulduse.Soin1963theJapaneseenlargedversionwaspublished.In1969theLiverpoolUniversityPressbroughtoutanewEnglishedition(theoriginalpublishershavingrelinquishedthecopyrighttome),incorporatingthenewmaterial.TodistinguishitfromthesmalleroriginalIgaveitthenewtitleofTheAwfulRevolution,whichwasintendedtorecallGibbon’sremarkthatweshould“learnthelessonsofthisawfulrevolution”.TherewerelaterSpanishandSwedisheditions;andIwanamiShotenwentonpayingmeroyaltiesforabout25yearsandsoldinallover13,000copiesinJapan.’(1992a:189)
(9)TheWalbanksmovedtoStAnne’s-on-Sea,atLytham,thetranquilendofBlackpoolontheFylde(coast),during1941–6,toavoidthebombing,copewithpostpartumproblemsforMaryWalbankwiththehelpofhermother,andcompletethefamilywithtwomorechildren;afterthewar,theymovedtoBirkenhead,‘wheretheschoolswerebetterthaninLiverpool’(1992a:195).
(10)Inconclusion:‘AfterdiscussionwiththeMountfordswedecidedtogoforahousein…Oxton,wherewestayeduntil1951.InthatyearwemovedtoHopeLodge,5PoplarRoad,whereweweretoremainuntilIretiredin1977.Butthatisanotherstory.||'(1992a:195)
(11)SeeWalbank2005a,‘TheTwo-wayShadow:PolybiusamongtheFragments’,keynoteandoverturetoSchepensandBollansée2005.
(12)Butforacomicmomentin1946whereSisamunsubtlywardsoffanofferedcommentaryonTacitus’HistoriesfromK.Brink,warningFWWoffcollaboration,andsignsoff(31January):‘Ihopeyouaregettingonwiththegreatwork.Symeisnowback,andtherearesignsofarevivalinourOxfordSchoolofRomanHistory’.He‘hadtemporarilyforgottenthatPolybiuscamefirstinyourdoubleplan,but“was”gladyouwrote,becauseIdon’tthinkSymehaschangedhismindabouttheHistories(hehasmanyotherthingsonhand),sowehopeyouwillgoontodothatwhenPolybiusisdone.Thereisnohurry,butweareanxiousthatthefieldshouldbeoccupied’.(7February).Frankquips,‘Ifeltnodesireatthatpoint[1979]toreturntoTacitus’Histories.…’(1992a:187).Plusthequietusin1961,‘unawareoftheseearliertentativesandwithProfessorSyme’sadvice,wehaveaskedMr.ChilverandMr.WellesleyofEdinburghtocollaborateonacommentary.Ithoughtyououghttobetoldofthisatonce,sinceitmayaffectyourmorelongdistantplans.…Iwonderifyouwouldbewillingtoputit[‘materialtowardstheTacituscommentary’]atthedisposalofMr.Chilver?’,cappedincrassnessbythefollow-up:‘IamgladthatourTacitusplansarenotprovingawkwardforyou.Idonotthinkweneedtroubleyouforthematerialyouhadcollected;IimaginemostofitChilverwillalreadyhavenoted.Butitiskindofyoutooffer.’(D.M.Davin,16and20February).
(13)CompareandcontrasttheprojectsstudiedinHenderson1998(Juvenal’sMayor),
‘A piece of work which would occupy some years…’ Oxford University Press ArchiveFiles 814152, 814173, 814011
Page 38 of 38
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
2001c(Farnell’sCults),2002(R.G.Austin),2003(‘Paroperisedes:MrsArthurStrongandFlavianstyle’),2006(‘OxfordReds’),2007a(J.E.B.Mayor,Juvenal),2007b(‘The“EuripidesReds”Series’),2010(theOxfordLatinDictionary).
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 1 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
Polybius,Phylarchus,and‘TragicHistory’:AReconsideration
JohnMarincola
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0003
AbstractandKeywords
Theproblemof'tragichistory'inHellenistichistoriographyhasgeneratedmuchscholarlydebate.ThischapterexaminesPolybius'attackonPhylarchusinBook2ofhisHistories,oneofthecrucialtextsforsuchcontroversies.Whereasthepassagehasoftenbeenseenasacriticismofanotherhistorianforwritingwithaviewtostirringupinappropriateemotion,thischaptershowshowPolybius'evocationofthemethodsoftragicpoetsallowsforcriticismofPhylarchusforhiswillingnesstoresorttoinventionandfalsehood.Thereis,moreover,withinPolybius'ownwritingaplaceforappropriateemotion,suchasinhisaccountofScipio'sreactiontothefallofCarthage,andfordiscussionoftopicssuchasreversalsoffortune.TheearliertendencyamongstscholarstointerprettheattackonPhylarchusinthelightofAristotle'sPoeticsthusneedstobemodified,asthepassageispartofwiderdebatesontheroleofhistoryandtragedy,andtheneedforhistorianstoavoidfalsehoods.
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 2 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,Phylarchus,historiography,tragedy,polemic,emotion,truth,fiction,'tragichistory'
Intreatingthetopicof‘tragichistory’IrealizethatIamtakingupatime-worntheme,butitseemsappropriate,inavolumehonouringFrankWalbank,torevisitanissuetowhichhehascontributedsosubstantially,andtoreconsideramatterwhich,itseemstomeatleast,iscriticalinevaluatingnotonlyPolybiusbutalsothewritingofhistoryinantiquityasawhole.1
Tragichistoryisthoughttohaveitsoriginsinareactionbysomehistorians—thereisdebateoverwhotheseare—againstAristotle’scriticisminthePoeticsthatpoetry(i.e.tragedy)ismorephilosophicalthanhistoryisbecausepoetryspeaksmoretouniversals,historymoretoparticulars;2andso,inadesiretomakehistorymoreuniversal,theybegantousethemannerandmethodsoftragedy.Nowalthougheachscholarmighthaveadifferentlynuancedideaabouttragichistory,thereareneverthelesscertainrecurringfeaturesthatareconsideredcharacteristic:first,aparticularlyemotionalnarrative,thatis,anarrativeinwhicheitherscenesfullofemotionaredepicted,orscenesinwhichthehistorian’saimistoraisethereader’semotions;secondly,aparticularlyvividstyle,onewhichisfullofdetailsandmayincludespeechesofasortonefindsintragedy,particularlygive-and-takespeeches;and,finally,(p.74) anarrativethatisfullofπεριπέτειαι,reversalsoffortune,somethingwhichAristotlethoughttobeespeciallycharacteristicoftragedy.3
WhatIwishtodointhispaperistore-examinethesinglemostimportantancienttestimoniumontragichistory,Polybius’refutationinhissecondBookoftheAthenianhistorian,Phylarchus.Althoughotherpassageshavebeenadducedindiscussionsoftragichistory,4thisis,sotospeak,thefoundationaltext,foritisherethatPolybiusexplicitlyaccusesPhylarchusofconfusingthetwogenres.InreconsideringthispassageIshallsuggestfirstthat,forPolybiusatleast,thecriticismofhistorianswhowrote‘tragically’didnot,asisoftensupposed,refertotheirstyleortheiruseofrhetoricortheiremploymentofemotion,butratherwasconcernedwiththetruthorfalsityoftheiraccount;and,secondly,thatPolybius’criticismsarebestunderstoodnotinnarrowdialoguewithAristotle’sPoetics,butwithinthelargercontextofafar-reachingancientdiscussiononthebenefits,aims,andmethodsofseveralgenres,nottomentiontheinter-genericcompetitionthatwasitselfafeatureofancientliterarycriticism.
IPolybius’attackonPhylarchusoccurswithinhisnarrativeoftheCleomeneanWar.InstatingthathewillfollowtheMemoirsofAratusofSicyonforthiswar,5Polybiusexpectssurprisefromsomeofhisreaders,sincePhylarchus,whoalsotreatedtheseevents,hasagoodreputation.Inanattempt,therefore,tojustifyhisdecisionandtodiscreditPhylarchus’authority,Polybiusfocusesonfourincidentsfromthelatter’shistory,themostimportantofwhichforourpresentpurposesisthefirst,thefallofMantineain223atthehandsofAratusandtheAchaeans.Thecrucialpartsareasfollows(2.56.3,6–13):6
(3)καθόλουμὲνοὐ̑νὁσυγγραφεὺςοὑ̑τοςπολλὰπαρ’ὅληντὴνπραγματείανεἰκῃ̑καὶὡςἔτυχενεἴρηκεν.…(6)βουλόμενοςδὴδιασαφειν̑τὴνὠμότητατὴν
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 3 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ἈντιγόνουκαὶΜακεδόνων,ἅμαδὲτούτοιςτὴνἈράτουκαὶτω̑ν᾿Αχαιω̑ν,φησὶτοὺςΜαντινέαςγενομένουςὑποχειρίους[A]μεγάλοιςπεριπεσειν̑ἀτυχήμασι,καὶτὴνἀρχαιοτάτηνκαὶμεγίστηνπόλιντω̑νκατὰτὴνἈρκαδίαντηλικαύταιςπαλαισ̑αισυμφοραις̑ὥστεπάνταςεἰςἐπίστασινκαὶδάκρυατοὺς῞Ελληναςἀ(p.75) γαγειν̑.(7)[B]σπουδάζωνδ’εἰςἔλεονἐκκαλεισ̑θαιτοὺςἀναγινώσκονταςκαὶσυμπαθεις̑ποιειν̑τοις̑λεγομένοις,εἰσάγειπεριπλοκὰςγυναικω̑νκαὶκόμαςδιερριμέναςκαὶμαστω̑νἐκοβολάς,πρὸςδὲτούτοις[C]δάκρυακαὶθρήνουςἀνδρω̑νκαὶγυναικω̑νἀναμὶξτέκνοιςκαὶγονευ̑σιγηραιοις̑ἀπαγομένων.(8)ποιει̑δὲτου̑τοπαρ’ὅληντὴνἱστορίαν,[D]πειρώμενος〈ἐν〉ἑκάστοιςἀεὶπρὸτω̑νὀφθαλμω̑ντιθέναιτὰδεινά.(9)τὸμὲνοὐ̑νἀγεννὲςκαὶγυναικω̑δεςτη̑ςαἱρέσεωςαὐτου̑παρείσθω,τὸδὲτη̑ςἱστορίαςοἰκειο̑νἅμακαὶχρήσιμονἐξεταζέσθω.(10)δει̑τοιγαρου̑νοὐκἐκπλήττειν[Casaubon:ἐπιπλήττεινmss.]τὸνσυγγραφέατερατευόμενονδιὰτη̑ςἱστορίαςτοὺςἐντυγχάνοντας,οὐδὲτοὺςἐνδεχομένουςλόγουςζητειν̑καὶτὰπαρεπόμενατοις̑ὑποκειμένοιςἐξαριθμεισ̑θαικαθάπεροἱτραγῳδιογράφοι,τω̑νδὲπραχθέντωνκαὶῥηθέντωνκατ’ἀλήθειαναὐτω̑νμνημονεύεινπάμπαν,κἂνπάνυμέτριατυγχάνωσινὄντα.(11)τὸγὰρτέλοςἱστορίαςκαὶτραγῳδίαςοὐταὐτὸνἀλλὰτοὐναντίον·ἐκει̑μὲνγὰρδει̑διὰτω̑νπιθανοτάτωνλόγωνἐκπλη̑ξαικαὶψυχαγωγη̑σαικατὰτὸπαρὸντοὺςἀκούοντας,ἐνθάδεδὲδιὰτω̑νἀληθινω̑νἔργωνκαὶλόγωνεἰςπάντατὸνχρόνονδιδάξαικαὶπεισ̑αιτοὺςφιλομαθου̑ντας,(12)ἐπειδήπερἐνἐκείνοιςμὲνἡγειτ̑αιτὸπιθανόν,κἂνᾐ̑ψευ̑δος,διὰτὴνἀπάτηντω̑νθεωμένων,ἐνδὲτούτοιςτἀληθὲςδιὰτὴνὠφέλειαντω̑νφιλομαθούντων.(13)χωρὶςτετούτων[A]τὰςπλείσταςἡμιν̑ἐξηγειτ̑αιτω̑νπεριπετειω̑νοὐχὑποτιθεὶςαἰτίανκαὶτρόποντοις̑γινομένοις,ὡ̑νχωρὶςοὔτ’ἐλεειν̑εὐλόγωςοὔτ’ὀργίζεσθαικαθηκόντωςδυνατὸνἐπ’οὐδενὶτω̑νσυμβαινόντων…
(3)Ingeneral,then,thishistorian[sc.Phylarchus]throughouthiswholeworkhasmademanyrandomandcarelessstatements…(6)WishingtoemphasizethecrueltyofAntigonusandtheMacedoniansandwiththemthatofAratusandtheAchaeans,hesaysthattheMantineans,whendefeated,[A]weresubjectedtogreatmisfortunes,andthatthemostancientandthegreatestofcitiesinArcadiawrestledwithsuchgreatmisfortunesastobringalltheGreekstodismayandtears.(7)[B]Eagertoarousethepityofhisreadersandtomakethemsympathetic(lit.,fellow-feelers)towhatisbeingsaid,hebringsonwomenclingingtooneanother,tearingtheirhairandbaringtheirbreasts,andinadditionhedescribes[C]thetearsandlamentationsofmenandwomenaccompaniedbytheirchildrenandagedparentsbeingledawayintocaptivity.(8)Hedoesthisthroughouthishistory,[D]strivingoneachoccasiontoplacethehorrorsbeforeoureyes.(9)Letusignoreforthemomenthisignobleandwomanishdisposition,7andconsiderwhatisproperandusefultohistory.(10)Nowthenitisnotthehistorian’stasktostartlehisreadersbydescribingthingssensationally,norshouldhetry,asthetragicwritersdo,torepresentspeecheswhichmighthavebeendelivered,ortoenumerateallthepossibleconsequencesoftheeventsunderconsideration,butrathertorecordwithfidelitythingsthatwereactuallyspokenanddone,howevercommonplacethesemightbe.(11)Fortheaimoftragedyisnotthesameasthatofhistory,but
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 4 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theopposite.Thetragicpoetseekstothrillandcharmhisaudienceforthemomentbythemostpersuasivewords,whilethehistorian’staskistoinstructandpersuadeforalltimethosewholovelearning,bymeansofthetruthofthewordsandactionshepresents,(12)sinceinthefirstcase(p.76) thesupremeaimisprobability,evenifwhatissaidisuntrue,thepurposebeingtodeceivethespectators,butintheseconditistruth,thepurposebeingtobenefitthosewholovelearning.(13)Andapartfromtheseconsiderations,Phylarchus[A]relatesthemajorityofthereversalsinhishistorywithoutsubjoiningwhythingsweredoneandtowhatpurpose,withoutwhichitisimpossibleeithertofeelpityreasonablyorangerappropriatelyatanyoftheevents…
Ihaveindicatedbylettersthesupposedlymainaspectsoftragichistory:thenarrationofreversalsoffortune[A];emotionalism,heretheattempttoarousethepityofreaders[B];anarrationfullofdetail,heredetailedscenesofsuffering[C];andavividstylebywhichthingsareplaced‘beforetheeyes’oftheaudience[D].Thepassagethusatfirstglanceseemstobearoutthetraditionalinterpretation,yetanexaminationofPolybius’argumentisessentialtoputeachofthesemattersintoitspropercontext.
Tobeginwith,wenotethatthedistinctionmadebyPolybiusbetweenhistoryandtragedyin§11followsimmediatelyfromageneralobservationthatthehistorianmustnot,byusingτερατεία,shockhisreaders,normustheseekaftertheprobableutterancesofthecharacters,norenumeratetheconsequencesoftheeventsunderconsideration,butrathernarratewhatwassaidanddoneinactualfact(κατ’ἀλήθειαν,§10).Thisisthenfollowedbyanexplanatoryγάρclause,anditisherethatwefindthecomparisonofthetwogenres.Thusthecomparisonismeanttoexplainandilluminatethenatureofinvention—thisiswhatPolybiushasjustmentioned—andinfactthatisexactlywhatitdoes.Tragedyisalignedwithpersuasion,historywithtruth,evenifthattruthismodest.Phylarchus’scenesarefaulted,therefore,inthefirstplacebecausetheyareinvented.PolybiushadindicatedasmuchintheintroductiontohisattackonPhylarchus,whenhesaidthepurposeofitwas‘sothatwemaynotallowthefalsehoodinhiswritingstohaveequalweightwiththetruth’,8andPolybiusconfirmsthistowardstheendofhisrefutationwhenheclaimsthattheMantineansinactualfactdidnotsufferinthewaythatPhylarchusclaimed:
οὐκου̑νὁλοσχερεστέραςτινὸςκαὶμείζονοςτυχειν̑ἠ̑σανἄξιοιτιμωρίας,ὥστ’εἴπερἔπαθονἃΦύλαρχόςφησιν,οὐκἔλεονεἰκὸςἠ̑νσυνεξακολουθειν̑αὐτοις̑παρὰτω̑νἙλλήνων,ἔπαινονδὲκαὶσυγκατάθεσινμα̑λλοντοις̑πράττουσικαὶμεταπορευομένοιςτὴνἀσέβειαναὐτω̑ν.ἀλλ’ὅμωςοὐδενὸςπεραιτέρωσυνεξακολουθήσαντοςΜαντινευ̑σικατὰτὴνπεριπέτειανπλὴντου̑διαρπαγη̑ναιτοὺςβίουςκαὶπραθη̑ναιτοὺςἐλευθέρους,ὁσυγγραφεὺςαὐτη̑ςτη̑ςτερατείαςχάρινοὐμόνονψευ̑δοςεἰσήνεγκετὸὅλον,ἀλλὰκαὶτὸψευ̑δοςἀπίθανον,κτλ.
Thesementhereforewereworthierofsomefarheavierandmoreextremepenalty;sothateveniftheyhadsufferedwhatPhylarchusalleges,itwasnotreasonablethattheyshouldhavereceivedpityfromtheGreeks;instead,praise(p.77) andassentshouldhavebeengiventothosewhoexecutedjudgementon
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 5 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
themfortheirimpiety.YetwhilenothingmoreseriousbefelltheMantineansintheirreversaloffortunethanthepillageoftheirpropertyandtheenslavementoftheirfreepopulation,thiswriter[sc.Phylarchus],forthesakeofsensationalism,composednotonlyafalsehood,butanimprobablefalsehood,etc.9
AfurtherindicationthatinventionorfalsehoodiswhatPolybiushasinmindisthathebeginsthisrefutationbysayingthatingeneralthroughouthiswholehistoryPhylarchushas‘spokenatrandomandasithappened’(εἰκῃ̑καὶὡςἔτυχενεἴρηκεν,2.56.3),acharacterizationthatechoesThucydides’criticismofhispredecessors,10thecontextforwhichispreciselythesame,namely,acontrastbetweentheactualeventsandexaggeratedorfalseaccounts.
AnexaminationofPolybius’remarkselsewhereinhishistoryontragedyandthetragicbearsouttheinterpretationthatfalsehoodorfactualinaccuracyisthecoreissue.EarlierinBookIIPolybius,indescribingthegeographyofthePovalley,saysthathewillomitfromconsiderationGreekstoriesabouttheriver(2.16.13–14):
…τἄλλαδὲτὰπερὶτὸνποταμὸντου̑τονἱστορούμεναπαρὰτοις̑Ἕλλησι,λέγωδὴτὰπερὶΦαέθοντακαὶτὴνἐκείνουπτω̑σιν,ἔτιδὲτὰδάκρυατω̑ναἰγείρωνκαὶτοὺςμελανείμοναςτοὺςπερὶτὸνποταμὸνοἰκου̑ντας,οὕςφασιτὰςἐσθη̑ταςεἰσέτινυ̑νφόρειντοιαύταςἀπὸτου̑κατὰΦαέθονταπένθους,καὶπα̑σανδὴτὴντραγικὴνκαὶταύτῃπροσεοικυια̑νὕληνἐπὶμὲντου̑παρόντοςὑπερθησόμεθα,κτλ.
…theothertalestheGreekstellabouttheriver,ImeanaboutPhaëthonandhisfallandthetearsofthepoplartreesandtheblackclothingofthosewhodwellaroundtheriver,who,theysay,stilldressthiswayfromtheirgriefforPhaëthon,andallmatterfortragedyandthelike,maybeleftasideforthemoment,etc.
Polybiusemphasizesherethefabulousormythicalnatureofthematerialwhichputsitinadifferentrealmfromhistory.Elsewhere,Polybiusfindsfaultwithsomewriterswho,hesays,soexaggeratedthedifficultiesofHannibal’scrossingoftheAlpsthattheyhadsomeheroappeartohimtoshowhimapassthroughthemountains.Theydothis,hesays,becausetheythemselvesareignorantofAlpinetopography(3.48.8–9):
…ἐξὧ̑νεἰκότωςἐμπίπτουσινεἰςτὸπαραπλήσιοντοις̑τραγῳδιογράφοις.καὶγὰρἐκείνοιςπα̑σιναἱκαταστροφαὶτω̑νδραμάτωνπροσδέονταιθεου̑καὶμηχανη̑ςδιὰτὸτὰςπρώταςὑποθέσειςψεύδειςκαὶπαραλόγουςλαμβάνειν,τούςτεσυγγραφέαςἀ(p.78) νάγκητὸπαραπλήσιονπάσχεινκαὶποιειν̑ἥρωάςτεκαὶθεοὺςἐπιφαινομένους,ἐπειδὰντὰςἀρχὰςἀπιθάνουςκαὶψευδεις̑ὑποστήσωνται.
…fromthis,asonewouldexpect,theyfallintothesamedifficultiesasthetragicdramatists,allofwhom,tobringtheirdramastoaclose,requirethegodandthecrane[i.e.thedeusexmachina],sincethedatatheychooseonwhichtofoundtheirplotsarefalseandimprobable.Thesewriters[sc.onHannibal]suffersomethingsimilarandmusthaveheroesandgodsappear,sincetheybuildonbeginningsthatareimprobableandfalse.
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 6 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Againweseefalsehood,exaggeration,andinvention—allboundtogether,notcoincidentally,withametaphorfromthetheatre.
OnelastpassageconcernsthedownfalloftheSicilianHieronymus(7.7.1–6):
τινὲςτω̑νλογογράφωντω̑νὑπὲρτη̑ςκαταστροφη̑ςτου̑Ἱερωνύμουγεγραφότωνπολύντιναπεποίηνταιλόγονκαὶπολλήντιναδιατέθεινταιτερατείαν,ἐξηγούμενοιμὲντὰπρὸτη̑ςἀρχη̑ςαὐτοις̑γενόμενασημεια̑καὶτὰςἀτυχίαςτὰςΣυρακοσίων,(2)τραγῳδου̑ντεςδὲτὴνὠμότητατω̑ντρόπωνκαὶτὴνἀσέβειαντω̑νπράξεων,ἐπὶδὲπα̑σιτὸπαράλογονκαὶτὸδεινὸντω̑νπερὶτὴνκαταστροφὴναὐτου̑συμβάντων,ὥστεμήτεΦάλαρινμήτ’Ἀπολλόδωρονμήτ’ἄλλονμηδέναγεγονέναιτύραννονἐκείνουπικρότερον.[…](4)κατὰδὲτὸνχρόνοντου̑τονἕναμέντινακαὶδεύτερονἐστρεβλω̑σθαικαίτιναςτω̑νφίλωνκαὶτω̑νἄλλωνΣυρακοσίωνἀπεκτάνθαιδυνατόν,ὑπερβολὴνδὲγεγονέναιπαρανομίαςκαὶπαρηλλαγμένηνἀσεβείανοὐκεἰκός.[…](6)ἀλλὰμοίδοκου̑σινοἱτὰςἐπὶμέρουςγράφοντεςπράξεις,ἐπειδὰνὑποθέσειςεὐπεριλήπτουςὑποστήσωνταικαὶστενάς,πτωχεύοντεςπραγμάτωνἀναγκάζεσθαιτὰμικρὰμεγάλαποιειν̑καὶπερὶτω̑νμηδὲμνήμηςἀξίωνπολλούςτιναςδιατίθεσθαιλόγους.
SomeofthehistorianswhohavedescribedthefallofHieronymushavedonesoatgreatlengthandintroducedmuchsensationalism,tellingoftheprodigiesthatoccurredbeforehisreignandthemisfortunesoftheSyracusans,andwritinguptragicallythecrueltyofhischaracterandtheimpietyofhisactions,andfinallythestrangeandterriblenatureofthecircumstancesattendinghisdeath,sothatneitherPhalarisnorApollodorusnoranyothertyrantwouldseemtohavebeenmoresavagethanhe….Itispossiblethatoneortwomenmayhavebeentortured,andsomeofhisfriendsandoftheotherSyracusansputtodeath,butitishardlyprobablethattherewasanyexcessofunlawfulviolenceoranyextraordinaryimpiety….Butthosewhowritemonographs,itseemstome,sincetheydealwithasubjectthatiscircumscribedandnarrow,arecompelledforlackoffactstomakesmallthingsgreatandtodevotemuchspacetowhatisreallynotworthyofmemory.
Heretooweseethattragedysupposesanunderlyingfactualinaccuracy:notetheremarkthatitwasonlyafewwhowereactuallytorturedandputtodeath—thesamekindofargumentPolybiususedwhenattackingPhylarchus’supposedexaggerations.The‘tragic’portrayalofHieronymusisthus(again)closelylinkedwithalackoftruthfulnessandaccuracy.
(p.79) Thisisnot,however,thesolesenseof‘tragic’inPolybius.Intwoplacesheinvokesthe‘tragic’todescribethesplendourandpompofindividuals.ThefirstdescribesthearrivalofApellesintoCorinth,anentrythatisdescribedas‘tragic’onaccountofthemultitudeofleadersandsoldierswhocameouttogreethim.11ThesecondconcernsHasdrubalwhenhemeetsGolossesandisportrayedasadvancingslowly,infullarmourandpurple,cuttingsuchafigure‘astoleavethetyrantsoftragedyfarbehind’.12Here
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 7 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thereisanemphasisonpageantryandspectacle,aswellasareference,nodoubt,totheelaboratecostumeswornonthetragicstage.
SomewhatdifferentarePolybius’usesofthenounτραγῳδίαandtheverbἐκτραγῳδέωinBookVI.Inthefirstpassage,Polybiusnotesthatdecisionsabouttriumphsarereservedforthesenate(6.15.7):
καὶμὴντὰςἐπιτυχίαςτω̑νἡγουμένωνἐκτραγῳδη̑σαικαὶσυναυξη̑σαικαὶπάλινἀμαυρω̑σαικαὶταπεινω̑σαιτὸσυνέδριονἔχειτὴνδύναμιν.
Thesenatehasthepowertocelebrateinsplendourandmagnifythesuccessesofthegeneral,orinturntoobscureandbelittlethem.
Thecontrastoftheinfinitivesἐκτραγῳδη̑σαιandσυναυξη̑σαιwithἀμαυρω̑σαιandταπεινω̑σαιshowsthatPolybiusisherethinking,asinthepreviousexamples,ofpompandsplendour(perhapsexactlyinthemannerofHellenistickingsorcondottieri).TheotherappearanceinBookVIisrelated.HerePolybiusisdiscussingthewayinwhichtheRomansdealwithreligion(6.56.8–11):
ἐπὶτοσου̑τονγὰρἐκτετραγῴδηταικαὶπαρειση̑κταιτου̑τοτὸμέροςπαρ’αὐτοις̑εἴςτετοὺςκατ’ἰδίανβίουςκαὶτὰκοινὰτη̑ςπόλεωςὥστεμὴκαταλιπειν̑ὑπερβολήν…του̑πλήθουςχάριντου̑τοπεποιηκέναι…ἐπεὶδὲπα̑νπλη̑θόςἐστινἐλαφρὸνκαὶπλη̑ρεςἐπιθυμιω̑νπαρανόμων,ὀργη̑ςἀλόγου,θυμου̑βιαίου,λείπεταιτοις̑ἀδήλοιςφόβοιςκαὶτῃ̑τοιαύτῃτραγῳδίᾳτὰπλήθησυνέχειν.
Thesemattersareclothedinsuchpompandintroducedtosuchanextentintheirprivateandpubliclivessoastoomitnoexcess…Theyhaveadoptedthiscourseforthesakeofthecommonpeople…[S]inceeverymultitudeisfickle,fulloflawlessdesires,unreasonedpassionandviolentanger,themultitudemustbereinedinbyinvisibleterrorsandsuchpageantry.
Inthesepassages,asinthepreviousones,thereisanemphasisonpompandpageantry,andalthoughthereisnosuggestionoffalsehood,itisnoteworthythatthesplendourandpompareemployedintheserviceofatypeofdeceptivecontrol.
(p.80) Oneadditionalpassage,differentintonefromthosementionedabove,occursinBookV,whereMolonfallsuponthecampofXenoetasandslaughtersthesoldierswhoaredrunkandscatteredabout:thosewhocangetawayrushintotheriver,forgettingthestrengthofthecurrent,andtheyandalltheiranimalsandequipmentaresweptaway,creating,Polybiussays,ascenethatwas‘tragicandextraordinary’.13Inthispassage,‘tragic’isusedtomeansomethingparticularlyhorribleorpitiable,aswemightsay‘atragicturnofevents’,althoughneitherinPolybiusnorinEnglishdoessuchaphrasenecessarilysuggestthetheatre,muchlessawholemethodofwritinghistory.
Inthecasessketchedhere,then,itcanbeseenthatPolybiususes‘tragic’asawayofindicatingsomethingthatisfalseorexaggerated,orsomethingthatispompous,empty,orvain,andinatleastonecasesomethingespeciallypitiableorsorrowful.Thereisone
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 8 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
otherimportantpassageinwhichPolybiustalksofhistoryandtragedy,butIwanttosavethatforaslightlylaterpoint.14
LetusmoveontothechargethatPolybiusisfaultingPhylarchusandthus‘tragic’historyforraisingtheemotionsoftheaudience:thisisprobablythemostcommonclaimmadebyscholars;inthisinterpretation,emotionalismissetattheoppositeextremefromeducationandpragmaticor‘sober’history.Ihavealreadydealtwithsomeaspectsofthistopic,15soIshallheresimplynotethefollowing.ThemainevidenceagainsttheviewthatPolybiusisopposedtoemotionalportrayalsinhistoryistobefoundattheendofthepassagewithwhichwebegan(2.56.13),wherePolybiusfaultsPhylarchusforfailingtogivecausesandpurposesofactions,‘withoutwhichitisimpossibleeithertofeelpityreasonablyorangerappropriately’(οὔτ’ἐλεειν̑εὐλόγωςοὔτ’ὀργίζεσθαικαθηκόντωςδυνατόν).NowtheforminwhichPolybiushereexpressestherelationshipbetweeneventandemotionshowsclearlythatwithorintheappropriatecontextonecouldfeel,andthehistoriancouldraise,pityoranger.Indeed,thisishardlysurprising,giventhatangerisneverfarfromthesurfaceinPolybius’retellingofthestoryofMantinea,andonecanseeitespeciallyclearlyinhisindictmentofTimaeusinBookXII.16
Furthermore,itcanbeshownfromPolybius’ownworkthatemotionisinnowayinappropriatetothebusinessofhistory:note,forexample,hispraiseoftheRomanfunerarycustomofrecitingthegreatdeedsofthedeceasedmanandhisancestors,apractice,Polybiussays,thatmakesthelistenersshareinthefeelings(συμπαθεις̑,thesamewordusedforPhylarchus),suchthattheyfeelthelosstobetheirown(6.53.2–3):
(p.81) πέριξδὲπαντὸςτου̑δήμουστάντος,ἀναβὰςἐπὶτοὺςἐμβόλους,ἂνμὲνυἱὸςἐνἡλικίᾳκαταλείπηταικαὶτύχῃπαρών,οὑ̑τος,εἰδὲμή,τω̑νἄλλωνεἴτιςἀπὸγένουςὑπάρχει,λέγειπερὶτου̑τετελευτηκότοςτὰςἀρετὰςκαὶτὰςἐπιτετευγμέναςἐντῳ̑ζη̑νπράξεις.δι’ὡ̑νσυμβαίνειτοὺςπολλοὺςἀναμιμνησκομένουςκαὶλαμβάνονταςὑπὸτὴνὄψιντὰγεγονότα,μὴμόνοντοὺςκεκοινωνηκόταςτω̑νἔργων,ἀλλὰκαὶτοὺςἐκτός,ἐπὶτοσου̑τονγίνεσθαισυμπαθεις̑ὥστεμὴτω̑νκηδευόντωνἴδιον,ἀλλὰκοινὸντου̑δήμουφαίνεσθαιτὸσύμπτωμα.
Thewholemassofthepeoplestandroundtowatch,andhis[sc.thedeadman’s]son,ifhehasleftoneofadultagewhocanbepresent,orifnotsomeotherrelative,thenmountstheRostraanddeliversanaddresswhichrecountsthevirtuesandthesuccessesachievedbythedeadmanduringhislifetime.Bythesemeansthewholepopulace,notjustthosewhosharedinthedeedsbuteventhosewhodidnot,areinvolvedintheceremonysothatwhenthefactsofthedeadman’scareerarerecalledtotheirmindsandbroughtbeforetheireyes,theybecomesharersofthefeelingstosuchanextentthatthelossseemsnottobeconfinedtothemournersbuttobeapubliconewhichaffectsthewholepeople.
OrcomparePolybius’portrayalofScipio’stearsatthefallofCarthage:Scipio’semotion,indicativeofhisremembrance,attheheightofhissuccess,ofthemutabilityoffortuneisthereasonthatPolybiuscandescribehimas‘agreatandperfectman,and,inshort,one
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 9 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
worthytoberemembered’.17Polybiusisnot,therefore,condemningtoutcourttheportrayalofemotioninhistoryorattemptsbyhistorianstoraisetheirreaders’emotions;rather,hefindsfaultwithPhylarchusforraisingthewrongorinappropriateemotionsgiventheactual(κατ’ἀλήθειαν)situationoftheMantineans.
NextthereisthenotionthatPhylarchus’vividness,hisplacingthingsbeforetheeyesofhisreaders,isalsoacomponentoftragichistoriography.Itisindeedtruethattragedy,ofallthegenres,isthemostimmediateintermsofvisualimpact,sinceitliterallybringsthingsbeforetheeyesofitsaudience.Polybiusheremightcertainlybereferringtosuchathing,yetwhenweexaminethisconceptof‘placingbeforetheeyes’(πρὸὀφθαλμω̑ντιθέναι)elsewhereinPolybius,itseemsclearthattragedyisusuallyfarfromhismind.Sometimeshereferstowhatancientliterarycriticismcalledἐνάργεια,thevividnessofdescriptionwhichwasconsideredadesirabletraitinthebestwriting,aqualityextolledbyPlutarch:18
themosteffectivehistorianishewho,byavividrepresentationofemotionsandcharacters,makeshisnarrativelikeapainting.AssuredlyThucydidesisalwaysstrivingforthisvividnessinhiswriting,sinceitishisdesiretomakethereadera(p.82) spectator,asitwere,andtoproducevividlyinthemindsofhisreaderstheemotionsofamazementandconsternationthatwereexperiencedbythosewhobeheldthem.
Yetvividnessandemotionalarousalarebynomeansthewholestory.
ForwhenwelookatPolybius’ownuseofthisconcept,itisclearthatvividness,thisplacingsomethingbeforetheaudience’seyes,ismostofallatooltoconveyknowledgeandimpartexperience,sinceitallowsthereadertoseethingsclearlyandthereforetounderstandtheissuesatstake.Davidson’sstudyofthegazeinPolybiusshowedtheextenttowhichPolybiusreliesonvisualizations,bothforhischaractersandforhisownaudience.19Theproper‘envisioning’byacharacterofhissituationisoftenthekeytosuccessorfailure,andPolybiushimselffrequentlyemphasizeshowimportantitisforhisaudiencetoplacebeforetheireyeswhatisgoingon.20See,forexample,thelistenersattheRomanfuneralmentionedabove,wherethedeedsofthedeadmanandhisfamilyarebrought‘beforetheireyes’;inanotherpassage,Polybius,inthecourseofpraisingtheRomansandtheCarthaginiansfortheirconductintheSecondPunicWar,comparestheiractionswithsomeearlierGreekheroes,andsumsupbysaying(9.9.9–10):
ταυ̑ταμὲνοὐ̑νοὐχοὕτωςτου̑ῬωμαίωνἢΚαρχηδονίωνἐγκωμίουχάρινεἴρηταιμοι…τὸδὲπλειο̑ντω̑νἡγουμένωνπαρ’ἀμφοτέροιςκαὶτω̑νμετὰταυ̑ταμελλόντωνχειρίζεινπαρ’ἑκάστοιςτὰςκοινὰςπράξεις,ἵνατω̑νμὲνἀναμιμνησκόμενοι,τὰδ’ὑπὸτὴνὄψινλαμβάνοντεςζηλωταὶγίνωνταιπαράβολονἔχειντικαὶκινδυνω̑δες,τοὐναντίονἀσφαλη̑μὲντὴντόλμαν,θαυμασίανδὲτὴνἐπίνοιαν,ἀείμνηστονδὲκαὶκαλὴνἔχειτὴνπροαίρεσινκαὶκατορθωθέντακαὶδιαψευσθένταπαραπλησίως,κτλ.
ItisnotforthepurposeofextollingtheRomansortheCarthaginiansthatIhave
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 10 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
offeredtheseremarks…butratherforthesakeoftheleadersofboththesestates,andforall,nomatterwhere,whoshallbechargedwiththeconductofpublicaffairs,sothatbyrememberingsomethingsandbyplacingbeforetheireyesotherthingstheymaybemovedtoemulation,andnotshrinkfromundertakingdesignswhichmaybefraughtwithriskandperil,butonthecontraryarecourageouswithoutbeinghazardous,areadmirableintheirconception;andtheirexcellence,whethertheresultbesuccessorfailurealike,willdeservetoliveinmen’smemoriesforever,etc.
ThisconnectionbetweenthevisualandtheintellectualcanbeseenalreadyinThucydides,whousesthetermτὸσαφές(‘clarity’or‘clearness’)toindicate(p.83)whatheseesastheobjectofhisaudience’sattention.21VividnessforPolybiusisalsorelatedtothewholeissueofthehistorian’sexperience:PolybiusattacksTimaeus,sayinghisworklacksvividnessbecauseitisnotaproductoflife,andἔμφασιςcancomeonlyfromαὐτοπάθεια.22Elsewhere,Polybiuslinksἐνάργειαwiththereliabilityoftestimonythatcomesfrombeinganeyewitnessofevents(20.12.8):
οὐχὅμοιόνἐστινἐξἀκοη̑ςπερὶπραγμάτωνδιαλαμβάνεινκαὶγενόμενοναὐτόπτην,ἀλλὰκαὶμεγάλαδιαφέρει,πολὺδέτισυμβάλλεσθαιπέφυκενἑκάστοιςἡκατὰτὴνἐνάργειανπίστις.
Itisnotatallthesametojudgeofthingsfromhearsayandfromhavingactuallywitnessedthem,butthereisagreatdifference.Inallmattersacertaintyfoundedontheevidenceofone’seyesisofthegreatestvalue.
Andthisconceptofeyewitness,ofcourse,isanabsolutelycrucialelementnotonlyforPolybiusbutforallancienthistoriography.23Insum,then,wefindthatvividnesscanbeatoolforraisingtheemotions24but,justas(ifnotmore)importantly,itisalsoatoolforinstructionandexplanationbythehistorian.25Thereisnothinginherentlyproblematic(andmuchthatisinherentlybeneficial)withbringingmatters‘beforetheeyes’ofone’sreaders,andthatisnotwhyPhylarchusisbeingfaulted.
Wecomethentoπεριπέτειαι,reversals.ItiswellknownthatforAristotlereversalsarecrucialinhisdefinitionoftragedy,fortheyaretheveryheartofthetragicaction.PolybiusreferstoreversalstwiceinhisattackonPhylarchus,oncewiththeverbπεριπεσειν̑(§6;noteἀτυχήμασιalso),andoncewiththenounitself,τὰςπλείσταςτω̑νπεριπετειω̑ν(§13).ItisthusassumedthatthereversalsofwhichPolybiusspeaksmustbespecificallyAristotelian,andindeedsomescholarshavetranslatedthewordhereas‘tragic’or‘dramaticreversals’.Butisthiswarranted?Theshortansweris‘no’.Foralthoughreversalsoffortuneare,ofcourse,foundintragedy,theyareinnowaythespecialpreserveoftragedy.Theyhadalreadybeenpartofepic—indeed,nodoubt,ofstory-tellingfromitsorigins—andbeginningwithHerodotus,reversalsoffortunebecomethesubject-matterofhistoryaswell:‘forthecitiesthatweregreatinmytimeweresmallonceandthosethataresmallinmytime(p.84) wereoncegreat’(1.5.4).ThucydidestooincorporatesthisnotionintheaccountofthereversalsexperiencedbyAtheniansandSiciliansinhisBooksVIandVII.26Mosttothepoint,however,are
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 11 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybius’ownremarksattheoutsetofhiswork,wherehepraisesthevalueofhistory(1.1.2):
ἀληθινωτάτηνμὲνεἰν̑αιπαιδείανκαὶγυμνασίανπρὸςτὰςπολιτικὰςπράξειςτὴνἐκτη̑ςἱστορίαςμάθησιν,ἐναργεστάτηνδὲκαὶμόνηνδιδάσκαλοντου̑δυνάσθαιτὰςτη̑ςτύχηςμεταβολὰςγενναίωςὑποφέρειντὴντω̑νἀλλοτρίωνπεριπετειω̑νὑπόμνησιν,κτλ.
…thatthetruesteducationandtrainingforthelifeofpoliticalactionisthestudyofhistory,andthattheclearest[ἐναργεστάτην,whichreturnsustoourdiscussionofἐνάργειαabove]andindeedtheonlymethodoflearninghowtobearbravelythevicissitudesoffortuneistherecollectionofthereversalsofothers,etc.
Polybiusgoesontonarratethesechangesoffortunewhichcan,ofcourse,befromgreattosmall,butcanalsobetheotherwayround,asinthecaseoftheprotagonistofPolybius’work,Rome.Sothenarrationofreversalsoffortuneisnotsomethingtobefaulted—PhylarchuswasnotwrongtonarratethefallofMantinea—butrathertheyaretheverysubject-matterofhistory.
Someclarification,however,inthismatterofreversalsisaffordedbyalaterpassagewherePolybiuscomparesthecourtierofPtolemyPhilopator,Agathocles,whomhedeemsaworthlessvillain,withAgathoclesofSicily,whomheconsidersanappropriatepersontostudyandemulate(15.36.1–7):
διὰδὴταύταςτὰςαἰτίαςτὸνμετ’αὐξήσεωςλόγονἀπεδοκιμάσαμενὑπὲρἈγαθοκλέους,οὐχἥκισταδὲκαὶδιὰτὸπάσαςτὰςἐκπληκτικὰςπεριπετείαςμίανἔχεινφαντασίαντὴνπρώτηνἀξίανἐπιστάσεως,τὸδὲλοιπὸνοὐμόνονἀνωφελη̑γίνεσθαιτὴνἀκρόασινκαὶθέαναὐτω̑ν,ἀλλὰκαὶμετάτινοςὀχλήσεωςἐπιτελεισ̑θαιτὴνἐνέργειαντω̑ντοιούτων.δυειν̑�γὰρ�ὑπαρχόντωντελω̑ν,ὠφελείαςκαὶτέρψεως,πρὸςἃδει̑τὴνἀναφορὰνποιεισ̑θαιτοὺςδιὰτη̑ςἀκοη̑ςἢτη̑ςὁράσεωςβουλομένουςτιπολυπραγμονειν̑,καὶμάλιστατῳ̑τη̑ςἱστορίαςγένειτούτουκαθήκοντος,ἀμφοτέρωντούτωνὁπλεονασμὸςὑπὲρτω̑νἐκπληκτικω̑νσυμπτωμάτωνἐκτὸςπίπτει.ζηλου̑νμὲνγὰρτίςἂνβουληθείητὰςπαραλόγουςπεριπετείας;οὐδὲμὴνθεώμενοςοὐδ’ἀκούωνἥδεταισυνεχω̑ςοὐδεὶςτω̑νπαρὰφύσινγενομένωνπραγμάτωνκαὶπαρὰτὴνκοινὴνἔννοιαντω̑νἀνθρώπων.ἀλλ’εἰσάπαξμὲνκαὶπρω̑τονσπουδάζομενἃμὲνἰδειν̑,ἃδ’ἀκου̑σαι,χάριντου̑γνω̑ναιτὸμὴδοκου̑νδυνατὸνεἰν̑αιδιότιδυνατόνἐστιν·ὅτανδὲπιστεύωμεν,οὐδεὶςτοὺςπαρὰφύσινἐγχρονίζωνεὐδοκει·̑τῳ̑δ’αὐτῳ̑πλεονάκιςἐγκυρειν̑οὐδ’ὅλωςἂνβουληθείη.διόπερἢζηλωτὸνεἰν̑αιδει̑τὸλεγόμενονἢτερπνόν·ὁδὲτη̑ςἐκτὸςτούτωνσυμφορα̑ςπλεονασμὸςοἰκειότερόνἐστιτραγῳδίαςἤπερἱστορίας.
ForthesereasonsIrefrainedfromenlargingonthestoryofthisman[Agathoclesthecourtier],andnolessbecauseallsensationalreversalsareworthyofattentiononlywhenfirstpresentedtoourview,butafterwardsitisnotonlyunprofitableto(p.85) readaboutthemandkeepoureyesonthembutsuchanexerciseofourfacultiesproducesacertaindisgust.Forsincetherearetwoobjects,benefitand
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 12 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
pleasure,whichthosewhowishtostudyanysubjecteitherbytheuseoftheirearsortheireyesshouldkeepbeforethem,andsincethisisespeciallytrueofthestudyofhistory,atoogeneroustreatmentofsensationaleventscontributestoneither.Forwhowouldwishtoemulateirrationalchangesoffortune?Noonehasanypermanentpleasureinseeingorreadingofthingswhicharecontrarytonatureandcontrarytothegeneralsentimentofmankind.Itistrueweareinterestedinseeingorhearingofthemonceforallandatfirst,justforthesakeofobservingthatwhatseemedtobeimpossibleispossible,butonceweareconvincedofthisnoonetakesanypleasureindwellingontheunnatural,andthereisnoonewhowouldhavetheleastwishtomeetwithfrequentreferencestothesameeventofthisclass.Thereforewhatistoldusshouldeitherexciteemulationorcausepleasure,andtheelaboratetreatmentofaneventthatdoesneitherissuitablerathertotragedythantohistory.
ThepassageisvaluablebecausePolybiusherespeaksofvariouskindsofreversalsoffortune,onlysomeofwhichheseesasappropriatetohistory.Thosewhicharesensationalorirrationalmustbeconsignedtotherealmoftragedy;thosemoreinaccordwithnatureareworthyofhistory.Again,itisnotreversalsthemselveswhichareproblematic,27butonlycertainkindsofreversalswhichPolybiusseesascharacteristicoftragedy.
Tosumupthisfirstpart,then,wemayreasonablyquestionwhetherPolybiusfoundfaultwithPhylarchusforhisemotionalscenes,forhisvividness,orforhisnarrationofreversalsoffortune.Phylarchus’crimeinPolybius’eyeswasnotthatheemployedthesedevicesbutthathemisusedthem,becauseunderlyingthemallwastheessentialfalsehoodofhisnarrative,sincethesufferingsPhylarchussupposedlydescribeddidnot,accordingtoPolybius,actuallyoccur.
IIFromtheearliestscholarshipon‘tragic’history,ithasbeencustomarytoconnectPolybius’attackonPhylarchuswithAristotle’sPoetics,andindeedseveralscholarshavelaidtheresponsibilityforthephenomenonoftragichistoryatthedoorofthePeripatos.28This‘connection’issupposedlyguaranteedamongotherthingsbythestrongsimilarityofvocabularybetweenthePoeticsandPolybius’characterizationofwhatPhylarchuswasdoing.Onescholarhaseventabulatedthem,29andalthoughhiscollocationsseematfirst(p.86) sightverypersuasive,closerexaminationrevealsthattheyhavebeenmadewithnoregardforcontextineitherPolybiusorAristotle;sufficeittosaythatineverycasethereareproblemswiththecorrelations.30WhatIconsidertobethemosttellingpointisthatPolybiusinhisattackonPhylarchusisnotconcernedwithAristotle’stragicemotionsofpityandfear,butratherwithpityandanger(ἐλεειν̑…ὀργίζεσθαι,2.56.13),emotionswhich,asIhavepointedoutelsewhere,areassociatednotwiththetragicpoetbutwiththeorator.31
SoifPolybiusisnotindialoguewithAristotle’sPoetics,howaretheremarkstobeunderstood?Theybelong,Isubmit,toalong-standingdebate,begunatleastthreecenturiesbeforePolybius,ontheimportanceandvalueofliteratureingeneralandthe
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 13 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
variousgenresinparticular:tragedy,history,butalsoepic,andevencomedy.Aristotle’sPoetics,ofcourse,ispartofthatdebatealthoughwetendtooveremphasizeitsimportancebecauseofitsauthorandbecauseithappenstosurvive.Muchoftheancientdiscussionisconcernedwiththatoldchestnut,thecontrastbetweenpleasureandutility.Putsimply,nowriter,unlessheisbeingsatirical,suggeststhathisworkprovidespleasurebutnotutility.YetintheagonisticsocietyofGreece,itwasacommonmeansofattacktosuggestthatyouropponent’sgenreprovidedpleasurebutnotutility.32
NowEratosthenes,forone,famouslydeniedanyinstructionalvaluetoHomericoranyotherpoetry,notingthat‘everypoetstrivesforentertainment,notinstruction’.33ButthiswasnottheviewofNeoptolemusofParium,atleastasitcanbereconstructedfromBookVofPhilodemus’OnPoets.Neoptolemus,thethird-centurycriticatAlexandriabestknownperhapsfromPorphyrion’sremarkthathisviewswerethesourceofallthemainpreceptsofHorace’sArsPoetica,saidthatpoetryaimedatbringingbenefitalongwithpleasure.34
EvenbeforeNeoptolemus,however,thelate-fifth-orearly-fourth-centurycomicpoetTimoclessawtragedyasprovidingpleasureandinstruction.Inoneofhisplays,acharacterspeaksofthebenefitofpoetry,specificallytragedy:
ὠ̑τα̑ν,ἄκουσονἤντισοιδοκω̑λέγειν.
ἄνθρωπόςἐστιζῳ̑ονἐπίπονονφύσει,
καὶπολλὰλυπήρ’ὁβίοςἐνἑαυτῳ̑φέρει.
(p.87) παραψύχαςοὐ̑νφροντίδωνἀνεύρετο
ταύτας·ὁγὰρνου̑ςτω̑νἰδίωνλήθηνλαβών[5]
πρὸςἀλλοτρίῳτεψυχαγωγηθεὶςπάθει
μεθ’ἡδονη̑ςἀπη̑λθεπαιδευθεὶςἅμα….
ἅπανταγὰρτὰμείζον’ἢπέπονθέτις[17]
ἀτυχήματ’ἄλλοιςγεγονότ’ἐννοούμενος
τὰςαὐτὸςαὑτου̑συμφορὰςἡ̑ττονστένει.
Mygoodman,listen,ifIseemtoyoutosaysomethingworth-while.Manisacreaturebornfortoilsandhislifecarriesmanydistressesinitself.Hehasthereforecontrivedforhimselftheseconsolationsforhisanxiousthoughts.Forhismind,forgettingitsownprivatetroublesandtakingpleasureatthoseofanother,departs[sc.fromthetheatre]inpleasure,whileatthesametimeinstructed….[17]Forinthinkingaboutallthecalamitiesgreaterthanhisownwhichhavehappenedtoothers,hegroanslessathisownmisfortunes.35
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 14 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thisthought—thatpartoftragedy’seducativevalueliesinitsabilitytohelppeoplebeartheirownsufferingsbetterwhentheyseethatother(sometimesgreater)menhavehadtoendurebadfortune—isalsopresupposedbyascholiononthegrammarianDionysiusThrax,which,thoughlaterthanPolybius,ispartofadebatealreadyvisibleinTimocles:36
τραγικοὶδὲὄντεςκαὶθέλοντεςὠφελειν̑κοινῃ̑τοὺςτη̑ςπόλεως,παραλαμβάνοντέςτιναςἀρχαίαςἱστορίαςτω̑νἡρώωνἐχούσαςπάθητινά,ἔσθ’ὅτεκαὶθανάτουςκαὶθρήνους,ἐνθεάτρῳταυ̑ταἐπεδείκνυντοτοις̑ὁρω̑σικαὶἀκούουσιν,ἐνδεικνύμενοιπαραφυλάττεσθαιτὸἁμαρτανειν̑.
Beingtragicpoetsandwishingtobenefitmenofthecitypublicly,theytookupcertainancienthistories[ornarratives]ofheroesthatcontainsufferings,sometimesevendeathsandlamentations,andtheydisplayedthesethingsinthetheatretothoselookingonandlistening,pointingouttothemtobeontheirguardagainstmakingerrors.
Thesufferingsofothersteachushowtobearbetterourownsufferingsandtheyteachushowtoavoidmistakes:arethesenotexactlytheclaimsmadebyhistoriansconcerningthevalueoftheirownwork?WenotedPolybius’openingremarkabove,andDiodorusechoeshiminhisownpreface:
Forbyofferingaschooling,whichentailsnodanger,inwhatisadvantageousthey[sc.historians]providetheirreaders,throughsuchapresentationofevents,withamostexcellentkindofexperience.37
(p.88) Yetherewastragedyclaimingtheverysamething.Howthenwashistorytoshowitssuperiority?Although,asWalbanklongagopointedout,tragedyandhistoryhadcommonrootsinepic,38tragedydevelopedearlierthanhistory,anditsprestigewasgreater.TheHellenisticworld,moreover,sawarevivalofinterestinhistoricaltragedy,perhapsbestrepresentedbyMoschion,activeinthesecondhalfofthethirdcentury,andauthorofaThemistoclesandaPeopleofPherae,thelatteraplayaboutthemurderofthetyrantAlexanderin358atthehandsofhiswifeandherbrothers.39Withtragedymoreprestigiousandsharingthesubject-matterofhistory,thehistorians,notsurprisingly,hadrecoursetoalineofcriticismthatquestioneditstruth-value.
Nowitsohappensthattherewereseveralschoolsofthoughtinantiquityonthenatureoftragedy:somecriticsclassifieditashistory(ἱστορία,historia)forthesamereasonsasepicwasthoughttobe,i.e.becauseitssubjectswereconsideredhistoricalpeople;othersasfiction(πλα̑σμα,argumentum);stillothersasmyth(μυ̑θοςorfabula).40Intwoofthethreecategories,truthwasabsent,sinceπλα̑σμαwasdefinedassomethingthatwasprobablebuthadnotactuallyhappened,whileμυ̑θοςwasimprobableandhadneverhappened.
Historians,notsurprisingly,werekeentoremovetragedyfromanyprivilegedrelationshiptotruth,andintheirattemptstheyfoundanunusualallyinthecomicpoets,forwhomthereisevidencetosuggestthattheyoftencriticizedtragedyincomparison
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 15 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
withtheirowngenre.Suchcriticismappearsinawell-knownfragmentfromAntiphanes’Ποίησις,writtenprobablyinthemid-fourthcentury.Thespeakercontraststheeaseofwritingtragedywiththedifficultyofwritingcomedy:thetragedianhashisplotandcharacterstohand,whilethecomedianmustinventitallandmakeitprobableandconvincing:
μακάριόνἐστινἡτραγῳδία
ποίημακατὰπαντ’,εἴγεπρω̑τονοἱλόγοι
ὑπὸτω̑νθεατω̑νεἰσινἐγνωρισμένοι,
πρὶνκαὶτιν’εἰπειν̑·ὥσθ’ὑπομνη̑σαιμόνον
(p.89) δει̑τὸνποητήν.Οἰδιπου̑νγ’ἂνφῃ̑�μόνον�[5]
τὰδ’ἄλλαπαντ’ἴσασιν·ὁπατὴρΛάιος,
μήτηρἸοκάστη,θυγατέρες,παιδ̑εςτίνες,
τίπείσεθ’οὑ̑τος,τίπεπόηκεν.ἂνπάλιν
εἴπῃτιςἈλκμέωνα,καὶτὰπαιδία
πάντ’εὐθὺςεἴρηχ’,ὅτιμανεὶςἀπέκτονε[10]
τὴνμητέρ’,ἀγανακτω̑νδ’Ἄδραστοςεὐθέως
ἥξειπάλιντ’ἄπεισι[…………]
ἔπειθ’ὅτανμηθὲνδύνωντ’εἰπειν̑ἔτι,
κομιδῃ̑δ’ἀπειρήκωσινἐντοις̑δράμασιν,
αἴρουσινὥσπερδάκτυλοντὴνμηχανήν,[15]
καὶτοις̑θεωμένοισινἀποχρώντωςἔχει.
ἡμιν̑δὲταυ̑τ’οὐκἔστιν,ἀλλὰπάνταδει ̑
εὑρειν̑,ὀνόματακαινά,[…………]
[…………]κἄπειτατὰδιῳχημένα
πρότερον,τὰνυ̑νπαρόντα,τὴνκαταστροφήν,[20]
τὴνεἰσβολήν.ἂνἕντιτούτωνπαραλίπῃ
ΧρέμηςτιςἢΦείδωντις,ἐκσυρίττεται·
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 16 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Πηλει̑δὲπαντ’ἔξεστικαὶΤεύκρῳποειν̑.
Tragedyisfortunateineveryrespect,sincefirstofallthestoriesarewellknowntotheaudienceevenbeforeacharacterspeaks.Andsothepoetmustsimplyremindthem.Forifthepoetmerelysays,‘Oedipus’,theyknowalltherest.HisfatherLaius,hismotherJocasta,whohisdaughtersandsonswere,whathewillsuffer,whathehasdone.If,inturn,onesaysAlcmeon,straightawayhehasmentionedallhischildren,andthatinamaddenedstatehekilledhismother;andAdrastus,beingaggrieved,straightawaywillcomeandthendepart[somewordsmissing].Andthen,whenthepoetscansaynomore,andtheyarealtogetherexhaustedintheirdramas,theyraisethecrane,likethefinger[sc.ofadefeatedathlete],andthespectatorsaresatisfied.Butwe[sc.comicpoets]cannotdothesethings;wemust,onthecontrary,inventeverything—newnames[somewordsmissing]andwhathashappenedbefore,thecurrentsituation,theoutcome,theprologue.IfaChremesoraPheidon[i.e.acomiccharacter]leavesoutanyoneofthesepoints,heishissedoffthestage;butaPeleusoraTeucercandoanything.41
Especiallyimportanthereisthemetaphor(13–16)ofraisingthecraneandcontrivinganimprobableending,preciselythesamechargewesawaboveusedbyPolybiusinhisattackontheHannibalhistorians.Thisnotionthatthetragicpoet’scharactersarenotboundbyprobability,muchlesstruth,isalsoechoedbyAntiphanes’slightlyyoungercontemporary,Diphilus,whenhespeaksof‘thetragicpoets…whoaloneareatlibertytosayanddoanything.’42
Suchanattackontragedyprovidedforthehistoriansaplacewherethegenrewasvulnerabletocriticism.Ifsomeclaimed—astheydid—thatthevalueof(p.90) tragedywasitsabilitytoportrayhumanreversalsandtoimpartunderstandingtotheaudience,thenthosewhodefendedhistoryclaimedinoppositionthathistorywassuperiortotragedybecauseitcontainedrealevents,notinvented,fictive,ormythicones,andassuchitaloneprovidedrealmodelsforconsolationoremulation.AndsoforPolybius,thosewho,likePhylarchus,inventedthingscrossedoverintotherealmoftragedy,aworldoffalsehoodsandimprobabilitiesfromwhichthereadercouldderivenobenefitorlearning.
Ourre-examinationofPolybius’attackonPhylarchushascalledintoquestionsomeoftheacceptedwisdomontragichistory,andonPolybiusaswell.ThesupposedcharacteristicsoftragichistorycannotbejustifiedfromacontextualreadingofPolybius,andinpracticefalltotheground:allgoodhistorians—includingPolybius—soughttoraisetheirreaders’emotions;toportrayeventswithvividnesssothattheiraudiencecouldvisualizethem;andtonarratereversalsoffortune,fromwhichhumanbeingscouldlearn.43WhenPolybiusaccusessomeoneofwriting‘tragically’,heisreferringprincipallytothefalsehood,thenon-factuality,oftheaccount,ortothemechanicalandimprobablewayinwhichanauthorresolvesdifficultiesorcontradictionsinhisnarrative(itselfaresultofbuildingonfalseorimprobablebeginnings).
Inaddition,Polybius’criticismofPhylarchusshouldbeseennotinanarrowdialogue
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 17 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
withAristotle’sPoeticsbutratherasacontributiontotheongoingdebateinantiquityconcerningthepurposeandvalueofthedifferentgenres.44WalbankpointedoutlongagothatitwasHomertowhomthehistoriansandtragediansbothlooked,andwhoprovidedthemodelsthattheyneeded:fromthegreatpoettheycouldlearnhowtostructureascene;howtobringvividnesstotheiraccounts;andhowtocreateanimpressiveemotionalnarrative.45Polybiuswasawareofthis,ofcourse,andhisattackonPhylarchuswaspartofhisattempttoasserttheclaimsofhistoryasamorevaluableendeavourthantragedybecauseofhistory’scloserelationshiptotruth,i.e.toreallife.Inthiswayhewaspartakingofafarlargerand,inmanyways,farmoreinterestinganddynamicdebateinantiquityontheimportanceofallliterature,bothfactualandfictional.46
Notes:
(1)Thescholarshipontragichistoryisvast;foritshistorytotheearly1970sseeMeister1975:109–26,towhichadd:Sacks1981:144–70,Fornara1983:124–34,Zucchelli1985,Pauw1986,Gray1987,Vegetti1989,Meister1990:95–101,Rebenich1997,esp.269–70,Pédech1989:368–466,Leigh1997:30–40,Canfora1999,Fromentin2001,Moles2001,Halliwell2002:289–92,Marincola2003,Zangara2007:70–85,Marincola2009,McGing2010:71–5.Walbank’sworkonthisissue—asalways,amodelofgoodjudgement—canbefoundinWalbank,HCPi.259–63,andWalbank1960a.
(2)Arist.,Poetics9,1451a38–b5,esp.theremarkἡμὲνγὰρποίησιςμα̑λλοντὰκαθόλου,ἡδὲἱστορίατὰκαθ’ἕκαστονλέγει.
(3)Itwouldbefruitlesstodocumenteachoftheseitemsindividually;cf.Meister1990:85–91andRebenich1997:269–70forrepresentativeapproaches.Formoreonπεριπέτειαι,seeBeckinthisvolume.
(4)Esp.DurisofSamos,FGrHist76F1;Diod.20.43.7;andCic.Fam.5.12.
(5)FormoreonAratus,seeMeadowsinthisvolume.
(6)ThetranslationsofPolybiushereandelsewherearemodified(sometimessubstantially)fromtheLoeb;forBooksI–IVIusetherevisedversionbyFrankWalbankandChristianHabicht.
(7)OnPhylarchus’‘womanish’disposition,seeMarincolaforthcoming.
(8)Plb.2.56.2:ἵναμὴτὸψευ̑δοςἐντοις̑συγγράμμασινἰσοδυναμου̑νἀπολείπωμενπρὸςτὴνἀλήθειαν.AlreadyrecognizedbyFromentin2001:85.
(9)Plb.2.58.1–15,esp.10–12;wemustleaveaside,ofcourse,whetherornotPolybiusisbeinghonestinhiscriticismofPhylarchus;fortheevidencethatPolybiusinpolemicisnotalwaystobetrustedseeWalbank1962;cf.McGing2010:71–4forthispassageinparticular.
(10)Thuc.1.22.2:‘ButthedeedsofthewarIdeemeditworthytowriteupnotfromanychanceinformantnorhowitseemedtome(οὐκἐκτου̑παρατυχόντος…οὐδ’ὡςἐμοὶ
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 18 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ἐδόκει),butbygoingthroughwithaccuracyoneachmatter,bothforthoseatwhichIwaspresentandthosewhichIheardfromothers.’
(11)Plb.5.26.9:γενομένηςδὲτη̑ςεἰσόδουτραγικη̑ςδιὰτὸπλη̑θοςτω̑νἀπαντησάντωνἡγεμόνωνκαὶστρατιωτω̑ν,κτλ.Walbank,HCPi.559translatesτη̑ςεἰσόδουτραγικη̑ςas‘entryinpomp’.
(12)Plb.38.8.6:ὁδὲ[Hasdrubal]πάλινἐξεπορεύετομετὰμεγάληςἀξίαςἐντῃ̑πορφυρίδικαὶτῃ̑πανοπλίᾳβάδην,ὥστετοὺςἐνταις̑τραγῳδίαιςτυράννουςπολύτιπροσοφείλειν.
(13)Plb.5.48.9:ἐξὡ̑νσυνέβαινετραγικὴνκαὶπαρηλλαγμένηνφαίνεσθαιτου̑ῥεύματοςτὴνφαντασίανὡςἂνὁμου̑τοις̑νηχομένοιςφερομένωνἵππων,ὑποζυγίων,ὅπλων,νεκρω̑ν,ἀποσκευη̑ςπαντοδαπη̑ς.
(14)15.36.1–7,quotedbelow,pp.84–5.
(15)SeeMarincola2003,wherefurtherevidenceandargumentsareadduced.
(16)Fortheraisedemotionaltoneofhistoriographicalpolemic,seeMarincola1997:218–24.
(17)Plb.38.21–2,esp.21.3:ἀνδρὸς…μεγάλουκαὶτελείουκαὶσυλλήβδηνἀξίουμνήμης.
(18)Plut.deglor.Ath.347A:…καὶτω̑νἱστορικω̑νκράτιστοςὁτὴνδιήγησινὥσπεργραφὴνπάθεσικαὶπροσώποιςεἰδωλοποιήσας.ὁγου̑νΘουκυδίδηςἀεὶτῳ̑λόγῳπρὸςταύτηνἁμιλλα̑ταιτὴνἐνάργειαν,οἱο̑νθεατὴνποιη̑σαιτὸνἀκροατὴνκαὶτὰγινόμεναπερὶτοὺςὁρω̑νταςἐκπληκτικὰκαὶταρακτικὰπάθητοις̑ἀναγινώσκουσινἐνεργάσασθαιλιχνευόμενος.FormoreonἐνάργειαseeZanker1981,Walker1993,Newman2002,andZangara2007:55–69.
(19)Davidson1991;forcharactersholdingorkeepingthings‘beforetheireyes’asawayofvisualizingthemintenselyseePlb.2.35.8;3.6.13;5.11.7;5.54.3;15.10.2;15.11.5;15.11.8;20.9.1;22.8.11,andpassim.
(20)Cf.Polybius’interestintopography,whichiscertainlytobeconnectedwithhisinterestinvisualization.
(21)Thuc.1.22.4:‘Andinthehearingperhapsthelackofamythicelement(τὸμὴμυθω̑δες)willperhapsappearlesspleasurable(ἀτερπέστερον).Butitwillbesufficientifallthosewhowillwishtoexaminetheclarityofthethingsthathavehappenedandthatwillagainhappeninthesameorsimilarwaysinaccordancewithhumannature(τω̑ντεγενομένωντὸσαφὲςσκοπειν̑καὶτω̑νμελλόντωνποτὲαὐ̑θιςκατὰτὸἀνθρώπινοντοιούτωνκαὶπαραπλησίωνἔσεσθαι)judgethisuseful(ὠφέλιμακρίνειν).’SeeS.Hornblower1987:102,Woodman1988:23–7,Kallet2006,esp.360–3.
(22)Schepens1975.
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 19 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(23)Schepens1980,Marincola1997:63–86.
(24)Fortheconnectionbetweenἐνάργειαandemotion,seeZangara2007:55–89.
(25)Notethat‘clarity’isintroducedrightatthebeginningofthehistory:1.1.2,quotedbelow,p.84.
(26)SeeRood1999.
(27)ThenounπεριπέτειαandverbπεριπίπτωareextremelycommoninPolybius,seeMauersbergers.vv.
(28)Seeesp.vonFritz1958.
(29)Zegers1959:6.
(30)SeeFromentin2001:85;Marincola2009.
(31)Marincola2003:301.
(32)Onecanevenseethediscussioninintragenericterms,e.g.inPlb.9.1–2,wherePolybiussuggeststhatdifferenttypesofhistorybringdifferenttypesofpleasureandutility.(IthankBruceGibsonforremindingmeofthispassage.)
(33)Eratosthenesap.Strabo1.2.3:ποιητὴν…πάνταστοχάζεσθαιψυχαγωγίας,οὐδιδασκαλίας.
(34)Philod.OnPoemsV.col.xiii(xvi)9–14:…τῳ̑τελείῳποιητῃ̑μετὰτη̑ςψυχαγωγίαςτὴντω̑νἀκουόντωνὠφέλησινκαὶχρησιμολογίανκαὶτὸνὍμηρον…‘…fortheperfectpoetalongwithhisentertainingqualitiestobenefithishearersandtellthemusefulthings,andthatHomer(bothpleasesandprofits?)…’ThetranslationisthatofDavidArmstrong.
(35)Timocles,F6.1–7,17–19K–A.Line19isalsorecordedasτὰςαὐτὸςαὐτου̑συμφορὰςῥᾷονφέρει(‘hehimselfbearsmoreeasilyhisownmisfortunes’):seeK-Aadloc.(vii.758–9);seealsoOlson2007:170onthedevelopmentofthoughtfromtheearlierlinestothelater.
(36)Schol.inDion.Thracem,p.746.1.Dionysiuswasbornc.180BC,onlytwentyyearsorsoafterPolybius.
(37)Diod.1.1.1:ἀκίνδυνονγὰρδιδασκαλίαντου̑συμφέροντοςεἰσηγησάμενοικαλλίστηνἐμπειρίανδιὰτη̑ςπραγματείαςταύτηςπεριποιου̑σιτοις̑ἀναγινώσκουσιν.
(38)Walbank1960a.
(39)Moschion'sThemistocles:TGrFi,97F1;hisPheraioi:ibid.F3.OnHellenistictragedy,seeSchramm1929,Easterling1993and1997,FantuzziandHunter2004:432–7.
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 20 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(40)Tragedyashistory:Schol.inDion.Thracem,p.173.3–4:ἡμὲντραγω̑δίαἱστορίανἔχεικαὶἀπαγγελίανπράξεωνγενομένων,κτλ.Cf.Asclepiadesap.Sext.Emp.Math.1.253:τη̑ςδὲἀληθου̑ς[sc.ἱστορίας]τρίαπάλινμέρη·ἡμὲνγὰρἐστιπερὶτὰπρόσωπαθεω̑νκαὶἡρώωνκαὶἀνδρω̑νἐπιφανω̑ν.ἡδὲπερὶτοὺςτόπουςκαὶχρόνους.ἡδὲπερὶτὰςπράξεις.(‘Andoftruehistoryagaintherearethreeparts:onesortisthataboutthepersonsofgodsandheroesandnotablemen,anotheraboutplacesandtimes,thethirdaboutactions.’).
Tragedyasfiction:Herm.Progymn.4.16Rabe:πλασματικὸνδιήγημα,ὃκαὶδραματικὸνκαλου̑σιν,οἱα̑τὰτω̑ντραγικω̑ν(‘fictionalnarrative,whichtheyalsocall“dramatic”,suchastheworksoftragicpoets’).
Tragedyasmyth:[Cic.]Rhet.Her.1.13:fabulaestquaenequeuerasnequeuerisimilescontinetres,uteaesuntquaetragoedistraditaesunt(‘themythicaltalecompriseseventsthatareneithertruenorprobable,likethosehandeddownintragedies’).
(41)Antiphanes,F189K–A(ii.418–19);IhaveusedthetextofOlson2007:154–5.
(42)Diphilus,F29.4–5K–A(v.65):οἱτραγωιδοὶ…οἱς̑ἐξουσία|ἔστινλέγεινἅπαντακαὶποιειν̑μόνοις.
(43)SeeMcGing2010:72–4forabriefbutgooddiscussionofdramaticandemotionalscenesinPolybius’history.HenotestherethatPolybius’truthisnotnecessarilyours.
(44)Cf.Zucchelli1985(aworkIshouldhavecitedinMarincola2009)onthecomplicatednatureofPolybius’relationshiptoAristotle.
(45)Walbank1960a.
(46)EarlierversionsofthispaperweregiveninOxford,Cambridge,TelAviv,Austin,Leeds,Providence,andDublin.Ithanktheaudiencesthereforstimulatingandhelpfulcomments.IthankalsotheparticipantsintheconferenceatLiverpool,especiallyArtEcksteinandJohnRich,forstimulatingdiscussionoftheissuesinvolvedhere;andalsoBruceGibson,whomadeanumberofveryhelpfulsuggestions.Noneofthesepeopleshouldnecessarilybethoughttoagreewiththeconclusionsofthispaper.
Polybius, Phylarchus, and ‘Tragic History’: A Reconsideration
Page 21 of 21
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 1 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
Polybius,Aratus,andtheHistoryofthe140thOlympiad
AndrewMeadows
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0004
AbstractandKeywords
ThischapterreassessesPolybius'claimthathewasacontinuatorofthememoirsofAratusofSicyon,whichendedattheendofthe139thOlympiadinAugust220BC.ExaminationofPolybius'narrativeofAchaeanaffairsandtheSocialWarinGreeceintheyearsthatfollowed220infactrevealsacomplexityofsourcematerial.Thisisevident,forexample,inPolybius'puzzlingnarrativeoftwoAetolianinvasionsinthecampaigningseasonof220BC;thetwoinvasionsarebetterseenasadoubletreflectingtheaccountsofasingleAetolianinvasiongivenbytwoseparatesources.Likewise,thepresenceofextensivepro-Arateanmaterialintheperiodbeginningwiththewintersolsticeof219BCsuggeststhatPolybiusmaywellhavebeenusingunpublishedmaterialwrittenbyAratusforthissectionofhisnarrative.
Keywords:Polybius,AratusofSicyon,sourcecriticism,SocialWar,Achaeanleague,Aetolianleague,PhilipV,Macedonia
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 2 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
BeforePolybiustherewasAratus.Thisistruehistoricallyandhistoriographically.ButitisalsotrueofthecareerofFrankWalbank.BeforeHCPtherewasAratosofSicyon.AtanumberoflevelsitseemsappropriatetocelebratethepublicationofthefirstvolumeofthegreatcommentarydevotedtoBooks1–6oftheHistorieswithanexaminationofthecomplexrelationshipbetweenPolybiusandhispredecessor.Morespecifically,IamparticularlycuriousabouttheplacethatAratus’MemoirsoccupyinPolybius’ownarticulationofhisstarting-point,aswellasinhissubsequentnarrativeofAchaeanaffairs.
InwhatfollowsIshallattempttoshowthatPolybiuswasusingAratusashissourceforlongerthanhasgenerallybeensupposed,andindeedforlongerthanPolybiushimselfstates.IndoingsoIshallsuggestthatPolybius’accountofeventsinGreeceduringthe140thOlympiadisinfactbadlymuddledasaresultofhismishandlingofmultiplesourcesforthesameevents.Theresultingaccount,particularlyofthewarfareinthePeloponnesein220BC,willemergeasquiteimplausible.IconcludebyofferinganexplanationforwhyPolybiuspresentedhisrelationshipwithAratusashedid,andsuggestingwhatthismaytellusconcerningPolybius’intentionsatthisearlystageofhiswork.
PolybiusintroducesustoAratus’Memoirsattheverybeginningofhisfirstbook,whereheoffersanexplanationforhisdecisiontobeginhishistoryproperatthe140thOlympiad:
MyHistorybeginsinthe140thOlympiad.Theeventsfromwhichitstartsarethese:amongtheGreeks,whatiscalledtheSocialwar,thefirstwagedbyPhilip,sonofDemetriusandfatherofPerseus,withtheAchaeansagainsttheAetolians;amongthosewhoinhabitAsia,thewarofCoele-SyriawhichAntiochusandPtolemyPhilopatorfoughtagainsteachother;intheareaofItalyandLibyathe(p.92) warbetweenRomeandCarthage,whichmostcalltheHannibalicwar.TheseeventsarecontinuouswiththelasteventsintheworkofAratusofSicyon.1
Thewatershed,asdescribedhere,iscreatedbytheconfluenceoftheSocialWarofPhilipandtheAchaeansagainsttheAetolians,theFourthSyrianWarbetweenAntiochusIIIandPtolemyIV,andtheSecondPunicWarbetweentheRomansandCarthaginians.2Inhistoriographicalterms,Polybiusalsodefinesthisperiodasfollowingonfromtheendoftheaccount(Syntaxis)ofAratusofSicyon.ForWalbank,thisisasignthatPolybiusisinsertinghimselfwithinthehistoriographicaltraditionof‘continuation’.3
AftertheprokataskeuēofBooks1and2,andhisbooklengthaccountoftheeventsinSpainandItalyinthe140thOlympiad(Book3),Polybiusturnstotheeast,andbeginsBook4withanotherjustificationofhisstarting-pointinOlympiad140,or220BC:
brieflysummarisingtheeventsincludedinmyprokataskeuēuptothedeathsofAntigonus,Seleucus,andPtolemy,sincetheyalldiedataboutthesametime,IannouncedthatIwasbeginningwiththeeventsimmediatelyfollowingthese.Ithoughtthiswasthebestpoint,firstbecausetheaccountofAratuscomestoanendatthisperiod,andIhaddecidedtotakeuptheaccountfromthispointandprovideacontinuationforGreekaffairs;andsecondly,becausetheperiodofmy
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 3 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
historywouldfallpartlyinourgenerationandpartlythatofourfathers;andthusIshouldbeabletospeakaseye-witnessofsomeoftheevents,andfromtheinformationofeye-witnessesforothers.WereItogofurtherbackintimeandwritethereportofareport,IdonotthinkIwouldseemreliable,eitherinmyinferencesormyassertions.But,aboveall,IbeganatthisperiodbecauseitwasthenthatTychewasbeginningtoremaketheworldanew.4
(p.93) Havingexplained(4.1.9)thathehassummarizedeventsuptothedeathsofAntigonosDoson(221),SeleucusIII(223),andPtolemyEuergetes(222),herecallsthepromisetobeginhishistoryimmediatelyafterthis,firstbecauseAratus’accountendswiththesetimes;secondlybecauseitcoincideswithhisownandtheprecedinggeneration;butmostofallbecauseTychewasremakingtheworldafresh,ἀπὸτούτων…τω̑νκαιρω̑ν.AgainwenotetheemphasisthatisplacedontheendofAratus’Syntaxis.ItmayindeedhavebeenconventionalbythesecondcenturyBCforahistoriantoestablishhimselfasacontinuerofapreviouswriter,buttwothingsaboutPolybius’prominentlyexpressedchoiceofAratusas‘continuedauthor’strikemeasodd.
First,itisintriguingthatPolybius,whosehistoriographicalconceptionofanaccountoftheriseofRome’spowercomprisedaninterweaving(συμπλοκή)ofregionalhistoriesintoasingleworkwithageographicalsweepfromSpaintoEgyptandSyria,5shouldhavecasthimselfasthecontinueroftheworkofAratus,atleastasthelatter’sworkisconventionallyenvisioned.Aratus’work,twicereferredtoherebyPolybiuswiththesomewhatneutraltermSyntaxis,iselsewheredescribedbyhimasπερὶτω̑νἰδίων…πράξεωνὑπομνηματισμούς(2.40.4 = FGrHist231T3)orhypomnemata(2.47.11 = FGrHist231T5),andbyPlutarchasHypomnemata.6ThetitlethesebooksarecommonlygiveninEnglishisMemoirs,andtheyhavesometimesbeencitedasanearlyformofautobiography.7Certainly,theyseemunlikelytohavebeenanaccountoftheoecumene,whosehistoryPolybiuswasnowtakingup.
Secondly,Polybius—andothers—hadarathermixedopinionbothofthemanand,insomecases,ofhiswork.ForPolybius,theaccountofAratus’owndeedsinhisMemoirscouldbeclearandaccurate(2.40.4:λίανἀληθινοὺςκαὶσαφεις̑),butattimesAratus’ownpositionintheeventshenarratedcouldresultinobfuscation,oromissionofimportantdetailsaltogether.8Elsewhere,PolybiusexpresseshisdisapprovalofrelianceonHypomnemataaloneas(p.94) historicalsources(Plb.12.25e.5–7).Ofthemanhimself,PolybiusgivesusaforthrightassessmentinBook4,Chapter8.Insummary,hewasanexcellentpolitician:agoodspeaker,clearthinker,couldhandlefellowpoliticians,andacleverwheeleranddealer.Butthesameman,whenoncampaign,wasslow-witted,timid,andcowardly,anassessmentsharedbyPlutarch,whoaddsthedetail‘thatwhenevertheAchaeangeneralpreparedforbattle,hisbowelslosttheirretentivefaculty;thatwhenthetrumpetsounded,hiseyesgrewdimandhisheadgiddy;andthatwhenhehadgiventheword,heusedtoaskhislieutenantsandotherofficerswhatfurtherneedtherecouldbeofhim,sincethediewascast,andwhetherhemightnotretire,andwaittheeventofthedayatsomedistance’(Plut.Aratus,29.7).
Justasthereweretwosidestohischaracter,sothereweretwosidestohisMemoirs,
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 4 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
which,asaconsequenceofthetrophiesthatlitteredthePeloponnesecommemoratinghisdefeats(Plb.4.8.6),apparentlycontainedmuchapologetic,omissionoffact,andmanipulationofdetail.Itwasnot,then,forhisreputationorthescopeofhiswritingsthatPolybiusheldupAratusasthemanhewasfollowing.
SoinwhatsensewasPolybiusacontinuerofAratus?AnddidhishistoryindeedstartwhereAratus’Memoirsended?Thelatterquestionrequirescloserexaminationthanithashithertoreceivedand,inansweringit,wemaycomesomewhatclosertoansweringtheformer.
Ithasgenerallybeenassumed,onthebasisofthetwopassagesofPolybiusquotedabove,9thattheMemoirsofAratusstoppedin220BC,ifnotearlier.So,forWalbank,‘Aratus’MemoirsdidnotdescendbeyondtheaccessionofPhilipV’,10whileJacobydeducedthattheyran‘biszumendedesKleomenischenKrieges’,suggestingthattheBattleofSellasiamarkedasuitablepointforAratustosignoff.11ForErringtontheMemoirs‘endedbeforePolybius’fourthbookbegins’.12Whicheverofthesestopping-pointsweaccept,theassumptionthathasbeenmadeisthatPolybiusisacontinuerofAratusinthesamesense,say,asXenophonisofThucydides.Tobesure,PolybiususedAratusasasourceforhisaccountoftheCleomeneanWarinBook2,andexplicitlyacknowledgesthatfact.Butafter220BC,theassumptionhasbeenthattheMemoirswerenolongeravailable,andPolybius’sourcesfortheSocialWar,whichbeganinthatyear,weredifferentandarenowobscure.
This,Ithink,isanassumptionthatcanbechallengedattwolevels.First,wemustexaminethecontextofPolybius’statementsaboutthecontinuationof(p.95) Aratus;secondly,wemusttakeacloserlookatPolybius’narrative.Inhisfirststatement(Plb.1.3.1–2),Polybiuscitesthreewarsashisstarting-point,thefirstofwhichbeganin220BC,theothersin219BC.Itisthesethings(ταυ̑τα)—notetheplural—thatcontinuefromthefinalparts(τοις̑τελευταίοις)—noteagaintheimpreciseplural—ofAratus’Syntaxis.Inthesecondpassagethingsbecomeevenmorevague,andPolybiusisclearlyself-consciousabouttheloosenessofthesesynchronisms.Againwenotethevaguepluralofπερὶτοὺςαὐτοὺςκαιρούς(4.1.9).Inthehistoricaleventshealightsupon,thereasonforthisisclearenough.AntigonusDosondiedin221,SeleucusCeraunusin223,andPtolemyEuergetesin222.ItwasthusoveraperiodofmorethantwoyearsthatFortune(Tύχη)hadbuilttheworldafresh.Infact,indescribingtherefreshingoftheworldin4.2.5–11,PolybiusgoesontoexpandhisgeographicalhorizonsbeyondthesethreeHellenisticmonarchiesandbeyondtheperiod223–1.Obviously,thereisnoonepointintimeatwhichallthingsbegantochange.Polybius’pointisthatthedeathsofthevariousmonarchsallhappenedinthe139thOlympiadandleduptowarsthatbeganinthe140th.Butinthisgeneralchronologicallandscape,wemustbecautiousaboutpositingapreciseend-pointforAratus’Memoirs.Polybiusisstretchingchronologyinthesepassagestoproduceaneffect.Moreover,givenPolybius’ownorganizationofbooksbyOlympiad,evenifAratus’workhadfinishedinthemiddleofayear,oreven,say,three-quartersofthewaythroughanOlympiad,thelikelihoodisprobablyagainstPolybiushavingworriedaboutasmalltime-lagoroverlap.
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 5 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
So,atonelevel,Polybius’ownstatementscannotbeusedtodefinetheend-pointofAratus’narrative.AmoredetailedlookatPolybius’ownnarrativeofthe140thOlympiadmakesitalmostcertain,tomymind,thatPolybiuswasusingAratusasasourceafterthepointatwhichtheMemoirshavetraditionallybeenthoughttoend,andthattherelationshipbetweentheHistoriesandtheMemoirs,atleastwithinthisOlympiad,ismorecomplexthancontinuation.Toclarifythis,itwillbenecessarytotakeafairlydetailedlookattheaccountofAchaeanaffairsandtheSocialWaracrossBooks4and5,whicharebrokenupbyPolybiusinto3sections(Table1).
Toanticipateoneconclusion,furtherexaminationofthesethreesectionsshowseachofthemtobeofafundamentallyseparatenature.Thisemergesmostclearlyifweconsidertheminreverseorder.
Section3(Plb.5.91–105.3)Thelastandshortestofthethree(5.91.1–5.105.3)dealswiththeeventsoftheseasonof217fromearlysummer(theentranceofAratustotheAchaeanstrategia)downtothePeaceofNaupactusintheautumn,anddisplaysin(p.96)
Table1.AsummaryofaffairstreatedinBooks4and5Book4 1–2 Introduction:ReasonsforbeginningwithOlympiad140
13–37 OriginsoftheSocialWar:itscoursetillspring21938–52 SituationofByzantium;herWaragainstRhodesandBithynia53–55 EventsinCrete;CnossianHegemony;DestructionofLyttus56 MithridatesofPontosattacksSinope;RhodianHelp(?220)2a57–87 TheSocialWar:Eventsof219andfollowingwinter
Book5 2b1–30.7 TheSocialWar:eventsof21830.8–57 RevoltsinEgypt
Molon’srebellionagainstAntiochus(222–220)58–87 TheFourthSyrianWar(219–217)
ContemporaryeventsinAsiaMinor(79–87Antiochus’campaignsof217;BattleofRaphia)
88–90 TheRhodianEarthquake391–105.3 Campaignsof217inGreece:endoftheSocialWar105.4–10 EventsofGreece,Italy,andAfricalinkedtogether106–107 Eventsof217/16inGreece,EgyptandSyria108–111 ActivitiesofPhilipandPrusiasin217/16
microcosmthemovementthatistakingplaceintheHistoriesasawholeatthispoint:thesymploke,orweavingtogetherofdisparatestrands.13TheactivitiesofAchaeans(5.91–5),Aetolians(5.95–6),andMacedonians(5.97–101)aretoldinturn,culminatinginthesceneatArgos(5.101.6),whereRomeiswovenintoo.Forobviousreasons,thissection
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 6 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
oftheSocialWarnarrativedisplaystheleastunityoffocus.
TheAchaeanpart(5.91–5.95)hasadistinctlyofficialringtoit:inthelatterhalfofchapter91PolybiusprovidesaparaphraseofanAchaeandecree(δόγμα);14inchapter93theargumentsofadebateatMegalopolisoverfortificationsandconstitutionarerecalled(togetherwithAratus’contribution)andtheinscriptionoftheresolutionmentioned(5.93.10).Attheendofchapter94thenewsoffinancialsuccessonthehighseasprovokesthereactionthatthearmybecameconfidentofitspay,andthecitiesoftheirfinancialpositions,andsinceatthebeginningofthechapterAratushaddepartedtoasynodos,15itseemsmostplausibletoassumethatthereactionwasfeltatthatmeetingandthestoryrecountedinchapter94recordedintheofficialrecords.ThenarrativeoftheIllyrianandAetolianmovementsinchapter95mightalso(p.97) infactderivefromofficialAchaeansources.Thepatternissimilartothenarrativestructureofchapters91and92:hostileactivityfollowedbyAchaean(Aratus’)responses.Soinchapter95,hostileactivityisfollowedbyAchaeanresponses—weareeventoldthelocationofthestrategos(5.95.5),althoughhetakesnopartinthesubsequentaction.
ThesourcesforthetwostoriesabouttheAetoliansinchapter96areunrecoverable.TheepisodesarelinkedbytheinvolvementinbothoftheAetolianstrategosAgetas;thebiasiscertainlyanti-Aetolian,butthiscould,ofcourse,bePolybius’owncontribution.
TheactivitiesofPhiliponhiswaydownthroughThessalyandcentralGreece(chapters97–101)areperhapstobeattributedtooneofthe‘writersofmonographsonPhilip’thatPolybiusispresumedtohaveturnedtofromtimetotime.16Philip’smovementsandtheirtimingsarerecordedwithsomeattentiontodetail(e.g.5.97.3–5,5.100.1,5.100.4),thoughspicedupwithcharacteristicPolybiandidactic(5.98.1–11).In5.101.5PhilipfinallyarrivesinArgosfortheNemeangames,perhapsinJuneorJuly,where,aswehavealreadybeentold,Aratuswaswaiting(5.95.5).17Thus,whenthenewsoftheRomandefeatatTrasimenearrivedandPhilipsoughtadvicefromhisphiloi,Aratuswasamongthem.Indeed,fromthedescriptionofthemeetingandPhilip’sreaction,Aratus’adviceemergesasthecatalystfortheking’sdesiretonegotiate(5.102.2–4).TheAchaeanstrategoshasresumedhisplacecentre-stageatthiskeysceneintheHistories,evenupstagingthecolourfulDemetrius,whohadbeenfirsttohearthenewsfromPhilip.
Section2(Plb.4.57–87and5.1–30.7)ThisconcentrationonAratusandhisinfluenceovertheyoungkingwasthesubjectofadetailedstudybyR.M.Errington,whoidentifiesthissame‘Arato-centric’biasascentraltomuchoftheactionofthesecondmainsectionontheSocialWar.Hisconclusions,brieflysummarized,areasfollows.ALeitmotivofthissectionofthenarrativeisthefeudingamongPhilip’sadvisers,culminatinginthedemiseofthreekeyMacedonians:Apelles,Leontius,andMegaleas.‘ThispoliticalcrisisandtheeventsleadinguptoitareseenbyPolybiusthroughtheeyesofAratusandtheAchaeans.AchaeathereforeplaysacentralpartinPolybius’account,anddevelopmentswithintheMacedoniangoverningcliquetendtobeinterpretedinthelightoftheireffectonAratusorAchaea.ThisisveryclearwhereAratusorhissonarepersonallyinvolved:(p.98) forAratussawhimselfcompetingwiththeseMacedoniannoblesforPhilip’sattention,wasthereforehostile
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 7 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
towardsthemostinfluentialofthemandpronetoexaggeratehisownsuccess.’18ThiscentralityofAratuscanbeobservedtimeandagainatcriticalpointsinthestory.At4.76AratusscoresavictoryagainstApellesinthematterofthetreatmentofAchaeantroops.PhilipisforcedtodecidebetweenAratusandApelles,andchoosestheformer.IntheelectionsfortheAchaeanstrategiainthefollowingyear(218)thehostilitybetweenthetwobreaksoutagain,andAratusisequated,bysomerathershamelessflattery,withthegreatnessandfreedomofAchaea(4.82.2–3).LaterthatyearatDyme,followingtheplotbyApellestodiscreditAratus,thelatterincreasedhisstandingstillfurther(4.86.8).
WhenheexperiencestroublecoaxingmoneyfromtheAchaeantreasury,PhilipdropsApelles’andLeontius’stoogestrategos,Eperatus,andapproachesAratusforhelpinstead,andobtainsit(5.1.9–10).Again,atCephallenia,wherePhilipmustchoosewhethertosailnorth(Aratus’advice)orsouth(Leontius’advice),thekingfavourstheAchaean(5.5.10).TherefollowsasimilarclashbetweenLeontiusandAratusattheAchelouswithasimilarresult(5.7.4–5).ButforAratus,weareledtobelieve,Philip’sglorioussuccessatThermumwouldneverhavehappened.TheaffairreachesitsculminationatThermum,whereMegaleasisfinedandimprisonedforanassaultonAratus,andPolybiussummarizestheaffairquiteexplicitlyat5.16.9–10:
ThustheplotofApellesandLeontiusturnedoutquitecontrarytotheiroriginalhopes:fortheyhadthoughtthat,byterrifyingAratusandisolatingPhilip,theycoulddowhateverwasintheirinterests;buttheresultwasquitetheopposite.19
ForErringtonthiscentralityofAratusinMacedonianaffairsisamirage;theconceitoftheAchaeanstatesmanwhowashimselfmerelythepawnofthecalculatingyoungking:‘Hisown[Aratus’]claimstoinfluenceatcourt,retailedfaithfullybyPolybius,wereunrealisticwhennotwhollyfalse.’20Whetherornotweacceptthisextremeviewofthetruthofthestory,thebiasoftheaccountremainsobvious.21PolybiusmostcertainlydoeshavehisinformationfromanAchaean,pro-Arateansource.Thequestion,then,iswhatmightthissourcebe?Erringtondoesnotcommithimself:‘AlthoughAratus’MemoirsendedbeforePolybius’fourthbookbegins(Pol.I.3.2;IV.2.1),thequantityof(p.99) informationaboutAratus(andbiasinhisfavour)isnotappreciablylessafter220.ThismayreflectanArateanfamilyrecord:AchaeastillhadapoliticallyactiveAratusin180whowasassociatedwithPolybius…’.22Arewethentoacceptthisviewofafamilyhistory,oristhereanotherpossibility?
Theanswerlies,Ibelieve,inastillcloserexaminationofthiscentralportionoftheSocialWarnarrativeandtheeventsthatframeit.ForthevastmajorityoftheaccountthefocusremainsfixedfirmlyonPhilip.23Thescenerychangesatrapidspeed,butthekingisalwaysthere.Hisactivitiesarenarratedinextraordinarydetail.PhiliparrivesatCorinthunexpectedlyintheheartofwinter.Acloseindicationofdateisgiven:περὶτροπὰςχειμερινάς(4.67.7),thewintersolstice(around22December219).FromthispointonuntilearlyFebruaryofthefollowingyear(4.87.13)Philip’smovementscanbeaccountedforonalmosteveryday.Ireconstructthesemovements,taking22Decemberasastartingdateexempligratia,inAppendix1.ThesequenceendsattheendofBook4
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 8 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
asPhilipdismisseshistroopstoMacedonia.Book5picksupverymuchwherethepreviousbookleftoff:5.1.1beginswithasimilarlyclosedating:περὶτὴντη̑ςΠλειάδοςἐπιτολήν—around22May218.Afterabriefstutter,wecanagainaccountforPhilip’smovementsdaybydayfromaroundthebeginningofJuneuntilearlyJuly(5.2.11–5.24.10).AreconstructionofthissequencewithsomeexempligratiadatesappearsasAppendix2.
Suchprecisionofdatingoversolongaspan(over40chapters,coveringsome60days)isunparalleledanywhereelseinthesurvivingtextofPolybius.Thereismorethanjustchronologicaldetailthatunifiesthissectionofthenarrative,however.WhenPhilipfirstarrivedatCorinthinDecember219,oneofhisfirstactionswastosendforAratus(4.67.8).AttheendofthecampaigninthePeloponneseinthefollowingyear,welearnthatPhilip’sreactiontothehonoursbeingpaidtoApelleswasnotgood,becauseAratuswasalwaysathissideworkingawayonhisownbehalf.24
AratuswasPhilip’sconstantcompanion.Evenwerewenotgivensuchexplicitstatementofthefact,itwouldbeevidentfromthenarrativealone.Throughoutthecampaignofwinter219/18Aratuswaspresent:hewasonhandtodealwithApelles’insultstotheAchaeantroops(4.76.8–9);hewasclearlypresentoncampaignatElis,thelocationofhissupposedplotwithAmphidamus(4.84.8).25Inthecampaignofspring/summer218,Aratuswas(p.100) presentatCephalleniatoadvisetheking(5.5.8)ashewasattheRiverAchelous(5.7.4)andatthesackofThermum(5.12.5).HewaspresenttobeassaultedonthenightofPhilip’sreturntohisshipsatLimnaea(5.15).InthePeloponnesiansectionofthecampaign,heturnsupatAmyclaeleadingtheMacedonianphalanx(5.23.6).Finally,afterhisabortivePhocianexpedition,PhiliplandedatSicyonandtakingupresidencewithAratushepassedallhistimewithhim.26
AratuswasconstantlyinPhilip’spresencethroughoutthesecampaigns.Thus,Polybius’sourcecouldaccuratelylocatenotonlythekingoneverydayduringthisperiodbutalsotheAchaeanstatesmanandwriter.Thiswemightreadilyattributetocoincidence,wereitnotforthefactthatthisisalsothesectionofnarrativethatwasclearlyidentifiedbyErringtonaspro-Arateaninitsbias.WemoveinexorablytotheconclusionthatPolybius’sourceforthissectionofhisnarrativemusthavebeenAratushimself.27
Section1(Plb.4.3–37)Thematterofthesourcesforsection2lookslikeanopen-and-shutcase,andwemightthereforeexpectthefirstsectionoftheSocialWarnarrativetodemonstrateasimilarappearance.Intriguingly,thisturnsoutnottobethecase.ThisfirstsectionishighlycomplexandappearsmarkedlydifferentfromtheobviouslyArateanmiddlesection.Foreaseofdiscussion,Ishallfurtherbreakdownthefirstsectionintothreesubsections,takingasmydividinglinesPolybius’ownschemeofdivision:thepointsatwhichthecausesofthewarstopandthewaritselfstarts.Thethreesubdivisionsthusformedrunfrom(a)4.3.1–4.13.7,(b)4.14.1–4.25.8,and(c)4.26.1–4.37.7,andtheirpositioninthePolybiansystemofcausation28isoutlinedinTable2.
Thefirstandlastofthesesubsections([a]and[c])arethemoststraightforwardandsoit
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 9 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
iseasiesttostartwiththem.Thefirstofthese(a)isexplicitlydividedfromtherestofthenarrativebyPolybiushimselfatthebeginning(‘thecausesofthis[sc.theSocialWar]wereasfollows’)andend(‘suchwasthecauseandpretextoftheSocialWar’).29Inbetweenthesetwo‘bookends’(p.101)
Table2.SummaryofthefirstsectionoftheSocialWarNarrativeSubsection Nature(a) 4.3.1–4.13.7 Aitiaiandprophaseis.Pro-Aratean(b) 4.14.1–4.25.8: Muddle.Twoprincipalsources(c) 4.26.1–4.37.7 Archai.Heterogeneous
comesastraightforwardnarrativeaccountoftheeventsfromthearrivalofDorimachusatPhigaleiaandtheactivitiesoftheAetoliansinthespringof220,tothedefeatoftheAchaeansatCaphyae,somedays(τιναςἡμέρας)beforetheAchaeansynodosofaroundlateJulyorearlyAugustinthesameyear.30Ofthemselves,theeventsdetailedinthissubsectioncausefewproblemsandneednottroubleusfurtherforthetimebeing.Asfarasthesourcesareconcerned,thereareoneortwotell-talehints.InthebackgroundtotheAetolian–Messenianhostilityanimpressiveamountoflocaldetailisdeployed.31Polybius’sourcewaswellinformedonlocalmatters.Later,asweentertheAchaeansphere,afamiliarbiasputsinitsfirstappearance.Aratus,anxioustodosomethingabouttheevilAetolians,takesthestrategiafivedaysearlierthanusual(4.7.10:notethespecificnumberofdays).WithAratus’accessiontothestrategiaacertainprecisionstartstoappearinthenarrative.Themovementsandcounter-movementsoftheAchaeanandAetolianarmiesarerecorded.Therearetwofurtherpreciseindicationsoftime.32ThedescriptionofthebattleofCaphyaehasproveddetailedandaccurateenoughtoallowidentificationofthebattle-sitetobemade.33Butperhapsmosttellingofallisthecodatothissection—thedescriptionofthesubsequentAchaeanassembly.ThedefeatofCaphyaebecomesafoilforthedisplayofloyaltytoAratusbytheassembledAchaeans:
Thecrowdquicklyandgenerouslyreversedtheiropinionandwereconsiderablydispleasedwiththoseofhisenemieswhohadattackedhim,andinsubsequentaffairstheyacceptedAratus’adviceinallthings.34
OncemoreitbecomestemptingtoattributethissortofaccounttoAratushimself.IfthedefeatofCaphyaewaspresentinAratus’Memoirs,itshouldnotsurpriseus,foritpavedthewaytoAratus’greatergloryattheveryend(p.102) ofthe139thOlympiad.35Thepicture,then,forsubsection(a)isofalocalPeloponnesiansource,inplacesdetailed,withpro-Arateanbias.Aratusisastrongpossibilityfortheentireaccount.Ishallcallthisthepro-Arateansource.
Subsection(c)isamorefragmentedaffair,butunityisprovidedbythehistorianhimself.Itsbeginning,forPolybius,marksthebeginning(ἀρχή)oftheSocialWar:
Withthepassageofthisdecreeinthefirstyearofthe140thOlympiadtheso-calledSocialWarbeganinamannerbothjustandappropriatetothecrimesthathad
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 10 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
beencommitted.36
Thereaderisinanycasewellpreparedforthisdivision,forhehasbeenwarnedofitalready,whenthediscussionofαἰτίαιcametoaclosetwelvechaptersearlierattheendofsubsection(a):Plb.4.13.6.
Attheendofthecampaigningseasonof220ameetingofthesymmachyhadvotedtodeclarewarontheAetolians(Plb.4.25).Now,atthebeginningofsubsection(c),envoysaresenttoeachstaterequestingaformalvoteforwarandPhilipdispatchesalettertotheAetolians(4.26.1–4).Subsection(c)describesthereactionsofthevariousmajorplayerstotheseevents.FirstthemeetingoftheAchaeanLeagueratifyingthedecreeofthesymmachy(4.26.7–8),nextthedecreeoftheAetoliansattheirautumnmeetingstatingthattheywerenotgoingtowar(4.27.1–3).ThencomePhilip’sownarrangements(4.27.9–29.7).Finally,thereceptionoftheenvoysisthemotifusedtounifytheaccountsofreactionsatAcarnania(4.30.1–5),Epirus(4.30.6–8),Messenia(4.31.1–2),andSparta(4.34.1–36.6).
Thenarrativeofsubsection(c)iswhollygivenovertodiplomacy.Thesourcesforthesevariouseventsmaywellbeasvariedasthegeographicallocations.TheoverallimpressionisofacollectionofheterogeneousepisodeslinkedtogetherbyPolybiususingthediplomaticmotif.Thechronologyinallcasesisleftvague,abroadterminuspostquembeingprovidedbytheautumnmeetingoftheAchaeanLeague,aroundtheautumnalequinox(4.26.7).37Thetwosynchronisms(4.28.1and4.37.1–7)confirmthisdateandofferaterminusantequemofaroundMay219.38
(p.103) Now,whenweturntosubsection(b)ofthefirstsectionofPolybius’SocialWarnarrative,ourfirstquestionmustbeabluntone:whatisthis?Aswehaveseen,subsection(a)containedthecauses(αἰτίαι)forthewar,amongwhichPolybiusminglesthepretexts(προφάσειςorἀφορμαί);39thebeginningofsubsection(c),thatistosaythedecreeofthesymmachy,markedthebeginning(ἀρχή).AsfarasthePolybianrhetoricofoutbreakofwarsisconcernedthen,subsection(b)fallsinnoman’sland.Thisisnottheonlyproblemcausedbysubsection(b),however.Pédech,inabriefexaminationofthissection,hasraisedsometroublingquestionsaboutitslogic.IftheactionsoftheAetoliansthatprecedethissectionaretheαἰτίαιandπροφάσεις,howisthefactthattheMacedoniansandEpirotsseetheseactionsasnothingmorethanpiracytobereconciled?Bothofthesepowersinfactvotetoremainatpeaceatthisstage(4.16.1–3).WhatwasitthatchangedPhilip’smindandcausedhimtoappearsuddenlyatCorinthwithanarmy(4.22.2)?HowhasAratusbecomeakeyadvisertoPhilipbythetimehearrivesatSparta(4.24.3)?AsfaraseditorialPolybiusisconcerned,thequestionofcauseshasbeenresolvedsincethebattleofCaphyaeinsubsection(a).Thenarrativethatfollowsbetraysaninconsistencyandabsenceofcrucialfact.40
Mattersbecomemorecomplicatedagainoncloserexaminationofthenatureofthenarrativeinsubsection(b).FirstcomestheaccountofAratus’successattheLeaguemeeting,which,asnotedabove,seemstoformaunitwiththenarrativeofsection(a)thatprecedesit.ThisdescriptionoftheLeaguemeetingends,quitestrikingly,inaprecise
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 11 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
datingoftheendoftheOlympiad(4.14.9).Itissostrikinginfact,thatsomehavedoubteditsauthenticity.41However,giventhecarethatPolybiustakesoverhisOlympiaddateselsewhere,42thisseemsanunnecessarilyboldreactionhere.Rather,wemustassumethatPolybiushadverygoodreasonsforplacinghisdateatthisexactpoint,theobviousreasonforthisbeingthathehadprecisedatesbothforwhatprecededandwhatfollowedthisdate.Polybius’pro-ArateansourcespecificallydatedAratus’triumphintheassembly(orpermittedPolybiusto).Thedecreethatfollows(4.15.1–4)wasundoubtedlyalsoclearlydated.43Butthereismoretothisdatethansimplechronologicalinterest,foritmarksthefirstpointatwhichadivergencefromtheprecedingnarrativesource(subsection[a])canclearlybeidentified.ThismightbeexplainedawaysimplyasPolybius’desireto(p.104) supplementhisone-sidednarrativewithofficialrecords,wereitnotforthefactthatitisalsothepointwherePolybius’ownnarrativestartstoloseitscoherence.
Tobeginwith,thereisthefundamentalirreconcilabilityoftheaccountoftheAetoliancampaigndescribedinsubsection(a)withthatdescribedashavingfolloweditinsubsection(b).Theconfusedaccountsofthesetwopurportedcampaignshavetendedtoobfuscatethefactthataproblemexists.ItmaybeperceivedmostclearlybyconsideringthemovementsoftheAetoliancommanderDorimachusandhistroopsimpliedinthesetwosubsections.
Inthespringof220,beforethefirstsynodosoftheAetolianLeague,DorimachusisinAetoliaplottingwithScopas.AtthispointtheysendoutprivateerstoravagethePeloponnese.FollowingthemeetingDorimachusgatherstheentireAetolianarmy(pandemei)andcrossestheCorinthianGulfatRhium.TheAetoliansmovesouthviaPatrae,Pharae,Tritaea,andPhigaliabeforeinvadingMessenia.WhenthreatenedbytheAchaeanarmy,Dorimachusmarchesfirstnorth-easttoOlympia,beforeencampingatMethydriuminArcadia.FromherehemarchesnorthagainpastOrchomenustoCaphyae,wherehedefeatsAratusinbattle.TheAetoliansnextmakeanassaultonPellene,plundertheterritoryofSicyon,beforetakingthecircuitousrouteviatheIsthmusbackhometoAetolia.BythetimetheyreachedThermum,Dorimachusandhistroopshadmarchedmorethan1,000kilometres,foughtamajorbattleandanumberofskirmishes,ravagedtheterritoryofseveralcities,andspentaweekatminimumterrorizingtheMessenians.44OnPolybius’chronology,theyhadcompletedthissubstantialcampaignbetweenthespringmeeting(precisedateuncertain)oftheAetolianLeagueandthethirdmeetingoftheAchaeanLeague(lateJuly/earlyAugust).But,onPolybius’account,Dorimachuswasnotfinishedfortheyear.Insubsection(b)weencouterhimnegotiatingforthebetrayalofthecityofCynaethainArcadia.OncemoretheAetoliansinvadethePeloponnese,againpandemei.AftersackingCynaetha,theAetolianarmymarchesviaLusitoCleitorbeforeeventuallyreturningtoAetolia,thistimeapparentlybysea.ThelatesummerinvasionofthePeloponnesehadinvolvedamarchofnolessthan350kilometres,andmustfitbetweenthethirdmeetingoftheAchaeanLeagueinlateJuly/AugustandtheAetolianautumnmeeting.
Thisnarrative,whichpositstwoAetolianinvasionsofthePeloponnesepandemeiwithin
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 12 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
onecampaigningseason,thesecondnotcommencinguntilAugust,lookshighlyquestionable,ifnotsimplyimpossible.Inadditiontothisfundamentalhistoricalimplausibility,thereisaspecificchronologicalproblem.ImmediatelyfollowingtheAchaeanLeagueassemblyatthetimeofthe(p.105) Olympicgames(July/August),thereoccursanaccountofτη̑ςκαθηκούσηςἐκκλησίαςoftheAetolianLeague(4.15.8),‘anexpressionwhichprobably,butforotherevidence,wouldbetakenbyeverybodytomeanaregularmeeting’.45However,accordingtotheorthodoxview,therewereonlytworegularmeetingsoftheAetolianLeague,oneinthespringandoneintheautumn.Sincethisonemustoccurinthefirstyearofthe140thOlympiad(4.14.9),itoughttobetheautumnmeeting.However,theautumnmeetingisclearlythatdescribedat4.27.1–3,whentheAetolianelectionstakeplace.Thestandardexplanationofthemeetingat4.15.8–11hasbeen,sinceHolleaux,thatitwasanextraordinarymeetingandthattheapparentmeaningofthewordκαθηκούσης(‘regular’or‘customary’)cannotbetrusted.46
Thisisclearlyspecialpleading,andthereisanother,simplerexplanationwhichitisworthexploring:thattheAetolianmeetingrecordedat4.15.8–11andthatat4.27.1–3areboththesameevent.Infact,Polybius’accountsofthetwomeetingsmakethemsoundsimilar.Thecentraldecisionofbothmeetingsisidentical:inthefirstεἰρήνηνἄγειν(4.15.8),inthesecondμὴπολεμειν̑(4.27.2).Thedifferentinterests(inthefirsttheAchaeandecisionregardingtheMessenians;inthesecondtheelectionofScopas)maybeexplainedasaproductoftheinterestsofthedifferentsourcesPolybiushadforthesemeetings.47YetwhydidPolybiussituatethetwoaccountsthus?HowcouldhehavemissedthefactthathewasrelatingaccountsofthesameAetolianassemblyattwodifferentpointsinhisnarrative?Theanswerisperhapstwofold.First,thereisthesubject-matter:theAetolian‘Messenian’meetingfollowsdirectlyondiscussionofAchaean-Messenianrelations(4.15.2–7).The‘election’meetingcomesattheappropriatepointforAetolianelections,adatewithwhichPolybiuswasfamiliar(4.37.2).Thesecondpartoftheanswermaybestructural:inbothcases,Polybiusdescribesthemeetingsinpairs.In4.15,asin4.26.7–4.27.2,AetolianassemblyispairedwithAchaean,asifinanswertoit.ThusPolybiuscameuponthemeetingdescribedin4.15.8–11inhissourceeitheralreadypairedwiththerelevantAchaeanmeetingandleftitthere,ormadetheconnectionhimself.
Iftheabovesuggestioniscorrect,thenPlb.4.15.8–11providesthefirstevidencethatPolybiushadtwosourcesforthisyear,whichoverlappedintheinformationtheyprovided.SupportforthisradicalproposalcomeswiththeaccountofAchaeanactivitiesinthetwomonthsbetweentheirthirdandfourthassemblies,andtheaccountofthesecondAetolianinvasion.At4.15.(p.106) 6–7.theAchaeanstrategos(Aratus)enrollsthelevy.Itislateintheseasonforenrollinganewarmy(probablyaroundmid-August),yetthisshouldnottroublethereader,sincePolybiusclaimsthatthisisbeingdone‘accordingtothedecree’(κατὰτὸδόγμα:4.15.6).Butacloserlookatthetextshowsthatthisisjustnottrue.ThedecreepassedbytheAchaeansat4.15certainlydoesprovideforthelevyingofsuchaforce,butitdoessoonacondition—ἐὰνἐπιβαίνωσινΑἰτωλοὶτη̑ςχώραςαὐτω̑ν(theMessenians).Atthispointintime,accordingtotheearliernarrative(4.13.5)theAetolianshavereturnedhomeviatheIsthmus,sothelevyprovidedforbythe
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 13 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
decreeshouldnothavebeentriggered.Again,whenwefindtheAchaeanlevyalreadycomplete(4.16.6),itisonlythenthattheIllyrianssetsail,probablynowinmid-to-lateAugust.TheAetoliansstilldonotinvadeatthispoint,however:itisnotuntilScerdilaidashassailedhalfwayroundthePeloponneseandbackagainthattheAetoliansfinallydecidetoattack(4.16.10).WemustnowbeinlateAugustattheveryearliest,andagainthequestionoftimingcomesup.Asalreadynoted,itisscarcelycrediblethattheAetolianscommencedanexpeditionwiththeirentirearmy(πανδημεί:4.16.11),theirsecondof220,thislateintheyear.WhenweencountertheAchaeanlevyforthethirdtime(4.19.1),sometimeafterwehaveheardthatitwasalreadycompleted(4.16.6),Aratusisstillenrollingit(4.19.1—συνη̑γε).Finally,wemustquestiontherationaleoftheAetolians’expedition.TheycrosstoAchaea,attackCynaetha,marchtoCleitor,thenbacktoCynaetha,andthenrunscaredtoRhiumwheretheycrossbacktoAetolia.InthemeantimetheAchaeanlevyaboutwhichwehavebeentoldatlengthisnowheretobeseen.Thereisonlytheapologeticstatementat4.19.11–12thatAratuswastooworriedbyhisrecentdefeattodoanything.TherethenfollowsalengthydigressionontheCynaetheans(4.19.13–4.21.12),beforethemysteriousappearanceofPhilipatCorinth.
Whatistobemadeofthismuddle?Itshouldbenotedthatthenarrativeofsubsection(b)coversthecrucialperiodofAratus’andPhilip’srapprochement.Sincewehearnothingaboutit,itseemsasafebetthatthesourcethatPolybiuswasusingherewasnotAratus,andthereforeprobablynotthesamesourcethatheusedforthenarrativeofsubsection(a)—afurtherindicationthattherearenowtwosourcesinplay.
TheresolutionofthemuddleoverAchaeanandAetolianactivitiesinthelatterpartof220hinges,Iwouldsuggest,onthefactthatPolybiuswasnowusingtwosources.JustasthesetwosourcesoverlappedontheAetolianautumnassembly,sotootheytoldslightlydifferentversionsofthesamemilitaryoperations.Themilitaryactivitiesrelatedin4.16.6–4.19.12inpartduplicatethosealreadynarratedinsubsection(a)(4.3.1–4.13.7).Thereisanobvioussimilarityinthepatternofevents(Table3).
ThereasonforPolybius’confusionbecomesclearonexaminationoftheendingandbeginningoftherespectiveaccounts.Inthepro-Arateanversionofsubsection(a),themainmilitaryeventwasthebattleofCaphyae.The(p.107)
Table3.StructuralsimilaritiesintheaccountsofthetwoAetoliancampaignsof220Subsection(a) Subsection(b)
Firstcampaign(Caphyae) Secondcampaign(Cynaetha)Dorimachus,Scopas,andfriendsarrangehostilitieswithoutofficialsanctionfromAristonandtheassembly(4.5.1–10)
Agelaus,Dorimachus,andScopasarrangehostilitieswhilestateisofficiallyatpeace;Aristonremainsathome(4.16.11–17.1)
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 14 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Aetolianssendoutπειρατάς,whoreturntoAetoliaanddisposeofbootycapturednearCythera(4.6.1)
ScerdilaidasandDemetriussetsailaroundPeloponnese.AtsomepointbetweenPylosandtheCycladesScerdilaidasturnsbackandarrivesatAetolia.ArrangesbootydistributionandagreestoinvadeAchaea.(4.16.6–10)
DorimachusandScopastheninvadePeloponneseviaRhium(4.6.7–8)
AccountofAetolianmilitaryactivityinAchaea(4.16.11–4.19.12)
Aetolians,havingbeatentheAchaeanarmy,andwithoutanyformofpursuit,advancedthroughthemiddleofthePeloponnesemakinganattemptonPelleneandplunderingtheterritoryofSicyon,beforedepartingoftheirownaccord.TheAetolians,thankstotheblunderofAratus,hadAchaeaattheirmercybutjustwentstraighthomebywayoftheIsthmus,eventhoughPolybiushaspreviouslyexplainedthatDorimachus’planhadbeentoengagetheAchaeanssothathemightembarkatRhium(4.10.8).Thisaccountissuspiciousinitself.OnturningtotheopeningofthenarrativeofAetolianactivitiesinthe‘second’campaignthough,wefindthatthereisnorecordoftheAetolianscrossingovertothePeloponneseagain.Polybiusplungesthereaderinmediasres:‘Dorimachus,havingmarchedacrossAchaea,appearedsuddenlybeforeCynaetha.’48
WherehadDorimachuscomefrom?PlainlythereissomethingamissinPolybius’accounthere.However,ifweassumethatatthispoint(4.17.3)PolybiushaspickedupanaccountofthesameexpeditionastheCaphyaeexpedition,containingeventsafterthebattle,allbecomesclear.WhencaughtbyAratusatCaphyaeDorimachuswasontheroadfromOrchomenusacrossOlygyrtustoAmilus(4.11.5),whencehehadthechoiceofproceedingeithertoStymphalusortoPheneus.49ForDorimachusPheneusshouldhavebeentheobviousnextdestinationwhereverhewantedtogointhenorthernPeloponnese(includingPellene):itformedthecrossroadsformanyoftheroutesthroughthispartofthecountry.50FromhereDorimachusmusthave(p.108) takentheroadnorth-easttoPellene(4.13.5),madeafeinttowardsSicyon(ibid.)beforereturninginthegeneraldirectionofhisfleetviaPheneusagain.Polybius’claimatthispoint(ibid.)thattheAetoliansnowleftviatheIsthmuswillbeanincorrectinferencenecessitatedbythebreak-offofhisCynaethasourceatthispoint,andderivedfromtheapparentdirectionDorimachuswastravelling.FromhereDorimachusthentookthenorth-westroadtoCynaetha.Itisatthispointthatthesecondaccountpickshimup(4.17.3).FromhereDorimachusmarchedsouthtoCleitorthenbackagain(4.18.9–12,4.19.2–4),receivingwordatthispointofstirringsinMacedonia,andstruckoutacrosscountrytoRhium(4.19.6),preciselyashehadpreviouslyplanned(4.10.8).
TheproblemoftheAchaeanleviessolvesitselfifweacceptthattherewasonlyoneAetolianinvasionin220.Theremustpresumablyhavebeentwolevies:oneearlyintheyear(firstdescribedat4.9.1);thesecondfollowingtheAchaeanassemblyinthewakeofCaphyae.Thesetwoleviessharedoneimportantaspect:theproperparticipationofSpartaandMesseniawasanissue.AtthetimeofthefirstassemblytherewasclearlyconcernamongtheAchaeanstatesthatMesseniashouldcontinuetoplayherpart—hencetherequiredhostages(4.9.5);similarlyPolybiusmakesapointofexplainingthat
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 15 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theSpartanswereparticipatingaccordingtotheiralliancewiththeAchaeanLeague(4.9.6).ThatitwasstillanissueatthetimeofthesecondlevyisclearfromthetermsofthedecreepassedatthethirdAchaeanassembly.51
Giventhesimilarityoftheprevailingconcerns,itwasalltooeasytoconfuseundatedaccountsofthetwoseparatelevies,andthisiswhatPolybiusdid.Eventhoughthelogicofhisownaccountshouldnothaveallowedforalevyimmediatelyuponthepassageofthedecree,hewasluredintoassumingonebythedesireforneatness:thedecreeprovidedforthesendingofambassadorsandtheholdingofalevy(ifeveritwerenecessary);theambassadorsweredulysentandthusalevywasalsoheld.However,sinceatthispointinthetext(4.15.5–6)Polybiuswasmovingbackinsourcefromofficialrecordstonarrativeaccount,hewasforcedtocastaroundamonghisnarrativesourcestofindtheappropriatelevy.Hefoundwhathethoughtwasthecorrectlevyinthe‘Cynaetha’source;unfortunately,thiswasinfactthefirstlevyoftheyear,sinceinthe‘Cynaetha’sourceitmusthaveprecededthearrivaloftheIllyrianandAetolianexpedition.Thusitisalsothefirstlevythatisbeingdescribedat4.16.6.ThethirdmentionoftheAchaeanlevyinthe‘Cynaetha’source(4.19.1),ashasbeennoted,contradictsthispreviousone.However,ifweassumethat,asitsplaceinthenarrative(aftertheAetolianmovetoCleitor)requires,thisisareferencetothesecondlevy,thecontradictionvanishes.
(p.109)
Table4.Thepro-ArateanCaphyaeandtheCynaethasourcescompared220BC
Subsection(a):Caphyae Subsection(b)Cynaetha
A AchaeanLevy(1)(16.6)B PrivateerssentoutbyDorimachusand
Scopas(6.1)B TheIllyrianprivateerssail
aroundthePeloponnese(16.6–8)
April–May
C TheyreturntoAetoliawithcapturedMacedonianshipanddividebooty(6.1)
C ScerdilaïdasreturnstoAetoliaandarrangesdistributionofbooty(16.9)
D PrivateerssendforcethroughPeloponnesetoClariumDorimachusandScopasinvadewithAetoliantroops(6.3–12)
D CombinedprivateerandlandforcesinvadePeloponnese(16.10)
A AchaeanLevy(1)(7.1–10)June–July
E TheCaphyaeCampaign(9.1–13.3)
Aug–Sept
F DorimachusmovesnorththroughthePeloponnese(13.4)
F DorimachusmovesnorththroughthePeloponnese(17.3)
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 16 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
G TheCynaethaCampaign(17.4–21.12)
H Aetolianautumnmeeting(15.8) H Aetolianautumnmeeting(27.1)
ToclarifythesuggestionIammakingaboutthesetwosources,ItabulatethemainpointsinthetwoaccountsinTable4.Thefirstsource,the‘pro-Aratean’Caphyaeaccount,ranfromthestartoftheyear220downtotheendofthe139thOlympiad(?lateJuly/August220).The‘Cynaethean’sourceshowedlittleinterestinanythingotherthanwhathappenedintheneighbourhoodofCynaethaandCleitor.Thisfocus,togetherwiththesimilaramountofdetailinthestoryoftheAetolianattackonAegeira(4.57.2–58.12),maywellpointtoaregionalnorthern-Achaeansourcehere.
Forthe‘pro-Aratean’source,weareconfrontedwiththeinterestingquestionofwhyitstoppedwiththeAchaeanassemblymeetingattheendoftheOlympiad.Onepossibleanswerisbynowobvious:thatitwasherethattheMemoirsofAratusstopped.Thechronologywasright,sowasthemoment.ThereasonfortheabsenceofAratus’diplomacytowardsPhilipisexplainedtoo.Aratus’Memoirswerenolongeravailable,andAratus’inactivitywhiletheAetolianscontinuedtoravagethePeloponneseensuredthatthestrategoskeptalowprofileeveninfriendlysources.PolybiushimselfwasforcedtoapologizeforAratus’inactivity(4.19.11–12).ConfirmationoftheabsenceofanyaccountbyAratusofthisperiodcomesintheaccountofPhilip’sspeechatSparta(4.24.1–3).PolybiuscannotsayoutrightthatAratusadvisedPhiliptospeakashedid.HeisforcedtoassumethatamongPhilip’sadvisers‘itistoAratusthatonemightmostplausiblyattributetheopinionexpressedbythe(p.110) king’.52TheinferenceisperhapsmadeonthebasisofwhatPolybiusknewofthesubsequenthistoryofthetwomen,andseemsaclearindicationthathedidnothaveexplicittestimonyashedidforepisodesinthecentralsectionoftheSocialWarnarrative.
Subsection(b)closeswiththemeetingofthesymmachyatCorinth—againwiththecuriousabsenceofAratus(4.25.1–8).Thesource,itturnsout,isanotherdecree.53Theorderofeventsintheprefacetothedecreecouldhavehelpedlittleinthecorrectnarrationofevents.Thelistisincomplete,Pylosischronologicallymisplaced,andtheattackonMegalopolisobscure.54
Ifthisiscorrect,thenwecanseethatwhenhecametodealwiththisfirstsectionoftheSocialWar,Polybiusfacedacomplexproblem.HepossessedAratus’MemoirsdowntotheendoftheOlympiad,butthereafterwasreliantuponalocalAchaeanhistoryforanyothernarrativedetailandofficialdecreesforthedecisionsatthetwokeymeetingsoftheyear.Bothofthesedecreeswereimportedatpivotalpointsinthestory.Thefirstmarkedtheendofthecausesandpretexts(αἰτίαιandπροφάσεις)(a),aswellastheendofhisbestnarrativesource.Thesecondmarkedthebeginning(ἀρχή)ofthewarproperandthetransitionpointfromthebarelocalhistory(b)tothevariedsourcesof(c)thatweretobelinkedbythethemeofdiplomacy.Inbothcasesthecontentofthepivotaldecreesgavethestructurallinktowhatfollowed.Inthelattercase,thedecreeoftheambassadorsformedasmoothunifyingconnection;intheformerthedecreeofthelevy
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 17 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ledPolybiusintoabadblunder.
ConclusionItseems,then,highlylikelythattheterminaldateofAratus’Memoirswas,asPolybius’owntestimonysuggests,preciselytheendofthe139thOlympiad(c.August220BC),concludingprobablywiththeassemblyoftheAchaeanLeaguethatcoincidedwithit.However,wehavealsonotedthatthesubsequentaccount,beginningaroundthewintersolsticeinDecember219BC,offersaday-by-dayaccountofAratus’and(Philip’s)activitiesfortwoperiods,bothinexcessofamonthinlength.ThesourceofthisaccountislikelytobeAratus,yetthisislongafteranyonehaspreviouslysoughttoplace(p.111)theendofAratus’Memoirsand,indeed,ayearafterPolybiushimselfseemstosuggestthattheyhadceased.
Thedailycharacterofthislatteraccountmayholdthesolutiontothisapparentcontradiction.Aratus’Hypomnemata,orpublished‘Memoirs’,mayhaveendedwiththe139thOlympiad,buthiscareerdidnot.Andnor,presumablydidtheephemeridesorjournalsinwhichastatesmanrecordedhisactivitiesonadailybasis.55Itwastotheselatterdocuments,ratherthanpublishedbooks,thatPolybiuswasabletoturnfortheeventsof219–218BC.
Aswehaveseen,itislikelythatPolybius’firstsourcefortheeventsof220cametoanendinAugust.Aratuswasnotactivemilitarilyafterthisevent,sofaraswecantell.CertainlyheisabsentfromtheaccountofeventsatCynaetha,andPolybiuscannotbecertainabouthisroleinPhilip’sactionsintheautumnofthisyear(4.24.3:seen.52above).ThisabsenceofAratusinthenarrativefromAugust220untilDecember219issurelytheclearestsignthatAratus’Memoirswereunavailableatthispoint.ButforPhilip’scampaignoflate219and218PolybiuswasabletodrawonAratus’unpublishedjournals.ThispatternofavailabilityperhapsexplainshowPolybiuswasabletomakesuchamessoftheaccountof220,yetprovidesuchadetailedaccountfortheeventsof219/18BC.
Thisfragmentationofsources,andthedisappearanceofAratus’MemoirsmayalsoservetoexplaintworemainingpuzzlesconcerningPolybius’broaderarticulationofhishistoriographicalproject.ThefirstoftheseconcernstheplaceoftheaccountoftheSocialWarwithintheHistoriesaswhole.Polybiushadbegunhisworkwithanintroduction,theπροκατασκευή(Books1and2),butdidnotregardthemainbodyofhisworkasbeginninguntilthepointatwhichtheaffairsofItaly,Greece,Africa,andAsiabecamefullyentwined,themomentofσυμπλοκή(interweaving),inthethirdyearofthe140thOlympiad,whenhistorybecameaunifiedwhole(σωματοειδής).56TheSocialWarfallsintoaninterimperiodbetweentheintroductoryBooks1and2andthismomentofsymplokelateinBook5.PolybiuswasclearlyconsciousofthetransitionalnatureofthecontentsofBooks3–5andanticipatedcriticismoftheapproachhetooktotheshortperiodtheycovered:
WereitthecasethatthefirstactivitiesofHannibalwereconnectedtoGreekaffairsfromthebeginning,clearlyIwouldhaveincludedthelatterinmypreviousbook
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 18 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(Book3).…ButsincetheaffairsofItaly,Greece,andAsiaweresuchthat(p.112)thebeginningsofthewarstherewereparticulartoeachplace,whiletheirendswerecommontoall,IdecidedtogiveaseparateaccountofeachofthemuntilIreachedthepointatwhichtheseeventsbecameentwinedwithoneanotherandbegantomovetowardsasingleend.…ThissymplokecameaboutaroundtheendoftheSocialWarinthethirdyearofthe140thOlympiad.Therefore,afterthatdateIshallnarrateeventsincommonaccordingtochronologicalorder;butuptothatpoint,asIsaid,Ishallgiveseparateaccounts,onlycross-referringtothoseeventsthathavebeendescribedinthepreviousbook.57
SoconcernedwasPolybiusthatthereaderunderstandthisrationale,thatherepeatstheexplanationlaterinBook5:
Tomakemynarrativeeasytofollowandclear,IthinkitisessentialthatforthisOlympiad(the140th)Idonotinterweaveeventswitheachother,butkeepthemseparateanddistinguishthemfromoneanotherasmuchaspossible,untilinthefollowingOlympiadsIcanbegintonarratethingsinchronologicalorder.58
Polybiusclaimsthathewillpresenthisreaderswithaseparateaccountoftheeventsineachofthetheatres(Italy,Hellas,andAsia)immediatelyprecedingthemomentofσυμπλοκή.ThisisthehistoriographicalcontextofPolybius’narrativeoftheSocialWar.Orisit?For,nottenchaptersafterhehasmadeusthepromiseabouthisorganizationjustquoted,Polybiusbreaksit.Thereadermightlegitimatelyexpect,havingreadacompleteaccountoftheSecondPunicWardowntotheσυμπλοκή,tobepresentedwithacompleteaccountofGreekwarsandthenAsianwars,forPolybiusclearlydifferentiatesbetweenthetwoat4.28.3whenhemakesthepromise.However,whenitcomestotellingofGreekandAsianevents,thisisnotwhathappens.PolybiusdoesinterweavehisaccountsfortheentireOlympiad,asisclearfromTable1above.HisnarrativeoftheSocialWarisbrokendownintothreeseparatesectionsandinterleavedwithaccountsofeventsinAsiaMinorandtheSyriankingdom.
ThereasonforthisbrokenpromiseperhapsliesinthenatureofthesourcesPolybiushadathisdisposal,andmayperhapsbeconnectedtotheprominentplacethathegivestotheterminaldateofAratus’Memoirsinhisarticulation(p.113) ofastarting-point.FollowingtheendofAratus’accountatthecloseofthe139thOlympiad,therewasnocontinuousaccountofAchaeanaffairsthatPolybiuscouldtakeasasinglesource.Polybius’narrationoftheseeventswasbaseduponapatchworkofevidenceconsistingoflocalhistories,officialdocuments,andunpublishedjournals.Inthissense,therefore,itwasnecessaryforPolybiustobeginatthebeginningofthe140thOlympiad,becausetherewasnootherhistoricalaccountfortheeventsoftheseyears.
YetonecannothelpsuspectthattherewassomethingmoreinPolybius’emphasisonAratusthanjustthechronological.MixedthoughhisopinionofAratusmayhavebeen,oneaspectofAratus’MemoirshadobviousappealtoPolybius.Theyconstitutedapersonalaccount—howeverflawed—oftheeventstheydescribed.ForPolybius,theconceptsofautopsyandautopatheiawere,aswehaveseen,decisiveinhischoiceofhis
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 19 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
history’sstarting-point(4.2.2:quotedabove,n.4).ButbycastinghimselfasacontinuerofAratus,PolybiusalsoimplicitlycontrastedAratus’parochial,self-interestedMemoirswiththebroadersweepofhisownHistories.Polybiusdidnotjustfollow,hesuperseded.59
(p.114)
Appendix1:Philip’sCampaignsinDecember–January219(Plb.4.67–87)Tentativedate Event Reference22Dec. Philiparrivesunexpectedlyat
Corinth67.7–68.5
ShutsgatesandsendsforelderAratusLeavesCorinthandencampsnearPhliusEuripidasmarchesonSicyononsamenight
23Dec. PhilipunawarebreakscampandheadsforCaphyae
68.6–69.9
HappensuponEleansandisvictorious
24Dec. MarchesthroughOlygyrtusinSnow
70.1
25Dec. ArrivesatCaphyae 70.126Dec. RestsatCaphyae 70.227Dec. RestsatCaphyae 70.228Dec. SetsoutforPsophisthrough
Cleitor70.2–5
29Dec. MarchesonPsophis 70.2–530Dec. Arrivesandencampsopposite
Psophis70.5
31Dec. Marchesontownandcapturesit 71.3–72.4
[chainbreaksdownatthispointwithPhilip’senforcedstayat
72.5–7
Psophisforseveraldays.Datesfromhereonexmpligratia]5Jan. PhilipmarchesonLasionand
takesemptytown72.7–73.2
TakesStratusalso6Jan. enrouteforOlympia 73.3
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 20 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
7Jan. enrouteforOlympia 73.38Jan. enrouteforOlympia 73.39Jan. ArrivesatOlympiaandsacrifices 73.310Jan. RestsatOlympia 73.311Jan. RestsatOlympia 73.312Jan. RestsatOlympia 73.313Jan. AdvancesintoElis,encampsat
Artemisium73.4
14Jan. AdvancestotheDioskourion 73.5whenceheraidsThalamaesuccessfully
75.2–8
15Jan. ReturnswithbootytoOlympia60andencamps
75.8
[show-downbetweenApellesandAratus]
76–77.4
16Jan. SetsoutforTelphousaandthencetoHeraea
77.5
Holdssaleofbootyandrepairsbridge
17Jan.61 PhilipcrossesbridgeandarivesatAlipheira
78.2–5
18Jan. PhiliptakesAlipheira 78.6–13Triphyliansstarttoworryandgiveup
19Jan. Philip’sconquestofTriphylia 79–80.1420Jan. Philip’sconquestofTriphylia 79–80.1421Jan. Philip’sconquestofTriphylia 79–80.1422Jan. LeavesLepreumforHeraea 80.1523Jan.62 DividesupbootyatHeraea;
picksupheavybaggage80.16
24Jan. ArrivesatMegalopolisinmid-winter
80.16
25Jan. MarchesfromMegalopolistoTegea
82.1
[TherefollowsthemeddlingofApellesintheAchaeanElections,tobedated,independentlybyAymard,toearlyFebruaryatthelatest
82.2–8]
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 21 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Afterthis PhilipmarchesthroughPatraeandDymetoTeichos
83.1–2
Encampsbeforecity?nextday Thegarrisonsurrenders 83.3? PhilipadvancesintoElisand
pillagesit83.5
ReturnswithbootytoDyme[Apelles’plotagainstAratus 84–87.
12]? PhilipreturnstoArgos,
dismissinghistroopstoMacedonia
87.13
(p.115)Appendix2:Philip’sCampaignsinMay–July218(Plb.5.1–30)Day Events Chapters22May EndofYoungerAratus’strategia 1.1?lateMay PhilipsummonstheAchaeanstoanekklesia 1.6–12
firstatAegiumthenatSicyon?lateMay PreparesfleetatCorinth;departureofApelles 2.1–10?1June63 PhilipsetssailfromCorinth 2.11?2June ArrivesatPatrae 2.11
Sendsdispatchestoallies 3.3?3June ArrivesatPalusinCephallenia 3.3–4.2?4–7June64 SiegeofPalusandarrivalofallies 4.3–131 AratuspersudesPhiliptosailtoLeucas 5.1–112 PhiliparrivesatLeucasatnight 5.113 PhiliparrivesatLimnaea(beforedaybreak) 5.12–6.6
JoinedbyAcarnaniansMarchesfor60stades;stopsforsupper;continues
4 ArrivesatAchelousbetweenStratusandConope 6.6–8.7Aratus’goodadvicenottodelayOccupiesMetapaandnegotiatespassOccupiesPamphiumMarchestoThermum,encamps,andplundersarea
5 ThesackofThermum(anddigression) 8.8–12.8Returnsviasameroad;winsbattleofthepass 13.1–8SacksPamphium;encampsatMetapa
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 22 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
6 RazesMetapa;marchesto,andencampsat,Acrae 13.87 Advancesto,andencampsat,Conope 13.98 RemainsatConope 13.99 MarchesalongAcheloustoStratus 13.10–15.9
Failstoprovokebattle;continuestowardsLimnaeaRearguardactionoutsideStratusPhilipencampsearlyatLimnaeaThebanquetandAratus’run-inwithLeontiusetc.
10 Show-downbetweenLeontiusandPhilip 16.1SetssailforLeucasovernight 18.8
11 ArrivesatLeucas 18.812 RemainsatLeucas 18.913 SetssailforLechaeum 18.914 RavagesOeantheandarrivesatLechaeum 18.9
SpendsnotimeatCorinth,breakscamp 18.1MarchesviaArgos
15 ArrivesatTegea 18.1–2PicksupAchaeansandsetsoutforLaconia
16 MarchtoLaconia 18.2–317 ArrivesonhilloppositeSparta 18.2–3
CampsatAmyclae 18.10–19.118 PlundershiswaytoPyrrhus’Camp 19.2–419 Plundersthearea 19.420 PlundershiswaytoCarnium 19.421 FailedassaultonAsine;ravagesasfarasTaenarus 19.5–7
PassesbyGythium;encampsindistrictofHelos22 DevastatesasfarasAcriae,Leucae,andBoiae 19.8–923 LeavesHelosandravagestheland 20.1224(1July?) RavagesenroutetoAmyclae 20.1225 RavagesenroutetoAmyclae 20.1226 ArrivesatAmyclae:thebattle;Aratus’role 20.12–24.627 MarchestowardsTegea;encampsatSellasia 24.6–828 ReachesTegea;holdssaleofbooty 24.9–1029? LeavesTegea 24.1030? ArrivesatCorinth 24.10–12
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 23 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ReceivesembassiesfromRhodiansandChians
GoesdowntoLechaeumTheconspiracyhotsup;Philiprushesbacktosquashit
? Apellesisputdown 25.1–26.15Afewdays TheKing’sPhocianbusiness:sailsfromLechaeum 26.16–27.4afterwards businessfallsthrough,returnsviaElateaandCirrha
toSicyon.HestayswithAratus? ReturnoftheRhodianandChianAmbassadors 28.1–3
PhilipacceptstruceandsummonsalliestoPatraeNextday ArrivesatPatrae?nextday65 Aetoliansprocrastinate;Philipcallsofftruce 29.1–4
PhilipreturnstoCorinth?nextday PhilipdismisseshistroopstoMacedonia 29.5
(p.116)
Notes:
(1)Plb.1.3.1–2:Ἄρξειδὲτη̑ςπραγματείαςἡμιν̑τω̑νμὲνχρόνωνὀλυμπιὰςἑκατοστήτεκαὶτετταρακοστή,τω̑νδὲπράξεωνπαρὰμὲντοις̑Ἕλλησινὁπροσαγορευθεὶςσυμμαχικὸςπόλεμος,ὃνπρω̑τονἐξήνεγκεμετ᾽Ἀχαιω̑νπρὸςΑἰτωλοὺςΦίλιππος,Δημητρίουμὲνυἱός,πατὴρδὲΠερσέως,παρὰδὲτοις̑τὴνἈσίανκατοικου̑σινὁπερὶΚοίληςΣυρίας,ὃνἈντίοχοςκαὶΠτολεμαιο̑ςὁΦιλοπάτωρἐπολέμησανπρὸςἀλλήλους·ἐνδὲτοις̑κατὰτὴνἸταλίανκαὶΛιβύηντόποιςὁσυστὰςῬωμαίοιςκαὶΚαρχηδονίοις,ὃνοἱπλεισ̑τοιπροσαγορεύουσινἈννιβιακόν.ταυ̑ταδ᾽ἔστισυνεχη̑τοις̑τελευταίοιςτη̑ςπαρ᾽ἈράτουΣικυωνίουσυντάξεως.
(2)Assuch,PolybiusiswritingwithinanestablishedGreekframeworkofsynchronism,albeitnewlyadaptedtotheriseofRome.SeeFeeney2007:43–67,noting(p.59),‘AGreekpredispositiontoconceiveoftheoecumeneinintegratedtermsisforcedtoredefineitselfinordertoaccommodatethenewpowerofRome’.
(3)Walbank,HCPi.43on1.3.2:‘InmakinghimselfAratus’continuatorP.followedanestablishedtradition.AmongThucydides’continuatorswereXenophon(Hell.i.1),Theopompos(P.viii.11.3),andCratippus(Dion.Hal.Thuc.16);andXenophonanticipatesacontinuator(Hell.vii.5.27).’Polybius,too,wouldbecontinuedbyPosidonius:FGrHist91T2(ἰστέονὅτιδιαδέχεταιτὴνΠολυβίουἱστορίανΠοσειδώνιος)withClarke1999:144–5,thoughnotethecautionofYarrow2006:161–2.
(4)Plb.4.1.9–4.2.5:συγκεφαλαιωσάμενοιδὲτὰςἐκτη̑ςπροκατασκευη̑ςπράξειςἕωςτη̑ςἈντιγόνουκαὶΣελεύκουκαὶΠτολεμαίουτελευτη̑ς,ἐπειδὴπερὶτοὺςαὐτοὺςκαιροὺςπάντεςοὑ̑τοιμετήλλαξαν,λοιπὸνἐπηγγειλάμεθατη̑ςαὑτω̑νπραγματείας
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 24 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ἀρχὴνποιήσασθαιτὰςἑξη̑ςτοις̑προειρημένοιςπράξεις,καλλίστηνὑπόστασινὑπολαμβάνοντεςεἰν̑αιταύτηνδιὰτὸπρω̑τονμὲντὴνἈράτουσύνταξινἐπὶτούτουςκαταστρέφειντοὺςκαιρούς,οἱς̑συνάπτοντεςτὴνδιήγησιντὸνἀκόλουθονὑπὲρτω̑νἙλλήνωνἀποδιδόναιπροῃρήμεθαλόγον,δεύτερονδὲδιὰτὸκαὶτοὺςχρόνουςοὕτωςσυντρέχειντοὺςἑξη̑ςκαὶτοὺςπίπτονταςὑπὸτὴνἡμετέρανἱστορίανὥστετοὺςμὲνκαθ᾽ἡμα̑ςεἰν̑αι,τοὺςδὲκατὰτοὺςπατέραςἡμω̑ν,ἐξοὑ̑συμβαίνειτοις̑μὲναὐτοὺςἡμα̑ςπαραγεγονέναι,τὰδὲπαρὰτω̑νἑωρακότωνἀκηκοέναι.τὸγὰρἀνωτέρωπροσλαμβάνειντοις̑χρόνοις,ὡςἀκοὴνἐξἀκοη̑ςγράφειν,οὐκἐφαίνεθ᾽ἡμιν̑ἀσφαλεις̑ἔχεινοὔτετὰςδιαλήψειςοὔτετὰςἀποφάσεις.μάλισταδ᾽ἀπὸτούτωνἠρξάμεθατω̑νκαιρω̑νδιὰτὸκαὶτὴντύχηνὡςἂνεἰκεκαινοποιηκέναιπάντατὰκατὰτὴνοἰκουμένηνἐντοις̑προειρημένοιςκαιροις̑.
(5)OnPolybiusandσυμπλοκήWalbank1975remainsfundamental;seealsoQuinninthisvolume.
(6)Plut.Arat.3.3( = FGrHist231T6),32.5(FGrHist231F2),33.3(FGrHist231F3),38.6(FGrHist231F4a),Cleom.16.4(FGrHist231F4b).
(7)See,ingeneral,JacobyFGrHistIIbKomm.654–6,Walbank1933:6–9,Porter1937:xv–xvii.OntheMemoirsasautobiography:Momigliano1971:89,citingalso(n.23)E.Fraenkel.
(8)2.47.9–11(FGrHist231T5):διόπερἔχωντοιαύτηνπρόθεσινἀδήλωςαὐτὰδιενοειτ̑οχειρίζειν.ἐξοὑ̑πολλὰπαρὰτὴνἑαυτου̑γνώμηνἠναγκάζετοκαὶλέγεινκαὶποιειν̑πρὸςτοὺςἐκτός,δι᾽ὡ̑νἤμελλετὴνἐναντίανἔμφασινὑποδεικνύωνταύτηνἐπικρύψεσθαιτὴνοἰκονομίαν.ὡ̑νχάρινἔνιατούτωνοὐδ᾽ἐντοις̑ὑπομνήμασικατέταξεν.
(9)Plb.1.3.1–2andPlb.4.1.9–4.2.5 = FGrHist231T2.
(10)HCPi.228on2.40.4;cf.Walbank1972a:42,79withn.73.ForPédechalsotheMemoires‘s’étendaientjusqu’en221’(1964:261),thoughseebelown.27.
(11)JacobyFGrHistIIbKomm.654,taking221asthedateforSellasia,insteadofthemorelikely222(forthelatterdateseeHCPi.272on2.65–9).ForSellasiaastheterminalpoint,cf.Porter1937:xvi.
(12)Errington1967a:20n.9.
(13)Cf.Sacks1981:116n.47:‘ThereisatransitionfromkatagenostotheannalisticmethodinBooksiv–v.’
(14)Notetherepetitiveuseofthecognatesin§§5(δόγμα),6(ταδόξαντα),8(ἔδοξεδὲ),andtheuseoftheaccusativeandinfinitiveintheofficialstyle.Cf.Walbank,HCPi.623on5.91.5:‘P.mayherehavedrawnontheAchaeanrecords’.OnPolybius’useofAchaeanrecordsingeneral,seeWalbank1972a:83n.105.
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 25 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(15)ForthenatureoftheAchaeanσύνοδοςatthisperiod(apparentlytheprimaryassemblytowhichallcitizensoftheLeaguewereadmitted),seeLarsen1955:76–85,Aymard1938:88–95.
(16)Walbank,HCPi.30.
(17)Walbank,HCPi.628on5.101.5givesthemonthofJuly,butthisisfarfromcertain:seeDerow1976:276–7n.36.
(18)Errington1967a:22.
(19)Ἡμὲνοὐ̑νἈπελλου̑καὶτω̑νπερὶτὸνΛεόντιονπρα̑ξιςἐντούτοιςἠ̑ν,παλίντροπονλαμβάνουσατὴνπροκοπὴνταις̑ἐξἀρχη̑ςαὐτω̑νἐλπίσιν.ἔδοξανμὲνγὰρκαταπληξάμενοιτὸνἌρατονκαὶμονώσαντεςτὸνΦίλιππονποιήσεινὅτιἂναὐτοις̑δοκῃ̑συμφέρειν,ἀπέβηδὲτούτωντἀναντίαSeealsoMcGinginthisvolume,p.195.
(20)Errington1967a:36.
(21)Infact,asMcGing2010:116–17notes,thereisacleartensioninPolybius’treatmentofPhilip.Atonelevelhisnarrativehighlightstherapidityofhisactionsandthemisperceptionofhimasyoungandfoolish;ontheotherhand,timeandagain‘whenPhilipmakesagooddecision,itmustbeduetoAratus’(p.117).
(22)Errington1967a:20n.9.
(23)SeenowthedetailedaccountofMcGing2010:97–117.
(24)Plb.5.26.6:παρὰπλευρὰνὄντοςἈράτουκαὶπραγματικω̑ςἐξεργαζομένουτὴνὑπόθεσιν.
(25)Thereisnoevidence(paceErrington1967a:26)thatAratusfell‘outoffavourwithPhilipinthelatewinter’of219/18.Aratus’failuretosecuretheelectionofTimoxenusprovesnothingaboutAratus’relationshipwiththeking.PolybiusmakesitclearthatApelles(Philip’senemy,ifErringtoniscorrect)wasresponsiblefortheelectionresult(4.82.8).Allthis,ofcourse,presupposesthatApellescouldhavehadanyinfluenceontheresultandthattheelectiondoesnotratherbespeakdivisiveAchaeanfactionalism.Forthelatterview,seeWalbank1933:166.
(26)Plb.5.27.3:παρὰδ᾽Ἄρατονκαταλύσαςμετὰτούτουτὴνπα̑σανἐποιειτ̑οδιαγωγήν.
(27)Pédech1977:21–2infactstatesthistobethecase,thoughwithoutargument.Elsewhere(aboven.10)heacceptsthetraditionalenddateoftheMemoirs.
(28)TheclearestexplicationofthistheorycomesatPlb.3.6–7.OnthetheoryofthecausesofwarsinPolybius,seethelengthydiscussionofPédech1964:75–98.Moresuccinctly:Walbank1972a:157–60,McGing2010:76–80.
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 26 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(29)οὑ̑τὰςαἰτίαςσυνέβηγενέσθαιτοιαύτας(Plb.4.2.11)andτὴνμὲνοὐ̑ναἰτίανκαὶτὴνἀφορμὴνὁσυμμαχικὸςπόλεμοςἔσχενἐκτούτων(Plb.4.13.6).
(30)Plb.4.14.1.Forthedateofthemeeting,seeWalbank,HCPi:461–2adloc.
(31)AnἐπαύλιονbelongingtoacertainChyronisattacked(4.4.1).Anephor’sname(Scyron)isrecorded(4.4.3),asisthatofaprivatecitizen,Barbyrtas(4.4.5).
(32)Plb.4.9.10:μετὰδύ᾽ἡμέρας;4.10.1:Ὁδ᾽Ἄρατοςἐπιμείναςδύ᾽ἡμέρας.
(33)Pritchett1969:120–32.
(34)Plb.4.14.8:οὕτωςταχέωςκαὶμεγαλοψύχωςμετεμελήθητὸπλη̑θοςὥστεκαὶτοις̑συνεπιτιθεμένοιςαὐτῳ̑τω̑νἀντιπολιτευομένωνἐπὶπολὺδυσαρεστη̑σαικαὶπερὶτω̑νἑξη̑ςπάνταβουλεύεσθαικατὰτὴνἈράτουγνώμην.ForsimilarexpressionsofrespectforAratus’advice(γνώμη)inpassagesthat,aswehaveseen,mayderivefromAratusseePlb.4.76.9and5.5.10.
(35)Cf.Walbank1936,whosecommentontheinclusionofAratus’mistakesatCynaethain241(Plb.9.17)inhisMemoirsmightwellapplyheretoo:‘whileitistruethatAratosdidnotasarulestressincidentstohisdiscredit,hehadnoobjectiontoexcusinghisfailures,particularlyiftheyhappenedtobefollowedbyacorrespondingsuccessshortlyafterwards’(p.65).
(36)Plb.4.26.1:Τούτουδὲτου̑δόγματοςκυρωθέντοςκατὰτὸπρω̑τονἔτοςτη̑ςἑκατοστη̑ςκαὶτετταρακοστη̑ςὀλυμπιάδοςὁμὲνσυμμαχικὸςπροσαγορευόμενοςπόλεμοςἀρχὴνεἰλήφειδικαίανκαὶπρέπουσαντοις̑γεγονόσινἀδικήμασιν.
(37)OntheidentitiesanddatesoftheAchaeanassembliesin220,seeAymard1938:263–64,Larsen1955:79–81.
(38)FortheroughdatesofthesesynchronismstogetherwitharejectionofPédech’s‘sixmonth’theory,seeWalbank1974a:60–5,78.
(39)Pédech1964:161withn.320,towhichaddPlb.4.5.8.
(40)Pédech1964:164:‘Aratoseutsansaucundoutefortàfairepourconvaincrelesunsetlesautres.MalheureusementPolybeditpeudechosedesonactivitédiplomatique,oudumoinsdel’essentiel,quiétaitd’emporterleconsentementdePhilippe.’
(41)e.g.Walbank,HCPi.462adloc.
(42)SeePédech1955.
(43)ItlooksverymuchagainasifPolybiusisquotingthetextofthedecreeitself.Notetheabundanceofaccusativeandinfinitives.Cf.Walbank1972a:83n.105andthediscussionabove(p.96withn.14)of5.91.6–8.
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 27 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(44)Forthislastestimate,seeScholten2000:277.
(45)Larsen1952:5.
(46)Holleaux1905:363( = 1938–68:i.220),cf.Larsen1952:5–6,Scholten2000:286n.112.Walbank,HCPi.463(andPaton,Walbank,andHabicht2010)translates‘appropriateassemblies’.
(47)TheMessenianinterestsofthefirstmaylinkittotheMessenianorientedaccountoftheαἰτίαι;theelectionaspectofthesecondmaypointtoamoredocumentaryaccountofthemeeting;thepolemic,ofcourse,isPolybian.
(48)οἱδὲπερὶτὸνΔωρίμαχονδιὰτη̑ςἈχαιάτιδοςποιησάμενοιτὴνπορείαν,ἡ̑κονἄφνωπρὸςτὴνΚύναιθαν(4.17.3).
(49)Pritchett1969:127–8,130,whoneglectsthebranchtoPheneus.Pausanias(8.13.4–5)describestheroutesoutofOrchomenus.
(50)AsdescribedbyPausanias,therewasonesouthtoAmilus(8.13.5),onenorth-easttoPellene(8.15.2),oneeasttoStymphalus(8.16.1–17.5),onesouth-westtoCleitorandnorth-westtoNonacrisandCynaetha(8.17.5).
(51)ThestrategoswastoberesponsibleforagreeingtermswiththeSpartansandtheMessenians(4.15.4)
(52)Plb.4.24.3:Ἀράτῳτιςἐπιεικέστατ᾽ἂνπροσάπτοιτὴντότεῥηθεισ̑ανὑπὸτου̑βασιλέωςγνώμην.
(53)Plb.4.25.6:προθέμενοιδὲτὰςπροειρημέναςαἰτίαςἐντῳ̑δόγματι.…Cf.Walbank,HCPi.472adloc.:‘P.probablysawacopyofthedecree’.
(54)Walbank,HCPi.472adloc.suggeststhatPolybiusmayhavebeenglossingoverinternalstasis;theAetolianadvancetoMethydriumτη̑ςΜεγαλοπολίτιδος(Plb.4.10.10)maybeaslikelytobetheeventbeingreferredto.
(55)FortheriseandimportanceoftheἐφημερίςduringtheHellenisticperiod,seeWelles1934:283–4.ForapossiblePtolemaicexample,cf.the‘GurobPapyrus’( = FGrHist160).ThemostobviousparallelforelaborationandpublicationisRoman:Caesar’sCommentarii.Onthedifferencesbetweenὑπόμνηματα/ὑπομνηματισμοίandἐφημερίδεςasofficialdocuments,seeBickerman1933:esp.351–2:‘Die“Ephemeriden”warenAufzeichnungübereinzelneTage,der“Hypomnematismos”ProtokollübereinenEinzelakt,dieerstenwurdenaufRollen,derzweitealsEinzelschriftaufgesezt.’
(56)Cf.Plb.4.28.5and,themomentofoccurrence,5.105.4–6.SeealsoWalbank1975.
(57)Plb.4.28.2–6:εἰμὲνοὐ̑ντὰςπρώταςἐπιβολὰςτὰςἈννίβουταις̑Ἑλληνικαις̑πράξεσινἀπ᾽ἀρχη̑ςεὐθέωςἐπιπεπλέχθαισυνέβαινε,δη̑λονὡςἐντῃ̑προτέρᾳβύβλῳ
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 28 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
περὶτούτωνἂνἡμα̑ςἐναλλὰξἔδει…ἐπεὶδὲτάτεκατὰτὴνἸταλίανκαὶκατὰτὴνἙλλάδακαὶκατὰτὴνἈσίαντὰςμὲνἀρχὰςτω̑νπολέμωντούτωνἰδίαςεἰλήφει,τὰςδὲσυντελείαςκοινάς,καὶτὴνἐξήγησινπερὶαὐτω̑νἐκρίναμενποιήσασθαικατ᾽ἰδίαν,ἕωςἂνἐπὶτὸνκαιρὸνἔλθωμεντου̑τονἐνᾡ̑συνεπλάκησαναἱπροειρημέναιπράξειςἀλλήλαιςκαὶπρὸςἓντέλοςἤρξαντοτὴνἀναφορὰνἔχειν…ἐγένετοδ᾽ἡσυμπλοκὴτω̑νπράξεωνπερὶτὴντου̑πολέμουσυντέλειανκατὰτὸτρίτονἔτοςτη̑ςἑκατοστη̑ςκαὶτετταρακοστη̑ςὀλυμπιάδος.διὸκαὶτὰμετὰταυ̑τακοινῃ̑τοις̑καιροις̑ἀκολουθου̑ντεςἐξηγησόμεθα,τὰδὲπρὸτου̑κατ᾽ἰδίαν,ὡςεἰπ̑α,προσαναμιμνήσκοντεςμόνοντω̑νκατὰτοὺςαὐτοὺςκαιροὺςἐντῃ̑προτέρᾳβύβλῳδεδηλωμένων.
(58)Plb.5.31.4–5:τὸδ᾽εὐπαρακολούθητονκαὶσαφη̑γίνεσθαιτὴνδιήγησινοὐδὲνἀναγκαιότερονἐπὶταύτηςτη̑ςὀλυμπιάδοςἡγούμεθ᾽εἰν̑αιτου̑μὴσυμπλέκεινἀλλήλαιςτὰςπράξεις,ἀλλὰχωρίζεινκαὶδιαιρειν̑αὐτὰςκαθ᾽ὅσονἐστὶδυνατόν,μέχριςἂνἐπὶτὰςἑξη̑ςὀλυμπιάδαςἐλθόντεςκατ᾽ἔτοςἀρξώμεθαγράφειντὰςκατάλληλαγενομέναςπράξεις.
(59)MythanksareduetoDavidPotter,whocommentedonaveryearlydraftofthispaper,andtoBruceGibsonforhisthoughtsonalaterone.
(60)Polybiusdoesnotmakeitclearthatthishappenedonthefollowingday,butcouldtherehavebeenenoughtimeonthedayofthebattle?SincePhiliphadestablishedacampatDioskourion,bettertosupposeheusedit.
(61)PolybiusdoesnotmentionanightspentatHeraea,butitseemsbesttoassumeone:PhiliphadbeentravellingheavysinceOlympiaandneededtimetorepairabridge.
(62)Theovernightstopisaguess.
(63)Approximatedatesuppliedexempligratia.
(64)Howquicklycanonediga200ftmine?
(65)Aguess.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius, Aratus, and the History of the 140th Olympiad
Page 29 of 29
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 1 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
SomeMisunderstandingsofPolybiusinLivy
JohnBriscoe
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0005
AbstractandKeywords
Livy'stextshowsonlyafewmisunderstandingsofPolybius'Greek,anditismisleadingtospeakofLivyassomehowbeingnegligent.Thereare,however,afewexampleswheretechnicalmilitarylanguagecreatesconfusion,suchasthepracticeofloweringspearstohorizontalpositioninordertoattack,whichLivyrendersusingLatinponere,givingthemeaningof'layingdown'spears;similarly,Livy'saccountofthesiegeofAmbraciain189BCalsocontainstwoconfusions(oneofwhichmayarisefromanearlycorruptiontoPolybius'text).ThechapteralsoexaminesoccasionswhereLivy'sadoptionofpresenttensesfromPolybius'descriptionofmattersthatarecurrentcreateswhatareineffectanachronismsinLivy'sowntime.
Keywords:Polybius,Livy,translation,intertextuality,militaryhistory,anachronisms,sourcecriticism
ItwasintheyearaftertheappearanceofthefirstvolumeofWalbank’sCommentarythat
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 2 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
PeterWalshpublishedashortarticleentitled‘TheNegligentHistorian;“Howlers”inLivy’.1InitWalshdiscussedanumberofpassagesinBooks33and38inwhichLivyhas,invariousways,misunderstoodPolybius.HisconclusionwasthatthemistakeswereduenottoignoranceofGreek—Polybius’language,hethought,‘providesnogreatdifficultytoanyonefamiliarwithGreek’—,butto‘acarelessandcasualscrutinyofhissources’.2
IntheintroductiontomyfirstvolumeofcommentaryonLivy’sfourthdecadeIrepeated,Iregrettosay,Walsh’suseof‘howlers’andaddedanumberofotherinstancesofmisinterpretationofPolybius,certain,probable,orpossible,bothinpassageswherePolybiussurvivesand(though,ofcourse,noneoftheseiscertain)inthosewherehedoesnot.3Iproducedfurtherlistsforbooks34–7and38–40.4ThematterisbrieflydiscussedbyAdamsatthebeginningofBilingualismandtheLatinLanguageandinmoredetailbyKooninInfantryCombatinLivy’sBattleNarratives.5
Asiswellknown,PolybiuswasLivy’sprincipalsourcefortheeventsintheHellenisticworldnarratedinBooks31–45,whichcovertheyearsbetweentheendoftheSecondPunicWarin201andtheendoftheThirdMacedonianWarandtheexterminationoftheMacedonianmonarchyin167(adeliberatepolicyofregimechangeandthatisnottheonlysimilaritybetweenLivy’saccountofthewarandtheeventsof2003inIraq).ItwasHeinrichNissen,in(p.118) 1863,6whofirstidentifiedthesectionsofLivywhich,evenwhenthePolybianoriginaldoesnotsurvive,canbeseentohavebeenderivedfromPolybius.ButLivydidnotmerelytranslatePolybius:headaptedhimforhisownliterarypurposes,leavingoutwhatheregardedasunimportantorofnointeresttohisreaders,makingadditions—sometimesinsertingblatantfalsehoodswhichhefoundinhisnormalLatinsources,principallyClaudiusQuadrigariusandValeriusAntias—andre-arrangingthePolybianmaterialinwhatseemedtohim,oftenrightly,amoresatisfactoryway.7ThedetailedstudyofLivy’smethodsbeganin1910withtwolongarticlesbyWitte8(heparticularlystressedLivy’sdesiretoconstructdiscreteepisodes);themostimportantcontributionsincethenisthatofHermannTränkle,inhisbookLiviusundPolybios,publishedoverthirtyyearsago.9Theamountofthismaterialoverthewholefifteenbooksisimmense—andletusrememberthatLivywillhavecontinuedtousePolybiusfortheyearsfrom166to145,whenPolybius’narrativeended(thelastOlympiadyearinPolybiuswasalmostcertainly146/510),andwhichLivycoveredinBooks46to52.Overall,itisfairtosaythathesucceededinconveyingtohisreadersboththeessentialsandthedetailsofRome’srelationswiththeHellenisticworld(andwiththewesternMediterranean).Inthatperspective,evenifallthosepassagesIclassifiedaspossiblemisunderstandingsareincluded,11thenumberisrelativelysmall.Theycertainlydonotindicate—incasethisseemsmoreplausiblethanWalsh’saccusationofnegligence—thatLivycouldbesaidtohavehadadeficientknowledgeofGreek,atleastinthesenseofareadingknowledge:whetherhecouldbesaidtohavebeenbilingualinLatinandGreekis,ofcourse,quiteanothermatter.
IwouldnowliketoreconsiderthetwopassageswhichWalshdiscussedfirst.TheyarealsothetwotowhichAdamsrefers,andarethemostfamousoftheso-calledhowlers.ThefirstcomesfromtheaccountofthebattleofCynoscephalae,inThessaly,in197BC,in
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 3 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
whichT.QuinctiusFlamininus,consulin198,defeatedPhilipVofMacedonandbroughttheSecondMacedonianWartoanendonRome’sterms.Polybius(18.24.9)hasγενόμενουδὲτούτου,καὶτω̑νπολεμίωνἐνχερσὶνὄντων,τοις̑μὲνφαλαγγίταιςἐδόθηπαράγγελμακαταβαλου̑σιτὰςσαρίσαςἐπάγειν,Livy(33.8.13)Macedonumphalangemhastispositis,quarumlongitudoimpedimentoerat,gladiisremgerereiubet.WalshtranslatesPolybiusthus:‘Thereupon,sincetheenemywascloseathand,themenofthephalanxwereorderedtolowertheirpikesandcharge’.Livy,however,says(mytranslation)‘He(sc.Philip)orderedthe(p.119) Macedonianphalanxtolayasidetheirspears,whoselengthwasanencumbrance,andtodothebusinesswithswords’.
Itisclearwhathashappened.καταβάλλεινheremeans‘lowerintoahorizontalposition’.Livyrecognizedtheword,buttookitinthesenseof‘laydown’and,sincetheMacedonianswereobviouslynotgoingtoexposethemselvestotheRomanlegionsunarmed,explainedthattheyweretousetheirswordsandthatthelengthofthespearswasthereasonforlayingthemdown.AsAdamssays,Livywillhaveanalysedκαταβάλλεινcorrectly,butdidnotrecognizethetechnicaluseoftheverb.(Polybiusreferstothemanœuvreat18.30.2(τὴνπροβολήν),inthecourseofhisdigressioncomparingthelegionandthephalanx(18.28–32);hemakesnoreferencetheretoproblemscreatedbythelengthofthespears,butinhisaccountofthebattleofPydnain168,derivedfromPolybius,Livy(44.41.7)writesimmobilemlongitudineetgrauitatehastam.)EvenWalshdescribedthiscaseas‘amorepardonablemistake’.12
TwofurtherfactorsmayhavecontributedtoLivy’serror.First,hisbattlescenes,reflectingactualpractice,frequentlyinvolvetheRomansoldiersdiscardingtheirspearsandfightingwithswords(cf.,e.g.,6.12.8pilisantepedespositisgladiistantumdextrasarmemus‘letuslaydownourspearsatourfeetandarmourrighthandswithswordsalone’)andhewouldhaveassumedthatthephalanxactedinthesameway.13Secondly,byἐνχερσίνPolybiusmeans‘closeathand’,butitoftenreferstohand-to-handfighting(cf.LSJs.v.χείρ6 f)andLivymaywellhavetakenitthus.14
InfactAdamsisnotconvincedthatLivymisunderstoodPolybiusatall.Inhistexthedescribesitasapossiblecase,butinafootnotesays‘thepossibilitycannotberuledoutthatLivymadeadeliberatechangetothenatureoftheevent,forwhateverreasonsofartistry’.15IdonotmyselffinditverylikelythatLivy,ifhehadcorrectlyunderstoodPolybius,wouldhavedeliberatelyintroducedapieceofmilitarynonsenseforliteraryreasons.(Itshouldbesaidthatitisbynomeanscertain,asisoftenthought,thatLivyhadnomilitaryexperience:evenifhewasbornin59BC,not,asSymeandOgilviethought,in64,16hecouldhaveservedinthePerusineWar.17)
ItlooksasifLivymadethesamemistakeat35.35.18ponerehastasequitesAlexamenusiubet(‘Alexamenusorderedthecavalrymentolaydowntheirspears’;thepassageconcernsthekillingofNabisofSpartabyAetoliancavalryledbyAlexamenus),thoughtherewedonothavethetextofPolybiustoenableustobesure.Inarecentarticle,however,C.L.H.Barneshasdiscussed(p.120) both33.8.13and35.35.18,seekingtoshowthatLivyunderstoodPolybiuscorrectly.18Hisargumentmaybesummarizedasfollows:
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 4 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(i)Livydidnotmisunderstandκαταβάλλειν,sinceponerecanbeallowedtomean‘placeinattackposition’;(ii)gladiisisaninterpolationbyascribewhomadethemistakenormallyattributedtoLivy;(iii)35.35.18impliesthattheAetoliansstillhadtheirspearsandusedthemtokillNabis;(iv)quarumlongitudoimpedimentoeratisnotanexplanationofhastispositis,butaclue(sc.toLivy’sreaders)thattheMacedonians’formidableweaponwouldleadtotheirdefeat.
Thisistotallyunconvincing:
(i)onecannotsimplyassignawordameaningitdoesnotpossessanywhereinLatinliterature;19(ii)remgerere,whichisneverusedwithoutsomeformofqualification(cf.TLLvi/2.1944.31 ff.)doesnotmean‘settlethematter’:toexpressthatLivywouldhavehadtosayremconficereorremfelicitergerere;andwhileaninterpolationisalwayspossibleinprinciple,toproposeoneheresmacksofdesperation;(iii)Alexamenusorderedhistroopstolaydowntheirspears:thereisnoindicationthathedidsohimself;andwhileitisindeedthecasethattheAetoliansmusthavekilledNabiswithspears,itdoesnotfollowthatLivydidnotthinkthattheyusedswords.(iv)itisinconceivablethatquarumlongitudoimpedientoeratisnotintendedasanexplanationofhastispositis:hadLivywantedtopointforwardtotheresultofthebattle,hewouldhavewrittenfuturaeratormadethecommentinaseparatesentence.20(p.121)
ThesecondpassagecomesfromtheaccountofthesiegeofAmbracia,innorth-westGreece,byM.FulviusNobilior,consulin189.AmbraciabelongedtotheAetolianLeague,withwhichRomewasstillatwarfollowingtheLeague’sinvitationtoAntiochusIIItoinvadeGreece.Orthodoxsiegemethodshavingprovedunsuccessful,Fulviusdecidedtounderminethewallsbyatunnellingoperation.TheAmbraciotsrealizedwhatwashappeninganddugatrenchtomeettheRomantunnel.Anundergroundbattletookplace,whichprovedindecisive,accordingtoPolybius(21.28.11)διὰτὸπροβάλλεσθαιθυρεοὺςκαὶγέρραπρὸαὑτω̑νἀμφότεροι(‘bothsidesusedshieldsandwattlesasprotection’).
Livy(38.7.10)writessegniordeindeea(sc.pugna)factaest,intersaepientibuscuniculumubiuellent,nuncciliciispraetentis,nuncforibusraptimobiectis(‘it(sc.thebattle)becamerathersluggish,theAmbraciotsblockingthetunnelwherevertheywished,nowstretchingoutblankets,nowhurriedlyusingdoorsasbarriers’).Itseemsthatwehaveaconfusionofθυρεός‘shield’andθύρα‘door’,aseriouserror,onemightreadilyconclude.Thereis,however,asAdamssuggests,arealpossibilitythatthetextofPolybiususedbyLivywascorruptandreadθύρας.21Ifthatsoundslikespecialpleading,considerPolybius27.5.3and,derivedfromit,Livy42.46.7,whereΘήβας/Thebasare
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 5 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
manifesterrorsforΘίσβας/Thisbas.22Livy,knowingnothingofThisbe,mightwellhavemadesuchanerrorhimself,butPolybius,obviously,wouldnothavedoneso.Itmustbe,asMommsensaw,23thatthetextofPolybiuswasalreadycorruptbythetimeofLivy.Tränkle24refusedtoacceptthis,unabletobelieveinsuchanearlycorruption—corruption,ofcourse,canoccurthefirsttimeatextiscopied—andheld,withReiske,25thatalacunashouldbepositedbetweenεὐνοίαςandτω̑νδέ(Plb.27.5.3–4),whichcontainedwhatappearsatLivy42.46.8,withnothingcorrespondingtoitinPolybius.Tränkle,ofcourse,wrotethisbeforethepublicationofHCPiii,whichmighthavepersuadedhimtochangehismind.
IreturntothesiegeofAmbraciaandtoanother,evenmoreextraordinaryerrorinthesamesentence,one,however,whichhasattractedlittleattention,thoughitdidnotescapethenoticeofTränkle.26InPolybiusmentionofthe(p.122) shieldsisfollowedbyoneofγέρρα,whileinLivynuncforibusraptimobiectisisprecededbynuncciliciispraetentis.γέρραarewickerworkscreensorwattles,usedinsiegeoperations,coveringwhatinLatinarecalledpluteioruineae.27InfactPolybiushadmentionedthemearlierinthechapter,atthebeginningofhisaccountofthetunnellingoperation(21.28.4)andLivycorrectlyrenderedγέρραwithuineis.Here,however,hewroteciliciis:ciliciaareroughblanketsandIcannotconceivewhatpossessedLivytotalkofthemhere,butpresumablyhecouldmakenosenseofγέρραinthiscontext;ciliciadooccurinanavalcontextinafragmentofSisenna(107P),28butthesignificanceofthat,ifany,isunclear.
Whatshouldbeadded,however,isthattherefollowsinPolybius(21.28.12–16)adescriptionofadevice—ajarfilledwithfeathers—whichtheAmbraciotsconstructedinordertoblowsmokeintothetunnel.Livy(38.7.11–13)29misunderstoodtwopoints:spearstopreventtheRomansapproachingthedevicewereplacedbetweenthejarandthewallsofthetunnel,notthroughtheholesinthelid,wheretheywouldhavebeenuseless;andfirewasplacedinthejarbeforethelidwasfitted,notafterwards,buthecanreadilybeexcusedforfailingtograspallthedetailsofadifficultpieceofGreek,andhesucceeds,taking,asoften,farlessspacethanPolybius,inconveyingthegeneralnatureofthedeviceaccuratelyenough.Tränkle’sclaimthattheattentivereaderscarcelygetsovertheirbewilderment30isover-harsh.
InowturntoadifferentcategoryofmisrepresentationofPolybius,namelypassageswhereLivyappearstohavetakenoverapresenttensefromhissourceinawaythatcreates,ormaycreate,ananachronism.31At33.17.5–8Livyhasageographicalexcursus,clearlytakenfromPolybius,whowasfondofsuchthings,concerningtheislandofLeucas,offthecoastofAcarnania,innorth-westGreece:hesays(§6)Leucadianuncinsulaest,uadosofretoquodperfossummanuestabAcarnaniadiuisa;tumpaeninsulaerat(‘Leucasisnowanisland,dividedfromAcarnaniabyamanuallyexcavatedshallowstrait;thenitwasapeninsula’).Polybiusmusthavesaid,inaccordancewiththenormalview,thatLeucaswasonceapeninsula,butinhistimewasanisland(thelandjoiningittothemainland,perhapsonlyasandbar,wasbelievedtohavebeenseveredinthetimeofCypselusofCorinth32).LivytookthisoverwithoutalterationandthusappearstobesayingthatLeucaswasapeninsulain197butanislandatthetimehewaswriting.
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 6 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(p.123) At34.51.5LivysaysthattheThessalians,becauseoftheirrestlessnature(inquietoingeniogentis;heisalwaysinterestedintheinnatecharacteristicsofvariouspeoples33),wereunabletoholdpeacefulmeetingsofpoliticalorgansiamindeaprincipioadnostramusqueaetatem(‘rightfromthebeginninguptoourownage’).ItisimprobablethatLivyknewanythingofcurrentThessalianpolitics,anditislikelythatagainhehasmerelyrepeatedaphrasewhichinPolybiusreferredtothemid-secondcenturyBC.34Similarly,whenat35.38.3LivytalksofafestivalofDianaofAmarynthusatEretriaquodnonpopulariummodosedCarystiorumetiamcoetucelebratur(‘whichiscelebratedbyagatheringtogethernotonlyofthelocalpeoplebutalsoofthoseofCarystus’),itisunlikelythatheknewofsuchacelebrationinhisowndayandhehasprobablytakenoverapresentfromPolybius.
ThreefurtherpassagescomefromtheendofBook39andthebeginningofBook40.At39.49–50LivyrelatestheeventsleadingtothedeathofthegreatAchaeanleader(andheroofPolybius)Philopoemen.MessenehadattemptedtosecedefromtheAchaeanLeagueandwarhadresulted.Philopoemenwascaughtinanambush,fellfromhishorse,andwascapturedbytheMessenians.Itwasdecidedtoimprisonhimovernightinanundergroundstore,andLivywrites(39.50.3)eouinctusdemittitur,etsaxumingens,quooperitur,machinasuperimpositumest(‘Hewasputdownintoit,bound,andahugerock,withwhichitiscovered,wasputontopwithalever’—thelatterisprobablythemeaningofmachina;Walsh35translates‘crane’).ItisscarcelycrediblethatLivyhadanyknowledgeaboutsucharrangementsatMesseneinhisowntime,andthepresentoperiturwasprobablytakenoverfromPolybius.ThatwastheviewofWeissenbornandMüllerintheirnoteonthepassage,36thoughtheysuggestalternativelyandlessplausibly(theyoffernoparallelsforsuchauseofthepresent)thatoperiturreferstothefactthatthestonehadtobereplacedinpositioneachtimethestorewasopened.Itmaybe,though,thatLivywasinfluencedbythecommonuseofthepresentofverbsofclosingandsurroundingtoindicateastateofaffairsbroughtaboutbypastaction.37
At40.3.3LivyistalkingaboutPhilipV’sforcedmovementofpopulationfromthecitiesofthenorthcoastoftheAegeantothehinterlandandtheirreplacementbyThraciansandothernon-Greekpeoples.HewritesiamprimumomnemferemultitudinemciuiumexmaritimisciuitatibuscumfamiliissuisinEmathiam—quaenuncdicitur:quondamappellataPaeoniaest—traduxit(‘Firstofall,hetransplantedalmostthewholeofthecitizen(p.124) populationofthemaritimestates,togetherwiththeirhouseholds,toEmathia—asitnowis;itwaspreviouslycalledPaeonia’.InthiscasethecorrespondingpassageofPolybiussurvives,andhewrites(23.10.4)τὴννυ̑νμὲνἨμαθίαν,τὸδὲπαλαιὸνΠαιονίανπροσαγορευομένην,whichcorrespondsexactlytothewordsofLivy.Here,then,thereisnodoubtthatLivyhastakenquaenuncdicitur38fromPolybius:whatisuncertainiswhetherhehasinfactcommittedananachronisminsodoing.HehimselfwillscarcelyhavehadanyideawhetherornotEmathiawasstillthenameofthearea.
ThefollowingchapterofLivyrelatestheextraordinarystoryofTheoxena.Sheandhernowdeadsister,Archo,hadbeenmarriedtomenwhohadbeenputtodeathbyPhilipV.ShehadsubsequentlymarriedArcho’ssecondhusband,Poris,and,whenPhilip,soit
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 7 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
wassaid,decidedtokillallthechildrenofthosehehadexecutedearlier,committedsuicidetogetherwithherhusband,hersonbyherfirstmarriage,andallthechildrenofArcho.At40.4.9LivysaysproficiscunturabThessalonicaAeneamadstatumsacrificiumquodAeneaeconditoricummagnacaerimoniaquotannisfaciunt(‘TheysetoutfromThessalonicatoAeneaforafixedsacrificewhichtheyperformfortheirfounderAeneaseachyearwithgreatceremony’).Thepassageispreciselyparallelto35.38.3:thePolybianoriginaldoesnotsurvive,buttherecanbenodoubtthatheindicatedthatthesacrificewasbeingperformedathistime.Livyisperhapsunlikelytohaveknownwhetheritwasstillbeingperformed,and,again,thereisnootherevidence.39
Finally,42.55.3,inLivy’saccountofthefirstyear’scampaign(171)oftheThirdMacedonianWar.TheconsulP.LiciniusCrassus,marchingfromtheAdriaticcoasttowardsThessaly,encountersdifficultterraininAthamania.Livycontinuescuisiuexatishominibusequisquetironemexercitumducentiacieinstructaetlocosuoettemporeobstitissetrex,neRomaniquidemabnuuntmagnasuacumcladefuissepugnaturos(‘Iftheking,ataplaceandtimewhichfavouredhim,hadblockedtheconsul’swaywhenhewasleadinganarmyofrecruitsandwhenhismenandhorsesweredistressed,noteventheRomansdenythatthebattlewouldhaveresultedinagreatdisaster’).ThisisclearlythecommentofPolybius,referringtowhatcontemporaryRomanshadtoldhim:theRomansofLivy’sowntimewouldnothavehadaviewonthematter.
Notes:
(1)Walsh1958.
(2)Walsh1958:88.
(3)Briscoe1973:6;intherevisedversionofthissectionoftheintroduction(Briscoe2009:467)Ihavereplaced‘howlers’by‘errors’;cf.myremarksinBriscoe1993:48.
(4)Briscoe1981:2,2008:3.
(5)Adams2003:4–5,Koon2010:25–6(atanearlierstageSamKoonkindlyshowedmethecorrespondingpagesofhis2007ManchesterPh.D.thesis).
(6)Nissen1863.
(7)Cf.Briscoe1973:1–8( = 2009:461–70),1981:1–3,2008:1–3.
(8)Witte1910.
(9)Tränkle1977.
(10)Cf.Walbank,HCPiii.50.
(11)Adams(2003:4n.9)callsthese‘evenlessconvincing’(sc.thantheoneIshalldiscussshortly)andinsomecases‘purelyspeculative’.
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 8 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(12)Walsh1958:84.
(13)SeeOakley1995:509–10,commentingon6.12.8.
(14)Iheredevelopapointmadebyacontributortothediscussionattheconference(IregretthatIdonotknowhisidentity).
(15)Adams2003:4n.9.
(16)Syme1979:414–16,Ogilvie1965:1;contraBadian1993:10–11.
(17)Cf.Koon2010:23.
(18)Barnes2005.
(19)BruceGibsondrawsmyattentiontoVirg.Aen.9.586,wherepositis…hastisclearlyreferstolayingdownspears.
(20)ThefootnotestoBarnes’sarticlecontainanumberofmisleadingstatementsabouttheviewsofvariousscholars,thoughitisunclearwhetherthisisduetomisunderstandingorclumsinessofexpression.Thusatn.1Iamsaidtohave‘condonedreadinghastispositistomean“move(thespears)intoahorizontalposition” ’:whatIsaidwas‘itiswrongtobeover-impressedbyLivy’sfamous“howlers”suchasinterpretingκαταβάλλειντὰςσαρίσαςas“puttingtheirspearsontheground”ratherthan“moveintoahorizontalpositionreadyforthecharge” ’(Briscoe1993:48).Inn.3thestatementthatCrévierandDrakenborch‘preferreddemittere’mightsuggestanemendation:whatBarnesshouldhavesaidis‘thoughtthatLivyoughttohavewrittendemissis’(whichishowCasaubontranslatedPolybiusintoLatin);Drakenborch(1741:690),moreover,merelyreportstheviewofCrévier:hedoesnothimselfexpressanopinion.Inn.5BarnesclaimsthatPianezzola(1969:86)‘pointedoutthatLivyhadplentyofopportunitiestoencountertheterm(sc.καταβάλλειν)throughoutthetextofPolybius’:infacthesaidthatPolybiususeditonotheroccasions;thepassagesconcerned(5.85.9,11.15.6,and11.16.1)allconcernpurelyGreekaffairsandLivymaywellnothavebotheredtoreadthem.Inn.11WeissenbornandMüller(1883:13)aresaidtohave‘realizedthatgladiisoughttorefertotheRomans,nottotheMacedonianphalangites’:theyinfactsaidthattheRomansfoughtwithswords,buttheMacedonianphalanxdidnot.
(21)Adams2003:4.
(22)Cf.Walbank,HCPiii.298.
(23)Mommsen1913:287–8.
(24)Tränkle1977:39–40n.72.
(25)Reiske1763:688.
(26)Tränkle1977:180–1n.11.IhererepeatwhatIwroteinmynoteonthepassage
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 9 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(Briscoe2008:44).
(27)Cf.Briscoe1981:81.
(28)puppisacetomadefactiscentonibusinteguntur,quossuprapereptuaaclaxesuspensaciliciaobtenduntur.aclaxeisaconjectureofSalmasiusforaclassiintheMSS(ofNoniusMarcellus,thesourceofthevastmajorityofthefragmentsofSisenna)andisfarfromcertain.
(29)IrepeatherewhatIsaidinmynoteonthepassage(Briscoe2008:45).
(30)Tränkle1977:186‘…deraufmerksameLeserkaumausdemStaunenherauskommt’.
(31)ToaconsiderableextentIamrepeatingmynotesonthepassagesconcerned,buthopethattheywillacquiregreaterpointbybeingbroughttogether.
(32)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.541.
(33)Cf.Oakley1998:264,Briscoe2008:53.
(34)At2.14.1,whereLivywritesmostraditusabantiquisusqueadnostramaetatem(‘acustomhandeddownfromtheancientsrightuptoourowntime’),thereisnoreasontosuspectananachronism.
(35)Walsh1994:95.
(36)WeissenbornandMüller1909:108.
(37)Cf.KühnerandStegmann1955:i.118.
(38)ForLivy’suseoftherelative+nuncinsuchformulations,seeOakley1998:376(thoughcf.Briscoe2008:288,417).
(39)InthediscussionattheconferenceJohnMarincolaarguedthatsinceAeneaswasinvolved,thisisjustthesortofdetailwhichsomepeopleatRomemaywellhaveknownabout.FortheAeneaslegendatAenea,seeErskine2001:94–5,Briscoe2008:421.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
Some Misunderstandings of Polybius in Livy
Page 10 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 1 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
Polybius’Romanprokataskeuē
HansBeck
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0006
AbstractandKeywords
ThischapterexaminesPolybiusRomanprokataskeuē('introduction'),whichrunsfromtheopeningofBook1to2.37.Thisisauniquepieceofhistoriographicalwriting,whichisdesignedtoprovidetheintroductiontoauniversalhistory,butwhichalsodescribesRome'sfirstconflictwithCarthageandtheperiodleadinguptotheHannibalicWar.Withinthesummarynarrativethatisoffered,Polybiuscanbeseentofocusonkeyeventsandreversals,especiallyinhistreatmentoftheFirstPunicWar.WhiletraditionallythevalueoftheevidenceofCassiusDio/Zonarasforthisperiodhasbeenaccordedlessweight,CassiusDio/ZonarasneverthelessrepresentanimportantcontrolforexaminingtheunderlyingassumptionsandmethodologiesofthePolybianprokataskeuē,whichisheavilyconcernedwithemphasizingthenatureoftheRomanachievement.
Keywords:Polybius,CassiusDio,Zonaras,Philinus,FabiusPictor,universalhistory,FirstPunicWar,sourcecriticism
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 2 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Itisatruismthatwenevergetthefullstoryofevents,pastorpresent.Thehumanbrainworksinaninnatelyselectiveway,andourabilitytocollect,analyse,andprocessdatafromsourcesotherthanourindividualexperiencehasitslimitations.Thenemesisofsubjectivityaddstotheaccumulationofgapsandomissions.Inordertocreatenarrativesandfillthemwithmeaning,weselectwhatwethinkissignificantinanygivencontext,aselectionwhichisbasedonpreconceptionsthat,again,aretheresultofoursubjectiveapproach.Theinevitableprocessofselection(randomordeliberate)posesoneofthegreatestproblemsforthewritingofancienthistory.Literaryandmaterialevidenceisscarceandoftenisolated.Historiansarenotalwaysinapositiontocomparedifferentaccountsonanygivenincident;moreoftenthannot,weareforcedtorelyontextualremainsthatofferbriefsnapshotsofeventsratherthancomplexaccounts,writtenfromdifferentperspectivesandretrievedfrommultiplelayersofinvestigation.
Thesourcenarrativeisinitselftheproductofahighlysubjectiveprocess.Whatmightappearasa‘fact’isnothingmorethanthepreselectionofanancientauthor,madesubconsciouslyorconsciously,andmodelled,presented,andappraisedaccordingtohisownpreconceptions.Anauthormayhavecomposedhisaccounttomeetcertainliterarystandardsandsuitartisticpurposes,toachieveamorepersuasivemessageormeaning,orsimplytoadheretotheneedsofhissupposedaudience.Indeed,theancientauthorwillhaveomittedasredundantinformationwithwhichhisaudiencewasmostlikelyveryfamiliar.Atthesametime,hewillhavemeticulouslyspelledoutotheritemsandepisodes.Butoftentheyonlymadesensebecausetheaudienceunderstoodtheminrelationtoothernotionsthatwereleftunsaid.Finally,someremarkswouldhavebeencompletelynewtotheaudience,inwhichcasetheywereatthemercyoftheauthorandhispreconceptions,forbetterorforworse.1
(p.126) Theprocessesofomission,selection,andframingcontributetoadramaticreductionofwhatwecallthe‘bodyofevidence’.Muchremainsunknownor,atbest,opentospeculation,becausedetailshavebeenexcludedfromthenarrative;orsimplybecauseanotherpieceofinformation,crucialforunderstandingthesignificanceofwhatwasincluded,hadbeenomitted.Awareofthisproblem,JacobBurckhardtreachedthefamousverdictthatThucydides’Historiesmaywellcontainapieceoffirst-classinformationthatwillonlybediscoveredinacenturyorso.2Thekeywillbetorecoverthemissinglinkthatonceconnectedtherelatedpieceofevidencetotheinformationthatwasprecluded.Inthemeantime,selectionandsubjectivityprevailmorethanever.
Thewritingofacommentaryisoneofthemosteffectivescholarlyantidotesagainstselectivity.Commentariesexpanduponthenarrativeoftheancientsources:theyspellouttheunspoken;theydelveintothetextinanattempttoreadbetweenthelines,tryingtoseewhatthesourcesrevealaboutthesubconsciousassumptionsandknowledgeofawriterandhisaudience.Thepropercommentary,tobesure,distinguishesitselfthroughlinguisticexpertise.Forinstance,whenCatoissaidtohaveusedthewordbiber,thelearnedmodernscholiastnotesatsomelengththatthismaynotmean‘drinker’,butrather‘todrink’,sincebiberisanarchaicinfinitiveandnotanoun.3Thisisimportant.Butitishardlythissortofcommentarythat,toborrowaPolybianphrase,enlightensthe
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 3 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
readersothathecanmakehisownjudgementanddrawforthnewconclusions.
Incontrast(andalthoughthegenreitselfisexposedtothepitfallsofselectivity),thehistoricalcommentaryattemptstofillthegapsofselectivityandprovideameaningtothenarrativetraditionthatgoesbeyondtheaccountofthewrittenword.Itexplainsbothintra-andextra-textualreferences,andelaboratesontheculturalcharacteristicsofapastenvironment;inthisregard,italsoresolvestextualorlinguisticambiguities.But,mostofall,itshedslightonthetext’simplicitassumptionsandsilentinnuendoes.Itdisclosestheintellectualenvironmentsurroundingtheauthorandhisreadership,sinceitilluminatesthebackgroundknowledgeoftheircommunication.Inthisregard,thecriticalcommentarybecomesonewiththeancienttradition.4Thedangers(p.127) associatedwithsuchanenterpriseareobvious:redundancyisone,over-interpretationanother;andbehindthefaçadeofacquaintancewiththeancientauthoritieslurksthetemptationofself-importance.HCPisfreefromanyofthesemisfortunes.FrankWalbanknotonlymasteredtheskillofcriticalcommentarywriting,buthiscommentaryitselfhassetthestandardsforgenerations.Itisanexemplummaiorum,apermanentreminderofwhathasbeenachieved,andcanbeachieved,bymeansoftruescholarship.
ItwasperhapsHCPVolume1thatchallengeditsauthorinhisdealingswithselectionandsubjectivitymorethananythingelse.Volume1coversBooks1–6.ThesebooksincludeapreludetotheactualtopicofPolybius’universalhistory,famouslyannouncedas‘thefifty-threeyears[from220to167]inwhichtheRomanssucceededinbringingalmostthewholeinhabitedworldunderthem’.5Beforeheturnedtothis,Polybius‘thoughtitnecessarytoprefixthisbook[thefirst]andthenext’(1.3.8),inorderthat‘nooneafterbecomingengrossedinthenarrativepropermayfindhimselfataloss,andaskbywhatcounselandtrustingtowhatpowerandresourcestheRomansembarkedonthatenterprisewhichhasmadethemlordsoverlandandseainourpartoftheworld’(1.3.9).Thegrandschemeisclear.Books1and2weredesignedtoprovideapreliminarysketch,whilethepropernarrativecommencedinBook3.Thisprefacewasnecessary—atleastthisiswhatPolybiusthought—becausetheGreekswerenot‘wellacquaintedwiththetwostateswhichdisputedtheempireoftheworld’.Thisledhim‘todeal…withtheprevioushistory[oftheRomansandtheCarthaginians]andtonarratewhatpurposeguidedthemandonwhatsourcesofstrengththeyrelied,inenteringuponsuchavastundertaking’(1.3.7).
Polybiusframedanewtechnicalexpressionforthispreface,ἡπροκατασκευή,whichsignifiesthe‘preparation’or‘introduction’tothemainhistory(theκατασκευή,HCPi.216).HegenerallyusesthetermprokataskeuēforthecontentsofBooks1and2,6boththroughoutthebooksthemselves,whenherefersto‘thebriefsummaryofeventsincludedintheseintroductorybooks’(1.13.1),andinlatersectionsofhisHistories.Forinstance,inBooks4and5,whenthereaderisremindedofeventsdescribedinthepreface,heisreferredtotheprokataskeuē(4.1.9;5.111.10).Onthefirstoccurenceofprokataskeuēinthetext(1.3.10),HCPvolume1listsotherreferencesinthePolybiantextandinformsthereaderthat,eventhoughthewordisanewtermforan(p.128)introduction,‘thecustomofappendingintroductionswasalreadyusual’(44).Walbank
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 4 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
refersthereadertoThucydidesBook1,whoseArchaeology(1.2–22)maywellhaveformedamosteminentandmostinfluentialintroductiontomonographichistory-writinginantiquity.7
Lateroccurrencesofthetermprokataskeuē,alloftheminBooks1–5,receivenospecificdiscussioninHCPVolume1,withonenotableexception.In2.37.2,towardstheendofhisRomanpreface,Polybiusremarksthathehasnow‘givenacontinuoussketch,suitabletothepreliminaryplanofmybook,ofeventsinSicily,Libyaandsoforth…downtothesecondwarbetweentheRomansandCarthaginians.This,asIstatedattheoutset[1.3.1–2],isthedateatwhichIproposetobeginmyownnarrative.’Yet,asthetextunfolds,Polybiusturns‘totheaffairsofGreece,sothateverywherealikeImaybringdownthispreliminaryorintroductorysketchtothesamedate’(2.37.3).Inotherwords,PolybiusclosestheRomanprokataskeuēin2.37.2withthepromisetoturntohisgenuinetopic.However,inthenextsentence(3)hebeginstoappendalengthysurveyoftheearlierhistoryofMacedonandAchaea(2.37.3–70.8).Thisisremarkableinthesensethatitpresentsasignificantruptureinthetext.Italsocontradictstheprogrammaticstatementonthenatureoftheprokataskeuēin1.3.7–10(citedabove),whichwasconceivedofasanintroductionnecessarybecauseofHellenicignoranceofRomanandCarthaginianhistoriespriortotheHannibalicWar.
ThiscontradictionhastriggeredalivelydebateontheHellenicprokataskeuēanditsplaceintheHistories.Notably,MatthiasGelzerandRichardLaqueurhavearguedthatPolybiusinsertedtheAchaeanintroduction(2.37.3–70.8)onlytowardstheendofhislife(after146).8GelzerinparticularassumedthatthesecondhalfofBook2wasnotenvisagedatallwhentheHistorieswerecomposed.Onasimilarnote,hesuggestedthatreferencestothecontentsoftheHellenicintroduction(suchas1.13.5)werealsolateradditions.9GelzersurmountstheobviousdifficultycreatedbythosereferencesbyproposingthehypothesisofanearlyPolybianworkwhichwascomposedinsupportofthepropagandaconductedforthereturnoftheAchaeanexilesafterPydna.AccordingtoGelzer,thatworkwaslaterincorporatedintothemainhistory,alongwithaseriesofcross-referencesandanticipatorynotes.10ThisviewpromptedalengthyresponseinHCPi.215–16.Itsmainobjectivewastocounterthehypothesisofalaterinsertion.WalbankpointstovarioussectionsoftheintroductorychaptersthatimplythecontinuedexistenceoftheAchaeanLeagueatthetimeofthecompositionofBooks1and2.11Thisargument(p.129) alonemakesitdifficulttoacceptthehypothesisofalaterinsertion,andthereseemstobenocompellingreasontoreviveit.However,thissolutionstillprovokesacertaindiscomfort,sinceWalbankdoesnotexplainthebreakinthenarrativeat2.37.2–3asnotedabove,whenPolybiusclosestheRomanintroductionandpromisestoturntohisownnarrativeonlytocontinuewiththeHellenicintroduction.HCPVolume1leavesthisincongruitywithoutcomment.
Theissueisdifficulttoresolve,buttheterminologyin2.37mayhintatabetterunderstandingofthiscrucialpassage.WhiletheaccountofRomanaffairspriortotheHannibalicWarisagainreferredtoasprokataskeuē(2.37.2),thehistorywhichfollowsisannouncedassyntaxis(2.37.3)and,forthefirsttime,asapodeiktikēhistoria(ibid.).As
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 5 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Walbankhasshownasearlyas1945andagaininHCPVolume1,Polybiususesapodeiktikosheretomean‘supportedbyfullreasons’,whichhighlightsapodeiktikēhistoriaas‘detailed,well-arguedhistory’.12Thetermthusopposesthe‘apodeictic’narrativeofthemainthemeandthepreparatoryaccountthatconsistsofmereassertions(cf.4.40.1)or,asofthispoint,theprokataskeuēofBooks1and2.Theapodeicticnarrativeisconcernedwithafully-fledged,elaboratemethodology,tracingcausesandeffects.Incontrast,theprokataskeuēiskephalaiōdōs,‘summarilyasintroduction’or,literally,‘accordingtoheadtopics’(cf.1.13.7;2.1.4).13Itssummarynaturedoesnotallowforanin-depthanalysis,anditmaynotevenleaveroomforacriticalreviewofotherhistorians,letalonetheinclusionofmaterialofatragiccharacter.14Inshort,apodeiktikosanditsopposite,kephalaiōdēs,refertodistinctmethodologiesthatareappliedtodifferentsectionsoftheHistories.Polybiusendorsesthisideain2.37,attheendoftheRomanintroduction.Hedoesso,mostlikely,toremindthereaderofthedifferenttextureoftheintroductorybooksandthemainnarrative.
TheconcludingremarksofBook2againhighlighttheconceptualapproachtowardshistoryintheprokataskeuē.PolybiusstressesthatthetopicalandmethodologicalschemeoftheHistoriesmadeitnecessary‘tomakeclearlyknowntoeveryonethestateofaffairsinMacedoniaandGreece’(2.71.2).Thetermfor‘making(orbeing)clearlyknown’appliedhereandelsewhere(2.37.6;cf.also1.5.4,citedbelow)isγνώριμονὑπάρχειν,whichreferstoacommon(p.130) knowledgethatisgenerallyagreeduponandfreefromdisputesanddoubts.15TheHellenicintroductionisthusconsistentwiththehistoriographicalprinciplesspelledoutfortheprokataskeuē.Despiteitserraticpositioning,itiswellinlinewiththegrandschemeofanintroductorysectionthatiswrittenprogrammaticallyandwithoutin-depthanalysesofthecausationofevents,andthatpresentsthereaderwithan(allegedly)undisputednarrativeofevents.PolybiusendorsesthisapproachbothatthebeginningandtowardstheendoftheHellenicintroduction.
TheRomanprokataskeuēislesstroublesome,atleastasfarasitsplaceintheHistoriesisconcerned.ThesectiondealswithaffairsinthewesternMediterraneanbefore220.Itstartsfrom‘thefirstoccasiononwhichtheRomanscrossedtheseafromItaly’,aneventthat,accordingtoPolybius,tookplaceinthe129thOlympiad(264–1,thatis)andthatfollowedimmediatelyonthecloseofTimaeus’History.16ItisclearfromthisannouncementthattheRomanprokataskeuēcoveredtheperiodoftheFirstPunicWar(1.10–63),theMercenaryWar(1.64–88),17aswellastheeventsthatledtotheHannibalicWar(2.1–36),aperiodofaboutforty-fiveyears.ThisisindeedhowPolybiussummarizesthecontentsatthebeginningofBook2andagainin2.37towardstheendoftheRomanintroduction.Butthispreparatoryoutlinereceivesyetanotherintroduction:afterasuccinctdescriptionoftheGallicWarsofthefourthcenturyandtheexpansionofRomanpowerinItaly(1.6.1–4),PolybiusrelatestheeventsthatledtotheTarentineWar,Pyrrhus’engagementinItaly,andtheconflictbetweenMessanaandRhegium(1.6.5–9.8).Thisopeningsectionisdesignedtoextrapolateaclearstarting-point,thatis,abeginningthatisgenerallyagreeduponandrecognized,andalso‘self-apparentfromtheevents’(1.5.4).18
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 6 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Itisironicthatofallpossiblecandidatesforsuchanundisputedstarting-point,Polybiuspicksthemostcontroversialonepossible—theRomancrossingtoSicily,anincidentwhichheintendstorelatewithoutcommentsothathisnarrativewillnotbediscreditedbydisputesanddigressionsearlyinthe(p.131) text(cf.1.5.5).Hence,theRomanprokataskeuēstartswithahistoriographicalbigbang.Inordertoestablishagenuineandundisputedbeginning,PolybiusrelatestheoccasionandmotivesofthefirstRomancrossingfromItalywithanarmedforce(1.7.1–12.4).Buthedoessoinahighlyopinionatedfashion,accordingtoeventswhichhehadselectedassignificantintheircontextandcrucialforhisapproach,andhedoessowithnoreferencewhatsoevertoalternativeinterpretations,letalonetothecontradictoryaccountsofotherauthorities.
Asmentionedabove,theprincipleofincludinganopeningsectionmighthavebeeninspiredbyThucydides.ButuponacloserlookatwhatfollowsaftertheRomancrossingfromItaly,itbecomesobviousthatPolybius’prokataskeuēhaslittleincommonwithThucydides.Theverynatureofauniversalhistorysetadistincttone.Inhisattempttodisentangletheinterconnectednessofeventsthatenablethereadertograspasenseofthewholeworld,Polybius’conceptualapproachdiffersfromthatofThucydides,whoseaimwastodisclosethemechanicsofbipolarity.19Thisdifferenceisalsoreflectedinthenumberofpageseachdevotestotheintroduction.WhilePolybius’introductionfillsnearlyoneandahalfbooks(some155Loebpages,excludingtheHellenicintroduction),Thucydides’treatmentofasimilartimespancomprisesonly28chapters(1.89–117,23Loebpages).So,despitehispreviouscommitmenttoprovidethereaderwithanintroductionwritteninakephalaiōdēsstyle,summarilyandaccordingtokeythemes,Polybius’actualtextisremarkablydetailedand,attimes,long-winded.ThisleadstoathirdmajordifferencebetweenThucydides’andPolybius’introductorysections,whichisalsothemosteminentone.ForunlikeThucydides,whosePentekontaetiawasanunprecedentedattempttocomposeanarrativeonthetopic,Polybius’enterprisewasbynomeanswithoutpredecessors.TheFirstPunicWarhadbeentreatedbyhistorianswhohadplentyoffirst-handinformation,includingpersonalexperience.TheirhistorieswerebothaninvaluablesourceforPolybiusandachallenge.
ThemostimportantsourceswereofcourseFabiusPictorandPhilinus.20ScholarshavelongbeenpuzzledoverwhichofthetwohistoriansPolybiusfollowedashisprincipalsourceinanygivenpassage.Thisexercisehas(p.132) attractedscholarsofallagesand—naturally—ithasproducedcompetingandoftenconflictingviewsonPolybius’useofhissources.21ThereisnoneedtoflogadeadhorsehereandofferanotherprecariousexerciseinQuellenforschung.AsGelzerpointedoutlongago,Polybius’RomanintroductionwasnotamechanicallyconstructedpatchworkofeasilyseparablematerialfromFabiusandPhilinus.22Forinstance,GelzerhasshownthatwhenPolybiusmentionsallRomanconsulsfortheyears263to250,thisinformationassuchdoesnotindicatetheuseofFabiusPictor(and,inturn,theabsenceofconsulnamesdoesnotpointtotheuseofPhilinus).23Walbankhasdevelopedthisideafurther.In‘Polybius,Philinus,andtheFirstPunicWar’hestressedtheinterweavingoftwoinextricablyconnectedstrandsinthePolybiantradition.24Thiswasnotanewaperçu,butWalbank’sanalysisalso,andmoregenerally,raisedaredflagaboutPolybius’independencefromhissourcesintheRoman
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 7 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
introduction.HedemonstratedthatmanypassagesthatseemessentiallyPolybianincharactermayinfactderivemoreorlessastheystandfromhispredecessors.25WalbankconcludesthatlongsectionsinBook1maygobackdirectlytoeitherFabiusor,moreextensively,Philinus,whosedidactichistorydoes‘not[appear]dissimilarintemperament’26toPolybius’.
Theseobservations,iftakenseriously,castadditionallightonourunderstandingofPolybius’Romanintroduction.Thesectionismethodologicallyandconceptuallyunique,ahistoriographicalpiecesuigeneris.Itisdesignedtosetthestageforauniversalhistory,butitactuallyrelatestheconflictbetweenRomeandCarthagepriortotheHannibalicWar.Thematerialisarrangedkephalaiōdōs,butthetextislengthyandsignificantlydetailed.And,whilethenarrativeisclearlynotapodeiktikosbutratheropinionatedandselective,itisseeminglyatthemercyofitssources.
From1.20on,PolybiusrelateswhenandhowtheRomansfirstbuiltnavalforces.Theincident,intheconsulshipofCn.CorneliusScipioandC.Duiliusin260,isdescribedasagreatturning-pointthatmarksadefiningmomentinthecourseoftheFirstPunicWar(cf.2.1.2).WhentheRomanssawthatthewarwasdraggingon,thesenatedecidedtobuildafleetof100quinqueremesand20triremes(1.20.9–10).Beforethebuildingprogrammeandthetrainingofthecrewswerecomplete,theconsulappointedtothecommandofthenavalforces,Cn.CorneliusScipio,embarkedonamissiontoLiparatocapturetheislandwiththesupportofcertaintraitors.Buttheplanfellthrough.The(p.133) RomanarmadawascapturedandScipiowastakenprisoner(1.21.1–8),whichleftthebulkofthefleetstillinOstiawithoutacommander.Onlynow,asPolybiusreports,wasC.Duiliusappointedtothenavalcommand.Onceatsea,hetrouncedaCarthaginiannavalcontingentnearMylae,landedonSicily,anddroveouttheCarthaginiansfromtheareaaroundSegesta(1.22.1–24.2).Duilius’stunningsuccessissaidtohavebeenduetoatechnicalrevolution.Forsomeone(τις:1.22.3)hadtheideaofequippingtheRomanvesselswithboardingplanks—thefamousravens—whichallowedforanovelfightingmethodmuchmoreadvantageoustotheRomansthanthetraditional‘ramandsink’.AtleastthisiswhatPolybiussays.27
Thisaccountisnotunchallenged.Forinstance,theroleoftheravenshaslongbeenquestioned.Theirimpactonnavalwarfareinandafter260wasmostlikelymuchlesssignificantthanPolybiussuggests.28Butthereareother,andmoreprofound,objections.Epigraphicevidence,aswellasfragmentsoftheRomanannalistictradition,offeradifferentoutline.29TheirversioniscomplementedbyDio/Zonaras,whoprovidestheonlycoherentnarrative,besidesthatofPolybius,tosurvive.30TheRomantraditionsetsadifferenttone.InDio,Duiliusisincommandofthenavalforcesfromthebeginning,31anditisDuilius,notScipio,whoiscreditedwiththetrainingofthecrewsandtheinventionofthecorvi.32ThebattlesofMylaeandnear(p.134) Segestaarepresentedashispersonalachievements(PolybiusdoesnotmentionDuiliuswithregardtotheseevents),whileScipio’sattempttoseizeLiparaisportrayedasanunauthorized,andinfactfoolish,expedition.33
Dio’snarrative,alongwithscatteredevidencefromtheannalistictradition,enablesusto
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 8 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
reassessPolybius’.Foronce,weareinapositiontocompareaccountsandevaluatetheircoherenceandcredibility.IthasbeenarguedelsewherethattheRomantraditionaspreservedinDio/ZonarasistrustworthyandinfactsuperiortoPolybius’version,whichnotonlysuffersfromalackofplausibilitybutalsofrominternalcontradictions.34AclosereadingoftheRomantraditionrevealsaremarkablycoherentalternative,analternativethatshedsadifferentlightontheeventsasoutlinedbyPolybius:notScipio,butDuiliuswasinchargeofthefleet.35Asconsulwiththenavalprovincia,heoversawthetechnicalequipmentandthetrainingofthecrews.36AnditwasduetohisexpertisethattheRomanfleetfoughtafirstsuccessfulnavalencounterwiththeCarthaginiansanddrovethemawayfromSegesta.37Asmentionedabove,ithasthereforebeensuggestedthatourpictureoftheseeventsneedsthoroughrevision,which,consequently,bringsnewlighttotheunderstandingofadefiningmomentinthehistoryoftheFirstPunicWar.But,withregardtohistoriography,whataretheramificationsofthisforourunderstandingofPolybius’prokataskeuēandtheveracityofthesectioningeneral?
BothFabiusPictorandPhilinustreatedtheeventsinquestionatsomelength,butitisnotalwayseasytoseetowhatextenttheiropposedprejudicescolouredtheiraccounts.38AsfarasScipio’sdisasternearLiparaisconcerned,theRomantraditionaccusestheCarthaginiansofbetrayalandtreason;(p.135) allegedly,theconsulwastakenprisonerduringcertainnegotiations.39Polybius,too,impliesthatScipio’smissionwasbasedonfalsepromises(1.21.5;cf.8.35.9),butherefrainsfromallegations,letaloneaccusations,againsttheCarthaginians.ThisobservationpointstoPhilinusratherthanFabius,whomostlikelywillhavepromotedtheversionofCarthaginianinfidelity.40Polybius’useofPhilinusmayalsobesupportedbyhisemphasisonelementsofsurpriseandunexpectedturnsthroughoutthatpassage.Theopeningremarkin1.20.9thatthesenatedecidedtobuildawarfleetonlyin260,whentheRomanssawthatthewarwasdraggingon,setsthestageforagenuineturning-pointinPolybius’accountandenhancesitsdramaturgy.ButitalsoeclipsesthepointthatamassiveRomanfleetofmorethan100shipshadalreadybeenbuiltandwasinuseasearlyas263.Polybiussimplyignoredthis,mostlikelytoincreasethenarrativetensionofthepassage.41In1.23.1,hepinpointstheperipeteiathathadbefallenScipio,andin1.24.1itisstatedthatthenavalsuccessatMylae(Duiliusisnotmentionedbyname)cameparadoxōs,‘contrarytoallexpectation’.Thestressonparadoxa,sensationalandunexpectedreversalsoffortune,aswellastheprominentpartplayedinhumanaffairsbytyche42seemtohavebeencharacteristicofPhilinus’work.Again,thiswasdemonstratedlongagobyWalbank,whodeemsPhilinus’historyanoutstandingcontributiontotheHellenistictragicschool.Itisthuspossibletoreinforcetheproposalthattheeventsof260asrelatedbyPolybiusstemlargelyandwidelyfromPhilinus.43Butthereisatleastoneimportantexception.ForneitherPhilinusnorFabiuswillhavechangedtheprovinciaeoftheconsuls.44ThismusthavebeenaPolybianingredient.Whatappearsasaminorormaybeacosmeticmanipulationofadetailedpieceofinformationhad,however,hugeramificationsfortheoverallaccountinthatsection.NotonlywasCn.CorneliusScipioportrayedinamorefavourablelightthanhedeserved45butthecourseofeventswastweakedandturnedintoamajorperipeteia.Underthe(p.136) smokescreenoftheprokataskeuē’sconceptualapproach,Polybiustookthelibertytopromotethisversionassomethingthatwascommonknowledge.
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 9 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Whiletheyear260ishighlightedasaperipeteiaintheFirstPunicWar,thetechniqueofsinglingoutindividualyearsandmarkingthemasgreatturning-pointsisbynomeanslimitedtothatonecampaigningseason.Indeed,itisaprominentfeaturethroughouttheprokataskeuē.ThenavalbattleofCapeEcnomusin256(1.26.1–28.14),tobefollowedbyRegulus’expeditiontoAfrica(1.30–4),isanothermajorcaesurainthenarrative,asisthebattleofDrepanain249(1.49.6–51.12).AsWalbankhasdemonstrated,Polybius’sourceinbothcasesseemstohavebeenPhilinuswhowaseitherhimselfacontemporaryoftheeventsordrewonsourcesfromeyewitnessaccounts.46BothdescriptionsrevealasignificantinterestinbattleformationsandtacticalmanœuvringwhichunderlinestheirimportanceinPolybius’grandschemeofevents.InRegulus’case,histragicfateeveninvitedalongerreflectionontheperipeteiaofRomanandCarthaginianaffairsthatwasbroughtaboutbytheconsulandbyXanthippusrespectively(1.35).WhileRegulusillustratestheturnofhistorywroughtbyfortune,Carthagewas(temporarily)restoredtoconfidencethroughtheaidofasingleman(cf.HCPi.92–4).
ItwasrecentlyarguedbyBrunoBleckmannthatPolybius’focusonthenarrativeexpositionof‘bigevents’andturning-pointshardlyreflectstherealitiesofthebitter,exhausting,andtenacioushostilitiesthathadworndownbothpartiesinthe250sandearlieryearsofthe240s.47BleckmanndemonstratesthatPolybius’tendencytooveremphasizetheimportanceofsingleeventsalsoincludesattemptstopresenttheyearsprecedingsuchkeymomentsasrelativelyeventless.Thenarrativestrategyseemstohavebeenthatofa‘calmbeforethestorm’,i.e.thereader’santicipationofamajorconflictisfuelledbytheinsinuationthatbothpartiesrefrainedfromfightinginordertoprepareamajorstrikeinthefollowingyear.Forinstance,inPolybius’accountofthecampaigningseasonof257(beforeEcnomus)thenavalengagementoffTyndarisisportrayedasaminorskirmish,andC.AtiliusRegulus’operationsonSicilyarepresentedas‘nothingworthyofmention’,asbothpartiesspenttheirtime‘inminoroperationsofnosignificance’(1.25.6).
Incontrast,Dio/ZonarasrelatesthattheRomanfleet,aftertheTyndarisencounter,wagedafull-scaleattackonLiparatocapturetheisland.48TheRomantraditionalsoclaimsthatAtiliusRegulussailedasfarasMaltaandplunderedtheharbour.49Bothreferencesmaybeauthentic:towardstheendof(p.137) 258,thesenatefreedfundstoinaugurateanexpensiveship-buildingprogramme,whichwasdesignedbothtoexpandandintensifythewarfareatsea.50Exploringnewsearoutesandwideningthemaritimehorizon,theexpeditiontoMalta,themostsouthernspottowhichaRomanfleethadeversaileduntilthatdate,wouldhavefittedintothatstrategy.UponhisreturnAtiliusReguluscelebratedatriumphusnavalisovertheCarthaginians,whichprovesPolybius’accountofadullcampaignseasonwrong.51
Theconceptualapproachtotheeventscoveredintheprokataskeuēallowedforsuchapin-pointing;infact,thearrangementofthematerialinakephalaiōdēsmannermadeitnecessarytofocusonpeaksandturns.Butatthesametime,theinformationrelatedintheintroductionexceedswhatisannouncedasasummaryintroduction;itoftendepartsfromtheprincipleof‘headtopics’.Severalpassagesareextremelyelaborateandfilled
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 10 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
withnumerousdetailsthatobfuscateratherthansharpenthenarrativeagendaofatopicalpeak.ItisinthosesectionsthatPolybius’accountseemstobeparticularlypronetounreliability.Theevaluationofthenarrativeontheconsularyearsof260and257suggestsasmuch.
ThefinalyearsoftheFirstPunicWarpointinthesamedirection.Inafamouspassage,Polybiusclaimsthattheendofthewarwasnotprecipitatedbymutualexhaustioninthefightingonland.For‘bothsidesemployedeverydeviceandeffortthatthesiege[atMountEryx]demanded.Bothenduredeverykindofprivationandbothessayedeverymeansofattackandeveryvarietyofaction.Atlengthnot,asFabiusPictorsays,owingtotheirexhaustionandsufferings,butliketwouninjuredandinvinciblechampions,theyleftthecontestdrawn.Forbeforeeithercouldgetthebetteroftheother…thewarhadbeendecidedbyothermeans.’52Despitethedecisionofthepeople’sassembliestowithdrawfromlarge-scalenavalenterprisesin247,53whichbythattimehadinvolvedheavylossesanddevouredenormoussumsfromthestatetreasury,thesenatein242decidedonceagainto‘courttheprospectofusingsea-forces’(1.58.2).Polybiussetsthisdecisioninstarkcontrasttothepreviousmaximofavoidingthesea.Itwasduetothisreversal,sohestresses,thatRomeultimatelyprevailedovertheCarthaginians,sincethelatterhadneglectedtheirnavalforcesformanyayear,‘owingtotheirhavingneverexpectedtheRomanstodisputetheseawiththemagain’(1.61.5;cf.1.58.3).54Rome’sreturntotheseaisanunexpectedmovethatmarksthefinalperipeteiaontheroadtovictory.
(p.138) Thispictureiswidelyacceptedamongscholars,althoughthetraditionisnotunchallenged.TheannalistictraditionaspreservedinDio/ZonarascontainsvariousreferencesthatpointtoahighfrequencyofsearaidsthatwereundertakenbyRomanprivateersintheyearsafter247.Mostprominently,alengthypassageonanavalencounterintheharbourofHippoinNorthAfricadocumentsthatthefightingatsearesembledsomeofthemajoroperationsinthedecadebefore,especiallyintermsofthenumbersofcombatantsinvolved.55Thesemanœuvrescontinuedand,infact,increasedintheyearsbefore242.56Ithasbeenarguedthatthevesselsusedduringthosecampaignsweremaintainedbyprivateentrepreneursratherthanthestatetreasury,andthatthecrewsweresignedonfromprivateersandpirates,wholookedforplunderandbooty.57Thismayindeedhavebeenthecase.ButitisstrikingtonotethatDio/Zonarasascribesaninterestingsidelighttothoseoperations.Henotesthat‘bytheravagingofAfricaonthepartoftheprivatecitizenswhoweremanagingtheships,theywerenolongerwillingtoneglectthesea,butagaingottogetherafleet’.58Inotherwords:whentheRomans‘officially’returnedtotheseain242,thiswasnotsomuchduetoadeadlockinthewaronlandandthegeneralexhaustionthatwasprovokedbyit,butwastriggeredbyaseriesofsuccessfulencountersfoughtbyRoman‘privateers’,whosevictoriesinstilledthevotingassemblieswithnewconfidenceatsea.59Polybius’notoriouspictureofRome’scapacitytomobilizeitsresourcesandovercomethemiseriesofexhaustion—acapacitythatisultimatelyexplainedbyRome’smoralsuperiority60—seemstobeimperfectatbest.TheannalistictraditionoffersadifferentexplanationfortheRomanreturntothesea,anditisnoteworthythatDio’saccountrestsonelaboratehistorical
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 11 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
contextualizationratherthanonmoralpreconceptions.
WhenC.LutatiusCatuluswaselectedconsulfor242Romanhopeswereputtothetest.PolybiusmakesitclearthatLutatius’actionsweredeterminedbyspeed.Heunexpectedly(paradoxōs:1.59.9)appearedoffthecoastofSicily,(p.139) ‘allowednotimetopassuselessly’(11)and,believingthatitwasonlybyaseabattlethatthewarcouldbefinished,readiedhisoarsmen‘inaveryshorttime’(12).Polybius’accountinsinuatesadramaticallyacceleratedcourseofeventsthatleadstothefinalshow-downattheAegatesIslands.AccordingtothealternativetraditionofDio/Zonaras,uponhisarrivalonSicilytheconsulwaswoundedduringthepreparationsforthesiegeofDrepana,whichposedasignificantdelaytothenextsteps.61Inthecourseofevents,theactualseabattleislessdramaticinDio,anditsoutcomeisamuchnarrowervictory.62TheRomantraditionagaintakesintoaccountvariousdetailsandsomedetoursthataddtoalessstreamlinedcourseofevents.Ontheotherhand,Polybius’versionseemsonceagainoversimplified,focusingonthesensationofRome’smilitaryandmoralachievement.
AfterhisvictoryneartheAegatesIslands,C.Lutatiusdemandedthesurrenderofarmsanddeserters,butwhenHamilcarrefused,theconsuldidnotpressthesedemandsandreadilyconsentedtonegotiateapeacetreaty.Polybiusreiteratestheexhaustionmotive,stressingthatLutatius’readinessforpeacewastriggeredbythefact‘thattheRomanswerebythistimewornoutandenfeebledbythewar’(1.62.7).ButwhenthepeacetermswerereferredtoRomeandputbeforethepeople’sassembly,thepeopledidnotacceptthemandsenttencommissionerstoexaminethematterinthenextspring(241).63Polybiusoffersnoexplanationforthisdelay,whichseemstobeodd,atbest,inthelightofomnipresentweariness.ThehistoricalreasonsfortherejectionofthefirstdraftofthepeacehavebeendebatedsincethedaysofMommsen:ithasbeensuggestedthattheprocedureofsendinglegatiindicatesabreakwiththenobility,orthatthepassagecloakstheactivitiesoftheequiteswhopressedforharshereconomictermstogethigherinterestontheirloanstothestatetreasury.64Morerecently,ithasbeenarguedthattheideaofsendingagroupoftenemissarieswasindicativeofthearistocracy’sattitudethattheyshould,ratherthanallowLutatiustomonopolizevictory,divideitamongtheleadingfamiliesthathadprovidedholdersofimperiumoverthepasttwodecades.65
(p.140) Bethatasitmay,inhistoriographicalterms,HCPVolume1basesthePolybianaccount‘nodoubt…onFabius’(127)andlinksitwiththelatter’sthesisof‘populargreed’(ibid.),whichhaddecidedtheissueofhelpingtheMamertiniatthebeginningofthewar.FabiusPictor’stextforbothinstances,attheoutbreakofthewarandonitsconclusion,is,ofcourse,lost,whichputsWalbank’sassumptioninaplausiblerealm,yetitnonethelessremainsunverifiableQuellenforschung.Itisstrikingtonotethatthegreedmotiveisinfactrelatedinthesources.WhenDio/ZonarasnarratestheeventsthatledtothepeacetreatywithCarthage,herelatesthatthepeoplerejectedthefirstdraftoftermsbecause‘theycouldnolongerrestrainthemselves,andhopedtopossessallofAfrica’.66Thatistosay,inDio’saccount,theRomanforcesarebynomeansexhausted,noristheconsul’sdesireforpeacedrivenbythehardshipsofawarthatwasdraggingonformorethantwodecades.Instead,DiopointstoRome’seagernesstomaximizewarspoilsand,if
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 12 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
necessary,prolonghostilitiesforthesakeofamoreprofitablepeacearrangement.Onceagain,Dio/Zonaraspresentsthereaderwithanalternativeaccountthatisnotaltogetherunconvincing,whereasPolybius’version,forcefulasitmaybe,suffersfrominternalinconsistencies.
BythetimeofHCPVolume1,Polybius’superiorityoverCassiusDioandtheremnantsoftheannalistictraditioninhisworkwasaxiomaticinclassicalscholarship.Itwasbasedononeofthefundamentaltenetsofancienthistorythatsourcesmorecontemporarytotheeventstheydescribearecreditedwithmoreweightthanlaterauthorities,thoughnotuncritically.TherewasalsoawidespreadconsensusthatPolybius’skillswereintellectuallyandmethodologicallypreferabletothoseofCassiusDioand,withregardtothefirstquarterofhishistory,hisByzantineepitomizer,Zonaras.67Thelatter’srecordwasmostlydisregarded.InonlyaveryfewinstancesdoesHCPVolume1referthereadertotheaccountofZonaras,whilereferencestoCassiusDioareevenlessfrequent.68Thisprominentviewwasonlyrecentlysubjectedtothoroughrevision.Thein-depthanalysisofDio/Zonaras’narrativeontheFirstPunicWarbyBleckmannrevealsstrikingsimilaritiesbetweenDioandavarietyofnon-annalisticsourcematerials,includingepigraphicevidence.Bleckmannis(p.141) abletoextrapolatetracesofatraditionthatisnotnecessarilyannalisticinarigidsenseoftheconcept,butwhichpreservesscatteredpiecesofcontemporaryevidencefromthethirdandsecondcenturies,aswellashistoriographicalinformationfrombothannalisticwritersandotherauthors.69Revisitingthisstreamofthetradition,Bleckmanncreditsitwith‘evenmoreweight’70thanPolybius,atleastconcerningeventsrelatedintheprokataskeuē.
Thetruevalueofthe‘new’Dio/Zonaras,then,isnotsomuch—andcertainlynotinthefirstplace—toprovePolybiuswrongorconvicthimof‘lies’.71Rather,thecomparativeapproachenableshistorianstobroadenthebasisoftextualremainsandtacklethechallengesofselectivity.Mostsignificantly,itallowsforabetterunderstandingofwhatisactuallyrelatedinPolybius’work.Inotherwords:itisnotnecessarilytheirpotentialtorevisePolybius’informationthatmakesparallelaccountssuchasDio/Zonaras’sovaluable,butrathertheircontributiontothevexedprocessofunearthingtheunderlyingassumptionsofPolybius’Historiesanddecipheringitsinherentpatternsofselectingthematerial,creatinganarrative,andpromotingacertainmeaning.WithregardtotheRomanprokataskeuē,thisapproachisparticularlypromising.Scholarsforlonghavebeenpuzzledbythemethodologyandnarrativetechniquesappliedtotheintroductionandalsobyitsreliability.ThetraditionpreservedinDio/Zonarasmakesanimportantcontributiontothesequestions.
OnPolybius’ownaccount,thenarrativeoftheRomanintroductionwasdesignedtoprovidethemainpointsnecessaryforunderstandingthehistoryproper.ItsgoalwastofamiliarizetheGreekaudiencewithaffairsinthewesternMediterraneanandtonarratewhatpurposeguidedtheRomanswhentheybegantheuniqueundertakingofbecomingthemastersofall.Toillustratethis,thematerialwaspresentedsummarilyandinkeytopics,kephalaiōdōs.Inturn,thisimpliedthattheintroductioneschewedhistoricaldetailandin-depthanalysis,amethodologythatwaspresentedincontrasttothepragmatic
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 13 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
styleofthemainhistory.Onemaywonderhowmuchjusticetheprokataskeuēdoestothatgoal.Tobesure,thenarrativeontheFirstPunicWarmeetsadidacticaiminthesensethatitillustratessomeofPolybius’basicconvictionsandbeliefs:theworksoftyche,butalsothemoralmatrixofpolitics(p.142) andRome’ssuperiormentalqualities,notablyitsψυχομαχία.72But,unlikeThucydides,Polybiusoftenrefrainsfromaxiomaticreductions.Hisdidacticagendaisembeddedinlong-windednarrativesoncampaignseasonsandthetechnicalitiesofwarfare.Theactualcontentofthisyear-by-yearaccountisrenderedfromFabiusandPhilinus—indeed,itisnotimplausibletosuggest,asWalbankhasdone,73thatmuchoftheRomanprokataskeuēwascopiedfromPhilinus.Inthisregard,theRomanintroductionremarkablylacksindependence.
Yet,atthesametime,theapproachisindividualisticandhighlyopinionated,especiallywhendidacticorotherhigh-mindedgoalsareatstake.True,thistechniquewascoveredbytheclaimtowritekephalaiōdōs.ButitmightbearguedthatthisprinciplealsohelpedtopromotePolybius’preconceptionsanddistortthereportingofdetailssothattheysuitedthedidacticormoralagendaofapassage.Itisnoteasytodeterminetowhatextentsucharewritingofeventstookplace,butthecomparisonwithDio/Zonaras’accountsuggeststhatPolybiuswasnotover-scrupulousinhisdealingswithwhathehadfoundinhissources.TheRomanintroductionoscillatesbetweenthereproductionofmaterialthatwasalreadyrelatedbyhisforerunnersandPolybius’creativerewritingofselectedevents.Itisthisdichotomythatdefinesitsuniquehistoriographicallegacy.74
Notes:35ThisisalsosuggestedbytheDuiliusinscription,ll.5–6(citedabove).
(1)Cf.Morley1999,whoseopinionatedaccountishighlyenjoyable.Itechoespost-modernapproachesandadvancesinnarratology,discourseanalysis,andcriticalthinking.Butitalsooffersmanytraditionaltakeson‘whathistoryis’or,inanycase,whatitshouldbe.A.J.Woodman’smoregeneralremarks,Woodman2004:ix–xxiv,esp.xv–xix,onthecomplexcorrespondencebetween‘event’andnarrative,pointinthesamedirection;theyareawelcomereminderofhowfragileourtoweringintellectualconstructsinancienthistoryattimesare.
(2)1982:252.
(3)Briscoe2003:355.
(4)Cf.alsoFRHI2,pp.52–3,whichelaboratesonthiswithregardtohistoricalfragments.ThisisnottheplacetoopenPandora’sboxandembarkonanin-depthanalysisofthevexedrelationbetweentextandcommentary.Earliernotions‘againstinterpretation’(e.g.S.Sontag,AgainstInterpretationandOtherEssays,4thedn.,NewYork1964),notablythebeliefthatonlythereadermayprovideaviablecommentary(inhisorherhead,thatis),havelostmuchplausibility.AssmannandGladigow1995isoneofthemostimportantsinglestepstowardsareconceptualizationofthegenre;seealsoMost1999,andGibsonandKraus2002.
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 14 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(5)Plb.1.1.5.ReferencestoPolybiusandtranslationsarebasedonW.R.Paton’sLoebedn.(firstpublished1922,latestrepr.2005),unlessotherwisestated.
(6)1.3.10;1.13.1–8;2.14.1;2.16.14;2.37.2–3;4.1.9;5.111.10.Cf.GlockmannandHelms,s.v.προκατασκευή;Petzold1969:20–5.
(7)Cf.Luraghi2000,Tsamakis1995,esp.20–63;alsoS.Hornblower1991:4–56,whichreplacesGomme’searlierinterpretationoftheArchaeology.
(8)Gelzer1940a,cf.alsoGelzer1940b,Laqueur1913:10–11,Petzold1969:91–100.
(9)Gelzer1940a:28–9,30–3.
(10)Ibid.:33–5.
(11)Plb.2.38.4;2.42.2–6;2.62.4.
(12)HCPi.216;Walbank1945a:16,Sacks1981:171–86,Mauersberger,s.v.ἀποδεικτικός.
(13)Forthismeaningofκεφαλαιώδης(Latin:capitulatim)cf.FRHI2,p.151andMauersberger,s.v.;onhistoriographicalimplementationsoftheconcept,seeBeck2003,Walter2004:287,Timpe2007:156–60.
(14)Cf.HCPi.181.ThecriticismofPhylarchusintheHellenicintroduction(2.56–63)isanexceptionalcase.AsWalbankhasindicated,Polybius’polemicagainsthimwasnotonlyinspiredbyPhylarchus’ethosas‘tragic’historianbutalsobyhispartisanshipforCleomenesagainstAratus.Thus,thedigressionisapowerfulpoliticalstatement,forwhichtherewasnootherplacethantheHellenicintroduction.SeealsoJohnMarincola’scontributioninthisvolume.
(15)Mauersberger,s.v.γνωρίζω.
(16)ThecrossingwouldbethatofAp.ClaudiusCaudex(cos.264),whichseemstohaveoccurredinthelatesummer,HCPi.46.Timaeushasnowbeenre-editedbyCraigeChampioninFGrHist566,whoalsooffersafully-fledgeddiscussionofthecloseofhisHistory.
(17)Onthis,seethecontributionbyBruceGibsoninthisvolume.
(18)Thepassagedeservestobequotedinfull:‘Ishalladoptasthestarting-pointofthisbookthefirstoccasiononwhichtheRomanscrossedtheseafromItaly.ThisfollowsimmediatelyonthecloseofTimaeus’History,andtookplaceinthe129thOlympiad.ThuswemustfirststatehowandwhentheRomansestablishedtheirpositioninItaly,andwhatpromptedthemafterwardstocrosstoSicily,thefirstcountryoutsideItalywheretheysetfoot.Theactualcauseofthecrossingmustbestatedwithoutcomment;forifIweretoseekthecauseofthecauseandsoon,mywholeworkwouldhavenoclearstarting-
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 15 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
pointandprinciple.Thestarting-pointmustbeaneragenerallyagreeduponandrecognized(ὁμολογουμένηνκαὶγνωριζομένηνἀρχὴνπαρ’ἅπασι),andoneself-apparentfromtheevents,evenifthisinvolvesmygoingbackalittleinpointofdateandgivingasummaryofinterveningoccurrences.’(1.5.1–4)
(19)Thelocusclassicusis1.1,whenThucydidesjustifieshisperceptionofthePeloponnesianWarasgreatandnoteworthyaboveall,‘inferringthisfromthefactthatbothpowerswereattheirbestintheirpreparationsforwarineveryway,andseeingtherestoftheHellenestakingsideswiththeonestateortheother,someatonce,othersincontemplation’.Onthis,Fliess1966,andStraussandLebow1991arestilluseful.Cf.nowalsoEckstein2003,whosereadingofThucydides’interstatetheoryflirtswithneo-realistparadigms.OnPolybius’universalapproach,seePédech1964:496–514,Sacks1981:96–121,Marincola1997:37;cf.alsoChampion2004a:2:‘TheunificationofworldeventsunderRome’saegisrequiredanewkindofhistory,universalinscope.’
(20)ThemostrecenteditionsofbotharethoseofHansBeckandUweWalterinFRHI2(Fabius)andCraigeChampioninFGrHist174(Philinus).Botheditionsincludeextensivebibliographies,biographicalaccounts,andcommentariesonindividualfragments.Cf.alsoAmbaglio2005.
(21)e.g.Pédech1964;Lehmann1974.ThemostrecentcontributionisthevolumeeditedbySchepensandBollansée2005.Itcontainsup-to-datediscussionsonPolybiusandallofhiseminentsources.
(22)Gelzer1933:133.
(23)Ibid.:133–42.
(24)Walbank1945a:1.
(25)Ibid.:7–8,11–14.
(26)Ibid.:14.
(27)Esp.1.23.6:‘WhentheRomancrewsboardedbymeansoftheravensandattackedthemhandtohandondeck,someCarthaginianswerecutdownandotherssurrenderedfromdismayatwhatwasgoingon,thebattlehavingbecomejustlikeafightonland.’
(28)HCPi.77–8givestherelevantliteratureonthetopic.LaterdiscussionsincludeSordi1967,whoarguesagainsttheimportancePolybiusattributestothecorvi;cf.alsoPoznanski1979,Lazenby1996:68–71.
(29)Theso-calledDuiliusinscription,Inscr.It.13.3.69=ILS65=CILI225andVI,8,31300Add.:[consolsecest]ano[s,sociosp(opli)R(omani),Cartaciniensiom|opsidione]dexemetlecione[squeCartaciniensisomnis|m]aximosquemacistr[a]tosl[ucipalampostdies|n]ovemcastreisexfociontMacel[amqueopidom|5p]ucnandodcepet.enqueeodemmac[istratudbene|r]emnavebosmaridconsolprimosc[esetcopiasque|c]lasesque
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 16 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
navalesprimosornavetpa[ravetque]|cumqueeisnavebosclaseisPoenicasomn[isitemma|x]umascopiasCartaciniensispraesente[dHanibaled]|10dictatoredol[or]ominaltodmaridpucn[advicet]|viquenave[iscepe]tcumsocieissepter[esmomI,quin|queresm]osquetriresmosquenaveisX[XX,mersetXIII.|aur]omcaptomnumei(triamiliaseptingentei),|[arcen]tomcaptompraedanumei(centummilia)[---;|15omne]captomaes(interundetriciesettriciesquatercentenamilia).|triump]oquenavaledpraedadpoplom[donavet|multosque]Cartacinie[ns]is[ince]nuosd[uxitante|curum---]eis[---]capt[---].TherecentanalysesbyBleckmann2002:116–25,andKondratieff2004:10–14,argueconvincinglyforacompositionshortlyaftertheeventsinquestion.LiteraryevidenceincludesLiv.Per.17;Val.Max.6.3.4;6.6.2;Polyaen.6.16.5;Flor.1.18.9–11;Eutr.2.20;Oros.4.7.7–9.SeealsoMRRi.205.
(30)Diofr.11.16–18/Zonar.8.10–11.
(31)Zonar.8.11.
(32)Zonar.8.11;cf.Fron.Str.2.3.24;Flor.1.18.9–10;Devir.ill.38.1.Lazenby1996:70,isawareofthesesources,buthegoesoutofhiswaytodissociateDuiliusfromthecorvi,becausePolybiusdoesn’tmentionhiminthisregard:‘Unfortunatelyhe[Polybius]doesnotsaywhosuggestedit[theideaofboarding-ladders],butitmayhavebeenaSyracusan,perhapsevenArchimedes.However,oneshouldnotruleoutthepossibilitythataRomanwastheinventor.’
(33)MylaeandSegesta:Zonar.8.11.ForScipio’sprematurestrikeonLipara,see8.10:‘Thelatter[Scipio],neglectingthewaronland,whichhadfallentohislot,sailedwiththeshipswhichhehadtoLipara,ontheunderstandingthatitwastobebetrayedtohim.ButthiswasaruseonthepartoftheCarthaginians.’
(34)ItissurprisingthatScipioputtoseawithonlyseventeenshipstosailtoMessanaandthentoLiparabeforethebulkofhisfleetwasready.Plb.1.20.5makesitclearthattheCarthaginiansbythattime‘maintainedwithoutanytroublethecommandofthesea’,whichmakesScipio’sactionasconsulwiththenavalcommand(Polybius)mostquestionable.Ifappointedtothenavalcommand,therewouldhavebeennoneedtorush.Athoroughrevisionoftheseevents,contrathePolybius-basedcommunisopinio,hasbeensuggestedbyBleckmann2002:113–31,andBeck2005:22–5.Cf.alsoKondratieff2004.
(36)Again,seell.7–8oftheDuiliusinscription(citedabove),whichexplicitlycreditDuiliuswiththis.
(37)Cf.ll.1–5oftheDuiliusinscription,whichreferstohisadvanceonSicily.UnlikeZonaras,theinscriptionplacesDuilius’landengagementonSicilybeforethenavalencounternearMylae.Mostlikely,thisfollowstheformulaicorderterramarique,whichalsoaddedtoaclimaxofDuilius’actionsaslistedintheinscription(i.e.theseabattleashismostmemorableachievementcomesattheend):seeDegrassi’scommentaryonInscr.It.13.3.69andWalbank,HCPi.80.
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 17 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(38)Cf.Polybius’famousverdictonFabius’andPhilinus’partisanshipin1.14.1–3,onwhichseeWalbank,HCPi.26–35,64–6,andtwoseminalarticlesbyGelzer1933and1934.Cf.alsoFRHI21F27(comm.);Marincola1997:171.
(39)Liv.Per.17;Val.Max.6.6.2;Flor.1.18.11;Eutr.2.20;Oros.4.7.7–9;Polyaen.6.16.5.
(40)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.77.
(41)PisoFRHI27F32(withcommentaryandForsythe1994:361–2)relatesashipbuildingprogrammeintheconsulshipofM.ValeriusMessalla(cos.263);cf.alsoIned.Vat.FGrHist839F4.BothsourcesarediscussedbyThiel1954:70–1and,morerecently,Steinby2007.Acollegiumofduovirinavalesclassisornandaereficiendaequecausaisattestedasearlyas311:Liv.9.30.4.
(42)e.g.Walbank,HCPi.16–26(aclassicdiscussion).
(43)Walbank1945a:11–13,contraGelzer1933.
(44)Bleckmann2002:134andn.1believesthattheprovinciaewerechangedbyawriterafterFabius,mostlikelybysomeonewhorepresentedpro-Scipionicfamilytraditions.Butwhowouldthatbe?Polybiusisnotoriousforhispro-Scipionictendencies(asBleckmann’sownanalysisreveals:131–9).Theswitchisbestascribedtohim.
(45)Plin.Nat.8.169relatesScipio’snickname‘Asina’tohisunfortunateLiparaexpedition.TheemphasisonCarthaginianinfidelityasreportedintheRomantradition(seeabove)exculpatedScipio;seeThiel1954:180–1,Eckstein1995:9.ButPolybius’account,too,isnotunfavourabletoScipio.
(46)Walbank,HCPi.85–9,113–17.
(47)Bleckmann2002,esp.19–31.
(48)Zonar.8.12,acceptedbyLazenby1996:76–9,Bleckmann2002:157–8.
(49)Naeviusfr.32Strzelecki:transitMelitam|Romanusexercitusinsulamintegramurit|populatur,vastat,remhostiumconcinnat;cf.Oros.4.8.5;Bleckmann2002:158.
(50)Cf.Thiel1954:200–10,Lazenby1996:82–4,Beck2005:235–6.
(51)Inscr.It.13.1.77;Itgenshorst2005:no.133.
(52)Plb.1.58.4–6 = FabiusPictorFRHI21F28.
(53)Plb.1.55.2;cf.Zonar.8.16.
(54)Polybius’accountoftheyears247to242(1.55to1.59)indeedreferstowarfareonlandinSicilyexclusively.
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 18 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(55)Zonar.8.16;cf.Fron.Str.1.5.6,whocreditsC.DuiliuswithasuccessfulraidinportuSyracusano(probablytobeemendedtoinportuHippocritano,i.e.HippouAcra:Lazenby1996:147).Thepresenceofthefamousconsulof260duringthosecampaignsraisesdoubtsabouttheirstrictly‘private’character.Notethataflotillaofonly20quinqueremeswouldhaverequiredacrewofc.6,000men.
(56)Cf.MRRi.216–17,whichassemblestheevidenceforvariousoperationsatsea.Zonaras’account(8.16)makesitclearthatoperationssuchastheoneagainstHippowerebynomeansextraordinaryorisolatedaffairs.
(57)Lazenby1996:146–7.
(58)8.16.
(59)Thedichotomybetween‘private’raidsand‘public’campaignsshouldnotbeoverstretched.ThetwocomplementedeachotherinancientMediterraneanwarfare.OnRomeandprivatemercenarycampaignsinancientItalyingenereal,seeSchulz2000,Loreto2001,andSteinby2007;adrem,Bleckmann2002:209–14.
(60)Notee.g.thedidacticreferencestoRomanψυχομαχίαin1.58.7–59.6;cf.Bleckmann2002:212.
(61)Zonar.8.17(questionedbyLazenby1996:155).
(62)AccordingtoZonar.8.17,theRomansprevailedonlybecausetheCarthaginianvessels‘wereimpededbythefactthattheyalsocarriedfreight,grainandmoney’.Diodorus,basedonPhilinus,alsoreportsaclosevictory(24.11).
(63)Plb.1.63.1–3;cf.Lazenby1996:158.
(64)Forrelevantreferences,seeWalbank,HCPi.127;cf.Hoyos1998:120andn.8.
(65)Thenamesoftheemissariesareunknownexceptforthatoftheirleader,Q.LutatiusCerco(cos.241),brotheroftheconsulofthepreviousyear,C.LutatiusCatulus,MRRi.219.Henceprosopographyfallsshort.Althoughthepeoplefirstrejectedtheterms,theembassyofthedecemviridoesnotseemtohavemadesubstantialchangestoLutatius’proposal.Hence,therewasnocontroversyoverthecontentsofthepeacebutratherovertheformalarrangement.TheprocedureofsendingdelegatesanticipatesthattowardstheendoftheHannibalicWar,whenthesenatestipulatedutP.ScipioexdecemlegatorumsententiapacemcumpopuloCarthaginiensiquibuslegibuseividereturfaceret(‘thatPubliusScipioontheadviceoftenenvoysshouldmakepeacewiththeCarthaginiansuponsuchtermsashesawfit:’Liv.30.43.4).Onthis,seeEckstein1987a:255–66andBeck2005:352–4,whopointtothenobility’sdesiretode-monopolizeScipio’sfame.
(66)8.17,implicitlyacceptedbyHoyos1998:119.
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 19 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(67)ThestandardgeneralaccountsofDioarestillMillar1964andManuwald1979.Millar’snotionthataspecialstudyonDio’searlybooks,whichhedeliberatelyomitted,wouldbeworththeeffort(3),hasfinallybeensatisfied:Bleckmann2002andUrso2005;notealsoLaBua1981.Forthelaterepublic,cf.Zecchini1978,Fechner1986,Berti1988,Lintott1997.
(68)IndexreferencestoZonarasandCassiusDioarerare:fiveandtwo,respectively.Onatleastoneoccasion,HCPVol.1findsDio’saccountpreferabletothatofPolybius(‘quitecredible’:168).
(69)Dio’ssourcesareanotoriousproblem.NeitherMillar1964norManuwald1979(cf.aboven.67)wereabletoidentifyspecificauthorswithcertainty.ThemostcomprehensiveaccountsarethosebyBleckmann2002:36–50andUrso2005:163–93.Thelatterarguesforaliberdemagistratibus(byAeliusTubero?)assourceofDio’searlyRome.Bleckmann’sintentionisnotsomuchtonameDio’ssources,buttoextrapolatesimilaritiesbetweenDio’s(late)accountandmorecontemporaryRomansourcesfromthethirdandsecondcenturies,includingepigraphicevidence(e.g.theDuiliusinscription,elogiaoftheScipios,fasti).
(70)Bleckmann2002:18.
(71)Cf.theprovokingtitleofHoyos1985a.
(72)i.e.theabilitytofight,andsucceed,underextremepressure:1.59.6andWalbank,HCPi.123;cf.also6.52.7andn.60above.
(73)1945a:11–14.
(74)Iwouldliketothanktheorganizersofthesymposium,ThomasHarrison,BruceGibson,andGinaMuskett,fortheircordialinvitationandkindhospitality.BruceGibsonalsoprovidedmanyvaluablecommentsandsuggestionsonthetext.ThanksarealsoduetomycolleaguesinMcGill’sthink-tankontheRomanrepublic,especiallyMichaelFrondaandJohnSerrati.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius’ Roman prokataskeuē
Page 20 of 20
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 1 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
HistoriographicPatternsandHistoricalObstaclesinPolybius’Histories:Marcellus,Flaminius,andtheMamertineCrisis
CraigeChampion
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0007
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'workhasanoverallnarrativepatterninginwhichRomanorderandvirtuedeterioratesafterthetimeofCannae(216BC)evenasRomanpowerexpands.Polybiusdoes,however,includeexamplesofquestionableRomanconductfromthethirdcenturyBC,suchasM.ClaudiusMarcellusandC.Flaminius:whileonthesurfaceproblematicforthewidernarrativepatterning,theseexamplesarebestseeninthelightofthecomplexityofPolybius'multiplereadershipsandaims.ButPolybiusdealswiththecontroversyoverRome'sinterventioninSicilyin264BCwithdeliberateindeterminacy,throughtheambiguousreferencetothe'many'takingthedecisiontointervene(1.11.2),whichcouldrefereithertoamajorityoftheSenateortheRomanpeople.ThedeliberateobfuscationoftherolesofSenateandpeopleenablesPolybiustoavoidgeneratingtooviolentacontradictionofhiswidernarrativepatterningofRomanvirtueandwiseguidancefrom
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 2 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theSenateinhisearlyperiod.
Keywords:Polybius,FirstPunicWar,M.ClaudiusMarcellus,C.Flaminius,Messana,causation,Romandecline
ThischapterexaminessomehistoriographicproblemsinPolybius’Histories,seekingtounderstandseemingincongruitiesbetweenlargenarrativepatternsintheworkanditsrepresentationsofparticularhistoricalevents.Myfirstsection(‘NarrativePatterninginPolybius’Histories’)summarizesanargumentImademoreextensivelyinanearlierstudy(Champion2004a);namelythatPolybiusrepresentstheRomanpolityasawell-orderedpoliticalcommunityattheoutset,butasthehistoryproceedsheshowsRome’sdeteriorationinbothitsdomesticandforeignpolicyspheres.Accordingtohispoliticaltheory,thecausesofthisdeteriorationwereRome’suncontestableinterstatepowerandtheriseofthepopularelementinpoliticallife.YettherearenotableinstancesofwhatPolybiusregardedasegregiouslydeplorablebehaviouronthepartofRomanofficialspriorto,orattheverybeginningof,thestatedonsetofthisdecay(sometimeaftertheheroicRomanresponsetothedisasteratCannae;cf.6.11.1,51.3–8).
Mysecondsection(‘ReadingMarcellusandFlaminius’)considerstwooftheseinstances:therepresentationsofthebehavioursofM.ClaudiusMarcellusandC.Flaminius,whichIusetostudytheapparentcontradictionbetweenPolybius’generallypristineimageofthird-centuryRomeandhisrepresentationofparticularexamplesofimproperbehaviourintheperiod.
Inmythirdsection(‘Curia,Comitia,andtheMamertineCrisis:HistoriographicInterventions’)Iturntothemainfocusofthischapter:thegenerallypositiverepresentationoftheRomandecisiontocrosstoSicilyunderarmsin264.Criticssharplycondemnedthisactionasduplicitousandimmoral,bothatthetimeofitsoccurrenceandatthetimeofPolybius’composition—makingtheRomanresolutionfitmostuncomfortablywiththeimageofthird-centuryRomanpoliticalvirtue.Someoftheinterpretativestrategiesproposedinmy(p.144) secondsectionarenotofmuchhelphere,suggestingthattheMessanacrisispresentsperhapsthemostdifficulthistoriographicproblemintheentirehistory.1MycontentionisthatwecanbestunderstandPolybius’representationofthiscrucialjunctureinRomanhistorybyattendingtothelargenarrativetrajectoriesoftheHistories.
NarrativePatterninginPolybius’HistoriesProfessorWalbankhastaughtusmanythingsaboutPolybius,notleastofwhichistheneedtounderstandthehistorianonhisownterms,givingdueconsiderationtohistoriographicproblemssuchasthehistorian’sconceptionoftyche(Fortune),hisideasonrelationshipsbetweenhistoryandtragedy,andhisconcessionstothesupernaturalinhistoricalcausation.Hehaswrittenthat‘althoughPolybiusiscommonlyregardedasarationalor“factual”historian,hisworkrevealsanobsessionwithwhatImaycallhistoricalpatterns’.2
Inabookpublishedseveralyearsago,Itriedtomakeacaseforthepresenceofsuch
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 3 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
patternsintheHistories,claimingthatinPolybius’representation,Roman(andAchaean)collectivecharacterdeterioratesastheworkprogressestowardsthehistorian’sownday.Thisdeterioration,inPolybius’opinion,wastheresultofpoliticalandsocietaldebasement;meanwhiletheRomanpolityinthethirdcenturywas,bycontrast,initsoptimalconditionasa‘mixedconstitution’underthedirectionofitsaristocraticelement,theRomansenate.3Polybiusmaintainsthatpoliteiaiintheirprimeoperateaccordingtothedictatesofreason,orlogismos.Intheircorruptedform,theyslideintoochlocracyormob-rule,inwhichcollectivebehaviourischaracterizedbyintemperance,irrationality,andviolentemotion—therealmofthePolybianbarbarian.Iassertedthatthesepoliticalconvictionsareever-presentthroughoutPolybius’work;andthatattheoutsetoftheHistorieshisnarrativeobjectivespushedhimtodepictRomeatitsacme,beforethecorruptionhadbegun.
(p.145) ThemostimportantpassagesforthisnarrativepatterningintheHistoriesareasfollows.PolybiusemphasizestheRomanpoliteiainhisaccountoftheriseofRome,4whichisshowntohavereachedthepinnacleofitsmoralvirtuesometimearoundthetimeoftheHannibalicWar(6.2.5–6,11.1).AtthistimeCarthage,Rome’sgreatnemesis,wasalreadyindecline(6.51.5–8,explicitlycontrastingtheconditionofCarthageandRome’sapogee),thecauseofwhichwas,asforallPolybianstates,thepreponderanceofthepopularelementinpoliticallife,whichisaresultofinterstatesupremacyanddomesticprosperity.ForPolybius,thenon-elitesarealwaysresponsibleforthisdecay(6.57.7–9).
AsforPolybius’owntime,Romancollectivedegeneracywasalltooevidentinthehistorian’sestimation.Forexample,Romanmilitaryvirtuewasbutashadowofitsformerself,andRomanpublicofficialsnolongeruniformlyexhibitedintegrityinfinancialtransactions.5Incasessuchasthese,PolybiuscontrastsglaringlybasebehavioursonthepartofRomanswiththestatedperiodofimmaculateRomanpoliticalandmoralvirtue.Adissonantnarrativetensionarises,however,whenimmoralRomanbehavioursoccurintheperiodinwhichRomewasostensiblyatitsheightofpoliticalandmoralexcellence.Thisdissonancedemandssomeattemptatanalysisandexplanation.Thefollowingsectionbrieflyconsiderstwosuchinstances—Polybius’representationsofM.ClaudiusMarcellusandC.Flaminius—anditconcludesbysuggestingsomeinterpretativestrategiesforunderstandingsuchseeminglyincongruouspassages.
ReadingMarcellusandFlaminiusM.ClaudiusMarcellusfirstappearsinPolybius’narrativeastheconsulin222engagedinsuppressingtheremnantsoftheGallictumultus,whosemainforcewasbrokenatthebattleatTelamon.PolybiusmentionsMarcellusastheleaderoftheRomancavalryandasmallinfantryforcethatrespondedtotheInsubres’siegeofClastidium,buthefeaturesMarcellus’consularcolleague,Cn.CorneliusScipioCalvus,asthecommanderresponsiblefortakingtheInsubres’strongholdofMediolanumandthusendingthewar.6Münzer(p.146) reasonablybelievedthatPolybiusmayhaveemphasizedCornelius’roleatMarcellus’expenseoutofpartisanshipfortheCorneliiScipiones.7
IfPolybiusonlyslightedMarcellusinhisaccountofthefinalphaseoftheGallicWarofthe220s,Livy’snarrativesuggeststhatheroundlycondemnedhisbehaviouratthesiegeof
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 4 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Syracusein211,inthecourseoftheHannibalicWar.8EarlierintheLeontiancampaign,Marcellushadhad2,000Romandesertersbeheaded,andafterSyracusefell,heplunderedpreciousGreekartworkinordertoadorntemplesnearthePortaCapena.9WhenPolybiuscomestorecounthisdeathasanunwittingvictimofHannibal’sambushinVenusia,heplainlystatesthatMarcellusactedmorelikeanimbecilethanageneral.10
MeanwhileC.FlaminiuswasbrandedinRomansenatorialtraditionasarenegade,demagogicpolitician,arevolutionaryvillaininthemouldoftheearlyrepublicansocio-economicagitatorsSp.CassiusVecellinus,Sp.Maelius,andM.ManliusCapitolinus,whocallouslydisregardedRomanreligioustraditions.11Flaminiuswasoneofthosetraitorousmembersofthepoliticalelitewhoseradicalsocio-economictacticsregularlyelicitthehistorian’ssavagecontempt.12Polybius(2.33.1–9)remarksthattheGallicwarsofthe220srevealedtheexcellenceofRomanmilitarytraininganddiscipline,whichcouldovercomeeventheineptitudesofcommanderssuchasFlaminius.However,heflatlystatesthatFlaminius’landredistributionschemewasthebeginningofthemoraldeclineofthepopulace—astatementcuriouslyatoddswiththeideathattheonsetofRomandeteriorationbegansometimeafterthemoralhigh-pointoftheRomanresponsetothedisasteratCannae(6.2.5–6,11.1).13
Polybius’acknowledgementofthedegeneracyofMarcellusandFlaminiusstrikesadiscordantnotewithhislargernarrativetrajectoryfromthird-(p.147) centuryRomanpoliticalexcellenceandmoralvirtuetoamid-second-centurydebasedRomanmorality.InthiscontextitiswelltorememberthatforPolybiustheindividualistheproductofhissocietyandanaccuratemirrorofitsculturalpractices.14
Howarewetoaccountfortheapparentdiscrepancy?Wemightpositinfluencesfrompoliticalpressuresappliedbythesenatorialaristocracy.Aswehaveseen,MünzerarguedthatPolybius’representationofM.ClaudiusMarcellusredoundedtothecreditofhisconsularcolleaguein222,amemberoftheCorneliiScipiones,thehistorian’spatrons.InthecaseofC.Flaminius,Polybius’highlynegativeassessmentwouldhavesimplyfallenintolinewithwhatseemstohavebeenanundisputedsenatorialtraditiononanoutlawandtreacherousdemagogue.Alternatively,wemightsimplyconcludethatPolybiuswasnotalwaysabletoreconcilehiscommitmenttopainstakingaccuracyandimpartialitywithhishistoriographicpatterning.15Finally,wecouldreadthecondemnatoryassessmentsofaMarcellusorFlaminiusaspartofasubtleattempttogivevoicetoanti-RomansentimentsamongPolybius’Greekreadership,offeringsubtextsthatcreateatensionwithandresistthestraightforwardideaofthird-centuryRomanexcellence.ElsewhereIhaveadoptedthisapproach,callingthehistoriographicstrategya‘politicsofculturalindeterminacy’(Champion2004a).
EachoftheseapproachesoffersavalidinterpretationofspecificinstanceswherePolybius’historicalnarrativesareindiscordwithhisgeneralimageofthird-centuryRomanpoliticalculture.Itwouldbeabsurdtoinsistthatoneofthemiscorrecttotheexclusionoftheothers,butinmyopiniontheideathatPolybiuswrotewithaneyetohismultiplereadershipsandtheirpoliticalpredispositionsrendersaninfinitelymoresubtle,
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 5 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
complex,andinterestingwriterandartist.IshallreturntotheseinterpretativeapproachesintheconclusiontothischapterinordertounderscoretheuniquehistoriographicproblemPolybiusstruggledwithattheveryopeningofhisHistoriesinrecountingRome’sdecisiontocrosstoSicilyunderarms.
(p.148) Curia,Comitia,andtheMamertineCrisis:HistoriographicInterventionsPolybius’primarysourcesfortheFirstPunicWar—Q.FabiusPictorandPhilinusofAgrigentum—undoubtedlypresentedamuchfullernarrativeoftheeventsthanwefindinhisBook1.Hisabbreviationofthesenarrativesrequiresexplanation.AlongtheselinesIshallarguetwopoints:(1)thefactthattheaccountoftheFirstPunicWaroccursinPolybius’prefatoryandcursoryintroductionisinitselfaninsufficientexplanationforthetruncatedandambiguoustreatmentoftheeventsatRomein264;and(2)thenarrativeobfuscationisbestunderstoodbyattendingtoPolybius’historiographicpatterningandhiscontemporaneousreaderships.
InstudyingRomanimperialism,historiansrightlystressthedeterminationin264tocampaigninSicily.ThisdecisionmarkedthefirststepinRome’stransitionfromapowerfulstateconfinedtotheItalianpeninsulatooneofworldhistory’smostsuccessful,largest,andlongest-lastinghegemonicempires.16Yetthedecision-makingprocessesultimatelyleadingtoMediterranean-widedominationareinPolybius’versionshroudedinobscurity.ThehistoricalissueconcernedthestrategicallyimportanttownofMessana,andSyracusanandCarthaginianinterventionsthere.Theso-calledMamertines(Campanianmercenaries)seizedMessanaandmadealargepartofnorth-easternSicilyinsecurebytheirmaraudingactivities(Plb.1.8.1–2;cf.Diod.22.13.1;23.1.4;Plut.Pyrrh.23.1,5).UnderpressurefromHieroIIofSyracuse,theMamertinesappealedtobothCarthageandRomeforaid.AccordingtoPolybius,RomansenatorsfearedCarthagewouldacquireabridgeheadatMessanaforinvadingItaly,butthequestionablemoralityofassistingthetreacherousMamertineusurpersgavethempause(1.11.1;cf.3.26.6).Polybius’narrativecompressionmakesitunclearastowhetherthesenateorthepopularassemblydeterminedtoaidtheMamertines,andjustwhatthenatureofthisaidwastobe.Hesimplystates,οἱδὲπολλοί…ἔκρινανβοηθειν̑(1.11.2,‘themajority…determinedtogiveaid’).
Chapters10and11ofthefirstbookcompriseouronlydetailednarrativeofthemomentousRomanresolutiontobecomeinvolvedinSicilianaffairs—a(p.149)resolutionwhicheventuallyledtotheFirstPunicWar.ThepreliminariestothewarinPolybius’account(1.7–10)arewellknown;onlyabriefsummaryisrequiredhere.ItalianRhegium,fearingbothPyrrhus’designsonItalyandCarthaginiannavalpower,appealedtoRomeforaprotectivegarrison.17AroundthetimeofPyrrhus’crossingtoItaly,theRomanssenttoRhegiumagroupof4,000CampanianmercenariesunderthecommandofacertainDecius.18TheseCampaniansforciblytookcontrolofRhegium,muchastheCampaniansinSicilyhadtreacherouslyoccupiedMessana.InSicily,HierodefeatedtheMamertinesnearbytheLonganusriver,andthenreturnedtoSyracuse,wherehewasnamedking(1.8.3–9.8).InItaly,aRomanexpeditionsubduedandpunishedthe
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 6 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
treacherousmercenariesatRhegium.19
TheMamertinesnowfoundthemselvesinadifficultsituation,sincetheyweredeprivedofthesupportoftheircompatriotsatRhegium.TheyhadbeensoweakenedbytheirdefeatatHiero’shandsthattheycouldnolongerpursuewarlikeactivitieswiththeirownresources.Theywereforcedtoseekoutsideassistance,buttheydisagreedastowhomtheyshouldappeal.OnepartysentforhelptotheCarthaginians,entrustingthemselvesandtheirdefencestothem.OtherswenttoRome,offeringtoplaceMessanaunderRomanprotectionandbeggingforassistanceonthegroundsofkinship.20ThisembassycausedthesenatorialquandaryatRome.
Inameticulousstudyoftheevents,EcksteinhaspersuasivelyarguedthattheRomandecisionwasinitiallytomakeapublicstatementtotheinternationalpoliticalcommunitythatRomehadreceivedMessanaintoitsamicitia,andthatitwasonlylaterthattheconsulAp.ClaudiusCaudexwasentrustedwithrelievingtheSyracusanandCarthaginiansiegeofthetown,bydiplomatic(p.150) or—asalastresort—militarymeans.21ThereforethereappeartohavebeenatleasttwostagesintheRomandeliberations,whereasPolybius’compressednarrativesuggestsonlyone.
Polybius’accountofthisdiplomaticsituationformspartoftheso-calledprokataskeuē,thesomewhathurriedandabbreviatedBooks1and2.Thesebooksstandoutsideofhishistoryproper,whichbeginswiththe140thOlympiad(220–16).Inhisprokataskeuēhesoughtonlytosketchearlierhistoryinorderforhisreadershiptohavetherequisitebackgroundknowledgeforthedetailednarrativetofollow.HewasthereforeinterestedinmerelysummarizingthesequenceofeventsleadinguptotheFirstPunicWar;inhistoriographicterms,hissimplificationis,therefore,understandable.22YetaccordingtoPolybius(1.63.1–9),theRomanactionprecipitatedthegreatestwarinhumanmemoryandcreatedambitionsforuniversaldominion.Itisthereforereasonabletoexpectalucidandcompletetreatmentofsuchanimportantchainofevents.
AsEcksteinhasdemonstrated,theancienttraditionoutsideofPolybius’history(mostimportantlythesurvivingfragmentsofDiodorus’Books22and23)suggeststhefollowingsequenceofevents:theMamertineexpulsionofasmallCarthaginiangarrisonfromMessana(whichitselfhadbeencalledinasadefenceagainstpossibleaggressionfromPyrrhus);theformationofaSyracusan–CarthaginianallianceagainstMessana,nowundersomesortofRomanprotection;andajointSyracusan–CarthaginiansiegeofMessana(Diod.22.13.9–23.3,esp.23.1.4).BeyondDiodorus’fragmentaryaccount,theannalistictraditionalsoisconsistentwithahistoricalreconstructioninvolvingmorecomplexcircumstancesthanthatofferedbyPolybius.23
Indeed,at1.20.13–16PolybiushimselfnarratesClaudius’navalskirmishinginthestraitsofMessana;andat3.26.6heseemstosaythatthereweretwodistinctstagesinthedevelopmentofRomaninterventioninSicily:acceptanceoftheMamertinesintoamicitia(Polybius’προσέλαβονεἰςτὴνφιλίαν);andlater(Polybius’καὶμετὰταυ̑τα)aresolutionforactiveassistance.Finally,at1.11.4–9,theMamertinesinviteClaudiusintoMessanaaftertheyhaveexpelledtheCarthaginiangarrison,buthecrossesovertoSicilyonly
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 7 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
aftertheCarthaginiansandSyracusanshaveformedsomesortofallianceandhavebeguntobesiegethecity.
(p.151) ClearlyPolybiusknewofafullertraditionconcerningtheseeventsandchosetotruncateit.Hissourceswere,onhisownadmission,thepro-CarthaginianPhilinusandthepro-RomansenatorialhistorianFabiusPictor.24Alivelypolemicregardingthequestionofwar-guiltinformedthedebate,withPhilinuscharacterizingtheRomansasunjustaggressors,andFabiusrepresentingthemasuprightandmorallyimpeccablestatesmen,engaginginwaronlyasalastresort.
Suchdebatescontinuetothepresentday,buttheycannotproceedveryfarwithoutconsideringtheso-calledPhilinusTreaty.Thisisnottheplacefordetaileddiscussionofthelong-standingcontroversysurroundingthetreaty,which,ifhistorical,probablydatedtotheyear306.Formypurposes,itwillbesufficienttostatethattherewasanintense,politicallymotivatedhistoriographicargumentastowhetheraRomano-Carthaginiantreatyofthelatefourthcentury,stipulatingthattheRomansmuststayawayfromthewholeofSicilyandtheCarthaginiansfromthewholeofItaly,actuallyexisted;andthatPolybiusvigorouslydeniedit(3.26.1–7).Iftherewasindeedsuchatreaty,thentheRomancrossingin264violatedaformalinternationalagreement.Philinusaccepteditashistoricalfact—asdidthelaterannalistictradition,whichdidnotcontestthetreaty’sexistencebutratherstrovetoprovethattheCarthaginianswerethefirsttobreakitwhentheysentafleettoTarentumin272.25
SincepublicationofaseminalarticlebyMatthiasGelzer,scholarshavebeeningeneralagreementthatFabius’history,writteninGreek,wasinlargepartaimedatjustifyingRome’sdiplomaticandmilitaryactionsbeforeareadershipoftheGreekpoliticalclasses.26Polybius’accountoftheearlierpartofthewarsuggeststhathereliedmoreheavilyonFabiusthanonPhilinus,sinceherehereferstoconsul-names;whereasinhisnarrativeofthewar’slaterstageshe(p.152) mentionsyearsofthewar,whichsuggestsheavierrelianceonPhilinus.27ButsuchcircumstantialevidenceisnotnecessaryforustobeconfidentthatFabiuswasPolybius’mainsourceforthird-centuryRomandiplomacyingeneralandthedecision-makingprocessesin264inparticular.
WhatcanwereasonablyconjectureaboutFabius’treatmentoftheRomandeliberations?Polybius’narrativeshowsthatFabiusdescribedlong,agonizingsenatorialdebatesregardingtheMamertineappeal(1.11.1,καὶτὸμὲνσυνέδριονοὐδ'εἰςτέλοςἐκύρωσετὴνγνώμην).Ecksteinhaswrittenofa‘complexandhighlyfluiddiplomaticsituation’,inwhichthesenatepresentedClaudiuswitha‘spectrumofpossibleactions’.28TwopassagesfromlaterRomansourcesmayalsoreflectFabius’representationoftheevents;atleasttheyareconsistentwithhispictureofamorallyconscioussenatethatdidnotaggressivelyinitiatetheFirstPunicWar.
First,Livy’sPeriocha16statesthatwhentheMessanaaffairreachedacrisispoint,thesenatedeterminedtoaidtheMamertines.29DiodorusstatesthatassoonastheRomanslearnedthatMessanawasundersiegebyCarthaginianandSyracusanforces,theysentClaudiustoRhegiumwithastrongarmy.30Claudiusdispatchedenvoystobothpartiesin
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 8 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ordertonegotiatealiftingofthesiege.TheharshresponseDiodorusattributestoHiero,castigatingtheRomansfortakingimpiousmurderersundertheirprotectionandthinlydisguisingunderthepretextoffidestheirlustforpossessingSicily,showsthatDiodoruswasnotfollowingonlyFabiusbutprobablyusingthepro-CarthaginianPhilinusaswell.31Consequently,itisimportanttoexercisecautioninattemptingtostudyDiodorusinordertoascertainwhateitherFabiusorPhilinushadtosayaboutthecrisis.
Thatcaveatnotwithstanding,itisnoteworthythat,beforeHiero’shostilereply,DiodorushasClaudiusstatepubliclythathewouldnotproceedwithwaragainstHiero.32ThecombinationofLivyandDiodorusmaycautiouslybetakenasevidencethat,inaverydetailedaccount,FabiusrepresentedClaudiusasagonizingoverhisdutytocarryoutthesenate’sauthorizationtoaidtheMamertines,butunwillingtotakeanyactionthatmightprecipitateawar(p.153) againstSyracuseand/orCarthagewithoutaformalwardeclarationfromtheRomansenateandpeople.Intheend,thedemandsoffidestowardstheMamertinesgaveClaudiuslittlechoicebuttoengageinopenhostilitiesatMessana,whichledtowarwithCarthage.
NoneofthesedetailsispresentinPolybius’narrative.Hisοἱπολλοίat1.11.2hasspawnedavigorousscholarlydebateonthedecision-makingprocessesatRome.ForalongtimeanearlyunanimousconsensusheldthatοἱπολλοίmeanstheRomanpeoplemeetinginformalassembly.33Beginningaroundthemid-pointofthetwentiethcentury,however,scholarshaveraisedobjections,arguingthatοἱπολλοίinsteadmeanshereamajorityinthesenate.34Eckstein’s1980article,inparticular,wasdealtasharprejoinderbyHoyos,whoattemptedtorestoreοἱπολλοίasthepeoplemeetingincomitialassembly.35Calderoneandhiscollaboratorssuggestedthat1.11.1,containingthephraseκαὶτὸμὲνσυνέδριονοὐδ'εἰςτέλοςἐκύρωσετὴνγνώμην,wasmeantasaconditionalapodosiswithoutἄν,butthatPolybiusbecameinvolvedinexplainingtheaitiaiforthesenate’shesitationandleftthephraseasananacoluthon.EcksteinarguedPolybiusdidnotstatetherewasapermanentdeadlockinthesenate,butintendedforthephraseεἰςτέλοςtohaveintensive,nottemporal,force.Headdedthattheμένat1.11.1wasareduplicatedμέν,resumedfrom1.10.9,sothecorrectreadingisthatthesenatedebatedatlength(Ῥωμαιο̑ι…πολὺνμὲνχρόνονἐβουλεύσαντο),butultimatelythemajorityofthesenatorsresolvedtohelptheMamertines(1.11.2,οἱδὲπολλοί…ἔκρινανβοηθειν̑).Finally,HoyosarguedagainstEcksteinthattheδόγμαat1.11.3neednotmeanasenatusconsultum,butratherrepresentsaformalvoteincomitialassembly.36
Alloftheseclosephilologicalargumentsbasedonparticularwordsorphrasesbegahistoriographicquestion:whydidPolybiusrepresentthesituationinsuchawaythathasallowedforthisfiercedebatetoariseinthefirstplace,especiallysinceelsewhereheunambiguouslydescribesactivitiesofboththesenateandthepopularassemblies?37Asalreadystated,partofthereason(p.154) forthisisthatPolybius’treatmentoftheFirstPunicWarformspartofhisfirsttwosummarybooks,butIwouldliketosuggestthatamoresatisfactoryexplanationliesinconsideringthelargernarrativepatternoftheHistoriesandthecircumstancesofitscomposition.
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 9 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybius’firstsixbookswereprobablywrittenandpublishedbefore150,whenhewasstilltechnicallyapoliticalprisoner.38DuringtheseyearstherewereintensedisagreementsinGreekpoliticalcirclesaboutthejusticeofRome’sacquisitionofempire.Polybiusindicatesthepresenceofsuchdebates,bothinstatingthathisworkwillenablereaderstodecidewhethertheRomandominionwasworthyofpraiseorblameandinrelayingdividedopinionsofGreekstatesmenonRomanbehaviourduringtheThirdPunicWar.39Inthisconnectionwemayconsiderthecelebrated‘philosophicalembassy’toRomein155,whentheAcademicphilosopherCarneadesmesmerizedmembersoftherulingelitewithhislectures,inwhichheapparentlycalledintoquestionthejusticeoftheRomanimperium.ThereisevidencethatPolybiushimselfmayhaveattendedCarneades’lectures.40Inanyevent,PolybiusmakesitclearthatthedubiousmoralityofRomanimperialexpansionwasdiscussedparticularlyinthelightofthecrossingtoSicilyin264.41
ItisreasonabletoassumethatPolybius’personalpredicamentasapoliticalhostageandthefactthathewroteforbothRomanandGreekreadershipshadaprofoundinfluenceonhiscomposition.42ThedecisiontoassisttheMamertinespresentedahistoriographicdilemma—therewasnowaytoexplaintheactionwhilepreservingtheimageofathird-centuryRomansocietymorallysuperiortothatofthemid-secondcentury.Toassignunequivocallythe(p.155) responsibilityforcrossingtoSicilytothesenate,whichIhavesuggestediswhatPolybiusmayhavefoundinFabius,wouldhavebeentorepresentthesenatorsinamorallydubiouslight.43Ontheotherhand,tostateunambiguouslythatthepeopletookthisexecutivedecisionwouldhaveunderminedhisimageofRomeatthistime,sincetheriseofthepopularelementinanystatewasforhimaclearsignofdecadenceandcorruption.44Hisambiguousοἱπολλοίat1.11.2,therefore,canbeviewedasadevicetoavoidcommitmenttoeitheroftheseinterpretations—andonewhoseindeterminacyservesthelargernarrativepattern.
Incasesofhistoriographicshaping,weshouldexpecttofindinconsistenciesanduneasytensionsbetweennarrativepatternsandactualevents.ThesedoinfactoccurinPolybius’work:forexample,intheaftermathoftheFirstPunicWar,RometookadvantageofCarthaginianweakness(1.79.1–7),asPolybiustouchesononlylightlyinBook1.HestatesthatatthetimeoftheCarthaginianmercenaryrebellioninSardinia,bothRomeandCarthageadheredtotreatyobligations;andthat,foritspart,RomereturnedallprisonersofwartoCarthage,didnotacceptaninvitationfromtherebelstoenterSardinia,andwouldnotacceptUtica’ssurrender.45PolybiusconcedesthatatsomelatertimetheRomansdidinfactaccepttheinvitationtoenterSardinia,andtheythreatenedtodeclarewarontheCarthaginianswhenthelatterbegantomakeretaliatorypreparationsagainsttheirrebelliousmercenaries.AlthoughCarthageprotestedthatithadsovereignrightsoverSardinia,itwasforcedtosubmit,relinquishingtheislandandagreeingtopayanadditionalwarindemnityof1,200talents.46AlthoughtheseeventscouldbeusedtocastRomeinamostnegativelight,itisimportanttorecognizethatPolybiuspreserveshisrepresentationofthird-centuryRomebymakingnomoraljudgementontheRomanbehaviourinBook1,andthathedoesnotrelatethesenate’sroleatthisjuncture.47
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 10 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(p.156) Polybius’criticismsofRomedowntotheclimacticbattleatCannae(Books1–6)areinfrequent;wehaveageneralizedstatementontheRomans’obstinateapplicationofβία,orforceagainstnature(1.37.7),andonseveraloccasions(includingrepresentationsofMarcellusandFlaminius)Polybiuscensuresthemistakesofindividualcommanders.48Overall,however,hisrepresentationofthird-centuryRomansocietyandgovernmentishighlypositive.Asnotedearlier,herepresentedRomanvirtueinthisperiodasbeingpredicateduponitspoliticalandsocietalinstitutions,andaboveallthestrong,guidinghandofthesenate.NowheredoeshestatethismoreexplicitlythaninhisnarrationofreactionstotheaftermathofthedevastatingdefeatatCannaeinBook3.Inthisseeminglyhopelesssituation,heshowsthesenatetakingfirmcontrolbyencouragingthemasses,preparingforthecity’sdefence,anddeliberatingonallnecessarymeasurestomeetthecomingchallenges.49ItisnotuntilafterhisaccountoftheRomans’responsetoCannaeinBook6thatthenarrativepatternchanges,andPolybiusmoreopenlysuggestssignsofRomandeterioration.
Aswehaveseen,PolybiuswaswillingtoadmitsomeanomaliestouprightRomanbehaviourcharacteristicofearlierperiods(MarcellusandFlaminius).ButhecouldnotdenythatthecrossingtoSicilyin264initiatedtheFirstPunicWarandwastheobjectofthesharpestcriticism,bothatthetimeofitsoccurrenceandamongstatesmeninthemid-secondcentury.Hechosetoomitthecontroversyinthenarrativeofhisintroductorybooks.Attheopeningofhishistory,heinsteaddeflectedthequestionofthedecision’sdubiousmoralityfromthesenate.Atthesametime,heavoidedanyexplicitstatementthatthepopularassemblyplayedtheleadingrole,anotionwhichwouldhavebeenincongruentwithhisrepresentationofthethird-centuryRomanpoliteia.Theambiguousοἱπολλοίat1.11.2wasthereforeakeyphraseinhelpinghimtoperformthisdelicatehistoriographicbalancingact.
(p.157) ConclusionInconclusion,letusreturntotheinterpretativestrategiesoutlinedattheendofthesecondsectioninordertoappreciatethemagnitudeofthehistoriographicproblemwhichrecountingtheMamertinecrisispresentedforPolybius.ClearlywecandiscountthepossibilityofinfluencefrompossiblesenatorialrivalriesorhispoliticalallegiancetotheCorneliiScipiones,sincein1.10–11thehistoriandiscussesthesenateasacollectivebody,withoutmentionofanyparticularstatesmen.WecanalsorejectthepositionthatinthiscasePolybius’exactingstandardsfordetailedandaccuratereportingresultedinacontradictionwithhislargerhistoriographicpattern.Onthecontrary,IhavearguedthathisaccountofRomandeliberationsontheMessanacrisisseemstobedeliberatelyvague,50andthattheindeterminacyactuallyservedthegoalofhishistoriographicpatterning,sinceitobscuresboththeresponsibilityforaidingtheMamertinesandwhatpreciserolesthesenateandpeopleplayedinthedecision.51ToassigntheresponsibilityunequivocallytoeithercuriaorcomitiawouldnothavesimplyunderminedPolybius’patternofprogressivedeteriorationfrompristineRomanmoralvirtue;itratherwouldhaveutterlydestroyedthegrandstructureatitspointofinception.Theindeterminacyofthehistorian’srepresentation,onthecontrary,allowedhisGreekandRomanreaderstointerprettheRomandecisiontocrosstoSicilyunderarmsin264accordingtotheirown
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 11 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
politicalpredispositions.
Notes:
(1)MyargumentaddressesahistoriographicprobleminPolybius’Histories;itisbestservedbytreatingthepassagesunderconsideration(concerningMarcellus,Flaminius,andtheMamertinecrisis)inreversechronologicalorder,leadinguptothemomentousRomandecisiontocrosstheStraitsofMessanain264.AnearlierversionwaspresentedattheannualmeetingoftheAssociationofAncientHistoriansheldatPrincetonUniversity,4May2007.IwishtothanktheorganizersofPolybius1957–2007,ThomasHarrison,BruceGibson,andGinaMuskett,forinvitingmetoparticipate,andtheparticipants(aswellastheaudienceatPrinceton),whosetrenchantcommentsandpenetratingquestionsenabledmetomakethepaperamuchbetterone.IextendspecialthankstoBruceGibsonforhiseditorialqueriesandsuggestions.Anyremainingflawsare,ofcourse,entirelymyown.AlldatesareBC.
(2)Walbank1994:29.
(3)Champion2004a:105–22.
(4)Plb.3.2.6;cf.1.1.5,64.2;3.118.8–9;6.2.2–3,18.4–5;8.2.3–11;39.8.7–8;Pédech1964:303–30.
(5)Plb.13.3.6–8;18.35.1–2;Champion2004a:144–69.
(6)Plb.2.34.1–35.1.AccordingtoPlutarch(Marc.6.5–7.1),MarcellussavedCorneliusatMediolanum,andthesenatedecreedatriumphforhimalone;cf.Eutr.3.6;Oros.4.13,15;Zonar.8.20.
(7)Münzer1899:col.2738.InadditiontofailingtomentionMarcellus’triumph,PolybiusissilentonMarcellus’single-handedcombatwiththeGallicleader,BritomarusorVirdumarus,hiswinningofthespoliaopima,andhisdedicationofatempletoVirtusandHonos,allamplyattestedintheannalistictradition;Münzer1899:cols.2739–40assemblesthereferences.Note,however,thatMarcellusisthefirstconsulmentionedat2.34.1.
(8)ForadetailedanalysisofMarcellus’Siciliancampaign,seeEckstein1987a:157–69,345–9;forLivy’sdepictionofMarcellus’character,seenowLevene2010:197–214,333–4.
(9)Liv.24.30.6;forMarcellus’savagery,seefurtherLiv.24.19.9–11(Casilinum);24.35.2(MegaraHyblaea);24.39.1–10(Henna);26.30.4–5(Leontini),withNissen1863:53–85,esp.83–5,forLivy’srelianceonPolybiusinthesebooks.Polybiuselsewhere(9.10.1–13;39.2–3)condemnsRomanremovalofGreekartwork,whichmadetheRomanstargetsofhatred.Cf.Cic.2Verr.2.4forafavourabletraditiononMarcellus’behaviouratSyracuse(cf.salusSiciliae,2.Verr.2.8),mentionedinordertoexcoriateVerres.
(10)Plb.10.32.7–8,withWalbank,HCPii.242–3on10.32.1–33.7,Eckstein1995:28–9.
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 12 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(11)Champion2004a:190–2,Rosenstein1990:58n.11,77–8n.74.AccordingtoZonaras(8.20),thesenatedeniedatriumphtoFlaminiusin223,butthepeopleoverturnedthesenators’wishes.ForFlaminius’careerandsenatorialpolitics,seeFeigVishnia1996:11–48.
(12)SeeWelwei1966,Mendels1979,1981b,1982,Eckstein1995:129–40,Champion2004a:185–93,Champion2004b.
(13)Plb.2.21.8(‘thefirststepinthecorruptionofthepeople’);cf.2.33.8–9;3.80.3,84.4–5.
(14)Plb.6.47.3–5.Conversely,itistruethatforPolybius,wherestrongindividualsareinpower,changesintheirdispositionscanresultinchangesinthenatureoftheirstates:see9.23.8–9;cf.4.2.10–11,withChampion2004a:103–5.Suchcases,however,appeartobemoreorlessconfinedforPolybiustomonarchiesorpoliteiaiinadecadentconditiontobeginwith(e.g.Boeotia,Aetolia).Forthewell-orderedstateofAchaea,atanyrate,PolybiusfeelscompelledtodigressonindividualpsychologyinordertoexplainAratusofSicyon’sdeviationsfromAchaeancollectivecharacter(4.8.1–12).Heconcedesthatrareindividuals,whoarepoliticallyandmorallysuperiortotheircontemporaries,canariseinstatesalreadyindecline;seeChampion2004a:146–51,158–63.
(15)ForPolybius’ideasonthemaincriterionoftruthinhistoricalwriting,seePlb.1.14.6–9andassembledreferencesatChampion2004a:22n.30.
(16)Interestingly,Polybiusgivesanother‘firststep’whenhereportsthenewsofthefallofAgrigentumearlyin261(1.20.1–2).HerepresentsthearrivalofthenewsatRomeasthemomentwhenthesenatefirstbegantothinkofendingtheCarthaginianpresenceinSicily.Consequently,theideathattheRomansweremerelyhelpingtheMamertinesin264,withnoimperialdesigns,isreinforced.Forhistoricalreconstructionsofthepreliminariestoandoutbreakofthewar,seee.g.Hoffmann1969,Petzold1969:129–79,Hampl1972:413–27,Rich1976:119–27,Eckstein1980,Hoyos1984,Eckstein1987a:73–101,Scullard1989:537–45,Lazenby1996:11–42,Hoyos1998:33–99.ForRome’simperialexpansioninthisperiod,see(fromamongavastliterature)Errington1971,Harris1979,Gruen1984,Ferrary1988,Hoyos1998,andnowEckstein2008.Kallet-Marx1995isindispensablefortheperiodfromtheAchaeanWartotheascendancyofCn.PompeiusMagnus.
(17)Plb.1.7.6–7;cf.Diod.22.1.2–3;Diofr.40.7–12;Dion.Hal.A.R.20.4.1–5.5.DionysiusstatesthattheRomanconsulC.FabriciusLuscinussentoutthegarrison;basedonFabricius’consulships,thedispatchwasin282;anattackontheCampanianusurpersatRhegiumfollowedin278(MRRi.189,194).
(18)Plb.1.7.6;seeWalbank,HCPi.52–3on1.7.6–13fordiscussionofthedateandnumericalvariantsforthesizeofthegarrison.TheidentityofthecommanderDeciusisexceedinglycomplicated;seeLiv.Per.12(DeciusVibellius);Liv.28.28.2–4(registeringaD.Vibulliusasmilitarytribune);App.Samn.9.2–3;andthe‘Jubellius’atVal.Max.2.7.15
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 13 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(withCampanianmercenariesasciuesRomanos,cf.Salmon1967:39n.1onthelegioCampana;MRRi.199).DeciuswasclearlyamemberofapowerfulCapuanfamily(cf.Cic.Agr.2.93–4,withSyme1955:129).
(19)Rhegiumwasreducedin270:Walbank,HCPi.53on1.7.6–13;MRRi.198.OnlyinBook3doesPolybiusconcedethattheRomanactioncouldbecondemned(3.26.6–7;passagequotedinfullinn.41.).
(20)Plb.1.10.1–3,δεόμενοιβοηθήσεινσφίσιναὐτοις̑ὁμοφύλοιςὑπάρχουσιν;Serrati2006:131n.70assemblesreferencesforItalianappealstoconsanguinitywithRome;onkinshipdiplomacygenerally,seeJones1999.ThequestionofthechronologicalrelationshipbetweenthebattleattheLonganus(269or265/64?)andtheMamertineappealstoCarthageandtoRomeisvexed,butZonar.8.8isclearaboutHierobesiegingMessanain265/64,whichledtotheMamertinerequestforoutsideassistance;seePetzold1969:160–1,Eckstein1987a:74n.3.
(21)Eckstein1987a:73–101,335–40.
(22)OnPolybius’prokataskeuē,seeGelzer1940aand1940b(the‘Achaeanprokataskeuē’),Petzold1969:135–48;cf.Champion2004a:138n.150.SeealsoHansBeck’schapterinthisvolume.
(23)Liv.Per.16;Dio11,fr.43;Zonar.8.8(Romanhesitation,οὐταχέωςαὐτοις̑ἐπεκούρησαν);Flor.1.18.3–6;Devir.ill.37.2;Oros.4.7.1.Forcarefulreconstructionoftheevents,see,inadditiontoEckstein1987a:73–101,335–40(whodiffersinsomedetails),Hoyos1998:33–104.
(24)Plb.1.14.1–3;forPolybius’furthercriticismsofFabius,see1.15.12,58.5;3.8.1–9.5;ofPhilinus,1.15.1–12;3.26.2–7,withWalbank,HCPi.64–5on1.14.1;andnowAmbaglio2005.PolybiusperhapsalsodrewuponTimaeus,fromwhomhisdigressiononHieroII(1.8.3–9.8)islikelytohavederived;seeWalbank,HCPi.53–4on1.8.3–9.8.ForthefragmentsofPhilinus,seemyarticle(Champion2010),‘FGrH174Philinos’,inBrill’sNewJacobyOn-Line(http://www.brillonline.com);forFabius,seeBeckandWalterFRHI2,pp.55–136.
(25)Seee.g.Serv.A.4.628(cf.Serv.A.1.108;Catofr.84Peter,referringtoafoedus);Liv.9.43.26;21.10.8;Per.14,withHampl1972:422n.18.Thepost-Polybianannalistictraditionalsofabricatedaformaltreaty(foedussociale)betweenRomeandtheMamertinesatthetimeMessanacameunderattackin264:Liv.30.31.4;Flor.1.18.3.Serrati2006,esp.120–9,hasrecentlyarguedforthehistoricityofthePhilinusTreaty,andprovidesbibliographicreferencesformodernscholarlypositions,bothforandagainst,at120n.25(seealsoHoyos1984:92n.6;Hoyos1998:10n.10,Foucault,Foulon,andMolin2004:191n.117);cf.Hampl1972:423n.20forearlierliteratureonthequestion.
(26)Gelzer1933(seealsoGelzer1934);cf.Hampl1972:413andn.2,withreferencesto
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 14 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
earlierliterature.ForFabius’compositioninGreek,seeDion.Hal.A.R.1.6.2;Cic.Div.1.43,withFrier1999:255–84.
(27)SeeWalbank,HCPi.65on1.14.1;theperverseattempttoreversethisreasoningatLaqueur1938:col.1283mustberejected.IntheprokataskeuēPolybiuswasdependentonthechronologicalmethodsusedbyhissources;seeErrington1967b.
(28)Eckstein1987a:74.
(29)Liv.Per.16:auxiliumMamertinisferendumsenatuscensuit.ForLivy’sdirectuseofFabius,seeLuce1977:159–62.
(30)Diod.23.1.4.NotethatDiodorus’senseofurgency(ὃς[Ap.Claudius]εὐθὺςἠ̑λθενεἰςῬήγιον)conflictswiththedelayinZonar.8.8(seen.23above).
(31)DiodoruscitesPhilinusthreetimesasasourceforhisaccountoftheFirstPunicWar(23.8.1;23.17;24.11.1).ForDiodorus’suseofFabius,seeDiod.7.5.4,withSacks1990:118n.3.
(32)Frontinus(Str.1.4.11)describesClaudius’ruseincrossingfromRhegiumtoMessana.Thegeneralproclaimedthathecouldnotengageinwarwithoutaformalwar-voteoftheRomanpeople,andthen,feigningareturntoItaly,turnedaroundandsailedtoSicily.
(33)Eckstein1980:176n.5assemblesthereferences.
(34)DeMartino1951:239–40,Develin1973:121–2,Calderone1977,Eckstein1980and1987a:80–2,Calderone,Bitto,deSalvo,andPinzone1981.
(35)Hoyos1984.
(36)Calderone1977:386,Calderone,Bitto,deSalvo,andPinzone1981:27–30,Eckstein1980:182andn.22,188andn.39,Eckstein1987a:82andn.35,Hoyos1984:89–90;cf.Hoyos1998:57–64.
(37)WhenPolybiuswantstodenoteunequivocallytheRomansenate,heusesτὸσυνέδριον(butonlyat1.11.1inBooks1–2;italsodescribestheCarthaginian‘senate’at1.31.8andPythagoreancouncilsinMagnaGraeciaat2.39.1)orἡσύγκλητος(intheprokataskeuēat1.20.1and2.8.3).Inrelationtotheδόγμαat1.11.3,notethatPolybiusfrequentlymakesitclearthathereferstosenatusconsultabyaddingthewordsτη̑ςσυγκλήτου(6.13.2;18.44.1,2,5;24.10.3(αὐτη̑ς);28.13.11,16.2;29.27.2;30.30.2–3,31.20).AsEckstein1980:184–5notes,οἱπολλοίclearlymeansamajorityintheRomansenateat33.18.10–11,wherePolybiusdiscussesadivision(τοις̑μὲνοὐ̑νμετρίοις…οἱδὲπολλοί),butthiscannotbesaidof1.11.2.WhenPolybiuswantstoreferunambiguouslytotheRomanpeoplemeetingformallyincomitia,heregularlyusesδη̑μος(twenty-oneoccurrences),notοἱπολλοί(Eckstein1980:183andn.28);butwedoreadοἱπλείονεςinwhatisclearlyacomitialcontextat6.12.4;cf.Hoyos1984:91.
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 15 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(38)Walbank1972a:19–25.
(39)Plb.3.4.6–8;36.9.1–10.1,withChampion2004a:193–203.Cf.Plb.1.83.3–4(onHieroII’swisdomincounterbalancingthepowersofRomeandCarthage),οὐδέποτεγὰρχρὴτὰτοιαυ̑ταπαρορα̑νοὐδὲτηλικαύτηνοὐδενὶσυγκατασκευάζεινδυναστείαν,πρὸςἣνοὐδὲπερὶτω̑νὁμολογουμένωνἐξέσταιδικαίωνἀμφισβητειν̑(‘forthesekindsofthingsshouldneverbeoverlooked,andweshouldneverassistanempiretosuchanextentthatnonedaredisputewithitconcerningacknowledgedrights’).
(40)Cic.Rep.3.7Powell(Lactant.Inst.5.14.3–5);Quint.Inst.12.1.35;Polybius’attendance:Plb.33.2.10(Gel.6.14.10),withFerrary1988:360andn.30.Champion2004a:197–8respondstothereservationsofGruen1984:342andFerrary1988:351–63concerningthehistoricityofCarneades’lectures.
(41)Plb.3.26.6,οὐμὴνἀλλ’εἰκατὰτου̑τότιςἐπιλαμβάνεταιῬωμαίωνπερὶτη̑ςεἰςΣικελίανδιαβάσεως,ὅτικαθόλουΜαμερτίνουςπροσέλαβονεἰςτὴνφιλίανκαὶμετὰταυ̑ταδεομένοιςἐβοήθησαν,οἵτινεςοὐμόνοντὴνΜεσσηνίωνπόλινἀλλὰκαὶτὴνῬηγίνωνπαρεσπόνδησαν,εἰκότωςἂνδόξειενδυσαρεστειν̑(‘ItmightseemplausibletoblametheRomans,intheirinvasionofSicily,forhavingtakentheMamertinesintoallianceatall,andforansweringtheirrequestforaidwhentheyhadbetrayedRhegiumaswellasMessana—onecouldreasonablydisapprove[oftheaction]’).
(42)ForPolybius’multipleaudiences,seePlb.6.11.3–8;31.22.8,withChampion2004a:4n.5.
(43)Intheend,thequestionofFabius’representationoftheeventsin264mustremainopen.Gelzer1933:134–6andHampl1972:417,421,andn.17arguedthatFabiusassignedresponsibilityforthedecisiontotheRomanpopularassembly;Bung1950:138andHoffmann1969:171suggestedthatthiswasPolybius’ownreconstruction.WhatiscertainistheambiguityofPolybius’οἱπολλοίat1.11.2,whichthischapterattemptstoexplaininhistoriographicterms.
(44)SeeWelwei1966,Eckstein1995:129–40,Champion2004a:185–93,Champion2004b.Cf.Plb.12.25k.6–7,wherePolybiusdiscussesTimaeus’representationofHermocrates’speechatGelain424(cf.Thuc.4.59–64).Hermocrates,accordingtoTimaeus,praisedtheGeloansandCamariniansformakingsurethatimportantmattersofstatewerenotdiscussedbythemultitudebutratherbytheleadingcitizens.PolybiusmissedfewopportuntiestocastigateTimaeus(cf.Sacks1981:21–95),buthedoesnotherequestionthepoliticaljudgementofTimaeus’Hermocrates.
(45)Plb.1.83.5–11;cf.3.28.3,30.4.FortheRomantraditionontheseevents,seeZonar.8.17;App.Pun.5;Sic.2.3;Nep.Ham.2.3;Val.Max.5.1.1;Walbank,HCPi.146on1.83.2–4.
(46)Plb.1.88.8–12;cf.3.10.3–4;thesetermswerenotpartofanewtreaty,butratherwereanἐπισυνθήκηtothearrangementsof241;seeWalbank,HCPi.355on3.27.2–8.
Historiographic Patterns and Historical Obstacles in Polybius’ Histories: Marcellus,Flaminius, and the Mamertine Crisis
Page 16 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(47)PolybiustakesupRome’sseizureofSardiniainhisdiscussionofRomano-CarthaginiantreatiesinBook3.HesaystherethattheRomanaction(ἀφαίρεσις)gavetheCarthaginiansjustcauseforundertakingthesecondwaragainstRome(3.30.3–4).At3.28.1–2,hestatesthatRome’stakingofSardiniawasπαρὰπάντατὰδίκαια;cf.3.15.10.ButinthisaccountCarthagestillemergesastheinitiator,albeitwithgoodcause,oftheHannibalicWar.Moreover,Polybius’aitiaiforthewarsubordinatetheSardinianaffairtotheaggressivedesignsoftheBarcidsandto‘Hannibal’sOath’,whichoccupytheemphaticfirstandlastpositionsinPolybius’listofcausesofthewar;seeRich1976:64–71,1996:5n.5formodernscholarshiponPolybius’aitiai;cf.Champion2004a:119–20.
(48)Cf.Champion2004a:199–201.
(49)Plb.3.118.5–9;cf.6.58.1–13.ItisnoteworthythatinhistreatmentofthepreliminariestotheHannibalicWar,Polybius(3.20.1–9)disallowsanydivisioninthesenateregardingawardeclarationagainstCarthageafternewsarrivedofSaguntum’sfall.Othersourcespresentamorecomplicatedpicturewithintensesenatorialdebatesoverthecorrectpolicy(forthelikelihoodthatthesedebateswereinFabius’history,seeBung1950:34–5):Liv.21.6.6–7.1;Diofr.55B;Zonar.8.22;Sil.1.675–94;App.Ib.11,withWalbank,HCPi.331–2on3.20.1,Frier1999:245–6;seeRich1976:110n.182formodernworksrejectingPolybius’account.
(50)NotethatPolybius’treatmentofRome’smoreambitiousplansafterthefallofAgrigentum(1.20.1)alsoseemstobedeliberatelyvague.ThenewsisbroughttotheSenate(εἰςτὴνσύγκλητον),butPolybiusthenshiftstoanunspecifiednominativeplural(περιχαρεις̑γενόμενοι):senatorsorRomansingeneral?
(51)Thediscussionperiodfollowingthepaper’spresentationatPolybius1957–2007wonderfullysupportedmycontentionthatPolybius’accountmayhavebeendeliberatelyobscure,astherewaslengthydebateastowhatparticularwordsandphrasesin1.10–11mightpossiblymean.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 1 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
PolybiusandXenophon:TheMercenaryWar1
BruceGibson
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0008
AbstractandKeywords
Unlikemostmodernhistorians,PolybiusallotsagenerousdegreeofcoveragetotheMercenaryWarfoughtbetweenCarthageanditsmercenariesaftertheFirstPunicWar.ThoughtheMercenaryWaranditsaftermathisanimportantfactorinthecausationoftheSecondPunicWar,theepisodedeservesconsiderationasanimportantopportunityforPolybiustoexplorethethemeofmercenarysoldiers.AkeyintertextforhistreatmentofmercenariesisXenophon'sAnabasis,whichallowsforexaminationofthemessuchasethnicity,unityanddisunity,aspartofawiderprocessofcomparisonbetweenCarthageandRome.JustasPolybiusacknowledgesthesignificanceoftheexpeditionofthe10000againstPersia(3.6),sotoodoestheMercenaryWarallowforanexplorationofCarthaginianweaknessandcruelty,amidthewidercontextofRome'slatentpowerwhichseesSardiniasnatchedfromCarthageattheendoftheMercenaryWar.
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 2 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,Xenophon,MercenaryWar,Mercenaries,Carthage,Rome,ethnicity,intertextuality
IntroductionTheMercenaryWarwasaviolentandparadoxicalcodatoCarthage’sfinaldefeatintheFirstPunicWarin241BC,withCarthagenowforcedtofightitsownmercenariesandtheirAfricanallies.2Thoughthedatingoftheconflictissubjecttosomeuncertainty,asnotedbyFrankWalbankinhiscommentary,3thiswasawarwhich,accordingtoPolybius,lastedforthreeyearsandfourmonths(1.88.7).AsregardsPolybius’sources,whileithasbeenarguedthatPolybiusmayhaveusedPhilinus,WalbanksuggeststhatPhilinusmayhavebeentheauthorofamonographontheFirstPunicWaralone,andisthereforedoubtfulthatPhilinuswasthesource.4Polybiusis,ofcourse,carefultoexplainwhyhechoosestocoverthiswar(Plb.1.65),offeringthreereasons:first,thewaristheperfectexampleofwhatatrucelesswarislike;secondly,itgivesasalutarywarningoftheneedforcautioninusingmercenaries;5and,thirdly,itofferscrucialmaterialforanyonereflectingontheoriginoftheSecondPunicWar,especiallyasthecausesofthatwararethemselvesamatterfordebate.Beforeweconsiderthesereasons,6itmaybe(p.160)usefulinthefirstinstancetoaddressthestrikingissueoftheextentofPolybius’coverageoftheMercenaryWar.
IfweconsidertheeventsofthefirsttwobooksofPolybius,7theMercenaryWarisproportionatelygivenalargeamountofspace.8ThechaptersinBook1coveringtheFirstPunicWar,evenifweexcludethechaptersonthatwar’sorigins(1.5–9),runfrom1.10(wherewefirsthearoftheRomansconsideringhowtorespondtotheMamertines)to1.64,wherePolybiusroundsoffhistreatmentofthewarwithgeneralreflectionsonthenatureandsignificanceoftheconflict.Therearethusfifty-fivechaptersdevotedtotheFirstPunicWar,coveringthetwenty-threeyearsfromtheoutbreakofthewarin264BCtothefinaldefeatoftheCarthaginiansinthenavalbattleoftheAegatesIslandsin241BC.PolybiusthenmovesontohiscoverageoftheMercenaryWar,whichcoverstwenty-fourchaptersfrom1.65to1.88,theendofthebook,sothatitreceivesjustunder45percentofthespacedevotedtotheFirstPunicWar.IfwelookforwardintoBook2,theachievementsofCarthageintheperiodbetweentheMercenaryWarandtheoutbreakoftheSecondPunicWararecrammedintoaverysmallspaceindeed.Thusasinglechapter(2.1)isgivenovertotheperiodofHamilcarBarca’scommandinSpain(237–229BC);9anotherchapterisgivenovertoHasdrubal’scontinuationofHamilcar’sSpanishcommand(2.13),takingeventsdownto221BC;whileathirdchapterdealswithHasdrubal’sdeathandHannibal’sassumptionofthecommandinthesameyear(2.36).Thus,eventhoughPolybiusspecificallymentionstheangerofHamilcarBarcaandthesuccessofCarthageinSpainashisfirstandthirdcausesoftheoriginsoftheSecondPunicWar(3.9–10),10Carthage’shistoryaftertheMercenaryWardowntoHannibal’sassumptionoftheSpanishcommandisonlydiscussedinthreechaptersinBook2.WhilstthesecondcauseoftheSecondPunicWargivenbyPolybiusinBook3,CarthaginianangeroverthelossofSardiniaintheimmediatesequeltotheMercenaryWar(3.10.1–4),issaidbyPolybiustobethegreatestcauseoftheSecondPunicWar,itremainsthecasethatPolybiusdealswiththelossofSardiniaandtheadditionalindemnityof1,200talentsimposedbytheRomansonlyverybriefly,inthelastchapterofBook1(1.88.8–
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 3 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
12).11Furthermore,ifwecomparetheothermaterialinBook2,thecoveragegiventotheMercenaryWarissimilartothatgivenovertoRome’sdealingswiththeGauls(2.14–35),12(p.161) andmoreextensivethanthespaceallottedtotheFirstIllyrianWar(2.2–12);onlytheFirstPunicWaritselfinBook1andtheaccountgivenofGreekaffairsinthesecondhalfofBook2areinfactlengthierthantheMercenaryWarintermsofcoverage.
NowPolybiusdoesatthestartofhisnarrativeoftheMercenaryWarexplainthatthereisalinkwiththeoriginsoftheSecondPunicWar(1.65.8):
τὸδὲμέγιστον,τὰςαἰτίαςἐκτω̑νἐνἐκείνοιςτοις̑καιροις̑πεπραγμένωνκατανοήσειεν,δι’ἃςὁκατ’ἈννίβανσυνέστηῬωμαίοιςκαὶΚαρχηδονίοιςπόλεμος.
ButthemostimportantthingisthatonemightfromtheeventsthattookplaceinthosetimesbeabletounderstandthereasonsbecauseofwhichthewararosebetweentheRomansandCarthaginiansinthetimeofHannibal.
ItistruethatSardiniadoesreceiveafewmentionsinthecourseofthenarrative:in1.79themercenariesstationedthererevoltfromCarthageandkilltheCarthaginiancommandersenttorelievethem,Hanno.13ThesignificanceofthismomentastheendofCarthaginianpowerintheislandisaccompaniedbyPolybius’observationthatSardiniahasbeendescribedatgreatlengthalreadybyotherwritersanddoesnotrequireadescriptionfromhim(1.79.6–7).TherearetwootherbrieferreferencestoSardinia:at1.82.7,thereisapassingreferencetoCarthagehavinglosttheisland;whilein1.83.11,PolybiusrecordsaninvitationfromthemercenariesonSardiniatotheRomanstoinitiateanoccupation,anopportunitywhichonthisoccasionwasturneddown,thoughin1.88.8,theRomanssubsequentlyacceptthechancetoannexSardinia,ataroundthetimeofCarthage’sfinalvictoryoverthemercenariesinAfrica.14
Thus,thefactthatSardiniawouldbeanimportantcausefortheSecondPunicWarcannotreallyexplainwhyPolybiusshouldgivesuchextensivecoveragetotheMercenaryWarattheendofthefirstbook.Ifweturntomodernnarrativehistoriansofthewiderperiod,thecontrastwithPolybiusisstriking.15ThusJohnLazenby,inhishistoryoftheFirstPunicWar,endswithanepilogueofsixpagesinwhichhementionstheMercenaryWarandtheRomanseizureofSardiniainitsaftermath,16remarkingthat‘Thedetailsdonotconcernus,butthewiderrepercussionsdo’(Lazenby1996:173);similarly,inhisearlierbookontheSecondPunicWar,LazenbymentionstheMercenaryWaronlyontwopages.17Walbankhimself,whendiscussingPolybius’(p.162) reasonsforincludingtheMercenaryWar,observesthat‘InfactthelinkwiththeHannibalicwarisverytenuous,andamountstonomorethantheRomanseizureofSardiniaduringtheLibyanwar.…HavingdecidedonadetailedaccountoftheLibyanWar,P.isdeterminedtojustifyitintermsofthewholework.’18
ThoughPolybiuscouldhavepassedovertheMercenaryWarveryrapidly,ashedoeswiththeCarthaginiancampaignsinSpainthatarebrieflymentionedinBook2,hechoosesnotto.Theextentofhiscoverageinvitesustoaddressthecontributionoftheepisodeto
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 4 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybius’history.AcrucialfeaturethatemergesisPolybius’exploitationofthetreatmentofmercenariesinearlierhistoriographicaltraditions,notablythepresentationofmercenariesintheAnabasisofXenophon.19Atfirstglance,theremightappeartobelittleincommonbetweenthesetwotexts.Assuredly,bothepisodesdealwithmercenaries,20butonemightfeelthatthesimilaritiesendthere.HowcouldtherebemuchincommonbetweenPolybius’accountofthehorrorsofwhatmightappeartobeafairlyunimportant,ifunpleasant,conflictinAfrica,andCyrus’famousexpeditionoftheTenThousandagainstArtaxerxesIIofPersia?
PolybiusandXenophonOneissuewhichcanbeaddressedstraightawayiswhetherPolybiusshowsanyinterestinXenophon’sworks.PolybiusrefersdirectlytoXenophononthreeoccasionsinhisHistories.21OneinstanceisPlb.6.45.1,wherePolybiuspraisesXenophonaspartofalistofλογιώτατοι(‘menmostlearned,mostskilledinwords’)whohavewrittenabouttheconstitutionofCrete,whichincludesEphorus,Callisthenes,andPlato.22AnotherisPlb.10.20.7,wherePolybiusisdescribingScipio’sactivitiesinNewCarthage(Cartagena),wherehepointsoutthatanobserverwouldhavetoresorttoXenophon’sphrasing(p.163) (Hell.3.4.17;Agesilaus,1.26)incallingtheplaceanἐργαστήριονπολέμου,a‘workshopofwar’.ThoughthephrasemightbyPolybius’timehavebecomeproverbial—whichwouldinanycasepointtothewiderinfluenceofXenophon—Polybiusagainchoosestomentionhimbynamehere.23ThethirdinstanceofdirectreferencetoXenophoncomesearliestinthetext,inPolybius’discussionofthecausationoftheSecondPunicWar,whichthenbecomesamorewide-rangingdiscussionofotherinstancesofcausation,includinghisconsiderationofthecausesofthewarbetweenthePersianempireandAlexandertheGreat(Plb.3.6.10):
ἠ̑νδὲπρώτημὲνἡτω̑νμετὰΞενοφω̑ντοςἙλλήνωνἐκτω̑νἄνωσατραπειω̑νἐπάνοδος,ἐνᾑ̑πα̑σαντὴνἈσίανδιαπορευομένωναὐτω̑νπολεμίανὑπάρχουσανοὐδεὶςἐτόλμαμένεινκατὰπρόσωποντω̑νβαρβάρων·
AndthefirstcausewasthereturnoftheGreekswithXenophonfromtheuppersatrapies,duringwhich,whiletheyweremarchingthroughthewholeofAsiaashostileterritory,noneofthebarbariansdaredtofacethem.
ForPolybius,therefore,theeventsoftheexpeditionoftheTenThousandwereofgreatsignificance,theargumentbeing(3.6.12–13)thattherevelationoftheweaknessofthePersianempireinthefaceofadeterminedaggressorwasadecisivemotivationforPhilipII’splans,andAlexander’sinvasion.ThepointisborneoutbythefactthatPolybius’secondcauseofAlexander’swarwasAgesilaus’successinPersiaafterthecampaignoftheTenThousand(3.6.11);similararetheviewsofIsocratesonthemarchoftheTenThousand(Or.4.145–9;5.90–101),thatitexposedtheweaknessofthePersianempireandcouldshowthewaytofutureHellenicsuccess.24Isocrates,however,doesnotnameanyGreekcommanderinthePanegyricus(Or.4),andonlymentionsClearchusinthePhilippus(Or.5),whereasPolybiusexplicitlyassociatesthereturnoftheTenThousandwithXenophon.Inthisrespect,PolybiusalsodiffersfromXenophon’sHellenica,sinceXenophonmakesnomentionofhimselfinthefamouslybriefsummaryoftheexpeditionof
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 5 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
CyrusatHell.3.1.2,wherethereaderissimplyreferredtoThemistogenestheSyracusan,usuallythoughttobeapseudonymforXenophonhimself.25
Thus,intermsofdirectreferencestoXenophon,ourexamplesincludementionofthereturnoftheTenThousand,whichdrawsontheargument(p.164) thattheactionsoftheGreekswereatoolinunderstandingtheweaknessofthePersianempire,andalsoaninstanceofdirectquotation.WemightalsobeopentoconsideringPolybianallusiontoXenophonintermsofhistoriographicalpractice.Consider,forinstance,Polybius’remarksonhisdecisiontocontinuehisworkbeyond167BC(3.4.12–13):
διὸκαὶτη̑ςπραγματείαςταύτηςτου̑τ’ἔσταιτελεσιούργημα,τὸγνω̑ναιτὴνκατάστασινπαρ’ἑκάστοις,ποίατιςἠ̑νμετὰτὸκαταγωνισθη̑ναιτὰὅλακαὶπεσειν̑εἰςτὴντω̑νῬωμαίωνἐξουσίανἕωςτη̑ςμετὰταυ̑ταπάλινἐπιγενομένηςταραχη̑ςκαὶκινήσεως.ὑπὲρἡ̑ςδιὰτὸμέγεθοςτω̑νἐναὐτῃ̑πράξεωνκαὶτὸπαράδοξοντω̑νσυμβαινόντων,τὸδὲμέγιστον,διὰτὸτω̑νπλείστωνμὴμόνοναὐτόπτης,ἀλλ’ὡ̑νμὲνσυνεργὸςὡ̑νδὲκαὶχειριστὴςγεγονέναι,προήχθηνοἱο̑νἀρχὴνποιησάμενοςἄλληνγράφειν.
Andthereforethiswillbethefinalworkofthishistory,torecognizetheconditionofeachpeople,whatitwasaftereverythinghadbeendefeatedandfellintothepoweroftheRomans,untiltheturbulenceanddisturbancethatagaintookplaceafterthis.Aboutthis,duetotheextentoftheactions,andtheunexpectednatureoftheevents,and,mostofall,duetothefactthatIwasnotonlyawitnessofmostevents,butwasinvolvedinsomeandwaseventheleadactorinsome,IwasimpelledtowriteasifIwerestartingtowriteanotherhistory.
LorenzobservedthatthelanguageofturmoilusedbyPolybiushererecallssimilarphrasinginothertexts,includingXen.Hell.7.5.27,wherethewordταραχήoccurs.26ThetemptationmightbetoseeXenophonasoneofanumberofpossibleparallels,andthereforeofnosignificance,butthepassagefromtheHellenicameritsfurtherexamination:27
ἀκρισίαδὲκαὶταραχὴἔτιπλείωνμετὰτὴνμάχηνἐγένετοἢπρόσθενἐντῃ̑Ἑλλάδι.ἐμοὶμὲνδὴμέχριτούτουγραφέσθω·τὰδὲμετὰταυ̑ταἴσωςἄλλῳμελήσει.
TherewasstillmoreconfusionandturbulenceinGreeceafterthebattle[ofMantinea]thantherewasbefore.Butletwhathappeneduptothispointbewrittenbyme.Perhapstheeventsthathappenedafterthiswillbeaconcernforsomeoneelse.
TwofeaturesmightbefelttolinktheHellenicapassagewithPolybius’announcementofhisintentiontocontinuehishistory.28Inthefirstplace,(p.165) wecannotePolybius’useofμετὰταυ̑τα(‘afterthis’)todenoteasubsequentperiodofchaos,whichisapossiblesubjectforhistory.Evenmoreimportant,though,isthepositionofXenophon’sHellenicapassage,foritistheverycloseoftheHellenica.Polybiusthus,inacomplex
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 6 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
move,evokes—inwhatiseffectivelyasecondproemtotheHistories—aclosuraldevicefromanotherhistorian,whichitselfevokesanotheropening,Xenophon’sownbeginningtotheHellenica(Μετὰδὲταυ̑τα,Hell.1.1.1),withitsimpliedcontinuationofThucydides;29atthesametimePolybiusoffersanewtakeontheconventionofcontinuationsofprevioushistoriographybybecominghisowncontinuator.Xenophon’scloseisthusevoked,butasareasonforanewstartintheproemtothethirdbook,andPolybiuseclipseshispredecessorbyprovidingthecontinuationofhisownhistory.30
PolybiusandXenophononMercenariesIfwereturntotheMercenaryWarinPolybius,IshallattempttodemonstratecumulativelyareaswherereadingPolybiusthroughXenophoncanbeproductive,andthenconsiderhowsuchaconnectionmightactuallyworkinpractice.ItisimportantattheoutsettonotethattherelationshipwithXenophonmightnotoperatesolelyintermsofsimilaritiesandparallels:differencesinemphasismightalsobeasignificantaspect.
Onastraightforwardlevel,wecanbeginbynotingoccasionswheresimilaractivitiesaredescribed.Forexample,inbothXenophonandPolybius,mercenarytroopsaretoldtoleaveacityandwaitelsewherefortheirpay,atAnab.7.1.7,whenAnaxibiustellsthetroopstoleavethecitywiththeirbaggage,andat1.66inPolybius,31whenthetroopsaresenttoSicca.32And,onthemilitaryside,onemightcomparethetacticsusedbythemercenariesatPlb.1.75,thedeploymentofforcesinthehillsandtheattempttopreventtheCarthaginians(p.166) fromcrossingtheriverMacaras(Bagradas),33withasimilarmomentinXenophon:HamilcarBarca’scrossingoftheriverattherightmomentinthischapterofPolybiusmightbecomparedtothesuccessfulriver-crossingintoArmeniainAnab.4.3.Suchdetailsmightofcourseseemtobecoincidences(thesearethekindofactivitiesonewouldexpectmercenaries—oranykindoftroops—tobeengagedwith),soonemightnotexpecttoplacetoomuchweightonsuchparallelsinthemselves.
Anareaworthconsidering,however,isthelanguagewhichPolybiususesofthemercenaries.Inspiteofawillingnesstorefertomercenarieswithwordssuchasμισθοφόροι,unambiguouslyreferringtothefinancialbasisoftheirservice,includingwithintheMercenaryWaritself,34hefirstintroducestheconflictbycallingitawarπρὸςτοὺςξένουςκαὶτοὺςΝομάδαςκαὶτοὺςἅματούτοιςἀποστάνταςΛίβυας,‘againstthexenoiandtheNumidiansandtheLibyanswhohadrevoltedwiththem’(1.65.3).35Xenoi,asMatthewTrundlehasnoted,isawordwhichXenophonusesextensivelyofthearmyofCyrusintheAnabasis,whilstavoidingwordslikeἐπίκουροιandμισθοφόροι;Trundlesuggeststhatxenoimayevenberegardedasakindofeuphemism,withhintsofritualizedfriendship.36InPolybius’case,theuseofsuchawordmightseemtomisdirectthereadertowardsexpectationsthatarefartoohigh:37thelanguagethatXenophonhadfavouredturnsouttobeillusionasonemoralconventionafteranotherisoverthrownbythemercenaries.
Polybius’accountoftheMercenaryWaremphasizes,aswehaveseen,itsimportanceasapartofthecausationoftheSecondPunicWar.ButitalsocontainsapreambleinwhichPolybiuspresentsthecausationoftheMercenaryWaritself,evenifthissectionisnotexplicitlyhighlightedassuch.Thusin1.70henotesthatthearrestoftheCarthaginian
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 7 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
commanderGescoandotherswithhimwasthebeginning(ἀρχή)38ofthewar(1.70.7).39Theprecedingchapters(1.66–70)describehowthisstateofaffairscameabout,andareessentiallyastudyoftheMercenaryWar’scausation.WithinthisfirstsectionofPolybius’coverage,anumberofthemesplaytheirpartintheslidetowardswarfarewhichalsohavearesonancewithXenophon.
(p.167) Inthefirstplace,thethemeofnegotiationaboutpay,40whichisoneoftheimmediatereasonsforthewar,hasawideXenophonticresonance.Theideaofpaymentformilitaryservicespreviouslyrendered,theconcernoftheCarthaginians’mercenaries,hasobviousparallelsinXenophon:asearlyasthefirstbookoftheAnabasis,theissueofnon-paymentandtheneedtosecurefundsisraised,whenCyrusisaskedforthreemonths’payowedtohistroopsandgivesreassurance(Anab.1.2.11).Similarly,alittlewhilelateron,thereisaminormutinyatTarsus(Anab.1.3),cleverlydealtwithbyClearchus,whichendswithapromisefromCyrusofmorepay.AfterCyrus’death,thethemeofpaynaturallyrecedesforawhile,butitreturnswithavengeanceattheendoftheAnabasis,wherethestartofBook6seesreportsofpromisestothearmyfromtheSpartanAnaxibiusthattheywouldbepaidoncetheyhadlefttheBlackSearegion(Anab.6.1.16),apromisewhichcomestonothingatthestartofBook7;thislastbookalsohasthestoryoftheThracianSeuthes,andhisattemptstoavoidremuneratingtheGreeksfromCyrus’army(Anab.7.5–7).Polybiusnotonlyraisestheissueofnon-paymentbytheCarthaginiansbutalsothethemeofpromisesofexceptionalpaymentsmadebygenerals(Plb.1.66.12).Similarly,Polybiusisatpainstopointoutthatamercenaryarmyisonlyasgoodasitsfunding,whenhenotesthatthedefectionofmostofLibyatothemercenaries’sidemeantthattheircommanderswereabletofundalongwaragainstCarthage(1.72.6).Inasimilarvein,wecannotethattheconstantLeitmotivoftheAnabasis,theneedtoprovidesuppliesforthemercenaryarmy,isathemealludedtoinPolybius’accountoftheMercenaryWar,thoughinfactwithreferencetoproblemsexperiencedbybothsides.41Intheend,ofcourse,itisthemercenariesandtheirallieswhofallvictimtotheextremeeffectsoflackofsupplies,starvationandcannibalism(1.84.9–1.85.2),whentheyaresurroundedbyHamilcarBarca’sforces;notetoothehintin1.85.2,wherethemercenarycommandersdecidetoseektermswithCarthagebecausetheyrecognizedthedangerstothemselvesfromtheirowntroopsinthisextraordinaryplight.42WecansetthismomentalongsideXen.Anab.6.4.13–19,whenthereunitedarmyattheharbourofCalpeisunable,becauseofpooromens,togooutinordertoobtainsuppliesatatimewhentheywererunningdangerouslylow,andXenophonisblamed.ThestarvationthatovertakesthemercenariesinPolybiusissomethingwhichconstantlyloomsovertheTenThousand,butisalwayssomehowavertedintheAnabasis.
(p.168) AfurtherthemewhichemergesrepeatedlyinPolybiusisthedisunityofthemercenaries.Thisisacomplexissue,sincethereareoccasionswheretheyarecapableofactingwithresolve,43butPolybiusdoesrepresenttheeffectsoftheirlackofunityaswell.Thisisamotifwhichisarguablylinkedtoquestionsofethnicityandnotionsofthecontrastbetweencivilizedanduncivilizedpeoples,sincePolybiusmakesitclearattheoutsetofhisnarrativethatonereasonforcoveringtheMercenaryWaristogainanunderstandingofsuchdifferences(1.65.7):44
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 8 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
…πρὸςδὲτούτοιςτίδιαφέρεικαὶκατὰπόσονἤθησύμμικτακαὶβάρβαρατω̑νἐνπαιδείαιςκαὶνόμοιςκαὶπολιτικοις̑ἔθεσινἐκτεθραμμένων·
Andadditionally,[onemightrecognize]howandtowhatextentnationsthataremingledandbarbarousaredifferentfromthosewhohavebeenraisedthrougheducationandlawsandthecustomsofcity-states.
SuchconcernsofcourseemergeinawholehostofGreekauthors,andtheAnabasisofXenophoniscertainlyatextwhichdirectlyexplorestheseideas.EthnicityisacentralthemeoftheAnabasisasawhole,withCyrus’Greeksoldiers(andofcoursetheirAsiaticallies)holdingtheirownagainstthePersianempire.InXenophon,anearlyinstanceofthispolarityoccursatAnab.1.2.14–18,whereCyrusreviewshisGreekandnon-GreekforcesatTyriaeum,inwhatmaybeacomplexechoofXerxes’reviewofhistroopsatAbydosinthePersianwaragainstGreece(Hdt.7.44–53),45anddecidestotellhisGreekphalanxtomarchforwardasifabouttofight.Aftertheresultingpanic,XenophonroundsofftheepisodebyreportinghowpleasedCyruswasthathisGreektroopsinspiredsuchterrorinhisotherforces(Anab.1.2.18);thepointisthenreinforcedalittlefurtheronwhenCyrusexplainstohisGreekcommandersthatheissurethattheyarefarbettermenthanhisAsiaticsoldiers(Anab.1.7.3).ElsewhereinXenophonthesamepointismadethroughthegeneralcontrastbetweentheGreeksoldiersandtheadversities,bothmilitaryandphysical,ofthePersianempirewhichtheyareabletoovercome.EncounterswithvariousothernativepeoplesalsopointoutthedifferencebetweenGreekandnon-Greek:afterthemeetingwiththeMossynoeci(Anab.5.4)XenophonnotesindeedthatthearmyexplicitlyratedthatpeopleasthemostdifferentfromtheGreeksintheircustoms(5.4.34).ThusinXenophontheaccountoftheactivitiesofthemercenaryarmyofGreeksisalocuswhichallowstheexplorationofethnicdifference.
(p.169) InPolybius,thepositionismorecomplex.Thisispartlybecausethemercenariesinquestionaremainlynon-Greeks,thoughitisinterestingtonotethatPolybiusinfactdoesmentionthepresenceofsomemercenarieswithGreekconnections,inhisratherdismissivelistofnationalitiesinvolvedat1.67.7:46
ἠ̑σανγὰροἱμὲνἼβηρες,οἱδὲΚελτοί,τινὲςδὲΛιγυστιν̑οικαὶΒαλιαρεις̑,οὐκὀλίγοιδὲμιξέλληνες,ὡ̑νοἱπλείουςαὐτόμολοικαὶδου̑λοι·τὸδὲμέγιστονμέροςαὐτω̑νἠ̑νΛίβυες.
ForsomewereIberians,somewereCelts,somewereLiguriansandfromtheBalearicisles,andnotafewweremixellenes,ofwhommostweredesertersandslaves.ButthelargestpartofthemwereLibyans.
Thecontemptuousreferencetomixellenesshouldperhapsnotbetakensoseriously,47butshouldratherbeseenasanattempttomakeitclearthatregularGreekmercenariescouldnotpossiblyhavebeenpresent.Thisis,ofcourse,inspiteofthefactthatPolybiushasalreadymentionedinhistreatmentoftheFirstPunicWartheexploitsoftheSpartangeneralXanthippus,culminatinginhisroleinthedefeatofRegulus.Xanthippusplaysalargerole,butPolybiusalsoreportsthathecamewithagreatnumberoftroopsfrom
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 9 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Greece(1.32.1),whocanonlybemercenaries.48InfactthepossibilitythatGreekmercenarieswerepresentintheMercenaryWarseemsnotunreasonable,especiallyastheirpresenceinSicilyisattestedinthesiegeofLilybaeum(1.48.3).ThatandthefactthatthemercenarieswereevacuatedfromSicily—andthatSicilyitselfofcourseincludedmanyGreekcities—meanthatPolybius’attempttodismissthepresenceoftheGreeksintheMercenaryWarasonlymixellenesmaybenomorethanasmokescreen.OnecancomparethewayinwhichheiskeentodenigratethosewhosupportedtheAchaeanWaragainstRomeasmenoflowstatus(Plb.38.12.5).49
TheemphasisonethnicdivisionsamongthemercenariesmayalsobeseenasaresponsetoXenophon’streatmentofdifferentkindsofdivisionamongtheGreeksoftheTenThousand.InPolybius,divisionsbetweennationalitiesreplacethoselatentdiscordsthatinXenophonthreatento(andoccasionallydo)breakoutbetweentheGreeksofthearmy.InXenophon,themost(p.170) dangerousmomentoccursinBook6,wherethearmyinfactsplitsintothree,withthejointArcadianandAchaeancontingentbeingparticularlyhostiletoXenophon,untiltheyhavetoberescuedbyhim(Anab.6.1–3);thereisobviouslyalsoawiderthemeofGreekdisunitypresentintheAnabasis,reflectedintherathertenserelationsbetweenthearmyandtheSpartansintheclosingphaseofthework,especiallyatByzantium(Anab.7.1),andindeedinsomeoftheencounterswithGreekcitiesalongtheBlackSea,suchasCotyora(Anab.5.5).
Polybius’approachistoemphasizethatdivisionsamongmercenariesrepeatedlyleadtodifficulties.Oneissueusedtobringoutthispointislanguage.Polybiusintroducesthethemein1.67.4byspecificallymentioningtheCarthaginianhabitofhavingtroopsfrommanydifferentnationalitiesasameansforpreventinginsubordination;Polybiusadds,however,thatthispracticecanbackfirewheninsubordinationtakesplace,asitisveryhardtocalmfeelingswhensomanylanguagesareinvolved(1.67.5).50Thisthemeistakenupimmediatelyintherestofthechapter,withtheinitialattemptofHannotosoothethemercenaries’feelingsfailingowingtothevarietyoflanguagesbeingspokenandtheresultingconfusion(1.67.8–13).51Polybiusreturnstothisthemewhenhenotesin1.69.12thatβάλλε,‘stonehim’,52wastheonlywordwhichwaswidelyintelligible,asSpendiusandMathostookcontroloftheconfusioninsettingthemercenariesonapathtowardswar.Polybiusseemstoplaceunusualemphasisontheimperativeβάλλε:thewordisfoundimmediatelyafterwardsat1.69.13,wherestoningsareahabitualsequeltothemiddaymeal.Italsooccursat1.80.5–11,wheretheGallicmercenarycommanderAutaritussucceedsinrecommendingtheharshesttreatmentfortheCarthaginiansbecausehehadsomeknowledgeofPunic,53alanguagewhichwastosomeextentunderstoodacrossthevariousnationalities:thoseindividualswhoattemptedtoargueforlesscrueltreatmentoftheCarthaginiancaptivesinotherlanguageswereagainshouteddownwithdemandsforthemtobestoned(βάλλε,1.80.9),andimmediatelykilled.
(p.171) ThesearetheonlythreeinstancesoftheformβάλλεintheextantremainsofPolybius,allfoundwithinhistreatmentoftheMercenaryWar.ThisconcentrationmightlookbacktotheuseofthewordintheAnabasis.AtAnab.5.7.21,Xenophon,addressingthearmy,recallsanincidentwhenthepeopleofCerasushadcomplainedaboutthe
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 10 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
stoningoftheirambassadors,andhowsomeofthoseresponsiblesentupacrytostonethen:Παιε̑παιε̑,βάλλεβάλλε,‘strikethem,strikethem,stonethem,stonethem’.Xenophonsubsequentlyrepeatsthephraseβάλλεβάλλε(Anab.5.7.28),whenheevokesinhisspeechthekindofchaoticviolencewhichmightovertakethearmyinthefutureifthereisnoresponsibleleadership.Similarly,suchbehaviourisseenasbestialbothinPolybius(1.80.10,wherethosewhohavebeenkilledarecomparedtothevictimsofwildbeasts,ὥσπερὑπὸθηρίωνδιεφθαρμένους)andintheAnabasis(Anab.5.7.32,whereXenophonaskshisaudienceiftheviolationoftherightsofambassadorsistheactionofwildbeastsratherthanmen,εἰμέντοιὑμιν̑δοκει̑θηρίωνἀλλὰμὴἀνθρώπωνεἰν̑αιτὰτοιαυ̑ταἔργα).Polybius’treatmentofthemercenaryarmy,andthemoralcollapseofitsmembers,thusreflectsanenactmentofthepotentialforanarchicviolencewhichisforthemostpartkeptundercontrolintheAnabasis.54ThefactthatinXenophontheissueofstoningisraisedinconnectionwithaviolationoftherightsofambassadorsalsohasastrongresonanceinPolybius:onecancomparethedecisionfirsttocaptureandthentokillGescoandthosewithhimwhenhehadbeennegotiatingwiththemercenaries(1.70.4–6;1.80.4–13),andthewarningtotheCarthaginiansthatheraldswouldbekilled(1.81.3).
ThegeneralpointcanalsobemadethatXenophon’srepeatedemphasisonassembliesanddiscussionsamongthearmyintheAnabasisissomethingthatfindsitswayintoPolybius,whogivesagooddegreeofdetailonthedeliberationsandvotesofthemercenaries.Thuswehearat1.69.14thatMathosandSpendiuswereelectedasgeneralsafterthedecisiontocaptureGesco,recallingthekindofdebatesandelectionswhichwefindinXenophon.55IndeedthenotionofanarmyasakindofpotentialpolisisathemewhichfindsvariousapplicationsinbothXenophonandPolybius.56Thus,soonafterthedeathofCyrusatthebattleofCunaxa,XenophonrecordshissuggestiontohistroopsthattheymightwishtogivetheimpressiontothePersiansthattheyareabouttosettleandestablishthemselveswithinthePersianempire(Anab.3.2.24);(p.172)furtheron,heevenconsidersfoundingacityontheBlackSea(Anab.5.6),whichcomestonothingowingtotheoppositionofthesoldiers.57InPolybiusthemercenariesofcoursegofurther,sincetheirconflictwithCarthage,whichbeginsasadisputeoverpay,turnsintosomethingmuchmoreelemental,withthemercenariesseekingtoconquerCarthage;58thisismadeclearrightatthestartofthenarrative(1.65.4),wherePolybiusemphasizesthedangertotheCarthaginianstate(inlanguagewhichwillbecloselyechoedwhenhedescribesthedangerincurredbyRomeintheSecondWar).59Moreover,themercenarieshadtheirfamilieswiththem,somethingPolybiuscriticizesasagravestrategicerroronthepartoftheCarthaginians(1.68.3),sincetheyhadlosttheopportunityforusingthemasabargainingtoolforgoodbehaviour.ThisisathemewhichisbrieflymentionedintheAnabasis:whenXenophonnotesthatalthoughtherewereGreekwomenandchildrenkeptatTralles(Anab.1.4.8),Cyrusmagnanimouslyexplainedthathewouldnotusethefamiliesasaweaponagainsttwoofhiscommanders.
Amirrortoempires?IfweconsiderwhyPolybiusmighthavechosentomakesomuchoftheMercenaryWar,variousanswersarepossible.Inthefirstplace,thepervasivenessandimportanceof
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 11 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
mercenariesinPolybius’owntimeshouldnotbeunderestimated.MercenarieswerearegularpartofthesceneinHellenisticwarfare,60butnotinthecaseofRomeitself.InBook6,PolybiusaccordinglycontraststhesuperiorpoliticalarrangementsoftheRomans,whodidnotmakeuseofmercenaries(6.52.5–7),withthoseoftheCarthaginians,whodid.(p.173) Onesignificantaspect,therefore,ofPolybius’treatmentoftheMercenaryWaristheemphasisontheshortcomingsofmercenaries.61ItisofcourseathemewhichhadalreadybeguntoemergeintheearlierpartofBook1.Thus,afterconcludinghisaccountofRome’srisetopowerinItaly,Polybiusmovesonin1.7towriteofhowCampanianmercenarieswhohadservedwithAgathoclesofSyracusehadseizedMessanaduringthe280s,62callingthemselvestheMamertines,whichisanearlyindicationofthedangertheycouldpose.Mercenariescanalsoprovideincentivestootherstocausetrouble,forthisishowPolybiusalsoexplainstheroleofanotherCampanian,theCapuanDecius,commanderofagarrisonsenttoprotectRhegium,intakingoverthecity(Plb.1.7),perhapsin280BC.63Similarly,thereistheextraordinaryanecdotegivenbyPolybiusin1.9aboutHiero’sstrategyforconsolidatinghispositioninSyracuse,andhisdeliberatedecisiontogointobattleagainsttheMamertines64inthehopeoflosinghismoredifficultmercenariesinbattle,beforeimmediatelyafterwardsrecruitingmoremercenaries(1.9.4–6).Book1thusstartsandendswithdifficultiescausedbymercenaries;similarly,problemscausedbyCampaniansalsobeginandendthebook,sinceSpendius,therunawayRomanslavewhoisoneofthemercenaries’twokeyleaders,isalsofromCampania.65Thereare,moreover,episodesduringtheFirstPunicWarinwhichmercenariesareprominent:PolybiusreferstotherecruitmentofIberian,Celtic,andLigurianmercenariesbyCarthagetobedeployedinSicilyveryearlyoninthecourseofhisnarrationofthewar(1.17.4),andmembersofallthesegroupingswillbementionedasbeingamongthosewhorevoltedintheMercenaryWar(1.67.7).ThereisalsothemomentduringthesiegeofLilybaeumat1.43,whentheAchaeanAlexonintervenestopreventsomeofthemercenaryofficersopeningnegotiationswiththeRomansforthehandoverofthecity.ThereislikewiseareferencetoanearlierdesertiontotheRomansofsomeGallicmercenariesat1.77.5inthevicinityofMountEryx;66thewidercontextoftheMercenaryWarnarrativeunderlinesthepoint,alreadyadumbratedinPolybius’accountoftheFirstPunicWar,thatmercenarytroopscannotbeconsideredassomethingsafe.
However,afurthereffectoftheMercenaryWaristhatitprovidesanextensiveopportunitytoconsidertheinternalaffairsofCarthage.Inthis(p.174) respect,theepisodemightpointbacktotheAnabasiswhichholdsupakindofmirrortothePersianempire,asatAnab.1.5.9,whentheempire’sfundamentalweaknessintermsofitsvastsizeandthescattereddeploymentofitsforcesisnoted.InPolybius,wehearmoreoftheinternalpoliticsofCarthageinthiswarthanwedoeveninthemuchlongerFirstPunicWar.ThisaffordstheopportunityforanumberoftellingobservationsabouttheCarthaginianstate:Polybiusaccordinglynotesitsdependenceonmercenaries(evenduringtheMercenaryWaritself,theCarthaginiansareforcedtoraisemercenaryforces,1.73.167),anditsunsatisfactoryrelationswithitsAfricanallies(1.72),whosedefectionleadstosuchseriousconsequences.PolybiusalsohighlightstheerraticnatureofCarthage’scommanders;thoughhepraisesHamilcarBarca,68thereare,asintheFirst
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 12 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
PunicWar,enoughexamplesofpoorleadershipfromtheCarthaginiansevendowntotheclosingphasesofthewartosuggestthecountry’sweaknesses.
TheseCarthaginianfailingsillustratedwithintheMercenaryWarcanalsobelinkedtoPolybius’widerdiscourseonCarthaginianmoraldeterioration.InBook6,whencomparingRome’sandCarthage’sconstitutions,PolybiusindicatesthatCarthagehadundergonedeclinebythetimeoftheSecondPunicWar(6.51.3).69This,ofcourse,modifiestheearlierpictureofmoralequivalencebetweenRomeandCarthagethatPolybiusemphasizesattheoutsetoftheFirstPunicWar(1.13.12):70
αὐτάτετὰπολιτεύματακατ’ἐκείνουςτοὺςκαιροὺςἀκμὴνἀκέραιαμὲνἠ̑ντοις̑ἐθισμοις̑,μέτριαδὲταις̑τύχαις,πάρισαδὲταις̑δυνάμεσιν.
Andthetwostatesthemselvesinthatperiodwereasyetunravagedintheirmorals,enjoyedonlymoderatefortune,andwereequalintheirstrength.
AttheendoftheFirstPunicWar,Polybiusagainimpliessomethingverysimilar(1.64.5),suggestingthatbothsideswereequalintheirefforts,theirgreatnessofspirit,andtheirdesireforthegloryofprimacy.71
ButbythetimePolybiuscomestodiscussCarthageingeneraltermsinBook6,setatthemomentofRomancrisisafterCannae,moraldeclinehassetin.Partoftheevidenceforthattendency,itmaybeargued,isprovidedin(p.175) Polybius’accountoftheMercenaryWar.ThoughPolybiusunderlinesthewickednessofthemercenaries’actionsintheconflict,72hisaccountalsorevealsdisturbingsimilaritiesbetweenthetwosides.Polybius’claimthatthewarshowsthedifferencesbetweenbarbarouspeoplesandthoseeducatedinacivilizedmanner(1.65.7)issomethingthatis,infact,underminedrepeatedlythroughoutthenarrativebythedegenerationofCarthaginianconduct.73Thus,afterthetortureandmurderofGescoandhisfellow-Carthaginiansat1.80,theCarthaginianswishtoachievevengeance.EventhoughHamilcarBarcahaspreviouslyfollowedapolicyofsparingprisoners(1.78.13–15),74thisapproachisabandoned,withcaptivesbeingthrowntotheelephants(1.82.2),75inanechoofthemercenaries’owndecisionnottotakeprisoners(1.81.4);76thewidercontextincludesPolybius’reflectionsonthefactthatneitherpardonnorretaliationhasanyeffectonsoulsthatareuntreatable(1.81).NowadetailsuchasthismightsimplybeexplicableinthelightofPolybius’viewsontheneedtoexterminatearebellionofsuchsavagery,butwecanalsonotethatHamilcarusesatrickwiththeheraldsofthemercenaries.Whentenleadersfromthemercenaries’sidegotonegotiate(1.85.3–5),Hamilcarsecurestheagreementthathecantakeinhispossessionanytenindividualsofhischoicefromtheotherside.Oncethedealisagreed,HamilcarthenclaimsashistencaptivesSpendiusandtheothernineemissaries;herewemightseeaparallelwithTissaphernes’stratagemtogetholdofClearchusandotherGreekleaderswithafatalconference(Xen.Anab.2.5).ThisrefusalonthepartoftheCarthaginianstotreatenvoysproperlyalsorecallsthemercenaries’ownrejectionofCarthaginianheraldswhoaskforthereturnofthedead(1.81.2–3),andevokesPolybius’openingdescriptionofthewarasa‘trucelesswar’(ἄσπονδονπόλεμον,1.65.6).ThisphrasemightbeseenasaprogrammaticechoofthedecisionoftheTen
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 13 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ThousandnottonegotiatewithPersia(Xen.Anab.3.3.5):77
…ἐδόκειτοις̑στρατηγοις̑βέλτιονεἰν̑αιδόγμαποιήσασθαιτὸνπόλεμονἀκήρυκτονεἰν̑αιἔστ’ἐντῃ̑πολεμίᾳεἰε̑ν.
…tothegeneralsitseemedthatitwasabetterdecisionforthewartobewithoutheraldswhiletheywerewithinenemyterritory.
(p.176) ButwhereasinXenophonthedecisionnottonegotiateisarationaldecisiontakenonthebasisoftreacheryalreadycommittedbythePersians,Polybius’interestinatrucelesswarismuchmoreconcernedwiththeoutragesthatsuchaconflictcanproduce,inthiscaseonbothsides.ThusthepunishmentofSpendiusandhiscolleagues,eventhoughitmightseemjust,issomehowtaintedinPolybius’accountbyitsjuxtapositionwiththesimilarfatemetedoutinreplytotheCarthaginiangeneral,Hannibal,whoiscrucifiedonthesamecrossthathadbeenusedforSpendius(1.86.6);thethirtyCarthaginiansslainaroundhim78provideadisturbingandstrikingechooftheTrojanskilledbyAchillesatthefuneralofPatroclusinHomer(Iliad23.175–6),79anincidentwhichinHomerfurnishesarareinstanceofexplicitmoralcomment:κακὰδὲφρεσὶμήδετοἔργα,‘heplannedevildeedsinhisheart’(Iliad23.176).80PolybiusindeedexplicitlygoesontounderlinethemoralequivalencebetweenthetwosidesintheMercenaryWar(1.86.7):
…τη̑ςτύχηςὥσπερἐπίτηδεςἐκπαραθέσεωςἀμφοτέροιςἐναλλὰξδιδούσηςἀφορμὰςεἰςὑπερβολὴντη̑ςκατ’ἀλλήλωντιμωρίας.
…asiffortuneweredeliberatelyforthesakeofcomparisongivingtobothsidesinturnincitementstowardsexcessivecrueltyintakingvengeanceagainsteachother.
Thisisborneoutinthewar’sfinalact,whereMathosisledthroughCarthageandtortured,withPolybiusobservingthatthewarwasthecruellestofall(1.88.6–7).ThehumilationofMathosisdescribedasτὸνθρίαμβον(‘triumphalprocession’),inwhatiscuriouslythefirstinstanceofthewordinPolybius’work,givingastrangeechoofRomancelebrationsoftriumphsoverdefeatedenemies.ThoughthenouncanalsocarrytheimplicationofaBacchichymnofcelebration(seeLSJ,s.v.),weshouldnotethatPolybiusdoesexplicitlyidentifytheθρίαμβοςasaRomanpracticeinBook6,explainingtheinstitutiontohisreadersat6.15.8,andonlyotherwiseusingθρίαμβοςinthesurvivingtexttodenoteRomantriumphs.81ItisstrikingthatwhilePolybiusdoesnotrecordtheRomantriumphcelebratedovertheFalisciinhisbriefaccountofRome’sconflict(1.65.2),82hedoesusethelanguageoftriumphforthefirsttimeinhisworkinreferencetotheCarthaginian‘triumph’overMathos.
(p.177) Indeed,theequivalencebetweentheCarthaginiansandtheirenemiespositedbyPolybiusmayencouragereflectionontheevocationofanotherpossibleequivalenceinBook1,thatbetweenCarthageandRome.ThecommentontheparallelismbetweentheCarthaginiansandthemercenariesin1.86.7isstrikingindeedifwereflectthatin1.64.5–6PolybiusoffersamuchmorepositivepairingofsimilaritiesbetweentheRomansand
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 14 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Carthaginians,praisingtheirsimilarvirtues,andonlydistinguishingbetweenthemintermsofthegreatercourageoftheRomans,andthesuperiorgeneralshipofHamilcar.Lookingoverthetrajectoryofthewholeofthefirstbook,theequivalenceestablishedbetweentheRomansandtheCarthaginiansatthebeginningofthenarrativeoftheFirstPunicWarin1.13.12(‘Andthetwostatesthemselvesinthatperiodwereasyetunravagedintheirmorals,enjoyedonlymoderatefortune,andwereequalintheirstrength’,citedabove)isreaffirmedattheendofthewar,at1.64.5–6.However,Polybius’suggestionofparityonthelevelof(im)moralitybetweentheCarthaginiansandthemercenariesrepresentsastrikingshiftattheendofthebook,asCarthage,havingpreviouslybeenamatchforRome,nowseemstobemovinginaratherdifferentdirection.
Rome,however,isalatentpresenceintheMercenaryWarnarrative,whichPolybiusbeginsbyevokingthesimilarproblemsfacedbyRomeandCarthageat1.65.1–3:therevoltoftheFalisci,whichRomewasabletocrushveryrapidly,andthemuchmoreseriouswarfacedbyCarthageagainstitsinternalenemies.Attheend,PolybiusalsodrawsouttheparallelismbetweenthefinalvictoryoftheCarthaginiansoverthemercenariesandtheRomandecisiontoaccepttheinvitationtoSardinia;theCarthaginianattemptatprotestisfollowedbythethreatofwarfromRomeandPunicacquiescence(1.88.8–12).WithintheMercenaryWarnarrative,therearevariousretrospectiveglancesattheRomansintheFirstPunicWar(1.68.7,1.71.5,1.77.5,1.82.8),buttherearehintsatthefutureaswell.PolybiusmentionsrightattheoutsettherolethattheMercenaryWarplayedinthecausationoftheSecondPunicWar(1.65.8),butthereisalsothereferencetoHiero’sdesiretohelptheCarthaginiansandthustopreserveabalanceofpowerasameansofsecuringhisfriendshipwiththeRomans(1.83.3–4).TheRomansthemselvesarealsoinvolvedat1.83.5–11,wheretheydecidetoobservetheirtreatywithCarthage,eventhoughthereisapotentiallyawkwarddisputeaboutthefateoftradersfromItalywhohavehaddealingswiththeenemiesofCarthage;theyalsodeclineinvitationstoacceptthesurrenderofSardiniaandUtica(1.83.11).ThereisthusalwaysthepossibilityforRometobeinvolvedinaffairsbeyondherborders,andthedecisionnottointerveneinSardiniais,ofcourse,reversedattheendofthebook,andevenaccompaniedbythethreatofwar.TheMercenaryWarillustratesthepropensityoftheRomanstoactatmomentsoftheirchoosing,thatwillbeseenlaterinthetextonoccasionssuchastheRomandecisiontopayheedtothecomplaintsaboutIllyrianpiracythathadhithertobeenignored(2.8.1-3),orthedecisiontodonothingabouttheassassinsofCn.Octaviuswhohadbeenhandedoverto(p.178) thembytheSeleucidking,DemetriusI,onthegroundsthatthisgrievancemightusefullybestoredupforlateruse(32.2.1–3;32.3.10–13).
ConclusionForPolybius,theMercenaryWaristhemomentwhenCarthagewasmostthreatened.Thisismadeclearattheoutsetin1.65.4,whentheCarthaginiansaresaidtohavebeenfightingnotjustforterritory(withanimplicitglanceatbothofthefirsttwoPunicWars)butfortheirverysurvival.ItisthusforCarthageatimeofdangeranalogoustoRome’ssituationintheimmediateaftermathofCannae,whichis,ofcourse,thecontextof
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 15 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybius’discussionoftheRomanconstitutioninBook6.ThatmomentofcrisisforRomemoreoverfurnishesPolybiuswiththeanecdotein6.58aboutthetenambassadorssenttoRomefromamongtheprisonersafterCannaetonegotiatearansom,andtheRomanrejectionofthisopportunity.Carthage’sconductduringtheMercenaryWarandinitsaftermathsimilarlyrevealsakindofstrengthandendurance,83butPolybiusalsosuggeststhatCarthaginianmoraldeclineisalreadyunderway.TheMercenaryWaristhusanextremelyimportantepisodeforPolybius:aswellashisstatedexplanationforhisaccount,theconnectionwiththecausationoftheSecondPunicWar(surelynotasufficientlygoodreasonforsuchdetailedcoverage),itallowshimtorevisitandprepareongoingaspectsofthemilitaryconflictbetweenRomeandCarthageinboththeFirstandSecondPunicWars,aswellasanticipating—ifoneconsidersPolybius’workinitsfinal,extendedform—theemphasisonCarthageandAfricaintheaccountoftheThirdPunicWar.TheMercenaryWarholdsupamirrortothetruestateofCarthage’spower(andherweaknesses),justasPolybiusarguedthatthemarchoftheTenThousandwithXenophonshoweduptheweaknessofthePersianempire(3.6.10).WecanmoreovernoteafurtherhintatRome’songoingtrajectorytowardsdominionwiththeepisodeoftheRomanseizureofSardiniaintheverylastchapterofBook1.ThereisalsoananticipationofwhatistocomewiththeIllyrians,whentheRomanscomplaintoCarthageonbehalfoftheirseatraderswhohadbeenimprisonedbyCarthagefordealingwiththemercenaries(1.83.6–8),whichlooksforwardtothecomplaintsmadetoRomeaboutIllyrianpiratesinBook2(2.8).
ThenarrativeoftheconflictalsoenablesPolybiustoexplorethemercenarytheme,84whichinthecaseofCarthageofferssuchanimportantfoiltohisemphasisonthesignificancenotonlyofRome’slegionsbutalsoofherItalian(p.179) allies,whorepresentanimplicitpointofcontrastwiththedefectionsoftheovertaxedandresentfulLibyansintheMercenaryWar.ItalsoaffordsPolybiusanopportunityforextensiveengagementwithXenophon’saccountoftheTenThousand,akeytextonmercenaries,echoingaspectsofthenarrativebutalsoofferingadifferentviewofmercenaries,andperhapsevendrawingattentiontosomeofthemoreproblematicsidesofXenophon’saccount,suchasthedangersofindisciplineanddisunity.
ItisworthremindingourselvesthatPolybiusinfactsinglesoutthewarasonewhichwasexceptionalandwhichinsomerespectswentbeyondothers.WehavealreadyseenPolybius’remarksonthedangerfacedbyCarthageinthewar(1.65.4),apointechoedat1.71.5,wherePolybiuscontrastsCarthage’swaroverSicily,theFirstPunicWar,withthedangeroftheMercenaryWar,foughtforsurvival.85ForPolybius,notonlywastheMercenaryWaragreaterandmorefearfulwar(μείζονοςγὰρἐνίστατοπολέμουκαταρχὴκαὶφοβερωτέρου,1.71.4),butitalsofarexceededallotherwarsinsavageryandwickedness(ὠμότητικαὶπαρανομίᾳ,1.88.7).86Weareobviouslynotdealingherewithawarwhosegeographicaloreventemporalscalecouldmatchmorecelebratedconflicts.Nevertheless,PolybiusappliestotheMercenaryWaraversionofthetime-honouredtropeusedbyThucydidesandothers—includingPolybiushimself—thattherewasnogreaterwar.87
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 16 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Notes:
(1)IamindebtedtoThomasHarrison,JohnMarincola,ChrisPelling,TimRood,ChristopherTuplin,andTonyWoodmanfortheircommentsandsuggestionsonearlierversionsofthispaper,andalsotoaudiencesinLiverpoolandattheCenterforHellenicStudiesinWashington,DC.
(2)KeyrecentstudiesareHuss1985:252–68andHoyos2007.
(3)Walbank,HCPi.148–50on1.88.7–8.Hoyos2007:275–6offersachronology,whichhecautionsisapproximate.HedatestheoutbreakofthemutinytoNovember241BC,andputstheendofthewarinMarch237BC.
(4)Walbank,HCPi.130–1;cf.i.65on1.14.1.SeealsoHoyos2007:xviii–xxiforanoverviewofthesources;cf.id.263–6.
(5)Fordiscussionofthistheme,seeEckstein1995:125–9;cf.Hoyos2007:272–3.
(6)ForPolybius’reasonsfornarratingthewar,seealsoHoyos2007:xix–xx.
(7)Ontheprokataskeuē,seeBeckinthisvolume.
(8)Foradifferentemphasis,seeHoyos2007:xviii–xxi,whoarguesthatthewarsinBook1arecoveredinafairlyconciseandcompressedfashion.
(9)Hoyos2007:276suggestsApril237BCasthedateforHamilcar’sdepartureforSpain.
(10)OnPolybiancausation,seeDerow1979:9–13;Derow1994.
(11)ThoughnotethatPolybiusmentionsRomanambitionsinSardiniaasearlyas1.24.7;seealsoChampioninthisvolume(p.155).
(12)Notethewayinwhichbothconflictsaresummedupwiththephraseτοιου̑τονἔσχετὸτέλος(1.88.5;2.35.2),beforegeneralreflectionsonthetwoconflicts.
(13)Onthisrevolt,seeHoyos2007:154–9.
(14)SeeWalbank,HCPi.148–50forthechronologyofthewarandthedateoftheRomanannexation:WalbanksuggeststhatitispossiblethattheRomanexpeditiontookplacein238/7,whileTi.SemproniusGracchuswasstillconsul,thoughEutr.3.2putsitinthefollowingyear,whichmightimplythatthediplomacytookplacesoastogiveafinalsettlementin237/36.SeealsoHoyos2007:249–52,276,whodatesthediplomaticcrisistoMarch–April237.
(15)Hoyos2007is,ofcourse,asubstantialandextremelyimportantstudyofthewar,butisnotageneralhistoryoftheperiod.
(16)Lazenby1996:171–6
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 17 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(17)Lazenby1978:20–1.
(18)Walbank,HCPi.132on1.65.5–9.
(19)FortheNachlebenofXenophoninantiquity,seeMünscher1920,esp.pp.36–70ontheHellenisticperiod.NotethestrikingclaimofArrian(Anab.1.12.3)thatXenophon’saccountofthemarchoftheTenThousandwasbetterknownthanthestoryofAlexander’sconquests.
(20)TwoimportantrecentstudiesofmercenariesinXenophonareRoy2004andAzoulay2004.
(21)Comparee.g.thesinglereferencebynametoThucydides(Plb.8.11.3).FortherecentandwelcometendencytoattachmoreimportancetoPolybius’historiographicalpredecessors,seeMcGing2010:52–66.Rood2012examinesPolybius’accountsoftheFirstPunicWarandoftheRomanconstitution,andcompellinglyarguesthatthesignificanceofThucydidesinPolybiushasbeenunderestimated.
(22)Itisworthnoting,however,thatwehavenoextantevidenceforXenophonwritinginthisvein,anditispossiblethatPolybiusmaybedrawingoninaccuratememoryhere:seeWalbank,HCPi.727on6.45–47.6,thoughseealsoPédech1964:326–7forthesuggestionthatwearedealingwithareferencetoalostwork.Dillery2004:265offersaharsherviewofPolybius’knowledgeofXenophoninthispassage;seealsoPrandi2005:76–7.
(23)PaceDillery2004:265,whooffersascepticalassessmentofthelinkbetweenPolybiusandXenophonhere.McGing2010:62–3hasamuchmorepositiveviewofXenophonticconnection;seealsoLevene2010:92–5foraperceptiveanalysisofLivy’sexploitationofthispassageofPolybiusina‘parasitic’caseof‘doubleallusion’bothtoPolybiusandtoXenophonatLiv.26.51.7–8.Forotherechoesofthisphrase,cf.Plut.Marc.21.3,Ath.10.18.4–5,421b,Julian,Epist.444a( = Epist.50Wright,59Hertlein),whereπολέμουisHertlein’sconjecturalsupplement.
(24)Walbank,HCPi.307on3.6.10;seealsoPédech1964:96–7,andthediscussionofRood2004a:306–7ontheancientreceptionoftheTenThousand.
(25)AtraditionwhichgoesbacktoPlut.Mor.345e(DegloriaAtheniensium):forthegeneralissueshere,seee.g.Marincola1997:186,Tuplin2004:15–16.
(26)Lorenz1931:102n.252;cf.Walbank1989/90:49.Note,too,thatsuchlanguagecanbefoundinscientificcontexts:seee.g.Aristotle,Insomn.461a24–5,Ph.248a1–2.
(27)OnthecontextofXenophon’sending,seeBadian2004:44–5.
(28)SeealsoRood2004c:155–6forthelinksbetweenthispassageofXenophonandtheintrusionofanew(posthumous)narratorintheremainsofBook39ofPolybius.Another
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 18 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
linkwiththeHellenicahasbeensuggestedbyEisen1966:107,whosuggeststhatPolybius’comparisonbetweenHannibal’smarchonRomeinordertorelievethesiegeofCapuaandEpaminondas’marchesfromTegeatoSpartaandthenbacktoArcadia(Plb.9.8–9.10)islikelytohavedrawnonXen.Hell.7.5.8–14,butnotethatWalbank,HCPii.127–8suggeststhatPolybius’sourceislikelytohavebeenCallisthenes.
(29)OnXenophon’sglanceattheopeningoftheHellenicaattheendofthework,seeRood2004b:341.
(30)Forthecomplextraditionsofcontinuationofearlierhistoricalworksinancienthistoriography,seeMarincola1997:237–57;cf.Rood2004boncontinuationsofThucydides.ForPolybius’ownroleasacontinuator,seealso1.3.1–2and4.2.1,onstartingthemainnarrativefromtheendofAratusofSicyon’sworkatthebeginningofthe140thOlympiadin220/19BC(thoughforthecomplexitiesofthis‘continuation’,seeMeadowsinthisvolume),and1.5.1forstartingthenarrativeintheprokataskeuēwiththeFirstPunicWarin264BCwhereTimaeushadfinished.Seealso8.11.3,wherePolybiusnotesthatTheopompussetouttocontinuewhereThucydidesfinished.ThispassageispartofalongerdiscussionwherePolybiuscriticizesTheopompusforchanginghismindbyturningfromageneralhistoryofGreecetowritingaboutPhilipIIofMacedon;seefurtherShrimpton1991:40–3,M.A.Flower1994:29–32,100–1.
(31)OnthemeaningofἀποσκευαίinPlb.1.66.7,seeWalbank,HCPi.133,Huss1985:253,Hoyos2007:36;cf.Trundle2004:35.
(32)Onthisepisode,seeHoyos2007:36–9.
(33)Fordiscussionofthecrossingandthesubsequentbattle,seeHoyos2007:111–24.
(34)μισθοφόροι:1.66.5,10;1.68.2,6;1.72.6;1.73.1,6;1.74.9;1.75.2;1.79.1,8;1.81.11;1.83.11;1.84.3;1.88.7,8.
(35)Cf.1.70.7Ὁμὲνοὐ̑νπρὸςτοὺςξένουςκαὶΛιβυκὸςἐπικληθεὶςπόλεμος.FordiscussionoftherelationshipbetweentheLibyansandthemercenaries,seeHoyos2007:78–9.Polybiusalsoreferstothewarasa‘kindredwar’(πόλεμον…ἐμφύλιον,1.71.5;cf.1.71.7ἐμφυλίουστάσεωςκαὶταραχη̑ς),usingthesamephrasingthatheusedtodescribetheRomanconflictagainsttheFalisci(1.65.2).
(36)Trundle2004:14–17.
(37)Forthistechniqueofsubvertingtheexpectationsofreaders,seefurtherMcGinginthisvolume.
(38)Forsuchlanguage,cf.e.g.Hom.Il.11.604,Hdt.5.97.3.OntheroleofbeginningsinPolybiancausation,seeDerow1979:9–11,Derow1994:86–7.
(39)OnthearrestofGesco,seeHoyos2007:74–6.
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 19 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(40)Onthepayandhireofmercenaries,seeTrundle2004:80–131;cf.Hoyos2007:8–10.
(41)Seee.g.Plb.1.71.1(theCarthaginianshadbeenaccustomedtodependfortheirlivelihoodsfromthecountryside);1.82.6(theCarthaginiansloseafleetofsuppliesinastorm),1.84.1–2(themercenariesareforcedtoraisethesiegeofCarthageduetolackofsupplies).OntheimportanceofsuppliesinPolybius,seeDaviesinthisvolume.
(42)OnthebackgroundtothedecisiontoattempttonegotiatewithHamilcar,seeHoyos2007:213.
(43)Notee.g.thedecisionofMathosandSpendiustolaysiegetoCarthage(1.82.11),orMathos’suddenattackonthecampoftheCarthaginiangeneral,Hannibal(1.86.5).
(44)Onthistheme,seeHoyos2007:274–5.ForPolybianconceptsofbarbariansandtheusageofβάρβαρος,seeErskine2000,Champion2004a:70–5,245–54.
(45)OnsuchimperialreviewsofAchaemenidarmies,seeBriant2002:196–8;ontheπομπήinXenophon,seeDillery2004.
(46)Huss1985:253notesthatthislistincludesnomentionofNumidians.Foranotherdismissivelistofmercenaryforces,seePlb.13.6.4(varioussocialoutcastsenlistedwithNabis),withEckstein1995:127.
(47)Themeaningofthistermhereisdebated:Tarn1938:38andWalbank,HCPi.134seethewordasreflectingethnicmixing,whileDubuisson1982:11–14seesthewordasdenotingindividualsintheprocessofgainingaculturalidentityasGreeks.Hoyos2007:6–8suggeststhatthemixellenesheremayoriginatefromGreekcitiesofsouthernItalyandSicily.SeealsoHarrison1998:19onconceptionsofmixedethnicitiesinHerodotus.
(48)InspiteoflatertraditionsthatSpartawasanallyofCarthage,rightlyrejectedbyWalbank,HCPi.91on1.32.1.
(49)Seee.g.Eckstein1995:135–6onthefollyofthemassesinPolybius,Champion2004a:220–2.
(50)Forthistraditionalclichéofbarbarianlanguagesasmultipleandchaotic,seee.g.Dubuisson1982:23–4,Harrison1998:19–20.ComparealsothecontrastbetweentheunisonshoutsoftheRomansandtheconfusedanddiscordantlanguagesoftheCarthaginianmercenariesatPlb.15.12.8–9(cf.Liv.30.34.1andseeLevene2010:88–91ontheuseofHomer,Il.4.437–8bybothPolybiusandLivy),andPlb.11.19.3–5onthedisparateforcesledbyHannibalinItaly(cf.Liv.28.12.2–5,andseeLevene2010:237–9).
(51)Onthisepisode,seeHoyos2007:43–6,whosuggests(p.45)thatthefinancialcharacterofHanno’smessagemayhavecausedsomeofhisofficerstomisunderstandthedetails.
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 20 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(52)Hoyos2007:70–1suggeststhatβάλλεmeansthattheactualGreekwordwasused,withtheimplicationthatitwasfirstusedbythemixellenes,whomhecloselyassociateswithSpendius,inviewofPolybius’descriptionofhimasaCampanianex-slavein1.69.4.
(53)Ontheissueoflanguage,seeagainHoyos2007:43–5,whodoesnotseetheepisodeofAutaritusascontradictingtheearlierstoryofHanno’sproblemsinconveyinghismessage.
(54)McGing2010:63notesthestoningofDexippus(Anab.6.6.5–7),andthenear-stoningofClearchus(Anab.1.3.2),andthethreatofstoningmadeagainstXenophonhimself(Anab.7.6.10).
(55)Hoyos2007:71–2citesprecedentsinCarthaginianhistoryforarmiestakingcontrolofaffairs,andalsonotestheelectionofnewofficersinXen.Anab.3.1.47–2.1.S.Hornblower2004isakeypaperonthethemeofpoliticalactivityamongtheTenThousand,arguingthatotherGreekarmiesalsoexhibitsomeofthesamefeatures.
(56)AndalsoinThucydides:seee.g.Avery1973:11–13onthepresentationoftheAthenianforcesinSicilyaslikea‘cityonthemove’(p.11).
(57)Onthepotential(alwaysthwarted)oftheTenThousandfoundingacityintheAnabasis,seeMa2004:339–40.
(58)NotethesiegeofCarthagebrieflyembarkedonbySpendiusandMathosat1.82.11,onwhichseeHoyos2007:188–96.ThisepisodeperhapsechoestheearlierthreatofsiegefromRegulusduringtheFirstPunicWar(1.31.2–3)andalsoofcourselooksforward—afterPolybius’decisiontokeepgoingdownto146BC—tothefallofCarthageitself,sothatassaultsonCarthageoccurtowardsthebeginningandendoftheHistories.
(59)1.65.4:…ἐνᾡ̑πολλοὺςκαὶμεγάλουςὑπομείναντεςφόβουςτέλοςοὐμόνονὑπὲρτη̑ςχώραςἐκινδύνευσαν,ἀλλὰκαὶπερὶσφω̑ναὐτω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους;3.2.2:…ἐρου̑μενὡςεἰςἸταλίανἐμβαλόντεςΚαρχηδόνιοικαὶκαταλύσαντεςτὴνῬωμαίωνδυναστείανεἰςμέγανμὲνφόβονἐκείνουςἤγαγονπερὶσφω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους,μεγάλαςδ’ἔσχοναὐτοὶκαὶπαραδόξουςἐλπίδας,ὡςκαὶτη̑ςῬώμηςαὐτη̑ςἐξἐφόδουκρατήσοντες.Thesamephrase,περὶσφω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους,isalsousedbyPolybiusattheendofthethirdbook(3.118.5)indescribingRomananxietiesafterthecatastropheatCannae;seealso15.6.6,whereHannibalobserveshowtheRomansinthepastandnowtheCarthaginiansareindangerπερὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους.
(60)OnthesocialcontextofmercenaryserviceintheHellenisticperiod,seetheusefuldiscussionofChaniotis2005:80–8.NoteventheAchaeanLeagueavoidedusingthem:seeGriffith1935:99–107.
(61)OnthegeneralissueofmercenariesinPolybius,seee.g.Eckstein1995:125–9,175–6,Champion2004a:83,111.
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 21 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(62)Forthedate,seeWalbank,HCPi.52.
(63)Walbank,HCPi.52.Onthe‘chronologicalcompression’(p.106)inthissectionofPolybius’narrative,seeChampion2004a:106–7.SeealsoChampioninthisvolume(p.149).
(64)StrikinglyreferredtoasτοὺςβαρβάρουςτοὺςτὴνΜεσσήνηνκατασχόνταςin1.9.3.
(65)OnSpendius,seefurtherHoyos2007:66–9.
(66)Champion2004a:110n.33,however,notesthatPolybiusdoesnotmentionthetraditionfoundinDiod.23.21thatthedrunkenbehaviourofCelticmercenariesruinedaCarthaginianattempttorecapturePanormusin250BC.
(67)Hoyos2007:92suggeststhattheseadditionalmercenaryforcesmayhavebeenrecruitedintheregionofCapBonandByzacium.
(68)ForHamilcarBarcaintheMercenaryWar,seeEckstein1995:174–7,whoseestheepisodeascontrastingtherationalityandcivilizedgeneralshipofHamilcarwiththechaosofthemercenaries.
(69)OnPolybius’viewsofCarthaginiandecline,seeChampion2004a:117–18.
(70)Forprogrammaticstatementsofparitybetweentwomainprotagonists,cf.e.g.Thuc.1.1.1…τεκμαιρόμενοςὅτιἀκμάζοντέςτεᾐ̑σανἐςαὐτὸνἀμφότεροιπαρασκευῃ̑τῃ̑πάσῃ…;Liv.21.1.2(withLevene2010:235–6).
(71)1.64.5:πλὴνἔνγετῳ̑προειρημένῳπολέμῳτὰςμὲντω̑νπολιτευμάτωνἀμφοτέρωνπροαιρέσειςἐφαμίλλουςεὕροιτιςἂνγεγενημέναςοὐμόνονταις̑ἐπιβολαις̑ἀλλὰκαὶταις̑μεγαλοψυχίαις,μάλισταδὲτῃ̑περὶτω̑νπρωτείωνφιλοτιμίᾳ…
(72)SeefurtherChampion2004a:83;seealsoe.g.Hoyos2007:xx.
(73)1.65.7:…πρὸςδὲτούτοιςτίδιαφέρεικαὶκατὰπόσονἤθησύμμικτακαὶβάρβαρατω̑νἐνπαιδείαιςκαὶνόμοιςκαὶπολιτικοις̑ἔθεσινἐκτεθραμμένων.Eckstein1995:177hasapositiveviewofthewar’soutcomeasbeingthesavingofcivilization,buthintsinn.73that‘theCarthaginiansthemselves…arecontinuallysusceptibletodisreputableemotion’.SeealsoErskine2000:170–1onthewidertraditionofcharacterizingCarthaginiansasbarbarian.
(74)OnHamilcar’sinitialdecisiontosparetheprisoners,seeHoyos2007:152–3.
(75)Onthispractice,seeHoyos2007:175,withn.4.
(76)Hoyos2007:174seesthistacticasdesigned‘toextendindefinitelytherebellion’sbondingthroughblood’.
(77)Hoyos2007:174notestheparallel.
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 22 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(78)Onthisincident,seeHoyos2007:224,whosuggeststhatthethirtyCarthaginianswouldhavebeenseniorofficersormembersofHannibal’sentourage.
(79)Plb.38.22,withScipio’squotationofIliad6.448–9atthefallofCarthageis,ofcourse,acelebratedinstanceofPolybianexploitationofHomer,butnotealsoPolybius’extensiveinterestinHomericgeography,onwhichseefurthere.g.Pédech1964:582–6,Walbank1972a:51,125–6.
(80)Cf.thedescriptionofthemutilationofHectorasἀεικέα…ἔργαatIliad22.395.
(81)θρίαμβος:2.31.6;3.19.12;4.66.8;11.33.7;16.23.5–6;21.24.17.Cf.25.1.1(ἐνταις̑θριαμβικαις̑πομπαις̑).
(82)FortheancientsourcesonthewaragainsttheFalisci,seeMRRi.219–20.
(83)AsnotedbyChampion2004a:111.
(84)SeealsoChampion2004a:111;cf.Eckstein1995:129,Champion2004a:114onthebetrayalofPhoenicebyGallicmercenariesinBook2.
(85)Forthisantithesis,cf.e.g.Dem.Olynth.1.5,andotherparallelscollectedbyOgilvieandRichmond1967:243onTac.Ag.26.2.SeealsoRood2012:60–1,notingtheparallelbetweentheevocationofthedesperatesituationfacedbyCarthageatPlb.1.71.5–6andThuc.8.1.2ontheplightoftheAtheniansaftertheSiciliandisaster.
(86)Onπαρανομία,seeChampion2004a:243–4.FortherhetoricalpresentationofactsofsuperlativesavageryinThucydidesandXenophon,seenowGray2011:82–4.
(87)Cf.Hdt.7.20.2(onthesizeofXerxes’expedition);Thuc.1.1.2–3(onthePeloponnesianWar;cf.1.10.3ontheTrojanWarasapreviousgreatestconflict,and1.23.1–3forThucydides’emphasisonthelengthandextentofthesufferingcausedbythePeloponnesianWar);Plb.1.63.4(ontheFirstPunicWar),withRood2012:60;Liv.21.1.1–2(ontheSecondPunicWar).Onthismotif,seefurtherHerkommer1968:164–71,Woodman1983:171onVell.2.71.1,MartinandWoodman1989:251onTac.Ann.4.69.3,Wiedemann1990:293,Marincola1997:34–43,Gibson2010:53–4.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
Polybius and Xenophon: The Mercenary War1
Page 23 of 23
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 1 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
YouthfulnessinPolybius:TheCaseofPhilipVofMacedon
BrianMcGing
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0009
AbstractandKeywords
YouthfulnessappearswidelyinPolybiusassomethingwhosefailingsandweaknesscanbedisadvantageousforaleader,inspiteofmorepositiveexamplesofyoungmensuchasAratusofSicyonandScipioAemilianus.ThepresentationoftheyouthofPhilipVinBooks4and5ismarkedbynegativeexpectationsfocalizedfromthepointofviewofvariouscharacters,expectationswhicharehoweverunderminedbyPolybius'narrativewhichpresentsanimpressionofasuccessfulanddynamicking.InhisSocialWarnarrative,PolybiusshowshowPhilip'svigorousandeffectivekingshipsurpassestheexpectationsofforeignanddomesticopponents,thoughthedestructionofThermumbyPhilipalsogivesaglanceforwardtohisdescentintotyranny.Polybius'literaryartistryhasingeneralremainedunderappreciated,andhisnarrativeisfarmoreartfullydesignedthaniscommonlyappreciated.
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 2 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,PhilipV,SocialWar,Macedonia,youthfulness,narratology
IthasbeenobservedbeforethattheliteraryaspectofPolybius’Histories,withwhichyoumightexpectmodernapproachestoengageclosely,hasnotreceivedtheattentiondevotedtootheraspectsofhiswork.1ThisprobablystemsfromtwoconspicuouscharacteristicsofPolybius’writing.First,theperceivedordinarinessofhisliterarystyle,famouslydisparagedbyDionysiusofHalicarnassus(Decompositioneverborum4.110):failuretopayadequateattentiontothepropercompositionofwords,Dionysiusargued,madePolybiusoneofthemanyauthorsthatnoonecouldabidetoreadfromcovertocover.AndindeedPolybiussayshimselfthatheconsciouslyespousedasimple,straightforwardstyle(16.17.9–11).Distractedbythislackofornament,readerscanalltooeasilybelulledintothinkingthathereisahard-nosed,straight-talkingsoldier-statesmanwhotellsthetruth,simpleandunvarnished(29.12.8).2AlongwithPolybius’stylisticplainnessgoesareadinesstothinkoutloudthatwasquiteuncharacteristicofmostotherhistorianswritingintheancientworld.AsJ.B.Burynoted:3
Heisalwaysonthestagehimself,criticizing,expounding,emphasizing,makingpoints,dottingthei’sandcrossingthet’s,propoundinganddefendinghispersonalviews…Polybiustakesthereaderfullyintohisconfidence,andperformsalltheprocessesofanalysisinhispresence.
(p.182) Althoughthisconstantauthorialinterventioncanappeartiresometoamodernaudience,4itisalsothecasethatitproducesanalyticalpassagesofgreatinterestandimportanceonahostofdifferenttopics.Thesehaveattractedclosescholarlyattentionandperhapsdiverteditfromthesimplenarrative.Andyetitwasthestorythatinterestedancientaudiences.Polybiusmaynothavebeenasharpstylistintheuseoflanguage,buthedidproduceanarrativeofverycarefullycontriveddesign.JustoverseventyyearsagoFrankWalbankwroteanarticleonthissubject,examiningPolybius’treatmentofPhilipVofMacedonasasortoffigurefromGreektragedy.5ItdealslargelywiththeendofPhilip’sreign.InthisarticleIlookatitsbeginning,examininghowPhilip’spresentationasa‘young’kingaffectsthedevelopmentofthenarrative.BeforeturningtoPhilip,itmightbeappropriatetoplacethisyouthfulnessinthewidercontextofPolybius’engagementwithage.
IFromtheverybeginningoftheHistoriesPolybiusdisplaysaninterestinage,howoldpeopleare(1.1.4–5):‘theextraordinarynatureoftheeventsIdecidedtowriteaboutisinitselfenoughtointeresteveryone,youngorold,inmywork,andmakethemwanttoreadit’.6Later,heexplainsthathehasspokenatsuchlengthaboutScipioAemilianusbecausehethoughtitwouldbepleasantforolderpeopleandusefulfortheyoung(31.30.1).7Onthewhole,Polybiusdoesnothaveagreatdealtosayaboutoldage.Oldermensometimeshavewiseadvicetooffer.WhenPhilipVwastryingtodecidehowtodealwiththeSpartansin221BC,someurgedhimtomakeanexampleofthem,butoldercourtiers(ἕτεροιδὲτω̑νπρεσβυτέρων)saidthiswastooharsh(4.23.9);intheendhetreatedtheSpartansleniently.AlittlelatertheSpartanswereinvitedtojointheAetoliansagainstMacedon,butolderSpartans(τω̑νπρεσβυτέρωντινές)couldrememberthe
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 3 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
benefitsbestowedonthembyAntigonusandpersuadedtheirfellowcitizenstomaintainthealliancewithMacedon(4.34.8–9).Whenactionwascalledfor,however,asyoumightexpect,oldagewasadisadvantage.InresponsetoAntiochusIII’sinvasionofhisterritory,forexample,ArtabazanesofAtropateneyieldedwithoutafight,mostlybecause(p.183) ofhisage,forhewasaveryoldman(τελέωςγὰρἤδηγηραιὸςἠ̑ν,5.55.10).AndAlexandertheIsianrefusedtopayaransomforhisfreedomwhencapturedbytheEpirots:heremainedinprison,anoldman(πρεσβύτεροςἄνθρωπος),eventhoughhewastherichestpersoninGreece(21.26.14).Theimplicationisthathewasastubbornoldfool,ratherthanthatPolybiuswassorryforanoldpersonbeinginprison.Oldageevenaffectedthegreat,but70-year-old,Philopoemen(ὑπὸτη̑ςἡλικίαςβαρυνόμενος,23.12.1).TheexceptionthatprovestherulewasprovidedbyArchimedes,whoseartilleryanddefenceengineshelpedtoprotectSyracuseagainsttheRomansduringtheSecondPunicWar:‘ifsomeonewouldonlyremoveoneoldSyracusan(πρεσβύτηνἕναΣυρακοσίων)’,theRomansbelievedtheywouldhavenotroubleincapturingthecityimmediately(8.7.8–9).
ItisoverwhelminglyyouthfulnessthatattractsPolybius’attention,inparticularyoungleaders.8Heconveysawidespreadbeliefamongtheactorsofhisstorythatyoungmenaregullible,rash,andnotabletomanagepublicaffairs.Youngmenspeakoutofturn.AtthesiegeofAbydosin202BC,theyoungest(νεώτατος)oftheRomanambassadors,M.AemiliusLepidus,addressedkingAttalusinanabruptmanner.Thekingwasshockedbutforgavehimforthreereasons:hewasyoungandinexperienced(πρω̑τονμὲνὅτινέοςἐστὶκαὶπραγμάτωνἄπειρος);hewasextremelyhandsome;andhewasaRoman(16.34.6).AtanaudiencewithqueenTeutaofIllyriatheyoungerCoruncaniusspoke‘withacandourwhichwaswhollyjustified,butfarfromdiplomatic’(ἐχρήσατοπαρρησίᾳκαθηκούσῃμέν,οὐδαμω̑ςδὲπρὸςκαιρόν,2.8.9):Polybiusdoesnotactuallysayso,buttheimplicationisthatCoruncaniusspokewiththerashnessofyouth.
Youngmenarealsounabletodealwithcomplicatedaffairs.WhenDemetrius,sonofPhilipV,wassenttoRometodefendhisfatheragainstamultitudeofcomplainants,thesenateexcusedhimfromhavingtospeakhimself:theylikedhim,Polybiusexplains,andsawthathewasveryyoungandquiteincapableofdealingwithsuchatangleofcomplications(23.2–3).9Thisassessmentprovedcorrectinamostunfortunatemanner.Forthesenate’sfavourturnedtheyoungman’shead(ἐμετεώρισεμὲντὸμειράκιον)andannoyedPhilipandhisotherson,Perseus.ThesituationwasmadeevenworsebyFlamininus,whotooktheyoungman(τὸμειράκιον)intohis(p.184) confidenceanddeludedtheyouth(τόντεγὰρνεανίσκονἐψυχαγώγησεν)intothinkingthatRomewouldimmediatelysecurethethroneofMacedonforhim.Thisallledtohisdeathintheend.
Inthemilitarycontext,althoughyoungmenmustdothefighting,inexperiencecanbeaproblem.AntiochusIII,beingyoungandinexperienced(ὡςἂνἄπειροςκαὶνέος)—hewas24or25—assumedfromhisownsuccessthathehadwonthebattleofRaphiain217BC;heneededanolderofficertopointoutthetruth(5.85.11–12).WhenbesiegingCynaethain241BCtheAchaeangeneralAratus,whowas30atthetime,10mistookasignalandattackedtooearly(9.17);forPolybiusthecauseoftheproblemwastheuseof
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 4 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
asignalbyacommanderwhowasstillyoung(νέονἀκμὴνὄντα)andignorantoftheuseofdoublesignals.
Evenifyouwerenotyoung,youcouldstillshowchildishgullibility.AtthebeginningoftheSecondPunicWar,forexample,theCarthaginiangeneralBostarallowedhimselftobetrickedintohandingoverSpanishhostagestotheIberianprinceAbilyx,thusgivingAbilyxtheopportunitytousethemstrategicallyinsteadofdoingsohimself(3.98–9).Forthisdisplayofgullibilityandnaivetyhewasthoughttohaveactedratherchildishly,givenhisage.11Andtheword‘childish’canfunctionasatermofabuseforpeopleactinginaparticularlystupidway.TheAetoliangeneralAristonpretendednottoknowabouttheAetolianinvasionofAchaeain220BC,whichisidentifiedas‘achildishlysillythingtodo’(εὔηθεςκαὶπαιδικὸνπρα̑γμαποιω̑ν),sincethefactsprovedotherwise(4.17.2).PolybiusfeltitwasnecessarytodiscussthehydrographyoftheBlackSeabecauseof‘thefalseandfancifulyarnsofseafaringtraders:weshouldnotbecondemnedbyourignorancetobelieveeverythingwehear,likechildren’(4.42.7–8).12IncontinuingtobelievethatAfricawasdry,sandy,andbarrenTimaeuswas‘likeachildwhoisquiteincapableofthinkingforhimself’(παιδαριώδηκαὶτελέωςἀσυλλόγιστον,12.3.2).Similarly,hisbeliefthatthesacrificeoftheOctoberhorsewasconnectedwiththeTrojanWarwas‘amostchildishnotion’(πρα̑γμαπάντωνπαιδαριωδέστατον,12.4b.2).Andwritingspeechesinwhichyoutelltheaudiencewhattheyalreadyknow,asTimaeusdid,isutterlyfutileandchildish(ματαιότατονεἰν̑αιπάντωνκαὶπαιδαριωδέστατον,12.25k.9).
ItisinthefieldofpoliticalleadershipthatyouthfulnessintheHistoriesisperceivedtobemostdisadvantageous.WhenHieroIIofSyracusedied,in215BC,theRomanssentamissiontohis15-year-oldsuccessorandgrandson,Hieronymus,inordertoconfirmthetreatybetweenRomeandSyracuse(7.3).(p.185) Hieronymustactlessly(ἀστοχία)sympathizedwiththemonbeingsobadlydefeatedbytheCarthaginiansinItaly,andaskedwhytheyhadsentafleettoPachynumbeforehisgrandfather’sdeath.TheanswerwastheythoughtHierohaddiedandwereafraidthattheSyracusanpeoplewoulddespisehissuccessor’syouthfulness(καταφρονήσαντεςτη̑ςτου̑καταλελειμμένουπαιδὸςἡλικίας)anddeposehim.Nomatterhowself-interestedtheRomanactionandbogustheclaim,theexcusewasthattheywerewatchingoverhiminhisyouthfulnessandprotectinghisrule.Asayoungster,theassumptionis,hewouldnotbeabletodothishimself.Hieronymusruledforonlyayearbeforebeingdeposed,andalthoughPolybiusadmitsthathewasextremelyrashandviolent(διαφερόντωςεἰκαιο̑ναὐτὸνγεγονέναικαὶπαράνομον),healsosaysyouhavetorememberthathewasonlyaboy(παις̑)whenhesucceededtothethroneandlivedonlyforanotherthirteenmonths(7.7).HeseemstoaccepttheRomanviewthatHieronymuswassimplytooyoungtoruleanddidnotlivelongenoughtoimprove.ThesortoftroubleayoungrulercouldgetintoisillustratedbythecaseofCharopsofEpirus(32.5–6)in160/59BC.WhenRomeremovedhisrivals,heandhiscourtierswentonarampageofcriminalmisgovernment,ashewashimselfveryyoung(ἅτενέοςμὲνὢναὐτὸςκομιδῃ̑)andtheyweretheworsttypes.AlthoughnotactuallydeposedbyRome,hewasstudiouslyignoredbyleadingRomansandthesenate,whenhewenttolookfortheirsupport.
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 5 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Ayoungkingwasalwaysatthemercyofenemiesandunscrupulouscourtiers.AttheSeleucidcourtthewickedHermiasthoughthehadtheyoungAntiochusIIIentirelyunderhiscontrol(διὰτὴνἡλικίανὑποχείριονἔχωντὸννεανίσκον,5.45.7),andMolonandAlexanderdecidedtorevoltagainstAntiochuspartlybecausetheydespisedthekingforhisyouthfulness(καταφρονήσαντεςμὲναὐτου̑διὰτὴνἡλικίαν,5.41.1).ToPolybius’disgust,PhilipVandAntiochusIIIgangeduponPtolemyVEpiphanesofEgypt,whowasonlyaninfant(παιδίοννήπιον)—hewas5yearsoldwhenhisfatherwaskilled13—andplannedtocarveuptheboy’skingdombetweenthem(τὴντου̑παιδὸςἀρχήν,15.20).AdecadelaterthePtolemaiccourtierScopasisdescribedasenjoyingstrongsupportandagoodopportunityasEpiphaneswasstillonlyaboy(παις̑,18.53.4).Asweshallsee,variouscourtiersandopponentsregardedPhilipVasayoungsterwhocouldbedisregarded.
TheprocessofmovingfromyouthfulincapacitytoadultcapabilityisillustratedbytheSeleucidprinceDemetrius(31.2).Hehadbeenheld,unjustlyitwasthought,ashostageinRomeformanyyears,buthadpreviouslydonenothingaboutit,‘ashewasstillaboy’(ἠ̑νγὰρἔτιπαις̑).Nowthathewasgrowntoadulthood(τότεδὲτὴνἀκμαιοτάτηνἔχωνἡλικίαν)—hewas23yearsold14—heappearedbeforethesenatetoaskforpermissiontoreturnandtake(p.186) upthethrone.Hisrequestwasrefused,Polybiusbelieved,becausethesenatethoughtthattheyouthandincapacityoftheyoungAntiochusVservedtheirinterestsbetterthanakinginhisprime.15TheevidenceforthissenatorialattitudeistheembassyofCn.Octaviussentin163toburntheSeleucidwarshipsandhamstringtheirelephants:noonewaslikelytoresistasthekingwasaboy(του̑μὲνβασιλέωςπαιδὸςὄντος)andtheleadingSeleucidcourtiersweredelightednottohaveDemetriusfoistedonthem.Inspiteofcallinghimanadult,PolybiuswasstillworriedthatDemetrius’fondnessfordrinkandextremeyouthcouldendangertheplansforhisescapefromRome(31.13.8).16AndhedidnotevenhavethegoodsensetotakePolybius’advicenottoaskthesenateforreleaseasecondtime.Instead,heconsultedoneofhisentourage,Apollonius,whowasguilelessandveryyoung(ἄκακοςὢνκαὶκομιδῃ̑νέος)andgaveDemetriuspooradvice(31.11).
Thefaultsofyouth,however,donotaffectallyoungleaders.Youngmenofexceptionalabilityrepeatedlydefyexpectationsoftheiryouthfulness.AratusofSicyonfreedhiscityoftyrannyatthetenderageof20.Eightyearslater,whenalreadygeneralforthesecondtime,heliberatedCorinthandbroughtMegaraintotheAchaeanLeaguetoo(2.43.3–5).ScipioAfricanusisanothergoodexample.17Whenheaskedhismother’spermissiontostandfortheaedileshipsheagreed,thinkinghewasjustjokingashewasveryyoung(καὶγὰρἠ̑νκομιδῃ̑νέος,10.4.8):hewas19.18In210/9BChewasjust27yearsoldandyethetookoverasituationinSpainthatmostpeopleregardedasdesperate,anddevisedacourseofactionthatneitherhisownsidenortheenemyexpected(10.8.10–11).HespentallwintermakingplansforthecaptureofNewCarthage,butinspiteofhisyouth,toldnooneexceptGaiusLaelius(10.9.1).In208afterthebattleofBaeculatheSpaniardswantedtocallhimking,butherefused,thusshowingagreatnessofmindeveninonesoyoung(κομιδῃ̑νέοςὤν,10.40.6).AndinaddressinghimbeforethebattleofZamain202,whenScipiowasnow34,HannibalsaidhewasafraidScipiowassoyoung
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 6 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(διὰτὸνέονεἰν̑αικομιδῃ̑)andsuccessfulthathewouldnotlistentohim(15.7.1).Bythisstagethepraiseofhistenderyearsiswearingthin,andthesuspicionarisesthattriumphoveryouthfulnessisaqualityPolybiuslikestoattributetohisfavourites,evenwhentheyarenolongerveryyoung.The(p.187) sameseemstoapplytoScipioAemilianusattheendofthe150s(35.4).ThesenatewasfacingarecruitmentcrisisforthewarinSpainasnoonewantedtofightthere,butAemilianus,whowasayoungman(νέοςμὲνὤν),volunteered,muchtothesenate’ssurprise,givenScipio’syouthandcaution(καὶδιὰτὴνἡλικίανκαὶδιὰτὴνἄλληνεὐλάβειαν).Aemilianuswasabout33atthetime.SimilarlywithHieroofSyracuse.Inthebuild-uptotheFirstPunicWar,Hieroisdescribedasbeingjustayoungman(νέονμὲνὄντακομιδῃ̑,1.8.3),buthehadanaturaltalentforpoliticsandtheSyracusansunanimouslyappointedhimgeneral.Hewasbornin315BCandhiscouptookplaceeitherin270/69(inwhichcasehewasabout36or37),orin275/4(whenhewouldbe31or32).19Inneithercaseisthepraiseofhisyouthveryconvincing.ThegreatPhilopoemenalsobenefitsfromanattributionofscarcelyconvincingyouthfulness.AtthebattleofSellasiain222,whenhewas30,Philopoementriedtowarnhissuperiorsofdanger,butwasignoredashehadnotheldhighcommandyetandwasyoung(διὰτὸμήτ’ἐφ’ἡγεμονίαςτετάχθαιμηδεπώποτεκομιδῃ̑τενέονὑπάρχειναὐτόν,2.67.5).Withoutorders,heledanattackthathadanimportantinfluenceonthecourseofthebattle.WhenAntigonuslateraskedhiscavalrycommander,Alexander,whyhehadengagedtheenemybeforegettingthesignal,Alexanderrepliedthathehadnotdoneso,butthata‘youngsterfromMegalopolis’(μειράκιόντιΜεγαλοπολιτικόν)hadattackedprematurelywithoutpermission.Antigonussaidthattheyoungsterhadbehavedlikeagoodcommanderinspottinganopportunity,whilethecommanderhadactedlikeanuntriedyoungster(2.68.1–2).20EvenPolybiushimselfshowedprecociousabilitywhenhewasappointedalongwithhisfather,Lycortas,asanambassadortoEgypt,inspiteofthefactthathehadnotyetreachedthelegalageforthejob(24.6.5).
IIThecharacteristicsetofyouthfulfailingsthatIhavebeenillustratinghasimportantnarrativefunctionsforPolybius.Itisoneoftheconsiderationsthatleadindividualsinthenarrativetotakeaction.Sometimestheassumptionsaresafe:youthsbehavewithyouthfulincompetence,andthosearoundthemareenabledtotakeappropriateaction.Atothertimestheuncriticalassumptionofyouthfulfollyleads,ormisleads,theactorsinthestorytounderestimatecertainindividuals,particularlyoutstandingones,andtakethewrongaction.Notonlyaretheactorsofthestorymisled,however,butthereaderstoo:(p.188) Polybiuscanusethediscourseofyouthasamechanismtodirectorattimesconfuseandmisdirecthisaudience.21ThecareeroftheyoungPhilipVoffersaparticularlygoodexampleofthewayinwhichthecommonexpectationsofyouthfulnesscanhelptoshapethenarrative,challengingboththeactorsinthestoryandthereader.
Philip’sintroductionintoBook4isgradualandunobtrusive.Heismentionedfirstinchapters2,3,and5,withanemphasisonhisyouth:hewasonlyaboy(παις̑)whenhecametothethrone(4.2.5).Thisisimportantinformation,asitispresentedasanelementinthecausesoftheSocialWar:for,Polybiussays,aslongasAntigonusruledinMacedon,theAetolianswerecowedintoinactivity,butwhenhedied,leavingPhiliponlyaboy,they
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 7 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thoughttheycouldignorehimandinterveneinthePeloponnese(4.3.2–3).22Theviewis‘focalized’throughtheAetolians:itistheirperceptionthatPhilipistooyoungtomanage,notthenarrator’s(thatis,insimpleterms,Polybius’).23ThisAetolianinterpretationofthesituationledtheviolentDorimachusintovariousactsofaggressioninthePeloponnese.Inlookingforanally,heurgesScopastojoinhiminattackingMessenia,astheywouldbequitesafefromMacedonia,Philipbeingonly17yearsold.24
Chapters22–9containthefirstcontinuousnarrativeofthekinginaction.HearrivesatCorinth,callsthealliestoaconference,andtakesofftodealwithinternaltroublesdevelopingatSparta.HerethreeoftheephorsweretakingtheAetolianside,convincedthatPhilipwastooyoungtocontrolPeloponnesianaffairs(4.22.5).25Thisisnowthethirddifferentfocalizationofthispoint.(p.189) Thereaderhasnotbeentoldanythingdefiniteyetaboutthevalidityorotherwiseofthisview:Polybiushasnot,sotospeak,takenresponsibilityforit—itissimplythewaycertainofthepartiesinvolvedseethesituation—andneitherthereadernortheparticipantsintheactionknowwhethertheassumptionofyouthfulinabilitywillprovecorrectinthiscase.
Forthemoment,thingsturnoutcontrarytoexpectation(4.22.6),assoofteninPolybius:26theAetolianswithdrawswiftly,andevenmoreswiftlyPhilipmakesanappearancefromMacedon.ThisisthefirstreferencetoPhilip’sspeed,athemePolybiusdevelopsandlinkswiththatoftheking’syouthfulness(seebelowpp.190–1,195–6).Thepro-MacedonianephorAdeimantusismurderedbythepro-Aetolianephors,whotrytokeepPhilipawayfromSparta.Helistens,butwillnotbeputoffandrequiresthattheSpartanssendadelegationwiththenecessaryauthoritytodiscussthesituation.Thisisafirmandmeasuredresponse:thereisnothingtoimplythatanyoneotherthanthekingisincompletecontrol.TheSpartansmaketheircaseattheking’scouncil,buttherewasdisagreementabouthowtoreact.SomeadvisedPhiliptomakeabrutalexampleoftheSpartans,inthewaythatAlexandertheGreattreatedThebesatthebeginningofhisreign;27othersurgedgreaterrestraintandpunishmentonlyfortheguiltyparties(4.22.11–4.23).
FinallyPhilipspoke(4.24).Polybiusimmediatelycastsdoubtontheabilityofa17-year-oldboytomakesuchweightydecisionsallonhisown.Writers,heargues,havetosimplifythedecision-makingprocessbyattributingallpolicytotheking,whileinfactitisamorecomplicatedprocessofadvicefrom,anddiscussionamong,theking’sassociates,particularlythoseclosesttohim.Inthepresentcase,Polybiussurmises,withoutexplainingwhy,thatAratuswasprobablytheonebehindthepolicythatemerged.28WenowappearforthefirsttimetohavePolybius’ownviewofPhilip’syouth:inalllikelihood,hesays,ayoungkinglikethisisnottheonegoingtobemakingthebigdecisions.Asadirectiontothereader—or,asitwillprove,amisdirection—heseemstobeimplyingthatthosewhoregardedthekingastooyoungtorulewereright:hewasnotreallyineffectivecharge,inthewayhewouldhavebeenifhewereolder.WearebeinginvitedtobelievethatDorimachus,theAetolians,andtheSpartanephorsarejustifiedintheassumptionstheyhavemadeaboutPhilip.ThisisthefirsttimePhilipiscalledontomakeamajordecision,soitisafittingplacetointroducethethemeofthecourtand(p.190)
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 8 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
courtiers,athemethatwilldominatetherestofthestoryofPhilip’searlyyears.29
Thisstatementaboutthedecision-makingprocessandtheroleofthecourtiersisimmediatelyunderminedbyPolybius’returntohisnarrativemode,inwhichhedescribestheactionsimplyintermsoftheking.EverythingPhilipdoesismarkedbyexcellence.HisresponsetotheSpartansituationismeasuredandrestrained:theSpartanbehaviourhadnotdamagedtheallianceasawhole,andsoharshpunishmentwasnotrequired.Thisdecisiontooverlooktheincident‘gavethealliesafineillustrationofhisprinciples’(καλὸνδειγ̑ματη̑ςἑαυτου̑προαιρέσεως,4.24.9).AshehasthealliesassembledatCorinth,hecallsforadebateonwhattodoabouttheAetolians.Thedecisionismadetodeclarewar,butPhilipwiselysendsthemaletterkeepingopenachannelofnegotiation(whichtheyreject).HethendepartsforMacedoniatoprepareforwar,having‘givennotjusttheallies,butallGreeks,goodreasontoexpecthisreigntobethatofamanwhowasnoteasilyruffled,butcouldmaintainakinglyobjectivity’(4.27.9–10).30Eveninwinterhecontinuestoactdecisively,fearlesslyputtinghimselfindangertowinoverScerdilaidastotheMacedonianside(4.29).Withthat,thestorytakesleaveofPhiliptofollowthewarpreparationsoftheotherstates,beforebreakingawayentirelyfromtheSocialWartoexaminethewarofRhodesandBithyniaagainstByzantium,andthesituationinCreteandSinope(4.38–56).
WhencoverageoftheSocialWarresumesinchapter57,afterabrieflookatPeloponnesianaffairs(4.57–60),PolybiusthenputsPhilipcentre-stage.Itisastoryofsustainedmilitarysuccess,withthekingcontinuingtodisplaycourageanddecisiveleadership.Hecapturesonetownafteranother,repeatedlydefeatingtheenemy,and,althoughPolybiusdoesnotsayit,repeatedlydefyingtheexpectationsofyouthfulinability.Inchapter66hehearstheDardaniareplanningtoinvadeMacedoniaandrushesback.IhavealreadyalludedtoPhilip’sspeed,andhisreturnfromMacedoniatothePeloponneseinchapters67–9bringsitoutfully,effectivelysetoffbyfocalization.ThesituationisfocalizedfirstthroughthePeloponnesians.Withtheonsetofwinter,everyonehadgivenuphopethatPhilipwouldcome,buthebroughtanarmytoCorinthwithsuchspeedandsecrecythatnooneinthePeloponnesewasawareofwhathadhappened.31Polybiusthenviewsthesituationthroughtheeyesofthemainplayers:Philip,theAetoliangeneralEuripidas,andtheEleanarmy,allstumblingaroundinignoranceofeachother’spresence.We,theaudience,(p.191) haveallthenecessaryinformation,butnottheprotagoniststhemselves.ThePeloponnesianswereastonishedatallthis:‘fortheyheardatthesametimeoftheking’sarrivalandofhisvictory’.32ThisepisodeisneatlyframedbythePeloponnesians’ignoranceatthebeginningandtheirastonishmentattheend.Akingdisplayingsuchabilitytomovefastinatheatreofwarandconfoundtheenemyisnotlikelytobeoneaffectedbytheusualweaknessesofyouth.
UptothispointPolybiushaspresentedPhilipintwoways.Throughtheeyesofcertainprotagonistsheisseenasayoungsterwhocansafelybeignored,aviewreinforcedbyPolybius’ownauthorialinterventionaboutyoungkingsandtheirdependenceonadvisers.ThisperceptionisoneofthemaingeneratorsoftheSocialWar.Ontheotherhand,theaccountofhisexploitspaintsaverydifferentpictureofthekingasadynamic
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 9 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
leaderandgeneral,fast-moving,brave,andmilitarilysuccessful,creatinghighhopesforthefuture.NosuggestionhasyetbeenmadeexplicitlythattheseachievementsunderminetheotherviewofPhilipasayoungweakling.FurtherunderminingitistheunclutteredfocusonPhiliphimself.InspiteofPolybius’statementonadvisers(in4.24),theonlyotherpersoninthecourtwhosenamehasevenbeenmentionedisAratus,andhefadedfromthepicturewhenPhiliptookcommandofthewaragainsttheAetolians.Inthenarrative,toallintentsandpurposesPhiliphassofarstoodalone.
Inchapter76,however,Apellesisintroduced.HeandhisfellowconspiratorsandtheirantagonismtowardsAratusaregoingtobethebigstorylinkingBooks4and5,whichruntogetherasasingleunit.33Hewas,Polybiustellsus,oneoftheguardiansoftheyoungPhilipleftbyAntigonus,andhenowenjoyedgreatinfluencewiththeking.34Thisis,innarratologicalterms,ananalepticdisplacement:itissomethingthathappenedbeforethestory-eventsnowbeingrecounted,butnotmentionedatthattime.WewereinformedofAntigonus’deathattheverybeginningofBook4.PolybiusobservedthenthatPhilipwasjustaboywhenhesucceededtothethrone,sohehadanexcellentopportunitytomentionApelles,ifhehadwantedto.WhennarratingthebeginningofthereignsofPtolemyIV(5.34–40)andAntiochusIII(5.40–57),Polybiusimmediatelyintroducesthecourtierstothescene.SothereisnothingunavoidableinthewayPolybiushaskeptsilentaboutApelles:hehasheldhimbackonpurposeandwemustaskwhy.35Isuggestatwofoldreason.First,itleavesthefieldclearforustoseePhilipentirelyashimself.Thishasthe(p.192) advantageofmaintainingdoubtinthemindofthereaderabouthisyouthfulness:arewetobelievethatDorimachus,theAetolians,andtheSpartanephorshavegotitright?OrhasthenarrativeofPhilip’sperformanceaskinggivenussufficientreasontothinkotherwise?Secondly,itisawayofemphasizingthegoodbeginningtoPhilip’sreign.Polybiusisabouttotellusthatitallwentwrong,andhehasavestedartisticinterestincreatingaclearcontrastbetweenthehopefulbeginningandwhathappenedlater.Onthewhole,courtiersintheHistoriesarepresentedbyPolybiusaswickedschemers.36AndtheirabsencefromPhilip’searlyreignleaveshim,atleastintheliterarypresentation,uncontaminatedbytheirbanefulpresence.
ImmediatelyfollowingtheintroductionofApelles,PolybiusoffershisfirstmajorassessmentofPhilip’sreign,inchapter77.Itisveryfavourable.Hisperformancewasgaininghimanexcellentreputation,notjustwiththoseunderhiscommandbutwithalltherestofthePeloponnesians.Intelligent,hehadagoodmemory,theauthorityofaking;hewascharming,andable,andbraveasageneral.Polybiusfoundit‘hardtothinkofakingwhowasmorerichlyendowedwiththetemperamentnecessaryforthepossessionofpower’(4.77.2).37Withallthispraise,PolybiusseemstohaveforgottentheissueofPhilip’syouthfulness.ButnowwegettheprolepticreferencetofuturedisasterIhavejustmentioned,asortofdramaticforeshadowing:whatwentwrong,heasks?WhatturnedPhilipfromanaturalkingintoasavagetyrant?Itisaquestionnoteasytoanswer,Polybiussays,andhewilldiscussitatamoresuitablemoment(4.77.4).ButperhapsthejuxtapositionofApelles’introductionandtheevaluationofPhilipsuggeststheanswerthatcourtintrigueisanelementinthechange.WhenPolybiusdoescometohisanswer(at7.11–14),whenattemptingtoexplainPhilip’smurderousattackonMessenein215/14BC,
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 10 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
whichmarkedthebeginningoftheking’schangefortheworse,courtiers’adviceiscrucial.EventhoughPhilipsucceededtothethroneatsuchayoungage(καίτοινέῳὄντιπαραλαβόντιτὴνΜακεδόνωνδυναστείαν,7.11.4),heattractedmoreloyaltythananyotherMacedonianking.Buthisabilitytotriumphoverhisyouthfunesswasdependentontwothings.First,hehadtopursuethesamepoliciesthathadbroughthimsuchsuccessuptothispoint.Secondly,inordertobeabletodothis,hehadtotaketherightadvice.AslongashefollowedAratus’advice,Polybiussays,everythingwasfineandthekingenjoyedtheaffectionofalltheGreeks.ButwhenheallowedthewickedDemetriustoleadhimastrayandreversepreviouspolicy,‘helostboththeaffectionofhisalliesandtheconfidenceoftheotherGreeks’:soimportantisitforyoungkingstochoose(p.193)wiselytheircourtiers(7.14.4–6).Atleastoneofthesecretsofbeingasuccessfulyoungkingwastheabilitytotaketherightadvice.InBook7welearnthatintheendPhilipinhisyouthfulnessfailedtolistentotherightadvice,butatthispointinBook5thereaderstilldoesnotknowthis.Wehavejustbeentoldthatheturnedbadintheend,butwedonotknowwhenthischangebegantoaffecttheoutcomeofevents.PolybiusissendingtoomanyconflctingsignalsforthereadertoknowwhetherPhilipwillbeabletomeetthechallengeofferedbyApellesatcourtandtheAetoliansonthebattlefield.Philipisthoughtbyhisenemiestobetooyoungtomanage,andweknowitallgoesbadintheend;yetheisperformingveryimpressively—althoughPolybiushascastdoubtonwhetheritishewhoisresponsibleforthatorhisadvisers.
Inthemilitarycontext,wehavealreadyseenenoughtosuggestthatPhilipwaswellabletomeetthechallenge,andfurthernarrativeofthecourseoftheSocialWarreinforcesthisimpression(78–82).Bychapter82thereappearsthefirstsignofachangeinthegeneralperceptionofPhilip’syouthfulness:heisinArgos,admiredforhisall-roundbehaviourandexploits‘beyondhisyears’(ὑπὲρτὴνἡλικίαν,4.82.1).IntheGreekwordfor‘admired’(τεθαυμασμένος)thereisanimpliedfocalizationofpublicopinion:thisishowpeoplewerenowseeingthesituation—Philipwasperforming‘beyondhisyears’.Withinashorttimewewillreceiveconfirmationthatincourtcircles,too,Philipwouldsoondispelanydoubtsabouthisyouthfulness.
AtthispointtheApellesstoryreturnsanddominatesthenarrative:thelastchaptersofthebookarealmostentirelyabouttheApelles–Aratusopposition.Thepaceofthenarrativeslowsrightdownasthestoryofthedisputebetweenthetwocourtiersisdevelopedindetail.Chapter87bringsthebooktoaclosebyopeningupthecourtanditsintriguestofullerinspection.ItisrepeatedthatApelleshadbeeninstalledasoneoftheking’sguardiansattheverybeginningofhisreign,butnowwegettherestofthecast,sotospeak.AntigonushadalsoleftinimportantpositionsLeontius,Megaleas,Taurion,andAlexander.Thiswholegrouphasbeenthereallalong,butheldback—forthesamereason,Iwouldsuggest,asApelles:Polybiusdoesnotwantthesceneclutteredwithcourtiers,distractingattentionfromPhilipandindeedcorruptinghim.Andherewehaveanotherprolepticdisplacementlookingtotheendoftheconspiracystory:‘beforelonghe[Apelles]paidforhisselfishnessandgreed:exactlywhathehadtriedtodotohisassociateswasdonetohim,verysoonafterwards’(4.87.10–11).Thiscomesattheveryendofthebook,addingweighttotheforwardreference.SonowweknowPhilipdestroys
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 11 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Apelles,althoughwedonotknowhow.Thewholenotionoftheincapableyoungsterisbeginningtofallapart,andtheremainingreferencestoPhilip’syouthcompletethedemolition.
Beforehistriumph,however,Philipmakesamistake.ToavengetheAetoliandestructionofDiumandDodona,heordersthesacrilegious(p.194) destructionofthetownofThermum(5.9–12).PolybiusarguesatsomelengththatthisactionwasaseriouserrorbecauseitrepresentedareversalofallthepoliciesthathadmadeMacedongreat.38HeshouldhavefollowedtheexamplesetbyPhilipIIandAlexander,but‘sincehisbehaviourwastheoppositeoftheirs,ashegrewolderheearnedtheoppositereputationtoo’(5.10.11).ByfailingtotreattheAetolianswithrestraintandmagnanimity,helostagreatopportunitytowintheiradmirationandrespect.Interestingly,Polybiusispreparedtoexcusehimonthegroundofyouth;‘perhapsPhilipwastooyoungtobeheldentirelyresponsibleforwhathappened’andsomeblameshouldattachtohiscourtiers(5.12.5).39HismainadviserswereAratusandDemetrius,and,basedontheircharacterandtheadvicetheygaveonalateroccasion(PolybiusisreferringtothesituationatMessenein7.11–14),itiseasytoconcludewhoseadvicePhilipmusthavefollowedinthiscase.ThisrepeatswhatPolybiushadsaidaboutPhilipinSparta(4.24),thathewastooyoungtoexerteffectivecontrolandwasundertheinfluenceofhiscourt,exceptthattherehehadfollowedthegoodadviceofAratus,herethebadadviceofDemetrius.BothpassagesunderminethenarrativesurroundingthemwherePhilipexcels,butifthesceneatSpartahadservedtomisleadthereaderintothinkingthatperhapstheperceptionsofPhilip’syouthfulnesscurrentatthetimewerecorrect,atthisstageinBook5wenowknowthatPhilipwinsoutagainstApelles.WhathappensatThermum,andlaterMessene,isaforewarningofPhilip’sultimatedescentintotyranny:asayoungkingmeetingthechallengeofApellesandtheAetolians,heexhibitsqualitiesthatdefyhisagebutintheendhecannotovercomehisyouthfulfailuretolistentotherightadvice.
Thisisallinthefuture.Forthemomentthosewhodoubtedhimcometorealizethattheywerewrongabouthisyouth.Leontiusisthefirsttofacethereality.HehadcombinedwithApellesandMegaleastoformaconspiracyagainstPhilip,althoughitisfarfromclearwhattheirultimateaimwas(5.2.7–8).ApelleswenttoChalcistosabotagetheking’sauthoritythere,whileLeontiusandMegaleasweretostaywiththekinganddowhateverdamagetheycould.Inpursuitoftheseaims,LeontiusdeliberatelypreventedhistroopsfromcapturingPalus(5.4.10–13),andgaveadvicetoPhilipthatwouldholdhiminMesseniaallsummer(5.5.5–8)andslowhisadvancetoThermum(5.7.1–2).ThefocalizationoftheseincidentseffectivelypitsLeontiusinabattleofwitsagainsttheking.WeseeLeontius’motivesthroughhisowneyes,andPhilip’sreponsethroughhis.IfLeontiuscouldpersuadePhiliptosailtoMessenia,thekingwouldbestuckthereallsummer,asitwaseasytosail(p.195) therewhentheEtesianwindsblewbutimpossibletogetback.This,Leontiuscalculated,wouldallowtheAetolianstoplunderThessalyandEpirusunhindered.Philip,ontheotherhand,wasalreadysuspiciousofLeontiusforhisbehaviouratPalus,and,nowunderstandingthetreacheryofhisadvice,followedAratus’counseltoattackAetoliainstead.Similarly,inrelationtotheadvanceonThermum,Leontiustriestoslowitdown—interestinglyrecognizingthattheAetolianswill
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 12 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
beunpreparedforPhilip’senergyandspeed(an‘embedded’focalizationinwhichtheAetolianpositionisfocalizedthroughLeontius)—whilePhilipknowswhatisgoingonandfollowsAratus’counselagain.WhenCrinonandMegaleasarefinedandarrestedfortheirpartinadrunkenassaultonAratus,Leontiusattempts,unsuccessfully,tointimidatetheking(5.15–16).ThissceneisalsofocalizedthroughLeontiusandisthefirstspecificunravellingofPhilip’syouthfulness:Leontiustakessomeofhissoldierswithhim,‘expectingthatitwouldnottakehimlongtobullytheyoungkingintochanginghismind’(5.16.2).40ButPhilipstandsuptohim—clearevidencethatthe‘boy’isinfactnoboy.
TheSpartansarenext.IntheircaseitisPhilip’sspeedthatparticularlyleadsthemtoadjusttheirassessmentofhim.ItisentirelytheirfocalizationthatdramatizesPhilip’sspeed(5.18.4–6;10).FourdaysafterleavingCorinth,hemarchespastSpartaitself.WeseethescenethroughSpartaneyesas,astonished,theywatchtheMacedonianarmymarchpastthecity.Thelasttheyheard,PhilipwasinAetoliadestroyingThermum;theywereeventhinkingofsendingLycurgustoAetoliatohelp.Noonethoughtthatdangercouldcomefromsofarawaysoquickly.‘Theycouldnothelpbutbeastonishedatthisunexpectedturnofevents,becausetheywerestilltendingtoregardPhilipastooyoungtoposeathreat’(5.18.6).41Theword‘still’(ἀκμήν)isaninterestingpointertotheirincorrectjudgement:thereisastrongimplicationthattheyshouldnot‘still’bethinkinganythingofthesort.Andindeedwiththingsturningoutcontrarytotheirexpectations,theyweredismayedandforcedintoareappraisal:‘forPhiliphadshowndaringandenergyinhisinitiativesbeyondhisyearsandreducedallhisenemiestoastateofbewildermentandhelplessness’(5.18.7).42Theexplanatoryword‘for’(γάρ)indicatesthatthisisnowtheSpartanassessmentofthesituation.Byhisdaringandenergy,theyconcluded,Philiphadovercomehisyouthandlefthisenemieshelpless,forithadonlytakenhimsevendaystogetfromAetoliatoSparta.TheSpartanscouldnotbelievetheireyes.
(p.196) Asimilaremphasisonspeed,conveyedbyvaryingfocalizations,characterizesPolybius’descriptionofthemarchofHannibal(another‘young’commander,2.36.3,3.15.6)fromSpaintoItaly(3.35–61).43JustastheSpartanswereastonishedtoseePhilipinthePeloponnese,sotheRomanswereastonishedtoseeHannibalinItaly:theythoughthewasstillinSpain,havingjustsackedSaguntum,andhadsentaconsultofighthimthere(3.61.6–9).Idonotthinkitisfancifultoseeaparallelbetweenthespeedofthetwogenerals,whichwouldservetoemphasizePolybius’highopinionofPhilip’smilitaryprowessatthisearlystageinhiscareer.Anotherparallelcomestomind.WithayoungMacedoniankingdisplayinganimpressivespeedofmovement(evenmatchingthatofthegreatHannibal),itistemptingtothinkthatPolybiushasinmindacomparisonwithAlexandertheGreat.Suchacomparisonisnotunproblematic,giventhecontrastPolybiusdrawsinBook5betweenPhilip’sactionsatThermumandAlexander’smildness:‘eventhoughthroughouthislifehetriedhardtoprovethathewasrelatedtobothAlexanderandPhilip,henevermadetheslightestefforttoimitatethem’(5.10.10).44Thisis,however,anillustrationofwhatbegantogowrongforPhilip:helistenedtothewrongadviceandwasledtoreversepreviousMacedonianpolicy.Itstandsincontrasttohisearlybehaviour,whenhewasthedarlingoftheGreeks,andmightwellbethoughtto
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 13 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
rivalAlexander’sspeed.WesawhowatSpartasomeofhisadvisersmadethecomparisonwithAlexanderexplicit,referringtohisdramaticallyswiftdescentonThebesin335BC.Alexanderwasthe‘boy’parexcellence.‘Hewas’,Demosthenesscathingly,butunwisely,wrotetothePersianleaders(Plut.Dem.23.2),‘justaboyandafool’(παιδ̑ακαὶΜαργίτηνἀποκαλω̑ναὐτόν).Alexander’sresponseshouldhavesentashiverdownDemosthenes’spine:‘sinceDemostheneshadcalledhimaboywhilehewasamongtheIllyriansandTriballians,andastriplingwhenhehadreachedThessaly,hewishedtoshowhimthatbeforethewallsofAthenshewasaman’(Plut.Alex.11.6).45InthesuggestionofasimilaritytoAlexander,perhapsPolybiusisinvitingthereadertoseePhilip’stransitionfromboytoman.
AfterPhilip’scampaigninthePeloponnese(5.17–24),thescenechangesbacktothecourt.ItisnowApelles’turntorecognizehismistakenestimateoftheyoungPhilip.HehasbeenlordingitinChalcis,actingwithmoreauthoritythanhereallyhad,‘lettingitbeknownthatthekingwasstillyoung(νέονἔτι)andwasruledbyhiminmostthingsanddidnothingofhisownaccord’(5.26.3–4).TheMacedonianofficialsweredeferringtoApelles,andtheotherGreekswereignoringPhilip.ThereaderknowsthatPhiliphasthematterunder(p.197) control,butisholdinghispeaceandlayinghisplans.Apellesdoesnotknowthis.SummonedbyLeontius,whohadgivenuphopeofachievinganything,Apellesthoughthewouldbeabletoarrangeeverythingashewantedbybrow-beatingtheking,ifhecouldjustmeetwithhim—exactlywhatLeontiusthought,andequallywrong.ArrivingatCorinthwithgreatceremonytoagenerousreceptionbythetroops,Apellesisrefusedaccesstotheking,andhissupportbeginstomeltaway,untilheisfinallyleftonhisown.
Philipisnowcompletelyincontrol.HeordersthearrestofLeontiuswhenMegaleasfleestoAthens,andwhenthepeltastsbegthekingnottoputLeontiusontrialintheirabsence,PhilipismerelyexasperatedandorderstheexecutionofLeontiusearlierthanhehadintended(5.27).Thisistechnicallyanalepticinformation:wehavenotactuallybeentoldthatPhilipwasintendingtoexecuteLeontius,althoughthethreatwasintheair,asPhilipwatchedandkepthiscounseluntilhewasreadytostrike.LettersthencomeintoPhilip’spossessionincriminatingMegaleasandApelles,andtheyarebotharrested.Bothcommitsuicide,thusmeetingtheendtheydeserved(5.28.4–8).Thelastoftheconspirators,Ptolemaeus,isexecutedshortlyafter(5.29.6).
ThereisonelastgroupwhohaveyettorecognizetheirmistakeinunderestimatingPhilip—theAetolians.WenowhearthattheAetolianswantpeace,asthingswerenotturningoutastheyexpected(5.29.1–2):46
Hisyouthandinexperiencehadledthemtoexpectthat,indealingwithPhilip,theywouldbedealingwithafoolishchild,butinsteadtheyfoundhimtobeamatureman,intermsofbothhisplansandtheirexecution,whileitwastheywhoappearedincompetentandchildishinbothsmall-scaleandlarge-scaleoperations.
ThisneatlyreturnsustothebeginningoftheSocialWaratthestartofBook4,andtothebeginningofthethemeofPhilip’syouth:foritwastheAetolianswhofirstthoughtPhilip
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 14 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
wastooyoungtomanageandthereforestartedinterferinginthePeloponnese,thuscausingthewar.ThelanguageisreversedtoemphasizetheAetolianabout-turn:in4.3.3thechild(παις̑)wasPhilipandtheythoughttheycoulddespisehim(καταφρονήσαντες);nowtheyarethechildishones(παιδαριώδεις)andtobedespised(εὐκαταφρόνητοι).Withtherealizationoftheirmistakewehavecomefullcircle.
ThethemeofPhilip’syoungagehasbeenasortofsignpost,notalwayspointingintherightdirection,forboththereaderandtheprotagonistsintheaction.WithhistriumphoverApellesandtheotherconspirators,andhisvictoriesonthebattlefield,Philipseemstohaveovercomehisyouthfulness.(p.198) ButPolybiuspersistswiththethemewhenheturnsbackintimetocoverEgyptianhistory.HetellsusthatatthebeginningofhisreignPtolemyIVPhilopatorfeltthathewasfreefromdangerabroadbecausebothPhilipVandAntiochusIIIwereveryyoung,indeedallbutboys(παντάπασινέωνκαὶμόνονοὐπαίδωνὑπαρχόντων,5.34.2).Thiswas,ofcourse,justwhattheAetoliansthoughtaboutPhilipatthesametime.TheremovalofbothexternalanddomesticrivalsledPhilopatortoignoreallaspectsofgovernment.HisbehaviourasakingwassomanifestlyinadequatethathisassessmentofPhilipandAntiochusastooyoungtoworryaboutwasalmostirrelevant.Evenwithoutgettingthatwrong,hewasclearlyheadingfortrouble;and,indeed,‘asyouwouldexpect’(εἰκότως),Polybiussays(5.34.10),peoplebegantoconspireagainsthim.ThenegativeassessmentofPhilopator,however,isreinforcedforPolybius’audiencebythefactthatatthisstageinthenarrativetheyalreadyknowthatPhilopatoriscompletelywrongaboutPhilip,atleastwithregardtotheearlyyearsofhisreign.Aswehaveseen,thenarrativeofBook4andofthefirstchaptersofBook5hasdemolishedthemisconceptionthatPhilipwasanineffectiveyouth.ThisknowledgeservestoconfirmPhilopator’sincompetence.Ontheotherhand,theaudiencehasnotyetcometothestoryofAntiochus’firstyearsonthethrone.SothenatureofPolybius’directionconcerninghimisuncertain.WillPtolemyalsoprovetobewrongaboutAntiochus?
YouthfulhelplessnessmisidentifiedisoneofthemainthematicstrandsPolybiushasdevelopedtoportraythebeginningsofPhilip’sreign.Itisathemeworkedoutinthecomplexofrelationshipsbetweentheperceptionsofauthor,reader,andtheprotagonistsinthestory;focalizationplaysacentralrole.Thisisnotjustaboutnarrativepatterns,however.AlthoughPolybiusoffersnogeneraltheoryofcausation,itiscleartimeandagainthatinhisestimationperceptions,correctornot,arewhatmakethingshappen.47Aswehaveseen,youngleaderscausepeopletoact,orreact,incertainwaysbasedontheassumptionofyouthfulfailings.Generalsattackcitiesattheirstrongestpoint,orundertakedangerousenterprises,becausetheythinkthatiswheretheenemywillleastexpectthem.48Inordertodelaytheenemyandhavetimetoprepareforwar,ministersatthePtolemaiccourtplayonwhattheybelieveistheSeleucidconvictionthatPtolemyIVwillnotgotowar(5.63).EveninPolybius’mostfamousstatementoncausation,hisanalysisofthecausesofwars(3.6–7),whichappearstogivenoparticularhelpoutsidethespecificdomainofwar,itisperceptionsthatdrivetheaction.ThecausesofAlexandertheGreat’sinvasionofPersiawerethemarchoftheTenThousandunderXenophon’scommandandAgesilaus’campaignsintheeast.ThereasonwhytheseareidentifiedasthecausesisthattheyledPhilipIItobelievethatthe(p.199) Persianswouldbeno
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 15 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
matchfortheMacedonians.49Focalizationisacrucialmechanismforhelpingtoexplainwhythingshappen.
Thereistooanartisticpoint.Polybiuswasawriterwhoweknowthoughtverycarefullyindeedabouthowhecouldbesttelltheverycomplicatedstoryhewantedtocommunicate.Thisismostobviousintheclarityofhisoverallstructures.ButIwouldarguethatwhenitcomestotheexecutionofthedetails,thereisasubtletyofpresentationthatwecanmissifwebuytooeasilyintoDionysius’claimthatPolybiuswasanauthoryoucouldnotreadallthewaythrough.
Notes:
(1)Seee.g.Davidson1991:10,Marincola2001:113.
(2)AsBury1909:218pronounced,‘Toillustratehisdictionandvocabularywemustlooknottobelleslettresbuttothelanguageofofficialdom—decreesanddespatches—andtechnicaltreatisesonphilosophyandscience.’Bury’sanalysisofPolybiuswascharacteristicallyastute.SeeparticularlyMiltsios2009:481–2fordiscussionofhowPolybius’lackofstylisticqualityhasdistractedscholarsfromliteraryanalysis.
(3)Bury1909:211.
(4)Seee.g.Sacks1981:8.
(5)Walbank1938:55–68;seealsoDreyerinthisvolume.
(6)αὐτὸγὰρτὸπαράδοξοντω̑νπράξεων,ὑπὲρὡ̑νπροῃρήμεθαγράφειν,ἱκανόνἐστιπροκαλέσασθαικαὶπαρορμη̑σαιπάντακαὶνέονκαὶπρεσβύτερονπρὸςτὴνἔντευξιντη̑ςπραγματείας.ForpassagesfromBooks1–5,6and12,IhavemostlyusedRobinWaterfield’sexcellentnewtranslationforOxfordWorld’sClassics(2010).
(7)ἐγὼδὲπλείωπεποίημαιλόγονὑπὲρτη̑ςΣκιπίωνοςαἱρέσεωςἐκτη̑ςπρώτηςἡλικίας,ἡδεια̑νμὲνὑπολαμβάνωνεἰν̑αιτοις̑πρεσβυτέροις,ὠφέλιμονδὲτοις̑νέοιςτὴντοιαύτηνἱστορίαν…
(8)ATLGsearchshowsthatthewordἡλικία,usedinallbutoneortwocasesforyouthfulnessratherthanoldage,occurs83timesintheremainsofPoybius;παις̑initsvariousformsoccursover100times,νέος50times.DefiningexactlywhatPolybiusmeantbythetermsisnoteasy.Schmitt1964:8–9identifiesπαις̑asreferringtosomeoneuptoandincludingtheageof20,whileνέοςlastsfrom21toatleast30.SeealsoGolden1990:12–16(παις̑),107–8(νέος).Infact,asweshallseebelow,Polybiusappliesνέοςtopeoplewellintotheirthirties.
(9)ἅτεκαὶφιλανθρώπωςπρὸςαὐτὸνδιακειμένηκαὶθεωρου̑σανέονὄντακομιδῃ̑καὶπολὺτη̑ςτοιαύτηςσυστροφη̑ςκαὶποικιλίαςἀπολειπόμενον.Demetriuswasabout23yearsoldatthistime:seeWalbank,HCPii.601on18.39.5.
(10)SeeWalbank,HCPii.144on9.17.6.
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 16 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(11)Βώστωρδὲπαιδικώτερονἢκατὰτὴνἡλικίανδόξαςἐγκεχειρικέναιτοὺςὁμήρουςτοις̑πολεμίοις,3.99.8.
(12)ἔτιδὲμα̑λλονεἰρήσθωκαὶτη̑ςτω̑νπλοϊζομένωνψευδολογίαςκαὶτερατείαςχάριν,ἵναμὴπαντὶτῳ̑λεγομένῳπροσκεχηνέναιπαιδικω̑ςἀναγκαζώμεθαδιὰτὴνἀπειρίαν.
(13)SeeWalbank,HCPii.473on15.20.2.
(14)SeeWalbank,HCPiii.465on31.2.1.
(15)ὑπιδομένητὴνἀκμὴντου̑Δημητρίου,μα̑λλονδὲκρίνασασυμφέρειντοις̑σφετέροιςπράγμασιτὴννεότητακαὶτὴνἀδυναμίαντου̑παιδὸςτου̑διαδεδεγμένουτὴνβασιλείαν,31.2.7.
(16)ἅτετου̑Δημητρίουσυμποτικου̑φυσικω̑ςκαὶνεωτέρουτελέωςὑπάρχοντος.
(17)Other‘young’leaders—notallofthemfavouritesofPolybius,buthighachievers—includeHannibal(3.15.6),hisbrotherMago(3.71.6),theAetolianDorimachus(4.3.5),SeleucusIII(4.48.7),AgathoclesofSyracuse(15.35.1),thePtolemaicadvisersTlepolemus(16.21.1),Sosibius(16.22.2),andPolycrates(18.55.5),Flamininus(18.12.5),theSpartansAgesipolis(23.6.1)andChaeron(24.7.1),FabiusMaximus(29.14.2),thefutureAttalusIII(33.18.1).
(18)ThereareinaccuraciesinPolybius’storyhere:seeWalbank,HCPii.199–200on10.4.1–5.Scipiowasaedilein213,not217,thedateimpliedinthestory(whenhewas19).
(19)SeeWalbank,HCPi.54–5on1.8.3.
(20)εἰπειν̑διότιτὸμὲνμειράκιονἡγεμόνοςἔργονἀγαθου̑ποιήσαι,συνθεασάμενοντὸνκαιρόν,ἐκειν̑οςδ’ἡγεμὼνὑπάρχωνμειρακίουτου̑τυχόντος.
(21)O’Gorman2000:13presentsasimilar,althoughmorecomplicated,networkofrelationshipsinTacitus:‘Tacitus’readerfollowsthecharacters(sometimesthenarrator)intheactofreading,notalwayscomingtothesameconclusion;thedifferencesaswellastheparallelsaresuggestive.Inparticular,Tacituscontinuallyrepresentshischaractersintheactofmisreading…’.Fordetailedanalysis,seeO’Gorman2000:81–97.SeetooMiltsios2009:492–8on‘illusoryexpectations’inPolybius.
(22)ἕωςἈντίγονοςἔζη,δεδιότεςΜακεδόναςἠ̑γονἡσυχίαν.ἐπειδὴδ’ἐκειν̑οςμετήλλαξετὸνβίον,παιδ̑ακαταλιπὼνΦίλιππον,καταφρονήσαντεςἐζήτουνἀφορμὰςκαὶπροφάσειςτη̑ςεἰςΠελοπόννησονἐπιπλοκη̑ς…
(23)Theterminologyofnarratologyisnowfamiliarinclassicalscholarship.Davidson’s(1991:10–11)choiceof‘gaze’asopposedto‘focalization’doesreflecthisconcernwithPolybius’visualpresentationofperspective,butdoesnotreallymakehisanalysisanylessnarratological;andmostnolongersharehisworryaboutapplyinganarratologicalapproachtoahistoricaltext:seee.g.S.Hornblower1994:131–66,Rood1998(whichisis
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 17 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
aparticularlygoodexampleofthefull-scaleapplicationofnarratologytohistoriography),Miltsios2009.OneofthemostinterestingandrevealingdiscussionsoffocalizationremainsFowler1990.ThebasicworkcitedonnarratologyisnowusuallyBal1997,butamuchmoreattractiveintroductionisGenette1980.
(24)Plb.4.5.3:προετρέπετοτὸνΣκόπανκοινωνη̑σαιτη̑ςἐπιβολη̑ςαὐτῳ̑τη̑ςκατὰτω̑νΜεσσηνίων,ὑποδεικνύωνμὲντὴνἀπὸΜακεδόνωνἀσφάλειανδιὰτὴνἡλικίαντου̑προεστω̑τος—οὐγὰρεἰχ̑επλειο̑νἐτω̑ντότεΦίλιπποςἑπτακαίδεκα…ThegeneralstatementaboutPhilip’syouthiscertainlyfocalizedthroughDorimachus,butitmaybethatthespecificinformationthathewas17yearsoldisanauthorialstatementbyPolybiustoexplainDorimachus’position.
(25)οἱδὲτρεις̑ἐκοινώνουντοις̑Αἰτωλοις̑τω̑νπραγμάτων,πεπεισμένοιδιὰτὴνἡλικίαντὸνΦίλιππονοὐδέπωδυνήσεσθαιτοις̑κατὰτὴνΠελοπόννησονπράγμασινἐπαρκειν̑.
(26)ATLGsearchgivesthirteeninstancesofthephrase‘contrarytoexpectation’(παρὰτὴνπροσδοκίαν)inPolybius.
(27)SeeDreyerinthisvolume(pp.204,206–9)fordiscussionoftheparallelsPolybiusdrawsbetweenthefamilyofPhilipIIandthatofPhilipV.
(28)Theresponsibilityforcourtiersinfluencingthedecisionofyoungkingsisamatterraisedontwofurtheroccasions:Philip’sattacksonThermum(5.9–12)andMessene(7.11–14).Seebelowfordiscussion.
(29)OnHellenisticcourtiers,seeparticularlyHerman1997:199–224.
(30)οὐμόνοντοις̑συμμάχοις,ἀλλὰπα̑σιτοις̑Ἕλλησιδιὰτου̑προειρημένουψηφίσματοςκαλὰςἐλπίδαςὑποδεικνύωνπρᾳότητοςκαὶμεγαλοψυχίαςβασιλικη̑ς.
(31)Plb.4.67.6–7:του̑δὲχειμω̑νοςἔτιπροβαίνοντος,καὶπάντωνἀπηλπικότωντὴνπαρουσίαντου̑Φιλίππουδιὰτὸνκαιρόν…ἡ̑κεδιὰτη̑ςΒοιωτίαςκαὶΜεγαρίδοςεἰςΚόρινθονπερὶτροπὰςχειμερινάς,ἐνεργὸνκαὶλαθραίανπεποιημένοςτὴνπαρουσίανοὕτωςὥστεμηδέναΠελοποννησίωνὑπονοη̑σαιτὸγεγονός.
(32)Plb.4.69.9:τοις̑δὲΠελοποννησίοιςπα̑σιπαράδοξονἐφάνητὸγεγονός·ἅμαγὰρἤκουοντὴνπαρουσίανκαὶτὴννίκηντου̑βασιλέως.
(33)ForanalysisofApelles’‘conspiracy’,seeErrington1967a:19–36.
(34)Ἀπελλη̑ςδ’,ὃςἠ̑νμὲνεἱς̑τω̑νὑπ’Ἀντιγόνουκαταλειφθέντωνἐπιτρόπωντου̑παιδός,πλεισ̑τονδ’ἐτύγχανετότεδυνάμενοςπαρὰτῳ̑βασιλει…̑
(35)OnmightcomparethewayTacitusholdsbackthecharactersketchofSejanusuntilthebeginningofAnnals4,eventhoughhehasbeenpresentbefore.JustasinTacitustheintroductionofSejanusmarksanewbeginning,‘whenfortunesuddenlystartedtoturndisruptive’(Ann.4.1—seeMartinandWoodman1989:77;80–1),soinPolybiusno
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 18 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
soonerisApellesmentionedthanwelearnofhowitallturnedbadforPhilip(4.77).
(36)SeePédech1964:231–5,McGing2010:28–9.
(37)βασιλέαγὰρπλείοσινἀφορμαις̑ἐκφύσεωςκεχορηγημένονπρὸςπραγμάτωνκατάκτησινοὐκεὐμαρὲςεὑρειν̑.
(38)OntheimportancePolybiusattachestoastatepursuing,afteritsrisetopower,thesamepoliciesthathadmadeitgreat,seeMcGing2010:159–63.
(39)ἴσωςμὲνοὐ̑νοὐκἄντιςαὐτῳ̑Φιλίππῳτω̑ντότεγενομένωνπα̑σανἐπιφέροιτὴναἰτίανδιὰτὴνἡλικίαν…
(40)ἡ̑κεπρὸςτὴνσκηνὴνμετάτινωνπελταστω̑ν,πεπεισμἑνοςκαταπλήξεσθαιδιὰτὴνἡλικίανκαὶταχέωςεἰςμετάνοιανἄξειντὸνβασιλέα.
(41)ἅτεκαὶτη̑ςἡλικίαςἐχούσηςἀκμὴνεὐκαταφρόνητόντιτη̑ςτου̑βασιλέως.
(42)ὁγὰρΦίλιπποςτολμηρότερονκαὶπρακτικώτερονἢκατὰτὴνἡλικίανχρώμενοςταις̑ἐπιβολαις̑εἰςἀπορίανκαὶδυσχρηστίανἅπανταςἠ̑γετοὺςπολεμίους.
(43)SeeMcGing2010:112–14.
(44)SeeDreyerinthisvolume,pp.204,206.
(45)παιδ̑αμὲναὐτὸνἕωςἠ̑νἐνἸλλυριοις̑καὶΤριβαλλοις̑ἀποκαλου̑ντι,μειράκιονδὲπερὶΘετταλίανγενόμενον,βούλεταιπρὸςτοις̑Ἀθηναίωντείχεσινἀνὴρφανη̑ναι.
(46)ἐλπίσαντεςγὰρὡςπαιδίῳνηπίῳχρήσασθαιτῳ̑Φιλίππῳδιάτετὴνἡλικίανκαὶτὴνἀπειρίαν,τὸνμὲνΦίλιππονεὑ̑ροντέλειονἄνδρακαὶκατὰτὰςἐπιβολὰςκαὶκατὰτὰςπράξεις,αὐτοὶδ’ἐφάνησανεὐκαταφρόνητοικαὶπαιδαριώδειςἔντετοις̑κατὰμέροςκαὶτοις̑καθόλουπράγμασιν.
(47)OncausationinPolybius,seeDerow1994,McGing2010:76–80.
(48)Seeesp.Davidson1991:11–12.
(49)OnemightcompareThuc.1.22.6,wherethe‘truestexplanation’(ἀληθεστάτηπρόφασις)forthePeloponnesianwarisboththegrowthofAthenianpowerandthefearthatthisinspiredintheSpartans,i.e.anemphasisonperception.SeealsothediscussioninGibson1998:124–6forasimilaremphasisonperceptionsinDio53.19.
Youthfulness in Polybius: The Case of Philip V of Macedon
Page 19 of 19
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 1 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
FrankWalbank’sPhilipposTragoidoumenos:Polybius’AccountofPhilip’sLastYears
BorisDreyer
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0010
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'highlydramaticportrayalofPhilipV'slastyearsaskingofMacedoniahasbeenseenasarisingfromadecisiontoconcentrateonthepersonaltragedyofPhilip'slastyears,especiallythedisputewithhissonDemetriusandthelatter'sdeath.ItisverylikelythatPolybiususedasourcewithcloseexperienceoftheMacedoniancourtforhisaccountoftheendofPhilip'sreign.Nevertheless,itisimportantnottoignorethefactthatPolybiusstillcontinuesmoreconventionalanalysisofissuessuchasthecausesoftheThirdMacedonianWar,whereemphasisisplacedinsteadonPhilip'scharacterflawofbeingunabletoactwhendecisiveactionwasdemanded,aflawwhichalsoappearsinhispresentationofPhilip'ssonandsuccessor,Perseus.
Keywords:Polybius,PhilipV,Macedonia,Perseus,'tragichistory',ThirdMacedonianWar,causation,sourcecriticism
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 2 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Inthispaper,1IwouldliketopickupatopicthatwasaddressedbyFrankWalbankalreadyin1938,inananalysisofPhilipposTragoidoumenos.2Everyonewouldsurelywishhisorherownanalyseswereaslong-lastingandastopicalasthethemediscussedsolongagobyFrankWalbank,thisgreatscholartowhomwearerenderinghomageasareminderofwhatcanbeachievedbyhonestscholarship.
MygeneraltopichereisthehistoriographicalworkingmethodofPolybius,aspecificexampleofwhichrevealsakeyprincipleaboutthewayinwhichthehistorianworkedwithandselectedfromthesourceswhichhispredecessorshadmadeavailabletohim:hisprinciple,thatistosay,thatthesource-writerhadtobeaneyewitnessoratleastcontemporarytotheevents,3certainlyasfarasthemainpartofhisHistoriesisconcerned.ThespecificissueisconcernedwithPolybius’accountofthedownfalloftheMacedonianmonarchy.
ThemainfocusofthisanalysiswillthereforebethesourceontheMacedoniancourtemployedbyPolybiusinhisaccount—anargumentFrankWalbankbroughtupforthefirsttime.Additionally,IwanttoexaminewhetherPolybius’choiceofsourcefitshisowncriteria,orsupportshisthesisthatthereasonsforthefalloftheMacedoniankingdomcanbetracedbacktoPhilip’spolicyofrevengeagainstRomefromthemid-180s,andtoPhilip’scharacter—asPolybiusdepictedthatcharacterandconstructedthatcausalchaininhisœuvre.
AfterWalbank’streatmentofthistheme,onlyafewresearchersfocusedexclusivelyonit,nodoubtbecauseoftheauthorityofthefirstscholarto(p.202) addressit.ButthiscanprobablyalsobeexplainedbythefactthattheassumptionthatPolybiusreliedonsecondarysourcesforlargepartsofhisdescriptionofeventshasbeengainingground.4TheconclusionsarrivedatbyWalbank,andelaborateduponbyPédech,5withregardtothedemiseofMacedoniadonotfitsowellintothisperspective,becauseinthatcasethemultipletraditionswithinPolybius’workareelided.
EvenbeforeWalbank,historianshadbeenstruckbyPolybius’peculiarlygrimandmorbidaccountofthedownfallofDemetrius,theyoungersonofPhilip,andofthelastyearsofPhilipV,asfarasitispreserved,andbytheevendenseranddarkerversioninLivy,whichiscompletelypreserved,derivingoriginallyfromPolybius.InPolybiusthisdarkaccountofdoomappearstobeaconsequenceofthemaddenedPhilip’spreviousbaddeeds:6
(1)firstofallhetransportedpeopletoEmathiafromthecoastandviceversa,inpreparationforhiswarwithRome;(2)whenPhilipheardthecursesofthepeople,hebecamemorefierce,andheorderedtheimprisonmentofthechildrenofthosemenofhighbirthhehadkilled.Thusthekingandhischildrenwereopenlycursed;and(3)thesecurses—heardbythegodsaccordingtothegrimaccountinLivy(40.5.1)—impelledPhiliptoturnuponhisownhouse,andtheplotagainstDemetriusfollows.
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 3 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Benecke7explainedthisaspectofthestoryasanartificiallyconstructedtragedythatPolybiusintegratedintohisdescriptionofevents.Walbank,incontrast,arguedpersuasivelythatitwaslessatragedythananover-dramatizedpresentationofhistoricalfact,quiteinkeepingwithfashionincontemporaryhistory-writingatthetimeofPolybius.
WeknowthatPolybiusfiercelycriticizedthosewritersofhistorywhorepresentedthe‘tragic’tendency.8Theirpurposewastoentertainviasensationalism,butnottoexplainthecausesunderlyinghistoricaloccurrences,asPolybiusdeclaredhisapproachtohistory-writingwoulddo.Polybiuswasthussettingoutwhathadbecomewidelyacceptedgoalsamonghistory-writers,goalswhichhadalsobeenexpressedbyThucydides(the‘didacticpurpose’ofhistory9),butwhichwereachievedveryrarely.
(p.203) However,thisbegsthequestionofwhetherPolybiusactuallyliveduptohisownstandards.WalbankanswersinthenegativeasfarasthedescriptionofPhilip’sdoomedfinalyears(182–179)areconcerned:
Polybius’mistake…wastointerpretPhilip’slastyearsasacareerofinfatuationinducedbyTyche,…Heisnotconvictedofstupidincompetenceinhischoiceofsources,oftreatingatragedyoranovelasapropermaterialforhistory.Ontheotherhand…hisexcessiveemphasisonthemoralissuesandhisuniqueandunfortunateuseofatragicschemeandtragicterminology…makePolybius’accountoftheselastyearsoneoftheleastsatisfyinginhiswholework.10
Polybius’narrative—accordingtoWalbank—evenobfuscatesthedeeperreasonsforthewarofPerseusagainsttheRomans,themaintopichewasactuallyaddressing,andshiftsthegeopoliticalcausesofthewartoalevelofpersonaltragedy,anapproachthatisinadequate.TheconclusionisthatalthoughPolybiusdidnotwrite‘tragichistory’inhisaccountofthefalloftheAntigonidhouse,hewasguiltyofoffencessimilartothosehecriticizedinhisfellowhistorians.11
However,Walbank’s1938analysisalsooutlinesanapproachthatgoesbeyondthisconclusion,anapproachthatwassubsequentlyadoptedbyPédech.AttheendofWalbank’sanalysis,heconsidersthepossibility—althoughhedoesnotelaborateonit—thataparticularsourceattheMacedoniancourt(fromthecircleofApellesandPhilocles)mayhavebeenresponsibleforPolybius’over-dramatizationofthemonarchy’sdownfall.12
PédechpursuedthisideafurtheranddidindeedtracethedarkmoodofPolybius’accounttoasourceattheMacedoniancourt,andsuggeststhatthissourcewasprobablyusedtothefullbyPolybiusduringhisexileinItaly,whereheenjoyedpreferentialtreatmentaswellasaccesstoalltheavailablematerial(includingoralaccounts).InthecaseofMacedonianhistoryPolybiusprofited,accordingtoPédech,fromasinglehomogeneoussourceasthebasisforhispictureofPhilipVfromaround213BConwards;PédechproposedthatPolybius’sourcewastheMacedoniancourtierOnesimus.13
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 4 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(p.204) PolybiusneededtheMacedonianinformantinordertonarratetheoutbreakoftheRomanwaragainstPerseusaccordingtohistheoryofthecausalchain(aitiai,prophaseis,andarchai)14,whichleads—accordingtothehistorian—backtothepolicyofrevengeagainstRomewhichwasinitiatedbyPhilipinthe180s.Theinformationaboutthesecretdecisionwhichresultsinthisfatalpolicycanonlyhavebeenprovidedbyapersonneartotheking,whomPolybiuscouldinterrogateconcerningthecatastrophetothekingdom.Thissourceofferedthekindofexclusiveinformationthatwouldalwayssatisfyhisselectioncriterionforhissources—thepointwasnottoamusethereadernortoprovideathrillingsituation.
ThiscourtsourceelaboratedthecomparisonbetweentheAntigonidPhilipandhisArgeadpredecessorsontheMacedonianthrone,athemethatwaspopularattheMacedoniancourt(Plb.4.23.8and5.10).15AccordingtothissourceandwiththeperspectivethesourcenowpossessedafterthedefeatofPerseus,theriseofMacedonunderPhilipIIandAlexanderwasparalleledinthedownfallofMacedonunderPhilipVandPerseus.Thisopinion,asPédechalsoargued,fittedwellwithPolybius’aetiologyoftheThirdMacedonianWar,16wherePhilip’slong-termplanofwarwithRomefromthe180swasthedeeperreasonforPerseus’waragainsttheRomansinthelate170s(22.18).Philip’sintentionwasthatPerseusshouldbethepersontoenact(cheiristes)thepolicyofrevenge,justasPhilipIIplannedthathissonAlexandershouldcarryoutthepolicyofwaragainstthePersians.
Inwhatfollows,IshalltrytoestablishtowhatextenttheperspectiveoftheMacedoniansourceandPolybius’ownviewscanbebroughtintoagreement—buildingontheargumentofWalbankandPédech.Theissueofwhowastoblameforthewar,accordingtoresearch,17takessecondplaceinthiscontexttothehistoriographicalquestion,althoughthereareofcoursecloselinksbetweentheissues.
First,IexaminePolybius’viewsconcerningthedownfallofMacedonia,sothattheycanbecompared(inasecondstep)withtheperspectiveofthe‘over-dramatized’presentationoftheMacedoniansource.Inseveralpassages,PolybiusdescribesthecausesoftheRomanwarwithPerseusanddistances(p.205) himselffromthewayhispredecessorshadtreatedthematerial,especiallythroughhissearchforthedeeperrootsoftheconflictinPhilipandhisactions,aswehavenoted.18
Polybius’viewiscomplex:aconsiderablerolemustbegiventothemotivesofPhiliptheindividual,sincePhilipwasamajorchallengertoRome’srisetobecomeaworldpower.19Indiscussingthisquestion,Polybiusreferstomanydocumentsandother(oral)sources,probablybutnotnecessarilyincludingthesamesourceheusedespeciallyforthedownfallofDemetrius.Butitisclear—contrarytoawidespreadviewamongresearchers20—thatPolybius’sviewsonmonarchyingeneralandontheruleofPhilipinparticularwerenotone-sidedlynegative.21Quitetheopposite:Polybius’saccountoftheearlydaysofPhilip’sruleisoftencouchedinpositiveterms—apositionthatcannotbeexplainedmerelyonthegroundsthatPolybiuswasworkingwithapro-PhilipsourcefromPhilip’scourt.22ThisisbecausethereisapositiveassessmentnotonlyofPhilip’scharacterandtalentsbutalsoofhisactionsuptothepeaceofNaupactus,the
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 5 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
effectivenessofwhichwasobvioustoallobservers.Philip,accordingtoPolybius,wasfollowinginthefootstepsofAntigonusDosonandknewwellhowtoreconcilehisowninterestswiththoseoftheothermembersoftheHellenicLeague.TherespectheenjoyedamongtheGreekswasthereforegreat.23Polybiushadevidencetosupportthisview,includingthefactthattheCretancitieselectedhimtothepositionofprostatesintheyear217.24Polybius’positiveassessmentcoincidedwiththepositivereceptiongiventothedeedsoftheMacedoniankingbytheHellenicpublicinthatperiod,asclearlyevidencedbyepigramswepossessinhispraise.25
(p.206) TheAntigonidkingwasalsoendeavouringtocontinuetraditionsconnectedtotheArgeaddynastyandtheirpolicy.26Evidenceofsuchaimscanbefoundinmanyplaces,quiteindependentlyofPolybius.Forexample,PhilipfollowedtheArgeadcustominfoundingcitiesinhiskingdom.27ThePolybiantraditioncapturedtheseelementsinPhilip’spolicyalsowithPhilip’sreplicationofthepothosmotivehistoricallyascribedtoAlexanderhimself(e.g.Philip’sascentoftheHaemusmountain28),and,mostimportantly,withreferencetotheambitionsforuniversaldominionwhichheascribedtoPhilip.
TheseambitionsofPhilipforuniversaldominionareaddressedinPolybius’discussionofthereorientationofPhilip’sexpansionismfromGreecetowardsthewestfrom217onwards—acrucialstepofcourse,inthemoregeneralPolybianthemeofthesymploke,thegrowthofinterconnectednessbetweentheeasternandthewesternhalvesoftheMediterraneanworld.29Thus,Polybius(5.102.1)—likehiscontemporariesalsoinMacedonia30—isnotunsympathetictoPhilip:‘…theseambitionsweretobeexpectedinthecaseofakingsoyoung,whohadachievedsomuchsuccess,whohadsuchareputationfordaring,andaboveallwhocameofahousewhichwemaysayhadalwaysbeeninclinedmorethananyothertocovetuniversaldominion.’
ThegoalofuniversalrulethusdatedtotheperiodbeforethechangeinPhilip’sbehaviourthatPolybiusidentified(in215‐21331),andwhichhelpedtobringtheking’snegativetraits—deeplyrootedinhischaracter,asPolybiussays32—increasinglytotheforeastimeprogressed,tothedetrimentofhispositivequalities.AnditbelongstoatimeafterPhilipexecutedtheadvisersofDoson(219/218),aturning-pointthatwouldbedecisiveforthe(oral)sourceofPolybiusaboutthedownfallofDemetrius.
(p.207) Philipcontinuouslypursuedtheseambitionsofuniversaldominion,alsobyenteringintotheso-calledRaubvertragwithAntiochusIIItodestroythePtolemiesandtheirwholeempire(accordingtoPolybiusatleast).33Inmyview,however,thisiswherethecrucialdifferencecanbeseeninrelationtothesourcethatPolybiuschose,orhadavailable,forthegrimpresentationofDemetrius’downfallandthelastyearsofPhilip’sreign.
ForPolybius,itisbeyondquestionthatPhilipwaspursuingagoalofuniversaldominion.ToPolybius,moralissueswerepresentbutsecondaryinjudgingtheseaims;buttheirmethodofimplementationhadtobecondemnedfromthemoralpointofview.34ThisclassicexampleisPolybius15.20.4:‘WhocanlookintothistreatyasintoamirrorwithoutfancyingthatheseesreflectedinittheimageofallimpietytowardsGodandallsavagery
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 6 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
towardsmen,aswellasoftheunboundedcovetousnessofthesetwokings?’
Polybius,asarationalanalyst,drawsadistinctionbetweenamoralevaluationandhisanalysisoftheavailableopportunitiesandnecessarymeansforaccomplishingthatgoal.WecannotethepraisethatPolybiusheapsontheeffectivenessofPhilip’sactionsduringthewarwithPergamumandRhodespriortotheentryoftheRomansintothewarinautumn200,andhispraiseofPhilip’sloyaltytohisfriendsindestroyingtheircorrespondencewithhimafterhisfinaldefeatin197.But,despitePolybius’contrastingofPhilip’senergywiththelaxnessoffutureRomanalliessuchasAttalus,35hiscriticismoftheking’slackoffirmnessinpursuinghisgoalsofworlddominanceisallthesharper.ThusPolybiusisharshlycriticalwhen,inthehistorian’sopinion,auniqueopportunityaroseforanattackbyPhiliponEgypt,whichhadperhapsbeenallocatedtoPhilipinthepactwithAntiochusIII,i.e.duringthenarrowwindowoftimebetweenthevictoriousbattleatLadeandRome’sinterventioninthewarintheeast.Philip,however,failedtomakeuseofthechance(Plb.16.10):
(p.208) Afterthesea-fightatLadewasover…itwasevidentlyquitepossibleforPhiliptosailtoAlexandria.ThisisthebestproofthatPhiliphadbecomelikeamadmanwhenheactedthus.Whatwasitthenthatarrestedhisimpulse?Simplythenatureofthings.Foratadistancemanymenattimesstriveafterimpossibilitiesowingtothemagnitudeofthehopesbeforetheireyes,theirdesiresgettingthebetteroftheirreason:butwhenthehourofactionapproachestheyabandontheirprojectsagainwithoutanyexerciseofreason,theirfacultyofthoughtbeingconfusedandupsetbytheinsuperabledifficultiestheyencounter.
AlthoughthemoralaspectofPhilip’sbehaviourisimportantforPolybius,whatishistoricallymorecrucialinhisviewisthecharacterflawthatdeprivedPhilipoftheabilitytotakedecisiveactionattherightmomenttoachievehisambitiousaims,whichprobablyappearedfeasibletoPolybius.
This,inPolybius’view,isalsothekeyreasonforthedownfalloftheMacedonianmonarchyingeneral.InPolybius’account,theoccasionalinabilityofPhilipVtotakedecisiveactionatcrucialmomentswasalsoatraitofPhilip’sson,Perseus,buttoamuchgreaterdegree.OnemaynoteinthisrespectPerseus’refusaltokeeptotheobligationstowardsthehiredbarbariantribes(i.e.hischeatingofthem),hisspendthriftnature,aboveall,hislossofnerveinbattle,andthefactthathedidnotburnhisdocumentsafterdefeat.36Consequently,aconsistentthemeinthedescriptionofPerseus’actionsisthathewasunabletoimplementPhilip’splanswithanyforce.
Bycontrast,PolybiusnotesthedecisivenessofthosekingsofMacedoniawhoachievedthemonarchy’srisetoempire,namelyPhilipIIandhisson,Alexander.37Inthesecondproeminthethirdbookaswell,Polybiuscontraststheonepair,PhilipIIandthe‘executor’(cheiristes)Alexander(whosepowerfullyeffectiveandefficientactionstoenforcetheirplansledtothecreationofanempire),withPhilipVandPerseus,theverydifferentpairwhopresidedoverMacedonia’sdeclineandfall.Polybiusisreferringbacktothispassageinthesecondproemwhen,lateron,hediscussesthedeeperreasonsof
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 7 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thefalloftheMacedoniankingdom,arguingthatitstartedwithPhilip(Plb.22.18.6–10):38
(p.209) Butmostwritersareguiltyofconfusioninthismatter,owingtotheirnotobservingthedifferencebetweenapretextandacause,andbetweenthebeginningofawarandthepretextforit.Iamtherefore,asthecircumstancesthemselvesrecalltomymindwhatIsaidonapreviousoccasion[Plb.3.7],compelledtorepeatmyself.ForoftheeventsIjustmentionedthefirstarepretexts,butthelast…constituteindeedevidentlytheactualbeginningofthewarbetweentheRomansandPerseusandtheconsequentfalloftheMacedonianpower,butnotasingleoneofthemwasitscause.ThiswillbeevidentfromwhatIamabouttosay.ForjustasIsaid[3.6]thatPhilip,sonofAmyntas,conceivedandmeanttocarryoutthewaragainstPersia,butthatitwasAlexanderwhoputhisdecisionintoexecution;sonowImaintainthatPhilip,sonofDemetrius,firstconceivedthenotionofenteringonthelastwaragainstRome,andhadpreparedeverythingforthepurpose,butonhisdeceasePerseuswastheexecutorofthedesign.
Contrarytothis,thesourcewhomPolybiusdrewuponwhendescribingPhilip’slastyearsandDemetrius’fallconcentratesonthe(royal)tragedyofthelastyearsofPhilip’sreignandhasanegativeassessmentofPerseus,whichheperhapsemphasizedbycontrasting(superficially)thesituationtothegloriouspastofthegreatArgeadkings.But,likeallthepredecessorsofPolybius,theMacedoniansourcefailedtolocatethereasonfortheThirdMacedonianWarandthedownfalloftheMacedoniankingdominPhilip’spolicyofrevenge.
AsWalbankhassaid,thedescriptionofthedownfallofDemetriusandthedeathofPhilipisover-dramatized.ThecorestatementbeingmadebyPolybiusisthatPhilipwasultimatelyovertakenbyhisownmoralmisdeedsandthatthesecompelledhimtoattackhisownchildren.39ThiscomesoutveryclearlyatPlb.23.10.12–13:
AndthethirdtragedywhichFortuneproducedatthesametimewasthatconcerninghissons.Theyoungmenwereplottingagainsteachother,andasthematterwasreferredtohim,anditfelltohimtodecideofwhichofthemhehadtobethemurdererandwhichofthemhehadtofearmostfortherestofhislife,lestheinhisoldageshouldsufferthesamefate,hewasdisturbednightanddaybythisthought.Whocanhelpthinking,that,hismindbeingthusafflictedandtroubled,itwasthewrathofheavenwhichhaddescendedonhisoldage,owingtothecrimesofhispastlife?Andthiswillbestillmoreevidentfromwhatfollows.40
(p.210) IncontrasttoPolybius’ownanalysisofthecausesofthedownfalloftheMacedonianmonarchy,herePhilip’smisfortunesareattributablenottoanintensifyinginabilitytoaccepttheunpleasantconsequencesofambitiousaims,butratherthemoralburdenofPhilip’satrocitiesduringthefinalyearsofhisreign,whichturnedthekingmoreandmoreintoaragingfury.
However—andthisissomethingthathasnotyetbeenrealizedbyscholars—whatmay
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 8 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
havefascinatedPolybius41somuchabouthisover-dramatizingsource,tothepointthathereliedonitextensively,isthefactthatPhilip,accordingtothissource,didnotdaretotakethefinalstepwhenfacedwiththealternativeofkillingonesonortheother(Plb.23.10.12–13,quotedabove).Thesource,whotookanegativeviewofPerseus,ascribesthemurderofDemetriustotheelderbrother,Perseus,whilePhiliphimselfissupposedtohaveattemptedshortlybeforehisdeathtoputAntigonus,thenephewofDoson,onthethroneratherthanPerseus—anothereffortthatwentnowhere.42Wedonotknowwhetherthesetwostoriesarehistorical,43andindeedtheyareunlikelytobeso(theyarecertainlynotverylogical),butitisunderstandablewhyPolybiuswouldfindthesource,hisMacedonianinformant,soattractive.WhatthesourcesaidfittedwithPolybius’ownconsideredandrationalopinionaboutPhilip,basedonhiscareer.
Polybius’sourcemayhavebeenoneofthemonarchy’sclosestadvisers,andcertainlyhadfirst-handinformationfromthecourt,buthewasclearlybiased(atleastafterthefact)againstPerseus.Thiscourtpersonagewasprobably(inretrospect?)anadvocateoftheDosonfamily,asweseeinthestorythatPhilipattheendwantedtoputthenephewofAntigonusDosononthethrone;hewishedhecouldturnbackthewheelofhistorybyusingthefamilyofAntigonusDosonandmakingtheirdescendantsthenewkings.44
Thepro-DosonpoliticalperspectiveofthecourtsourcewasprobablyirrelevanttoPolybiusbecausethatparticularissuewouldfailtoachievePolybius’ambitioushistoriographicalaimoflookingforthedeeperrootsofPhilip’sdownfallinhispolicyofrevengeandinhisspecificcharacter.Nevertheless,theexclusiveinformationwhichthissourcepossessedabouttheintensifyingconflictbetweenPhilip’ssons,withDemetriusperceivedasbecomingatooloftheRomansandincreasinglyanobstacletoPhilip’sagendaofawarofrevenge,movedPolybiustomakeuseofthissource,particularlysinceitshowsPhiliptohavebeenweakandinconsistentinhisfinalactionsshortlybeforehisdeath.
(p.211) PolybiusalsowoveexclusivedetailsobtainedfromcourtsourcesintohishistoryoftheSeleucidsandhishistoryofthePtolemaicdynasty,45evenwhentheseinvolvedsomedramatizeddescriptions(seehishistoryofthefallofAgathocles,totakejustoneexample46).Nonetheless,thedramatizedversionofthedownfallofDemetrius,providedbythesourcewithintheMacedoniancourt,camequiteclosetotheviewadoptedbythehistorianhimself,whoorganizedtheentirehistoryofMacedonia(fromtheriseofPhilipIIandAlexandertothedownfallofPhilipVandPerseus)aroundthequestionoftheabilityofthekingstoimplementrigorouslythegoalstheypropagated.
Wecansay,inconcluding,thatPolybiusdidnotbetrayhisownhistoriographicprinciplesbyusingcourtsources,evenwherethisconcernsthedemiseofDemetriusandthefinalyearsofPhilip’sreign,especiallysince(ascanbeprovedinthecaseofMacedonia)heavailedhimselfofthesourcethatwasclosestintimeandlocationforthesakeofgivingahistoricalaccountofeventsthatwasaspreciseaspossible.Indoingso,however,andinordernottodisruptthelineofnarrative,hereliedonhisMacedoniansourceextensively,asourcethatdidnotsparedramaticeffectswhendescribingthedemiseof
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 9 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Demetrius.Butthisover-dramatizingsourcecouldbeintegratedquitewellintothecontextofPolybius’narrative.ThusthesourcedidnotpreventthehistorianfromproposinghisprimarycausesforthewaragainstPerseusandthedownfalloftheMacedonianmonarchy.Theseprimarycauses,forPolybius,wererooteddeeplyintherevengepolicyofPhilipV(adangerouspolicy,ofwhichPerseusturnedouttobeanineffectiveexecutor)andinPhilip’sunstablecharacter.WhatPolybiusunderlinedinthisrespectaboutPhilipwasnotsimplyhismorallyconditioned‘madness’(ashisMacedoniansourceemphasized)butalsohisinabilitytotakefirmactionatcrucialmoments(bothin200BCandafter182BC),andPolybiusstressedthatthiswasanegativecharacteristicofPhilip’ssonPerseusevenmore.InthisrespectPolybiusfelthimselfconfirmedinwhathispro-DosonsourcesaidaboutPhilip’sincreasingmadnessbetween182and179.Despitehisgreatintelligence,militarytalent,andoccasionallyimpressiveenergy,inwhichhesurpassedmostcontemporaryrulers,andhisfearlessnessinencounteringdangers,atcrucialmomentsPhilipbackedaway.PolybiusfoundthisafatalflawforsomeonewithPhilip’shighlyambitiousaims,asforanyruler,whowantedtofaceuptotheRomanchallenge.47
Notes:
(1)MyteacherProfessorGustavAdolfLehmannoriginallyurgedmetothinkaboutthistopic,andaccompaniedhisencouragementwithgoodadvice.Theresultspresentedherearepreliminary,andthelargerissueofsourcesdeservesathoroughexamination.LikewiseIamindebtedtoProfessorArthurEcksteinforimprovingmyEnglishandtheargument.
(2)Walbank1938:55–68;cf.Walbank,HCPiii.229.
(3)Seeexplicitlyonhimself:Plb.29.21.8,withDreyer2011:100–20.
(4)Cf.Dreyer2007:321–33.
(5)Pédech1964.
(6)Plb.23.9.6,23.10.1–17;Liv.40.3–16.3,40.20.5–24.8;cf.Plb.23.11;Liv.40.56–8.ShorteraccountsaboutthelastyearsofPhilipV,dependingmoreorlessonthePolybianrecord:Plut.Aem.7–8,Diod.29.25,Just.32.2.7–3.5.Date:Porph.FGrH260F3.9.
(7)Benecke1930:254.
(8)PolemicofPolybius:e.g.2.16.14;2.56–60(againstPhylarchus);3.48.8;7.7.2:exaggerations,inaccuracy,thrill,sensationalism,etc.OnPolybiusand‘tragichistory’,seenowMarincolainthisvolume.
(9)Thuc.1.22.4.
(10)Walbank1938:67n.2.
(11)ThesourceondevelopmentsinMacedoniaemphasizesthepersonaland‘tragic’
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 10 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
dimensionofDemetrius’fall,whichfitsintoPolybius’account:thesuspicionsofPhilipandespeciallyofPerseusagainstDemetriuswerecausedbythefavourablewaytheyoungersonofPhilipwastreatedbythesenateinRome.There,histaskwastodefendPhilip’spolicyofrearmament,which,accordingtoPolybius(22.18),wastheultimatereasonfortheThirdMacedonianWarandconsequentlyforthedownfalloftheMacedoniankingdom.ContrarytoWalbank,Polybius’conceptofalong-termpolicyofrevengeconceivedbyPhilipisplausible,includingthestrategyofadoublestrikeagainstRome,whichmodifiedHannibal’splansproposedtoAntiochusIIIin196BC:seeDreyer2007:223–8.AtthemomentwhenthewarwithPerseusstartedin171,Romewasnotready:seePédech1964:128nn.146and148withreferences.
(12)Walbank1938:65.
(13)Pédech1964:123–39.TheaccountoftheMacedoniansource,whichculminatedinthetragicdownfallofDemetrius,isofcoursenotpositivetowardsPerseus,andhasasimilarlynegativeviewofthebehaviourofPhilip,whichstartedthetragicdevelopment.Likewise,thenaivebehaviouroftheyoungDemetriusisnotalwaysratedveryhighly.ItwasarguedthatPolybius’informantwasamemberofa‘peace-party’oranadherentoftheroyallineofAntigonusDoson.Thus,theunhistoricalplansofPhilipjustbeforehisdeathinthisaccount,acccordingtowhichAntigonus,thenephewofDoson,shouldbecomesuccessor,canbeexplained(Liv.40.56.7),cf.Pédech1964:130–1and133–4.
(14)Derow1994:73–90.Cf.Walbank’sreviewdiscussion(1997:170–2).
(15)SeealsoMcGinginthisvolume.
(16)ThissourcewasnotlikelytoberesponsibleforPolybius’aetiology,becausethehistorianclaimstohavehadnopredecessorinhisviewontheoutbreakofthePerseuswar,22.18.
(17)e.g.Mommsen1902:i.754–65,Gruen1984:403–23,Will1982:255–70,Errington1971:212,Giovannini1969:853–61,Bickerman1953:479–506.
(18)Plb.22.18;cf.PerseusascheiristesofPhilip’splans:Liv.42.11.4(speechofEumenes172);39.21.4;39.23.5.TheofficialversionatthebeginningofthewaragainstPerseusin172(seeLiv.42.40,Syll.3643)refersonlytothedeedsofPerseus,leavingoutthepartofPhilip.
(19)Cf.Plut.Aem.8.
(20)SeethecritiqueofsuchviewsinWelwei1963.
(21)Seee.g.Dreyer2007:129–137(describingthechangeofPhilipin215‐213).Incontrasttocontemporaryopinionontheirreconcilabilityofmonarchyandthecity-freedom,notethenegotiationsof189:Dreyer2007:332–3.
(22)OnPhilip’searlyyears,seeMcGinginthisvolume.
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 11 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(23)AlcaeusofMesseneAP9.518(cf.Geffcken1916,no.324);contrastthelaterepigramAP7.247(cf.Plut.Flam.9,Geffcken1916,no.325,cf.Walbank1942d,1943b,HCPiii.519–20).HonoursforPhilipVinEpidaurus:Moretti,ISE47:
῞Οσσονἔπ᾿ἀέλιοςτεμέγ[ανπόλονἄστρατ᾿ἀμ]είβει
αἰνετὸν῾Ελλάνωνἁγ[εμόν᾿ἐξενέπω],
εἰκαὶχάλκεόςεἰμι,κ[ράτειδορὸςοὕνεκα]νάσωι
᾿Απίδιτὰνὀλοὰνἄρκε[σεδουλοσύναν],
5 πολλὰμὲνΑἰτωλοισ̑ικ[αὶ᾿Αλείοιςκακὰῥ]έξας
μυρίαδ᾿εὐπώλωιλυγρὰ[Λακώνιδιγα̑ι]·
τω̑ικαὶνυ̑μμ᾿᾿Επίδαυρο[ςἀνέστασ᾿·ἀλ]λὰφύλασσε
Ζευ̑τὸνἀπὸΣπάρταςε[ὐρὺλαβόντα]κλέος.
(24)Plb.7.11.9(Trogus,Prol.29).
(25)SeeBohm1989,esp.73–80.
(26)Plb.5.10.In5.10.10–11thenegativetraitsinPhilip’sunstablecharactercanbealreadyrecognized.HethereforefailedtostayinthemouldofPhilipIIandAlexander,despitetheremindersofhisadvisers,4.23.8.EndeavoursofPhilipacceptedbycontemporaries:Walbank1993b:1721–30,esp.1729–30.
(27)OnEuromus-PhilippiinCaria,seeErrington1986:1–8.
(28)In181BC:Plb.24.4;Liv.40.21.2:cupido…ceperat(marchtoHaemus:40.21.1–22.14),seealsoLiv.39.35.4.ForAlexander,cf.Arrian,An.1.1.4–3(onthewaytoIstrus,tenmarchingdaysawayfromPhilippopolisonHebrus,seeSeibert1994:44).(Re-)Foundingcities:PhilippopolisandPerseis183BC:Liv.39.53.12–16.
(29)ProbablyderivingfromtheMacedonianinformant(thoughnotnecessarilyonlyfromhim).Plb.5.105.1:‘AgelausbythisspeechmadeallthealliesdisposedforpeaceandespeciallyPhilip,asthewordsinwhichheaddressedhimaccordedwellwithhispresentinclination,Demetriushavingpreviouslypreparedthegroundbyhisadvice.’Thishappenedin:Plb.5.102.1:‘Bysuchwordsasthesehe[sc.DemetriusofPharusafterheescapedtoPhilip]soonarousedPhilip’sambition,asIthinkwastobeexpectedinthecaseofakingsoyoung,…[seetherestofthesentenceinthequotationinthemaintext]’.Cf.Plb.5.101;5.108.ReceptionbyRomans:Liv.31.7.8(annalisticmaterial:speechofGalba).Onthesymploke,seefurtherQuinninthisvolume.
(30)Cf.Plut.Aem.8.4forPhilip’sviewofhimselfastheonlypossiblechallengerofRomandominion.
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 12 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(31)Walbank1970a.
(32)Andthereforeinevidenceevenbeforetheturningpoint:5.10.9–11.
(33)Dreyer2007:259–71.
(34)Eckstein2006:86–7;cf.Eckstein1995.Cf.Plb.15.24.6(enslavementofallinhabitantsofThasos):‘Butwhowouldnotqualifyasperfectlyirrationalandinsanetheconductofaprince[sc.PhilipV],who,engaginginvastenterprisesandaspiringtouniversaldominion,withhischancesofsuccessinallhisprojectsstillunimpaired,yetinmattersofnomoment,intheveryfirstmattershewascalledupontodealwith,proclaimedtoallhisficklenessandfaithlessness?’;onexplicitlymoralcriteriaasbeingoflesservalue,seefurtherBohm1989:24.Cf.Plb.15.20.1–2:‘ItisverysurprisingthataslongasPtolemyinhislifetimecoulddispensewiththehelpofPhilipandAntiochus,theywerereadytoassisthim,butwhenhediedleavinganinfantsonwhomitwastheirnaturaldutytomaintaininpossessionofhisrealm,thenencouragingeachothertheyhastenedtodividethechild’skingdombetweenthemselvesandbetheruinoftheunhappyorphan.…’Tyche,however,ispunishingthem.
(35)Liv.31.15.8–16.8(behaviourmorelikeakingthanAttalus).BraveandprudentbehaviourafterthedefeatagainstRomans:Plb.18.33;Liv.33.11.1;33.13.4;33.19.1(burningofdocumentsandrecords,contrarytoPerseus,whichbecamethebasisforpursuitoftheadherentsofPerseusafterthewar,Plb.30.13.10).
(36)Perseus’failuretoprovidemoneyandprovisionspromisedbyPhiliptotheBastarnae:Plb.25.6;Liv.40.5.10,57–8;41.19.3–11;42.11.4.HismeannesstowardstheGalatoi,Genthius,andEumenes:Plb.29.5–9,cf.Liv.44.24.9–26.2,esp.26.1–2.Thefailuretousecavalryafteracavalryvictory:Liv.42.57.1–62.2.CowardiceduringandafterbattleofPydna:Liv.44.42.1–2;Plb.29.17;Plut.Aem.19.Recordsnotdestroyed:Plb.29.17;30.13.10(cf.n.35above).
(37)Cf.Pédech1964:131:‘LeparallélismeétaitparfaitentrePhilippeIIandPhilippeV,entreAlexandreetPersée.’
(38)Cf.Plb.3.6.12–14:‘Fromthesefacts[sc.aboutthemilitarystrengthofthePersians]PhilipperceivedandreckonedonthecowardiceandindolenceofthePersiansascomparedwiththemilitaryefficiencyofhimselfandtheMacedonians,andfurtherfixinghiseyesonthesplendourofthegreatprizewhichthewarpromised,helostnotime,oncehehadsecuredtheavowedgood-willoftheGreeks,butseizingonthepretextthatitwashisurgentdutytotakevengeanceonthePersiansfortheirinjurioustreatmentoftheGreeks,hebestirredhimselfanddecidedtogotowar,beginningtomakeeverypreparationforthispurpose.WemustthereforelookonthefirstconsiderationsIhavementionedasthecausesofthewaragainstPersia,thesecondasitspretextandAlexander’scrossingtoAsiaasitsbeginning.’SeealsothesummaryofMacedonianhistoryatPlb.29.21(cf.Plb.5.9–10;7.11–14),andthespeechofLyciscusatPlb.9.32–39;withWalbank1993b:1729–30,Lehmann1974:154–7.
Frank Walbank’s Philippos Tragoidoumenos: Polybius’ Account of Philip’s LastYears
Page 13 of 13
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(39)Walbank1938:60–1,Plb.23.10.1–16,Liv.40.3–5.ThequarrelbetweenDemetriusandPerseus:Liv.40.5–24,Plb.23.10.17,23.11.DeathofPhilipVin179:Liv.42.54.1–57.1and58.9.
(40)Ondivinemadness,seeWalbank,HCPiii.233onPlb.23.10.14,whocompares31.9.4(AntiochusIV),32.15.14(Prusias),36.17.15(theMacedonians).PolybiussometimesoffersreasonssuchasTychewhenrationalexplanationsseemtofail.TheseexamplesdonothaveanythingtodowiththegeneraloutlineofthesourceaboutthedeclineoftheMacedoniankingdom.
(41)AlsoemphasizingthatPhilipactedmoreandmorelikeamadman,notmorallythough:16.10(quotedabove).
(42)Liv.40.22.15–24.8;40.55.8–57.1.
(43)SeeBriscoe2008:555forbibliographyonthereliabilityofthispassage.
(44)Cf.Liv.40.56.3forpraiseofAntigonusandhisuncle.
(45)Schmitt1964:175–85,Dreyer2007:225–6,260–1withn.104.
(46)Plb.15.26;forpolemicagainstthissource,seePlb.15.34–5;seealsothefallofHermias(Plb.5.40–58,esp.56and58withthedecisiveroleofApollophanes,thephysiciantokingAntiochusIII,cf.Walbank,HCPi.584).
(47)Cf.Polybius’similarrepeatedcriticismofAntiochusforhisbehaviour:seee.g.15.37.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 1 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
PolybiusinContext:ThePoliticalDimensionoftheHistories
JohnThornton
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0011
AbstractandKeywords
ThischapterconsidersPolybius'workwithinthetermsofdiplomaticdiscourse.RatherthanexaminingPolybius'viewsofRome,muchcanbegainedbyconsideringPolybius'writingswithinthecontextofhislong-standingaimoffurtheringtheinterestsoftheAchaeanLeagueandtheGreekworldmoregenerally.JamesScott'sworkonpublicandhiddentranscriptscanusefullybeappliedtoPolybius'work,especiallyinpassagessuchashisdiscussionoftheAchaeanWarof146BCwherehispoliticalandhistoriographicalactivitiesseemtocollide.Polybius'recurringemphasisonFortune(Tyche)andtheneedtobehavemoderatelywhensuccessful(whichislinkedtohispraiseofexemplaryRomanssuchastheScipios)canalsobeseenaspartofawiderattemptatpersuasionaimedatRomanhegemonyinGreekaffairs,inwhatmaybetermedthe'diplomacyofthedefeated'.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 2 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,Rome,JamesScott,AchaeanWar,Tyche,exemplarity,diplomacy,Achaeanleague
…nooneisabovethebattle,
becausethebattleisallthereis1
In2002,whenreviewingPolybianstudiesconductedduringthelasttwotothreedecadesofthetwentiethcentury,onthesubjectofPolybius’attitudetowardsRomeasadominantpower,FrankWalbankwasnotinapositiontorecordtheadoptionofnewapproaches.2Inordertocommemoratethe1957publicationofthefirstvolumeofWalbank’sCommentary,itisthereforenotoutofplacetoassessthepotentialofferedbyapplyinglinesofinterpretationthatarenowestablishedinthehistoryofmodernpoliticalthoughttothisclassicaltheme,ofgreatimportancealsointheactivityofProfessorWalbank.
ItwillthusbeattemptedtoconsiderPolybius’workasavoiceinthediplomaticdialoguebetweentheGreekworldandRomeinthemid‐secondcenturyBC.Inthisperspective,ourscrutinywillbearnotsomuchonPolybius’judgementofRomeasonthegoalshepursuedthroughtheHistories.IfitwerepossibletoconceiveofThomasHobbes’sLeviathan‘asaspeechinParliament’,3itmightbedeemednolesslegitimatetoconsiderPolybius’workasadiplomaticspeech.Inotherwords,itcouldinthefirstinstanceberepositionedinthecontextofthesimilarspeechesPolybiushadtodeliverbeforetheRomanauthorities,oftenindifficult,andevendramatic,circumstances,priorto,during,andafterhisenforcedstayinRome;andso,therefore,inthebroadercontextofdiplomaticrelationsbetweentheGreekworldandRomeduringthe(p.214) secondcenturyBCwhichcanberetrievedaboveall,althoughnotexclusively,throughtheHistories.
ComparedwiththeconventionalinvestigationaimedatdeterminingPolybius’viewsonRome,inmyopinion,thisapproachoffersseveraladvantages.Inthefirstinstance,asalreadymentioned,itresituatestheHistorieswithinthecontextoftheotheractivitiesoftheauthorandmoregenerallywithinitspropertime.Polybius’workshouldbeconsideredaresponsetothecentralproblemofthecontemporaryGreekworld—thatofitsrelationswithRome.TheimageofthetransformationofthepoliticianPolybiusintoahistorian,inwhatisvirtuallyanontologicalmutation,startingwithhisdeportationtoRome,willbesetasideinfavourofamorerealisticcontinuitybetweenthetwophasesandaconstantcontaminationbetweenthetwoaspectsofPolybius’activity.Throughouthispoliticallife,PolybiusseemstohavestriventogainfortheAchaeanLeague,andfortheGreekworldingeneral,themostfavourablepositionpossiblevis-à-visthehegemonicpowers,thatistosay,atleastfromacertainpointon,vis-à-visRome.AlsotheHistoriesareaimedatpursuingthisgoalandmustbeviewedagainstsuchabackground.
Inthesecondplace,analysingtheHistoriesasadiplomaticspeechwillmakeitpossible,orevennecessary,totakeintoaccounttheconstraintsimposedonitsauthorbytherealpowerrelations.IntherelationshipbetweenPolybius,andtheGreekworldingeneral,andRome,inthesecondcenturyBC,thesamedistinctionmayalsobemadebetweenthe
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 3 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
hiddenandthepublictranscriptselaboratedbyJamesScottwithreferencetoallrelationscharacterizedbyagreatdisparityinpowerbetweenthepartiesinvolved.Generallyspeaking,insuchconditions,thepublictranscriptimposedbythedominantgroup(inourcase,bythehegemonicpower)corroboratesitsbeneficialroleandevenitsgenerosity;inthepublicdiscourseitisadoptedbythesubordinategroup,aboveallbecausethepublicdomainiscontrolledbythedominantgroup,butthenalsoforstrategicpurposes.Theacceptanceofthepublictranscriptactuallyprovidesprotectionagainsttherepressionthatwouldotherwisesmashanyopenchallengetothelegitimacyoftheroleofthedominantgroup.Furthermore,atthediplomaticlevel,itrepresentsaweapon,aninstrument,bywhichtoendeavourtoconvincethepowerfultoapplytheprinciplesoftheirself-representation,soemphaticallydeclaimedonthemostsolemnofficialoccasions.However,thepublictranscriptdoesnotexhausttheattitudesandcannotreflectthedeepestbeliefsofthosehavingtosubscribetoit.Onunofficialoccasionsandwheneveritisreasonabletoassumeoneisoutsidetheearshotofpower-holders,adifferent,morerealistic,interpretationoftheirconditionsofoppressionemergesamongthesubordinates.Theresentment,theanger,andthedreamsofrevengehabituallyrepressedinthepublicsphereregularlyfindexpressioninthishiddentranscript.
TheattempttoapplytheworkofJamesScotttoPolybiusistosomeextentjustifiedbytheanalogydrawnbyScottfromthedialecticalrelationshipbetweenthepublicandhiddentranscripts,ontheonehand,andthevariability(p.215) ofadiplomat’sdiscourse‘dependingonwhetherheistalkinginformallywithhisownnegotiatingteamorformallywiththechiefnegotiatorofathreateningenemypower’.4InthecaseofPolybius,andthecontemporaryGreekworld,afurtheranalogywiththesituationsanalysedbyScottmayalsobefoundinthegreatdisparityofpowervis-à-visRome.
TheanalysismuststartfromtheacknowledgementofthepublicnatureoftheHistories.Insomecases,aswillbedemonstrated,itseemspossibletodiscerntraceshereandthereintheworkofthehiddentranscriptofPolybiusortheAchaeanrulingclassregardingRome.Asarule,however,theprinciplesandstatementscontainedinitmaybelinkedtothepublictranscript.TheycannotthereforebetakenatfacevalueinordertodrawimmediateconclusionsconcerningPolybius’‘conversion’toRome,orhis‘conviction’ofthe‘legitimacy’ofRomandomination.ItisinsteadnecessarytoexaminetheaimsunderlyingPolybius’statementsandtherhetoricalstrategiesadoptedinhisnegotiationswiththesenate.WhileitisimpossibleimmediatelytograspPolybius’judgementonRome,itispossible,andofinterest,toattempttograsphisdiplomaticobjectivesinthedialoguewithRome.
Inthefollowing,IwillendeavourfirsttoillustratetheformsofcontaminationbetweenhistoriographyandpoliticsinPolybiusinoneconcretecase;itwillthenbeshownhowtheprinciplessustainedbyPolybiuswerechosentosuitthevariouspoliticalobjectivespursued(§I).Inthelightoftheseresults,itwillthenbeattemptedtoinvestigatethesignificanceofseveralrecurrentthemesintheHistories:ananalysiswillbemadeoftheappealformoderation,inparticular,whenTychewasinfavour.Moregenerally,Polybius’
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 4 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
considerationsonthemostappropriatewaytomaintainone’shegemonicpositionafterithadbeenwon(§II)willbealsoexamined.Lastly,itwillbeattemptedtooutlinethestrategicfunctionoftheidealizationofseveralRomanfigures,suchasScipioAfricanus,AemiliusPaullus,andScipioAemilianus,andofthepositivejudgementpassedevenonLuciusMummius.ThelevelofPolybius’innermostconvictions,inaccessibleinthesepassages,conditionedbythepursuitofpoliticalobjectivesinpower-ladensituations,mustratherbesoughtintheoccasionalemergenceofdissonantindicationswhichenableustoglimpseforamomentthehiddentranscriptofPolybiusandthegrouphebelongedto.
IIn38.4,Polybiusseemstomakeaclear-cutdistinctionbetweenhispoliticalactivityandthatofhistorian.Thispassageis,however,morecomplexandambiguousthanmayappearatfirstsight.Withreferencetothehatedleadersof(p.216) theAchaeanWar,CritolausandDiaeus,Polybiusinitiallyseemspracticallytoadmithavingruncountertotheethosofthehistoricalaccountandtohaveadoptedastylemorebiased5andclosertothatofapodeicticoratory.However,wearenotupagainstanopenconfessionofcontaminationbetweenpoliticsandhistoriography.PolybiusindeedclaimsthathishostileattitudetowardsCritolausandDiaeuswasnottheresultofpoliticalprejudice,butofhishistorian’sfidelitytotruth.Thechargefromwhichhefeelshehastodefendhimself,asfarashiscondemnationoftheleadersoftherevoltisconcerned,isnotthatofbiasbutrathertheoppositechargeofnothavingdischargedhisduty‘tothrowaveilovertheoffencesoftheGreeks’.Heproudlyclaimedthathehadnotbaulked‘atthetimeoftheoccurrences’atthetaskofhelpinghisfellowcitizens‘ineveryway,byactivesupport,bycloakingfaultsandbytryingtoappeasetheangeroftherulingpower’(38.4.7);but,asahistorian,nothingoughttotakeprecedenceoverthetruthandhewasdutyboundtohandontoposterityanaccountuncontaminatedbyfalsehood(Plb.38.4.5–6).ThisappealtotruthisthusdeployedtolegitimizehisruthlesscondemnationofCritolausandDiaeus;itisonlyarhetoricaldeviceemployedtolendauthoritytowhatisasserted.Polybius’intentionistoequatehiscondemnationofCritolausandDiaeuswiththetruth;onlyforthispurposedoeshedeliberatelydenythatatthelevelofhistoricalreconstructionitwashisduty‘tothrowaveilovertheoffencesoftheGreeks’(περιστέλλειντὰςτω̑νἙλλήνωνἁμαρτίας,38.4.2).
Moreover,Polybiushadalreadypatentlyviolatedthenobleprincipleoftheclear-cutdistinctionbetweenpoliticalapologyandhistoriographyin27.9–10,apassagewhichwasexplicitlyaimedatdefendinghiscompatriotsfromtheaccusationofacharistia.6InthesetwochaptersrecountingthereactionofGreekpublicopiniontothevictoryofPerseus’cavalryinthebattleofCallicinus—thefirstclashintheThirdMacedonianWar—Polybiusadaptedhisoratoricalskillsandaimstohistoriography.7Thisresultsinamasterpiece—‘amasterpieceofhypocrisy’,accordingtoAdalbertoGiovannini;8butwhatismoreimportantthanpassingamoraljudgementistopointouthow,inactualfact,adiplomatic,oratleastpolitical,dimensionisindeedpresentintheHistories,9andthismustbetakenintoaccount.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 5 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thecircumstancesarewellknown:theunexpectednewsoftheMacedonianvictorywasgreetedwithmanifestationsofjoythroughoutGreece.10PolybiusendeavouredtoexplainawaythejoyengenderedbyPerseus’victoryby(p.217) appealingtoanaturalimpulsetosidewiththeunderdog.11Inthisway,heattemptedtodenyGreekhostilitytoRome.12Thedeclaredaimofthedigressionwastopreventanyone,through‘ignoranceofwhatisinherentinhumannature’fromaccusingtheGreeksofacharistia(27.10.5).Inotherwords,apoliticalapologyhadseepedintotheHistories.InordertodenythattheplethosoftheGreekcitieswasstubbornlyanti-Roman,Polybiusincludedargumentsthatamoderatepoliticalleadermighthaveaddressedtothemassestobringthemtotheirsenses(27.10.2–3).Inthefirstinstance,heplayedupontheirresponsiblenature(ἀνυπεύθυνος)ofkinglypower,13somethingtheywouldallhavebeenobligedtoendureifPerseushadactuallywon(27.10.2).Butwhatwastoprovedecisivewasthecomparison‘ofallthehardshipsthatthehouseofMacedonhadinflictedonGreece,andofallthebenefitsshehadderivedfromRomanrule’(τω̑νγεγονότωνἐκμὲντη̑ςΜακεδόνωνοἰκίαςδυσκόλωντοις̑Ἕλλησιν,ἐκδὲτη̑ς῾Ρωμαίωνἀρχη̑ςσυμφερόντων,27.10.3).ComingfromacitizenofMegalopolis,suchanegativejudgementpassedontheroleoftheMacedoniansinGreekhistorymightappearalittlesurprising.14However,inapassagelikethis,itisidletotryandfindtracesofPolybius’‘conversion’,oftheadoptionof‘apointofviewmuchclosertoRomethanthatwhichPolybiushadheldduringhisdetention’,15orofa‘convictionthatRomanpowerwasadvantageous…withrespecttothemonarchicpowerofMacedoniaandoftheHellenistickingsthatwas‘‘innowayaccountable’’ ’.16
Polybius’statementsconcerningtheroleplayedbyMacedoniaorRomeinGreekhistoryarenotthereflectionofchangesinhisideas;rathertheyareattheserviceofthepoliticalobjectiveshepursued.In27.10,Polybius,whoonotheroccasionshadexpressedhisappreciationofPhilipII,AntigonusIII,ortheyoungPhilipV,condemnsMacedonia’sroleinordertoshowtheRomansthattheGreekpoliticalleaderswerecapableofgettingthemassestoacknowledgethebenefitsreceivedfromtherepublic,asopposedtotheharmcausedbyMacedoniandominion.SincetheapologywasaddressedtotheRomans,itsmackedmoreofadroitdiplomacyratherthanappearingasasincereopinion,thefruitofmaturereflection.AllthatcanbedemandedofthispassageisanindicationofthepoliticalaimspursuedthroughtheHistories—whichisalreadyquitealot.17
(p.218) ThewaveringofPolybius’judgementsparallelsthatintheofficialstanceoftheAchaeanLeaguebetweenMacedoniaandRome,andmustbeexplainedinthesameterms,asaresponsetothesameproblems.Towardstheendof198,duringthenegotiationswithFlamininusandhisGreekallies,PhilipV,afterlistingbenefactionsvis-à-vistheAchaeans,firstonthepartofAntigonusandthenofhimself,againevokedthegreathonoursgrantedtothembytheAchaeans.Heconcludedbyreadingoutthedecreebymeansofwhich,in198,theAchaeanshadwithdrawnfromthealliancewithMacedoniaandsidedwithRome,usingthisasanopportunitytoaccusethemofdisloyalty(athesia)andingratitude(acharistia)(18.6.5–7).Onlyafewmonthsearlier,Aristaenus,addressinghisfellow-citizensinanattempttoconvincethemtojoinforceswiththeRomans,hadexplainedawaytheirhesitationintermsoftheirfearofthecruelty
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 6 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(crudelitas)ofPhilipV(Liv.32.21.25),andhadairedtheirhopesoffreedom,longcherishedinsecrecywithoutdaringtoexpressthemopenly.18TheRomanmilitarypresencenowprovidedtheoccasiontotranslateintopracticeahiddentranscriptthatbeliedtheofficiallanguageusedinthedecreesinhonouroftheMacedoniankings.
ThecontradictorynatureoftheofficialactscontemptuouslyevokedbytheMacedoniankingthusperhapsdoesnotjustifythejudgementofbetrayaluponwhichhisreproachesarebasedandwhichPolybiusattemptedtodeny.ThetroubledhistoryofAchaeo-Macedonianrelations19isthehistoryofapoliticalcommunitycompelledtocometotermswiththehegemonicambitionsofthemajorpowers.Whenforcedtosubmittoahegemony,theweakerallyadoptsthepublictranscriptofthesuperpower:itinterpretsitsinterventionsaseuergesiai,andreciprocateswiththegrantingofhonours,whichintheirturnaresupposedtoelicitfreshbenefits.20However,wheninternationalpoliticalcircumstancesofferachancetofreeoneselffromhegemony,ormakethisdecisionpracticallycompulsory,ashappenedtotheAchaeansin198,theoppositeinterpretationoftheroleofthehegemonicpoweremerges.Here,theharassmentsofsucharoleareclearlyapparent.InthecaseoftheAchaeans,whenfreedomfromhegemonyisachievedonlythroughsubmissiontoanotherpower,thehardshipscausedbytheMacedoniandynastyareoffsetbythebenefitsofRomandominion.Inthedramaticmomentsinwhichitisnecessarytochoosebetweentwoopposingsuperpowers,itiseasilyunderstandablethatthepoliticiansintheGreekcitiesshouldre-interpretthepastagainstthebackgroundoftheurgentneedsofthepresent—evenatthecostofexposingthemselvestorecriminationandaccusationsofbetrayalsuchasthosemadebyPhilipVagainstAristaenus.
(p.219) Asthecircumstancesandthepoliticalgoalschange,sodothehistoricalinterpretationsaimedatattainingthelatter.In174Archon,theAchaeanpoliticianclosesttoPolybiusintheyearsoftheThirdMacedonianWar,intervenedinfavouroftheabrogationofthebanthatfromthetimeofPhilipVhadpreventedtheMacedoniansfromenteringAchaeanLeagueterritory.Inthatcontext,Archonreferredto‘sogreatbenefitsconferreduponusbyformerkingsofMacedonia’(tantapriorumMacedoniaeregummeritaerganos);itwasbecauseofthe‘long-standingassociationwiththeMacedoniansandtheancientandgreatservicesrenderedusbytheirkings’(uetustaconiunctiocumMacedonibus,ueteraetmagnainnosregummerita,Liv.41.24.12–14)21thatin198thefactofsidingwithFlamininushadwarrantedalongandvigorousdebate.22Thepositionsdeclaredin174didnotpreventArchon,in170,fromrecognizingtheneed‘toactwiththeRomansandtheirfriends’(συμπράττειν῾Ρωμαίοιςκαὶτοις̑τούτωνφίλοις,28.7.1).InaveryfrankmeetingofLycortas’party,heldbehindcloseddoors,23Archonwasabletojustifyhisproposalforapro-RomanshiftinthepoliticsoftheLeagueonpurelytacticalgrounds:itwasnecessarytoadapttothecircumstancesinordernot‘togivetheirenemiesanypretextforaccusingthem’(28.6.7).Inanofficialmeetingheldbeforeamuchlargerandheterogeneousaudience,whenthecontentsoftheorationwereindangerofreachingtheearsoftheRomanauthorities,itwouldhavebeendifficulttoemploysucharguments;itwouldratherhavebeennecessarytomakeuseoftheargumentsthat,in27.10.2–3,PolybiusascribedtoahypotheticalGreekleader
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 7 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
addressingthemassesafterthebattleofCallicinus,comparingthebenefitsderivedfromRomanrulewiththehardshipsthattheMacedonianKingshadinflictedonGreece.
ThepointsthatPolybiusmakesintheHistoriesconcerningthedecisiveeventsintherelationshipbetweentheAchaeanLeagueandthepowerscontendingthehegemonyovertheMediterraneandonotappeartocarrymoreweightthanargumentsthatmighthavebeenusedatthetimetoorientorjustifytheAchaeanpoliticalline,andfluctuateaccordingly.TheythusdonotallowustoplumbthedeepestlevelsofPolybius’conviction;buttheyenableustodetectthepoliticalgoalspursuedandtherhetoricalstrategiesimplementedtoattainthem.
IISofar,usingaclearexample,wehaveseenhowPolybiusdidnothesitatetopursuepoliticalgoalsthroughhisHistories,andhavepointedouthowthispreventsusfromtakinghisassertionsatfacevalue.Asinpoliticalspeeches,it(p.220) isnotpossibletoreadintothemtheimmediatereflectionofhispersonalopinionsbutonlythechoiceoftheargumentsmostlikelytoconvincethepublicatlarge.Now,byshiftingourattentionfromasinglepassagetothegeneralstructureofhiswork,IwouldliketoofferatleastonemoreexampleofPolybius’pursuitofpoliticalobjectiveswhereformsandthemesofdiplomacyareappliedtohishistoricalwork.WeshallexaminethemainprincipleunderpinningPolybius’politicalthinking—orratherathemeessentialtohispoliticalmessage:thethesisthatthebestwaytowinandmaintainahegemonicpositionistotreatone’sdefeatedenemiesandsubjugatedpeopleswithgenerosity.
JohnMarincolaclaimedthat,intheoriginalthirty-volumeproject,thespeechbywhichAemiliusPaullusurgedthemembersofhisconsilium‘nevertoboastundulyofachievementsandneverbeoverbearing(hyperephanon)andmerciless(anekeston)intheirconducttoanyone,infactneverplaceanyrelianceonpresentprosperity’(Plb.29.20),‘usingPerseushimselfasanexampleofthetruthofthewords’,occurredtowardstheconclusionoftheworkandthustookonevengreaterprominence.24ItisworthnotingthatPolybiushaddweltontheseissuesrightfromBook1,takingadvantageofRegulus’Africancampaigntoimpartthelesson‘todistrustFortune,andespeciallywhenweareenjoyingsuccess’(διαπιστειν̑τῃ̑τύχῃ,καὶμάλιστακατὰτὰςεὐπραγίας,1.35.2):theRomancommander,‘whososhortatimepreviouslyhadrefusedtopityortakemercyonthoseindistresswasnow,almostimmediatelyafterwards,beingledcaptivetoimplorepityandmercyinordertosavehisownlife’(1.35.3).Theinsistenceontheadvisabilityoflearningnot‘throughtheirownmischances’,διὰτω̑νἰδίωνσυμπτωμάτων,but‘throughthoseofothers’,διὰτω̑νἀλλοτρίων(1.35.7),not‘bytheirownmisfortunes’,ἐνταις̑ἰδίαιςἀτυχίαις,but‘bythoseofothers’,ἐνταις̑τω̑νπέλας(29.20.4),makestheparallelbetweenthetwopassagesevenmorestriking.25ThesameLeitmotivisstressedatthebeginningandtheendoftheHistories;itactuallyalsorecursattheendofthefinalproject,infortyvolumes,intheconsiderationsattributedtoScipioAemilianuswithreferencetoHasdrubal(Plb.38.20.1–3)—awarningagainsthyperephania—aswellasinthewell-knownchaptersonAemilianus’reflectionsbeforetheflamesofburningCarthage(38.21–2).Then,inwhatseemstobethetrueepilogueofthe
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 8 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
work,thethemeoftheunpredictabilityofTyche,particularlysensitiveinmomentsofgreatsuccess,iscarriedoverfromthewell‐beingofthestatesto(p.221) thatoftheauthorhimself:PolybiuspraystotheGods,askingthatthestabilitybroughtaboutthroughhisultimatediplomaticmissiontoRomemightlast,‘seeingasIdohowaptFortuneistoenvymen,andhowsheespeciallyputsforthherpowerincaseswherewethinkthatourlifehasbeenmostblessedandmostsuccessful’(39.8.2).Itissignificantthatthesamethemeisfoundindiplomaticnegotiations;itrecursbothinHannibal’sspeechduringthenegotiationswithScipioAfricanuspriortothedecisivebattle(15.6.4–7.9),andinthepeaceproposalspresentedbyHeracleides,ambassadorofAntiochusIII,aftertheRomanslandedinAsia(21.14.4).26Again,afterthebattleofMagnesia,ZeuxisandAntipaterbeggedtheRomanstoexploit‘mildlyandmagnanimously’(praōsandmegalopsychōs)thesuccessesgrantedthembyTyche,claimingthatthiswouldbenefittheminthefirstinstance(21.16.7–8);andScipioAfricanushastenedtoreassurethem,denyingthatthevictoryhadmadetheRomans‘moreexacting’(βαρυτέρους,21.17.1).Priortohim,afterthebattleofCynoscephalae,FlamininuslecturedtotheAetoliansontheneed,afterthevictory,toshowthemselvestoberestrained,‘gentleandhumane’(μετρίουςκαὶπραεις̑καὶφιλανθρώπους,18.37.7).
Suchargumentswerecommonplacewhenimploringthevictor’sleniency;theyarefoundalreadyinThuc.4.17–20inthespeechproposingpeacedeliveredbytheSpartanambassadorsatAthenstosavetheprisonersofSphacteria.ItisinthisdiplomaticcontextthattheirpresenceintheHistoriesistobeinterpreted.
AsregardsthewordsattributedtoAemiliusPaullus,Diodorus30.23perhapsreflectsthePolybianoriginalbetterthantheexcerptummakingupchapter20ofBook29.27ButthereisnodoubtthatthispassagecontainingthepraiseofAemiliusPaullusforbeing‘considerateofadefeatedfoe’(πρὸςδὲτοὺςκρατηθένταςἐπιεικη̑)andtheobservationthat‘sincetherewereothersalsowhoaffectedasimilarattitude,Rome’sworldwiderulebroughthernoodiumsolongasshehadsuchmentodirectherempire’28areinharmonywithPolybius’aspirationstoproposemodelsofbehaviourbasedonclemency,epieikeia,forthehegemonicpowerstofollow.29Tomymind,Polybius’insistenceonthisthemeislinkedtoitsuseinthediplomaticfield,totheusemadeofthisargumentinpeacenegotiations,inanattempttoelicitepieikeiafromthosetowhomonewascompelledtosubmit.JustlikethekingofPergamum,EumenesII,inthesenate,afterthedefeatofAntiochusIII(Plb.(p.222) 21.18–21),Polybius‘reallyhopestoshowtheRomansthatacourseofactionisintheirinterestwhenofcourseitisalsoverymuchinhisown’.30
Epieikeia,praotes,metriotes,megalopsychiaarekeywordsusedinPolybius’reflectiononempireandonthebestwaytomaintainhegemonyaftergainingit.TheymaybefoundinseveralpointsintheHistories,wheneverPolybiusisgiventheopportunitytodwellonthebenefitsthatageneroustreatmentofthedefeatedfoeandthesubjugatedpeoplesaccruesalsotothehegemonicpower.Ofparticularsignificanceishisinsistenceonthegenerosity(διὰτη̑ςἐπιεικείαςκαὶφιλανθρωπίαςτω̑ντρόπων,‘bytheleniencyandhumanityofhischaracter’,5.10.1)displayedbyPhilipII,afterthevictoryatChaeronea,inordertowintheheartsandmindsofthedefeatedAthenians,releasingtheprisoners
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 9 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
withoutransomandrenderingfuneralhonourstothefallen.In5.10.1–5PhilipII’sconductiscontrastedwiththequitedifferentbehaviourofPhilipVatThermum,thefederalsanctuaryoftheAetoliansplunderedanddestroyedbythekingin218;inafewbrieflines,PolybiusattributestoPhilipIIthevirtuesofleniency(epieikeia),humanity(philanthropia),gentleness(eugnomosyne),moderation(metriotes),clemency(praotes),goodness(kalokagathia),andmagnanimity(megalopsychia).Theadoptionofthisstanceisalsodeemedtobethefruitofsagacity,anchinoia:inotherwords,Polybiusshowshisappreciationnotonlyatthemorallevelbutalsoatthatofpracticaleffectiveness,intheinterestofPhilipIIhimself.Polybiusreturnstothesametopicinthefirstpersonagainin18.14.13–14,inhispolemicagainstDemosthenes,reiteratingthemegalopsychiaandphilodoxia(‘loveofglory’)oftheMacedonianking;andagainin22.16.1–3,wherePhilipII’sconductafterChaeroneaisonceagainraisedtothestatusofaparagon,incontrastwithPtolemyV’scrueltreatmentoftheEgyptianrebels.ThiswasaninevitableissueinthepoliticaldebateconcerningthepoliticalroleofMacedoniaintheGreekworld,andwasstilltopicalinthelatethirdandtheearlydecadesofthesecondcenturiesBC:inthedebatebetweentheAetolianChlaeneasandtheAcarnanianLyciscus,atSparta,in210,evenChlaeneas,whowashostiletoMacedonia,couldnotdenythemagnanimityofPhilipII,andcouldonlygiveitamaliciousinterpretation(Plb.9.28.4).Polybiussignificantlyusesthisepisodetodemonstratetheadvantagespresentedbytheepieikeialine,andonseveraloccasionsproposesitasamodeltobeadopted.
Atthesametime,theoppositeapproach,thatofterror(kataplexis)andharshness,isrepeatedlyrejected—evenwhenitwasapparentlyfollowedbyPolybius’father,Lycortas.31Polybiusnevertiresofdescribingitsdevastatingeffectalsoforthehegemonicpower,asitattractstheresentmentandhatredoftheconqueredpeoples,whowouldlikenothingbetterthanachancetoridthemselvesofanoppressivedomination.Thesamelessonisdeliveredstarting(p.223) inBook1inreferencetotheCarthaginiandominationofLibya,andagain,repeatedly,almostobsessively,withreferencetoPhilipV’srelationswiththeGreekworld,rightfromthebeginningofhisreign.32Then,inBook10,boththeCarthaginiansandScipioAfricanusseektowintheloyaltyoftheindigenouspopulationsoftheIberianpeninsula.Afterthevictoriesin211,nowconvincedtheyareinanunassailableposition(aderitos),theCarthaginiansgivethemselvesovertohybrisandhyperephania,whereasScipioembracesthecontrarypolicyofbestowingbenefits.TheIberianpeoplesthusquicklyabandontheCarthaginiansandgoovertoScipio.Polybiusdwellsatlength,andwithsatisfaction,onthedifferenteffectsofthetwooppositepolicies.33
Inallthesepassages,itisnotaquestionofseekinganabstractPolybiantheoryofempire,whichmaturedafteranimplausibledetachedreflection.Onceagain,continuitywithapoliticaltraditioniswhatisobserved:thetraditionofAratusofSicyonandAgelausofNaupactusvis-à-visMacedonia,ofPhilopoemenandLycortasvis-à-visRome—thetraditionofsubjugatedpeoplesstrivingtopersuadethehegemonicpowerstotreatthemwithmoderation,torespecttreatiestotheletter,andtogainthefavouroflesseralliesthroughthebenefitsgranted.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 10 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
TheprinciplesrepeatedlyreiteratedbyPolybiusthuspointusinthedirectionofthediplomaticconfrontationbetweenAratusandPhilipV,betweenPhilopoemenandthesenate;atamoregenerallevelwearedealingwithanamplificationoftraditionaldiplomaticpracticesdevelopedoverthecenturiesbytheGreekcitiesintheirrelationswithhegemony-seekingpowers.Thetwoopposingpoliciesavailabletoahegemonicpowerinordertogaintheobedienceofsubjugatedpeoples—thatofterror,appliedforinstancebyAlexanderinthedestructionofThebesin336BC,ontheonehand,andwhatmaybedefinedasepieikeia,ontheother—maybetracedbackatleasttothedebatebetweenCleonandDiodotusonthepunishmentofMytileneinThucydides’Book3.IntheirrequestforanalliancewithSparta,theMytileneanambassadorsjustifiedtheirdefectionbycomplainingthattheirrelationswithAthenswerenotcementedbyeunoiaandphilia,mutualfriendshipandgoodwill,butbyphobosanddeos,thatis,terror(Thuc.3.12.1).Therefore,inthedramaticdebateinwhichCleonproposesthattheMytileneansshouldbegivenanexemplarypunishment,andcitesepieikeiaasoneofthethreevicesmostdetrimentaltoanempire(Thuc.3.40.2),theoppositeoptionisactuallythemorefavourabletoMytilene’sinterests—eventhoughDiodotuscunninglyendeavourstosuggestthatasignofwillingnesstopardonwouldbeinAthens’interest.ItisnocoincidencethatthebulkofDiodotus’speechisdevotedtothe(p.224) attempttoshieldhimselffromthedefamatorysuspicionofcorruption;andtheMytileneanambassadorspresentatAthensplayedanactiveroleinthematter,34althoughofcourseitwasinDiodotus’interesttosoft‐pedalthis.Iftheyhadbeenallowedtoexpressthemselvesdirectly,itisprobablethat,likeDiodotus,theytoowouldhaveadoptedthepointofviewofthehegemonicpower’sutility.Likewise,theMelianswerealsoobligedtoadoptitintheotherwell-knownThucydideandebateonempire(Thuc.5.90,98);theywarnedtheAtheniansoftherisksinvolvedoffallingfoulalsoofneutralpopulationsbyfollowingapolicyofharshness;PolybiuswastoimpartthesamelessontoPhilipVafterthecaptureofCius.35
Polybiusseizeseveryavailableopportunitytodemonstratetheusefulnessforthehegemonicpoweroffollowingapolicyofepieikeia;atthesametime,hewarnsoftherisksderivingfromthetemptationtogiveintohybrisandhyperephania,whichisallthemorelikelythemoreunassailablethedominatingpositionattained.HisinsistencecannotbeaccountedformerelybyawistfulrestatementofAratus’orPhilopoemen’spolicies.Iwouldevendiscardany‘Polybiantheoryofempire’,thefruitofadetachedreasoningbyanarmchairscholar.Polybius’‘theory’wasnotconcoctedinalibrary;itisratheramatterofPolybiusbrandishinginthediplomaticarenawhatisprobablythemainweaponintherhetoricalarsenalavailabletopeoplessubjugatedbysuperpowers.Significantly,PolybiusinsistedatgreatlengthonthesuccessachievedinSpainbyScipioAfricanusbyfollowingapolicyofmoderation.TheCarthaginians,nowconvincedtheyhadanunassailablegrip(aderitos)onSpain,gavethemselvesovertohybrisandhyperephania;theylostfirstthesupportoftheiralliesandthenthewar.TotheRomans,who,startingin168,hadgainedunopposeddominion(aderitosexousia,31.25.6)overtheMediterraneanbasin,theGreekPolybiusindicatedratherthemodelofScipioAfricanus,whogainedvictorybyfollowingtheoppositepolicy,thatofepieikeiaandbenefitsaccordedtoensuretheloyaltyoftheallies.Thisbeingthesituation,itwouldseem
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 11 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
necessarytoreiterateforcefullythehypothesispreviouslyputforwardrathertimidly,andinsomecasesthendiscarded,byscholarssuchasDomenicoMusti,36JacquelinedeRomilly,37GustavLehmann,38ArthurEckstein,39AndrewErskine,40Jean-LouisFerrary,41andlatterlybyChristopherPelling:42whenPolybiusreflectsbitterlyonthehistoricalexperienceofPhilipV,orextolsthemagnanimityofPhilipII,orevenmore,whenheanalysesthemomentsofcrisisinthePunicdominionofAfricaandthenSpain,hismainpurposeistosendamessagetotheRomanpoliticalestablishment.
(p.225) IIIIthaslongbeenacceptedthattheidealizedportraitsofScipioAfricanus,AemiliusPaullus,andScipioAemilianushadthefunctionofexamples.However,IwouldnotsaythattheirdepictionintheHistoriesrepresentsastageintheprocessofjustifyingRomandominion‘fromadoctrinalstandpoint’.43ThereisnodoubtthatPolybiusaimedtodefuseanyattemptatananti-Romanrevolt,butIdonotbelievethatheintendedto‘justifyRome’shegemonyovertheGreeks’bypraisingthevirtuesofafewfigures.HisaimwasrathertocontributetoimprovingthepositionoftheGreekswithintheframeworkofRomanhegemony,toconvincetheRomanstoexerttheirdominionwithmoderation,takingthesemodelsasexamples.PolybiusaspiredtobeingamediatorbetweentheGreeksandtheRomans;ifhesangthelatter’spraisesitwasonlybecausehehadthissolepurposeinmind.44Asoftenhappensinrelationswiththepowerful,anencomiumalsoservesasavehicleforadvice;whenallotheravenuesseemtobeblocked,thestrategicpotentialinherentintheacceptanceofthepublictranscriptisexploitedtothefull.Sincepubliceulogiesofhegemonicpowercomposedbysubordinateshaveatacticalfunction,oneoughtnottotakethemallatfacevalue.45
Examinationofthedeepest-lyingconvictionsofPolybiusandoftheAchaeanpoliticalgrouptowhichhebelongedwithregardtoMacedoniaandRomemustbeconductedbymeansofananalysisofthepassagesthatenableustoperceivetheechooftheirconfidentialdiscussions.OneofthesepassagesistheaccountofthepartymeetingcalledbyLycortasin170todiscussthestancetoadoptafterthediplomaticmissionofGaiusPopilliusLaenasandGnaeusOctaviusin28.6.HereLycortasexpressedthehopeofmaintainingthebalanceofpowersoastoavoidtheneedtosubmittoasinglesuperpower.Polybiuswasmoreclearlyawareoftheseriousnessofthesituation,andacceptedArchon’sproposaltocollaboratewiththesenate(28.6.7–7.1).Neverthelessheclearlysharedtheprinciplesaffirmedbyhisfather.46
AtraceofwhatPolybiusreallythoughtdeepdowninsideasregardsRomecanalsobefoundinhisbittercriticismofthespeechdeliveredbytheRhodianambassador,Astymedes,tothesenateinthewinterof168/7.HerePolybius(p.226) seemsoncemoretoadopttheoldpan-Hellenicpolaritywithregardtothebarbarians,takingittoapurelydiplomaticlevel.Astymedes,clearlyveryproudoftheresultsobtainedinfavourofhiscountryduringoneofthemostdramaticepisodesinitsrelationswithRome,47hadnoscruplesaboutpublishingawrittenversionofhisspeech(30.4.11).ForPolybius,theambassadoroughttohavebeenashamedofhavingbasedhisdefenceuponacomparisonbetweenthemeritsandfaultsinpopulumRomanumoftheRhodiansandtheotherGreek
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 12 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
communities.Inevitably,suchacomparisonworsenedtheaccusationsagainsttheotherGreekstates,makingthemappearevenmoreguiltyinordertomakethewrongdoingsoftheRhodiansappear‘smallanddeservingofpardon’,μικρὰκαὶσυγγνώμηςἄξια(30.4.13–14).Polybiusseverelycondemnedthistypeofdikaiologia,‘sincesurelyinthecaseofmenwhohavetakenpartinsecretdesignswedonotpraisethosewhoeitherfromfearorformoney48turninformersandbetrayconfidences,butweapplaudandregardasbravementhosewhoenduretheextremityoftortureandpunishmentwithoutbeingthecauseofsimilarsufferingtotheiraccomplices.Howthencouldthosewhoheardofitfailtodisapprovetheconductofamanwhoforfearofanuncertaindangerrevealedtotherulingpowerandpublishedalltheerrorsofothers,errorswhichtimehadalreadyveiledfromtheeyesoftheirmasters?’(30.4.16–17).Thispassagewouldthusseemtobetraythepersistenceofaneedforapan-HellenicsolidarityinthefaceoftheimperiumRomanum.Thelatterwasseenasanexternalpowerwhich,likeatyrant,controlledandjudgedthemandagainstwhich—intheirdreams—theymighteventuallyuniteandconspire.49
Evenmoresignificantisthewell-knowncomparisonbetweenPhilopoemenandAristaenus,50inwhichWalbankperceived‘twofictitiousspeechescondensingtheargumentswhichtheyemployedonseveraloccasions’.51ThesincerityoftheopendebatethatPolybiusattributestothetwoleadersissuchastopointtothedebatewithintheAchaeanpoliticalgroupsintheplacesofthehiddentranscripttowhichtheRomanauthoritieswerenotallowedaccess.Nevertheless,Polybiusalsoplacessidebysidetheargumentsthatthetwoadoptedinpublicinordertosupporttheirdiversepoliticallines.Thetworivals,togetherprobablywithPolybius,sharedtheviewthatthegrowingandincreasinglyoppressiveRomaninterferenceintheinternalaffairsoftheAchaeanLeague(p.227) wasaprocessthatwas,intheend,inevitable.52Philopoemenclaimedthattheprocessmightbestbeheldup,whereverpossible,byopposingitwithalldiplomaticmeansavailable,while,ontheotherhand,Aristaenus’advicewastoplacatetheRomansbypromptlyobeyingallorderssoastoavoidneedlesslyirritatingthem.53ThemoderateAristaenuswentasfarastodeclare,asthoughitweresomethingobviousandacknowledgedbyall,thatiftheAchaeanshadhadthemilitarycapacity,itwouldhavebeentheirdutytostanduptotheRomansandnotyieldtotheirorders(24.12.1).However,theargumentwithwhichPhilopoemenwouldhavedefendedtothehilthistoughdiplomaticstance—aimingtodelaythemomentinwhichitwouldbenecessarytoobeyallRomancommands—doesnot,Ibelieve,belongtothedeeperlevelofconvictionofPhilopoemenorofPolybius.Philopoemenisaccreditedwiththeaffirmation—anaffirmationthatevenAristaenushimselfcouldnotdeny—that‘theRomans,uptonowatleast,setaveryhighvalueonfidelitytooaths,treaties,andcontractswithallies’(24.13.3).AsobservedbyFerrary,54Polybiushadhimselfsupportedasimilarthesisin24.10.12,whenhecommentedontheembassyofCallicratestothesenatein180BC.However,theaffirmationthattheRomanswereendowedwith‘unsensparticulièrementaigudelajusticeetdesdevoirsenversceuxquiontétédefidèlesalliés’55isonlyadiplomaticploy,anexhortationmorethanastatementoffact,andshouldbeinterpretedasanintegralpartofthestrategyofthepublictranscript.ThisclaimofRomanexceptionalityactuallyalsosurfaceselsewhereintheHistories;butitalwayssurfacesindiplomaticcontexts.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 13 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Beforethesenate,afterthedefeatofAntiochusIII,theRhodianambassadorsstrovetoinfluencethedecisiononthefateofthecitiesinnorth-westernAsiaMinorseizedfromtheSeleucidking.Intheirspeech,theyplacedtheRomansaboveallothermen;withgenerousdisinteresttheywouldprefertherenownduetohavingliberatedtheGreekstogain:‘formoneyisapossessioncommontoallmen,butwhatisgood,glorious,andpraiseworthybelongsonlytothegodsandthosemenwhoarebynaturenearesttothem’(Plb.21.23.2–12,particularly9).Itwouldbenaivetointerpretthisasasincereconviction:itisratheranattempt,usingdiplomaticmeans,toconvincetherepresentativesofthehegemonicpowertoputintopracticethegrandiloquentdeclarationsofprinciplecontainedintheirofficialspeechesanddocuments.(p.228) TheRhodiansrecalledFlamininus’solemndeclarationsattheIsthmiangamesin196inthehopeofconvincingthesenatetoimplementtheprinciplesthuspubliclystatedatthetime.Onanother,muchmoredramatic,occasionanotherRhodianambassador,theabove-mentionedAstymedes,beggingthesenatetoputanendtotheangeragainsthisnativecountry,lamentedthepersistenthatredoftheRomans,‘whoareconsideredtobemostlenientandmagnanimous(πρᾳότατοικαὶμεγαλοψυχότατοι)towardsallotherpeoples’(Plb.30.31.15).AstymedesappealedforanapplicationtotheRhodiansofvirtuesclaimedintheRomans’self-representation:ScipioAfricanusboastedofwantingtoextendthemeventothedefeatedCarthaginians,treatedπρᾴως…καὶμεγαλοψύχωςdespiterepeatedviolationsofpacts,inconsiderationofTyche(Plb.15.17.4).56ItisunlikelythatAstymedeswasconvinceddeepdownoftheexceptionalleniencyoftheRomans;whatisimportantistoacknowledgehowusefulthisargumentwasinthepursuitofconcretediplomaticobjectives.TheimageofthemselvesprojectedbytheRomansistakenupagaininthenegotiationsaimingtoinducethemtoputintopracticeallofthesenobledeclarations.57Aswehaveseen,suchargumentsalsoappearedinGreekinternalpoliticaldebateswheretheywereusedtoembarrassallthosewhowereinfavourofcompleteobediencetothesenate—asifAristaenusandCallicratesweretheonlyonesnottorecognizetheRomans’scrupulousrespectforfides.
AsArthurEcksteinhasrecentlyobserved,theveryfactthatancientdiplomacywasactuallypublicinnaturewasamajorstumbling-blockinitsabilitytofunctionandresolvedisputes.Concessionswereraresincetheywerealltoooftenconsideredasanadmissionofinferiorityandthusapreludetosubmission.58However,thepublicnatureofancientdiplomacycouldalsoleadtodifferentresults.Indeed,oncethedominantpowerhadsolemnlyproclaimedtheloftyprinciplesunderpinningitsactions,theverypublicnatureoftheprocesseffectivelytransformedsuchworthyproclamationsintoadiplomaticweaponthatcouldbetakenupbyitsweakerallies.Sincethedominantpowerdidnotwishtolosefaceontheinternationalscene,theweakerpartiescouldremindthepresidingpoweroftheneedtorespecttheengagementsithadundertaken.However,todothis,theweakerallieshadtorecallandreiteratethedominantpower’spublicdeclarationswithregardtotheireuergeticaims.
Weshouldconsequentlybeextremelywaryofattemptingtoextrapolateopinions,convictions,andpointsofviewfromspeecheswhoseprimaryfunctionwasfirstandforemostdiplomaticandpolitical.Polybianscholarsoughtrathertoabandonsuchan
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 14 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
approachinfavourofamorematureunderstandingofthestrategiccapabilitiesofapublictranscript,focusingon(p.229) theveritablepoliticalnatureoftheHistoriesandontheinfluencethatcontinuedtobeexertedonPolybiusbyanancientdiplomatictradition.
Inthisway,thepositivejudgementofRome’shandlingofMacedoniaafterPydna59shouldnotbeconsideredasaclearreflectionofthe‘convictions’ofPolybius,butratherameditatedadhesiontothepublictranscriptdrawnupbythevictors.EventheidealizationofthefigureofAemiliusPaullus,anexampleofmoderationintheexerciseofdominion,60shouldbeviewedintheperspectiveofaneedtoprovidetheRomanrulingclasswithanexampletofollow.61
Inmyopinion,notevenPolybius’positivejudgementofMummius62countervailstheideathat,ifthechoicehadbeenavailable,itwouldhavebeenbettertoavoidtheRomansgainingsuchanaderitosexousia,inaccordancewiththeprincipleclearlystatedbyLycortasinthepartymeetingmentionedbyPolybiusin28.6.TheattributiontoMummiusofself-control,purity,andmildness(ἐγκρατω̑ςκαὶκαθαρω̑ς…καὶπρᾴως)shouldbeplacedonthesameplaneasthehonoursgrantedtohimintheconqueredcities:63notanimmediatereflectionofdeep-setconvictionsandsinceregratitudenorproofofanykindofconversiontoRome,buttheacceptancebythedefeatedofthepublictranscriptproposedbythehegemonicpowerandanattempttoexploitthepoliticalresourcesemergingfromthepossibilityofconvincingtheRomanstokeepfaithwiththeself-imagetheyhaddisseminated.
InhisHistories,Polybiusenjoyedplayingthepartofteacher,64alsoofateacherofpolitics.Hisarenotdisinterestedlessons—oratleast,notalways.Polybius’historiographyisoccasionallytosomeextentmingledwiththediplomacyofthedefeated,whoseaimsheshares:toconvincetheRomansthroughacleveruseoftheinstrumentsrefinedduringthelongtusslebetweentheGreekcitiesandhegemonicpowersoftheutilityofanexerciseofauthoritybasedonepieikeia—thusensuringtheGreekscouldmaintainascomfortableapositionaspossibleundertheinevitableRomandomination.
Notes:
(1)Skinner2002:i.7.
(2)Walbank2002:26.
(3)QuentinSkinnerinterviewedbyAlanMacfarlane,10Jan.2008(http://www.alanmacfarlane.com/ancestors/skinner.htm);cf.Skinner2002:ii.209–37,264–86.
(4)Scott1990:27–8.
(5)Polybiususesφιλότιμοςinthissamesensein21.16.5.
(6)Cf.Deininger1971:160,withthebibliographyinn.8.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 15 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(7)SeeThornton2001:131–48;nowcf.alsoVirgilio2007:64–5.
(8)Giovannini1984:38.
(9)NolessthanintheworkofZenoofRhodes,analysedbyWiemer2001(cf.Thornton2004:516–17);seealsoWiemerinthisvolume.
(10)Cf.Deininger1971:159–61.
(11)Plb.27.9.3;5(καὶτῷκαταδεεστέρῳφύσειπροσμερίζοντεςτὴνἑαυτω̑νεὔνοιαν);10.4–5(τὰφύσειπαρεπόμενατοις̑ἀνθρώποις).
(12)Plb.27.9.5(οὐμισοῦντεςοὐδὲκαταγινώσκοντες).
(13)Onthisaspect,cf.Virgilio2007:49,51,72–3.FortheimportanceofaccountabilityandthecontrolofthemagistratesintheHellenisticcity,seeFröhlich2004.ForthepersistenttensionsbetweenHellenisticmonarchsandtheGreekcities,cf.Erskine2007:278.
(14)OntherelationsbetweenMegalopolisandMacedonia,seeEckstein1987b:145,andcf.Liv.32.22.8–12.
(15)Walbank,HCPiii.308on27.10.3.
(16)Virgilio2007:51;cf.64–5.
(17)Ferrary2003:30correctlyestablishestheneed‘toanalysethemessagePolybiuswishestotransmitthroughhisHistories’.ForThucydides,cf.Leppin1999:14n.5.
(18)Liv.32.21.36:liberareuosaPhilippoiamdiumagisuoltisquamaudetis(‘Foralongtimeyouhavewished,butnotdared,tofreeyourselvesfromPhilip’,trans.byE.T.Sage).
(19)SeeEckstein1987b.
(20)SeeScott1990;Ma1999.
(21)Trans.byE.T.Sage.
(22)Liv.32.19.1–23.3.
(23)SeePédech1964:281n.136,290,Lehmann1967:200,Deininger1971:162,Walbank,HCPiii.333on28.6.1(‘Lycortas’supportersinAchaea’),Eckstein1985:278.
(24)Marincola2001:147andn.145.
(25)ConcerningtheimportancethatPolybiusattributestotheusefulnessoflearningfromthemistakesofothers,somethingtowhichhealreadyrefersin1.1.1–2(cf.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 16 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Marincola2001:147),seealso3.62–3,andthewordsattributedtoAristaenusinLiv.32.21.29(satisexemplorumnobiscladesalienaepraebent:nequaeramusquemadmodumceterisexemplosimus).Significantly,thissamethemealsoappearsinDiod.1.1;foritsearlieroccurrencesinGreekliterature,seePani2001:74n.41.
(26)SeeWooten1974:244.
(27)SeeNissen1863:273(‘genauern’),withthesupportofWalbank,HCPiii.392on29.20.1–4.
(28)Diod.30.23.2(Englishtrans.byF.R.Walton),onwhichseeSacks1990:153.
(29)Forthecentralityofthetheory‘thatkindactionsinspireloyalty,harshonesdisaffection’inthereflectionsofDiodorus,seeSacks1990:39,42ff.,124,andpassim;Sacks1994:216–19,220(‘ThepervasiveuseoftheschemamayhavebeenintendedasasubtlewarningtoRome’).AsregardsthelevelofindependenceofDiodorusfromhissources,cf.Wiemer2001:13n.14.
(30)Kennedy1972:35.
(31)Plb.23.15withWalbank,HCPiii.247–8on23.15.1–3.
(32)Cf.atleastPlb.5.9–12;7.11,13–14;15.22–24a.
(33)Plb.10.6.3–4,35.6–36.7.AlreadyinThucydides,metriotesandpraotesassuretheSpartanBrasidasofthedefectionofAthens’allies:Thuc.4.81.2,108.2–3.
(34)Cf.e.g.Thuc.3.49.3.
(35)Thuc.5.98,andcf.Plb.15.23.6–7,24.4–6.
(36)Musti1978:135n.9,onPlb.10.36.
(37)DeRomilly1979:247.
(38)Lehmann1989/90:76–7.
(39)Eckstein1985:271–3.
(40)Erskine2003:235.
(41)Ferrary2003:30–1.
(42)Pelling2007:249.
(43)Gabba1974:638–9.FortheexceptionalnatureofAemiliusPaullusandScipioAemilianusincomparisontotheircontemporariesintheaccountsofPolybius,cf.alsoMusti1978:91,136n.21;Marincola2001:147–8.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 17 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(44)SeeThornton1998forthewayinwhichthepoliticalobjectivespursuedbyPolybiusattheendoftheAchaeanWararereflectedinthework.ForthegrowingawarenessoftheimportanceofPolybius’mediationinthemostrecentstudies,seeThornton2004:508–24,andseealsoFerrary2003:18.
(45)Scott1990.
(46)Cf.Liv.42.30.5–7andtheappreciationofHieroII’spoliciesinPlb.1.83.2–4.
(47)Hehelpedobtainfromthesenate‘ananswerwhichrelievedindeedtheirextremeapprehensionofwar’(Plb.30.4.7);moreover,thesenate’sreplyindicatedexplicitlythatitwasaboveallduetotheambassadors(μάλισταδι᾽αὐτούς,30.4.9)thatitwasdecidednottoinflictupontheRhodiansthepunishmenttheydeserved.
(48)Patontranslatesδιὰφόβονἢπόρον,butseeWalbank,HCPiii.421on30.4.16:‘itseemspreferabletoreadδιὰφόβονἢπόνον,“throughfearor(actual)suffering”(cf.Strachan-Davidson)’.
(49)Cf.Thornton2001:127–30,andnowThornton2010:72–6.
(50)Plb.24.11–13;forthemostrecentanalysis,seeDesideri,forthcoming.
(51)Walbank,HCPiii.265on24.11.1–13.10.
(52)Cf.15.24.4fortheinevitabledegenerationofthebasileis,whoattheveryoutsettendtotreattheirinferioralliesσυμμαχικω̑ς,andthenδεσποτικω̑ς;onthispassageseeVirgilio2007:60.In24.13.2Philopoementakestheframeworkofthebasileisandextendsittoallhegemonicpowers,Romeincluded;cf.also§6(‘Iknowtoowell’,hesaid,‘thatthetimewillcomewhentheGreekswillbeforcedtoyieldcompleteobediencetoRome’)andseeFerrary2003:25.
(53)Forthisinterpretation,cf.Thornton1995:265–72,withananalysisoftheprecedingbibliography,andseealsoMusti1978:76–7.Morerecently,Ferrary2003:23–4hasdefendedthedifferentthesisalreadyproposedinFerrary1988:296–7.
(54)Ferrary2003:26.
(55)Ferrary2003:26;cf.alsoWooten1974:246.
(56)ForthepeacenegotiationswiththeAetoliansin190,see21.4.10:PolybiusclaimsthatScipiowouldhavetreatedthemἔτιδὲπρᾳότερονκαὶφιλανθρωπότερον.
(57)SeeScott1990:18.
(58)Eckstein2006:61–5,97–9,121.
(59)Plb.36.17.13–14,withFerrary2003:27.
Polybius in Context: The Political Dimension of the Histories
Page 18 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(60)Acomplexhistoriographicalprocessthatcannotbeanalysedhere;seehoweverReiter1988andFerrary1988:547–72.
(61)Thesethemes,alreadynotedsupra,willbetreatedmorecomprehensivelyelsewhere.
(62)Plb.39.6.2–5:‘Itwasonlynaturalindeedthatheshouldbetreatedwithhonourbothinpublicandinprivate.Forhisconducthadbeenunexactingandunsulliedandhehaddealtleniently(πρᾴως)withthewholesituation,thoughhehadsuchgreatopportunitiesandsuchabsolutepowerinGreece’.Onthispassage,seeThornton2005:212–13andn.87.OnPolybius’opinionofMummius,cf.Sacks1994:222–3(whocomparesittothemuchharsherjudgementofDiodorus).
(63)Plb.39.6.1–2.ForthehonoursreceivedbyMummiusinGreece,alongwiththeepigraphicattestationstothem,cf.Knoepfler1991.
(64)Cf.forexample3.32.10,withtheexplicitclaimofτὸμαθειν̑asabenefitofreadingtheHistories,andseeMarincola2001:125,134,140.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 1 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
HowtoRuletheWorld:PolybiusBook6Reconsidered1
AndrewErskine
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0012
AbstractandKeywords
MostscholarshaveapproachedBook6inpiece-mealfashion,exemplifiedbythetendencytotranslatethewordpoliteiaas'constitution',eventhoughPolybiusincludeselementswhichcouldnotbecalledconstitutionalsuchasfunerarypractices.ThischaptershowshowBook6explainsthesuccessofRome(andbyimplicationthefailureofGreekcommunities)holistically:elementsoftenignoredbyscholars,suchastheaccountofenrolmentfortheRomanarmyandtheRomancamp,areinfactpartofastrategyofemphasizingRomanefficiency.Likewise,theoverridingfocusonthestate'sinterestsoverthoseoftheindividualisreflectedinPolybius'accountsofmilitarydiscipline,andintheRomanresponsetothedispatchofprisonerstoRomebyHannibalafterCannaewhichendsthebook.
Keywords:Polybius,Rome,politeia,Romanarmy,constitutionaltheory,funerarypractices
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 2 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
IntroducingBook6ThequestionofrulingtheworldandhowitisachievedisacentraloneforPolybius.Atthebeginningofhishistoryhewritesthosemuch-quotedlines:‘Forwhoissoworthlessorsoindolentasnottowishtoknowbywhatmeansandbywhatsystemofgovernmentinlessthan53yearsalmostthewholeinhabitedworldwassubjugatedandbroughtunderonerule,thatoftheRomans,somethingthathadneverhappenedbefore?’(1.1.5).‘Bywhatmeans’(πω̑ς)isansweredbythenarrativeofthehistorybut‘bywhatsystemofgovernment’(τίνιγένειπολιτείας)istakenupinparticularinthesixthbook.2PolybiusisconcernedtoexplainRomansuccess,butmorethanthisheisexplainingtoGreeksandtohimselfwhytheGreeksfailed,whytheytoonowobeyRomanorders;howitwasthattheworldofthethirdcenturyhadgone,thephalanxyieldingtothelegion(seefurther18.28–32).Thiswas,hesaysintheprefatoryremarkstohishistory,anextraordinarytransformationandonethatdemandedattention.PermeatingPolybius’analysisinthesixthbookaretwothemes,whichwillbetreatedinturninsuccessivesectionsofthischapter:first,Romeasamodeloforderandefficiency,secondly,asasocietyinwhichallpartsservetheinterestsofthewhole.
TheimportancethatPolybiusplacedonthissixthbookisevidentfromthenumberandnatureofhisanticipatoryreferencestoit,whichgiveusasenseofhowheunderstoodthepurposeofthebookhimself.3Inthefirstbook,while(p.232) discussingtheRomannavy,helooksforwardtohisaccountofRome’ssystemofgovernment(politeia)inBook6,emphasizingitscentralityandadvisinghisreaderstopaycarefulattentiontoit.Thesubjectis,hecomments,anoblesight,yetonebarelyknownthankstothosewhohavewrittenaboutit.Somewereignorant;othersgaveanaccountthatwasobscureandwithoutprofit(1.64.2–4).Polybiushereistypicallydismissiveabouthisfellow-historians,whileatthesametimedrawingattentiontotheoriginalityandusefulnessofhisowncontribution.4
ThesignificanceofhisanalysisoftheRomanstatetohisworkasawholeandtotheunderstandingofRomanpowerisexpandeduponinthethirdbook.Hereinthepreface,whichintroducesthehistoryproper,hegivesanoutlineofwhatwillfollow.HeexplainsthatoncehehastreatedHannibal’ssuccessesinItalyandothercontemporaryevents,hewillpausethenarrativetoofferanaccountoftheRomansystemofgovernment.Hewillshowhowitssingularcharacter(ἰδιότης)‘madeamajorcontributionnotonlytothere-establishmentofRomanmasteryovertheItaliansandSiciliansandtheextensionoftheirruletotheSpaniardsandtheCelts,butalso,intheend,aftertheirvictoryovertheCarthaginians,totheformulationoftheideaofuniversaldominion’(3.2.6).ItisthisdistinctivepoliteiathatPolybiuspromisestoconsiderinBook6;herehewillbelookingatthoseaspectsthatenabledbothRome’srecoveryafterthedisastrousdefeatatCannae,anditsdriveforempire—inotherwordsthoseaspectsthatexplainedRomansuccess.BytheendofBook3,Rome’sdistinctivepoliteiaexplainsnotonlythedriveforempirebutalsoitsachievementofthatempire:‘bythesingularcharacteroftheirpoliteiaandbytheirownsoundjudgementtheRomansnotonlyregainedtheirmasteryoverItalyandsubsequentlydefeatedtheCarthaginiansbutinafewyearstheywereincontrolofthewholeinhabitedworld’(3.118.9).5Thus,bythetimethatBook6isreached,thereader
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 3 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
isawareoftheimportanceofitssubject-matterforthehistoryasawhole,apointreiteratedintheintroductiontothatbook.
WhereasthefirstfivebooksofPolybius’Historiessurvivecomplete,thesixthbookdoesnot.InsteadthemoderntextiscomposedofaseriesofsubstantialextractstobefoundintheExcerptaAntiqua,astheByzantinecollectionofexcerptsfromthefirsteighteenbooksofPolybiusisknown,acollectionthatappearstofollowtheorderoftheoriginaltextclosely.6Howmuchismissingisamatterofconjecture.Referencestothesixthbookin(p.233) Polybiushimselfandotherwritersrevealsomethingofwhathasbeenlost.Polybius,forexample,refersthereaderbacktoBook6foradiscussionofthepriesthoodoftheSalii;AthenaeuscitesitfortheRomanprohibitiononwine-drinkingbywomen;andStephanusofByzantiumcitesitforthefoundationofOstia—noneofwhichappearsintheextantportions.7Itisusuallyacceptedthatthebookincludedasummaryofthedevelopmentofthemaininstitutionsofthestateuntilthetimeofthedecemvirate,asectionthatscholarshavenamedthearchaeologia.8Thepresentchapter,however,isbasedonwhatsurvivesratherthanspeculationaboutwhatdoesnot.
Beforegoinganyfurther,IshouldownuptoacertainconfusionthatIfeelwhenconfrontingthismaterial.Myproblemistodowiththeterminologyusedinmodernscholarship,anditcomesdowntothis:howshouldyoutranslatepoliteia?Acommontranslationis‘constitution’,butthis,initsmodernusageatleast,seemstoorestrictive,toonarrow,andtoolegalistic.PolybiusseveraltimessaysthathewillinterrupthisnarrativetogiveanaccountofthepoliteiaoftheRomans,andwhenitdoescomehisaccountisimpressiveforitsrange:thepoliticalstructureofRome(howitisacombinationofkingship,aristocracy,anddemocracy),thefunctioningofthearmy(howitisenrolled,punishmentsandrewards,thelayoutoftheRomancamp),funeralcustoms,attitudestoreligion,comparisonswithotherstates,andinalostpartthereviewofearlyRomanhistory.9AlltheseoccurwithinabookwhichPolybiusprofessestobedevotingtotheRomanpoliteia.Togethertheygowellbeyondwhatwewouldnormallyexpecttobecapturedintheterm‘constitution’;onlythefirstpart,thepoliticalstructureofRome,theso-calledmixedconstitution,reallyfitsourmodernusageoftheterm.ButwhenPolybiuswritesaboutthepoliteiaoftheRomans,heclearlyhasinmindsomethingthatcanembracealltheseelements—theyarepartofthepubliclifeofthecitizen.10OnthishewouldbeinagreementwithotherGreekwriters,suchasXenophon,Aristotle,andPlato.11Politeiadoesrefertothenarrowpoliticalstructurethatwewouldcallaconstitution,forinstancean(p.234) aristocracyorademocracy,butintheancientcontextthatstructurecannotbeunderstoodseparatelyfromthepolisitself.IsocratesneatlyencapsulatesthisideainhisAreopagiticus:‘thesoulofthepolisisnothingotherthanitspoliteia’.12ConsequentlyIhavepreferredtheuseofpoliteiaorthephrase‘systemofgovernment’(cumbersomethoughitis)to‘constitution’whendescribingPolybius’themeinBook6,whilekeeping‘constitution’forthediscussionofRomanpoliticalstructuresinthenarrowsense,thatistosaytheinteractionbetweenthepeople,senate,andconsuls.
ThismaybeatrivialanxietyonmypartbutIhaveasuspicionthatithaswider
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 4 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
repercussions.Oneeffectofthemodernscholarlytendencytotranslatepoliteiaas‘constitution’andthenapplyitchieflytothe‘constitutional’sectionistofragmentfurtherwhatisalreadyafragmentedbook,totakeawaywhatholdstheremnantstogether.Thus,insteadofitbeingabookaboutthepoliteiaoftheRomans,itbecomesastudyoftheRomanconstitution,theRomanarmy,theRomanfuneral,andsoon.Byabandoningthepoliteiaasagoverningprinciple,andthereforethefullrangeofconceptsthatgowithit,wearelosingthecoherencythatPolybiushimselfsurelyfeltwasthere—andeveninitspresentfragmentedstateitispossibletoseethathebeganandendedthebookwithCannae.Yet,forallitsimportance,scholarsrarelytacklethebookasawhole.TitlesthatpromiseaninterpretationofBook6,theconstructionofBook6,orthesourcesofBook6turnout,inpractice,tobeaboutthenatureanddevelopmentofthemixedconstitution.13Inthesestudiesthetwenty-fourchaptersonthearmy(chapters19–42)maybedispensedwithinasinglesentence.InPaulPédech’ssizeablebookonPolybius’historicalmethoditisstrikingthat,fullasitis,theindexlocorumjumpsfromBook6chapter18tochapter42,thusalmostcompletelyeliminatingamajorpartofabookthatPolybiushimselfconceivedasfundamentaltohishistory.14ThisisnottosaythatscholarshipignoreswhatPolybiushastosayoftheRomanarmy,butitistreatedforthemostpartindiscussionsoftheRomanarmyratherthanofPolybiusandtherethePolybiancontexttendstogetneglected.Thesearegeneralizationsandthereare,ofcourse,exceptions,notablyCraigeChampion’sholistictreatmentinhisCulturalPoliticsinPolybius’sHistories.15WemaylackthePolybiantextthatlinksthesectiononthearmytotherestofthebook,butitisclearthatforPolybiushimselfthearmywasanintegralpartof(p.235) Rome’spoliteia.ThisisoneoftherespectsinwhichtheRomanpoliteiaissuperiortotheCarthaginian:for,insteadofusingforeignersandmercenariesastheCarthaginiansdo,theRomansusesoldierswhoarenativesoftheirowncountryandcitizens.Fightingisthusoneofthedutiesofcitizenshipandsoinseparablefromthepoliteiaitself.16
Polybius’choiceofthesixthbookforhisanalysisoftheRomanpoliteiawasverydeliberate.ChronologicallyitisplacedafterthetraumaticRomandefeatatCannaein216,inwhichover70,000menwerereportedtohavebeenkilledontheRomanside,allthemoredevastatingbecauseitwasthethirdsuccessivedefeatatHannibal’shands.17Observers,notleastPhilipVofMacedon,wrotetheRomansoffatthispoint.18Yettheyrecoverandgoontoachieveworlddomination.PolybiusseesatimeofcrisisastheidealopportunitytotestthevalidityofhisideasabouttheRomanstate.Justaswhatonesaysaboutaman,whetherheisgoodorbad,canbetestedbyhownoblyhecopeswhenhislifeisgoingexceptionallywellorexceptionallybadly,sotoowithwhatissaidaboutasystemofgovernment(6.2.5–7).InthiscaseCannaebecomesatestforthedistinctivequalitiesthatPolybiusattributestotheRomanpoliteiathatenableitssuccess.Polybius’bookonthepoliteiaisnot,however,placedimmediatelyaftertheaccountofCannae,whichoccursinBook3.InsteadtwoBooks,4and5,intervenetotellthestoryofGreekeventsinthe140thOlympiad,thusbringingtheGreekworlduptothetimeofCannae.Asaresult,theanalysisofthepoliteialeadsdirectlyintothesubsequentnarrativeandsoprecedestherecoveryasmuchasitfollowsthedisasterofCannae.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 5 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybiushasbeenfrequentlycriticizedfortheomissionsorinadequaciesofhisaccount;thereis,itispointedout,nomentionofthecomplexityofthearistocracy(patriciansandplebeians,nobilesandnouihomines),therangeofpopularassemblies,orpatronsandclients;19thereareanachronismsintheaccountofthearmy;20hetalksofRomanfinancialprobitywhenelsewherehecallsitintoquestion.21YetthesecriticismsfailtotakenoticeofPolybius’purpose;heisnotputtingforwardsomuchadescriptionoftheRoman(p.236) politeiaasanexplanationofitssuccess.Sothoseaspectsthatdonotcontributetothatsuccess,toRomanrecoveryandachievement,atleastinPolybius’viewofthings,donotneedtobementionedatthispoint.Whenthebookisexamined,itisfascinatingtoseethereissolittlethatisotiose;eventheelaboratedetailoftheRomanarmy’sactivitieshasafunction.IndeedPolybiusanticipatescriticism(orperhapshehadalreadyshownadrafttoaRomanacquaintance),whenhewrites:‘Thegoodcriticshouldnotjudgewritersbywhattheyleaveoutbutbywhattheyrelate,andifhediscoversanythingincorrectinwhattheywrite,hemayconcludethathemadetheomissionsasaresultofignorance;butifeverythingthatisrelatedistrue,heshouldacknowledgethatthesemattersarepassedoverinsilencedeliberatelyandnotfromignorance’(6.11.7–8).Similarly,totakeBook6asevidenceforaverypositiveviewofRomewouldalsobeunjustified.ThisisnotabookthatwaswrittentopointoutRomandeficiencies,thatwouldhardlyexplainRome’ssuccess,butratheritisintendedtohighlightRomanstrengthsand,intheprocess,Polybius’politeiabecomessomethingthatRomeitselfmayneverinpracticehaveachieved.ToappropriatePlatonicterminologywemaysaythatwhatwehavehereisnotRomebuttheformofRome.TheveryplacingofthepoliteiainthepastatthetimeofRome’sworstcrisiswhileusingthepresenttensetodescribeitgivesaqualityoftimelessnesswhilesimultaneouslyfrustratingscholars—doeshemeanthiswastruein216BCatthetimeofCannaeorinhisownday?22Onemightcomparethewayinwhichtheuseofthepresenttenseinethnographicwritingcanobjectifythesubjectandalmostdenychange.23
InBook6PolybiusexplainsRomansuccessbutheisalsowritingprimarilyforGreeks,andimplicitinthebook,therefore,isanexplanationofGreekfailure.24InwhatfollowsIexploretwothemesinparticularwhichrunthroughhiswholeaccountoftheRomanpoliteia.IntheprocessIaimtorehabilitatetheRomanarmytoshowthatitiscentraltoPolybius’conceptionoftheRomanstate,notmerelyatoolusedbyit.Thefirsttheme,whichwillbethesubjectofthenextsection,isthatofRomeasamodeloforderandefficiency.Greekreaderscould,nodoubt,lookattheirowncommunitiesandinthecontrastseereasonsfortheirpresentsituation.Thesecondimportanttheme,whichwillbeaddressedinthefinalsection,isthesubordinationoftheparttothewhole.InRometheinterestsofthestateturnouttobeparamount,overridingallelse.ThewayinwhichPolybiuspresentsthesetwothemesoffershisreaderssomethingbothterrifyingandseeminglyunstoppable.Ashe(p.237) putsitintheconclusiontohisdiscussionofRome’smixedconstitution:‘consequentlythisparticularformofstatepossessesanirresistiblepowertoachievewhateverithassetouttodo’(6.18.4).
RomeasaModelofOrderandEfficiencyEarlyinhisaccountoftheRomanarmyPolybiusdescribestheenrolmentofnewlegions.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 6 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thedensityofdetailmayencouragethelesscommittedreadertopassoverithurriedly,butitisthedetailitselfthatisofinterest.Itisusefulheretoquoteitinfull:
Whentheconsulsareabouttoenrolsoldiers,theyannounceatameetingofthepopularassemblythedayonwhichallRomansofmilitaryagemustbepresent.Theydothiseachyear.WhenthedayarrivesandthoseliableformilitaryservicehavecometoRomeandgatheredtogetherontheCapitoline,thejuniormilitarytribunes,accordingtotheorderinwhichtheyhavebeenappointedbythepeopleortheconsuls,dividethemselvesintofourgroups,becausethemainandprimarydivisionoftheirforcesisintofourlegions.Thefourtribuneswhowereappointedfirsttheyassigntothelegioncalledthefirst,thenextthreetothesecond,thefourfollowingthemtothethird,andthefinalthreetothefourth.Oftheseniortribunestheyassignthefirsttwotothefirstlegion,thenextthreetothesecond,thenexttwotothethirdandthefinalthreetothefourth.Whenthedivisionandassignmentofthetribuneshavebeencompletedinsuchawaythateverylegionhasanequalnumberofofficers,thetribunes,thoseofeachlegion,takeupaseparateposition,drawlotsforthetribesonebyoneandsummonthetribewhichisselectedoneachoccasion.Fromthistribetheychoosefouryoungmenofroughlythesameageandphysique.Whentheyarebroughtforward,thefirsttotaketheirpickarethoseofthefirstlegion,secondarethoseofthesecondlegion,thirdthoseofthethirdandlastlythoseofthefourth.Whenthenextfourarebroughtforward,thefirsttomaketheirselectionarethoseofthesecondlegionandsooninturn,thelasttochoosebeingthoseofthefirstlegion.Afterthiswhenthenextfourarebroughtforward,thefirsttochoosearethoseofthethirdlegionandthelastthoseofthesecond.Sincetheycontinueinthiswaytogivethechoicetoeachalikeinsuccession,itturnsoutthatthementhateachlegiongetsareofaverysimilarstandard. (6.19.5–20.7)
Ifweimaginewhatisgoingon,itisquiteextraordinary.Firstthereisthedistributionofmilitarytribunesamongthelegionstoensurearoughbalanceofjuniorandseniortribunes.Thenanevenmorecomplexprocessbegins.Fourmensimilarinbuildandagearechosenfromeachtribe,thenthetribunesofeachlegioninturnpickoneofthesefourmen,aprocessthatcontinuesinanelaboraterotatingsysteminordertoensurethateachlegionisequallybalanced,eachthesamestrength.Thus,everysoldierischosen(p.238) individually,noinsignificantfeatwithfourlegionsmadeupofatleast4,200meneach,atotalofalmost17,000soldiers.25ThewholedescriptionconveysapowerfulimpressionofRomanorderandefficiency,allthemoresobecauseofthemeticulouswaythatPolybiusrecordseachstageoftheprocess.ThisdegreeofdetailisafeatureofthearmysectionofBook6andnotwithoutpurpose;Polybius’attentiontodetailisbutareflectionoftheRomans’ownattentiontoit,evidencedagainlaterinhisaccountofthelayoutofamilitarycampandtheorganizationofthenightwatch.26NothingtheRomansdoisbychance;thisisacarefullyorganizedandrationalsystem.Accumulatively,allthisdetailcomestorepresenttheoverwhelmingandrelentlessefficiencyoftheRomanarmy,apointsurelynotmissedbyPolybius’Greekreadership.27
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 7 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
NonethelessscholarshavenotbeenhappywithPolybius’account.Criticismsaremany.Hesaysthattheenrolmentiscarriedoutinthiswayeveryyear,butitmustinpracticehavechangedfromyeartoyeardependingonthestate’srequirements.Hesaysallcitizensofmilitaryageattended,butthatwouldmeanapotential100,000convergingonRomeforthisevent.HesaysittookplaceontheCapitoline,butthatlocationcanhardlyhavebeenlargeenoughtoaccommodatethisactivity.28AfurtherproblemisthesourceofPolybius’information.OnemightassumethathegaineditbypersonalobservationasaresidentofRome;certainlyhewasamanwhobelievedinthevalueofpersonalexperienceandautopsyinthewritingofhistory,scorningthebookishTimaeus(cf.12.26e–28).Buttheconsensusnowseemstobethathehadreaditsomewhere;influentialindevelopingthisconsensusweretheargumentsofPeterBruntandElizabethRawsonintheearly1970s.BruntthoughtitmostlikelytohaveitsrootsinanantiquariandescriptionbysomeRomanannalistandsobebettersuitedtoanolder,smallerRome,whileRawsonsawlessanachronismandsuggestedthatPolybiushadaccesstoahandbookformilitarytribunesofagenerationorsoback(andthusrepresentingatleastsomeformoforiginalresearch).29Theseareissuesthatarebeyondthescopeofthischapter,butIdothinkthatbeforetheyareaddressedsomeattemptmustbemadetounderstandwhatPolybiusisdoinginhisaccountofthearmyandinBook6morebroadly.Discussionhastendedtooverlookapointmadesomefiftyyearsagobythescholarwhosememoryisbeingcelebratedinthiscollection.Commentingonthetwochaptersontheenrolmentofthearmy,FrankWalbankwrote,‘P.’saccountisover-schematic,like(p.239) hisaccountoftheconstitution’.30This,Ithink,isthepoint.TheremayneverhavebeenanenrolmentexactlyasPolybiusdescribesit,butPolybiushereisprovidingitsessence,thePlatonicformImentionedearlier,andthesameappliestotherestofhisaccountoftheRomanmilitarysystem.Hisdetailed,meticulousdescriptionscanmisleadusintoseeingthispartasmuchmoreempiricallybasedthantherathertheoreticalsectiononthemixedconstitution.Polybius’remarksaboutomissionsareasrelevanthereastheyweretohisaccountofthemixedconstitution.Forinstance,heallbutpassesovertheenrolmentofthecavalry,perhapsbecauseitdidnothavetheimpactofthecarefullychoreographeddisplayofinfantryselection,whichvividlydisplayedthelengthsthattheRomanswouldgotoinordertoachievelegionsthatwereequalinphysicalstrength,notsimplyequalinnumbers.31WhatPolybiuscapturesveryeffectivelyisthewayinwhichthesemilitaryinstitutionscontributedtoRomansuccess—andthatiswhatthesixthbookisallabout.
ThissenseoforderisdisplayedevenmoreforcefullyintheaccountoftheRomanarmycamp.32Hierarchyisassertedfromtheverybeginning:thefirststepistodesignatethegeneral’squarters,whicharemarkedbyplantingamilitarystandardintheground,33thentherestofthecampisconstructedaroundthisaccordingtoasettemplate.ButPolybiusdoesnotmerelytellhisreadersthis,hegivesthemenoughinformationtobuildtheirowncamp:whereunitsaresituatedandtheirrelationtoeachother,thepositionofthetribunes’tents,dimensionsofallsorts,thenumberofcorridorsorstreetsthroughthecamp,andsoon.Orderlinessandregularityarestressedbuttheyarenotfortheirownsake;everythingherehasafunction.Justasthecomplexandorderlymethodofenrolmenthadasitsend-resultanequaldistributionoffightingstrengthacrossthefourlegions,sotheregularityofthecampmeansthatasoldieroncefamiliarwithonecampis
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 8 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
familiarwithall.Sostableisthisenvironmentthatevenbeforeitisconstructedasoldierwillbeabletolookatthegeneral’sstandardandthusdeterminewherehisowntentwillbepitched,justasifhewasreturningtohisowncityandfindinghishomethere(6.41.10–12).AgainPolybiuspresentssomuchdetailthatthereisnoescapingthe(p.240)rigouroftheRomanarmyandtheformidablecharacteroftheRomansthemselves.ThismightseemsufficienttodemoralizehisGreekreadership,butheconcludeswithabriefcomparisonbetweenGreekandRomanmethodsofencampment.EssentiallytheGreekcampchangesconstantlytosuittheland,whileitsRomancounterpartchangesthelandtosuitthecamp;Polybius’explanationforGreekpracticeshereliespartlyinGreeksuspicionofman-madedefencesbutalsoinabasiclaziness(6.42).34
Noristhispreoccupationwithorderconfinedtothearmy;itistheretoointheverypoliticalstructureofRome,itsconstitutionwhichcombinesdemocracy,aristocracy,andkingship,asetofconstitutionaltypesthatreflecttheGreekstandpointoftheobserver.35Again,justasinhisaccountofthearmy,Polybiuswasseekingtheessentialfeatures,sothisisamodeloftheRomanconstitution,anattempttoexplainhowitoperates.36Indeedhesaysatonepoint:‘IfanyofthesethingsorthosethatIamabouttodescribeundergochangeeitherinthepresentorthefuture,thatwouldbenoargumentagainsttheanalysisthatIamnowputtingforward’(6.12.10).TheRomanconstitutionisdistinguishedbyitsstabilityandthecleardivisionofresponsibilitiesbetweenthekeyelements,thepeople,thesenate,andtheconsuls;theresponsibilitiesandpowersofeacharecarefullylisted(6.12–17).Allthisisinmarkedcontrasttothechaoticcycleofconstitutionswhichleadsgoodformssuchasaristocracytodeteriorateintooligarchyandbadformstobeoverthrownbythenextgoodforminthecycle(6.7–9).InRome’smixedconstitutionallthreeparts(μέρη)worktogether,andifonepartshouldgetoutoflineitwillbeopposedbytheothers(6.18).Thegoodofthestateasawholepredominates.
TheGoodoftheWholeInthecaseofRome’smixedconstitutionthesubordinationoftheparttothewholecomesacrossinafairlybenignmanner;thisiswhatmaintainsthelong-termstabilityofthestateandpreventsthedeteriorationevidentinmostotherstates.37ButitisalsoafundamentalfeatureoftheRomanstate,aspresentedbyPolybius,onethatrecursthroughouthisaccountofthepoliteia.Whatmattersisthestate;everythingelse,whetheritbelife,friendship,orfamily,issubordinatetothestate,anditisfromthisthatRomederivesitsstrength.
(p.241) ThiscomesoutveryclearlytowardstheendofthebookintheaccountoftheRomanaristocraticfuneral.38Suchafuneralcelebratesthelifeandancestorsofthedeadmanthroughvisualspectacleandthroughwords.Itrecallsthegreatachievementsofthefamily,thenobledeedsperformedforthestate.Themostimportantconsequenceofthisfuneralceremony,saysPolybius,‘isthattheyoungmenareinspiredtoendureeverykindofsufferingforthesakeofthecommongood(ὑπὲρτω̑νκοινω̑νπραγμάτων39)inthehopeofwinningtheglorythatawaitsthebrave’(6.54.3).Ononelevel,thismightseemtobewhatwouldbeexpectedintheGreekworldaswell,wherethepolisis
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 9 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
regularlyrepresentedashavingpriorityoverboththehouseholdandthecitizen.40Polybius,however,believesthattheRomanstakeitratherfurtherthanmost.HenotesthattherehavebeenRomanmagistrates‘whohaveputtheirownsonstodeathcontrarytoeverycustomandlaw,valuingwhatisintheinterestoftheircountry(τὸτη̑ςπατρίδοςσυμφέρον)morehighlythantheirnaturaltiestotheirclosestrelatives’(6.54.5).HewouldhavehadinmindmensuchasL.IuniusBrutuswhoexecutedtwosonsforconspiracyagainstthenewrepublic,andT.ManliusTorquatuswhoasconsulin340hadhissonbeheadedfordisobeyingorders.41Heretheinterestsofthecountryoverrideallelse,notintheorybutinpractice.
PolybiusexpandsononestoryinparticularasanexampletoshowtheeagernessofRomanyoungmentoachieveglorythroughservicetotheircountry;curiouslyitisnotarecentstorybutonefromearlyRomanhistory,HoratiusCoclesguardingthebridgeacrosstheTiberasitwasdemolishedbehindhim(6.55).Polybius’treatmentofthisstoryservestodemonstratehowimportantthethemeofself-sacrificeonbehalfofthestatewasforhisconceptionofRome.Inhisversion,oncethebridgeisdemolishedHoratiusdivesinfullarmourintotheTiberanddrowns,anactofdeliberateself-sacrificedrivenbytwomotives—thesafetyofhiscountry,andfutureglory.Significantly,althoughthestorywaswellknown,allothersourceshaveHoratiusswimmingacrosstheTiberandsurviving.42EitherPolybiusdidnotknowaversioninwhichHoratiussurvived,oritsuitedhispurposestohaveHoratiussacrificehimselfforRome.
Wemightseehereanaristocraticethos,buttheideathatitisthegoodofthestatethatdriveseverythingforwardisnotlimitedtothearistocracy.Itis(p.242) evidentinmorebrutalformselsewhere.Inthearmydisciplineisenforcedaboveallbythedeathpenalty.Thisisthepunishmentforawholerangeofoffences,suchasstealinginthecamp,givingfalseevidence,falseclaimsofcourageousacts,andthrowingawayyourweaponinbattle(6.37.9–12).ButtheoffencethatpromptsPolybiustodescribe(at6.37.1–6)themannerofpunishmentindetailisfailingtokeepwatchinthecampsatisfactorily,forinstancebyleavingone’spost,inotherwordsthedeathpenaltyforjeopardizingthesafetyofthewholecamp.Thepunishmentinthiscontextisespeciallyrevealing—thetribunelightlytouchestheoffenderwithacudgel,thenallthesoldiers(πάντεςοἱτοῦστρατοπέδου,6.37.3)proceedtobatterhimtodeathwithclubsandstones.Inotherwords,itishiscomrades(cf.aristocraticfatherskillingtheirsons),thosewhoseliveswereatrisk,whotakeitintheirhandstokillhim.Evenifhesurvives,heisanoutcast,eventohisownfamily.Theinterestsofthewholeareparamount.Polybiusconcludesthat‘asaresultoftheextremeseverityandinevitabilityofthispenaltythenightwatchesoftheRomansarefaultlesslykept’(6.37.6).Thisisdisciplinebyterror.Romansoldiers,hesays,stayattheirpostwhenoutnumberedandfacingcertaindeathbecausetheyfearthepunishmenttheywillgetiftheyabandonit(6.37.12).43TheRomanarmynodoubtwasbrutal,butPolybiusmaywellhavechosentoemphasizethispunishmentbecauseithelpedtoconveyRome’sruthlesssingle-mindedness.44TheelderCato,writingatroughlythesametimeinanow-lostworkonmilitarymatters,apparentlygavenotdeathasthepunishmentforstealinginthecampbutlossoftherighthand.45Thisisstillharsh,butitlacksthecommunaloutrage.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 10 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ElizabethRawson,commentingonPolybius’accountofpunishmentinthearmy,notesthatthemilitarytribuneisheregivenresponsibilityforthepunishmentratherthantheconsul,eventhoughlegallyanypowertopunishcomesfromtheimperiumoftheconsul.Sheseesthis,togetherwiththeemphasisonthetribuneelsewhereinthesectiononthearmy,asevidencethatPolybiususedsomeformofmanualformilitarytribunes.46Theproblemofresponsibilitymaybemoreillusorythanreal.Polybiusimmediatelymakesclearthemilitaryhierarchy:‘thesoldiershavetobesubjecttothetribunes,andthetribunessubjecttotheconsuls’(6.37.7);thuspunishmentultimatelydependsontheconsul.Nonetheless,theemphasisonthetribunesisindeed(p.243) curiousandIwishtosuggesttentativelyanotherpossibleexplanation.Inthepassagejustquoted,Polybiusbreaksthearmydownintothreekeycomponents:thesoldiers,themilitarytribunes,andtheconsuls.47Coulditbethatheseeshereatripartitestructureroughlycomparablewiththepoliticalstructureofthemixedconstitution,eachparthavingsomeresponsibilityforthewhole?Theconsuls,ofcourse,appearinboththearmyandthemixedconstitution,butthetribunesandsoldiersmightbeseenastheequivalentsofthesenateandpeople,respectively.Therelationshipbetweensenateandconsulsmayberathermorenebulousthanthatbetweentribunesandconsulsinthearmy,butpeacetime(orthedomesticsphereatanyrate)allowsforchecksandbalancesinawayinwhichwardoesnot.48
ForPolybiustheRomanpoliticalandmilitarysystemisonewheretheinterestsofthewholeoverrideabsolutelyeverythingelse.49Eachpartofthemixedconstitutionisrestrainedbyitspartners.Aristocratsarebredtosacrificethemselvesinpursuitofgloryandthesafetyofthestate.Thesoldiersthemselves,asbefitsthemasses,aremotivatedbylessupliftinggoals—forthemitispunishmentsandrewardsthatcount,andRomehasmuchtoofferhere.50Fearasamotivatorisafeature,too,ofRomanreligion,wheredeisidaimonia,superstition,orexcessivefearofthegodskeepsthestatetogether,inparticularthroughthefearitinstilsinthemasses(6.56.6–11).51Itisthesystemthatisimportantnottheindividual,andthisisonereasonwhyPolybiusdoesnotmakeacomparisonbetweentheRomanpoliteiaandthoseofThebesandAthens.Anygreatnessthatthesestatesattainedwastheresultnotoftheirpoliteiaibutoftheabilitiesoftheirleadingmen,namelyEpaminondasandPelopidasinThebesandThemistoclesinAthens(6.43–4).Incontrast,individualRomansareforthemostpartabsentfromthesurvivingportionsofBook6,asilencethatfurtherservestoemphasizethecontributionoftheRomanpolitieiatoRomansuccess.52
Thethemethattheinterestsofthestateareparamountissummedupinthelastchapterofthebook(6.58),whichreturnsthereadertothenarrativeandsototheaftermathofCannae.HannibalsendstenRomanprisonersbacktoRomeasadelegationtoputforwardhisproposalthatthe8,000Roman(p.244) prisonersheholdswillbereleasedonpaymentofaransom.Hemakesthemsweartoreturn,butonepretendstoforgetsomethingsohecangobackintothecampandfreehimselfofhisoath.Thesenate,however,onhearingtheirappeal,calculatesthatitisintheinterestsofthestatetorejecttheoffer,evenifitmeansabandoningtheirownpeople.Theninedelegates,boundbytheiroath,returntoHannibaloftheirownfreewill,whilethetenthissentbackinchains.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 11 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Whatmakesitallthemorepotentasanexemplarystoryisthewaythatthedelegationofprisonerspleadthattheransombepaid,yetthesenateneverthelessdecidesagainstthis,thusmakingthereaderthatmuchmoreawareofthesacrificeinvolved.Polybiuschoosesthisstorydeliberatelytoillustratethecharacterofthepoliteiahehasspentthebookanalysing.
ConclusionBook6mayrepresentPolybius’mostpositivetakeonRome,butitisonethatisconstructedtoexplainsuccessandthereforenecessarilypositive.EveninthisbookPolybius’attitudeiscomplex.Hesuggeststhatthebookwillbeofvaluetothosesettinguporreformingconstitutions(3.118.12),yethowfarwouldhewantimitationtogo?Inhisremarksonfathersexecutingsons,heimpliesthattherewouldbelimitsonwhatonemightdoforone'sownstate.TheactionsofthoseRomanmagistrateswere‘contrarytoeverycustomandlaw’(παρὰπᾶνἔθοςἤνόμον,6.54.5),aphrasethatmighteasilyputthereaderinmindoftheterm,παράνομος(lawless),commonlyusedtodescribebarbarians.53Itissignificant,too,thatonlyafewchaptersearlier(6.47.1–5)hehadponderedontheroleofcustomandlawinmakingajudgementaboutastateanditssystemofgovernment,apassagewhichbegins‘Ithinktherearetwofundamentalcomponentsofeverypoliteia,bymeansofwhichwecandecidewhetheritstruequalityandformaretobepreferredoravoided.Theseareitscustomsanditslaws.’ElsewhereinhishistorytheverysameactionisoneofthesignsofthedegenerationoftheMacedoniankingPhilipV—thatheexecutedhisownsonDemetriusintheinterestsofthekingdom—anironythatitistheRomanophileDemetriuswhomeetssuchaRomanend.54
PolybiusiswritingforanaudiencewhohaveseenRomeoverturntheestablishedorderoftheeast,kingswhowereonalevelwithgodsandpowerfulconfederaciessuchashisownAchaeanLeague.HepresentsanimageofRomethatexplainsthis,highlyorganized,almostpathologicallyobsessedwithdetail,drivensolelybytheneedsofthestate,aswillingtoterrorizeitsowncitizensas(p.245) itsenemies,andatheartalien.55ToaGreekreadershipthismayallhavebeenconfirmationoftheirworstfearsabouttheRomans:whathopewasthereagainstmenwhobeattheirownsoldierstodeathandhavenoqualmsaboutsacrificingthemselves,yetareatthesametimehyper-efficientandrelentlesslylogical.PolybiushimselfbecameconvincedthatrevoltagainsttheRomanswasmadness,ashemadeclearwhencommentingontheAchaeanandMacedonianrevoltsofthe140s.56Ifanyoneneedsanexplanationforwhyhethoughtthis,itishereinBook6.
Notes:
(1)Thischapterhasbenefitedfromthediscussionatanespeciallystimulatingconference.IamgratefulinparticulartoBruceGibsonandRobinSeagerforhelpfulcommentsonanearlydraft.
(2)ThethemerecursatPlb.6.2.3,8.2.3,39.8.7.
(3)Anticipatory:1.1.5,1.64.2,3.2.6,3.118.11–12;perhapsalso3.87.7–9,referringtoalater(lost)discussionwhichdealssomehowwiththedictatorshipandrelatedoffices.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 12 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
InthefragmentarylaterbookstherearealsoanumberofreferencesthatlookbacktoBook6:10.16.7,18.28.1,21.13.11(indicatingthathedescribedtheSaliiinalostpartofBook6),39.8.7.
(4)Forattitudetootherhistorians,seeWalbank1962,Walbank1972a:46–55,Lehmann1974,Schepens1990,McGing2010:65,83–4.
(5)Fortheroleofsoundjudgement,cf.6.51.7–8.
(6)Moore1965,esp.55–61,Walbank,HCPi.635–6.
(7)Salii:Plb.21.13.11;wine:Ath.10.55,440e( = Plb.6.11a.4);Ostia:Steph.Byz.s.v.Ὠστία( = Plb.6.11a.6).
(8)ThefragmentsattributedtothearchaeologiawerecollectedbyBüttner-WobstasPlb.6.11a,onwhichWalbank,HCPi.663–73on6.11aandWeilandNicolet1977:28–35(whoincludethepassagesintheirBudéedition).AttemptshavebeenmadetoreconstructitfromCicero’sDerepublica,notablyTaeger1922whoseapproachdidlittletoconvincethemorecautiousPöschl1936;cf.alsoPédech1964:313–17,Ferrary1984,Zetzel1995:22–3,Walbank1998b(withp.52ontheoriginsofthetermarchaeologia).Forasuccinctaccountoftheproblems,seeMcGing2010:178–80.
(9)Politicalstructure:6.11–18;army:6.19–42;comparison:6.43–56(whichincludesthefuneralat6.53–4andreligionat6.56.6–15);earlyhistory:seen.8above.
(10)ForthisbroaderconceptionofpoliteiainPolybius,seePédech1964:303,Derow1994:89,Champion2004a:75–84.NotealsoPlb.6.47.1–5,wherepoliteiaincludesbothcustomsandlaws,onwhichseeMartínezLacy1991.
(11)Bordes1982.
(12)Isoc.7.14,cf.12.138,onwhichHaskins2004:92–5,Balot2006:179.SimilarisAristotle’sstatementthat‘thepoliteiaisthewayoflife(βίος)ofthepolis’,Pol.1295a40–b1.
(13)e.g.‘InterpretationdessechstenBuches’(chaptertitleinEisen1966),‘TheconstructionoftheSixthBookofPolybius’(BrinkandWalbank1954),‘TheSourcesandCompositionofPolybiusVI’(Cole1964),‘DieNaturunddierömischePoliteiaim6.BuchdesPolybios’(Eisenberger1982).
(14)Pédech1964.
(15)Champion2004a,esp.91–9,emphasizingtheroleofreason(logos)inPolybius’account,cf.alsoNicolet1974:243forconcernwithunityofthebook.
(16)Plb.6.52.4–5,cf.Millar2002b:34onthissection:‘militaryservicewasoneofthefundamentalaspectsofcitizenship’.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 13 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(17)Ontheoutcomeofthebattle,Plb.3.117–18.
(18)Observersingeneral:Plb.3.118.3–5;Philip:Liv.23.33.4,Plb.7.9withWalbank,HCPii.42.
(19)Seager,ch.13inthisvolume,detailsmanyofPolybius’omissions(cf.alsoNicolet1974:215–22),althoughtheincompletenatureofthebookdoesmeanthatweshouldbewaryoftooreadilyassumingthatbecausesomethingisnottherehedidnotmentionit(cf.McGing2010:183–4);certainlyhedoesmakereferenceelsewheretotopicsthatmayhavebeentreatedinBook6butwhicharenowlost,seenn.3and7above.
(20)e.g.Brunt1971:624–8,anddeLigt2007:115onthelevy.
(21)Plb.6.56.4and56.13–15,contrastingwith18.35,usuallyexplainedashavingdifferentdatesinmind,Walbank,HCPi.741,MartínezLacy1991:90–1.OnRomanattitudestomoney,Erskine1996.
(22)Cf.thedistinctionbetween‘then’and‘now’at6.11.13withWalbank’snote,HCPi.675.
(23)Onthe‘ethnographicpresent’,Fabian1983:80–7.
(24)OnGreeksasPolybius’primaryaudience,seeWalbank1972a:3–4,whoissurelyrightinhisinterpretationofPlb.31.22.8–9,andisnotrefutedbyDubuisson1985:266–7,whereitisarguedthatPolybiusisaddressingaRomanaudienceasmuchas(orevenmorethan)aGreekone.
(25)LegionsizesasPlb.6.20.8,thoughnotedeLigt2007:115.
(26)Camp:6.26.10–6.32,6.41–2;nightwatch:6.34.7–37.6.
(27)Cf.Champion2004a:92–3;seePlb.10.16–17onthesackofNewCarthageforavividdepictionoftheruthlessefficiencyoftheRomanarmyinaction.
(28)Walbank,HCPi.698–9,Brunt1971:625–8,deLigt2007:115–16.
(29)Brunt1971:625–8,Rawson1991(firstpublished1971),thelattertakenup(partiallyatleast)byWeilandNicolet1977:153–4anddeLigt2007:115.
(30)Walbank,HCPi.699.
(31)At6.20.9Polybiusconcludesthedescriptionoftheinfantryenrolmentwitharemarkthatthecavalryusedtobeenrolledaftertheinfantrybutnowtheyareenrolledbefore.Rawson1991:35takesthisasevidencethatPolybiusisfollowingtheorderofadatedliterarysource,hencetheadditionofhiscorrection.Yet,clearly,theenrolmentofthecavalryisofsecondaryimportanceandtheverycursoryremarkcouldjustaseasilybetreatedastheequivalentofafootnote.
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 14 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(32)Plb.6.26.10–6.32with6.41–2ontheprocessoflayingoutthecamp.ThefullestdiscussionoftheRomancampisnowDobson2008.
(33)Plb.6.27.2;σημαίαissometimestranslatedasa‘flag’ratherthan‘standard’(cf.Walbank,HCPi.712),butitismorelikelythathereandelsewhereinthecamptheyplantedstandardswhichtheydecoratedinsomewaywithcolours,perhapsflags,thusat6.41.7:καὶταύτας(sc.σημαίας)μὲνποιοῦσιφοινικιᾶς,τὴνδὲτοῦστρατηγοῦλευκήν(‘theymakethesestandardscrimsonandthatofthegeneralwhite’).At6.24.6Polybiususesσημαιαφόροςforthestandard-bearer,thesignifer.
(34)Cf.alsothecomparisonbetweenthephalanxandthelegion,18.28–32.
(35)OnPolybiusandthemixedconstitutionnoteinparticular,vonFritz1954,Nippel1980,Lintott1999:16–26,214–32,Millar2002b:23–36,Hahm2009,andSeager,ch.13inthisvolume.
(36)Itisstillverydifferent,however,fromtheimaginedpoliteiaiofthephilosophers,6.47.7–10.
(37)Plb.6.10,6.18,6.50;asthesepassagesshow,oneoftheotherstatesthatpossessesamixedconstitutionisSpartabut,unliketheRomanconstitution,theLycurganconstitutiontherecannotmaintaindominion(6.50.4–6).
(38)Plb.6.53–4,withH.I.Flower1996forafullstudyofthearistocraticfuneral.
(39)Aphrasethatmightbeintendedtocapturetheideaoftherespublica,cf.shortlyafterwards,χάριντὴςτω̑νκοινω̑νπραγμάτωνἀσφαλείας(6.54.4),althoughitisalsousedmoregenerally,e.g.4.62.4,5.93.4,and28.6.5.
(40)Wallace2009:171–3.TheclassicformulationofthepriorityofthepolisisowedtoAristotle,Pol.1.1253a1–5,cf.alsotheevidencefromclassicalAthens,astatethatPolybiusdiscardsinhisconstitutionalcomparison:Thuc.2.43.1(deathinwar),Xen.Hell.1.7.21(interestsofthepolisoverfamily),Plato,Crito51a–c(necessarytodoascountrycommands).
(41)Brutus:Livy2.5;Torquatus:Livy8.7;cf.alsoA.PostumiusatLivy4.29.
(42)Livy2.10,Plut.Publicola16,Dion.Hal.A.R.5.23–5,Devir.ill.11.1.
(43)Note,too,thedescriptionofdecimationinthefollowingchapter(6.38),apracticeespeciallyeffectiveatinspiringterror(κατάπληξις,6.38.4).
(44)ThesethemesofcollectiveinterestplayoutinpracticeinScipio’shandlingofthemutinyinSpain,whichculminatesintheexecutionofthemutinyleadersinfrontoftherestofthefrightenedsoldiers(11.25–30).
(45)Rawson1991:47,Fron.Str.4.1.16( = Cato,Deremilitari15).Cf.Phang2008on
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 15 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
punishmentintheRomanarmy,esp.120–9oncapitalpunishmentanddecimation,althoughthefocusisonthelaterepublicandempire.
(46)Rawson1991:46(seealsopp.238–9above).Punishmentfromtheconsul:Plb.6.12.7.
(47)ThatthisconceptionofthearmyisPolybius’ratherthanduetohispossessionofamanualissuggestedbythewaythesethreeelementsappearelsewhereinhishistory,cf.2.33,whereitisthetribuneswhoareresponsibleforthesuccessagainsttheGaulsratherthantheincompetentconsulFlaminius,or11.27wheretheyhavearoleinthehandlingofthemutiny.
(48)Forabroadercomparison,cf.McGing2010:183–4:‘Itisdifficultnottoseetheorder,thecalm,thediscipline,theclearstructures,andthelogicofthearmyasametaphorfortheRomanstateasawhole.’
(49)ContrastCarthage,whichdoesnothavethiskindoffocus,6.52.5–7.
(50)Punishments:6.37–8;rewards:6.39.1–11.
(51)Erskine2000:176–81.
(52)ApartfromHoratius(6.55)exceptionstothisarelikelytohavebeenfoundinthelostarchaeologia(6.11a).
(53)Erskine2000;theRomansareaccusedofπαρανομίαinaspeechatPlb.11.5.7,cf.1.65.7–8;foritsuseinPolybiusgenerally,Champion2004a:243–4.
(54)Plb.23.3.4–10,Livy40.7–28;cf.Dreyer,ch.10inthisvolume.
(55)Cf.Champion2004a:95–6,whosuggeststhatitis‘theverydegreeoftheirquasi-Hellenicvirtues’thatmakesthemsomethingalientoPolybius’Greekreadership.
(56)Plb.36.17.13–15,38.13.8,38.18.7–8,Erskine2003:242–3.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
How to Rule the World: Polybius Book 6 Reconsidered1
Page 16 of 16
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 1 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
Polybius’DistortionsoftheRoman‘Constitution’:ASimpl(istic)Explanation1
RobinSeager
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0013
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'accountofthemixedconstitutionofRomeinBook6hasrecentlybeenviewedthroughthelensofdebateoverwhetheroligarchicordemocraticelementspredominate.Itisimportant,however,toseeBook6aswritteninthelightoftwoaxiomsofgreatimportance:Polybius'beliefthattheRomanconstitutionwasresponsibleforherrisetopower,andthatthemixedconstitutionwasthebestofallconstitutions.ThesedeterminingprinciplesarethereasonforthevariousdistortionswhichmakeupPolybius’accountofthemixedconstitution,suchastheexaggeratedaccountofthepowerofpopularassemblies:evenwithinPolybius'ownaccountthesenate'spredominanceemergesstrongly,inspiteofhisdesiretoemphasizethemixednatureofRome'sconstitution.
Keywords:Polybius,constitutionaltheory,senate,people,consuls
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 2 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
‘Abookaboutwhichtoomuchhasbeenwritten’:thusSymeonanotherworkabouttheRomanconstitution,Cicero’sDerepublica.2ButthesamemightwellbesaidwithevengreatertruthaboutPolybius’sixthbook.Thehistorian’saccountoftheRomanconstitutionandtheproblemsitpresentshaveledsomescholarstowriteworksofgreatlength,greatingenuity,andgreatoptimismintheattempttounderstandwhatPolybiusissayingandwhyhesaysit,andtoreconcilewhathesayswithstubbornlyrecalcitrantreality.ItisthecontentionofthisbriefpaperthatsuchdiligentinvestigationsdoPolybiustoomuchhonour.
ItispointlessheretobecomeinvolvedintheongoingdebateaboutthenatureoftheRomanconstitution:whetheritwas,asscholarscomfortablybelievedforgenerations,anaristocracy,orinfactsomeformofdemocracy.Imyselfhavenonewargumentstoadd.Thetraditionalviewstillseemstomecorrect.ItistomymindthenaturalconclusiontodrawfromareadingofPolybius’text,andinawidercontextIfindtheargumentsofthosewhobelieveinoligarchymoreconvincingthanthoseofthechampionsofdemocracy.3HereIendeavourtoconcentrateonPolybius’ownclaimsandtheirplausibility—orlackofit.
Polybius’accountisfoundedontwoaxioms.(1)ThepeculiarcharacteroftheRomanconstitutionwasanimportant,indeedthemostimportant,factorintherestorationofRomanpoweraftertheHannibalicWar,theconquestof(p.248) SpainandGaul,andRome’seventualrisetoworlddominationafterthefinaldefeatofCarthage(3.2.6;3.118.9;6.2.9;39.8.7).4(2)Themixedconstitutionwasthebestformofconstitution(6.3.7).
Withreferencetothefirstofthesepropositions,aninnocentorcynicalobservermightsuspectthatthepragmatichistorianactuallyknewbetter.WhyelseshouldhedevoteamereeightpagesofBook6aswehaveittotheRomanconstitution,butthirtypagestotheRomanarmy?5ThatquestionconjuresupthepossibilitythatinfactPolybiuswroteaperhapsmuchlongeraccountoftheconstitution,nowlost.6Ihavenoopiniononthatmattereither,saveonlythatitisofnogreatimportancehere.EvenifPolybiusdidwritemore,hisfundamentalpointthattheRomanconstitutionwasthesupremeexampleofthemixedconstitutionisunlikelytohavebeenaffected,andthatisallthatmatters.7
ThusfarthenPolybius’twopreliminaryaxioms:theRomanconstitutionwasthemajorfactorinRome’srisetomasteryoftheuniverse;themixedconstitutionisthebestformofconstitution.WiththesepointsstatedhegoestogreatlengthstotrytodemonstratethattheRomanconstitutionwasthemostperfectexampleofthemixedconstitutioneverachieved.Thequestiontobeaskedisthereforesimplythis.WasthereintheRomanconstitutionasufficientdegreeofbalancebetweenthethreeelementsofmonarchy,aristocracy,anddemocracy(whichneednotofcoursemeananexactlyevenbalance)8tojustifyapplyingtoitthelabel‘mixedconstitution’?9Inpursuitofhisclaimthattherewas,PolybiussystematicallymisrepresentstheRomansystemwithadoctrinaireruthlessnesswhichisstrikingbutperhapsnotsurprising.ThisisafterallthemanwhodismissestheAthenianandThebanconstitutionsasunworthyofattentionbecausetheydonotconformtothepatternofdevelopmentthat,accordingtohim,allconstitutionsmustfollow(6.43.
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 3 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
2).
Polybius’distortionsarealmostallofasinglebasicnature:theyaresinsofomission,whetheromissionsoffactoromissionsofthe(true)interpretationand/orsignificanceofstatedfacts.10Theseomissionsarenottheaccidentalconsequencesofcarelessness,ignorance,orinadequateresearch.Theyaredeliberate.Polybiusknewexactlywhathewasdoingandexactlywhyhewasdoingit.Hehimselfmakesnobonesaboutitwhenhepre-emptspossible(p.249) criticismbyRomanreaders(6.11.3–8).Theywill,heremarks,findhisaccountdefective,andsowillcarpaboutwhatheleavesoutinsteadofappreciatingwhathedoessay,assumingthathisomissionsaretheresultofignorance,notcalculation.Infacttheyshouldrealizethat,sinceeverythinghedoessayistrue,hisomissionsaredeliberate.11Thislastassertionisstrikinglyillogical,butthatneednotconcernus.AllthatmattersisthatPolybiusadmits,orratherboasts,thathisomissionsaredeliberate.
Polybius’earlieraccountofthevarioustypesofconstitutiondescribesthemixedconstitutionascombiningcharacteristicsdrawnfromkingship,aristocracy,anddemocracy(6.3.5–7),withtheSpartanconstitutionasdevisedbyLycurguscitedasanexample(6.3.8).Lycurgusconsciouslycombinedthemeritsandcharacteristicfeaturesofthebestconstitutions,sc.thethreeuncorruptedforms(6.10.6).Butwhereashereachedhisconclusionsbyratiocination,theRomanslearnedfrompracticalexperience(6.10.12–14).IntheRomanconstitutiontheelementsofthethreegoodconstitutionsweresowellblendedthateventheRomansthemselveswereunabletosaywithcertaintywhethertheirconstitutionwasaristocratic,democratic,ormonarchic:thepoweroftheconsulspointedtomonarchy,thatofthesenatetoaristocracy,thatofthemanytodemocracy(6.11.11–12).
Thecatalogueofthepowersoftheconsulsin6.12issaidtosuggestmonarchy(6.12.9).Theyintroduceforeignembassiestothesenate,submitquestionsforthesenatetodiscuss,andareresponsibleforputtingitsdecreesintopractice(6.12.2–4).12Similarly,theyareresponsibleforsummoningtheassemblies,introducinglegislativeproposals,andsupervisingtheexecutionofmajoritydecisions(6.12.4).Onthestrengthofthis,wemightsaythat,iftheconsulsaremonarchs,theyareconstitutionalmonarchs,withlessfreedomofactionthantheEuripideanDemophonorTheseus,andaveryfarcryfromAgamemnonorAlexander.13Onlyinthefieldistheirpowerclosetoabsolute(6.12.5–7).AndwhatPolybius,ofcourse,doesnotsayisthattheconsulswererestrictedbycollegiality14andtheirlimitedtermofoffice,andthat,oncethattermhadelapsed,theyhadtocoexistwiththeirfellow-senators,andinparticularwiththeirfellow-consularsfortherestoftheircareers,perhapsa(p.250) strongerdisincentivetoindependentorprovocativeactionwhileinofficethananyformaldefinitionofpowers.15
Thesenateexercisedanalmostcompletecontroloverdisbursementsfromthetreasury(6.13.1–3,cf.14.2)andovertheprincipalpracticalaspectsofRome’sdominationofItaly(6.13.4–5).Withoutinterferencefromthepeople,itmadearrangementsforanyembassiesthathadtobesentabroad,andreceivedandansweredallforeignenvoysto
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 4 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Rome(6.13.6–7).Inshort,itwasmoreorlesssolelyresponsibleforfinanceandforeignaffairs.Intheserespects,saysPolybius,theconstitutionappearedaristocratic,especiallywhentheconsulswereabsentfromthecity(6.13.8–9).16
Sowhatpartisleftforthedemos(6.14.1)?Thereisone,andaveryweightyone.Thedemosisthesolesourceofhonourandpunishment,anditalonehascapitaljurisdiction(6.14.4–6).Itbestowsmagistraciesonthedeserving;itpassesorrejectslegislativeproposals;and,mostimportant,itdecidesissuesofpeaceandwar,acceptingorrefusingalliances,truces,andtreaties(6.14.9–11).Allthisissuggestiveofdemocracy(6.14.12).17Asstatedhere,perhapsitis,andofcoursenothingthatisstatedhereisfalse.Butunderthisrubricthelistofomissionsislongandgrave.18Whenwethinkofthetimocraticstructuringoftheassemblies,ofthefactthatassembliesmetonlywhensummonedbyaqualifiedmagistrateandcouldconsideronlytheproposalshebroughtbeforeit,whichtheycouldneitheramendnorevendebate,andoftheinstitutionofclientelaanditsconsequences,theimportanceofthisdemocraticelementrapidlybeginstodwindle.19Recentscholarshiphasrightlyprotestedagainsttheoncewidespreadbeliefthatclientelawasall-pervasiveandall-powerful.20Ithasalso,againrightly,insistedontheimportanceoftheinstitutionofthecontioandofcontionaloratory.21Butnoneofthisvouchsafestodemocracyalargersliceoftheconstitutionalcake.22
Thusfar,then,Polybiushasnotpresentedaveryconvincingportrayaloftheperfectmixedconstitution.23Hehasslightlyexaggeratedthepowersof(p.251) theconsulsinrelationtothesenate,givenarelativelyfairpictureofthedegreeofcontrolexercisedbythesenate,andseriouslymisrepresentedtheindependenceofthepopularassemblies.24Itishardlysurprisingthathefelttheneedtosayquitealotmoreontherelationshipsbetweenthethreeelementsoftheconstitution.Thethemeofthenextfourchaptersisthepossibilitiesforobstructionandco-operationaffordedbythesystem(6.15.1).Theultimateoutcomeoftheinvestigationisthatthethreeelementscoexistinallegedperfectharmony,sothatnobetterformofconstitutioncouldpossiblybefound(6.18.1).
Polybiusdealsfirstwiththeconsuls’needforthegoodwillofbothsenateandpeople(6.15.11).Thedependenceoftheconsulsonthesenateisveryreal.Despitetheirpowerinthefield,theirfreedomofactionascommanderscanbeparalysedifthesenatechoosestobeobstructivebyfailingtoprovidesupplies,uniforms,andpayforthelegions.Prorogationisinthesenate’sgiftand,whenthecampaignisover,sotooistheawardorrefusalofatriumph(6.15.4–8).Thepeopleisrelevantinonlytworespects(6.15.9–10).Itcontrols,asalreadyremarked,trucesandtreaties,and,attheendoftheirtermofoffice,theconsulsmustrendertheiraccountstoit.Ofthesetwoassertionsthelatterisfalse,oratbestseriouslymisleading.25Sothischapterreinforcestheimpressionthatthesenateenjoyedadominantposition,whilethecompetenceofthepeoplewasverylimited.
Thepeople’ssupposedcontroloverthesenateisequallyunimpressive.Thesenatecannotconductenquiriesifthesehavenotbeenauthorizedbythepeople(6.16.2),whilethepeoplecanpassorrejectlawsthataffectthepowersandprivilegesofthesenateitself(6.16.2–3).Thustheseinstancesofpopularsovereigntyarelimitedtospecialoccasions,andareinanycasemuchunderminedbythesocio-economicstructuringandprocedural
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 5 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
rulesofthepopularassemblies,aboutwhich,asalreadyobserved,Polybiussaysnothing.Hisonlyotherpointisthepowerofthetribunes,whomust,hesays,alwaysdowhatseemsgoodtothepeople(6.16.5).Whetherthatwasevertrueevenintheoryisdebatable,buttherecanbenodoubtthatevenatthetimeofCannae,letaloneinPolybius’ownday,itwasnottrueinpractice.26Fromthischaptertoo,thepredominanceofthesenateemergesasessentiallyuntrammelled.
Thenextchapterpurportstoshowtheothersideofthecoinbydemonstratingthatthepeopleneedsthesupportofthesenate.Buttheevidenceofferedisconcernedwiththesenate’scapacityforpositiveandnegativeinterferenceinthegrantingofpubliccontracts,andthefactthatjudgesareappointedfromthesenate(6.17.2–7).Hencenobodyrisksaconfrontationwiththesenate,justasmenareafraidtoprovoketheconsulsforfearofreprisalsoncampaign(6.17.(p.252) 8–9).Asisnotorious,allthishasnothingwhatevertodowiththepeople,butisconcernedwithrelationsbetweenthesenateandtheasyetembryonicequestrianorderinakindofpragmaticprototypeofconcordiaordinum.27
Itshouldthereforebynowbeclearthat,evenifweweretoconfineourattentiontowhatPolybiussays,hisattempttopresenttheRomansystemasamixedconstitutionisafailure.28Whenwealsoconsiderthevariouspointsheomits,thetruth—thatRomewasanoligarchycontrolledbythesenate—becomesevenplainer.Theomissionshaveacommonpurpose,totrytoconceal,oratleastminimize,thepredominanceofthesenateovermagistratesandpeople,andtherelativeinsignificanceofthepopularassemblies.29Inotherwords,Polybius’distortionsandomissionsalikeserveasingleend,togivesomesemblanceofplausibilitytotheclaimthattheRomanconstitutionwasmixed.
Theoverridingimportanceofthatobjectiveprovidestheanswertoaquestionthatmightarise:whydidPolybiusnotpraisetheRomansforthoseundemocraticfeaturesoftheirsystemwhichhechoosesinsteadtopassoverinsilence?Afterall,Polybiushadnoloveofdemocracy.Hisdefinitionoftruedemocracy(6.4.4–5)isrevealing.Itisnotwherethemassofthepeoplehastherighttodowhateveritlikes(adefiningcriterionofdemocracyinclassicalAthens),30butwheremajorityruleexistsinanenvironmentofpietytowardsthegods,respectforparentsandelders,andobediencetothelaws(allofwhich,beitsaid,arealsocoveredbydefiningcriteriaofdemocracyinclassicalAthens).31ThesamemindsetisapparentinhiscontemptuousdismissalsofAthensandThebes,wherethemobcontrolseverythingaccordingtoitswhim(6.44.9),andCarthage,whichbythetimeoftheHannibalicWarhadsofardeclinedthatthedemosenjoyedthegreatestpowerindeliberations,whereasatRomepolicywasdeterminednotbythemanybutbythebestmen(6.51.5,7).So,too,hisdefinitionofochlocracy,wherethedemosisnolongerwillingtoobeyauthorityandhaveanequalsharewithitsleaders,butwantstocontroleverythingitself(6.57.8).Whenthingsreachthatpass,theconstitutionmaycallitselfbythefairestofnames,freedomanddemocracy,butinfactitdeservestheworst,ochlocracy(6.57.9).
(p.253) PolybiusmustthenhaveapprovedwholeheartedlyofthosefeaturesoftheRomanconstitutionthatwerecalculatedtolimittheinitiativesofthepeopleandensurethecontinuingsupremacyofthebettermostclasses.Buttolistandpraisethemwould
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 6 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
haverenderedevenharderthealreadydifficulttaskhehadsethimselfoftryingtoshowthatRomeenjoyedamixedconstitution.Instead,hehadtorisktheirritationofhisRomanreaders,whoknewperfectlywellthattheylivedinanoligarchy,notamixedconstitution,andwerenodoubtjustlyproudoftheelaboratearrangementstheyhadmadetoensurethatitremainedso.
SowhydidPolybiusdoit?Theansweris,Ibelieve,verysimple.ItisderivedfromthetwoaxiomaticpropositionstowhichIalludedearlier.PolybiusbelievedthattheRomanconstitutionwasthebestconstitution,becauseithadenabledtheRomanstomakethemselvesmastersoftheuniverseindoublequicktime.Healsobelievedthatthemixedconstitutionwasthebestformofconstitution,becauseitcombinedthemostcommendablefeaturesofthethreetypesofconstitution.Itistemptingtothinkofthesetwobeliefsasrespectivelypracticalandtheoretical,butthatwould,Ithink,bemisleading,sincePolybius’reasonsforpreferringthemixedconstitutionwerethemselvesatleastinpartpractical:itpromotedinternalstabilityandexternalsecurity(6.18.2–6;contrast6.50onthedefectiveSpartanconstitution).Itmightthereforeperhapsbebettertodistinguishthemasspecificandgeneral.
Bethatasitmay,Polybiusthenfounditnecessarytoreconcilethesetwopropositions.Inotherwords,ifthemixedconstitutionwerethebestingeneraltermsandtheRomanconstitutionwerethebestintermsofspecificpoliticalandmilitaryachievementinagivenhistoricalcontext,thentheRomanconstitutionhadforPolybiustobenotmerelyanexamplebutthesupremeexampleofthemixedconstitution.32Hiscompulsiontotrytoprovethisis,asfarasIcansee,thesoleandsufficientexplanationofallthedistortionsandomissionsthatmakehisaccountoftheRomanconstitutionsobizarre,andthatisreallyallthatneedstobesaidaboutit.
Soletmesayjustalittlemore,aboutanaspectofPolybius’analysisthatIhavenotsofarmentioned.ThemajorproblemsthattheGreekshadencounteredintheirdealingswiththeRomansstemmedlargelyfromtheirverydifferentattitudestowrittenrules,especiallyinthematteroftreaties.TheGreekshadbecomeaccustomedtoelaboratetreatiesthatdefinedineverincreasingdetailtherightsandobligations,thepermissionsandprohibitions,thatboundthecontractingparties.33Sotheyhadcometobelievethatifatreatysaidyouwereallowedtodosomething,thatmeantyouwerefreetogo(p.254)aheadanddoit,and,morebalefullystillfortheirdealingswithRome,thatifatreatydidnotsayyouwerenotallowedtodosomething,youwerelikewisefreetogoaheadanddoit.ThestoryofGraeco-RomanrelationsisthestoryoftheGreekslearningthehardwaythatthatwasnotwhattheRomansmeantbytheonethingonwhichtheyinsisted,respectformaiestaspopuliRomani.34
NowoneofthemajoraimsofPolybius’workwasclearlytoexplaintheRomanstotheGreeks,tohelptheGreekstounderstandthesavagelyunfathomablemonsterthathadcomeoutofthewestandturnedtheirworldupsidedown,tomakeiteasierforthemtocopewithRomeinthefuture,andsavethemfromrepeatingthesamedisastrousmistakes.35YetinhisaccountoftheRomanconstitution,howevermuchhe
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 7 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
misrepresentstheirnature,purpose,andconsequences,whatPolybiusistalkingaboutisalmostexclusivelythewrittenrules.Inthat,heremainsessentiallyGreek.Heisofcourseawarethatotherfactorsexisted.Hemakesatokenreferencetohabitsandcustoms(6.11.4),anddiscussestheimportanceofreligion(6.56.6–11)andfuneralpractices(6.53–5,cf.52.10).36ButheneverallowsfullimportancetothefactthatatRome,inconstitutionalasinothermatters,whatwaswrittendownmatteredfarlessthanwhatwasnotwrittendownbutuniversallyunderstoodandaccepted.37Inthatregard,forallhislongresidenceatRome,hisacquaintancewithRomanluminaries,andhiscopiousresearches,perhapsevenhehadnotfullyplumbedthetruenatureofthebeast.
Notes:
(1)IamgratefultoBruceGibsonandJeffTatumfortheircommentsonadraftofthispaper,toAndrewErskineforsomehelpfulsuggestions,andtoallwhocontributedtothediscussionattheconference.Sourcereferenceswithoutauthor’snamearetoPolybius.
(2)Syme1939:144n.1.
(3)Infavourofdemocracy,cf.aboveallMillar2002a:110–42,165–6,alsoLintott1999:198–207,and,morecautiously,Tatum2009:214–28.Against,cf.e.g.North1990b:3–21;Hölkeskamp2004b:257–80.
(4)ThatisnottodenythatPolybiusdiscernedamoraldimensioninRome’ssurvivalinadversity,asforcefullyarguedbyEckstein1995:65–8.
(5)OntheimportanceofthissectiontotheoverallpurposeofBook6asawhole,cf.e.g.vonFritz1954:123,Walbank1998b:48,Champion2004a:92–4,Erskine,ch.12inthisvolume.
(6)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.635–6.
(7)That‘constitution’isanunsatisfactoryrenditionofpoliteiaisstressedbyErskineinthisvolume,pp.233–5.Butitwillserveforthepurposesofthispaper,provideditisrememberedthatthe‘constitution’wasbynomeanslimitedtolegallydefinedwrittenrules.
(8)DespitevonFritz1954:328,Pédech1964:306.
(9)Cf.Walbank1998b:49–51,refutingNicolet1983.
(10)OnPolybius’omissions,cf.ingeneralNicolet1974:219–22.
(11)Erskineinthisvolume(pp.235–6)justifiesPolybius’omissionsonthegroundthatmatterswhichdidnotcontributetoRome’ssuccessdidnotneedtobementioned.Thisistrue,butitwouldhavebeennotmerelyunnecessarybutdamagingforPolybiustomentionaspectsthatcalledintoquestionhisclaimthattheRomansenjoyedamixedconstitution.
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 8 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(12)Polybiuscouldhaveputhiscasemorestronglyhere,sincehedoesnotmakeclearthatthepresidingconsulsettheagendaformeetingsofthesenate.(Thiswas,however,mitigatedbytheregularpracticeofincludingontheagendatheitemderepublica.)
(13)Cf.vonFritz1954:204–5,217,withtheconclusionthattherewasnotrulymonarchicelementintheRomanrepublic;Brunt1988:15–17;Mouritsen2001:6;Millar2002a:113–14.
(14)ThatPolybiuswaswellawareoftheproblemsofcollegialityisimpliedby3.87.7–8,wherehecontraststhepositionoftheconsulswiththatofadictator.Foraspecificexampleinhisnarrative,cf.3.70.1–8.
(15)Cf.vonFritz1954:218,Meier1966:49,Hölkeskamp2004b:265–8.
(16)Cf.Brunt1988:13–14andinparticularvonFritz1954:158onthestrangeimportanceofthepresenceorabsenceoftheconsulstothequestionofwhethertheconstitutionappearedtobeamonarchyoranaristocracy.
(17)Cf.Brunt1988:19–23,butnotealsoMeier1966:52–3.
(18)AsadmittedbyMillar2002a:138–42,withtheconclusionthatthecrowd‘symbolizedandrepresentedthesovereigntyofthepeople’;preciselyso:itdidnotexerciseit.Cf.alsoMouritsen2001:13–17.
(19)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.689–90on6.15.9–10;alsovonFritz1954:234–41,Finley1983:70–96,esp.84–96,North1990b:5,15onthedifferencesbetweenAthensandRome.
(20)Cf.Brunt1988:27–32,424–31;alsoYakobson1992ontheeffectsofcompetitionatelections.
(21)Cf.Brunt1988:45–9;Millar2002a:135–6;Hölkeskamp2004b:233–7;Morstein-Marx2004:4–12,119–59.
(22)Cf.North1990b:12–13,16–18;Hölkeskamp2004b:238–42;Morstein-Marx2004:12–32,160–203,257,283–7.
(23)Foramuchmorecharitableview,cf.Lintott1999:16–26.
(24)DespiteMillar2002a:115–24.
(25)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.689–90on6.15.9–10.
(26)Cf.vonFritz1954:160,330–2;Walbank,HCPi.691–2on6.16.4–5;contra:Nicolet1974:234–6.
(27)Cf.Walbank,HCPi.692–7on6.17;Brunt1988:25,388.
(28)Cf.vonFritz1954:345:‘apicturewhichbearsbutlittlerelationtoreality’,thoughhe
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 9 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
opts(218,342)foramixtureofoligarchyanddemocracy.
(29)VonFritz1954:159notesthatPolybiususesmuchweakerlanguagetodescribethepowersofthesenatethanhedoesofthoseoftheconsulsorpeople.Heoffersnoexplanation,butanobviousonewouldbethatPolybiuswasdeliberatelytryingtoplaydownthesenate’spredominance.
(30)Cf.e.g.Xen.Hell.7.1.12,26;Dem.20.120,148;Ps.-Dem.59.88.
(31)Forpiety,cf.Ar.Nub.1506–9;Ps.-Lys.6passim;Ps.-Dem.26.27,59.12,andofcoursethefateofSocrates.Forrespectforone’selders,cf.Ar.Plut.1044;Xen.Mem.1.2.9–10;Isoc.7.37;Ps.-Dem.25.24,66.Forobediencetothelaws,cf.Ar.Eccl.944–5;Xen.Hell.1.7.29;Pl.Crito50b;Isoc.4.39;Dem.21.150,24.5;Ps-Dem.26.10;Aeschin.1.179,3.169.Ingeneral,cf.themorefavourablejudgementofEckstein1995:140.
(32)Inotherwords,thesecondofthepossibilitiesadumbratedbyNorth1990b:8.Fortheoppositeview,cf.Pédech1964:316–17.
(33)ThemostobviousexamplescanbefoundinthesuccessiverenewalsoftheKing’sPeaceduringthefourthcentury,withtheirprogressivelymoreelaborateattemptstodefinethespecificcontentoffreedomandautonomy;cf.StaatsverträgeII242,265,269,270,282,285,292.
(34)Itshouldalwaysberememberedthattheliteralmeaningofmaiestasis‘greaterness’,afactthatgoesalongwaytowardsexplainingtheattitudeofRometotheoutsideworld.PolybiusandsomeotherGreekswereatleastawareoftheproblem,ashisnarrativeofhisowntimeshows;cf.inparticularthespeechofCallicratestothesenate(24.9.1–4)andtheconflictofprinciplebetweenAristaenusandPhilopoemen(24.11.4–8).
(35)Cf.Erskine,ch.12inthisvolume.
(36)Cf.Nicolet1974:216,Walbank1998b:46,Champion2004a:94–6,Erskineinthisvolume,pp.241,243.ItmustofcoursebeadmittedthatsomeatleastofthesematterswouldhavebeenmorefullydealtwithifBook6hadsurvivedcomplete.
(37)Cf.vonFritz1954:307onPolybius’failuretodistinguishbetweenlegalcompetencesandactualpowers;Meier1966:54–7;Brunt1988:13,51;Hölkeskamp2004b:247–53,276.
Polybius’ Distortions of the Roman ‘Constitution’: A Simpl(istic) Explanation1
Page 10 of 10
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 1 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
PolybiusandJosephusonRome1
ErichS.Gruen
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0014
AbstractandKeywords
PolybiusandJosephussharemorethanacontemptforarm-chairhistorianswithnoexperienceofeventsoroftopography.Parallelscanalsobedrawnbetweentheirpersonalcareers,whichincludedlengthystaysinRome,andtheirsenseofpowershiftingtowardsRome,withbothhistoriansusingthewordTyche(chanceorevendivinefate)inthiscontext.Thischaptersshowsthattheseconnectionsextendfurther:neitherwriterisanapologistforRome,andtheiremphasisremainsdisconcertinglyontheinevitabilityofRomanpower,notonthebenefitsthatitconferred.TheiranalysismoreoverextendstodiscussionofRomanfailingsandtransgressionsafterachievingdominion,andtherearelikewiseparallelsinthehintsofafutureendtoRome'sworldpower.
Keywords:Polybius,Rome,Judaea,Tyche,Romandecline,empire
ThegreatGreekhistorianPolybiussethighstandardsforhistoricalwriting.Hisscorn(or
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 2 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
atleastprofessedscorn)formostofhispredecessorswasdeep.Polybiusdeliveredsharpcriticismofarmchairhistorianswhositintheirstudies,collectandexaminedocuments,andwritewithauthorityaboutmattersofwhichtheylackallexperience.Thosewhohaveneverengagedpersonallyinpoliticsandwar,heasserted,havenobusinesswritinghistorybecausetheydon’tknowwhattheyaretalkingabout(12.25g.1–2,28a.7–10).
Josephus,theindispensablehistorianoftheJews,echoedthosesentiments.IntheopeningoftheJewishWar,hisfirstcomposition,heblaststhosehistorianswhohavewrittenonthesubjectbutdidnottakepartintheactions(1.1).Muchlater,inhisfinalwork,theContraApionem,hestillhammeredatthattheme.HerippedGreekhistorianswhowriteabouteventsinwhichtheyplayednorole.AndhereiteratedhiscontemptforthosewhopublishedaccountsoftheJewishWarbutneversetfootintheplacesaboutwhichtheywrote(1.45–6).ItisworthnotingthatJosephusattacksthosewhocriticizedhishistoryasifitwerenothingbutaschoolboyexerciseenteredinaprizecompetition(1.53).Thatappears,asmostscholarsrecognize,tobebasedonThucydides’famouscommentthathishistoryisapossessionforalltime,notaprizeessaycomposedforthemomentandthenforgotten(Thuc.1.22).Whatmanyhavefailedtonotice,however,isthatthisstatementalsocloselyresemblesapassageinPolybius,whomaintainsthatthepurposeofwritinghistoryisnottopublishacleveressaybuttodeliveralessonthatwillendurefortheindefinitefuture(3.31.12–13).
Theparallelsinthelives,careers,andattitudesofthesetwohistorians,infact,arequiteremarkable.Bothreachedpositionsofprominenceinthepoliticalandmilitaryspheresoftheirrespectivestates,Polybiusasaleader(p.256) oftheAchaeanLeague,amajorregionalpowerinGreece,andJosephusasmemberofadistinguishedfamilyandhimselfaJudaeangeneral.BothheldcriticalpostsintheirnationsatatimewhentheycameintoconflictwiththemightofRome.Polybiuswasamongthoseimplicatedinpurportedanti-RomanactivitiesduringtheThirdMacedonianWarandwassummarilyremovedtoRome,wherehelivedasasemi-hostageforclosetotwentyyears.JosephusservedascommanderofJewishforcesinGalileeduringthegreatJewishrebellion,surrenderedtotheRomans,wasreleased,and,likePolybius,landedinRome,wherehestayedformorethantwodecades.BothwrotethebulkoftheirworkinRome,underthepatronageofRome’smostpowerfulandinfluentialfigures,thehouseofAemiliusPaullusinthecaseofPolybius,theimperialfamilyinthecaseofJosephus.And,mostimportantly,eachwrotehistoriesdirected,atleastinlargepart,totheirfellow-countrymen,defeatedandcrushedbyRome,historiesthatsoughttoelucidateRomanbehaviourandexplainRomansuccessasalessontoGreeksandJews,respectively.
AcompellingmotiveinspiredPolybius’wholeenterprise:adesiretotracetheriseofRometoapositionofpre-eminencethroughwhichthecitybroughtthewholeMediterraneanworldunderitssway(1.2.7–8,1.3.7–10,3.1.4).Resistancetothisjuggernautcould—anddid—leadtodisaster.PolybiusrepeatedlybrandstheenemiesofRomeasirrational,irresponsible,andevenmad(2.21.2,5.102.1,7.2–7,8.24.10).ThatjudgementculminatesinhisbitterandfuriouscommentsaboutGreekleaderswhose
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 3 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
recklessactionspropelledhisownhomelandintoaninsaneconflictwithRome,theAchaeanWar,theupshotofwhichwastocastdestructionandcalamityuponGreece,apitiablefatethatthefollyoftheGreeksbroughtuponthemselves.2Allofthis,ofcourse,strikesfamiliarchordsforreadersofJosephus.TheJewishhistorianfastenedblameforthedisastrousJewishWarwithRomeuponheedlessleaders,afflictedwithirrationality,lunaticschemes,andunreasonablepassionthatamountedtoinsanity.3
Therashandheadlongdestructivenessascribedbybothauthorstotheirownfellow-citizensstemmed,sotheyargued,fromafailureofunderstanding—afailuretoseethattheRomanacquisitionofworldsupremacywasguidedbyaninvisiblehandthatledtoapredeterminedoutcome.Polybiuscharacterizedtheprocessasτύχη,anambiguousandtorturedterm.Thehistorianemploysitinmorethanonesenseinhishistory.Itoftencarriestheconnotationofchanceorrandomness,evenhappenstance.Atothertimes,itcomesclosertofateorprovidence.Polybiushadnorigorousconsistencyonthisscore.4Hedoes,onoccasion,evenconstruethewordasanalternativeor(p.257) paralleltothegods.5Mostsignificantly,herendersτύχηasaformofdivinefatethatguaranteedthesuccessofRomeinbringingtheentireworldunderasingleruleanddominion,somethingneverheretoforeaccomplished.6Thatstrikingphraseologyexpressedhisconsideredjudgementandthesummationofhisagenda.
ThesimilaritieswithJosephusherecannotbemissed.TheJewishhistorianalsoemploysthetermτύχηinthecontextoftransferringworlddominiontotheRomans.ThespeechsetinAgrippa’smouthtodissuadetheJewsfromtakinguparmsagainstRomemakesthepointmorethanonce.7HeretooGodandτύχηseemalmostinterchangeable.AgrippaassertsthatGodhasmovedtothesideofRome,therolethathehadalsoassignedtoτύχη.8Theoverlappingbetweentheconceptsmakesastrikingconjunction.InJosephus’formulation,τύχηadvancedtheaimsofVespasian,afeaturethattheRomanascribedtodivinepronoia(BJ4.622).WhenJosephusseekstojustifyhissurrender,heciteshisprayertoGodaffirmingthatthedivinewillaccordedwiththepassageofτύχηtotheRomans.9ThepointemergesmostforcefullyinJosephus’ownspeechoutsidethewallsofthecity,attheinstigationofTitus,urgingtheJewstoyieldtotheimperialpower.Thereisnouse,hesays,indefyingthemastersoftheuniverse:τύχηhaspassedfromeverywhereovertotheRomans,andGodwhohasbroughtimperialpowerfromnationtonationhasnowsetitinItaly.10
Thecorrespondencesbetweenthesetwohistoriansarenumerousandundeniable.JosephusalsocitesPolybiusthreetimesonothermatters.11HeplainlyknewandevidentlyreadtheworkoftheAchaeanhistorian.Thatisnowgenerallyacknowledgedandneednotbere-argued.12HowfarJosephus’ownattitudesandopinionsontherelationsofJewstothepowerofRomeowetheirformulationstothecloselycomparableviewsofPolybiusontheGreeks’experiencewithRomanmightandauthoritycanonlybeamatterofspeculation.Theissuerequiresnoinvestigationhere.Bothhistorians,inanycase,(p.258) writinginRomeinanalogouscircumstances,andanalysingthereasons(orabsenceofreasons)thatimpelledtheirnationstoclashwiththemastersoftheuniverseonlytosufferbalefulconsequences,reachedsimilarconclusions.Themarchofhistory,
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 4 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
whetheridentifiedwithτύχηorwithYahweh,nowsideswithRome,justifiesRome’striumphoverrecklessandself-destructiverebels,andproclaimsthehandofdestinyinRomanrule.ItbehovesGreekandJewaliketoswimwiththetideofthefuture.Allofthisiswidelyacknowledgedinthescholarship.
Yetthereisanotheraspectofthestorythathasreceivedlittleattention.PolybiusandJosephusarenomereapologistsforRomanpower.Theyrecognizethefollyofovertresistancetothegreatbehemoth.Andtheylamenttheirrationalexcessesoftheirownpeoplesthatbroughtcatastropheupontheirnations,alessontobelearned,andmistakesnevertoberepeated.ButthatisnotthesameaswelcomingtheruleofRomeandenjoyingthepeace,prosperity,andsecurityoflivingintheembraceoftheempire.NeitherPolybiusnorJosephuspraisesthebenefitsthatRomebroughttotheworld.Nothingintheirtextshailstheestablishmentofstability,theblessingsofcivilization,orthebenefactionsofRometothefar-flungregionsoftheworld.13ThepowerofRomeanditsinvincibility—notitsbenevolence—constitutetherecurringmotif.
Andonecangofurther.AcloserlookatthewritingsofPolybiusandJosephusshowsanotablenumberofcriticismsofRome,somesubtleandveiled,othersmoredirectandundisguised,thatgiveadifferentimpressionofthehistorians’outlookandanalysis.Theymightnotquitequalifyas‘speakingtruthtopower’.Buttheydosuggestaslylysubversiveandcautiouslycynicalperspectivethatputtheminacategoryverydifferentfromtheapologistsforempire.
Polybius,tobesure,admiredRomanprinciplesandRomaninstitutions.Asiswellknown,hegivesmuchcredittothestrengthandbalanceofRome’sconstitutionforitsimperialsuccess.14PolybiusreckonstheunbrokenexpansionofRomanterritoryintothewesternandeasternMediterraneanasafeatofincomparablemagnitude.15ButhisunderstandingofRomanbehaviourwasrudelyshakenbytheupheavalsofthelate150sandearly140sBC,culminatinginthesubjugationofhisnativeland.ThisshockinducedPolybiustoreconsiderhisperspectiveandtoattachawholenewportiontohishistory.HegivesashisreasonadesiretoassessthecharacterofRomanruleandtodeterminewhetheritmeritspraiseorblame.16Thatheshouldposesuchanissueatall(p.259) constitutesapowerfulstatement.ThehistorianhereinviteshisreaderstoconsidertheconsequencesanddesirabilityoftheentireRomanenterprise.Itwouldcertainlystopanyreadershort.Polybius’motivationherehasbeenthesubjectofmuchspeculationandcontroversy.Thisisnottheplacetosettlethatmatter.Thecomplexblendofmoralismandpragmatismdefiesaconfidentconclusion.ButtheideathatPolybiusconsideredRomansuccessassufficienttoestablishtheproprietyofempireandthathisfinalbooksrepresentedadefenceofRomanpolicyfallswellshortofpersuasion.SuchaverdictcannotadequatelyaccountfortheseriesofscornfulobservationsthatPolybiusdeliversinthosebooks.Thereismoregoingonhere.Thehistorian,mostprobably,soughttoleavehisreadersinnodoubtaboutthenatureofRomanbehaviour,thustowarnhiscountrymenbyimplicationagainstanyfurthersuicidalupheaval.17Onelooksinvainforanexplicitoverallevaluation.Perhapsitprovedtooproblematic—orhazardous.Butanotablemessagecomesthrough.Thehistorianindulgesinastrikingsequenceofremarksscattered
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 5 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
throughthelastbooksofhishistorythatshinealessthanflatteringlightuponRomanactions.
PolybiusrepeatedlydrawsattentiontoRomancynicismandself-interest,totheencouragementofservilityamongeasternprinces,todeliberateeffortstoundermineotherstates,todeviousdiplomacy,andtospeciouspretextsfortheinflictionofterror.Anumberofinstancescanillustratethepoint.TheRomansenatepromptedkingPrusiasofBithyniatoappearbeforetheminanoutfitnormallywornbymanumittedslavesandtogrovelbeforetheminhumiliatingandcontemptiblefashion(30.18).InthecaseofDalmatia,soPolybiusclaims,Romelackedanexcuseformakingwarbutinventedonefornootherreasonthantogiveitstroopssomeworktodo,lesttheybecometoolazyandidlefrominactivity(32.13.4–9).TokeeptheSeleucidrulersofSyriainline,aRomanenvoytookituponhimselftoburntheirwarships,hamstringtheirelephants,andgenerallydegradetheroyalpower(31.2.9–11).And,inaseriesofarbitrationdecisionsthatadjudicatedrivalclaimsbetweenCarthaginiansandNumidians,RomanarbitersalwaysdecidedagainsttheCarthaginians,accordingtoPolybius,notbecauseofthemeritsofthecasebutbecauseitwasintheinterestsofRome(31.21.5–6).Indeed,soPolybiusobserveselsewhere,theRomanshadlongsincedeterminedtomakewaronCarthage,andweresimplylookingforapretextthatmightappearjustifiableintheeyesofothers(36.2.1–4).AsPolybiusputsitmoregenerally,Romansadapttheirpolicyforcapitalizingonthefaultsofneighboursinordertoaugmenttheirowndominance(31.10.7).Andtheywereindignantifallaffairswerenotbroughttothemanddoneinaccordancewiththeirwishes(23.17.4).
(p.260) Thesepassagesconstitutearemarkableassemblageofcomments—andmuchofPolybius’textintheselastbooksismissing.Theremayhavebeenalotmoreofthesame.ItmisreadsPolybiustointerprettheseremarkssimplyasdetachedobservations,evenindeedasapositiveevaluationofRomanpragmatism.Theydonotamounttoamererecordofeventsbuttoaclearjudgement.18TheGreekhistorian,livingandwritinginRome,andacquaintedwithacircleofRomanaristocratsandintellectuals,deliveredasharpassessment.HedidnotshrinkfromexposingwhathesawasadulterationandimpairmentofRomancharacter.Romansofanearlierday,hestated,wouldnotcompromiseprincipleforcash—buthecouldnolongermakesuchaconfidentassertionaboutRomansofhisownday(18.34.6–18.35.2).Indeed,thearrivalofgreatwealthinthewakeofRome’smilitarytriumphoverPerseusdeeplyaffectedthedeportmentofRomanyouths.Theyindulgedinextravagantexpendituresand(inPolybius’view)disgracefulsexualadventures.19Expansionacrosstheseahaderodedsensitivitytomoralbehaviour.RomanshadonceconfiscatedworksofartfromSyracuse,atleastexhibitingsomeaestheticinterest;nowtheyusedpricelessCorinthianpaintingsasdiceboardsforthesportofsoldiers(9.10,39.2).Evenmoretelling,Polybiussetsthissombreevaluationatabroaderlevel,beyondtheparticularcaseofRome.Asheputsit,thestatethatattainsunchallengedempirewillenjoyprosperitybutyieldtoextravagance,itscitizensabsorbedinmutualrivalries;thestruggleforoffice,wealth,andboastfulostentationwillsignalthebeginningsofachangefortheworse(6.57.5–6).TheinstitutionsandcharacterofRome’scitizenryhadgainedthemanempire.Butoncethey
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 6 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
hadacquiredthatempire,theveryqualitiesthathadmadeitpossiblebegantounravelandwouldeventuallyplaceitinjeopardy.PolybiusstoodinaweoftheRomanachievement,butsuffereddisappointmentandexpresseddisillusionment.Thedarkerportraitcastsitsspell.
ThedarkerportraitlurksinJosephus’visionaswell.RuthlessnessandterrorappearagainandagainintheactionsofRomanmilitarymen.Nosurprisehere,onemightargue:warandthecrushingofrebellionnaturallycallforthsuchactions;Romanmilitarymentalityengenderedthem,andthehistoriansimplyrecordedthem.Onecanleaveasidesuchactionsasdemandedbytheexigenciesofbattleandtheferocityofconflict.ButRomanbehaviourofthissortwithregardtoJewsoccursrepeatedlyinJosephus’narrativeofeventswellbeforetheoutbreakofopenrebellion.Itappearsfromthestart,whenPompeycapturedtheTempleandhistroopsbutcheredJewishpriestsinthecourseof(p.261) pouringlibationsandconductingtheirrituals(BJ1.150;AJ14.66–7).AdecadelaterCrassusstrippedtheTempleofallitsgold,takingeverythingthatPompeyhadleft(BJ1.179;AJ14.105–9).Anothertenyearspassed,andCassiuswasintheeast,reducingJudaeancitiestoservitude,soJosephusputsit.20IntheupheavalsafterthedeathofHerod,in4BC,soldiersoftheRomanprocuratorSabinusburnedtheporticoesoftheTempleandplunderedthetreasury.WhateverremainedwassimplyconfiscatedbySabinus(BJ2.49–50;AJ17.261–4).OnceJudaeabecameaRomanprovince,Josephusdoesnothesitatetosetoutthetransgressionscommittedbyasequenceofgovernorsappointedbythecrown.OneneedstolookonlyathisaccountofPontiusPilate’sactionsunderTiberiusthatincludednotoriousprovocationsoftheJewsandthebeatingtodeathofJewishprotesters(BJ2.169–77;AJ18.55–62).InthereignofClaudius,theRomangovernorVentidiusCumanusquelledturmoilbykillingsubstantialnumbersofJews.21Hissuccessor,Felix,alsoengagedinwidespreadexecutionsofJewsandeven,accordingtoJosephus,engineeredthemurderofahighpriest.22
Worsewasstilltocome.JosephusdescribestheprocuratorAlbinus,anappointeeofNero,asonewhoomittednotasingleknownactofvillainy.23ButevenAlbinus’wickednesswasfarexceededbythatofhissuccessor,GessiusFlorus,who,Josephussays,madeAlbinusseembycomparisonamanofexemplaryvirtue.24ThereisnoneedtocataloguetheactsofiniquityandcriminalitythatJosephusascribestotheseRomanofficialsandthatledtotheoutbreakoftheGreatRevolt.TheJewishhistoriancertainlydidnotholdbackindetailingtheatrocitiesoftheRomanleadershipandthemilitary.ItistellingthatinhisVitaJosephusassertsthatJewstookuparmsagainstRomenotbychoicebutoutofnecessity(Vit.27).
Thisextendedtotheemperorsthemselves.JosephusisquicktorecitethefailingsoftheJulio-Claudianrulers.HeoutlinesthegrimandsuspiciouscharacterofTiberius,themurderousmegalomaniaofGaiusCaligula,andtheexcessesandcrueltyofNero.25Ofcourse,ineachofthesecases,JosephusmerelyfollowstheconsensusofRomanhistoriansandtheportraitsthatprevailedintheageoftheFlavians.ButitisnoteworthythathedwellsinconsiderabledetailontheaccessionofClaudius,followingthedeathofCaligula.JosephusprovidesagraphicpresentationofClaudius’panickedeffortstohidein
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 7 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
acloset,andtheneedofthePraetorianGuardtodraghim(p.262) outandthrusthimintopoweragainsthiswill,inpartthroughtheinterventionoftheJewishkingAgrippa.26ThenarrativeexposesnotonlythefearfulnessandspinelessnessofClaudiusbuttheimpotenceoftheRomansenate,theemptinessofaristocraticrhetoricinthefaceofthetroops,andtherawmilitarypowerandruthlessnessthatlayattheheartofRomanrule.JosephusdoesnotspareVespasian.Hecallsattentiontothefutureemperor’sruthlessness,theslaughterofcaptives,themercilesstreatmentofyoungandold,thedemolitionofvillagesandtowns,andtheenslavementofsurvivors.27
NordoesTitushimselfescapethestricturesofthehistorian.Josephus,soitisusuallyassumed,presentsarosyportraitofthemanwholedRomanforcesatthetimeofthedestructionoftheTemple.28Afterall,Titusbecamehispatronandprotector.AndJosephusnotoriouslystrainstoexculpateTitusfromthedastardlydeed:thecommandersoughttosparethecityanditsgreatshrine.IfJosephusbebelieved,theburningoftheTemplecameagainstTitus’wishesandmuchtohissorrow.29Whateverthecredibilityofthatjudgement,itdoesnotformpartofaconsistentlypositiveimageoftheRoman.JosephusmorethanoncecallsattentiontoatrocitiesorderedbyTitus—evenwhenheattemptstoofferexplanationsforthem.AftertakingaGalileancity,forinstance,Titusorderedthemassacreofeverymale,oldandyoung,inthattown,andthesaleofallwomenandchildrenintoslavery(BJ3.298–305).HeshowedequalunscrupulousnessatJotapata,whereheconductedwholesaleslaughter,evenhavingsoldiersshovehelplessdefendersdownasteepinclinewheretheywerecrushedinageneralmêlée(BJ3.329–31).HehadnoqualmsaboutthetortureandcrucifixionofJewishprisoners(BJ5.289,5.449–51).And,forrelaxation,afterthetakingofJerusalem,heenjoyedthespectaclesatCaesareaPhilippiandBeirutinwhichcaptivesinthethousandsweretornapartbywildbeasts,perishedthroughgladiatorialcombat,orwereconsumedbyflames(BJ7.23,7.37–9).30Allperhapsisfairinwar.ButtheseepisodeshardlypresentanedifyingpictureofTitus.Onecanpressthepointfurther.Josephus’presentationofTitus’generalshipimpliesmoresubtlythatthecommanderdidnotalwaysmatchRomanexpectationsoflookingtothesafetyofhismen,enforcingadequatediscipline,andexercisinggoodjudgement.31And,ifthedestructionoftheTempledidindeedoccuragainstTitus’wishes,thissurelyreflectsilluponthegeneral’sowncontrolofthatmostcriticalepisode,aninferencethatJosephus’readerscouldreadilydraw—withouthis(p.263) havingtospellitout.32Indeed,despitethelabouredexculpationofTitus,Josephuselsewhereacknowledgesthat,afterthefallofJerusalemandthefire,theRomancommanderorderedthedestructionofthecityanditsTemple—anotablesignaltohisreadership(BJ7.1;AJ20.250).
ThattheRomanempirewasadespoticentityemergeswithoutambiguityfromJosephus’work.HistextmakesthatpointmostconspicuouslyinthefamousspeechthatheputsintothemouthofAgrippainattemptingtodissuadetheJewsfromtakinguparmsagainstRome.AgrippaexpoundsatlengthupontheirresistibleandinvinciblemightofRomethatextendsoveralltheknownpeoplesoftheworldandagainstwhichnooppositionstandsachance.AnditistellingthatAgripparepeatedlyrepresentsthestatusofthosewhodwellunderRomansovereigntyas‘servitude’.Heemploysthetermsδουλεία,δουλεύειν,and
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 8 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
δου̑λοςagainandagaininthatspeech.33HecharacterizesRomanofficialsasunbearablyharsh.34AndhereferstotheRomansunabashedlyas‘despots’.35Reductionofthepeoplesoftheworldtotheconditionofslaveryisthemainmessage.ThebestthatAgrippacandoistoadvisetheJewstosubmittoitratherthanresistit(BJ2.361).ThathardlyconstitutesanadvertisementfortheblessingsofRomanrule.
Romanrule,however,mightnotendureforever.ThatprospectemergesinthepagesofbothPolybiusandJosephus.TheysuggestafuturewithoutRome—anotunwelcomefuture.PolybiusdrawsamemorableportraitsetintheimmediateaftermathofRome’sdestructionofCarthage.TheRomangeneralScipioAemilianus,whoheadedtheforcesthatdefeatedCarthageandordereditsannihilation,wasafriendandformerpupilofPolybius.AndthehistorianwaspresentasflamesroseoverthecityofCarthage.Scipio,sohetellsus,burstintotears,andthenexplainedthereasontoPolybius.HeweptbecausehecouldforeseeanotherconquerorsomedayissuingsimilarordersforthedestructionofRome—andpunctuatedtheprophecybyquotingHomericversesonthefateofTroy.ThesceneleftapotentimpactuponPolybius,whoredrafteditlaterinmovingfashionforhisreaders.36Themelancholycharacterofthispassageasareminderofthecapriciousnessoffortuneisnot(p.264) uncharacteristicofPolybius.37WhetherornotScipiomeanthiswordsasalugubriousreflectionuponRomanpolicy,Polybius’decisiontoreproducethemandthustoreaffirmthereversalsthatτύχηcanbringleftanominouscloudoverRomansuccess—asthehistorianclearlyintended.
AllusiontothefuturefateofRomeappearslessdramatically,butmostrevealingly,inJosephus’writingsaswell.HislengthybutselectiveparaphraseoftheBookofDanielcontainsasignificantpassage.DanielwasaskedtodecipherthedreamofNebuchadnezzarregardingthehugeimagemadeofvariousparts(gold,silver,bronze,iron,andamixtureofironandclay),thensmashedtobitsbyastonethatgrewtobeagreatmountainfillingtheearth(Dan.2:31–5).Theprophetinterpreteditasasequenceofkingdoms,thelastofwhichwouldbeshatteredbythekingdomofGodthatwillendureforever.38IntheperiodwhentheBookofDanielwascomposedorcompleted,inthe160sBC,thelastearthlykingdomcanonlyhavebeenthatoftheHellenisticmonarchies.But,byJosephus’day,thatkingdomwaswidelyunderstoodtobeRome.JosephushimselfassertsthatDanielhadpredictedthecomingoftheRomanempire(AJ10.276).InparaphrasingDaniel’sinterpretationofNebuchadnezzar’sdream,however,Josephusstopsshortofrecountinghisexplanationofthegreatstone,referringthereadertoDaniel’stextitself.39AnoutrightstatementaboutthekingdomofGodeventuallypulverizingtheRomanempiremighthavebeenimpolitic.ButJosephushadalreadysaidenoughforanyknowledgeablereader—atleastanyknowledgeableJewishreader.Hehadnoneedtobetooexplicitaboutit.Theeschatologicalfuturewasplainenough.Rome’sdemisehadalreadybeenpredestined,andJosephusmadeapointofcallingattentiontoit.40
Josephusdidnotlacksubtlety.InadditiontotheremarksonDanielintheAntiquities,JosephustwicemoremakesveiledallusionstotheeventualfateoftheRomanempire:oneinhisfirstwork,theJewishWar;andoneinhislast,theContraApionem.IntheWar
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 9 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
herecountshisownspeechtothebesiegedJews,urgingthemtosurrendertotheoverwhelmingforceofRomanmight.Thereisnopointinresistingthedespots,hesays,towhomallaresubject.41HeaddsfurtherthatτύχηhaspassedtotheRomansandthatGod,havinggrantedsupremeruletovariousnationsinturn,nowrestsinItaly.42The‘now’isnotable,andpossiblypregnantwithsignificance.TheideathatRometoowillhaveitsendisunexpressed,butlurksnottoofarbeneaththesurface.IntheContraApionemJosephusremarks,almostinpassing,thatonlyafewnations(p.265) havehadtheopportunitytogainempire(ἡγεμονία)andeventheyhavesufferedchangesinfortune(μεταβολαί)thatreducedthemagaintoservitude.43Hedoesnotelaborateonthis.Thatwouldhavebeensuperfluous.Theimplicationcouldhardlybemissed.
Inshort,PolybiusandJosephusdidindeedsharecommonground.NotonlyintheirlifeexperiencesasintellectualsandleadersoftheirnationswhowroteaboutthesubjugationofthosenationstoRome,whilebeingsponsoredandsubsidizedinthelandoftheconqueror,butalsointheircomplexandequivocaloutlookontherulingpower.TheyrespectedthesuccessofRomanimperialismandtheycastigatedthecalamitousfoolishnessofcontestingitsoverwhelmingmight.Atthesametime,however,theyexposed,inmorenuancedfashion,theoppressionanddespoticcharacteroftheconqueror,andcouldlookaheadtoatimewhenthatconquerorwouldmeetitsownfate.HowmanyRomanreaderswouldpickuponthesesubversivesentiments—orwouldcare—wecannotknow.ButacuteGreekreadersofPolybiuswouldunderstandandappreciate—aswouldthediscerningJewishaudiencesofJosephus.
Notes:
(1)Thegenerous(ifnotalwaysconcurring)commentsofJonathanPricehaveproducedanumberofimprovementsinthispaper.
(2)Plb.38.1.1–9,38.10.6–13,38.11.6–11,38.12.4–11,38.13.8,38.16.1–9,38.18.7–8.
(3)e.g.Jos.BJ2.346,2.395,2.412,5.364–5,5.376,5.406,6.378,6.409.
(4)Seee.g.Plb.1.2.2–4,18.28.5,29.21.3–5(ascapriciousfortune);36.17.2(inthesenseofchanceortheunexpected);15.20.4–6,38.7.11,38.8.8;39.8.1–2(inthesenseofwatchfulspiritwiththepowerofpunishment).ForPolybius’variedusagesofτύχη,seethecarefulstudiesofWalbank,HCPi.16–26;1972a:60–5;Pedech1964:331–54;and,morerecently,Sterling2000:138–9;Walbank2007:349–55.
(5)Plb.10.5.8,10.9.2:εἰςδὲτοὺςθεοὺςκαὶτὴντύχην.
(6)Plb.1.4.1–5,8.2.3–6,21.16.8:ἡτύχηπαρέδωκεναὐτοις̑τὴντη̑ςοἰκουμένηςἀρχὴνκαὶδυναστείαν.
(7)Jos.BJ2.360,2.373.
(8)Jos.BJ2.390;cf.2.360.
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 10 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(9)Jos.BJ3.351–4:μετέβηδὲπρὸςῬωμαίουςἡτύχηπα̑σα.
(10)Jos.BJ5.367–8;5.412;esp.5.367:μεταβη̑ναιγὰρπρὸςαὐτοὺςπάντοθεντὴντύχην,καὶκατὰἔθνοςτὸνθεὸνἐμπεριάγοντατὴνἀρχὴννυ̑νἐπὶτη̑ςἸταλίαςεἰν̑αι;Vit.17.Cf.Price2005:116–17.
(11)Jos.AJ12.135–7,12.358–9;Ap.2.84;cf.AJ12.402.
(12)ThecasewasadumbratedbyCohen1982:366–81.AndthecompellingargumentsofEckstein1990:175–208puttheconnectionbeyonddoubt.SeenowalsoHadas-Lebel1999:159–65,Mader2000:40–3,46,52,Sterling2000:135–51,Walbank1995.
(13)SeeStern1987:74–8onJosephus,withregardtothispoint.Cf.Eckstein1990:203–4.
(14)Seee.g.Plb.6.11–18(ontheRomanconstitution);24.8.2–5,24.10.11–12,24.13.13(onRomancharacter).SeefurtherthechaptersofErskineandSeager,chs.12–13,inthisvolume.
(15)Plb.1.2.1–7,3.59.3,29.21.1–9.
(16)Plb.3.4.7:πότεραφευκτὴνἢτοὐναντίοναἱρετὴνεἰν̑αισυμβαίνειτὴνῬωμαίωνδυναστείαν…πότερονἐπαινετὴνκαὶζηλωτὴνἢψεκτὴνγεγονέναινομιστέοντὴνἀρχὴναὐτω̑ν.
(17)Cf.Gruen1976:74–5;1984:346–8,withadditionalbibliography.FortheviewthatPolybiusbecameaspokesmanfortheRomanpointofview,seeWalbank1965:2–11,1972a:166–81,1977:139–62.ThatinterpretationiscogentlycontestedbyShimron1979–80:94–117.
(18)TheideathatPolybius’analysiswasessentiallyhard-headed,realistic,andnon-judgementalgainsexpressioninseveralofWalbank’sworks;seepreviousnote.Petzold1969:53–64,however,rightlyrecognizedthemoralpostureofPolybiusinthelastbooks.Eckstein1995showsindetailthemoraldimensionthatinheresinmuchofPolybius’historyandtheintensityofhiscommitmenttoanevaluationofbehaviouronmoralgrounds;see,esp.96–117,225–36.
(19)Plb.31.25.2–7.
(20)Jos.BJ1.221–2:ἐξανδραποδισάμενος;AJ14.275.
(21)Jos.BJ2.236;AJ20.110–12,20.122.
(22)Jos.BJ2.260,2.270;AJ20.160–5,20.177.
(23)Jos.BJ2.272:οὐκἔστινδὲἥντινακακουργίαςἰδέανπαρέλειπεν.
(24)Jos.BJ2.277:ἀπέδειξενὁμετ'αὐτὸνἐλθὼνΓέσσιοςΦλω̑ροςἀγαθώτατονκατὰ
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 11 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
σύγκρισιν;AJ20.252–3.
(25)Tiberius:Jos.AJ18.168–78,18.225–6;Caligula:BJ2.184–203;AJ18.257–303,19.1–27,19.201–11;Nero:BJ2.250–1;AJ20.154.
(26)Jos.AJ19.212–73.
(27)Jos.BJ3.132–4,3.336–8,3.532–42,4.447–8.
(28)Seee.g.Yavetz1975:411–32,Paul1993:56–66.
(29)Jos.BJ1.28,5.334,6.124–8,6.214–43,6.254–66,7.112–13.Cf.alsotheoccasionalreferencetoTitus’pityforthevictimsofRomancruelty—whichhehadhimselfallowed;e.g.BJ5.449–51.
(30)Cf.Yavetz1975:415.
(31)SeeonthisthecogentcommentsofMcLaren2005:282–7.
(32)Cf.thediscussionofParente2005:61–9.
(33)Jos.BJ2.349,2.355–6,2.361,2.365,2.379.
(34)Jos.BJ2.352.
(35)Jos.BJ2.397:Ῥωμαίουςδεσπότας.
(36)Plb.38.21–2:ἀλλ'οἶκοἰδ̑'ὅπωςἐγὼδέδιακαὶπροορω̑μαιμήποτέτιςἄλλοςτου̑τοτὸπαράγγελμαδώσειπερὶτη̑ςἡμετέραςπατρίδος.Scipio’scitationofHomerappearsinDiodorus,32.24andAppian,Pun.132,notintheextantfragmentofPolybius.ButbothauthorsmakereferencetoPolybius’conversationwithScipio,andthereisnoreasontodoubtthattheyfounditinhistext;seeWalbankHCP,iii.722–5.AppianalsoascribestoScipioareferencetothesuccessionofworldempires,includingmostrecentlyMacedonia,allofwhichhadmettheirdoom,thuspresagingRome’sown.ItisnotaltogetherclearthatthisderivesfromPolybius.SeeMendels1981a:333–4.
(37)Cf.Eckstein1995:268–70.
(38)Dan.2:36–45.SeethecommentaryofCollins1993:165–71.
(39)Jos.AJ10.210:καὶπερὶτῶ̑νἀδήλωντίγενήσεταιβούλεσθαιμαθειν̑,σπουδασάτωτὸβιβλίονἀναγνω̑ναιτὸΔανιήλου.
(40)So,rightly,Mason1994:165–76,Spilsbury2003:10–17,2005:224–5.
(41)Jos.BJ5.366:δειν̑μέντοικαὶδεσπόταςἀδοξειν̑ταπεινοτέρους,οὐχοἱς̑ὑποχείριατὰπάντα.
(42)Jos.BJ5.367:τὴνἀρχὴννυ̑νἐπὶτη̑ςἸταλίας.Cf.Barclay2005:329–30.
Polybius and Josephus on Rome1
Page 12 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(43)Jos.Ap.2.127:καὶτούτουςαἱμεταβολαὶπάλινἄλλοιςδουλεύεινὑπέζευξαν;Barclay2005:329,2007:235.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 1 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
TheRiseandFalloftheBoeotians:Polybius20.4–7asaLiteraryTopos
ChristelMüller
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0015
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'accountofthehistoryofdecadenceinBoeotiainBook20hasoftenbeentakenatfacevalue,butshould,however,beseenasaliteraryconstruct,likelytohavebeenaddedtothenarrativeofthe190safter146BC,andwithlittlerelationtoanytangiblereality.Polybius'treatment,moreover,caststhepro-MacedoniantendenciesoftheThebansasareflectionofMedisminthefifthcentury,whilethegreedandrusticityascribedtoThebesdrawsonthetraditionofPindar's'Boeotianpig'.Boeotia'sdecadencemoreovercanbeseeninthelightofwidertrajectoriesofmoraldeclinewithinPolybius'narrative,includingthatofRome.ThedigressiononBoeotianfailingsisanimportantreminderoftheneedtoconsiderallpossibleintertextualities,notmerelythosethatlinkPolybiuswithearlierhistorianswhowerehissources.
Keywords:Polybius,Boeotia,decadence,Romandecline,Greekdecline,medism,intertextuality,Pindar
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 2 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
IntroductionM.Feyel’sworkonBoeotia,Polybeetl’histoiredeBéotieauIIIesiècleavantnotreère,publishedin1942,wasbasedaboveall,asitstitlesuggests,onananalysisofPolybius’work,andinparticularonthepartofBook201wheretheAchaeanhistorianoffershisreaderatableauofthesituationinBoeotiabetweenc.250and200BC.Book20,whichhassurvivedonlyinfragments,wasdevotedtothearrivalinGreeceofkingAntiochusIII.Thesectionsthatconcernusappearinthefirstyearofthe147thOlympiad,192/91BC,2attheverymomentwhenAntiochusreachesthegatesofThebesafterstayingatChalcis.Tosummarize,wecansaythatPolybiusoffers,inanespeciallyunfavourablelight,anaccountofaseriesofeventsfrom245BC(theBoeotarchyofAbaeocritus)to192(theallianceoftheBoeotianswithAntiochus).TheprimaryfunctionofthispassageinPolybius’accountisclear:tolookbacktoBoeotia’spastforanexplanationforsuchaninexplicableaction.3ThispassagefromBook20is,however,almostunique:fewGreekstatesinPolybiusaregivensuchacompleteanddetailedaccountoftheirdecadence.Moderncommentatorshaveneverreallyconsideredittotallytrustworthy,decadenceofcoursebeingarathersuspectconcept;butthishasnotstoppedthemfromtakingsomeelementsliterally,whilethinkingthatPolybiushassimply(p.268) exaggerated.Withsomedegreeofdistrust,commentatorshaveaccordinglyadoptedthispassageintheirownway,fittingitintotheirpreoccupationsconcerningtheperiod.Onlythechronologyofthisaccountofdecadencehasbeensubjecttodebate.
Acoupleofspecificexamplesareworthrevisiting.ThefirstisFeyel,who,althoughhemakesaneffortto‘control’(inhisterms)Polybius’viewpoint,failstoeliminatetheideaofdecadence.NotwantingtogivetoomuchcredittoPolybius’assessment,FeyeldatesthestartofBoeotia’sdeclineonlytothe220s,4andnotfrom245,whenAbaeocrituswasaleader.Butafter220hefallsinlinewiththePolybianideologyonwhichhisanalysisdepends,especiallyintermsofBoeotia’sinternalpolitics.Intheconclusiontohischapteronpoliticallife,FeyeloffersapessimisticviewofBoeotiabasedonPolybius.AtthesametimehedenouncesboththeinternalsituationinFranceandGermanyattheendofthe1930sandPhilipV,theMacedonianking,is‘acomplicatedsoulcapableofcruelty’who‘forthepleasureofinflictingharm’comesand‘destroysthesocialorderofhisneighbours’.Feyel’stargetisasmuchHitlerasitisPhilipV.5Thesecondexample,M.Rostovtzeff,isevenmoreofacaricature.6Forhim,thethemeofdecadenceevokesallthepoliticalproblemsofRussiaatthestartofthetwentiethcentury:heusesavocabularythatischaracteristicallyMarxistandbourgeoisatthesametime.OnefragmentofPolybiusthereforeshowshow‘theclassstrugglereachesitsculminationinBoeotiaatthistime.Themobruled.Theywererepresentedbygeneralswhosedecisionsweredeterminedbytheirdesiretopleasetheproletariat.’
Mypaperoffersacompletelydifferentangleonthispassagefromthoseofpreviouscommentators.Ishalldemonstratethatthepassage,insofarasitisadigressionondecadence,ismorealiteraryconstructthananythingelse.ItsdifferentelementscanbefoundinwhatIshallrefertoasthe‘verticalintertext’,namelythewholeofGreekliteraturebeforePolybius;andthe‘horizontalintertext’,orthe‘intratext’,7namelythetextofPolybius’Histories,(p.269) whichitselfofferskeystounderstanding,through
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 3 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thereadingofsimilardigressions.Mythesisisasfollows:
(a)First,thatthepassageisnothingbutamotif,intherhetoricaloraestheticsenseoftheterm,aLeitmotiv,andisunderstoodbetterinnarrativeratherthanhistoricalterms.(b)Secondly,that,contrarytoPolybius’assertionontheimportationofGreekdecadenceintoRomeaftertheThirdMacedonianWar,thematrixonwhichtheLeitmotivisconstructedisRomanandnotGreek.
Mypaperwillconsiderthreeelements:thetext,thecontext,andtheintertext.Or,inmoreelaborateterms,aninternalcritiquetoshowthepassage’sincoherences,anexternalcritique,i.e.ahistoricalanalysistodemonstratetheinappropriateassessmentofferedbythepassage;andfinallyananalysisoftheintertextorthedifferentlayersoftheintertext.
InternalCritiqueandtheProblemsoftheText’sPositionintheNarrativeIfPolybius’aimisclear,toexplaintheabsurdbehaviouroftheBoeotians,thentheinclusionofthepassageinthenarrativetrainislessobvious.Feyelhadalreadyraisedthequestionswithoutbeingabletoofferananswer:‘whyhasPolybiusinsertedthislengthydispositionatthemomentwhenhedescribesthearrivalofAntiochusatThebes,aneventoflittleconsequenceforBoeotia,ashehimselfrecognizesattheendofthedigression(20.7),insteadofholdingitbackforthebookwherehehastonarratethecatastrophesof172orthoseof146?’8Infactthedigressionfindsnonaturalplaceeitherinthecourseoftheeventsorinthenarrative.Thedisjunctionisclearbetweenparagraphs3and4:PolybiusmakesnotransitionbetweenthesupportgivenbyAntiochustotheEpirotesandtheEleansandthedecadenceofBoeotia,thedescriptionofwhichbeginsabruptlywith‘TheBoeotians,alreadyforalongtime…’.Onecould,ofcourse,fallbackonthefragmentarynatureofBook20andsuggestthatthepassagehasnotsurvivedintact.However,theorderfollowedbyLivy,9whocondensesPolybius,showsthatnogapbetween20.3and20.4ispossible.Livy,interestedexclusivelyinthenarrative,passesoverPolybius’digressionwithoutanyacknowledgement.10Thesameobservationcanbemadeatthe(p.270) endofthepassage,wherethereturntothenarrativeisawkwardlysignalledbyaκαὶγάρ(20.7.5),which,contrarytoitsnormalsense,introducesneitheranexplanationnoranexample.11Ontheotherhand,thepassagecontainsatleasttwoallusionstoBoeotianeventsmentionedinotherbooks.FirstthereisthepunishmentinflictedbyFortuneonBoeotiaafter192,probablyin171whentheBoeotianConfederacywasdissolvedbytheRomans,ὑπὲρὧνἡμεις̑ἐντοις̑ἑξη̑ςποιησόμεθαμνήμην,‘towhichwewillreferlater’,asPolybiusunderlinesattheendofthepassage(20.7.2).CertainlyPolybiusisfollowinganestablishedplaninhiswritingoftheHistoryandknowswithoutdoubtinwhatorderheisestablishinghisnarrative.Butonemightalsohypothesizethathehasalreadywrittenthesectiontowhichherefersinanticipationandisdippingintotherhetorician’stoolboxsoastofixmorefirmlythedigressionintothenarrative.
Secondly,PolybiusplacestheargumentfoundinBook20againinBook22,statingthattheBoeotiancourtshadstoppedworkingforalmosttwenty-fiveyears,σχεδὸνεἴκοσικαὶ
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 4 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
πέντ’ἐτω̑ν(20.6.1and22.4.2),repeatingverbatimhisearliertext.Feyel,12likeallthecommentators,isembarrassedbythisrepetitionandthinksthatthesecondinstancewas‘thistimesincere’,whilegivinglittlecredittothefirst.Independentfromthecontentofthispassage,itshouldbenotedthatFeyel’sjudgementisbasedlargelyonthefactthatthesecondinstanceofthementionoftheBoeotianlawcourtsappearslessartificialthanthefirst.Inotherwords,itissuggestedthatPolybiuswasmerelyrepeatinginthefirstinstancehisownargumentwithmoreemphasis.
ExternalcritiqueortheanalysisofthehistoricalvalidityofthepassageWenowturntoconsiderthehistorical‘reality’ofthedecadencedescribedbyPolybius.Onceweremovethediplomatic/militarybasisofthenarrative,theconcreteelementsonwhichPolybiusconstructshisargumentaboutBoeotiandecadencearerevealedtobefewandfarbetween.Polybius’mainconcernhereismoraljudgementandtheonlypointonwhichanyargumentcanrestisindeedtheinterruptiontojudiciallifefortwenty-fiveyears.Forthisis(p.271) seeminglyonepieceofpreciseinformation,potentiallyverifiable,onwhichPolybiusstakeshisclaim.
Weshouldrememberthatthereturnofthisargumenttakesplaceintwopassageswhosedatesofreference,orterminusantequem,differ,onebeing192,theother188.Thisdifferencethereforepreventsanyattemptatcalculatingpreciselywhentheinterruptiontookplace.Togiveanexample,FeyelandWalbankagreeonthedateof188asthepointfromwhichthisretrospectivejudgementismade,andconsiderthatthetwenty-five-yearperioddatesbackto213,countingbackfromthePeaceofApameain188.ButthevaguecontextinwhichthisdeceptivelypreciseobservationisofferedbyPolybiusinBook20givestheimpressionthatthewholecenturyitselfisconcerned,asistherhetoricalaimoftheauthor.
Whateverthestartingdateofthetwenty-fiveyears,weneedtoidentifythebreakdowninjudiciallifeinordertoverifyPolybius’observationandsoconfrontothercontemporarysources,bothliteraryandepigraphic.AsFeyelhasalreadypointedout,13fortheHellenisticperiodwecanturntothelively,perhapssatirical,descriptionoftheBoeotiancitiesofferedbyHeraclidesCriticus—orCreticus.14InHeraclides’account,Thebes,andinparticularjudiciallifethere,functionswithsomedifficultyand‘trialslastmorethanthirtyyears’,αἱδίκαιπαρ’αὐτοις̑δι’ἐτῶ̑ντοὐλάχιστονεἰσάγονταιτριάκοντα.Thementionofapreciselengthoftime,andarathersimilaronetothatfoundinPolybius,demandssomecomparisonofthetwotexts.ThedifficultyisthattheHeraclidespassageposesjustasmanyproblemsasthatofPolybius.Heraclides’descriptionmayappeartoustobefirst-handimpressionandsotoofferaneffetderéel,butinfactitisinitselfonlyanassemblageofclichésandsketchesabouttheBoeotians.Nevertheless,itisthoughtthatPolybiushadbeenawareofHeraclides’descriptionandindeeddrewsomeinspirationfromit,aboveandbeyondanyquestionofGlaubwürdigkeit,asG.A.Lehmannmightsay.15However,asWalbankhasshown,16Heraclides’descriptionconcernsonlyThebes,whilePolybius’observationappliestothewholeofBoeotia.Infacttheinformationgivenbythetwowritersisnotthesame:forHeraclides,thethirtyyearsappliestothetrialsthemselveswhichdragonforever;while
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 5 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
forPolybiusitistheinterruptioninjudicialactivitywhichlastsfortwenty-fiveyears.InthiscasePolybiuswouldhavebeenseverelymisrepresentinghissource,oratleasthaveinjectedhisownchronologicalcalculationifhehadbeenfollowingHeraclides.
Thereisalsoaquestionaboutthedateofauthorship.TheworkofHeraclidesisusuallydatedtothethirdcentury.Feyelraisedsomedoubtaboutthe(p.272) dateofHeraclideswithoutbeingabletoofferanyprecisionapartfromlookingfordifficultiesinjudicialprocedureinThebes.17Inotherwords,PolybiusallowsustodateHeraclides,who,inturn,confirmsPolybius.Walbankwasrighttopointoutthecircularnatureofthisargument,18whichleadsusnowhere.AfinalpossibilityisthatbothPolybiusandHeraclidessharedacommonsourcewhomeachinterpretedinhisownway.This,however,willnotresolvetheproblem.
Forthehistorian,theonlywayoutofthisliterarydilemmaistoconsiderPolybiusalongsidetheepigraphicalevidence.ThisiswhatFeyelattemptedtodo,butmyowninterpretationdiffersfromhis.19FeyelseekstoshowhowPolybius’observationisvalidfrom220andnot245:hewantstohavehiscakeandeatit.ForFeyelisunabletoofferanyBoeotiantextthatindicatesthepresenceofforeignjudgesinthecitiesoftheBoeotianConfederacyattheendofthethirdcentury.Accordingtohim,thepresenceofsuchjudgeswouldtendtosuggestsomekindofparalysisinthelocalcourts.Allthetextsheofferscomefromparallelexampleselsewhere,suchasDelphiorcitiesinnorthernGreece.Infact,asPaulRoeschhasdemonstrated,noBoeotiandecreehonouringforeignjudgescanbefoundbeforethemiddleofthesecondcentury.Afterthispoint,atleastsixdecreesareknown.20Elsewhere,foreignjudgesappearattheendofthethirdcenturyoratthebeginningofthesecondcentury.IsthesituationinBoeotiapeculiartothisregion?RoescharguesthatalltheBoeotiandecreesforforeignjudgesdatefromafterthedissolutionoftheBoeotianConfederacy,in171BC,concludingthatthe‘institutionalframeworkoftheConfederacy…providedallnecessaryjurisdiction’forthecities.21After171theConfederacyceasedtoexistandwithitsdisappearancethisjuridicalinfrastructurewaslost.Atsomepoint,tocompensateforthisloss,Boeotiancitiesbegantoturntoforeignjudges.Insum,thecatastrophicimpressionofferedbyPolybiusisrelevantneitherto245norto220,norevento192nor188!Infact,itmaysimplyrepresentaninterpretation,perhapsnotatotallyobjectiveone,ofthesituationinBoeotiaduringthemiddleofthesecondcentury.Theclearlyanachronisticnatureofthepassageallowsustohighlightanimportantcontradiction:Polybius(20.7.1)hastoconcedethatduringthe(p.273) difficultperiodofthereignsofPhilipVandAntiochusIII‘inspiteoftheirconstitutionbeinginadeplorablestate,andbyIdonotknowwhatkindoffortune,theBoeotiansavoidedthecatastrophesthatcameaboutatthetimeofthewarsagainstPhilipandAntiochus’,τοιαύτηνδ’ἔχοντεςοἱΒοιωτοὶτὴνδιάθεσιντη̑ςπολιτείας,εὐτυχω̑ςπωςδιώλισθονκαὶτοὺςκατὰΦίλιππονκαὶτοὺςκατ’Ἀντίοχονκαιρούς.Theauthor’sembarrassmentismadeclearbytheuseoftheparticleπως.Thispassagemustthereforebeunderstoodintermsotherthanitsdescriptionofahistoricalreality.
PolybiusandtheintertextInowchangecompletelythetoneofmypaperinthis,thethird,sectiondealingwith
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 6 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Polybiusandintertext.IfirstexplainwhatIunderstandbyintertextualityandespeciallythewayinwhichIamgoingtousethisheuristictool.
TheconceptofintertextualityhasbeenrevisitedrecentlyinrelationtoPolybiusinacolloquiumatLeuvenpublishedin2005asTheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography.22Inthisvolume,researchintointertextualityislimitedtothosepassageswherethehistoriancitesandevaluateshispredecessorsinapolemicalframework.Hereweareanalysingtheintertextbywayofcitation,andmorepreciselyinwhatiscalledthe‘cover-textmethod’,the‘cover-text’beingthereceivingtext,textB.Ofcourse,thisishardlythefirstoccasiononwhichintertextualityhasbeenusedtoanalyseancienthistoriography.Itisnowaroundtwentyyearssincethisapproachhasenteredthemainstream:wemaythinkofSimonHornblower’sintroductiontothe1994volumeGreekHistoriography,23inwhichthecentralissueisthereceptionofearlierauthorsofGreekhistorybylaterones.24Somemaythinkthattherewasnoneedtowaitformodernliterarycriticismtobeinterestedinreception,andthatintertextualityamountstolittlemorethanjargon,inthesamewaythatMonsieurJourdainonedaymadethediscoverythathewasspeakinginprose.ButIdonotholdtothisviewfor,ifnonewtheoreticaltechniquesareappliedtohistoriography,wecanneverbeveryfarfromtheoldformofsourcecriticismwhichisalwaysmoreinterestedinthetextoforiginratherthanthereceivingtext,thereceptor;thistechniquegivespreferencetotextAratherthantextB,andconsidersthelatterlargelyinterms(p.274) offlawsintransmission.Intertextuality,ontheotherhand,offersusthechanceofconsideringtransformation,textBbeingnolesscreativethantextA.Infact,wecanconsiderintertextualityinamuchmoreopenway,asmodernliterarycriticismhasdonesincethetermwasdefinedbyJ.Kristevain1966andinthelightofsubsequentdevelopments.25Ofcourse,IthinkofG.Genette,26whose1982workPalimpsesteshastoalargeextentservedtocodifyourunderstandingoftheconceptandoffereda‘PeriodicTable’ofallthecategoriesthattheconceptcoversgoingbeyondapurelystructuralanalysisoftext.
ToadoptthisapproachrequiresustoconsiderPolybiusoutsideofhisgenre,outsideofthehistoriographicalstatusofthetext,andtoenvisagetheworkaspuretext,adifficultstepforthehistorianbutausefulone,especiallyifahistoricalsenseisaddedtowhatmightotherwisebepurelyformal.Theaimhereis,therefore,nottolimitanalysistoreceptionalone,ortoexternalorverticalintertextuality,buttoexplorewhatsomehavetermed‘intratextuality’.27Intratextualityisnotonlythesearchforpointsofcomparison,somethingthathasbeendoneforalongtime.Itplaysmoreontheideathatthetext,throughrepeatingideas,motifs,inlinguisticterms‘isotopies’,stopsbeingreferential(e.g.‘justiceinBoeotia’)butisitselfself-generating.Intratextualityofferskeystothetextthatarenolongeroutsidebutfoundwithin.Kaigar…SoletusreturntoPolybiusandBoeotiandecadence.ThefirstappearanceofκαχεξίαamongtheBoeotiansinBook20(20.4.1)comesinitsaberrantforeignpolicy.Polybius’visionofBoeotianforeignpolicyisonesuggestingapermanentdisaster.VictoryatLeuctra(20.4.2)wasakindofpositivemistake,largelytheresultoftheexceptionalpersonalityofitstwoleaders.28Thispeaksitsbetweentwolongtroughs,periodsofdegradationthatservetoechoeachotherinthenarrative.Hereonecanseethefirstinterventionofintertextuality,atoncebothinternal
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 7 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
andexternal.The‘Macedonianism’ofthethirdcentury,ifonecanforgivetheneologism,balancestheMedismofthefifthcentury;ThebansinPolybiusareonlyeverspokenofintermsoftheirbetrayal.29ItisnotPolybius’judgementthatisinterestinghere,whichiseasytodeconstructinhistoricalterms,justasEricPerrinhasdemonstratedconcerningPolybius’judgementofAthensbetween229and168.30RatherwehaveherethefirstmotifinthisembroideryoftheBoeotians;hereistheoriginalsinthatformspartofthehistoriographicalinheritance,theculturalbaggageofthesecondcentury,withouttherebeinganeedtosearch(p.275) fordirectallusionstopredecessors.PolybiusisincapableofinterpretingBoeotianpolicytowardsMacedoniawithoutreferringtothismotifofbetrayal.Thismotifproducesthesenseofthepassageandimposesontheauthorhisinterpretationofthethirdcentury.
ThereforePolybiusinBook6(6.43)hasaproblem.ForhedoesnotknowhowtotreattheThebanconstitution.Itshouldberememberedherethat,evenifitisnotalwaysthecase,theThebansinPolybiusareoftentheBoeotiansasawhole,andthatitisdifficulttosaywhethertheThebanconstitutioniscivicorfederal,justasEpaminondasandPelopidasareatthesametimeThebansandBoeotians.TheBoeotiansarenotaloneinthedifficultiestheirconstitutionpresentstoPolybius.Anotherconstitution,theAthenian,isalsodroppedbecauseitdoesnotfitinwiththecriteriathatPolybiushasestablishedforanacyclosis.WhenwefittheBoeotianconstitutionontoPolybius’scale,thenitisidentifiedasanochlocracywithoutanyhopeofawayout.ForPolybiushimselfsays(6.44.9),‘itisuselesstoturntotheinstitutionsofAthensandThebes,citiesinwhichtheimpulsesofthemobdriveeverything’.EachtimethatPolybiusreferstothebehaviouroftheBoeotians,itisintheseterms.Thisisaseverecaseofdenyingreality,sincePolybiusrefusestoconsiderhissubject(theThebanconstitution).Weseeherehowthedisconnectionbetweenthetextandthereferentworks.
Oursecondexampleofintertextuality:moraldecadenceproducedbypoliticaldecadence,and,tostartwith,theBoeotianpig(Βοιωτίαὑ̑ς).Thisisafascinatingdevice,amotifthatcanbetracedalongwaybackandthatisre-insertedintothePolybianconstruction.The‘Boeotianpig’isalinguisticisotopiethatcanbetracedthroughGreekliteraturefromPindarthroughatleasttoPlutarch.31ItisinPindar’ssixthOlympian(l.87–90)thatwefindtheappearanceofthisideathataBoeotiancanbeassimilatedtoapig,anotionthatPindaralreadyunderstandstobeanancientone.WethenfindthesatiricaltraditionsofAtheniancomedyinthefifthandfourthcenturieswhichcrystallizethetopos,asapassagefromAlexisdemonstrates.32Attheotherendofthischronologicalchain,Plutarch33referstotheBoeotians’ἀδηφαγία,theirgreed.WhatconcernsushereisnotsomuchthatPolybiususesamotiftypicallyvoicedbytheAthenians,whomhehates,buthowthisoperationtakesplace.Theoriginal‘Boeotianpig’containsatleasttworepresentations,asoutlinedbyPlutarch.Oneisofthecrassignoramus,thethickcountry-bumpkin,andthesecondishispathologicaladdictiontoeatinganddrinking,εὐωχίακαὶμέθη,anexpressionthatPolybiususestwiceinthe(p.276) passageinBook20.Polybiusfocusesinparticularonthesecondaspectbecausehecaninsertitintohisownparadigm:theassociationbetweendrunkennessandmoraldecline,individualorcollective,asalreadyshowninEckstein’swork.34
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 8 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ThisparadigmallowsPolybiustoshowthattheBoeotiansarenottheonlyGreekstoexperiencedecadence.Amongthemostwell-developedparallels,Walbankhadalreadyisolatedtwootherexamplesofdeclinethatareparticularlysignificant:35thesavageryofthepeopleofCynaethainArcadia(4.21.2–12);andtheὀλιγανθρωπία(‘scarcityofpeople’)affectingGreece(36.17.5–10).IntheCynaethaepisode,supposedtobetakingplaceinthe220s,thecrucialwordis‘savagery’,ἀγριότηςforthenounandbetterstilltheverbἀποθηριόωinthepassive.Thissavageryleadsustotwofurtherpoints:theBoeotianpig,evenifitisusuallyadomesticanimal,representsbestiality,asdothosewhofallintoochlocracy(6.9.9,ἀποτεθηριωμένον,appliedtotheπλη̑θος).Theprocessofἀποθηρίωσιςisatypicalnarrativemotifthatbelongstotheparadigmofthebarbarian.36TheCynaetheanstoryconfirms,thoughinaninvertedmanner,thetoposofthecivilizingpowerofmusic.Thereasonwhytheyhavebecomesosavageis,incontrasttotherestoftheArcadians,thattheyhavenotpractisedmusic,aclichéonthesamescaleasthosethattheAthenianscreatedwithregardtotheBoeotians!ItisalsoworthnotingthatthedigressionontheCynaetheansisasbadlyinsertedintothenarrativeasthepassageontheBoeotians,thusshowingitsownparticularstatusinthestory:whiletheCynaetheansarethevictimsofAetolianbrutality,itistheCynaetheanswhoarepresentedassavageapparentlybecauseofanearlierepisode.
Nowtoὀλιγανθρωπία.Moraldeclineisoneofthereasonsforὀλιγανθρωπίαandthismotifisplayedoutdifferentlydependingoncontext.Boeotianswhodiechildlessdrinkawaytheirwealthwithoutleavinganinheritancetotheiragnatedescendants(20.6.5).InBook36(36.17.7),PolybiuschargestheGreekswithloveofmoney(φιλοχρημοσύνη),whichdistractsthemfrommarryingandfromhavingchildren(fromwhichresultsἀπαιδία,childlessness);instead,theyprefertospendtheirmoneyelsewhereortofritterawaytheirpatrimony.Hereisavariationonthesamethemethat,likefoodanddrink,leadsustothebody.Therewouldprobablybemuchtosayonthistheme,inhistoricalterms,echoingasitdoesAristotleontheconcentrationofwealthinSparta.Butfromapurelynarrativeperspective,wecanseeclearlyhowBoeotiandecadenceiswovenwithseveralthreads.
HeretheRomansentertheframe.Theyhaveclearlynotbeensparedfrommoraldecadence,asPolybiusexplainsinBook18(18.35)andespeciallyin(p.277) Book31(31.25.2–7),withtheinfluxofwealthinItalyfollowingthecollapseoftheMacedonianKingdom.PolybiusoffershereaportraitofhisfriendScipio,aeulogythatdisplaysScipio’svirtueinthemidstofwidespreaddepravity.ThesocialchangesthattakeplacebetweentheendofthelastMacedonianwarandthedestructionofCarthageareinterpretedbyPolybius,aneye-witnessofthe‘Romancrisis’37intermsthatareessentiallymoral.From‘musicalspectacles’totheabuseofbanquets,viacourtesansanddemagogicpractices,allstrandscometogethertopresentRomeafter167asasortofparagonofdecadence.ClaudeNicolet,followingPolybius’reasoningveryclosely,consideredthat,whenhedescribeddemagogicpracticesatRome,‘theimpressioncorrespondstoocloselytothedescriptionsofextremedemocracyinPolybius,forhimnottohavethoughtinparticularofGreekstates’.38However,itseemstomethatthemodel,whetheridealordecadentbuteverywhereimplicit,isthatofRepublicanRome.Itisamodelallthemoreimmediate
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 9 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
becausetheauthormakesittheobjectofhisHistoriesandbecausehehasbeeninpartaneye-witnessofit,whilesomeoftheexamplesof‘extremedemocracy’inGreecedatetothethirdcentury.ItistemptingtoseethenthatthisschemeunderliesthedescriptionthatPolybiusoffersofBoeotiandecadenceinBook20andcertainlyothercasesofGreekdecadence.AlltheknowningredientsofRomandeclinearefoundinBoeotia:anidealera—theBoeotiaofEpaminondas—isfollowedbyamiserableperiodinwhichpoliticaldecadence,thedemagogyofgenerals,interruptionofjudiciallifedoublesupwithaperversionofcustoms,‘goodfoodanddrunkenness’,mentionedontwooccasions.
Conclusion:PolybiusandthetheoryofdecadenceToconclude,threepoints.Intermsofitscomposition,thepassagefromBook20onBoeotiashowsallthesignsofhavingbeengraftedaposterioriontothecentraltheme,atadatethatobviouslywecannotknow,butwhichmaybeafter146.Thisiswhattheabsenceofinternallogic,theexternalcritique,andtheanalysisofthestructuralelementsofthedigressionindicate.ThissuggestionconformstowhatweknowabouthowPolybiuscomposedhiswork.AsPédechnotes,afterhisreturntoGreece,Polybiuswasnothappytoadda‘supplementtohisearlierwork;herevisesit;heenrichesitwithadditions’.39Amongthoseadditions,someareonly‘datedbyaprecisedetailandidentified(p.278)distinctlybyaremarkableunity’.Itisverylikelythatwith20.4–7wehaveanexampleofthiskind.Theinterruptionofjudiciallife,evenifPolybiusgiveshisownversionofit,isalsomucheasiertounderstandifthesituationtowhichherefersisthatofthemiddleofthesecondcentury.Next,decadence.IhavealreadymentionedthearticleinwhichWalbanksuggestedthat,‘asthehistorianofRome’srisetoworldpower,Polybiuswasnotparticularlyinterestedintheconceptofdecline’.40HefollowedthisobservationwithalistofpassagesthatrefertodeclineinGreece.Thisconclusionclearlyowesmuchtooptimism,theproductofWalbank’ssympathyforhissubject.ButinfactdecadenceiseverywhereintheHistories.Onecanevensee,asCraigeChampion41hasshown,howPolybiusdrewanevolvingcurveofit,inGreeceasinRome,inspiteofthefragmentarystateofthebookswhereitstracesarethemostobvious.
Finally,method.TheanalysisofthePolybiannarrative,takenbeyondtheframeworkofitsprecisegenre,allowsustorevealanumberofmotifs,oftenancientandtraversingtheboundariesofpreviousworksandfromwhichtheauthordrawstoproducevariations.SothePolybianintertextisnottobefoundonlyintheearlierhistorians,butinarangeoftexts,andeveninrepresentationsandculturalcodesthateitherprecedehimorarecontemporarywithhim.Polybiannarrativemustthereforebestudiedasanobjectinitself,andnotonlyasamarvellousreferentialcanvasthatallowsuspartiallytofillthe‘historiographichole’thatisthethirdcentury.InthissenseIecho,albeitonadifferentplane,theanalysispresentedbyCraigeChampion,forwhomPolybiusisafaitculturelinhimself,tousethetermonceemployedbyClairePréaux.42Thistypeofanalysisallowsustodeconstructthenarrative,toavoidgivingittoomuchcredit.AnditallowsustogofurtherthanamorestraightforwardstudyofPolybianprejudices.Itallowsustoshowhowthenarrativeisproduced,bywayofintratextuality,andwhatremainsofitonceonehaspatientlyunwoundthethreads.Thisiswhereweseehowtheuseoftopoinourishesthewritingofhistory.
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 10 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Notes:
(1)Plb.20.4–7.Thispassagehasbeencommenteduponbyvariousscholars:Feyel1942;Cloché1952:240–9;Aymard1946(inareviewofFeyel1942);Roesch1965:112–21(onthefederalStrategos);Roussel1970,ad.loc.;Mendels1977:161–5(onPhilipVasdemagogue);Mendels1978:29–30(onAntiochusIIIasdemagogue);ÉtienneandKnoepfler1976:331–7(theentryofOpusintheBoeotianConfederacyandtheincidentatLarymna);Walbank,HCPiii.66–74;Roesch1982:404–11(justiceinBoeotiaandinparticularforeignjudges).
(2)ForthecountingbyOlympiads,cf.Walbank,HCPiii.56.
(3)Feyel1942:13–14.
(4)ThedateisnotsupportedbyAymard1946,whoconsidersthatthereisvirtuallynodifferencebetweenthesituationbeforeandafterwhatheregardsasafalsewatershed:onthegroundthattheinscriptionsofferfewtangibleindicationsofchange,Aymard1946:313arguesthat‘lecontrasteentrelesannéesquiprécèdentetcellesquisuivent220demeureinsuffisammentétabli.Bienplutôt,leschosesnedevaientpasallertrèsbrillammentavant220etellesn’ontpastournébrusquementàlacatastrophe’.SowhatinfluencedFeyelinhischoiceof220asthispivotaldate?IsitnotinfactPolybius’owntextthatsuggestedit?ForthisistheyearwhenBook3starts,thefirstrealyearofhisHistories:theprevioustwobooksserveinfactasprolegomenatotheworkasawhole(cf.Beck,ch.6inthisvolume).OnthebeginningoftheHistories,cf.Walbank1972a:16.
(5)ThesupposeddemagogicinterventionincentralGreecehasbeendismissedbyMendels1977:163:‘ItisratherdifficulttofindevidenceforanactivedemagogicroleplayedbyPhilipinBoeotia.’
(6)Rostovtzeff1941:611–12.
(7)Onintratextuality,seee.g.SharrockandMorales2000.Asageneralpoint,itisnotablethatconceptssuchasintertextualityarelesstheorizedontheGreeksidethanontheRomanone(seee.g.Riggsby2006onCaesar).TheopportunitytoraisetheseissueswasmissedbySchepensandBollansée2005(forwhichseebelow).
(8)Feyel1942:14n.1.
(9)Livy36.5–6.
(10)ThoughLivy36.6.2doescloselyechoPlb.20.4.1.
(11)Livy,almostcertainlyembarrassedbyhissource,wantedtopresentmorecontinuityinhisownaccount:aftertheEpirusepisode,herunsonwithsomeelegance,InBoeotiamipse(Antiochus)profectusest(36.6.1)andsumsup,infairlybrutalfashion,hisdiscussionofBoeotiandecadence,explainingitbythefactthatreuerapermultaiamsaeculapublicepriuatimquelabanteegregiaquondamdisciplinagentisetmultorumeostatu,quidiuturnusessesinemutationererumnonposset(36.6.2).Thislastsentenceis,
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 11 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
infact,avariationonPolybius’ownstatementτῃ̑δ’ἀληθείᾳκαχεκτου̑ντες(ἠ̑σαν)ταις̑ψυχαις̑διὰτὰςπροειρημέναςαἰτίας(20.7.4).
(12)Feyel1942:275.
(13)Feyel1942:275–6.
(14)GGM,258,§12–16.SeePfister1951:44and,morerecently,Arenz2006.
(15)Lehmann1967.
(16)Walbank,HCPiii.72.
(17)Feyel1942:276.Feyelendsbysuggesting‘unedatevoisinede180’(n.1),whichmeanswecannotseehowtheperiodthatPolybiushasinmindcanpossiblybe213–188.
(18)Walbank,HCPiii.72:‘ItmaybenotedthatmanyattemptstodateHeraclidesusetheconditionsdescribedinPolybiusasapointofreference;hencethedangerofcircularargument.’
(19)Feyel1942:276–7.
(20)Roesch1982:407–11.
(21)Ibid.407–8.Roeschofferssevenexamplesfromwhichweshouldinfactremovethetwodecreesof‘ThebesforthejudgesofOropus’thatwerepublishedlateronthebasisoftheRoescharchivesin1993.Gauthier1993hasdemonstratedthattheseinscriptionsnotonlybelongtooneinscriptionbutarealsopartofanEretriandecreehonouringOropianjudgeswhohavecometoThebestoruleonpendingtrialsbetweentheBoeotianandEuboeancitieswhoarelinkedbyasymbolon,i.e.ajudicialagreement.
(22)SchepensandBollansée2005.
(23)S.Hornblower1994:54–72,whoseentirechapteriscalled‘IntertextualityandtheGreekHistorians’.
(24)SeealsoWoodman1988,wheretheemphasisoninuentioandliteraryconventionsmightalsobefelttoencourageintertextualapproachestosetpieceslikedescriptionsofthefallofacityandthelike,orLaird1999foraninterestingtreatmentofbothintertextualityandhistoriography.
(25)Onthehistoryofthisidea,seetheexcellentintroductioninLimat-Letellier1998,esp.18–19and36–46.
(26)Genette1982.
(27)Limat-Letellier1998:26–7andn.18.
The Rise and Fall of the Boeotians: Polybius 20. 4–7 as a Literary Topos
Page 12 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(28)Thispointisseenat20.4,butisparticularlyevidentearlierat6.43.
(29)Forexample,4.31and9.39.
(30)Perrin-Saminadayar1999:445–53.
(31)Foranearlycompletesurvey,seeGuillon1948,esp.79–92,inanexasperatedattempttorehabilitateBoeotianvalues:nevertheless,oneshouldrememberhisanalysisofHeracles,themythicalherowhohasbecomethetargetofmuchhumour.
(32)AlexisF239K-A.
(33)Mor.995e,Deesucarnium.
(34)Eckstein1995:285–9.
(35)InanarticledevotedtodeclineinPolybius,Walbank1980.
(36)Forthelinksbetweentheruleofthemobandbarbarism,cf.Champion2004a:89.
(37)ThetermusedbyPédech1973.
(38)Nicolet1974:214n.2.
(39)Pédech1964:563–4.
(40)Walbank1980:41.
(41)Champion2004a:144–69.
(42)Préaux1978:i.83:‘Polyben’estpasseulementpournousunhistorien.Ilestunfaitculturelensoi.’
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 1 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
ZenoofRhodesandtheRhodianViewofthePast1
Hans-UlrichWiemer
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0016
AbstractandKeywords
ThoughPolybiusisonoccasioncriticaloftheRhodianhistorianZeno,hisdetailedknowledgeofRhodianactivitiesinLycia,andherdealingswithPhilipVandAntiochusIII,andwithRome,pointstoPolybiusmakingsignificantuseofZeno'shistoricalwork.Diodorus'writingsonthelegendaryRhodianpastarealsolikelytoreflectZeno'streatmentofthisearlyperiod,especiallyinrelationtothecultofLindianAthena,reflectingtheimportanceoflocaltraditionsandmythsinmuchHellenistichistoriography.Diodorus'accountofDemetriusPoliorcetes'siegeofRhodesmaylikewiseusefullybereadasreflectingalivelyandpatrioticaccountofthesiegeinZeno,inkeepingwithPolybius'critiqueofZenoandAntisthenesashistorianswhoweretoopartialwhenwritingaboutRhodianhistory.
Keywords:Polybius,ZenoofRhodes,Rhodes,mythography,localhistory,LindianAthena,DiodorusSiculus,DemetriusPoliorcetes
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 2 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
HistoriographyintheHellenisticWorldIntheHellenisticworld,historiographywasonlyoneofthemeansbywhichimagesofthepastwerecreatedanddisseminated,anditwassurelynotthemostimportant.2Giventhatthegenerallevelofliteracywasrelativelylow,thecirculationofbooksonhistoricaltopicswasnecessarilyrestrictedtoasmallgroupofpeoplewhohadboththeleisureandtheeducationnecessarytoreadandappreciatedetailedandhighlystylizedaccountsofthepast.3Forordinarycitizensandtheirfamiliestherewereotherwaystolearnhowthepresenthadbeenshapedbytheeventsandfiguresofthepast.Theylistenedtostoriestoldwithintheirfamiliesandtohistoricalexamplesadducedbyspeakersinthepoliticalassemblies.4Butmoreformaleducationalsocontributed,despitethefactthathistoryasweunderstandthattermwasnotamongthesubjectsGreekpupilsweretaughtatschool.InHellenisticpoleis,asizeableifvaryingnumberoffuturecitizensreceivedinstructionandphysicaltraininginapublicinstitution,commonlyknownasephebeia,thatfamiliarizedfuturegenerationswiththetraditionsbelievedtobeoftimelessvalueandwiththesiteswhere(p.280) theirmemorywaslocated.5Andonmanyoccasionsthecitizensandtheirfamiliesassembledtocelebratefestivalsinhonourofthegodsthatprovidedaframeworkforcommemorativepracticesfocusedonwhatwasconsideredtobeoflastingimportanceforthecommunityasawhole.Thesefestivalsimpressedimagesofthepastonpeopledrawnfromallgroupsofthecitizenbody,andtheydiditwithanemotionalintensitythatsolitaryreadinghardlyeverachieves.6
Nevertheless,theperiodafterAlexanderundoubtedlywitnessedanenormousupsurgeinhistoriographicalactivitywhencomparedtothefifth,oreventhefourth,century.7ManyGreekcitiesnowhadtheirhistorywrittendownfortheveryfirsttimesincetheirfoundation.Thisrisinggenreofso-calledlocalhistoriographywascloselyconnectedtoanintensifiedconcernfordefiningcollectiveidentities,andforupholdingwhatwasregardedasthebasisoflivingtogetherinapolis:theheritageoftheforefathers.Competitionbetweencitieshad,ofcourse,alwaysbeenadrivingforceinGreekculture,butitgainedfurthermomentumwhenGreekcitiescametoformaculturalnetworkthatstretchedfromasfarwestasSicilytoasfareastasIranandAfghanistan.BeingacceptedasafullmemberofthiscommunitydependedonbeingabletodemonstrateGreekoriginsandarecordofservicesrenderedtofellow-Greeks.Fromthisresultedanendlessprocessofnegotiationbetweenthepowersinvolved,inwhichhistoriographyfulfilledaverypracticalfunction:toshowthattheclaimstostatusandprestigestakedbyone’sownpoliswerewellfounded.8
Inthischapter,Ishallexamineonlyonesmallaspectofthisvastsubject:therichandversatilehistoriographyofHellenisticRhodes.Inonewayoranother,thetitlesofmorethantwentyworksdealingwiththehistoryandantiquitiesofthisislandhavecomedowntous.9Noneoftheseworks,however,ispreserved(p.281) intheoriginal,andmanyaremeretitleswithnotevenasinglequotationorexcerptpreserved.Itismycontentionthat,despitethisdeplorablestateofpreservation,itisstillpossibletoreconstruct,atleastinoutline,oneofthesehistoriographicalworks—thatofZeno—andIshallarguethispropositioninthreesteps.First,IshalllookatwhatPolybiushastosayaboutZenoandsupplementthisinformationbywhatcanbeinferredfromportionsofPolybius’workthat
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 3 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
arelikelytoderivefromZeno.Secondly,IshallpresentandanalysetheaccountofRhodianprehistorythatwefindinDiodorusandthatcan,Ibelieve,confidentlyberegardedasgoingbacktoZeno,too.Thirdly,IshallturntotheaccountofthefamoussiegeofRhodosbythediadochDemetrius,alsotobefoundinDiodorus,toseewhetherthiscanhelpustogetamorecomplexpictureofZenoasawriterandahistorian.Finally,Iwillsummarizetheresultsandtrytoputthemintothebroadercontextoutlinedatthebeginning.
ZenoinPolybius:Rhodes,theHellenisticMonarchiesandRomePolybiusisnotusuallyundersuspicionforbeingovergenerouswithpraiseforthosewhopractisedhisart;onthecontrary,heisknownasasevereandsometimesunfaircriticoftheirrealorsupposedfaultsanderrors.10ItthereforeamountstohighpraisethathesinglesouttwoRhodians,ZenoandAntisthenes,asauthorsofhistoricalmonographsthatdeservedetailedexamination;infact,theyaretheonlywritersontheperiodthatPolybiushimselfdealtwithtobetreatedwithsuchrespect.BothZenoandAntistheneswere,accordingtoPolybius,contemporariesoftheeventstheydescribed;bothhadgainedthepracticalexperiencenecessaryfortheserioushistorianthroughactiveparticipationinpolitics;andbothwrotenotforthesakeofgainbuttowinfameandoutofpatrioticduty.Polybiusisatpains,however,towarnhisreadersthat,despitethesevirtues,theyshouldnotbebelievedwherevertheydifferfromhisownaccount;outofexcessivepartialityfortheirowncountrytheyhad,heasserts,drawnadistortedpictureofeventsinwhichtheRhodianswereinvolved.11
(p.282) IthaslongbeenrecognizedthatthiscritiqueisdirectedmainlyagainstZeno.12ThoughAntisthenesisincludedinthegeneralaccusationofRhodianbias,hevanishesfromsightquicklywhenPolybiusgoesintodetails.TheAchaeanhistoriographeradducesthreeexamplesfromZeno’sworkinordertodemonstratethatitwasinferiortohisown:thesea-battletheRhodianshadfoughtagainsttheMacedoniankingPhilipVin201attheislandofLade,theSpartankingNabis’expeditionagainstMessene,andthebattlebetweentheSeleucidkingAntiochusIIIandthegeneralsofPtolemyIVfoughtin198neartheshrineofPanatthespringsoftheRiverJordan.Zeno’saccountofthesea-battleofLadeisexaminedtosubstantiatethechargeofexcessivepartialityfortheRhodians.Thisfaultwasobvious,soPolybiusclaims,fromZeno’soverallaccount,butespeciallyfromaletterbythecommandingRhodianadmiralthatZenohimselfhadquoted.AccordingtoPolybius,thisletterinfactdisprovedratherthansupportedtheinterpretationthatZenohadputontheevents.13Zeno’saccountofNabis’expeditionagainstMesseneiscriticizedforbetrayingaseriouslackofgeographicalexpertise.14WhilePolybiusconcedesthaterrorsofthiskindadmitofsomeexplanationandexcuse,intheaccountofthebattleatthePaneionhefindsZenoguiltyofavicethat,inhisview,wassimplyunforgivable:beingmoreconcernedaboutstylethangettingone’sfactsright.AccordingtoPolybius,Zenowroteinthesensationalmannerofauthorsofdeclamatorypieces.15Thisverdict,however,clearlyhastobetakenwithapinchofsalt,asPolybiushadgoodreasontofearthatreadersmightpreferawell-writtenmonographoverhisownmulti-volume,dry,andpedanticaccountofRome’srisetoworldpower.16
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 4 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
FromPolybius’critique,ZenoemergesasanexperiencedpoliticianwhosetouttowritethehistoryofhisowncountrywithinaverywideframeworkthatencompassedeventsasfarawayfromRhodesasthePeloponneseinthewestandPalestineintheeast.HesawtheworldfromaRhodianperspective,andwaseagertoshowhiscountryinafavourablelight.Hedidnot,however,suppressRhodianfailuresentirelyorinventvictoriestheyhadneverwon.(p.283) FromPolybius’critiquewearealsoentitledtoinferthatZenodescribednavalwarfarewithexpertise,andthathemadeuseofRhodiandocumentstowhich,asaRhodianpolitician,hehadeasyaccess.17Andhewasclearlyanartfulwriter,whoseornatestylemettheexpectationsofareadingpublicversedinrhetoricalprose.
ButthereismoretobelearnedaboutZenofromtheremnantsofPolybius’history.Morethanahundredyearsago,HermannUllrich,inaLatindissertation,arguedconvincinglythatPolybiusmadeextensiveuseoftheRhodian’sworkindealingwitheventsintheeasternMediterraneanthatlayoutsidethereachofhispersonalexperience,andsincethenfurtherargumentshavebeenadducedtoconfirmthishypothesis.18ThatPolybiuswaspronetoputhistrustinZeno’sworkseemsaplausibleassumptionnotonlybecauseherankedZenoamongthebesthistoriographersofhisage.Zeno’spoliticaloutlookisalsolikelytohaveappealedtoPolybius.Since198atthelatest,RhodesandtheAchaeanLeaguehadadoptedverysimilarpoliciesandoftenco-operatedclosely.TheyhadfoughttogetheragainstPhilipV,againstNabis,andagainstAntiochusIII;lateron,theywerebothreluctanttofightPerseus.Whenin154/3theRhodiansneededhelpforthewaragainsttheCretanLeague,theyturnedtotheAchaeans.19
IfoneexaminescloselywhatispreservedofPolybiusandthosepartsofLivythatarederivedfromhim,onefindscleartracesofhisdependenceonaRhodiansourceofinformationthatwashistoriographicalincharacter.PassagesderivedfromitstandoutfortheirintimateknowledgeofRhodianaffairsandinstitutions,astrikinginclinationandabilitytorefertodocumentsthatwereavailableinRhodes(and,insomecases,onlythere),20adisproportionateinterestinthefortunesoftheRhodians,andablatanttendencytoglorifytheirsuccessesandtodownplayorexcusetheirfailures.Whenallthosecluesaretakentogether,itishardtoescapetheconclusionthatZenohasexertedastronginfluenceonPolybius’representationofsomemajorwarsofthelatethirdandearlysecondcenturies.Apartfromthefamousaccountoftheearthquakeof228/7,whichshowsRhodescourtedbyallthegreatpowersof(p.284) theHellenisticworld,21hisworkleftitsmarkinthefollowingpassages:(i)theeventsleadinguptothewaroftheRhodiansagainstPhilipVandthewaritself;22(ii)thewaratseaagainstAntiochusIII;23(iii)RhodianruleinLycia;24and(iv)therelationsbetweenRhodesandRomefromthetreatyofApameadowntothetreatywithRomestruckaftertheThirdMacedonianWar.25
ThesepassagesshowZenoasapatriotichistoriographerwhotoldtalesofRhodiangloryandhonour.HedepictedhiscompatriotsasthevictimsoftheunprovokedaggressionofPhilipV,asvaliantwarriorsandseamen,andasunselfishfightersforthewelfareandlibertyofalltheGreeks.ButhealsoneededtocometotermswiththedisastrousresultofRhodianforeignpolicyduringthewartheRomanshadwagedagainsttheMacedonian
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 5 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
kingPerseus.HavingactivelytriedtopreventthedefeatofPerseus,theRhodiansfelloutoffavourwiththeRomansenateassoonasthekingwasvanquished,inJuly168,andtheyfearedtheworst.Severalyearsoftrepidationandhumiliationfollowed.ManyRhodianembassieswenttoRome,beforethesenatein164finallydeignedtoofferthematreatyofalliance,albeitonunequalterms.RelationsbetweenRomeandRhodeswerethusaverysensitiveissuewhenZenowrote.Heofferedanapologiaforthesetraumaticevents,stressingthelonghistoryofRhodianneutralityandexcusingtheirwaveringstanceduringthewaragainstPerseusasthemachinationsofasmallpro-MacedoniancliquethatwasdulypunishedassoonastheRhodianscametotheirsenses.
ZenoinDiodorusI:RhodianhistorybeforetheTrojanWarWehavesofarcometoknowZenoasachroniclerofrecenteventsandasapoliticalhistoriandescribingwarsandfeuds,battlesandnegotiations.Thischoiceofsubject-matterclearlyendearedhimtoPolybius,forwhomtheaffairsofpeoples,cities,anddynastsformedthethemeofthemostinteresting(p.285) andmostusefulgenreofhistoricalwriting.26Therewas,however,anothersidetoZenotowhichPolybiusdoesnotevenallude.ThoughZenodescribedeventsofhisowntimeingreatdetailandwithanalmostecumenicalbreadthofvision,hisworkwasnotahistoryoftheworldastheGreeksconceivedit,butamonographcentredonRhodes.Likesomanyotherwritersoflocalhistories,hestartednotatsomedefinitepointintherecentpastbutsomewhereinthemistsoftime.EveniftheprecisestructureofZeno’shistoryisirrecoverable,27wecanbesurethathedealtwiththeverybeginningsofRhodianhistoryintheformofan‘archaeology’,anarrationaboutaprimevalworldsupposedtohaveexistedbeforetheTrojanWar.
IfwearestillabletoformarelativelyclearpictureofhowZenodepictedtheearliesthistoryofRhodes,weowethistoDiodorusSiculus,whoincludedanexcerptfromZeno’shistoryinhismonumentalcompendiumofworldhistory.28Butforthisexcerpt,ourknowledgeofhowHellenisticRhodiansconceivedtheverybeginningsoftheirhistorywouldbereducedtoafewtinyanddisjointedbitsofinformationpreservedinwritersoftheimperialperiod,andtowhatcanbeinferredfromthefamouslistofdedicationsandepiphaniesknownasthe‘LindianChronicle’,andpublishedasaninscriptionin99BC.Thisfascinatingtextis,however,entirelyfocusedonthehistoryofonesinglesanctuary,notontheislandasawhole.29Fortunately,Diodorusisawriter(p.286) whofollowshissourcesclosely.Tobesure,forhispurposeofwritingauniversalhistoryinfortybooksrangingfromthebeginningsofhumanlifeonearthtoJuliusCaesar,hehadtoreadwidely.Butincomposingeachoneofthesefortybooks,Diodorususuallystucktoasingleauthorityandtransformedthisnarrativeintohisown,uniformstyle,thoughheoftenskippedwholepassagesthathethoughtwerenotsufficientlyinterestingtobeincluded,andfromtimetotimesupplementedhismainauthoritybymaterialdrawnfromasecondarysource.30NowZenoistheonlyauthorityonRhodianhistorythatDiodorussinglesoutbyname(Diod.5.56.7).Wecan,therefore,bequiteconfidentthatwhatDiodoruswritesaboutRhodianoriginsisafaithfulmirrorofhowZenonarratedthebeginningsofRhodianhistory.31InwhatfollowsIshallsummarizehisaccount,tryingtobringouthowitrelatestoothersourcesandmediaofcollectivememory.
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 6 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Zeno’sstoryopenedinaverydistantpastindeed,inatimewhentheislandwasnotyetinhabitedbyhumanbeingsandwasnotyetcalledRhodeseither;eventheOlympiangodshadyettobeborn.HiselaborateaccountofRhodianoriginsshowedastrikingcontrastwiththemuchsimplergenealogyusedbyPindarinhisfamousodeontheRhodianaristocratDiagoras.32AccordingtoZenotheislandofRhodeshadalreadyexperiencedfoursuccessiveagesbeforetheTrojanWarevenstarted:firstcametheAgeoftheso-calledTelchines,childrenofThalatta;secondlytheAgeoftheHeliadae,childrenofthesun-godHelios;thirdlytheAgeoftheArchegetae,thefoundersofthethreeoldcitiesontheislandofRhodes:Ialysus,Camirus,andLindus;andfourthlyandlast,theAgeoftheHeroes,stretchingdowntotheTrojanWar.
FortheTelchines,Zenowasfollowingatraditionthathehimselfcalledlegendary.33Althoughconceivedofasakindofdemon,theywereatthesame(p.287)
Fig.1. Period1:TheAgeoftheTelchines
(p.288) timeregardedasculturalheroeswhohaddiscoveredcertainartsandmadeinventionsusefultomankind.34Inparticular,theTelchineshadbeenthefirsttocraftstatuesofthegods.Thiswasthereasonwhy,Zenoexplained,inallthreeoldcitiesofRhodescertainstatuesofgodswerestillcalledafterthem.35InZeno’saccount,thenymphRhodos—knowntoeveryRhodianfromdepictionsonlocalbronzecoins36—wasnotadaughterofAphrodite,asPindar(Ol.7.13)hadasserted,butoneofthesevenchildrenPoseidonhadfromHalia,asisteroftheTelchines.Hersixbrothers,bycontrast,wererathersinisterfigures:whentheyrapedtheirownmother,Poseidonhadnochoicebuttoburyhiswaywardsonsbeneaththeearth.Thesignificanceofthisstoryforunderstandingthepresentwasagainspelledoutexplicitly:thesonsofPoseidonhadaftertheirburialbeencalled‘EasternDemons’,andtheirmother,Halia,wasreveredasLeucotheabecauseaftertherapeshehadleaptintotheseaoutofshame.37
TheAgeoftheTelchineswasterminatedbyagreatflood.TheTelchines,though,hadlefttheislandinadvanceandwerescattered:oneofthem,namedLycus,wenttoLyciaonthesoutherncoastofAsiaMinor,wherehededicatedatempleofApollo.38Mostoftheinhabitants,however,perishedinthedisaster,withonlythesonsofZeusfindingrescueintheupperregionsoftheisland.Thisisthelastwehearofthesemysteriousbeings;Zenoobviouslyfeltboundtomentionthem,butfoundnosatisfactorywayofintegratingtheminhisoverallscheme.39Theaccountofthenextage,thatoftheHeliadae,openedwithadiscussionabouthowtheislandbecameinhabitableagain.HereagainZeno
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 7 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
showedhimselftobearationalist:inhisopinion,thestorythatHelios,havingfalleninlovewiththenymphRhodos,hadpersonallycausedthewatertodisappearwasmerelyalegend.Hepreferredanaturalexplanation:thesunhadquitesimplydriedtheearthfromitswetnessandtherebycausedlivingcreaturestospringup.40
Despitethisreservation,however,Zenodidnotcallintodoubttheexistenceofthose‘sonsofthesun’celebratedbyPindar,andheevengavethemasister(p.289)
Fig.2. Period2:TheAgeoftheHeliadae(sonsof‘Helios’)
(p.290) thatwasunknowntothepoet:Alectrona.ZenoaffirmedthattheislandhadinconsequenceoftheseeventscometobeconsideredsacredtoHelios,andthattheRhodiansoflatertimeshadperseveredinhonouringHeliosmorethananyothergod,regardinghimastheancestorfromwhomtheyultimatelydescended;41healsomentionedthatAlectronawastherecipientofaheroiccultwhichhappenstobeattestedepigraphically,too.42Alectrona,however,wasofminorimportancewhencomparedtoHelios,whoseportraitadornedthecity’ssilvercoins.43ThemostmagnificentfestivalofHellenisticRhodeswascelebratedinhishonour,44andhispriesthoodwasmoreprestigiousthananyotherintheRhodianstate.45Theneedtohavehiscultanchoredintheverydistantpastwasthereforefeltverystrongly—notwithstandingthefactthatitcannothavebeenofpan-Rhodiansignificancebeforethesynoecismof407/8.
ToexplainthefirelesssacrificesofferedtoAthenaLindia—whosesanctuarywasoneofthegloriesofHellenisticRhodes46—ZenorefinedastorythatinoutlinewasalreadyfamiliarfromPindar(Ol.7.39–51).InPindar,theHeliadaesimplyforgettobringfirewhentheyclimbuptheacropolistooffersacrifice.InZeno,thestoryismorecomplexandmoredramatic.Accordingtohim,HeliosstagedacontestbetweentheinhabitantsofRhodosandthoseofAttica,promisingtograntthecontinualpresenceofAthenatowhoeverwouldbethefirsttooffersacrificetothegoddess.Hissons,theHeliadae,performedthesacrificeonthespot,butintheirhasteforgottoputfirebeneaththevictims.TheAtheniankingCecrops,ontheotherhand,performedthesacrificeoverfire,aswasusualintheGreekworld,butlaterthanhisRhodianrivals.47OnceagainZenodidnotleaveittohisreaderstodrawtheconclusions,obviousthoughtheywere:hecommentedthatthisstoryexplainedbothwhytheRhodians(inLindus)tohisdaysacrificedtoAthenainthispeculiarway,andhowthegoddesshadcometotakeherabodeontheisland.TheLindiancultofAthenawasthusshowntobeolderthanany
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 8 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
otherinthewholeGreekworld,andthusmorevenerableeventhanthecultofAthenahousedintheErechtheumontheacropolisofAthens.
NotonlyweretheHeliadaethefirsttooffersacrificetoAthena;accordingtoZeno,theyalsosurpassedallothermeninlearning,andespeciallyinastrology.(p.291) Theyintroducedmanyimprovementsinseamanshipandestablishedthedivisionofthedayintohours.ZenothusextendedtheclaimofRhodianprioritytofieldsofknowledgethatmanyGreeksregardedasadoptedfromEgypt.48ZenoevenwentsofarastoclaimthattheEgyptians—farfromhavingtaughtthelawsofastrologytotheGreeks—hadthemselveslearnedthemfromRhodians.Tobuttressthisclaim,heenlargedonastorywhichhadseveralsonsofHeliosfleeingtheislandaftertheyhadslaintheirbrotherTenages:oneofthemurdererssailedofftoEgypt,wherehefoundedthecityofHeliopolis,thecityofthesun,andtaughtastrologytoEgyptians.IftheGreekshadlostallmemoryofthisRhodianachievement,Zenocontended,itwasbecauseadisastrousfloodamongGreekshaddestroyedalldocumentsthatcouldhavefurnishedproofofthepriorityofRhodianastrology,andhadevenextinguishedtheartofwritingfromtheGreekworldentirely.SincethistheorypresupposedtheuseofwritingbyGreekslongbeforetheTrojanWar,hewentonimmediatelytodemonstratethatthewidespreadbeliefinthePhoenicianoriginsofGreekscriptwasalsomistaken.Zenoalsocameupwithanexplanationastohowthismisconception,sharedbymanyGreekauthorsfromHerodotusonwards,49couldhavetakenrootamongtheGreeksthemselves:bythetimeCadmusbroughtthePhoenicianalphabettoGreece,allmemoryoftheearlierGreekscripthadvanishedcompletelyasaresultoftheflood.50
WhilefouroftheHeliadaefledRhodesafterthemurderoftheirbrotherTenages,51two,whohadnottakenpartinthecrime,CercaphusandOchimus,stayedontheislandandtogetherfoundedthecityofAchaïa,whichconfusinglywasalsocalledCyrbe.AlthoughDiodorus’excerptisatthispointsocondensedastobealmostincomprehensible,52thereislittledoubtthatZeno(p.292)
Fig.3. Period3:TheAgeoftheArchegetae(‘Founders’)
(p.293) regardedthisfirstcitytobefoundedonRhodiansoilasaforerunnerofIalysus,theacropolisofwhichwascalledAchaïainhisowntime.53ThecityofAchaïadidnot,however,surviveforverylong.Itsfirstking,Ochimus,wassucceededbyhis
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 9 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
brotherCercaphus,whointurnhadthreesons,Ialysus,Camirus,andLindus.TheywerelatertobecomethefoundersofthehomonymouscitiesonRhodesafteraseconddelugehadsubmergedthecitytheirfatherhadruled.Thiswas,accordingtoZeno,theendoftheAgeoftheHeliadae.54
TheAgeoftheArchegetaesawthefoundationofthreeoldcitiesofRhodes.55AlthoughtheireponymousfoundersarebarelymentionedinDiodorus’excerpt,theydemonstrablyheldaprominentplaceinthecollectivememoryofHellenisticRhodians.NotonlywereCamirus,Ialysus,andLindusamongthedeitiestowhomtheassemblyofRhodiancitizensprayedwhensolemnlyratifyingtreaties,56buteachofthethreereceivedcultichonoursinthecityhewassupposedtohavefounded.57InthisperiodZenoplacedtwofurtherepisodesrelatingtotheoriginsofRhodiansanctuaries.BycreditingtheEgyptianDanauswiththefoundationofboththetempleandthestatueofLindianAthena,heclearlyplacedpanhellenicknowledgeabovelocaltradition,eventhoughthelatter,too,hadbyhistimepresumablybeentransformedintoliterature,albeitofanantiquariancharacter.58ReadersofHerodotusknewthatAthena’stempleinLindushadbeenfoundedbyDanaus’daughters,andconnoisseursofpoetryprobablyrememberedthatCallimachushadascribedherwoodencultimagetoDanaushimself.59Zeno,however,wentforaversion(p.294) inwhichDanaus—miraculouslydriventoRhodesbyastormatsea—alonegetscreditforbothachievements.60ThisversioncannotreflectwhattheLindiansthemselvesconsideredtobethetrueoriginsoftheirsanctuary,becauseDanausisnevermentionedinthenumerousinscriptionspreservedfromthissanctuaryoratleastinthe‘LindianChronicle’.Zeno’spreferenceforinformationvouchedforbyliterarysourceswithawidercirculationalsoexplainshisinclusionofadedicationtoLindianAthenasupposedlymadebythePhoenicianCadmus,sincethedetaileddescriptionZenogivesisinallprobabilitydrawnfromawrittensource;itdemonstrablyfeaturedinotherworksofRhodianhistoriographyalso,butisveryunlikelytohavebeenondisplayinHellenisticLindus.61
ButCadmus’primaryfunctioninZeno’saccountwastoactasfounderofthetempleofPoseidoninIalysus.Inthiscase,Zenoclearlyfollowedlocaltradition,ashehimselfiseagertoemphasizethatthepriestswhoservedthissanctuaryinhisdayweredescendantsofthemenCadmushadleftbehind.Itlooks,though,asifZenomadearadicalselectionfromthematerialthatwasavailabletohim,sinceweknowthatotherRhodianhistoriographersindulgedindramatictalesabouthowthePhoenicianshadbeenbesiegedontheacropolisofIalysusandwerefinallyforcedtoleavetheisland.62ZenoseemstohavebeencontentwithconstructinganarrationthattestifiedtothevenerableantiquityofaRhodiansanctuarybylinkingittoafigureofthedistantpast,who,tomanyGreeks,wasacommonpointofreference.63
TheAgeoftheFounderscametoanendwhenaplagueofserpentsbrokeoutthatcausedthedeathofmanyoftheinhabitants.64Thistime,however,notallwaslostthathadbeenachievedbefore.Thethreecitiesandsomeoftheirinhabitantssurvivedintothenewage,theAgeoftheHeroes.InthisperiodseveraltribesfromtheGreekmainlandimmigrated,whoseleadershelda(p.295)
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 10 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Fig.4. Period4:TheAgeoftheHeroes
(p.296) prominentplaceinthecollectivememoryoftheHellenisticRhodians.ThefirsttocomewereThessalians,whoseleader,Phorbas,hadbeenrecommendedtotheRhodiansbytheoracleofApolloonDelos.65AccordingtoZeno,Phorbaswasaccordedheroichonoursbecausehedestroyedtheserpentsandprovedhimselftobeavirtuousmaninmanyotherrespects.66SometimelatertheCretanAlthaemenesarrivedonRhodeswishingtocircumventanoraclethatpredictedhewouldslayhisownfather.Inevitablyhedidnotsucceedinescapingfromhisfate.Hedid,however,foundatempleofZeusonMountAtabyrus,whereinZeno’sdayrepresentativesofthethreeoldRhodiancitiesmettocelebratethecultofZeusAtabyrius.67ZenodidnotneedtospellouttheconclusionthattheheroichonoursAlthaemenesreceivedinHellenisticCamiruswerewelldeserved.68ThethirdandlastoftheheroestoarriveonRhodeshailedfromArgosinthePeloponnese.ShortlybeforetheTrojanWarTlepolemus,asonofHeracles,havingslainhisownfather,immigratedtoRhodes.Hequicklybecamekingofthewholeisland,carriedoutanequaldistributionoftheland,andruledequitablyineveryotherrespect,too.Beingaresponsibleruler,TlepolemusleftbehindaregenttomakesurethattherewouldbenopowervacuuminhisabsencebeforehefinallysetouttofighttheTrojans.TheexcerptendswiththeremarkthatintheTrojanWarTlepolemusgainedgreatfameforhimselfandmethisdeathintheTroad.ThisissurelyduetoDiodorusratherthanZeno;theRhodianhistoriographercannothavewishedtogivetheimpressionthattherewasagapbetweenthedistantandthemorerecentpastofRhodes.
TlepolemuswasaheroknownallovertheGreekworldashismemorywasenshrinedinHomer’sIliad.69FortheRhodians,however,hewasspecial.The‘LindianChronicle’listsadedicationsupposedlymadebeforehewentto(p.297) Troy,andanothermadebyhiscompanionsfromthebootytheyhadtakenfromtheTrojans;forbothnolessthanthreeRhodianauthoritiesaregiven.70InRhodos,Tlepolemusreceivedsacrificeinasanctuaryofhisown,wherehisgravewasshown,andwashonouredbyafestivalwithathleticconteststhatborehisname.71ThereasonwhyHellenisticRhodiansconsideredhismemorytobesoimportantisnothardtofind:sinceTlepolemushadbeentheleaderofastrongandunitedisland,hisreignfurnisheddecisiveproofthatwhatHellenisticRhodians,especiallythoseofthepoliticalelite,wereproudof—aunitarystate,wellgoverned,andcapableofleadinganindependentforeignpolicy—hadalreadybeenachievedbeforetheTrojanWar.HisstorythusstrengthenedtheconvictionthattheHellenisticpresentwasthefulfilmentofwhatRhodianshadalwaysstrivenfor.Theverydistantpastwasshowntobeinaccordancewithpresentidealsandaspirations,andthus
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 11 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
confirmedthebeliefinacollectiveidentityinheritedfromtheisland’sforefathers;insubstance,sothemessageran,wearewhatwe’vealwaysbeen.
Forus,Zeno’s‘Archaeology’isaninstructiveexampleofhowthedistantpastcouldbeputtouseinHellenisticRhodes.Hisliterarymethodistypicalforwritersofmonographsonpeoplesandcities.Zenotriedtosystematizewidelydiffering,oftenflatlycontradictory,traditionsabouttheearliesthistoryofhishometownbybringingthemintoagenealogicalorder.Notcontent,however,withworkingoutachronologicalschemeforRhodianprehistorybasedongenealogy,hedividedhistimeframeintofoursuccessivestagesthatwereseparatedbynaturalcatastrophes.Thissomewhatartificialconstructpresumablyappealedtohisreaders,astheideathatinthedistantpastwholecivilizationshadbeenwipedoutbyrecurrentcataclysmswascurrentamongeducatedHellenisticGreeks.72Intellinghisstory,Zenomadeuseofestablishednarrativepatternslikesea-storms,oracles,killingsofrelatives,orloveaffairsof(p.298) allsorts,fromincesttorape.73Sea-stormswereastockdeviceformovingpeopletoplaceswheretheyhadnoobviousrationaletobe;oracles,crimes,andloveaffairsconvenientlysuppliedmotivesforactsthatcouldotherwisenoteasilybeaccountedfor,andprovidedampleopportunityfordramatization.Zenowaseagertobringouttherelevancethateventsandfiguresofthedistantpastheldforhisowntime,andoftenassertedanunbrokenchainofcontinuitybetweenthepresentandtheverybeginningsofRhodianhistory.HepushedRhodianclaimsofbeingaGreekpoliswithanunimpeachablepedigreeandanoutstandingrecordofachievementsbyascribingvenerableantiquitytomanyRhodiancultsandinstitutions,andbyclaimingRhodianpriorityinmanyaccomplishmentsintheartsandsciences.AsaneducatedHellenisticGreek,heshowedapredilectionfornaturalcausesasexplanationsofculturaldevelopments,andtendedtorejectstoriesbasedonananthropomorphicalconceptionofthedivine.Hisscepticism,however,waslimitedtotheearliestphaseofRhodianprehistory,anddidnotleadtohisdenyingthehistoricityofmythicaleventsandfiguresinprinciple.Tobesure,thisattitudetothedistantpasthadbeencharacteristicofGreekhistoricalwritingsinceitsbeginnings;evenThucydidesbelievedthattherewasakerneloftruthinthetalestoldbyepicpoets.74Polybiusregardedmonographsongenealogies,foundations,andkinshiptiesbetweencitiesasinferiortohisownwork,notbecausehebelievedthatthesetypesofhistory-writingbelongedtotherealmoffictionbutbecause,inhisopinion,theywereboundtobeeitherderivativeordisingenuousandhadnopracticalvalueformasteringcontemporaryproblems.75Inthisrespect,ZenodivergessharplyfromPolybius:forZenothedistantpastwasheavilyloadedwithsocialmeaning,servingtoexplainhowtheinstitutionsandidealsofthepresentweredeeplyrootedinthepastandweretofurnishmodelsofbehaviourforthefuture.
ZenoinDiodorusII:thegloriousdefenceagainstDemetriusTheargumentsofardevelopedcanbecarriedonestagefurther,ifitiscorrectthatDiodorustookhisaccountofthefamoussiegeofRhodosbyDemetriusfromZenoalso.76Onthishypothesis,whichcannotbearguedherebutmay(p.299) gainsomeconfirmationfromtheanalysisthatfollows,itispossibletoreconstructyetanotherfacetofhiswork:thewayhedealtwitheventsthatfirmlybelongtotherealmofhistoryaswe
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 12 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
understandthatterm,butwhichalso,inthecollectivememoryofHellenisticRhodians,servedasapatrioticmyth.Forthem,thevictoriousdefenceagainstDemetriusPoliorcetesnotonlymarkedaturning-pointintheirrecenthistory.77Itwasaboveallasymbolofthosepoliticalvirtuestheyconsideredmostimportant.SoonaftertheeventstheyhaderectedthegiganticColossustoserveasamemorialtotheirvictory;anepigramincisedonitsbasedepictedtheRhodiansasvaliantandvictoriousdescendantsofHeracleswithanancestralclaimtoleadershiponbothlandandsea.78ThoughtheColossusfelldowninconsequenceoftheearthquakeof228/7,itsimpressiveruinsremainedvisibleallthroughtheHellenisticperiod.79Anothermemorialtothesiegehasonlyrecentlybeenuncoveredbyarchaeologists:inasanctuarybelowtheacropolisofRhodosmorethan1,000largebulletsleftbehindbytheMacedonianartillerywerecarefullypileduptoremindposterityofhowtheRhodianshaddefeatedanenemywhoseresourceswereseeminglyinexhaustible.80Admittedly,weknownothingaboutthecommemorativepracticesassociatedwiththesesitesofmemory.Wedo,however,haveexplicitevidencethattherewasaninstitutionalizedframeworkensuringthatthesiegewasdulyrememberedeachandeveryyear,sinceafestivalinhonourofPtolemyI—whohadbeeninstrumentalinwardingofftheAntigonidattack—isknowntohavebeencelebratedintothesecondcenturyBC.Therecanbenodoubt,therefore,thatthesemomentouseventswererememberedbymeansofpublicritual.81
(p.300) ReadingDiodorus’accountasanadaptationofZeno’s,weseethatafterRhodianpolicyduringtheThirdMacedonianWarhadendedindisaster,thememoryofthegreatsiegebyDemetriustookonadditionallayersofmeaning.Ofcourse,itwasstillconceivedasprovidingshiningexamplesoftimelessvirtuessuchasvalourorpublicspirit.ForZeno,however,thestoryalsoservedanapologeticaim:hewantedtodemonstratefromhistorythatRhodianpolicyhadalwaysbeenguidedbyfirmprinciplesanddirectedtowardsthecommongoodofallGreeks.Consequently,heprefacedhisnarrativeofthesiegewithaprogrammaticdeclarationastotheprinciplesofRhodianpolicy:beingstronginsea-powerandhavingthebestgovernmentamongalltheGreeks,thecityoftheRhodianshadthrivedbecauseithadalways,accordingtoZeno,preservedanindependentstanceamongthegreatpowers,andatthesametimeundertakenarelentlesswaragainstpiracyonbehalfofalltheGreeks.Outofrespectforsuchnoblespiritanddependability,AlexanderhadpromotedtheRhodianstoacommandingposition,andhonouredthemaboveallothercitiesbydepositinghistestamentontheisland.82ForZeno,Alexander’stestament,whichweknow(andmanycontemporariespresumablysuspected)tohavebeenforgedonRhodes,83constituteddocumentaryproofoftheesteeminwhichtheRhodianshadbeenheldbythegreatestofallkings.AfterAlexander’sdeath,Zenoadded,theRhodianswerefriendswithallkingsanddynasts,thoughforeconomicreasonstheyhadaspecialrelationshipwithPtolemyofEgypt.84
ThestorythatZenowentontotellabouttheoriginsofthewarbetweenAntigonusandDemetriusontheonehand,andhiscountryontheother,wasdesignedtoconfirmtheprogrammaticstatementsmadeintheintroduction.Needlesstosay,forZenoasforhiscompatriots,theRhodianshadbeenthevictimsofunprovokedaggression.ZenolaidtheguiltforthewarsquarelyatAntigonus’door:thekinghadtriedtocompeltheRhodians
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 13 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
tobetraytheirprinciplesbyparticipatinginhiswaragainstPtolemyofEgypt.Evenso,theRhodianshadtriedtoreachacompromisewiththekingrightuptothelastminute,onlytofindthathewasincreasinghisdemandsassoonastheyaccededtohisoriginalrequest.Intheend,theRhodianshadnochoicebuttofightthehugearmyAntigonus’sonDemetriusledagainsttheisland.85
(p.301) Thereisneitherspacenorneedtore-tellherethestoryofthesiegeasitwasnarratedbyZeno.InsteadIshouldliketocommentonthewaythenarrativeisconstructedandthemessagesitconveys.ThemostconspicuousfeatureofZeno’snarrativeisdramatizationbymeansofcreatingempathywiththebesiegedandbuildingupsuspense.NotonlywasthestorytoldfromthepointofviewoftheRhodians,buttimeandagainthereaderwasmadetofeeltheanxietythattheonslaughtofasuperiorenemycausedamongthem.Togivebutoneexample,inasortofHomericteichoscopy,ZenorelatedhowthesightofDemetrius’hugearmadacrossingoverfromCariatoRhodesstruckfearandpanicintothosewatchingfromthecity,withsoldiersawaitingtheenemyonthewallsandwomenandoldmenlookingonfromtheirhomes.86
Zenowasawriterwhoknewfullwellthateventhemostpatrioticoftalescannotholdthesamelevelofsuspenseforlongwithoutbecomingmonotonousanddull.Tomakethenarrationmorevaried,hedividedhisplotintothreemajorblocksclearlyseparatedfromeachother:thebattleintheharbour,thefightagainstthefamoussiegeengineknownasHelepolis,andthesubsequentattackonthewalls.87ThefirstsectionisdividedfromthesecondbyanelaboratedescriptionoftheHelepolisinthemannerofanekphrasis,andbyacomplexportraitofDemetriusasacharacter,88whilealivelydescriptionofanassemblyoftheRhodiansisplacedbetweenthesecondandthethirdsection.Eachofthethreenarrationsisthusself-containedinthesensethatithasitsownbeginningandend,andrisesfromalowlevelofsuspensetoaclimax.ItwaswithinthesethreenarrationsthatZenodeployedhisarttothefull.Thenarrativeiscarefullystructuredsoastogivethereadertheimpressionheishimselflivingthroughtheevents.Dramaticreversalsoffortunelethimexperiencethefullrangeofemotions,fromanxietyandfeartoreliefandjoy.Cleverretardationspreventthestoryfromreachingitsclimaxprematurelyandallowthereadertogainamoment’srespitebeforethefinaldenouementisreached.Allthiswasartfulstory-tellingintheserviceofpatriotichistoriography.
AnotherfeaturethatleapstotheeyeisthefrequencywithwhichthemainnarrativeisinterspersedwithshortepisodesoftheheroicdeedsofRhodianwarriors.WhereasthesoldiersofDemetriusarerarelymentionedbynameand,ifso,onlytorecordtheirbeingkilledortakenprisoner,manyRhodian(p.302) warriorsareimmortalizedwithbriefnarrativesoftheirheroismandcourage.TheRhodiangeneralAmyntas,forexample,waspraisedforhavingseizedmanyfreighterscarryingordnanceforDemetriusandhavingcapturedelevenengineersfamousfortheirskillinmakingmissilesandcatapults.89Lateron,hefoughtabattleagainstthreeshipsmannedbypeoplewhomZenoregardedaspirates,andcapturedallthreewiththeircrews.90TheloyaltyofAthenagoras,amercenaryfromMiletuswhoservedascommanderoftheRhodianguard,wasdepictedwithlovingdetail:whensomeofDemetrius’mentriedtobribehimintobetrayingthe
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 14 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Rhodians,hepretendedtoconsent,onlytohandovertotheRhodianauthoritiestheemissarysentbyDemetriustosignthefinalagreement.ZenowascarefultorecordthatAthenagoraswasdulyhonouredwithagoldencrownandthegiftof5talents.91Itseemsunnecessarytomultiplyexamples92astheoverallimpressionisclear:Zenolaidoutbeforehisreadersawholegalleryofportraitsdevotedtothemenwho,bytheirvalour,hadsavedRhodosfromfallingintoslaveryandtherebyenabledfuturegenerationstoenjoyalifeinfreedom.
TheassertionthatZenowasapatriotichistorianandanartfulwritershouldnot,however,betakentomeanthathedidnotbotherwithevidence.Onthecontrary,innarratingthesiegehedisplaysknowledgeofseveraldocumentsthatpresumablywereeitheronpublicdisplayinthecityofRhodosoravailableinRhodianarchives(orboth).ZenoreferredtospoilstheRhodianshaddedicatedtotheirgodsandtostatuestheyhaderectedinhonourofCassanderandLysimachus,summarizedRhodiandecreespassedasemergencymeasureswhenthesiegebegan,paraphrasedhonorificdecreesawardedtofighterswhohadshownexceptionalbravery,andquotedfromanoracletheRhodianshadreceivedfromAmmonatSiwaandfromthetreatytheyhadconcludedwithDemetrius.93Zenoclearlysharedtheconcernfor(p.303) documentaryevidencethatistypicalofHellenisticrepresentationsofthepast.ThisfeatureofhisworkclearlysatisfiedPolybius,whoappreciatedtheevidentialvalueofdocumentsandhimselfreferredtolettersandtreatiesseveraltimes—eventakingthetroubletohavetreatiesbetweenRomeandCarthagetranslatedintoGreek.94
Unsurprisingly,idealizationofRhodes’politicalorderandforeignpolicyisanotherpeculiarityofZeno’sprofileasahistoriographerthatpervadesDiodorus’accountofthegreatsiege.TheRhodianclaimtoleadanuncompromisingfightagainstpiracyiscorroboratedbyseveralepisodesinwhichcombatantsfightingonthesideofDemetriusarecalledpirates.ThedecisionoftheRhodianassemblynottopulldownthestatuesofAntigonusandDemetriusisinterpretedbyZenoasanexpressionofRhodianmagnanimityandconstancy.95ZenodescribedthecityofRhodosasbeingblessedbysocialharmonyandpublicspiritinallclasses:therichcontributedmoney,thecraftsmengavetheirservicesforthemanufactureofarms,andeveryonestroveinaspiritofrivalrytosurpasstheothers.96HeexplicitlycalledtheRhodianconstitutionademocracy,97butalsostressedtheleadingroleofthePrytaneis,aboardofofficialselectedforsixmonths,byshowingthemkeepingacoolheadwheneverthefortunesoftheircountrywereonaknife-edge.98
HistoriographyandtheCultureofMemoryinHellenisticRhodesItistimetopulltogetherthethreadsthathavesofarbeenspun.ThroughthelensofPolybiusweseeZenoastheauthorofahistoricalmonographdealingwithpoliticalandmilitaryeventsoftherecentpast.Hiswork—thoughfocusedonRhodes—includedeventsthathappenedfarawayfromtheislandandwithoutthedirectparticipationoftheRhodians.Hedid,however,viewtheeventshenarratedfromaRhodianperspective,andtendedtostressthevirtuesofhiscompatriots.TojudgefromtheRhodiantraditionsusedbyPolybius,ZenopublishedhisworkaftertheThirdMacedonianWar.99Polybius
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 15 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(p.304) regardedhimasacompetenthistorianandaseriousthreattohisownreputation,becauseZeno’swritingsappealedtothereadingpublicbutwere,fromthepointofviewoftheAchaeanhistorian,meresensationalism.AsPolybiuswasconcernedincriticizingZenotodefendhisownwayofwritinghistoryandnottogiveabalancedassessmentofZeno’smethod,100itisnosurprisethatinDiodoruswefindthattherewasanothersidetotheRhodianhistorianthatPolybiusentirelypassesoverinsilence.Zenoadheredtotheconventionsofthegenreoflocalhistorybygivingadetailedaccountoftheoriginsofhiscountry.HedesignedacarefullystructurednarrationthatdepictedtheearliesthistoryofRhodesasasuccessionoffouragesprecedingtheTrojanWar.Despitethefactthatthesestoriesweresituatedinaverydistantpast,theyclearlywereimportanttoZenoandhisreaders,andhewaseagertobringouttheirsignificanceforunderstandingandmasteringthepresent.Asstoriesaboutoriginsdemonstratedthepresenttobefirmlyrootedinthepastandfurnishedexamplesoftimelessvirtues,theywereanintegralpartofthecultureofmemoryinHellenisticRhodesandcouldnotbedispensedwith.
Whilethe‘archaeology’ofRhodesthatwereadinDiodorushasverylittleincommonwithwhatwelearnaboutZenofromPolybius,theaccountofthegreatsiegeofRhodosbyDemetriusdoes,Ibelieve,intworespectscorroborateandsubstantiatewhattheAchaeanhistoriantellsusabouthisRhodiancolleagueandrival.Polybius’contentionthatZenotendedtoexalttheRhodiansisamplyconfirmedbyDiodorus,asthegreatsiegeisnarratedasapatriotictaleglorifyingthedeadinordertoinstructandalsotoexoneratetheliving.TheliterarytechniquesthatmakethistalesovividanddramaticenableustoseemoreclearlywhatPolybiusmeantwhenheaccusedZenooftaking‘somanypainsabouthisstylethathissensationalismcouldnotbeexcelledbyanyofthosedeclamatoryworkswrittentoimpressthevulgarmasses’.101
IfwetrytoputZenointothebroadercontextofHellenisticmemoryculture,wemustfacethethornyproblemofwhetherhisaccountofRhodianhistory—ifmyreconstructionisaccepted—caninanywayberegardedasrepresentativeforthecollectivememoryoftheRhodiansasapolitical(p.305) community.SinceZenowasonlyoneamongmanyRhodianhistoriographers,albeitthemostwidelyknown,thisquestionhastwocloselyinterrelatedaspects:first,whetherZeno’saccountsubstantiallyagreedwiththatofearlierwritersonthesubject;and,secondly,howthedepictionoftheRhodianpastinhistoriographyrelatedtowidelyheldbeliefscreatedanddisseminatedinothercommemorativemedia.ThatRhodianhistoriographydidnotdrawauniformpictureoftheisland’sremotepastseemsclearifonlybecauseitswriterscompetedagainsteachother,butthedegreetowhichtheydifferedisdifficultforustogaugeaswelacktheevidencetoundertakeadetailedcomparison.Tobesure,thelittleweknowofRhodianwritersotherthanZenoissufficienttoshowthattheydisagreedonmanydetails.Polyzelus,forexample,gaveacompletelydifferentgeneaologyofPhorbas,makinghimthesonofTriopas,whoinZenoisasonofHelios.HealsotoldamelodramatictaleaboutPhoeniciansbesiegedinIalysusthatZenoapparentlyignored.102Fromthe‘LindianChronicle’welearnaboutanepiphanyofLindianAthenaduringthegreatsiegebyDemetriusthatmusthavebeenprominentinRhodianwritersbutisconspicuousbyits
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 16 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
absenceinDiodorus’excerptingofZeno.103AndinafragmentarypapyrusinColognewefindanaccountofPtolemy’sproclamationaskingthat,whileprobablycomingfromaRhodianauthor,differsinseveralpointsfromwhatDiodoruscopiedfromZeno.104ButthequestionastowhetherintheearlysecondcenturytherewassomethinglikeavulgateversionoftheRhodianpastis,onpresentevidence,betterleftopen.
WemayfeelmoreconfidentinconsideringtherelationbetweenhistoriographyandpopularconceptionsabouttheRhodianpast.Ontheonehand,Zeno’sviewofRhodianprehistorybearsallthehallmarksofbeinganartificialcreationdesignedtointegrateasmanytraditionsaspossibleintoacoherentandintelligiblepictureofthepast.Asweknowfromindependentsources,thereweretraditionsthatcouldnotbyanymeansbemadetofithistidyscheme,105andeveninZeno’sownaccountsomelooseendsremained.IhavealreadypointedoutthathewasobviouslyuncertainaboutwhattomakeofthesonsofZeusmentionedabove.HealsoreferredinpassingtoamysteriouspeoplethatinDiodorus’manuscriptsisnamed‘theso-calledGigantes’andmaybeidenticalwiththeequallypuzzlingIgnetesknownfromlexicographical(p.306) texts.106Andheknewstillothersthatarehiddenundertheenigmaticlabelof‘otherautochthonouspeoples’.107Therecan,ofcourse,benocertaintyastowhetherthisartificialconstructwasdesignedbyZenohimselfratherthanoneofhisforerunners.Itseemsclear,however,thatitisfartoocomplexandcoherenttohavesprungupasareflectionofwidespreadbeliefs,ortoreplacesimplervisionsofthepastthatwerecreatedanddisseminatedinothermedia.
Ontheotherhand,theveryfactthatZenodidincludeanextendedaccountofRhodianoriginsinhishistoricalmonographisnotatallidiosyncratic.ThereisnodoubtthatHellenisticRhodiansbelievedthattheirpastbeganlongbeforetheTrojanWar,andthattheirislandwasconnectedbypersonalbondscreatedinthisperiodwithawiderangeofcitiesandpeoplesallovertheeasternMediterranean.Decisiveproofofthisisagaintobefoundinthe‘LindianChronicle’becauseitexpressesavisionoftheRhodianpastthatinstructureisanexactmatchtowhatwefindinZeno:itbeginslongbeforetheTrojanWar,bringstogethermanyHomericheroes,andthenglidesimperceptiblyintowhatweregardashistoryproper.The‘LindianChronicle’,however,wascomposedin99BContheorderofthecitizensofLindus,andinscribedonastelethatwastobeputupinoneofthemostvenerablesanctuariesofRhodes.ThistextsurelycomesasclosetoanofficiallyapprovedaccountofRhodianhistoryasonecanpossiblygetintheworldofGreekcity-states.
Ifthisdiscussionallowsageneralconclusion,Iwouldformulateitonthefollowinglines.WorksoflocalhistoriographylikethatofZeno,whilereflectingpatternsofthoughtcharacteristicofthecultureofmemoryoftheirage,shouldnotberegardedaspassivereflectionsofoneunifiedandgenerallyacceptedviewofthepast,evenwithintheboundsofasinglepolis.Therewerebasicpointsofcommonground,buttherewasalsomuchspaceforconstantreinterpretationandcreativeelaboration.Hellenistichistoriographersdidnotarticulateaviewofthepastthatwasregardedorintendedtobefinalandbindingonothers.Theyinteractedwithothermediaofcollectivememorythatproducedotherversionsofthepast,andinlargecity‐stateslikeRhodestheyalsocompetedwithother
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 17 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
practitionersoftheirownart.ThecollectivememoryofHellenisticcitieswaspolyphonic,andhistoriographywasonlyoneofseveralvoicesthatcouldbeheard.
Notes:
(1)Inthisarticle,RhodosisusedasthenameofthecitywhereasRhodesmeanstheisland.MostotherGreeknameshavebeenlatinized,withexceptionssuchasHelios.IshouldliketothankCharlesFornara,BruceGibson,TomHarrison,andDavidKonstanfortheirperceptiveandhelpfulcommentsonthispaper.
(2)Tolisttheenormoustheoreticalandempiricalliteratureoncollectivememoryandassortedtopicswouldherebeoutofplace.Forencyclopedicintroductions,seenowPethesandRuchatz2001andErllandNünning2008.Along,thoughbynomeanscomprehensive,bibliographyistobefoundinBeckandWiemer2009.
(3)OnliteracyanditslimitsinClassicalandHellenisticGreece,seeHarris1989:65–146.
(4)Ontheuseofhistoricalexamplesinpoliticaloratory,seethefundamentalstudyofNouhaud1982onwhichClarke2008:245–303isheavilydependent.
(5)ThereisnocomprehensivestudyofthisinstitutiontoreplacetheoutdatedaccountofNilsson1955;Kennell2006merelyprovidesacatalogueofinscriptions.OntheephebeiaofAthensPélékidis1962hasnowbeenpartlysupersededbyPerrin-Saminadayar2007,whocoversonlytheperiodfrom229–88BC,however.
(6)TheseminalstudyonGreekfestivalsasaframeworkformnemonicpracticeswasChaniotis1991;seenowalsoGehrke2001,Beck2009,Wiemer2009a,Wiemer2009b.
(7)AcomprehensivesurveyofHellenistichistoriographyisadesideratum.ArecentbibliographicalsurveyistobefoundinMarincola2001:105–49.ThetextshavebeeneditedbyFelixJacobyinFGrHist,manyofthemwithapenetratingcommentary.InscriptionsrelevanttohistoryandhistoriographershavebeenstudiedbyChaniotis1988,whilethecareersofearlyHellenistichistoriographershavebeendealtwithbyMeissner1992.SomeaspectsoflocalhistoriographyarenowtreatedbyClarke2008:304–69,whodoes,however,seemtoequateRhodianhistoriographywiththe‘LindianChronicle’(onwhichseebelown.29).
(8)AfamousexamplefortheuseofhistoricalargumentsinHellenisticinterstatediplomacyisthearbitrationbetweenPrieneandMiletosinwhichthejurywascomposedofRhodians:I.Priene37=Syll.3599,discussedbyCurty1989.AninvaluablecollectionofepigraphicalsourcesonwhatmightbecalledkinshipdiplomacyisprovidedbyCurty1995.
(9)ThefundamentalaccountisbyFelixJacobyinFGrHistIIIb(Text):432–55withnotesinFGrHistIIIb(Noten):255–66.TheauthorsofmonographsonRhodianhistoryandantiquitiesarelistedasnos.508–33.ItisapitythatJustinsawfittocutouttheaccountofRhodianoriginsPompeiusTrogusgaveinhisfifteenthbook.
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 18 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(10)OnPolybiusasacriticofearlierandcontemporaryhistoriographers,seeamongothers,Walbank1962,Walbank1972a:48–55,Lehmann1974:145–200,Meister1975,Schepens1990:39–61,Marincola1997:222–3,229–32,andthecontributionsassembledinSchepensandBollansée2005.Polybius’critiqueofZenoandAntisthenesisanalysedindetailbyMeister1975:173–8,Wiemer2001:19–32,and,mostrecently,Lenfant2005.
(11)Plb.16.14.1–4=FGrHist523T3.
(12)Bye.g.Ullrich1898:16,Lehmann1974:201,Meister1975:173,Wiemer2001:20,Lenfant2005:191–2.
(13)Plb.16.14.5–15.8=FGrHist523F4.In16.15.8PolybiusexplicitlystatesthattheletterwasextantintheRhodianPrytaneion.Infact,Zeno’saccountmighthavebeenlessone-sidedthanPolybiuswouldhaveusbelieve:seeWiemer2001:21–5andLenfant2005:193–5.
(14)Plb.16.16.1–17.7=FGrHist523F5.Polybius(16.20.6–7)prideshimselfonhavingpointedoutthesegeographicalerrorsinalettertoZenohimself,whorespondedbysayingthatheacceptedthecriticismbutwasnowunabletocorrecthiserrorssincehisworkwasalreadypublished.NotallofPolybius’pointsseemvalidandeveniftheyweretheywouldnotjustifytheconclusionthatZeno’sknowledgeofgeographywasdeficientingeneral:seeMeister1975:175–6andLenfant2005:195–7.
(15)Plb.16.17.8–19.11=FGrHist523F6.ForamorebalancedassessmentofZeno’saccount,seeMeister1975:177andLenfant2005:198–200.
(16)Plb.9.1–2,esp.1.2:οὐκἀγνοω̑δὲδιότισυμβαίνειτὴνπραγματείανἡμω̑νἔχειναὐστηρόντικαὶπρὸςἕνγένοςἀκροατω̑νοἰκειου̑σθαικαὶκρίνεσθαιδιὰτὸμονοειδὲςτη̑ςσυντάξεως.
(17)ItseemsunlikelythatPolybiushadconsultedtheletterofthecommandingRhodianadmiral(cf.n.13)himself,ashehadneithermotivenoropportunitytodoso;Polybiusdidnotdeemitnecessarytobasehispolemicagainstotherhistoriographersonindependentevidence,andthenotionthataforeignerhadaccesstotheRhodianPrytaneionishardtosquarewithwhatweknowaboutHellenisticarchives:seeWiemer2001:22–4.
(18)Ullrich1898;recentlyelaboratedbyWiemer2001andendorsedbyWalbank2005a.
(19)ForarevisionistaccountofRhodianforeignpolicy,seeWiemer2002.ThetraditionalviewispresentedinBerthold1984.
(20)ApartfromtheRhodianadmiral’sreportreferredtoabove,adocumentarysourceofRhodianprovenanceorpertinenceseemsindicatedinPlb.4.56.2(RhodiandecreeonhelpingSinopeagainstMithridates);5.88–90(listofdonationsmadeaftertheearthquakeof227,analysedbyWiemer2001:33–9);25.4.5(S.C.deLyciis);28.17.1–2(MarciusPhilippus’lettertotheRhodians);30.23.2–4(S.C.deStratonicensibusetCauniis);31.5(S.C.deCalyndiis).
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 19 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(21)Plb.5.88–90withWalbank,HCPi.616–22andWiemer2001:33–9.
(22)Polybius’accountislargelylost,butcanpartlyberecoveredfromscatteredfragmentsandallusions(esp.Plb.13.4–5;15.23.2–6;16.9.1–5;18.54.7–11)andfromadaptionsinDiodorus(27.3;28.1),inLivy(33.18),andinPolyaenus(4.18.2;5.17.2).Foradetaileddiscussion,seeWiemer2001:59–106.
(23)Antiochus’marchalongthesoutherncoastofAsiaMinor:Liv.33.20(P);RhodiandefeatatPanormus:Polyaen.5.27(P);Liv.37.8–17(P);App.Syr.114–21;RhodianvictoryatSide:Plb.21.10;Liv.37.18.9–25.3(P);victoryofthealliesatMyonnesus:Plb.21.12;Liv.37.26–32(P);App.Syr.132–6.
(24)Plb.22.5;25.4–5(cf.Liv.42.14.8);thecaseforaRhodiansourceisarguedbyWiemer2001:151–8.
(25)SeethereferencesandargumentsgiveninWiemer2001:151–206.
(26)ThelocusclassicusisPlb.9.1–2,buttherearemanyotherrelevantpassages,citedanddiscussedinPédech1964:21–32andinWalbank1972a:55–8,66–96.
(27)ThetitleΧρονικὴσύνταξιςpointstoanannalisticframework(thus,rightly,Jacoby,FGrHistIIIb[Text]:425;IIIb[Noten]:253n.5;cf.FGrHist240F1and22;Diod.13.103.5;App.Celt.1.8;Dion.Hal.A.R.1.8.3).Inthe‘LindianChronicle’thesecondbookofZeno’shistoryiscitedasanauthorityforadedicationofkingPyrrhustoLindianAthena(I.Lindos2,C,XL,ll.114–21).This,however,canhardlymeanthatZeno’s‘archaeology’occupiedonlythefirstbook,ifD.L.7.35=FGrHist523T1hasbeencorrectlyemendedtoyieldthenumberof15booksforZeno’sworkasawhole(suggestedbyUllrich1898:13–4,readingἐντόπιονγεγραφὼςἱστορίανἐνιε,endorsedwithsomehesitationbyJacoby,FGrHistIIIb[Text]:435andbyWiemer2001:250–1,whopointsout,however,thatthenumeralἐνια[eleven]isjustaslikely).OnewayoutoftheproblemistoassumethatindiscussingdedicationsmadebyfamousrulersZenoanticipatedeventsthatlayfaraheadinrelationtotheperiodhewasdealingwith,anothertopositanerroreitherbytheauthorsofthe‘LindianChronicle’orthemasonwhoinscribeditonthestone.
(28)Diod.5.55–59=FGrHist523F1.
(29)Theeditioprinceps(Blinkenberg1912)includesaveryfullcommentarywhichstillrepaysconsultation;theeditiominor,publishedafewyearslater(Blinkenberg1915b),hasashortenendcommentary,butincorporatesimprovementssubsequentlymadetothetextandcontainsusefultableslistingallthesourcescitedinthe‘Chronicle’.Thefinaledition,publishedin1942asI.Lindos2,hasnocommentary,butacomprehensivebibliographyofliteraturebearingonthetext;thistextwasreprintedbyJacobyasFGrHist532.Higbie2003providestranslationintoEnglish,awealthofmythologicalparallelsandperceptiveobservationsonnarrativepatterns;herinterpretationsdo,however,sufferfrominsufficientknowledgeofRhodianhistoryandinstitutions:seethe
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 20 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
rightlycriticalreviewsbyGabrielsen2005andBresson2006.ThenotionthatthetextwascommissionedasameansofimpressingRomanvisitorstoLinduswithasenseofthevenerableantiquityofitsmostimportantsanctuaryisimplausiblefortworeasons:theinscriptionis,andalwayswas,verydifficulttoread;andthereisnoevidenceforRomansvisitingLindusinanynumbersatthisearlydate.ThisobjectionalsoappliestothemuchmorenuancedinterpretationofShaya2005,whofailstoconvincemethattheconceptofmuseumisausefultoolinanalysingthefunctionofatextthatwasinscribedonstoneanddisplayedinaGreeksanctuary.
(30)Theresultsachievedbynineteenth-centuryQuellenforschung,assummarizedinEduardSchwartz’smagisterialPauly-Wissowaarticle(Schwartz1903),havenotbeeninvalidatedsince.ThatDiodoruscopiedhissourceswithoutmakingsubstantialchangestotheirnarrativestructureorthevaluejudgementstheyexpressisconcededevenbySacks1994,whoclaimsoriginalityonlyforDiodorus’prefaces.Eventhisisdebatable,Ibelieve,butneednotbearguedhere.
(31)ThusJacoby,FGrHistIIIb(Text):435withIIIb(Noten):257nn.13and14;Wiemer2001:207.Lenfant2005:201–3opinesthatintheRhodian‘archaeology’Diodoruscombinedseveralsourcestocreateanoriginalpieceofwriting,butthishypothesisdoesnotaccountforhisusualmethodofworking.AstrongcaseforbelievingthateventheswitchfromdirecttoindirectreportingthatissoconspicuousafeatureofDiodorus’firstfivebooksismoreareflectionofthesourcesDiodorususedthanofhisownjudgementonthetraditionsherelateswasmadebyVolkmann1955.
(32)Pind.Ol.7.InPindar,RhodosandHelioshavesevensons,andfromoneofthemtheeponymsofthethreeoldRhodiancitiesdescend:ll.71–5.AccordingtoGorgonFGrHist515F18,thepoemhadbeeninscribedwithgoldenlettersanddedicatedinthesanctuaryofLindianAthena.TheconclusionthatthededicationwasstillondisplaywhenZenowrotewouldbeunsafe,however,asitisnotmentionedinthe‘LindianChronicle’.
(33)Diod.5.55.1:ὡςὁμυ̑θοςπαρέδωκε.
(34)TheTelchinesasdemons:Diod.5.55.3.ZenocomparedthemtotheMagiofPersia.OntheconceptofculturalherointheGreekworld,seetheexcellentoverviewinThraede1962,whichreachesfarbeyondtheclassicalperiodcoveredinthestudyofKleingünther1933.
(35)Diod.5.55.2:anApolloTelchiniusinLindus,aHeraTelchiniaandNymphaeTelchiniaeinIalysus,andaHeraTelchiniainCamirus.
(36)Diod.5.55.4.ZenoimplicitlyrefutedPindar’sversionbyassertingthattheTelchineshadpreventedAphroditefromlandingonRhodianshores.OnthenymphRhodos,seeRobert1967:7–14.
(37)Diod.5.55.6–7,esp.7.
(38)Diod.5.56.1–2.ItisnotclearwhetherthisisareferencetothetempleofApolloat
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 21 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Patara(onwhichseeFrei1990:1757–60)ortheevenmorefamousLetoonatXanthus(ibid.1747–53).
(39)InDiod.5.55.5thesearesaidtohavebeensonsofthenymphHimaliaandcalledbythenamesofSpartacus,Cronius,andCytus.
(40)Diod.5.56.2–3.
(41)Ibid.4.
(42)Ibid.5.Weknowfromthe‘sacredlaw’Syll.3338=LSS145thatthecultwaslocatedinIalysus.
(43)Onthesecoinswhichweremintedinlargequantities,seeAshton2001.
(44)TheevidenceiscollectedinMorelli1959:15–20.
(45)Thefundamentalstudy,basedonthelonglistsofpriestsdiscoveredin1944(SEG12,360),isstillMorricone1953;seenowalsoHabicht2003.
(46)Onthesanctuary,seeDyggve1960andLippolis1993.
(47)Diod.5.56.5–7,esp.7.FromSchol.Pind.Ol.7.86a,welearnthatApolloniusRhodius—whoisknowntohavewrittenaκτίσιςῬόδου—hadgivenacompletelydifferentexplanationforthispeculiarityofLindiancult—Athena’shatredofHephaestusbecauseofhismarriagetoAphrodite—whichZenodiscardedinfavourofPindar’s.
(48)OnEgyptinArchaicandClassicalGreekliterature,seeFroidefond1971.AstronomywassaidtobeanEgyptianinventionbyHecataeusofAbderaFGrHist264F25.
(49)Hdt.5.58–9.ArivaltheorythatcreditedDanauswithgivingscripttotheGreeksoriginatedwithHecataeusFGrHist1F20.ForGreekviewsontheinventionofGreekscript,seethestudyofJeffery1967.GreektraditionsaboutCadmusaresurveyedinEdwards1979:17–44.
(50)Diod.5.57.2–5.ZenoaddedthatSaïs,anAtheniancolonyinEgypt,waslaterforgottenforthesamereason.
(51)Zenogavetheirnamesandmighthavetoldtheirstories:ApartfromActis,whosailedofftoEgypt,hementionedMacarcomingtoLesbosandCandalusgoingtoCos;healsorelatedthatTriopastookpossessionofaCarianpromontoryandtherebybecametheeponymoftheTriopium,thecommonsanctuaryoftheDoriancitiesofCaria.Macar’sstoryalsoseemstohaveapoliticalpoint:sinceallcitiesofLesbostracedtheiroriginbacktothismythicking,theversionthathashimoriginatingfromRhodesmighthavebeenbroughtupwhenweknowtheLesbiankoinonwasalliedtoRhodes:seeIGXIISuppl.120(onwhichseeLabarre1996:69–88,Wiemer2002:290).
(52)InDiodorus’account(5.57.6–8)kingOchimusmarriesthenymphHegetoriafrom
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 22 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
whomhehasadaugthercalledCydippe,whoislaterrenamedCyrbia.InasecondmarriagesheiswifetoCercaphusandbearshimthreesons:Ialysus,Camirus,andLindus.WearethentoldthatacitycalledCyrbewasburiedbeneathafloodwithoutanyexplanationbeinggivenastohowithadcomeintobeingorhowitwasrelatedtoAchaïa,whichhasvanishedfromsightcompletely.ItisclearfromPlut.Mor.297cthattherewasanelaboratemythologyaroundCyrbe(andCercaphus),andthetemptationtoconnectherinsomewaytothegodswhoonRhodeswerecalledCyrbanteswassurelytoostrongtoberesistedsincetheyhadpubliccultsinbothCamirus(T.Cam.90,I,l.34)andinthecityofRhodositself(IGXII8,6;Segre1949:73).
(53)ForAchaïaasanoldnameofIalysus,seetheevidencecitedinPuglieseCarratelli1981,evenifhisattempttorestoreitinthe‘Periplus’ofScylax(§99)isdubious.ThenamewasalsousedbyErgiasFGrHist513F1=Ath.8.61,360d‐einhis‘HistoryofRhodes’.
(54)Diod.5.57.6–8.ExcessivecompressionmightbethereasonwhyDiodorussayssolittleaboutCercaphusandhissons.AcultofCercaphusisnowattestedbytwoolpaifromthelatesixthcenturywithgraffitithatwerefoundinthedepositofasanctuaryatIalysus(SEG46,989).
(55)ItseemscharacteristicofDiodorus’methodofworkingthatin4.58.8,wherehedoesnotfollowZeno,hegivesacompletelydifferentaccount,namingTlepolemusasfounderofthethreeRhodiancities.
(56)StaatsverträgeIII551,ll.1–4(treatybetweenRhodesandHierapytna).
(57)TheevidenceforthecultofLindushasbeencollectedbyMorelli1959:59–69;thecultofCamirusisattestedbyT.Cam.81b,l.1.ZenodoesnotseemtohavementionedCamirus’daughterAlce,whointheimperialperiodreceivedthededicationT.Cam.147.EpigraphicalevidenceforthecultofIalysushasnotsofarturnedup,butweknowthatthefamouspainterProtogenesdrewaportraitofhim:seeIşıkandMarek1997:65–74.
(58)The‘LindianChronicle’referstoaspeechonLindus(Λινδιακός)byacertainEudemus(FGrHist524F1–4)andabook‘OnRhodes’byanauthorcalledPhaennus(FGrHist525F1).
(59)Hdt.2.182.2;likewiseMarmorParium(FGrHist239)A8;Strab.14.2.11.ForthewoodenimageofLindianAthena,seeCallim.fr.100.4PfeifferandfurthertestimoniesdiscussedbyBlinkenberg1917,towhichapapyrusdatingfromaround100BC(P.Schubart34,col.II)cannowbeadded,ifinline1thenameofDanaushasbeensupplementedcorrectlybyPuglieseCarratelli1955.InDiogenesLaertius(1.89)thefoundationofthetempleisascribedtoDanaushimself.
(60)AsZenohasthreeoftheDanaidsdyingonLindiansoil,onemightspeculatethattheirgraveswereshownonthespot,butthishypothesisdoesnotaccountforthenon-Lindianprovenanceofthestory.
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 23 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(61)Diod.5.58.3;I.Lindos2,B,no.III,ll.15–17=PolyzelusFGrHist521F1.Cadmus’dedicationislistedamongtheitemsthataredescribedinthepasttense.
(62)Ath.8.61,360d–361c=ErgiasFGrHist513F1andPolyzelusFGrHist521F6.AsErgiasmentionedtreasuresthePhoenicianshadburiedwhentheyleftonewonderswhetherobjectsthatweresaidtocomefromthemmayhavebeenondisplayinHellenisticIalysus.PolyzelusaddedanerotictouchtothestoryofthesiegebyhavingthedaughterofthePhoeniciancommanderfallinlovewithIphiclus,theleaderoftheIalysians.WhetherPolyzelususedthismotiftoexplainthesupposedPhoenicianextractionofIalysianfamiliesinwhichthepriesthoodofZeuswashereditary(seenextnote)isforusimpossibletotell.
(63)Diod.5.58.2–3,esp.3.
(64)HereagainitisprobablethatDiodorushassuppressedmuchofwhatZenowrote.WeknowfromothersourcesthatὈφίουσσαwasanepithetappliedtoRhodos,andstillfindtracesofaetiologiesforthis:Heracl.Pont.FHGII,222FXXXIII;PolyzelusFGrHist521F7=Hyg.Astron.2.14;Strab.14.2.7;Plin.Nat.5.132;Steph.Byz.s.v.Ῥόδος.SeefurtherBlinkenberg1915a:289–303,Jacoby,FGrHistIIIb(Text):433.
(65)Againthechoiceofapresidinggoddessreflectscontemporaryconcerns:onHellenisticRhodes,DelianApollohaditsownpriest—atCamirus(T.Cam.50,l.25;T.Cam.90,I,l.28)—andDeloswasthereligiouscentreoftheCycladesoverwhichtheRhodianshadduringtheearlysecondcenturyexertedakindofprotectorateuntiltheNesioticLeaguedissolvedintheaftermathoftheThirdMacedonianWar:onthis,seeWiemer2002:271–6,wheretheearlierliteratureiscited.
(66)Diod.5.58.4–5.TheRhodiancultofPhorbasisnotasyetepigraphicallyattested,buttheRhodianauthorPolyzelusFGrHist521F7=Hyg.Astron.2.14relatedthatRhodiansusedtosacrificetohimwhenevertheywentonajourneybythesea.Polyzelus,likeZeno,connectedPhorbastotheserpentplague,butusedadifferentgenealogyashecalledhimasonofTriopas,whileinZeno’saccountPhorbasisasonofHelios.DieuchidasofMegaraFGrHist485F7=Ath.6.82,262e–263btoldastorythatexplainedwhyinIalysusslaveswerenotallowedtoparticipateinPhorbas’cult.
(67)Alistoftheoroihasbeenpreserved:T.Cam.App.19and20withSEG49,1070.Thesanctuarywasexcavatedinthe1920s,buttheresultswereneverproperlypublished:Jacopich1928:88–91.
(68)Diod.5.59.1–4.ApriesthoodofAlthaemenesinCamirusisknownfromtwoinscriptionsdatingtothefirsthalfofthesecondcenturyBC:T.Cam.50,l.36;T.Cam.90,II,l.20.
(69)Hom.Il.2.653–70.Ontheearlydevelopmentofthislegend,seetheexcellentaccountinPrinz1979:78–95.
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 24 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(70)I.Lindos2,B,VI,ll.37–41;B,IX,ll.54–61.TheauthoritiescitedareGorgon’smonograph‘OnRhodes’FGrHist515F5and7andlettersbytheLindianpriestsGorgosthenesFGrHist529F5and7andHierobulusFGrHist530Faddressedtothelocalboardofofficialscalledμαστροί.
(71)Pind.Ol.7.77–82;Schol.Pind.Ol.7.36c;141c.Kowalzig2007:247–9canvassestheideathatthisfestivalinhonourofTlepolemuswaslatertransformedintoonethatinHellenisticinscriptions(SER18,l.9;NS18,l.15;I.Lindos222,l.6;707,l.4)iscalled᾿Ἐπιτάφιαandmighthavebeencelebratedinmemoryofthewar-dead.ThisisimplausibleinviewofthefactthatanagonisticinscriptionfromCedreaeintheRhodianPeraiadatingtotheearlysecondcenturyBClistsΤλαπολέμεια:Syll.31067=IAG50=I.Peraia555=I.Pérée5,l.8.
(72)TheideathatwholecivilizationshadinthepastbeensweptawaywithouttracebyrecurrentcataclysmswasrootedinthemythsofDeucalionandPhaethon,andhadinthefourthcenturybeenespousedbybothPlato(Tim.22b–23c;Crit.104d–e;109d–e;Laws677a)andAristotle(Meteor.352a–353a;Metaph.1074b).Polybius(6.5.4–6)tookitforgranted:seefurtherGuthrie1957:25–6,63–9.TheearlyStoics,ontheotherhand,believedinperiodicdestructionsofthecosmosbroughtaboutbyuniversalconflagrations;seee.g.Mansfeld1979.
(73)ThesepatternsareanalysedindetailbyHigbie2003:204–42.
(74)Thuc.1.2–12(‘archaeology’);cf.2.68.3(Amphilochus);2.102.5–6(Alcmeon,sonofAmphiaraus).
(75)Plb.9.2.1–3;34.4.1–4(historyinHomer);cf.2.41.3–5(Tisamenus,sonofOrestes);4.33.1–6(theAristomeneanwar);34.2–4(Odysseus).Polybiusisnon-commital,however,astoJason(4.39.6)andopenlyscepticalastoIo(4.43.6).
(76)Diod.20.81–8,91.1–100.4.ThefragmentaryaccountofthesiegeintheBerlinÄgyptischesMuseumPapyrusno.11632,editedwithacommentarybyHillervonGaertringen1918andreprintedbyJacobyasFGrHist533no.2,goesbacktothesamesource,butpreservesdetailsDiodoruscutout.ThatthecommonsourceofDiodorusandtheBerlinpapyruswasanauthorfromRhodesseemsclearandisgenerallyacknowledged.ThehypothesisthatthisauthorwasZenohasthemeritofbeingeconomicalgiventhatheistheonlyRhodianhistoriographertobecitedbyDiodorus.Jacoby,FGrHistIIIb(Noten):256entertainedthepossibilitythatknowledgeoftheRhodiansourcebehindDiodoruswasmediatedbyAgatharchidesofCnidus,butonthatassumptionitishardtoexplainwhyDiodoruspreservessomuchdetailofpurelylocalsignificanceasthatkindofmaterialtendstobereducedintheprocessofadaptingasourcetoanewcontext.ThequestionisdiscussedatlengthinWiemer2001:222–50.
(77)Onthecourseofeventsseee.g.Berthold1984:66–80orWiemer2002:78–94.
(78)AP.6.171(onwhichseeWiemer2011:131–3).
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 25 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(79)TothetextualsourcescollectedinHebert1989:16–45no.Q28–103cannowbeaddedanepigrambythepoetPosidippusthathasrecentlybeendecipheredonapapyrusinMilan(P.Mil.Vogl.VIII309)andisnowconvenientlyaccessibleinAustinandBastianini2002;itshistoricalsignificanceisdiscussedinWiemer2011:129–30.
(80)Kantzia1999.TheenginesofwarandthehugeamountofordnanceatDemetrius’disposalarestronglyemphasizedintheliterarytradition,andseemtohavebeenatoposofRhodianmemoryculture:Diod.20.82.4,83.1,85–8,91.1–92.1,5;FGrHist533no.2,ll.2–12;Diod.20.93.5(engineers),95.1–3,96.3–97.4,6–7.InDiod.20.97.1–2DemetriushasthemissileshurledbytheRhodianscollectedandcounted;theirnumberisgivenasmorethan800firemissilesandmorethan1,500catapultbolts.
(81)Diod.20.100.3–4;GorgonFGrHist519F9=Ath.15.52,696f.ApriestofPtolemyappearsinalistofmagistratesdatingtotheearlysecondcenturyBC,editedbySegre1941:30l.16–17.
(82)Diod.20.81.1–4,onwhichseeWiemer2001:222–31.
(83)OnthetestamentofAlexander,Merkelbach1977:121–51isstillfundamental.
(84)ApapyrusinCologne(P.KölnVI247)preservesremnantsofanaccountofhowPtolemywasproclaimedkingthatstressesthespecialrelationshipbetweenhimandtheRhodiansandwould,therefore,seemtocomefromaRhodianhistoriographer.Lehmann1988hasidentifiedthisauthorwithZeno,butastheColognepapyrusdivergesfromDiodorus’accountinseveralpointsitseemsmorelikelythatitderivesfromanotherRhodianauthor,e.g.Antisthenes,whodepictedtheeventsinabroadlysimilarbutnotidenticalway(thusWiemer2001:231–8).
(85)Diod.20.82.1–4.
(86)Diod.20.83.2;cf.88.8.
(87)Diod.20.82.4–84.6,85–8,91.1–100.4.
(88)Diod.20.91.1–8(Helepolis),92.1–5(Demetrius).AsboththedescriptionoftheHelepolisandtheportrayalofDemetrius’characterhavecloseparallelsinPlutarch’slifeofDemetrius(2.3;19.6;21.1–2)whichisbasedonHieronymusofCardia,itseemslikelythatZenodrewonHieronymus,too(thusS.Hornblower1981:57–9,Wiemer2001:248–50).HieronymusalsomentionedtheroyalrobessentoffbyPhilatoDemetriusthattheRhodiansinterceptedandpassedontoPtolemy:cf.Diod.20.93.4withPlut.Demetr.21.1.
(89)Diod.20.93.5.
(90)Diod.20.97.5.
(91)FGrHist533no.2,ll.12–48;Diod.20.94.4–5.TheBerlinpapyrusismoredetailed
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 26 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thanDiodorus.
(92)Diod.20.88.3–7(theRhodiannauarchosExacestus);93.2(Demophilus);93.3–4(Menedemus).Inothercases,Diodorusseemstohavecompressedsuchanaristeiaintoonesingle,laudatorysentenceonaRhodianmagistratewhogavehislifefightingforhiscountrymen:Diod.20.97.7(thestrategosAmeinias);20.98.9(theprytanisDamoteles).InDiod.20.84.5–6,ontheotherhand,thenameofthecommandingRhodianofficermighthavefallenout.
(93)Diod.20.84.2(censusofmencapableofbearingarms),84.3–4(decreeordecreesonemancipatingandenfranchisingslaveswhoexcelledasfighters;cf.100.1,onburyingatpubliccostcitizenswhofellinbattleandonprovidingmaintenancefortheirparentsandchildren),87.4;cf.AeliusAristides,Or.25.4(dedicationsinRhodiansanctuariesmadeoutofthebootytakenfromDemetrius’troops);FGrHist533no.2,ll.40–4;Diod.20.94.5(decreeinhonouroftheMilesianAthenagoras),99.2(letterfromDemetriustotheRhodians),99.3(treatybetweenDemetriusandtheRhodians),100.2(statuesofCassanderandLysimachus),100.3–4(responseoftheoracleofSiwatotheRhodians).TheprecisefiguresgivenfortheamountofgrainsenttotheRhodiansbyPtolemy,Lysimachus,andCassander(Diod.20.96.3,98.1)alsoseemultimatelytoderivefromaliststoredinRhodianarchives.AndwecanbesurethatforZenoAlexander’stestamentwasanauthenticdocument,too.
(94)OntheuseofdocumentsinGreek(andRoman)historiography,seeHigbie1999andthemanycontributionsassembledinBiraschietal.2003.ForPolybius,seeWalbank,HCPi.31–3,Pédech1964:377–88,Prandi2003,Schettino2003,Zecchini2003.HisfamousdiscussionofthetreatieswithCarthageisin3.22–7.
(95)Diod.20.93.6–7.
(96)Diod.20.84.4.
(97)Diod.20.93.7.ThisterminologyaccordswithofficialRhodianparlance:StaatsverträgeIII551,ll.13–14;III552,l.29.
(98)Diod.20.88.3,8,98.4.
(99)ThedatewhenZeno’shistorywaspublishedcanonlybeinferredfromtheusePolybiusmadeofit.ThelasttracesofhisbeingdependentonRhodiantraditionaretobefoundinhisaccountofhowin163theRhodiansgotpossessionofCalynda;referencestolatereventsareeitherindifferentoropenlyhostiletotheRhodiansandcannot,therefore,derivefromaRhodiansourceofinformation.TheconclusionthatZenopublishedhisworkaround160oralittlelateriscompatiblewiththefewindicationsPolybiusgivesaboutZeno’slife:whenthetwocorrespondedPolybiuswasstillatwork,butZeno’shistoryhadalreadybeenpublished(Plb.16.20.5).AsPolybiusstartedwritingafter168,thiswouldseemtopointtoadatearoundthemiddleofthesecondcentury.
Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past1
Page 27 of 27
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(100)RightlystressedbyLenfant2005:187.
(101)Plb.16.18.2:περὶμὲντὴντη̑ςλέξεωςκατασκευὴνδη̑λόςἐστινἐπὶτοσου̑τονἐσπουδακὼςὡςὑπερβολὴντερατείαςμὴκαταλιπειν̑τοις̑τὰςἐπιδεικτικὰςκαὶπρὸςἔκπληξιντω̑νπολλω̑νσύνταξειςποιουμένοις.
(102)Seeaboven.62.
(103)I.Lindos2,D,III,ll.94–115.Thereare13morelinesonthestonewhichtodayareillegible;inthesewecannotnowrecoverreferencesthatweregiventothesourcesused.
(104)Seeaboven.84.
(105)Forexample,Strab.14.2.5relatesthat,accordingtosome,TlepolemusnamedthethreeoldcitiesofRhodesafterthreeoftheDanaids;themythographerCononhas(FGrHist26F1§47)auniqueversionofRhodianprehistoryinwhichtheHeliadaearekingsoveran‘autochthonous’peoplethatisthenexpelledbythePhoenicianswhointurnaredrivenoutbyCarians.OnlythendotheDoriansarriveandfoundthethreeoldcitiesofRhodes.
(106)Diod.5.55.5.Onthe῎Ιγνητες,seeBlinkenberg1915a:274–6,whoproposedemendingγίγανταςtoἼγνητας.Againstthisproposal,Jacoby,FGrHistIIIb(Text):438pointedoutthattheawkwardexpressionmightbeduetoexcessivecompressionbyDiodorus.
(107)Diod.5.56.3.TheRhodianwriterGorgonFGrHist515F13knewofaφυλὴΑὐτοχθόνων.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 1 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
ScipioAemilianus,Polybius,andtheQuestforFriendshipinSecond-CenturyRome1
MichaelSommer
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0017
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'accountofhisfriendshipwithScipioAemilianushasgeneratedfiercecontroversyconcerningwhetherornottherewasa'Scipioniccircle'.Insteadoftheextremepositionswhichhavecharacterizedeithersideofthisdebate,ScipioisbetterseenastheproductofamilieuwhereinvestmentintheculturalcapitalofferedbyGreekpaideiawasanimportantmeansforgeneratingprestige,thoughhisfriendshipwithPolybiusshouldbeseenintermsofGreekphiliaratherthanRomanamicitiabetweenequals.Nevertheless,Polybius'contactwithScipiodoesnotappeartohavegivenhimaclearerunderstandingofhowfriendshipworkedamongtheRomannobility,whichmayaccountforsomeoftheshortcomingsofhisunderstandingoftheRomanconstitution.
Keywords:Polybius,ScipioAemilianus,friendship,culturalcapital,paideia,philia,amicitia,constitutionaltheory
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 2 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Nowthattheprogressofmynarrativeandthedatecallourspecialattentiontothisfamily,Iwishinordertosatisfythereader’scuriositytoexecuteapromiseImadeinthepreviousbookandleftunfulfilled,andthiswasthatIwouldtellhowandwhythefameofScipioinRomeadvancedsofarandbecamesobrilliantmorequicklythanitshould,andtotellalsohowhisfriendshipandintimacywiththeauthorgrewsogreatthatthisreportaboutthemnotonlyspreadtoItalyandGreece,butthatevenfurtherafieldtheirlikingandintercoursewereamatterofcommonknowledge.2
Withthesewords,PolybiussetsoutthestoryofhisfriendshipwiththemanwhowaslatertobecomeCarthage’snemesisand,atleastformanymodernscholars,theleadingfigureoftheso-calledScipionicCircle,agroupofintellectualsthatfeaturesinsomeofCicero’sworksandhasbeensubjecttoconsiderablespeculationmorerecently.Itisthepresentpaper’sobjectivetorevisitPolybius’roleinScipioAemilianus’lifeand,morebroadly,bothmen’simportancefortheintellectualclimateofsecond-centuryBCRome.Inaddition,itwilldiscusstheinfluenceofGreekphilosophicalthoughtontheRomannobility,and,viceversa,therepercussionsthatPolybius’movinginthesecirclesmayhavehadonhisconceptionsoftheRomansenatorialclass.3
(p.308) The‘ScipionicCircle’—factorfiction?Whatdothesourcestellusaboutthetwomen’srelationship?AccordingtoPolybius’ownaccount,theauthorbefriendstheyoungman,whoisupsetthattheGreekhistorianseemstopreferhiselderbrother,FabiusMaximusAemilianus,duringtabletalkinthehouseofL.AemiliusPaullus,Scipio’srealfather.WhenPolybiusrepliesthathesimplypresumedthatScipiosharedhisbrother’sopinions,theyoungmanreplied:‘WouldIcouldseethedayonwhichyou,regardingnothingelseasofhigherimportance,woulddevoteyourattentiontomeandjoinyourlifewithmine;forthenIshallatoncefeelmyselftobeworthyofmyhouseandmyforefathers.’4Soithappened:Polybius,whobecameScipio’smentorandamemberofhisentourage,accompaniedtheaspiringaristocratatsomeofthekeymomentsofhiscareer,mostnotablyatCarthage.
Notsurprisingly,Polybius’portrayalofScipioisthoroughlyidealized.HepraiseshimasanexampleofhumanityandGreekπαιδεία.AfterhavingerasedCarthagefromthemap,Polybius’Scipio,withtheauthorbeingeyewitness,citesHomer:
AdaywillcomewhensacredTroyshallperish,AndPriamandhispeopleshallbeslain.5
Polybiusthenexpresseshisownconvictionthat‘atthemomentofourgreatesttriumphandofdisastertoourenemiestoreflectonourownsituationandonthepossiblereversalofcircumstances,andgenerallytobearinmindattheseasonofsuccessthemutabilityofFortune,islikeagreatandperfectman,amaninshortworthytoberemembered’.6
Polybius’ScipioisnotonlycapableofGreek-stylecompassionwithadefeatedenemy,healsoembodiestheentirecanonofRomanvirtues,beingfirm,courageous,modest,
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 3 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
generous,andliberal.7ThisimageofaRoman(p.309) gentlemanwhounitesthefortuneofasuccessfulgeneralwiththerefinedtasteandmannersofaGreekintellectual,combinedwiththeroleScipioAemilianusassumedinCicero’sdialoguesDeamicitiaandDerepublica,seems,atfirstglanceatleast,tojustifyhisreputationastheheartofanintellectualcirclethatcontributedsubstantiallytoestablishingGreekwaysofthinkingintheparvenucapitalofanexpandingempire,withimmediateconsequencesforRomanpolitics.
Scholarshiponthe‘ScipionicCircle’usedtooscillatebetweenunthinkingacceptanceandscepticism.RuthMartinBrown,who,inthe1930s,wrotetheonlymonographdedicatedtotheScipionicCirclesofar,wasstraightforwardyoverwhelmedbythegroup’simportance:‘WemustbelievethattheScipionicgroupheldaleadingplaceinpoliticsalmostuninterruptedlyfromthebeginningofthesecondcenturyuntilthedeathofTiberiusGracchus.’ForBrown,thecircle’sintellectualhegemonywasshakenonlyoccasionallybyoppositionwhich‘needcausebutlittleworrytothepowerfulScipionicCircle,whichfounditspositionsecurebothbecauseofthetraditionalfameofitsfounder,AfricanusMaior,andthehighqualityofleadershipdisplayedbyhissuccessor,ScipioAemilianus’.8
Thisis,tobesure,afairlyextremestatement.Butthepoliticallyandintellectuallyomnipotentthink-tankoftheliberalcurrentofRome’ssenatorialaristocracyisaspectrethatstillhauntstextbooks9—achimerawhichcannotstanduptothefacts.Consequently,thepresentorthodoxyhasadoptedacontraryposition.ForHermannStrasburger,the‘ScipionicCircle’wasnomorethanaliterarytrick,adevicethatprovidedahistoricalframeandsettingforthedialogues’philosophicalcontents,modelledonthecirclesurroundingtheScaevolaeandtheoratorsAntoniusandCrassus,whichCiceroclaimedtohaveformedpartofinhisyouth.10Similarly,A.E.AstinrejectedtheideaofanintellectualcircleofPhilhellenesthatcouldhavediffusedtheblessingsofGreekthoughtinRomansociety.11JamesZetzelwentevenfurther,viewingtheframesofthehistoricalsettings,amongthemthe‘ScipionicCircle’,assheer‘vehiclesforthedialoguesinwhichtheyareused,notindependent(p.310) entities’.12Asaresult,thedialogues’philosophicalcontentswere‘distinctlyremovedfromtheunpleasantcontemporaryscene’.13Finally,GaryForsythearguedthatthewordgrexinDeAmicitia69doesnotrefertothe‘ScipionicCircle’(asmostscholarsbelieved)buttothe‘commonherd[…]ofRomanpoliticians’.14HisattackwasintendedasthefinalblowtotheideaofanintellectualroundtableconveningatregularintervalsinScipio’shouseanddeterminingthecourseofRomanpolitics.15
ΠΑιΔΕιΑandtheeconomyofsymboliccapitalOnacloserlook,however,theseeminglycogentconclusionofanon-existent‘ScipionicCircle’isnomoresatisfactorythanthepositionheldbytheoldorthodoxy.TheideathatthegroupwasinventedbyCiceroformereliterarypurposesisapseudo-solutiontothepuzzlethatleavesagreatmanyquestionsunanswered.First,whatexactlywasthenatureofScipio’sinterestinGreekπαιδεία?Strasburgerarguesthatamanwhowasnotonlyresponsibleforthe‘VollstreckungderStaatsraisonanKarthagoundNumantia’16,
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 4 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
butwentaboutitwithenthusiasm,couldhardlybesusceptibletotheenlighteningideasofculturalHellenism.Theargumenthaslittlesubstance.Thegrimrealitiesofwarfareandthesublimeidealsofphilosophywereasurprisinglygoodmatchatalltimes.17Scipio’sgenuinededicationtoGreekart,literature,andphilosophyisindisputable,andPolybius’portrayalofanexemplaryaristocratofoutstandingvirtue,idealizedthoughitmaybe,doesnotappeartolacksomesolidfoundation.18DespitetherebeingasubstantialnumberofRomanswhoindulgedtheirphilosophicalandliterarypassions,19ScipiostoodoutasaPhilhelleneofdistinction.Scipio,unquestionably,feltthe‘appealofHellas’inaparticularlystrongway.20
Thisbringsustoasecondcomplexofquestions:whydidHellashavesuchanappealthatpeoplelikeScipioandhisfatherAemiliusPaullusinvestedtheir(p.311) timeinπαιδεία?WhydidScipioseekPolybius’friendshipatall?WhydoesayoungRomannoblemansurroundhimselfwithGreeks?AndwhatexactlywasPolybius’positioninthehouseoftheAemiliiandlaterinScipio’sentourage?
Greekcultureandπαιδείαwerehardlyuncontroversialinsecond-centuryBCRome.WhenCarneadesofCyrene,headoftheNewAcademyandamemberoftheAthenianphilosophicembassyof155BC,gavetwopubliclecturesinRome,oneonjusticeandoneoninjustice,thusshowingoffhisoratoricalskills,itwasnothisintentiontoundermineorevencriticizeRomanmorality.Nonetheless,Catowasdisconcertedbysomuchethicalrelativism.ConvincedthatRome’syouthneededprotectionfromtheGreekwordmongersandtheirideas,whichheperceivedtobethreateningtraditionalRomanvalues,hecouldnotwaitfortheAthenianphilosophers’returntoGreece.ForpeoplelikeCato,whoclungtoEnnius’maximthatRomereliedonancientmoresandmen,Carneades’andhisfellow-philosophers’ideashadenoughsubversivepotentialtoshaketheRomanstatetoitsfoundations.21
ButCatorepresentedaminorityofRomanaristocrats.HisconcernsmakesenseonlyifweconsiderhowpopulartheperformancesofCarneadesandtheotherGreekswere.AccordingtoPlutarch,youngRomanscametotheirlecturesindroves.22TheepisodeshedslightonarapidlychangingintellectualclimateinRome.ThecityontheTiberwasabouttobecomeacosmopolitanhubofeducationanderuditioninitsownright,whererhetoric,philosophy,andknowledgethatwentbeyondthepracticalthingsoflifewereheldinhighesteem.
ThisisthemilieuinwhichScipioAemilianuswasbroughtup.HehadembracedGreekcultureandtheprestigeitcarriedfromearlychildhood.AemilianusisthelivingproofthatCato’sconcernswereunfounded:versatilityinGreekπαιδείαdidnotaltertheattitudeofRomanofficialstowardstheirGreek,letalonebarbarian,opponents.IfCatohadfrettedthatculturalHellenismwouldturntheoffspringoftheshe-wolfintounprincipled,effeminateweaklings,hewaswrong.NoshiftinpoliticalprinciplesandprioritiesaccompaniedtheriseofGreekculturalinfluence.23
OneaspectofpoliticallifeinRomedidchange,however,andquiteprofoundly:theavailabilityofanewresourceofcapitalsymbolique—παιδεία—addedanentirelynew
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 5 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
battlegroundtothecenturies-oldstrugglefordignitasthatconcernedmembersoftheRomannobilitymorethananything.Along(p.312) withotherfactors—therepercussionsofempire,theconcentrationofenormouswealthinthehandsofthenobiles,andlooseningsocialtiesbetweenthefewandthemany24—theintroductionofπαιδείαcontributedtoRome’saristocraticcompetitionbecomingfiercerthanever.Soon,philosophical,oratorical,artistic,andliteraryconnoisseurshipbecamehardcashonthearistocraticvanityfairand,whenamassed,thehallmarkofasenator’sdignity.Theultimatearbiterinthisraceforthissymboliccapital,thatcouldthenbeconvertedintosocialcapitaland,finally,power,wastheRomanpeople.25
WhenScipioAemilianusfirstmetPolybiusinhisfather’shouse,hewasanxiousoverrumoursthathewasthedegenerateoffspringofaonceillustriousfamily,incapableofleadingtheCorneliiScipiones.26ItwasthearchetypicalfearforaRomannoblemantobeincapableofmatchinghisgloriousancestors.ThesocialcapitalofaRomanaristocratcomprisedtwocomponents:‘Ahnenkapital’,orthesocialprestigeaccumulatedbythepreviousrepresentativesofthegens,andindividualachievements.Inordertoequalthemaiores,hehadtoperformwellwhenholdinghighmagistraciesandtoaccomplishmemorabledeeds.Onlybydoingsocouldheenterthecollectivememoryofhisgensasanexemplum—thelicenceforbeingcarriedaroundasawaxmaskonthepompaefunebresofhisdescendants.27
AsthesonofL.AemiliusPaullusandtheadoptivegrandsonofScipioAfricanus,Scipiowasunderadualpressure.Hecouldhardlydrawlevelwithsuchancestorsthroughperformancesofdiplomaticshrewdnessandmilitaryleadership.However,inaworldwhereGreekπαιδείαincreasinglymattered,itsostentatiousdisplaywasalsoregardedasasourceofaristocraticdignitas:FabiusPictorexplicitlyaddressedaGreek-speakingaudienceinhishistoricalwork;L.AemiliusPaullus,afterhisvictoryoverPerseusatPydna(168BC),heldagonesintheGreektradition;28ScipioAfricanusmaiorwenttoSyracuse,dressedasaGreek,andvisitedthegymnasium;T.QuinctiusFlamininusboastedofhisknowledgeofGreekliteratureandlearning;andevenCatowasasoundconnoisseurofGreekculture.
(p.313) ByestablishingahubofGreekπαιδείαintheheartofRome,ScipioAemilianussurpassedthemall.HeensuredthathewouldberememberedasatruechampionofGreekeruditioninthecapitalofayoungandgrowingempire.Hisstrategypaidoff:throughPolybius’historicalwork,heassuredhimselfamostprominentplaceinthecollectivememoryoftheRomanaristocracy,and,bysponsoringthephilosopherPanaetius,hebecametheincarnationofaristocraticotiumcumdignitate,amodelforpeoplesuchasCicerowhoreferredtohimwhenvindicatingthemorecontemplativepartsoftheirpubliclives.29NolongerwashistoriographytheonlyintellectualdisciplineinwhichaRomannobiliswasallowedtoexcel.ScipioAemilianusprovedthatversatilityinanumberoffieldsaddedtoanaristocrat’sdecorum.Bycombiningformidableπαιδείαwithimpressivemilitaryachievements,Scipioevenmanagedtooutdohisfather,thevictorofPydnaandconquerorofMacedonia,andadoptivegrandfather,thevictoroverHannibal.30
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 6 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
TheroleofPolybiusinScipio’slifebeginstotakeshapenow.ThekeytoitsunderstandingisthechangingimportanceofπαιδείαinRomanaristocraticcompetition,whichmadethecompanyofaGreekintellectualaninvaluableasset.Thisexplainswhythemightysoughtthefriendshipofthesage.Buthowcanwedefinetheir‘friendship’?Whatwasthenatureoftherelationshipbetweenthetwomen,which,accordingtoPolybius,wasdistinguishedbyφιλίαandσυνήθεια?31
ThesocialsemanticsoffriendshipInordertoappreciatefullythefuzzinessandcomplexityofthisproblem,ashortdigressiononthesocialsemanticsoffriendship—φιλίαandamicitia,respectively—inGreeceandRomeisindispensable.FortheGreeks,friendshipwasasocialbond,generallybetweenequals,ofparamountimportance—arguablymoreimportantthanevenkinship.Apowerfulsourceoffriendshipwasaffection,butfriendshipwasfartooserioustobeonlyamatterofemotion;absoluteloyaltyandthedesiretohelpfriendsunderallcircumstances,inpersonal,economic,andpoliticalaffairs,wereessentialconstituentsofφιλία,too.Friendship,whichcouldbehandeddownoverseveralgenerations,wasguidedbytwobehaviouralnormsconstitutiveforGreeksociety:reciprocity,and‘agonal’competition.Inpolitics,friendshipcouldeasilylead(p.314) toupheaval,στάσις,whengroupsoffriends(ἑταιρίαι)turnedintopoliticalfactions.32
Inpoliticalsystemsbasedonmonarchicrule,socialtiesgainedevenmorepoliticalsignificance.Intheabsenceoftheconceptofa‘court’proper,theGreeksused‘friendship’toindicateaperson’sassociationwiththeruler.Hierarchieswereinformalandoftencovert.Greektyrantssurroundedthemselveswithloyalsupportersandcelebrities,mostnotablyintellectualsandartists,whoseskillscameinhandywhentheruler’sachievementsweretobecelebratedpublicly.Again,thedegreeofformalizationofsuchbondsofpatronagewaslow,thetransitionfromsymposiasticto‘courtly’companyrathersmooth.33OnefamousexampleisAnacreonofTeos,whofirst‘befriended’Polycrates,thetyrantofSamos,andafterPolycrates’death,in522BC,movedtoAthens,whereheworkedforHipparchus.HieroIofSyracusewasthepatronofBacchylidesofCeosandPindar,thefamouspoets.34
Lateron,circlesof‘friends’,φίλοι,ashubsofpoliticalleadershipbecameastandardfeatureinHellenisticcapitals.ThemoststrikingexampleisAlexandria,wherethePtolemaickingscreatedafunctionaleliteofMacedonianandGreekimmigrantswhosepositiondependedentirelyontheirpersonalrelationshipwiththeking.Themuseion,establishedbyPtolemyI,wastheHellenisticworld’sunrivalledcentreofscholarlyandliteraryactivity.Itoperatednotasanacademic‘institution’withmeritocraticproceduresofentry,butratheronthebasisofaconceptofextendedφιλία:thescholarsandpoetskeptcompanywiththekingas‘friends’,ideallyequals,whohad,ofcourse,toaccepttheking’ssuperiorityintherealworld.ThisparadoxofφιλίαgaveHellenistic‘court’relationshipsingeneral,andtherelationshipsbetweenrulersandintellectualsinparticular,theirpeculiarflair.Thearrangementwas,asbefitsarelationshipbetweenfriends,ofmutualbenefit:thescholars,philosophers,andwritersmadetheirliving—lavishly—whereasthekingexcelledasapromoterofwisdomandbeauty.35
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 7 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AswithGreekφιλία,Romanamicitiaentailedreciprocityandtheusefulnessoffriendstooneanother.Likeφιλία,amicitiahadastrongemotionalcomponentofaffectionandintimacy.Butthetwoconceptsarenotsynonymous.Stillmorethanφιλία,Romanamicitiawasanelusive,evencontradictory,concept,(p.315) spanningthespheresofpersonal,social,andpoliticalidentity.Butinwhatrespectsexactlydidamicitiadifferfromφιλία?First,afriendlyrelationshipinRomewasmorestrictly‘utilitarian’thanφιλία,althoughtherewascertainlyspaceforpersonalfeelings,too.36Secondly,theurgetoobservetherulesofreciprocitywasstrongerthaninGreeceandtheexchangeofbeneficiaandofficiawasanessentialrequirementoffides,which,inturn,wasthebasisofanysocialrelationship,nomatterwhethersymmetricorasymmetric.37Thirdly,andmostimportantly,amicitia,farmorethanφιλία,wasarelationshipbetweenequals.Falsesymmetry,whichhadbeenatthecoreoffriendshipbetweenindividualsofprofoundlyunequalsocialstandinginGreece,wasunknowntoRomansintherepublic.38
Tobesure,senatorscouldjoininaristocraticamicitiawithmembersoftheequestrianorder;buttheinclusionofa(slightly)inferiorsocialgrouponlyhighlightsthefundamentalegalitéwhichwasbothexpressedandcreatedbyamicitia.Thereweresomeborderlinecases:intheAugustanperiod,poetslikeHoraceoccasionallyavoidedthetermpatronusandaddressedMaecenasandotherpatronsasmagnusorpotensamicus.39Buttheywerepeopleofsomesocialstanding,andRomans,too;theyworkedatatimewhenGreekideashadfirmlytakenrootontheTiberandwhenAugustuswasalreadybeginningtoblurtheboundariesbetweensymmetricandasymmetricsocialrelationships.Bycontrast,‘friendship’betweenasecond-centuryBCRomansenatorandanindividualfromtherank-and-fileofRomansociety,letaloneaforeigner,wasstraightforwardlyunthinkable,eveniftheysharedcommoninterestsandwere(p.316) connectedthroughfidesandgratia.Suchtiesinvariablyrequiredthebondsofanasymmetricrelationship,andtheasymmetricrelationshipparexcellenceinRomewaspatrocinium.40
ThenatureoftherelationshipbetweenScipioAemilianusandPolybiusemergesmoreclearlyasaconsequence.Undeniably,thereexistedbetweenthetwomenastrongbondofφιλία,buttheywerenoamiciintheRomansense.Polybius,whendescribingtherelationshiptheyoungRomanwasseekingtoestablishwithhim,theGreekexile,usesthetermφιλία—andquiterightlyso.FromaRomanperspective,PolybiuswasdeepinScipio’sdebt,asScipioandhisbrother,throughtheiradvocacy,hadachievedforPoybiusthemanyprivilegesheenjoyed.InsteadofbeingretainedinoneoftheEtruscancities,41PolybiuscouldstayinRomeandbecomepartofAemiliusPaullus’household.Thisestablished,inRomanterms,areciprocalrelationshipofmutualsolidarity(fides),butonewhichwasasymmetric,apatrocinium.AsaforeignerwithnosocialstandingwhatsoeverinRome,whodidnotevenholdRomancitizenship,PolybiuscouldnotbetheamicusofaRomansenator:hewashisclient.Assuch,itwashisroletoenhancehispatronus’standingasapromoterofscholarshipandasanintellectualofsomecalibre.Thesameholdstrue,mutatismutandis,forPanaetius,whodidnotcometoRomeasahostagebutofhisownvolition.ThisStoic,whosefatherhadbeeninRomeasanenvoyofhishomepolisofRhodes,cametoRomeshortlyafter144BC.HeveryquicklybecameanassociateofScipioAemilianusandaccompaniedhimonhisfamousdiplomaticmissionto
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 8 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theNearEast,visitingsuchexoticplacesasEcbatanaandBabylon.42DidheserveasScipio’sadviserindiplomaticaffairs?Thediplomaticexperienceofhisfathernotwithstanding,thisseemshardtobelieve.Panaetiuswasaphilosopherandnotadiplomatbytraining.Fromaprofessionalpointofview,hewasdispensableforthemissionandthusnotrequiredinScipio’sentourage.Fidesratherthananyprofessionalqualification,eruditionratherthanmorepracticalskillslooklikelytobetheexplanationforPanaetius’accompanyingScipiototheNearEast.43
ItisremarkablethatinPolybius’accountofhisrelationshipwithScipioAemilianusonlytheGreeksidefeatures,whiletheRomansideismute.Romanpatternsofinterpretationareconspicuouslyabsentfromthepassage:noreferenceismadetofidesanditsimplicationsofmutualofficiaandbeneficia,theasymmetryinsocialstatusbetweenthetwo‘friends’isomitted,andtherelationshipappearsmoreinformalthaneventhetiesbetween(p.317) Maecenasandthepoetsofhis‘circle’150yearslater.AllthatweseeistheGreeknotionoffriendship,φιλία,includingtheappearanceofsymmetrybetweenthepartners.44
WasPolybiusright?Whileitshouldbeclearbynowwhatthemightyandthesagehadtogainfromtheirmutualrelationship,itisadifferentquestionhowthisaffectedtheirviewsontheconditiohumanaingeneral,andonRomanpoliticsinparticular.ItisevidentthatmenlikePanaetiusandPolybius,forScipio,providedagatewayintothecolossalinventoryofGreekwisdom;theyservedasguidesintothe(forRomans)sofarunchartedterritoriesofphilosophyandscience.Buthowdidhis‘friendship’withScipioshapePolybius’viewsonRome’spoliticallandscape?HowdidheusetheintimateknowledgeofRomanpoliticalpracticeheacquiredowingtohiscapacityasoneofRome’spowerfulmen’sφίλοι?
ThemostmanifestresultofPolybius’studyofRome’spoliticalsystemis,ofcourse,histheoryofthe‘mixedconstitution’inBook6.Thegroundbreakingoriginalityofthispassage,essentiallyatreatiseinitsownright,liesinitsapplicationofGreekpoliticaltheoryinanattempttodecodethepoliticalgrammarofanaliensociety,theRomanrepublic,andexplainittoits—GreekandRoman—audience.45ToPolybius,theRomanstate’sbalancebetweenthethreeidealformsofgovernmentestablishedbyPlatoandAristotlewasthekeytounderstandingitstriumphovertheotherpolitiesintheMediterraneanworld.ThecommunisopinioofmodernscholarshiprejectedtheideaofademocraticcomponentintheRomanpoliticalsystem,claiminginsteadthatpoliticalpowerintheRomanrepublicwasmonopolizedbyitsall-powerfulnobility—until,nearlythirtyyearsago,FergusMillaremphaticallydeclared:‘Polybiuswasrightandhismoderncriticsarewrong’.46Washe?Thisisnottheplacetorecapitulateindetailadebate,originallytriggeredbyKarl-Joachim(p.318) Hölkeskamp’sdoctoralthesis,47andwhichisstillsimmering.ThequestionsMillarasked—orratherreopened—werevalidonesandstimulatedfurtherinvestigation.But,onbalance,hiscriticsseemtohavegottheupperhandwiththeirpainstakingargumentationindefenceoftheRomannobilityasaheuristicconcept,anidealtype:thestatic‘constitutionalmachinery’.48Millar’sreplacementforMatthiasGelzer’sNobilitätsherrschaftisaratherbloodlessfictionalconstruct,whereastheeffectivenessof
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 9 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theinformal,asitwere‘sub-constitutional’,sourcesofpoweroriginallydescribedbyGelzercanhardlybedisputed.Ineffect,Millar’srevisionmarkedastepbackwards,behindGelzer’ssociologicalapproachandbacktoMommsen’sformalistconstitutionalism.49
ButifpopularpowerandtheconstituentsofPolybius’‘mixedconstitution’wereindeedamerefaçadeandthenobilitywasanexclusiverulingclasseffectivelymonopolizingaccesstopoliticaldecision-making,oneenigmaremainstobesolved:whywasPolybius‘wrong’,giventhathewassoclosetotherepublic’sinnercircleofpower?Whydidheignorethestructuresunderlyingtheconstitutionalsurface?IsitpossiblethathedidnotunderstandhowScipioAemilianusandhisfellow-nobilesactedonRome’spoliticalstage—andbehindthescenes?
PolybiusmayhaveignoredthesocialbondsthatcreatedthenobilityandguaranteeditspoliticaldominanceforpreciselythesamereasonsthatherefusedtoacknowledgetheRomandimensionofhisrelationshipwithScipioAemilianus.HemayhavewrittenhishistoryforaGreekandRomanaudience,buthisperspectivewasentirelyGreek.HisquestionswereGreek,andsowasthespecificanglefromwhichheapproachedhissubject:Polybius’purposewasnottodeliveranaccuratedescriptionofthepoliticalfunctioningoftheRomanrepublic,theproceduresandprocessesthatkepttheRomanstaterunning,butatheoretical—ideal–typicalintheWeberiansense—explanationforitssuperiorityovertheotherMediterraneanpolities.Hence,hisanalysiswasnotguidedbyanyautopsybutbythecategoriesofPlato’sandAristotle’spoliticalutopianism.Polybius’constitutionoftheRomanrepublic,likeMommsen’sRömischesStaatsrecht,didnotexistintherealworldbutonlyintheacademicmindofitscreator.
Notes:
(1)ThisisasubstantiallyrevisedversionofmypapergivenatthePolybiusconferencein2007.Itakethisopportunitytothanktheorganizersofthisevent,andinparticularBruceGibsonforhiscommentsonthischapter.AllquotationsfromPolybiusaretakenfromtheLoebeditionofPaton.
(2)Plb.31.23.1–3.
(3)OnScipioAemilianusingeneral,Kaerst1929,Bilz1935,Astin1967,Abel1971,Elvers1997,Zahrnt2000.OnScipio’smysteriousdeath,Worthington1989,Beness2005.
(4)Plb.31.24.9–10.
(5)Plb.38.22.2;Hom.Il.6.448.Theepisode,whichisalsopasseddownbyDiod.32.24andApp.Pun.132(bothreferringtoPolybiusbutgivingdifferentversions),hasbeenwidelydiscussedinrecentscholarship:accordingtoMommsen1902–4:ii.37–8,ScipiofearedretributionforthedestructionofCarthage.ThisviewisstillfollowedbyMiles2010:346–7.Gehrke1996:536–7,followingWalbank,HCPi.722–5on38.21.1–3,viewsScipio’squotingHomeras‘eineSensibilitätfürdiemenschlichenWechselfälle’owingtotheinfluenceofGreekphilosophicalthinkingand,inthecaseofScipioAemilianus,
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 10 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
mediatedthroughPolybius.Gehrke(p.537)seeshereatleastrudimentsofapolicyofthoughtfulness(‘denAnsatzgebenzueinerPolitikderNachdenklichkeit’).Othersaremoresceptical:Zahrnt2002:94suspectsthatScipio’stearsmaywellhaveflowedfromPolybius’penandpointstoPlb.8.20.9–10,whereanothervictoriousleader(AntiochusIII)shedstearsinthefaceofadefeatedenemy(Achaius).OnweepingandtearsastopoiinHellenistichistoriography,nowLateiner2009:122(withreferencetoScipioandPolybius).
(6)Plb.38.21.2–3.
(7)PolybiuslistsnumerousexamplesofScipio’stemperance(31.25.2–8),generosity(31.25.9–28.9),andcourage(31.29).
(8)MartinBrown1934:79.
(9)e.g.Christ1984:92–102,Dreyer2006:81–3,Ferrary1988:589–602,Gruen1968:17,Heuss1998:128(‘InjenerBegegnunglagenüberhauptdieKeimeeinerhöherenrömischenGeistigkeitvoneigenemFühlenundEmpfindenundwurdediePrägungeinerbesonderen,durchdasGriechischebefruchtetenGesittungvollzogen.’).Gruen,however,hassubsequentlyjoinedthesceptics(Gruen1992:252:‘Theideaofa“ScipionicCircle”,thecentreofRomanHellenism,encompassingthenation’scultivatedeliteandthesourceofintellectualactivityinthecity,nolongercarriesconviction’).
(10)Strasburger1966:72:‘DasgeistigeLebenundFluidumdes“Scipionenkreises”fingiertCiceronachdemkonstituierendengesellschaftlichenundzugleichBildungserlebnisseinerJugendim“Kreise”derScaevolaeundderRednerCrassusundAntonius.’
(11)Astin1967:294–306.
(12)Zetzel1972:176.
(13)Ibid.177.
(14)Forsythe1991:363.
(15)ForaconvincingphilologicalrefutationofForsythe’sargument,see,however,Wilson1994.
(16)Strasburger1966:70.
(17)Gruen1984:268–9listsnumerousRomancommanders,fromL.AemiliusPaullustoC.SulpiciusGalus,fromCn.OctaviustoL.LiciniusCrassus,withwhomGreekπαιδείαandprofounderuditiondidnottranslateintophilhellenisminpoliticis.
(18)Onart,Coarelli1990:644,Gruen1992:119;onHellenicphilosophyandScipio’sattitudestowardsRomantradition,Christ1984:99–100,Gruen1992:128.
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 11 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(19)Gruen1992:251listsL.MarciusCensorinus,Q.LutatiusCatulus,Q.AeliusTubero,M.AemiliusLepidus,Q.MuciusScaevola,Q.MetellusNumidicus,andM.ClaudiusMarcellusas‘RomanaristocratswithsincereinterestinHellenismandnotableaccomplishmentinthatsphere’.
(20)Gruen1992:223.
(21)Plut.Cato22.4–5;Plin.Nat.7.112.SeealsoCic.Rep.3.21.OnCarneades,thephilosophicembassy,andCato’sreaction,seeKienast1954:105,Fuchs1964:2–5,Gruen1984:341–2,Gruen1996:174–7,Jehne1999,Drecoll2004,Vössing2006:137–8.GruenhasshownthatitwasnotCarneades’purposetocriticizeorevenchallengeRome(asargued,forinstance,byFuchs).
(22)Plut.Cato22.2–3.TheirpopularityhasbeenemphasizedbyGruen1996:176.
(23)Ironicallyitwas,accordingtoPolybius(30.6.5–6),Catowho,withhisfamousdefenceoftheRhodiansin167BC,broughtanewelementintoRomanforeignpolitics.Onthefamous‘turn’of167,seeKienast1954:120–1,Calboli1978,Gabba1990:208–10,Gabba1993:68–70.
(24)AconcisesummaryofthestructuralchangesaffectingRomansocietyinthesecondcenturyBCisprovidedbyAlföldy1985:42–64.TherulesofaristocraticcompetitionareexplainedbyHölkeskamp2004a:85–92,basedonSimmel1992(chapter‘DerStreit’).AccordingtoHölkeskamp,aristocraticcompetitioninRomewasarace‘umdenErfolgihrerLeistungenbeieinerdrittenInstanz’(Simmel:340):theRomanpopulace.Competetionwas‘KonkurrenzumdenMenschen,einRingenumBeifallundAufwendung,umEinräumungenundHingebungenjederArt’(Simmel:328).
(25)Ontheeconomyofsocialdistinctionandtheconvertibilityofsymboliccapital,seeBourdieu1979.
(26)Plb.31.23.10–13.
(27)Ontheaccumulationofsocialcapitalthroughindividualachievementandgenealogicalmemory—anditsdisplayinthepompafunebris—H.I.Flower1996:211–16,Hölkeskamp1999,Flaig2003:49–98,Walter2003,Walter200484–130.
(28)TheagonesofAmphipoliswere,however,clearlyframedbyelementsoftheRomanludicritual,thussendingaclearmessagetotheGreeksastowhowasnowinpower(Flaig2000:139–40).
(29)Habicht1990:116.
(30)OntheGreekperspectiveonrhetoric,history,andπαιδεία,seeOliver2006:123–8.
(31)Plb.31.23.3.
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 12 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(32)OnconceptsofφιλίαinclassicalandHellenisticGreece,seeFraisse1974,Gehrke1985:333–4,Gehrke1987:129–30,Gehrke1990:53–4,Konstan1997:53–120,Gehrke1998.
(33)Goldhill1991:128–36.
(34)OnartisticpatronageunderthearchaicGreektyrants,Barceló1993:159n.570,DeLibero1996:286–7.OnAnacreonAlexisofSamos,FGrHist539F2,Strab.14.1.16,Paus.1.2.3,Ath.13.72,599c,[Arist.]Ath.Pol.18.1.ManyotherscommittedthemselvestoPolycrates,amongthemthepoetIbycus,DemocedesofCroton,thefamousphysician,andthearchitectsEupalinusofMegaraandRhoicusofSamos.ForSyracuseunderHieroI,seeWeber1993:38–44.
(35)Weber1993:23–5,Gehrke1995:90–1,Meissner2007:98–100,Murray2008.OnthecareersofindividualφίλοιintheperiodofPtolemyIV,Huss2001:458–64.Thepeculiar‘charismatic’componentofHellenistickingshiphasbeenexposedbyGehrke1982.
(36)Brunt1988:351–3hasrightlyemphasizedtheemotionalcomponentoffriendshipanddisposedoftheaxiomthatamicitiawasapurelypoliticalinstitution,buthehasalso—wronglytomymind—rejectedthenotionthatfeelingsand‘utilitybalance’couldwellgohandinhand.Bruntiscorrectwhenstatingthatpersonalfriendsarenotalwaysandnecessarilypoliticalfriends,butasarulebothgroupsoffriendswillhavebeenrathercongruentthandivergent.Likepatrocinium,amicitiawasnogenuinelypoliticalinstitution,butitcertainlyplayeditspartinpolitics(Gotter1996:346:‘AmicitiawareinerseitsderallgemeineRahmen,indemsichdiearistokratischePolitikabspielte,amicitiaewarenaberauchdiemehroderwenigerstabilenGefolgschafteninnerhalbdiesesRahmens,diesichaufganzunterschiedlicheIntensitätgründeten’).Forthepositionoftheoldorthodoxy,seeMünzer1920,Gelzer1962:102–10,Bleicken1975:123–4.
(37)Spielvogel1993:14–15.Again,therequirementsoffidesandtheironrulesofreciprocitydidnotimplythatamicitiawasprimarilyasocialadhesivetyingtogetheraristocraticfactions.Theamiciofpoliticalfoescouldstillbeamici;occasionalandevenpersistentpoliticaldissensiondidnotleadtofriendshipsbeingrevoked(Gotter1996:343–4).
(38)ItwasdevelopedonlyfromAugustusonwards,andthereasonwastomaintainthefictionofsocialbalancebetweentheprincepsandtheordosenatorius(Winterling1999,Winterling2001:5andpassim,andesp.Winterling2003:28:‘Augustusschaffteesauchhier,paradoxeSachverhaltemiteinanderinVerbindungzusetzen,indemerdasneue,durchkaiserlicheGunststrukturiertehierarchischeBeziehungssystemindenFormeneineralten,aufEgalitätundpersönlicherNähebasierendenFreundschaftpraktizierte’).
(39)Hor.Ep.1.18.44;butseeibid.1.7.Onpatronage,theAugustanpoetsasclientsandtheuseofthelanguageofamicitia,seeWhite1978,Gold1982:16and94,Bowditch2001:19–29,Bowditch2010:55.Onpatronageingeneral,Saller1982,Wallace-Hadrill
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 13 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
1989,Deniaux2007.
(40)Hutter1978:141–5,Brunt1988:382–442,Spielvogel1993:14–15,Gotter1996:344,Flaig2003:17–20.
(41)Paus.7.10.11.
(42)Cic.Luc.5;onthedatingofthemissionandtheevidenceoftheConstantinianexcerptafromDiodorusSiculus,seeAstin1959,Mattingly1986.
(43)OnPanaetius,hislife,andphilosophicalthought,seePohlenz1948:1.191–207,Abel1971,Kraus1997.
(44)Actually,sinceScipioisseekingPolybius’friendship,andsincehisportrayalisthatofaself-conscious,ratherunassertive,youngman—ascomparedtothematureGreekwhoconversesconfidentlyinAemiliusPaullus’house—thesocialasymmetryevenseemsreversed,makingPolybiusthestrongerandScipiotheweakerpartner.
(45)Plb.6.3–9.See,amongothers,Nicolet1974,Nicolet1980:208–9,Schubert1995,Nippel1980,Lintott1999:16–26,andnowPolverini2005:86:‘Polibiomutuadalpensierogrecoquestaconcezionepolitico-costituzionale,ma(storicoenonfilosofo)nefastrumentodiinterpretazionediunaconcretarealtàstorica,infunzionediunprecisoproblema,delproblemachehaispiratolasuaopera….’Forasummaryofthediscussion,seeWalbank2002:16.Ontheintendedandactualreadership(‘thepoliticaleliteinGreeceandRome’)ofPolybius’work,Champion2004a:7.
(46)Millar1984:2.OnthefurtherelaborationofMillar’sthesisseeMillar1986,Millar1989,North1990a,North1990b,Millar1995,Millar1998,Millar2002a,North2007,Yakobson2007.
(47)Hölkeskamp1987andlaterHölkeskamp1996,Hölkeskamp2004aandthepaperscollectedinHölkeskamp2004b.Hölkeskamp’sideashavebeenabsorbedandfurtherdevelopedbynumerousscholars.Largelyinsupportofhisideas,seethefollowing:Jehne1995,Kloft1998,Jehne2000,Jehne2001,Bleckmann2002,Goldmann2002,Walter2003,Beck2008.
(48)Millar1998:15.
(49)AspointedoutbyHölkeskamp2004a:19.
Scipio Aemilianus, Polybius, and the Quest for Friendship in Second-Century Rome1
Page 14 of 14
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 1 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
MediterraneanEconomiesthroughtheTextofPolybius
J.K.Davies
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0018
AbstractandKeywords
ThelivelystateofworkonancienteconomiesinvitesasystematicstudyoftherichesofeconomicevidencecontainedinPolybius,whichincludesinformationonlandscapes,humansettlements,themovementsofhumansandmaterials(includingbullion),populations,andagrarianproductionandprices.Hisanalysisofbehavioursincludesdiscussionofpredation,andmechanismstakentoensureitsprevention,aswellastheimplicitlyeconomicmotivationswhichinformedthepoliciesandactionsoftheSuccessorkingdoms.AlthoughPolybiushasrarelybeencitedinrecenteconomictreatmentsoftheHellenisticperiod,theveryfactthatPolybiusisnotan'economichistorian'meansthathistextisofincomparableusetothemoderneconomichistorianoftheancientworld,bothforitsprovisionofraweconomicdataindependentofanyinterpretiveframework,andthroughtheveryambitionandsweepofPolybius'visioninbringingoutthetypicalbehavioursofstatesandcommunitiesacrosstheMediterranean.
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 2 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,ancienteconomies,predation,economicdata,landscapes,humanmovement,theMediterranean
UsingPolybiusassourceofeconomicinformationInherpresentationtoa2007colloquiumatNottinghamhostedbytheCentreforSpartanandPeloponnesianStudies,CatherineGrandjeancommentedthat‘Polybiusstandsoutamongtheancientsasoneofthosemostinterestedintheeconomicfactorsinhistory’.1HerobservationwaspromptedbyhiscommentthatSpartaneededtobeabletodeploy‘acommoncurrencyinuniversalcirculationandsuppliesdrawnfromabroad’inordertobeabletoextendherpowerbeyondthePeloponneseafter404(6.49.7–10),butithasafarwiderapplication.True,noonewillcallPolybiusaneconomichistorian,andnotjustbecausethephraseisintrinsicallyinappropriateforanyhistorianwritingbeforethelaternineteenthcentury,buthistextissoloadedwitheconomicallysignificantinformationthatitseemedworthwhiletoembarkuponasystematictrawlandseewhatemerged.Theoutcomeisquiteremarkable,forthematerialisoverwhelming,farmoreindeedthancanpossiblybepresentedindetailhere.Thisispartlybecausehisowninterests,hishistoriographicalagenda,andhisowntravelscombine(howevercasuallyandincidentally)toofferaseriesofinvaluablesnapshotsoflifeintheMediterraneanregionsandtheirhinterlandsinthethirdandsecondcenturiesBC,andpartlybecausehedescribesthebehaviourofpowerfulindividualsandpolitiesinsuchawayastooffertherawmaterialforarealtheoreticalanalysis.InconsequenceIexpresshereveryopenlymywarmgratitudetoCatherineGrandjean,bothviaherinitialcommentand(p.320) viasubsequentfruitfulconversation,forengenderingtheexplorationwhichfollowshere.2
Itscontexthastwoothercomponents.Oneisdoublypersonal.Latein1977,inhiscapacityasoneoftheeditorsofthenewCAHVII2,thehonorandofthisvolumeinvitedmetocontributewhatbecamea63-pagechapter(Davies1984)onthe‘Cultural,Social,andEconomicFeaturesoftheHellenisticWorld’.Theprolongedengagementwhichthatinvolved,bothwiththeprimaryevidenceandwithRostovtzeff,leftalastingandcompleximpression,3whichthepresentvolumeoffersanopportunitytotakefurther.Thesecondcomponentisthelivelystateofcurrentscholarlystudyoftheeconomiesofclassicalantiquity,bothgenerallyandforthethreepost-Alexandercenturiesinparticular.Notonlyarefourbriefrecentsketchesof‘Hellenisticeconomies’currentlyavailable4butalsotheissuesinvolvedhavealreadystimulatedfourconferencesdevotedtotheeconomiesoftheperiod.5Since(perhapsratherstrangely)nocontributiontothemhasyetfocusedontheeconomicallyrelevantevidenceprovidedbyoneliterarysource,insuchawayastocorrespondwith(ortocontrastwith)thatofferedbyonesiteoronegenreofartefact,thereisalacunatobefilled.
Onetheonehand,therefore,givenhisprimordialcontributiontoourknowledgeofthosecenturies,Polybius’textistheobviousfirstsourcewithwhichtofillthatlacuna.Ontheotherhand,that‘primordial’statuspresentstheproblemofdecidinghowtopresentandusetheinformationwhichheoffers.Here,threescholarlyactivitieshavetobedistinguished.Thefirstisthatofassemblingandpresentingthe‘economic’informationwhichheprovides.Thatisitselfacomplexbusiness,forhisinformationfallsintoanumberofdistinctgenres.Onecomprisestheexplicitdescriptionsofregionsandpeoples,
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 3 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
especiallybutnotonlyinthecentralandwesternMediterraneanareas,whichheknewwouldbelargelyunfamiliartohisGreek-languagereaders.Asecondcompriseshistoriographicalcritiques,whiletheincidentaldetailsaboutthisorthateconomicaspectoflifewhichemergefromhisnarrativesofcampaignsandeventsconstituteathird.Ihavenotfounditeasyeithertodecidewhich‘genres’itwasappropriatetodistinguish,orwhatcountsas‘economicallyrelevant’information.Whatfollowsinmysecondsection(‘TheDescriptiveRawMaterial’)mustthereforebeseenasafirstandprovisionalframework,devisedwithsomesensethatitreflectsthemoresalientclustersofdatainhis(p.321) text,butwithnopretencethatitreflectsanyawarenessofeconomicdiscourseassuchonhispart.
Thesecondactivityisthatofidentifyingthestructuresofbehaviourwhichcanbedetectedfromthenarrativesanddescriptionsgiveninhistext.Again,suchananalysiscanlegitimatelybecompiledirrespectiveofwhetherPolybiusexplicitlyoffersanyrelevantformulation.ThatisnotbecauseforPolybius‘thenewscolumns’canbeseparatedfrom‘editorialmatter’,anymorethantheycanforThucydides.Rather,itisbecausesuchstructurescanbeidentifiedasbeingexemplifiedbyrepeatedpatternsofbehaviour.Thosepatternscutacrosstheregion-by-regiongridofreferenceforsimultaneousbutgeographicallydistinctactivity,whichbecomeshispreferredformatfromBook7onwards,andarethereforegenericallydistinctfromtheanimadversionsonthebehaviourofthisorthatruler,politician,orcommunitywhichPolybiusdeliberatelychoosestomake.Mythirdsection(‘ThreeTypesofEconomicBehaviour’)attemptstoidentifysomeofthemoresalientpatternsofcollectiveorindividualbehaviourwhichrecurinhistext.
Thethirdactivityisthatoftryingtoassesshowfarhiswitnessshouldbekeptonitsownorevenprivileged,insteadofbeingmerged(orindeedsubmerged)inthegeneralandever-growingmountainofprimaryevidencewhichistransformingourinterpretationofthosecenturies.Thatisamatterofcomparingwhatemergesfrommythirdsectionwithcurrentlyavailableanalyses,andofattemptingtoassesstheirrelativeexplanatoryvalue.Thatfinaltaskisattemptedinconclusion(‘PolybiustheUnconsciousInformant’).Throughoutallthreesections,thetitleofthiscontributionispertinent.ItisnotastudyofPolybiusasaneconomichistorian,orofHellenisticeconomies‘throughthe(interpretative)eyesofPolybius’.Itisastudyofthoseeconomiespurelyandsimply‘throughthetextofPolybius’,i.e.ofthepatternsofbehaviourofthepeoplesandindividualswhoarepresentedinhisextanttext.Inordertominimizetherisksofanachronismandofinsecureattribution,thesesectionswillreferonlytohistransmittedtextualwords,withoutusingtheindirecttraditioninLivy,Diodorus,Plutarch,orAppian.Likewise,forpresentpurposesthetaskofidentifyinghissourcesisofsecondaryimportance,forwhatmattersarethechoiceswhichhehimselfhasmadeofwhattorecord,emphasize,oromit.
ThedescriptiverawmaterialHistextofferstwokindsofrawmaterial,thefirstbeingevidencewhichcontributestoadescriptivesurvey,thesecondanalyticandinterpretative.Thelatter,whichwillbe
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 4 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
reviewedinthefollowingsection,hasitsowninternallogic,andisthereforeeasiertopresent;theformerdoesnot.Perforce,(p.322) therefore,thedescriptivematerialwillbepresentedviaeightarbitrarilyorderedsetsofheadings,eachwithareview(whichwillhavenoclaimtocompleteness)ofrelevantpassages.Iamwellawarethateachset,orclusterofdata,deservesapapertoitself,withafarmoredetailedevaluationandcontextualizationthanthelimitsofacontributiontoaDenkschriftpermit.Ithasnonethelessseemedmorehelpful,aliketothestudentofPolybiusandtotheeconomichistorian,ifasummaryoverviewofthetopicanditsmaterialisassembledandmadeavailable,forindividualcomponentscanalwaysberevisitedonalargerscale.
Commentsonlandscapes,especiallyfertilelandscapesandtheirproducts.Itispropertobeginthus,sincesuchcommentsexemplifythesecondpartofPolybius’tripartitedivisionofπραγματικὴἱστορία,that‘concernedwiththeaspectofcities,places,rivers,andharbours,andingeneralthespecialfeaturesoflandandsea,anddistances’(12.25e.1).Remarkably,heinterpretsthisportionofhistaskveryliberally,extendingwellbeyondmilitarilyrelevanttopographysensustrictoinordertoreportproductiveeconomicactivities.Suchcommentsareinvaluable,forvariousreasons.First,theyreflectbothhisowneyeforthelandandhisawarenessofthegrowthofgeographicalknowledgesinceAlexander(3.59.3–5).Secondly,sincehiswitnesspredatesthatofStrabobyatleast150years,thecontrastbetweenthem,notleastinthecaseofCisalpina,canbeinformative.Thirdly,theshapeofhisnarrativecauseshimtoembraceandeventooversteptheentire‘classical’world.Indeed,thoughtosomedegreeHecataeushadalreadysetthemould,itisaboveallPolybius’text,eveninitssurvivingfragmentaryform,whichdefinesthegeographicalandhumanscopeofthatworld.Intermsofgeographicalextent,itrangesfromLusitania(34.8)toByzantium(4.45.7–8)andMedia(5.44;10.27.1–2),andthenceacrosstheentireIranianplateautoBactria(10.48).Intermsofeconomicinformation,theharvestisperhapsatitsrichestwithCisalpina,6butisvaluableforotherregionsaswell.OnemayciteCorsicaandEtruriawiththeirherdsofgoatsandswinerespectively(12.3–4),thefertilityofSamnium(3.90.7),ofCampaniawithCapua(2.17.1;3.91),orofEchinusinMalis,7ortheirrigationsystemsontheIranianplateau(10.28).Modesoftransportrateoccasionalmention,aswhentheOxusandTanaisarereportedasnavigable(10.48.1),whilehisreferencestothesilverminesnearNewCarthage(34.9.8–11)andtogoldminesnearAquileia(34.10.10)areoffundamentalimportance.
Secondly,humanlandscapesandpatternsofsettlement,wherehiseye-witnessinformationthankfullysubvertsclichéaftercliché.Thatappliesnotsomuch,indeed,innotingGaulishsettlementκατὰκώμας(‘invillages’)inthePovalley(2.17.8–12)orinnotingRomanandCarthaginianactsofimposing(p.323) colonialisturbansettlementsonexpropriatedland,8asinemphasizingthattheAlpswereperfectlypermeableandsupportedaconsiderablepopulation(3.48.7)orinidentifying,notablyforuncolonizedterritoriessuchasHispaniainthe230sand220sbutalsoelsewhere,9nucleatedsettlements10whichhecheerfullycallspoleisinhappyignoranceofrecentterminologicaldebates.11Non-nucleatedsettlementsalsoappearoccasionally,aswiththeforts(φρούρια)andruralmasserie(συνοικίας)inthearearoundPrinassusinCaria(16.11.1).Moreover,ifweextendthesenseoftheterm‘humanlandscapes’whileremaining
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 5 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
withintheeconomichistorian’spurview,wemayincludewiderdemographicorbehaviouralobservationsunderthisheading.ExamplesarehiscommentonthebucolicopulenceofElis(4.73.6–10),hisaspersionsonthestateofBoeotia(20.6.1–6),orhisendlesslydebatedparagraphonthedepopulationofGreeceinhisowntime(36.17.5–11),nottomentionhiscommentsontheostentationofAemilia(31.26.3–9)withitswaspishstinginthetail(31.26.9).12Ofcourse,suchcommentsdepictdivagationsfromhisideaofthenorm,reflecthisprejudicesasmuchastheyreportrealbehaviour,andarenottobetrustedwithoutscrutiny,butareallthemorerevealingforthat.
Thirdly,thescaleofhumanmovement,forcedorwilling,throughtheselandscapes.Forcedmovementdidnotonlyinvolveslaves,forwehearoftwoenforcedmigrationsonthenorthernfrontierofMacedonafter188,13whileslaves,rarelyappearingintheirownrightexceptwhenbeingofferedfreedominacityundersiegeinordertoretaintheirloyalty,14occupyamajorindirectplaceinthepictureviaallusionstotheslave-trade,15tocapturedpopulations(p.324) beingsoldoff,16andtothenumbersinvolvedinsilvermining.FreemoversincludeRomansthemselves,suchasthosepresentinsignificantnumbersatTarasinwinter213/12(8.25.2)ortheemporoibothItalicandother.17EvenmorepervasiveweretheGreeks,who,withtheoccasionalGaul,providedthemilitaryandcivilianApparatofmostmajorpowers,evenincludingCarthageonoccasion,andaboveallthemercenarieswhopermeatethetext.18Especiallyiftosuchapictureonethereforeaddsthemovementsofarmies,nottomentioninvasionsandmigrations,oneplainlyhastopopulatethelandscapes,andespeciallytheseascapes,ofPolybius’worldwithaperpetualandnumericallyverysignificantBrownianmotionofhumanparticles,whowereoftenbeingimpelledlongdistancesbyneed,compulsion,orambition.
Menwerenottheonlyentitiesinmotion,forthemovementsofmaterialsandbullionwereequallyconspicuous.Theyareclassifiedbelowunderthreeseparateheadingsinordertobeabletodistinguish,alikefortheirmechanismsandtheireffects,supplies,booty,andmonetarytransfers.Ofcourse,theseareallpartofthepolitico-militarydomain,butPolybius’textshowsthemashavingenormouseconomiceffectsandascarryingahighlevelofstructuralcentralitywithinthesumtotalofalleconomicallysignificantactionsperformedthroughouttheareaandperiod.
Onemaybeginwithsupplies,whosestructuralcentralitytotheconductofwarfareneedsnoemphasisorproof.Whatmattershere,therefore,ishowthethemepresentsitself.Ahandfulofcasesmustsuffice.If,forexample,wefollowHannibaleastwardsfromtheRhonein218,theavailabilityorotherwiseofsuppliesfeaturesrepeatedly.19Likewise,ifwefollowhisnarrativeofAntiochusIII’scampaignagainstMolon,hemakesapointofreportingZeuxis’advicethatthemostimportantconsiderationwastodenyMolonhissupplyroutefromMedia,whilegivingroyalforcesaccesstothefertilearearoundApollonia-in-Sittacene,20justasthefollow-upcampaignagainstArtabazaneswasintendedtodenysuppliestootherpotentialrebels(5.55.1).ThesamemotifsurfacesseveraltimesduringtheRaphiacampaign(5.68.2,70.2and5,75.1),while(p.325)Polybius’narrativeofconcurrenthostilitiesinPisidia,withitsnotethatthemenofSelgewhowerebesiegingPednelissuswenthomefortheharvest(5.72.7),remindsusyet
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 6 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
againthattheagrariancalendardominatedlife,justasitdidinearlyJuly219whenPhilipV,remarkably,senthisMacedoniansbackhomefromPellatogathertheharvest(4.66.7).EvenmoredoesthemotiffigureinPhilip’searlycampaigns,withitsdisconcertinghintsthathiscommissariatwasaperilouslyhand-to-mouthaffairandthatseveraltimesin218theneedforacornsupplydrovehiscampaignasmuchas,ifnotmorethan,theambitiontosecurespecificstrategicobjectives.21
Next,booty.ThemotifisascentralinPolybius’warnarrativesasistherolewhichtheresourcesthusobtainedplayedinpubliclife.EvenifAetolianbehaviouristemporarilyleftononeside(seethefollowingsection),itrunsrightthroughhisnarrativeoftheFirstPunicWar,ontheRomanandontheCarthaginiansidesalike,andcharacterizesthebehaviourofvirtuallyallbelligerentsinallthewarshereports(even,onoccasion,theAchaeans).Significantinthiscontextisthedetailwithwhich,inthecontextofScipio’scaptureofNewCarthage,PolybiusrecordsthesystematicwayinwhichRomanssoldoffbooty,incontrasttowhathecallsthegeneralrulethateachman‘keepswhathegrabs’.22So,too,throughouthisworkhereportsquantitiesandvalues(suchasthe600talentsfromNewCarthage,10.19.1–2)insuchawayastorevealboththescaleofplunderingandthefactthatrecordsofthetakewerekept.Equally,heallowsustocomplementPhylarchus-stylehorror-journalismbypopulatingbattlefields,sieges,andcapitulationswithahoveringcrowdofhard-nosedslave-traders.23
Next,large-scalemonetarytransfers.Polybius’extanttextreportsaremarkablenumberofsuchtransfers.Itissimplesttobeginbysettingthelistout,asfollows:
Reference Date Details1.63.1–3 241 Anindemnityof3200TtobepaidbyCarthagetoRome1.88.11–12
238 Anextraindemnityof1,200TtobepaidbyCarthage
5.54.10–12
221 Fineof150T(initialdemandbyHermiasfor1,000T)fromSeleuciatoAntiochusIII
5.76.9–10
218 Anindemnityof400Tatonce,300Tmorelater,tobepaidbySelgetoAchaeus
5.88–90 220s GiftstoRhodesaftertheearthquake,mostlyinmaterielbutincluding500Tinsilver
7.5.6–7 215 HieronymusattemptstoextractfromRomethereturnofgiftsmadebyHieroII:amountsareunspecified
8.23 214 Giftof300T+fromAntiochusIIItoXerxesofArmosata,aswellastheremissionoftribute
(21.4.12–14
190 Indemnityof1,000TinitiallydemandedfromAetoliansasthepriceofpeace)
21.30.1–5
189 Indemnityof200TpayablebytheAetolianstoRomeatonce,withafurther300Tinlaterinstalments,asthepriceofpeace.Crownof150TpresentedtoFulviusbyAmbracia
21.34 188 Cibyrapays15Tcrown+100TtobuyManliusoff
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 7 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
21.35.4 188 Termessuspays50TtoManliusforanalliance21.36 188 CyrmasaandSagalassuspayManlius50Tandspecifiedquantities
ofgrain21.40.6 188 AriarathesistoldbyManliustopay200Tforpeace(but300Tin
21.44forthesametransaction)
21.42.19ff.
188 AntiochusIIItopayasindemnities12,000TandaspecifiedquantityofgraintotheRomans,and350TtoEumenesplusanother127Tinlieuofgrain
(22.7.3 185 Anofferof120TfromEumenestotheAchaeanLeagueisrefused)(22.8.10 207 Back-referencetothesaleofAeginabyAetolianstoAttalusfor30
T)25.2 179? Indemnities,tobepaidbyPharnaces,of900TtoAriarathesand
300TtoEumenes,andof300TbyMithradates(ofArmenia)toAriarathes
28.22 169 GiftsofAntiochusIV,onwithdrawingfromEgypt,of50TtotheRomansandof100TtocertainunidentifiedGreekcities
(33.5.1–3 155 Anofferof500TbyDemetriusIofSyriaforthepossessionofCyprusfails)
33.13.8 154 PrusiasofBithyniatopay500Tover20yearstoAttalusIIandtopay100TinreparationstofourGreekcities
(p.326) SucharetherawdatafromPolybius’text.Theyareamixedbag,somebeingindemnitiesimposedbytreaty,somebeinggiftsfrompolityXtopolityY,andsomebeingbribesandextortions,whiletheylargelyexcludeongoingorindefinitesubsidiessuchasthosebeingpaidbyEgypttoCleomenesofSpartainthe220s(2.63.2–5).Further,theyexcludebooty,andofcoursetheyalsoexcludethecapillarycirculationofmoniespaidduringoraftermilitarycampaignstomercenaryorcitizensoldiersandseamen.Allthesame,threeimpressionsfromthesedatastriketheeyeatonce.Thefirstistheirsheer(p.327) scale,ofawholeorderofmagnitudegreaterthanthosewhichahistorianofthepre-AlexanderfourthcenturyBCwouldencounter:therebytheyexposethesizeoftheresourceswhichevenminorHellenisticmonarchiescouldamassanddisburse.ThesecondistheoverwhelmingextenttowhichRomans,whethercollectivelyorindividually,werethebeneficiaries.Togetherwithmuchotherevidence,nowmostusefullygatheredtogetherbydeCallataÿ2006:70–4,theybegintorevealjusthowmuchbullioncametobestrippedfromtheeasternbasinoftheMediterranean.SinceitsimpactontheRomanstateandsocietyiswellenoughknown(andishighlightedbyPolybiushimself),24thisisnottheplacetoreiteratetheobvious.Equallyobvious,however,isathirdimpression,thatoftheconsequencesforthedebtorparties.Forexample,notonlywerepublicandprivateaccumulationsmilkedruthlesslybutalsothemoneysupplywassqueezedinregionswhichmayhavestillbeenonlyhalf-monetizedandhadlittledirectaccesstofreshbullionresources.Theconsequencesforregionalliquidityandforthegrowingincidenceofdebtcannotbepursuedindetailhere,anymorethantheproblemofhowsuch‘internationaltransferpayments’canbetheorizedwithinanynormaleconomic
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 8 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
framework.25
Eventhislightningsketchmusttouchonthatholygrailoftheeconomichistorian,quantification.Besidesthosealludedtoabove,InternationalTransferPaymentsandproceedsfrombooty,itisperhapsmostobviousandmostusefulinhisfiguresofthesizesofcontingentsforthemajorbattles,26whichpromptreflectionsonmodesofrecruitmentandonthe(sometimesveryexplicitlyflagged)scale,logistics,anddifficultiesofsupply.Equallyvaluable,butequallyproblematic,arehisrarefiguresforpopulations,forwhateveronedoeswithhisfiguresforRomanmilitarymanpowerin225isparalleledonamuchsmallerscalebyhisfigureofonly6,000forthefreepopulationofSeleucia-in-Pieriain219,27orbytheimplicationsofacceptingthatin218SelgeinthemiddleEurymedonvalleyinPamphyliacouldlose‘notlessthan10,000’oftheirownforcesandstillresistthePednelissianssuccessfully.28EquallyinvaluableasreportsoffiguresandquantitiesarehisdetaileddescriptionsofthegiftsmadebyHellenisticrulerstoRhodesafterthe227earthquake,29andoftheconstituentpartsofAntiochus’ostentatiouslyspectacularπομπήatDaphnein166or165,30orhisreport,presumablybasedinpartonhisvisittoSpainin151,thatthesilver(p.328) minesnearNewCarthagethenhad40,000minersandyielded25,000drachmasperday(24.9.8–11).Whatevertheproblemsinvolved,suchfiguresarecentraltoanyassessmentofpublicandprivatemoneysupply,andofitsroutesofaccumulationanddistribution.
Finally,sincesomuchoftheforegoinghasremainedperforcewithinthemilitarydomain,itisvaluabletoberemindedofhiseyefortheworldofagrarianproductionandprices,allthemoresosinceoutsideEgyptandBabylonwehavesolittlepost-Alexanderevidenceforthem.31Twovignettesmustsuffice,bothprobablystemmingfromautopsyinthe150s,andbothusingthesamethreecommodities(wheat,barley,andwine)ascomparators.32Thefirstisapassageinthe‘minormasterpiece’whichishissketchofCisalpina,withitsfertility,itspigs,itsacorns,andtheopen-handednessofitsinn-keepers(2.15.1).Thesecond,ifwecantrustthetranscription,vergesonthelyrical:
PolybiusofMegalopolis.…describingtheprosperityofLusitania(thisistheregionofIberia,whichtheRomansnowcallSpain)inhis34thbook,saysthatthere,owingtothepleasantblendingoftheair,bothanimalsandhumansareveryprolific,andthecropsintheregionneverfail.Roses,whiteviolets,asparagusandplantssimilartotheseceasefloweringfornomorethanthreemonths,whileinrespectaliketoquantity,toexcellence,andbeautythesea-fishshowagreatdifferencewhencomparedwiththoseofourownsea.TheSicilianmedimnusofbarleycostsadrachma,thatofwheat9obolsofAlexandria,themetretesofwinecostsadrachma,andareasonablekidorhareanobol.Thepriceoflambsis3or4obols.Afatpigweighing100minaecosts5drachmas,asheep2.Atalentoffigscosts3obols,acalf5drachmasandaploughingox10.Themeatofwildanimalsisscarcelyconsideredworthpricing,buttheyexchangethesefreelywitheachotheraspresentsandmarksoffavour.33
Yet,Herodoteanthoughthegenremaybe,theplethoraoffiguresreadsmorelikean
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 9 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
EconomicSurvey:historiographyhasmovedon.
ThreetypesofeconomicbehaviourSomuch,inthespaceavailable,bywayofillustratingsomeofthewaysinwhichPolybius’textisaninvaluable—andseriouslyunder-exploited—quarryofmaterialforeconomichistoriansoftheHellenisticMediterranean.34Iturn(p.329) nowtothesecondkindofmaterialwhichheoffers,theanalyticandinterpretative,forimplicitthroughouthisextanttextisacontinuous,attimesbrutallyviolent,three-waytug-of-waramongthreedifferenttypesofeconomicbehaviouronthepartofpolities.
Thefirstcomprisespredatorybehaviour,whetherbyprivateindividualsorbyformallyconstitutedstateforces,outwithapolity’sownboundariesanddirectedtowardstheacquisitionbyforceofmovablegoods,theobjectivebeingeithertotakethosegoodsbackhomeortosellthemoffandtherebytocapitalizetheirvalue.AsportrayedinPolybius’text,themainpractitionersofthismodewereIllyrians,Cretans,andAetolians,butthekingswerequitecapableofjoininginonoccasion,asweretheRomans,35whileitwouldbefoolishtoassumethatnocomparablebehaviourwasexhibitedelsewherewithintheworldwhichcamewithinhispurview.Thereasonsareobvious,forsuchbehaviourhaddeeprootswithineventheGreekworld:onemayrecallHomericportraitsofNestor-stylecattle-raidingortheendlessallusionsinGreekmythsandlegends.Indeed,itcanbeseenasareflectionoftheuniversalassumptionthat,indefaultofanyspecificmechanismofprotection,anyothercommunityexceptone’sownisanenemywithnorightsandisfairgameifonecangetawaywithit.Moreover,suchbehaviourhaditsownrationale,foritworkedbestwhenfiveconditionswerefulfilled:
•asignificantable-bodiedmalepopulationavailableinslackperiodsoftheagrarianorpastoralyear;•accessto,andcommandof,aneffectivehit-and-runtechnology(forexample,forAetoliansandIllyrians,theViking‐long-boat-styleλέμβος);•anaccessibleandattractivesetofpotentialtargets,suchastheshipsoftheItaliantraders(2.8.2–3)ortherurallandscapeofMesseniawhichhadescapedtheeffectsoftheCleomeneanWar(4.5.4–5);•inadequatesystemsofprotectionofthosetargetsonthepartofthecommunityconcerned;and•collusion(atleast)ormoreusuallyactivecollaborationonthepartofthepolitiesofthepredatorycommunity.
Thismodewaseffective,widespread,andhadsignificanteconomicimpact.Onemay,forexample,thinkoftheextensivesphereofinfluencewhichtheAetoliansbuiltupinthethirdcenturyBCviatheirnetworkofasylia-treaties,36(p.330) orofthemode’stwoprincipalformalencapsulations.ThefirstwasqueenTeuta’sreplytotheCoruncaniiin230(2.4.8),thesecondtheprovisionsaboutbootywhichwerewrittenintotheRomano-Aetoliantreatyof212or211—notindeeddirectlypreservedinPolybius,butreflectedwellenoughintheferociouscommentswhichhereportsofThrasycratesofRhodesinJune207.37Iamnot,however,hereconcernedtoexploreethicalormoraljudgementsonthismodeofbehaviour,whetherPolybius’orourown,eachwithitsoscillationsandits
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 10 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ambivalences;38whatmattersisthatitwasrationalbecauseitwasprofitable,39andthatitwasthereforewidelypractisedinregionswherethefiveconditionsidentifiedaboveconvergedwithsufficientforce.Itwasnotjustapatternofwidespreadindividualfreebooting,ofthekindwhichallowedScerdilaidasoffCapeMaleaandtownsinPelagoniainsummer217to‘treatallmerchantsasenemies’(5.101.1,108.1–2),forjustasatNicaeainNovember198PhilipVcouldcitetoFlamininustheAetolianlawofsylē,40socorrespondinglytheAetolianscouldcomplainafter217thatthePeaceofNaupactushad‘cutoffalltheirsourcesofbootybymakingpeacewithalltheGreeks’.41Thismodehastocountasastructuralcomponentofthesocietiesofitsleadingpractitioners,andhencealsooftheeconomicbehavioursofPolybius’world.
Asecondmodeisthecomplementofthefirst,namelythebehaviourofpolitiesinprovidingasafeenvironmentfornon-belligerenteconomicandsociallife.Thisallowedgainfulprocessesofproduction,distribution,andconsumptiontoproceed,andprotectedpersonsandpropertywithinandbetweencivilsocietiesatthecostofimposingandenforcingsystemsofpublicorderandtaxation.ThereisnotmuchaboutthismodeinPolybius,understandablyinsofarasheisconcernednotwithinfrastructuresbutwithevents.However,enoughsurvivesnotmerelytoconfirmwhatonewouldinanycaseassume,thatallthepolitieswhichenteredhisnarrativehadacivilorderofsorts,butalsotorevealthatforatleastsomepolitiestheprotectionofasupra-nationalcivilorderwasimportantenoughtojustifyactiveandcollaborativeintervention.
(p.331) ThemostexplicitexampleishissketchofthecrystallizationandconsolidationoftheAchaean‘federalstate’,thoughinterestinglyeventherehisemphasisisoncommonlaws,weights,andmeasures(2.37.10–11);taxationassuchfeaturedonlywheninsummer217theLeaguevotedtosetupasmallpermanentarmyandnavy,triggeringedginessinArgosaboutwhowouldpayforit(5.91.4and93.6).Otherinformationislargelyincidental42andtends(understandably)tofocusondeviationsfromthenorm,suchashiscommentsontheweightoftaxationfeltonbothsidesduringtheFirstPunicWar,43orhisreportsofPerseus’cancellationofdebtstothestateonhisaccession(25.3)andoftheRhodianlossofrevenuesafter167(30.31).
Likewise,lightshedontherealeconomy,asdistinctfromthefiscaleconomyorthepredatoryeconomy,isindeedscatteredandscrappybutfarfromabsent.Predictably,wehaveevidenceforproduction,withcraftsmenreportedasactiveintownsasfarapartasSaguntum,NewCarthage,andAntioch;44andforconsumption,whetherbyAemiliaandtheRomanjeunessedoréeofthe160s(31.25.5;31.26)orbytheM.Livius(Macatus?),whosedrunkenbanquetlosttheRomanstheircontrolofmostofTarasinwinter213–12.45Lesspredictably,wealsohaverealevidencefordistribution,whetherintheformofhisreportofthecommoditieswhichmovedintoandoutofPontus(4.38)andhisassociatedcomparisonbetweentheamountofthattrafficandthatwhichpassedthroughoracrossthestraitsofGibraltar(16.29.11–12),orinhiscommentthat,atleastbeforetheRomancolonyatBrundisiumwasfounded,Tarasastheonlyeast-coastharbourwastheunavoidableentrepôtforallwhotravelledfromGreeceorItalytoApulia(10.1.5).
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 11 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Allthesame,thosearevignetteswhichyieldlittleontheirown.Muchmoresignificant,asreflectingaregularityandanapparentcommonalityofinterest,arehisreferencestothestateswhichthrewtheirdiplomaticinfluencebehindmovestoendmajorwars.Askeletonlist,compiledbytherulesofthispaperfromPolybius’textonly,wouldneedtoinclude,fortheSocialWar,theRhodiansandChiansin218(5.24.11,28.1)andtheChians,Rhodians,Byzantines,andPtolemyIVin217(5.100.9);fortheFourthSyrianWarin217,firsttheRhodians,Byzantines,Cyzicenes,andAetolians(5.63.5)andthentheChians,Rhodians,andByzantines(5.100.9);andfortheFirstMacedonianWarin207,PtolemyIV,theRhodians,Byzantines,Chians,andMytilenians.46(p.332) Boththerecurrencesofnamesandtheirgeographicalconcentrationarestriking,allthemorewhenterritorialinterestsarenotsaidtobedirectlyinvolvedandwhen(aswiththeSocialWar)thetheatresofconflictlaymostlywellawayfromtheAegean.Obviously,anyinterpretativeframeworkforthisactivitymustincorporatehisreportofthehelpgiventoRhodesaftertheearthquake(5.88–90),hisnarrativeoftheRhodes–Byzantiumwar(4.38–52)withitsexplicitemphasisonByzantineactiontoprotectthePontictrade(4.50.1–3)andontheroleoftradersinarousingRhodianstoaction(4.47.1),andhisreportofRhodianfiscallossesafter167(30.31).47Evenaminimalistinterpretationhastoacceptthattheseinterventionscannothavebeendrivenpurelybyfiscalinterestorbytheneedtoensuretheimportofessentialfoodstuffs,importantthoughsuchmotivesmaywellhavebeen;theyhavetoreflectacommoninterest,whichwemayaswellcallcommercial,inprotectingtheviabilityandsecurityofmovementofgoodsbysea—i.e.thetotaloppositeofthepredatorymode.48
Inevitably,thethirdmodeofeconomicbehaviourtobesingledouthereisthatshownprincipally,butnotonly,bythepost-Alexandermonarchies.Hereitisnecessarytoberadicalandtoassertthateventhough—alikeforPolybius,forotherancientliterarysources,andformodernhistoriography—theirbehaviourisseentoattestitselfinpolitical,diplomatic,andmilitaryactivity,ithasfundamentallytobeseenaseconomic.Thatisnotasrevolutionaryasitappears,foritstartsfromtheelementaryfactthat(ifwecouchitinrealistterms)theunipolarsystemoftheAchaemenidPersianempirehadgivenwaytoamultipolarsystem.Orrather,ithadrevertedtoaverylongueduréeregularity,notsomuchbecausemuchcompetitivemultipolaractivityamongsatrapsanddynastswentonwithintheAchaemenidempire(thoughthatistrue)asbecausewhatemergedafterIpsuswithinex-Achaemenidterritorieswasgrossomodothere-emergenceofadeep-rootedpolymorphiccompetitivesystem.ThatsystemhadhadmuchthesamegeographicalconfigurationsincetheLateBronzeAge,intensifiedparipassuwiththespreadofGreeklanguage,culture,andinstitutions(Davies2002),andisstillperfectlyvisibleinaverysimilarconfigurationatthepresentday.49
(p.333) Perforce,therefore,theSuccessorkingdomswereincompetitionforsurvivalandpower.However,survivalandpowerarenotprimary‘goods’;theyaretheproductofwhatisprimary,namelyproductiveland,fightingmen,taxrevenues,aviableandwell-staffedadministrativestructure,andstoredwealth.ItwillbeotiosetopickoutfromPolybius’texttheendlessexamplesofthebehaviourofeachandeveryroyalpolityinseekingtoprotect,andifpossibletoincrease,itscommandofthosefivecommodities.50
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 12 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Rather,Iwanttoemphasizethatthoughthatcompulsioncouldanddidgeneratepredatorybehaviour,vitriolicallydescribedbyPolybiusonoccasion,itwasstructurallydifferentfromtheAetolianandotherbehaviourwhichIhavecalledmyfirstmode.Itdifferedbothbecauseitwasessentiallyterritorialanddirectedtowardstaxrevenues,notlootandbooty,51andbecauseitaimedtomaximizestoredwealthforre-use:inthatsense,itwasbehaviourdirectedtowardsproductivere-investment.Whatismore,suchbehaviourwasnotamonarchs’monopoly,fortheRhodiansbehavedinmuchthesamewayafter188intheircoldwarwithPergamumoverinfluenceandrevenuesfromwesternAsiaMinor.Oneistemptedtousethephrase‘marketshare’,butthatwouldbeagraveerror:thesepolitieswerenotsomuchlikecompetitivesupermarketchains,concernedtosell,aslikeoilcompanies,seekingtoseizeandcontrolaslargeashareoftheavailableprimarygoodastheycanacquire,byfairmeansorfoul.
PolybiustheunconsciousinformantThe‘economicreading’ofPolybiussketchedabovemaynowbejuxtaposed,andcompared,withrecentgeneralizedpicturesoftheperiod.Sixsuchpicturescomeintoquestion,whicharereviewedinchronologicalorderofpublication.52Threeofthemmaysuitablybeviewedthroughtheirsubheadings:
(p.334) Reger2003
1Introduction.2Physicalpreconditions.3Humanresources.4Formsofmovement.5Institutionsoftheeconomy(pricesettings;banks,financing,credit;thepolis;formsofinter-stateco-operation;Hellenistickingdoms;money).6Howmonetarizedwastheeconomy?7Didstateshave‘economicpolicies’?8TheimpactofRome.
Chankowski–Sablé2004
1Thesourcesandtheirlimitations.2TheeconomicsystemsofthekingdomsoftheeasternMediterranean:frompatternstopractices(therangeofinfluences;economicsystemsandpragmatism);royalwealth;from‘king’sfinances’to‘economiesofkingdoms’(thePtolemaicsystem,theSeleucidsystem,theAttalidsystem);fromHellenistickingdomstoRomanprovinces.3Economicagents:landuse(royallandsanddōrea;royallandandprivateproperty;civicterritoriesandtempledomains);thecitiesandtheireconomicactivities(economicpolicies;urbancentresandmarkets;largeandsmallcities);theworldofthemerchants.4Areasofprosperityandperiodsofcrisis:exchangenetworks;systemimpairmentsandbreakdowns;Aunifiedeconomicarea?
Davies2006
1Preliminariesandproblems.2Environmentandstabilities:landscapeandenvironment;useofcomplementaryhabitatsandresources;communications;landandlandownership.3Themainprocessesofchange.Monetization;royaleconomies;theriseandfallofEgyptasa‘royaleconomy’;populationmovements;seabornetransport;newinstitutionsandinstallations;knowledgetransfer;luxuriesandlifestyles;thepolarizationofwealth;westcentralItalyasaneconomicactor.4Thedrifttowardsintegratedeconomies.
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 13 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Thoughtherearedifferences,thesethreechaptersshowastrongfamilyresemblance.Theyallknowthediversityoftheregionandperiodinquestion,theyallremainwithinthediscourseoforthodoxeconomichistorians,andtheyalluseepigraphic,papyrological,environmental,andartefactevidenceratherthanthenarrativetextsofthehistoriansorthebiographers.Thesameistruefortheremainingthreepictures,plannedandpublishedasatriointheCambridgeEconomicHistoryoftheGreekandRomanWorldof2007.Steeredbytheireditorsandbytheuse,asstandardcategories,ofthetwotriads‘production,distribution,andconsumption’and‘land,labour,andcapital’,allthree(VanderSpek2007,Manning2007,andReger2007)useacommonframeworkofheadsofexposition,whichfocusesonagriculturalandotherproductionandconsumption,monetizationandprices,urbanization,taxationandrevenues,stateandprivateinstitutions,theeffectsofwarfare,andtheextenttowhichadvancesinknowledgeallowedrealeconomicgrowth.TheytoohavelittlecausetocitePolybiusdirectly.53
(p.335) Allinall,thedifferencesbetweentheshapesofthesesixsurveysandthepictureofferedbyPolybiusaresobering:healmostseemstobedescribingadifferentworld.Manyfactorscontribute.Tobeginwith,atleastafterthestartofBook3,hismainfocusisnotontheGreekorGreek-stylepoleiswhich—partlybecausetheyaredisproportionatelywelldocumented—haveattractedsomuch(perhapstoomuch)attentionincurrentscholarship:noreven(Achaeaapart)doeshedwellmuchonthe‘federalstates’.Hisattentionisfocusedaboveallontheroyalregimeswhosegigantictaxingandpurchasingpowersandnear-monopolycontrolofprimaryresourcespermittedlarge-scaleandfar-reachingroyalactivityinwarandpeace.Book6conspicuouslyexcepted,heisfarlessinterestedininstitutionsthaninpeoplesandpersonalities.Heisnotconcerned,exceptincidentally,withthestaticorslow-changingrhythmsofproduction,distribution,andconsumption,butaboveallwithpolitics,diplomacy,andwarfare,togetherwiththeirconductandeffects.Heisnot,afterall,an‘economichistorian’,eveninposse,letaloneinesse—andyetthatveryfactmakeshistextrevealviaitsdetailsutterlyinvaluableeconomicinformationwhichisallthemorereliablyusableforbeingverylargelyraw,54i.e.fornothavingbeenprocessedwithinaninterpretativeframeworkofhisown.Inconsequence,andespeciallywhenchroniclingthemovementsofPhilipVandAntiochusIII,hisgeographicalpurviewtakeshimacrosscountlessecologicalboundariesinawaywhich(expertocredite)authorsofsmallerscalesketchesofeconomiclifefinditveryhardtoencompass.Furthermore,andcrucially,hisfocusontheactionsofthegreatpowersallowshistexttoprovidethematerialsforconstructingadiachronicdynamicmodelfortheHellenisticMediterraneanasawhole,andtoprovidetheevidencethatitsscaleandimpetusweresetbythebehavioursofrulersandofpolities,notofindividualsorofgroups.Aboveall,astheprecedingsectionhasattemptedtoshow,hisnarrativebringsoutthecrucialfactsthatconflictswerenotjustbetweenpowersandpolitiesbutalsobetweenthreeopposedformsofcollectivebehaviour,eachofwhichcarriedmajorconsequencesfortheeconomicshapeofthepost-Alexanderworld.Polybiustellsusmoreaboutthatworldofcompetitiveandincompatiblemodesthananyoneelse,andmorethanheknewhimself.
Notes:
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 14 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(1)Grandjean2009:5.
(2)MythanksarealsoduetoBruceGibsonaseditor,andtothePress’sreferee,forexceptionallydetailedandhelpfulcomments.Throughoutwhatfollows,allnakedreferencesoftheform‘6.49.7–10’aretothetextofPolybius,and‘T’denotes‘talents’.
(3)BrieflyadumbratedinDavies2004b.
(4)Alcock1994,Reger2003,Chankowski-Sablé2004,Davies2006.VanderSpek,Manning,andRegerinScheideletal.2007:409–83provideamorelengthydelineation.
(5)Archibaldetal.2001,Archibaldetal.2005,Descat2006,Archibaldetal.2011.Konuk2012isineffectafifth:andcf.alsoAmbaglio2004.
(6)2.14–15;3.34.1–2,44.8,48.11.
(7)9.41.11,withHCPii.183forlocation.
(8)e.g.theexpropriationoflandforthesakeofitsresources(3.10.5,HamilcarinSpain)andthecolonialistimpositionofurbancentres,bothbyRomans(asatSenaGallica,2.19.11–13,PlacentiaandCremonain218,3.40.5,andMutina,3.40.8)andbyCarthaginians(2.13.1–2).
(9)Althaea/Cartala,3.13.5–7;Hermandica,3.14.1;Arbocala3.14.1;NorthernSpainingeneralin218,3.35.3.Mediolanum,too,isrepresented,thoughwithoutalabel,asasignificantsettlementinthe220s(2.34.10–11and15),allthemoreifthetempleofAthenewasthere(2.32.6,withHCPi.208).
(10)e.g.3.50.6and67.4(Cisalpina),76.5(CissainSpain);5.97.1(Bulazora‘thelargestpolisinPaeonia’);10.7.5(Spain,amongtheCarpetani);10.38.7(BaeculainTurdetania);15.4.1inthechoraofCarthage.
(11)TheLexhafniensis(forwhich,seeHansenandNielsen2004:34,withreferences),isnottherebyinfringed,sinceitisdeemedtoapplyonlybefore300BCandonlytoGreekcities.
(12)‘Forabsolutelynoonethereevergivesawayanythingtoanyoneifhecanhelpit’,withWalbank’sdrycommentadloc.(HCPiii.505).Ofthesamekidney,butreflectinganevenmoreheroicdegreeofover-simplification,arePolybius’characterizationsofRomansasintrinsicallyhonest,ofGreekoffice-holdersasinherentlydishonest,andofCarthaginiansthat‘atCarthagenothingwhichresultsinprofitisregardedasdisgraceful’(6.56).
(13)(a)‘DesertIllyria’,evacuatedinordertocreateacordonsanitaireagainstDardanianinvasion(28.8.3,withHCPiii.338foritsuncertainlocation),and(b)thetransferofpopulationsbetweenThraceandMacedon(23.10.4–7,withHCPiii.230–1forexplanatorydetail).
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 15 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(14)InSelge(5.76.5)andinAbydos(16.31.2).Incontrast,themassmanumissionsof146inAchaea(38.15.3–5)weredrivenbyaneedformilitarymanpower.
(15)4.50.3(Byzantium)andperhaps14.7.1–3(Utica).
(16)Citednumbersrangefromlessthan100,capturedinanAchaeanraidonAetolia(5.94.7),throughunquantifiedgroups(9.42.5–8(Aegina);15.4.1(Tunisia))tothe150,000capturedandsoldbyPaullusinEpirus(30.15).
(17)Mostconspicuouslythosewhowereill-treatedatPhoenice(2.8.2),orconverselythosewhomCavarusthekingoftheGaulsinThraceprotectedinPontus(8.22).
(18)Onecaseamongmany:theGaulsemployedsuccessivelyinthe240sand230sbytheCarthaginians,theRomans,andtheEpirots(2.5.4and7.5–11).
(19)In218atthe‘island’betweentheRhoneandtheIsère,πολύοχλονκαὶσιτοφόρον(3.49.5and11),intheunidentifiedpolishalfwayupthevalley(3.51.12,52.5),athiscampsouthofPiacenza(3.68.8),andatClastidium(3.69.1);in217duringthetraverseoftheArnomarshes(3.79.1–2),nearAnconaafterTrasimene(3.87),inSamniumroundBeneventumandTelesia(3.90.7–8),intheCapuanplain(3.91),andwhilewinteringinApulia(3.100.1–2,101.8–11);andnotmovingfromGeruniuminspring216untilthecornharvestwasavailable(3.107.1).
(20)5.51.7–11,with(pendingtheappearanceofCohen’sVol.III)Tscherikower1927:97and168foritsapproximatelocation.
(21)5.1.6and10–12(formalagreementformaterieltobeprovidedbytheAchaeanLeague);5.3.5(opportunisticraidonCephallenia);5.28.4(Philipallegedtobeinmajordifficultiesforlackofsupplies);but4.63.10and4.65.2areneutralearlierreferences.
(22)10.16–17,withHCPii.217butalsowiththewarningsofZiolkowski1993thatmuchofPolybius’descriptionofprocedureatNewCarthagecompriseseulogyratherthanfirst-handreportage.
(23)Forotherreverberationsoftragichistory,cf.Marincolainthisvolume.
(24)e.g.9.10(editorialcommentonthetransfertoRomeofthespoilsofSyracuse),withHCPii.134–6;31.25(linkingthegrowthofextravagancewiththedefeatofPerseus).
(25)Forapossiblealternativeframework,cf.Davies2009.
(26)e.g.hisfiguresforbothRomanandCarthaginianfleetmanpoweratthebattleofEcnomus(1.26.5–8).
(27)5.61.1,withHCPi.585and587.
(28)5.73.16(losses);5.76.11(eventualoutcome).
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 16 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(29)5.88–90,withHCPi.616.
(30)30.25–6,withAth.5.22–4,194c–195fanddeCallataÿ2006:40–1.
(31)HiscommentthattheCarthaginianswereaccustomed‘tosupporttheirprivatelivelihoodsfromtheproduceofthecountryside,assemblingtheirpublicpreparationsandsuppliesfromtherevenuesofLibya’(1.71.1)isallthemorefrustratinglybriefonthataccount.
(32)TheparallelswerenotedbyWalbank(HCPi.173andiii.602).
(33)34.8.4–10,fromStrabo3.2.7andAth.8.1,330c–331b.Walbank(HCPiii.601)canvassedaconfusionbyAthenaeuswithTurdetania(sc.theGuadalquivirvalley),aninterpretationresistedbyÉtienne1996:396=2006:556.
(34)IknowofnomonographonPolybiuswhichaddressesthethemeofthepresentchapter:noneiscitedinWalbank2000:1–27.
(35)e.g.therefugeesfromAgathurnalicensedbyM.ValeriusLaevinustoplunderBruttium(9.27.10).
(36)ReferencesinRigsby1996.Itisnoaccidentthatthephrase‘Thepoliticsofplunder’(Scholten2000)hasalsobeenappliedtothepiracyof1550–1650(Jowitt2006)aswellastocertainmodernmisgovernments,realoralleged.
(37)11.5.2–8;cf.alsothoseofLyciscusofAcarnaniaat9.39.1–3.ThevariousversionsoftheWortlautofthetreatyarebestsetoutinStaatsverträgeIII536,withAustin2006:no.77fortranslationsandreferencestomorerecentbibliography.
(38)AsvariouslyexploredbySacks1975,Garlan1978,Davies1984:285–90,andGrainger1999.
(39)HavingcapturedagroupofAetolianenvoystoRomein189,theEpirotsdemandedaransomof5Tforeach,andaccepted3TaheadforallexceptAlexandertheIsian,whoserefusaltopaywasprovidentiallyvindicated(21.26.7–19).Ifthesefiguresrepresentedanythinglikethegoingratesforhigh-statuscaptives,itisnowonderthatpiratesproliferated.Onemayfitlycomparethefigureof$500,000,reportedinJune2007asthegoingrateforransomingoilworkersintheNigerDeltaareaandasapparentlypaidbyoilcompaniesasaroutinecost.
(40)18.4.8–5.3.Incontrast,PhilopoemengrantedtheAchaeansstrictlylimitedῥύσιαagainsttheBoiotians(22.4.13–17,withHCPiii.181).
(41)5.107.5–7,ifhonestlyreportedbyPolybius.
(42)e.g.(a)1.71.1onCarthaginianresources;(b)apassingreferencetoTlepolemusadministeringthepragmataandthechremataofEgypt(16.22.7);(c)ablandnoteofthe
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 17 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
PtolemaicviceroyinCyprusapplyinghimselfdiligentlytothecollectionofrevenue(27.13.2:thepapyriallowustoenvisagealltooclearlywhatthatmeantinpractice).
(43)1.58.9;1.72.2(doubledfrom25percent?,Walbank,HCPi.137).
(44)Respectively,3.17.2;10.8.5and17.9;26.1.2.
(45)8.25.11;27.1–2;27.4ff.;30.5–6,withWalbank,HCPii.102,andMRRi.262n.7forhiscognomen.
(46)11.4–6,withWalbank,HCPii.274–5fortheevidenceofAppianthatAmynanderofAthamaniawasalsopartytothemediation.
(47)However,RomaninterventionintheSixthSyrianWardoesnotbelonginthislist,becausePopilliusLaenas’peremptorybehaviouratEleusis(29.27)showstheRomanstatebehavingasapower-wielder,notasmediatororpower-broker.
(48)TheRomaninterventionagainstIllyria(2.8–12)thereforeexemplifiesthemode(Davies2004a).Amaximalistinterestwill,ofcourse,lookoutsidePolybius’text,bothforwardsintimetotheAegeanresponsetoMithradates’controloftheHellespontandbackwardsintime,e.g.tothecollaborationof(largelythesamegroupof)AegeanstatesoveracenturyearlierintheFirstSocialWarof350s,inthesecondAegeanLeague,intheΣϒν-coinageallianceofthe390s,intheoriginalDelianLeague,andevenintothesixthcenturyBC.
(49)Exceptthat,ofthethreeintrinsicpower-resourcenuclei(Egypt,Anatolia,andSyria-Mesopotamia),thethirdiscurrentlydivided.
(50)e.g.theactionofPerseusinexpellingAbrupolisfromhisprincipalityinordertorecovercontrolofthePangaeummines(22.18.2–3).IthankJoeManningforpreliminarysightofhisinterpretationofEgyptunderthePtolemiesasa‘banditstate’,inasensewhichisfullycompatiblewithwhatissetoutinthetextabove.
(51)e.g.theactionofMasinissaincovetingandeventuallygettingholdofLesserSyrtisbecauseofitsfertilityandabundantrevenue(31.21).
(52)Withapologiestotheauthor,IhavetranslatedtheheadingsinChankowski-Sablé2004.IexcludehereanyreviewofDavies1984,bothbecauseitspurviewwasnotexclusivelyeconomicandbecause,basicallydraftedby1981,itisalreadythirtyyearsoutofdate.Likewise,thoughinitselfinvaluable,Alcock1994isbestreferencedhereratherthaninthetextbecausesheusesonlyonemaintypeofevidence,twelvesurfacesurveysofregionswithintheeasternMediterraneanzone.Thatdoesindeedofferamoredirectaccesstotheexperienceofitspopulations,byspottingtrendssuchasurbanization,demographicfluctuation,agrarianintensification,andtherealityorotherwiseofculturaldiscontinuities.
(53)Theydosomainlyforhissectionsonpopulationdeclineandonthewarbetween
Mediterranean Economies through the Text of Polybius
Page 18 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
RhodesandByzantium.
(54)Thereareexceptions,suchashissaccharineportrayaloftheeconomicunificationofAchaea(2.37.9–11)andmostconspicuouslyhisoutrageouscaricatureofBoeotia(20.6),onwhichseeMüllerinthisvolume,butitisrelativelyeasytoplantwarningflagsroundthem.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 1 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
ImaginingtheImperialMediterranean1
JosephineCrawleyQuinn
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0019
AbstractandKeywords
Polybius'interweaving(symploke)ofthehistoryofdifferentregionsfromhisstartingpointin220BCisanideologicalaswellasaliterarystrategy.BenedictAnderson'sworkonhowconceptsofsimultaneityacrosstheprogressofemptyorhomogeneoustimecanshapenationalidentity,itselfdrawingontheworkofWalterBenjamin,offersvaluableinsightintosimultaneityinPolybius,whosesymplokedrawstheMediterraneanworldintoahistoricalcommunityofGreeksandRomans:theuseofsynchronisms,andthechronologicalstructureofOlympiadsplayakeyroleinthisprocess.WhiletheprogressoftheHistorychartsRome'sincreasingpower,thestructuringoftimeaccordingtoGreekpracticemaybeseenasasmallmodeofresistancetoRome'ssway,withherachievementsbeingcastwithinanoverallstructurethatwasGreek.ThoughPolybiusmapsRome'srisetopowerovertime,healsochartsalternativeconceptionsofspaceandtimewithinhiswork.
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 2 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Keywords:Polybius,time,symploke,BenedictAnderson,WalterBenjamin,synchronisms,Olympiads,Rome,theMediterranean
Polybiusinventedanewwayofwritinghistory,inresponse,hesays,totheσυμπλοκήor‘interweaving’ofhistoryitselfinthe140thOlympiad:
Previously[before220–216]thedoingsoftheinhabitedworld(οἰκουμένη)hadbeen,sotosay,dispersed,astheywereheldtogetherbynounityofinitiative,resultsorlocality;buteversincethisdate2historyhasbecomeasiforganic(οἱο̑νεἰσωματοειδη̑),andtheaffairsofItalyandofAfricahavebeeninterweaved(συμπλέκεσθαί)withthoseofAsiaandGreece,allleadinguptooneend(τέλος)…JustasFortunehassteeredalmostalltheaffairsoftheinhabitedworldinonedirectionandhasforcedthemtoinclinetowardsoneandthesameend,soitisthetaskofthehistoriantobringbeforehisreadersunderonesynopticalview(ὑπὸμίανσύνοψιν)theoperationsbywhichshehasaccomplishedhergeneralpurpose. (1.3.3–4.1)
ItisthissynopticapproachthatIshallexplorehere,andwhatitmeansforPolybius’presentationoftheMediterranean,notintermsofgeographybutintermsofhumanexperience.FrankWalbank’sclassic1975articleontheσυμπλοκήcomprehensivelycoversthepracticalaspectsofthistopic;3whatIwanttodohereistoexamineitsideology.IamgoingtoarguethatPolybius’structureisinitselfaconstruction—oftheMediterraneanasaunitybetweeneastandwest,GreeceandRome—andthatthiscanbeunderstoodasapoliticalaswellasaliterarystrategy.Atthesametime,however,alternativeconstructionsoftheMediterraneancanbetracedthroughPolybius’account(p.338) andothersources.First,though,aglanceatapairofmorerecentstudiesofthehistoricaltreatmentoftimewillsetthescenefortherestofthediscussion,notbecauseIthinktheyexplainPolybius’strategybutbecauseIthinktheydon’t,quite.
Empty,HomogeneousTimeInhis1983bookImaginedCommunities,BenedictAndersonfamouslypointedtotheimportanceofaconceptionofsimultaneous,emptytimeacrossalimitedgeographicalspacefortheriseofnationalismintheearlymodernperiod:
Beneaththedeclineofsacredcommunities,languagesandlineages,afundamentalchangewastakingplaceinmodesofapprehendingtheworld,which,morethananythingelse,madeitpossibleto'think'thenation…[T]hemediaevalChristianmindhadnoconceptionofhistoryasanendlesschainofcauseandeffectorofradicalseparationsbetweenpastandpresent…itviewstimeas…asimultaneityofpastandfutureinaninstantaneouspresent.Insuchaviewofthings,theword‘meanwhile’cannotbeofrealsignificance…Whathascometotaketheplaceofthemediaevalconceptionofsimultaneity-along-timeis…anideaof‘homogeneous,emptytime’,inwhichsimultaneityis,asitwere,transverse,cross-time,markednotbyprefiguringandfulfilment,butbytemporalcoincidence,andmeasuredbyclockandcalendar.4
Asaresult,timeisunderstoodasanexperiencesharedbyallmembersofthenational
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 3 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
community,andAndersonshowshowthestructuresofnovelsandnewspapersinemergingnationsreinforcedthismodernideaofsimultaneityacrosshomogeneous,emptytime.Novelsofthissortpresenttheircharactersasdoingdifferentthingsatthesametime,linkedtoobecausetheyareembeddedinthesamesocietyandinthemindsofthecommonreadership;andtheyoftencontaincopiousreferencestothereaders’ownexperienceof,andeveninvolvementin,theeventsandplacesdiscussed.Inthecaseofthenewspaper,eventsandreadersarelinkedthroughthesimultaneous,large-scaleconsumptionofthatnewspaperaswellas‘calendricalcoincidence’—whichistosaythatthepaperprintsthedateatthetopofpage1,meaningthatthereisasingledateforthefirsttime,sharedbyprotagonistsandconsumersofevents.
MuchoftheinspirationforAnderson’saccountcomesfromWalterBenjamin’slastessay,the‘ThesesontheConceptofHistory’,anattackonwhathecallsthe‘historicist’formofhistory-writing,inwhichthehistoricalprogressofmankind
(p.339) wasregardedasirresistible,somethingthatautomaticallypursuedastraightorspiralcourse…theconceptofthehistoricalprogressofmankindcannotbesunderedfromtheconceptofitsprogressionthroughahomogeneous,emptytime…5
ForBenjamin,this‘historicism’alwaysempathizeswithhistory’svictors,whomitseesasinevitablysuccessful.6Hecontrastswiththe‘historicist’the‘historicalmaterialist’forwhomtimeisnotprogressive,‘empty’and‘homogeneous’,butis‘filledbythepresenceofthenow’;7thisisAnderson’scontrastbetweensimultaneity-across-timeandsimultaneity-along-time.Andhistoricalmaterialism,inthissense,wasapoliticalactofseriouscontemporaryrelevance:
Toarticulatethepasthistoricallydoesnotmeantorecognizeit‘thewayitreallywas’(Ranke).Itmeanstoseizeholdofamemoryasitflashesupatamomentofdanger8…OnereasonwhyFascismhasachanceisthatinthenameofprogressitsopponentstreatitasahistoricalnorm.9
AccordingtoBenjamin,revolutionariescan‘makethecontinuumofhistoryexplode’,andsometimesdothisliterallybyintroducinganewcalendar,ashappenedaftertheFrenchandSovietrevolutions,or,moredramatically,bygunningdownclocktowers.10
Iwanttosuggestinwhatfollowsthatthisconceptionofsimultaneity-across-timeisnotconfinedtothemodernperiod,asAndersonsuggests,11butiscentraltothesynopticapproachPolybiusadopts,whichinvokesasenseofsimultaneous,sharedtimeandhistorybetweenthepeoplesoftheMediterranean.Inparticular,hepresentstheRomansandtheGreeksasparticipatinginonehistoricalcommunityasbothcharactersandreaders,buildingnotanationbutanempire.12Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatPolybius’historyis(p.340) astraightforwardexampleofBenjamin’shistoricism;itdoesnotempathizesolelywiththeRoman‘victors’,butsuggestsalternativewaysofunderstandinghistoricalevents,andrecognizesalternativeconceptionsoftheMediterraneanworld.First,IshalldiscusshowPolybiusestablishessimultaneityacross
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 4 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theMediterranean,andwhatthismighthavetodowithRomanimperialism,andthenIshalllookbrieflyatacoupleofslightlyearlierandratherdifferentversions,orvisions,ofthewaytheMediterraneanworks;beforereturningtoPolybius,toshowthathistext,too,containsalternativestothehegemonicmessageofunitybetweeneastandwest,thathetoodealsinsimultaneityalongaswellasacrosstime.
ThePolybianMediterraneanFirst,then,howdoesPolybius’structure,andinparticularhisσυμπλοκή,constructspace?Afterthetwointroductorybookscoveringsketchilytheyears264–221,andthethreebookswhichtreatthewarswhichtookplaceinthe140thOlympiad
Iundertooktomakeafreshbeginning…andhenceforthtodealwiththesharedexperiences13oftheoikoumene(τὰςκοινὰςτη̑ςοἰκουμένηςπράξεις),classingitunderOlympiadsanddividingthoseintoyearsandplacingcontemporaryexperiencessidebysideforcomparison(συγκρίνοντεςἐκπαραβολη̑ςτὰςκαταλλήλους)untilthecaptureofCarthage,thebattleoftheAchaeansandRomansattheIsthmusandtheconsequentsettlementofGreece[i.e.146]. (39.8.6)
SoPolybiustellshisstoryyearbyyear,andwithineachyearheworkshiswayacrosstheworldinafigure-of-eightpattern,startingwitheventsinItaly,Sicily,Spain,andAfrica,movingontoGreeceandMacedonia,thencetoAsia,andfinallyreachingEgypt.14Noteveryareafeatureseveryyear,noteveryyearinthenarrativeconformsstrictlytothechronologicalpattern,andsomebooksaredigressionsbeyondthenarrativehistory,butthatisthebasicsynopticstructure,the‘sharedhistory’(κοινήἱστορία)bywhichPolybiusorganizes(p.341) horizontalspaceinverticaltimeinacompletelynewwaytodescribe‘sharedexperiences’.15
Whatarethecontoursofthisspace?Aswehaveseen,Polybiusclaimsattheendofthework(39.8.6,quotedabove)thathishistoryhasdealtcomparativelywiththesharedexperiencesoftheinhabitedworld,orοἰκουμένη,16suggestingthatforhimthisοἰκουμένηismadeupoftheareashissynopticstructurecyclesthrough:Italy,Sicily,Spain,Africa,Greece,Macedonia,AsiaMinor(withoccasionalforaysfurthertotheSeleucideast),andEgypt.Butatothertimeshesaysheisdealingwiththeknownpartsoftheοἰκουμένη(2.37.4),oralmostalltheaffairsoftheοἰκουμένη(1.4.1);andwhenhedefinestheοἰκουμένηgeographically(3.37),itisasAsia,Africa,andEurope,withboundariesattheriverDon,theNile,andthePillarsofHercules.AsiaandAfricaliesouthoftheMediterranean;Europeliesnorth.Polybiusisveryvagueabouttheextensionnorthandsouthofthesezones,explainingthattheseouterareasarenotyetknown(3.38.1–3).Itisclearthatheconceptualizestheseregionsintermsoftheircentre,theMediterranean,ratherthantheirfar-offandbarbarousperipheries,butitisalsoclearthatwhenheistechnicallydefiningtheconceptoftheοἰκουμένη,heincludesthewholeworldknowntohim,certainlyafarlargerareathanthatcoveredbythesynopticstructure.17Thecommunityunitedbythatstructure,however,‘almost’theοἰκουμένη,mapsfairlycloselyontothelandssurroundingtheMediterranean.Andthiscommunityisnotimaginedinavacuum:outsideit,definingandthreateningit,liethebarbarians,notincludedintheregularcycleofeventsunlesstheyareonthereceivingendofawar.The
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 5 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Persians(3.6.10)areatraditionalchoice,butPolybiusisalsoandparticularlyconcernedbytheGauls(2.35),commonenemytotheRomansandtheGreeks,asweshallseefurtherbelow.WhileRomeissubsumedintoGreekOlympiadichistory,thesetribesandpeoplesremainoutsidetime.
TheMediterraneanpeoples,bycontrast,arenowtiedtogetherthroughtime:Polybius’structurereliesonandreinforcesaconceptionofchronologicalsimultaneityacrossthisspace.Aftertheσυμπλοκή,Polybiusandhisreaders(p.342) enterBenjamin’s‘empty,homogeneoustime’asmembersofahistoricalcommunitythatstretchesfromSpaintoEgypt.Theconcurrentnarrativesthatheemploysfromthispointarethestructuralexploitationandconstantreassertionofthemeaningfulnessof‘meanwhile’withintheMediterraneanworld:κατὰτουςαὐτούςκαιρούς,aphrasewhichrecursconstantlythroughouttheHistories.18AndthesynopticstructureisbynomeanstheonlywaythatPolybiusproducesthiscommunityintimebetweentheeasternandwesternMediterranean,andinparticularbetweenGreeceandRome:anotheristheprovisionofsynchronisms;thealignmentofdifferentdatingsystemsisathird.
Synchronismsorientthereaderwithrespecttoeventsinotherareas,19andbringtheMediterraneantogetherbeforethefullsynopticstructurestartsinBook7,synchronismsystematized.20ThisisnotjustaboutpullingtogetherRomeandGreece:sixoftheninesynchronismsfoundinBooks4–5involvenotjustPhilipVofMacedonandtheGreekstatesbutalsoRome,eightincludeCarthage,andfiveeitherPtolemyorAntiochus.21
SynchronismsbetweenwestandeastarenotofcourseunheardofbythetimethatPolybiusiswriting,buthetakesthistechniqueunusuallyfarbackintimeforaGreekhistorian.DenisFeeneydrawsattention,forinstance,tothewaythatEratosthenesandApollodorus(writinginthelaterthirdandmid-secondcenturies,respectively)only‘starttotakenoticeofRomaneventsatallwhentheyarrivedattheinvasionofItalybytheGreekkingPyrrhus[in(p.343) 280]…Bythisapproach,theRomansaredeniedthe“likeness”ofsynchronicity,notbeingallowedtobepartofcivilizedtimeuntilthelatestpossiblemoment.’TheRomansaremadeallochronic,inJohannesFabian’sterms.22ButPolybiussynchronizesRomanandGreekhistorymuchearlier,inhisfamouslycomplexevocationinBook1ofwhatwecall387/6:
Itwas,therefore,thenineteenthyearafterthebattleofAegospotamiandthesixteenthbeforethatofLeuctra,theyearinwhichtheSpartansratifiedthepeaceknownasthatofAntalcidaswiththeKingofPersia,thatinwhichalsoDionysiustheElder,afterdefeatingtheItaliotGreeksinthebattleattheriverElleporos,wasbesiegingRhegium,andthatinwhichtheGauls,aftertakingRomeitselfbyassault,occupiedthewholeofthatcityexcepttheCapitol.TheRomans,aftermakingatruceonconditionssatisfactorytotheGaulsandbeingthuscontrarytotheirexpectationreinstatedintheirhomeandasitwerenowstartedontheroadofaggrandizement,continuedinthefollowingyearstowagewarontheirneighbours. (1.6.1–3)
ForPolybius,theRomansstartontheirhistoricaljourneymorethanacenturybefore
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 6 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
PyrrhusturnsupinItaly;23itisidentifiedhereasanimperialjourney,24anditisidentifiedwiththehistoryoftheHellenisticeast.25At3.22.1–2Polybiusgoesbackevenfurther,datingthefirsttreatywithCarthagein509/8by‘thefirstconsulsofRomeaftertheexpulsionofthekingsandthefoundersofthetempleofJupiterCapitolinus’andbytheyearsbeforeXerxes’invasion.PolybiusmaybefollowingTimaeusforthe387/6synchronism,26andFabiusPictorfor509/8,27inwhichcaseitisinterestingthathechosetorepeatthem.CertainlylaterRomanauthorsfillinpre-PyrrhicparallelsbetweenGreeceandRome—inanattempt,Feeneysuggests,toestablishlikenessbetweenthetwopeopleswheretheGreekshadmadeRomedifferent28—butPolybiusgottherebeforehand,andperhapsevenfirst.
(p.344) Aswellasthesynchronisms,thereisthedatingsystemitself:theuseoftheOlympiadsasthebackboneofthetextfromBook3onwardscreatesanimpressionofonecalendar,onekindoftime,acrosstheMediterranean,quiteremovedfromthelocalwaysofreckoningtimethatpeople,includingmanyhistorians,actuallyused.29PolybiusreliesontheuniversalityoftheOlympiadscheme,andthusoftimeitselfwithinthecommunityhecreates.HeisnotthefirsttouseOlympiads:forthatweshouldprobablylookagaintoTimaeus,thoughhemaynothaveusedthemconsistently.30Again,theycertainlyweren’ttheonlychoiceavailable:theywerenot,forinstance,thechoicemadebyPhilinus,whoseemstouseyearsofthe(FirstPunic)War.31And,asWalbankpointsout,arigidOlympiadschemewhichrunsmidsummertomidsummerdoesn’tsitwellwithahistorythatisprincipallyconcernedwiththecampaigningseason,runningspringtoautumn,andwherePolybiusisoftenalsofollowinglocaltime-markers,suchasRomanconsularyearsrunningMarchtoMarch.32Hesuggests,followingDeSanctis,thatPolybiusthereforeuses‘manipulated’andsomewhatflexibleOlympiads,normallyclosingwiththereturntowinterquartersintheautumn.33Theschemeheadoptsnecessitatesthealignmentofdifferentdatingsystemsasiftheyweresimultaneous:animaginarycalendarunitestheimaginedMediterraneancommunity.34
AfinalPolybianparallelbetweeneastandwest,GreeksandRomans,istheinvolvementofthereaderinthestory.ItseemsquiteclearthatPolybius’(p.345) intendedandexpectedaudiencewaslargelyGreek,35buttherearetextualreferencestoRomanreadersaswell.36Polybius’claimat31.22.8thatheis‘perfectlyawarethatthisworkwillbeperusedbyRomansaboveallpeople,containingasitdoesanaccountoftheirmostsplendidachievements’isespeciallystriking.Iwouldpropose,however,thattheunityimpliedbythesynopticstructurehelpstoexplainthisstatementandotherslikeit,bysuggestinganimplicitparallelclaimtoGreekreadersthattheyweresharingtheculturalandhistoricalexperienceofreadingPolybiuswithaRomanaudience;thattheyandtheRomanswereprogressingtogetherthroughhomogeneous,emptytime,bothinthetextandinreadingthetext.
ThestorysofarthenisthatPolybiusconstructsforhisreadersapan-Mediterraneancommunity,indeedconstructsofhisreadersapan-Mediterraneancommunity,crossingtheboundariesofeastandwest,andexperiencingthesameprocessesinthesamechronologicalframework.Isthisimaginedcommunityimaginedasimperial,one
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 7 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
MediterraneanunderRome?Insomewaysitseemsso:thespacewhichistreatedbythesynopticstructureandinwhichhistory—‘almostalltheaffairsoftheοἰκουμένη’—organically(soinevitably?)comestogether(1.4.1,above)isclearlysupposedtomapontothespace,‘almosttheοἰκουμένη’,whichhesaysissubjectedtoRomeoverlessthanfifty-threeyears(1.1.5).37AndinpracticetheareasregularlytreatedinthesynopticcycleareinfactalmostthosecontrolledbytheRomansby167,atleastaccordingtoPolybius’ownaccount:38heisorderingandhomogenizingtimeacrossthespaceofthenascentRomanempire.39Andonemightsaythatthisimperialspaceispre-writtenintimeontotheMediterraneanlandscape:theseareasmaybeforthemostpartunderRomanswaybythemid-secondcentury,buttheywerenotinthelatethirdcenturyatthetimeoftheσυμπλοκή.Bymanufacturingasharedhistoricalspaceandtimefromthe140thOlympiad,whichfitssocloselythepracticalandpoliticalcommunityexperiencedbytheauthorandreadersunderRomanhegemony,thestructureoftheHistoriesseemstowritetheRomanhistoricalspherebackseveraldecades,andinthiswayreinforcetheinevitabilityandinviolabilityofRomanempire.(The(p.346) barbarianswithoutwereinlittledanger,asitseemedatthetime,ofbeingsubsumed.)SoPolybius’imaginedMediterraneancommunityisinextricablylinkedtoRomanempire.Buttheyarenotthesamething:despitehisuseofastructurebasedonsimultaneousprogressthroughhomogeneous,emptytime,Polybiusdoesnotnecessarilyempathizewiththevictors.40TheriseofRomeisforPolybiusaprocessthatisnotsupposedtobecompleteuntil167,whereasthe‘interweaving’happensmorethanfiftyyearsearlier.Polybius’synopticstructuremayforeshadowtheempire,butitisnot,ornotyet,entirelyRoman.Instead,theimpliedchronologicalequalityandsharedcommunityherecouldaseasilybereadasPolybiusredefiningthevictorstoincludetheGreeks.Indeed,theprimarychronologicalfocalizationoftheworkisGreek,panhelleniceven,structuredaroundOlympiads,andemployingsynchronismstotiethenarrativeofeventsinotherplacesintothoseinGreeceandMacedonia,41eventhoughthegeographicalfocalpointcouldbeseenasRoman,sinceeachyearstartsinthewest.42Thisuseoftimecould,infact,beseenasatechniqueofresistance,anattempttoimposeadifferentcalendarandadifferentunderstandingoftheMediterranean:analliancewithRomeinGreektime,ratherthansubjectiontoRomeonRomanterms.Thiswouldnotthenbethecreationofanationbythehegemonicclasses,buttheredefinitionofanempirebyitssubjects.43
AlternativestoPolybiusAndPolybiuswouldn’tbetheonlyonedoingsomethinglikethis.SofarIhavearguedthathecreatesatextualunityfortheMediterraneaninthelightof,andinreactionto,Romanimperialismofthemid-secondcentury.Bywayofcomparisonandcontextualization,Inowwanttolookattwoearlierattemptstodosomethingsimilar,oneartistic,oneepigraphic.Polybius’synopticMediterraneanisarewritingoftheseearlierversions,andthatispartofitspower.
(p.347) AsimilarlybroadconceptionofMediterraneancommunityidentity,definedbythepresenceofexternalbarbarians,canbefoundintheLesserAttalidDedicationontheAthenianacropolis(theLittleBarbarians,orSmallGauls).WenowpossessonlyinRomancopiesthisseriesofbattle-scenesinvolvingstatuesofdefeatedanddyingbarbarians,a
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 8 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
littlelessthan1metrehigh,inhighbaroquestyle.44ThesewereagifttotheAtheniansfromAttalusIofPergamum(r.241–197),whoowedhisroyaltitletohisdefeatoftheGauls,‘thenthemostformidableandwarlikepeopleinAsia’.45Althoughnodateisgivenbyoursourcesforthededication,AttaluscametoAthensinthespringof200BCandsuccessfullypersuadedtheAthenianstojoinhisallianceagainstPhilipofMacedonafteralongperiodofneutrality;thisvisit,orperhapsthebrutalseasonofcampaigningthatfollowedforAthens,providesanidealcontextforthegift.46Romewasinvolvedinthisalliance,too:Attalushadappealedtothemthepreviousyear,theRomansenatehadalreadydecidedtorenewhostilitieswithMacedon,andinfactRomanambassadorswerealsoinAthensatthetimewithadeclarationofwaragainstPhilip.47
Pausaniasdescribesthegroup:
Bythesouthwall[oftheacropolisatAthens]AttalusdedicatedthelegendarybattleoftheGiants,whooncelivedaroundThraceandtheIsthmusofPallene,thebattleoftheAtheniansagainsttheAmazons,theaffairagainstthePersiansatMarathon,andthedestructionoftheGaulsinMysia. (1.25.2)
TheAtheniansdefeatedtheAmazonsandthePersians,thePergamenesdefeatedtheGaulsinMysia,attheCaïcusBattleofc.237,andnowtheywilljointogethertorepeatthedivinedefeatofthegiants,whosegeographiclocationsuggestsidentificationwiththeMacedoniansandtheneighbouringbarbarians;itisstrikingthatimmediatelyafterthispassagePausaniaslaunchesintoanattackonMacedon,callingthebattleofChaeronea‘thebeginningofmisfortuneforalltheGreeks’(1.25.3),anddiscussingitsunhappyaftermathatlength.ThisidentificationbetweengiantsandMacedoniansisnotjustaconceitthatcanbereadintoPausanias,butanongoingthemeofPergamenesculpture:ontheGreatAltarofthe160sorso,oneofthehumanoidgiantshasaMacedonianstarburstonhisshield.48SowiththisgiftAttalusispropagandizingonbehalfofaPergamene–Athenianallianceagainst(p.348) Macedon,bydefiningahistoricalcommunitywhichexcludesGauls,Persians,andMacedonians,andemphasizesAthenianandPergamenebattlesagainstthem.InreallifeRome,too,waspartofthisalliance,asnotedabove,andthisismentionedinaletterthatAttaluswrotetotheEcclesiain200,underliningthebenefitsfortheAtheniansofanalliancewithhim,theRhodians,andtheRomans,49butitisstrikingthatRomeisleftoutofthepictureontheacropolis:theterms,andsymbolism,ofthesculptureareentirelyeasternMediterranean.50
Polybiusthenrepeatsthisoverallschemeandtechniquehalfacenturylater,butwithmodifications:Attalus’GaulsandPersiansdomapontoPolybius’barbarians,butbythetimeheiswritingtheMacedoniansarefirmlyunderRomancontrol,andsohenolongerneedstodefinethemasbarbarians.Instead,theyareincludedinhissynopticMediterraneancommunity,asaretheRomans,nowveryvisibleindeed.TheAttaliddedicationcan,however,beseenasachallengetoanotherdiscourseofGreco-Macedonianunity,emanatingfromthealliesofMacedoniainGreece,whichwasfloweringjustafewyearsearlierinafamoussetofinscriptionsfoundatMagnesia-on-the-Maeander.51Thestoryiswellknown.TheMagnesiansdecidedtofoundafestivalfor
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 9 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
theirgoddess,ArtemisLeukophryene,afteranoraclegivenin221/0.Accordingtoaninscriptiontheyerectedinthemarketplace,theyappealedtotherestoftheGreeksinAsiatoparticipateinthefestival,whoseemtohavecompletelyignoredthem.52Buttheyrenewedtheappealin207,inthelaststagesoftheFirstMacedonianWar:
InthestephanephorateofMoiragoras(son)ofStephanos[208/7],they[established]acrowned[contest],Pythianinrank,offeringasprizeacrownmadefromfiftygoldpieces,andwhenthekingsaccepted,and[all]theotherstowhomtheysentenvoysbyleaguesandbycities[voted],tohonourArtemisLeukophryeneandthatthecityandlandoftheMagnesiansshouldbe[inviolable],becauseofthebiddingofthegodandthe[friendshipsand]relationshipsobtainingfromancestraltimesbetweenthemallandtheMagnesians. (Syll.3557,tr.BagnallandDerow2004,no.153)
(p.349) InresponsetherewasanavalancheofletterstotheMagnesiansrecognizingtheirfestivalandinsomecasesthecity’sinviolability;theletterfromEpidamnusrecordsthattheenvoysfromMagnesiarequestedthesehonoursonthebasisthatthoseaskedwere‘kinsmenandfriends’.53TheletterscomefromGreekcitiesinAsiaandonthemainland,fromPtolemyIV,AntiochusIII,andAttalusI,and,almostcertainly,fromPhilipVhimself.54NotablebytheirabsenceinthemarketplacearetheRomans.PeterDerowdrewattentiontothisdossierasapanhellenicphenomenon,55butitispanhellenicinaratherparticular,whichistosaybroad,sense:thestatesandmonarchsthatdoaccepttheMagnesians’invitationformaneasternMediterraneancommunity(stretchingasfarwestasSicily)thatdoesnotrequire,orrequest,Romanvalidation.ThisisclosertothetraditionaleasternGreekviewofaMediterraneandividedbetweeneastandwest,withRomeoutofthe(ir)picture.56
AlternativesinPolybiusThisis,ofcourse,aquitedifferentimaginedcommunityfromtheoneIhaveclaimedthatPolybiussynopticallyconstructs,butitisnonethelessvisibleevenwithintheHistories,anditiswithsomeexamplesofthisthatIwanttofinish.Again,theysuggestthatweshouldnotreadPolybiusstraightforwardlyasaBenjaminianhistoricist:histextopensupmultiplepossibilitiesforunderstandingthegeographyandhistoryoftheRomanempire.57AtthepeaceconferenceatNaupactusin217betweenPhilipVofMacedonia,hisHellenicconfederation,andtheAetolians,theveryeventwhichPolybiussawasusheringintheσυμπλοκή,thereisanappealfromtheAetolianambassadortopanhellenicsentiment,withawarningofdangerstocomefromthewest,whetherRomeorCarthage.AddressingPhilip,hesays
ItwouldbebestofalliftheGreeksnevermadewaroneachother,butregardeditasthehighestfavourinthegiftofthegodscouldtheyeverspeakwithoneheartandonevoice,andmarchingarminarmlikemenfordingariver,repelbarbarianinvadersanduniteinpreservingthemselvesandtheircities…ForifonceyouwaitforthesecloudsthatloominthewesttosettleonGreece,Iverymuchfear(p.350) lestwemayallofusfindthesetrucesandwarsandgamesatwhichweplayrudelyinterrupted… (5.104.1–10)
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 10 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
ThenthereisthespeechmadebyaRhodianambassadortotheAetolianstenyearslater,inordertopersuadethemtomakepeace(again)withPhilip,accusingthemofmakingatreatywiththebarbarians—i.e.theRomans—fortheenslavementandruinofGreece:
YousaythatyouarefightingwithPhilipforthesakeoftheGreeks,thattheymaybedeliveredandmayrefusetoobeyhiscommands;butasafactyouarefightingfortheenslavementandruinofGreece.ThisisthestoryyourtreatywiththeRomanstells…youhavemadeatreatybywhichyouhavegivenuptothebarbarianstherestoftheGreekstobeexposedtoatrociousoutrageandviolence. (11.5.1–7)
At3.7.3PolybiusdescribestheAetoliansgoingroundwithAntiochusIIIinthe190s,announcingtheliberationoftheGreeks.58TheseGreeksdonotseeRomanruleasinevitable,noralliancebetweeneastandwest,butinsteadrepresentthepointofviewthatdividedtheMediterranean.Thispointofviewcontinuestofeatureinhisaccountofthesecondcentury,withresistancetoRomeandattachmenttoMacedononthepartof,inparticular,thelowerclassesinGreece;inAchaeaofthe180s,forinstance,partisansofRomefacedviolenceandcontemptfromthemob;59inthenextdecadewhenPerseusofMacedonwonacavalrybattleagainstRome,‘theattachmentofthepeopletoPerseusburstforthlikefire’.60
ThisdisjunctiveversionoftheMediterraneanisfoundnotonlyinothervoicesinPolybiusbutalso,despitewhatIhavearguedabove,inthetext’sowntimeandstructure.Intermsoftime,IhavealreadynotedthatPolybiuschoosestousenotonlyaGreekcoredatingsystem,butonewhichisspecificallypanhellenic;not,forinstance,AthenianarchonshipsorAchaeanstrategoi.61Inaddition,hesometimesuseshissynchronismstoexcluderatherthanincludeRome(andlessoftenCarthage)inhistoricaltime.62Andfinally,to(p.351) comefullcircle,in3.2–3,theproekthesis(preliminarysummary)oftheaccountoftheyears220–168,thereistheshadowofanalternativestructuretothewholework.
Polybiusintroducesthissummarybysayingthatheisgoingtouse‘thefollowingmethodofprocedureinmyexposition(ἐξήγησις)’(3.1.11),butthesummaryofBooks7–39thatfollowsisnotinfactafairreflectionofwhatheactuallydoesinBooks7–39:ratheritignores,contradictseven,theannualsynopticstructurewhichmightbereasonablysaidtobehis‘methodofprocedure’,andinsteademphasizesprogressalongtimeratherthanthroughspace,dividingtheMediterraneanintodifferenthistoricalplaces:
Interruptingmynarrativeatthispoint,IshalldrawupmyaccountoftheRomanconstitution,asasequeltowhichIshallpointouthowthepeculiarqualitiesoftheconstitutionconducedverylargelynotonlytotheirreconquestoftheItaliansandSicilians,andsubsequentlyoftheSpaniardsandCelts,butfinallytotheirvictoryoverCarthage,andtheirconceivingtheprojectofuniversalempire.SimultaneouslyinadigressionIshallnarratehowthedominionofHieroofSyracusefellandafterthisIshalldealwiththetroublesinEgypt,andtellhow,onthedeathofPtolemy,AntiochusandPhilip,conspiringtopartitionthedominionsofhisson,ahelpless
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 11 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
infant,begantobeguiltyofactsofunjustaggression…Next,aftersummingupthedoingsoftheRomansandCarthaginiansinSpain,Africa,andSicilyIshallshiftthesceneofmystorydefinitely,asthesceneoftheactionshifted,toGreeceanditsneighbourhood.IshalldescribetheseabattlesinwhichAttalusandtheRhodiansmetPhilip,andafterthisdealwiththewarbetweentheRomansandPhilip,itscourse,thepersonsengagedinit,anditsresult.FollowingonthisIshallmakementionoftheangryspiritoftheAetoliansyieldingtowhichtheyinvitedAntiochusover,andthussetablazethewarfromAsiaagainsttheAchaeansandRomans.Afternarratingthecausesofthiswar,andhowAntiochuscrossedtoEurope,IshalldescribefirsthowhefledfromGreece;secondlyhowonhisdefeatafterthisheabandonedallAsiauptotheTaurus… (3.2.6–3.4)
AfterBook6,hesays,hewilldealwithRomanvictoriesinthewestuptothedefeatofHannibalandRome’sconceptionofauniversalaim,withadigressiononHieroandabriefdiversiontoEgyptforthecivilwarandplottodismemberthecountrybeforeroundingofftheeventsoftheSecondPunicWar;thisdoesdescribeBooks7–15.20,thoughthereisalsomuchontheeastinthosebooks.63Then‘Iwillshiftthesceneofmystorydefinitely,asthesceneoftheactionshifted,toGreeceanditsneighbourhood.’Asaresult,theeventsof15.21andthereafter(whichinfactcontainplentyofactivityinthewestaswell)arepresentedhereashappeningovertheirowntime,notatthesametimeasthoseinthewest:thisisadenialoftheimportanceofmeanwhile.Theemphasisinthispassage,firstonRomeandthewestupto200,andthenon(p.352) Greeceandtheeastafter200,illustratesthecounter-conceptionofthehistoricaldivisionratherthanunificationoftheMediterranean,withdifferentthingshappeningindifferentplacesatdifferenttimes.
Thishistoricaldivisionisdrawnmoresuccinctlyat3.32.2–3,wherePolybiusisdiscussinghoweasyitis‘toacquireandperusefortybooks,allasitwerewoventogetherinanunbrokenseries,andthustofollowclearlyeventsinItaly,Sicily,andLibyafromthetimeofPyrrhustothecaptureofCarthage,andthoseintherestoftheworldfromtheflightofCleomenesofSpartaontillthebattleoftheRomansandAchaeansattheIsthmus…’:heretheMediterraneanisagaindividedintoeastandwest,identifiedashavingquitedifferenthistoricalnarratives.
Polybius’MediterraneancommunitymapsontoRomanhegemony,butitdoesnotsimplyreproducethathegemony;instead,thetextreinterprets,andatpointssubvertsit,reproducinginsteadrecentandcontemporaryfrictionsbetweenwiderculturalconceptionsofmutualidentity.InthissensetheaccountoftheriseofRomeisnotatallhistoricistinBenjamin’stermsbutisinstead‘filledwiththepresenceofthenow’,whichwas,ofcourse,forPolybiusadisturbedandtroubledtime.64
Notes:
(1)IwouldliketothankKarlBritto,ChristopherBrooke,CraigeChampion,TimCornell,BruceGibson,ErichGruen,KieranHendrick,IradMalkin,GuyMétraux,JonathanPrag,andAndrewStewartforusefuldiscussionofdraftsofthisessay.Translationsaretaken
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 12 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(oftenwithamendments)fromtheLoebedition;IhavetakenadvantageoftheWalbankandHabichtrevisionnowavailableforBooks1–4.
(2)Polybiusspecificallylocatesthis‘interweaving’atthepeaceconferenceatNaupactusin217thatendedtheSocialWarbetweenPhilipVofMacedoniaandhisHellenicconfederation,ontheoneside,andtheAetoliansontheother(5.105.4–5).
(3)Walbank1975.
(4)Anderson2006(1983):22–4.
(5)Benjamin1968:Thesis13.
(6)Ibid.Thesis7:‘…ifoneaskswithwhomtheadherentsofhistoricismactuallyempathize[t]heanswerisinevitable:withthevictor.Andallrulersaretheheirsofthosewhoconqueredbeforethem.Hence,empathywiththevictorinvariablybenefitstherulers…’.
(7)Ibid.Thesis14:‘[Materialist]Historyisthesubjectofastructurewhosesiteisnothomogeneous,emptytime,buttimefilledbythepresenceofthenow[Jetztzeit].Thus,toRobespierreancientRomewasapastchargedwiththetimeofthenowwhichheblastedoutofthecontinuumofhistory.TheFrenchrevolutionvieweditselfasRomereincarnate.’
(8)Ibid.Thesis6.
(9)Ibid.Thesis8.
(10)Ibid.Thesis15:‘Theawarenessthattheyareabouttomakethecontinuumofhistoryexplodeischaracteristicoftherevolutionaryclassesatthemomentoftheiraction.Thegreatrevolutionintroducedanewcalendar…IntheJulyrevolutionanincidentoccurredwhichshowedthisconsciousnessstillalive.OnthefirsteveningoffightingitturnedoutthattheclocksintowerswerebeingfiredonsimultaneouslyandindependentlyfromseveralplacesinParis.’ForexamplesofthemanipulationoftimeintheGreekworld,seeClarke2008:41–5.
(11)ImpliedatAnderson2006:37andelsewhere;cf.Momigliano1966on,interalia,thedifficultiesofpinpointingtheinventionoftime.
(12)DenisFeeneyhasmadethesamegeneralpointabouttheapplicationofAnderson’s‘senseofsimultaneityinasharedtimeandparticipationinaparallelspace’touniversal,synchronistichistories,althoughhediscussesthisinthecontextoftheearlyempire,anddoesnotrelateittospecificstructuralmodels(2007:66–7).Foracomparableapproachtospace,seenowPurves2010onthecompetitionofsynoptic(‘protocartographic’)andhodological(‘countercartographic’)approachestospaceinarchaicandclassicalGreeknarrative.Purvesnoteswithreferencetotheformermodelhowamap’s‘abilitytolieanddistort’allowsit‘toengageseamlesslyinfictionsofpower’(pp.21–2).
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 13 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(13)IamgratefultoErichGruenforsuggestingthistranslationofτὰςκοινὰςπράξεις.
(14)Seeinparticular28.16.11.
(15)Cf.DerowinOCD3(s.v.‘Polybius’)forthehorizontal/verticalimage.Forκοινήἱστορίαafterthe140thOlympiad,see4.28.3–4;8.2.11(καθολικήκαὶκοινήἱστορία:combininguniversalandsynopticapproaches);1.4.11fortheimportanceofseeingtheinterconnectionandcomparisonofevents,andcf.5.31.7and32.11.2(notingadeparturefromthestandardpattern).KatherineClarkehasdiscussedatlengththevariousattemptsofhistoriansfromThucydidesonwardstodrawdifferentcommunitieswithdifferentwaysofreckoningtimeintoasinglehistoricalnarrative(2008:90–168);onPolybius’tacticsinparticular,see112–21.Shepointsoutthat,becauseofthefragmentarysurvivalofBooks6andfollowing,‘wearemorereliantonPolybius’explicitstatementsofintentthanontheextensiveexemplificationoftheOlympiadicstructure’(p.112).
(16)5.31.6isarathervaguestatementalongthesamelines.
(17)Thismeansthathisworkcannotdescribe,asWalbankputsit,theunificationoftheοἰκουμένηunderRome(1972a:68).
(18)Withsomevariation,andusuallymarkingageographicalmovesidewayswithinthesynopticstructure,orsynchronismsbeforethatstructurestarts;e.g.,beforetheσυμπλοκή:2.37.1referringto220;3.2.3on220–16;4.27.1on220;4.37.4,8on219;4.68.1on219/18;5.1.3on218;5.29.7on218;5.101.3on217;5.109.5on216;5.111.1on216.Aftertheσυμπλοκή,fromarandomsampleofBooks23–7:23.6.1;24.5.2;27.1.1;27.3.1.
(19)DenisFeeneynowremindsusthattherelativeratherthanabsolutenatureofancienttime-keepingmadesynchronismsapeculiarlypowerfulideologicaltool:‘correlatingGreekandRomandatesmeanscorrelatingGreekandRomanevents…ancientwritersarenotconnectingnumbers;theyareconnectingsignificanteventsandpeople’(2007:15).
(20)Synchronismsdooccasionallyoccurlater:seeWalbank,HCPi.229on2.41.1,HCPiii.235–9forthesynchronismofthedeathsofScipio,Hannibal,andPhilopoemeninthesameyear(Livy39.50.10,51.1(fromPolybius) ),althoughthismightbeanexampleofthetraditionalGreekrespectforstrikingcoincidences(seeFeeney2007:44)ratherthanagenuineattempttoanchoreventsintime;bythispointthesynopticstructurerendersthelatterunnecessary.
(21)SynchronismsinBooks4–5(afterWalbank1972a:5n.20):4.26.7–28.1(preparationsfortheSocialWarbyPhilipandtheAchaeanswiththeelectionsoftheAetolianstrategoiandtheattackofHannibalonSaguntum);4.37(Achaea,Aetolia,Carthage/Spain,Rome,Syria,Egypt,SpartaandMacedon,andRhodesandByzantium);4.66.7–67.1(Philip’sprosecutionofSocialWarwithRome,Carthage/Spain,andAetolia);
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 14 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5.1.1–4(AetoliaandAchaea,Carthage/Spain,Rome,Antiochus,andPtolemy);5.29.5–8(Philip/SocialWarwithactivitiesofCarthaginianandRomanforces,Antiochus,andLycurgusofSparta);5.101.3(Philip’ssiegeofThebeswithRomeandCarthageatTrasimene);5.105.3(Naupactus,Trasimene,andAntiochus’battleinCoele-Syria);5.108.9–10(Philip,Hannibal,andRome);5.109.4–6(Philip,Antiochus,andtheRomanfleetoperatingoffSicily).
(22)Feeney2007:24–5,discussingFabian1983.ThesamecouldbesaidofPolybius’PersiansandGauls(discussedabove,p.341).TimaeushastheevenearliersynchronismofthefoundationofCarthageandRome(Dion.Hal.A.R.1.74.1 = FGrHist566F60),thoughnotexamplesthatcrosseastandwest,andthereareofcoursementionsofRomaneventsinfifth-andfourth-centuryGreekhistorians:seethefifth-centuryreferencetoAeneasfoundingRome(Dion.Hal.A.R.1.72.1 = FGrHist4(Hellanicus)F84)andthefourth-centuryversioninvolvingLavinium(FGrHist560(Alcimus)F4).
(23)Whichheadmittedlydoesinthetextonlyafewsentenceslater,at1.6.5–7.
(24)Itisnonethelessstrikingthatthisjourneybeginswithasetback,andamorecomprehensiveoneinPolybius’versionthanthelaterRomantraditionontheSackofRomesuggests(Williams2001:143).BruceGibsonpointsouttomethatthereisacomparable‘narrativesynchronism’intheuseofCannaeasthedateatwhichtointerruptthehistoricalnarrativeforthediscussionoftheexcellenceoftheRomanconstitution(5.111.8–10;cf.6.58fortheRomanexploitationoftheirowndefeatthere).
(25)Cf.Feeney2007:47.
(26)SoWalbank,HCPi.48on1.6.2:‘probably’.
(27)Walbank,HCPi.340on3.22.2foradiscussionofearlieropinionsonthispoint.
(28)Feeney2007:25.
(29)SeeErrington1967bforthewayinwhichPolybiushasnoconsistentmethodofreckoningtimeinthefirsttwobooks,buttendstofollowhissources.Onlocaltime,seeClarke2008.
(30)OlympiadsarenotTimaeus’onlytime-keepingsystem:heputsthefoundingofCorcyra600yearsaftertheTrojanwar(F80),andthatofMassilia120yearsbeforeSalamis(F71).SeeClarke1999:11n.20ontheclaimsbysomescholarsthatEratosthenes,thoughlaterthanTimaeus,shouldbegiventhe‘honourofhavingfirstdevelopedtheuseofOlympiadsasasystemofreckoning’with2008:110ontherelativecontributionsofeachtothedevelopingscheme.
(31)Walbank1945a:1–5,notingthepossibilitythathealsousesconsularyears.FeeneypointsoutthatJeromeandEusebiusmakealltheirdifferentsystemsartificiallystartonthesameday(2007:225n.77).
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 15 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(32)ClarkepointsoutthatwhilePolybius’useofRomanconsulsasdating-markerscontinuessporadicallyafterthe140thOlympiad(2008:116),‘itisinterestingandsignificantthatPolybiusrefersbothtotheelectionandtotheaccessionofconsuls,twoeventswhichoccurredatdifferenttimesofyear’(p.117).
(33)Walbank1972a:101–2.
(34)ComparethewayinwhichPolybiusmisleadinglyinvolvesAsiainhisσυμπλοκή:whenheclaimsthateventsinItaly,Greece,andAsiacometogetherforthefirsttimeafterNaupactus,heisfacedwiththeproblemthatthereisnoplausiblewaytoincludeAsiainthisstoryatthistime:ithadnothingtodowitheithertheSocialWarortheHannibalicWar.Nonetheless,wearetoldthatwhenalleyesinGreeceturnedtoItaly‘verysoonthesamethinghappenedtotheislandersandthoselivingincoastalAsia’,andthatafterthisembassiesweresentfromthosewithgrievancesagainstPhilipandAttalustoRomeinfuture,ratherthantothekingsofAsiaandEgypt,andviceversa(5.105.6–8),though‘infact,manyyearsweretopassbeforeanyislandersorAsianGreekssentembassiestoRome;andnoRomanembassycrossedtheAegeanbefore200’(Walbank1972a:69;cf.Feeney2007:59).TheallianceofAttalusIofPergamumwithRomeintheFirstMacedonianWarmighthaveprovidedPolybiuswithabetterexampleofAsianeyesturningwestrelativelysoonaftertheσυμπλοκή.
(35)Therearevariousreferencesto,orassumptionsof,aGreekaudience(e.g.1.42.1–7;2.35.9;3.59.8),thehistoriesofRomeandCarthagearenotwellknownto‘us’Greeks(1.3.7–8),thereismuchexplanationofthetechnicalitiesofRomanmilitaryandpoliticallife(3.72.12,87.7,107.10–14;10.16–17;14.3.6;21.2.2,13.11)(adaptedfromWalbank1972a:3–4).SeeSeagerinthisvolumeonBook6asanattempttoexplainRometotheGreeks.
(36)3.21.9;6.11.3
(37)Cf.3.1.4(theknownpartsoftheοἰκουμένη).SeeClarke1999:119forthesuggestionthataftertheσυμπλοκήspacewassubordinatedtotimeinPolybius’account,and114–28forPolybius’universalizingstrategies,includingtheσυμπλοκή,moregenerally.
(38)OnwhichaccountRomancontrolis,ofcourse,hegemonicratherthanterritorial:fortheclassicstatement,see3.4.3,withtheclassicdiscussionofDerow1979.
(39)TimeandspacenonethelessremainseparateconceptsforPolybius,asdiscussedatClarke1999:80–1.
(40)Sometimeshecertainlydoes:Dubuisson,forinstance,discusseshisfrequentuseofthephraseἡκαθ’ἡμα̑ςθάλαττα,i.e.theLatinmarenostrum,whichinthatperiod‘n’aguèredesensdanslabouched’unGrec’(1985:172).ThankstoCraigeChampionforpointingthisouttome.
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 16 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(41)Walbank1972a:105;Plb.5.31.3fortheGreekbasisofthesynchronismtechniqueinthe140thOlympiad,‘inwhichIstateinwhatyearofthisOlympiadandcontemporaneouslywithwhateventsinGreeceeachepisodeelsewherebeganandended’.
(42)Cf.Clarke1999ontheGreekfocalpointofPolybius’historyandideology,incontrasttothebroaderfocalizationofhisgeography(98–101).
(43)ThepanhellenicnatureofOlympiaddatingisemphasizedatClarke2008:66.
(44)ForacomprehensivestudyofthesesculpturesfromtheHellenisticperiodtothepresent,seeStewart2004.
(45)Plb.18.41.7–8;cf.Strab.13.4.2.Itisunlikelythatthe‘Attalus’referredtohereisAttalusII(r.158–138),orAttalusIII(r.138–133)sincenobattleagainsttheGaulstookplaceduringtheirreigns.
(46)SeeStewart2004:218–36,esp.218–23,onthedatingproblems,andtheweightofevidenceinfavourofadateinorshortlyafter200.
(47)Plb.16.25.
(48)Stewart2000:40forthisandother‘anti-Macedonianallusions’ontheAltar.
(49)Plb.16.26.5–6.
(50)Cf.Gruen2000:18:‘Attalos’successisconjoinedwiththoseofthegreathistoricalandlegendarytriumphsofHellenismoverbarbarism.’GruenalsodrawsattentiontoAttalus’latethird-centurybuildingprojectsatDelphi,suggestingthatthelocation‘deliberatelyassociated’hisowndefeatoftheGaulswiththeAetolianvictoryoverthemin279(25).TheimplicitshadowofRome,allyofAetoliaandAttalusintheFirstMacedonianWar,mayfallovertheDelphicmonumentsaswell.
(51)Foracomprehensiveandthought-provokingaccountofHellenisticGreekapproachestotheMediterraneanthatdifferentiatedeastfromwest,includingtheMagnesia-on-the-Maeanderdossier,seeErskineforthcoming;Iwanttoacknowledgeamajordebtbothhereandinthenextsectiontothisdetailedsurveyofthevarietiesofconceptualgulfbetweeneastandwestinthisperiod.
(52)I.Magnesia16.
(53)Syll.3560,l.22,transBagnallandDerow2004,no.155.SeeRigsby1996:179–279forthefulldossier.
(54)Welles1934,letters31–4;Philip’sletterisnotpreservedbutseemsassuredbySyll.3561,ll.1–5,whereChalcisrecognizesthefestivalathisrequest.
(55)Derow2003:57.
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 17 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(56)e.g.Purcell1995:139,andErskineforthcoming.
(57)SeeDavidson1991forthesimilarpointthatPolybiusoftensurveysdifferentviewsofthesameepisode‘overlayingoneanotherandcompetingwitheachother’(p.13);Isuggestherethatthesameistrueoflargerphenomena.
(58)Aphrasewithalonghistory:seee.g.Seager1981.
(59)24.10–13(Callicrates’speech).
(60)27.9.1;seealso28.4.12;39.3.8.
(61)Cf.Thucydides’useofArgivepriestesses,Spartanephors,andAthenianarchonstodatethebeginningoftheArchidamianwar(2.2.1).TheMarmorParium(FGrHist239)usesAtheniankingsandarchons.Feeneynotesthatwhile‘[w]emaytalkcasuallyaboutsynchronismsbetweenGreeceandRome…thereisnoGreektimeagainstwhichtoplotRomantime.Romantimeisunified,asthetimeofonecity,butGreektimeisnot…ItisalwaysvitaltoaskwhichperspectiveonGreektimeisbeingadoptedatanymoment,throughwhichcalendricalorhistoricaltraditiontheideaofGreektimeisbeingfocalized,andwhatmotivatesthechoiceofdatesthataregoingtobeusedashooksoneitherside’(2007:23).Itshouldbenotedthatforatrulypan-Mediterraneansystemofsynchronisms,wehavetowaitforCastorofRhodeswritinghisChronicainthemid-firstcenturyBC,aworkwhichbringstogetherthetimesofAsia,Greece,andRome(Feeney2007:63–4).
(62)e.g.2.41on284/80withGreekandEgyptiandates.4.27.9–28.1and5.29.7–9includeCarthagebutnot(directly)Rome.
(63)ThedismembermentofEgyptisactuallydiscussedat15.20,afterthediscussionofthesettlementafterZamain15.19.
(64)3.4.12–13ontheperiodafter167asatimeofταραχὴκαὶκίνησις.AsIsaidinLiverpool,thisapproachhasalsobeencharacteristicofmuchworkonPolybius,includingthatofFrankWalbankandofotherabsentfriends.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
Imagining the Imperial Mediterranean1
Page 18 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 1 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
GrowingupwithPolybius:ADaughter’sMemoir
MitziWalbank
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.003.0020
AbstractandKeywords
Thischapterbeginswiththeauthor'sexperienceofchildhoodintheWalbankhousehold,andtheswaywhichWalbank'sacademicworkheldovertheentirefamily.TheonsetofMaryWalbank'sill-healthhadfar-reachingeffectsonthechildren,andmadethediligentstudyofPolybiusarefugeforWalbankhimself.ThecompletionofthethirdvolumeofWalbank'scommentaryonPolybiusin1979allowedhimgreateropportunitiesforenjoyingthecompanyofhisdescendantsinhisfinalyears.
Keywords:F.W.Walbank,Polybius,liverpool,Birkenhead,MaryWalbank,DorothyWalbank,MitziWalbank,ChristoWalbank
In1942,theyearIwasborn,FrankwaswritinganarticleonPolybius’discussionoftheRomanconstitution.Thefollowingyearitwouldseemnaturaltoturntothehistorianwithwhomhehadalreadybeenworkingforhischoiceofsubjectforabiggerwork.Heand
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 2 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Maryhadmovedtotheirfirsthouse,a1930ssemiinStAnnes,fromwhichhecommutedtoLiverpoolandatenuredpost.Thesameyearmayhaveseenhisbesteffortasahands-ondad.ToavoidanyrecurrenceofthepostnataldepressionandpsychosisthathadfollowedDorothy’sbirth,hedidmynightfeedsandnappychanging.Iwasbottle-fed.Thereafterinvolvementwithhischildrenwaned.Wesawhimatmealtimes,hecarrieduswhenwewhinedtobepiggy-backedonfamilywalks,andhedriedourhairinfrontofthefirewhenithadbeenwashed.Thatwasit.Thatwasnormalforthetimes,andalsoitwasundeniablethatwedidn’tyethaveanythingveryinterestingtosay.
AtthecentreofFrank’slifewasMaryandtheprogressionofherlifeiscrucialtoanypictureofFrank’s,andtothehistoryofthewritingoftheCommentary.Ourparentsbelongedtotheirtimes,andtheirliveswereboundbyaspecificsetofsocialmores.Iamsurethatattheoutsettheythoughtoftheirmarriageasanequalpartnership.Herswasthedominantpersonality.Shewasbeautiful,intelligent,headstrong,vivid,andhadbeenmuchcourted.HermotherhadpressedFrank’ssuit,regardinghimasagoodcatch,andsoitproved,fortheirlovelastedthroughsomebadtimes.Theyreadthesamebooks,sharedideas,grappledwiththepoliticalissuesofthetime.Theyengagedwiththeoutsideworld,hadfriendswithsimilaraspirations.Theywantedtomouldthefuture,theytookresponsibilityforit.Buttheirliveswouldinevitablygrowlessequal.FrankhadtheUniversityofLiverpoolforhisarena;hehadadiscoursewithPolybiustoengagewith.Maryhadus,andthehouse.AsFrank’slifeexpanded,hersgrewmoreconstricted.
(p.354) Ontheirmarriage,in1935,Mary’ssomewhatmenialpostasherfather’sfactotuminhisofficehadhadtoberelinquished.Thecountryinthethirtieswasineconomicdepressionanditwasthoughtthatmarriedwomenshouldnotoccupyanyjobthatamanandbreadwinnermightfillinstead.Women’sjobswereforpin-money.Frankwaslatertoregretthis,andtowishthathehadencouragedhertostudythenandcompletehereducation.Inlateryearshewasalsotorealizethathehadmissedsomethingbynotbeingthekindoffatherthathewouldseeyoungercolleaguesbecoming.Onceheaskedme:‘Whatwasthatgameyouplayedontheswingwhenyoujumpedoffandshouted,“Abird,abird!”andsometimesyoushouted,“Abirdofparadise!”?’Itoldhim:‘Thatwasit,thatwasthegame.Thebirdofparadisewaswhenthejumpsoaredbeautifully.’Iliketothinkthatsometimeshelookedupfromhisdeskandsawhischildrenplaying.
In1944mybrotherChristowasborn;twoyearslaterFrankgainedtheChairofLatin.SubsequentlywemovedtoBirkenhead.Mary’sself-appointedjobwastokeepusquietsohecouldwork.Coffeewouldbeprovidedat11.00andhewouldtellherwhathehadbeenwriting.Shewoulddosomethingshecalled‘makingtherightnoises’.Itwouldbeafuturejoytohaveproducedadaughterwhocouldreflectbacksomethingmorefruitfulthantherightnoises,andeven(laterinCambridge)tolivenextdoortohim.Thatwasnotyet;Dorothywasstillsmall.InBirkenheadtheneedtokeepusquiet,togetherwiththepost-warlackoftraffic,wouldmakeforanunfetteredchildhood.Wehadtobebackformeals.Wehadastreetlife;wehadaterritory.Itwascircumscribedsomewhatafterweallcaughtnitsandscabiesfromtheevacuatedslumchildrenopposite.Marywasa
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 3 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
creativeparentandwetdayswerefilledwithpainting,craftwork,stampalbums,reading,makingadenintheairingcupboard.
Polybiuswastheenemy,abalefulpresenceinourlives:‘Bequiet,yourfather’sworking.’Lunchwasat1.00andthatwaswhenFrankwouldputdownhispenandcomedowntoeat.Ifitwasn’tready,hewouldplaythepianotofillthetimepleasantly.Marywoulderuptanddragoonusallintohelpingsetthetable.‘He’splayingthepiano’,shewouldhissangrily.Musicwasregardedbyheraswarfare.LunchtimesattheWalbanks’were,myfriendLindasaid,shakingherhead,likefeedingtimeatthezoo.Wetalkedwithourmouthsfull;itwasnoisy.Wetookitforgrantedthatinterestingissuesmightbediscussed,thatdictionarieswouldbefetched,andtheencyclopaediaconsulted.Thepursuitoftruthwaspartofdailylife.Soitwas‘qualitytime’afterall,althoughitwasMarythatFranktalkedto.Ifwewantedattentionwehadtointerrupt,demandit.OccasionallyweallscrubbedupforavisitorandwouldunderstandexactlywhymeetingMichaelVentriswassignificant—IknewaboutLinearB.Wewerealsopoliticizedinaleft-leaningdirection,andI’dtakeontheentireclassatschooloverSuezin1956.
Mary’sattitudetoFrank’sactivitieswasoneoffierceprideandofbittercontempt.Shecouldalwaysbecomfortablewithholdinglogicallyconflicting(p.355) positions.Wemadeprofessorpuppetswithbignoses.TheywhackedeachotherlikePunch,nodoubtdefendingacademicterritory.SometimesFrankdressedupinhis‘penguinsuit’andtookhertoauniversityfunction.Shewasbeautifulinaturquoiseeveninggownandfurstole(everyonewantedonethen).Theyhaddinnerparties;theyentertainedstudents;friendscametostay.Frankworked.FromtimetotimeMaryhatchedsomeschemewhichwasdesignedtohelpFranktogettoknowus.Readingatbedtime:hechose‘TheOdyssey’andwehadnightmaresabouttheblindingofPolyphemus.ButIknowmyHomer.Goingoneatatimeforwalkswithhim:IrememberawalkinDelamereForestasateenager;hetoldmeaboutresinandItoldhimaboutschool.Helistenedpolitely.Itwasastrugglebutwebothtried.WeweresentonweekendstotheLakeDistrictwithhim,outofseasonbecauseofthecost.OnseparateoccasionsbothDorothyandIweredraggedupBowfellinblizzardswearinghighlyunsuitableshoes.Outdoorgearhadn’treallybeeninventedyet.
Aswehadapproachedadolescence,we’dmovedtoabiggerhousewithalargegarden.ItwascalledHopeLodgeandwewerenottoknowthenhowshortacommodityhopewastobethere.Therewerefruittrees,vegetablegardens,chickensandducks,bushestoplayin,andtreestoclimb.ForMaryitwasadreamrealized,butthenwhat?Itwasalsoisolatingandrequiredcontinualwork.Itrequiredagardener,acleaner,andasewinglady.Itdrankmoney;andavailablecashforanythingelsebecameeventighter.Ithaditsownproblems.Itwascold.Franksatinhisstudywrappedinlayersofclothingandworeremainderedairforcebootswithfurliningstotryandsaveonheatingbills.Partialcentralheatingwaslaterinstalledbutnotinthebedrooms;Irememberthatmyalarmclockrusteduponewinter.Thenwetrotwasfoundinmybedroom.Alsowoodworm.
Frank’sstudyhadalwaysremainedthesameandsurvivedmanychangesofroomsandmovingofhomes.Ithaditsownsmell,ofbooks,ofpeace.Hesatatitscentreandknew
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 4 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
whereeachbookwas,likeaspiderinitsweb’scentrefeelingdownthestrandsforsomevibration,hismindextendedoutontotheshelves.Wheninhislateninetieshewasunabletoclimbthestairs,hewouldsendusofftofetchdownabookwithpreciseandaccurateinstructions.HisgrandsonJamesWalbankwaslatertowriteofthatstudy:
ThisplaceSmellsofoldpaperandwords,ofthedeskAndchairandoftimeandwonder.Franksatheretowork.
SometimesIcreptsecretlyinanddrankinitsatmosphere,orreadthewordsonthespinesofbooks.WhatmightaPaulyWissowabe?InitslastincarnationinBirkenhead,thestudywasupstairsandhadamagnificentviewoutoverBirkenheadandacrosstherivertoLiverpool,wheretheboatspliedtheirtrade(p.356) toAmericastill,wherethePierheadbuildingsandAnglicanCathedral,beingbuiltveryslowlywithitssolitarycraneononeend,wereclearlyvisible.
Aswegrewolderourterritorygainedinscope.Werangedbetweenthehousesoffriends.Wemadeturfhutsinrun-downgardensandsleptoutintents,walkingbarefootandcookingourmeals.Afterkeepingthecountryrunningduringthewar,womenhadbeensentbackintotheirhomestoprovidejobsforreturningsoldiers.Themediasupportedthegovernmentinthiswithalongcampaignagainst‘latch-keykids’.Itwasnotunusualinourtravelstofindsomeone’smothersittinggloomilyinthekitchen,contemplatinghergrizzlingbaby,orjustsitting.ButMary’sillness,whichreturnedin1954,wasmorethanthat.Itwasafull-blownbi-polardisorderinvolvingswingsbetweenthesinging-in-streets-spending-sprees-and-angry-scenes-in-shopskindofbehaviourandthelying-in-bed-all-the-time-weeping-and-accusatory-rowskindofbehaviour.Itwasintenselyupsettingforallofus,notleastMary.PerhapsitwasworstforChristo,myyoungerbrother,whohadbeensentawaytoschoolandmusthaveneverknownwhathewascomingbackto.Frankescapedintowork.Mary’sillness,herstaysinmentalhospitals,musthaveclarifiedhislackofoptions.
Hehadsometimesponderedanextmove.Hewasanexcellentadministratorandloveduniversitycommitteework,itspolitics,manœuvring,thejokesandwitticisms.ThelatestsalliesofSeaborneDavieswereoftenrecountedatmealtimes.Frankmayhavebeentemptedtofollowhismentor,SirJamesMountford,intothehigherechelonsofuniversitygovernance.HeflirtedwithAllSoulsandfoundhimselfallergic.Theselectionprocessreactivatedhisnortherngrammar-schoolinsecuritiesamongtheOxbridgetoffsandhisstomachrevolted.Hecamehomesickened,sick,andnotalittlebruised.Mary’sillnessremovedsuchpossibilities,andnootherchangecouldbecopedwithwhenlifewasallaboutfire-fighting(again,forhe’dwatchedforfiresinthewar).Marywouldhavebeenanembarrassmenttohiminotherroles;she’dneverbeequaltoplayingtherequiredspouse.Itwasalltoomuch.FrankstayedputandworkonPolybiusgainedfromit.
Volume1waspublishedwhenIwas15andwewerethreeyearsintoMary’sillness.Therewouldbeperiodsinbetweentheswingswhenanuneasyequilibriumwouldbe
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 5 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
maintainedforawhile,butthetribulationsufferedwouldgoonandon.Thedisorderwouldonlyreallybegintoloosenitsgripwhenshehadareasontoco-operateintakingcontrolofit,somethingofherownatlast;whentheincentivetoperseverewithmedicationhadcoincidedwithanimprovementinitseffectiveness.MaryenrolledasanundergraduateatLiverpoolUniversityattheageof54andreadEconomics.Sheraisedastandingovationfromthesenatewhenshetookherdegree.
Untilthenitsravagesaffectedusall.IntheworstperiodsofillnessFrankwouldlooktenyearsolder.Ithinkweallworriedabouteachother.Ididnotunderstandwhatwashappening.Talkingaboutmentalillnessdidn’thappen(p.357) inthefifties.ItwasreferredtoobliquelyinaVictorianmanner.‘How’sMother?’,‘Muchthesame.’Wekeptabravefacetoeachotherandcriedinourseparatebedrooms.ForFrankhisworkonPolybiuswasarefuge,andacertainty,theonlycertainty.Itwassecuritywhenthesolidoutlinesthathaddefinedhislifeuntilthattimehadlosttheirnormalshape.HecouldcontinueallalonetowatchoverandunpickPolybius,engagewithandassesshim,havearelationshipthatwasnotavailableanywhereelse,notintimeandnotinspace.Whenallotherthingsfailed,Franklovedhisworkandhewastoseethisinhislastyearsasthegreatestgoodfortuneofhislife,tolovewhathedid.Thatdidnotmeanthatthesheergraftofthishugeendeavourmadeforthehappiestyears,eventhoughitdefinedhimsocompletely.Hewasonlyhuman.ThehappiestyearswerebeforeandafterthewritingoftheCommentary,whenMarywaswell,whenworkwasnotsohard,whentherewerenochildren.
Nineteensixty-sevenwasagoodyear.FionaAlexander,hisfirstgrandchild,hadbeenborntheyearbefore.Marygainedherdegree;Volume2oftheCommentarywaspublished.Finally,twoyearsafterheretiredtoCambridgein1977,thethirdvolumecameout.Wehadaparty.AndDorothybreathedagain.LikehernamesakeDorotheainMiddlemarch,shehadbeenhauntedbythefearthatshemighthavetofinishthe‘greatwork’ifthe‘greatman’diedbeforehehaddonesohimself.Theretheanalogyends.Frankafterallwasakindofanti-Casaubon;hewastherealthing,acompetentandaccomplishedscholar.Casaubonhadn’tevenlearnedGermanandTheKeytoallMythologieswasnevergoingtotakeoff.Frank’scommentaryonPolybiuswasalreadyairborne.Nowithadlandedsafelyandthedestinationhadbeenreached,Idecideditwastimetogettoknowtheenemy.Iboughtacopyofthepaperbacktranslationandwasamazed,gratified,delightedtodiscoverwhatagoodreadhewas.Therehewas(thisisalayperson’sapproach),beforeTolstoy,beforeBrecht,askingalltherightquestions.HewasfitforFrank,theyfittedeachother.
ThegatekeeperandpreserverofFrank’speaceandquiethadbeenMary.Shewasthewarmpersonwithwhomthegrandchildrenlovedtostayathalfterm;hewastheshadowycharacterinthestudy.Aftershedied,in1987,weallgottoknowhimbetter.WehadanIndiansummerinourrelationshipswithhim.Hewasgoodcompany.ChristoandIbothhadmanyseparateholidayswithhim.PerhapssomethinginhimcouldrelaxalittlewithPolybiusunderhisbelt.HediscoveredthatteachingLatintohisrecentlygraduatedgrandson,GavinAlexander,wasacompletedelight.Intime,inthenext
Growing up with Polybius: A Daughter’s Memoir
Page 6 of 6
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
century,AlexandertheGreat-grandsonwouldcomealong,tobefollowedswiftlybyTom,Hamish,andSophie.Hewasproudofhisfamily.InturnIwasproudofthewayhelearnedtocookforthefirsttimeandtomakenewfriends,tomakeanewlifeafterhishugeloss.Hefoundhomestooinhisoldcollege,Peterhouse,andintheCambridgeClassicsFaculty.
OnceinCrete,onholidaywithFrankandMary,IwasswimmingintheseawhenFrankwassubmergedbyagreatwave.Hecameupspluttering,‘Whata(p.358) horridwavethatwas!’Iwassurfingitanddisagreed.‘Ithoughtitwasalovelywave’,andthenIadded,‘Thereyouhaveit,theproblemoftheeyewitnessaccountforHistory’.Andwelaughed.Andthereyouhaveit,thatwashislife.Heservedachameleonbeast,History,inthralltothepast,orinlovewiththelatestcontemporaryfashion,nowaspotlight,nowawideillumination,withitsrigours,anditschallenges,andalwaysexertingitsconstantfascination.Frankserveditwellandlearnedtogrowandchangewithit.AfterallI’mratherproudthatPolybiuswasacharacterinmylife,andI’mveryproudofmydad.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Bibliography
Page 1 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.359) BibliographyBibliographyreferences:
Abel,K.(1971),‘DiekulturelleMissiondesPanaitios’,AntikeundAbendland,17:119–43.
Adams,J.N.(2003),BilingualismandtheLatinLanguage(Cambridge).
Alcock,S.(1994),‘BreakinguptheHellenisticWorld:SurveyandSociety’,inI.Morris(ed.),ClassicalGreece:AncientHistoriesandModernArchaeologies(Cambridge),171–90.
Alföldy,G.(1985),TheSocialHistoryofRome(London).
Ambaglio,D.(2004),‘Spuntiperunlessicodell'economiatraPolibioeDiodoro’,MediterraneoAntico7:541–55.
——(2005),‘FabioeFilino:Polibiosuglistoricidellaprimaguerrapunica’,inG.SchepensandJ.Bollansée(eds.),TheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography(Leuven),205–22.
Bibliography
Page 2 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Anderson,B.(2006),ImaginedCommunities,rev.edn.(LondonandNewYork).
Archibald,Z.H.,Davies,J.K.,andGabrielsen,V.(eds.)(2005),Making,MovingandManaging.TheNewWorldofAncientEconomies,323–31B.C.(Oxford).
——(2011),TheEconomiesofHellenisticSocieties(Oxford).
Archibald,Z.H.,Davies,J.K.,Gabrielsen,V.,andOliverG.J.(eds.)(2001),HellenisticEconomies(London).
Arenz,A.(2006),HeraclidesKritikos«ÜberdieStädteinHellas».EinePeriegeseGriechenlandsamVorabenddesChremonideischenKrieges(Munich).
Ashton,R.H.J.(2001),‘TheCoinageofRhodes408—c.190B.C.’,inA.MeadowsandK.Shipton(eds.),MoneyanditsUsesintheAncientGreekWorld(Oxford),79–115.
Assmann,J.,andGladigow,B.(eds.)(1995),TextundKommentar.ArchäologiederliterarischenKommunikationIV(Munich).
Astin,A.E.(1959),‘DiodorusandtheDateoftheEmbassytotheEastofScipioAemilianus’,ClassicalPhilology,54:221–7.
—— (1967),ScipioAemilianus(Oxford).
Austin,C.,andBastianini,G.(2002),PosidippiPellaeiquaesupersuntomnia(Milan).
Austin,M.M.(2006,2ndedn.),TheHellenisticWorldfromAlexandertotheRomanConquest.ASelectionofAncientSourcesinTranslation(Cambridge).
Avery,H.C.(1973),‘ThemesinThucydides’AccountoftheSicilianExpedition’,Hermes,101:1–13.
Aymard,A.(1938),LesassembléesdelaConfédérationachaienne.Étudecritiqued’institutionsetd’histoire(Bordeaux).
—— (1946),‘LaGrècecentraleauIIIesiècleavantJ.-C.’,Revuehistorique,196:310–16.
Azoulay,V.(2004),‘ExchangeasEntrapment:MercenaryXenophon?’,inR.J.LaneFox(ed.),TheLongMarch:XenophonandtheTenThousand(NewHavenandLondon),288–304.
Badian,E.(1993),‘LivyandAugustus’,inW.Schuller(ed.),Livius:AspekteseinesWerkes(Constance),9–38.
—— (2004),‘XenophontheAthenian’,inC.J.Tuplin(ed.),XenophonandhisWorld:PapersfromaConferenceHeldinLiverpoolinJuly1999,HistoriaEinzelschriften,172(Stuttgart),33–53.
Bibliography
Page 3 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Bagnall,R.,andDerow,P.S.(2004),TheHellenisticPeriod.HistoricalSourcesinTranslation(Oxford).
Bal,M.(1997,2ndedn.),Narratology.IntroductiontotheTheoryofNarrative(Toronto).
Balot,R.(2006),GreekPoliticalThought(Oxford).
Barceló,P.A.(1993),Basileia,monarchia,tyrannis.UntersuchungenzuEntwicklungundBeurteilungvonAlleinherrschaftimvorhellenistischenGriechenland,HistoriaEinzelschriften,79(Stuttgart).
Barclay,J.M.G.(2005),‘TheEmpireWritesBack:JosephanRhetoricinFlavianRome’,inJ.Edmondson,S.Mason,andJ.Rives(eds.),FlaviusJosephusandFlavianRome(Oxford),315–32.
—— (2007),AgainstApion.TranslationandCommentary(Leiden).
Barnes,C.H.L.(2005),‘Livy33.8.13and35.35.18Revisited’,ClassicalJournal,100:349–63.
Baronowski,D.W.(2011),PolybiusandRomanImperialism(London).
Beck,H.(2003),‘DenRuhmnichtteilenwollen.FabiusPictorunddieAnfängedesrömischenNobilitätsdiskurses’,inU.Eigler,U.Gotter,N.Luraghi,andU.Walter(eds.),FormenrömischerGeschichtsschreibungvondenAnfängenbisLivius(Darmstadt),73–92.
—— (2005),KarriereundHierarchie.DierömischeAristokratieunddieAnfängedescursushonorumindermittlerenRepublik(Berlin).
—— (2008),‘ProminenzundaristokratischeHerrschaftinderrömischenRepublik’,inH.Beck,P.Scholz,andU.Walter(eds.),DieMachtderWenigen.AristokratischeHerrschaftspraxis,Kommunikationund‘edler’LebensstilinAntikeundFrüherNeuzeit(Munich),101–23.
—— andWiemer,H.-U.(2009),‘FeiernundErinnernindergriechisch-römischenWelt—eineEinleitung’,inH.BeckandH.-U.Wiemer(eds.),FeiernundErinnern.GeschichtsbilderimSpiegelantikerFeste,StudienzurAltenGeschichte,12(FrankfurtamMain),9–54.
Benecke,P.V.M.(1930),‘TheFalloftheMacedonianMonarchy’,CambridgeAncientHistory,8(1stedn.),241–78.
Beness,J.L.(2005),‘ScipioAemilianusandtheCrisisof129B.C.’,Historia,54:37–48.
Benjamin,W.(1968),‘ThesesonthePhilosophyofHistory’,inW.Benjamin,Illuminations(NewYork),253–64.
Bibliography
Page 4 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Berthold,R.M.(1984),RhodesintheHellenisticAge(Ithaca,NYandLondon).
Berti.N.(1988),LaguerradiCesarecontroPompeo.CommentostoricoaCassioDione,libriXLI–XLII(Milan).
Bickerman,E.(1933),EinleitungindieAltertumswissenschaft:III.Band,5.Heft.Chronologie(Leipzig).
—— (1953),‘NotessurPolybeIII.InitiaBelliMacedonici’,Revuedesétudesgrecques,66:479–506,repr.inReligionandPoliticsintheHellenisticandRomanPeriods(Como,1985),185–212.
Bilz,K.(1935),DiePolitikdesP.CorneliusScipioAemilianus,WürzburgerStudienzurAltertumswissenschaft,7(Stuttgart).
Biraschi,A.-M.,Desideri,P.,Roda,S.,andZecchini,G.(eds.)(2003),L’usodeidocumentinellastoriografiaantica,IncontriPeruginidiStoriadellaStoriografia,12(Naples).
Bleckmann,B.(2002),DierömischeNobilitätimErstenPunischenKrieg.UntersuchungenzuraristokratischenKonkurrenzinderRepublik(Berlin).
Bleicken,J.(1975),DieVerfassungderrömischenRepublik.GrundlagenundEntwicklung(Paderborn).
Blinkenberg,C.(1912),‘Lachroniquedutemplelindien’,OversigtoverdetKongeligeDanskeVidenskabernesSelskabsForhandlinger,5–6:317–457.
—— (1913),‘ρoΔoϒΚΤιΣΤΑι’,Hermes,48:236–49.
—— (1915a),‘RhodischeUrvölker’,Hermes,50:271–303.
—— (1915b),DielindischeTempelchronik,KleineTextefürVorlesungenundÜbungen,131(Bonn).
—— (1917),LindiakaI.L’imaged’AthènaLindia,DetKongelikeDanskeVidenskabernesSelskab.Historisk-filologiskeMeddeleser,I2(Copenhagen).
Bohm,C.(1989),ImitatioAlexandriimHellenismus.UntersuchungenzumpolitischenNachwirkenAlexandersdesGroßeninhoch-undspäthellenistischenMonarchien(Munich).
Bordes,J.(1982),Politeiadanslapenséegrecquejusqu’àAristote(Paris).
Bourdieu,P.(1979),Ladistinction.Critiquesocialedujugement(Paris).
Bowditch,P.L.(2001),HoraceandtheGiftEconomyofPatronage,TheJoanPalevskyImprintinClassicalLiterature,7(Berkeley).
Bibliography
Page 5 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (2010),‘HoraceandImperialPatronage’,inG.Davis(ed.),ACompaniontoHorace(Oxford),53–74.
Brash,I.F.,andWalbank,F.W.(1946),‘LesétudesclassiquesenGrande-BretagnependantlaGuerre’,Bulletindel’AssociationGuillaumeBudé,n.s.1:73–105.
Bresson,A.(2006),ReviewofHigbie(2003),Topoi,14:527–51.
Briant,P.(2002),FromCyrustoAlexander:AHistoryofthePersianEmpire,trans.byP.T.Daniels(WinonaLake,Ind.).
Brink,C.O.,andWalbank,F.W.(1954),‘TheConstructionoftheSixthBookofPolybius’,ClassicalQuarterly,48:77–122.
Briscoe,J.(1973),ACommentaryonLivy,BooksXXXI–XXXIII(Oxford).
—— (1981),ACommentaryonLivy,BooksXXXIV–XXXVII(Oxford).
—— (1993),‘LivyandPolybius’,inW.Schuller(ed.),Livius:AspekteseinesWerkes(Constance),39–52.
—— (2003),ReviewofBeckandWalter,FRH,Vol.1,JournalofRomanStudies,93:355.
—— (2008),ACommentaryonLivy,Books38–40(Oxford).
—— (2009),‘Livy’sSourcesandMethodsofCompositioninBooks31–33’,inJ.D.ChaplinandC.S.Kraus(eds.),Livy(Oxford),461–75.
Brown,T.S.(1958),TimaeusofTauromenium(Berkeley).
Brunt,P.A.(1971),ItalianManpower(Oxford).
—— (1988),TheFalloftheRomanRepublicandRelatedEssays(Oxford).
Bung,P.(1950),Q.FabiusPictor,derersterömischeAnnalist,diss.(Cologne).
Burckhardt,J.(1982),WeltgeschichtlicheBetrachtungen,originallypublished1905,rev.edn.byP.Ganz(Munich).
Bury,J.B.(1909),TheAncientGreekHistorians(NewYork).
Calboli,G.(1978),MarciPorciCatonisOratioproRhodiensibus.Catone,l’Orientegrecoegliimprenditoriromani,Edizioniesaggiuniversitaridifilologiaclassica,18(Bologna).
Calderone,S.(1977),‘Diunanticoproblemadiesegesipolibiana,1,11,1–3,’ActaAntiquaAcademicaeScientiarumHungaricae,25:383–7.
Calderone,S.,Bitto,I.,Salvo,L.de,andPinzone,A.(1981),‘Polibio1,11,1sq.’,QuaderniUrbinatidiCulturaClassica,36:7–78.
Bibliography
Page 6 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Callataÿ,F.de(2006),‘Reflexionsquantitativessurl’oretl’argentnonmonnayésàl’époquehellénistique’,inR.Descat(ed.),Approchesdel’économiehellénistique,Entretiensd’archéologieetd’histoire,7(St-Bertrand-de-Comminges),37–84.
Canfora,L.(1999),‘Pathosestoriografia“drammatica”’,inL.Canfora,Lastoriografiaantica(Milan),44–60.
Champion,C.B.(2004a),CulturalPoliticsinPolybius’s‘Histories’,HellenisticCultureandSociety,41(Berkeley).
—— (2004b),‘PolybianDemagoguesinPoliticalContext’,HarvardStudiesinClassicalPhilology,102:199–212.
—— (2010),‘Philinos(174)’,Brill’sNewJacoby,availableonlineat
Chaniotis,A.(1988),HistorieundHistorikerindengriechischenInschriften.EpigraphischeBeiträgezurgriechischenHistoriographie,HeidelbergerAlthistorischeBeiträgeundEpigraphischeStudien,4(Wiesbaden).
—— (1991),‘GedenktagederGriechen.IhreBedeutungfürdasGeschichtsbewußtseingriechischerPoleis’,inJ.Assmann(ed.),DasFestunddasHeilige.ReligiöseKontrapunktezurAlltagswelt(Gütersloh),123–45.
—— (2005),WarintheHellenisticWorld(Oxford).
Chankowski-Sablé,V.(2004),‘Lesstructureséconomiquesdel’orientméditerranéen’,inM.-F.Baslez(ed.),L’Orienthellénistique(Paris),67–98.
Christ,K.(1984),KriseundUntergangderrömischenRepublik(Darmstadt).
Clarke,K.(1999),BetweenGeographyandHistory:HellenisticConstructionsoftheRomanWorld(Oxford).
—— (2008),MakingTimeforthePast:LocalHistoryandthePolis(Oxford).
Cloché,P.(1952),ThèbesdeBéotie,desoriginesàlaconquêteromaine(Paris).
Coarelli,F.(1990),‘Laculturafigurativa’,inG.Clemente,F.Coarelli,andE.Gabba(eds.),L’imperomediterraneo.1:Larepubblicaimperiale,StoriadiRoma,2(Turin),631–70.
Cohen,S.J.D.(1982),‘Josephus,Jeremiah,andPolybius’,HistoryandTheory,21:366–81.
Collins,J.J.(1993),Daniel(Minneapolis).
Curty,O.(1989),‘L’historiographiehellénistiqueetl’inscriptionn°37desInschriftenvonPriene’,inM.PiérartandO.Curty(eds.),Historiatestis.Mélangesd’épigraphie,d’histoireancienneetdephilologieoffertsàT.Zawadzki(Fribourg),21–35.
Bibliography
Page 7 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1995),Lesparentéslégendairesentrecitésgrecques,Centrederecherchesd’histoireetdephilologiedelaIVeSectiondel’ÉcolePratiquedesHautesÉtudes,III.HautesÉtudesdumondegréco-romain,20(Geneva).
Davidson,J.(1991),‘TheGazeinPolybius’Histories’,JournalofRomanStudies,81:10–24.
Davies,J.K.(1984),‘Cultural,Social,andEconomicFeaturesoftheHellenisticWorld’,CambridgeAncientHistory,VII.1(2ndedn.):257–320.
—— (2001),‘HellenisticEconomiesinthepost-FinleyEra’,inZ.H.Archibald,J.K.Davies,V.Gabrielsen,andG.J.Oliver(eds.),HellenisticEconomies(London),11–62.
—— (2002),‘TheInterpenetrationofHellenisticSovereignties’,inD.Ogden(ed.),TheHellenisticWorld.NewPerspectives(London),1–21.
—— (2004a),‘DemetriodiFaro,lapirateria,eleeconomieellenistiche’,inL.Braccesi(ed.),Lapiraterianell’Adriaticoantico,Hesperìa19:StudisullaGrecitàd’Occidente(Rome),119–27.
—— (2004b),‘AfterRostovtzeff’,MediterraneoAntico,7:1–14.
—— (2004c),‘AthenianFiscalExpertiseanditsInfluence’,MediterraneoAntico,7:491–512.
—— (2005),‘TheEconomicConsequencesofHellenisticPalaces’,inZ.H.Archibald,J.K.Davies,andV.Gabrielsen(eds.),Making,MovingandManaging.TheNewWorldofAncientEconomies,323–31B.C.(Oxford),117–35.
—— (2006),‘HellenisticEconomies’,inG.Bugh(ed.),TheCambridgeCompaniontotheHellenisticWorld(NewYork),73–92.
—— (2009),‘AncientEconomies’,inA.Erskine(ed.),ACompaniontoAncientHistory(Oxford),436–46.
—— (2011),‘FrankWilliamWalbank1909–2008’,ProceedingsoftheBritishAcademy,172:325–51.
Deininger,J.(1971),DerpolitischeWiderstandgegenRominGriechenland217–86v.Chr.(BerlinandNewYork).
DeLibero,L.(1996),DiearchaischeTyrannis(Stuttgart).
DeMartino,F.(1951),Storiadellacostituzioneromana,2.2(Naples).
Deniaux,E.(2007),‘Patronage’,inN.RosensteinandR.Morstein-Marx(eds.),ACompaniontotheRomanRepublic(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),401–20.
Bibliography
Page 8 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Derow,P.S.(1976),‘TheRomanCalendar218–191B.C.’,Phoenix,30:265–81.
—— (1979),‘Polybius,RomeandtheEast’,JournalofRomanStudies,69:1–15.
—— (1994),‘HistoricalExplanation:Polybiusandhispredecessors’,inS.Hornblower(ed.),GreekHistoriography(Oxford),73–90.
—— (2003),‘TheArrivalofRome:FromtheIllyrianWarstotheFallofMacedon’,inA.Erskine(ed.),ACompaniontotheHellenisticWorld(Oxford),51–70.
Descat,R.(ed.)(2006),Approchesdel’économiehellénistique,Entretiensd’archéologieetd’histoire,7(St-Bertrand-de-Comminges).
Desideri,P.(forthcoming),‘Filopemeneelasuaereditàpolitica:studiosulrapportofraPolibioeLivio’,inC.MolèVenturaandC.Giuffrida(eds.),StudiinonorediMarioMazza(Acireale).
Develin,R.(1973),MosMaiorumMutatus:TraditionandtheBasisofChangeintheRomanConstitution,287–201B.C.,diss.(AnnArbor,Mich.).
Dillery,J.(2004),‘Xenophon,theMilitaryReviewandHellenisticPompai’,inC.J.Tuplin(ed.),XenophonandhisWorld:PapersfromaConferenceheldinLiverpoolinJuly1999,HistoriaEinzelschriften,172(Stuttgart),259–76.
Dobson,M.(2008),TheArmyoftheRomanRepublic:TheSecondCenturyBC,PolybiusandtheCampsatNumantia,Spain(Oxford).
Drakenborch,A.(1741),TitiLiuihistoriarumaburbeconditalibriquisupersuntomnes,iv(LeidenandAmsterdam).
Drecoll,C.(2004),‘DieKarneadesgesandtschaftundihreAuswirkungeninRom’,Hermes,132:82–91.
Dreyer,B.(2006),DieInnenpolitikderRömischenRepublik.264–133v.Chr.(Darmstadt).
—— (2007),DierömischeNobilitätsherrschaftundAntiochosIII.205–188v.Chr.,FrankfurterAlthistorischeBeiträge,11(FrankfurtamMain).
—— (2011),Polybios—LebenundWerkimBanneRoms(Hildesheim).
Dubuisson,M.(1982),‘Remarquessurlevocabulairegrecdel’acculturation’,Revuebelgedephilologieetd’histoire,60:5–32.
—— (1985),LelatindePolybe.Lesimplicationshistoriquesd’uncasdebilingualisme(Paris).
Dutt,R.P.(1934),FascismandSocialRevolution.AStudyoftheEconomicsandPolitics
Bibliography
Page 9 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
oftheExtremeStagesofCapitalisminDecay(London).
Dyggve,E.(1960),Lasanctuaired’AthanaLindiaetl’architecturelindienneavecunecataloguedessculpturestrouvéessurl’acropoleparVagnPoulsen,Lindos—Fouillesdel’acropole1902–1914et1952,Vol.III(BerlinandCopenhagen).
Easterling,P.E.(1993),‘TheEndofanEra?TragedyintheEarlyFourthCentury’,inA.Sommerstein(ed.),Tragedy,ComedyandthePolis(Bari),559–69.
—— (1997),‘FromRepertoiretoCanon’,inP.E.Easterling(ed.),CambridgeCompaniontoGreekTragedy(Cambridge),211–27.
Eckstein,A.M.(1980),‘PolybiusontheRôleoftheSenateintheCrisisof264B.C.’,Greek,RomanandByzantineStudies,21:175–90.
—— (1985),‘Polybius,SyracuseandthePoliticsofAccommodation’,Greek,RomanandByzantineStudies,26:265–82.
—— (1987a),SenateandGeneral:IndividualDecision-makingandRomanForeignRelations,264–194B.C.(Berkeley).
—— (1987b),‘Polybius,Aristaenus,andtheFragment“OnTraitors”’,ClassicalQuarterly,37:140–62.
—— (1990),‘JosephusandPolybius:AReconsideration’,ClassicalAntiquity,9:175–208.
—— (1995),MoralVisionintheHistoriesofPolybius(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
—— (2003),‘Thucydides,theOutbreakofthePeloponnesianWar,andtheFoundationofInternationalSystemsTheory’,InternationalHistoryReview,25:757–74.
—— (2006),MediterraneanAnarchy,InterstateWar,andtheRiseofRome(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
—— (2008),RomeEnterstheGreekEast:FromAnarchytoHierarchyintheHellenisticMediterranean,230–170B.C.(OxfordandMalden,Mass.).
Edwards,R.B.(1979),KadmosthePhoenician.AStudyinGreekLegendsandtheMycenaeanAge(Amsterdam).
Eisen,K.F.(1966),Polybiosinterpretationen:BeobachtungenzuPrinzipiengriechischerundrömischerHistoriographiebeiPolybios(Heidelberg).
Eisenberger,H.(1982),‘DieNaturunddierömischePoliteiaim6.BuchdesPolybios’,Philologus,126:269–97.
Elvers,K.-L.(1997),‘P.CorneliusScipioAemilianusAfricanus’,DerNeuePauly,3:178–82.
Bibliography
Page 10 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Erll,A.,andNünning,A.(eds.)(2008),CulturalMemoryStudies:AnInternationalandInterdisciplinaryHandbook(Berlin).
Errington,R.M.(1967a),‘Philip,Aratosandthe“ConspiracyofApelles”’,Historia,16:19–36.
—— (1967b),‘TheChronologyofPolybius’Histories,BooksIandII’,JournalofRomanStudies,57:96–108.
—— (1971),TheDawnofEmpire:Rome’sRisetoWorldPower(London).
—— (1986),‘AntiochosIII.,ZeuxisundEuromos’,EpigraphicaAnatolica,8:1–8.
Erskine,A.(1996),‘Money-lovingRomans’,PapersoftheLeedsInternationalLatinSeminar,9:1–11.
—— (2000),‘PolybiosandBarbarianRome’,MediterraneoAntico,3:165–82.
—— (2001),TroybetweenGreeceandRome(Oxford).
—— (2003),‘SpanishLessons:PolybiusandtheMaintenanceofImperialPower’,inJ.SantosYanguasandE.TorregarayPagola(eds.),PolibioylaPenínsulaIbérica,RevisionesdeHistoriaAntigua,4(Vitoria),229–43.
—— (2007),‘RhetoricandPersuasionintheHellenisticWorld:SpeakingupforthePolis’,inI.Worthington(ed.),ACompaniontoGreekRhetoric(Oxford),272–85.
—— (2010),RomanImperialism(Edinburgh).
—— (forthcoming),‘TheViewfromtheEast’,inJ.R.W.PragandJ.C.Quinn(eds.),TheHellenisticWest:RethinkingtheAncientMediterranean(Cambridge).
Étienne,R.(1996/2006),‘Polybeetlevinlusitanien’,inDesvignoblesetdesvinsàtraverslemonde.HommageàA.HuetzdeLemps(Bordeaux),395–400,repr.inF.Mayet(ed.),ItinerariaHispanica.Recueild’articlesdeRobertÉtienne,ScriptaAntiqua,15(Bordeaux),555–60.
Étienne,R.,andKnoepfler,D.(1976),HyettosdeBéotieetlachronologiedesarchontesfédérauxentre250et171avantJ.-C.,BulletindeCorrespondanceHéllenique,Suppl.3(ParisandAthens).
Fabian,J.(1983),TimeandtheOther:HowAnthropologyMakesitsObject(NewYork),repr.withnewforewordbyM.Bunzl(2002).
Fantuzzi,M.,andHunter,R.(2004),TraditionandInnovationinHellenisticPoetry(Cambridge).
Fechner,D.(1986),UntersuchungenzuCassiusDiosSichtderrömischenPolitik
Bibliography
Page 11 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(Hildesheim).
Feeney,D.(2007),Caesar’sCalendar:AncientTimeandtheBeginningsofHistory(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
FeigVishnia,R.(1996),State,Society,andPopularLeadersinMid-RepublicanRome,241–167B.C.(LondonandNewYork).
Ferrary,J.-L.(1984),‘L’archéologieduDerepublica(2,2,4–37,63):CicéronentrePolybeetPlaton’,JournalofRomanStudies,74:87–98.
—— (1988),Philhellénismeetimpérialisme.Aspectsidéologiquesdelaconquêteromainedumondehellénistique,delasecondeguerredeMacédoineàlaguerrecontreMithridate(ParisandRome).
—— (2003),‘LejugementdePolybesurladominationromaine:étatdelaquestion’,inJ.SantosYanguasandE.TorregarayPagola(eds.),Polibioylapenínsulaibérica,RevisionesdeHistoriaAntigua,4(Vitoria),15–32.
Feyel,M.(1942),Polybeetl’histoiredeBéotieauIIIesiècleavantnotreère(Paris).
Finley,M.I.(1983),PoliticsintheAncientWorld(Cambridge).
Flaig,E.(2000),‘LuciusAemiliusPaullus—militärischerRuhmundfamiliäreGlücklosigkeit’,inK.-J.HölkeskampandE.Stein-Hölkeskamp(ed.),VonRomuluszuAugustus.GroßeGestaltenderrömischenRepublik(Munich),131–46.
Flaig,E.(2003),RitualisiertePolitik.Zeichen,GestenundHerrschaftimAltenRom(Göttingen).
Fliess,P.J.(1966),ThucydidesandthePoliticsofBipolarity(Nashville).
Flower,H.I.(1996),AncestorMasksandAristocraticPowerinRomanCulture(Oxford).
Flower,M.A.(1994),TheopompusofChios:HistoryandRhetoricintheFourthCenturyBC(Oxford).
Fornara,C.W.(1983),TheNatureofHistoryinAncientGreeceandRome(Berkeley,LosAngeles,andLondon).
Forsythe,G.(1991),‘APhilologicalNoteontheScipionicCircle’,AmericanJournalofPhilology,112:363–4.
—— (1994),TheHistorianL.CalpurniusPisoFrugiandtheRomanAnnalisticTradition(Lanham,Md.).
Foucault,J.de,Foulon,É.,andMolin,M.(eds.)(2004),Polybe:Histoires,Tome3,Livre3(Paris).
Bibliography
Page 12 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Fowler,D.(1990),‘DeviantFocalisationinVergil’sAeneid’,ProceedingsoftheCambridgePhilologicalSociety,36:42–63.
Fraisse,J.-C.(1974),Philia.Lanotiond’amitiédanslaphilosophieantique,Bibliothèqued’histoiredelaphilosophie(Paris).
Frei,P.(1990),‘DieGötterkulteLykiensinderKaiserzeit’,AufstiegundNiedergangderrömischenWelt,II.18.3:1729–1864.
Frier,B.W.(1999,2ndedn.),LibriAnnalesPontificumMaximorum.TheOriginsoftheAnnalisticTradition(AnnArbor,Mich.).
Fritz,K.von(1954),TheTheoryoftheMixedConstitutioninAntiquity(NewYork).
Fröhlich,P.(2004),Lescitésgrecquesetlecontrôledesmagistrats(IVe–IersiècleavantJ.-C.)(Geneva).
Froidefond,C.(1971),Lemirageégyptiendanslalittératuregrecqued’HomèreàAristote(Paris).
Fromentin,V.(2001),‘L’histoiretragiquea-t-elleexisté?’,inA.BillaultandC.Mauduit(eds.),Lecturesantiquesdelatragédiegrecque(Lyon),77–92.
Fuchs,H.(1964),DergeistigeWiderstandgegenRominderantikenWelt(Berlin).
Gabba,E.(1974),‘Storiografiagrecaeimperialismoromano(III-Isec.a.C.)’,Rivistastoricaitaliana,86:625–42.
—— (1990),‘L’imperialismoromano’,inG.Clemente,F.Coarelli,andE.Gabba(eds.),L’imperomediterraneo.1:Larepubblicaimperiale,StoriadiRoma,2(Turin),189–233.
—— (1993),Aspetticulturalidell’imperialismoromano(Florence).
Gabrielsen,V.(2005),ReviewofHigbie(2003),ClassicalReview,n.s.55:319–22.
Garlan,Y.(1978),‘Significationhistoriquedelapirateriegrecque’,Dialoguesd’histoireancienne,4:1–16.
Gauthier,P.(1993),‘Décretsd’Erétrie.II.DécrettrouvéàOropos’,Revuedesétudesgrecques,106:592–8.
Geffcken,J.(1916),GriechischeEpigramme(Heidelberg).
Gehrke,H.-J.(1982),‘DersiegreicheKönig.ÜberlegungenzurhellenistischenMonarchie’,ArchivfürKulturgeschichte,64:247–77.
—— (1985),Stasis.UntersuchungenzudeninnerenKriegenindengriechischenStaatendes5.und4.Jahrhundertsv.Chr.,Vestigia,35(Munich).
Bibliography
Page 13 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1987),‘DieGriechenunddieRache.EinVersuchinhistorischerPsychologie’,Saeculum,38:121–49.
—— (1990),‘ZwischenFreundschaftundProgramm.PolitischeParteiungimAthendes5.Jh.sv.Chr.’,HistorischeZeitschrift,239:1984.
—— (1995),GeschichtedesHellenismus(Munich).
—— (1996),‘RömischeNobilitätundHellenismus’,inB.Funck(ed.),Hellenismus.BeiträgezurErforschungvonAkkulturationundpolitischerOrdnungindenStaatendeshellenistischenZeitalters.AktendesinternationalenHellenismus-Kolloquiums,9.–14.MärzinBerlin(Tübingen),525–42.
—— (1998),‘FreundschaftI.SozialgeschichtlichA.Griechenland’,DerNeuePauly,4:669–71.
—— (2001),‘Myth,History,andCollectiveIdentity:UsesofthePastinAncientGreeceandBeyond’,inN.Luraghi(ed.),TheHistorian’sCraftintheAgeofHerodotus(Oxford),286–313.
Gelzer,M.(1933),‘RömischePolitikbeiFabiusPictor’,Hermes,68:129–66,repr.inM.Gelzer,KleineSchriften,Vol.3(Wiesbaden),51–92.
—— (1934),‘DerAnfangrömischerGeschichtsschreibung’,Hermes,9:46–55,repr.inM.Gelzer,KleineSchriften,Vol.3(Wiesbaden),93–103.
—— (1940a),‘DiehellenischeprokataskeueimzweitenBuchedesPolybios’,Hermes,75:27–37,repr.inM.Gelzer,KleineSchriften,Vol.3(Wiesbaden),111–22.
—— (1940b),‘DieAchaicaimGeschichtswerkdesPolybios’,AbhandlungenderdeutschenAkademiederWissenschaftenzuBerlin,3–32,repr.inM.Gelzer,KleineSchriften,Vol.3(Wiesbaden),123–54.
—— (1962),‘DieNobilitätderrömischenRepublik’,inM.Gelzer,KleineSchriften,Vol.1(Wiesbaden),17–135.
Genette,G.(1980),NarrativeDiscourse,trans.byJ.E.Lewin(Ithaca,NY).
—— (1982),Palimpsestes.Lalittératureauseconddegré(Paris).
Gibbon,E.(2004,firstpublished1776–88),TheHistoryoftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpire,ed.byJ.B.Bury,7vols.(Rockville,Md.).
Gibson,B.J.(1998),‘RumoursasCausesofEventsinTacitus’,Materialiediscussioni,40:111–29.
—— (2010),‘SiliusItalicus:AConsularHistorian?’,inA.Augoustakis(ed.),Brill’sCompaniontoSiliusItalicus(Leiden),47–72.
Bibliography
Page 14 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Gibson,R.K.,andKraus,C.S.(eds.)(2002),TheClassicalCommmentary:Histories,Practices,Theory,MnemosyneSupplement,232(Leiden).
Giovannini,A.(1969),‘Lesoriginesdela3eguerredeMacédoine’,Bulletindecorrespondancehéllenique93:853–61.
—— (1984),‘Review-Discussion:RomanEasternPolicyintheLateRepublic’,AmericanJournalofAncientHistory,9:33–42.
Gold,B.K.(1982),LiteraryandArtisticPatronageinAncientRome(Austin,Tex.).
Golden,M.(1990),ChildrenandChildhoodinClassicalAthens(Baltimore,Md.).
Goldhill,S.(1991),ThePoet’sVoice.EssaysonPoeticsandGreekLiterature(Cambridge).
Goldmann,F.(2002),‘NobilitasalsStatusundGruppe.ÜberlegungenzumNobilitätsbegriffderrömischenRepublik’,inJ.Spielvogel(ed.),Respublicareperta.ZurVerfassungundGesellschaftderrömischenRepublikunddesfrühenPrinzipats.FestschriftfürJochenBleickenzum75.Geburtstag(Stuttgart),45–66.
Gomme,A.W.(1945,correctededn.1959),AHistoricalCommentaryonThucydides,VolumeI:IntroductionandCommentaryonBookI(Oxford).
Gotter,U.(1996),‘CicerounddieFreundschaft.DieKonstruktionsozialerNormenzwischenrömischerPolitikundgriechischerPhilosophie’,inH.-J.GehrkeandA.Möller(eds.),VergangenheitundLebenswelt.SozialeKommunikation,TraditionsbildungundhistorischesBewußtsein(Tübingen),339–60.
Grainger,J.D.(1999),TheLeagueoftheAitolians,MnemosyneSupplement200(Leiden).
Grandjean,C.(2006),‘HistoireéconomiqueetmonétarisationdelaGrèceàl’époquehellénistique’,inR.Descat(ed.),Approchesdel’économiehellénistique,Entretiensd’archéologieetd’histoire,7(St-Bertrand-de-Comminges),195–214.
—— (2009),‘PolybiusandAchaiancoinage’,inBeingPeloponnesian.ProceedingsfromtheConferenceheldattheUniversityofNottingham31stMarch–1stApril2007,publishedonlinebytheCentreforSpartanandPeloponnesianStudies(Nottingham),
Gray,V.J.(1987),‘MimesisinGreekHistoricalWriting’,AmericanJournalofPhilology,108:467–86.
—— (2011),‘Thucydides’sourcecitations:“itissaid”’,ClassicalQuarterly,61:75–90.
Griffith,G.T.(1935),TheMercenariesoftheHellenisticWorld(Cambridge).
Gruen,E.S.(1968),RomanPoliticsandtheCriminalCourts,149–78B.C.(Cambridge).
Bibliography
Page 15 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1976),‘RomeandtheSeleucidsintheAftermathofPydna’,Chiron,6:73–95.
—— (1984),TheHellenisticWorldandtheComingofRome(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
—— (1992),CultureandNationalIdentityinRepublicanRome(Ithaca,NY).
—— (1996),StudiesinGreekCultureandRomanPolicy(Berkeley).
—— (2000),‘CultureasPolicy:TheAttalidsofPergamon’,inN.T.deGrummondandB.S.Ridgway(eds.),FromPergamontoSperlonga:SculptureandContext(BerkeleyandLosAngeles),17–31.
Guillon,P.(1948),LaBéotieantique(Paris).
Guthrie,W.K.C.(1957),IntheBeginning:SomeGreekViewsontheOriginsofLifeandtheEarlyStateofMan(London).
Habicht,C.(1990),CiceroderPolitiker(Munich).
—— (2003),‘RhodianAmphoraStampsandRhodianEponyms’,Revuedesétudesanciennes,105:541–78.
Hadas-Lebel,M.(1999),‘FlaviusJosèpheentrePolybeetJérémie’,Ktema,24:159–65.
Hahm,D.(2009),‘TheMixedConstitutioninGreekThought’,inR.K.Balot(ed.),ACompaniontoGreekandRomanPoliticalThought(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),178–98.
Halliwell,S.(2002),TheAestheticsofMimesis(Princeton).
Hammond,N.G.L.,andWalbank,F.W.(1988),AHistoryofMacedoniaIII.336–167B.C.(Oxford).
Hampl,F.(1972),‘ZurVorgeschichtedeserstenundzweitenPunischenKrieges’,AufstiegundNiedergangderrömischenWelt,I.1:412–41.
Hansen,M.H.,andNielsen,T.H.(eds.)(2004),AnInventoryofArchaicandClassicalPoleis(Oxford).
Harris,W.V.(1979),WarandImperialisminRepublicanRome,327–70B.C.(Oxford).
—— (1989),AncientLiteracy(Cambridge,Mass.).
Harrison,T.(1998),‘Herodotus’ConceptionofForeignLanguages’,Histos,2,availableonlineat(consulted1June2011).
Haskins,E.(2004),LogosandPowerinIsocratesandAristotle(Columbia,SC).
Hebert,B.(1989),SchriftquellenzurhellenistischenKunst.Plastik,MalereiundKunsthandwerkderGriechenvomviertenbiszumzweitenJahrhundert,GrazerBeiträge
Bibliography
Page 16 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Suppl.4(Graz).
Henderson,J.(1998),Juvenal’sMayor:TheProfessorwhoLivedon2D.aDay,ProceedingsoftheCambridgePhilologicalSociety,Suppl.20(Cambridge).
—— (2001a),‘Polybius/Walbank’,inS.J.Harrison(ed.),Texts,Ideas,andtheClassics.Scholarship,Theory,andClassicalLiterature(Oxford),220–41.
—— (2001b),‘FromMegalopolistoCosmopolis:Polybius,orThereandBackAgain’,inS.Goldhill(ed.),BeingGreekunderRome:CulturalIdentity,theSecondSophisticandtheDevelopmentofEmpire(Cambridge),29–49.
—— (2001c),‘Farnell’sCults:TheMakingandBreakingofPausaniasinVictorianArchaeologyandAnthropology’,inS.E.Alcock,J.F.Cherry,andJ.Elsner(eds.),Pausanias:TravelandMemoryinRomanGreece(Oxford),207–23,302–10.
—— (2002),‘TheWayWeWere:R.G.Austin,InCaelianam’,inR.K.GibsonandC.S.Kraus(eds.),TheClassicalCommentary.Histories,Practices,Theory,MnemosyneSupplement,232(Leiden),205–34.
—— (2003),‘Paroperisedes:MrsArthurStrongandFlavianstyle:TheArchofTitusandtheCancelleriaReliefs’,inA.J.BoyleandW.J.Dominik(eds.),FlavianRome:Culture,Image,Text(Leiden),229–54.
—— (2006),‘OxfordReds’:ClassicCommentariesonLatinClassics:R.G.AustinonCiceroandVirgil,C.J.FordyceonCatullus,R.G.andR.G.M.NisbetonCicero(London).
—— (2007a),J.E.B.Mayor,Juvenal,repr.withanintro.(Bristol).
—— (2007b),‘The“EuripidesReds”Series:TheBestLaidPlansatOUP’,inC.Stray(ed.),ClassicalBooks.Scholarship&PublishinginBritainsince1800,BulletinoftheInstituteofClassicalStudies,Suppl.101(London),143–75.
—— (2010),‘A1-ZYTHUM:DOMIMINANUSTIOILLUMEA,oroutwiththeO.L.D.(1931–82)’,inC.Stray(ed.),ClassicalDictionaries(London),138–75.
Herkommer,E.(1968),DieTopoiindenProömienderrömischenGeschichtswerke,diss.(Tübingen).
Herman,G.(1997),‘TheCourtSocietyoftheHellenisticAge’,inP.Cartledge,P.Garnsey,andE.Gruen(eds.),HellenisticConstructs:EssaysinCulture,HistoryandHistoriography(London),199–224.
Heuss,A.(1998),RömischeGeschichte(Paderborn).
Higbie,C.(1999),‘CraterusandtheUseofInscriptionsinAncientScholarship’,TransactionsoftheAmericanPhilologicalAssociation,129:279–308.
Bibliography
Page 17 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (2003),TheLindianChronicleandtheGreekCreationofthePast(Oxford).
HillervonGaertringen,F.(1918),‘AusderBelagerungvonRhodos304v.Chr.’,SitzungsberichtederPreussischenAkademiederWissenschaften,phil.-hist.Klasseno24–6:752–62.
Hoffmann,W.(1969),‘DasHilfegesuchderMamertineramVorabenddeserstenpunischenKrieges’,Historia,18:153–80.
Hölkeskamp,K.-J.(1987),DieEntstehungderNobilität.StudienzursozialenundpolitischenGeschichtederRömischenRepublikim4.Jhdt.v.Chr.(Stuttgart).
—— (1996),‘Exemplaundmosmaiorum.ÜberlegungenzumkollektivenGedächtnisderNobilität’,inH.-J.GehrkeandA.Möller(eds.),VergangenheitundLebenswelt.SozialeKommunikation,TraditionsbildungundhistorischesBewußtsein(Tübingen),301–38.
—— (1999),‘RömischegentesundgriechischeGenealogien’,inG.Vogt-SpiraandB.Rommel(eds.),RezeptionundIdentität.DiekulturelleAuseinandersetzungRomsmitGriechenlandalseuropäischesParadigma(Stuttgart),199–217.
—— (2004a),RekonstruktioneneinerRepublik.DiepolitischeKulturdesantikenRomunddieForschungderletztenJahrzehnte(Munich).
—— (2004b),SenatusPopulusqueRomanus.DiepolitischeKulturderRepublik—DimensionenundDeutungen(Stuttgart).
Holleaux,M.(1905),‘SurlesassembléesordinairesdelaligueAitolienne’,Bulletindecorrespondancehéllenique,29:362–72.
—— (1938–68),Étudesd’épigraphieetd’histoiregrecque,6vols.,ed.byL.Robert(Paris).
Hornblower,J.(1981),HieronymusofCardia(Oxford).
Hornblower,S.(1987),Thucydides(LondonandBaltimore).
—— (1991),ACommentaryonThucydides.Vol.I:BooksI–III(Oxford).
—— (1994),‘NarratologyandNarrativeTechniquesinThucydides’,inS.Hornblower(ed.),GreekHistoriography(Oxford),131–66.
—— (2004),‘“Thiswasdecided”(edoxetauta):TheArmyaspolisinXenophon’sAnabasisandElsewhere’,inR.J.LaneFox(ed.),TheLongMarch:XenophonandtheTenThousand(NewHavenandLondon),243–63.
Hoyos,B.D.(1984),‘Polybius’Romanοἱπολλοίin264B.C.’,LiverpoolClassicalMonthly,9:88–93.
Bibliography
Page 18 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1985a),‘Polybiusmendax?’,LiverpoolClassicalMonthly,10:135–9and153–6.
—— (1985b),‘TreatiesTrueandFalse:TheErrorofPhilinusofAgrigentum’,ClassicalQuarterly,35:92–109.
—— (1998),UnplannedWars:TheOriginsoftheFirstandSecondPunicWars(BerlinandNewYork).
—— (2007),TrucelessWar:Carthage’sFightforSurvival(Leiden).
Huss,W.(1985),GeschichtederKarthager(Munich).
—— (2001),ÄgypteninhellenistischerZeit.332–30v.Chr.(Munich).
Hutter,H.(1978),PoliticsasFriendship.TheOriginsofClassNotionsofPoliticsintheTheoryandPracticeofFriendship(Waterloo,Ontario).
Işık,C.,andMarek,C.(1997),DasMonumentdesProtogenesinKaunos,AsiaMinorStudien,26(Bonn).
Itgenshorst,T.(2005),Totaillapompa.DerTriumphinderrömischenPolitik(Göttingen).
Jacopich,G.(1928),‘Scaviedesplorazioninell’isoladiRodi’,ClaraRhodos,1:83–91.
Jeffery,L.H.(1967),‘Archaiagrammata:SomeAncientGreekViews’,inW.C.Brice(ed.),Europa.StudienzurGeschichteundEpigraphikderfrühenÄgäis.FestschriftE.Grumach(Berlin),152–66.
Jehne,M.(1995),‘Einführung.ZurDebatteumdieRolledesVolkesinderrömischenRepublik’,inM.Jehne(ed.),DemokratieinRom?DieRolledesVolkesinderPolitikderrömischenRepublik(Stuttgart),1–9.
—— (1999),‘CatounddieBewahrungdertraditionellenrespublica’,inG.Vogt-SpiraandB.Rommel(eds.),RezeptionundIdentität.DiekulturelleAuseinandersetzungRomsmitGriechenlandalseuropäischesParadigma(Stuttgart),115–34.
—— (2000),‘JovialitätundFreiheit.ZurInstitutionalisierungderBeziehungenzwischenOber-undUnterschichteninderrömischenRepublik’,inB.LinkeandM.Stemmler(eds.),Mosmaiorum.UntersuchungenzudenFormenderIdentitätsstiftungundStabilisierunginderrömischenRepublik(Stuttgart),207–35.
—— (2001),‘IntegrationsritualeinderrömischenRepublik.ZureinbindendenWirkungderVolksversammlungen’,inG.Urso(ed.),Integrazione,mescolanza,rifiuto.Incontridipopoli,lingueecultureinEuropadall’antichitàall’umanesimo(Rome),89–114.
Jones,C.P.(1999),KinshipDiplomacyintheAncientWorld(Cambridge,Mass.).
Jowitt,C.(ed.)(2006),Pirates?ThePoliticsofPlunder,1550–1650(Basingstoke).
Bibliography
Page 19 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Kaerst,J.(1929),‘ScipioAemilianus,dieStoaundderPrincipat’,inH.Kloft(ed.),IdeologieundHerrschaftinderAntike,WegederForschung,528(Darmstadt),205–37.
Kallet,L.(2006),‘Thucydides’WorkshopofHistoryandUtilityOutsidetheText’,inA.RengakosandA.Tsakmakis(eds.),Brill’sCompaniontoThucydides(Leiden),335–68.
Kallet-Marx,R.M.(1995),HegemonytoEmpire.TheDevelopmentoftheRomanImperiumintheEastfrom148to62B.C.(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
Kantzia,C.(1999),‘ΕναασυνήθιστοπολεμικόανάθημαστοιεροτηςοδούΔιαγόριδωνστηΡόδο’,inΡόδος2400χρόνια.ΗπόλητηςΡόδουαπότηνίδρυσήτηςμέχριτηνκατάληψηαπότουςΤούρκους(1532),24–9Οκτωβρίου,1993.Praktika(Athens),Vol.1,75–82.
Kennedy,G.(1972),TheArtofRhetoricintheRomanWorld300B.C.–A.D.300(Princeton).
Kennell,N.M.(2006),Ephebeia:ARegisterofGreekCitieswithCitizenTrainingSystemsintheHellenisticandRomanPeriods(Hildesheim).
Kienast,D.(1954),CatoderZensor.SeinePersönlichkeitundseineZeit(Darmstadt).
Kleingünther,A.(1933),ΠΡΩΤΟΣΕΥΡΕΤΗΣ.UntersuchungenzurGeschichteeinerFragestellung,PhilologusSuppl.,26(Leipzig).
Kloft,H.(1998),‘RealitätundImagination.ÜberlegungenzurHerrschaftstheorieinderrömischenRepublik’,inW.Schuller(ed.),PolitischeTheorieundPraxisimAltertum(Darmstadt),134–48.
Knoepfler,D.(1991),‘L.MummiusAchaicusetlescitésdugolfeeuboïque:àproposd’unenouvelleinscriptiond’Erétrie’,MuseumHelveticum,48:252–80.
Kondratieff,E.(2004),‘TheColumnandCoinageofC.Duillius:InnovationsinIconographyinLargeandSmallMediaintheMiddleRepublic’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,23:1–39.
Konstan,D.(1997),FriendshipintheClassicalWorld(Cambridge).
Konuk,K.(ed.)(2012),Stephanèphoros.Del'économieantiqueàl'Asiemineure,HommagesàRaymondDescat.Ausonius,Mémoireés,28(Bordeaux).
Koon,S.(2010),InfantryCombatinLivy’sBattleNarratives,BARInternationalSeries,2071(Oxford).
Kowalzig,B.(2007),SingingfortheGods.PerformancesofMythandRitualinArchaicandClassicalGreece(Oxford).
Kraus,M.(1997),‘Panaitios’,inO.Schütze(ed.),LexikonantikerAutoren(Darmstadt),497–9.
Bibliography
Page 20 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Kühner,R.,andStegmann,C.(1955,3rdedn.),AusführlicheGrammatikderlateinischenSprache:Satzlehre,rev.byA.Thierfelder(Leverkusen).
Labarre,G.(1996),LescitésdeLesbosauxépoqueshellénistiqueetimpériale,Collectiondel’Institutd’Archéologieetd’Histoiredel’Antiquité,UniversitéLumièreLyon2,Vol.1(Paris).
LaBua,V.(1981),‘CassioDione-Zonaraedaltretradizionisugliinizidellaprimaguerrapunica’,inL.Gasperini(ed.),ScrittisulmondoanticoinmemoriadiFulvioGrosso(Rome),241–71.
Laird,A.(1999),PowersofExpression,ExpressionsofPower(Oxford).
Laqueur,R.(1913),Polybius(Leipzig).
—— (1938),‘Philinos’(8),RealencyclopädiederclassischenAltertumswissenschaft,Vol.19(Stuttgart),cols.2180–93.
Larsen,J.A.O.(1952),‘TheAssemblyoftheAetolianLeague’,TransactionsoftheAmericanPhilologicalAssociation,83:1–33.
—— (1955),RepresentativeGovernmentinGreekandRomanHistory(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
Lateiner,D.(2009),‘TearsandCryinginHellenisticHistoriography.DacryologyfromHerodotustoPolybius’,inT.Fögen(ed.),TearsintheGraeco-RomanWorld(Berlin),105–34.
Lazenby,J.F.(1978),Hannibal’sWar(Warminster).
—— (1996),TheFirstPunicWar.AMilitaryHistory(LondonandPaloAlto,Calif.).
Lehmann,G.A.(1967),UntersuchungenzurhistorischenGlaubwürdigkeitdesPolybios(Münster).
—— (1974),‘PolybiosunddieältereundzeitgenössischegriechischeGeschichtsschreibung:EinigeBemerkungen’,inE.Gabba(ed.),Polybe,EntretiensHardt,20(Geneva),147–205.
—— (1988),‘DasneueKölnerHistoriker-Fragment(P.KölnNr.247)unddieχρονικὴσύνταξιςdesZenonvonRhodos’,ZPE72:1–17.
—— (1989/90),‘The‘‘Ancient’’GreekHistoryinPolybios’Historiae:TendenciesandPoliticalObjectives’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,10:67–77.
Leigh,M.(1997),Lucan:SpectacleandEngagement(Oxford).
Lenfant,D.(2005),‘Polybeetles‘‘fragments’’deshistoriensdeRhodesZénonet
Bibliography
Page 21 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Antisthène(XVI14–20)’,inG.SchepensandJ.Bollansée(eds.),TheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography(Leuven),183–204.
Leppin,H.(1999),ThukydidesunddieVerfassungderPolis.EinBeitragzurpolitischenIdeengeschichtedes5.Jahrhundertsv.Chr.,Klio-Beihefte,N.F.1(Berlin).
Levene,D.S.(2010),LivyontheHannibalicWar(Oxford).
Ligt,L.de(2007),‘RomanManpowerandRecruitmentduringtheMiddleRepublic’,inP.Erdkamp(ed.),ACompaniontotheRomanArmy(Oxford),114–31.
Limat-Letellier,N.(1998),‘Historiqueduconceptd’intertextualité’,inN.Limat-LetellierandM.Miguet-Ollagnier(eds.),L’intertextualité(BesançonandParis),17–64.
Lintott,A.W.(1997),‘CassiusDioandtheHistoryoftheLateRepublic’,AufstiegundNiedergangderrömischenWeltII.34.3:2497–2523.
—— (1999),TheConstitutionoftheRomanRepublic(Oxford).
Lippolis,E.(1993),‘IlsantuariodiAthanaaLindo’,AnnuariodellascuolaarcheologicadiAtene,n.s.66/67(1988/89):97–157.
Lorenz,K.(1931),UntersuchungenzumGeschichtswerkdesPolybios(Stuttgart).
Loreto,L.(2001),‘Laconvenienzadiperdereunaguerra.Lacontinuitàdellagrandestrategiacartaginese’,inY.LeBohec(ed.),Lapremièreguerrepunique(Lyon),39–105.
Luce,T.J.(1977),Livy.TheCompositionofHisHistory(Princeton).
Luraghi,N.(2000),‘AuthorandAudienceinThucydides’Archaeology.SomeReflections’,HarvardStudiesinClassicalPhilology,100:227–39.
Ma,J.(1999),AntiochosIIIandtheCitiesofWesternAsiaMinor(Oxford).
—— (2004/2010),‘YouCan’tGoHomeAgain:DisplacementandIdentityinXenophon’sAnabasis’,inR.J.LaneFox(ed.),TheLongMarch:XenophonandtheTenThousand(NewHavenandLondon),330–45,repr.inV.Gray(ed.),Xenophon(Oxford,2010),502–19.
Mader,G.(2000),JosephusandthePoliticsofHistoriography(Leiden).
Manning,J.G.(2007),‘HellenisticEgypt’,inW.Scheidel,I.Morris,andR.Saller(eds.),TheCambridgeEconomicHistoryoftheGreco-RomanWorld(NewYork),434–59.
Mansfeld,J.(1979),‘ProvidenceandtheDestructionoftheUniverseinEarlyStoicThought’,inM.J.Vermaseren(ed.),StudiesinHellenisticReligions,Étudespréliminairesauxreligionsorientalesdansl’empireromain,78(Leiden),129–88,repr.inJ.Mansfeld,StudiesinLaterGreekPhilosophyandGnosticism(London,1989),No.1[original
Bibliography
Page 22 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
paginationretained].
Manuwald,B.(1979),CassiusDioundAugustus(Wiesbaden).
Marincola,J.(1997),AuthorityandTraditioninAncientHistoriography(Cambridge).
—— (2001),GreekHistorians,Greece&RomeNewSurveysintheClassics,31(Oxford).
—— (2003),‘BeyondPityandFear:TheEmotionsofHistory’,AncientSociety,33:285–315.
—— (2009),‘Aristotle’sPoeticsand‘‘TragicHistory’’’,inD.IakovandS.Tsitsiridis(eds.),ΠΑΡΑΧΟΡΗΓΗΜΑ:StudiesinHonourofGregorySifakis(Heraklion),445–60.
—— (forthcoming),‘ManlyMatters:Gender,Emotion,andtheWritingofHistory’.
Martin,R.H.,andWoodman,A.J.(1989),TacitusAnnalsIV(Cambridge).
MartinBrown,R.(1934),AStudyoftheScipionicCircle,IowaStudiesinClassicalPhilology,1(IowaCity).
MartínezLacy,J.R.F.(1991),Ἔθηκαὶνόμιμα.PolybiusandhisConceptofCulture’,Klio,73:83–92.
Mason,S.(1994),‘Josephus,Daniel,andtheFlavianHouse’,inF.ParenteandJ.Sievers(eds.),JosephusandtheHistoryoftheGreco-RomanPeriod.EssaysinMemoryofMortonSmith(Leiden),161–91.
Mattingly,H.B.(1986),‘ScipioAemilianus’EasternEmbassy’,ClassicalQuarterly,36:491–5.
McDonald,A.H.(1958),ReviewofWalbank,HCPI,JournalofRomanStudies,48:179–83.
—— (1968),ReviewofWalbank,HCPII,JournalofRomanStudies,58:232–5.
McDonald,A.H.,andWalbank,F.W.(1937),‘TheOriginsoftheSecondMacedonianWar’,JournalofRomanStudies,27:180–207.
McGing,B.C.(2010),Polybius’Histories(NewYorkandOxford).
McLaren,J.S.(2005),‘JosephusonTitus:TheVanquishedWritingabouttheVictor’,inJ.SieversandG.Lembi(eds.),JosephusandJewishHistoryinFlavianRomeandBeyond(Leiden),279–95.
Meier,C.(1966),Respublicaamissa(Wiesbaden).
Meissner,B.(1992),HistorikerzwischenPolisundKönigshof:StudienzurStellungderGeschichtsschreiberindergriechischenGesellschaftinspätklassischerund
Bibliography
Page 23 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
frühhellenistischerZeit,Hypomnemata.UntersuchungenzurAntikeundzuihremNachleben,99(Göttingen).
—— (2007),Hellenismus(Darmstadt).
Meister,K.(1975),HistorischeKritikbeiPolybios(Wiesbaden).
—— (1990),DiegriechischeGeschichtsschreibung(Wiesbaden).
Mendels,D.(1977),‘Polybius,PhilipVandtheSocio-economicQuestioninGreece’,AncientSociety,8:155–74.
—— (1978),‘TheAttitudesofAntiochusIIItowardstheClassStruggleinGreece(192–191B.C.)’,RivistaStorica,8:27–38.
—— (1979),‘Polybius,Nabis,andEquality’,Athenaeum,57:311–33.
—— (1981a),‘TheFiveEmpires:ANoteonaPropagandisticTopos’,AmericanJournalofPhilology,102:330–7.
—— (1981b),‘PolybiusandtheSocio-economicReformsofCleomenesIII,Reexamined’,GrazerBeiträge,10:95–104.
—— (1982),‘PolybiusandtheSocio-economicRevolutioninGreece(227–146B.C.)’,L’Antiquitéclassique,51:86–110.
Merkelbach,R.(1977,2ndedn.),DieQuellendesgriechischenAlexanderromans,Zetemata.MonographienzurklassischenAltertumswissenschaft,9(Munich).
Miles,R.(2010),CarthageMustbeDestroyed.TheRiseandFallofanAncientMediterraneanCivilization(London).
Millar.F.(1964),AStudyofCassiusDio(Oxford).
—— (1984),‘ThePoliticalCharacteroftheClassicalRomanRepublic,200–151B.C.’,JournalofRomanStudies,74:1–19.
—— (1986),‘Politics,Persuasion,andthePeoplebeforetheSocialWar(150–90B.C.)’,JournalofRomanStudies,76:1–11.
—— (1989),‘PoliticalPowerinMid-RepublicanRome.CuriaorComitium?’,JournalofRomanStudies,79:138–50.
—— (1995),‘PopularPoliticsatRomeintheLateRepublic’,inI.MalkinandW.Z.Rubinsohn(eds.),LeadersandMassesintheRomanWorld.StudiesinHonourofZviYavetz(Leiden),91–113.
—— (1998),TheCrowdinRomeintheLateRepublic(AnnArbor,Mich.).
Bibliography
Page 24 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (2002a),TheRomanRepublicandtheAugustanRevolution(ChapelHill,NCandLondon).
—— (2002b),TheRomanRepublicinPoliticalThought(Hanover,NHandLondon).
Miltsios,N.(2009),‘ThePerilsofExpectation:Perceptions,SuspenseandSurpriseinPolybius’Histories’,inJ.GrethleinandA.Rengakos(eds.),NarratologyandInterpretation(Berlin),481–506.
Moles,J.L.(2001),‘AFalseDichotomy:Thucydides’HistoryandHistoricism’,inS.J.Harrison(ed.),Texts,IdeasandtheClassics:Scholarship,Theory,andClassicalLiterature(Oxford),195–219.
Momigliano,A.(1966),‘TimeinAncientHistoriography’,HistoryandTheory,6:1–23.
—— (1971),TheDevelopmentofGreekBiography:FourLectures(Cambridge,Mass.).
—— (1984),‘F.W.Walbank’,JournalofRomanStudies,74[notpaginated],repr.inA.Momigliano,OttavoContributoallastoriadeglistudiclassici(Rome,1987),424–6.
Mommsen,T.(1902–4,9thedn.),RömischeGeschichte,5vols.(Berlin).
—— (1913),GesammelteSchriften,Vol.VIII(Berlin).
Moore,J.M.(1965),TheManuscriptTraditionofPolybius(Cambridge).
Morelli,D.(1959),IcultiinRodi,Studiclassicieorientali,8(Pisa).
Morley,N.(1999),WritingAncientHistory(Ithaca,NYandLondon).
Morricone,L.(1953),‘IsacerdotidiHalios.FrammentodicatalogorinvenutoaRodi’,AnnuariodellascuolaarcheologicadiAtene,n.s.11–13(1949–51),351–80.
Morstein-Marx,R.(2004),MassOratoryandPoliticalPowerintheLateRomanRepublic(Cambridge).
Most,G.(1999),Commentaries—Kommentare,Aporemata:KritischeStudienzurPhilologiegeschichte,4(Göttingen).
Mouritsen,H.(2001),PlebsandPoliticsintheLateRomanRepublic(Cambridge).
Münscher,K.(1920),Xenophonindergriechisch-römischenLiteratur,PhilologusSuppl.,13/2(Leipzig).
Münzer,F.(1899),‘Claudius’(220),RealencyclopädiederclassischenAltertumswissenschaft,Vol.3(Stuttgart),cols.2738–55.
—— (1920),RömischeAdelsparteienundAdelsfamilien(Stuttgart).
Bibliography
Page 25 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Murray,O.(2008),‘PtolemaicRoyalPatronage’,inP.McKechnieandP.Guillaume(eds.),PtolemyIIPhiladelphusandhisWorld(Leiden),9–24.
Musti,D.(1978),Polibioel’imperialismoromano(Naples).
Newman,S.(2002),‘Aristotle’sNotionof‘‘Bringing-Before-the-Eyes’’:ItsContributionstoAristotelianandContemporaryConceptualizationsofMetaphor,Style,andAudience’,Rhetorica,20:1–23.
Nicolet,C.(1974),‘Polybeetlesinstitutionsromaines’,inE.Gabba(ed.),Polybe,EntretiensHardt,20(Geneva),209–65.
—— (1980),TheWorldoftheCitizeninRepublicanRome(London).
—— (1983),‘Polybeetla‘‘constitution’’deRome:aristocratieetdémocratie’,inC.Nicolet(ed.),Demokratiaetaristokratia(Paris),15–35.
Nilsson,M.P.(1955),DiehellenistischeSchule(Munich).
Nippel,W.(1980),MischverfassungstheorieundVerfassungsrealitätinAntikeundfrüherNeuzeit(Stuttgart).
Nissen,H.(1863),KritischeUntersuchungenüberdieQuellenderviertenundfünftenDekadedesLivius(Berlin).
North,J.A.(1990a),‘PoliticsandAristocracyintheRomanRepublic’,ClassicalPhilology,85:277–87.
—— (1990b),‘DemocraticPoliticsinRepublicanRome’,PastandPresent,126:3–21.
—— (2007),‘TheConstitutionoftheRomanRepublic’,inN.RosensteinandR.Morstein-Marx(ed.),ACompaniontotheRomanRepublic(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),256–77.
Nouhaud,M.(1982),L’utilisationdel’histoireparlesorateursattiques(Paris).
Oakley,S.P.(1995),ACommentaryonLivyBooksVI–X,Vol.1(Oxford).
—— (1998),ACommentaryonLivyBooksVI–X,Vol.2(Oxford).
Ogilvie,R.M.(1965),ACommentaryonLivyBooks1–5(Oxford).
—— andRichmond,I.A.(1967),CorneliiTacitiDeVitaAgricolae(Oxford).
O’Gorman,E.(2000),IronyandMisreadingintheAnnalsofTacitus(Cambridge).
Oliver,G.J.(2006),‘HistoryandRhetoric’,inG.R.Bugh(ed.),TheCambridgeCompaniontotheHellenisticWorld(Cambridge),113–35.
Olson,S.D.(2007),BrokenLaughter.SelectFragmentsofGreekComedy(Oxford).
Bibliography
Page 26 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Pani,M.(2001),LeragionidellastoriografiainGreciaeaRoma.Unaintroduzione(Bari).
Parente,F.(2005),‘TheImpotenceofTitus,orFlaviusJosephus’sBellumJudaicumasanExampleof‘‘Pathetic’’Historiography’,inJ.SieversandG.Lembi(eds.),JosephusandJewishHistoryinFlavianRomeandBeyond(Leiden),45–69.
Paton,W.R.,Walbank,F.W.,andHabicht,C.(2010),Polybios:TheHistories.Vol.2,Books3–4(Cambridge,Mass.).
Paul,G.M.(1993),‘ThePresentationofTitusintheJewishWarofJosephus:TwoAspects’,Phoenix,47:56–66.
Pauw,D.A.(1986),Diedramatieseelementindieantiekegeskiedskrywing(Johannesburg).
Pearson,L.(1987),TheGreekHistoriansoftheWest.TimaeusandHisPredecessors(Atlanta,Ga.).
Pédech,P.(1955),‘LaméthodechronologiquedePolybe,d’aprèslerécitdesinvasionsgauloises’,Comptesrendusdel’Académiedesinscriptionsetbelles-lettres,99:367–74.
—— (1964),LaméthodehistoriquedePolybe(Paris).
—— (1973),‘Polybefaceàlacriseromainedesontemps’,IXecongrèsinternationaldel’associationG.Budé:195–201.
—— (1977),Polybe.Histoires:Livre5(Paris).
—— (1989),Troishistoriensméconnus:Théopompe–Duris–Phylarque(Paris).
Pélékidis,C.(1962),Histoiredel’Ephébieattique,desoriginesà31av.J.-C.(Paris).
Pelling,C.(2007),‘TheGreekHistoriansofRome’,inJ.Marincola(ed.),ACompaniontoGreekandRomanHistoriography,Vol.1(Oxford),244–58.
Perrin-Saminadayar,É.(1999),‘Lessuccèsdeladiplomatieathéniennede229à168av.J.-C.’,Revuedesétudesgrecques,112:444–62.
—— (2007),‘Lepersonneld’encadrementdel’éphébieathénienne(229–88)’,inJ.-C.CouvenhesandS.Milanezi(eds.),Individus,groupesetpolitiqueàAthènesdeSolonàMithridate(Tours),385–419.
Pethes,N.,andRuchatz,J.(eds.)(2001),GedächtnisundErinnerung.EininterdisziplinäresLexikon(Reinbek).
Petzold,K.-E.(1969),StudienzurMethodedesPolybiosundzuihrerhistorischenAuswertung(Munich).
Bibliography
Page 27 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Pfister,F.(1951),DieReisebilderdesHeraclides.Einleitung,Text,ÜbersetzungundKommentarmiteinerÜbersichtüberdieGeschichtedergriechischenVolkskunde,SitzungsberichtederÖsterreichischenAkademiederWissenschaftinWien,227/2.
Phang,S.E.(2008),RomanMilitaryService:IdeologiesofDisciplineintheLateRepublicandEarlyPrincipate(Cambridge).
Pianezzola,E.(1969),Traduzioneeideologia:LiviointerpretediPolibio(Bologna).
Pohlenz,M.(1948),DieStoa:GeschichteeinergeistigenBewegung(Göttingen).
Polverini,L.(2005),‘DemocraziaaRoma?LacostituzionerepubblicanasecondoPolibio’,inG.Urso(ed.),Popoloepoterenelmondoantico.ConcezioniLinguaggioImmagini.AttidelconvegnointernazionaleCividaledelFriuli,23–25settembre2004(Pisa),85–96.
Porter,W.H.(1937),LifeofAratus,withIntroduction,NotesandAppendix(Dublin).
Pöschl,V.(1936),RömischerStaatundgriechischesStaatsdenkenbeiCicero(Berlin).
Poznanski,L.(1979),‘Encorelecoruus:delaterreàlamer’,Latomus,38:652–61.
Prandi,L.(2003),‘Treriflessionisull’usodeidocumentiscrittiinPolibio’,inA.-M.Biraschi,P.Desideri,S.Roda,andG.Zecchini(eds.)(2003),L’usodeidocumentinellastoriografiaantica,IncontriPeruginidiStoriadellaStoriografia,12(Naples),373–90.
—— (2005),‘PolibioeCallistene’,inG.SchepensandJ.Bollansée(eds.),TheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography(Leuven),73–87.
Préaux,C.(1978),Lemondehellénistique,laGrèceetl’Orient(323–146av.J.-C.),2vols.(Paris).
Price,J.(2005),‘TheProvincialHistorianinRome’,inJ.SieversandG.Lembi(eds.),JosephusandJewishHistoryinFlavianRomeandBeyond(Leiden),101–18.
Prinz,F.(1979),GründungsmythenundSagenchronologie,Zetemata.MonographienzurKlassischenAltertumswissenschaft,72(Munich).
Pritchett,W.K.(1969),StudiesinAncientGreekTopography:Part2(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
PuglieseCarratelli,G.(1955),‘CultianiconicidiRodieLesbo.ApropositodelledivinitàdiAhhijavaeLazpa’,StudiClassiciedOrientali,3:5–8.
—— (1981),‘AXAIAPOLISnelPeriplodiSkylax’,Paroladelpassato,36:391–2.
Purcell,N.(1995),‘OntheSackingofCarthageandCorinth’,inD.C.Innes,H.Hine,andC.B.R.Pelling(eds.),EthicsandRhetoric.ClassicalStudiesforDonaldRussellonhisSeventy-fifthBirthday(Oxford),133–48.
Bibliography
Page 28 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Purves,A.(2010),SpaceandTimeinAncientGreekNarrative(Cambridge).
Rawson,E.(1991),‘TheLiterarySourcesforthePre-MarianArmy’,ProceedingsoftheBritishSchoolatRome,39[1971]:13–31,repr.inE.Rawson,RomanCultureandSociety.CollectedPapers(Oxford),34–57.
Rebenich,S.(1997),‘HistoricalProse’,inS.E.Porter(ed.),HandbookofClassicalRhetoricintheHellenisticPeriod330BC–AD400(Leiden),265–337.
Reger,G.(2003),‘TheEconomy’,inA.Erskine(ed.),ACompaniontotheHellenisticWorld(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),331–53.
——(2007),‘HellenisticGreeceandWesternAsiaMinor’,inW.Scheidel,I.Morris,andR.Saller(eds.),TheCambridgeEconomicHistoryoftheGreco-RomanWorld(NewYork),460–83.
Reiske,J.J.(1763),AnimaduersionesadGraecosauctores,Vol.IV(Leipzig).
Reiter,W.(1988),AemiliusPaullus.ConquerorofGreece(London,NewYork,andSydney).
Rich,J.(1976),DeclaringWarintheRomanRepublicinthePeriodofTransmarineExpansion(Brussels).
—— (1996),‘TheOriginsoftheSecondPunicWar’,inT.Cornell,B.Rankov,andP.Sabin(eds.),TheSecondPunicWar.AReappraisal(London),1–37.
Riggsby,A.M.(2006),CaesarinGaulandRome.WarinWords(Austin,Tex.).
Rigsby,K.(1996),Asylia.TerritorialInviolabilityintheHellenisticWorld(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
Robert,L.(1967),Monnaiesgrecques.Types,légendes,magistratsmonétairesetgéographie,Centrederecherchesd’histoireetdephilologiedelaIVeSectiondel’ÉcolePratiquedesHautesÉtudes.I.HautesÉtudesnumismatiques,2(GenevaandParis).
Roesch,P.(1965),Thespiesetlaconfédérationbéotienne(Paris).
—— (1982),Étudesbéotiennes(Paris).
Romilly,J.de(1979),Ladouceurdanslapenséegrecque(Paris).
Rood,T.(1998),Thucydides.NarrativeandExplanation(Oxford).
—— (1999),‘Thucydides’PersianWars’,inC.S.Kraus(ed.),TheLimitsofHistoriography.GenreandNarrativeinAncientHistoricalTexts(Leiden),141–68.
—— (2004a),‘PanhellenismandSelf-Presentation:Xenophon’sSpeeches’,inR.J.LaneFox
Bibliography
Page 29 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(ed.),TheLongMarch:XenophonandtheTenThousand(NewHavenandLondon),305–29.
—— (2004b),‘XenophonandDiodorus:ContinuingThucydides’,inC.J.Tuplin(ed.),XenophonandhisWorld.PapersfromaConferenceheldinLiverpoolinJuly1999,HistoriaEinzelschriften,172(Stuttgart),341–95.
—— (2004c),‘Polybius’,inI.J.F.deJong,R.Nünlist,andA.M.Bowie(eds.),Narrators,Narratees,andNarrativesinAncientGreekLiterature(Leiden),147–64.
—— (2012),‘Polybius,Thucydides,andtheFirstPunicWar’,inC.J.SmithandL.M.Yarrow(eds.),Imperialism,CulturalPolitics,andPolybius(Oxford),50–67.
Rosenstein,N.(1990),ImperatoresVicti:MilitaryDefeatandAristocraticCompetitionintheMiddleandLateRepublic(Berkeley).
Rostovtzeff,M.(1926),TheSocialandEconomicHistoryoftheRomanEmpire(Oxford).
—— (1941),TheSocialandEconomicHistoryoftheHellenisticWorld(Oxford).
Roussel,D.(1970),Polybe,Histoire(Paris).
Roy,J.(2004),‘TheAmbitionsofaMercenary’,inR.J.LaneFox(ed.),TheLongMarch:XenophonandtheTenThousand(NewHavenandLondon),264–88.
Sacks,K.S.(1975),‘Polybius’OtherViewofAetolia’,JournalofHellenicStudies,95:92–106.
—— (1981),PolybiusontheWritingofHistory(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
—— (1990),DiodorusSiculusandtheFirstCentury(Princeton).
—— (1994),‘DiodorusandhisSources:ConformityandCreativity’,inS.Hornblower(ed.),GreekHistoriography(Oxford),213–32.
SainteCroix,G.E.M.de(1981),TheClassStruggleintheAncientGreekWorld(London).
Saller,R.P.(1982),PersonalPatronageundertheEarlyEmpire(Cambridge).
Salmon,E.T.(1967),SamniumandtheSamnites(Cambridge).
Scheidel,W.,Morris,I.,andSaller,R.(eds.)(2007),TheCambridgeEconomicHistoryoftheGreco-RomanWorld(NewYork).
Schepens,G.(1975),‘ἜμφασιςundἐνάργειαinPolybios’Geschichtstheorie’,Rivistastoricadell’antichità,5:185–200.
—— (1980),L’‘autopsie’danslaméthodedeshistoriensgrecsduVesiècleavantJ.-C.
Bibliography
Page 30 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(Brussels).
—— (1990),‘PolemicandMethodologyinPolybius’BookXII’,inH.Verdin,G.Schepens,andE.deKeyser(eds.),PurposesofHistory:StudiesinGreekHistoriographyfromthe4thtothe2ndCenturyB.C.ProceedingsoftheInternationalColloquiumLeuven,24–26May1988,Studiahellenistica,30(Leuven),39–61.
—— andBollansée,J.(eds.)(2005),TheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography,ProceedingsoftheInternationalColloquium,Leuven,21–22September2001,StudiaHellenistica,42(Leuven).
Schettino,M.T.(2003),‘DocumentidiplomaticiscrittiedocumentimilitarinonscrittinelPolibio‘‘romano’’’,inA.-M.Biraschi,P.Desideri,S.Roda,andG.Zecchini(eds.),L’usodeidocumentinellastoriografiaantica,IncontriPeruginidiStoriadellaStoriografia,12(Naples),391–412.
Schmitt,H.H.(1964),UntersuchungenzurGeschichteAntiochos’desGrossenundseinerZeit,HistoriaEinzelschriften,6(Wiesbaden).
Scholten,J.B.(2000),Thepoliticsofplunder.AitoliansandtheirkoinonintheearlyHellenisticera,279–217B.C.(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
Schramm,F.(1929),TragicorumGraecorumhellenisticaequaedicituraetatisfragmenta,diss.(Münster).
Schubert,C.(1995),‘MischverfassungundGleichgewichtssystem.PolybiosundseineVorläufer’,inC.SchubertandK.Brodersen(eds.),RomunddergriechischeOsten.FestschriftfürHattoH.Schmittzum65.Geburtstag(Stuttgart),225–35.
Schuller,W.(ed.)(1993),Livius:AspekteseinesWerkes(Constance).
Schulz,R.(2000),‘ZwischenKooperationundKonfrontation.DierömischeWeltreichsbildungunddiePiraterie’,Klio,82:409–25.
Schwartz,E.(1903/1957),‘Diodoros38’,RealencyclopädiederclassischenAltertumswissenschaft,Vol.1(Stuttgart),cols.663–704,repr.inhisGriechischeGeschichtsschreiber(Leipzig),35–97.
Scott,J.C.(1990),DominationandtheArtsofResistance.HiddenTranscripts(NewHaven).
Scullard,H.H.(1989),‘CarthageandRome’,CambridgeAncientHistory,VII.2(2ndedn.),486–569.
Seager,R.(1981),‘TheFreedomoftheGreeksofAsia:FromAlexandertoAntiochus’,ClassicalQuarterly,31:106–12.
Segre,M.(1941),‘IlcultorodiodiAlessandroedeiTolomei’,BulletindelaSociété
Bibliography
Page 31 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Royaled’Archéologied’Alexandrie,34:29–39.
——(1949),‘IlcultodiApolloPythaeusaRodi’,Paroladelpassato,4:72–82.
Seibert,J.(1994,4thedn.),AlexanderderGrosse(Darmstadt).
Serrati,J.(2006),‘Neptune’sAltars:TheTreatiesBetweenRomeandCarthage(509–226B.C.)’,ClassicalQuarterly,56:113–34.
Sharrock,A.,andMorales,H.(eds.)(2000),Intratextuality.GreekandRomanTextualTraditions(Oxford).
Shaya,J.(2005),‘TheGreekTempleasMuseum:TheCaseoftheLegendaryTreasureofAthenafromLindos’,AmericanJournalofArchaeology,109:423–42.
Shimron,B.(1979/80),‘PolybiusonRome:AReexaminationoftheEvidence’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,5:94–117.
Shrimpton,G.S.(1991),TheopompustheHistorian(Montreal).
Shurlock,B.(1986),TheWinchesterStory(Waterlooville).
Simmel,G.(1992),Soziologie.UntersuchungenüberdieFormderVergesellschaftung(FrankfurtamMain).
Skinner,Q.(2002),VisionsofPolitics,3vols.(Cambridge).
Smith,C.J.,andYarrow,L.M.(eds.)(2012),Imperialism,CulturalPolitics,andPolybius(Oxford).
Sordi,M.(1967/2002),‘IcorvidiDuilioelagiustificazionecartaginesedellabattagliadiMilazzo’,Rivistadifilologiaediistruzioneclassica,95:260–8,repr.inM.Sordi,ScrittidiStoriaRomana(Milan),193–201.
Spielvogel,J.(1993),Amicitiaundrespublica.CicerosMaximewährendderinnenpolitischenAuseinandersetzungenderJahre59–50v.Chr.(Stuttgart).
Spilsbury,P.(2003),‘FlaviusJosephusontheRiseandFalloftheRomanEmpire’,JournalofTheologicalStudies,54:1–24.
—— (2005),‘ReadingtheBibleinRome:JosephusandtheConstraintsofEmpire’,inJ.SieversandG.Lembi(eds.),JosephusandJewishHistoryinFlavianRomeandBeyond(Leiden),209–27.
Steinby,C.(2007),TheRomanRepublicanNavy:FromtheSixthCenturyto167BC(Helsinki)[e-thesis:.
Sterling,G.E.(2000),‘ExplainingDefeat:PolybiusandJosephusontheWarswithRome’,
Bibliography
Page 32 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
inJ.U.Kalms(ed.),InternationalesJosephus-Kolloquium,Aarhus,1999(Münster),135–51.
Stern,M.(1987),‘JosephusandtheRomanEmpireasReflectedinTheJewishWar’,inL.H.FeldmanandG.Hata(eds.),Josephus,Judaism,andChristianity(Detroit),71–80.
Stewart,A.(2000),‘OntheDate,ReconstructionandFunctionsoftheGreatAltarofPergamon’,inN.T.deGrummondandB.S.Ridgway(eds.),FromPergamontoSperlonga:SculptureandContext(BerkeleyandLosAngeles),32–57.
—— (2004),Attalos,AthensandtheAkropolis.ThePergamene‘LittleBarbarians’andtheirRomanandRenaissanceLegacy(Cambridge).
Stier,H.E.(1957),RomsAufstiegzurWeltmachtunddiegriechischeWelt(Cologne).
Strasburger,H.(1966),‘Der“Scipionenkreis” ’,Hermes,94:60–72.
Strauss,B.,andLebow,R.(1991),HegemonicRivalry.FromThucydidestotheNuclearAge(Boulder,Col.).
Stray,C.(2007),GilbertMurrayReassessed.Hellenism,TheatreandInternationalPolitics(Oxford).
—— (forthcoming),‘ReadingSilence(booksthatneverwere)’,inS.Eliot(ed.),AHistoryofOxfordUniversityPress(Oxford).
Syme,R.(1939),TheRomanRevolution(Oxford).
—— (1955),ReviewofT.R.S.Broughton,MRR(vols.1–2),ClassicalPhilology,50:127–38.
—— (1979),RomanPapers,vol.i(Oxford).
Taeger,F.(1922),DieArchäologiedesPolybios(Stuttgart).
Tarn,W.W.(1938),TheGreeksinBactriaandIndia(Cambridge).
Tatum,W.J.(2009),‘RomanDemocracy?’,inR.Balot(ed.),ACompaniontoAncientPoliticalThought(Oxford),214–28.
Thiel,J.(1954),AHistoryofRomanSea-PowerbeforetheSecondPunicWar(Amsterdam).
Thornton,J.(1995),‘IlsilenziodiAristeno:notaaPolibio22,10e24,11–13’,Rivistadiculturaclassicaemedioevale,37:261–72.
—— (1998),‘Trapoliticaestoria:Polibioelaguerraacaica’,MediterraneoAntico,1:585–634.
Bibliography
Page 33 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (2001),Lostoricoilgrammaticoilbandito.Momentidellaresistenzagrecaall’imperiumRomanum(Catania).
—— (2004),‘PolibioeRoma.Tendenzeneglistudidegliultimianni’,StudiRomani,52:108–39;508–25.
—— (2005),‘Pausaniaelaguerraacaica’,inL.TroianiandG.Zecchini(eds.),Laculturastoricaneiprimiduesecolidell’imperoromano,Alleradicidellacasacomuneeuropea,5(Rome),199–215.
—— (2010),‘Barbari,RomanieGreci.VersatilitàdiunmotivopolemiconelleStoriediPolibio’,inE.Migliario,L.Troiani,andG.Zecchini(eds.),Societàindigeneeculturagreco-romana,Trento7-8giugno2007(Rome),45–76.
Thraede,K.(1962),‘ErfinderII’,Rivistadiarcheologiacristiana,2:1191–1278.
Timpe,D.(1972),‘FabiusPictorunddieAnfängederrömischenHistoriographie’,AufstiegundNiedergangderrömischenWeltI.2:928–69,repr.inD.Timpe,AntikeGeschichtsschreibung.StudienzurHistoriographie(FrankfurtamMain,2007),132–81.
Toynbee,A.J.(1965),Hannibal’sLegacy,2vols.(London,NewYork,andToronto).
Tränkle,H.(1977),LiviusundPolybios(Basel).
Trundle,M.(2004),GreekMercenariesfromtheLateArchaicPeriodtoAlexander(AbingdonandNewYork).
Tsamakis,A.(1995),ThukydidesüberdieVergangenheit(Tübingen).
Tscherikower,V.(1927),DiehellenistischenStädtegründungenvonAlexanderdemGrossenbisaufdieRömerzeit,PhilologusSuppl.,19(Leipzig).
Tuplin,C.J.(2004),XenophonandhisWorld:PapersfromaConferenceheldinLiverpoolinJuly1999,HistoriaEinzelschriften,172(Stuttgart).
Ullrich,H.(1898),DePolybiifontibusRhodiis,diss.(Leipzig).
Urso,G.(2005),CassioDioneeimagistrati.LeoriginidellarepubblicaneiframmentidellaStoriaromana(Milan).
VanderSpek,R.J.(2007),‘TheHellenisticNearEast’,inW.Scheidel,I.Morris,andR.Saller(eds.),TheCambridgeEconomicHistoryoftheGreco-RomanWorld(NewYork),409–33.
Vasunia,P.(2011),‘TheComparativeStudyofEmpires’,JournalofRomanStudies,101:222–37.
Bibliography
Page 34 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Vegetti,M.(1989),‘LospettacolodellastoriainPolibio:Genealogiadiunequivoco’,inD.LanzaandO.Longo(eds.),Ilmeravigliosoeilverosimiletraantichitàemedioevo(Florence),121–8.
Virgilio,B.(2007),‘Polibio,ilmondoellenisticoeRoma’,Athenaeum,95:49–73.
Volkmann,H.(1955),‘DieindirekteErzählungbeiDiodor’,RheinischesMuseum,98:354–67.
vonFritz,K.(1954),TheTheoryoftheMixedConstitutioninAntiquity:ACriticalAnalysisofPolybius’PoliticalIdeas(NewYork).
—— (1958),‘DieBedeutungdesAristotelesfürdieGeschichtsschreibung’,inHistoireethistoriensdansl’Antiquité,EntretiensHardt,4(Geneva),85–145.
Vössing,K.(2006),‘Rom–RepublikundKaiserzeit’,inJ.Christes,R.Klein,andC.Lüth(eds.),HandbuchderErziehungundBildunginderAntike(Darmstadt),136–45.
Walbank,F.W.(1933),AratosofSicyon(Cambridge).
—— (1935),‘SocialRevolutionatSparta’(unpublishedpaper),SCAD1037/2/3/21/5.
—— (1936),‘Aratos’AttackonCynaetha(PolybiosIX,17)’,JournalofHellenicStudies,56:64–71.
—— (1937),ReviewofPorter(1937),ClassicalReview,51:223–5.
—— (1938),‘ΦΙΛΛΙΠΠΟΣΤΡΑΓΩΙΔΟΥΜΕΝΟΣ.APolybianExperiment’,JournalofHellenicStudies,58:55–68.
—— (1939/40),ReviewofCambridgeAncientHistory,vol.XII(1939),GreeceandRome,9:54–5.
—— (1940a),PhilipVofMacedon(Cambridge).
—— (1940b),‘Liciatelaeaddere(Virgil,Georg.I.284-6)’,ClassicalQuarterly,34:93–104.
—— (1942a),‘OlympichusofAlindaandtheCarianExpeditionofAntigonusDoson’,JournalofHellenicStudies,62:8–13.
—— (1942b),ReviewofJ.Göhler,RomundItalien(Breslau,1939),ClassicalReview,56:86–8.
—— (1942c),ReviewofRostovtzeff(1941),ClassicalReview,56:81–4.
——(1942d),‘AlcaeusofMessene,PhilipV,andRome’,ClassicalQuarterly,36:134–45.
—— (1943a),‘IsOurRomanHistoryTeachingReactionary?’,GreeceandRome,12:57–
Bibliography
Page 35 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
61[publishedunderthename‘Examiner’].
—— (1943b),‘AlcaeusofMessene,PhilipV,andRome’,ClassicalQuarterly,37:1–13.
—— (1943c),‘PolybiusontheRomanConstitution’,ClassicalQuarterly,37:73–89.
—— (1943d),ReviewofJ.Day,AnEconomicHistoryofAthensunderRomanDomination(NewYork,1942),GreeceandRome,12:91–3.
—— (1944),‘TheCausesofGreekDecline’,JournalofHellenicStudies,64:10–20.
—— (1945a),‘Polybius,PhilinusandtheFirstPunicWar’,ClassicalQuarterly,39:1–18,repr.inWalbank(1985),77–98.
—— (1945b),ReviewofR.Taubenschlag,TheLawofGreco-RomanEgyptintheLightofthePapyri332B.C.–640A.D.(NewYork,1944),GreeceandRome,14:93.
—— (1946a),TheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest(London).
—— (1946b),ReviewofJ.L.Myres,MediterraneanCulture(Cambridge,1943),GreeceandRome,15:31.
—— (1946c),ReviewofFeyel(1942),GreeceandRome,15:41–3.
—— (1946d),Resuméof‘PolybiusandtheGrowthofRome’,ProceedingsoftheClassicalAssociation,43:11–12(fulltextatSCAD1037/2/3/21/3).
—— (1947a),ReviewofJ.Vallejo,TitoLivio,LibroXXI(Madrid,1946),ClassicalReview,61:107–9.
—— (1947b),ReviewofJ.H.Thiel,StudiesontheHistoryofRomanSea-PowerinRepublicanTimes(Amsterdam,1946),Erasmus,1:655–8.
—— (1948a),‘TheGeographyofPolybius’,ClassicaetMedievalia,9:155–82,repr.inWalbank(2002),31–52.
—— (1948b),ReviewofH.Stier,GrundlagenundSinndergriechischenGeschichte(Stuttgart),JournalofHellenicStudies,68:160–1.
—— (1949a),ReviewofM.Cary,TheGeographicBackgroundofGreekandRomanGeography(Oxford,1949),JournalofHellenicStudies,69:101.
—— (1949b),ReviewofJ.O.Thomson,HistoryofAncientGeography(Cambridge,1948),EnglishHistoricalReview,64:360–1.
—— (1950a),ReviewofR.Paribeni,LaMacedoniasinoadAlessandroMagno(Milan,1947),JournalofHellenicStudies,70:81.
—— (1950b),ReviewofE.Mioni,Polibio(Padua,1949),Erasmus,3:273–6.
Bibliography
Page 36 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1950c),ReviewofF.Schachermeyr,AlexanderderGrosse.IngeniumundMacht(Graz,Salzburg,andVienna,1949),Gnomon,22:188.
—— (1950d),‘TheClassicsinEngland:SomeProblemsoftheLastDecade’,SodalitasErasmiana.1.Ilvaloreuniversaledell’umanesimo.AttidellaRiunionecostitutiva,Roma,20–23settembre1949(Naples),112–17.
—— (1951),‘TheProblemofGreekNationality’,Phoenix,5:41–60,repr.inWalbank(1985),1–19.
—— (1952),‘TradeandIndustryundertheLaterRomanEmpireintheWest’,inM.PostanandE.E.Rich(eds.),TheCambridgeEconomicHistoryofEurope,Vol.II.TradeandIndustryintheMiddleAges(Cambridge),33–85.
—— (1953a),ReviewofS.Davis,Race-relationsinAncientEgypt:Greek,Egyptian,Hebrew,Roman(London,1951),JournalofHellenicStudies,73:174.
—— (1953b),ReviewofW.Hartke,RömischeKinderkaiser(Berlin,1951),ClassicalReview,n.s.3:47–9.
—— (1954a),ReviewofW.H.Porter,PlutarchLifeofDion(Dublin,1952),ClassicalReview,n.s.4:18–20.
—— (1954b),ReviewofM.Holleaux,Étudesd’épigraphieetd’histoiregrecque,Vol.4(Paris,1952),Erasmus,7:51–4.
—— (1954c),ReviewofM.Grant,AncientHistory(London,1952),History,39:102.
—— (1955a),‘TragicHistory:AReconsideration’,BulletinoftheInstituteofClassicalStudies,2:4–14.
—— (1955b),ReviewofvonFritz(1954),JournalofRomanStudies,45:150–5.
—— (1956a),‘SomeReflectionsonHannibal’sPass’,JournalofRomanStudies,46:37–45,repr.inWalbank(1985),107–19.
—— (1956b),ReviewofS.Katz,TheDeclineofRomeandtheRiseofMedievalEurope(Ithaca,NY,1955),ClassicalReview,n.s.6:291–3.
—— (1958a),ReviewofH.Berve,Dion(Wiesbaden,1957),ClassicalReview,n.s.8:269–71.
—— (1958b),ReviewofP.Cloché,Unfondateurd’empire:PhilippeII,roideMacédoine(383/2-336/5)(St.Étienne,1955),ClassicalReview,n.s.8:156–8.
—— (1959a),ReviewofR.Syme,ColonialElites:Rome,SpainandtheAmericas(London,1958),JournalofRomanStudies,49:217.
Bibliography
Page 37 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1959b),ReviewofA.Toynbee,Hellenism.TheHistoryofaCivilization(Oxford,1959),History,44:244–5.
—— (1960a),‘HistoryandTragedy’,Historia,9:216–34,repr.inWalbank(1985),224–41.
—— (1960b),ReviewofN.G.L.Hammond,AHistoryofGreeceto322B.C.(Oxford,1959),History,45:131–3.
Walbank,F.W.(1962),‘PolemicinPolybius’,JournalofRomanStudies,52:1–12;repr.inWalbank(1985),262–79.
—— (1963a),‘PolybiusandRome’sEasternPolicy’,JournalofRomanStudies,53:1–13,repr.inWalbank(1985),138–56.
—— (1963b),ReviewofC.Mossé,Lafindeladémocratieathénienne(Paris,1962),ClassicalReview,n.s.13:317–19.
—— (1964a),‘PolybiusandtheRomanState’,Greek,RomanandByzantineStudies,5:239–60.
—— (1964b),ReviewofA.W.Gomme,MoreEssaysinGreekHistoryandLiterature(Oxford,1962),JournalofHellenicStudies,84:201–2.
—— (1965),‘PoliticalMoralityandtheFriendsofScipio’,JournalofRomanStudies,55:1–16,repr.inWalbank(1985),157–80.
—— (1966a),‘TheSpartanAncestralConstitutioninPolybius’,inE.Badian(ed.),AncientSocietyandInstitutions.StudiesPresentedtoVictorEhrenbergonhis75thBirthday(Oxford,1966),303–12.
—— (1966b),ReviewofToynbee(1965),ClassicalReview,n.s.16:384–8.
—— (1966c),ReviewofL.Pareti,P.Brezzi,andL.Petech,TheAncientWorld,1200B.C.toA.D.500.Part2.Fromabout500B.C.totheChristianEra(London,1965),History,51:197–8.
—— (1967),ReviewofR.H.Barrow,PlutarchandhisTimes(London,1967),Listener,77:692–3.
—— (1968),ReviewofLehmann(1967),JournalofRomanStudies,58:253–4.
—— (1969),TheAwfulRevolution.TheDeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest(Liverpool).
—— (1970a),‘PolybiusandMacedonia’,AncientMacedonia,1:291–307,repr.inWalbank(2002),91–106.
—— (1970b),‘AnExperimentinGreekUnion’,ProceedingsoftheClassicalAssociation,
Bibliography
Page 38 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
67:13–27.
—— (1972a),Polybius,SatherClassicalLectures,42(BerkeleyandLosAngeles).
—— (1972b),‘NationalityasaFactorinRomanHistory’,HarvardStudiesinClassicalPhilology,76:145–68,repr.inWalbank(1985),57–76.
—— (1974a),‘SynchronismsinPolybius,BooksIVandV’,inJ.A.S.Evans(ed.),PolisandImperium:StudiesinHonourofEdwardTogoSalmon(Toronto),59–80,repr.inWalbank(1985),298–312.
—— (1974b),‘PolybiusBetweenGreeceandRome’,inE.Gabba(ed.),Polybe,EntretiensHardt,20(Geneva),1–31,repr.inWalbank(1985),280–97.
—— (1975),‘Symploke:ItsRoleinPolybius’Histories’,YaleClassicalStudies,24:197–212,repr.inWalbank(1985),313–24.
—— (1976/7),‘WerethereGreekFederalStates?’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,3:27–51,repr.inWalbank(1985),20–37.
—— (1977a),‘Polybius’LastTenBooks’,HistoriographiaAntiqua:CommentationesLovaniensesinhonoremW.Peremansseptuagenariieditae(Leuven),139–62,repr.inWalbank(1985),325–43.
—— (1977b),‘TheCausesoftheThirdMacedonianWar:RecentViews’,AncientMacedoniaII.PapersReadattheSecondInternationalSymposiumheldinThessaloniki,19–24August1973(Thessaloniki),81–94.
—— (1977c),‘TheOriginalExtentoftheViaEgnatia’,LiverpoolClassicalMonthly,2:73–4.
—— (1980),‘TheIdeaofDeclineinPolybius’,inS.KoselleckandP.Widmer(eds.),Niedergang.StudienzueinemgeschichtlichenThema,SpracheundGeschichte,2(Stuttgart),41–58,repr.inWalbank(2002),193–211.
—— (1983a),‘Viaillanostramilitaris:SomeThoughtsontheViaEgnatia’,inH.Heinen,K.Stroheker,andG.Walser(eds.),AlthistorischeStudien:HermannBengtsonzum70.GeburtstagdargebrachtvonKollegenundSchülern,HistoriaEinzelschriften,40(Wiesbaden),131–47,repr.inWalbank(1985)193–209.
—— (1983b),ReviewofdeSte.Croix(1981),JournalofHellenicStudies,103:199–200.
—— (1983c),ReviewofJ.Hornblower(1981),AntiquariesJournal,63:162–3.
—— (1983d),‘WhatMadeaHellenisticKing?’,ProceedingsoftheClassicalAssociation,80:19–20.
—— (1984a),‘MonarchiesandMonarchicIdeas’,CambridgeAncientHistory,VII.1(2nd
Bibliography
Page 39 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
edn.):62–100.
—— (1984b),‘MacedoniaandGreece’,CambridgeAncientHistory,VII.1(2ndedn.):221–56.
—— (1984c),ReviewofE.E.Rice,TheGrandProcessionofPtolemyPhiladelphus(Oxford,1983),LiverpoolClassicalMonthly,9:52–4.
—— (1985),SelectedPapers:StudiesinGreekandRomanHistoryandHistoriography(Cambridge).
—— (1986),‘TheViaEgnatia:SomeOutstandingProblems’,inAncientMacedoniaIV.PapersReadattheFourthInternationalSymposiumHeldinThessaloniki,September21–25,1983(Thessaloniki),673–80.
—— (1989/90),‘Timaeus’ViewsonthePast’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,10:41–54.
—— (1990),‘ProfitorAmusement:SomeThoughtsontheMotivesofHellenisticHistorians’,inH.Verdin,G.Schepens,andE.deKeyser(eds.),PurposesofHistory:StudiesinGreekHistoriographyfromthe4thtothe2ndCenturiesB.C.,StudiaHellenistica,30(Leuven),253–66,repr.inWalbank(2002),231–41.
—— (1991/2),‘TheHellenisticWorld:NewTrendsandDirections’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,11:90–113.
—— (1992a),Hypomnemata(Cambridge,privatelyprinted,reformatted2007),SCAD1037/2/3/11/7.
—— (1992b,2ndedn.),TheHellenisticWorld(London).
—— (1993a),‘PolybiusandthePast’,inH.D.Jocelyn(ed.),TriaLustra.EssaysandNotesPresentedtoJohnPinsent,LiverpoolClassicalPapers,3(Liverpool),15–23,repr.inWalbank(2002),178–92.
—— (1993b),‘ΗΤΩΝΟΛΩΝΕΛΠΙΣandtheAntigonids’,AncientMacedonia,3:1721–30,repr.inWalbank(2002),127–36.
—— (1994),‘SupernaturalParaphernaliainPolybius’Histories’,inI.Worthington(ed.),VenturesintoGreekHistory(Oxford),28–42,repr.inWalbank(2002),245–57.
—— (1995),‘“Treason”andRomanDomination:TwoCase-studies,PolybiusandJosephus’,inC.SchubertandK.Brodersen(eds.),RomunddergriechischeOsten:FestschriftfürHattoH.Schmittzum65.Geburtstag(Stuttgart),273–85,repr.inWalbank(2002),258–76.
Walbank,F.W.(1996),‘1940s-1980s’,inP.E.H.Hair(ed.),Arts.Letters.Society.AMiscellanyCommemoratingtheCentenaryoftheFacultyofArtsattheUniversityofLiverpool(Liverpool),101–5.
Bibliography
Page 40 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
—— (1997),ReviewofS.Hornblower(ed.),GreekHistoriography(Oxford1994),Histos,1,availableonlineat
—— (1998a),TheUniversityofLiverpoolFacultyofArtsCentenaryLecture.ArtsatLiverpool:TheFirstHundredYears(Liverpool).
—— (1998b),‘AGreekLooksatRome:PolybiusVIRevisited’,ScriptaClassicaIsraelica,17:45–59,repr.inWalbank(2002),277–92.
—— (2000),‘HellenesandAchaeans:“GreekNationality”Revisited’,inP.Flensted-Jensen(ed.),FurtherStudiesintheAncientGreekPolis,HistoriaEinzelschriften,138(Stuttgart),19–33,repr.inWalbank(2002),137–52.
—— (2002),Polybius,RomeandtheHellenisticWorld:EssaysandReflections(Cambridge).
—— (2005a),‘TheTwo-wayShadow:PolybiusamongtheFragments’,inG.SchepensandJ.Bollansée(eds.),TheShadowofPolybius:IntertextualityasaResearchToolinGreekHistoriography(Leuven),1–18.
—— (2005b),ReviewofWiemer(2001),Gnomon,76:77–8.
—— (2007),‘Fortune(tyche)inPolybius’,inJ.Marincola(ed.),ACompaniontoGreekandRomanHistoriography,Vol.2(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),349–55.
Walker,A.D.(1993),‘EnargeiaandtheSpectatorinGreekHistoriography’,TransactionsoftheAmericanPhilologicalAssociation,123:353–77.
Wallace,R.(2009),‘PersonalFreedominGreekDemocracies,RepublicanRomeandModernLiberalStates’,inR.K.Balot(ed.),ACompaniontoGreekandRomanPoliticalThought(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),164–77.
Wallace-Hadrill,A.(1989),PatronageinAncientSociety(London).
Walsh,P.G.(1958),‘TheNegligentHistorian:“Howlers”inLivy’,GreeceandRome,5:83–8.
—— (1994),LivyBookXXXIX(Warminster).
Walter,U.(2003),‘AhnMachtSinn.FamilientraditionundFamilienprofilimrepublikanischenRom’,inK.-J.Hölkeskamp(ed.),Sinn(in)derAntike.Orientierungssysteme,LeitbilderundWertkonzepteimAltertum(Mainz),255–78.
—— (2004),Memoriaundrespublica.ZurGeschichtskulturimrepublikanischenRom(FrankfurtamMain).
Waterfield,R.(2010),Polybius.TheHistories(Oxford).
Bibliography
Page 41 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Weber,G.(1993),DichtungundhöfischeGesellschaft.DieRezeptionvonZeitgeschichteamHofdererstendreiPtolemäer,HermesEinzelschriften,62(Stuttgart).
Weil,R.,andNicolet,C.(1977),PolybeHistoireslivreVI(Paris).
Weissenborn,W.,andMüller,H.J.(1883),TitiLiuiaburbeconditalibri,Vol.VII.2(Berlin).
—— (1909),TitiLiuiaburbeconditalibri,Vol.IX.1(Berlin).
Welles,C.B.(1934),RoyalCorrespondenceintheHellenisticPeriod:AStudyinGreekEpigraphy(NewHavenandLondon).
Welwei,K.W.(1963),KönigeundKönigtumimUrteildesPolybios(Herbede).
—— (1966),‘DemokratieundMassebeiPolybios’,Historia,15:282–301.
White,P.(1978),‘AmicitiaandtheProfessionofPoetryinEarlyImperialRome’,JournalofRomanStudies,68:74–92.
Wiedemann,T.(1990),‘RhetoricinPolybius’,inH.Verdin,G.Schepens,andE.deKeyser(eds.),PurposesofHistory:StudiesinGreekHistoriographyfromthe4thtothe2ndCenturyB.C.ProceedingsoftheInternationalColloquiumLeuven,24–26May1988,Studiahellenistica,30(Leuven),288–300.
Wiemer,H.-U.(2001),RhodischeTraditioneninderhellenistischenHistoriographie,FrankfurterAlthistorischeBeiträge,7(FrankfurtamMain).
—— (2002),Krieg,HandelundPiraterie.UntersuchungenzurGeschichtedeshellenistischenRhodos,Klio.BeiträgezurAltenGeschichte,NeueFolge,6(Berlin).
—— (2009a),‘NeueFeste–neueGeschichtsbilder?ZurErinnerungsfunktiongriechischerFesteimHellenismus’,inH.BeckandH.-U.Wiemer(eds.),FeiernundErinnern.GeschichtsbilderimSpiegelantikerFeste,StudienzurAltenGeschichte,12(Berlin),83–108.
—— (2009b),‘BilddesKönigsoderBildderStadt?ZurRepräsentationsfunktionstädtischerFesteimHellenismus’,inM.Zimmermann(ed.),StadtbilderimHellenismus(Berlin),122–37.
—— (2010),‘StructureandDevelopmentoftheRhodianPeraia:EvidenceandModels’,inR.vanBremenandJ.-M.Carbon(eds.),HellenisticCaria(BordeauxandParis),415–34.
—— (2011),‘EarlyHellenisticRhodes:TheStruggleforIndependenceandtheDreamofHegemony’,inA.Erskine(ed.),CreatingaHellenisticWorld(Swansea),123–46.
Will,E.(1979–82,2ndedn.),Histoirepolitiquedumondehellénistique(323–30av.J.-C.),2vols.(Nancy).
Bibliography
Page 42 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Williams,J.H.C.(2001),BeyondtheRubicon.RomansandGaulsinRepublicanItaly(Oxford).
Wilson,J.P.(1994),‘GrexScipionisinDeAmicitia.AReplytoGaryForsythe’,AmericanJournalofPhilology,115:269–71.
Winterling,A.(1999),AulaCaesaris.StudienzurInstitutionalisierungdesrömischenKaiserhofesinderZeitvonAugustusbisCommodus(31v.Chr.–192n.Chr.)(Munich).
—— (2001),‘“Staat”,“Gesellschaft”undpolitischeIntegrationinderrömischenKaiserzeit’,Klio,83:93–112.
—— (2003),Caligula.EineBiographie(Munich).
Witte,K.(1910),‘ÜberdieFormderDarstellunginLivius’Geschichtswerk’,RheinischesMuseum,65:270–305,359–419.
Woodman,A.J.(1983),VelleiusPaterculus.TheCaesarianandAugustanNarrative(2.41–93)(Cambridge).
—— (1988),RhetoricinClassicalHistoriography(LondonandSydney).
—— (2004),Tacitus,TheAnnals.Translation,withIntroductionandNotes(Indianapolis).
Wooten,C.(1974),‘TheSpeechesinPolybius:AnInsightintotheNatureofHellenisticOratory’,AmericanJournalofPhilology,95:235–51.
Worthington,I.(1989),‘TheDeathofScipioAemilianus’,Hermes,117:253–6.
Yakobson,A.(1992),‘Petitioetlargitio:PopularParticipationintheCenturiateAssemblyoftheLateRepublic’,JournalofRomanStudies,82:32–52.
—— (2007),‘PopularPowerintheRomanRepublic’,inN.RosensteinandR.Morstein-Marx(eds.),ACompaniontotheRomanRepublic(OxfordandMalden,Mass.),383–400.
Yarrow,L.M.(2006),HistoriographyattheEndoftheRepublic:ProvincialPerspectivesonRomanRule(Oxford).
Yavetz,Z.(1975),‘ReflectionsonTitusandJosephus’,Greek,RomanandByzantineStudies,16:411–32.
Zahrnt,M.(2000),‘PubliusCorneliusScipioAemilianus—derintriganteEnkel’,inK.-J.HölkeskampandE.Stein-Hölkeskamp(eds.),GroßeGestaltenderrömischenRepublik(Munich),159–71.
—— (2002),‘Anpassung—Widerstand—Integration.PolybiosunddierömischePolitik’,inN.EhrhardtandL.-M.Günther(eds.),Widerstand—Anpassung—Integration.DiegriechischeStaatenweltundRom(Stuttgart),77–102.
Bibliography
Page 43 of 43
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Zangara,A.(2007),Voirl’histoire:Théoriesanciennesdurécithistorique,IIesiècleavantJ.-C.–IIesiècleaprèsJ.-C.(Paris).
Zanker,G.(1981),‘EnargeiaintheAncientCriticismofPoetry’,RheinischesMuseum,124:297–311.
Zecchini,G.(1978),CassioDioneelaguerragallicadiCesare(Milan).
—— (2003),‘LeletterecomedocumentiinPolibio’,inA.-M.Biraschi,P.Desideri,S.Roda,andG.Zecchini(eds.)(2003),L’usodeidocumentinellastoriografiaantica,IncontriPeruginidiStoriadellaStoriografia,12(Naples),413–22.
Zegers,N.(1959),WesenundUrsprungdertragischenGeschichtsschreibung,diss.(Cologne).
Zetzel,J.E.G.(1972),‘CiceroandtheScipionicCircle’,HarvardStudiesinClassicalPhilology,76:173–9.
—— (1995),Cicero,DeRePublica:Selections(Cambridge).
Ziolkowski,A.(1993),‘Urbsdirepta,orHowtheRomansSackedCities’,inJ.Rich,andG.Shipley(eds.),WarandSocietyintheRomanWorld(LondonandNewYork),69–91.
Zucchelli,B.(1985),‘EchidellaPoeticadiAristoteleinPolibio?Apropositodistoriografiaetragedia’,inSapienzaantica:studiinonorediDomenicoPesce(Milan),297–309.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
Index Locorum
Page 1 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.389) IndexLocorumForepigraphicandotherabbreviationsusedhereseepp.ix–xabove.Squarebracketsdenotepseudonymousauthors,e.g.[Lysias]=Ps.-Lysias
AeliusAristidesOr.25.4: 302
Aeschines1.179: 2523.169: 252
AlcaeusofMessene Sees.v.PalatineAnthology9.518Alexis(comicpoet)
F239K–A: 275AlexisofSamos(FGrHist539)
F2: 314Alcimus(FGrHist560)
F4: 343Antiphanes
F189K-A: 88–9Apollodorus(FGrHist240)
Index Locorum
Page 2 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
F1: 285F22: 285
AppianCelt.1.8: 285Ib.11: 156Pun.132: 263,308Syr.114–21: 284Syr.132–36: 284
AristophanesEccl.944–5: 252Nub.1506–9: 252Plut.1044: 252
[Aristotle],AthenaionPoliteia18.1: 314
AristotleInsomn.461a24–5: 164Metaph.1074b: 297Meteor.352a–353a: 297Poet.9,1451a38–b5: 73Ph.248a1–2: 164Pol.1253a1–5: 241
ArrianAnab.1.12.3: 162
Athenaeus5.22–24,194c–195f: 3276.82,262e–263b: 2968.61,360d–361c: 2948.61,360d–e: 2938.1,330c–331b: 32813.72,599c: 31415.52,696f: 299
Callimachusfr.100.4Pfeiffer: 293
CassiusDiofr.55B: 156fr.40.7–12: 149fr.43: 150fr.43.16–18: 13353.19: 198SeealsoZonaras
Catofr.84: 151
Deremilitari15: 242[Cicero]
Rhet.Her.1.13: 88Cicero
Index Locorum
Page 3 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Amic.69: 310Div.1.43: 151Fam.4.5.4: 8Luc.5: 316Rep.3.7: 154Rep.3.21: 3112Verr.2.4: 1462Verr.2.8: 146
Conon(FGrHist26)F1§47: 305
Daniel,Bookof2:31–5: 2642:36–45: 264
[Demosthenes]25.24: 25225.66: 25226.10: 25226.27: 25259.88: 252
Demosthenes1.5: 17920.120: 25220.148: 25221.150: 252(p.390) 24.5: 252
DeVirisIllustribus11.1: 24137.2: 15038.1: 133
DieuchidasofMegara(FGrHist485)F7: 296
DiodorusSiculus1.1: 2201.1.1: 87–84.58.8: 2935.55–9: 2855.55.1: 2865.55.2: 2885.55.4: 2885.55.5: 288,3065.55.6–7: 2885.56.1–2: 2885.56.2–3: 2885.56.3: 3035.56.5–7: 290
Index Locorum
Page 4 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5.56.7: 2865.57.2–5: 2915.57.6–8: 291,2935.58.2–3: 2945.58.3: 2945.58.4–5: 2965.59.1–4: 2967.5.4: 15213.103.5: 28520.81–8: 29820.81.1–4: 30020.82.1–4: 30020.82.4–84.6: 30120.82.4: 29920.83.1: 29920.83.2: 30120.84.2: 30220.84.3–4: 30220.84.4: 30320.84.5–6: 30220.85–8: 299,30120.87.4: 30220.88.3–7: 30220.88.3: 30320.88.8: 301,30320.91–100.4: 298,30120.91–92.1: 29920.91: 30120.92: 30120.93.2: 30220.93.3–4: 30220.93.4: 30120.93.5: 299,30220.93.6–7: 30320.94.4–5: 30220.95.1–3: 29920.96.3–97.4: 29920.96.3: 30220.97.1–2: 29920.97.5: 30220.97.6–7: 29920.97.7: 30220.98.1: 30220.98.4: 30320.98.9: 302
Index Locorum
Page 5 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
20.99.2: 30220.99.3: 30220.100.1: 30220.100.2: 30220.100.3–4: 299,30222.1.2–3: 14922.13.1: 14822.13.9–23.3: 15023.1.4: 148,150,15223.17: 15223.21: 17323.8.1: 15224.11: 13924.11.1: 15227.3: 28430.23: 22132.24: 263,308
DiogenesLaertius1.89: 2937.35: 285
DionysiusofHalicarnassusA.R.1.6.2: 151A.R.1.8.3: 285A.R.1.72.1: 343A.R.1.74.1: 343A.R.5.23–5: 241A.R.20.4.1–5.5: 149Decompositioneverborum4.110: 181
DiphilusF29.4–5K–A: 89
Ergias(FGrHist513)F1: 293,294
Eutropius2.20: 1333.2: 1613.6: 145
FabiusPictor(FRHI21)F28: 137
FGrHist533F2,ll.2–12: 298–9F2,ll.12–48: 302F2,ll.40–4: 302
FlorusEpit.1.8.3–6: 150(p.391) Epit.1.18.3: 151
Index Locorum
Page 6 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Epit.1.18.9–11: 133Frontinus
Str.1.4.11: 152Str.1.5.6: 138Str.4.1.16: 242
Gorgon(FGrHist515)F5: 297F9: 299F13: 306F18: 286
Gorgosthenes(FGrHist529)F5: 297F7: 297
HecataeusofAbdera(FGrHist264)F25: 291
HecataeusofMiletus(FGrHist1)F20: 291
HellanicusofLesbos(FGrHist4)F84: 343
HeraclidesCriticusGGM258§12–16: 271
HermogenesProgymn.4.16: 88
Herodotus1.5.4: 83–42.182.2: 2935.58–9: 2915.97: 1667.20.2: 1797.44–53: 168
HierobulusofRhodes(FGrHist530)F: 297
HomerIl.2.653–70: 296Il.4.437–8: 170Il.6.448–9: 176Il.11.604: 166Il.22.395: 176Il.23.175–6: 176
HoraceEp.1.7: 315Ep.1.18.44: 315
HyginusAstron.2.14: 294,296
IG
Index Locorum
Page 7 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
XII8,6: 293XIISuppl.120: 291
I.Lindos2,B,III,ll.15–17: 2942,B,VI,ll.37–41: 2972,B,IX,ll.54–61: 2972,C,XL,ll.114–21: 2852,D,III,ll.94–115: 305222,l.6: 297707,l.4: 297
I.Magnesia16: 348
Ined.Vat.(FGrHist839)F4: 135
Inscr.It.13.1.77: 13713.3.69(DuiliusInscription=ILS65=CILI225andVI,8,31300Add.): 133,134
I.Peraia555: 297
ISE47: 205
Isocrates4.39(Paneg.): 2524.145–9(Paneg.): 1635.90–101(Phil.): 1637.14(Areopag.): 2347.37(Areopag.): 25212.138(Panath.): 234
JosephusAJ10.210: 264AJ10.276: 264AJ12.135–7: 257AJ12.358–9: 257AJ12.402: 257AJ14.66–7: 261AJ14.105–9: 261AJ14.275: 261AJ17.261: 261AJ18.55–62: 261AJ18.168–78: 261AJ18.225–6: 261AJ18.257–303: 261AJ19.1–27: 261AJ19.201–11: 261
Index Locorum
Page 8 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
AJ19.212–73: 262AJ20.110–12: 261AJ20.122: 261AJ20.154: 261AJ20.160–5: 261AJ20.177: 261AJ20.250: 263Ap.1.45–6: 255Ap.1.53: 255Ap.2.84: 257Ap.2.217: 265BJ1.1: 255(p.392) BJ1.28: 262BJ1.150: 261BJ1.179: 261BJ1.221–2: 261BJ2.49–50: 261BJ2.169–77: 261BJ2.184–203: 261BJ2.236: 261BJ2.250–1: 261BJ2.260: 261BJ2.270: 261BJ2.272: 261BJ2.277: 261BJ2.346: 256BJ2.349: 263BJ2.352: 263BJ2.355–6: 263BJ2.360: 257BJ2.361: 263BJ2.365: 263BJ2.373: 257BJ2.379: 263BJ2.390: 257BJ2.395: 256BJ2.397: 263BJ2.412: 256BJ3.132–4: 262BJ3.298–305: 262BJ3.329–31: 262BJ3.336–8: 262BJ3.351–4: 257BJ3.532–42: 262BJ4.447–8: 262
Index Locorum
Page 9 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
BJ4.622: 257BJ5.289: 262BJ5.334: 262BJ5.364–5: 256BJ5.366: 264BJ5.367–8: 257BJ5.367: 264BJ5.376: 256BJ5.406: 256BJ5.412: 257BJ5.449–51: 262BJ6.124–8: 262BJ6.214–43: 262BJ6.254–66: 262BJ6.378: 256BJ6.409: 256BJ7.1: 263BJ7.23: 262BJ7.37–9: 262BJ7.112–13: 262Vit.17: 257Vit.27: 261
Livy2.5: 2412.10: 2412.14.1: 1234.29: 2416.12.8: 1198.7: 2419.43.26: 15121.1.1–2: 17921.1.2: 17421.6.6–7.1: 15621.10.8: 15123.33.4: 23524.19.9–11: 14624.30.6: 14624.35.2: 14624.39.1–10: 14626.30.4–5: 14626.51.7–8: 16328.12.2–5: 17028.28.2–4: 14930.31.4: 15130.34.1: 170
Index Locorum
Page 10 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
30.43.4: 14031.7.8: 20631.15.8–16.8: 20732.19.1–23.3: 21932.21.25: 21832.21.29: 22032.21.36: 21832.22.8–12: 21733.8.13: 118–19,12033.11.1: 20733.13.4: 20733.17.5–8: 12233.18: 28433.19.1: 20733.20: 28434.51.5: 12335.5–6: 26935.35.18: 119–2035.38.3: 12336.6.1–2: 27036.6.2: 26937.8–17: 28437.18.9–25.3: 28437.26–32: 28438.7.10: 12138.7.11–13: 12239.49–50: 12339.50.3: 12339.50.10: 34239.51.1: 34239.53.12–16: 20640.3–16.3: 20240.3–5: 209(p.393) 40.3.3: 12340.4.9: 12440.5.1: 20240.5.10: 20840.7–28: 24440.20.5–24: 20240.21.1–22.14: 20640.21.2: 20640.22.15–24.8: 21040.55.8–57.1: 21040.56–8: 20240.56.3: 210
Index Locorum
Page 11 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
40.56.7: 20440.57–8: 20841.19.3–11: 20841.24.12–14: 21942.11.4: 205,20842.14.8: 28442.30.5–7: 22542.40: 20542.46.7: 12142.46.8: 12142.55.3: 12442.57.1–62.2: 20844.24.9–26.2: 20844.42.1–2: 208
Per.12: 149Per.14: 151Per.16: 150,152Per.17: 133,135
[Lysias]6: 252
MarmorParium(FGrHist239)A8: 293
Moschion(TGrF97)PheraioiF3: 88ThemistoclesF1: 88
Naeviusfr.32: 136
NS18,l.15: 297
Orosius4.7.1: 1504.7.7–9: 133,1354.8.5: 1364.13,15: 145
PalatineAnthology(AP)6.171: 2997.247: 2059.518: 205
Pausanias1.2.3: 3141.25.2–3: 3477.10.11: 3168.13.4–5: 1078.15.2: 1078.16.1–17.5: 107
Index Locorum
Page 12 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
PindarOl.6.87–90: 275Ol.7: 286Ol.7.13: 288Ol.7.39–51: 290Ol.7.77–82: 297
Piso(FRHI27)F32: 135
P.KölnVI247: 300
P.Schubart34,col.II: 293
PhilodemusOnPoemsV,col.xiii(xvi),9–14: 86
PlatoCrito50b: 252Crito51a–c: 241Crito104d–e: 297Crito109d–e: 297Leg.677a: 297Tim.22b–23c: 297
PlinytheElderNat.5.132: 294Nat.7.112: 311Nat.8.169: 135
PlutarchAem.8: 205Aem.8.4: 206Aem.19: 208Alex.11.6: 196Arat.3.3: 93Arat.29.7: 94Cato22.2–3: 311Dem.23.2: 196Demetr.2.3: 301Demetr.19.6: 301Demetr.21.1–2: 301Flam.9: 205Marc.6.5–7.1: 145Marc.21.3: 163Mor.995e(Deesucarnium): 275–6Mor.297c(Quaest.Graec.): 291Mor.347a(Deglor.Ath.): 81–2Mor.345e(Deglor.Ath.): 163Public.16: 241
Index Locorum
Page 13 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Pyrrh.23.1: 148Pyrrh.23.5: 148P.Mil.Vogl.
VIII309: 299(p.394) Polyaenus
Strat.4.18.2: 284Strat.5.17.2: 284Strat.5.27: 284
Polybius1.1.1–2: 2201.1.1: 381.1.2: 841.1.4–5: 1821.1.5: 2,145,231,3451.2.1–7: 2581.2.7–8: 2561.3–4: 3451.3.1–2: 91–2,94,95,128,1651.3.3–4.1: 3371.3.7–10: 128,2561.3.7–9: 1271.3.7–8: 3451.3.10: 1271.4.1–5: 2571.4.1: 3411.4.11: 3411.5–9: 1601.5.1–4: 1301.5.1: 1651.5.4: 129,1301.5.5: 1311.6.1–4: 1301.6.1–3: 3431.6.5–9.8: 1301.6.5–7: 3431.7–12.4: 1311.7–10: 1491.7: 1731.7.6–13: 1491.7.6–7: 1491.8.1–2: 1481.8.3–9.8: 149,1511.8.3: 1871.9.3: 1731.9.4–6: 173
Index Locorum
Page 14 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
1.10–63: 1301.10–11: 1571.10: 1601.10.1: 1491.10.9: 1531.11.1: 148,152,1531.11.2: 148,153,155,1561.11.3: 1531.11.4–9: 1501.13.1: 1271.13.5: 1281.13.7: 1291.13.12: 174,1771.14.1–3: 134,1511.14.1: 151,152,1591.14.6–9: 1471.15.1–12: 1511.15.12: 1511.17.4: 1731.20.1–2: 1481.20.1: 132,153,1571.20.9–10: 1321.20.9: 1351.20.13–16: 1501.21.1–8: 1331.21.5: 1351.22.1–24.2: 1331.22.3: 1331.23.1: 1351.23.6: 1331.24.1: 1351.24.7: 1601.25.2: 3471.25.3: 3471.25.6: 1361.26.1–28.14: 1361.26.5–8: 3271.30.4: 1361.31.2–3: 1721.32.1: 1691.35: 1361.35.2–3: 2201.35.7: 2201.37.7: 1561.42.1–7: 345
Index Locorum
Page 15 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
1.43: 1731.48.3: 1691.49.6–51.12: 1361.55–9: 1371.55.2: 1371.58.2: 1371.58.3: 1371.58.4–6: 1371.58.5: 1511.58.7–59.6: 1381.58.9: 3311.59.6: 1421.59.9: 136,1381.59.11–12: 1391.61.5: 1371.62.7: 1391.63.1–9: 1501.63.1–3: 139,3251.63.4: 1791.64–88: 1301.64: 1601.64.2–4: 2321.64.2: 145,2311.64.5–6: 1771.64.5: 1741.65–88: 159–79(p.395) 1.65: 1591.65.1–3: 1771.65.2: 166,1761.65.3: 1661.65.4: 172,1791.65.5–9: 1621.65.6: 1751.65.7–8: 2441.65.7: 168,1751.65.8: 161,1771.66–70: 1661.66.7: 1651.66.12: 1671.67.4: 1701.67.5: 1701.67.7: 169,1731.67.8–13: 1701.68.7: 1771.69.4: 170
Index Locorum
Page 16 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
1.69.12–13: 1701.69.14: 1711.70.4–6: 1711.70.7: 1661.71.1: 167,328,3311.71.4: 1791.71.5–6: 1791.71.5: 177,1791.72: 1741.72.2: 3311.72.6: 1671.73.1: 1741.75: 165–61.77.5: 173,1771.78.13–15: 1751.79: 1611.79.1–7: 1551.79.6–7: 1611.80.4–13: 1711.80.5–11: 1701.80.10: 1711.81: 1751.81.2–3: 1751.81.4: 1751.82.2: 1751.82.6: 1671.82.7: 1611.82.8: 1771.82.11: 168,1721.83.2–4: 2251.83.3–4: 154,1771.83.5–11: 155,1771.83.6–8: 1781.83.11: 161,1771.84.1–2: 1671.84.9–85.2: 1671.85.2: 1671.85.3–5: 1751.86.5: 1681.86.6: 1761.86.7: 176,1771.88.5: 1601.88.6–7: 1761.88.7–8: 1591.88.7: 159,179
Index Locorum
Page 17 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
1.88.8–12: 155,160,1771.88.11–12: 3252.1–36: 1302.1: 1602.1.2: 1322.1.4: 1292.2–12: 1602.4.8: 3302.5.4: 3242.8–12: 3322.8: 1782.8.1–3: 1772.8.2–3: 3292.8.2: 3242.8.3: 1532.8.9: 1832.13: 1602.13.1–2: 3232.14–35: 1602.14–15: 3222.15.1: 3282.16.13–14: 772.16.14: 2022.17.1: 3222.17.8–12: 3222.19.11–13: 3232.21.2: 2562.21.8: 1462.32.6: 3232.33: 146,2432.33.8–9: 1462.34.1–35.1: 1452.34.10–11: 3232.34.15: 3232.35: 3412.35.2: 1602.35.8: 822.35.9: 3452.36: 1602.36.3: 1962.37: 1302.37.2–3: 1292.37.3–70.8: 1282.37.3: 1282.37.4: 341
Index Locorum
Page 18 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
2.37.6: 1292.37.9–11: 3352.37.10–11: 331(p.396) 2.38.4: 1282.39.1: 1532.40.4: 932.41: 3502.41.3–5: 2982.42.2–6: 1282.43.3–5: 1862.47.9–11: 932.47.11: 932.56–63: 1292.56–60: 2022.56.2: 762.56.3: 74–72.56.6–13: 74–72.56.13: 80,862.58: 76–72.62.4: 1282.63.2–5: 3262.67.5: 1872.68.1–2: 1872.71.2: 1293.1.4: 256,3453.1.11: 3513.2–3: 3513.2.2: 1723.2.6–3.4: 3513.2.6: 145,231,232,2483.4.3: 3453.4.6–8: 1543.4.7: 2583.4.12–13: 164,3523.6–7: 100,2093.6.10: 163,3413.6.11: 1633.6.12–14: 2083.6.12–13: 1633.7.3: 3503.8.1–9.5: 1513.9–10: 1603.10.1–4: 1603.10.3–4: 1553.10.5: 323
Index Locorum
Page 19 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
3.13.5–7: 3233.14.1: 3233.15.6: 1963.15.10: 1563.17.2: 3313.20.1–9: 1563.21.9: 3453.22.1–2: 3433.22.2: 3433.26: 1513.26.2–7: 1513.26.6–7: 1493.26.6: 148,150,1543.27.2–8: 1553.28.1–2: 1553.28.3: 1553.30.3–4: 1553.31.12–13: 2553.32.2–3: 3523.32.5: 3423.32.8: 3423.32.10: 2293.34.1–2: 3223.35–61: 1963.35.3: 3233.37: 3413.38.1–3: 3413.40.5: 3233.40.8: 3233.44.8: 3223.48.7: 3233.48.8–9: 77–83.48.8: 2023.48.11: 3223.49.5: 3243.49.11: 3243.50.6: 3233.51.12: 3243.52.5: 3243.59.2: 23.59.3–5: 3223.59.3: 2583.59.8: 3453.67: 1983.67.4: 323
Index Locorum
Page 20 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
3.68.8: 3243.69.1: 3243.70.1–8: 2493.72.12: 3453.76.5: 3233.79.1–2: 3243.80.3: 1463.84.4–5: 1463.87: 3243.87.7–9: 2313.87.7–8: 2493.87.7: 3453.90.7–8: 3243.90.7: 3223.91: 322,3243.98–9: 1843.99.8: 1843.100.1–2: 3243.101.8–11: 3243.107.1: 3243.107.10–14: 3453.117–18: 2353.118.3–5: 2353.118.5–9: 156(p.397) 3.118.5: 1723.118.8–9: 1453.118.9: 232,2483.118.11–12: 2313.118.12: 2444.1.9–2.5: 92–3,944.1.9: 93,95,1274.2.1: 1654.2.2: 1134.2.5–11: 954.2.5: 1884.2.10–11: 1474.2.11: 1004.3–37: 100–1104.3.1–13.7: 100,1064.3.2–3: 1884.3.3: 1974.4.1–5: 1014.5.3: 1884.5.4–5: 3294.5.8: 103
Index Locorum
Page 21 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
4.7.10: 1014.8: 1474.8.6: 944.9.1: 1084.9.5: 1084.9.6: 1084.9.10: 1014.10.1: 1014.10.8: 107,1084.10.10: 1104.11.5: 1074.13.5: 106,1084.13.6: 100,1024.14.1–25.8: 1004.14.1: 1014.14.8: 1014.14.9: 103,1054.15: 105,1064.15.1–4: 1034.15.2–7: 1054.15.4: 1084.15.5–6: 1084.15.6–7: 105–64.15.8–11: 1054.15.8: 1054.16.1–3: 1034.16.6–19.12: 1064.16.6: 1064.16.10: 1064.16.11: 1064.17.2: 1844.17.3: 107,1084.18.9–12: 1084.19.1: 106,1084.19.2–4: 1084.19.6: 1084.19.11–12: 106,1094.19.13–21.12: 1064.21.2–12: 2764.22.2: 1034.22.5: 1884.22.6: 1894.22.11–4.23: 1894.23.8: 2044.23.9: 182
Index Locorum
Page 22 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
4.24: 189,191,1944.24.1–3: 1094.24.3: 103,110,1114.24.9: 1904.25: 102,1104.25.6: 1104.26.1–37.7: 1004.26.1–4: 1024.26.1: 1024.26.7–27.2: 1054.26.7–8: 1024.26.7: 1024.27.1–3: 102,1054.27.9–29.7: 1024.27.9–28.1: 3504.27.9–10: 1904.28.1: 1024.28.2–6: 111–124.28.3–4: 3414.28.3: 1124.28.5: 1114.29: 1904.30.1–5: 1024.30.6–8: 1024.31: 2744.31.1–2: 1024.33.1–6: 2984.34.1–36.6: 1024.34.8–9: 1824.37.1: 1024.37.2: 1054.38–56: 1904.38–52: 3324.38: 3314.39.6: 2984.42.7–8: 1844.43.6: 2984.45.7–8: 3224.47.1: 3324.50.1–3: 3324.50.3: 3234.56.2: 2834.57–87: 97–94.57–60: 1904.57.2–58.12: 109
Index Locorum
Page 23 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
4.62.4: 241(p.398) 4.63.10: 3254.65.2: 3254.66.7: 3254.67–87: 113–154.67–9: 1904.67.6–7: 1904.67.7: 994.67.8: 994.69.9: 1914.73.6–10: 3234.76: 98,1914.76.8–9: 994.76.9: 1014.77: 1924.77.2: 1924.77.4: 1924.78–82: 1934.82.1: 1934.82.2–3: 984.84.8: 994.86.8: 984.87: 1934.87.10–11: 1934.87.13: 995.1–30: 115–165.1–30.7: 98–1005.1.1: 995.1.6: 3255.1.9–10: 985.1.10–12: 3255.2.7–8: 1945.2.11–5.24.1: 995.3.4: 1985.3.5: 3255.4.10–13: 1945.5.5–8: 1945.5.8: 1005.5.9 1005.5.10: 98,1015.7.1–2: 1945.7.4–5: 985.7.4: 1005.9–12: 189,194,2235.10: 204,206
Index Locorum
Page 24 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5.10.1–5: 2225.10.1: 2225.10.9–11: 2065.10.10–11: 2065.10.10: 1965.10.11: 1945.12.5: 100,1945.15–16: 1955.15: 1005.16.2: 1955.16.9–10: 985.17–24: 1965.18.4–6: 1955.18.6: 1955.18.7: 1955.18.10: 1955.23.6: 1005.24.11: 3315.26.3–4: 1965.26.6: 995.26.9: 795.27: 1975.27.3: 1005.28.1: 3315.28.4–8: 1975.28.4: 3255.29.1–2: 1975.29.6: 1975.29.7–9: 3505.31.3: 3465.31.4–5: 1125.31.6: 3415.31.7: 3415.34–40: 1915.34.10: 1985.40–58: 2115.40–57: 1915.41.1: 1855.44: 3225.45.7: 1855.48.9: 805.51.7–11: 3245.54.10–12: 3255.55.1: 3245.55.10: 183
Index Locorum
Page 25 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5.61.1: 3275.63: 1985.63.5: 3315.68.2: 3245.70.2: 3245.72.7: 3255.73.16: 3275.75.1: 3245.76.5: 3235.76.9–10: 3255.76.11: 3275.85.9: 1215.85.11–12: 1845.88–90: 283,284,326,327,3325.91–101.3: 95–75.91–5: 965.91–2: 975.91.4: 3315.91.6–8: 1035.93.4: 2415.93.6: 3315.93.10: 96(p.399) 5.94.7: 3245.95–6: 965.95.5: 975.97–101: 96–75.97.1: 3235.97.3–5: 975.98: 975.100.1: 975.100.4: 975.100.9: 3315.101: 2065.101.1: 3305.101.6: 965.102.1: 206,2565.102.2–4: 975.104.1–10: 3505.105.1: 2065.105.4–6: 1115.105.4–5: 3375.105.6–8: 3445.107.5–7: 3305.108: 2065.108.1–2: 330
Index Locorum
Page 26 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5.111.8–10: 3435.111.10: 1276.2.2–3: 1456.2.5–7: 2356.2.5–6: 145,1466.2.9: 2486.3–9: 3176.3.5–7: 2496.3.7: 2486.3.8: 2496.4.4–5: 2526.5.4–6: 2976.7–9: 2406.9.9: 2766.10: 2406.10.6: 2496.10.12–14: 2496.11–18: 233,2586.11.1: 143,145,1466.11.3–8: 154,2496.11.3: 3456.11.4: 2546.11.7–8: 2366.11.11–12: 2496.11.13: 2366.11a: 2436.11a.4: 2336.11a.6: 2336.12–17: 2406.12: 2496.12.4: 1546.12.7: 2426.12.10: 2406.13: 2506.14.1: 2506.14.2: 2506.14.4–6: 2506.14.9–11: 2506.14.12: 2506.15.1: 2516.15.4–11: 2516.15.7: 796.15.8: 1766.15.9–10: 2506.16.2–3: 251
Index Locorum
Page 27 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
6.16.4–5: 2516.17: 2526.17.2–7: 2516.17.8–9: 251–26.18: 234,2406.18.1: 2516.18.2–6: 2536.18.4–5: 1456.18.4: 2376.19–42: 233,2346.19.5–20.7: 2376.20.8: 2386.20.9: 2396.24.6: 2396.26.10–6.32: 238,2396.27.2: 2396.34.7–37.6: 2386.37–8: 2436.37.1–6: 2426.37.3: 2426.37.7: 2426.37.9–12: 2426.38: 2426.39.1–11: 2436.41–2: 238,2396.41.7: 2396.41.10–12: 2396.42: 2406.43–56: 2336.43–4: 2436.43: 274,2756.43.2: 2486.44: 2756.44.9: 2526.45–47.6: 1626.45.1: 1626.47.1–5: 233,2446.47.3–5: 1476.47.7–10: 2406.50: 240,2536.50.4–6: 2406.51.3–8: 1436.51.3: 1746.51.5–8: 145(p.400) 6.51.5: 252
Index Locorum
Page 28 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
6.51.7–8: 2326.52.4–5: 2356.52.5–7: 172,2436.52.7: 1426.52.10: 2546.53–5: 2546.53–4: 2416.53.2–3: 80–16.54.3: 2416.54.4: 2416.54.5: 241,2446.55: 241,2436.55.7: 2526.56: 3236.56.4: 2356.56.6–11: 243,2546.56.8–11: 796.56.13–15: 2356.57.5–9: 1456.57.5–6: 2606.57.8–9: 2526.58: 156,3437.2–7: 2567.3: 1847.5–11: 3247.5.6–7: 3267.7: 1857.7.1–6: 787.7.2: 2027.9: 2357.11–14: 189,192,1947.11: 2237.11.4: 1927.11.9: 2057.13–14: 2237.14.4–6: 1938.2.3–11: 1458.2.3–6: 2578.2.11: 3418.7.8–9: 1838.11.3: 162,1658.22: 3248.23: 3268.24.10: 2568.25.2: 324
Index Locorum
Page 29 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
8.25.11: 3318.35.9: 1359.1–2: 282,2859.2.1–3: 2989.8–9.10: 1649.9.9–10: 829.10: 146,260,3279.17: 1849.17.6: 1849.20.5–6: 289.23.8–9: 1479.27.10: 3299.28.4: 2229.32–9: 2099.39: 2749.39.1–3: 3309.39.2–3: 1469.41.11: 3229.42.5–8: 32410.1.5: 33110.4.1–5: 18610.4.8: 18610.5.8: 25710.6.3–4: 22310.7.5: 32310.8.5: 33110.8.10–11: 18610.9.1: 18610.9.2: 25710.16–17: 238,325,34510.16.7: 23210.17.9: 33110.19.1–2: 32510.20.7: 16210.27.1–2: 32210.28: 32210.32.1–33.7: 14610.32.7–8: 14610.35.6–36.7: 22310.36: 22410.38.7: 32310.40.6: 18610.48: 32210.48.1: 32211.4–6: 331
Index Locorum
Page 30 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
11.5.1–7: 35011.5.2–8: 33011.5.7: 24411.15.6: 12111.16.1: 12111.19.3–5: 17011.25–30: 24211.27: 24312.3–4: 32212.3.2: 18412.4b.2: 18412.25e: 32212.25e.5–7: 93–412.25g.1–2: 25512.25k.6–7: 15512.25k.9: 18412.26e-28: 23812.28a.7–10: 25513.3.6–8: 14513.4–5: 284(p.401) 13.6.4: 16914.3.6: 34514.7.1–3: 32315.4.1: 323,32415.6.4–7.9: 22115.6.6: 17215.7.1: 18615.12.8–9: 17015.17.4: 22815.19: 35115.20: 185,35115.20.1–2: 20715.20.2: 18515.20.4: 20715.21: 35115.22–24a: 22315.23.2–6: 28415.23.6–7: 22415.24.4: 22715.34–5: 21115.36.1–7: 80,84–515.37: 21116.9.1–5: 28416.10: 20716.11.1: 323
Index Locorum
Page 31 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
16.14.1–4: 28116.14.5–15.8: 28216.16.1–17.7: 28216.17.8–19.11: 28216.17.9–11: 18116.18.2: 30416.20.5: 30416.20.6–7: 28216.22.7: 33116.25: 34716.26.5–6: 34816.28–32: 23116.29.11–12: 33116.31.2: 32316.34.6: 18318.4.8–5.3: 33018.6.5–7: 21818.14.13–14: 22218.24.9: 11818.28–32: 24018.28.1: 23218.30.2: 11918.33: 20718.34.6–35.2: 26018.35: 276–718.35.1–2: 14518.37.7: 22118.39.5: 18318.41.7–8: 34718.53.4: 18518.54.7–11: 28420.3–4: 26920.4–7: 26720.4.1–2: 27420.4.7: 27820.6: 33520.6.1–6: 32320.6.1: 27020.6.5: 27620.7: 26920.7.1: 272–320.7.2: 27020.7.4: 27020.7.5: 27020.12.8: 83
Index Locorum
Page 32 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
21.2.2: 34521.4.10: 22821.4.12–14: 32621.10: 28421.12: 28421.13.1: 23221.13.11: 233,34521.14.4: 22121.16.5: 21621.16.7–8: 22121.16.8: 25721.17.1: 22121.18–21: 221–221.23.2–12: 22721.26.7–19: 33021.26.14: 18321.28.4: 12221.28.11: 12121.28.12–16: 12221.30.1–5: 32621.34: 32621.35.4: 32621.36: 32621.40.6: 32621.42.19: 32622.4.2: 27022.4.13–17: 33022.5: 28422.7.3: 32622.8.10: 32622.16.1–3: 22222.18: 203,20422.18.2–3: 33322.18.6–10: 20823.2–3: 18323.3.4–10: 24423.9.6: 20223.10: 20223.10.1–16: 20923.10.4–7: 32323.10.4: 12423.10.12–13: 209,210(p.402) 23.10.14: 20923.11: 20223.12.1: 183
Index Locorum
Page 33 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
23.15.1–3: 22223.17.4: 25924.4–6: 22424.4: 20624.6.5: 18724.8.2–5: 25824.9.1–4: 25424.9.8–11: 32824.10–13: 35024.10.11–12: 25824.10.12: 22724.11–13: 22624.11.4–8: 25424.12.1: 22724.13.2: 22724.13.3: 22724.13.13: 25825.2: 32625.3: 33125.4.5: 283,28425.6: 20826.1.2: 33127.1–2: 33127.4: 33127.5.3–4: 12127.5.3: 12127.9.1: 35027.9.3: 21727.9.5: 21727.9–10: 21627.10: 21727.10.2–3: 217,21927.10.5: 21727.13.2: 33128.4.12: 35028.6: 225,22928.6.1: 21928.6.5: 24128.6.7–7.1: 22528.6.7: 21928.7.1: 21928.8.3: 32328.16.11: 34028.17.1–2: 28328.22: 326
Index Locorum
Page 34 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
29.5–9: 20829.12.8: 18129.17: 20829.20: 22029.20.4: 22029.21: 209,25829.21.4–6: 3029.21.8: 20129.27: 33230.4.7: 22630.4.11: 22630.4.13–14: 22630.4.16–17: 22630.5–6: 33130.6.5–6: 31130.13.10: 207,20830.15: 32430.18: 25930.23.2–4: 28330.25–6: 32730.31: 331,33230.31.15: 22831.2: 18531.2.1: 18531.2.7: 18631.2.9–11: 25931.5: 28331.10.7: 25931.11: 18631.13.8: 18631.21: 33331.21.5–6: 25931.22.8–9: 23631.22.8: 15431.23.1–3: 30731.23.3: 31331.23.10–13: 31231.24.9–10: 30831.25: 32731.25.2–8: 30831.25.2–7: 260,276–731.25.5: 33131.25.6: 22431.25.9–28.9: 30831.26: 331
Index Locorum
Page 35 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
31.26.3–9: 32331.29: 30831.30.1: 18232.2.1–3: 17832.3.10–13: 17832.5–6: 18532.11.2: 34132.13.4–9: 25933.2.10: 15433.5.1–3: 32633.13.8: 32633.18.10–11: 15334.2–4: 29834.4.1–4: 29834.8: 32234.8.4–10: 32834.9.8–11: 32234.10.10: 322(p.403) 35.4: 18736.17.5–11: 32336.17.5–10: 27636.17.13–15: 24536.17.13–14: 22936.2.1–4: 25936.9–10: 2936.9.1–10.1: 15436.17.7: 27638.1: 25638.4: 21538.4.2: 21638.4.5–6: 21638.4.7: 21638.8.6: 7938.10.6–13: 25638.11.6–11: 25638.12.4–11: 25638.12.5: 16938.13.8: 245,25638.15.3–5: 32338.16.1–9: 25638.18.7–8: 245,25638.20.1–3: 22038.21–2: 81,220,26338.21.1–3: 30838.22: 176
Index Locorum
Page 36 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
38.22.2: 30839.2: 26039.3.8: 35039.6.1–2: 22939.6.2–5: 22939.8.2: 22139.8.6: 340–139.8.7–8: 14539.8.7: 232,248
Polyzelus(FGrHist521)F1: 294F6: 294F7: 294,296
QuintilianInst.12.1.35: 154
ScholiaDion.Thraxp.173.3–4: 88Dion.Thraxp.746.1: 87Pind.Ol.7.36c: 297Pind.Ol.7.141c: 297Pind.Ol.7.86a: 290
SEG12,360: 29046,989: 29349,1070: 296
SER18,l.9: 297
ServiusA.1.108: 151A.4.628: 151
SiliusItalicus1.675–94: 156
Strabo1.2.3: 863.2.7: 32813.4.2: 34714.1.16: 31414.2.5: 30514.2.7: 29414.2.11: 293
Syll.3338: 290557: 348560: 349561: 349
Index Locorum
Page 37 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
599: 280643: 2051067: 297
TacitusAg.26.2: 179Ann.4.1: 191–2
T.Cam50,l.25: 29650,l.36: 29681b,l.1: 29390,I,l.28: 29690,I,l.34: 29390,II,l.20: 296147: 293App.19and20: 296
Thucydides1.1.1: 1741.1.2–3: 1791.2–22: 1281.2–12: 2981.10.3: 1791.22: 2551.22.2: 771.22.4: 83,2021.22.6: 1991.23.1–3: 1791.89–117: 1312.2.1: 3502.43.1: 2412.68.3: 2982.102.5–6: 2983.12.1: 2233.40.2: 2233.49.3: 2244.17–20: 2214.59–64: 155(p.404) 4.81.2: 2234.108.2–3: 2235.90: 2245.98: 224
Timaeus(FGrHist566)F60: 343F71: 344F80: 344
Timocles
Index Locorum
Page 38 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
F6K–A: 86–7ValeriusMaximus
2.7.15: 149VelleiusPaterculus
2.71.1: 179Xenophon
Ages.1.26: 163Anab.1.2.11: 167Anab.1.2.14–18: 168Anab.1.2.18: 168Anab.1.3: 167Anab.1.3.2: 171Anab.1.4.8: 172Anab.1.5.9: 174Anab.1.7.3: 168Anab.2.5: 175Anab.3.1.47–2.1: 171Anab.3.2.24: 171Anab.3.3.5: 175Anab.4.3: 166Anab.5.4: 168Anab.5.5: 170Anab.5.6: 172Anab.5.7.21: 171Anab.5.7.28: 171Anab.5.7.32: 171Anab.6.1–3: 170Anab.6.1.16: 167Anab.6.4.13–19: 167Anab.6.6.5–7: 171Anab.7.1: 170Anab.7.1.7: 165Anab.7.5–7: 167Anab.7.6.10: 171Hell.1.1.1: 165Hell.1.7.21: 241Hell.1.7.29: 252Hell.3.1.2: 163Hell.3.4.17: 163Hell.7.1.12: 252Hell.7.1.26: 252Hell.7.5.8–14: 164Hell.7.5.27: 164–5Mem.1.2.9–10: 252
ZenoofRhodes(FGrHist523)
Index Locorum
Page 39 of 39
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
F1: 285F4: 282F5: 282F6: 282SeealsoFGrHist 533
Zonaras8.8: 149,150,1528.10: 1348.11: 133–48.12: 1368.16: 137,1388.17: 139,140,1558.20: 145,1468.22: 156
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29
General Index
Page 1 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
UniversityPressScholarshipOnline
OxfordScholarshipOnline
PolybiusandhisWorld:EssaysinMemoryofF.W.WalbankBruceGibsonandThomasHarrison
Printpublicationdate:2013PrintISBN-13:9780199608409PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2013DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608409.001.0001
(p.405) GeneralIndexAlldatesareBCunlessotherwiseindicated.Datesgivenforconsulshipsreferonlytotheyearofanindividual’sfirstconsulship.Longsyllablesareonlymarkedinplaceswherethepronunciationmightotherwisebeunclear.
Abaeocritus,Boeotarch 267,268Abilyx,Iberianprince 184Abydos 168,183,323Acarnania(ns) 102,122,222Achaea(ns) 16,23,28,74–5,96,97,98,99,101,105,106,107,123,128,144,169,170,184,214,215,218,219,225,226,227,283,304,325,331,335,350,352AchaeanLeague 17,23,28,42,96,100,102,103,104,108,123,186,218,219,226,244,245,256,283,331AchaeanWar 148n.16,169,216,225n.44,245,256,269,340AchaemenidPersia seePersianEmpireAchaïa,Rhodianheroandcity 289,291,293Achelous,river 98,100Acropolis,Athenian 290,347Acropolis,Rhodian 299
General Index
Page 2 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Adcock,F.E. 23,55Adeimantus,Spartanephor 189AegatesIslands 139,160Aegeira 109AeliusTubero,Q.(tr.pl.130) 311n.19Aemilia 323,331AemiliusLepidus,M.(cos.187) 183,311n.19AemiliusPaullus,L.(cos.182) 215,220,221,225,229,256,308,310,312,316,317n.44Aenea 124Aeneas 124Aetolia(ns) 92,96,97,101,102,104,106,107,108,109,182,184,186n.17,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195,197,198,276,325,329,330,331,333,349,350AetolianLeague 105,120–1Afghanistan 280seealsoBactriaAfrica 46,96,111,136,138,140,159,161,162,174,178,184,220,224,337,340,341,351Agamemnon 249Agathocles,courtierofPtolemyIVPhilopator 84–5Agathocles,tyrantofSicily 84,173,211AgelausofNaupactus 223Agesilaus,Spartanking 163,198Agetas,Aetoliangeneral 97agrarianproduction 328AgrippaII,KingofJudaea 257,262,263Albinus,procuratorofJudaea 261Alectrona 289–90Alexamenus 120AlexandertheGreat,ofMacedon 163,189,194,196,198,204,206,208,211,223,249,300,322AlexandertheIsian 183Alexander,Macedoniancavalrycommander 187Alexander,Macedoniancourtier 193Alexander,Seleucidrebel 185Alexandria 86,208,314,328AllSoulsCollege,Oxford,F.W.Walbank’sallergicreactionto 356Alps 323AlthaemenesofCrete 296ambassadors 25,45,102,108,110,139,149,152,154,171,175,178,183,184,186,187,221,223–4,225,226,227,228,249,250,259,284,302,311,316,330n.39,344n.34,347,348,349,350seealsodiplomacyAmbracia,Ambraciots 121–2amicitia 313–16seealsofriendship,philiaAmilus 107AmmonatSiwa 302Amphipolis 312n.28
General Index
Page 3 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Amyntas,Rhodiangeneral 302AnacreonofTeos 314anacyclosis 275Anderson,B. 338–9Antigonidkings 203,204,299AntigonusI 300,303AntigonusIIIDoson 93,95,182,187,188,191,193,205,206,210,211,217,218Antigonus,nephewofAntigonusIIIDoson 210Antioch 331AntiochusIII,Seleucidking 121,182,184,185,191,198,207,221,227,267,269,273,282,283,284,324,335,342,350,351(p.406) AntiochusIV,Seleucidking 209n.40,326AntiochusV,Seleucidking 186Antipater,ambassadorofAntiochusIII 221Antiphanes 88–9antiquarianism 237Antisthenes,Rhodianhistorian 281AntoniusM.(cos.99) 309Apamea,treatyof 271,284Apelles,Macedoniancourtier 79,97,99,191,192,193,194,196,197,203Aphrodite 288Apollo 288,296Apollodorus 342Apollonia-in-Sittacene 324Apollonius,Seleucidcourtier 186Appian 321Aquileia 322AratusofSicyon(theelder) 2,34,42,74–5,91–116,129n.14,147n.14,184,186,189,191,192,193,194,195,223,224;
Ephemerides,dailyjournals 111;Hypomnemata 30n.148,38n.2,74,91–116;HypomnemataasSyntaxis 93,95;personality 94;seealsoWalbank,F.W.,AratosofSicyon
AratustheYounger,sonofAratusofSicyon 97,115Arcadia 104,170,276Archaeologia,historicalaccountofprehistory 128,233,243n.52,284–98,304Archegetae,FoundersofRhodes 286,292,293Archimedes 183Archo 124Archon,Achaeanpolitician 219,225ArgeadkingsofMacedonia 204,206,209Argos,Argives 97,193,295,296Aristaenus 218,220n.25,226–7,228aristocracy 139,144,147,233,234,235,240,241–3,247,248–50,260,262,286,308–18
General Index
Page 4 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Ariston,Aetoliangeneral 184Aristotle 233,317–18;
Poetics 73–4,83,85–6,90army,Roman 234–6,237–40,242–3Artabazanes,ofAtropatene 182–3,324ArtemisLeukophryene 348Asia,AsiaMinor 112,221,227assemblies,
Achaean 101,103,104,108,109,110;Aetolian 105,106;amongTenThousand 171;Roman 137,138,139,148–56,235,237,249,250–2;Rhodian 293,301,303
Astin,A.E. 309astrology 290–1Astymedes,Rhodianambassador 225–6,228asylia 329Atabyrus,Mt. 296Athamania 124AthenaLindia 290,292,293,305Athenaeus 233,328n.33Athenagoras,Milesianmercenary 302Athens,Athenians 196,197,199n.49,221,222,223,224,248,252,274,311,314,347,350;
empire 8,21;politeia 243
AtiliusRegulus,M.(cos.267) 136,137,220AttalusI,ofPergamum 183,207,347,348,349,350Attica 290audienceforhistory 125–6,151,279,283seealsoFabiusPictor,Q.,Josephus,Polybius,ZenoAugustus,emperor 8,315Autaritus 170Babylon 316,328BacchylidesofCeos 314Bactria 322Baecula,battleof 186Balearicislands 169banquets 277barbarism 168,170n.50,175battles 327seealsoBaecula,Callicinus,Cannae,Chaeronea,Cynoscephalae,Drepana,Issus,Caïcus,Lade,Leuctra,Magnesia,Pydna,Raphia,Sellasia,Telamon,Trasimene,ZamaBaynes,N. 55Beirut 262
General Index
Page 5 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Benecke,P.V.M. 202beneficium 315–16Benjamin,Walter 340,342,349,352Bithynia 190BlackSea 172,184,331,332Bleckmann,B. 136,140–1Boeotia(ns) 35,267–78,323;
confederacy 270,272;courts 270,271;decadence 147n.14,267–78,323,335;pig 275
Bonner,S.F. 43,55–6booty 324,325,326Bostar,Carthaginiangeneral 184Bowra,C.M. 56BradfordGrammarSchool seeWalbank,F.W.,schoolingatBradfordGrammarSchoolBrunt,P.A. 238(p.407) Burckhardt,Jacob 126Bury,J.B. 181Byzantium,Byzantines 190,322,331,332Cadmus 291,294CaeciliusMetellusNumidicus,Q.(cos.109) 310n.19Caesar,JuliusseeJuliusCaesarCaesareaPhilippi 262Caïcus,battleof 347Calderone,S. 153Caligula,Gaius,emperor 261Callataÿ,F.de 327Callicinus,battleof 216,219Callicrates,Achaeanambassador 227,228Callimachus 293Callisthenes 162Camirus 286,292,293,296camp,military 239–40,242Campania 148,149,173,322seealsoMamertiniCannae,battleof 143,146,156,172n.59,174,178,232,234–6,243,251,343n.24cannibalism 167Caphyae 101,103,104,106,107,108,109capital,social 312capital,symbolic 311–12Capitolinehill,Rome 237–8Capua 322Caria 300,323CarneadesofCyrene,philosopher 154,311Cartagena seeNewCarthage
General Index
Page 6 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Carthage,Carthaginians 82,127,128,132,134,135,136,137,140,145,148,149,151,152,153,155,159–79,184,220,223,224,228,248,252,259,263,277,303,307–8,324,325,342–3,349,352;
affinitieswithRome 174,177;declineandfall 81,174–5,178,232;politeia 235
Carystus 123Cassander 302CassiusDio 133,134,136,138,139,140,141CassiusLonginus,C.(pr.44) 261CassiusVecellinus,Sp.(cos.502) 146cataclysms 297–8seealsoserpents,floodsCatotheElder seePorciusCato,M.cavalry,enrolmentof, 239Cecrops,Athenianking 290Celts 17,169,173,232,351Cephallenia 98,100Cercaphus,sonofHelios 289,291,292,293Chaeronea,battleof 222,347Chalcis 194,196,267Champion,C. 234,278Chankowski-Sablé,V. 334Charlesworth,M. 7n.32,46–7CharopsofEpirus 185Chios 331Chlaeneas,Aetolianambassador 222Cicero seeTulliusCicero,M.Cisalpina 322,328Cius 224clarity,inhistory-writing 19,82,199ClassicalAssociationofEnglandandWales 22–5,54,55Clastidium 145Claudius,emperor 261–2ClaudiusCaudex,Ap.(cos.264) 149–50,152ClaudiusMarcellus,M.(aed.cur.91) 310n.19ClaudiusMarcellus,M.(cos.222) 143,145,146,147,156ClaudiusQuadrigarius,Q.,historian 118Clearchus 163,167,171n.54,175Cleitor 104,106,108,109Cleomeneanwar 74,94,329CleomenesIIIofSparta 10,31,128n.14,326,352Cleon,Athenianpolitician 223clientela 250collectivememory 279–80comedy,itsdifficultiescontrastedwithtragedy 88–9
General Index
Page 7 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
comitia seeassembliescommentariesonClassicaltexts 35,126–7seealsoGomme,A.W.,How,W.W.,andWells,J.,Walbank,F.W.,HistoricalCommentaryonPolybiusconcordiaordinum 252constitution,mixed, 233,237,239,240,243,248,250,252–3constitution seepoliteia,PolybiusBook6consuls,roleof 240,242–3,249,251continuators,historiographical 92,164–5,165n.30Corinth 99,103,110,186,188,190,195,197,260CorneliiScipiones 146,147,157,312CorneliusScipioAfricanusAemilianus,P.(cos.147) 81,182,187,215,220,225,263–4,277,307,308n.5,309,311–13,316,318CorneliusScipioAfricanus,P.(cos.205) 162,186,215,221,223,224,225,228,309,312CorneliusScipioAsina,Cn.(cos.260) 132–3,135CorneliusScipioCalvus,Cn.(cos.222) 145–6Corsica 322Coruncanii 330Coruncanius,Lucius 183(p.408) courts,law 270,272courts,royal 84,98,182,185,186,189–94,196,198,201,203–5,210,211,314Cratippus 92n.3CretanLeague 283Crete,Cretans 190,205,295,296,329Crinon,Macedoniancourtier 195Critolaus,Achaeanleader 216curia seesenate,Romancursushonorum 308,314n.34Cynaetha,Cynaetheans 104,106,107,108,109,111,184,276Cynoscephalae,battleof 118,221Cypselus,Corinthiantyrant 122Cyrbe seeAchaïaCyrene 311CyrustheYounger 162,163,167,168,171,172Cyzicus,Cyzicenes 331Dalmatia 259Danaus 293,294Daniel,Bookof 264Daphne 327Davies,J.K. 2,334decadence 267,268,269,277–8seealsodegenerationdecline seedecadence,degenerationDecius,Campanianmercenary 14,173degeneration 143,146,207;
Achaean 144;Boeotian 147n.14,267–78,323,335;
General Index
Page 8 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Carthaginian 174,178;ofPhilipV, 201–11;Roman 144,156,157,260seealsoRome,declineandfall
deisidaimonia,superstition 243seealsoreligionDelos 296Delphi 272Delphicoracle 19n.100,42DemetriusofPharus 97DemetriusI,Seleucidking 178,185–6DemetriusPoliorcetes 281,298,300,301,302,304Demetrius,Macedoniancourtier 192,194Demetrius,sonofPhilipV 183–84,202,205,206,209,210,211DemocedesofCroton 314n.34democracy 8,10,12,14,26,32n.161,233–4,240,247–50,252,277,303seealsoochlocracyDemophon 249Demosthenes,Athenianstatesman 196,222depopulation 276,323Derow,P.S. 349,352n.64DeSanctis,Gaetano 26–30,32,344Diaeus,Achaeanstrategos 216Diagoras,Rhodianaristocrat 286Diana(Artemis)ofAmarynthus 123dignitas 311–12DioCassius seeCassiusDioDiodorusSiculus 87,150,152,281,284–98,304,305,316n.42,321Diodotus,Athenianpolitician 223,224DionysiusThrax 87DionysiusofHalicarnassus 181,182,199Diphilus 89diplomacy 43,49,102,109,110,149–50,151,152,154,161n.14,183,217,220,221,223–9,259,270,280n.8,312,316,331,332,335seealsoambassadors,Polybius’Historiesasdiplomacydiscipline,military 242Dium 193divine seegod(s)documentaryevidence 300,302–3Dodona 193Dorimachus,Aetoliancommander 101,104,107–8,186n.17,188,189,192dramaasmetaphorforhistory 28,78Drepana,battleof 136,139Duilius,C.(cos.260) 132–3,134,135Dyme 98earthquakeof228/7 283,299,327Ecbatana 316
General Index
Page 9 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Echinus 322Eckstein,A. 149,150,152,153,224,228,276Ecnomus,Cape 136economy,Hellenistic 35,319–35Egypt,Egyptians 24,31,187,198,207,222,291,293,300,326,328Elis,Eleans 99,269Emathia 124,202embassies seeambassadorsemotions
inhistory 11,14,28,33,73,74,76,80–1,82,83,86,90,301;ofbarbarians 144,175n.73;infriendship 313–15;ofreader 73–5,86
enargeia seevividnessEnnius 311envoys seeambassadorsEpaminondasofThebes 243,275,277Eperatus 98ephebeia 279EphorusofCyme 162epieikeia,fairness,leniency 221,222,223,224,229Epirus,Epirotes 102,103,183,195,269equestrianorder 252(p.409) Eratosthenes 86,342Eretria(ns) 123,124,272n.21Errington,R.M. 94,97,98,100Eryx,Mt. 137ethnography 236Etruria 322EumenesIIofPergamum 221EupalinusofMegara 314n.34Euripidas,Aetoliangeneral 190Eurymedonvalley 327exemplum 312experience,ofthehistorian 83,113Fabian,J. 342FabiusMaximusAemilianus,Q.(cos.145) 308FabiusPictor,Q.,historian 131,132,134,135,137,140,142,148,151,152,312,343;
audience 151fable seemythFalisci 166n.35,176,177family,Roman 240–1Farrington,B. 16,45,53fascism 9–11,12n.61,13–14,15,18,21,24,26–7,339federalism 4,5,16–17,25,18n.138,32,35,41,42,222,275,331,335seealsoAchaean,
General Index
Page 10 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Aetolian,Boeotian,CretanLeagues,LeagueofNations,Walbank,F.W.,AchaeanLeagueFeeney,D. 342,343Felix,procuratorofJudaea 261Ferrary,J.-L. 224,227festivals 97,280,290,327Feyel,M. 267,268,269,270,271fiction,tragedydefinedas 88fides 152,153,228,315–16Flaminius,C.(tr.pl.232,cos.223) 143,145,146,147,156floods 288,291focalization 188,190,193,194,195,196,198,199judges,foreign 272seealsocourtslanguages,foreign 170Forsythe,G. 310fortune,reversalsof 17,43,74,76–7,81,83–5,135–6,137,209,220–1,256,263–5,301,308seealsotyche,Walbank,F.W.,roleoffortuneinlifeoffreedom 8–10,18,22,98,218,252,284,302,323friendship 223,307,311,313–15,317seealsoamicitia,philiaFulviusNobilior,M.(cos.189) 121funerals,Roman, 80–1,82,233,234,241,254,312GallicWar 130,146Gaul(s) 130,145–6,160,170,173,243n.47,248,322,323,324,341,343,347–8gaze,the 82,188n.23Gelzer,M. 128,132,151,318gens 314geography seeimperialism,Roman,Mediterranean,Polybiusandgeography,Walbank,F.W.,importanceofgeographyGermany,modern 10,17,21Gesco,Carthaginiangeneral 166,171,175GessiusFlorus,procuratorofJudaea 261Getty,R.andM. 45,55–6Gibbon,Edward 21–2Gibraltar 331Giovannini,A. 216glory, 241,243god(s) 202,207,209n.40,221,243,244,252,256–7,264,280,286,287,288,290,293,295,302,348Goddard(néGropius),E.H.(Ned) xvi,1,7n.33,40Gomme,A.W.,ThucydidesCommentaryasmodelforHCP 3,50,57–62,64Grandjean,C. 319–20‘greatestconflict’motif 179Greek
art 146,260,310,312,314;culturalinfluenceonRome 307–318;literature 310,312;
General Index
Page 11 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
philosophy 307,308n.5,310,311–14,317;science 317
Greeks,characterof 240Hallward,B. 41–2HamilcarBarca 139,160,166,167,174–5,177Hammond,N.G.L. 71Hannibal,Carthaginiancommanderduring2ndPunicWar 77,146,160,186,196,221,232,235,243–4,313,324,351Hannibal,CarthaginiancommanderduringMercenaryWar 176Hannibalicwar, seePunicWar,2ndHanno,CarthaginiancommanderinSardiniaduringMercenaryWar 161,170Hasdrubal,CarthaginiancommanderinSpain(229–221) 160Hasdrubal,Carthaginiancommanderin3rdPunicwar 79,220HecataeusofMiletus 322(p.410) Helepolis,siegeengine 301Heliadae,childrenofHelios 286,288–93,305Heliopolis 291Helios,sun 286,288–90Hellenization 332Hellenism 307–18,esp.309–10Henderson,J. 3,15,26,30,35Heracleides,ambassadorofAntiochusIII 221Heracles 299HeraclidesCriticus/Creticus 271–2Hermias,Seleucidcourtier 185HerodtheGreat 261Herodotus 33,83–4,291,293HieroIofSyracuse 314HieroIIofSyracuse 148,149,152,173,177,184–5,187,225,351HieronymusofSyracuse 78,184–85Hipparchus,Athenian‘tyrant’ 314Hippo 138Hispania 322,323,328seealsoSpainhistory
andtragedy 74–6,88;inrelationshiptopoetry 73;andnarrativeofrealevents 90
Hobbes,Thomas 213Hölkeskamp,K.-J. 318Holleaux,M. 29,105Homer 176,295,296,301,306,308,329Horace(Q.HoratiusFlaccus) 315HoratiusCocles 241Hornblower,S. 273How,W.W.,andWells,J.,HerodotusCommentaryasmodelforHCP 3,47–50,59
General Index
Page 12 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Hoyos,B.D. 153hybris 223,224hydrography,ofBlackSea 184Hypomnemata,Memoirs 91,93–4seealsoAratusofSicyon,Walbank,F.W.Ialysus 286,292,293,294,305Iberia(ns) 169,173,184,223,328seealsoHispania,SpainIbycus 314IllyrianWar,1st 160,177,178Illyria(ns) 96,106,108,160,177,178,196,329,330imperialism,Roman 27,29,33,34,148,154,253,256,257,258,259,265,340,345;
culturaleffectsonRome 309,312,313;andtheMediterranean 340–6;resistanceto 221,222–4,232,255–65
indemnities 155,160,325–6Insubres 145intertextuality 34,162–72,268,273–4intratextuality 268–9,274Ipsus,battleof 332Iran 280,322Isocrates 163,234Isthmiangames 228Italy 112,130,250IuniusBrutus,L.(cos.509) 241Jacoby,F. 94Jerusalem 262–3seealsoTempleJews 255–65Jones,A.H.M. 2,21Josephus 34,255–65;
audience 256,259,264–5;comparedtoPolybius 255–65;criticismsofRome 260–3
Jotapata 262Judaea(ns) 256,261seealsoJewsjudiciallife,Boeotia 270,271JuliusCaesar,C.(cos.59) 286JupiterCapitolinus 343kalokagathia 222Koestler,Arthur 15n.78Lade,battleof 208,282Laelius,C. 186landscapes,economic 322landscapes,human 322–3Laqueur,R. 128Last,H. 55Lazenby,J.F. 161
General Index
Page 13 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
LeagueofNations 5n.30,16–17seealsofederalismLeavis,F.R. 9n.42legati seeambassadorslegions,enrolmentof 237–9Leontius,Macedoniancourtier 97,98,193,194,195,197LesserAttalidDedication 347–8Leucas 122Leucothea 288Leuctra,battleof 274Libya(ns) 91,128,162,166–7,169,179,223,352LiciniusCrassus,L.(cos.95) 309–10LiciniusCrassus,M.(cos.70) 261LiciniusCrassus,P.(cos.171) 124Liguria(ns) 169,173Lilybaeum 169,173Limnaea 100,115,116‘Lindianchronicle’ 285,294,305,306Lindus 286,290,292,293,294seealsoAthenaLindiaLipara 132,134,136literacy 279Liverpool xvi,1,353,355–6;
University 15,30,38,43–6,54–6,356(p.411) Livy 34,146,152,202,269,321;
militaryservice 119;useofPolybius 117–24
logismos,reason 144Lusi 104Lusitania 322,323,328LutatiusCatulus,C.(cos.242) 138,139LutatiusCatulus,Q.(cos.102) 310n.19Lycia 284,288Lyciscus,Acarnanianambassador 222Lycortas,fatherofPolybius 187,219,222,223,225,229Lycurgus,Spartanlawgiver 249Lycurgus,Achaeancommander 195Lycus,hero 288Lysimachus 302Macedonia(ns) 30,96,97,99,103,108,117,120,128,182,184,188,189,190,192,194,195,196,201,203,208,210,211,216,217n.14,218,219,222,223,225,229,245,275,277,313–14,323,325,346,347,348,350;
court 201,203MacedonianWar,
1st 331,348;2nd 118;3rd 117,124,204,209,216–17,219,256,269,284,300,303
General Index
Page 14 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
MacNeice,Louisv, 14–15Maecenas 315,317Maelius,Sp. 146Magnesia,battleof 221Magnesia-on-the-Maeander 348–9maiestaspopuliRomani 254maiores 314Malea,Cape 330Malis 322Malta 136,137Mamertini 34,140,143,148–57,160,173ManliusCapitolinus,M.(cos.392) 146ManliusTorquatus,T.(cos.347) 241manpower,military 327Mantinea(ns) 74–6,81MarciusCensorinus,L.(cos.149) 310n.19Marincola,J. 220MarmorParium 293n.59,350n.61MartinBrown,R, 309Mathos,leaderofmercenaries 168n.43,170–2,176McDonald,A.H. 44,63,66Media 322,324Mediolanum 145Mediteranean 141,206,219,224,283,317–18,337,340,341,342,345,348,349,350,352;
economy 319–35Megaleas,Macedoniancourtier 97,193,194,197Megalopolis 96,110,187,217megalopsychia 222,228Megara 186,314n.34Melos,Melians 224Memoirs seeAratusofSicyon,Hypomnemata,Walbank,F.W.,Hypomnematamercenaries 148,162,302,324,326;
asacommunity 171–2;ethnicity 168–70;families 172;lackofunity 168–70;languageusedtodescribe 166;leadership 169,171;notusedbyRome 172–3;pay 165,167,172;unreliability 173seealsoMamertini
MercenaryWar 130,159–79;conductofCarthaginianalliesinAfrica 159,166,167,169,174,179;Carthaginian'triumph'aftervictory 176;
General Index
Page 15 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
causation 166;moralequivalenceofbelligerents 176–7;roleofRome 177–8;savagery 170–1,175–6,179;‘trucelesswar’ 159,171,175;uncertaindate 159seealsoPolybius,Sardinia,supplies
Messana 130,143,148,149,150,152,157,173Messene,Messenia 101,102,104,105,108,123,188,189n.28,192,194,282,329Millar,F. 317–318mob-rule seeochlocracyMolon,Seleucidrebel 80,185,324Momigliano,A. 2,7n.33,21,24n.119,48–9Mommsen,T. 139,318monarchy 95,117,201,203,205,208,210,211,217,248–9,264,314,332–3Moore,J.M.,possibleeditorofPolybiusOxfordText 63Moschion, 88Mossynoeci 168motivationforwar
Greek 256;Jewish 256,261
Mountford,J.F. 19,43–4,46,54–6movement,human 323–4MuciusScaevola,Q.,augur(cos.117) 309–10MuciusScaevola,Q.,pontifex(cos.95) 309Mummius,L.(cos.146) 215,229Münzer,F. 145–6,147MuseionofAlexandria 314Mylae 135(p.412) Mysia 347myth 77,280,286–98,304,329;
tragedydefinedas 88mythicalagesofRhodianprehistory 286–98,304Mytilene,Mytileneans 223,224,331Nabis,rulerofSparta 120,282,283narratology 188n.23seealsofocalizationNationalSocialism 18,21seealsofascism,Walbank,F.W.,fascismNaupactus,peaceof 95,205,330,349navalpower 283;
Achaean 331;Carthaginian 149;Roman 132–8,232
Nebuchadnezzar 264NemeanGames 97NeoptolemusofParium, 86Nero,emperor 261
General Index
Page 16 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
NewAcademy 311NewCarthage 162,186,322,325,328,331Nicolet,C. 277nightwatch,Roman 242nobiles, 235nobility,Roman 307,311–13,317–18nouihomines 235Numidia(ns) 259Ochimus,sonofHelios 289,291,293ochlocracy 144,252,275seealsodemocracyOctavius,Cn.(cos.165) 177,186,225,310n.17OctoberHorse,Romanfestival 184Odysseus 33officium 315–16oikoumene,inhabitedworld 111,337,340–1,345seealsoPolybius,geographicalrangeofHistoriesoligarchy 252–3Olygyrtus 107Olympia 104Olympiads 95,341,344,345;
140th 91–116,337,340,345Onesimus,Macedoniancourtier 204Onians,R.B. 43oracles 296,297,298,302,348seealsoDelphicoracleOrchomenus 104,107Ormerod,H.A. 56Oropus 272n.21Ostia 133,233otiumcumdignitate 313OxfordUniversity 47,49,56n.12,60;
Press 3,37–9,46–72;Oxus,river 322Paeonia 124paideia 307–18Palus 194,195Pamphylia 327Pan 282Panaetius 313,316,317Patrae 104patricians 235patrocinium 314–16patronage 235Pausanias 347Pédech,P. 103,202,203,204,234Pednelissus 325,327
General Index
Page 17 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Pelagonia 330Pella 325Pellene 104,107,108Pelopidas 243,275Peloponnese 91,104,107,188,190,191,192,196,197,296,319people,Roman,roleof, 240,243,250–3seealsomaiestaspopuliromaniPergameneAltar 447Pergamum 207,221,333,347,348peripeteiai seefortune,reversalsofPerrin-Saminadayar,E. 274Perseus,kingofMacedon 183,203,204,208,210,211,216–17,220,283,284,314,331,350PersianEmpire 163–4,168,171,174,178,332Persians 341,347–8PerusineWar 119Peterhouse,Cambridge xvi,4seealsoWalbank,F.W.,Cambridgestudentphalanx 118–19Pharae 104Pheneus 107,108Phigaleia 101,104Philhellenism 309–10philia 223,313–17seealsoamicitia,friendshipPhilinusofAgrigentum 131,132,134,135,142,148,151,152,159,344Philinustreaty 151PhilipIIofMacedon 163,189n.27,194,196,198,204,208,209,211,217,222,224PhilipVofMacedon 35,94,97,98,99,100,102,103,106,109,111,118,123–4,181–199,201–11,217,218,219,222,223,224,235,244,268,273,282,283,284,325,330,335,342,347,349,350;
andAlexandertheGreat 196;alliancewithAntiochusIII 185;attackonMessene 189n.28,192,194;attackonThermum 189n.28,194,195,196;andsonDemetrius 183–4;andPhilipII 194,204,206,208,222;(p.413) speedasmilitaryleader 189,190,195,196;tragicfigure 182,201–11treatmentofSparta 182;asyouthfulfigure 188–98seealsoWalbank,F.W.,PhilipV
Philocles,Macedoniancourtier 203Philodemus, 86Philopoemen 123,183,187,223,224,226–7Phocia 100Phoenicians 291,294,305Phorbas 295,296n.66,305Phylarchus 34,73–90,325
General Index
Page 18 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Pindar 275,286,288,290,314piracy 103,138,177,178,300,302,303,329n.36,330Pisidia 325Plato 9,233,317plebeians 235Plutarch 32n.163,81–2,311,313,321Povalley 322poetry,distinguishedfromhistory, 86politeia 144–5,156;
meaningof 233–4;Rhodian 300,303;Roman 231–54seealsoPolybiusBook 6
Polybius140thOlympiad 91–116;
andAratusofSicyon 91–116;audience 147,150,154,157,236–7,245,247–54,256,259,263,265,320,345;onautopsy 113,201,238,255,281;Boeotia 35,267–78;Book6 3,34,41,156,167,170,172–6,178,231–54,275,317–18,335,351;captivityinItaly 154,203,256,316;causation 160–2,163,166,198;continuationofHistoriesafter167164–5;criticismsofRome 236,244–5,258–60;DeSanctis,Gaetano,on 26–7;ethnicity,approachesto 168–9;
genesisofHistories 30–1;geographicalrange 93,95,112,322,337–58;geography 35,77,122,176n.79,282,322,335;Historiesasdiplomacy 213–29;andHomer 176;onindividualinrelationtohissociety 147;andJosephus 255–65;literarystyle 181–2;andLivy 117–24;modernstudyof 25–6,33–5;onmonarchy 205;
onoldage 182–3;omissions 235–6,247–54;patternsinhisHistories 144,148;andPlato 162;polemic 33,128n.14,155n.44,184,202,232,255,281,282;prokataskeuē 92,125–42,150,152n.27,165n.30;receptionof 35;religion 33,35,79;andScipioniccircle 307–18;
General Index
Page 19 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
sourcesfor 91–116,148,159,238,343;asasourceofeconomicdata 319–35;survivalof 232–3;symploke 93,96,111,112,206,337–52;andThucydides 162;onTimaeus 80,83,343;ontime 339–52;tragichistory 73–90;ontruthinhistory 147n.15,216;andXenophon 162–72;onyouthfulleaders 183–8;andZenoofRhodes 281–3,298,304seealsoWalbank,F.W.
PolycratesofSamos 314PolyzelusofRhodes 296n.66,305pompafunebris seefunerals,RomanPompeiusMagnus,Cn.(cos.70) 260–1PontiusPilate 261PopilliusLaenas,C.(cos.172) 225popularsovereignty 251populations,evidencefor 327PorciusCato,M.(cos.195) 126,242,311–12portaCapena 146Poseidon 287,288,294Posidonius 92n.3praiseasvehicleforadvice 225Préaux,C. 278presenttense,anachronisticuseof 122–4Prinassus 323propheciesofRome’send 264–5PrusiasIofBithynia 96PrusiasIIofBithynia 209,259,326Ptolemaeus,Macedoniancourtier 197Ptolemies 198,207,211seealsoindividualPtolemiesbelowPtolemyI 299,300,305,314PtolemyIIIEuergetes 93,95PtolemyIVPhilopator 84,191,198,282,314n.35,331,342,349,350PtolemyV 185,222PunicWar
1st 130,131,132,134,137,140,149,150,152,154,155,156,160–1,169,177,187,325,331,344;2nd 82,92,112,117,128,129,130,132,145,146,160–2,163,183–4,247,252,351;3rd 154,178
punishment 242Pydna,battleof 119,129,229,312–13
General Index
Page 20 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(p.414) Pylos 110Pyrrhus 130,149,150,285n.17,342–3,352quantificationinancienteconomichistory 327QuinctiusFlamininus,T.(cos.198) 118,183–4,218,219,221,228,312,330Raphia,battleof 184,324Rawson,E. 238,242readershipforhistory seeaudienceReger,G. 334religion 9,11,24,35,146,193–4;
Roman 79,233,243,252,254seealsotyche,god(s)revolutions 339Rhegium 130,149,152Rhium 104,106,107,108Rhodes,Rhodian(s) 190,207,225–6,227,228,279–306,327,331,332,333,348,350;
Colossus 299;mythicalprehistory 280,284–98;asoriginofEgyptianwisdom 291
Rhodos,city 281,290,294n.64,297;siegeof 281,298–303,304
Rhodos,nymph 286n.32,287,288,289Rhone,river 324Roesch,P. 272Rome,Romans 127,130,132,136,218,219,223,225,226,227,228,229,307,309,311,312,313,315–17,318;
army 234–40,242–3,248;asbarbarians 244;constitution 145,231–54seealsoPolybiusBook6benefitstosubjectpeoples 258;declineandfall 7n.34,9–11,21,22,24;asdemocracy 247,317–8;successof 231,235–6,244–5seealsofunerals,imperialism,maiestaspopuliRomani,navalpower,people,religion,senate
Rostovtzeff,M. 5n.36,7n.32,11n.55,14,17–18,25n.129,54,268,320Sabinus,procuratorofJudaea 261Saguntum 196,331SainteCroix,G.E.M.de 7n.34,22Salii 233Samnium 322Samos 314Sardinia 155;
duringtheMercenaryWar 161;takenbyRomansfromCarthageafterMercenaryWar 160,161,177,178
Scerdilaidas,Illyrianking 106,190,330Schachermeyr,W. 18Schweighauser,I. 25
General Index
Page 21 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Scipio seeCorneliusScipioScipionicCircle 307,309,310Scopas,Aetolianleader 104,105,188Scopas,Ptolemaiccourtier 185Scott,J. 214Segesta 133,134Seleucia-in-Pieria 327Seleucids 185,186,198,211,227,259,282seealsoAntiochusIII,AntiochusIV,AntiochusV,DemetriusI,SeleucusIIISeleucusIIICeraunus 93,95Selge 325,327Sellasia,battleof 94,187SemproniusGracchus,Ti.(tr.pl.133) 309senate,Roman 148,153,154–7,249–52,284,347;
rejectsransomdemand 244;roleof, 240,243
serpents,plagueof 292,294,296settlementpatterns 322Sicily,Sicilians 128,130,133,136,138,143,151,154,156,157,169,232,328Sicyon 100,104,107,108Sinope 190Sisenna,historian 122Siwa 302slavetrade 323SocialWar 91–2,94,95,100,102,110,111,112,188,190,191,193,197,331,332sons,executionof 241,242,244Spain 44,92–3,160,162,184,186–7,196,224,232,242n.44,248,327,328,340–2,351seealsoHispaniaSparta,Spartans 7,9–10,15,23,102,103,108,109,169,182,186n.17,188,189,190,192,194,195,196,221,222,223,249,253,282,319,352speechesinhistory 73Spendius,leaderofmercenaries 168n.43,170–2,173,175–6Spengler,Oswald 7n.33,40Sphacteria 221starvation 167seealsocannibalism,suppliesstasis 314statues 288,293,302–3,347StephanusofByzantium 233Stier,H. 18,28Stoa 316stoning 170–1Strabo 322Strasburger,H. 309–10Stymphalus 107(p.415) SulpiciusGalus,C.(cos.166) 310n.17SulpiciusRufus,Ser.(cos.51) 8
General Index
Page 22 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
supplies 167Syme,R. 2,20,21,33,47,49–51,56n.12,61,247symploke 96,111–12,206,337–52seealsoPolybius,symploke,Walbank,F.W.,‘Symploke’synchronisms 95,102,342–3,350Syracuse 146,148,150,152,183,312,314Syria(ns) 112,259Syrianwar,4th 92,331Tacitus 188n.21,191–2n.35;
HistoriesaspossibletopicforF.W.Walbank 19–20,46–7,50–2,56n.12Tanais,river 322Taras 324,331Tarentinewar 130Taurion,Macedoniancourtier 193Telamon,battleof 145Telchines,childrenofThalatta 286,287,288TempleinJerusalem 260–1,262,263Tenages 289,290Teuta,queenofIllyria 183,330Thebes,Thebans 189,196,223,248,252,267,269,271,274;
constitution 243,275Themistocles 243TheopompusofChios 92n.3Theoxena 124Thermum 98,100,104,189n.28,194,195,196,222Theseus 249Thessaly,Thessalians 97,118,123–4,195,295,296Thompson,Dorothy 353–4,357Thrace,Thracians 123ThrasycratesofRhodes 330Thucydides 77,81–4,92n.3,94,126,128,131,142,162,165,202,223,224,255,298,321Tiber,river 311,315Tiberius,emperor 261TimaeusofTauromenium 80,83,343,130,155n.44,184,238,343,344time,conceptionsofinhistory 338–52Timocles,comicpoet 86–7Titus,emperor 257,262–3Tlepolemus,sonofHeracles 295,296,297topography 4–5,77–8tragedy 86–7,88seealsodramatragichistory 44,73–90,202–3Tränkle,H. 118,121–2transcript,hiddenorpublic 214–15,218,225–6,228–9Trasimene,battleof 97
General Index
Page 23 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
treaties 25,44,95,139,140,150,151,155,175,177,184,205,207,227,250,251,253,254,271,284,293,302,303,326,329,330,343,349,350Treves,P. 16Triballians 196tribunes,military 237–8,242–3tribunesofthepeople 251seealsopeople,RomanTriopas 305Tritaea 104triumph 137,176,251TrojanWar 176,184,285,296,297,304,306Troy 297,307truthinhistory 74,76–8TulliusCicero,M.(cos.63) 8,12,247,307,309,310,313tyche 30–1,93,95,144,203,207n.34,209,215,220,221,228,256–7,258,264,270,337seealsoWalbank,F.W.,roleoffortuneinlifeofTyndaris 136Ullrich,H. 283Utica 155,177Uxellodunum 27ValeriusAntias,historian 117VentidiusCumanus,procuratorofJudaea 261Ventris,Michael 354Venusia 146Vespasian,emperor 257,262Virgil,Georgics 30,43–4virtus 308,310vividness 81–3Walbank,Dorothy seeThompson,DorothyWalbank,F.W. 1–72,182,271,320,353–8;
AchaeanLeague 16,23,28;BritishCommunistParty 5n.30,37,45,53–4;Cambridgestudent: xvi,4,26,41–3;DeSanctis,Gaetano 26–30,32;fascism 9–11,17–18,21,24,26;federalism 4,5,16–17,25,32,41;geography,importanceof 4–5;Liverpoolcareer 37–8,43–6,54–6,353,355,356;natureofhistory 5,7,11–12,18–19,25–33,358;politicalcommitment 5,9n.44,12–33,44–5,353–4;relationshipoflifeandwork 3,5–7,12–13,16,35,71–2,353–8;(p.416) relationshipwithPolybius xvi,1–5,15,19–21,28–30,32–3;retirementtoCambridge 70,357;roleoffortuneinlifeof 19–20,29–31,40,43;schoolingatBradfordGrammarSchool xvi,7n.33,12n.48,30,39–40,42,47;SecondWorldWar 8,15,23,45–6,54;
General Index
Page 24 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Tacitus,Histories: 19–20,46–7,50–2,56n.12;travels 4,16n.85,33n.169,41–2;UnitedStates 21,29;AratosofSicyon 1,2,4,15–16,18–19,27n.137,29,31,42–4,47,91;AwfulRevolution 21–2,54n.8;CambridgeAncientHistory 2,13,17–18;‘ThecausesofGreekdecline’ 7,8,10,14,20,23,26,28,54;DeclineoftheRomanEmpireintheWest 7,11,12–13,15–16,20,21–2,25,45,53–4;HellenisticWorld 2,23–5;HistoricalCommentaryonPolybius 1,2,15,17–18,37–72,91,94,121,127–9,140,159,161–2,213,226,238–9,344,353,356–7;‘Historyandtragedy’ 88,90;HistoryofMacedonia 71;Hypomnemata 1,4–5,7–8,9,12,15–16,19–21,26,30–31,37–48,52–6;‘Theideaofdecline’ 276,278;‘IsourRomanhistoryteachingreactionary?’ 7,11–12,14,54;‘OlympichusofAlinda’ 19;‘PhilipposTragoidoumenos’ 182,201–11;PhilipV 2,31,44–6,47;‘Polybius,Philinus,andtheFirstPunicWar’ 132,135,142;‘TheProblemofGreeknationality’ 27,29–30,32;‘SocialrevolutionatSparta’ 7,9–10,15,23;‘SupernaturalPhenomena’ 144;‘Symploke’ 337;
Walbank,Mary 5n.30,9n.44,16,44,55n.99,353–7Walsh,P.G. 117–19,123Weber,Max 318Williams,Philip,unpublishedPolybiusedition 49n.7writing,originsof 291Xanthippus 136,169Xanthusvalley 287Xenoetas 80Xenophon 34,92n.3,94,198,233;
Nachleben 162;andPolybius 162–72;'ThemistogenestheSyracusan' 163
Xerxes,atAbydos 168Yahweh 258seealsogodsZama,battleof 186ZenoofRhodes 34,216n.9,279–306;
audience 283;andPolybius 281–3,298,304
Zetzel,J. 309Zeus 305;
General Index
Page 25 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
Atabyrius 295,296Zeuxis,Seleucidofficialandambassador 221,324Zonaras 133,134,136,138,139,140,141
Notes:
(2)These‘memoirs’willhavebeensotitledafterAratus’ownwork,whereintheauthorplayedeyewitnessandparticipant,providingPolybiuswithhisown‘starting-point’bothchronotopicallyandgenerically,andprovidingFWWwithhisfirstbookand,inthesememoirs,hisown‘starting-points’inandonautobiography:thisishowcomePolybiusattheoutsetdubshisownworkhupomnemata(1.1.1,etc:seen.adloc.,withMarincola1997:180).OnPolybiusandAratus,seefurtherMeadows,ch.4,inthisvolume.
(3)Walbank,HCPi.43on1.3.2:‘InmakinghimselfAratus’continuatorP.followedanestablishedtradition.AmongThucydides’continuatorswereXenophon(Hell.i.1),Theopompos(P.viii.11.3),andCratippus(Dion.Hal.Thuc.16);andXenophonanticipatesacontinuator(Hell.vii.5.27).’Polybius,too,wouldbecontinuedbyPosidonius:FGrHist91T2(ἰστέονὅτιδιαδέχεταιτὴνΠολυβίουἱστορίανΠοσειδώνιος)withClarke1999:144–5,thoughnotethecautionofYarrow2006:161–2.
(5)Plb.38.22.2;Hom.Il.6.448.Theepisode,whichisalsopasseddownbyDiod.32.24andApp.Pun.132(bothreferringtoPolybiusbutgivingdifferentversions),hasbeenwidelydiscussedinrecentscholarship:accordingtoMommsen1902–4:ii.37–8,ScipiofearedretributionforthedestructionofCarthage.ThisviewisstillfollowedbyMiles2010:346–7.Gehrke1996:536–7,followingWalbank,HCPi.722–5on38.21.1–3,viewsScipio’squotingHomeras‘eineSensibilitätfürdiemenschlichenWechselfälle’owingtotheinfluenceofGreekphilosophicalthinkingand,inthecaseofScipioAemilianus,mediatedthroughPolybius.Gehrke(p.537)seeshereatleastrudimentsofapolicyofthoughtfulness(‘denAnsatzgebenzueinerPolitikderNachdenklichkeit’).Othersaremoresceptical:Zahrnt2002:94suspectsthatScipio’stearsmaywellhaveflowedfromPolybius’penandpointstoPlb.8.20.9–10,whereanothervictoriousleader(AntiochusIII)shedstearsinthefaceofadefeatedenemy(Achaius).OnweepingandtearsastopoiinHellenistichistoriography,nowLateiner2009:122(withreferencetoScipioandPolybius).
(7)AtthisthesolepointofcontextualizationoftheproposalfortheCommentarywithinthehistoryofPolybiusscholarship,Ishouldmention(asthePressdidnot)thecuriosityofthegrandeditionwithErnesti’stextplusparallelLatintranslation,apparatus,andcriticalannotationes,bytheRevd.PhilipWilliams(1742–1830)whichwasprintedbutneverpublishedbyOUP’spredecessor:pp.1–642,BooksI–XVII;645–8,Prooemium;649–808,EPolybiihistoriisexcerptaelegationes;809–888,ExcerptaexPolybiodevirtutibusetvitiis;889–998,Polybiifragmenta;989–1008,HistoriaeUniversaePolybiisynopsischronologica.ThecopyinWinchesterCollege,broughttooureditors’attentionbyBarryShurlock(cf.his1986)aseditorof‘TheWilliamsPapers’,isbeingstudiedbyStray(forthcoming),fromwhomIbutgarblethisnote.WilliamshadbeenatworkonhisfolioPolybius(originallyusingCasaubon’stext)sincewellbefore1772whenthePress
General Index
Page 26 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
enquiredintohisprogresssofar,withnegotiationsatOUPhottingupthrough1783,butascompletionnearedin1798(whenWilliamswasthenewprebendaryofWinchesterandhisfirst-bornjustupatNewCollege),withdiscussionfocusingonsingleormultiplevolumeformattingandthelike,thepublicationofSchweighäuser’sIndexin700+pages(1795;volume1:1789)intervened:despiterepeatoutlaytowardsafarmed-outindextheDelegatespulledtheplugon2April1804.
(8)AfamousexamplefortheuseofhistoricalargumentsinHellenisticinterstatediplomacyisthearbitrationbetweenPrieneandMiletosinwhichthejurywascomposedofRhodians:I.Priene37=Syll.3599,discussedbyCurty1989.AninvaluablecollectionofepigraphicalsourcesonwhatmightbecalledkinshipdiplomacyisprovidedbyCurty1995.
(8)‘In1962IwasapproachedbyIwanamiShotentoauthoriseaJapaneseeditionandItoldthemthatIhad…additionalmaterial,whichtheycoulduse.Soin1963theJapaneseenlargedversionwaspublished.In1969theLiverpoolUniversityPressbroughtoutanewEnglishedition(theoriginalpublishershavingrelinquishedthecopyrighttome),incorporatingthenewmaterial.TodistinguishitfromthesmalleroriginalIgaveitthenewtitleofTheAwfulRevolution,whichwasintendedtorecallGibbon’sremarkthatweshould“learnthelessonsofthisawfulrevolution”.TherewerelaterSpanishandSwedisheditions;andIwanamiShotenwentonpayingmeroyaltiesforabout25yearsandsoldinallover13,000copiesinJapan.’(1992a:189)
(9)NolessthanintheworkofZenoofRhodes,analysedbyWiemer2001(cf.Thornton2004:516–17);seealsoWiemerinthisvolume.
(12)Butforacomicmomentin1946whereSisamunsubtlywardsoffanofferedcommentaryonTacitus’HistoriesfromK.Brink,warningFWWoffcollaboration,andsignsoff(31January):‘Ihopeyouaregettingonwiththegreatwork.Symeisnowback,andtherearesignsofarevivalinourOxfordSchoolofRomanHistory’.He‘hadtemporarilyforgottenthatPolybiuscamefirstinyourdoubleplan,but“was”gladyouwrote,becauseIdon’tthinkSymehaschangedhismindabouttheHistories(hehasmanyotherthingsonhand),sowehopeyouwillgoontodothatwhenPolybiusisdone.Thereisnohurry,butweareanxiousthatthefieldshouldbeoccupied’.(7February).Frankquips,‘Ifeltnodesireatthatpoint[1979]toreturntoTacitus’Histories.…’(1992a:187).Plusthequietusin1961,‘unawareoftheseearliertentativesandwithProfessorSyme’sadvice,wehaveaskedMr.ChilverandMr.WellesleyofEdinburghtocollaborateonacommentary.Ithoughtyououghttobetoldofthisatonce,sinceitmayaffectyourmorelongdistantplans.…Iwonderifyouwouldbewillingtoputit[‘materialtowardstheTacituscommentary’]atthedisposalofMr.Chilver?’,cappedincrassnessbythefollow-up:‘IamgladthatourTacitusplansarenotprovingawkwardforyou.Idonotthinkweneedtroubleyouforthematerialyouhadcollected;IimaginemostofitChilverwillalreadyhavenoted.Butitiskindofyoutooffer.’(D.M.Davin,16and20February).
(14)Cf.HCPi.181.ThecriticismofPhylarchusintheHellenicintroduction(2.56–63)isan
General Index
Page 27 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
exceptionalcase.AsWalbankhasindicated,Polybius’polemicagainsthimwasnotonlyinspiredbyPhylarchus’ethosas‘tragic’historianbutalsobyhispartisanshipforCleomenesagainstAratus.Thus,thedigressionisapowerfulpoliticalstatement,forwhichtherewasnootherplacethantheHellenicintroduction.SeealsoJohnMarincola’scontributioninthisvolume.
(14)Plb.6.47.3–5.Conversely,itistruethatforPolybius,wherestrongindividualsareinpower,changesintheirdispositionscanresultinchangesinthenatureoftheirstates:see9.23.8–9;cf.4.2.10–11,withChampion2004a:103–5.Suchcases,however,appeartobemoreorlessconfinedforPolybiustomonarchiesorpoliteiaiinadecadentconditiontobeginwith(e.g.Boeotia,Aetolia).Forthewell-orderedstateofAchaea,atanyrate,PolybiusfeelscompelledtodigressonindividualpsychologyinordertoexplainAratusofSicyon’sdeviationsfromAchaeancollectivecharacter(4.8.1–12).Heconcedesthatrareindividuals,whoarepoliticallyandmorallysuperiortotheircontemporaries,canariseinstatesalreadyindecline;seeChampion2004a:146–51,158–63.
(14)SeeWalbank,HCPi.148–50forthechronologyofthewarandthedateoftheRomanannexation:WalbanksuggeststhatitispossiblethattheRomanexpeditiontookplacein238/7,whileTi.SemproniusGracchuswasstillconsul,thoughEutr.3.2putsitinthefollowingyear,whichmightimplythatthediplomacytookplacesoastogiveafinalsettlementin237/36.SeealsoHoyos2007:249–52,276,whodatesthediplomaticcrisistoMarch–April237.
(14)OntherelationsbetweenMegalopolisandMacedonia,seeEckstein1987b:145,andcf.Liv.32.22.8–12.
(15)ForPolybius’ideasonthemaincriterionoftruthinhistoricalwriting,seePlb.1.14.6–9andassembledreferencesatChampion2004a:22n.30.
(16)Interestingly,Polybiusgivesanother‘firststep’whenhereportsthenewsofthefallofAgrigentumearlyin261(1.20.1–2).HerepresentsthearrivalofthenewsatRomeasthemomentwhenthesenatefirstbegantothinkofendingtheCarthaginianpresenceinSicily.Consequently,theideathattheRomansweremerelyhelpingtheMamertinesin264,withnoimperialdesigns,isreinforced.Forhistoricalreconstructionsofthepreliminariestoandoutbreakofthewar,seee.g.Hoffmann1969,Petzold1969:129–79,Hampl1972:413–27,Rich1976:119–27,Eckstein1980,Hoyos1984,Eckstein1987a:73–101,Scullard1989:537–45,Lazenby1996:11–42,Hoyos1998:33–99.ForRome’simperialexpansioninthisperiod,see(fromamongavastliterature)Errington1971,Harris1979,Gruen1984,Ferrary1988,Hoyos1998,andnowEckstein2008.Kallet-Marx1995isindispensablefortheperiodfromtheAchaeanWartotheascendancyofCn.PompeiusMagnus.
(17)Other‘young’leaders—notallofthemfavouritesofPolybius,buthighachievers—includeHannibal(3.15.6),hisbrotherMago(3.71.6),theAetolianDorimachus(4.3.5),SeleucusIII(4.48.7),AgathoclesofSyracuse(15.35.1),thePtolemaicadvisersTlepolemus(16.21.1),Sosibius(16.22.2),andPolycrates(18.55.5),Flamininus(18.12.
General Index
Page 28 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
5),theSpartansAgesipolis(23.6.1)andChaeron(24.7.1),FabiusMaximus(29.14.2),thefutureAttalusIII(33.18.1).
(17)Gruen1984:268–9listsnumerousRomancommanders,fromL.AemiliusPaullustoC.SulpiciusGalus,fromCn.OctaviustoL.LiciniusCrassus,withwhomGreekπαιδείαandprofounderuditiondidnottranslateintophilhellenisminpoliticis.
(17)ItseemsunlikelythatPolybiushadconsultedtheletterofthecommandingRhodianadmiral(cf.n.13)himself,ashehadneithermotivenoropportunitytodoso;Polybiusdidnotdeemitnecessarytobasehispolemicagainstotherhistoriographersonindependentevidence,andthenotionthataforeignerhadaccesstotheRhodianPrytaneionishardtosquarewithwhatweknowaboutHellenisticarchives:seeWiemer2001:22–4.
(19)Gruen1992:251listsL.MarciusCensorinus,Q.LutatiusCatulus,Q.AeliusTubero,M.AemiliusLepidus,Q.MuciusScaevola,Q.MetellusNumidicus,andM.ClaudiusMarcellusas‘RomanaristocratswithsincereinterestinHellenismandnotableaccomplishmentinthatsphere’.
(21)Ibid.407–8.Roeschofferssevenexamplesfromwhichweshouldinfactremovethetwodecreesof‘ThebesforthejudgesofOropus’thatwerepublishedlateronthebasisoftheRoescharchivesin1993.Gauthier1993hasdemonstratedthattheseinscriptionsnotonlybelongtooneinscriptionbutarealsopartofanEretriandecreehonouringOropianjudgeswhohavecometoThebestoruleonpendingtrialsbetweentheBoeotianandEuboeancitieswhoarelinkedbyasymbolon,i.e.ajudicialagreement.
(21)O’Gorman2000:13presentsasimilar,althoughmorecomplicated,networkofrelationshipsinTacitus:‘Tacitus’readerfollowsthecharacters(sometimesthenarrator)intheactofreading,notalwayscomingtothesameconclusion;thedifferencesaswellastheparallelsaresuggestive.Inparticular,Tacituscontinuallyrepresentshischaractersintheactofmisreading…’.Fordetailedanalysis,seeO’Gorman2000:81–97.SeetooMiltsios2009:492–8on‘illusoryexpectations’inPolybius.
(23)Theterminologyofnarratologyisnowfamiliarinclassicalscholarship.Davidson’s(1991:10–11)choiceof‘gaze’asopposedto‘focalization’doesreflecthisconcernwithPolybius’visualpresentationofperspective,butdoesnotreallymakehisanalysisanylessnarratological;andmostnolongersharehisworryaboutapplyinganarratologicalapproachtoahistoricaltext:seee.g.S.Hornblower1994:131–66,Rood1998(whichisisaparticularlygoodexampleofthefull-scaleapplicationofnarratologytohistoriography),Miltsios2009.OneofthemostinterestingandrevealingdiscussionsoffocalizationremainsFowler1990.ThebasicworkcitedonnarratologyisnowusuallyBal1997,butamuchmoreattractiveintroductionisGenette1980.
(24)Itisnonethelessstrikingthatthisjourneybeginswithasetback,andamorecomprehensiveoneinPolybius’versionthanthelaterRomantraditionontheSackofRomesuggests(Williams2001:143).BruceGibsonpointsouttomethatthereisacomparable‘narrativesynchronism’intheuseofCannaeasthedateatwhichtointerrupt
General Index
Page 29 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thehistoricalnarrativeforthediscussionoftheexcellenceoftheRomanconstitution(5.111.8–10;cf.6.58fortheRomanexploitationoftheirowndefeatthere).
(25)ConcerningtheimportancethatPolybiusattributestotheusefulnessoflearningfromthemistakesofothers,somethingtowhichhealreadyrefersin1.1.1–2(cf.Marincola2001:147),seealso3.62–3,andthewordsattributedtoAristaenusinLiv.32.21.29(satisexemplorumnobiscladesalienaepraebent:nequaeramusquemadmodumceterisexemplosimus).Significantly,thissamethemealsoappearsinDiod.1.1;foritsearlieroccurrencesinGreekliterature,seePani2001:74n.41.
(27)SeeDreyerinthisvolume(pp.204,206–9)fordiscussionoftheparallelsPolybiusdrawsbetweenthefamilyofPhilipIIandthatofPhilipV.
(27)SeeWalbank,HCPi.65on1.14.1;theperverseattempttoreversethisreasoningatLaqueur1938:col.1283mustberejected.IntheprokataskeuēPolybiuswasdependentonthechronologicalmethodsusedbyhissources;seeErrington1967b.
(28)TheagonesofAmphipoliswere,however,clearlyframedbyelementsoftheRomanludicritual,thussendingaclearmessagetotheGreeksastowhowasnowinpower(Flaig2000:139–40).
(28)Theresponsibilityforcourtiersinfluencingthedecisionofyoungkingsisamatterraisedontwofurtheroccasions:Philip’sattacksonThermum(5.9–12)andMessene(7.11–14).Seebelowfordiscussion.
(30)Forthecomplextraditionsofcontinuationofearlierhistoricalworksinancienthistoriography,seeMarincola1997:237–57;cf.Rood2004boncontinuationsofThucydides.ForPolybius’ownroleasacontinuator,seealso1.3.1–2and4.2.1,onstartingthemainnarrativefromtheendofAratusofSicyon’sworkatthebeginningofthe140thOlympiadin220/19BC(thoughforthecomplexitiesofthis‘continuation’,seeMeadowsinthisvolume),and1.5.1forstartingthenarrativeintheprokataskeuēwiththeFirstPunicWarin264BCwhereTimaeushadfinished.Seealso8.11.3,wherePolybiusnotesthatTheopompussetouttocontinuewhereThucydidesfinished.ThispassageispartofalongerdiscussionwherePolybiuscriticizesTheopompusforchanginghismindbyturningfromageneralhistoryofGreecetowritingaboutPhilipIIofMacedon;seefurtherShrimpton1991:40–3,M.A.Flower1994:29–32,100–1.
(30)Byhisownaccount,WalbankhadbeenaLaboursympathizersince‘atleast1922,when[he]feltstronglyonthesideoftheminers’,1992a:120;hehadjoinedtheSocialistSocietyandtheLeagueofNationsUnionin1930–1atCambridge,1992a:108.Duringaseven-weekstayinJenain1931he‘hadbecomeveryconsciousofthedangerspresentedbytheNazimovement’,1992a:121(cf.pp.115,128–9);reinforcedbyMary’smorepracticalcommitment(p.132),laterinthe1930s,hejoinedtheCommunistparty,wasHon.Sec.oftheMerseysidebranchoftheNationalCouncilforCivilLiberties(activeinwritingtolocalpaperstocounterNationalUnionofFascistspropaganda),andwasChairmanofthelocalbranchoftheLeftBookClub.Forhisreadinginthisperiod,see
General Index
Page 30 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
below,n.33.
(32)Theargumentof1944canbeseenanticipatede.g.inWalbank1943d,andespecially1942c(areviewofRostovtzeff1941).ForWalbank’sextensivenotesonthelateRomaneconomy,seeSCAD1037/2/3/15.ByWalbank’saccount,1992a:97,acrucialroleinintroducinghimtotheideasofRostovtzeffwasplayedbytheundergraduatelecturesofMartinCharlesworth.
(32)Pind.Ol.7.InPindar,RhodosandHelioshavesevensons,andfromoneofthemtheeponymsofthethreeoldRhodiancitiesdescend:ll.71–5.AccordingtoGorgonFGrHist515F18,thepoemhadbeeninscribedwithgoldenlettersanddedicatedinthesanctuaryofLindianAthena.TheconclusionthatthededicationwasstillondisplaywhenZenowrotewouldbeunsafe,however,asitisnotmentionedinthe‘LindianChronicle’.
(33)34.8.4–10,fromStrabo3.2.7andAth.8.1,330c–331b.Walbank(HCPiii.601)canvassedaconfusionbyAthenaeuswithTurdetania(sc.theGuadalquivirvalley),aninterpretationresistedbyÉtienne1996:396=2006:556.
(33)ApointgivenprominencebyMomigliano1984:‘Firstofall,itisimpossibletothinkof[Walbank]asamanandasahistorianwithoutbearinginmindthepre-waratmosphereofdiscussiononancientandmodernproblemsofcivilization.’ForWalbank’sreading,seee.g.1992a:76(indoctrination,byNedGoddard,withtheideasofOswaldSpengler’sDeclineoftheWest:‘later,ofcourse,weallthrewofftheseideasandmanyothersemi-mysticalnotionstowhichGoddardwaspartial’),p.121(G.B.Shaw).Anearlynotebook,SCAD1037/2/3/22,containstwopagesofreactionstoToynbee,AStudyofHistoryIV.58 ff.SpenglerandToynbeefeatureinhisdiscussionofthereceptionofthemixedconstitutioninhisthird1957GrayLecture,SCAD1037/2/1/11/9,p.332(Polybius‘amongthedistantprogenitorsofOswaldSpenglerandDr.Toynbee’),thoughcf.itspublishedversion,1964a:34–5.TheintensityandbreadthofWalbank’sengagementwithcontemporaryeventscanbegaugedbyhisyear-longWorkers’EducationalAssociation(WEA)courseonWorldAffairs,runatLytham,in1945–6,SCAD1037/2/1/4;lectures(mostlycountrybycountry)areinterspersedwithweeklyupdatesoneventsacrosstheglobe;seebelowfortherangeofWalbank’smodernanalogiesinlaterwritings,p.25.
(34)ComparethewayinwhichPolybiusmisleadinglyinvolvesAsiainhisσυμπλοκή:whenheclaimsthateventsinItaly,Greece,andAsiacometogetherforthefirsttimeafterNaupactus,heisfacedwiththeproblemthatthereisnoplausiblewaytoincludeAsiainthisstoryatthistime:ithadnothingtodowitheithertheSocialWarortheHannibalicWar.Nonetheless,wearetoldthatwhenalleyesinGreeceturnedtoItaly‘verysoonthesamethinghappenedtotheislandersandthoselivingincoastalAsia’,andthatafterthisembassiesweresentfromthosewithgrievancesagainstPhilipandAttalustoRomeinfuture,ratherthantothekingsofAsiaandEgypt,andviceversa(5.105.6–8),though‘infact,manyyearsweretopassbeforeanyislandersorAsianGreekssentembassiestoRome;andnoRomanembassycrossedtheAegeanbefore200’(Walbank1972a:69;cf.Feeney2007:59).TheallianceofAttalusIofPergamumwithRomeintheFirstMacedonianWarmighthaveprovidedPolybiuswithabetterexampleofAsianeyes
General Index
Page 31 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
turningwestrelativelysoonaftertheσυμπλοκή.
(34)OnartisticpatronageunderthearchaicGreektyrants,Barceló1993:159n.570,DeLibero1996:286–7.OnAnacreonAlexisofSamos,FGrHist539F2,Strab.14.1.16,Paus.1.2.3,Ath.13.72,599c,[Arist.]Ath.Pol.18.1.ManyotherscommittedthemselvestoPolycrates,amongthemthepoetIbycus,DemocedesofCroton,thefamousphysician,andthearchitectsEupalinusofMegaraandRhoicusofSamos.ForSyracuseunderHieroI,seeWeber1993:38–44.
(34)1944:11;forthepairingofGreekandRomandecline,cf.1983b:199,whereWalbanklocatestheachievementofdeSteCroix’sTheClassStruggleintheAncientGreekWorldin‘itstreatmentoftwodevelopmentsofmagnitude—thedestructionofGreekdemocracyfrom400BConwardsandthecausesofthedeclineandfalloftheRomanEmpire'.Walbankbrackets1943a,1944,and1946atogetherinhismemoir,1992a:188–9.
(34)Eckstein2006:86–7;cf.Eckstein1995.Cf.Plb.15.24.6(enslavementofallinhabitantsofThasos):‘Butwhowouldnotqualifyasperfectlyirrationalandinsanetheconductofaprince[sc.PhilipV],who,engaginginvastenterprisesandaspiringtouniversaldominion,withhischancesofsuccessinallhisprojectsstillunimpaired,yetinmattersofnomoment,intheveryfirstmattershewascalledupontodealwith,proclaimedtoallhisficklenessandfaithlessness?’;onexplicitlymoralcriteriaasbeingoflesservalue,seefurtherBohm1989:24.Cf.Plb.15.20.1–2:‘ItisverysurprisingthataslongasPtolemyinhislifetimecoulddispensewiththehelpofPhilipandAntiochus,theywerereadytoassisthim,butwhenhediedleavinganinfantsonwhomitwastheirnaturaldutytomaintaininpossessionofhisrealm,thenencouragingeachothertheyhastenedtodividethechild’skingdombetweenthemselvesandbetheruinoftheunhappyorphan.…’Tyche,however,ispunishingthem.
(35)Cf.1.70.7Ὁμὲνοὐ̑νπρὸςτοὺςξένουςκαὶΛιβυκὸςἐπικληθεὶςπόλεμος.FordiscussionoftherelationshipbetweentheLibyansandthemercenaries,seeHoyos2007:78–9.Polybiusalsoreferstothewarasa‘kindredwar’(πόλεμον…ἐμφύλιον,1.71.5;cf.1.71.7ἐμφυλίουστάσεωςκαὶταραχη̑ς),usingthesamephrasingthatheusedtodescribetheRomanconflictagainsttheFalisci(1.65.2).
(35)Weber1993:23–5,Gehrke1995:90–1,Meissner2007:98–100,Murray2008.OnthecareersofindividualφίλοιintheperiodofPtolemyIV,Huss2001:458–64.Thepeculiar‘charismatic’componentofHellenistickingshiphasbeenexposedbyGehrke1982.
(35)OnmightcomparethewayTacitusholdsbackthecharactersketchofSejanusuntilthebeginningofAnnals4,eventhoughhehasbeenpresentbefore.JustasinTacitustheintroductionofSejanusmarksanewbeginning,‘whenfortunesuddenlystartedtoturndisruptive’(Ann.4.1—seeMartinandWoodman1989:77;80–1),soinPolybiusnosoonerisApellesmentionedthanwelearnofhowitallturnedbadforPhilip(4.77).
(36)ReferencesinRigsby1996.Itisnoaccidentthatthephrase‘Thepoliticsofplunder’
General Index
Page 32 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(Scholten2000)hasalsobeenappliedtothepiracyof1550–1650(Jowitt2006)aswellastocertainmodernmisgovernments,realoralleged.
(36)1944:10.
(39)HavingcapturedagroupofAetolianenvoystoRomein189,theEpirotsdemandedaransomof5Tforeach,andaccepted3TaheadforallexceptAlexandertheIsian,whoserefusaltopaywasprovidentiallyvindicated(21.26.7–19).Ifthesefiguresrepresentedanythinglikethegoingratesforhigh-statuscaptives,itisnowonderthatpiratesproliferated.Onemayfitlycomparethefigureof$500,000,reportedinJune2007asthegoingrateforransomingoilworkersintheNigerDeltaareaandasapparentlypaidbyoilcompaniesasaroutinecost.
(40)Ondivinemadness,seeWalbank,HCPiii.233onPlb.23.10.14,whocompares31.9.4(AntiochusIV),32.15.14(Prusias),36.17.15(theMacedonians).PolybiussometimesoffersreasonssuchasTychewhenrationalexplanationsseemtofail.TheseexamplesdonothaveanythingtodowiththegeneraloutlineofthesourceaboutthedeclineoftheMacedoniankingdom.
(42)Cic.Luc.5;onthedatingofthemissionandtheevidenceoftheConstantinianexcerptafromDiodorusSiculus,seeAstin1959,Mattingly1986.
(42)1944:19,1946a:68.Walbank’suseofthephrase‘masscivilisation’caninpartbeseenasarejoindertothemuchmorenegativeandconservativeuseofthetermbyF.R.Leavis,authorofthenotoriousMassCivilisationandMinorityCulture(Cambridge,1930).WalbankwastakenforteawiththeLeavises,in1930–1:see1992a:123.
(43)Notee.g.thedecisionofMathosandSpendiustolaysiegetoCarthage(1.82.11),orMathos’suddenattackonthecampoftheCarthaginiangeneral,Hannibal(1.86.5).
(44)SeeThornton1998forthewayinwhichthepoliticalobjectivespursuedbyPolybiusattheendoftheAchaeanWararereflectedinthework.ForthegrowingawarenessoftheimportanceofPolybius’mediationinthemostrecentstudies,seeThornton2004:508–24,andseealsoFerrary2003:18.
(44)Actually,sinceScipioisseekingPolybius’friendship,andsincehisportrayalisthatofaself-conscious,ratherunassertive,youngman—ascomparedtothematureGreekwhoconversesconfidentlyinAemiliusPaullus’house—thesocialasymmetryevenseemsreversed,makingPolybiusthestrongerandScipiotheweakerpartner.
(44)SeeWelwei1966,Eckstein1995:129–40,Champion2004a:185–93,Champion2004b.Cf.Plb.12.25k.6–7,wherePolybiusdiscussesTimaeus’representationofHermocrates’speechatGelain424(cf.Thuc.4.59–64).Hermocrates,accordingtoTimaeus,praisedtheGeloansandCamariniansformakingsurethatimportantmattersofstatewerenotdiscussedbythemultitudebutratherbytheleadingcitizens.PolybiusmissedfewopportuntiestocastigateTimaeus(cf.Sacks1981:21–95),buthedoesnotherequestionthepoliticaljudgementofTimaeus’Hermocrates.
General Index
Page 33 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
(44)ThesethemesofcollectiveinterestplayoutinpracticeinScipio’shandlingofthemutinyinSpain,whichculminatesintheexecutionofthemutinyleadersinfrontoftherestofthefrightenedsoldiers(11.25–30).
(44)Theuseofthetermis,verylikely,duetothestronginfluenceatthetime—onbothFrankandMaryWalbank—ofPalmeDutt’sFascismandSocialRevolution:AStudyoftheEconomicsandPoliticsoftheExtremeStagesofCapitalisminDecay(London,1934):see1992a:128.
(47)ThatthisconceptionofthearmyisPolybius’ratherthanduetohispossessionofamanualissuggestedbythewaythesethreeelementsappearelsewhereinhishistory,cf.2.33,whereitisthetribuneswhoareresponsibleforthesuccessagainsttheGaulsratherthantheincompetentconsulFlaminius,or11.27wheretheyhavearoleinthehandlingofthemutiny.
(48)1946a:76.
(49)OnemightcompareThuc.1.22.6,wherethe‘truestexplanation’(ἀληθεστάτηπρόφασις)forthePeloponnesianwarisboththegrowthofAthenianpowerandthefearthatthisinspiredintheSpartans,i.e.anemphasisonperception.SeealsothediscussioninGibson1998:124–6forasimilaremphasisonperceptionsinDio53.19.
(50)Forthistraditionalclichéofbarbarianlanguagesasmultipleandchaotic,seee.g.Dubuisson1982:23–4,Harrison1998:19–20.ComparealsothecontrastbetweentheunisonshoutsoftheRomansandtheconfusedanddiscordantlanguagesoftheCarthaginianmercenariesatPlb.15.12.8–9(cf.Liv.30.34.1andseeLevene2010:88–91ontheuseofHomer,Il.4.437–8bybothPolybiusandLivy),andPlb.11.19.3–5onthedisparateforcesledbyHannibalinItaly(cf.Liv.28.12.2–5,andseeLevene2010:237–9).
(52)ApartfromHoratius(6.55)exceptionstothisarelikelytohavebeenfoundinthelostarchaeologia(6.11a).
(54)McGing2010:63notesthestoningofDexippus(Anab.6.6.5–7),andthenear-stoningofClearchus(Anab.1.3.2),andthethreatofstoningmadeagainstXenophonhimself(Anab.7.6.10).
(55)1946a:5–6;seealso1945b.Walbankwasclearlythinking,inlargepart,ofRostovtzeff:see1991/2:90.
(59)1.65.4:…ἐνᾡ̑πολλοὺςκαὶμεγάλουςὑπομείναντεςφόβουςτέλοςοὐμόνονὑπὲρτη̑ςχώραςἐκινδύνευσαν,ἀλλὰκαὶπερὶσφω̑ναὐτω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους;3.2.2:…ἐρου̑μενὡςεἰςἸταλίανἐμβαλόντεςΚαρχηδόνιοικαὶκαταλύσαντεςτὴνῬωμαίωνδυναστείανεἰςμέγανμὲνφόβονἐκείνουςἤγαγονπερὶσφω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους,μεγάλαςδ’ἔσχοναὐτοὶκαὶπαραδόξουςἐλπίδας,ὡςκαὶτη̑ςῬώμηςαὐτη̑ςἐξἐφόδουκρατήσοντες.Thesamephrase,περὶσφω̑νκαὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους,isalso
General Index
Page 34 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
usedbyPolybiusattheendofthethirdbook(3.118.5)indescribingRomananxietiesafterthecatastropheatCannae;seealso15.6.6,whereHannibalobserveshowtheRomansinthepastandnowtheCarthaginiansareindangerπερὶτου̑τη̑ςπατρίδοςἐδάφους.
(59)Hdt.2.182.2;likewiseMarmorParium(FGrHist239)A8;Strab.14.2.11.ForthewoodenimageofLindianAthena,seeCallim.fr.100.4PfeifferandfurthertestimoniesdiscussedbyBlinkenberg1917,towhichapapyrusdatingfromaround100BC(P.Schubart34,col.II)cannowbeadded,ifinline1thenameofDanaushasbeensupplementedcorrectlybyPuglieseCarratelli1955.InDiogenesLaertius(1.89)thefoundationofthetempleisascribedtoDanaushimself.
(61)1946a:80;cf.pp.84–5.Thesameurgencyisreflectedinanearlierlecture,givenaspartofaseriesoncitizenship(thoughhistory)fortheDurhamCountyCommunityServiceCouncilinSept.1938.Thefinallectureconcludeswithquestionsover‘thefutureofourliberties’,SCAD1037/2/1/3/1:
Conclusion:
—thereisanattackonourliberties
Defence—vigilanceandagitation:unity.
Context:thatofwide-spreadfascism[illegiblereferencetoUlsterUnionists,1913]
BurningofPapers—Hitler
Chamberlain—?
DutyofCitizentosafeguardhisrights,towatchoverthoseonwhomauthorityisconferred.
(61)Cf.Thucydides’useofArgivepriestesses,Spartanephors,andAthenianarchonstodatethebeginningoftheArchidamianwar(2.2.1).TheMarmorParium(FGrHist239)usesAtheniankingsandarchons.Feeneynotesthatwhile‘[w]emaytalkcasuallyaboutsynchronismsbetweenGreeceandRome…thereisnoGreektimeagainstwhichtoplotRomantime.Romantimeisunified,asthetimeofonecity,butGreektimeisnot…ItisalwaysvitaltoaskwhichperspectiveonGreektimeisbeingadoptedatanymoment,throughwhichcalendricalorhistoricaltraditiontheideaofGreektimeisbeingfocalized,andwhatmotivatesthechoiceofdatesthataregoingtobeusedashooksoneitherside’(2007:23).Itshouldbenotedthatforatrulypan-Mediterraneansystemofsynchronisms,wehavetowaitforCastorofRhodeswritinghisChronicainthemid-firstcenturyBC,aworkwhichbringstogetherthetimesofAsia,Greece,andRome(Feeney2007:63–4).
(64)3.4.12–13ontheperiodafter167asatimeofταραχὴκαὶκίνησις.AsIsaidinLiverpool,thisapproachhasalsobeencharacteristicofmuchworkonPolybius,including
General Index
Page 35 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
thatofFrankWalbankandofotherabsentfriends.
(64)HereagainitisprobablethatDiodorushassuppressedmuchofwhatZenowrote.WeknowfromothersourcesthatὈφίουσσαwasanepithetappliedtoRhodos,andstillfindtracesofaetiologiesforthis:Heracl.Pont.FHGII,222FXXXIII;PolyzelusFGrHist521F7=Hyg.Astron.2.14;Strab.14.2.7;Plin.Nat.5.132;Steph.Byz.s.v.Ῥόδος.SeefurtherBlinkenberg1915a:289–303,Jacoby,FGrHistIIIb(Text):433.
(66)Diod.5.58.4–5.TheRhodiancultofPhorbasisnotasyetepigraphicallyattested,buttheRhodianauthorPolyzelusFGrHist521F7=Hyg.Astron.2.14relatedthatRhodiansusedtosacrificetohimwhenevertheywentonajourneybythesea.Polyzelus,likeZeno,connectedPhorbastotheserpentplague,butusedadifferentgenealogyashecalledhimasonofTriopas,whileinZeno’saccountPhorbasisasonofHelios.DieuchidasofMegaraFGrHist485F7=Ath.6.82,262e–263btoldastorythatexplainedwhyinIalysusslaveswerenotallowedtoparticipateinPhorbas’cult.
(73)1.65.7:…πρὸςδὲτούτοιςτίδιαφέρεικαὶκατὰπόσονἤθησύμμικτακαὶβάρβαρατω̑νἐνπαιδείαιςκαὶνόμοιςκαὶπολιτικοις̑ἔθεσινἐκτεθραμμένων.Eckstein1995:177hasapositiveviewofthewar’soutcomeasbeingthesavingofcivilization,buthintsinn.73that‘theCarthaginiansthemselves…arecontinuallysusceptibletodisreputableemotion’.SeealsoErskine2000:170–1onthewidertraditionofcharacterizingCarthaginiansasbarbarian.
(78)1992a:191;onVEday,Walbank‘wastalkingtotheStAnne’sRotaryClubon“IsHistoryBunk?”’.Cf.hisaccountofKoestler’sstay,1992a:146–7,revealingthattheywerereallyliberals.
(79)Plb.38.22,withScipio’squotationofIliad6.448–9atthefallofCarthageis,ofcourse,acelebratedinstanceofPolybianexploitationofHomer,butnotealsoPolybius’extensiveinterestinHomericgeography,onwhichseefurthere.g.Pédech1964:582–6,Walbank1972a:51,125–6.
(85)1992a:108;ClassicsandtheLeagueofNationshadcoincidedforWalbankinthefigureofGilbertMurray,whohadspokentotheBradfordGrammarSchool‘SixthClassical’whenhewasinBradfordforaLeagueofNationsUnionmeeting(1992a:74),andwholecturedontheHellenicTravellers’Cruise,1930(1992a:105).ForMurray’sLeagueofNationsactivities,seeStray2007:esp.pp.217–37.
(99)ThedatewhenZeno’shistorywaspublishedcanonlybeinferredfromtheusePolybiusmadeofit.ThelasttracesofhisbeingdependentonRhodiantraditionaretobefoundinhisaccountofhowin163theRhodiansgotpossessionofCalynda;referencestolatereventsareeitherindifferentoropenlyhostiletotheRhodiansandcannot,therefore,derivefromaRhodiansourceofinformation.TheconclusionthatZenopublishedhisworkaround160oralittlelateriscompatiblewiththefewindicationsPolybiusgivesaboutZeno’slife:whenthetwocorrespondedPolybiuswasstillatwork,butZeno’shistoryhadalreadybeenpublished(Plb.16.20.5).AsPolybiusstarted
General Index
Page 36 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
writingafter168,thiswouldseemtopointtoadatearoundthemiddleofthesecondcentury.
(100)Mountford’ssuggestion:1992a:186.Cf.hischoiceofAratus(asopposedtotheDelphicoracle)ashisfirstresearchtopic(p.109),orhissettlingonabiographyofPhilipV(after‘recallingastatementbyW.W.TarnthataseriesofmonographsontheAntigonidkingsofMacedoniawasadesideratum’,p.151).WalbankundertookconsiderablepreliminaryresearchonTacitus’Historiesinthisperiod,althoughitisnotclearwhetherthisantedatesMountford’ssuggestion(aterminuspostquemisprovidedbya1942exampaperusedasscrap):SCAD1037/2/3/18/5–6.WalbankwasclearlystillentertainingthepossibilityofworkingontheDelphicoracleaslateas1939:aletterfromBenjaminFarrington,29Jan.1939,SCAD1037/2/6/1/20.
(119)ThoughcontrasttheopeningofMomigliano1984:‘Itmusthavebeenin1947or1948whenItoldFrankWalbankthat(Soviet)Russianreviewersofhisbooks,thoughthinkingthathisattemptsatbeingacoherentMarxistwerenotverysuccessful,hadahealthyrespectforhisscholarship.’
(129)2002:1.Forasimilarlitotes,see1964a:260(therolesoftheUSandRome‘notaltogetherdissimilar’).Cf.Walbank’sobservation(1944:10)onRostovtzeff1926:‘ThecomparisonwithBolshevikRussiaandtheancientworldindecayisconstantlyimplicitinhisnarrative,andfrequentlyhepausestodrawadirectanalogy’.
(137)1951:58.Theitalicsareours.ThetensionbetweentheselevelsofinterpretationisexploredearlierthroughWalbank’snarrativeofAratus,e.g.initsironicconcludingcomparisonofCleomenesandAratus(1933:166)orhisanalysisofSicyon’sadmissiontotheAchaeanLeague(‘thereisnoevidencethat[Aratus]envisagedanyoftheconsequencesofthestephewastaking’),intheconclusionofPhilipV,1940a:275,orinhiscritiqueofStier1948b:160:‘Notonlythefacts,butthecriteriabywhichtojudgethemmustsometimesbedrawnfromtheknowledgeoflatergenerations.OneneednotmakeananachronistictheoryofGreekunityone’stouchstoneinordertoassesstheoverwhelmingpricewhichGreecepaidfortheluxuryofinter-poliswarfare,andtoseeinthislossoneofthecausesofherdownfall;norisitunhistoricaltocharacterisethenationalismwhichcouldnotadvancebeyondthecity(justassofarwehavefailedtoadvancebeyondthenationstate)asparticularist.Ifthehistorianisconcernedwiththewholestoryhemustassignresponsibilityinthisway:ifontheotherhandhistaskismerelytoassessthepositivecontributionoftheGreeks(asS.seemstosuggest),hemayprefertolimithimselftotheirownstandards.’
(138)Walbank’sanalogyofhistoryanddramagoesbacktohisprizeessayonfederalism,SCAD1037/2/4/1/2:oneresultofthemoderninterestinfederalism(p.1)isthat‘thecurtainhasceasedtofalluponthespectacleofGreekhistorywiththedeathofAlexander,buttheplayhasbeenprolongedtoatrueriflessdramaticclimaxintheroutofScarpheiaandtheburningofCorinth’.
(148)SeeHendersoninthisvolume,pp.37–8andn.2.Itstitle,ofcourse,refersfurther
General Index
Page 37 of 37
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversidadNacional Autonoma de Mexico %28UNAM%29; date: 27 March 2014
backinhisowncareertotheHypomnemataofAratus,thoughWalbank’sowngrandfather’smemoirwasacrucialmodel:SCAD1037/1/1/9.
(161)1951:60.Cf.hischaracterizationoftheutilityofhistoryaccordingtoThucydides,1990:254–5(historywasuseful,‘not,itistrue,inprovidingaseriesofformulaeorblue-printsforfuturegeneralsandstatesmen,butcertainlyingivinghisreadersanextensionofthatgeneralisedexperiencewhich,asvonFritzputsit,enablesaship’scaptain—or,onemightsay,thedriverofacar—toknowtherightthingtodoinaparticularemergency’),orinalecture,‘HowDemocracyBegan’givenSept.1957,SCAD1037/2/1/10/1,p.18(‘noonewouldbesofoolishastouseourexperienceofdemocracyatAthenstoprovideablue-printformodernpracticeoraprognosticationastohowmoderndemocracyislikelytoturnout.…But,evenso,thestoryofGreekdemocracyisvaluabletous,notperhapstoinciteuslikecertainpoliticiansoftheeighteenthcenturytorevolutionaryaction,butrathertoemphasiseandillustrateinasmallercontextwhatarestillimportantproblemswhichdemocracyhastosolve…itremainsoneoftheessentialobjectsofstudyforanyonewhoisconcernedwiththeproblemsthatconfrontmoderndemocracy.’).
(163)Seee.g.hisjudgement,1967:692–3,ofPlutarch,‘thiswarm,shrewd,butmediocrewriter’,whose‘enviablemyopia[concerningRomeandthepossibilityofhistoricalchange]…goesalongwaytowardsaccountingfortheunruffledkindlinessthatishismostattractivecharacteristic’;cf.1964a:241onPolybius,1983conHieronymusofCardia.
(169)1948a:171–2;Walbankhimselfcompiledalistofhistravels,yearbyyear:SCAD1037/2/5/15.
Accessbroughttoyouby: UniversidadNacional
AutonomadeMexico%28UNAM%29