Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros112“Like Men Driven from a Captured ...

“Like Men Driven from a Captured City” (Plut. Phoc. 28. 4): Reconsidering the Displacement of the Disenfranchised Athenians to Thrace in 322 BC

“Comme des hommes chassés d’une ville capturée” (Plut. Phoc. 28. 4). Pour une réconsideration du déplacement des Athéniens privés de leurs droits vers la Thrace en 322 av. J.-C.
Elisabetta Poddighe
p. 247-263

Résumés

Cette note examine le problème des exilés athéniens émigrés en Thrace en 322 av. J.-C., après la suspension de la démocratie à Athènes et l’imposition d’un régime censitaire. En particulier, l’hypothèse avancée est que les exilés athéniens auraient été installés par Antipater dans une ville de Thrace, Sane, située dans une région de la péninsule chalcidienne initialement placée sous le contrôle d’Antipater puis passée, après 316, sous le contrôle de Cassandre. La ville a été refondée sous le nom de Sane-Ouranopolis par Alexarchos, le frère de Cassandre.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1. Introduction

  • 1 I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestions. Of course, the responsi (...)
  • 2 Antipater’s settlement was imposed (after the battle of Crannon in 322) on a defeated polis struggl (...)
  • 3 Plut. Phoc. 28.4: τῶν δὲ ἀποψηφισθέντων τοῦ πολιτεύματος διὰ πενίαν ὑπὲρ μυρίους καὶ δισχιλίους γεν (...)
  • 4 Diod. Sic. 18.18.4-5: τὴν δὲ πολιτείαν μετέστησεν ἐκ τῆς δημοκρατίας καὶ προσέταξεν ἀπὸ τιμήσεως εἶ (...)

1In his Life of Phocion, Plutarch describes the disenfranchised poor Athenians who migrated in 322 to Thrace “where Antipater furnished them with land and a city” as “men driven from a captured city” (Phoc. 28. 4).1 According to Plutarch’s account the new census regime imposed by Antipater after the end of the Lamiac war had deprived 12,000 Athenians of their citizenship.2 Many of them accepted Antipater’s proposal and chose to migrate to Thrace where they were provided with land and a city.3 According to Diodorus, Antipater transformed Athens’ democracy into a polity based on property ownership to the value of 2,000 drachmae. Those possessing two thousand drachmae (9,000 citizens) had power over both the government and the elections (due to their right to vote). Those who did not meet the census value of 2,000 drachmae were excluded from taking part in the administration of the state, and Antipater branded them as “troublemakers and warmongers”. These same Athenians, around 22,000 people, were in turn given the option of settling in Thrace where land was made available to them.4

  • 5 The number of those removed from the body of citizens is given as 22,000 (δισμυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων) (...)

2Diodorus’ account confirms both the news of the emigration resulting from the loss of rights and also the Thracian destination, but two aspects of his account differ from that of Plutarch: the total figure of the excluded is calculated as being 22,0005 and there is no explicit reference to the prospect of a stable and organised settlement in Thrace, i.e. there is no news of a city being made available to the Athenian exiles.

3Plutarch is alone in connecting the information concerning the migration of the excluded Athenians with the account of their displacement to a city in Thrace. Its reconstruction has thus been evaluated in different ways.

  • 6 Gehrke, 1976; Williams, 1982; Bearzot, 1985; Tritle, 1988; Poddighe, 2002; Hughes, 2008; Bayliss, 2 (...)

4Most scholars affirm that it is impossible to verify the reliability of the information provided by Plutarch as regards the exiles’ flight to a specific Thracian city.6. However, a different hypothesis has also been formulated, which recognises this account and tries to confirm the news that the Athenian exiles were settled in a Thracian city.

  • 7 Cf. McKechnie, 1989, p. 55-56. On Alexarchos see: Weinreich, 1933, p. 269-285; Zahrnt, 1971, p. 209 (...)

5The hypothesis, argued by Paul McKechnie in his Outsiders in the Greek Cities in the Fourth Century B.C., claims that the city which received the Athenian exiles was Ouranopolis, the city founded in the Thracian region by Alexarchos, one of Antipater’s sons.7

  • 8 Cf. Tritle, 1992; Sekunda, 1992; Bearzot, 1993 and 1994; Hansen, 1994; Poddighe, 2002; Baynham, 200 (...)
  • 9 Gray, 2015, p. 351 n. 333: “A possible fourth-century parallel for exiles exhibiting utopian tenden (...)
  • 10 Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 208-209, is more cautious affirming that no evidence can be provided for the c (...)

6McKechnie’s theory has been generally ignored in the studies devoted to the oligarchic government of 322-319 and to the number of Athenian citizens in the second half of the fourth century BC.8 However, Benjamin Gray9 and Marek Winiarczyk10 have recently reappraised this hypothesis, and, given the progress of the latest historical and archaeological studies on the foundation of Ouranopolis, it is worth briefly reconsidering the question.

  • 11 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “There were good reasons for Antipater to have done so: Alexander’s leaving (...)
  • 12 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “The suggestion that Antipater gave the disfranchised Athenians a city as w (...)
  • 13 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “The name is odd...but it is quite likely to be merely an indication of a r (...)
  • 14 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “if Antipater’s son founded a city in Thrace, there was probably a definite (...)

7McKechnie’s theory is based on four main arguments: (1) Antipater had good reasons to provide a city for the thousands of Athenians moving to Thrace in 322, since displacing exiles without providing them with firmly founded cities could have led to dangerous revolts;11 (2) Plutarch’s account is more lucid in describing what the disenfranchised Athenians did in 322 and, in that matter, has to be preferred to Diodorus’ account;12 (3) the city in Thrace was founded at a relatively early date (at which time Antipater would not have named a city after himself), i.e. before 322;13 (4) Alexarchos’ foundation of Ouranopolis is to be related to the Athenian migration to Thrace of 322.14

8Let us now consider the different points of McKechnie’s theory.

2. Antipater’s reasons for giving the Athenians a city and Plutarch’s account of the exile

  • 15 See also Baynham, 2003, p. 25: “Antipater was offering land, a civic structure and local citizenshi (...)

9As affirmed by McKechnie, Antipater had good reasons for providing a city for the thousands of Athenians moving to Thrace in 322, since displacing exiles without supplying them with a firmly founded city could have led to dangerous revolts.15

  • 16 Alexander’s decree (presumably a diagramma) had ordered the return of the long-term exiles (except (...)
  • 17 The Athenians’ opposition to this return originated the Greek revolt in 324 (Diod. Sic. 18.8.7). On (...)
  • 18 Baynham, 2003, p. 27. Cf. Hughes, 2008, p. 120: “Diodorus was well aware of the Samian issue and ma (...)
  • 19 Cf. Baynham, 2003, p. 26-29. See also Hughes, 2008, p. 108: “It is possible, therefore, that Diodor (...)
  • 20 Diod. Sic. 18.18.6, 9.
  • 21 Diod. Sic. 18.18.8-9: ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις Ἑλληνίσι πόλεσιν ἐπιεικῶς προσενεχθείς καὶ τὰ πολιτ (...)

10The main problem was how to deal with the contemporary movements triggered by the decree on Alexander’s political exiles.16 Related to that decree was Alexander’s decision ‘to return Samos to the Samians’ (SIG3 312, ll. 11–14), who had been expelled by Athenian cleruchs established on the island beginning in 365, and therefore to call home the Athenian cleruchs who had settled in Samos.17 Some scholars have argued that the number of 22,000 exiles, recorded by Diodorus, also included the exiles returning from Samos,18 and Elizabeth Baynham has suggested that he may be quoting the total number of Athenians who ended up settling in Thrace.19 If this is the case, then this figure must surely include a considerable number of Athenian cleruchs – Baynham calls them “Samian Athenians” – who were forced to leave Samos after the exiles’ decree of 324. Even though Antipater had deferred in that matter to the central government, i.e. Perdiccas, and the Samian exiles were subsequently restored on Perdiccas’ order,20 the prospect of their return in 322 must have worried the regent Antipater.21

  • 22 Cf. Landucci Gattinoni, 1995, p. 82-83.

11Even Alexander’s decision in 324 to dismiss the Greek mercenaries represented a problem to be addressed in 322: it is in fact possible that the mercenaries dismissed by Alexander in 324 were amongst the exiles mentioned by both Diodorus and Plutarch.22 It is most likely that, just as happened in the case of Samos, Antipater had to handle their return.

  • 23 Isoc. 4.36; 5.120; 12.167. See Mathieu, 19662, p. 60; Fuks, 1972, p. 17ff; de Romilly, 1992, p. 2-1 (...)

12That Thrace was an ideal region to be assigned to settlements under Macedonian control had already been suggested by Isokrates: in many of his later writings, he calls for the Greeks to conquer new lands like Thrace in order to settle the dispossessed and dangerous elements.23

13In this context, McKechnie is certainly right in saying that Antipater had to worry about firmly placing in Thrace the exiles coming from Athens in 322.

  • 24 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55.

14McKechnie’s position with respect to the reliability of Plutarch’s account of the destinations proposed to the exiles is also convincing. He suggests that Plutarch’s account is the most lucid in describing what happened to the disenfranchised Athenians after 322 BC.24 Plutarch’s account appears detailed and based on at least two sources: Duris of Samos and Demetrius of Phalerum.

  • 25 Bearzot, 1985, p. 16-57, 65-67, 148-156; Landucci Gattinoni, 1997, p. 194-204; Ead., 2008, p. 25; P (...)
  • 26 Hansen, 1985, p. 28-36; Sekunda, 1992, p. 319-320; Bearzot, 1993, p. 148; Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-69; (...)
  • 27 Ctesicles, FGrH 245 fr. 1 apud Ath. 6.103.272c. Cf. Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-73. On the census see now (...)

15Duris was a party to the Samian affair and Plutarch systematically recurs to his work for his Life of Phocion.25 Plutarch also mentions several works by Demetrius, one of which is the Περὶ τῆς δεκαετίας.26 With all probability this is the work that provided him with the data relating to the census conducted by Demetrius between 317 and 307, and which allows him to arrive at the number of 12,000 exiles (we will return on to this issue).27

16As regards the possibility that for the numerical question Plutarch may have been aware of further events Diodorus either overlooked or knew nothing about we need to make a brief digression starting from the comparison between the reconstruction that Diodorus and Plutarch propose on the subject.

  • 28 Diod. Sic. 18.18.4-5: προσέταξεν ἀπὸ τιμήσεως εἶναι τὸ πόλιτευμα καὶ τοὺς μὲν κεκτημένους πλέιω δρα (...)
  • 29 Diod. Sic. 18.18.5: Οὗτοι μὲν οὖν ὄντες πλείους τῶν δισμυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων μετεστάθησαν ἐκ τῆς πατ (...)

17Diodorus describes the concrete results of the decree in these terms: Antipater “removed from the body of citizens all who possessed less than this amount (scil. two thousands drachmae) on the ground that they were troublemakers and warmongers, offering to those who wished it a place for settlement in Thrace”.28 He goes on to say that “These men, more than 22,000 in number, were removed from their fatherland; but those who possessed the stated rating, being about 9,000, were designated as masters of both city and territory and conducted the government according to the constitution of Solon”.29

18Exile appears to be the only acceptable alternative left to the excluded 22,000 who decide to leave their homeland.

  • 30 Plut. Phoc. 28.4: τῶν δὲ ἀποψηφισθέντων τοῦ πολιτεύματος διὰ πενίαν ὑπὲρ μυρίους καὶ δισχιλίους γεν (...)

19Plutarch in turn writes: “but the citizens who were deprived of their franchise because of their poverty numbered more than twelve thousand, and those of them who remained at home appeared to be suffering grievous and undeserved wrongs, while those who on this account forsook the city and migrated to Thrace, where Antipater furnished them with land and a city, were like men driven from a captured city”.30

20Diodorus thus uses a descriptive style, full of present participles and it seems that the historian has limited himself to describing (perhaps through the work of Hieronymus of Cardia) the situation immediately following the decree.

21Plutarch’s account allows us to reconstruct a more definitive situation, since it refers to each fact using historical times and introduces further details to the events described in Diodorus.

  • 31 Plut. Phoc. 29.4.
  • 32 These were most likely political figure like Hagnonides (Plut. Phoc. 34-35). Cfr. Bearzot, 1994, p. (...)

22It is not unlikely that Plutarch was aware of further events, which Diodorus either overlooked or knew nothing about. In one of the chapters of the Life of Phocion, for example, Plutarch says that Phocion successfully pleaded with Antipater to exempt many of these citizens from exile.31 Moreover, for those who were exiled, he obtained the privilege of residing in Peloponnesus,32 instead of being driven out of Greece beyond the Ceraunian mountains and the promontory of Taenarum like other banished men.

  • 33 Bearzot, 1994, p. 163; Poddighe, 2002, p. 70.

23It is probable that the economic conditions of the excluded had a certain influence on the choice of destinations, since those whose livelihood in Athens was not guaranteed were more interested in Thrace, which made Antipater’s proposal of new territories all the more appealing, while those who were not so poor tended to favour a relatively nearby destination. This also helps us to understand the meaning of Phocion’s intervention, which is not meant to contain emigration as a whole, but only to “favour” a part of the exiles.33

24There is however a remarkable concordance between the testimonies of Diodorus and Plutarch regarding the gravity of the decree which, by depriving a large number of Athenians of all their rights, forced them into exile. Furthermore, Plutarch’s clarification regarding exile itself is also noteworthy: exile for a group of the excluded was not so hard, at least as far as the geographic area destined for the flow of emigration was concerned.

  • 34 See Bearzot, 1985, p. 242ff; ead., 1993, p. 148-152.

25The possibility that the source of this version belonged to the peripatetic tradition, a tradition that strongly favours Phocion, reinforces the hypothesis that Plutarch was able to draw on an Athenian source, Demetrius of Phalerum, for a series of news concerning the exiles of 322.34

  • 35 Plut. De exil. 601a-f. Cf. Caballero-Viansino, 1995, p. 92.
  • 36 Cf. Hansen, 1985, p. 28-36; Sekunda, 1992, p. 319-320; Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-69; Gallo, 2004, p. 22 (...)
  • 37 Ctesicles, FGrH 245 fr. 1. See also Canfora, 1982, p. 42.
  • 38 Bearzot, 1993, p. 148; Poddighe, 2002, p. 68.
  • 39 Supra n. 5.

26It is probable that Plutarch integrated the reconstruction preserved in Diodorus – which most likely dated back to Duris and Hieronymus – with other information and that this came from the peripatetic environment. It is also significant that in the Περὶ τῆς φυγῆς – another work of the Plutarchian corpus – he identifies the southern and northern extremes of mainland Greece as being in the same geographical locations as the Ceraunian mountains and the promontory of Taenarum and, shortly after, in the same context goes on to talk about the exile of Demetrius of Phalerum.35 The possibility that the same source may have provided Plutarch with the geographical clarifications on the exile of 322 and the news about Demetrius’ exile must be taken into consideration. An identical derivation can also be hypothesised for the numerical question: Plutarch could have integrated the datum he certainly obtained from the same source used by Diodorus (the 9,000 members of the politeuma) with the exact difference between that figure and the 21,000 indicated in the Χρονικά of Ctesicles.36 Moreover, as Jacoby hypothesised,37 it is not improbable that the Χρονικά of Ctesicles depended directly on the Περὶ τῆς δεκαετίας by Demetrius of Phalerum, to whose work we can also trace many of the new items contained in Plutarch’s biography of Phocion. The central nucleus of the tradition that favours Phocion (from which Plutarch has certainly drawn) has been identified precisely in the Ὑπομνήματα of Demetrius, and therefore in the Περὶ τῆς δεκαετίας.38 The hypothesis that Plutarch may have used the data related to the census conducted by Demetrius in 317-307 allows us to give a plausible explanation for the discrepancy between Plutarch’s given (calculated?) datum with the Diodorus’ datum of the 22,000 excluded (as agreed in the manuscript tradition of Diodorus).39

27Thus, while it is not difficult to agree on the first two arguments of McKechnie’s theory (Antipater’s concerns and the reliability of Plutarch’s account of the destinations proposed to the exiles), the last two arguments (the date of the foundation of the city in Thrace and the connection with the story of Alexarchos) need further consideration.

28In actual fact, these are two sides of the same problem, which regards the date of the foundation of Ouranopolis.

3. When did Antipater’s son found a city in Thrace?

  • 40 Ellis, 20142, p. 282; Bohem, 2018, p. 16.
  • 41 Tsigarida, 2011, p. 153: “Philip refounded Stagira the city of Aristotle. Large traits of other pol (...)

29McKechnie’s hypothesis that the city which received the Athenian exiles in Thrace was founded (or re-founded) at a relatively early date (at which time Antipater would not have named a city after himself) is reasonable. Antipater had a strong interest in the Chalcidian peninsula, probably dating back to Philip II’s campaign in Thrace in 342/341 BC and in which Antipater had also participated.40 On that occasion Philip II had re-founded Stagira, the city of Aristotle, without changing its name.41 It is likely, as some scholars have suggested, that Antipater’s interest in the area had grown during this campaign alongside Philip and that, at a later stage, he had strengthened his control over one of the cities near Stagira.

  • 42 See Fisch, 1937, p. 78: “soon after 316”; Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 211; Sq (...)

30On the contrary, McKechnie’s argument that Alexarchos founded Ouranopolis before 322, is unacceptable. In fact, the ancient evidence on Ouranopolis seems to refer to a later phase, certainly later than the time when Alexarchos’ brother, Cassander, founded Cassandreia, in 316.42

  • 43 Ath. 3.54.98e = Heraclides Lembus, Mueller FGH 3.169 fr. 5. See Squillace, 2012, p. 159-161.
  • 44 Strabo 7 fr. 35. See Squillace, 2012, p. 154-155.
  • 45 Clem. Alex. Protr. 4. 54 = Aristus Salaminius FGrH 143 fr. 4.
  • 46 Ath. 3.54.98e: τοιοῦτος ἦν καὶ Ἀλέξαρχος ὁ Κασσάνδρου τοῦ Μακεδονίας βασιλεύσαντος ἀδελφός, ὁ τὴν Ο (...)
  • 47 Cf. Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 79; Squillace, 2012, p. 165.
  • 48 Strabo 7 fr. 35: ἔστι δ᾽ ὁ Ἄθως ὄρος ὑψηλὸν καὶ μαστοειδές, ὥστε τοὺς ἐν ταῖς κορυφαῖς ἤδη ἀνίσχοντ (...)
  • 49 Clem. Al. Protr. 4.54.3-4. Squillace, 2010, p. 194, 201-202; Id., 2012, p. 122-125.

31Heraclides Lembus, cited by Athenaeus in the Deipnosophistae,43 Strabo44 and Clemens Alexandrinus quoting Aristus Salaminius45 are the literary sources, which inform us about the city Alexarchos founded in Thrace. Athenaeus states that Heraclides Lembus speaks about Alexarchos, Cassander’s brother, in the seventh book of his Histories, saying “Alexarchos, who founded the city Ouranopolis, imported many peculiar words and forms of speaking into the language”.46 Alexarchos, according to Athenaeus, substituted the words of the common language with words he had coined, so as to write it in a completely incomprehensible style.47 Strabo, for his part, states that Ouranopolis was located on the Athos Isthmus, near to the Xerxes canal and that the circuit of the city spanned thirty stades (c. 5.6 kilometres, or 3.5 miles).48 Clemens Alexandrinus adds information about Alexarchos being represented as Helios.49

  • 50 Tarn, 1933, p. 39; Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 78-79, 103ss; Dubois, (...)
  • 51 On Alexarchus’ city as the embodiment of an Utopian vision cf. Cioccolo, 2006; Dubois, 2006, p. 3-4 (...)

32Thus the literary sources essentially record the following data: (1) Alexarchos founded a city on the Athos peninsula and named it Ouranopolis, i.e. the “City of Heaven”; (2) Alexarchos styled himself as Helios and considered this city as a “Cosmopolis” (World-State) in miniature (its inhabitants were called heliokreis);50 (3) the city had its own institutions and language since Alexarchos had created a new language.51

  • 52 See Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 103-104.
  • 53 For the coinage of Ouranopolis see Lederer, 1931, p. 47-54; Gaebler, 1935, II p. 52-55, p. 117-133; (...)
  • 54 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 104; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 210-212; Squillace 2012, p. 162-163. Cf. als (...)

33The autonomy of Ouranopolis and its sovereign status is demonstrated by the coins minted by the city, an unequivocal sign of independence.52 It is precisely the numismatic datum that provides a first chronological indication of the dating of Alexarchos’ foundation. In c. 300 BC Alexarchos struck an entirely unprecedented series of coins bearing astral symbols, such as the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars and on which the inhabitants of Ouranopolis are called Ouranidai.53 The recto of the coins show the image of Aphrodite Urania sitting on the globe, holding a sceptre in her hand; the verso depicts a seated Helios and a star: the image of the radiated sun is represented alone or accompanied by a crescent moon.54

  • 55 Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 103; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 211; Tsigarida, (...)

34On the basis of numismatic sources, scholars believe that Alexarchos’ founding of Ouranopolis occurred after 316 and under the aegis of his brother Cassander, not that of his father Antipater.55 This of course makes McKechnie’s theory unacceptable.

  • 56 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 102-104; Boehm, 2018, p. 35.
  • 57 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 96-97, 103-104, and Schettino, 2012, p. 48. See also Psoma, 2011.
  • 58 See Schettino, 2012, p. 48: “des raisons politiques contingentes faisaient de la péninsule chalcidi (...)

35On the other hand, historians agree that the foundation of Ouranopolis has to be linked to the Antipatrids’ interest for that region.56 The foundation of Ouranopolis is proof of the Antipatrids’ desire to strengthen and increase the number of poleis in the Chalcidian peninsula57 and, as Maria Teresa Schettino has recently observed, contingent political reasons made the Chalcidian peninsula the only possible place to found Ouranoupolis.58

36Is there any way to reconcile what are apparently divergent research directions?

  • 59 Cf. Isaac, 1986, p. 53; Papangelos, 1993, p. 88; Zahrnt, 2015, p. 36; Boehm, 2018, p. 43.

37A possible explanation is that Alexarchos built the city of Ouranopolis on the site of a previous urban settlement where Antipater settled in 322 the Athenian exiles: that city was Sane.59

  • 60 Cf. Moggi, 1973; Hammond, 1995, p. 310-311; Tiverios, 2008, p. 53-54; Leone, 2012; Tsigarida, 2011, (...)
  • 61 Moggi, 1973; Leone, 2012.
  • 62 Ellis, 20142, p. 282 n. 19.
  • 63 Discussion of sources and bibliography in Squillace, 2010, p. 201. See also Poddighe, 2002, p. 110- (...)
  • 64 Squillace, 2010, p. 201-202. See also Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 204-213.
  • 65 Supra nn. 45, 49.
  • 66 Squillace, 2010, p. 201-202.
  • 67 See now Bohem, 2018, p. 43: “the substantial foundation of Ouranopolis subsumed ancient Sane”. For (...)
  • 68 Cf. Isaac, 1986, p. 53; Papangelos, 1993, p. 88; Zahrnt, 2015, p. 36 Boehm, 2018, p. 43.
  • 69 Cf. Papangelos, 1993, p. 1155-1187, Tsigarida, 1999, and now Tsigarida, 2011, p. 150: “The city was (...)

38Sane, along with Stagira, Akantos and Argilos, was founded by the settlers of Andros60 and was therefore a Greek colony of ancient foundation.61 Macedonian control in that area was strong and dated back to Philip II who may have followed Aristotle’s suggestion and re-founded Stagira in 342/341 BC. It is possible that Antipater had strengthened both his relations with those cities of the Chalcidian peninsula in this phase and also his personal relations with Aristotle. According to John Ellis “Antipatros’ presence in Macedonia during the time of the Thracian expedition – or at least in its earlier stages – may have provided the opportunity for the growth of friendship between him and Aristotle”62. The relations between Antipater and Aristotle and, broadly speaking, between the Peripatos and the family of the Macedonian general, are widely attested by the sources63. It has plausibly been suggested by Giuseppe Squillace that Antipater’s decision to entrust Alexarchos to the physician Menecrates of Syracuse must be considered precisely within the context of these relations.64 In fact, as Clemens Alexandrinus writes,65 Menecrates was the one to give the name Helios to Antipater’s young son. Indeed, as Squillace suggests, Aristotle may have referred the Macedonian general to the physician Menecrates for the treatment of his young son Alexarchos and the same Aristotle – perhaps together with Antipater – may have worked to introduce the Syracusan physician to the court of Philip II.66 Stagira, just like the nearby Sane, was situated in an area of the Chalcidian peninsula firmly placed under the control of Antipater. In that area, the city of Sane appears to have been the one with the greatest chances of development in view of the reception of Athenian exiles. Its territory is located in a protected area of the peninsula and contiguous to the site where Ouranopolis was built after 316. Archaeological studies have shown a clear relationship between Ouranopolis and the nearby city of Sane. Despite the fact that these neighbouring site were initially thought to be completely independent, scholars now admit the existence of a single city Sane-Ouranopolis and that Antipater’s son Alexarchos was probably responsible for the reorganisation of Sane after 316.67 Archaeologists have also recognised the city’s isolated and protected location: the remains of the city they identify with Sane-Ouranopolis are on the top of a hill, to the west of the Isthmus of Mount Athos (the one that according to Herodotus was made by Xerxes).68 The most recent archaeological reports state that the fortification walls of the ancient Ouranoupolis encompassed the canal.69

  • 70 Diod. Sic. 18.56.
  • 71 Diod. Sic. 18.55.3; 18.48.5-49.1.

39It could be hypothesised that the old city of Sane, with its great potential for extending its territory along the western slopes of the Isthmus, may have developed a new part of the city, called Ouranopolis at a later date, after 316. It is not difficult to understand Cassander’s reasons for trying to keep the exiles away from Athens by offering them a new and larger urban settlement: Cassander was forced to respond to Polyperchon’s strategy who, with the exiles’ return intended to overthrow the oligarchic regimes favourable to Cassander.70 We know in fact that Polyperchon’s resolution “to free the Greek cities and to overthrow the oligarchies established in them by Antipater” represented a means of defending Polyperchon’s regency against the claims of Antipater’s son Cassander, who did not consider Polyperchon a legitimate regent.71

40In this context, it would be plausible that the Athenian exiles had settled first (i.e. in 322) in the territory of Sane, which was under the control of Antipater. It was only later, at an imprecise date after 316, that the settlement was reorganised by Alexarchos as Ouranopolis and placed under Cassander’s control.

  • 72 Baynham, 2003, p. 27-29.
  • 73 Diod. Sic. 16.71.1-2.
  • 74 Cf. Bohem, 2018, p. 16. But see Topalilov, 2014, p. 7: “the use of a non-eponymous name like Ponero (...)

41The possibility that Antipater gave the disenfranchised Athenians a city located in the territory of Sane-Ouranopolis seems more convincing than the alternative one argued by Elizabeth Baynham. She suggests that Antipater had placed the exiles in Poneropolis.72 The establishment of a city called Poneropolis was connected with the urbanistic policy of Philip II during his campaign in Thrace in 342-340 in which Antipater had also taken part. As revealed by Diodorus Siculus “by founding strong cities at key places the Macedonian king made it impossible for the Thracians to commit any outrages in the future”73. This means that strongholds were built in strategic places, most probably on the border with the Odrysian kingdom which was where the Macedonian garrisons were established74. However, it is hard to accept the idea that Antipater chose to tackle the problem of keeping the Athenians quiet by proposing that they move to a very turbulent area of Thrace and to a city whose name (poneropolis) evoked the condition of the rejected who were settled there and became its inhabitants.

4. Sane-Ouranopolis a short-lived city

  • 75 See Psoma, 2013, and Tzigarida, 2011, p. 155: “The city was abandoned at the beginning of the third (...)

42What we do know for sure is that the city of Sane-Ouranopolis was short-lived and abandoned at the beginning of the third century.75

43The Athenian presence in Sane-Ouranopolis must have changed over time. When the conditions imposing exile changed, some of the Athenians decided to return to Athens.

  • 76 Diod. 18.56. See Rosen, 1967; Landucci Gattinoni, 2008, p. 231-236; Poddighe, 2013.
  • 77 Plut. Phoc. 33.2, 34-35; Diod. Sic. 18.66.5-6. Cf. Cuniberti, 2006, p. 43-49; Bayliss, 2011, p. 148 (...)
  • 78 Diod. Sic. 18.18.5: τοῖς βουλομένοις χώραν ἔδωκεν εἰς κατοίκησιν ἐν τῇ Θρᾴκῃ. Plut. Phoc. 28.4: οἵ (...)
  • 79 On Demetrius’ regime see O’Sullivan, 2009; Banfi, 2010; Faraguna, 2016.

44A first return to Athens dates back to 319, after the suspension of the census regime decided by the regent Polyperchon and formally notified by Philip III’s diagramma.76 Polyperchon’s decision restored democracy in Athens, bringing back a part of the exiles to Athens. According to Plutarch’s account, once the exiles were in the city, strangers and disenfranchised citizens ran in to join them, and a motley and turbulent assembly was gathered together, in which Phocion was deposed from his command and other generals were chosen.77 The provenance of the exiles returning to Athens in 319 remains uncertain, but it is probable that at least a part of them came from Thrace where so many Athenians voluntarily decided to settle by accepting Antipater’s proposal in 322.78 It is impossible to distinguish between near and far exiles, between politically active exiles such as Hagnonides and exiles who had left the city solely for economic reasons. A second return probably took take place after 307, following the end of the regime of Demetrius of Phalerum. This regime, placed under Cassander’s control in 317, immediately after the brief democratic restoration of 319/318, had once again imposed a census limit of a thousand drachmae.79

  • 80 Plut. Phoc. 28.4.

45It was only after 307 that those disenfranchised Athenians who had migrated to Thrace in 322 – as Plutarch states “because of their poverty”80 – were allowed to return to Athens.

  • 81 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55-56.
  • 82 Supra n. 75.

46It is possible that the Athenian component was not the only one to have populated Sane-Ouranopolis, i.e. that other temporary exiles had inhabited the site in the same period. But, against McKechnie’s argument, the hypothesis that the city “survived their return» admitting that “volunteers from the floating population could have been found to live there” is not acceptable.81 Archaeological data affirms that the city of Sane – Ouranopolis appears to have already been abandoned at the beginning of the third century.82

  • 83 Historical sources record the emblematic case of Scione in the same Chalcidic peninsula. According (...)
  • 84 Kulesza, 1999, p. 160.

47The fate of Sane-Ouranopolis was no different from that of other cities whose history was marked by the condition of being cities that received exiles.83 As in most cases, the return of the exiles came about as soon as the reasons for their original flight no longer existed: “No matter how long their absence, the escapees and refugees did not give up hope of returning”.84

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Andreou, A., 2014, The Star and the Moon on Coins from the Athens Numismatic Museum’s Collections, Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 20, p. 1-8.

Bayliss, A.J., 2011, After Demosthenes. The Politics of Early Hellenistic Athens, London - New York.

Banfi, A., 2010, Sovranità della legge. La legislazione di Demetrio del Falero ad Atene (317-307 a.C.), Milano.

Baynham, E., 2003, Antipater and Athens, in O. Palagia and S.V. Tracy (eds.), The Macedonians in Athens 322-229 B.C. Proceedings of an International Conference Held at the University of Athens, May 24-26, 2001, Oxford, p. 23- 29.

Bearzot, C., 1985, Focione tra storia e trasfigurazione ideale, Milano.

Bearzot, C., 1993, Plutarco. Vita di Focione, Milano.

Bearzot, C., 1994, Esilii, deportazioni, emigrazioni forzate in Atene sotto regimi non democratici, in M. Sordi (ed.), Emigrazione e immigrazione nel mondo antico, CISA 20, Milano, p. 141-167.

Blackwell, C.W., 1999, In the Absence of Alexander: Harpalus and the Failure of Macedonian Authority, New York.

Bloch, H., 1940, Herakleides Lembos and his Epitome of Aristotle’s Politeiai, TAPhA, 71, p. 27-39.

Boehm, R., 2018, City and Empire in the Age of the Successors: Urbanization and Social Response in the Making of the Hellenistic Kingdoms, Berkeley.

Bookidis, N., 2000, Corinthian Terracotta Sculpture and the Temple of Apollo, Hesperia, 69.4, p. 381-452.

Bosworth, A.B., 1988, Conquest and Empire. The Reign of Alexander the Great, Cambridge.

Caballero, R. and Viansino, G., 1995, Plutarco. Sull’esilio, Napoli.

Canfora, L., 1982, Il soggetto passivo della polis arcaica, OPUS, 1, p. 33-51.

Cioccolo, S., 2006, Tipologie greco-ellenistiche di città ideali, Utopia and utopianisme, 1, p. 14-17.

Cohen, J.M., 1995, The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands and Asia Minor, Berkeley.

Cuniberti, G., 2006, La polis dimezzata. Immagini storiografiche di Atene ellenistica, Torino.

De Romilly, J., 1992, Isocrates and Europe, G&R, 39, p. 2-13.

Dubois, P., 2006, The History of the Impossible: Ancient Utopia, CPh, 101.1, p. 1-14.

Dubreuil, R., 2018, The Orator in the Theatre: The End of Athenian Democracy in Plutarch’s Phocion, in M. Canevaro and B. Gray (eds.), The Hellenistic Reception of Classical Athenian Democracy and Political Thought, Oxford, p. 261-275.

Ellis, J.R., 20142 [1976], Philip II and Macedonian Imperialism, Princeton.

Erskine, A., 2018, Standing up to the Demos: Plutarch, Phocion, and the Democratic Life, in M. Canevaro and B. Gray (eds.), The Hellenistic Reception of Classical Athenian Democracy and Political Thought, Oxford, p. 237-259.

Faraguna, M., 2016, Un filosofo al potere? Demetrio Falereo tra democrazia e tirannide, MediterrAnt, 19, p. 35-63.

Fisch, M.H., 1937, Alexander and the Stoics, AJPh, 58, p. 59-82.

Fredricksmeyer, E.A., 1979, Divine Honors for Philip II, TAPhA, 109, p. 39-61.

Fuks, A.,1972, Isokrates and the Social-Economic Situation in Greece, AncSoc, 3, p. 17-44.

Gaebler, H., 1935, Die antiken Münzen von Makedonia und Pannonia II, Berlin.

Gallego, J., 2016, El campesinado y la distribución de la tierra en la Atenas del siglo IV a.C., Gerión, 34, p. 43-75.

Gallo, L., 2004, I cittadini “passivi» nelle poleis greche, in U. Fantasia and C. Carusi (eds.), Poleis e politeiai. Esperienze politiche, tradizioni letterarie, progetti costituzionali. Atti del convegno internazionale di storia Greca, Torino, 29 maggio-31 maggio 2002, Torino, p. 217-227.

Gatzolis, C., 2011, Royal and Civic Bronze Coinage: Monetary Circulation between the Macedonian Kingdom and the Chalcidic Peninsula, BCH Suppl. 53, p. 185-198.

Gehrke, H.J., 1976, Phokion. Studien zur Erfassung seiner historischen Gestalt, Zetemata 64, München.

Gomme, A.W., 1933, The Population of Athens in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C., Chicago.

Gray, B., 2015, Stasis and Stability: Exile, the Polis, and Political Thought, c. 404-146 BC, Oxford.

Green, P., 2003, Occupation and Co-Existence: the Impact of Macedon on Athens, 323-307, in O. Palagia and S.V. Tracy (eds.), The Macedonians in Athens 322-229 B.C. Proceedings of an International Conference Held at the University of Athens, May 24-26, 2001, Oxford, p. 1-7.

Habicht, Ch., 1997, Athens from Alexander to Antony, Cambridge.

Hammond, N.G.L., 1995, The Chalcidians and ‘Apollonia of the Thraceward Ionians’, ABSA, 90, p. 307-315.

Hansen, M.H., 1985, Demography and Democracy. The Number of Athenian Citizens in the Fourth Century B.C., Copenhagen.

Hansen, M.H., 1994, The Number of Athenian Citizens secundum Sekunda, EMC, 38, p. 299-311.

Hatzopoulos, M.B., 1996, Macedonian Institutions under the Kings: a Historical and Epigraphic Study, Melethemata 22, I-II, Athens.

Head, B.V., 19632 [1911], Historia Numorum, London.

Heckel, W., 1999, The Politics of Antipatros: 324–319 BC, Ancient Macedonia, 6, p. 489-498.

Hughes, S., 2008, After the Democracy: Athens under Phocion (322/1 – 319/8 B.C.), Diss. Thesis, School of Humanities, Classics and Ancient History, University of Western Australia.

Isaac, B.H., 1986, The Greek Settlements in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest, Leiden.

Kulesza, R., 1999, Population Flight: A Forgotten Aspect of Greek Warfare in the Sixth and Fifth Centuries BC, European Review of History, 6.2, p. 151-164.

Lamberton, R., 2003, Plutarch’s Phocion: Melodrama of Mob and Elite in Occupied Athens, in O. Palagia and S.V. Tracy (eds.), The Macedonians in Athens 322-229 B.C. Proceedings of an International Conference Held at the University of Athens, May 24-26, 2001, Oxford, p. 8-13.

Landucci Gattinoni, F., 1995, L’emigrazione forzosa dei mercenari greci di Alessandro, in M. Sordi (ed.), Coercizione e mobilità umana nel mondo antico, CISA 21, Milano, p. 125-140.

Landucci Gattinoni, F., 1997, Duride di Samo, Roma.

Landucci Gattinoni, F., 2003, L’arte del potere: vita e opere di Cassandro di Macedonia, Historia Einzelschr. 171, Stuttgart.

Landucci Gattinoni, F., 2008, Diodoro Siculo, Biblioteca storica. Libro XVIII. Commento storico, Milano.

Lane Fox, R. (ed.), 2011, Brill’s Companion to Ancient Macedon. Studies in the Archaeology and History of Macedon, 650 BC - 300 AD, Leiden - Boston.

Lederer, P., 1931, Symbole der Aphrodite Urania, Zeitschrift für Numismatik, 41, p. 47-54.

Leone, B., 2012, Lo strano caso di Sane e Acanto: la fondazione di due colonie nel nord Egeo, MediterrAnt, 15.1-2, p. 375-392.

Mathieu, G., 19662 [1925], Les idées politiques d’Isocrate, Paris.

McKechnie, P., 1989, Outsiders in the Greek Cities in the Fourth Century B.C., London.

Moggi, M., 1973, Sane o Gale (Thuc., 5, 18, 6), ASNP, 3, p. 731-740.

Mørkholm, O., 1991, Early Hellenistic Coinage: from the Accession of Alexander to the Peace of Apamea (336-188 B. C.), Cambridge.

O’Sullivan, L., 2008, “Le Roi Soleil”: Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Dawn of the Sun-King, Antichthon, 42, p. 78-99.

O’Sullivan, L., 2010, The Regime of Demetrius of Phalerum in Athens, 317-307 B.C.E.: A Philosopher in Politics, Mnemosyme Suppl. 318, Leiden.

Oliver, G.J., 2007, War, Food and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens, Oxford - New York.

Papangelos, I.A., 1993, Topography of Ouranopolis, Ancient Macedonia, 2, p. 1160- 1168.

Poddighe, E., 2002, Nel segno di Antipatro. L’eclissi della democrazia ateniese dal 323/2 al 319/8 a.C., Roma.

Poddighe, E., 2007, La questione samia tra Alessandro e Atene: “libertà dei Greci», QS, 66, p. 29-45

Poddighe, E., 2009, Alexander and the Greeks: the Corinthian League, in W. Heckel and L. Tritle (eds.), Alexander the Great. A New History, Chichester Ma, p. 99-120.

Poddighe, E., 2013, Propaganda Strategies and Political Document: Philip III’s diagramma and the Greeks in 319 BC, in V. Alonso Troncoso and E.M. Anson (eds.), After Alexander: The Time of the Diadochi (323-281 BC), Oxford, p. 225-240.

Pownall, F., 2013, Duris of Samos and the Diadochi, in V. Alonso Troncoso and E.M. Anson (eds.), After Alexander: The Time of the Diadochi (323-281 BC), Oxford, p. 43-56.

Psoma, S., 2011, The Kingdom of Macedonia and the Chalcidic League, in R.J. Lane Fox (ed.), Brill’s Companion to Ancient Macedon. Studies in the Archaeology and History of Macedon, 650 BC - 300 AD, Leiden - Boston, p. 113-135.

Psoma, S., 2013, Chalcidice, Chalcidian League, in The Encyclopedia of Ancient History.

Rosen, K., 1967, Political Documents in Hieronymus of Cardia (323–302 BC), AClass, 10, p. 41-94.

Schettino, M.G., 2012, Les Grecs sur le départ: légendes, pensées, utopies et désir d’expérimentations, Pallas, 89, p. 35-56.

Sekunda, N.V., 1992, Athenian Democracy and Military Strenght 338-322 B.C., ABSA, 87, p. 311-355.

Spratt, T., 1847, Remarks on the Isthmus of Mount Athos, The Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 17, p. 145-150.

Squillace, G., 2010, Medicina e regalità: Menecrate di Siracusa e Filippo II, in M. Caltabiano, C. Raccuia, and E. Santagati (eds.), Tyrannis, Basileia, Imperium. Forme e prassi e simboli del potere politico nel mondo greco e romano, Messina, p. 193-207.

Squillace, G., 2012, Menecrate di Siracusa: un medico del IV secolo a.C. tra Sicilia, Grecia e Macedonia, Spudasmata 141, Hildesheim - Zürich - New York.

Tarn, W.W., 1933, Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind, London.

Thompson, M., 1981, The Cavalla Hoard (IGCH 450), The American Numismatic Society Museum Notes, 26, p. 33-49.

Tiverios, M., 2008, Greek Colonisation of the Northern Aegean, in G.R. Tsetskhladze (ed.), Greek Colonisation. An Account of Greek Colonies and Other Settlements Overseas, II, Leiden - Boston, p. 1-156.

Topalilov, I., 2014, An Aspect of the Political Propaganda in Philippopolis, Thrace, during II C. AD, Studia hungaro-bulgarica, 3, p 5-18.

Tritle, L.A., 1988, Phocion the Good, London.

Tritle L.A., 1992, Plutarch’s Life of Phocion: An Analysis and Critical Report, II 33.6, in W. Haase and H. Temporini (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: (ANRW), Berlin - New York, p. 4258-4297.

Tsigarida, E.B., 1999, Στοιχεία για τη λατρεία του ηλίου στην Ουρανιδών πόλιν, Ancient Macedonia, 6.2, p. 1235-1243.

Tsigarida, E.B., 2011, Chalcidice, in R.J. Lane Fox (ed.), Brill’s Companion to Ancient Macedon. Studies in the Archaeology and History of Macedon, 650 BC - 300 AD, Leiden - Boston, p. 137-158.

Van Wees, H., 2011, Demetrius and Draco. Athens’ Property Classes and Population in and before 317 B.C., JHS, 131, p. 95-114.

Weinreich, O., 1933, Menekrates Zeus und Salmoneus, Tübingen Beiträge 18, Stuttgart.

Williams, J.M., 1982, Athens without Democracy. The Oligarchy of Phocion and the Tyranny of Demetrios of Phalerum, Diss. Yale University.

Winiarczyk, M., 2002, Uranopolis des Alexarchos. Forschungsgeschichte (1835-2002) und Interpretationsversuch, Eos, 89, p. 269-285.

Winiarczyk, M., 2011, Die hellenistischen Utopien, Berlin - New York.

Zahrnt, M., 1971, Olynth und die Chalkidier. Untersuchungen zur Staatenbildung auf der Chalkidischen Halbinsel im 5. und 4. Jahrhundert v.Chr., Vestigia 14, München.

Zahrnt, M., 2015, Early History of Thrace to the Murder of Kotys I (360 BCE), in J. Valeva, E. Nankov, and D. Graninger (eds.), A Companion to Ancient Thrace, Oxford - Malden MA, p. 33-47.

Haut de page

Notes

1 I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestions. Of course, the responsibility of any remaining mistake lies entirely on me. All the dates are to be understood as BC unless otherwise indicated.

2 Antipater’s settlement was imposed (after the battle of Crannon in 322) on a defeated polis struggling for the best terms it could get. For a discussion of the implications of the actual terms of Antipater’s constitution and analysis of the historical context see: Gehrke, 1976; Williams, 1982; Bearzot, 1985; Tritle, 1988; Poddighe, 2002; Green, 2003; Hughes, 2008; Landucci Gattinoni, 2008; Bayliss, 2011; Gallego, 2016.

3 Plut. Phoc. 28.4: τῶν δὲ ἀποψηφισθέντων τοῦ πολιτεύματος διὰ πενίαν ὑπὲρ μυρίους καὶ δισχιλίους γενομένων οἵ τε μένοντες ἐδόκουν σχέτλια καὶ ἄτιμα πάσχειν, οἵ τε διὰ τοῦτο τὴν πόλιν ἐκλιπόντες καὶ μεταστάντες εἰς Θρᾴκην, Ἀντιπάτρου γῆν καὶ πόλιν αὐτοῖς παρασχόντος, ἐκπεπολιορκημένοις ἐῴκεσαν.

4 Diod. Sic. 18.18.4-5: τὴν δὲ πολιτείαν μετέστησεν ἐκ τῆς δημοκρατίας καὶ προσέταξεν ἀπὸ τιμήσεως εἶναι τὸ πόλιτευμα καὶ τοὺς μὲν κεκτημένους πλέιω δραχμῶν δισχιλίων κυρίους εἴναι τοῦ πολιτεύματος καὶ τῆς χειροτονίας, τοὺς δὲ κατωτέρω τῆς τιμήσεως ἅπαντας ὠς ταραχώδεις ὄντας καὶ πολεμικοὺς ἀπέλασε τῆς πολιτείας καὶ τοῖς βουλόμενοις χώραν ἔδωκεν εἰς κατοίκησιν ἐν τῇ Θράκῃ. Οὗτοι μὲν οὖν ὄντες πλείους τῶν δισμυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων μετεστάθησαν ἐκ τῆς πατρίδος, οἱ δὲ τὴν ὡρισμένην τίμησιν ἔχοντες περὶ ἐννακισχιλίους ἀπεδείθησαν κύριοι τῆς τε πόλεως καὶ χώρας καὶ κατὰ τοὺς Σόλωνος νόμους ἐπολιτεύοντο.

5 The number of those removed from the body of citizens is given as 22,000 (δισμυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων) in the manuscript tradition of Diodorus, but Wesseling corrects it by reading μυρίων on the base of the Plutarch’s text. Wesseling’s correction has been accepted by editors and commentators. Diodorus’ account appears instead preferable to scholars who see no need to emend the unanimous MS reading δισμυρίων: Gomme, 1933, p. 17ff; Bearzot, 1985, p. 187ff; Hansen, 1985, p. 28ff; Poddighe, 2002, p. 59-66; Baynham, 2003, p. 26; Green, 2003, p. 2; Hughes, 2008, p. 120. Infra p. 251, 253.

6 Gehrke, 1976; Williams, 1982; Bearzot, 1985; Tritle, 1988; Poddighe, 2002; Hughes, 2008; Bayliss, 2011, p. 69-71; Gallego, 2016.

7 Cf. McKechnie, 1989, p. 55-56. On Alexarchos see: Weinreich, 1933, p. 269-285; Zahrnt, 1971, p. 209-210; Fredricksmeyer,1979, p. 44; Hatzopoulos, 1996, p. 201; Winiarczyk, 2002, p. 269-285; Id., 2011, p. 204ff; Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 78-79; Dubois, 2006, p. 3-4; O’Sullivan, 2008, p. 78ff.; Schettino, 2012, p. 48; Squillace, 2012, p. 44-45, 120-122, 159-161, 163-165.

8 Cf. Tritle, 1992; Sekunda, 1992; Bearzot, 1993 and 1994; Hansen, 1994; Poddighe, 2002; Baynham, 2003; Green, 2003; Lamberton, 2003; Gallo, 2004; Hughes, 2008; Bayliss, 2011, p. 69-71; van Wees, 2011; Gallego, 2016, p. 47-50.

9 Gray, 2015, p. 351 n. 333: “A possible fourth-century parallel for exiles exhibiting utopian tendencies concerns the later fourth-century foundation of Ouranopolis in Thrace, whose reported oikistes was Antipater’s son Alexarchos (Strabo Book 7a.1.35; Athenaeus Book III, 98de)…McKechnie plausibly suggests that its inhabitants were the disenfranchised Athenians of 322 reportedly granted a city in Thrace by Antipater”.

10 Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 208-209, is more cautious affirming that no evidence can be provided for the confirmation of McKechnie’s hypothesis.

11 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “There were good reasons for Antipater to have done so: Alexander’s leaving Greeks behind in the Upper Satrapies without firmly founded cities had led to a dangerous revolt”.

12 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “The suggestion that Antipater gave the disfranchised Athenians a city as well as land is exclusive to the account in Plutarch. Diodorus mentions only land...for settlement. But Plutarch’s account is the more lucide in the matter of what the 12,000 disfranchised Athenians did”.

13 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “The name is odd...but it is quite likely to be merely an indication of a relatively early date (at which Antipater would not have named a city after himself)”.

14 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55: “if Antipater’s son founded a city in Thrace, there was probably a definite reason for him to do so. It is not far-fetched to think that the reason may have been the need to provide a city for the thousands of Athenians moving to Thrace in 322”.

15 See also Baynham, 2003, p. 25: “Antipater was offering land, a civic structure and local citizenship in a foreign country”.

16 Alexander’s decree (presumably a diagramma) had ordered the return of the long-term exiles (except those guilty of sacrilege and murder) and required the Greek cities to apply the measures under threat of military reprisal (Diod. Sic. 17.109.1; 18.8.2–4). On Alexander’s decree cf. Bosworth, 1988, p. 227ff; Blackwell, 1999, p. 146-151; Heckel, 1999, p. 489-498; Landucci Gattinoni, 2008, p. 57-60; Poddighe, 2009, p. 117-120.; Ead., 2013, p. 229-232.

17 The Athenians’ opposition to this return originated the Greek revolt in 324 (Diod. Sic. 18.8.7). On the Samian case cf. Poddighe, 2007; Ead., 2009, p. 119-120 and 2013, p. 234.

18 Baynham, 2003, p. 27. Cf. Hughes, 2008, p. 120: “Diodorus was well aware of the Samian issue and makes specific reference to Perdiccas’ decision concerning the cleruchy; Plutarch makes no such reference. Diodorus’ twenty-two thousand, therefore, relates to the total number of Athenian citizens who could no longer take part in the administration of the city and were unwilling either to live in or return to Attica. The number of cleruchs living in Samos at the time of Alexander’s death has been estimated to be as high as twelve thousand”.

19 Cf. Baynham, 2003, p. 26-29. See also Hughes, 2008, p. 108: “It is possible, therefore, that Diodorus is referring not only to the residents of Attica but to all Athenians living at home and abroad. It is likely that Diodorus’ source, Hieronymus of Cardia, obtained his numbers from official Macedonian records”.

20 Diod. Sic. 18.18.6, 9.

21 Diod. Sic. 18.18.8-9: ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις Ἑλληνίσι πόλεσιν ἐπιεικῶς προσενεχθείς καὶ τὰ πολιτεύματα συναγαγὼν καὶ καλῶς καταστήσας ἐπαίνων καὶ στεφάνων ἔτυχεν. ὀ δὲ Περδίκκας ἀποκαταστήσας τοῖς Σαμίοις τήν τε πόλιν καὶ χώραν κατήγαγεν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν πατρίδα, πεφευγότας ἔτη τρισὶ πλείω τῶν τεσσαράκοντα. See Poddighe, 2009; ead., 2013.

22 Cf. Landucci Gattinoni, 1995, p. 82-83.

23 Isoc. 4.36; 5.120; 12.167. See Mathieu, 19662, p. 60; Fuks, 1972, p. 17ff; de Romilly, 1992, p. 2-13; Lane Fox, 2011, p. 351.

24 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55.

25 Bearzot, 1985, p. 16-57, 65-67, 148-156; Landucci Gattinoni, 1997, p. 194-204; Ead., 2008, p. 25; Pownall, 2013, p. 52.

26 Hansen, 1985, p. 28-36; Sekunda, 1992, p. 319-320; Bearzot, 1993, p. 148; Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-69; Gallo, 2004, p. 220; Gallego, 2016, p. 47-48.

27 Ctesicles, FGrH 245 fr. 1 apud Ath. 6.103.272c. Cf. Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-73. On the census see now van Wees, 2011, p. 107-110. Cf. infra n. 36.

28 Diod. Sic. 18.18.4-5: προσέταξεν ἀπὸ τιμήσεως εἶναι τὸ πόλιτευμα καὶ τοὺς μὲν κεκτημένους πλέιω δραχμῶν δισχιλίων κυρίους εἴναι τοῦ πολιτεύματος καὶ τῆς χειροτονίας, τοὺς δὲ κατωτέρω τῆς τιμήσεως ἅπαντας ὠς ταραχώδεις ὄντας καὶ πολεμικοὺς ἀπέλασε τῆς πολιτείας καὶ τοῖς βουλόμενοις χώραν ἔδωκεν εἰς κατοίκησιν ἐν τῇ Θράκῃ.

29 Diod. Sic. 18.18.5: Οὗτοι μὲν οὖν ὄντες πλείους τῶν δισμυρίων καὶ δισχιλίων μετεστάθησαν ἐκ τῆς πατρίδος, οἱ δὲ τὴν ὡρισμένην τίμησιν ἔχοντες περὶ ἐννακισχιλίους ἀπεδείθησαν κύριοι τῆς τε πόλεως καὶ χώρας καὶ κατὰ τοὺς Σόλωνος νόμους ἐπολιτεύοντο.

30 Plut. Phoc. 28.4: τῶν δὲ ἀποψηφισθέντων τοῦ πολιτεύματος διὰ πενίαν ὑπὲρ μυρίους καὶ δισχιλίους γενομένων οἵ τε μένοντες ἐδόκουν σχέτλια καὶ ἄτιμα πάσχειν, οἵ τε διὰ τοῦτο τὴν πόλιν ἐκλιπόντες καὶ μεταστάντες εἰς Θρᾴκην, Ἀντιπάτρου γῆν καὶ πόλιν αὐτοῖς παρασχόντος, ἐκπεπολιορκημένοις ἐῴκεσαν.

31 Plut. Phoc. 29.4.

32 These were most likely political figure like Hagnonides (Plut. Phoc. 34-35). Cfr. Bearzot, 1994, p. 162; Poddighe, 2002, p. 70.

33 Bearzot, 1994, p. 163; Poddighe, 2002, p. 70.

34 See Bearzot, 1985, p. 242ff; ead., 1993, p. 148-152.

35 Plut. De exil. 601a-f. Cf. Caballero-Viansino, 1995, p. 92.

36 Cf. Hansen, 1985, p. 28-36; Sekunda, 1992, p. 319-320; Poddighe, 2002, p. 66-69; Gallo, 2004, p. 220; Gallego, 2016, p. 47-48.

37 Ctesicles, FGrH 245 fr. 1. See also Canfora, 1982, p. 42.

38 Bearzot, 1993, p. 148; Poddighe, 2002, p. 68.

39 Supra n. 5.

40 Ellis, 20142, p. 282; Bohem, 2018, p. 16.

41 Tsigarida, 2011, p. 153: “Philip refounded Stagira the city of Aristotle. Large traits of other poleis’ territories were confiscated, some of which were annexed to the Macedonian territory and received Macedonian settlers”. See also Ellis, 20142, p. 282; Bohem, 2018, p. 16.

42 See Fisch, 1937, p. 78: “soon after 316”; Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 211; Squillace, 2012, p. 22 and p. 45: “in una data che oscilla tra il 316 e il 300»; Psoma, 2013: “In 316 BCE, Cassander founded Kassandreia on the isthmus of the Pallene peninsula and some years later his brother Alexarchos founded the shortlived Ouranopolis on the isthmus of the Akte”. See also Tsigarida, 2011, p. 155; Bohem, 2018, p. 35.

43 Ath. 3.54.98e = Heraclides Lembus, Mueller FGH 3.169 fr. 5. See Squillace, 2012, p. 159-161.

44 Strabo 7 fr. 35. See Squillace, 2012, p. 154-155.

45 Clem. Alex. Protr. 4. 54 = Aristus Salaminius FGrH 143 fr. 4.

46 Ath. 3.54.98e: τοιοῦτος ἦν καὶ Ἀλέξαρχος ὁ Κασσάνδρου τοῦ Μακεδονίας βασιλεύσαντος ἀδελφός, ὁ τὴν Οὐρανόπολιν καλουμένην κτίσας. ἱστορεῖ δὲ περὶ αὐτοῦ ῾ Ἡρακλείδης ὁ Λέμβος ἐν τῇ τριακοστῇ ἑβδόμῃ τῶν ἱστοριῶν λέγων οὕτως· Ἀλέξαρχος ὁ τὴν Οὐρανόπολιν κτίσας διαλέκτους ἰδίας εἰσήνεγκεν, ὀρθροβόαν μὲν τὸν ἀλεκτρυόνα καλέων καὶ βροτοκέρτην τὸν κουρέα καὶ τὴν δραχμὴν ἀργυρίδα, τὴν δὲ χοίνικα ἡμεροτροφίδα καὶ τὸν κήρυκα ἀπύτην. καὶ τοῖς Κασσανδρέων δὲ ἄρχουσι τοιαῦτὰ ποτ᾽ ἐπέστειλε· ‘Ἀλέξαρχος Ὁμαιμέων πρόμοις γαθεῖν. τοὺς ἡλιοκρεῖς οἰῶν οἶδα λιπουσαθεωτων ἔργων κρατιτορας μορσίμῳ τύχᾳ κεκυρωμένας θεουπογαις’.

And Alexarchus was a man of the same sort, the brother of Cassander, who was king of Macedonia, who built the city called Ouranopolis. And Heraclides Lembus speaks concerning him in the seventh book of his Histories, and says, “Alexarchus, who founded the city Ouranopolis, imported many peculiar words and forms of speaking into the language: calling a cock ὀρθροβόας, or he that crows in the morn; and a barber βροτοκέρτης, or one who cuts men; and a drachm he called ἀργυρὶς, a piece of silver; and a chœnix he called, ἡμεροτροφὶς, what feeds a man for a day; and a herald he called ἀπύτης, a bawler. And once he wrote a letter to the magistrates of the Cassandrians in this form: Ἀλέξαρχος ὁ μάρμων πρόμοις γαθεῖν. τοὺς ἡλιοκρεῖς οἰῶν οἶδα λιποῦσα θεωτῶν ἔργων κρατήτορας μορσίμῳ τύχᾳ κεκυρωμένας θεοῦ πόγαις χυτλώσαντες αὐτοὺς, καὶ φύλακας ὀριγένεις”.

47 Cf. Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 79; Squillace, 2012, p. 165.

48 Strabo 7 fr. 35: ἔστι δ᾽ ὁ Ἄθως ὄρος ὑψηλὸν καὶ μαστοειδές, ὥστε τοὺς ἐν ταῖς κορυφαῖς ἤδη ἀνίσχοντος ἡλίου κάμνειν ἀροῦντας, ἡνίκα ἀλεκτοροφωνίας ἀρχὴ παρὰ τοῖς τὴν ἀκτὴν οἰκοῦσίν ἐστιν. ἐν δὲ τῇ ἀκτῇ ταύτῃ Θάμυρις ὁ Θρᾷξ ἐβασίλευσε, τῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων γεγονὼς ὧν καὶ Ὀρφεύς. ἐνταῦθα δὲ καὶ διῶρυξ δείκνυται ἡ περὶ τὴν Ἄκανθον, καθ᾽ ἣν Ξέρξης τὸν Ἄθω διορύξαι λέγεται καὶ διαγαγεῖν ἐκ τοῦ Στρυμονικοῦ κόλπου διὰ τοῦ ἰσθμοῦ, δεξάμενος τὴν θάλασσαν εἰς τὴν διώρυγα. Δημήτριος δ᾽ ὁ Σκήψιος οὐκ οἴεται πλευσθῆναι τὴν διώρυγα ταύτην·μέχρι μὲν γὰρ δέκα σταδίων εὔγεων καὶ ὀρυκτὴν εἶναι, διορωρύχθαι δ᾽ ἐπὶ πλάτος πλεθριαῖον, εἶθ᾽ ὑψηλὸν εἶναι πλαταμῶνα σταδιαῖον σχεδόν τι τὸ μῆκος, ὅσον οὐκ ἐνὸν ἐκλατομηθῆναι δι᾽ ὅλου μέχρι θαλάσσης: εἰ δὲ καὶ μέχρι δεῦρο, οὔ γε καὶ κατὰ βυθοῦ ὥστε πόρον γενέσθαι πλωτόν· ὅπου Ἀλέξαρχον τὸν Ἀντιπάτρου πόλιν ὑποδείμασθαι τὴν Οὐρανόπολιν τριάκοντα σταδίων τὸν κύκλον ἔχουσαν. ᾤκησαν δὲ τὴν χερρόνησον ταύτην τῶν ἐκ Λήμνου Πελασγῶν τινες, εἰς πέντε διῃρημένοι πολίσματα, Κλεωνὰς Ὀλόφυξιν Ἀκροθώους Δῖον Θύσσον. μετὰ δὲ Ἄθω ὁ Στρυμονικὸς κόλπος μέχρι Νέστου τοῦ ποταμοῦ τοῦ ἀφορίζοντος τὴν κατὰ Φίλιππον καὶ Ἀλέξανδρον Μακεδονίαν· εἰς μέντοι τἀκριβὲς ἄκρα τίς ἐστιν ἡ ποιοῦσα τὸν κόλπον πρὸς τὸν Ἄθω, πόλιν ἐσχηκυῖα τὴν Ἀπολλωνίαν. ἐν δὲ τῷ κόλπῳ πρώτη μετὰ τὸν Ἀκανθίων λιμένα Στάγειρα, ἔρημος, καὶ αὐτὴ τῶν Χαλκιδικῶν, Ἀριστοτέλους πατρίς, καὶ λιμὴν αὐτῆς Κάπρος καὶ νησίον ὁμώνυμον τούτῳ· εἶθ᾽ ὁ Στρυμὼν καὶ ὁ ἀνάπλους εἰς Ἀμφίπολιν εἴκοσι σταδίων· ἔστι δ᾽ Ἀθηναίων κτίσμα ἐν τῷ τόπῳ ἱδρυμένον τούτῳ, ὃς καλεῖται Ἐννέα ὁδοί· εἶτα Γαληψὸς καὶ Ἀπολλωνία, κατεσκαμμέναι ὑπὸ Φιλίππου. “Mt. Athos is high and breast-shaped; so high that on its crests the sun is up and the people are weary of ploughing by the time cock-crow begins among the people who live on the shore. It was on this shore that Phamyris the Thracian reigned, who was a man of the same pursuits as Orpheus. Here, too, is to be seen a canal, in the neighborhood of Acanthus, where Xerxes dug a canal across Athos, it is said, and, by admitting the sea into the canal, brought his fleet across from the Strymonic Gulf through the isthmus. Demetrius of Scepsis, however, does not believe that this canal was navigable, for, he says, although as far as ten stadia the ground is deep-soiled and can be dug, and in fact a canal one plethrum in width has been dug, yet after that it is a flat rock, almost a stadium in length, which is too high and broad to admit of being quarried out through the whole of the distance as far as the sea; but even if it were dug thus far, certainly it could not be dug deep enough to make a navigable passage; this, he adds, is where Alexarchus, the son of Antipater, laid the foundation of Uranopolis, with its circuit of thirty stadia. Some of the Pelasgi from Lemnos took up their abode on this peninsula, and they were divided into five cities, Cleonae, Olophyxis, Acrothoï, Dium, Thyssus. After Athos comes the Strymonic Gulf extending as far as the Nestus, the river which marks off the boundary of Macedonia as fixed by Philip and Alexander; to be accurate, however, there is a cape which with Athos forms the Strymonic Gulf, I mean the cape which has had on it a city called Apollonia. The first city on this gulf after the harbor of the Acanthians is Stageira, the native city of Aristotle, now deserted; this too belongs to the Chalcidians and so do its harbor, Caprus, and an isle bearing the same name as the harbor. Then come the Strymon and the inland voyage of twenty stadia to Amphipolis. Amphipolis was founded by the Athenians and is situated in that place which is called Ennea Hodoi. Then come Galepsus and Apollonia, which were razed to the ground by Philip.”

49 Clem. Al. Protr. 4.54.3-4. Squillace, 2010, p. 194, 201-202; Id., 2012, p. 122-125.

50 Tarn, 1933, p. 39; Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 78-79, 103ss; Dubois, 2006, p. 3-4; O’Sullivan, 2008, p. 78ff; Squillace, 2010, p. 201-202, Id., 2012, p. 163; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 209; Schettino, 2012, p. 48; Boehm, 2018, p. 43; Cf. also Tsigarida, 2011, p. 150.

51 On Alexarchus’ city as the embodiment of an Utopian vision cf. Cioccolo, 2006; Dubois, 2006, p. 3-4; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 205-214; Schettino, 2012, p. 48; Squillace, 2012, p. 154-157, 161-163.

52 See Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 103-104.

53 For the coinage of Ouranopolis see Lederer, 1931, p. 47-54; Gaebler, 1935, II p. 52-55, p. 117-133; Head, 19632, p. 206; Thompson, 1981, p. 33-49; Mørkholm, 1991, p. 60; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 210-211; Squillace, 2012, p. 162-163; Andreou, 2014.

54 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 104; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 210-212; Squillace 2012, p. 162-163. Cf. also Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44: “the stars symbolize the citizens of Ouranopolis, the children of heaven, the Sun must be Alexarchus, and the Moon his consort”.

55 Fredricksmeyer, 1979, p. 44; Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 103; Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 211; Tsigarida, 2011, p. 155; Psoma, 2013. See also O’Sullivan, 2008, p. 78, arguing that Alexarchos’ foundation of Ouranopolis “might even have been encouraged by recent celestial phenomena: see Mamor Parium FGrH 239 B16 (312/11) and B25 (303/2)”.

56 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 102-104; Boehm, 2018, p. 35.

57 Landucci Gattinoni, 2003, p. 96-97, 103-104, and Schettino, 2012, p. 48. See also Psoma, 2011.

58 See Schettino, 2012, p. 48: “des raisons politiques contingentes faisaient de la péninsule chalcidienne le seul lieu possible pour fonder Ouranoupolis: autrement dit, un seul lieu envisageable pour une fondation unique”.

59 Cf. Isaac, 1986, p. 53; Papangelos, 1993, p. 88; Zahrnt, 2015, p. 36; Boehm, 2018, p. 43.

60 Cf. Moggi, 1973; Hammond, 1995, p. 310-311; Tiverios, 2008, p. 53-54; Leone, 2012; Tsigarida, 2011, p. 150; Psoma, 2013.

61 Moggi, 1973; Leone, 2012.

62 Ellis, 20142, p. 282 n. 19.

63 Discussion of sources and bibliography in Squillace, 2010, p. 201. See also Poddighe, 2002, p. 110-112.

64 Squillace, 2010, p. 201-202. See also Winiarczyk, 2011, p. 204-213.

65 Supra nn. 45, 49.

66 Squillace, 2010, p. 201-202.

67 See now Bohem, 2018, p. 43: “the substantial foundation of Ouranopolis subsumed ancient Sane”. For the idea that Alexarchos refunded Sane by the name of Ouranopolis cf. Hatzopoulos, 1996, p. 201: “The consequences of the contemporary foundation of Ouranopolis by Alexarchos, the brother of Cassander, cannot be fully evaluated for lack of sufficient evidence. It is in any case certain that it did not bring about the permanent at least disappearance of neighbouring Akanthos, which continues to be mentioned in our sources, for the new city was not founded on the territory of Akanthos, but on that of Sane”. For the idea that Ouranopolis was founded on the territory of Sane see also Tarn, 1933, p. 39, 185; Fisch, 1937, p. 78; Bookidis, 2000, p. 381, 386, and more recently Tiverios, 2008, p. 63 “Ouranopolis had been built on the site of Sane”.

68 Cf. Isaac, 1986, p. 53; Papangelos, 1993, p. 88; Zahrnt, 2015, p. 36 Boehm, 2018, p. 43.

69 Cf. Papangelos, 1993, p. 1155-1187, Tsigarida, 1999, and now Tsigarida, 2011, p. 150: “The city was built on a natural hill by the sea...the city has been recently excavated and yelded parts of private houses built on terraces and small findings dating from the sixth to the fourth centuries BC” and “Only the perimeter of its fortification has been located, but part of a sanctuary was excavated. The sanctuary originally in the chora of Sane”. See also Hammond, 1995, p. 310-311.

70 Diod. Sic. 18.56.

71 Diod. Sic. 18.55.3; 18.48.5-49.1.

72 Baynham, 2003, p. 27-29.

73 Diod. Sic. 16.71.1-2.

74 Cf. Bohem, 2018, p. 16. But see Topalilov, 2014, p. 7: “the use of a non-eponymous name like Poneropolis argues against the possibility that the city was founded by Philip II. If that had been the case, Philip would have followed the practice that may be observed in the case of Krenides turned into Philippi”.

75 See Psoma, 2013, and Tzigarida, 2011, p. 155: “The city was abandoned at the beginning of the third century BC”. For amphora stamps produced at Ouranopolis (the letters are written between the eight rays of a star) in early third century cf. SEG 48.813.

76 Diod. 18.56. See Rosen, 1967; Landucci Gattinoni, 2008, p. 231-236; Poddighe, 2013.

77 Plut. Phoc. 33.2, 34-35; Diod. Sic. 18.66.5-6. Cf. Cuniberti, 2006, p. 43-49; Bayliss, 2011, p. 148-150; Erskine, 2018, p. 253-259; Dubreuil, 2018, p. 269-273.

78 Diod. Sic. 18.18.5: τοῖς βουλομένοις χώραν ἔδωκεν εἰς κατοίκησιν ἐν τῇ Θρᾴκῃ. Plut. Phoc. 28.4: οἵ τε διὰ τοῦτο τὴν πόλιν ἐκλιπόντες καὶ μεταστάντες εἰς Θρᾴκην, Ἀντιπάτρου γῆν καὶ πόλιν αὐτοῖς παρασχόντος, ἐκπεπολιορκημένοις ἐῴκεσαν. See Gallo, 2004, p. 219-220.

79 On Demetrius’ regime see O’Sullivan, 2009; Banfi, 2010; Faraguna, 2016.

80 Plut. Phoc. 28.4.

81 McKechnie, 1989, p. 55-56.

82 Supra n. 75.

83 Historical sources record the emblematic case of Scione in the same Chalcidic peninsula. According to Thuc. 5.32.1 and Diod. Sic. 12.76 a group of Plataean refugees, who had previously been made welcome in Athens, were settled in the village of Scione in Thrace in 427 BC. Just as happened in the case of Ouranopolis, Scione was also short-lived, if it is true that Lysander had chased them away so as to return Scione to its citizens. Cf. Kulesza, 1999, p. 156, who evaluates this event within the most general phenomenon of population flight. See also Gray, 2015, p. 310 n. 108 and 321 n. 168.

84 Kulesza, 1999, p. 160.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Elisabetta Poddighe, « “Like Men Driven from a Captured City” (Plut. Phoc. 28. 4): Reconsidering the Displacement of the Disenfranchised Athenians to Thrace in 322 BC »Pallas, 112 | 2020, 247-263.

Référence électronique

Elisabetta Poddighe, « “Like Men Driven from a Captured City” (Plut. Phoc. 28. 4): Reconsidering the Displacement of the Disenfranchised Athenians to Thrace in 322 BC »Pallas [En ligne], 112 | 2020, mis en ligne le 01 juillet 2022, consulté le 26 mai 2024. URL : http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/pallas/21830 ; DOI : https://0-doi-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/10.4000/pallas.21830

Haut de page

Auteur

Elisabetta Poddighe

Università degli Studi di Cagliari

Professore Associato di Storia greca
Università degli Studi di Cagliari
Dipartimento di Lettere, Lingue e Beni Culturali
Poddighe[at]unica.it

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search