Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Author(s): N. G. Ashton
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 104 (1984), pp. 152-157
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/630286 .
Accessed: 17/11/2011 08:52
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
NOTES
Hoplites and heresies: a note
NOTES
153
[noAEc'p]in a scholionto the text of Aeschines.s To the that this referenceis to the so-called LamianWar. Lines
Greek referencesshould be added the Latin term bellum 16 and 17 mention the archonshipof Cephisodorus,and
Lamiacumin the prologues to the lost HistoriaePhilippi- 18 and 25 the admiral Euetion.12
caeof Pompeius Trogus.6 The ChronicleofJerome also
At lines 9 and 10 of IG ii2 50o6the restoredreadingis
containsthe term as a translationof the Eusebiuspassage ro oAci[oU yEvotLEvoU70rT EAAqrvt]KOO.13There is
cited above.7
reference to naval matters at line 10 and a virtually
a70"
Such then is the complete register of occurrencesof certain naming of Cleitus, the Macedonian admiral
the name 'The LamianWar'. In each case the source is a during the war.14 Further,the date of the inscriptionis
literary one, and no corroborating epigraphical evi- in accord with the above framework. Lacking the full
dence for the title has been found.
prescript(including the archon year) to this decree, we
The war was also known in antiquity, however, as 0 cannot assign it a precise date. However, the proposer
The evidence for this is primarily was one Lysicrates,son of Lysistratus,also known from
rTOAEtOSg.
'EAAhTvLKO9
The
epigraphical.
inscriptionsare firmly datable in the an honorary decree firmly dated 304/3,15 within the
main, and attest contemporaryand near-contemporary chronological boundaries of the two previously cited
use of that title." At IG ii2 448, in the second of two inscriptionsin which the term 6 'EAAqvLK'rdTAEo"LOS
is
decrees,which is from the Athenianmonth Maimacter- attested. This indicatesthat a date of c. 302/I for IG ii2
lines 43 50o6,as proposed in IG, is to be accepted.
ion in the archonshipof Archippus(318/17
BC),
Albeit scanty and fragmentary, the epigraphical
and 44 read [Kati'd T70n
r ovOoAE4Ov
701O] EAAqVLKov3.9
That this is the Lamian War is certain. Not only is the evidence is conclusive. In Athens the term 06
first of the two decrees from the archonship of
was the official name for the war tEAArvLKo
of 323 and
TOdAEpos
Cephisodorus (323/2) but the entire context of both 322, at least down to 301.16
A single literary reference corroborates the epigradecrees is the advent of Sicyon into the Greek alliance
for the war which began in that year.'0
phical evidence. At Plut. Phoc. 23.1, in an account of a
In IG ii2 505, from the Athenian month Scirophorion, in the archonshipof Nicocles (302/1), line 17 reads
conception of citizenship and the role of foreigners in fourth century
70r 'EAArYLKo3
ro ov. There can be no doubt Athens', Eirenevi (1967) 25.
r7TL
s There are two scholia to Aeschines ii 21, each providing
biographical details in elaboration of a textual reference to an
Athenian strategos,Leosthenes, who had gone into exile in 361 BC. The
scholioncommon to MSS L and M confuses this Leosthenes with the
one later so prominent in the Lamian War, and includes the comment
U
VUTEpov
Ev V 7C ~AtLaKKKaLd7TrOavE
AOV
KarTE
auTpaT7ryqafv
but in the margin of M another
7pwOdOl.Both L and M read rAtLaKcj
hand has written otfpaL AaptLaKp.Despite a conflation of two
Leosthenes, this sentence does appear to refer to the Athenian general
who commanded the forces at the siege of Lamia, and who died there
as a result of a blow. If so, then the reading AattaKWCshould be
understood. For the two
preferred, with the supplement [7rroAmAl]
scholiaand the adscript see W. Dindorf, ScholiaGraecain Aeschinemet
Isocratem(Oxford 1852; repr. Hildesheim 1970) 46.
6 Pompeius Trogus Prol. xiii. Although there is a variant MS
reading lansacum(or lamsacum),the context makes it certain that the
reading of Lamiacumpreferred by J. Bongars in his edition ofJustin's
epitome (Paris 158i) is correct, and it is now accepted without
exception. For the text and apparatus see O. Seel, Pompei Trogi
Fragmenta(Leipzig 1956) 120.
7 The
parallel passages are 6
EKLv'O7r(EuseAapt/aK, 7TrrdAE/o09
bius) and Lamiacumbellummotum(St Jerome).
' The MarmorParium
apart, I have examined first hand each of the
inscriptionscited in this article. My thanks to Mrs D. Peppas-Delmousou and her staff at the National Epigraphical Museum at Athens for
their aid and expertise.
9 The restoration is beyond question, as is evident both from the
immediately adjacent context (lines 43-51) and from the subject
matter of the whole, on which see below n. 1o.
10 Part a, the first decree, from the archonship of Cephisodorus in
323/2, honours Euphron of Sicyon for bringing Sicyon into the Greek
alliance (lines 8-15). Part b, from the archonship of Archippus in
318/17, comes from the year of the 'restored democracy' and harks
back to the Hellenic (i.e. Lamian) War when the above honours were
granted, recalling the reasonsfor the bestowal (lines 43-9). This decree
reaffirms the previous honours and orders that new stelae recording
them be erected (62 ff.).
11 An Athenian honorary decree in favour of Nicander of Ilium
and Polyzelus of Ephesus, metics who had contributed to the
Athenian navy during the Lamian War. On their status and r61esat
Athens see R. Thomsen, Eisphora(Copenhagen 1964) 237-42, and J.
PeEirka, The Formulafor the Grant of Enktesis in Attic Inscriptions
(Prague 1966) 8o-I together with his 'A note on Aristotle's
[..]HPEIEKAEI-[.. .....................
]. Although no
full restoration of a line is yet possible, from line o0it is clear that the
general context is naval. Koehler therefore proposed that the missing
first two letters of line 12 are PI and that the final letter of the previous
line should be T. The problem of the remaining extant letters in line
12 was resolved by A. Wilhelm, 'Ein neues Bruchstiick der parischen
Marmorchronik', Ath.Mitt. xxii (1897) 193, proposing to restore the
name of Euetion's opponent KAETroS. That Cleitus was the
Macedonian vav'apxog in the Lamian War is known from D.S. xviii
15.8. With the final letter of line i1, line 12 would read: 7]
[pt]4LIELp
KAELTr[....
NOTES
154
NOTES
doubtless is a reflection of Hieronymus' opinions,
resulting not only from his connections with the
Macedoniandynastsbut also from his own background
in Cardia, whose dependence on Macedonia in the
fourth century BC is well attested.33 This cynicism is
especially noticeable in Diodorus' account of the
attempt to break from the Macedonian domination in
323 and 322, with the accompanying Greek catch-cries
of
and av-rovolila. The attitude is most
,AEvOEpla
demonstrated in xviii Io, reporting the public
clearly
debate at Athens which resultedin an open declaration
of war againstAntipater.In its entirety the tone of D.S.
xviii 10 is pessimistic-not unexpectedly so given that
the source is Hieronymus.34
in D.S.
The five instances of d
TOdAE[Los
AattaKgs
with confidence to Hierxviii-xx can be attributed
onymus, but the remaining occurrenceis at xvii I I I. I,
and despite continuing controversy as to Diodorus'
major source for Bk xvii, there is no suggestion that
Hieronymus was used at all here.35 On the single
occasion where the name 'Lamian War' does occur in
xvii the phraseology is interesting. The sentence reads:
155
Tpb
'AOfqvatot
Sr
Tov ovo/La(uOEvra
7TdoAEOVE5$jvEyKav
'Av-rrTatrpov
AatKv.36
Elsewherein Bks xviii-xx the war is referredto merely
as 6 AaptaK~s rr~ATELos.Presumably,in first employing the term in xviii where the name is derived from
Hieronymus, Diodorus felt it necessary to mirror the
terminology of xvii I I.I in order to form a precise
bridge with the earlier account of the origins of the
conflict. It therefore appears most likely that HierKa-rar7v 'EAAaSa
aqpaS' -rorot 7TparroLpEVOLS
in
onymus used the name 6 AaptaKos
KaL 7Tpayt aTWV KaLVCov
ovvLUTavTO
rTOAELOSg
rapaxaL
referringto the war of 323 and 322, but that Diodorus'
~E~V d
iaE
KA7OGELSG
source for Bk xvii did not do so.
rTOEELOS
KLV?rELS~,
AaotzaKo
EK
aLTLaS.
TOLtavT7rSTLVOS
Ty7V aopr7,
Plutarchis the most intriguing of the literarysources
in referringto the name of the war is for this matter. In the Liveshe uses both 6"EAAqVLKb3
The use of
KA-r'qE1
and 6
in referringto the
strangeand would suggest that Diodorus might well not Arrd/Eos
TrrdMEtE~
AaptaKs
standsalone. 6A"aptaK rrOTAEP~OS
be echoing his source at this point. Since 6 AaptaKo~ war, and in this he
is
is used consistently from Bk xviii to xx when found in the Pyrrhus,and there is no doubt that for parts
Td6AEpLOSo
Diodorus'
source is Hieronymus, the likely supposition of this Plutarchhad as his source either Hieronymus, or
is that in referringto the origins of the LamianWar in perhapsmore likely an intermediaryHieronymus-based
xvii I I I the source used by Diodorus did not referto the source.37 On three separate occasions in Pyrrhus
forthcoming war by that name at all. Diodorus, who Plutarch cites Hieronymus as his authority,38 and it is
was aware that this was to be the name used in Bk xviii known from Pausaniasthat Hieronymus' history included information as to the death of Pyrrhus.39
33 References to Cardia in the speeches of Demosthenes show
in a biography
Plutarch'suse of 6 AauaKj~S rrTOqLEOS
clearly that it was only the support of the Macedonian monarchy
which prevented Athens from assertingcontrol over Cardia. A full list
for which the detail was derived to some extent at least
of the evidence from Demosthenes, together with that from D.S. xvi
from that source adds weight to the proposal that
and Plut. Eumenesis given by Brown (n. 32) 690 n. 56. For Cardian
Hieronymus referred to the war by that name.
animosity towards Athens and inclination towards Macedon see
The only surviving literary referencewith the name
Hornblower (n. 30) 175.
'EAAqvLKbS
CTdhAEPOSis in Plutarch's Phocion,40 in
d
34 Hornblower (n. 30) observes that 'the account of the Lamian
War in (Diodorus) xviii reveals a distinctly Macedonian slant' which Duris of Samosis twice mentioned as a source.41
(6o--reiterated at 66, 165 and more fully at 171). Nonetheless it is Although the evidence for Duris' life is far from
claimed at 176-7 that in xviii io there is a sympathetic analysis of the
comprehensive, it is certainthat his forebearsmust have
Greek problems in preparing for this war. Against this proposal see been removed from their homeland in the expulsion of
A. B. Bosworth's review of Hornblower's work in ]JHS ciii (1983) the Samians
by the Athenians in 366/5, and that Duris
209-IO. On Hieronymus' historical perspectives note also K. Rosen,
was born in exile, possibly in Sicily, c. 330. In the
'Politische Ziele in der friihen hellenistischen Geschichtsschreibung', restorationof the Samianexiles
by the general recall of
Hermescvii (1979) 460-77.
Duris
came
to
Samos, where both his
322/1
presumably
35 The most likely candidate is still Cleitarchus of Alexandria, who
father Kaios and he are attested as -r'pavvot. At some
is now widely accepted as the source, directly or indirectly, for D.S.
xvii. A thorough re-examination of the evidence is in J. R. Hamilton,
'Cleitarchus and Diodorus 17', Greeceand the EasternMediterraneanin
Ancient History and Prehistory, Fests. Schachermeyr(Berlin 1977)
126-46. Tarn's theory of a so-called 'mercenaries' source' on whom
Diodorus relied heavily up to the battle of Issus(Alexanderthe Greatii
esp. 71-5, 105-6, 128-30) has been laid to rest by P. A. Brunt, CQ xii
(1962) 141-55. On the contentious subject of the date of Cleitarchus,
recent works by J. R. Hamilton, 'Cleitarchus and Aristobulus',
Historiax (1961) 448-58; E. Badian, 'The date of Clitarchus', PACA
viii (1965) s-I1; F. Schachermeyr, Alexander in Babylon und die
nachseine Tode(Vienna 1970) 211-24 have argued for c.
Reichsordnung
310. If Cleitarchus was the source for the reference at D.S. xvii i 1.1 a
date of c. 310 would accord well with the proposition below that the
source which Diodorus used at that point could not have employed
'
the term A
Tr'AEtoJ.
eaKu!as
I56
NOTES
EpyCo8EIpOVapXLKS
dALyapyXLKis,
KaTaUTrEoEW
yEvorLEV,
td 77v 70ro)[OiaApEoJws
8vaptv.49
NOTES
I57
Although that figure is open to question, it is certain fighting there was like the sally which cost Leosthenes
that he lived long and that his history included events his life .... The likelihood is that P. has confused the
name of the decisive land battle with that of the town
down to at least 272.56
As far as the state of the sourceswill allow, it appears noteworthy for the most memorable incident of the
certain that Hieronymus used the name 06AatLaKoS war as a whole....'60 The confusion in Polybius is
for the war. On the other hand, it seems likely explicable if it is understood that by the time this
wTdOAPoso
that Duris, writing within a decade earlier than abbreviatedaccount of the war was written, the name 6
was in circulation. Polybius has
Hieronymus, referred to it as 6
W7TdOEAOSo
W7TdE/os
,EAArvLK0S
and had no knowledge of an alternative
name. What Aa/LtaKS
mistakenly assumed that the decisive land battle must
little evidence we do have suggests that Hieronymus have been near the city which had given its name to the
might well have been the first to use the name which overall conflict of 323 and 322, and by that error
later became standardfor the war. That such a change in supplies the first indication of the time by which the
T
dE/Aos had attained widespread
terminology could have occurred around the 260s has name 6 AaLaKos
o7T
some support from epigraphy. The MarmorParium, recognition.61
If Hieronymus was the first literaryfigure to use the
although not having an overall name for the war, does
record the struggle at Lamia and the naumachianear name
it remains to ask why.
o7TdAELOs,
Aa/,LaK8o
has arguedthat Hieronymus' final revision
Amorgus in the entry for 323/2. The reference to the Hornblower
events at Lamia reads:
of the early sections of his work was undertakenin the
260s, after Athens had capitulatedto Antigonus Gonatas
Jw 70rotwoALTovrot70yvoLEIvov
7wEOp Aapalav in the Chremonidean War. Not only were there
'A'qrvatols rpOs 'AvrwlTarpov.57
parallelsto be drawn between the 'Hellenic War' of the
Here, for the first time in the extant evidence, the 320s and the Greekstruggle for freedom from Macedon
military engagements at and around Lamia have been in the 260s, but for a contemporary historian (with
an indication that in some quarters pro-Macedonian tendencies) the recording of the
labelled a wrldTApoS,
the Lamianevents had been elevated in importance to a former revolt needed careful rewriting in view of the
point from which it was no great step to identify the current developments.62 In particular the traditional
entire conflict with the
at that location. It is name of 'EAAyqVLK~S
would have presented
d~E7TMEOS
'wTTdoAoso'
known from the prescript
tofr. A of the MarmorParium problems-both emotive and in the matterof precision.
that the chronicle recorded selected events down to the It is in that light, I would suggest, that Hieronymus
archonshipof Diognetus at Athens in 264/3,s8 which is decided to refer to the war of 323 and 322 BC as o
virtually synchronous with Hieronymus' time of writ- Aa/taKOS 7To0dEpOS.
N. G. ASHTON
ing.
That the name 6 AataLLaKsWdTO
The Universityof WesternAustralia
/oS was in circulation in the second century BCseems confirmed by an
60 F. W. Walbank, A HistoricalCommentaryon Polybiusii (Oxford
odd reference to the war by Polybius:
1967) 16761 A confusion somewhat similar to that in the Polybius
is
passage
VK'4jaa
evident at Paus. vii 6.5. There it is stated that of the people of Achaea,
"EAA'vas, KaKLUTa
v
Troi?
XpruaaTo
"70VS
only the noted wrestler Chilon of Patrae was present ir7LTr v 7p~s
TraatalrpoLs 'A6rlvatots 61Aol'ws S KaL TOL^s Aapda
7rd7AEov. However, in this case it is perfectly
I-v
'Av-rtwa-rpos
v 7^7TEpL
pa X
Aapv
/
&aAots.59
KaAoipEtvov
from the context of vii 6.5 and from an additional
clear, both
reference at vi 4.6-7, that Pausaniasmeant to refer only to the events
Aaplav and not to the war as a whole.
rEpL
62 Hornblower
(n. 30) 172 ff.