Demetrios Poliorketes

This essay looks at the cancellation of the Great Panathenaia of 286 and it re-examines the crucial section of text in the great honorary decree for Kallias of Sphettos (SEG XXVIII 60). It shows that the festival of 286 was certainly not held and the Great Panathenaia of 282 was the first celebration after the city had been liberated. As I argue, cancelling any festival was an extremely serious decision indeed because such celebrations created, maintained, and displayed relationships between the divine and the human community. Since the Panathenaia was also an important occasion for putting Athenian democracy, unity, and freedom on show, not celebrating the festival of 286 meant passing up the opportunity to display the city’s newly won freedom and her unity after revolution to an international audience. Such a momentous decision requires further explanation. Our evidence suggests that the on-going military situation surrounding the recovery of Athens from Demetrios is the most likely reason why this important festival was cancelled.

According to received history, the Karyatid Temple on the Acropolis of Athens (commonly known as the “Erechtheion”) was, in the city’s first Ottoman period (1456–1687), converted into a Turkish harem. In this article, I investigate the story by scrutinizing sources from this period. I argue that the notion of the harem, although historically suspect, found fertile ground in an orientalist worldview that has been prevalent among western visitors and scholars. I propose that the tale may have been inspired by the temple’s conspicuous Karyatid statues. I close by considering the story of the harem as part of a phenomenon of “antagonistic narratives” (stories that concern the desecration or destruction of monuments by enemies) in history and archaeology. The article offers new perspectives on later uses of and stories about the Karyatid Temple, on western attitudes towards the presence of Turks in Greece, and on the role that material remains can play in the creation of narratives about the past.

The Nike monument of Samothrace is one of the most important works of ancient sculpture. Since its discovery in 1863 it has always had a special appeal for modern viewers, but a deeper understanding of its historical significance is still a problem: if consensus could be reached quickly on the fundamental classification of the Nike statue in the Hellenistic period, the proposals for a more precise dating of the monument fluctuated by centuries; even the idea widespread in the 20th century that the Nike monument had been erected by the Rhodians on the occasion of their sea victories in 190 BC has been repeatedly questioned in recent years. Therefore, this study undertakes a new attempt at historical contextualization by systematically working through the complicated research debate, reconnecting the viable evidence with the historical context, and incorporating the original setting in the sanctuary of the Great Gods on Samothrace. As a result, a new understanding of the Nikemonument as a work of the Diadoch period and as a beacon in a protracted struggle of images emerges.

L'analisi delle immagini di potere create da Demetrio Poliorcete passa attraverso opere cardine dell'arte ellenistica, tra cui la Nike di Samotracia o il Poseidon con piede sulla rocca. Tali opere, che tanto hanno condizionato la produzione artistica e la propaganda politica dell'epoca romana, richiedono una lettura storica e artistica dell'opera e del contesto in cui fu creata, che tenga in considerazione il significato, il messaggio e l'opportunità politica che era alla base di capolavori tanto celebrativi.

In 197 BC, proudly holding Chalcis along with Corinth and Demetrias, the Macedonian King Philip V claimed to be controlling the “fetters” of Greece. Indeed, the site of Chalcis, located at the narrowest point of the strait of the Euripos separating the island of Euboia from the continent, allowed the control not only of the Euboic Gulf and its maritime routes, but also of Central Greece as a whole, and by extension, of the Greek peninsula. This paper investigates the strategic, political and military factors needed in the early Hellenistic period for the transformation of the Euboian commercial port into one of the most significant strongholds in Greece. It will be argued that to achieve this, it was first necessary to destroy Boiotian Thebes, the strongest local power in the 4th century BC, and to disperse its territory. Also, foreign interest in tightly controlling the region was needed. The Macedonian dynasts were the first of course, and it will be argued that, after Alexander the Great, it was probably Demetrios Poliorcetes who first conceived the concept of the three “fetters” of Greece, and who developed a significant element to the system of fortifications of Chalcis: the so-called Aniphoritis Wall, or at least the associated kastro. A survey of the use of the site in international affairs down to the Mithridatic Wars is also offered, followed by an analysis of the impact such a disputed site had at a more local level, in particular on the territory of Oropos.

This paper aims to give an alternative to the perceived idea that the political ambitions of Seleucus, Ptolemy and other Diadochs were limited as compared to those of Antigonus and Demetrius, and that they and their successors maintained some kind of balance of power. By examining the aspirations of the Diadochs in the context of the Near Eastern tradition of empire, and the ways in which imperial competition functioned in the early Hellenistic period, it is argued that the Diadochs had no other option than to claim world hegemony.

This essay focuses on Athens after the Chremonidean War and asks how at that time the Athenians remembered the revolution from Demetrios Poliorketes in BCE. As the honours for Phaidros of Sphettos show, the past could not simply be ignored. Since Phaidros' earlier actions were not consistent with the dominant narrative of the revolution, the past had to be reconfigured to make it suitable for the city's current circumstances, as I argue. Despite the initial success marked by the passing of the honours, this rewriting was inherently unstable. How the monument might be interpreted in the middle of the third century was very different from how it would be understood in BCE.

This article offers an exploration of the "Traveling Court" model of imperial integration from the perspective of Hellenistic kings' travels in mainland Greece. By personally attending local and regional festivals, and participating in the cults of the poleis, Hellenistic rulers increased their visibility and created opportunities for negotiations with local elites; pan-Hellenic festivals offered them opportunities to simultaneously address representatives of many different poleis. Conversely, the organization of so-called great events of the court (here in particular the marriage rites of Antiochos III and an Euboian elite woman at Chalkis) drew local power holders to the court.

This paper presents a proposal for the date of the Antigonid military presence in Aegosthena near Megara, which is known only by a Megarian honorary decree for Boiotian Zoilos, the royal commander of the garrison (IG VII 1). The named king Demetrios in the inscription could be Poliorketes (306-284 BC) or his grandson, Demetrios II (239-229 BC). All the available evidences (philological, prosopographical, letters a.o.) are examined and the conclusion is that a date around 295-287 BC is the more preferable.

The late Classical period was marked by a rapid specialisation of the approach to war under the reigns of Philip II and Alexander III of Macedonia, particularly with regards to the conduct of sieges and naval engagements.  From this revolution in warfare arose something akin to an arms race in these theatres of war between the Successor kingdoms of the early Hellenistic period.  Closely associated with this transitional period was the technical advancement of siege machinery and ship construction.  As such, new forms of engines were conceived, whilst vessels underwent a process of magnification – both of which reached unprecedented heights of scale and sophistication.  However, tracing the exact trajectory and function of warfare during these periods is difficult.  Therefore, in addition to outlining the path of siege and naval warfare, this essay will also attempt to shed light upon this latter issue.

I monogrammi riportati sui tetradrammi coniati a nome di Alessandro il Grande a Corinto nel 310-290 a.C. non sono degli  insiemi di lettere, come sembrerebbe ovvio, ma degli insiemi di numeri, espressi in greco con le stesse lettere dell’alfabeto: ecco allora che tali monogrammi si rivelano  delle interessantissime sequenze numeriche che indicano i quantitativi di moneta a mano a mano coniati.

This paper discusses the relationship between religion and politics as manifested in Early Hellenistic Athens on the aftermath of the polis’ liberation by Demetrios Poliorketes (307 BCE). The Athenians honoured Demetrios and his father, Antigonos I, with divine honours for ‘restor(ing) the freedom to the people’ (Diod. 20.46). Times were dire for Athens, and the alliance with the Antigonids was not only a solution but a political necessity. However, the restoration of democracy – the ancestral constitution of the polis (pátrios politeia; Diod. 20.46.3) became the occasion to embed Antigonos I and Demetrios Poliorketes to the civic memory of the Athenians in an interlacing program of political and religious acts. I will highlight the importance of civic religion for the Athenian identity and its interdependence to the contextual political reality. From the incorporation of the Antigonids to the sacred peplos of Athena in the Panathenaia, the most prominent civic ritual to the addition of the addition of two new tribes named after them– namely Antigonis and Demetrias – on the first lines of the Athenian tribal list (Plut. Demetr. 10.3-4; Diod. 20.46), the Athenians gradually incorporated the Antigonids to their civic life. The erection of altars dedicated to the Saviours (Soteres); the instigation of annual games and sacrifices; or the ithyphallic hymn (Douris FGrHist 76 F13; Athen. 6.253b-f; App.) showcase how the Athenians appropriated the contemporary political reality into a purely Athenian narrative. This narrative integrated the Antigonids in the polis’ civic context in a multifaced approach that transcended the political and religious spheres and brought together the polis’ identity – essentially its past –, its present needs, and its future aspirations. What will become clear in this discussion is that civic religion and politics are inextricably linked to memory and can be moulded by any society willing to reassert its role in a fluid historical context.

The early third century B.C. was a time of turmoil for the city of Athens. The freedom given to the city in 307 by Demetrios Poliorketes had not lasted, there were periods of both tyranny and oligarchy, good democrats were in exile, and the city was under Macedonian control. In either 287 or 286, revolution (and stasis) occurred and the city regained her freedom. At this point, the Athenians faced a series of problems, most particularly how to remake democracy and how to remember the difficult events of the revolution. As I argue, the Athenians addressed these issues by looking to the past and particularly to the ways in which they had responded collectively to the oligarchic revolutions at the end of the fifth century. Modelling their responses on those of their ancestors, the third-century Athenians restored democracy and remembered the difficult events as external war. That they chose to reuse earlier strategies testifies to the strength of their collective memories of the events at the end of the fifth century, over 100 years earlier. By now, responding to oligarchy had a history of its own.

The aim of my thesis is a comprehensive study and analysis of the garrisons’ network which was installed by the Antigonids in mainland Greece and the Aegean and their geopolitical aspirations . The control of this territory was critical for the prevalence and the consolidation of power among the competing Hellenistic states. A thorough examination of our literary, archaeological and epigraphical sources will help explore the significance and the problems of the garrisons' historical phenomenon in the region and will greatly contribute in the research of the period. In this framework, this particular paper is dealing with the importance of the inscriptions in my research and particularly with the special kind of obtained information from these sources.
Firstly, epigraphical sources are fundamental in the creation of a geographical list of the Macedonian garrisons. Thanks to the epigraphic data list of forts and cities with presence of antigonid troops has been enriched and new places have been identified. Furthermore, and more importantly, the inscriptions provide us with information of micro-historic nature, such as the interactions of the local population with the soldiers (their gradual integration or confrontation), or aspects of the everyday life on the garrisons with the help of the internal administrative regulations.