The Classical Review

[Link]

Additional services for The Classical Review:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

HELLENISTIC KINGSHIP. N. Luraghi (ed.) The

Splendors and Miseries of Ruling Alone.
Encounters with Monarchy from Archaic Greece to
the Hellenistic Mediterranean. (Studies in Ancient
Monarchies 1.) Pp. 284, ills. Stuttgart: Franz
Steiner, 2013. Cased, €49. ISBN: 978-3-515-10259-9.

Andrew Collins

The Classical Review / Volume 65 / Issue 01 / April 2015, pp 185 - 187

DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X14001851, Published online: 22 October 2014

Link to this article: [Link]

How to cite this article:

Andrew Collins (2015). The Classical Review, 65, pp 185-187 doi:10.1017/
S0009840X14001851

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from [Link] IP address: [Link] on 17 Apr 2015

 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W 185
Antipater’s dispositions for Greece invalid, Polyperchon was presented not only as the
legitimate regent but also as the true defender of the legacy of Philip II and Alexander,
and this was meant to undermine Cassander’s self-promotion as champion of
Macedonian traditions. D. Ogden discusses the cult of Agathos Daimon and the foundation
myth of Alexandria. He shows that the public cult was probably established by Ptolemy I
who successfully connected it with Alexander. Ogden also links these traditions with the
private cult of the Agathoi Daimones and the legend of the argolaoi-snakes that Alexander
supposedly brought to Egypt to fight off other venomous snakes. The subject of V. Alonso
Troncoso’s chapter is elephants as symbols of power and kingship. He shows that
Ptolemy’s famous coins featuring Alexander with the elephant scalp also referred to
Ptolemy’s own victory over Perdiccas and his war elephants. In the Seleucid context,
the image of Alexander in elephant-skin celebrated the (alleged) victories in the Far
East. After the battle of Ipsus, however, elephants became a general royal symbol repre-
senting power and military prowess in all parts of the Seleucid Empire.
The papers address many of the key problems of the Diadochic period, and most of
them provide innovative readings and fresh perspectives on pivotal questions. However,
as all chapters are rather short, they tend to focus on individual aspects without putting
them into the broader historical context. Cross-references to other chapters would have
helped to create a more cohesive picture. This criticism notwithstanding, the volume offers
many thought-provoking interpretations for anyone interested in the legacy of Alexander
and the formative years of the Hellenistic period.

Philadelphia, PA JULIA WILKER

wilker@[Link]

HELLENISTIC KINGSHIP
L U R A G H I ( N . ) (ed.) The Splendors and Miseries of Ruling Alone.
Encounters with Monarchy from Archaic Greece to the Hellenistic
Mediterranean. (Studies in Ancient Monarchies 1.) Pp. 284, ills.
Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2013. Cased, E49. ISBN: 978-3-515-10259-9.
doi:10.1017/S0009840X14001851

The editor of this book draws together a collection of essays on monarchy in the context of
Greek history, but mainly focusing on Hellenistic history, and three of the chapters provide
an English translation and revision of earlier published papers in German or Italian, with a
number of other original papers translated into English from the German.
Chapter 1 by L. is an introduction and discussion of kingship in pre-Classical Greece.
L. reviews modern scholarship on the basileis of the Homeric texts and, following K.A.
Raaflaub and others, questions Finley’s theory that the political world of these texts is a
coherent reflection of the situation in Dark Age Greece (pp. 13–15). Instead, the basileis
of Homer are a ‘pale and garbled reminiscence’ (p. 15) of Mycenaean kings, not of elusive
Dark Age kings. The upshot is that it is uncertain to what extent Greek society knew mon-
archy from the collapse of the Bronze Age to the age of tyrants (stated later in L.’s Chapter
3, p. 66). Though a poetic creation, the Homeric kingship nevertheless was construed as a
traditional and legitimate government, and this was in stark contrast to the odious image of
the turannos (pp. 16–17). This tension in Greek political discourse on autocracy was per-
vasive: on the one hand, there was the good basileus and, on the other, the turannos, his
evil reflection. Although the rise of Philip, Alexander and the Hellenistic kingdoms

The Classical Review 65.1 185–187 © The Classical Association (2015)

186 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W

provoked a new Greek confrontation with monarchy and a revived political discourse on
kingship, nevertheless the tension continued.
In Chapter 2, C. Mann discusses the poems of Pindar and Bacchylides commemorating
Hieron of Syracuse’s victories at horse racing contests in Greece, with a thorough review of
the genre, context and content of these poems, and how they were intended to legitimate
Hieron’s tyranny. Mann sees the poems as reinforcing the tyrant’s own self-representation
and elevating him to the heroic sphere (p. 44), familiar from the Homeric world, with the
emphasis on divine patronage, personal success in war and agonistic contest, and charis-
matic leadership.
Chapter 3 by L. examines literary narratives about the killing of tyrants in the Greek
world. The killing of a tyrant was universally seen as a legitimate and moral act (p. 51),
even to the point of killing the tyrant’s family and exculpating the tyrant-slayer from
any divine wrath or ritual pollution. L. connects stoning as a method of killing the tyrant
in some sources to the pharmakos ritual, and sees it as analogous to a purification rite with
the tyrant as the asebes, though ultimately finds this view ambiguous (pp. 58–60).
Nevertheless, there was an appropriate way to kill a tyrant: generally, one had to avoid sac-
rilege (pp. 52–5). In essence, however, the tyrant’s rule was anomia; so too was his violent
death (p. 67).
Chapter 4 is a revised English translation of H.-J. Gehrke’s ‘Der siegreiche König.
Überlegungen zur hellenistischen Monarchie’ (Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 64 [1982],
247–77), and is valuable in its own right. Gehrke takes up Max Weber’s idea of ‘charis-
matic’ rule as a useful model for Hellenistic kingship (p. 75), and especially for the
Macedonian dynasties that were established after the extinction of the Argead house.
Personal charisma, military victory, wealth, favour of the gods and benefaction were the
qualities that legitimised Hellenistic kings. Of course, the conception of personal charisma
sometimes sits uncomfortably with the hereditary dynastic principle–or rule by right of
birth (or ‘by nature’, as the Greeks said) (p. 86). After all, some kings were ignominious
and suffered humiliating military defeats, but they and their dynastic lines continued.
Gehrke seeks to overcome this with an appeal to the notion of ‘inherited charisma’: the
kings could pass on their own charisma to their sons (p. 87). Gehrke briefly refers to
the principle of ‘spear-won land’ and links it to charisma too (p. 97 n. 69), but the most
recent work on Hellenistic kingship has placed a much greater emphasis on this concept,
and sees it as a vital part of royal legitimation, and not simply reducible to some facet of
royal charisma.
Chapter 5, a revised English translation of an earlier paper by M. Haake, is a study of
royal succession under Agathocles and Hiero II. Haake subjects the sources to review and
criticism, and he concludes that succession troubles, common in Hellenistic kingdoms,
arose because there was no formal, legal or constitutional system that provided ‘accepted
rules of royal inheritance independent of the individuals involved’ (p. 107).
In Chapter 6, D.A. Walthall discusses Spartan kingship in the Hellenistic age, and the
ways in which Areus I, Cleomenes III and Nabis I overcame Spartan traditions of basileia
by asserting a more autocratic and grandiose style of kingship. Areus I broke with earlier
traditions by issuing a royal coinage, having extensive royal busts and portraits, and
engaging in international self-promotion (pp. 130–40), but Cleomenes III went even fur-
ther and broke with Spartan constitutional constraints, and instituted military and economic
reforms (pp. 140–6). Further development of Hellenistic autocracy occurred under Nabis
(pp. 146–59).
Chapter 7 by M. Haake examines Hellenistic treatises on kingship, their background,
social meaning and function. The generic treatise On Kingship became a standard philo-
sophical work by the third century B.C. (p. 174), was written for and read by a general
 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W 187
audience (p. 177), and the ideal good king is the opposite of the tyrant. Haake sees the
genre as a method by which the Greek poleis came to terms with the reality of
Hellenistic monarchy (p. 180), but his method of analysis of what such treatises contained
(pp. 176–7) is rendered somewhat problematic by the paucity of evidence.
In Chapter 8, U. Gotter, drawing on Gehrke’s ‘charismatic’ view of kingship (in
Chapter 4), discusses late Hellenistic kingship as restricted and reduced in power by the
Romans. The Pergamene kings responded by increased benefactions to the Greek cities
and monumental art commemorating old victories (pp. 209–19), while in Commagene
the king Antiochus turned to an extravagant ruler cult (pp. 219–23).
Chapter 9, the final chapter, by K. Trampedach analyses the Hasmonean kings and
shows how their attempts at legitimation departed from the standard Hellenistic model
owing to their special ethnic and religious environment. The opposition to Hasmonean
rule and in the sectarian Qumran texts is also examined.
This book is a valuable collection of essays on Hellenistic kingship that will inspire fur-
ther research and discussion. The English translations are of high quality and typographical
errors are rare.1

University of Queensland ANDREW COLLINS

[Link]@[Link]

GRAECO-ROMAN SYRIA
A N D R A D E ( N . J . ) Syrian Identity in the Greco-Roman World. Pp. xxx
+ 412, ills, maps. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Cased,
£70, US$110. ISBN: 978-1-107-01205-9.
doi:10.1017/S0009840X14001711

This book, a revised and expanded version of A.’s doctoral dissertation, examines how
local communities of Roman Syria identified themselves in the regional and broader,
imperial framework, and how their shifting identity was perceived by Greek and Roman
imperial authorities. The project is ambitious, even more so as the argument exceeds the
limitations announced in the title and transcends Syrian identity by discussing its links
and overlap with Greek and Roman identifications. The book comprises an introduction,
a conclusion and three complementary parts.
The first three chapters present a chronological narrative describing the impact of
Graeco-Roman imperialism and the transformation of identities in the ancient Near East,
from Antiochus IV’s reign in the early second century B.C.E. to the full incorporation of
Syria in the Roman empire, in the first century C.E. A. investigates the progressive integra-
tion of ethnic Syrians into the civic body of Greek cities, originally limited to the descent
of Graeco-Macedonian settlers under the Seleucids. A first attempt at enlarging Greek civic
bodies under Antiochus IV, best illustrated by the creation of an Antiochene polis in
Jerusalem, was ultimately hindered by a simultaneous increase of imperial intervention
in local economies and cults. The process was renewed with more success under the
impulse of client kings and Roman administrators after Pompey’s conquest. The

1
Of the few I noticed were the following: p. 14, ‘plaid’ for ‘played’; p. 15, ‘anakes’ for
‘anaktes’; p. 50, ‘the them’ for ‘them’; p. 65, ‘fort he’ for ‘for the’; p. 67, ‘ruitinely’ for
‘routinely’; p. 85, ‘every traits . . . are’ for ‘every trait . . . is’; p. 186, ‘nothig’ for ‘nothing’;
p. 231, ‘und’ for ‘and’.

The Classical Review 65.1 187–189 © The Classical Association (2015)