On the composition of the Achaian synodos in Polybios’ time

The question of who attended the regular assemblies (synodoi) of the Achaian koinon in the 2nd century BCE is still a subject of discussion. Two main theories prevail: the synodos either was a primary assembly of all citizens or a meeting of the federal council. However, the very existence of an elected council in the koinon can be doubted, since no trace of activity of this federal body in the 3rd and the 2nd centuries BCE can be found, either in literary, or epigraphic sources. The only evidence supposedly proving the existence of an Achaian council is the frequent mention of the word boule in Polybios’ accounts of the federal assembly meetings. Attentive consideration of these passages leads to the conclusion that, in the lexicon of the Achaian historian, boule is not the official name of a state institution and does not necessarily mean “a council.” Of the two theories, seeing the synodos as a meeting of the primary assembly seems to be the most compatible with the evidence. However, in light of the recently found inscription SEG LVIII 370, we may be certain that in Polybios’ time the synodos was a representative body – and therefore not a people’s assembly in the strict sense of the word. The only reasonable interpretation of this contradictory evidence appears to be the following: the synodos was a meeting of several thousand delegates representing all the Achaian poleis, the size of each delegation being determined in proportion to the population of the community. The list of these delegates varied from meeting to meeting, and therefore the synodos should not be regarded as a body with permanent membership, such as a state council. This kind of assembly also might have served as a model for the archairesiake ekklesia of the Lykians

A Note on the history of Hellenistic Megara: Τhe date of the Antigonid garrison in Aegosthena

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

Megalopolis and the Achaian koinon: local identity and the federal state

This dissertation examines the relationship between the Arkadian city of Megalopolis and the Achaian koinon in the Hellenistic period. By arguing that Megalopolis was a polis which used its own local identity to carve out a prominent position for itself within the Achaian federation, this thesis is able to provide new insights into the study of the wider topic of the relationship between federations and their member states. To support this argument, the thesis is divided into three parts. In part one of the dissertation, the Megalopolitan identity is clearly established by identifying its basic components, which were the result of the city’s foundation by the Arkadian koinon around 368 BC as well as its Achaian membership of 235 BC. The Megalopolitan identity was marked by a complex structure; it was characterised by a deep and traditional hatred for Sparta, longstanding relations with the Macedonian kings, a clear understanding of the mechanisms of a federal state and multi-ethnic politics, and, by Polybius’ time, a connection to both Arkadia as well as Achaia. The second part examines the influence of this local identity on the koinon through the direct relationship of Megalopolis with the federal government via its Achaian membership. Within the Achaian League, Megalopolis was an active member, taking part in the federal institutions and minting coins. However, through its interactions with other members of the federal state, Megalopolis used its relationship with the federal state to its own advantage. Finally, the last part of the thesis explores the role of Megalopolis and its local interests in Achaian foreign politics. The polis seems to have influenced these through the emergence of a series of influential statesmen (such as Philopoimen and Lykortas) as well as several new policies pursued by the Achaians after Megalopolis’ membership. Examples of these new policies are the Achaian alliance with Macedon of 225 BC and the increased focus of the koinon on Sparta in the second century BC, something that also shaped Achaian interactions with Rome. Throughout the thesis particular attention is paid to the narrative of the historian Polybius and the problems his writings pose, since he was an important source for the history of the Achaian koinon and who, as a Megalopolitan, was an excellent example of this distinct Megalopolitan identity. By shedding light on the various ways in which Megalopolis affected the Achaian koinon and its politics, this thesis shows that Megalopolis merits more attention than it has received in the past, as it was more than just an Arkadian city that was a member of the Achaian koinon. Furthermore, the intricate analysis of the distinct Megalopolitan identity makes a novel contribution to the wider study on the interaction between the polis, as a civic unit, and the federal state, as a developing political structure

A Note on the history of Hellenistic Megara: Τhe date of the Antigonid garrison in Aegosthena

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

From the Cradle: Reconstructing the ephēbeia in Hellenistic Megara

This chapter re-constructs the form and function of the ephēbeia in Hellenistic Megara, beginning with an examination of the city’s military catalogues during its membership in the Boiotian League. Through comparison with other member cities, a detailed reconstruction of the Megarian ephēbeia is advanced beginning with the period stretching from 224-193 BC, and then expanding to consider the potential origins of the city’s ephebic program in its local context. Throughout, the place of the ephēbeia in the local discourse environment of Megara is emphasized for its role in training subsequent generations of Megarian citizens who would go on to participate actively in the city’s military and political life

With and Without You: Megara’s Harbours

The main question that is addressed in this article is whether and how the harbour towns of the Megarid – Nisaia on the Saronic Gulf and Pagai, Aigosthena on the Gulf of Corinth – constituted local worlds in their own right. Exploring the entangled history of the polis Megara and its ports, this paper also points to the complexities behind scholarly approximations to the local horizon of an ancient Greek city-state

Some observations on koina and monetary economy in Hellenistic Asia Minor

The koina of pre-Roman Asia Minor, comprising several major organisations along its western and southern coasts like the koina of Athena Ilias, the Lesbians, the Ionians, the Chrysaorians, and the Lykians, present a collection of federal states less well understood than better documented koina in mainland Greece. This paper highlights the regional characteristics of these Anatolian koina by examining their monetary and political economies. It first suggests that federalising behaviour in Hellenistic western Asia Minor tended to be centred on regional sanctuaries and festivals, and less involved in the formation of cohesive political institutions through federal law-making or military mobilisation. This also had the effect that they present the impression of being monetarily ‘light’, as is explained in the second section, because they were not by and large fiscally cohesive, or had close oversight of monetary supply, with the notable exception of the Lykian league – taxation was not hugely intrusive or extensive, and little federal coinage was produced. The last two sections consider this ‘lightness’ as a function of the regional specificities of political and economic power in the region, suggesting that koina functioned parasitically as organisations ensconced between imperial states and civic communities, both reflecting and shaping the dominant role in the region of these two types of polity in the Hellenistic period

2. Work in Progress

Elena FRANCHI (Università di Trento) Border Management Cultures and Strategies in Ancient Greek Federal States FeBo Project Report 2023, 2   The project FeBo – Federalism and Border Management in Greek Antiquity (ERC 2021 COG PR. Nr. 101043954) aims at investigating the border-management strategies and cultures that stabilised the inter- and intra-federal border zones and thus contributed to the success of the koina that adopted those strategies to the best effect.[1] Without saying, Boiotia features among the most privileged case studies. The FeBo research group consists of the P.I., Elena Franchi, the three collaborators Claudio Biagetti, Sebastian Scharff, and Roy Van Wijk, and a PhD student, Rebecca Massinelli (https://erc-febo.unitn.it/about-us.html). It also profits from the support of digital-humanities expert Daniele Fusi. Roy Van Wijk and Rebecca Massinelli joined the team at the beginning of the second year and will be engaged on work packages (henceforth: WP[s]) 2, 3 and 4, as outlined in the proposal. The first year of the project (2022-2023) was specifically dedicated to the study of external, i.e. inter-federal border areas. The objective was the collection and analysis of evidence on economic, ethnic, cultural, and religious interactions on the borders of a koinon in its various phases (WP 1). The research actions undertaken were aimed at investigating phenomena of cross-border cooperation and the forms in which such cross-border cooperation made possible and even necessary a special legal definition of the areas in which this cooperation took place. They were intended to analyse the extent to which these phenomena influenced processes of integration and expansion of a koinon and the role played by cross-border commuters in these forms of cooperation. Beyond that, the extent to which these forms of cooperation were then exploited in the context of border-management strategies came into focus. Finally, the extent to which they are to be understood in a connection with border-management cultures were investigated and will be further explored. The speakers of the FeBinars contributed to the reflection on these issues, and the webinars organised as part of the project constituted a veritable think tank for FeBo. The dynamics studied in the first year with their particular reference to the Peloponnese and Western Greece will then be analysed with specific reference to Boiotia in the second and third year of the project. The initial results were discussed and disseminated in both academic and non-academic settings.   1. Cross-Border Cooperation: from Hybridizing Border Relations to the Definition of koinai chorai There are cases in which the strong receptive and creative capacity of a centre with respect to interactions with neighbouring centres makes this same centre of particular strategic relevance and thus of absolute interest to a koinon gravitating in neighbouring areas. This seems to have been the case in Phigalia which Claudio Biagetti took as a case study. Situated between the western foothills of Mt. Lykeion and the meeting point between the Messenian territory (to the south), the Triphylian coast (to the north-northwest) and the Arkadian hinterland (to the north and east), the city of Phigalia is certainly the major centre of the area and the one for which the available evidence is the richest and most stimulating. The ancient sources, in fact, emphasise its border location not only because of the role the polis played as a strategic crossroads (Strab. 8.3.22; Polyb. 4.3.4-5; Diod. 15.40.2), but also, to some extent, to point out its more unusual aspects related to local customs (Harmod. Lepr. BNJ 319 FF 1-3; Paus. 8.40.1-42.13), thus giving the scholars the impression of a centre of strong cultural hybridity. The article “Φιλοπόται Μεσσήνιοις ἀστυγείτονες ὄντες. Arcadian Phigalia as a Geographical, Political and Cultural Crossroad” aims to shed light on the function of Phigalia as a crucial stronghold for the control of the western Peloponnese and as a centre highly receptive to external cultural influxes. It was published in the diamond open access journal Hormos. Ricerche di storia antica n.s. 15 (2023), 1-40. In other cases, the considerable capacity for cross-border interaction gives rise to forms of cross-border cooperation so significant that a legal definition is possible and necessary. Quite common are the so-called koinai chorai, border areas with economic significance, declared ‘common’ and open to joint exploitation by several communities. They are the subject of a further article by Claudio Biagetti. As Biagetti notes, the koinai chorai were often territories that had been at the centre of interpoleic disputes and continued to be disputed even after the proclamation and/or formalisation of their status as common regions. The epigraphic record preserves a number of inter-state treaties that sanctioned the creation of a common region, i.e., reaffirmed its status and conditions of exploitation. The Peloponnese stands out as a privileged observatory for the study of such border territories. The existence of jointly exploited areas in Late Classical Arcadia (IPArk 14; 369-361 BC) is the first indication of a phenomenon that enjoys a certain development in the Hellenistic period (IG V 2, 419; SEG 58, 370; IG IV 2, 75+; IG IV 2, 76-77). Although access to a territory and its resources must first have been sanctioned by a formal agreement between the communities concerned, the intervention of koina and rulers as promoters and/or guarantors of the treaties often looms in the background of such understandings, the one and the other being concerned with the stability and security of the territories over which they exercised their jurisdiction. The article summarising these and further remarks bears the title “Border Regions, Political Communities, Economic Resources: Remarks on the Territories of Shared Exploitation in the Hellenistic Peloponnese” and will be published on the diamond open access journal Pallas. Revue des Études Antiques 123 (2024).   2. From Cross-Border Cooperation to Management Strategy There are also cases where the evidence suggests that forms of strong receptivity and interactive creativity as well as cross-border cooperation in and between border areas played a primary role for the integration of areas which were newly acquired by koina in a phase of expansion. This is the case forthe city of Oiantheia, in West Lokris studied by Elena Franchi. The ancient Greeks and most probably the Lokrians themselves felt they had to emphasise the Lokrian identity of Oiantheia by mentioning it with few others among the cities founded by the eponymous hero of the Lokrians, Lokros. Given its location, this does not seem to be by chance. According to the most common hypothesis, it should be identified with the modern site of Mathiou in the bay of Vitrinitsa, maybe comprising Kisseli. Ancient sources indicate that Oiantheia clearly had an outlet to the sea that had its own significance, not only for the Lokrian poleis, but also for poleis of the Aitolian hinterland such as Kallipolis (= modern Steno) and Aigition (= modern Strouza). This relevance has already been highlighted in historical, archaeological and topographical research. Thearticle shows how it was instrumental in cross-border cooperation activities that facilitated the integration of Oiantheia into the Aitolian koinon (as well as, subsequently, the recovery of its Lokrian identity). In this case, cross-border cooperation seems to be a bottom-up phenomenon that was exploited by the koinon of the Aitolians in conjunction with two top-down strategies such as the well-known creation of new ‘tele’ (districts) for the newly acquired territories as well as the manipulation of the genealogies of eponymous heroes (and that one goes so far as to make Aitolos a relative of Lokros). The article “Oiantheia in between. Cross-border Activities in Ancient Federal Greece” was submitted to the diamond open access journal Gerión. Revista de Historia Antigua. The above-mentioned cases of cross-border cooperation are often made possible by, and simultaneously make possible, situations of border porosity. Elena Franchi’s research on the cult of Apollo Pythaios in the eastern Peloponnese is dedicated to a similar case of border porosity and cross-border cooperation. Previous research leads to a distinction between the cult of Pythaios and the cult of Apollo Pythios. According to the available evidence, the former is practised primarily, but not exclusively, in the eastern Peloponnese, especially in Kynouria. Both epigraphic and literary documents contribute to a shared picture of the cult, which seems to have been practised in Kynouria by individuals who were familiar with Lakonian and Argolic cultural habits and alphabets. Whether this familiarity can be attributed to the mobility of such individuals or more generally to widespread mobility between the three regions, both cases seem to indicate that regional boundaries were porous in Archaic times, at least (and maybe not only) with reference to the cult of Pythaios. In addition to having been practised by the Kynourians themselves, the cult was probably also maintained by the Spartans and Argives: in the case of the Spartans and Argives, it formed part of their respective networks of ‘federal’ cults that were also functional to aims of extending control over areas perceived as borders. The chapter “Beyond War. Porosity of Borders and Ritual Interconnectedness across the Southeastern Peloponnese” was submitted to Marian Helm and Sophia Nomicos, editors of the volume “Laconia and the Argolid. An Interconnected Approach towards Reconstructing the Southern Peloponnese in Antiquity” (provisonal title) for publication with Teiresias Supplements Online (in diamond open access). Another case of the porosity of boundaries and the involvement of actors at different levels (local, regional, supra-regional) of boundary management is that of Ambrakia. The case is currently studied by Sebastian Scharff and appears to be promising. Ambrakiot politics seem to have been essentially border politics. As a point of reference of various claims to power, the territory of the city constituted a contested space. Korinthian settlers, Athenian strategoi, Makedonian and Epirotan kings, Aitolian politicians, and Roman generals all took a lively interest in the city after which the gulf is named. As a consequence, Ambrakia’s history was a history of changing affiliations from independent settlement to Epirotan capital back to independence and membership in the Aitolian League, a process that finally resulted in submission to Roman rule as civitas libera. In addition to the claims lodged by the major political players of the time, the people of Ambrakia also had to face border conflicts with regional and local stakeholders including the Amphilochians, Akarnanians, and the people of a small neighbouring town like Charadros. But what strategies were applied to secure the boundary lines? How were they established and legitimised and what can we say about the permeability of these borders? The article is currently in preparation and will be submitted in January 2024.   3. Cross-border Commuters The border porosity analysed in the articles reviewed in the paragraph above is often a product of the recurrent passage of individuals we would call cross-border commuters. To a specific category of cross-border commuters, that is the athletes, Sebastian Scharff has devoted an article intended as the first in a series on different groups of border-crossers. Starting from the observation that the role of former athletes as envoys has not been sufficiently analysed yet, the article examines on what kind of diplomatic missions Hellenistic athletes were sent after their career. Of special interest are their roles as interstate arbitrators and mediators in political conflicts, roles which were often assumed in the context of political conflicts with or within federal states. It is striking that Elian victors mediated and arbitrated even in such disputes in which their hometown had been one of the conflicting parties. This reveals what significant a role the prestige gained by an agonistic victory played for becoming appointed envoy. Another main reason for being nominated as ambassadors consisted in the athletes’ prior life realities as cross-border commuters which allowed them to build strong social and political networks from an early age. No doubt, former athletes, often ‘heavy weights’, served in many different roles on diplomatic missions of the highest importance. The article, entitled “Mediating, Arbitrating, Crossing Borders Constantly. Federal Athletes as Envoys”, was published in the diamond open access journal Erga-Logoi 11, No. 2 (2023), 77-90.   4. Border Management Cultures In the early months of the project and during the various internal workshops, we investigated the possibility that in certain cases border-zone management may not be attributable to a specific border-management strategy, but rather to a border-management culture. To Sebastian Scharff, we owe the hypothesis that ethne and koina developed specific border-management cultures. Scharff devoted an article to the Aitolian and Achaian border management cultures which specifically focuses on the two most important federal states of the Hellenistic age. It explores whether there were characteristic features of treaty-making practices in the Achaian and Aitolian Leagues respectively. Third-city arbitration delegated to member poleis and a special set of Beitrittsurkunden constituted typical features of Achaian treaty culture, whereas Aitolian-style treaty-making included particularly long dating clauses and centred on politically highly relevant contracts with major players of the day. With regard to the diplomatic personnel, the constant activities of young Achaian athletes provided a broad pool of potential future envoys, a pool that did not exist in Aitolia to the same extent. While the border management of the Achaians often referred to internal boundaries, the Aitolians seem to have been more involved with external ones. In sum, it is argued that there actually were individual treaty cultures in Aitolia and Achaia respectively. The unequal formation conditions of both leagues (polis-structured vs. tribal-based) may be understood as a reason behind these different cultures. The article, entitled “Treaty Cultures. The Aitolian and Achaian Leagues in Comparison”, was published in the diamond open access journal Hormos. Ricerche di storia antica n.s. 15 (2023), 169-195.   5. A Veritable Think Tank: the FeBinars Members of the FeBo team constantly consult with external experts. To facilitate the discussion FeBo organises so-called FeBinars, which are webinars in the context of which external experts in (ancient and modern) federalism and border studies present their case studies. Since intra-federal and external borders must necessarily be approached from various research perspectives and with different questions, FeBo organises two distinct series of lectures, each with another focus, one on internal (The Management of Internal Borders by Federal States), the other on external borders (Crossing Federal Borders: Ancient and Modern). Both series have been initiated by the inaugural lecture delivered by Hans Beck on 7 March which focused on a case study involving both intra-federal and extra-federal borders. Beck’s lecture was devoted to Boiotian border issues. Additional FeBinars were given by Francesco Palermo (an expert on contemporary federalism and conflict resolutions strategies related to federalization processes); Peter Funke, who spoke on the internal structure of the koina and intermediate levels of federal administration; Alex McAuley, who gave a FeBinar on the topic of intra- and inter-federal proxenia; Hans-Joachim Gehrke, who outlined the case of Ledrinoi; Nikos Petrochilos, who analysed cases of cross-border cooperation in West Lokris; and Corinne Bonnet with Sylvain Lebreton, who analysed the federalizing or conversely divisive potential of some cults practised in border areas.   Here is the list of previous FeBinars:   Inaugural lecture: Hans Beck, “Interpolis Cooperation and Competition: the Case of Southern Boiotia” (7 March 2023)   FeBinar series “The Management of Internal Borders by Federal States”: Peter Funke, “Own and Common. Reflections on the Internal Borders of Greek Federal States” (23 May 2023) Alex McAuley, “Under and/or through the Border: Proxeny across Federal Borders in the Hellenistic Peloponnese” (29 June 2023) Hans-Joachim Gehrke, “Internal or External Borders? The Case of Elis and Ledrinoi” (27 September 2023)   Crossing Federal Borders: Ancient and Modern: Francesco Palermo, “The Law and the Functions of Cross-border Cooperation” (9 May 2023) Nikos Petrochilos, “From Chalieis to Kallieis: Land, Boundaries and Threats in West Lokris and Eastern Aitolia” (23 November 2023) Corinne Bonnet & Sylvain Lebreton, “Gods to Federate, Gods to Separate: Territorial Dynamics and Greek Divine Onomastics” (7 December 2023)   Further info, photos and videos of FeBinars can be found at the FeBo website: https://erc-febo.unitn.it/febo-organizes.html   6. Dissemination The first results of the project have already been presented and discussed in the context of conferences, lectures and seminars for doctoral students: the full list can be found here and here. Simultaneously, members of the FeBo team have been engaged in disseminating FeBo to university students, high school students, students in primary schools and in various dissemination contexts. These initiatives are listed here and here.   [1] See “Federalism and Border Management in Greek Antiquity (FeBo) - Project Report 1 (2023),” Münster: University of Münster, 2023, 2 p. (TJO 2022.1). URL: https://www.uni-muenster.de/Ejournals/index.php/tjo/index. I am grateful to Claudio Biagetti and Sebastian Scharff for their valuable suggestions for revising and supplementing these reports, and more generally for their important contribution to the project.   Roy VAN WIJK (Università di Trento) Recent Work on the Cults of Boeotia, Archaeology, Epigraphy, and History Conference organized by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 4 to 6 December 2023   For the first time since Fribourg in June 2017, a conference entirely dedicated to Boiotia took place from December 4th to December 6th at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. The school was (briefly) the main hub of activity for Boiotian studies in the world. Accounting for this statement was not just the impressive programme of speakers but also a very high attendance online – according to the organisers 7,000 people, including the author of this report. The event started with a wonderful exploration of the fortress at Gla and its possible place within the Mycenaean Palatial system around Lake Kopais by Elena Kontouri. She explored how the fortress was a possibly a key hub for regulating the lake’s draining. From these deepest roots of Boiotian history, the next day was brought to life by Dimitra Oikonomou’s presentation of the place of tripods in Boiotian sanctuaries. This included Apolline stops at the Ismenion in Thebes and the Ptoion at Akraiphnia, investigated the vexing inventory lists for the Heraion found at Chorsiai and treated the seventh-century stone tripods at Plataia. In addition, tripods from Thespiai and Orchomenos were treated as well. It provided a perfect and succinct preview of the religious sites that would return in several other papers. The next paper by Nikos Gkiokas focused on a phenomological approach to the Ptoion sanctuary and its plethora of kouroi, and how this would have impacted the human experience at the site. Concluding the section on dedicatory practices was Maria Mili’s paper on the variations in dedicatory practices in Boiotia and Thessaly, especially regarding childbirth. Whereas in Boiotia the role of the mother was possibly suppressed to emphasise the family, in Thessaly the mother took centre stage in dedications thanking the gods for fertility and new additions to the family. The next section explored local cults through time. The section was rich in tracing the primordial roots of cults and their development until the Classical and beyond, when evidence is more readily available. Alice Solazzo provides an intriguing start by tracing Poseidon’s role as a safekeeper of amphictyonies and his role as a federal god in Boiotia prior to Onchestos becoming the federal hub in the post-Chaironeia period. In doing so, she traced local mythologies across the region and their connection to Poseidon to reveal that the god was already perceived as belonging to all the Boiotians in the archaic and classical period, thus making the choice for the Onchestos sanctuary as the federal sanctuary a logical one. Following Solazzo’s investigation was the paper by Eleni Goula, in which she revealed the long-standing traditions regarding (Athena) Tritogeneia in Boiotia – with roots in the Mycenaean period – and argued that it was this cult that eventually developed into Athena Ithonia at Alalkomenai. The section concluded with a piece on the cult of Dionysos in Boiotia and an ethnographical exploration of his continuing legacy among the Vlachs in the region. From these journeys through time – interrupted by a brief break – the subsequent investigations were firmly entrenched in the ground and space by analysing the development of sacred landscapes in the region. A wonderful expose by Vasilis Aravantinos and Kyriaki Kalliga demonstrated the development of the Herakleion in Thebes. Recent excavations revealed early

Megarian Local Adjudication: The Case of the Border Dispute between Epidauros and Corinth in 242-240 BCE (IG IV2.I.70 and 71)

Over the last quarter century, the study of interstate arbitration and the use of foreign judges to adjudicate disputes between city-states has been rejuvenated. This article re-examines the well-known Megarian adjudication of the border dispute between Epidauros and Corinth by the Achaean League in the 3rd century BCE, with a view to determining the reason for the Achaeans’ choice of Megara as judge and, more importantly, the acceptance of this decision by Corinth, given the less than friendly history between these two city-states