100 Interesting facts about the Hellenistic World

37. Athens failed to support Aigis III of Sparta in his abortive revolt of 330, but with the death of Alexander, the Athenians, prompted by the great orator Demosthenes, now rose in rebellion, in what was dubbed the Lamian War. The Athenians ran into trouble, as despite having a free male citizen population of 50,000, classical Athens could only field roughly 5000 hoplites, men wealthy enough to arm and equip themselves. To open recruitment to the poorer classes, Athens began to issue out equipment for the first time, and minted chits featuring pictures of swords, spears and armor as a form a receipt. The Athenians managed to give Antipater a rough time, beseiging him in the town of Lamia, from which the war takes its name. However, the tide turned when the Macedonian lieutenant Craterus returned from the east with approximately 10,000 veterans, to crush the revolt and end the war. The result was a Macedonian garrison in the Pireaus, one of the "fetters of Greece."

Edited by dexippus - 01-Dec-2007 at 23:59

That I appreciate, but that still doesn't change the fact that the key defining point of the Hellenistic era is the spread of world Hellenism - for this purpose, the Hellenistic period can only really be said to have begun when this begins to be fulfilled. In that respect, all of our three dates concide except for Choerona, because for decades afterwards, Greek culture was still only confined to the Medditeranian basin and not beyond. Although, Dexippus, your point does lie very much on the crossover point between this idea behind Hellenism. To disagree with it would be pedantic, because it was only a few decades later that the key principle of Hellenism began to be fulfilled. I think that all of our three dates are defensive and have a great deal of points behind them, but I might consider re-evalutating mine because of the many other successor wars that occured before the battle of Ipsus. Also, I've always wanted to write a book...

Edited by Aster Thrax Eupator - 01-Dec-2007 at 18:43

Dexippus, may I remind you the thread in this forum entitled "Hellenistic history - why viewed as obscure" where you together with several forumers contributed in a discussion about a relative lack of interest on Hellenistic rulers, from which Alexander is obviously an exception. This thread was an answer to that one.

However I'd understand much better Aster's point (301 BC marks the practical beginning of the Hellenistic states). The Hellenistic world is bound to these Hellenistic states and Alexander's empire hardly was, especially in its early years. Echoes you'll find everywhere, almost no process in history started overnight. But here we do not discuss such naive visions, but operative taxonomies. I have not encountered any book on Hellenism putting 338 BC as a start. I've encountered few starting their discussion with the reign of Alexander and some more starting with the death of Alexander. Let me give you examples from the latter category:

In Erskine's "Companion to the Hellenistic world":

Part I, Chapter 2 signed by David Braund is entitled "After Alexander: the Emergence of the Hellenistic World, 323-281". Let me quote a bit from it:
"These years show first the consequences of the great imperalist adventure in a a world which, from a Greek perspective at least had now expanded massively. [...] Moreover, it is in these years that monarchy re-emerges as the dominant form in Greek history, after a marked hiatus, with its roots both in Macedonian and local practices. The Hellenstic world which Alexander had instigated was to be a world with great cities - including his own foundations - but it was above all to be a world of kings. Perhaps most exciting and yet most elusive is the rich cultural mix that developed (and not without controversy) in the aftermath of Alexander."

The prestigious Cambridge Ancient History series compiled its volume on Hellenism (VII.1) starting with Alexander's death (however it traces Hellenistic kingdoms only to 217 BC, their last years being included in their volumes on Rome). The second chapter, "The succcession to Alexander" by Edouard Will starts with 323 BC. The chronological table which closes the volume starts again with 323 BC.

 

The "Hellenistic world" is of course the creation of 19th century German scholars, and as such has no definative start--naturally people didn't just wake up one day to discover they were Hellenistic, and not classical Greeks. For me, Hellenistic history should perhaps begin with the Battle of Chaironeia in 338 BC. With the hegemony of Macedon established, we have left the Greek world dominated politically and militarily by the Greek city-states, and entered a world where larger political entities, kingdoms, empires and leagues, will rule (although the polis itself continued as a thriving civic entity). It is true that many histories of the Hellenistic era begin upon Alexander's death, but the era of Alexander contained many of the themes that would echo throughout Hellenistic history: relations between empire and polis, Hellenization of non-Greek populations, royal and dynastic intrigues, city foundations and the opening of a wider world beyond the provincial collection of poleis huddled around the eastern Mediterranean.

36. Alexander the Great, in one of history's greatest acts of vandalism, set fire to the palace complex at Persepolis follwing a night of carousing. However, this act may not have simply been the product of royal mischief. The burning of the temple occured during a looming Spartan revolt, with the real fear that Athens would join in. A coalition of the two most powerful city states would have caused a major crisis for Alexander's regent Antipater. By burning Perseplois, Alexander sent a message of friendship and solidarity to Athens, with what was presented as the just retaliation for the sack of Athens by Xerxes in 480. Alexander also returned statues and artwork that had been looted from Athens. This gesture had its effect: Athens did not revolt, and the Spartan uprising was handily surpressed.

34. The primary formation of Hellenistic warfare was the Macedonian Phylanx of Phillip II and Alexander, a mass of heavy infantry, armed with 14-20 foot pikes, moving in close formation, a nightmare bristle of iron. Liberally supported by cavalry, elephants and light troops, it dominated ancient warfare for over a century. However, the stunning victory of the looser, more flexible Roman legions at Cynocephalae and Pydna led the Seleucid empire to reform its army along Roman lines, most notably Antiochus IV, who re-armed several large contingents of his polyglot army in the Roman fashion. 

33. During a seige of Athens, the philosopher Epicurus rationed beans to his disciples to prevent them from starving to death. Epicurus taught that the purpose of life was to maximize pleasure and reduce pain, believing in gods that were distant and indifferent to human behavior. Despite this, Epicurus was no craven hedonist. He practiced sexual restraint and lived on a meager diet of bread and water. "Pleasure" for him consisted largely of the warmth of friendship and the joy of intellectual discourse. Despite this, future Epicurians would gain the reputation as voluptuaries.

Edited by dexippus - 27-Nov-2007 at 16:49

Originally posted by Aster Thrax Eupator Quite...if it wasn't for those ingenius and enlightened Arab dynasties such as the Abbasids and Ayyubids, we wouldn't have many of the classical texts which we have today.

30. The library of Alexandria, at its height, had roughly 500,000 volumes.

29. The establishment of the Library of Alexandria,the plans and place of which Alexander himself might have approved - completed later by the Ptolemies with the help of Demetrius of Phalerum - made it possible to study the Greek classical writers. Despite the great fire thousands of volumes were recued, later trnslated by the Arabs, disseminated through the Iberian peninsula and thence to the whole of Europe.

Edited by akritas - 25-Nov-2007 at 22:33