A N T I OC Η Ο S I I I A N D T H E C I T I E S

OF W E S T E R N ASIA M I N O R
Antiochos I I I and the Cities
of Western Asia Minor

J O H N MA

OXFORD
U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS
 OXFORD
U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS
G r e a t C l a r e n d o n S t r e e t , O x f o r d 0X2 6DP
O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s is a d e p a r t m e n t o f the U n i v e r s i t y of O x f o r d .
It f u r t h e r s the U n i v e r s i t y ' s o b j e c t i v e o f e x c e l l e n c e in r e s e a r c h , s c h o l a r s h i p ,
and e d u c a t i o n b y p u b l i s h i n g w o r l d w i d e in
Oxford New York
Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogota Buenos Aires Calcutta
Cape T o w n C h e n n a i D a r es S a l a a m D e l h i F l o r e n c e H o n g K o n g Istanbul
Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai
Nairobi Paris Säo Paulo Singapore Taipei T o k y o T o r o n t o Warsaw
a n d a s s o c i a t e d c o m p a n i e s in B e r l i n Ibadan

O x f o r d is a r e g i s t e r e d trade m a r k o f O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s
in the U K a n d in certain o t h e r c o u n t r i e s

P u b l i s h e d in the U n i t e d S t a t e s
by O x f o r d University Press Inc., N e w Y o r k

© J o h n M a 1999
T h e m o r a l r i g h t s of the a u t h o r h a v e b e e n a s s e r t e d
D a t a b a s e right o f O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ( m a k e r )
F i r s t p u b l i s h e d 1999

A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t of this p u b l i c a t i o n m a y be r e p r o d u c e d ,
s t o r e d in a retrieval s y s t e m , or t r a n s m i t t e d , in a n y f o r m or b y a n y m e a n s ,
w i t h o u t the p r i o r p e r m i s s i o n in w r i t i n g of O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,
or as e x p r e s s l y p e r m i t t e d b y l a w , or u n d e r t e r m s a g r e e d w i t h the a p p r o p r i a t e
reprographics rights organizations. Enquiries concerning reproduction
o u t s i d e the s c o p e of the a b o v e s h o u l d be s e n t to the R i g h t s D e p a r t m e n t ,
O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , at the a d d r e s s a b o v e

Y o u m u s t not c i r c u l a t e t h i s b o o k in a n y o t h e r b i n d i n g or c o v e r
a n d y o u m u s t i m p o s e this s a m e c o n d i t i o n on a n y a c q u i r e r

B r i t i s h L i b r a r y C a t a l o g u i n g in P u b l i c a t i o n D a t a
D a t a available
L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s s C a t a l o g i n g in P u b l i c a t i o n D a t a
M a , John.
A n t i o c h o s I I I a n d the cities o f W e s t e r n A s i a M i n o r / J o h n M a .
p. cm.
I n c l u d e s b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l r e f e r e n c e s (p. ).
I S B N 0-19-815219-1 hb
ι . C i t i e s and t o w n s , A n c i e n t — T u r k e y . 2. Greeks—Turkey—History-
- T o 1500. 3. A n t i o c h o s I I I , K i n g o f S y r i a , ca. 2 4 2 - 1 8 7 B . C .
4. S y r i a — H i s t o r y — 3 5 5 B . C . - 2 8 4 A . D . I. Title.
DS155.M293 1999
939'.2—dc2i 99-23236
ISBN0-19-815219-1
13579 10 8 6 4 2

Typeset by Regent Typesetting, London

P r i n t e d in G r e a t B r i t a i n on a c i d - f r e e p a p e r b y
Biddies L t d . , G u i l d f o r d and K i n g ' s L y n n
 PREFACE

T h i s work (the revised and expanded version of a D . P h i l , thesis) is

not a biography of A n t i o c h o s I I I and does not cover all of this
interesting figure's reign. Rather, it concentrates on a particular
region, Asia M i n o r , and on a particular theme, the relation between
the Hellenistic empire and its structures of control and exploitation,
and the Hellenistic polis. Both aspects can be studied thanks to a
b o d y of epigraphical material; for convenience, the relevant inscrip-
tions are reproduced and translated in a separate annexe to the main
text, where these inscriptions are referred to by their n u m b e r in the
annexe (in the form 'document 4, 1', meaning no. 4 in the dossier at
line 1). T o treat the theme through this particular test-case, I drew
on a n u m b e r of historiographical approaches in Hellenistic studies:
political narrative, analysis of power structures, and, to m y mind the
most exciting development, close attention to language, rhetoric,
and self-presentation. T h e issues surrounding presentation
(analytical essay rather than biography) and sources (principally the
epigraphy of the Hellenistic kings and that of the Hellenistic poleis)
are explored in the introduction and (indirectly) the conclusion,
where I try to j u s t i f y m y historiographical choices. I attempted to
make the material and its treatment accessible to Classicists and
historians w h o were not specialists of the third century BC. M o r e
specifically, in its present form, the work is addressed to two c o m -
munities within Classics: epigraphist-historians of the Hellenistic
period (in the hope of showing that a little bit of theory or at least
an attempt at conceptual and abstract approaches to the material
cannot harm), but also interpreters of texts (in the hope of drawing
attention to material w h i c h is gripping in its details and its direct-
ness, 'good to read' and underexploited). W h e t h e r I will have
succeeded in reaching any of these audiences is not for me to say.
D u r i n g the elaboration of the work, I incurred many debts: it is a
pleasure to list some of them, with expressions of m y thanks and m y
gratitude, w h i c h of course do not imply agreement, or responsibility
for remaining mistakes in content.
First, I take great pleasure in thanking some of m y teachers. T o
m y supervisor, F. Millar, I owe thanks for guidance during and
beyond the conception and the writing of the thesis, and for
encouragement throughout the process. A n u m b e r of methodologi-
cal traits were developed under his advice: attention to detail
and concrete processes, coupled w i t h awareness of the very real,
'performative', force of language as preserved in our documents,
written both in 'king-speak' and in 'city-speak' (the association of
the two approaches is paradoxical only in appearance). A t least,
these were the most basic principles I attempted to follow in the
present work. I am also glad to thank S. H o r n b l o w e r , m y college
academic adviser, for c o m m e n t and criticism on every chapter and
assistance at every stage; in addition, as m y undergraduate tutor, he
first introduced me to the work of L . Robert and urged me to
conduct research on the G r e e k East. N . Purcell also was m y college
academic adviser for a term, and taught me how to bear geography
and resources in mind w h e n writing political history (and even
non-political history). Furthermore, I wish to thank J. O b e r for
showing, both in his written work and in discussion, that it was
possible to conceive of analyses w h i c h w o u l d take into account both
the realities of power and the importance of language in shaping
these realities. O n another front, I have been very fortunate to learn
something about epigraphy and Hellenistic history, in more or less
formal ways, f r o m the scholarship and the standards of three
historians: Ph. Gauthier (who assisted me in crucial ways at the
beginning of the thesis, and whose seminar I was lucky to attend
for a few weeks); C h r . Habicht (who gave a lecture course and a
graduate seminar I attended in H a m b u r g in 1995, and read the
thesis at various stages); P. H e r r m a n n (who helped me very greatly
early on, and w h o kindly advised me often and on many matters
during the writing of the thesis). T h e y m a y not always approve of
what I say in this work or of the ways I say it, but I could not have
said it without having learnt very m u c h f r o m them, and I am deeply
grateful for their teaching and their advice. Finally, I w o u l d like to
thank P. D e r o w and M . A u s t i n , the examiners of m y thesis, for
many considerate and helpful c o m m e n t s on substance and on style;
and the anonymous committee w h i c h saw fit to award the thesis the
C o n i n g t o n Prize for 1997.

Likewise, it is a pleasure to acknowledge m y great debt to the

following, for assistance, advice, criticism, or simply discussion:
A . Bertrand, W . Blümel, G . Bowersock, A . Chaniotis, C . C r o w t h e r
(especially for his help with the epigraphical dossier), P. D e r o w , Ph.
Gauthier, C h r . H a b i c h t , K l . Hallof, D . H e i m a n n , P. H e r r m a n n , L .
H o l f o r d - S t r e v e n s , R. L a n e F o x , J. L i g h t f o o t (for reading through
an earlier version of this text), H . M a l a y and his assistant C .
T a n r i v e r , A . M e a d o w s (for discussing written work, sharing ideas,
and helping me on the Ptolemaic side of things), S. Price,
N . Purcell, G . Rehrenböck, G . Rogers, M . Sayar, Ε. Vassilika and
P. W i l s o n at the Fitzwilliam M u s e u m (for help with the Ilion
decree, OGIS 219, or rather the physical object itself, the m o n u -
mental text qua carved stone). Individual remarks in the text make
clear the magnitude of m y debt.
Finally, to A l l Souls C o l l e g e I o w e thanks for material support
and help with travel abroad, to look at inscriptions, sites, and
landscapes of Asia M i n o r in S e p t e m b e r 1995 and A p r i l 1997; and to
H . O ' S h e a and G . G o d w i n at O U P for the making of this book.
J.M.
September igg8
All Souls College and Princeton
 C O N T E N T S

List of Documents in Epigraphical Dossier xi

Abbreviations xiv
Maps xviii
Introduction: T h e Great K i n g and the Cities ι
Chapter i. T h e Seleukid Past in Asia M i n o r (281-223 BC) 26
ι . In all the L a n d beyond the T a u r u s , Just as under our
Grandfather 26
2. Seleukid Asia M i n o r 33
3. A Seleukid Past? 39
4. Seleukid Collapse in Anatolia 43
5. P. Sulpicius G a l b a ' s History L e s s o n 50

C h a p t e r 2. T h e Reconquest of Asia M i n o r : A Narrative

(226-192 BC) 53
ι . A c h a i o s (223-213 BC) 54
2. A f t e r the Expedition to the U p p e r Regions (204-202 BC) 63
3. Philip V , the Rhodians, Attalos I, and the R o m a n s
(201-200 BC) 74
4. C o n s t r u c t i n g a Seleukid Space ( 1 9 7 - 1 9 2 BC) 82
5. C o n t e s t i n g the Seleukid Space ( 1 9 7 - 1 9 2 BC) 94
6. Beyond Narrative 102
C h a p t e r 3. Empire as Structures 106
ι. C o n q u e s t and Control 108
2. Officials and Administration 122
3. C i t y Statuses: T h e T y p o l o g y of Subordination 150
4. B e y o n d Structures 174
C h a p t e r 4. Empire as Interaction 179
ι. T h e L a n g u a g e of Euergetism 182
2. T a l k i n g to: Instrumental Functions 194
3. L o c a l M e a n i n g s and the Self-Identity of the Polis 214
4. T h e Successes of Royal Discourse 228
5. Conclusion: L a n g u a g e and P o w e r in the Hellenistic A g e 235
Conclusion, Epilogue, Envoi: 'Once there was a K i n g ,
A n t i o c h o s the Great . . .' 243
Appendices 254
ι. T h e D a t e of OGIS 219 254
2. T h e D a t e of the D o c u m e n t s f r o m T e o s 260
3. Dubia 266
4. ΜΙγas and βασι,λβνς μίγας 272
5· Stratonikeia 277
6. A n Invasion of the Attalid k i n g d o m in 198 BC? 279
7. T h e Settlement of 188 BC 282
Epigraphical Dossier 284
Bibliography 373
Index of Primary Sources 393
General index 396
 L I S T O F D O C U M E N T S

I. 2 1 6 - 2 0 9 BC

ι . Letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the Sardians ( M a r c h 213) 284

2. Decree of the Sardians, Letter of Laodike I I I and
A n t i o c h o s I I I (June 213) 285
3. Letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the Sardians ( S u m m e r 213) 287
4. Dossier C o n c e r n i n g the H i g h - P r i e s t h o o d of Nikanor:
Correspondence of Philotas to Bithys, Z e u x i s to
Philotas, A n t i o c h o s III to Z e u x i s (209) 288

I I . 2 0 3 - 2 0 1 BC

5. Letter of Z e u x i s to the A m y z o n i a n s ( M a y 203) 292

6. Letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the A r m y (203) 294
7. Dedication of Z e u x i s at A m y z o n (203) 295
8. T w o D o c u m e n t s Pertaining to the asylia of the
Artemision at A m y z o n (203 or later) 296
9. Decree of the A m y z o n i a n s for Chionis, the G o v e r n o r
of A l i n d a ( O c t o b e r - N o v e m b e r 202) 297
10. Decree of the A m y z o n i a n s for Menestratos of Phokaia, the
epistates of the Artemision ( N o v e m b e r — D e c e m b e r 201) 298
χ ι. D e c r e e of the A m y z o n i a n s for N i k o m e d e s (c.200?) 300
12. D e c r e e of the A m y z o n i a n s for a Royal Official (c.200?) 301
13. Decree of the A m y z o n i a n s for Soldiers and their Officer
(c.200?) 302
14. D e c r e e of the A m y z o n i a n s for I Iermias (c.200?) 303
15. Letter of Z e u x i s (?) to the A r m y at L a b r a u n d a (203) 304
16. A m p h i k t i o n i c Decree for the asylia of
Antiocheia/Alabanda (201) 305
17. First D e c r e e of the T e i a n s for A n t i o c h o s I I I and
Laodike I I I (probably 203) 308
18. Second Decree of the T e i a n s for A n t i o c h o s I I I and
Laodike III (probably 203) 311
19. Royal Correspondence A d d r e s s e d to the T e i a n s
(between 203 and 190) 317
 I I I . 1 9 7 - 1 9 0 BC

20. Dedication at Aigeai by T h e m i s o n , ' N e p h e w of the K i n g ' ,

for A n t i o c h o s I I I , A n t i o c h o s the Son, Laodike I I I , and
the Royal C h i l d r e n (probably 197) 321
Dedication at Soloi by Ptolemais, Son of Thraseas, to
H e r m e s , Herakles, and A n t i o c h o s I I I (probably 197) 321
Inscription Recording the Consecration of X a n t h o s by
A n t i o c h o s I I I (197) 323
Decree of the Xanthians for T h e m i s t o k l e s Son of
Aischylos, an Ilian Rhetor (196) 324
Decree of the Xanthian neoi. for L y s o n (August 196) 325
Letter of Z e u x i s to Kildarians (probably 197) 327
L e t t e r of Laodike I I I to Iasians, Decree of the Iasians for
Laodike (c. 196) 329
Decree of Iasian T r i b e C o n c e r n i n g Rituals for
A n t i o c h o s I I I and his F a m i l y (c. 196) 335
Decree of the Iasians in H o n o u r of A n t i o c h o s I I I
and his Family (c. 196) 336
A g r e e m e n t between Z e u x i s and the Philippeis/Euromians
C o n c e r n i n g their Alliance with A n t i o c h o s I I I
( A u g u s t / S e p t e m b e r 197) 338
Decree of the E u r o m i a n s on Constitutional Matters
(after 197) 339
Letters of A n t i o c h o s I I I and Z e u x i s to the Herakleians
(between 196 and 193) 340
Decree of the citizens of Laodikeia on L y k o s for Foreign
Judges f r o m Priene (between 196 and 190) 345
Decree of the Prienians for A m e i n i a s (between 197
and 190) 348
Letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I (?) to Ilion (Winter 197/6 or
S p r i n g 196?) 350
Alliance between A n t i o c h o s III and Perinthos (196?) 351
L e t t e r of a Royal Official (?) C o n c e r n i n g an Indeterminate
C i t y (between 209 and 193, probably c.197) 352
Royal Enactment C o n c e r n i n g the State C u l t for Laodike
( F e b r u a r y / M a r c h to M a y 193) 354
Letter of M . Valerius Messalla, the T r i b u n e s , and the
Senate of R o m e to the T e i a n s (193) 356
 IV. DATE UNDETERMINED, BUT C E R T A I N L Y UNDER
ANTIOCHOS III

39. E x - v o t o Erected at G o r d o s for the Safety of A p o l l o p h a n e s ,

Physician of A n t i o c h o s I I I 358
40. Honorific D e c r e e of the Sardians (between 209 and 193) 359
4 1 . Royal D o c u m e n t s f r o m Sardeis ( 2 1 3 - 1 9 0 ) 360
42. Statue Base of A n t i o c h o s I I I , Erected at K l a r o s
(between 197 and 193) 362
43. Letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the Nysaians 363
44. Decree of the Citizens of Apollonia under Salbake
H o n o u r i n g the Seleukid H i p p a r c h , Philo . . .
(between 213 and 190) 364

IV. AFTERMATH

45. Letter of the Scipios to the Herakleians (late 190) 366

46. Letter of the Scipios to the K o l o p h o n i a n s (189) 368
47. D e c r e e of the A m y z o n i a n s for D i o n y s i o s (after 188) 369
48. Decree of the Citizens of Apollonia under Salbake for
Pamphilos (after 188) 369
49. Attalid Dossier C o n c e r n i n g the L i s t of mystai of A p o l l o
Pleurenos (after 188) 371
 A B B R E V I A T I O N S

INSCRIPTIONS

A l l a b b r e v i a t i o n s of the f o r m I. Iasos (to be e x p a n d e d into Die

Inschriften von Iasos) refer to v o l u m e s in the series Inschriften
griechischer Städte aus Kleinasten (IK), B o n n , 1 9 7 2 - . O t h e r a b b r e -
viations, starting e.g. w i t h Inschr. are earlier publications, w h i c h do
not b e l o n g to the IK series.

I. Alexandreia (IK 43). Die Inschriften von Alexandreia Troas. Ricl,

Troas M. (1997).
I. Erythrai (IK 1) Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai.
Engelmann, H., Merkelbach, R. 2 vols. (1972, 1973).
I. Iasos (IK 28.1-28.2) Die Inschriften von Iasos. Bliimel, W.
2 vols. (1985).
I. I lion (IK 3) Die Inschriften von Ilion. Frisch, P. (1975)·
I. Laodikeia am (IK 49) Die Inschriften von Laodikeia am Lykos.
Lykos Corsten, T h . Teil 1: Die Inschriften (1997).
1. Mylasa (IK 34-5) Die Inschriften von Mylasa. Blümel, W . 2
vols. (1987, 1988).
I. Stratonikeia (IK 21, 22.1, 22.2) Die Inschriften von Stratonikeia.
§ahin, M . Ç. 3 vols. (1981, 1982, 1990).
I. Tralleis (IK 36.1) Die Inschriften von Tralleis. Poljakov, F.
B. vol. ι (1989).
Inschr. Asklepieion Habicht, Chr., Die Inschriften des Asklepieions
(Altertümer von Pergamon 8.3), Berlin, 1969.
Iscr. Cos Segre, M., Iscrizioni di Cos (Monografie della Scuola
archeologica di Atene et delle missioni italiane in
Oriente 6), 2 vols., Rome, 1993.
Iscr. Cret. Guarducci, M., Inscriptiones Creticae, 4 vols., Rome,
1935-50·
Inschr. Delphinion Rehm, Α., in G. Kawerau and A. Rehm, Das
Delphinion in Milet (Milet. Ergebnisse der
Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre
1899, ed. T h . Wiegand, vol. 1, fasc. 3), Berlin, 1914:
162-442.
Inschr. Didyma Rehm, Α., Didyma II: Die Inschriften, Berlin, 1958.
Inscr. Lindos Blinkenberg, Chr., Lindos. Fouilles de l'acropole
IQ02—IÇI4. II. Inscriptions. 2 vols., Berlin and
 Copenhagen, 1941.
Inschr. Magnesia Kern, O., Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Mäander,
Berlin, 1900.
Inschr. Pergamon Frankel, M. (with Ε. Fabricius and C.
Schuchhardt), Die Inschriften von Pergamon
(Altertümer von Pergamon 8), 2 vols., Berlin, 1890,
1895.
Inschr. Priene Hiller von Gaertringen, F., Die Inschriften von
Priene, Berlin, 1906.

BE Bulletin Epigraphique (referred to by year and rubric

number).
CIG Böckh, Α., Franz, J., Curtius, E., and Kirchhoff, A.
(eds.), Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, 4 vols.,
Berlin, 1828-77.
FD 3 Colin, G . , Bourguet, E., Daux, D., and Salaç, A.
(eds.), Fouilles de Delphes 3. Epigraphie, Paris,
1929- .
GUI T o d , M. N., A Selection of Greek Historical
Inscriptions, vol. 2., Oxford, 1948.
GIBM Newton, C., Hicks, E. L·., Hirschfeld, G . , and
Marshall, F. M., The Collection of Ancient Greek
Inscriptions in the British Museum, 4 vols., Oxford,
1874-1916.
G VI Peek, W., Grieschische Vers-Inschriften, Berlin, 1955.
ISE Moretti, L., Iscrizioni storiche ellenistiche, 2 vols.,
Florence, 1967—75.
LEW L e Bas, Ph., and Waddington, W . - H . , Voyage
archéologique en Grèce et en Asie Mineure, 3 vols.,
Paris, 1851-70.
ML Meiggs, R., and Lewis, D., A Selection of Greek
Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century
BC (rev. edn.), Oxford, 1988.
OGIS Dittenberger, W., Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selec-
tae. Supplementum sylloges inscriptionum Graecarum,
2 vols., Leipzig, 1903-5 (orig.; unchanged reprint,
Hildesheim, i960).
RC Welles, C. B., Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic
Period. A Study in Greek Epigraphy, London, 1934
(orig.; unchanged reprint, Chicago, 1974)·
Sardis Buckler, W . PI., and Robinson, D. M., Sardis V I I .
Greek and Latin inscriptions, Part I, Leyden, 1932.
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum.
Syll. Dittenberger, W., Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum,
4 vols. (3rd edn.), Leipzig, 1915-24 (orig.;
unchanged reprint, Hildesheim i960).
ΤΑΜ Tituli Asiae Minoris, Vienna, 1901- .
Tit. Cal. Segre, M., Tituli Calymnii, Bergamo, 1952.

P A P Y R I AND COINS

PCZ Edgar, C. C. (ed.), Catalogue général des antiquités

égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Zenon Papyri, 4 vols.,
Cairo, 1925—31.
P. Haun. Larsen, T . (ed.), Papyri Graecae Haunienses, vol. 1,
Copenhagen, 1942.
C. Ord Ptol Lenger, M . - T h . , Corpus des ordonnances des
Ptolémées. (2nd edn.), Brussels, 1980.
BMC A Catalog of the Greek Coins in the British Museum,
London,1873- .
WSM Newell, E. T . , The Coinage of the Western Seleucid
Mints from Seleucus I to Antiochos III (American
Numismatic Society. Numismatic Studies 4), New
York, 1941.

PRIMARY LITERATURE

Bosworth, HC A Bosworth, A. B., A Historical Commentary on

Arrian's History of Alexander, 2 vols., Oxford,
1980-95.
F GrHist Jacoby, F. (ed.), Die Fragmente der griechischen
Historiker, Berlin and Leiden, 1923-62.
ORF Malcovati, E. (ed.), Oratorum Romanorum fragmenta
liberae rei publicae (4th edn.) 2 vols., Turin, 1976-9.
Bengtson, H., and Schmitt, H. H., Die
Staatsvertr. Staatsverträge des Altertums, 2 vols., Munich,
1962-9.
Walbank, F. W., A Historical Commentary on
Walbank, HCP Polybius, 3 vols., Oxford, 1957-79·

SECONDARY LITERATURE

CAH Cambridge Ancient History.

Preisigke, Preisigke, F., Wörterbuch der griechischen Papyrus-
Wörterbuch urkunden mit Einschluss der griechischen Inschriften,
Aufschriften, Ostraka, Mumienschilder usw. aus
Aegypten, 3 vols., Berlin, 1925-31.
Robert, OMS Robert, L., Opera Minora Selecta. Epigraphie et
 antiquités grecques, η vols., Amsterdam, 1969-90.
Wilhelm, Wilhelm, Ad., Akademieschriften zur griechischen
Akademieschriften Inschriftenkunde (Opuscula. Sammelausgaben sel-
tener und bisher nicht selbständig erschienener wis-
senschaftlicher Abhandlungen 8), 3 vols., Leipzig,
1974·
ESAR Frank, T . (ed.), An Economic Survey of Ancient
Rome, Baltimore, 1933-40.
MRR Broughton, T . R. S., The Magistrates of the Roman
Republic, 2 vols, and supplement, New York,
1951-60.
Map ι. Anatolia and the Seleukid road from Antioch to the i a n d on the other side of the Taurus'. Achaios took this road on
his unsuccessful attempt on the Seleukid throne in 220; Antiochos II I or his armies travelled on this road in 216, c.203, in 197,
and one last time in winter 190/189, after Magnesia.
 300 Kilometres

Thyateira
.. i .·—[ ,Aigai ' ^ .
-ος- * Gördes
M'yrina· . a Λ·:*- ·Hierak,ome
Kyme. Te/nnosv^ 1 CJ }
w Wùil·
W>J
" · Magnesia Apameia
Phokaia· «Sardeis
ί ,
.tniolos
.Smyrna
•TîSt Kolophon .HieraPo1Ά
Lebedos. ' . Nysa Laodikej · W®.
Notion · 9. Magnesi
Magnesiaa .Tralleis Lauu Acipayait, plein y
Ephesos Tab ai
Amyzon Alinda \Iarsyas Plaie au ·
Priéne X , / —^M ; Apollonia
Jj 'jM y}·}
*" ,. . '_
. . uHerakleia c * **Al
osaban
EuromAla banda ,/J Ta bai
Κ I i
5Pedasa * ·
Stratonikeia r/f/iY^ûm,
'iasos. · ·.; "· pjsye"
Bargylia
"ri»
- \ T. Sinu ri
ta,, •Cy'

M a p 2. L y d i a , Ionia, Karia: the better documented regions of Asia M i n o r . Relevant cities are indicated, as well as mountains,
rivers, and some important regions or plains.
 I N T R O D U C T I O N

T h e Great King and the Cities

H o w to talk about the Hellenistic world? T h e topic is well agreed on

(if not always defined w i t h rigour), the scholarship plentiful, so that
the diversity of this world and of possible approaches can be illus-
trated by some recent (or not so recent) works, without any claim at
comprehensiveness. T h e r e have been synoptic treatments of the
period, textbooks or essays rather than intensive scholarly studies
(the exception still being M . Rostovtzeff's Social and Economic
History of the Hellenistic World)·, other large-scale w o r k s have
examined its political history, and the c o m i n g of Rome. W o r k s have
been devoted to regions or single cities, for instance Athens, the
best-documented case. Individual Hellenistic kings have been
treated in biographies or studies of their foreign policies; another
approach has been to study dynasties or kingdoms (like the Seleukid
realm, w h i c h S. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and A . K u h r t have studied in From
Samarkhand to Sardis, insisting on its Eastern dimension). A m o n g
countless thematic studies, a fertile development is the increasing
n u m b e r of 'dossiers par thème', along a model preconized by L .
Robert: the gathering of all the evidence (predominantly docu-
mentary) for a p h e n o m e n o n , followed by a critical edition and a
commentary. T h i s method allows for the clarification of issues and
focused discussion. M o s t topics handled have been institutional:
asylia (the recognition of a c o m m u n i t y ' s immunity f r o m plunder
and reprisals); international arbitration; treaties between the C r e t a n
poleis; the financial institutions of the Hellenistic city. 1

' T h i s is not the place for a full bibliographical essay (see for instance the recent intro-
duction by P. Cartledge, in Cartledge, Garnsey, and Gruen 1997: 1 - 1 9 ) ; a sense of the
recent research can be gained from the series 'Hellenistic culture and society' brought
out by the University of California Press or the 'Studies in Hellenistic civilization' from
Aarhus University Press. Works alluded or referred to include G r e e n 1990, Walbank
1992, RostovtzefT 1941 (synoptic treatments); Will 1982, G r u e n 1986 (political
histories); Habicht 1997 (Athens); Mehl 1986, Billows 1990, Grainger 1990, L u n d 1992,
Franco 1993, L e Bohec 1993 (biographies); Schmitt 1964, Huss 1976 (foreign policies of
individual kings); S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993 (Seleukids). Documentary-dossiers-
cum-studies: Rigsby 1996, Ager 1996, Chaniotis 1996, Migeotte 1984 and 1992.
 T h e present s t u d y superficially r e s e m b l e s the latter class, in that
it gathers in an annexe a dossier of epigraphical d o c u m e n t s , edited
and briefly c o m m e n t e d . B u t the f o c u s is not quite a single, n a r r o w l y
defined t h e m e ; rather, its origins lie in a p a g e of L i v y ( 3 3 . 3 8 . 1 - 7 ) ,
r e p r o d u c i n g the language and c o n c e p t s of his source P o l y b i o s , 2 the
great historian of the Hellenistic w o r l d . T h e passage d e s c r i b e s a
m o m e n t w h i c h is v i v i d , c o m p l e x , and i m m e n s e l y evocative for the
m o d e r n scholar of this period. T h r o u g h the actors and the relations
it portrays, it e m b o d i e s cardinal t h e m e s or areas of interest, w h i c h
m a k e it a m e a n i n g f u l topic, b e y o n d its i m m e d i a t e political and
c h r o n o l o g i c a l context (the c a m p a i g n of c o n q u e s t , or, f r o m the
S e l e u k i d v i e w p o i n t , r e c o n q u e s t , u n d e r t a k e n b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in
197 and 196). 3

Eodem anno Antiochus rex, cum hibernasset Ephesi, omnes Asiae civitates
in antiquam imperii formulam redigere est conatus. Et ceteras quidem, aut
quia locis planis positae erant aut quia parum moenibus armisque ac
iuventuti fidebant, haud difficulter videbat iugum accepturas; Zmyrna et
Lampsacus libertatem usurpabant, periculumque erat ne, si concessum iis
foret quod intenderent, Zmyrnam in Aeolide Ioniaque, Lampsacum in
Hellesponto aliae urbes sequerentur. Igitur et ipse ab Epheso ad Zmyrnam
obsidendam misit et quae Abydi copiae erant praesidio tantum modico
relicto duci ad Lampsacum oppugnandam iussit. Nec vi tantum terrebat,
sed per legatos leniter adloquendo castigandoque temeritatem ac pertina-
ciam spem conabantur facere, brevi quod peterent habituros, sed cum satis
et ipsis et omnibus aliis appareret, ab rege impetratam eos libertatem, non
per occasionem raptam habere. Adversus quae respondebantur, nihil
neque mirari neque suscensere Antiochum debere, si spem libertatis
diferri non satis aequo animo paterentur.
In the same year, King Antiochos, after wintering at Ephesos, attempted
to reduce all the cities of Asia into the ancient structure of sovereignty.
And he saw that the others, because they were located on open sites, or did
not readily trust their walls, their arms, and their men, would accept the
yoke without difficulty; but Smyrna and Lampsakos were claiming their
freedom, and there was a danger that if they got away with what they
wanted, other cities would follow the example of Smyrna in Aiolis and
Ionia, of Lampsakos in the Hellespont. Therefore, he sent troops from
Ephesos to besiege Smyrna, and ordered the troops at Abydos to be led out
to besiege Lampsakos, after leaving only a small garrison. Nor did he only
try to frighten them with force, but, by addressing them gently through
ambassadors and by reproaching them for their rashness and their
stubbornness, he also tried to create the hope that they would soon have
what they sought, but only when it was sufficiently clear both to them and
2 For parallels, see Pol. 5.62.6: cities resisting or not resisting Antiochos III in Koile-

Syria, depending on their strength; also 5.66.6; 5.77.3; 7.15.2; 35.3.9.

5 O n date (winter 197/6 rather than spring 196), C h . 2 § 4.
to all the others that they had obtained their liberty from the king, and did
not enjoy it as the result of grasping at opportunity. T o these words, their
answer was that Antiochos should be in no way surprised nor angry, if they
did not suffer with an even spirit the prospect that their hope of liberty be
deferred.

T h e passage gives us the perspective of one of the central figures in

Hellenistic history: a king, in that age of kings, presented as he
levels an imperialist gaze on future subjects. Y e t all the elements
involved immediately call for further commentary. In the first
place, it is important not to adopt the same generalizing perspective
as Antiochos, simply to speak of omnes civi.tat.es Asiae as if that bald
expression, evoking the map of royal strategic interests, could sub-
stitute for historical analysis. 'All the cities of Asia M i n o r ' : the first
topic that the L i v i a n passage introduces is the landscape itself, in
danger of being forgotten because of its very ubiquity in the plot
w h i c h it helps to shape. 4 Significant facts about this region are its
magnitude, its lushness and variety, and the way in w h i c h size,
resources, and diversity collaborate even nowadays to create a very
large n u m b e r and range of environments for human habitation,
such as great harbour towns, impressive agricultural cities in the
river plains, scattered villages in the highlands w h i c h are such a
noticeable feature even in the Western part of the country. T h e
same features characterized this region in ancient times, and
explains the profusion of ancient communities in Asia M i n o r .
'All the cities of A s i a ' — t h e expression regroups communities of
widely differing sizes: at one end of the scale, large, ancient, wealthy
cities like Miletos or Mylasa, with their great territories and their
expansionist urge to annex their neighbours; and at the other end of
the scale, smaller, remote communities, like the Aiolian cities of
A i g a i and its neighbour T e m n o s , or recently discovered Piginda in
the M o r s y n o s valley. 5 A n o t h e r way of looking at the diversity of this
world is to examine the origins of the communities. 'All the cities':
the phrase immediately evokes the old G r e e k cities—to name the
most prominent, L a m p s a k o s , Ilion, Phokaia, S m y r n a , Erythrai,
T e o s , K o l o p h o n (in reality two communities, O l d K o l o p h o n and
N o t i o n , living as a single polis), Ephesos, Magnesia on Maeander,

1 For a sense of Asia Minor as landscape, physical and human, and the history that

took place there, see Magie 1950: chs. 1 - 5 and 11, the more striking a feat of historical
writing for the fact that Magie apparently never went to T u r k e y . T h e work also covers
most of the cities, with a very full and still useful roster of references.
5 O n Aigai and T e m n o s , Robert 1937: 7 4 - 1 1 0 . Piginda is mentioned provisionally

by F. Olmez, Arkeoloji Dergisi 3 (1995), 165-6, editing an inscription from the site,
mentioning Zeus Pigindenos: this document substantiates a notation of Steph. Byz. s.v.
Piginda.
Priene, Miletos, Iasos, Halikarnassos. But the category must also be
extended to include the communities w h i c h had adopted G r e e k
political forms (decision-making assembly, council, magistrates)
along with the language: in the third century, they considered them-
selves, and, as far as we can tell, were considered by others aspoleis. 6
S u c h communities include Sardeis in L y d i a ; in western Karia,
Mylasa, Herakleia under L a t m o s , E u r o m o s , Pedasa, Bargylia,
K a u n o s ; in Eastern Karia, the hilltop fortress of T a b a i ; in L y k i a ,
X a n t h o s , L i m y r a , A r y k a n d a ; also smaller communities such as
Kildara or A m y z o n , hill communities of western Karia (like
Piginda, mentioned above). A n o t h e r category yet is that of the
communities founded or renamed by the kings ( C o h e n 1995): mili-
tary settlements such as T h y a t e i r a in L y d i a , great cities such as
Stratonikeia in western Karia or A p a m e i a in Phrygia, humbler
affairs such as Apollonia under Salbake on the east Karian plateau
near T a b a i . Finally, this profusion of poleis, each with its o w n
particular physical setting and identity, should not obscure other
forms of settlement in Asia M i n o r , beyond the cities: the villages
(two of w h i c h , K i d d i o u k o m e and Neonteichos in Phrygia, produced
a remarkable joint decree honouring the agents of their landlord),
the 'royal land' and the estates of the royal favourites, and, most
importantly, the great shrines (the best documented of w h i c h is the
Karian shrine of L a b r a u n d a , on a pass north of M y l a s a ) . '
T h e L i v i a n passage quoted earlier concerns a historical landscape
w h i c h is fascinating because of its diversity, but also because of
the richness of the documentation, mainly epigraphical, w h i c h is
already very large and increases yearly (see below). In addition,
m u c h of this material has been treated by the peculiarly concrete
and appealing genius of the epigraphist-historian, L o u i s Robert,
whose lifetime's work focused on Asia M i n o r and explored its
historical geography. For the purposes of the present study, the area
concerned will be the 'Seleukid' portion of Asia Minor: m u c h of the
coastal strip with its maritime cities, ζπιθαλάσσιοι πόλζις (the western
end of the Propontis, the Straits and the T r o a d , Aiolis, Ionia, Karia,
L y k i a , Pamphylia, R o u g h Kilikia, S m o o t h Kilikia), and the western
third of the Anatolian landmass. T h i s includes the river valleys

6 See further C h . 3 § 3. Robert 1987, 526-32, illustrates how integrated Hellenistic

K a u n o s was in the world of G r e e k poleis. D o c u m e n t 16 shows how Alabanda, in 202/1,

was fully accepted on a diplomatic level of interaction by the Delphic Amphiktions
(though admittedly they referred to the Alabandans as 'kinsmen of the Greeks' rather
than simply fellow-Greeks).
7 T h e village decree is in Wörrle 1975 (/. Laodikeia am Lykos 1). O n the royal land,
see C h . 3. Labraunda: the material is published by Crampa 1969. T h e topic of Anatolian
shrines is treated in D e b o r d 1982, BofTo 1985; see also Sartre 1995: 104-5.
w h i c h descend f r o m the higher inland: the K a i k o s valley (the heart-
land of the Attalid kingdom), the H e r m o s valley (which helps define
the 'Hyrkanian plain', the western, fertile triangle in western L y d i a ,
between Magnesia under Sipylos, T h y a t e i r a , and Sardeis), the
K a i k o s corridor, and, most importantly, the M a e a n d e r plain and its
tributaries, w h i c h completed the great valley with secondary, but
important lines of communication (Marsyas, Harpasos, Morsynos).
O t h e r areas fall within this definition and will be mentioned often,
though lack of precise evidence for our period prevents new or
concrete treatment: the hills of M y s i a , the Hellespontic plains, the
plateau of Phrygia and Lykaonia, at the end of the 'Seleukid road'
w h i c h starts w i t h the M a e a n d e r valley and connects with northern
Syria. Off this road lie two important and increasingly w e l l - k n o w n
regions: the highlands of Pisidia w i t h its cities, and the P a m p h y l i a n
plain. Finally, other areas in the region will be mentioned only as
they impinge on the narrative outline: cities in or near northern Asia
M i n o r , such as K y z i k o s , Byzantion (not strictly in Asia M i n o r , but
involved in its history), Herakleia Pontike; the k i n g d o m of Bithynia;
the principalities of the Galatians; the kingdom of K a p p a d o k i a ; and,
most importantly, Rhodes, w h i c h was a naval power, but also pos-
sessed a continental territory (the Rhodian Peraia) and harboured
further territorial ambitions on the mainland.
T h e narrative outline w h i c h determines the limits of the geo-
graphical context is part of the second theme the L i v i a n passage
brings in: the high political history of the Hellenistic age. T h e
decision by A n t i o c h o s I I I to impose 'the yoke' on 'all the cities of
Asia' manifests the vitality of the high political history of the period
(the late third and early second centuries BC), even at the time of
imminent collision with Rome: f r o m this point of view, these years
were as vital (or unstable) as the earlier age of the Diadochs. It is a
mistake to speak of the Hellenistic w o r l d ' s 'weakening', 'exhaus-
tion', or 'decay' merely because the period in question was immedi-
ately followed by the R o m a n s ' success, military and political, and
their subsequent hegemony. T h e L i v i a n passage, w h i c h temporarily
assumes the viewpoint of Hellenistic actors in a Hellenistic world,
invites us to do the same, only at greater length: we can examine the
period w i t h o u t the hindsight that makes it into the prelude to
R o m a n conquest, but f r o m a Seleukid, or Hellenocentric viewpoint,
to produce a chapter in the political history of the Hellenistic
world, w h i c h was never marked by stagnation or equilibrium
(Rostovtzeff's 'balance of power'), but always in constant flux, as M .
A u s t i n has pointed out. 8
8 Decline: Walbank 1992: 227; Rostovtzeff 1941: 71, 72. Instability: Austin 1986.
 In specific terms, the narrative history w h i c h L i v y evokes, and
which determines the geographical limits of the present study, is
that of the Seleukid interests in Asia M i n o r , 'the land on the other
side of the T a u r u s ' . A n t i o c h o s III repeatedly campaigned in the
region through his viceroy A c h a i o s in 223-220 BC in person in
2 1 6 - 2 1 3 , £-203 (probably), 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 (as described in the L i v i a n
passage discussed here), 193 (in Pisidia), and finally during the
Roman—Seleukid W a r , in 190, a campaign w h i c h ended w i t h his
defeat at Magnesia under Sipylos and the dismantling, the follow-
ing year, of the Seleukid dominion in Asia M i n o r . T h e s e events are
analysed and reconstructed in C h a p t e r 2 of the present volume, and
referred to in the C o n c l u s i o n . For all the energy and tenacity dis-
played, the activity of this one king, A n t i o c h o s I I I , the sixth in
the Seleukid dynasty, was not untypical, but belonged to a past of
relations between the Seleukids and Asia M i n o r . A n t i o c h o s ' project
was framed in terms of this Seleukid past in Asia M i n o r : 'to reduce
all the cities of Asia into the former structure of subjection', in
antiquam imperii formulant redigere, as L i v y writes. T h e Seleukids
had indeed controlled m u c h of Asia M i n o r , in addition to the cities
of Ionia and Aiolis w h i c h A n t i o c h o s I I I took over in 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 ; the
Seleukid dominion was founded by the victory of Seleukos I over
L y s i m a c h o s in 281. H o w e v e r , f r o m 246 onwards, Seleukid autho-
rity in Asia M i n o r had gradually collapsed, to the point of nearly
total loss at the accession of A n t i o c h o s I I I . Hence the latter's
repeated campaigning in the region, and, most importantly, the
description of his actions, both by contemporaries and by himself,
in terms of legitimacy and historical claims: he was not conquering,
but reconquering (literally 'reacquiring', άνακτάσθαι.) areas lost by
his ancestors. T h i s usage can be traced both in the literary sources
and the documentary material (Ch. 1 § 1). A n t i o c h o s I I I thought
that the Seleukid past justified present conquest; in (re)establishing
control, he looked back to the past, to inscribe his actions within his
o w n Seleukid narrative. T h e fact that this Great Idea was largely a
trick of selective m e m o r y , imposed on a complex political history
where the Seleukids took severe territorial losses, only makes it the
more intriguing (Ch. 1).

T h e Seleukid past in Asia M i n o r , actual or proclaimed, as well as

the narrative of A n t i o c h o s ' military activities, justified by this
Seleukid past: these will be important themes of the present study.
Nonetheless, we must be aware that it belongs to a w i d e r context:
apart from Asia M i n o r (and T h r a c e ) , A n t i o c h o s III lay similar
claims, based on historical rights, to K o i l e - S y r i a , A r m e n i a , Baktria,
and 'India' (in fact he dealt with a local ruler, one Sophagasenos).
H e acted on these claims in his eastern campaign, or 'expedition to
the U p p e r Regions' of 210-205 (see, briefly, C h . 2 § 2). T h i s draws
attention to an important characteristic of the Seleukid empire: its
extension and diversity, and the multiple contexts in w h i c h the
Seleukid ruler behaved. A n t i o c h o s I I I appears not only in western
Asia M i n o r , where he w a g e d war, wrote letters to cities and
bestowed benefactions on them, receiving honours in return; his
actions are also documented in Babylon, where he is seen to p e r f o r m
ritual duties in the various shrines of the city, in 204 and, with great
p o m p , in 188/7. I n Babylon, A n t i o c h o s I I I , like his ancestors,
fulfilled the role of traditional Babylonian kingship, and could be
described in traditional Babylonian terminology. 9
T h a t the eastern parts of the empire, and Babylonia in particular,
were important to the Seleukids is clear enough, and the present
work in no way challenges this point, w h i c h the reign of A n t i o c h o s
I I I illustrates forcefully. H o w e v e r , the main promoters of this view,
S. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and A . K u h r t , have gone further, reinterpreting
the Seleukid empire to claim that its geographical heart lay in
Babylonia, Asia M i n o r and Central Asia alike being frontier zones
and hence peripheral concerns ( S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993).
T h e long reign of A n t i o c h o s I I I does not support this view: out of
the thirty-nine years he ruled (223-187 BC), most seem to have been
spent in n o n - B a b y l o n i a n locations, such as Asia M i n o r (see above: a
total of nine years), the further eastern regions (210-205), o r K o i l e -
Syria (221—217; 2 0 I - I 9 9 ) ; i n Babylon, he made only punctual
appearances, in 220 in the aftermath of a revolt, in 204 on the w a y
f r o m the U p p e r Regions, and in 188/7 o n his way to these same
U p p e r Regions. T h e picture of polycentric empire and wandering
ruler seems closer to the reality of Seleukid rule than the Babylon-
centred picture defended by S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t . 1 0 If we
must speak of a centre, it can be more justifiably placed in northern
Syria. Polybios has the physician of A n t i o c h o s I I I , Apollophanes,
speak of Seleukeia in Pieria as 'the hearth, so to speak, of the
dynasty'. T h i s is the view of a G r e e k , repeated in a G r e e k source, to

9 S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 216 (Antiochos III in Babylon in 188/7), t o which

add Sachs and Hunger 1989, no. -204, C , rev., lines 1 4 - 1 8 (Antiochos in Babylon in
204); 36-7 (discussion of Antiochos I as portrayed in a Babylonian building inscription,
the 'Borsippa cylinder'), 130-1 (general discussion).
10 For whereabouts of Antiochos I I I during his reign, Schmitt 1964: 85. Antiochos'

longest stay in Babylon was probably before his accession: FGrHist 260 F 32.10.
Reactions to S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993 are gathered in Topoi 4.2 (1994). T h e
political role of wandering kingship has been studied for the Achaimenid period by P.
Briant, Iranica Antiqua 23 (1988), 253-73; 'he notion was evoked b y S h e r w i n - W h i t e —
as a corrective to an aegeocentric view of the Seleukids ( S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t
1987: 16).
be sure; but A n t i o c h o s ' actions, as recorded in Polybios, seem to
bear out the importance of northern Syria (the so-called 'Seleukis'):
A n t i o c h o s was proclaimed king, and L a o d i k e I I I was later pro-
claimed queen, in A n t i o c h . T h e expression 'kings of Syria', 'king-
ship of Syria', w h i c h Polybios applies to the Seleukids, reflects his
awareness of the central role played by northern Syria in the actions
and the self-definition of the dynasty.
Furthermore, the Seleukids never forgot their ethnic origins and
identity as Macedonians, a fact reflected even in the Babylonian
sources; the A e g e a n world remained the arena for their competition
with their peers, other M a c e d o n i a n kings. 1 1 In the superpower com-
petition between the dynasties, Asia M i n o r lay in the front line, a
fact reflected by its complicated political geography and history for
m u c h of the third century (see C h . ι). Hence, at the very least, Asia
M i n o r , even if it was a frontier zone, mattered to the S e l e u k i d s — i f
only for the reason that they laid historical claims to it, that these
claims were contested in the realm of international high politics, and
that the region was the scene for competition with the other dynas-
ties, Ptolemaic (especially) and Antigonid: the scene where the
ambitions the Seleukids harboured and the figure they cut could be
measured against other Hellenistic kings. K i n g l y honour, the belief
in inherited historical claims conceived as property rights, and the
duty to look over the state as patrimony: these were not ideological
superstructures, but necessities of the exercise of kingship and its
perpetuation by the projection of strength in a fluid world of super-
p o w e r rivalry. T o maintain kingly honour by claiming, recovering,
or preserving territory was to ward off the perception of weakness,
fatal for the large, unwieldy Hellenistic empire (see C h . 2 § 5). T h i s ,
in itself, is a sufficient reason to explain the Seleukids' constant
involvement with and concern for Asia M i n o r .
O t h e r factors make clear the practical value they derived f r o m the
region (these are explored at length in C h . 3). It supplied the
Seleukid empire with personnel, most importantly military man-
p o w e r f r o m the 'military colonies' installed in the countryside (on
w h i c h see C h . 1 § 2; C h . 3 § ι). 1 2 T h e Seleukids also raised revenue

" Briant 1994 (though Briant's remarks on Antiochos I I I must be qualified: the
rebuilding of Lysiniacheia as a residence for one of his sons does not imply his own
desire to 'govern from a Near-eastern base' (467)—at the time, Antiochos was mostly in
Sardeis or Ephesos, or busy with his Thracian and Anatolian campaigns). Bertrand
1992: 150-2 for the lure of the Aegean ('tropisme maritime').
12 Asia M i n o r was more important as a source of military manpower from the

countryside than as a source of administrators and courtiers from the cities (as some-
times claimed, e.g. Billows 1995: 78-80). Greeks could work for a king without their city
being subject to him: Hegesianax of Alexandreia T r o a s was a Friend and diplomat for
 f r o m their Anatolian dominions, in the form of agricultural rent,
tribute, and a complex, but far-reaching, network of indirect taxa-
tion (Ch. 3 § 2): even though no exact figures are known, the size and
richness of the region hint at its economic importance as source of
income for the Seleukids, and one need only remember the 1760
silver talents w h i c h it supplied to the Seleukids' A c h a i m e n i d pre-
decessors (Hdt. 3.90).
Military colonies and imperial revenue evoke another theme in
the L i v i a n passage: the Hellenistic kingdom as an imperial state-
formation, its nature and its workings. L i v y ' s expression is imperii
formula: whatever that translates, 1 3 it presents A n t i o c h o s ' conquests
as a state-building activity, and the resulting dominion as a struc-
ture of power. T h i s theme presents another way to c o m m e n t on L i v .
33.38: an essay on the workings of the Seleukid empire, drawing on
wider parallels in the hope of attaining general insights on
Hellenistic empires (see C h . 3). S u c h an essay should aim at pre-
senting the evidence for the structures of power, then attempt to
extrapolate and explore realities, processes, and ideology. T h i s topic
was already handled in classic treatments by Bickerman (Bikerman
1938) and M u s t i (1966); nonetheless, it has been renewed by recent,
sophisticated, research by P. Briant, S. S h e r w i n - W h i t e , and A .
K u h r t on the Hellenistic empires, and specifically on the Seleukid
realm and its A c h a i m e n i d forebear. 1 4 But an awareness of the
nuanced realities of empire is urged on us by the L i v i a n passage
itself, w h i c h hints at two important truths: at first sight, empire is
based on the components of c o n q u e s t — v i o l e n c e and military c o m -
pulsion, as made clear by A n t i o c h o s ' confidence that most cities will
give in to these means; but at the same time, also requires consent
or at least quiescence, and the illusion or representation of p o w e r —
in other words, ideological means. T h e latter point appears clearly
f r o m A n t i o c h o s ' determination not to allow the recalcitrant cities,
L a m p s a k o s and S m y r n a , get away with a state of f r e e d o m that did
not depend on his o w n decision, because this w o u l d endanger the
whole balancing act.
A n t i o c h o s I I I threatened, but also attempted to negotiate with
the recalcitrant cities: his behaviour shows that empire cannot be

Antiochos III (Olshausen 1974: 191-3), at a time when his native city was resisting that
king; Milesians served Antiochos I V at a time when Miletos was free, and had long been
independent of the Seleukids (Herrmann 1987). M a n y Seleukid officials, officers, and
Friends came, not from the cities of Asia M i n o r , but the new Seleukid foundations of
northern Syria: Gauthier 1985: 169-75. O n the importance of the region, Rostovtzeff
1941: 524-5·
13 It conflates formula provinciae and informam imperii redigere (I owe this observa-
tion to M . Crawford). 14 Briant 1982, S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993.
studied p u r e l y as structures. H i s imperial projects took place at the
expense of the poleis, t h e m s e l v e s c o m p l e x , t o u c h y , and articulate
social organizations. T h e y offer a test-case f o r the old, yet cardinal
issue of Hellenistic history: the relation b e t w e e n the Hellenistic
k i n g d o m and the polis}5 T h e test-case is w o r t h s t u d y i n g , not only
because it presents this relation as c o n f r o n t a t i o n (conquest and
resistance/accommodation) and w i t h i n a defined period of time
(216—190 BC), b u t also because it is based on a remarkable series of
epigraphical d o c u m e n t s , illustrating a variety of situations and
v i e w p o i n t s (see below).
T h e t h e m e of the relations b e t w e e n e m p i r e and city is interesting,
because it entails a n u a n c e d appreciation of the c o n d i t i o n of the
H e l l e n i s t i c polis.16 P u r s u i n g this t h e m e is one of the crucial tasks of
recent Hellenistic h i s t o r i o g r a p h y : the revision of clichés about the
p o s t - C l a s s i c a l polis' decadence, irrelevance, and p o w e r l e s s n e s s
b e f o r e the Hellenistic k i n g d o m s . It is clear that A n t i o c h o s ' e m p i r e ,
and Hellenistic e m p i r e s in general, affected the poleis, t h r o u g h
direct control and l e g a l - i d e o l o g i c a l structures (such as A n t i o c h o s '
determination that the cities' liberty s h o u l d exist e x c l u s i v e l y
t h r o u g h his grant, ab rege impetratam:). T h e e v i d e n c e p r o v e s the
existence and explicit f u n c t i o n i n g of s u c h structures, d i s p r o v i n g an
a t t e m p t by A . H e u s s (1937) at d e n y i n g any f o r m a l s u b o r d i n a t i o n of
the polis. In reaction to H e u s s , some have c h a m p i o n e d or f u r t h e r e d
the view that the polis w a s abject and defenceless b e f o r e the
m i g h t of the Hellenistic k i n g d o m s (e.g. O r t h 1977). T h e story of
A n t i o c h o s I I I and the cities challenges this v i e w . T h e general insta-
bility of the political situation and the c o m p e t i t i o n b e t w e e n the
s u p e r - p o w e r s m e a n t that any H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g ' s control o v e r cities
w a s fragile; the necessity f o r local collaboration, and the realities of
interaction and negotiation b e t w e e n rulers and ruled should alert us
against any s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d m o d e l of direct control and passive
subjects. T h e poleis w e r e capable of resistance, w h e t h e r physical or
i d e o l o g i c a l — a s p r o v e d b y the case of S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s . Polis
a u t o n o m y appeared in f o r m s s u c h as the will of s u b o r d i n a t e cities to
constrain rulers t h r o u g h a formal language e x p r e s s i n g reciprocity
rather than p o w e r , or to protect their civic p r i d e and identity
t h r o u g h local representations. T h e poleis' strategies a i m e d at c o n -
v e r t i n g straight d o m i n a t i o n into interaction, and their w o r k i n g s will

15Will 1988: 335, on centrality of this issue.

16For recent, balanced treatments, J. K . Davis, in CAH2 vii. 304-20; Gruen 1993; A .
Giovannini in Bulloch et al. 1993: 265-86; Billows 1995: ch. 3; Rhodes with L e w i s 1997:
542-9. Habicht 1997 presents the test-case of Athens in the Hellenistic age. Rostovtzeff
unabashedly called the history of some communities 'thrilling to follow' (Roztovtzeff
1941: 35-6).
be analysed in C h a p t e r 4. In offering a thematic study on the cities'
relation with their ruler, I hope not simply to move away f r o m the
simplistic clichés about the Hellenistic polis, but also to illustrate
and explore L . Robert's oft-repeated dictum, 'la cité grecque n'est
pas morte à Chéronée': such detailed studies are necessary if
R o b e r t ' s w o r d s are to be meaningful.

T h e actual treatment all these themes receive is shaped by the

sources; their state and the consequent issues of presentation can be
reviewed in the remaining part of this introduction. T h e timespan I
am considering (226-188 BC) is well documented in comparison
with other, earlier, periods in Hellenistic history. T h e reign of
A n t i o c h o s I I I falls within the ambit of P o l y b i o s , w h o was interested
in, and quite w e l l - i n f o r m e d about, the Seleukid k i n g d o m and
Seleukid activities in Asia M i n o r , no doubt thanks to a variety of
sources, many being oral informants f r o m the Seleukid court or the
Asian cities. 17 A n t i o c h o s ' accession and early years are so well
documented in the early, fully preserved books of Polybios that a
Seleukid courtier has been suggested as a source (Hofquelle: S c h m i t t
1964: 175-85). Polybios provides detailed information about admin-
istrative dispositions at the king's accession, and the reorganization
of the governorships in the U p p e r Satrapies after a revolt; about the
king's m o v e m e n t s and strategic dilemmas; about his long-term
plans and vision. A s for Asia M i n o r specifically, Polybios tells us
about the circumstances and actors involved in the usurper Achaios'
attempt on the Seleukid throne, and also about the topography in
w h i c h this attempt took place (royal proclamation at Laodikeia on
L y k o s , disaffection of troops on the borders of L y k a o n i a , and con-
solatory expedition into Pisidia). L i k e w i s e , A c h a i o s ' expedition of
218 against the Pisidian city of Selge, and the opportunistic cam-
paign Attalos I mounted in A c h a i o s ' absence, are minutely and
admirably d o c u m e n t e d , especially as concerns the topography of
military m o v e m e n t s and the reactions of the local communities.
F r o m Books 4 and 5, it is clear that Polybios was aware (as many
modern historians of the period are sometimes not) of the import-
ance of the local communities, because the high political history of
the superpowers was causally linked with local politics, and because

17 On Polybios' sources, Walbank HCP i. 26-35; Walbank 1972: 74-84, emphasizing

the difficulty of precisely tracking down any individual source, and insisting on the
personal contacts Polybios, himself a detainee in R o m e after 168, must have had with
hostages (for instance the Seleukid hostages held on the terms dictated to Antiochos III
after Magnesia) or ambassadors from all over the G r e e k world, especially since appeals
to Rome from the Greek cities and kingdoms became increasingly frequent after Pydna.
the description of the experience of empire involves close attention
to local conditions. Polybios w o u l d have provided the sort of
detailed narrative record w h i c h could have meshed in with the
epigraphical documents to produce a closely textured history of the
cities for the years 226-188 BC sensitive to broad political develop-
ments, to the interests of the local communities, and to the compli-
cated factors, external and internal, influencing their behaviour
towards the conquering Seleukid.
A s it is, the situation is more complicated and less satisfactory,
because of the fragmentary state of Polybios after Book 5. U s e f u l
or intriguing snippets of evidence survive in the collections of
excerpts: a description of the capture of Sardeis, the capital of the
rebel A c h a i o s ( 7 . 1 5 - 1 8 , completed by the fate of A c h a i o s himself at
8 . 1 5 - 2 1 ) ; an assessment of the impact of A n t i o c h o s ' eastern expedi-
tion (11.34.14); some details on the expedition of Philip V in Asia
M i n o r (16.1; 16.2-9; 1 6 . 1 0 - 1 2 ) , tiny narrative fragments for
A n t i o c h o s ' great campaign of 1 9 7 - 6 , and a complete account for the
negotiations between the king and the R o m a n envoys at
Lysimacheia in 196; finally, some incidents in the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d
W a r , and a problematic description of the aftermath of the R o m a n
victory, including the final settlement of Asia M i n o r in 188 (see
A p p e n d i x 7). T h e context for these fragments is supplied by L i v y
and A p p i a n , w h o depended on Polybios. L i v y , w h o quotes P o l y b i o s
at length, also used n o n - P o l y b i a n , annalistic material, sometimes
useful for the present purpose (as for the excellent information
he provides on the settlement of Asia Minor), sometimes quite
puzzling (as for the purported invasion of Pergamene dominions
by A n t i o c h o s I I I in 198: A p p e n d i x 6). A p p i a n ' s Syriake is more
concise, but seems to have relied exclusively on Polybios. 1 8
T h e combination of the three literary sources (Polybian excerpts,
L i v y , A p p i a n ) is not entirely helpful w h e n it comes to reconstruct-
ing the narrative for Seleukid activity in Asia M i n o r . W e are left in
the dark as to the exact events of A n t i o c h o s ' campaign against
Achaios in 2 1 6 - 2 1 3 ; we know nothing of the situation after the king
left for the U p p e r Satrapies, after appointing Z e u x i s to the gover-
norship of 'the regions on the other side of the T a u r u s ' (for instance,
it is difficult to understand how the invasion of Attalid territory by
Prousias I of Bithynia, in 209, fits in the political situation between
Attalids and Seleukids); finally, a major Seleukid campaign in Karia
and probably in Ionia on the king's return f r o m the U p p e r Satrapies

18 Brodersen 1991 provides a detailed, and in its broad outlines convincing, attempt

to prove that Appian relied solely on Polybios, and transmitted Polybian details quite
faithfully.
is barely alluded to. E v e n A n t i o c h o s ' greatest expedition to Asia
M i n o r , the joint campaign by land and by sea of 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 , is
scantily recorded in its latter parts, and there is no direct literary
evidence for many of the king's m o v e m e n t s with his fleet (between
L y k i a and Ephesos, and between Ephesos and T h r a c e ) and for the
activity of the land army after its departure f r o m northern Syria in
spring 197. M u c h of the Polybian detail that w o u l d have filled in the
picture has been lost, too devoid of moralizing or didactic force for
inclusion in the collections of Polybian excerpts, and too remote
f r o m the dramatic theme of the conflict between R o m e and the
Seleukids to interest L i v y and A p p i a n . T h e s e two authors handled
Polybios to suit their o w n interests. A p p i a n , though sometimes
more faithful than L i v y in preserving details unfavourable to R o m e ,
compressed Polybios, often to the point of being misleading or
inaccurate; L i v y varies between carefully written episodes drawn
f r o m Polybios (Einzelerzählungen), and wider segments of oblique,
concentrated, and sometimes inaccurate summary. 1 9 W h e n Polybios
did touch on the theme relevant to both L i v y and A p p i a n , the
conflict between Seleukids and R o m e , he was quoted extensively by
these authors. T h e y transmit informative accounts, taken f r o m the
totally lost Book 19 of Polybios, for the diplomatic confrontation
between the two powers ( 1 9 6 - 1 9 2 ) , culminating in the R o m a n -
Seleukid W a r ; these accounts illuminate Seleukid conceptions and
anxieties about the Anatolian dominion (see C h . 2 § 5). L i v y and
A p p i a n also preserve the outline and many details f r o m Polybios'
account of the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r ; these details illustrate the
condition of the poleis and the choices they faced at a time of super-
power conflict (see C o n c l u s i o n , for the analysis of a few instances).
T h e amount of detail that L i v y and A p p i a n did not see fit to
record points out the extent to w h i c h P o l y b i o s was a G r e e k
historian, closely interested in the Hellenistic G r e e k world. 2 0 In
contrast, L i v y explicitly declares that he finds this level of detail
tiresome, as he notes after giving information on the beginning of
A n t i o c h o s ' campaign of 197 and Rhodian resistance to it: 'non
operae est persequi ut quaeque acta in his locis sint, c u m ad ea quae
propria Romani belli sunt vix sufficiam', 'there is no need to go into
the detail of every action in this region, since m y efforts are hardly
adequate to the events of the R o m a n war' (33.20.13). 2 1 Nonetheless,

19 Brodersen 1991; L u c e 1977: 205-13, though elsewhere L u c e points out that L i v y

used Polybios extensively, conscientiously, and mostly accurately ( L u c e 1977: 181 and
n. 99, 221). 20 Millar 1987.

21 Luce, 1977: 43-4, points out that the function of the passage is in fact to provide an

apology for including any of these details at all.

L i v y often preserves interesting evidence, within the Einzelerzäh-
lungen. F o r instance, his account of the Rhodian campaign waged
in 197 against the M a c e d o n i a n troops left in Karia by Philip V
mentions Rhodian levies f r o m various parts of the Rhodian Peraia,
including Laudiceni ex Asia (33.18): not, as had long been supposed,
mercenaries f r o m Laodikeia on L y k o s , but almost certainly
m e m b e r s of a c o m m u n i t y in south-western Karia under Rhodian
control, the /laoSi/ceis (or το kolvov των Λαοδικέων), now attested
epigraphically on an honorary decree erected at Stratonikeia ( M a
1997); this is a good example of the locally e m b e d d e d and informa-
tive details w h i c h L i v y on occasion transmits f r o m Polybios.
A n o t h e r example is the paragraph describing the confrontation
between A n t i o c h o s I I I and the recalcitrant cities ( L i v . 3 3 . 3 8 . 1 - 7 ) —
the passage on w h i c h I have been offering a commentary through-
out this introduction.
T h o u g h Polybios does not allow any straightforward and integral
narrative reconstruction of A n t i o c h o s ' campaigns, he is nonetheless
invaluable as a source of parallels w h i c h indirectly illuminate the
broad historical context and the issues w h i c h I outlined earlier:
the workings of the Hellenistic kingdoms as power structures, the
relation between city and ruler, and the condition of the polis in the
Hellenistic age. Polybios provides extended passages of political
analysis, such as an analysis of royal euergetism and civic
evvoia (5.90.5-8) or a crucial (but difficult) passage assessing royal
behaviour towards cities, as it evolves f r o m συμμαχικών to δζσποτικώς
according to expediency and circumstances (15.24a). Further
insights can be gained f r o m the narrative: A n t i o c h o s ' eastern
expedition, even though it does not directly concern the cities of
western Asia M i n o r , shows us a ruler and potential subjects deploy-
ing strategies for interaction and submission, ranging f r o m straight-
forward violence to symbolical acts like gifts or royal grants of local
privileges; one example is the interaction between A n t i o c h o s I I I and
the Gerrhaians (Pol. 13.9). Other passages illustrate royal conquest
and its aftermath, the processes involved, the diplomacy, the politi-
cal role of ruler cult (at 5 . 8 6 . 8 - 1 1 , the cities of K o i l e - S y r i a offer
'crowns, sacrifices, altars and all this sort of thing' to Ptolemy I V
after his victory at Raphia). In this respect, P o l y b i o s as indirect
source for the world in w h i c h the Great K i n g and the cities inter-
acted can be completed by other literary texts, among w h i c h figure
the accounts of the Maccabaean revolt f r o m the Seleukids, as pre-
served in Josephus' Jewish Antiquities and 1 - 2 M a c c . , because of the
portrayal of the Seleukid empire as a military-imperial organization
and because of the numerous royal documents quoted in these
sources and w h i c h are (in the main) authentic. Bickerman's classic
treatment of the 'Seleukid institutions' (Bikerman 1938) drew on the
Maccabaean material, for instance, to describe the army, structures
of control, or imperial finances.
Besides the literary sources, direct or indirect, other types of evi-
dence are helpful. A n u m b e r of these can be enumerated, with some
examples. First, numismatics: the coins struck by A n t i o c h o s I I I ,
plentiful across his long reign, and by the cities can be used to talk
about a variety of themes, such as the image of the ruler in royal
portraiture, the narrative of royal campaigns and conquests, and,
most importantly for the issues I wish to treat in this book, about
city privileges and royal domination. 2 2
Second, archaeological r e m a i n s — t h o u g h this evidence is dis-
appointing: it provides a visual and material context (rather than
new information) for the story and the themes of this book.
A d m i t t e d l y , there is a small amount of art historical evidence:
ancient sculptural groups representing M a r s y a s flayed before
A p o l l o may reproduce a Seleukid original, alluding to the reduction
of the usurper Achaios by A n t i o c h o s I I I (Fleischer 1972-5).
Likewise, it is true that some sites provide material evidence: the
ruins of Priene even now present the striking picture of a city w h i c h
kept its general Hellenistic shape, and thus helps us imagine other
cities, their setting articulated by m o n u m e n t s , public spaces, and
shrines. A n o t h e r example is Aigai, w h i c h shows the deep impact of
Attalid architectural patronage in the second century, after the
Seleukid presence in Asia M i n o r had been removed. T h e site of
A m y z o n presents another physical model for the polis: a territory
with villages or forts, and a monumental and sacral centre, where
the religious and political institutions were located. 23 Nonetheless,
there are too many cities for whose material forms in the Hellenistic
period we have only vague ideas, because they await full excavation
(Alabanda, E u r o m o s , T e o s ) , or because later building activity
radically altered their shape. T h e latter is the case for cities such as
S m y r n a , Ephesos, Miletos, even Iasos; and also important Seleukid
centres such as Sardeis, Laodikeia on L y k o s , or Apameia. 2 4 Because

22 Generally, M o r k h o l m 1991; on Antiochos I I I , Newell WSM 395-401. Royal

portraiture: M o r k h o l m 1969: 15 (portraiture of Achaios). Royal movements: L e Rider
1990 (Antiochos II at Mylasa); M o r k h o l m 1969: 1 4 - 1 5 (movements of Seleukos III).
City privileges and royal domination: the whole issue still needs clarification, but the
principles I have followed in this work are those traditionally accepted (silver coinage
means civic autonomy) and underlying e.g. the summaries in L e Rider 1972/3, 1973/4,
1975/ 6 ; s e e C h . 3 § 3.
23 Aigai: Robert 1937: 74-89. A m y z o n : Robert 1983.
24 See the pages by Robert, OMS iv. 3 1 0 - 1 6 . T h e situation may improve with the
continuing excavation and surveying work at and around Ephesos and Miletos.
of this situation, w e cannot relate in detail the textual evidence w i t h
the relevant material remains. T o u n d e r s t a n d h o w h e a v y a h a n d i c a p
this is, w e need o n l y look to s e c o n d - c e n t u r y AD E p h e s o s , w h e r e G .
R o g e r s has studied the f o u n d a t i o n of V i b i u s Salutaris in its c o n -
t e m p o r a r y u r b a n context: b y s t u d y i n g the actual inscription and the
c e r e m o n i e s in their m o n u m e n t a l context, R o g e r s interprets the
c e r e m o n i e s ' social and ideological m e a n i n g , and the w a y in w h i c h
they e x p r e s s the c i t y ' s identity, especially in relation to the R o m a n
e m p i r e . In contrast, w e have a l o n g text d e s c r i b i n g h o w the T e i a n s
reordered their ceremonial life around a n e w sacral centre (a statue
of A n t i o c h o s I I I and an altar to the k i n g and the C h a r i t é s in the
bouleuterion), b u t w e cannot relate the detailed i n f o r m a t i o n to a
specific u r b a n layout, let alone to a m e a n i n g f u l s y m b o l i c a l g e o -
g r a p h y of T e o s . 2 5 F i n a l l y , there is v e r y scant archaeological i n f o r m a -
tion for the c o u n t r y s i d e in this period, so that w e have little idea
w h a t a rural shrine, a S e l e u k i d fort, or a 'military c o l o n y ' looked like,
let alone h o w rural p o p u l a t i o n w a s distributed in the 'royal land', or
s i m p l y h o w it lived in, say, Hellenistic P h r y g i a or L y d i a .
O n e e x c e p t i o n to the thinness of archaeological material is the
series of w e l l - p r e s e r v e d city w a l l s f r o m the Hellenistic period.
T h e s e fall into t w o categories: on one h a n d , the extensive and
sophisticated d e f e n c e w o r k s erected b y the Hellenistic kings,
e x e m p l i f i e d b y E p h e s o s and H e r a k l e i a u n d e r L a t m o s ; on the other
h a n d , the m o r e m o d e s t w a l l s put up by the cities to d e f e n d their
u r b a n nucleus, as can be seen at Priene, E r y t h r a i , N o t i o n / K o l o p h o n
b y sea, or K o l o p h o n — t h e latter w a s d e f e n d e d b y a late f o u r t h -
c e n t u r y , a m b i t i o u s , Geländemauer reminiscent of the great royal
walls, w h i c h p r o m p t s us not to u n d e r e s t i m a t e civic resources and
determination. 2 6 T h e cities' fortifications matter, because t h e y
created the possibility of resisting c o n q u e s t b y a king, at least for a
w h i l e , if the b r o a d e r political context was right: N o t i o n / K o l o p h o n
b y sea s u c c e s s f u l l y w i t h s t o o d a siege b y A n t i o c h o s I I I d u r i n g the
R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r ( L i v . 3 7 . 2 6 . 5 - 8 ; 3 7 . 3 1 . 3 ) . T h i s is an i m p o r t -
ant characteristic of the condition e n j o y e d b y the cities of w e s t e r n
A s i a M i n o r , in contrast w i t h the Classical period, w h e r e m a n y of

25 Ephesos: Rogers 1991. T e o s : document 18 and C h . 4 § 36. It would be even more

depressing to compare the situation for Hellenistic T e o s and the case-studies offered for
more recent periods: see O z o u f 1976: 225-42, for the routing of processions in Caen
during the French Revolution, and 242-59 on the geography of revolutionary festivals
in Paris. Generally, O z o u f is able to analyse both the intentions of festival-organizing
authorities and the ambiguous realizations of these intentions; both perspectives are
impossible (at least at that level of detail) for the modern historian of the Hellenistic
world.
36 M o s t of the evidence is catalogued and studied by M c N i c o l l 1997.
these cities were unwalled (ατείχιστος) and hence enjoyed a far
smaller margin of manoeuvre, as can be seen in T h u c y d i d e s ' narra-
tive of the Ionian W a r . A d m i t t e d l y , A n t i o c h o s I I I in winter 197/6
felt confident that he w o u l d conquer 'all the cities', because of their
lack of trust in their walls and their fighting men; but this opinion
reflected royal ideology and confidence, rather than any necessary
outcome determined by material conditions.
A third non-literary source is the array of Anatolian landscapes:
m u c h more instructive for our purposes than 'ancient ruins', the
land still allows us to study ancient sites—specific places in their
relation w i t h the geography. W e s t e r n Asia M i n o r (as I defined it
earlier in this introduction) still survives as a physical entity, w h i c h
can be studied on maps and in the accounts of earlier travellers, 27 or
by travel to modern T u r k e y , as long as attention is given not just to
the cities, but also to routes, plains, mountains and the w a y s
through them. I twice had the chance of travelling through this
region, going along many of the historically important routes, by
train, bus or minibus, car, tractor, bicycle, or on foot. T r a v e l in Asia
M i n o r gives a sense of its wealth and size, both explaining w h y an
imperial p o w e r w o u l d covet it and problematizing the realities of
controlling such a vast area. It also creates a sense of the relation
between places and hence promotes the concrete understanding of
military movements. Seeing the mass of M t L a t m o s , separating
A m y z o n and Herakleia under L a t m o s , w h i c h lie close on the map,
helps to understand w h y the Seleukids took the former but not the
latter place in c. 203. Likewise, going along the M e n d e r e s
(Cumaovasi)-Ivavakdere corridor, one of the crossing points f r o m
the S m y r n a plain to the coast (now the road between the coastal
resorts and Izmir airport), illustrates its importance and possibly
illuminates the m o v e m e n t s of A n t i o c h o s I I I in the region in the
same years (Ch. 2 § 3). 28 T h e awareness of geography as a source of
understanding about the past is nothing new; for the Hellenistic
world, it was particularly developed, by exhortation and by
example, in the work of L . Robert.
T h e most significant non-literary source is the body of epigraph-
ical documents, and it is worth reflecting on the nature of these
documents, the limitations they impose, and the ways in w h i c h
these limitations can be qualified. T h i s source of evidence, already
27 For instance Fellows 1839, 1841; C u i n e t 1894; de Planhol 1958. But see Strobel

1996: i o - i i , for qualifications about the practice of exclusively, and selectively, quoting
early travellers as a substitute for serious historical geography.
28 Apart from the work of L . Robert, the approach is exemplified by S y m e 1995:

1 7 7 - 2 1 5 for Pisidia and Pamphylia; for parallels, see also Millar 1994, and van Berchem
1982, for Roman Switzerland.
respectable in quantity at the time of H . S c h m i t t ' s m o n o g r a p h on
A n t i o c h o s I I I (1964), has been spectacularly increased by recently
published texts, most of the first importance ( n o t a b l y — i n order of
p u b l i c a t i o n — t h e finds f r o m Iasos, T e o s , A m y z o n , Herakleia under
L a t m o s , and Sardeis). It now counts forty-nine items relevant to the
king's activity in Asia M i n o r alone; to these can be added important
documents concerning A n t i o c h o s I I I f r o m K o i l e - S y r i a (the
' S k y t h o p o l i s dossier' concerning the estate of Ptolemaios, governor
of the region) and Media. 2 9 T h e y mostly are royal letters (adminis-
trative or diplomatic), and civic decrees, usually honorific, along
with a few records of dedications, statue bases, etc. N o r are these
documents isolated: they can be read in a context provided by the
rest of Hellenistic epigraphy, w h i c h offers many parallels with
w h i c h to expand or qualify conclusions drawn f r o m the inscriptions
concerning A n t i o c h o s I I I and the cities. A sense of the material's
abundance and fascination emerges even f r o m older corpora, like
the Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, Orientis Graecae Inscri.pti.ones
Selectae (volume 1 concentrates on Hellenistic kings), or C . B.
W e l l e s ' s Royal Correspondence·, many cities of Asia M i n o r have their
inscriptions gathered in convenient w o r k i n g collections, published
in the C o l o g n e series, Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien.
A s the case of A n t i o c h o s I I I illustrates, one great advantage to this
material is the way in w h i c h it is constantly increased, and the issues
it raises modified, by new publications, as reviewed in the Bulletin
Epigraphique and republished in the Supplementum Epigraphicum
Graecum: a glance at the bibliography to the present work will
show how the epigraphical material steadily increases, with new dis-
coveries w h i c h make adjustments to our political narrative of the
Hellenistic world, and enrich the analyses we can elaborate. 3 0
T h e epigraphical material provides important information for
the topic of A n t i o c h o s III and his relations with the cities. A s
mentioned above, inscriptions correct the narrative written f r o m the

29 For documents from Asia Minor, see the list at the introduction to the epigraphi-

cal dossier presented as an annexe. D u r i n g the three or four years taken by the research
and the writing of the thesis on which this book is based, several new documents
appeared. Other regions: for the Skythopolis dossier, the text was published by V . H.
Landau, IEJ 16 (1966), 54-70, republished by T h . Fischer, ZPE 33 (1979), 131-8,
revised by J . - M . Bertrand, ZPE φ (1982), 1 6 7 - 7 4 ar>d Fr. Piejko, Ant Class 60, (1991),
245-7, though Piejko's restorations for lines 5 - 7 and his construction of the syntax in
lines 2 1 - 4 are not convincing; I will quote the text as SEG 29.1613. Media: Robert
1949, Robert 1967.
30 T h e earliest epigraphical works quoted are Chishull 1728, Hessel 1731, followed by

traveller-epigraphists like Leake (1824), Fellows (1839, 1841), Hamilton (1842). A m o n g

modern examples of discoveries making important contributions, Gauthier 1989,
Herrmann 1965a, Malay 1987.
fragmentary literary sources. A single Seleukid document coming
f r o m northern M y s i a and published by H. M a l a y in 1987 disproved
a reconstruction of Seleukid territorial concessions to the Attalids
in 216 and of the subsequent political history of the region. 3 1 In
the case of the Seleukid campaigns of c.203, the record is almost
exclusively epigraphical, f r o m A m y z o n and (probably) Teos: 3 2 the
documents picture the aftermath of conquest, thus enabling us to
reconstruct or deduce military narrative. In the case of the crucial
campaign of 197/6, the epigraphical evidence unfortunately does not
fully complete the lacunas in L i v y , so that the documents mostly
show the effect of the campaign at the local level. T h i s point illus-
trates one strength of the epigraphical evidence: it reveals a diversity
of situations and v i e w p o i n t s — t h e campaigns of a Hellenistic king,
the institutions of imperial control and their workings, the local
experience of war and empire, as lived by the poleis. A l l these
aspects combine to help write an essay on empire, w h i c h I proposed
earlier as one of the themes raised by the seminal passage of L i v y .
T h e increase in documentation has sharpened our perception of this
theme: we now have some idea of the activities of Z e u x i s , the
'official in charge of the regions on the other side of the T a u r u s ' , or
the high-priest and official in charge of sacred matters, Nikanor.
T h e other important feature is the nature of the inscriptions as
immediate historical documents, rather than an author's elaboration
of events. T h e consequence is not that inscriptions are unimpeach-
ably real and objective; on the contrary, their value lies in the fact
that they are actual instances of official languages in action, as
spoken by historical agents and e m b o d y i n g ideologies and images as
well as representing, in themselves, historical events. S o m e texts
document the language of empire, w h i c h is not only practically
oriented, but is constitutive of empire ( C h . 3 § 3); other texts, the
civic decrees, express the identity of the polis, and its efforts to come
to terms with its rulers through the m e d i u m of honorific language
( C h . 4). C o n c e r n i n g the latter topic, the texts w h i c h the inscriptions
record (royal letters, civic decrees) do not merely mirror the inter-
action between ruler and city: they are this interaction.
A n important part of this book is devoted to applying what m i g h t
be called, in a broad sense, a 'text-aware' approach to the docu-
mentary material: taking the inscriptions seriously as texts, whose
language matters to us as interpreters, because it mattered to the
power actors w h o uttered them. T h i s approach seeks out meanings,
implications, and ideology, to be explored and teased out by close

31 D o c u m e n t 4, and C h . 2 § 1. 12 C h . 2 § 2; T e o s : A p p e n d i x 2.
readings. S u c h an a p p r o a c h c o m p l e m e n t s the m o r e traditional
positivist m o d e , w h e r e b y d o c u m e n t s m e r e l y d o c u m e n t historical
facts, w h i c h lie b e y o n d the d o c u m e n t s t h e m s e l v e s and w h o s e reality
is a s s u m e d to be readily reconstructible. F o r instance, a royal letter
m i g h t speak of the s u b j e c t s ' loyalty, the k i n g ' s b e n e v o l e n c e , and his
b e n e f a c t i o n s . W e do not k n o w if the s u b j e c t s w e r e truly loyal, nor
w h e t h e r the k i n g w a s truly b e n e v o l e n t ; nor do w e have e n o u g h e v i -
dence to correct the affirmations of the king (to say w h a t he really
t h o u g h t w h e n he m a d e his benefactions); in most cases, because of
the dearth of c o n t i n u o u s d o c u m e n t a t i o n , w e do not e v e n k n o w if
p r o m i s e d b e n e f a c t i o n s actually took place. W h a t w e can say, in all
such cases, is that the letter w a s w r i t t e n and received, that the
k i n g did say these things to the recipients of his missive, that the
recipients, the citizens of that s u p r e m e l y articulate b o d y , a
H e l l e n i s t i c polis, inscribed the missive and p e r h a p s p r o d u c e d a
d o c u m e n t of their o w n : all these things in t h e m s e l v e s are v e r y real
historical facts w h i c h deserve attention. T h a t utterances are in
t h e m s e l v e s acts is crucial to the s t u d y of the d o c u m e n t a r y e v i d e n c e ,
and also explains their u n i q u e value. T h i s a p p r o a c h is inspired b y
'speech-act t h e o r y ' , pioneered by J. L . A u s t i n , and d e v e l o p i n g
A u s t i n ' s insight that certain utterances ( Ί grant y o u f r e e d o m ' , 'we
decide to praise y o u ' ) are acts w i t h practical c o n s e q u e n c e s , and that,
in a sense, all utterances are actions, p e r f o r m e d in a certain c o n t e x t
w h i c h influences t h e m and is influenced b y t h e m ( M i l l a r 1992: 637).
T h e i m p o r t a n c e of the epigraphical material only makes it m o r e
i m p o r t a n t to u n d e r s c o r e the difficulties inherent in its exploitation.
A n o b v i o u s p r o b l e m is the p a t c h y nature of the e v i d e n c e f o r w r i t i n g
c o n t i n u o u s narrative: the inscriptions s o m e w h a t palliate the frag-
m e n t a r y record, b u t are still far f r o m a l l o w i n g any c o m p l e t e account
for the m o r e o b s c u r e sections in the history of A n t i o c h o s ' c a m -
paigns; nor do t h e y p r o v i d e any direct indication of m o t i v e s or the
s u r r o u n d i n g military context. B u t the i n c o m p l e t e n e s s of the e p i -
graphical material has far m o r e significant c o n s e q u e n c e s than j u s t
h i n d e r i n g the w r i t i n g of political narrative. T h i s is especially true
for the e v i d e n c e c o n c e r n i n g the polis. T h e m a j o r i t y of the d o c u -
m e n t s are honorific decrees, o f t e n f o r the ruler or his officials: a
crucial d i m e n s i o n of dissent or resistance, b y its nature, cannot ever
i m p i n g e on the s m o o t h , b l a n d discourse of honours. 3 3 F u r t h e r m o r e ,

33 A salutary experience is to read Cic. Verr. 2.4.140-4, where Cicero describes a

Syracusan honorific decree (laudatio) as issuing veiled criticism of Verres, by praising

him in areas where he had precisely failed to perform his duty (or so Cicero claims). T h e
story, whatever its reality, at least raises the possibility of insincerity and reluctance
behind the institutionalized enthusiasm of the honorific decrees surviving in our evi-
the set forms in the decrees present a picture of politics as con-
sensus, rather than as differences: έ'δο^ε τηι βονλήι καΐ τώι δήμωι,:
€π€ίδη . . ., 'it seemed good to the city: since . . .', leading to unitary
decisions and actions. Y e t we know that both the Classical and post-
Classical polis experienced divisions: between rich and poor,
between individuals or groups within the élite. T h e s e divisions
often became apparent in the stress of wartime: T h u c y d i d e s docu-
ments the process not just in his set-pieces on stasis, but in his
detailed narrative of the end of the M y t i l e n e a n revolt, or of the
T h r a c i a n cities' reactions to Brasidas' overtures; likewise, the rapid
changes in allegiance w h i c h Phokaia underwent during the
R o m a n - S e l e u k i d war mirrored internal tensions and shifts. 3 4 T h e
case of Phokaia (preserved through literary accounts, and not
documentary material) illustrates how the Hellenistic kings had
supporters in the cities, in the form of well-disposed 'family friends'
(e.g. RC 17, 22), and possibly of wider groups of supporters. T h e
picture in the epigraphical sources is of a monolithic, totally
mobilised, polis·, there is no hint of internal debate, let alone conflict,
shifts in policy, tensions, changes, indifference, or of the role played
by individuals, or of the attitude of the citizenry (or groups of
citizens) over a period of time concerning the changes brought
about by royal conquest and its aftermath. 3 5 T h e inscriptions
simply talk of (e.g.) the A m y z o n i a n s , the T e i a n s taking a decision
and reacting to events en masse, as a unified c o m m u n i t y with a
single voice and purpose.
T h e s e difficulties must be borne in mind, w h e n trying to interpret
the results of close readings to the epigraphical material. H o w e v e r ,
their severity should not be exaggerated. T h e concern about the
picture of the Hellenistic city, as derived f r o m inscriptions, being
too 'monolithic', ma}' rather reflect our appetite to know more about
the conditions in w h i c h the decrees were produced than c o n d e m n

dence. For an example illustrating how to read stereotypical archival documents, O z o u f

1976: 198-9.
31 Mytilene: T h u c . 3.27-8, with D . Gillis, AJP 92 (1971), 38-47; Brasidas: T h u c .
4.84, 103, 104, 1 1 0 - 1 4 . Phokaia: Pol. 21.6, L i v . 37.9.1-4, 1 1 . 1 5 . O n the omission of
debate in the epigraphical evidence, Loraux 1997: 18: 'les décrets . . . loin de rendre
compte du déroulement effectif d'une assemblée, construisent et limitent le souvenir
qu'il convient d'en garder.' I also am grateful to R. Osborne for showing me a paper on
this issue.
35 P. M . Fraser, reviewing Orth 1977 in CR 30 (1980), 158, argues that a study of the

interaction between the Seleukids and cities should take the role of individual élite
families into account; but it seems to me that the evidence is still insufficient for this sort
of research (though note Carsana 1996, with reservations expressed by Gauthier, BE 97,
151 and a critical review b y I. Savalli-Lestrade in REG 1 1 1 (1998), 308-22; Savalli-
Lestrade 1996, for Attalid courtiers and their cities).
the picture of unified, consensual polis behaviour as unusable for the
historian. T h e polis was a place where divisions and differences
existed, but also where (ideally and, often, in reality) they were
overcome through politics, c o m m o n decision-making, and shared
ideology; in normal times, class differences, political opposition,
support for divergent foreign policies, all these sources of conflict
were compatible with a democratic model of decision-making and
a shared c o m m u n a l existence. 3 6 F o r g i n g consensus, or at least
reaching the appearance of consensus for the pragmatic purpose
of getting on with the life in c o m m o n , was precisely the point of
democratic decision-making. T h e inscribed decrees do not allow us
to study conflict and disagreement: what they present is the normal
outcome of internal processes—the decision attained, and firmly
imposed on the c o m m u n i t y as authoritative by the canonical forms
of the decree, implemented by the city's authorities, and presented
to the world and to posterity by publication and inscription. T h e
fact that the inscribed decrees present us with a limited w o r l d v i e w
(their information is restricted to the outcome) and a particular,
civic, ideology does not detract f r o m the status of the decisions
reached and acted on by the c o m m u n i t y as a whole. T h e s e decisions
represent the public face of the polis: as long as that fact is never
forgotten, the decrees can be considered as a legitimate and fasci-
nating object of study, especially since it is difficult to see beyond
them (so that, all too often, they are all we have), and since the
communal language of the decrees is the m e d i u m w h i c h creates the
polis' public face. T h e way to stud}' this language and these docu-
ments without believing that they are the whole story is to bear in
mind the pervasive violence and structures of exploitation that the
Hellenistic empires lived off, and w h i c h form the general context in
w h i c h the civic decrees were produced.

W i t h these remarks on the way in w h i c h the sources, especially

epigraphical, shape our perceptions and the forms we use to talk
about the past, we are back at our starting-point: what form to adopt
to talk about the Hellenistic world. In the present study, I have
avoided the increasingly popular form of the royal biography:
partly because I think that the ancient evidence is insufficient for
this sort of exercise (one needs only think of later periods, for
instance the M i d d l e A g e s already or the early modern period, to
realize this), and partly because the focus on the figure of the king
leaves out the experience and viewpoint of the local communities.

36 A s a well-documented example, see Ober 1989 for 4th-cent. Athens.

T h e starting-point I chose, as e m b o d i e d in a passage of L i v y (or his
source, Polybios), was a m o m e n t in Hellenistic history w h i c h
dramatized an important issue, the relation between king and city,
in a particular context; a test-case with a particular narrative origin
and outcome.
For the actual treatment of this issue, I avoided the full 'dossier
par thème' model, where the main text is subordinate to the
presentation of epigraphical documents, and, indeed, subsumed in
the commentary to these documents. A n o t h e r format I did not want
to adopt to study the relation between a specific king, A n t i o c h o s I I I ,
and the cities of Asia M i n o r , is the catalogue of evidence, city by
city. In this model, entries are devoted to the evidence for each
individual city along w i t h a thumbnail sketch of narrative history as
experienced locally: these entries are followed by attempts at inter-
pretation for (e.g.) 'royal policy' towards any polis, hopefully as a
basis for more general interpretations. But such attempts are
hindered by the lack of a full record for any single city, so that the
advantages of the approach (antiquarian delight, philological rigour,
attention to specifics) dissolve into uncertainty and speculation.
T h e present work is structured as a series of thematic studies, all
written around the confrontation between A n t i o c h o s I I I and the
cities of western Asia M i n o r . T h e themes treated have already been
sketched out above: the setting, both geographical and political, of
Seleukid Asia M i n o r ( C h . 1); the narrative history of Antiochos'
(re)conquest of Asia M i n o r ( C h . 2); the structures, actual and
ideological, of imperial power (Ch. 3); the existence of power as
interaction between rulers and ruled (Ch. 4). T h e s e studies run
through the material and the broadly defined topic at different
angles, and each uses the sources in different ways, appealing to
various techniques and approaches: reconstructing and piecing
together disparate, fragmentary information to produce histoire
événementielle·, teasing out the practical implications and the ideo-
logical assumptions of administrative documents; reading the
imperfect dialogue between royal letters and civic decrees, by taking
seriously and analysing the language of interaction.
T h e results of these different modes of enquiry are predictably
varied in tone and feel, between the traditional political narrative,
with the uncertainties entailed by the lacunary evidence, and
the synchronic analytical chapters, w h i c h can palliate evidence
problems by drawing on parallels in the documentary material. Y e t
these approaches do not lead to divergent, or contradictory, inter-
pretations: they rather reflect different understandings of the same
material and different ways to talk about it. Furthermore, the
studies are not, or not only, parallel exercices de style in the field of
Hellenistic historiography, but (as I hope to make clear in the body
of the argument and in the transitional sections) closely linked
thematically: together, they present an e m b e d d e d test case, w h i c h
helps us approach the issue of the relation between Hellenistic king
and city. T h e first way in w h i c h these studies are linked is that each
leads to the following one, through the realization that its o w n
results are only part of the historical reality that the whole book
seeks to describe and understand. T h e narrative of A n t i o c h o s '
conquests leads to an awareness that military narrative and its con-
cepts are, in themselves, inadequate to describe the exercise of
imperial power; hence a chapter on the structures of empire, w h i c h
itself ends with the awareness of the role played by ideology and
language, and therefore is continued by a chapter on political
language.
C o n v e r s e l y , the narrative establishes the precise context, the
m o v e m e n t s and vicissitudes of the historical actors: it thus grounds
the more thematic sections, and hence helps determine the exact
methodological status of the parallels adduced in those sections. I
am not using them to talk about idealized entities, the K i n g and the
C i t y ; for lack of a complete documentary record, the test-case of
A n t i o c h o s I I I has to be expanded b y parallels, w h i c h establish
its typicality, and hence enable generalizations about the diverse
spectrum of possibilities but also the unity of language and institu-
tions w h i c h characterized the Hellenistic world. T h e s e generaliza-
tions in turn can be qualified by the specific aspects of the test-case
I examine, and also further tested against other individual cases,
another function of the parallels in the thematic chapters. M o r e
generally, the work is structured as a succession of interlocking
studies, w h i c h illuminate each other by providing background and
context for individual series of insights. T h e narrative, by establish-
ing the characteristics of continual violence and the problematic,
precarious nature of the Seleukids' domination over Asia M i n o r ,
provides a significant context to understand the workings of empire,
practical and, especially, ideological (the imperial power's claims to
ubiquitous efficacy and the monopoly of definitions are part of the
illusion of inevitability, and hence as important an instrument of
domination as armies or taxation). In turn, the study of the struc-
tures of power, physical and ideological, provides the background
for the interaction between rulers and ruled through a formalized
language of benefactions, honours, and obligation: in order to avoid
taking statements made in this language for the whole story, we
must keep awareness of the role played by violence in constituting a
Hellenistic empire and of the structures of compulsion or exploita-
tion.
Finally, the structure of the work attempts to mirror the m o v e -
ment in the passage f r o m L i v y . T h e latter opens with a statement of
imperialist vision and imperial institutions, but ends with local civic
pride and values, embodied in the reply given to A n t i o c h o s III by
the recalcitrant cities: they proclaimed their determination to
preserve f r e e d o m even in the face of a starkly threatening imperial
power and its offer of accommodation within the framework of its
institutions and its ideology. Likewise, this work starts with two
chapters driven by the Seleukid viewpoint, either in the form of the
Seleukids' imagined past in Asia M i n o r or of the narrative of
A n t i o c h o s ' conquests, naturally shaped by the m o v e m e n t s and pro-
jects of the king; but the book ends with a chapter w h i c h seeks to
show the resilience and potency of civic language and ideals, w h i c h
transformed straightforward relations of power-as-possession into a
complicated interaction; the conclusion and envoi tries to character-
ize the Hellenistic age as one where the cities matter, because of
their local persistence, whereas any individual supra-poliad empire
is oddly precarious and labile. W h e n approaching the Hellenistic
world, it is crucial to pay attention to this p h e n o m e n o n and to find
a historiographical mode that can accommodate the imperial and the
local. T h i s is one last implication, w o r t h exploring in depth, w h i c h
we can draw f r o m the confrontation between the Great K i n g
and 'all the cities of Asia M i n o r ' . T h e w h o l e of the present work is
structured around this insight.
 C H A P T E R 1

T h e Seleukid past in Asia Minor

(281-223 BC)

ι . In All the Land beyond the Taurus, Just as under our Grandfather

O n 23 D y s t r o s , year 103 SE (210/9), A n t i o c h o s I I I , on the eve of his

eastern e x p e d i t i o n , sent a πρόσταγμα to Z e u x i s , the g o v e r n o r of
c i s - T a u r i c A s i a . T h e k i n g a p p o i n t e d his c h a m b e r l a i n , N i k a n o r ,
' h i g h - p r i e s t of all the shrines in all the land b e y o n d the T a u r u s ' , at
N i k a n o r ' s o w n request. In addition, ' w e t h o u g h t necessary that
N i k a n o r s h o u l d be in charge of the sanctuaries, and that their
r e v e n u e s and the other m a t t e r s should be a d m i n i s t e r e d b y h i m , j u s t
as u n d e r our g r a n d f a t h e r b y D i o n ' ; f u r t h e r m o r e , N i k a n o r w a s to
be m e n t i o n e d 'in the contracts and the other d o c u m e n t s for w h i c h
it is usual'. 1 Z e u x i s d u l y passed on the instructions: a c o p y w a s
f o u n d in n o r t h e r n M y s i a ; N i k a n o r is n a m e d as ' h i g h - p r i e s t ' in
d o c u m e n t s f r o m A m y z o n and X a n t h o s . 2 T h e prostagma apparently
b e l o n g s to 'the c o n t i n u i n g administrative w o r k . . . that the king
routinely dealt w i t h , w h i l e on m a j o r c a m p a i g n s , to keep the e m p i r e
ticking over'. 3 B u t in spite of its m u n d a n e appearance, the prostagma
on N i k a n o r deserves closer attention, for it is based on arresting
S e l e u k i d a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t the g e o g r a p h y and history of A s i a
Minor.
T h e άρχιερεύς των Ιερών πάντων a p p o i n t e d over all the land b e y o n d
the T a u r u s has been interpreted as a h i g h - p r i e s t of the ruler cult
o r g a n i z e d b y the S e l e u k i d state. B u t the d o c u m e n t n o w h e r e
m e n t i o n s ruler cult, unlike the e n a c t m e n t of 193 w h i c h (in insti-
t u t i n g cult for L a o d i k e I I I ) e x p l i c i t l y refers to h i g h - p r i e s t s of
A n t i o c h o s I I I and his πρόγονοι; f u r t h e r m o r e , the state cult for
A n t i o c h o s I I I w a s p r o b a b l y f o u n d e d only in c.204, on the k i n g ' s

1 D o c u m e n t 4, 29-41; 44—5.
2 Documents 9, 10, 23.
! S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 198.
return f r o m his eastern expedition. 4 It is unlikely that the document
abbreviates the title of Nikanor, since it is the official act of appoint-
ment. T h e consequence is that in the document found at P a m u k ç u ,
A n t i o c h o s III simply appoints a high-priest: the immediate parallel
is RC 44, where he appoints a Friend high-priest of A p o l l o and
A r t e m i s Daittai at D a p h n e , in almost identical terms to the inscrip-
tion concerning Nikanor. T h e parallel brings out the character of
N i k a n o r ' s appointment: he is to be high-priest of every shrine in
c i s - T a u r i c Asia, with authority over the local priests of these
shrines; furthermore, in virtue of his functions as 6 επί των Ιερών, he
will administrate the shrines' income. T h i s interpretation is con-
firmed by the activity of N i k a n o r ' s successor as 'high priest' in
Attalid Asia M i n o r , E u t h y d e m o s , whose authorization a local shrine
(the sanctuary of A p o l l o Pleurenos, north of Sardeis, not linked
with state ruler cult) needed before setting up a stele listing initiates
of the god. 5
T h e prostagma of 20g is not about royal cult, but about imperial
practice and language. T h e geographical sphere of N i k a n o r ' s c o m -
petence was patterned on the c i s - T a u r i c c o m m a n d held by Z e u x i s
( C h . 3 § 2); the royal enactment created a unified space, where indi-
vidual difference and geographical expanse could be integrated
under a single, centrally appointed official. T h e size and diversity of
the region underline the forcefulness of A n t i o c h o s ' imperial vision.
Instructions to include N i k a n o r in the heading of documents
imposed the signs of an unified Seleukid dominion, akin to the
dating in local documents by the Seleukid era and by the reign of
A n t i o c h o s III. T h e same symbolic effect of 'imperial' chronological
markers appears in the 'Ptolemaic' city of X a n t h o s , in a document
dated by the regnal year of Ptolemy III and by the tenure of various
priesthoods at Alexandria. 6 In addition to the content of the pros-

4 Nikanor priest in ruler cult; Malay 1987: 1 3 - 1 5 . Enactment of 193: document 37.

State cult for Antiochos III only after 205: J. and L . Robert 1983: 168 n. 40.
5 Ptolemaios, the 'strategos and archiereus' of Koile-Syria w h o appears in the

Skythopolis inscription ( S E G 29.1613, lines 10, 11, 21-2, 29) and at Soloi (document
21, 2), perhaps occupied a similar function for his province, rather than a priesthood
within the state-organized ruler cult? See Welles RC, 159 n. 7, 'he, as representative of
the state, had supervision and control over particularly the finances of the temples
in his satrapy', Bengtson 1944: 130 n. 1; for parallels, Bengtson 1952: 141-3: the
Ptolemaic governor of C y p r u s was also 'high-priest of the shrines in the island' (as
well as, admittedly, a priest of the cult of the Ptolemies). A l s o Welles, RC 319, s.v.
άρχιερωαύνη for the imperial overseer of local religion in Roman Egypt. Euthydemos:
document 49.
6 SEG 3 6 . 1 2 1 8 — a Xanthian legal document dated to the fourth year of Ptolemy I V
(202/1), and to the time when 'those in Alexandria' were priests of Alexander and of the
deified Ptolemies: the formula clearly indicates that the preamble performs a symbolical
function as well as a practical one (see L . Koenen, in Bulloch et al. 1993: 46—8).
tagma, its very production assumes that A n t i o c h o s III has the
authority to name N i k a n o r to a position of control over all the
shrines in c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , both in the symbolic form of the
high priesthood and the actual administrative p o w e r over temple
finances. L e s s grand than the high priesthood, this overseership of
local shrine finances also a s s u m e s — c l o a k e d in the language of
euergetical solicitude—authority and control, exemplified in non-
Anatolian examples such as Heliodoros' interest in the wealth of
the T e m p l e at Jerusalem (probably accumulated surplus f r o m sub-
sidies). 7
A n t i o c h o s ' decision was made in reference to 'our grandfather',
A n t i o c h o s II, 8 combining imperial discourse about geography and
power with awareness of the past. By framing present action in
reference to an earlier m e m b e r of the dynasty, simply referred to as
'our grandfather', A n t i o c h o s I I I claims to be acting within a history
of Seleukid control, in all of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , manifest in con-
tinuity of administrative practice and of dynastic rule.
T h e appointment of N i k a n o r contains a dialogue between per-
ceived past and present actions; to be appreciated, this attitude
must be located within the context of Seleukid m e m o r y about the
geography and the history of Asia M i n o r . A parallel is the language
in w h i c h Polybios describes the vicissitudes of Seleukid power in
'the region on this side of the T a u r u s ' . U p o n his accession, Seleukos
III hears that Attalos I 'had already subjected all of the land on
this side of the T a u r u s ' (Pol. 4.48.7) and hastens to defend his
πράγματα. A f t e r the m u r d e r of Seleukos I I I , Achaios undertook to
recover all of the land on this side T a u r u s (Pol. 4.48.10): the verb
used is άνεκτατο, 'to acquire back'. Polybios writes of A c h a i o s '
successes unambiguously: he shut Attalos I into Pergamon, and
took control of all the rest, των δε λοιπών πάντων ην εγκρατής (Pol.
4.48.11). A f t e r his usurpation, Achaios is regularly referred to as the
master of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r (Pol. 4.2.6; 4.48.3; 8.20.11).
T h o u g h the form used is consistently hτίταδε τον Ταύρου ('on this
side of T a u r u s ' ) instead of the expression επεκεινα ('on that side')
preferred by A n t i o c h o s I I I in his prostagma,9 Polybios' references to
Achaios assume that all of Asia M i n o r was part of the Seleukid
πράγματα, and that, before the usurpation of this region by Attalos I

7 T h e office was later held by one Demetrios: document 44 (unless this is a local

subordinate). Seleukids and shrines: Bickerman 1938: 121-2; Rostovtzeff 1941: 504-7;
SEG 3 5 . 1 1 7 0 for Antiochos I and his co-regent Seleukos 'giving back' incomes to the
shrine of Apollo T o u m o u n d o s (perhaps adjudication over land-dispute?). Heliodoros:
Bickerman 1980: 159-91. Briant 1982: 327, for Achaimenid control of shrines.
8 D o c u m e n t 4, 40-1.
5 D o c u m e n t 4, 29—30.
and Achaios, it had entirely and unproblematically been under
Seleukid control.
In super-power diplomacy, the Seleukid claims could be brought
forth more explicitly. 1 0 A n t i o c h o s I I I asserted ancestral claims to
ownership in his diplomatic exchanges with the Romans: at the con-
ference of 196 at Lysimacheia, 1 1 the king stated that he had crossed
into Europe 'to recover (άνακτησόμενος) the Chersonesos and the
cities of T h r a c e , since rule (αρχή) over these places was rightly his
more than that of anyone else' (Pol. 18.51.3). A n t i o c h o s appealed to
history: victory over L y s i m a c h o s had made Seleukos I master of all
of his adversary's former k i n g d o m , as Βορίκτητος, spear-won terri-
tory; this implicitly justified A n t i o c h o s ' rights to the cities of Asia
M i n o r as well. N o w , after some opportunistic inroads by P t o l e m y
III, 1 2 then by Philip V , A n t i o c h o s was not taking possession
(κτασθαι) of these places, but 're-taking possession, in virtue of his
o w n rights': ανακτασθαι τοΐς Ιδίοις δίκαιοι? συγχρωμενος (Pol. 18.51.6).
In 193, A n t i o c h o s ' envoy Hegesianax of Alexandreia T r o a s pro-
tested against the injunction that A n t i o c h o s should evacuate
'Europe' (his conquests in T h r a c e ) if he wished the R o m a n s to
keep out of Asia: Hegesianax rehearsed the Seleukid rights to
L y s i m a c h o s ' former possessions of T h r a c e and Chersonesos, con-
quered by Seleukos I; he contrasted A n t i o c h o s ' ancestral rights to
these regions with the lack of any R o m a n claim to A s i a ( L i v .
34.58.4-6; A p p . Syr. 6). A t a conference held at Ephesos later the
same year, the Seleukid ambassador M i n n i o n w o u l d appeal to
historical claims in order to j u s t i f y A n t i o c h o s ' right to levy tribute
f r o m the cities of Ionia and Aiolis: hello superatas a maioribus, sti-
pendarias ac vectigales factas in antiquum im repetit, '[these cities,]
w h i c h were conquered in war by his ancestors and made to pay
tribute, [Antiochos] has recovered within their ancient status' ( L i v .
35.16.6). L i v y ' s repetit must translate the verb ανακτάσθαι, w h i c h
appears twice in the speech of A n t i o c h o s I I I at L y s i m a c h e i a as well
as in the description of A c h a i o s ' campaign against Attalos I. T h e
consistency of the vocabulary corresponds to the unity of Seleukid
conceptions about their history in Asia M i n o r , and the claims w h i c h
this history enabled in the present. 1 3

T h e verb άνακτάσθαι, also appears in direct address to a city.

10 Literary evidence: Schmitt 1964: 86.
11 Pol. 18.51 (Liv. 33.40 rearranges the order of the arguments; A p p . Syr. 3).
12 Presumably Ptolemy I I I , since the area under dispute is T h r a c e and the
Chersonesos.
13 In Appian (Syr. i; 12), Antiochos claims Ionia and Aiolis because they used to
belong to the 'former kings of Asia', presumably the Achaimenids; which is similar, but
not quite the same as appeal to ancestral rights.
L a o d i k e III refers to the benevolence of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the Iasians
after 're-acquiring y o u r city', την νμετεραν πάλιν . . . άνακτησάμενος. A
related expression (with the same άνα- prefix) is found in Z e u x i s '
letter to Herakleia under Latmos: άνακεκομισμενων ημών τώι βασιλεΐ
την πάλιν εζ άρχής ύπάρχονσαν τοις πρόγονοις αυτοί», 'as w e had
recovered for the king the city, w h i c h originally belonged to his
ancestors', an even more explicit statement than Laodike's. 1 4 T h e s e
documents show that Polybios' and L i v y ' s accounts preserve the
vocabulary of Seleukid m e m o r y . It is therefore an accident of
preservation that we only have these two cases of historical claims to
authority and ownership in direct interaction with the cities: such
references to rights based on past ownership must have been
c o m m o n in royal discourse addressed to the cities.
Asia M i n o r was not the only area where claims were justified by
appeal to inherited rights. In the conflict over K o i l e - S y r i a (Pol.
5.67.2), A n t i o c h o s I I I , determined to prevail in the field of armed
conflict (τοις οπλοις) and of legal rights (τοις δίκαιοι?), claimed
not to have acted unjustly in invading K o i l e - S y r i a , since he
could lay historical claims to 'the most p o w e r f u l and just titles of
property', κνριωτάτas και δικαιότατα? κτησε^, based on the victor}'
w o n by L y s i m a c h o s , Kassandros, and Seleukos I over A n t i g o n o s
M o n o p h t h a l m o s (the original ruler of K o i l e - S y r i a ) and on the
victors' agreement to concede K o i l e - S y r i a to Seleukos I (Pol.
5.67.6-8). Likewise, just as Antiochos I I I (and Polybios) could
speak about c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r as if Seleukid authority in
that region were absolute, Atropatene, Parthyene, and Baktria,
independent principalities, were still mentioned by the Seleukids as
'satrapies'. 1 5 Just as cities of Asia M i n o r were addressed as historic-
ally subjects of the Seleukids, A n t i o c h o s I I I during the eastern
expedition asserted his position in respect to the Baktrian k i n g d o m
by accusing the Baktrian king E u t h y d e m o s of being a rebel
(αποστάτη?) seceding f r o m the Seleukid empire, to w h i c h Baktria
rightfully belonged (Pol. 1 1 . 3 4 . 1 - 2 ) . In the following century,
A n t i o c h o s I V , during the Sixth Syrian W a r (168), justified himself
before an audience of ambassadors f r o m pro-Ptolemaic cities

14 Documents 26 A , I 6-8; 31 Β, II 8-10.

15 Schmitt 1964: 123, on Pol. 5.43.6 (the rebel M o l o n secures his relations with 'the
neighbouring satrapies'); since the actual Seleukid provinces that neighboured M o l o n ' s
province resisted him later, these 'satrapies' must be the former Seleukid provinces
which had seceded earlier in the third century. Walbank 1965: 264, bases his disagree-
ment with Schmitt's view on a discussion of Pol. 11.34.14, where the expression 'the
upper satraps' is taken b y Schmitt also to designate independent princelings. Walbank's
criticism of the latter point is justified, but does not disprove Schmitt's interpretation of
Pol. 5.43.6.
bent u p o n brokering a peace. H e referred to τα άρχής δίκαια, his
original rights to o w n e r s h i p (κτήσις) over K o i l e - S y r i a , originating in
the history of the D i a d o c h s (Pol. 28.20.1-9). A s P o l y b i o s o b s e r v e s ,
A n t i o c h o s I V , w i t h these a r g u m e n t s , 'convinced not only himself,
but also his audience that he was right' (Pol. 28.20.10).
T h e parallels provide a context for any interpretation of the
claims f o r m u l a t e d in regard to Asia M i n o r . O b v i o u s l y , the)' p e r f o r m
a legal f u n c t i o n , by asserting titles to property 1 6 f o u n d e d on two
principles w h i c h E. B i c k e r m a n regarded as the legal u n d e r p i n n i n g s
of the S e l e u k i d empire: the right of conquest, and the right of
inheritance. A n epigraphical d o c u m e n t , m e n t i o n i n g the establish-
ment of S e l e u k i d p o w e r in Asia M i n o r , succinctly m e n t i o n s both
principles: ' S e l e u k o s having gained p o w e r (έπικρατήσαντος) in the
battle against L y s i m a c h o s , A n t i o c h o s , his son, having succeeded to
the kingship (διαδεξάμενος την βασιλειαν)'. 1 ' H o w could these t w o
apparently contradictory principles coexist? B i c k e r m a n argued that
rights to o w n e r s h i p w e r e not established by mere takeover, but b y
the utter defeat of an o p p o n e n t , resulting in his extinction (as in the
case of A n t i g o n o s at Ipsos or of L y s i m a c h o s at K o u r o u p e d i o n ) or in
the formal surrender of his title to o w n e r s h i p . 1 8 T h e r e f o r e , accord-
ing to B i c k e r m a n , aggression f o l l o w e d by o c c u p a t i o n , even for a
length of time, did not create rights to o w n e r s h i p (in contrast,
R o m a n law a c k n o w l e d g e d o c c u p a t i o n (usucapio) as a source for
legitimate ownership). 1 9 W h a t mattered was not length or continuity
of o c c u p a t i o n , b u t the antiquity of the claim: for B i c k e r m a n , the
claims of A n t i o c h o s I I I to the cities of A s i a M i n o r and T h r a c e w e r e
justified w i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k of G r e e k legal thought, 2 0 because the
rights established by the victory over L y s i m a c h o s still held true;
diplomatic difficulties b e t w e e n A n t i o c h o s III and the R o m a n s thus
resulted f r o m a m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g b e t w e e n different legal c o n c e p -
tions in matters of property.

16 On past narratives (in the poets and historians) as legal justification (μαρτύρια) of

titles to ownership, see Holleaux 1938a: 404 n. 3; Chaniotis 1988: 1 1 4 n. 237; Curty 1989.
17 OGIS 335, lines 132-3; Bikerman 1938: 1 4 - 1 7 ; further references in M e h l 1980/1:
175-6·
18 Mehl 1980/1 neglects the distinction between debellatio (Bickermann 1932«: 5 1 - 2 )

and mere forcible occupation: this leads him to misunderstand the rights of conquest as
interpreted by Bickerman.
19 Bickermann 1932a: 5 1 - 2 ; Bikerman 1950: 123: mere occupation by force does not

create 'droit de propriété'. Parallels for 'reacquiring': Bikerman 1950: 123-4. A g y m -

nasiarch on Athenian-ruled Delos inscribed the list of gymnasiarchs άφ' ov 6 δήμος 8ià
Ρωμαίων άνεκτήαατο την νήσον, commemorating the recovery of Delos by A t h e n s in 167
(Robert 1983: 249 quoting A . Plassart, BCH 36 (1912), 395, no. 9).
20 Bickermann 1932a: 53. T h e envoys of Ptolemy I V , in the negotiations during the

Fourth Syrian War, whilst proclaiming their rights to Koile-Syria, admitted the
Seleukids claim to 'all of Asia', abetted by Ptolemy I himself (Pol. 5.67.10).
 T h i s view might be too simple. T h o u g h there existed accepted
norms of international behaviour, there was no universally acknow-
ledged, written, code of international law or Kriegesrecht (Mehl
1980/1: 177); w h e n A . Mastrocinque speaks of a 'conflitto di diritto
internazionale' and of the views held by the 'giurisprudenti
seleucidici', this description strikes the w r o n g note (Mastrocinque
1983: 9 1 - 5 ) . T h e legalistic approach passes over the fact that the
language of property disputes is applied to acts of conquest and
warfare. T h e insistence of A n t i o c h o s I I I on his inherited rights to
regions w h i c h in his view were rightfully Seleukid can be inter-
preted as a programme of reconquest, the Great Idea to w h i c h
A n t i o c h o s devoted his life. 21 T h e theme of Seleukid 'ancestors' of
Seleukid kings, important in royal ideology, 2 2 reached a new level of
intensity under A n t i o c h o s I I I , w h o inaugurated a joint state cult to
himself and his ancestors. 23 S c h m i t t speaks of A n t i o c h o s ' policy of
restoring his ancestors' empire ('Restitutor orbis'), by a plan of con-
quest (jEroberungsplan), though Schmitt is careful to point out that
within this master-plan, specific contingencies and o p p o r t u n i s m
played their role. 24
M o s t importantly, a legalistic approach overlooks the political
nature of the claims to 'ownership'. T h e Seleukids spoke about
the past, in terms of ownership rights, not simply in reference to
accepted legal principles, but in order to cover up or legitimize
aggression against other kingdoms, the violent takeover of cities
and the imposition of control in oppressive manifestations such as
tribute or garrisons (Pol. 21.41.2). T h e problematic nature of con-
quest, and of royal power, is clear in the passage of L i v y describing
the resistance of S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s to A n t i o c h o s I I I (above,
Introduction). T h e same passage also shows how conquest is
deproblematized by being grounded in the past: A n t i o c h o s decided
to reduce all the cities of Asia in antiquum imperii formulant ( L i v .
33.38). 25 O t h e r examples, mostly in the epigraphical documenta-
tion, bring out the legitimizing role of allusion to the past, to the
point that πάτριος χώρα is often used for territory w h i c h was pre-

21 Bikermann 1932a: 51; Schmitt 1964: 85; G r u e n 1986: 6 1 2 - 1 9 f ° r a short account of

Antiochos' actions and long term plans.

22 RC 15, line 23 (under Antiochos II?); RC 22, line 2 (under Seleukos II) with
Welles's comments, p. 109.
23 Rostovtzeft" 1935, Bikerman 1938: 247-50. Mastrocinque 1983: 1 1 4 - 1 6 for celebra-

tion of the ancestors under Antiochos III, notably in Seleukid literature.

24 Schmitt 1964: ch. 2; policy: 85—8 (Eroberungsplan); 86—90, for nuances. D o u b t s on

a master plan of reconquest: Badian 1966fr: 7 1 1 - 1 2 ; Will 1982: 52-3.

25 H. White has argued that historical narratives impose moralizing agendas and

authoritative meanings that enable social control (White 1992: 1-25). Debatable in
general, this view is appropriate for the Seleukid version of the past.
cisely contested between two states. 26 T h e functions performed by
the Seleukid version of the past call for an exploration of what we
know about Asia M i n o r before A n t i o c h o s I I I , to confront the
Seleukid version with our o w n narratives; these produce a picture of
fluctuating powers and local responses, at variance with the
Seleukid claims but providing insights into their meaning.

2. Seleukid Asia Minor

T h e starting point is obvious enough: the f o u n d i n g act of violence,

the victory of Seleukos I over L y s i m a c h o s at K o u r o u p e d i o n in the
L y d i a n plain (Feb. 281 BC), w h e n 'all of L y s i m a c h o s ' k i n g d o m
became spear-won to Seleukos'; this m o m e n t (and its aftermath in
the years d o w n to 279) marked the resolution of the complicated,
fluid history of the Diadochoi into a more recognizably stable
system, the Hellenistic world, w h i c h was still riven by super-power
warfare, but saw far less radical changes in the political make up.' 2 7
T h e r e is no surviving continuous account of Seleukid activities in
Asia M i n o r , but only fragments of literary evidence, so we must rely
heavily on the epigraphical documentation. T h e latter requires
patience and ingenuity, w h e n used to piece together political-
military narrative relations; its great advantage is that it provides
direct evidence for the relations between the Seleukids and the local
communities. 2 8
It is possible to offer a summary narrative by reign. In the seven
months between K o u r o u p e d i o n and an ill-fated expedition to
Europe to claim the rest of L y s i m a c h o s ' k i n g d o m , Seleukos I
started reorganizing his new Anatolian province. 2 9 U p o n his
26 J. and L. Robert 1989: 75-6; 1 M a c c . 15.33-4, used against the Seleukids. CIL ι2
725 speaks of the Lykians' ancestral liberty, 'recovered' after 167; OGIS 337 speaks of
the 'paternal democracy' (in the sense of independence) of P e r g a m o n — b o t h of which
are pious inventions.
21 Pol. 18.51.4; Will 1979: 10. T h e events are covered in the recent biographies of

Seleukos (Mehl 1986: 290-9; Grainger 1990: 1 7 3 - 9 1 ) and Lysimachos ( L u n d 1992:

184-206; Franco 1993: 58-64). For a detailed, up-to-date narrative of the last years of
the Diadochoi, Strobel 1996: 186-205. Rough Kilikia is a special case: it had already
come under Seleukid control in 295 (Plut. Dem. 32 and 47), so that the two items we can
ascribe to Seleukos I probably date before 281 (the foundation of Seleukeia on
Kalykadnos, the benefaction of Seleukos 1 to the temple at Olba: M a g i e 1950: 268, 269,
C o h e n 1995: 369-71, Bringmann and von Steuben 1995: 5 1 7 , no. 460). T h e r e is some
evidence for cities that did not come to terms with Seleukos I: apart from Herakleia
Pontike ( M e m n o n FGrHist 434 F 7), see L e Rider 1971/2: 238 on cities that went on
striking lysimachuses after 281.
28 M o s t of the evidence is gathered in Orth 1977 (in 'decreasing order of amount of

evidence available').
29 Expedition to Europe: M e m n o n FGrHist 434 F 8.1-3; Justin 17.2.4 (seven
assassination (by his protégé Ptolemy K e r a u n o s , a son of Ptolemy I)
in 281, he was succeeded by his son and co-regent, A n t i o c h o s I
(281-261), whose reign is marked by wars. 30 Early on, he fought a
war against the ' N o r t h e r n L e a g u e ' of recalcitrant cities on the Black
Sea allied with the k i n g d o m of Bithynia; he also fought against the
king of the Macedonians, A n t i g o n o s Gonatas. M o r e serious was the
arrival of Celtic invaders, in a mass migration, part of the Celtic
population m o v e m e n t s w h i c h disrupted the high politics of the
Hellenistic world in the years 280-^.275. T h e Galatians crossed into
Asia M i n o r (some b r o u g h t over by N i k o m e d e s I of Bithynia during
his fight against Antiochos, some crossing the Hellespont of their
o w n volition). T h e y w r o u g h t great havoc, vividly attested in
inscriptions, in L y d i a and Ionia in the 270s and in Phrygia in 268/7;
but A n t i o c h o s I defeated them in the 'Elephant Battle', of u n k n o w n
location and uncertain date (t.269?); the Galatians remained in
possession of a vast territory in central Anatolia. 3 1 T h e evidence
illustrates the violence of their onslaught and the permanent threat
of depredations, but also the survival of the Seleukid state and the
continued operation of its forms, as implied by documents such as
the village decree found near Denizli (I. Laodikeia am Lykos 1, f r o m
W ö r r l e 1975) or the L y d i a n d o c u m e n t s with their Seleukid dating
formulas ( Τ Α Μ 5.2.881). A n t i o c h o s I also had to face a super-
p o w e r rival, P t o l e m y II, in the First Syrian W a r , fought in A s i a
M i n o r and Syria; finally, he was confronted w i t h a recalcitrant
local power, E u m e n e s (I), the dynast of P e r g a m o n , w h o defeated
h i m and asserted the independence of his principality. T h e wars of
A n t i o c h o s II are even less well documented, though he seems to
have been successful in them. H i s activity can be traced on the
Straits ( M e m n o n FGrHist 434 F 15 mentions a war against
Byzantion), and possibly in T h r a c e (Polyain. 4.16). 3 2 T h e well-

months). O n Seleukos after Kouroupedion and before his western expedition, Grainger
1990: 183-7; M e h l 1986: 299-315.
30 On Antiochos I, Will 1979: 135-52; S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 2 1 - 3 7 ;

Strobel 1996: 206-14.

31 Will 1979: 143-4; Wörrle 1975: 6 1 - 7 1 , proposing the date of c.269 or even later for

the Elephant Battle; Robert, OMS vii. 538-9; Mitchell 1993: 13-19; and now especially
Strobel 1991 and Strobel 1996 (reconstructing two main conflicts between Antiochos I
and the Galatians: 278-C.275, when the Galatians supported Nikomedes I of Bithynia;
c.269, when, on this view, they invaded the Seleukid dominion before being defeated at
the Elephant Battle).
32 On Antiochos II, Will 1979: 234-48, 293-4; collection of documents with discrete

analyses of them in Orth 1977: 149—72. Bella quam plurima of Antiochos II: Porphyry,
FGrHist 260 F 43 (=Jer. Comm. in Dan. 11.6). T h r a c e : the alliance between a king
Antiochos and Lysimacheia is perhaps to be attributed to Antiochos II rather than
Antiochos I (but certainly not Antiochos III: A p p e n d i x 3). Straits: the alliance between
k n o w n Samian decree honouring Boulagoras ( S E G 1.366, lines
5-20) reveals that A n t i o c h o s II annexed parts of the Samian
A n a i t i s — a n d that a n u m b e r of his Friends helped themselves to
estates on Samian territory.
W i t h i n this time-span, one area of early Seleukid activity w h i c h
left its mark on the landscape of Asia M i n o r was royal 'coloniza-
tion', the foundation of new cities, the refounding or renaming of
previously existing cities, and the settlement of soldiers (often
Macedonians) in 'military colonies'; the latter are well attested in
L y d i a , for instance at T h y a t e i r a ( O G I S 211). S o m e of these founda-
tions reflect the involvement of a particular king, such as Antiocheia
in the T r o a d (founded out of K e b r e n and Birytis, detached f r o m
Alexandreia T r o a s ) , established by A n t i o c h o s I or II, both of w h o m
were active in north-west Anatolia and T h r a c e ; or Stratonikeia, in
south-western Karia, probably founded by A n t i o c h o s II as part
of his campaigns west of the M a r s y a s (next section). Others were
located along the routes, especially the 'southern route' f r o m
T r a l l e i s to northern Syria, via the Kilikian gates 33 in the M a e a n d e r
valley (Tralleis, renamed Seleukeia; N y s a , the product of a Seleukid
synoikism; Antiocheia on Maeander; Laodikeia on Lykos,
Hierapolis, Apameia/Kelainai), and at the start of the central
Anatolian segment (Antiocheia near Pisidia; perhaps Apollonia in
Pisidia; Seleukeia 'Sidera'; Laodikeia Ivekaumene). Routes branch-
ing off this main road also received Seleukid foundations: Apollonia
under Salbake on the T a b a i plateau, on the short-cut off the
M a e a n d e r valley, up the G e y r e valley, and to the A c i p a y a m plain;
A l a b a n d a , renamed or refounded as Antiocheia, at the north end of
the M a r s y a s valley; Seleukeia on K a l y k a d n o s , on the road f r o m the
coast through R o u g h Kilikia to central Anatolia. 3 4 Exact attribution
to w h i c h e v e r of the first three Seleukids is often difficult, in the state
of the evidence (because of the brevity of his stay in Anatolia,
Seleukos I is unlikely to have been the most active). W h a t is strik-
ing is the large n u m b e r of foundations, and their presence in the
Anatolian lieux de passage: they constituted visible signs of Seleukid
power, expressed though dynastic names, and wrote the Seleukids
into the landscape.

Lysimacheia and a king Antiochos must be attributed to the time of Antiochos II (or
perhaps I) rather than Antiochos III: Gauthier and Ferrary 1981.
33 S y m e 1995: 3-23 on 'the Royal Road', from the Maeander valley to the east, via the

crucial crossroad in Phrygia, near modern A f y o n . T h i s is the route taken b y the T e n

T h o u s a n d : X e n . Anab. 1.2.7—21.
34 T h e evidence and the bibliography are gathered and discussed in Cohen 1995;

Billows 1995: 145-82 for a general survey.

 Other manifestations of Seleukid presence were the structures of
state power, w h i c h I will discuss later, drawing on both the earlier
evidence and the documents f r o m the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I ( C h . 3).
For the present purposes of filling in the background to the pros-
tagma issued by A n t i o c h o s III in 209, it might be e n o u g h to evoke
an impression of the structures in Seleukid Asia M i n o r : the gover-
nors and their subordinates, the financial officials, the 'bureaucracy'
through w h i c h royal orders flowed both vertically to reach subject
communities and horizontally between officials, 35 the armies, the
fortresses and their commanders; the 'provincial capital' of Sardeis,
the world of the ancient Hellenic cities (mostly near the sea), the
sanctuaries, the tributary lands stretching f r o m the Hellespont to
the Taurus, 3 6 the villages, the cities in the royal land, usually royal
foundations; and finally the routes 37 such as the southern highway
mentioned above. T h e picture can be capped by the figure of
A n t i o c h o s II as he appears in the Boulagoras inscription, m o v i n g up
country from the royal residence at Ephesos, on his w a y to the
'provincial capital' of Sardeis, followed by a Samian embassy intent
upon reclaiming estates seized by the king's Friends and finally
restored to the Samians after a hearing before the king.
T h e evidence suggests an increase in intensity and sophistication
of these structures under A n t i o c h o s II. His northern activity is
reflected in the coinage of some cities in the T r o a d , whose issues of
alexanders were replaced by royal Seleukid coinage, in an assertion
of royal authority; likewise, L y s i m a c h e i a , allied to A n t i o c h o s I,
seems to have been taken over by A n t i o c h o s II, under w h o m the
city minted Seleukid tetradrachms. 3 8 T h e same intensification of
royal control can be seen in documents recording a sale of royal land
to Laodike I (Inschr. Didyma 492, cf. RC 18-20), and attesting to
complex forms of Seleukid land-administration (a similar trans-
action under A n t i o c h o s I, documented in RC 1 0 - 1 3 , allows us to
measure the difference). A t Aigai, a boundary-stone records a
survey marking out civic territory under A n t i o c h o s II (Herrmann
1959), perhaps implying the same desire to record and clarify the
Seleukids' cadastral knowledge of the immense Anatolian province.
35 For instance, RC 19; royal archives, RC 18, lines 27-8 and RC 19, lines 1 5 - 1 6 .
36 Laffi 1971: pi. 10.2, gives a photograph (June 1970) of the plain near the temple of
Zeus at Aizanoi, in Phrygia: the rolling agricultural plain just after the harvest, a wagon
heaped high with corn, the small figures of peasants in the landscape, help imagine
(without any pretension at rigorous historical ecology) the inland swathe of Seleukid
Asia Minor.
37 RC 20, lines 1 0 - 1 1 , proves that there was a distinct category of 'royal roads', όδος

βασιλική.
38 Seleukid coinage replacing alexanders at Lampsakos, A b y d o s , and Alexandreia

T r o a s : L e Rider 1971/2: 234-9. Lysimacheia: Ferrary and Gauthier 1981.

In the context of increasingly active and complex royal control, it
comes as no surprise to hear of D i o n , the official in charge of the
shrines and their income, appointed under A n t i o c h o s II; nor is it
surprising that A n t i o c h o s I I I should seek precedent f r o m the time
of his active and successful grandfather (see § 1 )
A n o t h e r aspect of Seleukid Asia M i n o r was the relation between
king and city. M o s t of the documentary evidence comes f r o m the
cities, w h i c h are at pains to present a positive image. Cities paid
honours to the Seleukid king, from physical objects such as the
crown and the golden 'hospitality gifts' offered by the Erythraians
(RC 15), to more impressive f o r m s — f o r instance, honorific statues
(εικόνες), attested at Priene for Seleukos I and A n t i o c h o s I, and at
Ilion for (probably) A n t i o c h o s I, in a lavish version: a gilt equestrian
image set up in the most visible spot of the temple of Athena Ilias. 39
T h e erection of statues belongs to the idiom of civic honours for
benefactors; more intriguing are the quasi-cultic and cultic honours
w h i c h acknowledged royal power: the naming of civic subdivisions
or of months in the civic calendar after kings, the celebration of
festivals in honour of a king or named after h i m (such as the
Antiocheia of K o l o p h o n ) and the offering of sacrifices to the king
(for instance T e o s for A n t i o c h o s I). 40 A good example is S m y r n a ,
w h i c h multiplied cultic honours for the Seleukids. M o n t h s received
Seleukid names: A n t i o c h e o n , Stratonikeon, and L a o d i k e o n , imply-
ing festivals for their namesakes (attested in the case of the
Antiocheia). C u l t s are specifically documented for A n t i o c h o s I ('god
and saviour'), A n t i o c h o s II, Stratonike (under the title 'Aphrodite
Stratonikis': the main civic shrine of A p h r o d i t e now associated a
Seleukid queen to the goddess), and Seleukos II. 41 A s in the case of
the inscriptions w h i c h record them, these 'honours w o r t h mention-
ing' (τιμαι αξιόλογοι'. OGIS 22g, line 10) were intended as perma-
nent additions to the civic landscape: the Seleukid months of
S m y r n a survived into the imperial period (Robert ig66b: 15).
H o n o u r s for the king were part of a dialogue, where the king
heard petitions and granted benefactions (as in RC 15), in an
atmosphere of mutual goodwill (evvoia: e.g. OGIS 229, lines 5 - 1 o) 42

55 Priene: Inschr. Priene 18, line 86; Ilion: OGIS 219, lines 35-8 (for attribution see
A p p e n d i x 1).
40 O n honours for kings, Gauthier 1985 and Price 1984: 25-40. T h e evidence for

cultic honours to the Seleukids (after Seleukos I) is discussed by Habicht 1970: 83-5
for Antiochos I at Ilion, and 9 1 - 1 0 5 for the Ionian League ( O G I S 222), Erythrai
(probably), T e o s ( C I G 3075) and Miletos (honours for Antiochos II).
41 Habicht 1970: 99-102 (but see Rigsby 1996: 97—9, arguing that the title was a pre-

existing epithet and not invented to honour the Seleukid queen).

42 O n this theme, in the context of Antiochos I I I , see C h . 4.
T h i s picture of the relations b e t w e e n city and ruler as d i p l o m a c y
and cordial reciprocity is of course exactly the image w h i c h the
rituals and the d o c u m e n t s of the cities s o u g h t to p u b l i c i z e in
p e r m a n e n t f o r m . T h i s is not a reliable source to evaluate the place
of the cities w i t h i n the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e and their relation w i t h the
kings; H e u s s ' s excessive reliance on the discourse p r o d u c e d b y the
cities resulted in his m u c h - c r i t i c i z e d view of royal de iure respect for
city a u t o n o m y ( H e u s s 1937). A t the other e x t r e m e , W . O r t h has
a p p r o a c h e d the d o c u m e n t s w i t h suspicion, and e n d e a v o u r e d to
s h o w h o w the cordial language of h o n o u r s and reciprocity d i s s i m u -
lated a tense relationship of authoritarianism and s u b j e c t i o n ( O r t h
1977). O r t h ' s treatment is occasionally simplistic and overstated, 4 3
t h o u g h his refusal to take the city d o c u m e n t s at face value is a
m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y s o u n d starting point, and he has m a n a g e d to
dispel the picture of the early S e l e u k i d s as disinterested f r i e n d s of
the cities in A s i a M i n o r .
B u t the fact that the image of cordiality and b e n e v o l e n c e p r e -
sented b y the cities is a construct does not m e a n that it s h o u l d be
c o n d e m n e d as n o n - f a c t u a l and d e v o i d of interest. W e can still
o b s e r v e h o w the S e l e u k i d past was refracted and p r e s e r v e d in
m u l t i p l e local histories and traces of royal activity. T h e s e s u b -
stantiated the S e l e u k i d claims to authority and l e g i t i m a c y : the cities
offered the visible f o r m s of m o n u m e n t s and m e m o r i a l rituals, w h i c h
a royal interlocutor c o u l d pick out, to resume a dialogue located in
c o n t i n u i t y w i t h the past. T h e letter of S e l e u k o s II to the M i l e s i a n s
(RC 22) s h o w s h o w the dynastic past c o u l d be used in c o m m u n i c a -
tion b e t w e e n city and ruler, by linking t h e m e s of royal ideology w i t h
local m e m o r i e s , and e v e n local h u m a n agents, the πατρικοί φίλοι to
w h o m S e l e u k o s II refers (line 9); c o n v e r s e l y , a city s u c h as Ilion
c o u l d e v o k e its h o n o u r s for S e l e u k o s I in a decree for his son,
A n t i o c h o s I (OGIS 219, lines 4 6 - 7 ) . S o this, too, w a s S e l e u k i d A s i a
M i n o r : traces of the S e l e u k i d past, local histories w h i c h presented
an image of royal b e n e v o l e n c e and civic gratitude in the f o r m of
τιμ,αι αξιόλογοι, an image w h i c h in turn c o u l d substantiate present
claims and define the p a r a m e t e r s for f u r t h e r r o u n d s of interaction.

43 For instance Orth overinterprets when he reads Inschr. Priene 18 between the lines

to produce a story of Prienian discontent manifested through slow implementation of an

honorific decree for a Seleukid official (Gauthier 1980).
3. A Seleukid Past?

T h e preceding section was written f r o m the point of view of

Seleukid m e m o r y , in search of a Seleukid Asia M i n o r — a deliberate
over-simplification, leaving out the complexities of political
history. 4 4 If one does not write solely within the Seleukid claims, it
is possible to sketch out a narrative history w h i c h w o u l d have been
unpalatable to the Seleukids, since it was essentially a story of their
losses.
T h e most serious omission is the Ptolemaic presence, w h i c h is
also absent f r o m the Polybian descriptions of Achaios' activities:
Achaios takes back, then rules over 'all of the land on this side of
T a u r u s ' — w i t h no mention of the Ptolemaic empire in Asia Minor. 4 5
H o w and w h e n the Ptolemies gained this dominion is o b s c u r e —
perhaps in 281, immediately after Seleukos I was m u r d e r e d — t h e
so-called ' W a r of Syrian succession', 4 6 but possibly earlier, during
the war between Seleukos I and L y s i m a c h o s , as suggested by epi-
graphical evidence f r o m Lykia. 4 7 T h i s intriguingly implies that
Seleukid presence in L y k i a and Karia was never actualized, but
remained virtual, L y s i m a c h a n control being immediately succeeded
by Ptolemaic presence; this certainly was the case for Samos. 4 8
A n o t h e r possibility is that Ptolemaic conquest took place in several
stages. L y k i a may have become Ptolemaic early on, and Kilikia con-
quered later, during the First Syrian W a r : a recently published
inscription indicates that the Nagidians participated in the founda-
tion of a city named [Antiojcheia, perhaps under A n t i o c h o s I. T h i s
dating (on palaeographical grounds) is compatible with the earliest
extant evidence for the Ptolemaic presence in Kilikia, the founda-
tion of Arsinoe in the 260s. 49
Two things are established. T h e first is the earliness of the

44 Orth 1977 does not integrate the non-Seleukid elements of the period (for instance,

never mentioning the Ptolemies), a serious problem with his final picture.
45 Bagnall 1976: 80-116, 168-75 f ° r Asia Minor; Huss 1976: 188-209, completing

Magie 1950: 929 η. 25. T h i s section is heavily indebted to A. Meadows.

46 For a standard account of the 'War of Syrian succession' or 'crise successorale',

Will 1979: 139-41, with sources and further references.

47 It is possible that Lykia was already taken over by Ptolemy I in c.295, if Wörrle's

dating of a L i m y ran inscription to 288 ('year 36' of Ptolemy I) is correct (Wörrle 1977,
cf. SEG 27.929); but M e a d o w s has pointed out to me that one could date this inscrip-
tion to 247 (year 36 of Ptolemy II), and also reject the dating to Ptolemy I of an
A m y z o n i a n inscription (J. and L . Robert 1983: no. 6 ) — i n which case the earliest evi-
dence is a Telmessian decree dated to 282 (Wörrle 1978).
48 Seleukid authority remaining purely virtual at Samos between Lysimachan control

and Ptolemaic presence: Habicht 1957: 2 0 9 - 1 1 . I. Stratonikeia 1001 should be dated to

Seleukos II rather than Seleukos I (Cohen 1995: 271).
45 Nagidos: Jones and Russell 1993: no. 2; Arsinoe: Jones and Habicht 1989.
Ptolemaic presence in Asia M i n o r , from the late 280s—at the same
time as the earliest Seleukid documents. T h e second fact, equally
incontrovertible and impressive, is the extent of the Ptolemaic
dominions. T h e o c r i t u s could write that Ptolemy II 'gives orders
to all the Pamphylians, the Kilikian spearmen, the L y k i a n s , and
the warlike Karians' (17.88-9): the encomiastic vision rests on the
reality of a majestic overseas empire.
It is now clear that the Ptolemaic holdings, far f r o m simply being
a string of harbours controlled by sea, stretched inland on all
fronts. Ptolemaic Karia included maritime cities such as Iasos,
Halikarnassos, M y n d o s , and K a u n o s (and perhaps the Milesian
peninsula as well), but also cities further east, such as A m y z o n ,
E u r o m o s , M y l a s a , and whatever c o m m u n i t y there was on the site of
the future Stratonikeia; it is likely that the province of Karia, under
its o w n governor (strategos), comprised all of Karia west of the river
M a r s y a s (the former Hekatomnid satrapy). 50 In L y k i a , Ptolemaic
control, starting from the coastal cities (such as Lissa, T e l m e s s o s ,
Patara, and Andriake), reached inland to the communities located
along the river valleys, for instance along the X a n t h o s (Xanthos,
T l o s , Araxa), or the A r y k a n d o s ( L i m y r a , Arykanda). A n epigram
f r o m T l o s shows a Ptolemaic general and courtier, N e o p t o l e m o s ,
beating off an invasion of the X a n t h o s valley. 5 1 T h e one piece of
evidence for P a m p h y l i a shows that the authority of the Ptolemaic
Παμφνλιάρχης included the city of T e r m e s s o s , some way inland
(Robert 1966a: 53-8). For Kilikia, the evidence for Ptolemaic cities
on the coast (taken over b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in 197: M a l l o s ,
Z e p h y r i o n , Soloi, Aphrodisias of Kilikia, K o r y k o s , A n e m o u r i o n ,
and finally Korakesion, and other nameless castella, L i v . 33.20.4)
has been supplemented by two discoveries: an inscription recording
an episode in the vicissitudes of a Ptolemaic foundation named
Arsinoe, on the coast near N a g i d o s , and a Ptolemaic-held site at
M e y d a n c i k Kalesi (about 15 kilometres f r o m the c o a s t ) — c o n -
trolling the shortest way f r o m Kelenderis even further inland, to

50 Karia: the evidence is gathered b y Magie 1950: 926 η. 2i and 929 n. 25; Bagnall

1976: 89-102; Huss 1976: 193-200; Euromos: Errington 1993: no. 3. T h e strategos of
Karia is honoured by the Amyzonians (J. and L . Robert 1983: no. 3) and by the Samians
under Ptolemy II (Habicht 1957: 218, no. 57). I owe the observation that Ptolemaic
Karia was equivalent to the Hekatomnid satrapy to A . M e a d o w s .
51 T h e evidence is gathered in Bagnall 1976: 105-10 and Huss 1976: 191-3, with

Bousquet 1986 providing freshly discovered evidence for Xanthos. T l o s : Robert OMS
vii. 531-48, on Neoptolemos, honoured at T l o s for defeating a force of Agrianians,
Pisidians, and Galatians; since the Agrianians were traditionally crack Macedonian
troops, the people defeated by Neoptolemos must have been a mixed force of merce-
naries under Seleukid command (Strobel 1991: 125-6) rather than roving Galatians
with allies.
the K a l y k a d n o s valley. 5 2 T h e latter case shows that 'Euergetes'
dominion in R o u g h Cilicia constituted a network of places and
routes, not merely a string of defensible sites along the coast' (Jones
and Habicht 1989: 335): this remark applies to the Ptolemaic empire
in Asia M i n o r generally. T h e o c r i t u s spoke of the fleet of P t o l e m y II
as well as his 'many horsemen and many shield-bearing soldiers,
girt in shining bronze' (17.90-4); prosaically, Polybios mentions the
mercenaries stationed in at εξω πόλεις, 'the cities abroad' (5.63.8).
T h e overseas dominions formed a defensive system protecting
E g y p t : the Ptolemies 'stretched out their arm afar' (μακράν εκτε-
ταχότες τας χείρας, Pol. 5·34·9)· T h e holdings in Asia M i n o r clearly
show how deep inland, f r o m an early date onwards, the long arm of
the Ptolemies could reach.
It is against this background of extended and durable Ptolemaic
rule in Asia M i n o r that we should evaluate the Seleukid claims to
authority over Asia M i n o r , starting with A n t i o c h o s II and his
achievements as conqueror and organizer. 5 3 Ptolemy II reacted to
the death of A n t i o c h o s I in 261 BC by attacking the Seleukid empire,
as he (possibly) did at the death of Seleukos I. T h e details of the
' S e c o n d Syrian W a r ' fought by A n t i o c h o s II between 261 and c.254,
in Syria as well as in Asia M i n o r , are heavily disputed. W h a t is clear
is the consequent 'fine Seleukid resurgence'. 5 4 A n t i o c h o s II cut deep
into the Ptolemaic possessions, favoured by the revolt of 'Ptolemy
the son', the co-regent of Ptolemy II and in high c o m m a n d in Asia
Minor. 5 5 Miletos, Ptolemaic since c.280, was 'liberated', after the
interlude of an Aitolian adventurer's tyranny, by A n t i o c h o s II, w h o
received divine honours f r o m the Milesians. A t the same occasion,

52 Arsinoe: Jones and Habicht 1989: 328-35; Meydancik Kalesi: references at Jones

and Habicht 1989: 335 η. 44 (admittedly the evidence is only for occupation under
Ptolemy III; the general point of Ptolemaic control reaching inland still holds).
53 Rather than reconstruct an earlier inroad under Antiochos I, on the basis of I.

Stratonikeia 1030, a decree from an unnamed community, found at T u r g u t (Lagina) and

dated to 268 by Seleukid kings and era, I prefer to assume that the stone is a pierre
errante from Seleukid-held eastern Karia ( A p p e n d i x 5, n. 1).
54 Antiochos II and the 'Second Syrian War': Will 1979: 234-43.
55 T h e co-regent, Ptolemy the son, appears in RC 14, line 9 (letter of Ptolemy II to
the Milesians); his revolt ( T r o g . Prol. 26) must have taken place after the last known
mention of him as co-regent, in April/May 259 ( P C Z 3) (following M e a d o w s per litt., I
would date 'Ptolemy of Ephesos' (Athen. 13.593b) to the period of Ptolemy III).
Ptolemy the son is also mentioned in a subsequent inscription from Mylasa (Crampa
1969: no. 3; the document does not prove, as Crampa believed, that Ptolemy the son was
still alive and active—in Seleukid service—c.240). Gauthier, in BE 95, 523, suggests a
mention to Ptolemy the son in an Euromian inscription (Errington 1993: no. 3); contra,
Blümel 1996 (arguing that the space is too short for Gauthier's restoration). T h e evi-
dence is summarized, and re-evaluated (somewhat speculatively) in Huss 1998.
he took the Ptolemaic base of Samos; in the south, he must have
taken P a m p h y l i a and Kilikia. 5 6
Better documented is the advance into the inland Karian province
of the Ptolemies, a large portion of w h i c h passed to Seleukid control
(as is attested under the successor of Antiochos II, Seleukos II, for
Mylasa, once a Ptolemaic city). T h e Seleukid governor of the
region, O l y m p i c h o s , whose long career is documented later on, was
perhaps appointed at this time. A l a b a n d a was probably renamed
Antiocheia as a result of the Karian campaign of A n t i o c h o s II; at the
other end of the Marsyas valley, the king founded Stratonikeia, on
a site distinguished by its great shrines and its strategic position on
important routes (the M a r s y a s valley, leading f r o m the M a e a n d e r
plain southwards, and the route leading eastwards f r o m M y l a s a past
M o b o l l a to the T a b a i plateau). He took Alinda and Mylasa; further
west, Bargylia, and, perhaps even Iasos and Herakleia (if mentions,
made under A n t i o c h o s I I I , of earlier Seleukid dominion do not
refer to the blanket claims to Asia M i n o r : above, section i). 5 7
But the extent of the Seleukid success does not diminish the fact
that it was a reaction to Ptolemaic power: a reaction to the Ptolemaic
aggression w h i c h started the Second Syrian W a r , but also,
generally, a reaction to the presence in Asia M i n o r of the Ptolemaic
empire, contiguous to the Seleukid dominions, on territory w h i c h
may have been taken over by Seleukos I and w h i c h could be con-
strued as legally belonging to the Seleukids. A n t i o c h o s II was a
reconqueror: his activities in northern Asia M i n o r and in T h r a c e
perhaps show his intention to recover territory once ruled over by
Seleukos I.
T h a t the activities of A n t i o c h o s II were a reaction to the
Ptolemies is in itself significant. T h e Seleukid viewpoint was
expressed in terms of rights over 'all of the land b e y o n d the T a u r u s ' ,

56 Samos: SEG 1.366. Rough Kilikia and Pamphylia were lost to Ptolemy II, since
they are mentioned in T h e o c r i t u s (17.88), but no longer in the list of lands which
Ptolemy I I I inherited from his father ( O G I S 54).
57 On Olympichos, see C r a m p a 1969: nos. 1, 3, 4; J. and L . Robert 1983: 149-50:

since Olympichos was based in the city of Alinda, he must also have controlled A m y z o n
(though it then becomes odd that Zeuxis, in his letter to the Amyzonians in 203 did not
mention a Seleukid past: document 5). T h e evidence for attributing to Antiochos II the
partial conquest of Western Karia is circumstantial rather than direct (though L e Rider
1990 proposes numismatic evidence for Mylasa; also BCH 120 (1996), 773-5).
Alabanda: Robert 1973. Stratonikeia: Debord 1994, and A p p e n d i x 5 of the present
work; the narrative context suggests Antiochos II as founder rather than Antiochos I
(Steph. Byz.): see further A p p e n d i x 5, n. 1. A Laodikeia, near Stratonikeia ( M a 1997),
the 'Laudiceni ex Asia' of Liv. 33.18.3, seems like a further Seleukid implantation in the
region. Bargylia: Syll. 426 should be dated to Antiochos II rather than Antiochos I (the
official Alexandros mentioned there later appears under Seleukos II: Bengtson 1944:
94-110). Iasos, Herakleia: documents 26 A , 31 B.
shading into a belief in continuity of control. It is true that the
greater part of c i s - T a u r i c A s i a M i n o r was in Seleukid hands, and
that traces of Seleukid presence could be found in various forms.
But the Ptolemies controlled a sizeable portion, taken simul-
taneously to the Seleukid conquest of L y s i m a c h o s ' empire. T h e
history of the Ptolemaic overseas holdings runs parallel, f r o m the
start, to the history of the Seleukid Anatolian dominion; Seleukid
claims about geography, power, and history were confronted by the
continuous challenge of the Ptolemaic possessions, w h i c h , as the
epigraphical material amply shows, took the same forms as the
Seleukid empire (administration and exaction) 5 8 and left the same
traces of dynastic euergetism.

4. Seleukid Collapse in Anatolia

Perhaps A n t i o c h o s I I I drew general inspiration f r o m A n t i o c h o s

II, his grandfather, (re)conqueror and administrator; hence the
reference to precedent f r o m the time of A n t i o c h o s II, in the
appointment of Nikanor. But there was another, m u c h simpler
reason. T h e years between the death of A n t i o c h o s II (246 BC) and
the accession of A n t i o c h o s III (223 BC) saw the collapse of Seleukid
power in Asia M i n o r , through a combination of intra-dynastic
conflict and external wars. T h e need, obvious in the appointment of
N i k a n o r , to refer back to a past of strong rule located before this
confused period of losses, is in itself significant: either there was no
clear trace of Seleukid practice in those intervening years, or the
losses deprived the c i s - T a u r i c office of any meaning, or perhaps
A n t i o c h o s I I I chose not to acknowledge or mention the arrange-
ments taken by the usurper, A n t i o c h o s Hierax. A t any rate, the
prostagma, through its attempt at denial, is an admission of the
Seleukid losses. T h e events themselves are badly d o c u m e n t e d , so
that it is difficult to produce a sequence for the major developments
(chronology is especially insecure): the Laodikeian W a r , the T h i r d
Syrian W a r , the Brothers' W a r , and the successes of Attalos I.
T h e first Seleukid reverses took place between 246 and 241. T h e
Laodikeian W a r was, at least initially, a dynastic conflict within the
Seleukid empire, between two claimants to the succession of
A n t i o c h o s II, on his death in 246: his baby son (named Antiochos,
we n o w know) by a Ptolemaic princess, Berenike, and Seleukos, his
son by an earlier wife, later divorced, Laodike I. Seleukos (II) pre-
vailed; but the dynastic conflict provided the opportunity for inter-
ss Bagnall 1976; Jones and Habicht 1989.
vention by Ptolemy I I I — t h e ' T h i r d Syrian W a r ' , w h i c h took place
in Syria, Mesopotamia, and the Aegean. 5 9
T w o features are important. First, the war affected the local c o m -
m u n i t i e s — t w o cities on opposing sides ( S m y r n a in the Seleukid
camp and T e l m e s s o s on the Ptolemaic) could mention, in decrees,
the ravages of the same w a r 6 0 — y e t also brings out, to the m o d e r n
observer, the importance of the local communities' collaboration
w i t h the Hellenistic empires, and the latter's need for local loyalty. 6 1
T h e documentary record shows Seleukos' willingness to ensure the
cities' loyalty by benefactions. S m y r n a received recognition of
asylia, a grant of autonomia, exemption f r o m tribute and the restora-
tion of 'ancestral' land ( O G I S 228 and 229, lines 10-12); Mylasa
also received liberty at this time (Crampa 1969: 82—3); a letter of
Seleukos II to Miletos (RC 22), though the actual decision is lost
(leaving only the dynastic rhetoric), probably concerned an analo-
gous grant. Similarly, Kildara was rewarded for good behaviour by
the Ptolemaic official T l e p o l e m o s (Blümel 1992, with G a u t h i e r in
BE 94, 528). In many of these cases, the actual rewards were the
result of petitions by the local c o m m u n i t y , acting on its awareness
of its master's need for its collaboration.
T h e second feature is the vast Ptolemaic gain by the end of the
war. Ptolemy III made inroads into the Syrian and M e s o p o t a m i a n
heartland of the Seleukid empire (a fragment of his report sur-
vives). 6 2 N o t all of his gains in this region were short-lived:
Seleukeia in Pieria was kept by the Ptolemies down to 218 (Pol.
5.58.10). E v e n more spectacular were the conquests in Asia M i n o r ,
of w h i c h Ptolemy I I I boasted (OGIS 54, lines 14-15). 6 3 Ptolemy I I I
cancelled out the (re)conquests of A n t i o c h o s II in Kilikia and
Pamphylia (though probably not in Karia); 6 4 in Ionia, he retook
Miletos, Ephesos, and Samos, and extended Ptolemaic control into
Seleukid territory, taking over Magnesia on Maeander, Priene

59 Sources in Magie 1950: 736 η. 22. An inscription from Kildara in Karia (Blümel

1992, reproduced as SEG 42.994) reveals that Berenike's son was named (unsurpris-
ingly) Antiochos. Divorce: Jer. In Dan. 11.6 = FGrHist 260 F 43. T h e land sale recorded
in RC 18-20 is probably part of a divorce settlement.
60 Smyrna: OGIS 229, lines 3-5 ; Telmessos: OGIS 55, line 10. OGIS 229 does not
mention a 'siege of S m y r n a ' (Elwyn 1990: 179), but merely the ravaging of the city
territory (as common an occurrence in Hellenistic as in Classical warfare).
61 A n echo of this fact is preserved in Justin 27, w h o describes 'all the cities of Asia'

supporting first Berenike, then Seleukos II; even if this account is too schematic,
Justin's attention to the cities' behaviour shows the importance of local support.
61 Justin 27 for the course of the war; the report of Ptolemy III (the famous G o u r o b

papyrus) in FGrHist 160, with Ilolleaux 1942: 281-310.

63 Magie 1950: 936 η. 31; Will 1979: 259-61.

64 For R o u g h Kilikia, the most important evidence comes from the recently published

inscription from Arsinoe (Jones and Habicht 1989), and the Meydancik Kalesi site.
(perhaps), K o l o p h o n , L e b e d o s (renamed Ptolemais), and perhaps
Teos. 6 5 T h e T r o a d , the Hellespont, and T h r a c e show clear evidence
for Ptolemaic structures of control, Larisa (refounded as Ptolemais),
at Maroneia and Ainos, and possibly even at Priapos, on the south
coast of Propontis, and hence implying Ptolemaic control not just at
the Straits, but beyond them. 6 6
T h e next phase of Anatolian warfare brought even graver reverses
for the Seleukids. T h e y o u n g e r brother (and co-regent?) of Seleukos
II, A n t i o c h o s (nicknamed Hierax, the H a w k ) , after being appointed
over c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , seceded f r o m Seleukid authority and,
with the help of Galatian mercenaries, resisted attempts to subdue
him, defeating Seleukos II before A n k y r a ; as a result of his victory
in the Brothers' W a r , A n t i o c h o s Hierax ruled in Asia M i n o r as an
independent king, striking his o w n coinage. 6 7 A t some point, Hierax
and his Galatian allies attacked Attalos I — w i t h disastrous results.
Attalos I defeated Hierax repeatedly, celebrating his victories in a
triumphal m o n u m e n t (the famous 'long base', with its inscriptions
and the sculpture it once supported), w h i c h give us the locations of
these battles: at the A p h r o d i s i o n near Pergamon, in Hellespontine
Phrygia, at a place called K o l o e in L y d i a , and finally in Karia
(OGIS 275, 278, 279, 280). Eusebius (preserving P o r p h y r y :
FGrHist 260 F 32.8) gives the date of 229/8 for K o l o e and 228/7 f ° r
the battle in Karia. H i e r a x turned against Seleukos II; worsted in
65 Magnesia on Maeander: FGrHist 260 F 32.8; Priene: Inschr. Priene 37, line 153
mentions a Ptolemaic official. Ephesos was in Ptolemaic hands during the Brothers' War
(FGrHist 260 F 32.8). Samos: SEG 1.366. Kolophon: an unpublished decree for a
Ptolemaic official, found at Klaros, attests 'une occupation lagide à Colophon, comme à
Lebedos, et à Ephèse, et aussi, à notre avis, à T é o s ' (Robert, OMS iv. 183-4); J- and L .
Robert 1989: 53 η. 267 (correct 'Philadelphe' to 'Evergète'). Lebedos: Inschr. Magnesia
53, line 79: Πτολεμαίος ol ττρότίρον καλούμενοι Λeß(8ioi. T e o s : apart from the
Kolophonian decree mentioned above, an unpublished T e i a n inscription found by the
Roberts mentions Ptolemaic queens: OMS iv. 149.
66 Larisa: Robert 1987: 281-95, Cohen 1995: 157-9 (with bibliography). Ainos: a

decree professes concern for the well-being of Ptolemy III and his family, which implies
Ptolemaic occupation (Herzog and Klaffenbach 1952, no. 8). Maroneia: the decrees for
Hippomedon, strategos of T h r a c e and Epinikos, the governor of Maroneia, republished
b y Gauthier 1979. Priapos: SEG 34.1256 (both Çahin, the first scholarly editor of
the inscription, and Gauthier in BE 87, 280, are cautious about identifying the
Hippomedon honoured at Priapos with the Ptolemaic governor, and hence about the
dating to Ptolemy III). S o m e of these territorial gains were perhaps made during
the troubled period of the Brothers' War or the conflict with Attalos I; certainly, the
dispatch of Magas, son of Ptolemy III, to Asia M i n o r against Seleukos II or I I I (Huss
1977) indicates close attention to Asia M i n o r after the truce of 241/0.
61 Will 1979: 294-6 (based on the chronology of Bickerman 1943/4). Ankyra: T r o g .

Prol. 27, Galatian mercenaries in Justin 27.2. T h e battle at Ankyra perhaps implies an
invasion of Galatia by Seleukos II. Hierax's coinage is documented in the T r o a d , at
Ilion, Alexandreia T r o a s , A b y d o s , Lampsakos, Parion (Le Rider 1971/2: 232—8); at
Lysimacheia (Ferrary and Gauthier 1981: 343) and at Sardeis ( L e Rider 1972/3: 251-2,
based on M o r k h o l m 1969).
M e s o p o t a m i a , he took to flight, before meeting a violent end at the
hands of bandits (Justin 27.3) or Galatians ( T r a g u s , Prol. 27).
Both the Brothers' W a r and Attalos' victories are badly docu-
mented, and not yet elucidated by new epigraphical discoveries.
T h e absolute chronology and the relation between the two sets of
events remain obscure: one solution is to locate the Brothers' W a r
c.239 BC, followed by several years of calm, until H i e r a x attacked the
Attalid k i n g d o m c.230, though it is also possible that Hierax's attack
took place earlier, soon after the end of the Brothers' W a r ; alterna-
tively, it has been argued that the Brothers' W a r broke out later, in
the late 230s, in parallel to the war between Hierax and Attalos I. 68
For the present purpose, it is better to focus on the suggestive
location of the battles between Attalos I and Hierax: Attalos I drove
Hierax southwards, in a geographical progression w h i c h took over
the inland masses of Seleukid Asia M i n o r . A n inscription f r o m the
city of Aizanoi, in Phrygia, records a land donation by Attalos I to
the city and to its shrine of Zeus: rather than reflecting Attalid
advances around 216, this document preserves a trace of Attalos'
conquest of the Seleukid hinterland. 6 9 T h e outcome is described by
P o l y b i o s (4.48.7): 'Attalos had subjected to himself all of the
dynasteia of the land on this side of the T a u r u s ' ; the Pergamene
victory m o n u m e n t s celebrate achievement and completion. H o w -
ever, the picture in Polybios is certainly exaggerated, even though
Attalos I did take over the vast majority of Seleukid possessions in
Asia M i n o r . T h e cities of the T r o a d probably became 'allies' of
Attalos I; more direct rule was imposed on the cities of Aiolis, and
on T e o s and K o l o p h o n ; S m y r n a presumably became a free 'ally'. 7 0

63 D i f f e r e n t solutions in B i c k e r m a n 1943/4 (high dating for B r o t h e r s ' W a r , i m m e d i -

ately f o l l o w e d b y attack on A t t a l o s I); A l l e n 1983: 1 9 5 - 9 , f o l l o w i n g Beloch 1927: 5 4 1 - 3

for a low dating of the B r o t h e r s ' W a r . Allen 1983: 35, believes that the battle in
H e l l e s p o n t i n e P h r y g i a occurred after the others, as H i e r a x was on his w a y to T h r a c e ;
b u t at that stage H i e r a x was p r o b a b l y already an adventurer w i t h o u t a k i n g d o m .
65 T h e inscription (a letter of H a d r i a n reconfirming a Hellenistic donation by
' A t t a l o s ' , then Prousias I — p r e s u m a b l y A t t a l o s I, though S c h w e r t h e i m 1988: 73 suggests
Attalos II), first p u b l i s h e d (non vidi) in Bolletino del Museo dell'Impero Romano 9 (1938),
44 ( A E 1940, no. 44); also republished, with the related epigraphical dossier f r o m the
temple of Z e u s itself, in L a f f i 1 9 7 1 . W e n o w k n o w that the date of A t t a l o s ' control of the
site of A i z a n o i is n o t c . 2 1 6 (as had been suggested b y H a b i c h t 1956: 93-4): see C h . 2 § 1.
70 Pol. 5 . 7 7 - 8 : in 218, A t t a l o s I exploited the absence of A c h a i o s to embark in a

c a m p a i g n of reconquest: K y m e , Phokaia, A i g a i , T e m n o s are n a m e d , as well as T e o s and

K o l o p h o n , w h i c h w e r e taken over 'on the same agreements (συνθήκαι) as f o r m e r l y ' , a
clear statement that these cities had been A t t a l i d p r e v i o u s l y , i.e. since c.228; the same
assumption m u s t be m a d e for the other cities. S m y r n a , L a m p s a k o s , A l e x a n d r e i a T r o a s ,
and Ilion are m e n t i o n e d as faithful allies. Since T e o s and K o l o p h o n had been taken over
by P t o l e m y I I I in the aftermath of the L a o d i k e i a n W a r , it seems that A t t a l o s I took
these cities f r o m the P t o l e m i e s (unless they had in the m e a n t i m e fallen to S e l e u k o s II or
Hierax, or regained their independence).
In contrast, there are no traces of Attalid presence in Karia, and it
even seems that Seleukos II managed to recover some measure of
control, since the Sardeis mint struck coins of Seleukos II. T h e
battles w h i c h Attalos I fought against 'Seleukos' and his generals
(OGIS 277, Inschr. Pergamon 36) might have taken place against
Seleukos II rather than Seleukos III (as usually asserted), reflecting
Seleukid efforts late in the reign of Seleukos II.
But the Seleukid hold over Asia M i n o r was shattered. Sardeis
soon escaped Seleukid authority (at the beginning of the reign of
Seleukos III): the former Seleukid capital may even have struck its
o w n coinage after 226, as 'autonomous' city under the Attalids. 7 1
O t h e r cities asserted and preserved genuine independence:
Magnesia on M a e a n d e r and Miletos were possibly independent
(under nominal Ptolemaic authority?); Iasos seems to have been free
f r o m Ptolemaic control around 215: w h e n faced with incursions
f r o m a local dynast, the Iasians did not appeal to a P t o l e m y for help,
but to R h o d e s (I. Iasos 150). 72
T h e Iasian document illustrates two further developments in the
years after the fall of Hierax. T h e dynast w h o invaded the Iasians'
territory was O l y m p i c h o s , the former Seleukid governor over parts
of western Karia under Seleukos II. B y the time of his conflict with
Iasos (c.215), he had become a subordinate official of Philip V , king
of M a c e d o n , w h o had inherited authority over parts of Karia f r o m
his predecessor, A n t i g o n o s D o s o n . T h e latter mounted a seaborne
expedition to Karia, in the early years of D o s o n ' s reign (probably a
single campaigning season by the king himself, in 227 or 226 or
225). Its rationale, execution, and outcome remain a mystery.
Nonetheless, such a development was made possible by the disinte-
gration of Seleukid power (or more accurately of Hierax's kingdom)
in Asia M i n o r and the subsequent confusion. One possibility is
that local powers (such as individual cities, or even O l y m p i c h o s )
appealed to A n t i g o n o s D o s o n for assistance against Attalos I. 73 T h e

" Seyrig 1986: 39-42, disputed by Price 1991: 321, w h o assigns the coinage to the
180s, because of the presence of a Sardian alexander in mint condition in a hoard of
Larisa dated to the 160s (but Price admits difficulties with this dating, since after 188,
Sardeis was an Attalid city and a cistophoric mint).
n Haussoullier 1902: 137-49, argues that Miletos stayed under the Ptolemies, though

with considerable autonomy. Magnesia on Maeander: none of the royal letters acknow-
ledging the asylia of the temple of Artemis Leukophryene (RC 31-4) implies control
over the city. Iasos: I. Iasos 150, also M e a d o w s 1996 for a new edition and historical
considerations.
" O n O l y m p i c h o s as Antigonid official, Robert 1983: 147-9, for detailed argument.
O n D o s o n ' s Karian expedition, Will 1979: 366-71 with attempts at interpretation; L e
Bohec 1993: 327-49 (dating, motivation: anti-Attalid position of Olympichos), 361
(assessment).
other feature w h i c h the Iasian inscription illustrates is the Rhodian
influence in Karia. R h o d e s already o w n e d territory on the mainland
(the 'Integrated Peraia') as well as a subject dominion on the main-
land (the ' S u b j e c t Peraia'). I. Iasos 150 is the earliest evidence for
wider Rhodian involvement in the rest of Karia. T h e s e interests
w o u l d become more prominent by the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I ; and,
after the T r e a t y of A p a m e i a (188), they culminated in twenty years
of rule over K a r i a (along with L y k i a ) . ' 4
By the accession of A n t i o c h o s I I I , the result was clear: the dis-
solution of the Seleukid c i s - T a u r i c dominion. G o n e were the inland
provinces and all of the coastal holdings with their cities, f r o m the
T r o a d to Karia. T h e signs of the Seleukid presence could be erased
w i t h ease. Erythrai, at some point in the very late third century,
ceased to celebrate a cultic festival c o m m e m o r a t i n g Seleukos I, the
Seleukeia in parallel with the Dionysia (Habicht 1970: 85); though
the exact circumstances are unclear, this must reflect the disappear-
ance of Seleukid overlordship. T h e citizens of Seleukeia/Tralleis
may have reverted to calling themselves Τραλλιανοί, if a recently
published Milesian citizenship grant to a Trallian dates f r o m the
220s ( G ü n t h e r 1988).
T h e case of the T r a l l i a n s is instructive. Frustrated by the
deficiency of the narrative sources, we turn to the documentary evi-
dence f r o m the subject communities, and use this material to write
the history of super-power conflict. F r o m this perspective, the local
communities of Asia M i n o r are passive objects of conquest: ut
quisque fortior fuisset, Asiam velut praedam occupabat (Just. 27.3).
T h a t the wars of the years 246-226 BC inflicted sufferings on the
cities is obvious: apart f r o m the cases of S m y r n a and T e l m e s s o s ,
referred to earlier, a striking example is the plight of the T e i a n s ,
powerless to resist an attack by pirates, w h o exacted a tithe on all the
citizens' property: in m y opinion, the incident should be dated in
the period of confusion caused by the war between Hierax and
Attalos I ( S E G 44.949). But the period also saw local vitality. T h e
citizens of Seleukeia, in rejecting the dynastic name to become
'Trallians' again, whatever the circumstances, were committing a
political act w h i c h affected their o w n history and identity. Against
the narrative background, we can reconsider the documents pro-
duced by the local communities in the context of their o w n history.
T h e Boulagoras inscription ( S E G 1.366) provides evidence for
A n t i o c h o s II and Seleukid rule in Asia M i n o r , or for Ptolemaic

7< See M e a d o w s 1996, for I. Iasos 150 as evidence for early, yet persistent, Rhodian

interest in Karia. D o c u m e n t 48 illustrates the reactions of one Karian community,

Apollonia under Salbake, at the beginning of Rhodian rule.
reconquests in the Laodikeian W a r — a reading w h i c h looks away
f r o m S a m o s to superpower conflict. But we can also shift our view-
point, to look at the Boulagoras inscription in its local context: this
inscription documents the experience of one city, its troubles and
its relations with different masters (and also, importantly, the con-
tinuity of its o w n concerns and activities, such as public trials,
education, religion, and corn supply). Even more striking is the case
of Arsinoe in Kilikia (Jones and H a b i c h t 1989), a city founded by a
general of Ptolemy II, reabsorbed by N a g i d o s w h e n Kilikia fell to
A n t i o c h o s II, then recreated under Ptolemy I I I — b y the son of the
original founder, a generation later. T h e behaviour of the Nagidians
deserves attention: despoiled of part of their territory for the
Ptolemaic foundation, they p r o m p t l y reannexed the latter as soon as
Ptolemaic control disappeared, and had to be placated w h e n Arsinoe
was refounded, by the face-saving solution of having the new-
foundation designated as a 'colony' of Nagidos. 7 5
In the vicissitudes of the conflicts between the superpowers, and
in spite of the varying degrees of royal control, the cities preserved
their identities, and might assert themselves as actors in their o w n
history. Miletos alternated between Seleukid and Ptolemaic control;
shortly after the cordial dealings documented in RC 22 (Seleukos II
responded w a r m l y to an embassy and probably granted a petition
for the asylia of the D i d y m e i o n ) , the Milesians defected f r o m the
Seleukid cause to Ptolemy I I I . Welles c o m m e n t e d w r y l y on the lack
of gratitude of the Milesians; beyond condemnation, w e must be
aware of the resilience of the cities. C i v i c resilience and identity are
e m b o d i e d in the exceptional issue of gold staters w h i c h L a m p s a k o s
and Alexandreia T r o a s struck to celebrate their newly found inde-
pendence, around 226, w h e n Seleukid power collapsed in the
N o r t h - W e s t : a solid golden bit of city-state pride. 7 6
S m y r n a is particularly interesting. It had a past under Seleukid
control, w h e n it functioned as a mint for A n t i o c h o s I and A n t i o c h o s
II, and offered cultic honours to the early Seleukids (above, § 2). In
the crisis of the Laodikeian W a r , S m y r n a seized the opportunity to
demand privileges f r o m Seleukos II, in exchange for evvoia during
the war ( O G I S 228, 229). T h e city received autonomy, exemption
f r o m taxes, and royal sponsorship of its main temple's asylia. S o o n
afterwards, the S m y r n i a n s struck an 'agreement' with the military
colonists at Magnesia under S i p y l o s ( O G I S 229). T h e transaction is
suffused with the language of loyalty towards the interests of

71 See further Chaniotis 1993, analysing the Ptolemaic power's attempts at saving face

for all parties involved.

76 Lampsakos, Alexandreia Troas: L e Rider 1971/2: 234, 238—9.
Seleukos II, especially as a m e d i u m of communication with the
soldiers and colonists; but the agenda was the local interests of
S m y r n a . In effect, the S m y r n i a n s try to carry out the take-over of a
royal military colony, to extend the city's territory into Lydia: the
Seleukid colonists are to become S m y r n i a n citizens, admit a
S m y r n i a n magistrate, and hand over a royal fort to the S m y r n i a n s . "
It is likely that the attempt ultimately did not work; nonetheless, the
resourcefulness of the S m y r n i a n s in exploiting the language of
loyalty to the royal power to pursue local interests shows that in the
Hellenistic polis utterances of loyalty need not imply 'internal
surrender' or the loss of civic values through 'toadying'. Indeed,
S m y r n a , w h i c h paid such handsome honours to the early Seleukids,
by 197 could resist A n t i o c h o s I I I , in the name of a civic ideology of
true independence ( L i v . 33.38).
T h e cases of S m y r n a , L a m p s a k o s , and Alexandreia T r o a s are
important, because they illustrate two related features: the local
survival of civic identity and values, w h i c h reappeared after half
a century of Seleukid domination; the possibility of rapid
'deprovincialisation', even after decades of provincial control by the
Seleukids. T h e s e individual stories form the prehistory to the
difficulties w h i c h A n t i o c h o s I I I had with these particular cities,
w h e n they resisted his attempts at reconquest in 196 (see Intro-
duction and C h . 2 § 5); the resistance of these cities w o u l d play an
important part in Antiochos' worsening relations with Rome, and
S m y r n a w o u l d fight on the side of the R o m a n s and Rhodians against
A n t i o c h o s I I I — o n the w i n n i n g side.

5. P. Sulpicius Galba's History Lesson

In 193, at w h a t w o u l d turn out to be the last conference between the

R o m a n s and the Seleukids before war, M i n n i o n restated Antiochos'
claims over the cities of Ionia and Aiolis, 'conquered by his
ancestors and made to pay tribute and taxes', w h i c h A n t i o c h o s had
simply restored to their former status. One of the R o m a n envoys,
the brutally frank P. Sulpicius Galba (consul in 211 and 200),
challenged this claim, by pointing out that the Seleukids had not
enjoyed continuous power over the cities of Asia, some of w h i c h had
been under the Ptolemies, some under Philip V , and some of w h i c h
had become independent (alias earum in Philippi, alias in Ptolomaei
fuisse potestate, alias per multos annos nnllo ambigente libertatem
77 On the date of OGIS 229, E l w y n 1990. Austin 1981: 302 n. 10: 'under a profession
of loyalty to Seleucus II the city is in effect extending its influence'.
usurpasse). G a l b a then introduced embassies f r o m the cities them-
selves: 'a very great n u m b e r was admitted, and as each bought forth
complaints alongside requests, and mingled the just with the unjust,
they turned the debate into a quarrel' (ex disceptatione altercationem
fecerunt). T h e unitary Seleukid claim to historical rights over all of
Asia M i n o r broke down, confronted with the assertive, multiple
voices issuing f r o m the cities as independent actors—a direct
reflection of the palimpsestic history of the region, with its compet-
ing super-powers and its latter phase of Seleukid collapse. T h i s
was the result w h i c h A n t i o c h o s I I I himself, more skilful or more
arrogant, had prevented at the conference at L y s i m a c h e i a , by
cutting d o w n on the speeches of the envoys f r o m L a m p s a k o s and
S m y r n a , with a curt ' N o long speeches', Παϋσαι των πολλών.'*
Sulpicius G a l b a ' s history lesson m i g h t be challenged on particu-
lars. For instance, his view that to admit the validity of Seleukid
claims w o u l d be to allow Philip V to reclaim C o r i n t h , Chalkis,
Demetrias, and T h e s s a l y is debatable, since Philip had expressly
given up these places by treaty, whereas the Seleukids never
renounced their claims to Asia M i n o r (Bickermann 1932a: 53).
Nonetheless, Sulpicius' general argument is right. T h e grand
Seleukid claims to Asia M i n o r , w h i c h underlay ways of referring to
the region, should be confronted w i t h other narratives—the history
of the Ptolemaic empire in Asia M i n o r , or the roster of Seleukid
setbacks f r o m 246 to 223. T h e legal validity of the Seleukid claims
does not cancel out this history; in addition, the legal situation is
ambiguous, since there are examples where length of occupation
constituted grounds for o w n e r s h i p ' 9 — t h e Seleukids themselves
sometimes considered mere armed takeover as creating rights to
property. 8 0
It is hard not to detect a note of aggressive anxiety in the
insistence on ancestral rights and the unique status of the Seleukids
78 P. Sulpicius: 34.59.1-2 for outspokenness; generally, MRR 272, 323. Conference at
Ephesos in 193: L i v . 3 5 . 1 6 - 1 7 . ' N o long speeches': Pol. 18.52.4.
79 M e h l 1980/1: 205-6 on RC 7: the Prienians do not get the Batinetis, in spite of their

original ktesis: the arbitration of Lysimachos seems to have favoured length of occupa-
tion; also M e h l 1980/1: 212, Nachtrag 2. O n the other hand, M e h l minimizes the
importance of Speererwerb, especially for the Ptolemies (197-205, 208-9): in the Fourth
Syrian War, the Ptolemaic envoys did not contest the principle of 'victors' rights', but
disputed over the contents of the convention between the victors of Ipsos. (Also
Hornblower 1985: 317 η. 8 for disagreement with M e h l 1980/1).
80 Liv. 34.58.4-6: the Seleukid envoy Hegesianax of Alexandreia T r o a s describes the

conquests of Antiochos III under a variety of headings, and overdetermines Antiochos'

right to them, as parla (acquired, taken over) as well as recuperata.\ Pol. 28.1.4: con-
cerning Koile-Syria, Antiochos I V reflects that ktesis through war is the safest and the
finest, and hence (Pol. 28.20.7-8) refers both to historical rights and to the forcible
έγκτησις b y Antiochos III.
as possessors of such rights. A t L y s i m a c h e i a , A n t i o c h o s I I I con-
trasted his activities in T h r a c e , natural and just ( r e c o v e r i n g —
άνακτάσθαι—what was rightfully his) w i t h the opportunistic grasp-
ing of P t o l e m y I I I or Philip V , exploiting the distractions (περισπασ-
μοι) of his ancestors. H e was not taking advantage of Philip's
troubles to take over his T h r a c i a n possessions, since he was recover-
ing his o w n (Pol. 18.51). Antiochos rewrote the past, representing
his actions within a history w h i c h reinterpreted the humiliating
events of the third century. O f course, the figure w h o casually refers
to the Seleukid losses as the result of 'distractions' is a Polybian
creation. But the attitude found in Polybios' A n t i o c h o s can be
matched with the documentary evidence; furthermore, the same
logic informs A n t i o c h o s ' reclaiming of tribute arrears f r o m the cities
of Asia M i n o r (Diod. 2 8 . 1 5 . 2 ) — a s he did with X e r x e s of A r m e n i a
(Pol. 8.23.4). T h i s action asserts continuity of authority in spite of
interruptions, and also abolishes any interruption, in order to
reclaim the past; in other words, the exaction of arrears symbolically
establishes the crucial element of continuity whose absence
Sulpicius Galba so priggishly denounced. 8 1
Belief in ancestral rights since K o u r o u p e d i o n allowed the
Seleukids to ignore the intervening events, and to speak as if
Seleukid authority pertained, by virtue of selective m e m o r y and
skewed geographical perspectives: Achaios could be described as
holding authority over all of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , and Nikanor
could be appointed to a supreme priestly dignity over the whole
region. C o n v e r s e l y , the historical claims could legitimize the
process of conquest; once A n t i o c h o s III had re-established Seleukid
power, he could look back on the troubled past as an accident, and
abolish it by demanding tribute arrears. T h e Seleukid past played a
crucial role in the definition of present successes and past humilia-
tions; it acted as a ' m y t h ' , not in that it was a total fabrication, but
in that it presented an authoritative discourse that enabled forms of
power. T h e Seleukid version is a selective arrangement of facts into
a meaningful relationship, a 'story-line' or intrigue (Veyne 1978:
35-42), built around the premiss of the historical rights enjoyed by
A n t i o c h o s III in Asia M i n o r , and the telos, or happy ending, of his
success in reasserting these rights. W h e t h e r this story-line, rather
than the history lesson given by P. Sulpicius Galba at E p h e s o s in
193, w o u l d turn out to be valid, w o u l d be determined by the balance
of power and the outcome of warfare.

81 Parallels can be found in T h u c . 8.5.5, with Lewis 1977: 97; Fowden 1993: 29-30,

for the Sassanian dream of 'reimposing' tribute on the lands which had once paid it to
the Achaimenids.
 C H A P T E R 2

T h e R e c o n q u e s t of Asia M i n o r :
A Narrative (226-192)

A stele found at m o d e r n G ö r d e s , in ancient north-eastern L y d i a ,

preserves the dedication of a Seleukid ήγεμών, Arkesilaos, 'in grati-
tude for the safety of Apollophanes, son of Apollophanes, of
Seleukeia in Pieria', the w e l l - d o c u m e n t e d physician of A n t i o c h o s
I I I . 1 T h e inference is that Apollophanes, no doubt at Antiochos'
side, passed though north-eastern L y d i a or close enough to concern
an officer stationed t h e r e — b u t w h e n did this take place? Perhaps
during Antiochos' campaign in 2 1 6 - 2 1 3 B C t o subdue the usurper
Achaios; or the activity in 204-203, on his return from his eastern
expedition; or the campaign of 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 , w h i c h swept f r o m Syria to
the Straits; or a march to T h r a c e ; or even the S e l e u k i d - R o m a n
War. 2 By its very chronological incertitude, the stele directs atten-
tion to the history of A n t i o c h o s I I I as one of military m o v e m e n t s
across the Seleukid empire: Asia M i n o r 'on the other side' of the
T a u r u s , the eastern satrapies, Syria and K o i l e - S y r i a (tabulated in
S c h m i t t 1964: 85). Antiochos' movements, over a fantastic distance,
f r o m the H i n d u K u s h to T h r a c e , were dedicated to the violent
reimposition of c o n t r o l — a n d the stele f r o m G ö r d e s , erected by a
Seleukid officer, belongs to this geography of war. 3
T h e king constructed the empire in the wake of his campaigning.
T h e full title of Zeuxis, the governor of c i s - T a u r i c Asia, was ό
άπολζλειμμενος ύπο τον βασιλέως Άντιόχον επι τών επιτάδε τον Τανρον
πραγμάτων, 'the official left in charge of affairs on this side of the
T a u r u s ' (see C h . 3 § 2). A Babylonian diary records, for the year
274, that A n t i o c h o s I 'left his . . ., his wife and a famous official in
the land Sardeis, to strengthen the guard'; m u c h later, a 'First

1 D o c u m e n t 39. Pol. 5.56, 5.58; Brown 1961.

2 O n dating, Herrmann 1970: 95—7. However, Apollophanes was already physician to
Seleukos II (regn. 246—226 BC): SEG 33.673, line 2; this makes a lower date difficult.
5 For a parallel for restless campaigning as a demonstration of royal success (baraka)

in traditional Moroccan kingship: Geertz 1993: 134-42.

Friend' of A n t i o c h o s V I I was άπολελειμμενος 8è καΐ èirl των τόπων,
'also left as governor of the area', as he is described in a dedication
found at Acre. 4 T h e king, in his movements, appointed governors
and left them at their posts: the participle άπολελειμμενος represents
the king's absent authority and his having-been-there. 5 T h e officer
Arkesilaos, w h o dedicated the G ö r d e s inscription, was also 'left
behind' at his post (a garrison? a 'military colony'?) by the king, no
doubt during one of his campaigns.
A n t i o c h o s I I I moved f r o m one zone of his empire to another,
alternating his focus of attention; his last campaign took him away
f r o m his defeat in Asia M i n o r , back to the eastern provinces (where
he met a violent death). But Asia M i n o r was the focus for repeated
efforts to assert control, over twenty-six years (223—197). It is worth
laying out what we know of A n t i o c h o s ' campaigns, for several
reasons. First, new epigraphical discoveries have modified the
standard picture (Schmitt 1964, W i l l 1982). Even though our
knowledge is lacunose, 6 w e can now rewrite some areas, or define
more sharply the schedule of events. Second, the narrative of these
campaigns brings the historical geography of Asia M i n o r to the
forefront; within this framework, the narrative portrays the consti-
tution of an imperial space through administrative and ideological
structures (§ 4). T h e process is the more interesting for the
difficulties and the resistance it met with, locally and internationally
(§ 5). Finally, the narrative provides the necessary context for the
documents produced by the c i t i e s — n a m e l y , the processes of con-
quest and imperial control w h i c h the cities experienced at their
expense.

ι. Achaios (223-213 BC)

T h e first stage in the reconquest of Asia M i n o r took place under

A c h a i o s , cousin of A n t i o c h o s I I I , f r o m a family closely linked to the
Seleukids and with a past of imperial service.' Achaios first acted as
governor for c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , then seceded f r o m the Seleukid
4 Zeuxis: document 29, 3-5; Babylonian calendar: Sachs and Hunger 1988: no. -273,

B, rev., line 29; Acre: Landau 1961.

5 Bengtson 1937: 19 n. 2 for comment and further examples; Bengtson 1944: 102 on

provincial office as representation of an absent ruler.

6 J. and L . Robert 1983: 53 n. 93, 56: gaps in the epigraphical record at A m y z o n , one

of the better-documented sites.

7 Family ties with Antiochos III: Schmitt 1964: 30-1; Meloni 1949: 536-7. Cousin of

Antiochos III: Pol. 4.5 1.4 and 8.20.11. Beloch 1927: 205-6, held that Achaios must have
been uncle and not cousin to Antiochos III (followed by Billows 1995: 96-9), but
Schmitt and Meloni argued convincingly against Beloch's view.
empire to create his own, short-lived kingdom. In spite of the
recently published inscriptions f r o m Sardeis, the episode is still
poorly documented. Achaios had accompanied an expedition by
Seleukos I I I , in 223, 'to see to his interests' and recover c i s - T a u r i c
Asia M i n o r (Pol. 4.48.7); the personal intervention of the king
followed the defeat of his generals at the hands of Attalos I, and the
subsequent loss of Sardeis. 8 Seleukos III reached Phrygia ( F G r H i s t
260 F 32.9), where coinage in his name was struck under the
supervision of courtiers; 9 he was faced with insubordination from
his army, and murdered in s u m m e r 223. A c h a i o s punished the
murderers, and, refusing the diadem offered by the troops, saved
the βασιλεία for Antiochos, the younger brother of the king (Pol.
4.48.9—10). A n t i o c h o s I I I , on his accession, appointed Achaios
governor of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , and Achaios set out to 'recover
all the land of this side of the T a u r u s ' (Pol. 4.48.10, with Schmitt
1964: 1 0 9 - 1 1 ) .
In late s u m m e r 223, according to Polybios (4.48.2, 4.48.11), he
had already established control over all of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r ,
driving Attalos I back into the original Pergamene dominion.
Polybios' statement is exaggerated, though A c h a i o s did achieve
substantial results. Sardeis became the Seleukid 'provincial capital'
once more, and struck coins where the portrait of A n t i o c h o s III
exhibits features recalling A c h a i o s ' o w n , a reflection, conscious or
not, of Achaios' king-like powers. 1 0 H e retook the cities of T e o s and
K o l o p h o n (but not Smyrna), K y m e , M y r i n a , Phokaia, Aigai,
T e m n o s , and the region of M y s i a , with places on the border with
the T r o a d . Achaios' advance deep into Aiolis explains Polybios'
description of Attalos I shut in his ancestral kingdom; his presence
in M y s i a implies that he had re-established Seleukid authority over
the regions further east (Lykaonia, Phrygia, L y d i a , eastern and
central Karia). 1 1 It is possible that Achaios' successes motivated the

8 Pergamene victory: OGIS ζηη\ Inschr. Pergamon 36. Loss of Sardeis: C h . 1 § 4.

Clashes between Seleukid and Attalid forces may have prompted Ptolemy III to send
his son Magas to Asia Minor: Huss 1977; a high-ranking Seleukid officer, Andromachos
(Achaios' father) was captured and sent to Alexandria (Pol. 4.51.1).
9 M a r k h o l m 1969: 14-15. T h e s e issues bear monograms also found in coins struck at

Antioch. M o r k h o l m suggests that this coinage was struck under the authority of the
mint of Antioch; more likely it was struck under the supervision of some of Seleukos'
Friends, who had previously exercised similar functions at Antioch, and now accom-
panied the king on his expedition.
10 For the chronology, Schmitt 1964: 161. Coinage: M o r k h o l m 1969: 15.

" For the cities of Aiolis, T e o s , Kolophon, and Myrina, our evidence is the fact that
in 218, Attalos I had to take these cities back, and marched into Mysia: Pol. 5.77-8; the
places of Karseai and D i d y m a T e i c h e , taken by Attalos, have been located by Robert on
the border between Mysia and the T r o a d : Robert 1937: 194-6. Attalos I treated the
Smyrnians well, because they had 'preserved to the greatest extent their faith towards
dispatch of Magas, the son of Ptolemy I I I , to Asia Minor. 1 2 H o w -
ever, Achaios probably did not achieve such results in the T r o a d ,
where L a m p s a k o s , Alexandreia T r o a s , and Ilion resisted him. 1 3
Polybios mentions that the cities of Aiolis and near Aiolis had 'gone
over to A c h a i o s out of fear' ( Ά χ α ί ω ττροσ€Κ€χωρήκ€ΐσαν δια τον φόβον:
5-77· 2 ); specific information on A c h a i o s ' reconquest w o u l d greatly
contribute to our knowledge of Seleukid Asia M i n o r , Attalid rule
between c.227 and 223, the problems of reimposing Seleukid
authority, and the local communities caught in the alternation
between Seleukids and Attalids.
A c h a i o s is referred to, but not active, during the entwined events
of the years 222-219: first, the revolt of M o l o n , the governor of the
eastern provinces, w h o declared himself king before being crushed
by Antiochos; secondly, the Fourth Syrian W a r , fought over K o i l e -
Syria (219-217). 1 4 In 220 Achaios attempted to usurp the Seleukid
kingship (Pol. 5.57.3-8): assuming the diadem and the royal title at
Laodikeia in Phrygia, he marched on Syria, but was thwarted w h e n
the troops mutinied, on the frontiers of L y k a o n i a (perhaps on the
approaches to Ikonion, the last important stopping-point before the
road headed towards the Kilikian Gates), 1 5 on realizing that they
were marching against 'their original and natural king'; A c h a i o s was
forced to return, with a detour to regain the troops' goodwill by
allowing them to plunder Pisidia. T h e sequence of events is difficult
to explain. 1 6 T h e breakaway k i n g d o m of Hierax perhaps offered
inspiration (Will 1982: 26). Achaios may have thought of himself

him' (Pol 5.77.6). For Mysia, also Holleaux 19386: 33-4 (Mysians in Achaios' army,
though these could simply be mercenaries).
12 Huss 1977 prefers this context for the presence of Magas in Asia Minor: 'Seleukos

h a v i n g j u s t died' in P. Haun 6 being Seleukos III rather than Seleukos II; Habicht 1980.
13 Meloni (1949: 536 n. 2 and 1950: 175 n. 2) believes that Pol. 5.78.6 (Sià το

τΐτηρηκέναι την προς αύτον [sc. Attalos I] πίοτιν) means the three cities of the T r o a d
surrendered to Achaios after resistance (also Schmitt 1964: 165 and n. 3); a parallel for
this usage is found in RDGE 18, line 5. Piejko 19916: 33, holds that Achaios took over
Ilion, and that this was the occasion when the Ilians offered sacrifices and prayers at the
accession of a king Antiochos—on this interpretation, Antiochos III ( O G I S 219, lines
i 6 - i 8 ) . However, Pol. 5.78. and especially 5.78.6 imply that in 218, Attalos I did not
need to reconquer the cities of the T r o a d (as has been written), but went through the
T r o a d only because of the revolt of his Aigosagian auxiliaries; the latter 'crossed to
Asia', upon Attalos' invitation—into the T r o a d , held by or sympathetic to the Attalids:
Pol. 5.78.5-6. It is unlikely that Achaios took over cities in the T r o a d c.223, and that
Attalos recovered them soon afterwards, since Attalos' expedition of 218 seems the first
time he took the military initiative, when Achaios' forces were diverted to Pisidia.
14 On both, Will 1982: 17-23; detailed treatment of Molon in Schmitt 1964: 116-50;

Gera 1998: 3-20 on Fourth Syrian War.

15 Leake 1824: 44-5, for the ridge before the plain of Konya.
16 Against the 'conspiracy theory' in Will 1982: 23-6 and Will 1962 (Achaios' usurpa-

tion directed against Hermeias), Schmitt 1964: 185-8.

within Seleukid legitimacy, as is suggested by the coinage he issued
at Sardeis, repeating Seleukid symbols (especially the anchor, on
the shield of the admittedly un-Seleukid A t h e n a Alkis: WSM no.
1440) and by the fact that A c h a i o s never again tried to attack the
Syrian heartland of the dynasty, even when A n t i o c h o s I I I was at
war in K o i l e - S y r i a . 1 '
A c h a i o s ' rule lasted about six years, f r o m the usurpation in
s u m m e r 220 to his capture and the surrender of the citadel at Sardeis
in autumn 214 or winter 214/13. T h e k i n g d o m of Achaios, seen from
the inside, could provide parallels for the history of A n t i o c h o s III in
western Asia M i n o r , especially for the mechanisms of control, and
the negotiations with the subject communities. But none of the
letters written b y 'king A c h a i o s ' to the cities (Pol. 4.2.6; 5.57.2;
5.57.5) has survived. W e know of a governor of Sardeis, A r i b a z o s
(Pol. 7 . 1 7 . 9 ; 8.21.9); and, in M y s i a or Hellespontic Phrygia, of a
governor (στρατηγός), T h e m i s t o k l e s (Pol 5.77.8). A T h e m i s t o k l e s
appears in the Trallian document RC 4 1 , line 9, as 'ό στρατηγός',
probably the governor of Karia (or Lydia?); it is conceivable that
this inscription preserves a letter of Achaios, concerning the city of
Tralleis, and referring to the decision by an earlier Seleukid king,
[Antio]chos (see A p p e n d i x 3). 18 A t the local level, few documents
refer to events under Achaios: an unsuccessful attempt in 221/0
by Magnesia under M a e a n d e r to have a contest for A r t e m i s
L e u k o p h r y e n e acknowledged as panhellenic; an alliance between
Miletos and Seleukeia/Tralleis, dated to 218/17 (showing that the
Trallians, w h o seem to have dropped the Seleukid ethnikon in the
220s, had reverted to i t — i n 223, under compulsion by Achaios,
w h e n he was still the general of A n t i o c h o s III?); and possibly an
honorific decree for a Trallian ambassador to 'the king' (Achaios?). 1 9

17 Will 1982: 26. A puzzling passage in Polybios (8.17.11) concerns Achaios' plan, in

winter 214/13 to go to Syria and seize power thanks to a movement in his favour in
Antioch, Koile-Syria, and Phoenicia (but the last two regions were not Seleukid).
18 Bengtson 1944: 1 1 6 - 1 7 , argues that Themistokles was appointed by Achaios when

he was governor of Asia M i n o r rather than independent king.

19 Magnesia: Inschr. Magnesia 16, Rigsby 1996: 180, 188-9. Alliance: Inschr.
Delphinion 143, same document I. Tralleis 20 (stephanephoria of Epikrates in Miletos,
which R e h m dated to 212/11, but should be dated earlier, to 218/17, o n account of
Wörrle's redating of the Milesian stephanephoroi list, Inschr. Delphinion 124: Wörrle
1988: 428-37). Embassy: the alliance between Miletos and Tralleis/Seleukeia mentions
Menodoros T i m e o u (Inschr. Delphinion 143, line 5), who also is named as stephanephoros
in a Trallian inscription (I. Tralleis 26, line 1) in honour of a citizen who went on
embassy 'to the king', conceivably king Achaios, if we posit, on the grounds of
Menodoros' eminence, a close connection in time between Menodoros' stephanephoria
and the alliance between Tralleis and Miletos (for which Menodoros represented
Tralleis).
It is difficult to relate any of these d o c u m e n t s or these events to the
reign of 'king A c h a i o s ' .
T h e absence of d o c u m e n t a t i o n is the more regrettable because
A c h a i o s ' activity and military might 2 0 were centred on Anatolia.
A c h a i o s avoided entanglements w i t h the great powers, b y keeping
away f r o m the dominions of P t o l e m y I V (who supported him w i t h
aid) 21 and the A n t i g o n i d holdings of Karia; his main target was
A t t a l o s I, on w h o m he w a g e d war t h r o u g h o u t his r e i g n 2 2 — i n a con-
tinuance of the mission assigned to h i m in 223. H e also intervened
in local conflict, such as the war between Byzantion and R h o d e s in
220 (Pol. 4 . 4 8 . 1 - 4 , t h o u g h Ptolemaic pressure soon forced A c h a i o s
out), and, in 218, the war between Pednelissos and Selge, an episode
well d o c u m e n t e d t h r o u g h P o l y b i o s (5.72—6); t h o u g h an attempt to
capture Selge failed, A c h a i o s 'subjected to the yoke the M i l y a s and
most of P a m p h y l i a ' (Pol. 5 . 7 7 . 1 ) — T e r m e s s o s and Sagalassos m a y
have fallen to him, as well as the smaller cities of the M i l y a s
( K o m a m a , Olbasa, Pogla). 2 3 A c h a i o s ' intervention in Pisidia illus-
trates the m e s h i n g of local d y n a m i c s and high politics characteristic
of the Hellenistic period.
A p a r t f r o m the Pisidian episode, the other d o c u m e n t e d event is
the campaign undertaken b y A t t a l o s I, w h e n A c h a i o s was o c c u p i e d
in Pamphylia. 2 4 A t t a l o s started out w i t h a force of Galatians, the
A i g o s a g e s , specially ferried f r o m E u r o p e to A s i a M i n o r , and
recovered K y m e , M y r i n a , Phokaia, A i g a i , and T e m n o s ; further
south, the T e i a n s and the K o l o p h o n i a n s sent in embassies to 'hand
themselves o v e r ' , u p o n the same terms as before (in the case of
T e o s , as a tribute-paying subordinate c o m m u n i t y ) . Attalos also
received courteously the e n v o y s of independent Smyrna. 2 5 H e next

20 Pol. 4.48.12, cf. 5.77.1; also the eagle clutching a palm branch or a wreath figured
on Achaios' bronze coinage: WSM 1441, 1442, 1445, 1446, 1448, 1450.
21 Support by the Ptolemies: Pol. 7.16.7; 8.15.10; also 5.63.8: Ptolemy I V recalls

forces from 'cities of the exterior', probably including Asia Minor, without fear of
aggression on Achaios' part. Schmitt 1964: 166-71 and Will 1982: 25-6, 30-1, minimize
the Ptolemaic connection, largely in reaction to earlier scholarship which saw Achaios as
entirely motivated by 'Alexandrian gold' (e.g. Holleaux 1942: 1 3 1 - 2 , 134).
22 Pol. 4.48.2: that Achaios and Attalos I were both contacted by the Byzantines in

their search for allies against the Rhodians does not prove that the two kings were at
peace (Schmitt 1964: 263) since Attalos was still 'shut up in his paternal kingdom'.
23 On the region, through which Achaios necessarily passed on his way to Pamphylia,

whether from Laodikeia or Apameia ( S y m e 1995: 204): S y m e 1995: 177-203 (with Hall
1986).
24 Holleaux 19386: 17-42; Schmitt 1964: 262-4.

25 Pol. 5.77.4—6. Polybios' account is silent about Erythrai; the city was probably

Attalid in 201 (Pol. 16.6.5). Allen 1983: 4 5 - 5 7 , proposes an unacceptable interpretation

of the status of the Teians: pace Allen, T e o s was not a vaguely 'free' city under some
form of Attalid protectorate and making occasional payments to the Attalids (47, based
on an excessively narrow interpretation of Ιγχΐΐρίζειν in Pol. 5.77.5), but a subject city
m o v e d into M y s i a and the ' M y s i a n katoikiai' (probably t h r o u g h
w e s t e r n L y d i a , since he crossed the L y k o s , and taking over
T h y a t e i r a in the process, t h o u g h P o l y b i o s is silent on this city), and
reached the P r o p o n t i s , taking o v e r K a r s e a i and D i d y m a t e i c h e
( p r o b a b l y the w e s t e r n m o s t places held by A c h a i o s in the region);
the latter was surrendered by A c h a i o s ' g o v e r n o r , T h e m i s t o k l e s .
A t t a l o s then turned south again, ravaging the plain of A p i a (the
m o d e r n Bahkesir plain), and finally reached the river M e k e s t o s . But
his plans for m a r c h i n g into eastern M y s i a w e r e thwarted by a
m u t i n y a m o n g the A i g o s a g e s , forcing h i m to w i t h d r a w to the
T r o a d , 2 6 w h e r e he dealt cordially w i t h L a m p s a k o s , A l e x a n d r e i a
T r o a s , and Ilion, for their loyalty, but w h e r e he also settled the
A i g o s a g e s (they w o u l d cause havoc in the f o l l o w i n g two years). 2 '
W h e n A c h a i o s returned f r o m Pisidia to Sardeis, he 'warred con-
tinuously w i t h A t t a l o s ' (Pol. 5 . 7 7 . 1 ) , to recover lost territory. T h i s
second round of reconquest was less successful than the c a m p a i g n
of 223—222. A t t a l o s retained control of the A i o l i a n cities, as well as
T e o s , K o l o p h o n , and T h y a t e i r a , p r o b a b l y taken over in 218 on the
m a r c h to Mysia. 2 8 T h e simultaneous events ( A c h a i o s ' P a m p h y l i a n
i n v o l v e m e n t , A t t a l o s ' n o r t h - w e s t e r n campaign) show the extension
of A c h a i o s ' d o m i n i o n ( f r o m the A e g e a n into inland Anatolia) and, at
the same time, its vulnerability.
T h e final act was the c a m p a i g n w a g e d by A n t i o c h o s I I I across the
T a u r u s , starting in 216, the spring after his defeat at R a p h i a in 2 1 7
(Pol. 5 . 1 0 7 . 4 ) — w h i c h freed A n t i o c h o s f r o m the d i l e m m a of choos-
ing b e t w e e n K o i l e - S y r i a and the need to reduce his rebellious
relative. 2 9 A n t i o c h o s had refused to a c k n o w l e d g e A c h a i o s as any-
thing else than a rebel, αποστάτης'· in winter 219/18, he o p p o s e d
attempts by P t o l e m y I V to include A c h a i o s in any treaty (Pol.
5 . 6 7 . 1 2 - 1 3 ) . T h e expedition into A s i a M i n o r of 216 came u n d e r a
double heading of legitimacy: the reconquest of ancestral S e l e u k i d
holdings, and the suppression of a rebellious subordinate.
A n t i o c h o s 'came to an arrangement' w i t h A t t a l o s I, κοινοπραγίαν

paying tribute; this is proved by the first T e i a n decree for Antiochos III (document 17)
which explicitly mentions tribute to Attalos), and the fact that Attalos I took hostages
from the city. See further C h . 3 §§ 2-3.
26 Pol. 5.77.7-78. For the topography, Robert 1937: 184-97, preferable to Meloni

1950: 166-76 (who emends Polybios to have Attalos I cross the Kaikos instead of the
L y k o s and reach the Karesene via Adramyttion). On the 'Mysian katoikiai' (Pol. 5.77.7),
Robert 1937: 1 9 1 - 3 (villages in a region devoid of cities), Schwertheim 1988: 74 η. 33
(military colonies, since they would have presented Attalos I with a valuable objective:
not compelling).
27 T r o a d : Pol. 5.78.6.

28 Pol. 16.1.7 with Robert 1962: 38.

29 O n the strategic dilemma, Schmitt 1964: 173-5.
(Pol. 5.107.4), against Achaios. T h e statue to Zeuxis, erected by the
citizens of P e r g a m o n ( O G I S 236), might date to this collaboration,
rather than the 190s or after the battle of Magnesia (Dittenberger).
Schmitt believed that the price paid by A n t i o c h o s I I I was the
cession of an enormous tract of territory in north-west Asia M i n o r ,
including M y s i a and Hellespontine Phrygia up to Aizanoi (Schmitt
1964: 2 6 4 - 7 , 302 for map). In fact the stele discovered near Balikesir
shows that most or all of M y s i a was taken back by A n t i o c h o s I I I :
Attalos I was simply left in control of whatever he had saved f r o m
A c h a i o s ' counter-campaign.
Far f r o m allowing a vast amount of land to pass over to Attalos,
A n t i o c h o s I I I recovered most of A c h a i o s ' kingdom. M o s t or all of
M y s i a was brought back under Seleukid dominion; though the fact
that Prousias was active near A b y d o s in 216 (when he exterminated
the Aigosages: Pol. 5 . 1 1 1 . 6 ) , and that he invaded the Attalid king-
dom in 208 (Liv. 28.7.10; H a b i c h t , RE s.v. Prousias, 1092-3), imply
that Prousias retained control of northern M y s i a for several years,
before Seleukid authority was re-established. 3 0 If OGIS 219 can be
dated to A n t i o c h o s I I I , his campaign against Achaios might provide
a context, implying Seleukid activity deep into the T r o a d (unlikely,
since Attalos I was allowed to retain his other dominions outside
of the Pergamene k i n g d o m itself). Plellespontine Phrygia was
recovered by A n t i o c h o s I I I , w h o also seized A c h a i o s ' conquests in
Pamphylia and Pisidia; Sagalassos may have fallen into Seleukid
hands at this occasion. 3 1 Greater Phrygia and L y k a o n i a must have
been recovered earlier.
î0 On the koinopragia of 216, Allen 1983: 58—65, suggesting that the most important

concession made by Antiochos III was to recognize the Attalid kingdom as a separate
and sovereign state, and arguing against the view of massive territorial concessions by
Antiochos III; also Gruen 1996: 1 6 - 1 9 , discussing the introduction of the cult of Magna
Mater to Rome in 205: the sacred stone came not from Pessinous (since the Attalid
holdings were not so extensive at that point), but from Pergamon itself. On Mysia, see
Schwertheim 1988: 73-6, who translates L i v . 38.39.15 (in 188, Eumenes II receives
from the Romans Mysiarn, quam Prusia rex ademerat) as 'Mysia, which the king (sc.
Antiochos) had taken from Prousias'. But this is difficult to reconcile with Pol. 21.46.10,
where the text reads Μυσους, ovs πρότερου αυτοΰ παρεσπάσατο: Schwertheim would inter-
pret the subject of this sentence as being Antiochos I I I , whereas (Προνοίας) has usually,
and rightly, been inserted into the text, since L i v y , translating Polybios, mentions
Prousias. T h e solution is probably that Prousias seized parts of Mysia before 216 from
Attalos I (in the aftermath of Attalos' campaign of 218?), and that Antiochos III seized
the region from Prousias (since Mysia was definitely Seleukid down to the Peace of
Apameia). In 188, the seizure of Mysia by Prousias was the one which Eumenes II and
the Roman commissioners referred to, since it established 'the historical claim of
P e r g a m u m to possession of M y s i a ' (Baronowski 1991: 452 n. 4). It is not clear when
Seleukid authority was established over northern Phrygia: perhaps as late as 197 (§ 4).
S1 Hellespontine Phrygia: Schwertheim 1988: 70-3 (Hellespontine Phrygia was
Antiochos' since it belonged to the territories at the disposal of the Romans in 188),
Wörrle 1988: 460 (Antiochos III in Hellespontine Phrygia); Pamphylia: Schmitt 1964:
 T h e reconquest of inland Asia M i n o r took place with ease; by
214, Achaios was cornered in Sardeis. 3 2 A n t i o c h o s I I I must have
been helped by the dynastic loyalty of (ex-)Seleukid troops and
officials rallying to him, as happened w h e n the king took to the field
against the usurper M o l o n : 'it is difficult for rebels to risk attacking
kings in daylight and face to face'. 3 3 A n t i o c h o s presumably was also
aided by the quiescence or opportunism of the local communities.
Sardeis was captured and sacked (Pol. 7.15—18), in late 215 or
early 214; Achaios was caught in late 214 (Pol. 8 . 1 5 - 2 1 ) , while
trying to smuggle himself out of the citadel of Sardeis; in Polybios'
words, 'it was resolved first to cut off the unfortunate man's
extremities, then to cut off his head and sew it up in an ass-skin,
while impaling the b o d y ' (Pol. 8.21.2—3); the citadel surrendered
shortly afterwards. T h e punishment undid A c h a i o s ' pretensions to
royal charisma (expressed in numismatic portraiture, or the physi-
cal deference shown to Achaios by his companions: Pol 8.20.3-4).
T h e mutilation and the impalement were taken f r o m Near-Eastern
imperial practice; they publicized Seleukid authority, after the
interlude of the usurpation. T h e same message was perhaps
expressed in a G r e e k visual vocabulary: the famous Hellenistic
group representing M a r s y a s on the point of being flayed before a
seated A p o l l o might be a Seleukid work of art dramatizing the
punishment of A c h a i o s (elderly and bearded, like Marsyas) by
A n t i o c h o s I I I (youthful and beardless, like Apollo). 3 4
T h e symbolical message was reflected in immediate and concrete
measures of repression and reorganization. 3 5 T h e one city we know-
about is the 'provincial capital' of Sardeis, thanks to epigraphical
documents dating to 213, in the immediate aftermath of the
campaigns against Achaios. 3 6 T h e city was fined, and a new 5 per

279 (Pamphylia recovered by Antiochos III around 216: the accounts of Antiochos' pro-
gression by sea in 197 do not mention any conquests between R o u g h Kilikia and Lykia).
Sagalassos: Κ . Vandorpe, in Waelkens and Poblome 1995: 299-305, for city seal with a
Seleukid elephant; but perhaps the city fell under Seleukid control in Antiochos'
Pisidian campaign of 193. N o t h i n g suggests that Achaios, then Antiochos had con-
quered Pisidia at this time (as proposed by Waelkens, in Waelkens 1993: 42).
32 Gauthier 1989: 1 5 - 1 9 (much swifter progression of Antiochos' campaign than had

been believed).
35 Quote from Pol. 5.52.9; also 5.41.9; 5.46.8; 5.54.1; for loyalist feelings in Achaios'

army, 5.57.6.
34 Van Proosdij (1934); S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 189. Marsyas: Fleischer

1972-5·
35 T h e land-conveyance to Mnesimachos (Sardis, no. 1) should not be dated to this

time (Atkinson 1972): Debord 1982: 244-7, Billows 1995: 144 η. 70.
36 D o c u m e n t 36 does not concern Sardeis after Achaios (Piejko 1987): Gauthier 1989:

1 7 1 - 8 . Piejko 1987 further attributes Sardis, no. 88, to Antiochos III; I see no reason
for preferring Antiochos I I I to Eumenes II, or even Achaios.
cent tax was perhaps imposed as a punitive measure; troops were
billeted on the population, and commandeered the city's gymnasion
for their use. T h e s e conditions were alleviated upon petition to
Antiochos, w h o later granted benefactions: a securely funded
yearly grant of 200 metretai, about 8,000 litres, of oil for the y o u n g
men in the gymnasion (restored to the city), and tax-exemption for
a festival in honour of Laodikeia. T h i s festival belonged to a set of
cultic honours for A n t i o c h o s ' spouse, Laodike I I I , and were per-
haps a response to benefactions f r o m her as well. It also is possible
that A n t i o c h o s granted the city exemption f r o m agricultural taxes
and gave grain, both for consumption and for sowing, thus helping
the city restart its agricultural cycle after the disruption of war. 3 7
T h e documents suggest that A n t i o c h o s I I I and Laodike stayed in
Sardeis, where over several months 3 8 they received embassies f r o m
the Sardians, and no doubt f r o m other communities of the recon-
quered regions. T h i s was A n t i o c h o s ' first stay in Asia M i n o r . H i s
unfamiliarity is apparent in his reply to the Sardians' petition for
release f r o m rent on εργαστήρια, royally o w n e d workshops:
άπολύομεν δε υμάς και του ενοικίου ου τελείτε άπο των εργαστηρίου, είπε ρ
και αΐ άλλαι πόλεις μη πράσσονται, 'we also e x e m p t y o u f r o m the rent
w h i c h you pay on the workshops, at least if it is true that the other
cities do not pay for it'. T h e Sardians had supported their petition
with appeals to parallels and precedents f r o m other cities; the king
accepted the a r g u m e n t — b u t was unable to confirm the particulars. 3 9
O n departing (winter 213/12?), A n t i o c h o s III 'left behind' the
officer Z e u x i s as governor of c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r . His responsi-
bilities are already apparent in the first letter of A n t i o c h o s III to the
Sardians: timber for the reconstruction (συνοικισμός) of Sardeis is to
be cut and brought in 'as Z e u x i s sees fit', and 'we have written to
Z e u x i s and Ktesikles concerning all these m a t t e r s ' — t h e restitution
of the commandeered gymnasion, the cancellation of the additional
tax, and perhaps the terms for the payment of a fine.40 T h e recon-

" Fine: document 1, 2 (with Gauthier 1989: 20-2). Supplementary tax: document 1,
5-6, with Gauthier 1989: 33-6; though the additional tax which Antiochos is seen to
suppress in that document may have been imposed b y Achaios. Billeting: document 1,
6 - 7 (gymnasion) and document 3, 6-8. Benefactions: document 3, with Gauthier 1989:
85-96; cult for Laodike: document 2. G i f t of grain: 41 C (assuming it concerns the city
and not, for instance, the installation of colonists). T h e fragmentary letters 41 A and Β
could also date to c.213, but this is not certain.
38 T h e first letter of Antiochos III (document 1) was issued in M a r c h 213, Laodike's

letter (document 2) in June, and Antiochos' 'second* letter later still (document 3: after
Laodike's letter).
35 D o c u m e n t 3, 8-10; Gauthier 1989: 107.

40 D o c u m e n t 1, 4, 7 - 8 . O n Ktesikles (perhaps ό [em των προσόδω]ν, certainly a high-

ranking financial official), C h . 3 § 2.

struction of Sardeis (documented in the archaeological record) is the
only securely documented instance of the long-term activity of re-
organizing Asia M i n o r . T h e fragmentary inscription f r o m Tralleis
(RC 4 1 ) m i g h t be a letter of Z e u x i s , in the aftermath of the war
against Achaios, addressed to the citizens of Seleukeia/Tralleis on
the subject of some financial obligation; in this case, the 'general
T h e m i s t o k l e s ' mentioned in line 9 could be the governor of M y s i a
under Achaios, w h o defected to Attalos I in 218 (Pol. 5.77.8) and
w h o then w o u l d have defected back to A n t i o c h o s I I I 111 216. 41 In a
letter to Zeuxis, preserved in Ajf 1 2 . 1 4 7 - 1 5 3 , the king ordered the
settling of 2000 Jewish families in L y d i a and Phrygia, after unrest
in these regions: assuming that the document is authentic, the
context must be the continuing pacification of inland Asia Minor. 4 2
B y 213, A n t i o c h o s I I I had recovered inland Asia M i n o r , f r o m the
Kilikian gates to M y s i a , and even retaken P a m p h y l i a (earlier lost to
P t o l e m y III). But the resurrected Seleukid dominion lacked the
western and coastal zones, f r o m the T r o a d (unless OGIS 219 is to
be dated to this period, implying a Seleukid presence) to western
Karia and L y k i a , and, to the south, R o u g h Kilikia; all of w h i c h
could be construed as 'ancestral possessions' belonging to Seleukos
1, and almost all of w h i c h had been under actual Seleukid control.

2. A fter the Expedition to the Upper Regions (204-202 bc)

Between 212 and 204, A n t i o c h o s was in the east, where he

endeavoured to reimpose Seleukid authority. In 212, he reduced
X e r x e s , the king of southern A r m e n i a , to submission (Pol. 8.23);
the geography implies renewed Seleukid control over K o m m a g e n e
and northern A r m e n i a ( S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 190-7). In
2 1 1 - 2 1 0 , A n t i o c h o s mustered his forces in M e d i a (Justin 41.5.7). In
209, A n t i o c h o s issued to Z e u x i s the prostagma concerning N i k a n o r
( C h . 1); the context might provide a clue to Antiochos' intentions:
recreating the office of 'high-priest of all the shrines in the land
b e y o n d the T a u r u s ' publicized the fiction of u n i f o r m Seleukid

41 For the r e b u i l d i n g of Sardeis after the sack, G a u t h i e r 1989: 32-3, with references

to the literature. O n RC 4 1 , A p p e n d i x 3.
42 O n the letter, B e n g t s o n 1944: 1 1 0 - 1 2 ; also A p p e n d i x 3, on the hypercritical view of

G a u g e r 1977. D o c u m e n t 41 C could concern the settlement of military colonists near

Sardeis, though it w o u l d be m o r e likely addressed to Z e u x i s than to the Sardians.
G a u t h i e r 1989: 41 η. 89, is cautious on the theory that partisans of A c h a i o s caused the
unrest. T h e b o u n d a r y stone MAMA 4.75 has been dated by its editors to 2 1 1 / 1 0 , b u t in
fact is m u c h later ( u n p u b l i s h e d paper b y T h . D r e w - B e a r : see A p p e n d i x 3), and tells us
n o t h i n g about S e l e u k i d reorganization.
authority in western Asia M i n o r , during an absence in the east.
A n t i o c h o s further designated co-regent his eldest son, Antiochos. 4 3
A n t i o c h o s I I I then set out on his 'expedition to the U p p e r
Regions', directed against Arsakes II, king of the Parthians (209),
E u t h y d e m o s , king of Baktria, and finally Sophagasenos, 'king of
the I n d i a n s ' — i n fact a local dynast, otherwise u n k n o w n (206). O n
all three, A n t i o c h o s I I I imposed the same f o r m of settlement as
in Armenia: the grant of the 'subject' kings' right to rule, c o m -
pounded with tribute or payment of ransom-money. A n t i o c h o s
withdrew to southern Iran (where he spent the winter 206/5), then
to Persis, w h e n c e he sailed against the Gerrhaians in Arabia; in
exchange for a 'grant' of liberty, he received a gift, or ransom, of
silver and spices. 44 A n t i o c h o s ' dealings with the 'rebel' states in the
eastern regions offer parallels and contrasts with the negotiations
between the king and the cities of western Asia M i n o r (Ch. 3). A t
this time (205), envoys f r o m Magnesia on Maeander, seeking
acknowledgement of their contest for A r t e m i s L e u k o p h r y e n e as
isopythian (and of their city as asylos, inviolate), met A n t i o c h o s I I I
in Antiocheia in Persis (RC 31, 32; OGIS 233): the first time we see
the king concerned w i t h the west since the prostagma about
Nikanor. A f t e r the winter, he continued his westward march, and in
spring 204 (month I, day 8), he sacrificed at the Esagil in Babylon
(Sachs and H u n g e r 1989: no. -204, C , rev., lines 14-18). L e s s easy
to date as precisely as the king's movements, an increase in coinage,
in all metals, must reflect the results of the eastern expedition; the
representation of elephants on several issues may allude to the 150
elephants A n t i o c h o s extracted from Sophagasenos. 4 5
A p p i a n describes A n t i o c h o s as 'having invaded M e d i a and
Parthia and other peoples w h i c h had already revolted before his
time, and having performed many great things, and receiving the
name A n t i o c h o s the G r e a t ' (και μέγας Άντίοχος άπο τούδε κληθείς:
A p p . Syr ι). T h e earliest evidence for the epithet appears in 202,
confirming Appian. 4 6 T h i s epithet may reflect the creation by
A n t i o c h o s of the state cult for himself and his ancestors, to celebrate
his exploits and the reimposition of Seleukid authority over the
possessions in the East. 4 7
43 Nikanor the high-priest: document 4. Antiochos the son: J. and L. Robert 1983:

163 n. 1; Schmitt 1964: 13 and n. 1, generally 13-20.

44 Parthians: Pol. 10.28-31 and Justin 41.5.7. Baktria: Pol. 10.49 a n d 11.34.1—11.
'India' and the return to southern Iran: Pol. 1 1 . 3 4 . 1 2 - 1 4 . Gerrhaians and Persian G u l f :
Pol. 13.9. O n Seleukids in the Persian G u l f , J.-F. Salles in S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t
1987, 75-109. 45 WSM, 397; Rostovtzeff 1941: pi. 7.1.
46 But the title ' G r e a t K i n g ' (βασιλεύς μέγας) was not taken on at this time: A p p e n d i x 4.
47 State cult founded in c.205: J. and L . Robert 1983: 168 n. 40. T h e only evidence is

a reference in the prostagma on cult for Laodike: document 37. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and

 P o l y b i o s appraises the 'expedition into the U p p e r regions' in a
w e l l - k n o w n passage:
ου μόνον τον s άνω σατράπας υπηκόους εποιήσατο της Ιδίας αρχής, άλλα και τάς
επιθαλλαττίους πόλεις και τους επί τάδε τοΰ Ταύρου δυνάστας, και συλλήβδην
ήσφαλίσατο τήν βασιλείαν, καταπληξάμενος τη τόλμη και φιλοπονία πάντας τους
υποταττομενονς· δια γαρ ταύτης της στρατείας άξιος εφάνη της βασιλείας ού μόνον
τοις κατά τήν Άσίαν, αλλά και τοις κατά τήν Εύρωπην. (Pol. 11 ·34· Ι4 — 1 6)
he made not only the upper satraps subject to his own rule, but also the
cities by the sea and the dynasts on this side of Taurus, and, in short, he
secured the kingdom, having intimidated all his subjects by his daring and
industry: for it was through this expedition that he seemed worthy of the
kingship not only to the inhabitants of Asia, but also to the inhabitants of
Europe.

L e a v i n g aside the problems connected with A n t i o c h o s ' eastern

achievements, 4 8 what exactly does P o l y b i o s mean? H e implies that
the expedition to the U p p e r Territories reduced to subjection
the communities of Asia M i n o r , the latter being included in the
ύποταττόμενοι w h i c h A n t i o c h o s impressed with his daring and
industry. Polybios' statement should not be watered d o w n to speak
of the 'propaganda effect' in Asia Minor: the passage is informed by
the claim that Asia M i n o r had rightfully been a Seleukid possession
ever since the victory of Seleukos I at K o u r o u p e d i o n in 281 ( C h . 1).
T h e 'upper satraps', and the maritime cities and dynasts of Asia
M i n o r , are equated as two g r o u p s within the Seleukid empire, their
vacillating loyalties secured by the demonstration of Antiochos'
energy: Polybios perhaps echoes the official Seleukid presentation.
A n o t h e r possibility is that this passage preserves a garbled trace of
Seleukid military and diplomatic activity in Asia M i n o r , during the
eastern expedition and in its immediate wake. 4 9
A t any rate, Polybios links the end of the eastern expedition with
c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r — A n t i o c h o s ' destination, after his activity in
the Persian G u l f . T h e king probably spent part of 204 in north
Syria, w h e n c e he made initial contacts with the επιθαλάσσιοι πόλεις of
Asia M i n o r , in the form of benefactions, for instance at T e o s (if the

K u h r t 1993: 209-10, suggest that the cult was created in 193, if the present tense in the
prostagma on cult for Laodike is to be taken narrowly: 'just as high-priests of us are
appointed throughout the kingdom, so there should be established, in the same places,
high-priestesses of her also' (document 37, 21-4); but I prefer to interpret the present
tense as describing general practice, rather than implying that priests of Antiochos III
were being appointed at that very moment (193).
48Positive reassessment in S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 197-201.
49 'Propagandistische W i r k u n g ' : Schmitt 1964: 90—2. 'Eau bénite de cour': Will 1982:
65-6. G r u e n 1986: 613 and n. 6 (interprets Pol. 11.34.14 a s directly describing the
Seleukid activity of c.203 in Asia Minor, which is not what the text says).
T e i a n decrees date f r o m c.203: A p p e n d i x 2). 50 In late 204 or in
spring 203, A n t i o c h o s crossed the T a u r u s . A r o u n d this time, after
the death of Ptolemy I V (204), the Ptolemaic minister A g a t h o k l e s
sent an ambassador to A n t i o c h o s 'in Asia', requesting that he keep to
the truce struck with P t o l e m y I V in 217 (Pol. 15.25.13); another
envoy was sent to ask for assistance f r o m Philip V , 'in case
A n t i o c h o s should try to break the treaties with them more c o m -
pletely' (eàv ολοσχερεστερον αυτούς Άντίοχος εττιβάληται -παρασπονδεΐν).
T h e formulation might imply that the Seleukids had started aggres-
sions against Ptolemaic dominions, by the time of Philopator's
death. 51
T h e activities of A n t i o c h o s are partially documented through
contemporary inscriptions, f r o m western Karia, with (probably)
another series of documents for the Ionian city of T e o s . A p a r t f r o m
locating at least some of the m o v e m e n t s and (re)conquests of £.203
on the map, they also provide a picture of local responses in the
aftermath of takeover by the Seleukids.
T h e most complete evidence comes f r o m A m y z o n , on the
northern flank of M t . L a t m o s . T h e earliest inscription is a letter
dated to 15 Daisios in the year 109 SE ( M a y 203 BC), the m o m e n t of
the takeover by the Seleukids: the author tries to reassure the
A m y z o n i a n s of his good intentions towards 'all those w h o have
handed themselves over to us'. T h i s document, long attributed to
A n t i o c h o s I I I , is rather the work of the governor of c i s - T a u r i c Asia
M i n o r , Zeuxis. 5 2 A n inscription on the architrave of the temple of
A r t e m i s states that Z e u x i s dedicated land to the shrine while in
A m y z o n . 5 3 In contrast, letters by A n t i o c h o s to the army at A m y z o n
and L a b r a u n d a (below) do not entail his presence in western Karia;
the implication is rather to the contrary, especially since at
L a b r a u n d a , the king's instructions were passed on by Zeuxis. 5 4 It is

50 D o c u m e n t 17, 6 - 1 0 ('the other side of the T a u r u s ' in this case designates the city's

point of view, unlike document 4, 29-30).

51 On the death of Ptolemy I V , Schmitt 1964: 189-237. Against the thesis of Seleukid

aggression, Walbank ( H C P ii. 484, ad 15.25.13) points out that ολοσχερέστεροι' might
mean 'in any significant way' rather than 'in any more significant way', and hence not
attest Seleukid aggression c.204. T h e case usually adduced for aggression against the
Ptolemies, the takeover of A m y z o n , has been reinterpreted by M e a d o w s (below). 'In
Asia' must mean Asia M i n o r rather than Asia in the broadest sense (including northern
Syria): document 14 shows an Amyzonian ambassador reaching the king, in or soon
after 203, without any hint at a long journey to northern Syria.
52 Letter to the Amyzonians: document 5. Attribution: M a , D e r o w , and M e a d o w s

1995 and commentary to document 5. J. and L . Robert 1983: 144, no. 13, is perhaps a
letter of Antiochos III, confirming and expanding Zeuxis' arrangements; cf. document
31 A, I 9
" Dedication: document 7.
54 Letter to the army at A m y z o n : document 6; at Labraunda: referred to in document
important to grasp that what took place was an act of conquest, and
not a voluntary alliance between A m y z o n and the Seleukid state.
T h e letter of A n t i o c h o s to his army at A m y z o n (above) is eloquent
e n o u g h about the military operations forming the background of
such lenifying utterances, and there is clear evidence of the violence
and spoliations (see C h . 3 § 1 ). T h e s e were followed by a declaration
of the shrine's asylia, w h i c h protected it f r o m spoliation, but also
was a reflection of royal authority over local statuses.
T h e A m y z o n i a n material documents a single c o m m u n i t y in the
aftermath of conquest, and the imposition of various forms of
Seleukid state p o w e r ( C h . 3 § 2), concrete (such as the plethora
of officials attested) and symbolical, such as the 'regnal f o r m u l a ' —
the city's decrees now started with a fixed Seleukid formula:
Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχου Μεγάλου και Άντιόχ[ου του υιού, erouç] εν[8]εκά-
τ ου και εκατο[σ]τοϋ, μηνός Δίου, εττΐ άρχιε[ρεως Νικάνορος, του] δε Δι os
τον Κρηταγενετα και Δικτνννης Τιμαί[ον], (kings, Seleukid era,
M a c e d o n i a n month, imperial e p o n y m o u s officials such as the high-
priest N i k a n o r or the mysterious priest of Z e u s Kretagenetes and
Diktynna). 5 5
A m y z o n is the best documented of a series of cities w h i c h Z e u x i s
took over (referred to by Zeuxis), and the brevity of the letter to
the A m y z o n i a n s may indicate how busy the viceroy was. F r o m the
M a e a n d e r plain, Z e u x i s marched up the M a r s y a s valley, recover-
ing Alabanda/Antiocheia for the Seleukid empire. W h e n an
Antiocheian ambassador to D e l p h i asked for acknowledgement of
his city's asylia in 202/1, he also praised A n t i o c h o s I I I , 'the
benefactor of the Antiocheians, thanking him for preserving the
democracy and the peace for the Antiocheians, according to the dis-
position of his ancestors'—a clear sign of Seleukid takeover, and the
general phrasing of the D e l p h i a n decree might veil a mention of a
grant of asylia by A n t i o c h o s to the city. 5 6 Furthermore, it has been
15. J. and L . Robert 1983: 204-6, no. 23, line 16, mentions 'the king's presence', but
need not refer to this time, or could simply mean 'in cis-Tauric Asia M i n o r ' .
55 Preambles of Amyzonian decrees: documents 9 (quoted here) and 10. Nikanor: 4.

Priesthood of Zeus Kretagenetas and Diktynna: also 30, where he seems to be a locally
elected official (but still imposed by the Seleukids?). T h e priesthood might be related to
contemporary Seleukid involvement on Crete (next section).
56 Other cities: document 5, 2. Alabandan asylia·. document 16. T h e Alabandan
embassy also went through Athens: Pounder 1978. Pounder 1978: 56, writes that the
campaign for asylia was a reaction to protect the city against Antiochos' aggressive
attentions; but OGIS 234 clearly implies that the city was 'Seleukid' at this point
(Wörrle 1988: 441 η. 69; but Alabanda had not been continuously Seleukid since
Antiochos II, as Wörrle seems to say). Piejko 1991a: 20, believes that the OGIS
234 shows that Antiocheia/Alabanda was declared inviolate by an oracle; in fact, the
inscription refers to Pausimachos consulting the oracle at Delphi, but not previously to
the inception of the campaign for Antiocheian/Alabandan asylia. See A p p e n d i x 2.
recently shown that the coinage of Antiocheia/Alabanda, certainly
struck under Seleukid control, is to be attributed to the time of
A n t i o c h o s I I I (rather than A n t i o c h o s II). 5 7 Further west, A l i n d a fell
to Zeuxis; 5 8 f r o m there, he took over A m y z o n , and, to the south,
Mylasa: Z e u x i s ordered troops to respect the M y l a s a n shrine at
L a b r a u n d a , and a fragmentary letter found in the sanctuary of
Sinuri, in the territory of Mylasa, is perhaps f r o m A n t i o c h o s III. 5 9
Z e u x i s , and A n t i o c h o s I I I , presumably respected the formal
'autonomy' of Mylasa, the result of a grant by Seleukos II. It is also
possible that A n t i o c h o s III granted asylia to the city, or acknow-
ledged such a status. 60
H o w far did the Seleukid advance into Karia reach in 203? It did
not affect the K a r i a n coast: cities such as Herakleia under L a t m o s ,
Iasos, and Bargylia were available for Philip V to take over in 201
(see § 3). T o the south-west of Mylasa, the city of Kildara probably
did not fall to the Seleukids, since Philip V controlled it later. T o
the east of M y l a s a lay the territory of Stratonikeia, a former
Seleukid foundation; the Rhodians had been given the city b y
Seleukos II (the most likely interpretation of Pol. 30.31.6), and they
had kept control of it continuously until Philip V captured it in 201
( A p p e n d i x 4). M o s t puzzlingly, E u r o m o s was not taken by Z e u x i s —
it too was available for (re)capture by Philip V in 2 0 1 — t h o u g h the
city lies close to Mylasa. T h e explanation for the incompleteness of
the Seleukid conquests in the region probably lies in the 'pact' with
Philip V (§ 3). Fulfilment of the Seleukid ambitions in the region
w o u l d have to await the campaign of 197.
Nonetheless, the Seleukid gains amounted to a sizeable portion of
the K a r i a n 'interior' (μεσόγαια: Strabo 14.22), w i t h important cities
such as M y l a s a , Alabanda, and A l i n d a . T h e advance into Karia

57 Waggoner 1989; Antiochos II argued for by Robert 1973.

58 Alinda: document 9; J. and L . Robert 1983: 147 (Alinda controls A m y z o n and m u s t
have been taken over first).
s5 Mylasa: document 15. Sinuri: Robert 1945: 12 (the reconstruction offered by Piejko

and noted in SEG 39.1122, is not convincing). However, it is possible that both these
documents pertain to Antiochos II, who was active in the region (Ch. 1 § 3). I. Mylasa
126, honouring an άρχιδικαστής in the δίκαοτήριον of Karia, who was also 'a Friend of the
king', is usually dated to the time of Antiochos I I I , but is more likely Ptolemaic:
A p p e n d i x 3 (at any rate, the expression 'Friend of the king', contrasting with 'the kings'
(plural) found in Amyzonian documents after 202, goes against a dating before the death
of Antiochos the son in 193).
60 A u t o n o m y : C r a m p a 1969: no. 5. Asylia: documents dating to the last years of the
third century show the Mylasans asking Cretan cities for acknowledgement of their
asylia and aphorologesia, perhaps in relation to grants b y Antiochos III (I. Mylasa 643,
lines 8 - 1 3 ; 644, 7 - 1 0 ; 660, 2-3; 661, 5 - 7 — t h e last two published in E A 19 (1992),
1 2 - 1 3 , now SEG 42.1003, 1004; Rigsby 1996: nos. 187-209, gives the whole series of
Cretan documents found at Mylasa).
recovered substantially the same territory w h i c h A n t i o c h o s II and
Seleukos II had once controlled. It is tempting to call this region
'Chrysaorian K a r i a ' , f r o m the name of the religious league regroup-
ing communities such as Antiocheia/Alabanda, Mylasa, A l i n d a , and
A m y z o n , and active in this period. 6 1
Z e u x i s ' military operations of 203, 62 including the takeover of
A m y z o n , have been interpreted as aggression against the Ptolemaic
empire; w h i c h explained the dispatch of an ambassador f r o m
A l e x a n d r i a to Asia M i n o r with a warning for A n t i o c h o s to refrain
f r o m infringing the truce struck in 217 after Raphia (above). T h i s
version (Schmitt 1964: 227; W i l l 1982: 109, 1 1 2 - 1 3 ) is n o longer
the obvious one. A m y z o n certainly was a 'Ptolemaic' city under
P t o l e m y II, as proved by the material published in J. and L . Robert
1983: 1 1 8 - 3 2 . H o w e v e r , we know that the inland portion of
W e s t e r n Karia was taken f r o m the Ptolemies by the Seleukids
(under A n t i o c h o s II, before 254: see C h . 1 § 3); under Seleukos II,
the region was governed by O l y m p i c h o s . W h e n A n t i g o n o s D o s o n
took over parts of W e s t e r n Karia around 227, the Seleukid governor
passed into his service. F r o m his base in A l i n d a , O l y m p i c h o s must
have controlled A m y z o n (though probably not Herakleia under
Latmos), 6 3 in addition to M y l a s a , where his presence is well
attested. Between 221 and 214, 6 4 he undertook incursions against
the territory of Iasos (I. Iasos 150; above C h . 1, § 4), before being
warned off by the Rhodians. T h i s activity implies that O l y m p i c h o s
controlled E u r o m o s , whose territory his troops crossed on their w a y
to attack Iasos; a subsequent E u r o m i a n decree of c.201, in speaking

61 O n the Chrysaorians, Oppermann 1924; J. and L . Robert 1983: 223-5; a Mylasan

inscription (Crampa 1969: no. 5, lines 1 5 - 1 6 ) distinguishes between Chrysaorians and

'the other Karians'. D o c u m e n t s 11, 16, IG 2 2 2313, line 54, for existence in this period.
However, several Chrysaorian communities were under Rhodian control, including
Stratonikeia, with the federal shrine of Z e u s Chrysaoreus; so that the Chrysaorian
League straddled two major Hellenistic states.
62 D o c u m e n t 9, 13, speaks of a war (τον ττεριεστηκότα π[όλεμον]). T h e soldiers sent by

Zeuxis under Ophelandros and the siege of the χωρίον mentioned in document 13 are
probably related.
65 Wörrle 1988: 442: Herakleia under Latmos was 'Ptolemaic' continuously down to

201, when Philip V conquered the city. T h i s is likely: Herakleia is never named along-
side Iasos, Bargylia, Euromos, and Pedasa in the negotiations between Philip V and the
Romans during the Second Macedonian War (Pol. 18.1-2), and therefore belonged to
the Ptolemaic cities Philip was summoned to restore to Ptolemy V (Pol. 18.1.14).
Furthermore, a Herakleian Menekrates appears both in IG 92 1, 173, on embassy to
request Aitolian intercession with the Herakleians' ruler, a Ptolemy, and in the letter of
Zeuxis to Herakleia of 196 (document 31 B) as an envoy to the Seleukid viceroy. If both
documents refer to the same Menekrates, Herakleia was probably Ptolemaic close to
196.
64 T h e dating is assured because I. Iasos 150 mentions a Rhodian ambassador (lines

38, 95), who died, at Alexandria, in 213 (Cook 1966: 24 no. 9).
of the city being 'restored' to Philip V , alludes to this period of
A n t i g o n i d control, under the local governorship of Olympichos. 6 5
By 201, the A n t i g o n i d zone under O l y m p i c h o s had broken up;
the city of E u r o m o s was probably independent for a few years,
before being (re)conquered by Philip V (see below). 6 6 It is possible
that a Ptolemaic resurgence, in the last years of Ptolemy I V ,
destroyed O l y m p i c h o s ' dominions, and reasserted control over
north-west Karia. T h i s w o u l d explain w h y Zeuxis, in his letter to
the A m y z o n i a n s , seems to promise the status quo w h i c h had pre-
vailed under Ptolemy (α και εν τήι Πτολεμαίου [. . .], RC 38, line 5).
S u c h a reaction might seem strange under Ptolemy I V , w h o
apparently neglected the overseas empire; the reference in Z e u x i s '
letter might simply designate some precise privileges once granted
by a Ptolemy. 6 ' A n o t h e r possibility is that Z e u x i s is not referring to
a king of the Ptolemaic dynasty, but (for instance) is confirming a
decision taken by a subordinate named Ptolemaios (or even by one
of O l y m p i c h o s ' subordinates bearing that name?).
It is equally possible that many of the cities in north-western
Karia were genuinely independent, though perhaps under some
degree of Rhodian influence. T h i s is suggested by the formulary of
an A m y z o n i a n inscription recording the decision to impose a special
tax (εισφορά) on all citizens, to reimburse a loan taken by the city
towards contributions to the Chrysaorian L e a g u e , a feature suggest-
ing possible autonomy and the concomitant absence of royal sub-
sidies (J. and L . Robert 1983: 2 1 7 - 2 7 , no. 28). T h e decree is dated
by the stephanephoros and by the Ionian month Heraion (rather than
by a M a c e d o n i a n month, as under the Ptolemies or Seleukids): the
decree shows no sign of subjection to a royal state, unlike the
Seleukid documents of 202 and 201 (above). But the eisphora decree
cannot date to the years after 188, under Rhodian domination, since
it does not have the compulsory 'Rhodian' preamble mentioning the
priest of Helios at R h o d e s and the Rhodian calendar (see J. and L .

65 M a , D e r o w , and M e a d o w s 1995. O n Alinda controlling A m y z o n , J. and L. Robert

1983: 17 and 147. Euromos under Olympichos: J. and L . Robert 1983: 150; subsequent
Euromian decree: Errington 1993: 21, no. 4, line 3.
66 Disappearance of the Antigonid province of Olympichos: Wörrle 1988: 440. T h e

inscription referring to depredations by some person or community (Errington 1993:

27, no. 6), might date to a period of independence after the disappearance of
Olympichos.
67 Letter of Zeuxis: document 5. Ptolemy I V neglecting empire: Pol. 5.34.4. O n the

other hand, the capacity for reaction of the local Ptolemaic forces should not be under-
estimated: Samos, captured by Philip V, was recovered for Ptolemy V , after a siege of
the akropolis by Ptolemaic forces (Habicht 1957: no. 64: εν τε τήι άποκαταστάσει της
πόλεως εις τ ά τον βασιλέως Πτολεμαίου πράγματα).
Robert 1983: 250-1). T h i s document was likely produced after the
disappearance of O l y m p i c h o s ' authority over this part of Karia, at a
time w h e n A m y z o n was independent, but part of the Chrysaorian
L e a g u e , at some time between 213 and 203. 68
Rather than aggression against the Ptolemaic dominion, Z e u x i s '
K a r i a n campaign intervened in a complex situation created b y the
interaction of super-power politics and local players. U p o n this
landscape, Z e u x i s imposed the 'simplification through conquest' of
Seleukid takeover, and his activities are typical of the Seleukid pro-
ject in the region ( C h . 1), in spite of their incompleteness (imposed
by external factors: see § 3).
A p a r t f r o m western Karia, the Ionian city of T e o s provides
evidence for Seleukid activity in Asia M i n o r in the last years of the
third c e n t u r y — i f the two important T e i a n decrees are to be dated to
this context (which I prefer) rather than 197 (see A p p e n d i x 2). T h e
T e i a n documents give a vivid picture of the king's passage through
T e o s , with his Friends and contingents of his army; it is possible
that Laodike accompanied him, since the T e i a n s also respond to her
benefactions (Herrmann 1965a, 110). A n t i o c h o s I I I went before the
assembled T e i a n s , and 'released the city as holy, inviolate, and free
f r o m tribute', specifically f r o m the heavy contributions (συντάξεις)
w h i c h the city had been paying to Attalos I. T h e impression
f r o m the T e i a n documents is of a more peaceful takeover than at
A m y z o n : the T e i a n s thanked the king for the πίστις he showed w h e n
staying in the city with troops, and there is no mention of garrisons
or governors. H o w e v e r , this might be misleading, since the first
T e i a n decree elides the specific events by w h i c h A n t i o c h o s was
allowed, or gained, entry into the city: 'he restored the affairs (or his
affairs) to a satisfactory conclusion', αποκατέστησε τα πράγματα εις
συμφερουσαν κατάστασιν.69

68 A n objection is that the list of citizens who paid the eisphora is headed by Pankrates

and Menippos, sons of Melaineus, honoured in another Amyzonian inscription, J. and

L . Robert 1983: 204-9, no. 23: this inscription refers to the activity of the two brothers
in the time of the Great K i n g (line 15), and how the brothers had something to do with
a king, presumably Antiochos (line 6), when they were still young, νεώτεροι. T h e
eisphora decree starts by listing important citizens (J. and L. Robert 1983: 226), w h o
held office in the Seleukid period: would Pankrates and Menippos, young men under
Antiochos I I I , have been important enough (or old enough) to figure at the beginning
of a list of citizens drawn up before 203? However, it is possible that the king in ques-
tion is not Antiochos III: this would explain w h y the expression βαοιλεΐ μεγάλω appears
in line 15, in the middle of the inscription, to distinguish him from the king referred to
earlier at line 6; the activity of Pankrates and M e n i p p o s would then have started earlier
than under Antiochos III.
69 T e i a n inscriptions: documents 17, 18, 19. 'Holy, inviolate, and free from tribute':

document 17, 18-20; 33-4; 47-8. Peaceful takeover: J. and L . Robert 1983: 137; but note
Herrmann 1965a: 110: ' D e r Anschein eines ruhigen, gewaltlosen Ubergangs braucht
 A likely context is a foray by A n t i o c h o s f r o m Sardeis, with only a
brief stay at Teos. 7 0 T h e route might have taken A n t i o c h o s towards
S m y r n a , then southwards on the h i g h w a y towards E p h e s o s
(Pritchett 1982: 272) into the plain south of S m y r n a ; f r o m this plain
it w o u l d be easy to reach T e o s , over the Ionian mountains, by the
M e n d e r e s / K a v a k d e r e corridor. If T e o s was taken over in 204 or
203, then the same probably happened to neighbouring K o l o p h o n
('Seleukid' in the 190s); on this geographical argument, it is likely
that L e b e d o s also fell to A n t i o c h o s then. T h e r e is thus no need to
see T e o s as an isolated Seleukid outpost or enclave (as H e r r m a n n
had proposed, tentatively).' 1 Both T e o s and K o l o p h o n had been
'Attalid' cities, taken back by Attalos I in 218 (above, § 1); Attalos I,
weakened by his efforts in the First M a c e d o n i a n W a r , then by a
conflict with Prousias I, may have accepted the fait accompli of
A n t i o c h o s ' foray, or surrendered them against c o m p e n s a t i o n — p e r -
haps the 400 talents owed by A n t i o c h o s I I I in 189? (Pol. 2 1 . 1 7 . 5 ,
L i v . 37.45.15, with H e r r m a n n 1965a: 1 1 0 - 1 3 ) . A c t i v i t y in the
region might have been directed at the Ptolemaic base at Ephesos,
at the end of the plain south of S m y r n a — p e r h a p s the aggression
about w h i c h the Ptolemaic minister A g a t h o k l e s complained (above).
T h e Karian activities of Z e u x i s constituted a sustained campaign
of conquest, followed by consolidation and further fighting; the
presence of A n t i o c h o s I I I at T e o s , if it is to be dated to 203, implies
a different r h y t h m . W h e n A n t i o c h o s crossed the T a u r u s , it is likely
that he visited the 'provincial capital', Sardeis, w h e n c e he dis-
patched Z e u x i s to Karia. T h e king himself may have embarked
on an armed tour of Seleukid c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r , to make his
presence felt again after an absence of over nine years, conduct a
reconnaissance in force, make a probe at Ptolemaic Ephesos, and
exploit local disaffection with the Attalids. 7 2 If the Ilian decree for a

natürlich nicht unbedingt der Wahrheit zu entsprechen'. 'Satisfactory conclusion':

document 17, 10—11.
70 D o c u m e n t 17, 29-36: that Antiochos instructed the T e i a n s to send him an embassy

suggests that he had already left.

71 Herrmann 1965a: 1 1 4 - 1 6 . Kolophon: document 42, a statue base for Antiochos the

son, points to the city being 'Seleukid'; though that statue is probably to be dated after
197, since Antiochos III is 'the great king'. A decree for the Attalid prince Athenaios,
which Holleaux dated around 197 (Holleaux 19386: 51-60), has been redated by
Habicht to the 150s (Habicht in Inschr. Asklepieion, 27-8 nn. 1-5) and hence does not
support Attalid possession of Kolophon c.200. Lebedos: Herrmann 1965a: 1 1 4 and n.
141, 116, arguing that the dynastic name Ptolemais, attested c.205 and in the 190s,
would hardly have persisted under Seleukid domination; on this line of reasoning,
Ptolemais/Lebedos did not fall to Antiochos III in 197 either. I think it possible that the
name Ptolemais persisted under Seleukid domination.
72 Herrmann 1965a: 118, proposes a campaign aimed at reconquering Asia Minor,

interrupted because of events in Egypt, in favour of the offensive in Koile-Syria.

king A n t i o c h o s ( O G I S 219) should be attributed to A n t i o c h o s III
(see A p p e n d i x 1), the closing years of the third century might
provide a satisfactory context: the king, m o v i n g into M y s i a , w o u l d
have made contact w i t h Ilion, and w o n the city over (Mastrocinque
1983: 67-9).
A n t i o c h o s ' armed tour, like Z e u x i s ' campaign of conquest in
Karia, was interrupted, for reasons w h i c h belong to international
high politics (§ 3). A n t i o c h o s turned f r o m Asia M i n o r to K o i l e -
Syria, around 202. T h i s enterprise (the F i f t h Syrian W a r ) ended
w i t h the defeat of the Ptolemaic forces, at Panion (200). /3 T h e
process of conquest is illustrated by documents such as a letter of
A n t i o c h o s III to the governor Ptolemaios concerning the status of
Jerusalem {AJ 13.138-44), a parallel to the A m y z o n i a n documents;
or the dossier of petitions and enactments concerning Ptolemaios'
private estates at Skythopolis, his reward for defecting to the
Seleukid side. 74 B y the time a R o m a n embassy came to broker a
settlement between A n t i o c h o s I I I and Ptolemy V (Pol. 16.27.5), in
200, /S the Seleukid conquest of K o i l e - S y r i a was complete. It was at
this time that A n t i o c h o s III took the title of βασιλεύς μέγας, ' G r e a t
K i n g ' ( A p p e n d i x 4), e m b o d y i n g claims to be 'king of Asia'.
L i v y writes that, in 198, while still in K o i l e - S y r i a , A n t i o c h o s
organized an invasion of the Attalid kingdom (literally, that he
invaded it himself), before w i t h d r a w i n g after an intervention f r o m
R o m e ( L i v . 32.8.9-16, and 32.27.1). It is certain that the king did
not travel from a major war in Syria back to Asia M i n o r for the sake
of a minor expedition and quickly relinquished territorial gains.
S o m e scholars have suggested that L i v y records some anti-Attalid
activity by local Seleukid forces; however, I incline to reject the
account as an annalistic invention ( A p p e n d i x 6). A t any rate, if some
local Seleukid aggression took place in 198, it was dwarfed by the
third expedition into western Asia M i n o r launched in 197.

" Fifth Syrian War: Will 1982: 1 1 8 - 2 1 ; Gera 1987, Gera 1998: 20-34.
74 Estates: SEG 29.1613. O n Ptolemaios, see Habicht's comments in Jones and
Habicht 1989: 335-46: Ptolemaios belonged to an Aspendian family of long-standing
tradition of service to the Ptolemies; his father and grandfather had served as governors
of Kilikia, and both founded (in successive generations) the Ptolemaic colony of Arsinoe
(Habicht and Jones 1989); Ptolemaios' father, and Ptolemaios himself, had been
governors of Koile-Syria for the Ptolemies, until Ptolemaios deserted to Antiochos III
(Gera 1987).
71 O n this embassy, Walbank, HCP ii. 533-4; Will 1982: 1 1 9 - 2 1 ; Holleaux 1957: 159
with further references, 345, 350-1; Warrior 1996; it is also catalogued, with comments
and bibliography, as no. 60 in A g e r 1996.
3. Philip V, the Rhodians, Attalos I, and the Romans (201-200 bc)

T h e second occurrence of Seleukid activity in c i s - T a u r i c Asia

M i n o r cannot be viewed in isolation f r o m the context of inter-
national politics, especially the ambitions w h i c h Philip V enter-
tained in the eastern A e g e a n and in Asia Minor. 7 6 A f t e r the peace of
Phoinike (205) w h i c h ended the inconclusive war fought against the
Aitolians and the R o m a n s (the 'First M a c e d o n i a n W a r ' ) , Philip V
sponsored a privateer to operate in the K y k l a d e s and along the
coasts of Asia M i n o r , supported the Cretans in their war against the
Rhodians, and sent an agent on a mission to damage the Rhodian
fleet. It is difficult not to see Philip's actions in c.204 as motivated,
at least in part, by competition with the Rhodians in the eastern
A e g e a n , for instance over K o s and the K y k l a d e s , and by the desire
to weaken the great naval power of the region as a prelude to
invasion. A r o u n d this time, A n t i o c h o s I I I attempted to broker a
peace between the Cretans and the Rhodians, perhaps to reduce the
disruption in the coastal region of Asia M i n o r , since he now had re-
established control over parts of Ionia, around T e o s (above, § 2 ) . "
It was Philip's ambitions in the eastern A e g e a n w h i c h led to an
agreement with A n t i o c h o s I I I , in the winter 203/2.' 8 T h e existence
of this agreement is stated by P o l y b i o s (16.1.8-9): Philip, during his
expedition in the k i n g d o m of Pergamon, asked Z e u x i s for supplies
κατά τάς σννθήκας, with Z e u x i s ' reluctant agreement; later, he com-
plied with a similar request (Pol. 16.24.6).
But what were these σννθήκαι? Literary sources' 9 mention a pact
struck between Philip V and A n t i o c h o s I I I , stipulating nothing less
than the partition of the Ptolemaic empire. Polybios states that
'when king Ptolemy [IV] died, A n t i o c h o s and Philip agreed on
the partition of the empire of the child he had left behind [Ptolemy
V ] , and initiated evil deeds, Philip laying hands on E g y p t , Karia,
and Samos, A n t i o c h o s on K o i l e - S y r i a and Phoenicia' ( 3 . 2 . 8 ) —
to Polybios' indignation (15.20.3). L i v y (31.14.5) seems to follow
Polybios; A p p i a n ( M a k . 4), however, describes the pact as a r u m o u r

76 Walbank 1940: 108-37; Holleaux 1952: 2 1 1 - 3 3 5 .

77 Privateer: Pol. 18.54.8, D i o d . 28.1 (Dikaiarchos sent to collect tribute in the
islands). Cretan War: D i o d . 27.3; Diod. 28.1; Pol. 13.4.2, 13.5.1. Rhodes: Pol. 13.4-5
and Polyainos, 5.17. Generally, Holleaux 1952: 124-45 a n d r 6 3 - 7 7 , w h o argues that this
activity was destined to raise money for an Antigonid fleet (139-42). Antiochos III in
Crete: Holleaux 1952: 1 9 1 - 9 (peace between some Cretan cities and the Rhodians
directed against Philip V); on Crete, Philip V , Antiochos I I I , and the T e i a n request for
asylia, K r e u t e r 1992: 5 7 - 6 1 .
78 C h r o n o l o g y : Schmitt 1964: 229-37; HC Ρ ii. 4 7 2 - 3 .
73 C o m m e n t e d list of sources, Schmitt 1964: 237-9; also Staatsvertr. no. 547.
(λόγος, δόξα), brought to R o m e by a Rhodian embassy in autumn
201, and the terms of the pact are different f r o m those in Polybios
(3.2.8): Philip w o u l d help A n t i o c h o s to campaign in E g y p t and
C y p r u s , while A n t i o c h o s w o u l d assist Philip in the conquest of
K y r e n e (!), the K y k l a d e s and Ionia. 80
T h e ' S y r o - M a c e d o n i a n pact' has a historiography of its own. 8 1
S o m e have accepted the Polybian version wholesale (for instance
Holleaux and Schmitt). 8 2 In reaction, D . M a g i e denounced the pact
as a Rhodian fabrication designed to provoke the Senate's alarm.
F o r M a g i e , the events of the years 202-200 fell into two unrelated
sets: Philip's activity in the eastern A e g e a n , and A n t i o c h o s ' cam-
paign in K o i l e - S y r i a ; the existence of a pact between Philip V and
A n t i o c h o s III was thus unnecessary to explain the events.
Furthermore, Errington convincingly argued against the import-
ance Holleaux lent to the ' S y r o - M a c e d o n i a n pact', and suggested
that a local agreement between Philip V and Z e u x i s provided
Polybios with the basis for a deduction concerning a broader pact. 83
H o w e v e r , the argument that an agreement between A n t i o c h o s I I I
and Philip is historically superfluous cannot hold. T h e Seleukid
advance into western Karia came to a halt (see above, § 2), and
the Seleukid forces in Asia M i n o r did not act against Philip V by
collaborating with Attalos I and the Rhodians, even w h e n Philip
was at his weakest, and even after Philip V had departed f r o m Asia
M i n o r in winter 201 (see below) and left scanty forces behind (in
fact, not until his defeat by the R o m a n s at K y n o s k e p h a l a i in 197).
In addition, Philip V , returning f r o m Pergamon, crossed parts of
Seleukid-held L y d i a , starting with the 'Seleukid' city of Hierakome
(Pol. 16.2.8-9). 8 4 C o n v e r s e l y , Philip V did not attack Seleukid
territory proper, until compelled by lack of supplies during the
winter 201/0 (Pol. 16.24). T h e pattern supports the existence of, at
the least, an agreement of non-interference between the two kings,
as mentioned by Polybios.
Pressure f r o m Philip V , whatever the exact terms, might explain

80 Schmitt 1964: 250-6 tries to conciliate Polybios and Appian, but his arguments are

unconvincing, e.g. on the different attribution of E g y p t in Polybios and Appian:

Errington 1971: esp. 345-7.
81 Schmitt 1964: 239-41; Will 1982: 1 1 4 - 1 8 ; G r u e n 1986: 387-8.
82 Holleaux 1935: 320-2, 328-30; Schmitt 1964: 235-61 and 301, map 4. Criticism of

Schmitt 1964: Berthold 1975-6: ι ο ί η. 22.

83 Magie 1939, followed by Errington 1971: 348-9 (pact unnecessary); Errington 1971

for Polybios as inventor of the pact.

84 Schmitt 1964: 246—8. But Schmitt 1964: 246, is mistaken to write that the plunder-

ing of Alabandian territory by Philip in winter 201/0 and the honours voted to Philip by
Hierakome ( Τ Α Μ 5.2 1261 A ) are proof of Seleukid 'tolerance', since the first was a
measure taken out of a need for supplies, and the second was a local initiative.
w h y the Seleukid advance broke off, 85 and w h y A n t i o c h o s ' attention
shifted f r o m Asia M i n o r to K o i l e - S y r i a . T h e possibility of any
collaboration on a wider scale remains mysterious, and even more so
whether it was primarily, or at all, directed against the Ptolemaic
empire. T h e fact remains that Philip V acted in the eastern A e g e a n ,
free f r o m Seleukid opposition. T h e year 202 was occupied by
operations in the north A e g e a n and the Propontis (Lysimacheia and
C h a l k e d o n were taken over, K i o s sacked, T h a s o s 'enslaved' on the
w a y back to Macedonia); 8 6 Philip then spent 201 in operations
across western Asia M i n o r , ranging f r o m the plain of T h e b e north
of Pergamon, to K n i d o s in southern Karia: the year 'when Philip
w a s o v e r r u n n i n g A s i a ' , Φίλιππος . . . ore τήν Άσίαν κατετρεχεν (Pol.
16.24.9).
Philip started by w o r k i n g through the K y k l a d e s , forcibly taking
over a n u m b e r of the islands and installing garrisons. 8 7 T h e island
route across the A e g e a n ends at Samos, where Philip seized the
Ptolemaic naval base and fleet, incorporating the ships and crews
into his o w n force. 8 8 Philip then besieged C h i o s (Pol. 16.2.1-3); off
C h i o s , he was defeated by the joint fleet of the Rhodians and Attalos
I (Pol. 16.2-8). A n o t h e r naval battle took place off Miletos, near the
island of L a d e , where Philip drove off the Rhodian fleet (Pol. 16.15).
Probably between the battle of C h i o s and the battle of L a d e , Philip
invaded the k i n g d o m of P e r g a m o n (Pol. 16.1); repulsed by the
defences of the city, he marched and counter-marched his force
across the whole length of the k i n g d o m in search of provisions. It
was after this foray that he sent to Zeuxis, asking for supplies
'according to the agreement' (Pol. 16.1.9). Holleaux believed that
Philip reached Pergamon by an inland march f r o m Miletos; more
likely, the expedition was at least in part seaborne, landing near the
m o u t h of the K a i k o s , and embarking again near Ephesos. 8 9

85 Initiative by Philip, concessions by Seleukids: Schmitt 1964: 248-50. Walbank

argued that Philip V could not put an embargo on Antiochos' Syrian campaign
(Walbank 1965: 264), but this does not take into account the powerful fleet Philip was
raising.
56 Lysimacheia and Chalkedon: Pol. 15.23.8; 18.3.11 and 18.4.5; Staatsvertr. no. 549
(with Robert 1955: 268-70, for correct dating); Robert 1955: 266-71. Kios: Pol. 15.23.6.
Thasos: Pol. 15.24.
87 Island route through the Aegean: Hdt. 6.95.2; Ormerod 1924: 19-20 and 20 n. 1.

Violence at Paros: L i v . 31.31.4. Garrisons at Andros, Paros, and K y t h n o s (only): L i v .

31.15.8.
88 Seizure of Samos, Holleaux 1952: 223-34, and 239-43 f ° r 'Egyptians' in the fleet

of Philip; the takeover was an act of war, in spite of Holleaux 1952: 3 1 0 - 1 2 : L i v . 31.1.4,
Habicht 1957: 237-8, Shipley 1987: 192.
89 T h e order followed here is that proposed b y Holleaux in a number of studies

assembled in Holleaux 1952: 2 1 1 - 9 8 , esp. at 213-33; except that the situation of the
expedition into Pergamon between the battles of C h i o s and Lade is taken from
 T h e latter phase of Philip's expedition, in south-western Asia
M i n o r , met with greater success. H e attacked the independent states
of K n i d o s and K o s (which briefly lost the island of Kalymna), 9 " then
the Rhodian dominions. T h e island of N i s y r o s was perhaps taken
over; 91 on the continent, Philip conquered all or most of the
Rhodian Peraia, then, following the T r a l l e i s - P h y s k o s road into
the M a r s y a s valley, Stratonikeia (a Rhodian city since the time of
Seleukos II: see A p p e n d i x 4). 92 Philip then took Iasos, Bargylia,
and Kildara; he may have taken T h e a n g e l a , and given it to
Halikarnassos, just as he would hand the territory of M y o u s over to
Magnesia on M a e a n d e r (below). A t the end of the L a t m i c G u l f , he
took Herakleia under L a t m o s , over w h i c h Philip appointed two
epistatai f r o m K a l y m n o s ; inland, E u r o m o s and Pedasa. 93 Philip's
achievement in S o u t h - w e s t Asia M i n o r was substantial (though
ragged on the ground): a Karian 'province', with its o w n governor

Walbank, HCP ii. 499-500, and 502-3 for the suggestion that the expedition was partly
seaborne, against Holleaux 1952: 253-5 (land-march from Miletos and back); also
Magie 1950: 7 4 7 - 9 η. 39. Berthold 1975 argues that the battle of Lade took place before
the battle of Chios, based on a reading of Pol. 16.9, the eulogy for the Rhodian navarch
Theophiliskos, who died after the battle of Chios; however, many of Berthold's argu-
ments are already answered b y Holleaux.
90 Knidos: FD 3.1, no. 308, with Homolle's commentary, 171 n. 2; I. Iasos 606
(Bargylietan decree, probably acknowledging asylia for Knidos); an epiphany of the
K o a n goddess Artemis Hyakinthotrophos is mentioned in I. Knidos 220. K o s : Holleaux
1952: 273-6; S h e r w i n - W h i t e 1978: 120-4, ar>d 124-8: K a l y m n o s was detached from
K o s by Philip V — p e r h a p s confirmed by the presence of Kalymnians governing
Herakleia under Latmos for Philip: Wörrle 1988: 433-4.
" Syll. 572 (cf. IG 12.3.91), with T h o m p s o n 1971: 6 1 8 - 1 9 : Philip V took over
Nisyros, and allowed it 'to use its ancestral and present laws', i.e. undid the incorpora-
tion of Nisyros into the Rhodian state.
92 Rhodian Peraia: Pol. 16.11.2—6, cf. 18.2.3; 18.6.3; 18.8.9 and A p p . Mac. 4.1; Inscr.

Lindos 151 makes it clear that Philip had taken over Pisye, Idyma, and Kyllandos. Liv.
33.18.4 mentions Macedonian troops at T h e r a and 'Alabanda' in 197. T h e reading
'Alabanda' is defended by Briscoe 1973 w h o argues that Alabanda was Antigonid,
but more likely the city remained Seleukid down to 190, so that the text should be
emended to some other Karian place-name (Robert 1954: 378-9 n. 4, suggested
Lobolda). Stratonikeia: cf. Liv. 33.18.4-7; 33.18.19; 33.18.21-2; I. Stratonikeia 3 (201)
and 4 (198), attesting Antigonid control at Panamara, near Stratonikeia (Debord 1994
argues that Panamara was not yet part of Stratonikeia).
93 Iasos, Bargylia: cf. Pol. 16.12; 18.8.9; Liv. 34.32.5 and 33.18.19 (Bargylia). Iasos,

Bargylia, Euromos, and Pedasa are referred to in Pol. 18.2.3 (Pedasa should be added)
and Pol. 18.44.4 ( · η the S C of 196). Euromos: Errington 1993: no. 4. Kildara: J. and L.
Robert 1983: 187: 'étant situé tout près de Bargylia, fut sûrement occupé par Philippe
V ' ; the city was framed b y Antigonid conquests of 201 (Bargylia, Stratonikeia, Pisye,
and Idyma). Theangela: Descat 1997 (a 'Philippeus', i.e. a Euromian between 201 and
196, appears in a document attesting the incorporation of Theangela into the polis of
Halikarnassos—assuming the stone is from T h e a n g e l a and not from Halikarnassos, as
argued by Bean and Cook 1955: 115). Herakleia under Latmos; Wörrle 1988: 433-4.
Pugliese-Carratelli 1987: 122—3, suggests that the apparition of Artemis K i n d y a s at
Bargylia (I. Iasos 613) dates to the invasion of Philip V , but the text does not counte-
nance this.
and local officials, 94 stretching from the m o u t h of the M a e a n d e r to
the K e r a m i c G u l f , arching inland, around Seleukid-held M y l a s a ,
up to and including most of the Rhodian Peraia, and to the upper
M a r s y a s valley at Stratonikeia. But Philip allowed the Rhodians and
Attalos I to trap him in the G u l f of Bargylia; in the winter, reduced
to 'the life of a w o l f (Pol. 16.24.4), he cajoled or bullied M y l a s a ,
Alabanda, and Magnesia on M a e a n d e r for supplies. Magnesia, in
return for supplying figs, received the town of M y o u s , detached
from Miletos 9 5 (Pol. 16.24.9). Philip even carried out acts of aggres-
sion against Seleukid territory, unsuccessfully trying to capture
M y l a s a by a botched coup de mam and plundering the territory of
Alabanda (the latter no doubt operating f r o m Stratonikeia).
In early 200, Philip V slipped past the blockade (Holleaux 1952:
287-92). In G r e e c e , after getting involved in hostilities against
A t h e n s ( L i v . 3 1 . 1 4 . 6 - 1 0 ) , Philip undertook a campaign in T h r a c e
( L i v . 31.16), besieging Maroneia, w h i c h soon fell, followed by many
places in T h r a c e and the Chersonesos (up to Sestos: HCP ii. 539, ad
Pol. 16.29.3). A b y d o s fell after a horrendous siege (Pol. 16.29-35;
L i v . 3 1 . 1 6 . 6 - 1 8 . 9 ) . T h e north Aegean expedition, with its swift
progression through a string of coastal cities, is reminiscent of the
advance of A n t i o c h o s I I I in 197 (see § 4). A n o t h e r similarity is that
most of the places taken over were Ptolemaic.
T h e thinness of the evidence hinders general interpretation. W e r e
the campaigns directed against the Ptolemaic empire? Philip
assailed Ptolemaic p o s s e s s i o n s — S a m o s , perhaps Halikarnassos and
M y n d o s 9 6 — b u t these were hardly the exclusive target of his
campaign. W a s Philip motivated by 'ancestral claims', analogous to
those of A n t i o c h o s III? In Karia, he could consider his activity as
the reconquest of 'ancestral possessions', the holdings of A n t i g o n o s
D o s o n . T h e failed attempt on M y l a s a might be interpreted as aimed
at recovering a city w h i c h had once been ' A n t i g o n i d ' (see § 2);97 but
P o l y b i o s does not mention any claim by Philip V to ancestral rights
during the negotiations at Nikaia with the R o m a n s and their allies

94 Wörrle 1988: 443 for appraisal of Philip's Asian holdings. Governor of Antigonid

Karia: Liv. 33.18.6. Epistates at Panamara: I. Stratonikeia 4; Herakleia under Latmos:

previous note.
95 Supplies: Pol. 16.24.6; attempt on Mylasa, territory of Alabanda ravaged: Pol.

16.24.7. O n M y o u s ' absorption into Miletos, Herrmann 19656: 90-103, esp. 93-6,
101-2. Holleaux 1952: 230-2, 255, held that M y o u s was given to Magnesia when Philip
was marching to Pergamon or back from Pergamon, but it is unlikely that the expedi-
tion took place entirely by land (above). T h e situation of Magnesia is unclear.
96 Schmitt 1964: 259-60 (against Holleaux 1952: 306—13). 'Ptolemaic' cities may be

referred to in Pol. 18.2.4. Ϊ9Ί> 'he Rhodians protected the Ptolemaic cities ( L i v .

33.12-23), and the same may have happened in 201-200.

97 Schmitt 1964: 243-5: 'ererbte Rechte auf Karien'.
( 1 8 . 1 - 1 0 ) , for instance as a reply to the Rhodian insistence that
Philip evacuate E u r o m o s . In any event, inherited claims w o u l d
concern a small part of Karia, and not the Rhodian Peraia, the
K n i d i a n peninsula, Samos, or Chios; nor w o u l d they concern
T h r a c e , A b y d o s , or the Propontis; besides, the Karian activity of
Philip came only after a naval phase in areas where Philip had no
ancestral rights whatsoever. T h e most likely explanation is still an
attempt at A e g e a n power. T o speak in terms of the individual
ambition of Philip V (and a spirit of rivalry with Antiochos III?) at
least reflects the viewpoint of one contemporary, Alkaios of
Messene, w h o spoke of Philip's Zeus-like greatness. 98
T h e impact on the local communities is the most interesting
feature: if there were more evidence, especially epigraphical, the
single year taken up by Philip's war of conquest in Asia M i n o r
w o u l d ofïer a subject-matter as rich as A n t i o c h o s ' activities in the
region. T h e material available illustrates the variety of local
responses: the military resistance of K o s ( S y l l . 568, 569, with
Holleaux 1952: 274-5); revolt after A n t i g o n i d conquest, as in the
case of S a m o s (Habicht 1957: no. 64); the rhetorical strategies of
subject communities such as E u r o m o s , w h i c h honoured the
A n t i g o n i d general w h o had conquered the city 'in accordance with
our prayers' and took on the name 'Philippeis'. 9 9 T h e same sort of
euergetic dialogue can be seen in the Panamarian decree on public
prayers for the safety of Philip, his queen, and his children (I.
Stratonikeia 3), or in the Panamarian decree for an A n t i g o n i d
official (I. Stratonikeia 4). T h e s e documents show us the rulers in
the guise of benefactors: Philip making dedications at a local temple,
an A n t i g o n i d governor restoring the walls of a local town after the
earthquake of 199. Just as illuminating is the decree passed after the
battle of L a d e by the Milesians (Pol. 16.15.6): καταττλαγεντας TO
γεγονός, ου μόνον τον Φίλιππον, άλλα καΐ τον Ήρακλείδην στεφανωσαι δια
τον εφοδον, '[according to Z e n o n and Antisthenes], terrified by what
had taken place, they voted a crown not only for Philip, but also for
Herakleides on account of the attack' (or 'through fear that he might
attack', preferred by W a l b a n k , HCP ). T h e course of action taken
by the Milesians, once it was clear that Philip had been victorious at
L a d e , gives a stark example of the function of civic honours for a
king (or his officials): to provide a m e d i u m for communicating and
for influencing behaviour (see C h . 4 § 2b).

98 I still agree with Walbank 1942: 134-7, o n Anth. Pal. 9.518 (the epigram, celebrat-

ing Philip's Zeus-like greatness, is encomiastic, not ironical).

99 Philippeis: document 29, 5. Errington 1993: no. 4, lines 1-4: decree for Alexandros

A d m e t o u , w h o 'restored the city to K i n g Philip, in accordance with our prayers'.

 T h e alienation of civic territory and its conveyance to another city
by royal fiat exemplifies the impact of Philip's presence. T h i s may
have happened in the case of T h e a n g e l a , possibly given wholesale to
Halikarnassos; 1 0 0 the best attested case is that of the conveyance of
M y o u s and its territory (annexed by Miletos some time in the late
third century) to Magnesia on Maeander. T h e royal gift increased
Magnesia's territory south of the Maeander, d o w n to the G u l f of
Miletos, but deprived Miletos of the Μνησία, its territory in the
M a e a n d e r valley. 1 0 1 N e a r b y , Herakleia under L a t m o s , in addition to
suffering the flight of its agricultural serfs, lost parts of its terri-
tory 1 0 2 —as a supplementary gift to the Magnesians, or as compensa-
tion to the Milesians for the loss of M y o u s ? In the latter case, the
tract in question w o u l d have been taken f r o m the only point of con-
tact after Miletos lost the Myesia: the Bucak plain, south of
Herakleia, the latter's agricultural territory. 1 0 3 T h e z e r o - s u m game
of territory-redistribution by royal fiat caused long-lasting dis-
ruption in the tight network of small, competing cities in western
Karia; the three communities concerned w o u l d fight territorial wars
in the 180s. 104 A measure of the disruption is given by the peace
treaty between Magnesia on M a e a n d e r and Miletos: a clause pre-
cludes either party f r o m ever again accepting a part of the other's
territory, with an emphatic profusion of negatives, μή είναι μήτε
Μάγνησιν τήν Μιλησίων χώραν μ[ή I τ\ε τήν περαίαν μήτε άλλην μηδεμίαν
μηδε φρουρών, μήτε Μιλησίο[ις I τή]ν Μαγνητών χώραν μήτε τήν περαίαν
μήτε άλλην μηδεμίαν μηδ[ε I φρ] ούριον παρά μηθενος λαβείν μήτε δι'
αυτών μήτε δι' ετερων μητ εγ κτ[ήσει I μή]τε εν δόσει μήτε εν άναθεσει
μήτε καθιερώσει μήτε κατ άλλον τρόπ[ον I μηθε\να μ7]δε κατά παρεύρεσιν
μηδεμίαν, 'let it not be possible neither for the Magnesians to take
the territory of the Milesians or their coastal territory or any other

100 Descat 1997 (arguing that Theangela belonged to Halikarnassos at some time

between 201 and 196, but not that Philip V was responsible: a local takeover, of a type
well attested in Hellenistic history, is another possibility).
101 T h e Myesia may have been the Upà χώρα which the Milesians lost in wars but the

Romans restored to them in 188 (Pol. 21.46.5).

102 Serfs: document 31 Β, III 10; and I. 1 2 - 1 4 o n general στενοχώρια, no doubt caused

by Philip V (with Gauthier, BE 89. 277, p. 404 on the meaning: 'want, poverty' and not
'land-shortage'). Loss of land: document 31 Β, II 9-10, Wörrle 1988: 469-70.
103 Robert 1987, 177-84, 198-214. Syll. 633, lines 82-3, shows that the Milesians did

lay claim to parts of the Bucak plain, adjacent to the Ionopolitis (Robert 1987: 204-10).
In fact, Syll. 633, 78-87, shows that the Milesians and Herakleians fought over owner-
ship both of a tract near the Myesia, on the north side of the G u l f of Herakleia, and of
land on the south of the G u l f , near lonopolis, in the Bucak plain. Either, or both, may
reflect a redistribution of territory effected by Philip V .
104 Robert 1987: 2 1 0 - 1 4 , on the close links between these cities. Errington 1989α for

date of Miletos' wars against Herakleia and later Magnesia (the peace between Miletos
and Magnesia is preserved in Syll. 588). A s a parallel, Hornblower 1982: 142-3, observ-
ing that Achaimenid gifts of land were only possible through dispossession of subjects.
territory of theirs whatsoever or a fort, nor let it be possible for the
Milesians to take the territory of the Magnesians or their coastal
territory or any other territory of theirs whatsoever or a fort, not
through their o w n agency or through other parties, nor as a posses-
sion, nor as a gift, nor as a dedication, nor as a consecration, nor in
any other way or according to any pretext whatsoever' (Syll. 588,
lines 40-6).
Generally, the activities of Philip V in the A e g e a n had the effect
of complicating the political mosaic in Asia M i n o r , where four
major powers competed (Antiochos I I I , Attalos I, the Rhodians,
and now Philip V ) . T h e Rhodians started immediately their o w n
war of reconquest in the Peraia, f r o m 201 onwards: a dedication
by Nikagoras, a Rhodian general, mentions his 'reacquiring the
territories of Pisye, I d y m a , and K y l l a n d o s , and the forts in these
territories', άνακτησάμενος τάν re Πισυήτιν χώραν και τάν Ίδνμίαν και
τάν Κνλλανδίαν και τά èv αύταΐς φρούρια (Inscr. Lindos 1 5 1 , lines 4 — 5!
second copy found on Karpathos, Syll. 586), in the years 2 0 1 - 1 9 8 .
T h e verb is exactly the same as that used by A n t i o c h o s I I I to
describe his ancestral claims; the parallel is reinforced by the
expression L i v y uses for the Rhodian campaign of 197: ad vindi-
candam a Philippo continentis regionem—Peraeam vocant—possessam
maioribus suis, 'to recover f r o m Philip the region on the m a i n l a n d —
they call it P e r a i a — w h i c h had been owned by their ancestors' ( L i v .
3 3 . 1 8 . 1 ) — m o r e precisely, Stratonikeia. T h e Rhodian eagerness
to 'reacquire' ancestral possessions illustrates how Philip's Asian
campaign further embroiled the palimpsestic history of western
Asia M i n o r .
Attalos I and the Rhodians appealed to R o m e (Pol. 16.24.3; L i v .
3 1 . 2 . 1 - 2 ; A p p . Mak. 4). T h e Senate, then the comitia decided on a
confrontation with Philip ( L i v . 31.6-8.1 ), 105 and, in 200, delivered
an ultimatum to Philip V before A b y d o s , where he was handed a
senatus consultum requesting him not to make war on an}7 of the
G r e e k s , nor to attack the possessions of Ptolemy; and to accept
arbitration for compensation to Attalos and to the Rhodians (Pol.
16.34.3-4.). Philip's response was to ignore the R o m a n requests,
and accept war with Rome. T h e Second M a c e d o n i a n W a r ended
w i t h a crushing victory for the R o m a n army, led by T . Quinctius
Flamininus, at K y n o s k e p h a l a i in 197.
It was the same R o m a n delegation of 200 w h i c h , after delivering
the ultimatum to Philip V , ended up before A n t i o c h o s I I I and
unsuccessfully tried to broker a settlement between him and
105 On chronology: Warrior 1996. In general, Berthold 1975-6; Will 1982: 131-49;

G r u e n 1986: 382-98, 534-6.

P t o l e m y V , after the Seleukid victory in the F i f t h Syrian W a r ,
and perhaps ensure Seleukid neutrality in the war with Philip V
(Pol. 16.27.5, a n d see § 2). T h e trajectory of this delegation shows
the beginning of R o m a n involvement in the Eastern Aegean. One
consequence of Philip's expedition was to bring Asia M i n o r , and
A n t i o c h o s I I I , within the horizons of the Romans; conversely, the
concept of G r e e k freedom publicized in the ultimatum of 200 and in
the SC of 196, and R o m a n willingness to intervene as interlocutors
of the various powers in Asia M i n o r , w o u l d play an increasingly
important part during the next years.

4. Constructing a Seleukid Space (içy—iç2 BC)

In spring of 197 BC, A n t i o c h o s sailed f r o m Syria with 100 cataphract

ships and 200 'undecked', lighter v e s s e l s — a fleet raised on the
resources and the naval k n o w - h o w of his recent conquest, the
Phoenician seaboard. 1 0 6 A land army set out for Sardeis under two
of his sons and two senior officers, A r d y s and Mithridates. 1 0 ' T h e
aim, according to L i v y , was the subjection of the Ptolemaic cities in
Kilikia, L y k i a , and Karia ( L i v . 3 3 . 1 9 . 8 - 1 1 ) . Other Seleukid officers
perhaps participated in the expedition, or were perhaps active in its
wake, such as Ptolemaios, son of T h r a s e a s (below), and T h e m i s o n ,
a Seleukid officer w h o c o m m a n d e d cavalry at Raphia, and is now
attested at Aigeai, making a dedication to Z e u s K a s i o s for the safety
of the Great K i n g A n t i o c h o s , A n t i o c h o s the son, queen L a o d i k e ,
and the royal children (ιταώίων). T h e dedication perhaps implies the
presence on the expedition of all, or most of, the royal family,
including Laodike. 1 0 8 T h e active participation of Ptolemaios and

106 C o m p a r e Braudel 1966: 147: in the 7th and again the 16th cent., it was the con-

quest of Syria that enabled the Islamic world to break into 'la grande histoire méditer-
ranéenne'. Phoenician crews: Liv. 35.48.6; SEG 41.1556.
107 O n the commanders of land army, Wörrle 1988: 4 5 1 - 4 : Antiochos did not have

two sons called ' A r d y s and Mithridates', as L i v y 33.19.9-10 seems to imply, so that
these must have been the senior officers known from Polybios, sent to assist Antiochos'
two sons—unless Polybios, L i v y ' s source, was confused by the fact that one of
Antiochos' sons, the future Antiochos I V , was also called Mithridates: document 31 A ,
I 3 (at Pol. 16.18.6 and 16.19.10, Antiochos [IV] is 'Antiochos the youngest of the sons'
and not 'Mithridates', but this does not preclude a mistake of Polybios in describing the
campaign of 197; in which case, the commanders of the land army were one unnamed
son, Mithridates/Antiochos, and the officer Ardys). Wörrle suggests that Seleukos and
Mithridates/Antiochos went with the land army, their youth explaining the supervision
of two experienced officers.
108 Ptolemaios at Soloi: document 21. T h e m i s o n at Aigeai: document 20. Sayar (forth-

coming) suggests that Aigeai played an important role in the naval preparations and
movements in the early stages of the expedition.
T h e m i s o n is no more than a suggestion, since none of the docu-
ments attesting their presence in S m o o t h Kilikia can be precisely
dated to 197 or the immediate aftermath of the expedition of 197.
Nonetheless, the presence of two important Seleukid officials in
S m o o t h Kilikia, the area where the expedition started off, does
suggest activity on the rear of A n t i o c h o s ' advance.
In R o u g h Kilikia, the coastal places readily surrendered to
A n t i o c h o s on his westward p r o g r e s s i o n — M a l l o s , Soloi, Z e p h y r i o n ,
Aphrodisias, K o r y k o s , A n e m o u r i o n , Selinous, 'and other forts on
this coast, out of fear or voluntarily' ( L i v . 33.20.4-5; cf. FGrHist
260 F 46). In Soloi, the Seleukid governor of K o i l e - S y r i a ,
Ptolemaios, son of Thraseas, made a dedication 'to H e r m e s ,
Herakles, and the great king A n t i o c h o s ' — i n the city gymnasion, a
frequent venue for royal euergetism and ruler cult. 109 Ptolemaios
came f r o m an Aspendian family w h i c h had produced two governors
of R o u g h Kilikia for the Ptolemies (Jones and Habicht 1989:
335-45); he may have left his province to take part at least in the
early, Kilikian, stages of the campaign because of his local con-
nections, since the Ptolemaic presence also took the form of inland
places (see C h . 1 § 3), whose surrender w o u l d have to be negotiated.
A t Korakesion, the Ptolemaic garrison put up resistance, and
A n t i o c h o s lay siege to the city and its citadel (whose strong position
is reflected in the /copa^-toponym). 110 D u r i n g the siege, the Rhodians
warned A n t i o c h o s against sailing beyond the Chelidonian i s l a n d s —
'not out of hostility, but out of the suspicion that A n t i o c h o s w o u l d
help Philip and become an obstacle to the liberty of the G r e e k s '
(Pol. 18.41 a . i , cf. L i v . 33.20.1-3). T h e Rhodian declaration may
have been patterned on the Peace of Kallias, w h i c h imposed a
similar interdiction on the Persian K i n g 1 1 1 — i n reply to the title
' G r e a t K i n g ' assumed by A n t i o c h o s I I I . A n t i o c h o s sent an embassy
to Rhodes, offering to renew the ancestral alliance with the
Rhodians, and stressing his good relations with R o m e (Liv.
33.20.6-10). T h e news of Philip's defeat at K y n o s k e p h a l a i removed
the Rhodian pretext ( L i v . 33.20.10).
Antiochos may have reached Korakesion in M a y 197; the
105 Soloi: document 21. However, there is no reason to attribute RC 30 to 197:
A p p e n d i x 3.
110 L i v . 33.20.4-5; J. and L . Robert 1983: 156-61, with photographs of the site

(modern Alanya).
111 Mastrocinque, 1983: 54, asserts that the geographical limit in the Rhodian ulti-

matum was not the Chelidonian islands (a later invention, for Mastrocinque), but the
frontiers of Karia, a 'Rhodian zone'. But operations in 190 (Liv. 37.15.6—7; 37.16) and
the cession of Lykia to the Rhodians in 189 (Pol. 21.24.8), indicate Rhodian interest in
that region; nor does Rhodian interest in Karia preclude the wish to keep Antiochos
further away.
confrontation with the Rhodians lasted until mid-June 197, w h e n
the news of K y n o s k e p h a l a i arrived (Schmitt 1964: 286). M e a n t i m e ,
the land army reached Sardeis, w h i c h lies approximately forty
days away f r o m Syria. 1 1 2 H o w e v e r , Seleukid land troops under
Mithridates may have taken A r y k a n d a in inland Lykia
(Agatharchides of K n i d o s , FGrHist 86 F 1 6 ) — o f f the direct route
f r o m Syria to Sardeis. T h e land army cannot have marched parallel
to the fleet, along the coast, since the coastal road along Kilikia is
modern. Antiochos, held up at Korakesion, possibly ordered
Mithridates to split off f r o m the rest of the land army, march d o w n
to P a m p h y l i a and then L y k i a ; f r o m Korakesion, orders could
have reached the land army by the road leading up the K a l y k a d n o s
valley. 1 1 3
A f t e r the news of K y n o s k e p h a l a i made the Rhodian ultimatum
irrelevant, A n t i o c h o s progressed past Seleukid P a m p h y l i a , over to
L y k i a : Andriake, L i m y r a , Patara, and X a n t h o s ( F G r H i s t 260 F 46).
A n t i o c h o s I I I consecrated X a n t h o s to L e t o , A p o l l o , and Artemis,
the poliad gods; the gesture is not a sign of powerlessness in the face
of Xanthian resistance (as has been claimed), but a reflection of
A n t i o c h o s ' authority. 1 1 4 A decree of the X a n t h i a n neoi. mentions
services (building work in the gymnasion) by a citizen èv τοις
άναγκαίοτάτοις καιροίς, perhaps the hardship of Seleukid takeover;
religious rules debarring soldiers in e q u i p m e n t f r o m the L e t o o n
might reflect the same event. 1 1 5 A t the western end of L y k i a ,
A n t i o c h o s took T e l m e s s o s , where he reorganized the city's status
and territory (below).
T h e Rhodians then intervened militarily: they 'did not omit their
other concern of protecting the liberty of the cities allied to P t o l e m y
and w h i c h were threatened with war by Antiochos, for they helped
some with military aid, some by warning them of the enterprises of
the enemies, and were responsible for the liberty of the Ivaunians,
M y n d i a n s , Halikarnassians, and Samians.' ( L i v . 3 3 . 2 0 . 1 1 - 1 3 ) .

112 T h e T e n T h o u s a n d took 42 stages: X e n . Anab. 1.2.5-21; 1.4.1-5.

113 T h i s assumes that the 'Mithridates' in Agatharchides is Antiochos' general (as has
been agreed since first proposed by Ed. Meyer: Holleaux 1942: 184 n. 6) and not the
Pontic king Mithradates V I (active in Lykia), who was proposed by Bevan 1902: ii. 295:
'the expression τα is Μιθριδάτον έλπίσιν does not appear to fit negotiations in which a
Mithridates acts as a mere subordinate'. But Jerome In Dan. 1 1 . 1 4 writes Ptolomaei
partium for Judaean pro-Seleukid notables in 200, adhering to Ptolemaios son of
Thraseas, by then a Seleukid general (Gera 1987: 64-6): this example makes it possible
that Agartharchides is referring to Antiochos' general.
" 4 D o c u m e n t 22, Schmitt 1964: 287, Herrmann 1965a: 119-20; Boffo 1985: 319-25
argues in favour of compromise, even if the exact terms are irrecoverable.
" s L e Roy 1986: 298 for the neoi decree (document 24); 279-300 for the Letoon
inscription ( S E G 36.1221). Gauthier 1996: 23-6, is cautious about the suggestion.
Operations did not extend to L y k i a , probably because of the speed
of A n t i o c h o s ' naval advance and (possibly) the presence of Seleukid
land forces in L y k i a . T h e Rhodians' intervention aimed at denying
a harbour to A n t i o c h o s ' fleet beyond T e l m e s s o s ; in addition, 'pro-
tecting the liberty' of the (subject) Ptolemaic cities was a convenient
cover, in the language of civic liberty, for the pursuit of R h o d i a n
interests in the region. 1 1 6 But an agreement was r e a c h e d — A n t i o c h o s
passed through, and the Rhodians received Stratonikeia, captured
by Seleukid land forces from its M a c e d o n i a n garrison. 1 1 7
Stratonikeia had earlier been ceded by Seleukos II to the Rhodians
( A p p e n d i x 5), and the Rhodians may have appealed to this pre-
cedent to convince A n t i o c h o s to hand over the city: an agreement
couched in the terms of the Seleukid past w o u l d have been accept-
able to both parties. T h e conveyance of Stratonikeia fostered
cordiality between the two powers (Pol. 30.31.6: èv μεγάλη χάριτι),
and in 196, A n t i o c h o s w o u l d confidently propose to refer the
grievances of the S m y r n i a n s and L a m p s a k e n e s to Rhodian arbitra-
tion (Pol. 18.51.4). 1 1 8
T h e next harbour reached by A n t i o c h o s was Iasos (Bargylia
remained occupied by a M a c e d o n i a n garrison until 196). A frag-
mentary Iasian decree alludes to fighting against the soldiers of the
A n t i g o n i d garrison. 1 1 9 It is probable that Iasos had already been
taken by Z e u x i s , as active in Karia in 197 as he was in 203-201,
perhaps operating out of Mylasa. In the same region as Iasos,
Z e u x i s took over Kildara (an inscription preserves the end of his
letter to the city). N o r t h - w e s t f r o m M y l a s a , the Philippeis/
E u r o m i a n s contracted an alliance with A n t i o c h o s I I I , through
Z e u x i s , in late s u m m e r 197: their dealing with Z e u x i s implies that
A n t i o c h o s was still held up at T e l m e s s o s . Pedasa, in the same area
as E u r o m o s , must also have fallen under Seleukid control. B e y o n d
the E u r o m o s plain, Herakleia under L a t m o s probably was 'recov-
ered for the king' by Z e u x i s at this time (his o w n expression). 1 2 0

116 It is an oversimplification to write (Rawlings 1976: 9 - 1 3 ) that the Rhodians in 197

'freed' Kaunos, Halikarnassos, M y n d o s , and Samos from Ptolemaic influence.

117 L i v . 33.18.21 (per Antiochum); Pol. 30.31.6: the Rhodians received Stratonikeia
'from Antiochos and Seleukos' (Seleukos II rather than Seleukos, the son of Antiochos
III).
" s However, the presence ot Rhodians in the entourage of Antiochos (which Rawlings
1976: 14-21, makes much of) is irrelevant to the question of official collaboration
between the king and Rhodes. T h e entente between the two powers encouraged
Rhodians, in a private capacity, to serve the king.
119 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, I 1 6 - 1 7 .
120 Iasos taken over b y Antiochos III: Holleaux 1952: 309 n. 2; Zeuxis at Iasos:

suggested by J. and L . Robert 1983: 178 n. 127. Kildara: document 25, with J. and L .
Robert 1983: 187. Euromos: document 29—alternatively: Antiochos I I I swept by, and
Z e u x i s m a y have been responsible for the capture of Stratonikeia,
and even the takeover of cities near K a r i a , s u c h as Priene, M a g n e s i a
on M a e a n d e r , and Miletos. 1 2 1
Z e u x i s ' activity explains w h y Jerome, after K i l i k i a and L y k i a ,
passes on to E p h e s o s ( F G r H i s t 260 F 46): the list reflects the
successes of A n t i o c h o s I I I h i m s e l f , w i t h the fleet; the K a r i a n cities
had already fallen to Z e u x i s b y the time the k i n g arrived. B e y o n d
w e s t e r n K a r i a , A n t i o c h o s c a p t u r e d Ephesos, 1 2 2 P t o l e m a i c since the
L a o d i k e i a n W a r ( C h . 1 § 3), in late s u m m e r 197 at the earliest
( S c h m i t t 1964: 288).
T h e s u b s e q u e n t c h r o n o l o g y is unclear. L i v y w r i t e s that, after
s p e n d i n g the w i n t e r 197/6 in E p h e s o s (cum hibernasset Ephesi),
A n t i o c h o s d e c i d e d to 'reduce all the cities of A s i a into the old
f o r m u l a of s u b j e c t i o n ' , s e n d i n g t r o o p s f r o m E p h e s o s to put pressure
on S m y r n a , and f r o m A b y d o s to attack L a m p s a k o s ; these events are
clearly located b y L i v y in early 196, eodem anno ( 3 3 . 3 8 . 1 - 7 ) . T h e
k i n g h i m s e l f (ipse), in spring 196, m a d e for the H e l l e s p o n t , and
o r d e r e d his land t r o o p s to cross f r o m A b y d o s into the C h e r s o n e s o s ,
w h e r e he took o v e r the cities ( M a d y t o s and S e s t o s are n a m e d b y
L i v y ) and started r e b u i l d i n g L y s i m a c h e i a , d e s t r o y e d earlier b y
T h r a c i a n s after Philip V e v a c u a t e d it ( L i v . 33.38.8-14). 1 2 3 T h e
passage seems to i m p l y that A n t i o c h o s left m o p p i n g - u p operations
in Asia M i n o r to s u b o r d i n a t e s , w h i l e h i m s e l f c a m p a i g n i n g in the
C h e r s o n e s o s ( M a s t r o c i n q u e 1983: 7 4 - 7 ) .
S c h m i t t has a r g u e d that the operations in A s i a M i n o r n o r t h w a r d s
of E p h e s o s s h o u l d be located at least partly in late 197 and in the
w i n t e r 197/6 ( S c h m i t t 1964: 289-95), because A n t i o c h o s ' land
t r o o p s w e r e already at A b y d o s in spring 196 ( L i v . 33.38.8) and
h e n c e m u s t have w i n t e r e d there. O n this v i e w , L i v y ' s eodem anno is
the translation of a P o l y b i a n κατά τούτο το ετος designating the year
e n d i n g w i t h the c a m p a i g n i n g season of 197, and cum hibernasset
L i v y ' s o w n o b s e r v a t i o n . T e o s (if the T e i a n decrees should be dated

the Euromians/Philippeis entered an alliance with him only some time after his passage.
I see no reason to suppose that Euromos acted out of fear of the Rhodians, and with
encouragement from Philip V (Errington 1986). Herakleia: document 31 Β, II 8-9, with
commentary; we can only be sure that conquest took place some time before summer
196.
121 Priene: documents 32, 33. Magnesia: Seleukid in 190 (Liv. 37.10.12). N o evidence

for Miletos.
122 Rawlings 1976: 13-14, argues that Frontinus, Strat. 2.9, refers to the capture
of Ephesos by Antiochos I I I (rather than Antiochos II) with Rhodian assistance; his
arguments are not convincing, and the incident must refer to an earlier Antiochos.
123 Franco 1993: 265—70. However, I believe the treaty between an Antiochos and the

Lysimacheians is not to be attributed to Antiochos III: Gauthier and Ferrary 1981, and
A p p e n d i x 3. Destruction of Lysimacheia: Robert 1955: 269.
to this time), K o l o p h o n , and Phokaia w o u l d then have been taken
over in late 197, and possibly Erythrai. 1 2 4
H o w e v e r , it is likely that A b y d o s was captured not by A n t i o c h o s '
fleet, sailing up to the T r o a d and back to Ephesos in late 197, but by
the land army. A f t e r reaching Sardeis around M a y 197, it probably
operated northwards, taking Attalid-held T h y a t e i r a . A n inscription,
dating between 209 and 193, and referring to arrangements after the
violent capture of an u n n a m e d city by Seleukid troops, may reflect
land operations in 197. A n o t h e r unnamed city, in Hellespontic
Phrygia, seems to have been deprived of autonomy and some
property under A n t i o c h o s I I I , perhaps subsequent to capture by the
land army at this time. 1 2 5 T h i s city might be Apollonia on the
R h y n d a k o s (proposed by Holleaux), and w o u l d then have been
taken in the course of Seleukid operations to roll back the dominions
of Prousias in north-west Anatolia 1 2 6 (above, § 2). F r o m L y d i a , land
troops could pass into the (Seleukid) plain of A p i a , and hence into
the Karesene, on the borders of the T r o a d — t h e route taken by
Attalos I in 218 (above, § 1). If the Ilian inscription OGIS 2x9 were
dated to A n t i o c h o s III ( A p p e n d i x 1), this might provide a suitable
context. A s s u m i n g that the land army had already driven to the
Straits in 197, the fact that Seleukid troops wintered at A b y d o s
holds no chronological implications for the progression of A n t i o c h o s
f r o m Ephesos. Furthermore, the list of cities in Jerome suggests that
A n t i o c h o s did stop at Ephesos in 197, since that city is the last
named. Finally, the L a m p s a k e n e decree for Hegesias suggests that
L a m p s a k o s , though under threat in 197, came under siege by
Seleukid forces only very late in 197 or early in 196. 12/
Nonetheless, it is tempting to see L i v y ' s account as preserving
some trace of Seleukid activity in the winter 197/6, because of the
clear break at 33.38.8 (initio verts), the m o m e n t of A n t i o c h o s ' spring
expedition to T h r a c e : what preceded took place in the winter. T h e
initial remark ( L i v . 33.38.1) eodem anno must be a L i v i a n suture; the
chronological marker cum hibernasset Ephesi translates a Polybian
notation locating the events described while A n t i o c h o s wintered at
Ephesos. W h a t took place was not a campaign of conquest in
'2t T e o s documents: A p p e n d i x 2; takeover in late 197: Piejko 1991a: 22. Phokaia; Liv.
36.43.8, A p p . Syr. 22. Erythrai: Liv. 36.43.10 only mentions the presence of the Roman
fleet there, without any information on the status of the city; it is unlikely that RC 15
should be dated to 197, as has been claimed by Piejko (Appendix 3).
125 Thyateira: Attalid in 201 (Robert 1962: 38-9), Seleukid in 190: Liv. 37.8.7;
37.44.5. U n n a m e d cities: document 36, with Gauthier 1989: 171-8; Korrhagos inscrip-
tion ( S E G 2.663, with Rostovtzeff 1941: 1472 n. 44)
126 Holleaux 19386: 1 1 4 - 1 6 suggesting Apollonia; above, section 2 for Prousias'
activity in Mysia and the T r o a d in 216 and 208.
127 p e r r a r y t g g 8 : 1 3 5 η . 1 2 .
northern Ionia and Aiolis, but demonstrations of force against
S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s , as L i v y tells us; operations in northern
Ionia presumably were conducted in the spring 196, while the king
himself went on to T h r a c e .
T h e chronology of the latter half of the campaign must reflect the
intentions of Antiochos. If he started out to take over Ptolemaic
possessions f r o m Kilikia to Karia, w h e n did his aims extend to the
(re)conquest of 'all the cities of Asia M i n o r ' ( L i v . 33.38.1)? Unlike
L i v y , Polybios (18.413.2) mentions designs on Ionia and the
Hellespont before the capture of Ephesos. T h e defeat of Philip at
K y n o s k e p h a l a i , the death of Attalos I, and the successes of Z e u x i s
in Karia presumably encouraged Antiochos. But the lack of
chronology deprives us of any sequence of intentions and events.
W e can nonetheless perceive the general pattern: a coastal sweep,
f r o m A n t i o c h to T h r a c e , followed by, or co-ordinated with, a series
of campaigns by land. 128 In L i v y ' s account (33.38.2), A n t i o c h o s I I I
draws comfort from the (projected) ease of conquering 'all the cities
of Asia'; this portrayal should not obscure the achievements of the
campaign of 197, w h i c h reduced a great n u m b e r of cities (ten places
named for A n t i o c h o s alone), some formidably fortified, like L i m y r a
or Herakleia under Latmos. 1 2 9 Part of the explanation for the
military success may lie in the earthquake of 199/8 (preceded by
smaller tremors). A t Iasos, the damage left the city vulnerable and
open to Seleukid offers of aid towards reconstruction. 1 3 0 T h e earth-
quake also hit R h o d e s (Justin 30.4.3) and perhaps weakened
Rhodian capacity for military operations against the Seleukids, at
a time w h e n the reconquest of the Peraia f r o m the A n t i g o n i d
garrisons was still underway (§ 3).
A n important result was the permanent elimination of the
remnants of the Ptolemaic empire in Asia M i n o r (as well as the
small A n t i g o n i d 'province' in Karia). By 196 A n t i o c h o s III and
P t o l e m y V were negotiating, and a peace treaty must have followed
(in 195?), acknowledging A n t i o c h o s ' gains. In winter 194/3,
Ptolemy V married Antiochos' daughter, Kleopatra: the w e d d i n g
took place at Raphia, where A n t i o c h o s had lost to Ptolemy I V in
l2s One might compare the observations of Fellows 1839: 204, 2 1 6 - 1 8 , on the
superficiality of travelling past Lykia by boat: by nature, Antiochos' naval campaign was
restricted to harbours and a narrow coastal strip, and the work of consolidation inland
(for instance in Kilikia, or up the Xanthos valley in Lykia) must have been done by land
troops.
125 T e n cities: FGrHist 260 F 46. Limyra: Wurster 1974: 272. Herakleia: Krischen
1922. Generally, on fortifications, M c N i c o l l 1997.
130 Earthquake: sources and discussion in Holleaux 1952: 209 n. 1; a l s o / . Stratonikeia
4, 16-18; Habicht 1957: no. 64 (earlier shocks); Iscr. Cos E D 178, 3 1 - 2 with Habicht
1996: 88; Robert 1987: 102-3. Iasos: document 26 I, A 6-8.
217. 1 3 1 It is hard not to see the choice of venue as a celebration of
Seleukid revanche on the part of the most successful among the
Hellenistic kings at that moment. Little w o n d e r that Hannibal chose
to take refuge with A n t i o c h o s in 195 ( L i v . 35.49.5-7; Holleaux
1957: 180-3).

In 196, the X a n t h i a n s honoured an Ilian rhetor by sending a stele,

complete with honorific decree, to his home city. T h e boat carrying
the stone sailed past a political landscape reshaped by Seleukid
conquest. 1 3 2 T h e southern seaboard of Anatolia, f r o m Soloi to
T e l m e s s o s , was now Seleukid; n o r t h w a r d s — a f t e r the Rhodian
Peraia and the Ptolemaic cities 'protected' against Antiochos, but
soon taken under Rhodian control ( K a u n o s was simply bought f r o m
its Ptolemaic governors: Pol. 30.31.6) 1 3 3 —came further Seleukid
dominions such as Iasos, Miletos (perhaps), Priene, Ephesos, and
most or all of the coast up to the Erythrai peninsula. N o r t h of the
p e n i n s u l a — o m i t t i n g S m y r n a , w h i c h preserved the independence it
had enjoyed since the 220s—parts of A i o l i s had become Seleukid
again, though there is no epigraphical evidence (as for Karia) to
clarify the situation for the formerly Seleukid cities: K y m e , M y r i n a ,
Phokaia, Aigai, and T e m n o s (controlled by A c h a i o s , but then retak-
en by Attalos I: Pol. 5.77.4 and above, § i). 1 3 4 T h e Attalid k i n g d o m
proper was untouched (though it lost its L y d i a n possessions), as
were the (Attalid) plain of T h e b e around A d r a m y t t i o n and the con-
tinental holdings of Mytilene. In the T r o a d , apart f r o m Ilion,
Dardanos, Rhoiteion, Gergis, Skepsis, and Priapos were Seleukid;
L a m p s a k o s resisted Antiochos, and perhaps Alexandreia T r o a s ;
away f r o m the coastal cities, inland T r o a d must have become royal

151 Negotiations in 196: Pol. 18.51.10; Liv. 33.40.3; A p p . Syr. 3. Marriage of Ptolemy

V and Kleopatra negotiated: Leuze 1923: 2 2 1 - 9 o n date; Will 1982: 192. T h e r e is no

reliable evidence on the terms of the treaty; Holleaux 1942: 337-55 on the question
whether Kleopatra received Koile-Syria as a dowry (unlikely). Liv. 33.41 and A p p . Syr.
4, say that Antiochos, at the news of Epiphanes' death, sailed south and later tried to
conquer C y p r u s in autumn 196; but he was sailing away from C y p r u s , when a storm
devastated his fleet off Smooth Kilikia. T h e story (drawn from Polybios) perhaps
reflects contemporary anxieties about Antiochos' activity and aggressiveness in the years
197-196.
132 Xanthian stele: document 23. Schmitt 1964: 278-85 on extent of reconquests of

197, with some irrelevancies.

133 Appian, Mithr. 23 indicates that the Kaunians became subjects of the Rhodians im

τω Άντιόχου ττολίμω, which might mean 'around the time of . . .', and hence indicate a
relatively late date.
13< Phokaia is the only city where Seleukid presence is attested; T e m n o s may have

been under Antiochos' control; K y m e perhaps escaped conquest b y Antiochos in 197,

as it seems to have rallied to the Seleukid side only in 190 (Liv. 3 7 . 1 1 . 1 5 ) , unless it was
taken over b y Antiochos, then defected in winter 191/0, under Attalid pressure or
encouragement (Liv. 37.8.5): I hold this the likelier solution.
land again, as under A n t i o c h o s I ( R C 10-13). 1 3 5 Across the Straits,
the Chersonesos was Seleukid, and L y s i m a c h e i a functioned as the
residence for the king's son, Seleukos, and also as a Seleukid mint.
F u r t h e r along the T h r a c i a n coast, the Seleukids held cities once
controlled by Philip V , A i n o s and Maroneia, perhaps taken in the
T h r a c i a n campaign of 196. 136
Consolidation and extension followed. T h e speed of the cam-
paign in 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 entailed bypassing many places; A n t i o c h o s ' belief
that 'all the cities of Asia' w o u l d fall under his control, once the
recalcitrant cities of S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s had been reduced,
indicates an expectancy of gradual extension. Bargylia, 'freed' of its
Macedonian garrison in 196 by R o m a n intervention (Pol. 18.48.2),
was possibly taken over by the Seleukids afterwards. 1 3 7 N e a r b y
T h e a n g e l a perhaps fell under Seleukid control at the same time. A
document dated between 201 and 196 probably shows us T h e a n g e l a
absorbed into Halikarnassos, whereas a decree datable to the 190s
attests an autonomous polis of the T h e a n g e l a n s again: the
T h e a n g e l a n s may have rallied to the Seleukids to escape synoikism
into Halikarnassos. 1 3 8 O t h e r cities must have followed: Polybios has
E u m e n e s II refer to 'cities alienated f r o m us' by A n t i o c h o s I I I
(21.20.8): he may mean that A n t i o c h o s detached cities f r o m him
(rather than f r o m the Attalid k i n g d o m in general), after his acces-
sion in 197.
M o r e spectacular were the king's campaigns. In 196, after prelim-
inary ravaging of the T h r a c i a n land near Chersonesos, A n t i o c h o s
135 Adramyttion and the plain of T h e b e were not under Seleukid control in 190, when

the Seleukid army ravaged the region ( L i v . 37.19.7-8). T r o a d : Schmitt 1964: 283-4.
Alexandreia T r o a s only appears alongside Smyrna and Lampsakos in 192 (Liv. 35.42.2),
but may have resisted Antiochos from the start: L i v . 33.38.1-7 does not say that Smyrna
and Lampsakos were the only non-Seleukid cities in 197, but the most important ones.
T a ç h k h o g l u and Frisch 1975: 221 attribute a festival for an Antiochos at Skepsis to
the aftermath of conquest by Antiochos I I I , but the date of the inscription where this
festival is first documented (c.200?) is not necessarily equivalent to the date of founda-
tion (the Roberts prefer Antiochos I or II: BE 76. 573).
136 Chersonesos: L i v . 33.38.9; 37.9.7-8. Lysimacheia as mint: Newell, WSM
1 6 1 5 - 2 1 . Ainos, Maroneia: L i v . 37.60.7. 196 is a likely date for the capture of Ainos;
Maroneia may have been taken later. Grainger 1996: 337, 341, holds that these two cities
could not have been taken in 196, because the Roman commissioner L . Stertinius 'freed
Ainos and Maroneia from control b y garrisons of K i n g Philip' in summer 196, ( j u s t as
P. Lentulus was sent to free Bargylia). But Polybios merely says that L . Stertinius was
sent to free these cities (Pol. 18.48.2), not that he actually freed them: as in the case of
Iasos, he might have been pre-empted by Antiochos III.
137 WSM no. 1468: coinage of Antiochos III at Bargylia. Mastrocinque, 1983: 57-9,
writes that Bargylia was 'taken' from the Romans, in 192—190; but the Romans did not
leave a garrison behind in Bargylia, so there is no reason to date the Seleukid takeover
of the city to the Syrian War. However, L e Rider 1990 would attribute this coinage to
Mylasa under Antiochos II.
I3S Descat 1997 (on SEG 29.1089).
m a r c h e d deep into central T h r a c e , and also gained control of cities
on the n o r t h e r n P r o p o n t i s shore, such as, it n o w seems f r o m an
u n p u b l i s h e d inscription, P e n n t h o s . 1 3 9 In 195 came a s e c o n d
T h r a c i a n e x p e d i t i o n ; one B r i k k o n son of A t e u r i s t o s , an A p a m e i a n
officer, of G a l a t i a n origin, killed near M a r o n e i a , m a y have f o u g h t
in this campaign. 1 4 0 A final T h r a c i a n e x p e d i t i o n took place in
192 1 4 1 ( L i v . 35.23.10; 35.35.7). W a r s on the peripher}' p u b l i c i z e d
A n t i o c h o s ' status as p r o t e c t o r of his subjects, an i m p o r t a n t part of
royal ideology ( A p p . Syr. 6: 'he freed the G r e e k s w h o w e r e s u b j e c t
to the T h r a c i a n s ' ) ; they also p r o c l a i m e d that the (re)conquest of the
old S e l e u k i d d o m i n i o n s w a s c o m p l e t e . A n t i o c h o s f u r t h e r w e n t on
c a m p a i g n in s o u t h e r n A n a t o l i a : in 193, he set out f r o m E p h e s o s ,
m a r c h i n g up to A p a m e i a , w h e n c e he d e s c e n d e d on the Pisidian
cities. 1 4 2 T h e narrative outline of these p o s t - 1 9 6 c a m p a i g n s can be
traced; it is m o r e difficult to reconstruct their results. T h e extent of
S e l e u k i d control as i m p o s e d b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in T h r a c e is yet
unclear (up the H e b r o s valley into the ' R o u m e l i a n plain', along the
north shore of the P r o p o n t i s and along the w e s t e r n Black Sea coast
( G r a i n g e r 1996)?). I n c e r t i t u d e also applies for s o u t h e r n A n a t o l i a
( t h o u g h the presence of Pisidians in the S e l e u k i d a r m y at M a g n e s i a ,
alongside L y k i a n s and P a m p h y l i a n s , suggests control of the
s o u t h e r n regions: L i v . 37.40.14). 1 4 3
D i p l o m a c y f u r t h e r e x t e n d e d S e l e u k i d influence: K y z i k o s and
B y z a n t i o n w e r e the target of b e n e f a c t i o n s or d i p l o m a t i c pressure,
p e r h a p s hinting at o v e r l o r d s h i p , and reflecting i n v o l v e m e n t on the
north shore of the P r o p o n t i s ( A p p . Syr. 6; 12; G r a i n g e r 1996: 3 3 5 - 6 ,
139 Grainger 1996: 336-7: in 196, the Roman commissioner Lentulus went in search

of the king by sailing to Selymbria (Liv. 33.39.1). Grainger's analysis is confirmed by

an inscription, discovered and to be published by M . Sayar, recording an alliance
between Perinthos and the kings, Antiochos I I I and Antiochos the son: document 35.
140 Second Thracian expedition: Liv. 34.33.12; 34.43.4; Holleaux 1957: 180-3. T h i s

is probably the same expedition referred to in A p p . Syr. 6, rather than a third Thracian
expedition in 194: Brodersen 1991: 95 (Grainger, 1996: 340-1, accepts this expedition
in the absence of contrary evidence). Maroneia epigram: SEG 24.637, same document
I SE 115, with Grandjean 1971 (believes in expedition of 194).
141 Leuze 1923: 244 and n. 2; A y m a r d 1940: 101 and n. 3.
142 L i v . 35.13.5; 35.15.1 (Apameia); from Apameia Pisidia can be reached by the

Keçiborlu pass (de Planhol 1958: 24). Mitchell 1991 for urbanization in Pisidia.
143 Pisidia: Sagalassos may have been taken over by Antiochos III in the 190s (for a

Seleukid-inspired seal in the city, K . Vandorpe, in Waelkens and Poblome 1995:

299-305), the Rhodian speech given in Rome in 189 (Pol. 21.22.14) l ' s t s Pisidia among
the spoils of the war against Antiochos I I I , that might be given to Eumenes II (Kearsley
1994 for new evidence of Attalid presence in Milyas and Pisidia in general: SEG
44.1108); Pisidia was a conquest of Antiochos III (and not recovered after a 'revolt', as
written by Waelkens in Waelkens 1993: 42). O n the other hand, Strabo 12.7.3 claims
that the Selgians were never subject to any of the kings. Recent research has emphasized
the links between Pamphylia and Pisidia (Brandt 1992; Mitchell 1991: 121; generally de
Planhol 1958).
338). T h e Seleukid dominance on the Anatolian coast must have
had some effect on the eastern A e g e a n islands. A n t i o c h o s I I I wrote
to the K o a n s , informing them of his esteem for his physician
Apollophanes, and, perhaps, requesting some privilege for him
(SEG 33.673). T h e structure of the letter resembles instructions to
royal officials or subordinate communities: though K o s was inde-
pendent, the unchallenged proximity of Seleukid rule made itself
felt. 144 T o the east, the Galatians were brought into alliance, in 195
or 194, as was Ariarathes I V of K a p p a d o k i a and Pharnakes I of
Pontos; these kings married daughters of Antiochos I I I . Earlier,
A n t i o c h o s had offered a daughter to E u m e n e s II ( A p p . Syr. 5; Pol.
21.20.8; probably the same daughter, N y s a , promised c.195 to
Pharnakes); but E u m e n e s declined this attempt to integrate him into
the system of Seleukid control and influence. 1 4 5 One s y m p t o m of the
now firm Seleukid implantation on the western coast of Asia M i n o r
can be seen in the A e g e a n contacts of A n t i o c h o s I I I , with D e l o s and
Athens. T h e s e form the background to A n t i o c h o s ' later involvement
with G r e e c e itself, and also contrast with the earlier Seleukids'
meagre A e g e a n involvement, w h i c h reflected their weaker hold on
the Anatolian seaboard. 1 4 6

In the 190s, A n t i o c h o s I I I by a combination of military efforts on a

vast scale and of diplomacy, managed substantially to impose, or (in

144 Structure: cf. RC 45; document 4: foregrounded object of royal decision, followed

by instructions (the latter are missing on the K o a n letter, but likely). Similarly,
Samothrake in the time of Ptolemy III was free, but had close relations with the
Ptolemaic governors in T h r a c e : Gauthier 1979.
145 Galatians: A p p . Syr. 6, Liv. 37.40.10 (though Grainger 1996: 335, believes the

Galatians in Appian to be Galatians of Thrace). Ariarathes: A p p . Syr. 5. Pharnakes:

T r a c y 1992: 307-13, reconsidering OGIS 771 (cf. IG n . 1 0 5 6 ) , the Athenian decree
honouring Pharnakes I and his promised bride, 'queen Nysa, daughter of king
Antiochos and queen Laodike'; by redating this decree to early 195, on palaeographical
and chronological grounds, T r a c y establishes that this Nysa must be the daughter of
Antiochos III (and not Antiochos the son or Antiochos I V , as had been supposed). T h e
offer of (presumably) this princess to Eumenes (App. Syr. 5, Pol. 21.20.8) must have
come before she was offered to Pharnakes, and specifically after the campaigns of 197
and 196, as Pol. 21.20.8 implies. In this case, we should disregard Appian when he writes
that Eumenes 'saw that [Antiochos] was already on the point of fighting a war against the
Romans', a remark which had led Leuze (1923: 2 1 1 ) to place the offer in 192 or 191.
146 Lefèvre 1996, for earlier contacts between Antiochos III and Greece. Delos:
Basiez and Vial 1987: 291, 303-4. Athens: Habicht 1994: 166-71 (Seleukid benefactions,
and also, on the basis of IG 2' 785, Athenian delegations to Antioch). See also T r a c y
1992: 307-13, redating to £.195 OGIS 771 (cf. IG 11.1056), the Athenian decree for
Pharnakes I of Pontos and his queen Nysa, now shown to be the daughter of Antiochos
III; this has important consequence for lines 28—30, which justify honours for Nysa
'because it is fitting that the Athenians conspicuously remember for good and honour
the benefactors of the people and those born of benefactors': the reference is to bene-
factions by Antiochos III.
his v i e w ) reimpose control over most of c i s - T a u r i c A s i a M i n o r : the
result w a s the creation of a great imperial space, w h o s e narrative
history and g e o g r a p h i c a l shape I have o u t l i n e d above. T h i s S e l e u k i d
space w a s articulated b y A n t i o c h o s ' and his sons' m o v e m e n t s along
fixed points: n o r t h e r n S y r i a , E p h e s o s , L y s i m a c h e i a w h i c h acted as
a 'provincial capital' for the T h r a c i a n d o m i n i o n s . W h i l e one of the
k i n g ' s sons, S e l e u k o s , resided in L y s i m a c h e i a , the c o - r e g e n t
A n t i o c h o s appears at A n t i o c h — w h e r e he m a r r i e d his sister, L a o d i k e
( I V ) , in w i n t e r 196/5 ( A p p . Syr. 4) and received H a n n i b a l in 195
( L i v . 33.49.6), w h i l e presiding o v e r contests at D a p h n e . 1 4 7 B u t he
also appears at E p h e s o s , w h e n c e his father sent h i m back east, to the
i m p o r t a n t g o v e r n o r s h i p of the U p p e r R e g i o n s ; he died in S y r i a , in
late s u m m e r 193, at the start of his j o u r n e y ( L i v . 3 5 . 1 3 . 5 ;
35.15.3). 1 4 8 W h i l e in A s i a M i n o r , A n t i o c h o s the son possibly sent
letters to T e o s , c o n f i r m i n g privileges g r a n t e d by his father; n e a r b y ,
one D i o s k o u r i d e s erected a statue of h i m b e f o r e the t e m p l e of
K l a r i a n A p o l l o . 1 4 9 E m p i r e w a s also c o n s t i t u t e d by royal discourse
into a space w h e r e individual d i f f e r e n c e m a t t e r e d less than the
k i n g ' s p o w e r to define statuses ( C h . 3). A f t e r r e c o v e r i n g Iasos,
A n t i o c h o s I I I 'gave b a c k its liberty': 1 5 0 local a u t o n o m y c o u l d be
tolerated because its existence w a s a f u n c t i o n of royal p o w e r . In the
saying attributed to A n t i o c h o s I I I (Plut. Mor. 183 F) that the cities
s h o u l d ignore royal o r d e r s if c o n t r a r y to their laws, c o n c e r n for local
a u t o n o m y is c o m b i n e d w i t h the a s s u m p t i o n that he w o u l d regularly
write letters bearing o r d e r s (av τι γράφη παρά τους νόμους κελεύων
γενέσθαι).
A n t i o c h o s ' b e h a v i o u r w a s not a n o m a l o u s (as M a g i e 1950: 107,
claimed). It w a s the arbitrary p o w e r s of a H e l l e n i s t i c king that m a d e
H? Syria: L i v . 33.19.8; 33.41.9; 35-13-4; A p p . Syr. 4. Ephesos: Liv. 33.49.7; 35-13-4;

35· 1 5-7 (palace). Lysimacheia: Pol. 18.51.8; A p p . Syr. 3; Liv. 33.40.6; 33.41.4. Kraeling
1964, with BE 65. 436, for an inscription from Antioch attesting a festival in 198/7 at
Antioch; perhaps the festival celebrated in 195 and repeated on a penteteric basis.
14S Death of Antiochos the son: Schmitt 1964: 15-19. A y m a r d 1949 reconstructs a

dynastic crisis (Laodike divorced, her sons disgraced). T h e contract between Ptolemaios
of Telmessos and the Kardakes (Segre 1938: 190, line 22), dates to Hyperberetaios of
1 1 9 S E ( S e p t e m b e r - O c t o b e r 193), starts Βασιλεύοντος Άντιόχου without the co-regent: a
documentary terminus ante quem confirming L i v y and supplementing the arguments of
A y m a r d 1940 (against 192, championed by E. Cavaignac on the grounds of a cuneiform
document). Antiochos III himself, before his accession, travelled from Apameia to
Seleukeia on the Tigris, to be greeted by the governor and the population: Sherwin-
W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 140.
145 Documents 19 Β and C with commentary. Liv. 35.15.4 mentions his p o p u l a r i t y —

though the context is unreliable (rumours about Antiochos' motives for allegedly
poisoning his co-regent). O n the other hand, Seleukos and Mithridates/Antiochos did
not write RC 9: A p p e n d i x 3. Klaros: 42.
150 D o c u m e n t 26 A , I 8-9 (Laodike); the process illustrates Antiochos' own general

statement at Lysimacheia (Pol. 18.51.9).

possible Antiochos' reorganization of the territory of T e l m e s s o s :
while leaving in place the local dynast, (Ptolemaios, whose daughter
was appointed priestess of L a o d i k e in 193), A n t i o c h o s took over the
city and installed a military colony (the Kardakes) on its territory. 1 5 1
T h e s e phenomena are no different f r o m the redefinition of the
territory of A i g a i by A n t i o c h o s II (Orth 1977: 169-70 on H e r r m a n n
1959), the seizure of the Samian Anaitis by the same king ( S E G
1.366) or the redistribution of land imposed by Philip V on Miletos
and Herakleia (previous section). Specific to A n t i o c h o s III is his
appeal to a Seleukid past as a deproblematizing strategy ( C h . 1; L i v .
33.38.1), to present the fact of empire as a natural object, grounded
in history; a message reinforced by the removal of other super-
powers f r o m the scene, leaving A n t i o c h o s the sole interlocutor of
the local communities.
H o w e v e r , there were other w a y s to describe the situation. T h e
T e l m e s s i a n s struck coinage with the Seleukid motif of A p o l l o
sitting on the omphalos; but the reverse showed the R h o d i a n -
inspired head of Helios ( B M C Lycia, 86, no. 1). T h e combination
(whatever its exact motivation and meaning) illustrates the v i e w -
point of one 'Seleukid' c o m m u n i t y , aware of other powers than
A n t i o c h o s I I I . O t h e r cities w o u l d actively resist; the existence of
these genuinely independent cities signalled the failure to complete
the work of reconquest and create a perfect Seleukid space.

5. Contesting the Seleukid Space (igy-iQ2 BC)

Shortly before being defeated by L . Scipio before Magnesia,

A n t i o c h o s I I I w o u l d name S m y r n a , L a m p s a k o s , and Alexandreia
Troas 1 5 2 as the άρχαί of his conflict with R o m e (Pol. 2 1 . 1 3 . 3 , cf. L i v .
151 Segre 1938; Wörrle 1978: 222 and n. 105: from Liv. 37.56.4, it is clear that the city

of Telmessos and the estates of Ptolemaios are distinct, which must result from a
decision of Antiochos III. Daughter of Ptolemaios: document 37, 30. Military colony:
Segre 1938; in addition, the Telmessian inscription published by Wörrle 1979 has been
shown to concern a royal colony by the Roberts (BE 80, 484), but need not be a letter
of Eumenes II (Robert) rather than Antiochos III; even if the letter were Attalid, it
might still concern a second Seleukid colony installed near Telmessos. Antiochos did
not deprive Ptolemaios of his estate (Segre 1938: 198): the pluperfect in Liv. 37.56.4-5,
agrum qui Ptolemaei Telmessii fuisset, must not refer to expropriation by Antiochos III,
but rather by the Romans, who gave Ptolemaios' estates to Eumenes II (Wörrle 1978:
222 η. l o s , confirming Magie 1950: 762-3). Briscoe 1981 ad loc. argues against this view
(Liv. 37.56.4 is ambiguous: Eumenes II received Telmessum item et castra Telmessium,
praeter agrum, qui Ptolemaei Telmessii fuisset)·, but he does not notice that Eumenes II
inherited the right to the debt owed by the Kardakes to Ptolemaios as payment for
purchased land (Segre 1938: 190, lines 7 - 1 0 ; Wörrle, loc. cit.)—which implies that
Eumenes had taken over Ptolemaios' property in general.
152 Alexandreia: preceding section, n. 135.
35.17.7). T h e remark concerns the diplomatic preliminaries to the
war, in the years 196-193. 1 5 3 T h e successive rounds of negotiations
show how A n t i o c h o s ' activity in Asia M i n o r could be interpreted
and challenged; in turn, his reactions provide insights into the
nature of Seleukid power. A n t i o c h o s ' remark calls attention to a
remarkable b o d y of discourse 1 5 4 about empire and geography, and
hence another viewpoint than the military narrative of conquests.
T h e involvement of the R o m a n s originated in their victory over
Philip V in 197, and the ensuing right to dispose of what Philip had
controlled (Pol. 18.49.6). T h e senatus consultum (SC) of 196 (Pol.
18.44) proclaimed the liberty of all the G r e e k s of Asia and Europe;
it specified that Philip w o u l d free E u r o m o s , Pedasa, Bargylia, Iasos,
A b y d o s , T h a s o s , M y r i n a , and Perinthos. T h e SC was not explicitly
directed against A n t i o c h o s III: its detailed provisions aimed at
undoing the results of Philip's A e g e a n campaigns (§ 3); the general
proclamation is an extension of the demands put to Philip in 200
(not to wage war on any Greek: Pol. 16.27.2, 18.34.3) a n d w h i c h
could now be represented as fact (Pol. 18.47.2). 1 5 5 A s a performative
speech-act, the SC created, or aimed at creating a certain state of
affairs, within a geographical zone, on its o w n logic: the R o m a n s
acted as if they were alone, ignoring the fact that the settlement
intersected with the Seleukid space created in 197 (Euromos,
Pedasa, Iasos, A b y d o s , and even Perinthos had already been taken
over by Antiochos). T h i s attitude is more important than the
question of whether the SC was a 'hidden warning' to A n t i o c h o s
III. 1 5 6
S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s gained acceptance within the world of
the R o m a n settlement. Lampsakos, in late 197, sent an embassy,
under Hegesias, to R o m e (via Massalia) and, on the way back, to
Flamininus at C o r i n t h in 196; their appeal was based on mythical
kinship (between the Romans, descended f r o m the T r o j a n s , and the
153 Badian 1964, Will 1982: 181-204, Mehl 1990 (narrative accounts); Bickermann

1932a (interpretative essay); G r u e n 1986: 6 1 1 - 3 6 (minimalist).

154 Apart from Polybios (transmitted through L i v y (mainly), Appian, Diodoros), the

issues and the way they were talked about are documented in two contemporary
inscriptions, the Hegesias decree (I. Lampsakos 4) and the Roman letter to the Teians
(document 38).
155 oihéva γαρ (τι των 'Ελλήνων οϋτΐ πολεμεϊσθαι νΰν ύ·π' ουδενός οντε δουλεύειν ούδενί: not
an order (Ferrary 1988: 142—one would expect μηδενα; also mistranslated by Liv.
33.34.3!), but a statement of fact justifying the Roman order to Antiochos III
(προοηγόρενον μή διαβαίνειν εις τήν Εύρωπήν).
156 Interpreting the SC from the Roman aims in the Second Macedonian War: G r u e n
1986: 620-1. Ferrary 1988: 141 n. 33, argues that the SC was directed against Antiochos
because he reacted to it; but Antiochos' reaction does not illuminate the Senate's inten-
tions. Perinthos: the evidence is an inscription, discovered and to be published by M .
Sayar, concerning an alliance between Perinthos and Antiochos III.
Lampsakenes, a c o m m u n i t y of the T r o a d ) , and supported by the
Massalians, also linked to the L a m p s a k e n e s by kinship (both cities
had been founded by Phokaia), and allies of Rome. T h e embassy is
documented in the L a m p s a k e n e decree for one of the ambassadors,
Hegesias (/. Lampsakos 4). 157 A s a result, the L a m p s a k e n e s managed
to secure inclusion in the R o m a n peace treaty with Philip V (had
L a m p s a k o s at some point been threatened by Philip, during his
activity in the Propontis or the Straits?). 158 S m y r n a also appealed to
R o m e , though the details are not known as they are for Lampsakos;
cultic honours for R o m e , inaugurated in 195 ( T a c . Ann. 4.56.5),
must represent the Smyrnian response to a specific 'benefaction', in
defence of the city's interests. 159 Both cities were acknowledged by
R o m e as players in the international scene, thus confirming the
independence w h i c h they had enjoyed since the 220s, and assisting,
f r o m the outside, their refusal to be integrated within the Seleukid
space ( L i v . 33.38.1-7). A l o n g s i d e Alexandreia T r o a s (which only
appears as a recalcitrant city in 192, but probably resisted A n t i o c h o s
early on), these two cities managed ideological and military resist-
ance to the Seleukids, f r o m 197 to 192 (Liv. 35.42), in a local history
w h i c h spans the duration of A n t i o c h o s ' recreated Seleukid Asia
Minor. 1 6 0
T h e S m y r n i a n s and the L a m p s a k e n e s were also directly sup-
ported by the Romans: their appeals provided the occasion for
diplomatic conflict between Rome and Antiochos. 1 6 1 T h e outline of

157 See also C u r t y 1995: 78-82, no. 39, with commentary on the mythical kinship (and

80 n. 7, for arguments against a connection between the Hegesias decree and a possible
mention of Massalia in a Phokaia decree of this period, Inschr. Priene 65). O n the
identity of the Romans as descendants from the T r o j a n s , and the political role the
' T r o j a n legend' played in the relations between Rome and the Greek world, G r u e n
1996: n - 1 5 ; G r u e n 1992: 6 - 5 1 ; C u r t y 1995: 257-8. Badian, Entretiens Hardt 17
(Geneva, 1972), 178-9 suggested that this embassy appears in Ennius (I think this
unlikely).
158 Hegesias: I. Lampsakos 4, with Ferrary 1988: 133-41 (against Bickermann 19326,

w h o claimed that the Lampsakenes misunderstood the Senate).

159 T h e Smyrnian cult is not equivalent to deditio to R o m e (claimed b y J. A . O .

Larsen, in R. Chevallier (ed.), Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire offerts à André Piganiol

(Paris, 1966), 1635-8), even though Pol. 18.49.1 may imply that one of the recalcitrant
cities considered surrendering to the Romans ((γχΐίριοϋσa> οφάς). Mellor 1975: 14-16, is
unhelpful, as pointed out by Errington 1987: 100-1.
180 Smyrna, Lampsakos, and Alexandreia T r o a s were still holding out from Antiochos

III in 192, at the eve of the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r (Liv. 35.42, the first time we hear of
Alexandreia Troas). I. Alexandreia Troas 4, a decree honouring a phrourarch (Robert,
OMS i. 65-74, f ° r attribution to Alexandreia Troas), might refer to military resistance
against Antiochos III, notably by fending off a surprise attack on a fort at C h r y s e (lines
2 - 3 , [πραίξικοπούντωΐ', though the geography of a Seleukid coup de main is not obvious).
141 A p p . Syr. 2, D i o d . 29.7. G r u e n 1986: 621 n. 42: the Lampsakene appeal against

Antiochos was not carried out by Hegesias, but a later e m b a s s y — b u t lines 74-5 of the
Hegesias inscription might describe such an appeal.
these diplomatic encounters is well k n o w n , with some obscure
patches: in 196, Flamininus received a Seleukid embassy at C o r i n t h
in the summer, and the king received a R o m a n embassy at
L y s i m a c h e i a in the autumn; in 195, Seleukid envoys met
Flamininus at C o r i n t h again, and were referred to Rome (where
they probably did not go). A f t e r an interval of a year and a half,
A n t i o c h o s reopened negotiations by sending an embassy to R o m e in
winter 194/3, w h i c h was followed by the dispatch of three envoys
f r o m R o m e to Asia in 193, where they met with A n t i o c h o s at
A p a m e i a , in late summer, and with his courtier M i n n i o n in the
autumn, at Ephesos. 1 6 2
W h a t is striking about this series of negotiations is their repeti-
tiveness and their uniformly unsatisfactory outcome. Rather than
look for substantial changes and concessions, 1 6 3 we should realize
that either party spoke f r o m a position w h i c h its interlocutor was
unwilling to acknowledge; utterances were issued in a loop w h i c h
could have carried on indefinitely, but for precipitating events in
G r e e c e in 192. T h e R o m a n s demanded that A n t i o c h o s evacuate
'Europe' and stay in Asia (Pol. 18.47.2, 18.50.8-9; L i v . 34.58.2-3);
to varying degrees, they also proclaimed the liberty of the G r e e k
cities in Asia, either directly or by sponsoring the grievances of the
recalcitrant cities 164 (Roman championship of Ptolemaic interests
was soon voided by the settlement between A n t i o c h o s I I I and
Ptolemy V : see § 4). T h e Seleukids responded by substituting for
the distinction between E u r o p e and Asia their o w n geography,
grounded in the Seleukid past: A n t i o c h o s I I I was reconquering

162 Corinth: Pol. 18.47.1—4. Lysimacheia: Pol. 18.49-52. Corinth (bis): L i v . 34.25.2.

Rome: L i v . 34.57.4-59, Diod. 28.15, A p p . Syr. 6. Apameia: L i v . 3 5 . 1 5 . 1 - 2 ; the con-

ference in A p p . Syr. 12 cannot be set at Ephesos, from where the king was absent (Liv.
35.16.1), and must concern Apameia. Ephesos: L i v . 3 5 . 1 6 . 1 - 1 7 . 2 . Holleaux 1957:
156-79, for order of negotiations; 166-75, against negotiations in 195 (which might be
inferred from L i v . 34.33.12, 34.57.4 and 34.59.8).
163 A p p . Syr. 12 has Antiochos offering to leave autonomous the Rhodians, the
Byzantines, the Kyzikenes, and 'all the other Greeks which live in Asia', except for the
Aiolians and the Ionians. It is unlikely that Antiochos would already have offered to
withdraw from the cities of southern Asia (Badian 1964: 138 n. 78): at the eve of
Magnesia, Antiochos' offer was far more restricted, and even after Magnesia the
Seleukids were reluctant to give up Pamphylia (Pol. 21.45.11) and unwilling to give up
Soloi (Pol. 21.24.13). 'All the other Greeks' must be a confusion by Appian. Antiochos
therefore spoke of recognising the autonomy of independent states on the fringes of the
Seleukid space itself, such as Rhodes or Byzantion (Bickermann 1932a: 50), cities over
which he had extended the shadow of his diplomacy and influence; this amounts to a
scaling back of his wider ambitions, but no concession on the substantial matter, the
status of the cities of Asia Minor.
Pol. 18.47.1, 18.50.5-7 (the Antigonid cities would have been declared free by the
Romans, in accordance with the SC of 196); Pol. 18.44.2, L i v . 34.58.8-13 (extended to
all the cities of Asia). Sponsoring grievances: Pol. 18.52.1—3, L i v . 3 5 . 1 7 . 1 - 2 .
T h r a c e , w h i c h had belonged to Seleukos I; 165 they also denied the
R o m a n s ' right to 'interfere' (πολυπραγμονεΐν) in Asia M i n o r , w h i c h
was A n t i o c h o s ' by right, and where the R o m a n s had no ground to
give orders. 1 6 6
T h e s e utterances should not be simplified or rationalized 1 6 7 to
speak of 'propaganda war', 'cold war', 'spheres of influence',
'blocks'; the debate about A n t i o c h o s crossing to Europe was not
about the creation of a 'buffer zone' between the Seleukid and the
R o m a n spheres, whether in the Balkans or in Greece. 1 6 8 B y recast-
ing the ancient terms in 'timeless' modern concepts of geopolitics,
these descriptions pass over what is historically specific and intrigu-
ing about the negotiations. W e should rather try to explore the logic
of two competing discourses, w i t h a view towards laying out their
assumptions, the workings of their conflict, and the conceptual
geography w h i c h each tried to impose.
T h e difficult feature is the rationale of the R o m a n d e m a n d s —
w h y they initiated the confrontational process, to the Seleukids'
astonishment (Pol. 1 8 . 5 1 . 1 ; L i v . 34.57.10; D i o d . 28.15.2). T h e
proclamation of G r e e k liberty in 196, issued after K y n o s k e p h a l a i ,
represented a c o m m i t m e n t that could not be renounced without
losing face (Liv. 34.57.11). But 'public consistency' ( G r u e n 1986:
621) cannot account for the demand that A n t i o c h o s evacuate
'Europe', w h i c h reveals R o m a n anxieties about security, or ignor-
ance about the precise geography involved, as opposed to the map
of their anxieties: the Senate seemed to fear that the Seleukid
advance across the Straits w o u l d automatically lead him westwards
to threaten R o m e (Pol. 18.50.9). 169 S u c h fears are exemplified in the
series of measures taken after the last conference with A n t i o c h o s ,
to ensure the security of Sicily and Italy ( L i v . 3 5 . 2 3 . 1 - 1 0 ) . T h i s

165 Pol. 18.51.4-6; L i v . 34.58.4-5; A p p . Syr. 6.

166 Pol. 18.51.2 and 9; L i v . 34.57.10-11 ; Diod. 28.15.2; A p p . Syr. 12; L i v . 35.16.5-6.
147 e.g. Briscoe 1972: 35 n. 4 on Liv. 34.58.3: 'si se ille Asiae finibus non continet et in

Europam transcendit, ut et Romanis ius sit Asiae civitatium amicitias et tueri quas habeant
et novas complecti is merely a rhetorical way of saying "if Antiochus does not keep out of
Europe we will drive him out of both Europe and Asia M i n o r " ' — b y trying to extract
the 'real' message, Briscoe simplifies the workings of a complex statement and reduces
the specifics of contemporary discourse to a brutal summary.
168 Badian 1964: 120; Errington 19896: 276, 282.
169 Bickermann 1932«: 66-75; Mastrocinque 1983: 131-3; Franco 1993: 265-70.
G r u e n 1986: 625 dismisses the references in L i v y to anxiety about Antiochos, on the
grounds that the Senate proceeded with the evacuation of Greece in 194; but that action,
imposed by consistency with the SC of 196, might explain the energy with which the
evacuation of Europe was demanded from Antiochos in winter 194/3. Franco 1993:
269-70, on the imitation of Seleukos I b y Antiochos III, and on the possibility of pro-
fessed aims on Macedonia, once part of the realm of Lysimachos and hence theoretic-
ally belonging to the inheritance of Seleukos I.
geography of anxiety was an important motive for R o m a n actions; it
was increased by external factors, such as the presence of Hannibal
at A n t i o c h o s ' court, or Attalid exaggeration ( L i v . 35.23.10). R o m a n
preoccupation with A n t i o c h o s seems to have been constant, f r o m
1 9 7 - 1 9 6 onwards: the references in P o l y b i o s (18.39.3; 18.43.2;
18.48.4) are confirmed by documentary evidence on the attitude of
L . Flamininus, in late 197. T h e legate in c o m m a n d of the R o m a n
fleet promised to the L a m p s a k e n e embassy that he w o u l d include
L a m p s a k o s in any agreement he might strike up, in the course of
o p e r a t i o n s — p r e s u m a b l y directed against the advance of A n t i o c h o s
I I I , since the war against Philip V had ended. 1 ' 0
T o constrain A n t i o c h o s within this conceptual geography, the
R o m a n s exercised various forms of pressure, as is obvious f r o m the
conference w h i c h took place in the winter 194/3. If A n t i o c h o s did
not evacuate Europe, Flamininus claimed the right for the R o m a n s
to maintain or strike up 'friendships' in A s i a — t o enjoy influence
with communities in a region w h i c h the Seleukids constructed as
an imperial dominion ( L i v . 34.58.1-4). T h e Seleukid envoys
responded by denying the R o m a n s any rights in Asia (whereas
T h r a c e was A n t i o c h o s ' by right); Flamininus then appealed to the
discourse of G r e e k freedom, again as a means of pressure, in paral-
lel to his earlier attempt, to force the evacuation of Europe: this is
clear f r o m the debate itself, where Flamininus' threat to defend the
liberty of the G r e e k cities of Asia was succeeded by a restatement
f r o m Sulpicius Galba of the initial demand to evacuate Europe (Liv.
34.58.8-59.2). T h e hierarchy of demands was made explicit by
Flamininus himself, the next day ( L i v . 34.59.4-5): populum
Romanum, qua virtute quaque fide libertatem eorum [i.e. of the G r e e k s
of Europe] a Phi.li.ppo vindicaverit, eadem ab Antiocho, nisi decedat
Europa, vindicaturum, 'the R o m a n people w o u l d defend the liberty
[of the G r e e k s of Europe] against Antiochos, unless he left Europe,
with the same valour and trustworthiness with w h i c h it had
defended this liberty against Philip'. 1 7 1
T h e Seleukids' response shows how seriously they took the chal-
lenge. V a r i o u s discursive strategies aimed at denying the legitimacy
of R o m a n claims, and keeping the R o m a n s at distance: for instance,
the analogy between Seleukid rule in Asia and R o m a n p o w e r in
Italy justified the Seleukid empire in terms the R o m a n s could not
170 p y !Ç88: 140, on I. Lampsakos 4, lines 32-6 (cf. Bickermann 19326: 296). In
e r r a r

fact, L . Flamininus' power to contract such agreements is highly problematical.

171 Bickermann 1932a: 61: 'das Recht des Sieges parierte [Flamininus] mit dem auf

die Freiheit'; Desideri 1970/1, 506, 510 (engagement for liberty is strumentalizzato).
Badian 1964: 127 and n. 70, would excise nisi decedat Europa·, against, Ferrary 1988,
144-6.
reject. 1 ' 2 M o r e aggressively, the Seleukids used the concepts of
G r e e k liberty to contest the Roman control of the G r e e k cities in
Italy ( L i v . 3 5 . 1 6 . 2 - 4 ; P. Sulpicius G a l b a did not address the point,
but shifted the debate by challenging the Seleukid historical claims
in Asia Minor). Antiochos' landing at Demetrias in 192 was also
parti}' motivated by the same urge to 'turn the tables on R o m e '
(Badian 1964: 1 3 0 - 1 ) , by appearing to free the G r e e k s f r o m
Rome. 1 ' 3
It is easy to see w h y the Seleukids reacted to the R o m a n demands
as to a threat to the imperial construct of 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 . T h e confronta-
tion was not about 'rival sloganeering' centred on G r e e k liberty:
A n t i o c h o s did not present his conquests under the heading of the
'liberation of the cities', but rather appealed to dynastic legitimacy
and euergetic solicitude; 1 7 4 local autonomy was a status w h i c h he
could grant, within an imperial space where he held the monopoly
of performative utterances (§ 4); local resistance (actual or ideologi-
cal) was an anomaly, w h i c h w o u l d soon be reduced and lead to
assimilation within the Seleukid space ( L i v . 33.38.1-2). T h e
R o m a n s challenged the dynastic past of the Seleukid p o w e r in Asia
M i n o r , by referring to a history of Seleukid weakness and absence
in Asia M i n o r ( L i v . 3 4 . 5 8 . 1 0 - 1 1 ; 3 5 . 1 6 . 7 - 1 1 ; C h . 1 § 5), and undid
the Seleukid claim to a legitimate, unproblematic p o w e r grounded
in the past. T h e y further challenged the Seleukid effort at appear-
ing the sole efficient interlocutor of the local communities, by
engaging S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s in an international dialogue
where these cities were acknowledged as independent powers, and
by encouraging the proliferation of local claims in the face of
Seleukid attempts at creating an unitary space ( L i v . 3 5 . 1 7 . 1 ) .
A contemporary d o c u m e n t illustrates how R o m a n discourse
could force open the Seleukid space. 1 7 5 In winter 194/3, the Seleukid
envoy M e n i p p o s , in addition to his mission for Antiochos, acted
172 D e n y i n g Roman locus standi: Pol. 18.52.9. Italy: Pol. 18.51.2, Liv. 34.58.6.
175 Liv. 3 5 . 3 2 . 1 1 - 1 2 ; 35.44.6; 35.48.8; 36.9.4; Pol. 20.8.1. Antiochos' projected
support for an expedition of Hannibal to Italy, if authentic, proposed to threaten Italy
just as the Romans threatened his dominions in Asia (Liv. 35.42.3-4).
174 'Rival sloganeering': G r u e n 1986: 636, cf. 619; Mastrocinque 1983: 6 1 - 4 ('libera-

tion propaganda'). Antiochos III did not regularly present himself as the 'liberator of
the cities', though Alabanda in 202 and Iasos c. 197 chose to speak of him in those terms
(document 16, 20-21; 26 Β, I 13 = 44 Blümel). T h e Seleukid viewpoint is clear from
document 26 A, I 8-9; 31 Β, II 8-9; Pol. 18.52.9. Possible exceptions are the frag-
mentary letter to T e o s (19 B) and Antiochos' freeing the Greeks from the Thracians
(App. Syr. 6).
175 D o c u m e n t 38. Gruen 1986: 628-9 calls this document amicable, neglecting
anomalies pointed out by Errington 1980 (though Errington's interpretation of the
letter as a 'versteckte D r o h u n g ' , 284, is too crude; the same applies to Errington 19896:
279).
for the T e i a n s : he asked the Senate to acknowledge the city's asylia.
T h e reply addressed to the T e i a n s by the praetor M . Valerius
Messalla, the tribunes, and the Senate, observes diplomatic courte-
sies by praising M e n i p p o s and proclaiming the authors' piety; it also
shows anomalies (apart from boastful confidence in divine favour).
In lines 19-24, the R o m a n s grant that T e o s should be άφορολόγητον
άπο τον δήμου τον Ρωμαίων, literally 'tribute-exempt f r o m the
R o m a n people'. T h i s formula is problematic: the direct parallel is
the letter of the A t h a m a n i a n kings, also for the asylia of T e o s (RC
35), and the formula might be a misunderstanding in both cases. 176
A r e the R o m a n authorities e x e m p t i n g the T e i a n s f r o m tribute, as
if they had any right or claim to levy tribute f r o m a c o m m u n i t y
within the Seleukid e m p i r e — h e n c e assuming a discursive position
normally reserved for the ruling power? O r is the meaning that the
T e i a n s can be asyloi and free f r o m tribute with the consent of the
R o m a n p e o p l e ? — t h u s granting approval to an administrative status
in the Seleukid e m p i r e . 1 " In both cases, the R o m a n utterance inter-
feres within the Seleukid space.
Discursive interference f r o m the R o m a n s also appears at the end
of the letter, with its promise of further φιλάνθρωπα, if the T e i a n s
should observe goodwill towards the R o m a n s (διατηρούντων υμών και
eis τα μετά ταύτα τήν προς ημάς εύνοιαν, 'if y o u should preserve in the
future too y o u r goodwill towards us'). T h e formula is unparalleled
in royal letters on asylia (RC 26, 27, 28, 31, 32): it is patterned on
the interaction between king (or royal officers) and subject c o m m u -
nities, w h e r e relations of power are mediated through a contract of
euergetism and local 'goodwill'. 1 7 8 W h a t M e n i p p o s had expected
was a favourable response to a request circulated, under Seleukid
patronage, among the international c o m m u n i t y ; instead, the
R o m a n s spoke the language of authority to a city located within the
Seleukid empire, where A n t i o c h o s ' utterances should have been
the only authoritative ones. T h e letter to the T e i a n s preserves a

176 O n these d o c u m e n t s , H e r r m a n n 1965a: 1 4 0 - 1 ; A p p e n d i x 2. T h e significance of the

reference to άφορολογησία and sacred city and territory in a series of C r e t a n decrees in

favour of M y l a s a (I. Mylasa 643, lines 8 - 1 3 ; 644, 7 - 1 0 ; 660, 2 - 3 ; 661, 5 - 7 — t h e last t w o
p u b l i s h e d in EA 19 (1992), 1 2 - 1 3 a n d r e p r o d u c e d as SEG 42.1003, 1004) is obscure,
because of the lacunose state of the d o c u m e n t s and the absence of any clear c h r o n o -
logical context.
177 T h i s interpretation is s u p p o r t e d by a R o m a n letter to the Jews, agreeing to the

concessions m a d e b y the S e l e u k i d minister L y s i a s in 164, after Judas M a c c a b a e u s '

i n i t i a l s u c c e s s e s (νττερ ών Λυσίας ο συγγενής τον βασιλέως συνεχώρησεν ύμίν, σννενδοκονμεν:
2 M a c c . 1 1 : 35» w i t h H a b i c h t 1976: 12 and ηη. 22-4)·
178 D o c u m e n t s , 7 _ 9 ( A m y z o n ) ; 25, 7 - 1 1 (Kildara); 26 A , I 2 5 - 2 9 (Iasos); 31 Β, I

1 4 - 1 5 and I V 9 - 1 1 (Herakleia); also C h . 4 § 1, w h e r e the notion of 'contract clause' is

e x p l o r e d through examples.
d o c u m e n t a r y trace of the process w h i c h F l a m i n i n u s , in the same
w i n t e r 194/3, had called 'striking up f r i e n d s h i p s ' in A s i a ( L i v .
34.58.3) and w h i c h the S e l e u k i d s called ' m e d d l i n g ' (πολυπραγ-
μονβΐν).
R o m a n ' m e d d l i n g ' threatened S e l e u k i d p o w e r , b y contesting its
bases and its logic ( B i c k e r m a n n 1932«: 65; B i k e r m a n 1938: 1 4 0 - 1 ) .
It d i s r u p t e d S e l e u k i d authority, the illusion, essential in any p o w e r
c o n f i g u r a t i o n , that there is n o t h i n g exterior to the dialogue b e t w e e n
ruler and ruled, the faculty of the e m p i r e to be accepted as part of
things. It challenged S e l e u k i d i d e o l o g y in its f u n c t i o n as discursive
c o v e r for relations and realities, creating authority b y s u p p r e s s i n g
alternatives: periculum erat ne, si concessum iis foret quod intenderent,
Zmyrnam in Aeolide Ioniaque, Lampsacum in Hellesponto aliae urbes
sequerentur, 'there w a s a d a n g e r that, if they w e r e g r a n t e d w i t h w h a t
they w a n t e d , S m y r n a in A i o l i s and Ionia, L a m p s a k o s on the
H e l l e s p o n t w o u l d p r o v i d e an e x a m p l e for other cities to f o l l o w '
( L i v . 33.38.3). T h e normal f u n c t i o n i n g of S e l e u k i d imperial ideo-
logy w a s threatened b y the R o m a n presence w i t h i n the S e l e u k i d
space, as A n t i o c h o s ' council w a s well aware, in late 193, w h e n it
d e c i d e d on w a r , rather than w i t n e s s i n g the dissolution of e m p i r e
t h r o u g h the loss of authority and the intrusion of external agents
( L i v . 3 5 . 1 7 . 3 - 9 ; Briscoe 1981: 30-3):

initium semper a parvis iniusta imperandi fieri, nisi crederent Persas, cum
aquam terramque ab Lacedaemoniis petierint, gleba terrae et haustu aquae
eguisse. Per similem temptationem a Romanis de duabus civitatibus agi;
sed alias civitates, simul duas iugum exuisse vidissent, ad liberatorem
populum defecturas.
unjust power always started from small things, unless one believed that the
Persians, when they asked the Spartans for earth and water, needed a clod
of earth and a gulp of water. T h e Romans were making a similar attempt
in the case of the two cities [Smyrna and Lampsakos]; but other cities, as
soon as they saw two of them shed the yoke, would defect to the people that
should set them free.

6. Beyond Narrative

T h r o u g h o u t this chapter, the f o c u s has been on s u p e r - p o w e r c o n -

flict, m o s t l y in the f o r m of S e l e u k i d c a m p a i g n s of (re)conquest in
A s i a M i n o r , f r o m 226 d o w n to the d i p l o m a t i c c o n f r o n t a t i o n
b e t w e e n A n t i o c h o s and the R o m a n s in the 190s. T h e narrative has
f o l l o w e d the u n f o l d i n g of a m b i t i o n and violence across the land-
scape of A s i a M i n o r : Philip V t h r e a t e n i n g the coastline w i t h his
lemboi, his b o l d m a r c h e s across the P e r g a m e n e territory; most
m e m o r a b l y , the great c a m p a i g n s of 1 9 7 - 6 , s w e e p i n g f r o m A n t i o c h
to T h r a c e , c o n d u c t e d on sea and on land b y A n t i o c h o s I I I , w i t h an
armada of 300 w a r s h i p s large and small, and a host of subordinate
c o m m a n d e r s (the k i n g ' s sons, his n e p h e w s , Z e u x i s in Sardeis) co-
o r d i n a t i n g an o n s l a u g h t b y land, cities falling under S e l e u k i d
control b y the d o z e n — o m n e s Asiae civitates . . . H i s t o r y as w a r -
driven narrative: w h a t c o u l d be m o r e real, in its i m p a c t on p e o p l e ' s
lives and h e n c e on its claim on the historian's attention, than this
story of Hellenistic B i g W a r , of royal c a m p a i g n s and c o n q u e s t ?
Y e t the r o u n d s of negotiations of 1 9 6 - 1 9 3 s h o w that c o n q u e s t and
e m p i r e , the materials of military narrative, are not natural objects,
b u t c o n s t r u c t i o n s , w i t h their o w n logic and their o w n m e c h a n i c s .
C o n v e n t i o n a l military narrative, w i t h its r e a d y - m a d e f o r m u l a s and
lifeless m e t a p h o r s , is o d d l y p o w e r l e s s to e v o k e the historical
specifics of c o n d u c t and e x p e r i e n c e , e v e n for as a p p a r e n t l y e l e m e n -
tal a p h e n o m e n o n as s u p e r - p o w e r w a r f a r e . T h i s b e c a m e especially
apparent to m e as I w a s w r i t i n g s u c h an account for this chapter,
especially for the Hellenistic age, w h e r e the e v i d e n c e is p o o r and
the situation h i g h l y c o m p l e x , thus o f t e n leaving no alternative b u t
speculation and c o m m o n - s e n s e g u e s s e s to s u p p o r t conventional
narrative, especially if the goal is a reasonably s m o o t h and coherent
a c c o u n t . 1 ' 9 It is s o m e t i m e s hard to escape the feeling that military
narrative history c o m e s d o w n to

might-be maps of might-have-been campaigns

showing in colour the obediences
before and after
(W. H. Auden, 'Makers of History')

S o narrative is not an end, b u t a b e g i n n i n g ; sentences s u c h as

' A n t i o c h u s ' imperialist appetite w a s insatiable' ( G r u e n 1986: 613)
or 'la C a r i a era z o n e d ' i n f l u e n z a rodia' ( M a s t r o c i n q u e 1983: 54) or
'pressure f r o m Philip V , w h a t e v e r the exact terms, m i g h t explain
w h y the S e l e u k i d advance b r o k e off, and w h y A n t i o c h o s ' attention
shifted f r o m A s i a M i n o r to K o i l e - S y r i a ' (§ 3), t h o u g h p r o b a b l y
factual, m e a n little. N a r r a t i v e p r o v i d e s the necessary c o n t e x t for a
series of historical operations, starting w i t h an analytical s t u d y of
the realities of e m p i r e . T h e relentless r e c o u n t i n g of w a r and c o n -
quest, f o l l o w e d by the p r o b l e m a t i z a t i o n of control in the d i p l o m a t i c

179 Lefèvre 1996, in analysing a Delphian (almost certainly Amphiktionic) inscription

mentioning Antiochos I I I , draws attention to the complexity of the period, and the
uncertainty of our knowledge, especially for the complicated ultimate years of the third
century (c.205—200).
sparring between the Seleukids and R o m e raise a series of questions:
'when a conqueror conquers, zuhat does he conquer? W h a t is the
relationship between place and power?' ( N . Purcell, jfRS 80 (1990),
178). M o r e prosaically, what does he create by conquest? H o w is
authority enforced, and control maintained? T o what purposes are
authority and control put? T h e s e questions can only be answered in
a study describing and analysing the structures of state power in the
Seleukid empire, in its force and its limitations, the limitations
w h i c h the R o m a n challenge highlighted ( C h . 3).
T h e R o m a n demands and the Seleukid responses also set forth a
direct illustration of how power and empire are about language as
m u c h as about physical constraint: the discursive position of the
masters, the flow and the f o r m of orders, the modes of address of the
subjects. L a n g u a g e , in its capacity to name and to define, was
as 'real' a constituent of power as the violence w h i c h C h a p t e r 2
narrates or the structures of constraint in C h a p t e r 3; language was
as important a feature of empire as the statuses of liberty or sub-
jection w h i c h have so taxed modern scholarship on the topic of 'city
and ruler'; in fact, these statuses themselves are part of the language
of power, so that language must be counted among the structures of
domination. A n awareness of performative language as part of the
exercise of power informs F. Millar's study of the R o m a n emperor
in his world (Millar 1992: 637); for the Hellenistic period, J. M .
Bertrand has examined similar issues (Bertrand 1990), drawing
explicitly on the methods of discourse analysis. But it is difficult to
'own' a language, especially if it is used in a dialogue: b e y o n d the
language of power, we can also study the language of interaction,
and the effect it had on the relationship between city and ruler. Here
again, the case of A n t i o c h o s I I I and his relations to the cities of Asia
M i n o r is ideal, because of our knowledge of the événementiel context
and of the quantity of epigraphical material, directly recording royal
utterances and civic decrees (see Introduction); this b o d y of dis-
course allows us to study the Seleukid empire as interactions, the
rhetorical strategies of ruler and ruled, and the workings of consent
and collaboration (Ch. 4).
N o n e of this means that the narrative is to be forgotten wholesale,
or merely serves as scene-setting for the analytical exercices of the
next chapters. T h e conclusions proposed in these chapters are,
explicitly or implicitly, shaped by the general picture that emerges
f r o m the military narrative. T h e flux and instability of political
history in the arena of Asia M i n o r invites us to caution about the
durability and extension of control exercised by any one power in
the region. T h a t stability often is the impression e m e r g i n g f r o m the
e v i d e n c e m a y reflect the state p o w e r of the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e and the
latter's c a p a c i t y to integrate local c o m m u n i t i e s w i t h i n its s t r u c t u r e s ;
o r it m i g h t result f r o m the d u r a b i l i t y and a u t o n o m y of a state
a p p a r a t u s , in e x i s t e n c e f r o m the A c h a i m e n i d s o n w a r d s and i n d e -
p e n d e n t of h i g h politics; o r it m i g h t again be an i d e o l o g i c a l e f f e c t of
the s t r u c t u r e s of d o m i n a t i o n — m o r e s i m p l y p u t , a p o m p o u s illusion
f o s t e r e d b y the r u l i n g p o w e r . T h e analysis o f f e r e d in C h a p t e r 3
e n t e r t a i n s all these p o s s i b i l i t i e s , and tries to a p p r o a c h the reality of
e m p i r e f r o m a variety o f p e r s p e c t i v e s : the u n s t a b i l i t y e v i d e n t in the
n a r r a t i v e d o e s not p r e c l u d e a s y n c h r o n i c s t u d y o f e m p i r e , b u t
s h o u l d h e l p u s a v o i d too static a picture. 1 8 0 L i k e w i s e , the p e r v a s i v e
v i o l e n c e of the m i l i t a r y n a r r a t i v e , the v i o l e n c e w h i c h f o r m s the basis
f o r i m p e r i a l a c q u i s i t i o n , is a s i m p l e , b u t n e c e s s a r y c o r r e c t i v e to the
p i c t u r e of e u e r g e t i c a l c o r d i a l i t y in the d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n r u l e r a n d
ruled: it s h o u l d s h a r p e n o u r f e e l i n g f o r the b a l a n c e of p o w e r that
u n d e r l a y the relation b e t w e e n city and ruler. T h e reality or threat
o f v i o l e n c e o n l y m a k e s m o r e r e m a r k a b l e the c o m p l e x and s o p h i s t i -
c a t e d d i s c o u r s e w h i c h the cities u s e d to a d d r e s s their rulers and t r y
to c o n s t r a i n t h e m .
T h e p r e s e n t c h a p t e r , d e v o t e d to m i l i t a r y n a r r a t i v e , started w i t h
the e v o c a t i o n of the m o v e m e n t s o f A n t i o c h o s , w a r r i o r k i n g , across
the l a n d s c a p e ; it e n d s w i t h m o r e abstract c o n s i d e r a t i o n s on insta-
b i l i t y and v i o l e n c e , and the s h a d o w o f v i o l e n c e . T h e n e x t c h a p t e r ,
o n the s t r u c t u r e s of p o w e r , will take the i m p a c t of v i o l e n c e as its
starting p o i n t , to e x p l o r e its c o n c r e t e w o r k i n g s and i m m e d i a t e
e f f e c t s , and the m o r e lasting s t r u c t u r e s w h i c h v i o l e n c e e n a b l e d
a n d s u p p o r t e d ( ' o r g a n i z e d v i o l e n c e ' ) as the basis o f e m p i r e : the
s t r u c t u r e s o f S e l e u k i d state p o w e r .

180 For a methodological defence of the synchronic approach, Ober 1989: 36-8.
 C H A P T E R 3

Empire as Structures

άπαντες γαρ οί την επιτάδε του Ταύρου κατοικοϋντες ουχ ούτως εχάρησαν
Άντιόχου λειφθεντος επί τω δοκεΐν άπολελύσθαι, τίνες μεν φόρων, οί δε φρουράς,
καθόλου δε πάντες βασιλικών προσταγμάτων, ώς επί τω τον άπο των βαρβάρων
αύτοις φόβον άφαιρησθαι και δοκεΐν άπηλλάχθαι της τούτων ύβρεως και παρα-
νομίας.
all the inhabitants of the land on this side of the T a u r u s were not so m u c h
pleased, w h e n Antiochos was defeated, at the prospect of being freed f r o m
tribute for some, garrisoning for others and f r o m royal injunctions for all,
as at the release f r o m the terror the barbarians inflicted on t h e m and at the
thought of being delivered f r o m their violence and their lawlessness.
Pol. 2i .41.2

P o l y b i o s i n v a l u a b l y r e c o r d s t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s ' p o i n t o f v i e w o n
S e l e u k i d r u l e , n o t l o n g a f t e r its d e s t r u c t i o n at t h e b a t t l e o f M a g n e s i a
( w i n t e r 190/189). T h e r i c h n e s s and t h o u g h t f u l n e s s o f the P o l y b i a n
p a s s a g e ( d e s c r i b i n g r e a c t i o n s in the G r e e k c i t i e s a f t e r M a n l i u s
V u l s o ' s G a l a t i a n e x p e d i t i o n o f 189) are a p p a r e n t w h e n c o m p a r e d to
L i v y ' s r e d u c t i v e p a r a p h r a s e ( 3 8 . 3 7 . 2 - 3 : regia servitus). I t s p a r t i c u l a r
v a l u e is t h a t it c o m p l e m e n t s t h e P o l y b i a n d e s c r i p t i o n o f A n t i o c h o s '
i m p e r i a l i s t a m b i t i o n s , f o u n d in t r a n s l a t i o n at L i v . 3 3 . 3 8 (see
I n t r o d u c t i o n ) . T h e l a t t e r g e n e r a t e d c o m m e n t a r y in v a r i o u s f o r m s :
an e x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e f o r m s t a k e n b y S e l e u k i d i m p e r i a l m e m o r y ,
w h e n p r o j e c t e d o n t h e l a n d s c a p e of A s i a M i n o r , a n d a n a r r a t i v e o f
the military action w h i c h actualized S e l e u k i d claims and g e o g r a p h y .
T h e p r e s e n t p a s s a g e , s h o r t t h o u g h it is, p r o m p t s f u r t h e r r e f l e c t i o n ,
b e y o n d m i l i t a r y n a r r a t i v e , o n t h e d o m i n i o n r e c r e a t e d b y the
c a m p a i g n s of A n t i o c h o s I I I , and m o r e generally on the nature of
e m p i r e a n d o n its c h a r a c t e r .
T h e f e a t u r e t h a t first a t t r a c t s a t t e n t i o n is the m a s s i v e v i s i b i l i t y o f
S e l e u k i d p o w e r . M i l i t a r y m e a n s of c o m p u l s i o n (rather than actual
v i o l e n c e ) d i s t r i b u t e d a m o n g t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s a n d l i v i n g at
t h e i r e x p e n s e ; i m m e d i a t e e x t r a c t i o n o f s u r p l u s in t h e f o r m o f
tribute; and, the simplest expression of imperial d o m i n a t i o n , direct
o r d e r s (προστάγματα) telling s u b j e c t s w h a t the state w a n t e d t h e m to
do: the exercise of p o w e r took place w i t h i n a visible f r a m e w o r k of
c o m p u l s i o n , and the figures of S e l e u k i d p o w e r r e m e m b e r e d b y
f o r m e r s u b j e c t s fit theoretical descriptions of the ' e m p i r e of
d o m i n a t i o n ' , w h i c h controlled local c o m m u n i t i e s w i t h o u t dissolv-
ing t h e m w i t h i n the imperial state. 1 A t this level, sophisticated,
recently d e v e l o p e d , a p p r o a c h e s to p o w e r ( p o w e r as 'battlefield',
p o w e r - a s - k n o w l e d g e ) are less u s e f u l than the s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
a n a t o m y of p o w e r - b y - c o n q u e s t or p o w e r - a s - p o s s e s s i o n , precisely
the f o r m s w h i c h m o r e sophisticated m o d e l s find uninteresting. 2 In
this respect, one traditional m e t h o d of s t u d y i n g the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e
has b e e n to catalogue and illustrate f o r m s , the same f o r m s w h i c h
P o l y b i o s singled out in his description: garrisons, tribute, and
finance, or the h i e r a r c h y of g o v e r n o r s that transmitted royal orders.
T h e classic w o r k of this sort of scholarship is B i c k e r m a n ' s
Ifis Mutions des Séleucides ( B i k e r m a n 1938), w h o s e results can be
c o n f i r m e d , m o d i f i e d , or u p d a t e d t h r o u g h the recent epigraphical
discoveries, especially those c o n c e r n i n g A n t i o c h o s I I I , b u t also the
d o c u m e n t s f r o m other Hellenistic states, w h i c h p r o v i d e parallels to
e x p a n d or m o d i f y B i c k e r m a n ' s detailed analyses and general views.
T h i s is one w a y of s t u d y i n g the relationship b e t w e e n e m p i r e and
local c o m m u n i t y : b y p o r t r a y i n g the structures of state p o w e r
t h o u g h w h i c h e m p i r e m a d e itself felt, and w h i c h constituted the
e x p e r i e n c e of the subjects. M u c h of the present chapter will be
d e v o t e d to arranging and d e s c r i b i n g the available material along
these lines.
Y e t this a p p r o a c h , t h o u g h at first sight m u n d a n e , is not p u r e l y
antiquarian, b u t o f f e r s a f r u i t f u l starting point. First, it leads to a
series of d y n a m i c historical questions e x p l o r i n g the processes of
e m p i r e : w h a t w a s i n v o l v e d e x a c t l y , w h a t did the S e l e u k i d state
w a n t , w h a t w a s it capable of? W h a t w a s the e x p e r i e n c e of e m p i r e
like? In the f o l l o w i n g sections, I will try to c o m b i n e both
approaches: the p a n o r a m i c review of e v i d e n c e , and the s u b s e q u e n t
historical questions. T h e e v i d e n c e allows a n u a n c e d , yet fairly
coherent picture for the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e as state; 3 or at least for
various e l e m e n t s of S e l e u k i d state-power: the material o f t e n does
not directly attest, b u t s e e m s to i m p l y a sophisticated and extensive
apparatus. S e c o n d , administrative history s h o u l d be c o m b i n e d w i t h
1 F i n l e y 1983: 45; W e b e r 1968: 946; D o y l e 1986: 19, 21, 30-47 and esp. 4 5 - 6 ; M a n n

1986:533-8.
2 F o u c a u l t 1975: 35; L u k e s 1974.

3 O n s t u d y i n g early empires, M a n n 1986; N i c o l e t 1990: 7 - 8 , for the c o n c e p t of state

elaborated b y students of e a r l y - m o d e r n E u r o p e (when the m o d e r n bureaucratic state

was created) and its applicability to the ancient w o r l d .
an awareness that the capabilities of a state reside not o n l y in its
potential for direct violence, control, and exploitation, b u t also in its
ideological force: for instance, its ability to be accepted as natural,
or perceived as 'sophisticated and e x t e n s i v e ' (to reuse the expression
above); or its resort to a s y s t e m of classification of the landscape into
royal land, and into cities subject, s u b o r d i n a t e , and 'free', categories
created and sustained t h r o u g h the definitions o f f e r e d b y the
imperial state. T h i s awareness of the ideological force w i e l d e d b y
the structures of p o w e r s h o u l d help d e e p e n our interpretation
of these structures, but also m a y c o m p e l us to m o v e to other
a p p r o a c h e s to the s t u d y of p o w e r .

ι. Conquest and Control

Hellenistic kingship w a s essentially c o n c e r n e d w i t h w a r ; w e k n o w

that A n t i o c h o s I I I s o m e t i m e s liked d a n c i n g in a r m s — a n apt
m e t a p h o r for the military narrative of C h a p t e r 2. 4 B u t for A n t i o c h o s
I I I , the only e v e n t s recorded in any detail are the capture of the
K i l i k i a n cities in 197 and A n t i o c h o s ' m o v e m e n t s in the C h e r s o n e s o s
in 196 ( C h . 2 § 4). R o y a l d o c u m e n t s b l u n t l y , but u n i n f o r m a t i v e l y ,
speak of ' r e a c q u i r i n g ' or ' r e c o v e r i n g ' cities; j u s t as n o n d e s c r i p t ,
t h o u g h f o r different reasons, civic decrees (for instance, f r o m T e o s ,
A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a , or Iasos) are evasive about the m o m e n t of
c o n q u e s t . 5 In the p r e c e d i n g narrative, I tried to avoid the usual
m e t a p h o r s of b a t t l e - a n d - c o n q u e s t narrative, since their ( w o u l d - b e )
v i v i d n e s s cannot s u p p l y the specific k n o w l e d g e a b o u t historical
processes; instead, I used the bland expression 'to take o v e r ' f o r
A n t i o c h o s ' c a m p a i g n s , partly inspired by the H e l l e n i s t i c usage
(παραλαμβάνω, παράληφις) and partly because of the lack of specific
evidence.
F o r a concrete idea of the process, w e m u s t turn to p a r a l l e l s —
A n t i o c h o s ' c a m p a i g n s in K o i l e - S y r i a (219 and 218), A t t a l o s ' foray
of 218, or P h i l i p ' s T h r a c i a n c o n q u e s t s of 200, or, b e y o n d the limits
of the late third c e n t u r y , A l e x a n d e r ' s route f r o m G r a n i k o s to Issos;
the m a r c h of L y s i m a c h o s and P r e p e l a o s in 302, f r o m the
H e l l e s p o n t , before the battle of Ipsos; or M i t h r i d a t e s ' irruption into
w e s t e r n A s i a M i n o r in 88. W h a t e m e r g e s is a semi-ritualized g e n r e ,

4 Pol. 1 1 . 3 4 . 1 5 - 1 6 ; Bikerman 1938: 12-14; Austin 1986; S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t

1993: 129. D a n c i n g in arms: Athen. 4.155b.

5 Royal letters: documents 26 A , I 8; 31 Β, II 8-9; T e o s : 17, 1 0 - 1 1 ; Alabanda/

Antiocheia: 16, 19-22; Iasos: 26 Β, I 9 - 1 8 . Further C h . 4 § 3, on the functions of allu-

siveness in civic language.
the p r o g r e s s of the royal c o n q u e r o r city b y city, in the r h y t h m s of
p r e - m e c h a n i z e d warfare: τάς δε πόλεις επητορενόμενος επεφάτο ras μζν
βία, τάς 8ε πειθοΐ προς αύτον επάγεσθαι (Pol. 5-62.5: A n t i o c h o s I I I in
K o i l e - S y r i a ) . W h e n w e say that a Hellenistic k i n g ' c o n q u e r e d ' a
region, w e m e a n this process, in its different m a n i f e s t a t i o n s —
capture b y siege, conditional surrenders, v o l u n t a r y rallying after
'persuasion' or for local reasons, betrayal b y local officers of the rival
p o w e r — a n d in its overall d y n a m i c s as the royal p r o g r e s s gathers
m o m e n t u m , and intimidation p r o v o k e s a d o m i n o effect. 6 T h i s
m o d e l of military activity supplies the context for features b a l d l y
r e c o r d e d in the narrative of A n t i o c h o s ' c a m p a i g n s : the sack of
S a r d e i s and other cities; the s u r r e n d e r of M a d y t o s and the d o m i n o
effect in the C h e r s o n e s o s in 196; the surrender of A m y z o n and other
n e i g h b o u r i n g c o m m u n i t i e s ; the v o l u n t a r y rallying of T e o s in c.203
and A r y k a n d a in 197, the first in the hope of lighter tribute than
u n d e r A t t a l o s I, the second in the e x p e c t a t i o n of debt relief f o r the
city; the s w i f t fall of the K i l i k i a n and L y k i a n coastal places in 197,
p e r h a p s abetted b y the betrayal of P t o l e m a i c officials. 7
W i t h i n this m o d e l , three aspects c o m e across as defining. T h e y
can be e n u m e r a t e d and studied in a c h r o n o l o g i c a l order w h i c h
m i r r o r s the initial stages b y w h i c h an e m p i r e installed itself: first,
the violence w i t h w h i c h c o n q u e s t took place; s e c o n d , the negotiation
of statuses that defined the s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s ' place in the
e m p i r e ; third, the establishment of p e r m a n e n t structures of control:
garrisons and forts.
T h e first aspect, v i o l e n c e , is o b v i o u s e n o u g h : the f o r m a l i z e d ,
repetitive character of the k i n g ' s c o n q u e r i n g p r o g r e s s cannot
o b s c u r e the violence w r o u g h t b y his δυνάμεις, only briefly m e n t i o n e d
in the narrative sources. 8 T h e fate of cities sacked (Sardeis, or the
u n n a m e d city in Sardis 7 . 1 , no. 2) is too o b v i o u s to deserve m u c h
c o m m e n t other than P o l y b i o s ' d e s c r i p t i o n of Sardeis' f a l l — t h e
scenes of carnage and P o l y b i o s ' final g r i m c o m m e n t should be b o r n e
in m i n d , w h e n reading the c o u r t e o u s letters w r i t t e n s u b s e q u e n t l y b y

6 ' C i t y b y city': J. and L . Robert 1954: 84, cf. Bikerman 1938: 133: 'le transfert de la

suprématie s'effectuait ainsi par une suite de conventions tacites ou expresses entre le
vainqueur et les vaincus, conclues au fur et à mesure de la conquête'. Fourth Syrian
War: Pol. 5.58.2-62.6; 5.68.7-71.12; Attalos I: Pol. 5.77.2-9; Philip V: L i v . 31.16.
Alexander: Arr. Anab. 1.17-2.6; Lysimachos: Diod. 20.107, Franco 1993: 47-52;
Mithridates: A p p . Mithr. 20-7.
7 Sack of Sardeis: C h . 2 § 1; other cities: document 36 and the unnamed city in the

Korrhagos inscription ( S E G 2.663, with Rostovtzeff 1941: 635 and 1472 n. 44);
Chersonesos: L i v . 33.38.9-10; surrender of A m y z o n and other communities: document
5, 2; Arykanda: C h . 2 § 4; T e o s : C h . 2 § 2; Kilikia and Lykia: C h . 2 § 4.
8 Pol. 5.77.3, Attalos' campaign of 218 ('for some cities, violence was needed'); A p p .

Syr. I ( τ α άττϊιβονντο. έβιάζετο), 2 (St€t τω τής αλώσεως).

Antiochos and Laodike to t h e Sardians, and crisply copied on
stone.

ή δε λοιπή δνναμις είσπεσοΰσα πανταχόθεν άμα κατειλήφει τήν πάλιν, και το

λοιπόν ήδη, των μεν φονευόντων τους εντυγχάνοντας, των δε τάς οικήσεις
εμπιπρώντοιν, άλλων δε προς τάς άρπαγας και τάς ωφελείας ωρμηκότων, εγίνετο
παντελής ή της πόλεως καταφθορά και διαρπαγή. και Σάρδεων μεν τούτον τον
τρόπον εγενετο κύριος Άντίοχος.
the rest of the army, attacking f r o m all parts simultaneously, had captured
the city. A n d f r o m then on, as some killed those they encountered, some
set the houses on fire, others rushed out to steal and to collect booty, the
destruction and sack of the city was complete. T h u s did Antiochos become
master of Sardeis. (Pol. 7 . 1 8 . 9 - 1 0 )

A m y z o n also s u f f e r e d , a l t h o u g h it w a s n o t s a c k e d o r p u n i s h e d f o r
r e b e l l i o n , b u t ' h a n d e d itself o v e r ' to Z e u x i s . H i s l e n i f y i n g p r o -
n o u n c e m e n t s o n l y highlight the e v i d e n c e for looting and violence:
p r o p e r t y p l u n d e r e d f r o m t h e A m y z o n i a n s a n d s t o r e d in t h e f o r t r e s s
o f A l i n d a ; t h e flight o f t h e c i t i z e n s , in s p i t e o f Z e u x i s ' i n j u n c t i o n s ;
t h e k i d n a p p i n g o f t e m p l e - s l a v e s , r e c o v e r e d o n l y t h r o u g h an
e m b a s s y to A n t i o c h o s h i m s e l f . 9 R o y a l o r d e r s c o n s t r a i n e d t h e a r m y
f r o m h a r m i n g t h e s h r i n e s at A m y z o n a n d L a b r a u n d a , a s o u r c e o f
p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t a b u s e s ; t h e y c a n also b e r e a d as t e s t i m o n y to
the threatening potential of the a r m y , and the effects of military
p r e s e n c e . 1 0 N o r w a s K a r i a u n i q u e : X a n t h o s s u f f e r e d in t h e S e l e u k i d
t a k e o v e r of 1 9 7 , a n d t h e L e t o o n p u t u p i n s c r i b e d r e g u l a t i o n s
e x c l u d i n g a r m e d m e n a r o u n d t h i s t i m e , p e r h a p s in r e a c t i o n to
a b u s e s b y S e l e u k i d s o l d i e r y ( C h . 3 § 4); H e r a k l e i a w o u l d c o m p l a i n
of material losses i n c u r r e d d u r i n g 'the w a r s ' , c o n q u e s t b y Philip V ,
t h e n A n t i o c h o s I I I . 1 1 A t e l l i n g detail is t h e s e r i e s o f m e a s u r e s in
f a v o u r o f cities ( s u c h as S a r d e i s ) i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r t a k e o v e r : g i f t s o f
m a t e r i a l s f o r r e b u i l d i n g o r t e m p o r a r y t a x r e l i e f (a s i m i l a r c a s e is t h e
s e r i e s of m e a s u r e s g r a n t e d to J e r u s a l e m in 200). 1 2
V i o l e n c e a n d s p o l i a t i o n w e r e n o t an a c c i d e n t a l b y - p r o d u c t o f w a r -
f a r e , b u t i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h its p u r p o s e . H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e s
w e r e g e a r e d t o w a r d s v i o l e n t a c q u i s i t i o n of p r o p e r t y ( A u s t i n 1986);

5 J. and L . Robert 1983: 136-7 ('l'armée séleucide est là'); S h e r w i n - W h i t e and

K u h r t 1993: 201-2; already Schmitt 1964: 246, postulating from the very need for
'beruhigende Briefe' that A m y z o n had suffered in the Seleukid conquest. Loot in
Alinda: document 10, 13; citizens fleeing to the autonomous cities: ibid. 1 5 - 1 7 ; sacred
slaves carried off: document 14, 4 - 7 .
10 Letters to army: documents 6, 15.

" Xanthos: L e Roy 1986. Herakleia: document 31 Β, II 12-14.

12 Sardeis: documents 1, 3; unnamed city: 36, 12—21; Jerusalem: Jos. AJ 12.138-44,
esp. 139 (destruction of city), 141 (reconstruction), 143-4 ( t a x exemptions, freeing of
Jews carried off as slaves).
t h e A m y z o n i a n s ' g o o d s a n d s l a v e s w e r e s e i z e d a n d s t o r e d in a r o y a l
f o r t r e s s o p e n l y , u n d e r the a u t h o r i t y of t h e r o y a l state. T h e c r u d e s t
f o r m w a s the application of violence and the l e v y i n g of a fee or
r a n s o m , f r o m the local c o m m u n i t i e s — a r e c u r r e n t t h e m e o f
A n t i o c h o s ' e x p e d i t i o n to t h e U p p e r S a t r a p i e s , a n d also o f C n .
M a n l i u s V u l s o ' s d e a l i n g s w i t h the A n a t o l i a n p o p u l a t i o n s h e
e n c o u n t e r e d in his G a l a t i a n c a m p a i g n . 1 3 T h e p r i n c i p l e n o t o n l y
a f f e c t e d m o v a b l e g o o d s , b u t e x t e n d e d to l a n d e d p r o p e r t y . A n t i o c h o s
I I c o n f i s c a t e d t h e S a m i a n A n a i a , a n d s o m e of h i s F r i e n d s t o o k
o v e r S a m i a n e s t a t e s , w h e n S a m o s fell u n d e r S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l d u r i n g
t h e S e c o n d S y r i a n W a r ( C h . ι § 2); a n x i o u s to a v o i d a s i m i l a r
o c c u r r e n c e , t h e H e r a k l e i a n s p e t i t i o n e d Z e u x i s , c. 1 9 7 , f o r r e t e n t i o n
o f τα e'yyaia, t h u s p r e - e m p t i n g a n y p o s s i b l e c o n f i s c a t i o n o f p r o p e r t y
b y the S e l e u k i d state. T h e u n n a m e d c i t y in t h e K o r r h a g o s i n s c r i p -
t i o n , l e s s f o r t u n a t e , p r o b a b l y lost s a c r e d e s t a t e s w h e n c a p t u r e d b y
Antiochos III.14
F u r t h e r m o r e , violence, destruction, and depredation played their
p a r t in t h e t e c h n i q u e s o f p o w e r u s e d b y the S e l e u k i d s , c r e a t i n g t h e
a t m o s p h e r e o f t e r r o r , φόβος, i n s t r u m e n t a l in t h e c o n q u e r i n g r o y a l
p r o g r e s s a n d e s s e n t i a l to t h e i m a g e o f r o y a l m i g h t . O u t o f d e s i r e to
b e t a k e n s e r i o u s l y as a k i n g , A n t i o c h o s X I I n e g l e c t e d t h e g o v e r n o r
o f D a m a s c u s w h o h a d s u r r e n d e r e d t h e c i t a d e l to h i m , b e c a u s e ' h e
w a n t e d to s e e m to h a v e t a k e n o v e r the c i t y t h r o u g h t h e f e a r h e
i n s p i r e d ' (τω παρ' αυτού φόβω βουληθείς δοκεΐν παραλαβεΐν τήν πάλιν:
J o s . AJ 13. 388). T h e t e r r o r i n s p i r e d b y r o y a l v i o l e n c e f o r m s t h e
b a c k d r o p for the discursive interaction b e t w e e n ruler and subject
(see C h . 4); it i n f o r m s a n d p r o b l e m a t i z e s t h e r o y a l c l a i m to b e n e v o -
l e n c e a n d p r o t e c t i o n (see b e l o w ) ; it e x p l a i n s t h e T e i a n s ' p r a i s i n g
A n t i o c h o s f o r ' p r e s e r v i n g h i s t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s ' , w h e n he s t a y e d in
the city w i t h court and troops. O n e need not believe that the
H e l l e n i s t i c polis w a s p o w e r l e s s a n d a b j e c t b e f o r e t h e k i n g s to u n d e r -
s t a n d t h a t t h e r e a l i t y a n d t h e t h r e a t of h a r m w e i g h e d h e a v i l y in t h e
relation b e t w e e n king and city.15
T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t transaction that f o l l o w e d the takeover by the
S e l e u k i d s w a s t h e r e g u l a t i o n of l o c a l s t a t u s e s . T h e p r a c t i c e w a s
defined b y B i c k e r m a n : c o n q u e s t entailed the m o m e n t a r y loss of the
v a n q u i s h e d p a r t y ' s p o l i t i c a l e x i s t e n c e , to b e r e c r e a t e d b y an u n i -
lateral p r o n o u n c e m e n t (a p e r f o r m a t i v e s p e e c h - a c t par excellence)
13 Antiochos in the east: Pol. 8.23.5, Ι Ι · 3 4 · Ι ° , Ι Ι · 3 4 · Ι 2 , 13.9.5. Manlius Vulso: Liv.

38.13.13; 38.14 (from Pol. 21.34); 38.15.6; 3 8 . 1 5 . 1 0 - 1 1 (the last two from Pol. 21.35-6).
14 Anaia: SEG 1.366, lines 5-20; Herakleia: document 31 Β, II 16; Korrhagos inscrip-
tion: SEG 2.663, lines 10—11.
15 Fear: e.g. Liv. 33.38.9 (Antiochos III in 196 bc); Pol. 5.55.10 (Antiochos III

intimidates Artabarzanes); Pol. 5.77.2, 5.77.4, 5.77.8 (Achaios, Attalos I).

of the c o n q u e r o r , on t e r m s of his c h o o s i n g and subject to his
g o o d w i l l . 1 6 B i c k e r m a n ' s 'surrender and g r a n t ' m o d e l f o r the legal
structure constituted b y c o n q u e s t is s u p p o r t e d b y literary e v i d e n c e
for the 'droit de la victoire' in the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I , s u c h as a
definition of the relations cum hello victis dicerentur leges ( L i v .
34.57.7) or A n t i o c h o s ' desire to ensure that S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s
e n j o y e d liberty as a royal grant ( L i v . 3 3 . 3 8 . 6 - 7 ) , a principle he p r o -
c l a i m e d at L y s i m a c h e i a before the R o m a n e n v o y s (Pol. 18.51.9).
B i c k e r m a n ' s m o d e l also describes accurately the early, but arche-
typal case of A l e x a n d e r ' s treatment of the G r e e k cities in A s i a
M i n o r : statuses resulted f r o m the c o n q u e r i n g k i n g ' s p r o n o u n c e -
m e n t , and their c o n t i n u a n c e d e p e n d e d on his g o o d w i l l . 1 7 C o n q u e s t
f u r t h e r entailed the legal forfeiting of p r o p e r t y r i g h t s — t h e v i c t o r ' s
g r a c i o u s p r o n o u n c e m e n t recreated the rights of the c o n q u e r e d to
e n j o y their b e l o n g i n g s as well as their political existence (e.g. D i o d .
18.18.4: after the L a m i a n W a r , A n t i p a t r o s allowed the A t h e n i a n s
εχειν τήν τ€ πόλιν και τάς κτήσεις και τ άλλα).
B i c k e r m a n ' s unilateral grants are p r e s e r v e d in the d o c u m e n t a r y
material: the earliest s u r v i v i n g evidence is the ' A l e x a n d e r edict'
(Inschr. Priene 1, same d o c u m e n t OGIS 1, GUI 185), establishing
statuses and royal o w n e r s h i p of land in the region of Priene. T h e
best e v i d e n c e c o n c e r n s A n t i o c h o s I I I . A letter f r o m A n t i o c h o s to
the g o v e r n o r of S y r i a and P h o e n i c i a defined the privileges of
J e r u s a l e m , and allowed the Jews to live in accordance to their ances-
tral laws (Jos. AJ 1 2 . 1 4 2 , w i t h B i c k e r m a n 1980: 44-85). In A s i a
M i n o r , a series of d o c u m e n t s , less c o m p l e t e than the letter c o n c e r n -
ing J e r u s a l e m , illustrate the process. In T e o s , A n t i o c h o s entered the
city, then m a d e a speech b e f o r e the assembled p e o p l e defining
the city's p r i v i l e g e s (he 'set free the city and the territory holy and
inviolate and e x e m p t f r o m tribute'); the a r r a n g e m e n t s w e r e c o n -
firmed in a later interview f o l l o w e d b y a royal letter. Iasos w a s 're-
a c q u i r e d ' by the king, w h o then restored its f r e e d o m and its laws to
the city, as a g r a c i o u s act. 1 8 A similar s e q u e n c e of e v e n t s p e r h a p s
took place at A l a b a n d a and X a n t h o s , w h e r e w e n o w only have a
record of the p r o c l a m a t i o n or a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t of these cities'
16 Bickermann 1932: 56-61; Bikerman 1938: 133-41; Bikerman 1939: 344-5; also, in

his classic treatment of the letter by Antiochos III concerning Jerusalem, Bickerman
1980: 67-72.
17 Earlier examples of victor's rights: Xen. Cyr. 2.3.2. Alexander and the Greek cities

of Asia Minor: Bikerman 1934; Bosworth 1988: 250-8 on Priene (Inschr. Priene 1) or
Aspendos (Arr. Anab. 1.17.26-27). T h e criticism levelled against Bickerman by T a r n
1948: 199-227 (accepted by Badian 1966a: 62 n. 10) does not address Bickerman's
'surrender and grant' model of interaction between city and conqueror.
13 T e o s : document 17, 17-20, 47-8; 29-36 for confirmation of grant. Iasos: 26 A , I

8-9.
asylia.19 In A m y z o n and K i l d a r a , Z e u x i s w r o t e to the city, p r o m i s -
ing to maintain p r e v i o u s arrangements. H i s short initial letter to the
A m y z o n i a n s was f o l l o w e d b y a m o r e detailed letter, and p r o b a b l y a
letter f r o m the king, regulating local privileges, s u c h as the asylia of
the A r t e m i s i o n , w h i c h was 'given back as asylos' b y A n t i o c h o s I I I
and his son. 20 W h e n Herakleia w a s taken b y Z e u x i s , the citizens
o b t a i n e d a few concessions on the spot, s u c h as e x e m p t i o n f r o m
billeting; later, the citizens negotiated f u r t h e r privileges. L i k e w i s e ,
the u n n a m e d city w h i c h appears in Sardis, no. 2, t h o u g h sacked and
b u r n e d b y A n t i o c h o s ' a r m y , later received various grants f r o m his
commanders.21
T h e royal grant f o r m a l i z e d force into a relation of legal authority,
an i m p o r t a n t ideological tool of d o m i n a t i o n (see § 3). It also deter-
m i n e d the f o r m s of S e l e u k i d presence, such as those d e s c r i b e d in
the passage of P o l y b i o s c o m m e n t e d a b o v e (21.41.2). 2 2 A p a r t f r o m
privileges ( e x e m p t i o n f r o m tribute or f r o m garrisoning) the ruler's
p e r f o r m a t i v e s p e e c h - a c t w o u l d decide on the degree of s u b o r d i n a -
tion, f r o m 'free' to subject (§ 3). Iasos, A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a , and
e v e n the u n n a m e d city in Sardis, no. 2, seem to have b e e n declared
free; the city in the K o r r h a g o s inscription ( S E G 2.663) p r o b a b l y
lost its a u t o n o m y as p u n i s h m e n t for resistance; A m y z o n r e m a i n e d
' s u b j e c t ' . T h e stakes explain w h y the H e r a k l e i a n s sent no less than
t w e n t y - t w o a m b a s s a d o r s to Z e u x i s , each d e f e n d i n g a particular
dossier c o n c e r n i n g the c i t y ' s privileges. T h e letter of A n t i o c h o s I I I
c o n c e r n i n g Jerusalem appears a unitary p r o d u c t of the royal w i l l ; a
chance reference reveals that the settlement w a s in fact negotiated
b y a Jewish e n v o y (2 M a c c . 4: 11). It is likely that the royal p r o -
n o u n c e m e n t s c o n c e r n i n g m a n y other c o m m u n i t i e s w e r e the o b j e c t
of negotiations to preserve or extend local privileges.

In addition to the p r o n o u n c e m e n t on statuses, the a f t e r m a t h of c o n -

quest w a s defined b y the stationing of d e t a c h m e n t s and garrisons.
A p p i a n (Syr. 2) describes G r e e k cities receiving A n t i o c h o s '

19 Alabanda/Antiocheia: document 16; Xanthos: 22.

20 A m y z o n : document 5. Kildara: 25. Zeuxis' subsequent letter to A m y z o n : 8 A ;
possible letter from Antiochos I I I : Robert 1983: no. 13. Asylia of the Artemision: 8.
21 Herakleia: document 31. T h e fact that the city had obtained a grant of anepistath-
meia before a second round of negotiations with Zeuxis is shown by the phrasing όπως
ύπάρχτι και μΐτα ταΰτα η re άνεττιοταθμεία (Β II 1 5 — t h e rest of the sentence seems to imply
that the city was initially also granted authority over its τέλη, later lost in the detailed
negotiations with Zeuxis, since Zeuxis' letter attests royal authority over Herakleia's
harbour tax). U n n a m e d city in Sardis, no. 2: document 36.
22 T h e early Seleukid document published by Malay 1983, stipulating taxes to be

exacted b y someone (a royal official?) and obligations (corvée labour) might represent the
details of a royal settlement (for a city or in the royal land?).
garrisons, a r o u n d 196, out of f e a r — t h e same garrisons w h i c h w o u l d
be r e m e m b e r e d as a h a r d s h i p of S e l e u k i d rule in w i n t e r 189/8 (Pol.
2 1 . 4 1 . 2 and above); the treaty of A p a m e i a m e n t i o n e d castella as a
feature of S e l e u k i d Asia M i n o r ( L i v . 38.38.4). T h e Hellenistic
w o r l d presents m a n y parallels: the P t o l e m a i c overseas e m p i r e , the
M a c e d o n i a n control of G r e e c e (and the ' F e t t e r s ' ) or S e l e u k i d
Judaea after 168, ringed w i t h fortresses and d o m i n a t e d b y the
garrison of a p u r p o s e - b u i l t fort in Jerusalem; 2 3 these present an
image of control t h r o u g h disseminated military resources. In K o i l e -
S y r i a , A n t i o c h o s I I I instructed that the privileges of P t o l e m a i o s '
estates ( C h . 2 § 3) should be e n f o r c e d b y 'the p h r o u r a r c h s and the
local governors', 2 4 a s s u m i n g the presence of g a r r i s o n e d forts in the
c o u n t r y s i d e . F o r S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r , the e v i d e n c e , t h o u g h i n c o m -
plete, is at least sufficient to give an outline of the military presence,
and s o m e t i m e s to p i n p o i n t it w i t h some specificity. B e y o n d the
m a p p i n g out of the militarized landscape, at issue are the w o r k i n g s
of c o m p u l s i o n and the landscape of control, b e y o n d general state-
m e n t s on 'chains of fortresses'. 2 5
T h r e e places are p r o m i n e n t in A n t i o c h o s ' c a m p a i g n s : Sardeis,
E p h e s o s , and L y s i m a c h e i a : ( r e ) c o n q u e r e d in 214, 197, and 196
r e s p e c t i v e l y , they f u n c t i o n e d as military bases, logistical depots, and
arsenals, c o m p a r a b l e to the P t o l e m a i c naval base at Samos. 2 6
M i l i t a r y presence took the f o r m of garrisons in the citadel of S a r d e i s
and E p h e s o s u n d e r specially a p p o i n t e d officers; at Sardeis, soldiers
w e r e also billeted in the t o w n (at least in 213). 2 ' A t E p h e s o s , the
garrison no d o u b t m a n n e d the f o r m i d a b l e fortifications of the city;
p e r h a p s f u r t h e r d e t a c h m e n t s w e r e stationed on the coast, near
P h y g e l a , w h e r e a fort w a s o c c u p i e d u n d e r the early S e l e u k i d s

23 Ptolemaic parallel: Bagnall 1976: 220-4, (now add J.and L . Robert 1983: 124 no. 4

and 124-7 for phrourarchs near A m y z o n and in Xanthos). Macedonian practice: Billows
1990, index s.v. 'garrisons, Antigonos opposes use in Greece' for Kassandros; L a u n e y
1987: 634 n. 2 for some examples; Pol. 18.11.5, 18.45.6 for the 'Fetters of Greece'.
Judaea: ι M a c c . 1: 33-5, 2: 3 1 - 7 , 4: 41 (Akra), ι Macc. 9: 50-3, 12: 45, 13: 33 (fortress-
es around Jerusalem). Briant 1982: 20-1, on fortresses in the hinterland of Kappadokia
under Eumenes of Kardia in 322.
24 SEG 29.1613, line 16 (the actual provision is lost; this does not m o d i f y the impli-
cations).
25 B a r - K o c h v a 1976: 26 (and n. 35), 36 (though the only forts he mentions are

Perge, Korakesion—because the usurper T r y p h o n used it as a base?—and Palai-

Magnesia).
26 Pol. 18.40a: Ephesos coveted in 197 b y Antiochos I I I as base for further operations.

A p p . Syr. 28-9, Liv. 37.31.1: Lysimacheia arsenal and stores. Samos: C h . 1 § 3.

27 Sardeis: Pol. 21.16.1, Liv. 37.44.7; the city and its citadel were already each under

their separate official under Alexander (Arr. Anab. 1.17.7-8). Ephesos: L i v . 37.13.9
(Diod. 20.111.3 for garrison in the acropolis in 302). Soldiers billeted at Sardeis: docu-
ment 3, 7-8.
( s i m i l a r l y , A n t i o c h o s II h a d l e f t a g a r r i s o n in the coastal r e g i o n
o p p o s i t e S a m o s , the A n a i t i s ) . 2 8
A n t i o c h o s I I I also s e c u r e d i m p o r t a n t c o a s t l i n e s : in T h r a c e ,
g a r r i s o n s a p p e a r at A i n o s a n d M a r o n e i a ; in L y k i a , at P a t a r a a n d
p e r h a p s at T e l m e s s o s o r K a l y n d a , since S e l e u k i d t r o o p s b e s i e g e d
the n e a r b y R h o d i a n t o w n of D a i d a l a in 190; A n t i o c h o s ma)' also
h a v e c o n t i n u e d the P t o l e m a i c p r a c t i c e o f g a r r i s o n i n g 'the f o r t s ' o n
the t e r r i t o r y o f X a n t h o s . L i k e w i s e , it is p r o b a b l e that A n t i o c h o s I I I
l e f t g a r r i s o n s in the K i l i k i a n coastal p l a c e s he t o o k , f o r i n s t a n c e at
S o l o i (a S e l e u k i d s t r o n g h o l d in 246) a n d K o r a k e s i o n , c a p t u r e d f r o m
a P t o l e m a i c g a r r i s o n in 197. 2 9 In a d d i t i o n , m i l i t a r y m e a n s w e r e
distributed along important routes. A l i n d a had a g o v e r n o r and
p r o b a b l y a g a r r i s o n ; it c o n t r o l l e d the r o u t e o f f the M a r s y a s v a l l e y ,
f r o m A l a b a n d a to M y l a s a . 3 0 A l i k e l y m i l i t a r y d i s t r i c t (φυλακή) at
E r i z a s t r a d d l e d the road f r o m P a m p h y l i a to L a o d i k e i a (an i m p o r t a n t
h i g h w a y d o w n the ages). 3 1 I n the s a m e r e g i o n , a c a v a l r y d e t a c h m e n t
o c c u p i e d A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e , o n the r o u t e w h i c h b r a n c h e d off
the M a e a n d e r p l a i n into the M o r s y n o s v a l l e y a n d the G e y r e p l a i n
(the f u t u r e site o f A p h r o d i s i a s ) , c r o s s i n g the T a b a i p l a t e a u to j o i n
the L a o d i k e i a - P e r g e r o u t e in the A c i p a y a m p l a i n . T h i s s h o r t c u t
f r o m the M a e a n d e r v a l l e y to the P e r g e r o a d ( b y p a s s i n g L a o d i k e i a )
w a s t a k e n b y M a n l i u s V u l s o , T r a j a n , a n d C a r a c a l l a , t e s t i m o n y to its
i m p o r t a n c e a n d c o n v e n i e n c e . 3 2 I n L y d i a , the o f f i c e r A r k e s i l a o s ,
w h o s e d e d i c a t i o n w a s f o u n d in G ö r d e s ( C h . 2, i n t r o d . ) , m a y h a v e
c o m m a n d e d a d e t a c h m e n t l e f t to c o n t r o l the P h r y g i o s v a l l e y , o n a

28 Phygela: I. Ephesos 1408, with Mastrocinque 1979: 53-4· Anaitis: SEG 1.366, lines
16-17.
2' Ainos, Maroneia: Liv. 37.60.7. Patara: L i v . 37.16.7. Daidala besieged: L i v . 37.22.3.
Ptolemaic garrisoning of 'the forts in Xanthos': SEG 33.1183 with J. and L . Robert
1983: 126. Soloi: FGrHist 160, Col. II. Korakesion: C h . 2 § 4 on Liv. 33.20.5.
30 Alinda governor: document 9; road from Alabanda to Mylasa: Strabo 14.2.23. T h e

governor and troops presumably resided in the 'second acropolis', an enclosure distinct
from the acropolis itself: Bean 1971: 196-7.
31 Perge: Pol. 2 1 . 4 1 . 1 - 5 ( L i v . 38.37.9-11). Eriza: OGIS 238 is a dedication by
φυλακΐται, perhaps the garrison of a φυλακή like that attested at Kermanshah, a similarly
strategic location (Robert 1967). OGIS 238 is probably not Attalid, as argued by
Ramsay 1895: 256-9, since the region was not 'assigned by the Romans to Eumenes' (it
went to the Rhodians). A garrison in Perge (Pol. 2 1 . 4 1 . 1 - 5 , cf. Liv. 38.37.9-11) might
have controlled the city permanently, or represent a temporary measure during the
R o m a n - S e l e u k i d War. Perge-Laodikeia road: Ramsay 1895: 255; J. and L. Robert
1954: 27, 29 n. 3, 81 (route of the Ottoman couriers from Antalya to Smyrna; earlier,
taken by Louis V I I and Ibn Battuta) and also OMS 5. 7 3 3 - 4 on the 'plaine de Karayük',
or Acipayam plain; de Planhol 1958: 25, on the 'Korkuteli road' from Pamphylia to
Denizli.
32 Apollonia: hipparch in document 44. Route: Liv. 3 8 . 1 3 . 1 1 - 1 4 . 1 (Manlius Vulso);

J. and L. Robert 1954: 33, 38-9; 150-1 and 223-4 (Trajan), 274-5 (Caracalla); 39:
'chemin commode'. In addition to the cavalry detachment at Apollonia, J. and L .
Robert 1954: 289-90, suggest a Seleukid garrison at T a b a i .
route f r o m Sardeis to M y s i a ; this route w o u l d have been important
w h e n A t t a l o s I controlled T h y a t e i r a ( 2 1 6 - 1 9 7 p ) . 3 3 F u r t h e r n o r t h ,
the fort of D i d y m a T e i c h e , lost b y A c h a i o s to A t t a l o s I in 2 1 8 (Pol.
5.77.8), o c c u p i e d a strategic position on the G r a n i k o s . T h e route
f r o m the M a e a n d e r valley to the K i l i k i a n G a t e s m u s t h a v e been
controlled b y garrisons and military posts—castella ad Maeandrum
amnem ( L i v . 37.56.3). A n o t h e r likely area of control is the road f r o m
S a r d e i s to E p h e s o s , along the H e r m o s v a l l e y , then t u r n i n g south
(just before S m y r n a ) t h r o u g h the K a r a b e l pass (Pritchett 1982:
272). T h e S e l e u k i d c o n c e r n for controlling the axes of c o m m u n i c a -
tion 3 4 can be traced earlier: O l y m p i c h o s , p r e s u m a b l y starting w h e n
still a S e l e u k i d g o v e r n o r , held the fort at Petra, near L a b r a u n d a ,
controlling the pass on the road b e t w e e n M y l a s a and A l i n d a
( C r a m p a 1969: no. 4). T h a t O l y m p i c h o s held on to this fort after
S e l e u k i d control w a s s u c c e e d e d b y the A n t i g o n i d (and after he had
b e c o m e a de facto s e m i - i n d e p e n d e n t local dynast) s h o w s that control
of routes is hardly a specifically S e l e u k i d practice. It can be paral-
leled in the P t o l e m a i c fort at M e y d a n c i k K a l e , on a road f r o m the
K i l i k i a n coast to the K a l y k a d n o s valley ( C h . 1 § 3); it also recalls the
p o l i c i n g of A n a t o l i a n routes in R o m a n imperial times ( M i t c h e l l
1993: 1 2 1 - 4 ) , or O t t o m a n zeybek in the M a e a n d e r valley ( H a m i l t o n
1842: i. 527).
A n t i o c h o s ' o r d e r , q u o t e d a b o v e , to p h r o u r a r c h s in K o i l e - S y r i a ,
implies military presence distributed t h r o u g h the land, a practice
w h i c h can be paralleled in other periods. 3 5 T h e fortresses of M y s i a ,
w h i c h w o u l d figure in the R o m a n w a r against A r i s t o n i k o s / E u m e n e s
I I I , m a y h a v e been garrisoned u n d e r the S e l e u k i d s already. 3 6 T h e
control of the p r o d u c t i v e c o u n t r y s i d e w a s p e r h a p s partly ensured b y
the 'strategic' garrisons: the cavalry at A p o l l o n i a controlled a route,
b u t also a p r o d u c t i v e niche, the T a b a i plateau w e a l t h y in grain and
t i m b e r ; the same applies for the M a e a n d e r valley, i m p o r t a n t as a
route and f o r its agricultural wealth. 3 7 S e l e u k i d garrisons c o u l d
33 Dedication of Arkesilaos: document 39. T h e Attalids also kept troops at this site:
ΤΑΜ 5-1 690 (dedication to Zeus Porottenos by Attalid officer for the safety of Eumenes
II).
34 Debord 1985: 347-8 (north-east Lydia, but applicable generally).
35 Achaimenid Asia Minor: Briant 1982: 20-1, 38 ('quadrillage militaire très serré');
T u p l i n 1987: 209-17, esp. 213 on X e n . Anab. 7.8.8-15. Kappadokia under Eumenes of
Kardia: Briant 1982: 20-1. T h e Phrygian countryside under Antigonos: Billows 1990:
206, 207, 261, 280-1. Karia under Philip V: L i v . 33.18.6 (castella and garrisons). A
garrison in M t . Latmos suggests Ptolemaic control of the countryside through military
posts: J. and L . Robert 1983: no. 4.
36 Mysian forts: J. and L . Robert 1989: 32-3; however, these might be fortified

villages, or an Attalid development.

37 T a b a i plateau: J. and L . Robert 1954: 22-40. In the 19th and 20th cents., the T a b a i

plateau has played an important economic role by processing the raw wool from the low-
reside in s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s : K a r s e a i , in N o r t h e r n M y s i a , received
a garrison u n d e r A c h a i o s (Pol 5 . 7 7 . 7 - 8 ) , j u s t as in J e r u s a l e m a garri-
son o c c u p i e d the citadel (2 M a c c . 4: 28 w i t h S c h ü r e r 1973: 154 η.
39). S o m e of these forces w e r e p e r m a n e n t ' g a r r i s o n - c o m m u n i t i e s ' ,
military settlers: A n t i o c h o s I I I settled 2000 J e w i s h families in
P h r y g i a and L y d i a , specifically as a pacification measure after
A c h a i o s ' revolt (if the letter in J o s e p h u s is authentic: A p p e n d i x 3);
earlier, u n d e r S e l e u k o s I I , the m e m b e r s of a garrison o c c u p y i n g a
fort near M a g n e s i a u n d e r S i p y l o s also held κλήροι in the n e a r b y
c o u n t r y s i d e . T h e K a r d a k e s settled on the territory of T e l m e s s o s
m a y have p e r f o r m e d similar duties. 3 8 F i n a l l y , a feature w h i c h made
the S e l e u k i d presence visible in the c o u n t r y s i d e was the scatter of
M a c e d o n i a n settlements, for m a n p o w e r rather than active d e f e n c e
and control. 3 9
Political vicissitudes i n f l u e n c e d the landscape of control, as
illustrated b y the implantation of J e w i s h military settlers in P h r y g i a
and L y d i a (above). T h e i m m e d i a t e a f t e r m a t h of c o n q u e s t p r o b a b l y
b r o u g h t g a r r i s o n i n g and the stationing of troops (as h a p p e n e d in the
F o u r t h S y r i a n W a r : Pol. 5 . 6 1 . 2 ; 5.70.6; 5 . 7 0 . 1 2 ; 5 . 7 1 . 1 1 ) . Phokaia
and Iasos w e r e o c c u p i e d b y φνλακαί, special d e t a c h m e n t s sent in
response to the i m m e d i a t e crisis of the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r ( L i v .
3 7 . 1 2 . 5 ; 3 7 . 1 7 . 3 ) : c o u l d the garrison at Patara or A b y d o s (see
above), o n l y attested in the u n t y p i c a l year 190, fall in this category?
B i c k e r m a n and R o b e r t insist on the distinction b e t w e e n a p e r m a -
nent garrison controlling a city (φρουρά) and a t e m p o r a r y detach-
m e n t on active service in w a r t i m e (φυλακή); b u t the e v i d e n c e is
rarely detailed e n o u g h to describe the d i s t r i b u t i o n of military m e a n s

lands into cloth (J. and L. Robert 1954: 52): it might have done so in the Hellenistic
period, giving another reason for the Seleukids empire to control, or at least tax, the
working and movement of textiles. Maeander valley: Robert 1937: 415—17.
18 Magnesia: OGIS 229, 89-108, esp. 100-3; though T u p l i n 1987: 227, notes that the
actual defence of the fort seems to be (totally?) in the hands of a Seleukid detachment
on active duty. Kardakes: C h . 2 § 4. B a r - K o c h v a 1976: 216 n. 27, argues that these
are not military settlers because Eumenes II, in his letter of 181 concerning 'those who
live in the village of the Kardakes', mentions no military duties but only other obliga-
tions (such as poll-tax); but the original settlement may have changed in character by
181, under a different dynasty, a possibility which B a r - K o c h v a does not manage to
argue away.
39 List in Bikerman 1938: 80 n. 2, though it is difficult to tell if these establishments

are Seleukid or Attalid (Debord 1985: 348); B a r - K o c h v a 1976: 21-48 on the military
colonies (though his thesis that every instance of κατοικία, even in Roman inscriptions,
indicates a Seleukid settlement, is dispelled by G . M . Cohen, Ane. Soc. 22 (1991),
41—50). I cannot see how military settlements 'acted as a barrier between the Greek
cities and Galatian incursions' or 'served to curb [Pergamon's] influence' ( B a r - K o c h v a
1976: 26); see rather J. and L. Robert 1948: 20 n. 5 on the 'caractère essentiellement
rural, et non stratégique', of such settlements.
in t i m e a n d s p a c e . 4 0 T h e k i n g ' s c a m p a i g n s also i n f l u e n c e d t h e s i z e o f
m i l i t a r y r e s o u r c e s in a r e g i o n b y h i s p r e s e n c e w i t h t h e r o y a l s t a n d -
i n g a r m y , at least p a r t l y d i s t r i b u t e d in t h e c o u n t r y s i d e o n g a r r i s o n
d u t y or w h i l e i n a c t i v e : u n d e r S e l e u k o s I I , a c o r p s ' f r o m the
p h a l a n x ' , t h e S e l e u k i d i n f a n t r y m a i n s t a y , w a s d e t a c h e d to t h e f o r t o f
P a l a i - M a g n e s i a ; t h e c i t y itself r e c e i v e d b i l l e t e d s o l d i e r s a n d s o l d i e r s
'under the s k y ' — a S e l e u k i d camp.41
F i n a l l y , w e k n o w n o t h i n g c o n c e r n i n g the s i z e o r n a t u r e — l o c a l
l e v i e s , r o y a l d e t a c h m e n t s , m e r c e n a r i e s ? — o f t h e t r o o p s at t h e d i s -
p o s a l o f t h e S e l e u k i d ' p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n o r s ' , w h o s e title, στρατηγοί,
implies military duties. 4 2 Since garrisons were directly responsible,
u n d e r o a t h , to t h e k i n g (as u n d e r t h e A c h a i m e n i d s a n d A l e x a n d e r ) , 4 3
g o v e r n o r s and garrison c o m m a n d e r s m a y have checked each others'
p o w e r ( n e x t s e c t i o n ) . T h e g o v e r n o r s o f local c o m m u n i t i e s , s u c h as
t h e επιστάτης o f t h e A r t e m i s i o n at A m y z o n , m a y h a v e h a d t r o o p s
at t h e i r d i s p o s a l ( w e k n o w Z e u x i s d i s p a t c h e d s o l d i e r s to A m y z o n ,
p e r h a p s in 202 o r 2 0 1 , t h o u g h u n d e r t h e i r o w n o f f i c e r ) , o r r e l i e d o n
f o r c e s in f o r t s n e a r b y . 4 4
T h o u g h t h e i n c o m p l e t e e v i d e n c e m a k e s it d i f f i c u l t to e v a l u a t e t h e
d e n s i t y o f c o n t r o l , it d o e s s u g g e s t t h a t p e r m a n e n t g a r r i s o n i n g d i d
n o t o f t e n a f f e c t t h e c i t i e s o f t h e w e s t e r n c o a s t . T h e r e is no t r a c e o f
g a r r i s o n s in t h e c i t i e s in t h e T r o a d a p a r t f r o m A b y d o s . T h e A i o l i a n
c i t i e s s e e m to h a v e b e e n l e f t u n g a r r i s o n e d : A t t a l o s I in 2 1 8 d i d n o t
e n c o u n t e r g a r r i s o n s o f A c h a i o s , a n d A n t i o c h o s I I I f o u n d it
n e c e s s a r y in 190 to h a v e h i s s o n , S e l e u k o s , h o l d m i l i t a r y d e m o n -
s t r a t i o n s in the r e g i o n to k e e p the c i t i e s f r o m d e f e c t i n g . 4 5 S i m i l a r l y ,
40 T u p l i n 1987: 208, 212 on the difficulty of using narratives of military operations for

studying routine control. Φρουρά, φυλακή: Bikerman 1938: 53 and n. 4; J. and L . Robert
1954: 301 n. 3. T h e Seleukid official in I. Ephesos 1408 commands a φυλακή in Phygela:
military district (as in Iran) or temporary detachment? Smyrna may have received a
detachment in the T h i r d Syrian War: OGIS 229, line 105 (the detachment sent to guard
the fort at Palai-Magnesia is paid out of royal funds: royal troops?). T u p l i n 1987:
209-10, 235 for ad hoc occupation of strategic places under the Achaimenids.
41 OGIS 229, lines 103-4 (soldiers from the phalanx); 14, 21, 35 (soldiers in the city
and in a camp).
42 Bengtson 1944: 1 1 5 - 2 5 . T h e western στρατηγοί descend from the fighting satraps

appointed by Alexander in the west, such as Kalas (Berve 1926: ii. no. 397) Balakros (no.
200) or Antigonos Monophthalmos (no. 87): Bosworth 1988: 230. Liv. 33.18.6 and 9
show Deinokrates, w h o governed the Karian possessions of Philip V , garrisoning his
castella with local levies.
43 OGIS 229, lines 38-9, 63; Pol. 21.41.3. T h e garrison and its commander swore an
oath to hand over intact (παραδιδόναι) what they had taken over (τταραλαμβάνειν) from the
king. U n d e r Achaimenids and Alexander: Berve 1926: i. 274 and 276.
44 T r o o p s sent by Zeuxis: document 13; governor at A m y z o n : 10. Bengtson 1944: 145,

postulates the presence of standing contingents, drawn from the central royal army, in
all the satrapies of Asia Minor.
45 Attalos' foray: Pol. 5.77.4. Seleukos in Aiolis: Liv. 37.8.5; 37.18.1-2; 37.21.6; Pol.

21.6.2-6). Phokaia: A p p . Syr. 22, L i v . 36.43.11-12).

w e m a y surmise that m a n y Ionian cities w e r e u n g a r r i s o n e d f r o m the
e v e n t s of 218 ( w h e n A t t a l o s I m a r c h e d u n o p p o s e d ) and of 190
( w h e n m a n y d e f e c t e d to the R o m a n s or w e r e taken o v e r b y them:
E r y t h r a i , T e o s , K o l o p h o n , and M i l e t o s ) . H e r a k l e i a u n d e r L a t m o s
w a s g r a n t e d e x e m p t i o n f r o m billeting, and s u r r e n d e r e d to the
S c i p i o s in 190, before M a g n e s i a . Phaselis or A s p e n d o s freely
assisted the R h o d i a n fleet in 190, i m p l y i n g the absence of a S e l e u k i d
garrison. 4 6 E v e n the u n n a m e d city in Sardis, no. 2, after sack, fire,
and massacre, e x p e c t e d to be left u n g a r r i s o n e d , 'as p r e v i o u s l y ' . N e w
e v i d e n c e m i g h t reveal garrisons in cities or on their territories;
besides, the c i r c u m s t a n c e s in 218 and 190, w h e n A t t a l o s I and the
R o m a n s f o u n d cities d e v o i d of S e l e u k i d military presence, w e r e
unusual: A c h a i o s in 218 and A n t i o c h o s I I I in 190 w e r e m o u n t i n g
i m p o r t a n t military operations and may have recalled garrisons f r o m
cities to concentrate t h e m . 4 ' H o w e v e r , the A t t a l i d s or e v e n
L y s i m a c h o s s h o w e d a similar restraint in the region. 4 8 F u r t h e r m o r e ,
the absence of S e l e u k i d garrisons in Ionian and A i o l i a n cities is
m a t c h e d b y the lack of e v i d e n c e u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I for g o v e r n o r s
or S e l e u k i d m i n t i n g in these c o m m u n i t i e s , w h i c h seem to have
f o r m e d a p r i v i l e g e d g r o u p in S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r .
T h i s 'restraint' should not be e x a g g e r a t e d : G r e e k cities on
i m p o r t a n t coastlines, like E p h e s o s , w e r e garrisoned; any city c o u l d
receive an e m e r g e n c y φυλακή (see above: Iasos, Phokaia). T h e
violence of S e l e u k i d takeover (above) m a y have lingered as a deter-
rent r e m i n d e r ; f u r t h e r m o r e , no city was far f r o m the royal forces,
w h e r e v e r stationed. A l a b a n d a , M y l a s a , and Iasos w e r e n o r m a l l y
u n g a r r i s o n e d , b u t a S e l e u k i d c o n t i n g e n t p r o b a b l y held the fort at
A l i n d a , w i t h i n easy reach of all three places. 4 9 G e n e r a l l y , S e l e u k i d
A s i a M i n o r was a militarized frontier b o r d e r e d b y rival p o w e r s (the
P t o l e m a i c e m p i r e , the A t t a l i d k i n g d o m , R h o d e s ) and threatening
p o p u l a t i o n s ( G a l a t i a n s , Pisidians, T h r a c i a n s ) ; the w i d e distribution

46 Erythrai: L i v . 37.8.5; 3 7 . 1 1 . 1 4 (Erythraian ships assist Rhodians); 37.12.10. T e o s :

Pol. 5.77.5 (Attalos I); L i v . 37.27.9-28.3 (no Seleukid garrison in 190). Kolophon Pol.
5.77.5; Liv. 37.26.5-9 (besieged by Antiochos III in 190); Miletos: L i v . 37.17.3. (on
Roman side in 190). Herakleia: documents 31 Β, II 15 (άνεπιαταθμεία) and 43 (letter of
Scipios). Phaselis: Liv. 37.23.1; Aspendos: L i v . 37.23.3.
47 Likewise, Ptolemy I V summoned mercenaries from αί ΐξω πόλεις in the military

build-up before Raphia (Pol. 5.63.8); the Antigonid governor of Karia mustered the
garrisons scattered in castella, to face a Rhodian attack in 197 (Liv. 33.18.6-9).
4S Lysimachos: Burstein 1986 (garrisons in D o b r u d j a , but not in e.g. Priene).
Attalids: Allen 1983: 109.
49 F r o m Alinda, a horseman could reach Alabanda in four hours, Mylasa in a day and

a half (J. and L . Robert 1983: 17 n. 25; Fellows 1841: 58, 64—7), and Iasos is not far from
Mylasa. In April 1997, 1 took a day's cycling (nine to ten hours, including a long break
at Labraunda) for the second of these routes, from Milâs to Karpuzlu (ancient Alinda).
a n d the c o n s t a n t p r o x i m i t y o f i m p o r t a n t m e a n s f o r c o e r c i o n are
b e y o n d d o u b t ( B e n g t s o n 1944: 9 1 ) .
T h e d i s s e m i n a t e d f o r c e s fitted i n t o a b r o a d e r s t r u c t u r e . T h e
' c h a i n of f o r t r e s s e s ' , as p r a c t i c a l t e c h n o l o g y o f d o m i n a t i o n , w a s
p o w e r l e s s in itself. S e l e u k i d f o r t s , i n c l u d i n g the A k r a at J e r u s a l e m ,
could not p r e v e n t the g r o w t h of M a c c a b a e a n p o w e r . If not b a c k e d
u p b y a w i d e r s t r u c t u r e o f p o w e r , t h e d i s s e m i n a t i o n of g a r r i s o n s
c o u l d p r o v e w o r s e t h a n u s e l e s s . P t o l e m y V I i n s t a l l e d g a r r i s o n s in
v a r i o u s c i t i e s of K o i l e - S y r i a , w h e n he i n t e r v e n e d in t h e r e g i o n
d u r i n g i n t r a - S e l e u k i d d y n a s t i c u p h e a v a l s a n d h o p e d to e x t e n d h i s
c o n t r o l ; a f t e r he d i e d o f w o u n d s s u s t a i n e d in b a t t l e , h i s g a r r i s o n s
w e r e p r o m p t l y slaughtered b y the inhabitants of the cities the
g a r r i s o n s w e r e m e a n t to c o n t r o l (1 M a c c . 1 1 : 18). T h e u l t i m a t e
i n s t r u m e n t o f c o n t r o l w a s the k i n g , w h o in c a m p a i g n w i t h h i s s t a n d -
i n g a r m y , g o i n g f o r t h to m e e t i n v a d e r s in d e c i s i v e b a t t l e s a n d to
s u b d u e r e b e l l i o n , as in the case o f M o l o n , A c h a i o s ( C h . 2 § 1),
M a c c a b a e a n J u d a e a , K i l i k i a n c i t i e s in t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y (2 M a c c .
4: 3 0 - 1 ; ι M a c c . 1 1 . 1 4 ) — o r N o t i o n - K o l o p h o n , b e s i e g e d b y
A n t i o c h o s I I I in 190 f o r r a l l y i n g to t h e R o m a n s ( L i v . 3 7 . 2 6 . 5 - 9 ) .
T h e g a r r i s o n s s l o w e d t h e p r o g r e s s o f an i n v a d e r (as h a p p e n e d to
A n t i o c h o s I I I in K o i l e - S y r i a , in 2 1 9 : P o l . 5 . 6 2 . 6 ) ; t h e y also m a d e
local r e b e l l i o n d i f f i c u l t a c r o s s t h e e m p i r e , t h u s e n a b l i n g t h e s t a n d -
i n g a r m y to be a p p l i e d in c o n c e n t r a t e d o p e r a t i o n s o f r e p r e s s i o n
( s u c h as t h e m a s s a c r e c a r r i e d o u t b y A n t i o c h o s I V in J e r u s a l e m o n
h i s r e t u r n f r o m E g y p t : a c c o r d i n g to 2 M a c c 5: 1 1 - 1 6 , t h i s r e s u l t e d
f r o m the k i n g ' s mistaking local, intra-Jewish a r m e d conflict for
r e v o l t , άποστατεΐν). H o w effective were these m o d e s of control? A s
a r g u e d a b o v e , t h e ease w i t h w h i c h A t t a l o s I w e n t t h r o u g h A i o l i s ,
I o n i a , a n d M y s i a , o r t h e s w i f t g a i n s o f t h e R o m a n s in 1 9 0 a l o n g t h e
c o a s t , m a y b e m i s l e a d i n g , b e c a u s e t h e y t o o k p l a c e in t h e s t r e s s o f
w a r . A n o t h e r i m p r e s s i o n m a y b e g a i n e d b y the S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l a n d
military presence on the T a b a i plateau, s u r r o u n d e d b y r u g g e d
m o u n t a i n s a n d b a n d i t c o u n t r y : R o b e r t c o m m e n t e d t h a t it t o o k ' u n
p o u v o i r c e n t r a l f o r t , t r è s f o r t ' , s u c h as t h e R o m a n e m p i r e or m o d e r n
T u r k e y , to k e e p the area p a c i f i e d . T h e r e m a r k m i g h t also a p p l y to
t h e S e l e u k i d state, at least as w e can i m a g i n e it in c e r t a i n s e t t i n g s ,
s u c h as t h e i m p o r t a n t r o a d c r o s s i n g t h e T a b a i p l a t e a u . 5 0

T h i s a n a l y s i s o f t h e m o d e s o f c o n t r o l s h a d e s into a d e s c r i p t i o n o f
f u n c t i o n s — e x t e r n a l l y , w a r d i n g off aggression; internally, repressing
o r p r e v e n t i n g r e v o l t : e s t a b l i s h i n g the S e l e u k i d state as p r i m a r y

50 J. and L . Robert 1954: 4 1 - 2 ; though see Shaw 1984, for evidence of endemic

banditry throughout the Roman world, and for an analysis of the structural relationship
between banditry, society, and state.
w i e l d e r of force w i t h i n the ' S e l e u k i d space' constituted by c o n -
quests and s u b s e q u e n t settlements. O n e crucial p u r p o s e of the
s y s t e m w a s the e x t o r t i o n of resources f r o m the local c o m m u n i t i e s in
the f o r m of violent seizure, as h a p p e n e d to the A m y z o n i a n s (above),
or taxation: the g a r r i s o n - c o m m a n d e r at J e r u s a l e m w a s responsible
for raising tribute (2 A-lacc. 4: 28). T h e fortresses c o u l d a c c u m u l a t e
the profit of e m p i r e : at Soloi, in 246, one s u c h treasury contained
1500 T . 5 1
T h e landscape of control was also a landscape of e x t o r t i o n
t h r o u g h 'organized violence' (a leitmotiv of Briant 1982; next
section). C o n v e r s e l y , the structures of organised violence generated
their o w n needs; in a self-sustaining relation, these costs w e r e met
out of the i n c o m e w h i c h the structures of control allowed the state to
raise. T h e local c o m m u n i t i e s also s u p p o r t e d the S e l e u k i d forces in
kind, by p r o v i d i n g l o d g i n g or f o d d e r , and p e r h a p s l a b o u r to m a i n -
tain the road s y s t e m w h i c h unified the structures of control across
A s i a M i n o r . 5 2 T h e language of protection 5 3 c o v e r e d the interests of
the state as organised c r i m e , or racketeer, 5 4 the m o d e l of e m p i r e as
exaction w e find in P o l y b i o s (21.41.2). V i o l e n c e and military
control, impressive in t h e m s e l v e s , participate in a b r o a d e r s y s t e m of
administration and a p p r o p r i a t i o n , w h i c h can be studied s i m u l t a n e -
ously in its nature, its realities, and its ideological w o r k i n g s .

51 FGrHist 160, C o l . II; cf. Briant 1982: 20—1, 210—11, on the forts as part of a system
of exaction and as treasuries. T h e Hellenistic 'treasury' (γαζοφυλάκιον) is a well-
documented phenomenon: Pergamon started out as a Lysimachan treasury (Strabo
13.4.1); a Ptolemaic γαζόφυλαξ resided in Halikarnassos ( P C Z 59036); Mithridates V I
kept a series of treasuries in his kingdom (Strabo 12.3.28); Franco 1993: 189-91 on the
treasuries which Lysimachos must have kept in Anatolia.
52 Lodging: document 3. Fodder: Wörrle 1979: 87-9, with BE 8o, 484 (a continuation

of Ptolemaic practice, as Wörrle observes). T h e r e also is evidence for cities providing

supplies for royal troops, but usually ad hoc in wartime: I. Erythrai 24, lines 1 5 - 1 6 ; 28,
lines 29-32, 41-8; L i v . 37.27.3; also MAMA 6.173 (Attalid Apameia). Labour: docu-
ment 36 mentions exemptions from λητουργίαι\ Malay 1983 gives an early Seleukid
document from Aigai, where corvée labourers receive supplies from the royal treasury.
For a parallel, Mitchell 1993: 124-7 o n probable corvée labour for the Roman road
system; J. and L . Robert 1983: 30-2 for Roman examples, especially the participation of
the cities of Asia in the upkeep of the T r a c h ô n , from Ephesos to the Maeander valley.
Braudel 1966: i. 47-8, describes Anatolia as 'le coeur d'une incomparable histoire
routière' and 49, for roads as prerequisite of effective government. On roads and land-
scapes, I have learnt much from van Berchem 1982.
" D o c u m e n t s 5, 6, 15. After successful campaigning in Koile-Syria (218), Antiochos
I I I left soldiers to protect his new subjects: πάοι την άσφάλειαν προκαταβκευάζειν τοις ΰττ'
αυτόν ταττομενοις (Pol. 5 - 7 1 · 1 1 ) ·
54 Organized crime: T i l l y 1985; already expressed in ancient times: Austin 1986:

465-6 with examples. Racket: T i l l y 1985: 170-1; M a n n 1986: 100 ('the gigantic pro-
tection racket of political history').
2. Officials and Administration

T h e P o l y b i a n w o r d for royal orders, πρόσταγμα, is also a S e l e u k i d

t e r m for a royal 'edict'. T h e P a m u k ç u stele s h o w s h o w a prostagma
was implemented. W h e n Antiochos III appointed Nikanor 'high-
priest of all the shrines on the other side of the T a u r u s ' and 'official
in charge of the shrines', he notified Z e u x i s : σύνταξον οΰν σννεργείν
αύτώι els τα προσήκοντα TOÎS προδεδηλωμενο^' καταχωρίζειν Se αυτόν
και èv TOÎS χρηματισμοΪ5 ois είθισται' και τrjs «πιστολτ^ το άντίγραφον
άναγράί/ίαντα? ei's OTTjXas Xi0ivas έχθειναι èv TOÎS έπιφανεστάτοis iepoîs
(lines 4 1 - 9 ) , ' D o therefore give orders f o r y o u r s u b o r d i n a t e s to w o r k
w i t h h i m in the matters that are appropriate to w h a t has b e e n p r e -
v i o u s l y e x p l a i n e d , and to m e n t i o n h i m in the contracts for w h i c h it
is usual, and to write up the c o p y of the letter on stone stelai and
e x p o s e t h e m in the most c o n s p i c u o u s sanctuaries'. T h e plural
participles in the infinitive c o n s t r u c t i o n i m p l y a m u l t i t u d e of s u b -
ordinates, b e y o n d the direct recipient of the royal order. 5 5 Z e u x i s
w a s to pass on three instructions to his subordinates: to collaborate
w i t h N i k a n o r in matters c o n c e r n i n g his duties, to see that N i k a n o r ' s
n a m e w a s i n c l u d e d in contracts, and to p u b l i c i z e the royal decision
t h r o u g h inscription on stone stelai in the most c o n s p i c u o u s shrines.
Z e u x i s sent a c o p y to one Philotas, w i t h a c o v e r i n g letter of his o w n ;
Philotas sent a c o p y of the k i n g ' s letter to one B i t h y s , w i t h Z e u x i s '
letter and another c o v e r i n g letter. A l l three m i s s i v e s — A n t i o c h o s ' ,
Z e u x i s ' , P h i l o t a s ' — w e r e inscribed on a large stele, s u r m o u n t e d b y a
massive s e m i c i r c u l a r p e d i m e n t . T h e stone w a s f o u n d in M y s i a , no
d o u b t close to the site of a shrine in the P a m u k ç u plain, a lieu de
passage d o m i n a t e d b y various landmarks 5 6 (the stele n o w lies in the
c o u r t y a r d of M a n i s a M u s e u m ) . T h e letters ΑΒΓ on the p e d i m e n t
m i g h t represent a r e m i n d e r for the stone cutter of the s e q u e n c e in
w h i c h to cut the letters, 5 ' the ultimate stage in this chain of c o m -
m u n i c a t e d orders.

T o stud)' the processes p r e s e r v e d on the stele and their i m p l i c a -

tions, will lead us to e x p l o r e the imperial institutions that c o n -
stituted the S e l e u k i d space: ' p o w e r as means, as organisation, as
infrastructure, as logistics' ( M a n n 1986: 518). W h e n A n t i o c h o s I I I

55 Prostagma as technical term: Holleaux 1942: 2 0 5 - 1 1 ; and C. Ord. Ptol. for the
collection of Ptolemaic royal ordnances (designated by the same term of prostagma),
gathered and commented b y M . - T h . Lenger. Pamukçu stele: document 4, and η. 1 to
the translation of these lines on the plural participles.
56 Robert 1962: 381 n. 3 (mentioning a pool with sacred fish), 385-6; Cuinet 1894: 42,

for hot springs. Further document 4 and commentary.

57 Malay 1987: 7 and n. 5; though it is not clear exactly how these numerals would

have functioned.
passed t h r o u g h T e o s , he s t e p p e d before the assembled citizens, and
p r o m i s e d to free the city f r o m taxes; later, the T e i a n s sent an
e m b a s s y to the king, w h o told t h e m that he had kept his w o r d , and
that he had indeed freed (παραλελνκε) the city f r o m taxes. T h e
actual ' f r e e i n g f r o m taxes' w a s an administrative process: 5 8 the
k i n g ' s decision had to be passed on to the right subordinates, and
c o m m u n i c a t i o n had to be f o l l o w e d by practical effects (in this case,
m a k i n g sure officials k n e w not to claim taxes f r o m the city). T h e
p r o c e s s took place away f r o m the city, in the w o r l d of royal a d m i n -
istration, so the incident incites us, as historians, to look for those
d o c u m e n t s (such as the P a m u k ç u stele) about the w o r k i n g s of royal
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n — r a t h e r than trust, as the T e i a n s w e r e meant to do,
in its m a g i c - l i k e efficacy. A n t i o c h o s I I I , b e f o r e an e m b a s s y f r o m a
s u b o r d i n a t e c o m m u n i t y , referred to an administrative process,
w h i c h e x e c u t e d his w i l l , as s o m e t h i n g m y s t e r i o u s and quite natural
at the same time: the scene should m a k e us p o n d e r the ideological
f u n c t i o n w i e l d e d b y the apparatus of administration and b y its
e f f i c i e n c y as a display of p o w e r .

(a) The World of Zeuxis

Z e u x i s , at the first stage of c o m m u n i c a t i o n , is a w e l l - k n o w n figure,

the overall g o v e r n o r of A s i a M i n o r (see below); he received the
k i n g ' s order, f r o m Iran ( C h . 2 § 2), reaching h i m almost certainly in
S a r d e i s (the administrative centre in A s i a M i n o r since the
A c h a i m e n i d s and A l e x a n d e r ) . T h e next official d o w n the chain of
c o m m a n d , Philotas, m u s t be the g o v e r n o r (strategos) of M y s i a ; his
s u b o r d i n a t e , B i t h y s , is the h y p a r c h , g o v e r n i n g a s u b - d i v i s i o n of the
satrapy. U n d e r B i t h y s there w e r e f u r t h e r s u b o r d i n a t e s (not illus-
trated on the P a m u k ç u stele), w h o , B e n g t s o n speculated, w e r e called
'toparchs' and w h i c h since B e n g t s o n w r o t e , have indeed appeared
u n d e r the title επιμελητής τοΰ τόπον or προεστηκως του τόπον, 'the
m a n in charge of the place', a p o r t m a n t e a u f o r m u l a rather than an
official title. 5 9
In contrast to w e l l - d o c u m e n t e d cases s u c h as A l e x a n d e r ' s a d m i n -
istration or P t o l e m a i c E g y p t (where w e can s t u d y not j u s t policies

58 D o c u m e n t 17, 17-20, 29-36.

55 Bengtson 1944: 12-29 f ° r chain of command; 102-3 f ° r Zeuxis (Bengtson's broader
theory that Seleukid governors were always called satraps without military powers,
except for militarized provinces like Asia Minor, need not detain us here: Bengtson
1944: 38-48). L o w e r echelon: Wörrle 1975: lines 3 - 4 and pp. 72-5 (not a village
magistrate, as Sartre 1995: 101 writes); SEG 29.1613, line 14 (not Ptolemaios' private
manager, pace J . - M . Bertrand, ZPE 46 (1982), 1 7 0 - 1 — P t o l e m a i o s ' own staff are οίπαρ'
έμον).
b u t personnel), 6 0 w e still have little sense of the provincial o r g a n i z a -
tion these titles c o v e r e d — f o r the reign of A n t i o c h o s I I I , w e have
e v i d e n c e for exactly t w o provincial g o v e r n o r s , Philotas (20g) and
A n a x i m b r o t o s (193); the first g o v e r n e d M y s i a , the second either
K a r i a or P h r y g i a 6 1 . W e similarly k n o w little a b o u t the satrapies
t h e m s e l v e s . A list of nine satrapies (by the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I )
g i v e n b y B e n g t s o n is based on the description of A s i a M i n o r in the
settlement of 1 8 9 - 1 8 8 , especially L i v . 3 8 . 3 9 . 1 5 - 1 6 and L i v .
3 7 . 5 6 . 2 - 7 . 6 2 H o w e v e r , g e o g r a p h i c a l usage does not necessarily
indicate administrative organization. D i d the M i l y a s , m e n t i o n e d in
these L i v i a n passages, constitute a satrapy b y itself, 63 or w a s the
region (a lieu de passage, w i t h its n o r t h - s o u t h valleys) a d m i n i s t e r e d
as part of a n e i g h b o u r i n g satrapy s u c h as P a m p h y l i a or P h r y g i a ?
S u c h a practice of r e g r o u p i n g several 'regions' into a single satrapy
had been current earlier. Ionia and L y d i a w e r e a d m i n i s t e r e d b y one
satrap in the late A c h a i m e n i d p e r i o d and u n d e r A l e x a n d e r , w h o also
j o i n e d P a m p h y l i a and L y k i a to P h r y g i a ( g o v e r n e d b y A n t i g o n o s , the
f u t u r e D i a d o c h ) . 6 4 E v e n if the L i v i a n list of territories c o r r e s p o n d e d
to provincial divisions in Asia M i n o r at the time of M a g n e s i a , the
situation m a y have been different u n d e r A c h a i o s , or after the recon-
quest of 216, or the forays of c.203, or the s w e e p of 197. N o r do w e
k n o w about the shape of satrapies: the ' H e l l e s p o n t i n e satrapy' is
usually e q u a t e d w i t h H e l l e s p o n t i n e P h r y g i a , y e t stretched into the
T r o a d , at least u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I (RC 1 0 - 1 3 ) . I n d e e d , the w h o l e
c o n c e p t of tidy satrapies, w i t h w e l l - d e f i n e d frontiers and 'satrapal
capitals' is o p e n to question. T h e h y p a r c h i e s , the s u b d i v i s i o n s of the
satrapy, are e q u a l l y o b s c u r e . T h e ' h y p a r c h y a r o u n d E r i z a ' (OGIS
238) no d o u b t c o v e r e d part or all of the A c i p a y a m plain. In K a r i a ,

60 Alexander: Berve 1926: vol. i; Bosworth 1988: 229-58. On members of Seleukid

personnel, we can only reflect on their Macedonian names, implying a 'colonial' back-
ground (in the sense that they came from the Macedonian ruling group, settled by the
Hellenistic kings in the east): Nikanor, Philotas, Zeuxis son of K y n a g o s (document 7,
with Robert 1964: 11 n. 4 on the Macedonian name Kynagos); contrast the richness of
a recent essay (Orrieux 1983) on the Ptolemaic agent Zenon.
61 Anaximbrotos: document 37; Robert 1967: 282, prefers Phrygia, 'sans y tenir'.

Polybios may have given details for administrative reorganization after Achaios' usurpa-
tion as he does for the aftermath of M o l o n ' s revolt (5.54.12).
62 Bengtson 1944: 13-16; earlier satrapies, 1 3 - 1 4 , but only the satrapy on the
Hellespont is known by a documentary source (RC 11, 3-4) and the existence of
satrapies of L y d i a and Phrygia is probable, but not yet documented. Doubts: M u s t i in
CAH* vii. ι, 186-9.
63 Bengtson 1944: 14 thinks a satrapy of Milyas probable, because Antiochos III

practised the 'Aufspaltung der grossen Satrapien' (hardly compelling). For the Milyas,
Hall 1986; S y m e 1995: 177-92.
64 Ionia and Lydia: Arr. 1.12.8, 1.17.7; Liv. 37.56.2, et Lydiam Ioniamque, perhaps
implies that Ionia and Lydia were governed as the same satrapy under the Seleukids.
Antigonos' satrapy: Bosworth 1988: 233.
' K a r i a H y d r e l a ' m i g h t be one such s u b d i v i s i o n , c o m p r i s i n g the
south-eastern portion of the u p p e r M a e a n d e r valley; the area
w e s t of the M a r s y a s river, the old H e k a t o m n i d , then P t o l e m a i c
d o m i n i o n , m a y have constituted another (administered as a unit b y
O l y m p i c h o s , w h o thus seems to have started as a S e l e u k i d
hyparch). 6 5
T h e figure for w h o m w e have e v i d e n c e is Z e u x i s 6 6 — n o t the
'satrap of L y d i a ' (Pol. 2 1 . 1 6 . 4 ) , b u t far m o r e i m p o r t a n t : the v i c e r o y
of A s i a M i n o r , a p p o i n t e d after the s u p p r e s s i o n of A c h a i o s ( C h . 2 §
1). T h e title appears in the alliance he struck w i t h the Philippeis/
E u r o m i a n s in 197: 6 άπολελειμμένος ύπο τον βασιλέως Άντιόχου επι των
em τάδε τον Ταύρου πραγμάτων, 'the m a n left b y the king in charge of
the affairs on this side of the T a u r u s ' . T h i s seems an official title,
adapted to the g e o g r a p h i c a l location; no d o u b t A n t i o c h o s said 'this
side of the T a u r u s ' w h e n he w a s in Anatolia. 6 7 B e n g t s o n recognised
the i m p o r t a n c e of the office early on; he placed Z e u x i s in a s e q u e n c e
of A s i a M i n o r v i c e r o y s , s u c h as A l e x a n d r a s u n d e r A n t i o c h o s II (the
b r o t h e r of L a o d i k e I), A n t i o c h o s H i e r a x as c o - r e g e n t w i t h S e l e u k o s
I I , and A c h a i o s ; p r e c e d e n t s can be f o u n d in the financial official
P h i l o x e n o s , sent b y A l e x a n d e r 'to collect the tribute f r o m the
regions in A s i a on this side of the T a u r u s ' ( A r r . 3.6.4), and in
several A c h a i m e n i d generals w h o held e m e r g e n c y authority in
W e s t e r n A s i a M i n o r , s u c h as M e m n o n , or C y r u s the Y o u n g e r . 6 8
A n o t h e r parallel for Z e u x i s ' position is the h i g h - c o m m a n d of the
U p p e r Satrapies, o f t e n held b y the heir to the S e l e u k i d throne, and
p e r h a p s the g o v e r n o r s h i p of the C h e r s o n e s o s and T h r a c e held after
196 b y S e l e u k o s (the son of A n t i o c h o s III). 6 9 B u t the case of Z e u x i s
is u n i q u e l y valuable: this v e r y h i g h - r a n k i n g official is d o c u m e n t e d

65 Karia Hydrela: Liv. 37.56.3 (Magie 1950: ii. 762). T r a n s - M a r s y a n Karia: another

argument is the priesthood of Zeus Kretagenetas and Diktynna, which appears in the
'imperial heading' (regnal year, Seleukid calendar, etc.) of decrees at A m y z o n in
202-201 bc (documents 9, 10), and in a decree regulating various offices at Euromos
£.197 bc (document 30), but not in the 'imperial heading' of a decree of Xanthos of 196.
It seems that the priesthood, and its official imposition as an element in the heading of
decrees, was limited to Karia West of the Marsyas as a unit. (On this cult, J. and L .
Robert 1983: 166; also below, § 3).
66 J. and L . Robert 1983: 176-87; Gauthier 1989: 39-42.
67 D o c u m e n t 29, 3-6; 4, 29-30 speaks of 'the other side of T a u r u s ' for Anatolia; but

the letter was written in Iran; Errington 1986: 2 η. 5 on the official character of Zeuxis'
title in alliance with the Philippeis/Euromians. Zeuxis' title was predicted almost exactly
by Bengtson 1944: 109-10.
68 Seleukid governors of cis-Tauric Asia Minor: Bengtson 1944: 9 4 - 1 1 0 , though his

attempt to find such an official under Antiochos I already is not convincing (Musti 1965:
157-60). Philoxenos: Bosworth 1988: 242; M e m n o n : Arr. Anab. 1.20.3, 2.1.1; Diod.
17.23.6; C y r u s : X e n . Hellen. 1.4.3, Anab. 1.9.7, ΐ · ΐ · 2 ; T h u c . 8.5.4.
69 U p p e r Satrapies: Bengtson 1944: 78-89; Schmitt 1964: 15-18; Robert 1950: 73-5.

Seleukos: Pol. 18.50.8.

e n o u g h to a l l o w analysis; f u r t h e r m o r e , b e c a u s e he w a s not a royal
k i n s m a n (unlike A c h a i o s or m a n y of the m e n q u o t e d a b o v e ) , he m a y
be m o r e t y p i c a l of the ' n o r m a l ' S e l e u k i d officials. 7 0
Z e u x i s ' full title, g i v e n in the E u r o m i a n i n s c r i p t i o n , i n f o r m s us
a b o u t the n a t u r e of his p o w e r : not a ' g o v e r n o r ' (strategos), as in
B e n g t s o n ' s r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , b u t an official επί των πραγμάτων—a
v i c e r o y or ' c h i e f m i n i s t e r ' w i t h full p o w e r s , w i t h i n a g e o g r a p h i c a l l y
l i m i t e d area (a p o l i c y p r o b a b l y m o t i v a t e d b y A n t i o c h o s ' b a d
e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h H e r m e i a s , the full ' c h i e f m i n i s t e r ' earlier in his
reign). Z e u x i s ' f u n c t i o n s e x p l a i n the b r e a d t h of his c o m p e t e n c e and
the e x t e n t of his p o w e r — κ α ι άπαντα τα άλλα, 'and all the o t h e r
m a t t e r s ' , in his o w n w o r d s . 7 1 A m i l i t a r y c o m m a n d e r , he r e c e i v e d the
s u r r e n d e r of A m y z o n , as w e l l as o t h e r cities; he sent t r o o p s to
A m y z o n u n d e r a c o m m a n d e r he a p p o i n t e d , and issued o r d e r s
r e s t r a i n i n g the soldiers f r o m i n t r u d i n g on the s h r i n e at L a b r a u n d a .
H e p r o b a b l y e s t a b l i s h e d C h i o n i s as g o v e r n o r at A l i n d a , and
M e n e s t r a t o s as epistates o f the A r t e m i s i o n at A m y z o n ; on his o w n
a u t h o r i t y , he restored land to that shrine: in t u r n , the A m y z o n i a n s
sent several e m b a s s i e s to n e g o t i a t e w i t h h i m . ' 2 In 197, Z e u x i s took
o v e r K i l d a r a , p r o m i s i n g to m a i n t a i n its p r i v i l e g e s ; he c o n c l u d e d an
alliance w i t h E u r o m o s , p e r h a p s o n his o w n initiative, c e r t a i n l y
t h r o u g h his o w n a g e n c y , w h i c h g i v e s an idea o f the t r a n s a c t i o n s he
w a s a u t h o r i z e d to c o n d u c t ; he also r e c e i v e d an e m b a s s y f r o m
H e r a k l e i a , n e g o t i a t i n g their p r i v i l e g e s and a d d i n g an e x t r a fiscal
p r i v i l e g e o n his o w n initiative. 7 3
A n i n d e x o f Z e u x i s ' p o w e r s is the A m y z o n i a n s ' p e r c e p t i o n of h i m
in their d e c r e e s . T h e y s h o r t e n e d the title to ό èm των πραγμάτων,
o m i t t i n g the g e o g r a p h i c a l l i m i t a t i o n on his p o w e r s ; a citizen is
h o n o u r e d for g o i n g on e m b a s s i e s to Z e u x i s and ' s e c u r i n g m a n y
g r e a t p r i v i l e g e s ' f r o m h i m . / 4 M o s t s t r i k i n g l y , the A m y z o n i a n s
h o n o u r e d M e n e s t r a t o s , the epistates of the A r t e m i s i o n , 'for w r i t i n g

70 Antiochos' kinsmen nonetheless occupied important functions in the patrimonial

system of the Seleukid empire: apart from Achaios, Antiochos' sons and cousins are
attested in high office (often military)—Antipatros the 'nephew', Pol. 5.79.12 (with
HCP), 21.16.4, Liv. 37.45.5; previous note, for Seleukos; Schmitt 1964: 29-31.
71 On the 'chief minister', Bikerman 1938: 187-8; Hermeias: Schmitt 1964: 150-8

(and generally ch. 3). ' A l l the other matters': document 15, 5 and J. and L . Robert 1983:
140 n. 15.
72 Documents 5, 13, 15, 9, 10, 7 with J. and L. Robert 1983: 180: the donation

'n'émane pas du roi, c'est une mesure prise par le vice-roi, qui place son nom après celui
d'Idrieus, le bienfaiteur ancien'. Embassies: 9, 6 - 7 and 35, 4—5.
73 Kildara: document 25; Euromos: 29. Herakleia: 31. M e a d o w s suggests that I.

Mylasa 24 might be a grant of Zeuxis to Mylasa (Ma, D e r o w , and M e a d o w s 1995: 80 n.

23)·
74 Title: documents 9, 7-8; 10, 9; 13, 4; 47, 5. Embassy to Zeuxis: 47, 4-6.
to Z e u x i s , the official in charge of affairs, c o n c e r n i n g the g o o d w i l l
w h i c h the p e o p l e has c o n t i n u o u s l y t o w a r d s the kings and t o w a r d s
Z e u x i s ' , γράφων προς Ζεύζιν τον επί των πραγμάτων νπερ της εύνοιας ήν
έχων διατελεί εις τε τους βασιλείς και εις {ι} τον Ζεύξιν: a reflection, f r o m
the point of view of a subject c o m m u n i t y , of Z e u x i s ' p o w e r and
of its p r o x i m i t y . A n o t h e r piece of evidence m a y give an indirect,
visual statement of Z e u x i s ' position at A m y z o n . W h e n Z e u x i s
dedicated land to the A m y z o n i a n A r t e m i s i o n , an inscription r e c o r d -
ing the dedication was carved on the architrave above the m o n u -
mental entrance to the shrine. T h i s w a s done in an archaizing style,
imitating the dedicatory inscription, on the same architrave, b y the
p o w e r f u l H e k a t o m n i d 'satrap' Idrieus, in fact a local dynast. 7 5 T h e
similarity in visual style m a y c o n v e y a local p e r c e p t i o n of Z e u x i s '
p o w e r s ; it m i g h t also be a gesture of Z e u x i s , s h o w i n g the sort of
figure he m a d e locally. Z e u x i s o f t e n acted as the k i n g ' s p r o x y ,
d u r i n g the latter's c a m p a i g n s in the U p p e r Satrapies (209-205, pre-
c e d e d b y preparations in 210) or in K o i l e - S y r i a (202-200, f o l l o w e d
b y a period of consolidation in 1 9 9 - 1 9 8 ) — o u t of a total of 24 years
that Z e u x i s w a s in office (winter 214/213 to w i n t e r 190/189), a total
of 10 y e a r s or m o r e d u r i n g w h i c h c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h the king
w o u l d be i m p o s s i b l e or v e r y slow. 7 6 It w a s p r o b a b l y d u r i n g one s u c h
period that Z e u x i s w r o t e a direct, administrative reply to a S a r d i a n
e m b a s s y . 7 7 Z e u x i s represented stability and availability in a state
f o r m a t i o n w h e r e the king, b y nature, w a s a restless warrior.
Y e t w e m u s t not exaggerate Z e u x i s ' p o w e r s to c o n c e i v e h i m as a
'feudal' lord or a 'dynast' (in spite of the dedication on the same
architrave and in the same style as the H e k a t o m n i d Idrieus: above).
H e w a s no less, b u t no m o r e , than the highest official in c i s - T a u r i c
A s i a M i n o r , the direct subordinate of the king, b u t his s u b o r d i n a t e
nonetheless, integrated w i t h i n the royal state. A l l of the decisions

75 D o c u m e n t 7, with J. and L . Robert 1983: 93—4.

76 T h e royal prostagma concerning Nikanor took one month and ten days to reach
Zeuxis from Iran, impressive considering the distance but in absolute terms a slow
process—document 4. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 198, would date the prostagma
a year or even two earlier; the document would then have reached Zeuxis only after a
year (or two years), one month and ten days. But after autopsy, I believe that the stone
reads 'year 103', not '102' or ' 1 0 1 ' (document 4, commentary). One problem is that on
the more recent dating, the order, after a month and a day to cover the distance between
Iran and Sardeis, required 17 days to reach the strategos of Mysia, a comparatively tiny
distance. T h e only similar document is the prostagma of 193 (document 37), which took
7 - 1 1 weeks to reach the strategos of Phrygia or Karia from Pisidia, where the king was
campaigning ( A y m a r d 1949: 339-42). Nonetheless, the slowness of communications
between Zeuxis and Antiochos when the latter was in Syria or in the U p p e r Regions is
clear.
77 For Antiochos' absences from Asia Minor, Ch. 2 §§ 2 and 3. Zeuxis and Sardeis:
d o c u m e n t 40, 8—9: ή περί. τούτων άπάκρισις γραφεΐσ[α I νπο 7.\ενξιΒος.
t a k e n b y Z e u x i s c o n c e r n i n g H e r a k l e i a h a d to b e c o n f i r m e d b y the
k i n g h i m s e l f : ' 8 τά τε υπό Ζευζιδος συγχωρηθεντα ΰμίν κνροϋμεν.
L i k e w i s e , Z e u x i s ' l e t t e r to A m y z o n , c o n f i r m i n g its p r e v i o u s p r i v i -
l e g e s , w a s p r e s u m a b l y v a l i d a t e d b y a r o y a l letter. 7 9 L i k e w i s e , a n y
c h a n g e in s t a t u s l a y w i t h i n the c o m p e t e n c e o f t h e k i n g . T h e asylia
of the A r t e m i s i o n w a s decreed b y A n t i o c h o s I I I (and A n t i o c h o s the
s o n ) , a n d p e r h a p s a n n o u n c e d d i r e c t l y to t h e c i t y ; Z e u x i s m e r e l y
w r o t e c o n c e r n i n g this decision (possibly a c o v e r i n g letter a c c o m -
p a n y i n g t h e r o y a l a n n o u n c e m e n t ) . 8 0 Z e u x i s h i m s e l f m a d e c l e a r that
t h e s u r r e n d e r o f local c o m m u n i t i e s , a n d t h e i r f u t u r e l o y a l t y , w e r e to
t h e b e n e f i t o f K i n g A n t i o c h o s : τήμ πάσαν πολνωρίαν ποησόμεθα υμών
οσωιπερ αν εννωεστεροι και προθυμότερο[ι] φαίνησθε εις τα τώι βασιλεΐ
Άντιόχωι συμφέροντα, ' w e w i l l t a k e all m e a s u r e s of s o l i c i t u d e f o r y o u
i n a s m u c h as y o u s h o w y o u r s e l v e s t h e b e t t e r - d i s p o s e d a n d t h e m o r e
eager t o w a r d s the interests of king Antiochos'.81 T h e E u r o m i a n s
accurately described the intermediary position of Z e u x i s ' office
w h e n t h e y s p o k e o f την συνθήκην τήμ περί της συμμαχίας της
σνντεθειμενης προς βασιλέα μεγαν Άντίοχον δια Ζενζιδος (lines 7—8).
Z e u x i s ' p o s i t i o n is i d e n t i c a l to t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e o f f i c e r s w h o
g r a n t e d a n u m b e r o f p r i v i l e g e s a n d e x e m p t i o n s to the u n n a m e d c i t y
o f Sardis, n o . 2, p r o b a b l y c a p t u r e d a n d s a c k e d b y S e l e u k i d f o r c e s in
1 9 7 : t h e a p p a r e n t a u t h o r i t y o f t h e o f f i c e r s in t h e field w a s b a l a n c e d
b y t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r s u b s e q u e n t r o y a l a p p r o v a l . N o r is Z e u x i s ' case
e x c e p t i o n a l : in 1 6 4 , the S e l e u k i d v i c e r o y L y s i a s , ο επί των πραγμάτων
(the s a m e p o s i t i o n Z e u x i s h a d h e l d , b u t w i t h o u t t h e g e o g r a p h i c a l
l i m i t a t i o n ) w r o t e in r e s p o n s e to a p e t i t i o n f r o m t h e J e w s u n d e r
Judas M a c c a b a e u s that Ί i n f o r m e d the king of w h a t e v e r m u s t be
b r o u g h t b e f o r e h i m also; w h a t e v e r lay w i t h i n m y c o m p e t e n c e (lit.
w h a t e v e r w a s p o s s i b l e ) , I g r a n t e d to y o u : ' (οσα μεν οΰν εδει και τώι
βασιλεΐ προσενεχθήναι διεσάφησα, (I δε ήν ενδεχόμενα συνεχώρησα- 2
M a c c . 1 1 : 18). P t o l e m a i c o f f i c i a l s w e r e s i m i l a r l y c o n s t r a i n e d : at
I a s o s , a P t o l e m a i c o f f i c e r g r a n t e d t h e c i t y t h e r i g h t to l e v y c e r t a i n
local t a x e s , b u t h a d to r e f e r to the k i n g t h e m a t t e r o f e x e m p t i o n f r o m
t h e syntaxis, t h e t r i b u t e - l i k e ' c o n t r i b u t i o n ' e x a c t e d f r o m t h e c i t y o n
t h e p r o c l a i m e d p r e t e x t o f d e f e n d i n g its t e r r i t o r y (/. Iasos 3).

Z e u x i s ' a c t i v i t y as s u b o r d i n a t e is e v i d e n t d u r i n g t h e k i n g ' s d i r e c t

78 D o c u m e n t 31 A , I 9.
75 D o c u m e n t 5, possibly c o n f i r m e d by royal letter, J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: no. 13.
80 Asylia dossier of A m y z o n : d o c u m e n t s 6, 8. A parallel is the restitution of laws and
ancestral constitution to the u n n a m e d city of the K o r r h a g o s inscription, w h i c h can only
be effected b y E u m e n e s II and n o t b y his g o v e r n o r ( S E G 2.663, lines 9 - 1 0 : ήξίωο&> τον
βασιλέα άττοόοθήι>ο.ί τους τ€ νόμους και τήν πάτριον ιτολιτείαν κτλ.).
81 Q u o t e f r o m letter to K i l d a r a , d o c u m e n t 25, 7 - 1 1 ; also 31 Β, I V 9 - 1 0 (Herakleia);

5, 7 - 9 (almost certainly Z e u x i s to A m y z o n ) .
presence in A s i a M i n o r . A t Sardeis in 2 1 3 , A n t i o c h o s delegated the
question of w o o d s u p p l y for the reconstruction of the city, καθ' âv
avvKpivj] Ζεύξις; he i n f o r m e d Z e u x i s of his decisions in f a v o u r of the
S a r d i a n s (a regular grant of oil, alleviated c o n d i t i o n s of troop billet-
ing, ateleia for the L a o d i k e i a ) . Z e u x i s h i m s e l f , w h e n o r d e r i n g the
t r o o p s to respect the shrine at L a b r a u n d a , w o u l d speak of the
επιμέλεια των [ίερ]ών ( R o b e r t ' s restoration) w h i c h the king had
e n t r u s t e d to h i m — a broad brief w h i c h justified Z e u x i s ' specific
decision c o n c e r n i n g L a b r a u n d a . 8 2 In these cases, Z e u x i s ' role was
p u r e l y instrumental, d i f f u s i n g the royal o r d e r , d i v i d i n g it into
s u b - o r d e r s for the appropriate officials, g e n e r a t i n g instructions to
i m p l e m e n t the general t e r m s of the royal o r d e r — t h e nature of
Z e u x i s ' activity appears the same as any s u b o r d i n a t e ' s . A t times,
A n t i o c h o s ' presence c o u l d e v e n elide Z e u x i s ' f u n c t i o n . In 193, the
king (then in Pisidia) issued a prostagma on cultic h o n o u r s in
f a v o u r of L a o d i k e . B u t instead of s e n d i n g it to Z e u x i s , for the
g o v e r n o r - g e n e r a l of c i s - T a u r i c A s i a M i n o r to diffuse (as had
h a p p e n e d w i t h the prostagma of 209), A n t i o c h o s w r o t e directly to
the level of the satrapy, for instance to A n a x i m b r o t o s , the strategos
of P h r y g i a (or Karia?): his presence in the p r o v i n c e seems to
'deactivate' the p o w e r s of Z e u x i s as v i c e r o y , and it is likely that
A n t i o c h o s simply w r o t e to Z e u x i s as g o v e r n o r of L y d i a , to i m p l e -
m e n t his prostagma in the region around Sardeis. In contrast, w h e n
addressing the edict to the U p p e r Satrapies, A n t i o c h o s w r o t e to
M e n e d e m o s , p r o b a b l y the g o v e r n o r - g e n e r a l of the East, for h i m to
diffuse the instructions at a l o w e r level. 8 3
In spite of his special c o m p e t e n c e , Z e u x i s can be c o n s i d e r e d
typical. First, the dual nature of Z e u x i s ' office, authoritative and
empowered when acting ' d o w n w a r d s ' , yet a n s w e r a b l e and s u b o r d i -
nate w h e n dealing ' u p w a r d s ' , is characteristic of any official b e l o n g -

a D o c u m e n t s 1, 3. F o r context, see C h . 2 § 1. L a b r a u n d a : 15, 4 - 5 .

83 T h i s is one interpretation of the fact that on the ' D o d u r g a stele' ( d o c u m e n t 37),
containing a copy of the prostagma of 193, Z e u x i s does not appear; b u t there are other
s o l u t i o n s — f o r instance, Z e u x i s m i g h t have been temporarily disgraced in 193 (was he
perhaps d e m o t e d to the status of strategos of L y d i a , w h i c h m i g h t explain w h y P o l y b i o s
g i v e s h i m this title in 2 1 . 1 6 . 4 , · η w i n t e r 190/189?), or the matter m a y have seemed so
a u g u s t to A n t i o c h o s that he w i s h e d to c o m m u n i c a t e it himself to the satrapy g o v e r n o r s
( w h i c h still illustrates the point that the king c o u l d b y p a s s Zeuxis). I have also assumed
that M e n e d e m o s w a s v i c e r o y of the U p p e r Satrapies ( R o b e r t 1950: 7 3 - 5 ) , though the
exact date of a p p o i n t m e n t is not k n o w n , and the fact that M e n e d e m o s addressed his
instructions n o t to the satrap of M e d i a , b u t to the city of L a o d i k e i a on M e d i a ( R o b e r t
1949: 5 - 3 0 ) and to T h o a s , the c o m m a n d e r of a phylake ( R o b e r t 1967) raises the possi-
bility that M e n e d e m o s was himself the satrap of M e d i a . E q u a l l y problematic, the
a p p o i n t m e n t of A n t i o c h o s the son as v i c e r o y in the East falls around this time, and
S c h m i t t has s h o w n that in 193 he was a b o u t to set out east to take up office ( S c h m i t t
1964: 1 5 - 1 8 ) .
ing to a chain of c o m m a n d . 8 4 S e c o n d , officials deal w i t h their
superior c o m p a r a t i v e l y rarely, b u t v e r y o f t e n w i t h the p o p u l a t i o n s
u n d e r their authority ( B e r t r a n d 1974: 31); in turn, the s u b j e c t
p o p u l a t i o n deals less o f t e n w i t h the superior than w i t h the s u b -
ordinate, w h o l o o m s m i g h t i l y in their local h o r i z o n . T h i s aspect is
important w h e n s t u d y i n g the interaction b e t w e e n imperial state and
s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s ( C h . 4 § 2c). F o r the present, w h a t e m e r g e s is
the e x e m p l a r y aspect of Z e u x i s ' f u n c t i o n as most p o w e r f u l local
official, w h o s e activity (oscillating b e t w e e n local p o w e r s and mere
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ) can help us to imagine his s u b o r d i n a t e s (strategoi,
h y p a r c h s , local g o v e r n o r s ) and characterizes the s y s t e m of g o v e r -
nors as a c o h e r e n t , unitary state apparatus, organised around the
tension of h i e r a r c h y , and not a loose feudal structure.

(b) The Royal Economy and its Officials

N i k a n o r , the beneficiary of the prostagma of 209, did not b e l o n g to

Z e u x i s ' s u b o r d i n a t e s , b u t to another set of officials, a p p o i n t e d , not
o v e r 'the affairs' w i t h i n a g e o g r a p h i c a l region, but to specific tasks
or actions, usually in relation to the royal e c o n o m y , 8 5 the profits
of o w n e r s h i p or taxation. In the first c a t e g o r y , the m o s t i m p o r t a n t
feature is the 'royal l a n d ' — β α σ ι λ ι κ ή χώρα, or, starkly, ή τοϋ βασιλέως,
'the (land) of the k i n g ' — c o m p r i s i n g villages, their land and their
inhabitants, λαοί βασιλικοί, w h o can be d e s c r i b e d as ' s u b j e c t ' or
' t r i b u t a r y ' p o p u l a t i o n s , b u t also s e e m to be o w n e d b y the k i n g
( A n t i o c h o s II sold an estate w i t h its villagers). 8 6 T h e royal d o m a i n
paid tribute (or rent) to the k i n g 8 ' — m o s t l y in kind, as is s u g g e s t e d
b y the royal w e a l t h in grain, t h o u g h some e v i d e n c e suggests p a y -
m e n t in cash. 88 T h i s is still an aspect of S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r a b o u t

84 U n n a m e d city: document 36. Nature of subordinates: Barnes 1988: 7 1 - 8 1 for

theory, Bertrand 1974 for a case study (Alexander's hyparchs).
85 T h e term derives from ps.-Arist., Oec. 2. Generally, Bikerman 1938: ch. 4;
Rostovtzeff 1941: 464-72; Briant 1982.
86 βασιλική χώρα: RC I I , line 17, and RC 12, lines 19-20 (cf. also [χώρα] βασιλεία in the

lex portorii provinciae Asiae, SEG 39.1180, line 27). T h e elliptical expression ή τον
βασιλέως from Zeuxis' letter to the Herakleians, document 31 Β, III 8 (the section gives
Zeuxis' summary of the Herakleian petition, so that it is not clear if the phrase is Zeuxis'
or the Herakleians'). Λαοι βασιλικοί: RC 11, line 22; RC 18, lines 8-9. T h e evidence does
not support Bickerman's suggestion that 'the royal land' was the expression used for the
king's private property, nor indeed his distinction between crown land and the king's
private patrimony (Bikerman 1938: 184).
87 Inschr. Priene 1, lines 9 - 1 3 with S h e r w i n - W h i t e 1985: 80-1; RC 3, line 83.
88 Cash tribute: Sardis, no. 1, line 6 and line 8 (the document dates to Antigonos
M o n o p h t h a l m o s — a s shown b y D e b o r d 1982: 244-7, Billows 1995: 144 n. 7 0 — b u t the
situation presumably also applied under the Seleukids). Royal grain: L i v . 38.13.8-10,
Pol. 21.40.8-12, L i v . 38.37.7-9 (Seleukids supply grain for the Roman army in
189-188); grain stores at Lysimacheia (App. Syr. 28); earlier, huge gift of grain of
w h i c h w e are v e r y p o o r l y i n f o r m e d (unlike the situation of E g y p t ,
w h e r e the royal land and its w o r k i n g s are m u c h better d o c u m e n t e d ) .
Besides the tributary villages, the royal land also i n c l u d e d natural
resources such as the forests of the T m o l o s or M y s i a . 8 9
T h e royal territory w a s not confined to the inland swathe, f r o m
the H e l l e s p o n t to the K i l i k i a n G a t e s : it stretched into the w e s t e r n
coastal region, flowing around the territory of the cities: w h e r e the
city territory s t o p p e d , there b e g a n the royal d o m a i n , a familiar and
visible reality. 9 0 T h e king also o w n e d p r o p e r t y w i t h i n cities: a letter
of A n t i o c h o s I I I to S a r d e i s s h o w s the king w a i v i n g rent on a royally
o w n e d portico, since (the S a r d i a n s claim) this is the practice in other
cities: the king rented out the portico (and its ergasteria, shops) en
bloc to the city ( w h i c h p r o b a b l y sub-leased the shops). T h e king
w a i v e d the r e n t — b u t retained p r o p e r t y rights. T h e king o w n e d real
estate, w i t h d o r m a n t rights to rent, in several other cities, w h o dealt
w i t h h i m as their landlord as well as their political master. 9 1
T h e other aspect of the 'royal e c o n o m y ' w a s the n e t w o r k of taxa-
tion w h i c h stretched across the imperial space, and p l a y e d a m a j o r
part in constituting it. S u b j e c t cities w e r e taxed collectively, p a y i n g
cash tribute (phoros) [ex] πασών τών γινομένων προσόδων πα [ρ' έ'καστον]
ένιαντόν, 'out of all the i n c o m e s that are p r o d u c e d for each year'. 9 2
C o n c e p t u a l l y , the city is not a t a x - c o l l e c t o r for the central p o w e r ,
d i s t r i b u t i n g the fiscal b u r d e n a m o n g the citizenry: it is the city itself
w h i c h is taxed, s u r r e n d e r i n g a cut of its i n c o m e to the imperial state.
A p a r t f r o m regular tribute, the cities c o u l d be asked for a special
c o n t r i b u t i o n , σννταξις: t h o u g h f o r m a l l y distinct f r o m phoros, this

Seleukos II to Rhodes: Pol. 5.89.9. RC 3, lines 80-5, cannot be used to prove either cash
tribute or tribute in kind: Antigonos merely tells the Teians that the 'tributary land' is
a readily accessible source of wheat, but it is unclear whether he is thinking of the T e i a n s
purchasing their grain from the tributary villages or from royal stores.
89 Forests: document 1, line 4, with Gauthier 1989: 28; Mysian forests: L i v . 37.56.1,

Mysiae regias silvas (text emended b y M c D o n a l d 1967: 2 n. 8), Robert 1955: pis. 46-7
for views of the Mysian mountains and the forests around Smdirgi, Robert 1987:
138-48.
90 Inschr. Priene 1, lines 10-13 (Priene at the time of Alexander); Herrmann 1959
(Aigai under Antiochos II); document 31 Β, I I I 8 (Herakleia under Antiochos III).
91 D o c u m e n t 3, 8 - 1 0 with Gauthier 1989: 1 0 1 - 7 , arguing that Seleukid kings erected

buildings in 'subject' cities, and retained ownership rights. Another possibility is a royal
claim to intestate property in the subject cities; Millar 1992: 158-63, for late Ptolemaic
and Roman practice. Equally possible is the confiscation of real estate pledged by the
city as security for a royal loan: a joke preserved in Strabo 13.3.6, takes as its starting
point the loss of K y m e ' s porticoes to creditors, when the city defaults on reimburse-
ment.
92 Collective tax: Bikerman 1938: 106-10. ' O u t of all the incomes': document 36,

16—18. T h e r e is no evidence for Seleukid phoros in kind from the cities, such as the levy
in horses paid by the Aspendians to the Achaimenids, then Alexander: Arr. Anab.
1.26.3.
c o u l d be levied on a regular basis (like the p a y m e n t s els τα Γαλατικά
m a d e b y the E r y t h r a i a n s u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I or II), and thus end up
as m e r e l y an increase (earmarked for various p u r p o s e s ) of phoros:
the T e i a n s use syntaxis and phoros interchangeably. 9 3 F i n a l l y , the
S e l e u k i d e m p i r e extracted services, λητουργtat, p r o b a b l y corvée
l a b o u r for the n e e d s of the imperial state, s u c h as the u p k e e p of the
road s y s t e m (see § ι for e v i d e n c e and parallels).
T h e S e l e u k i d state also m a d e itself m a n i f e s t t h r o u g h a m u l t i t u d e
of indirect taxes, agricultural duties, personal d u e s — t h e s y s t e m
w h i c h the p s e u d o - A r i s t o t e l i a n Oeconomica calls the 'satrapie'
e c o n o m y ( 2 . i 3 4 5 - i 3 4 0 ) , the i n c o m e - r a i s i n g n e t w o r k at the p r o -
b a

vincial level. T h e evidence c o n c e r n i n g M a c c a b a e a n Judaea, l o n g the

o n l y detailed source for S e l e u k i d indirect taxation ( B i k e r m a n 1938:
1 1 5 - 1 8 , 1 3 1 - 2 ) , is n o w s u p p l e m e n t e d b y a long and i n f o r m a t i v e
d o c u m e n t for A s i a M i n o r , Z e u x i s ' s u m m a r y of the H e r a k l e i a n
petition for e x e m p t i o n f r o m certain taxes. T h e H e r a k l e i a n s asked to
be s p a r e d — a n d , by implication, the S e l e u k i d state m i g h t r a i s e — a
tax on agricultural p r o d u c e , an ennomion ('pasture rights') on herds
and on beehives, a tax on the i m p o r t and sale of grain w i t h i n the
city, a h a r b o u r tax, and dues on the m o v e m e n t of g o o d s f r o m the
royal land (ix τής τοΰ ßaaiAeots) into the city w h e t h e r for personal use
or for resale. 9 4
T h e s e items are paralleled in the f r a g m e n t a r y e v i d e n c e for the
rest of S e l e u k i d Asia M i n o r (apart f r o m general m e n t i o n s of ateleia).
A g r i c u l t u r a l levies appear in a f r a g m e n t a r y , early S e l e u k i d , d o c u -
m e n t f r o m A i g a i ( M a l a y 1983): the S e l e u k i d state is seen taking in
levies on grain ( p r o b a b l y ) , fruit-trees, flocks of sheep and goats,
b e e h i v e s , and, r e m a r k a b l y , e v e n g a m e : a leg off each boar and each
deer. A n agricultural tax is p o s s i b l y attested at S e l e u k e i a / T r a l l e i s ,
and p r o b a b l y in the u n n a m e d city of Sardis, no. 2; 95 at Sardeis,
A n t i o c h o s I I I seems to have collected a tax on transactions w i t h i n
the city (a o n e - t w e n t i e t h due, technically a royal tax added to, and
d o u b l i n g the a m o u n t of, a civic tax), no d o u b t some f o r m of sales
tax. 9 6 T h e taxation on the i m p o r t and sale of grain w i t h i n the city

93 Distinction: Herrmann 1965«: 138-45; supported by the fact that an Iasian petition

to an official of Ptolemy I does not mention phoros (the Iasians were exempt), but a
reduction in the syntaxis they paid as a contribution towards 'the defence of the territo-
ry' (I. Iasos 3, lines 4-5). Erythrai: RC 15, 26-28 (phoros and contribution to the
Galatian fund, presumably money for war against the Galatians). T e o s and the blurring
of syntaxis and phoros·. document 17, 14, 18-19, 3 3 - 4 . 48 (contra, Allen 1983: 50-3,
Sherwin-White 1985: 85). 94 D o c u m e n t 31 Β, I I I 3-9.

95 Tralleis: RC 41, line 8: a tithe (δεκατήν) paid to the royal chest; unnamed city: doc-

ument 36, 23 (restoration of Piejko), [εκ των γεν]ημάτων.

96 D o c u m e n t I , 5—6: παραλνομεν δΐ και της προσεπιβληθείσης εικοστής επί τήν πολιτικήν
(the civic twentieth rather than the politike ge: Gauthier 1989: 33-6).
w a s the s u b j e c t of a petition to Z e u x i s f r o m a Prienian a m b a s s a d o r ,
as it had been on the part of Herakleia (above). T a x a t i o n on the
m o v e m e n t of grain and of g o o d s is likely to have been general
practice, w i t h tolls at the entrance into city territories or at city
gates, and p e r h a p s at the frontiers b e t w e e n satrapies. 9 ' T h e practice
of taxation on trade explains w h y the h a r b o u r dues at H e r a k l e i a
w e r e taken o v e r b y the S e l e u k i d state ( t r a n s f o r m i n g a H e r a k l e i a n
civic tax into an imperial due). 9 8
A p a r t f r o m the w i d e s p r e a d practice of l e v y i n g a share of agri-
cultural p r o d u c e and collecting dues on the m o v e m e n t of g o o d s ,
m a n y features of n o n - t r i b u t a r y taxation w e r e localized. T h e
Plerakleians specifically petitioned f o r the status quo ('the privileges
g r a n t e d b y the k i n g s ' ) to be m a i n t a i n e d , w h i c h hints at local
solutions and precedents. 9 9 A poll-tax appears in the letter f r o m
E u m e n e s II c o n c e r n i n g the inhabitants of the Kardakon koine, near
T e l m e s s o s ; a cheironaxion, or artisan tax (levied against the right to
ply a craft) w a s m e n t i o n e d in a royal letter ( A t t a l i d or S e l e u k i d ) to a
similar c o l o n y , in the same region. T h e s e two taxes are unparalleled
in Asia M i n o r ; rather than A t t a l i d innovations (as S e g r e b e l i e v e d
for the poll-tax), these taxes m u s t be a legacy f r o m the S e l e u k i d
administration of A n t i o c h o s I I I and, u l t i m a t e l y , the P t o l e m a i c
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n 1 0 0 — l o c a l i z e d taxes, raised because of p r e c e d e n t and
not b y application of a standardized imperial f o r m u l a . S u c h a
practice, reminiscent of the c o m p l e x s y s t e m of local taxes and
p r i v i l e g e s in A n c i e n R é g i m e F r a n c e , m a y seem c u m b e r s o m e and
u n s y s t e m a t i c to a m o d e r n eye. It nonetheless o f f e r e d the advantage
of precisely targetting local resources f o r exploitation. T h e l e v y on
g a m e attested at A i g a i (above) seems u n i q u e to that city, and m u s t
reflect a local r e s o u r c e — h u n t i n g in the h i g h l a n d s of A i o l i s , the
m o d e r n Y u n t D a g — a n d the imperial state's intention of taking its

97 Priene: d o c u m e n t 33. Bikerman 1938: 1 1 6 ( c o m m e n t i n g AJ 12.141: A n t i o c h o s I I I

orders w o o d to be b r o u g h t to Jerusalem, μηδενός ττρασσομενου τέλος)·, G a u t h i e r 1989:

25-6.
98 T h e case of Herakleia suggests that the Seleukids controlled most, or all harbours,

in their dominion, to be able to raise tolls or custom rights on g o o d s entering the

Seleukid empire ( G a u t h i e r 1989: 26 η. 37).
99 D o c u m e n t 31 Β , II 14—15: παρακαλεσοντας τά τε ΰπο των βασιλέων συγκεχωρημένα I
[ουνδιατηρηθήν]αι. W ö r r l e 1988: 465, observes that the agriculture tax and ennomion are
assessed in proportion to land-surface ('yokes': I I I 6), d r a w i n g a parallel with
A c h a i m e n i d practice, on the basis of the land survey for the purpose of tax assessment
carried out after the Ionian R e v o l t (Hdt. 6.42.1), b u t this m i g h t simply be the m o s t
o b v i o u s w a y of assessing an agricultural tax.
100 Poll-tax: Segre 1938: 190, lines 1 0 - 1 1 ; 199-203 for the u n c o n v i n c i n g suggestion

that the poll-tax was introduced around T e l m e s s o s b y the Attalids (Rostovtzeff 1941:
338: 'possibly this was a heritage f r o m Ptolemaic times'). Cheironaxion: W ö r r l e 1979: 83
at line 7, 91—2 (Ptolemaic precedent), and Robert, BE 80, 484, for context of the letter.
cut. A parallel is the tithe on j u n i p e r - b e r r i e s , paid b y the K a u d i a n s
to their master, the city of G o r t y n ( C h a n i o t i s 1996: no. 69). F i n a l l y ,
the T e l m e s s i a n d o c u m e n t s s h o w that the n e t w o r k of indirect, or
n o n - t r i b u t a r y , taxation affected the c o m m u n i t i e s in the c o u n t r y s i d e
and the royal d o m a i n , as well as the cities; the sanctuaries w e r e like-
wise i n c l u d e d , unless specifically exempted. 1 0 1
T h e e v i d e n c e is not sufficient to reconstruct local, concrete,
details: for instance, the o n l y figure w e have f o r tribute in S e l e u k i d
A s i a M i n o r is that of t w e n t y mnai annually, o n e - t h i r d of a talent,
u n t y p i c a l because it c o m e s f r o m the u n n a m e d city of Sardis, no. 2,
devastated b y S e l e u k i d capture (one w o u l d e x p e c t tribute to be
rated in talents, and in t w o or three figures).102 N o n e t h e l e s s , the
d o c u m e n t a t i o n illustrates the operations i n v o l v e d and their density.
T h e picture can be e x p a n d e d w i t h P t o l e m a i c parallels (for agri-
cultural taxes, taxation on g o o d s , indirect taxes p e r c e i v e d w i t h i n
s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s ) , or e v e n O t t o m a n parallels: like the S e l e u k i d s ,
the sultan taxed herds and beehives. 1 0 3 T h e s e illustrate a general
point about e m p i r e s of domination: the c o n d i t i o n f o r their exist-
ence, and one of their m a i n activities, is the extraction of s u r p l u s ,
t h r o u g h m e a n s direct (rent, tribute) or indirect (sales taxes, dues,
tolls), but all visible; the n e t w o r k of indirect taxation played as
i m p o r t a n t a role, b o t h practical and ideological, as the raising of
tribute w h i c h Briant (1982) has e m p h a s i z e d in his essays on the
A c h a i m e n i d and Plellenistic e m p i r e s . T h e principles of the 'fiscal
e c o n o m y ' c o u l d be o p e n l y expressed: a P t o l e m a i c g o v e r n o r w r o t e to
the A r s i n o e a n s ' y o u will do well to w o r k and sow all of it (i.e. y o u r

101 Exemptions: Syll. 353 (Prepelaos, Lysimachos' general, grants ateleia to the
Artemision at Xanthos); RC 9, line 3 (ateleia restored); RC 47 (άτελεια προβάτων for the
κάτοικοι of Apollo Tarsenos, granted by Attalids). A l l these examples imply that
Hellenistic kings routinely taxed shrines (though were ready to exempt them from tax-
ation).
102 T r i b u t e : document 36, 16-19. Normal figures: in comparison, Jerusalem (or the

whole Jewish ethnos?) apparently paid 300 talents (Bikerman 1938: 107-8), and the
Rhodians raised 120 talents a year from K a u n o s and Stratonikeia (Pol. 30.31.7), though
the figure might include indirect taxes as well as tribute. T h e discussion of the (alleged-
ly crushing) impact of royal taxation on the cities offered by Gallant 1989 is marred by
his ignoring indirect taxation, and his imprecise use of the documents: in his first ex-
ample, the Milesian inscription Inschr. Delphinion 138, Gallant is unaware that it is not
clear whether the sum the Milesians owe to Lysimachos is regular tribute, or as pre-
ferred by many commentators, a one-off payment, perhaps as reimbursement of a loan
(Rostovtzeff 1941: 1340); his second example, Syll. 955 (also IG 12.7. 67 Β), from
Amorgos, does not concern tribute at all.
103 Ptolemaic parallels: general survey in Rostovtzeff 1941: 273—316 (296 for
Ptolemaic taxation on bee-keeping); OGIS 55 for agricultural taxes at Telmessos under
the dynast Ptolemaios; tolls: e.g. PCZ 59093; Ptolemaic taxation within the cities:
Wörrle 1979: 1 0 6 - 1 1 , Bagnall 1976: 85-7 on OGIS 41 (Samos). Ottomans: Babinger
1978: 451.
land), so that y o u y o u r s e l v e s m i g h t live in p r o s p e r i t y and so that the
revenues w h i c h y o u p r o v i d e to the k i n g m a y be greater than those
w h i c h w e r e p r o d u c e d o r i g i n a l l y ' (οττως αυτοί re iv εύβοσίαι γίνησθε και
τώι βασιλεΐ τάς προσόδους πλείους των iv άρχήι γινομένων σνντελήτε),
and c o n v e r s e l y , the S a m a r i t a n s d r e w the attention of A n t i o c h o s I V
to the fact that, if left outside the scope of the anti-Jewish p e r s e c u -
tion, ' a p p l y i n g o u r s e l v e s in security to o u r w o r k , the r e v e n u e s w h i c h
w e p r o v i d e to y o u will be greater' (the phrases used are similar). 1 " 4
T h i s is the rationale w h i c h u n d e r l i e s the p r o f e s s e d solicitude of the
k i n g s for the local c o m m u n i t i e s ' w e l l - b e i n g , p o p u l o u s n e s s , and
e n j o y m e n t of their p r o p e r t y (τά ίδια). 105
T h e royal e c o n o m y m a t t e r e d , b o t h for the S e l e u k i d state, w h i c h
d e p e n d e d on its w o r k i n g s , and f o r the s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s , at
w h o s e expense it operated; it required its o w n set of officials,
centralized at S a r d e i s or distributed in the satrapies. T h e most
i m p o r t a n t official w a s K t e s i k l e s , based in Sardeis; his exact title is
u n k n o w n , but ό επί των προσόδων, cautiously p r o p o s e d b y the
R o b e r t s , is attractive. A n t i o c h o s notified the S a r d i a n s that γεγράφα-
μεν περί πάντων προς Ζεύξιν και Κτησικλήν: the parallel e x p r e s s i o n
suggests that K t e s i k l e s , a m o n g the financial officials, held the same
p r e - e m i n e n t position as Z e u x i s did in the h i e r a r c h y of governors. 1 0 6
A p a r t f r o m K t e s i k l e s , there w e r e other 'central' officials, c o n -
centrated at S a r d e i s , w h o s e p o w e r s w e r e exercised at the level of the
c i s - T a u r i c p r o v i n c e : on a mission to Sardeis, an e m b a s s y f r o m the
east K a r i a n city of A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e dealt w i t h K t e s i k l e s ,
M e n a n d r o s the dioiketes, D e m e t r i o s the eklogistes (tax-collector or
'financial controller'?), w h o w a s acting on the report of D e m e t r i o s
the 'official in charge of the s h r i n e s ' — p r o b a b l y the successor to
N i k a n o r in this f u n c t i o n , w h i c h also entailed the control of shrine
finances.107 T h e relationships, formal or actual, b e t w e e n these
officials, and their hierarchical position in relation to K t e s i k l e s are
not clear. A t the ' p r o v i n c i a l ' level, financial officials—dioiketai and

104 Arsinoe: Jones and Habicht 1989: 319, lines 6-9. Samaritans: Jos. AJ 12.261.
105 D o c u m e n t 5, 1 - 7 ; cf. Arr. Anab. 1 . 1 7 . 1 , T h e o c r i t u s 17. 95-107; 2 M a c c . 11: 22-33.
A l s o Briant 1982: 175-225 and esp. 179-88; 23 n. 6; J. and L . Robert 1983: 189-91 for
Seleukids rebuilding cities and gathering scattered populations.
106 Ktesikles at Sardeis: Gauthier 1989: 42-5 (residence in Sardeis is likely because the

Apollonian embassy of document 44 dealt with a whole set of central financial officials
in that city). Title: J. and L . Robert 1954: 292 and η. 1 (cautious); Gauthier 1989: 4 and
n. 97.
107 Apollonian embassy: document 44, 4-24. Eklogistes·. J. and L . Robert 1954:
292—3—either an auditor ('contrôleur financier', from ίκλογίζΐοθαι), or a tax-collector
(like the Ptolemaic εγλογίοτης', from (κλέγΐΐν). A tax-receipt from second-century Baktria
proves the existence of an official named ô επί των προαόδων and subordinates named
λογευταί—inspired by Seleukid practice (Bernard and Rapin 1994: 284-9). For an official
in charge of shrine finances in the Attalid period, Malay and Nalbantoglu 1996.
oikonomoi—operated in parallel to the g o v e r n o r s and their s u b o r d i -
nates. T h e s e officials w e r e clearly distributed b e l o w the satrapy:
u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I , a dioiketes is n a m e d alongside the p h r o u r a r c h in
the A n a i t i s , and b o t h seem to have a local c o m p e t e n c e ; the
S k y t h o p o l i s dossier s h o w s that P t o l e m a i o s ' estate fell w i t h i n the
p u r v i e w of t w o different dwiketai\ finally, the m e n t i o n of ή περί
Σάρδεis οικονομία s h o w s that L y d i a w a s d i v i d e d into several
oikonomiai no d o u b t each a d m i n i s t e r e d b y its o w n oikonomos. T h i s
situation p r o b a b l y c o n t i n u e d u n d e r the Attalids: an oikonomos
appears at Pleura (not far f r o m Sardeis), w h e r e he also seems to be
dealing w i t h m a t t e r s of land and property. 1 0 8 A royal letter of
A n t i o c h o s I V , q u o t e d by J o s e p h u s (Ajf 12.261), m e n t i o n s 6 τα
βασιλικά ττράττων, u n d o u b t e d l y a local financial official, o p e r a t i n g
alongside a m e r i d a r c h , at the level of a s u b d i v i s i o n of K o i l e - S y r i a
and Phoenicia; the S e l e u k i d official N i k o m e d e s , h o n o u r e d b y the
A m y z o n i a n s as well as the epistates of the A r t e m i s i o n and the
g o v e r n o r of A l i n d a , m u s t have b e e n a local financial official of j u s t
this sort (a dioiketes?), w o r k i n g in a s u b - d i v i s i o n of the satrapy of
K a r i a — p e r h a p s a h y p a r c h y , or a specifically financial s u b - d i v i s i o n
(such as the oikonomia)}09
F o r the time b e i n g , it is impossible to d o c u m e n t exactly w h a t all
these officials ( w h o s e n a m e s are attested) actually did. T h e processes
i n v o l v e d , let alone their signficance, are still o b s c u r e , b u t the evi-
dence is suggestive. T h e A p o l l o n i a n s sent an e m b a s s y to S a r d e i s
(above), to petition K t e s i k l e s and M e n a n d r o s the dioiketes, and
faced a c o m p l a i n t f r o m D e m e t r i o s the eklogistes, w h o s u m m o n e d the
e m b a s s y b e f o r e h i m (Δημητρίου] τον εγλογιστοΰ εισκαλεσαμενον τovs
[πρεσ]βεντα5 (. . .) και διαμ[φι]σβη[τησαντο5] TTpos avTovs νττερ των ιερών
κωμών κτλ.). It seems that the eklogistes contested the A p o l l o n i a n s '
rights over a g r o u p of 'sacred villages': the issue was p e r h a p s
w h e t h e r the revenues f r o m these villages b e l o n g e d to the S e l e u k i d
state or the A p o l l o n i a n s , and the transaction d o c u m e n t s a financial

los Dioiketes near Anaitis: S EG 1.366, line 17. Oikonomia around Sardeis: document

41 D and Gauthier 1989: 131-4; the document implies some relation with landed
property, since the document records a conveyance of royal land within this oikonomia.
Attalid oikonomos: document 49 shows an Attalid oikonomos receiving instructions to
designate a spot for a shrine to erect a stele (was the shrine on royal land?); see further
§ 2 c.
"" Local financial official alongside meridarch: Bengtson 1944: 173 and n. 2.
Nikomedes: document 11 and J. and L . Robert 1983: 188. T h e obvious parallel is
Ptolemaic practice at the level of the nome. A n early Seleukid inscription from Central
Asia, recording an administrative note to two officials, Andragoras and Apollodoros,
might be another example of a governor and a financial official working in parallel
(Robert i960: 8 5 - 9 1 , though Robert suggests Apollodoros was an official in charge of
sacred matters).
official's attentiveness to local statuses and their fiscal r e p e r c u s -
sions. 1 1 0 T h e r e is e v i d e n c e for the administration of the royal
d o m a i n — l a n d - s u r v e y s , r e c o r d - k e e p i n g — u n d e r the oikonomos, w h o
(at least in K o i l e - S y r i a ) also i n t e r v e n e d in j u d i c i a l cases i n v o l v i n g
the villages (in collaboration w i t h the local g o v e r n o r ) . 1 1 1 F i n a l l y , the
dioiketes, w h o s e title s i m p l y m e a n s ' a d m i n i s t r a t o r ' , m a y have
routinely handled m a n y affairs relevant to the royal e c o n o m y .
A n t i o c h o s I I I p r o m i s e d m o n e y to the H e r a k l e i a n s , for the c o n -
struction of an a q u e d u c t , and passed on the instructions to a
dioiketes: TO re [εσόμενον ά]νήλωμα eis τήν hησκευήν τοϋ ύδραγωγίου
οιόμε[θα δεΐν δίδο]σθαι €κ βασιλικού 4φ' €τη τρία, και τrepi τούτων
γεγράφαμεν [ c.S/g τ]ώι διοικητήι. T h e dioiketes h a n d l e d dis-
b u r s e m e n t f r o m the royal treasury (το βασιλικόν): it w a s p e r h a p s in
this quality that a dioiketes received instructions (the content is n o w
lost) f r o m A n t i o c h o s I I I c o n c e r n i n g N y s a , or that M e n a n d r o s ,
the central dioiketes in S a r d e i s , i n t e r v i e w e d the e m b a s s y f r o m
A p o l l o n i a . 1 1 2 A dioiketes, S t r o u t h i o n , was instructed b y L a o d i k e to
c o n v e y to the Iasians her gift of f o r t y tons of w h e a t a y e a r , f o r ten
years; 1 1 3 u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I , a dioiketes is f o u n d s u p e r v i s i n g
the transfer of estates, seized f r o m S a m i a n citizens, back to their
original o w n e r s ( S E G 1.366, lines 1 5 - 1 8 ) . In K o i l e - S y r i a , u n d e r
A n t i o c h o s I I I , P t o l e m a i o s son of T h r a s e a s asked for the royal
rulings c o n c e r n i n g his estates to be c o m m u n i c a t e d to the local
dioiketai, H e l i o d o r o s and K l e o n , e v e n t h o u g h they w e r e not directly
affected: one ruling c o n c e r n s the j u d i c i a l authority of P t o l e m a i o s
(qua landlord), the oikonomos and the local g o v e r n o r s , another the
e x e m p t i o n of P t o l e m a i o s ' estates f r o m billeting and the repression
of abuses on the part of local soldiery; 1 1 4 the dioiketes m a y have b e e n
e x p e c t e d to supervise any decision affecting the royal e c o n o m y .
T h i s w i d e range of activities is d e s c r i b e d b y the e x p r e s s i o n 'to
handle the k i n g ' s b u s i n e s s ' , πράττζιν τα βασιλικά (Jos. AJ 12.261).
G e n e r a l l y , these e x a m p l e s illustrate the i m p o r t a n c e of the officials,
and s h o w that local c o m m u n i t i e s saw t h e m regularly, in the practi-
cal e x e c u t i o n of the royal e c o n o m y ' s d e m a n d s .

110D o c u m e n t 44, 4 - 1 4 .
111Land surveys: Herrmann 1959; RC 18-20. Record-keeping: land sale (to Laodike
I) and survey registered ΐΐς τάς βααλικας γραφάς τάς iv Σάρδεσιν, RC ig, 15~ι6 (does the
phrase imply royal archives outside of Sardeis?). Jurisdiction: SEG 29.1613, lines
13-14·
1,2Herakleia: document 31 Β, II 11—14. Nysa: 43. Apollonia: 44, 6 - 1 0 .
113D o c u m e n t 26 A, I 1 5 - 1 8 . Laodike gave 1000 medimnoi a year; an Attic medimnos is
52.176 litres, which, at 0.772 kg./litre, entails 40.279 kg. per medimnos·, 1000 Attic
medimnoi weigh 40 tonnes, 279 kg. Figures: Foxhall and Forbes 1982: 84.
1,4 SEG 29.1613, C - D , E - F , G - H .
(c) Empire at Work

S o m e b r o a d e r remarks can be m a d e a b o u t the administrative

structures of S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r . First, the various administrative
s y s t e m s w e r e separated: the h i e r a r c h y of g o v e r n o r s , the financial
officials, the military sphere of p h r o u r a r c h s directly answerable to
the king. In the decree f r o m A p o l l o n i a ( m e n t i o n e d above), a general
characteristic is the discrete authority of the financial administration
to make its o w n decisions: K t e s i k l e s and M e n a n d r o s are sole
recipients of petitions, D e m e t r i o s , the eklogistes, has the p o w e r to
change ( K L V € Î V ) the status quo, after hearing an e m b a s s y s u m m o n e d
on his initiative. Z e u x i s is n o w h e r e to be seen, and the cavalry
c o m m a n d e r stationed at A p o l l o n i a intervenes i n f o r m a l l y , i n t e r c e d -
ing w i t h D e m e t r i o s — a n action w h i c h s h o w s w h e r e the p o w e r of
decision lay.
T h e cloisonnement of the different b r a n c h e s of administration is
usually e x p l a i n e d as the 'separation of p o w e r s ' into d e p a r t m e n t s that
c o u l d check each other, to p r e v e n t the e m e r g e n c e of local p o w e r
bases. T h e practice is not specifically S e l e u k i d . T h e A c h a i m e n i d
k i n g took care to see that garrisons in various strategic places (for
instance, Sardeis) answered directly to h i m . A f t e r c a p t u r i n g Sardeis,
A l e x a n d e r n a m e d a c o m m a n d e r of the citadel, a satrap of L y d i a , and
a financial official; an ordinance of P h i l i p V s h o w s h o w garrison-
c o m m a n d e r s and financial officials t h r o u g h o u t his k i n g d o m w e r e
m e a n t to control and report on each other. 1 1 5 Rather, the practice is
inseparable f r o m the exercise of imperial p o w e r : A n t i o c h o s ' last g e s -
ture in A s i a M i n o r , after the defeat of M a g n e s i a , w a s to a p p o i n t , in
s c r u p u l o u s b u t futile respect of the rule, a g o v e r n o r of L y d i a and
a separate c o m m a n d e r of S a r d e i s ( L i v . 37.44.7). T h e r e are other
possible explanations, not m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e : p e r h a p s a c o n t i n u -
ously felt or passively inherited inclination for efficiency, a separa-
tion in d i f f e r e n t styles and aims of g o v e r n m e n t .
In practice, the distinction should not be o v e r e m p h a s i z e d . T h e
g o v e r n o r s intervened in the royal e c o n o m y : a strategos transferred a
royal l a n d - d o n a t i o n to its beneficiary; u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I , Z e u x i s
m a n a g e d the gift to the S a r d i a n s of t i m b e r f r o m the royal forests of
T a r a n z a , and took decisions on l a n d o w n e r s h i p at A m y z o n (dedicat-
ing αγροί, to the g o d s of the A r t e m i s i o n ) . 1 1 6 A t S k y t h o p o l i s , j u r i s -

1.5 A c h a i m e n i d s : L e w i s 1977: 53 n. 21, to w h i c h add H d t . 1.154.3, a t t r i b u t i n g the

practice at Sardeis to C y r u s the G r e a t ; H o r n b l o w e r 1982: 147—52, g a t h e r i n g e x a m p l e s

b u t w a r n i n g against excessive f o r m a l i s m . A l e x a n d e r : A r r . Anab. 1 . 1 7 . 7 . Philip V : IG 12
suppl. 644 (same d o c u m e n t H a t z o p o u l o s 1996: ii. no. 13). See also O r r i e u x 1983: 2 5 - 6 :
'separation of p o w e r s ' in P t o l e m a i c E g y p t .
1.6 L a n d - d o n a t i o n (under A n t i o c h o s I): RC 1 0 - 1 3 . Z e u x i s : d o c u m e n t s 1; 7.
diction o v e r the villages w a s exercised b y the oikonomos, the local
g o v e r n o r s , the strategos of K o i l e - S y r i a and P h o e n i c i a , and the
p h r o u r a r c h s . 1 1 7 T h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of a royal decision c o n c e r n i n g
the sale of royal land c o u l d w e a v e b e t w e e n the h i e r a r c h y of
g o v e r n o r s and the 'financial' administration: A n t i o c h o s II o r d e r e d
M e t r o p h a n e s , p r o b a b l y the strategos of the H e l l e s p o n t i n e satrapy, to
see to the c o n v e y a n c e of a piece of royal land sold to L a o d i k e I, and
to record in the S a r d e i s archives the sale and c o n c o m i t a n t land
s u r v e y ; M e t r o p h a n e s passed the order on to an oikonomos,
N i k o m a c h o s , w h o in turn gave instructions to their final recipient, a
h v p a r c h , theoretically a subordinate of M e t r o p h a n e s the g o v e r n o r
(RC 18—20). 118 L i k e w i s e , the investigation of the finances of the
T e m p l e at J e r u s a l e m u n d e r S e l e u k o s I V i n v o l v e d the strategos of
K o i l e - S y r i a and P h o e n i c i a , the king, and H e l i o d o r o s , ό em τών
πραγμάτων, the chief minister, rather than the 'financial administra-
tion' ( B i c k e r m a n 1980: 1 5 9 - 8 1 ) .
C o l l a b o r a t i o n b e t w e e n officials w a s r e c o g n i z e d as a necessity.
W h e n a p p o i n t i n g N i k a n o r to his responsibilities as h i g h - p r i e s t and
ό €77t των ιερών, A n t i o c h o s I I I gave a clear o r d e r to Z e u x i s : σννταξον
ovv συνεργείν αύτώι els τα προσήκοντα TOLS προδεδηλωμενο^', 'pass on
the instruction to w o r k w i t h h i m in the matters relevant to w h a t has
j u s t been said [ N i k a n o r ' s duties, the k i n g ' s rationale and e x p e c t a -
tion]'. 1 1 9 T h e v e r b used is συνεργεΐν, and the collaboration it implies
in the routine of administration w a s h a r d l y a special p o l i c y of
A n t i o c h o s I I I or a specific feature of N i k a n o r ' s office. T h e tribute
w a s m a n a g e d by the financial officials (under the eklogistes?), but a
practical role m u s t h a v e b e e n p l a y e d by the military f o r c e s dis-
seminated in the satrapies, and b y the local g o v e r n o r s ; at Jerusalem,
the garrison c o m m a n d e r w a s responsible for the collection of
tribute. 1 2 0 T h e g o v e r n o r s and the garrisons p r o b a b l y collaborated in

117 SEG 29.1613, lines 13-16.

113 T h i s interpretation differs from M u s t i 1965. I prefer Welles's sequence: Antiochos
II to Metrophanes (RC 18), Metrophanes to the oikonomos (RC 19), letter of the
oikonomos to the hyparch [now lost]: these documents were inscribed in reverse chrono-
logical order, but the stele ended with the report of the hyparch, the last in the
administrative sequence (RC 20). It is possible, however, that Metrophanes, instead of
a strategos, was a high official in the 'financial' administration
119 D o c u m e n t 4, 4 1 - 3 .
120 Billows 1995: 279-84 speculates that the hyparchies were the main unit for tribute

collection, just as the chiliarchies, territorial divisions in Asia Minor, had been under
Antigonos M o n o p h t h a l m o s (but there is no evidence for the hyparchies). It is still not
clear whether Seleukid indirect taxation was farmed out. OGIS 55, lines 16—17, proves
the practice of tax-farming in Telmessos under the dynast Ptolemaios. For infra-
structure assisting in the collection of indirect taxes (by tax-farmers?) under the
Attalids: lex portorii provinciae Asiae (SEG 39.1180), lines 6 7 - 8 (εποίκια και [σταθμού;]
βασιλικούς, ovs βασιλεύς "Ατταλος Εύμενονς νιος τελωνίας χάριν εστήαατο).
collecting the agricultural taxation, the rights on herds and b e e -
hives, the poll-tax, and other personal taxes; military forces, s u c h as
the cavalry stationed at A p o l l o n i a or the phylakitai in the h y p a r c h y
of Eriza (both on i m p o r t a n t roads), p r e s u m a b l y h e l p e d to raise taxes
on the m o v e m e n t of g o o d s and control the m o v e m e n t of persons, as
well as collecting tribute f r o m local c o m m u n i t i e s , as the garrison
c o m m a n d e r did at Jerusalem. 1 2 1 T h e aspects w h i c h P o l y b i o s dis-
t i n g u i s h e d in his subtle d e s c r i p t i o n of the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e — t r i b u t e ,
garrisons, royal o r d e r s ( 2 1 . 4 1 . 2 ; see above, I n t r o d u c t i o n ) — m e r g e d
on the g r o u n d , in the e x e c u t i o n of imperial administration.
T h e second general feature that e m e r g e s is the pattern of the sur-
v i v i n g material: scanty i n f o r m a t i o n on the local officials (strategoi,
h y p a r c h s ) , and, in c o m p a r i s o n , the f r e q u e n c y of material pertaining
to central officials, concentrated at Sardeis. T h e pattern reflects the
centralization of c i s - T a u r i c A s i a M i n o r under A n t i o c h o s I I I (this
m a y have b e e n the case u n d e r earlier S e l e u k i d rulers as well). 1 2 2 It is
h a r d l y surprising that the S a r d i a n s or the Prienians sent e m b a s s i e s
to Z e u x i s : he p r o b a b l y resided in the first city, and Priene is part of
Ionia, traditionally g o v e r n e d together w i t h L y d i a (above). 1 2 3
H o w e v e r , L a o d i k e i a on L y k o s also addressed itself directly to
Z e u x i s , qua v i c e r o y of the p r o v i n c e , rather than to the strategos of
P h r y g i a ; likewise, A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e dealt w i t h the financial
officials at Sardeis, not w i t h any local officials or governors. 1 2 4 A f t e r
the disappearance of S e l e u k i d control in 189, the A m y z o n i a n s
w o u l d r e m e m b e r s e n d i n g e m b a s s i e s to Z e u x i s , not to the strategos of
Karia. 1 2 5 T h i s fact will not be c h a n g e d b y n e w evidence: even if it
turns out that A m y z o n , L a o d i k e i a on L y k o s , or A p o l l o n i a u n d e r
S a l b a k e routinely dealt w i t h the local strategos, it will remain true
that w i d e l y separated cities addressed t h e m s e l v e s to the viceroy
Z e u x i s or the central financial officials. T h e S e l e u k i d practice of
a p p o i n t i n g a v i c e r o y and financial high-officials o v e r the w h o l e cis-
T a u r i c region s u b o r d i n a t e d the satrapies and their g o v e r n o r s to a
v e r s i o n of the A c h a i m e n i d satrapy of Sardeis, w h i c h had i n c l u d e d
m o s t of A n a t o l i a in a single unit. 1 2 6

121 Jerusalem: 2 Macc. 4: 28.

122 RC 18-20, with its central registration at Sardeis of a land-sale near K y z i k o s , or
Syll. 426, which shows Bargylia lavishly praising Alexandros (brother of Laodike I and
probably viceroy for cis-Tauric Asia Minor) are suggestive.
123 Sardeis: document 40. Priene: 33.
124 Laodikeia: document 32, 3-4. Apollonia: 44.
125 D o c u m e n t 47, 4-6. T h e Seleukid official honoured in document 12 could be the

missing provincial governor.

126 T h e Seleukid cis-Tauric province had a different shape, because of the loss of
eastern Phrygia to the Galatians, and the inclusion of the T r o a d and the Hellespontine
regions (the old satrapy of Daskyleion). O n the satrapy of Sardeis, L e w i s 1977: 52-3,
 A third remark c o n c e r n s m e t h o d and presentation. T h e result of
this s u r v e y of the m e a g r e e v i d e n c e is an inert p a n o r a m a of 'insti-
t u t i o n s ' — n o t substantially different f r o m B i c k e r m a n ' s classic
Institutions des Séleucides or B e n g t s o n ' s k i n g d o m - b y - k i n g d o m
s t u d y , Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit. B u t w e can also
e x p l o r e the i m p l i c a t i o n s w h i c h the d o c u m e n t s hold out and the
q u e s t i o n s they raise. S e e n u n d e r this light, A s i a M i n o r u n d e r
A n t i o c h o s I I I is rich in d o c u m e n t s w h i c h are u n i q u e l y interesting,
because they illustrate e x p e r i e n c e w i t h specific e v i d e n c e .
W e m a y start once m o r e f r o m the P a m u k ç u stele. T h e S e l e u k i d
state appears as an apparatus for transmitting and issuing orders,
f r o m the king at the top, to the subordinate officials w h o actually
gave the instruction to inscribe the letters onto the stele, and w h o
m a y have left a discreet trace in the three n u m e r a l s carved on the
stele p e d i m e n t ( M a l a y 1987). In this w o r l d , e v e r y o n e says ' w e ' ;
p a t r o n y m i c s and ethnics are d r o p p e d ; the language is koine, not
dialect: w h i l e a dedication by P t o l e m a i o s , son of T h r a s e a s , at Soloi,
is in D o r i c , the series of his m e m o r a n d a to A n t i o c h o s I I I is w r i t t e n
in functional koine,127 T h e participants share a language of orders:
the P a m u k ç u stele, like other similar d o c u m e n t s (RC 1 0 - 1 3 , R C
18-20) is structured b y the v e r b συντάσσω, w h i c h designates instruc-
tions, or, m o s t o f t e n , the order to give orders; 1 2 8 it describes the
p r o c e s s b y w h i c h the apparatus of e m p i r e transmits the royal o r d e r
d o w n the h i e r a r c h y , a new s u b - o r d e r b e i n g generated and passed on
at each stage.
T h e flow of o r d e r s d o w n w a r d s also g e n e r a t e d responses f r o m
b e l o w : the oikonomos N i k o m a c h o s asked the h y p a r c h to report on
the c o m p l e t i o n of the land-sale to L a o d i k e I b y A n t i o c h o s I I ,
especially the a r c h i v i n g of the sale at Sardeis (RC 19, line 13: ώς αν
συντελεσθψ γράφον και ήμ,ΐν ' w h e n it is done, write to us also'); part
of the h y p a r c h ' s report survives (RC 20). I n s t r u c t i o n s w e r e also
notified ' h o r i z o n t a l l y ' , on account of the parallel n e t w o r k s of
administration: a royal edict c o n c e r n i n g e x e m p t i o n f r o m billeting
for P t o l e m a i o s ' estates w a s sent to the military officers in the region,
Petit 1990: 180. T h e importance of the central financial officials shows that the phe-
nomenon is one of administrative centralization rather than Zeuxis' personal power.
127 N o patronymics: Bikerman 1938: 193; Robert i960: 87 n. 5; J. and L. Robert 1983:

114 and n. 140 for examples. Ptolemaios' dedication: document 21 and commentary.
128 U n d e r Antiochos III: document 1, 7 and 3, 5; 15, 3; SEG 29.1613, line 2; RC 44,
lines 33-41. Other Seleukid examples; RC 10, line 4, RC 11, lines 19 and 24, RC 12, line
5; RC 18, lines 19 and 24; RC 19, line 6; Robert 1945: 12, for an occurrence in a frag-
mentary letter of a king Antiochos (Appendix 3): [καλώ; ovv ποιήσ]αις σύνταξα ς restored
by Piejko ( S E G 39.1122, though the rest of the restoration is unacceptable); Herrmann
1959: Συντάξαντος βασιλέως Άντιόχου όροι της ΑΙγαίδος. Ptolemaic: RC 14, line 14;
Preisigke, Wörterbuch s.v.; C. Ord. Ptol., no. 24, line 5. Attalid: Segre 1938: 190 line 7.
b u t also to the local financial officers ( S EG 29. 1 6 1 3 , lines 38-9). W e
learn f r o m an A m y z o n i a n honorific decree that the epistates of the
A r t e m i s i o n , M e n e s t r a t o s , w r o t e to Z e u x i s , and ' o f t e n ' to N i k o m e d e s
and C h i o n i s . N o d o u b t M e n e s t r a t o s did m e n t i o n the A m y z o n i a n s '
έννοια t o w a r d s the S e l e u k i d kings and Z e u x i s in his letters, as the
A m y z o n i a n s c l a i m — a m o n g other matters, s u c h as a c k n o w l e d g e -
m e n t of o r d e r s addressed to h i m or to n e i g h b o u r i n g officials,
receipts, reports on o r d e r s carried out, d e m a n d s to his superiors or
'colleagues'. 1 2 9 A t times, c o m m u n i c a t i o n w a s f a c e - t o - f a c e , w h e n
Z e u x i s was on c a m p a i g n (for w h i c h there is g o o d e v i d e n c e ) or on his
circuit ( u n d o c u m e n t e d , b u t p r o b a b l e ) . T h e h i p p a r c h stationed at
A p o l l o n i a w e n t twice, p r o b a b l y on official business, to S a r d e i s
(where he h e l p e d the A p o l l o n i a n s in their dealings w i t h a financial
administrator); u n d e r S e l e u k o s I V , the strategos of K o i l e - S y r i a
and Phoenicia w e n t to see the k i n g and i n f o r m e d h i m of s u r p l u s
a c c u m u l a t i n g in the T e m p l e at Jerusalem. 1 3 0
T h e administrative s y s t e m , beside c o n v e y i n g o r d e r s and p r o -
d u c i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n , generated its o w n actions. T h e case of
A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e is instructive. D e m e t r i o s , ο ivi των Ιερών,
reached a decision c o n c e r n i n g the 'sacred villages' near the c i t y —
p e r h a p s that, qua sacred c o m m u n i t i e s , they should not b e l o n g to
the city, b u t fall w i t h i n the χώρα, w h e r e they w o u l d be liable to
tribute. W e do not k n o w h o w he reached his decision (personal
inspection? the d e n u n c i a t i o n of a n e i g h b o u r i n g city? the petition of
the villagers? the report of a subordinate official?); at any rate, he
reported to D e m e t r i o s the eklogistes, w h o acted on the i n f o r m a t i o n .
T h e eklogistes c a u g h t an A p o l l o n i a n e m b a s s y w h i c h w a s at S a r d e i s
on another business, s u m m o n i n g t h e m f o r several hearings; he k n e w
that A p o l l o n i a n representatives w e r e at Sardeis, that their city had
b e e n the subject of a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n f r o m <5 επί τών ιερών, and w h a t
action to take. 1 3 1 T h e S e l e u k i d administration appears active and
i n f o r m e d , p e r h a p s e v e n b u r e a u c r a t i c in the W e b e r i a n sense (ration-
ally and a u t o n o m o u s l y organized). 1 3 2 It is true that an excessively
m o d e r n i s t i c interpretation should be avoided. T h e w h o l e p r o c e s s
w a s c u m b e r s o m e , w i t h two j o u r n e y s f r o m A p o l l o n i a to S a r d e i s and

125 D o c u m e n t 10, 7 - 1 2 . T h e s e operations are well documented in the Zenon dossier

(examples analysed in Orrieux 1983). Another example of horizontal communication:

document 49, where a letter from the Attalid 'high-priest' to an oikonomos is also trans-
mitted to another official, probably the dioiketes.
130 Apollonia: document 44, 4-24. T h e hipparch probably did not go to Sardeis

especially to assist the Apollonians: the second time, he arrived there only after the
Apollonians. Jerusalem: 2 M a c c . 3: 7.
131 D o c u m e n t 44.
132 W e b e r 1968: iii. 956-1005.
back (180 k m . and f o u r or five d a y s each w a y via H i e r a p o l i s and
A p o l l o n i a on M a e a n d e r , the f u t u r e T r i p o l i s ) ; 1 3 3 the city and the
administration c o m m u n i c a t e d not b y m e m o r a n d a , b u t t h r o u g h
embassies, since e v e n a s u b j e c t city existed as a s e l f - g o v e r n i n g b o d y
(next section); finally, the m a i n resource of the A p o l l o n i a n s w a s not
appeal to b u r e a u c r a t i c rules, b u t the patronage of a local S e l e u k i d
officer. N o n e t h e l e s s , the 'archaic' features do not change the impli-
cation of a p o w e r f u l and active administration (J. and L . R o b e r t
1954: 299).
T h e A m y z o n i a n inscriptions f u r t h e r illustrate the extension of
S e l e u k i d state p o w e r . A m y z o n , w i t h its m o n u m e n t a l shrine and its
scattered villages, lay h i g h in the foothills of M t . L a t m o s , six h o u r s
a w a y f r o m the M a e a n d e r , and f o u r h o u r s f r o m A l i n d a — u n l i k e
A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e , A m y z o n w a s not located on a m a j o r
route. 1 3 4 Y e t the A m y z o n i a n s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y dealt w i t h a S e l e u k i d
official appointed over the shrine, the g o v e r n o r of A l i n d a , a financial
official (see a b o v e , on N i k o m e d e s ) , the v i c e r o y Z e u x i s , an officer
( w i t h troops) sent b y Z e u x i s , p o s s i b l y another (now o b s c u r e )
official, and finally the k i n g himself: six or seven levels of S e l e u k i d
authority. 1 3 5 A m y z o n was not e x c e p t i o n a l , as s h o w n b y the case of
A i g a i and T e m n o s , located in the m o u n t a i n s of Aiolis. In the 390s
( a d m i t t e d l y a t r o u b l e d time for Persian authority in A s i a M i n o r ) ,
a c c o r d i n g to a speaker in X e n o p h o n ( D e r k y l l i d a s ) , these cities could
p l a u s i b l y be said to be outside the G r e a t K i n g ' s authority (Hellen.
4.8.5). In the Hellenistic period, h o w e v e r , they lay w i t h i n reach of
the Hellenistic empires: these ' S e l e u k i d ' cities w e r e taken o v e r b y
A t t a l o s I, recaptured b y A c h a i o s , taken again b y A t t a l o s I, in 218
(Pol. 5.77.4) and p r o b a b l y fell back into S e l e u k i d control in 197.
T h e territory of A i g a i w a s s u r v e y e d on the orders of A n t i o c h o s I I ;
the city benefited f r o m A t t a l i d architectural e u e r g e t i s m . Just as
tellingly, w e learn f r o m a chance reference in a decree of the
T e m n i a n s that they celebrated a contest for D i o n y s o s and the 'the
k i n g s ' — w h e t h e r S e l e u k i d or A t t a l i d , the fact implies royal e u e r g e t -
ism, s u c h as the subsidies w e k n o w the city received f r o m the

133 It would take a day or two to journey from Apollonia through the T a b a i plateau,

then over the formidable Baba D a g (ancient M t . K a d m o s ) to Laodikeia (J. and L.

Robert 1954: 2 5 - 3 1 , whence it emerges that the crossing could take five or six hours).
F r o m Laodikeia to Sardeis, the traveller might take four days (the T e n T h o u s a n d took
four stages to travel from Sardeis to Kolossai: X e n . Anab. 1.2.6).
134 Settlement pattern at A m y z o n : J. and L. Robert 1983: 2 7 1 - 3 . Remoteness: ibid.

17; 50-2 and 59-61.

135 Documents 5-14, 47. T h e unnamed official is honoured in 12, but since the begin-

ning of the decree is lost, it is unclear whether this is yet another official in addition to
Menestratos, Chionis, and Nikomedes, or the successor of one of these.
Attalids. 1 3 6 If the d o c u m e n t a t i o n w e r e fuller, the e x p e r i e n c e of
A i g a i , T e m n o s , and other h i g h l a n d c o m m u n i t i e s s u c h as K i l d a r a
w o u l d resemble the dealings of A m y z o n w i t h the S e l e u k i d a d m i n i s -
tration.
O n e of the services the A m y z o n i a n s praised M e n e s t r a t o s f o r w a s
his care ύπερ τών άλλων ημών πολιτών τών κατοικούντων τάς αύτονόμους
προσκαλούμενος εις τον συνοικισμον τού Αρτεμισίου, 'for the rest of our
citizens, those w h o live in the a u t o n o m o u s (cities), b y inviting t h e m
to the r e p o p u l a t i o n of the A r t e m i s i o n ' . 1 3 7 T h e A m y z o n i a n s speak
of ' i n v i t i n g ' ( t h r o u g h p r o c l a m a t i o n s in the cities?), t h o u g h one
m i g h t w o n d e r if the epist.at.es of the A r t e m i s i o n resorted to m o r e
pressing means. A t any rate, M e n e s t r a t o s w a s e x p e c t e d to k n o w
w h e r e the other citizens ( p r o b a b l y r e f u g e e s in the a f t e r m a t h of the
c a m p a i g n of c.203) r e s i d e d — t h e ' a u t o n o m o u s ' cities, such as
M y l a s a or A l a b a n d a . A t Herakleia, the situation did not involve
citizens, b u t 'villages' and ' d w e l l e r s ' ( p r o b a b l y agricultural serfs):
the H e r a k l e i a n s asked Z e u x i s that these be ' r o u n d e d u p ' : οπως και οί
δήμοι και οί οίκηται συναχθώσιν καθότι και πρότερον νπήρχον.138
P r e s u m a b l y they had fled to the territory of other cities, or taken
r e f u g e in the L a t m o s ; h o w Z e u x i s w a s e x p e c t e d to b r i n g t h e m back
is unclear. N o n e t h e l e s s , the H e r a k l e i a n s h o p e d that Z e u x i s w o u l d
do so, w h i c h p r o v i d e s a subject c o m m u n i t y ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the
S e l e u k i d state's capabilities. In b o t h cases, the S e l e u k i d state played
along: its c o n c e r n w a s the control of the h u m a n resource (to avoid
d i m i n u t i o n in i n c o m e t h r o u g h the flight of p r o d u c e r s ) 1 3 9 — a n o p e r -
ation i m p l y i n g strong capabilities and constant attention.
T h e prostagma c o n c e r n i n g N i k a n o r raises questions a b o u t its
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . H o w w a s the k i n g ' s p e r f o r m a t i v e utterance
realized? S o m e t i m e s , this w a s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d : in the e x e c u t i o n of

156 Aigai: Herrmann 1959; Robert 1937: 82-7 for buildings. T e m n o s : Herrmann
1979: 242-3, lines 9-10: άγων for Dionysos and the kings (decree found in Teos); RC 48,
fragmentary letter of Eumenes II to the city. T h e same remarks hold true for Mysia,
only loosely subjected to the Achaimenids (Anab. 3.2.23-26), yet firmly under Seleukid
control.
137 D o c u m e n t 10, 14-16; next section for 'the autonomous ones'. J. and L . Robert

1983: 191, remark on the implication that people can come and go from 'autonomous'
cities, and speculates that this was not the case for subject cities or the villages. But
citizens of such subject cities as Sardeis or Lysimacheia were given Milesian citizenship
in 202/3 a n d 197/6 (Günther 1988: nos. 3, 4).
138 D o c u m e n t 31 Β, III 10. T e r r i t o r y of Herakleia: Robert 1987: 198-214.
139 RC 18, 1 1 - 1 3 , indicates that Antiochos II sold an estate with its laoi, including
those which had moved to other villages, which implies some control of the human
resource. Babinger 1978: 235, describes the Ottoman prohibition of movement by the
subject populations keen to avoid taxation or corvée. T h i s sort of movement is an
inevitable by-product of an imperial space with differentiated statuses and privileged
communities.
his duties, N i k a n o r could rely on the collaboration (auvepyefv, see
above) of the local g o v e r n o r s , w h o w o u l d e n f o r c e N i k a n o r ' s royally
decreed authority. M o r e p r o b l e m a t i c : A n t i o c h o s I I I had d e c i d e d
that N i k a n o r w o u l d be m e n t i o n e d in legal acts; this decision was
c o n v e y e d to the s u b j e c t s b y ' p u b l i c a t i o n ' on stelai in the most
p r o m i n e n t shrines. W e can assume this a m o u n t e d to w i d e p u b l i c i t y ;
h o w was this item then i m p l e m e n t e d ? H o w c o u l d Z e u x i s and his
s u b o r d i n a t e s c h e c k on c o m p l i a n c e , and h o w c o u l d they sanction dis-
o b e d i e n c e ? In A m y z o n , the epistates of the A r t e m i s i o n c o u l d have
e n f o r c e d the o r d e r , or r e m i n d e d the A m y z o n i a n s of it. B u t A m y z o n
( w h e r e the e p o n y m y of N i k a n o r appears in 202 and 201) and
X a n t h o s ( w h e r e the e p o n y m y appears in 196) w e r e taken o v e r by the
S e l e u k i d s l o n g after the original p r o m u l g a t i o n of the prostagma,
w h i c h s h o w s that a b o d y of k n o w l e d g e w a s kept alive a m o n g the
administration. 1 4 0
A n o t h e r series of processes w h i c h can be e x p l o r e d in s o m e detail
relates to the office of ' h i g h - p r i e s t of the sanctuaries' in c i s - T a u r i c
A s i a M i n o r c o m b i n e d w i t h the authority of 6 i-rri τών ίερών. 141 A s
h i g h - p r i e s t , N i k a n o r was meant to take care (alongside 'the other
t h i n g s ' ) of 'the sacrifices', the regular s c h e d u l e of o f f e r i n g s in the
local shrines, p r e s u m a b l y b y d i s p e n s i n g royal subsidies and actually
p e r f o r m i n g sacrifice, as a representative of the k i n g ' s p i o u s zeal; the
royal subsidies to the T e m p l e at Jerusalem, to finance local
sacrifices, offer a parallel ( A J 12.140, 13.243; 2 M a c c . 3: 2 - 3 ) . A s
'official in charge of the sanctuaries', N i k a n o r ' s brief w a s to
a d m i n i s t e r 'the finances and the other matters'. A g a i n , J e r u s a l e m
m i g h t p r o v i d e a parallel: the T e m p l e w a s in receipt of annual s u b -
sidies f r o m S e l e u k o s I V , for the p u r p o s e of sacrifices; the 'προστάτης
a p p o i n t e d over the s a n c t u a r y ' , a Jew a p p o i n t e d to act as a local
S e l e u k i d official, reported to the g o v e r n o r of the satrapy that surplus
f r o m the subsidies w a s a c c u m u l a t i n g in the T e m p l e treasury; the

140 Prostagma: document 4. Amyzon: 9, 10. Xanthos: 23, 24. T h e actual implementa-

tion may have been loose. In the Καρδάκων κώμη near Telmessos, a contract concluded
in 193 (Segre 1938: 190, B, lines 1-2) would qualify for the eponymy of Nikanor, and,
in addition, of the high-priest of Antiochos and his ancestors and of the priestess of
Laodike; none of these appears on the contract. L'nless the eponymy of these three
officials had been abrogated, the Kardakes, in spite of being a 'military colony' probably
founded by Antiochos I I I , did not bother to observe the regulations of three royal
edicts, publicized on stelai in the most prominent shrines. On the other hand, Kadoos,
priest of Apollo Pleurenos, when applying to Nikanor for permission to inscribe a list of
the god's initiates, duly asked 'that I be allowed to set up a stele, having inscribed his
(Nikanor's) name . . .' (document 49).
141 D o c u m e n t 4, 29-40. T h e r e is no trace of an official in charge of shrines/sacred

affairs in the relations between Seleukos II and Labraunda (Crampa 1969), perhaps
because the office lapsed under Seleukos II, which would explain w h y Antiochos III
referred to precedent under Antiochos II (document 4, 40-1).
matter w a s investigated by the 'chief m i n i s t e r ' , H e l i o d o r o s , w h o
w e n t to inspect (επίσκεψις) the T e m p l e finances (but, the story
goes, w a s p r e v e n t e d b y supernatural visions: 2 M a c c . 3: 2 - 1 3 , w i t h
B i c k e r m a n 1985: 1 5 9 - 7 2 ) . M e n e s t r a t o s , the epistates of the
A r t e m i s i o n , may have technically been a s u b o r d i n a t e of N i k a n o r ,
acting in the same capacity as the prostates of the T e m p l e at
Jerusalem. O n e d o c u m e n t e d action is the report filed b y D e m e t r i o s ,
0 €7τ! των ιερών, to the eklogistes (above), p r o b a b l y a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n
on the status of 'sacred villages' near A p o l l o n i a ; as the R o b e r t s
o b s e r v e , D e m e t r i o s seems to h a v e e n j o y e d some authority in all
t h i n g s sacred, i n c l u d i n g , in this case a pair of villages d e p e n d e n t on
a city (J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 2 9 6 - 7 ) .
A final, i n t r i g u i n g , d o c u m e n t , is i m p o r t a n t , first because it p r o -
v i d e s m o r e specific e v i d e n c e for the office επί τών Ιερών and second
because it c o n f i r m s o u r i m p r e s s i o n s of S e l e u k i d administration in
general. T h i s is the recently p u b l i s h e d list of the mystai of A p o l l o
P l e u r e n o s , in L y d i a . D a t i n g to E u m e n e s I I , it m e n t i o n s that the
erection of the stele w a s authorized b y the S e l e u k i d official in charge
of sacred matters, N i k a n o r (and later c o n f i r m e d by N i k a n o r ' s
successor u n d e r the A t t a l i d s , one E u t h y d e m o s ) . 1 4 2

Memorandum to Euthydemos the high-priest from Kadoos, the long-

standing priest of Apollo in Pleura: I earlier asked Nikanor, under
Antiochos the king, for permission to put up in the shrine a stele on which
1 should record his name, and mine and that of the initiates (mystai), and
now I ask you, if it seems appropriate to give that order, to write to
Asklepiades the oikonomos to give me a place in which I may set up the stele
on which I may record your name and mine and that of the initiates.

T h e affair thus m o b i l i z e d the w h o l e apparatus of administrative

c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( c o m p l e t e w i t h υπόμνημα and the ' o r d e r - t o - g i v e -
o r d e r s ' , expressed b y συντάσσω) b e t w e e n s u b j e c t , h i g h official, and
subordinate o f f i c i a l s — n o t once, b u t t w i c e , first u n d e r the S e l e u k i d s ,
then u n d e r the A t t a l i d s — b e f o r e selected parts of the dossier w e r e
p u b l i s h e d as authorization for the inscribed list. B u t the w h o l e
i n v o l v e m e n t of the imperial state is all the m o r e striking because the
matter, initiated b y a m e m o r a n d u m f r o m the priest of A p o l l o
P l e u r e n o s , seems p u r e l y local: the desire of the priest to put u p a list
of the mystai, for w h a t e v e r reason (perhaps as a r e l i g i o u s - c e r e m o n i a l
gesture, or to help control access to certain religious activities,
restricted to initiates?). But w h y did K a d o o s , the priest, involve
the S e l e u k i d and A t t a l i d authorities? H e did not m e r e l y f o l l o w
the prostagma of 209, and, as he was r e q u i r e d to do, take care to

142 D o c u m e n t 49.
m e n t i o n N i k a n o r ' s h i g h - p r i e s t h o o d in the h e a d i n g of his d o c u m e n t .
W h y did K a d o o s feel the need, or obligation, to petition (άξιόω)
N i k a n o r in the first place, for p e r m i s s i o n to erect a stele, listing the
initiates of a local deity, in that deity's o w n shrine, and w h y did he
ask N i k a n o r ' s successor to designate a place, still w i t h i n the shrine,
for the stele? T h e exact c i r c u m s t a n c e s are still unclear; p r o x i m i t y to
Sardeis, N i k a n o r ' s residence, m a y have s u b j e c t e d the shrine at
P l e u r a to m o r e intense f o r m s of S e l e u k i d control, or close scrutiny
b y S e l e u k i d officials and hence to K a d o o s ' p r u d e n t request for
permission; the issue of p r o p e r t y m a y i m p l y that this particular
shrine w a s built on land s o m e h o w considered the k i n g ' s o w n . It
w o u l d be u n c a u t i o u s to b u i l d a general picture f r o m this single piece
of e v i d e n c e , e x t r a p o l a t i n g to claim that the S e l e u k i d state exercised
tight control over the internal adminstration of every local shrine in
the royal land. N o n e t h e l e s s , the stele f r o m Pleura illustrates one
possible case, b y attesting direct and close control, detailed i n v o l v e -
m e n t w i t h the affairs of a local shrine, and a s u b j e c t ' s need to obtain
p e r m i s s i o n for a local gesture; all these aspects taking shape in
b u r e a u c r a t i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n b o t h vertical and horizontal. It thus
b e l o n g s to the b o d y of e v i d e n c e that implies, at least for certain
parts of the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e , an active, attentive administration
e n d o w e d w i t h strong capacities f o r control and i n v o l v e m e n t .

(d) Institutions as Rhetoric

W T hen A n t i o c h o s 111 designated a h i g h - p r i e s t and official o v e r all the

shrines of c i s - T a u r i c A s i a M i n o r , in reference to p r e c e d e n t ' u n d e r
o u r g r a n d f a t h e r ' , asked a h i e r a r c h y of s u b o r d i n a t e s to p u b l i c i z e
the decision e p i g r a p h i c a l l y , and r e q u i r e d that the h i g h - p r i e s t be
i n c l u d e d in the h e a d i n g of all legal acts, he w a s issuing a c o m p l e x
message about imperial p o w e r . T h e p r o c l a i m e d intention that
N i k a n o r take care of sacrifices as h i g h - p r i e s t and of shrine finances
as 6 i-rri τών ιερών p r o c l a i m e d authority and l e g i t i m a c y , and i m p o s e d
on the i m m e n s e landscape of A s i a M i n o r , f r a g m e n t e d g e o g r a p h i c -
ally and historically, the u n i f o r m i t y of imperial administration ( C h .
ι § 1). A n a l o g o u s l y , the c o m p u l s o r y e p o n y m y of N i k a n o r b e l o n g e d
to a set of institutions w h i c h i m p o s e d the S e l e u k i d presence on the
passage of time, n o w m e a s u r e d in the subject c o m m u n i t i e s b y
M a c e d o n i a n m o n t h s and S e l e u k i d years, b u t also by the slower
beat, in years and decades, of kings ruling or officials' o c c u p y i n g
their f u n c t i o n (βασιλενόντοίν Άντιόχον και Άντιόχον τον νιου . . . ίττ'
άρχιερεως Νικάνορος), and the even broader scale of the S e l e u k i d era,
w h i c h c o v e r e d o v e r a c e n t u r y of S e l e u k i d p o w e r b y the time of
A n t i o c h o s III. 1 4 3 T h e i m p o s i t i o n of a S e l e u k i d c o n c e p t u a l g e o -
g r a p h y and a S e l e u k i d time are acts of s y m b o l i c a l violence, as real
as the military violence w h i c h characterized the e m p i r e ( w h e t h e r
actual violence d u r i n g c o n q u e s t , or the latent u n d e r p i n n i n g of
control: p r e v i o u s section).
T h e P a m u k ç u stele does m o r e than j u s t p u b l i c i z e the S e l e u k i d
claims. It b e l o n g s to a w h o l e genre of d o c u m e n t s , w h e r e a royal
o r d e r is not s i m p l y p u t up to i n f o r m the local c o m m u n i t i e s of its
content ( ' f r o m n o w one e v e r y o n e is to m e n t i o n the n a m e of N i k a n o r
in c o n t r a c t s ' ) — f o r that p u r p o s e , the f o r m is c u m b e r s o m e and less
effective than a simple p r o c l a m a t i o n , πρόγραμμα (AJ 1 2 . 1 4 5 - 6 ) .
Rather, m u c h of the ideological effect of the d o c u m e n t resides in the
fact that it is not directly addressed to the subjects: its effect is to dis-
play the m e c h a n i s m of o r d e r transmission and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e
administrative dossier is not c o n v e r t e d into a direct act of c o m m u n i -
cation w i t h the ruled, b u t s i m p l y d i s p l a y e d in m o n u m e n t a l f o r m :
k i n g speaks to official, official speaks of official, w i t h o u t ever c o n -
sulting or addressing the party finally c o n c e r n e d , the shrines w h o s e
h i g h priest N i k a n o r b e c o m e s and w h o s e finances he will oversee, the
i n d i v i d u a l s and c o m m u n i t i e s w h i c h will preface their d o c u m e n t s
w i t h N i k a n o r ' s n a m e — l o c a l c o m p l i a n c e on the part of les administrés
is p u b l i c l y taken for granted. T h e t e c h n o l o g y of g o v e r n m e n t w a s
also a rhetoric of p o w e r , and hierarchical c o m m u n i c a t i o n f u n c t i o n e d
as p e r f o r m a n c e or as narrative, celebrating the efficacy of orders and
the o v e r c o m i n g of distance and time b y the e m p i r e at w o r k . T h e
similarity of these d o c u m e n t s w a s a f u r t h e r significant feature. L .
R o b e r t d e s c r i b e d the effect of c o m p a r i n g identical copies of the
prostagma of 193 c o n c e r n i n g cultic h o n o u r s for L a o d i k e , one f o u n d
in P h r y g i a , t w o in Iran: ' R i e n ne p e u t m i e u x faire sentir ce qu'était
l ' e m p i r e des Séleucides.' 1 4 4 T h e effect is c o m p o u n d e d by the fact
that this prostagma sets in m o t i o n the apparatus of administration to
carry out the k i n g ' s will to celebrate h i m s e l f and his q u e e n t h r o u g h
cultic h o n o u r s . T h e k i n g ' s decision is m o t i v a t e d b y the tender feel-
ings (φιλοστοργία) w h i c h he receives f r o m the q u e e n and w h i c h he
has for her. T o p r o c l a i m these feelings, the k i n g ' s letter m o b i l i z e s
the imperial administration, thus d e m o n s t r a t i n g the patrimonial
nature of the e m p i r e : the official display of f a m i l y feelings and of a
familial style m a k e s clear the nature of the state, o r g a n i z e d and
d e s c r i b e d as a family business (πράγματα).

143 D o c u m e n t s 9, 10. O n the notion of Seleukid time, S h e r w i n - W h i t e in S h e r w i n -

W h i t e and K u h r t 1987: 27.

144 R o b e r t 1949: 8 (the second Iranian c o p y of the prostagma was p u b l i s h e d b y R o b e r t

1967).
 Both this prostagma and the earlier one c o n c e r n i n g N i k a n o r
c o n f r o n t e d the traveller w i t h a repeated epigraphical narrative of
S e l e u k i d administration, e x h i b i t i n g the same initial royal instruc-
tion c o n c e r n i n g N i k a n o r and tracing the path of its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
d o w n local b r a n c h e s of S e l e u k i d administration; u n i t y of p u r p o s e
spoke of a central p o w e r , the diversity of local agents gave an
implicit y e t v i v i d representation of the e x t e n s i o n of the e m p i r e .
F i n a l l y , the f o r m of the epigraphical p u b l i c a t i o n of adminstrative
dossiers a d d s to their ideological force: the m o n u m e n t a l f o r m , in its
p e r m a n e n c e and its visibility, ensures the iteration of the royal
speech-acts, and thus g i v e s substance to the efficiency it claims for
itself. T h e genre of the hierarchical dossier expresses the p o w e r to
c o m m a n d : the classification of the landscape into administrative
units, the e n f o r c e m e n t of orders, the regulation of details; its
rhetorical f u n c t i o n is to m a k e visible, or help to i m a g i n e , the s t r u c -
tures of p o w e r .
T h e rhetoric of e m p i r e played its part in c o n s t r u c t i n g a S e l e u k i d
space, w i t h i n w h i c h individuals and c o m m u n i t i e s w e r e aware of the
state. It c o m e s as no surprise that A n t i o c h o s II and his s u b o r d i n a t e s
s h o u l d have d i s t i n g u i s h e d b e t w e e n a S e l e u k i d financial officer, 0
οικονόμος, and the private m a n a g e r of L a o d i k e I, 6 οίκονομών τα
Λαοδίκης (RC 18, line 24; RC 20, lines 4 and 6). T h e same distinc-
tion is m a d e , h o w e v e r , b y the peasants on the estate of A c h a i o s the
elder, in 269 (I. Laodikeia am Lykos 1): e v e n if they spoke of A c h a i o s
as 'lord of the place' ( e n j o y i n g full private o w n e r s h i p of his estate),
the peasants c o u l d differentiate b e t w e e n institutions of the central
state (the official dating b y reign of the S e l e u k i d kings, the e p o n y m y
of the local S e l e u k i d g o v e r n o r ) and their l a n d l o r d ' s m a n a g e r s (ο τα
Αχαιού οίκονομών, εκλογιστής τον Άχαιού).145
A w a r e n e s s of e m p i r e a m o n g s u b j e c t s took a m o r e articulate f o r m
than mere taking notice. T h e obsession, c o m m o n to rulers and
ruled, w i t h φιλάνθρωπα, privileges, grants, statuses, o b t a i n e d
t h r o u g h the m e c h a n i s m of 'petition and response' ( M i l l a r 1992), is
s u m m a r i z e d b y Z e u x i s ' letter to K i l d a r a : 'the same things are
g r a n t e d to y o u as to all the others b y the [great] king A n t i o c h o s ' . 1 4 6
Z e u x i s ' phrase is based on a s s u m p t i o n s about the nature of e m p i r e ,
as patrimonial state, the ruler's personal affair (πράγματα):

145 Achaios the elder is not a 'dynast', though he is called κύριος του τόπου by his

peasants, but the private owner of a large estate, like Ptolemaios in Koile-Syria: I
assume that τόπος here designates this estate, whereas the same word, in the expression
επιμελητής τον τόπου earlier in the same document, designates an administrative sub-
division of the Seleukid empire.
146 D o c u m e n t 25, 2 - 5 . T h e exact phrasing and translation are now obscure, but the

generalising force of the sentence is clear.

A n t i o c h o s I I I justified the a p p o i n t m e n t of N i k a n o r in an e g o c e n t r i c
language c o m b i n i n g references to N i k a n o r ' s disposition t o w a r d s the
king, the k i n g ' s feelings and c o n v i c t i o n s , his dynastic awareness,
and his bon plaisir.14' T h e T e i a n s considered that they paid their
taxes {phoros, syntaxis) directly to A t t a l o s I, and o w e d such taxes to
A n t i o c h o s I I I , and that it w a s A n t i o c h o s I I I (and L a o d i k e ) w h o had
personally freed the city f r o m t r i b u t e — a s indeed he had, t h r o u g h a
speech in the assembly. 1 4 8
T h e implication w a s the S e l e u k i d state's pervasiveness, e x c e p t in
those specific locations, areas, or periods, w h e r e it agreed to hold
back, as a result of petition b y the ruled and the b e n e v o l e n c e of the
ruler: this is o b v i o u s in the relation of the local c o m m u n i t i e s w i t h
the royal e c o n o m y , as in the cases of H e r a k l e i a or S a r d e i s (discussed
above; both cities m a n a g e d to obtain ateleia for the period of a
festival). 1 4 9 It does not matter if e x e m p t i o n s w e r e f r e q u e n t : ' b e n e -
factions', φίλάνθρα)πα, represented a s y s t e m of g o v e r n m e n t , based on
the a s s u m p t i o n that the c o n d i t i o n s of the local c o m m u n i t i e s ' exist-
ence are the result of their relations w i t h the ruling power. 1 5 0 T h i s
i d e o l o g y of pervasive, accepted, imperial presence was a tool of
d o m i n a t i o n in itself, for naturalizing e m p i r e , for c o n s t r u c t i n g
e m p i r e as the closing limit of the s u b j e c t s ' h o r i z o n — t h e ideology
w h i c h R o m a n ' m e d d l i n g ' in 1 9 6 - 1 9 3 BC challenged f r o m outside
( C h . 2 § 5). It f o u n d its expression in a s y s t e m of legal statuses and
in the a s s u m p t i o n s u n d e r l y i n g it; these can be studied in the case of
the b e s t - d o c u m e n t e d local c o m m u n i t i e s , the poleis of A s i a M i n o r .

3. City Statuses: The Typology of Subordination

T h e polis w a s a corporate b o d y of citizens, o r g a n i z e d in a d e c i s i o n -

m a k i n g c o m m u n i t y , s t r u c t u r e d b y n o r m s and essentially d e m o c r a t i c
institutions w h o s e authority regulated the c o m m o n life; b y nature,
the polis w a s a state. 1 5 1 It w a s m a n y other things: a m o n u m e n t a l

147 D o c u m e n t 4. For royal conviction (πέπειομαι) as the proclaimed motive for action,

Herrmann 1965a: 54.

143 Patrimonial state: W e b e r 1968: iii. 1006-69; personal monarchy: Bikerman 1938:

7 - 1 7 . Nikanor: document 4. T e o s and taxation: 17, 19-20, 33-4, 48, (Antiochos' speech
was held in the boideuterion, 'the place in which he executed some favours and promised
others', and hallowed by a nexus of ritual: 18, 29-38).
149 D o c u m e n t s 31 Β, I V 5 (Herakleia); 3, 1 0 - 1 2 (Sardeis).
150 A n illuminating parallel—because the situation is a direct descendant of the

Hellenistic—is provided b y the Roman empire: Millar 1992: 420-2 on the 'vocabulary
of gifts' modulating the relations between ruler and ruled.
151 Arist. Pol. 1252 s : polis as κοινωνία, with e.g. Manville 1990: 35-54; Sakellariou
1989: 66-77, t S Ç - 2 ! ! . W . Schuller, in Hansen 1993: 106—28: institutional analysis of the
u r b a n centre and a territory; a descent g r o u p w i t h its m y t h s ; a
s y s t e m of participatory rituals; a sense of place and of past, and
h e n c e an identity; a locus of h u m a n interaction, and h e n c e a
society. 1 5 2 B u t all these aspects w e r e d e e p l y politicized, and for the
present p u r p o s e s , the polis as state is w h a t matters, especially in
s u c h institutional f o r m s as the military control of territory, the
raising of p u b l i c m o n i e s , their m a n a g e m e n t b y a c c o u n t a b l e officials,
and the m u t u a l a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t as polis b y other poleis, linked in
a ' m u l t i - p o w e r - a c t o r civilization'. 1 5 3
T h o u g h not necessarily e n j o y i n g i n d e p e n d e n c e (an aspiration
rather than a c o t e r m i n o u s characteristic), the polis w a s self-
g o v e r n i n g and politically autarkic; 'allied' cities s u c h as E u r o m o s ,
b u t e v e n subject cities s u c h as T a b a i or A m y z o n , u n d e r direct
S e l e u k i d control (see b e l o w ) , possessed d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g bodies,
finances, military means. 1 5 4 T h e Hellenistic poleis kept their distinct
political existence; it is a mistake to d o w n s c a l e t h e m to ' t o w n s . . .
left to run t h e m s e l v e s ' , as u n r e m a r k a b l e a p h e n o m e n o n in the
H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d as in 'mediaeval E n g l a n d , m i d d l e A m e r i c a or the
S o v i e t U n i o n ' ( G r e e n 1990: 198). O n e m a y contrast O t t o m a n
T u r k e y : the landscape w h i c h had h a r b o u r e d the life of the
H e l l e n i s t i c poleis w a s s u b j e c t e d to state-fostered s e g m e n t a t i o n
(Barkey 1994: 2 6 - 7 , 40), w i t h élites s e g m e n t e d f r o m c o m m o n
people in a w o r l d w i t h o u t a civil society (in contrast to the p o w e r f u l
c o m m o n identity of the polis), and t o w n s e g m e n t e d f r o m t o w n
(unlike the vibrant international life of the poleis). T h e c o m p a r i s o n
b e t w e e n Hellenistic A s i a M i n o r and the O t t o m a n p r o v i n c e of A y d i n
points out h o w the a s s u m p t i o n that local c o m m u n i t i e s should 'run
t h e m s e l v e s ' is not natural, b u t a legacy f r o m the polis and a
reflection of the latter's values.

polis as state. M u r r a y 1990: 21 on polis as expression of the common will. Hahn 1978:
20—2 for analysis of the 4th-cent. decree from Xanthos (on the 'trilingual stele'), exhibit-
ing all the traits of the decision-making polis. See now Jonnes and Ricl 1997, for a
village, T y r i a i o n , receiving a charter as Ά polis from Eumenes II: it will enjoy its own
constitution and laws (ί'διοι νόμοι).
152 Beyond the state: J. Ober, in Hansen 1993: 129-60 (polis as society). O n civic

norms and identity, Heuss 1937: 247-8. Nicolet 1990: 5-6, on the polis as the world of
politics, par excellence.
153 Politicization: M u r r a y 1990. Recognition by other poleis·. Robert, OMS 1. 331, on
the list of theorodokoi from Delphi, the register of official hosts for Delphian theoroi in
every polis. 'Multi-power-actor civilization': M a n n 1986: 76.
154 Polis not necessarily independent: Welles 1956: 87; Hansen 1995. Polis as autarkic,

if not necessarily sovereign: V e y n e 1976: 106-10. Military: Euromos: document 30, 3-8,
the kosmoi have responsibility for military activities; T a b a i has an army in 189, which
gives trouble to Manlius V u l s o and was probably not raised overnight after Magnesia
( L i v . 3 8 . 1 3 . n - 1 2 ; likewise, Liv. 38.15.4, for army at T e r m e s s o s in 189); A m y z o n : J.
and L . Robert 1983: nos. 20 and 23 for citizen army.
 H o w did the poleis fit into the H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e s ? T h e issue w a s
raised in w i n t e r 197/6 b y the s t a n d - o f f b e t w e e n A n t i o c h o s I I I and
the recalcitrant cities, S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s (see I n t r o d u c t i o n ) ;
w e can investigate it t h r o u g h the literary and d o c u m e n t a r y evi-
dence, m u c h of it S e l e u k i d and especially f r o m the time of
A n t i o c h o s I I I , to study the hierarchy of legal structures w h i c h
integrated the poleis into an e m p i r e , and a i m e d at their p r o v i n c i a l -
ization.
M y position is at variance w i t h the first i m p o r t a n t attempt at a
systematic t h e o r y of the relation b e t w e e n city and ruler, p r o p o s e d
b y A . H e u s s ( f o l l o w e d by T a r n and Magie). 1 5 5 H e u s s held that the
autarkic s e l f - g o v e r n a n c e of the polis ( w h i c h he correctly saw as
essential to its nature) a m o u n t e d to full s o v e r e i g n t y , w h i c h in
p u r e l y legal terms, w a s not i n f r i n g e d b y the Hellenistic kings,
because it was, b y definition, u n t o u c h a b l e . F o r m a l l y , the cities w e r e
allies of a k i n g , and n o t h i n g m o r e ; all manifestations of the royal
state w e r e informal: royal garrisons, g o v e r n o r s , taxation, did not
affect the cities' s o v e r e i g n t y , because they w e r e mere a d j u n c t s to the
cities' w o r k i n g s , h e l p f u l activities sanctioned b y the c o m m u n i t y (as
illustrated by the grateful civic decrees h o n o u r i n g these activities).
F o r H e u s s , the relation w a s n e v e r one of legal s u b o r d i n a t i o n , b u t of
h e g e m o n i c a l l i a n c e — e v e n if, as H e u s s is aware, the k i n g s controlled
the cities de facto}56
H e u s s ' s theory has b e e n d i s p r o v e d , most tellingly b y B i c k e r m a n
(one need not b e l a b o u r the technical flaws in H e u s s ' s arguments), 1 5 7
w h o d e m o n s t r a t e d the existence of f o r m a l , legal structures, w h i c h
shaped the relation b e t w e e n ruler and ruled, i n c l u d i n g the poleis. A s
n o t e d earlier (§ 1), B i c k e r m a n ' s ' s u r r e n d e r and grant' m o d e l f o r
the legal basis of s u b o r d i n a t i o n is substantiated b y the literary
and d o c u m e n t a r y e v i d e n c e . C o n q u e s t of a local c o m m u n i t y w a s
f o l l o w e d b y the recreation of its status b y royal grant, on t e r m s of
the c o n q u e r o r ' s choosing: A n t i o c h o s I I I ' r e a c q u i r e d ' (άνακτησά-

155 Heuss 1937; T a r n 1948: ii. 199-227; Magie 1950: 56-7, 822-34 (where the view is

restricted to 'real' Greek cities).

156 Heuss insisted in a 1963 Nachwort that his theory bore exclusively on the legal
relation between ruler and city (misunderstood by Green 1989: 183).
157 Bikerman 1939 (also Orth 1977: 184-5, f ° r Kollisionen between royal power and
formal sovereignty of the cities, though some examples are debatable, such as his inter-
pretation of royally sponsored 'foreign judges' as interference in civic autonomy).
Versnel 1990: 74 and n. 123 attempts to resurrect Heuss's theory: 'Heuss's first thesis
[no explicit legal structures] has not been disproved.' But Versnel misunderstands the
force of Bikerman's objections and arguments; Bikerman adduces facts which point to
legal (and not just political, de facto) relations. T e c h n i c a l flaws: Bikerman 1939; Robert
in Holleaux 1942: 325 n. 1; J. and L . Robert 1954: 300 nn. 1, 6.
fievos) Iasos, b u t gave back its laws and liberty. 1 5 8 T h e nature of the
transaction b e t w e e n city and ruler was the same as that b e t w e e n
A n t i o c h o s I I I and the vassal k i n g s of the East, to w h o m he g r a n t e d
the right to rule ( C h . 2 § 2 on e.g. Pol. 8.23, 11.34.9); it explains
royal authority o v e r the territory and e v e n the existence of cities,
some of w h i c h w e r e abolished b y a ruler's fiat, dissolved in royal
f o u n d a t i o n s , or g i v e n to other cities. 1 5 9 T h e possible c o i n c i d e n c e of
pol is-existence (local political autarky, a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t as a polis)
and of s u b o r d i n a t i o n is f u r t h e r p r o v e d b y cases, Classical and
H e l l e n i s t i c , w h e r e cities s u b o r d i n a t e d other cities: f i f t h - c e n t u r y
T h a s o s controlled cities on the coast o p p o s i t e the island, S i n o p e
in 400/399 ' o w n e d ' the n e i g h b o u r i n g city of K o t y o r a and levied
tribute off it, and several cities in Hellenistic C r e t e exercised rights
of d o m i n a t i o n , o p e n l v f o r m a l i z e d in treaties, o v e r other c o m m u n i -
ties. 1 6 0
M a n y poleis w e r e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y s e l f - g o v e r n i n g (the necessary
c o n d i t i o n f o r their political existence) 1 6 1 and s u b o r d i n a t e to the
k i n g — p r e c i s e l y the situation w h i c h H e u s s denied. T h e y w e r e self-
g o v e r n i n g , because the k i n g b y ' g i v i n g back' their constitution 1 6 2 or
their laws had g r a n t e d their c o n t i n u i n g existence as political c o m -
munities; 1 6 3 they w e r e f o r m a l l y s u b o r d i n a t e to a k i n g , as w e can tell

158 D o c u m e n t 26 A , I 8-9. ' G i v i n g back' does not imply that city liberty was inalien-

able, as Heuss or M a g i e held; only that the c o m m u n i t y had enjoyed liberty earlier.
159 A u t h o r i t y over civic territory: Seleukid m a r k i n g out of the territory of Aigai

( H e r r m a n n 1959, with O r t h 1977: 169-70). A b o l i t i o n of cities' existence: A n t i g o n o s

M o n o p h t h a l m o s founded Antigoneia (later Alexandreia T r o a s ) out of several poleis of
the T r o a d (Billows 1990: 294-5). R o b e r t 1951: 1 - 3 6 , shows that the Seleukids recreated
K e b r e n and Skepsis b y detaching them f r o m the n e w city. L y s i m a c h o s suppressed
K o l o p h o n and L e b e d o s to increase his foundation, Arsinoeia/Ephesos: J. and L . R o b e r t
1989: 80-4 on Paus. 1.9.7 a ° d 7 · 3 · 4 - 5 · Cities given to other cities: L y s i m a c h o s g a v e
several cities to Ilion (Strabo 13.1.26); Ilion received Rhoiteion and G e r g i s f r o m R o m e
( L i v . 38.39.10).
160 T h a s o s : H d t . 7.109.2; 7 . 1 1 8 ; ML 89. Sinope: X e n . Anab. 5.5.7 with Austin and
V i d a l - N a q u e t 1972, p r o p o s i n g the term ' m i c r o - e m p i r e s ' for such situations. Hellenistic
Crete: C h a n i o t i s 1996: 160-8.
161 J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 301 n. 2: a city is not necessarily independent because it

issues d e c r e e s — s o do subordinate cities, if they are to be cities/poleis.

162 Bengtson 1944: 141 and n. 4; 218 and n. 4; above, § 1.
16î A l e x a n d e r granted the freedom of the L y d i a n s , the Euergetai, and the city of Nysa,

yet subjected all of them to the authority of a satrap, and, in the case of the L y d i a n s , to
tribute (Arr. Anab. 1 . 1 7 . 4 - 7 ; 3.27.5; 5.2.2; also 7.20.1: plan to conquer the A r a b s and to
allow them to 'live a c c o r d i n g to their c u s t o m s ' ) — t h e s e grants probably correspond to
the restoration of local self-governance. A n t i o c h o s I I I may have granted its ancestral
constitution (π[άτριος πολιτεία], a restoration proposed b y J. and L . Robert) to A m y z o n
(1983: no. 13, line 2). A clear case is Phokaia, w h i c h surrendered to the R o m a n s in 190,
and w h o s e ancestral constitution (πάτριον πολίτευμα) and territory were restored in the
aftermath ( L i v . 37.32.14, Pol. 21.45.7); this is n o t a grant of a u t o n o m y (as to e.g.
Herakleia), b u t merely the consent to the continued existence of the city as political
c o m m u n i t y , albeit (probably) under Attalid subjection ( M a s t r o c i n q u e 1994: 452). T h e
f r o m o p e n signs of the k i n g ' s legal authority and rights. S u b o r d i n a t e
cities c o u l d be b o u g h t , sold, or g i v e n ( B i k e r m a n 1939: 3 4 1 - 2 ) :
A i g i n a , c a p t u r e d b y the R o m a n s , w a s g i v e n to the A i t o l i a n s , w h o
sold it to A t t a l o s I (Pol. 22.8.10); A n t i o c h o s I V gave T a r s o s
and M a l l o s to his mistress (2 M a c c . 4: 30). U n d e r P t o l e m y I I , the
T e l m e s s i a n s uttered curses against w h o e v e r m i g h t ask for their city,
their villages, or their land iv Swpeâ 1, and received reassurance that
this w o u l d not h a p p e n ( S E G 28.1224): the curses, directed against
w h o e v e r should ask for the city as a δωρζά, i m p l y the royal right to
give a city, as he c o u l d dispose of villages or of portions of the civic
territory; P t o l e m y I I I exercised just this right, g i v i n g T e l m e s s o s to
P t o l e m a i o s , son of L y s i m a c h o s ( O G I S 55). T h e implications of
'gift' status are spelled out b y the c o n f r o n t a t i o n b e t w e e n the
R h o d i a n s and the L y k i a n s , w h o had b e e n g i v e n to the f o r m e r b y
R o m e in 188: not h e g e m o n i c alliance (as the L y k i a n s had h o p e d ) ,
b u t s u b o r d i n a t i o n (Pol. 22.5). T h e legal rights o v e r a s u b o r d i n a t e
c o m m u n i t y , c o n c e i v e d in t e r m s of o w n e r s h i p , w e r e c o m p a r a b l e to
those of earlier N e a r - E a s t e r n kings (and in fact descend f r o m them).
L a o d i k e , w h e n she d e s c r i b e d A n t i o c h o s I I I as ' r e a c q u i r i n g ' Iasos,
m e a n t n o t h i n g less.
T h e most o b v i o u s f o r m of d o m i n a t i o n w a s royal taxation, to
s u p p o r t the 'royal e c o n o m y ' (§ 2b). S u b o r d i n a t e cities paid tribute,
φόρος, φόροι—an o b l i g a t i o n i m p o s e d on the cities, and w h i c h c o u l d
only be lifted by a m a s t e r ' s g r a c i o u s decision. A l e x a n d e r transferred
the E p h e s i a n s ' tribute to the benefit of the A r t e m i s i o n : the local
shrine benefited, b u t the city w a s still b u r d e n e d b y a c o m p u l s o r y
financial obligation w h i c h the ruler d e c i d e d on ( A r r . Anab. 1 . 1 7 . 1 0 ) .
H e u s s ' s claim that tribute did not infringe the c i t y ' s a u t o n o m y is
u n c o n v i n c i n g ; w e should rather see the φόροι as a f o r m a l m a r k e r of
s u b j e c t i o n , in the case of the subordinate cities as m u c h as the
d e p e n d e n t villages of the royal domain. 1 6 4 T h e royal e c o n o m y also
penetrated the civic sphere of the s u b o r d i n a t e poleis t h r o u g h the
f o r m s of indirect taxation (listed in the p r e v i o u s section). H e r e , too,

transaction between Antiochos V I I and Hyrkanos was similar: the king gave back the
Jews' πάτριος πολιτεία, but also imposed heavy terms amounting to subjection (Jos. AJ
13.244-8).
IW Heuss 1937: 106-13, argued that the imposition of tribute did not matter, because

it was levied from the city en bloc and hence did not infringe the city's autonomous
internal workings; and because there were many forms of direct taxation, some formally
voluntary. But the first argument is irrelevant: internal autonomy is not equivalent to
external independence (J. and L. Robert 1954: 300 n. 2); as for the second, to focus on
the diversity of direct taxation (and on the formally voluntary contributions) does not
diminish the fact that φόρος was imposed, legitimate, regular, and that the local com-
munity had no control.
H e u s s ' s a t t e m p t to m i n i m i z e the intrusion is unacceptable. 1 6 5 T h e
indirect taxes raised b y the imperial state created a parallel fiscality
w i t h i n the polis, over w h i c h it had no authority and w h i c h benefited
a foreign b o d y : h e n c e a f o r m u l a f o u n d in decrees of s u b o r d i n a t e
cities, g r a n t i n g ' e x e m p t i o n f r o m the taxes of w h i c h the city is
mistress', areAetav πάντων ων ή πόλις κυρία—implying there w e r e
taxes the city did not control. 1 6 6 T h e link b e t w e e n royal finances and
royal authority in the subordinate city is illustrated b y the tax of
o n e - t w e n t i e t h , w h i c h A n t i o c h o s I I I a d d e d on to the civic tax at
Sardeis, in w i n t e r 214/213. A f t e r r e c a p t u r i n g the city f r o m A c h a i o s
( C h . 2 § 1), the king c o u l d impose a n e w tax in a subject city, or
cancel it (as A n t i o c h o s did soon afterwards). T h e same c o n c l u s i o n
e m e r g e s f r o m an earlier d o c u m e n t , the c o n v e n t i o n b e t w e e n
T h e a n g e l a and the dynast E u p o l e m o s , w h o took the city over on
terms, i n c l u d i n g the right to raise indirect taxes w i t h i n the city (the
inscription records a l e v y on beehives, as at Herakleia u n d e r
A n t i o c h o s III). 1 6 7
R o y a l taxation w a s s y n o n y m o u s w i t h royal d o m i n a t i o n , to the
point that the settlement of A s i a b y the R o m a n s in 188 w o u l d define
free cities as those e x e m p t f r o m p a y i n g tribute to anyone (below and
A p p e n d i x 7). T h e r e are other m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of direct royal p o w e r
w i t h i n the city. 1 6 8 S o m e cities received p e r m a n e n t royal garrisons (§
1), military forces answerable to the central p o w e r o n l y — s u c h as the
cavalry d e t a c h m e n t stationed at A p o l l o n i a u n d e r Salbake. A s u b -
ordinate city m i g h t find itself u n d e r a royal g o v e r n o r (§ 2), f o r m a l l y
a p p o i n t e d by the king w i t h authority over the city, as for the
g o v e r n o r of A l i n d a , n a m e d by A n t i o c h o s III; 1 6 9 the m o n u m e n t a l

165 Heuss 1937: 1 1 5 - 2 4 , argued that indirect taxes raised by the kings did not infringe

city a u t o n o m y , because cities also raised their o w n indirect taxes, so that royal taxes
w e r e but a ' g e r i n g e M o d i f i z i e r u n g ' — b u t s u c h taxes w e r e raised by an external p o w e r
u n a n s w e r a b l e to the city, and the taxes themselves lay outside the city's authority.
166 Apollonia: d o c u m e n t 44, 3 0 - 1 , w i t h J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 298 and n. 9. C r a m p a

1972: no. 42, is quite explicit: this d o c u m e n t f r o m L a b r a u n d a , dating to the dynast

E u p o l e m o s b u t c o n f i r m i n g an act of the satrap Pixodaros, m e n t i o n s that a benefactor to
the Plataseis is to enjoy i m m u n i t y f r o m local taxes, b u t will pay τα βαοιλικ[ά] τέλη (lines
1 6 - 1 7 ) . C o r s a r o 1985 for the notion of parallel royal and civic taxation systems.
16' Sardeis tax: d o c u m e n t 1, 5 - 6 . E u p o l e m o s : R o b e r t 1936: no. 52 (lines 4 - 5 for b e e -

hive tax). Herakleia: 31 Β, III 5.

les P t 0 ] e m a j c parallels: PCZ 59341 with O r r i e u x 1983: 5 3 - 4 (authority of P t o l e m a i c
officials at K a l y n d a ) .
169 H e u s s 1937: 1 7 - 3 6 , claimed that the royal g o v e r n o r s w e r e only military c o m -

m a n d e r s with a tactical brief w h i c h h a p p e n e d to coincide with the physical location of a

polis, or that (in formal terms) they w e r e only auxiliary to the a u t o n o m o u s w o r k i n g s of
the city. B u t the latter are c o m p a t i b l e with the g o v e r n o r ' s formal authority over the city,
as p r o v e d b y d o c u m e n t a r y evidence: H o l l e a u x 1942: 2 1 7 - 2 0 (epistates of Seleukeia in
Pieria), OGIS 329 (Attalid g o v e r n o r of Aigina).
shrine of A m y z o n , the A r t e m i s i o n , w a s a d m i n i s t e r e d b y an official,
a p p o i n t e d b y A n t i o c h o s I I I . S e l e u k i d officials appear as the recipi-
ents of honorific decrees ( C h . 4 § 2c), b u t this should not o b s c u r e the
fact that they b e l o n g e d to a p o w e r structure o p e n l y i m p o s e d on the
local c o m m u n i t i e s and not answerable to them. 1 7 0
T w o instances are particularly significant. A n t i o c h o s I I I o w n e d
p r o p e r t y in S a r d e i s (a portico) as well as in other cities (§ 2b), an
i n f r i n g e m e n t of local autarky. In the Classical polis, p r o p e r t y had
b e e n o w n e d e x c l u s i v e l y b y the citizens, and e x c e p t i o n s w e r e granted
only b y their collective decision; in contrast, s o m e cities in the
H e l l e n i s t i c period lost the m o n o p o l y of authority o v e r p r o p e r t y
rights w i t h i n their u r b a n c e n t r e — t o the advantage of the king, their
political master. S e c o n d , royal p r o n o u n c e m e n t s o f t e n w e r e directly
p e r f o r m a t i v e inside the political space of the city, dictating actions
or n o r m s . F o r instance, in A t t a l i d A i g i n a , the king issued b o t h laws
and ad hoc orders (προστάγματα) w i t h the force of legal p r e c e d e n t ,
and recorded in the city archive, [τό δημ]όσιον;ν1 in S e l e u k i d
K o l o p h o n , the f a r m i n g of the civic taxes w a s regulated κατά το τον
βασιλέως διάγραμμα}12 T h e prostagma issued b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in 209
s h o w s the i m m e d i a t e effect of the royal will: the king d e c i d e d that
the h i g h - p r i e s t N i k a n o r w o u l d h e n c e f o r t h be n a m e d on all legal
transactions, and N i k a n o r d u l y appears in decrees f r o m A m y z o n
and X a n t h o s . H o w e v e r e n f o r c e d , the k i n g ' s decision, taken central-
ly and u n a c c o u n t a b l y , applied i m m e d i a t e l y at least in some poleis.
D i r e c t intrusions b y the central p o w e r resulted in restrictions
on various aspects of the s u b o r d i n a t e poleis. In some cases, city
g o v e r n o r s m a y have overseen m e e t i n g s of the a s s e m b l y , or vetted
the content of proposals; in others, city decrees w e r e subject to
approval b y the royal state. 1 7 3 T h o u g h the details are n o w lost, a
S a r d i a n d o c u m e n t m e n t i o n s an answer (17 περί τούτων άπόκρισις) of
Z e u x i s , c o n c e r n i n g some civic matter (possibly his approval of an
honorific decree). 1 ' 4 F u r t h e r m o r e , the d i p l o m a t i c life of some cities
170 Alinda: document 9. Artemision: 10.
171 OGIS 329, lines 1 3 - 1 5 , with new reading from Gauthier 1993α: cases judged επί
τ α καλώς και δικαίως ι'ενομοθετημένα ήμίν ύττο τώ[ν βα]σιλέων κατά τε τα εις [το δημ]όσιον
κεχρηματιομένα ττ[ροσ]τάγματα και τους νόμους. Gauthier's new reading shows that the
king's pronouncements had permanent legal force (43 n. 14, for the implications against
Heuss who believed royal pronouncements were only advisory and temporary).
172 de la Genière, REG 103 (1990), 105: lines 2 3 - 4 of yet unpublished inscription.
173 Governors: Holleaux 1942: 199-254 on Seleukeia in Pieria under Seleukos I V (the

phenomenon is not yet attested in Anatolia). Approval: Kearsley 1994 (Olbasa under
Attalos II; reproduced as SEG 44.1108); Jonnes and Ricl 1997 (laws of the new polis of
T y r i a i o n subject to approval by Eumenes II). A n earlier example appears on the
Xanthos trilingual stele, where the satrap is named as ultimate authority (Πιξόδαρος
κύριος έστω: SEG 27.942, line 35).
174 D o c u m e n t 40. Robert 1964: 14 and η. i , understands Zeuxis' ίττόκρισις as a
w a s restricted. W h e n n e e d i n g ' f o r e i g n j u d g e s ' f r o m another city,
L a o d i k e i a u n d e r L y k o s did not ask the Prienians directly, b u t sent
an e m b a s s y to ask Z e u x i s to w r i t e to the Prienians; only then did the
L a o d i k e i a n s send an e m b a s s y to Priene. Cro\vther suggests the
same pattern m i g h t be d e d u c e d f r o m decrees of A n t i o c h e i a on
M a e a n d e r . 1 7 5 F o r certain cities, the royal state t h u s c o n t r o l l e d , or
interfered w i t h full participation in the intra-poliad life. A striking
instance of this is the declaration of A n t i o c h o s I I I , c o n c e r n i n g
acceptance of the L e u k o p h r y e n e i a of M a g n e s i a on M a e a n d e r : γεγρά-
φαμεν δε και τοις επι τών πραγμάτων τεταγμένοι, οπως καΐ αί πόλεις
ακολούθως άποδέξωνται (RC 3 1 , lines 25-8): the picture is not of cities
r e c o g n i z i n g a request f r o m another city, b u t of subordinate cities
r e c e i v i n g instructions t h r o u g h the administrative h i e r a r c h y of
empire. 1 7 6 F i n a l l y , the S e l e u k i d state m a y have controlled the
m o v e m e n t s of the citizens in the s u b o r d i n a t e cities (J. and L . R o b e r t
1983: 1 9 1 ) , j u s t as it did w i t h the villagers of the royal land (§ 2).
It is unclear h o w far w e can generalize f r o m individual m a n i -
festations of s u b o r d i n a t i o n . L o c a l c o n d i t i o n s w e r e influenced b y
g r a n t e d privileges, s u c h as e x e m p t i o n s f r o m taxes or corvée ( l i t u r -
gies'), as e x a m i n e d above (§ 2b). A n o t h e r variation in f o r m a l status
m u s t have resulted f r o m the grant of asylia ('inviolateness'): a
shrine, or a city w h i c h had been ' c o n s e c r a t e d ' to a g o d , w e r e
declared i m m u n e f r o m violent spoliation, in w a r or as f o r c i b l e
redress; u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I , A m y z o n , T e o s , A n t i o c h e i a / A l a b a n d a ,
X a n t h o s w e r e recognised as 'sacred and inviolate' a m o n g the cities
of his k i n g d o m . H o w e v e r , the administrative implications of asylia,
partly a variation of internal status inside the S e l e u k i d state, partly
a matter of international d i p l o m a c y , are still o b s c u r e (it is not at all
clear w h e t h e r the status w a s m o s t l y a matter of r e l i g i o n - b a s e d
h o n o u r and distinction, or if it entailed practical p r i v i l e g e s in
matters of taxation or jurisdiction). 1 7 7

decision obtained by the honorand of the decree. He also tentatively interprets the κρίσις
mentioned later as 'la décision prise par ce décret'.
175 D o c u m e n t 32, with Crowther 1993: esp. 6 1 - 7 . Antiocheia on Maeander: ibid. 64-7

and his appendix 3.

176 Giovannini, Ancient Macedonia 2 (1977), 4 7 1 - 4 7 2 on the fact that the king spoke
in the name of the subject cities when acknowledging an international request for asylia.
177 Exemptions at Herakleia: document 31. Asylia: 8, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22; A p p e n d i x 2;

Schlesinger 1933; Rigsby 1996. Administrative implications: Rostovtzeff, 1941: 844-5,

suggested that asylia entailed 'privileges in respect of royal taxation' and possibly
exemption from royal jurisdiction; however, Xanthos, consecrated by Antiochos III and
declared asylos, prefaced its decrees with an imperial preamble, as did A m y z o n (22, 9,
10), and the shrine at A m y z o n , though asylos, was under a Seleukid official (10). Rigsby
1996: 13-25, comments on the difficulty to determine what practical advantages the
status entailed. But asylia brought fiscal advantages in the Roman period: P. Herrmann,
Chiron 19 (1989), 155-6.
 N o n e t h e l e s s , in spite of local variation, s o m e b r o a d e r patterns
can be discerned. T h e r e seems to exist a f o r m a l m a r k e r defining
categories w i t h i n the subordinate cities: the 'regnal f o r m u l a ' ,
i m p o s e d on the legal acts of some cities, n o w dated b y the ruling
king, various centrally defined e p o n y m i e s , the M a c e d o n i a n calen-
dar. U n d e r the S e l e u k i d s , the regnal f o r m u l a turns up at T a b a i ,
A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e , A m y z o n , X a n t h o s , indirectly at S a r d e i s —
b u t not in H e r a k l e i a u n d e r L a t m o s , w h i c h w a s s u b o r d i n a t e , as
s h o w n b y the f o r m s of royal taxation attested there (Herakleia dates
decrees by local stephanephoria and b y local calendar). L i k e w i s e ,
u n d e r the P t o l e m i e s , M e t h y m n a , A m y z o n , T e l m e s s o s , Lissa, and
X a n t h o s p r e f a c e d decrees and local acts w i t h a regnal f o r m u l a 1 7 8 —
b u t not S a m o s , e v e n if the latter did, in its o w n w o r d s , b e l o n g to the
k i n g ' s πράγματα, a fact c o n f i r m e d b y P t o l e m a i c authority over civic
finances and an administrative decision c o n c e r n i n g the right of
r e f u g e in the H e r a i o n . 1 7 9 T h e regnal f o r m u l a implies that certain
cities w e r e part of the royal d o m i n i o n , like the villages or the ' m i l i -
tary colonies' in S e l e u k i d and A t t a l i d L y d i a , w h i l e others w e r e
s u b o r d i n a t e , yet not part of the royal land. H e r a k l e i a asked for
e x e m p t i o n f r o m duties on private i m p o r t s ' f r o m the (land) of the
k i n g into the city', i m p l y i n g that the city did not b e l o n g to the royal
d o m i n i o n proper. 1 8 0
It t h u s s e e m s there w e r e (at least) t w o g r o u p s of subordinate
poleis. O n e c o m p r i s e d the c o m m u n i t i e s integrated in the royal
d o m i n i o n ; these w e r e the cities directly affected b y A n t i o c h o s ' p r o -
n o u n c e m e n t s on the e p o n y m y of the h i g h - p r i e s t N i k a n o r (above) or
on the state cult f o r Laodike. 1 8 1 W e m i g h t call these c o m m u n i t i e s
'cities in the χώρα', ' s u b j e c t cities' (cités sujettes) or 'provincial cities'
(villes provinciales)',182 apart f r o m those w h e r e the regnal f o r m u l a is
178 Seleukids: T a b a i , J. and L . Robert 1954: no. 3; Apollonia, ibid. no. 165; A m y z o n ,

documents 9, 10; Xanthos, 23, 24; Sardeis, 2, 7, 12. Herakleia, 31 Β, II 3: the epi-
graphical publication of Zeuxis' letter is prefaced only with the local stephanephoria.
Ptolemies: Methymna, OGIS 78; A m y z o n , J. and L . Robert 1983: nos. 5, 6; Telmessos,
SEG 28.1224, OGIS 55; Lissa, OGIS 57, 58; Xanthos, SEG 33.1183, 36.1218,
38.1476A, 36.1220. A n example from Phanagoreia, a Bosporan subject city of
Mithridates V I : SEG 41.625.
179 Bagnall 1976: 82, on Habicht 1957: no. 64, lines 26-8 for 'restoration to the

pragmata of king Ptolemy', c.200 bc; OGIS 41 for control of finances; Habicht 1957: no.
59 for Heraion. But there is no trace of regnal formula in Samian decrees under
Ptolemaic domination: Schede 1919: nos. 9. 11, 12, 13; Habicht 1957: nos. 49, 52, 58,
61, 64.
180 Regnal formulas in villages and colonies: ΤΑΜ 5.2.881; I. Laodikeia am Lykos ι;
SEG 40.1062, ΤΑΜ 5.2.1307, ΤΑΜ 5.1.221, ΤΑΜ 5.2.1188, SEG 28.902, ΤΑΜ
5·2.II90 (Attalid); Robert 1962: 76-8, for Attalid regnal year under Attalos II in a
military colony at Smdirgi, in Mysia. Herakleia: document 31, Β III 8.
181 J. and L . Robert 1954: 302 n. 6.
182 T h e expression seems implied by RC 11, lines 21—22 (cities iv τήι χώραι re και
attested (above), this category p r o b a b l y i n c l u d e d m a n y cities of
K a r i a , L y k i a , and the ' s u b j e c t h i n t e r l a n d ' , and most of the royal
f o u n d a t i o n s such as L a o d i k e i a on L y k o s . 1 8 3 T h e other g r o u p w a s
m a d e up of cities f o r m a l l y s u b o r d i n a t e to the king, b u t not inte-
grated w i t h i n the royal land: for instance, Herakleia u n d e r L a t m o s
u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I (and, indeed, u n d e r the P t o l e m i e s ) , S a m o s
u n d e r the P t o l e m i e s , A i g i n a u n d e r the A t t a l i d s , E r y t h r a i u n d e r
L y s i m a c h o s or D e m e t r i o s Poliorketes ( R C 15). T h e 'cities in the
χώρα' w e r e p r e s u m a b l y e x p o s e d to m o r e intrusive f o r m s of control
and direct contact w i t h royal administration. H o w e v e r , it is difficult
to tell w h e t h e r this difference in f o r m s actually reflects a systematic,
explicit d i f f e r e n c e (I do not k n o w w h a t the G r e e k expression m i g h t
have been for the second c a t e g o r y of s u b o r d i n a t e cities l y i n g outside
the chora). T h e significance of the o b s e r v a b l e differences is difficult
to d e t e r m i n e . T h e exact c o n s e q u e n c e s , legal and practical, of the
distinction b e t w e e n 'subject cities' and ' s u b o r d i n a t e cities' are yet
unclear, and the e x p e r i e n c e of both m a y have been similar: cities
' s u b o r d i n a t e ' and ' s u b j e c t ' could be ruled b y a royal g o v e r n o r ( S E G
2.556, Herakleia u n d e r Philip V ; OGIS 329, A t t a l i d A i g i n a ) . M a g i e
1950, 5 6 - 1 1 8 (esp. 5 6 - 6 5 ) and 8 2 2 - 3 3 , revising H e u s s ' s theory,
a r g u e d that the f r e e d o m of all G r e e k cities w a s f o r m a l l y unalienable
and respected as such by the kings; s u b o r d i n a t i o n , on this v i e w , was
restricted to 'the s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s of the interior', no true G r e e k
cities. T h i s view is mistaken. First, here are clear cases of s u b o r d i -
nate c o m m u n i t i e s a m o n g the old G r e e k cities (e.g. Priene u n d e r
L y s i m a c h o s ) . 1 8 4 S e c o n d , m a n y c o m m u n i t i e s of the interior w e r e
f u l l y H e l l e n i z e d and r e c o g n i z e d as G r e e k (for instance, X a n t h o s w a s
a ' D o r i a n ' city and had a m y t h i c a l kinship w i t h Ilion), and c o n -
versely, A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a w h i c h the D e l p h i a n s c o n s i d e r e d only
'related to the G r e e k s ' , 1 8 5 w a s r e c o g n i z e d as free b y A n t i o c h o s I I I .
N o n e t h e l e s s , a difference b e t w e e n old G r e e k cities and H e l l e n i z e d
c o m m u n i t i e s m i g h t be reflected in the distinction b e t w e e n s u b o r d i -
nate cities on the one hand, and s u b j e c t 'cities in the χώρα' along
w i t h n e w royal f o u n d a t i o n s on the other hand.

B e y o n d variations, local or typological, the different m a n i f e s t a -

tions illustrate w a y s in w h i c h the Hellenistic e m p i r e could intrude
on the political life of the poleis or restrict it, and hence give some
συμμαχίαι), though RC 12 only mentions 'cities in our alliance'. 'Subject cities': J. and
L . Robert 1954: 302. 'Provincial cities': Bikerman 1934: 369.
18î D o c u m e n t 32, a decree from Laodikeia, does not show the regnal formula, but this

may be explained by the document being inscribed in another city, autonomous Priene,
where the preamble to the Laodikeian decree may have been left out.
184 Orth 1977: 102-5, Franco 1993: 85; contra, L u n d 1992: 207-8.
185 Xanthos: document 23, C u r t y 1995: 183-93. Alabanda: document 16, 12-13.
idea of the situation of subordinate poleis, along a s p e c t r u m of
possibilities. T h e c o n s e q u e n c e is the opposite of H e u s s ' s c o n c l u -
sion: the existence of f o r m a l l y subordinate cities, w h o s e c o n d i t i o n
w a s d e t e r m i n e d b y their legal status. T h e e v i d e n c e , c o m p e l l i n g at
the time of B i c k e r m a n ' s critique of H e u s s ( B i k e r m a n 1939) is n o w
o v e r w h e l m i n g : it establishes that the Hellenistic k i n g d o m s had legal
structures (inherited, along w i t h the 'regnal f o r m u l a ' , f r o m the
A c h a i m e n i d s and A l e x a n d e r ) to s u b o r d i n a t e the autarkic polis, to
intervene b y o r d n a n c e s and taxation w i t h i n the sphere of the polis,
or integrate it into the imperial state; all these, o p e n l y and (on the
k i n g d o m s ' o w n terms) legitimately. 1 8 6
T h e other c a t e g o r y of the cities is, in the expression of an
A m y z o n i a n decree, at αυτόνομοι, 'the a u t o n o m o u s ones'; the a b b r e v i -
ation i m p l i e s an institutionalized status. 1 8 ' T h e s e w e r e the cities to
w h i c h the king had g r a n t e d or r e c o g n i z e d not only their autarkic
existence as political c o m m u n i t i e s (as for the subordinate cities), b u t
their full liberty: w h e n Iasos w a s g i v e n back its liberty and its laws,
its relation to A n t i o c h o s I I I w a s s i m p l y one of 'alliance and f r i e n d -
ship'. 1 8 8 I n formal terms, these cities w e r e ' g e n u i n e l y ' i n d e p e n d e n t .
T h e settlement of A s i a M i n o r by the R o m a n s in 188 c o n f i r m e d the
f r e e d o m of the cities w h i c h had been free before the Roman—
S e l e u k i d W a r ( L i v . 3 7 . 5 6 . 3 - 6 and A p p e n d i x 7): this c o n c e r n e d
not only C h i o s or S m y r n a ( w h i c h w e r e i n d e p e n d e n t f r o m any
H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e ) , but also M y l a s a , A n t i o c h e i a / A l a b a n d a , and
even A n t i o c h e i a in Pisidia. 1 8 9 N o n e of these l a n d l o c k e d cities had
been freed b y the R o m a n s d u r i n g the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r , as
H e r a k l e i a had b e e n b y the Scipios: they o w e d their f r e e d o m to a
royal grant, as w e k n o w for certain in the case of M y l a s a , and as is
almost certain for A n t i o c h e i a / A l a b a n d a (its f r e e d o m had been r e c o g -
nized b y A n t i o c h o s I I I ) . A n t i o c h e i a in Pisidia was declared free in
188 no d o u b t because the city had received a grant of f r e e d o m f r o m
A n t i o c h o s I I I (perhaps for services d u r i n g the w a r against A c h a i o s
in 216?). 1 9 0 F o r m a l l y , the f r e e d o m of M y l a s a (by royal grant) w a s
identical to that of any g e n u i n e l y free city. T h i s principle can be used

186 B e n g t s o n 1944: 1 3 2 - 1 4 2 , argued that all cities lay outside the 'provincial adminis-

tration' of the Hellenistic empires; the case of A p o l l o n i a u n d e r Salbake ( d o c u m e n t 44)

and the administrative e n f o r c e m e n t of the prostagma of 209 indicate otherwise.
187 D o c u m e n t 10, 15 (assuming that the stonecutter has n o t omitted πόλεις).

188 D o c u m e n t 26 A , I 5, 8 - 9 . RC 7 1 - 2 for a late S e l e u k i d grant of f r e e d o m to

Seleukeia in Pieria.
189 M y l a s a : Pol. 21.45.4; A l a b a n d a : Pol. 30.5.15, L i v . 43.6. A n t i o c h e i a in Pisidia:

S t r a b o 12.8.14. G e n e r a l l y , B i k e r m a n 1937.
190 A l a b a n d a : d o c u m e n t 16. M y l a s a had received f r e e d o m f r o m S e l e u k o s II, a grant

recognized b y Philip V ( C r a m p a 1969: no. 5, lines 33-6); it is p r o b a b l e that w h e n

A n t i o c h o s III took the city over, he c o n f i r m e d the grant m a d e by his father.
to postulate statuses w h e r e direct e v i d e n c e is lacking. Iasos, free
u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I , was p r o b a b l y free after 188 as well; the same
applies to E u r o m o s , w h i c h w a s not taken o v e r b y A n t i o c h o s I I I , but
c o n t r a c t e d a f u l l - b l o w n alliance w i t h h i m t h r o u g h Z e u x i s (below): it
is likely that this city r e m a i n e d free after 188, rather than b e i n g g i v e n
to the R h o d i a n s . 1 9 1 C o n v e r s e l y , because Pedasa w a s free in the i 8 o s
( w h e n it w a s s y n o i k i z e d into M i l e t o s : Inschr. Delphinion 14g), it
p r o b a b l y w a s left 'free' b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in 197.
T h i s c o n c l u s i o n is c o n f i r m e d by the t e r m i n o l o g y used to describe
the f r e e d o m granted to a city b y a king: it is the same as for a
g e n u i n e l y free city (for instance, one w h i c h had n e v e r k n o w n or
escaped royal domination). S e l e u k o s II 'granted to the S m y r n i a n s
that their city and their territory be free and e x e m p t f r o m tribute
(ελενθεραν και άφορολόγητον)', as a D e l p h i a n decree put it ( O G I S
228, lines 6-8); in a slightly later decree, OGIS 229, the S m y r n i a n s
t h e m s e l v e s described the king as ' p r e s e r v i n g the a u t o n o m y and
d e m o c r a c y (τήν αύτονομίαν και δημοκρατίαν) for the d e m o s ' (lines
1 0 - 1 1 ) , b u t also of 'the a u t o n o m y and d e m o c r a c y and the other
t h i n g s g r a n t e d to the S m y r n i a n s b y king S e l e u k o s ' (lines 65-6).
U n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I , L a o d i k e d e s c r i b e d her h u s b a n d as restoring
liberty to the Iasians; a slightly later Iasian decree refers to h i m as
' p r e s e r v i n g the d e m o c r a c y and a u t o n o m y ([τήν δημοκρ]α[τ]ίαν και
αν[τ]ονομίαν)'; the d e m o c r a c y of A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a w a s also pre-
served b y A n t i o c h o s I I I , a c c o r d i n g to an A m p h i k t i o n i c decree. 1 9 2
T h e three w o r d s , αυτονομία, δημοκρατία, or ελευθερία, used inter-
c h a n g e a b l y or in c o m b i n a t i o n , designate fully free g o v e r n m e n t : 1 9 3
they are used by truly i n d e p e n d e n t states. F o r instance, the
L y k i a n s , after b e i n g freed f r o m R h o d i a n d o m i n a t i o n , spoke of
πάτριος δημοκρατία (CIL ι 2 . 7 2 5 ) ; L a m p s a k o s used αυτονομία and
δημοκρατία to describe the i n d e p e n d e n c e it w a s t r y i n g to protect
f r o m A n t i o c h o s I I I (I. Lampsakos 4, lines 3 3 - 4 , 7 3 - 5 ) · T h e c o n c e p t
of αυτονομία w a s not d o w n g r a d e d , in the H e l l e n i s t i c period, to 'self-
g o v e r n m e n t c o m b i n e d w i t h s u b o r d i n a t i o n to a superior p o w e r ' (e.g.
H a n s e n 1995: 4 1 - 2 ) . T h e list of instances p r o v i d e d b y H a n s e n to
s u p p o r t this definition m i n g l e s e x a m p l e s of a u t o n o m y g r a n t e d b y a

151 Iasos: document 26 A for freedom grant by Antiochos III; free after 188: Crowther

19950: 232-3. Euromos: the Rhodian intervention in 167 (Pol. 3 0 . 5 . 1 1 - 1 5 ) does not
necessarily mean that the city was Rhodian (it may simply have been an ally).
152 Iasos: documents 26 A , I 8 - 9 and Β, I 15-16; 28, 2. Alabanda: 16, 2 1 - 2 .
193 Ferrary 1988: 186 with earlier bibliography; Ferrary 1991: 564-5; Rhodes with

L e w i s 1997: 5 3 1 - 6 . M u s t i 1966: 138-45, proposed that δημοκρατία retained its meaning

of 'democracy' in the internal sense; but this is debatable: the Smyrnian decree OGIS
229, at lines 6 7 - 9 distinguishes between δημοκρατία (independence?) and Ισονομία
('democracy'?). T h i s is not the place to review the scholarship on αυτονομία in the
Classical age (survey in Hansen 1995).
ruler (for instance to E r y t h r a i b y A n t i o c h o s I or I I , to S m y r n a b y
S e l e u k o s I I ) and cases of g e n u i n e f r e e d o m , like that of L a m p s a k o s
in Syll. 5 9 1 ; a fact w h i c h d e m o n s t r a t e s h o w the t e r m i n o l o g y , and
the c o n c e p t , w e r e the same for b o t h g r o u p s .
T h e ' a u t o n o m o u s o n e s ' , s u c h as Iasos or M y l a s a , w e r e free f r o m
the m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of direct royal control, s u c h as tribute (and,
p r o b a b l y , f r o m royal indirect taxation) or garrisoning. S u c h phrases
as 'free and e x e m p t f r o m tribute' 'free and e x e m p t f r o m garrisons'
spell privileges out, rather than i m p l y that a city could be free, yet
pay tribute. 1 9 4 It is p r o b a b l e that the a u t o n o m o u s cities e n j o y e d
their o w n j u r i s d i c t i o n , j u s t as free cities in R o m a n A s i a lived outside
the g o v e r n o r ' s authority. 1 9 5 T h e y c o n d u c t e d their o w n d i p l o m a c y
freely. Iasos resorted to f o r e i g n j u d g e s f r o m Priene, M y n d o s , and
other cities in this period, w i t h o u t h a v i n g to a p p l y to Z e u x i s first, as
the s u b j e c t city of L a o d i k e i a on L y k o s did (above); e v e n if
A n t i o c h o s I I I s p o n s o r e d the Iasian appeal to f o r e i g n j u d g e s , he only
s u p p l i e d advice to the city ( s u p p l e m e n t e d b y an oracle), and did
not control its d i p l o m a c y . 1 9 6 Priene, in the 190s, asked for R h o d i a n
arbitration on its ancient dispute w i t h S a m o s (Inschr. Priene 37),
w i t h o u t referring to the S e l e u k i d state; a l t h o u g h m a n y d o c u m e n t s
p r o b a b l y date to this period, there is no clear e v i d e n c e for intrusion
f r o m the S e l e u k i d s . 1 9 ' ' F r e e ' cities c o u l d also m i n t their o w n silver
coinage, in the f o r m of t e t r a d r a c h m s on the A t t i c standard, either
'alexanders' (patterned on A l e x a n d e r ' s coinage, b u t d i s t i n g u i s h e d
b y local marks) or civic designs: again, there is no formal difference
b e t w e e n cities w h i c h had received a grant of f r e e d o m f r o m a k i n g
and g e n u i n e l y i n d e p e n d e n t cities. 1 9 8 A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a and
M y l a s a , b o t h free cities (above), struck coins ( a u t o n o m o u s civic
issues in the first case, alexanders in the second) u n d e r A n t i o c h o s

194 Iasos 2, line 30; RC 15, lines 22-3; OGIS 228, lines 7-8. T h a t freedom and exemp-
tion from tribute are (or should be) synonymous emerges from a comparison of the
Livian and the Polybian accounts of the Roman settlement of Asia M i n o r in 188: L i v .
37.56.4-6 and Pol. 21.24.6-9, 21.45.2-3.
195 Ferrary 1991 on the Klaros decrees (J. and L . Robert 1989): the judicial independ-

ence of K o l o p h o n was protected by the action of two citizens (Polemaios decree, lines II
5 1 - 6 1 ; M e n i p p o s decree, lines I 40-8, II 4 - 7 and esp. 1 39-40: τής έπαρχείας à-πο rrjs
αυτονομίας χωρισθείσης. O n I. Mylasa 126, where Mylasa honours a royal judge, see
A p p e n d i x 3 (probably not under Antiochos III as often said, but Ptolemaic).
196 Crowther 19956, dating documents mentioning foreign j u d g e s at Iasos to the 190s

bc and relating them to OGIS 237 (document 28).

197 p , - j e n j a n documents: Hiller von Gaertringen dates many to 'um 200?'; more
impressive is the fact that there is no clear indication of Seleukid presence, apart from
documents 32 and 33 (Zeuxis and grain).
198 ι M a c c . 15: 6: Antiochos V I I grants the Jews their full freedom and the right to

mint coinage. Seyrig 1986: 104-6, for Arados, which struck alexanders starting 259/8,
probably when the city was granted freedom by Antiochos II (otherwise unattested).
ΙΠ. 1 9 9 Since, in this period, Skepsis and Side minted coinage on
their autonomous designs, and K o l o p h o n , T e o s , Phaselis, Perge,
and Side issued alexanders, these cities must have been 'free' as well
(in the case of T e o s , two fragmentary royal letters mention 'demo-
cracy' and 'liberty', perhaps documents granting liberty to the
city). 200 M o s t of H e u s s ' s proposals about the informal nature of the
Hellenistic king's power over the city, mistaken in the case of the
subordinate cities, m i g h t apply to the 'free' cities, whose constitu-
tional integrity was formally respected by the royal state. 201
But even the 'autonomous ones' were de facto exposed to the
demands of the ruling power. Iasos was a 'free' city under A n t i o c h o s
I I I ; nonetheless, during the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r , the king
installed a garrison in the city (Liv. 3 7 . 1 7 . 3 ) — a temporary φυλακή
rather than a permanent φρουρά, but a garrison nonetheless,
imposed at the king's desire; if Perge was a free city, as suggested by
its coinage, the garrison w h i c h appears there in 188 (Pol. 2 1 . 4 1 . 1 - 5 )
was probably of the same temporary nature (though Polybios calls
its commander a φρούραρχος), and further illustrates Seleukid power
over the 'autonomous ones'. Parallels substantiate this picture. A n
earlier document f r o m Iasos (I. Iasos 3) seems to imply that an
officiai of Ptolemy I had considered taking over the local πρόσοδοι,
the civic taxes, including the harbour dues; that the Iasians made
h i m swear an oath not to do so betrays their anxiety, and illustrates
the threat of erosion to a free city's 'liberty'. T h e same document
also shows how a 'free' city could be made to pay contributions, in
the f o r m of a 'contribution', σύνταξις, exacted f r o m Iasos, at a level
fixed by the king, and, it seems, as payment towards Ptolemaic
protection of Iasian territory. 202 T h e είσφοραί paid by the 'free'
Islanders under Ptolemy II fall in the same category (Syll. 390, line
16). Royal instructions to free cities, though formulated as requests,
did not admit disobedience: Larisa, like all other Thessalian cities
(Pol. 4.76.3), was free; yet Philip V decided (κρίνω) that the city
199 Alabanda: L e Rider 1973/4: 256-7; Robert 1973: 448-53; Waggoner 1989. Mylasa:

Akarca 1959: 13.

200 Skepsis: K a g a n 1984 for Skepsian autonomous coinage dated to Antiochos III on

stylistic grounds; the conclusion is that Skepsis was free under Antiochos III. Strabo
13.1.54 mentions that Skepsis was 'under the Attalic kings' in the second century: if this
means that the city was formally subordinate to the Attalids, the city was given to
Eumenes II in 188 because it had earlier been subject to the Attalids (Appendix 7). Side:
Seyrig 1986: 6 1 - 6 . Kolophon: Le Rider 1972/3: 254-5, Price 1991: 248; T e o s : L e Rider
1972/3, 255-6, Price 1991: 298; document 19 B, C . Phaselis and Perge: Seyrig 1986:
42—52, Price 1991: 349, 358. T h e details of civic coinage and status are not fully estab-
lished (Robert 1973: 463), and the whole issue needs re-examination.
201 Bikerman 1938: 133, 141-5 on the life of the 'villes franches' (indebted to Heuss

1937)·
202 I. Iasos 3, lines 4 - 5 , 7 - 9 , 14-15.
should admit all its metics to citizenship: he c o m m u n i c a t e d his
decision to Larisa in a short letter, and w h e n the Larisans dissented,
he enforced his will through a second letter (Syll. 543 with Bertrand
1990: 1 1 1 - 1 2 ) . Finally, free cities may have introduced changes to
their institutions under Seleukid influence or suggestion. It is likely
that the constitutional changes introduced in E u r o m o s after 197
(and somehow Cretan-inspired) took place under Seleukid
influence; at least, this is suggested by the introduction of a civic
priesthood of D i k t y n n a and Z e u s Kretagenetas, mirroring a
centrally administered, Seleukid, priesthood (named in the 'regnal
formula' in subject A m y z o n ) : this new priesthood was attached to
the stephanephoria, presumably a traditional magistracy in the city.
Both the creation of new offices, and the addition of a new priestly
office to an older form, suggest extensive reorganization of public
affairs in the city of E u r o m o s . Mylasa also had a priesthood of Z e u s
Kretagenes associated with the K o u r e t e s (attested f r o m the second
century onwards): this civic priesthood could have been introduced
at the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I under Seleukid influence or in imitation
of Seleukid provincial institutions. Both E u r o m o s and M y l a s a
provide suggestive (though not yet conclusive) evidence for the
effect royal power, or simply the proximity of royal institutions,
could have within a formally 'free' city. 203
M o r e significant still than the presence of de facto encroachments
by the Seleukid state on the independence of the 'autonomous cities'
is the fact that the f r e e d o m enjoyed by the latter was openly and
essentially precarious. T h e i r freedom, though nominally equivalent
to the full freedom of genuinely independent cities like S m y r n a
or L a m p s a k o s £.200, was in fact considered by the king as still
dependent on his goodwill: in the 'surrender and grant' model, even
full freedom is a status, a privilege allowed by the ruling p o w e r and
revocable by it. Cities w h i c h had received their f r e e d o m b y royal
grant could lose it by royal fiat (Bikerman 1938: 138). T h e r e is a
clear parallel in the grant of full freedom to the Jews by A n t i o c h o s
V I I , revoked once the king no longer needed their help (1 M a c c . 15:
3 - 9 and 27, Jos. Ajf 13.245-6). T h o u g h there are yet no documented
instances in Hellenistic Asia M i n o r of 'autonomous' cities being
deprived of their liberty, the possibility seems strongly implied by
A n t i o c h o s ' claim that the cities of Asia should receive and enjoy

203 Euromos: document 30, and introduction: the document is too fragmentary to

reveal the role played by the Seleukid state in the constitutional changes. Mylasa: J. and
L . Robert 1983: 166; I. Mylasa 102, 107, 806 (all 2nd-cent. bc). W h y the Seleukids
imposed or inspired institutions imitating Cretan practices is still obscure (short note by
Gauthier in BE 95, 525).
their liberty as a gift f r o m him, litterally 'through his grace', δια
της αυτού χάριτος (Pol. 18.51.9)· T h e Seleukid empire, like all
Hellenistic kingdoms, posited itself as a space within w h i c h even
full f r e e d o m was a function of dependency on the king's power to
decide and define.
T h e typology of statuses has obvious implications for the nature
of the relations between ruler and city, and in general for the
Hellenistic polis. H o w e v e r , before setting these out, we should
examine problems with Bickerman's 'surrender and grant' model.
First, it is clear that some cities did contract alliances with a king
(a possibility Bickerman considered purely theoretical: Bikerman
1938: 140). L y s i m a c h e i a concluded an alliance with A n t i o c h o s I or
II, 204 and later with Philip V , and Philippeis/Euromos with
A n t i o c h o s I IL 2 0 5 W h a t survives of these alliances shows that the
f o r m was the same as any alliance between two free states.
Nonetheless, Polybios has Philip admitting to taking over (προσλαμ-
βάνειν) L y s i m a c h e i a (Pol. 18.4.5), a n ( J installing troops in the city
(Pol. 18.3.11), whilst claiming that his soldiers were not a perma-
nent garrison, but a temporary protection against the T h r a c i a n s
(Pol. 18.4.6). T h e experience of E u r o m o s and A n t i o c h o s I I I was no
doubt similar to that of L y s i m a c h e i a with Philip V . T h e s e cases
point to an alternative legal model: a full alliance between city and
ruler, followed by de facto encroachments on civic autonomy,
because of the ruler's political p o w e r over the city (did these
encroachments lead to a change in formal status?). T h i s process is
in fact described by Polybios as the shift in kings' conduct, f r o m
σνμμαχικώς to δεσποτικώς (Pol. 15.24.4). In the end, there may have
been little practical difference for cities w h i c h had entered royal
control through 'surrender and grant', and those w h i c h had con-
tracted an alliance with a king w h o enjoyed de facto control.
Second, the state and the nature of the evidence might make us
uneasy with a smooth, systematic picture, such as the one I have
developed in this section, based on Bickerman's 'surrender and
grant' model. T h e better documented cases (Mylasa, Iasos,
A l a b a n d a ) corroborate Bickerman, through what is explicitly
k n o w n , and through what the evidence implies. In other cases, we
are reduced to speculation inspired by Bickerman's model (as for
T e o s : above). T h e r e are anomalies in the evidence: for instance, the
204 Ilion 45 with A p p e n d i x 3. T h e argument for attribution to Antiochos I or II rather

than Antiochos III is that the provisions in the treaty are incompatible with the way
Antiochos III treated the Lysimacheians (Gauthier and Ferrary 1981)—unless one
assumes that such provisions were blatantly violated.
205 Lysimacheia and Philip V: Staatsvertr. 549. Euromos and Antiochos III: docu-
ment 29.
Seleukid garrison at Perge (which struck its o w n coinage), w h i c h
was perhaps a temporary φυλακή (above). Ephesos under the early
Seleukids poses similar difficulties: the city struck silver coinage, yet
was a royal residence under A n t i o c h o s II, and, in 246, an official hτι
τής 'Εφέσου is attested by Phylarchos ( F G r H i s t 81 F 24). O n e might
argue that the status of the city changed under A n t i o c h o s II; that
royal sojourns at Ephesos do not make the city subject; that the
official attested in 246 was in charge of a temporary garrison. In any
case, the Ephesians participated in a decree of the Ionians honour-
ing A n t i o c h o s I and asking him to preserve the liberty and the
democracy of the Ionian cities ( O G I S 222), a clear indication that
Ephesos was formally an 'autonomous' city, at least at that
moment. 2 " 6 For now, the anomalies can still be explained away, or at
any rate do not seriously impair the usefulness of Bickerman's
model.
T h i r d , the language is ambiguous. I have tried to distinguish two
groups, of different status: subordinate or subject cities (enjoying
local autonomy), and 'autonomous' cities (de facto under the control
of an autocratic power): yet the language of self-government, 'own
laws' and possibly even liberty could apply to both cases. 20 '
C o n v e r s e l y , the language of enslavement could be used to describe
both, irrespective of legal status. Flamininus did so at Rome in the
negotiations of 193 ( L i v . 34.58.8-59.1); the Iasian exiles described
the Seleukid control of Iasos, the 'free' city, as enslavement ( L i v .
37.17.6). One wonders if the 'servitude' f r o m w h i c h the Iasians
claimed to have been freed by A n t i o c h o s I I I was not the de facto
control compatible with a formal status of 'freedom' under Philip V .
T h e language of liberation was indefinitely repeatable to describe
the end of de facto power over a c o m m u n i t y ; the 'propagandist^'
use of the concept of freedom and liberation as a slogan is well
documented, especially during the time of the D i a d o c h o i ( G r u e n
1986: 133-42). In 197, the Rhodians claimed to be protecting the
206 Coinage: L e Rider 1972/3: 245-6. Antiochos II at Ephesos: SEG 1.366, line 10. It
is perverse to argue, with Orth 1977: 130, that OGIS 222 actually proves Ephesian sub-
jection, because of their anxiety. Nonetheless, it is difficult to believe that Ephesos, an
important naval base, endowed with powerful fortifications, was not used by Seleukid
forces under Antiochos I: how was this compatible with full autonomy? Another
problem is the coexistence of a royal mint (striking royal coin) and local silver coinage
at K y m e ( L e Rider 1975/6: 355-6), or in Attalid Ephesos (Le Rider 1972/3: 247).
207 T h e inhabitants of K a u d o s were integrated into G o r t y n , to which they paid

tribute and were liable to various obligations, yet preserved some form of self-
government, described as permission to remain 'free and autonomous': Iscr. Cret. 4.184.
I. Erythrai 29 honours the strategoi for preserving the demokratia and passing the city as
free to their successors: if this inscription were dated before RC 15 (when Antiochos I
or II declared the city free), it would show the terminology of liberty used internally in
a subordinate city.
liberty of P t o l e m a i c cities ( L i v . 3 3 . 2 0 . 1 1 — 1 2 ) — i n fact subordinate
c o m m u n i t i e s , u n d e r d i r e c t c o n t r o l b y t h e P t o l e m a i c state. 2 0 8
T h e q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r t h e s e d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h t h e c o n c e p t , t h e
e v i d e n c e , and t h e a m b i g u o u s l a n g u a g e s e r i o u s l y c h a l l e n g e t h e j u r i -
dical m o d e l p r o p o s e d b y B i c k e r m a n . F o r V e r s n e l (1990), the
u n d o u b t e d a m b i g u i t i e s in l a n g u a g e a n d o c c a s i o n a l l y in p r a c t i c e
m e a n that the w h o l e situation w a s c o n f u s e d and f r a u g h t w i t h the
inconsistent ' d o u b l e realities' of full a u t o n o m y and full s u b j e c t i o n .
T h i s v i e w m u s t b e r e j e c t e d , b e c a u s e it is b a s e d o n u n c r i t i c a l a c c e p t -
ance of H e u s s ' s thesis, neglecting the d o c u m e n t e d cases that
e s t a b l i s h t h e e x i s t e n c e o f legal c o n c e p t s a b o u t s u b o r d i n a t i o n a n d
' f r e e d o m ' w i t h i n an i m p e r i a l s p a c e , e v e n in t h e a b s e n c e o f a c o d e o f
international law. A l t h o u g h the t e r m s used for these c o n c e p t s c o u l d
b e u s e d v a g u e l y o r in r e f e r e n c e to a n u m b e r o f o t h e r t h i n g s , t h e f a c t
r e m a i n s t h a t , in c e r t a i n c o n t e x t s , αυτονομία o r ελευθερία w e r e as
c l e a r l y d e f i n e d as άφορολογησία o r άνεπισταθμεία, with consequences
as r e a l — b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e c o n c e p t s o f t h e s a m e n a t u r e , r o y a l l y
d e f i n e d p r i v i l e g e s w i t h i n B i c k e r m a n ' s m o d e l w h i c h is still the m o s t
satisfactory account of the formal basis for e m p i r e .
I f w e a c c e p t as h i s t o r i c a l l y d o c u m e n t e d B i c k e r m a n ' s m o d e l f o r a
t y p o l o g y of legally defined statuses, u n d e r p i n n i n g the relations
b e t w e e n r u l e r s a n d r u l e d , t h e r e still r e m a i n s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e
s i g n f i c a n c e w e s h o u l d l e n d to t h i s p h e n o m e n o n . O n e v i e w o n t h e
legal statuses h o l d s that they w e r e u n i m p o r t a n t , because the king
c o u l d o v e r t u r n t h e m at a n y t i m e , a n d w i e l d e d o v e r w h e l m i n g p o w e r ,
o n l y t h i n l y v e i l e d b y p r o p a g a n d a s u c h as t h e l a n g u a g e o f l i b e r t y ( A .
Η . M . J o n e s 1940: 102). A t its m o s t e x t r e m e , t h i s v i e w d e n i e s a n y
s u b s t a n c e to legal s t a t u s e s — m e a n i n g l e s s , ad hoc s m o k e s c r e e n s f o r
the realities of p o w e r , the o p p r e s s i v e n e s s of the kings, the despair-
i n g s e r v i l i t y a n d p o w e r l e s s n e s s o f t h e cities; t h e h i s t o r i a n n e e d n o t
b o t h e r to d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n s t a t u s e s o r e x p l o r e t h e i r c o n t e n t , b u t
f o c u s o n t h e g r i m facts. 2 0 9
O r t h ' s p o s i t i o n , a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t the e x c e s s i v e l e g a l i s m o f
H e u s s , is p r o b l e m a t i c f o r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . T h e ' h a r s h realist' m o d e l
is b a s e d o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f c o n s t a n t , o v e r w h e l m i n g p o w e r o n t h e
p a r t o f the k i n g s . T h i s a s s u m p t i o n is q u e s t i o n a b l e b e c a u s e o f t h e
i n s t a b i l i t y o f p o l i t i c s in the m u l t i p o l a r H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d . E s p e c i a l l y
in w e s t e r n A s i a M i n o r , t h e s i t u a t i o n w a s m o r e c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n
O r t h ' s m e l o d r a m a o f royal o p p r e s s i o n a n d l o c a l p o w e r l e s s n e s s
( C h . ι § 4), w h i c h c a n n o t a c c o m m o d a t e t h e c a s e s o f S m y r n a o r
L a m p s a k o s : t h e s e cities, u n d e r S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l f o r fifty-odd y e a r s ,
208 Bagnall 1976: 81-8, 94-9.
205 Orth 1977: passim and 178-87; Piejko 1988Ô; Green 1990: 198.
s e i z e d t h e i r c h a n c e in the 230s o r the 220s BC, a n d later r e t a i n e d
their liberty. F u r t h e r m o r e , m a n y of the readings O r t h offers for
c e n t r a l d o c u m e n t s are e i t h e r m i s h a n d l e d , as in t h e case o f h i s i n t e r -
pretations of the (routine) i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of Prienian h o n o u r s for
t h e S e l e u k i d o f f i c e r L a r i c h o s , or b r u t a l l y r e d u c t i v e , as in t h e case o f
h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the e a r l y S e l e u k i d d o c u m e n t s f r o m I l i o n . It is
i m p o s s i b l e to f o l l o w O r t h w h e n he r e a d s OGIS 2 1 9 as p e r m e a t e d
w i t h t h e c i t y ' s Unfreiheit a n d f e a r , o r RC 10—13 a s p r o o f o f t h e c i t y ' s
servility and powerlessness, and h e n c e of his claim that Ilion's
f o r m a l s t a t u s o f a u t o n o m y w a s m e a n i n g l e s s . 2 1 0 OGIS 2 1 9 is n o t
a b o u t p o w e r l e s s n e s s , b u t c o m b i n e s v a r i o u s i d i o m s in a c o m p l e x
d i s c o u r s e : d i p l o m a t i c c o n g r a t u l a t i o n (a w i d e s p r e a d p h e n o m e n o n
a n a l y s e d in RC, p . 4 3 ) , e u e r g e t i c h o n o u r s , m o r a l i z i n g p r a i s e f o r the
k i n g ( a l t e r n a t i n g b e t w e e n d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e k i n g as p a t r i m o n i a l
r u l e r a n d as p r o t e c t o r o f t h e cities: f u r t h e r C h . 4). T h e t r a n s a c t i o n
in RC 1 0 - 1 3 i n v o l v e d I l i o n ' s i n t e r e s t — t h e a t t a c h m e n t o f a p r i v a t e l y
o w n e d estate ( t a k e n o u t o f t h e r o y a l l a n d ) to t h e c i t y ' s t e r r i t o r y . T h e
p r o b l e m a t i c n a t u r e o f O r t h ' s r e a d i n g s c a s t s d o u b t s o n the v a l i d i t y o f
t h e ' h a r s h realist' m o d e l in its e x t r e m e v e r s i o n . 2 1 1
M o r e o v e r , it is c l e a r t h a t legal s t a t u s e s p l a y e d an i m p o r t a n t , b u t
c o m p l e x , p a r t in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n H e l l e n i s t i c r u l e r a n d
H e l l e n i s t i c c i t y : first, t h e y g a v e t h e i m p e r i a l state t h e c o n c r e t e a n d
diverse local f o r m s w h i c h the cities w o u l d e x p e r i e n c e , and h e n c e
w e r e taken seriously b y b o t h sides; s e c o n d , the t y p o l o g y of statuses,
as a s y s t e m o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d a t o t a l i z i n g i d e o l o g y , w a s in itself
a tool f o r d o m i n a t i o n , w h i c h m u l t i p l i e d t h e a c t u a l f o r c e o f the
H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e . B y n e g l e c t i n g t h e s e t w o r e l a t e d e f f e c t s , the
' r e a l i s t ' a p p r o a c h c h a m p i o n e d b y O r t h a n d o t h e r s is far t o o c r u d e
w h e n it c o m e s to r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e a n d p r a c t i c e o f d o m i -
n a t i o n b y the H e l l e n i s t i c i m p e r i a l states.
L e g a l s t a t u s e s w e r e e x p e c t e d to h a v e legal f o r c e , e v e n if t h e y
w e r e p r e c a r i o u s g r a n t s f r o m an a u t o c r a t i c m a s t e r . A l e t t e r f r o m
O l y m p i c h o s to M y l a s a , d a t e d c.220, a n n o u n c e s t h a t h e is r e s t o r i n g
to t h e c i t y t h e f o r t of P e t r a n e a r L a b r a u n d a ' w h i c h w e h a d b e e n
f o r c e d to h o l d o n to f o r no o t h e r r e a s o n t h a n t h a t this w a s u s e f u l to
t h e c i t y ' ( C r a m p a 1969: n o . 4, l i n e s 1 0 - 1 3 ) . M y l a s a h a d b e e n a f r e e
c i t y s i n c e t h e late 240s, a n d O l y m p i c h o s (or t h e A n t i g o n i d s t a t e ) h a d
n o r i g h t to g a r r i s o n a f o r t o n M y l a s a n t e r r i t o r y . H o w e v e r ,
O l y m p i c h o s o c c u p i e d Petra for possibly t w o decades (we do not

Larichos: Gauthier 1980; Orth 1977: 50-61 (approved by Versnel 1990: 78-9).
210

See also Chaniotis 1993: after the Ptolemaic reconquest of Kilikia c.246 bc, the
211

governor had to take diplomatic precautions to save face for Nagidos and Arsinoe, the
Ptolemaic foundation absorbed by N a g i d o s under Antiochos II.
k n o w w h e n o c c u p a t i o n started). O l y m p i c h o s ' action m i g h t be taken
to p r o v e the a r b i t r a r y p o w e r of a H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e . B u t as l o n g as
the priest at L a b r a u n d a tried to o b t a i n his i n d e p e n d e n c e f r o m
M y l a s a , r i g h t s o v e r the fort w e r e m o o t ; o n c e it w a s e s t a b l i s h e d that
L a b r a u n d a and the r e g i o n b e l o n g e d to M y l a s a , and the legal situa-
tion b e c a m e clear, blatant illegality w a s i m p o s s i b l e . O l y m p i c h o s had
to g i v e in to M y l a s a ' s d e m a n d s , v a c a t i n g Petra. T e l l i n g l y , he e v e n
felt the n e e d to p r e s e n t an a p o l o g y o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r his a c t i o n s ,
c l a i m i n g that he had o c c u p i e d the fort o n l y to d e f e n d the city, and
a d m i t t i n g that he had no o t h e r right to b e there; this c o n s t i t u t e s a
r e m a r k a b l e a d m i s s i o n to the f o r c e o f legal a r g u m e n t and h e n c e the
reality of legal f o r m s in s h a p i n g b e h a v i o u r and realities.
S t a t u s e s m a t t e r e d b e c a u s e t h e y s h a p e d the f o r m s e m p i r e took o n
the g r o u n d . A sign of their i m p o r t a n c e is the e n e r g y p u t b y the cities
into the p r o c e s s o f n e g o t i a t i n g t h e m ; M i l l a r ' s r e m a r k s o n the
practical i m p o r t a n c e o f m i s s i o n s f r o m the cities to the R o m a n
e m p e r o r are a p p l i c a b l e to H e l l e n i s t i c d i p l o m a c y . 2 1 2 T h e statuses and
p r i v i l e g e s e m b o d i e d the local b a r g a i n s , c o m p r o m i s e s , and p r e c e -
d e n t s w h i c h f o r m a l i s e d the relations b e t w e e n ruler and r u l e d ; s u c h
a r r a n g e m e n t s , a s t a n d a r d f e a t u r e of p a t r i m o n i a l e m p i r e s , are m o r e
i m p o r t a n t than p h y s i c a l c o m p u l s i o n in c r e a t i n g the c o n d i t i o n s for
the c o o p e r a t i o n of the r u l e d , n o t a b l y the crucial c o n s e n t to s u r p l u s
e x t r a c t i o n ( W e b e r 1968: 1 0 1 0 - 1 1 ) . A s t r i k i n g e x a m p l e , t h o u g h
o u t s i d e the w o r l d of the G r e e k polis, comes from Hyrkania, where
the p e a s a n t r y p r o b a b l y h a d A n t i o c h o s I I I a c k n o w l e d g e p r i v i l e g e s
d a t i n g b a c k to the A c h a i m e n i d s (Pol. 10.28 w i t h B r i a n t 1982:
4 9 9 - 5 0 0 ) . U n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I I , the S a r d i a n s s u c c e s s f u l l y a p p e a l e d
to general practice in o t h e r cities to ask the k i n g to w a i v e his rent o n
a p o r t i c o . In their p e t i t i o n s to Z e u x i s , the H e r a k l e i a n s j u s t i f i e d
several d e m a n d s b y appeal to p r e c e d e n t . A t H e r a k l e i a , w h e n the
S e l e u k i d state t o o k o v e r the local h a r b o u r d u e , the H e r a k l e i a n s
asked that the k i n g s h o u l d still p a y to the city a share of the r e v e n u e ,
f o r oil in the g y m n a s i o n , as had b e e n the c u s t o m of those w h o
f a r m e d o u t the h a r b o u r tax; t h e y also r e q u e s t e d that a festival be
e x e m p t f r o m t a x a t i o n , as it had b e e n p r e v i o u s l y . Z e u x i s and
A n t i o c h o s a g r e e d , i n f l e c t i n g the 'royal e c o n o m y ' to fit local t r a d i -
tion. 2 1 3 T h e s e e x a m p l e s u n d e r l i n e the c o n c r e t e n e s s of legal status

2,2 M i l l a r 1992: 418, 420; M i l l a r 1967: 8 1 - 2 for the i m p o r t a n c e of local status for 'the

nature of a m a n ' s contacts with the State'; M i l l a r 1983.

2lä D o c u m e n t 31 B, I I I 2 - 4 ; I V 6 - 7 . T h e Herakleian practice, public services paid for

b y tax-farmers, is a m p l y paralleled in K o s , w h e r e the t a x - f a r m e r s w h o contracted out a

variety of indirect taxes w e r e expected to furnish a p u b l i c sacrifice and tents for the
s u b s e q u e n t feast: Syll. 1000.
a n d p r e c e d e n t , t h e i r i m p o r t a n c e f o r t h e l o c a l c o m m u n i t i e s , a n d the
e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t t h e r u l i n g p o w e r w o u l d r e s p e c t its c o m m i t m e n t s . 2 1 4
T h i s e x p e c t a t i o n — a d m i t t e d l y alongside the fear that the c o m m i t -
m e n t s m i g h t b e f o r g o t t e n o r o v e r t u r n e d — a p p e a r s in f r e q u e n t d o c u -
m e n t s w h e r e t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s a t t e m p t to b i n d t h e i r p o l i t i c a l
masters b y the e x c h a n g e of oaths or the publication of a g r e e m e n t s
( f o r i n s t a n c e R o b e r t 1 9 3 6 : n o . 5 2 , l i n e s 2 7 - 9 : E u p o l e m o s s w e a r s to
let the T h e a n g e l i a n s p u t u p a stele p u b l i c i z i n g t h e s e t t l e m e n t ) . I a s o s
exacted oaths f r o m P t o l e m y I and his officials; the liberty of the
c i t y w a s i n c l u d e d in t h e s e o a t h s as an e s s e n t i a l c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e c o -
operation b e t w e e n city and ruler; c o n v e r s e l y , the P t o l e m a i c official
a s k e d an I a s i a n e m b a s s y f o r g u a r a n t e e s (πιστιν δούναι) t h a t t h e i r
c l a i m c o n c e r n i n g an e a r l i e r g r a n t o f a u t o n o m y w a s g e n u i n e (I. Iasos
2, 3). L i k e w i s e , O l y m p i c h o s s w o r e an o a t h to e n f o r c e t h e M y l a s a n
r i g h t s o v e r L a b r a u n d a , w h i c h he e v e n t u a l l y f u l f i l l e d , w h e n the
M y l a s a n s m a d e Philip V r e m i n d O l y m p i c h o s of his e n g a g e m e n t s
( C r a m p a 1 9 6 9 : n o s . 3, 7). B e y o n d t h e p r o c r a s t i n a t i o n in t h i s p a r -
t i c u l a r c a s e , w h a t m a t t e r s is t h e f a c t t h a t the r u l i n g p o w e r w a s
b o u n d b y its c o m m i t m e n t s a n d b y local p r i v i l e g e s . A d m i t t e d l y , t h e
possibility a l w a y s existed that a H e l l e n i s t i c king w o u l d not keep his
c o m m i t m e n t s . I n 2 0 1 , the T h a s i a n s s u r r e n d e r e d to P h i l i p V o n
terms: e x e m p t i o n f r o m garrisoning, tribute, billeting, and the use of
t h e i r o w n l a w s ( f u l l a u t o n o m y o r local s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t ? ) ; t h e c o n -
ditions w e r e s e e m i n g l y accepted by P h i l i p ' s general, but the city w a s
t h e n ' e n s l a v e d ' b y P h i l i p ( P o l . 1 5 . 2 4 . 1 - 3 ) . Y e t this d i s r e g a r d f o r
a g r e e m e n t s w a s a n o m a l o u s , and p e r c e i v e d as s c a n d a l o u s ; P h i l i p ' s
r e p u t a t i o n f o r u n t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s e x p l a i n s t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s he m e t in
his A e g e a n ventures, and the fragility of his A e g e a n d o m i n i o n s ( C h .
2 § 3), is an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f A r e n d t ' s b a s i c i n s i g h t t h a t p u r e v i o l e n c e
d o e s n o t c o n s t i t u t e p o w e r ( A r e n d t 1970): e v e n if v i o l e n c e is a
visible and immediately effective w a y of m a k i n g others do y o u r will,
in t h e l o n g r u n , v i o l e n c e is n o t e n o u g h to i n a u g u r a t e l a s t i n g p o w e r ,
s i n c e in itself it w i l l n o t c r e a t e c o n s e n t o r c o l l a b o r a t i o n ( w h i c h , in
A r e n d t ' s m o r e c o n t r o v e r s i a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f h e r t h e o r y , are t h e sole
c o n s t i t u e n t s o f p o w e r ) . T h e case o f P h i l i p V o n l y s h o w s h o w the
s y s t e m of statuses and privileges e m b o d i e d c o m m i t m e n t s on the
p a r t o f t h e H e l l e n i s t i c r u l e r , a n d e x p e c t a n c i e s o n the p a r t o f
the ruled.

N o n e t h e l e s s , the fact that the legal statuses represented concrete,

w i d e l y p u b l i c i z e d c o m m i t m e n t s on the part of the Hellenistic k i n g
should not o b s c u r e the ideological f u n c t i o n these statuses played

2,4 D o c u m e n t s 3, 8-10; 5, 5.
w i t h i n the structures of imperial p o w e r . T h e existence of a scale of
statuses s t r e n g t h e n e d the h o l d of an e m p i r e over the local c o m m u -
nities. B y a l l o w i n g itself to be constrained or petitioned into g i v i n g
privileges (that is, lessening d e m a n d s ) , the e m p i r e of d o m i n a t i o n
c h a n n e l l e d the energies of the ruled into petition rather than
resistance or defection, into i m p r o v i n g the i m m e d i a t e situation
rather than c h a l l e n g i n g the f r a m e w o r k of imperial authority. A n
early e x a m p l e appears in the oath the A t h e n i a n s i m p o s e d on the
C h a l k i d i a n s c.446 BC: Ί will pay to the A t h e n i a n s the tribute (to the
a m o u n t ) w h i c h I will c o n v i n c e the A t h e n i a n s ' (ML 52, lines 2 5 - 7 ) ,
the A t h e n i a n s ' o p e n w i l l i n g n e s s to negotiate on the tribute d r a w i n g
attention a w a y f r o m the a s s u m p t i o n that the tribute w a s p e r m a n e n t .
N e g o t i a t e d statuses and the gradation of p r i v i l e g e s acted as a s y s t e m
e x e r c i s i n g repressive tolerance: concessions s t r e n g t h e n e d the f r a m e -
w o r k , b y creating a dialogue based on the a s s u m p t i o n of the ruling
p o w e r ' s l e g i t i m a c y and b y m a k i n g it s e e m b e n e v o l e n t . T h e g r a n t i n g
of p r i v i l e g e s and the respect of legal statuses b y the ruling p o w e r
m a d e the s u b j e c t s accept the b r o a d e r f r a m e w o r k of l e g i t i m a c y ,
w h i c h a s s u m e d that the king had the right to define such privileges
and statuses (see f u r t h e r C h . 4 § 5). M o s t of the privileges g r a n t e d
b y the H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g s e x e m p l i f y this p h e n o m e n o n : for instance,
the extensive roster of p r i v i l e g e s and e x e m p t i o n s so readily g r a n t e d
b y Z e u x i s and A n t i o c h o s I I I to H e r a k l e i a , and especially their w i l l -
ingness to f o l l o w local c u s t o m w h e n l e v y i n g a h a r b o u r - d u e , pre-
s u m a b l y m a d e the H e r a k l e i a n s accept the exaction of s u c h taxes as
fair and legitimate. 2 1 5
L o c a l statuses inscribed the cities in the ideology of the patri-
monial empire (§ 2d), since b y nature they are based on the a s s u m p -
tion that the king h o l d s the m o n o p o l y of p e r f o r m a t i v e utterances
w i t h i n the state; statuses are defined b y his p r o n o u n c e m e n t s , and
can be represented as his b e n e f a c t i o n s . T h i s is the i d e o l o g y w h i c h
underlies the s y s t e m of statuses and p r i v i l e g e s w h i c h the S e l e u k i d s
(and other H e l l e n i s t i c empires) used to classify and o r g a n i z e their
s u b j e c t c o m m u n i t i e s . T h e ancient imperial i d e o l o g y is u n w i t t i n g l y
reflected in a m o d e r n list of royal benefactions: military d e f e n c e ,
f r e e d o m , d e m o c r a c y , cash, b u i l d i n g s , land, p r i v i l e g e s s u c h as asylia
or ateleia ( B r i n g m a n n 1993: 9 ) — t h e k i n g ' s refraining f r o m
exactions is d e s c r i b e d w i t h the same v o c a b u l a r y as an actual gift.
T h e c i t y ' s political existence not o n l y is d e t e r m i n e d b y the ruler,
b u t can be represented as the s u m of the privileges w h i c h it e n j o y s
b y the r u l e r ' s g r a c e — a s reflected in the language d e s c r i b i n g this
2,5 D o c u m e n t 3 1 ; other examples: 1 9 ( A n t i o c h o s I I I and T e o s ) , RC 15 ( A n t i o c h o s I
or II and Erythrai).
 s i t u a t i o n , τα υπάρχοντα ( t h a t w h i c h a c i t y ' h a s ' f r o m its r u l e r ) , τα
προϋπάρχοντα (that w h i c h a c i t y h a s e n j o y e d f r o m e a r l i e r t i m e s ,
u n d e r the p r e s e n t r u l e r ' s p r e d e c e s s o r s ) , τα δίκαια, τά φιλάνθρωπα, τα
σνγκ€χωρημ€να\η6 t h e u n d e r l y i n g s t r u c t u r e w a s the s a m e f o r a s u b -
j e c t c i t y (a H e l l e n i z e d c i t y o r a r o y a l f o u n d a t i o n ) o r f o r a ' f r e e ' o l d
G r e e k city, w h i c h justifies treating both categories together.
A s seen a b o v e , the Hellenistic kings c o n s i d e r e d e v e n full f r e e d o m
as the r e s u l t o f r o y a l b e n e f a c t i o n . T h i s m a y h a v e b e e n s t a t e d e x -
p l i c i t l y in a r o y a l l e t t e r to T e o s , w h e r e iXevOepia is m e n t i o n e d a l o n g -
side φιλάνθρωπa, a n d p o s s i b l y a s s i m i l a t e d to t h e l a t t e r c a t e g o r y . 2 1 '
T h e t y p o l o g y o f s t a t u s e s g a v e m e a n i n g to t h e de facto relation
o f f o r c e b e t w e e n k i n g a n d c i t y ; it c l o s e d t h e local c o m m u n i t y ' s
h o r i z o n s to a n y t h i n g o u t s i d e the i m p e r i a l s p a c e , w h e r e t h e l i m i t w a s
a status of 'full f r e e d o m ' b y grant and on the condition of the ruler's
c o n t i n u e d g o o d w i l l . T h i s t o t a l i z i n g i d e o l o g y , w i t h its c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
s y s t e m o f s t a t u s e s , its a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e k i n g h e l d the r i g h t to
d e f i n e t h e s e s t a t u s e s , its r e s o r t to r e p r e s s i v e t o l e r a n c e to a c h i e v e
a c c e p t a b i l i t y , a s s i g n e d t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s a p l a c e in the w o r l d , o r
in a w o r l d w h i c h t h i s i d e o l o g y c r e a t e d . A s y m p t o m of t h i s i d e o l o g y
at w o r k m i g h t b e f o u n d in t h e t r e a t m e n t o f asylia for cities inside a
H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g d o m T h e w o r d asylia d e s i g n a t e s a state o f f r e e d o m
f r o m spoliation or reprisals, c o n c o m i t a n t with the designation of a
p l a c e as s a c r e d to a d e i t y ; t h i s state, t r a d i t i o n a l l y , c o u l d o n l y r e s u l t
f r o m a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t b y t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y . Y e t it
s e e m s t h a t asylia ( a n d n o t j u s t t h e c o n s e c r a t i o n to a g o d w h i c h
e n a b l e d asylia) c o u l d also b e the r e s u l t o f a r o y a l g r a n t , a p r i v i l e g e
g i v e n b y the k i n g j u s t like t a x - e x e m p t i o n or f r e e d o m f r o m billeting
( e v e n t h o u g h t h i s status t h e n h a d to b e p u b l i c i z e d o u t s i d e t h e
k i n g d o m b y the old m e t h o d of international canvassing): this w a s
p r o b a b l y t h e case at T e o s . 2 1 8 W i t h i n t h e i m p e r i a l s p a c e o f g r a d u a t e d
s t a t u s e s a n d g r a n t e d p r i v i l e g e s , it s e e m s t h a t asylia w a s c o n s i d e r e d ,
b y a fiction or a d i s t o r t i o n o f t h e n a t u r e o f asylia, as j u s t a n o t h e r

216 I. Erythrai 30, line 5; RC 22, lines 1 6 - 1 7 ; RC 38, line 5; RC 42, lines 3 - 7 ; d o c u -
m e n t 19 C , 4 - 7 ; 25, 2 - 6 ; 44, 1 4 - 1 6 ; J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: no. 22, lines 4 - 9 ; - R C 4 8 , lines
A 5 - 6 , Β 22-3. O n f r e e d o m as benefaction, H a h n 1978: 23-4. A strict parallel is the
usage in Ptolemaic E g y p t , w h e r e φιλάνθρωποι· (act of generosity) describes grants f r o m
the king, as pointed out by L e n g e r 1953: 4 9 5 - 6 : 'des allégements de charges fiscales, des
amnisties, des privilèges juridictionnels, des droits d'asile, des i m m u n i t é s , des garanties
contre les actions arbitraires, des titres de protection de la p e r s o n n e et des biens'.
217 D o c u m e n t 19 C , 5 - 6 ([τάλλα] φιλάνθρωποι proposed by H e r r m a n n ) .

218 O n the institutional issues of asylia, A p p e n d i x 2 and R i g s b y 1996. T e o s : d o c u m e n t

17 and A p p e n d i x 2. A parallel m i g h t be the royal grants of asylia in Ptolemaic E g y p t

(though the m e a n i n g seems to be different, closer to the m o d e r n 'asylum'); the material
is gathered in C. Ord. Ptol., w i t h J. B i n g e n , in L . C r i s c u o l o , G . G e r a c i (edd.), Egitto e
storia antica dall'ellenismo all'età araba . . . (Bologna, 1989), 24-30.
r o y a l l y g r a n t e d p r i v i l e g e , b e c a u s e all statuses m u s t o r i g i n a t e w i t h a
p e r f o r m a t i v e s p e e c h act b y the k i n g .
T h i s i d e o l o g y , b a s e d o n de facto p o w e r , w a s an i n s t r u m e n t of
d o m i n a t i o n , o f f e r i n g f o r m s for the i n t e g r a t i o n of the polis w i t h i n an
i m p e r i a l space and m e d i a t i n g i m p e r i a l p r e s e n c e o v e r and w i t h i n the
polis: the i d e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s for the c o n s t i t u t i o n of a s u p r a -polis
state w i t h o u t h a v i n g to dissolve the local c o m m u n i t i e s in a f u l l y
c o n s t i t u t e d territorial state. T h e f o r m s (statuses, p r i v i l e g e s ) p l a y e d
a m o r e i m p o r t a n t role in m a i n t a i n i n g c o n t r o l than the p r e s e n c e of
' f a c t i o n s ' ( o f t e n p r o p o s e d as the m a i n m e a n s of c o n t r o l o v e r cities,
in spite of the p o o r e v i d e n c e ) . 2 1 9 T h e typology of statuses reflects the
t r e n d t o w a r d s the p r o v i n c i a l i z a t i o n of the polis, the c o n v e r s i o n f r o m
free state to c o m m u n i t y d e p e n d e n t o n g r a n t s and p r i v i l e g e s , the
t y p o l o g y is itself a p o w e r f u l tool for b r i n g i n g this t r e n d to pass. T h i s
state o f affairs w o u l d b e c o m e g e n e r a l i z e d u n d e r R o m a n d o m i n a t i o n ,
w h e n a city m u s t resort to p e t i t i o n as a m a t t e r of c o u r s e , the
e m p e r o r spoke the royal l a n g u a g e of l i b e r t y - a s - g i f t and a n n u l l e d
liberty by fiat.220

S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s r e j e c t e d this m o d e l in 196, and their

resistance w a s ideological as w e l l as m i l i t a r y ( L i v . 3 3 . 3 8 . 1 - 7 ) . T h e s e
cities r e f u s e d to g i v e in to the o f f e r of a g r a n t o f l i b e r t y (unlike
M y l a s a or A l a b a n d a , in 203, w h i c h p r o b a b l y d i d s u r r e n d e r to
A n t i o c h o s I I I on c o n d i t i o n o f s u c h a grant). T h e i r resistance s e r v e s
as a r e m i n d e r that the p r o v i n c i a l i z a t i o n of the polis in the H e l l e n i s t i c
p e r i o d w a s not a f o r e g o n e c o n c l u s i o n , b u t w a s m a t c h e d b y rapid
d e p r o v i n c i a l i z a t i o n , b o t h b e f o r e A n t i o c h o s I I I ( C h . 1 § 4) and a f t e r -
w a r d s , e s p e c i a l l y in J u d a e a and P h o e n i c i a ; the g e n u i n e l y free city
w o u l d l o n g r e m a i n a reality. T h e S m y r n i a n and L a m p s a k e n e re-
c a l c i t r a n c e also p o i n t s o u t , e v e n as it contests, the l o g i c u n d e r l y i n g
the S e l e u k i d m o d e l , and its f u n c t i o n s : classification of the r u l e d
w i t h i n the cage of i m p e r i a l space, w h e r e the u l t i m a t e p r i v i l e g e w a s
' a u t o n o m y ' b y royal g r a n t ; the f o s t e r i n g of c o n s e n t ; the m o n o p o l y
of l e g i t i m a c y , g r o u n d e d in a S e l e u k i d past, the recalcitrant cities'

215 Factions: Bikerman 1938: 1 4 5 - 7 . T h e evidence is m o s t l y w a r t i m e (e.g. L i v .

3 7 . 9 . 1 - 4 , 3 7 . 1 1 . 1 5 , Pol. 2 1 . 6 . 4 - 6 ; L i v . 3 7 . 1 7 . 5 ) , w h e n u n d e r l y i n g issues w e r e exacer-
bated and factions could betray the city to the p o w e r they favoured; in peacetime, the
'factions' m a y have been restricted to a f e w individuals with ancestral ties to a king (RC
17, line 5; 22, line 9), and it is difficult to see h o w a 'faction' could easily control a polis
with its d e m o c r a t i c institutions (though M a c h i a v e l l i , The Prince, ch. 5, takes this
process as a definite possibility for the cities of Renaissance Italy).
220 p e t i t i o n : M e m n o n of Herakleia observes that Herakleia Pontike, w h e n subjected to
R o m a n publicans w h i c h the city perceived as 'the b e g i n n i n g of slavery', should have
petitioned to the Senate, rather than m u r d e r the p u b l i c a n s (FGrHist 434, 27.6). L i b e r t y
as gift: e.g. R e y n o l d s 1982: no. 13, lines 2, 7; SEG 32.469, lines 8 - 1 0 . E m p e r o r s taking
a w a y freedom: D i o C a s s . 54.7.6, 57.24.6 ( K y z i k o s u n d e r A u g u s t u s , T i b e r i u s ) .
liberty being considered insolent insubordination (Liv. 33.38.3,
5-6)·"

4. Beyond Structures

A t first s i g h t , it is d i f f i c u l t n o t to b e i m p r e s s e d b y t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e
S e l e u k i d state. T h e i m m e d i a t e i m p r e s s i o n is t h a t o f its m a t e r i a l
f o r c e . It c o n q u e r e d local c o m m u n i t i e s b y the t h r e a t o r the a p p l i c a -
tion of violence: large contingents of professional troops, strategic
m o v e m e n t s b y l a n d a n d b y sea o n a v a s t s c a l e . I t s m i l i t a r y m e a n s
c o n t r o l l e d , d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y , t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s a n d t h e
landscape, by garrisoning cities or b y h o l d i n g strategic points or
routes. Its far-reaching, hierarchically organized administrative
structures i m p l e m e n t e d royal orders; levied tribute, indirect taxes,
services; controlled the m o v e m e n t of people; generated c o m -
m u n i c a t i o n v e r t i c a l l y , f r o m h i g h o f f i c i a l s to s u b o r d i n a t e s , a n d
h o r i z o n t a l l y , b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f o f f i c i a l s ; p r o d u c e d its o w n
d e c i s i o n s a n d a c t i o n s ; k e p t r e c o r d s , a r c h i v e s , a l i v e b o d y of a d m i n -
i s t r a t i v e k n o w l e d g e . I s t h i s p i c t u r e an a c c u r a t e r e f l e c t i o n ? It c e r -
t a i n l y d e s c r i b e s t h e s i t u a t i o n at least in p a r t s o f A s i a M i n o r , a n d
e v e n in s o m e r e m o t e p a r t s , as A m y z o n , K i l d a r a , A i g a i , a n d T e m n o s
s u g g e s t : t h e s e w e r e h i g h l a n d c o m m u n i t i e s , n o t s i t e d o n the m a i n
a x e s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , b u t w h i c h still h a d to deal w i t h t h e S e l e u k i d
state o n a r e g u l a r b a s i s .
Y e t t h i s p i c t u r e is i m p o s s i b l e to s u b s t a n t i a t e m o r e g e n e r a l l y o r to
n u a n c e , f o r lack o f p r e c i s e a n d d e t a i l e d e v i d e n c e ; w h a t r e m a i n s , a n d
w h a t I h a v e d e v e l o p e d in t h e e a r l i e r s e c t i o n s o f t h i s c h a p t e r , is an
impression of S e l e u k i d p o w e r , d r a w n f r o m the implications of the
d o c u m e n t s . W i t h o u t f u r t h e r e v i d e n c e to t r a c e m a t t e r s o n the
g r o u n d , t h i s p i c t u r e is less a b o u t r e a l i t i e s t h a n a b o u t a r h e t o r i c o f
p o w e r , a n d h e n c e a b o u t i d e o l o g y : t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f the d o c u m e n t s
concern the existence of a space structured b y administration, the
efficiency and u b i q u i t y of royal authority, the m e t i c u l o u s n e s s of
c o n t r o l , the s u c c e s s f u l w o r k i n g s o f the s y s t e m . T h e s e h e l p to
i m a g i n e e m p i r e ; t h e s e are all a b o u t i d e o l o g y , t h e ' i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e
i m p l i c a t i o n s ' . It is e s s e n t i a l to b e a r the i d e o l o g i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e final
p i c t u r e o f ' i m a g i n e d e m p i r e ' , as w e s p i n o u t the i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e
d o c u m e n t s . T h i s d o e s n o t c o n d e m n t h e p i c t u r e as u n r e a l : o n t h e
c o n t r a r y , o n e s t r a n d o f t h e a r g u m e n t p r e s e n t e d in t h i s c h a p t e r is
t h a t i d e o l o g y p l a y e d a v e r y real role in c o n s t i t u t i n g e m p i r e , a n d
t h a t a H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e like t h e S e l e u k i d r e a l m d e p e n d e d o n i d e o -
l o g i c a l f o r c e as m u c h as o n p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e . T h e i m p r e s s i o n s o f
' s t r o n g s t a t e - n e s s ' g i v e n o u t b y the r h e t o r i c o f o u r S e l e u k i d d o c u -
m e n t s are an i m p l i c i t c o n s t i t u e n t o f t h i s i d e o l o g y o f e m p i r e . T h e
t y p o l o g y o f l e g a l s t a t u s e s a n d p r i v i l e g e s are a n o t h e r , e x p l i c i t f e a t u r e ,
w h i c h a s s i g n e d t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s a p l a c e in t h e s p a c e o f e m p i r e .
It p r e s e n t e d t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e c i t i e s as t h e s u m o f t h e g r a n t s w h i c h
t h e r u l e r h a d a g r e e d to; it r e s t e d o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f t h e r u l e r ' s
p o w e r to n a m e , a n d o f t h e p e r t i n e n c e o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s h e w i e l d e d
w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e cities. T h i s i d e o l o g y of e m p i r e , e x p r e s s e d
t h r o u g h a p r a c t i c a l s y s t e m of d e f i n i t i o n s a n d s t a t u s e s , w a s a
p o w e r f u l t o o l f o r d o m i n a t i o n , a n d is as i m p r e s s i v e an i n s t r u m e n t
o f S e l e u k i d state p o w e r as t h e m o r e o b v i o u s , m a t e r i a l m e a n s o f
control. T h e impression and ideology of strong state-ness, b y a self-
f u l f i l l i n g m o v e m e n t , c o u l d h e l p m a k e t h e S e l e u k i d state s t r o n g .
N o n e t h e l e s s , the i m p r e s s i o n o f a p o w e r f u l state a p p a r a t u s is
d i f f i c u l t to s u b s t a n t i a t e , a n d m i g h t b e l a r g e l y i d e o l o g i c a l — o r s i m p l y
an i l l u s i o n . T h i s s h o u l d m a k e u s r e c o n s i d e r t h e e v i d e n c e f o r
S e l e u k i d Asia M i n o r , and notice the u n t i d y e l e m e n t s w h i c h do not
fit an u n i f i e d p i c t u r e of s t r u c t u r e s a n d institutions séleuci.des. One
i n s t a n c e c a n b e f o u n d in w e s t e r n K a r i a , S e l e u k i d s i n c e 203 ( C h . 2 §
2). A m y z o n w a s c e r t a i n l y in c o n t a c t w i t h s e v e r a l l a y e r s o f S e l e u k i d
a u t h o r i t y , as d e s c r i b e d a b o v e . It also b e l o n g e d to an o r g a n i s a t i o n
c a l l e d t h e C h r y s a o r i a n L e a g u e , p r e s u m a b l y an e t h n i c a l l y b a s e d
f e d e r a t i o n , a b o u t w h i c h w e k n o w v e r y little. It h a d its o w n i n s t i t u -
t i o n s ( i n c l u d i n g an a s s e m b l y a n d financial i n s t i t u t i o n s ) a n d f e d e r a l
c i t i z e n s h i p (all C h r y s a o r i a n s h a d c e r t a i n r i g h t s in all C h r y s a o r i a n
cities). It w a s c e n t r e d o n a s h r i n e n e a r S t r a t o n i k e i a , a c i t y u n d e r
R h o d i a n control. A p a r t f r o m A m y z o n , i m p o r t a n t ' S e l e u k i d ' cities
like A l a b a n d a ( ' A n t i o c h e i a o f t h e C h r y s a o r i a n s ' ) , A l i n d a , a n d
Mylasa were Chrysaorian communities, along with Stratonikeia,
K e r a m o s , a n d T h e r a , f r o m R h o d e s ' S u b j e c t Peraia. 2 2 1 It is s u r p r i s -
i n g to d i s c o v e r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n w h o s e m e m b e r s h i p
w a s d r a w n f r o m b o t h the S e l e u k i d and the R h o d i a n d o m i n i o n s ,
e s p e c i a l l y if o n e c o n s i d e r s t h a t t h e S e l e u k i d state r e s t r i c t e d t h e
e x t e r n a l d i p l o m a c y o f at least s o m e o f its s u b j e c t cities. H o w t h e
C h r y s a o r i a n L e a g u e coexisted w i t h the concrete territorial and
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s S e l e u k i d state, a n d h o w t h i s c o e x i s t e n c e
s h o u l d m o d i f y o u r p i c t u r e o f t h e n a t u r e o f S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l is y e t
unclear.
J u s t as p r o b l e m a t i c is t h e e x i s t e n c e o f ' d y n a s t s ' , p e r s o n a l r u l e r s o f
s m a l l p r i n c i p a l i t i e s , w h o s e e m to h a v e e x i s t e d in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e

221 A m y z o n : document 11 (whence it appears that all Chrysaorians share privileges in

every Chrysaorian city), and J. and L . Robert 1983: no. 28 (finances). Chrysaorians; J.
and L . Robert 1983: 223-5.
S e l e u k i d state, s u c h as the P h i l o m e l i d s in P h r y g i a , o r M o a g e t e s in
t h e K i b y r a t i s ; if t h e case o f P t o l e m a i o s o f T e l m e s s o s , u n d e r t h e
P t o l e m i e s is t y p i c a l , d y n a s t s h a d f u l l e n j o y m e n t o f t h e i r p r i n c i p a l -
ity, w h e r e they c o u l d levy indirect taxes and agricultural d u e s
(OGIS 55). W e d o n o t k n o w h o w t h e s e w e r e c o n t r o l l e d o r i n t e -
g r a t e d (if i n d e e d t h e y w e r e i n t e g r a t e d ) . W e r e t h e y c o n s i d e r e d
' v a s s a l ' r u l e r s , like t h o s e in t h e e a s t e r n p a r t s o f the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e ?
O r were they hereditary Seleukid governors? ( T h e 'dynast'
O l y m p i c h o s s t a r t e d o f f as a S e l e u k i d g o v e r n o r , p e r h a p s a h y p a r c h ,
a n d c o n t i n u e d as an A n t i g o n i d g o v e r n o r . ) I n t h e l a t t e r c a s e , w h y
w o u l d c e r t a i n f a m i l i e s h a v e b e e n a l l o w e d to r e t a i n g o v e r n o r s h i p s as
their p r e r o g a t i v e — a s a reward, or because they w e r e too e n t r e n c h e d
l o c a l l y to b e r e m o v e d ? O r w e r e t h e y s o m e s o r t o f ' b a r o n ' , e n j o y i n g
l a r g e e s t a t e s as a p o w e r b a s e ? ( P t o l e m a i o s c e r t a i n l y e n j o y e d j u r i s -
d i c t i o n o n h i s e s t a t e at S k y t h o p o l i s . ) Y e t a n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y is t h a t
a d y n a s t like M o a g e t e s w a s l a r g e l y f r e e f r o m S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l ,
t o l e r a t e d b e c a u s e he w a s too d i f f i c u l t to r e d u c e . T h e q u e s t i o n is
c l o u d e d b o t h b y p r o b l e m s of definition and t e r m i n o l o g y , and b y the
l a c k o f a n y n e w e v i d e n c e . 2 2 2 It is n o n e t h e l e s s c l e a r t h a t t h e p r e s e n c e
o f d y n a s t s m a d e t h e S e l e u k i d state f a r less h o m o g e n e o u s t h a n a
general s u r v e y of administrative structures or a m a p presenting
' S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r ' as a s o l i d t e r r i t o r i a l b l o c k m i g h t h i n t .
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n the state a n d f o r m s o f o r g a n i s a -
t i o n in t h e r o y a l l a n d , s u c h as t h e v i l l a g e s a n d t h e s h r i n e s , m u s t h a v e
m a d e a l a r g e c l a i m , p e r h a p s the l a r g e s t , o n t h e S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l s '
a c t i v i t y , b e c a u s e o f t h e e x t e n s i o n a n d e c o n o m i c i m p o r t a n c e o f the
chora; y e t t h e s e r e l a t i o n s are still v e r y p o o r l y d o c u m e n t e d . T h e
details of control and exaction, the nature and f r e q u e n c y of contacts,
all t h e s e m a t t e r s still e s c a p e u s , in s p i t e o f e v o c a t i v e p i e c e s o f e v i -
d e n c e f r o m t h e v i l l a g e s o r c o n c e r n i n g t h e shrines. 2 2 3 F i n a l l y , a
s u r v e y o f i m p e r i a l s t r u c t u r e s , s u c h as I h a v e g i v e n in s e c t i o n s 1 - 2 o f
this chapter, precisely leaves out the regions w h e r e imperial p o w e r

222 T h e evidence is gathered in Billows 1995: 8 1 - 1 1 0 , and K o b e s 1996. Philomelids:

Philomelos appears as an independent power player in the confused local conflicts

of 189: Pol. 21.35.2; Moagetes: Pol. 21.34. Was the Kibyratis free from Seleukid
dominion, like Selge, which Strabo (12.7.3) claims was never subject to the kings
(despite the activity of Antiochos III in Pisidia?). However, it is probable that the
Kibyratis was Seleukid around 260: Strobel 1991: 125-6, argues persuasively that T l o s
was under Seleukid attack at that time; if so, Seleukid troops assailed the Xanthos
valley from the north, coming down from the Kibyratan march, which was presumably
Seleukid-held (on the geography, J. and L . Robert in BE 50, 183, on the decree for
Orthagoras of Araxa, edited by G . E. Bean, reproduced as SEG 18.570).
223 Villages: Wörrle 1975. Shrines: D e b o r d 1982; Boffo 1985; Virgilio 1987 for
programmatic essay; Brandt 1992: 69; I have argued that the office and activity of
Nikanor imply administrative control of the shrines (§ 2c).
d i d n o t o b t a i n , s i n c e s u c h a s u r v e y g o e s w h e r e t h e e v i d e n c e l e a d s it.
It is d a n g e r o u s to e x t r a p o l a t e f r o m S e l e u k i d a c t i v i t y in t h e lieux de
passage: D e b o r d ( 1 9 8 5 : 3 4 7 - 8 ) h a s o b s e r v e d t h a t in L y d i a at least,
S e l e u k i d c o n t r o l s e e m s r e s t r i c t e d to t h e p l a i n s a n d v a l l e y s , l e a v i n g
o u t m u c h o f t h e r o u g h e r c o u n t r y in N o r t h - E a s t e r n L y d i a ; l i k e w i s e ,
the R h o d i a n 'control' of L y k i a m a y have been far m o r e limited than
m o d e r n historians assume, and mainly centred on the X a n t h o s
v a l l e y ( Z i m m e r m a n n 1 9 9 3 ) . T o g e n e r a l i z e f r o m the p a t c h y e v i d e n c e
is t e m p t i n g , b e c a u s e it p r o d u c e s a m o r e s a t i s f y i n g p i c t u r e ; b u t to d o
so w o u l d a m o u n t to t a k i n g too s e r i o u s l y t h e i n c l u s i v e i d e o l o g y o f
t h e S e l e u k i d s p a c e , p r e c i s e l y the d a n g e r t h i s s e c t i o n h a s tried to
highlight.
I f w e h a d the e v i d e n c e to c o n f r o n t t h e i d e o l o g y o f e m p i r e , a n d
t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f state p o w e r w h i c h o u r d o c u m e n t s d e l i b e r a t e l y
g i v e o u t , w i t h local realities, t h e p i c t u r e m i g h t b e s u r p r i s i n g . T h e
e a r l y a n d classical O t t o m a n state, o r R e v o l u t i o n a r y F r a n c e , o r
N a p o l e o n i c F r a n c e , h a r d l y s t r i k e u s as w e a k states: t h e y s h o w a
d e v e l o p e d centre of p o w e r , the p r o f u s i o n of military m e a n s for
c o m p u l s i o n , a careful b u r e a u c r a c y , and extensive administrative
s t r u c t u r e s . Y e t t h e f o r m e r d r e w an e l o q u e n t d e c l a r a t i o n b y B r a u d e l :
'pauvre despotisme des T u r c s ! ' ; concerning France, R. C o b b
described the 'hinterland of indifference', w h i c h started i m m e d i -
ately b e y o n d the great cities and the m a i n a v e n u e s of c o m m u n i c a -
t i o n , e v e n in t h e I l e - d e - F r a n c e . 2 2 4 It w o u l d b e f a s c i n a t i n g to m a p
o u t S e l e u k i d p o w e r in A s i a M i n o r , to o b s e r v e w h e r e the S e l e u k i d
state w a s t h i c k a n d w h e r e t h i n , to t r y to e x p l a i n w h y . T h i s w o u l d
a l l o w u s to e v a l u a t e to w h a t e x t e n t t h e i m p e r i a l i d e o l o g y w a s an
i l l u s i o n t h a t s u s t a i n e d S e l e u k i d p o w e r , o r the p r o d u c t o f a t r u l y
p o w e r f u l a n d i n v a s i v e e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n ; w e m i g h t b e a b l e to
j u d g e w h e t h e r the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e was, like the O t t o m a n e m p i r e , a
p a r a d o x i c a l c o m b i n a t i o n of state p o w e r a n d o f s t r u c t u r a l w e a k n e s s ,
a n d w h y . I f t h e e v i d e n c e w e r e as p l e n t i f u l as f o r m o r e m o d e r n
p e r i o d s , w e c o u l d e v e n c o n c e i v a b l y start to relate l o n g - t e r m
patterns of settlement and social o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h the i m p a c t and
t h e f o r m s w h i c h an e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n t o o k in t h e l a n d s c a p e ,
both urban and rural. F o r the time b e i n g , w e do not k n o w h o w loud
w e s h o u l d s i g h ' p a u v r e d e s p o t i s m e d e s S é l e u c i d e s ! ' , o r w h e t h e r it
w o u l d b e j u s t i f i e d at all.

T h e firmest c o n c l u s i o n to e m e r g e f r o m t h i s c h a p t e r is t h e real
contribution which ideology makes towards constituting empire.

224 T u r k s : Braudel 1966: i. 34-6. Indifference: C o b b 1975: 30-4, 38; much of C o b b ' s

work is devoted to showing the powerlessness or the irrelevance of even strong, militant
governments like the pre-Thermidorian Revolutionary state, or the Napoleonic state.
B u t u n l i k e the s t r u c t u r e s of p o w e r - a s - p o s s e s s i o n , this a s p e c t c a n n o t
be s t u d i e d b y inert, a n a t o m i z i n g m e t h o d s like lists of officials or of
taxes. In s t u d y i n g h o w the t y p o l o g y of statuses s t r e n g t h e n e d
S e l e u k i d p o w e r , I h a v e m e n t i o n e d the n e e d f o r c o n s e n t or a c c e p t -
ability; earlier on, I n o t e d the fact that the royal p r o n o u n c e m e n t s
and the p r i v i l e g e s t h e y g r a n t e d w h e r e the o b j e c t of n e g o t i a t i o n s and
b a r g a i n i n g b e t w e e n rulers and ruled. B o t h aspects point o u t h o w
the e x p e r i e n c e of e m p i r e e s c a p e s m e r e c a t a l o g u i n g of s t r u c t u r e s ;
statuses and p r i v i l e g e s r e p r e s e n t e d b a r g a i n s struck b e t w e e n r u l i n g
p o w e r and local c o m m u n i t y , and c o u l d be u s e d f o r f u r t h e r n e g o t i a -
tions. 2 2 5 T h i s p o i n t s to a n o t h e r w a y in w h i c h p o w e r can b e
a p p r o a c h e d , e v e n w i t h i n an e m p i r e of d o m i n a t i o n like the S e l e u k i d
e m p i r e : p o w e r as interaction. I n o t h e r w o r d s , the m o d e l s w h i c h
s t u d y ' p o w e r - a s - b a t t l e f i e l d ' can b e r e i n t r o d u c e d into the s t u d y of
S e l e u k i d A s i a M i n o r , if w e e x a m i n e the i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n r u l e r s
and r u l e d . L u c k i l y , the v e r y m e d i u m of this i n t e r a c t i o n is p r e -
s e r v e d : w e h a v e the actual d o c u m e n t s , c o u c h e d in c o n v e n t i o n a l
f o r m s , royal letters, civic decrees. Just as the s y s t e m o f statuses
and p r i v i l e g e s s h o u l d not be m i n i m i z e d to a m e a n i n g l e s s c o v e r f o r
b r u t a l realities of p o w e r , so these c o n v e n t i o n a l f o r m s s h o u l d not
be r e d u c e d to h y p o c r i t i c a l f a ç a d e and servile t o a d y i n g : the political
l a n g u a g e o f the actors w a s not an e p i p h e n o m e n o n to the realities of
p o w e r , b u t w a s v e r y real, since it c o n s t i t u t e d the relations b e t w e e n
ruler and r u l e d , t h r o u g h p r o c e s s e s o f e x c h a n g e . It o f f e r s us w a y s to
p u r s u e and refine the analyses o f p o w e r o f f e r e d in C h a p t e r 3: these
w i l l be taken u p in the n e x t c h a p t e r .

225 T h e same process for the Roman empire: Millar 1983: 80, 'not . . . a one-sided

series of pronouncements from the centre of power, but . . . a constant dialogue of

petition and response'.
 C H A P T E R 4

Empire as Interaction

A s e n s e o f e m p i r e as a p r o c e s s o f e x c h a n g e c a n b e g a i n e d e v e n f r o m
d o c u m e n t s w h i c h at first s i g h t e x p r e s s t h e f u l l w e i g h t o f r o y a l
p o w e r , s u c h as Z e u x i s ' l e t t e r to A m y z o n , w r i t t e n i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r
t a k i n g t h e c i t y o v e r . 1 T h e p a r t i c u l a r case o f A m y z o n is f r a m e d in t h e
w i d e r c o n t e x t o f 'all t h o s e w h o h a v e t r u s t e d a n d h a n d e d t h e m s e l v e s
o v e r to u s ' , in t h e r h e t o r i c o f e x t e n s i o n a n d t o t a l i t y e s s e n t i a l to
representations of imperial power; Z e u x i s ' professed solicitude
s p e a k s o f t h e a s y m m e t r y b e t w e e n t h e r o y a l state a n d the local c o m -
m u n i t y ; the letter e n d s b y n o t i f y i n g the A m y z o n i a n s that Z e u x i s has
o r d e r e d h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s to t a k e c a r e o f t h e m a n d r e f r a i n f r o m
a b u s e s . T h e s t r u c t u r e s o f c o n t r o l are a l r e a d y in p l a c e ; l o c a l status
quo d e p e n d s o n the p e r f o r m a t i v e u t t e r a n c e o f t h e i m p e r i a l state. A l l
t h e s e f e a t u r e s — p a r a l l e l e d in Z e u x i s ' letter to K i l d a r a 2 — c h a r a c t e r i z e
t h e d i s c o u r s e o f e m p i r e : the w o r l d o f d o w n w a r d - f l o w i n g o r d e r s ,
w i t h its o w n s t y l e a n d v a l u e s d e r i v e d f r o m t h e p a t r i m o n i a l n a t u r e o f
t h e state, t h e w o r l d ' w h e r e y o u m e a n s it'. 3 E v e n so, Z e u x i s ' l e t t e r s
i n c l u d e a f e a t u r e w h i c h is t h e m o r e i n t e r e s t i n g b e c a u s e it f o l l o w s
e x p r e s s i o n s o f i m p e r i a l p o w e r : t h e p r o m i s e o f f u t u r e b e n e f a c t i o n , if
t h e l o c a l c o m m u n i t y b e h a v e s w e l l — ' w e w i l l take all c a r e f o r y o u ,
i n a s m u c h as y o u s h o w y o u r s e l v e s t h e b e t t e r d i s p o s e d a n d t h e m o r e
z e a l o u s t o w a r d s the i n t e r e s t s o f k i n g A n t i o c h o s ' . 4 S u c h e x p r e s s i o n s
are c o m m o n , in t h e e p i g r a p h i c a l m a t e r i a l p e r t a i n i n g to A n t i o c h o s
I I I a n d in t h e H e l l e n i s t i c p e r i o d g e n e r a l l y ; w e m a y u s e f u l l y call
t h e m 'contract clauses'.5 T h e y admit that the reality of interaction
1 Document 5. T h e analysis offered here is inspired by Marin 1978: 104, on royal dis-

course: the point is 'faire passer sa totalité, sa plénitude dans la 'petitesse' de l'occasion
présente'. 2 Document 25.
3 Royal orders: Bertrand 1990: 108-9, I I 4 - I 5 · Style: Wörrle 1978: 204-6.
Patrimonial ideology: Ch. 3 § 2. You meaning it: Pocock 1984: 34, 42.
4 Document 25, 7 - 1 1 ; A m y z o n (fragmentary, but unmistakable): 5, 7-9.
5 Antiochos III: also documents 26 A , I 25—30 (Laodike to Iasos); 31 A , I 14—15, B

IV 9 - 1 0 (Antiochos, Zeuxis to Herakleia); can be guessed in 19 D, 8-10 (Laodike to

Teos). Other: RC 14, lines 12-14; SEG 42.994, lines D 14-17; 2 Macc. 11: 19; 1 Macc.
10: 27; Jos. AJ 13.48 (signalled by Piejko 1991a: 64); Jonnes and Ricl 1997: 3-4, lines
36-8,47-8.
b e t w e e n r u l e r a n d r u l e d is a p r o c e s s o f r e c i p r o c i t y , r a t h e r t h a n
s i m p l y a vertical relationship of control and exploitation; the terms
in w h i c h t h e e x c h a n g e is d e f i n e d are n o t s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , b u t
c o u c h e d in a c o n v e n t i o n a l l a n g u a g e w h o s e f u n c t i o n s a n d e f f e c t s w i l l
h a v e to b e e x p l o r e d .
T h a t r e c i p r o c i t y w a s a figure u s e d b y the S e l e u k i d state a l e r t s u s
to t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c o n s i d e r i n g a H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g in a c o n t e x t o f
i n t e r a c t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n as t h e u n t r a m m e l l e d a u t h o r o f a c t i o n s
d i r e c t e d at p a s s i v e cities. T h i s h o l d s t r u e f o r the m o s t v i s i b l e r o y a l
a c t i v i t y : m a t e r i a l b e n e f a c t i o n s to t h e cities. 6 O f c o u r s e , it is l e g i t i -
m a t e to c o n s i d e r t h e m f r o m a b o v e , as a s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e o f e m p i r e :
g i f t s as m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f r o y a l p o w e r , an a s p e c t so w e l l d o c u m e n t e d
f o r A n t i o c h o s I I I , a n d in s u c h a v a r i e t y o f r e c i p i e n t s o f b e n e f a c t i o n ,
t h a t it is w o r t h r e c a p i t u l a t i n g the e v i d e n c e a n d p a u s i n g to r e f l e c t o n
it, a l b e i t b r i e f l y . A n t i o c h o s g a v e g r a i n to P r i e n e a n d H e r a k l e i a ; he
m a d e g r a n t s o f c a s h to H e r a k l e i a ( w h o s e c i t i z e n s b a l d l y a s k e d f o r a
y e a r l y s u b s i d y 'as l a r g e as p o s s i b l e ' , b u t a m o u n t i n g to at least five,
o r p e r h a p s n i n e , t a l e n t s ) ; he c o u l d m a k e m o r e s p e c i f i c g i f t s f o r i n s t i -
t u t i o n s , f o r i n s t a n c e oil f o r t h e g y m a s i o n , as he d i d w i t h H e r a k l e i a
and Sardeis; he c o u l d subsidize the expense of maintaining ameni-
ties, as w i t h a w a t e r - c o n d u i t at H e r a k l e i a ; he c o u l d h e l p w i t h t h e
e x p e n s i v e b u s i n e s s o f r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , as at S a r d e i s a n d p e r h a p s
e a r t h q u a k e - s t r i c k e n I a s o s ( w h e r e a g y m n a s i o n , the A n t i o c h e i o n ,
m i g h t b e a t t r i b u t e d to h i m , a n d t h e bouleuterion a n d archeion w e r e
p r o b a b l y r e b u i l t a f t e r S e l e u k i d t a k e o v e r ) . 7 A l l t h e s e i t e m s find
p a r a l l e l s in the g e n e r a l h i s t o r y o f H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g s h i p , s u c h as t h e
I v o r r h a g o s d e c r e e w h i c h d o c u m e n t s A t t a l i d g r a n t s to c i t i e s , o r t h e
case o f t h e T e m p l e o f J e r u s a l e m , the r e c i p i e n t o f b e n e f a c t i o n b o t h
in t h e f o r m of l o n g - t e r m g i f t s a n d o f i m m e d i a t e h e l p w i t h b u i l d i n g . 8
T h e case o f I a s o s , d o c u m e n t e d in s o m e d e t a i l , s t a n d s o u t b e c a u s e
of the c o m p l e x i t y and breadth of the arrangements, w h i c h allow us
to e x a m i n e t h e i m p a c t o f r o y a l e u e r g e t i s m w i t h i n the r e c i p i e n t c o m -
m u n i t y . L a o d i k e p r o m i s e d the city forty tons of w h e a t a year, for ten
y e a r s , w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s to u s e t h e i n c o m e r a i s e d b y s e l l i n g t h e g r a i n
f o r the d o w r i e s o f the p o o r c i t i z e n s ' d a u g h t e r s (els προίκας ταΐς τών
άσθηνούντων πολιτών θνγατράσιν), at a m a x i m u m o f '300 A n t i o c h e i a n

6 V e y n e 1976: 340 n. 131; Bringmann 1993, summarizing the results of a survey of

royal euergetism: the results are published in Bringmann and von Steuben 1995, a com-
pendium of the available evidence; Gauthier 1985: 39-53.
7 D o c u m e n t s I, 3, 31, 33. Water-conduit: 31 A , I 11—13. Iasos: Crowther 19956,

Robert 1937: 450-2 (gymnasion), Hicks on GIBM 443, same document I. Iasos 252
(1bouleuterion, archeion—but if these buildings had been financed by Antiochos I I I
(Hicks), one might expect the inscription to record the fact).
8 SEG 2.663 (also SEG 2.580, lines 16-18, RC 48, line D 4); Jos. AJ 1 2 . 1 3 8 - 4 ! .
d r a c h m a i ' p e r d o w r y . T h e g i f t is n o t o n l y a l i m e n t a r y , s u p p l e m e n t -
i n g t h e m e a g r e a g r i c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s o f Iasos; 9 it i n t e r v e n e s in t h e
fabric of the city, facilitating marriage and citizen r e p r o d u c t i o n ,
l e s s e n i n g social i n e q u a l i t y a n d c o n f l i c t in t h e a f t e r m a t h o f e a r t h -
q u a k e a n d w a r f a r e ; L a o d i k e d e s c r i b e s h e r g i f t as 'a b e n e f a c t i o n to
t h e p o o r c i t i z e n s a n d a c o m m o n s e r v i c e (κοινήν εύχρηστίαν) to t h e
w h o l e p e o p l e ' . L a o d i k e , as q u e e n , a l l o w s t h e r o y a l b e n e f a c t i o n s to
e x t e n d into t h e p r i v a t e s p h e r e o f m a r r i a g e ; t h e e x p r e s s i o n
' A n t i o c h e i a n d r a c h m a i ' in w h i c h L a o d i k e m e a s u r e s t h e d o w r i e s
( r a t h e r t h a n ' A t t i c d r a c h m a i ' o r ' A l e x a n d r i a n d r a c h m a i ' , δραχμαι
Άλεξανδpetat), b y u s i n g an i d e o l o g i c a l l y l o a d e d s t a n d a r d r a t h e r t h a n
t h e u s u a l p h r a s e s f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l w e i g h t s t a n d a r d s , s e r v e s as a
r e m i n d e r s o f r o y a l b e n e f i c e n c e in t h e t r a n s a c t i o n c o n c e r n i n g c i t i z e n
families and their daughters.10 Furthermore, it s e e m s that
A n t i o c h o s I I I f o s t e r e d s o c i a l p e a c e in the c i t y , b y s p o n s o r i n g t h e
r e s o r t to ' f o r e i g n j u d g e s ' to a r b i t r a t e c o n f l i c t , u n d e r the d i v i n e
s a n c t i o n o f an o r a c l e o f A p o l l o : b o t h t h e k i n g a n d t h e g o d u r g e d t h e
c i t y to l i v e its c o m m o n l i f e in h a r m o n y ( π ο λ ι τ ε ύ ε σ α ι μεθ' ομονοία?).11
E v e n if t h e p r o c e s s w a s u n o b t r u s i v e , r e s t i n g o n t h e a c c e p t a b l e
a u t h o r i t y o f an o r a c u l a r g o d , t h i s a c t i v i t y i n t r o d u c e d royal
b e n e f i c e n c e i n t o t h e c e n t r e o f polis e x i s t e n c e , t h r o u g h t h e p a t r o n a g e
o f l o c a l r e c o n c i l i a t i o n a n d c i v i c h a r m o n y ; t h i s state o f a f f a i r s , r a t h e r
t h a n m o r e c o n v e n t i o n a l g i f t s , m a y b e w h a t t h e I a s i a n s d e s i g n a t e d as
τα μέγιστα αγαθά r e c e i v e d f r o m t h e k i n g . 1 2
I a s o s , t h e r e c i p i e n t of e u e r g e t i c a l a t t e n t i o n f r o m A n t i o c h o s a n d
L a o d i k e , w a s f o r m a l l y a ' f r e e ' c i t y ( C h . 3 § 3). Y e t b e n e f a c t i o n s
a l l o w e d t h e S e l e u k i d state to e x t e n d its p r e s e n c e into t h e l o c a l c o m -
m u n i t i e s , r e g a r d l e s s o f j u r i d i c a l s t a t u s . B y i n t e r v e n i n g in areas o f
n e e d , s u c h as t h e c i t i e s ' p r e c a r i o u s f o o d s u p p l y o r u n s y s t e m a t i c
budgets,13 and b y p a y i n g for e x p e n s i v e b u i l d i n g projects, the king
9 Strabo 14.2.21, qualified by Crowther 1995b: 112 n. 120; Ph. Gauthier, BCH 114
(1990), 438 and nn. 6 1 - 2 ; for a sense of the territory of Iasos and its sub-units, see
further the studies by E. L a Rocca, J. Benoit, R. Pierobon Benoit, G . Ragone, R.
Ragone, G . Traina, within the survey published in ASNP 3rd ser. 23 (1993), 847-998.
10 D o c u m e n t 26 A . Iasos was a free city, and (on current orthodoxy) could have

minted its own coinage; it presumably chose not to do so. Attic-Alexandrine standard:
E. Will, Gnomon 68 (1996), 696-7.
11 D o c u m e n t 28, 1 - 7 . Crowther 19956 points out that the call for homonoia suggests

the resort to foreign judges, and dates (on palaeographical and prosopographical
grounds) a cluster of 'foreign judges' decrees concerning Iasos to the 190s; as C r o w t h e r
(19956: 120), observes, the fact that the archeion had to be rebuilt at this time perhaps
implies destruction in social unrest (qua repository for debt records).
12 D o c u m e n t 28, 9—10.
ls Food: a later parallel in Robert 1949: 74-81, for the Roman period; Broughton, in

ESAR 4. 607—9; Garnsey 1988: 14—16 on the frequency of grain shortage (with
Hellenistic references). Budgets: Will 1988: 334 n. 11 (though see Migeotte 1984 and
1992 for a qualification of the traditional view).
c o u l d foster d e p e n d e n c y o n gifts, integrate the cities, legitimize his
r u l e t h r o u g h an i d e o l o g y o f b e n e f i c e n c e , c r e a t e l o c a l ties o f o b l i g a -
t i o n , instil c o n s e n t (cf. C h . 3 § 3), a n d m u l t i p l y t h e f o r c e o f h i s o f t e n
i n d i r e c t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n b y d e v e l o p i n g a v e n u e s o f i n f l u e n c e in a d d i -
t i o n to c h a n n e l s o f c o m m a n d . T h r o u g h t h e s e f u n c t i o n s , g i f t - g i v i n g
c o u l d act as a s y s t e m o f g o v e r n m e n t ; in S t r a b o ' s w o r d s , f o r c e a n d
euergesia are the k i n g ' s t w o r e s o u r c e s f o r p e r s u a s i o n ( 9 . 2 . 4 0 ) . 1 4
N o n e t h e l e s s , it is m i s l e a d i n g l y o n e - s i d e d to v i e w r o y a l e u e r g e t -
ism solely f r o m above. T h e roster of benefactions obtained by
P r i e n e o r H e r a k l e i a w e r e g r a n t e d to r e q u e s t s f r o m t h e s e cities: g i f t -
g i v i n g b e l o n g s to a w i d e r c o n t e x t o f p e t i t i o n a n d r e s p o n s e , a n d t h e
' s y s t e m of g o v e r n m e n t ' m u s t also b e e x a m i n e d as a s y s t e m o f i n t e r -
a c t i o n . 1 5 L a o d i k e ' s l e t t e r to I a s o s i n v i t e s u s to d o so b y p r o l o n g i n g
her c o m p l e x gift with a 'contract clause' promising future benefac-
t i o n s if the I a s i a n s b e h a v e 'as is a p p r o p r i a t e ' a n d r e m e m b e r the
ευεργεσία ι. W e m u s t s t u d y b e n e f a c t i o n as p a r t o f a t r a n s a c t i o n o f
g i f t - g i v i n g , a c y c l e o f g i v i n g a n d r e m e m b r a n c e . 1 6 T h e w a y in w h i c h
g i f t - g i v i n g is h a n d l e d b y b o t h p a r t i e s t a k e s u s b a c k to l a n g u a g e , t h e
formalized, stereotypical language t h r o u g h w h i c h the transaction
w a s d e s c r i b e d a n d c o n d u c t e d , a n d w h i c h a l l o w e d b o t h p a r t i e s to
express requests for gifts and the legitimizing force of benefaction.
S t r a b o ' s s t a t e m e n t (9.2.40) t h a t t h e k i n g d i d n o t n e e d w o r d s to
persuade must be qualified. A n t i o c h o s III before S m y r n a and
L a m p s a k o s ( L i v . 3 3 . 3 8 . 5 ) , u t t e r e d t h r e a t s b u t also s p o k e c o n -
c i l i a t o r y w o r d s (leniter adloquendo).

ι. The Language of Euergetism

T h e i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n k i n g and c i t y t o o k p l a c e t h r o u g h c a n o n i c a l
f o r m s , the r o y a l l e t t e r a n d t h e c i v i c d e c r e e . T h e d o s s i e r o f t e x t s
c o n c e r n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n A n t i o c h o s I I I a n d the c i t i e s is
l a r g e a n d c o n s i s t e n t e n o u g h f o r a s u r v e y of t h e s e f o r m s , a n d also o f
t h e l a n g u a g e s h a r e d b y b o t h p a r t i e s . T h e s e t e x t s also h a v e the
a d v a n t a g e o f b e i n g t y p i c a l o f H e l l e n i s t i c d i p l o m a t i c s in g e n e r a l , so
t h a t t h e i r e x a m p l e s c a n b e e x p a n d e d w i t h p a r a l l e l s , a n d the findings
t h e y e n c o u r a g e a p p l y to t h e H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d in g e n e r a l .

14 Gauthier 1985: 41; Bringmann 1993; H. Ciaessen in Ciaessen and Skelnik 1978:

563-7 on the early state, which extracts surplus but derives legitimation by returning
some of it as gifts: likewise, the wherewithal for Seleukid benefactions derived from the
profit of empire.
15 Gauthier 1993b: 2 1 3 - 1 5 for a nuanced appreciation of royal euergesia and local

initiative.
16 V e y n e 1976: 76-81.
 T h e k i n g s (or t h e i r o f f i c i a l s ) c o m m u n i c a t e d to the c i t i e s t h r o u g h
l e t t e r s w r i t t e n o n a s t e r e o t y p i c a l f o r m a t a n d , in t h e i r d i p l o m a t i c a l
nature, different f r o m the curt messages of administration: a pre-
a m b l e , u s u a l l y a c k n o w l e d g i n g an e m b a s s y f r o m a c i t y , a c c e p t i n g
and a p p r o v i n g h o n o u r s decreed b y the city; a main decision or
a c t i o n b y the k i n g , d e s c r i b e d in t e r m s o f h i s o w n m o t i v a t i o n a n d
f e e l i n g s ; a c o n c l u d i n g s e c t i o n , w i t h f e a t u r e s s u c h as a c o n t r a c t c l a u s e
a n d r e f e r e n c e to a f u t u r e , o r a l , r e p o r t b y t h e c i t y ' s a m b a s s a d o r s . 1 7
T h e r e are s e v e r a l l e t t e r s o f t h i s t y p e w r i t t e n b y A n t i o c h o s I I I . H i s
l e t t e r s to T e o s , t h o u g h m u t i l a t e d , e x h i b i t the b a s i c s t r u c t u r e , w h i c h
c a n also be g u e s s e d at in t h e l a r g e l y lost l e t t e r o f A n t i o c h o s to
H e r a k l e i a , a n d w h i c h u n d e r l i e s t h e l o n g l e t t e r o f Z e u x i s to t h e s a m e
c i t y . 1 8 P a r a l l e l s are e a s y to f i n d , s u c h as t h e l e t t e r s o f P t o l e m y I I to
M i l e t o s (RC 14), S e l e u k o s II to M i l e t o s (RC 22), o r P t o l e m y I I I to
X a n t h o s (SEG 3 6 . 1 2 1 8 ) , all t h e s e e x a m p l e s , s u b s t a n t i a l l y p r e -
s e r v e d , s h o w i n g the s a m e u n i f o r m i t y o f c o m p o s i t i o n ( w h i c h also
i n f l u e n c e d the l e t t e r s o f R o m a n o f f i c i a l s a n d e m p e r o r s ) . 1 9 T h o u g h
t h e r e w e r e v a r i a n t s in c o m p o s i t i o n ( f o r i n s t a n c e in t h e c a s e o f r o y a l
i n i t i a t i v e , as w i t h L a o d i k e ' s b e n e f a c t i o n to I a s o s ) , t h e t o n e , t h e
style, and the basic g r a m m a r of royal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e remained the
s a m e ( m o t i v a t e d p e r s o n a l d e c i s i o n , n o t i f i e d to t h e c i t y c o n c e r n e d ) .
T h e u n i f o r m i t y o f r o y a l l e t t e r s m a k e s it i m p o s s i b l e to b e a b s o l u t e l y
s u r e a b o u t d o c u m e n t s w h o s e h e a d i n g is lost a n d w h e r e no t e l l i n g
d e t a i l s are p r e s e r v e d , f o r i n s t a n c e t h e e a r l y s e c o n d - c e n t u r y l e t t e r to
I l i o n , w h i c h c o u l d b e b y an A t t a l i d (or e v e n a R o m a n official?) as
w e l l as A n t i o c h o s I I I . 2 0

T h e c a n o n i c a l f o r m d e v e l o p e d b y the c i t y w a s t h e h o n o r i f i c
decree: after a preamble (dating formulas, proposers, 'sanction
f o r m u l a ' authenticating the decree), a series of 'considerations' or
m o t i v a t i n g c l a u s e s i n t r o d u c e d b y επειδή a n d g i v i n g r e a s o n s f o r t h e
d e c i s i o n s , a ' h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e ' i n t r o d u c e d b y όπως/'ίνα a n d d e s c r i b i n g
t h e a i m o f t h e d e c r e e ( u s u a l l y in q u i t e g e n e r a l t e r m s : t h e c i t y w a n t s
it k n o w n t h a t it r e w a r d s its b e n e f a c t o r s ) , a n d finally t h e r e s o l u t i o n s ,
in t h e f o r m o f a s e r i e s o f i n f i n i t i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n s e x p l a i n i n g w h a t t h e
c i t y h a d d e c i d e d (έδοξε/δεδόχθαι τήι βονλήι και τώι δήμωι)—all in a
single sentence: s u b o r d i n a t e clauses (the m o t i v a t i o n s and the

17 Welles in RC, pp. xliii-xlv (perhaps minimizes the difference between memoranda

and letters to cities); M o u r g u e s 1995: 120-1.

13 Antiochos to T e o s : document 19. Herakleia: 31. Other letters of Antiochos,
Laodike, or Zeuxis : I, 2, 3, 5, 26 A , 34 (probably), 43 (the latter probably an adminis-
trative note)
15 T h e letters of the Scipios to Kolophon and Herakleia are a good example;
M o u r g u e s 1995: 120-1 for the letters of the emperors.
20 D o c u m e n t 34.
' h o r t a t i v e ' c l a u s e ) a n d t h e m a i n ê'5o|e-clause. 2 1 T h e s t r u c t u r e is
o b v i o u s in d e c r e e s f o r n o n - r o y a l h o n o r a n d s , s u c h as t h e A m y z o n i a n
d e c r e e f o r H e r m e i a s o r the X a n t h i a n d e c r e e f o r the r h e t o r
T h e m i s t o k l e s ; it also g o v e r n s , in a m o r e c o m p l e x f o r m , t h e l o n g
T e i a n decrees h o n o u r i n g A n t i o c h o s and Laodike.22 Because of the
h o n o r i f i c n a t u r e o f t h e s e d e c r e e s , t h e y w e r e i n s c r i b e d o n s t o n e , an
act w h i c h p u b l i c i z e d a n d p e r p e t u a t e d the d e c i s i o n s , a n d t h u s p l a y e d
a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s role in t h e h o n o u r s o f f e r e d b y t h e cities. T h e c o n -
c e p t w a s f a m i l i a r e n o u g h to b e u s e d m e t a p h o r i c a l l y : A n t i o c h o s
d e c l a r e d T e o s asylos a n d t a x - f r e e , ίνα γενόμενης επαύζεως των κατά
τήν ττόλιν μή μόνον ευεργεσίας λάβη τήν επιγραφήν της του δήμου, άλλα
καί σωτηρίας, 'so t h a t , a f t e r t h e i n c r e a s e o f t h e m a t t e r s o f t h e c i t y , he
s h o u l d r e c e i v e t h e title (lit. ' i n s c r i p t i o n ' , titulus) n o t o n l y o f b e n e -
f a c t o r o f t h e p e o p l e , b u t also o f its s a v i o u r ' . 2 3 I n s c r i p t i o n s n o t o n l y
d o c u m e n t e d , b u t b e l o n g e d to t h e h o n o u r s r e q u i t i n g b e n e f a c t i o n s .
T h e two parties, city and ruler, w e r e radically different, and hence
the language and m e d i u m of e x c h a n g e w e r e not totally h o m o g e -
n e o u s . T h e v a l u e s a n d m o t i v e s b e l o n g to d i f f e r e n t w o r l d s : p a t r i -
m o n i a l l o y a l t y in r o y a l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , c o m m u n a l v a l u e s o f s e r v i c e
a n d g o o d c i t i z e n s h i p in t h e d e c r e e s . T h e r o y a l l e t t e r a n d t h e c i v i c
d e c r e e are t w o d i f f e r e n t f o r m s : the first a c t i v e , p e r f o r m a t i v e ,
a d d r e s s e d to a r e c i p i e n t ; t h e s e c o n d a r e c o r d o f p a s t d e c i s i o n
narrated and displayed autarkically.24 N o n e t h e l e s s , the t w o f o r m s
t a k e e a c h o t h e r i n t o a c c o u n t , a n d c a n l e g i t i m a t e l y b e c o n s i d e r e d as
t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s in a d i a l o g u e ; t h e y also s h a r e a v o c a b u l a r y f o r
benefaction and gratitude, a v o c a b u l a r y of great u n i f o r m i t y and
d u r a b i l i t y . I f t h e c o n t r o v e r s i a l I l i a n d e c r e e OGIS 2 1 9 is i n d e e d to
b e a t t r i b u t e d to the p e r i o d o f A n t i o c h o s I r a t h e r t h a n t h a t o f
A n t i o c h o s I I I ( A p p e n d i x 1), t h e e a r l y d a t e c o m b i n e d w i t h t h e
s i m i l a r i t y in p h r a s e o l o g y to d o c u m e n t s o f the latter p e r i o d (like
t h e T e o s d e c r e e s ) i l l u s t r a t e t h e c u r r e n c y a n d t h e d u r a b i l i t y o f the
language of euergetism.

B o t h f o r m s c a n be d e s c r i b e d as c o n d u c t i n g a d i a l o g u e , b e c a u s e
t h e y are b u i l t a r o u n d r e c i p r o c i t y a n d e x c h a n g e . B y t h e i r v e r y
s y n t a x , t h e y are s t r u c t u r e d as r e a c t i o n s , o r m o t i v a t e d d e c i s i o n s : o n
t h e p a r t o f t h e k i n g , a r e a c t i o n to an e m b a s s y o r to r e a l i z i n g a l o c a l
c o m m u n i t y ' s g o o d b e h a v i o u r ; o n t h e p a r t o f t h e c i t y , a r e a c t i o n to a

21 BE 76. 173, for a more complete exposition of the elements in a typical civic decree;

Gauthier 1985: 9—10, Bertrand 1990: ι ο ί ; M o u r g u e s 1995: 107 n. 6.

22 Documents 14, 23, 17, 18.
23 Epigraphical publication: e.g. documents r i , 9—12; 27, 5 - 9 . T e o s : 17, 20-2,
possibly the king's own expression (with Herrmann 19650 ad loc. for επιγραφή).
24 On the contrast, Bertrand 1990, with illuminating analyses of examples.
b e n e f a c t i o n , real o r p e r c e i v e d , r e q u i t e d t h r o u g h τιμαί.25 C i v i c d e c r e e
a n d r o y a l l e t t e r n e v e r talk a b o u t o r r e p r e s e n t an i s o l a t e d m o m e n t ,
but s u p p o s e a past s t i m u l u s or a f u t u r e r e a c t i o n — o r both.
R e c i p r o c i t y c o u l d b e i m p l i e d b y as s i m p l e a n d d e l i c a t e a f e a t u r e as
a και in t h e h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e f r o m a T e i a n d e c r e e , 'ίνα οΰν και ήμΐς εμ
I [παν]τι κα[ιρώ]ι φαινώμεθα χάριτας αποδίδοντες τώι τε βασι I [Ae]t και τη
βασιλίσση, 'so t h a t w e t o o , m a y be c o n s p i c u o u s in r e t u r n i n g t o k e n s
o f g r a t i t u d e to t h e k i n g a n d t h e q u e e n ' . M o r e e x p l i c i t l y , t h e h o r t a -
t i v e c l a u s e s o f c i v i c d e c r e e s p r o f e s s e d the i n t e n t i o n to s h o w
ευχαριστία o r to ' r e t u r n w o r t h y s i g n s o f g r a t i t u d e ' (χάριτες),26—for
i n s t a n c e , in a d e c r e e f r o m A m y z o n f o r the o f f i c i a l N i k o m e d e s : οπως
ήι πάσι φανερόν I ort ό δήμος ευεργετηθείς άποδιδώι χάριτας άζία[s] I τοΐς
ευεργετουσιν αυτόν, 'so t h a t it m a y b e o b v i o u s to all t h a t t h e p e o p l e ,
w h e n d o n e g o o d b y , r e t u r n s w o r t h y s i g n s o f g r a t i t u d e to t h o s e w h o
are its b e n e f a c t o r s ' . T h e h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e s d e c l a r e t h e i n t e n t i o n o f
t h e d e c r e e s : to c r e a t e r e c i p r o c i t y a n d to m a i n t a i n the e u e r g e t i c a l
e x c h a n g e . In the royal letters, the contract clause ( w h i c h I have
defined above) expresses reciprocity, linking royal benefaction
a n d c i v i c r e a c t i o n in a s e l f - p e r p e t u a t i n g s p i r a l , as in an e l a b o r a t e
e x a m p l e f r o m Z e u x i s ' l e t t e r to t h e H e r a k l e i a n s :

και καθόλου και εν τοις άλλοις φρον-

[τιοΰμεν ίνα ε'Ιμ μηθενι τών δυνατών και καλώς εχόντων ύστερήτε, άλλα τν-
[χητε τής προ]σηκούσης επιμελείας. Διό και ευ ποήσετε και αύτοι διαφυλάσ-
[aovres τήν eis] τα πράγματα εΰνοιαν οϋτο) γαρ πολλώι μάλλον και ήμεις
[ουδέν ελλείφομε]ν πρ<ο>θυμίας εις το συγκατασκενάζειν τ[ά προς δ]ό[£αν ]
[και τιμήν ανήκοντα]
and we will take complete care that you be not deprived in any matter of
the possible measures that w o u l d benefit you, b u t that y o u should receive
the suitable attention. T h e r e f o r e , for your part, y o u will do well to preserve
your goodwill towards the (king's) affairs, for thus we will all the less leave
out anything pertaining to eagerness to carry out measures w h i c h [have to
do with the honour and the repute (of the city)]

A p r o m i s e o f care (επιμελεια) is f o l l o w e d b y an i n j u n c t i o n to k e e p
εύνοια t o w a r d s t h e k i n g ' s a f f a i r s — w h i c h in t u r n w i l l m a k e Z e u x i s

25 Royal reaction: e.g. document 19 A , RC 22. C i v i c reaction to benefaction: Habicht

1970: 206-7; ' 6 3 - 5 , commenting Arist. Rhet. 1 1361a (τιμαί defined as return for
εύεργεσίαί).
26 Και: document 17, 40-2, cf. 10, 17, 13, 12-13. Ευχαριστία: ι6, 40; in contract clause

at end of Laodike's letter to Iasos, 26 A , I 28, possibly in 26 Β, II 15; 19 A , 5 (Antiochos'

summary of a T e i a n decree); also RC 15, lines 7—8. Χάριτες: II, i o - i 2 , whence the quote
in the text; also 10, 17-18; probably 13, 12-13; r7> 4 ° - 2 ; 18, 33, 40-1; J. and L. Robert
1983: no. 4bis and p. 126 ( S E G 33.1183 with Bousquet 1986: 29—30η. 15) for Ptolemaic
examples from A m y z o n and Xanthos; document 23 for example with non-royal
honorand; further Habicht 1970: 163.
care all the m o r e f o r t h e H e r a k l e i a n s . 2 / I g i v e , in o r d e r t h a t y o u g i v e ,
in o r d e r t h a t I g i v e — t h i s c o n t i n u o u s d i a l o g u e e x p l a i n s t h e d e n s i t y
o f d i p l o m a t i c e x c h a n g e s b e t w e e n k i n g a n d c i t y , as w e c a n p e r c e i v e
it b e t w e e n T e o s a n d A n t i o c h o s I I I , o r in o t h e r c a s e s . A n E r y t h r a i a n
d e c r e e f o r A n t i o c h o s I or II (I. Erythrai 30) r e c e i v e d a f a v o u r a b l e
r e p l y f r o m t h e k i n g , w h i c h in t u r n p r o v i d e d t h e o c c a s i o n f o r a n o t h e r
E r y t h r a i a n d e c r e e (RC 15: letter a n d f o l l o w - u p d e c r e e ) .
T h e d y n a m i c , o p e n structure characteristic of the euergetical
d i a l o g u e is r e i n f o r c e d b y t h e v e r y l a n g u a g e in w h i c h the i n t e r a c t i o n
was couched. T h e formalized vocabulary and syntax guarantee
r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y ; m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e i n t e r a c t i o n is f r a m e d , o r
expressed, through generalizing idioms of consistency, which
c h a r a c t e r i z e a n y t r a n s a c t i o n as n o r m a l r a t h e r t h a n e x c e p t i o n a l . A l l
t h e s e f u n c t i o n s can b e i l l u s t r a t e d f r o m t h e m a t e r i a l p e r t a i n i n g to
A n t i o c h o s I I I a n d h i s r e l a t i o n to t h e c i t i e s ( w i t h o c c a s i o n a l r e s o r t to
p a r a l l e l s , to e s t a b l i s h the t y p i c a l i t y o f t h i s p a r t i c u l a r t e s t - c a s e ) .
T h e s e f u n c t i o n s are i n t e r w o v e n w i t h i n t h e s a m e d o c u m e n t s ( o f t e n
w i t h i n t h e s a m e c l a u s e ) , in l o n g , c o m p l i c a t e d s e n t e n c e s . N o n e -
t h e l e s s , it is w o r t h i l l u s t r a t i n g e a c h s t r a n d s e p a r a t e l y , a n d f o r b o t h
p a r t i e s in t u r n : t h i s t h e m a t i c d i s m a n t l i n g o f d e n s e l y p a c k e d c l a u s e s
w i l l a l l o w u s to e x a m i n e t h e v a r i o u s s t r a t e g i e s w i t h i n a r h e t o r i c o f
generalization, and the w a y they c o m p l e m e n t each other.
A n o b v i o u s f e a t u r e is t h a t i n d i v i d u a l acts o f e u e r g e t i s m or
eucharistia are n e v e r p r e s e n t e d as i s o l a t e d in t i m e , b u t l o c a t e d in a
c h r o n o l o g y o f b e n e f a c t i o n a n d g r a t i t u d e . F i r s t l y , t h e y are p r e s e n t e d
a g a i n s t a b a c k g r o u n d o f p r e c e d e n t . I n t h e c i v i c d e c r e e s , t h i s is
a c h i e v e d b y t h e ττρότερόν re s u b - c l a u s e s u m m a r i z i n g p a s t c o n d u c t .
A n e x a m p l e c a n b e f o u n d in t h e m o t i v a t i n g c l a u s e s o f the I a s i a n
d e c r e e f o r L a o d i k e , w h i c h s t a r t s w i t h an e l a b o r a t e c l a u s e , a u g -
m e n t e d b y a genitive absolute describing A n t i o c h o s ' past b e h a v i o u r
t o w a r d s all t h e G r e e k s ; t h i s c l a u s e is f o l l o w e d b y d e t a i l s c o n c e r n i n g
I a s o s in p a r t i c u l a r , e n u m e r a t i n g e a r l i e r b e n e f a c t i o n s (πρότερόν re),
t h e n s p e c i f i c a n d r e c e n t d e e d s (in the lost p a r t o f the t e x t ) . T h e
o p e n i n g o f t h e first T e i a n d e c r e e f o r A n t i o c h o s I I I , t h o u g h f r a g -
m e n t a r y , is c l e a r l y c o n s t r u c t e d a l o n g the s a m e p a t t e r n . 2 8 I n t h e r o y a l
d o c u m e n t s , t h i s f u n c t i o n is p e r f o r m e d b y t h e e l e m e n t s p r e c e d i n g
t h e m a i n d e c i s i o n . L a o d i k e a s c r i b e s h e r b e n e f a c t i o n to t h e I a s i a n s to
f r e q u e n t l y (πλεονάκις) h e a r i n g f r o m A n t i o c h o s o f h i s s o l i c i t u d e f o r
h i s f r i e n d s a n d allies g e n e r a l l y , a n d I a s o s in p a r t i c u l a r ; A n t i o c h o s
I I I starts a l e t t e r to the T e i a n s b y n o t i n g t h a t t h e y h a v e t h e s a m e

D o c u m e n t 31 Β, I V 7 - 1 2 .
27

Iasos: document 26 Β, I 9-18; T e o s : 17, 1 - 1 0 . Other examples: 9, 13, 44; also

23

Habicht 1970: 162 η. 4 (e.g. OGIS 11).

d i s p o s i t i o n δια παντός, ' t h r o u g h o u t ' ; A n t i o c h o s I o r I I in a l e t t e r to
t h e E r y t h r a i a n s n o t e s h o w t h e i r euvoia h a s h e l d δια παντός a n d s p e a k s
o f h i s o w n εύνοια, w h i c h he h a s c o n t i n u a l l y c h o s e n to h a v e iv άρχήί.29
T h e p r e s e n t m o m e n t is e x t e n d e d b a c k in t i m e b y r e f e r e n c e s to
e a r l i e r r e l a t i o n s ; b u t it is also p r o j e c t e d f o r w a r d b y t h e p r o m i s e o f
f u t u r e b e n e f a c t i o n s , r e q u e s t e d b y the c i t i e s o r p r o m i s e d b y t h e
k i n g o r h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s (the f u t u r e t e n s e is t y p i c a l o f t h e c o n t r a c t
c l a u s e s , b u t c a n o c c u r o u t s i d e t h e m ) . A c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v e r b is
σνναύξαιν, to i n c r e a s e t h e h o n o u r s e n j o y e d b y the cities. E q u a l l y
t y p i c a l is the a d v e r b <xei, q u a l i f y i n g f u t u r e b e n e f a c t i o n s : L a o d i k e
promises to the Sardians [και πει ρασό]μζθα àei τι άγαθον
σννκατασκ€υάζ€ίν ττμ πό I [Aei].30 N o w o n d e r t h a t t h e v e r b διατελεω, 'to
d o c o n t i n u o u s l y ' , f r e q u e n t l y a p p e a r s , b o t h as an a v o w e d a n d as an
i m p u t e d state. 3 1 T h e s e e x a m p l e s c o u l d b e r e i n f o r c e d b y c o u n t l e s s
p a r a l l e l s d r a w n f r o m the e p i g r a p h i c a l m a t e r i a l . T h e y e s t a b l i s h t h e
u b i q u i t o u s u s a g e o f t i m e r e f e r e n c e s , as t h e o p e n i n g m o v e in b o t h
c i v i c d e c r e e a n d r o y a l l e t t e r , a n d a l l o w u s to u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r
function. C h r o n o l o g i c a l indications d r e w parallels b e t w e e n present
a n d ( o f t e n s a f e l y g e n e r a l i z e d ) p a s t , a n d t o o k t h e p r e s e n t as j u s t i f i c a -
t i o n f o r p r o g n o s i s o f s i m i l a r b e h a v i o u r ( e x p e c t e d o r p r o m i s e d ) in
t h e f u t u r e . T h e y t h u s e x t e n d e d t h e i n t e r a c t i o n in t i m e , b e y o n d t h e
i m m e d i a t e t r a n s a c t i o n (a r o y a l g i f t , c i v i c h o n o u r s ) : t h e y c o n s t r u c t e d
a context of continuity for each r o u n d of the euergetical dialogue,
m i r r o r i n g t h e l a t t e r ' s s t r u c t u r a l o p e n n e s s to i n d e f i n i t e r e p e t i t i o n .
I n a d d i t i o n to ' v e r t i c a l ' g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t h r o u g h t i m e , s p e c i f i c acts
c o u l d b e p l a c e d in a ' h o r i z o n t a l ' c o n t e x t o f c o n s t a n t b e n e f i c e n c e to
'all G r e e k s ' o r e v e n 'all m e n ' . T h e T e i a n s p r a i s e d A n t i o c h o s f o r
m a k i n g 'a v e r y g r e a t d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f h i s p r e - e x i s t i n g t r u s t w o r t h i -
n e s s (πίοτις) t o w a r d s all m e n ' : in a d d i t i o n to d e s c r i b i n g a p a r t i c u l a r
a c t i o n ( A n t i o c h o s ' s o j o u r n in T e o s ) a g a i n s t the b a c k g r o u n d o f
q u a l i t i e s p r o v e n in the past, t h i s p a r t i c u l a r p a s s a g e m a d e a g e n e r a l -
i z a t i o n a b o u t A n t i o c h o s ' r e l a t i o n w i t h 'all m e n ' , g e n e r a l i z i n g
b e y o n d a s p e c i f i c p l a c e , T e o s , as w e l l as a p a r t i c u l a r m o m e n t . 3 2 B o t h

29 Iasos: document 26 A , I 4. T e o s : 19 B, 4. Erythrai: RC 15, lines 6, 15-16. Also in

letter of Ptolemy III to Xanthos: SEG 36.1218, line 21.
30 Future tenses in royal letters: documents 2, 1 8 - 1 9 (Laodike to Sardeis); 19 B, 1 2 - 1 3

(Antiochos I I I to Teos); 26 A , I 28-9 (Laodike to Iasos); 31 Β, I V 7 - 8 (Zeuxis to

Herakleia); 34, 3 (Ilion). Συναύξειν. 20 A, I 10; 31 Β, III 15; also RC 15, line 12, RC 9,
line 7 (for gods, as in document 4, 36), SEG 2. 663, lines 5-6; discussion of later
parallels in V e y n e 1976: 367 n. 324. ΆεΙ\ i i , 6-7; 12, 2 - 6 (Amyzon), and in royal letters,
quoted above, 2, 19 B, 26 A .
31 Self-referential, by royal speaker: documents 26 A , 6 and 37, 9, also RC 15, line 16

and RC 62, line 3; self-referential, by polis·, document 10, 9; OGIS 219, line 18.
Descriptive, by city: documents 9, 9; 10, 17; 13, 5-6; 17, 26, 37; 44, 2, 29; concerning
non-royal honorands, 14, 4 - 1 2 ; 33, 11; 48, 32. 32 D o c u m e n t 17, 24-5.
T e o s a n d I a s o s s p e a k o f t h e k i n g ' s b e h a v i o u r t o w a r d s (or b e f o r e ) the
p a n - H e l l e n i c c o m m u n i t y : in t h e T e i a n s ' w o r d s , he p r o f e s s e d to b e
t h e ' c o m m o n [ b e n e f a c t o r ] o f all t h e G r e e k c i t i e s a n d o f o u r s ' a n d 'set
b e f o r e the G r e e k s ' an e x a m p l e (-παράδειγμα) o f h i s c h a r a c t e r ; the
Iasians described A n t i o c h o s preserving his ancestral disposition
(προγονική αϊρεσις) t o w a r d s all the G r e e k s , a n d f o l l o w i n g h i s
a n c e s t r a l b e n e f i c e n c e (ευεργεσία) t o w a r d s t h e G r e e k s . C o n v e r s e l y ,
L a o d i k e r e f e r r e d to ' t h e G r e e k s ' (in t h e d a t i v e , τοις Έλλησι) in h e r
f r a g m e n t a r y l e t t e r to t h e T e i a n s . 3 3 T h i s t r o p e w a s less c o m m o n
t h a n t h e u b i q u i t o u s r e f e r e n c e s to t i m e , 3 4 b u t p e r f o r m e d the s a m e
f u n c t i o n of p l a c i n g a n y s i n g l e u t t e r a n c e in a g e n e r a l i z e d c o n t e x t o f
parallels. In this case, the city receiving a b e n e f a c t i o n w a s c o m p a r e d
to a w i d e r h u m a n g r o u p t o w a r d s w h i c h t h e r u l e r f e l t , o r s h o w e d ,
b e n e f i c e n c e ; t h e c o m p a r i s o n e s t a b l i s h e d the t y p i c a l i t y o f a n y i n d i -
v i d u a l t r a n s a c t i o n , a n d also c o n n e c t e d its s p e c i f i c c i r c u m s t a n c e s to a
b r o a d e r , p u b l i c i z e d , s p a c e , the p a n - H e l l e n i c c o m m u n i t y o r e v e n t h e
entire h u m a n race. Finally, another, and analogous, g e n e r a l i z i n g
t r o p e is t h e n o t a t i o n κοινήι/ίδίαι, u s e d in c i v i c d e c r e e s to d e s c r i b e
p a s t εύεργεσίαι, o r b y r o y a l l e t t e r s in f u t u r e p r o m i s e s : b e n e f a c t i o n
e x t e n d s b o t h to t h e p u b l i c s p h e r e a n d to i n d i v i d u a l s , e a c h of w h o m
ideally benefits f r o m the benefactions.35
B o t h t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l r e f e r e n c e s a n d t h e e x t e n s i o n in g e o -
g r a p h i c a l t e r m s i l l u s t r a t e an u n d e r l y i n g n o t i o n o f c o n s i s t e n c y , as
m a d e v i s i b l e in a n y i n d i v i d u a l t r a n s a c t i o n . A g a i n s t t h i s b a c k g r o u n d ,
c o n s i s t e n c y is also d e c l a r e d o p e n l y in m o r a l i z i n g r e f e r e n c e s to
c h a r a c t e r ; t h e s e m a k e e x p l i c i t the g e n e r a l i z i n g f u n c t i o n o f the
chronological and geographical references. T h i s moralizing v o c a b u -
l a r y o f c o n s i s t e n c y a n d c h a r a c t e r is a s t r i k i n g f e a t u r e o f t h e l a n g u a g e
o f e u e r g e t i s m , e x p a n d i n g r a t h e r p e r f u n c t o r y r e f e r e n c e s to u t i l i t y
a n d p r o f i t (χρείας παρέχεσθαι, το συμφέρον). A c t i o n d o e s n o t c o n -
stitute, but reveals, character, by ' m a k i n g a display' (άπόδειξιν
ποιεΐσθαι)36 o f a m o r a l q u a l i t y o r b y p r o v i n g itself c o n s i s t e n t
33 Documents 17, 6-8, 26-7; 26 Β, I 1 0 - 1 1 ; 28, 3-5. Laodike: 19 D , 5. J. and L .

Robert 1983: 134, give references under Antiochos III, and restore a mention of pan-
Hellenic benevolence in document 5, 2 (Zeuxis to Amyzon).
34 Erskine 1994: 7 1 - 6 , shows that for the Hellenistic period, the concept of common

benefactor of all men is more frequent in private petitions than in the diplomatic
language of the cities.
35 In civic decrees: documents 9, 10; 10, 16-17; 26 Β, I 12'< 44. 1-2; also 5 £ G 33.1183,

line 9, SEG 2.663, l ' n e 6, OGIS 329, lines 23-4; document 33, 1 2 - 1 3 , f ° r a non-royal
honorand (Priene). Royal letters: documents 19 A, 1 4 - 1 5 (Antiochos to T e o s ) , 34 (to
Ilion, probably).
36 Documents 10, 7-8; 13, n (context mutilated); 17, 24-5 ( T e o s on Antiochos); 19

A , 6—7 and 17—18 (Antiochos on the T e i a n s demonstrating their qualities); 31 A , I 15 (in

contract clause of Antiochos' letter to Herakleia). Holleaux 1942: 92-4, for a long roster
of parallels (supplemented by Robert).
(ακόλουθα πράττειν)37 w i t h a m o d e l : f o r i n s t a n c e , a c c o r d i n g to a T e i a n
d e c r e e , A n t i o c h o s ' b e n e f a c t i o n s 'set o u t as an e x a m p l e to all t h e
G r e e k s w h a t c h a r a c t e r (τρόπος) h e b e a r s t o w a r d s t h o s e w h o are
h i s b e n e f a c t o r s a n d w e l l - d i s p o s e d t o w a r d s h i m ' . 3 8 B e h a v i o u r is
d e s c r i b e d in t e r m s o f ' c h o i c e ' , ai'ptOLs39 o r προαίρασις, t h e l a t t e r a
deliberate choice revealing essential character: the T e i a n s used b o t h
προαίρεσις a n d προαιρεΐσθαι in t h e o p e n i n g t h r e e l i n e s ( u n f o r t u n a t e l y
f r a g m e n t a r y ) of t h e i r first d e c r e e h o n o u r i n g A n t i o c h o s . T h e p h r a s e
is also u s e d b y t h e r o y a l i n t e r l o c u t o r s : A n t i o c h o s e x p r e s s e d h i s
d e s i r e to see t h e S a r d i a n s ' s i t u a t i o n i m p r o v e ; L a o d i k e i n s i s t e d o n
h e r ' r e a s o n e d c h o i c e ' (προαφουμζνη) to f o l l o w A n t i o c h o s ' f a v o u r f o r
t h e Iasians. 4 0 T h i s r e p e r t o i r e is s u p p l e m e n t e d b y d e c l a r a t i o n s o r
i m p u t a t i o n s o f i n t e n t i o n : t h e c h o i c e s are m a d e b y r e s p o n s i b l e
a c t o r s , a n d r e f l e c t t h e i r d e s i r e s , w h i c h in t u r n r e f l e c t t h e i r c h a r a c t e r .
T h e royal letters o f t e n motivate their decisions w i t h the participle
βουλόμζνοι', the I a s i a n s s p e a k o f t h e i r διάληψις (literally their
' t h o u g h t ' ) t o w a r d s A n t i o c h o s and L a o d i k e , and, m o r e generally, the
' h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e s ' in t h e c i v i c d e c r e e s are in f a c t d e c l a r a t i o n s o f
intent. 4 1 C o n v e r s e l y , b o t h p a r t i e s c o m m e n d t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s
w i s h to act in a c e r t a i n w a y , o r i m p u t e a c t i o n to s u c h a w i s h . 4 2 B u t
the euergetical language includes m o r e than just neutral references
to c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h c h a r a c t e r : it a l l o w s i t s e l f a w h o l e d e s c r i p t i v e a n d
e v a l u a t i v e r e g i s t e r to talk a b o u t c h a r a c t e r . I n t h e l e t t e r o f A n t i o c h o s
I o r II to E r y t h r a i , the v o c a b u l a r y is o r i g i n a l , b u t t h e t h o u g h t
c o n v e n t i o n a l : the k i n g n o t e s t h a t ευχαριστία is a r e s u l t o f t h e
E r y t h r a i a n s ' αγωγή, ( ' c o u r s e o f a c t i o n ' , l i t e r a l l y ' u p b r i n g i n g ' ) , a n d ,
f r o m t h e c i t y ' s d e c r e e , c a n d e d u c e t h e E r y t h r a i a n s ' n o b i l i t y , το
eùyevès- υμών.

B y s a y i n g t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e of e u e r g e t i s m s t r i v e s at g e n e r a l i z a t i o n
37 D o c u m e n t s 12 (Amyzon asks official to follow the king's character); 16, 22
(different wording but equivalent meaning); 26 A, I 1 1 - 1 2 (Laodike says she follows
Antiochos' οττούδη); 28, 3 - 5 (Iasians on Antiochos following the tvepyeoia of his
ancestors). Holleaux 19386: 114, for parallels ('formule banale').
38 D o c u m e n t 17, 26—7.

39 D o c u m e n t s 10, 19-20 ( A m y z o n on Menestratos) 26 Β, I 10 (Iasos on Antiochos);

19 A , 6, Β 8, C 13 (Antiochos on Teians). Parallels in royal correspondence: e.g. RC 14,

line 13; 15, lines 15-16; 22, line 14; SEG 36.1218, line 20. T h e word is usually trans-
lated as 'policy'.
40 Προαίρεσις: Arist. Nie. Eth. 3 . 1 1 1 ib4~i 113814 (I thank M . Burnyeat for this refer-

ence); J. and L . Robert 1989: 22. T e i a n decree: document 17, 4-6. Sardeis: document 3,
1-3; Laodike and Iasos: 26 A , I 1 1 - 1 2 , 29-30.
41 Royal letters: document 26 A , which speaks both of Laodike's intentions, and, indi-

rectly, of Antiochos' intentions (which Laodike wishes to follow); RC 15, line 25. Iasos:
document 28, 11.
42 D o c u m e n t s 19 A , 6 (admittedly in Antiochos' summary of a T e i a n decree), 17, 16

(Teians on Antiochos' desire to χαρίζεσθαι τώι 8ήμωι), 37 (Teians on Laodike having the
same γνωμή as Antiochos).
b y m a k i n g individual transactions into s h o w s of character, I argue
a g a i n s t r e a d i n g too s t r i c t l y t h e v i e w t h a t t h e c i t i e s a w a r d e d τι,μαί f o r
p a r t i c u l a r b e n e f a c t i o n s f r o m t h e k i n g , as H a b i c h t p o i n t e d o u t . T h e
latter, perfectly true observation does not m e a n that the transaction
o n l y c o n c e r n e d a p a r t i c u l a r c o n c r e t e b e n e f a c t i o n , to t h e e x c l u s i o n o f
the h o n o u r e r ' s and the h o n o r a n d ' s personality: the o p e n , d y n a m i c
structure c o n v e r t e d the euergetical transaction into o n g o i n g dia-
l o g u e , the g e n e r a l i z i n g v o c a b u l a r i e s t r a n s f o r m e d i n d i v i d u a l a c t s
i n t o p a r a d i g m a t i c m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f c h a r a c t e r . In S c h u b a r t ' s w o r d s ,
t h e d i a l o g u e w a s n o t j u s t a b o u t ' e i n z e l n e L e i s t u n g e n ' , b u t also
' d a u e r n d e H a l t u n g ' . 4 3 T h i s v i e w h a s to be q u a l i f i e d : the c i v i c
d e c r e e s o r t h e r o y a l l e t t e r s o f t e n d i d n o t p r a i s e m o r a l q u a l i t i e s in
g e n e r a l , b u t c h a r a c t e r as m a n i f e s t e d in a r e l a t i o n s h i p : n o t ( e . g . )
α'ipeais tout court, b u t αΐρασις πρός τινα, as in f a c t in m o s t of t h e
e x a m p l e s q u o t e d above.44 T h e A m y z o n i a n s praised the epistates
M e n e s t r a t o s f o r καλοκαγαθία eis πάντα τα τώι δήμωι συμφέροντα,
' e x c e l l e n c e in r e l a t i o n to t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e p e o p l e ' . T h e m o r a l l y
l o a d e d , a n d p o t e n t i a l l y a b s t r a c t , n o t i o n o f ' e x c e l l e n c e ' is u n a m b i g u -
o u s l y l i n k e d , in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e d e c r e e , to b e h a v i o u r t o w a r d s a
very specific community. 45 T h e moralizing notations described
character, but their h o r i z o n s o f t e n remained those of the specific
e x c h a n g e b e t w e e n benefactor and recipient. N o n e t h e l e s s , e v e n these
c o n t e x t - b o u n d evaluative terms had a generalizing force. W h a t a
c o n c e p t s u c h as καλοκαγαθία d i d w a s to m a k e e x p l i c i t t h e a s s u m p -
tions w h i c h u n d e r l a y the w h o l e dialogue: the existence of moral
norms, w h i c h dictated appropriate behaviour (caring for subordi-
n a t e s , r e t u r n i n g g r a t i t u d e ) , a n d a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h r a t i o n a l c h o i c e s
w e r e m a d e a n d a p p r o v e d . T h e s e n o r m s also a p p e a r in the s h o r t
p h r a s e s b u i l t a r o u n d προσήκεLV o r καθήκειν: A n t i o c h o s o r Z e u x i s
p r o m i s e s ' a p p r o p r i a t e c a r e ' f o r a c i t y , t h e T e i a n s w a n t to b e s e e n to
o f f e r ' a p p r o p r i a t e h o n o u r s ' to A n t i o c h o s a n d L a o d i k e , r o y a l l e t t e r s
praise or expect appropriate b e h a v i o u r (gratitude or goodwill) f r o m
the local c o m m u n i t i e s . 4 6

A p a r t f r o m d e s c r i b i n g the c o n t e x t f o r a c t i o n , c h a r a c t e r a n d m o t i -

43 Habicht 1970: 165, 208. Quote from Schubart 1937, 21.

44 Documents 19 A , 6-7 (Teians' policy towards Antiochos III), 26 Β, I 10
(Antiochos' policy towards all the Greeks), 10, 19-20 (Menestratos' policy towards
Amyzon), 17, 24-6, 26-7 (Antiochos' πίατις towards all men and τρόπος towards his
benefactors).
45 Document 10, 7-8.
46 'Appropriate care': documents 19 A, 15, 31 Β, IV 5, 9; also RC 14, line 3 (Ptolemy

II cared for Miletos, 'as was appropriate'). Appropriate honours: 18, 69; 40, 12; also
Crampa 1969: no. 4, line 2 (in letter of Olympichos). Appropriate behaviour, ώς
προσήκον εστί (vel sim), from the cities: 19 C , 13-14; 26 A, I 26; 31 A, 1 15; 31 Β, IV 9;
also RC 15, line 32.
v a t i o n , t h e l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m also s u p p l i e d a v o c a b u l a r y f o r
p r e s i d i n g v a l u e s . T h e m o s t c o m m o n w o r d in t h e e u e r g e t i c e x c h a n g e
is εύνοια, ' g o o d w i l l ' , i m p u t e d o r a v o w e d b y b o t h c i t y a n d k i n g . 4 7 It
d e s c r i b e s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e f e e l i n g s a f t e r r e c e i p t o f b e n e f a c t i o n s : in
A r i s t o t l e ' s w o r d s , o μεν γαρ ευεργετηθείς άνθ' ών πεπονθεν άπονεμει τήν
εΰνοιαν, τα δίκαια δρών (Nie. Eth. I i 0 7 a i 4 ) ; b u t , a c c o r d i n g to t h e
s a m e A r i s t o t e l i a n p a s s a g e , it also d e n o t e s g e n u i n e a n d ( p a r a d o x i c -
ally f o r the e u e r g e t i c a l d i a l o g u e ) d i s i n t e r e s t e d e s t e e m a n d g o o d w i l l .
T h e w o r d b e l o n g s to a r e g i s t e r w h i c h m i t i g a t e s t h e p r a g m a t i c
p r o c e s s o f e x c h a n g e , b y e x p r e s s i n g it in t e r m s o f c o r d i a l i t y a n d
c o u r t e s y . B o t h p a r t i e s c l a i m or are said to act o u t o f z e a l a n d
e n t h u s i a s m (εκτενεια, σπουδή, προθυμία) t o w a r d s t h e i r i n t e r l o c u t o r s : 4 8
t h e s e q u a l i t i e s are n o t o n l y t h e s t i m u l u s to b e n e f a c t i o n , b u t c h a r a c -
t e r i z e t h e a t m o s p h e r e o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n . A c t i o n can b e d e s c r i b e d in
i n t i m a t e t e r m s : the A m y z o n i a n s r e w a r d M e n e s t r a t o s f o r h i s ' g e n t l e
b e h a v i o u r ' (συμπεριφερόμενος), A n t i o c h o s accepts civic honours
φιλοφρόνως, φιλανθρώπως, οικείως49 j u s t as o n e o f h i s a n c e s t o r s
r e c e i v e d E r y t h r a i a n h o n o u r s οικείως (RC 1 5 , l i n e 13): w i t h f a m i l i a r
k i n d n e s s . F i n a l l y , the d i p l o m a t i c c o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f t h e k i n g s is
e l a b o r a t e l y c u l t u r e d in its s y n t a x a n d its v o c a b u l a r y , t a k i n g t h e
t r o u b l e o f c o u r t e s y t o w a r d s r e c i p i e n t s : a s t y l e r e f l e c t i n g the b r o a d e r
' s t y l e ' o f c o r d i a l i t y in t h e t r a n s a c t i o n s b e t w e e n c i t y a n d k i n g . 5 0
T h e generalizing vocabularies of time, space, moral consistency,
a n d c o r d i a l i t y , as i l l u s t r a t e d in t h e d o s s i e r c o n c e r n i n g A n t i o c h o s
I I I , c o n s t i t u t e a s t a b l e a n d u n i f o r m l a n g u a g e of r e a d y - m a d e
p h r a s e s ; t h e p r e - s c r i p t e d r e g u l a r i t y o f f o r m s is e s s e n t i a l to t h e
r e s t o r a t i o n o f l a c u n a r y d o c u m e n t s . T h e r e s u l t is a langue de bois, a
f o r m a l i z e d , r e p r o d u c i b l e , d i p l o m a t i c i d i o m , in w h i c h a c t i o n s fall
along a plot involving institutionalized characters, conventionally
a d m i r a b l e m o t i v a t i o n , a n d a set o f c o r d i a l v a l u e s to p r e s i d e o v e r
t h e i n d i v i d u a l o c c a s i o n : the b e n e v o l e n t k i n g , the g r a t e f u l c i t y ,
ευχαριστία, εύνοια. A n y t r a n s a c t i o n c o u c h e d in t h i s l a n g u a g e b e c a m e
47 C i t y for king, imputed: RC 6, line 10; 14, line 10; 15, line 6. C i t y for king, avowed:

documents 10, 9-10; 17, 27. K i n g or royal official for city, imputed: documents 13, 5, 8;
17, 5; 18, 92-3. K i n g for city, avowed: document 19 B, 12; RC 15, line 16. Further
Schubart 1937: 8 - 1 0 (from king), 16-18 (from subjects).
48 C i t y for king, imputed: document 19 A , 9, 17. City for king, avowed: 18, 93-4.

K i n g or royal official for city, imputed: 9, 9; 17, 38-9; 44, 7, 9; also Inschr. Delphinion
139, lines 29-30. K i n g or royal official for city, avowed: 26 A , I 12, 30-2; 31 Β, III 13;
also RC 14, line 2; 15, lines 24, 31 (Erythraians told to remember the king's 'most
zealous efforts').
49 A m y z o n : document 10, 17. Antiochos III: 19 A , 11 and C , 11; 31 A , I 7.
50 Style: Schubart 1920; also Welles's remarks after each letter in RC; Bousquet 1986

(analysing letter of Ptolemy III, with prose rhythm); the Roberts' remarks in BE 70,
553, arguing that a royal letter is too curt and imperative to have been addressed to the
city of Telmessos.
a s t e r e o t y p i c a l , s t y l i z e d affair: s y n t a x p r o c l a i m e d it a c o n t i n u o u s
r e l a t i o n , e a c h r o u n d o p e n to i n d e f i n i t e e x c h a n g e a n d r e p e t i t i o n , t h e
g e n e r a l i z i n g v o c a b u l a r i e s l o c a t e d it a l w a y s at t h e s a m e p o i n t in t i m e
and space (present dealings m i r r o r i n g the past and a n n o u n c i n g the
f u t u r e , a n d t y p i c a l o f d e a l i n g s w i t h m e n in g e n e r a l ) , f o r t h e s a m e
r e a s o n s ( t h e c h a r a c t e r o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s , a p p r a i s e d in a s h a r e d
m o r a l i z i n g v o c a b u l a r y ) a n d w i t h t h e s a m e o u t c o m e o f εύνοια. E v e n
t h o u g h o u r d o c u m e n t a t i o n is i n c o m p l e t e , a n d t h e r e w e r e o t h e r w a y s
o f e x p r e s s i n g i n t e r a c t i o n ( a b o v e , f o r r o y a l o r d e r s ; b e l o w , § 5), it is
c l e a r t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m as u s e d b e t w e e n k i n g a n d s u b -
o r d i n a t e c i t y w a s e x t r e m e l y c o m m o n ; e v e n if it fell s h o r t o f total
h e g e m o n y , it a t t a i n e d c u r r e n c y o r e v e n o r t h o d o x y .
H o w can w e a p p r o a c h this language? T h e p r e c e d i n g paragraphs
a t t e m p t e d to e x a m i n e it i n t e r n a l l y a n d s t r u c t u r a l l y , as w o r k i n g
s y s t e m of m e a n i n g . A full linguistic treatment of the political
languages of the Hellenistic age, of their lexicon and their syntax,
w i t h q u a n t i t a t i v e a n d s e m a n t i c a n a l y s e s , lies b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f t h e
p r e s e n t s t u d y . 5 1 B u t e v e n s o , the l i m i t s o f a p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c t r e a t -
m e n t o f e u e r g e t i s m a p p e a r r e a d i l y . It is c l e a r t h a t t h e l a n g u a g e o f
e u e r g e t i s m w a s n o t c o n f i n e d to t h e d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n c i t y a n d r u l e r ,
b u t also o p e r a t e d b e t w e e n c i t y a n d i n d i v i d u a l b e n e f a c t o r ( c i t i z e n ,
f o r e i g n e r , o r k i n g ) , a n d b e t w e e n cities: t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' f i r m a n d t r u e
χάρις' is f o u n d in a X a n t h i a n d e c r e e f o r a r h e t o r as w e l l as a S e l e u k i d
l e t t e r p r a i s i n g M i l e s i a n b e h a v i o u r ; the e x p r e s s i o n ' w a n t i n g to
f a v o u r t h e demos (χαρίζεσθαι τώι δήμωι)' w a s a p p l i e d b y t h e T e i a n s
to t h e c o n d u c t of A n t i o c h o s I I I , b u t also to the c i t y o f M y l a s a , w h e n
t h e l a t t e r sent ' f o r e i g n j u d g e s ' to T e o s (easily p a r a l l e l e d ) . 5 2 Εννοια is
s i m i l a r l y flexible. I n a I l i a n d e c r e e , it d e s i g n a t e s t h e s u p p o r t s h o w n
b y a r m y a n d f r i e n d s to t h e k i n g ( O G I S 2 1 9 , l i n e s 1 5 - 1 6 ) ; it w a s
u s e d b y t h e R o m a n s , to d e s c r i b e t h e b e h a v i o u r o f E r y t h r a i d u r i n g
t h e R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r — f r e e a d h e s i o n to t h e R o m a n side a n d
m i l i t a r y a s s i s t a n c e ( P o l . 2 1 . 4 5 . 5 ) . T h e e x p r e s s i o n 'to b e w e l l d i s -
p o s e d ' , εύνοικώς, is u s e d as a c o d e d e x p r e s s i o n f o r s u b m i s s i o n (or
l a c k t h e r e o f ) in a r e p o r t b y an official to S e l e u k o s I o n H e r a k l e i a
P o n t i k e (μή εύνοικώς εχειν τοις τοϋ Σελεύκον πράγμασι, Memnon,

51 Manifesto in Nicolet 1990: 9 - 1 0 : 'établir patiemment le ou plutôt les lexiques

politiques de l'antiquité'. M e t h o d o l o g y and examples (from m o d e m and contemporary

history) in Robin 1973. F ° r Classical Athens, the 'language of public approbation' in
honorific decrees, and the 'cardinal virtues' which appear in the epigraphical material,
are studied in Whitehead 1993.
52 Χάρις: document 23, RC 22, line 12. Favouring the demos: 17, 16, also I. Mylasa
624, line 4, and parallels listed by Robert, OMS i. 94—5, e.g. Inschr. Magnesia 97, lines
23-4, 65, 70: the T e i a n s ask the Magnesians to do a favour to the demos (sc. of T e o s ) by
noticing T e i a n honours for a Magnesian.
FGrHist 4 3 4 F 7); it also d e s c r i b e s t h e b e h a v i o u r o f the X a n t h i a n
r h e t o r (et'voiκώς διακεΐσθαι), h o n o u r e d in t h e d e c r e e m e n t i o n e d
a b o v e . H o w s h o u l d w e i n t e r p r e t evvoia w h e n a v o w e d b y A n t i o c h o s
I I I f o r a c i t y he c o n t r o l l e d , o r b y a s u b o r d i n a t e c i t y ( w h a t e v e r its
f o r m a l s t a t u s ) f o r its r u l e r ? ' L o y a l t y ' o r ' f a i t h f u l n e s s ' ( o f f e r e d as a
t r a n s l a t i o n b y S c h u b a r t 1 9 3 7 : 8 - 1 0 , 16: ' T r e u e ' ) do n o t e x h a u s t t h e
v e r s a t i l i t y of t h e w o r d , its p r i m a r y d e n o t a t i o n s as w e l l as its c o n t e x t -
specific meanings.
T h e c o n s e q u e n c e is t h a t the l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m is c l e a r l y a
w e l l - d e f i n e d , s t a b l e , i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d , l a n g u a g e , b u t also t h a t w e
m u s t s t u d y t h i s l a n g u a g e in its w o r l d , w h e r e it p e r f o r m s s e v e r a l
f u n c t i o n s , as d i s c o u r s e : l a n g u a g e as a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o r a m e d i a t i o n
o f p o w e r , in c o n d i t i o n s t h a t i n f l u e n c e a n d are i n f l u e n c e d b y t h i s
l a n g u a g e . 5 3 I n t h e p r e s e n t case, t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s are the n a r r a t i v e o f
A n a t o l i a n ( r e ) c o n q u e s t b y A n t i o c h o s I I I ( C h s . 1, 2), a n d t h e
imperial structures of domination and exploitation ( C h . 3 ) — r e l a -
t i v e l y w e l l k n o w n , t h e s e a l l o w u s to s t u d y e m p i r e as d i s c o u r s e . W e
can evaluate the stereotypical utterances against w h a t w e k n o w or
t h i n k to h a v e b e e n t h e c a s e , a n d h e n c e t r y to u n d e r s t a n d f u n c t i o n s
and effects.
T h i s a p p r o a c h e n t a i l s t a k i n g t h e d i s c o u r s e of e u e r g e t i s m
s e r i o u s l y . It is e a s y to p a s s o v e r t h e s t e r e o t y p i c a l e l e m e n t s in t h e
a n c i e n t d o c u m e n t s , in the s e a r c h f o r ' r e a l ' e v e n t s , o r — p a r a -
d o x i c a l l y — d i s m i s s these elements because of their v e r y u b i q u i t y .
T h e c o n v e n t i o n a l n a t u r e o f e u e r g e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e is o f t e n d e p l o r e d ,
as a s m o k e - s c r e e n h i d i n g h i s t o r i c a l f a c t . H o l l e a u x d e n o u n c e d t h e
p l a t i t u d e s in a d e c r e e b y C r e t a n a u x i l i a r i e s o n C y p r u s f o r t h e later
P t o l e m a i c official A g l a o s of K o s : 'l'art d'écrire p o u r ne rien dire',
' u n e x e m p l a i r e , a c c o m p l i et l a s s a n t , de c e t t e l a n g u e p r o l i x e et d i l u é e ,
v e u l e et v a g u e , t o u t e e n f o r m u l e s a b s t r a i t e s ' , ' c e t t e l a n g u e . . .
f a c t i c e et c o n v e n u e , c a l q u é e s u r d e s m o d è l e s c o u r a n t s ' , a j u d g e m e n t
H o l l e a u x s u p p o r t e d w i t h a long roster of parallels for each con-
v e n t i o n a l p h r a s e ( H o l l e a u x 1 9 4 2 : 88, 9 2 - 7 ) . Y e t t h e fact t h a t t h e
d e c r e e d i d n o t tell H o l l e a u x t h e t h i n g s h e w a n t e d to k n o w ( w h a t
A g l a o s w a s d o i n g o n C y p r u s ) s h o u l d n o t p r e v e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of
t h e t h i n g s t h e C r e t a n s o l d i e r s w a n t e d to tell us. T h e o b v i o u s fact
t h a t p o l i t i c a l l a n g u a g e , in O r w e l l ' s w o r d s , is u s e d to c o v e r m u r d e r

53 Robin 1973: 20-9, for difference between language and discourse, between study-

ing 'énoncés' (utterances) and 'énonciations' (conditions, production, practice of utter-

ance). T h e present approach is inspired b y the ' C a m b r i d g e school' (Pocock 1987), in the
belief that its methods (studying political vocabularies and grammars, exploring indi-
vidual applications of linguistic competence) are at least as suitable for the Hellenistic
documents, actual instances of parole politique, as for the great authors studied by the
C a m b r i d g e school.
a n d t h e f t (the o r g a n i z e d v i o l e n c e a n d s p o l i a t i o n a n a l y s e d in C h a p t e r
3), d o e s n o t m a k e it less i n t e r e s t i n g to s t u d y in its w o r k i n g s , t h e
m o r e so if w e are a w a r e o f the realities b e i n g c o v e r e d u p . N o r h a s
a n y t h i n g been achieved w h e n this language has been denigrated
as ' g r o t e s q u e s e r v i l i t y ' , ' t o a d y i n g ' , o r r h e t o r i c a l v e r b i a g e : 5 4 its
c u r r e n c y a n d d u r a b i l i t y still r e m a i n , as a h i s t o r i c a l fact r e q u i r i n g
interpretation. D i p l o m a t i c e x c h a n g e t h r o u g h language was a reality,
a n d o c c u p i e d an i m p o r t a n t p l a c e in t h e life o f the cities: T e o s a n d
S a r d e i s h a d s p e c i a l f u n d s , e a r m a r k e d as τίμα ι τών βασιλέων, f o r t h e
needs of interaction w i t h the king.55 T h e stereotypical language of
e u e r g e t i s m w a s the standard m e d i u m for interaction b e t w e e n ruler
a n d r u l e d , s h a p i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d a c t i o n s ; as m u c h as t h e legal
s t a t u s e s ( C h . 3 § 3), it w a s a v e r y real p a r t o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f
empire.

2. Talking to: Instrumental Functions

Because the language of e u e r g e t i s m did not s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l y

e x p r e s s p o w e r a n d s u b o r d i n a t i o n , it p e r f o r m e d a n u m b e r o f
i d e o l o g i c a l , o r p o l i t i c a l f u n c t i o n s . It is t o o s i m p l e to s p e a k o f ' p r o p a -
g a n d a ' — a p r o b l e m a t i c c o n c e p t to a p p l y to an a g e w i t h o u t m a s s -
media, and a description w h i c h does not adequately c o v e r the
v a r i e d r e a l i t i e s o f i n t e r a c t i o n . A first a v e n u e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is to
e x a m i n e separately the instrumental w o r k i n g s of the language of
euergetism, f r o m the point of v i e w of b o t h king and city: w h i c h
g o a l s t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s u s e d l a n g u a g e to a c h i e v e , a n d h o w t h e y
a c h i e v e d t h e m . T h i s a p p r o a c h is t h e m o r e i n t e r e s t i n g f o r t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e c o l l a b o r a t i o n o f b o t h p a r t i e s in d i a l o g u e w a s c o m p a t i b l e
w i t h different intentions and results.

(a) Power as Benefaction

It w a s p o s s i b l e to talk a b o u t t h e e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n in a r e a l i s t i c
l a n g u a g e a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h e r e a l i t i e s o f c o n t r o l a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n , as
in t h e case o f P o l y b i o s ' d e s c r i p t i o n o f S e l e u k i d i m p e r i a l s t r u c t u r e s ,
o r d o c u m e n t s m e n t i o n i n g local c o m m u n i t i e s l e f t in p e a c e to
p r o d u c e m o r e i n c o m e f o r t h e r o y a l e c o n o m y ( C h . 3, I n t r o d u c t i o n

54 Orth 1977: passinr, Green 1990: e.g. 198. Contrast Brown 1992: 7 - 8 , for the import-

ance of late-Roman culture alongside the realities of autocracy; 3 1-4, on the 'fine dust
of ancient phrases' and the role of rhetoric.
S! Documents 18, 63, T e o s ; 40, 19, Sardeis (probably, though Robert thinks the

lacuna may be too long for the restoration [τιμά;] required by the sense and the T e i a n
parallel).
a n d § 2); the h i e r a r c h y o f j u r i d i c a l s t a t u s e s is also a l a n g u a g e p r e d i -
c a t e d on the r u l e r ' s m o n o p o l y of p e r f o r m a t i v e u t t e r a n c e s ( C h . 3 § 3).
O t h e r i d i o m s d i s s i m u l a t e d o r d e p r o b l e m a t i z e d the f a c t o f d o m i n a -
t i o n . T h i s is the f u n c t i o n o f A n t i o c h o s ' r e f e r e n c e s to the S e l e u k i d
p a s t , w h i c h j u s t i f i e d e m p i r e b y p r e c e d e n t , a n d b y the a s s u m p t i o n
that i m p e r i a l d o m i n a t i o n w a s b a s e d o n a set o f w e l l d e f i n e d p r o p e r t y
rights (original conquest a c c o m p a n i e d by formal cession of territory
o r the d e m i s e o f the f o r m e r o w n e r , a n d t r a n s m i s s i o n o f c o n q u e r e d
territory b y legacy). T h i s conception of p o w e r justified by history
w a s m a d e e x p l i c i t in r o y a l letters; it p e r h a p s also u n d e r l i e s the
' a n c e s t r a l i d e o l o g y ' , e x e m p l i f i e d b y c l a i m s to a n c e s t r a l b e n e f i c e n c e
a n d the state c u l t f o r the S e l e u k i d a n c e s t o r s ( C h . 1 § 1).
U n l i k e the r e f e r e n c e s to the S e l e u k i d p a s t ( p r o g r a m m a t i c state-
m e n t s ) , the e u e r g e t i c a l r e g i s t e r c a l l e d f o r the i n v o l v e m e n t a n d the
a c q u i e s c e n c e o f the r u l e d . G i f t s , o r w h a t w a s r e p r e s e n t e d as g i f t s
(often s i m p l y refraining f r o m certain f o r m s of exploitation), w e r e
p r e s e n t e d as t o k e n s o f a m o r e g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , the r u l e r ' s k i n d
c o n c e r n f o r the r u l e d , h i s d e s i r e to b e n e f i t t h e m , a n d the e u e r g e t i c
n a t u r e o f the k i n g . 5 6 A s i m p l e w a y in w h i c h the r u l e r ' s g e n e r o u s
n a t u r e e x p r e s s e d itself w a s the s u p p l e m e n t a r y g i f t : a f t e r g r a n t i n g
f a v o u r s a s k e d f o r b y the H e r a k l e i a n s , A n t i o c h o s I I I i n c r e a s e d the
r o y a l g r a n t o f g y m n a s i o n - o i l b y t h i r t y metretai, a n d p r o m i s e d to
finance an a q u e d u c t ; a n a l o g o u s l y , a c i t y s a c k e d b y S e l e u k i d t r o o p s
a s k e d f o r t a x - e x e m p t i o n , a n d (it s e e m s ) w a s g r a n t e d a d d i t i o n a l
p r i v i l e g e s , o n the i n i t i a t i v e o f a S e l e u k i d official r a t h e r t h a n on the
c i t y ' s p e t i t i o n . 5 7 A s s u m i n g that s u c h a c t i o n s result f r o m the r u l e r ' s
i n i t i a t i v e ( r a t h e r t h a n i n f o r m a l p e t i t i o n s n o t r e c o r d e d ) , t h e y illus-
trate an i n s i g h t b y P. V e y n e , o n the f u n c t i o n o f the 'joli g e s t e
s y m b o l i q u e ' c o n s t i t u t e d b y 'le c a d e a u s u p p l é m e n t a i r e ' , w h i c h
p r o v e s the d e p t h a n d g e n u i n e n e s s o f the b e n e f a c t o r ' s f e e l i n g s , a b o v e
the r o u t i n e o f p a t r o n a g e ( V e y n e 1 9 7 6 : 79). T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f the
r u l e r ' s i n i t i a t i v e is e x p l i c i t l y c o n f i r m e d b y the d o c u m e n t s : an
i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e of the d e s c r i p t i o n o f the b e n e f i c e n t r u l e r a n d h i s
a c t i o n s c o n c e r n s h i s e f f o r t s at o r i g i n a l i t y in his g i f t s (literally 'to
t h i n k u p ' gifts). 5 8 T h e s t r i v i n g f o r o r i g i n a l i t y a d d e d w e i g h t to the

56 O n this 'sujet passablement ressassé', Gauthier 1985: 40-2, for main references.

For theoretical writing on kingship, M u r r a y 1970, and p. 311 for the diffusion of
'ethical kingship' in documentary material; Billows 1995: 56-70.
57 D o c u m e n t s 31 A , I 8 - 1 4 (the extra oil is certainly a voluntary gift, the aqueduct

probably); 36, 1 1 - 2 1 . For a parallel, Habicht 1997: 70: Antigonos Monophthalmos adds
a grant of cash to a gift of grain and timber promised to the Athenians by Demetrios
Poliorketes.
58 D o c u m e n t 26 A , I 28-9 with BE 7 1 , 621 p. 503 (εννοώ as technical term for
expected or promised behaviour from the benefactor).
c o n s t a n t l y p r o c l a i m e d c o n c e p t s : r o y a l care (πολυωρία, επιμελεια), for
t h e c i t i e s ' w e l f a r e a n d t h e i r r e p u t e (τιμή, δόξα)', a s p e c i f i c f o r m w a s
h u m a n i t a r i a n aid f o r c o m m u n i t i e s in h a r d t i m e s , a n d a s s i s t a n c e w i t h
t h e i r επανόρθωσις, as in the case o f S a r d e i s o r I a s o s . 5 9
L a o d i k e ' s l e t t e r to t h e I a s i a n s i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s v o c a b u l a r y , b y
s p e a k i n g o f A n t i o c h o s ' άντίληψις, an e x p r e s s i v e w o r d f o r e f f i c i e n t
help; 6 0 f u r t h e r m o r e , t h e l e t t e r s h o w s h o w t h e c o n c e p t s o f b e n e -
f a c t i o n are a s s e m b l e d in a s y n t a c t i c a l s t r u c t u r e t h a t m a k e s p o w e r
a c c e p t a b l e , a n d u r g e s t h e I a s i a n s to a c c e p t S e l e u k i d p o w e r a l o n g
w i t h S e l e u k i d b e n e f a c t i o n . T h e d e c i s i o n to g i v e g r a i n to t h e I a s i a n s
is p r e c e d e d b y a l o n g , c o m p l e x c l a u s e , e x p l a i n i n g L a o d i k e ' s m o t i v a -
t i o n t h r o u g h a s e r i e s o f p a r t i c i p l e s a n d s u b - c l a u s e s . 6 1 T h e s e are
w r i t t e n in the m o r a l i z i n g l a n g u a g e o f m o t i v a t i o n , d e s c r i b e d in t h e
p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n ; it is w o r t h c l o s e l y r e a d i n g t h e w h o l e p a s s a g e , a n d
a n a l y z i n g t h e s y n t a x , to s t u d y the a s s u m p t i o n s a n d ' t r u t h s ' w h i c h
t h e b e n e f a c t i o n a n d its d e s c r i p t i o n f o i s t o n t h e I a s i a n s .

Βασίλισσα Λαοδίκη Ιασίων τήι βουλήι καί τώι δή-

μωι χαίρειν άκούουσα πλεονάκις του αδελφού ην 4
re άντίληψιν τών εαυτού φίλων καί συμμάχων
διατελεί ποιούμενος καί ώς τήν ΰμετεραν πά-
λιν συμπτώμασιν περιπεσοΰσαν άπροσδοκή-
τοις άνακτησάμενος τήν τε ελευθερίαν ύμίν 8
άπεδωκεν καί τους νόμους καί τά λοιπά προτεθει-
ται συναύξειν το πολίτευμα καί εις βελτίονα δι-
άθεσιν άγαγεΐν, προαιρουμενη δή καί εγώ ακόλου-
θα πράσειν τη σπουδή αυτού καί εκτενείαι καί δια 12
τούτο καταθεσθαι τινά ευεργεσίαμ μεν εις τους
άσθενούντας τών πολιτών, εύχρηστίαν δε κοι-
νήν τώι σνμπαντι δήμο)ι, γεγράφεικα Στρουθί-
ωνι τώι διοικητήι εφ' ετη δέκα κατ' ενιαυτον πυρών χιλί- 16
ους μεδίμνους Αττικούς εις τήν πάλιν παρακομί-
ζοντα παραδιδόναι τοις παρά τού δήμου· κτλ.
Q u e e n Laodike to the council and the people of the Iasians, greetings.
H a v i n g often heard f r o m m y brother what urgent help he continually
deploys for his friends and allies, and that after recovering your city as it
had fallen into unexpected calamities, he gave back to you your liberty and
your laws, and in the other matters he strives to increase the citizen b o d y

59 Care: documents 5, 31 A , I 8-9 and Β, III 1 3 - 1 6 , IV 2, 9; 34. Also RC 14, line 3;

22, lines 15-16; generally, Habicht 1970: 230. Έπανόρθωσις: document 3, 1 (Sardeis, also
document 1 for the reconstruction of the city); 26 A (Laodike for Iasos); also Jos. Ajf
12.139 for reconstruction of Jerusalem, damaged in the Seleukid conquest of 200;
Robert i960: 5 1 7 - 1 9 .
60 D o c u m e n t 26 A, I 5, with J. and L . Robert 1983: 135 n. 2, a short lexical essay ('le

mot dit beaucoup').

61 D o c u m e n t 26 A , 3 - 1 8 . A full translation can be found there.
and bring it to a better condition, and making it my own intention to act in
accordance with his zeal and eagerness, and, because of this, to confer some
benefaction on the poor among the citizens, and a general advantage to the
whole people, I have written to Strouthion the dioiketes for him to send
along to the city one thousand Attic medimnoi of wheat a year, for ten
years, and hand them over to the representatives of the people . . .
T h i s long sentence declares that L a o d i k e gave grain to the Iasians,
and, m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , e x p a n d s on this action (expressed b y the
m a i n proposition) b y t w o participial clauses, w h i c h tell us w h y
L a o d i k e acted this w a y : first, because she had been hearing
(άκονουσα) f r o m A n t i o c h o s of his disposition, and s e c o n d , because of
her o w n c o m m i t t e d choice (προαιρουμένη) to f o l l o w A n t i o c h o s ' zeal.
S u b - c l a u s e s g i v e details on the first participial clause (άκούονσα)
c o n c e r n i n g the k i n g ' s attitude as p e r c e i v e d b y L a o d i k e : general care
for allies and friends, and specific action for Iasos; the latter t h e m e
is e x p a n d e d b y a participial phrase of its o w n , w h i c h describes the
c i r c u m s t a n c e s u n d e r w h i c h A n t i o c h o s c a m e to s h o w care for Iasos:
w h e n he had ' r e a c q u i r e d ' the city (άνακτησάμενος). M a j o r t h e m e s of
royal i d e o l o g y or practice are expressed in this c o m p l e x of nested
clauses: royal solicitude and b e n e f i c e n c e , ancestral rights o v e r a
local c o m m u n i t y , the k i n g ' s right to 'give back' local liberty and
laws. T h e second participial clause f o c u s e s on L a o d i k e ' s desire
(προαιρονμενη) to imitate the k i n g ' s euergetical e n t h u s i a s m , w h i c h
m a k e s her (Stα τούτο) wish to c o n f e r a b e n e f a c t i o n on the c i t y ' s poor
and the city m o r e generally. T h e euergetical t h e m e s stated in the
first (άκονονσa) participial clause are repeated or alluded to in the
s e c o n d participial clause, this time as facts: since L a o d i k e w i s h e s to
act in accordance w i t h them, they m u s t be there for her to f o r m this
w i s h at all.
T h e syntactical structure of the letter poses these t h e m e s as facts
(and does so twice), in the participial clauses w h i c h a c c o m p a n y and
d e p e n d on the action expressed in the m a i n verb: facts w h i c h m u s t
be true, since they are materialized in the repeated gift of grain,
w h i c h the l o n g sentence finally c o m e s to as the point of c o m m u n i -
cation. A c c e p t i n g the gift dissuades the Iasians f r o m q u e s t i o n i n g
both the p r i m a r y statements (I did this because I heard of
A n t i o c h o s ' b e n e v o l e n c e and because I w i s h to imitate h i m ) and the
s e c o n d a r y , implicit statements (since m y b e n e v o l e n c e imitates
A n t i o c h o s ' b e n e v o l e n c e , A n t i o c h o s is b e n e v o l e n t ; since he 're-
a c q u i r e d ' y o u r city, and since he 'gave b a c k ' y o u r liberty as a sign of
b e n e v o l e n c e , he e n j o y s ancestral political rights as w e l l as b e i n g
b e n e v o l e n t ) . B y a c c e p t i n g the present, the Iasians are s u p p o s e d to
accept the S e l e u k i d v e r s i o n — w h i c h L a o d i k e h e l p f u l l y restates (she
is i m i t a t i n g A n t i o c h o s ' e u e r g e t i c a l z e a l , a g i v e n f a c t ) at t h e e n d o f
t h e l e t t e r (lines 2 9 - 3 2 ) . T h e f a c t s , p o l i t i c a l in n a t u r e , o f r e c o n q u e s t
justified b y ancestral rights and of m o n o p o l y over definitions and
s t a t u s e s , are n o t d i s s i m u l a t e d , b u t r e f e r r e d to as c o n d i t i o n s o f
b e n e f i c e n c e : A n t i o c h o s I I I , a f t e r ' r e a c q u i r i n g ' t h e c i t y , g a v e b a c k its
l i b e r t y , a n d n o w s t r i v e s 'to i n c r e a s e its politeuma a n d to b r i n g it to a
b e t t e r s i t u a t i o n ' . 6 2 S e l e u k i d ( r e ) c o n q u e s t a l l o w e d A n t i o c h o s to
e x t e n d to t h e I a s i a n s in p a r t i c u l a r t h e care w h i c h in g e n e r a l he
s h o w e d h i s f r i e n d s a n d allies. T h e p o l i t i c a l f o r c e o f t h i s s t a t e m e n t
w o u l d b e t h e m o r e r e m a r k a b l e if I a s o s h a d n o t p r e v i o u s l y b e e n s u b -
o r d i n a t e to the S e l e u k i d s ( u n d e r A n t i o c h o s I I o r S e l e u k o s I I ) , b u t
L a o d i k e w a s rewriting Iasian history into a S e l e u k i d past, b y s i m p l y
a l l u d i n g to p r e v i o u s S e l e u k i d d o m i n i o n as a b a c k g r o u n d ( a n d a c o n -
d i t i o n ) to t h e p r e s e n t b e n e f a c t i o n ; t h e I a s i a n s , in a c c e p t i n g t h e
b e n e f a c t i o n , w o u l d also a g r e e to t h e r e w r i t i n g o f t h e i r p a s t . T h e s e
s t a t e m e n t s o n r o y a l b e n e f i c e n c e a n d its i m p l i c a t i o n s are r e i n f o r c e d
b y a secondary participial clause: A n t i o c h o s gave back liberty and
t h e l a w s , τήν ύμετεραν πάλιν σύμπτωμασιν περιπεσοϋσαν άπροσδοκήτοις
άνακτησάμενος, ' h a v i n g r e a c q u i r e d y o u r c i t y as it h a d f a l l e n in
u n e x p e c t e d d i s a s t e r s ' (the e a r t h q u a k e o f 1 9 8 ) — t h i s p a r t i c i p i a l
c l a u s e q u a l i f y i n g τήν ύμετεραν πόλιν g i v e s n o t j u s t t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e
of reconquest, but a motivation for A n t i o c h o s ' subsequent actions.
A n t i o c h o s a c t e d as he d i d , b e c a u s e he n o t i c e d t h e d i s a s t e r s w h i c h
h a d b e f a l l e n I a s o s ; f o r t h e s e n t e n c e to m a k e s e n s e , t h i s f a c t (or t h i s
s t a t e m e n t , p r e s e n t e d as a fact b y the p a r t i c i p i a l c l a u s e ) m u s t b e
r e l e v a n t , a n d it c a n o n l y b e r e l e v a n t if t h e k i n g f e e l s h u m a n i t a r i a n
s o l i c i t u d e f o r his s u b j e c t s . F i n a l l y , a n o t h e r , less l o g i c a l , e f f e c t o f
L a o d i k e ' s s e n t e n c e is to m a r g i n a l i z e t h e p o l i t i c a l t h e m e s : c o n q u e s t
a n d m o n o p o l y o f s t a t u s e s are m e n t i o n e d in a s u b o r d i n a t e c l a u s e (ώς
τήν ύμετεραν πόλιν κτλ.) to a p a r t i c i p i a l c l a u s e q u a l i f y i n g the m a i n
v e r b w h i c h n o t i f i e s the d e c i s i o n to g i v e g r a i n : t h e p o w e r r e l a t i o n is
c i r c u m s t a n t i a l , m e n t i o n e d as an a s i d e to t h e a c t i o n p r e s e n t e d as
i m p o r t a n t , t h e f a c t o f g i v i n g , the ευεργεσία.

A s i m i l a r c a s e to L a o d i k e ' s l e t t e r to t h e I a s i a n s is Z e u x i s ' d e a l i n g s
w i t h the H e r a k l e i a n s . T h i s e x a m p l e is less e l a b o r a t e in its s y n t a x ,
b u t its s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d n e s s i l l u s t r a t e s all the b e t t e r t h e w a y in w h i c h
l a n g u a g e , a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the act o f g i v i n g , i m p o s e d c e r t a i n t r u t h s :
p o w e r p r e s e n t e d itself as b e n e f a c t i o n , b u t b e n e f a c t i o n w a s also an
e x p r e s s i o n a n d m e a n s o f p o w e r . T h e H e r a k l e i a n s a s k e d Z e u x i s to
p r e s e r v e τα υπό τών βασιλέων σνγκεχωρημενα, t h e status quo o f p r e c e -

62 Lines 6—11: I construct the clause in the present tense (τα λοιπά προτεθειται ανναύξειν

κτλ.) as still governed by the participial clause άνακτησάμενος', but if the clause were
paratactic, the sense would be the same.
d e n t s a n d g r a n t s m a d e b y i n d e f i n i t e r o y a l m a s t e r s in t h e c i t y ' s
past. 6 3 Z e u x i s r e p l i e d b y s p e a k i n g o f h i s d e s i r e to r e s t o r e t h e p e o p l e
to its f o r m e r s i t u a t i o n , to i n c r e a s e t h e c i t y — s t a n d a r d f o r m u l a s in
t h e l a n g u a g e of r o y a l e u e r g e t i s m — a n d to p r e s e r v e τά re επί τών
προγόνων τον βασιλέως [σνγκ€χ]ωρημ€να, 'the grants m a d e by the
a n c e s t o r s o f the k i n g (i.e. A n t i o c h o s I I I ) ' ; to an i n d e f i n i t e p a s t ,
Z e u x i s s u b s t i t u t e s t h e p a r t i s a n S e l e u k i d v e r s i o n , b y w h i c h all o f c i s -
T a u r i c Asia M i n o r had been (rightfully, a n d — u n e x a c t l y — i n actual
f a c t ) a S e l e u k i d d o m i n i o n s i n c e 281 BC ( C h . 1). B y a c c e p t i n g t h e
g r a n t s a n d b e n e f a c t i o n s , the H e r a k l e i a n s a c c e p t t h e r e w r i t i n g o f
t h e i r l o c a l h i s t o r y into an e p i s o d e o f the S e l e u k i d p a s t , as r e l e v a n t to
t h e p r e s e n t m a s t e r . 6 4 H e r e , as in t h e c a s e of I a s o s , it is p o s s i b l e t h a t
t h e c i t y a c t u a l l y h a d n e v e r b e e n s u b j e c t to t h e S e l e u k i d s , a n d t h a t
Z e u x i s , like L a o d i k e , w a s r e w r i t i n g local c o n t e x t s into a v a g u e
S e l e u k i d past.
T h e n a t u r e o f the l i n k b e t w e e n t h e e u e r g e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e a n d r o y a l
p o w e r , a n d its e f f e c t , c a n b e i n t e r p r e t e d in d i f f e r e n t w a y s . F o r
i n s t a n c e , w e c o u l d d e s c r i b e the e u e r g e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e as a r e w r i t i n g
of p o w e r into benefaction, and h e n c e a process of e u p h e m i s m . T h e
e s s e n c e o f k i n g s h i p c o u l d b e d e f i n e d as b e n e f a c t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n
p o w e r 6 5 — a d e p r o b l e m a t i z i n g i m a g e o f p o w e r , w h i c h is g i v e n s u b -
s t a n c e b y a c t u a l b e n e f a c t i o n s p r e s e n t e d as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e
r u l e r ' s p e r s o n a l d i s p o s i t i o n a n d the n a t u r e o f h i s rule. A r e l a t e d
f e a t u r e is t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f r u l e n o t o n l y as b e n e f a c t i o n , b u t as
p r o t e c t i o n a n d a c t i v e c a r e ; t h i s is n o t o n l y e x p l i c i t l y e x p r e s s e d in
r o y a l l e t t e r s , b u t , to a c e r t a i n e x t e n t , u n d e r l i e s p h r a s e s a b o u t c o n -
s e r v i n g o r p r e s e r v i n g local p r i v i l e g e s — t h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f p o w e r -
a s - p r o t e c t i o n is a t r a d i t i o n a l f e a t u r e o f N e a r - E a s t e r n k i n g s h i p . 6 6
T h e i n s i s t e n c e o n care l e g i t i m a t e s p o w e r , s i n c e its m o t i v a t i o n a n d
its e f f e c t are to p r o m o t e t h e w e l f a r e o f the r u l e d ( M u r r a y 1 9 7 0 ; also
CR NS 1 6 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , 2 2 6 - 7 ) . A n o t h e r p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is t h a t t h e
b e n e f a c t i o n e l i d e s , o r c a m o u f l a g e s , p o w e r , a n d i n s t i t u t e s a fiction o f
f r e e e x c h a n g e b e t w e e n r u l e r a n d r u l e d ( d i s s i m u l a t i n g the f a c t t h a t
r u l e d in f a c t h a v e no c h o i c e ) . 6 7 P o l y b i o s ( 5 . 1 1 . 6 ) c o n t r a s t s t h e t y r a n t

" Parallel: Crampa 1969: no. 5, line 11 'granted by the kings' is a local formula for
status quo.
64 D o c u m e n t 31 Β, II 14, III 14-15.
65 T h e theme is already analysed in C h . 3, as an essential part of the ideological tools

of power (§§ 2d. 3, 4). On kingship and benefaction, Gauthier 1985: 40-1, with refer-
ences.
66 Protection: document 5; further C h . 3 § 1, ad finem. Conserving; documents 19 B,

18; 34, 5; also RC 15, line 26. Generally, Briant 1982: 179-80, 182-8 on the ideology of
Near-Eastern kingship as protection.
67 Holleaux 1942: 226-7, o n έννοια, creating the illusion of 'témoignage spontané' of

adhesion.
( w h o r u l e s b y fear) a n d t h e k i n g , w h o s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c is 'to do g o o d
to all a n d b e l o v e d o n a c c o u n t o f h i s b e n e f i c e n c e a n d k i n d n e s s , t h u s
r u l i n g a n d p r e s i d i n g o v e r p e o p l e w i t h f u l l w i l l i n g n e s s ' , βασιλέως 8è
το ττάντας εν ποιούντα, διά τήν εύεργεσ(αν καΐ τήν φιλανθρωπίαν
άγαττώμενον, έκόντων ήγεΐσθαι και προστατείν: in t h i s ideal r e l a t i o n , t h e
exercise of kingship through pure benefaction seems a zone where
p o w e r is a b s e n t , r e p l a c e d b y i n f l u e n c e a n d w i l l i n g a d h e s i o n . T h e
c o n t r a c t c l a u s e in r o y a l l e t t e r s s u g g e s t s t h a t c o m p l i a n c e , o r d e f e r -
e n c e , to t h e k i n g , is a c h o i c e o f the local c o m m u n i t y , a c t i n g o u t o f
t h e m o r a l o b l i g a t i o n to r e m e m b e r a n d r e q u i t e p a s t b e n e f a c t i o n : t h e
w o r d εύνοια, u s e d in c o n t r a c t c l a u s e s , a n d g e n e r a l l y in r o y a l
l a n g u a g e a d d r e s s e d to local c o m m u n i t i e s (§ i ) , also d e s i g n a t e s t h e
a t t i t u d e o f c i t i e s t o w a r d s k i n g s w h o are n o t t h e i r p o l i t i c a l m a s t e r s
(RC 2 5 , l i n e s 2 8 - 9 ; 66, line 11); 6 8 P o l y b i o s s p e a k s o f k i n g s in t h e
p a s t r e c e i v i n g εννοιαν και τιμήν in r e t u r n f o r m a g n i f i c e n t g i f t s — a
relationship of p u r e e u e r g e t i s m . T h e fact that the same language
c o u l d b e u s e d in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n r u l e r a n d r u l e d as w e l l as
b e t w e e n king and i n d e p e n d e n t city69 s u g g e s t s yet another interpre-
t a t i o n : e u e r g e t i s m c o u l d b e d e s c r i b e d as c r e a t i n g a r e l a t i o n p a r a l l e l
to t h e p o w e r s t r u c t u r e — a d i s t r a c t i o n f r o m p o w e r . E u e r g e t i s m
o f f e r e d a c h a n n e l f o r i n t e r a c t i o n w h i c h d i d n o t p a s s t h r o u g h the
r e a l i t i e s o f d o m i n a t i o n , d r a w i n g a w a y t h e a t t e n t i o n o f the r u l e d .
V e y n e r e m a r k e d o n t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g b e t w e e n the
d i f f e r e n t a i m s o f royal g i f t s to t h e c i t i e s ( m a i n t a i n d i p l o m a t i c
cordiality w i t h i n d e p e n d e n t p o w e r s , publicize royal generosity,
s y m b o l i z e ' u n e r e l a t i o n d e d é p e n d a n c e ' : V e y n e 1 9 7 6 : 2 2 8 - 3 0 ) : the
a m b i g u i t y o n l y m a d e the f o r m m o r e v e r s a t i l e , a n d m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e
to o b f u s c a t e s u b o r d i n a t i o n .

T h e differences b e t w e e n these f u n c t i o n s of the euergetical dis-

c o u r s e a p p l i e d f r o m a b o v e m a t t e r less t h a n t h e i r s h a r e d c h a r a c t e r i s -
tic. T h e y i l l u s t r a t e t h e e f f e c t o f b e n e f a c t i o n , a n d t h e l a n g u a g e o f
e u e r g e t i s m that a c c o m p a n i e d benefaction, w h e n applied f r o m the
r u l e r s to t h e r u l e d . G i f t s , t h e e v o c a t i o n o f p a s t g i f t s , the p r o m i s e o f
f u t u r e g i f t s , t h e r u l e r ' s p r o c l a i m e d i n i t i a t i v e in t h i n k i n g u p n e w
g i f t s , h i s b e n e f i c e n t c h a r a c t e r , m a n i f e s t e d in h i s d e c i s i o n s : r e f e r e n c e
to t h e s e t h e m e s c r e a t e d l e g i t i m a c y f o r the k i n g , r e p r e s e n t e d h i s
p o w e r , a n d d e p r o b l e m a t i z e d it b y s h i f t i n g the f o c u s of d i s c o u r s e

68 Reference for «τϋνοια, both in a free and a subordinate context, in Holleaux 1942: 226

n. 3, 227 η. I. T h e contract clause, in this context, reduces a power relation to the free
exchange and reciprocity between city and benefactor, such as that proclaimed at the
end of Athenian honorific decrees (e.g. Syll. 535, lines 68-70; 540, lines 48—51, signalled
in Piejko 1991a: 64).
65 On this topic, Gauthier 19936: 214; Veyne 1976: 229.
f r o m p o w e r to b e n e f a c t i o n . T h i s d i s c o u r s e p l a y e d its role in f o s t e r -
i n g c o n s e n t a n d m a k i n g p o w e r a c c e p t a b l e ; in t h i s r o l e , its a i m w a s
to d e p o l i t i c i z e t h e r e l a t i o n o f t h e e m p i r e to its s u b j e c t s . A s p e c i f i c
e x a m p l e is t h e i n t r i c a t e s y n t a x o f a r o y a l u t t e r a n c e s u c h as L a o d i k e ' s
l e t t e r to t h e I a s i a n s , as a n a l y s e d a b o v e : t h e p a r t i c i p i a l c l a u s e s ,
d e p e n d e n t on the main action ( L a o d i k e has g i v e n grain), m a k e the
I a s i a n s a c c e p t r o y a l i d e o l o g y a n d t h e r o y a l w o r l d v i e w , as p a r t o f t h e
w h o l e package of royal euergetism. M o r e simply, talking about
g i v i n g also a l l o w e d t h e r u l e r s to m e n t i o n t h e s u b j e c t s ' o b l i g a t i o n s ,
n o t in t e r m s o f p o l i t i c a l s u b o r d i n a t i o n , b u t in m o r a l i z i n g t e r m s , as
' a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o u r ' a f t e r r e c e i v i n g g i f t s a n d in t h e e x p e c t a n c y o f
m o r e g i f t s : L a o d i k e , in t h e c o n t r a c t c l a u s e at t h e e n d o f h e r l e t t e r to
t h e I a s i a n s , p r o m i s e d f u r t h e r b e n e f a c t i o n s if t h e y s h o w e d t h e m -
s e l v e s οίους καθήκ€ί."] T h e l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m , w h e n s p o k e n b y
k i n g o r q u e e n , e x p r e s s e s t h e w h o l e p o l i t i c s o f t h e act of g i v i n g
f r o m r u l e r to r u l e d . T h e ' g e n t l e a d d r e s s e s ' to w h i c h A n t i o c h o s I I I
treated the S m y r n i a n s and the L a m p s a k e n e s w e r e p r o b a b l y
e x p r e s s e d in t h i s r e g i s t e r : p o w e r - a s - b e n e v o l e n c e , a p p e a l to e u e r g e t -
ical m e m o r y , p r o m i s e o f g i f t s , t h e w h o l e w r i t t e n in c o m p l e x , e l a b o -
rate s e n t e n c e s p o s i n g t h e m e s o f r o y a l i d e o l o g y as f a c t s b y s h i f t i n g
t h e m to s u b o r d i n a t e o r p a r t i c i p i a l c l a u s e s w h i c h e m p h a s i z e d , a n d
w e r e substantiated b y , the m a i n action, the royal euergetical
g e s t u r e . T h a t t h e s e r e c a l c i t r a n t c o m m u n i t i e s w e r e n o t t a k e n in d o e s
not detract f r o m the i m p o r t a n c e of this language, w h i c h reached
o t h e r c o m m u n i t i e s , a n d a i m e d at i m p o s i n g c e r t a i n i m a g e s o f r o y a l
p o w e r o n t h e m ( a d m i t t e d l y , t h e y h a d less c h o i c e t h a n S m y r n a o r
Lampsakos).

(b) Diplomacy and Manipulation

T h e royal language of giving w a s m a t c h e d by a civic language of

r e c e i v i n g , the l a n g u a g e o f τιμαί a n d h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e s in d i r e c t c o m -
m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e k i n g s . T h e a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e to b e n e f a c t i o n
w a s the d i s p a t c h o f an e m b a s s y to the k i n g , to s e n d g r e e t i n g s , r e j o i c e
o v e r his g o o d h e a l t h , a n d r e a d o u t an h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e t a k e n b y t h e
city; 7 1 h o n o u r s d e c r e e d b y a c i t y ( p r a i s e , t h e e r e c t i o n o f a s t a t u e ,
r u l e r c u l t ) , w e r e p u b l i c l y c o m m u n i c a t e d to t h e k i n g , a n d p e r f o r m e d
b e f o r e h i m , in t h e a b s t r a c t , t h r o u g h t h e r e a d i n g o f t h e d e c r e e a n d
p r e s e n t a t i o n b y t h e c i t y ' s e n v o y s : the a i m w a s e x p r e s s l y to b r i n g
t h e c i t y to the a t t e n t i o n o f its r o y a l i n t e r l o c u t o r s , "va δε ό βασιλεύς
Άντίοχος καί ή ά[δ]ελφή αυτού I [βασί]λισσα [Λ]αοδίκη ειδήσωσι τήν
70D o c u m e n t 26 A, I 20.
71D o c u m e n t s 11, 4~7ί 107-13; 3 1 A , I 4 _ 5ί °f· RC 6, OGIS 11, 219, Inschr.
Delphinion 139.
εύχαριστίαν τού [8]ήμου, ' i n o r d e r t h a t k i n g A n t i o c h o s a n d h i s s i s t e r
q u e e n L a o d i k e s h o u l d k n o w t h e g r a t i t u d e o f the p e o p l e ' , as a T e i a n
d e c r e e p u t it.' 2
A first f u n c t i o n of c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e k i n g w a s t h e d e m o n -
stration of g o o d w i l l , loyalism, or e v e n submission. C i v i c decrees
i n s t r u c t e d t h e a m b a s s a d o r s to p r o c l a i m t h a t t h e l o c a l c o m m u n i t y
h a d t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e r u l e r at h e a r t , t h a t t h e r u l e r ' s g o o d h e a l t h
a n d f o r t u n e w a s in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e c i t y ' s p r a y e r s , ώς ενχόμεθα;
t h e f o r m u l a w a s u s e d in a d e c r e e o f E u r o m i a n s / P h i l i p p e i s to
describe reconquest b y Philip V — a n A n t i g o n i d official 'restored the
c i t y to k i n g P h i l i p ' , [καθά] I περ εύχόμεθα.72, T h e d e c r e e s i n f o r m e d t h e
k i n g o f s a c r i f i c e s o r p r a y e r s f o r h i s w e l f a r e . 7 4 E v e n if t h e l a n g u a g e o f
h o n o u r s is n o t e x p l i c i t a b o u t t h e p o w e r r e l a t i o n s h i p i n v o l v e d , t h i s
e l e m e n t a r y f u n c t i o n of d e m o n s t r a t i n g s u b m i s s i o n e m e r g e s f r o m the
b e h a v i o u r o f c i t i e s t o w a r d s k i n g s w h o are t h r e a t e n i n g , b e c a u s e n e a r
a n d r e c e n t l y v i c t o r i o u s in w a r — t h e first g e s t u r e w a s to issue an
h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e a n d s e n d c r o w n s , as t o k e n s o f s u b m i s s i o n . M i l e t o s ,
a l a r m e d at P h i l i p ' s s u c c e s s at L a d e in 2 0 1 , d e c r e e d c r o w n s f o r the
v i c t o r ( P o l . 1 6 . 1 5 . 6 a n d a b o v e , C h . 2 § 3); P t o l e m y I V , a f t e r h i s
v i c t o r y at R a p h i a , m a r c h e d into K o i l e S y r i a to t h e a c c o m p a n i m e n t
o f c r o w n s , s a c r i f i c e s , altars, a n d o t h e r h o n o u r s ( P o l . 5 . 8 6 . 8 - 1 1 ) , a
f a c t w e n e e d n o t a t t r i b u t e w i t h P o l y b i o s to t h e n a t u r a l fickleness o f
the inhabitants.75
A m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d f u n c t i o n w a s the m e d i a t i o n o f r e q u e s t s to
the ruler: h o n o u r s usually introduced petition. T h e A m y z o n i a n
decrees for Seleukid officials were b r o u g h t b y ambassadors, w h o
t h e n e x h o r t e d t h e m to ' a l w a y s b e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s o m e g o o d f o r t h e
demos' (παρακαλεσουσιν αυτόν άεί τίνος αγαθού παραίτιον γενέσθαι τώι
δήμωι). L a o d i k e , in a l e t t e r to t h e S a r d i a n s , s i m p l y d e s c r i b e d t h e
a m b a s s a d o r s as ' e x h o r t i n g ' , in the a b s o l u t e , w i t h o u t d i r e c t o b j e c t o r
e x p l a n a t o r y s u b o r d i n a t e c l a u s e : καί oi ττρεσβευταί παρεκάλουν

72 D o c u m e n t 18, 107-8; cf. 28, 10-13. 1 ° OGIS 222, lines 20-4, the Ionians ask
Antiochos I to choose a site for a temenos to him: the request demands a reply, and hence
attention, from the king.
73 C i t y prayers: document 18, 112; cf. the Telmessian decree in honour of Eumenes

II, republished b y Segre, Riv. Fil. 60 (1932), 446-52, lines 13-14: Eumenes has won
καλώς και άνδόξως και ώς ίύχόμεθα τοις θεοϊς. E u r o m i a n s / P h i l i p p e i s : E r r i n g t o n Ι 9 9 3 : 2Ι_3>

no. 4, lines 3-4.

74 Documents 2 Β, 1 3 - 1 5 ; 2 7 , 2 _ 5 (assuming this decree of a phyle was communicated

to Antiochos III); also OGIS 219, lines 20-5 (long description of public prayers at Ilion
for the welfare of king and queen), definitely communicated to the king.
75 T h e honours decreed by the cities after 'Antiochos' takes power on the death of

'Seleukos' (P. Berol. 21286: Brashear 1984), might concern a similar situation.
Bosworth, HC A i. 226 for earlier parallels: golden crowns as initial acknowledgement of
inferior status.
ακολούθως τοις iv τώι ψηφίσματι κατακεχωρισμάνοις·'6 In the latter
case, Sardeis had recently been recaptured and sacked b y A n t i o c h o s
I I I . T h e h o n o u r s d e c r e e d b y the S a r d i a n s f o r L a o d i k e — c u l t i c
h o n o u r s in t h e f o r m o f a temenos a n d a f e s t i v a l n a m e d L a o d i k e i a ,
s a c r i f i c e s to Z e u s G e n e t h l i o s f o r the s a f e t y o f A n t i o c h o s , L a o d i k e ,
a n d t h e i r c h i l d r e n — w e r e c l e a r l y a local i n i t i a t i v e , w h i c h a l l o w e d t h e
S a r d i a n s to a p p r o a c h t h e r u l e r (or h i s w i f e ) in t h e e u e r g e t i c r e g i s t e r ,
start a d i p l o m a t i c e x c h a n g e — L a o d i k e w o u l d h a r d l y t u r n d o w n t h e
c u l t i c h o n o u r s , s y m b o l i z i n g local g o o d w i l l — a n d , in t h e a f t e r m a t h
o f t h e s e d i s c u r s i v e m o v e s , to i n v i t e t h e r u l i n g p o w e r to r e s p o n d in
the same language of euergetism. L a o d i k e d u l y a c k n o w l e d g e d
the h o n o u r s , praising the Sardians' e n t h u s i a s m and p r o m i s i n g
f u t u r e b e n e f a c t i o n s . A f t e r h o n o u r i n g L a o d i k e , t h e S a r d i a n s also
a p p r o a c h e d A n t i o c h o s ; h i s r e p l y is a l m o s t e n t i r e l y l o s t , b u t it no
d o u b t a c k n o w l e d g e d similar h o n o u r s for himself; a third letter b y
h i m s p e a k s , in s t a n d a r d e u e r g e t i c a l l a n g u a g e , o f h i s d e s i r e to assist
w i t h the c i t y ' s Ιπανόρθωσις a n d h i s c o m m i t t e d c h o i c e (προαιρούμενοι)
to i m p r o v e t h e s i t u a t i o n of t h e c i t y — h e n c e a s e r i e s o f b e n e f a c t i o n s
a n d t h e a l l e v i a t i o n of the b u r d e n o f b i l l e t i n g . " T h e S a r d i a n s , a f t e r
t h e r a v a g e s o f s i e g e a n d sack b y t h e i r r u l e r , still c o u l d r e s o r t to t h e
r e s o u r c e s o f t h e e u e r g e t i c a l l a n g u a g e , to a d d r e s s t h e r u l i n g p o w e r in
a d i s c o u r s e t h a t w o u l d s h a p e its r e a c t i o n a l o n g p r e - s c r i p t e d l i n e s of
b e n e f a c t i o n : t h e e v i d e n c e a l l o w s u s to see e u e r g e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e in
a c t i o n , a n d t h e i n c r e m e n t a l s h i f t s in t h e a t t i t u d e a n d l a n g u a g e o f
A n t i o c h o s I I I , as he l e t s h i m s e l f b e d r a w n i n t o t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d
dialogue of h o n o u r s and benefaction.
Rather than being mere homilies w h i c h requested royal euerget-
i s m in g e n e r a l t e r m s , h o n o u r s m o r e f r e q u e n t l y i n t r o d u c e d p r e c i s e
p e t i t i o n s . T h e H e r a k l e i a n s d e c r e e d h o n o u r s ( c r o w n s , s a c r i f i c e s to
g o d s and kings) for A n t i o c h o s I I I and his family, before presenting
Z e u x i s w i t h a m u l t i t u d e o f d o s s i e r s (υπομνήματα) o n p r i v i l e g e s to b e
d e f e n d e d o r b e n e f a c t i o n s to b e r e q u e s t e d b y the t w e n t y - t w o e n v o y s :
g i f t s in n a t u r e o r in k i n d , v a r i o u s t a x - e x e m p t i o n s , t e r r i t o r y . N e i t h e r
Z e u x i s n o r A n t i o c h o s s e e m s to h a v e r e f u s e d m u c h o f t h e
Herakleians' long and c o m p l e x petition.78 T h e dealings b e t w e e n
H e r a k l e i a a n d t h e r o y a l state g i v e a d e t a i l e d e x a m p l e o f the i n s t r u -
m e n t a l f u n c t i o n o f h o n o u r s in i n t r o d u c i n g s p e c i f i c p e t i t i o n s ; b u t

76 A m y z o n : documents 1 1 , 12. Sardeis: 2 B, 1 5 - 1 6 . OGIS 219, line 48, probably con-

tained a general exhortation to the king requesting good disposition towards Ilion.
77 D o c u m e n t s 2 B, C (that this letter answers a different embassy than Β can be

inferred from the different composition of the embassy); 3.

78 D o c u m e n t 31 A (crowns), Β (II ι ο - ι ι for sacrifices). A parallel is found in the

φιλάνθρωποι and the τιμαί offered to the Scipios by the same city (45, 14-15, justifying
restoration [τιμάς]).
t h e y are h a r d l y u n i q u e . A t r a c e o f s u c h a p e t i t i o n is p r e s e r v e d in
A n t i o c h o s ' r e p l i e s to T e i a n e m b a s s i e s : o n e o f t h e l e t t e r s e x p l i c i t l y
p r o m i s e s s o m e a c t i o n ' i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h y o u r r e q u e s t ' , [κ]αθάπερ
άξιοΰτε.79 P a r a l l e l s a b o u n d : a d e c r e e o f the I o n i a n s c o n t a i n s c u l t i c
h o n o u r s f o r A n t i o c h o s I, a n d a r e q u e s t t h a t t h e k i n g p r o t e c t the
f r e e d o m o f t h e cities; l e t t e r s of A n t i o c h o s I I (?) a n d S e l e u k o s I I
s u m m a r i z e petitions c o m i n g after civic honours; most tersely,
t h o u g h not unpleasantly, P t o l e m y I I I a c k n o w l e d g e d the practical
g o a l s o f an e m b a s s y f r o m X a n t h o s , b e a r i n g a d e c r e e h o n o u r i n g h i m
a n d B e r e n i k e II w i t h c r o w n s a n d s t a t u e s : τήν re εΰνοιαν της πόλεως
ενεφάνισαν καί περί ών ήξιοντε τα νπομνήματ' επέδωκαν, ' t h e y s p o k e of
t h e eunoia o f t h e c i t y a n d h a n d e d o v e r t h e d o s s i e r s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
t h i n g s y o u ask f o r ' . 8 0
W h y w e r e h o n o u r s a d d r e s s e d to t h e k i n g e f f e c t i v e in m a k i n g h i m
r e s p o n d f a v o u r a b l y to p e t i t i o n s ? W e m i g h t c o n s i d e r the h o n o u r s as
a s y m b o l i c a l f e e ( s o m e t i m e s n o t so s y m b o l i c a l , as in t h e c a s e o f t h e
g o l d ξένια o f f e r e d b y E r y t h r a i to t h e S e l e u k i d k i n g , g o l d c r o w n s o f
real v a l u e , o r g i f t s o f m o n e y c a l l e d ' c r o w n s ' ) 8 1 — a n o f f e r i n g to t h e
k i n g , d e m a n d i n g r e q u i t a l in s o m e f o r m , a c c o r d i n g to the r u l e s o f
e x c h a n g e ; h o n o u r s w h e n o f f e r e d as i n i t i a t i v e f r o m b e l o w s t a r t e d t h e
e u e r g e t i c a l d i a l o g u e , in w h i c h t h e a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e w a s ( m o r e )
b e n e f a c t i o n s — t h e content of these benefactions being determined,
o r at least s u g g e s t e d , b y t h e p e t i t i o n s w h i c h f o l l o w e d the h o n o u r s .
F i n a l l y , t h e a c t u a l e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e s p l a y e d an
instrumental role, b y p u b l i c i z i n g expectations and projecting n o r m s
o n t o the r e c i p i e n t . C i v i c h o n o u r s a n d t h e i r m e s s a g e s , o p e n o r
i m p l i c i t , a i m e d at a c h i e v i n g a m a n i p u l a t i v e e f f e c t , as s u g g e s t e d b y
R . B i l l o w s . B y e c h o i n g the r o y a l t h e m e s o f p o w e r as b e n e f a c t i o n o r
ancestral attitudes, the cities c o u l d exercise 'moral pressure' on the
k i n g s to e n s u r e t h e f a v o u r a b l e r e c e p t i o n o f p e t i t i o n s . A n e a r l y
e x a m p l e is t h e f a m o u s A t h e n i a n i t h y p h a l l i c h y m n to D e m e t r i o s
P o l i o r k e t e s (291 o r 290), w h i c h b y s p e a k i n g o f the k i n g ' s d i v i n e a n d
active protection presents a n o t - s o - h i d d e n request for assistance,
e s p e c i a l l y a g a i n s t the A i t o l i a n s a n d t h e i r T h e b a n allies. L a t e r c i v i c
d e c r e e s in p r e s e n t i n g p e t i t i o n s r e f e r to t h e p r e c e d e n t o f r o y a l a n c e s -

75 'In accordance with your request': document 19 C , 14. 19 A almost certainly gave

Antiochos' reply ([οιό]μεθα Seiv τήμ πόλιν [νμών . . . ], 'we believe that your city should
. . .') to a T e i a n petition, alluded to in lines 1 5 - 1 6 (the T e i a n ambassadors speak of their
instructions, whose precise tenor is now lost). 19 Ε could also be a response by a
petition from the koinon of the Artists of Dionysos.
80 OGIS 222, lines 14-18; RC 15 and 22; SEG 36.1218, lines 1 7 - 1 9 . Also C r a m p a
1969: no. 4 (Olympichos to Mylasa).
81 RC 15, line 5; Bikerman 1938: i n — 1 2 . A l s o D i o d . 17.24.3, Arr. Anab. 1.26.2
(Alexander asks the Aspendians to pay a fee of 50 talents), 2.13.8; Millar 1992: 140-2 for
Roman parallels.
t o r s , as in OGIS 2 2 2 , l i n e 20, o r t h e p a r a p h r a s e o f a m b a s s a d o r s '
s p e e c h in RC 1 5 , l i n e s 2 3 - 4 . 8 2 I n t h e case o f A n t i o c h o s I I I , a s i m p l e
b u t v e r y e x p l i c i t e x a m p l e c o m e s f r o m t h e 'first' T e i a n d e c r e e , w h i c h
speaks a b o u t 'the great a d v a n t a g e s t h r o u g h w h i c h o u r city has
r e a c h e d h a p p i n e s s — s o m e o f w h i c h he n o w is b r i n g i n g a b o u t , s o m e
h e w i l l b r i n g a b o u t ' : [τ]ά μεν συντελεί τών αγαθών δι' ών εις ενδαιμονίαν
παραγίνεθ' ή πόλις ήμ[ώ]ν, τα δ' ε[ττι\τελέσει. T h e e x p l i c i t t h e m e o f t h i s
p h r a s e is c e l e b r a t i o n o f A n t i o c h o s ' b e n e f i c e n c e a n d p o w e r , in t h e
f o r m o f p o w e r o v e r the c i t y a n d o f p o w e r to d o g o o d ; n e v e r t h e l e s s ,
t h e p h r a s e , w h i c h w a s read o u t to the k i n g , p e r h a p s c o m m e n t e d o n
b y ambassadors, and inscribed on the m a i n city t e m p l e , w a s a p u b l i c
r e m i n d e r of royal p r o m i s e s and a m e a n s of pressure on the king.
O t h e r e x a m p l e s are i n d i r e c t . It is l i k e l y t h a t t h e S a r d i a n d e c r e e o n
cult for L a o d i k e , and the H e r a k l e i a n decree h o n o u r i n g the king and
h i s f a m i l y ( b e f o r e d e t a i l i n g a l o n g list o f r e q u e s t s ) p r e s e n t e d t h e
h o n o u r s in t h e g e n e r a l i z i n g r e g i s t e r of r o y a l b e n e f i c e n c e , to p r o j e c t
e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d s h a p e i n t e r a c t i o n into i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d e u e r g e t i c a l
c h a n n e l s , f a v o u r i n g p o s i t i v e r e s p o n s e s to p e t i t i o n . A r o y a l letter to
T e o s , a g r e e i n g to a local r e q u e s t , p r o m i s e s a c t i o n 'in a c c o r d a n c e
w i t h t h e e x a m p l e [of m y a n c e s t o r s ] ' , p e r h a p s e c h o i n g t h e w o r d i n g
o f the T e i a n d e c r e e it r e s p o n d s to. 8 3 I f w e h a d the t e x t of a n y s p e e c h
d e l i v e r e d f a c e - t o - f a c e b y c i v i c a m b a s s a d o r s to t h e k i n g , w e w o u l d
p r o b a b l y have m a n y more e x a m p l e s of directly manipulative
r h e t o r i c a n d a p p e a l to t h e v a l u e s o f r o y a l e u e r g e t i s m .
T h e ideal case illustrating this direct instrumental f u n c t i o n of
euergetical discourse m u s t be the b e h a v i o u r of the R h o d i a n s ,
d e s c r i b e d b y D i o d o r o s as u s i n g h o n o u r s a n d s k i l f u l d e c r e e s to m a k e
t h e k i n g s p a y t h e m εκουσίου s φόρους ( 3 1 . 3 6 , G a u t h i e r 1993 b:
2 1 4 - 1 5 ) . W e are e n t i t l e d to f i n d e x a g g e r a t e d t h i s i m a g e o f a c i t y
u s i n g h o n o u r s to t r a n s f o r m k i n g s into b e n e f a c t o r s ( o r e v e n p a y e r s o f
'voluntary tribute', a m e t a p h o r w h i c h reverses a m o r e usual relation
o f k i n g a n d c i t y ) , a n d it is t r u e t h a t R h o d e s w a s e x c e p t i o n a l b y its
i n d e p e n d e n c e a n d its n e u t r a l i t y . N e v e r t h e l e s s , D i o d o r o s d o c u m e n t s
ancient awareness of the m a n i p u l a t i v e force of the honorific
l a n g u a g e , a n d h e n c e v a l i d a t e s m o d e r n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f this
function.
T h e u s e o f l a n g u a g e b y t h e r u l e d to act u p o n t h e r u l e r s is e s s e n -
tial f o r a n u a n c e d a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e r e a l i t i e s a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f
e m p i r e . Its i m p o r t a n c e c a n b e s u b s t a n t i a t e d b y p a r a l l e l s in o t h e r

82 T h e s e examples are treated in Billows 1995: 70-80, esp. 74-8. On the Athenian

hymn, and its political context, Habicht 1997: 92-4.

81 T e i a n decree: document 17, 27-9. Sardeis: 2 B; Herakleia: 31. Letter to T e o s : 19

C, 14-16.
p e r i o d s , f o r i n s t a n c e in L a t e A n t i q u i t y w h e n t h e c i t y é l i t e s c o n -
s t r a i n e d t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f an a u t o c r a t i c i m p e r i a l state t h r o u g h
r h e t o r i c a n d the p r e s t i g e o f c l a s s i c a l c u l t u r e ( B r o w n 1 9 9 2 : 3 - 7 0 ) . I n
t h e case o f the H e l l e n i s t i c cities, the m a n i p u l a t i o n o r p r e s s u r i z i n g o f
rulers t h r o u g h discourse s h o w s h o w the h o n o u r s , and especially the
statements and generalizations w h i c h f r a m e d the presentation of
h o n o u r s , h a d d i r e c t p o l i t i c a l f o r c e , in a c t u a l i n t e r a c t i o n s . T h e s e
s t a t e m e n t s p r e s e n t a s p e c i f i c case of t h e g e n e r a l f u n c t i o n of l a n g u a g e
as ' r o l e a s s i g n m e n t ' w i t h i n a b i n d i n g l i n g u i s t i c c o n t r a c t ; m o d e s a n d
c o n t e n t o f a d d r e s s s h a p e t h e r e s p o n s e , if t h e l a t t e r is to b e e x p r e s s e d
w i t h i n t h e s a m e l a n g u a g e ( P o c o c k 1984). T h e s h a r e d , i n s t i t u t i o n a l -
i z e d l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m , u s e d in a d i a l o g u e w h e r e t h e t e r m s
w e r e n o t e x c l u s i v e l y o w n e d o r c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e e m p i r e , the p a r t y
w h i c h w i e l d e d the m e a n s of physical c o m p u l s i o n , allowed the ruled
to c o n v e r t t r a n s a c t i o n s i n t o d i a l o g u e , w h e r e t h e y c o u l d a d d r e s s t h e
r u l i n g p o w e r in c e r t a i n w a y s , to cast it in w e l l - d e f i n e d r o l e s a n d to
o b t a i n w h a t t h e y w a n t e d f r o m it.

(c) 'As for the Other Euergetai': Socializing the King's Officials

A w e l l - d o c u m e n t e d a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t c a s e o f role a s s i g n -
m e n t is t h e d e c r e e h o n o u r i n g a r o y a l o f f i c i a l , in g r a t i t u d e f o r
s e r v i c e s o r as an initial d i p l o m a t i c m o v e ( r e q u i t i n g g e n e r a l g o o d w i l l
r a t h e r t h a n s p e c i f i c f a v o u r s ) . T h e r e are m a n y i n s t a n c e s ; R o b e r t
r e c o g n i z e d t h e t y p e as a s u b g e n r e o f t h e h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e . 8 4 T h e t y p e
is a t t e s t e d at A m y z o n , w h e r e the c i t i z e n s h o n o u r e d the g o v e r n o r at
A l i n d a , the a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e A r t e m i s i o n , a financial o f f i c i a l (?),
another unspecified official, soldiers, and their c o m m a n d e r ; perhaps
t h e y also h o n o u r e d Z e u x i s ( w h o w e n t t h r o u g h t h e c i t y a n d d e d i -
c a t e d l a n d s to t h e g o d s o f t h e A r t e m i s i o n ) a n d t h e k i n g w i t h n o w
lost d e c r e e s . 8 5 A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e h o n o u r e d the local c a v a l r y
c o m m a n d e r for services; a fragmentary decree f r o m Sardeis m i g h t
h o n o u r a S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l w i t h a s t a t u e a n d a s h a r e o f the m e a t f r o m
p u b l i c s a c r i f i c e s ( t h e h o n o r a n d is n o t a S a r d i a n ) . 8 6 T h e m o s t e l a b o -
rate e x a m p l e c o m e s f r o m T e o s , w h i c h o f f e r e d c i t i z e n s h i p ( o n a
' p o t e n t i a l ' b a s i s , i.e. o p e n to p e r m a n e n t i m m i g r a n t s ) to t h e ' c i t i e s
n a m e d a f t e r t h e a n c e s t o r s o f the k i n g ' , t h e g r e a t S e l e u k i d c i t i e s o f
n o r t h S y r i a , A n t i o c h , S e l e u k e i a in P i e r i a , L a o d i k e i a b y t h e sea:

84 J. and L . Robert 1983: 194 (with further examples); also Habicht 1970: 57 n. g

(Athens); L a u n e y 1987: 642-50; Gauthier 1985: 45. Schubart 1937: 2 1 - 6 , amalgamates

images of officials from below, and prescriptions from above. For a study of Attalid
philoi between court and polis, Savalli-Lestrade 1996.
85 Documents 9, 10, 11, 12, 13; 7 for Zeuxis at A m y z o n .
86 Apollonia: document 44; Sardeis: 40.
G a u t h i e r has a r g u e d that this m e a s u r e (purely honorific, rather than
c o n c r e t e l y a d d r e s s e d to i m m i g r a n t s f r o m t h o s e cities) w a s d i r e c t e d
at t h e S e l e u k i d k i n g ' s F r i e n d s , m a n y o f w h o m c a m e f r o m t h e s e
c i t i e s , a n d s o m e o f w h o m h a d e a r l i e r s t a y e d in T e o s . 8 '
S o m e h o n o u r s p r o c l a i m e d distance b e t w e e n the city and the
r o y a l official i n s t a l l e d n e a r o r in it: t h e d i s p a t c h o f an e m b a s s y , t h e
i n s i s t e n c e o n p u b l i c i t y in the h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e , t h e s e are c h a r a c t e r i s -
tic f e a t u r e s o f t h e d e c r e e f o r the r o y a l o f f i c i a l , a n d d e s i g n a t e t h e
l a t t e r as an o u t s i d e r to t h e city. 8 8 L i k e w i s e , t h e title ευεργέτης, as a
f o r m a l title ( e q u i v a l e n t to r e g i s t r a t i o n in an official list o f a c i t y ' s
b e n e f a c t o r s ) , w h i c h t h e A m y z o n i a n s g a v e to r o y a l o f f i c i a l s , m i g h t
also c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e m as n o n - c i t i z e n s , s i n c e (as G a u t h i e r h a s
s h o w n ) t h e title w a s n e v e r f o r m a l l y g i v e n b y H e l l e n i s t i c c i t i e s to
t h e i r c i t i z e n s , b u t o n l y to f o r e i g n b e n e f a c t o r s ; 8 9 t h e title proxenos
g i v e n to s o m e o f f i c i a l s c e r t a i n l y h a s t h i s i m p l i c a t i o n ( S E G 2 9 . 1 2 1 6 ;
cf. SEG 3 4 . 1 2 5 6 ) . B u t m o s t l y , t h e local d i m e n s i o n o f t h e h o n o u r s
i n t e g r a t e d t h e i m p e r i a l o f f i c i a l into t h e c i t y : A m y z o n g r a n t e d
c i t i z e n s h i p to at least o n e S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l , M e n e s t r a t o s , t h e g o v e r -
n o r o f t h e A r t e m i s i o n , w i t h t h e r i g h t to o w n l a n d , to p a r t i c i p a t e in
f e s t i v a l s , a n d to h o l d o f f i c e ; A m y z o n also g r a n t e d h i m a d d i t i o n a l
p r i v i l e g e s , s u c h as a p o r t i o n o f p u b l i c s a c r i f i c e s , a literal s h a r e o f t h e
c o m m u n a l l i f e , a n d also an h o n o u r g r a n t e d to o t h e r , c i t i z e n , b e n e -
f a c t o r s : καθότι και τοις [άλλοι? ενεργεταις].90 T h e same privilege of
A m y z o n i a n c i t i z e n s h i p , w h e n g r a n t e d to N i k o m e d e s , p r o b a b l y a
financial o f f i c i a l w i t h a w i d e r area o f c o m p e t e n c e t h a n s i m p l y
A m y z o n , g a v e h i m r i g h t s a n d p r i v i l e g e s in all t h e C h r y s a o r i a n
cities: 9 1 p r a c t i c a l a d v a n t a g e s , l i n k e d to l o c a l i d e n t i t y .
H o n o u r s for royal officials socialized them, by reinscribing t h e m
i n t o t h e w o r l d o f the cities. I n r o y a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , i n d i v i d u a l s
are c a l l e d b y n a m e , w i t h n o p a t r o n y m i c o r e t h n i k o n , as a b s t r a c t
a n d i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e c o n v e y o r s o r e x e c u t o r s o f o r d e r s (J. a n d L .
R o b e r t 1983: 1 1 4 - 1 5 ) : this p r a c t i c e r e f l e c t s t h e p r a c t i c a l l a n g u a g e o f
e m p i r e , a n d the e m p i r e ' s a w a r e n e s s o f itself as an i d e a l l y r a t i o n a l
state, a u t o n o m o u s l y o r g a n i z e d ( C h . 3 §§ 2c—d). I n c o n t r a s t , t h e
A m y z o n i a n d e c r e e h o n o u r s M e n e s t r a t o s , s o n of A g a t h o k l e s , o f
87 D o c u m e n t i8, 90-104; Gauthier 1985: 169-75, developing Herrmann 1965a:
79-84. 39 lor a Friend from Seleukeia in Pieria, the doctor Apollophanes.
88 J. and L . Robert 1983: 194; documents 1 1 , 12.
85 D o c u m e n t 10, and J. and L . Robert 1983: no. 3, showing the title given to the

Ptolemaic governor of Karia, Margos; Gauthier 1985: 7-39: cities never formally titled
citizen benefactors as fvepyerai; 37, for the complicating fact that the A m y z o n i a n s may
have started doing so in the late third century.
90 D o c u m e n t 10, cf. 14 for similar honours given to a citizen benefactor.

91 D o c u m e n t 11. J. and L . Robert 1983: 223-5 o n f h e Chrysaorian League and its

institutions.
P h o k a i a : t h e S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l is g i v e n an i d e n t i t y in t h e n e t w o r k
o f poleis, as c i t i z e n a n d t h e s o n o f a c i t i z e n , an i n d i v i d u a l w h o
h a p p e n e d to h a v e b e e n a p p o i n t e d to a p o s i t i o n b y k i n g A n t i o c h o s ;
he w a s p r a i s e d in t e r m s c o n s o n a n t w i t h local m o r a l v a l u e s a n d local
i n t e r e s t s , f o r h i s καλοκαγαθία els πάντα τα τώι δήμωι συμφέροντα. B o t h
f e a t u r e s c a n b e p a r a l l e l e d in t h e A m y z o n i a n d e c r e e f o r C h i o n i s , the
g o v e r n o r o f A l i n d a , w h o s e p a t r o n y m i c a n d ethnikon w e r e n a m e d
b e f o r e h i s f u n c t i o n in t h e i m p e r i a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , a n d w h o w a s
p r a i s e d f o r h e l p i n g t h e c i t y w i t h [πά]ντα τα συμφέροντα [και καλώ?
β]χοντα.92 T h e r o y a l o f f i c i a l s c o u l d h a r d i ) ' r e f u s e t h e s e h o n o u r s ,
c o u c h e d in t e r m s o f m o r a l a p p r o v a l a n d g i v i n g t o k e n s o f r e s p e c t
( a n d also o f t h e v e r y s u b m i s s i o n a n d c o r d i a l c o n s e n t w h i c h t h e
e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n s o u g h t a m o n g its s u b j e c t s ) . T h e l o c a l i d e n t i t y
o f f e r e d b y t h e c i v i c d e c r e e s w a s m u c h p r e f e r a b l e to an a l t e r n a t i v e ,
c r i t i c a l , c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e r o y a l o f f i c i a l : t h e ' f l a t t e r e r ' , κάλαξ, o r
s e r v a n t o f the k i n g ( H e r m a n 1 9 8 0 / 1 ) . A s u i t a b l e m e t a p h o r f o r the
transaction c o m e s f r o m T h e a n g e l a , w h e r e the citizens presented a
r o y a l o f f i c i a l w i t h an h o n o r i f i c d e c r e e a n d t w o j a r s o f h o n e y ( R o b e r t
1936:90).
B u t t h e r o y a l o f f i c i a l s c o u l d n o t a c c e p t local h o n o u r s a n d local
i d e n t i t y w i t h o u t a s h a r e o f o b l i g a t i o n s ; t h e l a n g u a g e o f h o n o u r s cast
t h e m in t h e role o f b e n e f a c t o r s , e i t h e r b y s t a r t i n g t h e e u e r g e t i c a l
d i a l o g u e o r b y d e s c r i b i n g p a s t a c t i o n s in e u e r g e t i c a l t e r m s ; f o r
instance, administrative communication (probably) between
M e n e s t r a t o s a n d h i s c o l l e a g u e s w a s r e w r i t t e n b y t h e A m y z o n i a n s as
w r i t i n g to Z e u x i s , N i k o m e d e s , a n d C h i o n i s a b o u t t h e ewoia o f
A m y z o n t o w a r d s t h e k i n g s a n d t o w a r d s t h e m . 9 3 T h e a s c r i b e d role as
ε υ ε ρ γ έ τ η a l l o w e d t h e local c o m m u n i t y to a d d r e s s t h e r o y a l o f f i c i a l in
t h a t c a p a c i t y a n d m a k e d e m a n d s : e n v o y s to N i k o m e d e s r e q u e s t e d
h i m to d o g o o d to t h e d e m o s , ' s i n c e he is an euergetes', παρα-
καλέσουσιν δντα εύεργέτην πει I ράσθαι ÀEI TIVOS άγαθού παραίτιον γίνεσθαι
τώι δήμωι. T h e T e i a n g r a n t o f ( p o t e n t i a l ) c i t i z e n s h i p w a s i n t e n d e d
to m a k e the c i t i z e n s o f A n t i o c h , S e l e u k e i a , a n d L a o d i k e i a ( a n d , p r e -
s u m a b l y , the r o y a l F r i e n d s w h o fell in t h i s c a t e g o r y ) ' t h e r e a d i e r
t o w a r d s t h e b e n e f a c t i o n s , b e i n g z e a l o u s in all c i r c u m s t a n c e s , as is
a fine t h i n g f o r o n e ' s o w n f a t h e r l a n d ' , έτοιμότεροι 7r[pôs-] I τα?
eùepyeatas·, σπευδόντes διά παντός, καθά[π]ερ I [καλό]ν έστιν υπέρ TTJS
ι'δια? πατρίδος.94 E v e n if the m e a s u r e w a s s y m b o l i c a l , 9 5 a n d t h e

92 Documents 10, 9. J. and L. Robert 1983: no. 4 (Amyzon) and 4 A (Xanthos, repub-

lished SEG 33.1183), show Ptolemaic officials honoured for their καλοκαγαθία.
93 D o c u m e n t 10, 8 - 1 2 .
94 A m y z o n and Nikomedes: document II, 6 - 7 . T e o s : 18, 96-9.
95 However, in our surviving decree, the grant of citizenship to these cities is only a

possibility, to be proposed to the assembly in the following archairesiai: document 18,

c i t i z e n s o f t h e s e t h r e e c i t i e s d i d n o t all i n s t a n t l y b e c o m e ' d u a l
c i t i z e n s ' o f T e o s as w e l l as t h e i r o w n πατρίς, the g r a n t o f c i t i z e n s h i p
w o u l d p e r h a p s have g i v e n the T e i a n s a w a y of addressing S e l e u k i d
o f f i c i a l s w h o w e r e also c i t i z e n s o f t h e s e c i t i e s (as m a n y w e r e ) : as
m e m b e r s of c o m m u n i t i e s w i t h w h i c h T e o s had shared royal b e n e -
f a c t i o n s , a n d h e n c e as q u a s i - c i t i z e n s w i t h a s e n s e o f o b l i g a t i o n
towards Teos.
T h e c o n s e q u e n c e w a s to c o n v e r t t h e r o y a l official i n t o a l o c a l
euerget.es, e x e r c i s i n g p a t r o n a g e a n d r e c e i v i n g h o n o u r s f r o m a c i t y , in
a c o n s t a n t s p i r a l o f e x c h a n g e . T h i s m e c h a n i s m p r o b a b l y c a m e to
p l a y at A p o l l o n i a S a l b a k e , w h e r e a d e c r e e h o n o u r s a c a v a l r y
c o m m a n d e r ( h i p p a r c h ) , s t a t i o n e d t h e r e b y t h e S e l e u k i d state:
repeatedly and w i t h ultimate success, he d e f e n d e d the interests of
t h e c i t y b e f o r e the c e n t r a l a u t h o r i t i e s at S a r d e i s . T h e S e l e u k i d
h i p p a r c h w a s n o t a n a t i v e o f A p o l l o n i a , so t h a t t h e A p o l l o n i a n s m u s t
h a v e c r e a t e d t h e ties f o r h i m to d e c i d e to i n t e r c e d e w i t h t h e S e l e u k i d
state. T h e c i t y r e w a r d e d h i m w i t h local c i t i z e n s h i p w i t h e x e m p t i o n
f r o m c i v i c t a x e s , a n d y e a r l y r e p e a t e d p u b l i c h o n o u r s at a f e s t i v a l :
f r o n t s e a t i n g {prohedria) a n d c r o w n i n g w i t h a g o l d e n c r o w n . T h e s e
h o n o u r s f u r t h e r e d the r e l a t i o n , b y g i v i n g it a f o r m a l , i n s t i t u t i o n a l
s h a p e (the c i t i z e n s h i p g r a n t ) , a n d b y i n s e r t i n g t h e h i p p a r c h i n t o
civic ritual, w h e r e publicity, iteration, and material rewards c o m -
b i n e d to g i v e t h e e u e r g e t i c a l c o n t r a c t b e t w e e n local c o m m u n i t y a n d
Seleukid officer visibility (and hence a means for informal pressure
to k e e p c o m m i t m e n t s ) a n d c o n t i n u i t y . It w o u l d b e f a s c i n a t i n g to
k n o w m o r e a b o u t t h e case o f A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e a n d the (now-
n a m e l e s s ) S e l e u k i d h i p p a r c h : h o w t h e local h o n o u r s a f f e c t e d h i s
sense of identity, his relations w i t h his m e n , and his routine dealings
w i t h o t h e r S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l s ; w h a t o u t c o m e the ties b e t w e e n t h e c i t y
a n d t h e o f f i c e r h a d , e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r the e x t i n c t i o n o f t h e S e l e u k i d
d o m i n i o n in t h e area in 189 BC; h o w e x p e r i e n c e d , c y n i c a l , or c a l c u -
l a t i n g t h e A p o l l o n i a n s w e r e . 9 6 T h e q u e s t i o n s are u n a n s w e r a b l e , b u t
t h e y c o u l d b e a s k e d f o r m a n y m o r e cases; in t h i s s p e c i f i c i n s t a n c e ,
t h e y are r a i s e d s h a r p l y b y t h e a p p a r e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e
A p o l l o n i a n s in c o n v e r t i n g a S e l e u k i d c a v a l r y o f f i c e r into a local
benefactor.

A similar transaction, t h o u g h o n a m o r e a m b i t i o u s scale, m a y

h a v e h a p p e n e d in t h e c a s e o f T e o s , w h i c h m a n a g e d to h a v e its
r e q u e s t f o r asylia p r e s e n t e d b y a h i g h - r a n k i n g S e l e u k i d d i p l o m a t

100-4. C o n c e i v a b l y , the proposal regulated concrete details (it is also possible that the
proposal was rejected).
96 D o c u m e n t 44. T h e A m y z o n i a n s h o n o u r e d S e l e u k i d soldiers along with their
c o m m a n d e r , O p h e l a n d r o s : 13.
a n d o f f i c e r , M e n i p p o s , w h e n h e w e n t to R o m e in w i n t e r 194/3 B C as
part of the diplomatic confrontation b e t w e e n R o m e and A n t i o c h o s
I I I ( C h . 2 § 5). It is r e m a r k a b l e t h a t T e o s f o u n d m e a n s to c o n v i n c e
t h e S e l e u k i d d i p l o m a t to t r a n s a c t this p i e c e o f l o c a l b u s i n e s s a l o n g -
side the m u c h w e i g h t i e r m a t t e r o f the p r o t r a c t e d a n d i n c r e a s i n g l y
frustrating m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g b e t w e e n R o m e and A n t i o c h o s . 9 '
M e n i p p o s w a s a M a c e d o n i a n ( L i v . 3 6 . 1 1 . 6 ) : l i k e Z e u x i s (or, i n d e e d ,
the S e l e u k i d kings themselves), his p r i m a r y ethnic identity w a s not
l i n k e d to a polis b u t r a t h e r d e s c r i b e d as d e s c e n t f r o m , a n d m e m b e r -
ship of, the M a c e d o n i a n g r o u p ('ethno-class') spread out across and
d o m i n a n t in t h e e a s t e r n H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d s i n c e the t i m e of
A l e x a n d e r . M e n i p p o s thus cannot have been a p p r o a c h e d b y the
T e i a n s qua c i t i z e n o f t h e c i t i e s in t h e S e l e u k i s ; n o n e t h e l e s s , it is
l i k e l y t h a t t h e T e i a n s a p p r o a c h e d M e n i p p o s ( p e r h a p s w h i l e he w a s
s t a t i o n e d in t h e r e g i o n ) in t h e l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i c a l r e c i p r o c i t y , a
l a n g u a g e in w h i c h it w a s d i f f i c u l t to t u r n d o w n r e q u e s t s b e c a u s e
t h e y w e r e t i e d to h o n o u r s .
T h e process should not be m i n i m i z e d ( L a u n e y 1987: 642-3: 'dis-
t i n c t i o n s h o n o r i f i q u e s i l l u s o i r e s et en g é n é r a l p e u c o û t e u s e s ' ) : w e
s h o u l d b e a w a r e t h a t it r e p r e s e n t e d a s u b t l e m o d i f i c a t i o n in the
c o n d i t i o n s o f e m p i r e , a n d h e n c e g e n e r a l l y to t h e b a l a n c e o f p o w e r in
the relation, material and discursive, b e t w e e n the cities and the
Hellenistic ruler. T h e exercise of e m p i r e d e p e n d e d on the garrison
c o m m a n d e r s a n d t h e o f f i c i a l s i n s t a l l e d l o c a l l y ; to a c e r t a i n e x t e n t ,
t h e s e ivere t h e e m p i r e , in t h e m o s t c o n c r e t e s e n s e , b e c a u s e t h e y
enabled the crucial activities of control and of exaction, or carried
these activities out. F u r t h e r m o r e , they represented the principles
a n d t h e i d e o l o g y o n w h i c h the e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n w a s b a s e d : the
h i e r a r c h i c a l s y s t e m o f a state, s e p a r a t i o n o f p o w e r s , d i r e c t a c c o u n t -
a b i l i t y to t h e r u l e r , p a t r i m o n i a l e m p i r e , s t r o n g s t a t e - n e s s ; t h e p u b l i c
e n a c t m e n t of this ideology t h r o u g h the w o r k i n g of imperial institu-
t i o n s as p e r f o r m a n c e w a s itself an i m p o r t a n t t o o l o f i m p e r i a l p o w e r
( C h . 3 § 2d). B e c a u s e o f t h e i m p o r t a n t role o f S e l e u k i d o f f i c i a l s , a n d
b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e in c o n s t a n t c o n t a c t w i t h t h e r u l e d ( C h . 3 § 2 a ) ,
t h e w e a k e n i n g o f t h e i r ties w i t h t h e r u l i n g p o w e r , t h e i r ' e m b e d d i n g '
in local c o n t e x t s , p o s e d a s e r i o u s p r o b l e m : t h i s p r o c e s s h a s g e n e r a l l y
b e e n i d e n t i f i e d as a t h r e a t to t h e ' e m p i r e o f d o m i n a t i o n ' as a s o c i a l
f o r m a t i o n , a n d o f t e n c u l m i n a t e d in an e m p i r e ' s d i s s o l u t i o n ( M a n n
1986: 1 4 4 , 170—1, 5 3 5 - 6 ) . B y s o c i a l i z i n g t h e r o y a l o f f i c i a l s t h r o u g h
e u e r g e t i c a l i n t e r a c t i o n a n d role a s c r i p t i o n , t h e l o c a l c o m m u n i t i e s ,
c o n s c i o u s l y o r n o t , b u t at a n y rate a c t i v e l y , e n c o u r a g e d t h e p r o c e s s

97 D o c u m e n t 38. Even if the T e i a n mission was approved by Antiochos I I I , the

Roman letter attributes the initiative and the choice of M e n i p p o s to the Teians.
that m o s t w e a k e n e d the practical exercise of e m p i r e . T h e i r b e h a v -
i o u r t e n d e d t o w a r d s t h e d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o f t h e m e a n s of i m p e r i a l
p o w e r , and hence the g r o u n d i n g of the 'free-floating resources' on
w h i c h it d e p e n d e d : o f f i c e r s a n d f u n c t i o n a r i e s , i n d i v i d u a l s a d d r e s s e d
b y the king and b y their colleagues b y bare n a m e w i t h o u t
p a t r o n y m i c o r ethnikon, t h o u g h occasionally w i t h S e l e u k i d aulic
titles, o f f i c i a l s w h o o w e d t h e i r l o y a l t y to t h e k i n g a n d h e n c e l o o k e d
to a c e n t r e o f p o w e r , a n d w h o c o u l d be s h i f t e d a r o u n d at t h e o r d e r
o f t h e S e l e u k i d state. A t t h e i d e o l o g i c a l l e v e l , t h e s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f
r o y a l o f f i c i a l s t h r e a t e n e d t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n o f local h o r i z o n s a n d
r e l a t i o n s f u l l o f local m e a n i n g to p e r f o r m a n c e in a h i e r a r c h i z e d ,
a u t o n o m o u s , s e l f - a w a r e s y s t e m o f i m p e r i a l state p o w e r . A s t r i k i n g
e x a m p l e o f t h e e f f e c t o f t h i s p r o c e s s is the b e h a v i o u r , in t i m e s o f
crisis, of imperial garrisons, w h i c h chose locally m e a n i n g f u l solu-
t i o n s o v e r l o y a l t y to t h e f a r a w a y c e n t r e o f e m p i r e : in w i n t e r 1 9 0 / 1 8 9
BC, a f t e r the d e f e a t o f A n t i o c h o s I I I at M a g n e s i a , t h e c i t i z e n s o f
S a r d e i s a n d t h e g a r r i s o n in t h e a c r o p o l i s s e n t j o i n t a m b a s s a d o r s to
s u r r e n d e r to L . S c i p i o . 9 8 T h e i n t e g r a t i n g a n d s o c i a l i z i n g f o r c e o f
e u e r g e t i c a l i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n c i t y a n d official v i v i d l y i l l u s t r a t e s
h o w t h e l a n g u a g e o f e u e r g e t i s m , in a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n , i n f l u e n c e d
t h e r e a l i t y o f e m p i r e in an e f f e c t i v e a n d 'real' m a n n e r .

(d) Publicizing Norms and Expectations

I n a d d i t i o n to t h e t a r g e t i n g o f s p e c i f i c , n e a r b y , e m b o d i m e n t s o f
i m p e r i a l p o w e r , role a s s i g n m e n t b y the c i t i e s c o u l d p l a y a m o r e
diffuse function: p u b l i c i z i n g perceptions of the rulers and the n o r m s
t h e y s u p p o s e d l y a d h e r e d to. I n t h e a b s t r a c t , a c t i o n s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d
as p e r f o r m a n c e s b e f o r e t h e w o r l d ; t h e T e i a n s a n d t h e I a s i a n s
p r e s e n t e d A n t i o c h o s I I I as a c t i n g in a b e n e f i c e n t w a y t o w a r d s , o r
b e f o r e , 'all t h e G r e e k s ' (§ 1). T h e ' h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e s ' o f d e c r e e s f o r
k i n g s o r r o y a l o f f i c i a l s m a k e e x p l i c i t t h e d e s i r e to p u b l i c i z e t h e
e u e r g e t i c a l t r a n s a c t i o n . T h e T e i a n s , in e r e c t i n g a f o u n t a i n n a m e d
a f t e r L a o d i k e , i n t e n d e d t h a t 'that an e x a m p l e o f t h e g r a t i t u d e o f t h e
p e o p l e s h o u l d b e s e e n in a c e n t r a l l o c a t i o n b e f o r e all t h e f o r e i g n e r s
w h o c o m e to the c i t y , iva . . . τoîs εις τήμ πάλιν αφικνουμενοις τ ώ ν ξενα>ν
[παρά] I δείγμα πάσιν υπάρχον εμ μέσωι φαίνηται της ευχαριστίας το[ΰ

98 Liv. 37·44·7· Also FGrHist 160, col. II, lines 6 - 7 (inhabitants of Soloi and garrison
pursue common (pro-Ptolemaic) policy during T h i r d Syrian War). For a parallel, see
L e Roy Ladurie 1975: 35, 95: the châtelain at Montaillou, theoretically an official of
the C o u n t of Foix, obeys Montalionais notables. But it is difficult to evaluate the phe-
nomenon in the Hellenistic period, because w e do not know how long royal officials were
stationed in any community, before being transferred (in fact, we do not know if the
Seleukids regularly practised the transferral of adminstrative personnel at all).
δή] I μου." T h e m o n u m e n t w a s c o n c r e t e l y d e s i g n e d to p e r f o r m
c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e rest o f t h e w o r l d , i s s u i n g in a v i s u a l a n d
p e r m a n e n t f o r m its m e s s a g e a b o u t r o y a l b e n e f a c t i o n a n d c i v i c
g r a t i t u d e , f r o m its site o n t h e a g o r a , n e a r t h e h a r b o u r w h e r e m a n y
f o r e i g n e r s w o u l d first set f o o t in t h e city. 1 0 0 T h e m o n u m e n t w a s n o t
isolated, but the centre for religious rituals (next section), per-
f o r m e d p u b l i c l y ; likewise, these rituals h o n o u r i n g A n t i o c h o s I I I
s p o k e o p e n l y a n d r e p e a t e d l y o f h i s b e n e f a c t i o n s , p a s t o r f u t u r e , to
the city. A l l the inscribed civic decrees h o n o u r i n g A n t i o c h o s III or
h i s o f f i c i a l s ( i n d e e d , all i n s c r i b e d H e l l e n i s t i c c i v i c d e c r e e s h o n o u r -
ing a king or a royal official) ideally p e r f o r m e d the same function, b y
t h e i r n a t u r e as p u b l i c i n s c r i p t i o n : t h e y d i f f u s e d a local p e r c e p t i o n
a b o u t t h e H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g a n d p r o c l a i m e d t h e n o r m s g o v e r n i n g the
transaction b e t w e e n local c o m m u n i t y and ruler, b y presenting a
p e r m a n e n t v e r s i o n , e x p o s e d f o r a n y o n e to r e a d , f o r all t i m e s .
I n a d d i t i o n to b e i n g p u b l i c i z e d in the c i t i e s , in i n s c r i p t i o n s ,
m o n u m e n t s , o r r i t u a l s , f o r f o r e i g n e r s to see a n d talk a b o u t , i m a g e s
of a king's euergetical activity or character w e r e actively diffused b y
diplomatic contacts. T h e Antiocheian/Alabandan ambassador w h o
w e n t r o u n d G r e e c e a s k i n g f o r a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t o f asylia f o r the
c i t y , s p o k e b e f o r e t h e D e l p h i c A m p h i k t i o n s : ομοίως δε καί περί
βασιλεος I Άντιόχου τοΰ εύεργετα Άντιοχέων εύλογηκε ευχάριστων I
αντώι διότι ταν δημοκρατίαν καί ταν ειράναν {αν} τοις Άντιοχεϋσιν I δια-
φυλάσσει κατ ταν τών προγόνων ύφάγησιν, ' l i k e w i s e , he s p o k e w e l l
about king A n t i o c h o s , the benefactor of the A n t i o c h e i a n s , g i v i n g
t h a n k s to h i m , b e c a u s e he p r e s e r v e s t h e d e m o c r a c y a n d t h e p e a c e f o r
t h e A n t i o c h e i a n s , in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e e x a m p l e of h i s a n c e s t o r s ' .
A n t i o c h o s the euerget.es, h i s d e f e n c e o f p e a c e a n d l i b e r t y f o l l o w i n g
t h e a n c e s t r a l e x a m p l e , t h e c i t y ' s eucharistia: these notions were dis-
p l a y e d before the prestigious audience of a p a n - H e l l e n i c shrine.
T h e e m b a s s y d o e s n o t s e e m to h a v e m e n t i o n e d in a n y o t h e r w a y
t h a n an a l l u s i o n to t h e e x a m p l e o f S e l e u k i d a n c e s t o r s t h e f a c t t h a t
t h e c i t y in q u e s t i o n h a d b e e n (in s o m e w a y ) r e f o u n d e d b y A n t i o c h o s
I I , a n d c e r t a i n l y w a s r e n a m e d a f t e r h i m . O n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l , o r
p a n - H e l l e n i c , s c e n e , the c i t y s p o k e o f c i v i c , n o t d y n a s t i c i d e n t i t y ,
and cordial relations w i t h a benevolent king. T h e A m p h i k t i o n s
collaborated, by issuing a decree of their o w n echoing these themes,
a n d b y f u r t h e r d i f f u s i n g t h e m t h r o u g h e p i g r a p h i c p u b l i c a t i o n at
D e l p h i and large statues of A l a b a n d a / A n t i o c h e i a and A n t i o c h o s I I I ;
the king's statue m a y have been located a m o n g earlier statues of

99D o c u m e n t 18, 64-9.

Hamilton 1842: ii. 14-15 (recognizable 'open space' with monuments near the
100

south harbour); Béquignon and Laumonier 1925: 290.

S e l e u k i d rulers ( p r o b a b l y starting w i t h his father, S e l e u k o s I I ) , in
a g e s t u r e e c h o i n g the A n t i o c h e i a n / A l a b a n d a n a m b a s s a d o r ' s s p e e c h
in praise o f A n t i o c h o s ' a d h e r e n c e to ancestral e x a m p l e . 1 0 1 T h e
b e h a v i o u r of the A m p h i k t i o n s illustrates h o w the c o m m u n i t y of
cities c o u l d c o l l a b o r a t e to d i f f u s e a c c e p t a b l e i m a g e s of k i n g s h i p , and
the c o m m i t m e n t s of s p e c i f i c k i n g s .
' A l l the G r e e k s ' : the n o t i o n w a s not s i m p l y the h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n -
sion for g e n e r a l i z i n g l a n g u a g e , b u t also a v e r y real s p a c e of dense
a n d v i b r a n t i n t e r - c o m m u n a l interaction, as d o c u m e n t e d b y the
e p i g r a p h y of the cities i n v o l v e d ( A . G i o v a n n i n i in B u l l o c h et al.
1993: 2 6 5 - 8 6 ) . W i t h i n this w o r l d , local d e s c r i p t i o n s of the k i n g ' s
a c t i o n s and m o t i v a t i o n s c o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d , p e r c e i v e d , o r d i f f u s e d .
T h e s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t the k i n g ' s a c t i o n s and his c h a r a c t e r , the
i m p l i c i t m e s s a g e s of m o n u m e n t s and rituals, the p e r f o r m a n c e s
b e f o r e a p a n - H e l l e n i c a u d i e n c e : these w e r e not ' p e r f o r m a t i v e ' in the
strict, A u s t i n i a n sense of ' d o i n g t h i n g s w i t h w o r d s ' ( Ί declare y o u
f r e e ' ) , b u t n o n e t h e l e s s had a significant political f o r c e , qua p u b l i c
d e s c r i p t i o n s o f the rulers, c i r c u l a t e d and r e c e i v e d v e r y w i d e l y .
A u s t i n h i m s e l f , the initiator o f s p e e c h - a c t t h e o r y , o b s e r v e d that
s t a t e m e n t s (abstractly c o n s i d e r e d as n o n - p e r f o r m a t i v e , since p r e d i -
c a t e d o n t r u t h - v a l u e ) , w h e n c o n s i d e r e d as u t t e r a n c e s in the real
w o r l d , w e r e also p e r f o r m a t i v e , in that their e f f i c i e n c y d e p e n d e d o n
t h e i r r e l e v a n c e to a c o n t e x t , and in that t h e y had an e f f e c t o n t h e i r
recipients. 1 0 2 S o c i v i c s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t k i n g s , d i f f u s e d b y v a r i o u s
m e a n s , w e r e efficient in d e f i n i n g actors a n d b e h a v i o u r , p r o m o t i n g
the e u e r g e t i c a l d i s c o u r s e as the o r t h o d o x m e d i u m f o r i n t e r a c t i o n
b e t w e e n ruler and r u l e d , p u b l i c i z i n g m o r a l i z i n g n o r m s and c o m -
m i t m e n t s to these n o r m s , and h e n c e e n f o r c i n g b e h a v i o u r d e s i r e d b y
the local c o m m u n i t i e s . T h e c o l l a b o r a t i v e e f f o r t s of the s y s t e m of
cities in d i f f u s i n g d e s c r i p t i o n s and praise of rulers in the e u e r g e t i c a l
d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u t e d the latter into an a c c e p t e d political c u l t u r e , in
w h i c h the r u l e d c o u l d a c h i e v e a m e a s u r e of a g e n c y , since it a l l o w e d
the cities to c o n s t r a i n and m a n i p u l a t e the H e l l e n i s t i c k i n g s (as
a n a l y s e d in the t w o p r e v i o u s sections). A parallel (closely related
c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y and h i s t o r i c a l l y ) is the d e s c r i p t i o n of the R o m a n s as
' c o m m o n b e n e f a c t o r s ' b y the G r e e k cities of the s e c o n d and first
c e n t u r i e s : the title a c k n o w l e d g e s R o m a n u n i v e r s a l h e g e m o n y , b u t
o n certain t e r m s , as l o n g as p o w e r t o o k the p r e f e r r e d m a n i f e s t a t i o n

101 Speech: document 16, esp. 19-22. Statue, possibly among earlier Seleukid
portraits: I Iintzen-Bohlen 1992: 104-6, 140.
102 Pocock 1984, and generally the essays in Shapiro 1984, on the power of language

to define the world and shape political relations. Austin on statements: Austin 1975:
132-47·
of b e n e f a c t i o n . T h e practice e x p r e s s e d R o m a n p o w e r b u t also an
i d e o l o g y of e m p i r e and its acceptance b y the Greeks. 1 0 3 T a l k i n g
a b o u t rulers p l a y e d its part in the w i d e r p h e n o m e n o n of 'role assign-
m e n t ' , b y w h i c h the ruled trusted in the stereotypical language of
e u e r g e t i s m and its socializing and civilizing force 1 0 4 to constrain
rulers w i t h i n acceptable n o r m s , o n c e the n e t w o r k of cities had
d i f f u s e d the c o m m i t m e n t s of individual rulers and the n o r m s w h i c h
they (or their subjects) said they w o u l d f o l l o w .

3. Local Meanings and the Self-Identity of the Polis

T h e cities' statements, outside of direct interaction or the indirect

c o n s t r u c t i o n of a political w o r l d f a v o u r i n g euergetical interaction,
p l a y e d an i m p o r t a n t role w i t h i n the cities in m a k i n g local k n o w -
ledge: they defined the cities t h e m s e l v e s as well as the ruler. F o r a
city to a p p r o v e the k i n g ' s a'ipeais is an explicit description of the
king, b u t also an implicit description of the city, of its relation to the
king, and its right to f o r m u l a t e a p u b l i c j u d g e m e n t ; for Iasos to
praise A n t i o c h o s and L a o d i k e implies the right to do so. 105
A n a l o g o u s l y , an a c a d e m i c author m i g h t thank s o m e o n e , in his
a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s , for 'characteristically acute criticism': this act of
p u b l i c praise p r e s u m e s the a u t h o r ' s capacity, and establishes his
right, to p r o n o u n c e such j u d g e m e n t s . T h i s role is a local d i m e n s i o n
of civic discourse: statements about the self, for c o n s u m p t i o n b y the
p r o d u c e r s themselves. T h i s f u n c t i o n is not directly practical and
m a n i p u l a t i v e , as in the cases studied above; it is m u c h closer to the
civic statements about rulers, circulated internationally to achieve
relevance and impact. In fact, the p h e n o m e n o n I a m c o n s i d e r i n g
here c o n c e r n s the same sort of statements, and the same i m p a c t
w h i c h apparently constative statements can have on people and
t h i n g s — b u t b o t h in a local context. It is a w i d e s p r e a d and i m p o r t a n t
f u n c t i o n of civic discourse, and it is i m p o r t a n t because it represents
an act of local p o w e r .

103 p e r r a r y 130-2. Erskine 1994: the title passed f r o m the world of the indi-
vidual petition to the king, to that of diplomatic interaction b e t w e e n G r e e k city and
R o m e , and hence implied an asymmetrical relationship b e t w e e n the two latter parties.
104 I o w e the c o n c e p t to an u n p u b l i s h e d paper b y D . G a m b e t t a ; V e y n e 1976: 7 8 - 8 1 ,

on the reality of symbolical gestures. I have often heard J. D a v i s reflect that the ideal
type of the ' E n g l i s h g e n t l e m a n ' m u s t have been d e v e l o p e d and diffused b y Italian
c h a m b e r m a i d s and servants, to protect themselves against the real article, y o u n g 18th-
cent. u p p e r - c l a s s E n g l i s h m e n b e n t on e n j o y i n g their G r a n d T o u r .
105 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, II 4 - 5 , 1 4 - 1 5 .
(a) Talking about the Ruler

T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t place f o r s u c h statements is the series of m o t i -

v a t i n g clauses in the civic decrees. E v e n m o r e than the participial
clauses of the royal letter (§ 2a), the m o t i v a t i o n s are a statement of
truth: επειδή . . ., 'since P, then Q ' , f o r m a l l y e q u i v a l e n t to 'if Ρ — a n d
Ρ is the c a s e — t h e n Q ' . In the absence of local h i s t o r i o g r a p h y , of
w h i c h little has s u r v i v e d , the m o t i v a t i n g clauses s u p p l y the cities'
narratives: b y c o m p a r i n g these w i t h our o w n narratives, w e can try
to u n d e r s t a n d h o w the cities represented their p o w e r relation to the
empire.
T h e considerations of the first T e i a n decree for A n t i o c h o s and
L a o d i k e are fairly p r e s e r v e d , and narrate the k i n g ' s dealings w i t h
the city. T h e general context is first indicated: on the other side of
the T a u r u s , A n t i o c h o s w a s the source of m a n y f a v o u r s for the
T e i a n s ; he then w e n t to 'our region' (τovs καθ' ήμάς τόπους) and
'restored the affairs to an e x p e d i e n t state'. 1 0 6 If the date is c.203, the
b r o a d e r historical context w i l l have been A n t i o c h o s ' return f r o m his
impressive eastern e x p e d i t i o n ( C h . 2 § 2); b u t the only relevant facts,
in the local h o r i z o n s of the decree, are his b e n e f a c t i o n s to T e o s f r o m
an u n d e t e r m i n e d afar. W h e n the k i n g arrives in the region, the
decree describes his a c t i o n s — w h i c h w e w o u l d dearly like to k n o w
m o r e a b o u t — i n general t e r m s (he restored t h i n g s to an ' e x p e d i e n t '
state), and a m b i g u o u s l y : w a s the situation after A n t i o c h o s ' actions
' e x p e d i e n t ' (συμφέρουσαν) for the k i n g , for the city, for both? W h e n
the king stays in the city, the m o t i v a t i o n s for his b e h a v i o u r are
d e s c r i b e d in local terms, and as strictly oriented t o w a r d s T e o s : c o n -
cern for its plight, piety t o w a r d s the c i t y ' s great g o d D i o n y s o s , the
w i s h to receive titles of h o n o u r (benefactor, saviour) f r o m T e o s 1 0 7 —
possible e c h o e s of a royal speech in the T e i a n a s s e m b l y , b u t repeat-
ed in the civic narrative, w h e r e they n o w b e c o m e part of local
k n o w l e d g e a b o u t the ruler and his e s t e e m for the city. A n t i o c h o s
acts out of desire to do a f a v o u r to the city, θελων χαρίζεσθαι τώι
δήμωι: because this expression is part of a p r e - e x i s t i n g d i p l o m a t i c
l a n g u a g e , used b e t w e e n cities (above), it integrates A n t i o c h o s and
his m o t i v a t i o n s w i t h i n local intra-poliad cordiality. T h e k i n g ' s
actual entrance, w i t h troops and F r i e n d s , m a y have been a pageant
of royal m i g h t , of the sort so b e l o v e d b y the Hellenistic m o n a r c h s
and so flattering to their p o w e r ; the people may have gone out in
procession, o r g a n i z e d b y civic b o d i e s or age g r o u p s , dressed in
w h i t e and w e a r i n g c r o w n s , sacrificial v i c t i m s at the ready, to greet
A n t i o c h o s , in the c e r e m o n y of άπάντησις, w i t h its religious o v e r -

106 D o c u m e n t 17, 8 - n . 107 Ibid. 11-22.

tones; 1 0 8 the city p e r h a p s s u r r e n d e r e d ' f r e e l y , in a festive atmos-
p h e r e ' (J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 137). B u t these h y p o t h e s e s remain no
m o r e than s u g g e s t i o n s w h e n c o n f r o n t e d w i t h the sober narrative in
the decree itself, w h i c h tells us s i m p l y that 'the king stayed in the
city w i t h the F r i e n d s and the troops w i t h h i m , m a k i n g a very great
d e m o n s t r a t i o n of his p r e - e x i s t i n g t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s t o w a r d s all
men'. 1 0 9 A n t i o c h o s ' entrance is m e n t i o n e d m a t t e r - o f - f a c t l y , and the
e m p h a s i s is on his πίστιs, the k i n g ' s keeping his e n g a g e m e n t s to the
city, as an occasion to give a m o r a l i z i n g description of the king.
A p p r o v a l of the k i n g ' s m a r i s is a reversal of the royal l a n g u a g e ,
w h e r e kings c o m m e n d officials or s u b j e c t s for trustworthiness: the
local p e r s p e c t i v e s e s p o u s e d by the T e i a n decree allowed the T e i a n s
to appropriate the royal language of appraisal for their o w n uses, to
talk a b o u t royal b e h a v i o u r t o w a r d s the city, in a polis-centred
narrative. 1 1 0 T h e decree does not say explicitly that the city
s u r r e n d e r e d to A n t i o c h o s I I I , a fact w h i c h w e m u s t read b e t w e e n
the lines. It neglects any celebration of the king on his o w n terms; it
is v a g u e about the a c h i e v e m e n t of royal c a m p a i g n s , about the
takeover of T e o s , the k i n g ' s entrance in the city, or it describes these
events f r o m the point of view of local interests. A s e c o n d decree
spoke of 'the g o o d w i l l (ewota) of the king and his f r i e n d s for the
p e o p l e , and o u r e n t h u s i a s m (eVreWia) t o w a r d s the k i n g and his
f r i e n d s ' , as the situation w h i c h m o t i v a t e d the T e i a n s ' desire to grant
isopoliteia to the S e l e u k i d cities of n o r t h e r n Syria: 1 1 1 the relationship
b e t w e e n T e o s and the S e l e u k i d king (and his friends, a crucial
e l e m e n t in the S e l e u k i d state) is p o r t r a y e d as one of cordial
r e c i p r o c i t y , rather than a p o w e r relation. T h i s is the v e r s i o n w h i c h
the T e i a n decrees, and their epigraphical p u b l i c a t i o n , offered
(where w e w o u l d write h i g h political and administrative history): a
selective, polis-centred narrative.
T h e case of T e o s is h a r d l y u n i q u e . T h e m o t i v a t i o n s of the Iasian
decree on cult for L a o d i k e are i n c o m p l e t e ; it is still clear that, c o m -
pared w i t h the T e i a n decree, they are m o r e specific about the arrival
of A n t i o c h o s . V a l u a b l y , the Iasian d o c u m e n t c o m e s after the letter
of L a o d i k e , w h o g i v e s her o w n narrative of past relations b e t w e e n
A n t i o c h o s I I I and Iasos, and w e can contrast the t w o versions,
S e l e u k i d and local. L a o d i k e ' s letter m a r g i n a l i z e d the question
of r e c o n q u e s t and legal status, e v e n as it rested on the i d e o l o g y of
los Habicht 1970: 234; Robert 1987: 470-4, 523-4; cf. Brown 1992: 1 3 - 1 4 for the

parallel of the late-antique adventus.

109 D o c u m e n t 17, 22-5.
110 D o c u m e n t 4, 23—4 (restored in line 21), for royal courtier (cf. RC 44, line 2; also

Robert i960: 105-6 with 106 n. 1); for city, RC 63, line 8.
111 D o c u m e n t 18, lines 92-4.
c o n q u e s t - a n d - g r a n t and royal m o n o p o l y of status definition: these
w e r e less important than (even t h o u g h validated by) the m a i n fact of
royal generosity, restated and imitated b y L a o d i k e herself (§ 2a). In
contrast, the Iasian decree speaks of A n t i o c h o s ' p a n - H e l l e n i c
e u e r g e t i s m , as e x e m p l i f i e d in his striving to help the w e a k and to
free the enslaved; in the case of Iasos, he rescued the city f r o m
slavery (τήν 8ε ήμετεραν πόλιν πρότερό[ν] I [re] εγ δουλείας ρυσάμενος
εποίησεν ελενθεραν—not quite h o w L a o d i k e p o r t r a y s the situation);
A n t i o c h o s e x p e l l e d the g a r r i s o n i n g soldiers and m a d e the Iasians
masters of their city again (ήμάς κυρίους).η1 T h e Iasian decree b r i n g s
back the political aspects (subordinated to b e n e f a c t i o n in L a o d i k e ' s
letter) to the f o r e g r o u n d , e v e n if the decree m u s t have gone on to
c o m m e m o r a t e royal b e n e f a c t i o n s ; the Iasians e c h o e d the t h e m e of
royal solicitude and humanitarian c o n c e r n , but also chose to c o m -
m e m o r a t e , not a k i n g ' r e a c q u i r i n g ' a city and setting it free out of
c o m p a s s i o n , but a liberator, chasing a f o r e i g n garrison to m a k e the
city free again. F a c e d w i t h the e l e e m o s y n a r y c o n c e r n s of L a o d i k e ,
w h i c h carried royal b e n e f a c t i o n and s e n t i m e n t s deep into the polis,
and d r e w attention to, or s u m m o n e d , social divisions w i t h i n the city
b e t w e e n the poor citizens and the others, the Iasians in their
r e s p o n d i n g decree reasserted the existence of the polis as corporate,
political, a u t o n o m y - c e n t r e d , and essentially unitary o r g a n i s m . T h e
rephrasing of S e l e u k i d v i e w p o i n t into local narrative and polis val-
ues illustrates the vitality of civic i d e o l o g y , and the f u n c t i o n s of the
civic imagination: narrative on t e r m s acceptable to the polis.
A third e x a m p l e is p r o v i d e d b y the Ilian decree OGIS 2 1 9 , p r o b -
ably h o n o u r i n g A n t i o c h o s I (as I believe: A p p e n d i x 1). T h e c o n -
siderations (lines 2 - 1 6 ) echo royal i d e o l o g y : the king and his relation
to pragmata, a r m y , and F r i e n d s ; his patrimonial rights o v e r an
inherited e m p i r e ; his military p r o w e s s (αρετή), looked on w i t h
f a v o u r b y the g o d s (το 8αιμόνιον). N o n e t h e l e s s , the central trope in
this passage is the antithesis, repeated three times, b e t w e e n cities
and k i n g d o m : the king seeks to restore the cities of the S e l e u k i s to
peace and original happiness, and to 'reacquire his paternal e m p i r e ' ;
this d u l y (διό) h a p p e n s , w h e n the k i n g ' s 'fine and j u s t enterprise'
results in the restoration of the cities to peace, and the k i n g d o m to
its original situation; the king then g o e s to 'the region on this side of
the T a u r u s ' and b r i n g s peace to the cites, and increase to τα πράγ-
ματα καί τήν βασιλείαν. T h e k i n g ' s successes are celebrated w i t h i n a
c o n c e p t u a l g e o g r a p h y , insistently d e v e l o p e d , w h i c h distinguishes
b e t w e e n πόλεις and τα πράγματα/ή βασιλεία. C i t i e s are not part of the

1,2 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, I 9 - 1 8 .
k i n g ' s affairs, and have a different relationship to the king f r o m that
of the k i n g d o m : the latter is the k i n g ' s hereditary possession, w h i l e
the cities e n j o y the k i n g ' s care for their peace and their happiness.
T h e d e c r e e ' s m o t i v a t i n g clauses (considérants) are thus s t r u c t u r e d
around a tension b e t w e e n royal i d e o l o g y and civic w o r l d v i e w : they
e x p r e s s t h e m e s of royal i d e o l o g y , yet keep their distance f r o m this
i d e o l o g y , b y p r o m o t i n g a polis-centric c o n c e p t i o n ( w h i c h does not
c o r r e s p o n d to S e l e u k i d administrative g e o g r a p h y — t h e r e w e r e in
fact poleis w i t h i n the basileia: C h . 3 § 3). A n o t h e r w a y of maintain-
ing distance is the v a g u e n e s s and allusiveness of the narrative of
royal successes, c o m p a r a b l e to the narrative in the first T e i a n
decree. T h i s feature w o u l d be the m o r e remarkable if the decree
c o u l d be p r o v e n to date f r o m the time of A n t i o c h o s I I I (as some
argue): w h a t e v e r the exact date, b u t especially if dated to c. 197 BC,
the decree w o u l d give a bland and dramatically simplified version of
the e x p l o i t s p e r f o r m e d by A n t i o c h o s I I I since his accession, and
illustrate even m o r e strikingly h o w civic decrees p r o p o s e d narra-
tives f r o m a local v i e w p o i n t .
T h e local narratives in the civic decrees, w i t h their reticence
about celebrating the k i n g on an}' t e r m s b u t their o w n , contrast w i t h
other w a y s of representing royal p o w e r : for instance, the lavish
celebrations d e s c r i b e d b y C . G e e r t z f o r E l i z a b e t h a n E n g l a n d or
traditional I n d o n e s i a n k i n g s h i p , w h e r e s u b j e c t s collaborate w i t h
the rulers in p r o d u c i n g festive images ( G e e r t z 1993: 1 2 1 - 3 4 ) ; the
absolutist h i s t o r i o g r a p h y or the ' c e r e m o n i e s of i n f o r m a t i o n ' b r o a d -
casting the n e w s of royal victories (never defeats), in the France of
L o u i s X I V ; 1 1 3 or, w i t h i n o u r period, the portrayal of royal w e a l t h
and m i g h t g i v e n b y an e n v o y of A n t i o c h o s I I I before the A c h a i a n s ,
in 192 BC: the e m p i r e of d o m i n a t i o n materialized in its variegated
a r m y , c o n t a i n i n g D a h a i , M e d e s , E l y m a i a n s , K a d o u s i a n s , and in its
fleet m a n n e d b y S i d o n i a n s , T y r i a n s , A r a d i a n s , S i d e t a n s ( L i v .
35.48.4-6). A n t i o c h o s h i m s e l f spoke of his p o w e r in the same w a y
w h e n he w r o t e to the G r e e k cities in the preliminaries and the early
stages of the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r , a practice archly d e s c r i b e d b y
the elder C a t o : litteris calamento hello gerit, calamo et atramento
militât (ORF 8.20). T h e selective narratives of civic decrees m o v e d
in a different w o r l d , of their o w n m a k i n g : they v i e w e d the king f r o m
local perspectives; they a c k n o w l e d g e d his m i g h t , b u t related it to
polis interests; they restated civic i d e o l o g y : a sense of the dignity of
the local c o m m u n i t y , its a u t o n o m y or autarky, its existence outside
the k i n g ' s pragmata, its status as a g e n u i n e interlocutor of the king.
T o a certain extent, these features are self-fulfilling: the implicit
113 Marin 1978; Fogel 1989.
m e s s a g e a b o u t the i n d e p e n d e n c e , real o r s y m b o l i c a l , f r o m t h e k i n g -
d o m , is c o n f i r m e d b y the v e r y p r o d u c t i o n o f s u c h n a r r a t i v e s .

(b) Ruler Cult as Social Memory

I n a d d i t i o n to e x p l i c i t local n a r r a t i v e s a b o u t t h e k i n g , r i t u a l , a n d
e s p e c i a l l y t h e m e m o r i a l sites a n d g e s t u r e s c o n v e n t i o n a l l y c a l l e d
' r u l e r c u l t ' , also p e r f o r m e d an i m p o r t a n t local role in h e l p i n g c i t i e s
to talk a n d t h i n k a b o u t t h e r u l i n g p o w e r . A s h a s b e e n r e c o g n i z e d ,
r u l e r c u l t b e l o n g e d to t h e s y s t e m o f c i v i c τιμαί w h i c h r e s p o n d e d to
specific b e n e f a c t i o n s or services ( H a b i c h t 1970: 160-5, 206-13).
T h e s e also m a d e a s t a t e m e n t a b o u t the c i t y ' s r e l a t i o n to t h e k i n g , b y
r e c o g n i z i n g h i s s u p e r h u m a n q u a l i t i e s , h i s g o d l i k e p o w e r to s a v e t h e
c i t y ( H a b i c h t 1 9 7 0 : 1 7 0 - 1 , 2 3 0 - 6 ; G a u t h i e r 1985: 4 2 - 7 , 160). F o r S .
P r i c e , c u l t i c h o n o u r s a c t e d as a c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n , c l a s s i f y i n g t h e
p r o b l e m a t i c extra-poliad m i g h t of the king w i t h divine p o w e r ; a w a y
o f c o m i n g to t e r m s w i t h r o y a l p o w e r , o r m a k i n g s e n s e o f it, f r o m t h e
p o i n t o f v i e w o f t h e G r e e k c i t y a n d its t r a d i t i o n s ( P r i c e 1984: 2 5 - 4 0 ,
5 1 - 2 ) . T h e T e i a n s p r o c l a i m e d that A n t i o c h o s I I I had b r o u g h t t h e m
to h a p p i n e s s , ευδαιμονία: in r e s p o n s e , t h e y p u t c u l t i c i m a g e s o f h i m
a n d L a o d i k e in t h e t e m p l e of D i o n y s o s , t h e m a i n g o d o f t h e c i t y , to
s h a r e in the g o d ' s h o n o u r s , a n d to act as KOLV[OL σωτήρε]s a l o n g s i d e
t h e g o d , b r i n g i n g [τάγ]αθά to t h e c i t y ; a n o t h e r c u l t i c i m a g e , in t h e
bouleuterion, p r e s e n t e d an i m a g e o f t h e k i n g as p r o v i d e n c e , w h o s e
m e a s u r e s h a d m a d e w o r k a n d h a r v e s t safe: a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a c t i o n
( t a x - r e l i e f ! ) is d e s c r i b e d in t e r m s fitting f o r d i v i n e p o w e r . 1 1 4 T h e
I a s i a n s o f f e r e d p u b l i c s a c r i f i c e s to A n t i o c h o s I I I a n d h i s a n c e s t o r s
[ω? καί KOL] \ VOLS θεοΐς τψ πόλεως, '[as to c o m j m o n g o d s o f t h e c i t y ' . 1 1 5
C i v i c r u l e r c u l t is a local p h e n o m e n o n , to b e i n t e r p r e t e d f r o m t h e
p o i n t o f v i e w o f t h e local c o m m u n i t i e s ( H a b i c h t 1 9 7 0 ) ; t h i s is i l l u s -
trated b y a Prienian decree for L y s i m a c h o s treating ruler cult apart
f r o m (and hence after) diplomatic transactions w i t h the king ( O G I S
1 1 ) . H a b i c h t i n t e r p r e t e d the p h e n o m e n o n as local a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t
o f i n f e r i o r i t y and d e p e n d e n c y b e f o r e t h e g o d l i k e p o w e r o f t h e k i n g ;
t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m a y e x p l a i n the o r i g i n s o f c u l t i c h o n o u r s
( r e s p o n d i n g to, o r m a k i n g s e n s e o f , a p o w e r g r e a t e r t h a n the polis b y
s u b l i m a t i n g it into d i v i n e o r p r o v i d e n t i a l f o r m s ) , b u t t h e r e is r o o m
to e x p l o r e t h e r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f local m e a n i n g s . T h e s a m e a p p l i e s to
P r i c e ' s findings: the c u l t m a y b e a w a y o f c o m i n g to t e r m s w i t h t h e
p o w e r of the Hellenistic king, and m a k i n g sense of i t — b u t w h i c h
terms? and w h a t sense? H o w did this practice insulate civic identity
f r o m t h e s y m b o l i c a l v i o l e n c e o f t h e r o y a l state? T h e s e q u e s t i o n s c a n

114 Documents 17, 28, 50-2; 18, 50-3. 1,5 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, II 12-13.

b e a n s w e r e d , b y s t u d y i n g t h e d e t a i l s o f t h e c r e a t i o n o f r u l e r c u l t , the
' h o n o u r s w h i c h m a k e m e m o r y ' , a n d n o t j u s t the i m m e d i a t e χάρις o f
e u e r g e t i c a l i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e b e n e f a c t o r : μή μόνον χ[άριν] I εχονσαι
τήμ τταραυτίκα αλλά και μνήμην ποιούσα: τήν eis- το [ν α] I τταντα χρόνον.η 6
T h i s a p p r o a c h l e a d s to e x a m i n i n g t h e m a n i p u l a t i o n o f s o c i a l
m e m o r y a n d c i v i c i d e n t i t y , an a c t i v e p r o c e s s w h o s e c o n t e n t s a n d
f u n c t i o n s w e can study, t h r o u g h the w e l l - d o c u m e n t e d cases of T e o s
and Iasos.
O n e i n s t r u c t i v e case is t h e c r e a t i o n o f a n e w f e s t i v a l at T e o s , t h e
A n t i o c h e i a a n d L a o d i k e i a , a n d t h e w a y in w h i c h it w a s w o v e n i n t o
c i v i c l i f e . T h e f e s t i v a l t o o k p l a c e in L e u k a t h e o n , t h e first m o n t h of
t h e y e a r , a c e r e m o n i a l l y c h a r g e d m o m e n t in t h e ritual c a l e n d a r , w i t h
t h e i n a u g u r a t i o n o f n e w m a g i s t r a t e s , t h e ' g r a d u a t i o n ' to c i t i z e n
status of the ephebes, and the L e u k a t h e a , a festival of the civic
s u b d i v i s i o n s k n o w n as t h e summoriai. It w a s into t h i s c i v i c t i m e
t h a t the A n t i o c h e i a a n d L a o d i k e i a w e r e i n t r o d u c e d . 1 1 7 T h e f e s t i v a l
m o b i l i z e d all l e v e l s o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n : t h e m a g i s t r a t e s ( a n d t h e i r
g u e s t s , t h e D i o n y s i a c a r t i s t s i n s t a l l e d in T e o s ) h e l d an o f f i c i a l f e a s t ;
t h e c i t i z e n s s a c r i f i c e d b y summoriai, a n d t h e f o r e i g n e r s in t h e c i t y
p e r f o r m e d p r i v a t e s a c r i f i c e s in t h e i r h o u s e s ; t h e f e s t i v a l r e a s s e r t e d
the b o u n d a r i e s w i t h i n the citizen b o d y and b e t w e e n citizens
a n d o t h e r s , e v e n as it a f f i r m e d t h e polis as a p h y s i c a l p l a c e a n d a
p o p u l a t i o n i n t e g r a l l y a f f e c t e d b y the p r e s c r i b e d h o l i d a y a n d c o u r t
v a c a t i o n . 1 1 8 T h e r i t u a l s p e r f o r m e d b y t h e summoriai w e r e p a t t e r n e d
o n t h e L e u k a t h e a , w i t h a s u b s i d y f r o m t h e c e n t r a l finances of the
polis, a n d s u p e r v i s i o n b y a p r i e s t o f t h e c i t y (the p r i e s t o f P o s e i d o n
f o r the L e u k a t h e a , the p r i e s t o f A n t i o c h o s f o r t h e A n t i o c h e i a a n d
L a o d i k e i a ) ; t h e y i n v o l v e d o f f e r i n g s o n an altar w h i c h e a c h summoria
b u i l t o n its p r o p e r t y , n e x t to its altar (παρά [τον βωμον της σνμορίας]):
the j u x t a p o s i t i o n of altars illustrates h o w r e p r o d u c t i o n of existing
ritual a l l o w e d t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f r u l e r c u l t w i t h i n e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s .
T h e n e w f e s t i v a l i n t r o d u c e d r u l e r c u l t at t h e l e v e l o f local a s s o c i a -
t i v e life b e l o w the l e v e l o f t h e polis, y e t a l w a y s a w a r e o f b e l o n g i n g to
it ( t h r o u g h c e n t r a l f u n d i n g a n d c e n t r a l r e l i g i o u s s u p e r v i s i o n ) . T h e
c i v i c s u b - u n i t s , b y t h e i r v e r y n a m e s , m a y h a v e s e r v e d as r e m i n d e r s

116 Distinction in document 18, 65-7 ('(honours) which not only have gratitude in the

immediate present, but which also make memory for all times').
117 Leukatheon: document 18, 21, implies that the festival took place in this month,

since the deadline for financial applications to the city tamias was Leukatheon 4.
Ceremonial month: ibid., 37—8, 39. Leukathea and summoriai: Çahin 1985 for evidence.
118 D o c u m e n t 18, 3-28. T h e holiday, as moment of ritual celebration or simply of

general pause from daily labours, and more abstractly as a time for memory and self-
aware communion, must count among the mechanisms which define the 'imagined
community' (Anderson 1991).
o f t h e c i t y ' s m y t h i c a l h i s t o r y , a n d h e n c e a c t e d as i m p o r t a n t loci f o r
c i v i c i d e n t i t y . 1 1 9 T h e n e w f e s t i v a l f o r A n t i o c h o s and L a o d i k e w a s
i n s c r i b e d in t h e ' h o l y b o o k ' o f t h e c i t y , b o t h l i t e r a l l y , as a n e w e n t r y
in t h e o f f i c i a l c a l e n d a r (άναγ[ράψαι] I [Sè τ]αντην τήν εορτήν els τήν
ίεράν βύβλον), b u t also, m o r e g e n e r a l l y , as i n s c r i p t i o n w i t h i n t h e c o n -
stituent structures of civic identity.
T h e o t h e r p h e n o m e n o n d o c u m e n t e d at T e o s is the c r e a t i o n o f
n e w c e n t r e s f o r c i v i c life, i n t e n d e d as m e m o r i a l acts o f h o m a g e to
the benefactions and the character of A n t i o c h o s and L a o d i k e . T h e
T e i a n s c r e a t e d a n e w site f o r r u l e r c u l t , t h e bouleuterion adorned
w i t h a s a c r e d s t a t u e ( ά γ α λ μ α ) o f A n t i o c h o s , as a m e m o r i a l o f h i s
b e n e f a c t i o n s , ' s o m e o f w h i c h he r e a l i z e d , s o m e he p r o m i s e d a n d
s u b s e q u e n t l y r e a l i z e d ' : w h a t h a d b e e n a c o n s t r a i n i n g f o r m u l a in
d i r e c t a d d r e s s to t h e r u l e r (§ 2b) h a s n o w t u r n e d into c e l e b r a t i o n . 1 2 0
T h e i n t e n t i o n w a s 'to c o n s e c r a t e to K i n g A n t i o c h o s t h e G r e a t ' t h e
p l a c e w h e r e t h e s e e v e n t s h a p p e n e d , t h e bouleuterion as v e n u e f o r h i s
s p e e c h b e f o r e t h e a s s e m b l e d ekklesia:{2x t h e c o n s e c r a t i o n itself is a
c u l t i c h o m a g e to A n t i o c h o s as r e c i p i e n t o f d i v i n e h o n o u r s , a n d
e c h o e s h i s b e n e f a c t i o n , the c o n s e c r a t i o n o f t h e c i t y a n d t e r r i t o r y o f
t h e T e i a n s as asylos. I n f r o n t o f t h i s s t a t u e , o n L e u k a t h e o n 1, t h e
p r i n c i p a l m a g i s t r a t e s (strategoi, timouchoi, tamiai) s a c r i f i c e d o n t h e
c o m m o n h e a r t h o f t h e c i t y , to t h e k i n g , t h e Charités, and Mneme,
the euergetical values of reciprocal gratitude and m e m o r y . 1 2 2 O n the
s a m e d a y , the e p h e b e s , u p o n g r a d u a t i o n into a d u l t s t a t u s , w e r e l e d
b y t h e g y m n a s i a r c h i n t o t h e a g o r a f o r t h e first t i m e , a n d o f f e r e d t h e
s a m e s a c r i f i c e ; t h e i n t e n t i o n w a s d i d a c t i c , s h o w i n g the c i t i z e n s - t o -
be that gratitude t o w a r d s b e n e f a c t o r s w a s the m o s t i m p o r t a n t part
o f p o l i t i c a l l i f e , τα κοινά:123

ίνα μηθεν πρότερον άρξοινται πράσσειν τών κοινών πριν ή χάρ[ι]~

[ra]s a7roS[o]wai τοις ευεργεταις και εθίζωμεν τους εξ ήαυτών πά\ν\-
[τα] υστέρα και εν ελλάσσοντι τίθεσθαι προς άποκατάστασιν χάριτος

119 Rogers 1991. f ° r Roman Ephesos. T h e only attested summoriai are the Έχίνον

συμμορία (Çahin 1985), presumably named after a local hero, and ή Δατύλου συμμορία,
attested on a Teian gravestone recording honours paid to the deceased by various
bodies. ( T h e form Δα τύλου was suggested by Wilhelm for Άλτύλου, proposed by H.
Hauvette-Besnault and E. Pottier, the editors: the stone bears traces rendered as
ΑΛΤΥΛΟΥ; Datylos might be the same as an Athenian hero Datylos/Datyllos, first
identified by Wilhelm in IG ι3 383, line 76; for references, see J. and L. Robert, OMS
vii. 310 n. 58).
120 Document 18, 29-63.
121 Document 17, 17. T h e bouleuterion (perhaps the 'small theatre' which can still be

seen on the site) could presumably have held many, or all, of the Teian citizen body (on
the 'small theatre' or odeion at Teos, Béquignon and Laumonier 1925: 288-9).
122 Document 18, 33-8.
123 Ibid. 38-44.
so that they do not start to undertake anything concerning the community
before returning gratitude to the benefactors and so that we should
accustom our progeny to value everything less than the returning of
gratitude.

T e i a n athletes, v i c t o r i o u s in the prestigious pan-Hellenic

' c r o w n e d ' contests w e r e n o w to c r o w n the k i n g ' s agalma ( p r e s u m -
ably w i t h the very w r e a t h they had w o n ) and offer the same sacrifice
to king, Charités, and Mneme on the c o m m o n hearth, their first act
on their eiselastic entrance into the city. 1 2 4 T h e traditional gestures
of the city's finest, v i c t o r i o u s in contests abroad, are n o w r e c o n -
figured as tribute to the king, the path of their m o v e m e n t in the city
rechanelled to the new centre. T h e message is p e r h a p s that the
k i n g ' s p o w e r to benefit the city is superior to the s y m b o l i c a l a d v a n -
tages athletic v i c t o r y b r o u g h t to the city, or that the athletic contests
are less i m p o r t a n t than the contest to gain a city's gratitude t h r o u g h
e u e r g e t i s m (on this notion, G a u t h i e r 1985: 11—12, 129—30).
T h e bouleuterion w a s already an i m p o r t a n t location on the m a p of
civic life, since it was the m e e t i n g place of the council, and p r o b a b l y
of the a s s e m b l y , and also served as the spot w h e r e p u b l i c lists and
decisions w e r e t e m p o r a r i l y p u b l i s h e d on w h i t e n e d b o a r d s , t h u s
m a k i n g it a centre for p u b l i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the polis as
state and the citizens; 1 2 5 m a r k e d as a m e m o r i a l site, it n o w b e c a m e
the centre to w h i c h civic ritual a c c o m p a n y i n g cardinal m o m e n t s w a s
s h i f t e d 1 2 6 — t h e u n c e r t a i n m o m e n t w h e n the magistracies w e r e
r e n e w e d ; the rite de passage b y w h i c h the city a d m i t t e d n e w
m e m b e r s ; the t r i u m p h a l entrance of the v i c t o r i o u s a t h l e t e s — t o pay
h o m a g e to the agalma and the sacrifice to king, Charités, and
Mneme. C i v i c life w a s r e c o n f i g u r e d around a particular image: K i n g
A n t i o c h o s the G r e a t , w h o s e b e n e f a c t i o n s had b r o u g h t prosperity.
T h i s image was m a d e concrete b y the cult statue, to w h i c h first
fruits of 'the crops w h i c h g r o w on trees' w e r e o f f e r e d , and w h i c h
stood c r o w n e d with a w r e a t h w h i c h w a s c h a n g e d as the seasons w e n t
by: 1 2 7 a s y m b o l of the providential nature of the k i n g , and the p e r -
m a n e n c e of the c i t y ' s gratitude, m a n i f e s t e d b y r e c u r r i n g patterns of
c h a n g e centred around the e n d u r i n g , m o n u m e n t a l statue.
T h e T e i a n s h o n o u r e d L a o d i k e w i t h an e p o n y m o u s fountain, 1 2 8

124 D o c u m e n t 18, 46-50. On eiselastic entrances and customary sacrifices, J. and L.

Robert 1989: 21-2; there is an instance in document 16, 3 1 - 2 (Pausimachos will 'intro-
duce' into Antiocheia/Alabanda the crown he won at the Soteria).
125 T e m p o r a r y publications: see the inscription relative to the absorption of K y r b i s s o s

by T e o s , published by J. and L . Robert, and reprinted in OMS vii. 299, lines 1 7 - 1 8 .

126 'Umgestaltet', Herrmann 1965a: 68.

127 D o c u m e n t 18, 50-9.

128 Ibid. 64-90.
w h i c h c a n b e a n a l y s e d in the s a m e t e r m s as t h e n e x u s o f r i t u a l s
a r o u n d the bouleuterion. T h e f o u n t a i n h a d the s a m e m e m o r i a l f u n c -
t i o n , e s t a b l i s h e d a m o n u m e n t o f T e i a n eucharistia in t h e m i d d l e o f
t h e p u b l i c s p a c e o f the c i t y , εμ μέσωι, a n d p a i d h o m a g e to h e r p i e t y .
A r o u n d this n e w c e n t r e , the T e i a n s r e a r r a n g e d p u b l i c r e l i g i o n —
p r i e s t s a n d p r i e s t e s s e s d r e w w a t e r f r o m t h e f o u n t a i n to use in p u b l i c
s a c r i f i c e s προ πόλεων—and p r i v a t e ritual: j u s t as i m p o r t a n t m o m e n t s
o f c i v i c l i f e w e r e r e l o c a t e d at t h e s t a t u e o f A n t i o c h o s , t h e c a r d i n a l
e v e n t s o f d e a t h a n d m a r r i a g e in T e o s w o u l d n o w r e q u i r e t h e f e t c h -
i n g of w a t e r f r o m t h e f o u n t a i n o f L a o d i k e , f o r use in the p r e s c r i b e d
a b l u t i o n s , t h u s i n t e g r a t i n g t h e p r e s e n c e o f r u l e r c u l t a n d its
m e s s a g e s into p r i v a t e l i f e . T h e f o u n t a i n a n d t h e c e r e m o n i e s , p u b l i c
a n d p r i v a t e , w e r e m a r k e d as s a c r e d b y r e l i g i o u s d r e s s w o r n w h e n
d r a w i n g water (white clothes, c r o w n s , and, for the bridal bath, some
v e s t i m e n t a r y o r ritual f e a t u r e d e s c r i b e d in a l a c u n a o f t h e t e x t ) .
T h e p r o c e s s e s at T e o s find c l o s e p a r a l l e l s at I a s o s . B e f o r e the altar
o f A n t i o c h o s I I I , t h e strategoi p a s s e d t h e k e y s o f t h e c i t y to t h e i r s u c -
c e s s o r s , w h o t h e n o f f e r e d s a c r i f i c e , o n t h e altar, to t h e k i n g a n d h i s
a n c e s t o r s , '[as to c o m j m o n g o d s o f t h e c i t y ' : 1 2 9 a p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e
i n a u g u r a t i o n o f n e w m a g i s t r a t e s at T e o s ; in b o t h c a s e s , t h e d e l i c a t e
m o m e n t in the l i f e o f t h e c i t y is p u t u n d e r t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f the k i n g
a n d a m o n u m e n t w h i c h m a k e s h i m v i s i b l e (a s t a t u e at T e o s , an altar
at I a s o s ) . T h i s p i e c e o f c e r e m o n y o c c u r s in a d e c r e e m o s t l y d e v o t e d
to h o n o u r s f o r L a o d i k e : it m u s t b e an a d d i t i o n to a n e x u s o f r i t u a l s
d e c r e e d e a r l i e r a n d c e n t r e d a r o u n d t h e altar o f A n t i o c h o s ( a l r e a d y in
e x i s t e n c e w h e n t h e c e r e m o n y o f t h e k e y s w a s d e v i s e d ) : if w e k n e w
about these, w e w o u l d p r o b a b l y notice m a n y points of contact with
p r a c t i c e s at T e o s . It is also l i k e l y t h a t t h e t r a n s f e r r a l o f t h e k e y s h a d
b e e n a p r e - e x i s t i n g c i v i c c e r e m o n y , n o w c a p p e d w i t h a s a c r i f i c e to
t h e k i n g , its c i v i c m e a n i n g s o v e r l a i d w i t h the f u n c t i o n s o f r u l e r c u l t
f o r A n t i o c h o s I I I . 1 3 0 A l s o p a r a l l e l is t h e sense o f m e t a p h o r : t h e k e y s ,
a s y m b o l a n d an i n s t r u m e n t o f the s t a t e ' s s e c u r i t y , are p a s s e d b e f o r e
t h e altar o f the k i n g w h o h a s p r o v e d t h e φύλαξ o f t h e c i t y : t h e title is
u n u s u a l , a n d w a s d e v i s e d b y t h e I a s i a n s , to a r t i c u l a t e the m e t a p h o r
in the ritual. 1 3 1 L i k e w i s e , t h e I a s i a n s i n s t i t u t e d a c u l t o f L a o d i k e as
A p h r o d i t e L a o d i k e , w h i c h presided over marriage: the cult involved
sacrifices by n e w l y married couples and processions of w o m e n of
m a r r y i n g age. It c o m m e m o r a t e d L a o d i k e ' s b e n e f a c t i o n a p p r o p r i -
a t e l y ( t h e q u e e n p r o v i d e d d o w r i e s f o r p o o r c i t i z e n w o m e n ) a n d also
e x t e n d e d r u l e r c u l t into p r i v a t e l i f e , j u s t as t h e f o u n t a i n o f L a o d i k e

125 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, II 6-14
150 Parallel: document 30, 5, for the practice as purely civic ceremony at Euromos.
1!1 D o c u m e n t 26 Β, II 6.
d i d at T e o s . F i n a l l y , t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f r u l e r c u l t into c i v i c s u b -
d i v i s i o n s a p p e a r s in t h e d e c r e e o f an I a s i a n phyle, honouring
A n t i o c h o s a n d h i s f a m i l y ; t h e I a s i a n phyle m a y also h a v e b u i l t an
altar to the k i n g . 1 3 2 R u l e r c u l t at T e o s a n d I a s o s , t h o u g h r i c h l y d o c u -
m e n t e d , fits i n t o w e l l - k n o w n a n d s t u d i e d p a t t e r n s , a n d an e x t e n s i v e
c o m m e n t a r y could be easily p r o v i d e d b y d r a w i n g on m a n y parallels
w h i c h can be f o u n d t h r o u g h o u t the Hellenistic w o r l d — for the
i n v o l v e m e n t o f e p h e b e s ; t h e g r a f t i n g of r u l e r c u l t o n t o p r e - e x i s t i n g
f o r m s ( f o r i n s t a n c e , at A t h e n s , i m a g e s o f A n t i g o n o s M o n o p h t h a l m o s
a n d D e m e t r i o s P o l i o r k e t e s w o v e n into A t h e n a ' s peplos)·, t h e c o n -
s e c r a t i o n o f m e m o r i a l sites ( s u c h as t h e p l a c e w h e r e D e m e t r i o s
P o l i o r k e t e s set f o o t in A t h e n s in 304); c u l t i c p r a c t i c e at t h e l e v e l o f
c i v i c s u b d i v i s i o n s ( f o r i n s t a n c e the i m i t a t i o n in the d e m e o f
R h a m n o u s of t h e A t h e n i a n c u l t f o r A n t i g o n o s G o n a t a s ) , o f t e n w i t h
f u n d i n g f r o m t h e c i t y ; a n d the e x t e n s i o n to t h e p r i v a t e s p h e r e . 1 3 3
T h e s e p a r a l l e l s e n s u r e t h a t the case of T e o s is n o t u n i q u e . I t s
i m p o r t a n c e lies in t h e r i c h n e s s a n d t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f d e t a i l s .
R o b e r t , in t h e o u t l i n e o f an u n p u b l i s h e d a r t i c l e o n ' n o u v e a u x c u l t e s
de T é o s ' , e m p h a s i z e d t h e e l e g a n c e w i t h w h i c h r u l e r c u l t w a s i n t e -
g r a t e d into p r e - e x i s t i n g r e l i g i o n a n d c i v i c c e r e m o n y , a n d h e n c e its
connection w i t h local institutions of great vitality.134 T h e creative-
ness and s m o o t h n e s s of the process should not o b s c u r e h o w
deliberately and c o m p r e h e n s i v e l y i m p o r t a n t constituents of social
l i f e w e r e r e o r g a n i z e d a r o u n d n e w c e n t r e s , to ' c r e a t e m e m o r y ' . B y
a c o n s c i o u s , o p e n , p o l i t i c a l , p r o c e s s ( d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g in the
a s s e m b l y ) , the T e i a n s c o n s t r u c t e d and m a n i p u l a t e d social m e m o r y ,
at all l e v e l s of p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e l i f e — i n c i v i c c e r e m o n i a l s s u c h as
t h e m a g i s t r a t e s ' passation de pouvoirs o r t h e g r a d u a t i o n o f e p h e b e s ;
in p r i v a t e g e s t u r e s s u c h as t h e w a s h i n g o f a c o r p s e o r t h e b a t h i n g o f
a bride. T h e process demonstrates h o w a rational, historically-
m i n d e d s o c i e t y c a n c o n s c i o u s l y m o b i l i z e s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s (in the
p r e s e n t c a s e , t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s o f t h e polis) to c r e a t e a n d m a n i p u l a t e

132 D o c u m e n t s 26 Β, II 1 7 - 4 4 and frag.; 27.

133 Ephebes: Inschr. Delphinion 139 (ephebic oath); I. Ilion 31; ruler cult in the g y m -
nasion is attested at Soloi under Antiochos III (document 20), and was widespread:
Robert i960: 124-55 with further references; Habicht 1970: 143-4; Robert 1987: 291
and n. 66. Demetrios: Habicht 1970: 44-5, 48-50 (on Diod. 20.46.2, Plut. Dem 10.5 and
Mor. 338a). Festivals grafted onto, or imitated from, pre-existing festivals: Habicht
1970: 50-5 (Demetria and Dionysia, Athens), 76-8 (Demetria and Dionysia, Euboia),
85-7 (Dionysia and Seleukeia, Erythrai), 149 (Seleukeia as extension of Panathenaia,
Ilion). Subdivisions: SEG 41.75 (Rhamnous); Habicht 1970: 152, on I. Ilion 31, which
also shows central funding for tribal cult; this practice is further documented in OGIS
i l , lines 24-6. Private elements: Robert, OMS vii. 599-636.
134 BE 69, 496, announcing a new document from T e o s relevant to the question; also

Price 1984: 37-9 (against the conventional (or obsolete) thesis of decline in traditional
religion in conjunction with the rise of ruler cult).
pervasive, living memories of the past, for a political purpose. T h e
consequence of this finding is that it allows us to examine the
political functions and the effect of social m e m o r y as deliberately
reconstructed in reaction to the coming of A n t i o c h o s III. 1 3 5
T h e analysis and laying out of the workings of social m e m o r y
thus leads us back to the question of its function. T h e memorial
sites and rituals of 'ruler cult', within the c o m m u n i t y , confronted
and processed a large, extra-poliadic, threatening event: the
campaigns of (re)conquest waged by A n t i o c h o s I I I , as they worked
themselves out in local contexts. T h i s event was fast consigned to
μνήμη, by the almost immediate creation of commemorative
ritual. 136 Ruler cult worked as 'instant m e m o r y ' : it created m e m o r y
and hence meaning out of the confused present; the T e i a n s (and,
likewise, the Iasians) made sense of a potentially traumatic occur-
rence (armed takeover by the Seleukid empire, alarmingly resurgent
under A n t i o c h o s I I I ) by classifying it into the past and choosing
how to remember it. T h e memories w o u l d be not be those of con-
quest, violence, submission by local communities w h i c h had no
choice, but acceptable ones, consonant with civic pride, its sense of
worth, its sense of participation in a process of exchange: memories
of euergetical χάρις, the king's benefactions, motivated by concern
for the T e i a n s ' plight and resulting in the city's happiness, the city's
desire to reciprocate by honours (which themselves, through repeti-
tion, w o u l d become memorials). T h i s is the message carried deep
into civic structures, by a new festival, and by the reconfiguration of
public ceremonial and private ritual around new centres. T h e
process was a speedy one: the T e i a n and the Iasian decrees docu-
ment the creation of 'instant m e m o r y ' soon after the Seleukid
takeover; at X a n t h o s , a priest of the kings, A n t i o c h o s I I I and
A n t i o c h o s the son, is in office in 196 BC, the year following
A n t i o c h o s ' campaign in the region. 1 3 7

135 See Loraux 1997, for the world of the polis presented as a timeless, anthropologi-

cal world, where 'everything happens in the present tense', and for the deliberately
depoliticizing force of this way (both ancient and modern) of conceiving the polis. T h e
thoughts presented here owe much to Rogers 1991, notably at p. 139, on the rational,
systematic character of the creation of civic ritual in Roman Ephesos by Vibius
Salu taris.
T h e second T e i a n decree, document 18, cannot come much later than Seleukid
takeover; the same applies for the Iasian decree 26 B, which is not the first decree in
honour of Antiochos and Laodike.
137 Xanthos: document 23. A t A m y z o n , a local priest of Antiochos III and Antiochos

the son is not attested in document 9 (autumn 202), but appears in document 10, in
late 201, two and a half years after the Seleukid takeover, which took place in M a y 203
(document 5). However, document 10 only shows when the A m y z o n i a n s started to date
their civic documents by the priest of the kings, not when they created the priesthood:
this could have taken place earlier.
 T h e manipulation of social m e m o r y — s w i f t l y cast into m o n u -
ments, iterated in public and private rituals to mobilize civic sub-
divisions and human groupings, and proclaimed by inscriptions in
visible spots of the c i t y — w o u l d ensure the u n i f o r m i t y of remem-
brance and impose consensus. T h e creation and perpetuation of an
agreed-on version of the recent past could help to reinstate social
harmony and polis coherence after the potentially divisive adhesion
to a new power: it is likely that certain T e i a n s had supported the
Attalids, or that some Iasians had favoured the A n t i g o n i d s (just as
the Seleukids had long-standing partisans in K y m e or Miletos: RC
17; 22). M o n u m e n t s and ritual thus substituted social m e m o r y to
politics. So the T e i a n s w o u l d reach consensus on consciously
crafted memories of A n t i o c h o s ' coming and its results. Consciously
crafted memories: in preference to a narrative of conquest by
A n t i o c h o s I I I , imperialist, restorer of the Seleukid fortunes, warrior
king, m o u t h scarred and teeth missing f r o m a cavalry battle in
Baktria, prone to heavy drinking and after-dinner dancing in
arms, 1 3 8 the T e i a n s unanimously and repeatedly made themselves
commemorate the king's beneficence, the speech in the bouleuterion
declaring the city asylos and free f r o m tribute, euergetical promises
kept, all these events subsumed and fetishized in the unarguable,
concrete image around w h i c h manifestations of civic life r e v o l v e d —
A n t i o c h o s I I I as benign agrarian deity, first-fruits at his feet, a
changing crown of seasonal produce on his head.

(c) The P o l i s ' Version

T h e motivations of the civic decrees and the selective social m e m o r y
created by ruler cult worked to the same effect: they created local
narratives, w h i c h we might call 'non-realistic' in contrast with the
realistic w a y of talking about empire in the passage of P o l y b i o s
analysed in C h a p t e r 2 (21.41.2) or in documents where the exploita-
tive nature of empire is stated without qualms. T h e local narratives
historicize the potentially traumatic present: conquest, subordina-
tion (greater or lesser, but real) were written into the inert stuff of
history, 1 3 9 in w h i c h form they could be shaped to produce accept-
able versions, leaving the power relation unsaid, and focusing on

133 Warrior: C h . 2, introduction (the 'imperialist' tag is borrowed from S h e r w i n -

W h i t e and K u h r t 1993). Drinking: Bikerman 1938: 34-5 on Aelian, VH 2.41. T e e t h :

Pol. 10.49. Dancing: Athen. 4.155b.
139 V e y n e 1978: 63: 'l'histoire est un des produits les plus inoffensifs qu'ait jamais

élaborés la chimie de l'intellect' (silently reworking an epigram by P. Valéry, substitut-

ing 'inoffensifs' to 'dangereux'). On civic epigraphy as local history, Boffo 1988 (e.g.
21-2, on the production of local memory and local knowledge).
memories of euergetical exchange; they neutralized the problematic
realities of Hellenistic high politics, and insulated civic pride f r o m
their impact. In the aftermath of traumatic events, the T e i a n s and
the Iasians could reassure themselves that the local historiography
of civic decrees and memorial rituals w o u l d pass on to their
descendants carefully controlled narratives crafted out of the con-
fused present.
Local narratives also allowed the cities to offer their o w n
definitions of the world, if only for local consumption: they j u d g e d
the king, praised him, spoke approvingly of his trustworthiness,
gave meaning to his actions, honoured h i m in certain terms, remem-
bered his actions in certain forms; through local narratives the cities
could objectify, and hence exercise some form of symbolical power
over, their rulers. T h e T e i a n s , in their decree, proclaim confidently
that the honours they offer to A n t i o c h o s and Laodike will show the
world that they know how to 'decree the honours w h i c h are suitable
for each person': an assertion of the capacity to j u d g e , and the
ability to reward adequately anyone, including a Seleukid royal
couple. 1 4 0 T a l k i n g about the ruler was a way for the cities to talk
about themselves, imagine their relation to the ruler, and by talking
about the world, in the past or the present tense, to try to control it.
T h e s e local versions were quite different f r o m the administrative,
legal, and ideological structures of the Seleukid empire (explored in
C h a p t e r 3): the very difference illustrates the function of 'non-
realist narratives'—to offer local definitions within, and against, a
broader imperial ideology where definitions were the m o n o p o l y of
the king. In T . M o r r i s o n ' s Beloved, a slave-owner beats a slave
(after an argument over the interpretation of the slave's eating the
master's pig: theft, or improvement of the master's property, i.e. the
slave himself?): the beating demonstrates that 'definitions belonged
to the definers, not the defined'. 1 4 1 But the cities offered their o w n
selective narratives about the king and his relation to them,
affirming their o w n definitions, and their right to define; they
created local forms of ideological counter-power, and took an active
part in the 'struggle for the real' through their o w n discursive
resources (Rogers 1991: 69, quoting G e e r t z , on the parallel case of
civic ritual in R o m a n Ephesos).
T h e s e practices should not be scorned as pure wishful thinking or
local delusions. T h e 'non-realistic' narratives organized the experi-
ence of empire, f r o m the point of view of the subordinate c o m -
munities, a fact that is sufficient to warrant examination; that the
140 D o c u m e n t 18, line 69.
141 Quoted by K . Bradley, CJ 90 (1995), 445.
local communities responded to imperial power by offering narra-
tives where power was omitted in the favour of beneficence and
reciprocity is itself revealing of their strong self-identity, the
tenacity of their values and sense of autonomy. T h e p h e n o m e n o n
had practical political consequences. By insulating local civic iden-
tity and pride, 'non-realistic' narratives allowed the polis to preserve
a sense of purpose in the face of subordination and integration with-
in a supra-polis empire. T h i s could realize itself in action to seize
independence f r o m the Hellenistic empires, as the recalcitrant cities
of S m y r n a and L a m p s a k o s did. S m y r n a had earlier offered cultic
honours to the Seleukids (Habicht 1970: 99-102); these must have
been conceived in ways that preserved civic identity as well as inter-
acted with the rulers. A t the very least, this persistence of purpose
allowed the local communities to develop the patience, the sense of
local interests, and the opportunism 1 4 2 w h i c h characterized their
behaviour in the multi-polar Hellenistic world.

4. The Successes of Royal Discourse

T h e interpretation offered above might seem too optimistic, and

another is possible: instead of focusing on local versions preserving
polis pride, we might notice the speed and fluency w i t h w h i c h the
ceremonies of ruler cult introduced into the heart of the city images
of kingship w h i c h corresponded to the royal ideology itself, the
power-as-benefaction w h i c h was the central representation in the
king's discourse. T h e Hellenistic polis, for all the resilience of its
ideology, was not impermeable to this discourse; its acceptance
within the polis contributed to the creation of a cultural koine
centred on empire, and diffusing the effects of the ideological force
of empire, analysed earlier (Ch. 3 §§ 2 and 3). 143
T h e case of the T e i a n s , again, is worth pondering. I have tried to
show that ruler cult performed local functions, that might have
strengthened or insulated civic identity; nonetheless, it is impossible
not to notice that ruler cult thoroughly reorganized civic ritual
around royal images, by manipulating civic structures at a ver}' deep
level. T h e T e i a n s put concrete representations (a statue of
A n t i o c h o s I I I , a fountain named after Laodike) of the Seleukid king
and queen in sites w h i c h were central to the symbolical map of the

142 Rostovtzeff 1941: 35.

143 'Cultural koine': the concept is inspired b y M o u r g u e s 1995, studying the propaga-
tion of official ideology into the decrees of the G r a e c o - R o m a n cities; Price 1984, for the
role of the imperial cult in Roman Asia Minor.
city: the bouleuterion w h e r e political processes took place ( m e e t i n g s
of the council and a s s e m b l y , p u b l i c a t i o n of p u b l i c acts), and the
agora, the central space w h e r e o n l y g r o w n citizens c o u l d enter, and
w h e r e citizen m e t citizen in daily interaction. F u r t h e r m o r e , the
T e i a n s granted their citizenship to the cities of the S e l e u k i s , one of
the administrative and s y m b o l i c a l centres of the S e l e u k i d e m p i r e : in
P o l y b i o s (5.58.4) A n t i o c h o s ' p h y s i c i a n , A p o l l o p h a n e s of S e l e u k e i a
in Pieria, called the latter city the ' f o u n d r e s s ' (άρχηγέτις) and
'almost, so to speak, the hearth' of the S e l e u k i d state's p o w e r (σχεδόν
ώς ειπείν έστίαν ύπάρχονσαν της αύτών δυναστείας).144 E v e n if the T e i a n
grant w a s p u r e l y s y m b o l i c a l , and directed at S e l e u k i d officials w h o
m i g h t c o m e f r o m these cities (as s u g g e s t e d b y G a u t h i e r : above,
§ 2c), the decision w a s still represented as the result of a desire for
close relations w i t h these cities, b y sharing T e i a n citizenship, itself
represented as m e r e l y a w a y to share royal b e n e f a c t i o n s 1 4 5 — ' t o put
in c o m m o n , so to speak, w i t h the cities n a m e d after the ancestors of
the k i n g the f a v o u r s w h i c h w e r e g i v e n and those w h i c h will be g i v e n
b y the king to the p e o p l e , so that, after a grant of o u r citizenship to
t h e m , they should be the readier to b e n e f a c t i o n s and s h o w eagerness
in all matters, j u s t as it is a fine thing to do w i t h o n e ' s o w n father-
land'. T h e grant of isopoliteia m a y have resulted in d i p l o m a t i c
contacts, and p o s s i b l y in the adoption b y the T e i a n s of practices
f r o m the imperial cities of the Seleukis, n a m e l y a civic cult for
A n t i o c h o s I I I and his ancestors. T h i s cult is attested b o t h at
S e l e u k e i a in P i e r i a — a n d T e o s , w h e r e the p r i v i l e g e d position g i v e n
to A n t i o c h o s I I I p r o b a b l y indicates that the cult was i n t r o d u c e d in
his reign ( O G I S 245: n e w text in SEG 3 5 . 1 5 2 1 ; 2 4 6 — b o t h after the
time of A n t i o c h o s I I I ) . S i n c e the 'second T e i a n decree' tells of
T e o s ' desire to foster links w i t h the cities at the centre of the e m p i r e ,
H e r r m a n n s u g g e s t e d that the T e i a n s imitated the S e l e u k i d practice
of civic dynastic cult f r o m these cities, w h e r e it is attested
( H e r r m a n n 19650: 1 4 9 - 5 6 ; R o s t o v t z e f ï 1935). T h i s w o u l d s h o w an
old H e l l e n i c city, f o r m a l l y ' a u t o n o m o u s ' , a d o p t i n g a practice f r o m
n e w royal f o u n d a t i o n s , 'subject' cities par excellence, w h o s e identity
w a s defined b y their dynastic n a m e ('the cities n a m e d after the
ancestors of the king'). A t the v e r y least, the cultic title Μέγας in
T e o s w a s taken f r o m central S e l e u k i d practice b o t h administrative
(as in the 'regnal f o r m u l a ' ) and p r o b a b l y cultic. B y a d o p t i n g these

144 T h e r e c e n t e m p h a s i s , b y S h e r w i n - W h i t e a n d K u h r t 1 9 9 3 , o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f

S e l e u k i d B a b y l o n i a d o e s n o t d e t r a c t f r o m t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e S e l e u k i s in t h e A e g e a n
w o r l d ( w h o s e c o n c e p t u a l g e o g r a p h y b a l a n c e s ' A s i a on this side o f the T a u r u s ' a n d N o r t h
S y r i a ) . O n t h e c i t i e s o f t h e S e l e u k i s , F . M i l l a r , in S h e r w i n - W h i t e a n d K u h r t 1 9 8 7 :
r 10-33.
145 D o c u m e n t 18, 9 0 - 1 0 4 .
forms, T e o s participated in a wider culture of empire, expressed
through the ubiquity of signifiers of empire imposed on geographi-
cal diversity and extension (Ch. 3 § 2d). A g a i n , Iasos offers a
parallel showing that the case of T e o s is not unique: as already
mentioned in the preceding section, Iasian strategoi, upon entering
office, sacrificed on the king's altar to the king and his ancestors. 1 4 6
T h i s goes further than usual cultic honours f r o m subordinate cities
for Hellenistic rulers: the opening gesture of the chief military
magistrates of the city was a ritual w h i c h acknowledged an impor-
tant theme of Seleukid ideology under A n t i o c h o s III (the 'ancestral
theme' so important in his self-representation and his actions), but
also echoed the practice of dynastic cult in the royal foundations.
A more widely attested feature is the assimilation of royal lan-
guage into the language of civic decrees. Assimilation goes deeper
than simply repeating items f r o m the royal repertoire, such the
designation of A p o l l o as ancestor of the Seleukid dynasty, 1 4 7 or the
adoption of chancery forms, such as referring to A n t i o c h o s III as
'the Great K i n g A n t i o c h o s ' , found in all 'Seleukid' cities irrespec-
tive of formal status—at A n t i o c h (one of the 'imperial' cities of the
Seleukis), X a n t h o s (a 'subject' city) and Iasos (a 'free' city). 148 A n
example of deeper assimilation is perhaps to be found in Z e u x i s '
paraphrase of a decree f r o m Herakleia under Latmos: τό ψήφισμα
καθ' ο ώιεσθε Seîv, άνακεκομισμέ I νων ήμών τώι βασιλεΐ τήν πόλιν έζ
αρχής υπαρχουσαν τοις προγονοις αυτού, I θν σίας τ€ συντίλεσθήναι τοις
θεοίς και τοις βασιλεϋσιν και τοις τέκνοις αυτών, ' y o u r d e c r e e , a c c o r d -
ing to w h i c h you thought it right, after we had recovered for the
king the city w h i c h had originally belonged to his ancestors, to offer
sacrifices to the gods, the kings, and their children'. A s s u m i n g that
Z e u x i s is accurately paraphrasing the civic decree, the Herakleians,
in the considerations of their decree, seem to have accepted the
Seleukid version of their past, according to w h i c h Z e u x i s was not
conquering the city, but merely recovering it, in virtue of the ances-
tral property rights of the Seleukids. 1 4 9 H o w e v e r , this might more
likely be the result of Z e u x i s reformulating in Seleukid terms a
vaguer local narrative, like those found in T e o s or Iasos (§ 2a).
M o r e conclusively: as motivation for honours, cities can mention
the honorand's services not only to themselves, but also to the king.
T h e A m y z o n i a n s honoured O p h e l a n d r o s and his soldiers, for
1,16D o c u m e n t 26, Β II i i - i 2 .
147 OGIS 2 1 9 , l i n e s 2 6 - 7 ; 2 1 2 , l i n e s 13—14; d o c u m e n t s 22, 28; D e l p h i a n ( o r r a t h e r ,
A m p h i k t i o n i c : L e f è v r e 1 9 9 6 ) d o c u m e n t c o m m e n t e d in BE 55, 122 (used b y the
Amphiktions).
143 A n t i o c h : K r a e l i n g 1 9 6 4 . X a n t h o s : d o c u m e n t 22. I a s o s : 26 Β , I 9; 27, 3; 28, 1 2 .
145 D o c u m e n t 31 Β , II 8 - 1 0 .
services vnep τών τών βασιλέων πραγμάτων (the phrase occurs in
the considerations, and, significantly, in the 'hortative' clause: the
A m y z o n i a n s made clear that they honoured those w h o strove for
the interests of the kings, A n t i o c h o s I I I and A n t i o c h o s the son); the
Xanthian neoi praised their gymnasiarch L y s o n 'for eunoia towards
the city, themselves, and the affairs of the kings'. 1 5 0 T h e figure is
c o m m o n : the Euromians/Philippeis mentioned services to the
interests of Philip V in their decree for his general A l e x a n d r o s
A d m e t o u ; the A n t i o c h e n e s praised T h e o p h i l o s of Seleukeia in
Pieria 'for his philotimia and his eunoia towards the Great K i n g
A n t i o c h o s , A n t i o c h o s the son, Q u e e n Laodike and their children,
and towards themselves' (i.e. the citizens of Antioch). 1 5 1
It is natural that the king should praise individuals or c o m m u n i -
ties for their attitude towards himself and his pragmata, as part of
the patrimonial ideology of empire: A n t i o c h o s I I I praised N i k a n o r
in these terms, or a courtier w h o m he appointed to a priesthood in
A n t i o c h ; likewise, the king and Z e u x i s advised the Herakleians to
keep their eunoia towards the king's pragmata, and Laodike may
have done the same with the Teians; 1 5 2 earlier, Antiochos I praised
the eunoia of Aristodikides in a letter concerned with a land grant to
him ( R C 12). It is far more surprising to see this expression in the
civic decrees: the city says, in effect, 'we praise you for services to
him', introducing a royal third party in the exchange between bene-
factor and honourer. By admitting goodwill towards the king as part
of the reasons to honour an individual, the city proclaims awareness
of its integration within a supra-poliad empire, whose interests (the
personal interests of the king) are of relevance to the city; 153 this
awareness is voiced through expressions taken f r o m royal language,
now integrated within the cardinal form for civic self-expression,
the decree.
ls° D o c u m e n t s 13, 9, 1 2 - 1 4 ; 24> 3 2 ~34·
151 Errington 1993: no. 4; K r a e l i n g 1964. Also: Syll. 342, lines 1 2 - 1 5 (Athenian decree
for M e d e i o s of Larisa, Friend of A n t i g o n o s M o n o p h t h a l m o s and D e m e t r i o s
Poliorketes); Syll. 343, lines 6 - 1 6 (Athenian decree for O x y t h e m i s of Larisa, for his
behaviour towards 'the kings' (Antigonos and D e m e t r i o s ) and their pragmata)·, Syll.
426, lines 1 0 - 1 2 , 4 1 - 2 (Bargylietan decree f o r j u d g e f r o m T e o s ) ; Kearsley 1994 ( S E G
44.1108), lines 1 0 - 1 1 (Olbasan decree for Attalid official); Bikerman 1938: 128 n. 6
(Antiocheia on P y r a m o s for Seleukid financial official); LBW 3.1486 (same city for
citizen); IG 1 1 . 4 . 1 1 4 (Laodikeia in Pieria for the chief minister Heliodoros); MAMA
6.173, ' ' n e J4> with BE 39, 400 (decree of A p a m e i a in P h r y g i a for citizen w h o s h o w e d
his eunoia towards the pragmata of the Attalids).
152 D o c u m e n t 4; RC 44; d o c u m e n t s 31 A , I 15 and Β, I V 10; 19 D , 9 - 1 0 . P a r a l l e l s —

for individuals, IG 1 1 . 3 . 1 1 1 3 ; RC 44, 45, 58; for communities: RC 22, 31, 7 1 ; OGIS
229, lines 8 - 9 (in S m y r n i a n decree describing royal action); 2 M a c c . 1 1 , 19; H o l l e a u x
1 9 4 2 : 94.
153 G a u t h i e r 1996: 7: 'dans une cité dépendante, le loyalisme dynastique fait partie, au

m ê m e titre que le patriotisme, des qualités reconnues à ses bienfaiteurs'.

 T h e p h e n o m e n o n goes b e y o n d the mere demonstration of loyal-
ism, for instrumental purposes in interaction with the ruler (§ zb).
T w o instances may illustrate the depth w i t h w h i c h the 'cultural
koine of empire' had entered, if not the consciousness of the polis, at
least its public forms. A t Iasos, a phyle carried out rituals (libations,
perhaps a sacrifice) and pronounced public prayers, 'for [all]
advantages to happen to the Great K i n g Antiochos, queen L a o d i k e ,
and their children, and to the city': έπεύχεσθαι Se τους φυλέτας
\ πάντα γίν] I εσθαι τάγαθά βασιλεΐ re μεγάλωι Ά[ντιόχωι] I και
βασιλίσσηι Λαοδίκηι και τοις τέκνοις I και τήι πόλει. 1 5 4 A t the level of
the civic subdivision, as part of civic ceremonial, the phyle now-
uttered c o m m o n prayers for the welfare of the king and his family
w i t h the welfare of the polis. T h e phyle was one of the constituent
parts of the city and hence a prime context for ceremonials of
belonging to the polis (above, for T e i a n summoriai; Rogers 1991 for
R o m a n Ephesos); yet the public prayers w h i c h manifested the
citizens' sense of c o m m u n i t y were diverted f r o m their primary
function, now to speak of loyalism and integration within a supra-
poliad empire: the welfare of the rulers was not only mentioned in
the public prayers, but also named in precedence the polis itself—in
an old, juridically 'free' city like Iasos.
T h e second p h e n o m e n o n (though not yet uncontestably illus-
trated under A n t i o c h o s I I I ) is the introduction of the king into the
forms of decrees: a city (name now unknown), in a decree honour-
ing a king A n t i o c h o s and Priene for the dispatch of a Prienian
'foreign j u d g e ' , prefaced the decisions with the formula [ά\γαθήι
τΰχηι κάιπι σωτ[η] I [ρίαι του re βασιλέως και τών έκ]γόνων αύτοΰ, in
place of the more usual formulas stating that the decisions in a
decree are taken for the welfare of the city, or simply άγαθήι τΰχηι:
the local decree is taken under the wish for the welfare of the king
and his descendants (Inschr. Priene 24, lines 19-20). 1 5 5 N o r is the
practice isolated or restricted to 'subject' cities (as the city in Inschr.
Priene 24 probably was). 156 A t Samothrake, a decree (in honour of
L y s i m a c h o s ) prefaces the decisions with the formula άγαθήι τΰχηι I

154 D o c u m e n t 27, 1 - 5 . 18, 3 attests sacrifices and libations at T e o s , as part of the

A n t i o c h e i a and Laodikeia. Earlier, d u r i n g the formative period of the D i a d o c h s ,
w h e n m a n y of the f o r m s of d i p l o m a c y and interaction w e r e d e v e l o p e d , the Ephesians
responded to the n e w s of military successes by D e m e t r i o s Poliorketes by organizing
prayers 'for things to g o [even better] for D e m e t r i o s the king and the people [of the
Ephesians]' (Syll. 352, lines 6 - 7 ) .
155 P e r h a p s [α\γαθήι τύχηι κάίττί σωτ[ηρtat της πόλεως και του βαοιλέως και τών εκ\γόνων
αύτοΰ? F o r e x a m p l e s of the n o r m a l formula, d o c u m e n t s 10, 18; 16, 1 1 ; 17, 44; 32, 13.
156 It applied to the k i n g for a foreign j u d g e , j u s t as Laodikeia on L y k o s did with

Z e u x i s ( d o c u m e n t 32 and C r o w t h e r 1993; C h . 3 § 3).

[βα]σιλ€ως Λυσιμάχου και της irô\ea>[s] (Syll. 3 7 2 , l i n e s 19—20): as in
the Iasian prayers, the king is named before the city.
H o w royal ideology was diffused among the cities is unclear; local
initiative may have played the major part. Seleukid governors and
dignitaries perhaps performed a role; for instance, the dedication (of
a statue, a r o o m in a gymnasion, a whole gymnasion?) by Ptolemaios
T h r a s e o u at Soloi may have been part of a w h o l e nexus of
euergetism and dealings with the local c o m m u n i t y , w h i c h w o u l d
have accepted royal ideology as part of the benefactions f r o m
Ptolemaios. 1 5 ' A n important role was certainly performed by the
details of interaction, w h e n royal interlocutors could use their dis-
cursive position (gifts accompanied by explanations and descrip-
tions) to impose their assumptions on the cities: I have examined
the letter in w h i c h Laodike explains her gift of grain to the Iasians
(§ 2a). A n o t h e r channel may have been the local Seleukid officials,
w h o m the cities tried to socialize by citizenship grants and honours
(§ 2c). T h e s e honours, as argued above, may have represented local
obligations and hence possible restraints on the officials' behaviour;
but, conversely, the price to pay was possibly the admission of very
big fishes into small ponds, the introduction of Seleukid officials
into the space of the city, where these men could sit in the assembly,
meet citizens on a daily basis, and 'partake of all the other things'
alongside the citizens. Menestratos, the epistates of the Artemision
at A m y z o n , became an A m y z o n i a n citizen: what did he say, w h e n
the assembly of A m y z o n i a n s met (no doubt in the theatre w h i c h
belonged to A m y z o n ' s monumental complex)? H o w constrained did
he feel by his new co-citizens as he sat in their midst? W h a t sort of
speeches did he make? D i d his mere presence inhibit discussion of
issues that might have gone against Seleukid interests? D i d it
exercise subtle pressure, even without the need for vocalizing the
'Seleukid point of view', so that the A m y z o n i a n s felt it w o u l d be
politic to make the right gestures and references, and always take the
Seleukid state into account w h e n transacting c o m m o n affairs? N o n e
of these questions can be answered, but they are suggestive enough
to the historical imagination. A t the very least, they make it possible
that Menestratos helped introduce Seleukid-influenced forms and
ideology into the polis of A m y z o n . 1 5 8

A n o t h e r possible channel for the diffusion or imposition of royal

ideology is the creation of state cult for A n t i o c h o s III and his
ancestors, and later for Laodike. It is true that this state-organized,
ls?D o c u m e n t 21.
1SSMenestratos: document 10. On the notion of power as influencing the issues,
before they come to the light of decision-making, L u k e s 1974.
centrally administered ruler cult should be distinguished f r o m the
local cults, decreed by the cities for local reasons (Bikerman 1938:
ch. 7; H a b i c h t 1970). A t the same time, it is difficult not to see some
relation b e t w e e n the two f o r m s ( S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993:
202-10, esp. 209). T h e one case d o c u m e n t e d in some detail is the
cult for L a o d i k e , t h o u g h it hardly presents a simple picture of
centrally defined practice imitated locally: civic cults at Sardeis (213
BC), T e o s ( p r o b a b l y c.203) and Iasos (c. 196) in fact all preceded
A n t i o c h o s ' decision to h o n o u r L a o d i k e w i t h a state cult (193). 1 5 9 In
the prostagma creating the state cult for L a o d i k e , A n t i o c h o s is
content to m e n t i o n his personal motivation: to increase L a o d i k e ' s
h o n o u r s , because of her love and care for h i m and her piety t o w a r d s
the divine; w e are left to guess at broader f u n c t i o n s , or effects. D i d
the local cults s o m e h o w 'prepare' or 'facilitate' the creation of a state
cult for Laodike? 1 6 0 A n o t h e r interpretation is to see the central cult,
by its u n i f o r m i t y and mobilization of e m p i r e - w i d e resources, as a
w a y for the ruling p o w e r to offer, retrospectively, a u n i f y i n g m o d e l
for pre-existing, local cults, and hence a means to s u b s u m e , s y m -
bolically, local manifestations within a broader, supra-poliad form:
the very nature of imperial activity. 1 6 1

A t first sight, then, a register of successes for the e m p i r e of d o m i n a -

tion, in the symbolical realm: the d e v e l o p m e n t of an imperial
culture, shared by ruler and ruled alike; the acceptance by the polis
of practices, values, linguistic elements f r o m royal discourse; the
operation of channels for royal f o r m s and royal ideology to enter the
space of the polis, such as (perhaps) f r e q u e n t contacts w i t h S e l e u k i d
administrators; the creation of o v e r a r c h i n g f o r m s s u c h as centrally
organized ruler cult, perhaps p r o p o s e d , or experienced, as m o d e l s
for local practices. It is impossible to say h o w m u c h these i m p i n g e d
on the t h o u g h t s or the consciousness of citizens in the local c o m -
m u n i t i e s b e y o n d the f o r m s and the course of p u b l i c b e h a v i o u r . A s
concerns the latter, the e x a m p l e of the T e i a n s , once more, is
suggestive. T h e T e i a n s , in 190, during the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r ,
kept their eunoia to A n t i o c h o s I I I , t h o u g h they had not received a
S e l e u k i d garrison (as Iasos did) and t h o u g h other cities rallied to the
R o m a n s (like n e i g h b o u r i n g K o l o p h o n ) ; the T e i a n s supplied the

159 Gauthier 1989: 73-8: this series of earlier cults of Laodike does not affect the

essential distinction between civic cult and state cult, but raises the issue of the relation
between the two forms; documents 2, 18, 26 B, and 37.
160 Gauthier 1989: 77; S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 209.
141 It would be interesting to know if local cults for Laodike in turn imitated features

of the subsequently developed central cult for the queen, such as the golden crowns
bearing her portrait, worn by the high-priestesses in the state cult.
S e l e u k i d fleet benigne (for w h i c h read evvows, ευχαρίστως), and
p r o m i s e d five t h o u s a n d jars of w i n e ( L i v . 37.27.3). T h e T e i a n s '
loyalist b e h a v i o u r was no d o u b t shaped b y the constant infusion
into civic life of particular i m a g e s — t h e k i n g ' s past services to t h e m ,
their debt of gratitude t o w a r d s h i m — a n d p e r h a p s b y their imitation
of practices f r o m the 'imperial' cities of the Seleukis.
Y e t the situation is m o r e c o m p l e x . R o y a l discourse, assimilated at
a local level, c o u l d be used to f u r t h e r local interests. T h e S m y r n i a n s
c o n d u c t e d their annexation of a S e l e u k i d c o l o n y at M a g n e s i a u n d e r
S i p y l o s in the l a n g u a g e of loyalty t o w a r d s S e l e u k o s II and c o n c e r n
for his interests ( O G I S 229). M o r e m o d e s t l y , a city c o u l d use
images of royal beneficence as u n a n s w e r a b l e a r g u m e n t s in petitions
or h o m i l i e s addressed to royal officials: the A m y z o n i a n s asked an
official to b e h a v e in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the ' c h o i c e ' of the king
(παρακαλ<ί\σονσιν αύτον] I [άκό]λουθα ττράσοντα τήι τ[où βασι] I [Aejojs·
atpeoei). A parallel can be f o u n d in the considerations of a X a n t h i a n
decree for a P t o l e m a i c p h r o u r a r c h , κάλος κάγαθος . . . καϊ άξιος τον
βασιλέως}62 A t h e m e of royal i d e o l o g y , a d o p t e d locally, w a s used to
m a n i p u l a t e or to ascribe roles to the royal officials ( p r e v i o u s
section): a w a r n i n g against a s s u m i n g that the d i f f u s i o n of royal dis-
course implies the passivity or d e b a s e m e n t of local c o m m u n i t i e s ,
since this same royal discourse can be r e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d b y the local
c o m m u n i t i e s . I n d e e d , this e x a m p l e s h o w s the limits of analysing the
discursive interaction b e t w e e n the various actors (king, cities,
officials) as discrete strands, rather than as a c o n t i n u o u s p h e n o m e -
non o p e r a t i n g at man}' levels s i m u l t a n e o u s l y .

5. Conclusion: Kings and Cities, Power and Language, in the

Hellenistic Period

S o the different effects of the d i f f u s i o n of royal discourse at the local

level b e l o n g to a w i d e r diversity: the features studied above per-
f o r m e d a variety of f u n c t i o n s , in different c o n t e x t s and for different
audiences. O f course, the diversity w o u l d appear greater if other
l a n g u a g e s or voices than that used in the dialogue of e u e r g e t i s m had
s u r v i v e d in any sizeable a m o u n t : the epigraphical material tells us
that w h i c h the cities chose to m o n u m e n t a l i z e . W e do not have any
t h r e a t e n i n g letters f r o m the kings, or letters r e f u s i n g petitions. 1 6 3
162D o c u m e n t 12; SEG 33.1183, line 7. Also Syll. 502, lines 1 4 - 1 7 ; I. Stratonikeia 4.
163Threatening letters: L i v . 33.38.5, chastizing tone of Antiochos' ambassadors to
Lampsakos and Smyrna. Refusal of petition: a later case in Reynolds 1982: no. 13
(Octavian refusing autonomy to the Samians; published, significantly, b y the
Aphrodisians who received a copy of the decision).
T h e r e are some cases of confrontation or subordination, such as RC
6, in w h i c h L y s i m a c h o s speaks bluntly of the Prienians' obedience
to his general, or the stormy interview between Seleukos I and
Herakleia Pontike ( M e m n o n , FGrHist 434 F 7), or the dealings
between the Attalids and A m l a d a after a revolt (RC 54); these
remain exceptions in our material. N o r is there any large surviving
b o d y of Hellenistic political rhetoric or of Hellenistic literature f r o m
the cities (rather than the royal courts). T h e ideological debate
between ruler and ruled may have been harsher than the deliberate
blandness of the euergetical language lets on, and the general politi-
cal culture m u c h more diverse (Will 1988: 333-5). S o m e traces
remain of realistic discourse, especially in Polybios: observations
that the kings are intent on enslaving the cities, or a speech urging
the Achaians to refuse a gift f r o m E u m e n e s II, even if it was w o r t h y
of the Achaians, because the προαίρεσης of the benefactor and the
purpose (χρεία) of the gift were bad; the gift was a mere δελεαρ, a
piece of bait, to entrap the Achaians. 1 6 4 T h e speech shows awareness
of the language of euergetism, only to subvert and d e m y s t i f y it. L e s s
sophisticatedly than Polybios' d e m y s t i f y i n g moves, but with equal
forcefulness, the Panamarians, once Karia became free in 167,
chiselled out the name of a Rhodian governor they had earlier
honoured w i t h a decree of the standard form for imperial officials (I.
Stratonikeia 9).
A n o t h e r area where the evidence is lacking concerns the internal
workings of thQ polis. T h e decrees w h i c h e m b o d y deliberate, public,
stylized gestures do not inform us on dissent or debates within the
cities: we do not know how easily these decrees were adopted,
whether there were groups opposed to these motions, w h e t h e r
decisions were reached with large or small majorities (as far as I
k n o w , no honorific decree for a king or royal Friend mentions the
size of the assembly or the n u m b e r of those w h o voted against the
proposal), to what extent the adoption of a certain type of language
and attitude mirrored internal changes in the conduct of public
affairs in the assembly of any polis. It is difficult to picture, for
instance, the assembly at X a n t h o s in 1 9 7 - 6 BC. W e know that
T l e p o l e m o s A r t a p a t o u was a priest pro poleos in the city, a former
Ptolemaic courtier (and product of a family with a distinguished
tradition of Ptolemaic service), once greatly powerful in Alexandria
where he acted as regent for y o u n g Ptolemy V in 203-202, now
retired to his home city: if he attended the assembly where decrees
were passed inaugurating ruler cult for A n t i o c h o s I I I , the new

164 M e m n o n FGrHist 434 F 11.3, Pol. 21.22.8, 22.8; ibid, for speech of Apollonidas.
Seleukid master of the city, and reflecting Seleukid discourse, we
can only w o n d e r if he argued unsuccessfully against the Seleukid-
ization of X a n t h o s , or if he was forced to view the process f r o m the
sidelines, with a cynical or a jaundiced eye. 1 6 5
Nonetheless, the vast majority of the epigraphical evidence is
written in the language of euergetism: the bulk of the material, the
pervasiveness of its distribution, and in fact its very uniformity
emphasize the currency of this language as means of communication
between political actors in the Hellenistic world; this situation,
though it does not tell us about things w e w o u l d like to investigate
in further depth (attitudes b e y o n d the surface of euergetical cordi-
ality), is in itself important and demands serious attention. T h e
nature of the evidence (mainly epigraphical, and hence m o n u -
mental, celebratory, and selective) entails studying a power relation
mediated through the language of euergetism, a language where
power is not spoken of. It is a mistake to speak of civic decrees as
overt expressions of submission, as O r t h does w h e n he interprets
OGIS 219 as imbued with Unfreiheit, or G a w a n t k a in describing
the 'ungewöhnliche Ergebenheitsadresse an dem K ö n i g ' of the
second T e i a n decree; at a primary level, the civic decrees precisely
avoid talking about power, juridical or de facto, and the language of
euergetism is not intrinsically servile. 1 6 6 It was a close reading of
royal letters and civic decrees, and a willingness to take their pri-
mär}'· meanings as the whole story, that led H e u s s to describe the
relationship between king and cities as purely euergetical (seen
formally), with no juridical link of subordination: a remarkable
homage to the p o w e r of this language to dissimulate power. L i k e -
wise, A . G i o v a n n i n i proposed, on a strict reading of the T e i a n
decrees, that A n t i o c h o s I I I had not taken over T e o s , but merely
helped it by interceding with Attalos I to ask for tax relief. 1 6 '
Y e t power does impinge on the language of euergetism. Royal
letters mention conquest, albeit obliquely. T h e contract clause,
promising benefactions in return for evvoia, is absent f r o m contexts
other than the dialogue between ruler and ruled; furthermore, the
cities never complete the hortative clauses of their decrees honour-
ing rulers by the c o m m o n p l a c e (found in decrees for 'normal'
euergetai) that public honours will create emulation among other
potential benefactors, an inappropriate conceit in the exclusive
165 T h e s e thoughts are only the beginning of a reply to questions raised in an examina-

tion by M . Austin. Xanthos: documents 22, 23, 24. Tlepolemos: J. and L. Robert 1983:
168-71, vividly evoke the figure.
166 o r t h 1977: 50-61; Gawantka 1975: 123. O n the civic style of honorific decrees
expressing the city's dignity and sense of worth, V e y n e 1976: 235-7.
167 Heuss 1937; Giovannini 1983.
interaction with a political master. 1 6 8 T h e language of euergetism
itself invites us to study how it is used to mediate the extratextual
dimension of power. T h a n k s to the very uniformity of the m e d i u m ,
the diversity of the different interlocutors' behaviour can be studied
within a picture w h i c h integrates the multiplicity of possible v i e w -
points and functions.
I hope to have shown that the language of euergetism could be
used by royal interlocutors to represent, or camouflage, power as
benefaction, as a means to foster local quiescence and hence multi-
ply the indirect rule of the empire of domination, by lessening the
need for actual violence (as opposed to ideological violence).
C o n v e r s e l y , the same language, and the same contents, were used by
the local communities, to interact with the rulers, introducing peti-
tions in such way as to apply moralizing pressure on the rulers and
channel reactions along the pre-scripted lines of euergetism. W h o s e
interests did this transaction serve? T h e cities could obtain w h a t
they wanted; the list of benefactions and grants received by
Herakleia under L a t m o s is particularly impressive, catalogued over
four inscribed blocks. A t the same time, the formulas a c c o m p a n y i n g
royal acceptance of petitions defined a royal ideology w h i c h the
cities received along with the gifts, the concept of power as benefac-
tion, but also the royal principles of ancestral rights and monopoly
over the right to define statuses: the transaction ends up strength-
ening royal power, by making the local communities agree to the
legitimizing, deproblematizing discourse of the king. F u r t h e r m o r e ,
as seen in the previous chapter (§ 3), the fact that the king allowed
himself to be petitioned into euergetical behaviour in itself strength-
ened his rule, by presenting the latter as accessible and flexible to
the subjects' wishes: petition becomes a more viable solution than
local revolt; the language of euergetism was part of a structure of
repressive tolerance. H o w e v e r , the same language of euergetism also
represented public c o m m i t m e n t s , to specific actions and to general
norms, on the ruler's part, and hence a restriction on his liberty of
action: hence the collaborative effort by the c o m m u n i t y of cities to
broadcast and acknowledge, in terms drawn f r o m the language of

l6S Contract clause: C h . 2 § 5. D o c u m e n t 38 is a special case, representing a Roman

attempt to exploit the ambivalence of the form: formally free of power, yet indirectly
expressing it; another exception is RC 52, lines 32-7, where the Ionians promise that
Eumenes II will receive 'all things pertaining to honour and repute' if he responds to
the eucharistia of the Ionians, but the perceived weakness of Eumenes II, after rebuff at
Rome, might have influenced the language of the Ionian decree. Hortative clauses and
emulation: Habicht 1970: 165 η. ι; Gauthier 1985: 11—12, 129-30. Inschr. Didyma 479,
lines 27-30, a Milesian decree for Antiochos I, contains a hortative clause, but
Antiochos I was not the master of Miletos at the time.
euergetism, norms of royal behaviour, and royal c o m m i t m e n t s to
such norms. T h e euergetical register also provided the subjects w i t h
an effective means to socialize royal officials, and hence weaken the
king's means of direct administration. Both parties collaborated in
dialogue, but each seeking its o w n aims and achieving different
e f f e c t s — s o m e t i m e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y — f r o m the same language; the
open-ended nature of dialogue resulted in this diverse and imbri-
cated situation.
T h e other p h e n o m e n o n studied above is less dialectical, but
equally complex: the ambiguity of the polis' discourse. S o m e of the
evidence can be interpreted as local narratives, expressed in the
considerations of civic decrees, or e m b e d d e d in social m e m o r y by
deliberate and systematic measures, as at T e o s (particularly well
documented, but not unusual). Local narratives allowed the cities to
describe their world and their relation to the ruler, and to pre-
cipitate a potentially traumatic present of royal conquest into a
remembered past of euergetical cordiality. By enabling forms of
local ideological p o w e r , and control over the past, local narratives
insulated civic pride and civic i d e n t i t y — w h i c h could provide the
impetus for political conduct such as opportunism in time of super-
power conflict, dissidence, and resistance (as in the case of the
former Seleukid cities, S m y r n a and Lampsakos). A t the same time,
the contents of the local narratives were disturbingly consonant with
royal ideology and its images of power-as-beneficence or euergetical
dialogue without (or overshadowing) any power relation; images
w h i c h it introduced deep within the institutions of collective life.
T h e evidence for local narratives intersects with the evidence for
another phenomenon, the assimilation of royal discourse and the
values of the 'patrimonial' empire into civic forms, such as cult, but
also the civic decrees, w h i c h could praise a royal official or a citizen
for services not to the city, but towards the king and his 'affairs'.
T h e Hellenistic k i n g d o m s created, or favoured, a cultural koine
w h i c h mirrored forms of political integration of local communities
within a supra-poliad state (even if both cultural koine and political
forms were not as developed as under the R o m a n empire). T h e
ideological autarky and local identity of the polis were strongly
affirmed in the Hellenistic age, even under political subordination;
yet the Hellenistic polis under royal rule, 'autonomous' or subject,
old or new, was open to forms of imperial ideology w h i c h went
against local autarky.
A preliminary conclusion should bear on the fluidity of the situa-
tion, resulting not simply f r o m the fluidity of all dialogue, but f r o m
the mediation of power through a language precisely designed to
avoid overtly talking about power. T h e contract clause could
express collaboration and exchange, or it could express power and
dependency; so that, ambiguously, it spoke in both registers at the
same time. T h e language of euergetism, with its stereotypes and its
generalizing vocabularies, performed a stabilizing role in the inter-
action between rulers and ruled, important in a period of dramatic
change in international politics (Ch. ι): 169 it provided the forms and
the substance for exchange in the aftermath of warfare, as in the case
of A n t i o c h o s I I I , 'reconquering' what he claimed were ancestral
Seleukid possessions. A t the same time, it allowed a multiplicity of
meanings and functions.
In some cases, the diversity was presumably due to local factors,
w h i c h are n o w unclear. A n t i o c h o s I I I , the descendent of A p o l l o ,
mentioned this god first w h e n e v e r associated with other deities: he
wrote to his army to respect the shrine of A p o l l o and A r t e m i s at
A m y z o n — a shrine we call the Artemision, following local usage.
Y e t the A m y z o n i a n s adopted the Seleukid usage, referring to the
shrine in the same order as A n t i o c h o s rather than the local 'temple
of A r t e m i s ' . In contrast, the Xanthians, w h e n inscribing on their
gate a s u m m a r y of A n t i o c h o s ' decision to consecrate the city to the
l o c a l t r i a d , w r o t e Βασιλεύς μέγας Άντίοχος I άφιέρωσεν τήν πόλιν I τήι
Λητώι και τώι Άπόλλωνι I και τήι Άρτέμιδι δια τήν I προς αυτούς σννάπ-
τουσαν I σννγένειαν, ' T h e Great K i n g A n t i o c h o s dedicated the city to
L e t o , A p o l l o , and Artemis, on account of the kinship uniting him to
t h e m ' — r e s t a t i n g the traditional order of precedence in a city whose
main shrine was dedicated to Leto. 1 7 0 W h y one subject city adopted
a Seleukid form into its decrees, while the other rephrased a royal
utterance to fit traditional cultic precedence is baffling; in the case of
A m y z o n , was it a case of local initiative and loyalism, or did the
presence of Menestratos of Phokaia, the Seleukid official in charge
of the Artemision, co-opted into the citizen b o d y , influence the
behaviour of the assembly and the language of its decrees (above)?
A t any rate, the example of these two cities invites us to exercise
caution over broad statements about the 'internal surrender' or the
resilience of the Hellenistic poleis.
Nonetheless, the very fact that the interaction between ruler and
ruled was largely conducted in this elaborate, stereotypical, and
ambiguous language is highly significant. T h e king could c o m m u -
nicate in short administrative notes to his subordinates, conveying
orders (as in the prostagma of 209 appointing N i k a n o r to his
function) or agreeing to requests (such as Ptolemaios' requests con-
169 T h e n o t i o n o f ' s t a b i l i z i n g ' s t e r e o t y p e s f r o m O r r i e u x 1983: 123.
170 D o c u m e n t 6; J. a n d L . R o b e r t 1 9 8 3 : 2 0 2 n o . 2 1 ; d o c u m e n t 2 2 .
cerning his estates at Skythopolis): 1 7 1 σννταξον ούν, or yeveoOw ώσπερ
άξιοι. It thus becomes the more noticeable and significant that this
register was not employed in dealing with the cities: the administra-
tive tone of the king's replies concerning Ptolemaios' Skythopolis
estates contrasts with the courtesy and elaboration of Z e u x i s ' , then
A n t i o c h o s ' dealings with Herakleia, along set diplomatic forms and
couched in a conventional language of benefaction and reciprocity.
U n l i k e the brisk dialect of administration, this language was not the
king's own thing, but a pre-existing, institutionalized idiom used in
diplomacy and in relations between cities and individuals. T h i s
style of interaction is removed f r o m the picture of harsh, oppressive,
o v e r w h e l m i n g royal power sometimes offered (Orth 1977; G r e e n
1990)—a picture w h i c h rather suits the situation of the cities of the
N o r t h Pontic shore, at the m e r c y of the predatory local kings. 1 7 2 T h e
difficulties w h i c h L y s i m a c h o s or Philip V experienced, 1 7 3 w h e n they
behaved in w a y s perceived as unrestrainedly brutal, demonstrate
the practical importance of the norms, expectancies, and the general
political culture.
Rather than w o n d e r w h y the kings and cities resorted to the
language of euergetism and the attendant style of politics, and
search for simple functionalist explanations ('the kings needed the
cities' collaboration', 'the cities wished to manipulate the kings'), we
might reflect on the effect of this language on the nature of the rela-
tion. It prevented benefaction f r o m b e c o m i n g a solitary celebration
of royal splendour (as in T h e o c r i t u s 17) or a pure expression of
asymmetry and royal power: it did so by creating a process of dia-
logue, and hence an interaction where language was polity, where
both parties had a right to speak back to each other, on the basis of
shared assumptions and values 1 7 4 i m p l y i n g some form of parity.
T h e standardized nature of the euergetical language meant that,
far f r o m being monopolizable, it could be used indefinitely by both
parties. A king could promise to increase τα els τιμήν και δόξαν
ανήκοντα of a city; conversely, a city could make the same promise to
a king. T h e abstract terms minimize the fact that the possibilities of
a king and a subordinate city are rather d i f f e r e n t — t h e king could
offer material benefactions; the city, honours. T h i s is precisely the
function of the abstract terminology: the language establishes
parity and asserts the city's belief that the honours it decrees have

171 A b o v e , i n t r o d u c t i o n ; C h . 3; B e r t r a n d 1 9 9 0 : 1 1 4 — 1 5 o n p a p y r o l o g i c a l p a r a l l e l s .
172 G a u t h i e r 1985: 3 3 - 6 , w i t h references.
173 L y s i m a c h o s : B r e s s o n 1 9 9 5 , o n L y s i m a c h o s ' d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h v a r i o u s c i t i e s , p a r t l y

s t e m m i n g f r o m h i s u n a c c e p t a b l e i m a g e ; P h i l i p V : C h . 2 § 3.
174 P o c o c k 1 9 8 4 ; G a u t h i e r 1 9 8 5 : 1 1 , 4 1 .
real (if s y m b o l i c a l ) value. A king could praise a city, and the city
c o u l d praise him. S t r i k i n g l y , a city c o u l d represent itself as the
euergetes of the king, and speak of royal eucharistia, instead of the
(more familiar) reverse situation. 1 7 5 W h e n L a o d i k e w r o t e to
the Iasians τών άπαντω[μ]ενων εύεργεσιών μεμνημενοις [ευχαρίστως
πειράσομαι και άλλα α αν επινοώ συν[κατ]ασκενάζειν,1/6 the a d v e r b ,
ευχαρίστως, m i g h t describe either the Iasians' r e m e m b e r i n g of past
b e n e f a c t i o n s , or L a o d i k e ' s euergetical reaction to s u c h r e m e m -
brance, or p e r h a p s b o t h , απο κοινού. T h i s is the final impression w e
can draw f r o m the e l o q u e n t , g u a r d e d , stylized sentences on the
inscribed stones: no matter w h a t the detailed effects of the a p p l i c a -
t i o n — a n d I have tried to s h o w h o w they c o u l d w o r k to the
advantage of either party, rulers or r u l e d — t h e institutionalized
nature of the shared, reversible language entailed parity b e t w e e n the
t w o parties, and hence the c o n v e r s i o n of the s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
' p o w e r - a s - c o n q u e s t ' of e m p i r e into the far less s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
' p o w e r - a s - b a t t l e f i e l d ' of interaction and n e g o t i a t i o n . 1 "

175 7 a eis τιμήν καί δόξαν ανήκοντα: d o c u m e n t s SI 3 1 Β , I I I ι ό , I V ι Ι - Ι 2 ; 341 OGIS 219,

lines 3 2 - 3 · Praise: 19 A , 10; 3 1 A , I 8; 26 Β, II 4-5, 14-15; 7. Stratonikeia 3, 4.
Ευχαριστία: IJ, 25—7; 18, 74.
176 D o c u m e n t 26 A , I 27-9. 45, 15, for the Scipios promising 'return of gratitude' to

the Herakleians in exchange for honours.

177 Foucault 1975: 35: power not as property or privilege, but as 'un réseau de rela-

tions toujours tendues', as battlefield. A parallel: G . Algazi, on the negotiations between

lord and peasant through constantly reinvented tradition, in late medieval G e r m a n y
(Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales 105 (1994), 26-8).
 C O N C L U S I O N , E P I L O G U E , ENVOI

'Once there was a king, Antiochos the

Great . .

A n t i o c h o s I I I and the cities: exploring the background to the

confrontation of winter 197/6 BC (Liv. 33.38) has initially meant
evoking the earlier history of Asia M i n o r , the Seleukids' presence,
the narrative of their power, and of the challenges to their power, in
the region; it further entailed reconstructing the political and mili-
tary narrative of the years 226 to 193 BC, w h e n A n t i o c h o s I I I took
over, or took back, what he considered to be ancestral possessions in
Seleukid Asia M i n o r , until diplomatic clashes and geopolitical mis-
understandings with R o m e led to war. M o r e broadly, the same
L i v i a n passage offered the opportunity to explore its ramifications,
especially by interpreting the primary evidence w h i c h relates to this
particular m o m e n t in history, or illustrate the issues involved in it.
O n c e the background and the narrative context were established,
the implications of the L i v i a n passage led to a characterization of
empire and polis, and to conclusions about their relation.
I tried to describe and think about the purposes and means of
e m p i r e — t h e initial violence of conquest, followed by 'organized
violence' in the long term, w h i c h enabled the mutually supporting
activities of control and exploitation. F r o m this study of 'empire at
w o r k ' emerges the picture of an impressively extensive, centralized
and active administration, in spite of the limitations of the evidence:
this picture can be reached by pursuing the richly evocative impli-
cations of our documents for the functions and capacities of
Seleukid 'institutions', since we cannot collate the evidence to
produce a systematic tableau of structures. But this implied picture
might be an illusion p r o d u c e d by the inclusive, integrating ideology
of empire, to dissimulate material limitations (which our evidence
for institutions of power precisely will not tell us about, but w h i c h
can be detected in other ways, by looking at the implication of other
pieces of evidence). A m o n g the ideological resources at the disposal
of the Hellenistic imperial states, we must count the very structures
of imperial power, w h i c h not only carried out concrete duties, but
also made visible the empire's ubiquity, effectiveness, and 'natural-
ness'. A n o t h e r set of important ideological functions were per-
formed by the legal statuses w h i c h were granted to the cities by the
ruler, f r o m subjection to full liberty on the ruler's consent.
A d m i t t e d l y , legal statuses and privileges gave material advantages
to the local communities, and represented public c o m m i t m e n t s on
the part of the ruler and formal, legal constraints on his power, so
that they should not be minimized as mere hypocritical sham, as
has been done by some scholars. But I have tried to show that the
typology of statuses and privileges, culminating in 'freedom'
dependent on the ruler's grant, served to impose the assumption of
the ruler's authority over local statuses, his control over definitions,
his right to take back as well as to give away: these were meant to
form the limit of the local communities' horizon, whatever their
status.
Y e t faced w i t h the material resources and the ideological force of
a Hellenistic empire, the cities were not powerless and abject, as is
sometimes claimed on the basis of reductive, insensitive, or super-
ficial readings of our documents. T o varying degrees (and this
diversity in itself is a warning against facile generalizations on the
p o w e r relationship between ruler and city) the cities were capable of
resistance or opportunism, especially because the ideology of empire
was expressed through language and interaction between ruler and
ruled, and hence through an exchange where both parties could
attempt to shape the world and each other. In subordination, the
cities drew on the empire's need for collaboration to negotiate
privileges; they interacted with their master and mediated power
through a stereotypical, ambiguous language designed to talk not
about power but about reciprocity and exchange, in an open-ended
dialogue. In this dialogue, the cities were acknowledged as inter-
locutors of the central power, thus converting what might have been
a straight relation of domination into a complicated reality of
negotiation and mutual a c c o m m o d a t i o n — e v e n if all the exact details
of this reality are, for the m o m e n t , all but irrecoverable because we
do not have the evidence for a meaningful study of local factors and
the complicated flux of power-as-interaction. T h e 'catalogue-and-
speculation' presentation, city by city, sometimes favoured by
scholars of the Hellenistic world, does not attain this goal. N o n e t h e -
less, the conclusion remains: the final result of this interaction was
not predetermined, and the rewriting of power into the language of
beneficence could work to the ruler's profit, or the subjects' profit,
or do both at the same time. T h i s conclusion in itself shows the
fluidity of the relations between city and ruler in the period, and this
is one of the impressions that emerges f r o m this study: the existence
of a fluid, open-ended interaction between ruler and ruled, where
unspoken power structures, euergetical assumptions, and mutual
role assignment along moralizing norms combined in a c o m p l e x
game. Finally, the cities resorted to various strategies (local narra-
tives, selective m e m o r y , the practical exercise and the monumental
celebration of civic discourse) to preserve their sense of identity
and civic pride. T h e exercise was self-fulfilling, since the very
production of these local narratives proved a persistence of local
identity: a finding w h i c h substantiates L . Robert's dictum on the
persistence of thQ polis in the Hellenistic age, and helps to explore it,
by focusing on the crucial area of civic pride and identity.
T h e analyses I have proposed in the preceding chapters are
functions of two different, yet complementary perspectives on the
Hellenistic world: f r o m above, as the military narrative of conquest
and its concomitant history of empire; f r o m below, as a history of
local communities, whose diversity influenced the vicissitudes of
high political history, but also the shape of empires on the ground,
e m b o d y i n g the texture and experience of empire as lived by
Hellenistic men and w o m e n . Neither perspective is the exclusively
'correct' one, and both must be integrated into any satisfying
account of the Hellenistic world, as its greatest historians were
aware, f r o m P o l y b i o s d o w n to M . Rostovtzeff and L . Robert. T h e
study of A n t i o c h o s I I I and his relation to the cities of Western Asia
M i n o r is thus also an exercise in, and a reflection on, the issues
involved in writing the history of the Hellenistic period.
It is this final picture of a complex and shifting reality w h i c h
matters, b e y o n d the specifically Seleukid aspects of the story (even
though I have been at some pains to establish a Seleukid narrative
earlier on). T h e Seleukid aspects were soon dismantled in the
R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r and its aftermath, illustrated by ironical
juxtapositions w h i c h highlight the typicality, and hence the dis-
pensability, of the Seleukid experience.
T h e R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r , conducted, after Antiochos' defeat at
T h e r m o p y l a i (191 BC), in the eastern A e g e a n and Asia M i n o r
( 1 9 1 - 1 9 0 ) , presents a military narrative, well documented (through
L i v y and A p p i a n , reproducing Polybios), and d r a m a t i c — t h e
strategic manoeuvring with great naval clashes, A n t i o c h o s ' ill-
advised evacuation of T h r a c e and L y s i m a c h e i a , the land marches
leading to the final battle at Magnesia in winter 190/189, in the
L y d i a n plain: A n t i o c h o s I I I lost the c i s - T a u r i c dominions on the
same field where Seleukos I had w o n them, almost a century earlier.
A f t e r w a r d s , the cities surrendered en masse to the victor (just as they
had surrendered to Seleukos I in 281 BC), starting with several
'Seleukid' cities: T h y a t e i r a , where Seleukos I had settled military
colonists w h o offered cultic honours to the king; Magnesia under
Sipylos, also a focus of Seleukid military settlement; and Sardeis,
the administrative centre for 'the regions on the other side of the
T a u r u s ' . 1 A t Sardeis, the citizens and the garrison ignored the city-
c o m m a n d e r and the governor of L y d i a , both just appointed by
Antiochos: even in Sardeis, the provincial capital, Seleukid author-
ity no longer held (Liv. 37.45.3-7)·
A s suggested by these cities, there is another, fragmented, narra-
tive, for the local communities caught in 'the changes in circum-
stances', as an A m y z o n i a n decree puts it, ai τών καιρών μεταβολαί (J.
and L . Robert 1983: no. 36, line 11). M a n y cities rallied to the
Romans. K o l o p h o n (probably a Seleukid city till then), revolted
f r o m the king: the lower town (Notion, or K o l o p h o n - b y - s e a ) was
besieged by A n t i o c h o s , but resisted until the king lifted the siege 2
and marched to meet the R o m a n army in the field, at Magnesia; the
city was rewarded with privileges by the Scipios after the war. A
sign of this history is recorded in the festivals of K o l o p h o n . In the
third century BC, the Kolophonians, under the Seleukids, had
celebrated a festival called the Antiocheia, whose importance is
conveyed by the fact that public honours at K o l o p h o n were pro-
claimed at three occasions: the Dionysia, the Great Klaria, and the
Antiocheia. In the second-century BC, honours were proclaimed
only in the two former festivals, suggesting that the K o l o p h o n i a n s
ceased to celebrate the Antiocheia, presumably as a result of their
rallying to R o m e , and their successful resistance against A n t i o c h o s
I I I . 3 Other Seleukid cities passed over to the R o m a n s , in different
conditions and with different results. Herakleia under L a t m o s took
the step of sending an embassy to the Scipios before the battle of
Magnesia, thus securing the city's position after the R o m a n victory;

1 F o r a n a r r a t i v e of the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r , W i l l 1982: 2 0 4 - 1 6 . T h y a t e i r a : OGIS

211 (same d o c u m e n t Τ Α Μ 5.901, w i t h c o m m e n t a r y b y H e r r m a n n on cultic honours).
M a g n e s i a u n d e r S i p y l o s : OGIS 2 2 9 . S a r d e i s : s e e C h . 3 § 2.
2 T h e H e l l e n i s t i c w a l l s w h i c h e n a b l e d N o t i o n to r e s i s t A n t i o c h o s I I I a r e n o t t r e a t e d

in M c N i c o l l 1 9 9 7 .
5 D o c u m e n t 42, L i v . 3 7 . 2 6 . 5 - 1 3 , d o c u m e n t 46. A p o l l o K l a r i o s is ' l e a d e r a n d s a v i o u r

[ o f t h e c i t y ] ' , του καθηγέμονος και οωτήρος [TIJS πόλεως] in a K o l o p h o n i a n d e c r e e o f

t h e e a r l y s e c o n d c e n t u r y ( S E G 4 2 . 1 0 6 5 ) : t h e t i t l e m i g h t r e f e r to t h e c i t y ' s s u c c e s s f u l
r e s i s t a n c e t o A n t i o c h o s I I I i n 190. A n t i o c h e i a : I. Lampsakos 33, Inschr. Priene 5 7 , I.
Iasos 80, w i t h P . F r i s c h , ZPE 15 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , 9 8 a n d BE 7 4 . 4 5 7 ; b u t t h e f e s t i v a l is a b s e n t
f r o m SEG 4 2 . 1 0 6 5 . U n p u b l i s h e d m a t e r i a l , d i s c o v e r e d in t h e r e c e n t e x c a v a t i o n s at
K l a r o s , m a y clarify the situation.
the embassy included three men w h o once had gone to Z e u x i s about
the city's privileges. T e o s surrendered after a meeting of the
assembly, perhaps held in the same bouleuterion where A n t i o c h o s
had once declared the city and its territory free, asylos and tax-
e x e m p t (privileges w h i c h the R o m a n s had acknowledged in 193). If
so, the meeting where the T e i a n s renounced their adhesion to the
Seleukid king's pragmata took place before the bronze king's cult-
statue, crowned w i t h seasonal vegetation and earlier made into the
focus of carefully recentred civic rituals. 4 Other cities resisted the
Romans, such as Patara ( L i v . 37.16), or A b y d o s , held by Seleukid
f o r c e s — w h i l e Sestos, across the Straits, sent two priests of K y b e l e ,
in full regalia, to meet the R o m a n soldiers, before surrendering
formally (Pol. 21.6.7; L i v . 37.9.8—1 x; 37.12.1—3). Iasos, occupied by
a Seleukid phylake, saw its territory ravaged by R o m a n troops, but
was spared on the intercession of the Rhodians, w h o intervened in
favour of their συγγενείς, after being approached by Iasians expelled
by the Seleukid garrison; these Iasians claimed that their city was
unanimous in wishing to escape regia servitus—using the same
metaphor as an Iasian decree had done in 197, to castigate the
A n t i g o n i d dominion f r o m w h i c h A n t i o c h o s had freed the city. 5 T h e
Rhodians' intervention in favour of the Iasians recalls their earlier
intervention, c.215, w h e n they interceded with Philip V to protect
the Iasians against O l y m p i c h o s (Ch. 1 § 4). T h e case of another city,
Phokaia, is exceptional only because, divided on which course to
chose, it adopted all of them in succession: adhesion to the R o m a n s
in 191, 'out of fear' ( L i v . 36.43.8; A p p . Syr. 22); after an attempt at
neutrality (Pol. 21.6.2-6), rallying to the Seleukids, w h e n the
presence of the R o m a n fleet proved too burdensome, (Liv. 3 7 . 9 . 1 -
5); military resistance to the Romans, aided by Seleukid troops ( L i v .
37.21.8-9). T h e end came in a R o m a n siege, the ancient walls
breached by the battering-ram: nonetheless, the citizenry repelled
the assault by stubborn resistance, 'showing that arms and courage
were of greater help than walls' ( L i v . 37.32.5, a perplexing echo
of 33.38.2). T h e city finally surrendered, only to be sacked and
plundered by the R o m a n soldiers (Liv. 3 7 . 3 2 . 1 0 - 1 4 ) — a n incident
w h i c h recalls the economic motive for empire and warfare (Ch. 3
§ 1; A u s t i n 1986)—activities conducted at the expense of the local
communities.

A f t e r Magnesia and the Peace of A p a m e i a , business carried on, as

emphasized by ironical similarities with the now extinct Seleukid
4 H e r a k l e i a : d o c u m e n t 4S- T e o s : L i v . 37.27.3—28.9, w i t h H e r r m a n n 1965a: 156-7
( s u r r e n d e r p e r h a p s d e c i d e d in t h e bouleuterion).
5 Liv. 37.17.3-7.
dominion. T h e Romans, at A p a m e i a , exercised the victor's m o n o -
poly of performative utterances, and hence the right to define
statuses (freedom or subordination), distribute territory, and even
give away cities by fiat6—-just as A n t i o c h o s I I I had done. M o s t of
the Seleukid province was divided up (like dishes at a rich feast: Pol.
21.22.13), between E u m e n e s II (who received Aiolis, the T r o a s ,
Ionia, and the inland swathe, d o w n to the M a e a n d e r , and to the
Kilikian Gates) and the Rhodians (who received Karia and Lykia).
F o r both, the same activities can be traced as for the Seleukids: for
the Rhodians, control and administration; for the Attalids, coloniza-
tion in L y d i a (both 'military colonies' and cities), euergetism for the
cities, military activity in the inland, notably in Pisidia: 7 the land-
scape of Asia M i n o r w o u l d bear Attalid traces exactly similar in
nature to the traces of Seleukid power. In many cases, the new
power continued earlier practice: at G ö r d e s , where a Seleukid
officer had made a dedication to Z e u s Porottenos for the safety of
Apollophanes, physician to A n t i o c h o s I I I , the c o m m a n d e r of
Attalid troops erected a similar stele for the safety of E u m e n e s II,
' K i n g E u m e n e s , Saviour and Benefactor, and his brothers, and
Q u e e n A p o l l o n i s ' ; a ruling concerning the shrine of A p o l l o of
Pleura, near Sardeis, issued (probably on the eve of Magnesia) by
Nikanor, the 'high-priest of all the shrines' in xA.natolia, was
confirmed by his Attalid successor, E u t h y d e m o s . W h e n granting
the status of polis to a settlement at T y r i a i o n , E u m e n e s II, visiting
Phrygia shortly after the peace of A p a m e i a , affirmed the validity of
his grant, 'given by me, w h o have authority f r o m the R o m a n s
victorious both in war and in treaties, unlike (a letter) written by
those w h o do not hold power; for the latter favour (χάρις) w o u l d be
rightly considered e m p t y and deceitful'. In making this allusion to
the Seleukids, E u m e n e s II, though eager to deny their authority and
affirm the stability of his R o m a n - s u p p o r t e d rule, also shows how
Attalid p o w e r has taken precisely the place once assumed by the
Seleukids. 8 ( T h e r e are of course new developments, such as the

6 Pol. 2 1 . 4 5 ; L i v . 3 8 . 3 9 . 7 - 1 7 ( n o t e R h o i t e i o n a n d G e r g i t h o s , g i v e n to I l i o n ) ;
A p p e n d i x 7; R o b e r t 1987: 2 1 1 .
7 Lydia: D e b o r d 1 9 8 5 , a n a l y s i n g Τ Α Μ 5; C o h e n 1 9 9 5 : 2 0 1 - 4 o n Apollonis.
E u e r g e t i s m : e . g . R o b e r t 1 9 3 7 : 7 4 - 8 9 , f o r A i g a i . P i s i d i a : RC 5 4 , K e a r s l e y 1 9 9 4 .
8 G ö r d e s : d o c u m e n t 39; ΤΑΜ 5 . 6 9 0 ( A t t a l i d ) . P l e u r a : d o c u m e n t 49; t h e A t t a l i d s a l s o
k e p t t h e o f f i c e o f <5 ΙττΙ των ίΐρών ( M a l a y a n d N a l b a n t o g l u 1 9 9 6 ; A l l e n 1 9 8 3 : 9 6 - 7 ) .
T y r i a i o n : J o n n e s a n d R i c l 1 9 9 7 : 3, l i n e s 2 0 - 4 . G e n e r a l l y , o n t h e A t t a l i d k i n g d o m a f t e r
188, R o s t o v t z e f f 1941: 6 3 7 - 4 9 ; A l l e n 1983: 7 6 - 1 3 5 ; n e w e v i d e n c e has appeared:
K e a r s l e y 1 9 9 4 a n d e s p e c i a l l y M a l a y 1 9 9 6 , p u b l i s h i n g an ostotheke found near ancient
T r a l l e i s , r e c o r d i n g n a m e s a n d t i t l e s o f A t t a l i d o f f i c i a l s (a g o v e r n o r o f T r a l l e i s a n d o f
a c t i v e t r o o p s ( σ τ ρ α τ η γ ό ς του υπαίθρου), a g o v e r n o r o f t h e topoi a r o u n d E p h e s o s ) a n d d i s -
c u s s i n g p r e v i o u s l y k n o w n e v i d e n c e ( s e e a l s o t h e r e m a r k s b y P h . G a u t h i e r , BE 9 7 . 5 2 6 ) .
Attalid introduction of a restricted monetary system, the cistophoric
coinage: W i l l 1982: 229-30; M o r k h o l m 1991: 1 7 1 - 3 ) .
Local reactions were the same as under the Seleukids, and the
similarity of issues and behaviour again produced ironical echoes of
the Seleukid period. Apollonia under Salbake sent an embassy
before the ten R o m a n commissioners at A p a m e i a , then to the
Rhodians, to negotiate a settlement and oppose the claims of local
villagers (probably the Saleioi concerning w h o m the Apollonians
had opposed the Seleukid financial administration); the event,
naturally, is recorded in an honorific decree for a citizen w h o
distinguished himself on the mission. T h e decree was inscribed on
the anta of a public building, w h i c h , in all probability, bore the
honorific decree for a Seleukid hipparch w h o had helped the city in
its dealings with the Seleukid administration: high-politics changed,
and the political masters that had to be dealt with, but the local
c o m m u n i t y (and its public records, published in stone on a m o n u -
mental building) remained the same. A m y z o n praised a citizen,
Dionysios, for going on embassy to Z e u x i s , and 'likewise', ομοίως, to
the R o m a n consuls in 188, to safeguard the city's privileges. T h e
adverb gives the city's perspective: changes in international politics
did not affect the structural need to defend local interests nor the
techniques for doing so: sending out embassies of articulate citizens
bearing decrees and holding forth before representatives of w h a t -
ever power held sway in Asia M i n o r . T h u s , the same man, the same
city, dealt matter-of-factly with Seleukids and R o m a n s in succes-
sion. 9 T h e K a r i a n cities offered honorific decrees to their Rhodian
governors (e.g. I. Stratonikeia 9), along the same lines, and no doubt
to achieve the same socializing effects, as in their decrees for
Seleukid (and, indeed, Ptolemaic) officials. T h e Trallians, once a
Seleukid city named Seleukeia, offered cultic honours to E u m e n e s
II and served as a royal residence for Attalid kings. W h a t happened
in T e o s to the elaborate cultic arrangements honouring A n t i o c h o s
I I I is u n k n o w n . A t least some form of Seleukid dynastic cult
survived, documented in an altar w h i c h lists Seleukid kings d o w n to
the middle of the second century, long after A n t i o c h o s I I I had lost
Asia M i n o r ( O G I S 246; new text in SEG 35.1521). All the same, we
are entitled to w o n d e r if it was soon after 190 that the T e i a n s dis-
carded the pilasters bearing the decrees inaugurating m o n u m e n t s
and honours for A n t i o c h o s I I I and Laodike I I I : the stone blocks

9 A p o l l o n i a : d o c u m e n t s 48, 44 a n d J. a n d L . R o b e r t 1 9 5 4 : 286. A m y z o n : 47, c f .

W ö r r l e 1 9 8 8 : 4 5 5 : s e v e r a l H e r a k l e i a n s w e n t b o t h o n t h e c r u c i a l e m b a s s y to Z e u x i s c . 1 9 6
( d o c u m e n t 3 1 ) a n d o n t h e n o l e s s c r u c i a l e m b a s s y to t h e S c i p i o s in l a t e 1 9 0 , b e f o r e t h e
b a t t l e o f M a g n e s i a (45).
w e r e f o u n d , b r o k e n and not in situ, b e h i n d the t e m p l e of D i o n y s o s .
F u r t h e r m o r e , the T e i a n s d e v e l o p e d cultic f o r m s directed to, or
about, the n e w d o m i n a n t p o w e r , the A t t a l i d s . F o r the A t t a l i d q u e e n
A p o l l o n i s , they decreed h o n o u r s similar to, and p e r h a p s imitated
f r o m , those for L a o d i k e I I I : the agora, w h e r e the T e i a n s had w i s h e d
to set a m o n u m e n t of their eucharistia t o w a r d s L a o d i k e , received an
altar c o m m e m o r a t i n g the landing of A p o l l o n i s in the city. 1 0
A p a m e i a in P h r y g i a , n a m e d after a S e l e u k i d q u e e n , and a base for
the Pisidian forays of A n t i o c h o s I I I , h o n o u r e d a citizen f o r e r e c t i n g
statues of E u m e n e s II and his b r o t h e r A t t a l o s , and for p r o v i d i n g
m o n e y for the A t t a l i d a r m y ( M A M A 6 . 1 7 3 w i t h BE 39, 400);
Sardeis, the f o r m e r S e l e u k i d provincial capital, c o n t i n u e d as a ' s u b -
j e c t ' A t t a l i d city.
Sardeis, t h o u g h an A t t a l i d city, also illustrates the c o n t i n u i n g life
of the polis. C r o e s u s ' palace on the acropolis, w h i c h had p r o b a b l y
b e e n the residence of the S e l e u k i d k i n g and his g o v e r n o r , was trans-
f o r m e d into a gerousia, the m e e t i n g - p l a c e for the council (or p e r h a p s
a special council of elders) of Sardeis. T h e f o r m e r S e l e u k i d a d m i n -
istrative centre h o n o u r e d a citizen, H e l i o d o r o s , for successful
e m b a s s i e s and excellence 'in the j u d g e - p a n e l s sent out b y the people
to the other cities': S a r d e i s n o w sent ' f o r e i g n j u d g e s ' to help other
c o m m u n i t i e s , as a full participant in the concert of poleis,11 The
decree, strikingly, is inscribed on the same b l o c k as a royal letter,
almost certainly b y A n t i o c h o s I I I or L a o d i k e I I I ; the j u x t a p o s i t i o n
in itself contains a small narrative of the new existence of S a r d e i s as
polis a m o n g poleis, and one m a y w o n d e r if the effect was intended.
E v e n m o r e striking is the c o n t i n u i n g e v i d e n c e for a significant
n u m b e r of cities b e h a v i n g as military and political actors. W i t h o u t
g o i n g into a detailled history of the second c e n t u r y as e x p e r i e n c e d
b y the cities, I m a y m e n t i o n some of the better k n o w n or m o r e
evocative events. D u r i n g the year 189, b e t w e e n the battle of
M a g n e s i a and the peace of A p a m e i a , M a n l i u s V u l s o m a r c h e d
t h r o u g h A n a t o l i a , to fight the Galatians: his m a r c h revealed a w o r l d
of local rancours and conflicts, carried out w i t h local military forces,
a w o r l d w h i c h V u l s o e x p l o i t e d to his financial profit ( l e v y i n g r a n s o m
f r o m the cities) but on w h i c h he did not impose order. A f t e r the
settlement of 188, m a n y cities r e m a i n e d free, and p u r s u e d their

10 T r a l l e i s : R o b e r t , OMS ii. 1 1 7 8 - 9 0 ( o n a d e c r e e r e p u b l i s h e d a s I. Tralleis 2 3 ) . T e o s :

H e r r m a n n 1 9 6 5 a : 1 4 9 - 5 4 , o n OGIS 246; 3 1 - 2 , o n findspot o f T e i a n d e c r e e s ( a d m i t -
t e d l y , H e r r m a n n s p e a k s of the b l o c k s b e i n g f o u n d in Sturzlage, i m p l y i n g collapse rather
than deliberate discarding). F o r the r e m o t e possibility that a R o m a n graffito f o u n d near
T e o s a l l u d e s to A n t i o c h o s I I I , A p p e n d i x 3. A p o l l o n i s : H e r r m a n n 1 9 6 5 a : 61—2 a n d
Robert 1937: 9-20.
" Gerousia: V i t r u v . 2.8.9—10, P l i n . NH 3 5 . 1 7 2 . H e l i o d o r o s : G a u t h i e r 1989: no. 4 B.
interests (Will 1982: 238), especially in Southern Ionia and W e s t e r n
Karia, where Magnesia on Maeander, Priene, Miletos, Herakleia,
E u r o m o s , Mylasa, and A l a b a n d a , free cities in or near the Rhodian
province, conducted a complicated and protracted game of war and
diplomacy. T h e object of competition seems to have been territory,
in a process initiated or aggravated by Philip V , w h e n he redis-
tributed the mosaic of civic territories in the area (Ch. 2 § 3); in the
second-century, the cities fought wars over disputed territory,
finally coming to elaborate peace treaties. Miletos expanded by
absorbing its smaller neighbour, the city of Pedasa (which once had
figured among the list of R o m a n demands to Philip V : Pol. 18.44
and C h . 2 § 5); the adjoining cities of E u r o m o s and Mylasa united in
sympoliteia, to the alarm (and violent reaction) of their neighbour,
Herakleia. S o m e communities (the Kibyratans, M y l a s a , Alabanda)
w o u l d even fight against Rhodes, in 167, to aid or profit f r o m the
revolt of Rhodian subjects. 1 2 In this world, the Seleukid ruler,
A n t i o c h o s I V , w o u l d only appear as a far-away figure, at whose
court Milesians served as royal Friends, and whose benefactions,
mediated by these Milesian Friends were gratefully acknowledged
by Miletos ( H e r r m a n n 1987): the reality and the threat of Seleukid
power having disappeared, all that was left was the euergetical
cordiality w h i c h had once served to mask or make palatable the
prospect of Seleukid rule. A f t e r 167 BC, the communities of Karia
and L y k i a were freed from Rhodian domination, b e c o m i n g actors in
their o w n histories. L y k i a , organized in a league of cities, engaged
in frequent military activity: L y k i a n inscriptions honour the ser-
vices of citizen commanders, such as the military services of
Orthagoras of A r a x a , w h o fought, for his city and for the L y k i a n
L e a g u e , against the Kibyratans, 'tyrants' in the X a n t h o s valley, and
the Termessians, probably in the latter second century. 1 3 T h e inde-
pendence of L y k i a w o u l d formally last until C l a u d i u s provincialized
the region in AD 43. T h i s story is given a vivid and monumental
representation in the southern gate of the great L y k i a n city,
X a n t h o s . T h e right-hand gatepost recorded, in a monumental
inscription, the consecration of the city b y the 'great king'

12 G e n e r a l l y , R o b e r t 1 9 8 7 : 2 1 0 - 1 4 . P e a c e t r e a t i e s : Syll. 633, 588 (with E r r i n g t o n

1 9 8 9 a f o r d a t e ) . M i l e t o s a n d P e d a s a : Inschr. Delphinion 149. E u r o m o s , M y l a s a , and
H e r a k l e i a : I. Mylasa 102. T h e sympoliteia in t h e l a t t e r d o c u m e n t m i g h t b e t h e ' o c c u p a -
t i o n o f t h e c i t i e s i n E u r o m o s ' o f P o l . 3 0 . 5 . 1 1 , w h i c h l e d to t h e R h o d i a n s fighting a g a i n s t ,
a n d d e f e a t i n g , t h e M y l a s a n s a n d t h e A l a b a n d a n s in 1 6 7 , at t h e t i m e w h e n t h e K i b y r a t a n s
a i d e d t h e K a u n i a n s in r e v o l t f r o m R h o d e s .
l s A r a x a d e c r e e : SEG 18.570, w i t h E r r i n g t o n 1987: 1 1 4 - 1 8 (date m u s t be after 167,
w h e n the L y k i a n s g a i n e d their f r e e d o m f r o m the R h o d i a n s ) ; Z i m m e r m a n n 1993 w o u l d
d a t e s o m e o f t h e e v e n t s in t h e d e c r e e b e f o r e 1 6 7 , as d e s c r i b i n g t h e s t r u g g l e o f t h e
L y k i a n s against the R h o d i a n s .
A n t i o c h o s I I I , after Seleukid conquest in 197, an event w h i c h
presumably appeared definitive at the time to the Xanthians (who
put up the inscription on their o w n initiative). Y e t the Seleukid
dominion was not permanent, and the inscription was erased, per-
haps under the Rhodians, w h e n they dominated L y k i a . Y e t Rhodian
rule also came to pass away: constantly challenged, it was finally
dissolved by R o m a n ç a i in 167. A f t e r L y k i a was freed, the left-hand
post was inscribed with dedications by a local citizen, victorious
general and successful admiral of the L y k i a n fleet, active in the
L y k i a n s ' o w n history as manifested by military activity. 1 4
T h e R o m a n settlement of Asia M i n o r in 188 BC did more than
just debar Seleukid power f r o m the region, using the T a u r u s , which
had once been a feature of Seleukid administrative geography, as an
international frontier. It was also an exercise in history-writing: it
undid Seleukid Asia M i n o r , by referring not to the Seleukid past as
the status quo for local rights, but to the situation w h i c h had per-
tained under the Attalids (in c.226, then 2 1 8 ) — a n 'Attalid past' (see
A p p e n d i x 7). 15 T h e settlement of 188 consigned the Seleukid
project to h i s t o r y — n o longer a live reality in its manifestations and
its ideology, but of interest only to the historian, recorded in the
local epigraphical narratives such as the antas of the temple of
A t h e n a at Herakleia, where Seleukid letters were succeeded by
the letter of the Scipios, or the 'epigraphical m u s e u m ' of the
A m y z o n i a n Artemision, recording the life of the city under
Ptolemies, Seleukids, Rhodians, and as a free community. 1 6
A sense of this evolution can be gained f r o m a rather Cavafian
interlude in Polybios ( 2 1 . 4 1 . 1 - 5 ) . M a n l i u s V u l s o was surprised to
discover, in winter 189/8—just before the peace of A p a m e i a was
finalized—that a garrison-commander appointed by A n t i o c h o s I I I
over Perge had not evacuated that city; this Seleukid officer had no
doubt been overlooked during the more exciting, or depressing,
events of the years 190-189. W h e n challenged, the hapless
phrourarch invoked his royal orders, and the absence of any sub-

14 D o c u m e n t 21; ΤΑΜ 2 . 2 6 4 , 2^5· S i m i l a r is Syll. 1 2 2 6 , A l a b a n d a n p u b l i c e p i t a p h s

f o r c i t i z e n c o m m a n d e r s f a l l e n in b a t t l e îmèp της πατρίδος; also the square basis, of
u n k n o w n o r i g i n , n o w k e p t in S m y r n a , w h i c h t h e i n s c r i p t i o n d e s c r i b e s as t h e heroon o f
o n e D i o n , w h o d i e d f o r h i s f a t h e r l a n d in b a t t l e (ΐμ παρατάξει): R o b e r t 1 9 3 7 : 9 8 η . 2.
15 B i k e r m a n 1 9 3 7 is a w a r e o f t h i s a s p e c t , b u t a t t r i b u t e s it to an A t t a l i d s o u r c e o f
P o l y b i o s ' a c c o u n t , w h i c h h e r e j e c t s as e r r o n e o u s , c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e L i v i a n v e r s i o n . I
b e l i e v e b o t h can b e r e c o n c i l e d , and reflect t w o different, b u t c o m p a t i b l e a i m s of the
R o m a n s : r e s t o r e t h e status quo u n d e r A t t a l o s I a n d a l s o r e w a r d d e f e c t i o n s f r o m t h e
S e l e u k i d s in 190. I n t h e s e t t l e m e n t o f 1 8 8 , M y s i a w a s c o n s i d e r e d t h e A t t a l i d s ' a n c e s t r a l
p o s s e s s i o n , w h i c h P r o u s i a s h a d s e i z e d f r o m t h e m ( B a r o n o w s k i 1 9 9 1 : 4 5 2 n . 4; P o l .
21.46.10; Liv. 38.39.15).
16 B o f f o 1988 a n a l y s e s the f u n c t i o n o f e p i g r a p h y as local h i s t o r i o g r a p h y .
sequent instructions: παραλαβών γαρ iv πίστει παρ' Άντιόχον τήν πόλιν
τηρίΐν ταντην, ê'ws αν διασαφηθή πάλιν παρά τον πιστενσαντος τί δει
ποιβίν μέχρι 8i τον νύν απλώς ονδέν αντώι παρ' ονδενος άποδεδηλώσθαι,
'since he had received the city f r o m Antiochos, as an object of trust,
he was holding it, until the further course of action was made clear
by him w h o had entrusted the city; but up to now, he quite simply
had heard nothing f r o m anyone'. T h e phrourarch asked for, and
was granted, thirty days to await instructions; unsurprisingly, he
was ordered out 'after a few days'. T h e phrourarch's subsequent
fate is not recorded, and we can only speculate about what reward
he expected, or w h a t punishment he received. W h a t is striking is
his adhesion to Seleukid administrative practice (a garrison-
c o m m a n d e r under direct oath to the king obeyed orders f r o m no
other source, since powers were formally separated, in accordance
with an old rule for imperial stability: C h . 3 §§ 1 - 2 ) — a n d especially
the fact that he acted thus even while the R o m a n settlement was
undoing the Seleukid c i s - T a u r i c province, a world of w h i c h the
phrourarch's behaviour was a last, unwittingly ironical, active
remnant. M o r e succinctly, the historicization of Seleukid Asia
M i n o r is embodied by a tag w h i c h , A p p i a n notes, gained currency
in R o m e after Magnesia (Syr. 37)—ήν βασιλεύς Άντίοχος 6 μέγας,
'once there was a king, A n t i o c h o s the Great'.
 A P P E N D I X ι

T h e D a t e of OGIS 219

Select bibliography: Robert 1966b: 11-12, and OMS νii. 599-635; Frisch's
lemma to I. Ilion 32, also including earlier bibliography; Orth 1977: 61-72
(examines the case for Antiochos III but favours Antiochos I; the best,
fairest, treatment); Piejko 1991 b (characteristically depressing; Antiochos
III); Jones 1993 (Antiochos I); Mastrocinque 1993 (against the 'war of
Syrian succession'; Antiochos III); Strobel 1996: 208, 245—6 (early date:
immediately after 278).

OGIS 219 (same document now in I. Ilion 32) is a well-known decree of

Ilion, honouring a Seleukid king with cultic activity and an equestrian
statue. Because the motivating clauses give a short narrative of the king's
actions and movements, it has drawn the attention of scholars working on
the Hellenistic period. Unfortunately, the date of the inscription is contro-
versial. T h e king honoured is 'Antiochos, son of Seleukos'—Antiochos I or
Antiochos III. In the former case, the date would be some time after 281
bc, when Antiochos I succeeded Seleukos I; in the latter case, the date
could be f.216, when Antiochos crossed the Taurus to reduce Achaios, or
c.203, during activity in Anatolia on his return from the East, or 197/6, in
the campaign from Kilikia to the Straits. T h e evidence is familiar, but
inconclusive. In my opinion, the question is not settled (in spite of
determined cases made for either dating), but on balance, I lean towards
the earlier dating, under Antiochos I.
Three main arguments can be offered in support of a low dating
(Antiochos III): 1. verbal parallels with the Teian decrees for Antiochos
III; 2. the similarity to the early years of Antiochos III as described in
Polybios; 3. palaeography. However, each of these arguments is open to
challenge.

ι. Verbal Parallels
T h e texts from Teos and from Iasos offer parallels to the text from
Ilion. Orth 1977: 66-7, listed these, as did Piejko (19916: 18-20) and
Mastrocinque (along no less than eight 'terni' he believes he can discern:
Mastrocinque 1993: 28-9; also Mastrocinque 1983: 67-8). Both in Teos
and Ilion, the king crosses over to the region on 'this side of the Taurus',
sets aright a troubled situation and brings peace to the cities. 1 However,
parallels in themselves are not compelling, in the present state of the evi-
dence, since it is not clear that 'crossing the Taurus, setting things aright,
bringing peace' were ever only said of Antiochos III, and that only he had
been honoured by the cities after such actions. All of his predecessors
crossed the Taurus at some point of their reign, to reinforce or re-establish
Seleukid authority. OGIS 229 mentions Seleukos II crossing the Taurus,
into the Seleukis: both concepts were operative in the language of the cities
before Antiochos III (admitted by Piejko 19916: 32), and the tone of the
description of royal fortitude and success recalls OGIS 219. Therefore, the
presence of these themes in OGIS 219 does not make a dating in the time
of Antiochos III necessary. Furthermore, there is one major difference
between OGIS 219 and the documents of Teos and Iasos. These insist on
the change brought about by Seleukid takeover: the Teians referred to
Antiochos' decision on their status, particularly the abolition of the Attalid
tribute (document 17, 18-20, 47-8), the Iasians spoke of Antiochos III
making them free instead of slaves (document 26 B, col. I). In contrast,
OGIS 219 presents a picture of continuous Seleukid power, more suited to
Antiochos I than Antiochos III.
Other parallels: the (unnamed) queen in OGIS 219 is called 'sister'
(lines 22, 44). T h a t Laodike III was sometimes referred to as Antiochos'
'sister' is well documented (Orth 1977: 64-6; Piejko 19916: 35—7). T h i s
argues in favour of the low dating. However, Jones (1993: 81-6) pointed
out that 'sister' was not an official title, but used in certain contexts,
emphasising the good relations between king and queen. It is possible that
this semi-formal usage existed before Antiochos III: there is not enough
evidence for a compelling argument ex silentio. Orth notes that Apame is
called the sister of Seleukos I in Liv. 38.12.5: mistake, or echo of the court
title used early on?
Finally, OGIS 219, lines 26-7, mentions public prayers by the priests to
Apollo, τώι άρχηγώι τοϋ γένους αύτοΰ (namely, of the king). Apollo appears
under Antiochos III as founder of the Seleukid dynasty. 2 But the parallel
merely proves a compatibility with the reign of Antiochos III and not the
necessity of attributing OGIS 219 to that king. A reference to Apollo as
dynastic god is possible under Antiochos I.3

2. Parallels betzveen the Reign of Antiochos III and the Events in OGIS 21g
T h e account of Antiochos' first years in Polybios seems to match the events
in OGIS 219. T h e troubles in OGIS 219 recall the difficult beginnings of

' C r o s s i n g t h e T a u r u s : d o c u m e n t 17, 10; I l i o n , l i n e 1 2 . S e t t l i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n : d o c u -

m e n t 17, 1 0 - 1 1 ; I l i o n , l i n e s 1 3 - 1 4 . P e a c e : d o c u m e n t 18, 50; I l i o n , l i n e 13; c f . d o c u m e n t
26 Β, I i t .
2 OGIS 2 3 7 ; K r a e l i n g 1 9 6 4 ; BE 5 5 , 1 2 2 ; d o c u m e n t 2 2 .
1 T h e c o i n a g e of A n t i o c h o s I starts r e p r e s e n t i n g A p o l l o on the o b v e r s e ( M o r k h o l m
1991: 113), p e r h a p s i m p l y i n g early c u r r e n c y for the m y t h of A p o l l i n i a n origins
( S h e r w i n - W h i t e a n d K u h r t 1 9 9 3 : 27—8).
Antiochos III (on these, Schmitt 1964: 108-88). T h i s similarity has often
been noted (Piejko 19916: 24-9; Mastrocinque 1993: 29, 1983: 65-8). T h e
king of OGIS 219 faces rebels in the Seleukis (not revolts by the cities as
sometimes said), attacks on the pragmata, the necessity of recovering the
'paternal empire'; success is followed by a campaign across the Taurus,
bringing peace to the cities and increasing the pragmata. It is unclear
whether the 'people who attack the pragmata' (οί επιθέμενοι τοις πράγμασιν,
line 7), are the same as the rebels, or external aggressors. 4 In the first case,
the situation would recall the time of Antiochos III; 5 in the latter case, the
situation would fit Antiochos I better than Antiochos III who started his
reign by attacking the Ptolemaic possessions of Koile-Syria). 6 T h e
campaigns across the Taurus might apply to Antiochos III recovering Asia
Minor from Achaios in 216 (Orth 1977: 68-9).
I have difficulties with dating OGIS 219 later than 216 bc, because the
narrative, as proposed in the considerations, would be a strange repre-
sentation of the activity of Antiochos III after those years: if dated in 197,
lines 2 - 1 2 would have to cover the eventful years 223-197, a raccourci
saisissant over 26 years. This is unlikely, because the detail of the sufferings
of the Syrian cities implies a single event: the war against the Baktrian king
Euthydemos might be represented as war against a rebel, αποστάτης (Pol.
11.34), but it is improbable that the Ilians imagined that the cities of the
Seleukis suffered because of him. It is also difficult to fit the expedition to
Atropatene, the Fourth and Fifth Syrian Wars, and the Anatolian cam-
paign of 203 into lines 2—12, which describe the return of the status quo as
a unified action. Likewise, the chronological scheme of document 17, 8-11
(Teos) involves a first stage 'on the other side of the Taurus', then the
king's presence in cis-Tauric Asia: as in OGIS 219, both actions are
represented as fairly close in time. On the other hand, the local Ilian
narrative was under no obligation to accurate or consistent representation
of royal campaigns.
Another argument against a dating to 197-196 is that OGIS 219 fails to
mention by name Antiochos Megas' sons, active and visible in those years
(Jones 1993: 88). T h e Herakleian decree, summarized by Antiochos III in
his letter to Herakleia under Latmos, honours each member of the royal
family: Laodike, Antiochos the son, Seleukos, and Mithridates (the future
Antiochos IV). Admittedly, the documents from Iasos forgo such detail,

4 J o n e s 1993: 7 7 - 8 . B u t J o n e s d o e s n o t s h o w t h a t t h e v e r b o n l y m e a n s e x t e r n a l a t t a c k

(cf. a l r e a d y O r t h 1 9 7 7 : 70). T o J o n e s ' s p a r a l l e l s , o n e m i g h t a d d P. Haun. 6, fr. 1, l i n e s

2 8 - 3 4 : P t o l e m y I I I s e n d s h i s s o n M a g a s εις Άσίαν επιθησόμενον, with Huss 1977 and
H a b i c h t 1980: 3); BE 6 1 , 4 1 9 , p . 1 9 9 (I t h a n k P . H e r r m a n n f o r t h e s e r e f e r e n c e s ) .
5 M o l o n ' s r o y a l p r e t e n s i o n s , t h e a l l e g e d p l o t of E p i g e n e s , the m u r d e r o f H e r m e i a s ,

A c h a i o s ' m a r c h on S y r i a w o u l d fit; the άττοοτάται τών πραγμάτων o f l i n e s 5 - 6 w o u l d t h e n

d e s i g n a t e the K y r r h e s t i a n r e b e l s , w h o c a u s e d c o n s i d e r a b l e t r o u b l e f o r s o m e t i m e , b e f o r e
b e i n g s u b d u e d b y S e l e u k i d f o r c e s ( P o l . 5 . 5 0 . 8 ; in 220, the m u t i n e e r s w e r e still a c t i v e :
P o l . 5 . 5 7 . 4 ) . In t h i s case, the K y r r h e s t i a n r e b e l s w o u l d b e t h e c a u s e f o r the m i s f o r t u n e s
s u f f e r e d b y t h e c i t i e s o f the S e l e u k i s ( O G I S 2 1 9 , l i n e s 5 - 6 ) : P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 6 : 29—30.
6 J o n e s 1 9 9 3 : 7 7 - 8 , a s s u m e s t w o d i s t i n c t t h r e a t s , b u t the t e x t m i g h t r e f e r to t h e s a m e

event with stylistic variatio.

b u t t h e y w e r e p r o d u c e d a f t e r t h e c a m p a i g n of 197, w h e n t h e s o n s w e r e
d i s p e r s e d . T h e f a c t t h a t t h e q u e e n in OGIS 219 is n o t n a m e d 7 also a r g u e s
a g a i n s t a low d a t i n g , s i n c e L a o d i k e I I I w a s o f t e n n a m e d in c o n t e m p o r a r y
inscriptions.8
F u r t h e r m o r e , OGIS 219 d o e s n o t r e f e r to ' t h e g r e a t k i n g A n t i o c h o s ' ,
u n l i k e o t h e r d o c u m e n t s of 197 9 ( J o n e s 1993: 87). OGIS 219 r e f e r s t w i c e t o
' k i n g A n t i o c h o s , s o n of k i n g S e l e u k o s ' (lines 2 - 3 , 36-7) a n d o n c e to t h e
p r i e s t of k i n g A n t i o c h o s (line 26). T h i s u s a g e w o u l d b e a n o m a l o u s f o r
A n t i o c h o s I I I , 1 0 as f a r as w e c a n r e c o n s t r u c t p r a c t i c e in 197 a n d a f t e r
( A p p e n d i x 4). D i v e r g e n c e is p o s s i b l e , b u t u n l i k e l y b e c a u s e of w i d e s p r e a d
consistency and sufficient documentation. Conversely, ' K i n g Antiochos,
s o n of K i n g S e l e u k o s ' fits A n t i o c h o s I, t h e s o n of t h e r e c e n t l y d e c e a s e d
S e l e u k o s I.
F i n a l l y , t h e h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n of I l i o n a r g u e s a g a i n s t t h e low d a t i n g . I n
OGIS 2 1 9 , lines 1 6 - 1 8 , t h e I l i a n s m e n t i o n t h a t at t h e t i m e of t h e a c c e s s i o n
of t h e k i n g t h e y c o n t i n u o u s l y p e r f o r m e d p u b l i c p r a y e r s a n d sacrifices o n
h i s b e h a l f (εύχάς καί θυσίας îmèp αντον πάσι τοις θεοις 8ιετελει ποιούμενος).
P i e j k o ( 1 9 9 3 3 ) b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e n e w s of t h e a c c e s s i o n w a s b r o u g h t b y
A c h a i o s w h e n h e r e c o n q u e r e d t h e city. H o w e v e r , I l i o n p r o b a b l y h e l d o u t
a g a i n s t A c h a i o s , 1 1 a n d c o u l d n o t h a v e p e r f o r m e d sacrifices at t h e a c c e s s i o n
of A n t i o c h o s I I I . I n c o n t r a s t , I l i o n w a s S e l e u k i d at t h e a c c e s s i o n of
A n t i o c h o s I, t a k e n o v e r a f t e r K o u r o u p e d i o n . I n a d d i t i o n , OGIS 219, line
26 m e n t i o n s a p r i e s t of K i n g A n t i o c h o s , w i t h o u t f u r t h e r details; t h e office
a l r e a d y e x i s t e d w h e n t h e d e c r e e ( t h e first of its k i n d f o r t h e k i n g in
q u e s t i o n ) w a s p a s s e d . 1 2 I t is u n l i k e l y t h a t I l i o n h a d a p r i e s t of A n t i o c h o s
I I I w h e n t h e l a t t e r t o o k it, s i n c e t h e city h a d b e e n u n d e r A t t a l o s I. T h e
s i t u a t i o n w o u l d fit A n t i o c h o s I b e t t e r : I l i o n c o u l d h a v e c r e a t e d a p r i e s t -
h o o d for the king after K o u r o u p e d i o n , since Seleukos I and Antiochos I
r u l e d j o i n t l y ( P h y l a r c h o s FGrHist 81 F 29, H a b i c h t 1970: 89-90, o n j o i n t
c u l t i c h o n o u r s f o r S e l e u k o s I a n d A n t i o c h o s I in 281). 1 3 S t r o b e l 1996:
7 P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 6 : 43 u n a c c e p t a b l y r e s t o r e s L a o d i k e in line 44, on the a r g u m e n t t h a t the

r o y a l c h i l d r e n ( t h e u s u a l r e s t o r a t i o n f o r the line) a r e n o t a t t e s t e d in the t w o o t h e r

p a s s a g e s w h e r e t h e q u e e n is m e n t i o n e d (line 22, l i n e s 2 3 - 2 4 ) : b u t n e i t h e r is t h e q u e e n ' s
name.
8 D o c u m e n t s 17, 18, 26 B , 27, 28, 30

9 T h e e x c e p t i o n s a r e A n t i o c h o s ' o w n u s a g e in l e t t e r s , d a t i n g f o r m u l a s in the h e a d i n g s

of decrees, and the o p e n i n g lines of the alliance b e t w e e n A n t i o c h o s and E u r o m o s . T h e

latter c a s e can b e e x p l a i n e d : at the m o m e n t o f t h e t r e a t y , the P h i l i p p e i s w e r e n o t y e t a
' S e l e u k i d ' city ( t h o u g h on the p o i n t of b e c o m i n g one).
10 T h e filiation o f A n t i o c h o s I I I is m e n t i o n e d o n c e , in a s t a t u e set u p o n D e l o s b y
M e n i p p o s , t h e S e l e u k i d a m b a s s a d o r , a l o n g s i d e the title ' g r e a t k i n g ' , as w e l l as a
r e f e r e n c e to t h e k i n g ' s M a c e d o n i a n o r i g i n s ( O G I S 2 3 9 ) ; b u t this p r i v a t e d e d i c a t i o n , in
a p a n - H e l l e n i c c o n t e x t , is d i f f e r e n t in n a t u r e f r o m the i n s c r i p t i o n s in ' S e l e u k i d ' c i t i e s .
11 C h . 2 § ι . P o l . 5 . 7 8 . 6 d o e s n o t d e s c r i b e the r e c o n q u e s t ( P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 b: 3 3 - 4 ) o f the

T r o a d b y A t t a l o s in 2 1 8 , b u t f r i e n d l y d e a l i n g s w i t h c i t i e s w h i c h h a d s t a y e d l o y a l . T h e
m o v e m e n t o f A t t a l o s I w e s t w a r d s w a s o c c a s i o n e d b y the m u t i n y o f t h e A i g o s a g e s ( P o l .
5 . 7 8 . 1 - 4 ) , n o t b y t h e n e e d to r e a s s e r t a u t h o r i t y o v e r the T r o a d .
12 C o n t r a s t the I a s i a n d e c r e e h o n o u r i n g L a o d i k e ( f o u n d a t i o n o f a p r i e s t h o o d o f
L a o d i k e , w i t h d e t a i l s a b o u t e l e c t i o n a n d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ) : d o c u m e n t 26 B.
13 P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 6 : 3 2 a n d n . 7 5 , t h i n k s that t h e a m b a s s a d o r s o f OGIS 2 1 9 , l i n e 29, are
245-6, dates OGIS 219 to 278: on this view, the benefactions for w h i c h
K i n g Antiochos is praised and honoured as saviour would be the defence
of Ilion, by Seleukid forces, against the Galatians, immediately after they
crossed the Hellespont. T h i s view is supported by circumstantial evidence
(the crossing of the Galatians and their passage by Ilion, the presence of
the Seleukid commander Antipatros: M e m n o n FGrHist 434 F 11.2.3,
Strabo 13.1.27), but would be stronger if the decree actually mentioned
Galatians, as other documents squarely do.

3. Palaeography

A r g u m e n t s f r o m letter-shapes and general presentation of the d o c u m e n t

have been adduced for both high and low dating. 1 4 T h e approach is
hampered by the lack of secure local parallels. 1 5 T h e letter-forms in OGIS
219 vary. 1 6 Certain features favour a high dating: the airy layout, or the
divergent bars of some sigmas. B u t other features point to a low date.
A l p h a occurs in a broken-barred version (along straight-barred and
curved-barred alphas). C u r v e d - b a r alphas appear in RC 10-13 (I. Ilion
33), 17 but no broken bars (however, the six-line sample w h i c h I examined
is not sufficient to establish if RC 10-13 did not exhibit the same variation
in forms as OGIS 219, or some of the same shapes). T h e earliest examples
for broken-barred alphas are found before 250, but certainly not as early as
the 270s. 18 T h e r e f o r e , the palaeography appears to favour a date in the late
third century or early second century. H o w e v e r , this dating bears only on
the actual carving of the document: I suggest that a d o c u m e n t f r o m the
270s, under Antiochos I, was recarved under Antiochos I I I , in the last
years of the third or the very early years of the second century. T h e
copying of an earlier document m i g h t explain the extremely divergent
character of the lettering, which mingles early Hellenistic and later
Hellenistic forms. T h e actual sight of the stone at the Fitzwilliam M u s e u m
in C a m b r i d g e reinforces this impression of a divergent, almost 'schizo-
phrenic' lettering, and hence of probable recarving.

S e l e u k i d e n v o y s s e n t a h e a d o f t h e e x p e d i t i o n o f 1 9 7 . H o w e v e r , all o f h i s ' p a r a l l e l s ' c o n -

cern the n o r m a l e x c h a n g e of c o r r e s p o n d e n c e and ambassadors, not d i p l o m a t i c contact
as a f o r e r u n n e r o f c o n q u e s t . T h e e x p r e s s i o n w o u l d a l s o b e r e m a r k a b l y d i s c r e e t f o r r o y a l
envoys.
14 R o b e r t 1966b: 1 1 - 1 2 , a n d OMS vii. 605, p r o n o u n c e d the l e t t e r - f o r m s early ( b u t
q u o t e d c o n t r a r y o p i n i o n s ) ; O r t h 1 9 7 7 : 62, n o t e s t h a t t h e a l p h a s w i t h b r o k e n b a r h a v e n o
m a t c h in RC 1 0 - 1 3 ( u s i n g t h e ' t a b l e o f a l p h a b e t s ' o f RC).
,s T h e A r i s t o d i k i d e s s t e l e (RC 1 0 - 1 3 ; c f · I· Ilion 3 3 ) is d a t e d to A n t i o c h o s I;
u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e s t o n e is n o w l o s t , a n d t h e p h o t o g r a p h in RC is t o o s m a l l t o b e u s e f u l .
I. Ilion 31 ( c f . OGIS 2 1 2 ) l o n g a t t r i b u t e d to S e l e u k o s I, p r o b a b l y h o n o u r s S e l e u k o s I I
( O r t h 1 9 7 7 : 7 2 - 3 ) . RC 4 2 (cf. I. Ilion 3 7 ) is v e r y p o s s i b l y f r o m A n t i o c h o s 111, b u t m i g h t
also be (for instance) Attalid.
16 I a m g r a t e f u l to t h e F i t z w i l l i a m M u s e u m f o r a s p l e n d i d s q u e e z e .

17 I i n s p e c t e d a s q u e e z e o f s i x l i n e s at t h e Inscriptiones Graecae o f B e r l i n , c o u r t e s y o f
D r Κ . Hallof.
,8 I n t h e L a o d i k e l a n d - s a l e (RC 1 8 - 2 0 , s a m e d o c u m e n t p u b l i s h e d as Inschr. Didyma
4 9 2 ) , as p o i n t e d o u t b y P i e j k o .
T h e r e are other, even less conclusive, arguments (about a Ptolemaic
aggression against Antiochos I, 19 or the expression 'the paternal k i n g d o m ' ,
reminiscent of, yet not equivalent to, the 'ancestors' in documents of
Antiochos III). 2 0 I incline to the view that Ilion had not been taken by
Achaios, and hence that the situation in OGIS 219 cannot apply to the time
of Antiochos I I I ; new evidence may confirm or challenge this view. T h e
narrative of OGIS 219 might echo the account of the early struggles of
Antiochos I, as preserved in M e m n o n of Herakleia. 2 1 If the document were
to date to Antiochos I I I , I would favour as the most likely c.216 or c.203
(for the latter, Mastrocinque 1983: 68-9).

19 M a s t r o c i n q u e 1 9 9 3 : 27—39, a r g u e s a g a i n s t t h e ' w a r o f S y r i a n s u c c e s s i o n ' .

20 OGIS 2 1 9 , l i n e 8 s p e a k s o f r e c o v e r i n g ' t h e p a t e r n a l e m p i r e ' , άνακτήσασθαι τήμ
πατρώιαν αρχή v. T h e v e r b c a n b e p a r a l l e l e d i n t h e l e t t e r o f L a o d i k e t o I a s o s , as w e l l as in
t h e r e p l y o f A n t i o c h o s I I I to t h e R o m a n c o m m i s s i o n e r s at L y s i m a c h e i a i n 1 9 6 ( P o l .
1 8 . 5 1 . 6 , c o n c e r n i n g C h e r s o n e s o s , T h r a c e , and specifically L y s i m a c h e i a ) . L i k e w i s e , the
a d j e c t i v e is a n a l o g o u s to t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e a n c e s t o r s , w h i c h a r e s o p r o m i n e n t i n t h e
literary and the epigraphical evidence (Piejko 19916: 2 1 - 4 ) . O n the other hand, M e m n o n
d o e s u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n f o r A n t i o c h o s I: ό Sè Σέλευκου Άντίοχος -πολλοίς πολέμοις, d και
μόλις και ού&€ πάσαν, ομως άνασοισάμενος τήν πατρώιαν αρχήν (FGrHist 4 3 4 ^ 9)·
21 P r e c e d i n g n o t e . I t h a s b e e n c l a i m e d t h a t M e m n o n d e s c r i b e s t h e w h o l e o f t h e r e i g n

o f A n t i o c h o s I ( O r t h 1 9 7 7 : 6 3 η . 69; P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 6 : 2 3 ; M a s t r o c i n q u e 1 9 9 3 : 30, w i t h
e x a m p l e s ) ; s u c h s h o r t i n i t i a l a s s e s s m e n t s w e r e w i d e s p r e a d in H e l l e n i s t i c h i s t o r i o g r a p h y
(Pol. 10.26.9, d i s p a r a g i n g them). B u t M e m n o n explicitly locates the r e c o v e r y of the
' p a t e r n a l e m p i r e ' b e f o r e t h e d i s p a t c h of P a t r o k l e s , a n d the a l l e g e d e x a m p l e s of ' c a r a t e r -
i z z a z i o n e iniziale' g a t h e r e d b y M a s t r o c i n q u e are s i m p l y c i r c u m s t a n t i a l aorist participles.
J o n e s 1 9 9 3 : 9 0 - 1 , o b s e r v e s t h a t t r o u b l e s in t h e S e l e u k i s m i g h t e x p l a i n w h y A n t i o c h o s I
s t a y e d in S y r i a , a n d s e n t P a t r o k l e s o v e r t h e T a u r u s . J o n e s ( 1 9 9 3 : 9 1 ) p o i n t s o u t t h a t a
B a b y l o n i a n d o c u m e n t a t t e s t s t h e p r e s e n c e o f A n t i o c h o s I i n c i s - T a u r i c A s i a , at S a r d i s ,
in t h e y e a r s 2 7 5 t o 2 7 4 b c , w i t h h i s q u e e n . T h i s d o e s n o t p r o v e t h a t OGIS 2 1 9 is t o b e
a t t r i b u t e d t o A n t i o c h o s I , b u t s h o w s t h a t t h e e v e n t s d e s c r i b e d in t h e i n s c r i p t i o n a r e
c o m p a t i b l e with the record for that king.
 A P P E N D I X 2

T h e Date of the Teos Documents

T e o s has produced a series of important documents relative to A n t i o c h o s

III (Herrmann 1965a, documents 17, 18, 19 in the present volume),
especially two decrees honouring the king shortly after he took over T e o s .
Herrmann dated these two decrees to c.203 BC: hence they attested
Antiochos' presence in Asia M i n o r on his return f r o m his eastern expedi-
tion. A more recent view holds that the decrees date to Antiochos'
campaign of 197/6 BC.

Ι . High or Low Dating?

1.1 T h e main argument for dating the T e i a n decrees to c.203 (Herrmann

1965a: 93-100) is that the declaration of T e i a n asylia by Antiochos should
precede all other similar documents (abundantly preserved and published
in LBW 3.60-85 (see now R i g s b y 1996): an 'early series' f r o m the late third
century, and a i a t e series' f r o m the second century). A. W i l h e l m showed
that three documents f r o m central G r e e c e (issued by the Aitolians, the
A m p h i k t i o n s , and the Delphians) date between 205 and 201, a view
based on the datings for the Delphian archon Megartas and the Aitolian
strategos Alexandros of Kalydon; 1 hence a terminus ante quem for the T e i a n
documents. T h e context would thus be Antiochos' passage in Asia Minor
on his return f r o m the East: c.203.
1.2. Piejko argues that the T e i a n documents should be dated to the
campaign of 197 (Piejko 1991α: 14-27): 2 the early asylia documents should

' H o l l e a u x 1 9 5 2 : 1 7 8 - 9 ( q u o t i n g e a r l i e r c o n c l u s i o n s b y A . W i l h e l m , in Göttingen
Gelehrte Anzeiger 160 (1898), 2 1 9 - 2 0 ) ; H e r r m a n n 1965α: 94. P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 α : 2 θ - ι , tries
t o d o w n d a t e t h e A i t o l i a n a n d D e l p h i a n d e c r e e s to 1 9 6 , t h e s e c o n d strategia of
A l e x a n d r o s of K a l y d o n ; he mistakenly believes that the date of the a r c h o n s h i p d e p e n d s
on 'the date already established for A l e x a n d e r ' , and that 'the year for M e g a r t a s has not
b e e n d e t e r m i n e d b y c o m p l e t e l y i n d e p e n d e n t c r i t e r i a ' . I n f a c t , it is t h e D e l p h i a n a r c h o n -
s h i p w h i c h p r o v i d e s the c h r o n o l o g i c a l p e g for the A i t o l i a n s t r a t e g o s A l e x a n d r o s : t h e r e
is n o p l a c e f o r M e g a r t a s in t h e D e l p h i a n a r c h o n s o f t h e 1 9 0 s ( W i l h e l m ) a n d t h e five-
s t r o n g , t r i m e s t r i a l boule p o i n t s to a d a t e b e f o r e 2 0 1 ( C o l i n , FD, f a s c . 2, n o . 1 3 5 ) . T h e
D e l p h i a n d e c r e e f a l l s s l i g h t l y b e f o r e 200; t h e A i t o l i a n d o c u m e n t a n d t h e A t h a m a n i a n
letter are c o n t e m p o r a r y , since t h e y n a m e the s a m e T e i a n a m b a s s a d o r s : see f u r t h e r
L e f è v r e 1 9 9 5 : 204—5 a n d n . 1 6 6 .
2 L i v y 3 3 . 3 8 . 1 d o e s n o t s p e a k o f 'eodem anno 1 9 7 ' ( P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 a : 14): t h e y e a r r e f e r r e d
t o is a c t u a l l y 1 9 6 .
be dissociated f r o m Antiochos' proclamation of the city as inviolate, since
they do not refer to a royal 'grant' of inviolate status, and thus were solely
a T e i a n initiative. W i t h o u t Herrmann's terminus ante quem, the Seleukid
takeover of T e o s is free to be located in 197/6.
1.3. T h e literary sources are deficient: Polybios is not extant to confirm
or disprove the high dating; L i v y is sketchy (33.20.13; 33.38.1). I favour a
high dating, but only new documentation will establish the chronological
context.

2. The Asylia of Teos

2.1. T o enjoy asylia, a city (with its territory) had to be declared 'holy'
(iepd) to a d e i t y — o f t e n a local decision, prompted by an oracle or an
apparition. 3 T h e city then asked for recognition as 'holy and inviolate',
w h i c h could only be granted piecemeal, by the m e m b e r s of the inter-
national c o m m u n i t y , each in a specific decree; a collection of such decrees
could be referred to as 'the asylias' (τάς ασυλίας'· I• Stratonikeia 7, lines
4-5). T h e procedure combined acknowledgement of the city's consecrated
status and an agreement to refrain f r o m spoliation against the city or on its
territory. 4 T h i s is h o w Piejko (1991a: 18-20) classifies the T e i a n s ' efforts;
Antiochos I I I simply recognized the T e i a n claim, but, on this view, did
not initiate it, j u s t as the asylia of Smyrna was a local initiative acknow-
ledged and supported by Seleukos II, indeed first broadcast by the king on
the international scene, b u t not initiated by h i m ( O G I S 228, cf. T a c . Ann.
3.63.4; R i g s b y 1996: 95-8, somewhat differently). 5
2.2. H o w e v e r , the asylia of a city could also result f r o m a royal grant. In
RC 70 (same d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1996: no, 218), a Seleukid king grants
asylia to the shrine of Z e u s at Baitokaike; under T i b e r i u s , the Sardians
described their asylia as 'Alexandri victoris donum' ( T a c . Ann. 3.63.5-6).
T h i s m i g h t be the case of Antiocheia/Alabanda (document 16 is

1 Herrmann 1965e: 1 2 2 - 4 ('motiviert d u r c h eine göttliche Willenserklärung'), for

o r a c l e s ( e . g . S m y r n a , OGIS 2 2 8 , l i n e 5; A n t i o c h e i a o f t h e C h r y s a o r i a n s / A l a b a n d a :
d o c u m e n t 16, 16); a n d f o r d i v i n e a p p a r i t i o n s (at M a g n e s i a , t h e d e c i s i o n w a s p r o m p t e d
b y a n a p p a r i t i o n o f A r t e m i s L e u k o p h r y e n e h e r s e l f : Inschr. Magnesia 16, lines 2 - 1 0 ) . A l l
t h e s e d o c u m e n t s a r e r e p u b l i s h e d a n d t r e a t e d in R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 , b y c i t y . T h e M i l e s i a n
d e c r e e Syll. 5 9 0 , at l i n e s 9 - 1 0 , s p e a k s o f t h e c i t y a n d t e r r i t o r y b e i n g c o n s e c r a t e d ,
' b e c a u s e of Z e u s ' a n d L e t o ' s u n i o n in this place, a n d b e c a u s e of the o r a c l e s ' ; this c o n -
s e c r a t i o n p r e c e d e d t h e a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t b y ethne, c i t i e s , k i n g s .
4 O n asylia in g e n e r a l , R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 ; e a r l i e r w o r k s a r e S c h l e s i n g e r 1 9 3 3 ; H e r r m a n n
1965a: 118-38; G a u t h i e r 1972: 209-84 modifies Schlesinger; 226-30 on T a s y l i e des
s a n c t u a i r e s et d e s villes c o n s a c r é e s à u n e d i v i n i t é ' .
5 T h e e x a m p l e o f M a g n e s i a o n M a e a n d e r a n d its d e a l i n g s w i t h A n t i o c h o s I I I (RC
3 1 - 2 ) , w h i c h P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 α : 18, a l s o a l l e g e s , is i n a p p r o p r i a t e , s i n c e M a g n e s i a o n
M a e a n d e r w a s p r o b a b l y n o t a S e l e u k i d c i t y at t h i s p o i n t , a n d s i n c e A n t i o c h o s I I I
a c t u a l l y d o e s n o t a c k n o w l e d g e t h e asylia o f t h e c i t y . P i e j k o 1 9 9 1 a : 1 9 n n . 2 1 , 20, f u r t h e r
b e l i e v e s t h a t i n t h e c a s e o f A n t i o c h e i a / A l a b a n d a , ' t h e n e w s t a t u s w a s a l s o c r e d i t e d to t h e
g o d ' s o r a c l e ' . T h i s is n o t t h e c a s e : t h e A l a b a n d a n a m b a s s a d o r c o n s u l t e d t h e o r a c l e o n l y
a f t e r h e h a d s t a r t e d a s k i n g t h e G r e e k c i t i e s f o r a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t o f h i s c i t y ' s asylia
( d o c u m e n t 16, 1 4 - 1 8 ) — i t is p o s s i b l e t h a t A n t i o c h o s I I I h a d i n i t i a t e d t h e p r o c e s s .
ambiguous). Stratonikeia received a grant of asylia f r o m Sulla, which did
not dispense the city f r o m its own subsequent efforts at international
recognition ( O G I S 441, cf. RDGE 18). T h e decrees f r o m T e o s give the
impression that they belong to this group (Herrmann 1965a: 125—6).
Antiochos III 'consecrated our city and our territory' to D i o n y s o s
(document 17, 15—16: καθιέρωσαν ημών τήν πόλιν και τήν χώραν), and 'let
free our city and our territory as holy and inviolate and free f r o m tribute'
(document 17, 19—20: άνηκε τι)^] πόλιν Kai τήγ χώραν ήμών ίεράν και άσυλον
και άφορολόγητον, document 17. 47 — 8: αφέντες τήμ πόλιν και τήν χώραν ίεράν
και άσυλον). T h e verbs used are striking. It is unhelpful to write (Piejko
1991a: 62) that asylia could be indifferently expressed through a plethora
of phrases. T h e usual formulas are δέχεσθαι compounds, an infinitive con-
struction (εΐναι, νπάρχειν) dependent on a verb of decision, or the v e r b
άναδείκνυναι.6 In the case of T e o s , Antiochos' action is described as άνιέναι
or άφιέναι, a unitary grant of holy status, asylia, and άφορολογησία. T h e
same expression describes the grant of autonomy to Mylasa by Seleukos II:
Σέλευκον δε άφιέντα τήν πόλιν ελεύθεραν (Crampa 1969: no. 5, line 34); tfi e
action in both cases is the royal grant of a privilege. Antiochos I I I at T e o s
grants asylia and exemption f r o m tribute as part of the same gesture: this
is paralleled in the case of the shrine of Zeus at Baitokaike, which received
acknowledgement of asylia and the grant of a royal prerogative (άνεπι-
σταθμείa) in the same royal pronouncement (RC 70, line 13). Antiochos I I I
seems to have taken the initiative, and 'consecrated' T e o s to Dionysos. 7
T h e r e are two parallels: A m y z o n , 8 where A n t i o c h o s 'gave back the shrine
inviolate' (document 8 B), and where the verb recalls άνιέναι, άφιέναι used
at T e o s ; and Xanthos, where 'the G r e a t K i n g , Antiochos, consecrated the
city to L e t o and A p o l l o and Artemis, on account of the kinship that unites
h i m to them' (document 22).
2.3. ι T h i s interpretation was rejected by Giovannini (1983: 181-2), then
Piejko (1991a: 17-20) because of the failure of other cities to attribute the
6 F o r a list o f d o c u m e n t s , s e e S c h l e s i n g e r 1 9 3 3 : 7 1 - 8 4 , a n d R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 , c o l l e c t i n g

texts, illustrating usage, and analysing the practice.

7 H o w e v e r , it is p o s s i b l e t h a t A n t i o c h o s a c k n o w l e d g e d (7ταραδέχεσθαι) T e i a n asylia
u p o n the T e i a n s ' i n i t i a t i v e , a n d t h e n g r a n t e d (άνιέναι) f r e e d o m f r o m t r i b u t e , a n d t h a t
b o t h actions w e r e c o n d e n s e d into a m i s l e a d i n g f o r m u l a t i o n b y the T e i a n decree ( d o c u -
m e n t 17, 4 7 - 4 8 m e n t i o n s t h e a c t i o n s s e p a r a t e l y ) . A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y is t h a t A n t i o c h o s
r e p r e s e n t e d h i m s e l f a s g r a n t i n g asylia to T e o s , w i t h o u t t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t the T e i a n s '
e a r l i e r e f f o r t s at w i n n i n g a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t f o r asylia, t h e act o f r o y a l t a k e o v e r s u p e r -
s e d i n g p r e v i o u s d i p l o m a t i c activities. B o t h possibilities w o u l d open the w a y for the low
d a t i n g . F u r t h e r m o r e , Inscr. Cret. 2.3 ( A p t e r a : s a m e d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 , n o . 1 5 4 ) ,
n o . 2, l i n e s 1 9 - 2 1 , in t h e 2 n d c e n t . , r e f e r s to e a r l i e r r e c o g n i t i o n o f asylia b y t h e e x p r e s -
s i o n καθιερώσαμε ν τάν χώραν και τάν πόλιν; l i k e w i s e , in Inscr. Cret. 1 . 6 ( B i a n n o s ; R i g s b y
1 9 9 6 : n o . 156), n o . 2, lines 1 0 - 1 3 , T e i a n e n v o y s s p e a k o f τάν πόλιν ύττο τών προγόνων
καθιερωμέναν τάν πόλιν και τάν χώραν. T h e s e e x a m p l e s s u g g e s t t h a t t h e v e r b καθιερόω
m i g h t b e u s e d s i m p l y to a c k n o w l e d g e asylia ( b u t a g l a n c e at R i g s b y ' s i n d e x w i l l s h o w
t h a t t h e y are the o n l y e x a m p l e s in t h e w h o l e c o r p u s to u s e the v e r b this w a y ) . T h e w o r d
καθιέρωσε ν o c c u r s at T e o s in LBW 94, p r o b a b l y p a r t o f t h e asylia d o s s i e r : c o u l d it b e
p a r t of an i n s c r i p t i o n like the X a n t h i a n r e c o r d that A n t i o c h o s ' d e d i c a t e d t h e c i t y a n d the
t e r r i t o r y ' to a g o d ( d o c u m e n t 22)?
8 A l r e a d y H e r r m a n n 1 9 6 5 a : 128.
asylia of T e o s to royal initiative. In contrast, S m y r n a ( O G I S 228, cf.
R i g s b y 1996, no. 7), even though that city did not directly receive a grant
of asylia f r o m Seleukos II, and Antiocheia/Alabanda (document 16) drew
attention to royal support.
2.3.2. In the Cretan decrees concerning the asylia of T e o s (C.201 BC), an
envoy of Antiochos I I I appears three times (in the decrees f r o m Rhaukos,
L a p p a , and E l e u t h e r n a ) — i n fact, a Rhodian sent to broker a peace between
the Cretan cities. In contrast, no less than eight Cretan decrees mention
Perdikkas, the envoy of Philip V , as supporting the T e i a n embassies. 9 T h i s
led Holleaux to postulate that T e o s , around 201, was taken by Philip V
(Holleaux 1952: 184-6). N o n e of the Cretan decrees calls Antiochos I I I the
initiator of the T e i a n asylia campaign, and the Seleukid presence is less
prominent than the Antigonid support for the Teians. T h i s is not incom-
patible with an initial grant of asylia by Antiochos III: Philip's standing as
προστάτης of many Cretan cities (Pol. 7 . 1 1 . 9 ) , and his entente with
Antiochos would explain w h y T e i a n asylia was promoted in Crete mostly
by an Antigonid envoy, perhaps upon Antiochos' request; the Antigonid
envoy would not insist on the Seleukid origin of the campaign for T e i a n
asylia.
2.3.3. T h e verb άνύημι also appears in four of the Cretan decrees
acknowledging T e i a n asylia (Polyrrhenia, K y d o n i a , Aptera, Allaria) 1 0 —the
same v e r b used to describe the action taken b y A n t i o c h o s I I I in the
assembly at T e o s (see above). It is likely that these Cretan decrees are
echoing the terminology used by A n t i o c h o s I I I to grant asylia to the
T e i a n s , and recycled by the T e i a n s in their speech to these four Cretan
cities (Rigsby 1996: 287). H o w e v e r , the converse is also possible: that
Antiochos III acknowledged an already pre-existing status of asylia at
T e o s by using a verb supplied to h i m by the T e i a n s themselves (àviévai), as
had happened with the Cretan cities. T h e cities which use the peculiar verb
àviévai are also not the same as those three w h i c h say that they are acting
upon the urging of a Seleukid envoy; indeed, àviévai turns up at Allaria,
w h i c h received Perdikkas, the envoy of Philip V .
2.3.4. It is a l s ° difficult to explain the absence of any reference to
Antiochos III in the documents f r o m Central G r e e c e , especially in the
D e l p h i a n decree (Syll. 565, cf. R i g s b y 1996: no. 134), in contrast with
OGIS 228 (Delphian decree for Smyrna under Seleukos II), and docu-
ment 16, which notes the Alabandans' praise for Antiochos I I I and
honours the latter. If both involved royal initiative, w h y would Antiochos
I I I be so visible in the transaction involving Antiocheia/Alabanda, and yet
absent in the contemporary Delphian decree for T e i a n asylial

' S e e H o l l e a u x 1 9 5 2 : 1 8 2 - 9 4 >n g e n e r a l a n d f o r t h e d a t e ; H e r r m a n n 1 9 6 5 a : 1 3 4 - 7
( p l a c i n g the d e c r e e s earlier, c.203 or 202). T h e d e c r e e s are r e p u b l i s h e d as R i g s b y 1996:
nos. 136-52.
10 P o l y r r h e n i a ( I n s c r . Cret. 2 . 2 3 , n o . 3, l i n e s 9 - 1 1 , s a m e d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 : n o .
1 3 7 ) ; K y d o n i a (Inscr. Cret. 2 . 1 0 , n o . 2, l i n e s 2 1 - 2 , s a m e d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 : n o .
1 3 9 ) ; A p t e r a (Inscr. Cret. 2 . 3 , n o . 1 , l i n e s 4 - 6 , s a m e d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 : n o . 1 4 5 ) ;
A l l a r i a (Inscr. Cret. 2 . 1 , n o . 1, l i n e s 2 4 - 5 , s a m e d o c u m e n t R i g s b y 1 9 9 6 : n o . 1 5 1 ) .
 2.3.5. H o w e v e r , the procedure is still mysterious. T h e A l a b a n d a n
embassy praised Antiochos III before the A m p h i k t i o n s (document 16) b u t
failed to mention h i m at Athens: 1 1 there may have been diplomatic-politi-
cal reasons; or the Athenians in their decree refused to echo A l a b a n d a n
praise for Antiochos I I I . T h e decision to talk about royal initiative
operated at several levels, that of the c o m m u n i t y which made the request,
and the c o m m u n i t y which rephrased it in its decree. For instance, the
decree of Antiocheia in Persis ( O G I S 233, cf. R i g s b y 1996: no. i l l ) in
response to an embassy f r o m Magnesia on Maeander was issued in
response to a direct order of Antiochos I I I (RC 31, lines 25-8; cf. R i g s b y
1996: no. 70), and follows the king's will by omitting the asylia w h i c h the
Magnesians requested; however, the Antiocheians mention Antiochos I I I
only obliquely (line 50), motivating their decision through past relations
with Magnesia. T h u s the absence of any reference to royal patronage or
royal initiative in the matter of the consecration and the asylia of T e o s
cannot constitute decisive a r g u m e n t — b e c a u s e the documents only speak in
the terms they find acceptable, through diplomatic veiling.
2.4. O n balance, it is still likely that the asylia of T e o s was initiated by a
royal grant f r o m Antiochos I I I , predating and giving the impetus to the
(well dated) T e i a n requests for the acknowledgement of this status in the
G r e e k world; H e r r m a n n ' s interpretation is followed by R i g s b y 1996:
280-3. A t any rate, even if Piejko's argument were right, it would simply
establish that a low dating were possible, not necessary. Other arguments
weaken the case for a low dating.

3. Against a Low Dating

3.1. A point against the attribution of the T e i a n documents to the after-

math of 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 BC is the absence of Antiochos' sons, whereas L i v y tells
us that t w o of them were part of the expedition of 197, with the land forces
( L i v . 33.19.10), and they figure as recipients of honours in the documents
f r o m Herakleia under L a t m o s , issued around that time (document 31 A ) ,
w h i c h indicates their visibility in the immediate aftermath of the campaign
of 1 9 7 - 1 9 6 ; in contrast, the T e i a n documents only honour Laodike (fur-
ther, A p p e n d i x 1).
3.2. T h e T e i a n inscriptions nowhere refer to Antiochos as 'the G r e a t
K i n g ' ; this may support the high dating ( A p p e n d i x 4), though this argu-
ment cannot be pressed without risk of circularity.
3.3. A l o n g w i t h asylia, Antiochos I I I granted άφορολογησία, a new status,
since the T e i a n s were previously oppressed by heavy Attalid taxation
(document 17, 14; 18, 51-2). In their letter (RC 35, R i g s b y 1996: no. 135),
the Athamanian rulers, T h e o d o r o s and A m y n a n d r o s , acknowledge the
T e i a n request [Vjefpi] τοΰ συγχωρηθήναι παρ' ημών τήν re πόλιν και τήν χώραν
te[p]ài' τώι Διοννσωι και άσυλον και άφορολόγητον and comply—σ[υ]γχωρούμίν
eivai και τήν πόλιν υμών και τήν χώραν Îepàv και άσυλον και άφορολόγητον. T h e

" P o u n d e r 1 9 7 8 ( R i g s b y 1996: no. 162), H a b i c h t 1987.

formula is anomalous 12 (the obvious parallel is the letter of the praetor M .
Valerius Messalla to the Teians, document 38 (same document RDGE 34),
lines 19-21, another odd phrase: άφορολόγητον άπο τοΰ δήμου του Ρωμαίων);
it must echo Antiochos' grant (already Welles (RC, p. 155), quoting C.
Scheffer: 'a recognition of the actual situation of the city under Antiochus
I I P ) . T h e Teian request probably mentioned Antiochos' grant of
aphorologesia, which was included in the reply of the Athamanian kings,
conflated with asylia. A parallel, without the conflation, is the Delphian
decree OGIS 228: Seleukos II, writing to obtain recognition of the
Smyrnian asylia, is said to have acknowledged the asylia himself and
granted liberty and exemption from tribute to the Smyrnians (lines 5-8).
Besides, RC 35, line II 6, shows letters compatible with [βασ]ιλεΐ or per-
haps [ßaa]iAei[s]: Antiochos III sponsoring the Teian demand? T h i s would
be anomalous; but much is strange about this document. If RC 35 (written
c.205-201) contains an echo of the various privileges given by Antiochos
III, then it establishes a high dating for the Teian decrees.
3.4. Document 17 implies that Attalos I is still alive, since the Teians
were paying taxes to him up to the moment of exemption by Antiochos III.
It has sometimes been argued that Attalos I, who suffered a stroke in
Boiotia in early 197, was still alive late in that year, because a Delphian
inscription from that date mentions a works-commissioner sent by king
Attalos; but the title only shows that Attalos I was alive when he sent the
architect (Allen 1983: 10 n. 6). T h e position of the relevant Livian passage
(33.21.1-5) might suggest that the king died in summer 197, when
Antiochos III was still held up by the Rhodians; if this date were secure, it
would argue against a low dating of the Teian decrees.

12 T h e claim by Piejko 1991a: 24, that άφορολογηοία means 'freedom from plunder'

(already Giovannini 1983: 184), is unacceptable. T o stay within the context of the T e i a n
documents, this view is disproved, in document 17, by lines 33-4 as παραλέλυκε τήμ πόλιν
. . . â)v συνετάξαμίν φόρων and at line 48 as παραλύσαντες ημάς τώμ φόρων. T h e r e is a
related series of very fragmentary Cretan decrees, where the Mylasans are mentioned as
sending embassies οπως . . . αφορολόγητοι Ιώντι, τάν τ€ πόλιν και ταν χωράν αυτών ία ρ αν εξ
αρχάς . . . ( / . Mylasa 643, lines 8 - 1 3 ; 044> 7 - Ι ° ί 66ο, 2-3; 6 6 ι , 5~7—the last two
published in EA 19 (1992), 1 2 - 1 3 , now SEG 42.1003, 1004; the whole series of Cretan
documents from Mylasa is republished as Rigsby 1996: nos. 187-209). T h e date is
unknown, but might be contemporary to the Cretan decrees preserved at T e o s , since a
generalized war in Crete is mentioned in both cases (/. Mylasa 643, lines 3-4; 644, lines
6—7). I would suggest interpreting these as reflecting another grant (or acknowledg-
ment?) of asylia and aphorologesia by Antiochos I I I , c.203, this time for Mylasa.
 A P P E N D I X 3

Dubia

A number of documents might belong to the time of Antiochos III, and

reflect his activities; however, their attribution is problematic. In most
cases, certitude is impossible to reach without new evidence. T h e docu-
ments are listed below in geographical order.

I. Ilion 45: alliance between Lysimacheia and a king Antiochos

Frisch and Taçliklioglu edited an inscription from Ilion containing oaths
exchanged by the Lysimacheians and a king Antiochos in alliance, associ-
ating it with a fragment published by Brückner in 1902: both fragments are
published together as I. Ilion 45, and dated to Antiochos III.
Ferrary and Gauthier 1981 have interpreted the Frisch-Taçhkhoglu
fragment as an alliance between Antiochos I and Lysimacheia (distinct
from the Brückner fragment). T h e y hold that the text cannot be attributed
to Antiochos III, because it stipulates that Lysimacheia will be free and
exempt from taxes and garrison; these are precisely not applicable to
Lysimacheia under Antiochos III, who repopulated the ruined city, used
it as a military base and a regional capital (complete with Seleukid mint), 1
and deported the population in 190: 'la domination séleucide n'avait subi
aucune limitation depuis la refondation de 196'. Piejko 19886 re-edits the
texts with restorations, attributing the text to Antiochos III and arguing
(unconvincingly, to my mind) against Ferrary and Gauthier: for Piejko,
the status of autonomy in I. Ilion 45 squares with his view that Antiochos
III presented himself as a liberator to the Greek cities, and the guarantees
of autonomy, tax-exemption, and garrison-exemption are mere formalities,
which the king disregarded. On the first point, I would argue that
Antiochos III did not present himself as a 'liberator', but made occasional
grants of liberty in the aftermath of a conquest presented under the
heading of dynastic legitimacy (Ch. 2 § 4); on the second point, I believe
that legal guarantees such as those given to Lysimacheia in I. Ilion 45
represented real commitments (Ch. 3 § 3), incompatible with the behaviour
of Antiochos III in 196-190 BC (also Gauthier 1989: 176-7 and η. i i ) . T h e
arguments adduced by Ferrary and Gauthier are compelling; in the
absence of independent evidence, I would consider a treaty between
1 WSM 1615-21.
Antiochos III and Lysimacheia as anomalous as a treaty between
Antiochos III and Sardeis, the subject city, his regional capital.
I do not believe the alliance between Antiochos III and Perinthos, soon
to be published by M. Sayar (here provisionally reproduced as document
35), attenuates the force of the arguments presented by Ferrary and
Gauthier, since the status of Perinthos (free city, on the outskirts of the
Seleukid realm) is different from that of Lysimacheia, the Seleukid
'provincial capital'. In addition, the Perinthos alliance refers to 'kings
Antiochos and [Antiochos]', but the alliance which the Euromians
(Philippeis) contracted with Zeuxis speaks only of Antiochos III, without
Antiochos the son (document 29). T h e alliance with Lysimacheia simply
mentions a king Antiochos: because of proximity to Perinthos, if this
alliance had been concluded in 196, one would expect the formula with
both kings, as in Perinthos, so that the formulation (weakly) supports the
view that the Lysimacheia alliance dates not to Antiochos III, but to
an earlier Antiochos. (Admittedly, this argument could be bypassed by
supposing that the alliance between Perinthos and Antiochos III took
place at another time than 196 BC).

A J 12.147-53: Letter of Antiochos III to Zeuxis

Josephus quotes this letter, purportedly by Antiochos III to Zeuxis, con-
cerning the dispatch of Jewish colonists to Asia Minor. Gauger 1977:
23-151, argued against authenticity, though his arguments have been
contested (e.g. J. and L . Robert 1983: 178 n. 119, assertive rather than
argumentative; and especially Gauthier 1989: 41-2, including further
references). Gauger 1993 reiterates his position, comparing Josephus and
the Pamukçu stele (document 4): in the Pamukçu letter, the king uses the
first person plural and simply writes 'to Zeuxis, greetings', whereas in
Josephus, the author uses the first person singular, addresses Zeuxis as his
'father' (Ζενξιδι πατρι χαίραν), and mentions consulting the philoi before
his decision. These arguments establish that the text cannot be an un-
adulterated letter of Antiochos III. T h e y might be answered if the letter
were written by Antiochos the son, during his father's absence in the east,
thus accounting for the first person singular, as in RC 32, the address to
the senior officer, Zeuxis, as 'father', even the consultation of the Friends
before the decision (considered unlikely by Gauger 1977: 139-43, on the
uneasily co-existing grounds that Antiochos the son was too young to write
this letter, and that the revolts in Anatolia were not serious enough to
warrant intervention by the young king).

R C /5: Letter of a King Antiochos to Erythrai

Piejko attributed this document, RC 15 (same document, I. Erythrai 31 ) a
complete letter to Erythrai, to Antiochos III, without arguments (for
instance, in Piejko 1991a: 22 n. 28, the claim that the galatika were a civic
tax taken over by the Attalids, not a Seleukid tax, is a bald assertion). But
there is no trace of a change of régime, unlike the documents from Teos,
which insist on the passage from Attalid to Seleukid sphere. T h e galatika,
a levy linked with war against the Galatians, points to an early Seleukid;
the document is followed by a decree, whose considerations start [επειδή
β]ασιλενς Άν\ [τι'οχοί]: the absence of the title βασιλεύς μέγας argues against
the date 197 BC or later (contrast the Iasian decree of C.196, document
26 B).

S E G 27.834: Graffito near Teos

M. Baran and G . Petzl (1st. Mitt. 27/28 (1977-8), 305-6) published a set of
graffiti from a cave (the Kaplan Magarasi, 'panther cave'), obviously a
sacred place, near the village of Benler, located 22 km. north-east of
ancient Teos. T h e graffito closest to the mouth of the cave reads
Άντίοχος
βασιλεύς
επίγραψε
T h e letters are c.io cm. high. T h e lettering implies a late-Roman date: the
sigma in the first line is lunate, but in the following line, twice shaped like
a Latin S; the upsilon, in the same line, is formed like a Latin V. T h e
meaning of the graffito is obscure; the editors exclude as unlikely any rela-
tion with Antiochos III, and also discount the possibility of a (presumably
modern) forgery. But an intriguing possibility would be to see this graffito
as a Roman fake, or perhaps a piece of whimsy carved in the Roman
period (purporting to be an autograph of the Seleukid king?). T h i s would
document memory of Antiochos III in Teos centuries after his dealings
with the city (could cultic practice or some of the cult statues for that king
have survived, to keep at least the name of 'Antiochos, king' alive?). But
the last word is best left to the Roberts, who found this inscription rather
disquieting ('fait à tous égards une impression un peu inquiétante': B E 80,
443)·

B C H 10 (1886), 2QQ-314: Alabanda Decree

Earlier bibliography on this inscription (first published by Ch. Diel and G.
Cousin, BCH 10 (1886), 299-314) can be found in Holleaux 1968: 21, no.
52 (established by L. Robert). Bikerman 1937 dated this decree, which
mentions an embassy to renew the city's friendship with Rome and con-
duct negotiations concerning phoroi, and another embassy to 'the king' to
the Roman settlement of Asia Minor in 188, but the date is later, as argued
for convincingly by Gruen 1986: 733-5· T h e most likely date is the after-
math of the First Mithradatic War (established by Marek 1988: 294-302).
Robert 1945, p- i2: Letter of a king Antiochos, Found at Sinuri
T h i s fragmentary letter by an Antiochos, found in Sinuri (the stone, left on
the site, appears now lost), was attributed by J. and L. Robert 1983: 140,
187, to Antiochos III, because of the latter's interest in Karian shrines
where his letters were often carved. But Antiochos II, or even Antiochos
Hierax remain possible. T h e absence of published photographs precludes
palaeographical argument. (The reconstruction offered by Piejko in OAth
18 (1990), 153 no. 2, cf. SEG 39.1122, is not convincing).

I. Mylasa 126: Mylasan Decree

T h i s Mylasan decree for a Rhodian, 'friend of the king' and άρχώικαστής of
the δικαστήριον ly Καρίαι has been referred to the time of Antiochos III or
at least to the Seleukids (Bikerman 1938: 207 n. 2). However, the
άρχώικαστής is unknown among Seleukid institutions, whereas it is attested
for the Ptolemies ( O G I S 136), so this document is more likely a Ptolemaic
document (I owe this remark to C. Crowther).

R C 41: Letter to Tralleis

T h i s fragmentary letter, RC 41 (also I. Tralleis 17), found at Tralleis, is
attributed to Antiochos III on palaeographical grounds. Piejko 1988a
contested the attribution (58-60), arguing that Antiochos III would have
referred to his 'ancestors' rather than the king [Άντιό]χου of line 4. T h e
conclusion is correct, though the argument must be adjusted: Antiochos
III, if referring to a specific decision by one of his predecessors, would
have spoken of 'my grandfather' (cf. document 4, or 'my father and my
brother' in SEG 33.673). Piejko attributes the letter to Eumenes II, who
received Tralleis in 188, and believes it concerns asylia. Neither point is
compelling. Piejko also believes the Themistokles of RC 41 to be Achaios'
subordinate, who defected to Attalos I in 218 and (on this view) served
under Eumenes II after 188; alternative scenarios are possible, and it is not
assured that the Themistokles in question is the same man (the name is not
unique: document 23 for another example). T h e exact content of the letter
(fiscal privileges) is irrecoverable; as for authorship, Zeuxis in 213 (Pleket,
SEG 38.1170, proposes Antiochos III at this time), a Seleukid official
between 213 and 188, or even Achaios himself, as governor or as king, are
possibilities.

R C 9: Royal Letter Concerning the Athymbrianoi

T h i s fragmentary letter by a Seleukos and an Antiochos to an official, con-
cerning the privileges of the Athymbrianoi, has been attributed to Seleukos
I and Antiochos I, his co-regent, in 281. Piejko (e.g. Historia 38 (1989),
399) dates the document to Antiochos III, without argument (perhaps
because Antiochos I was in the east in 281?).2 This is unconvincing: the
Athymbrianoi were synoikized into the Seleukid foundation of Nysa
(Cohen 1995: 256-9); there is no reason why the sons of Antiochos III,
Seleukos (the future Seleukos IV) and Antiochos (the future Antiochos IV,
probably named Mithridates until the death of Antiochos the son in 193)
should have written such a letter (Mastrocinque 1983: 64 n. 24). Finally,
the squeeze published in RC can be read [ZtaaiAeùJs Σέλευκος και Άντιόχος or
perhaps [ßaaiAei]s Σέλευκος καί Άντίοχος, i.e. Seleukos I and Antiochos I
(for other examples of the expression, RC, p. 36; SEG 35.1170). 3

R C 64 : Royal Letter Concerning Nysa

J. and L . Robert 1983: 144, attributed this fragmentary letter to Antiochos
III, because of the prominence of asylia in his reign (Piejko, e.g. 1988:
60-1, and Historia 38 (1989), 402, proposes Eumenes II). K . Rigsby,
TAPhA 118 (1988), 149-53 proposes Mithradates as the author, because
of the style and the vague reference to 'earlier kings' (Gauthier, BE 89,
279, doubts the Nysaians would have inscribed a letter of Mithradates on
an archive wall of 1 bc). T h e first person singular does not suggest
Antiochos III.

Tit. Cal. 65: Kalymnian Decree for a Rhodian

Segre attributed this decree of Kalymna (also published as OGIS 243) for
a Rhodian friend of 'King Antiochos' to the time of Antiochos III. But
Kalymna as polis had probably been absorbed by Kos by that time
(Sherwin-White 1978; Klaffenbach, Gnomon 25 (1953), 457-8, who also
inclines to date the lettering to the third rather than the early second
century), apart from a short period under Philip V (should we date this
decree to those years?).

M A M A 4.75: Boundary Stone in Phrygia

A 'rough boulder, planted in the ground', close to 'Gazuk K ö y ' (about 20
km. south-east of ancient Synnada), and bearing the inscription EOPA I
ΡΑς, was interpreted by its editors, W. H. Buckler, W . M. Calder, and W.
K. C. Guthrie, as relating to a donation of land to a colony of Έορδαΐοι,
members of the Macedonian tribe, in the year 101 se (212/11); they further
wrote that the palaeography, notably the shape of the alpha with its broken
cross-bar, suited the date better than a date by the Sullan era (ad 16).
However, this interpretation is certainly incorrect. First, L. Robert, Ant.

2 Will 1979: 88. If this argument were pressed, Seleukos II and Antiochos Hierax

could be considered as the authors.

3 But G . Rehrenböck, who kindly checked the matter, can find no traces of an iota's

vertical stroke to the left of the surviving sigma on the squeeze (kept b y the
Kleinasiatische Kommission of the Austrian Academy).
Class. 4 (1935), 461 ( O M S 3. 1616), proposed to read Ε· ορ(ος)· Δ, inter-
preting the stone as a boundary marker between two communities, whose
initials frame the abbreviation of ορος. Second, there are no secure argu-
ments for the editors' dating. T h e absence of any Seleukid regnal formula
(Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχου και Άντιόχου του υίοϋ) casts doubt on a date in the
Seleukid period (contrast the Seleukid markers in the Aigai boundary
stone, published in Herrmann 1959). T h e broken-bar alpha also inclines to
date the stone later rather than earlier.
T h . D r e w - B e a r has rediscovered and examined the stone, and points out
(in an unpublished paper) that the letter s as an abbreviation for (έτους) is
Byzantine: this 'rough boulder' is not a Hellenistic inscription, but prob-
ably dates to the sixth century ad, when numerous similar boundary-
stones were erected. (I am grateful to T h . D r e w - B e a r for communication
on this topic.) 4

R C jo: Royal Letter Concerning Soloi

Welles summarizes the arguments for the attribution of this letter (found
at Soloi) to a Ptolemy: the first person singular, and complaints against
the behaviour of 01 εξω τάξεο^ν, a Ptolemaic expression for auxiliary non-
combatants (Welles). Piejko (e.g. 1985: 612) has attributed the letter to a
Seleukid official, after the conquest of Soloi in 197 bc. H o w e v e r , Seleukid
officials usually use the first person plural: document 4, RC 13 and 19;
furthermore, Antiochos I I I does not use a fixed formula for non-
combatants, but simply 'the others': βασιλεύς Ά ντίοχος στρατηγό ΐς,
ίππάρχαις, πεζών ήγεμοσι, στρα{στρα}τιωταΐς και τοις άλλοις χαίρειν (document
6); the expression οί εξω τάξεων is nowhere found in a Seleukid document.
T h e document was written by a Ptolemy or a Ptolemaic official.

4 1 had wondered if one could emend the reading to propose Σ• 5ρ(ος)· Δ, and inter-

pret the document as marking the boundary between Synnada and Dokimeion, but the
editors in MAMA claim their reading is secure (confirmed by D r e w - B e a r , w h o further
notes that the stone looks like a boundary stone between villages).
 A P P E N D I X 4

Μ 4 γ α ς a n d β α σ ι λ β ύ ς μ ί γ α ς

Antiochos I I I is conventionally called ' M e g a s ' , 'the G r e a t ' , in both ancient

and modern works of history. In his o w n lifetime, he assumed, or was
attributed, this surname, as well as the title βασιλεύς μεγας, ' G r e a t K i n g '
(far less frequent than 'Antiochos the G r e a t ' in modern usage, though
Holleaux used it in his narrative chapters in CAH' viii). N e w documents
make it worthwhile to recapitulate our knowledge, in order to examine
chronology and usage. 1 One important upshot is that the titulature helps to
date documents (though this could be overturned by new discoveries).
Sensitivity to context is crucial: in Robert's words (1966b: 91 and n. 3),
l'examen des documents et des formules au point de vue de la diploma-
tique, . . . sous peine des plus graves confusions et de reconstructions les
plus fallacieuses'—the title ' M e g a s ' of Antiochos I I I being quoted as an
example (see also A y m a r d 1948, for an analysis of the historical implica-
tions of royal titles and their forms).

ι. Antiochos Megas

(a) A t A m y z o n , two civic decrees of 202 and 201 (documents 9-10) start
Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχον Μεγάλου και Άντιόχον του υιού.
(b) A t T e o s , the epithet appears as βασιλεύς Άντίοχος Μέγας in cultic
context (document 18, 11: altar; 30, consecration of the bouleuterion).
T h e date is probably around 203 (Appendix 2).
(c) OGIS 245 (Seleukeia in Pieria) and 246 (Teos) were produced after
Antiochos I I I ; the context is cultic: a list of deified Seleukids
(Herrmann 1965a: 149-54).
(d) T h e blocks bearing RC 64, a letter (author unknown) to the Nysaians,
also preserve four lines of text, including the words [Άντι]όχου 8è τοΰ
μεγάλου.2 Welles assigns these fragments to the end of another letter
to the Nysaians, because of the date at the end of the document, an
epistolary f e a t u r e — f o r Welles, a letter by a later Seleukid. Piejko

1 M o s t recently Brodersen 1991: 75 _ 7; Jones 1993: 86—7; earlier, Holleaux 1942:

159-63.
2 Should we add [/3aaiAeajs]? T h i s was proposed by A y m a r d 1948: 262 n. 4; the

Roberts expressed doubt (BE 50, 28, p. 132), because 'nous ne voyons pas la nécessité
de l'addition du titre', and because the line seems to show a vacat after Μεγάλου.
 1988α: 6ο proposes a covering letter for RC 64, w h i c h he sees as a
letter of E u m e n e s II. 3

i . i . T h e evidence f r o m A m y z o n confirms A p p i a n (Syr. 1): Antiochos was

called μέγας after the eastern expedition (see C h . 2 § 2). T h e information,
probably derived f r o m a Seleukid king-list with biographies, 4 accurately
ascribes to this time the assumption, not of the title ' G r e a t K i n g ' , but of
the epithet ' G r e a t ' . A decree f r o m Antiocheia in Persis (OGIS 233), issued
c.205 BC mentions a priest of the Seleukid kings, including βασιλεύς
Άντίοχος—not 'Antiochos the Great': the epithet was probably adopted
afterwards (Holleaux 1942: 162). H o w e v e r , the preamble of inscriptions
dating to 197 (Euromos) and 196 (Xanthos) simply reads Βασιλευόντων
Άντιόχου και Άντιόχου τοΰ υίοΰ (document 29, 1—2; 23, 1—2; 24, 0 ; an
inscription f r o m T e l m e s s o s is dated to the year 193, in the reign of
'Antiochos', without the title (Segre 1938: 190). T h e r e f o r e , the epithet
μέγας in the regnal formula was dropped between 201 and 1 9 7 — p r o b a b l y
w h e n the title ' G r e a t K i n g ' was adopted.
1.2. T h e epithet adopted c.204 belongs to the category of royal 'nick-
names' (Bikerman 1938: 236-42). It may have originated in court usage, or
in an acclamation by the army; it was also a cultic epithet used in the ruler
cult, in Antiochos' lifetime already. 5 Spranger argued that this epithet
could not be a manifestation of imitatio Alexandri, because Alexander was
not 'the Great' until after Antiochos I I I (the earliest evidence being
Plautus, Most. 755). 6 Plowever, indirect evidence suggests that the expres-
sion 'Alexander the Great' started early in the Hellenistic period, implying
that Antiochos' epithet echoed A l e x a n d e r ' s title, just as the eastern expe-
dition imitated Alexander's campaigns (S. H o r n b l o w e r in CAHZ vi. 877
and n. 3). In spite of the epithet's disappearance f r o m the official regnal
formula, it probably endured in c o m m o n usage, and in ancient historio-
graphy written after the time of A n t i o c h o s III (Pol. 4.2.7). T h e occurrence
in the Nysaian d o c u m e n t (c) is historical or chronological, in that the
epithet is used as a marker for a past king.

2. Basileus megas Antiochos

(a) T h e 'governor and high-priest' of K o i l e - S y r i a , Ptolemaios son of

Thraseas, sent a petition to [Βασ]ιλεΐ μεγάλω[ι] Άντιόχωι υπόμνημα [παρά

5 But it is unlikely that an official Attalid document referred to 'Antiochos the Great'

(Piejko 1988a: 60 n. 14, is muddled); in document 49, a priest under the Attalids
simply says 'Antiochos the king'. Piejko's syntax for these four lines (Historic) 38 (1989),
402) is incomprehensible. Further, A p p e n d i x 3.
4 Brodersen 1991: 78.
5 Court: Spranger 1958: 30. A r m y : cf. Lucian, Zeuxis 11. Ruler cult: suggested by
Schmitt 1964: 95 and n. 3, on the basis of inscriptions later than Antiochos' lifetime,
OGIS 245, 246; confirmed by the usage in the civic cult for Antiochos III, preserved in
the second T e i a n decree (b), with Herrmann 1965a: 147-56 on the T e i a n imitation of
practice in the official state cult and in the cities of the Seleukis.
6 Spranger 1958: 3 1 - 2 , with Schmitt 1964: 95 η. 5.
 Πτολ]εμ[αίου] στρατηγού I και άρχιερέοκ. T h e date of this document,
part of the Skythopolis dossier, is probably 199/8 BC, preceding a
letter by Antiochos I I I to a Seleukid official, written the fourth of
Audnaios, year 114 (rather than 1 1 2 as read by the original editor). 7
(b) A t A n t i o c h on the Orontes, an inscription honouring a Seleukeian for
his goodwill εις βασιλέα μέγαν Άντίοχον was put up in year 115, 198/7
(Kraeling 1964, with BE 65, 436).
(c) Ptolemaios son of T h r a s e a s made a dedication to Hermes, Herakles,
and βασιλεΐ μεγάλωι Άντιόχωι (document 21) at Soloi, which Antiochos
I I I took in 197 (Ch. 2 § 4).
(d) A t Xanthos (also taken in 197), an inscription records h o w the ' G r e a t
K i n g ' dedicated the city to Leto, Artemis, and A p o l l o — p r o b a b l y a
local paraphrase of a royal enactment (document 22 with notes).
(e) Zeuxis' letter to Kildara (document 25: probably 197) mentions grants
υπό τού βασιλέως I [μεγάλου] Άντιόχου.
(f) Iasos produced three relevant documents after the Seleukid takeover in
197: (/,) T h e Iasian decree on cultic honours for Laodike (document
26 B), where the title appears three times: I 9; II 5 ; II 9 - 1 1 . (/2) A n
Iasian decree (document 28) expresses the desire to make clear the
people's thoughts ύπερ βασιλέως μεγάλου Άντιόχον και I βασιλίσσης
Λαοδίκης και τών τέκνων αυτών (lines 1 1 - 1 2 ) . (/3) A decree f r o m an
Iasian tribe stipulates public prayers for βασιλεΐ μεγάλωι Ά[ντιόχωι] I
και βασιλίσσηι Λαοδίκηι και τοις τέκνοις (document 27, 3 — 4)·
(g) T h e alliance between A n t i o c h o s III and the Euromians was referred to
as της συμμαχίας της συντεθειμένης I προς βασιλέα μέγαν Άντίοχον δια
Ζεΰξιδος on an inscription issued after 197 (document 30, 7-8). But the
title ' G r e a t K i n g ' does not appear in the few lines that are preserved of
the alliance itself (document 28).
(h) O n Delos, the Seleukid ambassador M e n i p p o s dedicated a statue of
Antiochos III: [£]ασιλέα [μέγαν] I Άντίοχο[ν] 1 [/3]aaiAews Σελενκο[υ] I
[Κ]αλλινίκου I [Μ]ακεδόνα (OGIS 239, lines 1 - 5 ) . T h e date is either of
M e n i p p o s ' missions to R o m e , in 193 and 192 (Holleaux 1942: 159-63). 8
(i) A t Klaros, a statue base for Antiochos the son reads Βασιλέα Άντίοχον I
βασιλέως μεγάλου Άντιόχον (document 42). T h e inscription was put up
before 193 (death of Antiochos the son).
(j) A Pergamene magistrate, [Pro]tas son of M e n i p p o s , erected a statue of
Antiochos III: ßaaiAe[a μέγαν Άντίοχ]ον I [j3]aaiAe'ü)s Σ[ελεύκου
Καλλι]νίκου. (OGIS 240). T h e date and the context are mysterious.
(k) A n A m y z o n i a n decree, issued after 188 in honour of two brothers
mentions [β]ασιλεΐ μεγάλωι (Robert 1983: no. 23, line 1 5 ) — p e r h a p s to
distinguish Antiochos I I I f r o m the king mentioned earlier at line 6, as
a historical marker referring back to a specific king in the past.
7 SEG 29.1613, lines 21-2; date of the letter by Antiochos III: line 20 (Fischer's
reading). 199/8 is preferable to 201/0, when Koile-Syria was still contested between
Antiochos III and Skopas, the general of Ptolemy V .
8 Basiez and Vial, 1987: 303-4, date this inscription to late 194, when M e n i p p o s must

have stopped on Delos on his way to Rome.

(/) T w o statues at Delos dedicated privately by individual Athenians,
honour Antiochos I V , son of 'the great king Antiochos' ( O G I S 249,
line 2; OGIS 250, line 2).

2 . 1 . 1 . T h e evidence suggests that Antiochos I I I took on the title ' G r e a t

K i n g ' only after the conquest of K o i l e - S y r i a in 200.
2.1.2. T h e non-dated examples do not disprove this thesis. T h e K l a r i a n
statue-base (i) might date to an earlier period, assuming K o l o p h o n was
taken over by Antiochos I I I in c.203, along with T e o s (which I suspect was
the case); nonetheless, the d o c u m e n t probably dates to 1 9 7 - 1 9 3 (since
Antiochos the son was present in Asia M i n o r only after 197). T h e inscrip-
tion f r o m Pergamon (J) cannot date to the entente of 216 (when Antiochos
had no reason to be called ' G r e a t K i n g ' ) ; the 190s provide a possible con-
text, w h e n Antiochos offered his daughter to Eumenes II. 9
2.2.1 T h e title ' G r e a t K i n g ' marked solemnity. Ptolemaios, son of
T h r a s e a s used it in the heading of his m e m o r a n d u m to the king (c), per-
haps to formalize his petition; 1 0 the Euromians, in the decree (g), gave
Antiochos his full title when referring to their alliance with him. In an
Iasian decree (J\), Antiochos is referred to simply as 'the king' several
times, before being called 'the G r e a t K i n g Antiochos' in the context of
loyalty to the dynasty; in an Iasian decree (J\) pertaining to the cult of
Laodike, Antiochos is 'the G r e a t K i n g ' in an ornate clause praising h i m as
a boon for all men, and in the mention of an altar erected to him. A l l the
other examples quoted above likewise occur in a context that is emphatic,
ceremonial, or solemn; in examples (a)-(i), the author of the inscription is
under Seleukid authority.
2.2.2 C o n t e x t and usage explain the omission of the title, for instance in
routine communication between Seleukid officials· 11 In his letter to the
Herakleians, Zeuxis refers to Antiochos I I I as 'the king' 1 2 rather than the
' G r e a t K i n g ' , but the letter is business-like rather than solemn. ' G r e a t
K i n g ' was not used systematically, to refer to Antiochos I I I whenever he
was mentioned.
2.2.3. T h e text of the alliance between Antiochos I I I and the
Euromians/Philippeis (document 29) in 197, nowhere uses the title ' G r e a t
K i n g ' . T h e title may have appeared in the lost portion of the text. Another
possibility is w h e n the alliance was struck, the Philippeis did not observe
Seleukid usage yet, since they were not a 'Seleukid' city (though being
9 Pol. 21.20.8; L i v . 37.53.13; A p p . Syr. 5; Leuze 1923: 2 1 1 - 1 3 improbably proposes

192 or later, just before the outbreak of war or during the war; see now T r a c y 1992. M .
Frankel, in his commentary on this document (his Inschr. Pergamon 182), suggests that
the dedicant was the son of the Seleukid envoy Menippos, established in Pergamon after
the R o m a n - S e l e u k i d War, making a private dedication reflecting Seleukid usage.
10 A s f o r t h e S a m a r i t a n p e t i t i o n to A n t i o c h o s I V : BaaiXei Άντιόχω Θεώ Έπιφανεΐ χαίρειν
(AJ 12.258).
11 D o c u m e n t 4, 1—2; Robert 1949, Robert 1967.
12 D o c u m e n t 31 Β, II 9 (Zeuxis recovering the city for the king), III 8 (exports from

the land of the king), III 14 (grants by the ancestors of the king), I V 3. O n the other
hand, Zeuxis' letter to the Kildarians (e) discusses grants made 'by the Great K i n g
A n t i o c h o s ' — t o impress the community being conquered with the king's majesty?
taken over); they later used the title in a decree passed when they were
already under Seleukid influence (g).
2.3. T h e title is the G r e e k one for the Achaimenid king; it embodies
lordship over Asia (whereas Μέγας may have referred to Alexander-like
exploits), as pointed out by E. Bevan (JHS 22 (1902), 2 4 1 - 4 , otherwise
superseded). Antiochos I I I considered himself as master of Asia not after
his expedition to the U p p e r Regions, but after the conquest of K o i l e - S y r i a .
T h e title belongs to an ideological debate with the Ptolemies. Ptolemy I I I
assumed the title ' G r e a t K i n g ' after his eastern conquests in the
Laodikeian W a r ( O G I S 54; exaggerated in Polyainos (8.50), perhaps
reflecting Ptolemaic claims over Asia). Ptolemy II also laid claims to
authority over Asia, as part of A l e x a n d e r ' s heritage and of the Achaimenid
dominion: his Alexandrian procession included personifications of 'the
cities of Ionia and the other G r e e k cities w h i c h occupied Asia and the
islands and had been subjected to the Persians' (Athen. 5.201 Ε; Rice 1983:
82-6; 105-7; 190-2). Antiochos I I I as ' G r e a t K i n g ' answered these claims.
It was also as 'king of Asia' that he claimed c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r (App.
Syr. ι and 12).

3. Consequences

3.1. Spranger proposed that Antiochos I I I called himself ' G r e a t K i n g ' on

returning f r o m the east, and that the epithet Μέγας was a derivative,
informal usage; 1 3 S c h m i t t believed that Antiochos encouraged the surname
in the G r e e k communities as more acceptable (Schmitt 1964: 92-5). T h e
available evidence suggests the contrary: the surname came first, in the
context of regnal formulas ( A m y z o n i a n decrees) and of cult (Teos);
Antiochos became the ' G r e a t K i n g ' only after Panion.
3.2.1. T h e fact that at T e o s , in the ceremonial, cultic context of the
decree listed above under 2 (b), Antiochos III is βασιλεύς Άντίοχος Μέγας (as
in A m y z o n in 202 and 201) but not βασιλεύς μέγας Άντίοχος (as in many
examples dating to 197, in the same ceremonial context) suggests a date
c.203 rather than 197, especially in combination with other arguments
(further, A p p e n d i x 2).
3.2.2. A n Ilian decree for a king Antiochos mentions a statue base
inscribed ό δήμος 6 [Ίλιέων βασιλέα Αντί] I οχον βασιλέως Σελεύκου κτλ. (OGIS
219, cf. I. Ilion 32, lines 36-8). 1 4 T h e statue bases quoted in § 3, as (c), (h),
(i), (j), as well as the prevalence of the title ' G r e a t K i n g ' after 197 in
honorific contexts, make it likely that the title would have been used in
Ilion had the decision been taken in 197. In conjunction with other, more
decisive arguments, this leads to the conclusion that OGIS 219 should
then be attributed to A n t i o c h o s I, or possibly to the earlier years of
Antiochos I I I ( A p p e n d i x 1).

13 Spranger 1958: 30—χ, followed by e.g. Schmitt 1964: 9 3 - 4 and Will 1982: 66

(Antiochos as 'king of kings'); Brodersen 1991: 7 6 - 7 .

" T h e s q u e e z e s h o w s t h e r e is n o s p a c e f o r * ό δήμος ô [Ιλιέων βασιλέα μέγαν Άντί\ I οχον.
 A P P E N D I X s

Stratonikeia

T w o questions occur concerning Stratonikeia, the Seleukid foundation

located at a strategically important site in south-west Karia: first, the date
and circumstances of its creation, and second, the date of its acquisition by
Rhodes. T h e evidence is not completely straightforward, and is worth
laying out, to attempt to find a solution, both for w h a t the events around
Stratonikeia tell us about the years 201—197 BC, and for their implications
about earlier Seleukid history in the region.

O n the first question, Antiochos I has often been favoured as the founder
of the city: see now C o h e n 1995: 168-273. H o w e v e r , in the present state of
our knowledge, it is likely that western Karia fell under Seleukid control
only under Antiochos II (Ch. 1 § 2), and that is a more likely chronologi-
cal context for the foundation of Stratonikeia.
T h e r e is a relevant piece of documentary evidence, I. Stratonikeia 1030,
w h i c h was found in the region and dated to 268 by clear markers of
Seleukid rule (Seleukid era, kings). But this inscription does not prove that
Stratonikeia was founded at that time: the decree indicates that K o l i o r g a (a
future deme of Stratonikeia), was then still an independent community,
and hence that Stratonikeia was founded later ( D e b o r d 1994: 107, 111). I
think it more probable that the inscription is a pierre errante f r o m eastern
Karia, and w o u l d maintain the date of foundation under Antiochos II.

T h e second question is better documented, and falls within the compli-

cated political history of the period and the region. Stratonikeia is promi-
nent in the military narrative of 197; Philip V had taken the city in 201. In
197, the Rhodians unsuccessfully tried to capture the city f r o m A n t i g o n i d
troops; they finally took possession of the city later, through Antiochos
( L i v . 33.18.22). Polybios has the Rhodians mention before the Senate, in
166, that they received the city 'from Antiochos and Seleukos':
Στρατονικΐίαν iXάβομεν iv μεγάΧτ] χάριτι παρ' Άντιόχου και ΣεΧεύκου (Pol.
30.31 ·6). Seleukid forces captured the city in 197, and handed it over to the
Rhodians.
T h i s was not the first conveyance of Stratonikeia to the Rhodians. T h e
attempt of 197 was part of a campaign to recover (vindicate) their 'ances-
tral possession' taken by Philip V ( L i v . 33.18.1-2). T h e verb recipi (Liv.
33.18.22) designates the Rhodians' recovering of Stratonikeia, recalling
άνακτάομαι in Polybios: they were not capturing the city, but recapturing
it. Stratonikeia was a Rhodian possession in 201, and no longer Seleukid in
201, w h e n Philip V took the city. T h i s is confirmed by the fact that Philip
V mostly kept away f r o m Seleukid possessions (Ch. 2 § 3).
Stratonikeia became a Rhodian possession, at some time between its
foundation, probably by Antiochos II, and 201. T h i s possibly happened
under Seleukos II (as a m o v e to weaken Hierax, or to reward assistance
against Hierax?). In w h i c h case, the expression 7rap Άντιόχον κο,ι ΣεΧενκον
in Polybios described the double conveyance, by Antiochos I I I and,
earlier, Seleukos II (the proteron husteron order can be explained by the
desire to avoid hiatus ( A y m a r d , REG 58 (1945), p. xiv, approved by
Robert, OMS v. 461. F o r further bibliography, C o h e n (above); Robert,
QMS v. 449-64.).
 APPENDIX 6

A Seleukid Invasion of the Attalid

K i n g d o m in 198 BC?

L i v y indicates that Antiochos I I I invaded the realm of Attalos I in 198,

but retired on the intervention of the R o m a n Senate. T h i s incident is
problematic as it stands; various efforts have been made to correct L i v y ' s
account, to preserve the 'fact' of a Seleukid invasion in 198, on the grounds
that the subsequent military operations in 197 make it historically
necessary. H o w e v e r , recent evidence challenges this view.

ι. The Account in Livy

i . i . L i v y (32.8.9-16), using an annalistic source, describes an Attalid

embassy, introduced by the consuls (including T . Quinctius Flamininus)
before the Senate at the first meeting of 198, and claiming that Attalos I
could no longer assist the R o m a n s against Philip V , since Antiochos had
invaded the Attalid kingdom, w h e n it was defenceless; it requested that the
Senate either send troops to Pergamon, or allow Attalos to defend his king-
dom. T h e Senate declined to send military forces against Antiochos, 'an
ally and a friend of the R o m a n people' (socium et amicum populi Romani),
and allowed Attalos to defend himself. Furthermore, the Senate undertook
to send an embassy to Antiochos, promising its gratitude if he kept away
f r o m the k i n g d o m of Attalos (32.8.16). Later, 'in the same year, envoys
f r o m king Attalos laid a golden crown weighing 246 pounds in the Capitol,
and thanked the Senate, because Antiochos, influenced by the authority of
the R o m a n envoys, had withdrawn his army f r o m the k i n g d o m of Attalos'
( L i v . 32.27.1).
1.2. T h e r e are obvious problems with this account. Antiochos himself
cannot have returned f r o m K o i l e - S y r i a to attack the Attalid kingdom; if
something did take place, Z e u x i s was responsible ( L e u z e 1923: 197). M a n y
details are suspect: the fact that A n t i o c h o s should be 'ally and friendly' (in
view of the Seleukid request for friendship and alliance in 194/3, a t L i v .
34.57.6, w h i c h would have been unnecessary had such a relationship
already existed in 198); the early intervention of R o m e in Asia Minor; the
fact that the R o m a n s sent an embassy to Antiochos I I I in 198, and that this
was followed (presumably) by the embassy referred to in L i v . 33.20.8.
2. Arguments against and for an Invasion in ig8

2.1. Holleaux was dubious about the chronology (Holleaux 1942: 331-5)·
T h e attack on Pergamene territories would have taken place in winter
199/8, since the Attalid embassy appeared before the Senate at the first
meeting of 198. H o w e v e r , Attalos I was in Pergamon in the winter of 199/8
( L i v . 31.47.2), and only left in the spring of 198 (by which time,
Flamininus was already in Epeiros: L i v . 32.16.1-6); therefore, the Attalid
k i n g d o m was not devoid of defences when the Seleukid invasion is sup-
posed to have happened. Holleaux suggested that this item m i g h t have
been misplaced, perhaps f r o m summer 199 or summer 198, or even 197
(Holleaux 1952: 334—5); later, he expressed doubts about the incident
(Holleaux 1957: 159 n. 4 and 175 n. 3).
2.2.1. S o m e have tried to salvage the main items (Seleukid invasion,
Attalos' appeal, the Senate's intervention), by rearranging the chronology
or disregarding the details of L i v y . L e u z e placed the invasion in spring
198, and put Flamininus' departure f r o m R o m e to the summer of the same
year ( L e u z e 1923: 190-201); b u t Flamininus is proved to have left in spring
(Walbank 1940: 321-2; M a g i e 1950: 753-4)· Badian offers alternative
scenarios: Attalos could have left Pergamon, then heard of an invasion of
his kingdom, and headed back, before setting out again in the spring, once
the Seleukid invasion had been contained or warned off (Badian 1964:
1 1 4 - 1 5 , also Briscoe 1973 ad. L i v . 32.8); or Attalos stayed in Pergamon in
winter 199/8 without all his troops; or, pace L i v y , he stayed with his army
without deterring Zeuxis. Badian also finds verisimilitude in the tone of the
Senate's intervention, which he interprets as moderate. ( T h i s j u d g e m e n t is
subjective; the tone of the senatorial injunction could well be considered
the least likely feature of the incident, and the most obvious sign of
annalistic invention emphasizing the Senate's authority and moderation.)
2.2.2. For Schmitt, the invasion of 198 is historically necessary (Schmitt
1964: 271—6, followed by Will 1982: 179—81). In 196, Antiochos' land army
was at A b y d o s ( L i v . 33.38.8); to reach the Straits it must have marched
through M y s i a , which, in Schmitt's view, had been granted by Antiochos
III to Attalos I in 216, along with a vast portion of north-western Asia
M i n o r . T h e campaign of 198 supposedly blazed a trail for the Seleukid
advance of 197 (Schmitt 1964: 274).

3. An Annalistic Invention?

3 . 1 . 1 . O n e problem is that, in L i v y ' s account, the Seleukid forces

evacuated what they had invaded (Liv. 32.27.1). S c h m i t t argues that
the evacuation concerned only territory w h i c h Antiochos III had once
surrendered to Attalos I in the κοινοπραγία of 216 (Schmitt 1964: 275-6).
T h e R o m a n intervention, in this reconstruction, was not very effective,
and S c h m i t t is forced to suggest that the thankful Attalid envoys and the
dedication of a golden crown were annalistic inventions ( S c h m i t t 1964: 276
η. ι). Rawlings 1976: 4 - 5 , argues convincingly against this elaborate and
 T h e S e l e u k i d Invasion of the A t t a l i d K i n g d o m in 198 BC 281

unnecessary scenario. Will (1982: 179-80) proposed another solution:

the Seleukid forces may have occupied north-western Asia Minor, but
evacuated a different region, probably on the coast; however, this is not at
all how Livy describes the events.
3.1.2. In fact, an advance in 198 is not necessary to explain the presence
of Seleukid land-forces at Abydos in 196. It is now clear that Mysia was
back in Seleukid hands after the defeat of Achaios (see document 4 and Ch.
2 § 1), and that Antiochos III did not allow Attalos I to keep a vast tract of
north-western Asia Minor in 216. Seleukid troops operating from
Seleukid-held Mysia reached the Straits in 197, without needing a trail-
blazing campaign in 198.
3.2. T h e conclusion must be that if anything did happen, it was a local
incursion, led by Zeuxis, against (for instance) Attalid-held Thyateira,
followed by evacuation on Roman intervention. However, even this solu-
tion entails drastically rearranging Livy. It is simpler to see the Seleukid
embassy returning from Rome in spring 197 (Liv. 33.20.8) as a belated
response to the Roman embassy of 200 (see Ch. 2 § 2), and reject the
'invasion of 198' as annalistic invention (for a parallel, see Liv. 33.30.11,
recording the annalistic invention that Athens was awarded Lemnos,
Imbros, Delos, and Skyros, with Habicht 1997: 195—6).
 APPENDIX 7

T h e settlement of Asia M i n o r in 189/8

In 189, the Senate divided the former dominions of Antiochos I I I between

the Rhodians and E u m e n e s II: both received territories as 'gifts' (Pol.
21.24.7-8; 22.5, where L y k i a is described as èv δωρεά). A s for 'the G r e e k
cities' (Pol. 21.24.8): those w h i c h had paid tribute to Attalos I were to pay
tribute to E u m e n e s II; those which had paid tribute to Antiochos I I I only
(and not to Attalos I) were not to pay tribute to Eumenes II (οσαι δ'
Άντωχω μόνον, ταύτα« άφεΐσθαι τον φόρον, repunctuated with a comma after
Άντιόχω by Baronowski 1991: 455 n. 9). T h e settlement thus restores the
status quo under Attalos I.
W h a t Polybios leaves implicit is spelled out by L i v y (both versions can
be reconciled, pace Bikerman 1937): cities w h i c h were formerly 'free' are
not included in the territories given to E u m e n e s II and the Rhodians (Liv.
37.56.2: extra ea oppida quae libera fuissent quo die cum. rege Antiocho
pugnatum est·, 37.56.4: oppida nisi, quae libera ante bellum fuissent; 37.56.6:
nisi quae eorum oppida in libertate fiassent pridie, quam aim Antiocho rege in
Asia pugnatum est). Despite differences in detail, the general implications
are clear. T h i s category included genuinely independent cities, such as
S m y r n a , Lampsakos, or Chios; cities w h i c h had rallied to the R o m a n s and
been declared free by them, such as Herakleia under L a t m o s (document
45); and finally, cities which had been granted autonomy by the Seleukids
themselves, such as Mylasa, A l a b a n d a , Iasos.
In 188, implementation of these guidelines was nuanced (Pol.
21.45.2-3). T h e fact that some 'autonomous' cities had once paid tribute to
Antiochos I I I (such a s — a l m o s t certainly—Herakleia under Latmos),
before rallying to the R o m a n s and being declared free, was considered
irrelevant (Pol. 21.45.2), as long as these cities had remained faithful to the
Romans. If they had not, they were to pay tribute to E u m e n e s II (Pol.
21.45.3): a punitive measure overriding the Roman grant of freedom
during the war. Phokaia falls in this category, since it first surrendered to
the Romans, then fought vigorously against them ( L i v . 37.32): the restora-
tion of the city's constitution and territory ( L i v . 37.32.14, 38.39.12; Pol.
21.45.7) merely expresses consent to the city's political existence, without
implying autonomy. 1 Finally, if any 'autonomous' city (of whichever of the
three categories above) had once paid tribute to Attalos I, then it would fall
1 Mastrocinque 1994: 452.
under the rule recreating the fiscal status quo under Attalos I, and pay
tribute to E u m e n e s II (Pol. 21.45.2). Skepsis, w h i c h struck its o w n
tetradrachms under Antiochos III, 2 but was given to E u m e n e s II, prob-
ably falls in this category. In sum, under certain conditions, the R o m a n
settlement deprived autonomous communities of their f r e e d o m and sub-
jected them to E u m e n e s II; 3 the recreation of the Attalid status quo was
given the precedence over autonomy.
1 assume that the Kolophonians, the K y m a i a n s , and the Mylasans, pro-
nounced 'free f r o m tribute' by the R o m a n s (Pol. 21.45.4) were in fact
autonomous, rather than somehow subject to the Attalids but tribute-free;
genuine freedom was certainly the status of Mylasa after Apameia. It is
bothersome that K o l o p h o n and K y m e were once Attalid cities (Pol.
5.77.4-6): since they were left autonomous in 188 and not reduced to
paying tribute to E u m e n e s II, they must have been pronounced tribute-
free or even autonomous by Attalos I himself, presumably at some time
after 218 (when he recovered the cities f r o m Achaios); another possibility
is that these two cities were explicitly excused the burden by R o m a n inter-
vention, as an exception to the rule, in reward for assistance during the
R o m a n - S e l e u k i d W a r or in answer to particularly successful petition. A
similar explanation is likely for the fact that Aigai, an Attalid city in 218
(Pol. 5.77.4), became independent in the second century (Pol. 33.13.8: the
city is named alongside independent communities as a recipient of war
indemnities f r o m Prousias II; it also struck its o w n coinage). 4 It is con-
ceivable that Eumenes agreed to the autonomy of many cities in western
Asia Minor in 188, to attract goodwill and because the increase of the
Attalid realm had lessened the need for tribute f r o m the cities.

2 Kagan 1984; Strabo 13.1.54: the city was 'under the Attalic kings'.
3 But I do not agree with Baronowski 1991 that 'all the cities which had defected from
Antiochus during the R o m a n - S e l e u c i d war' were subjected to the Rhodians or Eumenes
II.
4 Allen 1983: 98-9.
 Epigraphical Dossier

Introductory Note

T h e present dossier includes forty-five inscriptions relevant to the relation

between Antiochos I I I and the cities of Western Asia M i n o r , first the dated
documents, then documents of indeterminate date (though certainly pro-
duced under Antiochos III), and finally a few of the documents pertaining
to the period when Seleukid rule in Asia M i n o r was being dismantled.
W i t h i n these sections, the order followed is mainly geographical.
I have not attempted a critical edition of every text anew (though I have
made an effort to look at photographs, squeezes and, w h e n possible,
stones), but presented the documents, and some thoughts on them, along
the following principles. T h e L e y d e n conventions rather than Robert's old
Continental style are followed; nonetheless, the lemmata follow the 'lemme
génétique' model developed in Continental European epigraphy, and
vigorously promoted by Robert. I have chosen to restore sparingly in the
main text, and to propose restorations and suggestions in the apparatus.
Each text is translated, with footnotes mentioning variant possibilities.
T h e commentary gives details on context when known, some short notes
on dating or content when necessary, and directions to discussion in the
main text of the book.

I 2 1 6 - 2 0 9 bc

ι. End of Letter from Antiochos III to the Sardians ( March 213 BC)

Gauthier 1989: no. 1, with very good photographs (plate r ), editio princeps,
with textual notes ( S E G 39.1283; Bringmann and von Steuben 1995: no.
260 I). (A preliminary publication by R. Merkelbach appeared in E A 7
(1986), 74, literally as a stop-gap to fill in a vacant page.)
Cf. K n o e p f l e r 1993 (review of Gauthier 1989; especially 3 1 - 4 , 37-8 for
a reconstruction of the presentation of the documents). Gauthier 1989
provides a translation (14) and an extensive historical study of the text
(15-45)·
. ΑΤΑΛ . . . ΚΕΙ ANT . I [ 22-24 ] ί^Ι
διορθώσεσθε εν ετεσιν τρισίν, e[ù]0e[a)]s· δε και ξυλήν
els τον συνοικισμόν της πόλεως κόφαι και εξαγαγεσθαι
εκ τών εν Ταρανζοις υλών καθ' αν συν κ ρίνη Ζεύξις· vac. 4
παραλύομεν δε και της προσεπιβληθείσης εικοστής
επί τήν πολιτικήν και το γνμνάσιον ώι πρότερον εχρήσθε
σνντετάχαμεν άποκαταστήσαι ύμΐν και γεγράφαμεν
περί πάντων προς Ζεϋξιν και Κτησικλήν ύπερ αυτών 8ε 8
τούτων άπαγγελού^οίσιν ύμΐν και οί περί Μητρόόωρον. vac.
"Ερρωσθε. ΘΫ', Ξανόικού ε'.
ι Letters with sublinear dot supplied from Gauthier's apparatus. [κα]ταλ[εΛυκ]ίία>' το[
] suggested in Gauthier 1989: 21 η. i 6 (tentative). 4 Herrmann, in SEG, suggests
that the stone cutter first wrote καθ' a, before adding the nu to produce the present text;
the correct Greek would be καθ' â S.v. 9 A n erased round letter άπαγγελοΰ^ο^σιν or
άτταγγελοΰ^θ^σιν.

. . . (which) you will settle in three years; (we have given orders) 1 also to cut
w o o d for the rebuilding of the city and to bring it down f r o m the forests in
T a r a n z a , in accordance with whatever Zeuxis may decide; we also exempt
(you) f r o m the tax of one-twentieth, which had been added to the civic
tax, 2 and we have ordered that the gymnasion w h i c h you used formerly be
restored to you, and we have written about all things to Zeuxis and
Ktesikles; M e t r o d o r o s will also report to you about these very matters.
Farewell. (Year) 99, 5 Xandikos.

Commentary. T h e text is carved on a block f r o m a Wandpilaster, originally

in the entrance to the M e t r o o n of Sardeis (document 2 A and Knoepfler
1993); the blocks were later reused in the R o m a n synagogue installed in
part of the bath/gymnasion complex at Sardeis.
See C h . 2 § 1, on context; C h . 3 § 2, on Seleukid administration in this
document.

2. Sardian Decree, Letter of Laodike, Beginning of Letter of Antiochos III

(June 213)

Gauthier 1989: no. 2, with plates 2, 3, editio princeps, with textual notes
(SEG 39.1284; Bringmann and von Steuben 1995: no. 260 II).
K n o e p f l e r (1993: 33-4) argues that the letter of Antiochos I I I (C below)
is continued in d o c u m e n t 3, because the blocks on which both documents
are carved have exactly the same dimensions (whereas the whole pilaster
tapered upwards slightly); Gauthier (1989: 79) is more cautious. Gauthier
provides translation (48-9) and extensive commentary (49-79).

' Or perhaps 'we have agreed to let you cut wood': Gauthier 1989: 19-20 (either a
royal order or a royal grant in the earlier lost lines of the royal letter).
2 T h i s is Gauthier's translation, rather than 'the tax of one-twentieth which had been

added on to the civic territory'.

A.
'Ηρακλείδης Σωκράτου εΐπεν επε[ιδή C.I 5 τ]ην επι-
στολών τ]ην γραφεισαν παρά της βασιλίσση[ς πρός τε τή]ν βουλήν
καί τον δήμον υπέρ τών τιμών τών εφηφισμένων ύπο τον δήμου τώι τ[ε]
βασιλεΐ καί τήι βασιλίσσηι καί τοις τέκνοις αυτών άναγράφαι εις τήν 4
παραστάδα τον ναού του εν τώι Μητρώιωι- δεδόχθαι τήι βουλήι και τ[άη]
δήμοη άναγράφαι τον ταμίαν το δε έσάμενον άνήλωμα eis ταύτα ôowa[t]
άφ' ών χειρίζει προσόδων. Όλωίου.
Β.
Βασίλισσα Ααοδίκη Σαρδιανών τήι βουλήι καί τώι δήμωι χαίρειν 8
Μητρόδωρος καί Μητροφάνης καί Σοκράτης καί Ηρακλείδης οί παρ' ύμών
π ρεσβευταί άπέδωκαν το φήφισμα καθ' ο τέμενος τε Λαοδίκειον άνεΐναι
φηφίσαισθε καί βοιμον ίδρύσασθαι, άγειν δε καί πανήγυριν Λαοδίκεια
καθ' εκαστον έτος εν τώι Ύπερβερεταίωι μηνί τήι πεντεκαιδεκάτηι 12
καί πονπήν καί θυσίαν συντελειν Ait Γενεθλίου υπέρ τής τού αδελφού
ημών βασιλέως Ά ντιόχου καί τής ημετέρας καί τών παιδιών vac.
σωτηρίας, καί οί πρεσβευταί δε παρεκάλουν ακολούθως τοις εν
τώι φηφίσματι κατακεχωρισμένοις, τάς τ ε δή τιμάς άποδε- 16
[5]ey/A€0a ήδέως καί τήν τού δήμου προθυμίαν επαινούμεν
[«rat πειρασό]μεθα άεί τι αγαθόν συνκατασκευάζειν τήι πό-
[Àer άπαγγελ]ούσιν δε περί τούτων καί οί π ρεσβευταί. vac.
ΘΫ'έτους, Πανήμου ι. 20
C.
[Βασιλεύς Άντίο]χος Σαρδιανών τήι βουλήι και τώι δήμωι χα[ί]-
[ρειν οί παρ' ύμών πρεσ]βευταί Μητροφάνης, Μητρόδωρος, Μοσ[. . . .]
[ Άρ]τεμιδ[ω]ρ C.g ΝΤ[ ]
ι Gauthier 1989: 5 2 ar>d π. 9 discusses possible restorations for the lacuna; as he
observes, the meaning is clear: 'since it is good/fitting to put up the letter . . (επειδή
. . . e.g. καθήκει / προσήκει / προσήκον εστίν κτλ). ç Σοκράτης on the stone: see
Gauthier 1989: 59-60 (not a carver's mistake, but a case of divergent spellings within the
same document; Gauthier gives parallels). 18 [κ-αί πειρασό]μεθα Gauthier 1989:
60, gives arguments and parallels, e.g. I. Iasos 4, 25-30 (the same document in present
dossier, 26 A , I 25-30). 22 For the third name, Gauthier, 1989: 78, proposes
Μοσχίων, well attested at Sardis. 23 Gauthier, 1989: 78 η. io2, suggests
[<χπεδωκα]ν το [φήφισμα], the expected formula

A . Herakleides, son of Sokrates, proposed: since [it is fitting] to put up, on

the parastas of the temple in the Metroon, the letter written by the queen
to the council and the people concerning the honours voted by the people
for the king and the queen and their c h i l d r e n — l e t it seem good to the
people to have the treasurer do the putting up, and to have h i m cover the
subsequent expenditure f r o m the monies he handles.
Oloos.
B. Q u e e n Laodike to the council and the people of the Sardians, greetings.
Metrodoros, Metrophanes, Sokrates, and Herakleides, your 10 ambassa-
dors, have handed over the decree, according to w h i c h you have decreed to
consecrate a sacred enclosure called Laodikeion and to establish an altar,
and to organize a panegyris called Laodikeia, each year, on the fifteenth of
Hyperberetaios, and to carry out a procession and a sacrifice to Z e u s
Genethlios for the safety of our brother, king Antiochos, of us, and of our
children; your ambassadors also exhorted us in accordance with the
content of the decree; we accepted the honours with pleasure, and we
praise the eagerness of the people and we will always try to produce some
favour for the city; your ambassadors will report on these matters.
20 Y e a r 99, Panemos 10
C . [ K i n g A n t i o j c h o s to the boule and the people of the Sardians,
g r e e t i n g s . Y o u r amjbassadors Metrophanes, Metrodoros, M o s [ c h i o n ? . . .
A r j t e m i d o r o s . . . (handed over your decree . . .)

Commentary. See notes to d o c u m e n t 1 for the material disposition of the

text. T h e decree specifies carving on the parastas of the M e t r o o n . T h e
expression can designate the anta of a temple; Gauthier 1989: 54, took it to
mean a pillar against a wall ( G e r m a n Wandpilaster)·, Knoepfler 1993: 3 1 - 4
argues that the w o r d designated the 'entrance' of the temple, framed on
both sides by Wandpilaster.
A t line Β 14, Laodike speaks of her children as παίδια, the affective term
rather than the more neutral τέκνα: Gauthier 1989: 7 2 - 3 , to w h i c h add
document 20 (dedication by T h e m i s o n for the Seleukid royal family) and
K r a e l i n g 1964 (honorific inscription set up by theoroi at a Seleukid festival
for the agonothete T h e o p h i l o s , on account of his behaviour towards the
royal family). T h e s e examples help define Seleukid court usage, and style,
insisting on familial tenderness between m e m b e r s of the royal family;
Antiochos I I I w o u l d proclaim the φιλοστοργία between h i m and Laodike as
one of the motives for founding a cult of her in 193 (document 37).
See C h . 2 § 1; C h . 4 § 2b, on the role of honours in interacting with
rulers.

3. Letter of Antiochos III to the Sardians (Summer 213)

G a u t h i e r 1989: no. 3, with plate 4, editio princeps, with textual notes ( S E G

39.1285; Bringmann and von Steuben 1995: no. 260 I I I and IV).
See lemma of previous inscription for bibliography (and the possibility
that the beginning of this letter is preserved on another block). Gauthier
1989 provides translation (82) and extensive commentary ( 8 3 - 1 1 1 ) .

i συν] -
χωρήσαντες πάντα α διέτε[ιν]εν προς επανόρθωσιν και νΰν 1
προαιρούμενοι γενέσθαι υμάς εμ βελτίονι διαθέσει πεποήκαμεν τα
ενδεχόμενα· τοις τε γαρ νέοις άποτετάχαμεν εις ελαιοχρίστιον
άνθ' ων πρότερον ελαμβάνετε κατ' ενιαυτόν ελαίου μετρητός 4
διακοσίους και εις τούτο το πλήθος συνετάξαμεν άποτάξαι vac.
προσόδους άφ' ών εζ υποκειμένου λήφεσθε ευτάκτως, και εις
τους κατασταθμευομενους δε παρ' ύμΐν συνχωροΰμεν λαμβά-
νεσθαι ών έχετε οικιών άντι τών ήμισέων τα τρίτα μέρη· άπο- 8
λύομεν δε υμάς καί τον ενοικίου ου τελείτε άπο τών εργαστηρίων, εΐ-
7τερ καί αί άλλαι πόλεις μη πράσσονται· οίόμεθα δε δεΐν καί εν τοις
άγομε{με)νοις Λαοδικείοις ύπο τής πόλεως νπάρχειν νμΐν άτε-
λειαν εφ' ημέρας τρεις και περί πάντων γεγράφαμεν π[ρο?] Ζεύξ[ιν] 12
[«αί Κτησικλήν?]

12 A s Gauthier observes, all the readings are secure, even though the top half or third
of the letters is all that remains. 13 It is tempting to restore [καί Κτησικλήν], as in
document 1, line 8.

having granted all the things that concerned the recovery (of the city) and
now making it our intention that y o u should be in a better situation, we
have taken the possible measures; for w e have given to the y o u n g men, as
replacement for what y o u received previously, two hundred metretai of oil
a year for the oil-anointment, and w e have given orders to set aside, up to
this amount, monies f r o m which you will receive (the oil) regularly, out of
specially designated funds; and regarding those among y o u w h o have men
billeted upon them, we agree that there should be taken a third instead of
a half of the houses you have, and we exempt you f r o m the rent which y o u
pay on the workshops, 10 inasmuch as the other cities are not liable to it;
we also think it necessary that in the Laodikeia conducted by the city, you
should have ateleia for three days; and we have written concerning all
matters to Zeuxis [and Ktesikles? . . .]

Commentary. See notes to document 1 for the material disposition of the

text.
In translating this document, I have followed the interpretation offered
by Knoepfler 1993: 34-5, for lines 6-8 (concerning billeting), and
approved by Gauthier in BE 93, 493 (Gauthier 1989: 9 7 - 1 0 1 , had argued
for translating this difficult sentence as follows: 'regarding the men billeted
upon you, we agree that they should take a third instead of a half of the
houses you have').
See C h . 2 § 1; C h . 3 § 2, for Seleukid administration.

4. Dossier Concerning the High-Priesthood of Nikanor: Correspondence of

Philotas to Bithys, Zeuxis to Phi lotas, Antiochos III to Zeuxis ( 20g)

Malay 1987, editio princeps with photographs ( S E G 37.1010). T h a n k s to

the courteous help of H. M a l a y and C . T a m v e r , I examined the stone in
the Manisa M u s e u m , in 1995 and 1997.
Cf. Ph. Gauthier, BE 89, 276 (p. 402, date; p. 403, improved readings
f r o m photographic enlargements); S c h w e r t h e i m 1988 (historical implica-
tions); S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 198 (date and function of
Nikanor); Malay and Nalbantoglu 1996 (on both the office of 'high-priest'
and the office of 'official in charge of the sacred finances', continued under
the Attalids).
T h e stele is topped by a large, semi-circular pediment, with the
numerals αβγ' carved discreetly, perhaps as a reminder for the stonemason
of the order in which to carve the letters (Malay 1987: 7 n. 5).
Φιλώτας Βίθυ[ι χ]αιpeiv της παρά Ζεύξιδος
γραφείσης προς ημάς επιστολής ύπερ τών
κατά Νικάνορα κατακεχόρισθαί σοι το άν-
τίγραφον σύνταξον οΰν συντελεΐν 4
καθότι επεσταλται.
"Ερρωσο. γρ, Αρτεμισίου κ'.
vacat
Ζεύξις Φιλώται χαίρειν
εί έρρωσαι, τό δεον αν εΐη· και α[ϋ]τοι ôè 8
ύγιαίνομεν τοΰ γραφεντος προς
ημάς προστάγματος παρά τοΰ βα-
σιλέως ύπερ Νικάνορος τον επί τον
κ[ο]ιτ[ώ]νος ύπογεγραπται σοι τό άντί- 12
γρ[αφο]ν ίία^ώ?] αν οΰν ποιήσαις συν-
[r<x]£as [επακ]ολου[θ]ήσαντας τοις
[επισταλ]εΐσ[ι]ν συντελεΐν ώσπερ οί-
[ε]ται δεΐν. [γ]ρ', Αρτεμισίου γ 16
vacat
Βασιλεύς Άντίοχος vac.
Ζεύξιδι χ\αίρειν]· Νικάνορα
τον επί τοΰ κοιτ[ώνος] όντα τών
φί[λων δ] là το [. ,]ν [. . ]ΡΙ νειν èv τιμήι 20
[και πιστέ]ι Τ . Λτ[ c. 10 ] σνντε-
[θρα]μμενον ήμΐν [πεποι]ήσθαι αποδεί-
ξεις εκτενείς [r]ijs αύτοΰ πίστε-
[ω]? και εύνοιας, [ήβονλό]μεθα μεν 24
άπολΰσαι [. ,]ν . μ[. . . . ]να άξίως
τών προγεγραμμ[εν]ων [. . .] ΤΕΥΧΑ[4~s]
[τ]ων παρ' ήμών φιλανθρώποιν ούχ «[πο]-
μενοντος δε α[ΰ]τ[ο]ΰ εφ' ετερα προχει- 28
ρισθήναι, άποδεδ[είχα]μεν εν τήι e[/7re]-
κεινα του Ταύρου ώσπερ αυτός ή-
ξίωσεν άρχιερεα τών ιερών πάν-
τών, πεπεισμένοι και διά τό ήθος 32
εξάξειν τά τε κατά τάς θυσίας και
τα λοιπά άξίως τής ήμετερας
σπουδής ήν εχομεν περί ταύτα,
προαιρούμενοι αϋξειν ώσπερ προσ- 36
ήκόν εστίν ώιόμεθα δε δειν είναι αυ-
τόν και επί τών ιερών, και τάς προσό-
δους τούτων και ταλλα διεξάγεσ-
θαι ΰπ' αύτοΰ καθά και επί τοΰ πάπ- 40
που ήμών υπό Δίωνος· σύνταξον
οΰν σννεργεΐν αύτώι εις τά προσ-
ήκοντα τοις προδεδηλωμενοις·
καταχώριζειν δε αυτόν καί εν ταΐς 44
συγγραφαΐς καί εν τοις άλλοις
χρηματισμόΐς οΐς είθισται· καί τής
επιστολής το άντίγραφον ανα-
γράφοντας εις στήλας λιθίνας 48
εχθεΐναι εν τοις επιφανεστά-vac.
τοις ίεροΐς.
γ ρ', Α[ύσ]τ[ρ]ου κγ'.
3 κατακεχόριοθαι on the stone. 8 τάδε [ev] αν εϊη Malay; the present restoration
proposed by Gauthier. 12 T h e restoration K[O]IT[CÛ]IOS proposed by P. Herrmann
to Malay. 18-29 Pleket attempts a reconstruction of the meaning in SEG
37.1010; see below Pleket's suggestions for lines 26-27. 20 [κ\ρίνειν suggested by
Malay, who prints the surviving letters without sublinear dots. One might expect an
expression such as δια το [συ]>Ίεχώΐ] μενειν εν τιμήι I και πίστει (though the photograph
does not confirm this reading). 25-7 It is tempting to write [i\va at line 25, as in
RC 44, 18—20: "να μεν ουν και εις το λο[ιπ]ον τυγχάνηι πάντων τών εις τιμήν κα[ί δ^^αν·
ανηκόντων, in a similar situation (Antiochos III appoints the high-priest of a temple at
Daphne); unfortunately, the letters TEYX cannot fit a suitable (active or middle voice)
form of τυγχάνειν. Pleket, SEG 37.1010 suggests [καί] τευχ[θε'ν\τ] ων or [καί
έν]τευχ[θεν\τ]ών. T h e lacuna is clearly too small for [καί εν]τευχ[θεντων], After examining
the stone, I believe I can make out the traces of an alpha following the preserved letters
T E Y X (autopsy M a y 1997), and this reading has been reproduced in the text above. T h e
stone certainly contained more space after T E Y X (line 26) than one or two letters
(Malay), as can be seen from Malay's photograph. 27-9 Readings and restora-
tions by Gauthier. 38 Repunctuated by Gauthier. 49 Vacat added on
basis of autopsy (can be confirmed on Malay's photograph). 50 I believe that the
numeral y ' c a n still be made out on the stone (autopsy September 1995 and photograph).

Philotas to Bithys, greetings. T h e copy of the letter written to us by Z e u x i s

about the measures concerning Nikanor is attached; therefore give out
orders to carry them out as it is ordered. Farewell. (Year) 103, Artemisios
20.
Zeuxis to Philotas, greetings; if y o u are well, that would be as is right;
we ourselves are in good health. T h e 10 ordnance written to us by the king
concerning Nikanor, the chamberlain, has been copied out for y o u below;
y o u would do well, therefore, by giving orders for your subordinates 1 to
obey the orders and carry out things as he thinks fit. (Year) io[3],
Artemisios 3.
K i n g Antiochos to Zeuxis, greetings. C o n c e r n i n g Nikanor, the cham-
berlain, one of the 20 Friends, because he . . . in honour [and trust . . .],
and, having been raised with us, has given devoted demonstrations of his
faithfulness and his g o o d w i l l — w e wished to free h i m f r o m . . . so that, in
a manner worthy of what is written above, he should obtain all privileges

1 T h i s translates the plural participle, which agrees with the implicit subject of the

infinitive clause. T h i s construction in itself reflects the assumption that Antiochos'

orders will be executed not only by Zeuxis, but a host of subordinates (cf. Hdt 6.30.2,
Δαρείος . . . τήν κεφαλήν τήν Ίοτιάιον λούοαντάς τε και περιοτείλαντας ευ ενετείλατο θάφαι κτλ.,
'Darius . . . ordered his attendants to wash and wrap up well the head of Ilistiaios and
to bury it . . .').
f r o m us; but since he did not accept to be assigned to other functions, we
have appointed h i m high-priest of the sanctuaries 30 in the region b e y o n d
the T a u r u s , as he has asked himself, being convinced that because of his
character, he will carry out both the business concerning the sacrifices and
the rest in a manner worthy of the zeal w h i c h we have concerning these
matters, making it our intention to increase them, as is appropriate. W e
thought necessary that he should also be in charge of the sanctuaries, and
that their revenues and the other matters should be administered 40 by
him, just as was done under our grandfather by Dion. D o therefore give
orders for your subordinates 2 to collaborate with h i m in the matters that
are appropriate to what has been previously explained, and to mention h i m
in the contracts for which it is usual, and to write up the copy of the letter
on stone stelai and expose them in the most conspicuous 50 sanctuaries.
(Year) 103, Dystros 23.

Commentary. T h e three letters are carved on a large marble stele, topped

b y a heavy semi-circular pediment; though its exact place of discovery is
u n k n o w n (if in situ originally, it would provide us with the location of a
local shrine), it was b r o u g h t to the attention of H. Malay in the vicinity of
P a m u k ç u (formerly E f t e l e ) . T h e plain of P a m u k ç u is distinguished by hot
springs (Cuinet 1894: 42); it plays an important role in communications
between Mysia and L y d i a , is dominated by a crest (occupied b y a
Byzantine castle), and (in the time of R o b e r t ' s travels there) boasted of a
pool with sacred fish (Robert 1962: 385-6, 381 n. 3: 'un curieux example
d'un bassin avec des poissons sacrés'). A n y of these features m i g h t have
provided the site for a local shrine. T h i s context, along with the size and
weight of the stele, make it very likely that the document comes f r o m this
part of Mysia.
T h e documents are dated to early 209. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993:
198, would date Antiochos' letter a year earlier than the others. In their
view, it was produced in Dystros, 'the penultimate m o n t h of the year', and
Zeuxis' letter in Artemisios, 'the first month' of se 103—hence their
position that the king's letter was produced in the preceding year, 102
(even in the year before that, 101). H o w e v e r , this assumes that the order of
months observed in this transaction is the Babylonian one; it is m u c h more
probable that the order of months is the Macedonian one, w h i c h begins in
Dios and where Dystros can be followed by Artemisios without crossing
the threshold of a new year (Samuel 1972: 142).
T h e official Philotas might be the commander of the Seleukid garrison
at A b y d o s in 190 ( L i v . 37.12.2), even though the latter position seems
lowly for the administrator of the P a m u k ç u inscriptions: the demands of
the incipient Asian phase of the war could have dictated his movements,
just as Seleukos was m o v e d f r o m his residence of Lysimacheia to Aiolis,
for his armed presence to keep the cities of the coast on the Seleukid
side.
Nikanor is not linked to the state-organised cult for Antiochos I I I and
3 See note 1.
his ancestors (an institution created after the king's return f r o m the East,
c.204): C h . ι § ι.
See C h . 1 § 1 on the implications for the Seleukid view of the past; C h .
3 § 2, on administrative processes and rhetoric as revealed in this docu-
ment.

II 203-201 bc

5. Letter of Zeuxis to the Amyzonians (May 203)

GIBM 1035, editio princeps by F. Marshall, with facsimile and transcrip-

tion of CIG 2899 (= RC 40; J. and L . Robert 1983: 1 4 1 - 2 , no. 11; in the
present collection, document 8 A ) w h i c h Marshall believed to be part of
the left hand portion of the present text (contra, Wilhelm,
Akademieschriften 2, 39-56, esp. 39-50: extensive reconstruction of the
text; dissociates CIG 2899 and the present text); RC 38, with photograph;
J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 132-6, no. 9, basically W i l h e l m ' s text with a few
different readings or restorations. A l l these editions attribute the author-
ship of the letter to Antiochos; but the letter must be by a Seleukid official,
probably Zeuxis. I examined the stone in the British M u s e u m , w h i c h also
kindly supplied a squeeze.
Cf. Marshall's commentary; A d . W i l h e l m (above), for historical context;
J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 136-7 (against the 'interprétation idyllique' of this
document, cf. S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 58); M a , D e r o w , and
M e a d o w s 1995 for identification of author, text and historical c o m m e n -
tary.

[Ζεϋζις Άμυζονεων τώι δή\μωι χαίρειν. Ήμεΐς καί τους άλλους μεν πάντας
c.i8 a]î3roi)s ιτιστενσαντες ήμιν ενεχείρισαν, τήν πάσαν αύ-
[τών C. 14 τ]ο μένοντας επί τών ιδίων εν τήι πάσηι ΕΝΑΝ
! C.1J ] δε πρόκειται ήμιν καί ύπερ ύμών φροντίζειν 4
[ c. II ΰπάρχο]ντα ΰμιν τά τε άλλα α καί εν τήι Πτολεμαίου
[ C.I5 ] νοήσετε οντες εϋθυμοι καί γινόμενοι προς τώι
C. ΐ6 ] τών ιδίων διαφνλάσσουσι γαρ ύμίν τήν εις τ(ου)ς
[βασιλείς εύνοίαν? π]αρ' εκείνων καί παρ' ημών πάντα συγκατασκευ- 8
C.I7 κ]αί πολυωρίαν άνήκοτα· γεγράφαμεν δε καί
C. ΐ8 οπ]ως άντιλαμβάνωνταί τε ύμών
[και μηθενί επιτρεπωσιν ε]νοχλείν υμάς. vac. "Ερρο>σθε. θρ' Δα{ι)σίου ιε'
2 J. and L . Robert 1983: Ι34> propose [ S ä i j r a s ] , though it is impossible to be sure.
T h e r e are traces of an earlier, erased line, as Welles observed, though it is impossible to
make out the earlier text. T h e line is also m u c h longer than the others: perhaps the
words πάσαν αν- were added later? 3 Marshall in GIBM read δομενον τάς ΙπΙ κτλ.;
the present reading is by Wilhelm and accepted by Welles and Robert. T h e stone only
shows traces of an apex. 3 - 4 Wilhelm proposed Ένα{ν] I [ναατρίφεσθαι], assuming
a mistaken duplication of the nu; unconvincing considering the syllabic division in the
rest of the text. 4 [οι3χ ήκιατα] S<r Welles, followed by J. and L. Robert 1983: 134
('nous paraît excellent'); Piejko 1988a: 63 n. 22, [ομοίως] δε seems equally acceptable.
6 [συμμαχίαι] restored b y Wilhelm; though it is legitimate to wonder how a Seleukid
official w o u l d have referred to the p o w e r of another Hellenistic super-power; συμμαχία
is also an unlikely w o r d for a city as subordinate as A m y z o n (though this argument
perhaps takes the modern categories, invented b y Bickerman and Robert, of 'free city'
versus 'subordinate city' too seriously and legalistically). M o r e likely, perhaps, is a con-
crete word, such as 'ordnance' or 'enactment', a specific legal d o c u m e n t (<=πιστολήΰ
εντολήι?), issued b y 'Ptolemaios': a Ptolemy, or an imperial official? T h e reading τώι at
the end of the line is a 'lecture de G . Hirschfeld, préférée à celle de Marshall τού(ς)'
( R o b e r t 1983: 133 n. 7). T h e correct reading can be read on W e l l e s ' photograph, and,
indeed, on the stone (though it is easy to understand how Marshall came to his reading,
since there are traces above the iota w h i c h make it look like an upsilon); f r o m a m e t h o d o -
logical point of view, it is interesting to note h o w GIBM misleadingly reproduces
M a r s h a l l ' s reading in the authoritative form of the facsimile). 6 - 7 A possible
restoration is προς τώι I [μένειν άδεώς em] τών ιδίων κτλ, 'directing yourselves towards
[staying without fear on] y o u r property', repeating the terms of line 3. 7 The
s t o n e h a s ΤΥΟΣ at t h e e n d . 7 - 8 [τήν εις τους θεούς και εις -ημάς πίστιν] Wilhelm:
Welles, in RC, noted that 'the stock reference to the gods has here an unusual form';
indeed, it probably is not justified here (below). 8 For the restoration see below;
the supplement εϋνοιαν? could be replaced b y near-synonyms, for instance αϊρεσιν.
A n o t h e r possibility might be τήν εις τους βασιλείς και τα πράγματα εϋνοιαν, a combination
w h i c h occurs in the inscription h o n o u r i n g the Seleukid high-official M e n e d e m o s
( R o b e r t 1950: 7 3 ) — t h o u g h the date of the latter d o c u m e n t is not at all clear ( S c h m i t t
1964: 19 η. 5). A near-parallel comes f r o m Z e u x i s ' letter to Herakleia, ( d o c u m e n t 31 B,
I V 9—10): Διο και et; ποήσετε και αυτοί 8ιαφυλάσ[σοντες τήν ei's] τά πράγματα εϋνοιαν. Or
perhaps even τήν εις τους βασιλείς και ήμάς εϋνοιαν, an expression of self-importance f r o m
Zeuxis? ( T h e A m y z o n i a n s thanked a Seleukid official for writing ύπερ τής εύνοιας ψ έχων
διατελεί εις τε τους βασιλείς και εις {ι} τον Ζεΰξιν: d o c u m e n t 10, 9 - 1 0 ) · 9 W e l l e s and
W i l h e l m wrote ανήκοντα, but the Roberts (1983: 135 and n. 22) observed that ανήκοτα is
'un vulgarisme dans la rédaction', a contemporary spelling w h i c h should be respected in
edition.

[ Z e u x i s (?) t o t h e p e o p l e of t h e A m y z o n i a n s ] g r e e t i n g s . A s f o r t h e o t h e r s
[ w h o ] h a v e . . . e n t r u s t e d t h e m s e l v e s t o u s , w e h a v e . . . t h e m , . . . in r e g a r d
t o t h e i r s t a y i n g u p o n t h e i r o w n p r o p e r t y in all . . . w e i n t e n d t o t a k e c a r e of
y o u as w e l l . . . t h e o t h e r t h i n g s w h i c h w e r e y o u r s in t h e [. . .] of P t o l e m y
a l s o . . . y o u will d o w e l l , t h e r e f o r e , t o b e of g o o d c h e e r a n d t o d i r e c t y o u r -
s e l v e s t o w a r d s t h e . . . of y o u r o w n p r o p e r t y ; if y o u p r e s e r v e y o u r [ g o o d -
will? t o w a r d s t h e k i n g s , (it is likely t h a t ) ] f r o m t h e m a n d f r o m u s , all
m e a s u r e s will b e t a k e n r e g a r d i n g y o u r . . . a n d y o u r c a r e . W e h a v e also
w r i t t e n t o . . . 10 s o t h a t t h e y s h o u l d b e of p r e s e n t a s s i s t a n c e t o y o u , a n d
[ n o t to a l l o w a n y o n e to] t r o u b l e y o u . F a r e w e l l . Y e a r 109, 15 D a i s i o s .

Commentary. T h e l e t t e r o r i g i n a l l y f i g u r e d o n a m a r b l e b l o c k f r o m a b u i l d -
i n g ( t e m p l e o r m o n u m e n t a l g a t e ) of t h e A r t e m i s i o n ; J. T . W o o d s a w e d off
t h e i n s c r i b e d s u r f a c e , t o e n a b l e t h e r e s u l t i n g 14 c m t h i c k p l a q u e t o b e
t r a n s p o r t e d t o E n g l a n d (J. a n d L . R o b e r t 1983: 1 3 2 - 3 ) .
T h i s d o c u m e n t is a l m o s t c e r t a i n l y a l e t t e r f r o m Z e u x i s t o A m y z o n ( M a ,
D e r o w , a n d M e a d o w s 1995). T h e a t t r i b u t i o n t o A n t i o c h o s I I I w a s b a s e d
o n W i l h e l m ' s r e s t o r a t i o n of l i n e 8: t h e a u t h o r p r o m i s e d t h e A m y z o n i a n s
a d v a n t a g e s f r o m t h e g o d s a n d h i m s e l f , if t h e y k e p t t h e i r t r u s t t o w a r d s
both, a highly anomalous expression. W i l h e l m ' s justification for this
r e s t o r a t i o n is v e r y w e a k : h e r e f e r s t o OGIS 2 2 4 , w h e r e t h e p u b l i s h e d t e x t
h a s a S e l e u k i d k i n g m e n t i o n i n g a h i g h - p r i e s t 'of t h e g o d s a n d of u s ' — i n
f a c t , t h e i n s c r i p t i o n is a n e d i c t of A n t i o c h o s I I I c o n c e r n i n g t h e c e n t r a l l y
organized ruler-cult; as is now k n o w n with certitude, the text should read
τών προγόνων και ήμών, in relation to a high priest of Antiochos I I I and his
ancestors (document 37; R o b e r t 1949, Robert 1967). W i t h o u t this parallel,
the necessity to attribute the letter to Antiochos disappears; better an
attribution to a royal official, speaking in the first person plural about bene-
factions f r o m the kings (Antiochos I I I and Antiochos the son) and himself.
It is possible that the fragmentary letter published as J. and L . R o b e r t
1983: no. 13, records the confirmation and elaboration of Zeuxis'
measures by Antiochos I I I .
See C h . 2 § 2, on context; C h . 3 § 2a, on Zeuxis.

6. Letter of Antiochos III to his Army at Amyzon (203)

E. Hula, E. Szanto, Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der

Wissenschaften in Wien, phil. hist. Klasse 132 (1895), A b h . 2, p. 2 (initial
publication); a better text, f r o m the stone, in W . R. Paton and J. L . M y r e s ,
JHS 16 (1896), 231, no. 34, ( O G I S 217); RC 39, with commentary, trans-
lation, and near illegible photograph of squeeze; J. and L . Robert 1983:
138—41, no. 10, with commentary and slightly more legible photograph,
but truncated to the left.

Βασιλεύς Άντίοχος στρατηγοΐς,

ίππάρχαις, πεζών ήγεμόσι, στρα-
{στρα}τίωταις και τοις άλλοις
[χ]αιρ[ε]«'. Τό ιερόν τοΰ Άπόλλω- 4
[vos και τής Άρτ]εμιδος τό εν
[Άμυζώνι \
5 ΜΑΟΣΤΟΕΝ Hula and Szanto. 6 Άμυζώνι Robert.

K i n g Antiochos, to the generals, hipparchs, infantry commanders, sol-

diers, and to the others, greetings. C o n c e r n i n g the sanctuary of A p o l l o and
A r t e m i s in [Amyzon] . . .

Commentary. T h e text is carved on an architectural block, probably 'le

morceau d'une ante' (J. and L . Robert 1983: 138), f r o m the Artemision at
A m y z o n , and was found, like almost all of the epigraphical material f r o m
that site, reused in the walls of a Byzantine castro.
See J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 1 4 0 - 1 , for the typically 'Seleukid' way in
w h i c h A p o l l o is named before Artemis, against the local usage. O n the
basis of document 8, we could imagine Antiochos I I I writing to the army
to announce that he has 'given back the shrine inviolate', To ιερόν τοΰ
Άπόλλω[νος και τής Άρτ]εμιδος το εν [Άμυζώνι άπεδώκαμεν ασυλον]; the initial
statement of a royal enactment w o u l d then have been followed by a series
of direct orders and prohibitions addressed to the army, [ύμεΐς οΰν
εύτακτειτε], as at Labraunda (document 15). T h e document perhaps ended
with a short remark such as 'we have also written to Zeuxis in this matter'.
T h i s organization of the material can be observed in the appointment of
Nikanor (document 4) and (probably) in the letter of Antiochos I I I to the
K o a n s ( S E G 33-673): the initial sentence baldly states the tenor of a royal
decision, with the object of the decision located at the front of the sentence
(e.g. Νικάνορα τον επι τον κοιτ[ώνος] οντα κτλ: document 4. 18—19 a n d
f o l l o w i n g ) — t h e 'Stichwort' construction analysed by Schubart as a typical
feature of business-like administrative notes, probably dictated by the king
(Schubart 1920: 334)
O n 'the others' (camp-followers), Bikerman 1938: 91.
See C h . 2 § 2; C h . 3 § ι , on Seleukid violence.

7. Dedication of Zeuxis at Amyzon (203)

E. Fabricius, Sitzungsberichte der königlich Preussischen Akademie der

Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1894: 9 1 5 - 1 7 , with drawing of lintel block
and tentative commentary ( O G I S 235); Robert 1983: 93-6, no. 1, f r o m
autopsy of the text in 1949, worn but still legible; facsimile, and photo-
graph of squeeze. I did not see the stone w h e n I visited the site in A p r i l
1997.
Cf. Robert 1983: 95-6: arguments for size of lacuna, based on size of
blocks and the principle that these monumental dedications were sym-
metrically disposed ( S E G 33.853).

Ίδριενς Έκατό[μνω άνίθηκΐν]

ZevÇis Κννάγου Μακέδων τους αγρούς τα>[ c.78 ]
I Ίδριεύς Έκατό[]Χνω Μυλασεύς ανέβηκε τον πυλώνα Άρτεμίδι] Robert. 2 Ζεύξις
Κυνάγου Μακεδών τους αγρούς τώ[ι θεώι άποκατέατησεν] F a b r i c i u s ; Ζεύξις Κυνάγου
Μακεδών τους αγρούς τώ[ν θεών ] Robert. T h e restoration proposed b y P i e j k o 1985:
609, τώ[ν βασιλέων κελευόντων] is not c o m p e l l i n g : apart f r o m the oddity of the G r e e k , his
a r g u m e n t , that Z e u x i s could only have acted on the orders of the king(s), is disproved
b y the d o c u m e n t s f r o m E u r o m o s and Herakleia u n d e r L a t m o s , where Z e u x i s is seen to
e n j o y considerable authority. R o b e r t 1983: 96, rejects the possibility of restoring τώ[ι
Άπόλλωνι και τήι Άρτέμιδι], claiming that the definite article w o u l d be anomalous in a
dedication. B u t at X a n t h o s , a slightly later inscription (197 or later) reads Βασιλεύς μέγας
Άντίοχος άφιέρωαεν τήν πόλιν τήι Λητώι και τώι Απόλλωνι και τήι Αρτέμιδι δια τήν προς αυτούς
συνάπτουσαν αυνγένειαν. T h e practice of n a m i n g A p o l l o b e f o r e A r t e m i s , even though the
latter was the m o r e important deity in the local shrine, w o u l d reflect S e l e u k i d priorities,
as in d o c u m e n t 6 (where the g o d s both receive the definite article). I w o u l d propose
Ζεύξις Κυνάγου Μακέδων τους άγρονς τώ[ι Άπόλλωνι και τήι Άρτέμιδι C.ζο άνέθηκεν or
άπεκατέστησεν].

Idrieus, son of Hekatomnos, dedicated . . .

Zeuxis, son of K y n a g o s , Macedonian, . . . the fields . . .

Commentary. T h e support of the texts is T a n g l e gauche d'une architrave

dont manque la partie droite', probably f r o m the monumental entrance,
tepos πυλών, of the Artemision (Robert 1983, 93, quoting R. Martin).
T h e second dedication, by Zeuxis, was carved, some time after the
Seleukid takeover in 203, in a script imitating an earlier inscription by the
fourth-century satrap, Idrieus. T h e object and circumstances of Zeuxis'
dedication were detailed in the 78-letter gap after τω (J. and L . R o b e r t
1983:96).
Fabricius' supplement implies the restoration of property (probably a
Hekatomnid endowment) to the shrine; the p r o b l e m is that the great deity
of A m y z o n was Artemis, and one would rather expect 'the goddess'
(though Zeuxis could have mentioned A p o l l o , then Artemis, following
Seleukid usage, as in 9). Robert suggests that Zeuxis handed over to the
Artemision land whose owners had fled or died during the Seleukid
conquest. T h i s is possible, but hardly squares with the restoration he pro-
poses for line 2: the phrase 'the lands of the gods', with the definite article
τους, would indicate that these pieces of property are already in the gods'
possession, not that they are being designated as such. Perhaps Zeuxis
restored to the shrine land w h i c h it had once owned, or w h i c h the
A m y z o n i a n s claimed it had once owned; the land was presumably close
enough to the shrine for a definite article to be used without further preci-
sions. A t any rate, the content of lacuna gave precise details which we have
no other evidence to supply.
See C h . 3 § 2a, on Zeuxis.

8. Two Documents Pertaining to the asylia of the Artemision at Amyzon

(203 or later)

T e x t A : Leake 1824: 238, f r o m a transcription by W . R. Hamilton ( C I G

2899; GIBM 1035, trying to incorporate the fragments into document 5;
RC 40; J. and L . Robert 1983: 141-2, no. 11; R i g s b y 1996: 336-7).
C f . W i l h e l m , Akademieschriften 2: 49-50; J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 44—6
(W. R. Hamilton at A m y z o n ) ; 1 4 1 - 4 (asylia of A m y z o n ) .
Readings by Leake in a copy of an A m y z o n i a n inscription—the first to
be so i d e n t i f i e d — f o u n d by Hamilton on the site 'in a very defective state of
preservation'; unfortunately, Leake does not bother to give a transcription
of what he does not understand, and gives no indication of the length of the
document or the order of occurrence of the fragments he reads. (Piejko
1985: 613, is unaware of this fact: on the grounds of the layout in RC, he
believes that the fragments are 'all f r o m the left upper corner' and gives an
unacceptable restoration; he also criticizes Welles for not including το
before και μηθενι κτλ; but Piejko is unaware that the 'earlier tradition' he
refers to is a mistake of Böckh ( C I G 2899), w h o omitted και and invented
the TO; silently corrected by Welles, and pointed out by J. and L . R o b e r t
1983: 142 n. 4. T h e presentation adopted here might make the random
nature of the selection by Leake clear to the literal-minded or the careless.)
E n o u g h survives to identify a letter by a royal official, probably Zeuxis,
mentioning the asylia of the Artemision. C o u l d this fragment be part
of another, fairly well-preserved letter to the A m y z o n i a n s , as Marshall
suggested? (See lemma above and document 5). J. and L . Robert (1983)
precluded this possibility, on the grounds that document 5 was written by
Antiochos III. H o w e v e r , if document 5 is f r o m Zeuxis, as I argue (com-
mentary to 5), this obstacle disappears. How would the preserved frag-
ments fit? Perhaps the phrase βασιλέως «ΰνοιαν could be emended to βασιλείς
evvoiav, and be inserted at the beginning of line 8; lines 7-8 would then read
διαφυλάσσουσιν γαρ ύμίν τήν eis τους I βασιÀe(i)s evvoiav κτλ. But the correc-
tion supposes a serious misreading on the part of Leake in Hamilton's
copy, or Hamilton on a rather legible stone. Furthermore, it would still be
difficult to fit TO iepov ασυλον into document 5.

Άμυζονίων—χαίρζιν—το iepov ασυλον—[τήν του] βασιλέως eivoiav—καί μη0€νί

ένοχλαίν υμάς—έρρωσθβ
Leake writes ' T o w a r d s the beginning [of Hamilton's copy] I observe AMYTONEUN and
XAIPEINy; unproblematically, Leake amends the first word to Άμυζονεων. Welles
published these words in close sequence, as Άμυζονέων χαίρειν (his line 1). But document
5, i , reads [Ζεύξις Άμυζονέων τώι 8ή]μωι χαίρειν, the usual construction, so that the two
words read by Leake were not contiguous. T h e expression should probably be restored
here.

[Zeuxis? to the people] of the Amyzonians, greetings . . . the shrine as

inviolate . . . the goodwill of the king . . . and (to allow) no one to trouble
you . . . farewell.
T e x t B: J. and L . Robert 1983: 142—3, no. 12, with photographs on facing
page (Rigsby 1996: 337).
[0] ι βάσεις
[ά]πέδωκαν
[το iep]ov ασυ-
[λον ] . HA 4
[ ]..
4 - 5 [ώ? ή ο]τήλ[η I περιορίζ]ει Piejko 1985: 613· T h e photograph of the stone does
seem to show a trace of a T, but not the squeeze. Rigsby 1996: 337, observes that the
singular in Piejko's restoration is difficult to justify (a series of stelai rather than a sole
pillar would be expected for a delimitation, περιορισμός).

T h e kings gave back the sanctuary inviolate, . . .

Commentary. Β was found by the Roberts on the site of Amyzon, an
inscribed column drum.

9. Decree of the Amyzonians for Chionis, the Governor of Alinda

(October-November 202 )
J. and L. Robert 1983: 146-51, no. 14, with photograph of squeeze. I
examined the squeeze at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, with
the kind permission of G . Bowersock and Chr. Habicht.

Βασιλευόντων ^Ιντιόχου Μεγάλου καί Άντιόχ[ου τοϋ νίοΰ, έτους]

év[8]eKàTov καί έκατο[σ]τοΰ, μηνός Δίου, έπί άρχΐ6[ρέως Νικάνορος, τοΰ]
Se Διος τού Κρηταγανέτα καί Δικτύννης Τιμαί[ου], ώς [Se ό δήμος ά]-
y e i έπί στ€φανηφόρου Άπόλλοινος, μηνός [Θeσ]μoφoριώvoς• «[δο]£ε 4
τώι δήμων γνώμη πρυτάνεων επειδή .XYfovis. . c.5 · · ·]ΖΗΦ [. . c.5 . · ·] φί-
λος ών τών βασιλέο)ν και τεταγμένος επ' Άλίνδων [π]άσ[αι? ταΐς αττο]-
στελλομέναις υπό τοΰ δήμου πρεσβείαις προς Ζεΰξιν τ[όν επΐ\
[τώ]ν πραγμάτων καθεσταμένο[ν πά\ντα τά συμφέροντα [και κα]- 8
[λώί ε\χοντα συνπράσσων διατελεί προθ[ΰμως . . .J ΠΑΝΥΠ
ΟΙΣ κατ' ιδίαν δε τών πολιτών εντυνχάνουσιν αΰτώι [. . c.4 · •]
[μετά πά]σης {άπαντα} φιλανθρωπίας άπαντα συνκατασκε[υά\-
[Çei αΰ]τοί? τά δια τείνοντα προς σωτηρίαν, τών τε . .0 . ΓΥ vac. 12
[. . οί πο]λιται πεποίηνται δια τον περιεστηκότα π[όλεμον ..C.3]
[ ] . ΕΤΑΙΦΡΟ . Ε
T h e stone crumbled on the right hand side when turned over, so that the squeeze is less
complete than the Roberts' text. 2 Nikanor can safely be restored (as suggested
in Robert 1983: 165), now that document 4 has given us the date of the appointment of
the 'high-priest' (209), and documents 23 and 24 show that Nikanor was still in office in
196. 10 T h e stone reads εντυνχάνουσιν rather than the εντυγχάνονσιν printed in J.
and L. Robert 1983. 11 [μετά πά]σ·ης φιλανθρωπίας Robert. 12-13 Piejko
1985: 614, would reconstruct τών τε [θε\ω[ριών\ λΰI [aif οί ττο]λϊται. J3_I4
ττο\λίται πεποίψται . . . φρον[τίζει] Robert. 14 T h e Roberts print 0 . . ΑΙΦΡΟΝ.
T h e present reading is what I saw on the squeeze ([ ]εται φρο[ν]ε[ίν]?). Note Piejko
1985: 614, where he would restore [επαγγελλετ\αι φρον[τίζειν].

When Antiochos the Great and Antiochos the son were kings, in the
hundred and eleventh year, in the month of Dios, in the high-priesthood
of Nikanor and in the tenure of Timaios as priest of Zeus Kretagenetas and
Diktynna, and within the city in the tenure of Apollo as stephanephoros, in
the month of Thesmophorion; it seemed good to the people; proposal of
the prytaneis; since Chionis [son of . . ., of the city . . .,] being a friend of
the kings and appointed over Alinda, continuously assists with great eager-
ness, in regard to all the interests of the people and all the things that are
fine, all the embassies sent out by the people to Zeuxis, the official estab-
lished in charge of affairs . . . and to those of the citizens who go to see him
on their own, 10 he provides all the things which pertain to their safety,
with all generosity, . . . the citizens have made . . . because of the w[ar]
which has broken out all around . . .he takes care ( ? ) · • ·

Commentary. T h e document is carved on the long side of an anta block

from the Artemision, beneath document 12 (the block also bears a frag-
mentary royal letter on the short side): J. and L. Robert 1983: 144 and 281 ;
the block was found, like almost all of the epigraphical material from that
site, reused in the walls of a Byzantine castro.
See Ch. 3 § 2a on the organization of Seleukid officials; Ch. 4 § 2c, on the
socialization of royal officials.

10. Decree of the Amyzonians for Menestratos of Phokaia, the Epistates of

the Artemision (November-December 201)
J. and L . Robert 1983: 151-4, no. 15 with photographs of stone and
squeeze.
[Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχον Μεγάλου κ[α£ Ά ντιόχου του νίοΰ, êVous]
[δω]δε«·άτου και εκατοστού, μηνός Άπίλλαίο[υ, έπί άρχιερέως Νικά\-
[t']opos, τού δε Δ ιός του Κρηταγενέτα καί Δικτύννης [. . . c.7 • • • ·, ώς δε]
[ό δ]ήμος άγει έπί στεφανηφόρου θεού δευτέρου καί ιερέως τ[ών βασι\- 4
[Α]ε'ων Ιάσονος του Βαλά(γ)ρον ε[δο]£ε τώι δήμωι· γνώμη πρυτάνεων]·
επειδή Μενέστρατος Άγαθοκ{λ)είονς Φοικαιεύς κατασταθείς έπί
του Αρτεμισίου έπιστάτης αποδείξεις πολλάς πεποίηται τής αύτοΰ
καλοκαγαθίας εις πάντα τά τώι δήμωι συμφέροντα, γράφουν προς Ζεΰ- 8
ξιν τον επί τών πραγμάτων ύπερ τής εύνοιας ην έχων διατελεί
εί'ς τε τους βασιλείς καί εις {ι} τον Ζεΰξιν, πολλάκι δε γράφων καί
προς Νικομήδην καί Χίονιν τον επ' Άλίνδο)ν τεταγμένον ομοίως
έγμαρτυρών ύπερ τής εννοίας τών πολιτών έσπούδασεν δε 12
καί ύπερ τής αποσκευής τής κατασχεθείσης ημών εν ϋλά'δου οποις
κομισώμεθα· φροντίζει δε διά τέλους καί ύπερ τών άλλων ημών πολι-
τών τών κατοικούντων τάς αύτονόμονς, προσκαλούμενος εις τον
σννοικισμόν τού Αρτεμισίου, ίδίαι τε τοις εντυγχάνονσι τών πολι- 16
τών συμπεριφερόμενος διατελεί· ίνα οΰν καί ό δήμος φαίνηται
τοις άξίοις τών ανδρών χάριτας άποδιδούς· τύχηι άγαθήι- δεδό-
χθαι Άμυζονέων τώι δήμωι· έπηινήσθαι Μενέστρατον έπί τήι αίρέ-
σει ήι έχει εις τον δήμον είναι δε αύτον καί εύεργέτην τού δήμου· 20
δεδόσθαι δε αύτώι καί πολι{ρ}τείαν καί ένκτησιν καί μετουσίαν ίε-
[ρ]ών καί άρχε(ι)ων καί τών άλλων απάντων ών καί Άμυζονεΐς με-
[τέ]χουσιν πάντηι- τά δε αυτά ταύτα ύπαρχειν αύτώι καί εκγόνοις- πέμπε[σ\-
[θαι δε] αύτώι καί γέρας άπο τών δημοτελών θυσιών καθότι καί τοις 24
[aÀÀois εύεργεταις

2 - 3 A s in the case of the decree for C h i o n i s , the ' h i g h - p r i e s t ' is certainly N i k a n o r

(suggested in J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 165), appointed in 209 and still in office in 196
( M a l a y 1987; d o c u m e n t s 4, 23, 24). 3 T h e R o b e r t s reconstructed an 1 1 - 1 2 letter
g a p for the n a m e of the priest of Z e u s K r e t a g e n e t a s and D i k t y n n a , b u t the squeeze
and the overall letter c o u n t (£.45-50 per line) suggest a shorter gap, c.7 letters, so
that Τιμαίου, as in d o c u m e n t 9, is possible. 5 Β Α Α Α Π ΡΟΥ on the
stone. 6 ΑΓΑΘΟΚΑΕΙΟΥΣ on the stone. 15 P i e j k o 1985, 6 1 4 , w o u l d
s u p p l y τάς αύτονόμους (πόλεις); b u t the expression m i g h t be a fixed, administrative usage
22 ΑΡΧΕΓ0)Ν on the stone. 25 T h e restoration f r o m a parallel d o c u m e n t ,
R o b e r t 1983: 239-40, no. 37, line 14.

When Antiochos the Great and [Antiochos the son] were kings, in the
hundred and twelfth [year], in the month of Apellai[os, in the high-
priesthood of Nikan]or and in the tenure of . . . as priest of Zeus
Kretagenetas and Diktynna, and within the city in the tenure of the god as
stephanephoros for the second time and in the tenure of Iason son of
Balagros as priest of [the kings]; it seemed good to the people; proposal of
the prytaneis; since Menestratos, son of Agathokles, of Phokaia, appointed
epistates over the Artemision, has given many demonstrations of his
excellence in favour of all the interests of the people, by writing to Zeuxis,
the official in charge of affairs, concerning the goodwill which the people
continuously has 10 towards the kings and towards Zeuxis, and by writing
to Nikomedes and to Chionis, the official appointed over Alinda, to give
likewise testimony of the goodwill of the people; he zealously took care of
our movable property that was held in Alinda, so that we should recover it;
he also takes full care concerning the remainder of our citizens, who reside
in the autonomous (cities), and summons them to the repeopling of the
Artemision, and is kind towards those of the citizens who meet him on
their own;—so that the people be seen to return gratitude to those among
men who are worthy of it;—with good fortune, let it seem good to the
people of the Amyzonians:—to let Menestratos be praised for the disposi-
tion 20 which he has towards the people; to let him be a benefactor of the
people; to give him citizenship, the right to landownership, and participa-
tion, to full extent, in the rites, the offices, and all the other things in which
the Amyzonians participate; to extend the same privileges to him and to his
descendants; to send to him a share of the public sacrifices, as is done for
the (other benefactors) . . .

Commentary. T h e document is carved on the short side of an anta block

from the Artemision (document 11, the decree for Nikomedes, is carved on
one of the long sides): J. and L. Robert 1983: 151 and 281.
On the suggestion of C. Crowther, I have taken πάντηι to describe
Menestratos' full enjoyment of Amyzonian privileges, rather than translate
(with the Roberts) 'all the other things in which the Amyzonians partici-
pate fully'.
See Ch. 3 § 2, on the organization of Seleukid officials; Ch. 4 § 2c, on the
socialization of royal officials.

11. Decree of the Amyzonians for Nikomedes (c.200?)

J. and L. Robert 1983: 192-3, no. 16, with photograph of squeeze.
traces of 1 line
και τών άλλων άπ]άντων ών και Ά[μυζο]-
[veîs μετέχουσιν èv t]cus· Χρυσαορέωμ πόλ[ίσιν\·
[ίλέσθαι δε avÖpjas ο Γ άφικόμΐνοι προς Νικομήδ[ην] 4
[τό re] φήφισμα άποδώσουσιν και άσπασάμανοι αι)τ[όν]
[παρ]ά τοΰ δήμου παρακαλέσουσιν όντα ζύ^ργέτην πει-
[ρ]άσ0αι àei τίνος αγαθού παραίτιον γίνεσθαι τώι δήμωι-
[ά]ναγράφαι δ« τόδε φήφισμα èv τώι έπιφανεστάτωι τό- 8
πωι τοϋ ναού τής Αρτέμιδος· έπιμίληθήναι δε τής α-
ναγραφής τους προστάτας όπως ήι πάσι φαν^ρόν
ότι ό δήμος ΐύίργίτηθΐΐς άποδιδώι χάριτας άζία\ς\
τοΐς ίύΐργίτούσιν αυτόν τό δε άνήλωμα εις ταύτα 12
δότω 6 καθεσταμένος ταμίας άπο TOW κοινών
προσόδων. Ήιρέθησαν Μυωνίδης Ίξροκλξίονς, Μένιπ-
πος Νικασικλζίους.
5 [τό Τ<Γ] Piejko 1985: 615.

(let it seem good to the people: . . . and to grant him participation) [in all
the other things] in w h i c h the A m y z o n i a n s as well [participate] among the
cities of the Chrysaorians; to elect men w h o will go to N i k o m e d e s and hand
over the decree to him, and, after greeting h i m on the part of the people,
invite h i m to always try to be responsible for some good for the people
since he is a benefactor; to write up this decree in the most conspicuous
location of the temple of Artemis; to have 10 the prostatai take care of the
writing up, so that it be clear to all that the people, w h e n it has received a
benefaction, returns worthy tokens of gratitude to those w h o do good to
the people; let the tamias in office give the monies to be spent towards these
measures out of the public revenues. M y o n i d e s son of Hierokles,
M e n i p p o s son of Nikasikles were elected.

Commentary. T h e decree is carved on the long side of the anta block

bearing document 10, the decree for Menestratos: J. and L . R o b e r t 1983:
192 and 281.
T h i s undated decree may have been issued at the same time as the other
two dated decrees for royal officials.
See C h . 3 § 2, on the organization of Seleukid officials; C h . 4 § 2c, on the
socialization of royal officials.

12. Decree of the Amyzonians for a Royal Official (c.200?)

J. and L . Robert 1983: 193-4, no· ! 7> with photograph of squeeze.

c.i ο ] το [φ]ήφισμ[α αποδώ] -

[σουσ]ιν καί παρακαλί[σουσιν αυτόν]
[άκό]λουθα πράσοντα τήι τ[οϋ βασι]-
[Ae]ci>s αίρέσει καί τώι αΰτο[ύ . . c.i\. .] àe[i] 4
[TÎ]VOSαγαθού παραίτιον γίνεσθαι
[τ]ώι δήμωι. Ήιρίθησαν Απολλώνιος
Ίατροκλίίους, Μελαινεύζ Απολλώ-
νιου, Ούλιάδης Ίατροκλΐίους, 8
Έρμίας Παγκράτου, Διονύσι[ος]
Μυωνίδου.
3 πράσοντα on the stone. 4 αντο[ν βίωι] proposed in J. and L . Robert
1983, though the Roberts recognize that 'nous n'avons pas d'exemple de la formule'.
6 T h e squeeze reads ήιρίθησαν rather than ήρέθησαν (Robert).

(and to elect ambassadors to go to . . . and) hand over the decree to h i m and

to invite h i m to behave in accordance with the [king's] policy and his own
. . . and always be responsible for some good for the people. Apollonios son
of Iatrokles, Melaineus son of Apollonios, Ouliades son of Iatrokles,
Hermias son of Pankratos, Dionysios son of 10 M y o n i d e s were elected.

Commentary. L i n e s 3-4, as well as the dispatch of the embassy, paralleled

in the decree for N i k o m e d e s , shows that this d o c u m e n t honours another
local official, as pointed out by J. and L . Robert. T h e honorand is asked to
behave 'in accordance with the king's policy': the singular (rather than the
plural, 'kings', so common in Amyzon for the late third century) might
indicate that the document dates to 193 or later, after the death of
Antiochos the son. It is not entirely clear that the honorand is a Seleukid
official, for no unambiguous indications (reigning kings, era, Macedonian
calendar, eponymous officials, named individuals) are preserved. Since the
inscription was inscribed, on an anta block of the Artemision, above (and
hence earlier?) than the decree for Chionis, the governor of Alinda, it could
conceivably honour (e.g.) a Ptolemaic official. One of the ambassadors
named in the present decree is Hermias, son of Pankrates—the same name
as the honorand of document 14, who went on an embassy to Antiochos
III; but this does not necessarily imply that the present decree dates to the
time of that king: Hermias might have been active under another ruler, or
the Hermias in the present decree might be the grandfather of the Hermias
in document 14.

13. Decree of the Amyzonians for Soldiers and their Officer (c.200?)
J. and L. Robert 1983: 196-8, no. 19, with photograph of squeeze.
[ ]ΛΟΥ επί στεφα-
[νηφόρον τον δείνα τώι δήμων γνώ-
[μη πρυτάνεων?· επειδή ] ύπο Όφελανδρον τεταγμε-
[νοι ύπο Ζεύξιδος] τοΰ επί τών πραγμάτων 4
[καθεστάμενονΡ μετά πάσης eùrjafias και εννοίας διατετε-
[ÀeVaat ε]μ πάσιν άν4γκλητοι οντες
\ e.g. τών δε πολεμίων πο]λιορκοΰντων το χώρων ύπο
]μονο£ μετά πάσης εννοί- 8
[as ύπερ] τών τών βασίλευαν πραγμά-
των ελ]νσαν αντών τήν πολιορκί-
[αν ] σωτηρίας άπόδειξιν
ίνα ο]νν και ό δήμος φαίνη- 12
[rat ν]περ τών τών βασιλε-
ίων πραγμάτων <
ι T h e preamble of Amyzonian documents in this period lists the Seleukid kings,
Nikanor, and the priest of Zeus Kretagenetas and Diktynna, before the city's
stephanephoros and the local priest of the kings (cf. documents 9, 10). T h e first three pre-
served letters might therefore belong to the name of the priest of Zeus Kretagenetas and
Diktynna, perhaps [(^πΐ ιερέως) τοΰ δέ Διός τοΰ Κρηταγενέτα και Δικτύννης Τιμ]αίον, on the
parallel of document 9 (the traces on the photograph of the squeeze look compatible).
T h e letters Λ OY do not allow for the formula introducing the civic stephanephoria on
other Amyzonian decrees, ώς δέ ô 8ήμος άγει. 3 T h e restoration πρυτάνεων pro-
posed by the Roberts, on the basis of the formulary in documents 9, 10, though I see no
reason to be sure that this time also, the prytaneis made the proposal. [fVetöij οί
οτρατιώται otj ύπο Όφελανδρον κτλ. Robert. 4 [άποσταλέντες ύπο Ζεύξιος τοΰ επί
τών πραγμάτων Robert. 5 By analogy with the decree for Chionis, document 9, 8,
perhaps τον επί τών πραγμάτων I [καθεσταμενον]. τών 8ε πολεμίων Robert, exem-
pli gratia.

. . . in the tenure of . . . as stephanephoros, it seemed good to the people:

since [the soldiers] put under Ophelandros [. . . by Zeuxis] the official in
charge of affairs, . . . they have continuously [behaved with all] good
discipline and goodwill . . . being above reproach in all matters . . . when
. . . were besieging the region, . . . with all goodwill, . . . in defence of the
affairs of the kings . . . 10 they put an end to the besieging . . . of safety, a
demonstration . . .; so that the people be conspicuous [(in honouring those
who make efforts)] in defence of the affairs of the kings . . .

Commentary. T h e document is inscribed on the long side of an anta block

from the Artemision at Amyzon; this block bore two more decrees on the
same long side (one of which may be Seleukid: J. and L. Robert 1983: 202,
no. 21), and a possible Seleukid decree on its short side (ibid. 196 and 281).
Piejko 1985: 615, observes that in the light of this document, the
authority of Menestratos of Phokaia 'may have been limited to the temple
complex' (though the latter amounted to the urban nucleus of the polis)—
unless Ophelandros took over from Menestratos as epistates, or his military
command overlapped, on the ground, with the area under Menestratos'
'civil' authority.
See Ch. 3 § 2, on the organization of Seleukid officials; Ch. 4 § 2c, on the
socialization of royal officials.

14. Decree of the Amyzonians for Hermias (c.200?)

J. and L. Robert 1983: 195-6, no. 18, with photograph (Bielman 1994:
154-6, no. 42: edition, translation, commentary).
traces of 1 line
. . ANU)NA[ ]
traces of 1 line
«•[at] ^eya[À]as· χρείας παρεσχημενος τώι §[17]-
μωι διατελεί, άπαχθεντων τε τών ιερών 4
σωμάτων κατά πόλεμον επρεσβευσεν προς
βασιλή Άντίοχον τοις ιδίοις άναλώμασιν κα[£ ε]-
πανήγαγεν τά σώματα, εν τε τοις αλλοι[?]
εν οΐς ό δήμος χρείαν εσχηκεν αύτοΰ ε[μ] 8
παντί καιρώι παρασκενάζων αύτον πρό[θυ]-
μον διατελεί• δεδόχθαι τώι δήμωι- επ[αίνεσαι\
Έρμίαν Παγκράτον αρετής ενεκε[ν καί εύ]-
νοίας ής έχων διατετελεκεν εις [τον δη]- 12
μον δίδοσθαι δε αύτώι καί γερα άπ[ο τών δη]-
μοτελών θυσιών τά αύτά δε ύπ[άρχειν]
τοις εκγόνοις αύτοΰ· ίνα δε τό φήφ[ισμα άνα]-
γραφήι επί τής παραστάδος τοΰ [ίεροϋ πνλώ>νος] 16
επιμεληθήναι τον ενεστώτα [νεωποίην]
[κ·]αι Άριεράμνην τον νεωκό[ρον].
ι 6 T h e squeeze shows άναγραφήι, rather than αναγραφή (Robert). T h e expression τοΰ
[lepoO -π-υλώΐΌϊ] J. and L. Robert 1983: 217, no. 28, line 10.
(since . . .) and (since) he has continuously performed great services for the
people; and when the sacred slaves had been carried off in war, he went on
an embassy to king Antiochos, at his own expense, and b r o u g h t back the
slaves; and in the other affairs in w h i c h the people has a need for him, 10
he continuously presents himself zealously, in every circumstance;—let it
seem good to the p e o p l e : — t o praise Hermias, son of Pankratos, on account
of his excellence and the goodwill w h i c h he continuously has towards the
people; to give h i m shares from the public sacrifices; to extend the same
privileges to his descendants; to have the neopoies (temple-overseer) in
function at the time and Arieramnes the neokoros (temple-warden) take
care that the decree be written up upon the parastas of the sacred portal.

Commentary. T h e text is carved on an anta block f r o m the monumental

entrance to the shrine complex at A m y z o n . T h e document implies that
Antiochos III is in Asia M i n o r , since there is no hint of a journey to e.g.
A n t i o c h in northern Syria. T h e date must be be soon after the Seleukid
takeover in M a y 203, since the king soon left to start the F i f t h Syrian W a r
c.202; the next passage by Antiochos I I I in Asia M i n o r was in 197, six
years after the 'war' in w h i c h the sacred slaves of A m y z o n were carried off,
and too long afterwards for a petition like Hermias' to succeed or even to
be meaningful any longer (I assume the sacred slaves were carried off by
Seleukid troops, and that Hermias intervened before they could be sold
off).
See C h . 2 § 2; C h . 3 § ι , on Seleukid violence and spoliation—not
accidental, but essential activities of empire.

15. Letter of Zeuxis (?) to the Army at Labraunda ( 203)

Crampa 1969: 134-5, with plate 6 (preliminary publication of lines 3-8);

revised version, C r a m p a 1972: 61 —3, no. 46 (J. and L . Robert 1983:
139-40, though that text is not as rigorous as Crampa's)
Cf. BE 70, 553 (correction by the Roberts of preliminary edition b y
Crampa: the d o c u m e n t was not addressed to the polis of the Mylasans, b u t
to the army); J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 139—40 (comparison with letter to the
army at A m y z o n , document 6). Piejko offers restorations (none com-
pelling) and justifications in (1985: 6 1 2 - 1 3 , a lso OAth 18 (1990), 145-6,
reproduced SEG 40.982, with the criticisms of P. Herrmann).

traces of 1 line
[ c.% ]ττ) [ c. 17 ]
! c.8 ] oi θύοντ[ες c. 14 ]
[ C-3 ]συντεταχεν ήμ[ΐν ό] βασιλεύς 4
[Ά]ντίοχος επιμέλειαν ποιεΐσθαι \τών\
[ίερ]ων Kai άπαντα τά άλλα. Ύμεΐς ου[ν]
[κ·]ατά τε τά λοιπά εύτακτειτε ώσ\περ\
[πρ]οσήκει και μήτε επισκηνοντ[ε . . 4—S • • •]
[. Λαβραύνδοις μήτε εν To.f[s tepoîs] 8
\T6TT\OIS καταλύετε μηδε κτήνη σ[ C-5 ]
[. . . μ]ήτε εν τοις πνλώσι μ[ή]τ<= èv [. . .6—7 . . . .]
[. . . μή]τε εν ταΐς στ[οαί? C. 1 4 ]
[ C.8 ]θεσθ[ε C. \η ] 12
2 T h e mention of 'those who offer sacrifice' recalls Le Roy 1986: 279-80 ( S E G
36.1221), line 14: a set of religious rules pertaining to the Letoon of Xanthos ends with
the prohibition for all except οί θύοντες to spend the night in the shrine or even enter it.
Perhaps the author of the letter is restating or confirming a local cultic rule comparable
to the Xanthian one. 2—4 Piejko, OAth 18 (1990), 145 proposes [ è l W ] συντεταχεν
•ήμιν ο βασιλεύς [yàp] I Άντίοχος· T h e position (indeed, the presence) of γάρ is intolerable.
Perhaps the clause started with an adverb followed by γάρ, e.g. [πολλά/«? (πλεονάκις) I
γαρ] σνντεταχεν ήμιν κτλ. 4~5 Present restoration by the Roberts (BE 70, 553,
accepted by Crampa 1972). Piejko 1985: 612, would like [τού I των], but the size of the
space to the left of the surviving letters (i)N really precludes this (though Piejko claims
that a tau with a very big cross-bar would fill the gap). 7 - 8 Crampa proposed
ίδίαι, μήκετι or αύτοθι after the verb επιακηνοΰ[τε], Piejko, OAth 18 (1990), 145, proposes
το Δίον or τώι Δίωι (but the former is really precluded for syntactical reasons: the verb
επισκηνόω should take a preposition or the dative, as in Polybios: de Foucault 1972: 349
s.v.). 8 - 9 TOT[Ç ιεροίς I τόποις] J. a n d L . R o b e r t 1983: 140, q u o t i n g P o u i l l o u x (Ant.
Class. 1 9 7 3 , 5 4 7 ) ; TOI[S ιεροίς οίκ]οις Crampa Ι 9 7 2 > t e n t a t i v e l y ; TOÎ[S περιπάτοις], Piejko
1985: 612. Pouilloux's restoration is probably the correct one, because one expects first
a general stipulation, before the detailed orders of lines 10-11. Piejko's περίπατοι might
be restored as part of these detailed instructions. 9 - 1 0 κτήνη σ[υνάγετε] Crampa;
the Roberts (1983: 140 n. 12) would expect the verb εισάγετε, which the stone might
allow, reading the traces as an Ε rather than Σ. Piejko, OAth 18 (1990), 146, tries to
justify σ[ταθμεΰτε] or σ[τήσαιτε], 'do not station animals . . .'. T h e former construction is
impossible morphologically (as pointed out by Herrmann in SEG) and of all the
'parallels' quoted by Piejko, only Strabo 4.5.2 supports the transitive construction he
proposes for the verb σταθμεύω; all the others show (επι)σταθμεύω with accusative object
to mean 'to occupy a place as a billet' or 'to impose billeting on people', not 'to station
animals/people in a billet'.

K i n g Antiochos has enjoined upon us to take care of the [sanctuaries],

among all the other instructions. So, as regards you, be well disciplined in
all other matters as is fitting, and do not camp . . . in Labraunda and do not
live in the [sacred places] and [bring in] pack animals . . . 10 nor in the
gateways nor in [. . .] nor in the porticoes . . .

Commentary. T h e inscription is borne by an anta block f r o m the propylaia

of the shrine at Labraunda.
See C h . 2 § 2 (on context); C h . 3 §s 1 (on violence), 2a (on Zeuxis).

16. Amphiktionic Decree for the-Asylia of Antiocheia/Alabanda (201)

L . C o u v e , BCH 18 (1894), 235-47, n o · 2> editio princeps, facsimile, trans-

lation, commentary ( O G I S 234); R. Flacelière, FD 3, fasc. 4, nos. 162 and
163 (from the stone, but with some mistakes in the published text); R i g s b y
1996: no. 163 (collated f r o m the stone; edited with commentary and pho-
tograph, though the latter is nearly useless).
Cf. OGIS 234, η. ι , L e f è v r e 1995, 205, Rigsby 1996, 328-329, 334 (for
dating); Holleaux 1942: 1 4 1 - 5 7 (Antiocheia = Alabanda); H e r r m a n n
1965a: 121-38 and esp. 127-28 (on asylia in general and at Antiocheia/
Alabanda). Pounder 1978 ( S E G 28.75, Rigsby 1996: no. 162), publishes
a decree from Athens recognizing the asylia of Antiocheia of the
Chrysaorians and honouring the same ambassador as in the present decree
(Pausimachos), as well as his brother (Aristophanes). Pounder relates both
to Antiochos' Karian campaign of 203. T h e absence of any mention of
Antiochos is conspicuous in the Athenian document. Habicht 1987, and
Rigsby 1996: 332, on the dating: the present decree cannot have been
issued in 199/8 (as had sometimes been proposed), since the contemporary
Athenian decree mentions a 650-strong boule, which puts it before 201
(when the suppression of the tribes Antigonis and Demetrias reduced the
number of Athenian tribes from 13 to 11, soon increased to 12 by the
creation of the tribe Attalis). Habicht 1994: 167 η. 17 (reprinted from
Chiron 19 (1989), 11), further wonders if Antiochos was named in the (lost)
considerations of the Athenian decree—but the dispositions of the decree
make no mention of honours for the king, unlike OGIS 234. Lefèvre 1996
explores the broader historical context. See also Hintzen-Bohlen 1992:
104—6, 140 (on the inscribed block—part of a statue base—and its context).

Θεοί.
Άρχοντος èv Δελφοΐς Φιλαιτώλου, πυλαίας όπωρινής, ίερομνα-
μονούντων Αιτωλών Τελεσάρχου Άπιρικοϋ, Λεωνος Ναυπα-
κτίου, Στομίου Μαχετιεος, Θεοδώρου Άργείου, Νικοβούλου Θηβαίου, 4
Εύρυμάχου Θαυμακοΰ, Δορυμενεος Ύπαταίον, Θεοδώρου Κοττα-
εος, Λαττάμου Βουκατιεος, Εύδάμου Άρσινοεος, Λαμίου Άπολλω-
νιεος· Κεφαλλάνων Οίανθίον Δελφών Άριστομάχου, Καλλικρά-
τεος• Αθηναίων Άριστοκλεος· Βοιωτών Φόζου, Καλλικράτεος- 8
Μαγνήτο^ν Πολεμαίου· Xiow Μητροφάνεος· γραμματεΰον-
τος τοις ίερομνάμοσιν Μενάνδρου Θαυμακου·
άγαθάι τΰχαι- εδοξε τώι κοινώι τών Άμφικτιόνων, επεί ά πόλις
ά τών Άντιοχέων τών εκ τοΰ Χρυσαορεων εθνεος, συγγενής εοΰσα 12
τών Έλλάνων, άποστείλασα πρεσβευτάς ποτί πλεονας τετευχε
πάντων τών τιμίων και φιλανθ ρώπων, και Παυσίμαχος δε <5 πα-
ρ' αυτών πρεσβεύσας εν εκείναις τε καλώς και άζίως τών Έλλά-
νων άνεστρεπται, και νϋν ποτειληφώς χρησμον παρά τοΰ θεού, 16
κατακολουθεων {του} τούτωι ποτελθών ποτί το συνεδριον άμών
περι τε τάς ιδίας πατρίδος πολλά κατευφάμηκε, εμφανίζων τάν
εύσεβειαν αύτάς και τάν άρετάν ομοίως δε και περι βασιλεος
Αντιόχου τοΰ εΰεργετα Αντιοχέων εΰλόγηκε εΰχαριστών 20
αΰτώι διότι τάν δαμοκρατίαν και τάν είράναν {αν} τοις Άντιοχεΰσιν
διαφυλάσσει κάτ τάν τών προγόνων ΰφάγησιν δεδόχθαι άποκρίνασ-
σθαι αΰτώι ότι τό κοινον TOW Άμφικτιόνων τάμ μεν πόλιν τάν Άντιο-
χεοΜ και τάν χώραν άναδεικνΰει άσυλον και ίεράν τοΰ Διός Χρυσαορε- 24
ως και Απόλλωνος 'Ισοτίμου, τον δε δάμον αυτών και βασιλή Άντίοχον
επαινεί, και στέφανοι εκάτερον είκόνι χαλκεαι όκταπάχει επί πάσι
τοις προγεγραμμενοις· στάσαι δε τάς εικόνας εν τώι ίερώι τοΰ Απόλ-
λωνος τοΰ Πυθίου και καρΰζαι εν τοις Πυθίοις· επαινεί δε καί Παυσί- 28
μαχον Ίατροκλεος, καί στέφανοι χρυσεωι στεφάνο^ι άρετάς ένε-
κεν καί φιλοτιμίας τάς εις ταν αύτοΰ πατρίδα· καί καρΰξαι τον στε-
φανον αύτοϋ εν τάι πατρίδι, όταν είσάγηι τον τών Σωτηρίων στε-
φανον δπως Ôè καί νπόμναμα ήι εις άπαντα τον χρόνον, άναγράφαι 32
τάδε το φάφισμα εν τάι βάσει τάι τού βασιλέως Άντιόχου εν τώι
ίερώι τοΰ Άπόλλοινος τοΰ Πυθίου, καί άποστείλαι ποτ Άντιοχεΐς
σφραγισαμενους τάι κοινάι τών Άμφικτιόνων σφραγίδι.
On the side of the same stone:
Μειδιάς επόησε
6 Αατταμίου C o u v e . 17 κατακολουθεων δε C o u v e . 21 T h e stone bears
ΕΙΡΑΝΑΝΑΝΤΟΙΣΑΝΤΙΟΧΕΥΣΙΝ. C o u v e (followed b y Flacelière) published εΐράναν
{«'}>' τοις Άντιοχεΰοιν. T h e present text follows W i l h e l m , GGA 1898, 224-5 (whence the
text in OGIS 234). 22-3 C o u v e read άποκρινασ I σθαι. Present reading f r o m
Flacelière, R i g s b y . 23 C o u v e read ταμ μεν. Flacelière, R i g s b y read ταν μεν.
24 C o u v e read τον Διος ΧρνσαορεΙ ως, whereas Flacelière and R i g s b y publish τοΰ
ΧρνσαορεΙ ως, assuming that the name of Z e u s has been omitted b y the stonemason. T h e
photograph seems to confirm C o u v e ' s reading. 30 C o u v e publishes φιλοτιμίας τά£
εις ταν αύτοΰ πατρίδα, whereas Flacelière and R i g s b y write φιλοτιμίας τής εις ταν αύτοΰ
πατρίδα. C o u v e ' s reading is obviously correct (and can be confirmed, with difficulty, on
R i g s b y ' s photograph).

Gods. When Philaitolos was archon in Delphi, summer meeting, when the
following were hieromnemons: of the Aitolians, Telesarchos of Epiros, 1
Leon of Naupaktos, Stomios of Maketia, Theodoros of (Amphilochian)
Argos, Nikoboulos of Thebes (in Phtiotis), Eurymachos of Thaumakoi,
Dorymenes of Hypatos, Theodoros of Kotta, Lattamos of Boukatia,
Eudamos of Arsinoe, Lamias of Apollonia; of the Kephallenians,
Oianthios; of the Delphians, Aristomachos, Kallikrates; of the Athenians,
Aristokles; of the Boiotians, Phoxos, Kallikrates; of the Magnesians, 2
Polemaios; of the Chians, Metrophanes; when 10 Menandros of
Thaumakos was secretary for the hieromnemons·,—with good luck, it
seemed good to the assembly of the Amphiktions:—since the city of the
Antiocheians of the Chrysaorian nation, being related to the Greeks,
having sent ambassadors to very many, has received all honours and
advantages; and Pausimachos, their ambassador has conducted himself in
those cities in a tine manner and worthily of the Greeks; and now having
received an oracle from the god, he has, in accordance with this oracle
come before our council, and said many fine things concerning his own
fatherland, making clear the latter's piety and excellence; likewise, he
spoke well about king 20 Antiochos, the benefactor of the Antiocheians,
giving thanks to him, because he preserves the democracy and the peace for
the Antiocheians, in accordance with the example of his ancestors;—let it
seem good:—to answer him by saying that the assembly of the
Amphiktions recognizes the city and the territory of the Antiocheians as

' N o t the north-western region, but probably an otherwise u n k n o w n Aitolian city

(Dittenberger).
2 Magnesia on M a e a n d e r (see c o m m e n t s by L e f è v r e 1995: 205).
inviolable and consecrated to Chrysaorian Zeus and Apollon Isotimos, and
praises their demos and king Antiochos, and crowns both of them with a
bronze statue of eight cubits, for all the aforementioned reasons; to erect
the statues in the sanctuary of Pythian Apollo, and to proclaim them at the
Pythia; (and to say that) the assembly of the Amphiktions also praises
Pausimachos son of Iatrokles, and crowns him with a golden crown, on
account of his excellence 30 and his zeal towards his fatherland; and to pro-
claim the crown in his fatherland, whenever he formally brings in the
crown won at the Soteria;—and so that there be a memorial for all time, to
write up this decree on the base of king Antiochos, in the sanctuary of
Pythian Apollo, and to send it to the Antiocheians, sealing it with the
common seal of the Amphiktions.
Meidias made (the statue).
Commentary. T h e decree, and the one-line artist's signature, are carved on
the base of the statue for Antiochos III mentioned in the decree. T h e base
was found on the terrace of the temple of Apollo at Delphi (in the western
part of the terrace, in front of the opisthodomos), along with four other
similar bases, including the base inscribed with OGIS 228, the Delphian
decree acknowledging the asylia of Smyrna. It has been suggested that all
these bases supported statues of Seleukid rulers, and that the statue of
Antiochos III was placed among statues of his ancestors (evidence and
literature gathered by Hintzen-Bohlen). If so, the gesture elegantly echoed
a concept developed by Pausimachos before the Amphiktions, Antiochos'
adherence to the example of his ancestors.
See Ch. 2 § 2 (on context); Ch. 4 § 2d (on the pan-Hellenic diffusion of
perceptions of the ruler); Appendix 2 (on asylia).

17. First Teian Decree for Antiochos III and Laodike III (probably 203)
Herrmann 1965a: 33-6 (text); 51—5 (textual commentary), and plate 1
(SEG 41.1003, I, document reedited by Herrmann, with an especially full
apparatus).
Cf. J. and L. Robert, BE 68, 451 (improvements to the text); BE 69, 495
(detailed analysis of the texts); BE 69, 496 (royal cults in the Teian con-
text); Giovannini 1983 (interpretation of the political situation); Gauthier
1985: 51-2; Piejko 1991a: 13-37 (arguments for low dating in 197; uncon-
vincing restorations for earlier parts of text; brief line-by-line commen-
tary). Translation: Austin 1981: no. 151.
Τιμού[χων και στρατηγών γνώμη· επειδή βασιλεύς]
Άντίοχ[ος I
• στη[ ]
! 9 — 1° π]ροαίρεσιν κ·[αι δια]ψ!>[),ι]λάσσω[ν . . . . ]ΑΡΑΠ[. . .] \
ç—io ]ν εαυτώι δια προ[γόνω]ν ύπάρχουσα[ν εύ]νοιαν κα[£]
8—9 ] . τασθαι προαιρούμενος ποΑα7τΑασ[ι . ]ν, κοινός [ev] -
[εργετης πρ]οείρηται γίνεσθαι τών τε άλλων Έλληνίδωμ [πο\-
[Aea>v καί τ]ής πόλεως τής ημετέρας, και πρότερόν τε ύπάρ- 8
[χων] εν τή έπέκεινα τοΰ Ταύρου πολλών αγαθών εγίνετο παραί-
τιος καί παραγενόμενος επί τούς καθ' ημάς τόπους απο-
κατέστησε τά πράγματα εις συμφερουσαν κατάατασιν καί ε-
πώημήσας εν τή πάλει ημών καί θεωρών έξησθενηκότας 12
ημάς κα[ι] εν τοις κοινοίς καί εν τοις ιδίοις διά τε τούς συνεχείς
πολίμουΙΥ] καί το μέγεθος ων εφερομεν συντάξεων καί βουλόμενος
τά τε προς τον θεον εύσεβώς διακείσθαι ώι καθιέρωσεν ημών τήν πόλιν
καί τήν χώραν (καί) θελων χαρίζεσθαι τώι τε δήμωι καί τώι κοινώι τών 16
περί τον Διόνυσον τεχνιτών παρέλθουν εις τήν εκκλησίαν αύτος
ανήκε T I ) [ V ] πόλιν καί τήγ χώραν ήμών ίεράν καί ασυλον καί άφορολό-
γητον κ[αι] τών άλλων ών εφερομεν συντάξεων βασιλεί Άττά-
λο>ι ύπεδεξατο άπολυθήσεσθαι ημάς δι' αύτοΰ, ίνα γενόμενης ε- 20
παυξήσ[ε]ως τών κατά τήν πόλιν μή μόνον ευεργεσίας λάβη τήν
επιγραφ[ή]ν τής τοΰ δήμου, άλλά καί σωτηρίας· έπεδήμησε δε καί
εν τή πάλει μετά τε τώμ φίλων καί τών άκολουθουσών αύτώι δυνά
μεων άπόδιξιν ποιούμενος μεγίστην τής προϋπαρχούσης αύτώι πίσ- 24
τέως προς άπαντας ανθρώπους, καί μετά ταύτα πολλών αγαθών πα-
(ρ)αίτιος δ[ι]ατελεί γινόμενος ήμιν παράδειγμα πάσιν εκτιθείς τοις Έλλη[σι]ν 8ν
τρόπον προσφέρεται προς τούς εύεργέτας καί εύνους ύπάρχοντας αύτοη, κα[ι τ]α
μεν συ[ν]τελει τών άγαθών δι' ών εις εύδαιμονίαν παραγίνεθ' ή πόλις ήμ[ώ]ν, 28
τά δ' ε[πι]τελεσει· επιστείλας δε προς τον δήμον ύπελαβε δείν πεμψαι [προ]?
[αυτόν π]ρεσβείαν ή συνλαλήσει περί ών εφη πεπείσθαι καί τώι δ·>7μ[ωι] συμ-
[φερειν], και τοΰ δήμου πρεσβευτάς εξαποστίλαντος Διονύσιον Άπολλο-
[ ], Έρμαγόραν Έπιμένου, Θεόδωρον Ζωπύρου ενεφάνισε τούτοις 32
[άτι πα]ραλέλυκε τήμ πόλιν εις άεί καθότι επηγίλατο ών συνετάξα-
[μεν φ\όρων βασιλεί Άττάλωτ ύπερ ών καί γράφας εφη εντετάχθαι τοις
[πρεσβευταί]ς άναγγελλειν ήμεΐν καί οί π ρεσβευταί άνήγγ[ι]λαν ταΰ-
[τα τώι δήμ]ωι· κατά τ α ύ τ α δε καί ή αδελφή αύτοΰ βασίλισσα Λαοδίκη εν 36
[άπασι «raipjoîs· τήν αυτήν έχουσα γνώμην διατελεί τώι βασιλεί καί
[ η—8 κ]ai εν τοις προς τήμ πόλιν φιλανθρώποις εκτενή καί πρό-
[θυ]μον ε[αυτ]ήν παρέχεται προς τάς εύεργεσίας, καί τά μέγιστα
[τώ]ν άγα[θώ]ν ό δήμος εϊληφε παρ' άμφοτέρων ίνα οΰν καί ήμίς εμ 40
[πα]ντί κα[ιρώ]ι φαινώμεθα χάριτας άξιας αποδίδοντες τώι τε βασι-
[Λε]Γ καί τή [βα]σιλίσση καί ύπερτιθέμενοι ήαυτούς Ιν ταίς τ[ιμ]αΐς ταΐς προς
[τ]οι')τους «α[τα] τάς εύεργεσίας καί φανερός fj πάσιν 6 δι^μο^] εύπορίσ-
τως διακίμε[ν]ος προς χάριτος άπόδοσιν τύχη αγαθή- 7ί[α]ραστΐ7σαι 44
τώι άγάλματ[ι] τού Διονύσου άγάλματα μαρμάρινα ώς «·άλλιστ[α καί te]-
ροπρεπέστατ[α] τοΰ τε βασιλέως Ά ντιόχου καί τής αδελφής αΰ[τ]οΰ [/3α]-
σιλισσης Λαο\δί\κης, δπως άφέντες τήμ πόλιν καί τήν χώραν ίεράν
καί άσυλον καί [π]αραλύσαντες ημάς τώμ φόρων καί χαρισ[ά\μενοι ταύ- 48
τα τώι τε δήμ[ω]ι καί τώι κοινώι τώμ περί τον Διόνυσον τεχνιτών πα-
ρά πάντων τ[ά?] τιμάς κομίζωνται κατά το δ[υνατόν] κ[α]ι ναού καί τών
άλλων με[τέχ]οντες τώι Διονύσωι /cotv[ot σωτήρε]ς ύπάρχωσι τής
[7rô]Ae[a)s· η]μών καί κοινή διδώσιν ή[μΐν άγ]αθά· ίνα δε καί τά 52
[έφ]ηφισ[μένα aw]TeAijTat άποδείξαι επισ[τάτας δ]ύο εξ απάντων
[τώμ] πο[λιτών οϊτιν]ΐς 4πιμίλήσονται τ[ής re κα]τασκΐνής τών άγαλ-
[μάτ]ω[ν και τής άν]αθίσίως· το Sè άργ[ύριον το] eis ταύτα διδόναι
29 τά δ' è[m]r€Àia€i can be justified by the same verb in the parallel expression docu-
ment 18, 31; pointed out by Oliver 1968: 321. 37 [αττααι καφ]οΐς Herrmann
1965a; [re τοις â/U]ois Habicht, noted in SEG. 38 [άδίλψώι] Merkelbach 1968:
173; [α'ίρεαιν] Habicht by letter to Herrmann, noted in SEG, which seems better.
52 τάγαθά is the 'formule rituelle' restored by J. and L . Robert, BE 68, 451.

Timou[choi's and strategoi's proposal. Since King] Antiochos . . . inten-

tion and, preserving . . . the goodwill which is his from his ancestors and
. . . choosing to . . . manifold . . ., he has resolved to become the common
benefactor of all the Greek cities and especially of ours, and, whilst staying
on the other side of the Taurus, he was responsible for many advantages 10
towards us, and, having come to our region, he restored the affairs to a
profitable conclusion and, having stayed in our city and seen our weakness
in matters both public and private, on account of the continuous wars and
the size of the contributions which we paid, and wishing to be piously
disposed towards the god to whom he has consecrated our city and our
territory, and wishing to favour the people and the corporation of the
Dionysiac artists, he went into the assembly and personally granted that
the city and the territory be sacred and inviolate and free from tribute, and,
as for the other contributions which we paid to King Attalos, 20 promised
that we would be freed through his agency, so that on account of the
increase of the affairs of the city, he should not only receive the title of
benefactor of the people, but also that of saviour; he stayed in the city with
his friends and the forces that accompanied him, making a very great
display of the trustworthiness, which was his before, towards all men, and
after that, he consistently is responsible for many favours towards us,
giving an example to all the Greeks of the disposition he adopts towards
those who are his benefactors and show goodwill towards him; and some of
the favours through which our city comes to happiness he now brings
about, others he will bring about; in his letter to the people, he was of the
opinion that it was necessary to send 30 an embassy [to him], to discuss the
matters which he was convinced would benefit the people also, and when
the people sent as ambassadors Dionysios son of Apollo[. . .], Hermagoras
son of Epimenes, Theodoros son of Zopyros, he made clear to them that he
had freed the city in perpetuity, as he had announced, from the taxes which
we paid to King Attalos; in his letter he said that he had instructed the
ambassadors to report to us on these matters, and the ambassadors did so;
in the same manner, his sister, queen Laodike consistently adopts the same
disposition as the king and . . . and shows h[erself] eager and zealous in
benefactions towards the city, and the people 40 has received the greatest
of benefits from both;—in order that we too may be seen to return
appropriate tokens of gratitude, in every occasion, to the king and the
queen, and to surpass ourselves in the honours for them in relation to
their benefactions, and in order that the people may show to all that it is
generously disposed towards the returning of gratitude,—with good
fortune, (it seemed good) to set up, by the cult-image of D i o n y s o s , marble
cult-images, as beautiful [and] as fitting for sacred matters as possible, of
K i n g Antiochos and his sister, Q u e e n Laodike, so that, for having granted
that the city and the territory should be sacred and inviolate and having
released us f r o m the tribute and having accomplished these actions as
favours to the people and the corporation of the Dionysiac artists, 50 they
should receive f r o m everyone the honours, as m u c h as possible, and that
they should share in the temple and the other rituals of Dionysos and be
the c o m m f o n saviours] of the city and in c o m m o n bestow favours on us; in
order that the content of the decree be executed, to choose [two epis]tatai
out of all the ci[tizens], w h o will see to the making and the dedication of
the statues; to provide the money for this purpose . . .

Commentary. T h e decrees are carved on two blocks f r o m a pilaster in

the entrance to the temple of Dionysos at T e o s (Herrmann 1965a: 89-93);
they were found near the west wall of the temenos of the temple, probably
deliberately discarded there (Herrmann 1965a: 31—2).
See C h . 2 § 2 for context; C h . 4 §§ 2b, 3 for analysis of the document's
functions; on date, see A p p e n d i x 2.

18. Second Decree of the Teians for Antiochos III and Laodike III
(probably 203)

Herrmann 1965a: 36-40 (text); 56-85 (line-by-line commentary), 99-100

(for date), and plates 2, 3, 4 (SEG 41.1003, II, re-edited with very detailed
and fair apparatus, by P. Herrmann.)
Cf. J. and L . Robert, BE 68, 451 (improvements to the text); BE 69, 495
(detailed analysis of the texts); BE 69, 496 (royal cults in the T e i a n con-
text); Gauthier 1985: 169-75 ( o n isopoliteia for the cities of the Seleukis);
Piejko 1991a: 37—48 (for commentary a n d — m o s t l y u n c o n v i n c i n g —
restorations)

traces of two lines

[ ] μετέχων [ |
]TJS διαφυλάοσ·η[ j

κα]ΐ συνεΐναι iv rfj ήμε[ρα ταύτη πάντας]

[TOUS τής πόλεως αρχο]ντας και τους περί [τον Διόνυσον τεχ]- 8
[viras 12—14 ]?' κατασκευάσασθ[αι 8ε βωμόν εκάστην]
[τών] συμ[οριών εν τώι] ίδίωι τόπωι ενα παρά [τον βθ)μόν τής σνμο]-
[pias] τοΰ τε j8[aatAews] Άντιόχου Μεγάλου και [TIJS αδελφής]
[αϋτ]οί βασιλ[ίσσης yl]ao8i/crys και συντελεΐν τήν [θυσίαν]
[επι\ τούτου και κα[τάρ]χεσθαι τών ιερών τον ΐερεα το[ΰ βασι]-
[Ae]a>s και TOW σπο[ν]8ών και τών άλλων π ά ν τ ω ν προ[ί'στασ]-
[#αι] αυτόν êv τή εορ[τ]ή ταύτηι τών συντελουμένων υπό [τών]
[συ]μοριών καθάπε[ρ] ο ιερεύς τοΰ Ποσειδώνος εν ro[fe Λευ]- 16
[«•aöjeois προέστηκεν το δε εσόμενον άνάλωμ[α καθ' ε]-
[καστοί'] άνδρα τάξαι μεν [το]ν δήμον [άπ]αξ εν ταΐς [πρώταις]
[άρχα]ιρεσίαις, τούς δε ταμίας τούς εκάστοτε γιν[ομενους]
[διδό]ναι τοις τών συμοριών προστάταις το ταγεν εκ T^S διοι]- 20
[κήσε]ως έσχατο ν τή τετράδι τοΰ Λ ευκαθεώνος λαβόν[τας τήν]
[άπογ]ραφήν παρά τών π[ρ]οστατών τοΰ πλήθους τών εν ταις
[. . κα]£ τών έν ήλικίαι Ka[£] τών άπογραφαμένων προς αυτούς
. . . . θύειν δε καί εορτάζει ν καί τούς άλους πάντας τούς oft/cow]- 24
[ras] τήμ πόλιν ημών έν τοις ιδίοις ο'ίκοις εκάστους κατά δύν[αμιν]·
[στε]φανηφορεΐν πάντας τούς έν τή πάλει έν τήμέραι ταύτ[η· παύε]-
[σθαι δ]ε καί τάς εργασίας πάσας τάς τ' εν τή πάλει καί τή χώ[ρα καί εί]-
[ναι έ]χεχιρίας πάσι προς πάντας έν τή {ή)μέραι ταύτη• άναγ[ράψαι] 28
[δε τ\αύτην τήν εορτήν εις τήν ίεράν βύβλον ίνα δε καί καθιε[ρωμέ]-
[vos] <5 τόπος ή τώι βασιλεί Άντιόχωι Μεγάλωι έν ώι τά μεν ε[τε'λεσε]
[τών ά]γαθών, τά δε ύπέσχετο καί μετά ταύτα επετέλεσεν, ά[ναθεί\-
[ναι ά]γαλμα χαλκοΰν εν τώι βουλευτηρίωι ώς κάλλιστον [τού βα\- 32
[σιλε^ωΐ καί συντελείν θυσίαν έπί τής κοινής τής πόλεως «[στια?]
[εν τ\ώι βουλεντηρίο)ΐ τώι τε βασιλεί καί Χάρισιν καί Μνήμη καθ' εκ[αστον\
[eVo]s τάς άρχάς μετά τοΰ Ιερέως καί τοΰ πρυτάνεως τήν τ[ε τών]
[στρ]ατηγών καί τήν τών τιμούχων καί τήν τών ταμιών κατά το ... . 36
. . . είσιτητήρια τής αρχής άρχομένας άπ' άγαθών τήι ν ουμη [νίαι]
[τοΰ] Λευκαθεώνος καί θύειν ίερείον τέλειον, συντελείν δε θυσίαν
[ T O Ù ] S έκ τών έφηβων μετά τού γυμνασιάρχου τή αύτη ήμέραι καθότι γέγ[ρα]-
[πτ]αι, ίνα μηθεν πρότερον άρξωνται πράσσειν τών κοινών πριν ή χάρ[ι]- 40
[ r a j s ά7τοδ[ο]ϋναι τοις εύεργέταις καί έθίζωμεν τούς εζ ήαυτών πά[ΐ']-
[τα] ύστερα καί έν έλάσσονι τίθεσθαι προς άποκατάστασιν χάριτος
[και] τήμ πρώτην αύτοίς είσοδον εις τήν άγοράν επί τ α ύ τ α καλλίστην
[ποι]ήσο[μ]εν τά δε ίερεία τά εις τάς θυσίας παριστάναι τούς πριαμέ- 44
[vous] τω πρότερον ετει τήν παράσχεσιν τών ιερειών, τοις δε είσιοΰσι
[αρχ]ουσιν καί τοις έκ TOW έφηβων τούς ταμίας• όσοι δ' αϊ' νικήσαντες
[TOÎ)]S στεφανίτας αγώνας είσελαύνοισιν εις τήμ πόλιν, παραγίνεσθα[ι]
. . . .ους άπο τής {άπό TTJS] πύλης πρώτον εις το βουλευτήριον καί στεφ[α]~ 48
[vow] το άγαλμα τοΰ βασιλέως καί συντελείν θυσίαν καθότι επάνω γέ-
[γραπ]ται· επειδή ού μόνον είρήνην ήμίν ό βασιλεύς παρέσχεν, αλλά καί
[τών] βαρέων καί σκληρών έκ(κ)ούφισιν εις το μετά ταύτα τελών παραλύ-
[aas] τών συντάξεων καί λυσιτελείς τάς εν τή χώραι μετ' άσφαλεί- 52
[as π]εποίηκεν έργασίας και τάς καρπέίας, τιθέναι προς το άγαλμα
[τοΰ] βασιλέως άπαρχάς καθ' έκαστον έτος τούς πρώτους έν τή
[χώρ]αι ξυλίνους φανέντας καρπούς• οπως δε καί δια παντός ή το άγαλ-
[μα τ]οΰ βασιλέως έστεφανωμένον στεφάνωι τώι κατά τάς ώρας γινο- 56
[μέν]ωι επιμελείσθαι τον ιερέα τού βασιλέως· προσπο)λείν δε τή ώνή
[TTJS] στεφανοπωλίας τούς εκάστοτε γινομένους ταμίας τήν
[παρ]άσχεισιν τών στεφάνων τούτων· άποδείξαι δε καί έπιστάτας δύο
[ε£ ά]πάντων τώμ πολιτών οϊτινες έπιμελήσονται τής τε κατασκευ- 60
[17s τ]οΰ αγάλματος και τής αναθέσεως καθότι αν οί τιμούχοι και οί
στ[ρ]ατηγοι 7ταραγγέλλωσιν τό δε άργύριον τό εις ταύτα διδόναι
τους ταμίας εκ τών τιμών τώμ βασιλέων ή εκ τής öioiKijaeo/fs]·
ίνα δε και τή αδελφή τοΰ βασιλέως βασιλίσση Λαοδίκη προς [rat?] 64
άλλαις ταΐς δεδομέναις τιμαΐς νπάρχοισιν αλλαι μή μόνον χ[άριν]
εχουσαι τήμ παραυτίκα άλλά Kai μνήμην ποιοΰσαι τήν εις το[ν ά]-
παντα χρόνον και τοις εις τήμ πόλιν άφικνουμένοις τών ξένων [παρά]-
δειγμα πάσιν υπάρχον εμ μέσωι φαίνηται τής ευχαριστίας το\ΰ δη]- 68
μου και προσήκουσας εκάστοις φαινώμεθα τάς τιμάς φηφιζόμ[ενοι],
κατασκευάσαι τήγ κρήνην τήν εν τή αγορά ι και επιμεληθήνα[ι ο]-
πως εις αυτήν τό ΰδωρ άχθη και άναθεΐναι τήγ κρήνην τή άδελ[φή]
τοΰ βασιλέως Άντιόχου βασιλίσση Λαοδίκη και είναι αυτήν επώνυμ[ον] 72
Λαοδίκης, και έπειδή ή βασίλισσα τά τε προς τους θεούς eùae/3[às]
διακεΐται και τά προς ανθρώπους εΰχαρίστως και διά ταύτα κ[α]-
λώΐ έχον εστίν εκ τής ταύτης επωμύμου κρήνης πάντας κα-
τάρχεσθαι τιμώντας τους θεούς και άγνεύοντας· τύχη άγαθ[η]· 76
όσοι αν ιερείς ή όσαι ίέρειαι προ πόλεως θυσίαν συντελώσιν, )^_ρήσ\-
θαι προς τάς θυσίας εν οΐς δει ύδατι τόυτωι, λαμβάνιν δε [καί TOUS]
συντελοϋντας τά λουτρά εντεύθεν, ύδρεύεσθαι δε κα[ί ταις νύμ]-
φαις τά λο[υ]τρά άπό τής κρήνης ταύτης- όσοι δ* αν λαμ[βάνωσιν το] 80
ΰδωρ εις r[às] χρείας τάς προγεγραμένας παραγίνεσ[θαι επι τήγ]
κρήνην [/cat ά]ποπορεύεσθαι εν εσθήτι λαμπράι εσ[τεφανω]μ[έ]-
νους, τά[? δε ύδρ]ευομένας τά λουτρά ταΐς νύμφαις [ 6-8 ]ΤΡΙΑ . Σ· [ί]-
να δε σ[υντελήται] ή κρήνη καθότι γέγραπται ά[ποδ€ΐ|αι επι]στάτας δύο 84
εξ άπ[άντων τώμ] πολιτών οί'τινες [έπιμελήσον]ται τής κατασκευής
τής κ[ρήνης και τής αναθέσεως c. ί ο ]νην ύδατος παρεσομε-
[ν . . το δε ε]σόμενον άνάλω[μα τό εις ταύτα δι]δόναι τούς ταμίας ef«·]
[τή? διοι]κήσεως καθότι αν οί επι τώ[ν] έργων τεταγμένοι παραγγέ[λ]- 88
[λωσιν, υ]περ δε τών έργων τής συντελείας τούτων είναι κατά τον νό-
[μον τό]ν γεγ ραμμένο ν ύπερ τής κατασκευής τών τιμών επει δε κ[α]-
[Λώΐ ε]χον εστίν άμα ταΐς άλλαις ταΐς δεδομέναις παρά τής πόλε-
ις τώι β]ασιλει τιμαΐς και άκόλουθον τή τε τοΰ βασιλέως και τών 92
[φίλων] εύνοίαι προς τον δήμον και τή παρ' ήμών πρός τε τον βασι-
λέα και] τους φίλους αυ[τ]ού εκτενείαι καθάπερ εις κοινόν τεθήναι τό
[τών ε]πωνύμων πόλευ>ν τών τοΰ βασιλέως προγόνων τά δε[δο]-
[μένα κ]αί δοθησόμενα παρά τοΰ βασιλέως αγαθά τώι δήμωι (ίνα) φη[φισ]- 96
[öeiaiys] αύτοΐς πάσιν παρ' ήμΐν τής πολιτείας και ετοιμότεροι 7t[pôs]
[τά? εύ]εργεσίας ύπάρχο>σι σπεύδοντες διά παντός καθά[π]ερ
[καλό]ν εστίν, ύπερ τής ιδίας πατρίδος [κ]α£ [τι)]ν προϋπάρχουσαν τοις
[. . J o t s πρός αύτούς άνανεοισόμεθα φιλίαν τύχη άγαθή• T O Ù [ S ] στρα- 100
[TI77O]ÙS και τούς τιμούχους είσενεγκεΐν εις τάς επιούσας άρχαι-
[ρεσία\ς καθότι δοθήσεται πολιτέα τώι δήμοη τω Άντιοχέων τώμ
[προ?] Δάφνηι και τώι δήμωι τώι Σελευκέων τών εμ Πιερίαι [κα]ί τώι δή-
[μωι τ]ώι Λαοδικέων τώμ πρός θαλάσση· άναγράφαι δε [κ]αί τό φή- 104
[φισμα τ ] ό δ ί εις τήν παραστάδα τοΰ νεώ τοΰ Διονύσου κα[£ κ]αθιερώ-
[σαι, T T ^ S δε αναγραφής τού φηφίσματος επιμεληθήνα[ι T ] O U S ενεσ-
[τηκότ]ας τα[μί]ας' ίνα δε ό βασιλεύς Άντίοχος καί ή à[S]eÀ</>·)) αύτού
[βασί\λισσα [Λ]αοδίκη είδήσωσι τήν εύχαριστίαν τού [δ]ήμου, άποδεί- 108
[£cu 7r]peaj6ei>Tas τρίς ήδη οί'τινες παραγενόμενοι προς αύτούς το
[μεν φ]ήφισμα τάδε άποδώσουσι καί άσπασάμεν[ο]ι ύπερ τού δήμου
[και] συνησθεντες επί τώι ύγιαίνειν αύτούς [και] πράσσειν ον τρόπον
[αι)τ]οί τε βούλονται καί ημείς τοις θεοίς εύχόμεθα καί εμφανίσαν- 112
[res] r à s [ r j / ^ à s τάς εφ[η\φισμ[ε\νας καί δ [ η ] λ ώ σ α ν τ ε 5 αύτοΐς [ ]

2 P e r h a p s διαφυλάσσy, in w h i c h case this v e r b and at least lines 2—4 b e l o n g to a lva-

clause c o m p a r a b l e to those at lines 29-31, 64-69, (restored) 96-100; the participle
μετέχων m i g h t q u a l i f y the s u b j e c t of the clause ( K i n g A n t i o c h o s or rather the demos of
Teos?). 7 — 8 πάντας τους τής πόλεως άρχοντας or τούς άρχοντας τής πόλεως πάντας
p r o p o s e d by J. and L . R o b e r t , BE 77, 405: the first b a n q u e t n a m e d is n o t organized for
all the inhabitants of the city (the editor's restoration: τούς . . . ο'ικοΰντας), but only for
the magistrates and their choice guests, the D i o n y s i a c artists (cf. R o b e r t 1937, 184).
16—17 J· AND L . R o b e r t , BE 68, 451 p r o p o s e έν TO[ÎS Λε\ υκαθέοις], 2 4 τούς άλους
on the stone. 26-7 [παύ\εσθαι] D u n s t 1968: 1 7 1 . 28 τήμέραι with crasis,
D u n s t 1968: 171. 36 κατά το[ν νόμον] P i e j k o ΐ 9 9 ι α : 43· [αΰτ]ουΐ
P i e j k o iggia: 44> [τούτ]ονς fits the four-letter gap p u b l i s h e d b y H e r r m a n n .
52-3 μετ aa^aAe/fas] J. and L . R o b e r t , BE 68, 451. 72 χ[ρήσθαι] D a u x 1973: 235.
83 TCC[S δέ ύδρ]ευομένας D u n s t 1968: 1 7 1 . T o w a r d s the e n d , J. a n d L . R o b e r t , BE 69, 499
p r o p o s e [μετά οτλεγγ\ίδος, ' w e a r i n g a h e a d b a n d ' . 86 [καί τής αναθέσεως] P i e j k o
1991α: 47, b y analogy with line 55 of the previous T e i a n inscription and line 61 of the
present inscription. 92 O n the g r o u n d s of usage in the rest of the d o c u m e n t (e.g.
lines 30, 32) [τώι β]ααιλεΐ seems better than [τω β]ααιλεί (though see line 102 for τώι δήμωι
τώ Άντιοχέων) gg-ioo T h e three-letter g a p at the b e g i n n i n g of the line is difficult
to fill, t h o u g h the m e a n i n g is clear ( r e n e w i n g the T e i a n s ' friendship for the cities n a m e d
after the k i n g ' s ancestors) H e r r m a n n 1965a proposed [πρόγ(ον)\οις, m e a n i n g the T e i a n s '
ancestors. P i e j k o 1991a: 47-8, w o u l d see [δήμ]οις ( w i t h o u t any justification; p e r h a p s
unlikely), and prints τήν προϋπάρχουσαν τοις [. . .]ois προς αύτούς: 'so that we should renew
the friendship w h i c h the peoples had for us'. B u t the m e a n i n g is n o t the expected one,
and the T e i a n d o c u m e n t s use the f o r m ή αυτούς or εαυτούς: d o c u m e n t 17, 42; present
d o c u m e n t , line 41; d o c u m e n t 19 A , 6. D u n s t 1968: 172, proposes [Τηί]οις, but in these
decrees, the T e i a n s refer to themselves in the first person singular or as 'our city'
( d o c u m e n t 17, 8, 12, 15, etc). It m i g h t be t e m p t i n g to write τήν προϋπάρχουσαν {rois}
[τ?αυτ]οίΐ προς αυτούς . . . φιλίαν, 'our previous friendship for t h e m ' (though the
expression is infelicitous, and the correction harsh).

. . . sharing in . . . preserving . . . of sacrifices and lfibations] . . . should

increase towards him through ( ? ) . . . with gratitude to conduct [. . .
Antioch]eia and Laodikeia . . . to have on this day [all the magistrates of the
city] and the [Dionysiac artists] assemble for a feast . . .; and to have 10
[each of the symmoriai] build on its own place next to [the altar of the sym-
moria] one [altar] of King Antiochos and [his sister] Queen Laodike, and to
perform the sacrifice on it and to have the priest of the king inaugurate the
rituals and to have him preside in this festival over the libations and all the
other rites which are performed by the symmoriai just as the priest of
Poseidon presides at the [Leukath]ea; and to have the people determine
once and for all at the future elections the future expenditure per head, and
to have the successive tamiai 20 give the fixed amount to the prostatai
of the symmoriai, out of the state budget, at the latest on the fourth of
Leukatheon, after having received from the prostatai the return of
numbers of those in . . ., those in the age-classes and those registered with
them . . .; and to have all the others who live in our city sacrifice and cele-
brate the festival in their own houses, each according to his means; and to
have all wear crowns in the city on that day; and [to suspend] all working
activities in the city and in the countryside, and to have on that day court
holidays for all towards all; and to inscribe this festival in the sacred book;
and in order that 30 the place be consecrated to K i n g Antiochos Megas
where he accomplished some of his favours, and promised the others,
which he accomplished later, to dedicate in the bouleuterion a bronze
cult-image of the king, as fine as possible, and to have the colleges of the
strategoi and the timouchoi and the tamiai and . . . along with the priest and
the prytanis perform in the bouleuterion a sacrifice upon the common hearth
of the city to the king and the Charités and to Memory, as eisiteteria
(entrance-ritual) each year when these colleges enter office, for good result,
upon the first of Leukatheon, and to have them offer a full-grown victim;
and to have those who leave the ephebes offer a sacrifice with the gym-
nasiarch on the same day, as it is written, 40 so that they do not start to
handle anything among the common affairs before returning gratitude to
the benefactors and so that we should accustom our progeny to value every-
thing less than the returning of gratitude and so that we should make their
first entrance into the agora as fine as possible, in the same spirit (P);1 and to
have those who in the previous year have bought the right to supply the
sacrificial victims make available the victims for the sacrifices, and to have
the tamiai supply the victims to the magistrates entering office and those
who leave the ephebes; and to have those who after a victory in the crown-
games make a solemn entrance into the city go from the gate to the
bouleuterion first, and crown the cult-image of the king and offer a sacrifice
as is written above; and 50 since the king brought us not only peace, but
also an alleviation of the heavy and harsh taxes for the future, by releasing
us from the syntaxeis, and made the working and harvesting in the land
profitable and safe, (it seemed good) to place before the cult-image of the
king the first produce from trees that appear each year in the land, as first-
fruit offerings; and to have the priest make sure that the cult-image of the
king should be crowned at all times with the crown that fits the season; and
to have the successive tamiai add the right to supply these crowns to the
auction (of the contract) of the crown-supplying and to appoint two
epistatai 60 out of all the citizens who should see to the work on the cult-
image and the dedication, following the orders of the timouchoi and the
strategoi; to have the tamiai give the money for this purpose out of the hon-
ours for the kings or out of the state budget;—and in order that Queen
Laodike should have, in addition to the honours given to her, other
honours which not only contain gratitude in the present but also create
memory for the rest of time and so that an example of the gratitude of the
people should be seen in the middle before all the foreigners who come to
the city and so that we should be seen to decree the honours that suit each
and all,2 to build 70 the fountain in the agora and to see that water should
1 Έττι ταύτα: 'ebenso' H e r r m a n n , tentatively.
2 O r 'so that w e m a y be seen b y each and all . . .'?
be adducted to it and to dedicate the fountain to the sister of K i n g
Antiochos, Q u e e n Laodike, and that it should take its name f r o m
L a o d i k e ; — a n d since the queen is piously disposed towards the gods and
gratefully towards mankind, and since it is good, for the above reasons, that
all those w h o honour the gods and are pure should offer libations f r o m this
water named after h e r — w i t h good fortune, (it seemed good) to have all the
priests and the priestesses w h o offer sacrifice in favour of the city draw
water f r o m this fountain for the sacrifices where it is appropriate, and to
have those w h o make offerings of water take it f r o m there, and to draw the
baths for the brides 80 f r o m this fountain; and to have all those w h o take
the water for the purposes mentioned above go to the fountain and retire
f r o m it in white clothing and wearing crowns, and to have the w o m e n w h o
draw the vessels of water for the brides . . .; and in order that the fountain
be built, as it is written, to appoint two epistatai out of all the citizens, w h o
should see to the work on the f[ountain and the dedication . . .] of water
. . . and to have the tamiai cover the future expenditure out of the budget,
according to the instructions of those appointed to the works, and concern-
ing the execution of the works, to follow the written law 90 concerning the
work on h o n o u r s ; — a n d since, in addition to the honours given to the king
by the city, it is a fine thing and fitting with the goodwill of the king and his
friends towards the people and our eager character towards the king and his
friends, to put in c o m m o n , so to speak, with the cities named after the
ancestors of the king the favours which were given and those w h i c h will be
given by the king to the people, so that, after a grant of our citizenship to
them, they should be the readier to benefactions and show eagerness in all
matters, j u s t as it is a fine thing to do with one's o w n fatherland, and so that
100 we should renew our pre-existing friendship with t h e m , — w i t h good
fortune, (it seemed good) to have the strategoi and the timouchoi propose
at the next elections that citizenship be granted to the people of the
Antiocheians by D a p h n e and the people of the Seleukeians in Pieria and
the people of the Laodikeians by the sea; and to write up this decree on the
parastas of the temple of D i o n y s o s and to consecrate it, and to have the
tamiai in office take care of the writing-up of the decree; and in order that
K i n g Antiochos and his sister, Q u e e n Laodike, should know of the grati-
tude of the people, to appoint three ambassadors w h o should go to them
and 1 1 0 hand over this decree, and, after bringing greetings f r o m the
people, and after rejoicing that they be in good health and in the situation
w h i c h they wish and w h i c h we pray the gods for them to be in, and after
informing them of the honours decreed and after telling them . . .

Commentary. A s in the case of the previous decree, the present text is

carved on two blocks f r o m a pilaster in the entrance to the temple of
Dionysos; the archaeological context is also the same. T h e present text is
certainly later than the previous document (Herrmann 1965«: 89-93),
because of the greater elaboration of the honours, and because the
promised benefactions of document 17, 2 7 - 9 , are now described as realized
(lines 30-1).
 See Ch. 2 § 2 for context; Ch. 4 §§ 2b, 3 for analysis of the document's
functions; on date, see Appendix 2.

19. Royal Correspondence Addressed to the the Teians (between 203 and
igo)
T e x t A: Herrmann 1965a: 41-2 (text of letter), 85-9 (textual notes), and
plate 5.
Texts Β and C: Herrmann 1965a: 157-8 (two further letters, both on
the same stone, discovered in 1966 and presented 'provisorisch' as an
addendum).
Texts D and E: Herrmann 1965a: 158-9, letter of Laodike, and a further
fragment on the same stone which could be a letter of Antiochos III or
Laodike; Piejko 1991a: 69, suggests Antiochos the son (but his restoration
Βασιλεύς Άντίοχος ο νεώτεροςΡ is unlikely, since Antiochos the son is simply
βασιλεύς Άντίοχος in RC 32, line 1).
T h e lines on texts Β and C, D and E, though both pairs are on the same
stone, have been numbered separately.
SEG 41.1003, III—IV, 1004—5, f ° r aH four letters re-edited by P.
Herrmann with a generous apparatus.
Cf. Piejko 1991a: 50—69: attempts at reconstructing complete reading
texts of texts Β and C, as well as a speculative reconstruction of the frag-
mentary letter of Laodike exempli gratia.
T e x t A is inscribed in a different hand from documents 16 and 17
(Herrmann 1965a: 49-50); the same is true for texts Β and C (Herrmann
1965a: 159) and presumably D and Ε (though Herrmann does not
comment on the letter-forms).
A.
traces of 2 lines
! Άν]τιόχωι[ \
] καί παρη[
vacat
[ B a a i A e ù j s [Ά]ντίοχος Τηίων τήι βουλήι κα[ΐ τώι δήμωι χαίρειν οί παρ' ύμών]
[πρεσβ]ευταί Πυθάδοτος και Πολύθρους καί [ c.8 το ψήφισμα άπεδωκαν] 4
[eV] ώι εγεγράφειτε εύχαριστούντες επί r [ o t s δεδομενοις ύμίν ύφ' ημών]
[φιλ]ανθρώποις καί οτι βουλόμενοι τήν εαυτών α[ΐρεσιν τήν προς ημάς άπο]-
δείκνυσθαι στεφανώσαιτε ημάς χρνσώι στεφάν[ωι καθ' εκαστον ένιαυ]-
τον καί εικόνι χρυσήι· διελεχθησαν δε καί οί π ρεσβευταί [μετά σπουδής εμφα]- Β
νίζοντες τήν τού δήμου εκτενειαν θεωρούντες ουν ύμ[άς ευχαρίστως καί γνη?]-
σίως διακείμενους προς τήν οίκίαν ημών επαινούμεν ώς ενδ[εχ]ε[ται μ ά λ ι σ τ α ]
άποδεδεγμεθα δε καί τον στεφανον καί τάς τιμάς φιλοφρόνως κα . . . ισ[ C.8 ]
τας ημάς καί τήν αρχήν ομοίως πολλώι προθυμοτερους παρασκ[ευά]ζε[ιν εις τό] 12
πάν το συμφέρον συνκατασκευάζειν τήι πάλει καί μή μόνον συντηρε[ΐν τά ύπο]-
κείμενα άλλα καί δσ' άν άνήκη προς τιμήν καί δόξαν σ[υναύξε]ιν ύμίν κα[ί κοινήι]
καί ίδίαι εκάστου ποιείσθαι τήμ προσήκουσαν πολυ[ωρίαν και'] νύν ύ[πομνη]-
σάντων τών πρεσβευτών εντετάλθαι ύμάς [αυτοί?] . ... Λ . [ C. ί ο ] 16
[. . . ό]ρώντες εμ πάσ[ι]ν οντάς υμάς εκτενεΐς «-[at c.20 |
[ c.6 ] άπόδειξ[ιν ο'ιό]μεθα δεΐν τήμ πόλιν [υμών C.2θ
[ c. 1 2 άναγγ\ζλουσιν ύμιν και οί π[ρεσβευταί c. 1 5
traces of ι line
1 - 2 Herrmann 1965α: 85-6 suggests these might be the last lines of a T e i a n decree
for Antiochos; another possibility is a short decree recording the decision to inscribe the
letter of Antiochos of lines 3-20, as in document 2. 5 ewi r[oiy -rrporepov
γεγενημένοις ύμΐν] Piejko 1991α: 48. 7 - 8 Herrmann 1965α: 87, justified his
restoration καθ' ίκαοτον ίνιαυτόν with a passage from the T e i a n decree Inschr. Magnesia
97, line 44. il—15 T h e construction and the meaning are still unclear (possibilities
examined by Herrmann 1965a: 87-8; further suggestions by Dunst 1968 or Piejko
1991a noted by Herrmann in SEG, neither convincing).

[. . . to An]tiochos . . .
King Antiochos to the council and [the people of the Teians, greetings;
your ambassadors], Pythodotos and Polythrous and [. . . handed over the
decree in] which you had written to express your gratitude over the
fav[ours given to you by us] and to say that in your wish to make clear your
[disposition towards us] you had crowned us with a gold crown [each year]
and a golden statue; the ambassadors also spoke [with zeal] to point to
the eager character of the people; so seeing that you are [gratefully and
honestly] 10 disposed towards our house, we praise you as much as
possible; we have accepted the crown and the honours with pleasure, . . .
to make ourselves and likewise in the beginning (or: 'our empire'?) more
eager to help with all that benefits the city and not only to preserve
your present advantages, but also to increase all things that relate to your
honour and your standing, and to take all the appropriate attention for each
thing, in your favour as a community and as individuals; [and] after the
ambassadors [reported] that you had told [them to . . .], seeing that you are
eagerly disposed in all matters and . . . demonstration . . . we think it is
necessary that [your] city . . . the ambassadors will also [report] to you
[(concerning all these matters. Farewell.)]

B.
[Βασιλεύς Άντίοχος Τηίων] τήι βονλήι και [τώι]
[δήμωι χαίρειν οί παρ' υ μ ώ ν ] πρεσβευται Ζΐιονυ-
[aios το φή]φισμα άπέδωκαν
] έχετε διά παντός 4
i διελέχθησαν δε κα]ί περί τών τιμών
! τοις 7rpoy]ovois και ών εμοί
! προσδέδεγμα]ι δε και τον στέφανον
] αΐρεσιν και επι ταΐς 8
ττ)ν] δημοκρατίαν ύμΐν
! και τήν πόλιν /cat] τήν χώραν ιερόν και
[ασυλον καθά]περ και οί πατέρες και
[αυτό? ]ν εύνοιας άεί τίνος 12
[άγαθοΰ παραίτιος ]t vac. έρρωσθε.
vacat
 7 [προσδεδεγμα]ι Herrmann; the present verb on analogy with letter A , line 1 1 .
12 [εγώ\ Herrmann; [αύτόΐ] Piejko 1991a: 54.

[ K i n g Antiochos to ] the council and [the people of the T e i a n s , greetings;

your] ambassadors Dionyfsios and . . . handed over the decree [. . .] you are
always [. . . they also spoke] concerning the honours [. . . the a n c e s t o r s and
of those w h i c h to me [. . . I have also accepted] the crown [. . .] intention
and [. . . the] democracy for your [. . . and the city and] 10 the territory to
be sacred and [inviolate . . . just] as m y fathers and [myself . . .] of good-
will, always [responsible for some favour.] Farewell.

C.
[Βασιλεύς Άντίοχος Τηίων τ]ήι βουλήι και τώι δή-
[μωι χαίρειν οί π]αρ' ύμών πρεσβευται
i ]oiç και εμε και τήν ά-
[δελφήν τά φ]ηφίσματα καθ' α ετετι-
[μήκειτε ήμάς διότι τήν] ελευθερίαν και τήν
και τάλλα φιλ]άνθρωπα τήι πόλει
[ύμών διατηροΰμεν? κ]α£ τών χρησίμων αεί
[τι τών] άλλων τών εν τοις
[φηφίσμασι? μετά] πάσης [σπουδή?
τούς στε]φάνους και τάς άλλας
[τιμάς ο]ίκείοις προσδεδεγμε-
[0α τον δήμον? επαινο]ΰμεν διατηροΰντα 1
! τήν αΐ]ρεσιν ώς προσήκον
[εστίν και πειρασόμεθα εις τό λοιπόν? κ]αθάπερ άζιοϋτε τήι
[TOW προγόνων ύφηγ]ήσει? κατακολου-
[θούντες συ]νπράσσειν και τήν 1
i ] και τά άλλα τά δεδομέ-
να φιλάνθρ]ωπα συνδιαφυλάσ-
[aeiv e]y τήι αύτήι διαθέσει και
περι το]ύτων και οί πρεσβευ- 2
[ται άναγγελοΰσιν] ύμΐν vacat έρρωσθ[ε.]
7 - 8 τών χρησίμων αεί [τι] Piejko Ι 9 9 ι α : 6a, to be completed with a verb meaning 'to
provide'; or perhaps τών χρησίμων αεί [τίνος παραίτιοι], as in the expression 'we will
always try to be responsible for some good towards you'. 9 [μ^το] πάσης [στ^ουδ?^
must represent the king's approving description of the ambassadors' speech and
conduct. Piejko 1991a: 55: διελεγησαν, above, document A , line 8: διελεχθησαν δε και οί
πρεσβευται [μετά σπουδής πάσης] I Ι - Ι 2 O n the parallel of RC 32, line 17, perhaps
one could restore a singular participle προσδεδεγμένον in the genitive absolute, agreeing
with a clause describing an action of Antiochos III (if this letter is a document of
Antiochos the son). Another possibility is προοδεδεγμενος, agreeing with the author of
the letter, who in line 3 writes in the first person singular. 1 5 - 1 6 If this were a
letter of Antiochos the son, τήι [τοΰ πατρός . . . ΰφηγ]ήσει would be possible.

K i n g A n t i o c h o s to the council and the people of T e o s , greetings. Y o u r

ambassadors . . . me and m y sister . . . the decrees, according to w h i c h
y o u honoured [us because we] . . . the liberty and the . . . [and the other]
privileges . . . for the city . . . and always [some] advantage . . . the other
things in the . . . with all zeal . . . 10 the crowns and the other [honours]
. . . we gladly accept. . . we praise [the city? (for keeping the same)] policy,
as it is fitting and . . . as you ask, following the [ex]ample [of the ancestors]
. . . to assist in the . . . the other things which were given . . . preserve the
privileges . . . in the same situation and . . . [concerning] these matters,
your ambassadors [will report] to you. Farewell.
D.
]y St«[
] καί αϋ[
κ]αι εις το[ !
]s άφιστα[
]TCHS "Ελλη[σιν ]
]μενοις α[ |
] τήν αυτή [ν ]
εύν]οιαν τήμ ^fpos]
] εγώ καί 6 àS[eA(/>os]
έρρ[ωσθε]
vacat
Ε.
τώι κοινώι τών περί τον Διόνυσον] τεχνιτών [χαίρειν.]
φ]ήφισμα το[ j
φιλ]ανθρωπ ]
]έχετ[ε ] 4
Μ ]
(fragments) . . .to the Greeks . . . the same . . . goodwill towards . . . I and
my brother . . .
Farewell.
(next letter) . . .to the corporation of the Dionysiac Artists, [greetings].
Decree . . . generous . . . you have . . .
Commentary. Document A comes from a pilaster on the entrance of the
temple of Dionysos at Teos. This is probably also the case of Β and C,
since the depth of the block on which they are inscribed is the same as the
parastas bearing the other texts (Herrmann 1965a: 157); the letter-shapes
are also different from those of the preceding Teian documents (Herrmann
1965a: 159): larger and coarser, as I noticed when I examined the stone (in
1995, in the new archaeological museum in Izmir). T h e archaeological
context for this block, found in 1966, is similar to that of the material dis-
covered earlier: near the western wall of the sanctuary's temenos.
Documents Β and C are written (mostly) in the first person singular,
which opens the possibility that the author is Antiochos the son rather than
Antiochos III (cf. RC 32), perhaps acknowledging the new status of Teos
granted by his father. It would be appropriate for Antiochos the son to
speak of the Seleukid ancestors as οίπάτερες (Β 11), in addition to the more
usual πρόγονοι (though the Iasians refer to the king's πατέρες: document 28,
4); he could also have referred to his queen as his sister (C 3-4), since he
m a r r i e d his sister Laodike, in w i n t e r 196/5. T h e v e r b συμπράσσειν (C 16)
m i g h t also designate collaboration with the m o r e p o w e r f u l figure of
A n t i o c h o s I I I ( j u s t a s it does in RC 44, lines 9-10, on the p a r t of a royal
Friend).

III 197-190 bc

20. Dedication at Aigeai by Themison, Nephew of the King, for Antiochos

III, Antiochos the Son, Laodike III, and the Royal Children (probably igy )
I owe k n o w l e d g e of this d o c u m e n t to the generosity of M . Sayar, w h o
k i n d l y s h o w e d his text, d u e to appear in Asia Minor Studien 33 ( M ü n s t e r ,
f o r t h c o m i n g ) ; the p r e s e n t text is taken f r o m a p a p e r delivered in a con-
ference in B o r d e a u x (12-13 D e c e m b e r 1997), on ' L e s cités d'Asie M i n e u r e
occidentale au I l e siècle a. C.', listed in R e f e r e n c e s as Sayar ( f o r t h c o m i n g ) .

Ύπερ βασιλέως μεγάλου

Ά ντιόχου και Ά ντιόχου
τοΰ υίοΰ και βασιλίσσης
Λαοδίκης καί τ ώ ν π α ι δ ί ω ν 4
Θεμίσων ό άδελφιδοΰς
τοΰ βασίλευες
Αιί Κασίωι
F o r the safety of the G r e a t K i n g A n t i o c h o s and A n t i o c h o s the son and
q u e e n L a o d i k e and the children, T h e m i s o n , the n e p h e w of the king, to
Z e u s Kasios.
Commentary. T h e stele was f o u n d near ancient Aigeai. T h e m i s o n , ' n e p h e w
of the k i n g ' , and a u t h o r of the dedication, m u s t be the c o m m a n d e r on Pol.
5.79.12 and 5.82.11. T h e inscription dates b e t w e e n c.199 ( w h e n A n t i o c h o s
took the title 'great king') and 193 ( w h e n A n t i o c h o s the son died). It is
p r o b a b l y c o n n e c t e d to the expedition of 197.
T h e expression τών παιδίων, 'little c h i l d r e n ' (line 4), rather than the m o r e
usual and n e u t r a l TÔKVOW, is paralleled in L a o d i k e ' s letter to the Sardians,
d o c u m e n t 2 B, 14. T h e emotive w o r d , u s e d b y the q u e e n and a relative of
the king, m a y be p a r t of court style; it also t u r n s u p in the honorific inscrip-
tion f r o m A n t i o c h for T h e o p h i l o s of Seleukeia in Pieria, h o n o u r e d for his
attitude t o w a r d s the royal family (Kraeling 1964). See c o m m e n t a r y to
d o c u m e n t 2.

21. Dedication at Soloi by Ptolemaios, Son of Thraseas, to Hermes,

Herakles and Antiochos III (probably igy)
G . R a d e t and P. Paris, BCH 14 (1890), 587-9 (OGIS 230). P h o t o g r a p h of
the stone, w h i c h has now lost its u p p e r r i g h t h a n d corner, in BCH 96
(1972), 110.
 T h e editors dated the document to 218 (adopted in OGIS); for the
correct date, Holleaux 1942: 161 and n. 6.
Πτολεμαίος Θρασεα
στραταγός και άρχιερεύς
Συρίας Κοίλας Kai Φοίνικας
Έρμάι vac. και vac. Ήρακλεΐ vac. και
βασιλει μεγάλωι Άντιόχωι 4

3 T h e presence of one-letter spaces between the words can be seen on the photo-
graph. Presumably the intention was to regularize the layout of the whole text by
'justifying' this line on both margins.

Ptolemaios, son of Thraseas, strategos and high-priest of Koile-Syria and

Phoenicia, to Hermes and Herakles and the Great King Antiochos.
Commentary. T h e text is preserved on a smallish marble plaque; the
modest thickness (5 cm.) suggests that the present stone was sawn off a
larger block (architectural? statue base?): though the editors do not
mention such an action, this would have allowed transport from Mersin
(where it was found and bought) to the French School in Athens (where it
is now kept).
Ptolemaios is well known from Polybios and from the Hefzibah inscrip-
tion; for new information from Kilikia on his Aspendian family, which
produced several Ptolemaic officers, see Jones and Habicht 1989, especially
Habicht at 338-41.
T h e dedication, intriguingly, is in Doric. T h e editors believed this
reflected the local dialect at Soloi, which was considered a Rhodian or an
Argive foundation. 1 Dittenberger disagreed ('certe non recte'), because, in
his view, the dedication must reflect the dialect of the dedicator, not the
locality; he proposed that Doric was used in this inscription because
Ptolemaios came from a Dorian city. We now know that his family origi-
nated from Aspendos, a city which could in fact be viewed as Dorian
through its claimed kinship with Argos 2 (Jones and Habicht 1989: 338 and
n. 62). Most of the Hellenistic epigraphy of Aspendos is written in the local
Hellenized dialect, which exhibits several points of contact with Doric. 3
However, the context for dialect inscriptions is almost entirely funerary. 4

' Pol. 21.24.10 (Soloi, as A r g i v e foundation, was considered by Rhodes as related by

kinship, in 188); Strabo 14.5.8 (Soloi was founded by Lindian colonists). Whether these
assertions, not documented before the Hellenistic period, reflect a genuine foundation
in the Archaic period is unclear (but likely).
2 SEG 34.282 (late 4th-cent. Argive decree granting isopoliteia to the Aspendians,
their kinsmen); Jones and Habicht 1989: 338 and n. 62; C u r t y 1995: no. 3, republishing
the text with commentary and bibliography.
5 Brixhe 1976: 146 and n. 1; 191. For 'Doric-like' proper names, see Brixhe, Etudes

d'archéologie classique 5 (Nancy, 1976), 11 no. 183, 13 no. 189, 14 no. 190; Brixhe and
Hodot 1988: 168 no. 193, 175 no. 175, 176-7 no. 198, 192 no. 207, 202 no. 213, 222 no.
224.
4 BE 1991, 601 (Brixhe and Panayotou); the exceptions are the two inscriptions
recording a donation for the city walls from women who had filled the office of δαμιοργός
(Brixhe 1976: 200-1, no. 17 and 204, no. 18; both from the second century).
In contrast, the language for official affairs was probably koine,5 as s h o w n
by the sole surviving Aspendian decree ( S E G 17.639).
D i d Ptolemaios use the 'private', dialectal register of Aspendian dialect
for his dedication at Soloi? In a similar situation (dedication by a royal
official to the ruling dynasty and the gods of the gymnasion), the
Aspendian Meas used koine (SEG 31.1321): his dedication to H e r m e s at
M e y d a n c i k K a l e reads 'Eppet, not the D o r i c f o r m Έρμα ι w h i c h appears at
Soloi. T h e dedication of Meas, exactly parallel to Ptolemaios' except for
the dialect, makes Ptolemaios' use of D o r i c even more peculiar. W a s
Ptolemaios influenced by the usage at Soloi, as the editors believed? T h i s
assumes that D o r i c was indeed spoken in that city in the Hellenistic
period, as a result of its (claimed) Argive/Rhodian ancestry. 6 It is difficult
to understand w h y Ptolemaios would have decided to observe the local
dialect ('courtesy' to the local c o m m u n i t y seems unlikely). A n o t h e r ,
perhaps neater, possibility is that Ptolemaios left funds and instructions
concerning the gymnasion, and that the city of Soloi put up the dedication
in Ptolemaios' n a m e — i n local dialect.

22. Inscription Recording the Consecration of Xanthos by Antiochos III

(197)
O . Benndorf, Beiträge zur alten Geschichte. Festschrift für O. Hirschfeld
(1903), 7 7 - 8 , with facsimile of squeeze taken by H e b e r d e y (-OGIS
746 = Τ Α Μ 2.266, with B e n n d o r f s facsimile). T h e text was erased at some
time after its inscription, but every word can be made out.
Cf. S c h m i t t 1964: 287 and H e r r m a n n 1965«: 1 1 9 - 2 0 (both against
B e n n d o r f s interpretation that the consecration of the city on the part of
Antiochos was only a Scheingewinn, a compromise in the face of Xanthian
resistance—there is no evidence for this scenario, and other Xanthian
documents show that the city adopted formal markers of subjection,
namely the complex Seleukid dating system for civic documents); J. and L .
R o b e r t 1983: 161, 164 (the inscription was p u t up by the Xanthians). Boffo
1985: 1 3 1 - 4 2 for a study of the inscription in its ideological and politi-
cal context (believes in some f o r m of compromise reached by king and
city).

s Brixhe and Hodot 1988: 217 ('langue de la vie publique', in Aspendos and
Pamphylia generally).
6 A m o n g all the inscriptions listed in G . Dagron, D . Feissel, Inscriptions de Cilicie
(Paris, 1987), 57-63, the only testimony for Doric is onomastic: a 4th-cent. metrical
epitaph for the family of Athanadotos (A. von Gladiss, 1st. Mitt. 23-24 (1973-1974),
175-81) and a Hellenistic metrical epitaph for Athanadoros and Athanaios ( G V I 502).
T h e epitaphs themselves are not in Doric, but this is presumably a factor of the
poetical form. T h e presence of theophoric names derived from Athena may support
the tradition of colonists from Lindos, where the main deity was Athena Lindia, and
hence make it possible that Doric was spoken (down to the Hellenistic period?) at
Soloi.
Βασιλεύς μέγας Ά ντίοχος
αφιερωσεν τήν πόλιν
τήι Λητώι και τώι Άπόλλωνι
και τήι Άρτέμιδι δια τήν
πρός αυτούς συνάπτονσαν
συνγένειαν.
T h e Great King, Antiochos, consecrated the city to Leto and Apollo and
Artemis, on account of the kinship uniting him to them.
Commentary. T h e inscription was carved in monumental letters on a privi-
leged emplacement of the main, southern, gate of Hellenistic Xanthos
(inward-facing side of the right hand post when entering the city); the text
was later deliberately erased (Benndorf, quoted above; also lemma to Τ Α Μ
edition).
Since the inscription gives the full title of Antiochos (which never
happens in royal letters), it was probably put up by the Xanthians them-
selves, acting upon the royal consecration (J. and L. Robert 1983: 164).
Furthermore, the inscription mentions the Lykian triad in its traditional
order, with Leto named first, as is fitting for the great goddess of Xanthos,
and hence ahead of the Seleukid god Apollo; in contrast, Antiochos' letter
to the army at Amyzon (document 6), mentions Apollo before Artemis, the
main goddess in that city. T h e respect for the traditional precedence of
gods in the present document supports the Roberts' suggestion.

23. Decree of the Xanthians for Themistokles Son of Aischylos, an Ilian

Rhetor (September or October IQ6)
J. and L. Robert 1983: 154-63, no. 15 Β (with photograph of squeeze),
with commentary at 163-76 ( S E G 33.1184; Curty 1995: no. 76).
Cf. Malay 1987 on the high-priest Nikanor.

Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχου και Άντιό[χου]

του υΐοΰ, ςιρ', μηνός Ύπερβερεταίον
επ' άρχιερεως Νικάνορος, εν δε Ξάνθ[ωι]
εφ' ιερέως τώμ μεν βασιλέων {Π)ρασί-
[δ]οι> τοΰ Νικοστράτου, προ πόλεως δε
Τληπολέμου τοΰ Άρταπάτον εκκλη-
σίας ούσης κυρίας, έδοξεν Ξανθιών
τήι πόλει και τοις άρχουσιν επειδή
Θεμιστοκλής Αισχύλου Ίλιεύς παρα-
γενόμενος εις τήν πόλιν ήμών αποδεί-
ξεις πεπόηται τών ρητορικών λόγων
εν αΐς εύδοκίμηκεν επι πλέον παρεπι- 1
δεδήμηκέν τε χρόνον ούκ όλίον, άνέγ-
κλητος γεγονώς και τής ύπαρχούσης
ήμΐν πρός Ίλιεΐς συγγενείας άξιος·
δεδόχθαι- επαίνεσαι Θεμιστοκλήν 1
Αισχύλου Ίλιέα, άνδρα καλόν καί αγαθόν
γεγονότα εν τήι παρεπιδημίαι
καί προς ημάς εύνοικώς διακείμενον
τιμήσαι δε αυτόν καί δραχμαΐς 20
τετρακοσίαις' ίνα δε καί τοις τιμωμένοις
ιλικρινή καί βέβαιαν τήν χάριν απο-
νέμοντες φαινώμεθα, άναγραψάτοισαν
οί άρχοντες το ψήφισμα τόδε 24
[eis] στήλας λιθίνας δύο καί τεθο)σαν
[τήμ με]ν μίαν εις τον επιφανέστα-
[τον τά]πον εν τώι τής Λητούς ίερώι
[τήν δε αλ]Λην άποστειλάτωσαν 28
[eis Ίλιον ίνα] τεθήι εν τώι τής Ίλιάδος
[Αθηνάς ίερώι] παρά τάς εικόνας
\τού Θεμιστοκλ]είους πατρός Αισχύλου.
4~5 Γρασί[ω \ν]ος Robert (squeeze); rectified Bousquet 1988: 25 η. 13 (stone:
Γρασil [δ]ου), and confirmed by the decree of the Xanthian neoi (document 24 with
Gauthier 1996: 6).

When Antiochos and Antiochos the son were kings, in the one hundred and
sixteenth (year), in the month of Hyperberetaios, in the high-priesthood of
Nikanor, and in Xanthos, in the tenure of Prasidas son of Nikostratos as
priest of the kings, and of Tlepolemos son of Artapates as priest pro poleos;
in plenary assembly, it seemed good to the city and magistrates of the
Xanthians:—since Themistokles son of Aischylos, of Ilion, after arriving in
our city 10 gave demonstrations of rhetorical speeches, in which he won
great repute; he stayed for no little time, proving himself blameless and
worthy of our kinship with the Ilians; let it seem good:—to praise
Themistokles, son of Aischylos, of Ilion, who proved an excellent man
during his stay, and well disposed towards us; 20 to honour him with four
hundred drachmai; and so that we should be seen to return sincere and firm
gratitude to those we honour, let the magistrates write up this decree on
two stone stelai, and place one in the most conspicuous place in the shrine
of Leto, and let them send the other to Ilion so that it be placed in the
shrine of Athena Ilias, 30 next to the statues of Themistokles' father,
Aischylos.

Commentary. T h e document is preserved on a 'petite stèle' found by H.

Metzger in the Letoon at Xanthos.

24. Decree of the Xanthian neoi for hyson (August 196)

Gauthier 1996 (editio princeps, translation commentary, photograph).
[βασιλευόντων Άντιόχου καί Άντιόχου τοΰ υιού, vac.
[(éVous) SI ρ' vac. μ]ηνός Γορπιείου, vac. έπ' άρχιερέω ς Νικάνορος,
[èv δε Ξάνθ]ωι επ' ιερέως τών μεν βασιλέων Πρασί-
δου [τοΰ Νικ]οστράτου, προ πόλεως δε Τληπολέμου 4
τον Άρ[ταπ]άτου, vac. έδοξεν Ξανθιών TOÎS νέοις' επει-
δή Λύσων Αημοσθένου, πολιτευόμενος ώς καθή-
κει τοις καλοΐς και άγαθοίς άνδράσιν, και πολλά s
άποδείξεις τής τε πρός τήν πόλιν εύνοιας και 8
τούς νέους πεποίηται εν τοις άναγκαιοτάτοις και-
ροΐς άξίο>ς αύτοΰ Te και τής τών προγόνων άνα-
στροφής, ών ένεκεν και ύπο τής πόλεως τιμάται
ταις άρμοζούσαις [τ]ιμαΐς, vac. αίρεθείς Te γνμνασί- 12
άρχος τής Te περι τό γυμνάσιον επιμελείας
και κατασκενής προεστη μετά πάσης εκτενεί-
ας και πολλά τών ιδίων είσανηλώσας εκόσμη-
σεν, προαιρονμενος ον μόνον τοις èv τώι πολιτεν- 16
ματ ι πεπραγμένοις αύτώι καλοΐς και ενδόξοις άκό-
λουθος φαίνεσθα[ι], άλλα και τοις εξ ήμών επιγινο-
μενοις ύπόμνημα καταλιπεΐν ής εσχεν αίρεσε-
ως πρός τά τήι πατρίδι συμφέροντα και τούς νε- 20
ους, όθεν και ήμει[ς, ε]πιγνόντες τήν τε εν τοις [è]-
π ά ν ω χρόνοις περ[ι cJuToe καλοκάγαθίαν και τον [ε]-
νεστώτα καιρόν θε[ο^ρο]ΰντες προσδε[ό]μενον αν-
δρός άξιου και δυνα[μεν]ου [öije^ayayeiV άνεγκλή- 24
τως τήν κατά τό γυ[μνάσιο]ν άρχήν, παρεκαλεσαμε[ν]
αύτόν και εις τ[όν ε]χόμενον ενιαυτόν παρασχεΐσ-
θαι τήν χρεία[ν, κ]αι επιδόντος αύτοΰ προθύμως εί-
[λόμεθα αύτόν γ]υμνασίαρχον επει οΰν εμ πάσιν 28
[τοί? συμφερου]σιν τήι τε πάλει και τοις νέοις όμοι-
ας τήν αυτήν] προθυμίαν έχων ούθενός αφίστα-
ται τών χρησί]μων, vac. άγαθήι τύχη ν δεδόχθαι έπαινέ-
[σαι Λύσωνα Αη]μοσθένου άρετής ένεκεν και εύνοί- 32
[as ής έχων δ ι α τ ε λ ε ί πρός τε τήν πατρίδα και τούς
[νέους και τά τώ]ν βασιλέων πράγματα· vac. τιμήσαι δε
[αίιτόν και είκ]όνι χαλκήι και άναθεΐναι αύτήν εν τώι
[γυμνασίωι] εν τώι επιφανεστάτωι τόπωι, επιγρά-vac. 36
[φαι δε και τήν] επιγραφήν τήνδε• vac. Ξανθιών οί νέοι ννν
[Λύσωνα Αη]μοσθένου γυμνάσιαρχήσαντα εφ' έτη
[δύο άρετη]ς ένεκεν και εύνοιας τής εις αύτούς
[και τήν πό]λιν vac. ίδρύσασθαι δε και βωμούς δύο εν 40
[τώι επιφανε]στάτωι τόπωι τοΰ γυμνασίου, τόμ μεν
[τοΰ Αιός τοΰ Σ]ο)τήρος, τον δε άλλον τοΰ Λύσωνος vac.
C.II ], εφ' ών θύσει Λύσων τε έως αν ζήι ή άλ-vac.
[Aos άντ' αύτ]οΰ τώι Αιί, τον δε έτερον ό κατ' ενιαυτόν 44
[αίρούμενο]ς γυμνασίαρχος, παριστάντων τοΰ τε
[κοινού τών ν]έων και τοΰ γυμνασιάρχου άπό τής
[ c. 1 5 ] Τω . [β]ούς τριετ[εΐ\ς [δύο? ]
traces of one line
38-9 εφ' ετη [δύο] carved later, in a different hand, after L y s o n ' s tenure of office.
43 T h e lacuna was probably taken up by a cultic epithet qualifying L y s o n (Gauthier
1996: 18, suggesting [τον Ενεργετον]).
W h e n Antiochos and Antiochos the son were [kings], [in the one hundred
and sixteenth (year)], in the m o n t h Gorpiaios, in the high-priesthood of
Nikanor, and in Xanthos, in the tenure of Prasidas, son of Nikostratos, as
priest of the kings, and of T l e p o l e m o s , son of Artapates, as priest pro
poleos, it seemed good to the neoi of X a n t h o s : — s i n c e L y s o n , son of
Demosthenes, acting as a citizen as is fitting for excellent men, has given
many demonstrations of his goodwill towards the city and the neoi, in the
most difficult circumstances, 10 in a fashion worthy of himself and of his
ancestors' behaviour, for w h i c h reason he is also honoured by the city with
appropriate honours; and, w h e n elected gymnasiarch, he oversaw the care
and the construction work (or: repair work) of the gymnasion, with all zeal,
and spending m u c h out of his o w n fortune he adorned it, making it his
intention not only to be seen as consistent with his fine and glorious deeds
in the political sphere, but also to leave to our successors a memorial of the
disposition he had 20 towards the advantages of the fatherland and towards
the neoi; for w h i c h reason, we too, taking notice of the earlier excellence
about his person and seeing that the circumstances required a worthy man
and one capable of filling the office over the gymnasion in a manner above
reproach, w e have invited h i m to meet this need for next year, and since he
offered himself with enthusiasm, we elected h i m gymnasiarch; and since in
all the interests of the city and of the neoi he shows 30 the same enthusiasm
and refrains f r o m nothing that is advantageous;—with good fortune, let
it seem good to praise [Lyson son of De]mosthenes, on account of his
quality and the goodwill which he [ c o n t i n u a l l y [shows] towards the
fatherland and the [neoi and the] affairs of the kings; to honour [him also
with a stat]ue of bronze, and to set it up in the most conspicuous place in
the [gymnasion], and to inscribe this inscription: ' T h e neoi of the
Xanthians (dedicated a statue of) [Lyson, son of De]mosthenes, w h o was
gymnasiarch for [two] years, on account of his [quality] and his goodwill
towards them 40 [and the ci]ty'; and to erect two altars in the [most con-
s p i c u o u s place of the gymnasion, one of [Zeus S]aviour, the other of
L y s o n [. . .], on which L y s o n for as long as he lives, or another in his stead,
will sacrifice to Z e u s , and, as concerns the other altar, the yearly elected
gymnasiarch, with the attendant condition that the [corporation of the
n]eoi and the gymnasiarch will supply out of the . . . [two?] oxen three years
in age . . .

Commentary. T h e decree is carved on a small limestone stele found in the

L e t o o n near Xanthos. T h o u g h the date was inscribed in the part now lost,
the e p o n y m o u s priest of the kings is the same as in document 23, issued in
196 (Gauthier).

25. Letter of Zeuxis to Kildarians (probably igy)

J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 1 8 1 - 7 , with photographs of stone and squeeze

(SEG 33.867; I. Mylasa 962).
μηθενί μήτε τώμ πολιτών μή[τ€]
[τ]ών παροίκ[ω]ν· τοις τε άλλοις
{aÀA}oÎs πάσιν ύπο τον βασιλέως
[μεγάλου] [^]ν[π]ό[χ]ου [σ]υνκεχώρ-
[ΐ7]ταί και ύμεΐν τά αΰτά·[ c.6 ]
. υπάρχει και τά λοιπά . . . Δ
. . τήμ πάσαν πολυωρίαν ποη-
σάμεθα ύμών οσωιπερ αν εύ- 8
ν[ο]εστεροι και προθυμάτερο[ι]
φαίνησθε εις τά τώι βασιλεί
Άντιόχωι συμφέροντα.
2 T h e p h o t o g r a p h o f t h e s q u e e z e s h o w s t h a t t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h s p a c e at t h e b e g i n -
n i n g o f l i n e 2 f o r t h e R o b e r t s ' [τ-e τώμ], b u t r a t h e r s i m p l y f o r [τωμ] o r r a t h e r [τ]ων.
2 - 3 B l ü m e l in I. Mylasa r e a d s τοις τε άλλοις {αλλ}οΓ? ( f o r όί), a s a n t e c e d e n t o f [«Όν]
υπάρχει: ' t h e t h i n g s w h i c h w e r e g r a n t e d b y t h e G r e a t K i n g A n t i o c h o s t o t h e o t h e r s , a r e
n o w , t h e s e v e r y s a m e t h i n g s (τά αυτά), at y o u r d i s p o s a l ' . T h e R o b e r t s ' ΑΛΛΟΙΣ is
difficult to c o n f i r m o n the s q u e e z e . 4 It is d i f f i c u l t to s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e R o b e r t s '
r e a d i n g Άντιό[χ]ου f r o m the p h o t o g r a p h of the s q u e e z e . T h e p r e s e n t r e a d i n g s u g g e s t e d
b y C . C r o w t h e r . T h e rho at t h e e n d o f t h e l i n e c a n b e m a d e o u t o n t h e p h o t o g r a p h
( r a t h e r t h a n at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e f o l l o w i n g l i n e ) . 6 T h e squeeze clearly
s h o w s t h a t t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h s p a c e f o r R o b e r t ' s [όσα], b u t r a t h e r e n o u g h f o r o n e l e t t e r
( p e r h a p s [a]) o r a vacat. B l ü m e l r e s t o r e s [vw]. 8 T h e s t o n e r e a d s οσωιπερ r a t h e r
t h a n δσωπερ (Robert). 9 εύ I ν[ο]έστεροι Blümel, rather than the Roberts'
εύ I νωέστεροι w h i c h at a n y r a t e c a n n o t b e r e a d o n t h e p h o t o g r a p h o f t h e s q u e e z e .

(I have written to . . . to prevent any harm to be done) to any of the citi-

zens and of the paroikor, the same privileges have been granted to y o u by
the [Great] K i n g Antiochos as to the others, and the other things are at the
disposal of . . . we will show all consideration for you, inasmuch as you 10
show yourselves to be the better disposed and the more eager towards the
interests of K i n g Antiochos.

Commentary. T h e marble block bearing this text (built into a well w h e n

Robert saw it in 1934, at K u z y a k a , near the site of ancient Kildara) prob-
ably came f r o m a major civic temple, 'avec des documents hellénistiques
sur les antes et les murs, c o m m e partout en Carie' (J. and L . R o b e r t 1983:
186).
T h e meaning of the first part of the letter (lines 1 - 6 ) is far f r o m clear,
and the translation offered here is tentative. T h e mention of Antiochos
alone, without Antiochos the son, m i g h t mean that the letter was written
after the death of Antiochos the son in 193, but not necessarily (the refer-
ence to the king alone might depend on the context and on the use of the
expression 'the interests o f ) .
I cannot accept the suggestion made by Piejko 1985: 6 1 4 - 1 5 , that this is
a complete document: to support his assertion, Piejko must radically
supplement and emend the text, and then blames the subsequent oddities
on 'the unskilled redactor' rather than on his o w n emendations and his o w n
assumptions. T h e method is circular; furthermore, the present document
is quite unlike e.g. the royal prostagma f r o m Jerusalem (Jos. AJ 12.145-6,
with Bickerman 1980: 86-104) or OGIS 746 which Piejko would pre-
sumably compare it to. O n Robert's photograph, it looks as if the final line,
with the salutation έρρωσθε and the Seleukid year, have been chiselled out,
confirming that this text was once part of a complete letter. H o w e v e r , the
stone, on the photograph, does not show any traces above the surviving
inscribed field, w h i c h seems to have been surrounded by a smooth margin.
T h e text presumably started on an adjacent block, in a separate c o l u m n
(for an example of this arrangement, see GIBM 477).

26. Letter of Laodike III to Iasians, Decree of the Iasians for Laodike
(c .196)

G. Pugliese-Carratelli, ASAA 29/30 (1967/8), 445-53, no. 2, with photo-

g r a p h — n o t e that J. and L . Robert, BE 7 1 , 621, p. 505, integrate a few lines
published as fragment 2bis a by Pugliese-Carratelli (p. 448), into the text of
the lines here reproduced as Β II 18-19 ( = L Iasos 4, 80-1). Lines 33-50 of
the first edition (here Β I 1 - 1 8 ) were corrected f r o m autopsy by Y . Garlan
(ZPE 13 (1974), 197-8). W . Blümel, I. Iasos 4 is based on Pugliese-
Carratelli's text, except for the portion revised by Garlan; the same
principle is followed here. H o w e v e r , Blümel also acted upon the Roberts'
suggestion that OGIS 237 was part of the same text and incorporated it in
his edition; but OGIS 237 is in fact a separate document (below), so I have
presented it separately (document 28). See also Bringmann and von
Steuben 1995: no. 297.
Cf. SEG 26.1226, registering literature on textual matters; J. and L .
Robert, BE 7 1 , 621 (detailed analysis, correct dating; attempt to fit in
OGIS 237); Robert, OMS v. 9 - 1 1 (summary of lectures on these docu-
ments); C r o w t h e r 1989 proves that OGIS 237 cannot belong to the same
document. Mastrocinque 1995: 132, for the beginning of the text (from
autopsy of the text, supported by photographs). Translation of lines 1-32:
A u s t i n 1981: no. 156.
T h e stone presents two columns of text, carved in the same hand. T h e
first column fully preserves a letter of Laodike, here entitled text A , and
numbered 1 - 3 2 , as in the ed. princ. and I. Iasos 4; the first column also pre-
serves the beginning of the decree of the Iasians, w h i c h has been called text
B, and renumbered as column I. T h e second, severely damaged column on
the stone preserves another part of text B, here entitled B col. II and
renumbered on its o w n (returning to Pugliese-Carratelli's numbering).
H o w e v e r , for reference, Blümel's numbering (which integrates OGIS
237/document 28) has been indicated in brackets for text B.

A (Col. I of the stele).

traces of one line

ίπΐ στΐφανηφόρον Κνδίον τον lepoxXeiovs'
[inιστολή π . ] Έλαφηβολιώνος·
Βασίλισσα Λαοδίκη Ιασίων τήι βουλήι καί τώι δή-
μωι χαίρειν άκούουσα πλεονάκις τοΰ άδελφοΰ ην 4
τε άντίληφιν τών εαυτού φίλων καί συμμάχων
διατελεί ποιούμενος καί ώς τήν ύμετεραν πό-
λιν συμπτώμασιν περιπεσοϋσαν άπροσδοκή-
τοις άνακτησάμενος τήν τε έλευθερίαν ύμΐν 8
άπε'δωκεν καί τούς νόμους καί τά λοιπά προτεθει-
ται συναύζειν τό πολίτευμα καί εις βελτίονα δι-
άθεσιν άγαγεΐν, προαιρουμενη δή καί εγώ ακόλου-
θα πράσειν τή σπουδή αύτοΰ καί εκτενείαι καί δια 12
τούτο καταθεσθαι τινά εύεργεσίαμ μεν εις τούς
άσθενούντας τών πολιτών, εύχρηστίαν δε κοι-
νήν τώι σύμπαντι δήμωι, γεγράφεικα Στρουθί-
ωνι τώι διοικητήι εφ' έτη δέκα κατ' ένιαυτόν πυρών χιλί- 16
ους μεδίμνους Αττικούς εις τήν πόλιν παρακομί-
ζοντα παραδιδόναι τοΐς παρά τοΰ δήμου· εύ οΰν ποή-
σετε συντάξαντες τοις μεν ταμίαις παραλαμβά-
νοντας τακτού πλήθους εγδιοικείν, τοις δε προστά- 20
ταις καί οΐς άν α λ λ ο ΐ ΐ κρίνητε προνοειν όπως τό γινό-
μενον διάφορον εκ τούτων κατατιθώνται εις προίκας
ταις τών άσθενούντων πολιτών θυγατράσιν, δίδον-
τες μή πλέον Άντιοχέων δραχμών τριακοσίων εκάσ- 24
τηι τών συνοικιζομένων γινομένοις θ' ύμίν εις τε τον
άδελφόν καί καθόλου τον οίκον ημών οίους καθήκει
[κα]ι τών άπαντω[μ]ένων εύεργεσιών μεμνημένοις
[εύ]χαρίστως πειράσομαι καί άλλα α άν έπινοώ συν- 28
[κατ]ασκευάζειν, παντί τρόπωι συνεκτρέχειν προ-
[αιρου]μένη τήι τοΰ άδελφοΰ θελήσει- κατανοώ γάρ αύ-
[τον λ]ίαν εκτενώς έχοντα πρός τήν έπανόρθωσιν
[τήΐ] πόλεως, vac. έρρωσθε. vac. 32
2 T h e w o r d s επιστολή π . a r e e r a s e d , a n d s e e m t o b e i n a d i f f e r e n t h a n d f r o m t h e r e s t
o f t h e t e x t ( M a s t r o c i n q u e 1 9 9 5 ) . w â ' e d . p r . ; h e n c e t h e d a t i n g t o 228, t h e e i g h t y - f o u r t h
y e a r o f t h e S e l e u k i d e r a . J. a n d L . R o b e r t , BE 7 1 , 6 2 1 , p . 5 0 6 o b s e r v e t h a t t h e d a t i n g b y
S e l e u k i d e r a w o u l d b e a n o m a l o u s in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e l o c a l m o n t h E l a p h e b o l i o n
i n s t e a d o f t h e M a c e d o n i a n m o n t h ; t h e y t h e r e f o r e p r e f e r to s e e a b l a n k s p a c e , a s i n l i n e
Β I 2. B l ü m e l s u g g e s t s tS', ' o n t h e f o u r t e e n t h o f E l a p h e b o l i o n ' . T h e t e x t a d o p t e d
h e r e f r o m M a s t r o c i n q u e 1995, w h o read Π f o l l o w e d b y a triangular letter, w r i t t e n
i n t h e s a m e h a n d as επιστολή a n d e r a s e d a t t h e s a m e t i m e as t h e l a t t e r w o r d .
2 7 άπαντω[μ]ένων C h r . H a b i c h t , r e c o r d e d i n BE 73, 437, for P u g l i e s e - C a r r a t e l l i ' s
απάντων ήμών. 2 8 - 9 αυν\[κατ]ασκευάζειν G a u t h i e r 1 9 8 9 : 60, p a r a l l e l e d in t h e
letter of L a o d i k e to the S a r d i a n s .

W h e n K y d i a s son of Hierokles was stephanephoros, (letter . . ,)1 in the

m o n t h of Elaphebolion.
Q u e e n Laodike to the council and the people of the Iasians, greetings.
I l a v i n g often heard f r o m m y brother what urgent help he continually
deploys for his friends and allies, and that after recovering your city as it

1 Erased words.
had fallen into unexpected calamities, he gave back to you your liberty and
your laws, and in the other matters he strives 10 to increase the citizen
b o d y and bring it to a better condition, and making it m y o w n intention to
act in accordance with his zeal and eagerness, and, because of this, to
confer some benefaction on the poor among the citizens, and a general
advantage to the whole people, I have written to Strouthion the dioiketes2
for h i m to send along to the city one thousand Attic medimnoi of wheat a
year, for ten years, and hand them over to the representatives of the people;
you will do well, therefore, to order the treasurers to take over the wheat
and sell it 20 in fixed quantities (?), 3 and to order the presidents (prostata!),
and all the others w h o m you think fit, to see that they pay out 4 the income
f r o m the wheat towards the dowries of the daughters of the poor citizens,
giving not more than three hundred Antiocheian drachmai to each of the
w o m e n getting married. If you remain as is right in your behaviour
towards m y brother and generally towards our house, and if you gratefully
remember the benefactions w h i c h y o u have met with, I shall try to procure
for y o u the other favours which I can think up, since I make it m y
intention in all matters to concur 30 with the will of m y brother; for I
notice that he is extremely eagerly disposed towards the reconstruction of
the city. Farewell.

Β (Col. I)
[επί σ]τεφανηφόρου Κνδίον τον Ίεροκλείους·
Έλαφηβολιώνος·
[πρυτ]άνεων εκκλησίαν συναγαγόντων τριακάδι- έ'δο- (35)
[|e] τώι δήμων Μενοίτιος Ίεροκλείους επεστάτεν πρν- 4
[τάν]εων γνώμη Έρμοκράτου τοΰ Θεοδότου, Άστιάδου
[τοΰ] Έκατωνύμου, Έρμίον τοΰ Αρτεμιδώρου, Έκαταίον τοΰ Δι-
[οπε\ίθου, Μενοιτίου τοΰ Ίεροκλείους, Μενοιτίου τοΰ Με-
[νε]δήμου, Πινδάρου τοΰ Σοιστράτου δι' επιτρόπου Διονυ- 8 (40)
[σίο]υ τοΰ Μενεκλείους- επειδή βασιλέως μεγάλου Άντιό-
[χο]υ προγονικήν αϊρεσιν διατηροΰντος εις πάντας
[TO]ÙS "Ελληνας και τοις μεν τήν ειρήνην παρέχοντος,
[πο]ΑΑοΓ? δε επταικόσιν βοηθοΰντος και ίδίαι και κοινήι, 12
[τι]νά.5 δε αντί δούλων ελευθέρους πεποιηκότες και τό (45)

2 W ö r r l e ( 1 9 8 8 : 4 6 6 η . 2 1 3 ) p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h i s is u n l i k e l y t o b e a p r i v a t e b a i l i f f o f
L a o d i k e I I I ( B l ü m e l ) , s i n c e t h e b a i l i f f o f L a o d i k e I i s c a l l e d 6 οίκονομων τ ά Λαοδίκη; (RC
18, lines 2 4 - 2 5 ) .
ä B l ü m e l s u g g e s t s ' a t a f i x e d p r i c e ' ; in t h e p r e s e n t t r a n s l a t i o n I f o l l o w W ö r r l e 1988:
4 6 7 n . 2 i g . T h e e f f e c t i n t h e first c a s e w o u l d b e t o p r o v i d e c h e a p g r a i n ; i n t h e s e c o n d
c a s e , to a v o i d s u d d e n c h a n g e s in the p r i c e o f g r a i n . T h e first s e e m s in a g r e e m e n t with
the p u r p o s e of social aid, the s e c o n d m i g h t b e m o r e suited for the g e n e r a l a i m of social
harmony.
4 O r ' d e p o s i t ' ( A u s t i n ) , to b e i n v e s t e d to p r o d u c e r e v e n u e f o r the f u t u r e b r i d e s ; on
this s o l u t i o n , L a o d i k e a l l o w e d the I a s i a n s to d e c i d e h o w to i n v e s t the r e v e n u e , a n d w h e n
to g i v e o u t d o w r i e s f r o m t h e r e t u r n on t h e i n v e s t m e n t s . T h e t r a n s l a t i o n g i v e n in the
m a i n t e x t i s t h e o n e I f e e l i s i m p l i e d b y t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n t h a t n o i n d i v i d u a l d o w r y is t o
e x c e e d 300 d r a c h m a i : this s o u n d s like a r u l e a p p l y i n g to the i m m e d i a t e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
the profit f r o m the grain-sale.
 κα]θ' ολον το βασιλεύειν νενομικότος πρός εϋεργεσ/α[ν]
. . ,]σθαι ανθρώπων, τήν δε ήμετέραν πόλιν πρότερο [ν]
τε] έγ δουλείας ρυσάμενος έποίησεν ελευθερα[ν
TO[Î)S Φ Ρ Ο Υ Ρ Ο Ύ Ν Τ Α Ι στρατιώτας καί τάς [
] α τ ε σ α ν σ . . ημάς κυρίους τ[

6-7 ΔΑ [οπε\ίθου Blümel.

Β (Col. II)
Άριστολοχ[ c.25 τώι βασι]-
λεΐ διαλεξο[μενους C.2ζ
μον άξίως δε . . [ C.2Q (65)
ως εις τήν πόλιν δ[ c.i8 έπηνήσθαι] 4
βασιλέα μέγαν . Μ ν τ ι ο [ ; γ ο ν C.zo
γέγονεν καί φίιλαξ αγη[ c.io οί δε στρατηγοί]
οί εξιόντες εκ της αρχής [παραδιδότωσαν καθ' εκασ]-
τον ένιαυτον τάς κλείδας C.IO TOÎS] 8(70)
μεθ' εαυτούς στρατηγοίς τ[ c.io παρά τον βω]-
μόν όν ίδρύσατο ό δήμος βασ[ιλεως μεγάλου . Μ ν τ ι ό ] -
χου, οί δε είσιόντες είς τήν άρ[χήν θυετο>σαν επί τού]
βοιμού τώι τε βασιλεί καί τοις α[ύτοΰ προγόνοις ώς /cot]- 12
νοΐς της πόλεως θεοίς ουτ[ c.20 (75)
τάς κλείδας· επηνήσθα[ι] δε [ c. ιό τήν βα]-
σίλισσαν Λαοδίκην καί ίνα ε ΰ [ ν ο υ ϊ ώ ν ό δήμος μη]-
θεν ελλείπηι τιμής πρός T[OT)S τήν πόλιν εύεργετοΰν]- 16
τας τά μέγιστα, αίρείσθω κα[θ' εκαστον ε ] ν ι α [ υ τ ό ν ί ε ' ρ ε ι α ν ]
παρθένον βασιλίσσης Άφρο[δίτης Λα]οδίκης· [ε'ν δε] (80)
ταίς έζόδοις εχέτω στρό[φιον μεσ]όλευκο[ν καί αΰ]-
τήι μη έξέστω δις ίερητεϋ[σαι ]ετ[ τήν τι]- 20
μήν εν τώι μηνί τώι Άφροδι[σιώνι τήι C. 12
εν ήι γέγονεν ήμέραι ή βασίλι[σσα Λαοδίκη παρα]-
γινέσθωσαν πάντες εν[ έτι δε οί γα\- (85)
μοϋντες καί αί γαμούμενα[ι άμα μετά τήν τών γάμων σύν]- 24
ερξιν θυέτωσαν βασιλίσσ[ηι Άφροδίτηι Λαοδίκηι κατά δΰ]-
ναμιν έκαστοι ο άν π[ C.22 βα]-
σιλίσσης συνπομπ[ευέτωσαν c.i 8
αί ίέρειαι πάσαι καί αί [παρθένο ι αί μέλλουσα ι γα\- 28
μείσθαι έν τώι [ £-3°
δε καί άπαρ[χ c.30 ήμζ]
ραι στεφ[αν C-3°
ποιου[μεν 32
Η (95)
ποτ[ γη]
ραιο[
ηι δυ[ 36
ου y t v [
ήμερα[ (100)
τα χρη[ ]
γψαιχ[
γαμον[ ]
κηεσ[ ]
γρα[
] (105)
Μ 44

and a further fragment, belonging to this decree:

]
]
]
4

1 - 4 A t line 1, P u g l i e s e - C a r r a t e l l i identifies A r i s t o l o c h o s as a S e l e u k i d official

( a t t e s t e d in RC 4 5 ) ; h e is m o r e l i k e l y o n e o f s e v e r a l I a s i a n a m b a s s a d o r s s e n t t o t h e k i n g .
T h e p a r a l l e l c a n b e f o u n d i n t h e first T e i a n d e c r e e , l i n e s 3 1 - 2 , και τοΰ δήμου άποατίλαν-
τος πρεσβευτάς Διονύαιον Άπολλο[. . .] κτλ. I t is t h e n l i k e l y t h a t t h i s l i n e s t i l l b e l o n g s t o t h e
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f the d e c r e e , w i t h the m e n t i o n o f an e m b a s s y sent to the k i n g . T h e lost
lines m i g h t h a v e d e s c r i b e d A n t i o c h o s ' f a v o u r a b l e a n s w e r to this e m b a s s y , or p e r h a p s
L a o d i k e ' s a s s i s t a n c e t o t h e e n v o y s . S o m e w h e r e i n l i n e 3, t h e r e m u s t h a v e s t a r t e d a s h o r t
h o r t a t i v e c l a u s e , — " ν α οΰν ό δήμος . . .—immediately b e f o r e t h e first d e c i s i o n , t o p r a i s e
A n t i o c h o s , [έπηνήσθαι] βασιλέα μεγαν Άντίοχον. 3 SieSe[ ] Pugliese-Carratelli,
b u t t h e p h o t o g r a p h r a t h e r c o u n t e n a n c e s A Ε f o l l o w e d b y t w o u n c e r t a i n l e t t e r s , t h e first
o f w h i c h p o s s i b l y a t r i a n g u l a r l e t t e r . (I o w e t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n t o C . C r o w t h e r . ) 4 I
h a v e i n s e r t e d [έπηνήσθαι] o n the b a s i s o f the p a r a l l e l w i t h line 14. 5-6 One might
r e s t o r e a διότι i n l i n e 5 t o g o v e r n t h e γεγονε o f l i n e 6, ' [ b e c a u s e ] h e h a s p r o v e d h i m s e l f
t h e . . . a n d t h e g u a r d i a n . . .' 6 [01 στρατηγοί] B l ü m e l , to w h i c h I h a v e a d d e d the
δε, t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h i s s e r i e s o f r e s o l u t i o n s f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n . 12-13
/COIJIJOIS τής ττόλεως θεοΐς BE y I, 6 2 1 , p . 5 0 4 ; B l ü m e l s u g g e s t s [και τοις κοι]νοίς θεοΐς\
c o n v i n c i n g a r g u m e n t s a g a i n s t b y P h . G a u t h i e r a n d G . R o u g e m o n t i n BE 8 7 , 1 8 ( t h e
line w o u l d be too long, 48 rather than 40 letters; unlikely that sacrifices to the
' c o m m o n g o d s ' s h o u l d b e m a d e u p o n t h e altar o f the k i n g ; g o o d p a r a l l e l in t h e c u l t o f
A n t i o c h o s a n d L a o d i k e a s κοινοί σωτήρες i n T e o s , d o c u m e n t 17). 15 B l ü m e l
r e s t o r e d εΰ[νους ων κ τ λ ] . I t is p e r h a p s b e t t e r t o s u p p l y εΰ[χαρίστως\ or εύ[χαριστών].
i 6 - i 7 R e s t o r a t i o n s f r o m B l ü m e l , e x c e p t t h a t a t l i n e s 1 6 - 1 7 B l ü m e l r e s t o r e d πρός
T[OS)S ημάς εύεργετοΰν]τας, t o w h i c h I h a v e p r e f e r r e d τήν πόλιν ( f i l l s t h e r e q u i r e d 4 0 - o d d
l e t t e r s r e q u i r e d ; p e r h a p s r e a d s b e t t e r ) ; I h a v e a l s o a d d e d [έκαστοι'] i n t o l i n e 1 7
2 0 ίερετεΰ[σαΐ\ D . F e i s s e l , r e c o r d e d BE 72, 423. 2 4 T h e r e s t o r a t i o n is b y
S o k o l o w s k i , GRBS 13 ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 1 7 3 , j u s t i f i e d at 1 7 5 . 25 I have added 'Aphrodite'
in the title of the q u e e n .

Β (Col. I)
W h e n K y d i a s , son of Hierokles was stephanephoros, in the m o n t h of
Elaphebolion. T h e prytaneis having s u m m o n e d the assembly on the
thirtieth, it seemed good to the p e o p l e ; — M e n o i t i o s son of Hierokles was
president of the prytaneis (epistates); proposal of the prytaneis,
Hermokrates, son of T h e o d o t o s , Astiades son of Hekatomnos, Hermias
son of Artemidoros, Hekataios son of Di[ope]ithes, Menoitios son of
Hierokles, Menoitios son of M e n e d e m o s , Pindaros son of Sostratos,
through his guardian Dionysios son of M e n e k l e s ; — s i n c e , the G r e a t K i n g
Antiochos 1 0 — m a i n t a i n i n g his ancestral disposition towards all the
G r e e k s , and bringing peace to some, helping individually and in c o m m o n
many others w h o have met with troubles, making some men free instead of
slaves, and believing that the whole of the exercise of kingship is . . .
towards the benefaction of men,—earlier rescued our city out of slavery
and made it free . . . the soldiers in garrison . . . (making?) us masters.

B (Col. II)
Aristoloch[. . .] to speak with the king . . . worthily . . . towards the city
. . . [(it seemed good) to praise] the G r e a t K i n g Antiochos [. . . because]
he has proved the [. . .] and the guardian . . . let [the strategoi] w h o leave
office each year pass on the keys . . . to the strategoi w h o come after them
. . . [next to the ] 10 altar which the people has built to the G r e a t K i n g
Antiochos, and let those w h o enter office [sacrifice upon the] altar to the
king and to his [ancestors, as to com]mon gods of the city . . . the keys; and
to praise . . . queen L a o d i k e ; — a n d so that the people, [being full of grati-
tude?], should not omit anything in regard to honours for those w h o have
[given us benefactions] to the greatest e x t e n t , — l e t [(the people)] elect [each
year] a maiden [as priestess] of queen Aphro[dite La]odike; in the formal
processions let her wear a headband of mingled white; let it not be 20
possible for the same to be priestess twice . . . this honour on the [. . . day
of] Aphrodision, on which day Q u e e n Laodike was born, and let all the
. . . be present [and let the men who] are about to wed and the w o m e n w h o
are about to wed, [after the completion of the wedding] sacrifice to Q u e e n
[Laodike . . . according to] their means, each one . . . of the queen; let . . .
all the priestesses and the [maidens about to wed] all take part in the pro-
cession . . . first fruits offering . . . 30 crown . . . (the remainder of the text
is too fragmentary for significant translation)
(another fragment)
. . . in the procession . . . sacred herald . . . in the m o n t h . . .

Commentary. Both texts are preserved on a marble stele and smaller frag-
ments, discovered at Iasos, reused in a late antique building located in the
precinct of the temple of Artemis.
Blümel, in I. Iasos, 23 and 26 (on his line 79, here Β II i6) dates this
inscription between 195 and 193, on the basis of two arguments. Firstly,
L i v . 34.32.5 (I. Iasos Τ 22), where Flamininus mentions, in the future
tense, the withdrawal of Antigonid garrisons f r o m Iasos and Bargylia, in
195; therefore, Iasos was taken over by Antiochos I I I only after that date.
Secondly, line Β II 16 (line 79 Blümel) mentions a priestess of Laodike,
whereas the royal prostagma of 193 creates the office of 'high-priestess' of
Laodike; therefore, according to Blümel, the Iasian documents were pro-
duced before this date, presumably on the grounds that the high-priestess
would have superseded the priestess of Laodike at Iasos.
H o w e v e r , L i v . 34.32.5 is not a statement (as Blümel misleadingly prints
the passage), but a rhetorical question addressed by Flamininus to Nabis:
an ut ab Iaso et Bargyliis praesidia Philippi deducantur curae erit nobis,
Argos et Lacedaemon, duas clarissimas urbes, lumina quondam Graeciae,
sub pedibus tuts relinquemus? T h e future tense erit occurs by attraction to
relinquemus, and the whole sentence can be translated 'after having taken
care that Iasos and Bargylia be evacuated by the garrisons of Philip, shall
we leave A r g o s and Sparta under your feet?' Bargylia had already been
freed by P. Cornelius L e n t u l u s in 196 (Pol. 18.12.1); w h e n L e n t u l u s
appears in Lysimacheia in late 196, there is no hint that his mission has not
been successful (Pol. 18.50.2), and the matter is heard of no more. T h a t
L e n t u l u s was sent to liberate Bargylia only suggests that Iasos had already
been taken over b y Antiochos, presumably without the knowledge of
the Senate, since it included Iasos among the cities which Philip was to
evacuate (Pol. 18.44.4), along w i t h E u r o m o s , w h i c h we now know for
certain contracted an alliance with Antiochos in 197. T h e correct terminus
post quem is therefore 197. O n c e Blümel's late terminus post quern of 195 has
been removed, the letter of Laodike and the Iasian decree must be dated
some time 5 after the Seleukid takeover, perhaps 196 or 195; C r o w t h e r pro-
posed (c.) 196/5 as most likely. 6 A s for the terminus ante quem, proposed by
Blümel, one should merely observe that the royal prostagma creates a high
priesthood of Laodike in the context of the central, 'imperial' ruler cult,
w h i c h has no influence on the 'municipal' ruler cult, administered by the
city within its o w n boundaries; nor does the state cult have any bearing on
the matter of dating the Iasian documents. In fact the only applicable indi-
cation is the fact that Laodike's letter was written before her disgrace,
w h i c h preceded Antiochos' marriage to a y o u n g w o m a n f r o m Chalkis in
192. 7
See C h . 4 §§ 2a (for an analysis of the language of benefaction in this
document) and 3 (on local Iasian perspectives).

27. Decree of Iasian Tribe Concerning Rituals for Antiochos III and his
Family (C.IQ6)

D . L e v i and G . Pugliese-Carratelli, ASAA 23/24 (1961/2), 578, no. 5 (/.

Iasos 5). Read once by the editors in poor light, before the stone was lost.
Cf. L . Robert, OMS iii. 1503, for commentary and text; J. and L .
Robert, BE 7 1 , 621, p. 508.

at τήν σπονδοφ[ορίαν c. 16 j
επεύχεσθαι δε τούς φυλετας [πάντα γίν]-
εσθαι τάγαθά βασιλεΐ τε μεγάλωι Ά[ντιόχωι]
και βασιλίσσηι Λαοδίκηι και τοις τ[έκνοις] 4
και τήι πάλει- άναγράφαι δε και το [φήφισμα το\-

5 A s p o i n t e d o u t b y t h e R o b e r t s i n BE 7 1 , 6 2 1 , p . 5 0 9 ; L . M i g e o t t e , Chiron 23 (1990),
2 7 6 c o n f i r m s this v i e w b y d r a w i n g a t t e n t i o n to the f a c t that t h e I a s i a n s a l r e a d y h a v e an
altar to A n t i o c h o s I I I b y t h e t i m e o f their d e c r e e for L a o d i k e ( 2 7 6 - 7 o n t h e d a t e o f the
Iasian d o c u m e n t s generally).
6 BICS 3 7 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , 1 4 4 - 5 ; a l s o Chiron 25 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , 227 ( d i s c u s s i n g his d a t i n g against
M i g e o t t e , Chiron 23 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , 2 7 6 a n d n. 24).
7 R o b e r t 1949: 2 5 - 9 ; A y m a r d 1 9 4 9 ( a r g u i n g for d i v o r c e rather than m e r e d i s g r a c e , as
p a r t of a w i d e r d y n a s t i c crisis in 193).
Se εν τώι επιφανεστάτυιι τόπω[ι C.g ί\-
va ή τε τοΰ βασιλέως εύνοια [ C. 11
καί ή τής φυλής ύπερ τής 77·[όλεω5 ευχαριστία] 8
αείμνηστος διαμένηι τ[ C.15
βωμού ίνα τώι τε μεγε[θει c.9 κατα]-
σκευασθήι προς γ[ C.ig
ληιδος-όμοίω[ς δε καί c. 14 ΦνΦΐ" 12
ίσματος γ[ C.22 το δε]
άνάλοι[μα δοΰναι C. 2θ
ονγ[ C.2Ç
T h e l i n e l e n g t h a p p e a r s t o b e 3 0 - 3 3 l e t t e r s , f r o m l i n e s 3, 4, 8 ( t a k i n g iota, a s w o r t h h a l f
a full letter space). 2 T h e r e s t o r a t i o n ( L e v i , P u g l i e s e - C a r r a t e l l i ) a b o u t fills t h e
g a p at 2 9 l e t t e r s , πάντας is a l s o p o s s i b l e . 4 τοις τ[εκνοις αυτών] L e v i , P u g l i e s e -
C a r r a t e l l i , o n t h e p a r a l l e l o f d o c u m e n t 28, l i n e 1 3 . B u t t h e r e s t o r a t i o n is t o o l o n g .
7 τ€ R o b e r t , f o r t h e e d i t o r s ' ye. 10 μεγε[θει] L e v i and Pugliese-Carratelli;
με[γάλον βασιλέως] or με[γίστωι Διί] R o b e r t , t e n t a t i v e l y , t h o u g h n e i t h e r is c o m p e l l i n g .
1 0 - 1 1 T h e verb restored b y Robert. 1 1 P e r h a p s προς τ [ ], ' t o w a r d s t [ h e . . .]'?
1 1 - 1 2 [βασι]ληιδός L e v i and Pugliese-Carratelli; rejected b y R o b e r t , w h o suggests a
t r i b e n a m e , e . g . [!Ήρακ]ληίδος.

the offering of libations . . . (it seemed good) also to have the m e m b e r s of

the tribe offer public prayers . . . [for all] advantages to happen to the G r e a t
K i n g Antiochos and to Q u e e n Laodike and to their children and to their
city; to write up this [decree] on the most eminent place . . . ; — s o that the
goodwill of the king . . . and the [gratitude] of the tribe on behalf of the city
should remain remembered for ever, [. . . of the] 10 altar; and so that . . .
be erected to . . . [of the tribe (?)—]leis . . .; and likewise, . . . [a copy of?]
the decree . . . give out the money for the expenditure . . .

Commentary. T h e stele was discovered at Iasos, out of its original context

(probably reused, near a later building by the east gate of the city) and is
now lost.
See C h . 4 §§ 36 (on ruler cult), and 4 (on the f o r m of the public prayers)

28. Decree of the Iasians in Honour of Antiochos III and his Family
(c.iç6)

GIBM 442 ( O G I S 237)

Cf. BE 71, 621, pp. 507-8 (the Roberts suggest that OGIS 237 belonged
to the Iasian decree, document 26 B); C r o w t h e r 1989 (the Roberts'
suggestion is physically impossible, and the script is different; the inscrip-
tion is about the resort to foreign judges, upon the recommendation of
Antiochos and Apollo). Photograph; plates volume to CAHZ vii. 1, no. 40,
with commentary by S. S h e r w i n - W h i t e (p. 36). I examined the two
squeezes on view on the web-site of the Centre for the Study of A n c i e n t
D o c u m e n t s , O x f o r d University (http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk).
[τήν δημοκρ]α[τ]ίαν και αύτονομίαν διαφυλάσσειν, yéy[pa]-
[</>e] 7τλεονάκις τώι δήμωι περί τούτων, ακόλουθα πράσσων
τήι δια πατέρων ύπαρχούσηι αύτώι πρός τούς "Ελληνας
εύεργεσίαι, ό τε θεός ό άρχηγέτης τοΰ γένους τώμ
βασιλέων συνεγμεμαρτύρηκεν τώι βασιλεΐ παρακα-
λών μεθ' ομονοίας πολιτεύεσθαι, ό δε δήμος έχων
ταύτην τήν α'ίρεσιν πολύ τι μάλλον μεθ' ομονοίας πολι-
τευόμενος τά μέγιστα αγαθό, παρειληφώς παρά τοΰ 8
βασιλέως ταύτα διατηρεί· ίνα δε φανερόν γένηται τώι τε
βασιλεΐ και τοΐς άλλοις πάσιν, ήν έχει διάληφιν ό δήμος
πρώτομ μεν ύπερ βασιλέως μεγάλου Άντιόχου και
βασιλίσσης Λαοδίκης και τών τέκνων αύτών, εί\τ\εν 12

1 2 €i[r]ev D i t t e n b e r g e r , p a r t l y o u t o f t h e c o n t e x t ( a n s w e r i n g t h e -πρώτομ μεν) and

p a r t l y i n t e r p r e t i n g the r e m a i n s of the first three letters.

. . . (since) . . . to preserve the [ d e m o c r a c y and the autonomy, he wrote

often to the people concerning these matters, acting in accordance with the
propensity to benefactions for the G r e e k s which is his through his fathers,
and the god w h o is the origin of the race of the kings bore testimony to
support the king, calling upon us to live harmoniously in the city; the
people, now being so disposed to a m u c h greater degree, and hence living
harmoniously in the city, having received the greatest favours f r o m the i o
king, keeps t h e s e — s o that it should become clear to the king and to all the
others what opinion the people has, firstly, in favour of the G r e a t K i n g
Antiochos, Q u e e n Laodike and their children, secondly . . .

Commentary. T h e text is borne by an architectural block, with anathyrosis

( C r o w t h e r 1989: 137, for physical description of the stone), taken f r o m
Iasos ('from the wall of a bath f r o m the Byzantine period', according to
Hicks) and given to the British M u s e u m by the D u k e of St Albans.
Lines 1 - 1 0 are obviously part of the liminary επειδή clause, 10-13 are
the 'hortative' clause w h i c h immediately precedes the now lost decision
formulas (άγαθήι τύχηι, δέδοχθαι κτλ.)
A t line 12, the εΐ[τ]εν preceded a second group, also concerned by the
Iasians' display of feeling. T h e king's Friends, or his δυνάμεις? A n o t h e r
possibility w o u l d be to restore the name of a city w h i c h had sent arbitra-
tors to Iasos, under the sponsorship of Antiochos I I I ( C r o w t h e r 19956);
the decree would then honour this city, whilst paying sufficient homage to
the royal involvement in the project (a parallel could be found in Syll. 426,
a decree of Bargylia for a T e i a n arbitrator: the Bargylietans nonetheless
take care to praise Antiochos II and his minister, Alexandros, and to let
them know).
See C h . 4, introduction (on royally-sponsored foreign judges) and § 3
(on local perspectives at Iasos).
29. Agreement between Zeuxis and the Philippeis /Euromians Concerning
their Alliance with Antiochos III (August/September 797)

Errington 1986, editio princeps with textual and historical commentary;

photograph ( S E G 36.973).
Cf. G a u t h i e r , BE 87, 294; Descat 1997 (on an Euromian attested at
T h e a n g e l a as a 'Philippeus').

Βασιλευόντων Άντιόχου και Άντιόχου

τοΰ υΐοϋ e ι και ρ' Γορπιαίου· επί τοίσδε
συνεθεντο Ζεύξις τε ό άπολελειμμενος ύ-
πο τού βασιλέως Άντιόχου επί τών επιτάδε
τού Ταύρου πραγμάτωγ καί Φίλιππεΐς δια τών
άποσταλεντωμ πρεσβευτώμ παρά τής πόλε-
ως Άνδρονόμου, Σωτάδου, Άντιόχου, Χενωνος, ε-
φ' ώι έσονται Φιλιππεις φίλοι καί σύμμαχοι Άντιό-
[χ]° υ T e τ°ύ βασιλέως καί τών εκγόνων αύτοΰ
[κ·]αι συντηρήσουσιν τήν τε φιλίαγ καί συμμαχί-
[αν] εις άπαντα τόγ χρόνον άδόλως καί άπ[ρο]φ[ασί\-
[στως ] 1
7 G a u t h i e r , BE 8 7 , 2 9 4 p o i n t s o u t that the t e x t m e n t i o n s f o u r a m b a s s a d o r s a n d n o t
t w o w i t h p a t r o n y m i c s ( E r r i n g t o n ) . T h e n a m e Χένων is p u z z l i n g ( G a u t h i e r ) : t h e c l o s e s t
p a r a l l e l s s e e m to b e C r e t a n ( I s c r . Cret. 1, p . 142 n o . 3 1 : C h e n o s , at L a t o ; IG 1 2 . 9 . 8 3 9 :
C h e n o n , at D r e r o s ) , so t h e n a m e m a y s u p p o r t t h e i d e a o f C r e t a n i n f l u e n c e o n E u r o m o s ,
as v e n t u r e d b y E r r i n g t o n 1 9 9 3 (see n e x t d o c u m e n t ) . I o w e t h a n k s to E . M a t t h e w s f o r
assistance w i t h this note. 11 is n o w d a m a g e d ; t h e p r e s e n t r e a d i n g is R .
Harper's, reported by Errington.

W h e n Antiochos and Antiochos the son were kings, in the hundred and
fifteenth year, in the month of Gorpiaios. T h e s e were the terms of the
agreement struck by Zeuxis, the official left in charge of affairs on this side
of the T a u r u s , and the Philippeis through the ambassadors sent forth by
the city, A n d r o n o m o s , Sotades, Antiochos, C h e n o n , upon which terms
the Philippeis will be friends and allies of Antiochos the king and his
descendants, 10 and will observe friendship and alliance for all times with-
out deception nor pretence . . .

Commentary. T h e text, found during clearing and restoration operations at

the (Hadrianic) temple of Zeus L e p s y n o s at E u r o m o s , is located at the very
top of a pilaster f r o m the corner of a b u i l d i n g — p r o b a b l y the older temple
of Z e u s L e p s y n o s (Rumscheid 1994: cat. no. 62; also autopsy in September
1995 of the block, now in the garden of the Milâs Müzesi). By the shape of
the stone and the pattern of anathyrosis, it is possible to determine that the
text did not figure on an anta, but on a corner block f r o m the rear of the
building (the rear right hand corner if standing in front of the temple
entrance).
30. Decree of the Euromians on Constitutional Matters (after igy)

Errington 1993: 24-7, no. 5 (SEG 43.707).

Cf. Gauthier, in BE 95, 525, for criticism and textual contributions.
T h e text (inscribed on the same stone as document 29) comes in two
columns; the first (of which the greater part is broken off) is too mutilated
for any extended text to be published, and the editor recognised exactly
four phrases: ημείς, κοσμοΐς, τής πόΙ[λεωΐ], [τοΰ Zltos] τοΰ Λεφύ\[νου].1 The
second column contains the text below.

] ταΐς άρχαιρεσίαις πρώτους κόσμους τρεΐς, μετά δε

[τούτους] προστάτας τοΰ δήμου γ', τήν δε αί'ρεσιν είναι τών άρχείοιν
τούτωμ πρός μέρος από τώμ φυλών, επιτετάχθαι δε τοις μεγ κόσ-
μοις όσα πρός τήν τής πόλεως και τής χώρας φυλακήν ανήκει και 4
τάς κλείδας παραδίδοσθαι τούτοις, εΐναι δε πρός τούτους και τήν
τώμ φρουρίων επιμέλειαγ και τα κατά τάς στρατείας και όσα κατά
τήν συνθήκην τήμ περι τής συμμαχίας τής συντεθειμενης
πρός βασιλέα μεγαν Άντίοχον διά Ζεύξιδος, μή εΐναι δε άλλο άρχει- 8
ον μηθεν κυριώτερον τούτου πλήν τής βουλής μηδε τετάχθαι
τούτους υπ' άλλομ μηθενα, τοΐς δε προστάταις τά κατά τούς χρημα-
τισμούς επιτετάχθαι και εΐ τι άλλο εν τοΐς νόμοις διατέτακται,
γράμματα δε άμ που δεηι πεμπεσθαι ύπερ τής πόλεως ή ύπερ άλλου 12
τινός διά τών αρχείων τούτων, εξαποστελλε'σθω γραφόμενα ε-
[πί τε] τώγ κόσμων και τώμ προστάτωμ, μή εξουσία δε έστω μηδε ό-
[ποτέρωι] τών αρχείων τούτωγ καθ' ιδίαν γράμματα πέμπειν, μή
]τα άρχεΐα αίρεΐσθαι πρός μέρος άπό τώμ φυλών 16
[αίρεΐσθαι δε καθ' έ]καστον ενιαυτόν εν άρχαιρεσίαις πρός μέρος
[άπό τώμ φυλών τον στ]€</>ανΐ7[</>ορον και ίερέ]α τοΰ dtôs τοΰ Κρηταγε-
[νε'τα (?) και Δικτύννης (?) ] ύπό [ ]ου και

1 2 - 1 5 G a u t h i e r , f o r l i n e s 14—15> r e s t o r e s όΙ [ποτερωι] τών αρχείων τούτων, 'let it n o t b e

a l l o w e d to e i t h e r o f t h e s e m a g i s t r a c i e s to s e n d l e t t e r s s e p a r a t e l y ' . 13-14
τού]τωγ κόσμων . . . ο\νθενί πΑ-ήΐ'] E r r i n g t o n . P r e s e n t r e s t o r a t i o n s f r o m G a u t h i e r .
1 5 - 1 6 μη\[§è δις τά αν]τά αρχεία κτλ. G a u t h i e r . 1 8 - 1 9 1 h a v e r e s t o r e d τον Διος
τοΰ Κρηταγε[νετα] ( Z e u s K r e t a g e n e t a s ) , as f o u n d o n the A m y z o n i a n d o c u m e n t s , r a t h e r
t h a n ' Z e u s K r e t a g e n e s ' , as f o u n d in M y l a s a (I. Mylasa 102, line 9; 1 0 7 , l i n e 1; 806, l i n e
8), w h e r e t h e o f f i c e is d i f f e r e n t , a p r i e s t h o o d o f ' Z e u s K r e t a g e n e s a n d t h e K o u r e t a i ' .

[(it seemed good) . . .] to choose, in the elections for office, first three
kosmoi, and after these, three prostatai ton demon, and to elect these
magistrates f r o m the tribes in turn; and to entrust to the kosmoi all matters
concerning the security of the city and the territory, and to hand over the
keys to them, and to entrust to them the care for the forts and the business
concerning military expeditions and all matters related to the agreement
pertaining to the alliance contracted through Zeuxis with the G r e a t K i n g
Antiochos; to allow no magistracy to have more authority than this one,
1 ΤΗΣ Π0- at t h e e n d o f l i n e 8, ΛΕΨΥ at t h e e n d o f l i n e 10, as c a n b e r e a d o n t h e
p h o t o g r a p h , r a t h e r t h a n the e d i t o r ' s πό[λεως], Λεφύ[νου], I a m g r a t e f u l to W . B l ü m e l f o r
a s q u e e z e o f t h i s p a r t o f the s t o n e . F r o m t h i s s q u e e z e , f u r t h e r p h r a s e s w h i c h I t e n t a -
t i v e l y s u g g e s t a r e [?v]a γίνη\ [ται], l i n e 9, a n d φύλη, l i n e 1 1 .
except the boule, and to subordinate ί ο these magistrates to no one else; to
entrust to the prostatai the matters concerning the official documents 2 and
whatever else is stipulated in the laws; and if letters must be sent by these
magistrates concerning the city or any other matter, let there be sent a
letter written in the presence of both the kosmoi and the prostatai, and let
it not be allowed for [either] of these magistrates to send a letter on his
own, . . . to elect magistrates f r o m the tribes in turn . . . during the year?
in the elections for office, in turn [from the tribes, (to elect)] the
stephanephoros and priest of Z e u s Kretage[netas (?) and Diktynna (?) . . .]

Commentary. T h e text is on another face of the corner block which bears

the previous text (alliance between Antiochos I I I and Euromos); f r o m the
temple of Zeus L e p s y n o s at Euromos.

31. Letters of Antiochos III and Zeuxis to the Herakleians (between 196
and 193)

Wörrle 1988, editio princeps with extensive commentary (chronology, con-

text, and content) and photographs (SEG 37 859; Bringmann and von
Steuben 1995: no. 296, with translation and commentary). (Wörrle's text
supersedes S. Çahin in Ε A 9 (1987), 55-60, a preliminary and controversial
publication).
Cf. Ph. Gauthier, BE 89, 277; Errington 1989« (on dating: see com-
mentary).
T h e inscription stretches over four architectural blocks (from the north
anta of the temple of Athena), I - I V , each with its o w n line numbering; it
also falls into two documents: A (letter of Antiochos) and Β (letter of
Zeuxis). I have preserved W ö r r l e ' s numbering.

A . Letter of Antiochos.
I
Λαοδίκ]ην καί τον υ ιό ν Άντί[οχον προς τ]eus 7τ[αρ']
[ύμών φηφι]σθείσαις τιμαίς οΐς διεσαφειτε στεφανοις, ομοίως δε
[στ€<^ανώ]σαιτ€ και Σελευκον και Μιθ ριδάτην τούς άλλους ημών νί-
[oùs, ot>]ç και άνενεγκαντες οί π ρεσβευταί ήσπάσαντό τε ημάς ύπερ 4
[τοΰ δ]ήμου και το περί τών τιμών φήφισμα άποδόντες διελεχθησαν
[/cat α]ΰτ£π περί εκάστων ακολούθως τοις κατακεχωρισμενοις. Τάς τε
[δι) τι]μάς και τούς στεφάνους άπεδεξάμεθα φιλανθρώπως και
[υμά]ΐ επαινούμεν επί τήι προθυμίαι. Θελοντες δε και κατά τά λοιπά πο- 8
[λυ]ωρείν ύμών τά τε ύπο Ζεύξιδος συγχωρηθεντα ύμίν κυροΰμεν
[και] προς τώι ύποκειμενωι πλήθει εις ελαιοχρίστιον τοις νεοις άπο-
[τάσσομεν κα]τ' ενιαυτόν και άλλους μετρητάς τριάκοντα. Τό τε
[εσάμενον ά]νήλωμα εις τήν επισκευήν τοΰ ύδραγωγίου οίομε- 12
[0α δείν δίδο]σ#αι εκ βασιλικού εφ' ετη τρία, καί περί τούτων γεγράφαμεν
[ C.8/9 τ]ώι διοικητήι. Ποιουμενους δε καί εις το λοιπόν δια τών [èp]-
[γων τάς προ]σηκούσας αποδείξεις τής προς τά πράγματα ήμώ[ν εύνοίας\

2 Suggested in BE 95, 525, Ρ· 525·

 1 4 [Στρουθίωνι τ]ώι διοικητήι w o u l d fit t h e l a c u n a : S t r o u t h i o n is t h e dioiketes named,
a r o u n d t h e s a m e p e r i o d , i n L a o d i k e ' s l e t t e r t o t h e I a s i a n s : d o c u m e n t 26 A , I 15—16.

II
ΑΒΑΣΙΛΙ
[υπ]«ρ αυτών δε τούτων άκο[ύσεσθε εκ τ]ών πρεσβευτών. Έρρωσ[θε\.
I. [ (e.g. your ambassadors have handed over the decree, according to
which you wished to honour) . . . Laodik]e and our son, Antifochos, in
addition to] the honours decreed [by you], with the crowns which you have
mentioned, and that you also crowned our other sons, Seleukos and
Mithridates; your ambassadors, after handing over these crowns, greeted
us in the name of the people, and after handing over the decree concerning
the honours, and spoke in person concerning each of these matters, in
accordance with the content of the decree. W e have acknowledged the
honours and the crowns with pleasure, and we praise you for your eager-
ness. Since we wish to show solicitude for you in the future, we confirm the
grants made by Zeuxis to you, and, 10 on top of the monies set aside for
the oil-anointment of the young men, we assign thirty additional metretai
a year. As for the expense to be incurred in the repair and maintenance 1 of
the water conduits, we think it right that it should be granted from the
royal chest, over three years, and we have written about these matters to
. . . the dioiketes. If in the future too, you make through your [actions]
the appropriate displays of your goodwill towards our affairs, . . .
II. Concerning these same things, you will hear from the ambassadors.
Farewell.
B. Letter of Zeuxis
II (continued)
vacat
Έπι στεφανηφόρου θεού τρίτον τοΰ μετά Δημήτ ριον Δημητρίου, Ήραιώνο[ς],
Ζεύξις Ήρακλεωτών τήι βούληι και τώι δήμο^ι χαίρειν. Οί παρ' ύμών πρεσβευται 4
Φανίας, Έρμίας, Αίσχρίων, Απολλώνιος, Ερμογένης, 'Ιάσων, Α'ινέας, Παρ-
μενείδης, Παγκράτης, Διάς, Εύανδρος, Θαργήλιος, Έρμίας, Άριστέας, Μενε-
κράτης, Ήρακλεόδωρος, Διονύσιος, Πρωτέας, Διοννσικλής, Άντιλέων, Ιερο-
κλής, Μένης, άνήνεγκαν το φήφισμα καθ' S ώιεσθε δεΐν, άνακεκομισμέ- 8
νων ήμών τώι βασιλεΐ τήν πάλιν εξ αρχής ύπάρχονσαν τοΐς προγόνοις αύτοΰ,
θνσίας τε σνντελεσθήναι τοΐς θεοΐς και τοΐς βασιλεΰσιν και τοΐς τέκνοις αύτών
και εις το λοιπόν ομοίως γίνεσθαι κατά μήνα τήι έκτηι άπιόντος, αίρεθήναι
δε και πρεσβεντάς τούς εμφανιοΰντας ύπερ τής γεγενημένης στενοχω- 12
[pia]s περι τήν πόλιν εκ τών επάνο) χρόνων διά τούς πολέμους και τάς κα-
[ταφθ]οράς και παρακαλέσοντας τά τε ύπο TÔW βασιλέων σνγκεχωρημένα
[συνδιατηρηθήν]αι, όπως ύπάρχη και μετά ταύτα ή τε άνεπισταθμεία και τά
! c. ι 6/1 7 κ]αΐ τά τέλη και έγγαια και τά είσαγώγια και εξαγώγ[ια] 16
traces of one line

' W ö r r l e 1988: 4 6 6 η . 209 for the m e a n i n g o f άπιακευή.

III
[πρ]άσις, δίδωται δε και εκ βασιλικού eis χρή]σιν τής πόλεως μάλιστα {μεν}
μεν πλέον, el δε μή ye τάλαντα [ C.ζ ώ]ΐ πρότερον και το έλαιοχρίστιον δ[ι]-
αμένηι τό άποτεταγμένον τοις v[e'ois, ο] έπεκηρύσσετο τήι ώνήι τοΰ λιμέ-
νος, άζιώσοντας δε και άτελειαν συγχοιρήσαι τών τε εκ τής γής καρπών πάν- 4
των και τον έννομίου τών τε κτηνών και τών σμηνών εφ' έτη δσ' άν φαίνη-
ται και ζεύγη τοις πολίταις, μνησθησομένους δε και δπως σίτος δοθή τήι πό-
[A]ei δωρεάν καί άτέλεια{ν} τον τε εισαγομένου εις τήν πόλιν καί τοΰ πωλονμέ-
νον καί ίνα οί ενάγοντες έκ τής τοΰ βασιλέως εις τήν πόλιν έπί τάς 8
ιδίας χρείας και εις πράσιν άτελείς ώσιν, άποκατασταθήι δ^ ύμιν καί ή χώρα
καί οί δήμοι καί οί οίκηται συνα χθώσιν καθότι καί πρότερον ύπήρχον. Καί οί π ρεσ-
βευταί περί τε τών δεδηλωμένοι διελέγησαν ήμιν μετά σπουδής ακολούθως
τοις έν τώι φηφίσματι κατακεχωρισμένοις, εύθέως δε καί ύπερ τών σνντεθε[ιμέ\- 12
[ν]ων αύτοίς ύπομνημάτο>ν. Σπεύδοντες ούν καί αύτοί τον δήμον εις τήν έξ α[ρ]-
[χ1?]? διάθεσιν άποκατασταθήναι και τά τε έπί τών προγόνων τού βασιλέως
[συγκεχ]ωρημε'να συντηρηθήναι αύτώι καί έν τοις άλλοις επαύζεσθαι τήν π[ο\-
[λιν μετέχ\ουσαν πάντων τών εις πόλεως ανηκόντων . . ΟΣ . . ΠΑΝ[ ] 16

IV
(4 lines of text missing
! εί]σαγωγη[ ]
c.i i σθε· έσται δε ήμίν «πιμίλ^ΐ
[ c.i3 άπ]ολύομεν δε καί το[ΰ [ c.ii ]NC0N . . . IIÙJN τούς [ ]4
i c.i3 κα]θήκον ην λαμβάνεσθαι αύτό, βουλόμενοι καί έν τούτο[ις]
C.I5 ] έπιχωροΰμεν δε ύμίν καί τήν πανήγνριν ατελή συντελείν ο\υ\-
[ro)s ώ σ π ε ρ ] καί πρότερον είώθειτε άγειν, καί καθόλου καί εν τοις ά λ λ ο ι ? φρον-
[τιοΰμεν ίνα έ]μ μηθενί τών δυνατών καί καλώς έχόντων ύστερήτε, αλλά τύ- 8
[χητε τής προ]σηκούσης επιμελείας. Διό καί εύ ποήσετε καί αύτοί διαφυλάσ-
[ a o v r e s τήν eis] τ α πράγματα εΰνοιαν ούτω γάρ πολλώι μάλλον και ημείς
[oùSeV έλλε,ίφομε]ν πρ(ο)θυμίας εις τό συγκατασκευάζειν τ [ ά προς δ]ό[|αν]
[και τιμήν ανήκοντα ] ΤΑ . . φιλανθ[ρο)π ] 12
[ Μ ]
traces of one line
11 W ö r r l e ' s text suggests τ[ά προς δ]ό[£αι> καί τιμήν ανήκοντα] as in document 34. 6.

When the god was stephanephoros for the third time after Demetrios,
son of Demetrios, in the month of Heraion. Zeuxis to the council and
the people of the Herakleians. Your ambassadors, Phanias, Hermias,
Aischrion, Apollonios, Hermogenes, Iason, Aineas, Parmenides,
Pankrates, Dias, Euandros, Thargelios, Hermias, Aristeas, Menekrates,
Herakleodoros, Dionysios, Proteas, Dionysikles, Antileon, Hierokles,
Menes, have handed over the decree according to which you thought it
necessary, after we recovered for the king the city that had originally
belonged to his ancestors, i o to perform sacrifices the gods and the kings
and their children, and to observe this practice in the future, on the sixth
day before the end of every month; to elect ambassadors who should speak
concerning the poverty 2 which has befallen the city from preceding times,
on account of the wars and the destructions, and who should ask that the
measures granted by the kings be preserved; namely, that the city should
enjoy freedom from billeting and . . . and the taxes and property, 3 and the
tolls on imports and exports . . . III. farming out, and that out of the royal
chest, preferably more, but at least . . . talents be given, as before, and that
the amount which was taken out of the profit of the harbour tax4 for the oil-
anointment of the young men, stay the same; the ambassadors should also
ask for the grant to the citizens of exemption from taxes on all produce of
the land and from pasturage dues (ennomion) on herds and bees, for as
many years and yokes 5 (zeuge) as seems appropriate 6 ; the ambassadors
should also request that grain be given to the city as a gift, and that exemp-
tion from taxes be granted to grain 7 imported into the city and sold there,
and that those who import from the land of the king into the city, for their
own use or for sale, be exempt from taxes, and that the territory be restored
to you i o and that the villages and the dwellers (oiket.ai) be gathered, 8 as
they used to be before. T h e ambassadors spoke to us with zeal concerning
the above, in accordance with the content of the decree, and, specifically,
concerning the dossiers which had been entrusted to them. Since we too
are eager that the people be restored to its original situation, and that the
concessions made by the ancestors of the king be preserved for the people,
and that the city be increased and partake in all the things which are fitting
for the city's . . . IV. import . . . we will take care that . . ., of the king,
and the territory and . . . we also free you from . . . it was fitting that it be
taken, wishing in these matters also . . . we grant you the right to conduct
the festival exempt from taxes, as you were accustomed to before, and in
all other matters too, we will take complete care that you should not be
deprived in any matter of the possible measures that would benefit you, but
that you should receive the appropriate attention. Therefore, you will do
well, on your part, to preserve your goodwill towards the (king's) affairs,
for thus we will all the less leave out anything pertaining to eagerness to

2 G a u t h i e r g i v e s p a r a l l e l s f o r t h i s w i d e s p r e a d m e a n i n g o f στενοχώρια, preferable here

to t h e s t r i c t l y e t y m o l o g i c a l ' L a n d n o t ' ( W ö r r l e ) .
5 Tà τέλη καΐ εγγαια s e e m s l i k e a fixed e x p r e s s i o n , ' t a x e s a n d i m m o v a b l e p r o p e r t y ' .
4 W ö r r l e 1988: 4 6 1 - 2 f o r the e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h i s p h r a s e : t h e m o n e y f o r o i l - a n o i n t m e n t

w a s f o r m e r l y paid for b y the t a x - f a r m e r w h o took on the h a r b o u r tax.

5 W ö r r l e 1988: 4 6 4 - 5 , a s s u m e s t h a t t h e s e ' y o k e s ' a r e a l o c a l m e a s u r e o f l a n d s u r f a c e .

A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y is to t a k e t h e ' y o k e s ' as u n i t s of m e a s u r e m e n t f o r the h e r d s s u b j e c t

to the ennomion ( t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' y o k e s ' w o u l d b e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r o x e n : R o b e r t 1 9 8 7 :
1 8 2 - 4 f ° r p a s t u r e s — a n d h i v e s — i n t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e c i t y , in t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y as
in a n t i q u i t y ) .
6 1 h a v e s u p p o s e d t h a t τοις πολίταις is t h e i n d i r e c t o b j e c t o f άτέλειαν συγχώρησα ι. T h e
s a m e u s e o f φαίνεσθαι in d o c u m e n t 49.
7 W ö r r l e ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f τοΰ εισαγομένου εις τήν πόλιν και τοΰ πωλουμένου, supplying
(σίτου). A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y is to t a k e the e x p r e s s i o n as d e s i g n a t i n g all i m p o r t s a n d sales
in t h e c i t y , τό εισαγόμενον και το πωλούμενον.
8 T h e v e r b m i g h t d e s i g n a t e s o m e f o r m o f ( r e ) i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o the polis o f H e r a k l e i a ,

a s C . C r o w t h e r p o i n t s o u t to m e .
carry out measures w h i c h [have to do with the honour and the repute of the
city] . . . privileges ( ? ) . . .

Commentary. T h e letters come f r o m anta blocks of the temple of Athena,

near w h i c h they were found by A. Peschlow-Bindokat (Wörrle 1988: 421).
( T h e y still lie in their findspot, where I saw them in April 1997, close to
the edge of the rock on w h i c h the temple stands).
T h e inscription bears a local dating, the third stephanephorate of the
god after Demetrios D e m e t r i o u . Both letters were issued before the death
of Antiochos the son in autumn 193. Wörrle further refines the dating:
since Herakleia under L a t m o s fought on the side of Miletos in the war that
opposed the latter to Magnesia on Maeander, and was included in the
peace treaty that followed that war, supposedly around 196, 9 Herakleia
must have been independent until then, and submission to the Seleukids,
and the diplomatic transactions reflected in the two letters, took place after
that date.
Wörrle 1988: 4 3 1 - 7 , adduces three documents to support this dating
(between 196 and 193): (a) the treaty between Miletos and Herakleia
(Inschr. Delphinion 1 50), dated to 'the fourteenth stephanephorate of the
god after D e m e t r i o s [in Herakleia]', presumably the same D e m e t r i o s
D e m e t r i o u as the one named in the preamble to the publication of Zeuxis'
letter, and to the stephanophorate of M e n a n d r o s in Miletos; (b) the list of
Milesian stephanephoroi, Inschr. Delphinion 124; (c) the treaty between
Miletos and Magnesia, dated to 'the stephanephorate of the god after . . .
[in Miletos]' (Inschr. Delphinion 148, cf. Syll. 588). A s mentioned, item (c)
has conventionally been dated to 196; the treaty between Miletos and
Herakleia (a) dates to at least three years after the end of (b) the Milesian
stephanephoroi list (Wörrle 1988: 432 η. 28). W ö r r l e identifies the
stephanephorate in the treaty between Miletos and Magnesia (c) as A p o l l o
after Menalkes, w h i c h provides a fixed point within the Milesian
stephanephorate list (b) and puts its end in 190/89; the earliest date for the
treaty between Miletos and Herakleia (a) is therefore 186/5. If 186/5 (or
after) is the date of 'the fourteenth stephanephorate of the god after
Demetrios [presumably Demetrios D e m e t r i o u , in Herakleia]', the 'third
stephanephorate of the god after Demetrios D e m e t r i o u ' should fall in
197/6 10 or after.
H o w e v e r , Errington 1989α convincingly attributes (c) to the late 180s.
He still accepts W ö r r l e ' s dating scheme, on grounds of general plausibility;
but his arguments remove one firm foundation for dating. H o w e v e r , as
Errington observes, W ö r r l e has shown that R e h m ' s datings for the
stephanephoroi list (b) are too low, and must be m o v e d upwards in time.

' Inschr. Delphinion 1 4 8 ( c f . Syll. 588), w i t h s e c o n d a r y l i t e r a t u r e n o t e d in W ö r r l e

1988: 4 3 1 η. 25.
10 R a t h e r t h a n 1 9 8 / 7 , as W ö r r l e 1 9 8 8 : 4 3 2 w r i t e s ? I a s s u m e n o n - i n c l u s i v e counting,
s i n c e t h e s e a r e n o t r e g n a l y e a r s , o r y e a r s c o u n t e d f r o m a fixed p o i n t : it d o e s n o t m a k e
s e n s e t o c a l l t h e first t i m e t h e g o d s e r v e d as stephanephoros 'the second stephanephorate
of the g o d ' . If 186/5 ' s the f o u r t e e n t h s t e p h a n e p h o r a t e o f the g o d after D e m e t r i o s ,
D e m e t r i o s s e r v e d in 2 0 0 / 1 9 9 , a n d t h e g o d ' s t h i r d s t e p h a n e p h o r a t e f a l l s in 1 9 7 / 6 .
Errington further offers a corroborating argument for W ö r r l e ' s datings for
the stephanephoroi list. W e know that Menandros, the Milesian stephane-
phoros in the alliance between Miletos and Herakleia (a), was preceded
by at least three other stephanephoroi, none of w h i c h appears in the
stephanephoroi list (b): Pasikles, Philidas, and the god A p o l l o (Inschr.
Delphinion 248). U n d e r Pasikles, an alliance between Miletos and Pidasa
was contracted (Inschr. Delphinion 149). Since this document does not
mention the R o m a n legates w h o presided over Asian affairs in 188, it
should be dated at the earliest to 188/7:

Pasikles at the earliest 188/7

Philidas at the earliest 187/6
Apollo at the earliest 186/5
Menandros at the earliest 185/4

If the stephanephorate of M e n a n d r o s at Miletos, and with it the fourteenth

stephanephorate of the god after Demetrios at Herakleia, are dated to
185/4 a t the earliest, then the letter of Zeuxis to the Herakleians, issued in
the third stephanephorate of the god after Demetrios should be dated
to the Milesian stephanephorate year (spring) i90-(spring) 195 at the
earliest. 11 (Demetrios was stephanephoros in 199/8, hence the god's third
stephanephorate fell in 196/5).
T h e majority of Zeuxis' response to the Herakleians' petition is lost, but
the fragments seem to correspond to the order of the demands: IV 1 seems
to pick up the mention of imported grain in III 7, the phrase 'of the king'
could correspond to the request for tax-exemption on imports f r o m
the royal territory (III 8), and mention of 'the territory ' ( I V 3) can be
plausibly linked with the Herakleian petition for 'the restoration of the
territory' ( I I I 9 - 1 0 ) . In this case, the exemption preserved in IV 4 is an
initiative of Zeuxis, in addition to the Herakleian schedule of petitions, as
is the grant of ateleia for the festival ( I V 6-7).
See C h . 3 §§ 2b (on the royal economy) and 3 (on 'repressive tolerance');
C h . 4 §§ 2a (on Zeuxis' answer), 2b (on the petition).

32. Decree of the Citizens of Laodikeia on Lykos for Foreign Judges from
Priene (between 196 and 190)

GIBM 421 (Inschr. Priene no. 59). C r o w t h e r 1993: 40-55 (extensive dis-
cussion and revision of text, with full justification of all new readings,
translation), Gauthier 1994: 179-94 (SEG 43.850; I. Laodikeia am Lykos 5,
drawing on both C r o w t h e r and Gauthier, and with very full apparatus).

11 W ö r r l e 1 9 8 8 : 4 2 9 - 3 0 a n d n . 20, s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e H e r a k l e i a n s t e p h a n e p h o r a t e y e a r

b e g a n in s u m m e r , p r o b a b l y at t h e s u m m e r s o l s t i c e ; b u t I d o n o t s e e h o w t h e d o c u m e n t
a d d u c e d , Sylt. 6 3 3 , a n d s p e c i f i c a l l y l i n e s 74—7, p r o v e t h i s . C o n t r a r y t o w h a t W ö r r l e s a y s ,
t h e H e r a k l e i a n stephanephoros h a s n o t c h a n g e d b e t w e e n t h e first m o n t h o f t h e M i l e s i a n
y e a r , T a u r e o n ( l i n e s 25—27) a n d t h e fifth m o n t h o f t h e M i l e s i a n y e a r , M e t a g e i t n i o n
( l i n e s 7 4 - 7 7 ) : i n b o t h p a s s a g e s , t h e H e r a k l e i a n stephanephoros is t h e g o d f o r t h e f o u r -
teenth time after D e m e t r i o s .
Crowther and Gauthier both reached the same revisions of the text with
some very minor differences, and their version is taken as the basis here.
Cf. Crowther 1993, who gives a complete archaeology of the text,
summarizing the criticisms and improvements of Ad. Wilhelm, GGA 162
(1900), 96-7 and U. v. Wilamowitz's important textual notes in E. Sonne,
De arbitris externis quos Graeci adhïbuerunt ad lites et intestinas et peregrinas
componendas (Diss. Göttingen 1888), 55 η. 29; Holleaux 1938α: 301-2
(REA 1899,14-15)·

T[o παρ]ά Λαοδικέων

traces of four crowns
Κύδωρος Διονυσίου εΐπεν επειδή εκ 7rA[e]iovos [χρόν]ου δικών ού-
[σ]ών άδικάστων παρ' ήμΐν ο δήμος €77ε[μ]φε πρεσβείαν 7rpô[s]
Ζεΰξιν περί ξενικού δικαστηρίου, Ζεύξις [0]è ίιπολαμβ[ά\- 4
[ν]ων μάλιστα προστήσεσθαι τώγ κατά τάς δίκας [δε]όντως τούς 7ra[pà]
Πριηνεων άποσταλησομενους δικαστάς, εγρ[αφ]εν αύτών τήι βο[ν]-
[λ]·>?ι και τώι δήμωι, όπως προχειρίσ[ων]ται δικαστάς τρεις ώς επιει-
κεστάτους και πεμφωσι προς ημάς· άποστείλαντάς τε και τοΰ Öfij]- 8
μου προς αύτούς πρεσβείαν, Πριηνεΐς οντες ήμών φίλοι επεμ-
φαν δικαστάς Μενίσκον Μητροδώρου, Άγίαν Σίμου, Μάλωνα Διαγ[ό]~
ρου, οΐ παραγενόμενοι εις τήμ πόλιν εδίκασαν τάς δίκας δίκαι[ω?]
κατά τούς υπάρχοντας ήμΐν νόμους· επει δε καλώς έχον εσ\τί] 12
τιμάσθαι τούς εύνους άνδρας, τύχηι άγαθήι και επί σωτηρίαι· δεδ[ό]-
[χ]θαι τήι βουλήι και τώι δήμων Ζεύ[ξιν μεν] επηνήσθαι επί τώι y[p](w/ia[i]
[Π]ριηνεύσιν, Πριηνεΐς δε επί τώι πέμφα[ι άνδρας κα]λοΰΐ και αγαθούς, τοΰ[?]
δε δικαστάς Μενίσκον Μητροδώρου, Άγ ίαν Σίμου, Μάλωνα Διαγόρου 16
επηνήσθαι τε και καλεΐσθαι ύπο τοΰ δήμου εις τό θέατ[ρ]ον και στεφ[α]~
νοΰσθαι έκαστον αυτών χρυσώι στεφάνωι καθ' έκαστον έτος δι[α]
[β]ίου εν τώι άγώνι τώι γυμνικώι τώι συντελουμένωι εν τοις Άντ(ι)οχ\εί\-
οις, επηνήσθαι δε και τον συναποσταλέντα αύτοΐς γραμματέα Ήγ[έ\- 20
πολιν Ήγίου και στεφανούθήναι εν τοΐς Άντιοχείοις ελαίας στεφά-
νων περί δε τοΰ καλεΐσθαι εις τήν προεδρίαν τούς δικαστάς {και) τής
άναγγελίας τών στεφάνων επιμέλειαν ποιήσασθαι τόν τε
άγωνοθέτην και τούς πρυτάνεις τούς εκάστοτε γινομένους- 24
ύπάρχειν δε τοΐς δικασταΐς και εμ πρυτανείωι σίτησιν και έφοδον
επί τήν βουλήν και τόν δήμον πρώτοις μετά τά ιερά- ίνα δε και ό δ·>7μο[?]
ό Πριηνέων είδήσηι τά εφηφισμένα, ελέσθαι πρεσβευτήν, δς ά</>[ι]-
κόμένος εις Πριήνην τό τε φήφισμα αποδώσει και τήν τοΰ δήμο[υ] 28
εϋνοιαν εμφανίσει, ήν έχει πρός Πριηνεΐς, παρακαλέσει τ[β]
αύτούς ποιήσασθαι τήν άν{αν}αγγελίαν τών εφηφισμέ-
νων στεφάνων τοΐς τ ε δικαστ αΐς και τώι γραμματεΐ
εν τώι άγώνι τών Διονυσίων, όταν [σ]υν(τ«λώσιν) τάς πρώτας νν 32
σπονδάς, και ίνα άναγραφήι τό φήφισμα είστήλην και σταθήι
εν τώι ίερώι τής Αθηνάς· εΐναι δε τό φήφισμα τούτο επί σω-
τηρίαι τής πόλεως- τούς δε εξεταστά[ς άνα]γράφαντας
αυτό εις λεύκοιμα θεΐναι εν τώι Άρ[τέμιδο]ς θησαυρώ[ι]. 36
πρεσβευτής Κύδωρος Διονυσίου.
 3—4 H i c k s read πρό I αευξιν; Hiller v o n G a e r t r i n g e r restored προ[εν]τευξις. C r o w t h e r
and G a u t h i e r for the correct reading. 4 F o r Ζεύξις δε, H i c k s in GIBM read
ποιούμενος. 22 καί at the end of the line added b y C r o w t h e r ; omitted on the stone.
32 H i c k s in GIBM reads όταν συνθυήται προ πάσης; C r o w t h e r Ι993 : 5 2 - 3 > reads [·]^[·]
ΤΑΣΠΡίύΤΑΣνν\ he argues that the first three letters can be restored as [σ]υ[ΐ'], and that
the stonecutter omitted the rest of the v e r b σνντελώσιν. T h e f o r m u l a is paralleled in
another Prienian inscription, Inschr. Priene 83, line 7 (with C r o w t h e r 1993: 53 n. 39).

[Decree fro]m the Laodikeians.

K y d o r o s son of Dionysios proposed:—since, there being over a long
period unresolved lawsuits among us, the people sent an embassy to Zeuxis
concerning a foreign court, and Zeuxis, believing that the j u d g e s w h o
would be sent f r o m the Prienians would take care of the matters concern-
ing the lawsuits most [satisfacto]rily, wrote to their council and then-
people, so that they should select three judges as fair-minded as possible
and send them to us; after the people had also sent an 10 embassy to
them, the Prienians, being our friends, sent as judges Meniskos, son of
Metrodoros, Agias son of Simos, M o l o n son of Diagoras, w h o , after
arriving in the city j u d g e d the suits justly, according to our l a w s ; — a n d
since it is a fine thing to honour well disposed m e n — w i t h good luck and
for the safety (of the city), let it seem good to the council and the p e o p l e : —
to let Zeu[xis] be praised for writing to the Prienians, and the Prienians for
sending [good] and noble men, and to let the judges, Meniskos son of
Metrodoros, Agias son of Simos, M o l o n son of Diagoras, be praised, and
invited by the people to the theatre and to let each one of them be crowned
with a golden crown, each year, for life, in the g y m n i c contest organized at
the Antiocheia, 20 and to let the secretary sent along with them, Hegepolis
son of Hegias, be praised and crowned at the Antiocheia with a crown of
olive; to have the agonothete and the prytaneis in office on each occasion
take care of the invitation of the judges to front seats and the proclamation
of the crowns; to provide free dining in the prytaneion for the j u d g e s
and right of access to the council and people in priority after the sacred
matters; and so that the people of the Prienians should also know what has
been decreed, to choose an ambassador w h o , after going to Priene, will
hand over the decree and make clear the goodwill which the people has
towards the Prienians, and invite 30 them to make a proclamation of the
crowns decreed for the j u d g e s and the secretary, in the Dionysia whenever
they per(form) the first libations, and request that the decree be written up
on a stele and erected in the sanctuary of Athena; and to let this decree be
for the safety of the city; to have the exetastai, after writing it up on a
whitened board, put it in the treasury of Ar[temis]. Ambassador: K y d o r o s ,
son of Dionysios.

Commentary. T h e decree is preserved on a 'stele of blue marble, f r o m the

temple of Athenè Polias, Priènè' (Hicks in GIBM).
It is likely that Priene, the recipient of a letter of instructions f r o m
Zeuxis, was under Seleukid control; the date for this document would then
fall after 197, the most probable date for a Seleukid takeover. H o w e v e r , it
is still possible that Zeuxis wrote to Priene when the city was independent:
in that case, the document would date between his appointment over the
cis-Tauric province (214) and Magnesia (190).
See Ch. 3 § 3 (on subject cities and the limitations on their external life).

33. Decree of the Prienians for Ameinias (between 196 and 190)
Inschr. Priene 82; but lines 1-5 are taken from Ph. Gauthier (below), 11-25
from Ad. Wilhelm (below). I am grateful to C. Crowther for photographs
of a squeeze and for discussion of the text.
Cf. Ad. Wilhelm, Wiener Studien 29 (1907), 11-13, for lines 15-25 (used
as basis here); Ph. Gauthier, Chiron 21 (1991), 51, nn. 11, 12, 13, for the
text of lines 1-6, restored in line with other Prienian documents (used as a
basis here); S. Dmitriev, EA 21 (1993), 43-4 (=ZPE 103 (1994), 115-16)
for restorations (reviewed by Gauthier in BE 95, 494; also SEG 43.849).
We have the left-hand edge of the text; the squeeze shows that the text
was flanked by engraved crowns (at least six can be made out) on the left
hand side, and perhaps also on the (now lost) right hand margin. T h e
squeeze also shows that the heading (lines 1-6 in the restoration of
Gauthier) was written in much larger letters than the rest of the decree, so
that the text must have shown a considerable overhang on the right hand
side (the letters of the heading are not large enough to suggest that the
heading actually took up a width sufficient for a text in two columns under-
neath; the line-length of the decree proper can be determined by the secure
restorations at lines 7-8). T h e lettering, with its great serifs and its long-
stemmed phi and rho, is closely related to e.g. Inschr. Priene 49 or 64.

[Έπί σ]τεφανηφόρου [ C.20 , μηνός]

[Μετ]αγειτνιώνος [πεμπτήι?], έτίμησεν ή βουλή καί 6 δήμος
[Διοκ]λήν Άμεινίου [ σ ι τ ί σ ε ι έμ πρυτανείου και]
[εμ Π]ανιωνίο)[ι καί στ]ε[φάνο)ΐ χρυσέωι αριστείου]
[/cat πρ]οεδριαι [έμ πάσιν τοις άγώσιν καί areAeiai]
[τοΰ σ]ώματος [
W7rè[p τι]μών Διo/cAe[f] έδοξε \τήι βουλήι καί τώι δήμωι]·
Άπο[λ]λοφάνης Άκεσάνδ[ρου εΐπεν επειδή Zlio/cA^s]
Άμεινίου άνήρ ών καλός [και αγαθός καί χρήσιμος],
εκτενή καί πρόθυμον έμ π[άσι καιροίς? παρασκευάζων]
εαυτόν διετελει καί τήν Λ[
πολιτείαν τά βέλτιστα, καί [κοινήι παντί τώι δήμοιι] 1
ίδίαι τε τοις εντυγχάνου[σιν αύτώι τών π ο λ ι τ ώ ν ]
εϋνουν αυτόν καί πρόθυμ[ον παρείχετο, έπιμελού]-
μενος τών τώι δήμωι σ[υμφερόντων ύπο τού]
δήμου κατά τήν σιτικ[ην παράθεσιν άποσταλβι?] 1
προς Ζεΰξιν τον τοΰ βασιλε[ως στρατηγόν μετά τού]
συναποδειχθεντος ούκ άτ[ ],
<χ[λ]λ' έλαβε τώι δήμο)[ι
μ[·]τα τε ταύτα άπο[
[τα] τήν ένεστώσα[ν
[ τ ] ώ ι δήμωι. eXaßev [
εξαγωγήν, άτίλ[
[ π ] ρ ο ΐ τόν όήμο[ν ] 24
τωΝΓ
1 - 6 T h e first lines, with their s u m m a r y of the decree, restored b y Gauthier: since
Prienian inscriptions do not mention the p a t r o n y m i c of the stephanephoros, line ι either
r e a d επί στεφανηφόρου τον δείνα το δεύτερον or επί στεφανηφόρου τον θεον τοΰ μετά τον δείνα.
7 - 8 T h e restorations in these lines are absolutely certain, and determine the line-length
for the rest of the inscription. ί ο [παρασκευαζόμενος] Hiller von Gaertringen in
Inschr. Priene; [παρασκευάζων] suggested b y C . C r o w t h e r , since the active appears
in other examples of this formula (e.g. Inschr. Priene io8, lines 88-9, 313).
1 5 - 1 6 [θλιβομένου δε τοΰ] δήμου W i l h e l m . D m i t r i e v p r o p o s e d ( 1 5 ) μένος τών τώι δήμωι
ο\υμφερόντων· πρεσβευτής ύπο τοΰ] I δήμου . . .[αποσταλείς], b u t t h e r e s t o r a t i o n is p e r h a p s
slightly too long for line 15, since the indications of lines 7 and 8 allow a m a x i m u m of
c.zo letters for the gap. H o w e v e r , the general meaning 'being sent as ambassador b y the
people' is convincing, and the elements πρεσβευτής and αποσταλείς m i g h t be restored
later in the text. 16 τήν σιτικ[ήν οίκονομίαν] W i l h e l m , [παράθεσιν] D m i t r i e v .
17 Ζεΰξιν τον τοΰ βασιλέ[ως στρατηγον] W i l h e l m . T h i s would be the only epigraphical
evidence for such a title, instead of the more usual ό επί τών πραγμάτων. Bengtson ΐ944 :
1 1 2 η. 3, for a r g u m e n t against the restoration [σατράπην] ( W i l h e l m , p. 12, tentatively).
Perhaps φίλον or even συγγενή? ι 8 ουκ (XT[€ÀIJ εποιήσατο τήν έντευξιν] W i l h e l m .
1 9 - 2 2 A t line 20, the traces suggest μ[α]τα rather than μ[ε]τα. W i l h e l m proposed to
r e s t o r e : [και τά χρή] I [μα]τά τε ταύτα άπο[SeScu/cεν και τάς αλλας δωρεάς ας «α-] I (20) [τά]
τήν ένεστώοα[ν οιτοδεία ν παρά τών εύνοικώς εχόντων] I τ]ώι δήμωι έλαβε v. D m i t r i e v s e e s in
the two similar phrases έλαβε τώι δήμωι (line 19) and τώι δήμωι έλαβεν (line 22) the proof
that D i o k l e s w e n t on an embassy twice, and restores line 20 as [μ<=]™ δέ ταύτα
αποσταλώ]· T h e restoration is tempting, b u t the similarity of recurrence of the phrase
m i g h t also refer to the reception of two different benefactions f r o m Z e u x i s on the same
occasion. 25 W i l h e l m ' s readings, f r o m a squeeze.

W h e n . . . was stephanephoros, [in the month of Met]ageitnion, [the

council and the people honoured Diok]les son of Ameinias, [with free
dining in the prytaneion and] in the Panionion, with [a gold crown and]
front seating [in the contests . . .] and ateleia ton somatos. C o n c e r n i n g the
honours for Diokles, it seemed good [to the council and to the people],
Apol[l]ophanes son of Akesand[ros proposed: since Diokles] son of
Ameinias, being a good [and noble and useful man] 10 continuously [puts]
himself [forward] as an eager and zealous man and . . . the best towards the
c o m m u n i t y (politeia), and [behaved] with goodwill and zeal both [towards
the whole people in common] and individually to those of the citizens w h o
deal with him, taking care of the [interests] of the people; and [having been
sent by] the people, because of the grain [supply,] to Z e u x i s the [governor
(strategos)] of the king, with his fellow-ambassador, he did not [conclude
his mission unsuccessfully?], but received for the people . . . 20 and [after?]
this, . . . on account of the [shortage?] w h i c h prevailed, . . . he received for
the people, and . . . export (of grain?), exemfption f r o m taxes?] . . .

Commentary. T h e decree was carved on a unfluted column in the W e s t stoa

of the agora at Priene (as several other contemporary Prienian documents).
See C h . 4, introduction (on royal benefactions).
34. Letter of Antiochos III (?) to Ilion (Winter 197/6 or Spring 196?)
A. Brückner, in W . Dörpfeld, Troia und Ilion (Athens, 1902), ii. 448—9, no.
4 with plate 59 (RC 42); I. Ilion 37. I examined a squeeze in the archive of
the Inscriptiones Graecae in Berlin (summer 1994), courtesy of D r Κ.
Hallof.
Cf. Piejko 19916: 47-8, for some restorations.
re προς το σ[ν]γκατασκ[€υάσασθαι άπαν]-
τα τα προς Ιπιμέλειαν κ[αι C.8 άνή]-
κοντα· 7τ€ΐρασόμ€θα yà[p ου μόνον τά St]—
à προγόνων προϋπηργμ[ίνα προς τον δη]-
μον σνντηρξΐν, άλλα κ[αι ίνα τών eis]
δόξαν καί τιμήν άνηκ[όντων iv μηθενί]
ΰστερήτί, ποείσθαι τ[
] καί κοινήι καί ίδίαι 4κ[άστου
! συγχω]ρούμ€ν δε καί τα[
ι [όμ.οιωΐ] I τε Piejko iççib: 48. 2 evvoiav Welles, for the editor's καταλογή v.
Perhaps πολυωρίαν, as in d o c u m e n t 5, 9, m i g h t fit the lacuna. 4 προς Welles, εις
Brückner. 6 B r ü c k n e r ' s εν μ-ηθενί is paralleled in Z e u x i s ' letter to Herakleia under
L a t i n o s , d o c u m e n t 31 Β , I V 8: [ « ε] μ μ-ηθειΊ τών δυνατών και καλώς εχόντων ΰατερήτε,
better than W e l l e s ' s μηθενός. J—8 τ[ήν πάοαν πρόνοι I αν] Welles; τ[ήν προσήκον I σα^]
και κοινήι και ίδίαι έκ[άστου πο I λυωρίαν] P i e j k o iççib: 48, o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e first letter o f
A n t i o c h o s to T e o s , d o c u m e n t 19 A , 15. T h e word order thus obtained is s o m e w h a t odd.
9 [συγχω]ροϋμεν Welles. Frisch writes that the squeeze shows a 'schräge Hasta' w h i c h
w o u l d make this impossible. T h e restoration proposed by Piejko, [έπικ]υροϋμεν is n o t
compelling, since the parallel he quotes (Antiochos to Herakleia under L a t m o s ,
confirming—κυροΰμεν—the grants m a d e b y Zeuxis: d o c u m e n t 31 A , I 9) is not obviously
relevant to the situation in the present letter, where nothing indicates whether
A n t i o c h o s is talking about privileges granted b y another. In any case the 'schräge Hasta'
on the squeeze starts and ends too low to be the right branch of an upsilon, and is
probably a few pits on the stone or perhaps the edge of the break, as I believe after
inspecting the squeeze. W e l l e s ' s restoration still seems the best.

. . . and to carry out all measures pertaining to care and [goodwill]; for we
will not only try to preserve the things which the people enjoyed through
our ancestors, but also, so that you may be deprived of none of the things
pertaining to your glory and your honour, to show all solicitude in
common and individually to each . . . we also [grant] . . .
Commentary. T h e text, found in the Troad, is preserved on the fragment
of a stele, as the dimensions published by Brückner indicate.
Welles canvasses possibilities for authorship, mentioning a Roman
official as a possibility (the context would then be the settlement of Asia
Minor in 188, and the ancestral theme might be an allusion to past contacts
between Ilion and Rome, real or imagined). Welles excludes the possibility
of an Attalid, arguing that the first person plural would be unusual in that
case; however, Attalid rulers could write we (RC 16, 23, 49, 50), and the
ancestral theme would be fitting, since Ilion had been close to the Attalids
since Attalos I. Welles favoured Antiochos III, whose actions provide a
very suitable context, and whose other letters provide close parallels. T h i s
is the most appealing solution (though by no means absolutely certain, on
account of the ruinous state of the document).
See C h . 4 § 1 (on the language of euergetism).

35. Alliance between Antiochos III and Perinthos ( 196?)

I owe knowledge of this document to the generosity of M . Sayar, w h o

showed me his text, due to appear imminently in M . Sayar, Perinthos-
Herakleia und Umgebung. Geschichte, Testimonien, Griechische und
Lateinische Inschriften (Vienna, 1998), as nos. 3a and 3b (nondum vidi) ; the
present version is taken f r o m a paper delivered in a conference in Bordeaux
( 1 2 - 1 3 D e c e m b e r 1997), on ' L e s Cités d ' A s i e Mineure occidentale au I l e
siècle a. C . ' , cited in references as Sayar (forthcoming). In consequence,
the following text is provisional.

A.
traces of 4 or 5 lines

traces of 1 line
T h e restorations are tentative. 6 - 7 seem to indicate a v e r y short line length. A n o t h e r
possibility is to suppose a v e r y long line length, so as to fit the elements of the oath
formula, as attested in two parallel d o c u m e n t s , the alliance b e t w e e n a k i n g A n t i o c h o s
and L y s i m a c h e i a (I. Ilion 45, with F e r r a r y and G a u t h i e r 1981) and the alliance b e t w e e n
Philip V and L y s i m a c h e i a (Staatsvertr. 549): (α) ομνύω + list of gods; (b) εμμενείν iv τήι
συμμαχίαι rjv πεπόημαι προς βασιλείς Άντίοχον και Άντίοχον, (c) v a r i o u s f o r m u l a s p r o m i s i n g
aid, in different circumstances, to the kings A n t i o c h o s and A n t i o c h o s and their
descendants (so that the datives of lines 6 - 7 w o u l d b e l o n g to different sub-sections of
the oath). 6 - 7 I a m n o t sure [τώι υίώι] is necessary. 8 [ομωσάτω]σαν οί
βασιλείς {οι} τό[ν ορκον τόν ύπογεγραμμενον],

. . .oath [of the Perinthians? I swear by Zeus . . . Posjeidon, Ar[es, Athen]a

[Areia and all the gods and] all the [goddesses] and the Ta[uropolos: I
will be an ally?] to kings Antiochos and [Antiochos (the son?)] and their
descendants . . . [let?] the kings [swear the oath written below?] . . . the
alliance f r o m . . .

B.
traces of several lines
^έποήσαντο TH[
[συμμα]χίαν ei'ç τον άπα[ντα χρόνον]
[προ]? βασιλέα Άντίοχο[ν
! ]ΜΟΥ καί βασιλέως[ ]
[ ] ΤΟΣ Περινθου[ ]
[ ] 0 Υ [ ]
traces of several lines
l [àSoAcos και άπροφασίστως] could be added. 3 Άντίοχο[r και Άντίοχον]?
A n o t h e r possibility is that the text here refers to earlier contacts, perhaps b e w t e e n
P e r i n t h o s and A n t i o c h o s II.

. . . they made the [alliance?] . . . alliance for all time . . . towards King
Antiochos . . . (the rest is too fragmentary for translation).
Commentary. Both fragments were found on the site of ancient Perinthos
(now reused in a garden wall); that they come from the same document is
assured by the identity of script, and the presence of a King Antiochos in
both. T h e Seleukid rulers mentioned are Antiochos III and Antiochos the
son, and the document must date to the activity of Antiochos III in
Thrace: most likely in 196, though a later campaign cannot be excluded.

36. Letter of a Royal Official(?) Concerning an Indeterminate City

(bewteen 20Q and 193, probably C.IQJ)

Sardis, 7-9, no. 2, with facsimile of the 'marble slab', found in Sardeis, left
by J. Keil in the Consulate of the United States at Smyrna, and lost in the
destruction of the city in 1922 (Gauthier 1989: 171—8 for new text, incor-
porating remarks subsequent to the editio princeps, and refuting an attempt
by Piejko to attribute this inscription to the events of Sardeis in 214/13,
Piejko 1987, noticed in SEG 37.1003 with additions for lines 21-4 from
CM 39 (1988), 111). T h e text given here is Gauthier's except for a few
sublinear dots added from Buckler and Robinson, and a transcription of
lines 23-7, from the facsimile (readings of J. Keil).
Cf. Robert 1964: 19-20 (analysis, corrections to the text),
[ C.7 }ΤΑΣΕΛ [ c.2.5 τοις β α]-
[σι]λεύσιν Άντιό[χωι καί Άντιόχωι C.IJ
Μην αρχήν ής άνέχον\το c.22
[. . ,]άρχου συνχωρήσαντο[ς c. 19
[. ]ωσιν προς αύτούς ολβίαν [κ]αΐ Α [ c. 15
[. .] Α [. ], χρήσον[ται? S]e' επ' ε α υ [ τ ] ο & κ α [ ι νόμοις πάσιν ο??]
[κ]at έξ αρχής έχρώντο• καί έπεί άπεΑ[ογισ]αντ[ο c.4
[. . ]/ τήν re πόλιν αύτών ένπεπυρ[ώσθ]αι καί [ C.7
[.]ωσθαι έν τώι πολέμωι καί τά ίδια ά π ο λ ο ) λ ( [ κ ό τ α ς τών]
[ π ο Α ι ] τ ώ ΐ ' τούς πλείστους διαπεφωνηκέ[ναι C.6
[....] δέ όλίους παντάπασιν καί ήξίωσαν [ C.8
. . TU)N ποιήσ[α]σθαι καί τών [φ]όρο)ν άπολύ[σαι και] 12
[έ]ποικίσαι τον τόπο[ν], συνεχώρησεν [a]v[roîs C.6
[S]a>pos έως μεν έτών έπτα μηθεν α [ ϋ τ ο ύ ί διορ]-
[θού]σθαι εις το βασιλι[κ]όν αλλά άπολε[λύσθαι C.4
[<χ]7το δε τον ογδόου έτους διδόναι τρε[ΐς c.8 ] 16
[. . ] πασών τών γινομεωνων προσόδων πα[ρ' έκαστον ]
ενιαυτόν άργν[ρ]ίου μνάς είκοσι και aAA[ws μή εν]-
οχλεΐσθαι, etv[a]t Se αύτούς ά[φ]ρουρήτ[ους καθώς και το]
[πρ]ότερον ήσαν, eivfajt Se αύτούς και άν[επισταθμεύ\- 20
τους και άλητου[ρ]γήτους, άπολελύ[σθαι δε c.8 |
vacat?
. ΙΑΣΑΥ. . . Σ[ c. 12 ] ΗΜΑΤωΝΚΑΙΟΛ[ c.io ]
vac.? βασιλικ [ ] 24
αύτόν βου[ \
[ c.6 ] CU5T[O]Z)S ύπ[

[ C-5 ] μ α · [ ]
7 a7re[Sei] ξ αν Τ . . . edd., ' since the Τ . . . pointed out'; present restoration Robert
1964:20 η. I. 20—ι άνεπισταθμευτούς L a u n e y 1987: ii. 697-8. 22 ' L i n e 22
is effaced' edd. (attempted reconstruction by Piejko, CM 39 (1988), 111). B u t Buckler's
drawing suggests a vacat: the space between lines 21 and 23 seems slightly greater than
that of a normal line of text. C o u l d line 23 be the beginning of another document?
23 [κτ]·ημά[των]? Piejko's [<f/< τών γεν]ημάτων, for a tax on agricultural produce, is
attractive (CM 39 (1988), 111); [γενν]ημάτων also possible.

to the kings Antiochos and [Antiochos] the beginning (?) the . . . which
they endured ( ? ) . . . [ . . .]archos having granted . . . to them prosperity and
. . . and they are to use all the same laws which they did originally; and
since they reported that . . . their city had been burnt and . . . in the war
and that 10 most of the citizens had lost their property and been killed . . .
very few, and they asked . . . to do . . . and to grant exemption from the
tribute and to settle the place, [. . .]doros granted to them . . .that for seven
years, they should pay nothing to the royal treasure, but be released . . .
from the eighth year, that they give three . . . out of all the income pro-
duced, 20 mnai of silver, for each year, and not to be troubled in any other
way; that they be free from garrisoning, as 20 they were before, and free
from billeting and from obligations to provide services, and that they be
released from . . . [of the] agricultural produce?. . . royal (or: the treasure?)
. . . (the rest of the document is too fragmentary for translation).

Commentary. T h e document must date between 209 and 193, because of

the mention of the kings Antiochos III and Antiochos the son; it probably
reflects the activities of the land army's campaign in 197, the most likely
context for the recapture of a city by Seleukid forces within that chrono-
logical bracket (see Ch. 2 § 4).
T h e nature of the document is unclear: this is unlikely to be a city decree
or a royal letter, more probably a letter from a Seleukid official, informing
subordinates of decisions taken by other officials, affecting the status and
the privileges of the city in question (Gauthier 1989: 172-3).
37. Royal Enactment Concerning the State Cult for Laodike
( February/March to May IQ3 )

M . Holleaux and P. Paris, BCH 9 (1885), 324-30 (editio princeps, 'copié au

milieu de la crotte de chameau': R o b e r t 1949: 8); improved M . Holleaux,
BCH 13 (1889), 523-9 ( O G I S 224); final version M . Holleaux, BCH 54
(1930), 245-62, with plates 1 2 - 1 3 (Holleaux 1942: 165-81); RC 36-7. I
examined the stone in the L o u v r e ( M A 2936) in M a r c h 1997, thanks to Ph.
Gauthier.
Cf. R o b e r t 1949: 5-31 for parallel document f r o m N e h a v e n d in Iran,
w h i c h establishes text and date; yet a third version of the same enactment
was found in Kermanshah, also in Iran (Robert 1967); A y m a r d 1949, for
dates and speculation on surrounding events. A u s t i n 1981: no. 158, for
translation of N e h a v e n d version.
T h e text presented below is that of Robert 1949: 9—13, combining
Holleaux (1930) with secure restorations f r o m the parallel Iranian docu-
ment: 'le nouvel exemplaire permet de compléter, de façon définitive,
toutes les lacunes de l'inscription de Phrygie, à l'exception d'une seule'
(line 31). I have nonetheless preserved Welles's sublinear dots and square
brackets: the N e h a v e n d copy allows us to restore all the lacunae, but not to
read what is not on the stone.

[Άναξίμ]βροτος vac. Διονυτάι vac. χαίρειν τονγρα-

[φέντος] παρά τον βασιλέως προστάγματος
[περ]ί τον άποδεδείχθαι τής βασιλίσσης
[ά]ρχιέρειαν τών εν τήι σατραπείαι Βερενίκην 4
τήν Πτολεμαίου τοΰ Λυσιμάχου θυγατέρα
κατακεχώρισται το άντίγραφον επακολουθών
οΰν τοις επεσταλμε'νοις συντελεί καθ' α
οίεται δείν, ίνα δε καί τά άντίγραφα άναγρα- 8
φεντα εις στήλην λιθίνην άνατεθήι εν τώι
έπιφανεστάτωι τόπωι προνοήθητι.
'Έρρωσο. [θ]ιρ', Αρτεμισίου ιθ'.

[BafftAe]ùs Άντίοχος Άναξιμβρότωι χαίρειν 12

[βουλόμεν]οι τής αδελφής βασιλίσσης Λαοδίκη[ς]
[rà]s τίμας επί πλείον ανξειν καί τούτο άναγ-
[καιο\τατον έαντοίς νομίζοντες είναι δια το
[μή μ]όνον ήμίν φιλοστόργως καί κηδεμονι- 16
[κώϊ] αύτήν συμβιοΰν, αλλά καί προς τό θ ε [ι] -
[ον ε]ύσεβώς δια[κ]εΐσθαι, καί τά άλλα μεν
[οσα πρ]έπει καί δίκαιον εστι παρ' ημών αύτήι
[συνα]ντάσθαι δια[τ]ελοΰμ,€ν μετά φιλοσ- 20
H°[p]y"*S ποιοϋντε[ς, κρ]ίνομεν δε καθάπερ
\ήρ]ών \άπο\δείκ\ν\υν\ται κ]ατά τήν βασιλεί-
[αν a]pfx]tepets, καί ταύτης καθίστασθαι
[èv] τοις αύτοίς τόποις άρχιερείας αΐ φο- 24
[ρή] σονσιν στεφάνους χρνσοΰς έχοντας
[εικόνας αΰ]τής, επιγραφήσονται δε και εν
[ T O Î S ] σνναλλάγμασι μετά ΤΟΰς τών

[προγόν]ων και ήμών άρχιερεΐς· επεί οΰν 28

[α77·οδ]εδεικται iv τοΐς ύπο σε τόποις
[Βερ]ενίκ·η ή Πτολεμαίου τοΰ Λυσιμάχου
τοΰ [· · ί\όντος ήμΐν κατά συγγενειαν θυγάτη[ρ],
συντελείσθω πάντ[a] TOÎS προγεγραμμε- 32
vois ά[κο]λοΰθως, και τά αντίγραφα τών
επιστολών άναγραφεντα εις στήλας
άνατεθήτω εν τοΐς επιφανεστάτοις
τόποις, όπως νΰν τε και εις το λοιπόν 36
πάσιν φανερά φαίνηται ή ήμετερα και εν τοΰ-
[ T O I ] S · 7I[p]os τήν άδελφήν π[ρ]οαίρεσις.

ι For spaces between the first three words, plates 12-13 ' n BCH 54 (1930) and
Holleaux 1942: 171. 11 For date, Robert 1949: 1 3 - 1 5 (new reading, based on the
Nehavend text). 16 T h e Nehavend text reads μή μόνον, so that expression is to
be restored instead of Welles [où μ]όνον. zo [άπα]ντάσθαι Welles; present reading
from Nehavend copy. 20—1 φιλο[ατοργί\ας Welles. 26 [εικόνας ai5]rijs,
proposed by Robert, BCH 54 (1930), 262-7, a l s o >n Holleaux 1942: 181; Robert's
intuition is confirmed by the Iranian text. 28 [προγόν]ων Welles, also in
Nehavend text. 31 Welles proposed [συν]όντος (RC, p. 162); [απτ]οντος might be
p o s s i b l e , cf. d o c u m e n t 2 2 ( X a n t h o s ) Βασιλεύς μέγας Άντίοχος άφιέρωσεν τήν πόλιν τήι
Λητώι και τώι Άπόλλωνι και τήι Άρτέμιδι δια τήν πρός αύτούς συνάπτονσαν συνγένειαν. W h e n
I examined the stone, I read \ / . Ο V / Ο Σ, traces which are compatible with the
restoration I propose above. 37 TOI!I[TOIS] Robert 1949.

A n a x i m b r o t o s to Dionytas, greetings. T h e copy of the enactment written

by the king concerning the appointment of Berenike, daughter of Ptolemy
the son of L y s i m a c h o s , as high-priestess of the queen for the rites in the
satrapy, 1 is enclosed. T h e r e f o r e , c o n f o r m to the instructions and carry
them out as he thinks necessary, and take care that the copies are put up on
a stone stele in the 10 most prominent place. Farewell. Y e a r 119.
Artemisios 19.

K i n g A n t i o c h o s to A n a x i m b r o t o s , greetings. W i s h i n g to increase the

honours of our sister, Q u e e n Laodike, and thinking that this was a most
necessary task for us, since she not only is a loving and caring consort, but
also is piously disposed towards the divine, 20 w e continuously do, with
love, the things w h i c h it is fitting and just that she should receive f r o m us,
and we decree that, just as high-priests of us are appointed throughout the
kingdom, so there should be established, in the same places, high-priest-
esses of her also, w h o will wear golden crowns bearing her image, and be
inscribed in the contracts after the high-priests of our ancestors and of us.
Since 30 Berenike, the daughter of Ptolemaios son of L y s i m a c h o s , w h o is

' Robert 1949: 18 n. 4, prefers 'high-priestess of the shrines (ιερά) in the satrapy' to
Welles's translation, 'in the satrapy' (the phrase τα εν τήι οατραπείαι meaning 'the
satrapy': RC, p. 164). T h e phrase is different from the περί or κατά periphrases Welles
would compare it to. I have taken the phrase in a vaguer interpretation than Robert's
'shrines'.
[. . .] to us by kinship, has been appointed in the regions under you, let
everything be done in accordance to the instructions written above, and let
the copies of the letters be written up on stelai and erected in the most
prominent places, so that for now and for future times our intentions
towards our sister in these matters too may be obvious to all.

Commentary. T h e text, now very worn, is inscribed on a white marble

stele, found at ' D o d u r g a ' (modern Dodurcular), in the A c i p a y a m plain. 2
See C h . 3 § 2d (on the rhetoric of the hierarchical dossier).
S h e r w i n - W h i t e and K u h r t 1993: 209-10, suggest that the cult for
Antiochos I I I and his ancestors was created in 193, at the same time as the
cult for Laodike. T h e y reach this conclusion by taking the present tense in
the presentprostagma, on cult for Laodike, in the strictest sense: 'we decree
that, just as high-priests of us are appointed (in the sense of 'are being
appointed right n o w ' ) throughout the kingdom, so there should be estab-
lished, in the same places, high-priestesses of her also' (above, lines 21-4).
I prefer to interpret the present tense as describing general practice since
the foundation of the cult in c.204 (the likeliest date), rather than implying
that priests of Antiochos I I I were being appointed at that very moment,
even as Antiochos I I I was writing (193).

38. Letter of M. Valerius Messalla, the Tribunes, and the Senate of Rome to
the Teians (193)

Chishull 1728: 102-4: editio princeps, dating, Latin translation. Hessel

1731 : p. 12 (unnumbered), no. 1 (text by C . A . D u k e r , communicated to
h i m by J. de I l o c h e p i e d , D u t c h consul in Smyrna). 1 ( C I G 3045 corrects
Chishull with readings f r o m Hessel. T h e CIG text is the basis for R i g s b y
1996: 3 1 4 - 1 6 , no. 153.) LBW 3.60, locating the stone at Hereke (modern
D ü z c e ) , north of T e o s , and giving a facsimile (Syll. 601). (P. Viereck,
Sermo Graecus quo senatus populusque Romanus magistratusque populi
Romani . . . usi sunt (Göttingen, 1888), no. 2, combines elements of both

2 T h e traditional title, 'édit d'Eriza', is misleading: there is no clear evidence as to the

provenance of the stone (nor is Eriza securely located near Dodurcular, at 'Ischkian
Bazar': Robert 1962: 1 1 2 η. 4).

1 Hessel writes: 'Itaque in antecessum dabo fasciculum inscriptionum, quas mecum

benigne communicavit Carolus Andreas D u k e r u s in Academia Trajectensi historiarum

atque eloquentiae professor Ordinarius, vir adprime eruditus: cui plerasque omnes mis-
erant Justinus de Hochepied vir nobilis, consul nostras apud Smyrnaeos; & Hermannus
vander Horst theologus, vir egregie doctus, & tunc a sacris nostratium, qui Smyrnae
negotiantur.' T h e present text was copied b y de Hochepied, as made clear b y D u k e r ' s
comments on p. 22 (unnumbered) of the praefationis appendix (Hessel 1731). In the
recent epigraphical littérature, this was first clarified b y Rigsby 1996: 292 n. 47 (but de
Hochepied was not 'Belgian consul', as Rigsby writes: Belgium was not independent in
1731, and Belgica natio is the D u t c h baroque humanist Duker's expression for Holland).
It is worth bearing in mind that the text which Böckh (in CIG) uses to correct the read-
ings in LBW, came through two intermediaries, Baron de Hochepied and C . A . Duker,
before reaching print.
CIG 3045 and LBW 3.60 (reproduced as RDGE 34). T h e same principle
for the basis of the text given below.)
Rigsby 1996: 292, on the textual history of the asylia texts f r o m T e o s .
A u s t i n 1981, no. 157 gives translation.

vac. Ρωμαίων, vac.

Μάρκος Ούαλάριος Μάρκου στρατηγός και
δήμαρχοι και ή σύνκλητος Τηΐων τήι βουλήι και τώι
δήμωι χαίρειν. vac. Μένιππος ο τε παρ' Άντιόχον τοΰ βα-
σιλέως αποσταλείς πρός ήμάς πρεσβευτής, προ-
χειρισθείς και ΰφ' ύμών πρεσβεΰσαι ύπερ τής πόλεο^ς
τό τε φήφισμα άνέδωκεν και αΰτός ακολούθως τούτωι
διελέχθη μετά πάσης προθυμίας· ήμεΐς δε τόν τε άν-
δρα άπεδεξάμεθα φιλοφρόνως και διά τήν προγεγενη-
μένην αΰτώι δόζαν και διά τήν ύπάρχουσαν καλοκά-
γαθίαν περί τε ών ήξίου διηκούσαμεν εύνόως· και ότι
μεν διόλου πλείστον λόγον ποιούμενοι διατελοΰ- 1
μεν τής πρός τούς θεούς εύσεβείας, μάλιστ' άν τις στο-
χάζοιτο εκ τής συναντωμένης ήμεΐν εύμενείας
διά ταύτα παρά τοΰ δαιμονίου· ού μήν άλλα και εζ άλ-
λων πλειόνων πεπείσμεθα συμφανή πάσι γεγονέναι 1
τήν ήμετέραν εις τό θεΐον προτιμίαν. διό και διά τε ταύ-
τα και διά τήν πρός ήμάς εϋνοιαν και διά τόν ήξιω[μέν]ον
πρεσβευτήν κρίνομεν εΐναι τήν πόλιν και τήγ χώ-
ραν ίεράν, καθώς και νΰν εστίν, και άσυλον και άφορο- 2
λόγητον άπό τοΰ δήμου τοΰ Ρυ^μαίων και τά τε εις
τόν θεόν τίμια και τά εις ύμάς φιλάνθροιπα πειρασό-
μεθα συνεπαύξειν, διατηρούντων ύμών και εις τό
μετά ταΰτα τήν πρός ημάς εϋνοιαν. vac. έρρωσθε. 2
4 T h e vacat comes from the fac-simile in LBW, which however does not give τον
found in Duker and Hessel, reproduced in CIG. T h e word order presumably reflects
the Latin ab Antiocho rege, rather than the usual Greek practice (βασιλεύς Άντίοχος).
6 ύπερ from D u k e r and Hessel, reproduced in CIG. LBW gives -περί in its facsimile and
its text (easy enough a misreading). 16 -πάσι from D u k e r and Hessel, reproduced
in CIG and not in LBW. 18 προς ύμάς Duker and Hessel, reproduced in CIG. I
have preferred Chishull's προς ημάς, which perhaps makes better sense in this passage.

O f the Romans.
M . Valerius, son of Marcus, 2 praetor, and the tribunes, and the Senate, to
the council and the people of the T e i a n s , greetings. Menippos, the
ambassador sent by K i n g Antiochos to us, having also been selected by y o u
to represent the city, has handed over your decree and spoke in accordance
with its content, with all zeal; as for us, we have received the man with
friendly mind, on account of his pre-existing repute 10 and his present
good qualities, and we have listened to his request with goodwill. T h a t we
continuously take the greatest consideration possible of piety towards the
gods, m i g h t best be deduced f r o m the favour w h i c h we enjoy f r o m the
2 M . Valerius, M . f., Messalla, pr. peregrinus 193: MRR i. 347.
superhuman (daimonion) on account of our piety. Indeed, we are convinced
that our honour for the divine has become manifest to all through very
many other signs. For this reason, and on account of your goodwill towards
us3 and on account of the ambassador making the request, 4 we decided that
the city and the territory should be sacred, 20 as it is now, and inviolate and
free from tribute from the Roman people, 5 and we will try to increase the
honours for the god and the privileges for you, if you observe in the future
also your goodwill towards us. Farewell.

Commentary. T h e document was carved on an architectural block from the

temple of Dionysos (as were the other documents of the series it belongs
to, the early asylia texts of Teos).
This document is treated in Ch. 2 § 5 (Roman discursive interference in
the Seleukid space).

IV Date Undetermined but C e r t a i n l y under

Antiochos III

39. Ex-voto Erected at Gordos for the Safety of Apollophanes, Physician of

Antiochos III
Herrmann 1970: 94-8, no. 1, editio princeps, dating ( = T A M 5.1.689).
Photograph of stele, with its wreath encompassing an intricate flower
motif, in Ans. Ak. Wien 1974, opposite 440, and of the inscription in ΤΑΜ
5·ΐ. T h e stone is now kept in the collection of antiquities of Ege
Universitesi, where I examined it in May 1997, thanks to H. Malay and C.
Tannver.

ALL ΠοροττηνώL
υπέρ [ 5—6 ] ιατρού
f. . .] βασιλέως
Άπολλοφάνου τού Άπολλοφάνου 4
Σελευκεως τής άπο Πιερίας
Άρκεσιλα\ο\ς Άρκεσιλάου
ήγεμοιν χαριστήρια
2-3 T h e word Ιατρού is inscribed on an extensive rasura which was carried out on the
whole of the line after {mip\ this erasure, and that at the beginning of line 3, as well as
the failure to recarve a syntactically complete text, are puzzling (Herrmann 1970: 97).
W h e n I examined the stone I could read Λ Ε as the last two letters before ιατρού, so that
the stone mason may have first inscribed a formula starting ύπερ βασιλέως), as in a

3 It might be possible to read 'on account of our goodwill towards you (ύμάς)', but the

present text perhaps reads better and announces the 'contract clause' at the end of the
document.
4 τον ήξιωμίνον πρ€σβ(υτήν: the translation given here assumes the participle is in the

middle voice.
5 Literally 'free from tribute from the Roman people', a very problematic expression

(Ch. 2 § 5 and A p p e n d i x 2).

dedication for the k i n g ' s safety, rather than the less c o m m o n dedication on behalf of the
royal p h y s i c i a n ' s safety.

T o Zeus Porottenos, for (erasure) doctor (erasure) of king, Apollophanes

son of Apollophanes, of Seleukeia in Pieria, Arkesilaos, son of Arkesilaos,
officer, in token of gratitude.
Commentary. T h e stele bearing this ex-voto was found in modern Gördes,
in eastern Lydia (photograph of site in Τ Α Μ 5.1, plate 5; also Herrmann
1970).
See chap. 2, introduction (on this document as emblem for Antiochos'
movements); Ch. 3 § 1 (on garrisons).

40. Honorific Decree of the Sardians (between 20g and 193)

Robert 1964: 9—19, no. 1 (editio princeps, commentary), plates 1—2.

I πέμπεσθαι δε αΰτώι d]-

πό τών δημοτ[ε]λών θυσ[ιών γέρας· κα]-
λεΐσθαι δε και εις τάς θυσίας τ[άί δημοτί]-
[Ae]ts και et's το πρυτανεΐον \6μ]οί(ος· κ\αλεΐσθαι Se]
[αϋ]τόι> και eis προεδρίαν iv τοις άγώσι π[άσιν] 4
[ois η] πόλις συντελεί- στήσαι Se αΰτο[ΰ και et] -
[ K W C I ] χαλκήν στεφανώσαι ΔΕ αύτόν και χρ[υ]-

[ σ ώ ι σ]τεφάνωι άπό χρυσών δέκα έν τήι ε κ κ λ ^ ] -

[σίαι ε]ν ήι αν ή περι τούτων άπόκρισις γραφεΐσ[α] 8
\ύπό Ζ]εύξιδος άναγνωσθή, 'ίνα πάντε\ς\
[ει'δώσ]ιν τήν εύχαριστίαν τοΰ Σαρδιανώ[ν]
[ δ ή μ ο υ ] και τήν κρίσιν, ότι r o [ ù ] s άξιους επίσ-
[ τ α τ α ι π]ροσηκόντως τιμάν άναγράφαι δε 12
[τόδε το φ]ήφισμα εις στή[λη]ν λευκού λίθου και
[παρασ]ττΐσαι τώι άνδρίαντν τήν δε eyôoa[iv]
[τοΰ] στεφάνου και τής εικόνος κ[αΐ] TOW άλ-
[λων] ποήσασθαι Αθήναιον τόν ταμίαν «-[at] 16
[δοΰν]αι τά ά ν α λ ώ μ α τ α άφ' ών [ χ ] ε φ ί [ ξ ε ι προσό]-
[δων πλ]ήν τών άποτεταγμένων εις [TOS τι]-
τ]ών βασιλέων και τής βασιλίσ[σης].
ι 8 - Ι 9 'Peut-être τ°νς αγώνας τ]ών βασιλέων', R o b e r t 1964, 18 (on g r o u n d s of line
length, always a shaky criterion), t h o u g h he notes that the m e a n i n g ' f u n d s for h o n o u r s
for the kings' is certain, and suggests τιμάς·, the same expression is f o u n d in the second
T e i a n decree, d o c u m e n t 18, 63.

[(It seemed good to the council and the people) . . . to send to him a share]
from the public sacrifices, and to invite him to public sacrifices, and to the
prytaneion as well; to invite him to front seating in all the contests which
the city celebrates; to erect a bronze statue of him; to crown him with a
gold crown worth ten golden (staters) in the meeting of the assembly in
which the answer written by Zeuxis on these matters will be read, so that
all may 10 know of the gratitude of the people of the Sardians and the
d e c i s i o n , n a m e l y t h a t t h e p e o p l e k n o w s h o w to h o n o u r w o r t h i l y t h o s e w h o
d e s e r v e it; to w r i t e u p t h i s d e c r e e o n a stele of w h i t e s t o n e a n d to set it u p
n e x t to t h e s t a t u e ; to let A t h e n a i o s t h e t r e a s u r e r c o n t r a c t o u t t h e s u p p l y i n g
of t h e c r o w n a n d t h e s t a t u e a n d t h e o t h e r t h i n g s , a n d to let h i m c o v e r t h e
e x p e n d i t u r e f r o m the i n c o m e w h i c h he handles, except for those allocated
t o t h e h o n o u r s of t h e k i n g s a n d t h e q u e e n .

Commentary. T h e t e x t is p r e s e r v e d o n a m a r b l e s t e l e f o u n d in S a r d e i s . I t
c a n b e d a t e d a f t e r 209, b y t h e m e n t i o n of ' t h e k i n g s ' , A n t i o c h o s I I I a n d
A n t i o c h o s t h e s o n ( w h o w a s a p p o i n t e d c o - r e g e n t in t h a t y e a r : R o b e r t 1964:
18 a n d n . 2; J. a n d L . R o b e r t 1983: 163 n . 1; S c h m i t t 1964: 13 a n d n . 1,
g e n e r a l l y 1 3—20).
T h e h o n o r a n d is n o t a S a r d i a n , a n d c o u l d b e a S e l e u k i d official
h o n o u r e d b y t h e c i t y of S a r d e i s . T h e κρίσις of line 11 is t e n t a t i v e l y i n t e r -
p r e t e d b y R o b e r t as 'la d é c i s i o n p r i s e p a r ce d é c r e t ' ( R o b e r t 1964: 14 η . ι ) ,
a n d e x p a n d e d b y t h e ότι c l a u s e .

41. Royal Documents from Sardeis (213-190)

T e x t A: G a u t h i e r 1989: 1 1 2 - 1 6 , n o . 4 A , e d i t i o n , c o m m e n t a r y , p l a t e 5
(SEG 39.1286 A).
T e x t B: G a u t h i e r 1989: 125-6, n o . 5, e d i t i o n , c o m m e n t a r y , p l a t e 6 (SEG
39.1287).
T e x t C: G a u t h i e r 1989: 127-9, no
· 6, e d i t i o n , c o m m e n t a r y , p l a t e 7 (SEG
39.1288).
T e x t D: Gauthier 1989: 129-34, no
· 7. e d i t i o n , c o m m e n t a r y , p l a t e 8 (SEG
39.1289).

A.
ΚΑΘ . . Α Σ [άπ]αγγελο[ϋ]-
[σιν ύ]μίν καί οί π ρεσβευταί περί τών αυτών. vac. 'Έρρωσθε
ι Gauthier suggests iv τοις καθ' [ι}μ]άϊ or ίν τοις καθ' [ιίμ]άΐ.

[. . . in m a t t e r s ] c o n c e r n i n g y o u (?). Y o u r a m b a s s a d o r s will also tell y o u

about these same matters. Farewell.

B.
Βασιλεύς [Άντίοχος Σαρδιανών τήι βουλήι καί τώι]
δήμωι χαίρ[ειν t h r e e or f o u r n a m e s οί παρ' ύ]-
μών πρ[εσβευταί άπέδωκαν ήμίν τό ψήφισμα εν ώι]
εγεγ[ράφειτε c. 2Ç
rvi
τοις [
καί e[
όσοι Μ[
ΑΔΙΑ[

μηδ[
Gauthier proposes the following restorations, tentatively: 5 γή[ν] or yij[î] 8 όσοι
μ[ή] 9 e-§· ο.δια[ίρ€τος], àSià[Aii7rroç] or άδιά[77·τωτοΐ] g—10 [&>s τα\χιοτ[α] or
[τήν τα]χίστ[ην] II μηδ[ί] or μηδ[έν].

King [Antiochos to the council and the] people [of the Sardians] greetings
(three or four names) your amfbassadors handed over to us the decree in
which you had] written . . . land ( ? ) . . . the . . . and . . . as soon as possible
(?)...

C.
These three fragments belong to the same document, but the order of C 2
and C 3 is uncertain
C. ι
[Βασιλεύς· Άντίοχος ·Ζ]αρδια[νών τήι βουλήι καί τώι δήμωι χαίρειν]
e.g. Άπολ]λων[ίδης
T h e exact beginning and end of the lines are unknown, and the reconstruction pre-
sented above is merely a possibility. 2 Απολλώνιος is another possibility. Both
names, Gauthier observes, are well attested in Sardeis.

C. 2
άτελειαν ε[τών numeral]
[διατ]ροφήν καί σπε[ρμα]
2 O n the parallel of the Korrhagos decree ( S E G 2.663), as pointed out by Gauthier,
[σίτοι' €ις 8ιατ]ροφήν και σπ([ρμα].

(we grant) exemption from taxes for [. . .] y[ears . . . (grain for) subsistence
and so[wing . . .]

C. 3
[ ]KOMI[ ]
I ]AE[ ]
[ ] Γ [ ]

I A form of κομίζειν or κομιδή, Gauthier. 2 ά^ί], Gauthier.

D.
ή] βασίλισσα γέγρα[φεν !
i ]ΕΝΕΙ τών περί ΗΜΑΣΕΙ[ ]
! ]εν τήι περί Σάρδεις οίκον[ο]μία[ι |
I ]Πορσουδδα κώμην καί ΣΑΝΝ . ΦΕ[ ] 4
j ]ΤΑΙΣ κατά τούς προυπάρχοντ[ας περιορισμούς?
]ΣΙΝ εν ταΐς κώμ[αι]ς καί rot[s] ày[poîs?
i ]ΤΑΙ αυτός τε καί οί εγγονοί αύτοΰ[ \
[ ]Υ []ΠΑΗ. ωΝΤΟ[ ] 8
6 âyfpoîç] seems a reasonable suggestion, especially since on the photograph the
letter after gamma seems to present the 'haste verticale très longue' typical of the rho in
this inscription (Gauthier 1989: 131). However, RC 10—13 and 18-21 use the word χώρα
for land given or sold by a king. Gauthier notes that the last letter preserved in the line
could be pi as well as gamma: perhaps TOÎ[S] A7R[O ], for instance a noun qualified
by a passive participle of άποδείκνυμι?
T h e queen wrote . . . in the oikonomia around Sardeis . . . the village of
Porsoudda and . . . according to the pre-existing [surveys?] . . . in the
villages and the [fields?] . . . himself and his descendants . . .
Commentary. T e x t A: these two lines are carved on a marble block, no
doubt from the Metroon since it comes from the excavations of the Roman
synagogue where blocks from the Metroon were reused. However, the
block does not belong to the pilasters on which documents 1, 2, 3, are
carved. Below these lines, there is a Sardian decree for Heliodoros,
honoured for going on embassies and serving as a foreign judge (Attalid
period).
T e x t B: the text is preserved on three marble fragments from the syna-
gogue excavation; Gauthier associates it with documents from the time of
Antiochos III on grounds of appearance and letter-form.
T e x t C: on material grounds (letter-forms, dimensions, weathering),
Gauthier showed that three marble fragments belong to the same docu-
ment, a royal letter. Unfortunately, there is no join between any of the
three pieces.
T e x t D: this small fragment was found near the synagogue in the bath-
gymnasion complex at Sardeis, in a disturbed archaeological context.
T h o u g h it is almost certain that these three documents date from the
time of Antiochos III, there is no further indication of date, so that they
were not necessarily produced at the same time as documents 1-3, in 213,
immediately after the recapture of Sardeis by Antiochos; they could date
to later contacts between the king and the city. Documents C and D, the
first concerning a gift of grain, the second a land conveyance, could belong
to the settlement of affairs in 213. C could concern a gift of grain to the city
of Sardeis, to help it through an agricultural year after the sack of the city,
and thus would belong to the measures the king took for the city's
επανόρθωσα (document 3). Alternatively, it could concern the initial gift of
grain and tax-exemption to a colony near Sardeis, like the Jews Zeuxis
settled in Lydia and Phrygia, according to a document preserved in
Josephus (Ajf 12.147-53: on authenticity, see Appendix 3). However, a
royal letter concerning the installation of a colony would rather be
addressed to Zeuxis (in addition to the letter in Josephus, see Segre 1938
for a parallel: Eumenes II writes to an official, Artemidoros, concerning the
settlement of the Καρδάκυ^ν κώμη near Telmessos).

42. Statue Base of Antiochos III, Erected at Klaros (between igy and 193)
Robert 1964: 18 (with reference to future publication of a photograph of
the 'belle base' with its 'inscription honorifique en très belles lettres'). I
saw the stone in Klaros, in April 1997.

Βασιλέα Άντίοχον
βασιλέως μεγάλου Άντιόχου
Διοσκουρίδης Χάρητος
K i n g Antiochos, son of the great king Antiochos, dedicated by
Dioskourides son of Chares.

Commentary. T h e base was found next to the temple of A p o l l o at Klaros,

prolonging its south-east angle. It is still in situ: the recent reopening of the
excavation at K l a r o s has made it visible, and the elegant, airy lettering is
easily legible. T h e inscribed surface was m u c h later reused to record a
delegation to the oracle at Klaros.
T h e f o r m of the dedication implies that the now-lost statue of Antiochos
the son was put up, not by the Kolophonians, but by an individual—a
Seleukid official, or a local friend of the Seleukids?

43. Letter of Antiochos III to the Nysaians

W . Judeich, Ath. Mitt. 15 (1890), 2 8 1 - 2 , no. 32 (RC 43).

J. and L . Robert 1954: 291 n. 9, remark that 'rien dans les débris du
texte ne permet de soutenir qu'il s'agit des "privilèges du Ploutonion",
c o m m e on l'a dit'; the text does not belong to the great archival inscription
w h i c h recorded the temple privileges, but was carved on an independent
stele found in N y s a and not at or near the site of the Ploutonion. T h e
mention of a dioiketes does not prove, as Welles claims, that the privileges
of the Ploutonion were involved; Antiochos would also have written to the
dioiketes to give instructions for the implementation of a gift (for instance
various subsidies, as at Herakleia: d o c u m e n t 31 A ; or Laodike's gift of
grain to Iasos: document 26 A), a financial privilege or a transaction involv-
ing the city (as in the case of Apollonia under Salbake: document 44).
Piejko, Historia 38 (1989), 399, proposes various restorations, such as
inserting a mention of an epistates as an addressee, presumably to fill the
gap in line 1 (but the office is not attested elsewhere for Nysa) and naming
the dioiketes Sopatros, on the basis that RC 9 (where one Sopatros does
appear) should be dated to A n t i o c h o s I I I (not argued for, and highly
unlikely: A p p e n d i x 3)

Βασιλεύς Άν[τι'οχος c.20 roîs]

άρχουσιν και [ j
ής γεγράφ[αμεν επιστολής προς τον διοι]-
κητήν [κατακεχώρισται το άντίγραφον
K i n g Antiochos . . . to the magistrates and [(the city) . . ., greetings; a copy
of the letter] w h i c h we wrote [to . . . the dioi]ketes [is appended . . .]

Commentary. T h e inscription is preserved on a stele (see above, in lemma),

and preceded by a fragmentary decree, the exact relation of w h i c h to the
royal letter is unclear (RC, p. 178).
44. Decree of the Citizens of Apollonia under Salbake Honouring the
Seleukid Hipparch, Philo . . . (between 213 and 190)
J. and L. Robert 1954: 285-302, no. 166 (first edition with photograph of
squeeze at plate 46; translation and commentary by sections; historical
analysis of information on Seleukid administration).
Cf. Malay 1987: 14 (on the function of ό έιτι τών ιερών: the Pamukçu stele
published by Malay, document 4, makes explicit the financial nature of
the office); Gauthier 1989: 42-5 (confirmation of the dating proposed by J.
and L . Robert 1954; Ktesikles, Menandros the dioiketes, Demetrios the
eklogistes all resided at Sardeis, in the light of the documents from this
city). Austin 1981: no. 187, translation.
i lv τε TOIS]

[πρότερον] χρόνοις εύ[νους ών διετέλει κοινήι τώι ]

[δή]μωι καί ίδίαι εκάσ[τωι τών πολιτών ταχθείς? ]
[δε ιπ\ιτάρχης έπί τών παρ' [ήμιν στρατιωτών?]
[τήν 7τά]σαν εύταζίαν παρέσ[χηται· πρεσβευ]- 4
[τών δ]ε πεμφθέντων περί τών [συμφερόντων]
[τώι δ]ήμωι πρός τε Κτησικλήν τον [ C.9
και Μένανδρον τον διοικητή[ν εκτενώς ]
[εαυτό]ν επιδούς, ότε οί πρεσβενταί άπή[λθον, και] 8
[συνε]ισπορευόμενος αύτοΐς εσπευδεν ei'[s το πώ>]-
[τα 7!·ορι]σ#·>7ΐ'αι 7re[pi] ών ήξιοΰμεν έτι δέ και Α[ημη]-
[τρίου] τού εγλογιστού είσκαλεσαμένου τούς
[πρεσ]βευτάς ύπερ ών έμπεφανίκει αύτώι Δημή- 12
[τριοί] ό τεταγμένος έπι TOW ιερών, καί διαμ[φι]σβη[τή]-
[σαντο]ΐ πρός αύτούς ύπερ τών ιερών κωμών [ Ζ ] α λ ε [ ι ] -
[ων τε\ τών ορεινών καί Σαλειων τών π6δΐ€ΐνώ[ΐ']
μένος παρέκαλει Δημήτριον μηθεν τών 16
[πρoυπa]ρχόvτυw τώι δήμωι κινεΐν έπί τής αΰτο[ΰ] πρα-
ιας, άλλ' εάν διαμένειν καθάπερ [é]a>s
[τοΰ νΰν] καί τοις μετά ταύτα πεμφθεΐσιν πρε[σ]βε[υ]~
[ταΪ5 περ]ί τών προδεδηλωμένων κωμών ού μ[ό]ΐΌ[ν] 20
[άκόλο]νθον τοις έφηφισμένοις προήκατο €77·ι[σ]τ[ο]-
[Ληΐ' 7r]poç Δημήτριον, άλλα καί άπαντήσας
[αΰτώ]ι διελέγη φιλοτιμότερον καθότι καί οί [π]ρ€[σ]-
[|8ευτα]ΐ άκούσαντες προσεμαρτύρησαν τό δ' ο- 24
[λον ο]ΰ διαλείπει άεί τίνος αγαθού παραίτ[ι]ος
[γινό]μενος τοις πολίταις· δεδόχθαι Άπολλω-
[νιατ]ών τήι βουλήι καί τώι δήμωι· έπηνήσθα[ι] Φιλο-
. . . . άρετής ένεκεν καί εύνοιας ήν έχων 28
[SiaT]eAei εις τον δήμον· δεδόσθαι δε α ϋ τ [ ώ ] ι τε
[και έ]κγόνοις πολιτείαν καί άτέλειαν πάντω[ν]
[ών η] πόλις κύρια· καλεΐσθαι δε αύτόν κα[ΐ] ei[s]
[7!·ροί]δριαν καθ' έκαστον ένιαυτόν καί στεφα- 32
[νούσ]θαι χρυσώι στεφάνωι έν τώι γυμνικώ[ι] άγω-
[νι τώ]ι συντελουμένωι τώι /3ασιλ[ίΐ] Σ[ελεύκωι]
 ι T h e ' S e l e u k i d ' prescript was reconstructed in general terms by R o b e r t 1954: 288.
T h e secure attribution to the time of A n t i o c h o s III (see c o m m e n t a r y b e l o w ) allows us
to fill in s o m e of t h e s p e c i f i c s : [Βασιλεύοντος Άντιόχον or βασιλευόντων Άντιόχον (Μεγάλου)
και Άντιόχου τοΰ υ'ιοΰ, έτους numeral μηνός Macedonian month, έπ' άρχιερέως Νικάνορας,
εκκλησίας κυρίας γενομένης, εδοξεν Άπολλωνιατών τήι βουλήι και τώι δήμωι- επειδή Φιλο—
patronymic, ethnikon, κτλ. A mention of N i k a n o r as h i g h - p r i e s t is probable: the official
D e m e t r i o s , ό τεταγμένος επι τών ιερών, m u s t be a successor or a s u b o r d i n a t e of N i k a n o r
(as official in charge of the sanctuaries), w h o was appointed in 209 ( d o c u m e n t 4).
2 7τεμφθείς is also possible (J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 288). 3 J. and L . R o b e r t 1954:
289-90 argue for their restoration τών παρ' [ήμΐν στρατιωτών?]·, though they a d m i t that it
is n o t absolutely certain; in any case, the sense is that P h i l o . . . c o m m a n d e d the local
cavalry garrison (so perhaps ιππέων should be restored; if that is too short, perhaps the
w o r d was s o m e t h i n g m o r e exotic and specific, such as ίπποτοξοτών or Ταραντίνων).
6 J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 292 and η. 1, τόν [iwi τών προσόδων] w o u l d suit the lacuna,
t h o u g h the R o b e r t s are cautious in p r o p o s i n g this restoration. 7 T h e adverb
could also be, say, φιλοτίμως. 1 7 - 1 8 πρα \ [γματε]ίας is tempting, because the w o r d
can precisely designate the business of an official: LSJ πραγματεία (2), Preisigke,
Wörterbuch πραγματεία (3), b u t the restoration m i g h t b e too short for the lacuna (on the
other hand, the last letter b e f o r e IA is c o m p a t i b l e with an epsilon). 34 T h e
R o b e r t s are categorical about the restoration ^[^eu/ctm] ('il est a b s o l u m e n t certain que
c'est un sigma'), and the top of the sigma can b e m a d e out on the p h o t o g r a p h of the
squeeze.

( W h e n Antiochos was king / Antiochos (the Great?) and Antiochos the son
were kings, year . . ., m o n t h . . ., when Nikanor was high-priest, in full
assembly; it seemed good to the council and the people of the
Apollonians:—since Philo . . . son of . . .) earlier was continuously well
[inclined in general towards the] people and in particular towards each
[one of the citizens]; [having been n a m e d hip]parch over the [troops which
stay with us], he ensures a complete state of discipline; ambassadors
having been sent to Ktesikles the . . . and to M e n a n d r o s the manager of
finances (dioiketes), concerning the interests of the people, he p u t himself
forward with great [zeal] when the ambassadors left, and 10 travelling
with t h e m he m a d e efforts so that all the things which we were asking for
should be procured; moreover, when Demetrios the controller of finances
(eklogistes) s u m m o n e d the ambassadors concerning the matters which
Demetrios the official in charge of the sanctuaries had b r o u g h t to his
attention, and laid claims against the ambassadors concerning the sacred
villages of [S]ale[ioi] in the m o u n t a i n s and Saleioi in the plain, . . . he in-
vited Demetrios to change none of the privileges which the people enjoyed
u n d e r his . . ., b u t to let t h e m be as they had been until the present time,
and he not only delivered to the ambassadors, who were sent at a later time
20 about the matter of the villages mentioned above, a letter addressed to
Demetrios and which agreed with the (people's) decree, b u t he also went
to meet h i m and spoke to h i m with great zeal, as the ambassadors bore
witness, since they had heard him; in general, he does not cease to be
always responsible for some good towards the citizens;—let it seem good to
the council and the people of the Apollonians:—to praise Philo . . . on
account of his quality and his goodwill towards the people; to give h i m 30
and to his descendants citizenship and exemption f r o m all the taxes which
the city has control of; to invite h i m to f r o n t seating every year, and to
crown h i m with a gold c r o w n in the g y m n i c contest w h i c h is celebrated in
honour of king Sfeleukos].

Commentary. T h e text is carved on a 'bloc de marbre' (J. and L . R o b e r t

1954: 285; though the thickness (8 cm.) means the block was sawn down
for reuse). T h e width can be reconstructed as 51 cm., the same as on the
block bearing d o c u m e n t 48: both texts were inscribed on a same building,
on the antas (Robert 1954: 286).
Since Ktesikles is also mentioned in the first letter of Antiochos to the
Sardians (document 1, 8), this inscription can be securely dated to that
king's reign, between 213 (the date of the Sardian document) and the end
of Seleukid rule in Asia M i n o r in 189/8, thus confirming the Roberts'
attribution (J. and L . Robert 1954: 286-8).
Ktesikles' involvement in financial matters concerning Sardeis as well as
Apollonia suggests that he wielded authority over the whole of cis-Tauric
Asia, as a financial counterpart of the viceroy Zeuxis. Ktesikles, as well
as the other officials mentioned in the Apollonian document, probably
operated f r o m Sardeis, and the Apollonian embassy presumably travelled
there to meet them, and back. It is likely that Demetrios 6 τεταγμένος επί
τών ίερών (lines 1 2 - 1 3 ) was appointed to succeed Nikanor as official in
charge of the shrines in c i s - T a u r i c Asia M i n o r (rather than an official
operating locally in Karia).
See C h . 3 § 2 on this document's implications for the workings of
Seleukid administration; C h . 4 § 2c (on the socialization of royal officials).

IV AFTERMATH

45. Letter of the Scipios to the Herakleians (late iQo)

CIG 3800 (misattributing the text); LBW 3.588) W . Judeich, Ath. Mitt. 15
(1890), 254-8, no. 7 (Syll. 618); RDGE 35 (composite text, taking into
account the identification of the authors and the textual improvements
by de Sanctis and Holleaux: below). T h e stone (whose left side is badly
eroded) is now in the L o u v r e ( M A 2819), where I examined it in M a r c h
1997, with the assistance of Ph. Gauthier.
M . Holleaux, REA 19 (1917), 237-51 (reprinted in ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΟΙ
ΥΠΑΤΟΣ (Paris, 1918), 131-46), arguing against attribution to Manlius
V u l s o ; G . de Sanctis, Atti Accad. Torino 5 (1921/2), 242-9 (attribution to
the Scipios), accepted and refined by M . Holleaux, Riv. Fil. 52 (1924),
29-44 (esp. 39-41). W ö r r l e 1988: 428 η. 14 for textual notes f r o m autopsy
and squeeze; photograph published by R o b e r t 1987: 197 (reproduced f r o m
BCH 102 (1978), 501). W ö r r l e 1988: 455 (Dias, Dionysios, and M e n e s
appear in embassies both to Z e u x i s and to the Scipios). O n date, Gauthier
in BE 89, 277, p. 406. A u s t i n 1981: no. 159, translation.

[Λεύκιος Κορνήλιος Σκιπίω]ν στρατηγός ύπατος Ρωμαίων

[καί Πόπλιος Σκιπίων 6 άδελ]<|>05 Ήρακλεωτών τήι βούληι καί τώι δή-
[μαu χαίρι iv •] ενέ[τνχον] ήμΐν οί παρ' υμα>μ πρέσβεις Διάς, Διής, Διονύ-
σιος, ]άμ[αν]δρο$·, [Εύ]δημος, Μόσχος, Αριστείδης, Μένης, άνδρες κα- 4
[Aot κάγαθοί], οΐ τό τε [φήφ]ισμα άπέδυικαγ και αύτοι διελεγησαν άκολού-
[θοις τοί]? εν τώ[ι φη]φίσματι κατακεχωρισμενοις ούδεν ελλείποντες
[φιλοτι]μίας· ήμ[εΐ]ς δε πρός πάντας τούς Έλληνας εύνόως διακείμεν[οι]
[τνγχά]νομεγ και πειρασόμεθα, παραγεγονότων ύμών εις τήν ήμέτεραμ 8
[πίστιμ], πρόνοιαμ ποιεΐσθαι τήν ενδεχομενην, άεί τίνος άγαθον παρα[ί]
[not γεν]όμενοι· σνγχωρονμεν δε ύμΐν τήν τε ελευθερίαγ καθότι και
[rats ά ] λ λ α κ πόλεσιν, όσαι ήμΐν τήν επιτροπήν έδωκαν, εχουσιν ύ[φ']
[αύτού? πά]ντα τά αύτώμ πολιτεύεσθαι κατά τούς ύμετέρονς νόμους 12
[/fat εν r]ots άλλοις πειρασόμεθα εύχρηστονντες ύμΐν άεί τίνος άγαθον
[παραίτ]ιοι γίνεσθαν άποδεχόμεθα δε και τά παρ' ύμώμ φιλάνθρωπα και τάς
[τιμάς, /f]at αύτοι δε πειρασόμεθα μηδενός λείπεσθαι έγ χάριτος άποδόσεν
[άπεστά]λκαμεν δε πρός ύμάς Λεύκιον "Ορβιον τόν επιμελησόμενον τής 16
[πόλίωΐ κ]α[ί) τής χώρας όπως μηδείς ύμάς παρενοχλήι. Έρρυ>σθε.
ι Wörrle holds the nu for absolutely certain; Haussoullier and, more tentatively,
Rayet had read the same letter (Rev. Phil. 23 (1899), 278, though admitting sigma as a
possibility); the photograph published by Robert also suggests a nu. A f t e r examining the
stone, I also read a nu (sigma is excluded). T h i s reading compels the restoration of the
name of L . Scipio as given above. 2 T h e phi entails the word [àSfA]</>oç and hence
the authorship by the Scipios; the reading was proposed by Holleaux, Riv. Fil. 52
(1924), 39-41, and reproduced by Sherk in RDGE. Phi is considered as certain by
Wörrle, according to w h o m the stone bears a long vertical stroke which can only belong
to a phi (and not the rho of earlier texts). O n examining the stone I could not make out
this long vertical stroke, but could see a small ellipse suggesting the middle part of a phi.
15 [πίστεις] from Böckh, and reproduced ever since; but it is better to restore τιμάς, to
o b t a i n t h e p h r a s e άποδεχόμεθα δέ και τά παρ' ύμών φιλάνθρωπα και τάς [τιμάς]. For a
parallel, e.g. document 31 A , I 6 - 7 (ironically, Antiochos III to Herakleia under
Latmos); RC 52, lines 4 1 - 4 2 (Eumenes II to the Ionians), is similar.

[Lucius Cornelius Scipio] consul of the Romans, and [Publius Scipio], his
brother, to the council and the people of the Herakleians, greetings. Your
ambassadors have m e t us: Dias, Dies, Diony[sios, . . .]am[an]dros,
[Eu]demos, Moschos, Menedemos, Aristeides, Menes, efxcellent] men,
who handed over the decree and themselves spoke according to the
contents of the decree, leaving out nothing in matters of zeal. As for us, we
h a p p e n to be well disposed towards all the Greeks, and we will try, since
you have come over into our [faith], to show solicitude as m u c h as
possible, always trying to be 10 responsible for some advantage. W e grant
you your liberty, just as to other cities which have entrusted themselves to
us, with the right to see all your own affairs conducted by yourselves
according to your laws, and in all other matters we will try to assist you and
always be responsible for some advantage. W e also acknowledge the
favours and the [honours] f r o m you, and we will try for our part to fall
behind in nothing as concerns the returning of gratitude. W e have sent to
you Lucius O r b i u s who will take care of your city and your territory, so
that no one should trouble you. Farewell.
Commentary. T h e text is p r e s e r v e d on an anta block f r o m t h e t e m p l e of
Athena at Herakleia (now in the Louvre).
4 6 . Letter of the Scipios to the Kolophonians ( 189)

C h . P i c a r d , Ephèse et Claros ( P a r i s , 1 9 2 2 ) , 1 4 4 - 6 , t e x t at 1 4 5 η . 5 ( S E G
ι . 4 4 0 ) ; M . H o l l e a u x , Riv. Fil. 52 (1924), 2 9 - 4 4 , w i t h n e w s u p p l e m e n t s and
h i s t o r i c a l c o m m e n t a r y ( R D G E 36 is H o l l e a u x ' s v e r s i o n ) ; L . R o b e r t , f r o m
a squeeze,1 p r o v i d e d elements for a new text, notably b y determining that
the t e x t w a s c o m p l e t e or n e a r l y c o m p l e t e o n the r i g h t h a n d side, and b y
o f f e r i n g a n e w r e a d i n g a t l i n e 3 ( R o b e r t in H o l l e a u x 1 9 6 8 : 3 4 - 5 ) . Robert's
t e x t is f o l l o w e d b e l o w .
Picard (above) describes the lettering as first century bc, and hence
suggests that the text was reçut.

I CAT, Λ]εύκιος [Κορνήλιος Σκι]-

[πίων στρατηγό]ς ύπατος Ρο^μαίων και [Πό]-
[πΑιοί Σκιπίων ό] αδελφός Κολοφονίων (sic) τή[ι]
[βουλήι καί τώι δήμ]ωι χαίρειν. ένέτυχο[ν] 4
[ήμίν οί παρ' ύ]μών πρέσβεις Άγαμήδης καί
[ C.7 ανδρε]? καλοί κάγαθοι, (οί) τό τε
[φήφισμα άπέδω]καν καί αύτοί διελέγη- vac.
[σαν άκολούθ]ως τοις ύφ' ύμών δεδογμέ- 8
[vois, ούδεν èÀ]Àet770vres φιλοτιμίας καί
c.iy ]ναι το ίερόν ασυ-
[λον ]

ι Robert proposed Παρά Ρωμαίων to fill the lacuna, since the document belonged to
a dossier of asylia acknowledgements. Another possibility is a local dating formula, επι
τον δείνα. 1—3 T h e solution for the names adopted here is Holleaux's, with
hesitations as to the last form. Robert could not read a nu in line 3, and hence proposed
[Λ]εύκιος [Κορνήλιος Π ο I πλια υ] and [Πό\πλιος Κορνήλιος]] but the parallel letter of the
Scipios to Herakleia makes Λεύκιος Κορνήλιος Σκιπίων certain. 3 I have added
the definite article to read [ό] αδελφός, favoured by Holleaux but ruled out by the nu
which Robert subsequently dismissed. Picard's text, reproduced above, is Κολοφονίων,
usually corrected to Κολοφ(ω)νίων; Robert's Κολ{ο)φωνιων is presumably an oversight.
5 Picard's [οί δύο παρ' ύμίν πρέσβεις] is not necessary. 6 Pace Hondius in SEG
4.567, the relative clause is necessary, since it also appears in the letter of the Scipios to
Herakleia. 9 - 1 0 T h e general sense is clear: the ambassadors made a request for
the asylia of the temple of Apollo Klarios to be acknowledged or declared.

[. . . L ] u c i u s [ C o r n e l i u s S c i p i o , c o n s u l ] o f t h e R o m a n s a n d [ P u b l i u s S c i p i o ,
his] b r o t h e r , to the c o u n c i l a n d the p e o p l e o f the K o l o p h o n i a n s , g r e e t i n g s .
Your ambassadors Agamedes and . . ., e x c e l l e n t m e n , m e t [us], (who)
h a n d e d o v e r [ t h e d e c r e e ] a n d t h e m s e l v e s s p o k e [in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the
t h i n g s y o u h a d d e c r e e d , o m i t t i n g [ n o t h i n g ] p e r t a i n i n g t o z e a l a n d [. . .] t o
. . . the shrine inviolate . . .

' Robert does not give details, but this squeeze presumably figured among the col-
lection of squeezes taken from the stones found by T h . Macridy-bey and Ch. Picard in
1913: this collection was entrusted to L . Robert by Picard (Robert 1989: 2 n. 6). Another
possibility is that Robert took this squeeze from the stone (Robert 1989, ibid, states that
some of the 1913 stones were seen again by the Roberts in their first season at Klaros),
in the field or in the old museum in Izmir, in Basmane, which had acted as a depot for
the excavations by Picard and M a c r i d y - B e y .
Commentary. T h e support for the text is an architectural block f r o m the
temple of A p o l l o at K l a r o s (Picard, Ephèse et Claros, 143-4).

47. Decree of the Amyzonians for Dionysios ( after 188 )

J. and L . R o b e r t 1983: 202-4, no· 22 with photograph of squeeze.

έδοξεν τήι\
βούληι και τώι δ[ήμωι· γνώμη πρυτάνεο>ν· επειδή Αιο]-
[ν]υσιο? {tos} Ίεροκλείους τών πολι[τών |
[χρή]σιμον εαυτόν εις πάντα τά συμφέροντα [τώι]
[κοινώι πα]ρέχεται, πράτεράν τε πρεσβεύων 7rpo[s Ζεϋ]- 4
[£if τον γε]νάμενον επι τών πραγμάτων π[ολλά /cat]
[μεγάλα φι]λάνθρωπα περιεποίησεν όμοίω[ς δε /cat]
[νυν προς r]oùs στρατηγούς πρεσβεύων [ c.6—7 ]
c.8 ] σ[υ\γκατασκευ[άζ\ει τώι κοινώ[ι C.6—7 ] 8
[ c.8—9 συγ]κεχω[ρημενα φιλάνθpom[a c.6—J ]
[ ]Π[ ] τίμια [ ]
traces of ι line
ι In the lacuna, formula for date. 4 κοινώι on the basis of line 8; the Roberts
also suggest δήμωι.

. . . it seemed good to the council and the people; [proposal of the prytaneis·,
since Dio]nysios, son of Hierokles, among the citizens, . . . makes himself
useful concerning all the interests of [the commonwealth]; first, by going
on embassies to [Zeuxis] the official in charge of affairs, he secured many
great favours; likewise, at the present time, by going on embassy to the
generals, . . . he obtains for the c o m m o n w e a l t h . . . conceded privileges
. . . grants of honours . . .

Commentary. T h e marble fragment which bears this text no doubt came

f r o m an anta block of the temple or the monumental gateway to the
Artemision.

48. Decree of the Citizens of Apollonia under Salbake for Pamphilos (after
188)

R o b e r t 1954: 303-12, no. 167, with plate 47 (edition, translation, com-

mentary by paragraphs).

τών δέκα πρεσβευτών άπο Ρώ]-

μης μετά Γνα,ί[ο]υ τοΰ στρατηγοΰ ταλ(λ)α δί[οι]- 1
κούντων εν Άπαμείαι, πορευθείς προς
αύτούς καλώς και συμφερόντοκ
ύπερ τής πατρίδος έστήσατο και εν ε- 4
κείνοις τοις καιροϊς, ούτε κίνδυνον ΰφι-
δάμενος τον οντα προ οφθαλμών ούτε
κακοπαθίαν ούδεμίαν εκκλίνων, μετά
πάσης σπουδής καί φιλοτιμίας έκαστα τού- 8
των διώικησεν μετά δε ταύτα πεμφθείς
εις Ρόδον καί διάγωνισάμενος μετά τών
συμπρεσβευτών προς τούς αντικείμε-
νους τών εγχωρίων, ώς ενεδεχετο μά- 12
λίστα σνμφερειν, ούτως έποιήσατο τάς συν-
θήκας προς Ροδίους• άλλας τε πλείονας
πρεσβείας πρεσβεύσας ύπερ τών κοινών
καί έμ πάσαις δεόντως αναστραφείς καί ορ- 16
θώς χρησάμενος τοις πράγμασιν πολλών αγα-
θών τήι πάλει παραίτιος γεγονεν τών δε προσόδων
τών δημοσίων μή ορθώς διοικούμενων, άλλα διαφ[ω]-
νουσών ούχ ώς ετυχεν, φήφισμα γράφας καί επιδούς 20
τήι βούληι καί τώι δήμωι εποίησεν αύτάς διασώιζεσ-
θαι, TOW προχειρζομένων ανδρών κατ' ένιαυτόν έκασ-
[τ]α διοικούντων κατ(ά τό) φήφισμα ώστε μηθεν έτι διάπτω-
μα γενέσθαι, καί το δλον [έμ π\αντί καιρώι καί λέγων καί γρά- 24
φων καί πράσσων τά βέλτιστα ύπερ τοΰ δήμου διατελεί
τηλαυγή δεικνύων τήν σπ[ου]δι)ΐ' έμ πάσιν ην ποιείται
ύπερ τής πόλεως· «ττ [e] i ούν πολλάς καί μεγάλας χρείας
παρείσχηται τώι δήμωι, δίκαιον δε έστιν τούς αγαθούς 28
τών ανδρών καταξίας χάριτας κομίζεσθαι τών εύε[ρ]-
γετημάτων δεδόχθαι Άπολλονιατών τήι βουλ[ήι]
καί τώι δήμωι· επηινήσθαι Πάμφιλον άρετ[ής ένεκεν]
[κ]αι εύνοιας ήν έχow διατ[ελει ] 32
[κ]αλεισ0αι δεν αύ[τόν εις προεδρί]-
αν καθ' εκα[στον ένιαυτόν εν τώι συνελουμέ]-
νωι γυ[μικώι άγώνι ]
33 Robert proposes [οται τούς ίκγόνους]. 35 Robert Ι954 : 3 1 2 > suggests that the
contest was celebrated for Seleukos (I), here as for the decree in honour of the Seleukid
hipparch (line 34).

[. . . as the ten legates from Ro]me were settling all the other matters, with
Cnaeus the consul, at Apameia, (Pamphilos) travelled to see them and
behaved in a fine and useful manner on behalf of his fatherland, and in
those circumstances, without avoiding the danger that lay before his eyes
nor any hardship, he handled each of these matters with all eagerness and
zeal; after these events, having been sent 10 to Rhodes and having
struggled, with his fellow-ambassadors, against those of the locals who
were our opponents, he concluded agreements with the Rhodians, in the
manner that was the most likely to be useful; having gone on many other
embassies on behalf of the common interests, and having behaved properly
on all of them, and having dealt with affairs rightly, he has been
responsible for many advantages for the city; and as the public finances
were not administered rightly, but 20 were being squandered in a quite
extraordinary way, having written a decree and passed it on to the council
and the people, he brought it about that the public finances be saved, since
the citizens elected year by year were administering everything according
to the decree, so that no losses occurred anymore; and in general, on every
occasion, by speaking, writing, and doing the best on behalf of the people,
he continuously demonstrates the brilliance of the zeal w h i c h he has in all
matters on behalf of the city;—since then he has performed many great
services for the people, and since it is j u s t that good men should receive
tokens of gratitude worthy of their benefactions;—30 let it seem good to
the council and the people of the Apolloniates:—to praise Pamphilos on
account of his excellence and the goodwill w h i c h he continuously has
[(towards the city) . . .]; to invite h i m [and his descendants? . . .] to front
seating, each [year, in the] g y m n i c [contest celebrated for (king Seleukos?)]

Commentary. T h e decree is preserved on an architectural block, probably

f r o m the anta of a monumental building: 'sans doute une parastade' (J. and
L . Robert 1954: 303), found in M e d e t , on the site of Apollonia. T h e width
of the block (51 cm.) is the same as can be restored for the block bearing
the decree for a Seleukid hipparch (document 44), so that both documents
were probably inscribed on the same building (J. and L . R o b e r t 1954: 286).

49. Attalid Dossier Concerning the List of M y s t a i of Apollo Pleurenos

(after 188)

Malay and Nalbantoglu 1996: 7 5 - 9 , no. 1 (editio princeps, translation,

commentary, plate).

Έπι Ενθνδήμον άρχιερέως και

ιερέως Καδοου Πληρν Εύθυδ-
ήμωι άρχιερεΐ υπόμνημα πα-
ρά Καδοου, ιερέως τον εν Πλευ- 4
ροΐς Απόλλωνος, έχοντος τήν
Ιερητήαν εκ πλείονος χρόνου·
ωσα πρότερον επ' Άντιόχου τού
βασιλέως Νικάνορα τόν άρχιερ[έ]- 8
α ίνα στήσω στήλην εν τώι ιερώι
κατατάξαντός μου τό εκείνον
όνομα και τό εμόν και τών μν[στ]-
ών και νΰν άζιώ σ' εί φαίνετα[ι] 12
συντάξαι γράφαι Άσκληπιάδ[ηι]
τώι οίκονόμο)ΐ ίνα παραδείξη μοι
τόπον εν φ σ\τ\ήσω τήν στήλην
εν ή κατατάξω τό τε σον όνομα 16
και τό εμόν και τών μυστών.
Διόφαντος Άττινψ τής γραφ[εί\-
σης μοι επιστολής παρά Εύθνδή-
μου τοΰ άρχιερέως νποτέταχά 20
σοι τό άντίγραφον. Εΰθνδημος Ά-
σκληπιάδη· τοΰ άναδοθέντος
μου υπομνήματος παρά Καδ-
οου ίερίως τοΰ iv Πλευροΐς 24
Απόλλωνος γενέσθω αύτώ-
ι καθάπβρ ήξίωσεν.
Μενεκράτης Έρμογένου
Μητρόδωρος Μιθρεους 28
traces of one line
τρ
14 T h e stone reads ΠΑΡΑΔ^ΙΞΗ, with an epsilon inserted above the line as an after-
thought (eds.).
W h e n E u t h y d e m o s was high-priest, and K a d o o s son of Pleri was priest.
M e m o r a n d u m to E u t h y d e m o s the high-priest f r o m K a d o o s , the long-
standing priest of A p o l l o in Pleura: I earlier asked Nikanor, under
Antiochos the king, for permission to put up in the shrine a stele on which
ί ο I should record his name, and mine, and that of the initiates (mystai),
and now I ask you, if it seems appropriate to give that order, to write 1 to
Asklepiades the oikonomos to give me a place in w h i c h I may set up the stele
on w h i c h I may record your name and mine and that of the initiates.
Diophantos to Attinas: I have 20 joined a copy of the letter f r o m
E u t h y d e m o s the high-priest. E u t h y d e m o s to Asklepiades: of the m e m o -
randum given to me f r o m K a d o o s the priest of A p o l l o in Pleura, let it be
for h i m as he asks. (List starts:) Menekrates son of Hermogenes,
Metrodoros son of Mithres . . .

Commentary. T h e dossier is inscribed on a stele, purchased by the Bergama

M u s e u m and reportedly found north of the lake K o l o e (modern M a r m a r
Gölü).
A p o l l o Pleurenos and his mystai were already k n o w n from an inscription
published and treated by R o b e r t (see Robert 1987: 323—9, reproducing the
original publication in BCH 106 (1082), 361-7): the priest Apollonios, son
of K a d o o s , and the mystai honour one Menandros, the 'official in charge of
the sacred incomes', under the high-priesthood of Hermogenes. T h a n k s to
the new document, reproduced here, Malay and Nalbantoglu 1996 reinter-
pret Robert's inscription: rather than dating to the first century bc, it must
be an Attalid document, relating to the same institutions as the present
inscription, and produced slightly later.
See C h . 3 § 2c (on the implications of this d o c u m e n t for the activity of
Nikanor, and the control of the Seleukid state over the local shrines).

' I have preferred to punctuate and translate el φαίν€τα[ι] I σνντάξαι, γράφαι

Άσκληπιάδ[ηι], literally 'if it seems good to you to order, (I ask you) to write to
Asklepiades', rather than the editors' 'If it seems good to you, (I ask you) to order to
write'. Euthydemos did not need to give an order to write: as a royal official, his medi-
um for conveying orders was the writing of letters. T o order and to write were cotermi-
nous for him: hence the interchangeability of the terms, and K a d o o s could as well have
said 'If it seems good to you to write it, please give the order that . . .'.
 B I B L I O G R A P H Y

AGER, SH. L . (1996) Interstate Arbitrations in the Greek World, 337-90

B.C. ( H e l l e n i s t i c S o c i e t y a n d C u l t u r e 18). B e r k e l e y , C a l i f . , a n d L o n d o n :
LTniversity of C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s .
AKARCA, A . (1959) Les Monnaies grecques de Mylasa (Bibliothèque
a r c h é o l o g i q u e et h i s t o r i q u e d e l ' I n s t i t u t f r a n ç a i s d'archéologie
d ' I s t a n b u l 1). P a r i s .
ALLEN, R. E. (1983) The Attalid Kingdom: A Constitutional History.
O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Press.
ANDERSON, Β. (1991) Imagined Communities : Reflections on the Origin and
Spread of Nationalism (rev. e d n . ) . L o n d o n a n d N e w - Y o r k : V e r s o .
ARENDT, Η . (1970) On Violence. L o n d o n : A l l e n L a n e .
ATKINSON, Κ . T . M . (1972) Ά H e l l e n i s t i c L a n d - C o n v e y a n c e : T h e E s t a t e
of M n e s i m a c h u s in t h e P l a i n of S a r d i s ' , Historia 21: 45-74.
AUSTIN, J. L . (1975) How to do Things with Words (2nd e d n . , e d . J. O.
U r m s o n a n d M . S b i s à ) . C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : H a r v a r d LTniversity P r e s s .
AUSTIN, M . M . (1981) The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman
Conquest. A Selection of Ancient Sources in Translation. Cambridge:
C a m b r i d g e University Press.
(1986) ' H e l l e n i s t i c K i n g s , W a r a n d t h e E c o n o m y ' , CQ 36, 450-66.
a n d VIDAL-NAQUET, P. (1972) Economies et sociétés en Grèce ancienne.
Paris: A r m a n d Colin.
AYMARD, A. (1940) ' L a M o r t d ' A n t i o c h o s , tils d ' A n t i o c h o s I I I M é g a s .
É t u d e de c h r o n o l o g i e ' . Rev. Phil. 14: 89-109.
(1948) ' L e P r o t o c o l e r o y a l g r e c et s o n é v o l u t i o n ' , REA 50: 232-63.
(1949) ' D u n o u v e a u s u r A n t i o c h o s I I I d ' a p r è s u n e i n s c r i p t i o n
g r e c q u e d ' I r a n ' , REA 51: 327-45.
BABINGER, F r . C . H . (1978) Mehmed the Conqueror and his Time ( B o l l i n g e n
series 96) ( t r a n s . R . M a n h e i m , ed. W . C . H i c k m a n ) . P r i n c e t o n :
Princeton University Press.
BADIAN, E. (1964) ' R o m e a n d A n t i o c h u s t h e G r e a t : A S t u d y in C o l d W a r ' ,
in Studies in Greek and Roman History, O x f o r d : Basil B l a c k w e l l , 1 1 2 - 3 9 .
(1966a) ' A l e x a n d e r t h e G r e a t a n d t h e G r e e k s of A s i a ' , in E . B a d i a n
(ed.), Ancient Society and Institutions (Studies presented to Victor
Ehrenberg on his 75th birthday), O x f o r d : Basil Blackwell, 37-69.
(1966b) R e v i e w of S c h m i t t 1964, Gnomon 38: 709-16.
BAGNALL, R . S. (1976) The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions out-
side Egypt ( C o l u m b i a s t u d i e s in t h e C l a s s i c a l t r a d i t i o n 4). L e i d e n : E . J.
Brill.
BAR-KOCHVA, Β. (1976) The Seleucid Army: Organization and Tactics in
the Great Campaigns. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press.
BARKEY, K . (1994) Bandits and Bureaucrats: The Ottoman Route to State
Centralization. Ithaca and L o n d o n : Cornell University Press.
BARNES, B. (1988) The Nature of Power. C a m b r i d g e : Polity.
BARONOWSKI, D . W . (1991) ' T h e Status of the G r e e k Cities of Asia M i n o r
after 190 B . C . ' , Hermes 119: 450—63.
BASLEZ, M . - F R . , and VIAL, CL. (1987) ' L a Diplomatie de Délos dans le
premier tiers du I l e siècle', BCH m : 2 8 1 - 3 1 2 .
BEAN, G . Ε. ( 1 9 7 1 ) Turkey beyond the Maeander : An Archaeological Guide.
L o n d o n : E. Benn.
and COOK, J. M . (1955) ' T h e Halicarnassus Peninsula', BSA 50:
85-171·
BELOCH, K . J. (1927) Griechische Geschichte (2nd edn.), iv.2. Berlin and
Leipzig: de G r u y t e r .
BENGTSON, H. (1937) Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit. Ein Beitrag
zum antiken Staatsrecht, i ( M ü n c h e n e r Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung
und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 26). M u n i c h .
(1944) Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit. Ein Beitrag zum antiken
Staatsrecht, ii ( M ü n c h e n e r Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken
Rechtsgeschichte 32). M u n i c h : Beck.
(1952) Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit. Ein Beitrag zum antiken
Staatsrecht iii ( M ü n c h e n e r Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken
Rechtsgeschichte 36). M u n i c h : Beck.
BÉQUIGNON, Y . , and LAUMONIER, A . (1925) 'Fouilles de T é o s (1924)',
BCH 49: 288-9.
BERNARD, P., and RAPIN, CL. (1994) ' U n parchemin gréco-bactrien d'une
collection privée', CRAI 1994: 261-94.
BERTHOLD, R. M . (1975) ' L a d e , P e r g a m u m and C h i o s ' , Historia 24:
150-63·
( 1 9 7 5 - 6 ) ' T h e Rhodian A p p e a l to R o m e in 201 B . C . ' , Cjf 71: 9 7 - 1 0 7 .
BERTRAND, J . - M . (1974) 'Sur les hyparques d ' A l e x a n d r e ' , in Mélanges
d'histoire ancienne offerts à William Seston, Paris: E. de Boccard, 25—34.
(1990) ' F o r m e s de discours politiques: décrets des cités grecques et
correspondance des rois hellénistiques', in Cl. N i c o l e t (ed.), Du pouvoir
dans l'antiquité: mots et réalités (Cahiers du Centre G l o t z 1), Paris and
G e n e v a : D r o z , 101 —15.
(1992) Cités et royaumes du monde grec: espace et politique. Paris:
Hachette.
BERVE, H. (1926) Das Alexanderreich auf prosopographischer Grundlage. 2
vols. M u n i c h : Beck.
BEVAN, E. R. (1902) The House of Seleucus. London: E. Arnold.
BICKERMANN, Ε.* (1932a) ' B e l l u m A n t i o c h i c u m ' , Hermes 67: 4 7 - 7 6
(= Bickerman 1985, 38-68).
t This remarkable scholar transcribed his Russian name in three different ways, accord-
ing to the language each article was written in: Bickermann in German, Bikerman in
French, and Bickerman in English (reflecting his own movements from Germany to
BICKERMANN, Ε. (19326) ' R o m u n d L a m p s a k o s ' , Philologus 87: 2 7 7 - 9 9 .
BIKERMAN, E . ( 1 9 3 4 ) ' A l e x a n d r e le G r a n d e t les v i l l e s d ' A s i e ' , REG 47:
3 4 6 - 7 4 ( = B i c k e r m a n 1985: 7 1 - 9 9 ) .
0 9 3 7 ) ' N o t e s s u r P o l y b e . I. L e s t a t u t d e s v i l l e s d ' A s i e a p r è s la p a i x
d ' A p a m é e ' , REG 50: 2 1 7 - 3 9 ( = B i c k e r m a n 1985: 1 4 3 - 6 5 ) .
(1938) Institutions des Séleucides (Haut-commissariat de la
R é p u b l i q u e française en Syrie et au Liban. Service des antiquités.
B i b l i o t h è q u e a r c h é o l o g i q u e e t h i s t o r i q u e 26). P a r i s : G e u t h n e r .
( 1 9 3 9 ) ' L a C i t é g r e c q u e d a n s les m o n a r c h i e s h e l l é n i s t i q u e s ' , Rev.
Phil. 13: 3 3 5 - 4 9 ( = B i c k e r m a n 1985: 2 1 5 - 2 9 ) .
BICKERMAN, E . (1943/4) ' N o t e s o n S e l e u c i d a n d P a r t h i a n c h r o n o l o g y . 2.
A n t i o c h u s H i e r a x a n d A t t a l u s Γ , Berytus 8: 7 6 - 8 .
BIKERMAN, E . (1950) ' R e m a r q u e s s u r le d r o i t d e s g e n s d a n s la G r è c e
c l a s s i q u e ' , RIDA 4: 9 9 - 1 2 7 ( = B i c k e r m a n 1985: 3 2 5 - 5 3 ) .
BICKERMAN, E . (1980) Studies in Jewish and Christian history ( A r b e i t e n z u r
G e s c h i c h t e d e s A n t i k e n J u d e n t u m s u n d d e s L T r c h r i s t e n t u m s 9), p a r t 2.
L e i d e n : E . J. Brill.
(1985) Religion and Politics in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods ( e d .
E. G a b b a and M . Smith). C o m o : N e w Press.
BIELMAN, A . (1994) Retour à la liberté: Libération et sauvetage des
prisonniers en Grèce ancienne. Recueil d'inscriptions honorant des
sauveteurs et analyse critique ( É t u d e s E p i g r a p h i q u e s 1). L a u s a n n e : É c o l e
Française d ' A t h è n e s , U n i v e r s i t é de L a u s a n n e .
BILLOWS, R . A . (1990) Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the
Hellenistic State ( H e l l e n i s t i c C u l t u r e a n d S o c i e t y 4). B e r k e l e y , C a l i f . ,
a n d L o n d o n : LTniversity of C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s .
0995) Kings and Colonists: Aspects of Macedonian Imperialism
( C o l u m b i a S t u d i e s i n t h e C l a s s i c a l T r a d i t i o n 22). L e i d e n : E . J. B r i l l .
BLÜMEL, W . (1992) ' E i n B r i e f d e s p t o l e m ä i s c h e n M i n i s t e r s T l e p o l e m o s a n
d i e S t a d t K i l d a r a i n K a r i e n ' , EA 20: 1 2 7 - 3 3 .
(1996) ' E r g ä n z u n g e n in d e m F u n k t i o n ä r b r i e f a u s E u r o m o s ' , EA 27:
61-2.
BOFFO, L . ( 1 9 8 5 ) I re ellenistici e i centri religiosi dell'Asia Minore
( P u b b l i c a z i o n i d é l i a f a c o l t à d i l e t t e r e e filosofia d e l l ' U n i v e r s i t a d i P a v i a
37). F l o r e n c e : L a N u o v a I t a l i a .
(1988) ' E p i g r a f i d i c i t t à g r e c h e : u n ' e s p r e s s i o n e d i s t o r i o g r a f i a l o c a l e ' ,
i n Studi di storia e storiografia antiche per Emilio Gabba. P a v i a a n d C o m o :
N e w Press, 9-48.
BOSWORTH, A . B. (1988) Conquest and Empire: The Reign of Alexander the
Great. C a m b r i d g e ; C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .
BOUSQUET, J. (1986) ' L e t t r e d e P t o l é m é e E v e r g è t e à X a n t h o s d e L y c i e ' ,
REG 99: 2 2 - 3 2 .
(1988) ' L a S t è l e d e s K y t é n i e n s a u L é t ô o n d e X a n t h o s ' , REG 101:
12-53·

France and finally the USA). The original spellings have been preserved; in this book
(written in English), 'Bickerman' is used to refer to him discursively.
BRANDT, H. (1992) Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft Pamphyliens und Pisidiens
im Altertum (Asia M i n o r Studien 7). Bonn: R. Habelt.
BRASHEAR, W . M . (1984) Ά N e w F r a g m e n t on Seleucid History (P. Berel.
21286)', in Atti del XVII congresso internazionale di papirologia, ii.
Naples: C e n t r o internazionale per lo studio dei papiri ercolanesi,
345-50·
BRAUDEL, F. (1966) La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen à l'époque de
Philippe II (2nd edn.). 2 vols. Paris: A r m a n d Colin.
BRESSON, A . (1995) ' U n diadoque pas comme les autres', DHA 21: 87-8.
BRIANT, P. (1982) Rois, tributs et paysans. Études sur les formations tribu-
taires du Moyen Orient ancien (Annales littéraires de l'Université de
Besançon 269). Paris: L e s Belles Lettres.
(1994) ' D e Sarmarkhand à Sardes et de la ville de Suse au pays des
Hanéens', Topoi 4: 4 5 5 - 6 7
BRINGMANN, K . (1993) ' T h e K i n g as Benefactor: Some Remarks on Ideal
K i n g s h i p in the A g e of Hellenism', in Bulloch et al. 1993: 7 - 2 4 .
and VON STEUBEN, H. (eds.) (1995) Schenkungen hellenisticher
Herrscher an griechische Städte und Heiligtümer. Teil I. Zeugnisse und
Kommentare. Berlin: A k a d e m i e .
BRISCOE, J. (1972) 'Flamininus and R o m a n politics, 200-189 B . C . '
Latomus 31: 22-53.
(1973) Commentary on Livy Books XXXI—XXXIII. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
(1981) Commentary on Livy Books XXXIV-XXXVII. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
BRIXHE, CL. (1976) Le Dialecte grec de Pamphylie. Documents et grammaire
(Bibliothèque de l'Institut Français d'études anatoliennes d'Istanbul
26). Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
and HODOT, R. (1988) L'Asie mineure du nord au sud. Inscriptions
inédites (Études d'archéologie classique 6). N a n c y : Presses LTniversi-
taires de N a n c y .
BRODERSEN, Κ . (1991) Appians Antiochike (Syriake 1-44, 232). Text und
Kommentar. Nebst ein Anhang: Plethons Syriake-Exzerpt (Münchener
Beiträge zur Alten Geschichte 3). M u n i c h : Editio Maris.
BROWN, P. (1992) Power and Persuasion in late Antiquity: Towards a
Christian Empire. Madison, Wis.: LTniversity of Wisconsin Press.
BROWN T . S. (1961) 'Apollophanes and Polybius, Book 5', Phoenix 15:
187-95·
BULLOCH, Α . , GRUEN, E. S., LONG, Α . Α . , and STEWART, A . (eds.) (1993)
Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World (Hellenistic
Culture and Society 12). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n : University of
California Press.
BURSTEIN, S. (1986) ' L y s i m a c h u s and the Greek Cities: A P r o b l e m in
Interpretation', in Ancient Macedonia 4, Thessaloniki: H i d r y m a
Meleton Chersonesou tou H a i m o u , 133-8.
CARSANA, C . (1996) Le dirigenze cittadine netto stato seleucidico (Biblioteca
 di Athenaeum 30). C o m o : N e w Press.
CARTLEDGE, P., GARNSEY, P., and GRUEN, E. (1997) Hellenistic Constructs:
Essays in Culture, History and Historiography (Hellenistic Culture and
Society 26). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n : U n i v e r s i t y of California
Press.
CHANIOTIS, A . (1988) Historie und Historiker in den griechischen Inschriften.
Epigraphische Beiträge zur griechischen Historiographie (Heidelberger
althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien 4). Stuttgart: F.
Steiner.
(1993) 'Ein diplomatischer Statthalter n i m m t Rücksicht auf den ver-
letzten Stolz zweier hellenistischer Kleinpoleis (Nagidos und Arsinoe)',
EA 21: 3 1 - 4 2
(1996) Die Verträge zwischen kretischen Poleis in der hellenistischen Zeit.
(Heidelberger althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien 24).
Stuttgart: F. Steiner.
CHISHULL, E. (1728) Antiquitates Asiaticae Christianam aeram antecedentes.
London.
CLAESSEN, H . , and SKALNÎK, P. (eds.) (1978) The Early State ( N e w
Babylon, Studies in the Social Sciences 32). T h e Hague: M o u t o n .
COBB, R. (1975) Paris and its Provinces. O x f o r d : O x f o r d LTniversity Press.
COHEN, G . M . (1995) The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands and
Asia Minor (Hellenistic Culture and Society 17). Berkeley, Calif., and
L o n d o n : University of California Press.
COOK, B. F. (1966) Inscribed Hadra Vases in the Metropolitan Museum
(Metropolitan M u s e u m of A r t Papers, no. 12). N e w Y o r k : Metropolitan
M u s e u m of A r t .
CORSARO, M . (1985) 'Tassazione regia e tassazione cittadina dagli
A c h e m e n i d i ai re ellenistici', REA 87: 73-95·
CRAMPA, J. (1969) Labraunda. Swedish Excavations and Researches, i i i . i ,
The Greek Inscriptions. Part I: 1-12 (Period of Olympichus). Lund: C.
W . K . Gleerup.
(1972) Labraunda. Swedish Excavations and Researches, iii.2, The
Greek Inscriptions. Part II: 13-133. L u n d : C . W . K . G l e e r u p
CROWTHER, CH. V . (1989) 'Iasos in the Early Second Century B . C . : A
N o t e on O G I S 137', BICS 36: 136-8.
(1993) 'Foreign Judges in Seleucid Cities ( G I B M 421)', Journal of
Ancient Civilizations 8: 39—77.
(1995a) ' T h e C h r o n o l o g y of the Iasian T h e a t r e Lists: A g a i n ' , Chiron
25: 225-34.
(19956) 'Iasos in the Second C e n t u r y B . C . I l l : Foreign Judges f r o m
Priene', BICS 40: 91—138.
CUINET, V . (1894) La Turquie dAsie. Géographie administrative.
Statistique descriptive et raisonnée de l Asie-Mineure, iv. Paris: E. L e r o u x .
CURTY, O . (1989) ' L ' H i s t o r i o g r a p h i e hellénistique et l'inscription
"Inschriften von Priene" no. 37', in M . Piérart and O. C u r t y (eds.),
Hi storia testis. Mélanges d'épigraphie, d'histoire ancienne et de philologie
 offerts à Tadeusz Zawadzki. Fribourg: Éditions Universitaires, 2 1 - 3 5 .
CURTY, O . (1995) Les Parentés légendaires entre cités grecques. Catalogue
raisonné des inscriptions contenant le terme ΣΥΓΓΕΝΕΙΑ et analyse critique
(École Pratique des Hautes Études, IVe section. Hautes Études du
monde gréco-romain 20). G e n e v a and Paris: Droz.
DAUX, G . (1973), ' U n passage du décret de T é o s pour Antiochos I I P , Z P E
12: 235-6.
DEBORD, P. (1982) Aspects sociaux et économiques de la vie religieuse dans
ΓAnatolie gréco-romaine. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
(1985) ' L a L y d i e du N o r d - E s t ' , REA 87: 345-58.
(1994) 'Essai sur la géographie historique de la région de Stratonicée',
Mélanges Pierre Lévêque 8: 107-22.
DE PLANHOL, X . (1958) De la plaine pamphylienne aux lacs pisidiens.
Nomadisme et vie paysane. Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
DESCAT, R. (1997) Ά propos d'un citoyen de Philippes à T h é a n g e l a ' , REA
99: 4 1 1 - 1 3 .
DESIDERI, P. (1970/1) 'Studi di storiografia eracleota. II. L a guerra con
A n t i o c o il grande', SCO 19-20: 4 8 7 - 5 3 7 .
DOYLE, M . W . (1986) Empires. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
DUNST, G . (1968) ' Z u dem neuen epigraphischen D o k u m e n t aus T e o s . I',
ZPE 3: 170-3.
ELWYN, S. (1990) ' T h e Recognition Decrees for the Delphian Soteria and
the Date of S m y r n a ' s Inviolability', jfHS 110: 177-80.
ERRINGTON, R. M . (I971 ) ' T h e A l l e g e d S y r o - M a c e d o n i a n Pact and the
Origins of the Second Macedonian W a r ' , Athenaeum 49: 336—54.
(1980) ' R o m , Antiochos der Grosse und die Asylie von T e o s ' , ZPE
39: 279-84.
(1986) 'Antiochos I I I , Zeuxis und E u r o m o s ' , E A 8: 1-8.
(1987) 'Θέα Ρώμη und römischer Einfluss südlich des Mäanders im 2.
Jh. v. C h r . ' , Chiron 17: 9 7 - 1 1 8 .
(1989a) ' T h e Peace T r e a t y between Miletus and Magnesia (I. M i l e t
148)', Chiron 19: 279-88
(19896) ' R o m e against Philip and A n t i o c h u s ' , in Α . Ε. Astin, F. W .
Walbank, M . W . Frederiksen, and R. M . Ogilvie (eds.), CAH2, viii.
244-89.
(1993) 'Inschriften von E u r o m o s ' , E A 21: 15-32.
ERSKINE, A. (1994) ' T h e R o m a n s as C o m m o n Benefactors', Historia 43:
70-87.
FELLOWS, CH. (1839) A Journal Written During an Excursion in Asia
Minor. L o n d o n .
(1841 ) An Account of Discoveries in Lycia, Being a Journal Kept during
a Second Excursion in Asia Minor. L o n d o n .
FERRARY, J . - L . (1988) Philhellénisme et impérialisme. Aspects idéologiques de
la conquête romaine du monde hellénistique de la seconde guerre de
Macédoine à la guerre contre Mithridate ( B E F A R 271). R o m e : École
française de Rome.
 ( 1 9 9 1 ) ' L e S t a t u t d e s c i t é s l i b r e s d a n s l ' E m p i r e r o m a i n à la l u m i è r e
d e s i n s c r i p t i o n s d e C l a r o s ' , CRAI 1991: 557-77·
a n d GAUTHIER, PH. ( 1 9 8 1 ) ' L e T r a i t é e n t r e le r o i A n t i c h o s e t
L y s i m a c h e i a ' , Journ. Sav. 1981: 3 2 7 - 4 5 .
FINLEY, M . I. (1983) Economy and Society in Ancient Greece, ( e d . B . S h a w
a n d R. P. Sailer). H a r m o n d s w o r t h : P e n g u i n .
FLEISCHER, R . ( 1 9 7 2 - 5 ) ' M a r s y a s u n d A c h a i o s ' ÖJh 50, Beibl., 1 0 3 - 2 2 .
FOGEL, M . (1989) Les Cérémonies de l'information dans la France du XVIe
au milieu du XVIIIe siècle. P a r i s : F a y a r d .
DE FOUCAULT, J . - A . ( 1 9 7 2 ) Recherches sur la langue et le style de Polybe.
Paris: L e s Belles L e t t r e s .
FOUCAULT, M . ( 1 9 7 5 ) Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison. P a r i s :
Gallimard.
FOWDEN, G . (1993) Empire to Commonwealth: Consequences of Monotheism
in Late Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
FOXHALL, L . a n d FORBES, H . A . (1982) 'Sitometreia: T h e R o l e of G r a i n s as
a S t a p l e F o o d in C l a s s i c a l A n t i q u i t y ' , Chiron 12: 4 1 - 9 0 .
FRANCO, C . (1993) II regno di Lisimaco. Strutture amministrative e rapporti
con le città ( S t u d i e l l e n i s t i c i 6). P i s a : G i a r d i n i .
GALLANT, T . W . (1989). ' C r i s i s a n d R e s p o n s e : R i s k B u f f e r i n g B e h a v i o r i n
H e l l e n i s t i c G r e e k C o m m u n i t i e s ' , Journal of Interdisciplinary History 19:
393-413·
GARNSEY, P . (1988) Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman World:
Responses to Risk and Crisis. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .
GAUGER, J . - D . ( 1 9 7 7 ) Beiträge zur jüdischen Apologetik: Untersuchungen
zur Authentizität von Urkunden bei Flavius Josephus und im I.
Makkabäerbuch ( B o n n e r B i b l i s c h e B e i t r ä g e 49), C o l o g n e : P . H a n n s t e i n .
0993) 'Formalien und Authentizitätsfrage: noch einmal zum
S c h r e i b e n A n t i o c h o s ' I I I . a n Z e u x i s ( J o s . A n t . J u d . 12: 1 4 8 - 5 3 ) u n d z u
d e n A n t i o c h o s - U r k u n d e n b e i J o s e p h u s ' , Hermes 1 2 1 : 6 3 - 9 .
GAUTHIER, PH. ( 1 9 7 2 ) Symbola. Les étrangers et la justice dans les cités
grecques ( A n n a l s d e l ' E s t . M é m o i r e s 42). N a n c y : U n i v e r s i t é d e N a n c y I I .
( 1 9 7 9 ) 'ΕΞΑΓΩΓΗΣΙΤΟΥ: S a m o t h r a c e , H i p p o m é d o n e t les L a g i d e s ' ,
Historia 28: 7 6 - 8 9 .
(1980) ' L e s H o n n e u r s d e l ' o f f i c i e r s é l e u c i d e L a r i c h o s à P r i è n e ' , Journ.
Sav. 180: 3 5 - 5 0 .
( 1 9 8 5 ) Les Cités grecques et leurs bienfaiteurs (IVe—Ier siècle avant J.-
C.). Contribution à l'histoire des institutions (BCH s u p p l é m e n t 12). P a r i s :
École française d'Athènes.
(1989) Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes I I ( A r c h a e o l o g i c a l E x p l o r a t i o n
of S a r d i s / É c o l e P r a t i q u e d e s I d a u t e s É t u d e s , I V e s e c t i o n . H a u t e s É t u d e s
d u M o n d e G r é c o - R o m a i n 15), P a r i s a n d G e n e v a : D r o z .
(1993A) ' E p i g r a p h i c a I I . 4. Prostagmata a t t a l i d e s à É g i n e ( O G I 329)',
Rev. Phil. 67: 4 1 - 8 .
(19936) ' L e s C i t é s h e l l é n i s t i q u e s ' , i n H a n s e n 1993: 2 1 1 - 3 1 .
(1994) ' L e s R o i s h e l l é n i s t i q u e s e t les j u g e s é t r a n g e r s : à p r o p o s d e
 décrets de K i m ô l o s et de Laodicée du L y k o s ' , Journ. Sav. 1994: 165-95.
GAUTHIER, PH. (1996) ' Bienfaiteurs du gymnase au L é t ô o n de X a n t h o s ' ,
REG 109: 1-34.
GAWANTKA, W . (1975) Isopolitie. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der zwischen-
staatlichen Beziehungen in der griechischen Antike (Vestigia 22). M u n i c h :
Beck.
GEERTZ, C . (1993) Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive
Anthropology. L o n d o n : Fontana.
GERA, D . (1987) 'Ptolemy son of T h r a s e a s and the F i f t h Syrian W a r ' , Anc.
Soc. 18: 63-73.
(1998) Judaea and Mediterranean Politics. 219 to 161 B.C.E. (E. J.
Brill's series in Jewish Studies 8). Leiden: E. J. Brill.
GiovANNINI, A . (1983) ' T é o s , Antiochos I I I et Attale 1er', Mus. Helv. 40:
178-84.
GRAINGER, J. D . (1990) Seleukos Nikator. Constructing a Hellenistic
Kingdom. L o n d o n : Routledge.
(1996) 'Antiochos III in T h r a c e ' , Historia 45: 329-43.
GRANDJEAN, J. ( 1 9 7 1 ) ' N o t e sur une épigramme de Maronée', BCH 95:
283-94
GREEN, P. (1989) Classical Bearings: Interpreting Ancient History and
Culture. L o n d o n : T h a m e s and Hudson.
(1990) Alexander to Actium. The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic
Age (Hellenistic Culture and Society 1). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n :
University of California Press.
GRUEN, E. S. (1986) The Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome (reprint
of orig. edn., 1984). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n : University of
California Press.
(1992) Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (Cornell
Studies in Classical Philology 52). Ithaca, N e w Y o r k : Cornell University
Press.
(1993). ' T h e Polis in the Hellenistic W o r l d ' , in R. M . Rosen and J.
Farrell (eds.), Nomodeiktes: Greek Studies in Honor of Martin Ostwald.
A n n A r b o r : University of M i c h i g a n Press, 339-54
(1996) Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy (reprint of orig.
edn., 1990). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n : U n i v e r s i t y of California
Press.
GÜNTHER, W . (1988) 'Milesische Bürgerrechts- und Proxenieverleihungen
der hellenistischen Zeit', Chiron 18: 383-419.
PIABICHT, CHR. (1956) ' Ü b e r die K r i e g e zwischen Pergamon und
Bithynien', Hermes 84: 9 0 - 1 1 0 .
(1957) 'Samische Volksbeschlüsse der hellenistischen Zeit', Ath.
Mitt. 72: 152-274.
(1970) Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte (2nd edn.) (Zetemata
14). M u n i c h : Beck.
(1976) 'Royal D o c u m e n t s in Maccabees, II', HSCP 80: 1 - 1 8 .
(1980) ' B e m e r k u n g e n z u m P. Haun. 6', Z P E 39: 1—5.
 Bibliography 381

(1987) ' D e r A r c h o n P h i l a i t o l o s v o n D e l p h i ' , ZPE 69: 87-9.

(1994) Athen in hellenistischer Zeit. Gesammelte Aufsätze. Munich:
Beck.
(1996) ' N e u e I n s c h r i f t e n a u s K o s ' , ZPE 112: 83-94.
(1997) Athens from Alexander to Antony ( e x p a n d e d t r a n s , b y D . L .
S c h n e i d e r , of G e r m a n orig. e d n . 1995). C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . , a n d L o n d o n :
H a r v a r d University Press.
HAHN, I. (1978) ' K ö n i g s l a n d u n d k ö n i g l i c h e B e s t e u e r u n g i m h e l l e n i s -
t i s c h e n O s t e n ' , Klio 60: 11-34.
HALL, A . S. (1986) ' R e g i o n a l E p i g r a p h i c a l C a t a l o g u e s of Asia M i n o r .
N o t e s a n d S t u d i e s I X : t h e M i l y a d e i s a n d t h e i r T e r r i t o r y ' , Anat. Stud.
36: 137-57·
HAMILTON, W . J. (1842) Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus and Armenia;
with some Account of their Antiquities and Geology. 2 vols. L o n d o n .
HANSEN, Μ . Η . (ed.) (1993) The Ancient Greek City-State. Symposium on
the Occasion of the 250th Anniversary of the Danish Academy of Sciences
and Letters. 1—4 July 1992 ( D e t K o n g e l i g e D a n s k e V i d e n s k a b e r n e s
S e l s k a b , H i s t o r i s k - f i l o s o f i s k e M e d d e l e l s e r 67). C o p e n h a g e n : M u n k s -
gaard.
0 9 9 5 ) ' T h e " a u t o n o m o u s city-state". Ancient Fact or M o d e r n
F i c t i o n ? ' , in M . H . H a n s e n a n d K . R a a f l a u b (eds.), Studies in the
Ancient Greek Polis ( H i s t o r i a E i n z e l s c h r i f t 95), S t u t t g a r t : F . S t e i n e r ,
21-43.
HATZOPOULOS, M . B. (1996) Macedonian Institutions under the Kings, 2
vols. ( M e l e t e m a t a 22). A t h e n s : K e n t r o n H e l l e n i k i s kai R o m a i k i s
Archaiotitos.
HAUSSOULLIER, B. (1902) Etudes sur l'histoire de Milet et du Didyméion
( B i b l i o t h è q u e d e l ' É c o l e d e s H a u t e s É t u d e s , s c i e n c e s h i s t o r i q u e s et
p h i l o l o g i q u e s , 138). P a r i s : E. B o u i l l o n .
HERMAN, G . (1980/1) ' T h e " F r i e n d s " of t h e E a r l y H e l l e n i s t i c R u l e r s :
S e r v a n t s o r O f f i c i a l s ?', Talanta 12/13: 103-49.
PIERRMANN, P. (1959) Neue Inschriften zur historischen Landeskunde von
Lydien und angrenzenden Gebieten ( D e n k s c h r i f t e n d e r Ö s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n
A k a d e m i e d e r W i s s e n s c h a f t e n , p h i l . - h i s t . K l a s s e , 77.1), 4 - 6 , n o . 2.
(1965α) ' A n t i o c h o s d e r G r o s s e u n d T e o s ' , Anadolu 9: 2 9 - 1 5 9 .
(19656) ' N e u e U r k u n d e n z u r G e s c h i c h t e v o n M i l e t i m 2. J a h r h u n d e r t
v. C h r . ' , Ist. Mitt. 1 5 : 7 1 - 1 1 7 .
(1970) Ί . W e i h u n g e n an Z e u s P o t t o r e n o s . 1. D e r H e g e m o n A r k e s i l a o s
für Apollophanes, den Leibarzt Antiochos' I I I ' , Anzeiger der
Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse 1970:
94-8-
0 9 7 9 ) ' D i e S t a d t T e m n o s u n d i h r e a u s w ä r t i g e n B e z i e h u n g e n in
h e l l e n i s t i s c h e r Z e i t ' , Ist. Mitt. 29: 220-71.
(1987). ' M i l e s i e r a m S e l e u k i d e n h o f . P r o s o p o g r a p h i s c h e B e i t r ä g e z u r
G e s c h i c h t e M i l e t s i m 2. J h d t . v. C h r . ' , Chiron 17: 1 7 1 - 9 2 .
HERZOG, R . , a n d KLAFFENBACH, G . (1952) Asylieurkunden aus Kos
 ( A b h a n d l u n g e n der Deutschen A k a d e m i e der Wissenschaften zu Berlin,
Klasse für Sprachen, Literatur und K u n s t , 1952.1). Berlin: A k a d e m i e -
Verlag.
HESSEL, F. (1731) Praefationis appendix to Antiquae inscriptiones quum
Graecae tum Latinae olim a Marquardo Gudio collectae, nuper a Ioanne
Koolio digestae, hortatu consilioque Ioannis Georgii Graevii, nunc a
Francisco Hesslio editae cum adnotationibus eorum. L e e u w a r d e n .
HEUSS, A . (1937) Stadt und Herrscher des Hellenismus in ihren staats-
und völkerrechtlichen Beziehungen ( K l i o Beiheft 39, NS 26). Leipzig:
Dieterich.
HINTZEN-BOHLEN, B. (1992) Herrscherrepräsentation im Hellenismus.
Untersuchungen zu Weihgeschenken, Stiftungen und Ehrenmonumenten in
den mutterländischen Heiligtümern Delphi, Olympia, Delos und Dodona.
Cologne and Weimar: Bühlau.
HOLLEAUX, M . (1935) Rome, la Grèce et les Monarchies Hellenistiques. Paris:
E. de Boccard.
(1938a) Études d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, i (ed. L . Robert).
Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(19386) Études d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, ii (ed. L . Robert).
Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(1942) Études d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, iii, Lagides et
Séleucides (ed. L . Robert). Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(1952) Études d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, iv, Rome, la Macédoine
et l'Orient grec. Première partie (ed. L . Robert). Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(1957) Etudes d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, v, Rome, la Macédoine
et l'Orient grec. Seconde partie (ed. L . Robert). Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(1968) Études d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques, vi, Bibliographie et
index détaillé (ed. L . Robert). Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
HORNBLOWER, S. (1982) Mausolus. O x f o r d : Clarendon Press.
(1985) The Greek World 4.JÇ-323 (corr. printing of ist edn., 1983).
L o n d o n : Routledge.
H u s s , W . (1976) Untersuchungen zur Aussenpolitik Ptolemaios' IV.
( M ü n c h e n e r Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und Antiken Rechts-
geschichte 69). M u n i c h : Beck.
(1977) 'Eine ptolemäische Expedition nach Kleinasien', Ane. Soc. 8:
187-93.
(1998) 'Ptolemaios der S o h n ' , Z P E 121: 229-50.
JONES, A . H. M . (1940) The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian.
O x f o r d : Clarendon Press.
JONES, CHR. P. (1993) "The Decree of Ilion in H o n o r of a K i n g A n t i o c h u s ' ,
' GRBS 34: 73-92.
and HABICHT, CHR. (1989) Ά Hellenistic Inscription f r o m Arsinoe in
Cilicia', Phoenix 43: 3 1 7 - 4 6 .
and RUSSELL, J. (1993) ' T w o N e w Inscriptions f r o m N a g i d o s in
Cilicia', Phoenix 47: 293-304.
JONNES, L . and RICL, M . (1997) Ά N e w Royal Inscription f r o m Phrygia
 Paroreios: E u m e n e s II G r a n t s T y r i a i o n the Status of a Polls', EA 29:
1-29.
KAGAN, J. H. (1984) 'Hellenistic Coinage at Scepsis after its Refoundation
in the T h i r d C e n t u r y B . C . ' , ANSMusN 29: 1 1 - 2 4 .
KEARSLEY, R. A . (1994) ' T h e Milyas and the Attalids: A Decree of the C i t y
of Olbasa and a N e w Royal Letter of the Second C e n t u r y B . C . ' ,
Anatolian Studies 44: 47—57.
KNOEPFLER, D . (1993) ' L e T e m p l e du M é t r ô o n de Sardes et ses inscrip-
tions', Mus. Helv. 50: 26-43.
KOBES, J. (1996) Kleine Könige. Untersuchungen zu den Lokaldynasten im
hellenistischen Kleinasien (323—188 v. Chr.). S t Katharinen: Scripta
Mercaturae.
KRAELING, C . Η . (1964) Ά N e w Inscription f r o m A n t i o c h on the Orontes',
AJA 68: 178-9.
KREUTER, S. (1992) Aussenbeziehungen kretischer Gemeinden zu den hel-
lenistischen Staaten im 3. und 2. Jh. v. Chr. ( M ü n c h e n e r Arbeiten zur
alten Geschichte 6). M u n i c h : Editio Maris.
KRISCHEN, FR. (1922) Die Befestigungen von Herakleia am Latmos (Milet,
Ergebnisse der A u s g r a b u n g e n und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre
1899, ed. T h . W i e g a n d , vol. 3, fasc. 2). Berlin and Leipzig: Vereinigung
wissenschaftlicher Verleger.
LAFFI, U . ( 1 9 7 1 ) Ί terreni del tempio di Zeus ad Aizanoi. L e iscrizioni
sulla parete interna dell'anta destra del pronaos', Athenaeum NS 49: 5—53.
LANDAU, Y , H. (1961) Ά G r e e k inscription f r o m A c r e ' , IEJ 11: 1 1 8 - 2 6 .
LAUNEY, M . (1987) Recherches sur les armées hellénistiques ( B E F A R 169). 2
vols, (reprint of original edn. (1949-50), with additional comments by Y .
Garlan, Ph. Gauthier, and Cl. Orrieux). Paris: E. de Boccard
LE BOHEC, S. (1993) Antigone Doson, roi de Macedoine ( T r a v a u x et
mémoires. Études anciennes 9). N a n c y : Presses Universitaires de N a n c y .
LE RIDER, G . (1971/2) ' N u m i s m a t i q u e grecque', Annuaire de l'Ecole
Pratique des Hautes Etudes (IVe section), 227-42.
(1972^3) ' N u m i s m a t i q u e grecque', Annuaire de l'École Pratique des
Hautes Etudes (IVe section), 243-59.
(1973/4) ' N u m i s m a t i q u e grecque', Annuaire de l'École Pratique des
Hautes Études (IVe section), 251-60.
(1975/6) ' N u m i s m a t i q u e grecque', Annuaire de l'École Pratique des
Hautes Études (IVe section), 345—58.
(1990) 'Antiochos II à M y l a s a ' , BCH 114: 5 4 3 - 5 1 .
LE ROY, CHR. (1986) ' U n règlement religieux au L é t ô o n de X a n t h o s ' , RA
1986: 279-300.
LE ROY LADURIE, E. (1975) Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324.
Paris: Gallimard.
LEAKE, W . M . (1824) Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor, with Comparative
Remarks on the Ancient and Modern Geography of that Country. L o n d o n .
LEFÈVRE, FR. (1995). ' L a Chronologie du 1 1 l e siècle à Delphes, d'après les
actes amphictioniques (280-200)', BCH 119: 161-208.
LEFÈVRE, FR. (1996) 'Antiochos le G r a n d et les Etoliens à la fin du 1 1 l e
siècle', BCH 120: 7 5 7 - 7 1 .
LENGER, M . - T H . (1953) ' L a N o t i o n de bienfait (philanthrôpon) royal et les
ordonnances des rois lagides', in Studi in onore di Vincenzo Arangio-Ruiz
nel XLV anno del suo insegnamento (Naples: Jovene), i. 483-99.
LEUZE, O. (1923) ' D i e Feldzüge Antiochos des Grossen nach Kleinasien
und T h r a k i e n ' , Hermes 58: 187-229, 2 4 1 - 8 7 .
LEWIS, D . M . (1977) Sparta and Persia (Cincinnati Classical Studies ι).
Leiden: Brill.
LORAUX, N . (1997) La Cité divisée. L'oubli dans la mémoire d'Athènes. Paris:
Payot.
LUCE, T . J. (1977) Livy : The Composition of his History. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
LUKES, ST. (1974) Power: A Radical View. L o n d o n : Macmillan.
LUND, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A Study in Early Hellenistic Kingship.
L o n d o n : Routledge.
MCNICOLL, A . W . (1997) Hellenistic Fortifications from the Aegean to the
Euphrates (rev. N . P. Milner) O x f o r d : Clarendon Press.
MA, J. (1997) ' T h e koinon of the Laodikeis in the Rhodian Peraia', EA 27:
9-10.
DEROW, P., and MEADOWS, A . (1995). 'RC 38 ( A m y z o n ) recon-
sidered', Z P E 109: 71-80.
MCDONALD, A . H . (1967) ' T h e T r e a t y of A p a m e a (188 B . C . ) ' , JRS 57:
1-8.
MAGIE, D . (1939) ' T h e " A g r e e m e n t " between Philip V and A n t i o c h u s I I I
for the Partition of the Egyptian E m p i r e ' , JRS 29: 32-44.
(1950) Roman Rule in A sia Minor to the End of the Third Century after
Christ. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton LTniversity Press.
MALAY, H. (1983) Ά Royal D o c u m e n t f r o m Aigai in Aiolis', GRBS 24:
349-53-
(1987) 'Letter of Antiochos I I I to Z e u x i s with T w o C o v e r i n g Letters
(209 B . C . ) ' , EA 10: 7 - 1 7 .
(1996) ' N e w Evidence C o n c e r n i n g the Administrative S y s t e m of the
Attalids', Arkeoloji Dergisi 4: 83-6.
and NALBANTOÖLU, C . (1996) ' T h e C u l t of A p o l l o n Pleurenos in
L y d i a ' , Arkeoloji Dergisi 4: 7 5 - 8 1 .
MANN, M . (1986) The Sources of Social Power. A History of Power from the
Beginning to A.D. 1760, i. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press.
MANVILLE, P. B. (1990) The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
MAREK, CHR. (1988) ' K a r i e n im ersten Mithridatischen K r i e g ' , in P.
Kneissl, V . L o s e m a n n (eds.), Alte Geschichte und Wissenschafts-
geschichte. Festschrift für Karl Christ zum 65. Geburtstag (Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft), 285-308.
MARIN, L . (1978) Le Récit est un piège. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
MASTROCINQUE, Α . (1979) La Caria e la Ionia méridionale in epoca ellenis-
 tica (323-188 a. C.). Rome: L ' E r m a di Bretschneider.
(1983) Manipolazione dell storia in età ellenistica: i Seleucidici e Roma
(Universittà di V e n e z i a — I s t i t u t o di studi classici—Pubblicazioni del
seminario di storia antica 1). Rome: L ' E r m a di Bretschneider.
(1993) " ' G u e r r a di successione" e prima guerra di Celesiria: un falso
moderno e una questione storica', Ane. Soc. 24: 27-39.
(1994). Review of Brodersen 1991, Gnomon 66: 4 5 1 - 3 .
(1995) 'Iaso e i Seleucidici', Athenaeum 83: 1 3 1 - 4 2 .
MEADOWS, A . (1996) ' F o u r Rhodian decrees. Rhodes, Iasos and Philip V ' ,
Chiron 26: 2 5 1 - 6 6 .
MEHL, A . (1980/1) ΆΟΡΙΚΤΗΤΟΣ ΧΩΡΑ. Kritische Bemerkungen z u m
" S p e e r e r w e r b " in Politik und Völkerrecht der hellenistischen E p o c h e ' ,
Ane. Soc. 1 1 - 1 2 : 1 7 3 - 2 1 2 .
(1986) Seleukos Nikator und sein Reich. I. Seleukos' Leben und die
Entwicklung seiner Machtposition (Studia Hellenistica 28). Louvain.
(1990) ' Z u den diplomatischen Beziehungen zwischen Antiochos I I I .
und R o m , 200-193 v · C h r . ' in Chr. Börker and M . Donderer (eds.), Das
antike Rom und der Osten. Festschrift für Klaus Parlasca zum 65.
Geburtstag (Erlanger Forschungen, Reihe A , Geisteswissenschaften, 56),
Erlangen: Universitätsbund E r l a n g e n - N ü r n b e r g , 143-55·
MELLOR, R. (1975) ΘΕΑ ΡΩΜΗ. The Worship of the Goddess Roma in the
Greek World ( H y p o m n e m a t a 42). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
MELONI, P. (1949) ' L ' u s u r p a z i o n e di A c h e o sotto A n t i o c h o s I I I di Siria. I.
L e circostanze ed i primi atti dell'usurpazione', Rendiconti délia Classe di
Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche dell'Ac cad emia dei Lincei 8.4:
535-53·
(1950) ' L ' u s u r p a z i o n e di A c h e o sotto A n t i o c h o s I I I di Siria. II. L e
campagne di A c h e o in Asia M i n o r e e la sua morte', Rendiconti della
Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche deU'Accademia dei Lincei
8.5: 161-83.
MERKELBACH, R. (1968) ' Z u dem neuen epigraphischen D o k u m e n t aus
T e o s . I I ' , ZPE 3: 173-4.
MIGEOTTE, L . (1984) L'Emprunt public dans les cites grecques: recueil des
documents et analyse critique. Quebec: Éditions du S p h i n x and Paris: L e s
Belles Lettres.
(1992) Les Souscriptions publiques dans les cités grecques. Geneva: D r o z
and Quebec: Éditions du Sphinx.
MILLAR, F. (1967) The Roman Empire audits Neighbours (trans, of original
G e r m a n edn., Frankfurt am M a i n and H a m b u r g , 1966; with contribu-
tions by D . Berciu, R. N . Frye, G . Kossack, and T . T . Rice). L o n d o n :
G . W e i d e n f e l d and Nicholson.
(1983) 'Empire and City, A u g u s t u s to Julian: Obligations, Excuses
and Status', J RS 73: 76-96.
(1987). 'Polybius between Greece and R o m e ' , in J. T . A .
K o u m o u l i d e s (ed.), Greek Connections ( N o t r e - D a m e : University of
N o t r e D a m e Press), 1 — 18.
MILLAR, F . ( 1 9 9 2 ) The Emperor in the Roman World (31 BC-AD 337)
( r e p r i n t of i s t e d n . , 1977, w i t h a f t e r w o r d ) . L o n d o n : D u c k w o r t h .
(1994) The Roman Near-East. 31 BC-AD 337 (2nd e d n . ) C a m b r i d g e ,
Mass.: H a r v a r d University Press.
MITCHELL, ST. ( 1 9 9 1 ) ' T h e H e l l e n i z a t i o n o f P i s i d i a ' , Mediterranean
Archaeology 4: 119—45.
(1993) Anatolia. Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor, i, The Celts and
the impact of Roman rule. O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n P r e s s .
M0RKHOLM, O . (1969) ' S o m e S e l e u c i d C o i n s of t h e M i n t of S a r d e s ' ,
Ν or disk Num. Ars skr ift 1969: 5 - 2 0 .
(1991) Early Hellenistic Coinage from the Accession of Alexander to the
Peace of Apameia (336-188 B.C.) (ed. P h . G r i e r s o n a n d U.
Westermark). Cambridge: C a m b r i d g e University Press.
MOURGUES, J . - L . ( 1 9 9 5 ) ' É c r i r e e n d e u x l a n g u e s : b i l i n g u i s m e e t p r a t i q u e
d e c h a n c e l l e r i e s o u s le H a u t - e m p i r e r o m a i n ' , DHA 2 1 : 1 0 5 - 2 9 .
MURRAY, Ο . ( 1 9 7 0 ) Περί βασιλείας. D . P h i l , t h e s i s , O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y .
(1990) ' C i t i e s of R e a s o n ' , in O . M u r r a y a n d S . P r i c e ( e d s . ) , The Greek
City from Homer to Alexander, O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Press, 1-25.
MUSTI, D . ( 1 9 6 5 ) ' A s p e t t i d e l l ' o r g a n i z z a z i o n e s e l e u c i d i c a in A s i a M i n o r e
n e l I I I . s e c . a. c . ' , PP 20: 1 5 3 - 6 0 .
(1966) ' L o s t a t o d e i S e l e u c i d i : d i n a s t i a , p o p o l i , c i t t à da S e l e u c o I a d
A n t i o c o I I I ' , SCO 15: 6 1 - 1 9 7 .
NICOLET, C L . (1990) ' D u p o u v o i r d a n s l ' a n t i q u i t é : les m o t s e t les r é a l i t é s ' ,
in C l . N i c o l e t ( e d . ) , Du pouvoir dans l'antiquité: mots et réalités ( C a h i e r s
d u C e n t r e G l o t z 1), P a r i s a n d G e n e v a : D r o z , 3—11.
OBER, J . (1989). Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens: Rhetoric, Ideology,
and the Power of the People. P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .
OLIVER, J. PI. (1968) ' N o t e s o n t h e I n s c r i p t i o n a t T e o s i n H o n o r o f
A n t i o c h u s I I I ' , GRBS 9: 3 2 1 - 2 .
OLSHAUSEN, E. ( 1 9 7 4 ) Prosopographie der hellenistischen Königsgesandten.
Teil I: von Triparadeisos bis Pydna ( S t u d i a H e l l e n i s t i c a 19). L o u v a i n :
Nauwelaerts.
OPPERMANN, H . ( 1 9 2 4 ) Zeus Panamaros. G i e s s e n : A . T o p e l m a n n .
ORMEROD, PI. A . ( 1 9 2 4 ) Piracy in the Ancient World: An Essay in
Mediterranean History. L i v e r p o o l a n d L o n d o n : H o d d e r a n d S t o u g h t o n .
ORRIEUX, C L . (1983) Les Papyrus de Zénon. L'horizon d'un grec en Egypte
au Ille siècle avant J. C. P a r i s : M a c u l a .
ORTH, W . ( 1 9 7 7 ) Königlicher Machtanspruch und städtische Freiheit.
Untersuchungen zu den politischen Beziehungen zwischen den ersten
SeleukidenherrSchern (Seleukos /., Antiochos /., Antiochos II.) und den
Städten des westlichen Kleinasien ( M ü n c h e n e r Beiträge zur Papyrus-
f o r s c h u n g u n d antiken R e c h t s g e s c h i c h t e 71). M u n i c h : Beck.
OSBORNE, R . (1990) ' T h e Demos a n d its D i v i s i o n s in C l a s s i c a l A t h e n s ' , i n
Ο . M u r r a y a n d S. P r i c e ( e d s . ) , The Greek City from Homer to Alexander.
O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Press, 265-93.
OZOUF, M . ( 1 9 7 6 ) La Fête révolutionnaire 1789—1799. Paris: Gallimard.
PETIT, TH. (1990) Satrapes et satrapies dans l'empire achéménide de Cyrus le
Grand à Xerxès 1er. Liège: Bibliothèque de la faculté de philosophie et
lettres de l'LTniversité de L i è g e (254).
PIEJKO, F. (1985) Review of J. and L . Robert 1983, Gnomon 57: 608-21.
(1987) ' T h e Settlement of Sardis after the Fall of A c h a e u s ' , AjfP 108:
707-28.
(1988a) 'Letter of E u m e n e s II to T r a l l e s concerning Inviolability and
T a x E x e m p t i o n for a T e m p l e . A f t e r 188 B . C . ' , Chiron 18: 55-69.
(19886) ' T h e T r e a t y between Antiochos I I I and Lysimachia ca. 196
B . C . (with a discussion of the earlier treaty with Philip V ) ' , Historia 37:
151-65·
(1991«) 'Antiochus I I I and T e o s Reconsidered', Belleten (Türk Tarih
Kurumu): 13-69.
(19916) 'Antiochus I I I and Ilium', APF 37: 9-50.
POCOCK, J. G . A. (1984) 'Verbalizing a Political Act: T o w a r d a Politics of
S p e e c h ' , in Shapiro 1984: 25-43.
(1987) ' T h e C o n c e p t of a L a n g u a g e and the métier d'historien: Some
Considerations on Practice', in A . Pagden (ed.), The Languages of
Political Theory in Early-Modern Europe, C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e
University Press, 19-38.
POUNDER, R. L . (1978) 'Honours for Antioch of the Chrysaorians',
Hesperia 47: 4 9 - 5 7
PRICE, S. R. F. (1984) Rituals and Power : The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia
Minor. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press.
PRICE, M . J. (1991) The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great and
Philip Arrhidaeus. A British Museum Catalogue. Zurich: Swiss
N u m i s m a t i c Society and L o n d o n : British M u s e u m .
PRITCHETT, W . K . (1982) Studies in Greek Topography. Part IV (passes)
(University of California publications: Classical Studies 28). Berkeley,
Calif., and L o n d o n : University of California Press.
PUGLIESE-CARRATELLI, G . (1987). 'Epigrafi di C o s relativi al culto di
A r t e m i s in K n i d o e in Bargylia', P P 232: 110-23.
RAMSAY, W . M . (1895) The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, Being an Essay
of the Local History of Phrygia from the Earliest Times to the Turkish
Conquest, i, The Lycos Valley and Southwestern Phrygia. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
RAWLINGS I I I , H . (1976) 'Antiochus the G r e a t and Rhodes', AJAH 1.
2-28.
REYNOLDS, J. (1982) Aphrodisias and Rome. Documents from the Excavation
of the Theatre at Aphrodisias Conducted by Professor Kenan T. Erim,
together with some Related Texts {Journal of Roman Studies M o n o g r a p h s
1). L o n d o n : Society for the Promotion of R o m a n Studies.
RHODES, P. J., with LEWIS, D . M . (1997) The Decrees of the Greek States.
O x f o r d : O x f o r d University Press.
RICE, E. E. (1983) The Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadephus. O x f o r d :
O x f o r d LTniversity Press.
RIGSBY, Κ . J. (1996) Asylia. Territorial inviolability in the Hellenistic World
(Hellenistic Culture and Society 22). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n :
University of California Press.
ROBERT, J. and Robert, L . (1948) Hellenica. Recueil d'épigraphie, de numis-
matique et d'antiquités grecques, vi. Paris: Impr. A . Bontemps.
(1954) La Carie. Histoire et géographie historique, avec le recueil
des inscriptions antiques. Tome II. Le plateau de Tabai et ses environs.
Paris: A . Maisonneuve.
(1983) Fouilles d'Amyzon en Carie. Tome I. Exploration, histoire,
monnaies et inscriptions. Paris: C o m m i s s i o n des fouilles et missions
archéologiques au Ministère des relations extérieures.
(1989) Claros. Décrets hellénistiques, fasc. 1. Paris: Éditions
Recherche sur les civilisations.
ROBERT, L . (1936) Collection Froehner, i. Les inscriptions grecques. Paris:
Editions des bibliothèques nationales.
(1937) Études Anatoliennes. Recherches sur les inscriptions grecques de
l'Asie Mineure. Paris: E. de Boccard.
(1945) Le Sanctuaire de Sinuri près de Mylasa Ρ Les inscriptions
grecques (Mémoires de Γ Institut Français d'Archéologie de Stamboul
7). Paris: E. de Boccard.
(1949) Hellenica. Recueil d'épigraphie, de numismatique et d'antiquités
grecques, vii. Paris: Impr. A . Bontemps.
(1950) Hellenica. Recueil d'épigraphie, de numismatique et d'antiquités
grecques, viii. Paris: Impr. A. Bontemps.
(1951) Études de numismatique grecque. Paris: Collège de France.
(1955) Hellenica. Recueil d'épigraphie, de numismatique et d'antiquités
grecques, x. Paris: Impr. A . Bontemps.
(i960) Hellenica. Recueil d'épigraphie, de numismatique et d'antiquités
grecques, xi/xii. Paris: Impr. A . Bontemps.
(1962) Villes d'Asie Mineure. Etudes de géographie ancienne (reprint of
ist edn., 1935, with updates and postface). Paris: E. de Boccard.
(1964) Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes I. Paris: A. Maisonneuve.
(19660) Documents de l'Asie mineure méridionale. Paris and Geneva:
Droz.
(1966b) Monnaies grecques en Troade. Paris and G e n e v a : D r o z .
(1967) 'Encore une inscription grecque de l'Iran', CRAI 1967:
281-97.
(1973) ' S u r des inscriptions de Délos. I. Sur un proxène d ' A n t i o c h e
de Carie', in Etudes déliennes (BCH supplément 1), Paris, 435-68.
(1987) Documents d'Asie Mineure ( B E F A R 239bis). Paris: E. de
Boccard.
ROBIN, R. (1973) Histoire et linguistique. Paris: A r m a n d Colin.
ROGERS, G . M . (1991) The Sacred Identity of Ephesos. Foundation Myths of
a Romani city. L o n d o n and N e w Y o r k : Routledge.
ROSTOVTZEFF, M . (1935) 'ΠΡΟΓΟΝΟΙ', JHS 55: 56-66.
(1941) The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, 3
 vols. O x f o r d : Clarendon Press.
RUMSCHEID, F. (1994) Untersuchungen zur kleinasiatischen Bauornamentik
des Hellenismus (Beiträge zur Erschliessung hellenisticher und
kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 14). Mainz: Zabern.
SACHS, A . J., and HUNGER, H. (1988) Astronomical Diaries and Related
Texts from Babylonia, i (Denkschriften der Österreichischen A k a d e m i e
der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse 195). Vienna: Verlag der
Österreichischen A k a d e m i e der Wissenschaften.
(1989) Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, ii
(Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
phil-hist. Klasse 210). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften.
ÇAHIN, S. (1985) 'Ein neues Dekret der S y m m o r i a zu Ehren ihrer Prostatai
in T e o s ' , EA 5: 1 3 - 1 8 .
SAKELLARIOU, M . V . (1989) The Polis-State: Definition and Origins
(Meletemata 4) Athens: Research Centre for G r e e k and R o m a n
A n t i q u i t y , National Hellenic Research Foundation.
SAMUEL, A . E. (1972) Greek and Roman Chronology : Calendars and Years
in Classical Antiquity (Müllers H a n d b ü c h e r der Altertumswissenschaft
1.7). M u n i c h : Beck.
SARTRE, M . (1991) L'Orient romain. Provinces et sociétés provinciales en
Méditerranée orientale d'Auguste aux Sévères (31 avant J.-C.-235 après
J.-C.). Paris: Seuil.
0 9 9 5 ) L'Asie Mineure et l'Anatolie d'Alexandre à Dioclétien (IVe
siècle av. J.-C./IIIe siècle ap. J.-C.). Paris: A r m a n d Colin.
SAVALLI-LESTRADE, I. (1996) 'Courtisans et citoyens: le case des philoi
attalides', Chiron 26: 149—80.
SAYAR, M . (forthcoming) ' V o n Kilikien bis T h r a k i e n : N e u e n Erkenntnisse
zur Politik Antiochos' III. zwischen 1 9 7 - 1 9 5 v. C h r . anhand von zwei
neugefundenen Inschriften', in A . Bresson and R. Descat (eds.), Les
Cités d'Asie Mineure occidentale au Ile siècle a. C.
SCHEDE, M . (1919) ' A u s dem Heraion von Samos', Ath. Mitt. 44: 1—46.
SCHLESINGER, E. (1933) Die griechische Asylie. Glessen: W . F. Kaestner.
SCHMITT, IT (1964) Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Antiochos' des Grossen
und seiner Zeit (Historia Einzelschrift 6). Stuttgart: F. Steiner.
SCHUBART, W. (1920) 'Bemerkungen zum Stile hellenistischer
K ö n i g s b r i e f e ' , APF 6: 324-47.
(1937) ' D a s hellenistische Königsideal nach Inschriften und Papyri',
APF 12: 1-26.
SCHÜRER, E. (1973) The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus
Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (eds. G . V e r m e s and F. Millar), i.
E d i n b u r g h : Clark.
SCHWERTHEIM, Ε. (1988) 'Studien zur historischen Geographie Mysiens.
ι. M y s i a im Vertrag von A p a m e i a ' , Ε Α 11: 65-78.
SEGRE, M . (1938) 'Iscrizioni di Licia. I. T o l o m e o di T e l m e s s o ' , Clara
Rhodos 9: 181-208.
SEYRIG, H. (1986) Scripta numismatica (Institut français d'archéologie au
P r o c h e - o r i e n t — B i b l i o t h è q u e archéologique et historique 126). Paris:
Geuthner.
SHAPIRO, M . J. (ed.) (1984) Language and Politics. O x f o r d : Basil Blackwell.
SHAW, Β. (1984) 'Bandits in the R o m a n empire', Past and Present 105:
3-52.
SHERWIN-WHITE, S. M . (1978) Ancient Cos: An Historical Study from the
Dorian Settlement to the Imperial Period ( H y p o m n e m a t a 51). Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
(1985) ' A n c i e n t Archives: T h e Edict of Alexander to Priene, a
Reappraisal',^//»? 105: 69-89.
and KUHRT, A . (eds.) (1987) Hellenism in the East: Interaction of
Greek and Non-Greek Civilizations from Syria to Central Asia after
Alexander. L o n d o n : D u c k w o r t h .
(1993) From Samarkhand to Sardis: A New Approach to the
Seleukid Empire. L o n d o n : D u c k w o r t h .
SHIPLEY, G . (1987) A History of Samos, 800-188 B.c. O x f o r d : Clarendon
Press.
SPRANGER, P. P. (1958) ' D e r Grosse. U n t e r s u c h u n g e n zur Entstehung des
historischen Beinamens in der Antike', Saeculum 9: 22-58.
STROBEL, Κ . (1991) ' D i e Galater im hellenistischen Kleinasien: historische
Aspekte einer hellenistichen Staatenbildung', in J. Seibert (ed.),
Hellenistische Studien. Gedenkschrift. für Herrmann Bengtson ( M ü n c h e n e r
Arbeiten zur alten Geschichte 5), M u n i c h : Editio Maris, 101-34.
(1996) Die Galater. Geschichte und Eigenart der keltischen
Staatenbildung auf dem Boden des hellenistischen Kleinasien, i
(Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und historischen G e o g r a p h i e des hel-
lenistischen und römischen Kleinasien 1). Berlin: A k a d e m i e Verlag.
SYME, R. (1995) Anatolica. Studies in Strabo (ed. A . Birley). O x f o r d :
Clarendon Press.
TARN, W . W . (1948) Alexander the Great. 2 vols. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e
University Press.
TAÇLIKLIOÔLU, Z . , and FRISCH, P. (1975) 'Inscriptions f r o m the T r o a d ' ,
Z P E 19: 219-24.
THOMPSON, W . Ε. ( 1 9 7 1 ) 'Philip V and the Islanders', T A P A 102: 615-20.
TILLY, CH. (1985) 'War M a k i n g and S t a t e - M a k i n g as Organised C r i m e ' ,
in P. B. Evans, D . Rueschemeyer, and T . Skocpol (eds.), Bringing the
State back in, C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press, 169-91.
TRACY, ST. V . (1992) 'Inscriptiones Deliacae. I G X I 713 and I G X I 1056',
Atli. Mitt. 107: 303-14.
TUPLIN, CHR. (1987) ' X e n o p h o n and the Garrisons of the A c h a e m e n i d
E m p i r e ' , AMI 20: 167-245.
VAN BERCHEM, D . (1982) Les Routes et l'histoire. Etudes sur les Helvètes et
leurs voisins dans l'empire romain (Université de Lausanne. Publications
de la Faculté de Lettres 25) (eds. P. D u c r e y and D . Paunier, with H.
Lichtenthaeler). G e n e v a : D r o z .
VAN PROOSDIJ, B. A . (1934) ' D e morte Achaei', Hermes 69: 347-50.
VERSNEL. H. S. (1990) Inconsistencies in Greek and Roman religion, i. Ter
Unus. Isis, Dionysos, Hermes. Three Studies in Henotheism (Studies in
G r e e k and R o m a n Religion 6). Leiden: E. J. Brill.
VEYNE, P. (1976) Le Pain et le cirque. Sociologie historique d'un pluralisme
politique. Paris: Seuil.
(1978) Comment on écrit l'histoire (abridgement of i s t edn., 1978).
Paris: Seuil.
ViRGiLio, B. (1987) 'Strutture templari e potere politico in Asia M i n o r e ' ,
Athenaeum 65: 2 2 7 - 3 1 .
WAELKENS, M . (ed.) (1993) Sagalassos, i. First General Report on the
Survey (1986-1989) and the Excavations (IÇÇO-IÇÇI) (Acta Archaeo-
logica Lovaniensia, Monographiae 5). L e u v e n : L e u v e n University Press.
and POBLOME, J. (eds.) (1995) Sagalassos, iii. Report on the Fourth
Excavation Campaign of 1993 (Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia,
Monographiae 7). L e u v e n : L e u v e n University Press.
WAGGONER, N . M . (1989) Ά N e w Wrinkle in the Hellenistic Coinage of
Antioch/Alabanda', in G . L e Rider, G . K . Jenkins, Ν . M . W a g g o n e r ,
and U . Westermark (eds.), Kraay-Merkholm Essays. Numismatic Studies
in Memory of C. H. Kraay and O. Merkholm (Publications d'histoire de
l'art et d'archéologie de l'LTniversité catholique de L o u v a i n 59),
Louvain: Institut supérieur d'archéologie et d'histoire de l'art,
Séminaire de numismatique Marcel H o c , 283—90.
WALBANK, F. W . (1940) Philip V of Macedon. C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e
University Press.
(1942) 'Alcaeus of Messene, Philip V and R o m e ' , CO 36: 134-5.
O965)· Review of SCHMITT 1964, in jfRS 55: 262-4.
(1972) Polybius (Sather Lectures 42). Berkeley, Calif., and L o n d o n :
University of California Press.
(1992) The Hellenistic World (corr. 3rd edn.). L o n d o n : Fontana.
WARRIOR, V . (1996) The Initiation of the Second Macedonian War: An
Explication of Livy Book 31. (Historia Einzelschrift 97). Stuttgart: F.
Steiner.
WEBER, M . (1968) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive
Sociology (ed. G . Roth and CI. Wittich). 3 vols. N e w York: Bedminster
Press.
WELLES, C . B. (1956) ' T h e G r e e k C i t y ' , in S. Pagani (ed.), Studi in onore
di Aristide Calderini e Roberto Paribeni, i. Milan: Ceschina, 81-99.
WHITE, H. (1992) The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and
Historical Representation. Baltimore and L o n d o n : Johns H o p k i n s
University Press.
WHITEHEAD, D . (1993) 'Cardinal Virtues: T h e L a n g u a g e of Public
A p p r o b a t i o n in Democratic A t h e n s ' , Class, et Mediaev. 44: 37-75.
WILL, E. (1962) ' L e s Premières années du règne d ' A n t i o c h o s I I I (223-219
av. J.-C.)', REG 75: 7 2 - 1 2 9 .
(1979) Histoire politique du monde hellénistique (2nd edn.), i. N a n c y :
 U n i v e r s i t é de N a n c y I I .
(1982) Histoire politique du monde hellénistique (2nd e d n . ) , ii. N a n c y :
U n i v e r s i t é de N a n c y I I .
(1988) ' P o l e i s h e l l é n i s t i q u e s : d e u x n o t e s ' , Echos du Monde
Classique/Classical Views 32, NS 7: 329-52.
WÖRRLE, M . (1975) ' A n t i o c h o s I., A c h a i o s d e r Ä l t e r e u n d die G a l a t e r .
E i n e n e u e I n s c h r i f t in D e n i z l i ' , Chiron 5: 59-87.
( ! 9 7 7 ) 'Epigraphische F o r s c h u n g e n zur Geschichte Lykiens I',
Chiron 7: 43—66.
(1978) ' E p i g r a p h i s c h e F o r s c h u n g e n z u r G e s c h i c h t e L y k i e n s I I .
P t o l e m a i o s I I . u n d T e l m e s s o s ' , Chiron 8: 201-46.
0 9 7 9 ) 'Epigraphische Forschungen zur Geschichte Lykiens III. Ein
h e l l e n i s t i s c h e r K ö n i g s b r i e f a u s T e l m e s s o s ' , Chiron 9: 83—111.
(1988) ' I n s c h r i f t e n v o n H e r a k l e i a a m L a t m o s I: A n t i o c h o s I I I . ,
Z e u x i s u n d H e r a k l e i a ' , Chiron 18: 4 2 1 - 7 6 .
WURSTER, W . W . (1974) ' D i e B u r g v o n L i m y r a . E i n v o r b e r i c h t ' , Arch.
A n z . 89: 259-73.
ZIMMERMANN, M . (1993) ' B e m e r k u n g e n z u r R h o d i s c h e n V o r h e r r s c h a f t in
L y k i e n (189/8-167 v. C h r . ) ' , Klio 75: 1 1 0 - 1 3 0 .
 INDEX OF P R I M A R Y S O U R C E S

INSCRIPTIONS
IG 12 suppl. 644: 138 233: 64, 264
236: 60
I. Alexandreia Troas 4: 96 n. 160
238: 1 1 5 , 124
I. Iasos: 246: 229, 249
2: 170 335: 31
3: 163, 1 7 0 339: 156
15°: 47 7 7 1 (cf. IG 11.1056): 92 n n . 1 4 5 - 6
I. Ilion 4$: 266-7 RC:
3: 1 3 0 n. 88
I. Lampsakos 4: 87, 95-6, 99 n. 170, 161-2
6: 236
I. Laodikeia am Lykos 1: 34, 149 9: 35, 2 6 9 - 7 0
I. Mylasa 126: 162 n. 195, 269 1 0 - 1 3 : 36, 168
I. Stratonikeia: 15: 2 6 7 - 8
1 8 - 2 0 : 36, 1 3 7 , 139, 1 4 1 , 1 4 9
3: 79
22: 3 8 , 4 4 , 4 9
4: 79 30: 271
9: 236, 249 3 1 - 3 2 : 64, 1 5 7 , 264
1030: 277 4 1 : 5 7 , 63, 269
I. Tralleis: 44: 27
23: 249 64: 270, 2 7 2 - 3
26: 57
Sardis 7.1
Inschr. Didyma 479: 238 n. 168 1: 61 n. 35, 1 3 0 n. 88
Inscr. Lindas 151: 81 2: see document 36
88: 61 n. 36
Inschr. Priene: SEG:
1: 1 1 2 , 1 3 0 - 1 1-366: 35, 4 8 - 9 , 94, m
18: 38 n. 43 2.663: 87, I I I
MAMA: 18.570: 1 7 6 η. 222, 251
4 . 7 5 : 63 n. 42, 2 7 0 - 1 24.637 (cf. ISE 1 1 5 ) : 91
6 . 1 7 3 : 231 n. 5 1 , 250 27.942: 156 n. 173
27.834: 268
ML 52: 1 7 1 2 8 . 1 2 2 4 : 154
OGIS: 2 9 . 1 6 1 3 : 27 n . 5, 1 1 4 , 1 3 7 , 141
1: see Inschr. Priene 1 33·673: S3 n- 2, 92
54: 42 n. 56, 44 33.1183: 125
2 1 1 : 35 33.1034: see below, Malay 1983
218: 168 3 6 . 1 2 1 8 : 27 n . 6
219: 60, 63, 7 2 - 3 , 87, 168, 184, 192, 203, 3 6 . 1 2 2 1 : 84
2 1 7 - 8 , 237, 2 5 4 - 9 , 2 7 6 3 9 . 1 1 8 0 : 130 n . 86, 139 n . 120
219 lines 46-7: 38 42.994: see below, Bliimel 1992
222: 166 4 2 . 1 0 6 5 : 246
224: 2 9 3 - 4 43.706: see below, Errington 1993
228: 44, 4 9 - 5 0 , 1 6 1 , 265 4 4 . 1 1 0 8 : 156 η . 172
229: 44, 49-5°, 118, 161, 235 44-949: 48
Syll.·. no. 7: 1 7 °
390: 163 BCH 1886, 299-314: 268-9
426: 42, 337
543: 163-4 Errington 1993:
588: 80-1 no. 4: 79, 231
591 : see I. Lampsakos 4 Herrmann 1959: 36, 94
633: 80 Jonnes and Ricl 1997: 150 n. 151, 248
ΤΑΜ s.2 Malay 1983: 113 n. 22, 132
881: 34
Robert 1936, no. 52: 155, 170
1261 A: 75 η. 84
Robert 1945, p. 12: 269
Tit. Cal. 65: 270
j . and L. Robert 1983:
Blümel 1992: 44 no. 23: 71 n. 68
Crampa 1969: no. 28: 70
no. 3: 170
no. 4: 116, 168-9 J. and L. Robert 1989: 162 n. 195
no. 5: 160 η. 190, 199 η. 63 Segre 1938: 94 n. 151, 14S n. 140

PAPYRI
P. Berol. 21286 (Brashear 1984): 202 n. 75 PCZ:
P. Haun. 6: 56, 256 n. 4 S9°30: 121 n' 51
59093: 134 η. I03
5934i: i55 n · 168

DOCUMENTS REPROD 3 E D IN T H I S VOLUME

ι (Sardeis): 62, 138 25: (Kildara): 85, 113, 126
2 (Sardeis): 62, 202-3 26 (Iasos): 180-1, 186, 195, 196-8, 219,
3 (Sardeis): 62, 131 223-4, 230, 242, 255
4 (Pamukçu): 26-29, 60, 122, 127, 139, 141, 27 (Iasos): 181,232
148-9, 156, 281, 281 28 (Iasos): 181
5 (Amyzon): 66, 70, 179 29 (Euromos): 128,275-6
6 (Amyzon): 66, 240 30 (Euromos): 164
7 (Amyzon): 66, 127, 138 31 (Herakleia): i n , 132, 144, 169—70, 171,
ι ο (Amyzon): 126-7, I 4 2 > I 9°> 2 33 185-6, 195, 198-9, 203, 230, 249 n. 9
12 (Amyzon): 235 32 (Laodikeia on Lykos): 157
13 (Amyzon): 69 n. 62, 126, 209 n. 96, 36 (unknown) 113, 119
230-1 37 (Dodurcular): 65 n. 47, 129, 293-4
16 (Alabanda): 67, 212-13 38 (Teos): 100—2, 209-10, 238 n. 168
17 (Teos): 184, 186, 187, 205, 215-16, 39 (Gördes): 53 η. ι, 115-6, 207
219-23, 254-5 41 (Sardeis): 62 n. 37
18 (Teos): 206-7, 211-12, 216, 219-23, 43 (Nysa): 137
229-30, 237, 255 44 (Apollonia): 115, 135-7, 138, 146, 209,
19 (Teos): 205 249
20 (Aigeai): 82 45 (Herakleia): 242 n. 176, 246-7, 249 η. 1
21 (Soloi): 82-3, 233 47 (Amyzon): 126, 249
22 (Xanthos): 84, 140 48 (Apollonia): 249
23 (Xanthos): 89 49 (Pleura): 27, 142, 146-7, 248
24 (Xanthos): 84
 LITERARY SOURCES

AGATHARCHIDES (FGrHist 86): 2 MACC.:

F 15: 84 3:7: 142
ALKA I OS OF MESSENE: 4:28: 140
Anth.Pal. 9 . 5 1 8 : 79 1 1 : 1 8 : 128

APPIAN: MEMNON ( F G r H i s t 434):

Mithr.: F 7: 1 9 2 - 3 , 236
F 9: 259 η. 2o
23: 89 n. 133
F 27.6: 173 η. 220
Syr.:
1: 64 PLUTARCH:
4: 89 n. 131 Μ or. 183 F: 93
6: 91
POLYBIOS:
12: 97 nn. 1 6 2 - 3 4.48.7: 28, 46
ARISTOTLE: 4.48.10: 55
Nie. Eth. ι i 6 7 " i 4 : 191 4 . 4 8 . 1 1 : 28
5.11.6: 199-200
CATO:
5.62.5: 109
ORF 8.20: 2 1 8
5-67: 30
CICERO:
5 . 7 2 - 7 6 : 58
Verr. 2.4.140—4: 20 n. 33
5 - 7 7 - 7 8 : 46 n . 70
DIODOROS: 5-77-7: 59 n. 26
28.15.2: 52 5 . 8 6 . 8 - 1 1 : 202
31.36: 205 7.18.9-10: ΙΙΟ
JEROME In Dan.: 8 . 7 . 1 1 : 57 n. 17
χ ι . 14 (FGrHist 260 F 45): 84 10.28: 169
11.16 (FGrHist 260 F 46): 84, 86 I I . 3 4 . 1 - 2 : 30
1 1 . 3 4 . 1 4 - 1 6 : 65
JOSEPHUS, AJ:
15.24: 165, 170
12.147-153: 63,267
1 5 . 2 5 . 1 3 : 66, 69
1 3 . 1 3 8 - 4 4 : 73 1 6 . 1 . 7 : 59 n. 28
13-388: III 1 6 . 1 . 8 - 9 : 74
LIVY: 1 6 . 1 5 . 6 : 79, 202
32.8.9-16: 279-81 16.24.6: 74
33.18: 1 4 , 8 6 - 8 18.47.2: 95
3 3 . 1 9 . 8 - 1 1 : 82 18.48.2: 90 n. 136
33.20.11-13: 84-5 1 8 . 5 1 : 29, 52, 1 1 2 , 1 6 4 - 5
33.20.13: 13 18.52.4 51
33-34-2 21.13-3 94-5
3 3 . 3 8 - 1 - 7 : 2 - 2 5 , 88 90 n. 135, 102, 1 1 2 21.17.5 72
33.38.8: 86-8 21.20.8 90
33.41: 89 n. 131 2 1 . 2 2 . 8 236
34-32-5: 334 21.24.7· 8: 282-3
3 4 . 5 8 . 1 - 4 : 99 2 1 . 4 1 . 2 : 32, 1 0 6 - 7
34.58.3: 98 n. 167, ι 2 1 . 4 5 . 2 : 282
3 4 . 5 8 . 4 - 6 : 29 28.20: 3 0 - 1
34.59.1-2: 50-1 30.31.6: 6 8 , 2 7 7 - 8
34-59-4-5: 99 PORPHYRY:
3 5 . 1 6 . 6 : 29 see JEROME
3 5 - i 7 - 3 - 9 : 102 STRABO:
3 7 . 1 1 . 1 5 : 89 n. 134 9.2.40: 182
3 7 - 4 5 - i s : 72
12.8.14: 160 η. 189
37.56.2: 282
37-56-4-5: 94, 282 THEOCRITUS:
3 8 . 3 7 . 2 - 3 : 106 Idyll 17: 40, 4 1 , 42 η. 56, 241
38.39.15: 60 n. 30
 G E N E R A L INDEX

Abydos 78, 86, 95, 247 anaktaomai 29—31, 8 1 , 152—3, 1 5 4 , 1 9 7 ,

Achaimenids 124, 131 n. 92, 138, 140, 143, 277-8
1 4 4 n. 1 3 6 , 160, 2 7 6 'ancestral' 32-3, 77 n. 91, 81, 112,
Achaios 54-63 1 2 8 n. 80, 1 5 3 n. 163
avoids entanglements with great powers annalists, Roman 73
58 Antigonid holdings in Karia 47, 58, 69—70,
coinage 55, 57, 61 77-8
no documents 57-8 Antigonos Doson:
punishment 61 in Asia Minor 47
Acipayam plain 35, 124 antilepsis 196
Adramyttion 89 Antiocheia of the Chrysaorians:
administration 122—50 see Alabanda
autonomy 142 Antiocheia in Pisidia:
as knowledge 145 status 160
agricultural levies 132 'Antiocheian drachmai' 181
Aigai 36, 58, 89, 132-3, 143 Antiochos I 34, 254-9, 277
independent after 188: 283 and Apollo 255
Aigeai 82 early years 257-8
Ainos 90, 115 Antiochos II 28, 34, 36, 43
Aiolis 46, 55, 89 advance in Western Karia 42
Aizanoi 36 n. 36, 46 increased imperial activity 36
Alabanda (Antiocheia of the Chrysaorians) reaction to Ptolemies 41-3
78, 1 1 2 , 2 1 2 - 1 3 as reconqueror 41-2
asylia 67 Antiochos III:
coinage 68, 162 as agrarian deity 226
not taken by Philip V 77 n. 92 'ancestors' 29-30, 32, 50, 52, 64, 67, 188,
renamed Antiocheia 41, 212-13 ! 9 5 . ι 9 7 _ 8 » 1 9 8 - 9 , 2 0 4 - 5 , 2o6, 2 1 2 - 3 ,
status 160, 173 229
taken by Antiochos III 67 in Antiocheia in Persis 64
Alexander 112, 160,273 and Asia Minor 54, 62,
Alexandreia Troas 49, 89 in Babylon 7, 64
and Antiochos 111 94, 96 campaign of 216: 59-63
Alinda 115, 119, 126 campaign of 203: 66—73, 3°4
taken by Antiochos II 42 campaign of 197: 82-90
taken by Zeuxis 68-70 campaigns of 196—3: 90—1
'all the Greeks' 187-8 coinage 64
alliances 165 daughters 88-9, 92
Amyzon n o , 113, 126-7, 155—6, 175, drinking and dancing in arms 108, 226
2 3 0 - 1 , 233, 2 3 5 . 2 4 0 early years 255-6
in 188: 249 expedition to the Upper Regions 63-5
density of contacts with Seleukid state invades Attalid kingdom? 73, 279—81
143 in Media 63
local epigraphical narrative 252 in north Syria 65
possibly independent after Olympichos policy of reconquest 32, 71
70-1 sons 82, 93, 256-7, 264
taken by Antiochos III 66-8 state-cult for himself and ancestors 64,
 145 η. I40, 2 3 3 - 4 c r i t e r i o n in 188: 252, 2 8 2 - 3
t e e t h m i s s i n g 226 A u d e n , W . H . o n h i s t o r y and e m p i r e 103
A n t i o c h o s I V 120 a u t o n o m y 68
in S i x t h S y r i a n W a r 3 0 - 1 under Antiochos III 162-3
see also M i t h r i d a t e s (son o f A n t i o c h o s a u t o n o m o u s c i t i e s 160—5
III) and c o i n a g e 1 6 2 - 3
A n t i o c h o s H i e r a x 4 5 - 6 , 269, 278 f o r m a l l y e q u i v a l e n t to i n d e p e n d e n c e
A n t i o c h o s the s o n 64, 93, 267, 3 2 0 - 1 160—1
A p a m e i a ( P h r y g i a ) 9 1 , 1 2 1 , 250 instrument of oppression w h e n granted
A p a m e i a , T r e a t y o f 1 5 5 , 160—1, 247—8, 172-4
282-3 precarious 164—5
as h i s t o r y - w r i t i n g 2 5 2
aphorologesia 112,123,264-5 B a h k e s i r p l a i n (plain o f A p i a ) 59
A p i a , p l a i n of: B a r g y l i a 7 7 , 90, 95
see B a h k e s i r , plain o f bandits 120
A p o l l o n i a o n R h y n d a k o s 87 basileus megas 7 3 , 83, 230, 2 5 7 , 2 7 2 - 6
A p o l l o n i a u n d e r S a l b a k e 1 1 5 , 1 3 5 , 138, b e e h i v e s and h o n e y 132, 134, 1 5 5 , 208
209, 249 benefactions 1 7 1 - 3
Appian 12-14 B i c k e r m a n , E . J. 15, 107, 1 4 1 , 1 5 2 - 6 0
Arendt, Η. ιηο spelling of name 374-5
A r i a r a t h e s I V 92 b i c y c l e , t o u r i n g in T u r k e y 1 7 , 1 1 9 n. 4 9
archiereus ton hieron panton 26, 145—7 B r a s i d a s 21 n . 34
u n d e r A t t a l i d s 248 Brothers' W a r 45
o f f i c e p e r h a p s lapsed a f t e r A n t i o c h o s II B y z a n t i o n 58, 91
43
see also ho epi ton hieron camel d u n g 354
A r s i n o e ( P t o l e m a i c c o l o n y in K i l i k i a ) 40, cavalry 115
49 C a v a f y , C . 252
A r y k a n d a 84 c h a r a c t e r , in e u e r g e t i c a l l a n g u a g e 188—9
Asia Minor: charts (and c o g n a t e s ) 185, 1 9 2 , 2 1 5 , 222
a g r i c u l t u r a l h i n t e r l a n d 36 n. 3 6 see also eucharistia
cities 3 - 4 , 159 C h i o s 76
flux in political h i s t o r y 4 8 - 5 0 , 1 0 4 - 5 C h r y s a o r i a n L e a g u e 69, 1 7 5 , 207
free c i t i e s a f t e r 188: 2 5 0 - 2 cities:
geography 3-4 see polis
militarized zone 1 1 9 - 2 0 c i t i z e n s h i p 144 n. 1 3 7 , 2 0 6 - 9 , 2 2 1 - 2 , 229
p e n e t r a t i o n o f H e l l e n i s t i c e m p i r e s 143 city walls 1 6 - 1 7
and Philip V 79-81 c o i n a g e 36, 49, S5, 5 7 , 64, 90, 94, 1 6 2 - 3 ,
and Seleukids 8 - 9 1 6 6 , 1 8 1 , 249, 2 5 5 , 283
Aspendos 119,322—3 c o l o n i z a t i o n 4, 35, 63, 1 1 7 , 124 n . 60, 1 5 8
asylia 4 9 , 64, 6 7 , 68, 6 1 , 1 0 0 - 1 , 1 2 8 , 1 5 7 , A t t a l i d 248
172-3, 209-10, 260-5, 296-7, 3 0 5 - 1 1 , n e a r S a r d e i s ? 362
323-4, 356-8 communication 147-9, 182-6, 196-9,
Athenian empire 171 201-6, 2 1 1 - 1 2
A t h e n s 92, 204 communications, slow pace 127, 142-3
Attalids 1 4 6 - 7 , 156 conquest, processes involved 108-13
a f t e r 188: 2 4 8 - 9 , 252, 2 8 2 - 3 c o n s i s t e n c y , in e u e r g e t i c a l l a n g u a g e 188—9
e x p a n s i o n in A s i a M i n o r 4 5 - 7 c o n t r a c t c l a u s e 1 0 1 , 1 7 9 - 8 0 , 1 8 5 - 6 , 200,
k i n g d o m ( t e r r i t o r y ) 89 240
in P h r y g i a 4 6 s p e c i f i c to r u l e r a n d r u l e d 237
Attalos I 279-80 control 1 1 6 - 2 1 , 144, 147
and Achaios 55-6, 58-9 functions of 1 2 0 - 1
c a m p a i g n of 218 58-9 corvée 121, 132
date o f d e a t h 88, 265 C r e t e 74, 1 5 3 , 164, 166
defeats Hierax 4 5 - 6 and M y l a s a 265 n. 1 2
koinopragia w i t h A n t i o c h o s I I I 5 9 - 6 0 and T e o s 263
status quo u n d e r A t t a l o s I u s e d as c r o w n s 204
Dardanos 89 subversion by subjects 206-11
Delos 92 and taxation 134-5
Delphi 212-3 see also administration; control; kings;
Demetrios (Seleukid eklogistes) 135-8 officials
Demetrios (Seleukid ho epi ton hieron) 'English gentleman' 214 n. 104
135-7, 366 ennoo ('to think up' gifts) 195
democracy 161 Ephesos 7 6 , 8 9 , 9 3 , 1 1 4 , 1 1 9 , 1 6 6
see also autonomy; freedom attacked by Antiochos in 203 ? 72
depoliticizing 200-1, 224-5, 238 Roman Ephesos 16
deprovincialization 50, 173 epigraphy:
Diadochs, formative period for Hellenistic as source 17—22
age 232 η. 154 ideological force of publication 149, 184
dialect at Soloi 322-3 selectivity 235-6
dioiketes 135-7 see also erasure
diplomacy 201-6 epimeleia 185, 196
Dutch humanists 356 erasure:
dynasts 175-6 on dedication for Apollophanes of
Seleukeia 358
earthquake of 199/8: 88 of honorand's name in decree 236, 249
eklogistes 135 of Antiochos III at Xanthos 324
'Elephant Battle' 34 Erythrai 37, 48, 58 n. 25, 89
empires, Hellenistic 103—4 eucharistia 185, 189, 242
administration 142-3 euergetes (title) 207
bargains and compromises 169-70 euergetism:
collaboration between different branches continuity 185-7
138-40, 144-s as exchange 182
consent 169-71, 182, 195, 207 extends royal power 181-2
control of population 144, 157 extension in space
communication as part of structure institutionalized characters 191—2
141-2 language of 182-94, 199-201, 237
cultural koine 228—35, 239 reciprocity 185—6, 216
embedding of 'free-floating resources' weakens royal pwer 208-11
210-11 Eumenes II 92
exaction 121, 134-5 eunoia 187, 191, 192, 199 n. 67, 200, 216,
exchange 179-80, 184-6, 204 231
extensiveness 143 Euromos (Philippoi) 77, 85, 95, 126, 165
fiscal rationale 134-5 constitutional changes 164
how to study 106-8, 177-8 status 161
ideology 147-50, 170-4, 177-8, 210
'imagined empire' 174—5, 210 'facts', instrumental use in discourse 197—9
implementation of decisions 144 'factions' 173
language of empire 1 4 1 , 1 7 9 Fifth Syrian War 73
legal settlements after conquest 64 'foreign judges' 1 5 7 , 1 6 2 , 1 8 1
see also privileges; statuses; surrender and forests 1 1 6 , 1 3 1
grant forts 114, 116, 120, 168
local dimension 133, 210 see also garrisoning
as magic 123 freedom 84, 93, 113
mediated through langauge of benefaction application in 188: 282-3
193-4, 'giving back' 152—4
as organized crime 121 'liberation ideology' not attested for
patrimonial state 149-50 Antiochos III 100
as performance 148-9, 210 not necessary condition for polis 152-4,
precarity 25, 102 159
as rhetoric 147-50 propaganda use 98, 100, 166
ruler cult, function 233-4 see also autonomy
separation of administrative branches
138-9, 252-3 Galatians 34, 45, 92, 257-8
garrisoning 113-20, 155 'Ilion decree' 168, 184, 192, 203, 217-8,
relation to standing army 118, 120 237, 254-9
and taxation 139-40 indirect taxes 132-4, 140, 154-5
Gergis (Troad) 89 intimacy, in euergetical language 191
giving away cities or territory 80, 154 Ionia 124
Gördes 53, 248 Ptolemy 111 takes over 44-5
governors, over cities i n , 126, 155-6, 156
n. 173, 159, 166, 248 n. 8, 249 Jerusalem 28, 113, 114, 117, 121, 145—6,
grain, royal 130, 137, 196-8, 348-9, 362 180
'Great' Judaea 114, 132, 173
see Megas
'Great King': kai 185
see basileiis megas Kalynda 115
gymnasion 62, 83, 84 Kalymna 77
Karia 125
Halikarnassos 77 advance of Antiochos II in Western part
Hannibal 89, 99 42
Hekatomnids 40, 127, 295-6 under Antigonids 47, 69-70
Hellenistic world, approaches to i , 5, 245 'Chrysaorian Karia' 68—9
Hellespontine satrapy 124 Western part possibly not taken over by
Herakleia Pontike 33 n. 27, 173 n. 220, 236 Seleukos I 39
Herakleia under Latmos 68, 69, 77, 80, 85, Zeuxis'operations 66—71,85—6
119, 126, 180, 185-6 katoikia 117
local epigraphical narrative 252 Kaudos 134, 166
negotiations with Zeuxis and Antiochos Kaunos 89
113, 169-70, 198-9, 203, 238, 241 Kibyratis 176
no use of'regnal formula' 158 Kildara 44, 77, 85, 113, 126
not part of "royal land' 158 Kilikia 82-3
in Roman-Seleukid War 246—7 possibly taken over by Ptolemy II in
Hermeias 126 First Syrian War 39
Heuss, A . 38, 152-60 under Ptolemies 40
high-priest of all the shrines in Asia Minor: kinship, mythical:
see archiereus ton hieron panton 26 see sungeneia
ho epi ton hieron 27, 28, 135, 146 kings:
office perhaps lapsed after Antiochos II courtesy towards cities
43, 145 n. 141 euergetism 180-2
ho epi ton pragmaton 125-7, 139, 146 in formulary of decrees 232-3
ho epi ton prosodon 135 honours from cities 37, 201-6
honorific decree 183-4 ideology adopted by cities 230-4
'hortative clause' 211—12,237—8 letters to cities 183, 240—1, 328—9
mediating petitions 201-6 orders to cities 93, 163-4
for royal officials 206—n ownership of property in cities 131, 156
weakens empire 208-11 personal power 149-50
hyparchies 124-5, Γ 39 n - 120 power 80, 93-4
Hyrkania 169 relations with cities 37-8, 118-20, 155-7,
167-8, 170, 201-6, 243-5, Άηά passim
Iasos 77, 85, 89, 95, 112, 161, 216-7, 230, and war 109, 120
232 see also empires, Hellenistic
date of takeover by Antiochos III 334—5 Kleopatra I 88
rituals for Laodike III 223-4 Knidos 77
in Roman-Seleukid War 234, 247 Koile-Syria 56, 59, 73, 114, 120
Seleukid benefactions 180-2 koinei/idiai 188
status 160-1 Kolophon 72, 87, 156, 93, 163, 283
territory 181 Antiocheia (festival) 37, 246
Ikon ion 56 in Roman-Seleukid War 234, 246
Ilion 89 Korakesion 83, 115
and Achaios 56, 59, 257 Kos 77, 79, 92
Koile-Syria 30 Megas 64, 229-30, 253, 272-6
Kouroupedion 33 Menderes-Kavakdere corridor 72
krisis 360 Mesopotamia 44
Ktesikles 135, 366 Meydancik Kale 40
Kyme 58, 89, 283 Miletos 41, 80-1, 86, 89, 251
Kyzikos 91 Millar, F. 104, 149, 169
Milyas 124
Labraunda 68 Mithridates (relative of Antiochos III) 82,
84
Lade, battle of 76
Lampsakos 49, 89, 201, Mithridates (son of Antiochos III) 82
and Antiochos III 94, 95, 173, 228 moralizing language 188—90, 201
land surveying 36, 137 motivating clauses 215-19
language 179-80, 182-94, 201-2, 244-5 Mylasa 78, 168-9
function of stereotypes 191-2 coinage 162-3
how to study political language 192-4 priesthood of Zeus Kretagenes 164
as polity 231-2 taken by Antiochos II 42
realistic language 194 taken by Antiochos 111 68
role assignment 206-14 status 160, 173, 283
Laodike III 62, 71, 82, Myous 77, 80-1
cult for 62, 64 n. 47, 94, 129, 202-3, Myrina (Aiolis) 58, 89
222-4, 234, 334-s Myrina (Lemnos) 95
'sister' title 255 Mysia 59, 60, 116, 131, 144 n. 136
Laodikeian War 43-4 Mytilene 89
Laodikeis of Rhodian Peraia 14
'leaving behind' 53-4 Nagidos 39
Lebedos 72 narrative, limitations of 103—4
legal claims 29-32, 78-9 naval operations, superficial without land
used to create legitimacy 32—3, 52 troops 88
see also 'surrender and grant' negotiations between city and ruler 113
liberty: negotiations between Rome and Seleukids,
see freedom 50-1, 94-102,2174 n. 89
Livy 12-14, i o 6 Neoptolemos 40
mistranlsation of Polybios by 95 n. 155 Nikanor 26, 130, 144-5
lodging, provision of 121 Nisyros 77
loyalism 202, 230-1 North Syria 7-8, 44, 65, 93, 206-7, 229
Lydia 124, 177
Lykia: oaths 170
Antiochos III takes over 84-5 official in charge of sacred matters:
freedom 251 see ho epi ton hieron
possibly not taken over by Seleukos I 39 officials 123-5, 127-30, 135-7, 140, 144-5,
and Ptolemies 40 156, 303
and Rhodians 177, 251, big fish in small ponds 233
Lysimacheia 76, 86, 90, 93, 114, 165, 266—7 cities socializing officials 206—11, 235
Lysimachos 33, 119, 241 face to face contacts 142
'flatterers' 208
Maccabees 14 language and world 141, 207, 240-1
Macedonians 8, 33, 40 n. 51, 117, 124 n. oikonomos 135-7, !39
60, 210 Olympichos 42, 47, 69-70, 116, 176
Magas 56 apologizes to Mylasa 168-9
Magnesia on Maeander 77, 78, 80-1, 86 perhaps started as hyparch 125
war with Miletos 251 Orth, W . 167-8
Cn. Manlius Vulso H I Ottomans 134, 151, 177
Maroneia 78, 90, 115 paidia 287
Marsyas (statue) 61 Pamukçu 291
Marsyas valley: Pamukçu stele 26-9, 60, 122, 127, 141,
Antiochos II advance 42 148-9, 156, 281
Maeander valley 5, 116 Patara 1 1 5 , 2 4 7
'paternal empire' 259 precedent, force of 52, 169-70, 195
peace of Rallias 83 Priapos 89
peace of Phoinike 74 Priene 37, 86, 89, 162, 180, 347-8
Pedasa 77, 85, 95, 161 privileges 113, 149-50
performative utterances (speech-act) 20, 8o, ideological function 171-3
95, 101, 104, h i , 113, 144-s, 156, vocabulary 172
171, 179, 213-4, 248 prohairesis 189
see also speech-act theory 'propaganda', inadequate concept 98, 194
Perge 163, 166, 252-3 Propontis 45, 76, 91
Perinthos 91, 95 prostagma 122
petition and response 149, 169—70, 171, Prousias I 60
178, 182 proxenos 207
Pharnakes I 92 Ptolemaios of Telmessos 94, 176
Phaselis 119, 163 Ptolemaios Thraseou 27 n. 5, 73, 82-3, 84
Philip V 51, 68, 79, 170, 241 n.113, 114
in Asia Minor 74-82 Ptolemies 134, 158, 271
in Thrace 78 in Asia Minor 39-43, 78, 88
Philippoi/Euromos: in Hellespont and Thrace 45, 78, 92 n.
see Euromos 144
Philotas (Seleukid official) 123, 291 in Karia 40, 69-70
phobos H I Ptolemy II 39-41
Phoenicia 82, 173 Ptolemy III:
Phokaia 58, 87, 89, 247, 282 conquests in Asia Minor 44-5
phrourarch 114, 139, 252-3 dominion in Kilikia 41
see also garrisoning Ptolemy IV 58
Phrygia, Hellespontine 60, 87 Ptolemy V 88-9
phulake (military district) 115 Ptolemy V I 120
phulake (temporary garrison) 117, 119 Ptolemy the son 41
Phygela 114-1S
Piginda 3 L. Quinctius Flamininus 99
Pisidia 91 T . Quinctius Flamininus 99
pistis 56 n. 13, 216
plunder 1 1 0 - 1 1 , 2 4 7 Raphia 59
see also ravaging regnal formula 67
plural participle construction 122, 290 where attested 158
polis 3-4, 10 11, 150-1 repressive tolerance 171, 238
approaches to 225 n. 135 Rhodes 74, 81, 83, 84-5, 85 n. 120, 88, 248,
civic decrees not 'servile' 168, 178, 237 251
civic discourse and identity (collective) involvement in Karia 48, 248
214-28, 239 'voluntary tribute' from kings 205
civic identity (individual) 207-8 Rhodian Peraia 77
conceptual geography 217-18 Rhoiteion 89
experiences in Third Syrian War 48-9 Robert, Louis 4, 11, 17 and passim
discord 21-2, 226, 236-7 Roman-Seleukid War 118, 245-7
ideological power 226-8 Rome:
importance and durability in Hellenistic conceptual geography in East 97-9
period 25, 150—1, 167 involvement in Eastern Aegean 81—2, 96
international community 151, 212-13 negotiations with Antiochos III 81-2, 83,
as military organism in Hellenistic period 94-102
151 routes 5, 17, 35-6, 72, 77, 115-16, 121
open to royal ideology 228-35 royal economy 130-7
subdivisions 220-1, 224, 232 royal land 130-1, 132
Polybios 1 1 - 1 5 royal treasury (to basilikon) 137
power 107, 122, 170, 178, 233, 237-42 ruler cult 219-26, 229, 334-5
as benefaction 194-201 'instant memory' 225-7
pragmata (royal affairs) 126, 149, 158, 217, sense of metaphor 221-4
230-1 speed of creation 225
ruler cult (cont.): Side 163
see also Antiochos III, state cult for him- Skepsis 89, 163, 283
self and ancestors; Laodike III, cult Smyrna 48, 89, 94, 96, 173, 201, 228, 235
for ally of Attalos I 46
honours for Seleukids 37
sacred fish 291 in Third Syrian War 44, 49-50
Sagalassos 60, 91 η. 143 social memory 219-26, 239
sales tax 132—3 Soloi 83, 115, 271
Samos 76 Doric spoken 322-3
possibly not taken over by Seleukos I 39 spear-won territory 29
Samothrake 92 n. 144 speech-act theory 20, 104, 213
Sardeis 36, 72, 109, 114, 138, 156, 180 statues 212-3, 221-2
after 188: 150 statuses 64, 1 1 1 - 1 3 , T 5 0 _ 74
autonomous under Attalos I 47 ambiguity of statuses as language 166-7
honours for Laodike 111 202-3 ideological force of 170-4, 175
lost under Seleukos III 55 reality of 168-70, 266-7
recovered by Seleukos II 47 Stratonikeia (Karia) 35, 42, 77, 85, 86,
recovered by Antiochos III 61-3 277-8
surrenders to the Romans 246 'subject cities' 158-9
satrapies 124 subordinate poleis 153-60
Seleukeia/Tralleis: restriction of diplomatic life 156-7
see Tralleis see also kings, relations with cities
Seleukid road 5 P. Sulpicius Galba 50-1
Seleukids: sungeneia 96
and Achaimenids 9 suntasso 141
administration 123—50 suntaxis 131, 163
affective court style 148, 287 supplementary gift 195
anxiety about claims to Asia Minor 51—2, supplies, cities providing 121
99—100 'surrender and grant' model 111—13, 152—3,
centralization 140 164,
colonization 4, 35, 63 problems with 165—7
conceptual geography 27-8, 65, 92-3, see also Bickerman, E. J.
97-8, 100, 147 Syro-Macedonian pact 74-6
eastern dimension i, 7-8
garrisoning 113-20 Tabai 115
historical memory in Asia Minor 28-52, Tabai plateau 115, 116, 120
94, 97-8 Taurus 28, 53, 59, 66, 72, 125, 215
influence on free cities 164 taxation 131-5, 139-40, 154-S
lack of homogeneity in empire 175-7 local dimension 133
Macedonian identity 8 Telmessos 48, 84, 94, 115
'nomadic' kingship 7, 36, 53-4, 93 Temnos 58, 89, 143-4
North Syria 7-8 Teos 65
'Seleukid past' 65, 94, 195, 198-9 after Seleukids 249-50, 268
'Seleukid time' 67, 147-8 agora 210-11, 250
'Seleukid usage' (Apollo named first) Antiocheia and Laodikeia (festival) 220-1
240, 294 and Attalids 58, 250
'strong state' 120, 142—4, ISO, 174—5, and Antiochos III 71—2, 86, 112, 123,
177, 218 205, 206-7, 209-10, 219-23, 228-30,
structures of empire 36 237
see also administration; control; empire coinage 163
Seleukos I 33-4, 98 cult for Antiochos III and his ancestors
Seleukos II 43 229
gives Stratonikeia to Rhodes 278 date of takeover by Antiochos III 260-5
recovers Sardeis 47 honours for Antiochos I 37
Seleukos III 55 honours for Ptolemies 45 n. 65
senatus-consultum of 196: 77 n. 93, 95 pirates at 48
shrines 134, 176 in Roman-Seleukid War 234-5, 247
Thasos 76, 95, 170 vice-roy:
Theangela 77, 80, 90, 208 see ho epi ton pragmaton
Themison 82 villages 4, 136-7, 158, 176
Themistokles (official of Achaios) 57, 59, 63 violence 109-11, 170
Third Syrian War 44
and local communities 44
war 53-4, 103, 108-9, 1 2 0
Thrace 45, 78, 90—1
ravaging, in Hellenistic warfare 44, 59,
Thyateira 35, 9, 87, 246
90, 247,
timai 184-5
Xanthos 115, 157 n. 177, 225, 235, 236-7,
timber 62, 116
240
time, in euergetical language 186—7
taken by Antiochos III 84, n o , 112
Tlepolemos Artapatou 236
Tralleis (Seleukeia) 48, 57, 249
treasury (gazophulakion) 121 n. 51 zeal, in euergetical language 191, 216
tribute 130, 131-2, 134, 150, 154, 282-3 Zeus Kretagenetes/Kretagenes and
collection 139 Diktynna 67, 164
Troad 89 Zeuxis 62, 66, 123-30, 140, 142, 185-6,
and Achaios 56 198-9
and Attalos I 46, 59 author of letter to Amyzon 293-4
coinage under Antiochos II 36 invaded Attalid kingdom in 198? 279-81
Ptolemy III takes over 45 not a dynast 127-9
Tyriaion 248 operations in 197: 85—6
powers 126-7
Upper Regions 30, 63, 93 viewed as powerful 126-7