Mechanics and Mathematics in Ancient Greece

This entry presents an overview on how mechanics in Greece was linked to geometry. In ancient Greece, mechanics was about lifting heavy bodies, and mathematics almost coincided with geometry. Mathematics interconnected with mechanics at least from the 5th century BCE and became dominant in the Hellenistic period. The contributions by thinkers such as Aristotle, Euclid, and Archytas on fundamental problems such as that of the lever are sketched. This entry can be the starting point for a deeper investigation on the connections of the two disciplines through the ages until our present day.

Ancient Greek Terracotta Sculpture

The phrase “terracotta sculpture” refers to all figurative representations in fired clay produced in Greece and in the Greek world during the first millennium bce, (from the Geometric period to the end of the Hellenistic period), whatever their size (figurine, statuette, or statue), whatever their manufacturing technique (modeling, molding, mixed), whatever their material form (in-the-round, relief, etc.), whatever their representation (anthropomorphic, zoomorphic [real or imaginary], diverse objects), and whatever the limits of their representation: full figure (figurines, statuettes, groups), truncated or abbreviated representations, including protomai, masks, busts, half figures, and anatomical representations, among others. All these objects, with the possible exception of large statues, were the products of artisans who were referred to in ancient texts as “coroplasts,” or modelers of images in clay. Because of this, the term “coroplasty,” or “coroplathy,” has been used to refer to this craft, but also increasingly to all of its products, large and small, while research on this material falls under the rubric of coroplastic studies. Greek terracottas were known to antiquarians from the mid-17th century onward from archaeological explorations in both sanctuary and funerary sites, especially in southern Italy and Sicily. Yet serious scholarly interest in these important representatives of Greek sculpture developed only in the last quarter of the 19th century, when terracotta figurines of the Hellenistic period were unearthed from the cemeteries of Tanagra in Boeotia in the 1870s and Myrina in Asia Minor in the 1880s. These immediately entered the antiquities markets, where their cosmopolitan, secular imagery had a great appeal for collectors and fueled scholarly interest and debate. At the same time, sanctuary deposits containing terracottas also began to be explored, but scholarly attention privileged funerary terracottas because of their better state of preservation. For most of the 20th century, the study of figurative terracottas basically was an art-historical exercise based in iconography and style that remained in the shadow of monumental sculpture. It is only in the last four decades or so that coroplastic studies has developed into an autonomous field of research, with approaches specific to the discipline that consider modalities of production, as well as the religious, social, political, and economic roles that terracottas played in ancient Greek life by means of broad sociological and anthropological approaches. Consequently, this bibliography mainly comprises publications of the last forty years, although old titles that are still essential for research are also included.

Demagogues and Demagoguery in Hellenistic Greece

This paper introduces scholars of Greek political thought to the continued existence of the phenomenon of demagoguery, or ‘(mis-)leadership of the people’, in the Hellenistic period. After summarizing Classical elite discourse about demagoguery, I explore three areas in which political leaders continued to run afoul of elite norms in Hellenistic democratic poleis: 1) political persecution of the wealthier members of a political community; 2) ‘pandering to’ the people in a way considered infra dignitatem; and 3) stoking bellicosity among the common people. I show that considerable continuities link the Classical and Hellenistic periods and that demagoguery should be approached as a potential window onto ‘popular culture’ in Greek antiquity.

Archaeology of Central Asia during the 1st millennium BC, from the Beginning of the Iron age to the Hellenistic period

The present volume edited by Johanna Lhuillier gathers contributions presented during the workshop “Archaeology of Central Asia during the 1st millennium BC” at the 10th ICAANE in Vienna in 2016. Designed to treat both the Iron Age and the Hellenistic period, it aims to embrace the diversity of current archaeological work led on the 1st millennium BC in Central Asia. The contributions are based on previously unpublished data and ongoing fieldwork, treating key aspects of the covered period, like chronology, the development of settlements and architecture, and the distribution and evolution of material culture. The volume casts new light on this challenging period by characterizing its cultural, socio-economical, and political transformations and focusing on broader interactions with neighbouring cultures.

Back to the Iron Age Chronology in Southern Central Asia

The article reconsiders two major sites of the 1st millennium BC in southern Uzbekistan, Kyzyltepa and Kurganzol. It contests their recent dating – exclusively the Achaemenid and transitional Hellenistic period for the first one, and the end of the 4th c. BC for the second one – mainly based upon dendrochronological analyses relating the samples to the time of Alexander the Great’s conquest or slightly before, and ruling out the other dates given to these sites in previous publications. Our argumentation is based upon (1) various archaeological arguments and (2) scientific criteria that question the dendrochronological data and the supposed aging of the 14C results due to “old waters” from glaciers.

Insularity and Religious Life: The Case of Hellenistic Ikaros/Failaka Island

This paper explores the notion of insularity and religious life in the sacred landscape of Ikaros/Failaka with a particular focus on the Hellenistic period. The little island of Ikaros/Failaka in the Persian Gulf had a long pre-Hellenistic religious history and was occupied by Alexander, explored by his officials and became part of the Seleucid kingdom. From the mid-20th century, archaeological missions working on the nesiotic space of the Persian Gulf have revealed material evidence that has altered our view of this remote part of the Hellenistic world. Research revealed a flourishing network of cultural communication and contacts between the indigenous population of the East and Greco-Macedonians. These interactions mirror the landscape of the Hellenistic East. Thus Ikaros/Failaka, an island on the periphery of the Seleucid kingdom, situated at a strategic point (near the mouth of the River Euphrates and close to the shores of the Persian Gulf) appears to be part of a chain of locations that possessed political/military, economic, and religious importance for the Seleucids. It became a fruitful landscape, where the Seleucids pursued their political and religious agenda.

Royal Polis Policy in the Seleukid Heartland

<p>In the Hellenistic Period most of the Greek poleis (city-states) came under the control of the Greco-Macedonian kings. The ideology of the poleis, which stressed the importance of autonomy, conflicted with the reality of royal domination. In Western Asia Minor, this conflict was resolved by presenting the relationship between king and polis as one of free association, in which the poleis were allowed a large amount of autonomy. The kings used ideas of reciprocity to tie the poleis to them and worked to make their rule as amenable as possible, while the poleis of Western Asia Minor continued to aspire to complete independence. This was not the only possible resolution of the conflict between polis autonomy and royal dominance, however. In the Seleukid heartland of Syria and Mesopotamia the Seleukids founded and maintained new poleis. By means of names, myths, and symbols, the identities of these poleis were closely linked to the Seleukid dynasty. As a result, expressions of polis identity were expressions of loyalty to the dynasty, rather than of opposition. Their internal structures were based around an alliance between the royally-appointed epistatēs and the magistrates of the city, who represented a small civic elite. Royal support was thus important to the internal power structure of these poleis. The poleis of the Seleukid heartland did not pursue full independence, even when the Seleukid royal power collapsed at the end of the Hellenistic period because, entirely unlike the poleis of Western Asia Minor, submission to a higher power was a central part of their identities and internal structures.</p>

Royal Polis Policy in the Seleukid Heartland

<p>In the Hellenistic Period most of the Greek poleis (city-states) came under the control of the Greco-Macedonian kings. The ideology of the poleis, which stressed the importance of autonomy, conflicted with the reality of royal domination. In Western Asia Minor, this conflict was resolved by presenting the relationship between king and polis as one of free association, in which the poleis were allowed a large amount of autonomy. The kings used ideas of reciprocity to tie the poleis to them and worked to make their rule as amenable as possible, while the poleis of Western Asia Minor continued to aspire to complete independence. This was not the only possible resolution of the conflict between polis autonomy and royal dominance, however. In the Seleukid heartland of Syria and Mesopotamia the Seleukids founded and maintained new poleis. By means of names, myths, and symbols, the identities of these poleis were closely linked to the Seleukid dynasty. As a result, expressions of polis identity were expressions of loyalty to the dynasty, rather than of opposition. Their internal structures were based around an alliance between the royally-appointed epistatēs and the magistrates of the city, who represented a small civic elite. Royal support was thus important to the internal power structure of these poleis. The poleis of the Seleukid heartland did not pursue full independence, even when the Seleukid royal power collapsed at the end of the Hellenistic period because, entirely unlike the poleis of Western Asia Minor, submission to a higher power was a central part of their identities and internal structures.</p>

Continuity and Change in the Third Century

This chapter uses two case studies to explore how identities both changed and stayed the same under the changing conditions of the Hellenistic period. First, in southern Italy, Hellenic identity gained increasing prominence, especially at Taras, which understood the growing presence of non-Greeks (including Rome) as a barbarian invasion and invited Pyrrhus to assist it in support of Greekness. This discourse was not universal, however, since other cities such as Thurii were more concerned with local identities and resisting Tarantine imperialism. Second, Syracusan identity in the age of King Hieron II was articulated by three major factors: its sense of Greekness, emphasizing its role as defender of the Sicilian Greeks against barbarian enemies; the memory of the city’s past greatness, especially under the Deinomenids; and pride in its Dorian, Corinthian, and Peloponnesian origins.