Macedonian Monarchy

8/13/2019 Macedonian Monarchy

1/18

N. G. L. Hammond

Monarchy is a red rag to a republican, and I suppose there are republicans amongyou today. Greeks too thought poorly of monarchy. Even Isocrates, who curriedfavor with Philip, made this clear: if a Greek wanted to become a king, he had to goto the backwoods as Philips progenitor had done and impose himself on people of a

different race !see figure "#. $ristotle, who outlived Philip and $le%ander and saw theMacedonian monarchy at work, condemned monarchy as a political institution and&udged it fit only for barbarians, who were incapable of organi'ing their own affairsand so became subservient to a king(whereas the Greeks, being both spirited andintelligent, conducted their own affairs in a sensible manner and re&ected any form ofsub&ection. )et the hallmark of the *ellenistic world was monarchy. $lmost everysuccessful general, whether Macedonian, Greek, +ithynian, appadocian, or of mi%edrace, set himself up as a king. -ne e%ception was osthenes, who made hisMacedonians in Macedonia take an oath of loyalty to himself not as king !as theywere prepared to do# but as general.[1]/as he a republican, a forerunner of -liverromwell0 1he answer is probably no2 and his reason was surely that he was not amember of the royal house and saw no hope in 3456344 of establishing himself as

king permanently. 1he fact is that monarchies ruled over as many parts of the*ellenistic world as remained uncon7uered for some three centuries !e%cludingGreece and most of icily#.

8ig. ".Macedonia in the fourth century +.. $fter Eugene 9. +or'a, In the Shadow of Olympus: The Emergence of Macedon!Princeton:Princeton niversity Press, "55;#, p.


2/18

own fields2 he told the Aydians to live by their own customs and to be free, put $dain control of aria and gained the cooperation of arian cities, and confirmed manyPhoenician and yprian kings in their positions. /henever a claim was made for orby $le%ander, it was as Bing of $sia(in the prophecy at Gordium, in his belief thatthe claim was confirmed by thunder and lightning, in the letter to ?arius !Come tome as Aord of all $siaD and Csend to me as Bing of $siaD#, and in his own words on

the spoils dedicated to $thena at Aindos Chaving become Aord of $sia.D -thersacclaimed him as Bing of $sia, from the army in


3/18

that the Macedones were serving soldiers2 and we may add e%@soldiers, because-lympias asked to be tried by all Macedones and because $ntigonus held anassembly of Macedones at 1yre which consisted of the soldiers with him and menresident in the area, that is, soldiers settled there.[20]It is e7ually clear that not allmen capable of bearing arms in Macedonia in the geographical sense wereCMacedonesD2 for that title was given only to the elite infantrymen !being the

*ypaspists and the Phalangites# and to the ompanion avalry, the two groupsmaking up the Companions.D 1hey alone were Cthe citi'en troops.D ?iodorus,following a *ellenistic historian, probably ?iyllus, described the Macedonians whom$le%ander chose to send home in


4/18

the ashes of the deceased king and 7ueen !we may compare the presence of$le%anders corpse at the election of $rrhidaeus and the baby@to@be in


5/18

I turn ne%t to the other peoples in the Macedonian kingdom. 1hey lived on landwhich had been won by the spear of the king and which was thenceforth the kingspossession. 1he earliest known e%ample of such possession is $nthemus, an areawhich $myntas offered to *ippias, the banished tyrant of $thens. ome inscriptions,&ust published or about to be published, provide other e%amples. Lulia okotopoulougenerously showed me one such inscription before publication. In it the frontiers of

several small +ottiaean cities of southeast halcidice are laid down by the fiat of?emetrius, c. 35;, and there is mention of an earlier royal grant of land to theamaioi, probably by Philip II in


6/18

1hey were no part of the Macedonian tate. 1hey had to accept that tates foreignpolicy, and they had to obey the kings commands. +ut they en&oyed greatadvantages: security2 prosperity2 freedom of language, law, and religion2 no largee%penditure on armaments and mercenaries2 and the right of appeal to the king. $very few served in the Bings $rmy as light cavalry and light@armed troops. 1he mainfunction of these native peoples was to promote the economy of the kingdom and

thus to enable it to maintain its regular army of Macedones. $s need arose, thenumber of peoples on the land was increased by the transplantation of Illyrians,Gauls, 1hracians, and Getae to work the lands of Aower Macedonia especially. /e donot know of any risings by the native peoples or by the transplanted peoples.

1he relationship between the king and the native peoples of $sia and Egypt wasvery similar. $fter the battle of the Granicus iver $le%ander told the peasants ofMysia Cto return to their own property,D that is, to cultivate it as theirs2 and he gavethe same order to the Indian peasants of the Indus delta.[47]$t ardis he granted theuse of their own customs and laws to the Aydians and left them Cfree,D that is, freeto manage their own affairs in their own way, but of course to be sub&ect to theoverall kingship of $le%ander and to pay ta%es to him2 and he continued on the sameprinciple, which he intended to apply also in $rabia.[48]$s he advanced, the

proportion of Macedones to the peoples on spear@won lands decreased. *e thereforebegan early to train elite troops from the native peoples: Aydians, Aycians, arians,Egyptians !,;;; according to the uda s.v.&$#'(+#2 and from


7/18

Perrhaebia. Philip carried out &ust such a policy: C*e uprooted the citi'en men withtheir women and children from the most distinguished coastal cities and plantedthem in the area now called Emathia.D [53]It was a two@way process, the displacedpopulation of Emathia being transferred elsewhere. uch transplants of populationswere used by Philip II in order to mi% old and new populations together in bothMacedonia proper and pper Macedonia.

1he Macedonian cities within the kingdom, old and new, managed their ownaffairs(financial, religious, diplomatic, and military(and in the last war againstome the cities sent envoys to the king, offering their own money and their ownreserves of grain for the campaign.[54]In physical terms the kingdom consisted of twoparts: #(+ &2%, Cthe cities and the countrysideD !so divided by Pyrrhusand Aysimachus, according to Plutarch#.[55]+ut it was, rather, the cities which formedthe basis of Macedonias military and economic strength.

imilar developments were promoted in the Bingdom of $sia by $le%ander andthen by his successors. 1he already established cities, both Greek and non@Greek,received favored treatment in terms of land and ta%ation. Populations weretransferred !e.g., for refounding 1yre and Ga'a, and for many eleucid foundations#2and e%panding trade brought prosperity to these cities. 1hey managed their own

affairs, like the cities in the Macedonian kingdom, but within the overall authority ofthe king. 9ew cities were founded with a modicum of Macedonians and Greeks, whowere directed initially by $le%ander and then were welcomed by the uccessors.1hese cities included within their territory a large element of local indigenous people,like the villagers attached to Macedonian Balindoia. It is important to stress thatthese were not Greek cities in any political sense2 for the Greek city was a city@state,fiercely independent, riven by stas0s, racially e%clusive, and intolerant of royal rule.1heir function, as in the Macedonian kingdom, was to produce the military andeconomic resources which the *ellenistic kingdoms re7uired for survival. 1he historyof what $. *. M. Lones called the CGreek ityD of the *ellenistic and oman periodsin $sia[56]was rather the history of the Macedonian city(perhaps the greatestcontribution which the Macedonian tate made to human civili'ation.

Response: E. N. Bora

Professor *ammond has given us a rich paper, full of intriguing suggestions aboutconnections between the traditional Macedonian monarchy and the kingships of the*ellenistic period. *e sees in the Macedonian state the antecedents for what followedin the *ellenistic era. 1he implications of what he has suggested are far@reaching andshould be important to all of us interested in political and cultural continuity in theancient world.

In order to acknowledge the validity of Professor *ammonds thesis, we must be

prepared to accept two things: first, that his reconstruction of the institutions of theMacedonian state is valid2 and second, that his interpretation of the *ellenisticlegacy of these institutions is correct. I leave the *ellenistic aspect to others better7ualified to comment, and shall limit myself to the first 7uestion: are Professor*ammonds views a fair representation of Macedonian institutions0

I cannot deal in detail with all of the matters raised by Professor *ammond, andoffer the following in the way of commentary. 8irst, I should like(though with abrevity that neither scholar nor sub&ect deserves(to raise a few critical points thatmay, I hope, suffice to reveal the nature of what I perceive as a ma&or problem in
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.53#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.53#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.53#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.54#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.54#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.55#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.55#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.55#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.56#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.53#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.54#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.55#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e2665&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1.56#X


8/18

treating these matters. econd, I wish to address the larger conte%t of describing the$rgead dynasty of Macedon,[1]and to suggest why it is so difficult to developanalogues or parallels between what *ellenistic kings did and the activities of theirMacedonian predecessors.

1he heart of Professor *ammonds argument lies in his reconstruction of therelationship between the Macedonian king and his people, the Macedones, in the

$rgead period. *is attempt here and elsewhere to define the Macedones as theMacedonians@at@arms has met with general approval. Professor *ammond correctlydemonstrates that the epigraphical evidence(on this point, the best kind of evidence(from the late fifth and early fourth centuries shows that the king is(+.&('!!. 1he same evidence also reveals that all treaties are made with the kingpersonally2 the only other persons mentioned are the kings descendants or livingmembers of his immediate family, the $rgeadae. 1his would remain true through thereign of $le%ander the Great, where CBing $le%anderD alone marks all of thesurviving treaties.

1he numbers of the Macedones are still largely guesswork. Professor *ammondgives ";,;;; Macedones in


9/18

Europe.D I thus cannot accept that our sources comments about $le%anders titles in$sia have any significance for describing his formal relationship with his own peoples.

1o continue, Professor *ammond suggests that these citi'en@soldiers bothelected and deposed their kings. 9ow we have surviving the names of si%teenhistorical $rgead kings, beginning with $myntas I in the late si%th and early fifthcentury and ending with $le%ander I, son of the con7ueror, who was murdered in


10/18

army, which may have been a normal, ritual part of the process, is not the same aselection, a procedure marked by political agreements and compromises made onanother level. 1here is in fact no evidence proving that the sovereign power to electa king rested with any particular group of persons. uccession appears rather to bethe result of a series of political and military decisions made by those in a position todo so, and the manner in which they conducted themselves was a response to the

circumstances of the moment.[12]

1hus, while I can accept much of what Professor *ammond says about thenature of the Macedonian citi'enship through the age of $le%ander, I am somewhatskeptical about the power of that citi'en body to effect momentous decisions, suchas the election and deposition of their kings.

+ut there is also a logical inconsistency in Professor *ammonds position. Evenif we accept that some kind of assembly of troops selected and deposed kings !and Ido not accept this#, they did so because they were Macedones, citi'ens of aMacedonian monarchical state. 1o claim the perpetuation of the process into*ellenistic times would re7uire defining the citi'en body of the Ptolemaic andeleucid kingdoms in the same way for the same reason. Professor *ammond hasnot done this, and I am not certain that the analogy is possible. +ut I leave that

matter to those well versed in matters of *ellenistic ruling and ruled classes.[13]$s for$ntigonid Macedonia, I suspect that things were much as they had been before theage of Philip and $le%ander, although this is an impressionistic view.

1here are several other points in Professor *ammonds paper that re7uire asimilar response, that is, that I do not see in one or two isolated instances, cited bylate sources, a sample of evidence statistically sufficient to lay down a general rule,especially when much of that evidence concerns the reign of $le%ander, whosecareer may be uni7ue because of its geographical setting and multiethnic comple%ity.1he most that can be said is that there appear to be some features of the reigns ofPhilip and $le%ander that may have established precedents for the *ellenistickingships that followed. +ut, if Bienast and 8redricksmeyer are correct,[14]Philipskingship was tending toward an $sian absolutist model, and most of $le%anders

kingship was e%ercised for eleven years amid almost constant campaigningthousands of miles from home. It is difficult to believe that either of these royaladministrations was Cnormal,D although I confess that the dearth of informationabout political and social institutions before Philip makes it as dangerous for me toclaim that Philip and $le%ander were unusual as it does for Professor *ammond toclaim that they were part of a continuing tradition.

$s for the king and the city, Professor *ammond raises the possibility that theMacedonian city in the *ellenistic and oman world was Cperhaps the greatestcontribution which the Macedonian tate made to human civili'ation.D 9ow wecannot deny that the Macedonians were city founders and refounders from the timeof $rchelaus to the age of Philip and $le%ander. +ut I cannot attach muchsignificance to this Macedonian custom, or regard it as very different from whatGreeks had traditionally been doing for centuries. 1here were, roughly speaking, onlytwo kinds of inhabited communities in the +alkans for people who had settled into anagricultural or commercial pattern: towns andpole0s. 1he custom of Europeansettlement, until 7uite recently, has been to live in defensible towns that lay neartrade routes and had access to fresh water and farmland. 1he Macedonians lived thisway both as the result of their natural evolution and because their kings forciblymoved people into such settlements from time to time, as Professor *ammondpoints out. 1hat the towns managed many of their own affairs should not surprise us,especially as the $rgead monarchy seems not to have been highly bureaucrati'ed.+ut it would appear that a ma&or difference between Macedonian towns and Greek
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.12#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.12#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.12#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.13#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.14#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.14#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.14#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.12#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.13#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.14#X


11/18

towns is that the Greeks selected their own magistrates and legislated on their ownbehalf inpole0sthat were politically autonomous.

$s this is a ma&or difference, I am not clear about Professor *ammondsphrasepol0s Ma3edonon, and what the distinction is between it and a Greekpol0s. Ithink a better analogy would have been between Macedonian towns and the largertowns that were part of the $thenianpol0s, e%cluding the town of $thens. $ll centralMacedonian towns whose sites are known were located on prime farmland, and, asProfessor *ammond has shown by his use of the new halcidic inscriptions recentlyrecovered by our Greek colleagues, good farmland in halcidice was used to settlepersons in towns. $nd when Philip II took $mphipolis, he may have settled someMacedonians therein, but the infrastructure that had managed this city for nearly acentury continued as before.[15]1hat is, $mphipolis continued to maintain all of thecharacteristics of its former status as apol0s, save one essential one: it was nolonger politically independent. an any of these settlements, new or old, properly becalled apol0s, when political authority resided in the monarchy0

9ow Professor *ammond apparently understands this. 1his is the $rgead modelhe sees establishing the pattern for the eastern cities of the *ellenistic and omanperiods, and certainly no one would wish to deny Professor *ammonds claim

concerning the historical importance of those centers. +ut I fail to see that this is apeculiar Macedonian institution. 1he characteristic Macedonian institution was themonarchy itself, replanted throughout the $sian and $frican rim of the easternMediterranean as an attempt to legitimi'e the con7uests of $le%anders successorgenerals, but even so hardly a uni7ue form of government in that part of the world.8urthermore, as the general pattern of settlement in the Greek as well asMacedonian world was through towns, the development of cities in the easternMediterranean seems to me to be a perfectly natural, indeed, the only possible,means of social organi'ation.

Perhaps my 7uarrel with Professor *ammond on this point is only one ofemphasis. /e agree that the cities of the East were important. *e sees this as anoutgrowth of a Macedonian custom2 I see it as a more common and natural means of

establishing settlements or of perpetuating e%isting urban centers. 1he relationshipof these cities to their ruling monarchs was, as Professor *ammond points out,similar to what may have e%isted in old Macedon, but I do not view this assomething especially characteristic of the Macedonian heritage so much as the onlysituation possible if one is to have cities within a far@flung monarchy.

Professor *ammond is correct when he points out that these self@governing*ellenistic cities were not city@states, since, like Macedonian cities, they were ruledby the king. )et he calls the Macedonian citiespole0s. I agree that the Macedonianand *ellenistic cities were alike2 but I see neither as a proper city@state in the Greeksense, if by that we mean they were autonomous. till, it may in the end be a mootpoint: who would be willing to argue that Mytilene or 9a%os or arystos werenotpole0s&ust because they were ruled by $thens in the fifth century +..0 I thinkthat Professor *ammond is on the right track in attempting to define the relationshipbetween kings and cities in Macedonia, but I am unpersuaded that this is significantfor an understanding of the cities of the early *ellenistic world. elf@managing citiese%isting within larger monarchies in the East had rarely been independent, and onewonders whether their *ellenistic status is not as much due to traditional city@monarchy relationships in the East as to the fact that Macedonian kings now ruledthere.

9evertheless, it is not certain that Professor *ammond is wrong in the end. -neof the more remarkable aspects of his career is the unusual prescience or intuition he
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.15#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.15#X


12/18

has shown about some things, most notably his identification of the modern villageof ergina as the site of ancient $egeae. $s ancient historians, we are most of us, onoccasion, intuitive and impressionistic when confronted with scanty evidence.Professor *ammonds argument about the cities remains, in my view, &ust that(impressionistic(but I am intrigued by the implications of it, and await the recoveryof more epigraphical and archaeological evidence from Macedon itself to test the

hypothesis more accurately.[16]

9ow, let us e%amine a methodological conte%t for what Professor *ammond andothers of us attempt to do when tracing the long course of Macedonian institutions.[17]$t the core of his argument lies a conviction that the Macedonian monarchyoperated according to a set of procedures that had been established through customover a long time. 1here are two basic schools of thought about the MacedonianCconstitution,D if by that term we mean the customs and institutions by which asociety was regulated. -ne school holds that the Macedonian kingdom was runaccording to a generally accepted set of traditions within which various groups heldand e%ercised customary rights which the king oversaw and guaranteed. 1his is whatI shall call the CconstitutionalistD position. 1he other school believes that the kingdomwas centered on the autocracy of the monarch himself, who did precisely what he

wanted, or(more e%actly(what he could get away with.+ut what is the evidence for these institutions0 nfortunately for those of us

who are historians attempting to seek order !and even reason# out of the chaos ofevents, the Macedonians are a people who are mainly silent about themselves, andthere is no Polybius for the $rgead period. 9early all our information about politicaland social institutions in early Macedon comes from the age of Philip and $le%ander2and any attempt to retro&ect such evidence into earlier Macedonian history re7uireslarge assumptions about the continuity of institutions from the classical period intothe later fourth century and the *ellenistic era. If the advocates of constitutionalismuse this continuity as an operating methodological assumption, they should also beable to trace the continuation of these institutions into the *ellenistic period, or, ifnot, to posit when and why there was a break.

1he constitutionalist position was laid out forcefully more than half a centuryago by 8riedrich Granier,[18]and much of the discussion since then has evolved insupport, modification, or re&ection of his views. sing evidence mainly from the*ellenistic period, Granier concluded that the Macedonian kingship evolved from aprimitive chieftainship, in which the king was a first among e7uals, chosen by hisfellow warriors. $s Macedonian institutions became more formal, an organi'ation ofMacedonian men@at@arms came into e%istence, marking a transition to somethingakin to a sovereign military assembly. $s the population became more settled andthe Macedonians were transformed from a warrior society into a landed aristocracy,the nobility usurped popular sovereignty. In the fourth century, however, theassembly was revived to provide the monarchy with support against the nobility. 1hearmy assembly ac7uired some &udicial functions and even selected the king orregent. $ll parties were aware of their rights, although in practice the king ruled as

an autocrat. 9onetheless, the relationship between king and people was regulated bytwo constituent functions of the army assembly: the right to elect the king, and theright to sit as &udge and &ury.

Graniers book proved influential, and, although some details in it were foundunacceptable, its basic thesis(that the Macedonians lived according to traditionalcustoms(long remained unchallenged. -ver the years it has been e%tended andmodified by others, including $ndrO $ymard, Pierre +riant, and Professor *ammondhimself2 and while some small differences e%ist, these are all variations on theconstitutionalist theme.[19]
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.16#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.16#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.17#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.17#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.17#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.18#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.19#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.16#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.17#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.18#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.19#X


13/18

1his constitutionalist view remains an attractive hypothesis, despite the fact thatthere is no evidence from anti7uity to support the kind of political evolution thatGranier described. Moreover, the fragments that have been used to prove thee%istence of an assembly at any period have been drawn from late authors farremoved from the scene, or have referred to events in the *ellenistic era. 1he ma&orchallenge to the constitutionalist position has been led by Malcolm Errington, who

has received some support from obert Aock and Edward $nson.[20]

1he criticsposition may be summari'ed thus: !a# Granier and others have constructed atheoretical model based upon an unacceptable assumption, namely that peoplesrights were recogni'ed by Macedonian kings but not reali'ed in practice2 !b# theevidence used to support the model comes mainly from the *ellenistic period, andthe assumption that there was an institutional continuity from early Macedon to the*ellenistic period is unproven2 !c# the evidence from the reign of $le%ander theGreat that shows occasional meetings of the army for some &udicial or forensicpurpose describes a special situation(an e%ception to the rule, not the rule itself2and !d# there is no supporting evidence from reliable contemporary writers, such as$ristotle. 1he sources centuries removed are for the most part ignorant about earlyMacedonian institutions and anachronistic in describing institutional terms andprocedures.

In my view the modern critics have struck a telling, though perhaps not fatal,blow at the constitutionalist position, which must remain what it has always been: atheoretical construction largely unsupported by evidence from anti7uity. 9ow it couldbe argued that it is not methodologically incorrect to develop a theoretical model bye%tending a body of information from a relatively well@documented period into an eralacking sources. 1hat is, if one could show that there was a constitutional structure inthe *ellenistic period like that in the age of Philip and $le%ander, it would not beunreasonable to suspect that its origin lay back in the earlier period of Macedonianhistory for which there is no evidence. +ut the critics have shown that theseinstitutions did not e%ist under the autocratic rule of the $ntigonid dynasty of*ellenistic Macedon. $ssuming that they had been in place earlier, what made themvanish0 1he only possible answer lies in the reigns of Philip and $le%ander: the

autocracy of the latter in particular was legendary, and he may well be said to havekilled prior constitutional arrangements. +ut this is the very monarch whose reignappears to have provided us with much of our information about the rights of theMacedonians. /e are thus driven to the improbable conclusion that the constitutionalarrangements of the Macedonian monarchy collapsed under the absolutism of thatvery king whose reign provides evidence of their e%istence. 1his simply will not do.1he more probable alternative is that the interaction between $le%ander, hiscommanders, and his troops in assembly was a uni7ue situation, resulting from thee%traordinary circumstances of a Macedonian army operating far from home andlacking the normal forms of support and references.

1o present such a minimalist picture of Macedonian institutions without offeringan alternative may not be satisfactory. Perhaps one can offer(lacking evidence(a

theoretical model. +ut what model0 1he C*omericD model is attractive, but it, too, isfraught with problems of evidence and method that are part of the ongoing struggleto understand ?ark $ge Greece. Moreover, we lack information about the social andeconomic support en&oyed by Macedonian kings to match what we know about therelationship of *omeric chieftains with other members of their community. +esides,the Macedonian king was clearly more autocratic. 1here is no contemporary Greekmodel, certainly not the constitutionally constrained monarchy of the partans.Illyrian and 1hracian models come to mind, but these appear to be too tribal andare, in any case, imperfectly understood. 8ifth@ and fourth@century Macedon may
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.20#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.20#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.20#X


14/18

have been influenced by the Persians, but no serious analysis can be offered untilthere is a clearer notion of Persian@Macedonian relations in the fourth century beforethe age of Philip and $le%ander.[21]

In sum, I hold that we do not know enough about early Macedonian institutionsto describe the e%tent to which they were preserved in the *ellenistic period.ertainly, some aspects of the reigns of Philip and $le%ander do appear to have

continued at least into the early *ellenistic era. +ut I regard as unproven thisattempt to show that such features were a part of traditional Macedonian monarchy(what Professor *ammond calls the CpatternD of the Macedonian state. I agree thatthe Macedonians had a vital impact on the history of western $sia and the easternMediterranean world2 but that had little to do with the migration of Macedonianinstitutions to distant places. In fact, the true CMacedonian imprintD was due to thecon7uest carried out by $le%anders armies, thus removing from western $sia thepolitical power that had for centuries blocked the penetration of Greek culture. 1heircon7uest replaced $sian rule with Macedonian rule. 1o the e%tent that a culturaltransformation followed, it was, in my view, due rather to a continuation of localtraditions and the influence of pockets of *ellenism than to the establishment ofanything distinctly Macedonian.

!"s#$ss"on

E. S. Gruen:

Plutarch is surely right that $le%ander shunned the title CBing of Bings.D I have no 7uarrel with the factspresented by Professor *ammond. +ut the interpretation I find a little more difficult. Professor *ammondsparado%ical version is that $le%ander avoided the designation because it was too restrictive: CBing of $siaD wasmeant to be a more sweeping title. 1hen he goes on to say that $le%ander did not want to succeed ?arius butwanted ?arius to remain as the Bing of the Medes and Persians, as would his successors. I have three problemswith this. 8irst, if $le%ander was willing to have ?arius retain his throne, what was the symbolic significance of$le%ander s0tt0ngon that throne0 econdly, if he e%pected ?arius heir to be king to the Medes and Persians, whydid he send him to Macedonia to learn Greek0 $nd third, if ?arius was to be Bing of the Medes and Persians,

would he also retain the title CBing of BingsD0 /hich kings would he then be king of0 Perhaps $le%ander avoidedthe title CBing of BingsD for a simpler reason(that is, the negative connotations that this phrase had in the Greekworld, at least since the time of er%es and $eschylus4ersae.

N. G. L. Hammond:

If you look at the letter, which, I think, gives the actual sense of what $le%ander wrote to ?arius, he says that?arius can be king over other kings, and this must mean that ?arius could retain the hereditary title CBing ofMedes and Persians,D 5as0leus 5as0leon. It is kings within the Medic and Persian state that he is king of, not allthe kings of the world. I think the point of confusion is that Persian kings could claim the title CBing of $sia.D +utso could the kings of, say, Phrygia and Macedonia. 1o be Bing of $sia does not mean to be king of the Medes andPersians. $le%ander claimed to be king of all of $sia. *e thought of India as being the end of $sia. $sia to himwas a geographical concept. *e didnt know the l imits of it, but it was a clear concept.

P. Green:

$le%ander is in fact e7uating $sia with the entire Persian domain. o in fact whether he was called Bing of Bingsor not was a moot point.

N. G. L. Hammond:

9o, $sia was more than the area controlled by ?arius at his death. $le%ander went beyond that. ?arius, fore%ample, didnt control the Indus valley.

A. E. Samuel:

I am dubious as to whether we can use the evidence for $le%ander to describe Macedonian kingship as aninstitution. 1hat is, although I would be inclined to say that we can describe $le%ander as a king, and can talkabout his kingship, in terms of patterns of behavior, overall we get the impression from the sources that$le%ander became increasingly suspicious of his generals and was worried about their reaction to what he wasdoing. I am concerned about whether or not we can really use the evidence about $le%ander on items. $s an$le%ander historian I know some of those stories are true, but Im not sure which ones. $nd Im not sure which
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.21#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.21#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.21#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=d0e3102&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=bn1a.21#X


15/18

stories come out of the tradition to amplify it, or which ones establish the tradition. 1o depend on any singlepiece of evidence to describe the situation which pertained at the time of $le%ander seems to me to be dependingon evidence that is really shifty. o I incline to a minimalist position simply because I dont have any evidence.

N. G. L. Hammond:

Its obviously important to decide which of the original sources of information were used by the later writers. $ndthat Ive endeavored to do for three $le%ander historians and I hope to go on to the sources ofPlutarchs6le7anderand of $rrian. 1hat seems to me to be a vital foundation which hasnt been properly laid. It

will always be controversial, but some points one can probably establish. If you accept the word of $rrian that hewas following $ristobulus and Ptolemy, then you have a fairly solid basis to go on. 1hings which he saysare legomenaare &ust stories he knows are not trustworthy, and so we know it too.

S. M. Burstein:

Professor +or'as minimalist position on the 7uestion of the constitution of Macedonia I accept as a statement ofthe evidence. +ut he also slipped in a redefinition that might actually be very promising. Errington, as I see it,has been fundamentally attacking a straw man. /hat Granier, +riant, and the others have done is to devise forMacedon something akin to MommsensStaatsrecht, a precise model with rigid rules and formulas. 1hat is easy toknock down. It has been done convincingly. *owever, Errington has come perilously close to positing somethingunparalleled: an autocracy in which the murder of litus is normal. 1he king can do anything. $ Merovingianwarlord might get away with a murder(many murders(but not even the Merovingian system ever assumed thatthis was normal behavior. Professor +or'a appears to be suggesting that there wasa set of Macedonianconstitutional traditions, but that we &ust dont know what they are. Is that correct0

E. N. Borza:

I think so, yes. Aeon Mooren has written on these matters recently and has taken a plausible moderate position,somewhere between *ammond and Errington, though a bit closer to the latter. 1he heart of the 7uestionremains: /hat is the relationship of the king of the Macedonians to the Macedonians0 If my position is accepted(and I hope Professor *ammond will agree with what follows(the king of the Macedonians had a workingrelationship with his army, as did any good general in anti7uity. $nd this relationship is not the law of the &ungle.I would never claim that, even though Errington may appear to do so2 in fact, I know personally that he believesthat even the &ungle has laws. /hatever the nature of the Macedonian Cconstitution,D it arises from a mutualunderstanding of the nature of that relationship. /e have the most evidence for it from the e%pedition of$le%ander, although his reign may be an unusual situation. Even though the CrulesD are difficult for us to recover,they seem(some notable e%ceptions aside(to have worked tolerably well.

I do not believe that the evidence supports the notion that Macedonian kings were elected and deposed throughsome popular procedure, although I accept, on the basis of three later@fourth@century successions for which wehave evidence, that troops played some part in the process. It is a political process, but not necessarily aconstitutional process following some rigid theoretical model.

N. G. L. Hammond:

-ne comment on Greek and Macedonian cities: 1he Macedonians called their citiespole0sand other Greek writerscalled thempole0s. 1hey were in that sense cities. +ut the Greek city was not able to coe%ist with local peoplespeacefully. 1he Greek cities in $sia soon ceased to grow, for they tried to sub&ect the native peoples to serfdom.$ristotle said: /hen you con7uer $siatics, reduce them to serfdom, make them sub&ect to the Greek [email protected] the Greekpol0swas racially e%clusive, not capable of e%tension to whole areas in the East. +ut theMacedonianpol0s, as we see it being created, was a mi%ture of Macedonians and other peoples. 1his is whathappens in $sia. Its a Macedonianpol0s, not a Greek type.

No%es %o &e'%

". Lust. 3F.H."F, in ducis nomen.=+$B>

3. Plut. 8emetr. 3H.

4. $rr. F.4.

J. $rr. ."4.3.=+$B>

5. $rr. 4.3;.".=+$B>

";. ? "5.FJ.".=+$B>

"". ? "5.H.

"3. *dt. 5.FF."2 1huc. ".H4.3.=+$B>

"


16/18

"F. I9

3H. $pp. Syr. HF.=+$B>

3. Plut. 8emetr. "J.".=+$B>

34. $pp. Syr. HF.=+$B>

3J. Memnon, D9rF

35. 1rogus, 4rologue"4: cognomine eraunus creatus ab e%ercitu.=+$B>

F5. Lust. J..3.=+$B>

H;. Plut. 4yrrh. J.".=+$B>

H". Plut. Eum. 4.3, J..=+$B>

H3. ? "4.H.3.=+$B>

H

No%es %o Response

". 1hroughout I prefer C$rgeadD to *ammonds C1emenid,D as I hold that the tradition of a 1emenid !$rgiveGreek# origin for the Macedonian royal family is a story probably derived from the propaganda of $le%ander I2see my C$thenians, Macedonians and the -rigins of the Macedonian oyal *ouse,D esper0a, suppl. "5 !"5J3#:46"
http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2013#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2013#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2019#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2019#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2024#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2038#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2038#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2041#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2041#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2044#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2048#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2048#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2066#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2075#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2075#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2082#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2082#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2091#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2091#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2097#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2097#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2100#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2100#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2115#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2115#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2118#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2118#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2123#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2123#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2126#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2126#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2129#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2129#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2141#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2141#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2147#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2147#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2155#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2176#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2176#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2182#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2182#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2185#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2185#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2196#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2196#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2201#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2201#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2208#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2208#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2219#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2235#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2244#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2249#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2255#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2260#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2260#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2272#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2272#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2278#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2278#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2288#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2288#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2294#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2294#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2300#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2303#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2303#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2322#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2322#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2327#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2327#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2336#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2336#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2347#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=s1.1.1&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2359#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=s1.1.1&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2359#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2013#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2019#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2024#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2038#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2041#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2044#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2048#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2066#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2075#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2082#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2091#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2097#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2100#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2115#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2118#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2123#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2126#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2129#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2141#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2147#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2155#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2176#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2182#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2185#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2196#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2201#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2208#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2219#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2235#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2244#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2249#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2255#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2260#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2272#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2278#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2288#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2294#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2300#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2303#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2322#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2327#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2336#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=ch1&toc.id=&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2347#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f&chunk.id=s1.1.1&toc.id=ch1&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e2359#X


17/18

3. 8or detailed discussion of the numbers in $le%anders army see 9. G. A. *ammond and 8. /. /albank,60story of Macedon0a, vol. @J ABC. !-%ford, "5JJ#, J6J4.=+$B>

. Porphyr. frag. " !Q yncell. 3"?# in D9III, p. 5", part of a garbled and largely untrustworthy account ofMacedonian rulers of the early fourth century.=+$B>

4. $rchelaus was killed by a lover, $myntas II by ?erdas, Pausanias !probably# by $myntas III, $le%ander II byPtolemy, Ptolemy by Perdiccas III, Philip II by Pausanias, Philip III by -lympias, and $le%ander I by assander.Moreover, there were additional conspiracies against at least $myntas III and $le%ander III, and a number ofpotential rivals were dispatched in the struggles for succession of $rchelaus, Philip II, and $le%ander the Great.?eath from natural causes: $le%ander I, Perdiccas II, $myntas III, and $le%ander the Great. =+$B>

J. 1he matter of Philips regency is not settled. 1he strongest argument favoring a regency is offered by $drian1ronson, Catyrus the Peripatetic and the Marriages of Philip II,DHS";F !"5JF#: "3;63". I am, however,inclined to accept the view of Griffith, 0story of Macedon0a3:3;J65, 4;36F, who is persuasive in arguing that$myntas never ruled.=+$B>

5. ? "4.3.3. Lustin !"".".J# mentions a cont0o, the same word used by urtius !";.4."


18/18

attributes to Macedonian towns, thus far is missing. 1here are other differences, having to do with thedistribution of burial sites and small shrines, but I have no time to e%plore them beyond this brief reference. $trickle of inscriptions describing city procedures and officials continues to appear, but, as yet, of insufficient7uantity and 7uality to &udge the e%tent to which the institutions that governed these towns are indicative of self@government or royal rule.=+$B>

In brief, there is not enough literary or archaeological evidence to make a strongcase for the self@governingpol0s@type urban center having e%isted in Macedonia

itself. 8urther, since the *ellenistic urban center in the eastern Mediterranean may,as I believe, have resulted from a natural organic evolution coupled with Greekinfluences in new city planning, a link between Macedonian cities and those of the*ellenistic East has yet to be established.

"4. ome of what follows reflects an argument presented in detail in my recent work, In the Shadow of Olympus:The Emergence of Macedon!Princeton, "55;#.=+$B>

"J. 80e ma3edon0sche eeresersammlung: E0n Ae0trag Pum ant03en Staatsrecht!Munich, "5

Documents

Macedonian Monarchy