CIEGL XIII: Thematic Panel 1.2, ‘Greek Inscriptions and Warfare’

After an introduction by Patrick Bakker (Université de Laval, Québec), which gave a brief overview of this “old yet always new” subject, there were four speakers in this very diverse panel:

Filippo Canali de Rossi (Liceo Scientifico Talete, Rome) gave a paper entitled “Achaean Military Support for Rome: A New Interpretation”, with the aim of clarifying the dating of Moretti, ISE 60. This inscription records the support lended by Achaean cities during a Roman campaign led by Gnaius Domitius (Ahenobarbus) against the Galatians. There are two possible identifications of the leader of this expedition, the consuls of 192 BC and 122 BC respectively. Adducing the evidence of SIG(3) 606, which records a dedication by Achaean mercenaries of a statue of Attalos II at Pergamon ca. 190 BC as a result of a campaign in Lydia, Canali de Rossi presented the hypothesis that the two military expeditions were linked and that the earlier date of ca. 192 BC for ISE 60 must be preferred.

Jean-Christophe Couvenhes (Université de Tours) presented a preliminary report on his work in preparing a corpus of Greek inscriptions which mention troops devoted to civic and territorial defense in Attica: “Péripoloi, kryptoi et hypaithroi dans la défense de l’Attique: permanence civique, influence royale”. He outlined in some detail the historical development of these various groups, which succeeded one another: peripoloi and peripolarchoi (generally from the end of the 5th century to ca. 332/280 BC), kryptoi (‘covert’ units, 287-229 BC), and hypaithroi (non-garrisoned troops, from 229 to probably the end of the 1st century BC). The question of the influence that Hellenistic kings may have had on these developments was briefly raised.

Henri-Louis Fernoux (Université de Bourgogne, Dijon), in “Représentations et faits de guerre dans cités grecques d’Asie mineure à l’époque impérial à travers le témoignage de l’épigraphie”, offered an account of the evolution of warfare in Asia Minor during the centuries of Roman imperial peace. Local conflicts between neighbouring cities such as Nikaia and Nikomedeia, illustrated by sometimes rich epigraphical dossiers (cf. L. Robert, “La titulature de Nicée et de Nicomédie: la gloire et la haine,” HSCP 81, 1977, 1-39 = OMS VI, Paris 1989, 211-249), show that warfare took place mostly on a psychological and covert level, and that effective ‘faits de guerre’ were few and far between.

Eduard Rung (University of Kazan), in “Diplomacy of Classical Greece and the Inscriptions”, presented a general overview of the large number of inscribed treaties of alliance (symmachia) between Greek cities which date from the 5th and 4th centuries BC. He is preparing a new study of these inscriptions.

This entry was posted in CIEGL, news. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to CIEGL XIII: Thematic Panel 1.2, ‘Greek Inscriptions and Warfare’

  1. Filippo Canali De Rossi says:

    The campaign in “Lydia” is actually the campaign against Antiochos III of Syria, which led to the battle of Magnesia (ad Sipylum), fought under the supreme command of Cn. Domitius, former consul of 192 BC. This responsibility had been entrusted to him by Publius Scipio, who stayed back in Elaea to convalesce. In the Panhellenic context of Olympia the Achaeans allies stress their victory over the Galatians, allies of Antiochus III.
    I am not teaching anymore in Liceo Scientifico Talete since three years. I teach now in Liceo Classico Dante Alighieri, also in Rome.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.