Hellenistic History

Leonatus's campaign of 322 BC

by sprawski slawomir

Land Ownership in Babylonian Cuneiform Documents

by R.J. (Bert) van der Spek

R.J. van der Spek,  ‘Land Ownership in Babylonian Cuneiform Documents,’ in: M.J. Geller, H. Maehler, A.D.E. Lewis eds., Legal Documents of the Hellenistic World. Papers from a Seminar arranged by the Institute of Classical Studies, the Institute of Jewish Studies and the Warburg Institute, University of London, February to May 1986  (London: The Warburg Institute, University of London 1995), 173-245.

This article discusses the concept of ownership of land in the Late Babylonian period, especially the Hellenistic... more This article discusses the concept of ownership of land in the Late Babylonian period, especially the Hellenistic period. All kinds of transaction concerning land ownership are discussed, such as contracts of sale, lease, pledge, donation and quitclaims. Attention is paid to different legal formularies and the ways in which ownership was protected. The article challenges the accepted opinion, expressed by Koschaker, Petschow and Cardascia, that the Babylonians lacked a concept of ownership that knew the distinction between ownership as ultimate right (in Latin dominium) and actual possession or holding (in Latin possessio and detentio). Koshaker and Petschow argued for a Babylonian concept of  “divided ownership” of e.g. lessor and lessee of land and Cardascia calls pledge a “conditional alienation” and lease a “temporal alienation”. In my view the Roman distinction between ownership as highest and ultimate right and actual possession, though not identical, is closer to the Babylonian situation.
Another point at issue is the status of temple land and royal land, that was in the possession of individuals, could be sold and leased, yet remained in ownership of the temple or palace (bIt ritti).

At the end of the article ten cuneiform texts are presented in transcription, translation and brief commentary. One of these texts is a very important tablet, discovered already the beginning of the 19th century and copied by Carl Bellino by c. 1818. It was published by Robert Ker Porter in 1822. It was one of the first published tablets, copied and published in a time when the cuneiform script was not yet deciphered. Yet the copy is quite good and readable. I first edited this tablet in my dissertation, where I reproduced Bellino’s copy op p. viii and a transliteration and Dutch translation in the Appendix, text 5, p. 202-11. My dissertation, Grondbezit in het Seleucidische Rijk (Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij 1986), is available online:
http://dare.ubvu.vu.nl/handle/1871/15433 ; or
http://dare.ubvu.vu.nl/bitstream/1871/15433/2/Grondbezit%20in%20het%20seleucidische%20rijk.pdf

In this article I provide an edition with English translation in the appendix as text 9, pp. 238-241. Meanwhile, however, after this publication (1995) a new (partial) edition was provided by Francis Johannès, ‘La Babylonië méridionale: continuité, déclin ou rupture?’ in: P. Briant, F. Joannès eds., La Transition entre l’empire achéménide et les royaumes hellénistiques (vers 350-300 av. J.-C.). Actes du colloque organisé au Collège de France par la « Chaire d’histoire et civilisation du monde achéménide et de l’empire d’Alexandre » et le « Réseau international d’études et de recherches achéménides » (GDR 2538 CNRS), 22-23 novembre 2004, (Paris: De Boccard, 2006), 101-35, on pp. 113-4. In the same volume Michael Jursa discussed the text in note 32 of his article ‘Agricultural management, tax farming and banking: aspects of entrepreneurial activity in Babylonia in the Late Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods’, ibid., 137-222, esp. p. 148.
Both authors suggested improved readings which I shall present here and I shall present a new English translation of lines 4-15, slightly differing from Joannès’s and Jursa’s (esp. line 10).

4. Add ina IGI in the break (Jursa)
7. Add KUR in the break (Joannès)
9. Read [i-(te)-ri-i]š instead of [iš-ku]n; Joannès reads ina áš-bi instead of ina qí-bi, but Bellino’s copy has a very clear qí (KI), so I shall not follow him in this. He reads the personal name mPar-ta-ri-ih?-li-su as mtu!?-ri-il!-li-su (Troilos?). The copy, however, has a clear par-ta. The reading of the first sign, par (UD, tú), is a mere guess. The reading –ut-  is a good alternative. The sign read as ih or il is difficult to interpret. Collation (1984) did not help. It seems indeed that a Greek name is at issue, ending on –lēs, -lios or –klēs perhaps.
10. Read [lúGAL] É LUGAL (Jursa) and ig!-re-e’ instead of EN re-‘i (Joannès and Jursa), from the verb gerû, ‘to start a lawsuit’. See CAD G, p. 62, s.v. gerû, 1 b 3’: dīna gerû. Certainly correct. It is uncertain whether the phrase mišil ... našatat?, “half of the barley which returns from the land, the property of Shamash, is (to be) brought(?) to the royal treasury”, is the result of the verdict (so Jursa), or the reason to start the lawsuit. I opt hesitatingly for the latter option: I suspect that the legal dispute originated in the fact that suddenly in year 9 the chief of the royal treasury requisitioned half of the yield of the entire estate of the Shamash temple.
11. Joannès reads ta-tu-ru instead of ta-tur-ru, but this is erroneous. Taturru is the present tense, which means that the barley is not harvested yet or is in the process of being harvested. Jursa reads na-šá-ti?! sup. ras. instead of na-šá-tat?; both readings problematic. Collation did not help. I assume that the form is a fem. stative of našû. Note that taturru is also feminine . The subject, uțțatu, “barley”, is feminine.
13. Read mu-šu-ur instead of  MU-šu lu (Joannès and Jursa). Certainly correct. From the verb uššuru (wuššuru, muššuru), “to let go; to release; the hand over; to exempt, remit debts, annul obligations”; cf. CAD U and W, s.v. uššuru, p. 310-325. It is probably a stative: muššur ; cf. undašar for undaššar in line 13.
19. Both Joannès and Jursa read É LUGAL TIN.TIR.KI as Bīt šar Bābili, and do not interpret it as Treasury (Bīt šarri =lit.  ‘house of the king’, but always ‘royal office’, ‘royal treasury’ or ‘royal estate’) of Babylon (TIN.TIR.KI), but as the locality with the name Bīt šarri Bābili (mostly written, however, with the determinative for ‘city’ URU), a locality close to Babylon. N.B.: the royal treasury is mentioned in line 10! If so, Iltalimatu has nothing to do with the royal treasury of Babylon and is no more than some city governor who accidentally had rented an estate belonging to the temple of Shamash.

New translation of lines 4-20:

4.  [.......... arable land,] property (makkūru) of Shamash, king of the world,
5.  [.......... was at the disposal of Ilt]alimatu, the governor
6.  [of Bīt-šar-Bābili,] the slave of Intaphernes, the governor
7.  [of the land? Sa?]-gashtu. Later, in the 9th year
8.  [of Alexand]er, son of ditto (=308-7 BC), he jointly (with the temple) [cultivate]d(l. 9)  the land in question
9.  and he started lawsuits at the command of Partarihlisu (Uttari x lisu),
10. [the chief] of the royal treasury (on account of the fact that) half of the barley in question, which will return from the arable land,
11. [the pro]perty (makkūru) of Shamash, is (to be) brought to the royal treasury.
12. Iltalimatu will leave(l.13)  the arable land at the disposal
13. of the exchequer (makkūru) of Shamash and the barley, the rent (sutu) of this arable land,
14. is relinquished(l. 15) by the exchequer of Shamash to Iltalimatu.
15. There will not be(l. 17) any lawsuit, legal proceeding or claim on the part of the Temple Council (kiništu)
16. of Ebabbar with regard to the barley, the rent (sutu) of these arable lands,
17. against Iltalimatu in perpetuity
18. and there will not be(l. 21) any lawsuit, legal proceeding or claim on the part of Iltalimatu,
19. the governor of Bīt-šar-Bābili, with regard to these arable lands
20. against the exchequer of Shamash and the Temple Council of Ebabbar in perpetuity.

This document is a verdict concerning a legal conflict between two parties, namely Ebabbar, the temple of the god Shamash in either Sippar or Larsa, and a certain Iltalimatu, the governor of Bit-šar-Babili (= a settlement at the edge of the city of Babylon, perhaps the summer palace of Babylon). Apparently some arable land, belonging to the Ebabbar had become at the disposal of Iltalimatu and he cultivated it jointly with the temple, which probably meant that the profit should be divided, half would go to the temple, half to Iltalimatu. The conflict seems to concern the fact that half of the harvest was requisitioned by the state (represented by Partarihlisu), so that Iltalimatu could not pay half of the harvest to the temple (his sutu, his rent). Now Partarihlisu seems to have ordered or advised a lawsuit (or perhaps better a settlement), so that the mutual claims by temple and Iltalimatu were rescinded: Iltalimatu relinquishes his right to cultivate the temple land and at the same time is freed from the obligation to pay his rent to the temple. One should note that it was during or briefly after the Babylonian War between Antigonus and Seleucus (311-308) when the grain prices were extremely high.  Now the result of this lawsuit is: half of the yield of year 9 (308-7 BC) goes to the royal treasury and the contract between Iltalimatu and the temple is dissolved: the temple is granted ownership rights of the arable land and Iltalimatu is freed from paying rent to the temple in perpetuity.

« L’image des rois hellénistiques dans l’œuvre de Florus »

by Guillaume Flamerie de Lachapelle

publié dans: Arctos 44, 2010, p. 109-122.

Florus n'est pas foncièrement hostile aux valeurs grecques de l’époque classique; cependant, le tableau qu'il brosse... more Florus n'est pas foncièrement hostile aux valeurs grecques de l’époque classique; cependant, le tableau qu'il brosse des rois hellénistiques est sombre. Trois traits se distinguent: l'inaptitude au combat, la lâcheté et le goût pour le luxe. Il s'agit pour une part d'une conception stéréotypée largement répandue à Rome, mais Florus force le trait, par rapport à ses sources. En outre, l'insistance, dans une œuvre à caractère bref, sur des points secondaires et anecdotiques, amène à se demander comment il faut interpréter ces portraits au vitriol.
Il nous semble qu'ils corroborent tout d'abord une conception profonde de Florus: les peuples sont des organismes vivants qui naissent, s'épanouissent et se flétrissent – les souverains dégénérés, lointains descendants des glorieux généraux d'Alexandre le Grand, relèvent visiblement du dernier stade. En allant plus loin, on peut même se demander si ces personnages ne dessinent pas, en creux, deux écueils qu'Hadrien, sous le règne duquel vécut Florus, ne sut pas toujours éviter: le relâchement dans le domaine militaire, d'une part; un certain goût, chez ce philhellène et égyptomane, pour les fastes royaux et pour les plaisirs, d'autre part.

Roman Patrons of Greek Communities before the Title πἀτρων

by Dylan Bloy

published in Historia 61.2 (2012) 168-201

Prominent Roman senators acted as patrons of Greek communities thoughout the 2nd century B.C., long before 'patron'... more Prominent Roman senators acted as patrons of Greek communities thoughout the 2nd century B.C., long before 'patron' became a regularly used honorary term for Romans in the Greek East around the beginning of the 1st century B.C. This article draws wherever possible on contemporary epigraphical evidence to reconstruct both the services provided by the patron and the reciprocal honors and material aid he and his family might expect in return. It also provides historical and contextual support for the 2nd century date of an Abderan decree (SIG3 656) that famously transliterates the words 'patronus' and 'atrium' in discussing the activities of Teian ambassadors in Rome.

PhD Thesis - Contents and Summary

by Christopher Dickenson

If you are interested in obtaining a (digital) copy of my thesis please contact me by sending a message via this site... more If you are interested in obtaining a (digital) copy of my thesis please contact me by sending a message via this site or an email.

Notabilité urbaine et administration locale en Babylonie du sud aux époques séleucide et parthe

by Julien Monerie

in Chr. Feyel et alii (dir.), Communautés locales et pouvoir central dans l'Orient hellénistique et romain, Nancy, A.D.R.A., Etudes Anciennes 47, 2012 : 327-352.

The Complete Archaeology of Greece: Introduction and Contents

by John Bintliff

Seleukos I. und das babylonische Königtum

by Ulf Scharrer

in: Kai Brodersen (ed.), Zwischen West und Ost. Studien zur Geschichte des Seleukidenreichs, Hamburg 1999, p. 95-128

Rhizon (Montenegrin Coast) - A Trading and Staple Town on the Crossroads of Mediterranean and Inland Balkan Routes. Late Classical and Hellenistic Pottery Evidence

by Dubravka Ujes Morgan

Quaderni ticinesi di numismatica e antichita' classiche 28 (Lugano, 1999), pp. 203-220.

Autonomous Coinage of Rhizon in Illyria

by Dubravka Ujes Morgan

L'Illyrie méridionale et l'Epire dans l'antiquité 4, Actes du 4e colloque international de Grenoble 2002, réunis par P. Cabanes et J.-L. Lamboley (Paris 2004), pp.149-168.

There are two main types of the autonomous coins of Rhizon in Illyria, both of which have the inscription PIZONITAN on... more There are two main types of the autonomous coins of Rhizon in Illyria, both of which have the inscription PIZONITAN on the reverse: the Post-Ballaios type, and the Apollo/Artemis type. The following analysis of the autonomous coinages of Rhizon is based on the information available from more than 100 specimens of both types. All these coins were discovered in Risan, as stray site-finds at Carine, the modern name of the site of the lower town of ancient Rhizon, except for one specimen of unknown provenance.

Dispersion des monaies macedoniennes tardives en bronze sur les territoires du centre des Balkans

by Dubravka Ujes Morgan

12. Internationaler Numismatischer Kongress, Berlin 1997, Akten - Proceedings - Actes, Hg von B. Kluge und B. Weisser, Berlin 2000, pp. 384-389.

Le dépôt de monnaies en bronze des rois macédoniens et des villes ouest-pontiques de l’époque hellénistique découvert à Paraćin

by Dubravka Ujes Morgan

Quaderni ticinesi di numismatica e antichità classiche, vol. 24, Lugano 1997, pp. 185-204

Exzellente Netzwerke: die Astronomen von Uruk

by Mathieu Ossendrijver

M. Ossendrijver, 2011, in: G.J. Selz, K. Wagensonner (Hrsg.), 'The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies', Wiener Offene Orientalistik Band 8, (LIT-Verlag: Wien), 631-644

Science in Action: Networks in Babylonian Astronomy

by Mathieu Ossendrijver

M. Ossendrijver, 2011, in: E. Cancik-Kirschbaum (ed.), 'Proceedings of the Conference `Babylon - Wissenskultur zwischen Orient und Okzident'', Pergamon Museum, Berlin 26-28/6/2008, 229-237

Babylonian Calendar for 2000-2019

by Mathieu Ossendrijver

M. Ossendrijver, 2012: `Babylonian Calendar for 2000-2019. First appearances of the lunar crescent in Babylon computed for 2000-2019'

Hellenistic Imagery and Iconography in Daniel 12.5-13

by Janelle Peters

Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 19.2 (2009): 127-145. Presented at the Second Enoch Graduate Seminar (Princeton 2008).

Though often interpreted in light of Mesopotamian traditions, exegetically problematic images in Dan. 12.5-13 have... more Though often interpreted in light of Mesopotamian traditions, exegetically problematic images in Dan. 12.5-13 have analogues in Hellenistic visual and literary representations of river gods. Hellenistic associations from the preceding chapters of Daniel 10—12 are amplified in the epilogue. Like Hellenistic river gods, the man in linen stands on the river with two attendants and two hands lifted in an attitude of sacrifice, prayer, and prophecy (cf. 1 En. 84.1-6). The man’s orientation suggests an evocation of the Jewish Temple, which was a pressing contemporary concern (cf. 1 Macc. 1.54, 59). Thus, the Danielic author constructs a Hellenistic Jewish framework for the eschatological speculation meant to support Jewish interests over against Roman-controlled Seleucids and Ptolemies.

Каллиппа и Бероя / Kallippa and Beroia

by Yuri Kuzmin

Вестник древней истории. 2012. № 1 . С. 147–154 / The Journal of Ancient History 1 (2012) 147–154

(in Russian with English abstract)

Among the other noble families from Beroia in Macedonia under Antigonids epigraphic sources attest family whose... more Among the other noble families from Beroia in Macedonia under Antigonids epigraphic sources attest family whose representatives had the names Hippostratos and Kallippos. Kinship can be noted that between Hippostratos, son of Kallippos (I) (EKM I. 4 v. 11–12; 223 B.C.) and Kallippos (II), son of Hippostratos (EKM I. 1 v. 4–5, 18; first third of second century B.C.). But we can not be as certain in supposing that the latter was the one of the fleet commanders under Perseus (Callippus – Liv. 44. 28. 1).

From Diodorus we know about a certain Kallippa, the former concubine (pallakis) of King Perseus; later she lived with Athenaios, an Attalid (Diod. 32. 15. 4–5), the youngest brother of the kings Eumenes II and Attalos II. It is not known when Kallippa had a relationship with Perseus. It could have been before the marriage of the last Antigonid to the Seleucid princess Laodike (ca 178–177 B.C.), or during this marriage (or both).

Athenaios, since he was one of the commanders of the contingent from Pergamon, participated in the Third Macedonian War, including the battle of Pydna (Liv. 42. 55. 7–8; 42. 56. 5; SEG XXV. 118 = ISE I. 35 v. 13–16). The Attalid prince also accompanied Aemilius Paullus on his journey across Greece in 168 or 167 B.C. (Liv. 44. 27. 6). The relationship between Athenaios and Kallippa could have begun at this time, shortly after Perseus’ surrender and the fall of the Antigonid monarchy.

According to Diodorus, ca 150–149 B.C. a certain Macedonian by name of Nikolaos, a friend of Andriskos, who claimed the Macedonian throne, arranged (obviously on the territory of the Attalid Kingdom) for him a meeting with Kallippa. She gave to Andriskos the king’s robe and the diadem, some money as well as two slaves (Diod. 32. 15. 4–5). The importance of this act – approval of his desire to reign, actually – is evident, but the background for it remains unknown.

D. Ogden, who unreasonably considers Kallippa to be a courtesan (hetaira), supposed in addition even that she was the mother of a pretender to the throne of Macedonia (whether or not Andriskos was of royal origin is a matter for a separate discussion; most probably that he was not an Antigonid).

It is quite plausible that Kallippa, who bore a name rare for Macedonia (not attested in LGPN IV), and was during her life connected with representatives of two royal dynasties, Antigonids and Attalids, was descended from a noble family of Hippostratoi-Kallippoi from Beroia. If this supposition is correct, there appears yet another argument in favor of C.F. Edson’s theory of a close connection of the Antigonid royal house with Beroia.

T.Mojsik, Tragedia w domu Antygonidów albo o (poli)narracji historycznej (w:) Grecy, Rzymianie i ich sąsiedzi, red. K. Nawotka, M. Pawlak ("Antiquitas" 29), Wrocław 2007, s. 123-144;

by Tomasz Mojsik

Заметки о матримониальной политике Антигонидов в 50–20-е гг. III в. до н.э. / Notes on the Matrimonial Policy of the Antigonids in 250–220s B.C.

by Yuri Kuzmin

Co-authored with Oleg Gabelko

Проблемы истории, филологии, культуры. 2012. № 1. С. 27-42 / Journal of Historical, Philological and Cultural Studies... more Проблемы истории, филологии, культуры. 2012. № 1. С. 27-42 / Journal of Historical, Philological and Cultural Studies 1 (2012) 27-42


The subject of this article is the elucidation of several aspects in the matrimonial politics of the Macedonian kings Antigonos Gonatas, Demetiros II and Antigonos Doson as well as other questions of political and dynastic connections among the Hellenistic monarchies.

The authors analyze the conceptions formulated in recent articles written by A.L. Zelinsky (2009) and N.Yu. Sivkina (2011) with the purpose to make clear the date of marriage between Demetrios and Stratonike, the daughter (as we suggested) of Seleucid king Antiochos II Theos (Zelinsky proposes to date it by first half of 246 BC instead of common opinion inclined to ca 253 BC) and the identification of personality of mysterious Chryseis, the possible candidature to be Philip’s V mother (Sivkina tries to prove that it could be the nickname of Nikaia, the widow of Gonatas’ nephew Alexander who was the ruler of Corinth and Euboea in the first half of 240s BC).

The analysis of written tradition and epigraphic sources allows to conclude, that, at first, the previous data and context of the alliance between Demetrios and Stratonike (ca 253 BC) remains still preferable and, at second, the possibility of the sameness between Chryseis and Nikaia must be rejected at all (because the latter wasn’t the mother of Philip V).

During the course of study many interesting and important details in the matrimonial strategies and dynastic interrelations of the Hellenistic royal houses were revealed (i.e. the possible infertility of Stratonike, the background, reasons and context of divorce between Antiochos II and Laodike, the matter of Gonatas’ intrigues around the matchmaking of his son to Nikaia, the dating of Demetrios’ marriage to the Epirote princess Phthia and so on).

Iconographie et societe antique: A propos d'une stele funeraire d'Orgame

by Peuce Journal

V. Lungu in Peuce SN 2, 2004