Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:11:10.321Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two Notes on Philip of Macedon's First Interventions In Thessaly1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Christopher Ehrhardt
Christopher Ehrhardt
Affiliation:
University of the West Indies
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This passage comes at the end of Diodorus' account of the archon year 357/6 (Alexander's death probably in fact occurred earlier; 358 is the most likely date) and obviously contains a proleptic reference to the future fortunes of the tyrannicides, Tisiphonus, Lycophron, (and Peitholaus). Tisiphonus died probably in 355 or early in 354; Lycophron and Peitholaus were expelled from Pherae by Philip in 352.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , December 1967 , pp. 296 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 296 note 2 Hertlein; MSS.

page 296 note 3 On the date of Alexander's death, cf. Beloch, K.J., Griechische Geschichte iii 2. 2 (Berlin and Leipzig, 1923), pp. 83–84, based on Diod. 15. 61. 2, and Schol. Aristid., p. 298 Dind.Google Scholar

page 296 note 4 On Peitholaus cf. Diod. 16. 37. 3; 39.3; Plut, . Pelop. 35. 3–7.Google Scholar

page 296 note 5 Cf. Sordi, M., La Lega Tessala fino ad Alessandro Magno (Roma, 1958), pp. 348–9Google Scholar; Bengtson, H., Griechische Geschichte2 (München, 1960), p. 304, n. 1.Google Scholar

page 296 note 6 Cf. Beloch, , op. cit., p. 84Google Scholar; Sordi, , op. cit., pp. 235–6, 241.Google Scholar

page 296 note 7 Diod. 16. 37. 3; for the chronology, cf. Hammond, N. G. L., J.H.S. lvii (1937), 56–57, 66–68.Google Scholar

page 296 note 8 For example, Beloch, , op. cit. iii 2. 1, p. 228Google Scholar, n. 1; Westlake, H. D., Thessaly in the Fourth Century B.C. (London, 1935), pp. 166–7Google Scholar; Hammond, , art. cit., p. 66Google Scholar, and History of Greece (Oxford, 1959), p. 539Google Scholar; Sordi, op. cit., pp. 230–4Google Scholar, 348–54. Cloché, P., Un fondateur d'empire (Saint-Étienne, 1955), pp. 55, 82, refuses to make a decision.Google Scholar

page 297 note 1 Thus Rühl, the Teubner editor; cf. Jacoby, F., Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, ii B 2 (Leiden, 1962), p. 363 (Commentary on Theopompus 115J, Ff. 48–49).Google Scholar

page 297 note 2 Westlake, , op. cit., p. 167Google Scholar, n. 2, rejects Rühl's transposition and believes ‘Larissam’ to be corrupt; cf. also Sordi, , op. cit., p. 349, n. 3. On the Aleuads cf. also Diod. 15–61. 3.Google Scholar

page 297 note 3 Op. cit., p. 350.

page 297 note 4 Sordi, , op. cit., pp. 351–2Google Scholar, says this explicitly; Beloch, , op. cit. iii 2. 2, pp. 68–70, is more cautious, and indeed tacitly admits that the list is not in chronological order, by placing Philip's marriage to Olympias between his associations with Philinna and with Nicesipolis.Google Scholar

page 297 note 5 Beloch, , op. cit., p. 69.Google Scholar

page 297 note 6 Arrian 7. 28. 1; Plut, . Alex. 3. 3–5;Google Scholar 11. 1; Beloch, , op. cit., p. 68.Google Scholar

page 297 note 7 Diod. 16. 35. 1; for the chronology cf. Hammond, , art. cit., pp. 56Google Scholar, 59–60, 65, 67. Plutarch's anecdote, Conjug. Praec. 23 (Mor. 141 B–c), for what it is worth, suggests that Philip acquired at least one of his Thessalian concubines later than his marriage to Olympias.Google Scholar

page 297 note 8 Plut, . Alex. 10. 1. Alexander's son by Roxane, Alexander IV, was thought nearly or quite old enough to rule in 310, when he was only thirteen, and was therefore killed by Cassander, Diod. 19. 105. 2; Justin 15. 2. 5; Marmor Parium, 239 J, B 18.Google Scholar

page 298 note 1 Cf. Beloch, , op. cit., pp. 19–24Google Scholar (on Theopompus' work in general),Jacoby, , op. cit., pp. 358–9Google Scholar, p. 360 (on Theopompus F 28), p. 361 (on F 35), Sordi, , op. cit., pp. 352–4Google Scholar.

page 298 note 2 Cf. Jacoby, , op. cit., p. 361 (on F 35).Google Scholar

page 298 note 3 Cf. n. 1.

page 298 note 4 Diod. 16. 35. 1 gives the impression that the Pheraeans had not expected their Thessalian opponents would get outside help; ibid. § 2, Onomarchus breaks off his campaignin Boeotia and comes with all his forces after his brother's lack of success.

page 298 note 5 Macedonia's own borders can hardly have been secure before the defeat of the northern coalition; cf. Tod, M. N., Greek Historical Inscriptions, ii (Oxford, 1948), 157, Diod. 16. 22. 3; and Amphipolis and Mt. Pangaeum were much more important than Thessaly to Philip.Google Scholar

page 298 note 6 Grote, G., History of Greece (new ed., London, 1869), vol. xi, cap. lxxxvii, p. 64, n. 4, pointed out that ‘from the language of Demosthenes (Olynth. i, p. 12, s. 13 [= 1. 12]) we see that Philip did not attack Thessaly until after the capture of Methone’. Cf. also Dem. 9. 25 (delivered in 341).Google Scholar

page 298 note 7 This was pointed out briefly by Grote, , loc. cit. and pp. 98–99Google Scholar, and Schäfer, A., Demosthenes und seine Zeit2 (Leipzig, 1885), i. 509Google Scholar, n. a, but the only recent scholar who seems to have noticed their remarks, Hammond, , art. cit., p. 65, n. 86, dismisses them without argument.Google Scholar

page 299 note 1 E. Schwartz, R.-E. v, s.v. Diodorus (38), coll. 665–9; Hammond, , art. cit., p. 61, n. 69.Google Scholar

page 299 note 2 Ibid., pp. 55–60, 75.

page 299 note 3 Ibid., pp. 56, 65, 76; Beloch, , op. cit., pp. 267–8 (that Diod. 16.35 describes parts of two campaigning seasons, the end of the first being marked by Philip's retreat to Macedon after his defeats).Google Scholar

page 299 note 4 Hammond, art. cit., Beloch, loc. cit.

page 299 note 5 Diod. 16. 35. 3–6.

page 299 note 6 Diod. 16. 37. 3.

page 299 note 7 So Hammond, suggests, art. cit., pp. 67, 75.Google Scholar

page 299 note 8 Dem. 1. 9, 13; 4. 35.

page 299 note 9 Ninety stades, Strabo 9. 5. 15, p. 436.

page 299 note 10 Diod. 16. 14. 2; 35. 1.

page 300 note 1 I.G. ii 2. 130; Dem. 1. 9; 4. 35.Google Scholar

page 300 note 2 Diod. 16. 34. 5.

page 300 note 3 Meyer, Ernst, R.-E. xviii 2, s.v. Pagasai, col. 2306.Google Scholar

page 300 note 4 As Sordi, suggests, op. cit., p. 357.Google Scholar

page 300 note 5 Dem. 1. 13; 2. 7; cf. 1. 22; 2. 11.

page 300 note 6 As Hammond has shown is most probable, art. cit., pp. 57–58.

page 300 note 7 Diod. 16. 35, 2; Polyaen. 2. 38. 2.

page 300 note 8 There seems to be no name resembling in the gazetteer in Athenian Tribute Lists, i. 461 ff., so probably the town or tribe was in the interior.Google Scholar

page 300 note 9 Beloch, , op. cit., p. 268, n. 1, suggestsGoogle Scholar emending Diodorus' text to eliminate this difficulty.

page 301 note 1 Dem. i. 12–13 (which Beloch, Ioc. cit., tries to explain away); in 1. 9 Demosthenes does not mention Pherae, since, unlike Pydna, Poteidaea, Methone, and Pagasae, it could not have been relieved by an Athenian naval force; 4. 35, Methone, Pagasae, Poteidaea, is not in chronological order on any hypothesis.

page 301 note 2 Cloché's, suggestion, op. cit., pp. 83–84, that Philip may have captured Pagasae twice, seems quite groundless.Google Scholar