The purpose of the current thesis is to study various aspects of women’s mobility in the so-called Hellenistic period It will attempt to provide answers to the questions ‘why did women travel,’ ‘how common was it for women to travel,’ and most importantly, ‘did women take part in the Hellenistic colonisation processes’ The importance of women’s mobility for the Greek societies as a whole will also be evaluated

To study the mobility of Hellenistic women we shall use a wide variety of literary sources, inscriptions and papyri The direct sources will be supplemented with some indirect evidence and a few theoretical models For example, it will be argued that the number of mixed marriages in the new Greek colonies and kingdoms reflects the number of women immigrants

In chapter one, it will be argued that Greek exiles habitually, although not universally, took their wives and families abroad with them In Chapter two, an argument will be put forward that many Hellenistic mercenaries travelled together with their families Moreover, it will be suggested that the growing number of female camp followers was one of the things that aided the successful colonisation processes of the Seleucids and the Ptolemies In chapter three, we draw attention to the many professional, artistic, and athletic women who moved temporarily or permanently because of work Chapter four on religion and female mobility is primarily concerned with female pilgrims, but it will also be claimed there that because of religion Greek women had to be ‘imported’ to the new Greek settlements in the East In the fifth and final chapter, it will be argued that many more Greek women took part in the colonisation processes of the era than has previously been acknowledged

background or methods

http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/11684/1/Loman_thesis_incl_authors_note.pdf

Alexander’s Newly-founded Cities

Mobility of Hellenistic women

Summary: The paper deals with the cults of Alexander the Great in the Greek cities of Asia Minor (on the coast and the nearby islands). The author argues that although some cults in these cities could be set up after the Macedonian king's death, at least most known to us (or supposed) cults of Alexander in them were instituted still in his lifetime, in all likelihood, in 324–323 BC. It seems that the cults of the king were established only in a certain, probably far from overwhelming, number of the Greek cities of Asia Minor in this period. In turn, it should be believed that the do ut des principle played an important role when these cities introduced such cults. At the same time, their institution was also caused by a sense of gratitude of the inhabitants of the Greek cities of Asia Minor to Alexander for the liberation of them from the unpopular power of both the Persians and the pro-Persian oligarchs or tyrants and, in addition, for those general and particular benefactions that were given by the Macedonian king to the communities.

The Cults of Alexander the Great in the Greek Cities of Asia Minor

Cassander’s implementation of power during the early stages of his rule of Macedonia was wide ranging and multifaceted. He employed numerous different strategies to gain support from a variety of influential groups within the Macedonian homeland and adjacent areas to secure his position. Much of the discussion surrounding Cassander’s actions to accomplish control over Macedonia has focussed on his desire to become the next king in Macedonia as demonstrated by overt public actions, a feat he achieved after the Peace of 311. However, when one considers the coinage issued by Cassander prior to 311, this single-minded monarchic aim appears less evident, calling into question the strength of this understanding of his actions.

https://revistes.uab.cat/karanos/article/download/v2-pitt/pdf-26-en

An Ill-defined Rule: Cassander’s Consolidation of Power

Although Caesar is sometimes argued to have been the founder of the Principate, Augustus is the one typically considered by modern scholars to have been responsible for its creation. There is acknowledgement of some obvious marks of inspiration but the stress is often on what Augustus did differently to his adoptive father. A contrast is drawn between the barely concealed autocracy of the dictator Caesar and the carefully cultivated image of the princeps Augustus as first among equals within a restored Republic. Augustus’ actions in the religious sphere are characterised as focussing on tradition, whether real or invented, while practising relative restraint in the way he promoted his own position. For many historians, the underlying basis of his power was ultimately the military forces under his command and the prerogatives he acquired through the so-called settlements. In actual fact, however, Augustus’ rule was much more similar to Caesar’s than is generally recognised. Several key features of the Principate directly followed the example of the dictator and this is particularly evident with respect to religion. Augustus did not accept a public cult at Rome during his lifetime but he extensively associated himself with a number of deities, including personified virtues, much like Caesar did. He portrayed himself as a sacred father-figure in a fashion that closely emulated Caesar. The chief pontificate and title pater patriae were especially significant in this regard. Caesar’s contribution is sufficiently great that he can be considered the Principate’s true founder. Furthermore, both Caesar and Augustus were directly responsible for the important measures that helped to secure their autocracy. Contrary to what is often stated, particularly for Caesar, the senators did not have a major role in formulating the extraordinary honours that were decreed. The emphasis on Augustus’ supposed restraint and moderation within the scholarship is misleading. He could hardly have done more to strengthen his own position within the state without risking dangerous levels of discontent and resentment. He merely demonstrated the caution necessary to hold on to his power. Augustus deliberately engineered the establishment of permanent one-man rule at Rome, just as Caesar probably did after he won the civil war. Suggestions that concerns for stability were uppermost in his mind do not accord with the consistent manner in which he pursued personal supremacy. Religion was not simply important in all this but vital. It formed a pillar of both Caesar’s and Augustus’ autocracy that was no less critical than their formal political powers or their military backing.

/pdf/caesar-s-contribution-to-augustus-religious-programme-1fayllgcw9.pdf

Caesar’s contribution to Augustus’ religious programme

In contemporary discussions of preferred urban form, many planners and designers advocate a return to the grid. Proponents of the grid see it as legible, accessible, efficient, traditional, and, perhaps, even egalitarian. This chapter examines the grid in the context of traditions which have used it as a dominant form in city building. A brief historical review shows that the grid has emerged in some societies seeking to diffuse authority among citizens, but appears most commonly in the context of centralizing or globalizing power. The author illustrates that the extraordinary symbolism of the grid as a “rational” built form imposed on landscapes can convey a range of meanings, both positive and negative.

The Dark Side of the Grid Revisited: Power and Urban Design

/pdf/alexander-s-newly-founded-cities-13zgg4m3jx.pdf

Alexander’s Newly-founded Cities

Citations

Mobility of Hellenistic women

The Cults of Alexander the Great in the Greek Cities of Asia Minor

An Ill-defined Rule: Cassander’s Consolidation of Power

Caesar’s contribution to Augustus’ religious programme

The Dark Side of the Grid Revisited: Power and Urban Design

Related Papers (5)

Rome: City and Empire.

The Enlightenment world

Epilogue: An Historical Anthropology of American Cities

Revolutionary england 1640-1642

The British Empire as a World Power