TrLysim

From Seshat Data Browser
Jump to navigation Jump to search

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams ♥ The name of the research assistant or associate who coded the data. If more than one RA made a substantial contribution, list all.

♠ Original name ♣ Kingdom of Lysimachus ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣ Thrace ♥

♠ Peak Date ♣ 306-281 BCE ♥ These dates correspond to the rule of Lysimachus from when he declared himself king in 306 BCE to when the kingdom was conquered by the Seleucid Empire in 281 BCE. [1]


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 323-281 BCE ♥ The starting date corresponds with the death of Alexander the Great and the beginning of Lysimachus' governorship of the Thracian territories. The end date is when Lysimachus' kingdom was taken over by the Seleucid Empire.[2]

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ loose ♥ It is unclear how much influence Lysimachus had on all parts of Thrace, particularly as the role of the Thracian ruler Seuthes is unclear. However: “Some poleis were accorded internal autonomy and the right to form alliances, but under the supervision of a strategos of the King as attested by the Ionian League. Similar organizations may to some extent even have the freedom to follow a foreign policy of their own.”[3]

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ vassalage; personal union; alliance ♥ 323 BCE: vassalage; 323-281 BCE: personal union; alliance; 281 BCE: vassalage The Thracian territory was part of Alexander's empire until his death in 323 BCE. Thrace was then ruled by Lysimachus (and Seuthes?). The two rulers seem to have come to an arrangement with each other, but the exact nature of this relationship is unclear. Lysimachus created personal unions with other ruling families through marriage, and allied Thrace with other Diadoch polities at various times. The Thracian territory was once again taken over by an expanding empire in 281 BCE when Lysimachus was defeated by Seleucus of the Seleucid Empire.[4][5]

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ Macedonian Empire ♥
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ continuity ♥
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ Seleucid Empire ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ Greek ♥
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared.

♠ Capital ♣ Lysimacheia ♥ Lysimacheia: 309-281 BCE [6][7]

♠ Language ♣ Greek ♥ Lysimachus was Macedonian.

General Description

The Thracian kingdom under Lysimachus constituted only a short period in the history of the area. The Odrysian Kingdom was present in Thrace before it was conquered by Philip II, then ruled by Alexander the Great until his death in 323 BCE. Lysimachus, one of Alexander’s Successors, took over governorship of the area and eventually declared himself king in 306 BCE. Lysimachus ruled with an expansionist policy, and extended the kingdom to its furthest reaches by around 300 BCE.[8] His reign was however, very short lived. He was defeated at the Battle of Corupedium by Seleucus (ruler of the Seleucid Empire) in 281 BCE and his territories became part of the Seleucid Empire.

The evidence of Lysimachus’ reign is very limited and, “There is almost no direct information as to Lysimachus’ administration, nor do we know the site of his headquarters before Lysimacheia’s walls rose in 309 BCE.” [9] There is however a certain amount of continuity with the Odrysian Kingdom before the Macedonain conquest which may provide some proxy information on Thrace under Lysimachus. In addition, there is some evidence that Thracian rulers continued to rule under or with Lysimachus, although the exact nature of their relationship is not clear. The earlier reigns of Philip II and Alexander, and the subsequent reign of Seleucus, have not been coded on this page as those polities have separate pages. It was only under Lysimachus that the area was ruled relatively independently, and only during this time that the boundaries were extended to include the Konya Plain.

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams; Edward A L Turner ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ 420,000: 300 BCE ♥ in squared kilometers. Estimated using Google Area Calculator and the territory shown on the map (above) of Lysimachus' kingdom around 300 BCE.

♠ Polity Population ♣ [2,000,000-3,000,000] ♥ Lysimachus' kingdom covered approximately 50% of modern Turkey and all of Bulgaria.

Turkey as a whole had an estimated 4.5 million in 300 BCE.[10]

Turkey-in-Europe had about 100,000 in 300 BCE.[11]

Bulgaria had approximately 200,000 in 300 BCE.[12]

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ ♥ unknown

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ 3 ♥ levels.

At least three.

1. City

2. Town
3.

♠ Administrative levels ♣ 4 ♥ levels. At least four.


“The state of Lysimachos was a typical Hellenistic “personal monarchy” (generally: Burnstein 1980; 1986; Lund 1992: 107-183; Делев 2004: 170-171; 329-353). It was ruled by a Macedonian ruler and aristocracy with the participation of some locals such as Bytis and Paris, citizens of Lysimacheia, supposed to be of Thracian or Thracian-Phrygian origin. The royal domains and the subjected poleis were governed by strategoi or epistat appointed by the King.” [13]

“In Asia Minor, the Hellespont and Thrace, from the 280s BC, at least, the strategos’ authority extended to the Greek cities lying within the satrapy; his intervention might take various forms and is often beneficent in effect.” [14] Lysimachus’ strategos of the Ionians: “Until recently, only one incumbent of the post was known to us, the Milesian Hippostratus, philos of the king and recipient in 289-8 BC of conspicuous honours awarded by the cities of the Ionian koinon. Now, another strategos, Hippodamus, also from Miletus, has stepped out of the shadows, courtesy of a recently published inscription from Chios.” [15]

It is likely that there were administrative levels beneath the strategos, but evidence from this time is sparse.

(2) King
(1) Strategos

Under Macedonian Empire may have had -

1. Diadochi

Military general
2. Provinces ruled by Macedonian Satraps or Strategoi
3. Local districts
Inferred. Within the Achaemenid Empire, a "five-level hierarchical structure," there was at least one administrative level below the provincial, possibly two ("provincial sub-satraps and local districts").
4. Village headmen


♠ Religious levels ♣ 2 ♥ At least 2.

Similar to Macedonian Empire?

For the Macedonian Empire, the king was the chief priest and religious leader. Phillip II believed in "his special relationship with Zeus, maintained the cult of the Temenid family, and worshipped his his ancestor, Herakles, the son of Zeus." [16] After Alexander III, divine worship of king emerged.[17]


♠ Military levels ♣ [5-7] ♥

This is the code for the preceding Macedonian Empire -

1. King

Supreme commander[18]
2. Bodyguards
Called somatophylakes. An honor, not literal bodyguards, as they commanded units. [19]
2. Companion Corps
hetairoi Companions[20]
pezhetairoi Foot Companions (phalanx) [21]
3. asthetairoi
Called asthetairoi. Under Phillip II had 800 officers. [22]
4. Lochoi (100)
- Lochoi (100) - Dekades (10) (probable organization)[23]
5. Dekades (10)
6. Individual soldier
2. Squadron
Called Ilai (eight of them), commanded by Ilarches [24]
3. Lochoi, commanded by Lochagos
Called Lochoi, commanded by Lochagos. In 331 CE there were 2 lochoi to an Ilai. [25]
4. Dekades?
5. Individual soldier

Hypaspistani were elite infantry.[26]


Alternative: [27]

1. King

Alexander
2. Army Secretariat
Eumenes of Cardia.
2. Royal Secretaries
One for each section of the empire. Not active in field.
3. Secretary of Groups
Secretary of Cavalry Secretary of Mercenaries.
4. Divisions called moirai
5. taxiarches commanded taxis
force of 1,536
5? Chiliarchy
force of 1,024
5? Pentakosiarchy
force of 512
6. Lochos
force of 256
7. Dekas
force of 10
8. Individual soldier


Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ inferred present ♥ Present for Macedonian Empire.

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ inferred present ♥ Present for Macedonian Empire.

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ present ♥ "At Didyma, the obvious parallel, it is clear that Lysimachus allowed the Milesians to administer the shrine and its resources without interference.” [28]

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ inferred present ♥ Lysimachus began striking coins at his capital Lysimacheia after the Battle of Ipsis (306 BCE)[29] and he established or used mints in fifteen cities to produce his coins.[30]

♠ Examination system ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ present ♥ Lysimachus began striking coins at his capital Lysimacheia after the Battle of Ipsis (306 BCE)[31] and he established or used mints in fifteen cities to produce his coins.[32]

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ inferred present ♥ royal ordinances (prostagmata) "…it is true that the Successors, like Alexander before them, represented the ultimate source of law for the cities. While epigraphic evidence suggests that the kings were not quite so prone to flaunt these powers as the literary tradition would have it - royal ordinances (prostagmata) for example, are enshrined in the city laws by means of popular decree, at the tactful request, rather than the order, of the king - the fact remains that their powers of intervention in this sphere were very wide; nor did they hesitate to use them when necessary." [33]

♠ Judges ♣ ♥ unknown

♠ Courts ♣ ♥ unknown

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ ♥ unknown


Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ inferred present ♥ Maintenance of Persian networks and expansion under the Greeks. [34]
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ inferred present ♥ There were public fountains in the Greek Kingdoms of Central Asia [35] Something referred to as a "fountain building" in earlier Macedonia.[36]
♠ markets ♣ inferred present ♥ The Macedonians used the agora as a market place. [37]
♠ food storage sites ♣ inferred present ♥

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Bridges ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Canals ♣ ♥ unknown
♠ Ports ♣ present ♥ Lysimachus’ marriage to Amastris “gave him possession of a port which would facilitate communications with Thrace, and command of the route which would bring Seleucus from the east.” [38]

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ inferred present ♥

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ ♥ unknown
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ present ♥
♠ Written records ♣ present ♥
♠ Script ♣ present ♥ "While the ancient Thracians were a non-literary people and no domestic historical sources are known, a number of Greek and Roman authors give information on the region and the local tribes. Ancient writings provide some possibility to study Thracian political history, culture, religion and society, but, on the other hand, they do not contain sufficient data to enable those studying Thrace to draw comprehensive conclusions and to reconstruct the whole situation." [39]
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ absent ♥
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ present ♥

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ inferred present ♥ government + literacy
♠ Calendar ♣ inferred present ♥ government + literacy
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Religious literature ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Practical literature ♣ inferred present ♥ government + literacy
♠ History ♣ present ♥ “While the ancient Thracians were a non-literary people and no domestic historical sources are known, a number of Greek and Roman authors give information on the region and the local tribes. Ancient writings provide some possibility to study Thracian political history, culture, religion and society, but, on the other hand, they do not contain sufficient data to enable those studying Thrace to draw comprehensive conclusions and to reconstruct the whole situation.” [40]
♠ Philosophy ♣ inferred present ♥ Greek intellectual world.
♠ Scientific literature ♣ inferred present ♥ Greek intellectual world.
♠ Fiction ♣ inferred present ♥ Greek intellectual world.


Money

♠ Articles ♣ present ♥
♠ Tokens ♣ ♥ unknown
♠ Precious metals ♣ ♥ unknown
♠ Foreign coins ♣ present ♥ "The coin bulk came from different centers and trade routes. The coins found on the territory of the Kingdom were of various denominations struck after several standards: Phokean (the cyzikeni), Attic (tetradrachms of Athens), light Thracian-Macedonian (staters and drachms of the Thasos-type and ¼ drachms of Thasos), Chian-Rhodian (drachms of Parion and of Apollonia Pontica) and the local standard (the Odrysian royal issues and the Thasos-type bronzes)...” [41]
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ present ♥ [42] Lysimachus, like Seleucus and Alexander, minted coins as a form of propaganda.[43]
♠ Paper currency ♣ inferred absent ♥

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Postal stations ♣ ♥ unknown
♠ General postal service ♣ inferred absent ♥

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams ♥ The name of the research assistant or associate who coded the data. If more than one RA made a substantial contribution, list all.

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ present ♥ used to make bronze “Odrysian Cavalry javelins were 1.5 to 1.8 metres in length, and tipped with iron or bronze heads. They could be thrown immediately before contact or used as a thrusting weapon.” [44]
♠ Bronze ♣ present ♥ “Odrysian Cavalry javelins were 1.5 to 1.8 metres in length, and tipped with iron or bronze heads. They could be thrown immediately before contact or used as a thrusting weapon.” [45]
♠ Iron ♣ present ♥ [46]“Odrysian Cavalry javelins were 1.5 to 1.8 metres in length, and tipped with iron or bronze heads. They could be thrown immediately before contact or used as a thrusting weapon.” [47]
♠ Steel ♣ ♥

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ present ♥ “Odrysian Cavalry javelins were 1.5 to 1.8 metres in length, and tipped with iron or bronze heads. They could be thrown immediately before contact or used as a thrusting weapon.” [48]
♠ Atlatl ♣ inferred absent ♥ New World weapon
♠ Slings ♣ present ♥ [49] Many ancient armies used slingers. Vulnerable to counter-attacks, slinger units were usually small and used at the start of the battle. Because of the training required to produce an effective slinger they were often hired mercenaries.[50]
♠ Self bow ♣ present ♥ [51] "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."[52] Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn't place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.[53]
♠ Composite bow ♣ present ♥ "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders."[54] Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn't place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat.[55]
♠ Crossbow ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not at this time: "the hand-held crossbow was invented by the Chinese, in the fifth century BC, and probably came into the Roman world in the first century AD, where it was used for hunting."[56] The crossbow also developed after the Syracuse Greek Dionysios I invented a form of crossbow called the gastraphetes in 399 BCE.[57]
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ absent ♥
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ absent ♥

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ ♥ “Thracian cavalry would be mainly armed with sword, (usually the kopis) and 2 cornel wood javelins, or the composite bow (kept in a leather gorytos) if they were Getai.” [58]
♠ Battle axes ♣ ♥
♠ Daggers ♣ present ♥ “Swords were most often only secondary weapons and to begin with, only nobles could afford them; the rest of the troops made do with curved daggers.” [59]
♠ Swords ♣ present ♥ “Thracian cavalry, however, are always shown on metalwork, tomb paintings, and reliefs with long, straight swords (probably the xiphos) from around the 3rd century onwards.” [60] "All armies after the seventeenth century B.C.E. carried the sword, but in none was it a major weapon of close combat; rather, it was used when the soldier's primary weapons, the spear and axe, were lost or broken."[61]
♠ Spears ♣ present ♥ [62] Spear-using phalanx first used in Sumer 2500 BCE. The phalanx was in use until the 1st century BCE.[63]
♠ Polearms ♣ ♥

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ ♥
♠ Donkeys ♣ ♥
♠ Horses ♣ present ♥ [64] “Horse riding epitomised the Thracians. Euripides and Homer called the Thracians “a race of horsemen”, and Thrace, “the land of the Thracian horsemen”.20 This description seems justified, as even though the cavalry onlymade up a small proportion of their army, they were quite numerous. For instance, although Sitalkes’ army was only one-third cavalry, this represented about 50,000men.”[65]
♠ Camels ♣ ♥
♠ Elephants ♣ ♥

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ present ♥ Pelte shields were made with wood or wicker, and leather. [66]
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ present ♥ Leather small shields, or pelte, were used by the cavalry before 300 BCE. [67]
♠ Shields ♣ present ♥ The fourth century Thracian army:“Light cavalry was now likely to have the basic protection of helmet and shield, while heavy cavalry took to wearing iron helmets and composite corselets.”[68]
♠ Helmets ♣ present ♥ The fourth century Thracian army:“Light cavalry was now likely to have the basic protection of helmet and shield, while heavy cavalry took to wearing iron helmets and composite corselets.”[69]
♠ Breastplates ♣ present ♥ The fourth century Thracian army:“Light cavalry was now likely to have the basic protection of helmet and shield, while heavy cavalry took to wearing iron helmets and composite corselets.”[70]
♠ Limb protection ♣ present ♥ Greaves were worn by Thracian cavalry after the 4th century BCE. [71] By the time of 'Etruscan Rome' (400 BCE?) - here I believe the author is referring to ancient armies in general - "bronze greaves to protect the shins and forearms of the soldier were standard items of military equipment."[72]
♠ Chainmail ♣ inferred present ♥ “Thracian troops of the Thracian client-kingdom were equipped “in the Roman style”, which may have meant that they wore Roman mail shirts and helmets, and carried Roman shields. They continued to use these when they became Thracian auxiliaries in Roman service.” [73] Gabriel (2002) says iron chain mail not introduced until the third century BCE, probably by Celtic peoples.[74] That's close to this time.
♠ Scaled armor ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Laminar armor ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Possible. Already introduced by the Assyrians.
♠ Plate armor ♣ inferred present ♥ By 600 BCE early Greeks and Romans had introduced the bronze cast bell muscle cuirass.[75]

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ inferred present ♥ boats had been in use for thousands of years in this NGA
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ ♥
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ present ♥ Under Lysimachus: “The maritime centers provided the King with a fleet required for military expeditions.” [76]

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ inferred present ♥
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ present ♥ Lysimachus built a fortified camp near Dorylaeum that was fortified with a "deep ditch and three lines of palisades".[77]
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ present ♥ Ephesus, which was relocated and rebuilt: "drystone walls with their substantial, quarried limestone blocks were carefully fitted onto the bedrock and followed the contours of the countryside wherever they led for about ten kilometers ... protecting the harbor and surrounding the city at some distance, to allow for expansion and the emergency evacuation of the rural population. The entire length of the wall consisted of two faces, inner and outer, with rubble and soil infill between, and an average width of almost three meters ..." [78] This is essentially an earth rampart with stone facing.
♠ Ditch ♣ present ♥ Lysimachus built a fortified camp near Dorylaeum that was fortified with a "deep ditch and three lines of palisades".[79]
♠ Moat ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Lysimachus defeated Thracian cities with dry-stone walls, including Odessus, defeated during the revolt of 313 BCE by Lysimachus. [80] This was essentially an earth rampart with stone facing (Waterfield's quote contains more detail) so am coding it as mortared. A true non-mortared defensive wall should be self-supporting without any other material (mortar). This one was directly backed by earth which helped bind the stones together. Maybe it can be coded both ways, coding suspected unknown for now.
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ present ♥ Ephesus, which was relocated and rebuilt: "drystone walls with their substantial, quarried limestone blocks were carefully fitted onto the bedrock and followed the contours of the countryside wherever they led for about ten kilometers ... protecting the harbor and surrounding the city at some distance, to allow for expansion and the emergency evacuation of the rural population. The entire length of the wall consisted of two faces, inner and outer, with rubble and soil infill between, and an average width of almost three meters ..." [81]
♠ Fortified camps ♣ present ♥ The preceding Macedonians under Alexander the Great built fortified camps.[82] Lysimachus built a fortified camp near the Phyrgian city of Abassium on a campaign against Antigonus.[83]
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ inferred present ♥ Lysimachus built a fortified camp near Dorylaeum that was fortified with a "deep ditch and three lines of palisades".[84] “No excavations in Lysimacheia have been undertaken up to now, the only particular building we know about is the temple renamed Lysimacheion after the death of Lysimachos. There the King was buried and certainly venerated as an oikist (App. Syr. 341; ИTM: 330). One may expect impressive fortifications to have defended the new foundation with the sites of older Kardia and Paktia.” [85]
♠ Long walls ♣ ♥ km.
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ absent ♥ Inferred as occurred later.

Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ ♥ Unknown? Not mentioned by the sources.
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ ♥ Unknown? Not mentioned by the sources.
♠ Impeachment ♣ inferred absent ♥ "At first sight, there is little that seems contentious in these accounts. To try and isolate one motive for Seleucus’ invasion of Asia Minor in 282-1 BC as primary would be futile; plausibly all these factors played their part. The suggestion that widespread revolt among the poleis was prompted by disgust at the king’s unnatural murder of his son is, however, questionable, as is the assumption that the cities defected on a large scale before Seleucus’ victory at Corupedium.44" [86] Revolts seemed to be the only way to contest Lysimachus's power, which hints at the absence of an effective impeachment system.

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ present ♥ "Closely connected to the idea of the king as a symbol of stability and continuity is the concept of an inherited claim to rule. […]The line taken by the Diadochs was essentially the same. Promoting their victories and their own heroic qualities, they strove to present themselves as rightful heirs to the kings who had preceded them. Lysimachus and his colleagues emphasised their ties with Alexander, who himself had claimed his ‘inheritance’ from the Achaemenid kings." [87]

Religion and Normative Ideology

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥

Deification of Rulers

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Deification of rulers is common in other Greek-ruled polities at this time[88][89], but it is not at all clear whether this was the case in this specific polity.

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ absent ♥ “The philosophers taught a universalizing frame of reference so they encouraged people to look on each other as equals. But as we saw with slavery, this did not translate into actual social change or even recognizing a need to break down categories. The only example I can think of is again Musonius Rufus who advocated a version of male and female equality (in education, for example). He was against double standards of sexual morality for men and women. Traditional Greek religion reinforced all kinds of social distinctions. Foreigners could not worship in most civic cults of another city without a special permission, women were restricted to certain well-defined roles in certain cults, and on and on. There was no doctrinal or ritual drive toward universal equality, though rituals were used to emphasize the equality of individuals within a given social group (e.g. Athenian male citizens). There is only one exception but it is an important one: mystery cults, very popular in Hellenistic times, were surprisingly open to initiating all comers. The Eleusinian Mysteries accepted women, slaves and foreigners, and so did many other mysteries (but not all).” [90]

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ absent ♥ “The philosophers taught a universalizing frame of reference so they encouraged people to look on each other as equals. But as we saw with slavery, this did not translate into actual social change or even recognizing a need to break down categories. The only example I can think of is again Musonius Rufus who advocated a version of male and female equality (in education, for example). He was against double standards of sexual morality for men and women. Traditional Greek religion reinforced all kinds of social distinctions. Foreigners could not worship in most civic cults of another city without a special permission, women were restricted to certain well-defined roles in certain cults, and on and on. There was no doctrinal or ritual drive toward universal equality, though rituals were used to emphasize the equality of individuals within a given social group (e.g. Athenian male citizens). There is only one exception but it is an important one: mystery cults, very popular in Hellenistic times, were surprisingly open to initiating all comers. The Eleusinian Mysteries accepted women, slaves and foreigners, and so did many other mysteries (but not all).” [91]
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ absent ♥ “The philosophers taught a universalizing frame of reference so they encouraged people to look on each other as equals. But as we saw with slavery, this did not translate into actual social change or even recognizing a need to break down categories. The only example I can think of is again Musonius Rufus who advocated a version of male and female equality (in education, for example). He was against double standards of sexual morality for men and women. Traditional Greek religion reinforced all kinds of social distinctions. Foreigners could not worship in most civic cults of another city without a special permission, women were restricted to certain well-defined roles in certain cults, and on and on. There was no doctrinal or ritual drive toward universal equality, though rituals were used to emphasize the equality of individuals within a given social group (e.g. Athenian male citizens). There is only one exception but it is an important one: mystery cults, very popular in Hellenistic times, were surprisingly open to initiating all comers. The Eleusinian Mysteries accepted women, slaves and foreigners, and so did many other mysteries (but not all).” [92]

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ present ♥ “The philosophers taught various versions of the Golden Rule, whereas traditional Greek morality said it was best to help one’s friends and harm one’s enemies. The only philosopher I can think of who specifically advocates “helping people” over “living luxuriously” is the Stoic Musonius Rufus from the first century CE, but he may have been an innovator in that respect. In general the Greeks had no religious or philosophical teachings to compare with Jewish and Christian teachings about almsgiving, gleaning, or caring for “widows and orphans.” Greek cities sometimes gave stipends to orphans if their fathers had died in battle defending the city. The most important traditional religious teaching on this subject was that the gods required people to treat “strangers and suppliants” well. That is, you should assist strangers who come to your door in need (and definitely not harm them). You can see this when Odysseus disguised as a beggar receives hospitality (Homer was a basic school text in the Hellenistic period) or in the Hellenistic myth of Baucis and Philemon, a very poor elderly couple who received two strangers and gave them hospitality. The strangers turned out to be Zeus and Hermes, who rewarded the couple. The belief that the gods “tested” humans by coming down to earth was common Hellenistic Asia Minor, where Paul and Barnabas were mistaken for Zeus and Hermes in disguise (Acts 14). Hellenistic philanthropy was closely tied to piety because the benefactions were usually things like sponsoring a festival or enhancing a sanctuary. Sponsoring a festival meant entertainment and free food distribution, but the main goal was not necessarily to help the poor—it was more to enhance the public good. I think it is very likely that the teachings of philosophers encouraged these sorts of activities, but of course the donors also benefited from increased prestige.” [93]

♠ production of public goods ♣ present ♥ “The philosophers taught various versions of the Golden Rule, whereas traditional Greek morality said it was best to help one’s friends and harm one’s enemies. The only philosopher I can think of who specifically advocates “helping people” over “living luxuriously” is the Stoic Musonius Rufus from the first century CE, but he may have been an innovator in that respect. In general the Greeks had no religious or philosophical teachings to compare with Jewish and Christian teachings about almsgiving, gleaning, or caring for “widows and orphans.” Greek cities sometimes gave stipends to orphans if their fathers had died in battle defending the city. [...] Hellenistic philanthropy was closely tied to piety because the benefactions were usually things like sponsoring a festival or enhancing a sanctuary. Sponsoring a festival meant entertainment and free food distribution, but the main goal was not necessarily to help the poor—it was more to enhance the public good. I think it is very likely that the teachings of philosophers encouraged these sorts of activities, but of course the donors also benefited from increased prestige.” [94]

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ absent ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ unknown ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ present ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [95] [96] [97]

References

  1. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p107
  2. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York.
  3. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p15
  4. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24.
  5. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York.
  6. Hadley, R. A. (1974) Royal Propaganda of Seleucus I and Lysimachus. The Journal of Hellenistic Studies. Vol.94. p55
  7. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p21, 42
  8. (Dimitrov 2011, 13) K Dimitrov. 2011. Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24.
  9. (Lund 1992, 21) H S Lund. 1992. Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York.
  10. (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 135) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
  11. (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 113) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
  12. (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 113) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
  13. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p14
  14. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p141
  15. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p142
  16. (Gabriel 2010, 21)
  17. (Christesen and Murray 2010)
  18. (King 2010, 373-391)
  19. (King 2010, 373-391)
  20. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  21. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  22. (Gabriel 2010, 11)
  23. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  24. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  25. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  26. (Sekunda 2010, 446-471)
  27. (Sheppard 2008)
  28. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p136
  29. Hadley, R. A. (1974) Royal Propaganda of Seleucus I and Lysimachus. The Journal of Hellenistic Studies. Vol.94. p55
  30. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p131-132
  31. Hadley, R. A. (1974) Royal Propaganda of Seleucus I and Lysimachus. The Journal of Hellenistic Studies. Vol.94. p55
  32. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p131-132
  33. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p138
  34. Tarn, William Woodthorpe. The Greeks in Bactria and India. Cambridge University Press, 2010. pp. 101-105
  35. Bernard, Paul. "The Greek Kingdoms of Central Asia." History of civilizations of Central Asia 2 (1994): pp. 99-129.. pp. 110-113
  36. (Girtzi-Bafas 2009, 136-144)
  37. (Girtzi-Bafas 2009, 136-144)
  38. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p75
  39. Theodossiev, N. (2011) Ancient Thrace during the First Millennium BC. In, Tsetskhladze, G. R. (ed.) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the First Millennium BC. Peeters: Leuven, Paris, Walpole, pp1-60)p5
  40. Theodossiev, N. (2011) Ancient Thrace during the First Millennium BC. In, Tsetskhladze, G. R. (ed.) The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the First Millennium BC. Peeters: Leuven, Paris, Walpole, pp1-60)p5
  41. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p7
  42. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p7
  43. Hadley, R. A. (1974) Royal Propaganda of Seleucus I and Lysimachus. The Journal of Hellenistic Studies. Vol.94.
  44. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  45. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  46. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p537
  47. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  48. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  49. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  50. (Gabriel 2002, 31) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  51. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  52. Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
  53. (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  54. Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
  55. (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  56. (Nicholson 2004, 99) Helen Nicholson. 2004. Medieval Warfare: Theory and Practice of War in Europe, 300-1500. PalgraveMacmillan. Basingstoke.
  57. (Keyser and Irby-Massie 2006, 260) Paul T Keyser. Georgia Irby-Massie. Science, Medicine, And Technology. Glenn R Bugh. ed. 2006. The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  58. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  59. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p550
  60. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p550
  61. (Gabriel 2002, 26-27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  62. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  63. (Gabriel 2002, 25) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  64. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p24-5
  65. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p530
  66. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p541
  67. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p540-1
  68. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p537
  69. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p537
  70. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p537
  71. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p549
  72. (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 51) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.
  73. Webber, C. (2003) Odrysian Cavalry, Army, Equipment and Tactics. Bar International Series 1139, pp. 529-554. p540
  74. (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  75. (Gabriel 2002, 21) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
  76. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p14
  77. (Champion 2014, 155) Jeff Champion. 2014. Antigonus the One-Eyed: Greatest of the Successors. Pen & Sword. Barnsley.
  78. (Waterfield 2011, 78) Robin Waterfield. 2011. Dividing the Spoils: The War for Alexander the Great's Empire. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  79. (Champion 2014, 155) Jeff Champion. 2014. Antigonus the One-Eyed: Greatest of the Successors. Pen & Sword. Barnsley.
  80. Lund, H. S. (1992) Lysimachus: A study in early Hellenistic kingship. Routledge: London and New York. p40
  81. (Waterfield 2011, 78) Robin Waterfield. 2011. Dividing the Spoils: The War for Alexander the Great's Empire. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  82. (Buckley 1996, 383) Terry Buckley.1996. Aspects of Greek History, 750-323 BC: A Source-based Approach. London. Routledge.
  83. (Champion 2014, 155) Jeff Champion. 2014. Antigonus the One-Eyed: Greatest of the Successors. Pen & Sword. Barnsley.
  84. (Champion 2014, 155) Jeff Champion. 2014. Antigonus the One-Eyed: Greatest of the Successors. Pen & Sword. Barnsley.
  85. Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p15
  86. (Lund 1992, 199)
  87. (Lund 1992, 158-159)
  88. Rolf Strootman, "SELEUCID EMPIRE," Encyclopædia Iranica, online edition, 2015, available at http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/seleucid-empire (accessed on 22 May 2016)
  89. Mikalson, J.D. 2006. Greek Religion. In Bugh, G.R. (ed) The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World pp. 208-222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  90. Jennifer Larson 2016, pers. comm.
  91. Jennifer Larson 2016, pers. comm.
  92. Jennifer Larson 2016, pers. comm.
  93. Jennifer Larson 2016, pers. comm.
  94. Jennifer Larson 2016, pers. comm.
  95. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  96. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  97. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html