1
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
36.12.
2
. The expression was coined by a later Macedonian king, Philip V (222–179), according to Polybius,
Histories
18.11.5.
3
. Delev 2000.
4
. Plutarch,
Life of Pyrrhus
8.2.
5
. Plutarch,
Life of Pyrrhus
10.5.
6
. Duris of Samos, fr. 13 Jacoby; full text at Austin 43, Burstein 7, Grant p. 67.
7
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
42.2.
8
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
41.3.
9
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
43.5. On the whole subject, see Murray 2012.
10
. The villa of P. Fannius Synistor at Boscoreale: see Billows 1995, 45–55.
11
. On Hellenistic religious developments, see especially Chamoux 2003, ch. 9; Mikalson 2006; Potter 2003; Shipley 2000, 153–76.
12
. On Samothrace, see Cole 1984; on Eleusis, Mylonas 1961.
13
. Plutarch,
On Isis and Osiris
361f–362a; Tacitus,
Histories
4.83–4 (= Austin 300).
14
. Demetrius of Phalerum fr. 82a Stork/van Ophuijsen/Dorandi.
15
. Lund 1992, 98.
16
. Plutarch,
Life of Pyrrhus
12.4.
17
. Memnon of Heraclea, fr. 1.5.6 Jacoby. A later Hellenistic king was also named Ceraunus: Seleucus III Ceraunus, king of Syria from 226 to 223.
18
. So Plutarch has Seleucus describe him (
Life of Demetrius
38), with a hint at the significance of the anchor symbol to their line. It was said to be a Seleucid birthmark, passed down through the generations, as predicted by the anchor seal ring the god Apollo had given to Seleucus’s mother after impregnating her with Seleucus.
19
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
38.7; Appian, 59–61.
20
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
49.2.
21
. Plutarch,
Life of Demetrius
51.3.
Chapter 16
1
. There is an excellent account of the excavations at Seuthopolis in Dimitrov and
i
ikova 1978.
2
. The evidence for Lysimachus’s administration is regrettably scant. See Lund 1992, ch. 5, for more on the topic.
3
. Justin 17.1.3.
4
. Memnon of Heraclea, fr. 1.5.6 Jacoby.
5
. On the sculptures of Pergamum, see Pollitt 1986, ch.4.
6
. Strabo,
Geography
16.2.10.
7
. Plutarch,
Life of Phocion
29.1.
8
. This is a very controversial topic, with views ranging from skepticism to acceptance of the idea that men could be gods. See especially Badian 1981; Balsdon 1950/1966; Bosworth 2003 b; Cawkwell 1994; Chaniotis 2003; Dreyer 2009; Fredricksmeyer 1979, 1981; Green 1990 (ch. 23), 2003; Habicht 1970; Hamilton 1984; Sanders 1991.
9
. For Lysander, see Plutarch,
Life of Lysander
18, based on Duris of Samos. For Dionysius, see DS 16.20.6 with Sanders 1991. For further pre-Alexandrian possibilities, see Fredricksmeyer 1979 and 1981.
10
. Homer,
Odyssey
8.467–8.
11
.
OGIS
6 = Austin 39.
12
. Sir Frederick Maurice (ed.),
An Aide de Camp of Life: Being the Papers of Colonel Charles Marshall, Assistant Adjutant General on the Staff of Robert E. Lee
(London: Little, Brown, 1927), 173.
13
. The evidence for private cult of rulers is slight, but see Smith 1988, 11.1–2.
14
. Smith 1988, 39–41.
15
. For this view in Greek literature (though certainly later than the Successors), see Diotogenes,
On Kingship
fr. 2, pp. 73–4 in H. Thesleff’s
The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period
(Å bo: Å bo University Press, 1965). For Achaemenid Persia, see e.g. Briant 2002, 240–41; for Macedon, Hammond 1989a, 21–2.
16
. Euhemerus T 4e Jacoby. For more on Euhemerus, see Ferguson 1975 (ch. 7) and Gutzwiller 2007, 189–90; for the fifth-century origins of the idea, see Prodicus of Ceos fr. 5 Diels/Kranz.
17
. Justin 17.2.1.
18
. Justin 24.2.
19
. Justin 24. 3.7; after an unsuccessful bid for the Macedonian throne, the surviving son (another Ptolemy) became an independent dynast based in the city of Telmessus in Pisidia.
Bibliography
There are good reasons for the length of this bibliography. The loss of nearly all our literary sources for the era of the Successors, and the patchiness and unreliability of the sources that remain, mean that the period is a playground for scholars. My job in this book is to reach as wide an audience as possible. This means that I have not gone into scholarly controversies, nor have I generally interrupted the flow of the book with other arguments and positions. The notes have largely been restricted to referencing quotations and alerting the reader to major controversies. The list that follows, then, is intended to be full enough to guide any reader who wants to go on to read more detailed and more nuanced accounts. I have omitted many books and even more articles, especially if they were written in a language other than English. I have marked with an asterisk those works which seem to me to be indispensable, or at least the most useful of their class. The ancient sources are, of course, all essential.
ANCIENT SOURCES
Among the lost sources for the era of Alexander the Great and his Successors, the greatest loss is the work of Hieronymus of Cardia, an eyewitness attached to the courts, in turn, of Eumenes (possibly a cousin), Antigonus Monophthalmus, Demetrius Poliorcetes, and Antigonus Gonatas. See J. Hornblower, Hieronymus of Cardia(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), and J. Roisman, ‘Hieronymus of Cardia: Causation and Bias from Alexander to His Successors’, in. E. Carney and D. Ogden (eds), Philip II and Alexander the Great: Father and Son, Lives and Afterlives(New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 135–48.
The most important literary source that remains is Diodorus of Sicily (late first cent. BCE). Books 18–20 of his Library of Historyconstitute the only continuous narrative of the age of the Successors, though after 302 BCE his work remains only in pitiful fragments. But others add substance in the form of alternative traditions or corroboration: Appian, Syrian History52–64 (second cent. ce = Roman History11.52– 64); Q. Curtius Rufus, The History of Alexander(first cent. CE), book 10; Justin (M. Junianus Justinus, perhaps third cent. ce), digest of books 13–17 of the Philippic Historyof Pompeius Trogus (late first cent. BCE); Cornelius Nepos (first cent. BCE), Lives of Eumenes, Phocion; Plutarch (first/second cent. ce), Lives of Alexander, Eumenes, Demetrius, Demosthenes, Phocion, Pyrrhus; Polyaenus (2nd cent. ce), Stratagems, esp. book 4.
A number of fragmentary histories are also relevant, of which the most important is that of Arrian (L. Flavius Arrianus, second cent. ce), After Alexander(fragments, and lamentably brief summary by Photius of Constantinople, ninth cent. ce). Others include P. Herennius Dexippus (third cent. ce), After Alexander(fragments, and summary by Photius of Constantinople, ninth cent. ce); Duris of Samos (fourth/third cent. BCE); Memnon of Heraclea Pontica (second cent. ce); and Philochorus of Athens (fourth/third cent. BCE). These fragments are collected in F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker(Berlin: Weidmann, 1923–58; CD-ROM ed, Leiden: Brill, 2004): Arrian is FGrH156; Dexippus is FGrH100; Duris is FGrH76; Hieronymus is FGrH154; Memnon is FGrH434; Philochorus is FGrH328. Jacoby’s monumental work is currently being revised under the editorship of I. Worthington, to be published in various formats by Brill.