GREEK LIBERTY
No historian is free from prejudice, and Polybius of Megalopolis was less free than most, hut precisely that attribute of his which makes so unre-liable his reports of the Antigonids, Ptolemies, and other royal families unpo-pular in Achaea, makes his observations in other areas not only authoritative but interesting. He insisted that only men of affairs could write proper history1, and he himself had been active in public life in the Achaean League and later an intimate friend of prominent Romans. While his judgment of his political opponents was clearly warped, his understanding of the mentality of Greeks and Romans in their first political contacts was profound. After the victory of Manius Glabrio in 191 B.C. over Antiochus the Great at Thermopylae, he reports, the Aetolians were frightened and decided to place themselves in the hands of the consul, "giving themselves into the πίστις of the Romans", not realizing what this meant but deceived by the hopeful suggestion of the term. For in Roman political legality entrusting oneself to a general's fides meant surrendering unconditionally. The envoys learned of their mistake when iron collars were placed about their necks2.
This, of course, is an old observation, familiar to the eminent jurist and historian whom we honor ourselves in honoring in this volume. It seems to me, however, that something of the same misunderstanding has attached to the terms libertas-έλευθερία, wherein the one had a technical meaning lacking in the other. I believe that this misunderstanding has been too little emphasized in modern times, and that it was of some considerable importance in Greco-Roman relationships from the Illyrian Wars down to the establishment of the Province of Macedonia; of greater importance, indeed, than any confusion over fides-πίστις. For when the Senate or the Roman People accepted a com-munity as a civitas libera, they effected a constitutional act undreamed of by the Greeks when they declared a πόλις to be έλευθέρα.
It is the fluidity of the Greek term which has obscured the issue. Polybius himself, for all his interest in and association with Roman constitutional matters, continues to use έλεύθερος and its cognates as loosely as he subsequently uses
1 X I I , 28, 3: δταν οί πραγματικοί των ανδρών γράφειν έπιχειρήσωσι τάς Ιστορίας. 2 X X , 9, 11-10, 8. He returns to the topic later ( X X X V I , 3, 9; 4, 1-3), where he tran-slates fides as έπιτροπή.
30 С. В. WELLES
the πίστις of which he has taken pains to explain the precise significance3. We, certainly, can be in no doubt as to what libertas in the political area meant to the Romans, but Polybius seems not to have noted it, at least as far as his preserved text shows. For us, the jurist Proculus of Nero's time has explained the situation, and Mommsen's brilliant analysis only confirms it4. A Greek would, of course, accept his basic principle: "Liber autem populus est is, qui nullius alterius populi potestati est subjectus", and agree further that this general situation was not altered by obligations under a treaty. He would, however, have balked at continuing: "...sive aequo foedere in amicitiam venit, sive foedere comprehensum est, ut is populus alterius populi majestatem comiter conservaret; hoc enim adiicitur, ut intelligatur, alterum populum superiorem esse, non ut intelligatur, alterum non esse liberum". For Proculus continues with the analogy of clients who are regarded as free even though they are not the equals of their patrons in auctoritas or dignitas; „sic eos, qui majestatem nostram comiter conservare debent, liberos esse intelligendum est".
It is not, of course, that factual differences of power and obligation could not exist in the Greek world of free cities. It is obvious that they often did. The point is that, for the Romans, any recognition of a civitas as libera, whether by foedus or lex data or any other means, carried with it this notion of superior-inferior, of patron-client, with obligations mutual and in principle permanent on both sides. This is not, of course, anything which Roman jurists of much less distinction than Professor Arangio-Ruiz have not known all along, but I sub-mit that the Greeks of 196 B.C. did not know it, and that modern historians have failed to give proper weight to the political consequences of their ignorance. Seen in this light, what Flamininus meant and what the Greeks thought he meant were quite different things, and the subsequent Roman conduct in Greece, mystifying and infuriating to the one party, can have seemed only logical and legally obvious to the other.
Of this, more later. It is the purpose of the remainder of the discussion to insist the Greeks never used έλευθερία with technical exactness. It was a good thing, evidently, for the possessor, but what it meant in any given situation varied with the circumstances. "Freedom to" was constantly confused, as in modern times, with "freedom from", political or group freedom with freedom of the individual. This muddied thinking has been passed down from the Greeks to us, but in our general admiration and even affection for them, we must pay them the compliment of trying to understand them5.
3 So X X I I , 17, 1, where the πίστις was Ptolemy's, and X X I I I , 3, 3, where it was
Euraenes'.
4 Digest, 49, 15, 7; Τ h . Römisches Staatsrecht (1887) 654, η. 4; 655658; Α. N. S h e г
-w i η-W h i t e, The Roman Citizenship (1939) 149-163 ; A. B e r g e r , Encyclopedic Dictionary
of Roman Law (1953) 389 f. (with bibliography).
GREEK LIBERTY 31 Time out of mind Greece and freedom have been associated in men's minds6. Typically, freedom was something for -which you fought, not something (as with the Romans) to receive as a gift from a victorious enemy. In the Iliad men fought for their lives and for the protection of their families, and all knew the lot of those who did not win. Andromache reminded Hector that her father and her seven brothers had been slain by Achilles and her mother taken captive. She had been ransomed by her family, but if Hector was killed and Troy taken, her lot and that of little Astyanax would be slavery7. Similarly, at Sparta in the seventh century, the martial poet Tyrtaeus sang of the glory of standing and fighting to the end—"And having done all, to stand",—so that the city might remain secure8. Later, with the Persian Wars, the names of Miltiades at Marathon and Leonidas at Thermopylae became symbols of man's determi-nation to remain free. Instinctively the world has honored those who bravely faced the decision, liberty or Death? The alternative was liberty or slavery, which had the appeal of obvious and self-evident simplicity.
Simple things, however, are rarely true, and still in the early days of Greece the poet and adventurer Archilochus brazently flaunted this categorical imperative9. "My shield I left beside a bush, and one of the Saians now carries it proudly. Let it go. I am alive, and I'll quickly get another just as good". "No man gets honor or glory once he is dead". His ambition was rational and therefore limited, "I do not envy the wealth of golden Gyges; I am not jealous of the works of gods, and I have no desire to become a tyrant. Such things exceed my vision". His desire was fixed on kneaded bread and Ismarian wine: that is to say, on the good life in so far as it was practicable and attainable. Life was an absolute, but not freedom. Better be a live dog than a dead lion. If absolute freedom was possible only with absolute power, then only a king could be free, and aside from the somewhat unsocial nature of this doctrine, the accomplishment of such a goal might cost more than it was worth. Freedom might be too expensive.
When, in the early years of the fifth century, the Greek cities of Ionia re-volted from Persia, they set to work and assembled a fleet, and Dionysius, the Phocaean admiral, addressed the company10: "Men of Ionia, our affairs to my present point of view are the brief comments of E. S e i d I, Studia et Documenta Historiae
et Juris (1961) 478. But it is impossible to cite everything relevant.
6 This concept, romantic rather than, historical, is commonly reflected in histories of Greece
or of Greek culture. Among the more meritorious recent examples of this point of view may be cited A.-J. F e s t u g i è r e , Liberté et civilisation chez les Grecs (1947); R. A n d r e o t t i ,
Monarchie orientali e liberta greche (1948): H. J. M i l l e r , Freedom in the Ancient World
<1961).
' Iliad VI, 406-481. 8 Frag. 10 ( B e r g к).
β Frags. 6, 64, 25, and 3 (В e r g к). 10 Herodotus VI, 11-17.
32 С. В. WELLES
hang on the razor's edge, either to be free or to be slaves. Now you must choose whether you will endure hardships and so for the present lead a life of toil, but thereby gain ability to overcome your enemies and establish your own freedom; or to persist in sloth and disorder, in which case I see no hope of your escaping the king's vengeance". Dionysius was, accordingly, charged with turning them into fighting men, and proceeded every day to make the ships move in column and the rowers ply their oars, while the marines were held under arms, so that the men had nothing but toil from morning to night. Seven days did the Ionians continue obedient, but on the eighth, worn out by the hardness of the work and the heat of the sun, they began to say one to another: "What god have we offended to bring upon ourselves such a punishment as this? Even the slavery with which we are threatened can be no worse that our present servitude". So they gave up training and reposed in the shade, and when the Persian fleet appeared, some fought bravely and some deserted. Some of the Ionians migrated to the west and some remained to endure their punishment, but before the year was out the satrap of Sardes forced the cities to agree not to harass each other by force of arms but to settle their differences by arbitration. He surveyed their land and established an equitable tribute, and converted all their governments into democracies11. And some may well have wondered why they thought of fighting in the first place.
Freedom, evidently, required definition, and unlike the Romans, the Greeks always had trouble with definitions. Freedom from what, or freedom for whom to do what? Later Greeks were typically to associate freedom with democracy. One hundred and eighty years later the same Ionians, in the city of Miletus, were to record in their annals that in the year of the stephanophore Hippomachus "the city was made free and autonomous by Antigonus (the one of Alexander's Successors who then controlled Asia Minor) and the democracy was restored".12 Was it not better to be free and democratic under the Persians or Antigonus than to be free of outside control under a local tyrant? The story of the Ionian Revolt, with its seemingly happy if paradoxical ending, is told by the same Herodotus who earlier in his narrative (not much earlier) had reported the effect of freedom upon Athens. Cleisthenes had established the Athenian de-mocracy in something like its final and classical form, and Athens defeated its neighbors in war, as soon it was to play a major role in the repulse of Persia. And Herodotus moralizes13: "It is plain enough that freedom is an excellent thing; since even the Athenians, who, while they continued under the rule of tyrants, were not a whit more valiant than any of their neighbors, no sooner
11 Herodotus, VI, 42-43.
12 G. К a w e г a u, A. R e h m, Das Delphinion in Milet (1914; cited hereafter as I. Milet), 259, No. 123, 1-3: ή πόλις έλευθέρα καΐ αυτόνομος έγένετο ύπό 'Αντιγόνου και ή δημοκρατία άπεδόθη. The sentiment is common. Cf. e.g. SIG 323 (308 B.C.), from Eretria.
GREEK LIBERTY 33 shook off the yoke than they became decidedly the first of all. They let them-selves he beaten when they worked for a master, but so soon as they got their freedom, each man was eager to do the best he could for himself".
Similarly, later in the century, Thucydides was to have Pericles find in Athens' democracy the source of its strength14: "Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighboring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favors the many in stead of the few; that is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if to social standing, advancement
in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition. The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbor for doing what he likes. But all this ease does not make us lawless as citizens. Against this, fear is our chief safeguard, teaching us to obey the magistrates and the laws". And later: "We cultivate refinement without extravagance and knowledge without ef-feminacy; wealth we employ more for use than for show and place the real disgrace of poverty not in owning to the fact but in declining the struggle against it. Our public men have, besides politics, their private affairs to attend to, and our ordinary citizens, though occupied with the pursuits of industry, are still fair judges of public matters. For unlike any other nation, regarding him who takes no part in these duties not as unambitious but as useless, we Athenians are able to judge at all events if we cannot originate".
This was the so-called government of universal participation, wherein a quar-ter or a third of the citizens worked in rotation for the city, ruling and being rided by turns ; and at the end of the Funeral Oration15, from which I have been quoting, Pericles directs the citizens, if their age permits it, to return home and beget more sons to replace those killed in the war. Athens was free and democratic but obedient to the laws and to the magistrates. As Demaratus, the exiled king of Sparta who was with Xerxes, said to the Great King16: "When the Lacedaemonians fight in a body, they are the bravest of all. For though they be freemen, they are not in all respects free. Law is the master whom they own, and this master they fear more than thy subjects fear thee". In the same way, Polybius could claim that freedom was best preserved under the mixed but clearly aristocratic constitution of the Roman Republic17, and Cassius 14 Thucydides, II, 37^40. This is the „Crawley Translation", which renders the Greek about as well as anything can except a paraphrase.
" Thucydides, II, 44. " Herodotus, VII, 104. " Polybius, VI, 11-18.
34 С. В. W E L L E S
Dio in his history1 8 m a k e Maecenas advise A u g u s t u s t h a t only u n d e r a m o n a r c h y do people h a v e a t r u e d e m o c r a c y a n d secure f r e e d o m .
E v i d e n t l y , t h e n , even on t h e p u r e l y political side, t h e p r o b l e m of f r e e d o m is n o t so simple, a n d i t is n a t u r a l l y m a d e worse w h e n p h i l o s o p h y e n t e r s ; a n d Greeks were a t t r a c t e d t o p h i l o s o p h y f u l l y as m u c h as t h e y w e r e t o f r e e d o m . I n s t i n c t i v e l y , in t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y , t h e people of P r i e n e w r o t e in a resolution in h o n o r of some f a i t h f u l guards1 9, " n o t h i n g m e a n s m o r e t o Greek people t h a n f r e e d o m " , b u t if y o u a n a l y z e d it, w a s f r e e d o m an a b s o l u t e good, s o m e t h i n g good in itself, or only a r e l a t i v e good, desirable for s o m e t h i n g else t h a n i t s e l f ? W a s it good for t h e b o d y or f o r t h e soul, for t h e i n d i v i d u a l or f o r t h e g r o u p ? W h y , as E u r i p i d e s w r o t e in t h e " S u p p l i a n t s2 0" , was f r e e d o m f o r t h e w e a k or t h e poor only p r e s e n t w h e n t h e r e were w r i t t e n l a w s ? I t was f r e e d o m w h e n t h e h e r a l d a n n o u n c e d in t h e a s s e m b l y : " W h o wishes t o c o m e f o r w a r d w i t h s a m e wise counsel t h e c i t y " ? B u t did f r e e d o m also r e q u i r e w i s d o m ? I n t h e " R e p u b l i c2 1" P l a t o c o m m e n t s t h a t a free m a n would only wish t o live in a democ-r a t i c city, b u t t h e n pdemoc-roceeds t o a democ-r g u e t h a t f democ-r e e d o m b democ-r i n g s w i t h itself a n in-s a t i a b l e greedinein-sin-s which leadin-s t o t y r a n n y a n d loin-sin-s of f r e e d o m , in a in-s t a t e a n d in t h e i n d i v i d u a l . T h e d e m o c r a t i c m a n leads a life w i t h o u t controls2 2. " S o m e t i m e s he is l a p p e d in drink a n d strains of t h e f l u t e ; t h e n he becomes a w a t e r - d r i n k e r a n d tries t o get t h i n ; t h e n he t a k e s a t u r n a t g y m n a s t i c ; s o m e t i m e s idling u n d neglecting e v e r y t h i n g , t h e n once m o r e t h e life of a philosopher. O f t e n h e is b u s y w i t h politics, a n d s t a r t s t o his feet a n d says a n d does w h a t e v e r comes i n t o his h e a d . A n d if he is e m u l o u s of a n y one who is a w a r r i o r , off he is in t h a t direction, or of m e n of business, once m o r e in t h a t . His life h a s n e i t h e r law n o r o r d e r a n d t h i s d i s t r a c t e d existence he t e r m s j o y a n d bliss a n d f r e e d o m " . A n d S o c r a t e s ' i n t e r l o c u t o r a g r e e s : „ H e is all l i b e r t y a n d e q u a l i t y " . W i t h his pleasures as w i t h his c o m p a n i o n s , one is as good as a n o t h e r , or seems so t o h i m a t least, h o w e v e r t h e y m a y look t o others. So a l m o s t in t h e lifetime of Pericles a n Old Oligarch2 3 h a d w r i t t e n of his n a t i v e A t h e n s : " W i t h t h e d e m o s is t h e g r e a t e s t ignorance a n d license a n d r a s c a l i t y . If a n y o n e n o t of t h e d e m o s chooses t o live in a d e m o c r a t i c c i t y r a t h e r t h a n in an oligarchic, i t is only t h a t he h a s decided on t h e life of a criminal a n d realized t h e r e he will b e least easily
18 L, 14-40. As two recent essays on the problem, of personal freedom in Greece I m a y
cite A. W. G o m m e , Concepts of Freedom (1962) 139-155, and J. A. O. L a r s e n, Classical
Philology, LVII (1962) 230-234.
18 F. Frhr. Hiller v o n G a e r t r i n g e n , Inschriften von Priene (1906) 19, 18-20: ώς ούθέν μείζον έστιν άνθρώποις "Ελλησιν της έλευθερίας. Much later Dio Chrysostom said the same thing (14, 1): φασί τήν έλευθερίαν μέγιστον των άγχθών, but he was thinking of slavery as the alternative, and not of political freedom.
20 Lines 433-438. 21 V I I I , 557 B .
22 V I I I , 561 D / E ; this is the J o w e t t translation. 23 Ps.-Xenophon, Ath. Pol., I , 5 - 8 .
G R E E K L I B E R T Y
discovered. These are n o t t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s u n d e r -which a c i t y will be b e s t g o v e r n e d , b u t t h e d e m o s does n o t wish t o b e enslaved in a well-governed city, b u t t o be free a n d t o r u l e " . This is a f a r cry f r o m t h e R o m a n concept of f r e e d o m .
F o r political f r e e d o m in Greek eyes is r e l a t i v e , as P l a t o r e m i n d s us in t h e Republic2 4: " F o r i n d e e d a n y city, h o w e v e r small, is in f a c t divided i n t o t w o , one t h e city of t h e poor, t h e o t h e r of t h e r i c h ; these are a t w a r w i t h each o t h e r " . If t h e b e s t people got p o w e r , t h e d e m o s was enslaved, as h a p p e n e d a t Miletus in t h e m i d - f i f t h c e n t u r y2 5. T h e issue m i g h t be less i m p o r t a n t b e t w e e n Greeks a n d b a r b a r i a n s . E u r i p i d e s , like P l a t o a n d Aristotle, insisted t h a t t h e b a r b a r i a n s were b y n a t u r e slaves, t h e Greeks b y n a t u r e free2 6. R u t w h a t of t h e issue b e t w e e n Greeks a n d G r e e k s ? T h e f r e e d o m of A t h e n s a n d t h e p o w e r of t h e d e m o c r a c y d e p e n d e d on t h e E m p i r e , a n d Pericles (as q u o t e d b y T h u c y d i d e s ) m a k e s no bones2 7 of i t : " F o r w h a t y o u hold is, t o s p e a k s o m e w h a t plainly, a t y r a n n y (in c o n t r a s t , u n d e r t h e s a m e circumstances, a R o m a n w o u l d h a v e r e g a r d e d t h e cities as " f r e e " ) ; t o t a k e it p e r h a p s w a s w r o n g , b u t t o l e t go of it is u n s a f e " . I n t h e w a r w i t h S p a r t a t h e y were t o keep a t i g h t rein on t h e allies. T h e A t h e -n i a -n s (as t h e a m b a s s a d o r E u p h e m u s e x p l a i -n e d a t C a m a r i -n a i-n Sicily)28 h a d d o n e n o t h i n g u n f a i r in r e d u c i n g t o s u b j e c t i o n t h e I o n i a n s a n d islanders, t h e i r kinsfolk w h o m t h e S y r a c u s a n s said t h e y h a d e n s l a v e d . T h e y h a d t a k e n t h e lead against Persia a n d h a d h a d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y , a n d " n o one c a n be quarrelled w i t h for p r o v i d i n g for his p r o p e r s a f e t y . F e a r m a k e s u s hold our empire in Hellas". Such a r g u m e n t s were t o p r o v e an e m b a r r a s s m e n t in t h e f o u r t h century2 9, b u t t h e y p o i n t t o t h e n a t u r e a n d t h e p e r v a s i v e n e s s of t h e p r o b l e m : A t h e n s ' f r e e d o m d e p e n d e d on t h e s u b j e c t i o n of o t h e r s , a n d in t h e case of Mytilene, which h a d r e v o l t e d a n d been recovered, it was d e b a t e d a t l e n g t h w h e t h e r even m e r c y was a d v a n t a g e o u s3 0.
So f r e e d o m involved a n o t h e r p r o b l e m also, a n d t h a t w a s j u s t i c e . Cleisthenes' s e t t l e m e n t of 507 w a s l a t e r r e g a r d e d as ισονομία, e q u a l i t y u n d e r law3 1, a n d a b o u t t h e m i d d l e of t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y I s o c r a t e s e q u a t e d d e m o c r a c y a n d e q u a l i t y , t h u s c o m b i n i n g t w o of t h e t h r e e slogans of t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n . P a r a -doxically he a r g u e d t h a t t h e g r e a t e s t l i b e r t y a n d d e m o c r a c y existed u n d e r t h e
24 IV, 422 E - 4 2 3 A.
25 Ps.-Xenophon, Ath. Pol., III, 11.
26 Iphigenia at Aulis, 1400-1401; Plato, Republic, V, 469 B/C; (G. R. M o r r o w , Plato's
Cretan City (1960) 150): Laws, VI, 777 C. Aristotle, Politics, I, 6, 18, 1255 a, 28-29, and earlier,
Isocrates, Panegyr. 181. It was the normal Greek point of view.
27 Thucydides, II, 63, 2.
28 Thucydides, VI, 82-83.
Notably Isocrates, Peace, 8 2 - 8 9 .
30 Thucydides, I I I , 36-50.
31 In the earliest reference, Herodotus (V, 78) calls it ίσηγορίη. Isocrates, Areopagiticus.
20, uses ισονομία; in 60, ίσότης. Unlike the Romans, the Greeks avoided techuical terms. Polybius even uses παρρησία in the same sense ( X X X , 31, 16).
36 С. В. WELLES
strict Spartan rule of law32, for as Aristotle was to point out33, equality did not consist in treating unequals equally, but this is slipery ground. What if a group or even one man is so manifestly superior as to have no even close equals? Thinking possibly of either Philip or Alexander of Macedon, Aristotle suggested that such a person should be accepted as a god and so by definition above human law34; he may therein have planted the seeds of the Hellenistic ruler cult, but the question would still remain open, by whom and how was any man's superiority to be judged? Was justice in practice to be merely, as Thrasymachus argued in the "Republic35", the interest of the stronger: anything which he could succeed in doing would be by definition just? When in 416 Athens decided to compel the independent island of Melos to join her empire as a tributary ally, Thucydides imagines the Athenian envoys to state a monstrous thing36: "Of the gods we believe, and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can." But no people, however logical, could long accept such moral nihilism. In the "Laws"37, Plato insisted that his contemplated city must be, internally as well as externally, free and harmonious and smart. Could not these principles be applied to the entire world of the Greek city states so that Greek would not enslave Greek, but all remain free?
It is true that there are two different, opposite, ways of winning freedom. One is that of being able to do whatever one wishes with no unpleasant conse-quences, and this method is certainly more intrinsically appealing, if not ne-cessarily easy. The other is to condition yourself freely to accept whatever happens, as a Christian's freedom consists in voluntary submission to the Will of God38, and this was the way of Socrates, who became in his heroic death the
32 Areopagiticus, 61.
33 Politics, III, 9, 8, 1280 a, 11-13; already noted by Isocrates, Nicocles, 14, and
Areo-pagiticus 21 (cf. N о г 1 i η 's note ad. loc.).
34 Politics, III, 13, 2, 1284a, 2-14. This remark of Aristotle regularly occupies a place in.
the enormous and ever increasing bibliography on the Ruler Cult, which in Hellenistic and Roman times was a regular attribute of monarchy. Aristotle states that if there is one or a number of persons outstanding in ability (διαφέρων κατ' αρετής ύπερβολήν), then he or they would be outside the body politic (οΰκέτι θετέον τούτους μέρος πόλεως). Such an one would be like a god (ώσπερ γαρ θεόν έν άνθρώποις εικός είναι τ0ν τοιούτον). Thus far he has not gone beyond the ordinary Greek outlook, which accepted extraordinary persons as gods, in more or less pure form (e.g., Isocrates, To Nicocles, 5; Philip, 137, 143). The discussion, however, occurs in connection with kingship, and the suspicion has always existed that he had Philip or Alexander jn mind. As it stands, however, it does not argue that a king deserved worship merely by virtue of being a king, as was believed later on.
« I, 343 В — 344 С. « V, 105, 2.
3' III, 701 D: ή νομοθετουμένη πόλις έλευθέρα τε έσται καΐ φίλη εαυτή και νουν ίξει. 39 So in II Gor. 3, 17; 6, 18; 8, 2. Among the enormous bibliography dealing with the relation of Christianity to Greek philosophy 1 may cite. I. L a n a , Rivista di Filologia, X X X I I I (1955), 1-28.
GREEK LIBERTY 37 model of the Stoic sage who alone could be really free, because he alone was indifferent to what might happen to him so long as he remained true to his own convictions. But this way required fortitude and was admired more than imitated. Socrates might insist that no evil could happen to a good man living or dead39, but this called for a definition of "evil" other than that to which men were accustomed. Socrates' example was not without influence in later generations40, on individuals first and then on states, but for the moment, in the fourth century, Greece tried something else.
The Freedom of the Greeks was a slogan which went back to the Persian Wars. "On, ye sons of Greeks, free your land, free your children, wives, the seats of your ancestral gods and the tombs of your ancestors; this is your supreme struggle", as the soldiers and sailors at Salamis shouted in Aeschylus' play41. Two generations later, this was the ultimatum of Sparta to Athens: "Let the Greeks go free"42. The destruction of Athens' walls in 404 was univer-sally hailed as the day of Greek freedom43, and when ten years later, disillusioned with the Spartan hegemony44, the Greek world set itself seriously to the problem, it was able to come a little further with it. Would not the renunciation of war help ? About the year 391 an Athenian statesman could plead with his country-men45: " D o not fail to consider this, that you are now fashioning a common peace and freedom for all the Greeks" if you accept the Spartan proposals. They did not, and it was hard to get Greeks to agree, but the new formula stuck.
Four year later, in desperation of finding a solution by themselves, the Greeks turned to the arbitriment of the King of Persia, and the sole major provision of the King's Peace46 was that the Greeks should all be free (with some excep-tions, of course), but the king also offered to guarantee the peace by military action. This foreshadowed the Roman solution later, although the king proved feckless. Nothing could have seemed more promising, but again there were problems. Did this agreed freedom obligate the cities not to change their govern-ments or to enter into voluntary associations? Sparta, as the strongest Greek military power, ruled that it did, and enforced accordingly, until in the winter of 377/6 Athens published a great decree of the assembly, preserved on a
mo-39 Apology, 41 C/D.
40 The old study of H. G о m ρ e r ζ, Die Lebensauffassung der griechischen Philosophen und das Ideal der inneren Freiheit (1904) is still of value. The phenomenon, is treated by everyone who deals with Cynics and Stoics.
41 The Persians, 402-405.
42 Thucydides, I, 139 3: τούς "Ελληνας αύτονόμους άφεϊτε. On the equivalence of the terms αύτονομία and έλευθερία cf. especially Isocrates, Panegyricus, 175.
43 Xenophon, Hellenica, II, ii, 23. 44 Cf. Isocrates, Peace, 67.
45 Andocides, On the Peace with Sparta, 1.
48 Xenophon, Hellenica, V, i, 31. For this and later agreements cf. Η. В e n g t s o n, Die Verträge der griechisch-römischen Welt, II (1962).
38 C . B . W E L L E S
n u m e n t a l stele4 7, inviting all of t h e Greeks (other t h a n t h o s e l e f t s u b j e c t s o f t h e G r e a k King) t o b e c o m e h e r allies so t h a t " t h e S p a r t a n s m a y leave t h e Greeks f r e e a n d a u t o n o m o u s a n d in peace, possessing t h e i r own l a n d in s e c u r i t y " a n d t h a t t h e K i n g ' s P e a c e m a y prevail. B e y o n d s p l i t t i n g t h e a d h e r e n t s t o t h e P e a c e i n t o t w o w a r r i n g c a m p s , t h i s p r o p o s a l of t h e A t h e n i a n s accomplished little, b u t t h e f o r m u l a r e m a i n e d alive, t o be e m p l o y e d b y P h i l i p of M a c e d o n in 338 a f t e r t h e b a t t l e of C h a e r o n e a .
T h e o a t h of t h e m e m b e r s of t h e L e a g u e of Corinth is p r e s e r v e d in p a r t4 8: " I shall abide b y t h e peace. I shall observe t h e a g r e e m e n t w i t h Philip. I shall n o t c a r r y a r m s against a n y of t h e signatories. I shall n o t s u b v e r t t h e kingship of P h i l i p or t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n s n o w existing in t h e s i g n a t o r i e s " . T h e m e m b e r s pledged t h e m s e l v e s t o enforce t h e t r e a t y a n d m a i n t a i n t h e peace b y j o i n t m i l i t a r y action u n d e r P h i l i p ' s c o m m a n d , a n d Greek f r e e d o m u n d e r t h e s t a t u s q u o seemed a s s u r e d ; b u t t w o of t h e m a j o r cities, A t h e n s a n d T h e b e s , r e g a r d e d this f r e e d o m as slavery4 9, a n d w h e n T h e b e s r e v o l t e d against P h i l i p ' s son Ale-x a n d e r t h r e e y e a r s l a t e r , it raised t h e slogan of t h e K i n g ' s P e a c e against him5 0.
E v e r y o n e was for peace a n d f r e e d o m , m i l i t a n t l y , b u t t h e y did n o t agree as t o h o w these w o r t h y o b j e c t i v e s were t o be a t t a i n e d , or e v e n as t o w h a t t h e y specifically were. D i d peace exclude a n y use of a r m e d force, or, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , did it r e q u i r e t h e use of a r m e d f o r c e ? D i d f r e e d o m exclude a n y associations or a g r e e m e n t s of f r e e cities, or a n y changes in g o v e r n m e n t or c o n s t i t u t i o n or even t h e recall or r e t u r n of political exiles ? F o r w h e n P l a t o spoke of every city being m a d e u p of t w o cities, one of t h e rich a n d one of t h e poor5 1, he m i g h t h a v e a d d e d t h a t t h e political leaders of one or t h e o t h e r w e r e likely t o be living in foreign p a r t s , p l o t t i n g . Did t h e f o r m u l a " P e a c e a n d Free-d o m " m e a n a c t u a l l y t h e rigiFree-d m a i n t e n a n c e of t h e s t a t u s quo, a n Free-d so actually,, as in Greece in t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , little of e i t h e r ?
A l e x a n d e r , m a s t e r of Greece in 335, a c t e d realistically w i t h o u t m u c h con-cern f o r w h a t would seem t o h a v e b e e n t h e spirit of t h e L e a g u e of C o r i n t h , a l t o u g h he d o u b t l e s s observed its l e t t e r . E x c e p t in defense of its i n t e g r i t y , he f o u g h t no m e m b e r a n d c h a n g e d no g o v e r n m e n t , b u t t h i s g a v e h i m occasion e n o u g h . A t h e n s s u b m i t t e d t o a m o d i f i e d d e m o c r a c y loyal t o Macedonia b u t
47 W . D i t t e n b e r g e r , Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, I , (1914) ( S / G ) , 147; M . N . T o d , Greek Historical Inscriptions, I I (1948) ( „ T o d " ) , 123, 9 - 1 2 .
48 S I G 260; T o d 177. T h i s is a c o n s t a n t l y r e c u r r i n g t h e m e i n t h e speeches of I s o c r a t e s , a n d t h e m a t t e r has been o f t e n discussed. I t is n o t necessary t o deai w i t h i t here.
49 So L y c u r g u s as q u o t e d i n D i o d o r u s , X V I , 88, 2. I t is s t a t e d as a f a c t in Dionysius of H a l i c a r n a s s u s , Roman Antiquities, I I , 17, 2. T h e A t h e n i a n s d i d n o t a c t a t t h e m o m e n t enslaved, or a n g r y (Diodorus, X V I , 92, 2).
50 D i o d o r u s , X V I I , 9, 5; P l u t a r c h , Life of Alexander, 11, 4.
G R E E K L I B E R T Y 39
k e p t her -walls, a r m y , a n d f l e e t . T h e b e s w a s d e s t r o y e d as a c i t y , a l t h o u g h still occupied b y T h e b a n s , a n d h e r citadel w a s held b y a Macedonian garrison. Pellene in Achaea5 2, as a p p a r e n t l y o t h e r cities in t h e Peloponnese, was held for A l e x a n d e r b y a t y r a n t . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e A n a t o l i a n cities a n d islands l i b e r a t e d f r o m t h e P e r s i a n s in 334 were placed u n d e r democracies a n d were called free, a l t h o u g h t h e y were n o t necessarily t a k e n i n t o t h e League of Corinth a n d p r o b a b l y c o n t r i b u t e d t r o o p s a n d m o n e y t o his e x p e d i t i o n , j u s t as t h e y also were placed u n d e r obligations. A m o n g o t h e r s . I l i u m was a d o r n e d w i t h new buildings5 3, P r i e n e received a c o n t r i b u t i o n for t h e A t h e n a temple5 4, a n d a t Miletus A l e x a n d e r t o o k over t h e f u n c t i o n of s t e p h a n e p h o r e or chief priest5 5. A n d T h e o p o m p u s , in w r i t i n g t o Alexander5 6, r e f e r r e d t o t h e Creeks killed in t h e b a t t l e of I p s u s as h a v i n g died "in behalf of y o u r kingship a n d t h e f r e e d o m of t h e Greeks". D u r i n g t h e Asiatic c a m p a i g n , A l e x a n d e r r e g u l a r l y sent b a c k
" P a u s a n i a s , V I I , 27, 7. T h e d a t e is d i s p u t e d ; cf. for e x a m p l e Η . В e r ν e, Das Alexan-derreich auf prosopographischer Grundlage (1926) I, 243; G. G l o t z , P . R o u s s e l , R . С о h e η . Histoire Grecque, I V , 1 (1938) 191.
53 S t r a b o , X I I I , 1, 26 (593) says t h a t i t received t h e d e s i g n a t i o n of a π ό λ ι ς . F o r S m y r n a cf. P l i n y , Nat. Hist., V , 31, 118; P a u s a n i a s , V I I , 5, 1 ; В e r ν e, I , 296.
5 1 T o d 184.
55 I. Milet 122, 81 : 'Αλέξανδρος Φ ι λ ί π π ο υ . All m o d e r n h i s t o r i a n s of A l e x a n d e r h a v e
consi-dered his t r e a t m e n t of a n d a t t i t u d e t o t h e A n a t o l i a n cities, b u t serious s t u d y of t h e p r o b l e m of t h e i r legal a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e position began w i t h t h e p a p e r of Ε . В i с к e r m a η n-Revue des Etudes Grecques, X L V I I , (1934), 346-374, who a r g u e d t h a t t h e y were t r e a t e d like o t h e r conquered peoples, according t o t h e wishes of t h e c o n q u e r o r . T h e y were n o t t a k e n i n t o t h e League of Corinth or f o r m a l l y a d o p t e d as allies. H i s p r o p o s a l has led to a n active discussion: A. H e u s s, Staat und Herrscher des Hellenismus (1937); V. E h r e η b e r g, Alexander and the Greeks, (1938) 1 - 5 1 ; Ε . В i к e r m a η, Revue des Etudes Anciennes, X L I I (1940) 2 5 - 3 5 ; W . W . T a r n , Alexander the Great (1948) I I , 199-232; А. В. R a η о w i t s с h, Der Hellenis-mus und seine geschichtliche Rolle (1958; G e r m a n t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e 1948 R u s s i a n edition), 3 8 - 4 5 ; G. T i b i l e t t i , Athenaeum, X X X I I (1954) 1 - 2 2 . I t c a n h a r d l y be claimed t h a t a n y p o s i t i v e a g r e e m e n t h a s come of t h i s , a n d I s u s p e c t t h a t p a r t of t h e t r o u b l e is t h e elasticity of t h e Greek concept of f r e e d o m . T h e cities were c e r t a i n l y „ f r e e " , or m o s t of t h e m , b u t t h e m e a n i n g of t h e t e r m v a r i e d w i t h c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d t h e p o i n t of view. I n one p o i n t , however, I believe t h a t T a r n has been misleading. O n p a g e 231 be s t a t e s : „ t h e cities of t h e League h a d to, a n d d i d , f u r n i s h c o n t i n g e n t s of troops for t h e w a r , while t h e cities of Asia Minor f u r n i s h e d no t r o o p s " . So f a r as I k n o w , t h e r e is no evidence t h a t t h e y did n o t , a n d t h e p r e s u m p t i o n m u s t be t h e reverse. N o t only were r e - i n f o r c e m e n t s regularly f o r w a r d e d t o A l e x a n d e r b y t h e s a t r a p s i n Asia Minor (Berve, I , 176-185), a n d t h e m o s t desirable of these would c e r t a i n l y h a v e been u r b a n a n d Hellenized, if n o t specifically Greek, b u t t h e presence of A n a t o l i a n Greeks in t h e service of t h e Successors c a n be b e s t e x p l a i n e d on occasion as t h e result of r e c r u i t m e n t u n d e r A l e x a n d e r . N o t a b l e i n t h i s r e g a r d a r e t h e m e n f r o m t h e t i n y Aeolic t o w n of T e m n u s in t h e garrison of E l e p h -a n t i n e i n u p p e r E g y p t u n d e r t h e f i r s t P t o l e m y (O. R u b e n s o h n , Eleph-antine-P-apyri, 1907, nos. 1 a n d 2). I f i n d it d i f f i c u l t t o t h i n k of so m a n y as h a v i n g been recruited b y P t o l e m y himself, lacking a n y political control of his own over t h a t a r e a . T h e c o m p e t i t i o n for soldiers was i n t e n s e a t t h a t t i m e , a n d t h e sources of supply were c a r e f u l l y g u a r d e d .
40 С. В. W E L L E S
d e d i c a t i o n s t o t h e Greek t e m p l e s f r o m t h e spoils of w a r , a n d r e t u r n e d t o A t h e n s t h e s t a t u e s of t h e t y r a n n i c i d e s H a r m o d i u s a n d Aristogeiton which X e r x e s h a d r e m o v e d t o Susa5 7. W i t h all t h i s t h e Greeks h a d little specific cause t o c o m p l a i n , a l t h o u g h m a n y were n o t h a p p y .
T h e n in 324, a y e a r b e f o r e his d e a t h , A l e x a n d e r t o o k t w o m e a s u r e s which t h r e w t h e Greek world i n t o a t u r m o i l . Safely b a c k f r o m t h e I n d u s c a m p a i g n a n d m a s t e r of t h e P e r s i a n E m p i r e , A l e x a n d e r sent w o r d t o t h e Greek cities t o worship h i m as a god a n d t o r e s t o r e t h e i r political exiles58. To a n c i e n t s a n d t o m o d e r n s , one of t h e s e m e a s u r e s seems r e a s o n a b l e a n d t h e o t h e r n o t , b u t in a precisely r e v e r s e d sense. E v e n P a u s a n i a s , t h e Greek B a e d e k e r , w r i t i n g u n d e r t h e E m p e r o r A n t o n i n u s Pius, w h o f o u n d it h a n d t o t h i n k t h a t Heracles h a d b u d t a t e m p l e a n d i n v e s t e d a priestess t o himself, f o u n d no d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h e idea of m e n b e c o m i n g or being gods, as s u c h ; he o b j e c t e d only b e c a u s e H e r a c l e s h e l p e d m e n r a t h e r t h a n m a d e t r o u b l e f o r t h e m , a n d e x e r y o n e k n e w t h a t he did n o t b e c o m e a god u n t i l his death5 9. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e r e t u r n of political exiles posed precisely t h e p r o b l e m s of which I s r a e l is now conscious: t h e i r p r o b a b l e u n f r i e n d l i n e s s a n d t h e d i f f i c i d t y of r e t u r n i n g t h e i r f o r m e r p r o p e r t y . This was t h e m e a s u r e which caused t h e Greeks t o revolt a f t e r A l e x a n d e r died, a l t h o u g h since A l e x a n d e r was n o t p o p u l a r , t h e r e was little e n t h u s i a s m f o r h o n o r i n g h i m w i t h deification6 0.
I t h a s b e e n claimed t h a t t h e Exiles Decree was a v i o l a t i o n of t h e c h a r t e r of t h e L e a g u e of Corinth, a n d t h a t t h e r e q u e s t for divine s t a t u s w a s designed t o p r o v i d e a quasi-legal basis f o r such i n t e r f e r e n c e in t h e i n t e r n a l affairs of t h e m e m b e r states6 1, b u t an analysis of b o t h m e a s u r e s seems t o m e t o r e f u t e this claim6 2. T h e Exiles Decree w a s p r o m u l g a t e d f i r s t in A l e x a n d e r ' s h e a d -q u a r t e r s , in Susa in t h e l a t e shring of 32463. A special messenger w a s sent t o t h e O l y m p i c G a m e s t o m a k e p u b l i c p r o c l a m a t i o n t h a t while A l e x a n d e r h a d n o t b e e n responsible for t h e i r exile, he w o u l d be responsible f o r t h e i r r e t u r n .
57 References i n G 1 o t z-R o u s s e 1-C о h e n , 105.
58 References i n В e r ν e, I, 96 f. ; G 1 o t zR o u s s e 1C о h e n , 217 f. ; C. A. R o b i n -s o n , J r . , The Hi-story of Alexander the Great, I I (1963) 79 f.
6» I X , x x v i i , 6 - 8 .
60 T h e evidence is given b y Chr. H a b i c h t , Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte (1956) 28-36. The religious or o t h e r significance of t h i s has been m u c h discussed, b u t does n o t concern us now. I h a v e outlined m y own view i n t h e Propyläen-Weltgeschichte, I I I (1962) 546-549. 61 T h e r e is a f u l l discussion of t h e p r o b l e m i n T a r n (note 53 above), who r e j e c t s t h e associa-t i o n . Cf. also U . W i l c k e n , Alexander der Grosse (1931) 1 9 6 - 2 0 2 ; G 1 o associa-t z-R o u s s e 1-C o h e n , 217; P . 1-C l o c h é , Alexandre le Grand (1947) 1 9 0 - 1 0 2 ; F r . S c h a c h e r m e y r , Alexander der Grosse (1949) 433-438. I t is, of course, possible a n d necessary t o cite only a few of t h e A l e x a n d e r historians. These are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .
82 So n o t a b l y W i l c k e n , loc. cit.
63 So Chr. H a b i c h t , Athenische Mittheilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, L X X I I (1957) 168. B i c k e r m a n h a d argued t h a t t h e decision was t a k e n earlier (Revue des Etudes Anciennes, X L I I (1940) 34), a n d t h i s is b y no m e a n s impossible.
G R E E K L I B E R T Y 41
This proposed was i n c o r p o r a t e d in a collection of έπιτάγματα dealing w i t h v a r i o u s m a t h e r s a n d t h e n6 4 p r e s u m a b l y — f o r t h i s is t h e only s t e p which is n o t specifically a t t e s t e d — l e t t e r s were sent t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l cities concerned, in-f o r m i n g t h e m or A l e x a n d e r ' s p l a n a n d i n v i t i n g t h e m t o p u t it i n t o ein-fin-fect. A t all events, t h e r e q u e s t f o r worship, a b o u t w h i c h we are less well i n f o r m e d , was h a n d l e d in t h i s w a y , a n d t h e p r o c e d u r e b e c a m e s t a n d a r d in t h e Hellenistic p e r i o d : t h e k i n g did n o t o r d e r b u t r e c o m m e n d e d ( " W e t h i n k it best")6 5. T h e cities m a y h a v e b e e n u n a b l e t o r e f u s e , b u t t h e m e a s u r e as a d o p t e d was an a u t o -n o m o u s act of t h e c i t y g o v e r -n m e -n t q u i t e u-nlike t h e c o m p l i a -n c e of a civitas libera w i t h R o m a n orders.
W h e t h e r or t o w h a t e x t e n t it was p r o p e r , desirable, or necessary for Alexan-der t o h a v e a cult in t h e Greek cities m a y be l e f t m o o t . A l e x a n d e r m a y h a v e died before a n y could be set up6 6 b u t such existed c o m m o n l y f o r his successors, t h e Hellenistic k i n g s ; a n d no case is k n o w n w h e r e i t served a n y political p u r p o -se67. As m a t t e r of f a c t , t h e f i r s t c e r t a i n i n s t a n c e of such a cult is t h a t of P t o l e m y , called t h e " S a v i o r " , a t Rhodes6 8, a n d t h a t p o w e r f u l m e r c h a n t city n o t a b l y preserved its f r e e d o m in f a c t as well as in f o r m . On t h e o t h e r h a n d , if t h e Greek cities were t o e n j o y peace as well as f r e e d o m , t h e p r o b l e m of t h e exiles was one which h a d t o be solved. T h e r e were t w e n t y t h o u s a n d of t i e m a t O l y m p i a t o h e a r A l e x a n d e r ' s p r o c l a m a t i o n6 9, a n d m a n y t h o u s a n d m o r e were serving w i t h A l e x a n d e r or otherwise t r y i n g t o m a k e a living as m e r c e n a r y soldiers. Cape T a e n a r u m a t t h e s o u t h e r n t i p of Laconia was t h e i r place of assembly a n d of hire, a n d as iron of itself d r a w s t h e m a n , so t h e existence of b a n d s of u n e m p l o y e d mercenaries was a n i n v i t a t i o n t o a n y a d v e n t u r e r w i t h m o n e y t o t r y his h a n d a t w a r . I n some cases t h e s e exiles included m o s t of a c i t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n , as a t
61 H y p e r e i d e s , Y , col. 18.
65 Cf. t h e examples in m y Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period (1934) e.g. no. 1, 6 5 : κ α λ ώ ς δή μοι δ ο κ ε ϊ ε / ε ι ν . S u c h v e r b s as κρίνομεν (ib. 36, 10) occur r a t h e r i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e m e t t e r s of an i n t e r n a l c h a r a c t e r .
68 T h i s is t h e u s u a l opinion a n d it has chronology on its side. If t h e cities were a p p r o -ached i n t h e m a t t e r only in t h e l a t e s u m m e r or a u t u m n of 324, it m a y well h a v e t a k e n t h e following w i n t e r to decide w h a t , if a n y t h i n g , to do a b o u t it. A n u m b e r of cities agreed t o recognize Alexander as a god, a l t h o u g h t h e r e was opposition a n d discussion, b u t w h a t was called for w a s a cult place a n d a c u l t ; a n d s u c h m a t t e r s could n o t be h a n d l e d over-night. P r o b a b l y l i t t l e positive h a d been done b y t h e s u m m e r of 323, w h e n word c a m e of A l e x a n d e r ' s d e a t h , a n d t h e r e a f t e r Greece was i n revolt. T h e only reference t o a t e m p l e k n o w n t o m e is t h e one m e n t i o n e d in an a n e c d o t e of L y c u r g u s told b y P l u t a r c h ( M o r a l i n , 842 D). W h e n t h e y were „ p r o c l a i m i n g " (άνχγορευόντων) Alexander t o be a god a t A t h e n s , L y c u r g u s c o m m e n t e d : „ W h a t k i n d of a god would t h a t be, w h e n those who come o u t of his t e m p l e h a v e t o be p u r i f i e d " (ou το ιερόν έξιόντας δεήσει*. περιρραίνεσΟαι). T h i s does n o t m e a n , of course, t h a t t h i s t e m p l e h a d a l r e a d y been erected, b u t it was a t t h e least i n p r o s p e c t a n d p a r t of t h e proposal.
67 T a r n (page 372) says p r o p e r l y , w h y should i t h a v e b e e n m e n t i o n e d even if it e x i s t e d ? 68 D i o d o r u s , X X , 100, 3/4; H a b i c h t , Gottmenschentum, 109 f.
42 С. В. W E L L E S
S a m o s w h i c h t h e A t h e n i a n s h a d reoccupied w i t h t h e i r own people7 0. J u s t i c e m i g h t call for t h e i r r e t u r n t o t h e i r homes, b u t e v e r y w h e r e t h e s e c u r i t y of t h e Greeks d e m a n d e d t h e end of a d a n g e r o u s s i t u a t i o n . A l e x a n d e r ' s proposal h a d only a l i m i t e d success, b u t it f o r e s h a d o w e d t h e w a y in which (on q u i t e d i f f e r e n t t h e o r e t i c a l bases) t h e kings a n d t h e R o m a n emperors a f t e r t h e m m i g h t deal w i t h u r g e n t p r o b l e m s while still leaving t h e cities free a n d a u t o n o m o u s .
A l e x a n d e r ' s p r e m a t u r e d e a t h was followed b y f o r t y y e a r s of struggle before t h e s e p a r a t e p a r t s of his k i n g d o m a s s u m e d an a p p r o a c h t o s t a b i l i t y as s e p a r a t e s t a t e s . T h e leaders of t h e struggle a n d t h e e v e n t u a l f o u n d e r s of n e w royal d y n a -sties were t h e Macedonian generals, b u t t h e a g e n t s of t h e struggle were t h e M a c e d o n i a n s a n d especially t h e Greeks in t h e i r service, a n d t h e Greek cities b e c a m e v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t , as b a s e s a n d as t h e source of m e n a n d money). I t was a t u r b u l e n t a n d t r y i n g t i m e for t h e cities, b u t i n e v i t a b l y a g a i n t h e slogan of t h e F r e e d o m of t h e Greeks was raised as a w e a p o n of p r o p a g a n d a . I n 315 A n t i g o n u s h a d t h i s f o r m a l l y v o t e d b y his soldiers as a p a r t of t h e i r p r o g r a m a t a t i m e w h e n m o s t of t h e cities w e r e controlled b y his rivals7 1, a n d claimed credit f o u r y e a r s l a t e r for h a v i n g w r i t t e n t h i s principle i n t o a t r e a t y w i t h t h e m . As he w r o t e t o t h e city of Scepsis in t h e T r o a d7 2; " P e a c e is m a d e . W e h a v e provi-d e provi-d in t h e t r e a t y t h a t all t h e Greeks are t o swear t o aiprovi-d each o t h e r in preserving t h e i r f r e e d o m a n d a u t o n o m y " . This was an ingenious w a y of involving the Greeks in a conflict otherwise n e i t h e r welcome t o n o r i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e m , b u t P t o l e m y , s a t r a p of E g y p t , t u r n e d t h i s provision i n t o a casus belli against Anti-gonus t h e following year7 3. A n t i g o n u s ' s son D e m e t r i u s Poliorcetes f r e e d A t h e n s f r o m Cassander in 307 a n d r e s t o r e d its democracy7 4, a n d t w o y e a r s l a t e r u n d e r -t o o k a s p e c -t a c u l a r a n d p r o -t r a c -t e d siege of his ally R h o d e s , n o -t -t o s u b y e r -t i-ts f r e e d o m , b u t t o compel it t o only t o be less f r i e n d l y t o P t o l e m y7 5. A city h a d t o be b o t h p o w e r f u l a n d l u c k y t o m a i n t a i n a policy of n e u t r a l i t y , a n d for m o s t cities i t was a question only of g e t t i n g on as well as possible w i t h t h e d o m i n a n t p o w e r , or possibly of p l a y i n g one off against a n o t h e r f o r f a v o r s . Miletus, „ f r e e d " b y A n t i g o n u s in 3 1 376, held for D e m e t r i u s u n t i l 2 9 577 in spite of t h e d e a t h of his f a t h e r a n d t h e loss of his Asiatic empire in 301, b u t t h e n a c c e p t e d L y s i m a -chus, only t o s h i f t b a c k t o D e m e t r i u s in 287 in his l a s t d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t a t
70 SIG 312 a n d especially inscriptions 1 a n d 2 published b y H a b i c h t , Athenische
Mit-teilungen, L X X I I (1957), 154-169.
71 D i o d o r u s , X I X , 61, 3. A n t i g o n u s was only i m i t a t i n g P h i l i p I I I a n d his r e g e n t P o l y p e r c h o n : D i o d o r u s , X V I I I , 56. H e w a s p r o m p t l y f o l l o w e d b y P t o l e m y (ibid- 62,1). 72 Royal Correspondence, 1, 51—56. 73 D i o d o r u s , X X , 19, 3. 74 P l u t a r c h , Life of Demetrius, 10, 1. 75 D i o d o r u s , X X , 81-82. 76 I. Milet, 123, 1 - 3 . 77 I. Milet, 123, 22: Δ η μ ή τ ρ ι ο ς ' Α ν τ ι γ ό ν ο υ ( u n d e r 295/4 B.C.).
G R E E K L I B E R T Y 43
r e c o v e r y , b u t7 8 f i v e y e a r s l a t e r a p p e a r s b o r r o w i n g m o n e y t o p a y L y s i m a c h u s a n i n d e m n i t y7 9. T w o y e a r s m o r e a n d Miletus b a s k e d in t h e f a v o r of D e m e t r i u s ' son-in-law, ally, a n d rival t h e Seleucid k i n g Antiochus.8 0 One m o r e y e a r a n d Miletus, still or again f r e e b u t d i f f e r e n t l y oriented, recorded a rich gift of terri-t o r y f r o m A n terri-t i o c h u s ' a r c h e n e m y , P terri-t o l e m y of E g y p terri-t8 1. I t called for some agility f o r t h e cities t o m a i n t a i n t h e i r f r e e d o m in t h e early Hellenistic period, b u t it w a s possible.
T h e h i s t o r y of t h e Greek cities t h r o u g h t h e r e m a i n i n g t w o h u n d r e d a n d f i f t y y e a r s of Hellenism a n d on i n t o t h e R o m a n E m p i r e is a rich a n d c o m p l e x one, o f t e n vividly d o c u m e n t e d b y public d o c u m e n t s inscribed on stones which h a v e s u r v i v e d t o us a n d s o m e t i m e s also b y P o l y b i u s a n d o t h e r c o n t e m p o r a r y h i s t o r i a n s whose w o r k s h a v e s u r v i v e d in quotation8 2, b u t t h e principles establis-h e d in t establis-h e t i m e of A l e x a n d e r a n d t establis-h e Successors r e m a i n e d f i r m . P r a c t i c e v a r i e d , i n e v i t a b l y , b u t f r e e d o m , a u t o n o m y , a n d d e m o c r a c y were a c c e p t e d as essential a t t r i l u t e of t h e c i t y , h o w e v e r t h e y m i g h t s o m e t i m e s seem t o be in disaccord w i t h t h e a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n . F e w cities could h o p e t o go it a l o n e : A t h e n s , R h o d e s , Cyzicus, B y z a n t i u m , H e r a c l e i a . I n Greece itself, w h e r e Macedonia did n o t r u l e t h e cities c o m b i n e d in f e d e r a l leagues a n d pooled t h e i r resources in order t o s u r v i v e , b u t this delegation of sovereignty was n o t held t o involve loss of free-d o m . I n Asia a n free-d in A f r i c a t h e cities were royal allies or even resifree-dences, b u t still technically f r e e a n d a u t o n o m o u s8 3.
78 Royal Correspondence, 5. Cf. m y c o m m e n t s , Propyläen-Weltgeschichte, I I I , 449.
79 I. Milet, 138. T h e m o n e y was borrowed f r o m Cnidus ( 6 - 7 : ών δει άποδουναι ή μ δ ς
βασι-λ ε ΐ Λ υ σ ι μ ά χ ω ι .
80 I. Milet, 123, 37: Ά ν τ ί ο χ ο ς Σελεύκου.
81 I. Milet, 123, 3 8 - 4 0 : εδόθη ή χ ώ ρ α τ ω ι δ ή μ ω ι ΰπό του βασιλέως Π τ ο λ ε μ α ί ο υ . T h e
expression „ t h e t e r r i t o r y " is o d d , for it can h a r d l y m e a n t h e e n t i r e city t e r r i t o r y . A n y w a y , t h i s would n o t be a „ g i f t " (εδόθη) b u t a „ r e t u r n " (άπεδόθη). A n d y e t t h e χ ώ ρ α was n o t a b l e e n o u g h t o need no f u r t h e r d e f i n i t i o n .
82 The usage of t h e i n s c r i p t i o n s is m o r e d i f f i c u l t t o check, b u t t h e n a r r a t i v e of P o l y b i u s f u r n i s h e s a c o m m e n t a r y on his usage. Generally speaking, he r e g a r d s a c i t y or c o m m u n i t y as n o t free w h e n it is garrisoned or s u b j e c t t o a king. So i n X V , 24, 2, Thasos would n o t be free if it were t u r n e d over (παραδοϋναι) .to P h i l i p , even t h o u g h he left t h e T h a s i a n s άφρουρήτους, αφορολογήτου?, άνεπισταθμεύτους, νόμοις χρήσθαι τ ο ι ς ιδίοις; b u t these are otherwise t h e n o r m a l a t t r i b u t e s of a f r e e c i t y . H e believes t h a t t h e Macedonians a t t h e end of t h e monarchy-were μεταλαβόντες από δουλείας ομολογουμένως ελευθερίαν, a n d is puzzled a n d i n d i g n a n t t h a t t h e y did n o t like it ( X X X V I , 17, 13). S p a r t a was free w i t h t h e d e a t h of N a b i s ( X X I , 1, 4). O n t h e other h a n d , t h e L y c i a n cities given t o R h o d e s έν δωρεά were n o t free, a l t h o u g h E u m e n e s t h o u g h t t h a t t h e y would be if t h e y b e c a m e his allies ( X X I , 19-23). T h e r e m a y be a n e l e m e n t of R o m a n t h i n k i n g here, especially i n t h e a t t i t u d e t o w a r d kings, b u t t h e basic concept is G r e e k , f l u i d r a t h e r t h a n technical, p r a c t i c a l r a t h e r t h a n legal.
83 T h e best a n d f u l l e s t s y s t e m a t i c account of t h e cities is given b y Α . Η . M. J o n e s i n h i s Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces (1937) a n d The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian (1940). Much u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n is given b y Ε . В i к e r m a n , Institutions des Séleucides (1938) 141-145, a n d V. E h r e n b e r g , The Greek State (1960) 191-205. B u t each i n s t a n c e h a s i t s 4 ·
44 С. В. WELLES
In the period of Roman intervention, the Freedom of the Greeks again appears as a political formula, mainly employed by Rome against the kings84, and in 196 the Roman general Flamininus, victorious over Philip V of Macedon, received a huge ovation when he proclaimed at the Isthmian Games that Philip's former Greek allies would be restored to freedom, neither garrisoned nor taxed85. It is true that they were largely, in the sequal, given over to various Greek allies of the Romans, so that their absolute freedom existed no more after than it had before86. In the same way a few years later the Romans were to demand own evidence and its own problems, and it is hard to generalize. It must be remembered that Isocrates has seen no difficulty in this relation of city and king (Philip, 122, 154).
84 As early as 229, in the operations against Teuta, Rome took Corcyra and Epidamuus into her fides and gave them her friendship, which involved recognition of them as civitates liberae (Polybius, II, 11), and the Peace of Phoenice, which Philip was in 200 accused of breaking, must have involved recognition of the freedom of the parties, although the slogan itself does not appear in our sources. The Roman demand on Philip was that he refrain from making war on any of the Greeks (XVI, 34, 3), but this was quickly expanded into the order to vacate (i.e. liberate) Greece altogether (XVII, 1, 13; 11, 11). Certainly none of the Greeks who then gladly accepted Roman help realized that Rome was moving in as a guide and protector to stay.
85 The dramatic story in Polybius, XVIII, 44-46, is repeated with only slight changes in Livy, X X X I I I , 30-33. The basic document was a senatus consultum providing that the other Greeks in Asia and Europe were to be free and autonomous (ελευθέρους ύπάρχειν και νόμοις Ιχρησθαι τοις ιδίοις; omnes Graecorum civitates, quae in Europa quaeque in Asia essent, libertatem ac suas haberent leges), while those in Greece subject to or garrisoned by Philip should be turned over to the Romans (τούς 8è ταττομένους ύττο Φίλιππον και τάς πόλεις τάς έμφρούρους; quae earum sub dicione Philippi fuissent, praesidia ex iis Philippus deduceret; this with an eye on King Antiochus), those in Asia and Thrace set free. The Aetolians objected that this neither satisfied their territorial claims nor was logical. Stirred by this last argument, Flamininus in his Isthmian proclamation specifically freed the former allies of Philip in Greece also (άφιάσιν ελευθέρους, άφρουρήτους, άφορολογήτους, νόμοις χρωμένους τοις πατρίοις; liberos, immunes, suis legibus esse). Livy's omission of the freedom from garrison may be accidental, but more likely due to the fact that he, as presumably also the Senate, was thinking in Roman constitutional terms. The Greek communities were to be civitates liberae et immunes, and the presence or absence of a Roman garrison was immaterial, a matter to be determined by the specific circumstances.
86 Some were freed, actually: Thessalians, Perrhaebians, Dolopians, Magnesians. On the other hand, the Phthiotic Achaeans (specifically freed in the proclamation) were not only not freed (in the Greek sense) but split, being given half to the Thessalians and half to the Aeto-lians. The Aetolians received also the Phocians and the Locrians, also specifically freed in the proclamation. In a similar way, the Achaeans received Corinth, and Eumenes almost got Oreus and Eretria, but missed on grounds rather of expediency than of principle. Pleuratus and Amy-nander, Roman allies, also were given Greek communities. In this (to our eye) illogical or even hypocritical procedure, both Greek and Roman political concepts acquiesced, but from different points of view. To the Greeks, freedom was a fluid notion, and the Phocians and Corinthians were certainly regarded as free by the Aetolians and Achaeans when they were compelled to join their respective Leagues. Similarly Eumenes would certainly have regarded Oreus and Eretria as free, if he had got them as allies. To the Romans, on the other hand, a civitas libera, obligated to guard the majestas of the Roman people, might logically be combined in whatever larger
GREEK LIBERTY 45 that Antiochus the Great grant Lysimacheia its freedom, only themselves after the war to turn it over to their ally Eumenes of Pergamum87. Perhaps we may see here one of the many instances where Roman legalism was being corrup-ted by Greek liberalism.
With the establishment of the Roman Empire, which we may date with Polybius to 146 B.C., the concept of έλευθερία and its counterpart, libertas, took on new meanings. Political freedom in the old sense was no longer possible88, but personal freedom within and without the city entered upon a new world of opportunity. The next hundred and fifteen years brought little to the Greek world but trouble and unhappiness, but even before Augustus a development had set in affecting the Greek city which was salutary and good. The cities became less exciting and less precarious, but as they came under the control of higher powers capable of preventing them from fighting each other89 they acquired internal and external peace without loss of the fealing, at least, of freedom and democracy; and that was what really counted, as the philosophers had pointed out long ago. Absolute freedom meant chaos, but real freedom meant order and obedience.
In the old, fiercely competitive world of the Greek city states, class conflict within and foreign war without was the rule if the individual, the faction, and the city was to be protected, satisfy its pride, and attain prosperity. It was a period of great intellectual, artistic, and moral productivity, but it was not an easy period to live in and required a sublimation of normal human values· In particular, the individual life or desires mattered little; Socrates insisted political groupings were desirable, for of course, strictly speaking, the Aetolians and the Achaeans were civitates liberae also (though they would have been shocked to know what Romans meant by the term). They could not so logically assign a civitas libera to a king, and it is not clear how they got around this difficulty.
Whether any of this is discussed by M. L e m о s s e in his article in Mnemosyne Perikles K. Bizoukides (Thessalonike, 1960, 123-135). I cannot say. I have not been able to see it. A Greek might also regard the release of a city from the control of a king (or a different king) as „freeing". So Isocrates, Philip, 64, 123, 129, 139; Peace, 42; etc.
87 Polybius, XVIII, 50; X X I , 45.
88 Plutarch comments (Moralia, 824 C) that there is still much for the πολιτικός to do. His major responsibility is to guard against civil strife, στάσις. Then Plutarch lists the „goods" of a city: ειρήνη, έλευθερία,, εύετηρία, 'εύανδρία, ομόνοια, and points out that the first in the list is taken care of automatically, while of the second the Greeks have as much as the rulers, οί κρατούντες, allow them, but the other three invite local concern. Dio Chrysostom also (XLIV, 10), while recognizing that τιμή, δόξα, and εύπορία χρημάτων come from the κρατούντες, comments that there still remain many things which the people of Prusa can do for them-selves.
89 When Nero „freed" the Greeks by removing them from the control of a provincial governor (a sentimental revival of the old slogan), they began quarreling, and Vespasian restored the province, remarking that they had forgotten how to be free. It was he, of course, who had for-gotten, if he ever knew, what freedom had meant earlier to the Greeks. (Pausanias, VII, 17, 4),
4 6 С. В. W E L L E S
on t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e i n d i v i d u a l m i n d a n d w a s e x e c u t e d . I t w a s m a g n i f i c e n t b u t it was h a r d l y tolerable, a n d it is little w o n d e r t h a t t h e Greeks of t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y should h a v e b e g u n searching f o r s o m e t h i n g m o r e c o m f o r t a b l e a n d m o r e secure. I t was a h a r d search. W h e t h e r or n o t t h e Greeks could h a v e w o r k e d t h i n g s o u t f o r t h e m s e l v e s , t h e y were n o t allowed t o do so. Macedonia a n d t h e n , in a m o r e t e r r i b l e a n d f i n a l w a y , R o m e p r o v i d e d t h e solution. T h e wider world of t h e Hellenistic k i n g d o m s a n d t h e R o m a n E m p i r e o p e n e d u p n e w areas of economic a n d social f r e e d o m u n d r e a m e d of or despised b e f o r e : t h e f r e e d o m of t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o m a k e his f o r t u n e a n d f i n d his h a p p i n e s s w h e r e a n d how he could. T h e c i t y lost none of its a p p e a l as a social a n d economic, religious a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l c e n t e r , a n d t h e Greek r e m a i n e d always in a n t i q u i t y a πολιτικον ζώον, a creature^ of t h e c i t y ; b u t as t h e m i l i t a n t a n d c o m p e t i t i v e struggle f o r existence lessened or was p r e v e n t e d b y a higher power, so t h e city b e c a m e s t a b l e a n d secure.
I n f o r m , little was changed9 0. T h e typical d e m o c r a t i c c o n s t i t u t i o n r e m a i n e d w i t h m a g i s t r a t e s , council, a n d assembly, a n d p r o v i d e d a s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r m u l a f o r rich a n d poor. T h e magistracies, m o r e a n d m o r e r a r e l y d e m a n d i n g m i l i t a r y c o m p e t e n c e , presided over t h i n g s civil a n d religious. T h e y h a n d l e d r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e sovereign, saw t o r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d j u s t i c e , a n d t o o k care of t h e c i t y ' s welfare, its schools a n d g y m n a s i a , food s u p p l y , a n d p u b l i c building. T a x e s were collected, b u t t h e m a g i s t r a t e s h a d a m p l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o d i s p l a y t h e i r generosity a n d r e a p an answering h a r v e s t of praise. T h e people in a s s e m b l y legislated a n d elected, b u t legislation involved less a n d less i m p o r t a n t t h i n g s . T h e r e was no p o i n t in electing a poor m a n t o an office which called for l a v i s h e x p e n d i t u r e . I n f o r m a n d c e r t a i n l y also in n a m e t h e y were democracies, b u t t h e cities were a c t u a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e rich, a t f i r s t f r o m necessity a n d t h e n u n d e r law.
This is t h e p a t t e r n of t h e older cities in Greece itself a n d i n Asia Minor. I n t h e E a s t t h e p i c t u r e is c o m p l i c a t e d b y t h e presence in t h e new f o u n d a t i o n s of Hellenistic a n d R o m a n d a t e of a large, o f t e n a p r e p o n d e r a n t n u m b e r of n o n - G r e e k o r i e n t a l s w i t h i n t h e city. W e are n o t well i n f o r m e d a b o u t a n y of these, a l t h o u g h occasionally, as in t h e case of T a r s u s , it is possible t o glimpse t h e process of g r a d u a l assimilation a n d stabilization which w e n t on t h e r e as elsewhere in a n a t m o s p h e r e of f r e e d o m a n d democracy9 1. D u r a - E u r o p o s h a s given us o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n , a l t h o u g h t h a t , as a M a c e d o n i a n r a t h e r t h a n a Greek city, m a y n o t be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . I t is, a t all e v e n t s , of i n t e r e s t t h a t in a c o n t r a c t d a t e d in t h e y e a r 254 of t h e Christian E r a , only t w o or t h r e e y e a r s b e f o r e its c a p t u r e a n d d e s t r u c t i o n b y t h e Persians, t h e c i t y displays t h e p r o u d titles of holy a n d
80 Best seen in the books of Jones cited above, note 83.
91 I have presented the evidence and m y interpretation in „Hellenistic Tarsus", Mélanges de l'Université Saint Joseph, X X X V I I I , (1962) 2 (offert au Père René Mouterde).
GREEK LIBERTY 47 inviolate and autonomous, granted by an Emperor92. What these meant practi-cally, if anything, is unimportant. They testify to the strength and persistence of a concept. They are a reminder that while in the later Greek world έλευθερία was largely confined to individual interests, its political sense and its original flexibility had not disappeared, even if, in fact, the concept of the Roman civitas libera had prevailed even in an age which was shortly to see the end of almost all freedom of any sort.
92 The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report V, Part Is The Parchments and Papyri
(1959) 166-169, No. 32, line 5. The best general account of Dura is still M. R o s t o v t z e f f , Dura-Europos and its Art (1938) although more is known in many respects. For the social pattern of the city see my „Population of Roman Dura", Studies in Roman Economic and Social History in Honor of Allan Chester Johnson, (1951) 251-274.
