No description available.

This thesis will contend that Polybius' stress on Achaean unity was related to his need to contrast how tyche and anacyclosis, the two vital supernatural forces that he believed influenced historical events, had influenced the Achaean system of polity detrimentally. Examining the rationale behind Aetolian intervention in the Peloponnese during the Hellenistic period, it will contend that the Aetolians and their allies in Elis and Sparta were engaged in a struggle for control over the Peloponnese against the Macedonians and their Arcadian allies, a situation the Romans exploited. During the Second Macedonian War Polybius presents the Achaean league and Rome acting as equals; this was related to his desire to show the eventual decline in Greece that allowed the Romans to gain control. In reality Flamininus exploited Megalopolitan fears over Aetolian and Spartan interests to ensure the Peloponnese remained stable during the Aetolian/Syrian War. Afterwards Polybius took the question of the Spartan exiles, a relatively unimportant question, and presented its resolution as the decisive turning point in the relationship between Rome and the Achaean league, Callicrates' speech in front of the senate marking the onset of the final stage of anacyclosis in Achaean democracy. This process continued in his portrayal of later events; Polybius was detained by the Romans because of his sympathy for Perseus during the Third Macedonian War; however he blamed Callicrates because at this point he wished to present the corruption and decline that was occurring in the Achaean league. This process ended with the destruction of Corinth in 146BC, where Polybius emphasises the madness and irrationality of the Achaean mob and leadership. This was to provide his readers with the consolation that their society would emerge renewed and strengthened at a time that the Roman Republic began its eventual decline through the resumption of anacyclosis.

The study of Greek colonisation is still dominated by Hellenocentric and Imperialist approaches. Furthermore, culture historical methodologies are still common. Studies often prioritise Imperialist readings of Greek literature, and even (as demonstrated here) restore fragments of Archilochos according to these assumptions. They also demonstrate a reified view of ethnicity, particularly in their adherence to the model of 'Hellenisation'. This thesis attacks the colonialist assumptions which pervade even the more theoretically sophisticated literature on the subject. Instead it attempts to provide a theoretically-informed account of the Greek settlement of Thrace, a region complicated by the presence of a divisive national frontier between Greece and Bulgaria. It rejects the Hellenocentric models and attempts to contextualise the first material evidence of Thracian contacts with Greeks. In so doing, thiss tudy demonstrates that first contacts with Greeks must be seen in the context of profound social (in which are embedded technological and economic) changes within Thrace which led to the active seeking out of exotic objects on the part of nascent elites. It does this through the media of studies on the adoption of iron, landscape, megaliths and burial in Early Iron Age Thrace, and a case study of burial, settlement and cult evidence from the island of Thasos. This thesistherefore has wider implications than just for the study of the Early Iron Age, or Greek 'colonisation' of this area. It demonstrates that the local social context is crucial to understanding the nature of the phenomenon of Greek colonisation. More than that, it demonstrates that the local context and local populations can no longer be seen as tabulae rasae for the imposition of Greek culture.

Memnon a écrit une histoire locale, celle de sa cité d’origine, Héraclée du Pont, colonie mégarienne située en mer Noire. Sa chronique est conservée en partie grâce aux fragments, plus ou moins consistants, résumés dans la Bibliothèque de Photius. Ce dernier nous a transmis seulement une partie de l’œuvre de Memnon, puisqu’il ne rapporte que les faits contenus dans les livres IX à XVI qui couvrent une période allant des années 60 du IIIème siècle aux années 40 du Ier siècle av. J.-C. avec, cependant, une grosse lacune entre le milieu du IIIème siècle et l’arrivée des Romains. Le texte a fait l’objet d’un commentaire historique détaillé qui met en lumière les incohérences du récit et les événements pour lesquels Memnon constitue notre seule source. Cette recherche se propose également de dégager la méthode historique de Memnon à travers l’étude des thématiques récurrentes dans le texte et l’analyse de l’ordre chronologique des événements. Il est évident que l’intervention de Photius a des incidences sur l’organisation chronologique initiée par Memnon mais il semble néanmoins que la méthode de l’historien d’Héraclée a, dès l’origine, dénaturé la chronologie des faits qu’il rapporte. De surcroît, l’analyse du texte a permis de dégager les objectifs de Memnon, lequel tente de raviver le passé glorieux d’Héraclée et de dénoncer les excès de la domination romaine, en particulier envers sa cité d’origine. L’auteur de l’Histoire d’Héraclée reste méconnu mais il me semble qu’il faut situer son activité littéraire dans la seconde moitié du IIème siècle de notre ère. / Memnon wrote a local history, the one of his native city, Heraclea Pontica, megarian colony located in the Black Sea. His chronicle is partially preserved thanks to fragments, more or less substantial, summarized in Photius’ Library. The latter passed on to us only a part of Memnon’s work, since he related only the facts contained in books IX to XVI, which cover a period from the 60’s of the third century to the 40’s of the first century BC., but with a big gap between the mid-third century to the arrival of the Romans. The text was the object of a detailed historical commentary which highlights the inconsistencies of the story and the events for which Memnon is our only source. My research also aims to identify the historical method of Memnon through the study of the recurring themes in the text and the analysis of the chronological order of events. It is obvious that Photius’ intervention has incidences on the chronological organization initiated by Memnon, nevertheless it seems that the method of the historian of Heraclea has distorted from the start the chronology of events he related. Furthermore, analysis of the text allowed to identify the objectives of Memnon who tries to revive the glorious past of Heraclea and to denounce the excesses of the Roman rule, especially to his city of origin. The author of the History of Heraclea remains unknown but it seems to me that his literary activity should be placed in the second half of the second century AD.