Ioanna Kralli

Acknowledging the value of past scholarship on diplomacy in ancient Greece L. Piccirilli sets as his target μrst, the illumination of certain characteristics of ancient Greek ambassadors, and secondly, the analysis of the language of diplomacy, or, to be more speciμc, the arguments and common themes recurring in the speeches of envoys, since in his view ‘l’arma vincente’ of diplomacy in antiquity was the art of persuasion. Accordingly, the monograph is divided into two parts: Part I comprises eleven sections, while Part II contains fourteen. Part I very sensibly starts by stressing the di¶erences in status and authority between ancient envoys and the ambassadors of our time: most notably, that being a presbys in antiquity was not an actual o ̧ce and that he did not enjoy diplomatic immunity. There follows a survey of a series of topics (in the following order): the di¶erences between the various words denoting an envoy (keryx, angelos, presbys); physical appearance and its relationship with authority; age as a prerequisite, rightly seen by P. in the light of the prevailing ideology. Arguing against a recent article, P. discusses the vexed term tritos autos (and the like) agreeing with K. J. Dover (‘Dekatos autos’, JHS 80 [1960], 61–77) that it does not indicate prominence over one’s colleagues and certainly not possession of the generalship. Another theme is garments and (in P.’s interesting view) the apotropaic function of purple. With regard to the envoys’ duties, he cites numerous violations of the time necessary for completion of a mission, as well as notorious cases of misconduct. The ambassadors’ status in their own state, accusations, and rewards form another thread. Referring to the factors determining the election of an envoy, P. emphasizes the amicable relations (guest-friendship mostly) with citizens of the receiving state and adds bilingualism as an ulterior motive lying behind the election of an envoy to Persia. P. gives a new dimension to the mission of Alexander I of Macedon to Athens, on behalf of Xerxes and Mardonios, presenting it as an example of the limitations encountered by an envoy when on a double mandate. The μnal and lengthiest section of Part I, on deception, highlights the point that cunning was instrumental for the implementation of certain goals; deception with regard to one’s wealth forms a substantial part of P.’s analysis. Speeches of envoys dating to the Peloponnesian War and to a lesser extent to the fourth century .. constitute P.’s case studies in Part II. After a lengthy presentation of methodological problems, there follows a survey of ancient authors’ views on the principles guiding insertion of speeches in historical works. Inevitably P. tackles the issue of the credibility of the speeches in Thucydides (since for the most part the information relating to the language of envoys is found there: p. 70). As to the importance of rhetorical skills P. stresses the fact that renowned orators were dispatched as envoys, a practice to be observed until the end of the second century .. P. presents one by one the arguments and recurring themes put forward by envoys: syngeneia (ethnic a ̧liation); appeals to a preceding alliance; appeals to one’s interest when the μrst two did not work; justice, rightly presented by P. as inferior to interest. The obligation to return a favour and the call on liberty and autonomy complete the list. With regard to the envoys’ requests, P. enumerates help, a truce, friendship, peace, and war; defection, return of prisoners, or surrender of orators/politicians; and permission for an army to pass through a foreign country. P. does not fail to notice the    141

services and duties. The age of 70 was generally regarded as grounds for seeking release from public liturgical duties, as well as from munera privata (the literary texts are conμrmed by papyrological data from Egypt). Even some of the materials on the supposed ‘private’ sphere treatment tend in the same direction. The chapter on ‘old age, sexuality and marriage’ (Chapter 7), for example, is in fact a study of the upper age limits set for penalties under the Augustan marriage legislation (50 for women, 60 for men). The problem is that these older ages do not necessarily tell us much about ‘old age’ as such, much less its perception in the ‘private sphere’, since one is surely considering the o ̧cially recognized reproductive lifespan, especially of women. Although the category ‘widow’ admittedly does not map perfectly with ‘old woman’, the links between them are surely su ̧cient to merit more discussion of the body of evidence that exists on the subject. Jens-Uwe Krause’s monumental four-volume work on widows and widowhood in Roman society (Witwen und Waisen im römischen Reich [Stuttgart, 1994–5]) is noted in the bibliography, but seems hardly to be used in the text itself—as also the useful analysis of its μndings by T. A. J. McGinn, ‘Widows, Orphans, and Social History’ (JRA 12 [1999], 617–32). What one has in sum, then, is barely one page that relates speciμcally to the problems of women and old age (pp. 246–7). On the side of values, P. makes good sense of the reciprocal function of pietas in Roman society, given the precise lack of the kind of speciμc legal obligations imposed on children to support their parents that was found, for example, in μfth-century Athens. It might well be argued, however, that his μnal judgement that the elderly were ‘liminal’ to their society (pp. 241–2) is far better caught by his other argument that their status was one of a severe and permanent marginalization (pp. 244–5). For the rest, P. does not disguise the cold and brutal fact that for most Romans old age was depressing, brutish, and almost unendurable. He might have added to his assessments the common philosophical judgement that old age, along with chronic illness and extreme poverty, was held to be one of the justiμable grounds for taking one’s own life. Set in the balance against the poetic vision of respect to be accorded to the elderly as a generally honorable status, there was the more sordid reality of attempting simply to live from one day to the next in the circumstances of loneliness, illness, failing bodily functions, and the general immiseration that accompanied old age. This had to be done in a society where there was no system of social assistance for the elderly or any ‘retirement’ in our sense. He argues, rightly I think, that the heavy ideological exaltation of elderly males, and the honor and respect that was granted to some older persons, was a counterweight to the much less honorable and less happy circumstances in which most of the real elderly had to complete their lives.

In my thesis I examine certain aspects of the political history of Athens in the
early Hellenistic period, that is after the battle of Chaironeia in 338 B.C. and until the late 260s.
For Athens this was a transitional period; she had to face a completely new political reality: she was no longer the great power of the fifth or even the fourth century B.C., Macedonia rose to power, then Alexander created a huge empire and his death triggered endless struggles for power among his Successors, in which Athens found herself involved.
Independent foreign policy then on the part of Athens was impossible; on the other hand, diplomacy became more delicate and demanding than ever. I focus on the ways in which the Athenian leadership (the generals and the orators) adjusted to the circumstances.
Firstly, I have examined the role of the generals in diplomacy in order to
establish that they did assume increased responsibilities. Secondly, I have examined the role of the orators in the formation of relations with the various monarchs, in an attempt to trace the changes that Athenian diplomacy underwent. Finally, I have dealt with an important aspect of the orators’ career and an important instrument in diplomacy: the
passing of honours for kings and their officials as well as for Athenian citizens. My purpose was to establish the ways in which euergesia (benefaction) was affected by the circumstances as well as the influence it exercised on foreign relations.
The aim of my thesis is to demonstrate that the Athenian political system did survive in this period; Athens proved to be quite flexible, capable of responding to the new situation; whatever changes were made, they were due to practical considerations, without affecting the substance of the system.