Table Of ContentAncient Perceptions of
Greek Ethnicity
E d i t e d by
Irad Mal ki n
Center for Hellenic Studies
Trustees for Harvard University
Washington, D.C.
Distributed by Harvard University Press
Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England
2001
Copyright © 2001 by the Center for Hellenic Studies, To A.}. Graham, Professor of Classical Studies and the Allen
Trustees for Harvard University
Memorial Professor in Greek at the University of Pennsylvania,
All rights reserved
and a former Senior Fellow of the Center for Hellenic Studies
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Ancient perceptions of Greek ethnicity / edited by Irad Malkin.
p. cm. — (Center for Hellenic Studies colloquia; 5)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-674-00662-3 (alk. paper)
1. Greeks—Ethnic identity. 2. Group identity—Greece. 3. Ethnicity—
Greece. 4. Greece—History—To146b.c. 5. Greece—History—146b.c.-
323 ad I. Malkin, Irad. II. Series.
. .
DF135.A53 2001
305.8Ό09495—dc21
2001028410
CONTENTS
PREFACE.............................................................................................................................................................VC
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................................................xi
A NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION.............................................................................................................XÜi
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction had Malkin.....................................................................................1 '
CHAPTER TWO
To Hellenikon ethnos: Ethnicity and the Construction of
Ancient Greek Identity David Konstan...................................................29 '
CHAPTER THREE
Ethnos and Ethnicity in Early Greece Jeremy Mclnerney.................................51'
CHAPTER FOUR
Ethne, Ethnicity, and Early Greek States, ca. 1200-480 B.C.:
An Archaeological Perspective Catherine Morgan.................................75
CHAPTER FIVE
Ethnicity and Colonization Carla M. Antonaccio..........................................113
CHAPTER SIX
Contested Ethnicities: Perceptions of Macedonia within
Evolving Definitions of Greek Identity Jonathan M. Hall.....................159
CHAPTER SEVEN
Greek Ambiguities: Between “Ancient Hellas” and
“Barbarian Epirus” had Malkin............................................................187
CHAPTER EIGHT
Ethnicity, Genealogy, and Hellenism in Herodotus Rosalind Thomas . . . 213
VII
CHAPTER NINE
Ethnic Identity in Democratic Athens and the Visual
Vocabulary of Male Costume Beth Cohen.............................................235
CHARTERTEN
The Discourse of Identity in Greek Rhetoric from
Isocrates to Aristides Suzanne Said.........................................................275
Center for Hellenic Studies Colloquia
CHAPTER ELEVEN
Hellenistic Hellenes: The Case of Ptolemaic Egypt Dorothy J. Thompson . . . 301
CHAPTER TWELVE
Yaunä by the Sea and across the Sea Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg............323
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
Jewish Perspectives on Greek Culture and Ethnicity Erich S. Gruen . . . . 347 Harvard University’s Center for Hellenic Studies, located in Washington
D.C., brings together a variety of research and teaching interests centering on
CHAPTER FOURTEEN Hellenic civilization in the widest sense of the term “Hellenic,” encompassing the
Shades of Greekness: A Lydian Case Study Antony Spawforth.....................375 evolution of the Greek language and its culture as a central point of contact for
all the different civilizations of the ancient Mediterranean world.
THE CONTRIBUTORS............................................................................................................................401 Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity, edited by Irad Malkin, is part of a
monograph series initiated by the former directors of the Center, Kurt Raaflaub
INDEX 405 and Deborah Boedeker. The title of the series, “Center for Hellenic Studies
Colloquia,” reflects the fundamental dependence of the whole enterprise on the
diverse colloquia that bring together the scholars of varied backgrounds and
interests who contribute to each volume. The intellectual exchanges that are
generated by each colloquium help shape the individual chapters of each
monograph, and even the monograph as a whole.
The present collection of contributions exemplifies the diversity and the
topicality of the series. The editor, who was also the prime organizer of the
original colloquium that brought together the contributors, has integrated a
wide variety of approaches and interests in focusing on the problem and even
the definition of ethnicity, viewed through the lens of Hellenic constructs of
identity, both cultural and personal. A careful reading of this monograph leads
to a deeper understanding of the basic human drives that lead to conflicts and
their resolutions, to war and peace.
Gregory Nagy
Director, Center for Hellenic Studies
IX
Acknowledgments
I wish to extend my thanks to the former directors of the Center for Hellenic
Studies in Washington D.C., Deborah Boedeker and Kurt A. Raaflaub, for their
generous help and fruitful comments. My appreciation to Gregory Nagy, the
current director, for his warm and forthcoming approach. I thank Barbara
Metzger, our editor, for her careful eye and prudent remarks, and Lisa A. Wehrle
of nSight, Inc., our cheerful and responsible production manager. Finally, I am
grateful to the participants of this volume, who helped me and each other
achieve an integrated, thematic book. We mourn the passing away of Heleen
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, an excellent and wise scholar, and a source of inspiration
to us all.
xi
A Note on Transliteration
Ancient proper names and terms are spelled according to the Oxford
Classical Dictionary, Third Edition, edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony
Spawforth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996). Except for special cases,
Greek is transliterated in the text; Greek characters are more common in the
notes.
wyrhynchi
O
The Roman Empire (East of Italy)
The Hellenistic World
ο Ν Ε
Introduction
(rad Malkin
The question “Who is a Greek?” has been asked time and again during the
past three millennia. With shifting emphases and inconsistent application,
categories of blood kinship, language, religion, and way of life were employed
in antiquity. In later periods, the heritage of Christian, “Roman” Byzantium
continued into the Ottoman empire, where Greeks were called (and called
themselves) Rum or Rumeli ("Romans”) and Greekness was almost
exclusively defined in term of religion. During the nineteenth century, with the
advent of nationalism, Byzantine-Roman definitions vied with Classical,
"Periclean” ones, a controversy in which both Greeks and Europeans of various
philhellenic shades were involved. This issue has a tendency to reemerge on the
cultural and political scene in our own day, frequently drawing on ancient
perceptions of Greek ethnicity—the subject of this book.
Few people today talk about ethnicity in primordial or racial terms. The
tone of current writings about ethnicity, any ethnicity, reflects a ubiquitous
antiessentialism. Things have no essence, no “core.” Ethnicity? There’s no such
thing, as such, and the key words for discussing it are now “invention” and
“construction.” Many observers acknowledge that ethnicity usually seems
primordial, but, they claim, primordiality too is an invention, cynically
“instrumentalist” or more neutrally “situational” molded by changing
circumstances. Paradoxically, this exposure of the artificiality of ethnicity is
taking place just when ethnic conflicts are proliferating around the world. Just
when historians, political scientists, and anthropologists are emphasizing
the malleability of ethnicity, its manipulations and inventions, the real-life
experience of ethnicity and its historical effects confronts us far more
Introduction 3
powerfully than the liberal-civic ethos would have wished for the beginning of “Hellenes” as a general appellation and uses terms such as “Danaans,” “Argives,”
the twenty-first century. and “Achaeans.” Some Greek historians writing in the fifth century B.C., when
As we grapple with theories predating World War II (in which ethnicity and “Hellenes” had become a generally recognized self-appellation, speculated that
race often overlap)1 while struggling to confront phenomena such as the rise this comprehensive name had expanded through diffusion, agglomeration, and
of regionalism in a uniting Europe or the ethnic conflicts of the Balkans or the migration, accompanied by (or as a result of) the advent of the Greek language.
former Soviet Union, ethnicity has become part and parcel of our political External appellations, however, vary to this day. As early as the seventh century
and cultural Zeitgeist. There is a new interest in ethnicity among historians, b.c. Assyrians spoke of “Ionians,” a comprehensive name still used today in the
anthropologists, political scientists, and critics of literature and cultural studies. Near East (Hebrew Yawan, Persian Yaunä, Egyptian demotic Wynn, Turkish
“Hybridity,” “postcolonial,” and “national/ethnic identities” have become Yunan). In the western Mediterranean, perhaps via Dodona and Epirus or pos
bywords for literary, historical, and philosophical discussion, and they will sibly through an encounter with a specific group of colonists, the name “Graikoi”
inevitably come to the fore in our discussions of ancient perceptions of Greek (Latin Graeci, hence modem “Greeks”) came to serve the same purpose.
ethnicity, reflecting a dialogue between ancient and modern approaches. Throughout the periods discussed in this book we find various functions
This volume originated in a colloquium held at the Center for Hellenic of “collective” identities, among them genealogy (“descendants of Hellen”),
Studies in the summer of 1997. The idea for a colloquium on ancient political or civic polis identity (see David Konstan’s paper. Chapter Two in this
perceptions of Greek ethnicity came to me while working on a book about the volume), ethnos identity (“Phocians”; see Jeremy Mclnemey’s paper, Chapter
way myths were used to mediate encounters and conceptualize ethnicity and Three), federal (“Boeotians”), colonial (“Siceliots”; see Carla Antonaccio’s
group identity in the Archaic and Classical periods.2 I soon realized that my paper, Chapter Five), intra-Hellenic (“Dorians,” “Ionians”), and Panhellenic
interest in ethnicity was shared by many people in various disciplines. The past (e.g., participants in the Olympian games). In no way were such collective
decade has seen a significant increase in publications about ancient Greek identities exclusionary; nor can we point to a priori hierarchies among them.
ethnicity, and I found myself in contact with several colleagues whose work, in For example, the collective identity of a citizen of ancient Syracuse could be
various stages of progress, seemed significant and relevant. This interest articulated as "Syracusan,” “Corinthian colonist,” “Siceliot” (=a Greek living in
was shared by the Senior Fellows of the Center for Hellenic Studies and its Sicily, of whatever origin), “Dorian,” and “Greek.” These identities would find
directors, Deborah Boedeker and Kurt Raaflaub, who organized and hosted expression according to the circumstances. In his political and civic relationship
the colloquium and contributed significantly to the discussions with keen to other citizens of Syracuse he (women shared ethnicity but not full citizen
observations, constructive criticism, and helpful suggestions. ship) was a Syracusan. In terms of international relations the Syracusan’s
The emphasis in this book is on ancient perceptions and, sometimes, on Corinthian affiliation and Dorian identity were meaningful. In terms of cult
their function as social facts. This criterion has helped us concentrate on practices he or she shared Dorian notnima and dress. In relation to the native
perceptions already problematized in antiquity—"voiced” through words, populations of Sicily and to the menacing Phoenicians, as well as to Greeks of
artifacts, and art—and to choose among them those that best correspond to the mainland, a Syracusan was primarily a Siceliot. In relation to Olympia
our own assessments. Our purpose is not to create a modern litmus test (where the prominence of western Greek dedications has been noted)3 or to the
for ancient Greekness. Nor is the discussion of ethnicity confined here to a Persian Wars (e.g., Gelon’s claim to supreme command), Syracusans were Greek.
philological straitjacket of what could be said in ancient Greek. By now we have Ethnicity is by no means the only (or even the major) form of Greek
learned, i think, that not all phenomena, mental or material, are explicitly identity. We do not claim that Greek ethnicity is necessarily a key concept for
formulated. The term “ethnicity” is even today missing from major all periods. When ethnicity appears a confusing term we wish to illuminate
dictionaries, and our own changing concepts (not unlike the observer in that confusion, hoping thus to problematize the issue. At the same time,
quantum theory) affect what we observe. Fully aware, then, that our own precisely by refining its contextual significance and its shifting modes of
perceptions of ancient perceptions are variable, I hope we have shown here that articulation and historical function, we hope to present a more focused picture
we can still examine the validity and usefulness of the category of Greek of its role.
ethnicity in the framework of the ancient world. Is it legitimate to apply the term “ethnicity,” invented in the mid-twentieth
The fluctuation, throughout history, of a general name for “Greeks” is century (see below), to an ancient phenomenon? It would have been easier
indicative of the variety of perspectives involved. Homer does not know to find refuge in the broader descriptive term “collective identity.” Indeed,
4 Irad Malkin Introduction 5
ethnic identity is a form of collective identity, but they are not synonyms and were attributed to the Dorian “invasion” led by “returning” descendants of
ethnicity, we all conclude, is a viable and significant concept in its more precise Heracles. Therefore, Tyrtaeus’s “we” probably addresses a wider intra-Greek
signification. The contributors to this book address some noteworthy cases, circle of ethnic awareness.
from the Archaic period to the Roman Empire. We also address issues and It is not entirely self-evident, however, to what extent Tyrtaeus shares in
terms current in modern discussions about ethnicity, especially with regard to a “Dorian” construction of a past. His statement illustrates that collective
the question of whether Greek ethnicity was regarded in antiquity as primor identity has multiple aspects even in an apparently cohesive unit such as the
dial, with a shared “essence” persisting throughout the centuries from heroic polis. In discussing Greek identity David Asheri6 adduces these two examples as
progenitors, or whether it was seen as cultural or circumstantial, the result of well as Theognis’s famous dictum that although a city remains the same the
diffusion, acculturation, and construction. people are different; this underlines the perceived constancy of polis identity in
spite of internal change. By contrast, both Mimnermus and Tyrtaeus tell of
Sources and Ancient Definitions cities that were there “before” but whose ethnic identity is no longer the “same,”
having changed because of conquest and colonization.
Where does one look for ancient perceptions of Greek ethnicity? Ancient We have tried to maximize the historian’s advantage of observing
writers, telling us something of their perceptions, did not simply “reflect” phenomena through a temporal prism of many planes and perspectives. On the
common views; they debated them, sometimes in terms surprisingly similar one hand, we can acknowledge ancient articulations of ethnicity as authentic,
to our own. It was not clear to everyone what ethnicity was. Strongly especially when these appear in essentialist terms of primordial blood kinship.
reverberating today, the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians is the most On the other, we can apply reflective hindsights from various points on the time
famous issue (see Jonathan Hall’s paper, Chapter Sue). There were also doubts line of antiquity, applying these both to the changing perceptions of ethnicity
about the Hellenism of peoples living in Epirus (see my paper, Chapter Seven), over a millennium and a half (from the early Archaic period to the Late Roman
Acarnania, Aetolia, Thrace, Crete, Cyprus, and Lemnos. Empire) and to our own angles of observation. Herodotus may serve as an
The variety of approaches is indicative of the richness of viable example for one of the methodological guidelines of this book. For example, his
perspectives. To illustrate, let us take two early examples not discussed in this expressed perceptions about Ionia can be studied as a fifth-century affair and/or
book, cases in which a sense of “we,” of a self-aware collective identity in relation to how fourth-century Greeks (who knew Herodotus) viewed eth
conditioned on a common historical past and bearing on present nicity and/or in relation to how we view and analyze them. Moreover, we may
circumstances, is attested in Archaic Greek poetry. Recounting the /crisis apply external criteria: Herodotus did not suspect this, but it is quite possible
(foundation story) of his city Colophon, the seventh-century poet Mimnermus that Ionians developed a collective identity not just because they chose to but
(fl. 632-629),4 tells how “we” arrived by sea from Neleian Pylos and, applying because they were assigned it by the civilizations of Anatolia and those of the
hybris, subdued the local inhabitants and took over Colophon (Mimnermus fr. Near East. Perhaps the outsider’s view of Greek ethnicity is relevant here (see the
9 West 1971; fr. 3 Gentili Prato).5 This is clearly a case of polis, rather than papers by Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, Chapter 12, and Erich Gruen, Chapter
ethnic identity, although it probably echoes against a background of traditions 13). It may even be possible that the name “Ionian” (we do not know its mean
about the Ionian migrations. This broader aspect of collective identity is more ing) originated in a non-Greek language, signifying, for example, a coastal
strongly implied in the poems of Mimnermus’s contemporary, the Spartan region where Greeks settled, and was later expanded and adopted by Greeks.
Tyrtaeus: “For Zeus himself, the son of Cronus, the husband of fair-crowned We try to be careful not to insert generalized terminology where the slight
Hera, gave this polis to the Heraclids, with whom we [my emphasis] left windy variation afforded by paraphrase might make it tempting to do so. For
Erineus and came to broad Peloponnese”(Tyrtaios ff. la [Prato 1968]). These example, if one knows anything about Greek self-definition, it is Herodotus’
verses expressed, sometime after the middle of the seventh century, the core dictum (8.144.2), often quoted too in modem national Greek discourse.7
of the Heraclid/Dorian charter myth. The polis is Zeus’s gift to the Heraclids, Greekness (to Hellenikon) and Greek solidarity are defined in terms of five
leaders of the Dorians, thus alluding to more than a foundation myth of a criteria, two of which (sanctuaries) overlap: common purpose (avenging the
single polis. Sparta, the “colony of the Dorians” (Pindar Seventh Isthmian Ode burning of temples by Persians), kinship (having the same blood, homaimon),
12-15), was regarded as one among other Dorian foundations, superimposed shared language (homomglösson), shared sanctuaries of the gods and sacrifices
on older, “Homeric” cities in the Peloponnese such as Argos or Corinth. These (■theön hidrumata koina kai thusiai), and similar ways of life or customs (ethea
