This article argues that a holistic approach to documenting and understanding the physical evidence for individual cities would enhance our ability to address major questions about urbanisation, urbanism, cultural identities and economic processes. At the same time we suggest that providing more comprehensive data-sets concerning Greek cities would represent an important contribution to cross-cultural studies of urban development and urbanism, which have often overlooked relevant evidence from Classical Greece. As an example of the approach we are advocating, we offer detailed discussion of data from the Archaic and Classical city of Olynthos, in the Halkidiki. Six seasons of fieldwork here by the Olynthos Project, together with legacy data from earlier projects by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and by the Greek Archaeological Service, combine to make this one of the best-documented urban centres surviving from the Greek world. We suggest that the material from the site offers the potential to build up a detailed ‘urban profile’, consisting of an overview of the early development of the community as well as an in-depth picture of the organisation of the Classical settlement. Some aspects of the urban infrastructure can also be quantified, allowing a new assessment of (for example) its demography. This article offers a sample of the kinds of data available and the sorts of questions that can be addressed in constructing such a profile, based on a brief summary of the interim results of fieldwork and data analysis carried out by the Olynthos Project, with a focus on research undertaken during the 2017, 2018 and 2019 seasons.

In this article part of a red-figure bell krater, found in the area of the new entrance of the archaeological site of Pella, is presented. This vase is very interesting because of its rare iconographic subject. On side A the chariot of Pelops is depicted. From other sherds of the same vase we come to the conclusion that on the same chariot Hippodameia was also probably shown. In this scene elements of the abduction of Hippodameia by Pelops, as well as the chariot race between Pelops and Oinomaos, can be traced. The vase is attributed to the workshop of the Painter of Athens 12255 and is dated to the beginning of the fourth century BC. This dating makes it possible to connect the krater’s iconographic subject to king Archelaos’ quadriga victory at the Olympic Games and the celebration of the Olympia festival in Macedonia. The krater under examination is one among the many red-figure vases that arrived in the Macedonian capital from Attica.

The question of the appearance, operating conditions and diffusion of the products of local red-figure pottery workshops in the fourth centurybc, in conjunction with the spread of Attic red-figure ware and its influence on local potteries, has been a focus of research in recent years. The result has been the recognition of a number of local workshops all across Greece, including those of Chalcidice, Boeotia, Euboea, Corinth, Elis, Sparta, Crete and the Agrinion Group. This article examines a red-figure pelike made by a previously unknown local workshop that was very likely located in Pella, the capital of the Kingdom of Macedonia. This vessel was in storage in the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki and is one of the best-preserved examples from that Macedonian workshop. In shape and decoration it recalls Attic vases of the second half of the fourth centurybc, and particularly the work of Group G and the Amazon Painter. The pelike dates fromc.320bcand is attributed to the Pella B Painter.

Dans cet article, deux petites dénominations de bronze de Philippe II – les types Hercule / foudre (type A) et Hercule / massue (type B) – sont examinées sur la base de nouvelles données numismatiques et de découvertes archéologiques récentes en Grèce du nord. Les deux types monétaires ont été datés par la plupart des experts du règne de Philippe II (359-336 av. J.-C.). Bien que les deux types présentent certaines similarités, il faut exclure l’idée d’une frappe concomitante. Une des différences notable est la présence de symboles, de lettres et de monogrammes sur les monnaies du type B, en revanche absents sur celles du type A. On peut également relever d’autres différences en matière d’iconographie, de poids ou d’inscription. Une frappe des monnaies du type A au cours des premières années du règne du Philippe II semble être étayée par les découvertes archéologiques récentes, bien que celles-ci soient assez limitées. Au contraire, les monnaies du type B ont probablement été frappées de manière posthume, entre 325-309 ou 325-306 av. J.-C. Cette thèse est confirmée par l’étude des trésors ainsi que par la chronologie des tombes et autres contextes bien datés. En particulier, aucune tombe ne peut-être datée avant le dernier quart du ive siècle. Toutefois, les deux types monétaires, et principalement le type B, sont probablement restés en circulation jusqu’au début du deuxième quart du IIIe siècle av. J.-C.

It is curious that H. considers Curtius' narrative of the death of Spitamenes as more sensational than that of Arrian, who says that the Massagetae killed Spitamenes (pp. 194-7). Curtius blames Spitamenes' wife for murdering him, in a way comparable to the well-known cliché of the Greek image of Persian women. After a discussion of the difficulties Alexander faced on his way back to Babylon in Chapter 15 and a short epilogue (Chapter 16), which tries to model the resistance to Alexander's conquests and his treatment of the conquered empire, H. introduces the sources in an appendix. The book ends with a glossary, bibliography and index. As noted above, the bibliography is not rich in references to French works. One wonders why the important contribution of P. Briant (Alexandre. Exégèse des lieux communs [2016]) and the edited book of P. Briant and F. Joannès (La transition entre l'empire achéménide et les royaumes hellénistiques [2006]) have been missed. Although H. aims at writing history from the defeated perspective, his book is still a complete narrative of the Macedonian conquest. As such, students and scholars will read it with interest. In the eyes of the present reviewer H. has been less successful with regard to his overall aim; at the same time his work contains a series of new perspectives and analyses that will enrich the debate on Alexander's conquests.