2007
DOI: 10.1080/09518960701538549
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Did the Delphic Amphiktiony Play a Political Role in the Classical Period?

Abstract: This paper seeks, against recent work, to re-assert the occasional political importance of the Delphic amphiktiony in the fifth and fourth centuries BC, without denying the primarily religious function of that organization. The paper deals with the centuries in reverse chronological order, because the fourth is better documented. In particular, it is argued that there is solid epigraphic evidence, from Athens as well as Delphi, for Theban use of the amphiktiony for transparently political purposes in the 360s … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar processes are also observable in the working of the Delphic Amphictyony, which was used, on a number of occasions, by member states as little more than a convenient mechanism to further their own regional interests and hegemonic aspirations (see, for instance , Hornblower 2009;Low 2007). Not even Boeotian federalism was free of polis primacy.…”
Section: Conflictmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar processes are also observable in the working of the Delphic Amphictyony, which was used, on a number of occasions, by member states as little more than a convenient mechanism to further their own regional interests and hegemonic aspirations (see, for instance , Hornblower 2009;Low 2007). Not even Boeotian federalism was free of polis primacy.…”
Section: Conflictmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…This, as the historical record demonstrates, tended to act as self-balancing system, in which the rise of one major power was balanced by the combined resistance of the others, who feared the infringement of their own autonomy. Put simply, the Athenian hegemony was opposed by Sparta and Thebes; the Spartan hegemony that followed it was opposed by Athens and Thebes; the Theban hegemony was opposed by Athens and Sparta, and all three ultimately failed (for this argument specifically, see Hunt 2010;Strauss 1991, and for an excellent overview of this period, see Hornblower 2002, also Rhodes 2005).…”
Section: The Limits Of Hegemonymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no doubt that members of the Amphiktyony could use its meetings for a variety of purposes, and the hints in our sources about its significance in the politics and diplomacy of the Greek world in the fifth and fourth century have generated much debate (Lefèvre 2002: 437-443;Bowden 2003;Hornblower 2007;Buckler and Beck 2008). We have a detailed account of one meeting of the Amphiktyony at Delphi, reported by the Athenian politician Aischines, who was one of the Athenian pylagorai in spring 339 BCE.…”
Section: The Delphic Amphiktyonymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies of the relationship between Athens and Delphi usually focus on two important institutions: the Delphic oracle and the Delphic Amphiktyony, and tend to treat Athenian interest in both of them as fundamentally political (e.g. Hornblower 2007;Bowden 2005). However, both of these institutions are associated with the temple and sanctuary of Apollo Pythios at Delphi and are therefore very much religious institutions: the relationship between Athens and Delphi was importantly the relationship between a community and a god.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%