Thyreatis constitutes the northernmost part of Kynouria,1 which in turn is a region in the south-eastern Peloponnese.2 Both Thyreatis and Kynouria are mentioned in the sources mainly in reference to the conflicts between Argives and Spartans. In some cases, the sources indicate that the disputed territory is Thyreatis (or Thyrea/Thyreai), in others (most frequently, but not uniquely, in later sources), the whole of Kynouria. In this article, we focus on the former. In these sources we can grasp an alternation between Thyrea(i) and Thyreatis. Here we will investigate this oscillation and consider it in relation to the emergence of the city identity of Thyrea.
Thyrea(i) and Thyreatis in Herodotus and Thukydides
The earliest known reference to Thyrea(i)/Thyreatis is the famous Herodotus’ passage about the battle of the champions (1.82 Rosén). Herodotus begins by recounting that Argives and Spartans are at war περὶ χώρου καλεομένου Θυρέης:
[1] ἔς τε δὴ ὦν τὰς ἄλλας ἔπεμπε συμμαχίας καὶ δὴ καὶ ἐς Λακεδαίμονα. τοῖσι δὲ καὶ αὐτοῖσι [τοῖσι Σπαρτιήτῃσι] κατ᾽ αὐτὸν τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον συνεπεπτώκεε ἔρις ἐοῦσα πρὸς Ἀργείους περὶ χώρου καλεομένου Θυρέης. [2] (τὰς γὰρ Θυρέας ταύτας έούσας τῆς Ἀργολίδος μοίρης ἀποταμόμενοι ἔσχον οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι· ἦν δὲ καὶ ἡ μέχρι Μαλεών ἡ πρὸς ἑσπέρην Ἀργείων, ἥ τε ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ χώρη καὶ ἡ Κυθηρίη νῆσος καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ τῶν νήσων.).3
The Spartans and Argives agree to fight 300 champions from both sides; three survive, two Argives and one Spartan. The Argives, convinced that they had prevailed because they had survived in greater numbers, return home to announce the victory. The Spartan Othryades remains on the battlefield stripping the corpses of his enemies, convinced that victory went to those who remained on the battlefield while also taking care to collect the spoils. Unable to agree, the entire armies from both sides ended up clashing, and the Spartans won (82.4-6). Herodotus at this point goes on to narrate the aftermath of the battle (82.7-8 Rosén):
[7] (…) Ἀργεῖοι μέν νυν ἀπὸ τούτου τοῦ χρόνου κατακειράμενοι τὰς κεφαλάς, πρότερον ἐπάναγκες κομῶντες, ἐποιήσαντο νόμον τε καὶ κατάρην μὴ πρότερον θρέψειν κόμην Ἀργείων μηδένα, μηδὲ τὰς γυναῖκάς σφι χρυσοφορήσειν, πρὶν Θυρέας ἀνασώσωνται. [8] Λακεδαιμόνιοι δὲ τὰ ἐναντία τούτων ἔθεντο νόμον, οὐ γὰρ κομῶντες πρὸ τούτου ἀπὸ τούτου κομᾶν· τὸν δὲ ἕνα λέγουσι τὸν περιλειφθέντα τῶν τριηκοσίων, Ὀθρυάδην, αἰσχυνόμενον ἀπονοστέειν ἐς Σπάρτην τῶν οἱ συλλοχιτέων διεφθαρμένων αὐτοῦ μιν ἐν τῇσι Θυρέῃσι καταχρήσασθαι ἑωυτόν.4
The Argive women, Herodotus recounts, will no longer be able to bring gold πρὶν Θυρέας ἀνασώσωνται, and the Spartan hero Othyrades in shame commits suicide ἐν τῇσι Θυρέῃσι.5 In sum, in this passage (82) Herodotus names Thyrea(i) four times: once in the singular in its Ionian spelling (Θυρεή, έης [ἡ]), calling it a χώρος (82.1),6 and then a second (82.2), a third (82.7) and a fourth time (82.8) in the plural (Θυρεαί, ῶν [αἱ]). In all four cases, reference is made to a territory. The name of this territory is uncertain, since different forms recur, and it is not explicitly linked to a landscape element or a city (simply because they are not mentioned, not necessarily because they do not exist).
Θυρεή is mentioned again in the passage in which the Argive vicissitudes of Kleomenes are narrated (6.76 Rosén):
Κλεομένεϊ γὰρ μαντευομένῳ ἐν Δελφοῖσι ἐχρήσθη Ἄργος αἱρήσειν. ἐπείτε δή Σπαρτιήτας ἄγων ἀπίκετο ἐπὶ ποταμὸν Ἐρασῖνον, ὃς λέγεται ῥέειν ἐκ τῆς Στυμφαλίδος λίμνης (τὴν γὰρ δὴ λίμνην ταύτην ἐς χάσμα ἀφανὲς ἐκδιδοῦσαν ἀναφαίνεσθαι ἐν Ἄργεϊ, τὸ ἐνθεῦτεν δὲ τὸ ὕδωρ ἤδη τοῦτο ὑπ᾽ Ἀργείων Ἐρασῖνον καλέεσθαι), ἀπικόμενος ὦν ὁ Κλεομένης ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τοῦτον ἐσφαγιάζετο αὐτῷ. [2] καὶ οὐ γὰρ ἐκαλλιέρεε οὐδαμῶς διαβαίνειν μιν, ἄγασθαι μὲν ἔφη τοῦ Ἐρασίνου οὐ προδιδόντος τοὺς πολιήτας, Ἀργείους μέντοι οὐδ᾽ ὣς χαιρήσειν. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἐξαναχωρήσας τὴν στρατιὴν7 κατήγαγε ἐς Θυρέην, σφαγιασάμενος δὲ τῇ θαλάσσῃ ταῦρον πλοίοισί σφεας ἤγαγε ἔς τε τὴν Τιρυνθίην χώρην καὶ Ναυπλίην.8
The Spartan king is engaged in a campaign against Argos and reaches the Argive river Erasinos; however, as the auspices are unfavourable, he leads his army down to Thyrea (ἐς Θυρέην).9 From there he embarks with his men to reach Tiryns and Nauplia. In this passage Herodotus mentions no χώρος, but there seems to be no indication that ἐς Θυρέην would mean anything else here.
The occurrences of Thyrea/Thyreatis in Thukydides seem to be different. In the first passage in which Thukydides mentions it, Thyrea appears to indicate a territory to be inhabited (and maybe divided and/or cultivated),10 perhaps even a settlement (later occurrences actually make us lean towards this hypothesis). In Thukydides 2.27 (Hude) Thyrea assumes a non-secondary function in the well-known affair of the Aiginetans that took place in 431 B.C.:
[1] ἀνέστησαν δὲ καὶ Αἰγινήτας τῷ αὐτῷ θέρει τούτῳ ἐξ Αἰγίνης Ἀθηναῖοι, αὐτούς τε καὶ παῖδας καὶ γυναῖκας, ἐπικαλέσαντες οὐχ ἥκιστα τοῦ πολέμου σφίσιν αἰτίους εἶναι· καὶ τὴν Αἴγιναν ἀσφαλέστερον ἐφαίνετο τῇ Πελοποννήσῳ ἐπικειμένην αὑτῶν πέμψαντας ἐποίκους ἔχειν. καὶ ἐξέπεμψαν ὕστερον οὐ πολλῷ ἐς αὐτὴν τοὺς οἰκήτορας. [2] ἐκπεσοῦσι δὲ τοῖς Αἰγινήταις οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἔδοσαν Θυρέαν οἰκεῖν καὶ τὴν γῆν νέμεσθαι, κατά τε τὸ Ἀθηναίων διάφορον καὶ ὅτι σφῶν εὐεργέται ἦσαν ὑπὸ τὸν σεισμὸν καὶ τῶν Εἱλώτων τὴν ἐπανάστασιν. ἡ δὲ Θυρεᾶτις γῆ μεθορία τῆς Ἀργείας καὶ Λακωνικῆς ἐστίν, ἐπὶ θάλασσαν καθήκουσα. καὶ οἱ μὲν αὐτῶν ἐνταῦθα ᾤκησαν, οἱ δ᾽ ἐσπάρησαν κατὰ τὴν ἄλλην Ἑλλάδα.11
The Aiginetans driven out of Aigina by the Athenians are ‘given to inhabit’ (ἔδοσαν […] οἰκεῖν) and maybe ‘to divide/cultivate’ (καὶ τὴν γῆν νέμεσθαι)12 Thyrea by the Lakedaimonians.13 Leaving aside the fact that it is not of central interest here that the Thukydides passage implies that Thyrea is controlled by Sparta at this stage,14 it is interesting to note that it is referred to here as a place where one could live as a community.15 What’s more, this community appears to control not only the city itself, but also a larger territory called Thyreatis. Indeed, it is in this very passage that Thyreatis is mentioned for the first time in the extant Greek literature: ἡ δὲ Θυρεᾶτις γῆ μεθορία τῆς Ἀργείας καὶ Λακωνικῆς ἐστίν: Thyreatis is a border zone between (the territory controlled by) Argos and (the territory controlled by) Sparta.16
In the fourth book, Thukydides returns to the story and specifies the whereabouts of Thyrea (while not mentioning Thyreatis: 4.56.2-57.3 Hude): ἥ ἐστι μὲν τῆς Κυνουρίας γῆς καλουμένης, μεθορία δὲ τῆς Ἀργείας καὶ Λακωνικῆς:
[56] [2] ἐκ δὲ αὐτῶν περιέπλευσαν ἐς Ἐπίδαυρον τὴν Λιμηράν, καὶ δῃώσαντες μέρος τι τῆς γῆς ἀφικνοῦνται ἐπὶ Θυρέαν, ἥ ἐστι μὲν τῆς Κυνουρίας γῆς καλουμένης, μεθορία δὲ τῆς Ἀργείας καὶ Λακωνικῆς. νεμόμενοι δὲ αὐτὴν ἔδοσαν Λακεδαιμόνιοι Αἰγινήταις ἐκπεσοῦσιν ἐνοικεῖν διά τε τὰς ὑπὸ τὸν σεισμὸν σφίσι γενομένας καὶ τῶν Εἱλώτων τὴν ἐπανάστασιν εὐεργεσίας καὶ ὅτι Ἀθηναίων ὑπακούοντες ὅμως πρὸς τὴν ἐκείνων γνώμην αἰεὶ ἑστᾶσιν. [57] [1] προσπλεόντων οὖν ἔτι τῶν Ἀθηναίων οἱ Αἰγινῆται τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάσσῃ ὃ ἔτυχον οἰκοδομοῦντες τεῖχος ἐκλείπουσιν, ἐς δὲ τὴν ἄνω πόλιν, ἐν ᾗ ᾤκουν, ἀπεχώρησαν, ἀπέχουσαν σταδίους μάλιστα δέκα τῆς θαλάσσης. [2] καὶ αὐτοῖς τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων φρουρὰ μία τῶν περὶ τὴν χώραν, ἥπερ καὶ ξυνετείχιζε, ξυνεσελθεῖν μὲν ἐς τὸ τεῖχος οὐκ ἠθέλησαν δεομένων τῶν Αἰγινητῶν, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῖς κίνδυνος ἐφαίνετο ἐς τὸ τεῖχος κατακλῄεσθαι· ἀναχωρήσαντες δὲ ἐπὶ τὰ μετέωρα, ὡς οὐκ ἐνόμιζον ἀξιόμαχοι εἶναι, ἡσύχαζον. [3] ἐν τούτῳ δὲ οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι κατασχόντες καὶ χωρήσαντες εὐθὺς πάσῃ τῇ στρατιᾷ αἱροῦσι τὴν Θυρέαν. καὶ τήν τε πόλιν κατέκαυσαν καὶ τὰ ἐνόντα ἐξεπόρθησαν, τούς τε Αἰγινήτας, ὅσοι μὴ ἐν χερσὶ διεφθάρησαν, ἄγοντες ἀφίκοντο ἐς τὰς Ἀθήνας καὶ τὸν ἄρχοντα ὃς παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἦν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων, Τάνταλον τὸν Πατροκλέους· ἐζωγρήθη γὰρ τετρωμένος. 17
In this passage Thukydides also recounts the sequel: the Athenians attack Thyrea (the city, not the territory) and expel the Aiginetans; here Thukydides explicitly says that Thyrea is a polis:18 the Athenians τήν τε πόλιν κατέκαυσαν καὶ τὰ ἐνόντα ἐξεπόρθησαν, burned the town and pillaged it. A similar perspective is adopted by Diodorus Siculus and by Pausanias regarding the same story (and possibly derived from Thukydides): the Aiginetans go to live in Thyrea, Λακεδαιμόνιοι δὲ τοῖς ἐκπεπτωκόσιν Αἰγινήταις ἔδωκαν οἰκεῖν τὰς καλουμένας Θυρέας (D.S. 12.44.3 Vogel-Fischer-Dindorf) and Θυρέαν τὴν ἐν τῆι Ἀργολίδι Λακεδαιμονίων δόντων ᾤκησαν (Paus. 2.29.5 Rocha-Pereira).
At the time of Thukydides’ writing, the city of Thyrea is at the centre of relevant events and controls a surrounding territory called Thyreatis. That becomes even more evident in 6.95.1 (Hude), where the choronym is used and it is also said that Thyreatis is bordered by the territory controlled by Argos, ἐς τὴν Θυρεᾶτιν ὅμορον οὖσαν (and thus controlled by the Spartans):
τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἦρος καὶ ἐπ᾽ Ἄργος στρατεύσαντες Λακεδαιμόνιοι μέχρι μὲν Κλεωνῶν ἦλθον, σεισμοῦ δὲ γενομένου ἀπεχώρησαν. καὶ Ἀργεῖοι μετὰ ταῦτα ἐσβαλόντες ἐς τὴν Θυρεᾶτιν ὅμορον οὖσαν λείαν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων πολλὴν ἔλαβον, ἣ ἐπράθη ταλάντων οὐκ ἔλασσον πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι.19
For Isokrates, it is ἐν Θυρέαις that the 300 Spartan champions defeated the Argives (Archid. 99).
Thyrea and Thyreatis in Hellenistic and Roman Sources
Later sources refer to Thyrea(i)/Thyreatis almost exclusively with reference to Archaic to Classical events.20 These sources fluctuate between Thyrea(i) and Thyreatis, but over time Thyrea(i) is increasingly used. Sometimes we find it in the plural variant used by Herodotus; this variant, however, does not seem to have a particular connotation, being used both in reference to the battle of the champions, as by Strabo, and in reference to the affair of the Aiginetans, as by Diodorus.21 In Pausanias Thyrea and Thyreatis occur in almost equal measure. About Thyreatis he writes that this territory includes several komai (8.54.4: ἡ δὲ εὐθεῖα <ἡ> ἐπὶ Θυρέαν τε καὶ κώμας τὰς ἐν τῆι Θυρεάτιδι ἐκ Τεγέας)22. Pausanias uses Thyreatis 3 times; Thyrea 4.23 Regarding Thyrea, Pausanias seems to consider it a city especially when past events are at stake (e.g., 2.29.5, maybe also 10.9.12?), but this is not a rule (8.54.4; 10.9.12 with comment of Piérart 2001a, 220):
2.29.5 Rocha-Pereira:
χρόνωι δὲ ὕστερον μοῖρα Ἀργείων τῶν Ἐπίδαυρον ὁμοῦ Δηιφόντηι κατασχόντων, διαβᾶσα ἐς Αἴγιναν καὶ Αἰγινήταις τοῖς ἀρχαίοις γενόμενοι σύνοικοι, τὰ Δωριέων ἔθη καὶ φωνὴν κατεστήσαντο ἐν τῆι νήσωι. προελθοῦσι δὲ Αἰγινήταις ἐς μέγα δυνάμεως, ὡς Ἀθηναίων γενέσθαι ναυσὶν ἐπικρατεστέρους καὶ ἐν τῶν Μηδικῶι πολέμωι παρασχέσθαι πλοῖα μετά γε Ἀθηναίους πλεῖστα, οὐ παρέμεινεν ἐς ἅπαν ἡ εὐδαιμονία, γενόμενοι δὲ ὑπὸ Ἀθηναίων ἀνάστατοι Θυρέαν τὴν ἐν τῆι Ἀργολίδι Λακεδαιμονίων δόντων ὤικησαν. καὶ ἀπέλαβον μὲν τὴν νῆσον, ὅτε περὶ Ἑλλήσποντον αἱ Ἀθηναίων τριήρεις ἐλήφθησαν, πλούτου δὲ ἢ δυνάμεως οὐκέτι ἐξεγένετο ἐς ἴσον προελθεῖν σφισιν.24
8.54.4 Rocha-Pereira:
ἡ δὲ εὐθεῖα <ἡ> ἐπὶ Θυρέαν τε καὶ κώμας τὰς ἐν τῆι Θυρεάτιδι ἐκ Τεγέας παρείχετο ἐς συγγραφὴν Ὀρέστου τοῦ Ἀγαμέμνονος μνῆμα, καὶ ὑφελέσθαι Σπαρτιάτην <τινὰ> τὰ ὀστᾶ αὐτόθεν οἱ Τεγεᾶται λέγουσι· καθ’ ἡμᾶς δὲ οὐκέτι πυλῶν ἐντὸς ἐγίνετο ὁ τάφος.25
10.9.12 Rocha-Pereira:
ταῦτα μὲν δὴ ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον εἰρήσθω· τὸν δὲ ὑπὲρ τῆς καλουμένης Θυρέας Λακεδαιμονίων ἀγῶνα καὶ Ἀργείων, Σίβυλλα μὲν καὶ τοῦτον προεθέσπισεν ὡς συμβήσοιτο ἐξ ἴσου ταῖς πόλεσιν, Ἀργεῖοι δὲ ἀξιοῦντες ἐσχηκέναι πλέον ἐν τῶι ἔργωι χαλκοῦν ἵππον—τὸν δούρειον δῆθεν—ἀπέστειλαν ἐς Δελφούς· τὸ δὲ ἔργον Ἀντιφάνους ἐστὶν Ἀργείου.26
One wonders whether in Pausanias’ time the city still existed and was inhabited. Given the equivocal identification with a modern site,27 this is difficult to establish on the basis of material culture without engaging in circular reasoning on a combinatorial basis, but would explain why he does not mention it among the cities of Thyreatis (2.38.6 Rocha-Pereira):
[6] ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν πολυανδρίων ἰόντι Ἀνθήνη τέ <ἐστιν>, ἧι Αἰγινῆταί ποτε ὤικησαν, καὶ ἑτέρα κώμη Νηρίς, τρίτη δὲ Εὔα μεγίστη τῶν κωμῶν· καὶ ἱερὸν τοῦ Πολεμοκράτους ἐστὶν ἐν ταύτηι. ὁ δὲ Πολεμοκράτης ἐστὶ καὶ οὗτος Μαχάονος υἱός, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἀλεξάνορος, καὶ ἰᾶται τοὺς ταύτηι καὶ τιμὰς παρὰ τῶν προσοίκων ἔχει.28
This leads us to ask more generally in which historical periods Thyrea was a city and had inhabitants. Assuming that inhabitants of Thyrea must have been identifiable well before Stephanus of Byzantium (Steph.Byz. s.v. Θυρέα), it is difficult to say whether they were already known to Herodotus who refers to the inhabitants of Kynouria as “Ὀρνεῆται καὶ οἱ περίοικοι” (8.73.3). Philippe Legrand’s proposed amendment of substituting Θυρεῆται for Ὀρνεῆται is plausible but far from certain.29 On closer inspection, the first undebated occurrence of Thyrea as a settlement is in Thukydides, who calls it a city and does so in connection with the affair of the Aiginetans. The suspicion therefore arises that the two issues – the settlement of the Aiginetans in Thyrea and the emergence of Thyrea as a city – are connected. This connection had already been suggested by Panagiotes Phaklaris, who, however, neither elaborated on it nor analysed the literary occurrences on a case-by-case basis to provide a historical interpretation.30 It is worth going over the whole affair in greater detail than has been done above.
The settlement of the Aiginetans and the emergence of Thyrea
In order to contextualise the Spartan-supported settlement of the Aiginetans driven out by the Athenians in Thyrea, it is necessary to briefly retrace the salient phases of the enmity between Athens and Aigina. In his Histories, Herodotus (5.80-89.2) is aware of this enmity (89.1: τῆς δὲ ἔχθρης τῆς πρὸς Αἰγινήτας ἐξ Ἀθηναίων γενομένης ἀρχὴ) and of Athens’ aggressive intentions and its desire to control Aigina. The story begins with a request for help from the Thebans to the Aiginetans against the Athenians (5.80) and immediately reminds us that there was an ancient enmity between the Athenians and the Aiginetans (5.81.2).31 He repeatedly claims he wants to reconstruct the Archaic roots of the conflict (cf. 5.82.1; 89.1). This enmity is intertwined with various neighbourly relations. It includes the Epidaurians, to whom the Aiginetans were initially subject (5.83.1, cfr. also Hdt. 8.46.1 and Paus. 2.29.5). The latter broke free and even went so far as to steal the statues of Damia and Auxesia that the Epidaurians had built from Athenian olive tree wood following an oracular response (5.82).32 The Athenians sent to retrieve these statues from the Aiginetans came to a bad end (5.85). This was partly the result of the Argive support the Aiginetans received, as claimed by both the Aiginetans and Argives (5.87.1). The women of these two groups adopted a particular type of brooch (5.88.2, a narrative following a typically aetiological logic).33 As a result of these events, the Aiginetans decided to support the Thebans and devastated the coastal areas of Attica (5.89) to the extent that the Athenians thirsted for revenge. Other emergencies prevented them from acting upon these emotions, however in the immediate future.34 The Persian Wars brought solace for this desire through the Aiginetans’ initial medizing (cf. 6.49).35 In this context there is a convergence between the Athenians and the Spartans led by Kleomenes, who was more hostile than other Spartan kings to the Aiginetans (cf. 6.50).36 This convergence, however, is not set in stone (6.85): while the hostility between Athenians and Aiginetans, recounted in fragmented form by Herodotus,37 recurs over the next decades (6.73; 86-87; 89),38 that between Spartans and Aiginetans is intermittent (cf. below). The Athenians support a coup d’état by the Aiginetan damos (6.88; 91.1-2)39 and, having failed, settle the exiles in Sounion (6.90), thus admitting members of the Aiginetan damos to citizenship.40 Later, Aigina becomes tributary of Athens (having revolted and having been subjugated in 457)41 and its links with Athens will be strengthened by importing Attic cults (SEG 59.347-350)42. In parallel, the Aiginetans started cultivating good relations with the Spartans. The more or less forced collaboration of Aiginetan ships with Spartan ships at the time of Kleomenes’ Argolis expedition (Hdt. 6.92.1-2 with comment of Figueira 2016, 27) is difficult to interpret. Following the earthquake in 462, the Aiginetans brought relief to the Spartans, most likely because of a sense of common belonging consolidated by their membership of the Hellenic League rather than the Peloponnesian League. Precisely for this reason, the Spartans felt a special gratitude to the Aiginetans, as is evident from their support in resettling the Aiginetans in Thyrea.43 It is probably also because of their support in the Messenian Revolt and the war against Xerxes (8.93.1; cf. also 3.64.3), that the Spartans included the demand to respect the Aiginetan autonomy in their ultimatum to Athens before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War (Thuk. 1.139.1). The Aiginetans for their part had secretly complained about the deprivation of this autonomy44 and had played an important role in the declaration of war on Athens (2.27.1).
In light of all this, the events following the expulsion of the Aiginetans from Aigina and their placement in Thyrea by the Spartans are well understood. According to Thukydides, not all the Aiginetans moved to Thyrea; part of them moved elsewhere. As for the former, the situation they faced in Thyreatis is unclear. A passage by Pausanias suggests that after the victory in the Battle of the Champions some Spartiates were assigned kleroi in Thyreatis and that later (ὕστερον) these lands were assigned to the Aiginetans driven out by the Athenians (2.38.5), perhaps as perioikoi45 or at least as allies. Be that as it may, given Thukydides’ phraseology at 2.27.2, where “the combination of ἔδοσαν and οἰκεῖν with the verb νέμω in the middle (with γῆν) [sic] implies a permanent settlement, if not a division of the land into individual holdings”46, Thyrea represents at this stage a city with landholding citizens.
Thus, even if we assume that the city of Thyrea already exists before the Aiginetans’ settlement, 47it seems clear that it only acquires social consistency and historical prominence after the settlement. In fact, all the elements taken into consideration lead one to believe that this represents the true turning point for the emergence of Thyrea.
From then onward, Thyrea became even more strategic from different perspectives. Regardless of the fact that the analogy with the case of the fugitive Messenians settled by the Athenians in Naupaktos was already clear to Ephorus (D.S. 12.44.2-3) or even earlier,48 from the Spartan point of view the settlement of the Aiginetans in Thyreatis must have had consequences in relations with Argos. The (partly) parallel cases of Asine and Nauplia, whose inhabitants, driven out by the Argives, were supported in their resettlement by the Spartans, have been rightly recalled.49 Assuming that the Aiginetans of Thyrea were allies concretely engaged in support for Sparta, for example through a contribution to the Spartan war fund (IG V.1 1 [SEG 36.357]+ Matthaiou-Pikoulas 1989; SEG 39 370 [SEG 56 451]comments on both fragments as well as on the “possibly related” IG V.1 219 )50, in anti-Argive terms their function seems to have a further significance: that of creating a buffer state. It would safeguard the Spartan occupation of Thyreatis from any attempts by the Argives to reconquer it. Moreover, as has been noted, recurrent political cooperation between Argives and Aiginetans are attested as far back as Herodotus, while later sources report consanguinity ties.51 Accordingly, the Aiginetan settlement in Thyrea by the Spartans served a double purpose: the Argives might have felt it difficult to attempt to reconquer Thyreatis, since it was occupied by their ’relatives’ from Aigina. Thus, it is no coincidence that Thukydides emphasises that Thyreatis is a border area between Argos and Sparta precisely in the passages in which he describes the Aiginetan settlement. In fact, the only other passage in which he refers to the boundary position of the Thyreatis and in which the Aiginetans are not involved is 6.95.1.52 Returning from a Spartan-Argive perspective to a Spartan-Athenian one, what happens a few years after the settlement of the Aiginetans in Thyrea should at least briefly be taken into account because it is significant in relation to the problem we are dealing with here. The Athenians attack the Aiginetans at Thyrea who had built a τεῖχος along the coast (4.57.1), a τεῖχος that, as has been noted, “stood as a surrogate for lost Aigina”53.
The Athenians then prevail over the Aiginetans, who, poorly assisted by the Spartans (4.57.2), are killed or deported to Athens (4.57.3). It is unclear whether those who managed to avoid battle were able to retain the Aiginetan identity of Thyrea54. We could go further. It is unclear whether Thyrea as a city continues to exist. Some later authors when they mention it seem to consider it a territory in reference to the time in which they write (think of Pliny NH 4.5.16)55. Pausanias in his list of the cities of Thyreatis (2.38.6) enumerates Anthene, Eua and Neris, but not Thyrea 56. One might reflect on the fact that he adds that Anthene was once Aiginetan, and it is suggestive (but not entirely convincing) that the surviving Aiginetans moved to Anthene.
Some concluding remarks
The evidence analysed above leads us to believe that in the 6th century and perhaps for much of the 5th century Thyrea(i) was a territory, χώρος, not characterised by settlements of a considerable size and considered strategic in its own right, so much so that it was disputed between Argos and Sparta. Following the battle of the champions, and as a result of the battle of Sepeia, Sparta took control of it. This was a strategic occupation but in an anti-Argive context and from a broader interpoleic perspective also aimed at the Athenians by virtue of the outlet to the sea not too far away.
The strategic position of the area prompted the Spartans to settle the Aiginetans there after their expulsion from Aigina by the Athenians at the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. At that point, the settlement of Thyrea, defined by Thukydides as a city (whose citizens were probably Aiginetans), took shape. The first relevant city of the χώρος of Thyrea is called Thyrea, and at that stage the name Thyreatis is given to the territory it controlled. The extent of Thyreatis is not known to us, while we are aware that besides Thyrea there is another settlement, Anthene, where the Aiginetans who survived the Athenian attack are said to have moved (Paus. 2.38.6). The impression, however, is that of the two settlements, Thyrea is the more significant, so much so that it takes the name of the original χώρος and gives its name to the region. This greater prominence is due to the Aiginetan settlement.
From a Spartan point of view, the Aiginetan settlement was of strategic value to counter the Argives – similar to the Asineans and the Nauplians – and against the Athenians, just as the latter had used the Messenians at Naupaktos. In an anti-Argive key, the strategic function was twofold: as a buffer state, but also as a disincentive that relied on a tradition of political cooperation between the Argives and the Aiginetans as well as on the belief perhaps nurtured by the Argives themselves of Argive-Aiginetan consanguinity. The Spartan occupation of the Thyreatis was by then so well established that the centrality of this borderland was increasingly perceived, both by its inhabitants and by the surrounding neighbours. This centrality is situational for the same reason that its previous (and subsequent) peripherality is situational: Thyrea is perceived as central or peripheral depending on historical circumstances, specifically its relationship with Argives and Spartans and its capacity for political action, more or less marked according to the period. We might go so far as to say that if the Aiginetans are to be considered more allies than perioikoi of the Spartans, the drive for ever-increasing emergence as well as the ambition (which remains a tendency) for autonomy develop, too.
The Athenian intervention, the expulsion of the Aiginetans and the destruction of Thyrea reshuffle the cards and create the conditions for other settlements to emerge in Thyreatis over time (Neris, Eva, and especially Anthene, the latter already existing in Thukydides’ time), even though the region has now taken its name from the settlement that was most significant in history, namely Thyrea.
Bibliographie
Baladié, R. (1978): Strabon: Géographie. Livre VIII, Paris.
Balandier, C. and Guintrand, M. (2019): “L’apport de la teichologie à l’étude historique d’une région: le cas des fortifications de Thyréatide, zone conflictuelle entre Sparte et Argos aux périodes classique et hellénistique”, BCH, 143.1, 425-445.
Barron, J. P. (1983): “The Fifth-Century Horoi of Aegina”, JHS, 103, 1-12.
Blomley, A. M. (2022): A Landscape of Conflict? Rural Fortifications in the Argolid (400–146 BC), Oxford.
Christien, J. and Spyropoulos, T. (1985): “Eua et la Thyréatide. Topographie et histoire”, BCH, 109, 455-466.
Christien, J. (1992): “De Sparte à la côte orientale du Péloponnèse”, in: Piérart, M., ed., Polydipsion Argos: Argos de la fin des palais mycéniens à la constitution de l’État classique: actes de la table ronde Fribourg (Suisse), 7-9 mai 1987, Paris, 157-172.
Christien, J. (2018): Roads and Quarries in Laconia in: Powell, A., ed., A Companion to Sparta, Hoboken, 615-642.
Classen, J. and Steup, J. (1914-1922): Thukydides. Band 5, Berlin.
Corti, E. (2021): “L’influenza delle immagini sul racconto storico: Damia e Auxesia in Erodoto e Pausania”, Ὅρμος: Ricerche di Storia Antica, 13, 41-55.
Dent, J. M. and Dutton, E. P., ed. (1910): Thucydides. The Peloponnesian War, Londres-New York.
Figueira, T. (1981): “Aeginetan Membership in the Peloponnesian League”, Classical Philology, 76, 1-24.
Figueira, T. (1983): “Aeginetan Independence”, CJ, 79, 8-29.
Figueira, T. (1985): “Herodotus on the Early Hostilities between Aegina and Athens”, AJPh, 106, 49-74.
Figueira, T. (1988): “The Chronology of the Conflict between Athens and Aegina in Herodotus Bk. 6”, QUCC, 28, 49-90.
Figueira, T. (1991): Athens and Aigina in the Age of Imperial Colonization, Baltimore.
Figueira, T. (1993): Excursions in Epichoric History: Aiginetan Essays, Lanham.
Figueira, T. (2016): “Aigina: Island as Paradigm”, in: Powell, A. and Meidani, M., ed., The Eyesore of Aigina: Anti-Athenian Attitudes in Greek, Hellenistic and Roman History, Swansea, 19-50.
Fontana, F. (2016): “La Cinuria di Erodoto: una nota testuale”, Hermes, 144.2, 214-220.
Franchi, E. (2009): “Spartani dalle lunghe chiome e Argivi rasati: interpretazioni iniziatiche moderne e costruzioni di senso antiche”, Incidenza dell’antico, 7, 61-88.
Franchi, E. (2014): “Per Era, Ares o Afrodite? Le tradizioni argive sulla battaglia di Sepeia tra storiografia locale ed epos panellenico”, in: Costa, V. and Lanzillotta, E., ed., Le tradizioni del Peloponneso tra epica e storiografia locale, Rome, 99-128.
Franchi, E. (2021): “Women in Gold: Luxurious Objects, Excellence and Prestige in the Peloponnese”, in: Hodkinson, S. and Gallou, C., ed., Luxury and Wealth in Sparta and the Peloponnese, Swansea, 161-176.
Franchi, E. (forthcoming): Sparta e Argo. Le guerre per la Tireatide.
Godley, A. D. (1920): Herodotus. The Persian Wars. Books 1-2, Cambridge.
Godley, A. D. (1922): Herodotus. The Persian Wars. Books 5-7, Cambridge.
Goester, Y. C. (1993): “The Plain of Astros: a Survey”, Pharos, 1, 39-112.
Gomme, A. W., Andrewes, A. and Dover, K. J., ed. (1970): A Historical Commentary on Thucydides. Vol.4. Book V (25)-VII, Oxford.
Hammond, N. G. L. (1955): “Studies in Greek Chronology of the Sixth and Fifth Centuries B.C.”, Historia, IV, 371-411.
Hornblower, S. (1991): A Commentary on Thucydides. Volume 1. Books I–III, Oxford.
Hornblower, S. and Pelling, C., ed. (2017): Herodotus. Histories. Book VI, Cambridge-New York.
How, W.W. and Wells, J. (1928): A Commentary on Herodotus. Volume 2. Books V-IX, Oxford.
Irwin, E. (2011): “ ‘Lest the Things Done by Men Become exitela’: Writing up Aegina in a Late Fifth-Century Context”, in: Fearn, D., ed., Aegina: Contexts for Choral Lyric Poetry: Myth. History and Identity in the Fifth Century BC., Oxford, 426-457.
Jacoby, F. (1923-1958) = FGrHist: Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. I-III, Berlin-Leyde.
Jeffery, L. H. (1962): “The Campaign between Athens and Aegina in the Years before Salamis (Herodotus VI, 87-93)”, AJPh, 83, 44-54.
Jones, W. H. S. and Ormerod, H. A., ed. (1918): Pausanias. Pausanias Description of Greece, Cambridge-Londres.
Kallitsis, K. L. (1960): “Εὔας ἐπιγραφή”, AEph, 6-8.
Kritzas, C. B. (2006): “Nouvelles inscriptions d’Argos : les archives des comptes du trésor sacré (IVe s. av. J.-C.)”, CRAI, 150, 397-434.
Legrand, P.-E. (1953): Hérodote. Histoires. Livre VIII. Uranie, Paris.
Lévy, E. (1983): “Αὐτονομία et ἐλευθερία au Vᵉ siècle”, RPh, 57, 249-270.
Loomis, W. T. (1992): The Spartan War Fund: IG V1, 1 and a New Fragment, Historia Einzelschriften 74, Stuttgart.
Macan, R. W. (1908): Herodotus: the Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Books, London.
MacDowell, D. M. (1960): “Aigina and the Delian League”, JHS, 80, 118-121.
Matthaiou, A. and Pikoulas Y. A. (1989): “Ἔδον τοῖς Λακεδαιμονίοις ποττὸν πόλεμον”, Horos, 7, 77-124.
Meiggs, R. (1966): “The Dating of Fifth-century Attic Inscriptions”, JHS, 86, 86-98.
Müller, K. O. (1824): Die Dorier I, Breslau.
Musti, D. and Torelli, M. (1986): Guida della Grecia. Libro II. La Corinzia e l’Argolide, Milan.
Nenci, G., ed. (1998): Le Storie. Libro VI. La battaglia di Maratona, Milan.
Ostwald, M. (1982): Autonomia: Its Genesis and Early History, New York.
Phaklaris, P. B. (1987): “Η μάχη της Θυρέας (546 π.Χ.). Το πρόβλημα του προσδιορισμού του πεδίου της μάχης (The Battle of Thyrea. Determining the Site of the Battlefield)”, ΗΟΡΟΣ, 5, 101-118.
Phaklaris, P. B. (1990): Αρχαία Κυνουρια Ανθρωπινη δραστηριοτητα και περιβαλλον, Athènes.
Piérart, M. (2001a): “Argos, Philippe II et la Cynourie (Thyréatide): les frontières du partage des Héraclides”, in: Frei-Stolba, R. and Gex, K., ed., Recherches récentes sur le monde hellenistique : Actes du colloque international organisé à l’occasion du 60e anniversaire de Pierre Ducrey (Lausanne, 20-21 Novembre 1998), Berne, Francfort-sur-le-Main, 27-43.
Piérart, M. (2001b): “Observations sur la structure du livre II de la «Périégèse»: Argos, l’Argolide et la Thyréatide”, in: Knoepfler, D. and Piérart, M., eds., Éditer, traduire, commenter Pausanias en l’an 2000. Actes du colloque de Neuchâtel et de Fribourg (18-22 septembre 1998) autour de deux éditions en cours de la Périégèse, Genève, 203-221.
Piérart, M. (2014): “Les relations d’Argos avec ses voisines: repentirs et mises au point”, in: Christien, J. and Legras, B., ed., Sparte hellénistique : IVe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes de la table ronde organisée à Paris les 6 et 7 avril 2012, Besançon, 219-236.
Polinskaya, I. (2009): “Fifth-Century Horoi on Aigina: A Reevalution”, Hesperia, 78, 231-267.
Polinskaya, I. (2013): A Local History of Greek Polytheism: Gods, People and the Land of Aigina, 800-400 BCE, Leyde.
Pritchett, W. K. (1965-1991): Studies in Ancient Greek Topography. I-VI, Berkeley 1965–89; VII, Amsterdam 1991.
Shipley, G. (1996): “Archaeological Sites in Laconia and the Thyreatis”, in: Cavanagh, W., Crouwel, J., Catling, R. W. V. and Shipley, G., The Laconia survey: Continuity and change in a Greek rural landscape. Vol.2. Londres, 263-313.
Shipley, G. (1997): “ « The Other Lakedaimonians »: The Dependent Perioikic Poleis of Laconia and Messenia”, in: Hansen, M. H., ed., The Polis as an Urban Centre and as a Political Community, Copenhague, 189-281.
Shipley, G. (2000): “The Extent of Spartan Territory in the Late Classical and Hellenistic Periods”, ABSA, 95, 367-390.
Shipley, G. (2004): “Lakedaimon”, in: Hansen, M. H. and Nielsen, T. H., ed., An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis: An Investigation Conducted by the Copenhagen Polis Centre for the Danish National Research Foundation, Oxford, 569-598.
Sirano, F. (2000): “Fuori da Sparta. Note di topografia lacone”, ASAA, 74-75, 397-465.
Stein, H. (1869-1871): Herodotus, Berlin.
Tausend, K. (2006): Verkehrswege der Argolis: Rekonstruktion und historische Bedeutung, Stuttgart.
Van Wees, H. (2003): “Conquerors and Serfs: Wars of Conquest and Forced Labour in Archaic Greece”, in: Luraghi, N. and Susan, E. A., ed., Helots and Their Masters in Laconia and Messenia: Histories, Ideologies, Structures, Washington DC, 33-80.
Winter, J. E. and Winter, F. E. (1990): “Some Disputed Sites and Itineraries of Pausanias in the Northeast Peloponnesos”, Échos du monde Classique, 34, 2, 221-261.
Woodhead, A. G. (1974): “Before the Storm”, in: Mélanges helléniques offerts à Georges Daux, Paris 375-388.
Notes
* This article was made possible by generous financial support from the European Union in the framework of the ERC project “FeBo: Federalism and Border Management in Greek Antiquity” (COG PR. 2021 Nr. 101043954, P.I. Elena Franchi). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. I am grateful to Stefania De Vido, Roy Van Wijk and to the anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions.
- Shipley 2000, 376-377 with previous bibliography; see esp. Hdt. 1.82; Thuk. 4.56.2; Polyb. 4.36. Further bibliography below, n. 15.
- Shipley 2000, 377.
- [1] So he sent to the Lakedaimonians as well as to the rest of the allies. Now at this very time the Spartans themselves were feuding with the Argives over the country called Thyrea; [2] for this was a part of the Argive territory which the Lakedaimonians had cut off and occupied. All the land towards the west, as far as Malea, belonged then to the Argives, and not only the mainland, but the island of Kythera and the other islands. (trans. by A.D. Godley [adapted])
- [7] (…) The Argives, who before had worn their hair long by fixed custom, shaved their heads ever after and made a law, with a curse added to it, that no Argive grow his hair, and no Argive woman wear gold, until they recovered Thyreai; [8] and the Lakedaimonians made a contrary law, that they wear their hair long ever after; for until now they had not worn it so. Othryades, the lone survivor of the three hundred, was ashamed, it is said, to return to Sparta after all the men of his company had been killed, and killed himself on the spot at Thyreai (trans. By A.D. Godley [adapted]
- See also Franchi 2009; 2021.
- As already stressed by Piérart 2001a, 34; 2001b, 219.
- See e.g. Thuk. 4.56.3.
- [1] As Kleomenes was seeking divination at Delphi, the oracle responded that he would take Argos. When he came with Spartans to the river Erasinos, which is said to flow from the Stymphalian lake (this lake issues into a cleft out of sight and reappears at Argos, and from that place onwards the stream is called by the Argives Erasinos – when Kleomenes came to this river he offered sacrifices to it. [2] The omens were in no way favorable for his crossing, so he said that he honored the Erasinos for not betraying its countrymen, but even so the Argives would not go unscathed. Then he withdrew and led his army seaward to Thyrea, where he sacrificed a bull to the sea and carried his men on shipboard to the region of Tiryns and to Nauplia. (transl. by A.D. Godley [adapted])
- See also Franchi 2014.
- Figueira 1993, 295. Cfr. Gomme ad 2.27 (p. 87). See below, p. 74.
- [1] During the summer the Athenians also expelled the Aiginetans with their wives and children from Aigina, on the ground of their having been the chief agents in bringing the war upon them. Besides, Aigina lies so near Peloponnese, that it seemed safer to send colonists of their own to hold it, and shortly afterwards the settlers were sent out. [2] The banished Aiginetans found an asylum in Thyrea, which was given to them by Lakedaimon to inhabit and to divide, not only on account of her quarrel with Athens, but also because the Aiginetans had laid her under obligations at the time of the earthquake and the revolt of the Helots. The territory of Thyrea is on the frontier of Argolis and Lakonia, reaching down to the sea. Those of the Aiginetans who did not settle here were scattered over the rest of Hellas. (transl. by J. M. Dent- E. P. Dutton [adapted])
- Figueira 1993, 295. Cfr. Gomme ad 2.27 (p. 87). See below, p. 74.
- See also comment of Hornblower-Pelling ad Hdt. 6.91 (p. 211), where we find “a very casual allusion to a much later event, the forcible Athenian removal of population of Aigina in 431 as being ‘not least responsible for the [Peloponnesian] war”.
- See Franchi forthcoming.
- The identification of Thyrea is debated. Among modern settlements are candidates Helleniko (LS AA 13; thus Phaklaris 1990, 78-90; Goester 1993, 55-81; Sirano 2000, 423); Kastraki Kato Meligous (LS AA 11, Tausend 2006, 127), where, however, material culture is scarce (Phaklaris 1990, 104-5; Goester 1993, 99; Pritchett IV 72 ); Nisi Agiou Andrea (LS AA 19, where Thyrea would have been relocated after the Athenian attack of 424 according to Pritchett VI 95; see also Shipley 1996, 279; 1997, 231; 2004, 578); or Marmaralona Xerokambiou (LS AA16; see Phaklaris 1987; 1990, 111-17; Winter & Winter 1990; Sirano 2000, 427). See Christien & Spyropoulos 1985, 457; Pritchett IV, 64-74 (on p. 66 also the discussion of the Loukou hypothesis formulated by William M. Leake, which is however debunked [see also Goester 1993, 49]; on p. 69-70 and 72 the Kastraki hypothesis, preferred by Pritchett); Shipley 1997, 231. Sirano 2000 provides a recent overview.
- Thyreatis is usually considered to be the plain of modern Astros (Christien & Spyropoulos 1985, 455; Goester 1993; Piérart 2001, 34; Christien 2018, 617). Cf. also Musti & Torelli 1986, 339; Hornblower ad 2.27 (p. 283) on the possibility that the note on the Thyreatis is an intrusive gloss (“Thyrea is familiar, to us as to Th.s contemporary readers, from Hdt. 1.82”), a solution towards which, however, the commentator seems not to lean (“the difficulty is to know where to draw the line”).
- [56] [2] From thence (scil. Kythera) they (scil.the Athenians) sailed round to the Limeran Epidauros, ravaged part of the country, and so came to Thyrea in the Kynourian territory, upon the Argive and Lakonian border. This district had been given by its Lakedaimonian owners to the expelled Aiginetans to inhabit, in return for their good offices at the time of the earthquake and the rising of the Helots; and also because, although subjects of Athens, they had always sided with Lakedaimon. [57] [1] While the Athenians were still at sea, the Aiginetans evacuated a fort which they were building upon the coast, and retreated into the upper town where they lived, rather more than a mile from the sea. [2] One of the Lakedaimonian district garrisons which was helping them in the work, refused to enter here with them at their entreaty, thinking it dangerous to shut themselves up within the wall, and retiring to the high ground remained quiet, not considering themselves a match for the enemy. [3] Meanwhile the Athenians landed, and instantly advanced with all their forces and took Thyrea. The town they burnt, pillaging what was in it; the Aiginetans who were not slain in action they took with them to Athens, with Tantalos, son of Patrokles, their Lakedaimon commander, who had been wounded and taken prisoner. (transl. by J. M. Dent – E. P. Dutton [adapted])
- Shipley 2004, 595, who retains that the polis existed “before the Aiginetans came (though there may have been a time when the area was called Thyrea but did not contain a polis)”.
- The same spring the Lakedaimonians marched against Argos, and went as far as Kleonai, when an earthquake occurred and caused them to return. After this the Argives invaded the Thyreatis, which is on their border, and took much booty from the Lakedaimonians, which was sold for no less than twenty-five talents. (transl. by J. M. Dent – E. P. Dutton [adapted])
- See e.g. Anth. Pal. 7.430; 431; 432; 526; 720; 721; Sos. FGrHist. IIIb 595 F 6 (=Athen. XIV 646a); D.S. 12.44.3; Chrysermos of Korinth FGrHist 287 F 2a in [Plut.] Par.Min. 306 A-B; Teseus FGrHist 453 F 2 in Stob. Flor. 3.7.68 H; Strab. 8.6.17-18 C 376; Plut. De Herod. mal. XVII, p. 858, C-D; Paus. 2.29.5; 2.38.5; 3.7.5; 10.9.12; Steph.Byz. s.v. Θυρέα.
- Thyrea: Anth. Pal. 7.431; 432; 526; 720; 721; Sos. FGrHist. IIIb 595 F 6 (= Athen. XIV 646a); D.S. 12.44.3 (Thyreai: τὰς καλουμένας Θυρέας); D.S. 12.65.9 (again Thyreai: Θυρέας μὲν κειμένας ἐν τοῖς μεθορίοις τῆς Λακωνικῆς καὶ τῆς Ἀργείας); Teseus FGrHist 453 F 2 in Stob. Flor. 3.7.68H; Strab. 1.4.7 (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); 8.6.17-18 C 376 (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); D.Hal. De Thuc. 14.14; Plut. De Herod. mal. XVII, p. 858, C-D; Paus. 2.29.5; 8.3.3; 8.54.4; 10.9.12; Herodian. de pros. cath. 3.1.397, 22–24 Lentz; Timaios Lex.Plat. s.v. Γυμνοπαιδία Ruhnken pp. 412-413 (Thyreai: ἐν Θυρέαις); Phryn. Praep.Soph. s.v. Γυμνοπαιδιά p. 57, 19-21 De Borries (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); Menander rhet. 3.365.5-9 Spengel; Steph.Byz. s.v. Θυρέα; Choirob. GrammGr. 4.1 p. 297: (=E. Bekker, Anecdota Graeca III, Berlin 1821, p. 1408, s.v. Πάρ); Phot. Lex., Γυμνοπαιδία γ 230 Theodoridis (περὶ Θυραίαν); γ 231 Theodoridis (Thyreai: ἐν Θυραίαις); Etym.Mag., s.v. Γυμνοπαιδία p. 243 ll. 4-7 Gaisford (περὶ Θυραίαν, depending on Phot. γ 230); Lex.Sabb., s.v. Γυμνοπαιδία; Apostol. 5.68 Leutsch-Schneidewin (Thyreai: ἐν Θυραίαις, both depending on Photius γ 231).Thyreatis: Anth.Pal. 7.430; Chrysermos of Korinth FGrHist 287 F 2a in [Plut.], Par.Min., 306 A-B; Paus. 2.38.5; 2.38.7 (but with reference to a gulf: ἐς τὸν Θυρεάτην κόλπον); 3.7.5; Steph. Byz. s.v. Θυρῆ.
- Cfr. also, in the same vein yet in more general terms, Plut. Pyrrh. 32.9.
- Thyrea: Paus. 2.29.5; 8.3.3; 8.54.4; 10.9.12; Thyreatis: Paus. 2.38.5; 2.38.7 (ἐς τὸν Θυρεάτην κόλπον, see above, n. 21); 3.7.5.
- Subsequently a division of the Argives who, under Deiphontes, had seized Epidauros, crossed to Aigina, and, settling among the old Aiginetans, established in the island Dorian manners and the Dorian dialect. Although the Aiginetans rose to great power, so that their navy was superior to that of Athens, and in the Persian war supplied more ships than any state except Athens, yet their prosperity was not permanent but when the island was depopulated by the Athenians, they took up their abode at Thyrea, in Argolis, which the Lakedaimonians gave them to dwell in. They recovered their island when the Athenian warships were captured in the Hellespont, yet it was never given them to rise again to their old wealth or power. (transl. by W.H.S. Jones- H.A. Ormerod [adapted])
- The straight road from Tegea to Thyrea and to the villages its territory [scil. Thyreatis: ἐν τῇ Θυρεάτιδι] contains can show a notable sight in the tomb of Orestes, the son of Agamemnon; from here, say the Tegeans, a Spartan stole his bones. In our time the grave is no longer within the gates. By the road flows also the river Garates. Crossing the Garates and advancing ten stades you come to a sanctuary of Pan, by which is an oak, like the sanctuary sacred to Pan. (transl. by W.H.S. Jones- H.A. Ormerod)
- [12] So much for this belief. The struggle for the district called Thyrea between the Lakedaimonians and the Argives was also foretold by the Sibyl, who said that the battle would be drawn. But the Argives claimed that they had the better of the engagement, and sent to Delphi a bronze horse, supposed to be the wooden horse of Troy. It is the work of Antiphanes of Argos. (transl. by W.H.S. Jones- H.A. Ormerod [adapted])
- See above, n. 15.
- [6] As you go from these common graves you come to Athene, where Aiginetans once made their home, another village Neris, and a third Eua, the largest of the villages, in which there is a sanctuary of Polemokrates. This Polemokrates is one of the sons of Machaon, and the brother of Alexanor; he cures the people of the district, and receives honors from the neighbours. (transl. by W.H.S. Jones- H.A. Ormerod [adapted])
- Legrand 1953 ad l. p. 72. Here is the passage (8.73.3 Rosén): οἱ δὲ Κυνούριοι αὐτόχθονες ἐόντες δοκέουσι μοῦνοι εἶναι Ἴωνες, ἐκδεδωρίευνται δὲ ὑπό τε Ἀργείων ἀρχόμενοι καὶ τοῦ χρόνου ἐόντες Ὀρνεῆται καὶ οἱ περίοικοι ([3] The Kynourians are aboriginal and seem to be the only Ionians, but they have been Dorianized by time and by Argive rule. They are the Orneatai and the perioikoi., transl. by A.D. Godley[adapted] ). Given that Ὀρνεῆται raises a problem of a topographical nature (the Orneai known to us is north of Argos), alternative proposals (in addition to expunging [Macan 1908 ad l. p. 472; Stein 1871 ad l. pp. 55-56 expunges only καὶ οἱ περίοικοι] or retaining the original lesson by resorting to the hypothesis of a second Kynouria north of Argos [cfr. Gomme et al. 1970, 108-110; Baladié 1978, 295-296 ad Strab. 8.6.7 C 370]) include Hyrnathioi (Van Wees 2003, 44) and Oreiatai, the ancient name of Prasiai according to Pausanias (Christien & Spyropoulos 1985, 459 and n. 23; Christien 1992, 157-158, 161-162; Fontana 2016, who also discusses K.O. Müller’s [1824 I 83, 159] problematic proposal to understand Orneatai figuratively to mean generically ‘perioecic’). Cfr. esp. Piérart 2001, 34-35.
- Phaklaris 1990, 89.
- See Nenci 1994, ad l. p. 276, with further sources and literature.
- Polinskaya 2013, 269-83, and, more recently, Corti 2021.
- Figueira 1981, 2-4, 7-8; 1983; 1985. See also Franchi 2021, 170 with notes.
- See Figueira 1991, 104-105.
- With comment by Nenci ad l., p. 217, also citing further Herodotean passages on the Aiginetans-Athenians feud.
- With comment by Nenci ad l., p. 219; see also 6.61; 6.64-65.
- Nenci 1998, ad 6.85-93 p. 247.
- Cf. Hammond 1955; Jeffery 1962; Figueira 1988 (who nevertheless argues against Hammond regarding the chronology of single events).
- with comment of How-Wells ad 7.91 (pp. 100-101) and of Hornblower-Pelling ad 6. 88 (p. 210) and ad.6.91 (p. 211)
- See Figueira 1991, 105-106 and n. 4 at p. 105.
- Thuk. 1.104 with comment of Gomme ad l. (p. 307) and ad 1.67.2 (p. 225). Cfr. also Thuk. 1.105 with comment of Figueira 1991, 106-107 and of Hornblower ad l. (p. 166). Cfr. Ostwald 1982, 23; Lévy 1983, 249-50; Figueira 1981, 20 (= 1993, 108); 1991, 108-112 (vs. MacDowell 1960).
- Barron 1983; Meiggs 1966, 183f; Woodhead 1974; Figueira 1991, 115-128 (dating them to the decades preceding 431 and maintaining that they delimit precincts); Polinskaya 2009; 2013, 268-69, 313 (she adds 4 more inscriptions which she dates to the decades after 431 and maintains they delimit agricultural estates allocated to gods).
- Cf. Figueira 1993, 107 (=1981, 18) with n. 90, where he comments on Thuk. 2.27.2 and 4.56.2; see also Figueira 1991, 127; Figueira 2016, 27.
- 1.67.2 with comment by Hornblower ad l. (p. 109: “The present passage comes closest than any other in Book I to explaining the treatment of the Aiginetans described at II.27, and the explanation there given for it”); see also Plut. Per. 29.5.
- 4.56.2 with comment by Figueira 1993, 295 (=1988, 526); Shipley 1997, 205. The condition of these perioikoi may have been perceived as not very different form the one of the Helots (cfr. also Hdt. 9.80), either from a Spartan perspective or from a perspective the Athenians attributed to the Spartans: Irwin 2016, 376. The Aiginatean logoi feature mixed attitudes at Sparta toward Aigina: see Irwin 2016, 376 and 417. See also Steup ad 4.57.3 and Gomme ad 4.57.3 (p. 512), both commenting on the archon mentioned by Thukydides.
- Figueira 1993, 295. Cfr. Gomme ad 2.27 (p. 87): “[τὴν γῆν νέμεσθαι=] to occupy and cultivate, but not to own, perhaps. In V.41.2 the Lacaedemonians νέμονται δ᾽ αὐτὴν, without reference to expelled Aiginetans”.
- Shipley 1997, 231; 2004, 595.
- Irwin 2011, 376, comparing the different perspectives of Thuk. 2.27, 4.56.2 and D.S. 12.44.2-3.
- Figueira 1988, 527 (= Figueira 1993, 296).
- Cfr. Matthaiou-Pikoulas 1989, 77-124 (ed. princeps for the new fragment); Meiggs-Lewis2 1989, 312; Loomis 1991; SEG 36.357.
- With some exceptions: 6.92 (the thousand led by Euribates were volunteers). Further sources: see e.g. Σ Pind. P. 8.113c and Σ Pind. O. 8.39a-b with comment of Polinskaya 2013, 121-23 and 397.
- τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἦρος καὶ ἐπ᾽ Ἄργος στρατεύσαντες Λακεδαιμόνιοι μέχρι μὲν Κλεωνῶν ἦλθον, σεισμοῦ δὲ γενομένου ἀπεχώρησαν. καὶ Ἀργεῖοι μετὰ ταῦτα ἐσβαλόντες ἐς τὴν Θυρεᾶτιν ὅμορον οὖσαν λείαν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων πολλὴν ἔλαβον, ἣ ἐπράθη ταλάντων οὐκ ἔλασσον πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι. The same spring the Lakedaimonians marched against Argos, and went as far as Kleonai, when an earthquake occurred and caused them to return. After this the Argives invaded the Thyreatis, which is on their border, and took much booty from the Lakedaimonians, which was sold for no less than twenty-five talents. (transl. by J. M. Dent – E. P. Dutton [adapted])
- Figueira 1981, 301 with n. 25 (=1993, 532) also commenting on some passages by Xenophon on Aiginetan campaigns of pillaging on behalf of Spartan interests (HG 5.1.1-2; 13; 18-24; 29; 5.4.61; 6.2.1).
- which, according to Pritchett, was relocated at Nisi Agious Andrea. Cf. Pritchett VI 95 vs. Shipley 1997, 231. See Balandier & Guintrand 2019, 439-440.
- with comment of Shipley 1997, 231. This is maybe the reason why they use it in the plural form?: D.S. 12.44.3 (Thyreai: τὰς καλουμένας Θυρέας); D.S. 12.65.9 (again Thyreai: Θυρέας μὲν κειμένας ἐν τοῖς μεθορίοις τῆς Λακωνικῆς καὶ τῆς Ἀργείας); Strab. 1.4.7 (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); 8.6.17-18 C 376 (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); Timaios Lex.Plat., s.v. Γυμνοπαιδία Ruhnken pp. 412-13 (Thyreai: ἐν Θυρέαις); Phryn. Praep.Soph., s.v. Γυμνοπαιδιά p. 57, 19-21 De Borries (Thyreai?: περὶ Θυρέας); Phot. Lex. Γυμνοπαιδία γ 231 Theodoridis (Thyreai: ἐν Θυραίαις); Lex.Sabb., s.v. Γυμνοπαιδία; Apostol. 5.68 Leutsch-Schneidewin (Thyreai: ἐν Θυραίαις, both depending on Photius γ 231). Contra Pritchett VI 95.
- See above, p. 72. The locations of these settlements are disputed in modern studies. It was proposed for Anthene the modern Tsiorovos (on Mount Zavitsa), Nisi Paraliou Astros (AA6) or Nisi Agiou Andrea (AA19), where Classical to Roman pottery was found (Pritchett III, 116-121; VI 94; Phaklares 1990, 47-78; Goester 1993, 54, 91-93; Shipley LS II, 277; 1996, 211-212, 226; Tausend 2006, 129; Balandier & Guintrand 2019, 432 [Tsiorovos], 433-434 [Nisi Paraliou Astros and Nisi Agiou Andrea], 442; Sirano 2000, 423); for Eua Helleniko and Loukou (Kallitsis 1960; Christien & Spyropoulos 1985; Pritchett III 124-7; IV 66; VI ch. 2 and p. 91, 92; Phaklaris 1990, 108-114 on finds at Loukou, identified with Roman Eua: Tausend 2006, 129; Goester 1993, 44, 54; Shipley 1997, 241; 2004, 581; Tausend 2006, 128; Balandier & Guintrand 2019: 433–34, 441, 444–45; Sirano 2000, 425); for Neris Tsiorovos and Kourmeti (also known as Kourmeki]/Kato Doliana (Pritchett III 122-124, IV 75-9; Phaklares 1990, 95; Christien & Spyropoulos 1985, 455; Shipley 1997, 212; 2004, 575; Kritzas 2006: 429–30; Tausend 2006, 129). On Eua and Neris as Argive komai in the 4th BC see Kritzas 2006, 429; Piérart 2014; Balandier & Guintrand 2019, 440; Blomley 2022, 51.
