S. Plischke: Die Seleukiden und Iran

Cover
Titel
Die Seleukiden und Iran. Die seleukidische Herrschaftspolitik in den östlichen Satrapien


Autor(en)
Plischke, Sonja
Reihe
Classica et Orientalia 9
Erschienen
Wiesbaden 2014: Harrassowitz Verlag
Anzahl Seiten
XVIII, 408 S.
Preis
€ 78,00
Rezensiert für H-Soz-Kult von
Robert Sebastian Wójcikowski, Instytut Archeologii, Uniwersytet Jagielloński Kraków

In her dense and detailed book Sonja Plischke (now Sonja Richter) analyzes the multifaceted history of the Seleucid period in Iran. She carried out a real Herculean task, providing a volume containing a variety of problems from political history, administration and economy to coinage and religion. The book is divided into four parts: I ‘Introduction’ / ‘Einleitung’ (pp. 1–21), II ‘Structural conditions of Seleucid rule’ / ‘Strukturelle Bedingungen der seleukidischen Herrschaft’ (pp. 22–172), III ‘The Exercise of Power’ / ‘Herrschaftsausübung’ (pp. 173–314) and IV ‘Conclusions’ / ‘Fazit’ (pp. 315–334).

In her introduction Plischke gives an overview of the evidence and presents ‘the prehistory’ of the Seleucid period, including the Achaemenid period, the era of Alexander the Great and the Diadochi. Her interpretation of some aspects may not command general agreement. Noteworthy is a rather sketchy treatment of the Seleucid beginnings in Iran: Plischke discusses the wars of the Diadochi and the Seleucid conquest of Babylonia but fails to show the mechanism of Seleucus’ policies towards the Babylonians and western Iranians which was based on the acquisition of local Asiatic elites.

In part II Plischke diligently scrutinizes the literature and sources on a variety of issues concerning the system of kingship, Seleucid statehood, court, administration or the political role played by local Iranian populations. In the sub-chapter on nomads Plischke claims that the Abioi are part of the Dahae (p. 69, n. 383) but gives no reason for the hypothesis. In her discussion of the threat posed by nomads there is no mention of the chief testimonial, Strabo 11.8.3 (it does not appear in the index to the sources), which speaks of nomadic attacks on Parthia. This is a key piece of evidence that informs exactly about the situation of the people of northern Iran under the Seleucids.

In a subchapter on the city Alexandria/Antiochia in Margiane (pp. 118–120) Plischke describes Merw and Margiana. There is only a single paragraph on the controversial mention of Margiana in Curtius 7.10.15–16. Plischke cites here two different hypotheses but does not state her own position on the question. She also discusses the problem of the Oxos and Ochos Rivers and claims that ‘Bosworth’s assumption’ (‘die Annahme von Bosworth’) has been confirmed (p. 119). But which of Bosworth’s hypotheses does she mean? This is not clear, especially as Plischke refers to Bosworth’s article as a whole1 without giving a specific page reference.

Part III describes the history of the reign of the Seleucids in the East. An important part of Plischke’s subsequent reflections is dedicated to Seleucus’ Indian campaign and treaty with Indian king Chandragupta. It is doubtful whether Seleucus controlled the area around the southern slopes of the Hindukush (p. 187). Kabulistan and Arachosia were located in these parts of Afghanistan. The discussion on the demise of Seleucid power in Parthia and Bactria is a key issue for Plischke’s book. She gives a cursory analysis of Andragoras’ coinage (pp. 226–229) and the Diodotoi rebellion (pp. 229–236). She is not in favour of ascribing ‘imperialistic tendencies’ to Arsaces (Arsaces I, not II, as erroneously in the text) – as if he were not an enemy to be reckoned with by the Seleucids (p. 238, n. 447).

The ‘Conclusions’ / ‘Fazit’ are the final part of the book. Concerning the use of Aramaic, Plischke mentions the texts from Aï Khanoum and the Seleucid milestones from the Persis but omits the inscriptions from Armenia and legends from early Arsacid and Persid coins. The earliest Parthian texts from Old Nisa go back to the mid-2nd century BC, which did not come out of nowhere, but were a continuation of the Achaemenid administrative traditions. In the conclusions Plischke considers the part played by the ethnic criterion in Seleucid policy. She writes that the selection of management and administrative personnel was not at all based on ethnic criteria (“war in keiner Weise ethnisch motiviert”), but what counted was personal loyalty to the monarch and the advantages a given individual’s appointment offered on the basis of his ‘origin’ or ‘local background’ (p. 317). The meaning of this sentence is not clear, since an individual’s origin involves an ethnic dimension. Plischke then stresses the advantages entailed in the ‘ethnic’ origin of Apame and her half-Iranian son, Antiochus I (p. 318). So was ethnicity a relevant factor?

Plischke devotes very little attention to Armenia, which does not appear in the Index. It should be recalled that the significance of Armenia was appreciated in earlier publications on the Seleucids.2 The role of Media Atropatene has not been given a sufficient amount of attention, either. Plischke refers very superficially to military issues. The important battle of Ipsos in 301 BC, for example, is mentioned several times (pp. 111, 142, 188–190) but without analyzing it and without focusing on the presence of elephants that actually did not play any significant role in the battle. Furthermore, there is no sub-chapter dedicated to the Seleucid army and warfare.3 In the text there are some evident mistakes, e.g. “die Schlacht von Apameia 188 v.Chr.” which should be corrected to “die Schlacht von Magnesia 190” (p. 34). Furthermore, is Koshelenko 1972 not a book but an article. The first and only edition of Koshelenko’s book Grecheskiy polis came out in 1979. The numerous careless mistakes in the terminology and quotes suggest that the book was compiled too hastily.4

Plischke’s piece-by-piece discussion of evidence is extremely useful and it gives a clear impression of the material available, even though there are some lacunae. Furthermore, she demonstrates erudition, particularly in case of Graeco-Roman historiographic sources. The line of reasoning is sometimes somewhat unclear, but this is a work of impressive scholarship based on wide research. What we really miss in the book are original conclusions. Plischke has assiduously cited a vast array of opinions and studies, but does not contribute much to the state of research with new conclusions or new determinations. By and large, Plischke has made a very thorough investigation of the evidence which propels the common interest in the Seleucids forward. Her “Die Seleukiden und Iran” is a distinguished addition to recent numerous works on the history of the Seleucids, both monographs and collective volumes.5

Notes:
1 Albert B. Bosworth, A Missing Year in the History of Alexander the Great, in: Journal of Hellenic Studies 101 (1981), pp. 17–39.
2 Susan M. Sherwin-White / Amélie Kuhrt, From Samarkhand to Sardis. A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire, London 1993, pp. 190–197.
3 For some new insights, see Nick Sekunda, Seleucid and Ptolemaic Reformed Armies 168–145 BC, vol. 1: The Seleucid Army under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, Stockport 1994; Robert S. Wójcikowski, Kawaleria perska w okresie wczesnosasanidzkim, t. 1: Konnica w Iranie przed Sasanidami (Persian Cavalry in the Early Sasanian Period, vol. 1: Cavalry in Iran before the Sasanians), Oświęcim 2014, pp. 134–151.
4 See also Marek J. Olbrycht, Review of Sonja Plischke, Die Seleukiden und Iran, Wiesbaden 2014, in: Gnomon 88 (2016), pp. 716–720.
5 See, e.g., Laurent Capdetrey, Le pouvoir séleucide: territoire, administration, finances d’un royaume hellénistique (312–129 avant J-C.), Rennes 2007; Kyle Erickson / Gillian Ramsey (eds.), Seleucid Dissolution. The Sinking of the Anchor, Wiesbaden 2011; John D. Grainger, The Rise of the Seleukid Empire (323–223 BC): Seleukos I to Seleukos III, Barnsley 2014; Seleukos Nikator: Constructing a Hellenistic Kingdom, London 2014; Paul J. Kosmin, The Land of the Elephant Kings: Space, Territory, and Ideology in the Seleucid Empire, Cambridge 2014; Altay Coşkun / Alex McAuley (eds.), Seleukid Royal Women, Stuttgart 2016.

Redaktion
Veröffentlicht am
Redaktionell betreut durch
Klassifikation
Mehr zum Buch
Inhalte und Rezensionen
Verfügbarkeit
Weitere Informationen
Sprache der Publikation
Sprache der Rezension