F. W. Walbank_Bryn Mawr Classical Review 94

7/30/2019 F. W. Walbank_Bryn Mawr Classical Review 94

1/4

Bryn Mawr Classical Review 94.04.11

F.W. Walbank, The Hellenistic World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press, 1993. Revised edition. Pp. 288. $12.95. ISBN 0-674-38726-0 (pb).

Reviewed by Edmund F. Bloedow, University of Ottawa.

A concise but comprehensive and authoritative book in English on the Hellenistic

world, the world set in motion by Alexander the Great, is indeed most welcome.Walbank was unquestionably well equipped to undertake such a project, and his

contribution has been well appreciated in reviews following the publication of the

first edition in 1981.

What does the revised edition have to offer? Much has been published in this field

in the intervening years, not a little of which could significantly enhance a secondedition. Unfortunately, however, the main text has remained completely unaltered.

The only revision consists of twenty-seven entries under "Further Reading andBibliography" at the end (266-277). Peter Green's statement in the blurb on the

back cover, implying that the book is "commendably up-to-date" is therefore a

trifle misleading.

It would be going too far afield to attempt here to integrate everything that hasbeen published meanwhile on Alexander the Great and Hellenistic history and

Hellenistic civilisation, or even the twenty-seven studies which have been added tothe Bibliography. I shall therefore restrict my comments to a few aspects of the

original edition, and also attempt to illustrate how the book could have profited by

more thorough revision.

While Walbank did indeed provide a "lucid and authoritative" account in his first

edition (Green), and while it may well be (partly by reason of being most up-to-date at the time) "the best book available in English" (Lane Fox), it is not the most

readable. Welles'Alexander and the Ancient World(Toronto 1970), of comparablelength, while now admittedly less up-to-date, was none the less more readable and

scarcely less informative.1

Walbank's survey of "Alexander the Great" (29-45) is a matter-of-fact account,with little relief. That may, however, be overlooked since the book is primarilyabout the Hellenistic world. Much the same, however, applies to his account of

"The Formation of the Kingdoms" (46-59). To take but one instance -- Eumenes,

who occupied an almost unique position on Alexander's staff and had a significantcareer as one of the Successors. We are, however, simply given the bare facts

about him: that he was one of those present at Babylon when Alexander died,
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT1http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT1http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT1http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT1


2/4

where he is described as "Alexander's secretary and the only Greek among the

leading Macedonians" (47); that he was involved in a battle against Craterus, in

which the latter also died (49); that Antigonus organised a force against him (49,50); his success against Ptolemy (101); a notice that he had meanwhile died (101).

By contrast, Bengtson gives a much better idea of Eumenes, both in isolatedreferences and especially in a brief paragraph devoted to him.2

It is also in connection with Eumenes that not insignificant revision could have

been included in a new edition. For instance, in a thoughtful study Badian has

demonstrated, on the basis of a papyrus fragment first published in 1951, thatprobably the most important problem with which Eumenes had to cope was that oflanguage. Since Walbank not infrequently cites ancient sources (in translation), the

quoting of this papyrus could be illuminating:

When Eumenes saw the close-locked formation of the Macedonian phalanx ... hesent Xennias once more, a man whose speech was Macedonian, bidding himdeclare that he would not fight them frontally but would follow them with his

cavalry and units of light troops and bar them from provisions.

As Badian comments, "this clearly shows that the phalanx had to be addressedin Macedonian, if he wanted to be sure (as Eumenes certainly did) that they would

understand ... the suggestion is surely thatMacedonian was the language of theinfantry and that Greek was a difficult, indeed aforeign, tongue to them ... we can

now see that his disability was not only his Greek birth, as has always been

realized, but the simple fact that he could not directly communicate withMacedonian soldiers. His alien culture and provenance were not only obvious inan accent: it was a matter oflanguage. In the end, he therefore lost his bid for

power and his life".3

Walbank duly notices that Clearchus of Soli, an Aristotelian philosopher, travelledthe 5000 km from Delphi to Ai Khanum, on the northern frontier of present-day

Afghanistan, and there became responsible for introducing the 140 philosophical

maxims set up in Delphi, some of which French archaeologists found in 1966inscribed on a pillar that had been erected in the middle of the city (60). And while

he highlights some of the other significant information that turned up in the highlyimportant excavations at this site, there is much more that could be added in arevised edition. Moreover, the following should be added in the Bibliography, i.e.,

over and above the two studies cited, one by Bernard and the other by Robert: P.

Bernard,Fouilles d'A Khanoum I. Campagnes 1965, 1966, l967, 1968 (Memoiresde la dlgation archologique franaise en Afghanistan 21) (Paris 1973) (cf. K.

Fischer, Gnomon 58 [1976], 290-95; O. Gallium,Fouilles d'A Khanoum II. Lespropyles de la rue principale (Mem. de la dlg. arch. fran. en Afgh. 26) (Paris

1983); H.P. Francfort,Fouilles d'A Khanoum III. Le sanctuaire du temple niches

indents 2: Les trouvailles (Mem. de la dlg. arch. fran. en Afgh. 27) (Paris

1984); P. Bernard,Fouilles d'A Khanoum IV. Les magnus hors trsors. Questions
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT2http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT2http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT2http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT3http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT3http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT3http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT3http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT2


3/4

d'histoire grvo-bactrienne (Mem. de la dlg. arch. fran. en Afgh. 28) (Paris

1985) (cf. S. Sherwin-White,JUS107 [1987], 238-39); P. Leriche,Fouilles d'A

Khanoum V. Les ramparts et les monuments associs (Mem. de la dlg. arch.fran. en Afgh. 29) (Paris 1986) (cf. R.A. Tomlinson,JHS107 [1987], 251-52). On

special aspects: P. Bernard, "Alexandre de A Khanoum,"Journal desSavants (1982), 125-38 (taking issue with A.B. Bosworth,JHS101 [1981], 17-39,and idem,JHS100 [1980], 1-21); P. Bernard and O. Gallium, "Magnus indites

A Khanoum (Afghanistan),"RevNum 22 (1980), 9-32; S. Veuve, "Cadranssolaires greco-bactriens A Khanoum (Afghanistan)",BCH106 (1982), 23-51; C.

Rapina, "Les textes letterers grecs de la Trsorerie d'A Khanoum," BCH111

(1987), 225-66.

Although A Khanum is the most conspicuous example, there are other instances of

a not dissimilar nature. The above observations are not made so much with

reference to the original edition rather, are they meant to indicate how much bettera new edition might have been, had the most recent finds and the latest research

been reflected in the body of the text.

The chapter on "The Frontiers of the Hellenistic World" could have profited from a

summary at the end. This in fact applies to all chapters.

In the chapter "Religious Developments," the Maccabaean revolt appears to begiven an importance disproportionate to his historical importance (222-26). It

would warrant this amount of space if it were true that, as Walbank maintains, "it

helped to create the conditions in Palestine which made it fertile soil for the rise ofChristianity two hundred years later" (222). Conditions in Palestine in the time of

Jesus can scarcely be said to have emerged out of a Maccabaean-type revolt or out

of a matrix of similar religious-nationalist motives. The "mixed Jewish andHellenistic environment," within which Walbank rightly sees Christianityemerging and developing, was not a result of the Maccabaean uprising -- rather

came about in spite of it. As Walbank notes, "the Jewish conflict continued" --

becoming "part of the Roman history of the near east" (226). It was precisely this

narrow nationalist Jewish element which the early Christians had to combat with

great vigour. What contributed much more to the rise and spread of Christianitywas the overall religious situation among ordinary people throughout the

Hellenistic world. It is this aspect which should have received much moreattention, instead of approximately one page.4

The overall summary of the book (249-51) is welcome, but should be readalongside the masterful overview provided by Bengtson and now available in

English.5

There are a few idiosyncracies in the book. I cite only the following. "In 283, on

his death, Ptolemy II proclaimed his father a god..." (213). Sometimes it is good
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT4http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT4http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT4http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT5http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT5http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT5http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT5http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1994/94.04.11.html#NT4


4/4

that the knowledge of history takes precedence over grammar. An error has crept

in "Contents" (7) in connection with Chapter 11. It begins on p. 198, not 200.

NOTES

[1] Walbank does not include it in his Bibliography.

[2] H. Bengtson,History of Greece (Ottawa 1988), 217, 225, 226, and especially

228. In fact, in an account of comparable length, Bengtson gives an equallyauthoritative but much fuller picture of "the foundation of the kingdoms" (ibid.,

225-239).

[3] E. Badian, "Greeks and Macedonians," in B. Barr-Sharrar and E.N. Borza

(eds.),Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic

Times (Studies in the History of Art 10) (Washington 1982), 41. [4] Incidentally, the dating of the book of Daniel to just before 163 BC (222)

does not seem to reflect the latest research on this subject.

[5] H. Bengtson,History of Greece (Ottawa 1988), 280-91.

Documents

F. W. Walbank_Bryn Mawr Classical Review 94