Achaemenid Cultural History and the Hellenistic World

Abstract

Among the transformational impact of the “new Achaemenid history” on the study of the Hellenistic world, cultural history has been neglected: the assumption often seems to be of a radical break. Yet the prehistory of Hellenistic / Alexandrian elite poetry (so visible in the third century BCE, in its reflexive, playful, ironical, puzzling, aporetic, or destabilizing modes) partly lies in fourth century BCE Asia Minor, with such figures as Antimachos and Philetas. The practice of learning, philology, and scholarly allusion can hence be interpreted within the context of the Achaemenid empire, and specifically a frontier region of the empire, Asia Minor. The latter region offers a picture of complex ethnic identities and cultural practices, where local cultures, “Iranization,” “Achaemenidization,” and “Hellenization” coexisted within the context of Achaemenid power and social relations. I propose that the particular practice of Greek philology within the context of Achaemenid history can be interpreted together with Antimachos’ poetry, or Ephoros’ history, as a cultural stance of deliberate disengagement with the Achaemenid empire; this stance can be contrasted with other forms of “Hellenism” in Achaemenid Asia Minor: the “Ionian renaissance,” the adoption of Greek visual tropes by Achaemenid elites, eclectic forms developed by the Hekatomnid or the Lykian dynasts. In conclusion, I propose examining the specific nature of Antimachean “hyper-Hellenism” as a local learned culture within the Achaemenid empire, but also to reexamine the role of “pre-Hellenistic” forms (the term need not imply teleology) across the Achaemenid space.