central part of the PELOPONNESE (BA 58 C2; Müller I, 750–51). Their claim to AUTOCHTHONY, attested already in the Hesiodic corpus (Hes. F160–61 M‐W with Fowler 2013, 84–96 and 103–12), is fully endorsed by Herodotus, who counts the Arcadians among the PELASGIANS (1.146; 2.171; 8.73). While defined by this close connection to their land, the Arcadians also took part in the Greek COLONIZATION of the MEDITERRANEAN. Herodotus mentions their presence in Asia Minor as an argument against the supposed ethnic purity of the Ionian Dodecapolis (1.146); later, he lists the Arcadians among the seven tribes that make up the population of CYPRUS (7.90).
SPARTA’s expansionist policy in the Peloponnese inevitably led to conflicts with Arcadian city‐states. Herodotus narrates extensively Sparta’s repeated attempts to capture TEGEA after annexing MESSENIA (end of seventh century BCE); the Lacedaemonians only succeeded after they recovered ORESTES’ bones from Tegea (1.66–68). Furthermore, when King CLEOMENES took refuge in Arcadia, he was preparing the locals for hostilities against the Spartans; according to Herodotus, this threat led the Spartans to bring Cleomenes back (6.74–75). Finally, two of the five great victories that the Spartans achieved after they employed the famous Iamid seer Teisamenus were against Arcadian CITIES (9.35).
During the PERSIAN WARS, Arcadian cities contributed 2,120 men to the Greek army sent to the THERMOPYLAE (7.202) and participated in the Peloponnesian effort to fortify the ISTHMUS (8.72). Arcadian soldiers also fought at PLATAEA (9.28); most of them were from Tegea, while the Mantineans arrived shortly after the battle (9.77).
SEE ALSO: Ethnicity; Ionians; Mantineia; Peloponnesian League; Teisamenus son of Antiochus
REFERENCE
1 Fowler, Robert L. 2013. Early Greek Mythography. Vol. 2, Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
FURTHER READING
1 Callmer, Christian. 1943. Studien zur Geschichte Arkadiens bis zur Gründung des Arkadischen Bundes. Lund: Gleerup.
IACP, pp. 505–39.
ARCESILAUS I (Ἀρκεσίλεως, ὁ)
TYPHAINE HAZIZA
Université de Caen Normandie
Son of the founder of the Greek city of CYRENE in LIBYA (North Africa), Arcesilaus I reigned over Cyrene for 16 years (c. 600–583 BCE). Herodotus gives practically no information on his reign, except for its length and the fact that the number of colonists remained the same as it had under his father, BATTUS I (4.159). Overall Arcesilaus seems to have pursued policies put in place by his father, to whom cult worship was instituted in his role as founder. A hereditary MONARCHY was thus established in Cyrene, a distinctive feature which could stem from Libyan influences—relations with the native inhabitants were good under the first two kings.
SEE ALSO: Battus II; Colonization
FURTHER READING
1 Chamoux, François. 1953. Cyrène sous la monarchie des Battiades. Paris: de Boccard.
ARCESILAUS II (Ἀρκεσίλεως, ὁ)
TYPHAINE HAZIZA
Université de Caen Normandie
Son of BATTUS II, king of CYRENE in LIBYA (North Africa), Arcesilaus II had a difficult reign (from after 570 until around 550 BCE) marked by conflict with his brothers, who were no doubt at the head of the aristocratic party at Cyrene. Desiring FREEDOM from kingly rule, they founded the city of BARCA with the help of the native Libyans. When Arcesilaus attacked these Libyans and pursued them into the DESERT, they turned to the attack and destroyed the troops of the king at a place called LEUCON. Humiliated after losing 7,000 HOPLITES, Arcesilaus fell sick and was, according to Herodotus, strangled by one of his brothers, LEARCHUS. His MURDER was avenged by his wife, ERYXO (4.160).
SEE ALSO: Aristocracy; Battus I; Battus III; Vengeance
FURTHER READING
1 Chamoux, François. 1953. Cyrène sous la monarchie des Battiades, 136–43. Paris: de Boccard.
Corcella in ALC, 687–89.
ARCESILAUS III (Ἀρκεσίλεως, ὁ)
TYPHAINE HAZIZA
Université de Caen Normandie
Arcesilaus III, king of the Greek city of CYRENE in LIBYA (North Africa) from around 530 until 519 BCE. He did not accept the reforms of DEMONAX, an arbitrator called in from MANTINEIA, which were imposed by Arcesilaus’ father, BATTUS III. Herodotus, our principal source for this conflict (4.162–64), insists upon the tyrannical character of the power Arcesilaus sought to put in place with the aid of his mother, PHERETIME. In his struggle against the great landowners of Cyrene, he relied on help from the common people and also received, before he was forced into EXILE, the support of POLYCRATES, tyrant of SAMOS, who supplied him with MERCENARIES. This assistance allowed him to retake power at Cyrene, which he quickly conferred upon his mother. Arcesilaus did not hesitate to place himself under the authority of the Persians, who had just conquered EGYPT, in 526/5 (4.165.2). He ended up being assassinated by his adversaries while he was taking refuge with his father‐in‐law, ALAZIR, at BARCA (having misinterpreted an ORACLE which Herodotus reports, 4.163); but he left to Cyrene a regime which the last two Battiad kings maintained.
SEE ALSO: Monarchy; Stasis
FURTHER READING
1 Chamoux, François. 1953. Cyrène sous la monarchie des Battiades, 144–59. Paris: de Boccard.
Corcella in ALC, 690–94.
1 Laronde, André. 1990. “Cyrène sous les derniers Battiades.” In Cirene: storia, mito, litteratura. Atti del Convegno della S.I.S.A.C., edited by Bruno Gentili, 35–50. Urbino: QuattroVenti.
2 Marini, Sophie. 2013. “Grecs et Romains face aux populations libyennes.” Diss. Paris‐Sorbonne, Paris IV (www.theses.fr/2013PA040163).
ARCHAEOLOGY
MARGARET C. MILLER
University of Sydney
Herodotus is often described as the first anthropologist but, in view of his notably material outlook, he can also be seen as an archaeologist, seriously engaged in study of the physical testimonies to the past. Sometimes Herodotus is perceived as mis‐quoting or mis‐remembering elements of the material world, leading to doubts about his frequent claims to AUTOPSY. At other times archaeological investigation has found surprising and notable corroboration of details that had seemed too fantastic to be true.
Herodotus’ “archaeological” interests emerge in such details as attention to skeletal remains, whether ascribed to flying SNAKES (2.75)
