The Process of Hellenization - Term Paper Example

Running Head: Hellenization Hellenization of Hellenization The Seleucid Empire was one of the s created after the death of Alexander the Great. Vast areas of present day Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and India were under the control of this empire. As Alexander’s generals battled for supremacy after his death, Seleucus received Babylonia. He expanded his dominions to include the eastern part of Alexander’s empire. He went to India reaching an agreement with Chandragupta Maurya. The agreement called for the exchange of eastern territories in return for war elephants which played a decisive role in the battle of Ipsus. Seleucus captured Eastern Anatolia and Northern Syria at the Battle of Ipsus where he found a new capital city. Another capital was established in the north of Babylon. The defeat of his rival Corupedion heralded the greatest expansion of the empire. His ambitions to expand his dominions in Europe were thwarted after his assassination by Ptolemy Ceraunus. His successors faced many challenges as repeated wars with Ptolemy II and Celtic invasions prompted them to focus on the West. Some provinces began to assert their independence as a result of their focus towards the West. A brief revival of the empire would begin under Seleucus II’s younger son, Antiochus III the Great. He would spend his term crushing rebellious governors and provinces. The empire would experience disintegration after being defeated by the Romans in 191 BC. The empire would further experience civil wars and strife as rival governors would battle each other. The empire would finally collapse as a result of foreign invasions and rebellions (Sherwin, 1990). The Seleucid Empire comprised a vast empire which spanned from the Aegean Sea to Afghanistan. It had many ethnic groups like Greeks, Persians, Medes, Jews and Armenians. The rulers of the empire wanted to establish a policy of unity based on the principles of Alexander the Great. This process was called Hellenization which started after Greek cities were built throughout the empire. Many ancient towns and cities were renamed with Greek names. Many Greeks immigrated to various parts of the empire because of the problems of overpopulation in Greece. Colonization of the parts of the empire was an effective tool to advance Greek interests and consolidate their monopoly. This also allowed the assimilation of the different racial and ethnic groups. The native elite also adopted Greek practices and customs in order to enhance their public status. The ruling Macedonian elite also embraced many local traditions. Hellenistic ideas rapidly expanded over a period of two hundred and fifty years into the Middle East and Central Asian cultures. Many cities were established for trade and commerce. The existing native cities were coerced or began the Hellenized philosophic thought, religious ideas, and political ideologies. There was some measure of success in the mixing of Hellenized and indigenous ideas. This would lead to peace and rebellion in some parts of the empire. The Jews for instance would not accept the Hellenization of their religious ideas and beliefs. This would lead to the forcible Hellenization of the Jews which would provoke conflict and rebellion (Teixidor, 1990). Mesopotamia was heavily influenced by Hellenization because there were many cities where Greeks and Macedonians lived. Greek Officials had complete civil and military authority. They were also exempted from taxes. The native cities continued with their systems of government and religion. Greek cities had many Greek temples devoted to the worship of Greek gods. Native cities had native temples which worshipped native gods of Mesopotamia. Greek ideas influenced the local elite and educated people. Greek philosophy, religion and belief did have an impact on the local population. However there is lack of research regarding the enthusiasm of the local population towards these beliefs and ideas. The native priests were not subjected to government persecution. Many ancient forms of worship would continue under their rule. Cuneiform writing by local priests continued to flourish under their rule. Mesopotamia’s administrative institutions remained hardly changed with the old taxes simply paid to the new rulers. The satrapy allowed the domination of the country by the Seleucids. A satrap was in control of each satrapy which was divided into eparchies. Administration was further divided in the cities into smaller units of administration. Greek and Aramaic were the official languages of the empire. The legal system was a mixture of local and Greek laws. Research has found of the existence of a system of controls and taxes on goods. There were many Greek officials who presided over the economic system of the local province. Local Mesopotamian law was respected and integrated into the new legal system (Boiy, 2004). Paintings and artistic representations have been very rare from the Seleucid period. Some kind of popular art, seals and clay figurines have been excavated by archaeologists. They have found both Greek and local styles. This points to the evidence of syncretism in cultures. Statues and statuettes of Heracles have been found which indicate the popularity of the Greek deity amongst the local population. Greek became the official language of the empire. However Aramaic and Greek were used throughout the empire. Aramaic would eventually evolve into Syriac and Mandaic over a period of several years. The local literature of the natives is limited to ancient religious texts. Some local authors wrote in Greek but little of their work exists today. The local Greek colonists were interested in the culture of the local population. Many important works in astrology, astronomy, geography and other sciences have been found. Greek was a very popular language amongst the educated people of the local provinces. Many Greek colonists settled into plots of land given by the government. The process of Greek colonization would continue until the conflicts of the empire would halt this process. However it is fascinating that Greek influences and practices continued to flourish in the empire even when the process of Greek colonization was halted. Many local people would still adopt Greek ideas, beliefs, religious beliefs and philosophies and integrate with their local culture. The Seleucids also influenced the local calendars of Mesopotamia. Local people would adopt the calendar and dating system which was imposed by the Seleucids (Sherwin, 1983). The Jews of Palestine were caught in the rivalry between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms. Like other native people affected by Hellenization, the Jews were also influenced in their language, custom, architecture, dress and philosophical ideas. The Jews also learned Greek and changed their names to Greek names. The names of cities because changed as Akko became Ptolemais. The language of trade and administration became Greek. Palestine was a strategic position in the trade between the north and south. The use of Greek was at first confined to the upper class educated Jews. The Jewish scriptures were also translated into Greek. This translation was known as the Septuagint. An estimated seventy rabbis translated the Jewish scriptures into Greek copies. The Jews remained in touch with Greek culture. By the third century BC, Judaism came to be known as Hellenistic Judaism. The majority of Jews did not show much resistance to Helenization despite some revolts. The Greeks appointed good administrators that were in frequent contact with the Jewish society. They supervised the administration of villages and presided over the paying of taxes. Greek education influenced the Jews and their education. Jewish circles in Qumran had influence of Greek philosophy. Despite this there is very little evidence to support the assertion that the majority of Jews spoke Greek. Some Jews had a reasonable knowledge of Greek as evidence from a number of writings. The Galilee region in Palestine was surrounded by Greek speaking cities. However there is little evidence to support the theory that it was bilingual (Boiy, 2005). The process of Hellenization was very long and it reached the levels of Jewish society under the Romans. Hellenized Jews began to interpret the events and personalities of the Bible according to Greek mythology. They said that the sons of Abraham were friends of Hercules. The descendants of Isaac were reputed to have sailed with the Argonauts. Moses was identified with Musaeus, the son of Orpheus. The process of Hellenization saw a strong reaction by the traditional Jews. A Jew named Jesus who adopted the name; Jason was an important proponent of adoption of Greek culture. He created an institution where Jews could discuss philosophical ideas. The Maccabees were a faction that was hostile to the process of Hellenization. The Jews would successfully gain independence from the declining Greek state. Anti Greek feelings led to propaganda against the Greeks. Forged prophecies and books were written about the imminent downfall of the Greeks. The anti Greek forces did not eradicate the Greek influence of the previous centuries. Judaism in the first century did not have a centralized doctrine. Many groups were however considered to be heretics. The Hellenizers were a set of diverse Jews that tried to unite the Greek and Jewish cultures. Jason who was an advocate of Hellenization was a faithful Jew. However he wanted to integrate Greek ideology, philosophy and beliefs into Judaism. There were some regions which were bilingual yet some cities remained exclusively filled with traditional Jews. The Seleucids were tolerant of native religions and customs (Spek, 2005). The lives of the majority of people living under the Seleucid Empire changed little since most of them lived in rural areas. However for Greeks it brought many economic opportunities in the conquered areas. The male members of the Greek elite had many opportunities. There was a constant need for Greek soldiers and administrators. In the Near East the cities prospered under the Seleucids. The population in these cities was in the hundreds of thousands. Many splendid public buildings and amenities were available in these cities. They had broad streets, monumental temples and elegant mansions. These cities were enclaves for the interaction between Greek and native cultures. Greek culture in these conquered areas was very different from the Macedonian kingdoms. Greek culture dominated the conquered areas of the Seleucid Empire. Greek was the language of the government. Hellenized intellectuals valued their knowledge of Greek ideas and philosophies. Education played a vital role in the dominance of Greek culture in the conquered areas. Books like Iliad and Odyssey of Homer were emphasized and their styles were copied. Artists and writers would travel in search of teachers and patrons of Greek culture. This led to the Greek dominance of the social and political life of the East. There were significant differences in the intellectual life of Aegean Greece and the Asian kingdoms. Some major festivals in Asia are an example of this difference. A festival of Artemis Leucophryene was celebrated at Magnesia (Wallenfeels, 1993). Persia saw a severe reaction against Hellenism. Ancient books were told to predict of the defeat of the Greeks. Aristocrats of the landholding military and religious classes were behind the resistance to Greek culture. Their high status was in danger. Iranian culture was not perceived to be threatened by the Greeks as there were very few Greeks in Iran. However the Iranian resistance came from articulate elements of Iranian society, that is, from those people who had been a part of or close to the dynasty, the aristocrats of both the landholding military and religious classes. Their position of high status was in danger. As far as Iranian culture as a whole was concerned, there were far too Greeks in Iran seriously to modify it. Those Europeans who settled in Iran were in course of time entirely assimilated by intermarriage. Iran in the third century BC was a prosperous state. Hellenic customs came along with Greek settlers, soldiers and administrators. They were practiced alongside ancient Iranian customs. The practice of some Iranians to adopt Hellenistic customs provoked a sharp reaction from anti Hellenic Iranians. This was perceived to be cultural treason. The religion of the Greeks was different from the Iranians. The Iranians did not erect temples with statues and they condemned the use of images. This however changed with the advent of Greek domination. The Greeks buried their dead by cremation which was considered unlawful by the Iranians. Hellenism was an attractive culture of higher civilization. It was the way of life for a victorious power (Burstein, 1985). It occupied the most lucrative and powerful positions of government. Some of the Greek elites were engaged in the exploitation of agriculture. Iranians elite had a tendency to imitate the ways of their new rulers. They desired to integrate themselves and make themselves more efficient. They wanted to observe the culture and manners of a people who were highly successful. The majority of Iranians remained hostile to the process of Hellenization. Some people however became cultural converts. Iranians who served with the Greek armies knew about Greek ways and religion. They also accepted the process due to their interaction in the army. Some Greeks adopted Iranian gods and religious rituals. A Greco-Iranian class with syncretic religious practices came into existence. This provoked a sharp resistance from the Iranians who considered the new religion as heresies. There are no records that the Greeks attempted to undermine the religion of Iran. Iranian holy places remained under Seleucid rule. The Iranian clergy also retained extensive lands and villages inhabited by serfs who worked on the land. Peasant resistance was almost non existent. There was no persecution of the peasants by the Seleucid Empire. They did not suffer under the oppression of the local Hellenized elite as they did in Syria. Iranian resistance was widespread in the upper classes who protested against the cultural treason of some Iranians who had become Hellenized. Hellenic rule and kingship were the real issues which faced the Iranians. In Iran the dynasties had established their right to rule as part of a divine scheme which the Macedonians could not fulfill (Eddy, 1961). Macedonians were not Aryans and Persians; therefore they could never be able to follow the Persian traditions. Iranians were committed to the idea of the lordship of Ahura Mazda. They could never believe that their deity could choose Macedonians over them. The opposition to Hellenization must be understood that it took place only under a specific class. The vast majority of people were not bothered about opposing the process of Hellenization. They were content with the tolerant policies of the Macedonians by which they could pursue their religious practices. The lack of unity amongst the Iranians was the reason why they could not oppose the Greeks. Another effect of Hellenization was a series of coins which showed local and Greek ideas. These coins could display fire temples and pictures of Iranian shrines. Pictures of Greek deities were also present in the coins. There were also coins inscribed with the portraits of Persian and Greek kings. Portraits of first kings usually consisted of Greek engravers. There is no evidence that the non Iranian parts of ancient Persian resisted the process of Hellenization. Parthia, Bactria and Media did not resent the occupation to such a degree that opposition would be active. There was rivalry over economic and strategic interests. Research has found the lack of any cultural or religious rivalry. All the three regions accepted Hellenism because they did not have a view of a world empire. Many were glad to get rid of their Iranian rulers. They had been tributary provinces under Persian rule (Green, 1990). Parthia was a state with a diverse culture. Migration from central Iran had prevented the development of a united culture. The Parthian royal court was heavily influenced by Greek elements. The titles philos and suggenes were used by Macedonians. Parthia also showed dedication towards Hellenization by advertising it in their coins. The Greek language was also widely spoken in the region. The Greek financial system, legal system and culture flourished in Parthian controlled cities. Greeks held important positions in the area along with Hellenized Iranians. The religious beliefs of the Parthians are not known. They practiced blood sacrifice and buried their dead. They adopted elements of Greek religion. Bactria was the most enthusiastic to cooperate with the Greek regime. There is no evidence of anti Hellenic movement in this region. The penetration of the Greeks in this region was very thin as few Greeks settled in this area. There were no economic or social problems in this part of Iran. Media was a region which was both hostile and receptive to the Greeks. Some parts of the country accepted the Greek rule while others openly rebelled and established their independence. Research of non Iranian parts of Iran shows that they did not actively oppose the process of Hellenization. These regions accepted Hellenization and depended on the Greeks. The lack of cultural unity and former empires made it impossible to oppose the Greeks. They were looked as allies or technical experts by these regions (Macurdy, 2003). The Seleucid Empire was the successor of Alexander the Great Empire. It rules over vast areas of Eastern provinces of the empire. The process of Hellenization was the adoption of Greek customs, ideas, religious beliefs, legal system and philosophies amongst the various people. The empire was a huge melting pot for various racial and ethnic groups. Jews, Medes, Persians, Armenians and Greeks all lived in this great empire. There was a huge influx of Greek colonists to various parts of the empire. This led to the flourishing of Greek culture. It also led to the development of new customs and ideas. Greeks would adopt the local native customs and traditions. The natives were also eager to adopt the new manners and customs of the successful civilization (Momigliano, 1975). However in some parts of the empire there was a process of resistance towards the process of Hellenization. The Jews began an active movement against the Hellenized Jews who were termed as apostates. The majority of Jews were against the process of Helenization. Hellenized Jews began to mix Greek mythology with their own beliefs. Therefore the sons of Abraham were considered friends of Hercules while the descendants of Isaac were considered to be members of Jason’s Argonauts. Greek language was adopted by higher levels of Jewish society. The Jewish scriptures were translated into Greek. Greek philosophy also influenced Jewish beliefs. However this process was confined to the upper classes and did not reach the majority of Jewish society. There was fierce revolt against the Hellenization which resulted in the independence of the Jews (Pfeiffer, 1968). Mesopotamia was heavily influenced by the Greeks because of the large numbers of Macedonians and Greeks. They were officials who looked after the administration, economy, taxes and military affairs of the region. They were exempted from taxes. There were Greek temples and native temples where the worship of gods occurred. Greek ideas influenced the local elite and educated people. Greek philosophy, religion and belief did have an impact on the local population. However there is lack of research regarding the enthusiasm of the local population towards these beliefs and ideas. The native priests were not subjected to government persecution. Many ancient forms of worship would continue under their rule. Cuneiform writing by local priests continued to flourish under their rule (Peters, 1970). Inside Persia there was a severe reaction against the process of Hellenization. However this was only present in the upper elite which saw it threatened by the Greek domination of politics. There was no peasant resistance towards the Greeks. Many of the peasants were content with their lives as long as they were allowed to practice their religious beliefs. The Persian reaction to Hellenization was directed towards the cultural apostates of Persia who had adopted the Greek ideas and religious beliefs. Moreover the Persian elite were not receptive to the idea that a Macedonian could rule them. They believed that their legitimate kings were chosen by their deity Ahura Mazda. Parthia, Bactria and Media which were non Iranian parts of the Persian Empire embraced Hellenization because of the lack of cultural and religious unity. Further they also took advantage of Greek technical and military assistance for their own purposes (Onians, 1979). The rulers of the empire wanted to establish a policy of unity based on the principles of Alexander the Great. This process was called Hellenization which started after Greek cities were built throughout the empire. Many ancient towns and cities were renamed with Greek names. Many Greeks immigrated to various parts of the empire because of the problems of overpopulation in Greece. The native elite also adopted Greek practices and customs in order to enhance their public status. The ruling Macedonian elite also embraced many local traditions. Hellenistic ideas rapidly expanded over a period of two hundred and fifty years into the Middle East and Central Asian cultures. Many cities were established for trade and commerce. The existing native cities were coerced or began the Hellenized philosophic thought, religious ideas, and political ideologies. There was some measure of success in the mixing of Hellenized and indigenous ideas. This would lead to peace and rebellion in some parts of the empire. The process of Hellenization affected the native people. For others it was not a problem. Some natives wholeheartedly accepted the process while others launched a violent reaction towards it. Many Hellenized natives were considered as apostates and traitors by their brethren. For the majority of peasants however little changed and the process of Hellenization was a slow process spanning many centuries. The Greeks were the most advanced of ancient civilizations. They deeply affected the local populations with their customs, ideas, philosophies, religious beliefs, financial systems, legal systems and manners. Many Greeks would also enthusiastically learn the local traditions and develop their own assimilated versions. References: S.Sherwin-White and A.Kuhrt, 1993 From Samarkhand to Sardis, London J.Teixidor, "Interpretations and misinterpretations of the east in the hellenistic times" in P.Bilde et al (eds), Religion and religious practice in the Seleukid kingdom (1990) T.Boiy, Late Achaemenid and Hellenistic Babylonia (2004) S.Sherwin-White, 1983 "Aristeas Ardibelatios: some aspects of the use of the double names in Seleukid Babylonia" ZPE 50:pp. 209-221 T.Boiy, 2005, "Akkadian-Greek double names in Helelnistic babylonia", in W.H. Van Soldt (eds), Ethnicity in ancient Mesopotamia, Leiden Van der Spek,2005, "Ethnic segregation in hellenistic Babylon", in W.H Van Soldt (eds) Ethnicity in ancient Mesopotamia, Leiden Wallenfeels, 1993, "Apkallu-sealings from hellenistic Uruk", BaM 24: pp 309-324 Burstein, Stanley. The Hellenistic Age from the battle of Ipsos to the death of Kleopatra VII . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Eddy, Samuel K. The King is Dead: Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism 334-331 B.C. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961. Green, Peter. Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age . Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1990 Macurdy, Grace Harriet. Hellenistic Queens: A Study of Woman-Power in Macedonia, Seleucid Syria, and Ptolemaic Egypt. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003. Momigliano, Arnaldo. Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Onians, John. Art and Thought in the Hellenistic Age: The Greek World View, 350-50 BC. London: Thames & Hudson, 1979. Peters, F. E. The Harvest of Hellenism: A History of the Near East from Alexander the Great to the Triumph of Christianity . New York: Simon and Schuster, 1970. Pfeiffer, R. History of Classical Scholarship: From the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968. Read More