The last stand of the Greeks against Rome before Greece sank into the limbo of the Roman Empire is to some a truly patriotic rising, to others a misguided attempt at the impossible. Whatever their general estimation, most scholars have recognised social traits in the Achaian War and in the events which immediately preceded it.To Kahrstedt it was ‘bolschewistisches Fahrwasser … Massenmord der Besitzenden und Gebildeten … Ausrottung der Bourgeoisie … eine reine Proletarierrepublik, ein Kampf gegen die eigenen Bourgeois und (...) gegen die kapitalistische italische Grossmacht’. Colin sees in the events of 147/6 B.C. traits of ‘une révolution sociale’. According to Fustel de Coulanges, ‘ils abolissent les dettes, ou tout au moins en diffèrent le payement. Ils affranchissent et arment les esclaves.’ To Oertel, it was ‘sozialistische Bewegung … die Ziele sind die alten’. According to Pöhlmann, ‘selbst in die letzte grosse politische Krisis der Nation … spielt die sozialdemokratische Bewegung mächtig hinein’. In the view of Benecke ‘the masses in the Greek cities were encouraged by promises of a social revolution, and the … Achaean general Critolaus did not dare to disappoint them’. According to Rostovtzeff, the aim of Rome in the destruction of Corinth was ‘to put an end to social and economic revolution’. Other authorities, such as Niese, Mommsen, De Sanctis, Tarn, Niccolini, note social traits in their accounts of the events of 147/6 B.C. without attempting a general view of the place of the social factor in the Achaian War. (shrink)

Maas's annotation on Fr. C, col. I in his edition of the new fragments says: ‘fortasse conferendi Diod. 13. 66. 6; Xen. Hell. 1. 3. 16–22; Dionys. Byz. Anapl. 13’. The comparison of Fr. C, col. I with the passage in Dionys. Byz. De Bospori Navigatione 13 seems to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the city referred to in the fragment is Byzantion. Consequently the supposition that the papyrus tells the story of the siege of Byzantion—dealt with in the other (...) two passages quoted by Maas—becomes almost a certainty. (shrink)

It is generally held that Plutarch's authority in his Vita Agidis was Phylarchos and that, consequently, our knowledge of Agis' programme derives solely from the Phylarchean, pro-Spartan, and generally unreliable tradition. There is little doubt that Plutarch's biography of Agis is based on Phylarchos. However, our knowledge of the programme of Agis does not depend solely on the Phylarchean tradition.

The story of Dion of Syracuse was told by ancient writers, and is still being told by modern historians, in the main as a story of ‘freedom versus tyranny’. The liberation of the greatest state in the Hellenic world from the rule of the most powerful tyrants' house in Greek experience fired the imagination and aroused the admiration of contemporary and later writers. There is, however, another side to the story of Dion.