Molossians

The Molossians (Greek: Μολοσσοί or Μολλοτοί, romanized: Molossoi or Molottoi) were a group of ancient Greek tribes which inhabited the region of Epirus in classical antiquity.[1][2] Together with the Chaonians and the Thesprotians, they formed the main tribal groupings of the northwestern Greek group.[3] On their northern frontier, they neighbored the Chaonians and on their southern frontier neighbored the kingdom of the Thesprotians. They formed their own state around 370 BC and were part of the League of Epirus. The most famous Molossian ruler was Pyrrhus of Epirus, considered one of the greatest generals of antiquity. The Molossians sided against Rome in the Third Macedonian War (171–168 BC) and were defeated. Following the war, 150,000 Molossians and other Epirotes were enslaved and transported to the Roman Republic, overwhelmingly in Italy itself.

Tribes of Epirus in antiquity.

Ancient sources
Coin of Molossi, 360–330/25 BC. Obverse: Vertical thunderbolt on shield, ΜΟΛΟΣΣΩΝ (of Molossians) around shield. Reverse: Thunderbolt within wreath.

According to Strabo, the Molossians, along with the Chaonians and Thesprotians, were the most famous among the fourteen tribes of Epirus, who once ruled over the whole region. The Chaonians ruled Epirus at an earlier time, and afterwards the Thesprotians and Molossians controlled the region. The Thesprotians, the Chaonians, and the Molossians were the three principal clusters of Greek tribes that had emerged from Epirus and were the most powerful among all other tribes.[4]

The Molossians were also renowned for their vicious hounds, which were used by shepherds to guard their flocks. This is where the canine breed Molossoid, native to Greece, received its name. Virgil tells us that in ancient Greece the heavier Molossian dogs were often used by the Greeks and Romans for hunting (canis venaticus) and to watch over the house and livestock (canis pastoralis). "Never, with them on guard," says Virgil, "need you fear for your stalls a midnight thief, or onslaught of wolves, or Iberian brigands at your back."

Strabo records that the Thesprotians, Molossians and Macedonians referred to old men as pelioi (πελιοί) and old women as peliai (πελιαί) (<PIE *pel-, "grey"). Cf. Ancient Greek πέλεια peleia, "pigeon", so-called because of its dusky grey color. Ancient Greek πελός pelos meant "grey".[5] Their senators were called Peligones (Πελιγόνες), similar to Macedonian Peliganes (Πελιγᾶνες).[6]

Molossian royalty

The most famed member of the Molossian dynasty was Pyrrhus, who became famous for his Pyrrhic victory over the Romans. According to Plutarch, Pyrrhus was the son of Aeacides of Epirus and a Greek woman from Thessaly named Phthia, the daughter of a war hero in the Lamian War. Pyrrhus was a second cousin of Alexander the Great. In the 4th century BC, they had adopted the term for office of prostatai (Greek: προστάται) literally meaning "protectors" like most Greek tribal states at the time.[7] Other terms for office were grammateus (Greek: γραμματεύς) meaning "secretary", demiourgoi (Greek: δημιουργοί) literally meaning "creators", hieromnemones (Greek: ἱερομνήμονες) literally meaning "of the sacred memory" and synarchontes (Greek: συνάρχοντες) literally meaning "co-rulers".[8] An inscription from the 4th century stated (referring to Alexander I of Epirus):[9]

When King was Alexandros when of Molossoi prostatas was Aristomachos Omphalas secretary was Menedamos Omphalas resolved by the assembly of the Molossoi; Kreston is benefactor hence to give citizenship to Kteson and descent line

The shrine of Dodona was used for the display of public decisions.[10] Despite having a monarchy, the Molossians sent princes to Athens to learn of democracy, and they did not consider certain aspects of democracy incompatible with their form of government.[11][12]

Olympias, the mother of Alexander the Great, was a member of this celebrated sovereign house.

History
Political structure of the ancient Greek world (8th–5th centuries BC). Tribal social structures in purple.

During the Late Bronze Age the Molossians were probably located over much of the central and western ranges of the Pindos.[13] They initially lived in small unwalled settlements, kata komas, mainly scattered in the river valleys and lakeside areas of central Epirus. Among those settlements the most excavated were located in Liatovouni (near Konitsa) established from the 13th-12th century B.C and Vitsa.[14] The Molossian expansion in Epirus possibly began in the early 6th century B.C.. As such they were a leading power in the region already from the time of historian Hecataeus (c. 550-476 B.C.). [15]

In 385 BC, Alcetas, the deposed Molossian king who was exiled to the court of Dionysius of Syracuse with aid by the Illyrians, attacked the faction of Molossian dynasty who had overthrown him and attempted to take power.[16] Dionysius planned to control all the Ionian Sea. Sparta intervened and expelled the Illyrians who were led by Bardyllis.[17][18][19] Even with the aid of 2,000 Greek hoplites and 500 suits of Greek armour, the Illyrians were defeated by the Spartans (led by Agesilaus) but not before ravaging the region and killing 15,000 Molossians.[19] Alcetas eventually managed to restore his pwoer and brought the Molossian state closer to Athens (the traditional enemy of Sparta).

In another Illyrian attack in 360 BC, the Molossian king Arymbas (or Arybbas) evacuated his non-combatant population to Aetolia and let the Illyrians loot freely. The stratagem worked, and the Molossians fell upon the Illyrians, who were encumbered with booty, and defeated them.[19][20]

The Molossians briefly sided with the anti-Roman Macedonian-Illyrian pact in the Third Macedonian War. After the Roman victory, a total of 150,000 Epirotes, mostly Molossians, were enslaved and sent to Italy, by decision of the Roman Senate. This decision is the only such act of the Roman senate and the largest, single, slave-hunting operation in Roman history. In the following years, Epirote slaves in Italy outnumbered slaves of other origins and the majority of slave marriages were between Epirotes.[21] In historiography, the decision of the senate has been the subject of much debate, as the two main anti-Roman powers of the time in that region, the Macedonians and the Illyrians, suffered few consequences in contrast to the Molossians in terms of punishment. Howard Hayes Scullard had proposed the most recognized theory in the past. He connected the measures taken by the Romans to Charops of Epirus, member of a rival tribe the Chaonians - a Roman ally - who in order to gain command of the region, pushed for the extermination of the Molossians.[22] This interpretation is based on the negative assessment of Charops, already in ancient sources, as Polybius calls him "the most savage and degenerate of all men". The modern interpretation of the events, focuses more on the structural reasons which led to this decision by the Romans rather than the personal politics of regional actors.[23] The plague of 174 BC caused a great reduction of available labor in Italy, which was supplied almost exclusively by slave labor. In the following years, slave-hunting became a central feature of Roman campaigns. The Roman senate, which represented the landowning elite, specifically targeted the Molossians because of the proximity of their territory to Brundisium and Taranto would require a much lower cost of transportation. In comparison, at least 65,000 Sardinians and many other tribes were enslaved in the same year.[24]

Historian Elizabeth Meyer, in a work published in 2013 suggested that previously seen as early 4th century inscriptions attributed to Neoptolemus I and his son, Alexander I of Epirus for redating in the era of the Neoptolemus II of Epirus (about a century later) and Alexander II of Epirus respectively. Reviews on this work stated that this redating if accurate would have larger implications about the history of the Molossian state,[25][26][27] as well as that not all historians will be convinced by the interpretations suggested in this account and further investigation is needed.[27]

Mythological royal genealogy

In ancient Greece common descent was demonstrated thorough genealogies and foundation legends. As such the local royal household, the settlements and tribes traced their origin to Achaean mythical heroes of the Mycenaean era. Such genealogies were known and widely accepted in Ancient Greece at least from the end of the Archaic period, as demonstrated in the poems of Pindar (c. 518 – 438 BC) dedicated to the Achaean Neoptolemos.[28][29]

In order to increase their prestige, the ruling dynasty of the Molossians in classical antiquity constructed a prestigious genealogy going back to the Trojan War and then these names from the Trojan cycle were used for contemporary rulers of the dynasty like Neoptolemos and Pyrrhus of Epirus. In the case of the Molossian ruling class, the philosopher who has been credited with much of the mythological construction of their origins is Proxenus of Atarneus (early 4th century BC).[30] This use of names from Iliad was contrary to ancient Greek name giving customs of classical antiquity in which names from the Iliad were not given to living people.[30] When the ruling class of the Molossians began to construct such a genealogy is unclear. The various theories place it chronologically from a post-Odyssey framework to the 5th century BC. The initial reasons for doing so are also debated. The conflict with the Thessalian tribes to the east (who claimed similar mythological ancestry as the later Molossians) and the beginning of the Hellenization of the Molossians in the 5th century BC have been argued as contributing factors for these constructions.[31] An important point is that the function of this construction of a fictional genealogy by the ruling dynasty of the Molossians was not to Hellenize the ethnic origin of their people, but to heroize their house.[32] In this context, the purpose of the constructed genealogy was to provide the Molossian dynasty with a "cultural passport as Greeks" in their relations with other ruling houses.[33] These genealogical claims from the Molossian ruling dynasty were part of a planned effort by them in order to use elements of Greek culture for their own political ends in order to dominate in regional power struggles.[34]

According to these mythological constructions, the Molossian ruling dynasty claimed to be the descended from Molossus, one of the three sons of Neoptolemus, son of Achilles and Deidamia. Following the sack of Troy, Neoptolemus and his armies settled in Epirus where they joined with the local population. Molossus inherited the kingdom of Epirus after the death of Helenus, son of Priam and Hecuba of Troy, who had married his erstwhile sister-in-law Andromache after Neoptolemus's death. According to some historians, their first king was Phaethon, one of those who came into Epirus with Pelasgus. According to Plutarch, Deucalion and Pyrrha, having set up the worship of Zeus at Dodona, settled there among the Molossians.[4] Then, among writers of the classical era these stories were not doubted .[35] According to Johannes Engels (2010) in the Oxford Companion to Macedonia, genealogical links through the Trojan cycle and other myths strongly connected Epirus with the rest of Greece, precluding serious debate about the Greekness of the Epirotes, including the Molossians.[36]

Culture

Language
Map of Ancient Greek dialects.

In terms of language, there is today an overall consensus that the Molossians were among the Greek-speaking population of Epirus, which spoke the North-West Doric dialect of Ancient Greek, akin to that of Aetolia, Phocis, and certain other regions, based on the available epigraphic evidence in Epirus.[37] These first inscriptions come from Corinthian colonies or dedications to Dodona and are not representative of sites in Epirus, although some of the early Dodona tablets may be related to Epirus.[38][39] The first epigraphic evidence in Epirus outside of Dodona and the nearby colonies dates from the beginning of 4th century BC. The Molossian decrees issued during the reign of king Neoptolemos I (370–368 BC) display considerable experience in the use of Greek language. They used a Greek dialect which was not borrowed by nearby Corinthian colonies, but a distinct northwestern Greek dialect similar to Akarnanian, Aetolian and Lokrian, which also exhibited several unique features. Thus, the possibility of being borrowed is rejected.[40] Most inscriptions comes from the late Classical or the Hellenistic era, in which they were under influence from a northwestern Doric dialect—also also used by the adjacent populations.[41]

N. G. L. Hammond (1982) argues that the Molossians and other Epirote tribes spoke Greek at least from the Dark Ages (1100–800 BC).[42] Based on Hatzopoulos' research, the epigraphic corpus unearthed during the recent decades also yielded a great number of onomastics which is of Greek origin akin to the onomastic areas of Thessaly and Macedon. Based on these points the possibility of Greek being not the ancestral language among Epirotes can be easily rejected.[43] Tom Winnifrith argues that the Epirotes, including the Molossians were semi-Hellenized tribes whose hellenization continued in the centuries before Roman conquest (3rd-2nd century BC) and afterwards.[44] Winnifrith later (2001) argued that the majority of western scholarly opinion states that the tribes of Epirus spoke Greek.[45]

Earlier historians on the basis of largely linguistic material argued that they were of Greek origin, while other scholars of equal academic weight but at an earlier era (Nilsson (1909 and 1951), Meyer (1878)) in their fields argued in favor of an Illyrian origin. Such views were based on subjective ancient testimonies and are not supported by the earliest epigraphic evidence.[46] In the view of Irad Malkin of Tel Aviv University (1998), following Hammond, Greek was spoken at least since the 5th century BC and notes that it may have been the prestige language without the Molossians themselves necessarily being Greeks.[47] In modern research, the question of identity has arisen about what constituted the ancient Greek identity with mode of a life as main criterion of ethnicity construction as regardless of what language they spoke in each given historical era the Molossians were regarded as "barbarians" by contemporary Greeks not on the basis of language, but because of their tribal way of life, their organization and their pastoral economy. In this context, the Epirotes were more similar to the Macedonians and Illyrians than to those ancient Greeks who were organized in city-states.[32][36] According the Johannes Engles (2010), the language the Epirotes spoke was regarded as a primitive Northwestern Greek dialect, but there was no question that it was Greek, and the way of life in Epirus was more archaic than that in the Corinthian and Corcyrean colonies on the coast, but there was never a discussion about their Greekness.[36] A far more reliable source on the views of the Greeks is the list of sacred envoys (Ancient Greek: θεαρόδοκοι) in Epidaurus, which includes the Epirotes.[48] The list which was compiled in 360 BC includes the sacred envoys (members of the ruling family of each tribe or subtribe) of the Molossians, Kassopeans, Chaonians and Thesprotians.[49]

Religion
Main articles: Ancient Greek religion and Dodona

In terms of religion they worshipped the same gods like the rest of the Greeks. No traces of non-Greek deities were found until the Hellenistic age (with the introduction of oriental deities in the Greek world). Their supreme deity was Zeus and the Oracle of Dodona found in the land of the Molossians attracted pilgrims from all over the Greek world. As with the rest of the Epirotes they were included in the thearodokoi catalogues where only Greeks were allowed in order to participated in Panhellenic Games and festivals.[50] Aristotle considered the region around Dodona to have been part of Hellas and the region where the Hellenes originated.[51]

List of Molossians

Family tree of kings of Epirus
AEACIDAE
Tharrhypas
king of Epirus
430-392 BC
Alcetas I
king of Epirus
390-370 BC
Neoptolemus I
king of Epirus
370-357 BC		Arybbas
king of Epirus
370-343 BC
Philip II
king of Macedon		OlympiasAlexander I
king of Epirus
343/2-331 BC		TroasAlcetas II
king of Epirus
313-306 BC		Aeacides
king of Epirus
331-316, 313 BC		Phthia
daughter of
Menon IV of Pharsalus
Alexander the Great
king of Macedon
lord of Asia		CleopatraNeoptolemus II
king of Epirus
302-297 BC		Deidamia IDemetrius I Poliorketes
king of Macedon
∞ Phila		2.Lanassa
daughter of
Agathocles of Syracuse
king of Sicily		Pyrrhus I
king of Epirus 306-302 BC,
of Macedon 274-272 BC,
of Syracusse 278-276 BC
∞ 3.Bircenna		1.Antigone
daughter of
Philip and Berenice I
Antigonos II Gonatas
king of Macedon		(1) Ptolemy
military officer		(2) Alexander II
king of Epirus
272-242 BC		(1) Olympias II
Demetrius II
king of Macedon		PhthiaPyrrhus II
king of Epirus
242-238 BC		Ptolemy
king of Epirus
238-235 BC
Nereis
∞ Gelo
king of Syracuse		Deidamia II
queen of Epirus
235-c.231 BC		Pyrrhus III
king of Epirus
235 BC

See also

References

Citations
  1. Borza 1992, pp. 62, 78, 98; Encyclopædia Britannica ("Epirus") 2013; Errington 1990, p. 43; Hammond 1998, p. 19; Hammond 1994, pp. 430, 433–434; Hammond 1982, p. 284; Wilkes 1995, p. 104.
  2. Hornblower, Spawforth & Eidinow 2012, p. 966: "Molossi, common name of tribes forming a tribal state (koinon) in Epirus, which originated in northern Pindus including the Orestae, FGrH 1 F 107) and expanded southwards, reaching the Ambraciote Gulf (see AMBRACIA) c.370 BC."
  3. Errington 1990, p. 43.
  4. Plutarch. Parallel Lives, "Pyrrhus".
  5. Liddell & Scott 1889: πελός.
  6. Liddell & Scott 1889: πελιγᾶνες.
  7. Horsley 1987, p. 243; Hornblower 2002, p. 199.
  8. Hammond 1994, p. 431.
  9. Brock & Hodkinson 2000, p. 250.
  10. Brock & Hodkinson 2000, p. 257.
  11. Alcock & Osborne 2007, p. 392.
  12. Brock & Hodkinson 2000, p. 256.
  13. Douzougli & Papadopoulos 2010, p. 8
  14. Papadopoulos, John (31 August 2016). ""Komai, Colonies and Cities in Epirus and Southern Albania". Of Odysseys and Oddities: Scales and Modes of Interaction Between Prehistoric Aegean Societies and their Neighbours. Oxbow Books: 444-446.
  15. Hammond, N. G. L. (1997). "The Tribal Systems of Epirus and Neighbouring Areas down to 400 B . C ". Epirus: 55. The Molossian group was the leading power in the time of Hekataios. Its expansion may have begun early in the sixth century.
  16. Hammond 1986, p. 479.
  17. Diodorus Siculus. Library, 15.13.1.
  18. Hammond 1986, p. 470.
  19. Hammond 1994, p. 428.
  20. Diodorus Siculus. Library, 14.92, 15.2, 16.2.
  21. Ziolkowski 1986, p. 79.
  22. Ziolkowski 1986, p. 71.
  23. Ziolkowski 1986, p. 80.
  24. Ziolkowski 1986, p. 75.
  25. Nakkas, Yannis (2014). "MOLOSSIA - (E.A.) Meyer The Inscriptions of Dodona and a New History of Molossia". The Classical Review. 64 (2). doi:10.1017/S0009840X14000055.
  26. Smith, Philip (2014). "The Inscriptions of Dodona and a New History of Molossia. Heidelberger althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien (HABES), 54". Bryn Mawr Classical Review.
  27. D'Alessandro, Adele (2015). "Elizabeth A. Meyer, The Inscriptions of Dodona and a New History of Molossia". Klio. 97 (2): 765. doi:10.1515/klio-2015-0052. The inscription was dated, by Cabanes, in the years before 330 / 328 BC, the last years of AlexanderI.s reign. M. seems to trust in Hammond’s restoration of the name of the king (Neoptolemus, Alexander’s son) in the last line of the inscription: in fact, it is very unlikely (an unicum, in all epigraphic sources in Epirus) that the name of the king would be listed after the name of the prostatas and of the other officials (political, in common scholars’ opinion, or religious, as M. suggest
  28. Currie, Associate Professor in Classical Languages and Literature Bruno; Currie, Bruno. Pindar and the Cult of Heroes. Oxford University Press. p. 342. ISBN 978-0-19-927724-7.
  29. Hatzopoulos 1997, p. 141: "Common descent was not demonstrated by anthropometric research or blood analysis, but by resource to genealogies and the foundation-legends of cities and tribes. And it is known that only the royal households but also the tribes and cities of Epirus traced their origin or their foundation to Achaian heroes of the Mycenaean period. These genealogies were known and accepted as early as the end of the Archaic period at the latest, and are projected in the work of Pindar as fully established and beyond dispute".
  30. Douzougli & Papadopoulos 2010, p. 7 "Nilsson argues persuasively that the bold mythological inventions were due to Proxenos, who flattered the royal house with an unsurpassed and excessive abuse of mythology, and that apart from the native names of Tharyps and Arrybas "all other male members of the house have names take from the Trojan myth (...) This plundering of mythical names is contrary to the principles of Greek nomenclature in the classical age in which the heroic names were not given to living men. The whole story shows the overdone eagerness of a barbarian house to appear as heroic Greeks."
  31. Douzougli & Papadopoulos 2010, p. 6
  32. Douzougli & Papadopoulos 2010, p. 8 In terms of mode of life, moreover, the tribal Epirotes were more similar to Illyrians than they were to those Greeks dwelling in poleis.
  33. Davies, J. K. (2002). "A Wholly Non-Aristotelian Universe: The Molossians as Ethnos, State, and Monarchy". In Roger Brock (ed.). Alternatives to Athens: Varieties of mazarPolitical Organization and Community in Ancient Greece. Oxford University Press. p. 242. ISBN 0199258104.
  34. Davies 2002, p. 237 In fact it was not Greek needs, ambitions or curiosity which eventually eliminated the barriers so much as a calculated effort by the ruling dynasty of one Epeirote people, the Molossoi, to manoeuvre themselves into a position of predominance within the region. (..) One truck was cultural - to present themselves as Greek (with a Trojan War ancestry) to take from Greek culture what could be turned to political use, and to manipulate the Greek political process in their own interest as best they could.
  35. Hammond, N. G. L. (1997). "The Greek Heroes and the Greek Colonies". Epirus: 4000 Years of Greek Cilization and Culture. Ekdotike Athenon: 46. The proposition, that the Molossian kings aroud 500 B.C. were descended from the grandfather of Achilles, Aiakos, born some 800 years earlier, was not doubted by writers of the Classical period.
  36. Joseph Roisman; Ian Worthington (7 July 2011). A Companion to Ancient Macedonia. John Wiley & Sons. p. 83-84. ISBN 978-1-4443-5163-7.
  37. Filos, 2017: There is an overall consensus nowadays that the Greek-speaking population of Epirus, despite its fragmentation into major (Molossoi, Thesprotoi, Chaones) and minor... tribes, spoke a North-West Doric variety akin to that of the numerous neighboring populations of central and western Greece (Aettolia, Acarnania, Phocis, Doris, cf. also certain affinities with the dialects of Elis and Macedonia), even though there were obviously some inevitable local peculiarities... the contact with non-Greek populations (Illyrians) in the northern part of Epirus may have further boosted sub-dialectal variation in this part of the region at least (e.g. lexicon), although we lack any concrete evidence, especially outside the field of onomastics...}}
  38. Filos 2017, p. 233.
  39. Filos 2017, p. 222: "..most epigraphic texts date to the late Classical/Hellenistic period i.e. to a time when the impact of a supraregional NW Doric koina was already felt, even though the Attic-Ionic koine eventually established itself in the region at a later time, i.e. in ca 1st c.AD.".
  40. Hatzopoulos 1997, p. 141: “...date not from the end but from the beginning of the fourth century B.C.. And it is clear that the composers of the Molossian decrees incised "in the reign of Neoptolemos of Alketas between 370 and 368 already had a considerable experience in the use of Greek. Second, it was established that the dialect in which they are written is not, as we believed, the Doric of Corinth, but a north-west dialect, akin to others of the same family (Akarnanian, Aitolian, Lokrian etc.), but exhibiting several distinctive features that preclude the possibility of its being borrowed.“.
  41. Filos 2017, p. 222.
  42. Hammond 1982, p. 284, 285: "Greek speech of the tribes in Epirus should not be ascribed to the influence of the Greek colonies on the coast. Nowhere in fact did the Greek colonies convert the peoples of a large hinterland to Greek speech. If these tribes of the hinterland spoke Greek, it was because they had done so before the Dark Age. What we have seen in this chapter is the consolidation of the Greek-speaking in the north, which enable them to fulfill their future role of defending the frontiers of a city-state civilization and later of leading that civilisation into wider areas."
  43. Hatzopoulos 1997, p. 141: “The epigraphic evidence of recent decades has also yielded a vast number of personal names. There are not only purely Greek from the very... Indeed the affinities they reveal are not with the onomasticon of the Corinthian colonies, but with those of Macedonia and Thessaly. There is thus no longer any doubt that the ancestral speech of the inhabitants of Epirus was Greek.”.
  44. Winnifrith, Tom (1983). Greeks and Romans. Springer. p. 73. ISBN 1349051233.
  45. Winnifrith, Tom (2002). Badlands, Borderlands: A History of Northern Epirus/Southern Albania. Duckworth. p. 47. ISBN 978-0-7156-3201-7. We are left with the vexed question as to what language there Epirotes tribes spoke. Greek scholars, followed by most people in the West, would have them speaking Greek
  46. Filos 2017, p. 222: "Nonetheless, such views, which largely rely on subjective ancient testimonies, are not supported by the earliest (and not only) epigraphic texts.".
  47. Douzougli & Papadopoulos 2010, p. 7 Based on linguistic arguments, earlier historians of the standing Beloch, Wilamowitz, and Hammond were in favor of a Hellenic origin, whereas equally influential scholars including Nilsson and Meyer held that the Epirotes were of Illyrians stock. (...) Malkin, following Hammond, goes on to shows that Greek was spoken, at least from the 5th century BC on, by the Molossians, but is careful to note that the Molossians may have had Greek as a cultural language without actually being Greek.
  48. Filos 2018, p. 219.
  49. Davies, J. K. (2002). "A Wholly Non-Aristotelian Universe: The Molossians as Ethnos, State, and Monarchy". In Roger Brock (ed.). Alternatives to Athens: Varieties of Political Organization and Community in Ancient Greece. Oxford University Press. p. 247. ISBN 0199258104.
  50. Hatzopoulos 1997, p. 140-141: "It is equally inconstestable that the Epirote tribes practised the same religion as the other Greeks. The supreme god of the Epirotes was Zeus and his sanctuary at Dodona attracted believers from all over the Greek world. Foreign deities are not attested...The most convincing proof, however, that the Epirotes belonged firmly within the religious body of Greece, is provided by the catalogue of thearodokoi listing Greek cities and tribes to which the major hellenic sanctuaries sent theoroi to... only Greeks were allowed to, participate in the pan-hellenic games and festivals.
  51. Hammond 1986, p. 77: "The original home of the Hellenes was 'Hellas', the area round Dodona in Epirus, according to Aristotle. In the Iliad it was the home of Achilles' Hellenes.".
  52. Cabanes, L'Épire 534,1.
  53. IG IV²,1 95 Line 31.
  54. Woodbury 1979, pp. 95–133.
  55. Cabanes, L'Épire 540,4.
  56. Smith 1844, p. 191: "ANTI'NOUS (Άντίνους), a chief among the Molossians in Epeirus, who became involved, against his own will, in the war of Perseus, king of Macedonia, against the Romans."

Sources
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.