|材料类型：||硕士论文/博士论文, 手稿, 互联网资源|
|文件类型：||书, 档案资料, 互联网资源|
Michael D Dixon
|描述：||xxii, 306 leaves. : ill., maps.|
|详述：||System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF viewer.|
|责任：||by Michael D. Dixon.|
Of these new Achaian League members Corinth, Epidauros, Hermion, and Troizen were all at some time involved in territorial disputes with their neighbors. On two separate occasions Epidauros and Troizen each became involved in a dispute with the Ptolemaic colony of Arsinoë; (Methana).
Our sources for these territorial disputes is almost exclusively epigraphic and it is with the inscriptional evidence that this study begins. The majority of the inscriptions studied here were set up originally in the Asklepieion of Epidauros (IG IV².1.70+59, 71, 72, 74, 75+, and 76+77) while one was found in Hermion (SEG XI 377) and another in Troizen (IG IV 752).
Presented first in each chapter is a new edition of each inscription followed by a detailed epigraphical commentary on each stone. After this a commentary on the date and historical circumstances of each dispute is presented. Finally each chapter concludes with a topographical commentary on the disputed territory with conclusions suggested as to what the land was used for and why the land was contested.
This examination of interstate arbitration also allows us to make some conclusions concerning the relationships between Achaian League members as well as the relations between the League and the Ptolemies. The argument is made here that Achaian members submitted their disputes for arbitration with the hope of territorial aggrandizement, as well as for the control of land that was more productive than previous scholars have believed. Ptolemaic Arsinoë, on the other hand, enjoyed cordial relations with its Achaian neighbors while the League and the Ptolemies were allied and it was during these times that outstanding disputes were settled by arbitration.