Syngeneia and the Romans
Kinship, or syngeneia formed an important aspect of diplomacy for the Greek poleis. However during the Hellenistic period the Roman republic got more and more important and began to deal more and more with the Greek poleis. In order to study the effectiveness of diplomacy based on syngeneia two inscriptions will be compared, one from a Greek polis to another Greek polis and one from a Greek polis to Rome.
What is Syngeneia?
Syngeneia sometimes referred to two or more Greek poleis who considered themselves related through ties of kinship. This relationship came from a common, often mythological, ancestry. Syngeneia was often used by the Greek poleis for diplomatic reasons. For example: when a polis needed neutral judges they could go to another polis with whom they had syngeneia and ask for help there, the other polis would then generally speaking help their relatives by sending a few judges. Or as John Ma put it: Syngeneia offered not just a formal, reproducible templates for diplomatic behavior, it also provided a common language for diplomacy both literally and symbolically.
Enter: the Romans
Syngeneia sometimes referred to two or more Greek poleis who considered themselves related through ties of kinship. This relationship came from a common, often mythological, ancestry. Syngeneia was often used by the Greek poleis for diplomatic reasons. For example: when a polis needed neutral judges they could go to another polis with whom they had syngeneia and ask for help there, the other polis would then generally speaking help their relatives by sending a few judges. Or as John Ma put it: Syngeneia offered not just a formal, reproducible templates for diplomatic behavior, it also provided a common language for diplomacy both literally and symbolically.
Enter: the Romans
During the Hellenistic era the Romans began to rise to power. This rise to power meant that more and more the Romans interacted with the Greek poleis. This increased interaction also meant that the Romans became more and more intertwined in the network of the Greek poleis and Greek poleis also began to ask for aid from the Romans. However while the Greeks took syngeneia very seriously, as will be shown later in the text by the lengths to which both the Kythenians and the Lampsacians went in order to push their claim to syngeneia, it is a bit more debatable as to how important syngeneia was in dealing with the Romans. In order to see the importance of syngeneia for the Romans two different uses of syngeneia are compared here: one from a Greek polis to another Greek polis and one mission from a Greek polis to the Romans.
Kythenians and Lampsacians
Kythenians and Lampsacians
The Kythenians tried to restore their wall that was destroyed earlier. In 205 BC they decided to ask for aid. In order to get aid they used the fact that they were from Doris. Using this they send envoys to other Dorians. A description of one such visit, their visit to the Xanthians remains. To the Xanthians they told, through various myths, that not only where they related but that the Xanthians owed the Kythenians. In response the Xanthians acknowledged the syngeneia between themselves and the Kythenians but explained that due to various reasons they would not be capable of helping the Kythenians. The Kythenians had to leave with only symbolic gifts.
The fortune of the Lampsacians was different than that of the Kythenians. In 196/7 BC they felt threatened by the Seleucid empire, a large Hellenistic empire that had recently expanded in the region where Lampsacus lay. In response to this the Lampsacians send a diplomatic mission to the Romans asking them for aid. First they went to the commander of the Roman fleet after they explained at length that Lampsacus and Rome were related they received a positive response: the Roman recognized the kinship between Rome and Lampsacus and said that he would give the Lampsacians what they wanted. Then they took a bit of a detour and went to Massilia, modern day Marseille, Massilia was asked by the Lampsacians, once again based on syngeneia, if they would go on a joint embassy to Rome in order to champion their cause because the Massiliotes were already friends with Rome. In Rome the Lampsacians once again, now joined by the Massilians explained to the Romans that they were related to the Romans and once again they received a positive response. Still not done, the Lampsacian delegation met once again with the Romans in Corinth. Interesting about this last meeting is that syngeneia is not mentioned in the inscription describing the journey of the Lampsacian envoys.
The fortune of the Lampsacians was different than that of the Kythenians. In 196/7 BC they felt threatened by the Seleucid empire, a large Hellenistic empire that had recently expanded in the region where Lampsacus lay. In response to this the Lampsacians send a diplomatic mission to the Romans asking them for aid. First they went to the commander of the Roman fleet after they explained at length that Lampsacus and Rome were related they received a positive response: the Roman recognized the kinship between Rome and Lampsacus and said that he would give the Lampsacians what they wanted. Then they took a bit of a detour and went to Massilia, modern day Marseille, Massilia was asked by the Lampsacians, once again based on syngeneia, if they would go on a joint embassy to Rome in order to champion their cause because the Massiliotes were already friends with Rome. In Rome the Lampsacians once again, now joined by the Massilians explained to the Romans that they were related to the Romans and once again they received a positive response. Still not done, the Lampsacian delegation met once again with the Romans in Corinth. Interesting about this last meeting is that syngeneia is not mentioned in the inscription describing the journey of the Lampsacian envoys.
The importance for the Romans
So the Roman response was positive towards the Lampsacians. This would seem to indicate that the Romans considered kinship diplomacy to be important. However was this the case? First of all only the commander of the Roman fleet is mentioned as recognizing the kinship between Rome and Lampsacus. It seems unlikely that the inscription skipped over this recognition of the other Romans because the Lampsacians’ appeal to kinship is repeated with every meeting. This also brings us to the next point: during the meeting in Corinth there is no mention of syngeneia at all this is a bit strange considering the aforementioned emphasis on syngeneia. Another important point is that Roman writers rarely mention syngeneia in their writings, in fact neither Livy nor Polybius mention syngeneia at all when discussing Lampsacus and the Roman aid to Lampsacus. Another, somewhat weaker, argument against the importance of syngeneia for the Romans is how they treated an earlier request for aid based on syngeneia: in 264 BC a people known as the Mamertines asked the Romans for aid as kindred. The Romans were hesitant to aid the Mamertines because of crimes that the Mamertines had committed but decided to aid the Mamertines in order to stop Carthage. The situation that the Mamertines found themselves in was very similar to the situation of Lampsacus. It could thus be said that the primary motivation of the Romans was to curb a rival power and not to aid a long lost relative.
It must also be said however that syngeneia did seem to play some role: one of the reasons that the Romans agreed to help Lampsacus seems to be because the Massiliotes vouched for Lampsacus, they did this because of the syngeneia between Lampsacus and Massilia. It thus seems that the Romans did put some importance in syngeneia but that syngeneia was not as important as simple practical reasons.
Network Theory
Network theory is useful for this study because during this period various poleis held power. These poleis where connected with each other through several cultural practices of which syngeneia was but one. Using network theory the actions taken by the Lampsacians and the Kytenians can be seen in a wider context instead of just as individual actions. Network theory also gives us a way of better recognizing the nature of the relations between the various poleis and cities. Network theory could also be used in reconstructing other networks, see which poleis function as brokers, a broker is someone or something that connects two seperate groeps with each other, between other poleis or other people and theoretically one could reconstruct the relations between various Greek and related people.
Primary sources
This text used various primary sources. The two most important sources where inscriptions detailing diplomatic missions in which syngeneia was used in order to get support from another polis in the case of the Kythenians and from the Romans in the case of Lampsacus. Furthermore both Livy and Polybius are also cited they were cited not just to get a more complete picture but also to see how these writers looked at the relations between Rome and Lampsacus.
Conclusion
No action taken by Lampsacus was without reason. Massilia was kin of them and allies of Rome so they asked for their aid in convicing Rome. The Romans where kin of Lampsacus so the choice for Rome as a protector was logical for Lampsacus. That Massilia could help them with the Romans was not just because Massilia was an ally of Rome but also because they shared descend with Lampsacus. So Lampsacus used a network that they recognized in order to get what they wanted. However to the Romans actual pragmatic reasons seem to have been the cause for their aid to Lampsacus, not some shared ancestry. From the inscription detailing the journey of the Lampsacian envoys it would seem that the Lampsacians eventually figured this out. So the usefulness of syngeneia seems to have been that it gave the Lampsacians reason to contact Rome but that it wasn't crucial in securing the aid of the Romans. For the Romans syngeneia was useful as a way of integrating themselves into an already existing network and expand their power in that way.
Sources and notes for the images
Image 1
-Taken by the author, detail from the fire in the Borgo by Raphael, this painting also refferences the burning of Troy
Image 2
-Taken by the author, detail from the fire in the Borgo by Raphael
Image 3
-Taken by the author
Image 4
-Google Maps modern location Lampsacus
Sources
-Ma, J. (2003) 'Peer polity and interaction in the Hellenistic age', Past and Present 180, 9-39.
-Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum: 591
translations from: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/classics/bagnall/3995/readings/b-d2-1d.htm
Sherk, Robert K, ed. Rome and the Greek East to the Death of Augustus. Translated Documents of Greece and Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. 4
-(Livy 35. 15-17) Livy. History of Rome, Volume X: Books 35-37. Translated by Evan T. Sage. Loeb Classical Library 301. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935.
-(Polybius 21.13) Polybius. The Histories, Volume V: Books 16-27. Translated by W. R. Paton. Revised by F. W. Walbank, Christian Habicht. Loeb Classical Library 160. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012.
-(Polybius 1. 7-10)
Further Reading
-Battistoni, Filippo. 'Rome, Kinship And Diplomacy' in Diplomats and Diplomacy in the Roman World, ed Claude Eilers (Bosten and Leiden: Brill, 2009)
-Burton, Paul J. Friendship and Empire : Roman Diplomacy and Imperialism in the Middle Republic (353-146 Bc). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
-Jones, Christopher P. Kinship Diplomacy in the Ancient World. Revealing Antiquity, 12. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999.
-Patterson, Lee E. Kinship Myth in Ancient Greece. Austin, Tex.: University of Texas Press 2011.
S.J De V