LA SUPERINTENDENCIA NACIONAL DE ADUANAS Y DE

The circumstances after Philip’s death, i.e. the absence of Alexander in Asia, offered only the possibility of limited or indirect contact with the Macedonians. The period extending from 335 (after the destruction of Thebes) until the Lamian War is marked by a series of rather insignificant diplomatic missions; most notably, probably two to Alexander and two to Dareios. It is quite noteworthy that, most frequently, the members of these missions are rather undistinguished. Why did Athens refrain from dispatching her leading statesmen? Various explanations could be put forward: Athens did not consider these missions important enough and she would rather use the services of her leading statesmen internally. On the other hand, who of the leading statesmen of the time would be willing to undertake a mission to either Alexander or Dareios when the journey would be so distant and probably dangerous? Alexander had once demanded the surrender of Demosthenes, and similarly Hyperides was out of favour. Demades or Phokion would be the obvious candidates but Phokion was too old to embark upon such a distant journey and Demades was engaged in establishing his political position and in reorganising military finance and the navy.

The two missions to Dareios, in 332 and in 330, (Arr., Anab. 2.15.2) are indicative of a dangerous diplomatic activity on Athens’ part. Their exact purpose is not specifically recorded but they were probably asking for some kind of support against Alexander. Yet, the people participating in these missions had no spectacular career. Aristogeiton could have been the well-known demagogue (Plut., Phoc. 10.3, 9) who had brought a graphe paranomon against Hyperides’ motion to give civic rights to the slaves after Chaironeia ([Plut.], X. Orat. Vit. 849e); Iphikrates was the son of the famous general Iphikrates but he himself did not have a marked career; he was in fact captured by Alexander who treated him quite honourably.21 Athens then was very careful not to dispatch her leading statesmen, basically for two reasons: should they be captured their loss would be an unfortunate event for Athenian political life and also

because, in such a case, Alexander would be more irritated than if the envoys were important politicians. It is noteworthy that there is no information about embassies to Dareios after 330, i.e. after it had become obvious that he had been defeated and could no longer be of any use.

The objective of the embassy to Alexander in 331 (Arr., Anab. 1.29.5; Curt., IV.1.9) was to obtain the liberation of the Athenian mercenaries who had fought in the army of Dareios and were captured by Alexander after the battle of Granikos (Arr., Anab. 3.6.2-3). About a year later there occurred a significant turn in Athenian policy, expressed in the embassy undertaken by Ktesiphon. Ktesiphon, the well-known proposer of the golden crown for Demosthenes, was elected in 330 envoy to Kleopatra (Alexander’s sister) to offer his condolences for the death of her husband Alexander, king of the Molossians (Aes., III.242). In fact, this is the only recorded mission to Alexander’s court. I would venture to suggest that Ktesiphon, given his association with Demosthenes, would have undertaken this mission on the suggestion or at least with the approval of Demosthenes. At any rate, this mission represents the first, official attem pt to establish a connection with Alexander’s court, and it is significant that this occurred as soon as it became obvious that Athens could not count on Dareios’ defeat.

A fter that and for a few years we do not hear of any Athenian contacts with either Alexander or members of his court. However, an important issue arose in 324 when Alexander issued the edict for the restoration of the exiles which seriously affected Athens: the Samian exiles would return too and the Athenian cleruchs would have to evacuate the island of Samos (D.S., XVIII.8.2-7). Athens resorted to diplomacy: Demosthenes was sent as an architheoros to the festival of Olympia (Din., I.81f). An architheoros is a religious ambassador but this supposedly religious mission took place at a festival where exiles from all over the place had gathered to listen to Nikanor (Alexander’s official) proclaiming their restoration to their cities.22 It is plausibly speculated

that Demosthenes took advantage of the opportunity to discuss the edict with N ik a n o r .2 3 The results of the meeting are obscure and it is quite

dubious whether Demosthenes could achieve anything since Nikanor was only responsible for the proclamation but not for the restoration of the exiles (Antipatros was: D.S., XVIIL8.4). It is important to note, however, how Athens was willing to employ diplomacy before resorting to more drastic measures, that is, war.

A few months later an embassy was probably sent to Alexander in order to plead the Athenian case for Samos (D.S., XVII.113.3-4; Arr., Anab.

7.19.1), though it is not clearly recorded in the sources. Diodorus reports that Alexander received last those envoys who had come to object to the restoration of the exiles, and it is conceivable that Athenian envoys would have been included since Athens (together with Aitolia) were the states most affected by Alexander’s e d ic t .2 4 The names of the envoys are not

recorded in our sources, an indication of their not being of high political standing.

* * *