Материални и нематериални граници. Изследване на процесите на конструиране на граници. Съст. М. Карамихова. Велико Търново: Университетско издателство „Св. Св. Кирил и Методий“, 2018, 260–278, ISBN 978-619-208-150-8, 2018
Military structures of each country are a function of its social, economic and political organiza... more Military structures of each country are a function of its social, economic and political organization. This applies in full force and Roman society in antiquity. These factors influence each other in the course of the historical process. In most cases, military structures are changing under the influence of changes in the economy and society but sometimes military realities have a significant impact in the opposite direction. This publication aims to present those moments of Roman history in which these interdependencies are especially visible. Analysed examples are just the tip of the iceberg, but they allow clearer to track mutual influences. The chosen approach allows to look for the causes of these processes and to explore the consequences thereof, which in an overall analysis will allow to derive general patterns and causal relations or to reject the existence of such.
Uploads
Papers by Живко Жеков
development of Greece in the 5th century BC. It marked the beginning of an open military confrontation between Athens and Sparta, which had been simmering in previous decades and had been extinguished only by various conjunctures factors. Practically, the First Peloponnesian War ended without a winner. It shows that neither of the two polis claiming hegemony over Greece has enough resources to realize its claims. Athens’ failure to achieve its goal is due to its aggressive policy, which frightens the other Hellenic poleis, whereas the Athenians openly demonstrate that they do not respect the autonomy of their allies, and the principle of polis autonomy is a leading idea for the ruling elites in Hellenic poleis. Practically to a large extent Sparta did not achieve parity in the war, but the Athenians, with
their aggressive policy, set the other Hellenic poleis against themselves, for the hegemony they claim, which is why the Athenians fail to win. In a sense, this war suggests the development of the Great Peloponnesian War, for in it again Athens’ overly aggressive policy towards its allies leads to the defeat of the Athenians.
contenders for hegemons over Ancient Greece. In conclusion, it can be said that Antigonus III Doson became the hegemon of Ancient Greece, both due to the favorable geostrategic situation in the region and due to his personal qualities as a diplomat and military strategist.
Key words: Antigonid dynasty, Antigonus III Doson, Achaean League, hegemony, Aetolians.
The gradual establishment of Odryan statehood in VII - VI BC is in the context of similar processes developing and among the other Thracian tribes. In this competitive environment, the Odrys during the period under review probably managed to put into control a considerable size and rich in natural resources territory situated between the Rhodopes and the Balkan Mountains, which is basically marked by the Tundja River and the upper and middle course of the Hebros River. During the same period, there were other strong political subjects in Thrace, such as Getae, Triballi, Satrae, which prevents their aggression from spreading beyond the specified territory. The penetration of the Persians with military force in Thrace in the end of VI - the beginning of the 5th century BC. changes the strategic situation, which leads to the weakening of the Getae’s and allows the Odrys to develop their military and political potential. Under the leadership of their ruler Teres I, they manage to put their Getae under their control. They conquer the lands situated between the middle course of the Tundzha River, the Eastern Balkan Mountains, the western coast of the Black Sea and the Strandzha-Sakar Mountains. It is possible for Teres to undertake military campaigns and in the southeast direction against the tribes of Thyni. These military-political successes warrant the Athenian historian Thucydides to define this Odrys ruler as the creator of the powerful Odrysian kingdom.
development of Greece in the 5th century BC. It marked the beginning of an open military confrontation between Athens and Sparta, which had been simmering in previous decades and had been extinguished only by various conjunctures factors. Practically, the First Peloponnesian War ended without a winner. It shows that neither of the two polis claiming hegemony over Greece has enough resources to realize its claims. Athens’ failure to achieve its goal is due to its aggressive policy, which frightens the other Hellenic poleis, whereas the Athenians openly demonstrate that they do not respect the autonomy of their allies, and the principle of polis autonomy is a leading idea for the ruling elites in Hellenic poleis. Practically to a large extent Sparta did not achieve parity in the war, but the Athenians, with
their aggressive policy, set the other Hellenic poleis against themselves, for the hegemony they claim, which is why the Athenians fail to win. In a sense, this war suggests the development of the Great Peloponnesian War, for in it again Athens’ overly aggressive policy towards its allies leads to the defeat of the Athenians.
contenders for hegemons over Ancient Greece. In conclusion, it can be said that Antigonus III Doson became the hegemon of Ancient Greece, both due to the favorable geostrategic situation in the region and due to his personal qualities as a diplomat and military strategist.
Key words: Antigonid dynasty, Antigonus III Doson, Achaean League, hegemony, Aetolians.
The gradual establishment of Odryan statehood in VII - VI BC is in the context of similar processes developing and among the other Thracian tribes. In this competitive environment, the Odrys during the period under review probably managed to put into control a considerable size and rich in natural resources territory situated between the Rhodopes and the Balkan Mountains, which is basically marked by the Tundja River and the upper and middle course of the Hebros River. During the same period, there were other strong political subjects in Thrace, such as Getae, Triballi, Satrae, which prevents their aggression from spreading beyond the specified territory. The penetration of the Persians with military force in Thrace in the end of VI - the beginning of the 5th century BC. changes the strategic situation, which leads to the weakening of the Getae’s and allows the Odrys to develop their military and political potential. Under the leadership of their ruler Teres I, they manage to put their Getae under their control. They conquer the lands situated between the middle course of the Tundzha River, the Eastern Balkan Mountains, the western coast of the Black Sea and the Strandzha-Sakar Mountains. It is possible for Teres to undertake military campaigns and in the southeast direction against the tribes of Thyni. These military-political successes warrant the Athenian historian Thucydides to define this Odrys ruler as the creator of the powerful Odrysian kingdom.