Herodotus’ depiction of Miltiades’ transgression in the sanctuary of Demeter Thesmophoros on Paros is marked by the intriguing phrase κινήσοντά τι τῶν ἀκινήτων (6.134.2). We examine this proverbial phrase, whose implications for Herodotus’ portrayal of Miltiades’ downfall have not yet been fully acknowledged. The article draws attention to the widespread concept of sacred immovables (ἀκίνητα) that were protected by imprecations, and suggests that Miltiades triggered a contingent curse protecting divine property. Herodotus configures the episode of Miltiades on Paros as a narrative of entrapment and steers his readers to view Miltiades’ fate as the consequence of a curse at work.

According to an account that Felix Jacoby published as Philochoros (FGrH 328) F119, a gift of 30,000 medimnoi of grain was sent by Psammetichos from Egypt to Athens in the archonship of Lysimachides (445/4). When for its distribution a scrutiny (diapsēphisis) was held to check the citizen status of the claimants, 4,760 individuals appeared to be illegally listed as citizens, while 14,240 Athenians received a portion of grain. Brought together in this fragment, the events feature as a significant historical fact in studies of Pericles’ Citizenship Law, Athenian demography and the Athenian grain supply. However, in this article I argue that the account in F119 is not correct as it stands, but a conflation of historically disparate events into one episode. This confusing amalgam is not Philochoros’ mistake, but, with several possible causes, it must originate in the tradition between him and Plutarch, who incorporated it into his Life of Pericles (37). The most likely source of this conflated report for Plutarch’s version is the Alexandrian scholar Didymos. A major element in the confusion is the diapsēphisis of 346/5, when all male citizens scrutinized each other on their civic status, a one-off event that deeply affected Athenian society and its historical traditions.

Following on Josine Blok’s article (this volume), this note assesses the possible historical contexts for the gift of grain to Athens recorded in Philochoros FGrH 328 F119.

The focus of this paper is a first-century pseudepigraphic treatise titled On Human Nature, preserved by Stobaeus and attributed to the Pythagorean Aesara. Whether the treatise is to be ascribed to a woman philosopher named Aesara or the Pythagorean man Aresas is a point of controversy. In what follows, we gloss over the question of the identity and gender of the author and turn to the philosophical content of the treatise. In the surviving fragment, Aesara analyses the structure of the human soul and the relationships among its parts. The human soul becomes a model of law and justice for both the city and the household. Thus, On Human Nature revisits well-known Platonic doctrines, such as the city-soul analogy, the tripartition of the soul and the definition of justice as harmony, providing novel insights into their political implications. In what follows, we argue that Aesara constructs an original psychological theory by supplementing Plato’s tripartite conception of the soul in the Republic with aspects from later dialogues. Specifically, Aesara employs the Laws to stress the political implications of the tripartition and the leading role of νοῦς, and the Timaeus to explain our psychological reactions through physiological phenomena.