Location: Old Library

The fifth, and final, lecture brings together the conclusions reached in the previous lectures of the series. It draws a big-picture interpretation of political development in the three selected regions based on common features observed across the three case studies, casting light on shared structural factors that underpinned socio-political transformations in Greece, Anatolia, and the Levant during the Iron Age. Detected common features span from the social profiles of the new political actors to the fluidity of socio-political hierarchies, and include the criteria of political legitimacy as well as the modes of institutionalization of political leadership. Immune to teleological implications, these common features are intended as analytical tools for a cross-cultural investigation of processes of socio-political development and their human protagonists.

Location: Old Library

The fourth lecture focuses on the role of individual leaders as vectors of socio-political development in the early Greek world. The social profile of Iron Age leaders is rooted in that of Late Bronze Age independent agents, some of whom held the same title of qa-si-re-u ≈ basileus as the Homeric and Hesiodic leaders. Despite occasionally serving the interests of the Mycenaean palaces, these figures engaged in military and economic activities independently of them and were thus able to overcome their collapse. Claims to leadership rested on military prowess as well as the capability of establishing overseas networks and of controlling the circulation of metals and trade. Political power was wielded informally, and social cohesion rested on the leaders’ ability to meet the community’s expectations of justice and well-being. The basileis of early Greece were among the main protagonists of the creation of new institutions, a process that had different outcomes, ranging from monarchy (in Cyprus), to diarchy (in Sparta), to systems of power sharing.