The author of the article substantiates the conclusion about the identity of two little-known historical characters of the same name-Demetrius, the chief of the fleet of Philip II of Macedon, who was defeated by the citizens of Byzantium in 340/339 BC (Dion. Byz. 65), and the elder brother of Antigonus the One-Eyed, who died around the same time (Plut. Dem. 2).

Key words: Philip II, Dionysius of Byzantium, Byzantium, Demetrius, Antigonus the One-eyed, Plutarch.

The plot of this work is connected with the dynastic history of the Antigonids, a royal house that succeeded the Argeades and for a while united under its rule vast territories in both Europe and Asia. The starting point of the study is a passage from the Voyage of the Bosporus by Dionysius of Byzantium1, a source that often does not attract the proper attention of researchers 2 (65):

"Komarod is followed by a jutting, uneven beach and underwater cliffs rising out of the sea. They were called Bacchae by the ancients , from the fact that the waves around them seem to be raging in rapid motion, like bacchantes.3 When the Byzantines defeated the army of Demetrius, the general of Philip, they named the area Fermemeria (heat)4 because of the work they did, for on that day they fought the battle of the sea with great skill, 5 and with great fervor. " 6

The work was carried out within the framework of a research project supported by the grant of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation "Polis and supra-polis structures: forms and evolution of relations in the Greco-Roman world".

1 See the latest edition of the source with its first translation into modern (Italian) language, an extensive introductory article, and a thorough commentary: [Belfiore, 2009]. Paragraphs 57 to 95 of The Bosporus Voyages have only come down to us in a Latin translation made by the French traveler Pierre Gilles (1490-1555; then all the dates in the article are BC).

2 There are no references to it at all, for example, in a new paper specifically devoted to the problem of control over the Black Sea Straits in ancient times [Rubcl, 2009]. It is mentioned only once in another recent study on similar issues [Gabrielsen, 2007, p. 314; p. 323, p.84].

3 Cape Keibashi, which, according to the current map, has a 1.5 cable-length shoal, and there is also a deviation of the current towards the Asian coast and a small countercurrent (in the direction from south to north) [Lotsiya Chernogo morya, 1937, p. 358].

4 The coast of the modern Yenikei district in the northern part of the Istanbul megalopolis (Oberhummer, 1897, Sp. 748), approximately 13 km from the peninsula on which Byzantium proper is located.

5 It can be assumed that the Byzantines used to achieve victory a thorough knowledge of the coastline and features of the currents in this part of the strait, where, as follows from the description of Dionysius and the very name of the area (Bacchae), the sea was very restless (see above). Cf. with Polnenus pointing out that during the battle in the Thracian Bosporus between the fleet of Polyperchon, commanded by Clitus, and the ships of Antigonus the One-Eyed under the leadership of Nicanor (317), the latter was defeated, "because his sailors experienced great difficulties due to inexperience in managing ships in the opposite current" (trans. by T. V. Antonov) (IV. 6. 8). This naval battle, as follows from Polnen's story, took place near Byzantium and Calhedon, much to the south of Fermemeria; the nature of the current there is even more complex than that of the Yenikei; see the description of the currents at Arnautkei (Black Sea Area, 1937, p.360).

6 Post Comarodes consequitur littus editum, asperum, cautesque concavae ex mari minentes, quas antiqui Bacchias nominarunt ex eo, quod circum ipsas concitato motu fluctus furere et bacchari videntur. Hie Demetrium, Philippi ducem exercitus, quum vicessent Byzantii, Θερμημεριαν nominarunt locum a re ipsa quae contigerat: pugnam enim navalem illius diei magna solertia et summo ardore pugnaverant. It is significant that in the latest edition of Dionysius of Byzantium [Belfiore, 2009, p. 282; 311] this passage is left without comment. K. Muller in the first edition of "Voyages...", included in the second volume of "Geographi Graeci minores", briefly wrote about Demetrius: "Who he was, I don't know" (Quinam iste fuerit, nescio) [Geographi Graeci minores, 1861, p. 50]. It is also necessary to take revenge on the fact that the naval victory of the Byzantines over the fleet of Philip, and even before the arrival of the Athenian fleet of Haret, is mentioned by Hesychius of Miletus: "Then, having entered into a naval battle, the inhabitants won a glorious victory over the Macedonians" (Patria Const. 27). Hesihi - the author

page 28

1. The Thracian Bosporus (according to fOberhummer, 1897, Sp. 749-750).

page 29
(here and further, this source is translated by I. E. Surikov, to whom I express my sincere gratitude).

This message, in a strange way, remained almost ignored by the researchers. References to it in the works where Philip II's war against Byzantium (September-October 340 - March 339) is described in varying degrees of detail (and this passage, by default, it would seem, should be associated with it), in the absolute majority of cases there are no references at all7. Philip's general Demetrius is also not mentioned in the major study of Macedonian prosopography written by A. Tataki (Tataki, 1988).

In some works, Philip II's general Demetrius is still mentioned. However, they also leave many ambiguities. J. Ellis describes him as a royal admiral who was driven into the Black Sea by the Athenian fleet under the command of Haret [Ellis, 1976, p. 182]. A specific reference to the source of this passage is not given, so it is impossible to find out where the name Demetrius came from. However, when describing this episode, even taken in a broader event context, Dion. Byz. 65 is missing [Ellis, 1976, p. 288-289, n. 1-9]. J. Worthington refers to Demetrius as the commander of the Macedonian fleet, who captured Athenian grain ships in Hiero on the Asian coast of the Thracian Bosporus, 8 then allegedly pushed out of the Strait by Haret, but not to Pontus, but to the Propontis [Worthington, 2014, p. 186], which is probably erroneous 9. Both of these look very strange passage: in addition to references to the work of John. Nor in the passage of Theopompus (FGH 115, F. 292), nor in the book of R. Sealy (Sealy, 1993), which the American researcher refers to when describing this episode (Worthington, 2014, p.344, ed. 62], the name Demetrius does not appear. At the same time, tellingly, neither J. R. R. Tolkien nor Neither Ellis nor I. Worthington seem to be aware of Dionysius of Byzantium's account of Demetrius at all, so it must be some strange misunderstanding.

Only in the book of V. P. Nevskaya about the history of Byzantium it is said that after the arrival of Haret's squadron to the theater of military operations, the naval forces of Philip's opponents increased significantly and "in a naval battle that unfolded in the Strait, the allies defeated the royal navarch Demetrius and drove the Macedonian fleet away from the besieged city" (with reference to fr. 41 according to Muller's 1861 edition G.) [Nevskaya, 1953, p. 119, note 3]. However, this idea does not get any development. In the old dissertation of H. Merle, this episode is completely ignored, and in the latest and very thorough article by D. Engster when describing the Byzantine war against Philip II, footnotes twice contain blind references to Dion. Byz. 66 (sic! - O. G.) without mentioning Demetrius and, obviously, with a factual error [Merle, 1916, Pp. 42-49; Engster, 2014, Pp. 385-390].

The opinion recently expressed by the Romanian antiquarian A. Dumitru (2006) stands out. The main idea of his article, which is based on a detailed analysis of sources and a thorough knowledge of historiography, is that Dioni's story-

late (VI century). It sometimes provides information that can only be described by the word "fairy tales"; however, it is hardly worth ignoring it completely, as is done in modern science. It is possible that Hesychius in this case reproduces the specified information of Dionysius (such examples are found in his work). It is significant, however, that Hesychius gives a chronological reference to this battle, although it looks suspicious, being an element of an extremely distorted picture-after the unsuccessful night assault on Byzantium by Philip; Dionysius does not have one. This may serve as an indirect circumstance indicating the independent nature of Hesychius ' message.

7 See, for example: [Hammond and Griffith, 1979, p. 566-581] (the most detailed account of the course of events); [Cawkwell, 1978, p. 135-140; Corvisier, p. 246-248].

8 See sources about this event: Demosth. XVIII. 72; XXXV. 10; L. 17; Didym. Comm. ad Demosth. XI.1. Col. 10-11 (= Theopomp. FGH 115, F. 292; Philochor. FGH 328, F. 162); Just. IX.L1-6; Front. Strat. 1.4.13. For more information about this action and its consequences, see [Bresson, 1994]. Neither in ancient authors, nor in the article of A. Bresson and the literature used by him does the name Demetrius occur.

9 There may be an error in the Russian translation; unfortunately, the original English version of the book is still unavailable to me.

page 30
Along with the mentioned passage in paragraph 65, the Byzantine Gospel, which mentions the destruction of the temple of Pluto, 10 should not be associated with the well-known campaign against the Byzantines of Philip II, but with the war that Philip V might have waged with the Byzantines at the very end of the third century [Dumitru, 2006, p. 140-143]11. The main argument in favor of This is due to the very fact of the Macedonian king's destruction of the temple-a case that strongly disagrees with Philip II's policy regarding sanctuary12, but is quite typical for Philip V, who indeed often committed such blasphemies [Dumitru, 2006, p. 143] 13. This circumstance is indeed quite important, but it is difficult to recognize it as decisive: it cannot be excluded that Philip II, forced by the circumstances of the difficult siege of Byzantium, changed his usual practice and actually destroyed the temple of Pluto (information about which, significantly, is preserved only in local tradition). Further, the presence of Philip V's fleet in the Thracian Bosporus and the Propontis during his campaign in Thrace and Northwestern Asia Minor was not strategically necessary and therefore hardly took place [Gabelko, 2007, p.106]. Therefore, it is difficult to prove the connection of paragraph 65 of the Bosporus Voyage with these events, 14 whereas the actions of Philip II's fleet in the campaign against Byzantium are reflected in the sources.15 Finally, it should not be forgotten that no general Demetrius is known to have served Philip V, and in the case of Philip II, as will be shown later, this is not the case. Perhaps, in partial agreement with the idea of A. Dumitru (and taking into account the fact that the relationship between Philip V and the Byzantines reconstructed by him, placed in the military-diplomatic context of the end of the third century, looks quite interesting and in many respects very convincing [Dumitru, 2006, p. 143-155]), it should be assumed that in Passages 14 and 65 refer to different Macedonian kings-Philip V and Philip II, respectively. Probably, the "Voyage of the Bosporus" could not reflect the difference between the events related to the two monarchs of the same name.16
10 "The temple of Pluto was dismantled, needing wood, by the Macedonian Philip, when he was besieging the city "(14). A. Dumitru leaves open the question of the validity of the opinion of those researchers who connect the information of paragraph 27 with this paragraph: "[The bridge], the construction of the Macedonian Philip, which connected with it both banks (Golden Bay Rog. - O. G.). He lowered stone buttresses into the mors and built a huge embankment, since he had many workers at his disposal, so that, having thrown a bridge over the Horn, he could easily raid overland. After all, the ships could not compete with the Byzantines, who were much superior to him at sea " [Dumitru, 2006, p. 141].

11 Nothing is known about the actual fact of such a conflict, but Philip V, starting his campaign in Asia Minor, crossed the Thracian Bosporus and captured Calchedon, which is located opposite Byzantium [Walbank, 1940, p. 114; Hammond and Walbank, 1988, p. 412-413]. Byzantium, based on the logic of events, could have been affected by the actions of the Macedonian army, but the poor preservation of the XV book of Polybius, which dealt with the beginning of Philip's expedition, does not allow us to express this more confidently.

12 Philip II's accusations of religious crimes are absent even in the diatribes of his arch-enemy Demosthenes and other opponents of the tsar [Dumitru, 2006, p. 142, p. 30].

13 See especially on the blasphemies of Philip V and their interpretation in the context of Polybius ' political and religious views: [Gabelko and Teitelbaum, 2008]. A. Dumitru's observation that the picture of the siege of Byzantium by "Philip", briefly outlined by Frontinus (Strat. I.3. 4), does not fully correspond to what is known from other sources about the war of Philip II against the Byzantines, and can also be attributed specifically to the events of the end of the third century.

14 Dumitru's references to the inaccuracy of Pierre Gilles 'rendering of Dionysius' terminology regarding Demetrius ' position [Dumitru, 2006, p. 142, p.12-13] mean little, since paragraph 65 deals specifically with a naval battle.

15 It is emphasized that the fleet assembled by Philip for operations against Byzantium was the largest in his entire political activity, although it was still inferior to the naval forces of his opponents [Hammond and Griffith, 1979, p. 567].

16 The successful repulse of Philip II's attack was one of the most striking episodes in the history of Byzantium and was reflected in the polis religion (see Dionysius ' mention of the locality of Phosphoros, apparently associated with Artemis, who was considered the savior of the city-78; cf. on the veneration of Hecate identified with her-62; Hesych. Mil. -15; 27; see also Steph. Byz. s. v. βοσπορος). It would be strange if Dionysius, the patriot of his native city, did not mention these events in a context that excludes any ambiguity. It is with them, in my opinion, that the one mentioned above should also be associated (see note. 11) the story of Dionysius (27) about the large-scale engineering works carried out by "Philip" during the siege of Byzantium.

page 31
Meanwhile, the report of Dionysius of Byzantium can be compared with the information reported by Plutarch about the family of Demetrius Poliorketes in the biography of this ruler:

"By Stratonice, the daughter of Corrages, Antigonus had two sons: one he named Demetrius, after his brother, and the other Philip, after his father. This is what most writers say, but some say that Demetrius was not Antigonus 'son, but his nephew, and that his father died when he was still an infant, and that his mother married Antigonus immediately afterwards, and therefore everyone considered Demetrius his son" 17 (Plut. Dem. 2; translated by S. P. Markish).

This passage also went almost unnoticed by researchers. Probably, the fact that the brother of Antigonus is not directly named here also played a role. R. Billows, in the most thorough study on Antigonus the One-Eyed to date, notes that Antigonus had two brothers, Demetrius and Ptolemy, and the first, apparently, was the eldest 18. Further, the researcher writes:

"It was about this time that Antigonus' brother Demetrius died, so that Antigonus married his widow, and by her he soon had an eldest son, Demetrius (c. 337/36), soon enough for rumors to arise that the younger Demetrius was actually the son of Antigonus ' deceased brother, after whom he was named named. Presumably Demetrius was killed near Perinthus or Byzantium, or during the campaign against the Tribals, in which Philip suffered heavy losses" [Bills, 1991, p. 29; cf.: Champion, 2014, p. 12-13].

Thus, the American antiquarian seems to be just one step away from identifying two characters of the same name - Philippov's commander Demetrius from the passage of Dionysius of Byzantium and brother Antigonus of One-Eye, but he also overlooked the message "Voyages...". Of course, it should be borne in mind that the name Demetrius is one of the most common in Macedonia: The volume "Lexicon of Greek Personal Names" devoted to this region gives more than one and a half hundred examples of its appearance [LGPN IV, p. 91-92]. However, in this situation, a random coincidence seems almost impossible, especially since Dionysius 'information about Demetrius' defeat at the hands of the Byzantines makes it very likely that Demetrius died in the course of these events. This assumption can be supported by the Byzantine geographer's reference to the fact that Philip was significantly inferior to the Byzantines at sea (27) (see above, note 11).

The family history of the Antigonids thus acquires a severe touching, at the same time adding to its authenticity. Two brothers, Demetrius and Antigonus, participated in the military campaign of 340-339 under the leadership of King Philip; first, the younger of them was seriously injured-lost an eye, showing valor and courage at the siege of Perinth, 19 then the elder, who apparently held a responsible post in the Macedonian army, died during the war against Byzantium in a hot naval battle, which left its mark even in the toponymy of the Thracian Bosporus 20. Thereafter

17 Αντιγονα) τοινυν δυοιν υιων εκ Στρατονικης της Κορραγου γενομενων, τον μεν επι ταδελφω Δημητριον, τον δ' επι τω πατρι Φιλιππον ωνομασεν. ουτος εστιν ο των πλειστων λογος. ενιοι δε τον Δημητριον ουχ υιον, αλλ' αδελφιδουν γενεσθαι του Αντιγονου λεγουσιν επι νηπιω γαρ αυτω πανταπασι του πατρος τελευτησαντος, ειτα της μητρος ευθυς τω Αντιγονα) γαμηθεισης, υιον εκεινου νομισθηναι. The verb τελευταω, as you know, has different meanings - both "to die" (= by one's own death) and "to perish" (=to be killed).

18 (Billows, 1991, p. 17), compare the family tree of the Antigonids on p. 16.

19 Plutarch reports that Antigonus was wounded (Alex. 70); analysis of contradictions in sources: [Billows, 1991, p. 27-29; Heckel, 2006, p. 30-31; Gabelko, 2014, p. 120-125].

20 It is interesting, however, that the course of relations between Antigonus the One-Eyed and Byzantium after the start of the Diadoch wars does not show any desire to avenge the death of his brother, if it occurred during the conflict with the Byzantines. Citizens of Byzantium assisted the fleet of Antigonus in the battle with the ships of Polyperchon in 317 (Diod. XVIII.72.3-4; Polyaen. IV.6.8). Although they later refused to form an alliance with him (under pressure from Lysimachus) and remained neutral (Diod. XIX. 77. 6-7), R. Billows believes that the friendship of Antigonus with Byzantium continued throughout his reign

page 32
Antigonus married the widow of Demetrius and named the son who was soon born, the future "conqueror of cities" (Poliorcetes), in honor of the deceased brother...

Unfortunately, the acceptance of this hypothesis does not allow us, as it may seem at first glance, to correct our ideas about the years of Demetrius Poliorcetes ' life. Information transmitted by Plutarch that some writers considered Demetrius not the son of Antigonus, but of his elder brother (accordingly, he must have been born before the latter's death no later than March 339, or even earlier, as the Hieronean writer says; however, it can be assumed that Antigonus married his brother's widow when she was already pregnant from Demetrius), should be considered groundless. The most complete data of sources on this issue (Plutarch, Diodorus, Appian, Pseudo-Lucian, Eusebius, etc.) are analyzed in a detailed article by P. Wheatley [Wheatley, 1997], who comes to the conclusion that the birth of Demetrius seems to be most likely at the very beginning (January or February) of 336, and he died in February or March 282 at the age of 54. This is generally consistent with Plutarch's data (Plut. Dem. 52.3-4)21 [Wheatley, 1997, p. 27]. If we attribute the death of Demetrius, the elder brother of Antigonus the One-Eyed, to the time before 339 inclusive and relate this fact to the rumors about the birth of Demetrius (the future Polyorcetes) from him, then it becomes obvious that the latter must have been at least more than two years older.

There is no way to reconcile this assumption with P. Wheatley's calculations. The only way out, it seems, would be to assume that the mistake (overestimating the date of Demetrius ' birth year) was made in the original source of Plutarch and other authors who report on the life span of Polyorcetes (see above, note 22). Obviously, it is not too much of a stretch to assume that Hieronymus of Cardia (FGH 154) is the author who gave, by all accounts, the most detailed and reliable description of the period of the Diadochi. However, Hieronymus, who was a close confidant of Antigonus the One-Eyed, was well aware of the family history, and the assumption that he might have made a mistake in estimating the age of Demetrius Poliorcetes, reproduced by Diodorus, Plutarch and Appian, seems far-fetched. At the same time, it is unlikely that rumors about the possible birth of Demetrius (if we stick to the date justified by P. Wheatley) from the elder brother of Antigonus can serve as an argument against the hypothesis proposed here in the sense that too much time passed between the death of Demetrius the elder during the siege of Byzantium and the birth of the future Polyorcetes to insist on the identity of Filippov's Commander 22. Rather, it is the usual inconsistency of tradition.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

RE - Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart. LGPN IV - A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names: Vol. IV. (Macedonia, Thrace, Northern Shores of the Black Sea) / Ed. by P.M. Fraser, E. Matthews, R.W.V Catling. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

[Billows, 1991, p. 216]. The citizens of Byzantium were Asclepiades, a prominent confidant of Antigonus [Bills, 1991, p. 375-376], and Hegethor, a military engineer in the service of him and Demetrius Poliorcetes [Bills, 1991, p. 388-389]. Apparently, Antigonus the One-Eyed, true to his policy of maintaining political freedoms, in this case sacrificed personal feelings for political reasons: it was more profitable for him to have a rich and powerful Byzantium as a friend than an enemy.

21 As well as consistent data from various sources that Demetrius was left with the army in Syria in the winter of 314/313 at the age of 22 (Diod. XIX. 69; App. Syr. 54. 274; Plut. Dem. 5.2) [Wheatley, 1997, p. 19, n. 1-3].

22 For example, J. Champion supposedly attributes the marriage of Antigonus to Stratonyx to 335/4 BC (Champion, 2014, p. 12-13).

page 33
list of literature

Gabelko O. L. Istoricheskaya interpretatsiya nekotorykh maloaziyskikh tombstones with images of battle scenes. 2. Voina, armiya i voennoe delo v antichnom mire [War, army and Military Affairs in the ancient World]. Kazan-Nizhny Novgorod-Saratov, 2007.

Gabelko O. L. Antigonus Monophthalmus and Antigonus Fuscus: on the interpretation of two nicknames of Hellenistic monarchs. 4. Istoriya ponyatii, kategorialnyi apparat sovremennoi istoricheskoi nauki i problemy (rekonstruktsii proshego) [History of Concepts, categorical apparatus of modern Historical science and problems of reconstruction of the past]. Nizhny Novgorod, 2014.

Gabelko O. L., Teitelbaum E. G. Polybius ' Views on Religious Crimes in military conflicts of Hellenistic States.Problemy istorii, filologii, kul'tury [Problems of History, Philology, and Culture]. 2008. Issue 19.

Lotsiya Chernogo morya, L.: Izdanie Gidrograficheskogo upravleniya UMS RKKA, 1937.
Worthington I. Philip II of Macedon, St. Petersburg: Evraziya-Klio Publishing House, 2014.

Belfiore S. II La Navigazione sul Bosforo di Dionisio di Bisanzio // Periplo del Ponto Eusino di Arriano e altri testi sul Mar Nero e il Bosforo: spazio geografico, mito e dominio ai confini dell 'Impero romano / lntroduzione, traduzione e note a cura di Stefano Belfiore. Venezia, 2009.

Billows R.A. Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State. Berkeley, LA - London: University of California Press, 1991.

Bressson A. L'attentat d'Hieron et le commerce grec // Economie antique. Les echanges dans I'Antiquite: le role de I'Etat / P. Briant, R. Descat, J. Andreau (eds). Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges: Musee Archeologique Departemental, 1994.

Cawkwell G. Philip of Macedon. London-Boston: Faber & Faber, 1978.

Champion J. Antigonos the One-Eyed: Greatest of the Successors. Barnsley: Pen&Sword Military, 2014.

Corvisier J.-N. Philippe II de Macedonie. P.: Fayard, 2002.

Dumitru A. Byzance et les Philippe de Macedonie // Revue des etudes grecques. 119/1. 2006.

Ellis J. R. Philip II and Macedonian Imperialism. L.: Thames and Hudson, 1976.

Engster D. Die Kolonie Byzantion - Geschichte, Gesellschaft und Stadtbild einer Handelsmetropole // Phanagoreia und dariiber hinaus.... Festschrift fur Vladimir Kuznetsov / Hrsg. von N. Povalahev. Gottingen: Cuvillier Verlag, 2014.

Gabrielsen V. Trade and Tribute: Byzantion and the Black Sea Straits // The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges / Ed. by V. Gabrielsen, J. Lund. Aarhus: Universitetsforlag, 2007 (Black Sea Studies, Vol. 6).

Geographi Graeci minores. Vol. II / Rec. C. Miillerus. Parisiis: Didot, 1861.

Hammond N.G.L., Griffith G.T. A History of Macedonia: Vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979.

Hammond N.G.L., Walbank F.W. A History of Macedonia: Vol. HI. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Heckel W. Who's Who in the Age of Alexander the Great: Prosopography of Alexander's Empire. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2006.

Merle H. Die Geschichte der Sladte Byzantion und Kalchedon. Kiel: H. Fienckc, 1916.

Oberhummer E. Bosporos // RE. 1897. Hlbbd. 5.

Rubel A. 2009: Die okonomische und politische Bedeutung von Bosporos und Hellespont in der Antike // Historia. 2009. 58/3.

Sealy R. Demosthenes and His Time: A Study in Defeat. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Tataki A.B. Macedonians Abroad: A Contribution to the Prosopography of Ancient Macedonia. Athens-Paris: DeBoccard, 1998.

Walbank F.W. Philip V of Macedon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940.

Wheatley P.V The Lifespan of Demetrius Poliocretes // Historia. 1997. 46/1.

page 34

Permanent link to this publication: