IndexIntroductionThe city-state in the Hellenistic ageThe Hellenistic philosophical and social panoramaHellenistic art and religionConclusion: a complex legacyIntroductionThe transition period from the classical to the Hellenistic age is a period full of changes for Greek citizens. From being citizens of a relatively small community, in which they could actively participate and engage, to a cosmopolitan environment, following the conquest of Alexander the Great. How did the function of city-states change in the Hellenistic age? To what extent have they lost their political autonomy? It is important to address all these questions to understand the implications of Hellenistic imperialism and its influence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay City-states in the Hellenistic Age We must keep in mind that the monarchical empire was only a new phenomenon for the cities of mainland Greece. By the time the Macedonians became the major political power in the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, the Greek city-states of Asia Minor had been accustomed to Persian rule for years. The emergence of city-states in classical Greece was aided by the geographical characteristics of Greece. Therefore, they were not large enough, which meant they had social homogeneity and political autonomy. The image of the Greek city is sometimes distorted in Macedonian imperialism. For example, the view that civic autonomy is a Greek ideal. Self-government is the natural state form for cities. Most cities are governed by national magistrates. Of course, democracy, as it existed in Athens, was exceptional in the Greek context of the 5th century. But to some extent it was also preserved during the Hellenistic period. A constant supply of resources and manpower, as well as control of strategic roads were crucial prerequisites of ancient imperialism. Such “hegemonic empires,” such as the Hellenistic one, in which local rulers recognize the institution of the “great king,” through which the new empire takes control of ethnically diverse populations providing them with the security they need to produce the surplus that the empire needs. to support his army. Such empires had neither the will nor the power to directly rule subject cities. Rather than seeking to install outsiders as governors against the wishes of city leaders, kings supported local political factions or elite families against their rivals, seeking to manipulate the composition of the ruling oligarchy. Indeed, kings depended on cities as much as cities depended on them. Cities administered the infrastructure and collection of surpluses, which were essential to the empire's exercise of power. Besieging cities was a costly and time-consuming decision. As Alexander learned in Tire and Antigonus Gonatas in Athens. Therefore, rather than forcing cities into submission at any cost, rulers preferred to seek peaceful cooperation with urban oligarchies whenever they could. The Hellenistic Philosophical and Social Landscape The golden age of Greek philosophy, culminating with Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle lasted only about hundreds of years. In subsequent centuries, changes in the political and cultural climate of the ancient world tended to discourage the earlier philosophical thought of that time. The general culture of the Hellenistic period remained Greek in spirit, political power was vested in a highly centralized state. The Athenian democratic tradition of participatory government disappeared as individuals were excluded from significantly shaping social structureof their lives. Therefore, the Hellenistic philosophers of this time devoted less time to the issues addressed by Plato and Aristotle, such as the construction of the ideal state that would facilitate happy living. Instead thinkers of this time were focused on the life of the individual, detailing the types of character and action that could enable the person to live well despite the prevailing political realities of that time. We might say that philosophers have tried to show how we should live when circumstances beyond our control could influence what we want to accomplish. It is commonly said that Hellenistic philosophy derived much of its character from political and social crisis. Individuals, troubled by turbulent change, are believed to have found the institutions and traditional values ​​of the polis an inadequate context for defining their lives. Many Hellenistic philosophers offer ways to diminish or eliminate fear and anxiety. The main obstacles to happiness, according to Epicurus, are the fear of divine control of the world and the fear of death. But to understand the special focus of Hellenistic ethics we should remember Socrates' contribution to philosophy. It was he who gave the concept of the "wise man", whose life represents an extraordinary challenge to conventional views on human needs and priorities and yet a paradigm of happiness. It is correct to see Hellenistic ethics as a development of Socratic tendencies, rather than a direct response to seemingly new problems and situations. Socrates founded no school and it was too complex to be fully adopted by any of his followers, but Socrates' challenge persisted, passed on to the Hellenistic world. So, what does Socrates think of Hellenistic ethics? Many argue that it is a particular vision of what ethics should be about: the questioning of conventions, the removal of fears and desires without any rational foundation, a radical order of priorities around the concept of the health of the soul . The Stoics insist that pleasant and painful sensations make no difference to true happiness. Pyrrhonists center happiness exclusively in skepticism. Although the Hellenistic philosophers are concerned with the same issues such as: happiness, excellence and self-mastery, and agree on much of what these require in the sphere of practical reason and desire. The new political climate of the period forced Hellenistic ethics to detach itself from politics, and this meant two things: first, the theories of Hellenistic ethics were more abstract than those of their classical predecessors. Teachers of Hellenistic ethics did not care much whether their goals were practical considering the conditions in which people lived. Concrete social and political questions did not interest them. In particular, they didn't ask themselves whether better policy would make it easier to live a good life. Second, Hellenistic ethics placed vastly greater emphasis on individual choice than public policy. What most characterizes Hellenistic ethics may not be its Socratic influence, but may be the surprisingly academic character of the different schools of thought. Hellenistic ethics may have been self-generated. It could be the result of a long technical debate between schools. As professional philosophers they were primarily concerned with subtle aspects that might make a difference in ordinary life. Hellenistic art and religion Hellenistic kings became leading figures of the arts, commissioning public works of architecture and sculpture, as well as private luxury items that demonstrated their wealth. and taste. Hellenistic art is quite diverse in subject matter and.