having been under the administration of Antipater. The country had
become tributary as early as the time of Philip, but had retained its
ancient dynasties. The princes of the Odrysians, though dependent on,
and weakened by Philip, still existed; and, in the reign of Alexander,
Thrace was always united with Macedonia. But, after his death Perdiccas
separated the two countries, for the purpose of weakening Antipater, and
changed Thrace into a satrapy, which he gave to Lysimachus, and which
Lysimachus subdued.
LYSIMACHUS
It is uncertain whether Lysimachus was a Thessalian or a Macedonian. He
was captain of the king’s bodyguard, and very distinguished, especially
for his lion-like bravery. When Callisthenes was tortured by Alexander,
Lysimachus, on seeing his frightful condition, gave him poison out of
compassion--a bold thing to do under a tyrant of Alexander’s temperament.
This story shows that Lysimachus was considered as a man of independence
of mind, who preserved his free and proud spirit, when Alexander had
already become an eastern despot.
He established his empire with small means, and for the greater part of
his life he was reasonable enough to be satisfied with his dominion.
It was not till his old age that ambition overcame him and carried him
away, though, perhaps, not without some deeper motive and the desire to
save himself. He once crossed the Danube in the vain attempt to make
conquests in the country beyond the river; this may, perhaps, have been
only an attempt to keep off the invading nations of the north. He had a
difficult problem to solve, to conquer the wild and warlike Thracians,
whose country appears to us northern people as a fair southern sort
of paradise, but was terrible to the Greeks on account of the severe
arctic cold; and the terror was increased by the savage manners of the
inhabitants. On the coast, however, there were large and magnificent
Greek cities, and the beautiful Chersonesus. We know little of the
reign of Lysimachus, and we are not even informed whether he resided at
Byzantium or elsewhere. In later times, during the war against Antigonus,
his residence seems to have been in Asia, at Sardis or at Ephesus.
CASSANDER IN POWER
[Sidenote: [316-307 B.C.]]
When Cassander was once in possession of Macedonia, he extirpated the
family of Alexander, without a hand being raised in their defence.
Aristobulus, who wished to interfere, was delivered up and sacrificed.
Hence it is remarkable that he married Thessalonice, the only surviving
daughter of Philip; but this may have arisen from the pride of the
usurper, or from the hope of thereby establishing his dominion. His
government of Macedonia was at the same time a perfect dominion over
Greece, with very few exceptions, one of which was Sparta.
Thebes had been restored by Cassander immediately after the conquest
of Macedonia (316 B.C.), for, in his hatred of Alexander, he undid all
that Alexander had done. By their possession of the Theban territory the
Bœotians were so much bound up with the interests of Macedonia, that it
became a question as to whether it was prudent to restore Thebes. It is
not certain whether they had incurred the suspicion of Cassander. It
was a matter of great difficulty to induce the Bœotians to consent to
the restoration; in all of the rest of Greece it was regarded as an act
of the greatest justice, and it seems to have been a general national
consolation.
About the same time Cassander founded Cassandrea, a remarkable proof
that he was a man of practical sagacity. Philip had extirpated or sold
the Greek population on the Macedonian coast, with the exception of that
of Amphipolis and Pydna. One of these destroyed cities was Potidæa,
which had at first been a Corinthian colony, but afterwards belonged to
Athenian cleruchi. Now, on that site, Cassander assembled, not only many
strangers, but all the Greeks, especially those Olynthians who were still
surviving from the destruction of their city, and built Cassandrea. On
the site of the insignificant town of Therma, he founded Thessalonica,
which he called after the name of his wife. This act also shows great
practical wisdom. Thessalonica, situated on a fine harbour, and in a
fertile district, being now extended, became the chief commercial place
in Macedonia, a rank which it has maintained down to the present day.
Cassandrea (now Cassandra) soon became great and powerful; it has often
been destroyed, but was always restored again; and its situation was so
happily chosen, that it naturally always recovered.
This was the condition of Greece at the time when the appearance of
Demetrius Poliorcetes, the son of Antigonus (307 B.C.), stirred up
everything without doing any good. He had even before been actively
engaged in a war against Ptolemy.
The defeat and death of Eumenes put Antigonus in possession of a vast
monarchy, extending from the Hellespont as far as India. According to the
early invented principle of the balance of power, the others now demanded
that he should give up a part of his conquests; they even thought it
necessary, for the sake of justice and for the balance of power, that the
countries of upper Asia should form a separate state.
Seleucus, the child of fortune, was destined to obtain that empire; a
man who was the pet of fortune, but in no way distinguished as a hero or
statesman. In the same year (316 B.C.) in which Cassander had conquered
Macedonia, and Antigonus, after the conquest of Eumenes, returned
from Upper Asia, Antigonus intended to order Seleucus to be arrested
at Babylon. But he escaped, and the Chaldeans now foretold Antigonus,
that the fate of his family was involved in the affair. It was easy
to foretell the beginning, but not the end, for the Seleucidæ did not
overthrow Antigonus. Seleucus now went to Ptolemy whom he urged on to
wage war against Antigonus.
Thus arose, in 316 B.C., the second or third great internal war among
the Macedonian princes--we say the second or third, because the
recommencement of the war in 318 B.C. may either be regarded as a
continuation of the first or as a second war. In this war, Antigonus
fell out with Cassander, and Ptolemy allied himself with Cassander and
Lysimachus against Antigonus. Lysimachus, however, was cunning enough to
keep aloof as much as he could, and Cassander, too, at first took much
less part in it than Ptolemy. In the beginning it was, properly speaking,
only Antigonus and Ptolemy that were arrayed against each other.
The war was at first carried on especially in Syria and Cyprus. Ptolemy
had taken possession of Cœle-Syria and southern Phœnicia. Antigonus now
directed his arms against him, and at first generally with success, so
that he made himself master of Syria and a great part of Cyprus; until,
in the fourth year of the war, Demetrius Poliorcetes lost the battle of
Gaza against Ptolemy, of which we shall speak hereafter.
In the meantime, however, the generals of Antigonus were carrying on a
war in Greece against Cassander, from 315 B.C. till the end of 312 B.C.
It is worthy of remark that both Antigonus and Ptolemy considered the
Greeks of sufficient importance, to endeavour to gain their favour by
proclaiming the struggle a war of independence for the Greeks; neither of
them, however, had any serious intention of this kind. In the very first
year of the war, Antigonus sent Aristodemus of Miletus with a fleet and
large sums of money to Greece, probably with no other intention than to
make a diversion against Cassander and prevent him from crossing over
into Asia.
[Sidenote: [312-311 B.C.]]
This brought unspeakable misery upon Greece. Each city was too weak, and
also but little inclined to defend itself; each threw itself into the
arms of the party that happened to be at its gates. Alexander, the son of
Polysperchon, had remained in Peloponnesus, establishing himself mainly
at Corinth and Sicyon; he now joined Antigonus, from whom he received
money and troops. He and Aristodemus also enlisted soldiers in Greece,
and the war now broke out, especially in Peloponnesus. Cassander, forcing
his way into the peninsula, conquered Cenchreæ, the port of Corinth.
But all on a sudden, Alexander deserted Antigonus, and faithlessly
concluded a peace with Cassander in his own name and that of his father.
By this means, Aristodemus was driven out of Peloponnesus, and now went
to Ætolia, whence he carried on the war against the opposite countries of
Peloponnesus, Achaia, and Elis. The watchword always was, “Liberty and
Autonomy for Greece;” but the towns were, notwithstanding, treated in a
most terrible manner. During the first campaign, the principal scene of
operations was Arcadia and Argolis, and in the second, Elis and Achaia.
Almost the whole of Achaia was laid waste during this campaign, and Patræ
and Ægium were taken. Alexander was then murdered, and Cratesipolis, his
widow, keeping possession of Corinth and Sicyon, ruled there almost as an
absolute queen.
[Illustration: A SCENE IN SYRIA]
But Cassander transferred the war into Ætolia; these occurrences rendered
the conflict more and more important, and the Acarnanians, therefore,
beginning to be apprehensive, threw themselves into the arms of Cassander
and the Macedonians. Being now supported by Cassander, they endeavoured
to rid themselves of their connection with the Ætolians. The year
following saw the commencement of the war of Cassander against Ætolia.
In 312 B.C., Antigonus made great preparations, and under the command of
Ptolemy, a son of his sister, sent an army into Greece, more especially
into Bœotia, which was exasperated against Cassander, for having been
obliged by him to give up the territory of Thebes. In conjunction with
them, Ptolemy conquered Chalcis, and wherever they went, they were
successful in expelling the garrisons of Cassander, who had no other city
in Greece left that sided with him except Athens. But while Antigonus was
victorious there, he was losing ground in other parts; and thus he found
himself obliged, in 311 B.C., to conclude a peace with his opponents.
[Sidenote: [312-308 B.C.]]
In Syria, Antigonus had entrusted the supreme command against Ptolemy
and Seleucus to his son Demetrius, who was then still a very young man.
This Demetrius plays a very prominent part in history. He has the honour
of having his life described among the biographies in Plutarch--an
honour which we might reasonably grudge Demetrius, for he is a despicable
person. We know him, partly from Plutarch’s biographies, and partly from
a number of anecdotes in Athenæus, to have been the most unprincipled
and most detestable man in existence: the acts of faithlessness which
he committed against Alexander, the son of Cassander, are not the only
things for which he deserves our detestation. He was also a voluptuary
of the vulgarest and most abject description; the lowest crapule was the
element in the filth of which he revelled; and he was quite a heartless
man, who knew no friendship; the basest creatures, the companions of
his lusts, were his only friends. Cassander was, after all, capable
of distinguishing persons deserving of respect, as he showed in the
selection of Demetrius Phalereus; and so also was Ptolemy; but we know
that Demetrius Poliorcetes lived at Athens in intimacy with the most
abject and abandoned persons of the time. He also showed towards his
soldiers an ingratitude and a heartlessness, which are quite revolting;
they were perfectly indifferent to him, and he regarded them only as his
tools. They accomplished great things for him, but he always sacrificed
them without any scruple, leaving to destruction on the morrow those who
had saved his life the day before. In addition to this, he was a gambler,
whose dull torpor could be excited only by great changes of fortune, and
who staked everything upon a card. He is remarkable for his enormous good
fortune: “fortune raised him beyond all conception, and then deserted
him, but when he seemed entirely lost, she again held out her hand to
him,” says Plutarch, in a verse which he applies to him.
Such a man would deserve no attention at all, were it not that he acted
a great part, and that nature had endowed him with great abilities,
especially in mechanics, according to the leaning of that age toward the
mechanical sciences. In this respect, as in many others, we may compare
him with a modern person, the regent Philip of Orleans, who, however, was
a far better man. Demetrius was a great inventor in mechanics, and he did
much for the improvement of military engineering: this is a merit which
he did not unfairly assume, but he is fully entitled to his reputation
in this respect. A short time before, a great impulse had been given
to mechanics in the affairs of war, and machines of every description
were improved. Engines, which for centuries had remained unchanged, were
now, partly through the progress of mathematics, and partly through the
increased wealth that could be employed upon them, improved in one year,
more than they were formerly in the course of centuries.
Demetrius was eighteen years old when Antigonus commissioned him to
undertake the command of an army against Ptolemy. The first attempt
failed, for at Gaza he was completely defeated, and Ptolemy again took
possession of Cœle-Syria. Ptolemy carried on the war in a generous
spirit, for, declaring it to be a civil war between Macedonians, he set
the prisoners free without ransom, whereby he gained the good will of the
Macedonians. Antigonus now undertook the command himself, and Ptolemy
again evacuating the towns of Cœle-Syria, ravaged them.
Peace was then concluded, but it lasted only for a short time. Cassander
succeeded in inducing Ptolemy, the nephew of Antigonus, who was stationed
in Bœotia, as well as another general on the Hellespont, to revolt. Yet
Antigonus soon recovered those countries. In the same year Ptolemy took
Cyprus and extended his power on the coast of Asia Minor.
In the year following Ptolemy appeared with a fleet in Greece, having
until then been the ally of Cassander. It was probably the Bœotians and
Peloponnesians that called in his assistance against Polysperchon, and
he had a fair opportunity of being able to say that he was coming to
avenge the murder of Roxane and Alexander. Cratesipolis surrendered to
him her principality of Argos and Sicyon, being unable to maintain those
cities any longer; but it was not without difficulty that the mercenaries
were prevailed upon to surrender: it was effected only by stratagem. The
Peloponnesians afterwards were slow in doing what they had promised, and
Ptolemy himself probably did not care much about the conquest. Hence he
concluded a treaty with Cassander, whereby he obtained possession of
Peloponnesus with the exception of Argos and Sicyon.
[Sidenote: [308-306 B.C.]]
Antigonus now sent his son Demetrius with a fleet to Greece. No one there
was willing to sacrifice himself for Cassander, who had no fleet, so
that he was unable to undertake anything against Demetrius. The latter
appeared unexpectedly before Piræus: the harbour not being closed, he
landed and quickly took Piræus, before the posts could be occupied. He
immediately proclaimed that the expedition had been undertaken for the
purpose of restoring to Athens her freedom and autonomy, and he was
accordingly received with enthusiasm. The Macedonian garrison under
Dionysius shut itself up in Munychia, and negotiations were commenced
between Demetrius Poliorcetes and the city. Demetrius Phalereus was
sent as ambassador down to the camp in Piræus: Demetrius promised the
Athenians an amnesty, the city was declared free, and the ancient
democratic constitution was restored; but Demetrius Phalereus was sent
into exile.
Demetrius Poliorcetes now besieged the Macedonians in Munychia. He
would not go to Athens till he had taken that fortress; it was at first
blockaded, while the preparations for a siege were going on. While the
engines were building, Demetrius marched against Megara, where there
was a garrison of Cassander. The town was taken by storm and plundered,
and it was only at the urgent request of the Athenian ambassadors, that
its inhabitants were saved and not dragged away into slavery. He then
returned to Piræus, where he attacked Munychia, until the feeble garrison
being exhausted, was obliged, after several days, to surrender, and then
departed. The fortifications were razed to the ground, and the place
given up to the Athenians. Athens was now free, but Demetrius, for the
protection of the Athenians, gave them a garrison of his own troops.
After this he stayed for a time at Athens, where he was received with
enthusiasm, as elsewhere described.
If Demetrius had remained at Athens, and continued the war against
Cassander, he might easily have conquered all Greece; but he was called
away by his father Antigonus, because Ptolemy had made himself master
of Cyprus. About the month of Hecatombæon, Demetrius sailed to Cyprus;
and now, by a brilliant victory of Demetrius over Menelaus, the brother
of Ptolemy, near Salamis in Cyprus, Antigonus and Demetrius gained the
mastery at sea. Cyprus was reconquered. Menelaus, with all his forces in
the island, was obliged to capitulate; and thus the sea far and wide was
in the power of Antigonus and his son. But an expedition which the two
undertook against Egypt proved a failure.
THE NAME OF KING ASSUMED
[Sidenote: [307-305 B.C.]]
Until now, none of the princes had assumed the title of king, but after
the victory of Salamis, Antigonus took the diadem for himself and his
son. Immediately afterwards, Ptolemy, Cassander, Lysimachus, and Seleucus
did the same; and the years were now counted from their accession (306
B.C.): these are what are called the Macedonian Eras.
Demetrius now remained absent from Athens for a period of three or
nearly four years; during this time the city was left to itself, and a
hard time it was. We may easily imagine that Cassander was not idle,
and endeavoured to recover Athens, which was of such importance to him.
He was in possession of Panactum and Phyle, and inflicted the severest
sufferings upon the city. This war must unquestionably be regarded as one
of the chief causes of the terrible poverty in which we afterwards find
Athens, for there can be no doubt that the whole territory was laid waste
during the incursions from Panactum and Phyle. In this war, Demochares
was strategus of Athens, and with her resources alone he operated against
Cassander for four years in a most able manner, until Demetrius returned.
According to the order observed by Trogus Pompeius--though not according
to that of Justin, who has here quite without judgment omitted many
things--we now come to the expedition of Demetrius against Rhodes, one
year after the unsuccessful undertaking against Egypt.
THE SIEGE OF RHODES
[Sidenote: [305-304 B.C.]]
The salted and dried fish of the Euxine were articles of great
consumption in Egypt, and it was for this trade that Rhodes was the
natural entrepôt. The consequence of this was, that the Rhodians and
the Ptolemies were natural friends and allies, and that Rhodes would
on no account separate itself from Egypt; its whole existence depended
upon the commercial advantages, which even the first Ptolemy conceded to
them. Rhodes, therefore, was a weak place, in which Demetrius Poliorcetes
and Antigonus might attack the Egyptians; and it would have been an
immense loss to Egypt, if the two princes had conquered the island, the
possession of which was to them of equal importance.
Hostilities commenced by Demetrius capturing the Rhodian merchant
vessels, which were sailing to Egypt; the first example in antiquity of
neutral vessels being seized upon. The Rhodians paying in equal coin,
captured the ships of Antigonus, who now declared this measure to be an
act of open hostility; and Demetrius was commissioned to lay siege to
Rhodes. While Antigonus was engaged in preparations, the Rhodians, seeing
that Ptolemy’s fleet had been defeated, made an attempt to obtain peace;
but the terms which were offered to them were such as to prevent their
accepting them. Antigonus demanded one hundred hostages, whom he himself
was to select, the right freely to use the harbour of Rhodes for his
ships of war, and an unconditional alliance against Ptolemy. These terms
were rejected by the Rhodians.
Demetrius then landed at Rhodes. His preparations were immense: the
determination of the Rhodians to defend themselves manfully could not
be doubted, and hence every effort was made to compel them by force.
Demetrius appeared with two hundred ships of war, one hundred and seventy
transports, and many small vessels; he is said to have embarked no less
than forty thousand men, partly sailors and partly soldiers. He assembled
his forces at Loryma, opposite to Rhodes, and during his passage across,
the sea between Caria and Rhodes was covered with his ships. He landed
without opposition, made a harbour for his ships of war, and approached
with besieging engines. The whole island was in the meantime overrun,
the country was laid waste, and all who had not fled into the city, were
led away into slavery.
While Demetrius was thus encamped before the walls of the city, the
Rhodians were making the most extraordinary preparations. Their citizens
were called to arms; in their enumeration only six thousand were found
capable of bearing arms, and not more than one thousand metœci and
strangers, who were willing faithfully to undertake the defence. At first
they do not appear to have employed mercenaries; but they allowed their
slaves to take up arms, and after the close of the war they rewarded them
with freedom and the franchise.
This siege is as interesting and as important as the siege of Rhodes
under Soliman against the noble Grand Master de l’Isle Adam in 1522,
which was one of the most heroic defences in modern history. In like
manner, the siege of ancient Rhodes is one of the most glorious
achievements in the later history of Greece.
[Illustration: TERRA-COTTA URN
(In the British Museum)]
Demetrius at last became tired, observing that the game was not worth the
chase. The siege would have lasted a few months longer, and this prospect
made him impatient, as he was losing immense numbers of men and ships.
In addition to this, Cassander was completely gaining the upper hand in
Greece, and Antigonus found that all around, everybody was rising against
him. Demetrius accordingly, on the mediation of Athens and several other
Greek cities, concluded a peace, by which he hoped to save his honour.
It was based on the terms which the Rhodians had been willing to accept
from the first: they were to assist Antigonus and Demetrius in all other
wars, but not against Ptolemy, “and as the wars of the two princes were
chiefly directed against Ptolemy, the Rhodians had neutrality guaranteed
to them.” They were further to retain their city with perfect freedom, as
well as all their subjects.
Demetrius now returned to Greece. Cassander had been blockading Athens,
while Demetrius was besieging Rhodes; and the latter now appeared with
a very considerable fleet to relieve Athens. He landed at Aulis on the
Euripus, between Oropus and Chalcis, to come upon the rear of Cassander
and compel him to withdraw from Athens. Demetrius had a good harbour at
Aulis. Chalcis was in the hands of Cassander, and had a Bœotian garrison;
but it was a large, desolate place, and was easily taken. In order not
to be cut off, Cassander was obliged to break up, and proceeded through
Bœotia towards Thessaly. He succeeded in reaching Thermopylæ; Demetrius
pursued him, and Heraclea surrendered to him; while six thousand
Macedonian troops declared in his favour.
[Sidenote: [304-301 B.C.]]
Demetrius, then entering to Attica, conquered Panactum and Phyle, which
had been occupied by Cassander, and through which he had had Attica
under his control. The Athenians received Demetrius with enthusiasm, as
their benefactor. All that impertinent flattery could devise had been
exhausted; and what was done now had the character of caricature.
From Athens, Demetrius made several expeditions in different directions,
but the city remained his headquarters. During these expeditions, the
desolation of the country increased more and more, and it is surprising
that Attica did not become a complete wilderness as early as that time.
In the spring of 303 Demetrius entered Peloponnesus, which was in the
hands of Cassander and Ptolemy; and he again showed himself in the field
as an excellent and active commander. He conquered Corinth, Sicyon, Bura,
and Ægium. Then he undertook an expedition with his fleet to Leucas and
Corcyra. The Corcyræans were enemies of Cassander. While Demetrius was
engaged in those parts, the Romans had advanced to the extreme point of
Messapia, and accordingly were very near to Demetrius.
From thence Demetrius returned to Corinth, where he convened a congress
of the Greeks, the first after the time of Alexander. He was there
proclaimed hegemon of the Greeks, and in the spring, he proceeded to
Athens, where he was received as a god with incense and processions by
the Athenians, who, being adorned with wreaths, came out to meet him.
Afterwards Athens had to pay a war contribution of 250 talents, which
Demetrius under the very eyes of the people gave to his courtesans while
he ridiculed the Athenians. Things like these naturally goaded the people
into madness.
Demetrius was now master of the greater part of Greece. In the following
year he assembled a large army of his allies, and proceeded by way of
Chalcis into Thessaly with fifty-six thousand men, to meet Cassander.
He took from him a great part of Thessaly, and then after both had
dragged each other about without anything being decided, they separated,
Demetrius being called to Asia by his father, because a great coalition
had there been formed against him. In order, therefore, to withdraw
honourably, Demetrius concluded a peace with Cassander, in which Greece
was declared free, and then crossed over into Asia.
THE FALL OF ANTIGONUS
[Sidenote: [301-300 B.C.]]
Seleucus who was now master of Babylon and the upper satrapies, after
having subdued all Iran as far as India without any effort, had formed,
together with Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus, a coalition against
Antigonus. This is the first instance known in history, of a great
coalition of princes of equal rank and equal independence. Antigonus, who
now possessed only Asia Minor, Cyprus, a portion of Syria and the greater
part of Greece, was thus opposed by all the rest of the Macedonian world;
and it was against this coalition that Demetrius led his army into Asia
Minor. We know very little about the details of the war, but it appears
that the enemies pressed into Asia Minor from all sides. The decisive
battle was fought near Ipsus in Phrygia; it was decided especially by
the admirable infantry of Lysimachus and Cassander. Seleucus had only
Asiatics; the phalanx of Ptolemy was of little importance, and only his
mercenaries fought bravely; but the truth is that in reality he had no
talent as a commander. Antigonus fell in the battle, and the defeat was
so complete, that his whole empire was destroyed. Demetrius escaped
with a small band to the maritime towns of Ionia, but behaved in a
praiseworthy manner.
The empire of Antigonus was now cut up: the western provinces were
divided between Cassander and Lysimachus, the upper provinces were
assigned to Seleucus, and Cyprus and Syria to Ptolemy, who, however, did
not maintain upper Syria, but confined himself to Phœnicia and Cyprus.
Plistarchus, a brother of Cassander obtained Cilicia as a special
indemnification for Cassander, who himself received Caria and Pamphylia,
while Lysimachus acquired Lydia, Ionia, Phrygia, and the north coast of
Asia Minor.
DEMETRIUS AT LARGE
After the battle of Ipsus, Demetrius had escaped with a few thousand men
to Ephesus, where he had a fleet; and he did not altogether despair of
the success of his cause. Cyprus, Sidon, and Tyre, as well as several
of the Ionian towns and islands, were still in his possession, and he
was anything but an insignificant man. He now displayed great skill, and
drew all his forces together, with a view to establish himself in Greece,
and there again to try his fortune. For he saw well, that the coalition
of the generals who had invaded his father’s empire must soon break up,
and that then his assistance would probably be sought by one or other of
them, which was, in fact, afterwards done by Seleucus and Ptolemy. He
sent the great Pyrrhus first as negotiator, and afterwards as hostage, to
Ptolemy. Pyrrhus had been his companion in arms; he had lost his kingdom
through Cassander, and was now wandering about in the world in the hope
of conquering a kingdom for himself. The expedition of the adventurer
Cleonymus also belongs to this time, or, rather, to a somewhat earlier
one; he was a pretender to the throne of Sparta, from which he was,
perhaps unjustly, excluded.
From Ephesus, Demetrius sailed through the Cyclades to Athens, where he
wanted to establish himself first. But the Athenians were determined to
avail themselves of the jealousy of the princes among each other, to
secure their independence; and accordingly they sent an embassy to meet
Demetrius, and declare to him, that they would not receive him.
Athens was now spared for a time, and Demetrius, before attacking the
city, undertook several other expeditions. He first directed his course,
with his squadron, towards the coast of Thrace, gained a footing in the
Thracian Chersonesus, and made war upon Lysimachus, who, in the meantime,
had taken possession of Lydia, Caria, and Phrygia. Lysimachus was not
supported by the other princes, nor was it necessary, and Demetrius
made no conquests there. Meantime, however, a new lucky star was rising
for him through Seleucus, who, having fallen out with Ptolemy, and
being dissatisfied with his share, was ready to form a friendship with
Demetrius. He sued for the hand of Stratonice, a daughter of Demetrius,
whom, however, he afterwards gave up to his son, Antiochus. Demetrius
now sailed with his fleet to Cilicia and Syria, and, in passing, made
himself master of Cilicia, and the treasures which Plistarchus, the
son of Cassander, was guarding there, and then began to quarrel with
Seleucus. For when Cilicia and the Phœnician cities were in the power of
Demetrius, Seleucus in vain asked that they should be given up to him;
and it was not without difficulty that Demetrius escaped from his plots:
a formal rupture, however, did not take place. Demetrius then became
reconciled with Ptolemy also, and that as we have already mentioned,
through the mediation of Pyrrhus. He now again appeared in Greece, with
increased forces. He gained a firm footing in Peloponnesus, though it is
uncertain how many towns he subdued there.
[Sidenote: [300-295 B.C.]]
In the mean time, Cassander died, and Demetrius, supported by a
newly-increased fleet, began the siege of Athens. He had then again
fallen out with Ptolemy, who now sent a fleet to assist the Athenians.
Demetrius blockaded the city by land and by sea, and the Athenians, being
cut off from the sea, were visited by a fearful famine. They fed upon all
kinds of animals, upon indigestible herbs, and the grass which grew on
the Acropolis. An Egyptian fleet, attempting to introduce provisions into
Piræus, was repelled by Demetrius. At length, after an obstinate defence,
they were compelled by the famine to surrender. Every catastrophe brought
the city nearer its downfall, though Demetrius, considering that he was
the conqueror, displayed great mildness. He convened the Athenians,
without their arms, in the theatre, and surrounded the building with his
hoplites. But he was satisfied with having struck them with the horrors
of death, and, having reproached them for their ingratitude, he declared
that he pardoned them. The Athenians were obliged at once to concede to
him the right to keep garrisons at Munychia and Piræus, but otherwise
they fared better under him now, than at the time when as their friend
he had revelled in his excesses. He even fed the Athenians, giving them
grain and other necessaries of life.
Demetrius now returned to Peloponnesus. During this expedition, he was on
the point of making himself master of Sparta. The Spartans, ever since
the battle of Megalopolis, had taken no part in the struggle of the
Greeks for independence. Sparta had during that period become more and
more powerless, although she was in the enjoyment of peace. That which
now emboldened and induced her to declare against Macedonia, is left
unnoticed by the historians of the time; and it would be inexplicable,
if we did not know that Ptolemy and Lysimachus continued the war
against Demetrius. We also know that down to the time of Cleomenes,
there existed a constant connection between Sparta and Alexandria;
whence we may suppose, that that alliance already existed, and that
all the Lacedæmonians received pay from Alexandria. Acts of hostility
had indeed occurred between Sparta and Demetrius, but they were not of
any importance. It is unknown what forces Archidamus possessed, and
what occasioned him to commence the war. All we know is that Archidamus
was defeated near Mantinea, that Demetrius advanced as far as Laconia,
and that Sparta was now surrounded for the second time with palisades
and trenches, and in some parts also with a wall: Pausanias at least
places the fortifications at this time. He also calls the defeat of
Mantinea, the third great blow to Sparta after the battle of Leuctra
and that of Agis. Demetrius might, no doubt, easily have crossed those
fortifications, if he had not at the moment received intelligence that
all his affairs were in a bad condition, and if he had not for this
reason given up the war with Sparta.
For Ptolemy had taken possession of all the places in Cyprus, with the
exception of Salamis, which city he was besieging, and which contained
the children of Demetrius. Lysimachus was making himself master of the
Ionian and other maritime Greek towns in Asia Minor, which had hitherto
been under the dominion of Demetrius. The Egyptian fleet seems to have
gained the ascendency; probably because Ptolemy had become master of
Tyre and Sidon, whereby Demetrius lost the means of obtaining timber and
troops. The Asiatic province henceforth disappears from the history of
Demetrius, and he was again in great difficulties.
DEATH OF CASSANDER; DEMETRIUS WINS AND LOSES
But the death of Cassander, and the misfortunes of his family, opened
fresh prospects for Demetrius. Cassander died of dropsy in 297. His
eldest son Philip appears to have been his sole heir, but he died soon
afterwards at Elatea, 296; two other sons, Antipater and Alexander, then
divided the empire between themselves. Both were very young, and their
mother Thessalonice, a daughter of King Philip, was the only surviving
member of the family; they can scarcely have been more than grown up
boys, if the time of Cassander’s marriage with Thessalonice is correctly
stated in Diodorus. Thessalonice was appointed guardian, or she was
commissioned to divide the empire between her two sons. To do this
fairly, was a difficult task.
[Sidenote: [295-286 B.C.]]
Antipater, the elder, thinking himself wronged by his mother in the
division, murdered her; and applying to Lysimachus, his father-in-law,
he was supported by him. But Alexander, who was confined to western
Macedonia, applied to Pyrrhus, who in the meantime had returned to his
paternal kingdom, to obtain his assistance; for this purpose he ceded to
him the possessions which the Macedonian kings had in Epirus, together
with Ambracia and Acarnania. But distrusting Pyrrhus, he applied at the
same time to Demetrius. As Pyrrhus sold his assistance, we may suppose
that Demetrius did not give his without some selfish motive either; he
evidently caused Thessaly to be ceded to him, the whole of which had
belonged to Cassander. Demetrius now entering Thessaly, met Alexander at
Larissa. Both intrigued against each other, and aimed at each other’s
life. After many attempts, and repeated snares, Demetrius struck the blow
and caused Alexander to be murdered.
The Macedonian troops of the latter now had no king; Demetrius came
forward with a proclamation, in which he declared that he had acted only
in self-defence; that his life had been in danger (which was really
true, but all the Macedonian princes were equally bad); and called upon
the Macedonians to submit to him. The troops submitted to Demetrius and
he was proclaimed king. Lysimachus having put himself in possession of
the dominion of Antipater, his son-in-law, gave up his new Macedonian
possession and made peace with Demetrius, who thus became master of all
Macedonia. He now ruled over Macedonia, Thessaly, Attica, Megara, and
most of the towns of Peloponnesus. The Spartans, however, continued the
war against him.
During these struggles, Demetrius wanted to take from Pyrrhus that
portion of Macedonia which Alexander had ceded to him, and thus he
began to quarrel with his most faithful friend. During his residence
in Alexandria, Pyrrhus had married Antigone, a daughter of Ptolemy by
his first wife; and as long as he lived, he was sure of the friendship
of the Alexandrian court. The detail of the wars between Pyrrhus and
Demetrius cannot form a part of this history, for they are petty and
insignificant. Pyrrhus was allied with the Ætolians, and defended himself
with great skill against an immensely superior force; and after a few
years he was victorious. It was fortunate for him that Demetrius was
just then planning greater things; for he was thinking of recovering
the empire of his father--a senseless idea under the circumstances of
the time. He built an enormous fleet, and enlisted an army which is
said to have amounted to one hundred thousand men. His empire comprised
not only Macedonia and Thessaly, for nominally he was also hegemon of
the Greeks, as Philip and Alexander had been before, and possessed a
number of coast towns in Asia; the parts of his kingdom were very much
scattered about. But he collected his army with immense exertions; his
subjects were fearfully oppressed, and all his dominion was in a state of
ferment. His government was on the whole unbearable to the Macedonians
on account of his pride and his cruelty; they were not a nation to allow
themselves to be governed in the Asiatic fashion. He showed himself
very rarely and accepted no petitions; but once he behaved with unusual
kindness, receiving all petitions and throwing them into the folds of his
garment. Everybody was highly delighted; but when he rode over the bridge
of the Axius, he threw them all into the river. Such things naturally
exasperated all the people against him.
[Illustration: GRECIAN OIL BOTTLE]
[Sidenote: [286-285 B.C.]]
In the end Pyrrhus, called upon by the more distant kings, and being
no doubt invited by the Macedonians themselves, availed himself of the
ferment, and invaded Macedonia with a small force. Demetrius marched
against him; Pyrrhus manœuvred and negotiated with the Macedonians, until
they rose in a general insurrection, refusing obedience to Demetrius and
ordering him to withdraw. He was glad to get away, and went, we believe,
to Demetrias in Magnesia, which he himself had built on the Gulf of
Pagasæ, near the ancient town of Iolcus, and which we afterwards find
in the hands of his son Antigonus. Thence he proceeded into Greece. He
was a great general; his keen discernment as a military commander is
attested by the foundation of Demetrias and of New-Sicyon: the fortress
of Demetrias exercised an important influence upon the fate of Greece.
Demetrius had reigned over Macedonia five or six years.
Demetrius soon concluded peace with Pyrrhus, and if he had waited
patiently, he would have been certain of his restoration; but he could
not wait, he wanted to decide everything at once, and thus in his
restlessness he crossed over into Asia. He left behind him in Greece his
son Antigonus, surnamed Gonatas, who remained master of a great part of
Greece. His father had retained possession of Thessaly and of some Greek
towns, in which he had garrisons, and the fortress of Demetrias, where he
had established arsenals and wharfs for ships of war, commanded Thessaly
and Eubœa. Demetrius landed in Asia Minor, wishing to undertake an
expedition into the interior of Asia, like a man who has no more to lose;
heaven knows what dreams he may have indulged in of overthrowing the
empire of Lysimachus and Seleucus. It was impossible for him to conceive
anything else but a successful result of his scheme. He accordingly
first appeared with his troops in the Asiatic provinces of Lysimachus,
where he was met by Agathocles, a son of Lysimachus, who successfully
manœuvred him out of those provinces, so that he was obliged to proceed
to the interior. In this manner he dragged his army into Armenia, just
as Charles XII dragged his into the Ukraine. His desponding troops at
length delivered him up to Seleucus, who had surrounded him and cut him
off from the sea. He was accordingly taken prisoner, but Seleucus treated
him with great clemency. He continued to live for a time very contentedly
and happily as a perfectly reckless man; Seleucus, who formed a correct
estimate of him, having given him a large Persian palace with hunting
grounds, etc., in Syria. Seleucus would perhaps have made use of him
against Lysimachus, but Demetrius died in the meantime.
LYSIMACHUS, ARSINOE, AND AGATHOCLES
[Sidenote: [285-283 B.C.]]
Lysimachus had, during this period, after the murder of Antipater, his
son-in-law, and the last heir of the elder Antipater (perhaps as a
punishment for an attempt upon his own life), been in possession of a
portion of Macedonia; but he had afterwards given it up to Demetrius.
The Macedonians now recognised Pyrrhus as their king; but Lysimachus
invaded his kingdom, and after having reigned alone for seven months,
Pyrrhus was obliged to divide his empire between himself and Lysimachus.
The Macedonians deserting him as a stranger, surrendered to Lysimachus,
whom they honoured as an ancient companion of Alexander, and whom they
regarded as being nearly related to themselves, being either a Thessalian
or a Macedonian. The division, however, between Lysimachus and Pyrrhus
did not last for any length of time; for shortly after Lysimachus drove
Pyrrhus out of his kingdom. He had reigned over Macedonia altogether five
years and six months, partly in conjunction with Lysimachus and partly
alone.
The empire of Lysimachus had been gradually extended and consolidated.
Greece did not become subject to him; Antigonus Gonatas, who had
received the greater part of his father’s fleet, maintained himself
there with the remnants of his father’s forces, and from Demetrias he
ruled over a part of Greece, although many Greek cities asserted their
independence. Besides Macedonia proper and Thrace, Lysimachus ruled over
Lydia, Mysia, Ionia, Caria, and, no doubt over Phrygia Major also--an
empire as beautiful as he could have wished, “and just of that extent
which Alexander ought to have given to his empire in order to insure
its stability.” His real residence seems to have been Lysimachia in
Chersonesus, in the neighbourhood of the ancient Cardia. With the
exception of Thessalonice, all those Macedonian princes built new
capitals for themselves; Alexandria was at least enlarged by Ptolemy.
Previously to the conquest of Macedonia, Lysimachus had undertaken an
expedition across the Danube, against Dromichætes, a king of the Getæ.
In the plain of Bessarabia his retreat was cut off, and he, with all
his army, was taken prisoner. The generous conduct of the Dacian king,
Dromichætes, is celebrated in the collection of anecdotes; Lysimachus was
set free, and his power was not weakened by this defeat.
[Sidenote: [283-282 B.C.]]
But the royal house was soon to become the scene of a terrible tragedy,
the occasion of which came from the family of Ptolemy. Ptolemy had
divorced his first wife Eurydice, the daughter of Antipater; and his
second wife, the intriguing Berenice, employed every means to cajole
Ptolemy, who was enfeebled by age, and to get the succession decided
in favour of her own son. She succeeded so well that the aged Ptolemy,
two years before his death, resigned his throne to his younger son
Ptolemy Philadelphus, and himself took the oath of allegiance to him.
The first-born Ptolemy, surnamed Ceraunus, betook himself to Lysimachus,
whose eldest son, Agathocles, was married to his sister Lysandra,
likewise a daughter of Ptolemy Soter, by his first wife Eurydice.
Lysimachus, who received him in a friendly manner, was himself married
to Arsinoe, a daughter of Ptolemy by his second wife, by whom he had two
sons. This Arsinoe now had recourse to the same intrigues in the house
of Lysimachus. His eldest son, Agathocles, was already a man of very
mature age (Lysimachus was seventy-four years old at his death) and of
great eminence. In many a campaign he had successfully commanded his
father’s armies; he was very popular throughout the country, and it was
he that was destined to succeed his father. But Arsinoe hated him as the
husband of her half-sister, against whom she entertained a deadly enmity;
and also because he was an obstacle in the way of her own children. She
accordingly determined to deprive him of both his throne and his life. It
must be borne in mind, that in case of Lysimachus’ death she had reason
to fear for her own life, and that according to the practice of the age,
the step-mother and her children would have been murdered by Agathocles
as soon as he had ascended the throne.
Arsinoe, therefore, calumniously informed Lysimachus that his life
was threatened by his son Agathocles. The latter was at first treated
with insult and persecuted by his father, and soon afterwards killed
by poison. As this made a great impression, Lysimachus caused several
others of his sons to be put to death, and began to rage against all whom
Arsinoe pointed out as partisans of Agathocles. These things produced
a complete state of anarchy both in the house of Lysimachus and in his
kingdom. As everyone felt that his life was in danger, his nobles began
to apply for protection to Seleucus, to whom Lysandra, the wife of
Agathocles, had fled with one of her husband’s brothers. Seleucus had
no objection to being thus called upon to interfere. He marched from
Babylon across Mount Taurus down into Western Asia, and, though chiefly
by treachery, gained a decisive victory over the aged king in Lower
Phrygia. Lysimachus, as at all other times, showed great valour, but fell
in the battle. With the exception of Cassandrea, where the widow Arsinoe
resided with her children, the whole of the Macedonian state surrendered
to Seleucus.
SELEUCUS; ANTIGONUS; THE PTOLEMIES
The whole of Alexander’s empire, with the exception of Egypt, southern
Syria, a portion of Phœnicia, and Cyprus, was thus united under the
sceptre of Seleucus. As he had not seen his native country since
the beginning of Alexander’s expedition, Seleucus now crossed the
Hellespont to take possession of his native land, perhaps with the
intention of there closing his days in peace. But while sacrificing in
the neighbourhood of Lysimachia, he was murdered by Ptolemy Ceraunus,
whom he had protected in his misfortunes with the view, according to
the policy of the time, of having a dangerous pretender against Ptolemy
Philadelphus. The state of dissolution was such that Ptolemy, without any
difficulty, was recognised as king by the Macedonian troops of Seleucus,
and by all Macedonia. He accordingly took possession of the empire. There
was no hereditary family--that was the misfortune. Ptolemy Ceraunus had
paved his way to the throne by murder and ingratitude; but he was in
himself no insignificant man: he was very brave and resolute. What his
morality was will be seen hereafter.
[Sidenote: [281-280 B.C.]]
The Asiatic provinces of Lysimachus were quite united with the Syrian
empire, of which Antiochus remained in undisturbed possession, Seleucus,
even in his lifetime, having assigned to him the upper provinces.
Antiochus endeavoured to avenge the death of his father; and a war broke
out between Ptolemy Ceraunus and this Antiochus, who is surnamed Soter,
for all the Macedonian kings bearing the same name are distinguished by
surnames. He was called Soter, for having conquered the Gauls in Asia
Minor. Ptolemy Ceraunus was also at war with Antigonus.
The war with Antiochus did not last long; for Antiochus was wise enough
to confine himself to Asia, and not to extend his power further. He would
not come to Europe, because he would have been unable to defend his
possessions there. He therefore soon listened to proposals of peace.
No definite peace seems to have been concluded with Antigonus; he was
too weak to effect anything against Macedonia, and seems to have been
reasonable enough to avoid everything which might have called forth
greater efforts against him.
Ptolemy endeavoured to establish his power firmly by treaties; and here
our guide passes on to the history of Pyrrhus: Ptolemy tried to form
alliances, renounced his claims to Egypt, became reconciled with his
brother Ptolemy Philadelphus, and tried to win the friendship of Pyrrhus.
Throughout this period, Antigonus Gonatas was at war with Ptolemy
Ceraunus, Antiochus Soter, and Ptolemy Philadelphus, and carried on a
petty maritime war with them. But during the same period a general Greek
war was carried on against him “with the aid of Egypt.” This war is
mentioned only in a chapter of Justin, by means of which we must find our
way by a careful interpretation; and for this reason the war has been
overlooked by all who have written on the Amphictyons. It had its origin
in the Amphictyony. Justin, who mentions its date, 281, however, does not
call it an Amphictyonic war. The fact is that the Greeks sought a pretext
for uniting their forces, in order to rid themselves of the dominion of
Antigonus, and therefore engaged in a war against the Ætolians, who were
allied with Antigonus.
It is not difficult to understand that, under the Amphictyonic pretext,
the Spartans again obtained the assistance of the allies, and recovered
the supremacy. Sparta had the supreme command of the army. Areus (or as
the Latins call him, Areas), who was then king of Sparta, as well as his
son Acrotatus, was very different from the earlier Spartan kings. In his
reign Sparta again became a state of some importance, not through his
power but through his name, and perhaps more particularly through his
good fortune. The war was carried on with Egyptian money; with it Areus
raised the armies which he commanded, and the wars continued for a long
time. Egypt assisted with her fleet, but gave no land forces, which were
furnished by Areus.
This war forms the beginning of another interference of Egypt in the
affairs of Greece, for since the time when Demetrius Poliorcetes removed
the garrisons of Ptolemy Soter from Corinth and Sicyon, the Egyptian
kings do not seem to have interfered in the affairs of Greece. This new
interference tore Greece to pieces, and owing to the subsidies which
Sparta received, the power of that state rose again.
PTOLEMY CERAUNUS IN MACEDONIA
After the Amphictyonic War, Justin passes on to Ptolemy Ceraunus and the
affairs of Macedonia. He reigned two years, or one year and a half, and
during that period he committed crime upon crime. His sister Arsinoe,
the widow of Lysimachus, was living with two sons at Cassandrea; the
Macedonian princesses had such towns as places in which they resided as
widows, and in which, in case of a change of dynasty, they might be safe
against any hostile machinations. Cassandrea quickly rose to prosperity,
and its possession had an immense charm for her brother. If Arsinoe
had placed herself under the protection of Ptolemy Philadelphus, her
step-brother, the latter would have had a very strong place in Macedonia,
where his fleet might have been stationed, and her sons might then have
placed themselves at the head of the malcontents in Macedonia, and have
come forward as pretenders. The simplest way for Ptolemy Ceraunus now
was to cause his sister and her sons to be murdered, and the question
as to whether this should be done or not could not excite any scruples,
according to the principles of that time; the only doubt was, how it
should be done.
[Illustration: GREEK JUG]
In order to carry out his plan, Ptolemy sued for the hand of his own
sister, according to the notions of the family of the Lagidæ, who had
adopted the Egyptian views about marriage with a sister. Arsinoe was
at first very timid, and her eldest son, though still a child, foresaw
what was to come, and warned his mother, saying that the whole was a
treacherous scheme. But Arsinoe was a silly woman, who allowed herself to
be deceived by the prospect of becoming a queen, just as afterwards Nicæa
allowed herself to be gained over by Antigonus Gonatas. She confided in
him, opened the gates of the fortress, and admitted him into the town.
But now the clouds vanished from her eyes, and she discovered too late
what his intentions were. Ptolemy treacherously took possession of the
gates of the town, and the first thing he did was to murder the two boys
before the eyes of their mother; Arsinoe herself was stripped of all
her ornaments (for the avarice of those men was as great as their other
vices), and ignominiously sent to Samothrace. She afterwards returned
to Egypt, where she spent the remainder of her life. The history of
that period reveals to us an interesting but horrible spectacle; it is
by no means as monotonous or as unimportant as we are easily tempted to
imagine.
This crime of Ptolemy Ceraunus was soon followed by its punishment--the
arrival of the Gauls as previously described.
Ptolemy drew his forces together, but foolishly declined the auxiliaries
offered to him by the Dardanians, and thoughtlessly ventured upon a
battle, the result of which was the same as that of the battle on the
Allia. No army could resist the vehemence of the Celts, without having
been previously accustomed to their appearance and their horrid war
cries, and without having learned to sustain the shock with which the
intoxicated and infuriated Celts rushed to battle. Familiarity with these
things alone rendered resistance possible. Ptolemy, with all his crimes,
was an able warrior; he fought bravely, until being severely wounded, he
fell into the hands of the Gauls who murdered him.
ANARCHY IN MACEDONIA
[Sidenote: [280-277 B.C.]]
We know nothing of the consequences of this victory, except that there
followed a state of anarchy in Macedonia, which lasted four years. A
panic spread over the whole country, and even a number of towns no
doubt succumbed to the Gauls; the open country was thoroughly inundated
by the Gauls, and all the population was put to the sword or dragged
into slavery, as is usually done by the Tartars and Turks, the latter
of whom, in 1683, carried away from Austria no less than two hundred
thousand men. There was no heir to the throne, for Ptolemy had left no
issue; the families of Cassander and Lysimachus were extirpated, and
Pyrrhus happened to be in Italy; civil disturbances breaking out among
the Macedonians, whom the death of their king had left to themselves,
completed the misfortune. One Meleager, a brother of Ptolemy Ceraunus,
came forward as king, and then Antipater, a son of Philip, the brother
of Cassander; but neither was able to maintain himself on account of the
divisions among the Macedonians. What became of Meleager is uncertain,
but Antipater afterwards appears again.
In these circumstances, Sosthenes, as we have seen, assembled an army,
and successfully resisted the enemy. His exploits attracted so much
attention that the Macedonians proclaimed him their king. But he did not
accept the royal title for himself, but only demanded that they should
take the oath of allegiance to him as a strategus; he is, however,
enumerated among the kings of Macedonia. His modesty does him honour.
When the barbarians had murdered and plundered to their hearts’ content,
they gradually retreated, and Sosthenes restored a portion of Macedonia.
But two years later, there followed a fresh invasion of the barbarians
on their expedition to Delphi; he met them with all his forces, but the
battle was lost, and the brave and worthy man died in consequence of
illness, 279.
There now followed again a state of anarchy. Several pretenders arose
against one another, who are mentioned in the fragments of Porphyrius
on Macedonian history; Antipater came forward again, then Ptolemy a son
of Lysimachus, Arrhidæus, and Antigonus. Antipater appears for a time
to have had the upper hand, at least he was in possession of Macedonia
at the time when Antigonus Gonatas gained the sovereignty. Among the
pretenders we also find Eurydice, the daughter of Lysimachus, and
widow of Antipater, the son of Cassander; she, being in possession of
Cassandrea, restored its inhabitants to freedom. This must have happened
after 280, when it was yet in the hands of Ptolemy Ceraunus, and before
277, in which year Antigonus Gonatas overpowered his competitors. We
should scarcely know anything about that period, had not fortunately a
kind providence preserved some isolated statements here and there, and in
Eusebius the excerpts from Porphyrius on the chronology of the Macedonian
kings.
Four years of perfect misery thus passed away, until Antigonus Gonatas,
after having concluded peace with Antiochus Soter, proceeded from Greece
and Thessaly to the coast of Macedonia, and was readily recognised by the
Macedonians (277). He restored the kingdom of Macedonia. From a Greek
point of view, as well as from that of common humanity, we can only
detest him; but, as far as the Macedonian nation is concerned, he was
a benefactor--a real Camillus, and he was even more to Macedonia than
Camillus was to Rome.
The expedition of the Gauls against Delphi was contemporary with the
second campaign of Pyrrhus against the Romans, and for years he did
not allow himself to be induced by these dangers to return across the
Adriatic, although he became more inclined to make peace. During that
period Antigonus made himself master of the vacant throne of Macedonia.
The reign of Antigonus Gonatas is quite obscure; there is scarcely any
other period in history which is equally so. It is a remarkable period,
and the long reign of thirty-six years was not without great events.
ANTIGONUS GONATAS
He was the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes and Phila, the daughter of
Antipater, so that through his mother he was a grandson of Antipater,
and a step-brother of Craterus, the son of Craterus. Antigonus had not
recovered Macedonia till after the lapse of ten years. In the interval
he had ruled over a very scattered empire, and he seems to have resided
at Demetrias in Magnesia. Whether during that period he was still in
possession of Corinth and Chalcis, or whether they were already in
the hands of Craterus, we cannot say with certainty. He was, however,
master of a part of Thessaly. It was not till 277 that he became king of
Macedonia. Chronology here is in the most terrible confusion.
[Sidenote: [277-266 B.C.]]
Even his conquest of Macedonia has not come down to us in any connected
narrative, and we can only guess the connection. Macedonia was overcome
by Gauls, and had no legitimate ruler, Antipater being only a usurper.
Antigonus must have come by sea, and have offered himself as king to
the Macedonians. After he was landed and was encamped near Lysimachia,
he came in contact with the Gauls, who were in possession of the open
country. While still encamped on the coast, he tried to conclude peace
with them; but they were as faithless as they were uncivilised, and at
the most critical moment he learned that they were treacherously marching
against him. Abandoning his camp, he withdrew to his ships, while a part
of his army remained concealed in a forest; they then fell upon his camp,
intoxicated themselves, and when they, engaged in plunder, had fallen
into disorder, and were overladen with food and drink, Antigonus attacked
and defeated them. This victory at once raised him very high in public
estimation, and gained for him great repute. He then conquered Antipater,
and established himself as king of Macedonia, though assuredly not of
Macedonia in its whole extent. The interior at first did not belong to
him, and was still occupied by the Gauls.
To Macedonia he was a very beneficent ruler, and he showed himself to be
an extremely prudent, thoughtful, and resolute character.
At the very beginning of his reign there occurred a war, which Antigonus,
for the recovery of Macedonia, carried on against Apollodorus, the tyrant
of Cassandrea, a man whose name is interesting at a time when Greek
history cannot point to any other person of importance.
This was the first success of Antigonus, and he also extended his
dominion in Greece; but the Athenians maintained themselves against him.
Pyrrhus then returned from Italy after an absence of seven years; he was
highly indignant at Antigonus, of whom he had demanded assistance against
Italy, and who had imprudently refused it. Antigonus went to meet Pyrrhus
as far as the passes of the Aous--where afterwards Antigonea was founded.
Pyrrhus defeated him in a battle of some importance; during his retreat,
the Gauls who were to protect Antigonus were nearly all cut to pieces,
and the Macedonian phalanx, deserting Antigonus, proclaimed Pyrrhus
king. Pyrrhus was thus, for a time, king of Macedonia, and Antigonus was
confined to a few places on the seacoast, Thessalonica, Cassandrea, and
Thessaly.
Pyrrhus now marched into Greece, and perished at Argos whither Antigonus
had followed him with an army.
Antigonus was then stationed in the heart of Peloponnesus with an armed
force. He availed himself of the opportunity of making himself master of
the peninsula and of constituting it anew according to his own mind. Not
being able to place garrisons everywhere, he gave the government in all
towns which surrendered to him, to his partisans, and established tyrants
who were ready to exert their power for his interests. Hence rebellions
sometimes occurred when Antigonus was absent. We may mention particularly
the overthrow of Aristotimus of Elis, which was brought about by a heroic
conspiracy headed by a childless old man; this is one of the noble
occurrences in dying Greece.
THE CHREMONIDEAN WAR
Athens, and Sparta under its king, Areus, were apparently allied with
the Ætolians and with king Ptolemy against Antigonus. The friendship
which the war of Pyrrhus had brought about between Antigonus and the
Spartans, was of short duration; the Antigonids and Ptolemies were and
remained mortal enemies, and thus the Spartans, being the allies of
Ptolemy, became again involved in a war against Antigonus. We do not know
how Athens was drawn into this war, whether she had imprudently formed
an alliance with Ptolemy, or whether Antigonus had sought a quarrel
with her. But an alliance did exist between Athens and Ptolemy, and
an Egyptian fleet was stationed near Attica to support Athens by sea.
Attica was cruelly ravaged by incursions from Bœotia, and Athens itself
was besieged and often blockaded. This war lasted for many years, and
completed the misery of Athens, as much as the siege and conquest of
Totila completed the destruction of Rome.
This war in Attica is called the Chremonidean War, because Chremonides,
an Athenian, was the soul of it.
We know only very little about this war. Ptolemy sent a fleet under the
admiral Patroclus to the assistance of the Athenians; and while he was
to land and relieve Athens from the sea side, Areus, with the Spartans
and his allies, was to attack the Macedonians and oblige them to raise
the siege on the land side. But Areus was too slow. The two parties
thus being unable to come to an understanding, returned home without
having effected anything. After a very long siege, during which Ptolemy
Philadelphus, with all his good intentions, effected nothing, Athens
being completely exhausted and helpless, was obliged to capitulate.
PYRRHUS’ SON TAKES MACEDONIA
[Sidenote: [265-239 B.C.]]
Among the various changes of that period, we may mention the transitory
conquest of Macedonia by Alexander II, of Epirus, during the Chremonidean
war. This Alexander was the only one of the three sons of Pyrrhus that
survived his father, of whom he was not unworthy. After his father’s
death, he remained in the undisturbed possession of the country. He
greatly resembled his father, and was, in fact, almost a copy of him,
although with feebler features. He also possessed the intellectual
culture of his father, and was, like him, an author. Alexander had the
same restlessness as his father, but he was not a gambler in the same
degree as his father, who staked everything on one throw. While Antigonus
was deeply involved in the war with Greece, Alexander invaded Macedonia,
which was then still so weak (and it was not yet so much attached to the
new dynasty as it was afterwards under Philip, the grandson of Antigonus)
that the Macedonian troops deserted to him, and Alexander was recognised
as king without difficulty. But he did not maintain the new acquisition.
Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, who was then still very young, assembled
a fresh army, attacked him, and recovered Macedonia from him, just as
Charles XII, in his youth, so brilliantly repelled a similar attack.
Demetrius pursued Alexander himself into Epirus, so that the latter was
obliged to take refuge in Acarnania, and returned to his kingdom only
with the assistance of the Ætolian towns. Afterwards, Alexander of Epirus
observed indeed a hostile policy towards Macedonia, but took care not to
become involved in a war with it. His kingdom of Epirus was consolidated,
and had the same extent in which Pyrrhus had left it to him, and he was
allied with the Ætolians.
Trogus says that after the subjugation of Athens, about 264, and after
the death of Areus, Antigonus had to carry on a war with Alexander,
the son of his brother. This Alexander was the son of Craterus, a
half-brother of Antigonus, by Phila.
We will not decide whether the statement that Antigonus poisoned
Alexander, is true or not; but there can be no doubt that he gained
possession of Corinth by treachery and gained a secure footing in the
Peloponnesus. But through the carelessness of the aged Antigonus, whose
thoughts turned away from Greece to the restoration of Macedonia, the
league of the Achæan towns was revived and gained fresh strength.
Antigonus became the second founder of the Macedonian kingdom, but the
more he strengthened his own country the more he neglected Greece. Aratus
of Sicyon, as we have already seen, surprised Corinth and expelled the
Macedonian garrison. The loss of Corinth was a death-blow to Antigonus,
for through it he lost his dominion over Peloponnesus. The Ætolians,
thinking themselves thus endangered, allied themselves with Antigonus.
The Achæans had received considerable support from Ptolemy Euergetes.
Antigonus died at the age of seventy-three and was succeeded by his son
Demetrius, whose reign was inglorious and unfortunate for Macedonia.
The greatest event of the reign of Demetrius is his great war for the
possession of Epirus which he fought with the Ætolians.
[Sidenote: [242-232 B.C.]]
Alexander of Epirus, the son of the great Pyrrhus, left behind him five
children--two sons, Pyrrhus and Ptolemy, and three daughters. At his
death his sons were yet very young, and his widow Olympias, who was at
once his sister and his wife, according to the detestable custom of
the Ptolemies, acted as guardian of the children. Alexander’s kingdom
comprised all Epirus to the extent which his father had possessed, and
the part of Acarnania which had fallen to his share at the time when the
country was divided between him and the Ætolians. But his relation to the
Ætolians was insecure, and Olympias was not without apprehensions; it is
possible that symptoms may have already been visible in Epirus of the
ferment which afterwards manifested itself in so fearful a manner, and it
is not unlikely that the malcontents may have applied to the Ætolians.
Olympias alone being unable to offer any resistance to the Ætolians,
sought the protection of the Macedonians by endeavouring to effect a
marriage between one of her daughters (whose name is misspelt Ptia;
we must no doubt read Phthia) with Demetrius of Macedonia. Demetrius
accepted the offer, although he was already married to the Syrian
princess Stratonice, a sister of Antiochus Theos, whom he now divorced in
order to marry Phthia.
Stratonice, leaving Demetrius, went to Asia Minor, as Justin, our only
authority, relates; the divorce, however, did not lead to a war between
Macedonia and Syria, because the latter country was too weak. But in
Syria itself that fury of a woman created great mischief. She proceeded
to the court at Antioch, offering her hand to Seleucus Callinicus; and
when he rejected the offer, she induced the restless Antiochians by
her intrigues to recognise her as their queen. Seleucus happened to
be engaged in an expedition against the upper satrapies, and when he
returned, he conquered Stratonice. Being now deserted by the Antiochians,
she was taken prisoner and put to death.
The marriage of Phthia with Demetrius then became the occasion of
great confusion and misfortune, by dragging him into the war with the
Ætolians. The latter availed themselves of the forlorn state of Epirus
for the purpose of attacking the Epirot portion of Acarnania, and making
themselves masters of the whole country. Demetrius hastened to support
the Epirots, and thus arose a war between the Macedonians and Ætolians,
in which the latter joined the Achæans, against whom they otherwise
entertained an invincible aversion. This is the most brilliant war that
was ever carried on by the Greeks against the Macedonians, but we know
nothing of its separate occurrences. Whether the war was brought to a
close by the conclusion of a truce or otherwise, is unknown.
There never was a moment since the Lamian war, at which the recovery of
the national independence of the Greeks was so near at hand as after the
death of Demetrius. He died during an expedition against the Dardanians,
after a reign of ten years, leaving behind him Philip, a boy of between
five and six years old, just at the time when the Romans, for the first
time, appeared with their armies on the eastern coast of the Adriatic.[g]
FOOTNOTES
[41] [Diodorus describes vividly how Perdiccas tried to cross the Nile;
part of his army crossing safely trod away the sand and hundreds who
followed were lost. Perdiccas then recalled the vanguard and they were
drowned by hundreds. Enraged at this loss of two thousand lives “without a
stroke stricken,” a body of knights killed him in his tent.]
[Illustration]