_c._ The fate of the other Sicilian cities was more or less

dependent on that of Agrigentum and Syracuse: they all had

originally republican forms of government; but though the Ionian

colonies had a celebrated legislator in the person of Charondas,

(probably about 660,) they had the same fortune with the rest, of

being frequently oppressed by tyrants, either from among their own

citizens, or by those of Syracuse, who often used to drive out the

old inhabitants, and introduce a new population more devoted to

their interest: hence must have sprung manifold wars. The foregoing

history shows how grievously they likewise suffered in the wars

between Syracuse and Carthage. Following the dates of their

respective foundations, they may be thus arranged: Zancle, (after

664, known by the name of Messana,) the earliest, though of

uncertain date; Naxus, 736; Syracuse, Hybla, 735; Leontini, Catana,

730; Gela, 690; Acrae, B. C. 665; Casmenae, 645; Himera, 639;

Selinus, 630; Agrigentum, 582. The dates of the rest cannot be

ascertained with any degree of accuracy.

3. On the other islands and coasts of the Mediterranean we meet

with various insulated Grecian settlements; in Sardinia, the cities

Garalis and Olbia: the date of their foundation unknown; in

Corsica, Alaria, (or Alalia,) a colony of Phocaeans founded, 561;

hither the inhabitants of the mother city betook themselves in

541; and subsequently, after the naval engagement with the

Etruscans and Carthaginians, withdrew, some to Rhegium, others to

Massilia, 536.

4. On the coast of Gaul stood Massilia, founded by the Phocaeans,

who had been driven out of Corsica after the above mentioned naval

engagement, 536; or rather, there was on the same site an old

settlement which was now increased. Massilia rapidly grew in wealth

and power. Our information respecting the wars she waged on the sea

against Carthage and the Etruscans is but of a general kind. Her

territory on the main land, although rich in wine and oil, was

limited in extent; she established, nevertheless, several colonies

along the shores of Spain and Gaul, among which Antipolis, Nicaea,

and Olbia are the best known. The trade of Massilia was carried on

partly by sea, and partly by land, through the interior of Gaul.

The constitution was a moderate aristocracy. The chief power was in

the hands of six hundred individuals; the members of this council

were called timuchi, they held their places for life, were obliged

to be married men with families, and descended at least to the

third generation from citizens. At the head of this council stood

fifteen men, three of whom were chief magistrates. As early as 218

Massilia was in alliance with Rome, under whose fostering

protection she grew in prosperity; her freedom was preserved to her

until the war between Pompey and Caesar; having sided with the

former, she was stormed, 49, by Caesar's army. She soon retrieved

herself, and, under the reign of Augustus, Massilia was the seat of

literature and philosophy, in which public lectures were there

given as at Athens.

AUG. BRUEKNER, _Historia Reipublicae Massiliensium_. Gotting. 1826.

A prize essay.

5. On the Spanish coast stood Saguntum, ([Greek: Zakunthos],) a

colony from the island of Zacynthus; the date of its foundation is

undetermined. It became opulent by its commerce; but at the opening

of the second Punic war, B.C. 219, was destroyed by Hannibal, as

being an ally of Rome.

6. On the coast of Africa lay Cyrene, founded at the suggestion of

the Delphic oracle in 631, by the island of Thera. The constitution

was at first monarchical. Kings: Battus I. the founder, 631-591.

In whose family the sceptre remained. Arcesilaus I. _d._ 575. Under

the reign of his successor, Battus II. surnamed the happy, (_d._

554,) the colony was much strengthened by new comers from Greece.

The Libyans, bereaved of their lands, seek for help at the hands

of Apries, who is defeated by the Cyrenaeans, 570, and in

consequence loses his crown.--Arcesilaus II. _d._ 550. Rebellion of

his brothers, and foundation of Barca, an independent town ruled by

its own separate kings. Secession of the Libyan subjects. He is put

to death by his brother or friend Learchus, who in his turn is

poisoned by Eryxo the widow of Arcesilaus. Her son, Battus III.

surnamed the lame, (_d._ about 529,) succeeds to the throne. The

royal power confined within narrow limits by the laws of Demonax of

Mantinea: the king retains nothing more than the revenue and

priestly office. His son Arcesilaus III. becomes of his own accord

tributary to the Persians; in conjunction with his mother,

Pheretime, he seeks to reestablish the regal supremacy, but is

expelled; nevertheless he regains possession of Cyrene. In

consequence of his cruelty he is assassinated in Barca, about 516.

Pheretime seeks for help from the Persian satrap of Egypt,

Aryandes, who by craft gets possession of Barca; the inhabitants

are carried away and translated into Bactria, 512. Soon after

Pheretime dies. It seems probable that another Battus IV. and

Arcesilaus IV. must have reigned at Cyrene, to whom Pindar's fourth

and fifth Pythian Odes are addressed: their history, however, is

veiled in obscurity. Cyrene then received a republican

constitution, probably somewhere about 450; but we are unacquainted

with the internal details of the government. Yet though Plato was

invited by the Cyrenaeans to give them laws, and though they had for

their legislator Democles of Arcadia, they appear never to have

been blessed with a good and stable constitution. Not only is

mention often made of domestic troubles, as in 400, when amid the

uproar excited by Ariston most of the aristocratic party were cut

off; but we likewise frequently meet with tyrants. Concerning the

external affairs of this state we know nothing but a few general

facts relative to the border wars with Carthage. Subsequently to

Alexander, Cyrene became a part of the Egyptian kingdom; so early

as the reign of Ptolemy I. it was added to that realm by his

general Ophellas, about B.C. 331. It now continued to receive

various rulers from the family of the Ptolemies (see below) until

the reign of Ptolemy Physcon, when it became a separate state, the

bastard son of that prince, Apion by name, having made it over to

the Romans, 97. Cyrene possessed a considerable share of trade,

consisting partly in the exportation of country produce, more

especially the Silphium, (Laser,) partly in a varied intercourse

with Carthage, Ammonium, and thence with the interior of Africa.

The former splendour and importance of this city and the

neighbouring country are testified by an abundance of most noble

ruins; a more accurate research into which every friend of

antiquity must desire.

HARDION, _Histoire de Cyrene_, in _Mem. de l'Academie des

Inscriptions_, t. iii.

J. P. THRIGE, _Historia Cyrenes, inde a tempore quo condita urbs

est, usque ad aetatem, qua in provinciae formam a Romanis redacta

est: particula prior, de initiis coloniae Cyrenen deductae, et

Cyrenes Battiadis regnantibus historia_. Havniae, 1819. The best

work on Cyrene. It is hoped that the author will not disapppoint

our expectations of the second part, which is to contain the period

of republican government. [The whole was completed in 1828. The

learned and ingenious author has neglected no authority whether

ancient or modern, and is particularly cautious and judicious in

his researches.]

A ray of light has lately, for the first time, been thrown on the

remains still found in Cyrenaica by DELLA CELLA, _Viaggio di

Tripoli_; translated by Spieker, in the # _Journal of the latest

travels by sea and by land_, Sept. 1820.

W. BEECHEY, _Proceedings to explore the northern coast of Africa

from Tripoli eastward_, 1827.

F. R. PACHO, _Relation d'un voyage a Marmarique et Cyrenaique_,

1828. A most accurate description.

T. EHRENBERG, _Travels through North Africa_, in the years

1820-1825, by Dr. W. F. Hemprich and Dr. C. G. Ehrenberg. Berlin,

1828.

THIRD PERIOD.

_From the commencement of the Persian wars to the time of Alexander

the Great, B. C. 500-336._

Sources. The chief writers in this period are: For the history of

the Persian wars to the battle of Plataeae, 479, Herodotus. For the

period between 479 and the breaking out of the Peloponnesian war,

we must, in the absence of contemporary authors, consider Diodorus

Siculus as the principal authority.--The beginning of the 11th

book, which commences with the year 480, (the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th,

and 10th books being lost,) to the middle of the 12th; the

chronology of this author, however, must in several cases be

rectified after Thucydides's summary in lib. i. For the period of

the Peloponnesian war, 431-410, the history of Thucydides is the

capital work; but it must be accompanied by Diodorus, from the

middle of the 12th book to the middle of the 13th.--From the year

410 to the battle of Mantinea, 362, the principal sources are the

Hellenics of Xenophon, and occasionally his Anabasis and Agesilaus;

together with Diodorus, from the middle of the 13th book to the end

of the 15th. For the years intervening from 362-336, no

contemporary historian has been preserved; Diodorus's 16th book

must therefore here be considered as the chief source: for the

times of Philip, however, recourse may likewise be had to the

speeches of Demosthenes and Aeschines. The Lives of Plutarch and

Nepos often touch upon this period, but cannot be regarded as

authentic sources; of still less authority are the abridged

documents given by Justin and some others.

The modern authors on this, the brilliant period of Greece, are, of

course, the same as have been enumerated above: (see p. 118.) To

whom must here be added:

POTTER, _Archaeologia Graeca; or the Antiquities of Greece:_ 2 vols.

8vo. Lond. 1722. Translated into German by J. J. Rambach, 3 vols.

1775.

BARTHELEMY, _Voyage du Jeune Anacharsis en Grece_. (Between the

years B. C. 362 and 338.) Paris, 1788, 5 vols. Accompanied with

charts and plans, illustrating the topography of Athens, etc. This

work is conspicuous for a rare union of good taste and erudition;

unattended, however, with an equal share of critical acumen and a

correct appreciation of antiquity.

# _History of the Origin, Progress, and Fall of Science in Greece

and Rome_, by C. MEINERS. Gottingen, 1781. It contains also a

delineation of the political state of affairs; but does not extend

beyond the age of Philip.

The principal works on the monuments of ancient Greece are:

LE ROY, _Les Ruines des plus beaux Monumens de la Grece_. Paris,

1758, 2nd edit. 1770, fol. The first in point of time; but far

surpassed by:

J. STUART, _The Antiquities of Athens measured and delineated_; 3

vols. Lond. 1762: the 4th vol. published in 1816. In beauty and

accuracy of execution superior to all.

R. DALTON, _Antiquities and Views of Greece and Egypt_, 1691, fol.

The Egyptian monuments are confined to those of Lower Egypt.

R. CHANDLER, _Ionian Antiquities_. London, 1796, 1797, 2 vols. fol.

A worthy companion to Stuart.

CHOISEUL GOUFFIER, _Voyage pittoresque dans la Grece_, vol. i,

1779: vol. ii, 1809. Confined principally to the islands and Asia

Minor.

1. From a multitude of small states, never united but continually

distracted by civil broils--and such at the beginning of this period

were the states of Greece--any thing important could hardly be expected

without the occurrence of some external event, which, by rallying the

divided forces round one point, and directing them toward one object,

should hinder them from mutually exhausting one another. It was the

hostile attempt of Persia that first laid the foundation of the future

splendour of Greece; certain states then grew so rapidly in power, that

upon their particular history hinges the general history of all the

rest.

Causes which led to the Persian war. Share taken by Athens in the

Ionian insurrection and firing of Sardes, B. C. 500. (see above,

p. 98.) Intrigues of Hippias, first with the satraps, and afterwards

at the Persian court itself.--First expedition, that of Mardonius,

thwarted by a storm, 493.

2. Not even the summons to acknowledge the Persian authority was

sufficient to rouse the national energy of the Greeks. All the islands,

and most of the states on the main land, submitted to the yoke; Sparta

and Athens alone boldly rejected it. The Athenians, unassisted, under

their leader Miltiades, acquainted from his youth with the Persians and

their mode of warfare, and with the superiority of the arms of his

countrymen, became the saviours of Greece.

Quarrel of Athens and Sparta with Aegina, which sides with the

Persians, 491; and consequent deposition of Demaratus, king of

Sparta, by his colleague Cleomenes.

Persian expedition of Datis and Artaphernes under the guidance of

Hippias: frustrated by the battle of Marathon, B. C. Sept. 29,

490, and the failure of an attempt upon Athens.

3. The immediate consequence of this victory was a naval expedition

against the islands, more particularly Paros, to which Miltiades, out of

a private grudge, persuaded the Athenians. It was undertaken for the

purpose of levying contributions; and seems to have given the Athenians

the first idea of their subsequent dominion of the sea. The Athenians

punished Miltiades for the failure of this expedition, although the

effect of their own folly; yet was this act of injustice a source of

happiness to Athens; as the fall of Miltiades made room for the men who

laid the solid foundation of her glory and greatness.

4. As usual in every democratic state rising to power, the history of

Athens now becomes that of eminent individuals, standing at the head of

affairs, as generals or demagogues. Themistocles, who united to an

astonishing degree in his own person the most splendid talents of

statesman and general, with a spirit of intrigue, and even of egotism;

and Aristides, whose disinterestedness, even in those days, was singular

at Athens, were the real founders of the power of this commonwealth.

Athens, however, was more indebted to the first than to the latter.

Rivalry of these two men, 490-486. While Themistocles at the head

of the Athenian fleet prosecutes the design of Miltiades against

the islands, the management of state affairs is confided to

Aristides. On the return, however, of Themistocles as conqueror,

Aristides is by ostracism banished Athens, 486. Themistocles

alone, at the head of affairs, pursues his plan for making Athens

a maritime power. In consequence of a war against the object of

popular hatred, Aegina, B. C. 484, he prevails on the Athenians to

devote the income from the mines to the formation of a navy. While

Athens is thus rising to power, Sparta suffers from the insanity

of one of her kings, Cleomenes, (succeeded in 482 by his half

brother Leonidas,) and the arrogance of the other, Leotychides.

5. The glory of frustrating the second mighty Persian invasion of Greece

under Xerxes I. belongs to Themistocles alone. Not only his great naval

victory off Salamis, but still more the manner in which he contrived to

work upon his countrymen, proves him to have been the greatest man of

the age, and the deliverer of Greece, now united by one common bond of

interest.--All national leagues are weak in themselves: yet how strong

may even the weakest be made when held together by one great man, who

knows how to animate it with his own spirit!

Themistocles' plan for the conduct of the war; first, a common

union of all the Hellenic states; a measure which succeeds to a

certain degree, the honour of the command being left to the

Spartans; secondly, the sea made the theatre of war.--Gallant

death of Leonidas with his three hundred Spartans and seven

hundred Thespians, July 6, 480. An example of heroism which

contributes as much to the greatness of Greece as the victory of

Salamis. About the same time naval engagements off Artemisium in

Euboea, with two hundred and seventy-one sail. The leaders of the

Greeks are kept to their posts merely by bribery; the means of

purchasing their services being for the most part furnished by

Themistocles himself.--Athens, deserted by its inhabitants, is

taken and burnt by Xerxes, July 20. Retreat of the Grecian fleet

into the bay of Salamis: revocation of all exiles, Aristides among

the rest.--Politic measures adopted by Themistocles to hinder the

dispirited Greeks from taking flight, and at the same time to

secure to himself, in case of need, an asylum with the Persian

monarch.--Naval engagement and victory off Salamis, Sept. 23, 480,

with three hundred and eighty sail, (one hundred and eighty of

which were Athenian,) against the Persian fleet, already much

weakened: retreat of Xerxes.--Poets and historians have disfigured

these events by fanciful exaggerations: still, however, they may

show us how commonly human weakness is attended with human

greatness!

6. The victory of Salamis did not conclude the war; but the negotiations

entered into during the winter months with the Persian general,

Mardonius, left in Thessaly, and with the Asiatic Greeks, to excite them

to throw off the yoke, show how far the confidence of the nation in its

own strength had increased. But by the battle fought on land at Plataeae,

under the command of the Spartan, Pausanias, (guardian to Plistarchus,

son of Leonidas,) and the Athenian, Aristides; together with the naval

battle at Mycale on the same day, and the destruction of the Persian

fleet, the Persians are for ever driven from the territory of Greece,

though the war continues for some time longer.

7. The expulsion of the Persians wrought an entire change in the

internal and external relations of Greece. From being the aggressed the

Greeks became the aggressors; to free their Asiatic countrymen is now

the chief object or pretext for the continuation of a war so profitable;

the chief command of which abides with Sparta until B. C. 470.

Athens rebuilt and fortified by Themistocles despite of Spartan

jealousy, 478: formation of the Piraeus, an event of still greater

importance, 477.--Naval expedition under Pausanias, accompanied by

Aristides and Cimon, undertaken against Cyprus and Byzantium, for

the purpose of expelling the Persians, 470. Treachery and fall of

Pausanias, 469. In consequence of the Spartans' haughtiness, the

supreme command devolves upon the Athenians.

8. This transfer of the command to Athens had a decided effect on all

the subsequent relations of Greece, not only because it augmented the

jealousy between Sparta and Athens, but because Athens exercised her

predominance for a purpose entirely different from that of

Sparta.--Establishment of a permanent confederacy, comprising most of

the Grecian states without Peloponnesus, especially the islands, and an

adjustment of the contributions to be annually furnished by each, with

the view of prosecuting the Persian war, and liberating the Asiatic

Greeks from the Persian yoke. Although the common treasury was first

established at Delos, the superintendence of it was confided to Athens;

and such a manager as Aristides was not always to be found.--Natural

consequence of this new establishment: 1. What had hitherto been mere

military precedence, becomes in the hands of Athens a right of

political prescription, and that, as usual, is soon converted

into a sovereignty. Hence her idea of the supremacy of Greece,

([Greek: arche tes Hellados],) as connected with that of the sea,

([Greek: thalassokratia].) 2. The oppression of the Athenians,

sometimes real, at other times presumed, after a short time, rouses the

spirit of discontent and contumacy among several of the confederates:

hence, 3. The gradual formation of a counter league, headed by Sparta,

who maintains her supremacy over the greatest part of the Peloponnesus.

9. The changes introduced into the internal organization are not to be

determined solely by the palpable alterations made in any of Lycurgus's

or Solon's institutions. In Sparta, the general frame-work of Lycurgus's

constitution subsisted; nevertheless the power was virtually in the

hands of the ephori, whose dictatorial sway placed Sparta in the

formidable posture she now assumed.--At Athens, in proportion as the

importance of foreign relations increased, and amid the protracted

struggles between the heads of the democratic and aristocratic parties,

the real power, under the outward appearance of a democracy, gradually

centered in the hands of the ten annually elected generals, ([Greek:

strategoi],) who with more or less effect played the parts of

demagogues.

Abrogation of the law that excluded the poorer citizens from

official situations, B. C. 478.

Expulsion of Themistocles, implicated in the fall of Pausanias,

principally through the intrigues of Sparta: he is first banished

by ostracism, 469, but in consequence of further persecution he

flies over to the Persians, 466.

10. The following forty years, from 470-430, constitute the flourishing

period of Athens. A concurrence of fortunate circumstances happening

among a people of the highest abilities and promoted by great men,

produced here phenomena, such as have never since been witnessed.

Political greatness was the fundamental principle of the commonwealth;

Athens had been the guardian, and the champion of Greece, and she wished

to appear worthy of herself. Hence in Athens alone were men acquainted

with public splendour, exhibited in buildings, in spectacles, and

festivals, the acquisition of which was facilitated by private

frugality. This public spirit animating every citizen, expanded the

blossoms of genius; no broad line of distinction was anxiously drawn

between private and public life; whatever great, whatever noble was

produced by Athens, sprung up verdant and robust out of this harmony,

this buxom vigour of the state. Far different was the case with Sparta;

there rude customs and laws arrested the development of genius: there

men were taught to die for the land of their forefathers: while at

Athens they learnt to live for it.

11. Agriculture continued the principal occupation of the citizens of

Attica; other employments were left to the care of slaves. Commerce and

navigation were mainly directed towards the Thracian coast and the Black

sea; the spirit of trade, however, was never the prevailing one. As

affairs of state became more attractive, and men desired to participate

in them, the want of intellectual education began to be felt, and

sophists and rhetoricians soon offered their instruction. Mental

expertness was more coveted than mental knowledge; men wished to learn

how to think and to speak. A poetical education had long preceded the

rise of this national desire; poesy now lost nothing of its value: as

heretofore Homer remained the cornerstone of intellectual improvement.

Could it be that such blossoms would produce other fruits than those

which ripened in the school of Socrates, in the masterpieces of the

tragedians and orators, and in the immortal works of Plato?

12. These flowers of national genius burst forth in spite of many evils,

inseparable from such a constitution established among such a people.

Great men were pushed aside; others took their places. The loss of

Themistocles was supplied by Miltiades's son Cimon; who to purer

politics united equal talents. He protracted the war against the

Persians in order to maintain the union of the Greeks; and favoured the

aristocratic party at the same time that he affected popularity. Even

his enemies learnt by experience, that the state could not dispense with

a leader who seemed to have entered into a compact for life with

victory.

Another expedition under Cimon; and victory by sea and land near

the Eurymedon, B. C. 469. He takes possession of the Hellespontine

Chersonesus, 468. Some of the Athenian confederates already

endeavour to secede. Hence, 467, the conquest of Caristus in

Euboea; subjection of Naxos, 466, and from 465-463, siege and

capture of Thasos, under Cimon. The Athenians endeavour to obtain

a firmer footing on the shore of Macedonia; and for that purpose

send out a colony to Amphipolis, 465.

Great earthquake at Sparta; gives rise to a ten years' war, viz.

the third Messenian war or revolt of the Helots, who fortify

themselves in Ithome, 465-455: in this war the Athenians, at the

instigation of Cimon, send assistance to the Spartans, 461, who

refuse the proffered aid. The democratic party seize the

opportunity of casting on Cimon the suspicion of being in the

interest of Sparta; he is banished by ostracism, 461.

13. The death of Aristides, and the banishment of Cimon, concur in

elevating Pericles to the head of affairs; a statesman whose influence

had begun to operate as early as 469. Less a general than a demagogue,

he supported himself in authority during forty years, until the day of

his death, and swayed Athens without being either archon or member of

the areopagus. That under him the constitution must have assumed a more

democratic character, is demonstrated by the fact of his exaltation as

leader of the democratic party. The aristocrats, however, contrive until

444 to set up rivals against him in the persons of the military leaders,

Myronides, Tolmidas, and more particularly the elder Thucydides.

Change in the spirit of administration under Pericles, both in

reference to internal and external relations. A brilliant

management succeeds to the parsimonious economy of Aristides; and

yet, after the lapse of thirty years, the state treasury was

full.--Limitation of the power of the areopagus by Ephialtes, B.

C. 461. The withdrawal of various causes which formerly came under

the jurisdiction of that tribunal must have diminished its right

of moral censorship.--Introduction of the practice of paying

persons who attended the courts of justice.

With regard to external relations, the precedence of the Athenians

gradually advanced toward supremacy; although their relations with

all the confederates were not precisely the same. Some were mere

confederates; others were subjects.--Augmentation in the imposts

on the confederates, and transfer of the treasury from Delos to

Athens, 461. The jealousy of Sparta and the discontent of the

confederates keep pace with the greatness of Athens.

Unsuccessful attempt to support by the help of an Athenian fleet

and troops, Inarus of Egypt in his insurrection against the

Persians, 462-458.

Wars in Greece: the Spartans instigate Corinth and Epidaurus

against Athens. The Athenians, at first defeated near Haliae, in

their turn rout the enemy, 458, and then carry the war against

Aegina, which is subdued, 457. In the new quarrel between Corinth

and Megara respecting their boundaries, the Athenians side with

Megara; Myronides conquers at Cimolia, 457. Expedition of the

Spartans to the support of the Dorians against Phocis; and hence

arises the first rupture between Athens, Sparta, and Boeotia.

First battle of Tanagra, in which the Spartans are victorious in

the same year, 457. The Boeotians, incited by the Spartans, are

in the second battle of Tanagra worsted by Myronides, 456. The

recall of Cimon, at the suggestion of Pericles himself, in

consequence of the first defeat.

14. Cimon recalled from exile, endeavours to reestablish the domestic

tranquillity of Greece, and at the same time to renew the war against

the Persians. He succeeds in his attempt after the lapse of five years;

and the consequence is a victorious expedition against the Persians. He

defeats their fleet off Cyprus, and routs their army on the Asiatic

coast. The fruit of this victory is the celebrated peace with Artaxerxes

I. (see above, p. 104.) Ere that peace is concluded Cimon dies, too soon

for his country, while occupied with the siege of Citium.

Termination of the third Messenian war in favour of Sparta, by the

cession of Ithome, B. C. 455. Meantime Athens continues the war

with Peloponnesus; Tolmidas and Pericles making an incursion by

sea on the enemy's territory, 455-454. At the same time Pericles,

by sending out colonies to the Hellespont, endeavours to secure

more firmly the Athenian power in that quarter: a colony is

likewise sent out to Naxos, 453.--Cimon negotiates a truce, which

is adopted first (451) tacitly, afterwards formally, (450,) for

five years. The result of this truce is his victorious expedition

against the Persians, and the consequent peace with that nation.

Although the conditions of the peace prescribed by Cimon were

sometimes infringed, they appear to have been ratified by all

parties.

15. The conclusion of peace with Persia, glorious as it was, and the

death of the man whose grand political object was to preserve union

among the Greeks, again aroused the spirit of internal strife. For

notwithstanding nearly twenty years intervened before the tempest burst

with all its fury, this period was so turbulent during its course, that

Greece seldom enjoyed universal peace. While Athens by her naval

strength was maintaining her ascendancy over the confederates, and while

some of those confederates were raising the standard of rebellion and

passing over to Sparta, every thing was gradually combining towards the

formation of a counter league, the necessary consequence of which must

have been a war, such as the Peloponnesian. Up to this time Athens was

at the height of her power; she was governed by Pericles, who, in every

thing but the name, was sole ruler during this period, and for that

reason she experienced few of the evils resulting from a democratic

constitution. Who, indeed, could overthrow a demagogue whose presence of

mind, even in the greatest good fortune, never once deserted him; who

knew how to keep alive among his fellow-citizens the conviction that,

however exalted they might be, it was to him alone they were indebted

for it?

During the five years' truce the sacred war for the possession of

the Delphian oracle took place, and it is given by the Spartans to

the city of Delphi; but after their return is given back again by

the Athenians to the Phocians, B. C. 448. The Athenians commanded

by Tolmidas, are defeated by the Boeotians, 447. This expedition,

undertaken in opposition to the advice of Pericles, contributes to

increase his influence; particularly as he reduces to obedience

the revolted Euboea and Megara, 446. End of the five years' truce

with Sparta; and renewal of hostilities, 445; further warlike

proceedings are repressed by a new thirty years' peace, which

lasts, however, only fourteen years.--Complete suppression of the

aristocratic party, by the banishment of the elder Thucydides,

444; the whole administration of the state consequently centres in

the hands of Pericles.--Democracy in the confederate states

favoured; forcibly introduced in Samos, which, after a nine

months' siege, is obliged to submit to Pericles, 440.--Commencement

of the war between Corinth and Corcyra, on the subject of Epidamnus,

436, which the Corcyraeans take possession of after winning a naval

victory, 435. The Athenians take part in the quarrel, and side with

the Corcyraeans, 432. The rupture with Corinth, and the policy of

Perdiccas II. king of Macedonia, lead to the secession of the

Corinthian colony of Potidaea, which previously belonged to the

Athenian confederacy: the war thereby is extended to the Macedonian

coast. Engagement near Potidaea, and siege of that town, 432. The

Corinthians direct their steps to Sparta, and excite the Spartans

to war; which is further accelerated by the attack of the Thebans

upon Plataeae, the confederate of Athens, 431.

16. The history of the twenty-seven years' war, known by the name of the

Peloponnesian, or great Grecian war, which swept away the fairest

flowers of Greece, is the more deserving attention from its being not

merely a struggle between nations, but likewise against certain forms of

government. The policy of Athens, which to establish or preserve her

influence in foreign states, excited the multitude against the higher

orders, had on all sides given rise to two factions, the democrat or

Athenian, and the aristocrat or Spartan; and the mutual bitterness of

party spirit produced the most violent disorders.

17. The respective relations of the two head states of Greece to their

confederates, were at this time of a very opposite nature. Athens, as a

naval power, was mistress of most of the islands and maritime cities,

which, as tributary confederates, rendered for the most part a forced

obedience. Sparta, as a land power, was allied with most of the states

on the continent, which had joined her side of their own accord, and

were not subject to tribute. Sparta therefore presented herself as the

deliverer of Greece from the Athenian yoke.

Confederates of the Athenians: the islands Chios, Samos, Lesbos, all

those of the Archipelago, (Thera and Melos excepted, which stood

neutral,) Corcyra, Zacynthus; the Grecian colonies in Asia Minor, and

on the coast of Thrace and Macedonia; in Greece itself, the cities

of Naupactus, Plataeae, and those of Acarnania.--Confederates of the

Spartans: all the Peloponnesians, (Argos and Achaia excepted, which

stood neutral,) Megara, Locris, Phocis, Boeotia, the cities of

Ambracia and Anactorium, and the island of Leucas.

18. Sketch of the internal state of Athens and Sparta at this period.

The power of Athens depended mainly on the state of her finances;

without which she could not support a fleet, and without a fleet her

ascendancy over the confederates would of course fall to ground. And

although Pericles, notwithstanding his lavish public expenditure, was

able to enter upon the war with 6,000 talents in the treasury,

experience could not fail to show that, in such a democratic state as

Athens was now become under Pericles, the squandering of the public

money was an unavoidable evil. This evil was produced, however, at

Athens much less by the peculations of individual state officers than by

the demands of the multitude, who for the most part lived at the expense

of the state treasury. On the other hand, Sparta as yet had no finance;

and only began to feel the want of it as she began to acquire a naval

power, and entered upon undertakings more vast than mere incursions.

Financial system of the Athenians. Revenue: 1. The tribute paid by

the confederates ([Greek: phoroi]) increased by Pericles from four

hundred and sixty to six hundred talents. 2. Income from the

customs, (which were farmed,) and from the mines at Laurium. 3.

The caution money of the non-citizens: ([Greek: metoikoi].) 4. The

taxes on the citizens, ([Greek: eisphorai],) which fell almost

entirely on the rich, more particularly on the first class, the

members of which were not only to bear the burthen of fitting out

the fleet, ([Greek: trierarchiai],) but were likewise to furnish

means for the public festivals and spectacles, ([Greek:

choregiai].) The whole income of the republic at this time was

estimated at 2,000 talents. But the disbursements made to the

numerous assistants at the courts of justice (the principal means

of existence with the poorer citizens, and which, more than any

thing else, contributed to the licentiousness of the democracy and

the oppression of the confederates, whose causes were all brought

to Athens for adjudication,) together with the expenditure for

festivals and spectacles, even at this time, absorbed the greatest

part of the revenue.

# F. BOEKH, _Public Economy of the Athenians_, 2 parts, Berlin,

1816. The chief work on the subject. [Ably translated by J. C.

LEWIS, esq. of Christ Church in this university.]

_Athenian Letters, or the Epistolary Correspondence of an Agent of

the King of Persia, residing at Athens during the Peloponnesian

war._ London, 1798, 2 vols. 4to. The production of several young

authors; first printed, but not published, in 1741. This sketch

comprises, not only Greece, but likewise Persia and Egypt.

19. First period of the war until the fifty years' peace. Beginning of

the war unsuccessful to Athens during the first three years, under the

conduct of Pericles, in whose defensive plan we may perhaps discern the

infirmities of age. The Athenians, however, suffered less from the

annual inroads of the Spartans than from the plague, to which Pericles

himself at last fell a victim. The alliance of the Athenians with the

kings of Thrace and Macedonia extended the theatre of war; on the other

hand, Sparta had already conceived the idea of an alliance with Persia.

20. The death of Pericles was, for the next seven years, during which

the place of that great man was supplied by Cleon a currier, followed by

all the evils of an uncurbed democracy. The atrocious decrees with

respect to Mitylene, which after seceding, had been recaptured, and the

insurrection of the Corcyraean populace against the rich, characterized

the party spirit then dominant in Greece better than the few

insignificant events of a war conducted without any plan. Sparta,

however, found in young Brasidas a general, such as are wont to arise in

revolutionary times. His prosecution of the war on the Macedonian coast

might have brought great danger to Athens, had he so early not fallen a

victim to his own gallantry.

Capture of Amphipolis by Brasidas, and exile of Thucydides, 424.

Engagement near Amphipolis between Brasidas and Cleon; and death

of those two generals, 422.

21. The peace now concluded for fifty years could not be of long

duration, as many of the confederates on either side were discontented

with its terms. All hope of tranquillity must have been at an end when

the management of Athenian affairs fell into the hands of a youth like

Alcibiades, in whom vanity and artifice held the place of patriotism and

talent, and who thought war the only field in which he could gain

credit. Against him what availed the prudence of Nicias?--Happy was it

for Athens that during the whole of this period Sparta never produced

one man who could match even with Alcibiades!

Attempt of some states, Corinth especially, to set Argos at the

head of a new confederacy; this measure Athens likewise favours,

421.--Violation of the peace, 419; the war indirect until 415, and

limited to assisting the confederates on either side.--Alcibiades's

plan of giving Athens the preponderance in Peloponnesus, by an

alliance with Argos, is defeated by the battle of Mantinea,

417.--Exterminating war of the Athenians waged against the Melians,

who wish to preserve their neutrality, whereas neutrality in the

weaker party now becomes a crime, 416.

22. Alcibiades's party brings forward at Athens the project of

conquering Sicily, under the pretence of succouring the Segestani

against the Syracusans. This rash expedition, in which the hopes both of

the Athenians and of its instigator Alcibiades were blighted, gave to

Athens the first great blow, from which she never after, even with the

utmost exertion of her strength, recovered; especially as Sparta also

was now become a naval power.

Early interference of the Athenians with the concerns of the

Sicilian Greeks.--A fleet and army under the command of Nicias,

Lamachus, and Alcibiades, sent against Sicily, 415.--Accusation,

recall, and flight of Alcibiades to Sparta: formal rupture of the

peace by an inroad of the Spartans into Attica, where they fortify

Decelea, 414. Unsuccessful siege of Syracuse, 414; and total

annihilation of the Athenian fleet and army by the assistance of

the Spartans under Gylippus, 413.

23. Fatal as in the present circumstances the blow struck in Sicily must

appear to have been to Athens, yet the calamity was surmounted by

Athenian enthusiasm, never greater than in times of misfortune. They

maintained their supremacy over the confederates; but the part which

Alcibiades, in consequence of the new posture his own personal interest

had assumed at Sparta, took in their affairs, brought about a twofold

domestic revolution, which checked the licentious democracy.

Alliance of the Spartans with the Persians, and indecisive

engagement off Miletus--Flight of Alcibiades from Sparta to

Tissaphernes; his negotiations to gain the satrap over to the

interests of Athens, 411.--Equivocal policy of

Tissaphernes.--Negotiations of Alcibiades with the chiefs of the

Athenian army at Samos, and the consequent revolution at Athens,

and overthrow of the democracy by the appointment of the supreme

council of four hundred in place of the [Greek: boule], and of a

committee of five thousand citizens in place of the popular

assembly, 411.--The army assumes the right of debate; names

Alcibiades to be its leader; but declares again for

democracy.--Great commotions at Athens in consequence of the

discomfiture of the fleet at Eretria, and the secession of Euboea.

Deposition of the college of four hundred, after a despotic rule

of four months;--Reformation of the government;--Transfer of the

highest power to the hands of the five thousand;--Recall of

Alcibiades, and reconciliation with the army.

24. Brilliant period of Alcibiades's command. The reiterated naval

victories won by the Athenians over the Spartans under Mindarus, who,

mistrusting Tissaphernes, now forms an alliance with Pharnabazus, satrap

of the north of Asia Minor, oblige the Spartans to propose peace, which

haughty Athens, unluckily for herself, rejects.

Two naval engagements on the Hellespont, 411.--Great victory by

sea and land won near Cyzicus, 410.--Confirmation of the Athenian

dominion over Ionia and Thrace by the capture of Byzantium, 480.

Alcibiades returns covered with glory; but in the same year is

deposed, and submits to a voluntary exile, 407.

25. Arrival of the younger Cyrus in Asia Minor; the shrewdness of

Lysander wins him over to the Spartan interest. The republican

haughtiness of Lysander's successor, Callicratidas, shown to Cyrus, was

a serious error in policy; for, unassisted by Persian money, Sparta was

not in a condition to pay her mariners, nor consequently to support her

naval establishment. After the defeat and death of Callicratidas, the

command is restored to Lysander, who terminates the twenty seven years'

war triumphantly for Sparta.

Naval victory of Lysander over the Athenians at Notium, 407; in

consequence of which Alcibiades is deprived of the

command.--Appointment of ten new leaders at Athens; Conon among

the number.--Naval victory of Callicratidas at Mitylene; Conon is

shut up in the harbour of that place, 406.--Great naval victory of

the Athenians; defeat and death of Callicratidas at the Aeginussae

islands, near Lesbos, 406.--Unjust condemnation of the Athenian

generals.--Second command of Lysander, and last _decisive_ victory

by sea over the Athenians at Aegospotamos on the Hellespont, Dec.

406.--The loss of the sovereignty of the sea is accompanied by the

defection of the confederates, who are successively subjected by

Lysander, 406.--Athens is besieged by Lysander in the same year,

405; the city surrenders in May, 404.--Athens is deprived of her

walls; her navy is reduced to twelve sail; and, in obedience to

Lysander's commands, the constitution is commuted into an

oligarchy, under thirty rulers, (tyrants.)

26. Thus ended a war destructive in its moral, still more than in its

political, consequences. Party spirit had usurped the place of patriotic

feeling; as national prejudice had that of national energy. Athens being

subdued, Sparta stood at the head of confederate Greece; but Greece very

soon experienced the yoke of her deliverers to be infinitely more

galling than that of the people hitherto called her oppressors. What

evils must not have ensued from the revolutions Lysander now found it

necessary to effect in most of the Grecian states, in order to place the

helm of government in the hands of his own party under the

superintendence of a Spartan harmost?--How oppressive must not have been

the military rule of the numerous Spartan garrisons?--Nor could any

alleviation of tribute be hoped for, now that in Sparta it was

acknowledged that the "state must possess an exchequer."--The arrogance

and rapacity of the new masters were rendered more grievous by their

being more uncivilized and destitute.

History of the reign of terror at Athens under the thirty tyrants,

403.--What happened here must likewise have happened more or less

in the other Grecian cities, which Lysander found it necessary to

revolutionize. In all quarters his party consisted of men similar

to Critias and his colleagues, who appear to have been long before

united in clubs ([Greek: hetaireiai]) intimately connected with

each other; from which were now taken the most daring

revolutionists, in order to place them everywhere at the head of

affairs.

27. Happy revolution in Athens, and expulsion of the thirty tyrants

by Thrasybulus, favoured by the party at Sparta opposed to Lysander,

and headed by king Pausanias. Restoration and reform of Solon's

constitution; general amnesty. It was easy to reestablish forms;--to

recall the departed spirit of the nation was impossible!

ED. PH. HINRICHS, _De Theramenis, Critiae et Thrasybuli, virorum

tempore belli Peloponnesiaci inter Graecos illustrium, rebus et

ingenio, Commentatio_, Hamburgi, 1820. An inquiry which exhibits

much research and impartiality.

28. The defeat of the younger Cyrus entangles the Spartans in a war with

the Persians, the same year that, after the death of king Agis,

Agesilaus takes possession of the regal dignity. We willingly forget his

usurpation as we follow him in his heroic career. None but a man of

genius could have instructed Sparta how to support for so long a time

the extravagant character which she had now undertaken to play.

Opening of the war with Persia by Tissaphernes's attack on the

Aeolian cities of Asia Minor, 400.--Command of Thimbron, who, 398,

is succeeded by the more successful and fortunate

Dercyllidas.--Availing himself of the jealousy between

Tissaphernes and Artabazus, he persuades the latter to a separate

truce, 397.--Command of Agesilaus; his expedition into Asia, from

the spring of 396 until 394. The conviction which he obtained of

the domestic weakness of the Persian empire in the successful

invasion of Phrygia, 395, seems to have matured in the mind of

Agesilaus the idea of overturning the Persian throne: this design

he would have accomplished had not the Persians been politic

enough to kindle a war against Sparta in Greece itself.

29. The Corinthian war, waged against Sparta by Corinth, Thebes, and

Argos, to which Athens and the Thessalians unite, terminated by the

peace of Antalcidas. The tyranny of Sparta, and more particularly the

recent devastation of Elis, a sacred territory, were the alleged

pretexts; but the bribes of Timocrates, the Persian envoy, were the real

causes of this war.

Irruption of the Spartans into Boeotia; they engage and are routed

at Haliartus, 394. Lysander falls on the field of battle; and

Agesilaus is recalled out of Asia.--His victory at Coronea ensures

to the Spartans the preponderance by land; but the discomfiture of

their navy near Cnidus at the same time, gives to their enemies

the sovereignty of the sea: Conon, who commanded the combined

Persian and Athenian fleets, avails himself, with consummate

skill, of this success to reestablish the independence of Athens,

393.--Sparta endeavours by apparently great sacrifices to bring

over the Persians to her interests: the peace at last concluded by

the efforts of the skilful Antalcidas, (see above, book ii, parag.

42), was readily agreed to by the Spartans, as they gave up only

what otherwise they could not have retained. The preponderance of

Sparta on the continent of Greece was established by the article

which invested them with the power of seeing the conditions of the

treaty fulfilled: the stipulated freedom of the Grecian cities was

but an apparent disadvantage; and now that the Asiatic colonies

were given up, the contest for power in Greece itself must be

decided by land, and not by sea.

30. The quarrels which, after the peace of Antalcidas, Sparta began to

have with Mantinea and Phlius, and still more so her participation in

those between the Macedo-Greek cities and the over-powerful Olynthus,

prove too plainly the arrogance with which Sparta behaved to the weaker

states. But the arbitrary appropriation of the citadel of Thebes by

Phoebidas,--an act not indeed commanded, yet approved by Sparta,--was

attended with more serious consequences than were at first expected.

Would that all authors of similar breaches of good faith and the law of

nations were visited with the same vengeance!

31. Period of the rivalry of Sparta and Thebes, Thebes, from the year

378. The greatness of Thebes was the work of two men, who knew how to

inspire their fellow-citizens and confederates with their own heroic

spirit: with them Thebes rose, with them she fell. Rarely does history

exhibit such a _duumvirate_ as that of Epaminondas and Pelopidas. How

high must our estimation of Pythagoras be, even had his philosophy

formed but one such man as Epaminondas!

Liberation of Thebes from Spartan rule by the successful attempt

of Pelopidas and his fellow-conspirators, 378. Vain attempts

against Thebes, by the Spartans under Cleombrotus, 378, and

Agesilaus, 377 and 376. The defensive war conducted by Pelopidas,

during which he established the Theban supremacy in Boeotia, and

brought over the Athenians, (whose fleet, 376, beat that of the

Spartans,) deserves our admiration more than the winning of a

battle.--The vast plans of Thebes were not unfolded, however, till

Epaminondas was at the head of affairs.

SERAN DE LA TOUR, _Histoire d'Epaminondas_. Paris, 1752.

# MEISSNER, _Life of Epaminondas_. Prague, 1801, 2 parts. In which

the authorities are duly considered.

# J. G. SCHEIBEL, _Essays towards a better understanding of the

Ancient World_, 1809. The second part contains an essay upon the

history of Thebes, as the first does on that of Corinth.

32. A general peace is concluded in Greece through the mediation of the

Persians, (who wish to obtain auxiliaries against the Egyptians,) under

the condition that all the Grecian cities shall be free: it is acceded

to by Sparta and Athens, but rejected by Thebes, because she cannot

admit the condition without again falling under the Spartan yoke. In

fact, the lofty language used by Epaminondas, as envoy to Sparta, shows

that it was problematic whether Sparta or Thebes should now be at the

head of Greece. Could the idea, therefore, of a perfect equality between

the states of Greece be other than chimerical?

33. The long struggle maintained so gloriously by Epaminondas against

Sparta is remarkable both in a political and military point of view. The

power of Sparta was abased; Epaminondas invented a new system of

tactics, (out of which soon after sprang the Macedonian art of war;) and

as soon as he found confederates in Peloponnesus itself, he made his way

to the very gates of Sparta.

Victory won by the Thebans at Leuctra, July 8, 371, and

annihilation of what hitherto had been called the supremacy of

Sparta.--First irruption into Peloponnesus preceded by alliances

with Arcadia, Elis, and Argos.--The attack upon Sparta itself is

unsuccessful; but the freedom of Messene is restored, 369.

34. Sparta in distress forms an alliance with Athens, under the

stipulation that the command shall alternately be in the hands of the

two confederates; conditions, no doubt, humiliating to Spartan pride! It

however affords them the means of frustrating Epaminondas's new attempt

on Corinth and the Peloponnesus. Even Dionysius I. of Syracuse, thinks

himself bound to assist the Spartans as being Dorians.

35. Thebes played a no less brilliant part in the north than she did in

the south. And had the attempts to liberate Thessaly from the rule of

the tyrant, Alexander of Pherae, been attended with success, Thebes would

have received a vast increase of power. Even in Macedonia she acted as

arbitress.

First and successful expedition of Pelopidas into Thessaly,

368.--After the decision of the disputed succession to the

Macedonian throne, young Philip is brought as hostage to Thebes,

and educated in the house of Epaminondas.--Pelopidas is sent as

ambassador, and taken prisoner by Alexander; hence the second

expedition of the Thebans, in which Epaminondas rescues the army

and delivers his friend, 367.

36. Alliance of Thebes with Persia successfully brought about by

Pelopidas. In the intrigues of the opponents at the Persian court, the

object of each was to bring that court over to his own interest. Yet the

domineering tone in which the Persians wished to dictate peace, had not

the consequences that might have been expected; and although Sparta

consented to her confederates remaining neutral, she would not forego

her claims on Messene. The establishment of a navy would have been of

more important consequences to Thebes than this alliance, had not all

these plans, together with the greatness of Thebes, been swept away by

the premature death of her two leading men.

Last expedition of Pelopidas against Alexander of Pherae, in which

he himself falls, 364.--New irruption into Peloponnesus caused by

the commotions in Arcadia.--Battle of Mantinea, and death of

Epaminondas, June 27, 362.--General peace in Greece mediated by

the Persians; Sparta does not assent to it on account of Messene,

but sends Agesilaus to Egypt, there to support the insurrection of

Tachos.

37. The result of this bloody struggle for the supremacy of Greece was,

that neither Sparta nor Thebes obtained it; the former of these states

being weakened by the loss of Messene, the latter by the loss of its

leaders, and both strained by their violent exertions. The situation of

Greece after this war seems to have been thus far changed, that no state

had the predominance; an independence proceeding from enervation. Even

Athens, who by means of her naval power still preserved her influence

over the cities on the coast and in the islands, lost the greater part

in the war of the allies, together with three of her most celebrated

leaders, Chabrias, Timotheus, and Iphicrates, whose places were ill

supplied by Chares.

Confederacy of the islands Cos, Rhodes, and Chios, and the city of

Byzantium; their secession from Athens, 358.--Unsuccessful siege

of Chios, before which Chabrias falls, 358; of Byzantium, 357.

Athens suffers a still greater injury from the cabals of Chares

against his colleagues Timotheus and Iphicrates, and from her

imprudent participation in the insurrection of Artabazus, 356. The

threats of Artaxerxes III. force Athens to make a peace, in which

she is obliged to acknowledge the freedom of her confederates.

38. At the very time when the growing power of Macedonia under Philip

ought to have united all the Grecian states, had such an union been

within the range of possibility, Greece plunged into another civil war

of ten years' duration, which is known by the name of the sacred or

Phocian war. The Amphictyonic assembly, whose duty it was to maintain

peace, and whose influence had been in the present circumstances

reinstated, abused its authority by kindling discord. The hatred of the

Thebans, who sought for new opportunities of quarrel with Sparta, and

the ambition of the Phocian Philomelus, were the real causes which led

to the war, which the policy of Philip knew how to prolong till the

precise moment favourable to his own particular views arrived. The

treasures of Delphi circulating in Greece, were as injurious to the

country as the ravages which it underwent. A war springing out of

private passions, fostered by bribes and subsidiary troops, and

terminated by the interference of foreign powers, was exactly what was

requisite for annihilating the scanty remains of morality and patriotism

still existing in Greece.

Sentence of the Amphictyons against Sparta on account of the

former surprise of the citadel of Thebes by Phoebidas; and against

Phocis on account of the tillage of the sacred lands of Delphi,

357.--Philomelus is elected general of the Phocians; the rifling

of the treasury of Delphi enables him to take into his pay

Athenian and other auxiliaries, and to carry war against the

Thebans and their confederates, the Locrians, etc. under pretence

of their being the executors of the Amphictyonic decrees.

Philomelus having fallen, 353, is succeeded by his brother

Onomarchus, more skilful than himself in intrigue and war: but

Onomarchus having fallen, 352, in the battle with Philip in

Thessaly, is followed by Phayllus. Philip even thus early

endeavours to push through Thermopylae into Greece, but is repelled

by the Athenians. He executes this plan after his peace with

Athens, 347, and having procured the expulsion of the Phocians

from the Amphictyonic council, gets their place and right of vote

to be transferred to himself.

39. From the very first advance of Philip, the fate of Greece could

scarcely afford matter for doubt; although the eloquence of Demosthenes

warded it off until the second invasion, caused by the Amphictyonic

sentence passed on the Locrians. (See below, book iv. parag. 15.) The

battle of Chaeronea laid the foundation of Macedonia's complete

ascendancy over the Grecian republics: by the appointment of Philip to

be generalissimo of Greece in the Persian war, that ascendancy was, as

it were, formally acknowledged; nor did it end with the assassination of

that prince.

* * * * *

FOURTH BOOK.

HISTORY OF THE MACEDONIAN MONARCHY.

FIRST PERIOD.

_From its origin to the death of Alexander the Great. B. C. 800-323._

Sources. We have no historian who wrote, particularly, on

Macedonia, before the time of Alexander. The facts relative to the

earlier history previous to Philip are collected from Diodorus,

Justin, Thucydides, and Arrian; from Diodorus more especially. In

consequence of the loss of the other historians, Diodorus is the

chief authority for the history of Philip; the speeches of

Demosthenes and Aeschines must likewise be consulted, but not made

use of without caution and judicious historical criticism. With

respect to Alexander the Great, as so many writers on his reign

have been destroyed by time, Arrian must now be considered as the

chief authority, on account of the care he has shown in the

selection of his authorities, conjointly with the seventeenth book

of Diodorus. Plutarch's biography contains several valuable

additional facts; and even the superficial Curtius might furnish us

with abundance of information, did his accounts offer higher claims

to our credit.

1. An Hellenic colony from Argos, headed by the Temenidae, a branch of

the Heraclidae, settled in Emathia, and laid the feeble foundation of the

Macedonian empire, which was in time to rise to such power. Not only did

the settlers keep their footing in the country, in spite of the

aboriginal inhabitants; but their princes gradually extended their

territory, by subjecting or expelling several of the neighbouring

tribes. Their earlier history, not excepting even the names of their

kings, is buried in obscurity till the time of the Persian invasions.

The three first Macedonian kings, Caranus said to have ruled

twenty-eight years, Coenus twenty-three, Tyrmas forty-five, were

unknown to Herodotus, who names as founder of the Macedonian

monarchy, Perdiccas, 729-678. Of this prince and his successors

Argaeus, _d._ 640, Philip I. _d._ 602, Aeropus, _d._ 576, and

Alcetas, _d._ 547, nothing more is known than that they waged war,

with various success against the neighbouring Pierians and

Illyrians, who had their own kings.

2. When the Persians commenced their incursions into Europe, Macedonia,

by its situation, must have been one of the first countries they

ravaged. Accordingly, as early as the reign of Darius Hystaspis, the

Macedonian kings were tributary to the Persians; and were indebted for

their deliverance from that yoke, not to their own valour, but to the

victories of the Greeks. The battle of Plataeae restored independence to

the Macedonian kingdom, although that independence was not formally

acknowledged by the Persians.

Immediately after the Scythian campaign, 513, Amyntas (_d._ 498,)

became tributary to the Persians; his son and successor, Alexander,

(_d._ 454,) was in the same state of subjection, and was even

compelled to join the expedition of Xerxes.

3. But the expulsion of the Persians still left Macedonia exposed to the

attacks of other formidable neighbours; on one side there was the

Thracians, among whom, under Sitalces, and his successor, Seuthes, arose

the powerful kingdom of the Odrysae; on the other, the Athenians, who,

availing themselves of their extensive navy, reduced to subjection the

Grecian settlements on the Macedonian shores. Harassing as these

neighbours were to the Macedonian kings, they proved to be the very

instruments by which Macedonia became so early and so deeply involved in

the affairs of Greece.

Commencement of the differences with Athens, under the reign of

Perdiccas II, 454-413; Athens having supported his brother Philip

against him.--Defection of Potidaea, and fortification of Olynthus,

into which the Greeks from Chalcis and other cities are

transplanted, 432. Potidaea being forced to surrender to Athens,

431, Perdiccas contrives to play so skilful a part in the

Peloponnesian war just now commencing, that he outwits the

Athenians, parrying the attack of Sitalces by a marriage of his

sister with Seuthes, the heir to that prince, 429. His alliance

with Sparta, 424, is very detrimental to the Athenians, Brasidas

wresting Amphipolis from their hands; nevertheless Perdiccas

chooses rather to conclude a peace with Athens, 423, than to throw

himself entirely into the arms of his new allies.

4. Archelaus, the successor of Perdiccas, introduced agriculture and

civilization among the Macedonians, who were never, however, recognized

by the Hellenes as their legitimate brethren: highways and military

roads were constructed; forts were erected; and the court became the

seat of literature. In these days the Macedonian kingdom seems to have

comprised Emathia, Mygdonia, and Pelagonia, to which may be added some

of the neighbouring tribes, who, although governed by their own kings,

were tributary. The power of the kings was insignificant when unaided by

the nobles, among whom, as was the case with all the hereditary princes

of Greece, they merely held the right of precedence. How difficult was

it, even in Alexander's time, to erase from the minds of the Macedonian

nobility the recollection of their former importance!

5. The murder of Archelaus was followed by a stormy period, wrapped in

obscurity: the unsettled state of the succession raised up many

pretenders to the throne, each of whom easily found the means of

supporting his claims, either in some of the neighbouring tribes, or in

one of the Grecian republics.

Aeropus, as guardian to the young king Orestes, usurps the supreme

power, B. C. 400-394. After his death, and the murder of his son

Pausanias, 393, the throne was seized by Amyntas II. son of

Philip, and brother to Perdiccas II. who was nevertheless unable

to maintain his power until he had gained a victory over Argaeus,

the brother of Pausanias, who was backed by the Illyrians,

390-369. The war with Olynthus, 383-380, could not be brought to a

successful conclusion until he had formed an alliance with Sparta.

6. The three sons of Amyntas II, Alexander, Perdiccas, and Philip,

successively ascended the throne after the death of their father; but so

violent were the commotions during the reigns of the two former, that

the future existence of Macedonia as a kingdom might have been regarded

as problematical: it is certain that they were obliged to submit to the

payment of tribute to the Illyrians.

Alexander, in opposition to his rival, Ptolemy of Alorus, placed

on the throne by Pelopidas, sends his youngest brother Philip as

hostage to Thebes: in the same year he is deposed by Ptolemy, 368.

Reign of Ptolemy, 388-365, with the stipulation imposed, 367, by

Pelopidas, that he shall only hold the sceptre in reserve for the

two younger brothers. Murder of Ptolemy, 365, by Perdiccas III.

who is nearly overwhelmed by Pausanias, another and earlier

pretender to the crown; he is at last firmly seated on the throne

by the Athenians, under Iphicrates, 364. But as early as 360 he

falls in the war against the Illyrians, leaving behind him a son,

Amyntas, still a minor, and a younger brother Philip, who escapes

from Thebes in order to gain possession of the throne.

7. The reign of Philip, which lasted twenty-four years, is one of the

most instructive and interesting in the whole range of history, as well

on account of the prudence he displayed, as for the manner in which his

plans were arranged and executed. Though it may be difficult to trace in

his morals the pupil of Epaminondas, yet it is impossible to view

without feelings of astonishment the brilliant career of a man, who,

under the almost hopeless circumstances in which he commenced his

course, never lost his firmness of mind, and who in the highest

prosperity preserved his coolness of reflection.

The history of Philip, even in his own days, was distorted to his

disadvantage by orators and historians. Demosthenes could not,

Theopompus would not, be impartial; and the information contained

in Diodorus and Justin is mostly derived from the work of the

latter.

OLIVIER, _Histoire de Philippe, roi de Macedoine_. Paris, 1740, 2

vols. 8vo. A defence of Philip.

DE BURY, _Histoire de Philippe, et d'Alexandre le grand_. Paris,

1760, 4to. A very mean performance.

TH. LELAND, _The History of the Life and Reign of Philip king of

Macedon_. London, 1761, 4to. Dry, but exhibiting much reading and

strict impartiality.

In MITFORD, _History of Greece_, vol. iv, Philip has found his

most zealous panegyrist and defender. It would seem that, even in

the present day, it is impossible to write an impartial history of

this monarch.

8. Melancholy posture of the Macedonian affairs at the beginning of

Philip's reign. Besides victorious foes abroad, there were at home two

pretenders to the throne, Argaeus, backed by Athens, Pausanias, supported

by Thrace; and Philip himself, at first, was merely regent, and not

king. In the two first years, however, every thing was changed, and

Macedonia recovered her independence. The newly-created phalanx ensured

victory over the barbarians; recourse was had to other means than force

for success against the suspiciousness of Athens and the neighbouring

Greek settlements, particularly against the powerful Olynthus. It is in

the conduct of these affairs that the peculiar sagacity of Philip is

displayed.

After the defeat of Argaeus, peace is purchased from Athens by a

momentary recognition of the freedom of Amphipolis, 360.--Removal

of Pausanias by means of an accommodation with Thrace.--By the

conquest of the Paeonians and Illyrians, 359, the boundaries of

Macedonia are extended to Thrace, and westward to the lake

Lychnitis.--As early as 360 Philip was proclaimed king.

9. Development of Philip's further plans of aggrandizement.--By the

gradual subjection of the Macedo-Greek cities, he proposed, not only to

make himself sole master in Macedonia, but also to remove the Athenians

from his domain.--The first object of his policy against Greece was to

get himself acknowledged as a Hellen, and Macedonia as a member of the

Hellenic league. Hence the subsequent tutelage in which Macedonia held

Greece was not converted into a formal subjection, a proceeding which

would have savoured too much of barbarian origin.--The execution of all

these plans was facilitated by the possession of the Thracian gold

mines, which enabled Philip to create finances as well as the phalanx.

Capture of Amphipolis, 358; in the mean while Athens is amused

with promises, and Olynthus with the momentary cession of Potidaea,

which had likewise been captured: this event is followed by the

conquest of the mountainous districts, abounding in gold, which

extend from the Nestus to the Strymon, and furnished an annual

income of nearly 1,000 talents.

10. The interference of Philip in the affairs of Thessaly dates from the

year 357; the possession of that country was an object equally important

for the furtherance of his views upon Greece, as for the improvement of

his finances. He first stepped forth as the deliverer of Thessaly, and

ended in making it a province of Macedonia.

Expulsion of the tyrants from Pherae, at the request of the

Aleuadae, 356; the tyrants, however, receive support in the sacred

war from the Phocians under Onomarchus. The final defeat of

Onomarchus, 352, makes Philip master of Thessaly; he places

Macedonian garrisons in the three chief places, and thus supports

his authority in the country until he is pleased to make it

entirely a Macedonian province, 344.

11. The protraction of the sacred war in Greece furnished Philip with an

excellent opportunity of promoting his views upon that country; although

his first attempt at an irruption, too precipitately undertaken, was

frustrated by the Athenians. The capture of Olynthus, notwithstanding

the assistance afforded it by the Athenians, after a season of apparent

inaction, insured the safety of the frontiers in his rear; and by a

master stroke of policy, almost at the very moment in which he was

driving the Athenians out of Euboea, he found means to enter with them

into negotiations, which, after repeated embassies, were closed by a

peace, opening to him the way through Thermopylae, and enabling him to

raise a party favourable to himself within the very walls of Athens.

12. First descent of Philip into Greece, and termination of the sacred

war by reducing the Phocians. The place which he now obtained in the

Amphictyonic council, had been the height of his wishes; and the

humility of Sparta proved how firmly his ascendancy over Greece was

already established.

13. Brief view of the state of Greece, and more particularly of Athens,

after the sacred war; description of the means by which Philip succeeded

in creating and supporting parties favourable to his own interests in

the Grecian states. Bribery was not his only instrument; what he gave he

borrowed from others; the main feature of his policy was, that he seldom

or ever recurred to the same means. Scheming and consistent even in his

drunken revels, he hardly ever appears under the same form.

Dreadful consequences to the morals of the Greeks, resulting from

the spirit of party, the decline of religion, and the vast

increase in the circulating medium, produced by the treasures of

Delphi and Macedonia.--Estimate of the power of Athens during the

period of Demosthenes and Phocion. It seems that, unfortunately,

the eloquence and political acuteness of the former was not

accompanied with sufficient talents for negotiation; the latter,

perhaps, did not place confidence enough in his country, while

Demosthenes placed too much. In spite of public indolence and

effeminacy, Athens was still enabled to support her rank as a

maritime power, the navy of Philip not being equal to hers.

# A. G. BECKER, _Demosthenes as a Statesman and an Orator_. An

historico-critical introduction to his works: 1815. A very useful

work, both as a history and as an introduction to the political

orations of Demosthenes.

14. New conquests of Philip in Illyria and Thrace. The Adriatic sea and

the Danube appear to have been the boundaries of his empire on this

side. But the views of the Macedonian king were directed less against

the Thracians, than against the Grecian settlements on the Hellespont;

and the attack of the Athenian Diopithes furnished him a pretext for

making war against them. The siege, however, of Perinthus and Byzantium,

was frustrated by Phocion, to the great vexation of Philip; an event

which aroused the Athenians, and even the Persians, from their lethargy.

15. Policy of Philip after this check.--At the very time that, engaged

in a war against the barbarians on the Danube, he appears to have wholly

lost sight of the affairs of Greece, his agents redouble their activity.

Aeschines, richly paid for his services, proposes in the Amphictyonic

council, that, to punish the sacrilegious insults of the Locrians to the

Delphian oracle, he should be elected leader of the Greeks in this new

sacred war. Following his usual maxim, Philip suffers himself to be

entreated.

16. Second expedition of Philip into Greece. His appropriation of the

important frontier town of Elatea soon showed that, for this time at

least, he was not contending merely for the honour of Apollo.--Alliance

between Athens and Thebes brought about by Demosthenes.--But the defeat

of Chaeronea in the same year decided the dependence of Greece. Philip

now found it easy to play the magnanimous character towards Athens.

17. Preparations for the execution of his plan against Persia, not as

his own undertaking, but as a national war of the Hellenes against the

barbarians. Thus, while Philip, by obtaining from the Amphictyons the

appointment of generalissimo of Greece against the Persians, secured in

an _honourable_ manner the dependence of the country, the splendour of

the expedition flattered the nation at whose expense it was to be

conducted. It is a question, indeed, whether Philip's own private views

extended much further!

18. The internal government of Macedonia, under so skilful and

successful a conqueror, must necessarily have been absolute. No

pretender would dare to rise up against such a ruler, and the body guard

([Greek: doryphoroi]) established by him at the beginning of his reign,

and taken from the Macedonian nobility, contributed much to keep up a

proper understanding between the prince and the nobles. The court became

a military staff, while the people, from a nation of herdsmen, was

converted into a nation of warriors.--Philip was unfortunate only in his

own family; but the blame is not to be attributed to him if he could not

agree with Olympias.

19. Philip murdered by Pausanias at Aegae, probably at the instigation of

the Persians, while celebrating the marriage of his daughter.

20. The reign of ALEXANDER the GREAT, in the eyes of the historical

inquirer, derives its great interest, not only from the extent, but from

the permanence, of the revolution which he effected in the world. To

appreciate properly the character of this prince, who died just as he

was about to carry his mighty projects into execution, is no easy task;

but it is totally repugnant to common sense to suppose that the pupil of

Aristotle was nothing more than a wild and reckless conqueror, unguided

by any plan.

ST. CROIX, _Examen critique des anciens historiens

d'Alexandre-le-grand_, 2nd. edition, _considerablement augmentee_.

Paris, 1804, 4to. The new edition of this, which is the principal

work on the history of Alexander, and important in more respects

than one, contains more than the title implies, though by no means

a strictly impartial estimate of that prince's character.

21. Violent commotions at court, in the conquered countries, and in

Greece, after the death of Philip. Great as his power appeared to be,

the preservation of it depended entirely on the first display of

character in his successor. Alexander showed himself worthy to inherit

the sceptre by his victorious expedition against the Thracians; (to

whom, and more especially to his alliance with the Agrians, he was

afterwards indebted for his light horse;) and by the example which he

exhibited to Greece in his treatment of Thebes.

22. Appointment of Alexander in the assembly at Corinth to be

generalissimo of the Greeks. Yet what his father would probably have

turned to a very different account, he allowed to remain a mere nominal

office.--Development of his plan of attack upon Persia.--The want of a

navy, soon experienced by Alexander, would probably have frustrated his

whole project, had not Memnon's counterplan of an inroad into Macedonia

been thwarted by the celerity of the Macedonian king.

23. Passage over the Hellespont, and commencement of the war. The

tranquillity of his kingdom and of Greece appeared to be secured,

Antipater being left at the head of affairs.--The victory on the

Granicus opens to Alexander a path into Asia Minor; but the death of

Memnon, which soon after followed, was perhaps a greater advantage than

a victory.

24. The victory of Issus, gained over Darius in person, appears to have

given Alexander the first idea of completely overturning the Persian

throne, as was proved by the rejection of Darius's offers of peace. When

indeed have not the plans of conquerors been dependent on the course of

events? Yet Alexander must have been pretty certain of his future

victory, since he permitted Darius to escape, while he sat down seven

months before Tyre, in order to make himself master of the sea; and,

after the conquest of Egypt without a battle, to which the possession of

Tyre opened the way, to build Alexandria, and erect to himself a

monument more lasting than all his victories.

Although Alexandria perhaps in the end may have surpassed the

expectations of the founder, yet the selection of the site,

favourable only for navigation and commerce, shows that an eye was

originally had to those objects.

25. Invasion of Inner Asia, facilitated by the tacit submission of the

ruling tribes, and by the state of cultivation in which the country was

found. On the plains of Arbela the Macedonian tactics were completely

triumphant. It might now be said that the throne of Persia was

overturned; and the unexpectedly easy capture of Babylon, Susa, and

Persepolis, was surely of more importance for the moment than the

pursuit of a flying king.

Insurrection of the Greeks quelled by Antipater; Alexander himself

falls in with the malcontent envoys to Darius in the interior of

Asia.

26. The subjection of the north-eastern provinces of the Persian empire

would perhaps have been attended with the greatest difficulties, had

not the astonishing activity of the conqueror crushed in their birth

the schemes of the treacherous Bessus, who, after the assassination of

Darius, wished to erect a separate kingdom in Bactria. The Jaxartes was

now the northern boundary of the Macedonian monarchy, as it had hitherto

been that of the Persian. Besides, the possession of the rich trading

countries, Bactria and Sogdiana, was in itself an object of vast

importance.

During this expedition, the execution of Philotas and his father

Parmenio took place, though both were, probably, guiltless of the

conspiracy laid to their charge, 330. After the death of Darius,

Alexander met with almost constant opposition in his own army: the

majority of the troops fancying that that event precluded the

necessity of any further exertions. Cautious as Alexander was in

his treatment of the Macedonian nobles, we may discern, not

however by the mere example of Clitus, how difficult they found it

to banish from their memory the relations in which they had

formerly stood to their kings.

27. Alexander's expedition against India had, no doubt, its origin in

that propensity to romantic enterprise which constituted a main feature

in his character. Yet what could be more natural than that a close view

of Persian splendour, the conquest of such wealthy countries, and the

desire of prosecuting his vast commercial designs, should gradually

mature in the mind of the Macedonian king the plan of subjecting a

country which was represented as the golden land of Asia. To this

likewise the scantiness of geographic information must have greatly

contributed; if he pressed forward to the eastern seas, the circle of

his dominion would, it was supposed, be complete.--It appears very

certain that Alexander was destitute of a sufficient knowledge of the

country when he entered upon this expedition.

Alexander's invasion was directed against Northern India, or the

Panjab; in those days a populous and highly cultivated country;

now the seat of the Seiks and Mahrattas; and then, as now,

inhabited by warlike races. He crossed the Indus at Taxila

(Attock,) passed the Hydaspes (Behut or Chelum,) and, availing

himself of the quarrels between the Indian princes, defeated the

king, Porus. He then proceeded across the Acesines (Jenaub) and

Hydraotes (Rauvee). The eastern verge reached in this expedition

was the river Hyphasis (Beyah;) here, having already proceeded

half way to the Ganges, the conqueror was, by a mutiny in his

army, compelled to retreat. His return was through the country of

the Malli (Multan) as far as the Hydaspes, when the majority of

his troops took ship, and were floated along that stream into the

Acesines, and from thence into the Indus, which they followed down

to its mouth.

RENNEL, _Memoir of a Map of Hindostan_. London, 1793, (3d. edit.)

and

ST. CROIX, _Examen_, etc. (see p. 216.) furnish all the necessary

historical and geographical explanations relative to the Persian

and Indian campaigns of Alexander.

28. Although Alexander was obliged to give up the project of conquering

India, yet the connection between Europe and the east, which has

continued from that time, was the work of his hands. While the

communication on land was secured by the establishment of various

settlements, the communication by sea was opened by the voyage of his

admiral, Nearchus, from the Indus to the Euphrates. In the mean time

Alexander himself proceeded to Persis and Babylon, across the desert,

and the unexplored provinces of Gedrosia and Carmania.

Nearchus's voyage (our knowledge of which is derived from his own

journal, preserved in Arrian's _Indica_) lasted from the

beginning of October, 326, to the end of February, 325: nearly

the same time was occupied in the almost incredible land march of

the king.

VINCENT, _The Voyage of Nearchus from the Indus to the Euphrates_.

London, 1797, 4to. Exhibiting the most learned researches, and

illustrated with excellent charts.

29. After the abandonment of India, the whole circuit of Alexander's

conquests was precisely that of the former Persian empire; his later

projects were probably directed against Arabia alone. However easy it

had been to make these conquests, it was a more difficult task to retain

them; for Macedonia, exhausted by continual levies of men, could not

furnish efficient garrisons. Alexander removed this difficulty, by

protecting the conquered from oppression; by showing proper respect to

their religion; by leaving the civil government in the hands of the

native rulers who had hitherto possessed it; and by confiding to

Macedonians the command only of the garrisons left in the chief places,

and in the newly established colonies. To alter as little as possible in

the internal organization of countries was his fundamental principle.

30. Simple as Alexander's plans were in the outset, their simplicity was

more than compensated by the magnitude and importance of their results.

Babylon was to be the capital of his empire, and consequently of the

world. The union of the east and the west was to be brought about by the

amalgamation of the dominant races by intermarriage, by education, and,

more than all, by the ties of commerce, the importance of which much

ruder conquerors, in Asia itself, soon learnt to appreciate. In nothing

probably is the superiority of his genius more brilliantly displayed,

than in his exemption from all national prejudice, particularly when we

consider that none of his countrymen were in this respect to be compared

with him. To refuse him this merit is impossible, whatever judgment we

may form of his general character.

31. Sudden death of Alexander at Babylon by fever; under the peculiar

circumstances of the time, the greatest loss mankind could experience.

From the Indus to the Nile the world lay in ruins; and where was now the

architect to be found, that could gather up the scattered fragments and

restore the edifice?

Alexander's disorder may be easily accounted for by the hardships

he had undergone, and the impure air to which he exposed himself

in cleaning out the canals about Babylon. He certainly was not

poisoned; and in the charge of immoderate drunkenness brought

against him, we must take into account the manners of the

Macedonian and Persian courts. Was it not the same with Peter the

Great? In estimating his moral character we must bear in mind the

natural vehemence of his passions, ever inclined to the most rapid

transitions; nor should we forget the unavoidable influence of

constant success upon mankind.

SECOND PERIOD.

_History of the Macedonian monarchy, from the death of Alexander

the Great to the battle of Ipsus, B. C. 323-301._

To enable the reader to take a general view, the history of the

European events is resumed below, under the head of the history

of Macedonia Proper.

SOURCES. Diodorus, lib. xviii-xx. is the great authority for this

portion of history. He compiled mostly, for this period, from a

contemporary historian, Hieronymus of Cardia. He is followed by

Plutarch in the Lives of Eumenes, Demetrius, and Phocion; and by

Justin, lib. xiii, etc. Of Arrian's history of Alexander's

successors, nothing unfortunately remains but a few fragments in

Photius.

# MANNERT, _History of Alexander's successors_. Nuremberg, 1787.

Composed with the usual judgment and learning of that author.

1. The very first measure adopted after the death of Alexander contained

within itself the seeds of all the dire revolutions that afterwards

ensued. Not only were the jealousy and ambition of the nobles aroused,

but even the interference of the army was exhibited in the most terrific

manner. Although the idea of the supremacy of the royal family was cast

off only by degrees, yet the dreadfully disturbed state in which that

family stood, rendered its fall unavoidable.

State of the royal family at the death of Alexander. He left his

wife Roxana pregnant, who at the end of three months brought into

the world the rightful heir to the sceptre, Alexander; he left

likewise an illegitimate son, Hercules; a bastard half-brother,

Arrhidaeus; his mother, the haughty and cruel Olympias, and a

sister, Cleopatra, both widows; the artful Eurydice, (daughter to

Cyane, one of Philip's sisters,) subsequently married to the king,

Arrhidaeus; and Thessalonica, Philip's daughter, afterwards united

to Cassander of Macedonia.

2. The weak Arrhidaeus, under the name of Philip, and the infant

Alexander were at last proclaimed kings, the _regency_ being placed in

the hands of Perdiccas, Leonnatus, and Meleager; the last of whom was

quickly cut off at the instigation of Perdiccas. Meanwhile Antipater,

with whom Craterus had been joined as civil ruler, had the management of

affairs in Europe.

3. The sequel of the history becomes naturally that of satraps, who fell

out among themselves, all being ambitious to rule, and none willing to

obey. Twenty-two years elapsed ere any massy edifice arose out of the

ruins of the Macedonian monarchy. In few periods of history are the

revolutions of affairs so violent, in few periods, therefore, is it so

difficult to unravel the maze of events. For this purpose the most

convenient division of the history is into _three_ periods: the first

extending to the death of Perdiccas, 321: the second to the death of

Eumenes, 315: the third to the defeat and death of Antigonus at the

battle of Ipsus, 301.

4. First grant of the provinces made by Perdiccas. The vanity of this

man seems to have induced him to select the office of regent, in order

that no separate province might fall to his share; he placed his whole

reliance on having the command of the royal army, although it had

already given so many proofs of its determination to command rather than

to obey.

In this division Ptolemy son of Lagus received Egypt; Leonnatus,

Mysia; Antigonus, Phrygia, Lycia, and Pamphylia; Lysymachus,

Macedonian Thrace; Antipater and Craterus remained in possession

of Macedonia.--The foreigner, Eumenes, would hardly have received

Cappadocia, although yet to be conquered, had Perdiccas been able

to dispense with his services. The remaining provinces either did

not come under the new division, or else their governors are

unworthy of notice.

5. The first acts of Perdiccas's government showed how little dependence

he could place on the obedience of men who hitherto had been his

colleagues. The general insurrection among the mercenaries who had been

settled by Alexander in Upper Asia, and now wished to return to their

homes, was, no doubt, quelled by Python's destruction of the rebels; but

it was not Python's fault that he did not make himself independent

master of the scene of mutiny.

6. Still more refractory was the behaviour of Leonnatus and Antigonus,

when they received orders to put Eumenes in possession of his province.

Antigonus was too haughty to obey; and Leonnatus preferred going over

into Europe to marry Cleopatra; there, however, he almost immediately

met with his death in the Lamian war. (See below, book iv. period iii.

parag. 2.) Perdiccas, therefore, was himself obliged to undertake the

expedition with the royal army; he succeeded by the defeat of

Ariarathes.

7. Ambitious views of Perdiccas, who, in order to ascend the throne by a

marriage with Cleopatra, repudiates Nicaea, the daughter of Antipater.

Cleopatra actually came over to Asia; but Perdiccas, being obliged, at

the request of the army, to marry Eurydice, Philip's niece, after the

murder of her mother Cyane, to the king Arrhidaeus, found her a

troublesome rival and opponent in the government.

8. Attempts of Perdiccas to overthrow Antigonus and Ptolemy, by accusing

them before the army. Antigonus passes over to Antipater in Macedonia;

and gives rise to the league between Antipater, Craterus, and Ptolemy,

against Perdiccas and Eumenes.

9. Commencement and termination of the first war. Perdiccas himself

marches against Egypt, leaving his friend Eumenes to command in Asia

Minor: meanwhile Antipater and Craterus fall upon Asia; the former

advances towards Syria against Perdiccas; the latter is defeated and

slain by Eumenes. Before the arrival, however, of Antipater, Perdiccas,

after repeated and vain attempts to cross the Nile, falls a victim to

the insurrection of his own troops.--Thus three of the principal

personages, Perdiccas, Craterus, Leonnatus, were already removed from

the theatre of action; and the victorious Eumenes, now master of Asia

Minor, had to maintain, unaided, the struggle against the confederates.

10. Second period, from the death of Perdiccas to that of

Eumenes.--Python and Arrhidaeus quickly resigning the regency, it is

assumed by Antipater.--New division of the provinces at Trisparadisus in

Syria. Seleucus receives Babylon; Antigonus is promised, besides his

former possessions, all those of the outlawed Eumenes.

11. War of Antigonus with Eumenes. The latter, defeated by treachery,

shuts himself up in the mountain fastness of Nora, there to await more

favourable times; and Antigonus remains master of all Asia Minor: in the

mean time Ptolemy ventures to take possession of Syria and Phoenicia.

12. Death of the regent Antipater, in the same year, (320;) he bequeaths

the regency to his friend, the aged Polysperchon, to the exclusion of

his own son Cassander. Antigonus now begins to unfold his ambitious

plans; he endeavours vainly to win over Eumenes, who deceives him in the

negotiations, and seizes the opportunity of leaving his mountain

fastness.

13. Eumenes's plan to strengthen himself in Upper Asia; as he is on the

way he receives tidings of his being appointed generalissimo of the

royal troops. What better man could Polysperchon have selected for the

office than he who in his conduct towards Antigonus exhibited so

striking an example of attachment to the royal house?

14. Exertions of Eumenes to maintain himself in Lower Asia, ineffectual,

the naval victory won by Antigonus over the royal fleet, commanded by

Clitus, depriving him of the empire of the sea. He bursts into Upper

Asia; where, in the spring, he unites with the satraps, who had taken

arms against the powerful Seleucus of Babylon.

15. Antigonus following up the royal general, Upper Asia becomes the

theatre of war. Victorious as was at first the stand made by Eumenes,

neither valour nor talent were of any avail against the insubordination

of the royal troops, and the jealousy of the other commanders. Attacked

in winter quarters by Antigonus, he was, after the battle, delivered

into the hands of his enemy by the mutinous Argyraspidae, who had lost

their baggage: he was put to death, and in him the king's family lost

its only loyal supporter.

16. Great changes had also taken place in the royal family. Her enemy

Antipater having deceased, Olympias, invited by Polysperchon, who wished

to strengthen himself against Cassander, had returned from Epirus, and

put to death Arrhidaeus together with his wife, Eurydice: in the year

following she was besieged in Pydna by Cassander, and being obliged to

surrender, was in her turn executed; meanwhile Cassander held Roxana and

the young king in his own power.

17. Third period, from the death of Eumenes to that of Antigonus.--The

rout of Eumenes seemed to have established for ever the power of

Antigonus in Asia; still animated with the fire of youth, though full of

years, he saw himself revived in his son Demetrius, fond of boisterous

revelry, but gallant and talented.--Even Seleucus thought it time to

consult his safety by flying from Babylon into Egypt.

18. Changes introduced by Antigonus into the upper provinces; return to

Asia Minor, where his presence seemed indispensable, by reason of the

aggrandizement of Ptolemy in Syria and Phoenicia, of the Macedonian

Cassander in Europe, of Lysimachus in Mysia, and the Carian Cassander in

Asia Minor.--He repossesses himself of Phoenicia, a country of the first

importance for the construction of a fleet.

Siege of Tyre, 314-313: it lasts fourteen months; a proof that the

city was certainly not razed by Alexander.

19. The fugitive Seleucus forms a league against Antigonus and

Demetrius, between Ptolemy, the two Cassanders, and Lysimachus. But

Antigonus frustrates their combination, himself driving out the Carian

Cassander, and his son marching against Ptolemy.

Victory won by Ptolemy over Demetrius at Gaza, 312; after which

Seleucus marches back to Babylon, and, although subsequently

followed up by Demetrius, permanently maintains his footing in

Upper Asia.--On the other hand, Ptolemy, at the first approach of

Antigonus with the main body, surrenders back Syria and Phoenicia,

312.

20. A general peace concluded between Antigonus and his enemies,

Seleucus only excepted, from whom Upper Asia is to be again wrested. The

first article, that each should retain what he had, demonstrates pretty

evidently that the treaty was dictated solely by Antigonus; the second,

that the Greek cities should be free, was pregnant with the seeds of a

new war, ready to burst forth at every favourable opportunity; the

third, that the young Alexander should be raised to the throne upon

attaining his majority, was probably the death warrant of the hapless

prince, who, that same year, together with his mother, was murdered by

Cassander.--Shortly after, at the instigation of Antigonus, Cleopatra

was put to death, in order that Ptolemy might be thwarted in his object,

which depended on a matrimonial connection with that princess.

21. Even the execution of the articles must have given rise to

hostilities; Ptolemy wishing to force Antigonus, and he, on his side, to

compel Cassander, to withdraw the garrisons from the Grecian towns; a

condition which neither party felt inclined to fulfil. Grecian freedom

was now but a name; this, however, is not the only example history

furnishes of political ideas making the greatest stir long after they

have survived their own existence; for then they become excellent tools

in the hands of artful designers.

Expedition of Demetrius to liberate Athens, 308. The day when he

announced freedom to the Athenians, must have been the happiest of

his life! Few portions of history present such a scope for the

contemplation of human nature as the twofold sojourn of Demetrius

at Athens.

22. The growing power of Ptolemy on the sea, and the capture of Cyprus,

determines Antigonus to an open rupture: he commands his son to drive

Ptolemy out of the island.

Naval victory of Demetrius off Cyprus, 307, perhaps the greatest

and most bloody in history; nevertheless, as little decisive to

the general question as are most naval battles. The assumption of

the royal title, first by the conqueror, afterwards by the

conquered, and ultimately by all the rest, was but a mere form now

that the royal family was extirpated.

23. The conquerors having failed in their project of subduing Egypt,

made the wealthy republic of the Rhodians, as an ally of that country,

the victim of their fury. But though in the renowned siege of their

capital, Demetrius earned his title of Poliorcetes, the noble defence of

the Rhodians afforded an illustrious example of the power of discipline

in conjunction with well-guided patriotism. The invitation of the

Athenians came seasonably to Demetrius; he raised the blockade and

proceeded to complete the liberation of Greece, the necessity of which

became every day more pressing.

24. Second sojourn of Demetrius in Greece. The expulsion of Cassander's

garrisons from the Grecian cities, and more particularly from those in

Peloponnesus; the appointment of Demetrius as generalissimo of Greece,

for the conquest of Macedonia and Thrace; proved not only to Cassander,

but also to the other princes, that their common interest loudly called

upon them to resist the over-powerful Antigonus.

25. Third grand league of Cassander, Ptolemy, and Seleucus, against

Antigonus and his son; brought about by Cassander. How easily, even

after the violent irruption of Lysimachus into Asia Minor, might

Antigonus have dispersed the gathering storms, had not his presumption

led him to place an overweening reliance on his own good fortune!

26. Junction of Seleucus of Babylon and Lysimachus, in Phrygia.

Antigonus, to concentrate his forces, recalls his son, who had pushed on

to the borders of Macedonia. The cautious Ptolemy, on the other hand, is

afraid to invade Syria; and, in consequence of a false report, that

Lysimachus had been defeated, retires full of alarm, into Egypt.

27. Great and decisive battle fought at Ipsus in Phrygia, in the spring

of 301, which costs Antigonus his life, and annihilates his empire, as

the two conquerors divide it between themselves, without taking any

account of the absent confederates. Asia Minor, as far as mount Taurus,

falls to the share of Lysimachus; and all the rest, with the exception

of Cilicia, which is given to Plisthenes, Cassander's brother, is left

to Seleucus.--Demetrius, by the help of his navy, escapes into Greece.

28. The almost unbroken series of wars which had raged from the time of

Alexander, must have precluded the possibility of much being effected

with respect to domestic organization. It appears to have been nearly,

if not wholly, military. Yet were the numerous devastations in some

measure compensated by the erection of new cities, in which these

princes vied with one another, impelled partly by vanity to immortalize

their names, partly by policy to support their dominion, most of the new

settlements being military colonies. Nevertheless this was but a sorry

reparation for the manifold oppressions to which the natives were

exposed by the practice of quartering the army upon them. The spread of

the language and civilization of the Greeks deprived them of all

national distinction; their own languages sinking into mere provincial

dialects. Alexander's monarchy affords a striking example of the little

that can be expected from a forced amalgamation of races, when the price

of that amalgamation is the obliteration of national character in the

individuals.

HEYNE, _Opum regni Macedonici auctarum, attritarum et eversarum,

causae probabiles; in Opusc._ t. iv. This collection contains

several other treatises on Grecian and Macedonian history, which

cannot be all separately enumerated.

THIRD PERIOD.

_History of the kingdoms and states which arose upon the dismemberment

of the Macedonian Monarchy after the battle of Ipsus._

I. HISTORY OF THE SYRIAN EMPIRE UNDER THE SELEUCIDAE, B. C. 312-64.

SOURCES. Neither for the history of the Syrian, nor for that of

the Egyptian and Macedonian kingdoms, has any eminent writer been

preserved. The fragments of the lost books of Diodorus, and, from

the time that these kingdoms became allies of Rome, those of

Polybius, several narratives of Livy, the Syriaca of Appian, and a

few of Plutarch's Lives, are the principal authorities; too

frequently we are obliged to rely upon the extracts of Justin. For

the history of the Seleucidae, in consequence of the political

connection between these princes and the Jews, the Antiquities of

Josephus and the book of Maccabees become of importance. Besides

these authorities, the many coins that have been preserved of

these kings, afford much information respecting their genealogy

and chronology.

Of modern publications on the subject, the principal work is

VAILLANT, _Imperium Seleucidarum sive historia regum Syriae_, 1681,

4to. The enquiry is principally grounded on coins, as is the case

with

FROELICH, _Annales rerum et regum Syriae_. Viennae, 1754.

1. The kingdom of the Seleucidae was founded in Upper Asia by Seleucus

Nicator. It was an extensive empire; but, being composed of various

countries united only by conquest, it could possess but little internal

stability except what it derived from the power of its rulers. That

power fell with the founder; and the transfer of the seat of empire

from the banks of the Tigris to Syria, entangled the Seleucidae in all

the political disputes of the western world, and facilitated the

insurrection of the upper provinces. The history of this kingdom divides

itself into the periods before and after the war with Rome; although at

the breaking out of this war the seeds of its decline and fall had

already been sown.

Seleucus received, 321, Babylon as his province; but after the

defeat of Eumenes was obliged to take to flight, 315, in order to

avoid subjection to the conqueror Antigonus. But his moderate

government had rendered him so popular, that after the victory won

by Ptolemy over Demetrius at Gaza, 312, he could safely venture to

return with only a few adherents to Babylon. In this year

commences the kingdom of the Seleucidae.

2. In the ten following years, and while Antigonus was busied in Asia

Minor, Seleucus laid the foundation of his power over all Upper Asia,

with a facility to which the detestation excited by the rigid government

of Antigonus mainly contributed. After his victory over Nicanor of

Media, all in that quarter declared spontaneously for him; and the

unsuccessful expedition of Demetrius taught Antigonus himself, that it

would no longer be prudent to assert his claims. As early as 307,

Seleucus was in possession of all the countries between the Euphrates,

Indus, and Oxus.

3. Great campaign in India undertaken by Seleucus against king

Sandracottus. He penetrated as far as the Ganges, and the close alliance

he formed with the Indian sovereign lasted a long time after, and was

kept up by embassies. The great number of elephants which he brought

back with him was not the only advantage accruing from this expedition;

the intercourse with the east seems to have been permanently

reestablished.

4. By the battle of Ipsus Seleucus added to his dominions the greater

part of the territories of Antigonus;--Syria, Cappadocia, Mesopotamia,

and Armenia. Unfortunately Syria now became the head province,

notwithstanding Coele-Syria and Phoenicia were left in the hands of

Ptolemy. How widely different would have been the course of historic

events, had the seat of empire remained at Seleucia on the Tigris, and

the Euphrates continued to be the western boundary of the Seleucidae!

5. Reciprocal relations between the several kings, who now combine in

forming a kind of political system, in which continued exertions to

maintain a balance of power by alliance and marriage are plainly

discernible.

Connection between Seleucus and Demetrius Poliorcetes, by the

marriage of the former with the beautiful Stratonice, daughter of

the latter; made with the view of counterbalancing a similar

connection between Ptolemy and Lysimachus; Lysimachus and his son

Agathocles having united themselves with two daughters of Ptolemy.

6. The eighteen years of tranquillity enjoyed by Asia after the battle

of Ipsus, prove that Seleucus was one of the few followers of Alexander

who had any genius for the arts of peace. He either founded or

embellished a vast number of cities, the most important of which were

the capital, Antiochia in Syria, and the two Seleucias, one on the

Tigris, the other on the Orontes: the flourishing prosperity of several

of these places was the result of the restoration of eastern trade; new

channels for which appear to have been opened at this period on the main

streams of Asia, and more particularly on the Oxus.

7. The home department of his empire was organized into satrapies, of

which there were seventy-two. But Alexander's maxim, "to give the

satrapies to natives," was wholly forgotten by his followers; and the

Seleucidae were not long before they experienced the evil consequences of

swerving from that practice. Under such a prince as Seleucus scarce any

kingdom could of itself fall to pieces; but the king himself paved the

way for the dismemberment of his empire, by ceding Upper Asia, together

with his consort Stratonice, to his son Antiochus; not, however, without

the previous approbation of the army.

8. War with Lysimachus, kindled by ancient jealousy, and now fomented by

family feuds. The battle of Curopedion cost Lysimachus his throne and

his life; and Asia Minor became a part of the Syrian realm. But as

Seleucus was crossing over to Europe, to add Macedonia to his dominions,

he fell by the hand of an assassin, Ptolemy Ceraunus, and with him the

splendour of his kingdom was extinguished.

9. The reign of his son, Antiochus I. surnamed Soter, seemed not

unprosperous, inasmuch as the empire preserved its former extension; but

in any state founded upon conquest, the failure of new attempts at an

increase of territory is a sure token of approaching ruin; and this was

the case here.--In such a state, the more immediately all depends on

the person of the ruler, the more rapid and sensible are the effects of

degeneration in a family like that of the Seleucidae.

The late conquests of his father in Asia Minor entangled Antiochus

in new wars; although, by the marriage of his stepdaughter Phila

with Antigonus Gonatas, he ceded his claims on Macedonia,

277.--Fruitless attempt at subjecting Bithynia, 279; the king of

that country, Nicomedes, calls in the Gauls, who had invaded

Macedonia, and gives them a settlement in Galatia, 277, where they

keep their footing, even after the victory won over them by

Antiochus, 275, and by their participation in the wars, as

mercenaries, become of importance.--The newly risen state of

Pergamus likewise thrives, at the expense of the Syrian empire, in

spite of Antiochus's attack, 263; and the inroad into Egypt, for

the purpose of supporting the rebel Magas, is anticipated by

Ptolemy II. 264.

10. Antiochus II. surnamed [Greek: Theos]. During his reign the sway was

in the hands of women; and the diseased state of the interior of the

empire became palpable by the secession of various eastern provinces,

out of which arose the Parthian and Bactrian kingdoms. The boundless

luxury of the court hurried on the decline of the ruling family; having

once begun to sink, it could not without difficulty have retrieved its

virtue independently of the matrimonial connections now constantly

formed from within itself.

Ascendancy of his stepsister and wife Laodice, and of his sister

Apame, relict of Magas; the latter involves him in war with

Ptolemy II. to vindicate her claims upon Cyrene; it ends by

Antiochus's marriage with Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy, and his

repudiation of Laodice, 260-252. Having, after the death of

Ptolemy, 247, put away Berenice and taken back Laodice; the

latter, distrusting his motives, cuts him off by poison.--The

secession of Parthia happened in consequence of the expulsion of

the Macedonian governor by Arsaces, founder of the house of the

Arsacidae: that of Bactria, on the other hand, was brought about by

the Macedonian governor himself, Theodotus, who asserted his

independence. (Concerning these two kingdoms, see below, book iv.

period iii. Dist. Kingdoms iv. parag. 4, 5.) At first, the former

of these kingdoms comprised but a part of Parthia; the latter only

Bactria, and, perhaps, Sogdiana; both, however, were soon enlarged

at the expense of the Seleucidae.

11. Seleucus II. surnamed Callinicus. His reign, twenty years in

duration, is one unbroken series of wars; in which the kingdom, already

enfeebled, was subverted, partly by the struggle with Egypt, caused by

the hatred between Laodice and Berenice; partly by the jealousy of his

brother Antiochus Hierax; and partly by vain attempts at recovering the

upper provinces.

Assassination of Berenice, and most unfortunate war thereby

kindled with Ptolemy Evergetes of Egypt, 247-244. The assistance

which Seleucus obtains from his junior brother, Antiochus,

governor of Asia Minor, induces Ptolemy to a truce, 243; but

another war ensues between the two brothers, in which Antiochus,

at first conqueror, is himself soon afterwards conquered in his

turn, 243-240; and during this contest, Eumenes of Pergamus

greatly increases his territory at the expense of Syria, 242.--His

first campaign against Arsaces, who had formed an alliance with

the Bactrian king, ended in a defeat, 238, regarded by the

Parthians as the real epoch of the foundation of their kingdom. In

the second campaign, 236, he himself fell into the hands of the

Parthians, and remained a prisoner till the day of his death, 227.

12. His elder son Seleucus III. surnamed Ceraunus, on the point of

taking the field against Attalus king of Pergamus, was removed by

poison. But the dominion of the Seleucidae was reestablished in Asia

Minor by his mother's fraternal nephew, Achaeus; and the crown ensured to

the younger brother Antiochus, governor of Babylon.

13. The long reign of Antiochus III. surnamed the Great, is not only the

most eventful in Syrian history, but likewise marks an epoch, by the

relations now commencing between Syria and Rome.--To earn the title of

_great_ was a task of no extreme difficulty in such a line of princes.

14. Great power of Hermias the Carian, who soon became so formidable to

the young monarch, that he was obliged to rid himself of him by murder.

The great stand made by the brothers, Molo and Alexander, satraps of

Media and Persia, who probably had an understanding with Hermias,

threatened the king with the loss of all the upper provinces: it ended

in the defeat of Molo, Hermias being at last no longer able to hinder

the king from marching against him in person.

15. The intrigues of Hermias excited Achaeus to rebellion in Asia Minor:

but Antiochus held more important, first to execute the plan he had

previously traced, of ejecting the Ptolemies from their possessions in

Syria; great as the success which at first attended this expedition, it

was completely traversed by the battle of Raphia.--Combining with

Attalus of Pergamus, Antiochus then defeated Achaeus, who, being shut up

in the citadel of Sardes, was treacherously delivered into his hands.

16. Great campaign of Antiochus in the upper provinces, in consequence

of the seizure of Media by Arsaces III.--Hostilities ended in a compact,

by which Antiochus agreed formerly to cede Parthia and Hyrcania;

Arsaces, on his side, pledging himself to furnish assistance against

Bactria.--But the war with Bactria was also followed by a peace,

leaving the king, Euthydemus, in possession of his crown and

dominions.--The expedition now undertaken by Antiochus, in company with

Demetrius of Bactriana, against India, extended, probably far up the

country, and was attended with important consequences to Bactriana. (See

below, history of Bactria, book iv. per. iii. Dist. Kingdoms iv. parag.

5.)

The result of these great expeditions was the establishment of the

supremacy of the Seleucidae in Upper Asia; those countries excepted which

had been formally resigned.

On his return through Arachotus and Carmania, where he wintered,

he likewise undertook a naval expedition on the Persian gulf: here

Gerrha, in possession of its freedom, appears a flourishing place

of trade.

17. Resumption of the plan against Egypt, after the death of Ptolemy

Philopator; and alliance with Philip of Macedonia, then carrying on war

in Asia. Antiochus, it is true, attained his end in the expulsion of the

Ptolemies from their possessions in Syria, Coele-Syria, and Phoenicia;

but then, his success brought him in contact with Rome, an event of

decisive importance to himself and his successors.