the conquest of the major part of Asia Minor and the Thracian
Chersonesus; meanwhile Hannibal had taken refuge at the Syrian court,
and the probability daily increased of a great league being formed
against Rome, although that power, after conquering Carthage, 201, and
Macedonia, 197, had succeeded in winning over Greece even, by the magic
spell of _freedom_. But Antiochus ruined all: instead of following
Hannibal's advice, and attacking the Romans on their own ground, he
stood on the defensive, and suffered himself to be invaded by them in
Asia. His defeat at Magnesia near Mount Sipylus compelled him to accede
to such conditions as Rome chose to dictate, and the power of the Syrian
empire was for ever broken.
For the history of this war, see below in the Roman history. Book
v. per. ii. parag. 10, 11.
19. The conditions of the peace were: 1st. That Antiochus should
evacuate Asia Minor; (Asia cis Taurum.) 2nd. That he should pay down
15,000 talents; and to Eumenes of Pergamus four hundred. 3rd. That
Hannibal and some others should be delivered up, and the king's younger
son Antiochus, be given as an hostage.--The loss of the surrendered
countries was a consequence of this peace, less disadvantageous to the
Syrian kings, than the use made of it by the conquerors. By adding the
greatest part of the ceded territories to those of the kings of
Pergamus, the Romans raised up alongside of their enemy a rival, whom
they might at their own will use as a political engine against
him.--Rome took care likewise that the stipulated sum should be paid by
instalments in twelve years, to the end that Syria might be kept in a
permanent state of dependence.
20. Murder of the king, 187. The reign of his elder son, Seleucus IV.
surnamed Philopator, was a period of tranquillity; peace arising from
weakness.--Though once he unsheathed his sword in defence of Pharnaces
king of Pontus, against Eumenes, his fear of Rome soon compelled him to
restore it to the scabbard. He exchanged his son for his brother at
Rome; but fell a victim to the ambition of his minister Heliodorus.
21. Antiochus IV. surnamed Epiphanes. Educated at Rome, he sought to
combine the popular manners of a Roman with the ostentatious luxury of a
Syrian; and thereby became an object of universal hatred and contempt.
Our information respecting his history is too meagre to allow of our
deciding whether most of the evil reported of him, in the Jewish
accounts especially, may not be exaggerated. At any rate, among all his
faults, we may still discern in him the germs of good qualities.
22. War with Egypt, springing out of Ptolemy Philometor's claims upon
Coele-Syria and Palestine. Obscure as many parts are in the history of
this war yet it is evident that success attended the arms of Antiochus,
and that he would have become master of Egypt had not Rome interfered.
The pretext for war, on the Egyptian side, was, that those
provinces had by Antiochus III. been promised as a dowry to
Cleopatra, sister of Antiochus and the mother of Philometor:
Antiochus Epiphanes, on his side, laid claim to the regency of
Egypt, as uncle to the young king, who, however, was soon declared
of age.--Opening of the war, and victory won by Antiochus at
Pelusium, 171; in consequence of which Cyprus is betrayed into his
hands.--Pelusium is fortified with a view of insuring the
possession of Coele-Syria, and of facilitating an irruption into
Egypt.--Another victory, 170, and Egypt subdued as far as
Alexandria. Philometor driven by a sedition out of Alexandria,
where his brother Physcon is seated on the throne, falls into the
hands of Antiochus, who concludes with him a most advantageous
peace, and takes his part against Physcon. Hence siege is laid to
Alexandria, 169; attended with no success. Upon the retreat of
Antiochus, Philometor, concluding a separate peace with his
brother, according to which both are to rule in conjunction, is
admitted into Alexandria. Antiochus, bitterly enraged, now
declares war against both brothers, who crave assistance from
Rome: he once more penetrates into Egypt, 168; where the Roman
ambassador, Popillius, assumes so lofty a tone, that the Syrian
king is glad to purchase peace by the surrender of Cyprus and
Pelusium.
23. The religious intolerance of Epiphanes, exhibited in his wish to
introduce the Grecian worship everywhere among the subjects of his
empire, is the more remarkable, as such instances were less frequent in
those times. This intolerance seems to have taken its rise, not only in
the love of pomp, but in the cupidity of the king, who by that means was
enabled to appropriate to himself the treasures of the temples, no
longer inviolate, since the defeat of his father by Rome. The consequent
sedition of the Jews, under the Maccabees, laid the foundation of the
future independence of that people, and contributed not a little to
weaken the Syrian kingdom.
See below; History of the Jews, book iv. per. iv; Small states
Jews, parag. 6. The deep decay of the finances of the Seleucidae,
palpable from the latter days of Antiochus the Great, may be
accounted for well enough, by the falling off of the revenue,
accompanied with increased luxury in the kings, (an instance of
which is furnished in the festivals celebrated by Antiochus
Epiphanes at Daphne, 166,) and in the vast presents constantly
sent to Rome, in addition to the tribute, for the purpose of
keeping up a party there.
24. His expedition also into Upper Asia, Persis especially, where great
disorders were likewise excited by the introduction of the Grecian
religion, had for its object not only the recovery of Armenia, but the
rifling of the temples. He died, however, on his way to Babylon.
25. The real heir to the throne, Demetrius, being detained at Rome as an
hostage, Epiphanes was first succeeded by his son Antiochus V. surnamed
Eupator, a child nine years old. During his short reign, the quarrels of
his guardians, the despotism of the Romans, the protracted war with the
Jews, and the commencing conquests of the Parthians, reduced the kingdom
of the Seleucidae to a powerless state.
Contest between Lysias, regent in the absence of Epiphanes, and
Philip, appointed by the king, previously to his death, as
guardian of the young prince, terminated by the defeat of Philip,
162.--Eupator's right acknowledged at Rome, in order that the
guardianship might fall into the hands of the senate, who
administer the government by means of a commission sent over into
Syria, and completely deprive the king of all power of resistance.
Octavius, head of the commission, put to death, probably at the
instigation of Lysias.--While the Parthian king, Mithridates I. is
prosecuting his conquests at the expense of the Syrian kingdom in
Upper Asia, Demetrius secretly escapes out of Rome, takes
possession of the throne, and causes Eupator and Lysias to be put
to death, 161.
26. Demetrius I. surnamed Soter. He succeeded in getting himself
acknowledged at Rome, on which all now depended. The attempts to extend
his power, by supporting Orofernes, the pretender to the crown of
Cappadocia, against the king Ariarathes, had their origin partly in
family relations, but still more, as was the case with almost all
political transactions of those times, in bribery. By this act he only
drew upon himself the enmity of the kings of Egypt and Pergamus; as,
moreover, he was hated by his subjects on account of his intemperance,
the chances of success were greatly in favour of the shameful usurpation
of Alexander Balas, brought about by Heraclidas the expelled governor of
Babylon, and backed by the yet more shameful conduct of the Roman
senate, who acknowledged his title to the throne. The Syrian kingdom was
now fallen so low, that both king and usurper were obliged to court the
favour of the Jews under Jonathan, hitherto regarded as rebels. In the
second battle Demetrius lost his life.
27. The usurper Alexander Balas endeavoured to confirm his power by a
marriage with Cleopatra, daughter of Ptolemy Philometor: but he soon
evinced himself more unworthy even than his predecessor of wielding the
sceptre. While he abandoned the government to his favourite, the
detested Ammonius, the eldest remaining son of Demetrius succeeds not
only in raising a party against the usurper, but even in prevailing on
Philometor to side with himself, and give him in marriage Cleopatra,
whom he takes away from Balas. The consequence of this alliance with
Egypt was the defeat and downfal of Balas, although it cost Philometor
his life.
The account, that Philometor wished to conquer Syria for himself,
must probably be understood as meaning that he had formed the
design of recovering the ancient Egyptian possessions, Coele-Syria
and Phoenicia. Otherwise, why should he have given his daughter to
a second pretender to the throne?
28. Demetrius II. surnamed Nicator, 145-141, and for the second time,
130-126. The disbanding of his father's mercenaries having roused the
indignation of the army, the cruelty of his favourite Lasthenes kindled
a sedition in the capital, which could not be quenched without the
assistance of the Jews, under their high priest and military chieftain,
Jonathan.--While affairs were in this posture, Diodotus, subsequently
called Tryphon, a dependent of Balas, excited an insurrection, by
bringing forward Antiochus, the latter's son, and even, with the help of
Jonathan, seating him on the throne of Antioch: soon after, Tryphon,
having by treachery got Jonathan into his power, removed Antiochus by
murder, and assumed the diadem himself.--Notwithstanding Demetrius
kept his footing only in a part of Syria, he was enabled to obey
the call of the Grecian colonists in Upper Asia, and support them
against the Parthians, who had overrun the country as far as the
Euphrates.--Although victorious in the commencement of the contest, he
was soon after taken by the Parthians, and remained ten years a
prisoner, though treated meanwhile as a king.
29. In order to maintain herself against Tryphon, Cleopatra marries the
younger, and better brother, Antiochus of Sida, (Sidetes); he being at
first in alliance with the Jews,--who, however, were soon after
subdued--defeats and overthrows Tryphon. Being now lord and master of
Syria, he undertakes a campaign against the Parthians; at the
commencement, befriended by the subjects of the Parthians, he is
successful, but soon afterwards is attacked in winter quarters by those
very friends, and cut to pieces, together with all his army.
If the accounts of the wanton licentiousness of his army are not
exaggerations, they furnish the clearest proof of the military
despotism of those times. By continued pillage and extortion, the
wealth of the country had been collected in the hands of the
soldiers; and the condition of Syria must have been pretty nearly
the same as that of Egypt under the Mamluk sultans.
30. Meanwhile Demetrius II. having escaped from prison, again seated
himself on the throne. But being now still more overbearing than before,
and meddling in the Egyptian affairs, Ptolemy Physcon set up against him
a rival in the person of Alexander Zebinas a pretended son of Alexander
Balas; by him he was defeated and slain.
The Parthian king Phraates II. had, at first, liberated Demetrius,
to whom his sister Rhodogune was united by marriage, in order
that, by appearing in Syria, he might oblige Antiochus to retreat.
Antiochus having fallen, Phraates would fain have recaptured
Demetrius, but he escaped.
31. The ensuing history of the Seleucidae is a picture of civil wars,
family feuds, and deeds of horror, such as are scarcely to be
paralleled. The utmost verge of the empire was now the Euphrates; all
Upper Asia acknowledging the dominion of the Parthians. The Jews,
moreover, having completely vindicated their independence, the kingdom
was consequently confined to Syria and Phoenicia. So thoroughly decayed
was the state, that even the Romans--whether because there was no longer
anything to plunder, or because they conceived it more prudent to suffer
the Seleucidae to wear themselves out in mutual quarrels--do not seem to
have taken any account of it, until, at the conclusion of the last war
with Mithridates, they thought proper formally to annex it to their
empire as a province.
War between Alexander Zebinas and the ambitious relict of
Demetrius, Cleopatra, who with her own hand murders her eldest son
Seleucus, B.C. 125, for pretending to the crown, which she now
gives to her younger son, Antiochus Gryphus; the new king,
however, soon saw himself compelled to secure his own life by the
murder of his mother, 122; Alexander Zebinas having been the year
before, 123, defeated and put to death. After a peaceful rule of
eight years, 122-114, Antiochus Gryphus is involved in war with
his half-brother Antiochus Cyzicenus, son of Cleopatra by
Antiochus Sidetes: it ends, 111, in a partition of territory. But
the war between the brothers soon burst out anew, and just as this
hapless kingdom seemed about to crumble into pieces, Gryphus was
murdered, 97.--Seleucus, the eldest of his five sons, having
beaten and slain Cyzicenus, 96; the eldest son of the latter,
Antiochus Eusebes, prosecuted the war against the sons of Gryphus;
Eusebes being at last defeated, 90, the surviving sons of Gryphus
fell to war among themselves, and the struggle continued until the
Syrians, weary of bloodshed, did what they ought to have done long
before, viz. made over the sovereign power to Tigranes the king of
Armenia, 85. Yet Eusebes's widow, Selene, retained Ptolemais till
70; and her elder son Antiochus Asiaticus, at the time that
Tigranes was beaten by Lucullus, in the Mithridatic war, took
possession of some provinces in Syria, 68; these were wrested from
him after the total defeat of Mithridates by Pompey, when Tigranes
was obliged to give up his claim, and Syria became a province of
the Roman empire, 64. Antiochus Asiaticus died 58; his brother
Seleucus Cybiosactes, having married Berenice, was raised to the
Egyptian throne, but murdered at her command, 57; and thus the
family of the Seleucidae was completely swept away.
II. _History of the Egyptian kingdom under the Ptolemies, 323-30._
The sources of this history are for the most part the same as in
the foregoing section; see above, p. 232; but unfortunately still
more scanty; for in the first place, less information can here be
derived from the Jewish writers; secondly, as on the coins struck
under the Ptolemies no continuous series of time is marked, but
only the year of the king's reign, they are by no means such
safeguards to the chronology as those of the Seleucidae. With
respect to some few events, important illustrations are supplied by
inscriptions.
By modern writers, the history of the Ptolemies has been composed
under a form almost entirely chronological, and by no means treated
of in the spirit which it deserves.
VAILLANT, _Historia Ptolemaeorum_, fol. Amstelodam. 1701.
Illustration by the aid of coins.
CHAMPOLION FIGEAC, _Annales des Lagides, ou Chronologie des Rois
d'Egypte, successeurs d'Alexandre le Grand_. Paris, 1819, 2 vols.
This treatise, which was honoured with a prize by the Academie des
Inscriptions, has by no means exhausted the whole of the subject.
See
J. SAINT-MARTIN, _Examen Critique de l'ouvrage de_ M. CH. F.
_intitule Annales des Lagides_. Paris, 1820.
LETRONNE, _Recherches pour servir a l'histoire de l'Egypte pendant
la domination des Grecs et des Romains, tirees des inscriptions
Grecques et Latines, relatives a la chronologie, a l'etat des arts
aux usages civils et religieux de ce pays_. Paris, 1828. It cannot
be denied that the author has thrown a much clearer light on the
subjects mentioned in his title.
1. Egypt, under the Ptolemies, fulfilled, and perhaps more than
fulfilled, the designs projected by Alexander; it became not only a
mighty kingdom, but likewise the centre of trade, and of science. The
history of Egypt, however, confines itself, almost solely, to that of
the new capital, Alexandria; the foundation of that city produced,
imperceptibly, a change in the national character, which never could
have been wrought by main force. In the enjoyment of civil welfare and
religious freedom, the nation sunk into a state of political drowsiness,
such as could scarce have been expected in a people who so often rose up
against the Persians.
Alexandria, originally, was no doubt a military colony; it was not
long, however, before it became a general place of resort for all
nations, such as was scarcely to be met with in any other town of
that day. The inhabitants were divided into three classes;
_Alexandrines_, (that is to say, foreigners of all nations, who had
settled in the place; next to the Greeks, the Jews were, it
appears, the most numerous,) _Egyptians_, and _Mercenaries_ in the
king's service. The Greeks and Macedonians divided into wards
([Greek: phylas]), constituted the citizens; they were under
municipal government; the others, such as the Jews, formed bodies
corporate according to their respective nations. The more
important, in so many respects, that Alexandria is for history, the
more it is to be regretted that the accounts respecting it, which
have reached us, are so far from satisfactory!--Concerning the
topography of ancient Alexandria:
BONAMY, _Description de la ville d'Alexandrie_ in the _Mem. de
l'Academie des Inscript._ vol. ix. Compare:
# J. L. F. MANSO, _Letters upon ancient Alexandria_, in his
_Vermischte Schriften_, vol. i.
2. Ptolemy I. surnamed Soter, the son of Lagus, received Egypt for his
share, at the first division after the death of Alexander. Aware of the
value of his lot, he was the only one of Alexander's successors that had
the moderation not to aim at grasping all. No doubt he was, by the
ambition of the other princes, entangled in their quarrels, but his
conduct was so cautious, that Egypt itself was never endangered. Twice
attacked in that country, first by Perdiccas, afterwards by Antigonus
and Demetrius, he availed himself successfully of his advantageous
position, and moreover, in this period, added to his dominion several
countries without Africa, such as Phoenicia, Judaea, Coele-Syria, and
Cyprus.
The possession of Phoenicia and Coele-Syria, by reason of their
forests, was of indispensable necessity to Egypt as a naval power.
They frequently changed masters. The first occupation of those
provinces by the Egyptian government, occurred in 320, soon after
the rout of Perdiccas by Ptolemy's general Nicanor, who took the
Syrian satrap Laomedon prisoner, established his footing in the
whole of Syria, and placed garrisons in the Phoenician cities. In
314 it was again lost to Antigonus, after his return out of Upper
Asia, and the siege of Tyre. Ptolemy having defeated Demetrius at
Gaza, 312, repossessed himself of those countries, but soon after
evacuated them on the appearance of Antigonus, to whom they were
ceded by the peace of 311. At the conclusion of the last grand
league against Antigonus, 303, Ptolemy once more occupied them: but
alarmed at a false report, that Antigonus had gained a victory, he
retreated into Egypt, leaving nevertheless troops in the cities.
After the battle of Ipsus, 301, those countries were made over to
him, and continued in the hands of the Ptolemies until they were
lost at the second invasion of Antiochus the Great, 203.
Cyprus, (see p. 154) like most other islands, acknowledged
submission to those who possessed the sovereignty of the sea, and
therefore could not escape the dominion of the Ptolemies. It was
taken possession of by Ptolemy as early as 313. Still the separate
cities of the islands preserved their kings, among whom Nicocles of
Paphos, having entered into a secret league with Antigonus, was put
to death, 310. After the great seafight, 307, Cyprus fell into the
hands of Antigonus and Demetrius. Subsequently to the battle of
Ipsus, 301, it remained indeed at first in the power of Demetrius;
but that prince being gone over to Macedonia, Ptolemy, 294, seized
an opportunity of recovering it, and the island from that time
remained under the dominion of Egypt. Availing themselves of their
naval strength, the Egyptian kings frequently exerted sovereign
power over the coasts of Asia Minor, especially Cilicia, Caria, and
Pamphylia, which appear to have absolutely formed a part of their
territory under the second Ptolemy. It is, however, hardly possible
to define with accuracy what were their real possessions in those
quarters.
3. Ptolemy likewise extends his territory within Africa, by the capture
of Cyrene; in consequence of which Libya, or the neighbouring countries
betwixt Cyrene and Egypt, fell under his dominion. It is probable, also,
that even in his reign the frontier of the Egyptian empire was advanced
into Aethiopia; but for this assertion we have no positive authority.
The fall of Cyrene was brought about by domestic broils: at the
time the place was besieged by Thimbron, a portion of the exiled
nobles fled to Ptolemy; the Egyptian prince commanded that they
should be reinstated by his general Ophellas, who took possession
of the town itself, 321. An insurrection in 312 was quelled by
Agis, Ptolemy's general: nevertheless it would appear that
Ophellas had almost established his independence, when, by the
treachery of Agathocles, with whom he had entered into a league
against Carthage, he perished, about 308. Cyrene was now seized by
Ptolemy, and given to his son Magas, who ruled over it fifty
years.
4. With respect to the internal government of Egypt, our information is
far from complete. The division into districts or nomes was continued;
subject perhaps, in some cases, to alterations. The power of the king
appears to have been unlimited; the extreme provinces were administered
by governors, appointed by the sovereign; similar officers were probably
placed at the head of the various districts of Egypt itself; but hardly
any document relative to the home department of that country has reached
our time. High public situations, at least in the capital, appear
exclusively reserved to Macedonians or Greeks; no Egyptian is ever
mentioned as holding office.
There were four magistrates at Alexandria: the Exegetes, whose
office was to provide for the wants of the city; the Chief Judge;
the Hypomnematographus--(Registrar of the archives?)--and the
[Greek: Strategos nykterinos], no doubt, the supervisor of the
police, whose duty it was to watch over the peace of the city at
night. We have the express testimony of Strabo, that these
offices, which continued under the Romans, had already existed
under the kings; whether their establishment can be dated as far
back as the time of Ptolemy I. is a question that does not admit
of a solution.--The number of the districts or nomes appears to
have been augmented; probably with a political view, in order that
no governor or monarch should be invested with too great a share
of power.
5. Be that as it may, it is an undoubted fact, that the ancient national
constitution and administration were not entirely obliterated. The caste
of priests, together with the national religion, continued to exist; and
though the influence of the former was considerably diminished, it did
not entirely cease. A certain sort of worship was, by appointed priests,
paid to the kings, both in their lifetime and after their death.
Memphis, though not the usual residence of the court, remained the
capital of the kingdom; there the ceremony of coronation was performed;
and its temple of Phtha was still the head sanctuary. What influence had
not the religion of the Egyptians upon that of the Greeks! It were
difficult to say which nation borrowed most from the other.
6. The regeneration of Egypt from the state of general ruin into which
she had been plunged, and the permanent tranquillity she enjoyed during
nearly thirty years, the duration of the reign of Ptolemy I.--at a time
when the rest of the world was harassed by continual wars,--must have
heightened her prosperity under so mild and beneficent a ruler. But
Ptolemy was certainly the only prince who could have taken advantage of
these favourable circumstances. Though a soldier by profession he was
highly accomplished, was himself a writer, and had a genius for all the
arts of peace, which he fostered with the open-handed liberality of a
king: while amidst all the brilliant splendour of his court, he led
himself the life of a private individual.
Increase of Alexandria by the importation of vast numbers of
colonists; especially Jews.--Erection of several superb buildings,
more particularly the Serapeum.--Measures taken for the extension
of trade and navigation.--The twofold harbour on the sea, and on
the lake Mareotis.--The Pharus built.
7. But what more than any thing else distinguished Ptolemy from his
contemporaries was his regard for the interests of science. The idea of
founding the Museum sprung out of the necessities of the age, and was
suited to the monarchical form of government now prevalent. Where in
those days of destruction and revolution could the sciences have found a
shelter, if not under the protection of a prince? But under Ptolemy they
found more than a shelter, they found a rallying point. Here accordingly
the exact sciences were perfected: and although the critic's art which
now grew up could not form a Homer or a Sophocles, should _we_, had it
not been for the Alexandrines, be at present able to read either Homer
or Sophocles?
Foundation of the Museum, (Society of the learned,) and of the
first library in Bruchium, (afterwards removed to the Serapeum;)
probably under the direction of Demetrius Phalereus. A proper
estimation of the services rendered by the Museum is yet wanting:
what academy in modern Europe, however, has done so much?
HEYNE, _De genio Saeculi Ptolemaeorum_. _In Opuscul._ t. i.
MATTER, _Essai historique sur l'ecole d'Alexandrie_, 1820.
8. Ptolemy II. surnamed Philadelphus, son of Berenice, the second wife
of his father, had ascended the throne in 286 as joint king. His reign,
which lasted thirty-eight years, was more peaceful even than that of his
predecessor, whose spirit seemed to inspire him in every thing, save
that he was not a warrior: but, by that very reason, the arts of peace,
trade, and science were promoted with the greater energy. In his reign
Egypt was the first power by sea, and one of the first by land, in the
world; and even though the account given by Theocritus of its
thirty-three thousand cities may be regarded as the exaggeration of a
poet, it is very certain that Egypt was in those days the most
flourishing country in existence.
The commerce of Alexandria was divided into three main branches:
1. The land-trade over Asia and Africa. 2. The sea-trade on the
Mediterranean. 3. The sea-trade on the Arabian gulf, and Indian
ocean.--With regard to the land-trade of Asia, especially that of
India carried on by caravans, Alexandria was obliged to share it
with various cities and countries: since one of its chief routes
traversed the Oxus, and Caspian, to the Black sea; while the
caravans, travelling through Syria and Mesopotamia, spread for the
most part among the seaports of Phoenicia and Asia Minor.--The
trade over Africa extended far west, and still farther south.
Westward it was secured by the close connection between Cyrene and
Alexandria; and no doubt followed the same roads as in earlier
times: of far greater importance was that carried on with the
southern countries, or Aethiopia, into the interior of which they
now penetrated, principally for the purpose of procuring
elephants. The navigation on the Arabian and Indian seas had
likewise for its immediate object the Aethiopian trade, rather than
the Indian.--The measures taken by Ptolemy with this view,
consisted partly in the building of harbours (Berenice, Myos
Hormos) on the Arabian gulf; partly in establishing a caravan from
Berenice to Coptos on the Nile, down which latter the goods were
further transmitted to their destination; for the canal connecting
the Red sea with the Nile, although, perhaps, completed at this
time, was nevertheless but little used. The grand deposit for
these wares was the lesser harbour of Alexandria, united by a
canal with the lake Mareotis, which in its turn communicated by
another canal with the Nile; so that the account we receive of the
lesser harbour being more thronged and full of bustle than the
larger one, need not excite our surprise. With regard to the trade
on the Mediterranean, it was shared between Alexandria, Rhodes,
Corinth, and Carthage. The chief manufactories appear to have been
those of cotton stuffs, established in or near the temples.
The best inquiry into the trade of Alexandria will be found in J.
C. D. DE SCHMIDT, _Opuscula, res maxime Aegyptiorum illustrantia_,
1765, 8vo.
9. It would be important to know what, in a state like Egypt, was the
system of imposts, which under Philadelphus produced 14,800 silver
talents, (four millions sterling,) without taking into account the toll
paid in grain. In the extreme provinces, such as Palestine, the taxes
were annually farmed to the highest bidder, a mode of levy attended with
great oppression to the people. The case appears to have been very
different with regard to Egypt itself; the customs, however, constituted
the main branch of the revenue.
10. The wars waged by Ptolemy II. were limited to those against
Antiochus II. of Syria, and Magas of Cyrene, half-brother to the
Egyptian king; the former sprung out of the latter. Luckily for Egypt,
Ptolemy II. was of a weak constitution, and by his state of health was
incapacitated from commanding his armies in person.--Under his reign the
first foundation was laid, by means of reciprocal embassies, of that
connection with Rome which afterwards decided the fate of Egypt.
Magas had, after the defeat of Ophellas, received Cyrene, 308. He
had married Apame, daughter of Antiochus I., and in 266 had raised
the standard of rebellion with the intention of invading Egypt
itself, when an insurrection in Marmarica compelled him to
retreat; he contrived, notwithstanding, to prevail upon his
father-in-law to undertake an expedition against Egypt, which,
however, was frustrated by Philadelphus, 264. To terminate this
contest, Magas was about to unite his daughter Berenice with the
eldest son of Philadelphus; Apame, wishing to thwart the
negotiation, fled over to her brother, Antiochus II. whom, after
her husband's death, 258, she excited to a war against Egypt,
which closed in 252.--The embassy to Rome originated in the
victory won by the Romans over Pyrrhus, 273; it was answered by
another from the Romans, 272.
11. The son inherited from his father all but the simplicity of domestic
life: under the reign of Philadelphus, the court was first thrown open
to that effeminate luxury, which soon wrought the destruction of the
Ptolemies as it had previously done that of the Seleucidae; at the same
time was introduced the pernicious practice of intermarriages in the
same family, by which the royal blood was more foully contaminated here
even than in Syria. Philadelphus set the first example, by repudiating
Arsinoe the daughter of Lysimachus, and then marrying his own sister,
likewise named Arsinoe; this princess preserved her influence over the
king as long as she lived, although she did not bring him an heir, but
adopted the children of her predecessor.
12. Ptolemy III. surnamed Evergetes. Under him, Egypt, from being merely
mercantile, assumed the character of a conquering state; notwithstanding
his warlike spirit, he was not uninspired with that genius for the arts
of peace peculiar to his family. His conquests were directed partly
against Asia in the war with Seleucus II. and extended as far as the
borders of Bactria; and partly, it is probable, against the interior of
Ethiopia, and the western coast of Arabia. Countries so wealthy, and
with which commerce had made men so well acquainted, could hardly escape
the arms of such a formidable power as Egypt; yet she seems to have made
scarcely any other use of this extension of territory, than to insure
the safety of her commercial routes.
The main source of the history of Ptolemy Evergetes, is the
inscription on the monument erected by that prince at Adule in
Ethiopia: it contains a chronological list of his conquests, a
copy of which has been preserved to us by Cosmas Indicopleustes;
modern researches, however, have shown the probability of its
having consisted of two inscriptions, one referring to Evergetes,
the other to a later king of Abyssinia.--According to this
monument, Ptolemy inherited from his father, besides Egypt itself,
Libya, that is to say, western Africa as far as Cyrene,
Coele-Syria, Phoenicia, Lycia, Caria, Cyprus, and the
Cyclades.--War with Seleucus Callinicus caused by the murder of
Berenice (see above, p. 237.); lasted until the ten years' truce,
246-240. During this war, he conquered the whole of Syria as far
as the Euphrates, and most of the maritime countries in Asia
Minor, from Cilicia to the Hellespont: an easy prey to a naval
power. Whether the conquest of the countries beyond the Euphrates,
Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Persis, Susiana, and Media as far as
Bactria, was effected in these four years, or not till between 240
and 230, is a question which cannot be determined with certainty.
If we may judge by the booty brought back, this campaign was
rather a foray than a regular expedition for conquest, though
Ptolemy, indeed, appointed governors in Cilicia and Babylonia; yet
the peculiar situation of affairs in Asia at the time, Seleucus
being at war with his brother Antiochus Hierax, and the Parthian
and Bactrian kingdoms being also in a state of infant feebleness,
afforded unusual opportunities for an expedition of this sort.
The southern conquests, so far as they may be referred to
Evergetes, were effected during the last period of his reign, in a
separate war. They comprised: 1st. The greatest part of modern
Abyssinia,--for as the catalogue of nations commences with that of
Abyssinia, it necessarily follows that Nubia had already been
subjected to Egypt.--The mountain range along the Arabian gulf,
the plain of Sennaar as far as modern Darfur, the lofty chain of
mountains to the south, beyond the fountains of the Nile. All
these conquests were made by the king in person; and from those
distant lands to Egypt, commercial roads were opened. 2nd. The
western coast of Arabia, from Leuke Kome to the southern point of
Arabia Felix, was conquered by his generals and admirals: here,
likewise, the security of the commercial roads was established.
_Monumentum Adulitanum_, published in FABRICIUS, _B. Graec._ t. ii.
MONTFAUCON, _Coll. Patr._ t. i. and in CHISHULL, _Antiquit.
Asiaticae_.
The assertion that the monument bears two different inscriptions
is made by SALT, in the narrative of his travels contained in the
_Travels of Lord Valentia_.
13. Egypt was singularly blessed in having three great kings, whose
reigns filled one whole century. A change now ensued; but that change
was brought about by the natural course of events; in fact, it could
scarcely be expected that the court should remain untainted by such
luxury as must have prevailed in a city, which was the main seat of
trade, and the deposit of the treasures of the richest countries.
14. Ptolemy IV. surnamed Philopator. A debauchee and a tyrant, who,
during the greater portion of his reign, remained under the tutelage of
the crafty Sosibius, and, after the decease of that individual, fell
into the yet more infamous hands of Agathocles and his sister
Agathoclea. Philopator being contemporary with Antiochus the Great, the
dangers that threatened Egypt under such a reign seemed to be doubled;
they were, however, averted by the ill-deserved victory of Raphia (see
above, p. 238).
15. Agathocles and his sister would fain have taken into their own hands
the guardianship of his son Ptolemy V. surnamed Epiphanes, a child only
five years old; but the people having risen up and made a terrible
example of them, the office of guardian was confided to the younger
Sosibius and to Tlepolemus. The reckless prodigality of the former soon
gave rise to a feud between him and his colleague, who was at least
cunning enough to keep up appearances. Meanwhile the critical posture in
which the kingdom was placed, by the attack of the enleagued kings of
Syria and Macedonia, compelled the nation to defer the regency to Rome
and the senate, who had hitherto carefully cherished an amicable
connection with Egypt.
The regency confided to M. Lepidus, 201, who hands over the
administration to Aristomenes of Acarnania. The sequel will show
how decidedly important this step was for the ulterior destinies
of Egypt. By the war of the Romans against Philip, and their
differences with Antiochus, Egypt was, no doubt, for the present
extricated from her embarrassment; but nevertheless in 198 she
lost her Syrian possessions, notwithstanding Antiochus III. had
promised to give them as a dowry to Cleopatra, the affianced
bride, and subsequently the consort of the young king of Egypt.
To this time, or about 197, belongs the celebrated inscription on
the Rosetta stone, erected by the caste of priests as a tribute of
gratitude for past benefits, after the consecration of the king at
Memphis upon his coming of age: a monument important alike for
palaeography, and for the knowledge of Egyptian administration.
AMEILHON, _Eclaircissemens sur l'inscription Grecque du monument
trouve a Rosette_. Paris, 1803.
HEYNE, _Commentatio de inscriptione Graeca ex Aegypto Londinum
apportata_, in the _Commentat. Societ. Gotting._ vol. xv.
16. The hopes conceived of Epiphanes, were grievously disappointed as he
grew up to manhood. His guardian Aristomenes fell a victim to his
tyranny; nay, his cruelty drove even the patient Egyptians to rebel,
although the insurrections were stilled by his counsellor and general
Polycrates. His reign happened during the period in which Rome crushed
the power of Macedonia and Syria; and notwithstanding the close alliance
between Epiphanes and Antiochus III. the Romans succeeded in holding the
Egyptian king in dependence; he was, however, in the twenty-eighth year
of his age, brought to an early grave by intemperance and debauchery.
17. Of his two sons, the elder, a child five years old, was his
immediate successor; this prince, by the title of Ptolemy VI. surnamed
Philometor, ascended the throne under the guardianship of his mother
Cleopatra, who fulfilled the duties of her office to the satisfaction of
all, until 173. But, after her death, the regency having fallen into the
hands of Eulaeus an eunuch, and Lenaeus, these individuals, asserting
their claims to Coele-Syria and Phoenicia, engaged with Antiochus
Epiphanes in a war exceedingly detrimental to Egypt, until Rome
commanded peace to be made.
Antiochus, after the victory of Pelusium, B. C. 171, and the
treacherous surrender of Cyprus, having possessed himself of Egypt
as far as Alexandria, a faction arose in the city; Philometor was
expelled, and his younger brother Physcon seated on the throne,
170.--The exile Philometor fell into the power of Antiochus, who
compelled the fugitive to sign a separate peace, highly injurious
to the interests of Egypt. The articles were not, however,
ratified; Philometor secretly entering into an agreement with his
brother that they should both rule in common, 169. Antiochus
having in consequence again made an inroad into Egypt, the two
kings addressed themselves for assistance to the Achaeans and to
the Romans: the latter forthwith despatched an embassy to
Antiochus, commanding him to evacuate the territory of their
allies, which happened accordingly, 168.
18. In the contest, which soon afterwards ensued between the two
brothers, the younger was driven out and sought a refuge at Rome; when a
partition of the kingdom between the princes was determined upon: the
senate, however, after due consideration, refused to confirm the
decision, so that the disputes between the two kings were rekindled and
protracted, until the younger fell into the power of the elder.
In the first division, 164, Philometor received Egypt and Cyprus;
and the infamous Physcon had for his share Cyrene and Libya. But,
during his stay at Rome, Physcon, contrary to all justice,
obtained the promise of Cyprus; Philometor refusing to give up
that portion of his share, and Cyrene having risen up against its
king, Physcon ran the risk of losing the whole of his dominions.
In the war which, supported by Rome, he waged against his brother,
Physcon fell, 159, into the hands of Philometor, who not only
forgave him, but, leaving him in possession of Cyrene and Libya,
added some cities in the place of Cyprus, and promised him his
daughter in marriage.
19. During the last period of his reign, Philometor was almost
exclusively busied with Syrian affairs. He supported Alexander Balas
against Demetrius, and even gave him his daughter Cleopatra.
Nevertheless, he afterwards passed over to the side of Demetrius, seated
him on the throne, gave him in marriage this same Cleopatra, who had
been taken away from Balas. But in the battle in which Balas was
overthrown, the Egyptian king also received his death wound. He may be
regarded as one of the good princes of the Ptolemaic dynasty, especially
if compared with his brother.
20. His younger brother Ptolemy VIII. surnamed Physcon, and likewise
Evergetes II. a monster both in a moral and a physical sense, who had
hitherto been king of Cyrene, now possessed himself of the throne of
Egypt by marrying his predecessor's widow and sister, Cleopatra, whom,
however, after having murdered her son, he repudiated for her daughter
of the same name. This prince accordingly, once more united the divided
kingdom; but at the same time that he was purchasing the sanction of
Rome by vile adulation, he maintained himself at Alexandria by means of
military law, which soon converted the city into a desert, and obliged
him to attract foreign colonists by large promises. Another bloody
massacre, however, produced an insurrection in the town, which compelled
the king to flee to Cyprus, the Alexandrines, meanwhile, raising to the
throne his repudiated wife Cleopatra. Physcon, nevertheless, with the
assistance of his mercenaries, recovered the sceptre, and wielded it to
the day of his death.
That a prince of such a character should nevertheless be a friend
to science, and himself an author, must ever be regarded as a
singular phenomenon; yet his exaction of manuscripts, and his
treatment of the learned, whole crowds of whom he expelled, betray
the despot.
21. His widow, the younger Cleopatra, to gratify the Alexandrines, was
obliged to place on the throne the elder of her two sons, Ptolemy IX.
surnamed Lathyrus, who was living in a sort of banishment at Cyprus: to
the younger, Ptolemy Alexander I. who was her favourite, she accordingly
gave the island of Cyprus. But Lathyrus not choosing to obey her in
everything, she compelled him to exchange Egypt for Cyprus, and gave the
former to her younger son. But neither was the new king able to brook
the tyranny of his mother: as she threatened even his life, he saw no
other means of escape than to anticipate her design; but failing in his
project, he was obliged to take to flight, and, after a vain attempt to
recover the throne, perished. The Alexandrines then reinstated in the
government his elder brother Lathyrus, who ruled till the year 81,
possessing both Egypt and Cyprus.
Revolt and three years' siege of Thebes in Upper Egypt, still one
of the most wealthy cities even in those days, but after its
capture almost levelled to the earth; about 86.--Complete
separation of Cyrenaica from Egypt: this province had been
bequeathed by Physcon as a separate branch-state to his
illegitimate son, Apion, 117; that prince, after a tranquil reign,
bequeathed it, in his turn, to the Romans, 96, who at first
allowed it to retain its independence.
22. Lathyrus left one daughter born in wedlock, Berenice, and two
illegitimate sons, Ptolemy of Cyprus and Ptolemy Auletes. Besides the
above, there was a lawful son of Alexander I. of the same name as his
father, and at that time residing at Rome with the dictator Sylla. The
following history is obscured by clouds, which, amid the contradiction
of accounts, cannot be entirely dispelled. Generally speaking, Egypt was
now a tool in the hands of powerful individuals at Rome, who regarded it
but as a financial speculation whether they actually supported a
pretender to the Egyptian crown, or fed him with vain hopes. All now saw
that Egypt presented a ripe harvest; but they could not yet agree by
whom that harvest should be reaped.
The first successor of Lathyrus in Egypt was his legitimate
daughter Cleopatra Berenice, 81: at the end of six months,
however, Sylla, then dictator at Rome, sent his client Alexander
II. to Egypt, 80; that prince married Berenice, and with her
ascended the throne. Nineteen days after Alexander murdered his
consort, and, according to Appian, was himself about the same time
cut off by the Alexandrines, on account of his tyranny. We
afterwards hear, notwithstanding, of a king Alexander, who reigned
until 73, or, according to others, until 66; when, being driven
out of Egypt, he fled to Tyre, and called upon the Romans for that
aid, which probably through Caesar's intercession, would have been
granted, had not the supplicant soon after died at the place of
his refuge. He is said to have bequeathed by will his kingdom to
Rome; and although the senate did not accept the legacy, it does
not appear to have formally rejected the offer; in consequence of
which, frequent attempts were made at Rome for effecting the
occupation.--Either, therefore, Appian's account must be false,
and this person was the same Alexander II. or he was some other
person bearing that name, and belonging to the royal house.--Be
this as it may, after the death of Lathyrus the kingdom was
dismembered: and one of his illegitimate sons, Ptolemy, had
received Cyprus, but that island was taken from him, 57, and
converted into a Roman province: the other, Ptolemy Auletes, seems
to have kept his footing either in a part of Egypt, or in Cyrene,
and was probably the cause of Alexander's expulsion, at whose
decease he ascended the throne; although the Syrian queen Selene,
sister to Lathyrus, asserted her son's claims at Rome, as
legitimate heir to the throne of Egypt. With Caesar's assistance,
Auletes, however, succeeded in obtaining the formal acknowledgment
of his right at Rome, 59. But the measures taken by the Romans
with regard to Cyprus, gave rise to a sedition at Alexandria, 57,
in consequence of which Auletes, being compelled to flee, passed
over into Italy: or, perhaps, he was ordered to take this step by
the intrigues of some Roman grandees, anxious of an opportunity to
reinstate him. Pompey's attempts, with this view, are thwarted by
Cato, 56. Meanwhile the Alexandrines placed Berenice, the eldest
daughter of Auletes, on the throne; she married first Seleucus
Cybiosactes, as being the lawful heir; and after putting that
prince to death, united herself to Archelaus, 57.--Actual
restoration of Auletes by the purchased assistance of Gabinius,
the Roman governor of Syria; and execution of Berenice, whose
husband had fallen in the war, 54. Not long after, this miserable
prince, no less effeminate than tyrannical, died, 51.
J. R. FORSTER, _Commentatio de successoribus Ptolemaei VII._
Inserted in _Comment. Soc. Gotting._ vol. iii.
23. Auletes endeavoured by his last testament to insure the kingdom to
his posterity, nominating as his successor, under the superintendence of
the Roman nation, his two elder children. Ptolemy Dionysos, then
thirteen years old, and Cleopatra, seventeen, who were to be united in
wedlock: his two younger children, Ptolemy Neoteros and Arsinoe, he
recommended to the Roman senate. Notwithstanding these measures, Egypt
would not have escaped her fate upwards of twenty years longer, had not
the impending calamities been diverted by the internal posture of
affairs at Rome, and still more by the charms and policy of Cleopatra,
who through her alliance with Caesar and Antony not only preserved but
even aggrandized her kingdom. From this time, however, the history of
Egypt is most closely implicated with that of Rome.
Feuds between Cleopatra and her brother, excited and fomented by
the eunuch Pothinus, in whose hands the administration was: they
lead to open war: Cleopatra, driven out, flees to Syria, where she
levies troops: Caesar in pursuit of the conquered Pompey arrives at
Alexandria, and in the name of Rome, assumes the part of
arbitrator between the king and queen, but suffers himself to be
guided by the artifices of Cleopatra, 48. Violent sedition in
Alexandria, and Caesar besieged in Bruchium, the malcontent
Pothinus having brought Achillas, the commander of the royal
troops into the city. The hard struggle in which Caesar was now
engaged, demonstrates not only the bitterness of the long
rankling grudge of the Alexandrines against Rome, but shows also
how decisive, to the whole of Egypt, were the revolutions of the
capital. Ptolemy Dionysos having fallen in the war, and Caesar
being victorious, the crown fell to Cleopatra, 47, upon condition
of marrying her brother, when he should be of age: but as soon as
the prince grew to manhood, and had been crowned at Memphis, she
removed him by poison, 44.
24. During the life of Caesar, Cleopatra remained under his protection,
and consequently in a state of dependence. Not only was a Roman garrison
stationed in the capital city, but the queen herself, together with her
brother, were obliged to visit him at Rome. After the assassination of
Caesar, she took the side of the triumviri, not without endangering
Egypt, threatened by Cassius who commanded in Syria; and after the death
of her brother, succeeded in getting them to acknowledge as king,
Ptolemy Caesarion, a son whom she pretended to have had by Caesar.--But
the ardent passion conceived by Antony for her person, soon after the
discomfiture of the republican party, now attached her inseparably to
his fortunes; which, after vainly attempting to win over the victorious
Octavius, she at last shared.
The chronology of the ten years in which Cleopatra lived, for the
most part, with Antony, is not without difficulty, but, according
to the most probable authorities, may be arranged in the following
manner. Summoned before his tribunal, on account of the pretended
support afforded by some of her generals to Cassius, she appears
in his presence at Tarsus, in the attire, and with the parade, of
Venus, 41; he follows her into Egypt. In the year 40, Antony,
called back to Italy by the breaking out of the Perusine war, is
there induced, by political motives, to espouse Octavia; meanwhile
Cleopatra abides in Egypt. In the autumn of 37, she goes to meet
him in Syria, where he was making ready for the war against the
Parthians, until then prosecuted by his lieutenants; here she
obtained at his hands Phoenicia--Tyre and Sidon
excepted,--together with Cyrene and Cyprus; and in 36 went back to
Alexandria, where she remained during the campaign. The expedition
ended, Antony returned into Egypt and resided at Alexandria. From
thence it was his intention to attack Armenia in 35; this design,
however, he did not effect until 34, when, after taking the king
prisoner, he returned in triumph to Alexandria, and presented to
Cleopatra, or to his three children by her, all the countries of
Asia from the Mediterranean to the Indus, already conquered or to
be conquered. Preparing then to renew, in conjunction with the
king of Media, his attack on the Parthians, he is prevailed upon
by Cleopatra to break with Octavia, who was to bring over troops
to him, 38. A war between him and Octavius being now unavoidable,
the Parthian campaign already opened is suspended, and Cleopatra
accompanies Antony to Samos, 32, where he formally repudiated
Octavia. From hence she followed him in his expedition against
Octavius, which was decided by the battle of Actium, fought
September 2, 31.--Octavius having pursued his enemy into Egypt,
Alexandria was besieged, 30, and after Antony had laid violent
hands on himself, the place surrendered; and Cleopatra, not
brooking to be dragged a prisoner to Rome, followed the example of
her lover, and procured her own death.
25. Even in this last period, Egypt appears to have been the seat of
unbounded wealth and effeminacy. The line of infamous princes who had
succeeded to the third Ptolemy were unable to destroy her prosperity.
Strange, however, as this seems, it may be easily accounted for when we
consider that the political revolutions scarcely ever overstepped the
walls of the capital, and that an almost perpetual peace ruled in the
country: that Egypt was the only great theatre of trade; and that that
trade must have increased in the same proportion as the spirit of luxury
increased in Rome, and in the Roman empire. The powerful effects
wrought on Egypt by the growth of Roman luxury, are most convincingly
demonstrated by the state of that country when it had become a Roman
province; so far from the trade of Alexandria decreasing in that
period,--though the city suffered in the first days after the
conquest--it subsequently attained an extraordinary and gigantic bulk.
III. _History of Macedonia and of Greece in general, from the death of
Alexander to the Roman conquest, B. C. 323-146._
The sources for this history are the same as have been quoted
above: see p. 232. Until the battle of Ipsus, 301, Diodorus is
still our grand authority. But in the period extending from 301 to
224, we meet with some chasms: here almost our only sources are
the fragments of Diodorus, a few of Plutarch's lives, and the
inaccurate accounts of Justin. From the year 224, our main
historian is Polybius; and even in those parts where we do not
possess his work in its complete form, the fragments that have
been preserved must always be the first authorities consulted.
Livy, and other writers on Roman history, should accompany
Polybius.
Among modern books, besides the general works mentioned above
p. 1. we may here in particular quote:
JOHN GAST, D. D. _The History of Greece, from the accession of
Alexander of Macedon, till the final subjection to the Roman
power, in eight books._ London, 1782, 4to. Although not a
master-piece of composition, yet too important to be passed over
in silence.
1. Of the three main kingdoms that arose out of Alexander's monarchy,
Macedonia was the most insignificant, not only in extent,--particularly
as till B. C. 286 Thrace remained a separate and independent
province,--but likewise in population and wealth. Yet, being, as it
were, the head country of the monarchy, it was considered to hold the
first rank; and here at first resided the power which, nominally at
least, extended over the whole. As early, however, as the year 311, upon
the total extermination of Alexander's family, it became a completely
separate kingdom. From that time its sphere of external operation was
for the most part confined to Greece, the history of which,
consequently, is closely interwoven with that of Macedonia.
Posture of affairs in Greece at Alexander's decease: Thebes in
ruins: Corinth occupied by a Macedonian garrison: Sparta
humiliated by the defeat she had suffered at the hands of
Antipater in her attempt at a revolt against Macedonia, under Agis
II. 333-331: Athens on the other hand flourishing, and although
confined to her own boundaries, still by her fame, and her naval
power, the first state in Greece.
2. Although at the first division of the provinces, Craterus, as civil
governor, was united with Antipater, the latter had the management of
affairs. And the termination, as arduous as it was successful, of the
Lamian war,--kindled immediately after the death of Alexander, by the
Greeks, enthusiastic in the cause of freedom,--enabled him to rivet the
chains of Greece more firmly than they had ever been before.
The Lamian war--the sparks of which had been kindled by
Alexander's edict, granting leave to all the Grecian emigrants,
twenty thousand in number, nearly the whole of whom were in the
Macedonian interest, to return to their native countries,--was
fanned to a flame by the democratic party at Athens. Urged by
Demosthenes and Hyperides, almost all the states of central and
northern Greece, Boeotia excepted, took up arms in the cause; and
their example was quickly followed by most of those in
Peloponnesus, with the exception of Sparta, Argos, Corinth, and
the Achaeans. Not even the Persian war produced such general
unanimity! The gallant Leosthenes headed the league.--Defeat of
Antipater, who is shut up in Lamia; Leosthenes, however, falls in
the siege of that place, B. C. 323, and although Leonatus--who
with the view of ascending the throne by his marriage with
Cleopatra, had come to the assistance of the Macedonians--was
beaten and slain, 322, the Greeks were finally overwhelmed by the
reinforcements, brought to Antipater out of Asia, by Craterus. And
Antipater having fully succeeded in breaking the league, and
negotiating with each separate nation, was enabled to dictate the
terms. Most of the cities opened their gates to Macedonian troops;
besides this, Athens was obliged to purchase peace through the
mediation of Phocion and Demades, by an alteration in her
constitution,--the poorer citizens being excluded from all share
in the government, and for the most part translated into
Thrace--and by a pledge to deliver up Demosthenes and Hyperides;
whose place Phocion occupied at the head of the state.--The
Aetolians, the last against whom the Macedonian wars were directed,
obtained better terms than they had ventured to expect, Antipater
and Craterus being obliged to hurry over to Asia in order to
oppose Perdiccas.
3. That hatred which, even in the lifetime of Alexander, had sprung up
between Antipater and Olympias, in consequence of his not permitting the
dowager queen to rule, induced her to withdraw to Epirus; her rankling
envy being still more embittered by the influence of the young queen
Eurydice. See above, p. 224. Antipater, dying shortly after his
expedition against Perdiccas, in which his colleague Craterus had
fallen, and he himself had been appointed regent, nominates his friend,
the aged Polysperchon, to succeed him as regent and head guardian, to
the exclusion of his own son Cassander. Hence arose a series of quarrels
between the two, in which, unfortunately for themselves, the royal
family were implicated and finally exterminated, Cassander obtaining the
sovereignty of Macedonia.
Cassander having secured the interest of Antigonus and Ptolemy,
makes his escape to the former, 319: he had previously
endeavoured also to raise a party in Macedonia and Greece,
particularly by getting his friend Nicanor to be commander at
Athens.--Measures taken by Polysperchon to oppose him; in the
first place, he recalls Olympias out of Epirus, but the princess
dares not come without an army; in the next place, he nominates
Eumenes commander of the royal troops in Asia (see above, p. 225);
he likewise endeavours to gain the Grecian cities, by recalling
the Macedonian garrisons, and changing the governors set over them
by Antipater. These latter, however, were in most of the cities
too firmly established to suffer themselves thus to be deposed;
and even the expedition into Peloponnesus, undertaken by
Polysperchon to enforce his injunctions was attended but with
partial success.--In the same year occurs a twofold revolution in
Athens, whither Polysperchon had sent his son Alexander, nominally
for the purpose of driving out Nicanor, but virtually to get
possession of that important city. In the first place, Alexander
and Nicanor appearing to unite both for the attainment of one and
the same object, the democratic party rise up, and overthrow the
rulers, hitherto taken from Antipater's party, and headed by
Phocion, who is compelled to swallow poison: soon after, however,
Cassander occupies the city, excludes from the administration all
that possess less than ten mines, and places at the head of
affairs Demetrius Phalereus, who, from 318 to 307, ruled with
great prudence.--Not long after, Olympias returns with an army
from Epirus; the Macedonian troops of Philip and Eurydice having
passed over to her side, she wreaks her revenge on the royal
couple, and on the brother of Cassander, all of whom she puts to
death, 317. Cassander, nevertheless, having obtained
reinforcements in Peloponnesus, takes the field against her; she
is besieged in Pydna, where, disappointed in the hope of being
relieved either by Polysperchon or by Aeacidas of Epirus, both of
whom were forsaken by their men, she is obliged to surrender, 316.
Cassander, having caused her to be condemned by the Macedonian
people, has her put to death.
4. Cassander being now master, and, from 302, king of Macedonia,
confirmed his dominion by a marriage with Thessalonice, half-sister to
Alexander, and at the same time endeavoured to corroborate as far as
possible his authority in Greece. Polysperchon and his son Alexander,
it is true, still made head in Peloponnesus; but the states without the
peninsula, Aetolia excepted, were all either allies of Cassander, or
occupied by Macedonian troops. After the defeat of the league against
Antigonus, in which Cassander had borne a part, general peace was
concluded, with the proviso, that the Grecian cities should be free, and
that the young Alexander, when of age, should be raised to the throne of
Macedonia: this induced Cassander to rid himself both of the young
prince and his mother Roxana by murder: but he thereby exposed himself
to an attack from Polysperchon, who, availing himself of the discontent
of the Macedonians, brought back Hercules, the only remaining
illegitimate son of Alexander. Cassander diverted the storm by a new
crime, instigating Polysperchon to murder the young Hercules, under
promise of sharing the government: Polysperchon, however, unable to
possess himself of the Peloponnesus which had been promised him, appears
to have preserved but little influence. Cassander met likewise with
formidable opponents in the persons of Antigonus and his son; and
although delivered by the breaking out of the war with Ptolemy from the
danger of the first invasion of Greece by Demetrius, his situation was
more embarrassing at the second irruption; from which, however, he was
extricated by the circumstance of Antigonus being obliged to recall his
son, on account of the newly formed league (see above, p. 230).
Antigonus, on his return from Upper Asia, declares loudly against
Cassander, B. C. 314; despatches his general Aristodemus to
Peloponnesus, and frames a league with Polysperchon and his son
Alexander; the latter, however, Cassander succeeds in winning over
by a promise of the command in Peloponnesus. Alexander was soon
after murdered, but his wife Cratesipolis succeeded him, and
commanded with the spirit of a man. Meanwhile, Cassander carried
war against the Aetolians, who sided with Antigonus, 313; but
Antigonus, 312, having sent his general Ptolemy into Greece with a
fleet and army, Cassander lost his supremacy. In the peace of 311,
the freedom of all the Grecian cities was stipulated; but this
very condition became the pretext of various and permanent feuds;
and Cassander having murdered the young king, together with his
mother, drew upon himself the arms of Polysperchon, who wished to
place Hercules on the throne, 310; but the pretender was removed
in the manner above described, 309.--Cassander now endeavouring to
reestablish his power over Greece, Demetrius Poliorcetes was by
his father sent into that country in order to anticipate Ptolemy
of Egypt, in the enforcement of the decree for the freedom of the
Greeks, 308; the result at Athens was the restoration of
democracy, and the expulsion of Demetrius Phalereus.--From any
further attack of Demetrius, Cassander was delivered by the war
which broke out between Antigonus and Ptolemy, (see above, p.
229.) and had the leisure, once more, to strengthen his power in
Greece, until 302, when Demetrius arrived a second time, and, as
generalissimo of liberated Greece, pressed forward to the borders
of Macedonia; Demetrius was, however, recalled by his father into
Asia, and at the battle of Ipsus, 301, lost all his dominions in
that quarter of the world. Yet although Athens closed her harbours
against him, he still maintained his possessions in Peloponnesus,
and even endeavoured to extend them; from thence, in 297, he
sallied forth, and once more took possession of his beloved
Athens, and after driving out the usurper Lachares, forgave her
ingratitude.
5. Cassander survived the establishment of his throne by the battle of
Ipsus only three years: and bequeathed Macedonia as an inheritance to
his three sons, the eldest of whom, Philip, shortly after followed his
father to the grave.
6. The two remaining sons, Antipater and Alexander, soon worked their
own destruction. Antipater having murdered his own mother Thessalonice,
on account of the favour she showed his brother, was obliged to flee; he
applied for help to his father-in-law Lysimachus of Thrace, where he
soon after died. Meanwhile Alexander, fancying that he likewise stood in
need of foreign assistance, addressed himself to Pyrrhus, king of
Macedonia, and to Demetrius Poliorcetes, both of whom obeyed the call
only with the expectation of being paid. After various snares
reciprocally laid for each other, the king of Macedonia was murdered by
Demetrius, and with him the race of Antipater became extinct.
7. The army proclaimed Demetrius king; and in his person the house of
Antigonus ascended the throne of Macedonia, and, after many
vicissitudes, established their power. His seven years' reign, in which
one project succeeded the other, was a constant series of wars; and as
he never could learn how to bear with good fortune, his ambition was at
last his ruin.
The kingdom of Demetrius comprised Macedonia, Thessaly, and the
greatest part of the Peloponnesus; he was also master of Megara
and Athens.--Twofold capture of Thebes, which had been rebuilt by
Cassander, 293, and 291; unsuccessful attempt upon Thrace, 292.
His war with Pyrrhus, 290, in whom men fancied they beheld another
Alexander, had already alienated the affections of the
Macedonians; but his grand project for the recovery of Asia
induced his enemies to get the start of him; and the hatred of his
subjects compelled him secretly to escape to Peloponnesus, to his
son Antigonus, 287. Athens, taking advantage of his misfortunes,
drove out the Macedonian garrison, and, by the election of
archons, reestablished her ancient constitution; although
Demetrius laid siege to the town, he allowed himself to be
pacified by Crates. Having once more attempted to prosecute his
plans against Asia, he was obliged, 286, to surrender to Seleucus
his father-in-law, who, out of charity, kept him till the day of
his death, 284.
8. Two claimants to the vacant throne now arose, viz. Pyrrhus of Epirus
and Lysimachus of Thrace; but although Pyrrhus was first proclaimed
king, with the cession of half the dominions, he could not, being a
foreigner, support his power any longer than the year 286, when he was
deposed by Lysimachus.
The sovereigns of Epirus, belonging to the family of the Aeacidae,
were properly kings of the Molossi. See above, p. 150. They did
not become lords of all Epirus, nor consequently of any historical
importance, until the time of the Peloponnesian war. After that
period Epirus was governed by Alcetas I. about 384, who pretended
to be the sixteenth descendant from Pyrrhus, the son of Achilles;
Neoptolemus, father to Olympias, by whose marriage with Philip,
358, the kings of Epirus became intimately connected with
Macedonia, _d._ 352; Arymbas, his brother, _d._ 342; Alexander I.
son of Neoptolemus, and brother-in-law to Alexander the Great; he
was ambitious to be as great a conqueror in the west as his
kinsman was in the east, but he fell in Lucania, 332. Aeacides, son
of Arymbas, _d._ 312. Pyrrhus II. his son, the Ajax of his time,
and, we might almost say, rather an adventurer than a king. After
uninterrupted wars waged in Macedonia, Greece, Italy, and Sicily,
he fell at last at the storming of Argos, 272. He was followed by
his son Alexander II. in the person of whose successor, Pyrrhus
III. 219, the male line became extinct. Although the daughter of
this last prince, Deidamia, succeeded to the throne, the Epirots
were not long before they established a democratic government,
which endured till such time as they were, together with Macedonia
and the rest of Greece, brought under the Roman yoke, 146.
9. In consequence of the accession of Lysimachus, Thrace, and for a
short time even Asia Minor, were annexed to the Macedonian kingdom. But
rankling hatred and family relations soon afterwards involved Lysimachus
in a war with Seleucus Nicator, in which, at battle of Curopedion, he
lost both his throne and his life.
Execution of the gallant Agathocles, eldest son of Lysimachus, at
the instigation of his step-mother Arsinoe: his widow Lysandra and
her brother Ptolemy Ceraunus, who had already been driven out of
Egypt by his step-mother Berenice, go over, followed by a large
party, to Seleucus, whom they excite to war.
10. The victorious Seleucus, already lord of Asia, now causing himself
to be proclaimed likewise king of Macedonia, it seemed as if that
country was again about to become the head seat of the whole monarchy.
But shortly after he had crossed over into Europe, Seleucus fell by the
murderous hand of Ptolemy Ceraunus, who, availing himself of the
treasures of his victim, and of the yet remaining troops of Lysimachus,
took possession of the throne; by another act of treachery he avenged
himself of Arsinoe, his half-sister; but just as he conceived himself
securely established, he lost both his crown and his life by the
irruption of the Gauls into Macedonia.
The irruption of the Gauls, threatening desolation not only to
Macedonia but to the whole of Greece, took place in three
successive expeditions. The first under Cambaules, (probably 280,)
advanced no further than Thrace, the invaders not being
sufficiently numerous. The second in three bodies; against Thrace
under Ceretrius; against Paeonia under Brennus and Acichorius;
against Macedonia and Illyria under Belgius, 279. By the
last-mentioned chieftain Ptolemy was defeated; he fell in the
contest. In consequence, Meleager first, and Antipater
subsequently, were appointed kings of Macedonia; but both, on
account of incapacity, being soon afterwards deposed, a Macedonian
noble, Sosthenes, assumed the command, and this time liberated his
country. But the year 278 brought with it the main storm, which
spent its fury principally on Greece: Sosthenes was defeated and
slain: and although the Greeks brought all their united forces
into the field, Brennus and Acichorius burst into Greece on two
different sides, and pushed on to Delphi, the object of their
expedition; from hence, however, they were compelled to retreat;
and most of them were cut off by hunger, cold, or the sword.
Nevertheless a portion of those barbarians stood their ground in
the interior of Thrace, which, consequently, was for the most part
lost to Macedonia: another portion, consisting of various hordes,
the Tectosagae, Tolistobii, and Trocmi, crossed over to Asia Minor,
where they established themselves in the country called after them
Galatia (see above, p. 236). Although there can be no doubt that
the Tectosagae must have come from the innermost parts of Gaul, the
mode of attack demonstrates that the main tide of invaders
consisted of the neighbouring races; and, in fact, in those days
the countries from the Danube to the Mediterranean and Adriatic
were mostly occupied by Gauls.--Greece, though she strained every
nerve, and with the exception of Peloponnesus, was united in one
league, could scarcely bring forward more than 20,000 men to stem
the torrent.
11. Antigonus of Gonni, son to Demetrius, now seated himself on the
vacant throne of desolated Macedon; he bought off his competitor,
Antiochus I. named Soter, by treaty and marriage. Successfully as he
opposed the new irruption of the Gauls, he was dethroned by Pyrrhus,
who, on his return from Italy, was a second time proclaimed king of
Macedonia. That prince, however, having formed the design of conquering
the Peloponnesus, and, after an ineffectual attack on Sparta, which was
repelled with heroic gallantry, wishing to take possession of Argos,
fell at the storming of the latter place.
Extraordinary as these frequent revolutions appear, they may be
easily accounted for by the mode of warfare in those days. Every
thing depended on the armies; and these were composed of
mercenaries, ever willing to fight against him they had defended
the day before, if they fancied his rival to be a more valiant or
fortunate leader. Since the death of Alexander, the Macedonian
phalanx was no longer dependent on its captains, but they on their
men. The impoverishment of the countries, in consequence of war,
was such, that the soldier's was almost the only profitable trade;
and none prosecuted that trade more ardently than the Gauls, whose
services were ever ready for any one who chose to pay for them.
12. After the death of Pyrrhus, Antigonus Gonnatas recovered the
Macedonian throne, of which he and his descendants kept uninterrupted
possession, yet not till after a violent contest with Alexander, the son
and successor of Pyrrhus. But no sooner were they secure from foreign
rivals, than the Macedonian policy was again directed against Greece,
and the capture of Corinth seemed to insure the dependence of the whole
country, when the formation of the Aetolian, and the yet more important
Achaean, league, gave rise to relations entirely new, and of the highest
interest, even for the universal history of the world. After so many
storms, the sun of Greece was about to set in all his splendour!
The ancient confederacy of the twelve Achaean cities (see above, p.
145.) had subsisted until the death of Alexander, but was
dissolved in the subsequent commotions; particularly when, after
the battle of Ipsus, 301, Demetrius and his son made Peloponnesus
the principal seat of their power. Some of these cities were now
garrisoned by those princes, while in others arose tyrants,
generally favourable to their interests. In 281, four asserted
their freedom and renewed the ancient federation; which, five
years afterwards, was gradually joined by the rest, Antigonus
being busied elsewhere, in consequence of his occupation of the
Macedonian throne. But the league did not become formidable till
the accession of foreign states. This took place, in the first
instance, with Sicyon, through the exertions of the liberator of
that town, Aratus, who now became the animating spirit of the
federation; and in 243 brought over Corinth, after the expulsion
of the Macedonian garrison, and Megara. Afterwards the league
gradually acquired strength, by the junction of several Grecian
cities, Athens among others, 229; and thereby excited the jealousy
of the rest. And as Aratus, who was more of a statesman than a
general, and possessed but little independence, had in the very
outset joined the party of Ptolemy II. the league soon became
involved in the disputes of the great powers, and was too often
but a mere tool in their hands. The main principles on which it
was founded were the following: 1. Complete political equality of
all the federate cities; in this respect it essentially differed
from all the earlier federations in Greece. 2. Unconditional
preservation of the domestic government in every one of the
cities. 3. The meeting twice a year of deputies from all the
cities, at Aegium, and afterwards at Corinth; for transacting all
business of common interest, particularly foreign affairs, and
also for the purpose of electing the strategus, or military leader
and head of the union, and the ten demiurgi, or supreme
magistrates.--But what more than all contributed to exalt this
league, founded on pure liberty, was the virtue of Aratus, 213,
Philopoemen, 183, and Lycortas, 170; men who breathed into it the
spirit of union, until, enfeebled by Roman policy, it was
overthrown.
# BREITENBAUCH, _History of the Achaeans and their league_, 1782.
The Aetolian league was formed about 284, in consequence of the
oppressions of the Macedonian kings. The Aetolians had likewise a
yearly congress, panaetolium, at Thermus; where they chose a
strategus and the apocleti, who constituted the state council.
They had, besides, their secretary, [Greek: grammateus]; and
supervisors, [Greek: ephoroi], whose particular functions are,
however, matter of doubt. This federation did not increase like
the Achaean, none but Aetolians being admitted. The more unpolished
this piratical nation remained, the more frequently it was used as
the tool of foreign, and particularly of Roman, policy.
13. Antigonus, in the latter part of his reign, had recourse to various
means, and more especially to an alliance with the Aetolians, for the
purpose of counterpoising the Achaeans. He died in his eightieth year,
and was succeeded by his son, Demetrius II. who waged war upon the
Aetolians, now, however, supported by the Achaeans; and endeavoured to
repress the growth of the latter, by favouring the tyrants of particular
cities. The remainder of the reign of this prince is little more than a
chasm in history.
The vulgar assertion that this prince conquered Cyrene and Libya,
originates in a confusion of names; his uncle Demetrius, son of
Poliorcetes of Ptolemais, being mentioned by Plutarch as king of
Cyrene. The history of that town, from 258 to 142, is enveloped in
almost total darkness: cf. Prolog. Trogi, l. xxvi. ad calcem
Justini.
14. Demetrius's son Philip was passed over; his brother's son, Antigonus
II. surnamed Doson, being raised to the throne. This king was occupied
the most of his time by the events in Greece, where a very remarkable
revolution at Sparta, as we learn from Plutarch, had raised up a
formidable enemy against the Achaeans; and so completely altered the
relative position of affairs, that the Macedonians, from having been
opponents, became allies of the Achaeans.
Sketch of the situation of Spartan affairs at this period: the
ancient constitution still continued to exist in form; but the
plunder of foreign countries, and particularly the permission to
transfer landed estates, obtained by Epitadeus, had produced great
inequality of property. The restoration of Lycurgus's constitution
had, therefore, a twofold object; to favour the poor by a new
agrarian law and release from debts, and to increase the power of
the kings by repressing that of the ephori.--First attempt at
reform 244, by king Agis III; attended in the beginning with
partial success, but eventually frustrated by the other king,
Leonidas, and terminating in the extinction of Agis and his
family, 241. Leonidas, however, was succeeded, 236, by his son
Cleomenes, who victoriously defeated the plans of Aratus to force
Sparta to accede to the Achaean league, 227; this king, by a
forcible revolution, overthrew the ephori, and accomplished the
project of Agis, at the same time increasing the Spartans by the
admission of a number of periaeci; and enforcing the laws of
Lycurgus referring to private life; but as in a small republic a
revolution cannot be confirmed without some external war, he
attacked the Achaeans as early as 224; these being defeated,
implored, through Aratus, the help of Antigonus; Cleomenes in
consequence was, at the battle of Sellasia, 222, obliged to yield
to superior force, and with difficulty escaped over to Egypt;
while Sparta was compelled to acknowledge her independence as a
gift at the hands of Antigonus. Such was the miserable success of
this attempt made by a few great men on a nation already
degenerate. The quarrels between the ephori and king Lycurgus and
his successor Machanidas, placed Sparta in a state of anarchy,
which ended, 207, in the usurpation of the sovereign power by one
Nabis, who destroyed the ancient form of government. Let him who
would study great revolutions commence with that just described;
insignificant as it is, none perhaps furnishes more instructive
lessons.
PLUTARCHI _Agis et Cleomenes_. The information in which is
principally drawn from the Commentaries of Aratus.
15. Philip II. son of Demetrius. He ascended the throne at the early age
of sixteen, endowed with many qualities, such as might, under favourable
circumstances, have formed a great prince. Macedonia had recruited her
strength during a long peace; and her grand political aim, the supremacy
of Greece, secured by the connection of Antigonus with the Achaeans, and
by the victory of Sellasia, seemed to be already within her grasp. But
Philip lived in a time when Rome was pursuing her formidable plans of
aggrandizement: the more vigorous and prompt his efforts were to
withstand that power, the more deeply was he entangled in the new maze
of events, which embittered the rest of his life, and at last brought
him to the grave with a broken heart, converted by misfortune into a
despot.
16. The first five years of Philip were occupied by his participation
in the war between the Achaeans and Aetolians, called the war of the two
leagues; notwithstanding the treachery of his minister Apellas and his
dependents, the prince was enabled to dictate the conditions of peace,
according to which both parties were to remain in possession of what
they then had. The conclusion of this peace was hastened by the news of
Hannibal's victory at Thrasymenus, Philip being then instigated to form
more extensive projects by Demetrius of Pharus, who had fled before the
Romans, and soon acquired unlimited influence with the Macedonian king.
The war of the two leagues arose out of the piracies of the
Aetolians on the Messenians, the latter of whom the Achaeans
undertook to protect, 221. The errors committed by Aratus
compelled the Achaeans to have recourse to Philip, 220; whose
progress, however, was for a long time impeded by the artifices of
Apellas's faction, who wished to overthrow Aratus. The
Acarnanians, Epirots, Messenians, and Scerdilaidas of Illyria,
(who, however, soon after declared against Macedonia,) combined
with Philip and the Achaeans; the Aetolians, on the other hand,
commanded by their own general, Scopas, had for their allies the
Spartans and Eleans.--The most important consequence of this war
for Macedonia was, that she began again to be a naval
power.--About the same time a war broke out between the two
trading republics of Byzantium and Rhodes (the latter supported by
Prusias I. of Bithynia) insignificant in itself, but which, as a
commercial war, originating in the duties imposed by the
Byzantines, was the only one of its kind in this age, 222. The
Rhodians, so powerful in those days by sea, compelled their
adversaries to submit.
17. The negotiations between Philip and Hannibal concluded with an
alliance, in which reciprocal help was promised towards annihilating
Rome. But Rome contrived to excite so many foes against Philip on the
borders of his own kingdom, and availed herself so skilfully of her
naval power, that the execution of this plan was prevented until it
became possible to attack the Macedonian king in Greece; where he had
made himself many enemies, by the domineering tone he had assumed
towards his allies at the time that, sensible of his power, he was about
to enter upon a wider sphere of action.
Commencement of hostilities by Rome, against Philip: immediately
that the alliance of Philip and Hannibal was known, a squadron
with troops on board was stationed off the coast of Macedonia, by
which the king himself was defeated at Apollonia, 214.--Alliance
of Rome with the Aetolians, joined likewise by Sparta and Elis,
Attalus king of Pergamus, and Scerdilaidas and Pleuratus, kings of
Illyria, 211. On Philip's side were the Achaeans, with whom
Philopoemen more than supplied the loss of Aratus, occasioned,
213, by the Macedonian king; to them were joined the Acarnanians
and Baeotians.--Attacked on every side, Philip successfully
extricated himself from his difficulties; in the first place, he
compelled the Aetolians, who had been abandoned by Attalus and
Rome, to accept separate terms, which, shortly after, Rome,
consulting her own convenience, converted into a general peace,
inclusive of the allies on either side, 204.
18. New war of Philip against Attalus and the Rhodians, carried on for
the most part in Asia Minor; and his impolitic alliance with Antiochus
III. to attack Egypt. But can Philip be blamed for his endeavours to
disarm the military servants of the Romans? Rome, however, did not grant
him time to effect his designs; the Macedonian king was taught at Chios,
by woeful experience, that his navy had not increased proportionably
with that of the Rhodians.
19. The war with Rome suddenly hurled the Macedonian power from its
lofty pitch; and by laying the foundation of Roman dominion in the
east, wrought a change in almost all the political relations of that
quarter. The first two years of the war showed pretty evidently, that
mere force could scarcely overturn the Macedonian throne. But T.
Quintius Flaminius stepped forward; with the magic spell of freedom he
intoxicated the Greeks; Philip was stripped of his allies; and the
battle of Cynoscephalae decided everything. The articles of the peace
were: 1. That all Grecian cities in Europe and Asia should be
independent, and Philip should withdraw his garrisons. 2. That he should
surrender the whole of his navy, and never afterwards keep more than 500
armed men on foot. 3. That he should not, without previously informing
Rome, undertake any war out of Macedonia. 4. That he should pay 1,000
talents by instalments, and deliver up his younger son Demetrius as an
hostage.
The Roman allies in this war were: the Aetolians, Athenians,
Rhodians, the kings of the Athamanes, Dardanians, and
Pergamus.--The Achaeans at the beginning sided with Philip, but
were subsequently gained over by Flaminius. See below, in the
Roman History.
20. Soon after, the freedom of Greece was solemnly proclaimed at the
Isthmian games by Flaminius: but loud as the Greeks were in their
exultations, this measure served merely to transfer the supremacy of
their country from Macedonia to Rome: and Grecian history, as well as
the Macedonian, is now interwoven with that of the Romans. To foster
quarrels between the Greek states, with the especial view of hindering
the Achaeans from growing too formidable, now became a fundamental
principle at Rome; and Roman and anti-Roman parties having quickly
arisen in every city, this political game was easily played.
Flaminius even took care that the Achaeans should have an opponent
in the person of Nabis, although under the necessity of waging war
against him previous to his return into Italy, 194.--In 192, war
between Nabis and the Achaeans; followed after the murder of Nabis,
at the hands of the Aetolians, by the accession of Sparta to the
Achaean league.--But about the same time Greece once more became
the theatre of foreign war; Antiochus having firmly seated himself
in the country, and enleagued himself with several tribes, but
more particularly the Aetolians, inspired with bitter and
long-standing hatred against the Romans. These last, however,
after the expulsion of Antiochus from Greece, 191, paid dearly for
their secession; nor was peace granted them by Rome till after
long and unsuccessful supplications, 189.
21. While war was pending between the Romans and Antiochus, Philip, in
the character of one of the numerous allies of Rome, ventured to
increase his territory at the expense of the Athamanes, Thracians, and
Thessalians. To keep him in good humour he was permitted to effect those
conquests; but after the termination of the war the oppression of Rome
became so galling, that it could not be otherwise than that all his
thoughts should centre in revenge, and all his exertions be directed
towards the recovery of power. Meanwhile the violent measures adopted
for repeopling his exhausted kingdom--such is the punishment of ambition
which usually awaits even the victorious!--the transplantation of the
inhabitants of whole cities and countries, and the consequent and
unavoidable oppression of several of his neighbours, excited universal
complaints; and where was the accuser of Philip to whom Rome would not
now lend a ready ear?--His younger son, Demetrius, the pupil of Rome,
and by her intended, it is probable, to succeed to the crown, alone
diverted the impending fate of Macedonia. But after the return of that
prince from his embassy, the envy of his elder and bastard brother,
Perseus, grew into an inveterate rancour, such as could not be quenched
but by the death of the younger. The lot of Philip was indeed hard,
compelled as a father to judge between his two sons; but the measure of
human woe was filled, when after the death of his favourite child he
discovered that he was innocent; are we to wonder that sorrow should
soon have hurried him to a premature grave!
22. The same policy which was observed by the Romans towards Philip,
they pursued towards the Achaeans, with whom, since the termination of
the war with Antiochus, they had assumed a loftier tone; and this artful
game was facilitated by the continual quarrels among the Greeks
themselves. Yet the great Philopoemen, worthy of a better age,
maintained the dignity of the league at the very time that the Romans
presumed to speak as arbitrators. After his decease they found it easy
to raise a party among the Achaeans themselves, the venal Callicrates
offering his services for that purpose.
The Achaeans was continually embroiled either with Sparta or with
Messene: the grounds of difference were, that in both of those
states there were factions headed by persons who, out of personal
motives, and for the most part hatred to Philopoemen, wished to
secede from the league; on the other hand, the prevailing idea
among the Achaeans was, that this league ought to comprise the
whole of the Peloponnesus. In the war against the Messenians,
183, Philopoemen, at the age of seventy, was taken prisoner by the
enemy and put to death.
PLUTARCHI, _Philopoemen_. Nearly the whole of which is compiled
from the lost biography of Polybius.
23. The last Macedonian king, Perseus, had inherited his father's
perfect hatred of the Romans, together with talents, if not equal, at
least but little inferior. He entered into the speculations of his
predecessor, and the first seven years of his reign was occupied in
constant exertions to muster forces against Rome; with this view he
called the Bastarnae out of the north, in order to settle them in the
territories of his enemies the Dardanians; he endeavoured to form
alliances with the kings of Illyria, Thrace, Syria, and Bithynia; above
all, he strove by negotiations and promises to reestablish the ancient
influence of Macedonia in Greece.
The settlement of the Bastarnae (probably a German race, resident
beyond the Danube) in Thrace and Dardania, in order with them to
carry war against the Romans, was one of the plans traced out by
Philip, and now partially executed by Perseus.--In Greece the
Macedonian party, which Perseus formed chiefly out of the great
number of impoverished citizens in the country, would probably
have gained the upper hand, had not the fear inspired by Rome, and
the active vigilance of that power, interposed an effectual bar.
Hence the Achaeans, apparently at least, remained on the Roman
side; the Aetolians, by domestic factions, had worked their own
destruction; the case was the same with the Acarnanians; and the
federation of the Boeotians had been completely dissolved by the
Romans, 171. On the other hand, in Epirus the Macedonian party was
superior; Thessaly was occupied by Perseus; several of the
Thracian tribes were friendly to him; and in king Gentius he found
an ally who might have been highly useful, had not the Macedonian
prince, by an ill-timed avarice, deprived himself of his
assistance.
24. The commencement of open hostilities was hastened by the bitter
hatred existing between Perseus and Eumenes, and by the intrigues of the
latter at Rome. Neglect of the favourable moment for taking the field,
and the defensive system, skilfully in other respects as it was planned,
caused the ruin of Perseus, as it had done that of Antiochus.
Nevertheless he protracted the war to the fourth year, when the battle
of Pidna decided the fate both of himself and his kingdom.
Miserable condition of Perseus until his capture at Samothrace;
and afterwards until his death at Rome, 166.
25. According to the system at that period followed by Rome, the
conquered kingdom of Macedonia was not immediately converted into a
province; it was first deprived of all offensive power, by being
republicanized and divided into four districts, wholly distinct from one
another, and bound to pay Rome half the tribute they were before wont to
furnish to their kings.
26. It was in the natural order of things that the independence of
Greece, and more especially that of the Achaean league, should fall with
Perseus. The political _inquisition_ of the Roman commissaries not only
visited with punishment the declared partizans of Macedonia; but even to
have stood neutral was a crime that incurred suspicion. Rome, however,
amid the rising hatred, did not deem herself secure until by one blow
she had rid herself of all opponents of any importance. Above a thousand
of the most eminent of the Achaeans were summoned to Rome to justify
themselves, and there detained seventeen years in prison without a
hearing. While at the head of the league, stood the man who had
delivered them up, Callicrates, (_d._ 150.) a wretch who could, unmoved,
hear "the very boys in the streets taunt him with treachery."--A more
tranquil period, it is true, now ensued for Greece, but it was the
result of very obvious causes.
27. The ultimate lot both of Macedon and was decided by the system now
adopted at Rome, that of converting the previous dependence of nations
into formal subjection. The insurrection of Andriscus in Macedonia, an
individual who pretended to be the son of Perseus, was quelled by
Metellus, the country being constituted a Roman province; two years
afterwards, at the sack of Corinth, vanished the last glimmer of Grecian
freedom.
The last war of the Achaeans arose out of certain quarrels with
Sparta, 150, fomented by Diaeus, Critolaus, and Damocritus, who had
returned bitterly enraged from the Roman prison; in these disputes
Rome interfered, with the design of wholly dissolving the Achaean
league. The first pretext that offered for executing this scheme
was the ill-treatment of the Roman ambassadors at Corinth, 148;
war, however, still raging with Carthage and Andriscus, the Romans
preserved for the present a peaceful tone. But the party of Diaeus
and Critolaus would have war; the plenipotentiaries of Metellus
were again insulted, and the Achaeans declared war against Sparta
and Rome. In the very same year they were routed by Metellus, and
their leader Critolaus fell in the engagement; Metellus was
replaced in the command by Mummius, who defeated Diaeus the
successor of Critolaus, took Corinth and razed it to the ground,
146. The consequence was, that Greece, under the name of Achaia,
became a Roman province, although to a few cities, such as Athens,
for instance, some shadow of freedom was still left.
IV. _History of some smaller or more distant Kingdoms and States erected
out of the Macedonian monarchy._
SOURCES. Besides the writers enumerated above, (see p. 232.)
Memnon, an historian of Heraclea in Pontus, deserves particular
mention in this place, (see p. 162): some extracts from his work
have been preserved to us by Photius, Cod. 224. In some individual
portions, as, for instance, in the Parthian history, Justin[a] is
our main authority; as are likewise Ammianus Marcellinus, and the
extracts from Arrian's _Parthica_, found in Photius. The coins of
the kings are also of great importance; but unfortunately
Vaillant's Essay shows, that even with their assistance the
chronology still remains in a very unsettled state. For the Jewish
history, Josephus (see p. 35.) is the grand writer: of the Books
of the Old Testament, those of Ezra and Nehemiah, together with
the Maccabees, although the last are not always to be depended
upon.
The modern writers are enumerated below, under the heads of the
different kingdoms. Much information is likewise scattered about
in the works on ancient numismatics.
[a] As Justin did no more than extract from Trogus Pompeius, a
question presents itself of great consequence to various
portions of ancient history; what authorities did Trogus
Pompeius follow? The answer will be found in two treatises
by A. L. L. HEEREN: _De fontibus et auctoritate Trogi Pompeii,
ejusque epitomatoris Justini_, inserted in _Comment. Soc.
Gott._ vol. 15.
1. Besides the three main empires into which the monarchy of Alexander
was divided, there likewise arose in those extensive regions several
branch kingdoms, one of which even grew in time to be among the most
powerful in the world. To these belong the kingdoms of, 1. Pergamus. 2.
Bithynia. 3. Paphlagonia. 4. Pontus. 5. Cappadocia. 6. Great Armenia. 7.
Little Armenia. 8. Parthia. 9. Bactria. 10. Jewish state subsequent to
the Maccabees.
We are acquainted with the history of these kingdoms, the Jewish
state alone excepted, only so far forth as they were implicated in
the concerns of the greater empires; of their internal history we
know little, often nothing. With respect to many of them,
therefore, little more can be produced than a series of
chronological data, indispensable, notwithstanding, to the general
historian.
2. The kingdom of Pergamus, in Mysia, arose during the war between
Seleucus and Lysimachus. It owed its origin on the one hand to the
prudence of its rulers, the wisest of whom luckily reigned the longest;
and, on the other, to the weakness of the Seleucidae: for its progressive
increase it was indebted to the Romans, who in aggrandizing the power of
Pergamus acted with a view to their own interest. History exhibits
scarcely one subordinate kingdom whose princes took such skilful
advantage of the political circumstances of the times; and yet they
earned still greater renown by the anxiety they showed, in rivalling the
Ptolemies, to foster the arts of peace, industry, science, architecture,
sculpture, and painting. How dazzling the splendour with which the small
state of Pergamus outshines many a mighty empire!
Philetaerus, lieutenant of Lysimachus, in Pergamus, asserts his
independence; and maintains possession of the citadel and town,
283-263. His nephew, Eumenes I. 263-241, defeats Antiochus I. at
Sardes, 263, and becomes master of Aeolis and the circumjacent
country. His nephew, Attalus I. 241-197, after his victory over
the Galatians, 239, becomes king of Pergamus: a noble prince, and
one whose genius and activity embraced everything. His wars
against Achaeus brought him in alliance with Antiochus III. 216.
Commencement of an alliance with Rome, arising out of his
participation in the Aetolian league against Macedon, 211, in order
to thwart Philip's project of conquest. Hence, after Philip's
irruption into Asia, 203, participation on the side of Rome, in
the Macedonian war. His son Eumenes II. the inheritor of all his
father's great qualities succeeds him, 197-158. As a reward for
his assistance against Antiochus the Great, the Romans presented
him with almost all the territories possessed by the vanquished
king in Asia Minor, (Phrygia, Mysia, Lycaonia, Lydia, Ionia, and a
part of Caria,) which thereafter constituted the kingdom of
Pergamus; this prince extended his frontiers, but lost his
independence. In the war with Perseus he was scarce able to
preserve the good will of the senate, and therewith his kingdom.
His brother, Attalus II. 158-138, a more faithful dependent of
Rome, took part in nearly all the concerns of Asia Minor, more
especially Bithynia. His nephew, Attalus III. 138-133, a prince of
unsound mind, bequeathed his kingdom to the Romans, who, after
vanquishing the lawful heir, Aristonicus, 130, took possession of
it, annexing it to their empire, under the shape of a province
called Asia.--Great discoveries and vast establishments made at
Pergamus. Rich library; subsequently transferred by Antony to
Alexandria, as a present for Cleopatra. Museum. Discovery of
parchment, an invaluable auxiliary to the preservation of works of
literature.
CHOISEUIL GOUFFIER, _Voyage pittoresque de la Grece_, vol. ii.
1809. Containing excellent observations, both on the monuments and
history of Pergamus, as well as on those of all the neighbouring
coasts and islands.
SEVIN, _Recherches sur les rois de Pergame_, inserted in the _Mem.
de l'Acad. des Inscript._ vol. xii.
From the fall of Tyre and the unsuccessful attempt of Demetrius,
B. C. 307, to the establishment of Roman dominion in the east,
300-200, was the brilliant period of Rhodes; alike important for
political wisdom, naval power, and extensive trade. At the head of
the senate ([Greek: boule]) were presidents, ([Greek: prytaneis,])
who went out of office every half year, and were honoured with
precedence in the meetings of the commons. Friendship with all,
alliance with none, was the fundamental maxim of Rhodian policy,
until subverted by Rome. Thus was preserved the dignity of the
state, together with its independence and political
activity--where do we not meet with Rhodian embassies?--and
permanent splendour, resulting from the cultivation of arts and
sciences. What proofs of general commiseration did not Rhodes
enjoy after that dreadful earthquake, which threw down even the
famous colossus, 227! Long did her squadrons command the Aegaean;
over that sea, the Euxine, and the western parts of the
Mediterranean as far as Sicily, her commerce extended, consisting
in the rich exchange of commodities between three quarters of the
globe. Her revenue proceeded from the customs, and was abundant;
until, blinded by avarice, she sought to obtain at Peraea a
territory on the mainland; an ambition of which the Romans availed
themselves to her detriment, by presenting her with Lycia and
Caria, 190. And yet did this republic outlive that of Rome! Great,
indeed, is the chasm left in general history by the loss of the
internal history of this island!
P. D. CH. PAULSEN, _Commentatio exhibens Rhodi descriptionem
Macedonica aetate, Gottingae_, 1818. A prize essay.
3. The other small kingdoms of Asia Minor are fragments rather of the
Persian than of the Macedonian monarchy; for Alexander's march following
another direction, they were not formally subjugated by that conqueror.
The lines of their kings are generally traced back to an early period of
the Persian age; but, properly speaking, their rulers in those days were
nothing more than viceroys: selected indeed, for the most part, from the
royal family, they bore the title of princes, and, in the gradual
decline of the empire, not unfrequently threw up their allegiance.
Nevertheless these kingdoms do not appear as really independent until
after the time of Alexander. Connected with the Grecian republics
Heraclea, Sinope, Byzantium, etc. they formed, both in the Macedonian
and Roman ages, a system of small states, often distracted by internal
wars, and still oftener mere tools in the hands of the more powerful.
1. _Bithynia._ As early as the Persian period, mention is made of
two kings in Bithynia, Dydalsus and Botyras. The son of the
latter, Bias, B. C. 378-328, made head against Caranus, one of
Alexander's generals; as did also his son Zipoetas, _d._ 281,
against Lysimachus.--Lycomedes I. _d._ 248. He called the Gauls
over from Thrace, 278, and with their assistance deposed his
brother Zipoetas; the Gauls in consequence kept their footing in
Galatia, and were for a long time an object of terror to Asia
Minor. Zelas, _d._ about 232; established his dominion after a war
with his half-brothers. Prusias I. son-in-law and ally of Philip
II. of Macedon, _d._ 192. He sided with the Rhodians in the
commercial war against Byzantium, 222, (see above, p. 282.) and
directed his arms, 196, against Heraclea, a Grecian city in
Bithynia, with a respectable territory along shore. Prusias II.
waged war against Eumenes II. at the instigation of Hannibal, who
had fled to his court, 184; he was subsequently about to deliver
up the fugitive to the Romans; had not Hannibal put a period to
his existence, 183: this king likewise waged war against Attalus
II. 153; in both these contests Rome acted as mediator. Prusias,
who had the meanness to style himself a freedman of the Romans,
was dethroned by his own son, Nicomedes II. _d._ 92; a confederate
of Mithridates the Great, with whom, nevertheless, he afterwards
fell out concerning the appropriation of Paphlagonia and
Cappadocia. Nicomedes was murdered by his son Socrates, who was,
however, compelled to flee; in consequence of which Nicomedes III.
succeeded to the crown. Deposed by Mithridates, who supported his
half-brother Socrates, he was reinstated by Rome, 90. Having,
however, at the instigation of the Romans, 89, attacked
Mithridates, he was defeated and expelled in the first Mithridatic
war, now kindled; but in the peace of 85, he was again reinstated
by Sulla. At his death, 75, he bequeathed Bithynia to the Romans;
and this legacy gave rise to the third Mithridatic war.
VAILLANT, _Imperium Arsacidarum_, vol. ii. See below.
SEVIN, _Recherches sur les rois de Bithynie_; inserted in the
_Mem. de l'Academie des Inscript._ vol. xii.
2. _Paphlagonia._ Even in the Persian age, the rulers of this
country were but nominally subject. After Alexander's death, B. C.
323, it fell into the hands of the kings of Pontus; it was,
however, subsequently, again ruled by its own monarchs; among whom
we hear of Morzes, about 179; Pylaemenes I. about 131: who assisted
the Romans in the war against Aristonicus of Pergamus.--Pylaemenes
II. _d._ before 121; who is said to have bequeathed his kingdom to
Mithridates V. of Pontus. Hence Paphlagonia came to be implicated
in the fortunes of Pontus, (see just below,) until after the fall
of Mithridates the Great, 63, that kingdom was converted into a
province, with the exception of one of the southern districts, to
which the Romans left some shadow of freedom.
3. _Pontus._ The later kings of this country derived their origin
from the family of the Achaemenidae, or house of Persia. In the
Persian age they remained dependent or tributary princes: and as
such we must consider Artabazes, son of Hystaspes, _d._ 480,
Mithridates I. _d._ 368, and Ariobarzanes, _d._ 337, mentioned as
the earliest kings of Pontus. Mithridates II. surnamed Ctistes,
_d._ 302, was one of the first to acknowledge subjection to
Alexander; after the death of the conqueror he sided with
Antigonus, who treacherously caused him to be murdered. His son,
Mithridates III. _d._ 266, (the Ariobarzanes of Memnon,) not only
maintained himself after the battle of Ipsus against Lysimachus,
but likewise possessed himself of Cappadocia and Paphlagonia.
Mithridates IV. father-in-law to Antiochus the Great, waged an
unsuccessful war against Sinope. The year of his death is
undetermined, Pharnaces, _d._ about 156. He conquered Sinope 183;
and that town then became the royal residence. War with Eumenes
II. whom Rome had made so powerful, and with his allies;
terminated by a treaty, according to which Pharnaces ceded
Paphlagonia, B. C. 179. Mithridates V. _d._ about 121. He was an
ally of the Romans, from whom, after the defeat of Aristonicus of
Phrygia, he contrived to obtain Great Phrygia. Mithridates VI.
surnamed Eupator, about 121-64. He bore the title of Great, an
epithet to which he was as fully entitled as Peter I. in modern
history; indeed he resembled the Russian prince in almost
everything except in good fortune. His reign, although of the
highest importance to general history, is, particularly in the
portion previous to the wars with Rome, replete with chronological
difficulties.--At the age of twelve years he inherits from his
father not only Pontus, but likewise Phrygia, and a reversionary
title to the throne of Paphlagonia, vacated by the death of
Pylaemenes II.--During his nonage, 121-112, while by voluntarily
inuring himself to hardships, he contrived to elude the
treacherous hostility of his guardians, Rome deprived him of
Phrygia. His conquests in Colchis and on the eastern side of the
Black sea, 112-110.--Commencement of the Scythian wars. Called by
the Greeks of Crimea to their assistance, he expelled the
Scythians; subjected several insignificant Scythian princes on the
mainland; and entered into alliances with the Sarmatic and even
Germanic races as far as the Danube, 108-105, having already a
view to the invasion of Italy from the north.--This war ended, he
travels over Asia, (Asia Minor?) about 104-103.--At his return,
after punishing with death his faithless sister and wife, Laodice,
he makes good his pretensions to Paphlagonia, which he divides
with Nicomedes II. 102. The Roman senate demanding the restoration
of that province, Mithridates not only refuses to accede, but
likewise takes possession of Galatia; meanwhile Nicomedes places
on the throne of Paphlagonia one of his own sons, whom he gives
out to be a son of Pylaemenes II. and denominates Pylaemenes
III.--Rupture with Nicomedes II. 101; the subject of dispute,
Cappadocia, which, after removing the king, Ariarathes VII. his
brother-in-law, with the assistance of Gordius, Mithridates
himself now wished to possess; he is anticipated, however, by
Nicomedes II. who marries Laodice, Ariarathes's
widow.--Mithridates, notwithstanding, expels his rival, under
pretence of holding the kingdom for his sister's son, Ariarathes
VIII. whom at the end of a few months he puts to death at a
private conference, 94; he defeats the brother of the murdered
prince, Ariarathes IX. and then places on the throne, under the
name of Ariarathes X. his own son, who is given out to be a third
son of Ariarathes VII; in opposition to whom Nicomedes sets up
another pretended Ariarathes. The Roman senate, meanwhile, declare
both Paphlagonia and Cappadocia free, B. C. 92; attending,
however, to the desires of the Cappadocians, they sanction the
election of Ariobarzanes to the crown; and he is put in possession
of the kingdom by Sylla, as propraetor of Cilicia, likewise in
92.--Mithridates, on the other hand, forms an alliance with the
king of Armenia, Tigranes, to whom he gives his daughter in
marriage; and employs him in expelling Ariobarzanes.--He himself,
after the death of Nicomedes II. 92, supports the claims of the
deceased king's exiled son, Socrates Chrestus, against the bastard
Nicomedes III. and in the mean time takes possession of
Paphlagonia. Nicomedes and Ariobarzanes are reinstated by a Roman
embassy, 90, Mithridates, in order to gain time against Rome,
causing Socrates to be put to death. The hostilities of Nicomedes,
instituted by Rome, gave rise to the first Roman war, 89-85,
carried on in Asia and Greece, and brought to a conclusion by
Sylla. By the peace of 85, Mithridates restores Bithynia,
Cappadocia, and Paphlagonia.--War with the revolted Colchians and
Bosporans, 84.--Second war with Rome brought about by the Roman
governor, Murena, 83-81. Mithridates hereupon appoints his son,
Machares, king of Bosporus, (Crimea,) whom he afterwards himself
causes to be put to death, 66; he was likewise, in all
probability, the instigator of the migration of the Sarmatae out of
Asia into Europe, in order to maintain his conquests in that
quarter, about 80. Fresh disputes with Rome about Cappadocia, of
which Tigranes takes possession, and third war with Rome, 75-64.
The contest ended in the downfal of Mithridates, caused by the
treachery of his son Pharnaces; Pontus became a Roman province;
although the Romans, in the sequel, appointed over a portion of
the country princes from the royal house, Darius, Polemo I. Polemo
II. until Nero reduced it again wholly to the state of a province.
VAILLANT, _Imperium Achaemenidarum_ in his _Imperium Arsacidarum_,
tom. ii. With the assistance of the coins.
For the history of Mithridates the Great, previously treated
without sufficient chronological accuracy, see DE BROSSES,
_Histoire de la Rep. Romaine_, and more especially
JOAN. ERNST. WOLTERSDORF, _Commentatio vitam Mithridatis Magni,
per annos digestam, sistens; praemio ornata ab A. Phil. Ord.
Gottingae:, A_. 1812.
4. _Cappadocia._ Until the time of Alexander this country remained
a province of the Persian empire, although the governors
occasionally made attempts at insurrection. The ruling family was
here likewise a branch of the royal house; Ariarathes I. was
particularly distinguished about B. C. 354. The prince
contemporary with Alexander was Ariarathes II. who, being attacked
by Perdiccas and Eumenes, fell in the contest, 322. Nevertheless,
his son, Ariarathes III. supported by the Armenians, recovered the
sceptre about 312. The son of this king, Ariaramnes, formed a
matrimonial connection with the Seleucidae, uniting his son
Ariarathes IV. with the daughter of Antiochus [Greek: Theos].
Ariarathes IV. during his lifetime, associated in the government
his son Ariarathes V. _d._ 162. who married Antiochis, daughter to
Antiochus the Great: this princess, finding herself at first
barren, procured two supposititious sons, one of whom, Orophernes,
subsequently wrested the sceptre from the legitimate and later
born son, Ariarathes VI. but was afterwards expelled by the
rightful heir, 157. In the war against Aristonicus of Pergamus,
131, he fell, as an ally of the Romans, leaving behind him six
sons; five of whom were cut off by his ambitious relict Laodice;
the sixth however, Ariarathes VII. ascended the throne, and was
married to Laodice, sister of Mithridates the Great, at whose
instigation he was murdered by Gordius, under pretence of placing
on the throne his sister's son, Ariarathes VIII; this last prince
was soon after treacherously put to death by Mithridates, 94, and
his brother Ariarathes IX. defeated 93, died of a broken heart;
Mithridates then placed on the throne his own son, Ariarathes X. a
lad eight years old. The independence of Cappadocia having
meanwhile been proclaimed at Rome, the inhabitants of the country,
in order to preclude domestic broils, themselves elect a king,
appointing to that dignity Ariobarzanes I. who was installed by
Sylla, 92, and, backed by the Romans, kept his footing in the
Mithridatic wars. In 63 he made the crown over to his son,
Ariobarzanes II. who was slain by the army of Brutus and Cassius,
43, as was his brother, Ariobarzanes III. 34, by Mark Antony;
Antony then appointed Archelaus to be king, who enticed to Rome by
Tiberius, A. D. 17, was there assassinated; and Cappadocia then
became a Roman province.
5. _Armenia_ was a province of the Syrian empire until the defeat
of Antiochus the Great by Rome, 190. That defeat was followed by
the accession of Antiochus's lieutenants, Artaxias and Zariadras;
and now arose the two kingdoms of Armenia Major and Armenia Minor
(the latter on the west bank of the Upper Euphrates). In Armenia
Major the family of Artaxias kept possession of the throne, under
eight (according to others _ten_) consecutive kings, until B. C.
5.--The only remarkable prince of this line was Tigranes I. 95-60,
son-in-law and ally of Mithridates the Great, and lord of Asia
Minor, Cappadocia, and Syria. He was, however, at the peace of 63,
obliged to give up all, so that Armenia was dependent on the
Romans, and remained so until B. C. 5, when it became the object
of contention between the Romans and Parthians, being ruled at
intervals by kings appointed by both parties, who endeavoured
thereby to protect their own provinces. Finally, in A. D. 412,
Armenia became a province of the new Persian empire.--In Asia
Minor the descendants of Zariadras ruled dependently on Rome;
after its defection under Mithridates the Great it usually formed
part of some one of the neighbouring kingdoms, until in the reign
of Vespasian it was converted into a province of the Roman empire.
VAILLANT, _Elenchus regum Armeniae Majoris_, in his _Hist. Imp.
Arsacidarum_.
4. Besides the above small kingdoms, two mighty empires arose in Inner
Asia, both out of Alexander's monarchy, and at the same time: these were
the Parthian and the Bactrian; each having previously constituted a part
of the empire of the Seleucidae, from which they seceded under Antiochus
II. The Parthian kingdom, or that of the Arsacidae, B. C. 256-A. D. 226,
at the maximum of its extension, comprised the countries between the
Euphrates and Indus. Its history, so far as we are acquainted with it,
is divided into four periods (see below); but unfortunately our
information is so imperfect respecting all that relates to the
Parthians, except their wars, that even the most important particulars
are beyond the reach of conjecture.