Chapter V: Part 5

"In many of the Peloponnesian cities, when the power of Sparta
seemed visibly on the wane, internal commotions had arisen, and
much blood had been shed on both sides. But now Argos
displayed the most fearful example of popular fury recorded in
Greek annals, red as they are with tales of civil bloodshed.
{1595}
The democratic populace detected a conspiracy among the
oligarchs, and thirty of the chief citizens were at once put
to death. The excitement of the people was inflamed by the
harangues of demagogues, and the mob, arming itself with
cudgels, commenced a general massacre. When 1,200 citizens had
fallen, the popular orators interfered to check the
atrocities, but met with the same fate; and, sated at length
with bloodshed, the multitude stayed the deadly work. But
where the pressure of Spartan interference had been heaviest
and most constant, there the reaction was naturally most
striking. The popular impulses which were at work in Arkadia
[see above] found their first outlet in the rebuilding of
Mantineia." But there was far from unanimity in the Arkadian
national movement. "In Tegea … public opinion was divided.
The city had been treated by Sparta with special
consideration, and had for centuries been her faithful ally;
hence the oligarchical government looked with disfavour upon
the project of union. But the democratical party was powerful
and unscrupulous; and, with the help of the Mantineians, they
effected a revolution, in which many were killed, and 800
exiles fled to Sparta." The Spartans, under Agesilaos, avenged
them by ravaging the plain in front of Mantineia. "This
invasion of Arkadia is chiefly important for the pretext which
it furnished for Theban intervention. The Mantineians applied
for help at first to Athens, and, meeting with a refusal, went
on to Thebes. For this request Epameinondas must have been
thoroughly prepared beforehand, and he was soon on the march
with a powerful army. … On his arrival in the Peloponnese
[B. C. 370], he found that Agesilaos had already retired; and
some of the Theban generals, considering the season of the
year, wished at once to return." But Epameinondas was
persuaded by the allies of Thebes to make an attempt upon
Sparta itself. "In four divisions the invading host streamed
into the land which, according to the proudest boast of its
inhabitants, had felt no hostile tread for 600 years. At
Sellasia, not ten miles distant from Sparta, the army
reunited; and, having plundered and burnt the town, swept down
into the valley of the Eurotas, and marched along the left
bank till it reached the bridge opposite the city. Within
Sparta itself, though a universal terror prevailed, one man
rose equal to the emergency. While the men fainted in spirit
as they thought how few they were, and how wide their unwalled
city, … Agesilaos accepted, not without mistrust, the
services of 6,000 helots, collected reinforcements, preserved
order, suppressed conspiracy, stamped out mutiny, posted
guards on every vantage-ground, and refused to be tempted to a
battle by the taunts of foes or the clamours of over-eager
friends. … After one unsuccessful cavalry skirmish, the
Theban general, who, in a campaign undertaken on his sole
responsibility, dared not risk the chance of defeat, decided
to leave the 'wasps'-nest' untaken. He completed his work of
devastation by ravaging the whole of southern Lakonia, … and
then turned back into Arkadia to devote himself to the more
permanent objects of his expedition." Messene was now rebuilt
(see MESSENIAN WAR, THE THIRD), and "the descendants of the
old Messenian stock were gathered to form a new nation from
Rhegion and Messene [Sicily], and from the parts of Lybia
round Kyrene. … By thus restoring the Messenians to their
ancient territory, Epameinondas deprived Sparta at one blow of
nearly half her possessions. … At last Epameinondas had done
his work; and, leaving Pammenes with a garrison in Tegea, he
hastened to lead his soldiers home. At the Isthmus he found a
hostile army from Athens," which had been persuaded to send
succor to Sparta; but the Athenians did not care to give
battle to the conquering Thebans, and the latter passed
unopposed. On the arrival of Epameinondas at Thebes, "the
leaders of a petty faction threatened to bring him and his
colleagues to trial for retaining their command for four
months beyond the legal term of office. But Epameinondas stood
up in the assembly, and told his simple tale of victorious
generalship and still more triumphant statesmanship; and the
invidious cavils of snarling intriguers were at once
forgotten." Sparta and Athens now formed an alliance, with the
senseless agreement that command of the common forces "should
be given alternately to each state for five days. … The
first aim of the confederates was to occupy the passes of the
isthmus," but Epameinondas forced a passage for his army,
captured Sikyon, ravaged the territory of Epidauros, and made
a bold but unsuccessful attempt to surprise Corinth. Then, on
the arrival of reinforcements to the Spartans from Syracuse,
he drew back to Thebes (B. C. 368). For a time the Thebans
were occupied with troubles in Thessaly, and their Arkadian
proteges in Peloponnese were carrying on war against Sparta
independently, with so much momentary success that they became
over-confident and rash. They paid for their foolhardiness by
a frightful defeat, which cost them 10,000 men, whilst no
Spartan is said to have fallen; hence the fight was known in
Sparta as the Tearless Battle. "This defeat probably caused
little grief at Thebes, for it would prove to the arrogant
Arkadians that they could not yet dispense with Theban aid;
and it decided Epameinondas to make a third expedition into
the Peloponnese." The result of his third expedition was the
enrolment of a number of Achaian cities as Theban allies,
which gave to Thebes "the control of the coast-line of the
Corinthian gulf." But the broad and statesmanlike terms on
which Epameinondas arranged these alliances were set aside by
his narrow-minded fellow citizens, and a policy adopted by
which Achaia was "converted from a lukewarm neutral into an
enthusiastic supporter of Sparta. In this unsettled state of
Greek politics the Thebans resolved to have recourse, like the
Spartans before them, to the authority of the Great King.
Existing treaties, for which they were not responsible,
acknowledged his right to interfere in the internal affairs of
Greece." Pelopidas and other envoys were accordingly sent to
Susa (E. C. 366), where they procured from Artaxerxes a
rescript "which recognised the independence of Messene and
ordered the Athenians to dismantle their fleet." But the
mandate of the Great King proved void of effect. "After this
the confusion in Greece grew infinitely worse. An accident
transferred the town of Oropos … from the hands of Athens to
those of Thebes; and as the Peloponnesian allies of the
Athenians refused to help them to regain it, they broke with
them, and, in spite of the efforts of Epameinondas, formed an
alliance with Arkadia. …
{1596}
The Athenians made soon after a vain attempt to seize the
friendly city of Corinth, and the disgusted Corinthians,
together with the citizens of Epidauros and Phlious, …
obtained the grudging consent of Sparta, and made a separate
peace with Thebes. As soon as tranquillity was restored in one
quarter, in another the flame of war would again burst forth."
Its next outbreak (B. C. 365) was between Elis and Arkadia,
the former being assisted by Sparta, and its principal event
was a desperate battle fought for the possession of Olympia.
The Arkadians held part of the city and acquired possession of
the sacred treasures in the Olympian temple, which they
determined to apply to the expenses of the war. "Raising the
cry of sacrilege, the Mantineians, who were jealous both of
Tegea and Megalopolis, at once broke loose and shut their
gates." Soon afterwards, Mantineia separated herself wholly
from the Arkadian confederacy and entered the Spartan
alliance. This was among the causes which drew Epameinondas
once more, and for the last time, into the Peloponnese (B. C.
362). "The armies of Greece were now gathering from all
quarters for the great struggle. On the one side stood Sparta,
Athens, Elis, Achaia, and a part of Arkadia, led by Mantineia;
on the other side were ranged Boiotia [Thebes], Argos,
Messenia, and the rest of Arkadia, while a few of the smaller
states—as Phokis, Phlious, and Corinth—remained neutral."
At the outset of his campaign, Epameinondas made a bold
attempt, by a rapid night march, to surprise Sparta; but a
traitorous warning had been given, the Spartans were
barricaded and prepared for defence, and the undertaking
failed. Then he marched quickly to Mantineia, and failed in
his design there, likewise. A pitched battle was necessary to
decide the issue, and it was fought on the plain between
Mantineia and Tegea, on the 3d day of July, B. C. 362. The
fine discipline of the Theban troops and the skilful tactics
of Epameinondas had given the victory into his hands, when,
"suddenly, the aspect of the battle changed. Except among the
light troops on the extreme right, the advance was everywhere
stayed. The Spartan hoplites were in full flight, but the
conquerors did not stir a step in the pursuit. … The fury of
the battle had instantly ceased. … Epameinondas had fallen
wounded to death, and this was the result. … Every heart was
broken, every arm paralysed. … Both sides claimed the
victory in the battle, and erected the usual trophies, but the
real advantage remained with the Thebans. … By the peace
that ensued, the independence of Messenia was secured, and
Megalopolis and the Pan-Arkadian constitution were preserved
from destruction. The work of Epameinondas, though cut short,
was thus not thrown away; and the power of Sparta was confined
within the limits which he had assigned."

_C. Sankey,
The Spartan and Theban Supremacies,
chapter 12._

ALSO IN:
_Xenophon,
Hellenica,
books 5-6._

_E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 6, chapter 2._

_G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 80 (volume 10)._

GREECE: B. C. 359-358.
First proceedings of Philip of Macedonia.
His acquisition of Amphipolis.

The famous Philip of Macedon succeeded to the Macedonian
throne in 359 B. C., at the age of 23. In his youth he had
been delivered to the Thebans as one of the hostages given
upon the conclusion of a treaty of peace in 368. "His
residence at Thebes gave him some tincture of Grecian
philosophy and literature; but the most important lesson which
he learned at that city was the art of war, with all the
improved tactics introduced by Epaminondas. Philip …
displayed at the beginning of his reign his extraordinary
energy and abilities. After defeating the Illyrians he
established a standing army, in which discipline was preserved
by the severest punishments. He introduced the far-famed
Macedonian phalanx, which was 16 men deep, armed with long
projecting spears. Philip's views were first turned towards
the eastern frontiers of his dominions, where his interests
clashed with those of the Athenians. A few years before the
Athenians had made various unavailing attempts to obtain
possession of Amphipolis, once the jewel of their empire, but
which they had never recovered since its capture by Brasidas
in the eighth year of the Peloponnesian war."

_W. Smith,
Smaller History of Greece,
chapter 19._

The importance of Amphipolis to the Athenians arose chiefly
from its vicinity to "the vast forests which clothed the
mountains that enclose the basin of the Strymon, and afforded
an inexhaustible supply of ship-timber." For the same reason
that the Athenians desired ardently to regain possession of
Amphipolis their enemies were strong in the wish to keep it
out of their hands. Moreover, as the Macedonian kingdom became
well-knitted in the strong hands of the ambitious Philip, the
city of "the Nine Ways" assumed importance to that rising
power, and Philip resolved to possess it. It was at this point
that his ambitions first came into conflict with Athens. But
the Athenians were not aware of his aims until too late. He
deceived them completely, in fact, by a bargain to give help
in acquiring Amphipolis for them, and to receive help in
gaining Pydna for himself. But when his preparations were
complete, he suddenly laid siege to Amphipolis and made
himself master of the city (B. C. 358), besides taking Pydna
as well. At Athens, "Philip was henceforth viewed as an open
enemy, and this was the beginning—though without any formal
declaration—of a state of hostility between the two powers,
which was called, from its origin, the Amphipolitan War."

_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapter 42 (volume 5)._

GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
Advancement of Philip of Macedonia to supremacy.
The Sacred Wars and their consequences.
The fatal field of Chæronea.
Philip's preparations for the invasion of Asia.
His assassination.

A war between the Thebans and their neighbors, the Phocians,
which broke out in 357 or 356 B. C., assumed great importance
in Greek history and was called the Sacred War,—as two
earlier contests, in which Delphi was concerned, had been
likewise named. It is sometimes called the Ten Years Sacred
War. Thebes, controlling the shadowy Amphictyonic Council, had
brought a charge of sacrilege against the Phocians and
procured a decree imposing upon them a heavy fine. The
Phocians resisted the decree with unexpected energy, and, by a
bold and sudden movement, gained possession of Delphi, where
they destroyed the records of the Amphictyonic judgment
against them. Having the vast accumulation of the sacred
treasures of the Delphic temple in their hands, they did not
scruple to appropriate them, and were able to maintain a
powerful army of mercenaries, gathered from every part of
Greece, with which they ravaged the territories of Bœotia and
Locris, and acquired control of the pass of Thermopylæ.
{1597}
In the midst of their successes they were called upon for help
by the tyrant of Pheræ in Thessaly, then being attacked by
Philip of Macedon (B. C. 353). The Phocians opposed Philip
with such success, at first, that he retreated from Thessaly;
but it was only to recruit and reanimate his army. Returning
presently he overthrew the Phocian army, with great
slaughter—Onomarchus, its leader, being slain—and made
himself master of all Thessaly. Both Athens and Sparta were
now alarmed by this rapid advance into Central Greece of the
conquering arms of the ambitious Macedonian, and both sent
forces to the help of the Phocians. The former was so
energetic that an army of 5,000 Athenian foot-soldiers and 400
horse reached Thermopylæ (May 352 B. C.) before Philip had
been able to push forward from Thessaly. When he did advance,
proclaiming his purpose to rescue the Delphian temple from
sacrilegious robbers, he was repulsed at the pass and drew
back. It was the beginning of the struggle for Greek
independence against Macedonian energy and ambition. A few
months later Demosthenes delivered the first of his immortal
orations, called afterwards Philippics, in which he strove to
keep the already languishing energy of the Athenians alive, in
unfaltering resistance to the designs of Philip. For six years
there was a state of war between Philip and the Athenians with
their allies, but the conquests of the former in Thrace and
the Chalcidian peninsula were steadily pressed. At length (B.
C. 346) Athens was treacherously persuaded into a treaty of
peace with Philip (the Peace of Philocrates) which excluded
the Phocians from its terms. No sooner had he thus isolated
the latter than he marched quickly to Thermopylæ, secured
possession of the pass and declared himself the supporter of
Thebes. The Sacred War was ended, Delphi rescued, Phocis
punished without mercy, and Greece was under the feet of a
master. This being accomplished, the Peace of Philocrates was
doubtfully maintained for about six years. Then quarrels broke
out which led up to still another Sacred War, and which gave
Philip another opportunity to trample on the liberties of
Greece. Curiously, the provoking causes of this outbreak were
an inheritance from that more ancient Sacred War which brought
ruin upon the town of Cirrha and a lasting curse upon its
soil. The Locrians of Amphissa, dwelling near to the accursed
territory, had ventured in the course of years to encroach
upon it with brick-kilns, and to make use of its harbor. At a
meeting of the Amphictyonic Council, in the spring of B. C.
339, this violation of the Sacred Law was brought to notice,
by way of retaliation for some offence which the deputies of
Amphissa had given to those of Athens. Hostilities ensued
between the citizens of Delphi, pushed on by the Amphictyons,
on one side, and the Amphissians on the other. The influence
of Philip in the Amphictyonic Council was controlling, and his
partisans had no difficulty in summoning him to act for the
federation in settling this portentous affair. He marched into
Bœotia, took possession of the strong city of Elatea, and very
soon made it manifest that he contemplated something more than
mere dealing with the refractory trespassers of Amphissa.
Athens watched his movements with terror, and even Thebes, his
former ally, took alarm. Through the exertions of Demosthenes,
Thebes and Athens, once more, but too late, gave up their
ancient enmity and united their strength and resources in a
firm league. Megara, Corinth and other states were joined to
them and common cause was made with the Locrians of Amphissa.
These movements consumed a winter, and war opened in the
spring. Philip gained successes from the beginning. He took
Amphissa by surprise and carried Naupactus by storm. But it
was not until August—the first day of August, B. C. 338—that
the two combatants came together in force. This occurred in
the Bœotian valley of the Cephisus, near the town of Chæronea,
which gave its name to the battle. The Sacred Band of Thebes
and the hoplites of Athens, with their allies, fought
obstinately and well; but they were no match for the veterans
of the Macedonian phalanx and most of them perished on the
field. It was the last struggle for Grecian independence.
Henceforth, practically at least, Hellas was swallowed up in
Macedonia. We can see very plainly that Philip's "conduct
towards Athens after the victory, under the appearance of
generosity, was extremely prudent. His object was, to separate
the Thebans from the Athenians, and he at once advanced
against the former. The Athenian prisoners he sent home, free
and clothed, accompanied by Antipater; he ordered the dead
bodies to be burned, and their ashes to be conveyed to Athens,
while the Thebans had to purchase their dead from him. He then
entered Thebes, which he seems to have taken without any
resistance, placed a Macedonian garrison in the Cadmea, and,
with the same policy which Sparta had followed at Athens after
the Peloponnesian war, he established an oligarchy of 300 of
his partizans, who were for the most part returned exiles, and
who now, under the protection of the garrison in the Cadmea,
ruled like tyrants, and raged in a fearful manner. … Philip
accepted all the terms which were agreeable to the Athenians;
no investigations were to be instituted against his enemies,
and none of them was to be sent into exile. Athens was not
only to remain a perfectly sovereign city, but retain Lemnos,
Imbros, and Scyros, nay even Samos and Chersonnesus, though he
might have taken the latter without any difficulty, and though
the Athenians had most cleruchiae in Samos. Thus he bought
over the Athenians through this peace, against which
Demosthenes and others, who saw farther, could not venture to
protest, because Philip offered more than they could give him
in return. … The only thing which the Athenians conceded to
Philip, was, that they concluded a symmachia with him, and
conferred upon him the supreme command in the Persian war. For
with great cunning Philip summoned an assembly of the Greeks
whom he called his allies, to Corinth, to deliberate upon the
war against Persia. The war of revenge against the Persians
had already become a popular idea in Greece. … Philip now
entered Peloponnesus with his whole army, and went to the diet
at Corinth, where the Greek deputies received his orders. In
Peloponnesus he acted as mediator, for he was invited as such
by the Arcadians, Messenians, and Argives, to decide their
disputes with Lacedaemon, and they demanded that he should
restore to them their ancient territories.
{1598}
The Arcadians had formerly possessed many places on the
Eurotas, and the Messenians were still very far from having
recovered all their ancient territories. He accordingly fixed
the boundaries, and greatly diminished the extent of Laconia.
… The Spartans, on that occasion, behaved in a dignified
manner; they were the only ones who refused to acknowledge
Philip as generalissimo against Persia. … Even the ancients
regarded the day of Chaeronea as the death-day of Greece;
every principle of life was cut off; the Greeks, indeed,
continued to exist, but in spirit, and politically, they were
dead. … Philip was now at the height of his power.
Byzantium, and the other allied cities, had submitted to the
conqueror, when he sent his army against them, and he was
already trying to establish himself in Asia. 'A detachment of
troops, under Attalus, had been sent across, to keep open the
road for the great expedition, and had encamped on mount Ida.'
Philip was thus enabled to commence his passage across the
Hellespont whenever he pleased. But the close of his career
was already at hand." He was assassinated in August, B. C.
336, by a certain Pausanias, at the instigation, it is said,
of Olympias, one of Philip's several wives—and the mother of
his famous son Alexander—whom he had repudiated to please a
younger bride. "Philip was unquestionably an uncommon and
extraordinary man, and the opinion of several among the
ancients, that by the foundation of the Macedonian state he
did something far greater than Alexander by the application of
the powers he inherited, is quite correct. … When we regard
him as the creator of his state, by uniting the most different
nations, Macedonians and Greeks; … when we reflect what a
man he must have been, from whom proceeded the impulse to
train such great generals, … to whom Alexander, it must be
observed, did not add one, for all Alexander's generals
proceeded from the school of Philip, and there is not one whom
Alexander did not inherit from Philip;—when we perceive the
skill with which he gained over nations and states, … we
cannot but acknowledge that he was an extraordinary man."

_B. G. Niebuhr,
Lectures on Ancient History,
lectures 69 and 66 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:
_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapters 43-46 (volumes 5-6)._

_T. Leland,
History of the Life and Reign of Philip of Macedon,
books 2-5._

GREECE: B. C. 351-348.
The Olynthian War.
Destruction of Olynthus by Philip of Macedonia.

After the overthrow of Spartan domination in Greece, Olynthus
recovered its independence and regained, during the second
quarter of the fourth century B. C., a considerable degree of
prosperity and power. It was even helped in its rise by the
cunning, dangerous hand of Philip of Macedon, who secured many
and great advantages in his treacherous diplomacy by playing
the mutual jealousies of Athens and Olynthus against one
another. The Olynthian Confederacy, formed anew, just served
its purpose as a counterpoise to the Athenian Confederacy,
until Philip had no more need of that service. He was the
friend and ally of the former until he had secured Amphipolis,
Methone, and other necessary positions in Macedonia and
Thrace. Then the mask began to slip and Olynthus (B. C. 351)
got glimpses of the true character of her subtle neighbor. Too
late, she made overtures to Athens, and Athens, too late, saw
the vital importance of a league of friendship between the two
Greek confederacies, against the half Hellenic, half barbaric
Macedonian kingdom. Three of the great speeches of
Demosthenes—the "Olynthiac orations"—were made upon this
theme, and the orator succeeded for the first time in
persuading his degenerated countrymen to act upon his clear
view of the situation. Athens and Olynthus were joined in a
defensive league and Athenian ships and men were sent to the
Chalcidian peninsula,—too late. Partly by the force of his
arms and partly by the power of his gold, buying traitors,
Philip took Olynthus (B. C. 348) and all the thirty-two lesser
towns that were federated with her. He took them and he
destroyed them most brutally. "The haughty city of Olynthus
vanished from the face of the earth, and together with it
thirty-two towns inhabited by Greeks and flourishing as
commercial communities. … The lot of those who saved life
and liberty was happy in comparison with the fate of those
who, like the majority of the Olynthians, fell into the hands
of the conqueror and were sold into slavery, while their
possessions were burnt to ashes or flung as booty to the
mercenaries. … The mines continued to be worked for the
royal treasury; with this exception the whole of Chalcidice
became a desert"

_E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 7, chapter 3 (volume 5)._

ALSO IN:
_A. M. Curteis,
Rise of the Macedonian Empire,
chapters 4-5._

_B. G. Niebuhr,
Lectures on Ancient History,
lectures 66-68 (volume 2)._

GREECE: B. C. 340.
Siege of Byzantium by Philip of Macedonia.

The enmity between Athens and Byzantium yielded in 340 B. C.
to their common fear of Philip of Macedon, and the exertions
of Demosthenes brought about an alliance of the two cities, in
which Perinthus, the near neighbor of Byzantium, was also
joined. Philip, in wrath, proceeded with a fleet and army
against both cities, laying siege, first to Perinthus and
afterwards to Byzantium, but without success in either case.
He was compelled to withdraw, after wasting several months in
the fruitless undertaking. It was one of the few failures of
the able Macedonian.

_G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 90 (volume 11)._

GREECE: B. C. 336-335.
Northern campaign of Alexander of Macedonia.
Revolt at Thebes.
Destruction of the city.

"Alexander … took up and continued the political and
military schemes which his father had begun. We first make
acquaintance with him and his army during his campaign against
the tribes on the northern frontier of Makedonia. This
campaign he carried out with energy equal to that of Philip,
and with more success (spring of 335 B. C.). The distinctive
feature of the war was that the Makedonian phalanx, the
organization and equipment of which were adapted from Grecian
models, everywhere won and maintained the upper hand. … Even
at this epoch Byzantium was rising into importance. That city
had, owing to its hostility with Persia, deserted the side of
the Greeks for that of the Makedonians. It was from Byzantium
that Alexander summoned triremes to help him against the
island in the Danube on which the king of the Triballi had
taken refuge. … The great successes of Alexander induced all
the neighboring nationalities to accept the proposals of
friendship which he made to them. … In Greece false reports
concerning the progress of events in the north had raised to
fever heat the general ferment which naturally existed.
{1599}
Alexander relied upon the resolutions of the League of the
Public Peace [formed by the Congress at Corinth], which had
recognized his father and afterwards himself as its head. But
he was now opposed by all those who were unable to forget
their former condition, and who preferred the alliance with
Persia which had left them independent, to the league with
Makedonia which robbed them of their autonomy. … Thebes took
the lead of the malcontents, and set about ridding herself of
the garrison which Philip had placed in the Cadmeia. She thus
became the centre of the whole Hellenic opposition. The
enemies of Makedon, who had been exiled from every city,
assembled in Thebes. … The same party was stirring in
Lakedæmon, in Arcadia, in Ætolia, and, above all, at Athens.
From Athens the Thebans were supplied, through the mediation
of Demosthenes, and doubtless by means of Persian gold, with
arms, of which they were likely to stand in need. …
Alexander had no sooner settled with his enemies in the north
than he turned to Hellas. So rapid was his movement that he
found the pass of Thermopylæ still open, and, long before he
was expected, appeared before the walls of Thebes." The fate
of the city was decided by a battle in which the Makedonians
were overwhelmingly victorious. "In the market-place, in the
streets, in the very houses, there ensued a hideous massacre.
… The victors were, however, not satisfied with the
slaughter. Alexander summoned a meeting of his League, by
which the complete destruction of Thebes was decreed, and this
destruction was actually carried out (October, 335 B. C.). [At
the same time Platæa, which Thebes had destroyed, was ordered
to be rebuilt.] In Grecian history it was no unheard-of event
that the members of the defeated nation should be sold into
slavery, and so it happened on this occasion. The sale of the
slaves supplied Alexander with a sum of money which was no
inconsiderable addition to his military chest. But his main
object was to strike terror, and this was spread through
Greece by the ruthless destruction of the city of Œdipus, of
Pindar, and of Epameinondas. … Deep and universal horror
fell upon the Greeks. … The close connection that existed at
this moment between Grecian and Persian affairs forbade him to
lose a moment in turning his arms towards Asia. … A war
between Alexander and Persia was inevitable, not only on
account of the relation of the Greeks to Makedon, whose yoke
they were very loth to bear, but on account of their relation
to Persia, on whose support they leaned. … The career which
Philip had begun, and in which Alexander was now proceeding,
led of necessity to a struggle with the power that held sway
in Asia Minor. Until that power were defeated, the Makedonian
kingdom could not be regarded as firmly established."

_L. von Ranke,
Universal History:
The Oldest Historical Group of Nations and the Greeks,
chapter 10, part 2._

ALSO IN:
_Arrian,
Anabasis of Alexander,
book 1, chapters 1-10._

_T. A. Dodge,
Alexander,
chapters 14-17._

GREECE: B. C. 334-323.
Asiatic conquests of Alexander the Great.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 334-330; and 330-323.

GREECE: B. C. 323-322.
Attempt to break the Macedonian yoke.
The Lamian War.
Subjugation of Athens.
Suppression of democracy.
Expulsion of poor citizens.
Death of Demosthenes.

On the death of Alexander the Great, B. C. 323, a party at
Athens which still hoped for freedom in Greece set on foot a
vigorous movement designed to break the Macedonian yoke. A
league was formed in which many cities joined—a larger
assemblage of Hellenic states, says Mr. Grote, than that which
resisted Xerxes in 480 B. C. A powerful army of Greek citizens
and mercenaries was formed and placed under the command of a
capable Athenian, Leosthenes, who led it into Thessaly, to
meet the Macedonian general Antipater, who now ruled Greece.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.

The latter was defeated in a battle which ensued, and was
driven into the fortified Thessalian town of Lamia, where he
was besieged. Unfortunately, Leosthenes was killed during the
progress of the siege, and a long interval occurred before a
new commander could be agreed on. This gave Antipater time to
obtain succor from Asia. A Macedonian army, under Leonnatus,
crossed the Hellespont, and the besiegers of Lamia were forced
to break up their camp in order to meet it. They did so with
success; Leonnatus was slain and his army driven back. But
meantime Antipater escaped from Lamia, joined the defeated
troops and retreated into Macedonia. The war thus begun, and
which took the name of the Lamian War, was continued, not
unfavorably to the confederates, on the whole, until the
following summer—August, 322 B. C.—when it was ended by a
battle fought on the plain of Krannon, in Thessaly. Antipater,
who had been joined by Kraterus, from Asia, was the victor,
and Athens with all her allies submitted to the terms which he
dictated. He established a Macedonian garrison in Munychia,
and not only suppressed the democratic constitution of Athens,
but ordered all the poorer citizens—all who possessed less
than 2,000 drachmæ's worth of property, being 12,000 out of
the 21,000 who then possessed the Athenian franchise—to be
driven from the city; thus leaving a selected citizenship of
9,000 of the richer and more manageable men. The banished or
deported 12,000 were scattered in Thrace, Illyria, Italy and
even in northern Africa. The leaders of the anti-Macedonian
rising were pursued with unrelenting animosity. Demosthenes,
the great orator, who had been conspicuous among them, was
dragged from a temple at Kalauria, to which he had fled, and
took poison to escape the worse death which probably awaited
him.

_G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 95 (volume 12)._

GREECE: B. C. 323-301.
Wars of the Diadochi or Successors of Alexander.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316; 315-310; and 310-301.

GREECE: B. C. 321-312.
The contest for Athens and Peloponnesus, between Cassander and
Polysperchon.
Execution of Phocion.
Restoration of Thebes.

"Antipater, after the termination of the Lamian war, passed
over to Asia and took part in the affairs there.

See MACEDONIA: A. D. 323-316.

Being appointed guardian to the Kings, as the children and
relatives of Alexander were called, he returned to Macedonia,
leading them with him. … Antipater died (Olympiad 115, 3)
shortly after his return to Macedonia. He directed that
Polysperchon, his ancient mate in arms, should succeed him in
his office, while to his son Cassander he left only the second
place. But Cassander, an ambitious youth, looked upon his
father's authority as his inheritance; and relying on the aid
of the aristocratic party in the Grecian states, of Ptolemæus,
who ruled in Egypt, and of Antigonus, the most powerful
general in Asia, he resolved to dispute it with Polysperchon.
{1600}
Under pretext of going a-hunting, he escaped out of Macedonia,
and passed over to Asia to concert matters with Antigonus.
Polysperchon, seeing war inevitable, resolved to detach
Greece, if possible, from Cassander. Knowing that the
oligarchies established in the different states by Antipater
would be likely to espouse the cause of his son, he issued a
pompous edict, in the name of the Kings, restoring the
democracies. … At Athens (Olympiad 115,4) [B. C. 317],
Nicanor, who commanded in the Munychia, finding that the
people were inclined toward Polysperchon, secretly collected
troops, and seized the Piræeus. The people sent to him
Phocion, Conon the son of Timotheüs, and Clearchus, men of
distinction, and his friends; but to no purpose. A letter also
came to him from Olympias, Alexander's mother, whom
Polysperchon had recalled from Epeirus, and given the charge
of her infant grandson, ordering him to surrender both the
Munychia and the Piræeus; but to as little effect. Finally,
Polysperchon's son Alexander entered Attica with an army, and
encamped before the Piræeus. Phocion and other chiefs of the
aristocracy went to Alexander, and advised him not to give
these places up to the people, but to hold them himself till
the contest with Cassander should be terminated. They feared,
it is evident, for their own safety, and not without reason;
for the people, ferocious with the recovery of power, soon
after held an assembly, in which they deposed all the former
magistrates, appointed the most furious democrats in their
room, and passed sentences of death, banishment, and
confiscation of goods on those who had governed under the
oligarchy. Phocion and his friends fled to Alexander, who
received them kindly, and sent them with letters in their
favor to his father, who was now in Phocis. The Athenians also
despatched an embassy, and, yielding to motives of interest,
Polysperchon sent his suppliants prisoners to Athens, to stand
a trial for their lives before the tribunal of an anarchic
mob. … The prisoners were condemned and led off to prison,
followed by the tears of their friends and the triumphant
execrations of their mean-spirited enemies. They drank the
fatal hemlock-juice, and their bodies were cast unburied
beyond the confines of Attica. Four days after the death of
Phocion, Cassander arrived at the Piræeus with 35 ships,
carrying 4,000 men, given him by Antigonus. Polysperchon
immediately entered Attica with 20,000 Macedonian foot and
4,000 of those of the allies, 1,000 horse, and 65 elephants,
which he had brought from Asia, and encamped near the Piræeus.
But as the siege was likely to be tedious, and sufficient
provisions for so large an army could not be had, he left a
force such as the country could support with his son
Alexander, and passed with the remainder into Peloponnesus, to
force the Megalopolitans to submit to the Kings; for they
alone sided with Cassander, all the rest having obeyed the
directions to put to death or banish his adherents. The whole
serviceable population of Megalopolis, slaves included,
amounted to 15,000 men; and under the directions of one Damis,
who had served in Asia under Alexander, they prepared for a
vigorous defence. Polysperchon sat down before the town, and
his miners in a short time succeeded in throwing down three
towers and a part of the wall. He attempted a storm, but was
obliged to draw off his men, after an obstinate conflict. …
The Athenians meantime saw themselves excluded from the sea,
and from all their sources of profit and enjoyment, while
little aid was to be expected from Polysperchon, who had been
forced to raise the siege of Megalopolis, and whose fleet had
just now been destroyed by Antigonus in the Hellespont. A
citizen of some consideration ventured at length to propose in
the assembly an arrangement with Cassander. The ordinary
tumult at first was raised, but the sense of interest finally
prevailed. Peace was procured, on the conditions of the
Munychia remaining in Cassander's hands till the end of the
present contest; political privileges being restricted to
those possessed of ten minas and upwards of property, and a
person appointed by Cassander being at the head of the
government. The person selected for this office was Demetrius
of Phaleron, a distinguished Athenian citizen; and under his
mild and equitable rule the people were far happier than they
could have been under a democracy, for which they had proved
themselves no longer fit. Cassander then passed over into
Peloponnesus, and laid siege to Tegea. While here, he heard
that Olympias had put to death several of his friends in
Macedonia; among the rest, Philip Aridæus and his wife
Eurydice, members of the royal family. He at once (Olympiad
116, 1) [B. C. 316] set out for Macedonia; and, as the pass of
Pylæ was occupied by the Ætolians, he embarked his troops in
Locris, and landed them in Thessaly. He besieged Olympias in
Pydna, forced her to surrender, and put her to death.
Macedonia submitted to him, and he then set forth for
Peloponnesus, where Polysperchon's son Alexander was at the
head of an army. He forced a passage through Pylæ, and coming
into Bœotia, announced his intention of restoring Thebes,
which had now lain desolate for twenty years. The scattered
Thebans were collected; the towns of Bœotia and other parts of
Greece (Athens in particular), and even of Italy and Sicily,
aided to raise the walls and to supply the wants of the
returning exiles, and Thebes was once more numbered among the
cities of Greece. As Alexander guarded the Isthmus, Cassander
passed to Megara, where he embarked his troops and elephants,
and crossed over to Epidaurus. He made Argos and Messene come
over to his side, and then returned to Macedonia. In the
conflict of interests which prevailed in this anarchic period,
Antigonus was ere long among the enemies of Cassander. He sent
one of his generals to Laconia, who, having obtained
permission from the Spartans to recruit in Peloponnesus,
raised 8,000 men. The command in Peloponnesus was given to
Polysperchon, whose son Alexander was summoned over to Asia to
accuse Cassander of treason before the assembly of the
Macedonian soldiers. Cassander was proclaimed a public enemy
unless he submitted to Antigonus; at the same time the Greeks
were declared independent, Antigonus hoping thus to gain them
over to his side. He then sent Alexander back with 500
talents; and when Ptolemæus of Egypt heard what Antigonus had
done, he also hastened to declare the independence of the
Greeks; for all the contending generals were anxious to stand
well with the people of Greece, from which country, exclusive
of other advantages, they drew their best soldiers.
{1601}
… Antigonus, to show the Greeks that he was in earnest in
his promise to restore them to independence, sent one of his
generals, named Telesphorus, with a fleet and army to
Peloponnesus, who expelled Cassander's garrisons from most of
the towns. The following year (Olympiad 117, 1) [B. C. 312] he
sent an officer, named Ptolemæus, with another fleet and army
to Greece. Ptolemæus landed in Bœotia, and being joined by
2,200 foot, and 1,300 horse of the Bœotians, he passed over to
Eubœa; where having expelled the Macedonian garrison from
Chalcis (the only town there which Cassander held), he left it
without any foreign garrison, as a proof that Antigonus meant
fairly. He then took Orôpus, and gave it to the Bœotians; he
entered Attica, and the people forced Demetrius Phalereus to
make a truce with him, and to send to Antigonus to treat of an
alliance. Ptolemæus returned to Bœotia, expelled the garrison
from the Cadmeia, and liberated Thebes."

_T. Keightley,
History of Greece,
part 3, chapter 5._

ALSO IN:
_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapter 58 (volume 7)._

GREECE: B. C. 307-197.
Demetrius and the Antigonids.

In the spring of the year 307 B. C. Athens was surprised by an
expedition sent from Ephesus by Antigonus, under his
adventurous son Demetrius, surnamed Poliorcetes.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 310-301.

The city had then been for ten years subject to Cassander, the
ruling chief in Macedonia for the time, and appears to have
been mildly governed by Cassander's lieutenant, Demetrius the
Phalerian. The coming of the other Demetrius offered nothing
to the Athenians but a change of masters, but they welcomed
him with extravagant demonstrations. Their degeneracy was
shown in proceedings of Asiatic servility. They deified
Demetrius and his father Antigonus, erected altars to them and
appointed ministering priests. After some months spent at
Athens in the enjoyment of these adulations, Demetrius
returned to Asia, to take part in the war which Antigonus was
waging with Ptolemy of Egypt and Lysimachus of Thrace, two of
his former partners in the partition of the empire of
Alexander. He was absent three years, and then returned, at
the call of the Athenians, to save them from falling again
into the hands of Cassander. He now made Athens his capital,
as it were, for something more than a year, while he acquired
control of Corinth, Argos, Sicyon, Chalcis in Eubœa and other
important places, greatly reducing the dominion of the
Macedonian, Cassander. His treatment at Athens, during this
period, was marked by the same impious and disgraceful
servility as before. He was called the guest of the goddess
Athene and lodged in the Parthenon, which he polluted with
intolerable debaucheries. But in the summer of 301 B. C. this
clever adventurer was summoned again to Asia, to aid his
father in the last great struggle, which decided the partition
of the empire of Alexander between his self-constituted heirs.
At the battle of Ipsus (see MACEDONIA: B. C. 310-301),
Antigonus perished and Demetrius was stripped of the kingdom
he expected to inherit. He turned to Athens for consolation,
and the fickle city refused to admit him within her walls. But
after some period of wanderings and adventures the
unconquerable prince got together a force with which he
compelled the Athenians to receive him, on more definite terms
of submission on their part and of mastery on his. Moreover,
he established his rule in the greater part of Peloponnesus,
and finally, on the death of Cassander (B. C. 297), he
acquired the crown of Macedonia. Not satisfied with what
fortune had thus given him, he attempted to recover the
Asiatic kingdom of his father, and died, B. C. 283, a captive
in the hands of the Syrian monarch, Seleucus. His Macedonian
kingdom had meantime been seized by Pyrrhus of Epirus; but it
was ultimately recovered by the eldest legitimate son of
Demetrius, called Antigonus Gonatus. From that time, for a
century, until the Romans came, not only Macedonia, but Greece
at large, Athens included, was ruled or dominated by this king
and his descendants, known as the Antigonid kings.

_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapters 59-60 (volumes 7-8)._

GREECE: B. C. 297-280.
Death of Cassander.
Intrigues and murders of Ptolemy Keraunos and his strange
acquisition of the Macedonian throne.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 297-280.

GREECE: B. C. 280-279.
Invasion by the Gauls.

See GAULS: B. C. 280-279.

GREECE: B. C. 280-275.
Campaigns of Pyrrhus in Italy and Sicily.

See ROME: B. C. 282-275.

GREECE: B. C. 3d Century.
The Hellenistic world.

As the result of the conquests of Alexander and the wars of
his successors, there were, in the third century before
Christ, three great Hellenistic kingdoms, Macedonia, Egypt,
Syria, which lasted, each under its own dynasty, till Rome
swallowed them up. The first of these, which was the poorest,
and the smallest, but historically the most important,
included the ancestral possessions of Philip and Alexander—
Macedonia, most of Thrace, 'Thessaly, the mountainous centre
of the peninsula, as well as a protectorate more or less
definite and absolute over Greece proper, the Cyclades, and
certain tracts of Caria. … Next came Egypt, including Cyrene
and Cyprus, and a general protectorate over the sea-coast
cities of Asia Minor up to the Black Sea, together with claims
often asserted with success on Syria, and on the coast lands
of Southern Asia Minor. … Thirdly came what was now called
Syria, on account of the policy of the house of Seleucus, who
built there its capital, and determined to make the Greek or
Hellenistic end of its vast dominions its political centre of
gravity. The Kingdom of Syria owned the south and south-east
of Asia Minor, Syria, and generally Palestine, Mesopotamia,
and the mountain provinces adjoining it on the East, with
vague claims further east when there was no king like
Sandracottus to hold India and the Punjaub with a strong hand.
There was still a large element of Hellenism in these remote
parts. The kingdom of Bactria was ruled by a dynasty of kings
with Greek names—Euthydemus is the chief—who coined in Greek
style, and must therefore have regarded themselves as
successors to Alexander. There are many exceptions and
limitations to this general description, and many secondary
and semi-independent kingdoms, which make the picture of
Hellenism infinitely various and complicated. There was, in
fact, a chain of independent kingdoms reaching from Media to
Sparta, all of which asserted their complete freedom, and
generally attained it by balancing the great powers one
against the other.
{1602}
Here they are in their order. Atropatene was the kingdom in
the northern and western parts of the province of Media, by
Atropates, the satrap of Alexander, who claimed descent from
the seven Persian chiefs who put Darius I. on the throne. Next
came Armenia, hardly conquered by Alexander, and now
established under a dynasty of its own. Then Cappadocia, the
land in the heart of Asia Minor, where it narrows between
Cilicia and Pontus, ruled by sovereigns also claiming royal
Persian descent. … Fourthly, Pontus, under its equally
Persian dynast Mithridates—a kingdom which makes a great
figure in Eastern history under the later Roman Republic.
There was moreover a dynast of Bithynia, set up and supported
by the robber state of the Celtic Galatians, which had just
been founded, and was a source of strength and of danger to
all its neighbours. Then Pergamum, just being founded and
strengthened by the first Attalid, Philetærus, an officer of
Lysimachus, and presently to become one of the leading
exponents of Hellenism. … Almost all these second-rate
states (and with them the free Greek cities of Heracleia,
Cyzicus, Byzantium, &c.) were fragments of the shuttered
kingdom of Lysimachus. … We have taken no account of a very
peculiar feature extending all through even the Greek
kingdoms, especially that of the Selucids—the number of large
Hellenistic cities founded as special centres of culture, or
points of defence, and organized as such with a certain local
independence. These cities, most of which we only know by
name, were the real backbone of Hellenism in the world.
Alexander had founded seventy of them, all called by his name.
Many were upon great trade lines, like the Alexandria which
still exists. Many were intended as garrison towns in the
centre of remote provinces, like Candahar—a corruption of
Iskanderieh, Iskendar being the Oriental form for Alexander.
Some were mere outposts, where Macedonian soldiers were forced
to settle, and guard the frontiers against the barbarians,
like the Alexandria on the Iaxartes. … As regards Seleucus
… we have a remarkable statement from Appian that he founded
cities through the length and breadth of his kingdom, viz.,
sixteen Antiochs called after his father, five Laodiceas after
his mother, nine Seleucias after himself, three Apameias and
one Stratoniceia after his wives. … All through Syria and
Upper Asia there are many towns bearing Greek and Macedonian
names—Berea, Edessa, Perinthos, Aclæa, Pella, &c. The number
of these, which have been enumerated in a special catalogue by
Droysen, the learned historian of Hellenism, is enormous, and
the first question which arises in our mind is this: where
were Greek-speaking people found to fill them? It is indeed
true that Greece proper about this time became depopulated,
and that it never has recovered from this decay. … Yet …
the whole population of Greece would never have sufficed for
one tithe of the cities—the great cities—founded all over
Asia by the Diadochi. We are therefore driven to the
conclusion that but a small fraction, the soldiers and
officials of the new cities, were Greeks—Macedonians, when
founded by Alexander himself—generally broken down veterans,
mutinous and discontented troops, and camp followers. To these
were associated people from the surrounding country, it being
Alexander's fixed idea to discountenance sporadic country life
in villages and encourage town communities. The towns
accordingly received considerable privileges. … The Greek
language and political habits were thus the one bond of union
among them, and the extraordinary colonizing genius of the
Greek once more proved itself."

_J. P. Mahaffy,
The Story of Alexander's Empire,
chapter 10._

See, also,
HELLENIC GENIUS AND INFLUENCE.

GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
The Achaian League.
Its rise and fall.
Destruction of Sparta.
Supremacy of Rome.

The Achaian League, which bore a leading part in the affairs
of Greece during the last half of the third and first half of
the second century before Christ, was in some sense the
revival of a more ancient confederacy among the cities of
Achaia in Peloponnesus. The older League, however, was
confined to twelve cities of Achaia and had little weight,
apparently, in general Hellenic politics. The revived League
grew beyond the territorial boundaries which were indicated by
its name, and embraced the larger part of Peloponnesus. It
began about 280 B. C. by the forming of a union between the
two Achaian cities of Patrai and Dyme. One by one their
neighbors joined them, until ten cities were confederated and
acting as one. "The first years of the growth of the Achaian
League are contemporary with the invasion of Macedonia and
Greece by the Gauls and with the wars between Pyrrhos and
Antigonos Gonatas.

See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 277-244.