Childrens Literature A Readers History From Aesop To

Harry Potter

Sold on alibris.com
( 4.8/5.0 ★ | 102 downloads )
-- Click the link to download --

https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1494105.26
539780226473017&type=15&murl=https%3A%2F%2F2.zoppoz.workers.dev%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fwww.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2
Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F9780226473017
Childrens Literature A Readers
History From Aesop To Harry Potter

ISBN: 9780226473017
Category: Media > Books > Non-Fiction > Education Books
File Fomat: PDF, EPUB, DOC...
File Details: 16.7 MB
Language: English
Website: alibris.com
Short description: Good condition book with a firm cover and clean
readable pages. Shows normal use including some light wear or limited
notes highlighting yet remains a dependable copy overall. Supplemental
items like CDs or access codes may not be included.

DOWNLOAD: https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&
offerid=1494105.26539780226473017&type=15&murl=http%3A%2F%2F
www.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F9780226473017
 Childrens Literature A
Readers History From
Aesop To Harry Potter

• Click the link: https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1494105.2653978022647301

7&type=15&murl=https%3A%2F%2F2.zoppoz.workers.dev%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fwww.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F9780226473017 to do
latest version of Childrens Literature A Readers History From Aesop To Harry Potter in multiple
formats such as PDF, EPUB, and more.
• Don’t miss the chance to explore our extensive collection of high-quality resources, books, and guides on
our website. Visit us regularly to stay updated with new titles and gain access to even more valuable
materials.
.
he was at the greatest distance.
The show-kings were now handed over to Antipater. The
unfortunate Philip Arrhidæus was married to Eurydice, the daughter
of Cyna—a circumstance which is of interest only in the tragic fate of
the house of Philip. Eurydice, on account of her ambition, now
endeavoured to throw matters into confusion, but Antipater took her
and Arrhidæus, as well as Roxane and her child, to Europe with him,
and compelled them, as long as he lived, to be more humble. It may
in some respects have been disagreeable to the ambitious
Macedonian rulers in Asia, that the members of the royal family were
in Macedonia in the hands of Antipater; but at the same time this
very circumstance paved the way for their independence.
A new distribution of the satrapies also was then undertaken,
which, however, was soon set at nought by Ptolemy, who by force
made himself master of Phœnicia and Syria, and expelled the
governors of these provinces.

THE FEATS OF EUMENES

In the meantime, there had been going on in
[321-301 b.c.] Asia Minor the war between Eumenes, the
satrap of Cappadocia, and Antigonus, the satrap
of Phrygia, with the party of Antipater; and in that war Craterus had
fallen. He had come to the assistance of Antigonus, but Eumenes
gained a brilliant victory over him, and Craterus lost his life. But now
a storm was rising against Eumenes: a superior force, for which he
was no match, was assembling against him. He was sometimes
successful, but he succumbed in the end.
The facts are these. After the death of Perdiccas, Eumenes,
together with the other partisans of Perdiccas, especially his brother
Alcetas of Pisidia, was declared an outlaw in an assembly of the
Macedonian army, which on such occasions represented the nation.
Antigonus was commissioned to carry the sentence into effect, and
he also received the means necessary for this object—but he
employed them for the purpose of establishing for himself a larger
dominion.
Eumenes, after having lost a battle in Cappadocia, in the face of
Antigonus, shut himself up with five hundred men, in the mountain
fortress of Nora in Cappadocia, and disbanded his whole army, in the
hope that if circumstances should improve, his soldiers would be
drawn towards him as towards a magnet. He sustained the siege for
half a year. Then, after having been besieged in vain during the
winter, he escaped from the besiegers, having kept them engaged,
until he had collected strength in other parts. He fled into Syria, and
then to the upper satrapies (which had taken no part in the earlier
war) to Antigenes of Susa, and Peucestas of Persia. A second war
then broke out between Eumenes and Antigonus.
The death of Antipater, which had taken place in the meantime,
had greatly altered all circumstances. He had appointed
Polysperchon regent, and the latter called upon Olympias to come
forward again. Antigonus, Cassander, and Ptolemy (though the last
did not do so actively), declared against him; Polysperchon, on the
other hand, put himself in connection with Eumenes, on behalf of
Olympias and her grandson, and called upon him to take the family
of Alexander under his protection.
Eumenes now appeared in upper Asia with full authority from
Olympias. The argyraspidæ and most of Alexander’s veterans were
likewise in those parts, for what reason, we know not. They looked
upon themselves as a station of invalids, were in the enjoyment of
perfect leisure, and lived in the greatest abundance, like the
followers of the Normans in England. They were all seigneurs. They
had hitherto joined no party, and lived like a nation of Mamelukes,
almost in the forms of a republic. Eumenes, provided with the
authorisation of Olympias, now applied to them, and gained them
over to his side. The satraps also declared themselves in his favour,
and he obtained possession of the royal treasures. With these means
at his command, Eumenes for years carried on the war on behalf of
Olympias and young Alexander. For years he overcame the jealousy
of the Macedonian commanders, who hated him as a foreigner, and
controlled those old faithless men of the sword. He induced them to
quit their merry quarters for the objects he stated to them, to follow
him, and to risk their own existence for his personal objects; he
guided them all by assuming the appearance that they were all
equal, and by erecting a symbolical throne of Alexander.
All the Macedonian world was now divided into two masses, which
fought against each other both in Europe and in Asia. Cassander was
engaged in Greece against Polysperchon, and Antigonus in Asia
against Eumenes, still pretending that he was obliged to carry into
effect the decrees of the Macedonian army against Eumenes.
The power of Antigonus, however, increased immensely through
the war with which he was commissioned: he not only made himself
master of Eumenes’ satrapy of Cappadocia in western Asia, and of
other satrapies in Asia Minor, such as Pisidia and Lycia, but he also
occupied Media and the intermediate provinces, so that his rule
extended from the Hellespont to Persia. He took his headquarters at
Ecbatana, whence he made war upon the southern provinces. In
order to attack them he had to pass through the desert of Rhei and
Kom, which separates Fars and Kerman from Media. Antigonus there
undertook the celebrated expedition through the desert, in order to
attack the allies in their winter quarters; but the manner in which
Eumenes discovered and thwarted his march, is much more brilliant,
for he deceived his enemy, and induced him to give up his plan,
which could not have failed, and to make his retreat. In the eighth
year after Alexander’s death, Antigonus concluded the war against
Eumenes, by attacking him with a far superior force. Peucestas had
displayed a miserable character, but Antigonus had conducted the
war in a most able manner. In the end (316 b.c.), he defeated the
allies, and conquered the immense oriental train and their harems,
which they carried about with them; and in order to recover these,
they concluded peace with Antigonus. This was the price for which
the unfortunate Eumenes was delivered up by his own troops, as
Charles I was delivered up by the Scotch. Antigonus would willingly
have saved him, but he was obliged to sacrifice him to the national
hatred of the Macedonians against the Greeks.

THE EMPIRE OF ANTIGONUS

This war established the dominion of Antigonus, who through his
victory over Eumenes and the satraps under him, obtained the
supremacy over their provinces, and now was in possession of a
large empire. He was the first who was courageous enough to drop
all hypocrisy, and in 306 b.c. assumed the diadem and the kingly
title. No one had as yet ventured to do this, just as Napoleon
hesitated for a long time to assume the imperial title. Antigonus was
already advanced in years, being of about the same age as
Perdiccas, and somewhat younger than Antipater (who was the
oldest among the generals) if we take into consideration the age at
which he died in 301 b.c. He was one of the old officers of Philip, and
a good one too. He was, indeed, like most of them, nothing beyond
a soldier, but in ability he was superior to most of them. Among
those who contended for the empire (if we except Eumenes the
stranger and Craterus who fell early), he and Lysimachus were
probably the best. Besides Antipater and his son Cassander, they
alone were true generals. Ptolemy distinguished himself only by his
skilful defence of Egypt against Perdiccas; subsequently in the war
against Antigonus, not much is to be said of him.
In the meantime great changes had taken place in Macedonia.
Antipater had been quiet during the latter years: he reigned in the
name of Arrhidæus, and of the little son of Alexander, who at his
death was not yet seven years old. Heracles was older, but
illegitimate, and was regarded as incapable of succeeding his father:
he too was in Macedonia with his mother Barsine. Antipater kept the
royal family at Pella in a state of splendid captivity, while he himself
lived in the greatest simplicity.
But when his end was approaching, he made
[319-317 b.c.] a singular arrangement concerning the regency
(319 b.c.). Two of his sons were still alive: the one, Iollas, who was
said to have poisoned Alexander, was dead, but Cassander and Philip
were still living. Antipater did not give the regency and his power to
either of them, but to a petty Epirot prince of the name of
Polysperchon or Polyperchon.

POLYSPERCHON VERSUS CASSANDER

This arrangement made Cassander and Polysperchon enemies. As
soon as the father had closed his eyes, and Polysperchon had
entered upon the administration, Cassander quitted Macedonia, went
to Ptolemy in Egypt, assembled troops, and prepared to attack
Polysperchon. He was conscious of his own superiority: he was a
man who in great difficulties knew how to extricate himself; he was
a general who undertook little, but was very cautious in what he did
undertake, and a remarkable instrument in taking revenge for
Alexander’s cruelty against the Greeks. Antigonus and Ptolemy, as
we have already mentioned, joined him; though the latter took no
active part in the war, being desirous firmly to establish his own
dominion in the interior.
A war now arose which was carried on with the most fearful
devastation of unhappy Greece; the ravages were constantly
repeated, until the country was brought down so completely, that it
was entirely annihilated.
This war between the two pretenders to the crown of Macedonia,
and to the guardianship of the unfortunate royal family, however,
inflicted even more suffering upon Macedonia than upon poor
Greece.
Polysperchon favoured Olympias, with whom he was already
connected by his nationality. She was still living among her
countrymen in Epirus, whither she had gone even in the reign of
Alexander. The fact that Æacides, a petty prince of the Molossians,
who had been expelled by her, now supported her, and on this
account brought great misery upon his family, shows that national
ties were stronger than those arising from family connection.
Polysperchon, as we said before, connected himself with Olympias,
and called upon her to return to Macedonia, and undertake the
government as the guardian of her grandson, Alexander, the son of
Roxane. She readily accepted this proposal, and both now formed
connections with Eumenes.
The latter obtained from Olympias full power to act as he thought
fit, as if he were Lieutenant du Roi, and this induced the
argyraspidæ and the satraps of Upper Asia to declare in his favour.
Olympias, however, appears still to have remained in Epirus.
Eurydice, on the other hand, joined the party of Cassander, and the
feud between the two queens became the cause of the civil wars in
Macedonia. Polysperchon seems to have had less ambition, and was
satisfied with being the first general.
At the same time, however, Polysperchon also endeavoured to
secure the assistance of the Greeks, and in the name of the king he
issued a proclamation to them in which he declares, in the name of
King Philip Arrhidæus, employing the language of hearty sympathy,
that the Greeks ought not to impute the harsh cruelties which they
had experienced from the generals (Antipater and Craterus) to the
king; that he had neither approved nor known of them; that he
disapproved of the change in their constitutions, and that they
should be restored just as they had been under Philip and Alexander.
All the exiled Greeks, moreover, with the exception of a few, were to
return. For the purpose of carrying this measure into effect,
Polysperchon proceeded to Greece.
Cassander appeared with a few thousand
[317 b.c.] soldiers, whom he had collected in Asia. With
this small force he commenced the war
elsewhere described, in which he recovered the dominion of his
father and a great deal more. When Cassander had established
himself there, Polysperchon no longer attacked him, but turned to
Peloponnesus, to carry his decrees into effect.
 While Polysperchon and Cassander were thus arrayed against each
other in Greece, Olympias ruled in Macedonia with a tragic fury. The
Macedonians hated and despised her both personally and because
she was a foreigner; and she knew this quite well. She remembered
that the old national party in Macedonia had regarded Alexander as
the son of a foreigner; that on the other hand, the marriage of Philip
with Cleopatra, the niece of Attalus, had been hailed with general
rejoicings, and that she had been obliged to withdraw with
Alexander. She therefore looked upon the real Macedonians as her
personal enemies, and the more terrible her natural disposition was,
the more she felt irritated, and the more she abandoned herself to
acts of infuriated cruelty. The accounts of them are certainly not
exaggerated, for we are moving during this period on perfectly
historical ground, though it is indeed a barren and exhausted
ground, which does not produce a single blossom of poetry. The
history of that time is quite authentic, but we may rejoice that we
have no very minute accounts of it.
Among the victims of Olympias, we find her step-son, the poor
Arrhidæus, and his unfortunate wife Eurydice, the daughter of
Cynane. This Cynane was persecuted by her in every way as a
mortal enemy, and Eurydice was looked upon by her as the
granddaughter of a rival. In early life, Philip had loved Olympias, but
afterwards he was shocked at her, and withdrew from her; she had
become detestable to him. He lived in wild polygamy, and his
mistresses were to her the objects of a truly oriental hatred.
Eurydice, the granddaughter of such a rival, was young, lively, and
equally ambitious. Olympias cherished against her the hatred of
fading age and a malign disposition against the freshness of youth.
It must also be borne in mind, that Eurydice’s mother had been
married to Amyntas, the champion of the party which drove
Olympias from Macedonia. Her mother, Cynane, was a bold woman,
and Eurydice was a person of the same character; she wanted to
rule in the name of her husband.
While Polysperchon was forming a connection with Olympias,
Eurydice entered into a relation with Cassander. Olympias seems still
to have been staying in Epirus at the time
when Polysperchon went to Phocis and
thence into Peloponnesus. He took
Arrhidæus with him on this expedition, but
he must afterwards have sent him back to
Pella. Olympias now returned to Macedonia
with an army of Epirots and Ætolians, which
was opposed by Eurydice and a Macedonian
force. Olympias made use of the influence
of her own name and of that of her son, for
the purpose of gaining over the followers of
Eurydice. The Macedonians were extremely
untrustworthy, and they seem to have been
induced to desert to their opponents not
only by bribery, but often by mere caprice;
and it is not till the time when the dominion
of the Antigonidæ had become established,
that this faithlessness ceases. Eurydice and
Arrhidæus accordingly being deserted by Hygeia
the Macedonians, fell into the hands of (After Hope)
Olympias, who now ordered them to be put
to death. Wishing to enjoy their death, she
first intended to kill them by hunger, and ordered them to be walled
up in a dungeon—and a little food to be given to them. But as this
lasted too long, Olympias becoming impatient, and fearing lest a
tumult should arise, ordered the dungeon to be broken open and the
harmless idiot to be murdered by Thracians. Eurydice was obliged to
choose the manner in which she was to die, and died with great
firmness. Olympias now put forward her little grandson Alexander
with his mother Roxane. In the same manner she raged against the
whole house of Antipater, one of whose sons was likewise killed.
But the cruelties of Olympias excited
[316 b.c.] discontent and rebellion among the restless and
mutinous Macedonians. When Polysperchon was
obliged to retreat from Megalopolis, most of the Greek cities
declared for Cassander. Cassander thus gained a firm footing in
Greece; and, while Polysperchon retreated, Cassander followed him
into Macedonia, where the people declared for him, Pella, Pydna,
and Amphipolis alone declaring against him. Olympias, with her
grandson Alexander, Roxane, and others, had fled to Pydna.
Polysperchon was deserted by his troops, who were bribed by
Cassander, and was obliged to flee with a few faithful adherents into
Ætolia.
Olympias was thus shut up in
Pydna; it was situated quite close to
the sea, and there was no one
inclined to afford her assistance.
Eumenes was then in Upper Asia,
engaged in the war against Antigonus.
If Antigonus, as he himself wished,
had become reconciled to Eumenes,
the latter would have been able to act
as mediator on behalf of Olympias;
but, at all events, the assistance from
that quarter would have come too
late. The party blockaded at Pydna
were suffering from the most terrible
famine, and Olympias was compelled
to surrender. She stipulated for her
life, and Cassander promised to spare
her, but had no intention of keeping
Costume of a Youth of the Upper his word. The widows and orphans of
Classes those who had been murdered by
Olympias brought charges against her
before the Macedonians, who again
formed a champ de Mars. Olympias did not appear, and was
sentenced to death. Afterwards, she declared her willingness to
appear before a court of Macedonians; but Cassander ordered her to
be executed, saying, that he must obey the will of the nation.g
Olympias received warning that she must prepare for death. She put
on her royal robes and came forward, leaning on two of her women,
to meet the soldiers. Even they were so overpowered by the majesty
of her presence, and by the numberless great recollections attached
to her name, that they could not bring themselves to execute
Cassander’s order. He was obliged to commit the deed of blood to
the persons who had accused her, and who were eager enough for
revenge to undertake it themselves. She submitted to her fate with
unbending firmness, neither shrinking from their swords nor uttering
a word unworthy of her birth and fortunes.b
Young Alexander, and his mother, Roxane, were sent to
Amphipolis, where, for a time, they were kept in close confinement,
and afterwards put to death. Hercules, the son of Barsine, was
likewise murdered, and that too by Polysperchon; but when this
happened cannot be accurately determined. Polysperchon now
disappears from history. His son, Alexander, continued to play a part
for some time, but it did not last long.
After the fall of Olympias, all the other places, which had till then
held out, opened their gates to Cassander; and he now was king of
Macedonia, without having the regal title.
About the same time Antigonus, by his conquest of Eumenes,
became master of all Asia, while Lysimachus ruled in Thrace, and
Ptolemy in Egypt. We need hardly observe, that Antigonus’ dominion
in the most eastern satrapies was merely nominal, or did not exist at
all; but, in regard to Babylonia, Persia, and other interior provinces,
the case was different, for there he really ruled as master. But none
of the princes had yet assumed the kingly title. This was the state of
things in 316 b.c.
In the feuds which henceforth arise among the rulers, a younger
generation of men already appears on the stage, and they can in no
way be compared with the older men who had gone forth from the
school of Philip. Seleucus was one of these younger men; he had not
yet distinguished himself, but may have become acquainted with war
as early as the time of Philip. He was of about the same age as
Alexander, and in every sense an enfant de la fortune, who rose only
through his extraordinary good fortune. [His realm and his followers,
known as the Seleucidæ, will be treated in a later chapter.]
Antigonus had conquered for himself an empire by campaigns,
labours, and hardships; he lost one eye, and, in the end, his life.
Ptolemy had been a companion in arms of Philip, and had greatly
distinguished himself under Alexander. Of Cassander we have
already spoken; and Lysimachus had been obliged to conquer
Thrace, the possession of which he was now enjoying.
It had been given to him to be conquered, for it was not a satrapy,
having been under the administration of Antipater. The country had
become tributary as early as the time of Philip, but had retained its
ancient dynasties. The princes of the Odrysians, though dependent
on, and weakened by Philip, still existed; and, in the reign of
Alexander, Thrace was always united with Macedonia. But, after his
death Perdiccas separated the two countries, for the purpose of
weakening Antipater, and changed Thrace into a satrapy, which he
gave to Lysimachus, and which Lysimachus subdued.

LYSIMACHUS
It is uncertain whether Lysimachus was a Thessalian or a
Macedonian. He was captain of the king’s bodyguard, and very
distinguished, especially for his lion-like bravery. When Callisthenes
was tortured by Alexander, Lysimachus, on seeing his frightful
condition, gave him poison out of compassion—a bold thing to do
under a tyrant of Alexander’s temperament. This story shows that
Lysimachus was considered as a man of independence of mind, who
preserved his free and proud spirit, when Alexander had already
become an eastern despot.
He established his empire with small means, and for the greater
part of his life he was reasonable enough to be satisfied with his
dominion. It was not till his old age that ambition overcame him and
carried him away, though, perhaps, not without some deeper motive
and the desire to save himself. He once crossed the Danube in the
vain attempt to make conquests in the country beyond the river; this
may, perhaps, have been only an attempt to keep off the invading
nations of the north. He had a difficult problem to solve, to conquer
the wild and warlike Thracians, whose country appears to us
northern people as a fair southern sort of paradise, but was terrible
to the Greeks on account of the severe arctic cold; and the terror
was increased by the savage manners of the inhabitants. On the
coast, however, there were large and magnificent Greek cities, and
the beautiful Chersonesus. We know little of the reign of Lysimachus,
and we are not even informed whether he resided at Byzantium or
elsewhere. In later times, during the war against Antigonus, his
residence seems to have been in Asia, at Sardis or at Ephesus.

CASSANDER IN POWER
When Cassander was once in possession of
[316-307 b.c.] Macedonia, he extirpated the family of
Alexander, without a hand being raised in their
defence. Aristobulus, who wished to interfere, was delivered up and
sacrificed. Hence it is remarkable that he married Thessalonice, the
only surviving daughter of Philip; but this may have arisen from the
pride of the usurper, or from the hope of thereby establishing his
dominion. His government of Macedonia was at the same time a
perfect dominion over Greece, with very few exceptions, one of
which was Sparta.
Thebes had been restored by Cassander immediately after the
conquest of Macedonia (316 b.c.), for, in his hatred of Alexander, he
undid all that Alexander had done. By their possession of the Theban
territory the Bœotians were so much bound up with the interests of
Macedonia, that it became a question as to whether it was prudent
to restore Thebes. It is not certain whether they had incurred the
suspicion of Cassander. It was a matter of great difficulty to induce
the Bœotians to consent to the restoration; in all of the rest of
Greece it was regarded as an act of the greatest justice, and it
seems to have been a general national consolation.
 About the same time Cassander founded Cassandrea, a
remarkable proof that he was a man of practical sagacity. Philip had
extirpated or sold the Greek population on the Macedonian coast,
with the exception of that of Amphipolis and Pydna. One of these
destroyed cities was Potidæa, which had at first been a Corinthian
colony, but afterwards belonged to Athenian cleruchi. Now, on that
site, Cassander assembled, not only many strangers, but all the
Greeks, especially those Olynthians who were still surviving from the
destruction of their city, and built Cassandrea. On the site of the
insignificant town of Therma, he founded Thessalonica, which he
called after the name of his wife. This act also shows great practical
wisdom. Thessalonica, situated on a fine harbour, and in a fertile
district, being now extended, became the chief commercial place in
Macedonia, a rank which it has maintained down to the present day.
Cassandrea (now Cassandra) soon became great and powerful; it
has often been destroyed, but was always restored again; and its
situation was so happily chosen, that it naturally always recovered.
This was the condition of Greece at the time when the appearance
of Demetrius Poliorcetes, the son of Antigonus (307 b.c.), stirred up
everything without doing any good. He had even before been
actively engaged in a war against Ptolemy.
The defeat and death of Eumenes put Antigonus in possession of
a vast monarchy, extending from the Hellespont as far as India.
According to the early invented principle of the balance of power, the
others now demanded that he should give up a part of his
conquests; they even thought it necessary, for the sake of justice
and for the balance of power, that the countries of upper Asia should
form a separate state.
Seleucus, the child of fortune, was destined to obtain that empire;
a man who was the pet of fortune, but in no way distinguished as a
hero or statesman. In the same year (316 b.c.) in which Cassander
had conquered Macedonia, and Antigonus, after the conquest of
Eumenes, returned from Upper Asia, Antigonus intended to order
Seleucus to be arrested at Babylon. But he escaped, and the
Chaldeans now foretold Antigonus, that the fate of his family was
involved in the affair. It was easy to foretell the beginning, but not
the end, for the Seleucidæ did not overthrow Antigonus. Seleucus
now went to Ptolemy whom he urged on to wage war against
Antigonus.
Thus arose, in 316 b.c., the second or third great internal war
among the Macedonian princes—we say the second or third,
because the recommencement of the war in 318 b.c. may either be
regarded as a continuation of the first or as a second war. In this
war, Antigonus fell out with Cassander, and Ptolemy allied himself
with Cassander and Lysimachus against Antigonus. Lysimachus,
however, was cunning enough to keep aloof as much as he could,
and Cassander, too, at first took much less part in it than Ptolemy. In
the beginning it was, properly speaking, only Antigonus and Ptolemy
that were arrayed against each other.
The war was at first carried on especially in Syria and Cyprus.
Ptolemy had taken possession of Cœle-Syria and southern Phœnicia.
Antigonus now directed his arms against him, and at first generally
with success, so that he made himself master of Syria and a great
part of Cyprus; until, in the fourth year of the war, Demetrius
Poliorcetes lost the battle of Gaza against Ptolemy, of which we shall
speak hereafter.
In the meantime, however, the generals of Antigonus were
carrying on a war in Greece against Cassander, from 315 b.c. till the
end of 312 b.c. It is worthy of remark that both Antigonus and
Ptolemy considered the Greeks of sufficient importance, to
endeavour to gain their favour by proclaiming the struggle a war of
independence for the Greeks; neither of them, however, had any
serious intention of this kind. In the very first year of the war,
Antigonus sent Aristodemus of Miletus with a fleet and large sums of
money to Greece, probably with no other intention than to make a
diversion against Cassander and prevent him from crossing over into
Asia.
 This brought unspeakable misery upon
[312-311 b.c.] Greece. Each city was too weak, and also but
little inclined to defend itself; each threw itself
into the arms of the party that happened to be at its gates.
Alexander, the son of Polysperchon, had remained in Peloponnesus,
establishing himself mainly at Corinth and Sicyon; he now joined
Antigonus, from whom he received money and troops. He and
Aristodemus also enlisted soldiers in Greece, and the war now broke
out, especially in Peloponnesus. Cassander, forcing his way into the
peninsula, conquered Cenchreæ, the port of Corinth.
But all on a sudden, Alexander deserted Antigonus, and faithlessly
concluded a peace with Cassander in his own name and that of his
father. By this means, Aristodemus was driven out of Peloponnesus,
and now went to Ætolia, whence he carried on the war against the
opposite countries of Peloponnesus, Achaia, and Elis. The watchword
always was, “Liberty and Autonomy for Greece;” but the towns
were, notwithstanding, treated in a most terrible manner. During the
first campaign, the principal scene of operations was Arcadia and
Argolis, and in the second, Elis and Achaia. Almost the whole of
Achaia was laid waste during this campaign, and Patræ and Ægium
were taken. Alexander was then murdered, and Cratesipolis, his
widow, keeping possession of Corinth and Sicyon, ruled there almost
as an absolute queen.
 A Scene in Syria

But Cassander transferred the war into Ætolia; these occurrences

rendered the conflict more and more important, and the
Acarnanians, therefore, beginning to be apprehensive, threw
themselves into the arms of Cassander and the Macedonians. Being
now supported by Cassander, they endeavoured to rid themselves of
their connection with the Ætolians. The year following saw the
commencement of the war of Cassander against Ætolia.
In 312 b.c., Antigonus made great preparations, and under the
command of Ptolemy, a son of his sister, sent an army into Greece,
more especially into Bœotia, which was exasperated against
Cassander, for having been obliged by him to give up the territory of
Thebes. In conjunction with them, Ptolemy conquered Chalcis, and
wherever they went, they were successful in expelling the garrisons
of Cassander, who had no other city in Greece left that sided with
him except Athens. But while Antigonus was victorious there, he was
losing ground in other parts; and thus he found himself obliged, in
311 b.c., to conclude a peace with his opponents.
In Syria, Antigonus had entrusted the
[312-308 b.c.] supreme command against Ptolemy and
Seleucus to his son Demetrius, who was then
still a very young man. This Demetrius plays a very prominent part
in history. He has the honour of having his life described among the
biographies in Plutarch—an honour which we might reasonably
grudge Demetrius, for he is a despicable person. We know him,
partly from Plutarch’s biographies, and partly from a number of
anecdotes in Athenæus, to have been the most unprincipled and
most detestable man in existence: the acts of faithlessness which he
committed against Alexander, the son of Cassander, are not the only
things for which he deserves our detestation. He was also a
voluptuary of the vulgarest and most abject description; the lowest
crapule was the element in the filth of which he revelled; and he was
quite a heartless man, who knew no friendship; the basest
creatures, the companions of his lusts, were his only friends.
Cassander was, after all, capable of distinguishing persons deserving
of respect, as he showed in the selection of Demetrius Phalereus;
and so also was Ptolemy; but we know that Demetrius Poliorcetes
lived at Athens in intimacy with the most abject and abandoned
persons of the time. He also showed towards his soldiers an
ingratitude and a heartlessness, which are quite revolting; they were
perfectly indifferent to him, and he regarded them only as his tools.
They accomplished great things for him, but he always sacrificed
them without any scruple, leaving to destruction on the morrow
those who had saved his life the day before. In addition to this, he
was a gambler, whose dull torpor could be excited only by great
changes of fortune, and who staked everything upon a card. He is
remarkable for his enormous good fortune: “fortune raised him
beyond all conception, and then deserted him, but when he seemed
entirely lost, she again held out her hand to him,” says Plutarch, in a
verse which he applies to him.
Such a man would deserve no attention at all, were it not that he
acted a great part, and that nature had endowed him with great
abilities, especially in mechanics, according to the leaning of that
age toward the mechanical sciences. In this respect, as in many
others, we may compare him with a modern person, the regent
Philip of Orleans, who, however, was a far better man. Demetrius
was a great inventor in mechanics, and he did much for the
improvement of military engineering: this is a merit which he did not
unfairly assume, but he is fully entitled to his reputation in this
respect. A short time before, a great impulse had been given to
mechanics in the affairs of war, and machines of every description
were improved. Engines, which for centuries had remained
unchanged, were now, partly through the progress of mathematics,
and partly through the increased wealth that could be employed
upon them, improved in one year, more than they were formerly in
the course of centuries.
Demetrius was eighteen years old when Antigonus commissioned
him to undertake the command of an army against Ptolemy. The first
attempt failed, for at Gaza he was completely defeated, and Ptolemy
again took possession of Cœle-Syria. Ptolemy carried on the war in a
generous spirit, for, declaring it to be a civil war between
Macedonians, he set the prisoners free without ransom, whereby he
gained the good will of the Macedonians. Antigonus now undertook
the command himself, and Ptolemy again evacuating the towns of
Cœle-Syria, ravaged them.
Peace was then concluded, but it lasted only for a short time.
Cassander succeeded in inducing Ptolemy, the nephew of Antigonus,
who was stationed in Bœotia, as well as another general on the
Hellespont, to revolt. Yet Antigonus soon recovered those countries.
In the same year Ptolemy took Cyprus and extended his power on
the coast of Asia Minor.
In the year following Ptolemy appeared with a fleet in Greece,
having until then been the ally of Cassander. It was probably the
Bœotians and Peloponnesians that called in his assistance against
Polysperchon, and he had a fair opportunity of being able to say that
he was coming to avenge the murder of Roxane and Alexander.
Cratesipolis surrendered to him her principality of Argos and Sicyon,
being unable to maintain those cities any longer; but it was not
without difficulty that the mercenaries were prevailed upon to
surrender: it was effected only by stratagem. The Peloponnesians
afterwards were slow in doing what they had promised, and Ptolemy
himself probably did not care much about the conquest. Hence he
concluded a treaty with Cassander, whereby he obtained possession
of Peloponnesus with the exception of Argos and Sicyon.
Antigonus now sent his son Demetrius with a
[308-306 b.c.] fleet to Greece. No one there was willing to
sacrifice himself for Cassander, who had no
fleet, so that he was unable to undertake anything against
Demetrius. The latter appeared unexpectedly before Piræus: the
harbour not being closed, he landed and quickly took Piræus, before
the posts could be occupied. He immediately proclaimed that the
expedition had been undertaken for the purpose of restoring to
Athens her freedom and autonomy, and he was accordingly received
with enthusiasm. The Macedonian garrison under Dionysius shut
itself up in Munychia, and negotiations were commenced between
Demetrius Poliorcetes and the city. Demetrius Phalereus was sent as
ambassador down to the camp in Piræus: Demetrius promised the
Athenians an amnesty, the city was declared free, and the ancient
democratic constitution was restored; but Demetrius Phalereus was
sent into exile.
Demetrius Poliorcetes now besieged the Macedonians in Munychia.
He would not go to Athens till he had taken that fortress; it was at
first blockaded, while the preparations for a siege were going on.
While the engines were building, Demetrius marched against
Megara, where there was a garrison of Cassander. The town was
taken by storm and plundered, and it was only at the urgent request
of the Athenian ambassadors, that its inhabitants were saved and
not dragged away into slavery. He then returned to Piræus, where
he attacked Munychia, until the feeble garrison being exhausted,
was obliged, after several days, to surrender, and then departed.
The fortifications were razed to the ground, and the place given up
to the Athenians. Athens was now free, but Demetrius, for the
protection of the Athenians, gave them a garrison of his own troops.
After this he stayed for a time at Athens, where he was received
with enthusiasm, as elsewhere described.
If Demetrius had remained at Athens, and continued the war
against Cassander, he might easily have conquered all Greece; but
he was called away by his father Antigonus, because Ptolemy had
made himself master of Cyprus. About the month of Hecatombæon,
Demetrius sailed to Cyprus; and now, by a brilliant victory of
Demetrius over Menelaus, the brother of Ptolemy, near Salamis in
Cyprus, Antigonus and Demetrius gained the mastery at sea. Cyprus
was reconquered. Menelaus, with all his forces in the island, was
obliged to capitulate; and thus the sea far and wide was in the
power of Antigonus and his son. But an expedition which the two
undertook against Egypt proved a failure.
 THE NAME OF KING ASSUMED
Until now, none of the princes had assumed
[307-305 b.c.] the title of king, but after the victory of Salamis,
Antigonus took the diadem for himself and his
son. Immediately afterwards, Ptolemy, Cassander, Lysimachus, and
Seleucus did the same; and the years were now counted from their
accession (306 b.c.): these are what are called the Macedonian Eras.
Demetrius now remained absent from Athens for a period of three
or nearly four years; during this time the city was left to itself, and a
hard time it was. We may easily imagine that Cassander was not
idle, and endeavoured to recover Athens, which was of such
importance to him. He was in possession of Panactum and Phyle,
and inflicted the severest sufferings upon the city. This war must
unquestionably be regarded as one of the chief causes of the terrible
poverty in which we afterwards find Athens, for there can be no
doubt that the whole territory was laid waste during the incursions
from Panactum and Phyle. In this war, Demochares was strategus of
Athens, and with her resources alone he operated against Cassander
for four years in a most able manner, until Demetrius returned.
According to the order observed by Trogus Pompeius—though not
according to that of Justin, who has here quite without judgment
omitted many things—we now come to the expedition of Demetrius
against Rhodes, one year after the unsuccessful undertaking against
Egypt.

THE SIEGE OF RHODES

The salted and dried fish of the Euxine were
[305-304 b.c.] articles of great consumption in Egypt, and it
was for this trade that Rhodes was the natural
entrepôt. The consequence of this was, that the Rhodians and the
Ptolemies were natural friends and allies, and that Rhodes would on
no account separate itself from Egypt; its whole existence depended
upon the commercial advantages, which even the first Ptolemy
conceded to them. Rhodes, therefore, was a weak place, in which
Demetrius Poliorcetes and Antigonus might attack the Egyptians;
and it would have been an immense loss to Egypt, if the two princes
had conquered the island, the possession of which was to them of
equal importance.
Hostilities commenced by Demetrius capturing the Rhodian
merchant vessels, which were sailing to Egypt; the first example in
antiquity of neutral vessels being seized upon. The Rhodians paying
in equal coin, captured the ships of Antigonus, who now declared
this measure to be an act of open hostility; and Demetrius was
commissioned to lay siege to Rhodes. While Antigonus was engaged
in preparations, the Rhodians, seeing that Ptolemy’s fleet had been
defeated, made an attempt to obtain peace; but the terms which
were offered to them were such as to prevent their accepting them.
Antigonus demanded one hundred hostages, whom he himself was
to select, the right freely to use the harbour of Rhodes for his ships
of war, and an unconditional alliance against Ptolemy. These terms
were rejected by the Rhodians.
Demetrius then landed at Rhodes. His preparations were
immense: the determination of the Rhodians to defend themselves
manfully could not be doubted, and hence every effort was made to
compel them by force. Demetrius appeared with two hundred ships
of war, one hundred and seventy transports, and many small
vessels; he is said to have embarked no less than forty thousand
men, partly sailors and partly soldiers. He assembled his forces at
Loryma, opposite to Rhodes, and during his passage across, the sea
between Caria and Rhodes was covered with his ships. He landed
without opposition, made a harbour for his ships of war, and
approached with besieging engines. The whole island was in the
meantime overrun, the country was laid waste, and all who had not
fled into the city, were led away into slavery.
While Demetrius was thus encamped before the walls of the city,
the Rhodians were making the most extraordinary preparations.
Their citizens were called to arms; in their enumeration only six
thousand were found capable of bearing arms, and not more than
one thousand metœci and strangers, who were willing faithfully to
undertake the defence. At first they do not appear to have employed
mercenaries; but they allowed their slaves to take up arms, and
after the close of the war they rewarded them with freedom and the
franchise.
This siege is as interesting and as important as the siege of
Rhodes under Soliman against the noble Grand Master de l’Isle
Adam in 1522, which was one of the most heroic defences in
modern history. In like manner, the siege of ancient Rhodes is one of
the most glorious achievements in the later history of Greece.

Terra-cotta Urn

(In the British Museum)

Demetrius at last became tired, observing that the game was not
worth the chase. The siege would have lasted a few months longer,
and this prospect made him impatient, as he was losing immense
numbers of men and ships. In addition to this, Cassander was
completely gaining the upper hand in Greece, and Antigonus found
that all around, everybody was rising against him. Demetrius
accordingly, on the mediation of Athens and several other Greek
cities, concluded a peace, by which he hoped to save his honour. It
was based on the terms which the Rhodians had been willing to
accept from the first: they were to assist Antigonus and Demetrius in
all other wars, but not against Ptolemy, “and as the wars of the two
princes were chiefly directed against Ptolemy, the Rhodians had
neutrality guaranteed to them.” They were further to retain their city
with perfect freedom, as well as all their subjects.
Demetrius now returned to Greece. Cassander had been
blockading Athens, while Demetrius was besieging Rhodes; and the
latter now appeared with a very considerable fleet to relieve Athens.
He landed at Aulis on the Euripus, between Oropus and Chalcis, to
come upon the rear of Cassander and compel him to withdraw from
Athens. Demetrius had a good harbour at Aulis. Chalcis was in the
hands of Cassander, and had a Bœotian garrison; but it was a large,
desolate place, and was easily taken. In order not to be cut off,
Cassander was obliged to break up, and proceeded through Bœotia
towards Thessaly. He succeeded in reaching Thermopylæ; Demetrius
pursued him, and Heraclea surrendered to him; while six thousand
Macedonian troops declared in his favour.
Demetrius, then entering to Attica, conquered
[304-301 b.c.] Panactum and Phyle, which had been occupied
by Cassander, and through which he had had
Attica under his control. The Athenians received Demetrius with
enthusiasm, as their benefactor. All that impertinent flattery could
devise had been exhausted; and what was done now had the
character of caricature.
From Athens, Demetrius made several expeditions in different
directions, but the city remained his headquarters. During these
expeditions, the desolation of the country increased more and more,
and it is surprising that Attica did not become a complete wilderness
as early as that time.
In the spring of 303 Demetrius entered Peloponnesus, which was
in the hands of Cassander and Ptolemy; and he again showed
himself in the field as an excellent and active commander. He
conquered Corinth, Sicyon, Bura, and Ægium. Then he undertook an
expedition with his fleet to Leucas and Corcyra. The Corcyræans
were enemies of Cassander. While Demetrius was engaged in those
parts, the Romans had advanced to the extreme point of Messapia,
and accordingly were very near to Demetrius.
From thence Demetrius returned to Corinth, where he convened a
congress of the Greeks, the first after the time of Alexander. He was
there proclaimed hegemon of the Greeks, and in the spring, he
proceeded to Athens, where he was received as a god with incense
and processions by the Athenians, who, being adorned with wreaths,
came out to meet him.
Afterwards Athens had to pay a war contribution of 250 talents,
which Demetrius under the very eyes of the people gave to his
courtesans while he ridiculed the Athenians. Things like these
naturally goaded the people into madness.
Demetrius was now master of the greater part of Greece. In the
following year he assembled a large army of his allies, and
proceeded by way of Chalcis into Thessaly with fifty-six thousand
men, to meet Cassander. He took from him a great part of Thessaly,
and then after both had dragged each other about without anything
being decided, they separated, Demetrius being called to Asia by his
father, because a great coalition had there been formed against him.
In order, therefore, to withdraw honourably, Demetrius concluded a
peace with Cassander, in which Greece was declared free, and then
crossed over into Asia.

THE FALL OF ANTIGONUS

Seleucus who was now master of Babylon
[301-300 b.c.] and the upper satrapies, after having subdued
all Iran as far as India without any effort, had
formed, together with Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus, a
coalition against Antigonus. This is the first instance known in
history, of a great coalition of princes of equal rank and equal
independence. Antigonus, who now possessed only Asia Minor,
Cyprus, a portion of Syria and the greater part of Greece, was thus
opposed by all the rest of the Macedonian world; and it was against
this coalition that Demetrius led his army into Asia Minor. We know
very little about the details of the war, but it appears that the
enemies pressed into Asia Minor from all sides. The decisive battle
was fought near Ipsus in Phrygia; it was decided especially by the
admirable infantry of Lysimachus and Cassander. Seleucus had only
Asiatics; the phalanx of Ptolemy was of little importance, and only
his mercenaries fought bravely; but the truth is that in reality he had
no talent as a commander. Antigonus fell in the battle, and the
defeat was so complete, that his whole empire was destroyed.
Demetrius escaped with a small band to the maritime towns of
Ionia, but behaved in a praiseworthy manner.
The empire of Antigonus was now cut up: the western provinces
were divided between Cassander and Lysimachus, the upper
provinces were assigned to Seleucus, and Cyprus and Syria to
Ptolemy, who, however, did not maintain upper Syria, but confined
himself to Phœnicia and Cyprus. Plistarchus, a brother of Cassander
obtained Cilicia as a special indemnification for Cassander, who
himself received Caria and Pamphylia, while Lysimachus acquired
Lydia, Ionia, Phrygia, and the north coast of Asia Minor.

DEMETRIUS AT LARGE
After the battle of Ipsus, Demetrius had escaped with a few
thousand men to Ephesus, where he had a fleet; and he did not
altogether despair of the success of his cause. Cyprus, Sidon, and
Tyre, as well as several of the Ionian towns and islands, were still in
his possession, and he was anything but an insignificant man. He
now displayed great skill, and drew all his forces together, with a
view to establish himself in Greece, and there again to try his
fortune. For he saw well, that the coalition of the generals who had
invaded his father’s empire must soon break up, and that then his
assistance would probably be sought by one or other of them, which
was, in fact, afterwards done by Seleucus and Ptolemy. He sent the
great Pyrrhus first as negotiator, and afterwards as hostage, to
Ptolemy. Pyrrhus had been his companion in arms; he had lost his
kingdom through Cassander, and was now wandering about in the
world in the hope of conquering a kingdom for himself. The
expedition of the adventurer Cleonymus also belongs to this time, or,
rather, to a somewhat earlier one; he was a pretender to the throne
of Sparta, from which he was, perhaps unjustly, excluded.
From Ephesus, Demetrius sailed through the Cyclades to Athens,
where he wanted to establish himself first. But the Athenians were
determined to avail themselves of the jealousy of the princes among
each other, to secure their independence; and accordingly they sent
an embassy to meet Demetrius, and declare to him, that they would
not receive him.
Athens was now spared for a time, and Demetrius, before
attacking the city, undertook several other expeditions. He first
directed his course, with his squadron, towards the coast of Thrace,
gained a footing in the Thracian Chersonesus, and made war upon
Lysimachus, who, in the meantime, had taken possession of Lydia,
Caria, and Phrygia. Lysimachus was not supported by the other
princes, nor was it necessary, and Demetrius made no conquests
there. Meantime, however, a new lucky star was rising for him
through Seleucus, who, having fallen out with Ptolemy, and being
dissatisfied with his share, was ready to form a friendship with
Demetrius. He sued for the hand of Stratonice, a daughter of
Demetrius, whom, however, he afterwards gave up to his son,
Antiochus. Demetrius now sailed with his fleet to Cilicia and Syria,
and, in passing, made himself master of Cilicia, and the treasures
which Plistarchus, the son of Cassander, was guarding there, and
then began to quarrel with Seleucus. For when Cilicia and the
Phœnician cities were in the power of Demetrius, Seleucus in vain
asked that they should be given up to him; and it was not without
difficulty that Demetrius escaped from his plots: a formal rupture,
however, did not take place. Demetrius then became reconciled with
Ptolemy also, and that as we have already mentioned, through the
mediation of Pyrrhus. He now again appeared in Greece, with
increased forces. He gained a firm footing in Peloponnesus, though it
is uncertain how many towns he subdued there.
In the mean time, Cassander died, and
[300-295 b.c.] Demetrius, supported by a newly-increased
fleet, began the siege of Athens. He had then
again fallen out with Ptolemy, who now sent a fleet to assist the
Athenians.
Demetrius blockaded the city by land and by sea, and the
Athenians, being cut off from the sea, were visited by a fearful
famine. They fed upon all kinds of animals, upon indigestible herbs,
and the grass which grew on the Acropolis. An Egyptian fleet,
attempting to introduce provisions into Piræus, was repelled by
Demetrius. At length, after an obstinate defence, they were
compelled by the famine to surrender. Every catastrophe brought the
city nearer its downfall, though Demetrius, considering that he was
the conqueror, displayed great mildness. He convened the Athenians,
without their arms, in the theatre, and surrounded the building with
his hoplites. But he was satisfied with having struck them with the
horrors of death, and, having reproached them for their ingratitude,
he declared that he pardoned them. The Athenians were obliged at
once to concede to him the right to keep garrisons at Munychia and
Piræus, but otherwise they fared better under him now, than at the
time when as their friend he had revelled in his excesses. He even
fed the Athenians, giving them grain and other necessaries of life.
Demetrius now returned to Peloponnesus. During this expedition,
he was on the point of making himself master of Sparta. The
Spartans, ever since the battle of Megalopolis, had taken no part in
the struggle of the Greeks for independence. Sparta had during that
period become more and more powerless, although she was in the
enjoyment of peace. That which now emboldened and induced her
to declare against Macedonia, is left unnoticed by the historians of
the time; and it would be inexplicable, if we did not know that
Ptolemy and Lysimachus continued the war against Demetrius. We
also know that down to the time of Cleomenes, there existed a
constant connection between Sparta and Alexandria; whence we
may suppose, that that alliance already existed, and that all the
Lacedæmonians received pay from Alexandria. Acts of hostility had
indeed occurred between Sparta and Demetrius, but they were not
of any importance. It is unknown what forces Archidamus
possessed, and what occasioned him to commence the war. All we
know is that Archidamus was defeated near Mantinea, that
Demetrius advanced as far as Laconia, and that Sparta was now
surrounded for the second time with palisades and trenches, and in
some parts also with a wall: Pausanias at least places the
fortifications at this time. He also calls the defeat of Mantinea, the
third great blow to Sparta after the battle of Leuctra and that of
Agis. Demetrius might, no doubt, easily have crossed those
fortifications, if he had not at the moment received intelligence that
all his affairs were in a bad condition, and if he had not for this
reason given up the war with Sparta.
For Ptolemy had taken possession of all the places in Cyprus, with
the exception of Salamis, which city he was besieging, and which
contained the children of Demetrius. Lysimachus was making himself
master of the Ionian and other maritime Greek towns in Asia Minor,
which had hitherto been under the dominion of Demetrius. The
Egyptian fleet seems to have gained the ascendency; probably
because Ptolemy had become master of Tyre and Sidon, whereby
Demetrius lost the means of obtaining timber and troops. The Asiatic
province henceforth disappears from the history of Demetrius, and
he was again in great difficulties.

DEATH OF CASSANDER; DEMETRIUS WINS

AND LOSES
But the death of Cassander, and the misfortunes of his family,
opened fresh prospects for Demetrius. Cassander died of dropsy in
297. His eldest son Philip appears to have been his sole heir, but he
died soon afterwards at Elatea, 296; two other sons, Antipater and
Alexander, then divided the empire between themselves. Both were
very young, and their mother Thessalonice, a daughter of King
Philip, was the only surviving member of the family; they can
scarcely have been more than grown up boys, if the time of
Cassander’s marriage with Thessalonice is correctly stated in
Diodorus. Thessalonice was appointed guardian, or she was
commissioned to divide the empire between her two sons. To do this
fairly, was a difficult task.
Antipater, the elder, thinking himself wronged
[295-286 b.c.] by his mother in the division, murdered her; and
applying to Lysimachus, his father-in-law, he
was supported by him. But Alexander, who was confined to western
Macedonia, applied to Pyrrhus, who in the meantime had returned to
his paternal kingdom, to obtain his assistance; for this purpose he
ceded to him the possessions which the Macedonian kings had in
Epirus, together with Ambracia and Acarnania. But distrusting
Pyrrhus, he applied at the same time to Demetrius. As Pyrrhus sold
his assistance, we may suppose that Demetrius did not give his
without some selfish motive either; he evidently caused Thessaly to
be ceded to him, the whole of which had belonged to Cassander.
Demetrius now entering Thessaly, met Alexander at Larissa. Both
intrigued against each other, and aimed at each other’s life. After
many attempts, and repeated snares, Demetrius struck the blow and
caused Alexander to be murdered.
The Macedonian troops of the latter now had no king; Demetrius
came forward with a proclamation, in which he declared that he had
acted only in self-defence; that his life had been in danger (which
was really true, but all the Macedonian princes were equally bad);
and called upon the Macedonians to submit to him. The troops
submitted to Demetrius and he was proclaimed king. Lysimachus
having put himself in possession of the dominion of Antipater, his
son-in-law, gave up his new Macedonian possession and made
peace with Demetrius, who thus became master of all Macedonia.
He now ruled over Macedonia, Thessaly, Attica, Megara, and most of
the towns of Peloponnesus. The Spartans, however, continued the
war against him.
During these struggles, Demetrius wanted to take from Pyrrhus
that portion of Macedonia which Alexander had ceded to him, and
thus he began to quarrel with his most faithful friend. During his
residence in Alexandria, Pyrrhus had married Antigone, a daughter
of Ptolemy by his first wife; and as long as he lived, he was sure of
the friendship of the Alexandrian court. The detail of the wars
between Pyrrhus and Demetrius cannot form a part of this history,
for they are petty and insignificant. Pyrrhus was allied with the
Ætolians, and defended himself with great skill against an immensely
superior force; and after a few years he was victorious. It was
fortunate for him that Demetrius was just then planning greater
things; for he was thinking of recovering the empire of his father—a
senseless idea under the circumstances of the time. He built an
enormous fleet, and enlisted an army which is said to have
amounted to one hundred thousand men. His empire comprised not
only Macedonia and Thessaly, for nominally he was also hegemon of
the Greeks, as Philip and Alexander had been before, and possessed
a number of coast towns in Asia; the parts of his kingdom were very
much scattered about. But he collected his army with immense
exertions; his subjects were fearfully oppressed, and all his dominion
was in a state of ferment. His government was on the whole
unbearable to the Macedonians on account of his pride and his
cruelty; they were not a nation to allow themselves to be governed
in the Asiatic fashion. He showed himself very rarely and accepted
no petitions; but once he behaved with unusual kindness, receiving
all petitions and throwing them into the folds of his garment.
Everybody was highly delighted; but when he rode over the bridge
of the Axius, he threw them all into the river. Such things naturally
exasperated all the people against him.
In the end Pyrrhus, called upon by the more distant kings, and
being no doubt invited by the Macedonians themselves, availed
himself of the ferment, and invaded Macedonia with a small force.
Demetrius marched against him; Pyrrhus manœuvred and
 negotiated with
[286-285 b.c.] the Macedonians,
until they rose in
a general insurrection, refusing
obedience to Demetrius and ordering
him to withdraw. He was glad to get
away, and went, we believe, to
Demetrias in Magnesia, which he
himself had built on the Gulf of
Pagasæ, near the ancient town of
Iolcus, and which we afterwards find
in the hands of his son Antigonus.
Thence he proceeded into Greece. He
was a great general; his keen
discernment as a military commander
is attested by the foundation of
Demetrias and of New-Sicyon: the
fortress of Demetrias exercised an
important influence upon the fate of
Greece. Demetrius had reigned over Grecian Oil Bottle
Macedonia five or six years.
Demetrius soon concluded peace
with Pyrrhus, and if he had waited patiently, he would have been
certain of his restoration; but he could not wait, he wanted to decide
everything at once, and thus in his restlessness he crossed over into
Asia. He left behind him in Greece his son Antigonus, surnamed
Gonatas, who remained master of a great part of Greece. His father
had retained possession of Thessaly and of some Greek towns, in
which he had garrisons, and the fortress of Demetrias, where he had
established arsenals and wharfs for ships of war, commanded
Thessaly and Eubœa. Demetrius landed in Asia Minor, wishing to
undertake an expedition into the interior of Asia, like a man who has
no more to lose; heaven knows what dreams he may have indulged
in of overthrowing the empire of Lysimachus and Seleucus. It was
impossible for him to conceive anything else but a successful result
of his scheme. He accordingly first appeared with his troops in the
Asiatic provinces of Lysimachus, where he was met by Agathocles, a
son of Lysimachus, who successfully manœuvred him out of those
provinces, so that he was obliged to proceed to the interior. In this
manner he dragged his army into Armenia, just as Charles XII
dragged his into the Ukraine. His desponding troops at length
delivered him up to Seleucus, who had surrounded him and cut him
off from the sea. He was accordingly taken prisoner, but Seleucus
treated him with great clemency. He continued to live for a time very
contentedly and happily as a perfectly reckless man; Seleucus, who
formed a correct estimate of him, having given him a large Persian
palace with hunting grounds, etc., in Syria. Seleucus would perhaps
have made use of him against Lysimachus, but Demetrius died in the
meantime.

LYSIMACHUS, ARSINOE, AND AGATHOCLES

 Lysimachus had, during this period, after the
[285-283 b.c.] murder of Antipater, his son-in-law, and the last
heir of the elder Antipater (perhaps as a
punishment for an attempt upon his own life), been in possession of
a portion of Macedonia; but he had afterwards given it up to
Demetrius. The Macedonians now recognised Pyrrhus as their king;
but Lysimachus invaded his kingdom, and after having reigned alone
for seven months, Pyrrhus was obliged to divide his empire between
himself and Lysimachus. The Macedonians deserting him as a
stranger, surrendered to Lysimachus, whom they honoured as an
ancient companion of Alexander, and whom they regarded as being
nearly related to themselves, being either a Thessalian or a
Macedonian. The division, however, between Lysimachus and
Pyrrhus did not last for any length of time; for shortly after
Lysimachus drove Pyrrhus out of his kingdom. He had reigned over
Macedonia altogether five years and six months, partly in
conjunction with Lysimachus and partly alone.
The empire of Lysimachus had been gradually extended and
consolidated. Greece did not become subject to him; Antigonus
Gonatas, who had received the greater part of his father’s fleet,
maintained himself there with the remnants of his father’s forces,
and from Demetrias he ruled over a part of Greece, although many
Greek cities asserted their independence. Besides Macedonia proper
and Thrace, Lysimachus ruled over Lydia, Mysia, Ionia, Caria, and,
no doubt over Phrygia Major also—an empire as beautiful as he
could have wished, “and just of that extent which Alexander ought
to have given to his empire in order to insure its stability.” His real
residence seems to have been Lysimachia in Chersonesus, in the
neighbourhood of the ancient Cardia. With the exception of
Thessalonice, all those Macedonian princes built new capitals for
themselves; Alexandria was at least enlarged by Ptolemy.
Previously to the conquest of Macedonia, Lysimachus had
undertaken an expedition across the Danube, against Dromichætes,
a king of the Getæ. In the plain of Bessarabia his retreat was cut off,
and he, with all his army, was taken prisoner. The generous conduct
of the Dacian king, Dromichætes, is celebrated in the collection of
anecdotes; Lysimachus was set free, and his power was not
weakened by this defeat.
But the royal house was soon to become the
[283-282 b.c.] scene of a terrible tragedy, the occasion of
which came from the family of Ptolemy. Ptolemy
had divorced his first wife Eurydice, the daughter of Antipater; and
his second wife, the intriguing Berenice, employed every means to
cajole Ptolemy, who was enfeebled by age, and to get the
succession decided in favour of her own son. She succeeded so well
that the aged Ptolemy, two years before his death, resigned his
throne to his younger son Ptolemy Philadelphus, and himself took
the oath of allegiance to him. The first-born Ptolemy, surnamed
Ceraunus, betook himself to Lysimachus, whose eldest son,
Agathocles, was married to his sister Lysandra, likewise a daughter
of Ptolemy Soter, by his first wife Eurydice. Lysimachus, who
received him in a friendly manner, was himself married to Arsinoe, a
daughter of Ptolemy by his second wife, by whom he had two sons.
This Arsinoe now had recourse to the same intrigues in the house of
Lysimachus. His eldest son, Agathocles, was already a man of very
mature age (Lysimachus was seventy-four years old at his death)
and of great eminence. In many a campaign he had successfully
commanded his father’s armies; he was very popular throughout the
country, and it was he that was destined to succeed his father. But
Arsinoe hated him as the husband of her half-sister, against whom
she entertained a deadly enmity; and also because he was an
obstacle in the way of her own children. She accordingly determined
to deprive him of both his throne and his life. It must be borne in
mind, that in case of Lysimachus’ death she had reason to fear for
her own life, and that according to the practice of the age, the step-
mother and her children would have been murdered by Agathocles
as soon as he had ascended the throne.
Arsinoe, therefore, calumniously informed Lysimachus that his life
was threatened by his son Agathocles. The latter was at first treated