A Smaller History of Greece

W >> William Smith >> A Smaller History of Greece

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22

After the death of Ptolemy Ceraunus, Macedonia fell for some time
into a state of anarchy and confusion, and the crown was
disputed by several pretenders. At length, in 278, Antigonus
Gonatas, son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, succeeded in establishing
himself on the throne of Macedonia; and, with the exception of
two or three years (274-272) during which he was temporarily
expelled by Pyrrhus, he continued to retain possession of it till
his death in 239. The struggle between Antigonus and Pyrrhus was
brought to a close at Argos in 272. Pyrrhus had marched into the
Peloponnesus with a large force in order to make war upon Sparta,
but with the collateral design of reducing the places which still
held out for Antigonus. Pyrrhus having failed in an attempt to
take Sparta, marched against Argos, where Antigonus also arrived
with his forces. Both armies entered the city by opposite gates;
and in a battle which ensued in the streets Pyrrhus was struck
from his horse by a tile hurled by a woman from a house-top, and
was then despatched by some soldiers of Antigonus. Such was the
inglorious end of one of the bravest and most warlike monarchs of
antiquity; whose character for moral virtue, though it would not
stand the test of modern scrutiny, shone out conspicuously in
comparison with that of contemporary sovereigns.

Antigonus Gonatas now made himself master of the greater part of
Peloponnesus, which he governed by means of tyrants whom he
established in various cities.

While all Greece, with the exception of Sparta, seemed hopelessly
prostrate at the feet of Macedonia, a new political power, which
sheds a lustre on the declining period of Grecian history, arose
in a small province in Peloponnesus, of which the very name has
been hitherto rarely mentioned since the heroic age. In Achaia,
a narrow slip of country upon the shores of the Corinthian gulf,
a league, chiefly for religious purposes, had existed from a very
early period among the twelve chief cities of the province. The
league, however, had never possessed much political importance,
and it had been suppressed by the Macedonians. At the time of
which we are speaking Antigonus Gonatas was in possession of all
the cities formerly belonging to the league, either by means of
his garrisons or of the tyrants who were subservient to him. It
was, however, this very oppression that led to a revival of the
league. The Achaean towns, now only ten in number, as two had
been destroyed by earthquakes, began gradually to coalesce again;
but Aratus of Sicyon, one of the most remarkable characters of
this period of Grecian history, was the man who, about the year
251 B.C., first called the new league into active political
existence. He had long lived in exile at Argos, whilst his
native city groaned under the dominion of a succession of
tyrants. Having collected a band of exiles, he surprised Sicyon
in the night time, and drove out the last and most unpopular of
these tyrants. Instead of seizing the tyranny for himself, as he
might easily have done, Aratus consulted only the advantage of
his country, and with this view united Sicyon with the Achaean
league. The accession of so important a town does not appear to
have altered the constitution of the confederacy. The league was
governed by a STRATEGUS, or general, whose functions were both
military and civil; a GRAMMATEUS, or secretary; and a council of
ten DEMIURGI. The sovereignty, however, resided in the general
assembly, which met twice a year in a sacred grove near AEgium.
It was composed of every Achaean who had attained the age of
thirty, and possessed the right of electing the officers of the
league, and of deciding all questions of war, peace, foreign
alliances, and the like. In the year 245 B.C. Aratus was elected
STRATEGUS of the league, and again in 243. In the latter of
these years he succeeded in wresting Corinth from the Macedonians
by another nocturnal surprise, and uniting it to the league. The
confederacy now spread with wonderful rapidity. It was soon
joined by Troezen, Epidaurus, Hermione and other cities; and
ultimately embraced Athens, Megara, AEgina, Salamis, and the
whole Peloponnesus, with the exception of Sparta, Elis, and some
of the Arcadian towns.

Sparta, it is true, still continued to retain her independence,
but without a shadow of her former greatness and power. The
primitive simplicity of Spartan manners had been completely
destroyed by the collection of wealth into a few hands, and by
the consequent progress of luxury. The number of Spartan
citizens had been reduced to 700; but even of these there were
not above a hundred who possessed a sufficient quantity of land
to maintain themselves in independence. The young king, Agis
IV., who succeeded to the crown in 244, attempted to revive the
ancient Spartan virtue, by restoring the institutions of
Lycurgus, by cancelling all debts, and by making a new
distribution of lands; and with this view he relinquished all his
own property, as well as that of his family, for the public good.
But Agis perished in this attempt, and was put to death as a
traitor to his order. A few years afterwards, however,
Cleomenes, the son of Leonidas, succeeded in effecting the
reforms which had been contemplated by Agis, as well as several
others which regarded military discipline. The effect of these
new measures soon became visible in the increased success of the
Spartan arms. Aratus was so hard pressed that he was compelled
to solicit the assistance of the Macedonians. Both Antigonus
Gonatas and his son Demetrius II.--who had reigned in Macedonia
from 239 to 229 B.C. were now dead, and the government was
administered by Antigonus Doson, as guardian of Philip, the
youthful son of Demetrius II. Antigonus Doson was the grandson
of Demetrius Poliorcetes, and the nephew of Antigonus Gonatas.
The Macedonians compelled him to accept the crown; but he
remained faithful to his trust as guardian of Philip, whose
mother he married; and though he had children of his own by her,
yet Philip succeeded him on his death. It was to Antigonus Doson
that Aratus applied for assistance; and though Cleomenes
maintained his ground for some time, he was finally defeated by
Antigonus Doson in the fatal battle of Sellasia in Laconia (B.C.
221). The army of Cleomenes was almost totally annihilated; he
himself was obliged to fly to Egypt; and Sparta, which for many
centuries bad remained unconquered, fell into the hands of the
victor.

The succession of Macedonian kings from Alexander the Great to
the extinction of the monarchy will be seen from the following
table:--

B.C.
Philip III. Arrhidaeus . . . . . . . . 323-316
Cassander . . . . . . . . 316-296
Philip IV. . . . . . . . . 296-295
Demetrius I. Poliorcetes . . . . . . . . 294-287
Pyrrhus . . . . . . . . 287-286
Lysimachus . . . . . . . . 286-280
Ptolemy Ceraunus and others . . . . . . . . 280-277
Antigonus Gonatas . . . . . . . . 277-239
Demetrius II . . . . . . . . 239-229
Antigonus Doson . . . . . . . . 229-220
Philip V . . . . . . . . 220-178
Perseus . . . . . . . . 178-167

In the following gear Antigonus was succeeded by Philip V., the
son of Demetrius II., who was then about sixteen or seventeen
years of age. His youth encouraged the AEtolians to make
predatory incursions into the Peloponnesus. That people were a
species of freebooters, and the terror of their neighbours; yet
they were united, like the Achaeans, in a confederacy or league.
The Aetolian League was a confederation of tribes instead of
cities, like the Achaean. The diet or council of the league,
called the Panaetolicum, assembled every autumn, generally at
Thermon, to elect the strategus and other officers; but the
details of its affairs were conducted by a committee called
APOCLETI, who seem to have formed a sort of permanent council,
The AEtolians had availed themselves of the disorganised state of
Greece consequent upon the death of Alexander to extend their
power, and had gradually made themselves masters of Locris,
Phocis, Boeotia, together with portions of Acarnania, Thessaly,
and Epirus. Thus both the Amphictyonic Council and the oracle of
Delphi were in their power. They had early wrested Naupactus
from the Achaeans, and had subsequently acquired several
Peloponnesian cities.

Such was the condition of the AEtolians at the time of Philip's
accession. Soon after that event we find them, under the
leadership of Dorimachus, engaged in a series of freebooting
expeditions in Messenia, and other parts of Peloponnesus. Aratus
marched to the assistance of the Messenians at the head of the
Achaean forces, but was totally defeated in a battle near
Caphyae. The Achaeans now saw no hope of safety except through
the assistance of Philip. That young monarch was ambitious and
enterprising possessing considerable military ability and much
political sagacity. He readily listened to the application of
the Achaeans, and in 220 entered into an alliance with them. The
war which ensued between the AEtolians on the one side, and the
Achaeans, assisted by Philip, on the other, and which lasted
about three years, has been called the Social War. Philip gained
several victories over the AEtolians, but he concluded a treaty
of peace with them in 217, because he was anxious to turn his
arms against another and more formidable power.

The great struggle now going on between Rome and Carthage
attracted the attention of the whole civilized world. If was
evident that Greece, distracted by intestine quarrels, must be
soon swallowed up by whichever of those great states might prove
successful; and of the two, the ambition of the Romans, who had
already gained a footing on the eastern shores of the Adriatic
was by far the more formidable to Greece. After the conclusion
of the peace with the AEtolians Philip prepared a large fleet,
which he employed to watch the movements of the Romans, and in
the following year (216) he concluded a treaty with Hannibal,
which, among other clauses, provided that the Romans should not
be allowed to retain their conquests on the eastern side of the
Adriatic. He even meditated an invasion of Italy, and with that
view endeavoured to make himself master of Apollonia and Oricum.
But though he succeeded in taking the latter city, the Romans
surprised his camp whilst he was besieging Apollonia, and
compelled him to burn his ships and retire. Meanwhile Philip had
acted in a most arbitrary manner in the affairs of Greece; and
when Aratus remonstrated with him respecting his proceedings, he
got rid of his former friend and counsellor by means of a slow
and secret poison (B.C. 213).

In B.C., 209 the Achaeans, being hard pressed by the AEtolians,
were again induced to call in the aid of Philip. The spirit of
the Achaeans was at this time revived by Philopoemen, one of the
few noble characters of the period, and who has been styled by
Plutarch "the last of the Greeks." He was a native of
Megalopolis in Arcadia, and in 208 was elected Strategus of the
league. In both these posts Philopoemen made great alterations
and improvements in the arms and discipline of the Achaean
forces, which he assimilated to those of the Macedonian phalanx.
These reforms, as well as the public spirit with which he had
inspired the Achaeans were attended with the most beneficial
results. In 207 Philopoemen gained at Mantinea a signal victory
over the Lacedaemonians, who had joined the Roman alliance; 4000
of them were left upon the field, and among them Machanidas who
had made himself tyrant of Sparta. This decisive battle,
combined with the withdrawal of the Romans, who, being desirous
of turning their undivided attention towards Carthage, had made
peace with Philip (205), secured for a few years the tranquillity
of Greece. It also raised the fame of Philopoemen to its highest
point; and in the next Nemean festival, being a second time
general of the league, he was hailed by the assembled Greeks as
the liberator of their country.

Upon the conclusion of the second Punic war the Romans renewed
their enterprises in Greece, and declared war against Philip
(B.C. 200). For some time the war lingered on without any
decided success on either side; but in 198 the consul T.
Quinctius Flamininus succeeded in gaining over the Achaean league
to the Roman alliance; and as the AEtolians had previously
deserted Philip, both those powers fought for a short time on the
same side. In 197 the struggle was brought to a termination by
the battle of Cynoscephalae, near Scotussa, in Thessaly, which
decided the fate of the Macedonian monarchy. Philip was obliged
to sue for peace, and in the following year (196) a treaty was
ratified by which the Macedonians were compelled to renounce
their supremacy, to withdraw their garrisons from the Grecian
towns, to surrender their fleet, and to pay 1000 talents for the
expenses of the war. At the ensuing Isthmian games Flamininus
solemnly proclaimed the freedom of the Greeks, and was received
by them with overwhelming joy and gratitude.

The AEtolians, dissatisfied with these arrangements, persuaded
Antiochus III., king of Syria, to enter into a league against the
Romans. He passed over into Greece with a wholly inadequate
force, and was defeated by the Romans at Thermopylae (B.C. 191).
The AEtolians were now compelled to make head against the Romans
by themselves. After some ineffectual attempts at resistance
they were reduced to sue for peace, which they at length
obtained, but on the most humiliating conditions (B.C. 189). They
were required to acknowledge the supremacy of Rome, to renounce
all the conquests they had recently made, to pay an indemnity of
500 talents and to engage in future to aid the Romans in their
wars. The power of the AEtolian league was thus for ever
crushed, though it seems to have existed, in name at least, till
a much later period.

The Achaean league still subsisted but was destined before long
to experience the same fate as its rival. At first, indeed, it
enjoyed the protection of the Romans, and even acquired an
extension of members through their influence, but this
protectorate involved a state of almost absolute dependence.
Philopoemen also had succeeded, in the year 192, in adding Sparta
to the league, which now embraced the whole of Peloponnesus. But
Sparta having displayed symptoms of insubordination, Philopoemen
marched against it in 188, and captured the city; when he put to
death eighty of the leading men, razed the walls and
fortifications, abolished the institutions of Lycurgus, and
compelled the citizens to adopt the democratic constitution of
the Achaeans. Meanwhile the Romans regarded with satisfaction
the internal dissensions of Greece, which they foresaw would only
render her an easier prey, and neglected to answer the appeals of
the Spartans for protection. In 183 the Messenians, under the
leadership of Dinocrates, having revolted from the league,
Philopoemen, who had now attained the age of 70, led an
expedition against them; but having fallen from his horse in a
skirmish of cavalry, he was captured, and conveyed with many
circumstances of ignominy to Messene, where, after a sort of mock
trial, he was executed. His fate was avenged by Lycortas, the
commander of the Achaean cavalry, the father of the historian
Polybius.

In B.C. 179 Philip died, and was succeeded by his son Perseus,
the last monarch of Macedonia. The latter years of the reign of
Philip had been spent in preparations for a renewal of the war,
which he foresaw to be inevitable; yet a period of seven years
elapsed after the accession of Perseus before the mutual enmity
of the two powers broke out into open hostilities. The war was
protracted three years without any decisive result; but was
brought to a conclusion in 168 by the consul L. AEmilius Paulus,
who defeated Perseus with great loss near Pydna. Perseus was
carried to Rome to adorn the triumph of Paulus (167), and was
permitted to spend the remainder of his life in a sort of
honourable captivity at Alba. Such was the end of the Macedonian
empire, which was now divided into four districts, each under the
jurisdiction of an oligarchical council.

The Roman commissioners deputed to arrange the affairs of
Macedonia did not confine their attention to that province, but
evinced their design of bringing all Greece under the Roman sway.
In these views they were assisted by various despots and traitors
in different Grecian cities, and especially by Callicrates, a man
of great influence among the Achaeans, and who for many years
lent himself as the base tool of the Romans to effect the
enslavement of his country. After the fall of Macedonia,
Callicrates denounced more than a thousand leading Achaeans who
had favoured the cause of Perseus. These, among whom was
Polybius the historian, were apprehended and sent to Rome for
trial. A still harder fate was experienced by AEtolia, Boeotia,
Acarnania, and Epirus. In the last-named country, especially, no
fewer than seventy of the principal towns were abandoned by
Paulus to his soldiers for pillage, and 150,000 persons are said
to have been sold into slavery.

A quarrel between the Achaeans and Sparta afforded the Romans a
pretence for crushing the small remains of Grecian independence
by the destruction of the Achaean league.

The Spartans, feeling themselves incompetent to resist the
Achaeans, appealed to the Romans for assistance; and in 147 two
Roman commissioners were sent to Greece to settle the disputes
between the two states. These commissioners decided that not
only Sparta, but Corinth, and all the other cities, except those
of Achaia, should be restored to their independence. This
decision occasioned serious riots at Corinth, the most important
city of the league. All the Spartans in the town were seized,
and even the Roman commissioners narrowly escaped violence. On
their return to Rome a fresh embassy was despatched to demand
satisfaction for these outrages. But the violent and impolitic
conduct of Critolaus, then Strategus of the league, rendered all
attempts at accommodation fruitless, and after the return of the
ambassadors the Senate declared war against the league. The
cowardice and incompetence of Critolaus as a general were only
equalled by his previous insolence. On the approach of the
Romans under Metellus from Macedonia he did not even venture to
make a stand at Thermopylae; and being overtaken by them near
Scarphea in Locris, he was totally defeated, and never again
heard of. Diaeus, who succeeded him as Strategus, displayed
rather more energy and courage. But a fresh Roman force under
Mummius having landed on the isthmus, Diaeus was overthrown in a
battle near Corinth; and that city was immediately evacuated not
only by the troops of the league, but also by the greater part of
the inhabitants. On entering it Mummius put the few males who
remained to the sword; sold the women and children as slaves and
having carried away all its treasures, consigned it to the flames
(B.C. 146). Corinth was filled with masterpieces of ancient art;
but Mummius was so insensible to their surpassing excellence as
to stipulate with those who contracted to convey them to Italy,
that, if any were lost in the passage, they should be replaced by
others of equal value! Mummius then employed himself in
chastising and regulating the whole of Greece; and ten
commissioners were sent from Rome to settle its future condition.
The whole country, to the borders of Macedonia and Epirus, was
formed into a Roman province, under the name of ACHAIA, derived
from that confederacy which had made the last struggle for its
political existence.

CHAPTER XXII.

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF GREEK LITERATURE FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES
TO THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT.

The Greeks possessed two large collections of epic poetry. The
one comprised poems relating to the great events and enterprises
of the Heroic age, and characterised by a certain poetical unity;
the other included works tamer in character and more desultory in
their mode of treatment, containing the genealogies of men and
gods, narratives of the exploits of separate heroes, and
descriptions of the ordinary pursuits of life. The poems of the
former class passed under the name of Homer; while those of the
latter were in the same general way ascribed to Hesiod. The
former were the productions of the Ionic and AEolic minstrels in
Asia Minor, among whom Homer stood pre-eminent and eclipsed the
brightness of the rest: the latter were the compositions of a
school of bards in the neighbourhood of Mount Helicon in Boeotia,
among whom in like manner Hesiod enjoyed the greatest celebrity.
The poems of both schools were composed in the hexameter metre
and in a similar dialect; but they differed widely in almost
every other feature.

Of the Homeric poems the Iliad and the Odyssey were the most
distinguished and have alone come down to us. The subject of the
Iliad was the exploits of Achilles and of the other Grecian
heroes before Ilium or Troy; that of the Odyssey was the
wanderings and adventures of Odysseus or Ulysses after the
capture of Troy on his return to his native island. Throughout
the flourishing period of Greek literature these unrivalled works
were universally regarded as the productions of a single mind;
but there was very little agreement respecting the place of the
poet's birth the details of his life, or the time in which he
lived. Seven cities laid claim to Homer's birth, and most of
them had legends to tell respecting his romantic parentage, his
alleged blindness, and his life of an itinerant bard acquainted
with poverty and sorrow. It cannot be disputed that he was an
Asiatic Greek; but this is the only fact in his life which can be
regarded as certain. Several of the best writers of antiquity
supposed him to have been a native of the island of Chios; but
most modern scholars believe Smyrna to have been his birthplace.
His most probable date is about B.C. 850.

The mode in which these poems were preserved has occasioned great
controversy in modern times. Even if they were committed to
writing by the poet himself, and were handed down to posterity in
this manner, it is certain that they were rarely read. We must
endeavour to realise the difference between ancient Greece and
our own times. During the most flourishing period of Athenian
literature manuscripts were indifferently written, without
division into parts, and without marks of punctuation. They were
scarce and costly, could be obtained only by the wealthy, and
read only by those who had had considerable literary training.
Under these circumstances the Greeks could never become a reading
people; and thus the great mass even of the Athenians became
acquainted with the productions of the leading poets of Greece
only by hearing them recited at their solemn festivals and on
other public occasions. This was more strikingly the case at an
earlier period. The Iliad and the Odyssey were not read by
individuals in private, but were sung or recited at festivals or
to assembled companies. The bard originally sung his own lays to
the accompaniment of his lyre. He was succeeded by a body of
professional reciters, called Rhapsodists, who rehearsed the
poems of others. and who appear at early times to have had
exclusive possession of the Homeric poems. But in the seventh
century before the Christian era literary culture began to
prevail among the Greeks; and men of education and wealth were
naturally desirous of obtaining copies of the great poet of the
nation. From this cause copies came to be circulated among the
Greeks; but most of them contained only separate portions of the
poems, or single rhapsodes, as they were called. Pisistratus,
the tyrant or despot of Athens, is said to have been the first
person who collected and arranged the poems in their present
form, in order that they might be recited at the great
Panathenaic festival at Athens.

Three works have come down to us bearing the name of Hesiod--the
'Works and Days,' the 'Theogony,' and a description of the
'Shield of Hercules.' Many ancient critics believed the 'Works
and Days' to be the only genuine work of Hesiod, and their
opinion has been adopted by most modern scholars. We learn from
this work that Hesiod was a native of Ascra, a village at the
foot of Mount Helicon, to which his father had migrated from the
AEolian Cyme in Asia Minor. He further tells us that he gained
the prize at Chalcis in a poetical contest; and that he was
robbed of a fair share of his heritage by the unrighteous
decision of judges who had been bribed by his brother Perses.
The latter became afterwards reduced in circumstances, and
applied to his brother for relief; and it is to him that Hesiod
addresses his didactic poem of the 'Works and Days,' in which he
lays down various moral and social maxims for the regulation of
his conduct and his life. It contains an interesting
representation of the feelings, habits, and superstitions of the
rural population of Greece in the earlier ages. Respecting the
date of Hesiod nothing certain can be affirmed. Modern writers
usually suppose him to have flourished two or three generations
later than Homer.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22