Walbank F.W., Astin A.E., Frederiksen M.W., Ogilvie R.M. The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume 7, Part 1: The Hellenistic World
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
ANTIGONUS, CORINTH AND ARATUS
2
47
observed that everything
in
Egypt is play-acting and painted scenery,
he
has come over entirely to us \
66
The anecdote is dubious; but if there was
some such attempt to discredit Aratus with Ptolemy,
it
had little success.
Meanwhile, either before
or
after
the
liberation
of
Sicyon, Antigonus
suffered
a
much more serious setback when Ecdemus and Demophanes
assassinated Aristodamus
and
liberated Megalopolis,
the
important
outpost
of
Macedonian power
in the
Peloponnese.
67
It
was perhaps
in
response to this that Antigonus helped Aristomachus to set up a tyranny
at Argos, which
was
to
prove
for
many years
a
strong support
for
Macedonia,
and a
bulwark against
the
extension
of
Achaean power
in
the Peloponnese.
68
The fall of Aristodamus was a serious matter: but worse was
to
come.
At some date around 250 Antigonus' brother Craterus, the governor of
Corinth, died
and
Antigonus assigned
his
command
to
Craterus'
son
Alexander, thus creating
the
impression
of a
dynastic succession;
and
shortly afterwards, perhaps
in
249,
Alexander revolted
and
declared
himself independent
of
Macedonia.
69
An
inscription from Eretria
(IG
xn.9.212), honouring
a
Macedonian Arrhidaeus, one
of
his supporters,
gives Alexander
the
title
of
king. This revolt was
a
disaster
of
the first
magnitude
for
Antigonus,
for it
deprived him
of
his
two chief garrison
towns, Chalcis
and
Corinth
—
though
not
indeed
of
Piraeus which
appears soon afterwards under
a
Macedonian general loyal to Antigonus
and independent
of
the
Corinthian command.
To
win
support
in
Euboea Alexander withdrew
the
Macedonian garrisons from
the
cities,
as a convincing restoration
of
the same Eretrian decree records;
it
was
a
gesture recalling that
of
Demetrius
I
Poliorcetes
in
304.
70
The
Euboean League was also revived. Although
it
cannot
be
proved,
it
is
likely that Ptolemy was behind these events. Plutarch (Arat. 18.2) refers
to attacks made
by
Aratus against Alexander, which evidently date
to
the time before
the
viceroy revolted from Antigonus,
and
may indeed
represent
a
quid pro
quo
for the
Ptolemaic subsidy
to
Achaea
and
were
68
Plut. Arat.
15.3.
67
On the
subsequent activity
of
these
two men at
Cyrene, where they established
a new
constitution, see above n. 62.
68
Paus.
VIII.
10.5
records
a
battle
of
Mantinea which,
if it
ever took place, belongs about this
time.
According
to
his account the Spartans under Agis besieged Megalopolis
but
were defeated
near Mantinea (with the loss
of
Agis)
by a
combined army
of
Mantineans, Megalopolitans under
Lydiades (the later tyrant) and Leocydes, and Achaeans and Sicyonians under Aratus. This story
presents so many difficulties (e.g. Agis did not die at Mantinea, Aratus would hardly command the
Achaean army when so young, the alignment of Achaea and Sicyon with Megalopolis against Sparta
is highly improbable) that
it is
best dismissed
as
unhistorical.
See
Urban, 1979, 38—45: (D
117)
against Beloch 1927, iv.2.253-7: (A
5).
e9
Many scholars date Alexander's revolt to 252 (cf. Will 1979,1.316-18:
(A
67)); but the order of
events
in
Trogus, Pro/. 26,
on
which this view rests,
is
not chronological.
For
the arguments
in
favour
of
dating
the
revolt
c.
249
see
Urban 1979,
i4ff.:
(D
I
17).
">
Cf.
Picard 1979,
272-3:
(B 252).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
2
4
8 7 MACEDONIA AND GREECE
possibly one
of
the factors which persuaded Alexander
to
rebel. When,
shortly afterwards, the Achaeans made
an
alliance with Alexander, now
an independent ruler, these attacks naturally ceased.
71
Antigonus
did not let his
nephew's defection
go
unchallenged.
An
Athenian inscription
(ISE 1.23)
honouring Aristomachus
of
Argos
shows that
for
some time Macedonian attacks were levelled against
Corinth from Argos
and
Athens;
but
evidently
the
balance
of
the
fighting favoured Alexander, for the conflict ended in a peace secured by
payments
to
Alexander
by
Aristomachus.
72
A
Salaminian decree
honouring Antigonus' general
in the
Piraeus (SIG 454) shows Alexan-
der using pirates to put pressure on the Athenians during this struggle.
73
Whether
the
Megalopolitans shared
in
the
attacks
on
Corinth
is
not
recorded;
the
absence
of
any reference
to
Megalopolis
in the
Athenian
decree
for
Aristomachus
is
not evidence that they did not,
for
there was
no reason
for the
Athenians
to
mention Megalopolis
in
that context.
Antigonus' failure
to
shake Alexander's power by these attacks from
Athens and Argos was
in
contrast
to
the growing strength and prestige
of the Aetolians who about this time made a public gesture designed
to
assert their position
of
eminence
in
central Greece, their influence
at
Delphi
and
their past services
to
Greece generally.
In
the
year
of
Polyeuctus' archonship
at
Athens (either 247/6
or,
more probably,
246/5
)
74
the
Aetolians reorganized
the
annual Delphic
Soteria,
com-
memorating
the
delivery
of
the
shrines from
the
Gauls
in
279,
as a
panhellenic festival,
to be
celebrated every fourth year;
its
general
acceptance would
be
tantamount
to
an admission by the Greek cities
of
the Aetolian right
to
control Delphi
and the
Amphictyonic Council,
which
had the
responsibility
for
administering
the
festival both before
and after
its
transformation.
75
In its
expanded form the
Soteria
was first
held
in
245/4; and
it
was also
in
245 that Antigonus established two new
festivals concerned with the dedication
of
vases
at
Delos, the
Paneia
and
the
Soteria.
Unfortunately the occasion which prompted this celebration
is
not
known.
If
the
naval battle
of
Andros
in
which
'the old man'
Antigonus defeated Sophron (who was perhaps the man mentioned
on
an inscription from Labraunda and so possibly a Ptolemaic governor of
Caria) was fought about 246,
the
new festivals may commemorate that
71
Plut. Aral. 18.1.
72
Aristomachus remained a supporter of Antigonus, but he preferred
to
keep the war away from
his
own
frontiers.
73
Brule 1978, 3-6: (H
29)
argues that they were Cretans.
74
Cf.
Pelekidis 1961, 53?.:
(D 96)
(247/6); Nachtergael 1977,
2iiff.:
(E 113)
(246/5).
75
For the
terms
of the
invitation
and its
acceptance see
SIG
408 (Athens);
SIG
402
-
better
Vi'ilhelm 1922,
7:
(B 174);
cf.
Robert 1933, 535-7: (B 136)
-
(Ch'os);
FD
in. 1.481 (one
of the
Cyclades),
482
(Tenos), 483 (Smyrna);
cf.
Flaceliere 1937, 133flF.: (D
105).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
ANTIGONUS, CORINTH AND ARATUS 249
victory;
76
but
that would depend
on
assuming that Macedonia
was
involved
in
the Laodicean War, and
for
this there
is no
evidence.
The
date
of
the battle
of
Andros must still be regarded as uncertain; indeed,
despite Plutarch's reference
to
Antigonus
as 'the old man' the
possibility cannot
be
entirely excluded that
the
battle was fought
and
won
by
Antigonus
III.
Alternatively, then,
the
vase festivals were
instituted
to
celebrate some unrecorded victory
on the
northern
frontiers
of
Macedonia. Trouble there
in the
immediately preceding
years would also serve
to
explain Antigonus' strangely indirect
and
ineffective reaction
to the
revolt
of
Alexander
the son of
Craterus.
A
suggestion that
the
Delian foundations were intended
as a
response
to
the Aetolian reorganization of the
Soteria
at Delphi
77
seems on the whole
less likely,
for a
vase-festival
at
Delos would hardly compete
in
Greek
estimation with
a
penteteric festival
at
Delphi; and
in
any case even
on
this explanation the vase festivals would require some nominal success
to celebrate.
In 245 Aratus, now twenty-six years of
age,
was elected general of the
Achaean League
for
the first time. His generalship saw the initiation of
an aggressive policy towards the Aetolians, who had attempted
a
coup at
Sicyon shortly before its liberation from Nicocles
in
251.
Aratus took a
raiding party across the Corinthian Gulf into Locris and Calydon, and at
the same time persuaded the Boeotians who, ever since the annexation
of southern Phocis (above,
p. 241) had
made
the
Aetolians into
neighbours, had regarded them with suspicion,
to
ally themselves with
Achaea
and to
attack Aetolia. This proved disastrous.
The
Aetolians
quickly retaliated by invading Boeotia, and though the Boeotian general
Abaeocritus appealed to Aratus
for
help and Aratus marshalled an army
reputedly
of
10,000 men
(an
impossibly large figure), before
he
could
bring
it
over
the
Isthmus
of
Corinth
to
Abaeocritus' support,
the
Boeotian general
and 1,000 of his men had
been defeated
and had
perished
at
Chaeronea. Boeotia, shattered
by
this blow,
at
once
capitulated and allied itself
to
Aetolia. The military weakness of Boeotia
at this time
is
confirmed
by a
federal
law on
military preparedness
mentioned
in a
decree from Thespiae, which required
the
cities
to
provide military instruction
for the
boys;
78
clearly such measures
had
come
too
late.
It was
probably
now
that Boeotia
was
obliged
to
surrender Opuntian Locris, which she had annexed
in
272, though she
78
For the
battle
of
Andros
see
Trogus, Pro/.
27;
Plut.
Pel. 2; T.
Larsen
on P.
Haun.
6;
Momigliano and Fraser 1950, 107-18:
(D
34). On Sophron ('Sophrona' was Miiller's correction
of
the MS
of
Trogus 'Oprona') see Crampa 1969, no.
3,
and Habicht's review, 169:
(B
60). For a date
c.
246 see Tarn 1913,
}78ff.:
(D
38);
contra,
Bikerman 1938, 368-83:
(D
3). For the view that Andros
was
a
victory
by
Doson
see
Merker 1960, 39-52: (B 240).
"
So
Will 1979, 1.323: (A 67).
7
» Cf.
Roesch 1972, 66-7: (D
84).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
2JO 7 MACEDONIA AND GREECE
was allowed to keep her representation on the Amphictyonic Council.
79
Thus the effect of Chaeronea was to strengthen the power of Aetolia;
and while it cost Achaea an ally, it can hardly have given any satisfaction
to Antigonus.
In the same year (245), however, Antigonus had an unexpected stroke
of good fortune. Alexander of Corinth died, and his widow Nicaea
yielded to Antigonus' proposal that she should marry his son De-
metrius, who was presumably to discard his existing wife Stratonice, the
sister of Antiochus II. According to the rather sensational account in
Plutarch, on the day of
the
wedding Antigonus left the procession, made
his way up the Acrocorinth and by sheer bluff had himself admitted to
the citadel. Once master of this he installed the philosopher Persaeus as
governor, with Archelaus as garrison-commander under him.
80
The
wedding was abandoned, Nicaea was jettisoned and Stratonice re-
instated for at any rate another five years (see below, ch.
12,
p.
446).
With
his seizure of Acrocorinth Antigonus also recovered the rest of
Alexander's splinter-kingdom including Euboea and the fortress of
Chalcis. The Euboean League was suppressed and Macedonian gar-
risons were once again introduced into the cities of the island.
81
This
coup by Antigonus supervening on the defection of Boeotia from their
alliance was a serious setback to Aratus and the Achaeans, who had also
to take account of a continuing Aetolian interest in the western
Peloponnese, which constituted a potential threat to the League.
In the first place a Messenian decree (SVA. 472) records the
establishment, in the years immediately before
240
and perhaps in 244, of
isopoliteia
and a treaty of mutual assistance between Messenia and
Phigalea, states which had hitherto been at loggerheads despite the fact
that both were friends of Aetolia. The agreement, reached at the
instigation of the Aetolians and the Phigaleans, served to consolidate the
Aetolian position in the south-western part of the Peloponnese. About
the same time Lydiades of Megalopolis made himself tyrant of that city,
probably with Macedonian help, since he is later a supporter of
Antigonus and Demetrius II. At some time during his tyranny he ceded
Alipheira to Elis, for reasons which Polybius does not specify;
82
it could
have been for help given at the time he became tyrant or for some other
reason later, such as the ransoming of prisoners.
83
Elis must also have
gained possession of Triphylia at this time, since that area was
subsequently returned to the Achaean League, of which Megalopolis
was by then a member. Whether this more or less peaceful penetration
was accompanied by Aetolian raids depends on the dates attached to
?B
Cf. Klaffenbach 1959, 199 n.
2:
(D 107); Beloch 1927, iv.2.432: (A ;).
80
Bengtson 1964-7, 11.354-5:
(A
6).
81
Picard 1979, 274-8:
(B
252).
82
Polyb. iv.77.9-10. 83 Urban 1979, 87 n.412: (D 117).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
ANTIGONUS, CORINTH AND ARATUS 25 '
various incursions into the Peloponnese mentioned
by our
sources
out
of context.
It is on the
whole more likely that these attacks occurred
a
year
or two
later (see below,
pp.
254-5).
Hemmed in by Elis to the west, by the new tyranny at Megalopolis
to
the south
and by
Macedonian Corinth
to the
east,
the
Achaeans
depended
for
any further expansion
on
some new initiative;
and
from
the time Antigonus recovered Acrocorinth Aratus set about working on
a bold plan
to
take
it
from
him.
This project came
to
fruition
at
midsummer 243 when, with the help of traitors within the garrison and
leading a small force of
400
men, he penetrated the city by night and
by
the
use of
speed
and
great audacity took
the
citadel after only
a
little
fighting. Persaeus, the Macedonian governor, overwhelmed with guilt at
its loss, committed suicide.
At one blow Aratus had thus wholly reversed the balance of power in
southern Greece. Corinth, with
its two
ports
of
Cenchreae
and
Lechaeum, giving access
to the two
seas,
now
joined
the
Achaean
League, followed quickly
by
other states.
A
fragmentary inscription
from
the
Asclepieum
at
Epidaurus
(SVA 489)
contains part
of the
agreement
by
which Epidaurus now became
a
member
of
the Achaean
League; enough of it survives
to
show that freedom from garrisons,
the
maintaining
of
the constitution,
the
laws
and the
lawcourts,
and the
settlement
of
disputes were among
the
matters dealt with. Besides
Epidaurus, Megara and Troezen both joined Achaea, thus establishing
federal authority firmly
on the
Saronic Gulf and thrusting
a
wedge
of
hostile territory between Antigonus' nearest outposts
in
Attica and
the
tyrants
in
Argos
and
Megalopolis.
It has
been estimated
84
that
the
territory now controlled by the League amounted
to
5,500
km
2
, and this
sudden accession
of
strength
to
Achaea
was as
unwelcome
to the
Aetolians
as it
was
to
Antigonus. According
to
Polybius,
85
Antigonus
thereupon entered into
a
compact with
the
Aetolians
to
partition
Achaea;
but
neither party took
any
immediate action.
It is at
least
possible that
a
parallel agreement between Aetolia and Alexander
II of
Epirus
to
divide
up
Acarnania,
86
which Polybius twice mentions along
with the proposed partition of Achaea, belongs to the same date and was
countenanced
by
Antigonus against
his
immediate interest
in the
hope
of obtaining Aetolian help against
the
Achaeans.
87
Meanwhile the Achaeans, having thus given proof
of
their ability
to
deal Macedonia
a
substantial blow, cemented their relations with
Alexandria
by
electing Ptolemy
III as
leader
{hegemon)
of
the League,
88
84
Beloch 1925, iv.1.621
n.
3:
(A
5). «5
Polyb. 11.43.10; 45.1; ix.34.7; 38.9.
80
Polyb.
11.45.1;
ix.34.7; cf.Just. Epit. xxvm.i.i.
s
' Alternatively,
it
may
be
slightly earlier
at the
time
of
the revolt
of
Alexander
of
Corinth.
88
Plut. Aral.
24.4.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
252
7
MACEDONIA
AND
GREECE
. probably an honorary post
-
despite the reference to leadership by land
and sea
—
and one designed mainly to indicate gratitude for past, and the
expectation
of
future, subsidies;
and
it
was perhaps with Ptolemaic
encouragement that, in the spring of
242,
Aratus launched an attack over
the Isthmus against Attica, in the course of which he raided the island of
Salamis. It was no doubt
as
an act of policy that, whereas he had enslaved
the Macedonian prisoners captured at Corinth, he now chose to release
without ransom the free citizens whom he took
in
Attica. About this
time the Achaeans made
an
alliance with Sparta,
the old
enemy
of
Macedonia.
IX. AGIS IV OF SPARTA
The death of Areus near Corinth in the Chremonidean War had deprived
Sparta
of
an
ambitious
and
aggressive leader,
and
that
of
his
son
Acrotatus
in an
attack on Megalopolis was
a
further blow. But quite
apart from the loss of individual leaders Sparta in the mid third century
faced serious economic difficulties, which would in any case have made it
difficult
for
her
to
fulfil the kind
of
role which Areus had envisaged.
Already
at
the time when Aristotle was writing his
Politics,
internal
developments
at
Sparta had
led
to a
great concentration
of
wealth,
especially
in
the hands
of
heiresses, and
a
consequent decline
in the
number
of
citizens
to
around i,ooo;
89
and since then this trend had
become more pronounced. Its causes cannot be confidently identified,
but
it
is
not unlikely that one factor was the wealth brought back by
mercenaries returning from abroad. This had been used to buy up land,
thus reducing still further the number of those with sufficient property
to qualify
for
citizenship. When
in
244
or
243 Agis IV ascended
the
Eurypontid throne, the number of full Spartiates had fallen to 700, and
of these perhaps about a hundred were extremely rich. If
we
can believe
Phylarchus,
90
half the land now belonged
to
women.
Agis'
primary aim was probably to win power for Sparta and glory for
himself;
but he
saw
that
any
revival
of
Spartan military strength
depended on carrying through a radical programme including economic
and social changes capable of restoring the citizen body to an effective
size.
His proposals were related to that end. For the year 243/2 one of his
followers, Lycurgus, was elected
to
the ephorate and he put forward
measures to implement Agis' radical plans, representing them however
as the reintroduction
of
the ancient Spartan way
of
life, known and
venerated
as
the
system
of
Lycurgus,
the
traditional and somewhat
shadowy Spartan lawgiver. His programme provided for the division of
89
Arist. Pol. 11.9.1270a
1
jff.
*>
Plut.
Agis-j.f.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
AGIS IV OF SPARTA
2
53
the central part of Laconia, the 'city land'
(politike chord)
lying between
Pellana, Sellasia, Taygetus and Malea, into 4,500 lots, which were to be
assigned to dispossessed Spartiates and, since there were not enough of
these, to other selected 'inferiors'
(hypomeiones)?
1
perioikoi and even
foreign residents, to make up the number. Similarly
15,000
lots were to be
created in perioecic territory and assigned to landless
perioikoi
capable of
bearing arms. The ancient messes, the
syssitia,
which had fallen into
desuetude, were to be revived to the number of fifteen in all and with a
membership of 200 or 400, and the traditional Spartan
agoge
with its
organization of the boys into age-groups was to be restored. After being
passed in the assembly,
the
apella,
these proposals were rejected by
a
small
majority in the council, thegerousia
—
according to Plutarch (Agis n.
1)
by
one vote (though in
a
council of thirty that
is
not possible unless someone
was absent). Since the Agiad king Leonidas, the successor of Acrotatus'
son Areus II, who died as a child, was behind the opposition, Lycurgus
had him indicted for having married
a
foreign wife and deposed, his place
being taken by Cleombrotus, Leonidas' son-in-law.
When the new board of ephors for 242/1 proved sympathetic to the
rich and reinstated Leonidas (who had taken sanctuary in the temple of
Athena of the Brazen House), Agis and Lycurgus had them expelled
from office and Leonidas fled to Tegea. The new board of ephors which
replaced those deposed contained Agis' uncle Agesilaus and he, Plutarch
records, then carried through the legislation necessary to cancel debts,
but not the land-distribution essential for the creation of new citizens
and the strengthening of the numbers of
perioikoi.
The young men
supported Agis; but the poorer citizens generally, once their condition
was ameliorated by the cancellation of the debts which burdened their
property and threatened their status as citizens, were reluctant to share
with others the privileges which citizenship conferred, and the rich
naturally resisted any reduction in the size of their estates. Consequently
the creation of the new lots and the proposed increase in the size of the
citizen body, which was essential to the fulfilment of Agis' ambitions,
were postponed; and at this moment the internal course of the
revolution was interrupted by events outside.
In response to the compact between Antigonus and the Aetolians and
perhaps too as a means of countering the seizure of the tyranny at
Megalopolis by Lydiades (see above, p. 250), an event which threatened
both Sparta and the Achaean League, Aratus had contrived an alliance
between these two states; the exact date is uncertain and it may have been
before Agis' accession. The first appeal to the terms of this alliance came,
however, in 241 when the Aetolians, either urged on by Antigonus or
91 The
bypomeiones
probably included men of non-citizen origin as well as dispossessed citizens:
cf. Oliva 1971, 177-8: (D 132).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
254 7 MACEDONIA AND GREECE
perhaps alarmed
at an
unsuccessful attempt
by
Aratus
to
take
the
town
of Cynaetha,
92
which will
at
this time have been under
the
control
of
their allies
in
Elis, invaded the Peloponnese
by
way
of
Boeotia and
the
Megarid. Learning
in
advance
of
their proposed invasion Aratus
appealed
to
Sparta,
and
Agis
was
sent north with
a
Spartan army.
Evidently he had already made some progress in drilling and organizing
this force,
for its
well turned
out
appearance inspired popular admir-
ation
and
some alarm
in
Aratus
and the
richer element
in the
cities
of
Achaea.
The
meeting
of
the
two
armies
at
Corinth was followed
by a
council
of
war,
at
which Aratus imposed
his
view that
a
pitched battle
should
be
avoided;
and
soon afterwards
he
dismissed both
his own
forces and those of
Agis.
Social revolution was not without its advocates
in many cities, and unwillingness
to
let Agis' army advertise the Spartan
movement too widely may help to account
for
Aratus' dismissal of Agis
and his army. Plutarch (Agis
14)
emphasizes the suspicion evinced by the
rich
in
Achaea
for his
innovating ways. The expedition heralded Agis'
downfall, however,
for he
arrived back
in
Sparta
to
find Agesilaus
moving towards
a
tyranny. Shortly afterwards
his
political enemies
seized power, recalled Leonidas, expelled Agesilaus
and
drove Agis
to
take sanctuary
in the
temple
of
Athena
of
the Brazen House. Cleom-
brotus was spared and went with his wife into
exile,
but Agis was tricked
into leaving sanctuary
and,
along with
his
mother
and
grandmother,
who
had
supported
his
plans,
was
executed.
In
consequence
the
completion
of
the Spartan revolution was postponed
for
nearly a decade
and
a
half.
Shortly after Agis' dismissal
by
Aratus,
the
Aetolians marched over
the Isthmus into
the
Peloponnese unresisted.
But
when they attacked
Pellene
in
eastern Achaea, Aratus fell upon them
as
they plundered
the
town, inflicting
a
defeat
and
heavy losses. This invasion, which thus
ended
in
disaster
for the
Aetolians,
was
probably
not
their only
incursion into
the
Peloponnese about this time. Polybius mentions,
unfortunately
out of
context, several Aetolian raids associated with
outrages against temples, which should no doubt be dated to this period
and perhaps
to the
year
241.
93
They include
an
invasion
of
Laconia
by
Charixenus
and
Timaeus and
the
plundering
by
Timaeus
of
the temple
of Poseidon
at
Taenarum
and the
temple
of
Artemis
at
Lusi
-
which
perhaps indicates an approach by way of Elis and Messenia. A passage in
Plutarch
[Cleom.
18.3) speaks
of
the Aetolians carrying
off
50,000 slaves
from Laconia, perhaps
on
this occasion.
The
figure
is
improbably high,
but the success
of
these raids may reflect the military weakness
of
Sparta
following
the
abrogation
of
Agis' reforms. There were also Aetolian
92
Polyb. ix.17;
cf.
W'albank 1936,
64-71:
(D 74).
OT
Polyb. iv.34.9; ix.34.9.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
ANTIGONUS' LAST YEARS
attacks on the temple of Poseidon
at
Mantinea led by Polycritus and
on
the Argive Heraeum led by Pharycus.
In
241 the tyrant
of
Argos was
a
Macedonian client,
but
this need
not
have weighed greatly with
an
Aetolian raiding party against
the
attractions
of
easy plunder.
X. ANTIGONUS LAST YEARS
Except
in
encouraging
the
Aetolians
to
attack Achaea
and
Sparta,
Antigonus was strangely inactive
in
southern Greece during
the
years
following Aratus' seizure
of
the Acrocorinth in 243. He may have been
distracted
by
trouble
on the
northern frontiers which
has not
been
recorded
in
the sources; but he was by now an old man and perhaps
no
longer
able
to react energetically to provocation. However this may
be,
it
was probably
in
241/40 that peace was made between Antigonus
and
Achaea and also between Achaea and Aetolia, perhaps
all as
part
of
a
single settlement.
94
This did not, however, deter Aratus from continu-
ing his drive against Argos and Athens. For a peace-time attack against
Aristippus, Aristomachus' successor
as
tyrant
in
Argos,
the
Achaeans
were arraigned,
by
some procedure which
is not
explained, before
a
Mantinean court (Mantinea being
at
this time
an
independent city) and
were required to pay as damages the perhaps nominal sum
of
30
minae.
95
This attack probably took place
in 240 and in the
same year Aratus
raided Athens and
the
Piraeus,
the
latter several times, though always
unsuccessfully. Already, perhaps, before peace was made with Aetolia
he
had
gained possession
of
Cynaetha.
96
In the winter
of
240/39 Antigonus died. His long reign had given
Macedonia time
to
recover from
the
weakness
and
devastation
of
the
years between Cassander's death and 276,
and he
had encouraged this
recovery by carefully husbanding Macedonian resources and manpower
and by making use of mercenaries wherever possible. His foreign policy
had been cautious
and
defensive. Towards
the
expanding Aetolian
League
he
had been patient and unprovocative,
97
taking
no
retaliatory
measures when various states lying between Thessaly and Attica were
incorporated into the league and apparently content
to
resort
to a
sea-
crossing and the route through Euboea to maintain his communications
between Demetrias
and the
Macedonian garrisons
at
Chalcis, Piraeus
and Corinth. His policy was one
of
wary neutrality, broken only
in his
last years when after Aratus' capture
of
Corinth
he
entered into
a
positive,
and as it
turned
out
short-lived, alliance with Aetolia against
94
Plut. Aral. 35.1-2.
«
Plut. Aral. 25.j.
•« Cf.
Walbank 1936,
64-71:
(D 74).
97
See, however, Roesch 1982,
351:
(D
85), for an unpublished inscription recording an attack by
Antigonus
on
Cytinium
in
Aetolian Doris
a
little before 243.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
256 7 MACEDONIA AND GREECE
the Achaean League. The control of southern Greece, secured by
garrisons and, especially in his later years, by the support of friendly
tyrants in Argos, Megalopolis and other smaller cities, was itself
defensive in conception, designed to debar any political enemy access to
Greece; and since the agreement made with Antiochus in
278,
that meant
primarily Ptolemy.
The challenge from Ptolemy came in the Chremonidean War, but
proved wholly inadequate
to
support Athens and Sparta; and though the
details are obscure (see above, pp. 239-40, 242-3), Antigonus seems to
have won a naval victory over the Ptolemaic fleet off
Cos,
which shook
but did not shatter Ptolemaic naval power. Unfortunately, as we saw, the
evidence is insufficient to allow a satisfactory assessment of Macedonian
power in the Aegean. On land the failure of Athens and Sparta left the
Macedonian system unimpaired and it was only with the revolt of
Alexander and, more important, the growth in the power of the Achaean
League and the capture of Corinth by Aratus in 243 that this system was
seriously shaken. Subsequently either the inertia of old age or
unrecorded fighting on the northern frontier prevented any serious
attempt by Antigonus to repair the damage.
Antigonus was a pupil of Zeno and himself a Stoic. An anecdote
illustrates his generosity of spirit
{philanthropic!),
telling how when his
son ill-treated some of
his
subjects he reproved him with the words that
'our kingship is a kind of glorious servitude
(endoxos douleia)
\
98
But too
much should not be made of this, for there is no evidence that Stoic
theories of kingship exercised the least influence on his policy or his
statesmanship. Though he was joined at court by Persaeus, it was as a
politician and an officer that the Stoic served him. As a man Antigonus is
attractive and leaves a favourable impression. He was humane and
modest, rejecting flattery and enjoying good relations with his family
and especially with his sons. But his death left his successor Demetrius
face to face with serious problems.
98
Ael. VH 11.20.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008