Alexanders Heirs
Page 26
current ostensible holder of the region, Ptolemy. The evidence, then, supports
the deaths of Eumenes and Olympias in 315, and the start of the Third War of the
Successors in 314.
Notes
1 Antipater was already dying when Demades arrived on a mission from Athens (Diod.
18.48.1; Plut. Phoc. 30.4–6; Dem. 30.3–4). Demades did not leave Athens earlier than mid-June 319 (see Errington 1977: 488 and n. 35 [ IG II2 383b]). Antipater’s death then occurred in the summer, with the news reaching Antigonus in the late summer
(Billows 1990: 80; Bosworth 1992a: 80; Boiy 2007b: 148). This dating corresponds to the Parian Marble’s date of 319/18 for the death of Antipater ( FGrH 239 B F-12).
2 The Parian Marble ( FGrH 239 B F-12) places Cassander’s flight before Arrhidaeus’
siege of Cyzicus, which occurred very early in 318 (Diod. 18.52.1–3).
3 Most of the Greek cities of Asia were given a limited autonomy under the ultimate authority of the king, not his satrap (Badian 1966: 55).
4 The assault was, even by Hellenistic standards, very early in the year. Antigonus and his army were still in winter quarters when news of the attack reached Celaenae (Diod.
18.52.1; cf. 18.50.1).
5 Even though Diodorus (18.54.3) states that after Cassander’s arrival in his camp Antigonus “immediately” gave Cassander an infantry force and a fleet, it is very clear that these forces were not official y turned over to the latter until much later. Cassander’s
122
Alexander’s Heirs
first port of call was to be Athens and he did not sail there until after Phocion’s death in May 318 (Plut. Phoc. 37.1).
6 While Diodorus 18.50.4 only says a “greater satrapy” than he had controlled, Eumenes, after his release, remained in Cappadocia (Diod. 18.53.6). Nicanor, who was appointed satrap of Cappadocia at Triparadeisus (Diod. 18.39.6; Arr. Succ. 1a.37; App. Mith. 8), may never have physical y acquired the province (Billows 1990: 409). Nothing is
known of his activities after his appointment unless this is the same Nicanor who in 312 shows up as an Antigonid general in Media (Diod. 19.92.1), as is claimed by
Billows (1990: 409), but not accepted by Heckel (2006: 178).
7 For Eumenes’ early history, see Schäfer 2002: 39–51; Anson 2004: 35–49.
8 According to Nepos ( Eum. 13.3), when Eumenes died the last hope of the Argead dynasty was lost. This is a theme picked up by modern historians as well (most completely: Vezin 1907: 18, 125–8). For a much less positive view of Eumenes’ motivation, see Schäfer (2002: passim, and 15–18, 61) and Anson (2004: passim, and 49, 75–6, 145, 258).
9 Schäfer (2002: 119–21) and Dixon (2007: 166–7) support the altered oath, arguing that Eumenes did have some promise of assistance from Polyperchon prior to his
release, but the evidence is otherwise. See Anson 1977: 251–6, for a detailed refutation of the altered oath.
10 For the chronology, see the chronology section at the end of this chapter.
11 Heckel (2006: 175–8) lists twelve different Nicanors from the period, suggesting that the correct one is number 4, Nicanor, the son of Balacrus (Heckel 2006: 177; 2007.
12 Simpson (1957b: 504) suggests that it may have contained around 20,000 talents.
There were still 10,000 talents left when Antigonus took over the treasury in 315
(Diod. 19.56.5). Eumenes later attempted to send part of the treasure by ship to
Macedonia and Polyperchon, but the crews deserted (Polyaen. 4.6.9; cf. Diod. 18.73.1).
13 Antigenes and Peucestas in their later meeting in 316 in Susiane exhibited hostility toward one another which might have resulted from Peucestas’ usurpation of Susiane.
However, Diodorus (19.15.1–2) lists a different cause for their differences.
14 On the career of Antigenes in general, see Heckel 1982; 1992: 308–13; 2006: 30–1).
Nothing is known of Teutamus until 318. He was likely a Macedonian nobleman and a high-ranking officer in Alexander’s hypaspist corps (Berve 1973 [1926]: 372 [#744]; Heckel 1992: 316–17), who may have been appointed at Triparadeisus by Antipater to keep a watchful eye on Antigenes (Heckel 2006: 262). Bosworth (1992b: 66–7) believes that Teutamus was satrap of Paraetacene. Diodorus (18.62.7) refers to “satrapies” with respect to both Teutamus and Antigenes. “Satrapies,” however, may be an error arising from Diodorus’ abbreviation of his source. Whether Teutamus had been awarded a
satrapy at Triparadeisus, and whether that satrapy was Paraetacene, must remain
undetermined.
15 This translation is from the Loeb Classical Library edition (Geer 1969: 175).
16 Only Philip is mentioned by name (Plut. Phoc. 33.8, 11–12; Nep. Phoc. 3.3), but both kings were apparently present (Diod. 18.68.2).
17 The actual site of Cyinda has not been identified, but it was somewhere between Soli and the mouth of the Cydnus (Simpson 1957b: 503; Bing 1973: 346, 348).
18 Nepos ( Eum. 7.2) inaccurately places the initiation of the Alexander Tent in Susiane in 316. Diodorus (19.15.3), also, repeats this incident in Susiane as if it had not occurred previously. However, Diodorus’ earlier account (18.61) is replete with details fixing the location at Cyinda (the use of the royal treasury) and the chronology to 318
(Diod. 18.61.3–4). Plutarch ( Eum. 13.4) dates the incident before Eumenes’ departure
The End of a Dynasty
123
for the upper satrapies, which occurred in 317 (see chronological section at the end of this chapter).
19 In Diodorus’ (18.60.3–61.3) description of the creation of the “Alexander Tent” the availability of the Cilician gold is twice referenced (18.60.6 and 61.1).
20 This cult was entirely Greek, not Asiatic (as Schäfer 2002: 25–32). Persian or other Asiatic aspects would have been resented by the very troops Eumenes was most
interested in placating, the Macedonians.
21 Polyperchon did not leave Attica until after both the execution of Phocion (May) and the later arrival of Cassander in Piraeus (Diod. 18.67.6–68.1). Cassander’s arrival occasioned the appearance of the regent in Attica (Diod. 18.68.2). There followed a number of seaborne operations between the fleets of the two (Diod. 18.69.1–3). It was only some time later that he moved to the Peloponnesus (Diod. 18.69.3), where he met with the delegates from the various cities in Corinth (Diod. 18.69.3). The siege of Megalopolis then took place in the summer and, perhaps, into the fall of 318 (see Anson 2004: 140 n. 80).
22 With respect to Polyperchon’s destination when he left Megalopolis, Diodorus only says that he had “more necessary business” elsewhere. Given that Cleitus was sent to the Hellespont at roughly the same time to prepare to stop any crossing from Asia (Diod. 18.72.2), Macedonia would be the likeliest terminus.
23 Zephyrion is the modern town of Mersin, which is 30 miles west of Adana (Stil well 1976: 999–1000).
24 Sosigenes had commanded part of the Perdiccan fleet in Aristonous’ expedition to Cyprus in 320 (Arr. Succ. 24.6; Heckel 2006: 253).
25 The chronology for events beginning with 318 is controversial; see the chronology section at the end of this chapter.
26 The current in the Bosporus can run at 7 knots; normal maximum is between 4 and 5
(Ştefan and Romanescu 2010:182).
27 Amphimachus is referred to in Arrian ( Succ. 35) as the brother of the king. Bosworth (2002: 113 and nn. 59 and 60) believes that he was related through Arrhidaeus’ mother Philinna, the result of an earlier marriage, but see Heckel 2006: 22.
28 Diodorus (19.13.7) states that, in the spring of 316, Eumenes “had already sent to the commanders of the upper satrapies the letters from the kings.” The obvious time for the dispatch of these letters would have been the previous winter.
29 In a summary statement, Diodorus (18.73.3) mistakenly places these operations near the Euphrates; however, he later makes it very clear that they occurred along the Tigris (19.1
2.3).
30 Peucestas, the satrap of Persis, commanded 10,000 Persian archers and slingers, 3000 heavy infantry, 600 Greek and Thracian cavalry, and 400 Persian horsemen;
Tlepolemus, the satrap of Carmania, 1500 infantry and 700 cavalry; Sibyrtius, satrap of Arachosia, 1000 infantry and 610 cavalry; Androbazus, general for Oxyartes, the satrap of Paropanisadae, 1200 infantry and 400 cavalry; Stasander, the satrap of Areia and Drangiana, 1500 infantry and 1000 cavalry; and Eudamus from India with 300
infantry, 500 cavalry, and 120 elephants (Diod. 19.14.5–8). The total given by Diodorus does not equal the sum of the listed individual commands. Diodorus’ total may reflect in some fashion the addition of the forces of Amphimachus, the satrap of Mesopotamia.
31 This is not Pithon’s brother, Eudamus, the son of Crateuas (see Heckel 2006: 120).
32 Plutarch ( Eum. 14.3) mistakenly places the battle between Eumenes and Antigonus on the Pasitigris, but it is very clear that it actual y occurred on the Coprates (Diod. 19.18.3–4).
124
Alexander’s Heirs
33 Aeacides was the son and apparent heir of his father Arybbas, but in 342 his father was deposed through the intervention of Philip II, and Olympias’ brother Alexander
became king (Diod. 16.72.1; Just. 8.6.7–8; 17.3.14–15). With Alexander of Epirus’
death in Italy in 331, Aeacides became king (Liv. 8.24.5–13).
34 On Olympias’ authority in Macedonia, see Anson 1992: 39–43.
35 Bosworth (1992a: 62–3) is correct that Errington’s assumption (1977: 483) that Eumenes’ forces knew of Philip’s death prior to Eumenes’ own demise is unlikely.
36 This fabrication Paschidis (2008: 245) believes was based on a very real invasion of Asia Minor by Polyperchon in 317. See earlier discussion.
37 While Diodorus only enumerates the heavy infantry, in his description of Antigonus’
battle order, it is known that he initial y entered Mesopotamia with 20,000 light infantry (Diod. 18.73.1), but by this point in time, even with additional recruitment, the losses suffered prior to his arrival in Media, had likely significantly reduced this number. With respect to cavalry the total given in Diodorus 19.27.1 does not agree with the total of the individual detachments set forth in Diodorus 19.29.2–6.
38 Diodorus’ summary figures for Eumenes’ forces do not agree with the totals for the enumerated units (Diod. 19.27.2–28.4).
39 On the tactics and course of the battle, see Kromayer and Kahnes 1931; Devine 1985a.
40 The Battle of Paraetacene could not, then, have been fought earlier than late October, and no later than early November. Both armies entered winter quarters shortly after the battle and not long before the winter solstice (Diod. 19.37.3).
41 On the supply problems in this part of Iran, see Engels 1978: 78–9; Bosworth 2002: 142).
42 The later Parthian kings did not dare encamp in the open in winter because of the severity of the cold (Plut. Ant. 40.2); on the desert fringe the mean minimum temperature in December is 29 °F (Naval Intelligence Division 1945: 592).
43 For a full analysis of the tactics, see Devine 1985b.
44 Justin (14.3.11) reports that the argyraspids went to Antigonus and offered to surrender Eumenes without the knowledge of their officers.
45 It is possible that Nicanor was tried before the Athenian assembly, but unlikely (Heckel 2007: 410 n. 32).
46 On the two citadels of Babylon, see Reade 2000: 205–7.
5
“War, both the King and Father of Al ”1
With the deaths of Olympias and Eumenes in 315, the Second War of the Successors
came to an end. These deaths sealed the fate of the Argead dynasty. Both Olympias and Eumenes had very vested interests in backing the young Alexander IV.
Olympias was the grandmother and guardian of the young man, who after the
murder of Philip III was the sole king of Macedonia. While she could never be
the official ruler in her own name, as the regent she was in fact in charge at least until Alexander came of age and proved himself capable of ruling. Eumenes
had backed the ambitions of Perdiccas to seize the monarchy, so the theme in
our surviving sources of his steadfast loyalty to the Argead dynasty is clearly
suspect, but after the death of his patron and his own defeat in Asia Minor, his
career, like that of Olympias, was tied to the mystique of Argead rule. With their deaths, only the now minor figure of Polyperchon had any real need of the sons,
legitimate and bastard, of Alexander.
Antigonus, after dispatching Eumenes, had moved to secure the east. Of those
who had served with Eumenes, Antigenes, Eudamus, the otherwise unknown
Celbanus (Diod. 19.44.1), and likely also Stasander (Heckel 2006: 255) and
Amphimachus (Yardley, Wheatley, and Heckel 2011: 219) had been executed
shortly after the battle. The now infamous argyraspids were divided and sent to
various distant outposts, with the most truculent being given to Sibyrtius, the
satrap of Arachosia, who was told to see to their destruction (Polyaen. 4.6.15;
Diod. 19.48.3–4; Plut. Eum. 19.3).2 While in winter quarters in Media, Antigonus learned that his al y in the previous campaign, Pithon, was attempting to subvert the army. Promising to make him general of the upper satrapies, Antigonus tricked him into coming into his presence, where he was condemned by that commander’s
advisory council and executed (Diod. 19.46.1–4). The Mede Orontobates was
appointed in his place as satrap of Media (Diod. 19.46.5; Billows 1990: 413).
Additional y, Antigonus made Hippostratus, one of his Greek commanders,
general over the upper satrapies with a contingent of at least 3500 mercenaries
(Billows 1990: 393). This was the very command that had been dangled before
Pithon to secure his capture. Antigonus and his forces left winter quarters shortly Alexander’s Heirs: The Age of the Successors, First Edition. Edward M. Anson.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
126
Alexander’s Heirs
after Pithon’s execution and proceeded to Ecbatana, where he took possession of
the royal treasure stored there. From Ecbatana he continued into the satrapy
of Persis, where the inhabitants acknowledged him as king and “Lord of Asia”
(Diod. 19.48.1). While on the march into Persis, two of Pithon’s col aborators,
likely Macedonians who had served with Alexander, Meleager and Menoetas,3
revolted and collected 800 of the remaining adherents of both Pithon and Eumenes, but failing to attract the support of the Medes, were cornered and either killed or captured by the forces under Hippostratus (Diod. 19.46.5–47.4). This commander
of the upper satrapies may himself have died during this operation, for Nicanor,
an Antigonid general, is subsequently found in charge of the upper satrapies with the title of general, and Hippostratus disappears entirely from the historical record (Diod. 19.100.3; Billows 1990: 393).4
Most of the other satraps in the region who had not been part of Eumenes’
coalition were simply confirmed in their satrapies. With the death of Antigenes,
Susiane was assigned to Aspisas, “a native” (Diod. 19.55.1). Peucestas, despite
his surrender to Antigonus and his acceptance of that commander’s authority,
was thought to be too popular with the Persians and was replaced with Asclepio-
dorus (Diod. 19.48.5). This popularity with the native population also led to
the replacement of Seleucus in Babylonia. In contrast to the case of Peucestas,
Antigonus desired to force Seleucus to flee from his satrapy so that he could
avoid having to replace another popular governor. His cashiering of Peucestas had caused a degree of discontent, which w
as met by the new de facto ruler of Asia
with repression (Diod. 19.48.5). Therefore, even though Seleucus, like Peucestas, honored Antigonus as a king and feasted the entire army, the new Lord of Asia
demanded that the Babylonian satrap give a full accounting of his finances.
Seleucus resisted on the basis that his satrapy had been given him by the authority of the kings and he was, as a result, not required to respond to these demands. As the argument grew more heated, Seleucus, with fifty friends, fled west to Ptolemy, who graciously received the fugitive (Diod. 19.55.2–56.1).
With the death of Eumenes and the departure of Polyperchon from Macedonia,
the new political configuration had Ptolemy still entrenched in Egypt with
his power extending from Cyrene in Libya all the way to Syria. In the eastern
Mediterranean, he also controlled Cyprus through alliances with the kings there
(Arr. Succ. 10.6; cf. Diod. 19.59.1, 62.5), and many of the Aegean islands were also his allies (cf. Diod. 19.62.9). Asia, from Asia Minor to the borders of India, appeared to be firmly under the control of Antigonus. Macedonia, with the many
failures of Polyperchon, seemed now to be stabilized under the authority of
Cassander. Only Greece was still in turmoil, with an ongoing struggle between
Cassander and Polyperchon. The former regent, after the debacle in Macedonia,
had retreated to Aetolia; he still retained allies, especial y in the Peloponnesus.
Cassander had adopted the formal title previously held by his father in Macedonia during the reign of Alexander the Great (Diod. 18.22.1), that of general, but he was also preparing for a future when he could become king in his own right (Diod.
19.52.1). Having imprisoned Alexander IV and his mother Roxane, and having
“War, both the King and Father of Al ”
127
been responsible for the death of Olympias, he was anxious to offset these
actions, so damaging to the royal family, by securing some connection to the
Argead clan, and by behaving as a traditional king of Macedonia. Soon after
the death of Olympias, Cassander married Thessalonice, a daughter of Philip II