returned them to the Athenians. The Athenians, having already granted elaborate
honors to Demetrius during his previous deliverance of the city-state, would appear to have been hard pressed to find new ones to honor their again savior. But, in an age when the granting of honors to saviors knew few bounds, the Athenians found
new ways to flatter the god Demetrius. He was given the rear chamber of the great Temple of Athena, the Parthenon, as his residence. Demetrius now often referred
to the goddess as his sister. Moreover, he shared the Parthenon with at least four professional ladies, Lamia, often called “the love of his life” (Wheatley 2003b), Chrysis, Demo, and Anticyra (Plut. Demetr. 23.3–24.1, 25.9; [Demochares] FGrH
75 F-1). Two of Demetrius’ mistresses, Leaina and the aforementioned Lamia, were
granted religious sanctuaries by the Athenians, and certain of his companions
received altars and libations (Athen. 6.253A). These were all aspects of formal
worship. Here in Athens in his new residence he spent the remainder of 304.
At the start of the new year (303) (Diod. 20.102.1), Demetrius proceeded into
the Peloponnesus. None of the forces there loyal to either Cassander, Ptolemy, or Polyperchon chose to meet him in battle, but remained in what they hoped were
securely fortified locations (Plut. Demetr. 25.1; cf. Diod. 20.103.7). The last of these, the former regent Polyperchon, disappears at this point from the historical record (Diod. 20.100.6, 103.5–6). He was apparently one of those old generals who did simply fade away without fanfare. His career had demonstrated that ineptness
was the kiss of death in an age of powerful and skillful individuals. Demetrius
took the city of Sicyon by direct assault, and even though the Ptolemaic garrison fled into the citadel, these troops were persuaded through a bribe to surrender,
The End of the Diadochi
169
eliminating the need for a siege (Diod. 20.102.2; Plut. Demetr.25.1; cf. Polyaen.
4.7.3). The city was now proclaimed to be free and autonomous. In gratitude, the
inhabitants granted their liberator divine honors, renamed the city Demetrias,
and voted to celebrate annual festivals, games, and sacrifices in his honor. Having achieved this success, Demetrius moved on to Corinth, which was held by
Prepelaus, Cassander’s overall commander in the Peloponnesus. He captured not
only the city but also the spectacularly situated and seemingly impregnable citadel, the Acrocorinth, as well (Diod. 20.102–103.3; Polyaen. 4.7.3). “At the request of the grateful Corinthians,” Demetrius placed a garrison in the latter. While in Corinth, he summoned the Greek states to meet with him, with the result that a charter of
a new Hellenic league was drafted. Some of its terms are strikingly similar to those of the original League of Corinth (Rhodes and Osborne 2007: 372–5; Dixon 2007:
176–7). In a surviving, though fragmentary, inscription ( IG IV2 1.68 [trans.
Bagnall and Derow 1981: 18–20]), it is clear that Demetrius’ league was to be both defensive and offensive ( IG IV3 frg. 5; a synedrion (common council) of members was formed and its resolutions were to be binding on all members, with the provision that all were bound to go to war against violators. This same council was
to have judicial authority over all violations. The monarchy of Antigonus and
Demetrius and their descendants, as well as the constitutions of the cities, were to be preserved. Demetrius was proclaimed the hegemon or leader of the new league (Plut. Demetr. 25.5; Diod. 20.102.1; cf. Diod. 20.106.1). Demetrius, since this was an Isthmian year, may also have celebrated the games (so Dixon 2007: 177), but this is nowhere recorded.
The notice in the agreement that the monarchy of Antigonus and Demetrius
was to be dynastic is a clear sign of the evolution of these personal monarchies.
The association of a son and heir in the monarchy would ensure that the younger
individual would have a share of the prestige enjoyed by his father and, hence,
a claim on the loyalty of those who had served the father. But more importantly
it would establish the concept of permanence associated with a dynasty. These
monarchies were personal, not national. As one commentator has remarked,
these were “kings without kingdoms” (Billows 1990: 160). Especial y in the case of a multi-ethnic empire such as those created by Antigonus and Seleucus, nationalism
was not a real possibility. As is clear in this new League of Corinth, Antigonus and Demetrius were looking to a future in which their kingship would endure in the
hands of their descendants, not just for their lifetimes. It would be around these dynasties that the institutions of state would develop over time, most often copied from their Persian predecessors (Briant 2002), but also especial y with respect to the “Greek” communities, those created by Philip II. However, these were never
states that transcended their rulers. The central feature, the key institution, was the monarchy. While these were autocracies, it was absolute rule tempered by the
practical need to secure the adherence of their supporters, especial y their “friends.”
These Diadochs had an interest not only in their own successes and those of their immediate heirs, but in a future that transcended themselves and would see
their regimes continue through the ages. This was an aspect of the Successors that
170
Alexander’s Heirs
they did not inherit from Alexander the Great, whose interests hardly strayed
beyond his own person.
From Corinth Demetrius marched back into the Peloponnesus. Here he freed of
their garrisons all of the cities, with the exception of Mantinea. Most of these cities surrendered without Demetrius having to strike a blow (Plut. Demetr. 25.1), but the Achaean cities of Bura and Scyros were taken by storm (Diod. 20.103.4),
and the Arcadian city of Orchomenus was taken by storm and its commander and
approximately eighty others were crucified. The commander, one Strombichus,
the agent of Polyperchon, had not only refused to surrender the city, but had also insulted the besieger (Diod. 20.103.4–5). The mercenaries in the now crucified
commander’s employ were enrolled in Demetrius’ army. Later in Argos, he pre-
sided at the games held to celebrate Argive Hera (Plut. Demetr. 25.1–2). It was during this celebration that Demetrius married his third wife, Deidameia,
the daughter of Aeacides and the sister of the new king of the Molossians, Pyrrhus (Just. 17.3.21; Plut. Pyrrh. 3.5). While Deidameia was still a child she had been nominal y married to Alexander IV (Plut. Demetr. 25.2; Pyrrh. 4.3). The marriage between Demetrius and the recently come-of-age young woman created an alliance between her family, the Aeacids, then ruling Epirus, and the Antigonids
(cf. Plut. Pyrrh. 4.3). Since Cassander had worked against this branch of the royal family, this was also an alliance isolating Cassander and Macedonia. Demetrius
was already married to the Athenian Eurydice, a descendant of that Miltiades who
had commanded at Marathon in 490 (Plut. Demetr. 14.1), and also to Phila, the former wife of Craterus (Diod. 19.59.3), and perhaps to others as well (Plut.
Demetr. 14.2).3 Polygamy had been rare in the Greek world (Scheidel 2011: 108, 110), but was common among Macedonian royalty (see Greenwalt 1989: 19–45;
Carney 2000: 23–7). It certainly became a commonplace among the Diadochs
(Seibert 1967: 27–33, 45–50, 93–6, 100–3; Carney 2000: 228–32). With the
conclusion of a most successful campaigning year, Demetrius retired to Athens.
With Demetrius’ many successes in Greece, Cassander was in dire straits. Most
of his possessions in southern Greece were lost. Demetrius had an alliance with his neighbor to the west, Epirus, and was planning a spring off
ensive into Macedonia
itself the next year (Diod. 20.102.1). Given these circumstances, the Macedonian
ruler opened negotiations with Antigonus concerning peace. During these past
two years, Antigonus is barely mentioned in our sources. He was involved in
the building of Antigoneia-on-the-Orontes, and when the request came from
Cassander, he was preparing to celebrate games in his new city, having assembled
the greatest athletes and artists from throughout the Greek world (Diod. 20.106.1, 108.1). It is also true that Antigonus was the oldest of the Diadochs. He was
of Philip II’s generation, not that of Alexander the Great. In 302, he was 85 (Plut.
Demetr. 19.4; Eusebius [Porphyry] FGrH 260 F-32;4 App. Syr. 55), and obese (Plut. Demetr. 19.4). It is likely that the old warrior was simply slowing down.
However, his response to the proposal from Cassander was quintessential y
Antigonus. With his son poised for an assault on Macedonia, he offered the
Macedonian ruler only unconditional surrender (Diod. 20.106.1–2). Rebuffed,
The End of the Diadochi
171
Cassander immediately formed an alliance with Lysimachus and the two kings sent
envoys to Ptolemy and Seleucus offering an alliance against the danger represented by the power of Antigonus and Demetrius. Both agreed to join the alliance, and
a second grand coalition against Antigonus was formed (Diod. 20.106.3–5; Plut.
Demetr. 28.2; Just. 15.2.17, 4.1). The Fourth Diadoch War would begin the next year, although it hardly came after a peaceful interlude.
It was decided by the allies that Cassander would remain in Greece, while
Lysimachus, taking with him part of the Macedonian’s forces under the command
of Cassander’s general Prepelaus, who had been Cassander’s commander in the
Peloponnesus and had fled ignominiously back to Macedonia during Demetrius’
invasion, would cross to Asia. Here he would be joined by Seleucus and Ptolemy.
Once in Asia, Lysimachus and Prepelaus moved against the cities of the Propontis, Aeolis, and Ionia. The attacks on Abydus, Erythrae, and Clazomenae, failed due to the timely arrival of Antigonid reinforcements, but other successes were to follow.
Docimus, Antigonus’ general operating in Phrygia, joined with Lysimachus and
assisted in the capture of a number of the Antigonid treasuries (Diod. 20.107.4).
Ephesus fell and Phoenix, another Antigonid general,5 deserted and delivered the
city of Sardis, except for its citadel, which remained loyal to Antigonus. There were desertions also occurring as far east as Phrygia and Lycaonia (Diod. 20.108.3).
Antigonus, as soon as he learned of his enemies’ activities and the desertion of his generals, headed with his forces into Cilicia. There he took from the treasury at Cyinda enough to pay his troops for three months. In addition to these funds, he
carried with him 3000 talents. In Phrygia, he won back all those who had formerly deserted him. Now that Antigonus had arrived in Asia Minor, Lysimachus decided
to await the arrival of Seleucus before confronting the approaching forces of
the enemy. He therefore fled deep into Phrygia hoping to hold out until the
arrival of Seleucus. The chase across northern Asia Minor was only halted by
the coming of winter with its storms, and both armies retired into winter quarters (Diod. 20.108–109.4). It was here that Antigonus learned that Seleucus was
approaching from the upper satrapies. He now summoned Demetrius back to
Asia (Diod. 20.109.5)
As noted earlier, Demetrius had moved to Athens after his activities in Corinth.
Here, he delayed a planned invasion of Macedonia in order to be initiated into the Eleusinian Mysteries, a ceremony that normal y took place in two stages over
two different Athenian months. To satisfy the new god, who wished to be initiated in a single ceremony, and to remain in accord with the religious necessities, the assembly changed the name of the month, Mounichion (April/May), first to
Anthesterion (February/March), and then, after Demetrius had been initiated
into the “Lesser Mysteries,” to Boëdromion (September/October), with Demetrius
becoming an initiate in the “Greater Mysteries” (Philochorus Atthis [ FGrH 328 F
69–70]; Plut. Demetr. 26.1–5; Diod. 20.110.1). Following the ceremony, probably in early May, Demetrius gathered his forces and moved towards Thessaly. But
finding the passes blocked by forces loyal to Cassander, he took his army by sea to the Thessalian port of Larisa, which he captured. Cassander moved south with
172
Alexander’s Heirs
an army of 29,000 infantry (presumably Macedonian) and 2000 cavalry, opposing
Demetrius’ 8000 Macedonian infantry, 15,000 mercenaries, 25,000 Greek infantry,
and 1500 cavalry. Both sides delayed, awaiting the news of what they expected
to be a great battle in Asia. Instead there arrived the envoys from Antigonus summoning Demetrius to join his father (Diod. 20.110–111.1). Demetrius quickly
arranged terms with Cassander. These included a promise that all of the Greek
cities in Asia and Greece would be free and autonomous. Both sides knew that the
real peace terms would be dictated by the winners of the coming battle in Asia
(Diod. 20.111.2). When Demetrius departed, he left with the 17-year-old Pyrrhus.
With respect to their kings, the Epirotes were a fickle lot. At some point during the year 302, Pyrrhus was again forced to flee his homeland and seek refuge, this
time with his brother-in-law Demetrius (Plut. Pyrrh. 4.1). Neoptolemus, the son of Neoptolemus I, who was the uncle of Aeacides, was the new choice of the Epirotes
and became the new king (Plut. Pyrrh. 4.2; cf. Plut. Pyrrh. 2.1).
Demetrius landed at Ephesus, and that city now returned to its alliance with
Antigonus, whose citadel Demetrius then garrisoned. So much for the validity of
the agreement he had previously signed with Cassander. Demetrius proceeded
to the Bosporus, where he likewise enjoyed success, and after leaving a guard of
3000 infantry and 30 warships to guard against a possible crossing from Europe,
he went into winter quarters (Diod. 20.111.3). Cassander, after the departure of
Demetrius, took possession of the cities in Thessaly and attempted to send an
army to Asia to aid Lysimachus, but this force found Demetrius’ force in place.
Since the commander, Pleistarchus, lacked the naval resources either to do battle with the opposing naval force or, given his lack of sufficient transport vessels, to carry the entire army across at one time, he divided his force of 12,000 infantry and 500 cavalry into three groups. Only the first crossed successful y. The second was captured by Demetrius’ warships, and the third was almost entirely destroyed
by a storm, with only its commander, who accompanied the last group, and 32
others making it safely to shore. These, along with the first group to depart, made their way to Lysimachus’ winter quarters (Diod. 20.112).
During this same winter, Ptolemy moved to take advantage of the absence of
Antigonus to recapture Phoenicia, but arriving at Sidon he was told that the great battle had already been fought and that Antigonus, the victor, was advancing into Syria. Ptolemy immediately retreated back to Egypt (Diod. 20.113.1–2). While
Ptolemy would not be a factor in the coming battle, Seleucus had arrived in
Cappadocia with 20,000 infantry, 12,000 cavalry, 100 scythed chariots, and 480
elephants (Diod. 20.113.4). The significant number of cavalry and the presence of the chariots suggests that the majority of this force was Asian, likely Persian and Mede. While there is no breakdown of the ethnic origin of the competing
forces
in the opposing armies, there are other indications of an Asian presence as well
(cf. Diod. 20.113.3). The presence of the large contingent of elephants was the
result of the treaty signed between Seleucus and Chandragupta, the founder of
the Mauryan Empire. Seleucus’ conquest of the upper satrapies had brought him
into contact with this new power in India. Whether through battle or negotiation
The End of the Diadochi
173
is unknown, but an agreement was reached that ceded all of the Indian areas of
Alexander’s conquests to the Indian ruler for 500 war elephants (Str. 15.724; Plut.
Alex. 62.4). With the players, Lysimachus, Seleucus, Antigonus, and Demetrius, in place, the Battle of Ipsus was at hand.
In 301, the opposing forces came together near the vil age of Ipsus in central
Phrygia. Antigonus’ army consisted of 70,000 infantry, 10,000 cavalry, and 75
elephants; their opponents, 64,000 infantry, 10,500 cavalry, and 480 elephants6
(Plut. Demetr. 28.5). Demetrius and the majority of the cavalry, most being heavy cavalrymen, occupied the right wing. The plan was to hold back the infantry
phalanx and the weaker left cavalry wing, and win the battle with the horsemen
under Demetrius’ command. On the allied side, Demetrius was faced by Seleucus’
son Antiochus and a sizable cavalry force, the majority of which was made up of
light cavalry. Lysimachus commanded the infantry phalanx (cf. Diod. 21.1.2),
while Seleucus commanded the cavalry on the right and held a body of elephants
in reserve. Both forces were screened by elephants interspersed with light infantry.
The battle opened with skirmishes between the two armies’ light troops and
elephants. Demetrius’ superior cavalry drove Antiochus’ wing from the field, but
carried on the chase too long. It is very possible that the allies’ plan was for
Alexanders Heirs Page 35
