« ZurückWeiter »
Athens in the times when her power was on its decline, and a possession almost overlooked by the kings; also the Thracian maritime cities of Aenus, Maronea, and others to the westward as far as the Macedonian frontier (Polybius, v. 34). Only the southern part, and not the whole of Phænicia, was united to the Egyptian empire. Eleutherus seems to have formed the boundary, and Orthosia to have been the Syrian border fortress.
Of these conquests, Seleucia in Pieria, and Lysimachia (with which city the Chersonesus went), were lost as early as the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. The Lysimachians, probably forsaken by this corrupt government, made themselves independent, and sought to gain that protection from the Thracians which was indispensable to the maintenance of their existence, by entering into a joint citizenship with the Æolians. The other maritime cities of Thrace, especially Aenus and Maronea, the Egyptian Ionia, Caria, Lycia, the maritime cities of Pamphylia, and the Cyclades," all the transmarine conquests therefore of Philadelphus as well as Euergetes, became a prey to the Kings Philip and Antiochus, who were leagued against the minor, Ptolemy Epiphanes. Both remained but a very short time in possession of their booty. Philip lost his share by the peace after the battle of Cynoscephalæ. Antiochus (who, when he crossed over to Europe, took possession of the unoccupied cities in Thrace and the Chersonesus which Philip had been forced to evacuate, and at the same time of the provinces in Anterior Asia, anciently belonging to his house) also lost them all by his peace with the Romans, who granted them as fiefs to their allies, Eumenes and the Rhodians. Egypt did not recover by the victories of the foreigners what she had lost through her own incapacity and baseness.
Ptolemy Philopator is the only king to whom the name of his mistress is attached as surname both by his contemporaries and posterity. He is called tñs 'Aya@oklelas. He was an æsthetic gentleman, and even a poet. In the Scholia to the Thesmophoriazousai of Aristophaues, which Bekker has discovered at Ravenna aud copied, a tragedy of his is quoted, in which Echo played a chief part.
Philip sent against them, and they were no doubt taken by, Dicæarchus, the most abandoned man of a shameless age, who erected altars and offered sacrifices to impiety and vice as deities (Polybius, xviii. 37). A corrupt passage in Polybius (iii. 2) is to be referred, with emendations, to these and the neighbouring islands, It
says with regard to the projects of partition formed by Philip and Antiochus: ήρξαντο... τας χείρας επιβάλλειν, Φίλιππος μεν τοίς κατ’ Αίγυπτον, και Kαρίαν, και Edwov: that is, the best MSS. read thus; others leave out the words kał Kaplav; the editors, even Casaubon, fall into various errors. The word Ayuttov is wrong, and instead of it, kat' A iyacov ought to be read, for so Polybius calls this sea, without the article, and in another place,-xvi. 34 : di' Aiyalov torno áuevos TDV aoûv. The preceding elucidation of the possessions of the Egyptian kings renders everything intelligible. In another passage, too, xvi. 7, the name of the nation is to be obliterated by an emendation. There were no Egyptians at the naval battle of Chios, and it ought to be read έαλωσαν-των μεν-Μακεδόνων είς δισχιλίους, των δε εναντίων εις επτακοσίους: not Αίγυπτίων.
The following remarks do not concern the history of the Seleucidæ, but still bear upon the political relations of the countries of Anterior Asia. The Prologue to the 28th book of Trogus says, in the printed editions, ' Antigonus, qui Thessaliam, Moesiam, Cariam subjecit.' The absence of connecting particles renders the words suspicious, and there was no · Mæsia in existence at that date: the name does not appear in the geographies till a much later time. Now it must be remarked that the mss. either omit the word Moesiam altogether, or read instead in Asiam. As to Cariam, all read alike; but if we hold Cariam also to be wrong, because a Macedonian naval expedition does not appear to be among the natural resources of that realm, we shall be tempted to read, instead of the two words, a name belonging to one of the districts bordering on the Macedonian state ; and et Atintaniam occurred to myself, but it is inadmissible, because this country was already under Roman sway, and was not ceded until after the first war of Philip. Some familiarity with the various readings in mss., particularly in those of very ancient date, and in copies made from ancient mss. by persons unable to understand them, will show us that in Asiam is only the rustic form for [et] in Asia. Now I do not see any reason for doubting that Antigonus undertook a naval expedition against Asia, and, in passing, conquered a portion at least of Caria. A permanent feud existed between the Antigonidæ and Lagidæ, as is sufficiently shown by the story of Aratus and Cleomenes; and in an excerpt from Polybius (xx. 5, 7-12), a notice has been preserved of an expedition of Antigonus Doson to Asia with a fleet which stranded in the shallows at Larymna on the Baotian coast, but got afloat again by lightening the ships at the flood-tide, and pursued its voyage. Of this I think a notice is preserved in the Prologue of the preceding book (xxvii.), which mentions a naval victory of Euergetes over Antigonus at Andrus; for if Antigonus only appeared there as the ally of the Syrian king, and no other supposition is admissible, this battle might be related in the history of the Syrian war.
Seleucus Callinicus died in Olymp. 138, 2=526. The epithet by which he is distinguished has been ridiculed by the moderns ; with injustice I think ; for to recover a monarchy, of which all but a few scattered portions had been lost, surely not less deserves to be called a victory than to conquer foreign provinces.
The earliest relations of the Roman republic to the states of the East are so interesting, as exhibiting the first link in the chain of connection which bound together the whole world round the Mediterranean in the course of the sixth century, A.U.C. ; and at the same time have been so neglected, that I am unwilling to omit the remark that this king Seleucus (no other monarch of this
name, unless possibly his son, can be intended) sued for the friendship and alliance of the Roman nation, a step to which he was strongly urged by the emergencies of his government. The Senate replied by a Greek letter, in which they stipulated for the people of Ilium, seeing they were kindred by blood of the Romans, that they should be freed from tribute (Suetonius, Claudius, 25). This document, too, had been dug up out of the dust by Claudius.
I shall now quit the connected history of the Seleucidæ, and turn to my immediate object, the collection of the scattered notices afforded by Porphyry.
Among these I include the statement that Seleucus III. originally bore the name of Alexander, and changed it when he came to the throne; but it is erroneous, and no doubt another mistake of Eusebius, to call Nicanor, one of the murderers of this king, a Gaul, to which nation his accomplice Apaturius, or Epacorius, belonged
I know of no other passage which states that Antiochus Eupator ascended the throne at the age of twelve years.
The Armenian Eusebius, according to the Milan edition, establishes the reading Siripides against all other variations in the surname given to Demetrius II. after his captivity among the Parthians, and that the Venetian translation has Sidirites is of no importance, for σιδηρίτης or σιδηρήτης cannot in any case pass for Greek. The explanation must be sought in the Syriac, a language with which I am entirely unacquainted ; but I understand from those who are masters of the subject that in Chaldee signifies the same as the Hebrew 70, that is, a chain; and that the Arabic bsy, ligavit, is also to be found in the cognate languages, as in the Hebrew the word 797, necklace, occurs. Eigimions therefore, with its Greek termination, means, being interpreted, one bound with a chain.
Porphyry says that Antiochus Sidetes pulled down the walls of Jerusalem, and caused the heads of the nation to be executed. This sounds much more credible of an Oriental victor than the story of Josephus, who is silent as to any personal chastisement of the vanquished, and limits the razing of the walls to the destruction of their towers. With regard to the walls, Diodorus (xxxiv. Ecl. 1) agrees with Porphyry; and the foolish vanity of Josephus, in endeavouring to hush up the humiliating part of the national misfortunes, is clearly betrayed in his whole narrative. The truth, however, gleams through, that Hyrcanus was forced to submit, to deliver up his arms, raze the walls, pay a contribution towards the war, and heavy taxes on the lands gained in the war which had been formerly tributary. None of the advantages won by that severe war were left to him, except the liberty of garrisoning the fortress, and the surplus of what might be extorted by the magistrates in the provinces, with the more important right of freedom of worship. But an unarmed nation, which had already lost so much of the enthusiasm through which it had shaken off its yoke, that the high priest thought it advisable to hire mercenaries, would not long have maintained what it still possessed, if Antiochus had been victorious over the Parthians. His defeat in this war, which broke for ever the power of the Seleucidean monarchy, enabled the Jews to effect their complete liberation,-an epoch which introduced a native tyranny worse than the foreign yoke, and the decline of all that was great and beautiful, however imperfect, which they had still retained from their ancient times.
* The name Zebinas, which is universally acknowledged to be Syriac, ought to have led scholars to seek in this instance, too, an explanation from the Aramaic language.
Porphyry reckons the army with which Antiochus Sidetes set out to recover Upper Asia from the Parthians, at 120,000 men, a number not incredible, though it is nowhere else mentioned ; but the effeminate infantry of Syria were powerless against warlike nations of horsemen, and at last everything was utterly ruined by the want of talent and discipline, which must necessarily prevail where the leader was sunk in drunkenness and gluttony.
We learn from Porphyry that five children were born to this Antiochus, three of whom died in childhood before their fathertwo daughters, both named Laodice, and a boy named Antiochus. Antiochus, who was distinguished from his brother by the surname Cyzicenus, was carried to a place of refuge by his preceptor after his father's death. Not he, but his elder brother Seleucus, would have been the successor to the throne, but that the latter, though still very young, had accompanied his father to the Parthian war, and been made prisoner. Arsaces treated him royally in his misfortunes ; and here there is the explanation of the supposed captivity of Seleucus Callinicus among the Parthians, for it is no other Seleucus than this royal youth, of whom Posidonius speaks in his 16th book (Athenæus, iv. p. 153, a). Athenæus calls him king, and hence the blunder, for else it would have been remembered that the historian had treated, in the same 16th book, of the defeat and death of Sidetes (Athenæus, x. p. 439, e).
Many passages in this chapter, no less evidently erroneous, and no less easily to be corrected, ought not to have been left by the editors without emendation or remark.
In the conclusion of this chapter, the Armenian translation affords but a few unimportant readings, most of them wrong. have therefore no occasion to linger over this revolting history of
the struggle between bloodthirsty and contemptible tyrants for the dominion of the miserable country whose dismemberment, and bondage under a foreign yoke were at last looked for with desire, as putting an end to such sufferings. Only because every point in universal history which admits of more definite decision ought to receive it, I will here observe that the opinion is incorrect which supposes that the empire of the Seleucidæ closed about 669 A.U.C., and that Tigranes ruled over the whole of Syria until Lucullus overthrew him in the year 686, and restored Antiochus. Undoubtedly a large portion of Syria had submitted to the Armenian king. According to the impressions on coins, Antioch had certainly done so; and it is probable that Damascus had followed her example, though only for a short time. But during this period Antiochus was by no means hidden in a corner of Syria. He was acknowledged king of Syria at Rome, which he visited with his brother Seleucus about 676 A.U.C. ; and some part of the sea-coast must have been under his rule, because Verres y could pretend, in 678, that pirates made sallies from the harbours of his subjects
. VIII For the chronological history of the Lagidæ, the Armenian Eusebius also offers nothing beyond some new but unimportant readings, which at the most confirm emendations that every attentive reader will have thought of and marked for himself. The editors ask once more, on this occasion, which was the Egyptian king who bequeathed his empire to the Romans by will ? It is bad indeed that such a question should still need a solution, for scarcely one of the many which have been put respecting this dynasty can be so safely and easily decided. That king can have been no other than Ptolemy Alexander I., who was expelled in Olymp. 173, 1=665, who then first turned his steps to Myra in Lycia, and thence attempted an expedition against Cyprus. Where he went afterwards, when he had been driven back by Charæas, is certainly nowhere to be read; but the independent city of Tyre stood open to him, where that king died, or perhaps only deposited his treasures, whose will, inspired by revenge, caused so many intrigues at Rome, and of which the republic, with an apparent generosity to be explained by the embarrassments of the time, availed themselves only so far as to fetch from that city the treasures consisting of specie. The fragments of Cicero's oration, De Rege Alexandrino,' which Mai has edited from the few extant leaves of the Ambrosian palimpsest, place it beyond a doubt that Alexander II. atoned with his life for the murder of his sister Berenice, in a popular insurrection at Alexandria.
The impudent robbery which Verres practised on Antiochus was the first açt of the kind which he perpetrated in Sicily (2 in Verr. iv. 27, 30); it must be placed therefore in the first year of his prefecture.
VOL. V.-NO, X.