Download Macedonia and Greece (275

Macedonia and Greece
(275-146 BCE)
March 19th, 2012
The Hellenistic World, Ca. 240 BCE
Teacher Oz’s Kingdom of History, Ancient Greece Page, http://www.uoregon.edu/~atlas/europe/static/map09.html, accessed Dec. 1, 2006
Conditions in Macedonia after 275 BCE








Macedonia permanently under Antigonid rule
until 168 BCE.
277-239 BCE – Antigonus II Gonatas.
239-229 BCE – Demetrius II.
229-222 BCE – Antigonus III Doson.
222-179 BCE – Philip V.
179-168 BCE – Perseus.
168-146 BCE – Macedon divided into four
republics nominally under Roman control.
Post 146 BCE – Macedon turned into a Roman
province.
Macedonian Foreign Policy after
275 BCE

Desire of uniting the kingdom of Alexander abandoned.

Prevention of other kingdoms from gaining power and
influence in Greece.

Exercise (indirect) influence in Greece; interference in
domestic Greek politics to ensure pro-Macedonian
governments.

Desire to secure Macedonian mercantile interests;
Peireius, Chalchis, Demetrias (the Fetters of Greece).
Affairs in Greece after 275 BCE

Characterized by poleis struggles to maintain autonomia.

Principal strategy = Koinon (i.e. a federated league of
states).

Predicated upon earlier models (i.e. the Second Athenian
Confederacy, The Synedrion of Corinth etc.).

The Aetolian League, and the Achaean League.

Athens and Sparta attempt independent policies; play off
principal powers against one another.
The Reign of Antigonus II Gonatas and
the Chremonidean War (267-262 BCE)

Reign of Antigonus in Greece seen to be repressive (i.e.
garrisons; taxes; harbour dues etc.).

272-270 BCE - Encroachment on free and independent
Greek states (i.e. Argos, Megara, Euboia).

War initiated by free states (esp. Athens and Sparta);
fear their freedom in jeopardy.

Encouragement received from Ptolemy II; seeking to
frustrate competition from Macedonian shipping.
The Chremonides Decree

“Chremonides son of Eteocles of Aethalidae moved: since previously
the Athenians, the Lacedaemonians, and their respective allies after
establishing a common friendship and alliance with each other have
fought together many glorious battles against those who sought to
enslave the cities, which won them fame and brought freedom to
the other Greeks; and now, when similar circumstances have
afflicted the whole of Greece because of those who seek to subvert
the laws and ancestral constitutions of each city, and King Ptolemy
following the policy of his ancestor and of his sister conspicuously
shows his zeal for the common freedom of the Greeks; and the
people of Athens having made an alliance with him and the other
Greeks has passed a decree to invite all to follow the same policy;
and likewise the Lacedaemonians, who are friends and allies of King
Ptolemy, have voted to make an alliance with the people of
Athens…” (Syll. 434-5, IG II2. 687, Staatsv. III. 476. – lines 724M.M. Austin, Doc. 49)
The Course and Outcome of the
Chremonidean War

Anti-Macedonian policy in Athens promoted by Chremonides.

268 BCE – Persuades the demos to declare war to seek a koinon
with Sparta et.al; War declared on Macedonia.

265 BCE – Antigonus II Gonatas defeats allied forces near Corinth;
Spartan king (Areus I) falls in battle.

262-261 BCE – Athens besieged and starved into submission; Relief
fleet of Ptolemy II caught near Cos and defeated.

Athens receives a permanent garrison; Tyrant, Demetrius of
Phaleron, appointed to govern Athens.

255 BCE – Antigonus II Gonatas “Frees Athens” (i.e. removes the
tyrant); Remains garrisoned; Democracy restored but limited).
Leagues and Federations

The koinon of Athens and Sparta reflective
of broader trends in Greek politics.

Federated leagues increasingly common.

Aetolian League and the Achaean League
the most significant.
The Aetolian League (ca. 200 BCE)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Macedonia_and_the_Aegean_World_c.200.png
The Aetolian League

Attested as early as 367 BCE.

Joined the rebel cause in the Lamian War (323-321 BCE).

Evolved into principal opponent against Macedonian encroachment in
Greece.

Affairs run by a common council (Boule); each state sent a number of reps.
Proportionate to pop.

Council elected a common strategos (general).

All adult males are citizens of their own polis and members of the Aetolian
League.

Played a major role in repelling the Gauls.

Ca. 278 BCE – Aetolians expanded their territory to include Delphi;
controlled the Delphic Amphictionic Council.

Reputation as semi-barbarous herdsmen and farmers; pirates and brigands;
image principally from Polybius.
Chios Receives Isopoliteia with the
Aetolian League

“…Since the [Aetolian] League, because of the ancestral
kinship and [friendship] which exists between [our]
people and the Aetolians, voted previously to grant us
citizenship [and] forbade all to plunder the property of
[the Chians] from whatever starting-base [on] pain of
being liable to prosecution before the [councilors] on a
charge of harming the common interests of the
Aetolians; for this the people graciously [accepted] their
good will and voted that the [Aetolians] should be
citizens and share in all the rights the Chians share in,
and decided that they should have priority of [access] to
the council and the assembly…” (Moretti II. 78, Syll3.
443. M.M. Austin, Doc. 52. lines 3-11).
The Achaean League (ca. 200 BCE)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Macedonia_and_the_Aegean_World_c.200.png
The Achaean League

Originated ca. early 4th century BCE.

Comprised of ca. 12 small poleis in north-central Peloponnese.

323-ca. 280 BCE – In a state of disarray; garrisoned by Macedon;
pro-Macedonian tyrants est. in a number of cities.

280 BCE – Tyrants expelled.

251 BCE – Aratus of Sikyon ( a non-Achaean polis) expelled the proMacedonian tyrant Nikokles; joined the Achaean league and
assumed nominal leadership; money and support received from
Ptolemy II.

Initially anti-Macedonian; later would become pro-Macedonian
force.
Polybius on the Origins of the
Achaean League

“Subsequently in the periods down to the reigns of Philip and
Alexander their fortunes varied according to circumstances, but they
sought, as I have mentioned, to preserve democracy in the
institutions of the League. The League consisted of twelve
cities…They are: Patrae, Dyme, Pharae, Tritaea, Leontium, Aegium,
Aegira, Pellene, Bura, Cerynea. In the period after Alexander, before
the 124th Olympiad (284-280 BCE), they fell into such a state of
disunity and disarray, particularly because of the kings of Macedon,
that all the cities became divided from each other and acted against
their common interest. As a result some had garrisons imposed on
them by Demetrius and Cassander and later by Antigonus Gonatas,
while others fell under the rule of tyrants; for no one set up so
many tyrannies in Greece as did Antigonus Gonatas. In the 124th
Olympiad, as I had mentioned above, they had a change of heart
and began to work towards unity….For the first twenty-five years
the cities I have mentioned constituted the League, electing in
rotation a federal secretary and two generals. Thereafter they
decided to appoint one general only to whom they entrusted
supreme command.” (Polybius 2.39. 42-43. M.M. Austin, Doc. 53)
The Political Organization of the
Achaean League

Comprised 12 Achaean cities; other non-Achaean cities
join after 251 BCE.

A common Boule comprising mainly the propertied elite
from member states.

Boule elected a common strategos.

10 Damiourgoi (lit. “people-workers”); probably judicial
magistrates of sorts.

The objective of the League = to protect the freedom of
Greek cities in the Peloponnese
From Anti-Macedonian to ProMacedonian Policy








245 BCE – Aratus of Sikyon elected strategos; war declared on Aetolian
League for fomenting stasis in Sikyon and Aetolian attempts to bring over
towns in the western Peloponnese.
243 BCE – Aratus attempts (unsuccessfully) to induce Athens and Sparta to
join.
Threat posed by Macedonia gradually superceded by a growing threat from
Sparta in the reigns of Agis IV (244-241 BCE) and Cleomones III (235-222
BCE).
Agis IV and Cleomones III both social reformers; addressed growing civil
unrest by debt-relief measures; attempt to revive a modified version of the
Lycurgan constitution.
Ca. 235-234 BCE – Achaean League putting pressure on Cleomenes to join;
Cleomenes refused and pursued its own hegemonic agenda; aligned Sparta
with the Aetolian League; Cleomenes believed to be spreading social
revolution throughout the Peloponnese.
227 BCE – Aratus of Sikyon convinces Achaean League to declare war on
Sparta; assistance sought from Macedon (Antigonus III Doson).
224 BCE – Antigonus III Doson invades the Peloponnese; Cleomenes
defeated at b. of Sellasia (222 BCE); flees to Ptolemy III Euergetes;
Antigonus “restores” Sparta’s constitution.
Alliance between Macedonia and the Achaean League.
The Revolutionary Proposals of Agis
IV (243 BCE)

“However, Agis secured the appointment of Lysander as
ephor, and straight away introduced through him a law
before the elders, the chief provisions of which were the
abolition of debts and the redistribution of land. The
region between the ravines of Pellene and Taygetus,
Malea and Sellasia was to be divided into 4,500 lots, and
the rest of the country into 15,000; the latter was to be
shared out to those of the perioikoi who were capable of
bearing arms, while the central region would go to the
Spartiates themselves, whose numbers were to be filled
up from all those perioikoi and foreigners who had
received a liberal education, were sound in body and in
their prime. The Spartiates would be organized into
fifteen public messes of 400 or 200 men, and their style
of living would be that of their ancestors.” (Plutarch,
Agis 7.8. M.M. Austin, Doc. 55b)
Aratus of Sicyon Turns to
Antigonus III Doson (227-224 BCE)

“The ruined affairs of Greece, which was still able to recover
somehow from its present situation and escape from the insolence
and rapacity of the Macedonians. Whether it was through distrust
and fear of Cleomenes, or because he envied his unexpected
success and believed it would be a terrible thing, after holding the
front rank for 33 years, to see an upstart interloper destroy his glory
and power at once and take over the control of the position he had
built up and preserved for so long, Aratus at first sought to apply
compulsion and prevent the Achaeans from (from yielding to the
leadership of Cleomenes). But they did not listen to him, amazed as
they were at the audacity of Cleomenes and believing even that the
pretensions of the Spartans to bring the Peloponnese back to the
ancestral order was justified. And so Aratus turned to a course of
action unworthy of any Greek and most disgraceful for him, and in
complete contradistinction of his previous actions and policies: he
invited Antigonus Doson into Greece and filled the Peloponnese with
Macedonians, whom he himself as a young man had expelled from
the Peloponnese after liberating Acrocorinth; he had been himself
suspect to all the kings and their enemy, and had heaped abuse on
this same Antigonus in the memoirs he left.” (Plutarch, Cleomenes
16. M.M. Austin, Doc. 57)
Formation of the Hellenic League

Balance of powers in Macedonia and Greece after b. of Sellasia (222 BCE) =
Macedonia & Achaean League vs. Aetolian League & nominal support from Ptolemies.

Antigonus III Doson forms the Hellenic League (224 BCE).

Antigonus league president (not hegemon).

Decisions of the league not binding on member states.

Comprised not only of individual poleis but other leagues (i.e. Boeotian League,
Achaean League etc.).

The neutrality of Athens.

221 BCE – Antigonus III Doson is dead; succeeded by Philip V.

220 BCE – Philip V mobilized the Hellenic League against the Aetolian League (The
Second Social War, 220-217 BCE).

The war a stalemate; Developments in the West increased the pressure for peace
and unity in Greece.
The Peace of Naupactus (217 BCE)

“To begin with, the king (Philip V) sent out all the representatives of
the allies with instructions to put to the Aetolians as conditions for
peace that each side should keep what they had at present. The
Aetolians readily agreed to this, and there then began a continuous
interchange of messages to settle points of detail…I shall record the
advice given by Agelaus of Naupactus…Above all the Greeks should
never go to war against each other…And if this was altogether
impossible, they ought for the present to agree and be on their
guard when they considered the size of the armies and the
magnitude of the war which was being fought in the west. Even
now it was clear to anybody that with even a slight interest in
politics, that whether the Carthaginians defeated the Romans in the
war or the Romans the Carthaginians, there was no likelihood that
the victors would be satisfied with the empire of Italy and Sicily, but
would go further and extend their operations and their forces
beyond the proper limit.” (Polybius, 5.103.7-104. M.M. Austin, Doc.
59)
Rome and the Hellenistic Greeks

338-280 BCE – Rome slowly expanding through peninsular Italy.

280s – Subduing Magna Graecia.

280 BCE – Tarentum invites Pyrrhus of Epirus to Italy to defend
against Roman encroachment.

280-275 BCE – Pyrrhus vs. the Romans; a Pyrrhic victory.

230 BCE – Roman merchants murdered by Illyrian pirates (1st
Illyrian War – 230-228 BCE) – Protectorate est. over some Adriatic
Greek cities.

219 BCE – Demetrius of Pharos attacks cities protected by Rome
(2nd Illyrian War) – defeated, he flees to Philip V, king of Macedon.

218-202 BCE – Rome engaged in the Second Punic War
Philip V and Rome:
The First Macedonian War (215-205 BCE)

215 BCE – Philip V makes an alliance with
Hannibal against Rome (First Macedonian
War 214-205 BCE).

211 BCE - Rome makes an alliance with
the Aetolian League and Attalus I of
Pergamum.

205 BCE – The Peace of Phoenice.
Rome’s Treaty with the Aetolians
(211 BCE)

“And so terms were drawn up to admit them to the friendship and
alliance of the Roman people; and clauses were added (1) that
should they wish the Eleans, Spartans, Attalus, Pleuratus and
Scerdilaedus would be included in the same treaty of friendship…(2)
that the Aetolians should immediately wage war against Philip by
land and the Romans should assist them with a fleet of not less than
25 quinqueremes; (3) that of the towns from Aetolia as far as
Corcyra, the soil, roofs, walls, and territory should belong to the
Aetolians, and everything else should be the spoils of the Roman
people…(4) that should the Aetolians make peace with Philip, they
would specify in the treaty that the peace would only be valid if
Philip refrained from attacking the Romans, their allies and those
under their rule….” (Livy XXVI 24.7-15. M.M. Austin, Doc. 62a)
Roman Objectives in the Peace of
Phoenice

“These were the terms written down and
sealed, and a truce was made for two
months, to give time to send envoys to
Rome to ask the people to ratify the peace
on these terms; all the tribes agreed to
them, as now that the war was moving to
Africa they wished to be free from all
other wars for the time being…” (Livy
XXIX 12.16. M.M. Austin, Doc. 64)
Philip V and Rome:
The Second Macedonian War (200-196 BCE)

205-200 BCE – Philip V gradually encroaching on cities in Illyria and
Greece; under Roman protection.

Rhodes and Pergamum appeal to Rome; Rome issues an ultimatum
(200 BCE).

200 BCE – Philip V seizes Abydus; Rome declares war.

197 BCE – B. of Cynocephalae.

196 BCE - T. Quinctius Flamininus proclaims “the freedom of the
Greeks.”; Romans evacuate Greece; Rome the guarantor of Greek
freedom and autonomy.

Joy in Greece except among the Aetolians.
Rome Frees the Greeks

“When this decree was made public, all the Greeks were filled with
confidence and joy, and only the Aetolians, disappointed at not
getting what they had hoped, sought to disparage the decree…And
when the herald came forward to the middle and silenced the
clamour trhough his trumpeter, and then repeated the same
proclamation in the same words as before, the applause was such
that those who hear of it today would find it difficult to
imagine…Indeed after the competition they were so overjoyed that
they nearly killed Flamininus in their display of grattitude.” (Polybius
XVIII.45-46. M.M. Austin, Doc. 68).

N.B. Aetolian irritated that the new treaty superseded all previous
treaties.
The Third Macedonia War

191 BCE – Alliance between the Aetolian League and Antiochus III
(Seleucid king of Syria) to “Free the Greeks.”

191-189 BCE – First Syrian War/Romans defeat Antiochus at

179 BCE – Philip V dead; succeeded by his son Perseus.

179-171 BCE – Perseus marries Laodike (daughter of Seleucus IV);
expands his military; secures alliances in Illyria, Thrace, and Epirus;
Starts to interfere in internal affairs of Greek poleis.

Eumenes II of Pergamum alert the Romans to Perseus’ violation of
the treaty.

171-167 BCE – Third Macedonian War – Rome (L. Aemillius Paulus)
Thermopylae and Magnesia – Romans leave Greece; Macedon
remains loyal to Rome.
defeats Perseus of Macedon (b. of Pydna, 168 BCE) – Antigonids
deposed & Macedon divided into 4 republics – Polybius taken
hostage to Rome
The Fate of Macedonia in 167 BCE

“A herald proclaimed silence and Paulus read out
in Latin what had been decided by the Senate
and by himself in consultation with his council.
Cn. Octavius the Praetor, who was also present,
translated the terms into Greek and repeated
them. They were as follows: first of all the
Macedonians were to be free, keep possession
of their cities and lands, use their own laws, and
appoint annual magistrates; they were to pay
the Roman people half of the tribute they had
paid the kings. The Macedon was divided into
four regions.” (Livy, XLV.29.3. M.M. Austin, Doc.
79)
The End of Macedonia and Greece

Ca. 150 BCE - Andriscus claimed to be a son of Perseus; raised an
army and attempted to re-unite Macedon; destroyed a small Roman
detachment.

150-148 BCE – The Fourth Macedonian War; Andriscus defeated by
Q. Caecilius Metelleus; Macedon absorbed as a Roman province;
garrisoned and governed directly.

Discontent in Greece over: 1. The forced incorporation of Sparta
into the Achaean League. 2. Forced repatriation of exiles from the
Third Macedonian War.

Roman envoys beaten up in Corinth; The Achaean War (148-146
BCE); Lucius Mummius annihilates Corinth; all Greece turned into a
Roman province (Achaea).
Lucius Mummius and the End of
Greek Freedom (146 BCE)

“The Achaeans who had taken refuge in Corinth after the battle escaped
from the city as soon as night fell, together with the majority of the
Corinthians. Although the gates were opened, Mummius first hesitated to
enter Corinth, as he suspected some ambush lying within the walls; two
days after the battle he stormed and burned Corinth. The Romans put to
death the majority of the people found in the city, while Mummius sold the
women and children into slavery; he also sold all the slaves who had
received their freedom and fought on the side of the Achaeans and had not
been killed at once in the war. Mummius carried off most of the votive
offerings and other works of art, and gave the less interesting ones to
Philopoenon, the general sent by Attalus II; even in my time there were
spoils from Corinth at Pergamum. All the cities which had fought against the
Romans had their walls razed and were deprived of their arms by Mummius
even before the sending of the senatorial commission of advisers from
Rome. When they arrived, Mummius overthrew the democracies and set up
constitutions based on wealth; tribute was imposed in Greece and men of
wealth were forbidden to acquire property abroad. All the federal councils,
in Achaea, in Phocis, in Boeotia, and everywhere else in Greece, were
likewise dissolved. A few years later the Romans were moved to pity for
Greece, and restored to all their ancient federal councils and the right to
acquire property abroad, and they cancelled the fines imposed by
Mummius…And so the Greeks obtained remission of these from the
Romans, but a governor has continued to be sent to Greece up to my
time…” (Pausanias VII. 16.7-17.1. M.M. Austin, Doc. 80)
Conditions in Greece and
Macedonia Post 146 BCE

Neither Macedonia nor any Greek polis possess
autonomia in foreign policy.

Allowed control over local/internal matters; subject to
Rome in international matters.

Roman senate cultivated personal ties of loyalty (patronclient relations) with the established elite of Greece and
Macedonia.

The nature of Roman citizenship.