The Ancient Library

Scanned text contains errors.



the characters of its people. He was still at Thebes, according to Diodorus, when his brother Perdiccas III. was slain in battle against the Illy-rians, in B. c. 360 ; and, on hearing of that event, he made his escape and returned to Macedonia. But this statement is contradicted by the evidence of Speusippus (ap. Atli. xi. p. 506, f.), from whom we learn that Plato, conveying the recommendation through Euphraeus of Oreus, had induced Perdiccas to invest Philip with a principality, which he was in possession of when his brother's death placed him in the supreme government of the kingdom. On this he appears to have entered at first merely as regent and guardian to his infant nephew Amyntas [amyntas, No. 3.] ; but after no long time, probably in b. c. 359, he was enabled to set aside the claims of the young prince, and to as­sume for himself the title of king, — aided doubt­less by the dangers which thickened round Mace­donia at that crisis, and which obviously demanded a vigorous hand to deal with them. The Illyrians, flushed with their recent victory over Perdiccas, threatened the Macedonian territory on the west,

— the Paeonians were ravaging it on the north,— while pausanias and argaeus took advantage of the crisis to put forward their pretensions to the throne. Philip was fully equal to the emergency. By his tact and eloquence he sustained the failing spirits of the Macedonians, while at the same time he introduced among them a stricter military dis­cipline, and organized their army on the plan of the phalanx ; and he purchased by bribes and promises the forbearance of the Paeonians, as well as of Cotys, the king of Thrace, and the chief ally of Pausanias. But the claims of Argaeus to the crown were favoured by a more formidable power,

—the Athenians, who, with the view of recovering Amphipolis as the price of their aid, sent a force under Mantias to support him. Under these cir­cumstances, according to Diodorus, Philip withdrew his garrison from Amphipolis, and declared the town independent,—a measure, which, if he really resorted to it, mav account for the lukewarmness

7 •/

of the Athenians in the cause of Argaeus. Soon after he defeated the pretender, and having made prisoners of some Athenian citizens in the battle, he not only released them, but supplied with va­luable presents the losses which each had sus­tained ; and this conciliatory step was followed by an embassy offering to renew the alliance which had existed between Macedonia and Athens in the time of his father. The politic generosity thus displayed by Philip, produced a most favour­able impression on the Athenians, and peace was concluded between the parties after midsummer of b.c. 359, no express mention, as far as appears, being made of Amphipolis in the treaty. Being thus delivered from his most powerful enemy, Philip turned his arms against the Paeonians, taking advantage of the death of their king, Agis, just at this juncture, and reduced them to subjec­tion. He then attacked the Illyrians with a large army, and having defeated them in a decisive battle, he granted them peace on condition of their accepting the lake of Lychnus as their eastern boundary towards Macedonia. [bardylis.]

Thus in the short period of one year, and at the age of four-and-twenty, had Philip delivered him­self from his dangerous and embarrassing position, and provided for the security of his kingdom. But energy and talents such as his could not, of course,


be satisfied with mere security, and henceforth his views were directed, not to defence, but to aggran­disement. The recovery of the important town of Amphipolis, which he could never have meant se­riously to abandon, was his first step in this direc­tion, and the way in which he accomplished it (b. c. 358) is one of the most striking specimens of his consummate craft. Having found pretexts for war with the Amphipolitans, his policy was to prevent interference with his proceedings on the part of Athens and of Olynthus (both of which states had an interest in resisting his attempt), and, at any rate, to keep them from uniting against him. Accordingly, in a secret negotiation with the Athenians, he led them to believe that he was willing to restore Amphipolis to them when he had taken it, and would do so on condition of their making him master of Pydna [charidemus, No. 2]. When therefore the Olynthians sent an embassy to Athens to propose an alliance for the defence of Amphipolis, their overtures were re­jected (Dem. Olynth. ii. p. 19), and while their ardour for the contest would be thus damped by the pros­pect of engaging in it single-handed, Philip still more effectually secured their forbearance by sur­rendering to them the town of Anthemus (Dem. Phil. ii. p. 70). He then pressed the siege of Amphipolis, in the course of which an embassy, under Hierax and Stratocles, was sent by the Amphipolitans to Athens, to ask for aid ; but Phi­lip rendered the application fruitless by a letter to the Athenians, in which he repeated his former assurances that he would place the city in their hands. Freed thus from the opposition of the only two parties whom he had to dread, he gained possession of Amphipolis, either by force, as Dio­dorus tells us, or by treachery from within, accord­ing to the statement of Demosthenes. lie then proceeded at once to Pydna, which seems to have yielded to him without a struggle, and the acqui­sition of which, by his own arms, and not through the Athenians, gave him a pretext for declining to stand by his secret engagement with them. (Dem. Olynth. p. 11, de Halonn. p. 83, c.Aristocr. p. 659, c. Lept. p. 476 ; Diod. xvi. 8.) The hostile feeling which such conduct necessarily excited against him at Athens, made it of course still more im­portant for him to pursue his policy of dividing those whose union might be formidable, and of detaching Olynthus from the Athenians. Accord­ingly, we find him next engaged in the siege of Potidaea, together with the Olynthians, to whom he delivered up the town on its capture, while at the same time he took care to treat the Athenian garrison with the most conciliatory kindness, and sent them home in safety. According to Plutarch (Alex. 3), Philip had just taken Potidaea when tidings of three prosperous events reached him at once; — these were, a victory in a horse-race at the Olympic games. — the defeat by Pannenion of the Illyrians, who were leagued with the Paeonians and Thracians against the Macedonian power, — and the birth of Alexander ; and, if we combine Plutarch's statement with the chronology of Dio­dorus (xvi. 22), we must place the capture of Potidaea in b. c. 356. Soon after this success, whenever it may have occurred, he attacked and took a settlement of the Thasians, called Crenides from the springs (Kpfjvai) with which it abounded, and, having introduced into the place a number of new colonists, he named it Philippi after himself.

About | First



page #  
Search this site
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of