1. THE ANCIENT GREEK LEGACY

ALEXANDER AND HELLENISM
The Late 300s to 3 B.C.

 BC
359   Philip II comes to power in Macedon (r. 359-336 BC)

340s  Demosthenes issues his "Philippics," publicly denouncing Philp as a great danger to Athens

338    Philip takes control as hegemon of Athens and Thebes after the Battle of Chaeronea

336    Philip is murdered by a member of his own bodyguard ... bringing young Alexander to power

334    Alexander (only 22!) takes on the Persian Empire, starting with the battle at Granicus

333    Alexander's army destroys the Persian army at Issus ... then takes Syria and Palestine

332    Alexander takes Egypt ... and begins to build the city of Alexandria, Egypt

331    Persia is completely defeated at Gaugemela ... Alexander then taking the Persian throne

328    Alexander begins his march deeper into central Asia ...

326    Alexander's army reaches all the way to India (at the Indus River)
          But his tired troops then refuse to advance further East

324    An exhausted Alexander finally finds himself back in Persia

323   A young Alexander (only 32) dies in Babylon ... mourned deeply by his troops
          Cavalry general Perdiccas takes administrative control of the empire
          Ptolemy I Soter however rules Egypt (323-283 BC)

321  Perdiccas is assassinated ... beginning the breakup of Alexander's empire

319   Alexander's wife Roxana and his son Alexander are poisoned ... ending all hope of union

305  General Seleucus Nicator rules (305-281 BC) from Babylon nearly all of the Asian portion of the Empire
        Ptolemy takes the title of Egyptian Pharoah ... establishing the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt

283    Ptolemy II Philadelphia (283-246 BC) secures Ptolemaic rule in Egypt against Seleucid ambitions
       He also has the Jewish Bible translated into Greek (the "Septuagint Bible")

277    Antigonus II takes the kingship in Macedonia ... and then Greece

247    Arsacid Parthia breaks from from the Seleucid Empire ... reviving Persian resistance

217    Young Antigonid King Philip (221-179 BC) ends the Achaean-Aetolian war

200    Romans, in alliance with Greek rebels, bring Philip's Greece under Roman authority

188    Antiochus III's Seleucid army is defeated by Rome ... giving Rome dominion in much of the former Seleucid Empire

168    Romans defeat the Macedonian army at Pydna ... 300,000 Greeks carried off to slavery

63     Mithridates loses the last of the Selucid Syrian holdings with his defeat by Pompey

55     Ptolemy XII is placed back on the Egyptian throne ... but only as a Roman client

31   Marc Antony's Roman forces are defeated by Octavian's Roman forces at Actium
       Marc Antony and his lover Cleopatra VII chose suicide ... ending the Ptolemaic dynasty
        Egypt is now just another Roman province

Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) The brief, meteoric rise (and sudden loss) of the young conqueror of the Greek North – Alexander of Macedonia – marks a critical turning point in the evolution of Greek or Western cosmology.  Everything that seemed to lead up to the life of this conqueror of the known civilized world of his times and everything that proceeded onward from this amazing life threw the comfortable Greek cosmology into confusion, disorder. The Decline of the Greek City-State The century prior to Alexander's arrival on the scene had been a time of gradual decline from the self-understood grandeur of Greece (during the "Age of Pericles" around 450 BC).  True, the material culture of  Greece even reached new heights during this period.  But the moral- ethical foundations of Greek's cherished public life had been undergoing quite noticeable decay.  From the time that the Athenian citizenry pronounced the death sentence upon Socrates (399 BC), philosophers had begun to wonder about whether things were indeed so orderly in Greece.  Indeed, reaching back even to the beginning of the "Troubled Times" of the wars of the city-states in Greece (starting in 459 BC), Athens had been growing increasingly imperious in its relations with its neighboring city-states.  Power, wealth, status seemed only to corrupt the Good Greek order. Stoics, Epicureans, Skeptics Around the time of Alexander (around 330 BC) a series of new schools of political thought were founded by philosophers from around the Greek realm (especially around its eastern borders).  Though each of these new schools was unique they all shared in common a view that the private life was the only place that a person could trust things to go right.  They thus all drew back from the older Greek view that the highest good for a person was in the contributions they might make to the public life.  These new philosophers instead looked within the human soul in their search for order, good, truth, beauty.  They all tended to invite people to build a safe haven of life by withdrawal from the public domain and a focus on personal intellectual development.  Here was where the blissful order could be found.  But some, like the Skeptics, were not even sure that this was entirely a reliable haven.  A sense of prevailing chaos seemed to be getting a grip on the Greek mind. Opening Up to the East Alexander's conquest of the grand and vast Persian Empire to the East in Asia began what some might feel ironically as the spiritual conquest instead of the European West by the Asian East!  Perhaps this is a bit of an exaggeration.  Yet certainly intimate contact with the East through the new Greek Selucid (Syria and Palestine) and Ptolemaic (Egypt) monarchies opened Greek culture to strong Eastern influences – ones that reached to the heart of Greece, even to the venerable Athens.  Here a mystical vision of the divine order – perhaps not too much different from Pythagoras' vision (whom we suspect had also been profoundly influenced by Eastern thinking through his travels there) – moved deeply into Greek thinking.  Concepts such as life after death (or – a return to life of an eternal soul as a new person), notions such as the most noble life being found in a mystical union with the very essence of God, these were ideas that began to take hold in Greek thinking. On-going Platonism and the new Stoicism stepped right into this thought mode.  So would elements of Judaism and, eventually, much of Christianity. ALEXANDER ... AND HIS CONQUEST OF THE EAST Philip II of Macedon (359-336 BC) While the city-states of Classical Greece seemed to be enjoying tremendous prominence (when not fighting each other), a new power was growing to the North of Greece: the semi-Greek kingdom, Macedonia, under its ruler Philip II (382-336).  Many of the Greeks, including some influential Athenians, looked to Philip to rescue Greece from its military and political follies.  But others, most notably the Athenian statesman and orator Demosthenes, saw in the ascendancy of Philip the end to Greek political values and liberties. Demosthenes spoke fervently and often (his Philippics) about the dangers to Athens posed by Philip.  But all to no avail. The son of the Macedonian King Amyntas, as a youth Philip was held hostage by the Greek city-state of Thebes (at that time the strongest of the Greek city-states).  During that four-year captivity Philip learned much about military and diplomatic strategy from his teacher Epaminondas.  He was able to return to Macedonia in 364 BC, where he quickly proved himself in both battle and the conduct of diplomacy ... securing Macedonia from a threat coming from Thracians, Paeonians and several thousand Athenian mercenary troops (359 BC). That same year, at age 23, he received the throne of Macedonia when the last of his brothers died in battle.  He immediately set himself to the task of rebuilding his infantry corps or phalanx and proceeded to throw Macedonian control over the surrounding states in northern Greece … securing valuable gold fields in the region … bringing him frequently in conflict with Athens.  He spread Macedonian dominance to the south in Thessaly (356-352 BC), turned again to focus on consolidating his power at home in growing Macedonia, then in 349 BC resumed his movement against Athens, Thebes and the other leading city states in southern Greece.  Only Sparta was spared the threat of Macedonian domination. Finally in 338 he defeated the armies of both Athens and Thebes at the Battle of Chaeronea, opening for him the opportunity to create the League of Corinth with himself as its hegemon or leader.  By this diplomatic action he finally brought peace to Greece … under Macedonian supervision (despite ongoing political opposition urged by Demosthenes).  Then in 336 BC he was murdered by one of his bodyguards on the way to the wedding of one of his daughters.  At this point the Macedonian challenge seemed to have suddenly disappeared as quickly as it had arisen.  Or so many hoped. Young Alexander No one was giving much thought to Philip's son, a young man of only 20.  But Alexander surprised everyone by quickly revealing himself to be every bit the man (even more so) than his father.  Under his father's sposorship, he had been carefully raised in Greek ways, studied under Aristotle (when not off somewhere fighting battles!) – thus combining personally the scholarly interests of his Athenian teacher with the political talents of his Macedonian father. Coming to power in 336 BC, he quickly put down challenges to his kingship in Macedonia ... and in Greece.  He crushed and destroyed the city-state of Thebes, sending a clear message to Athens to behave (Demosthenes had turned his invective on Alexander since Philip's death).  Thus very quickly, Alexander demonstrated to the surrounding Greek, Thracian and Illyrian peoples that, though young, he was very much made of the same stuff as his father. He then in 334 BC moved to further galvanize his rule by turning the combined Macedonian-Greek state he now ruled toward the idea of ending the Persian threat to Greece forever.  He intended to invade Persia – and not just wait as they had in the past for the Persians to take the initiative in their strained relations. He divided his Macedonian army (leaving some behind to keep his power secure in Greece) and added a large number of Greek soldiers to his ranks and then crossed into Asia Minor to raise the flag of anti-Persian rebellion by the various subject peoples living there under Persian tutelage. When he and his army set off toward Asia Minor in 334 BC no one had any idea of how far Alexander's ambitions in Asia were going to take them. Granicus (334 BC) Persian royal power had been in decline for a while, corruption within the bureaucracy was growing rapidly, and the subject peoples were quite restless.  Alexander saw his incredible opportunity as liberator or deliverer of these subject peoples. To meet this challenge from Alexander, a Persian army was quickly organized by the satraps of Asia Minor ... and proceeded to come out to meet him at the Granicus River.  The Persian forces expected to demolish Alexander and his Macedonian-Greek forces in short order. But instead, Alexander and his army proceeded to crush the Persian forces ... much to the Persian dismay of the Persians.  However, Alexander was wounded in battle ... but continued to fight until the Persians fled before him.   At this point the Persian regional capital at Sardis capitulated to Alexander … and Alexander moved his troops onwards along the Ionian coast (today's western coast of Turkey), with city after city going over to his side (depriving the Persians of naval bases along the Aegean Sea). Then Alexander used the next months to consolidate his position as the new master of Asia Minor.  The Battle of Issus (333 BC) and occupation of Syria/Palestine He then headed east towards Syria where in late 333 BC he met near the town of Issus a huge Persian army ... led by the Persian king Darius himself.  But the area of the battlefield was narrow in scope, not allowing Darius to bring the full force of his 400,000 man army against Alexander's mere 40,000 troops.   Alexander himself led a cavalry charge straight into the Persian ranks … startling Darius and causing him to flee … thus breaking the morale of his Persian army and turning the battle into a slaughter of retreating Persians (and again, also Greek mercenaries serving in the Persian ranks).  Onwards, towards Egypt This victory then opened up the eastern end of the Mediterranean to Greek expansion.  Indeed, Alexander easily entered Syria and Palestine as liberator/conqueror, facing serious resistance only from Tyre and Gaza, both of which he destroyed.  Most other cities opened their gates to the conqueror without resistance – and were met with fair treatment. Then at this point he strangely turned away from chasing the humiliated Persian Emperor ... and headed instead to Egypt. Here too he was received without resistance ... in fact being received even as liberator rather than as an enemy. Was Alexander the son of a God?  What might seem to be a mere side incident in the story is actually a very major piece in Alexander's life.  No doubt out of a desire to get to the bottom of a story (and perhaps in part also out of a desire to impress his troops) that Philip was not his true father – that Alexander was actually descended on his father's side from one of the gods – Alexander journeyed to the Siwa Oasis in the Libyan desert to inquire of the famed priests of Ammon there as to the truth to the story.  They confirmed that indeed the story was true.  Indeed, Egyptian priests greeted him as a divine instrument of their god Ammon and crowned him Pharaoh. The establishment of Egypt's greatest city, Alexandria.  While in Egypt he planted a Greek colony at the edge of the Nile delta – a fabulous Greek-Egyptian city bearing (as did so many of the towns or cities he founded) his name, Alexandria. It would soon grow to outclass all other cities around the Mediterranean ... and hold that position for centuries.  Even with the rise of Rome, Greek Alexandria retained the reputation for being the most sophisticated city in the Western world.  It would be the center of fabulous Greek scholarship for at least another thousand years.    Gaugemela/Arbela and the defeat of Persia (331 BC) But soon it was time for Alexander to turn his attentions back to the Persians.  The Persians had been assembling the largest multi-ethnic army ever seen before in western Asia.  But Alexander's army was more disciplined, more maneuverable and more personally loyal to its leader than the Persian army.  The two prior defeats of the Persians also contributed to the high morale of the Greeks and the nervousness of the Persians.  In 331 BC the Greeks and the Persians met in a mighty clash at the Battle of Gaugamela (or Arbela).  Once again the Greeks were victorious, and once again the Persians and their king Darius were routed.  Darius was eventually hunted down (330 BC) – and put to death for his cowardice by his own men as Alexander approached. Victorious in battle, Alexander now focused his attentions on consolidating his rule over his newly acquired territories.   Interesting, and convenient for Alexander, even in the very heart of the Persian empire Alexander was greeted as a liberator/conqueror.  Babylon and even Susa, the old Persian capital, greeted him as a liberator, and indeed Alexander did what he could in service as "protector" of these grand cities.  He wanted to rule over a land of wealth, not ruin. The sack of Persepolis However the new Persian capital of Persepolis proved to be a different matter.  The city tried to take a military stand in its own defense – and chose the unwise tactics of parading before Alexander's army 800 badly mutilated Greeks who had been captured earlier, presumably as a ploy to demoralize the Greeks.  Instead it merely infuriated them (and Alexander) – and the Greek troops went wild, slaughtering its inhabitants and burning Persepolis to the ground.   Consolidating his conquests by creating an East-West synthesis Though Alexander's power was clearly based on the support of his very practical-minded Macedonian-Greek army, Alexander soon began to envision himself as a great Oriental god-king sent to rebuild civilization in what he supposed was the entire reach of the world.  He planted cities with Greek colonists wherever he went, urged his soldiers to take wives from among the Persians and other Oriental peoples (as he himself did in marrying the Bactrian princess, Roxana), and did what he could to rebuild Western Asian civilization on a mix of Greek and Oriental culture.  His loyal troops humored him in his thoughts, though they themselves were very unlikely candidates for ever seeing Alexander as a god – as the Orientals so easily came to see their new ruler.  Onward to Central Asia and India Alexander would not let up on his conquering ways, particularly as he began to learn of other lands that lay to the north and east beyond the Persian empire.  He pressed on with his Macedonian-Greek army, first into central Asia (328 BC), where he faced bitter conditions and bitter resistance and where there was very little of value (Roxana excepted!) to add to his already vast dominions.  He then turned eastward (327 BC), again passing through bitter situations in Afghanistan in an attempt to reach India with its rumored wealth and splendor.  Crossing the high Hindu Kush Mountains he descended into the Indus River Valley (326 BC) where at the Jamnia River he defeated King Porus and his Indian army – though turning them into allies after all. The reluctant end to the conquering Hearing of the wealth of India further East along the Ganges River he decided to press on with his conquests, only to be faced with firm resistance from his troops.  They would go no further East.  In fact, after nine years of conquest, they were ready to return home to Greece and Macedonia.  For the first time ever, Alexander and his ambitions faced defeat.  Against the resistance of his own troops he could do nothing.     The Journey Back to Babylon He thus turned South along the Indus River, ran into trouble at Malli, where he led a charge and was nearly killed – but rescued by his own troops – putting him in convalescence for several months, before continuing his journey back towards the West.  He divided up his troops, able to send only half of them back to Babylon by ship, the other half having to take the desert route (today's Balochistan) – which through heat and thirst left ten thousand of his soldiers dead along the way and Alexander himself physically and mentally exhausted in his arrival back in Persia.   His Last Days On arriving at Babylon he cleaned out much of the corruption that had set in on his administration during his absence.  He then returned to the program of integrating his Greek and Persian supporters – including organizing (in 324 BC) a massive marriage ceremony between his Greek soldiers and Persian women, taking two Persian princesses as additional wives of his own (a very non-Greek concept).  He then had rebellions to face down, including one among his own Greek troops (also 324 BC).  His last enterprise (323 BC) was to have been a massive exploration of the water link between Babylon and Egypt by 1000 ships he had built for the occasion.  But his body was spending itself out – not only because of his constant exertions, but because of his deep drinking and carousing that went on for hours.  Just prior to his departure on this grand sailing expedition he caught a fever which his tired body could not shake – and as he lay dying ten days later his army passed silently before him to bid their hero farewell.  He died the next day, June 13, 323 BC. Most interestingly, Alexander is remembered greatly not only in the West but also in the East ... where he is known as Iskandar ... and his exploits celebrated there as much as they have come to be celebrated in the West.  He was truly an outstanding individual ... empowered by the forces of heaven, which every religion (except secular materialism) knows well as being the ultimate source of all human greatness.  Alexander himself knew this to be so in his own case.  The palace at Pella in Macedonia ... where it all began Miles Hodges Miles Hodges Alexander attacking Darius III in the the Battle of Issus (mosaic) – First century BC in Pompeii in the House of the Faun. Perhaps after an earlier 3rd century BC Greek painting of Philoxenus of Eretria. Archeological Museum of Naples Alexander attacking Darius during the Battle of Issus – detail ALEXANDER'S EMPIRE IS CARVED UP With Alexander's sudden death, a crisis arose over the matter of who was to succeed him in overseeing his empire.  Alexander's Bactrian wife Roxana was pregnant, and if she were to deliver a son it was assumed that he should rule … under the regency of Antipater of Macedonia.  But this set the generals themselves to fighting among themselves for power (the "Wars of the Diadochi").  Perdiccas.  At first Alexander's cavalry general Perdiccas took control by killing Meleager, the commander of Alexander's foot soldiers – leaving himself in unquestioned command.  But when Perdiccas attempted to make his own assignments with regard to the governance of the various regions of the empire, he found himself strongly resisted by Ptolemy of Egypt and Antipater of Macedonia - individuals previously assigned their regional commands by Alexander.   Cassander.  When Perdiccas was then assassinated by his own officers (321 or 320 BC), the foundations of the Alexandrian Empire began to break up.  In 310 BC Cassander – who took his father Antipater's position when Antipater died in 319 BC … and who was once an early friend of Alexander and fellow student of Aristotle – had Alexander's wife Roxana and their 13-year old son Alexander poisoned.  Thus any likelihood of a continuing single Alexandrian domain ended.   What at that point was taking place was the rise of a number of independent kingdoms, usually founded by one or another of Alexander's generals. THE ANTIGONID DYNASTY IN MACEDONIA-GREECE Antigonus, governing the region of Syria and Asia Minor (today's central Turkey), first stayed out of the in-fighting among the Alexandrian generals.  However, the migrating Celtic-speaking Gauls began to invade a weakened Macedonia and Asia Minor at this point.  This is what brought Antigonus II to action, and in defeating the Gauls in 277 BC, brought him to kingship in Macedonia, and then in Greece itself.  But then he had to face another challenge, from the Greek general Pyrrhus, who had been off fighting and defeating the Romans in Italy, but at a great cost to himself financially and in the loss of many of his troops (thus the term "Pyrrhic" victory).  At first Antigonus was brought to defeat by Pyrrhus.  But then Pyrrhus was killed in another battle deeper into Greece, effectively returning Antigonus to power in Macedonia and Greece. But the Greeks themselves were attempting to regain their independence from Macedonian rule … resulting in a string of Greek rebellions – even on into the reign of the next Antigonid, Demetrius, and after him, Antigonus III.  But the latter was able not only to hold off a new group of invaders from the north, the Dardanians, but also put down a Spartan rebellion – largely by working diplomatically with the Achaean League (cities of the Peloponnese Peninsula – except the hostile Sparta).  In 221 BC, the 17-year-old Philip (221-179 BC) was finally able to take the Antigonid throne ... and soon proved his worth in forming a new Hellenic League, which brought to an end the "Social War" (220-217 BC) between the Achaean League and the Aetolian League (Corinth and cities on the northern mainland), giving Philip full respect in both Macedonia and Greece.  Rome now enters the picture.  But mounting problems with Rome would occupy Philip greatly.  At one point he entered into a treaty with Carthaginian General Hannibal (then ransacking the Italian countryside) ... only to have the Romans enter into an alliance with the Aetolian League – which tended to remain hostile to Macedonian rule. But with the Romans deeply occupied with their 2nd Punic War with Carthage, Philip was able to finally crush the Aetolian League in 205 BC.  But in 200 BC, the Romans took up the cause of some of the still-rebellious Greek cities and attacked Philip's Macedon, bringing Philip and his army to defeat.   The Romans allowed Philip to keep his throne, but put him under Roman dependency ... and forced him to pay an indemnity of a thousand talents annually.  But Philip proved to be cooperative with the Romans in their war with the Seleucid King Antiochus III and eventually the indemnity was lifted and Philip was allowed to rebuild his weakened rule. Perseus (179-166 BC), who followed upon the death of his father Philip, would be the last Antigonid king.  At first Perseus conducted fairly friendly relations with the domineering Romans.  But the Romans finally decided that he was a bit too independent and went to war with him (Third Macedonian War, 171-168 BC) ... in which Perseus was defeated and captured at the Battle of Pydna, was paraded in Rome in chains and was imprisoned by the Romans.  Additionally, some 300,000 Greeks were deported and enslaved by the Romans ... and their land given to Roman settlers.  This would finally bring an end to the rule of the Antigonid dynasty in Macedonia-Greece. Finally in 146 BC, Rome simply declared Macedonia to be a Roman province.  This then prompted the Greeks – spurred on by foolish demagogues of the Greek cities of the Achaean League – to rise up in revolt ... which turned out to be suicidal for the Greeks.  As a result, the city of Corinth was laid waste (similar to what happened to Carthage that same year). Following this, there were no further thoughts among the Macedonians or Greeks about the possibilities of independence from Rome.  They were now permanently part of the Roman Empire. 1The Roman legion proved itself to be a military formation superior to the traditional Greek phalanx (more easily maneuvered in battle). THE SELEUCID EMPIRE IN THE EAST In the division of Alexander's Empire, infantry General Seleucus Nicator would receive the largest section of the empire, approximately the equivalent of the former Persian Empire … and all the problems that went with it.  Locating his own capital at Babylon in 305 BC, Seleucus ruled Anatolia, Syria and Palestine, Mesopotamia, Persia, Kuwait, Bactria (Afghanistan and Turkmenistan), and parts of what is today Pakistan.  However when Seleucus ran into serious opposition in the eastern reaches of his empire from the Indian general Chandragupta Maurya,2 he entered into alliance with Chandragupta, handing over to him not only much of the far eastern portions of the Empire (Afghanistan and Pakistan) but also his daughter in marriage … receiving 500 elephants in return – which Seleucus subsequently used to great advantage in his battles elsewhere. But much territory still remained to the new Seleucid dynasty that he established.  And into this land the Greeks migrated in large numbers, bringing their language and culture ... leaving a permanent mark on Central and West Asia that would only be replaced very slowly by a return of the pre Greek cultures (but much changed through Greek influence). Seleucus' son and grandson, Antiochus I (281-261 BC) and Antiochus II (261-246 BC), faced constant challenges in the West as well – from the Egyptian Ptolemies and the Celts (Gauls or Galatians) who were migrating into Asia Minor.  This ended up distracting Antiochus II so much that he lost control of the satrapies of Bactria and Sogdiana (Afghanistan and Turkmenistan) ... which however moved to independence as Greek Bactrian States (c. 250 BC), Greek power centers by their own rights.  Indeed, Greek Bactrian King Demetrius I Aniketos ("the Invincible") would invade India in 180 BC and set up a Bactrian Greek-Indian kingdom that would last over a century and a half. Parthian independence (247 BC).  And Parthia (northeastern Iran) also moved to independence under the Greek satrap Andragoras (also around 250 BC) … but was not able to maintain its independence. An Asian (of Scythian origin?) named Arsaces soon overthrew him and laid the foundations in Parthia for the Arsacid Dynasty … which would eventually come to dominate all of Persia for five centuries as the powerful "Parthian Empire" (247 BC – 224 AD). Antiochus III and the Romans.  Antiochus (223-187 BC) then made the fateful political decision to cooperate with the Carthaginian General Hannibal – whose army at the time was thrashing the Romans in their own homeland – in Antiochus's effort to liberate mainland Greece from Roman influence.  That was a mistake.  In four years of fighting between Antiochus's Seleucid army and the Roman legions, Antiochus was slowly ground down by the Romans, in 188 BC had to accept humiliating terms for peace, and watched the eastern provinces he had worked so hard to return to Seleucid control once again go on their independent way.  Likewise, he lost land in the West (Anatolia, today's central Turkey) to Rome's allies Pergamum and Rhodes.  The next year he was killed (assassinated?) raiding Persia in an attempt to gain the gold he was required to pay Rome as an annual indemnity ... at the same time helping to establish Arsacid rule in Persia in reaction to Antiochus's maneuvering. Rome now pretty much dictated matters ... at least within the Western reaches of the Seleucid Empire (while the Eastern portions became increasingly rebellious and independent). Seleucid kings came and went in rapid succession ... and containing (or causing) civil strife occupied most of their time in power. By the beginning of the 1st century BC little more than Damascus and the area of Syria immediately around it was about all that the Seleucids truly governed ... although they remained deeply involved in the dynastic politics of the Eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea.  Far greater in power and importance by that time was the Greco Persian (semi-Seleucid) kingdom of Pontus, to the north of Seleucid Syria ... and encompassing all of Asia Minor and Anatolia (modern Turkey). For a while Pontus's leader Mithridates VI was able to hold off Roman power, defeating a Roman army in 89 BC.  But Rome was not going to let matters stand at that, and in 66 BC Roman General Pompey took on Mithridates and set him and his army in flight.  Three years later. With Pompey closing in on him … and not wanting him and his family to be subjected to a triumphal parade in Rome – Mithridates chose suicide.  At this point Seleucid Syria was simply converted into a Roman province under the rule of a Roman governor. 2It is said that in a battle in 305 BC between the Greek and the Indian generals, Chandragupta was able to field 600,000 troops and 9,000 elephants. PTOLEMAIC (GREEK) EGYPT (323 - 30 BC) Ptolemy I Soter. With Perdiccas's death, wide support existed for Ptolemy (r. 323-283 BC) to head up the Alexandrian Empire.  Ptolemy wisely refused the honor, understanding the many problems such an position would create for him.  Instead, he further consolidated his well-established position in Egypt … as well as outlying areas along and across the Mediterranean Sea. Then in 305 BC he took the title of Pharoah, helping to legitimatize his position among the Egyptians themselves.  He hereby established the beginning of a dynasty that would rule Egypt for the next three centuries.   He also began the process of turning the Ptolemaic capital city Alexandria into not only an economic and political power center ... but also the most noble of all Hellenistic cities in terms of its intellectual achievement (founding the great Royal Library of Alexandria) ... one that even the eventual conquest of Egypt by the Romans would not diminish. His son and successor, Ptolemy II Philadelphia (283-246 BC) proved to be an equally capable ruler, his navy succeeding in fending off a Seleucid attempt to grab southern Syria (Palestine/Judah).  And he also held off an attempt by invading Celts or Gauls to try to establish themselves in Egypt (they did take control of part of Asia Minor ... known subsequently as Galatia He also continued the policy of his father to support the intellectual development of the capital Alexandria ... expanding the Library and supporting scientific research.  It was during his rule that Greek culture would establish itself as the dominant culture of Egypt. The Septuagint Bible. And most importantly for Western Civilization, he was instrumental in having the Hebrew Bible translated into Greek as the Septuagint Bible.3  This brought this key piece of Jewish law and literature out of its narrower Hebrew cultural world into the much broader Hellenistic world, offering that almost "universal" Greek speaking world of the day easy access to what would eventually become the start up section of Western civilization's most foundational writing. More Ptolemies … and Cleopatras!  Following Ptolemy II's death there were a succession of Ptolemies (for a total of thirteen!).  They increasingly took on Egyptian ways ... especially in marrying their sisters (frequently of the name Cleopatra) such as the ancient Egyptian pharaohs had done.  Indeed, one of these Cleopatras (II) would rule from c. 175 BC to her death in 116 BC through a series of husband brothers (Ptolemy VI: 180-145 BC; Ptolemy VIII: 144-132 BC) and then by herself (132-127) and again with Ptolemy VIII and her daughter Cleopatra III (131-127 BC).  It was all very incestuous ... and all very Egyptian. Ptolemy VI "Philometor" ("loves his mother") and his sister-wife Cleopatra II (or possibly her daughter Cleopatra III) Louvre, Paris And as a general rule among the Alexandrians, these Ptolemies found themselves usually at war with the Seleucids of Syria as well as the Macedonians of old Greece.  And of course these dynastic quarrels and the political confusion they generated began to weaken seriously the Ptolemaic dynasty ... so much so that the Romans simply moved themselves gradually into the position of protectors of Ptolemaic Egypt (just as they had done initially with Macedonia) … after 80 BC when an Alexandrian mob lynched Ptolemy XI (who ruled only a few weeks) after he murdered his stepmother – who was also his cousin and probably half sister. The next Ptolemy (Ptolemy XII, popularly known as "Auletes" or "Flute player") was actually more of a Roman client than a true Egyptian ruler.  At one point he was driven from power (58 BC) and exiled to Rome by his daughter Bernice IV ... but restored to his throne in 55 BC by the Romans (after Ptolemy made a payment of 10,000 talents to one of Roman Consul Pompey's Generals).  But at this point Auletes enjoyed his power only through the support of Rome. Cleopatra VII and Mark Anthony.  When he died of illness in 51 BC, he was followed on the throne by another daughter, the 18 year old Cleopatra VII – who had served with him as co regent during the last year of his life – as well as her brother and husband Ptolemy XIII ... but the latter only briefly.  After a failed attempt to win Julius Caesar's support by murdering Pompey, who had fled to Egypt to escape Caesar, Ptolemy XIII was defeated (with the help of Caesar, who was her lover!) and died in 47 BC in a civil war he waged against her. Cleopatra then chose another younger brother (and husband) Ptolemy XIV to rule with her. When Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC, she attempted to have her son, Caesarion (born from the affair with Caesar) to take his place in Rome.  But Caesar's grandnephew Octavian took that position instead.  Nonetheless, she had her brother Ptolemy XIV murdered (also 44 BC) and then elevated her son Caesarion to co rulership with her in Egypt. Following the assassination of Caesar, Rome itself fell into a series of civil wars among a number of Roman contenders for power.  During this period the Eastern half of the Roman Empire (including Egypt) came under the command of the Roman politician and general Mark Antony (ca. 42 BC) ... with the Western half under his ally Octavian Caesar. This eventually brought Mark Antony into a relationship where he and Cleopatra openly became lovers (including the birthing of three children) ... despite the fact that Mark Antony was married to Octavian's sister, Octavia.  This would become part of the reason for a growing split between the former allies Octavian and Mark Antony.  By 33 BC the two Roman leaders were in full conflict with each other and in 31 BC, in a major battle at Actium, Octavian's forces decisively defeated the forces of Mark Antony and Cleopatra.   Both Mark Antony and Cleopatra presumably chose suicide rather than face the humiliation at the hands of Octavian.  Cleopatra's 17 year old son Caesarion was executed soon after.  The Ptolemaic line of pharaohs had come to end.  Egypt was now formally a Roman province under the rule of a Roman governor (30 BC). 3"Septuagint" from the idea of "Seventy" ... the number of Jewish scholars commissioned by Ptolemy II to come up with a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scripture or Bible.  These 70 scholars worked independently of each other.  In the 70-day period in which they did their work, they presumably came up with exactly the same Greek translation – word for word – something considered miraculous then ... and today! The Nile mosaic of Palestrina, showing Ptolemaic Egypt (c. 100 BC) Paris, Louvre Museum Hellenistic soldiers circa 100 BC - A detail of the Nile mosaic of Palestrina THE DEVELOPMENT OF HELLENISTIC CULTURE The dominating role of the Greek language With Alexander's success, the civilized "Western" world was united by a new sense of Greek cultural hegemony.  Though local peoples might cling to their more ancient tribal or regional ways, the Greek language and culture quickly established themselves throughout the whole of the Eastern Mediterranean (and the hinterland) as the medium of literature, philosophy and science. Thus Alexander did more than any actual Greek in establishing the Greek language as the dominant international tongue used by scholars, scientists, tradesmen, governing officials, not only in Alexander's day but for centuries to come.  Even when Rome expanded its military power into the Eastern Mediterranean it did not supplant Greek with its own Latin.  Indeed the Roman government itself took up the use of Greek in administering its Eastern holdings.   The original works of Christian Scripture were not in Hebrew (which anyway had passed out of daily use in Jesus's times) or even Aramaic (a local Semitic language used in Syria/Palestine) ... but in Greek, considered the only language adequate to cross the lines separating the various cultural groups making up the Middle East.  Even Paul's letter to Rome was written in Greek, not Latin.  Eventually a translation had to be made from the Greek into Latin (the Latin "Vulgate" translated by the monk Jerome in the late 300s, long after Christianity had been formally accepted as the official religion of the Roman Empire) – which the Western Church then went on to adopt as its official translation of the original Greek. A shift to a new sense of order in life But this great Greek achievement came at a time of continuing confusion among the Greeks as to what the ideals of life ought to be.  Certainly Alexander's imperial political legacy made trivial any residual Greek affections for the city-state – though certainly such sentiments were slow to die.  The domain of politics now rested in the hands of lofty rulers – ones who even took on the Eastern affectation of being "gods."  The noble Greek citizen directing the course of his cherished city was now an anomaly, even a dangerous one at that. But even beyond these changes in political style and vision lay other major changes in Greek life.  Just as politics seemed to slip out of the hands of the Greek commoner and move to the loftier realm of royal, almost god-like authority, so even the sense of the source of life seemed to move away in the same direction.  Life now seemed shaped by forces that greatly transcended direct human management.  To achieve any sort of sense of connectedness with such transcendent sources, a person now had to look well beyond the realm of the surrounding physical or material reality – to the mystical realm of the Divine.  True, the Greeks held on to their gods, personal protectors whom they hoped would protect them and intercede on their behalf with the higher forces of the universe.  But ultimately they knew that it was with these higher forces that all things in the end drew their power, their direction, their life. Such a realm was not necessarily hostile.  It was not necessarily chaotic.  Indeed, a new Order seemed to be the rule of the day.  But it was distant, beyond the easy understanding of the common man, mysterious in its nature and action.  To reach such a realm required enormous amounts of concentration of human thought and understanding.  Perhaps only those who had the luxury of free time could ever achieve such a connection, such a relationship with the ultimate. Thus in general, common folk turned increasingly to the mystery cults and religions brought forward out of older times ... such as the Eleusinian Mysteries involving the secret cults of Demeter and Persephone – cults that reached all the way back to the Mycenean age.  They also looked to religions brought in from outside the Hellenistic world ... such as Mithraism, a part of the Persian or Iranian Zoroastrian tradition. But while this tended to satisfy the general population, it seemed to have less impact on the more educated of Hellenistic society ... who attempted to keep alive the rich Hellenic philosophical tradition of intellectual inquiry into the kosmos and its ways.   However Hellenistic philosophy began to take on a more complex character.  It could no longer be found just in simple dialogues between a teacher and a citizen-student as in Socrates' days.  It now required profound devotion to study, a deep focusing of oneself on the task, meditation, prayer even, to reach the goal of understanding.  Philosophy was now itself a mystical, spiritual enterprise – engaged in by specialists. A big part of that mysticism came from the deep reverence for the starry heavens, which Greek philosophers (such as Aristotle) had been certain presided over life on earth. Thus ongoing "scientific" study of the heavens was supposed to bring new insights into related events on earth ... even the power to predict the course of future events both social and personal.  Thus there was a huge development of astrology. However this derived not only from the research that the Greeks had undertaken in their study of the heavens, but also from the quite sophisticated astrological mysteries brought in from the East – thanks to Alexander's conquest and subsequent uniting of the Asian East with the Greek West. In short, the mysticism of the East inserted itself deeply into the pragmatism of the West, producing an amalgam Greek in language but Asian in spirit which we call Hellenism. Cynicism and Skepticism Cynicism and Skepticism involve two different degrees of questioning life's underlying or fundamental order … the two philosophies being in ancient Greek times almost the reversal of what they have come to represent today.  Today, skepticism implies that someone is holding some doubts about how things seem to appear to be.  To the skeptic, they may not be what they seem to be.  Cynicism today means having no doubts at all about such matters … for to the cynic, nothing is ever to be trusted!  To the ancient Greek, these ideas were quite the opposite of what we hold them to be today. Cynicism actually started even before the Alexandrian era … most notably under the Greek philosopher Diogenes of Synope (c. 412-323 BC).  Diogenes, a contemporary of Plato and Aristotle, simply chose to escape the world of wealth and power and try to live the simplest life possible, such as does an animal.  To Diogenes, the life of a dog (Greek:  kuon or kyon, from which the word "cynic" is derived) has greater integrity than the life of the wealth-and-power-grasping human.  But like his contemporaries, Plato and Aristotle, Diogenes still believed that it was possible, by deciding to go down the right road in life, to come to excellence as a person.  In short, he was not at all cynical about human possibilities … though skeptical at times!  He truly believed that there was hope that humankind could pull out of the mess he was observing around him in his pre-Alexandrian Greece. Diogenes the Cynic in his tub - by Jean-Léon Gérôme (1860) Walters Art Museum - Baltimore But in the post-Alexandrian world, that optimism seemed to fade away.  Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360-270 BC) took on something similar to a Buddhist or Hindu attitude in concluding "skeptically" that true knowledge, true goodness, true anything, was humanly unattainable.  He felt that life would be simpler and happier if people simply gave up trying to find perfection … and accepted the fact that life has its times of grand disappointment as well as moments of glory – and that there is little that we can do to determine those results. Also to Pyrrho, simply following tradition – rather than trying to come up with new, more progressive ideas intellectually – worked better for everyone in the long run.   But exactly what those more useful traditions actually happened to be Pyrrho never clarified … leaving the matter for the individual to decide.  Ultimately, there was nothing to keep a skeptic from disavowing all intellectual standards and simply following a life of wantonness. Epicureanism Epicurus (342-270 BC) was not actually the "eat, drink, and be merry" individual that we associate with being an "Epicurean" today.  He did however certainly support the idea of the pursuit of pleasure.  But to him, such pleasure was found in a life free of pains and hurts, because a person has chosen to live a life of virtue.  But what that life of virtue actually consisted of Epicurus was not of Socrates's variety … that is, of finding the higher realm of truth and goodness and then staying focused on living according to those standards.  Rather, to Epicurus, the definition of the virtuous life that brings real pleasure was a rather subjective one … not really anchored on standards lying above an individual's own preferences on the matter.  In short, because to Epicurus pleasure was purely subjective, a person was easily led to the understanding that whatever a person craves is the ultimate good for that person. Epicurus also believed that we were wasting our time speculating on the nature of some kind of higher realm, especially one that perhaps follows death, that we would do well simply to explore the material-mechanical world around us … and make the most of that practical or physical world. Stoicism Stoicism actually had its origins in Cynicism … although Zeno of Citium (336-264 BC) took the matter well beyond a simple retreat from the material world in to a life of simplicity.  Zeno, who came to Athens to teach his ideas to students gathered under him at the Stoa (Porch) located in the Athenian marketplace (thus "Stoicism"!) believed that there was great purpose in bringing to anyone's life the practice of deep contemplation about the mysteries of the world … bringing human life under such mystical discipline in order to truly free up that life. Following something of a Socratic or Platonic tradition, Zeno was confident that there existed some kind of Divine Reason (the Logos), an ultimate reality beyond mere physical appearances.  Thus he taught that the human mind could – and most certainly should – attach itself to this Logos in pure devotion. He also taught (in strong distinction to Epicurus) that we should bring our personal cravings under the mastery of a mind-over-matter life.  In the face of life's many difficulties, this was particularly important … that is, important to stay focused on the Logos – and not the worries or hurts of the moment.  This "quietism" ultimately became the hallmark of the Stoic. Most interestingly – perhaps because it offered such hope to a world that seemed to find little logic in the way political and social affairs seem to be moving at the time – Stoicism soon became a widespread philosophy across the Greek world.  It would even make its way into the Roman realm. The development of the physical sciences But at the same time, the larger Alexandrian world seemed to offer a new sense of order … or at least point to the possibility of one being achieved – in the same way that Alexander had so quickly achieved so much. Thus Aristarchus of Samos (c. 310-230 BC) came to have a very lofty view of the universe, even as a young man publishing a work (lost to us today) declaring that the sun was 19 times the size and distance of the moon (actually the figure is about 400 times the size and distance) – something that seemed to defy the common sense of his times that the sun and moon differed only in the intensity of their light, not their size and distance.  He even stated that the sun was much larger than the earth … and therefore it was most likely that the smaller earth circled the larger sun (the heliocentric theory), rather than the reverse (the geocentric theory) – as it was viewed at the time.   Of course all of this was ridiculed in Aristarchus's day … though defended and promoted (a century later) by Seleucus.  But sadly, it ultimately got dropped in Western thinking for the longest time. Then there was Eratosthenes (c. 276-192 BC), the head librarian at the huge museum and library of Alexandria Egypt, who conducted an unheard-of experiment in calculating the curvature of the earth by measure the length of shadows at the exact same moment in two different locations in Egypt … and came up with a figure that gave the earth the estimate of being  (by today's measurements) 24,660 miles in circumference … only 200 miles less than the actual measure!  He also made the bold claim that a person could theoretically sail around the world and arrive back at the same staring point, provided that he never changed course along the way.  And additionally, he cataloged nearly 700 stars … as well as a system of calculating prime numbers. Tragically these amazing discoveries did not fit well with the preconceptions of the times … and were dismissed by other intellectuals.   For instance, Hipparchus (fl. 145-130 BC) argued strongly against Aristarchus's heliocentric theory … pointing out that there were serious problems mathematically with the theory.  Of course, neither he nor Aristarchus had taken into account the gravitational effect of the sun's surrounding planets or the elliptical way that things seemed to move in the heavens.  That would come only many, many centuries later.  Thus it was that he would help the mathematician Ptolemy (fl. early 100s AD) use very complicated mathematical formulas to  put the earth back at the center  of things … the geocentric theory that would last all the way to the time of the West's Renaissance in the 1500s (Copernicus) and the early 1600s (Brahe, Galileo, and Kepler). Mathematics was another field of great accomplishment, Euclid (fl. c. 300 BC) putting together in his Elements, a clear and precise explanation of the laws of geometry … used all the way down to modern times as the model for that mathematical field.  And there was Archimedes of Samos (c. 310-230 BC) who in his Sand Reckoner (212 BC) not only laid out the major laws of engineering and physics … but was able to put those to use in helping his native city of Syracuse defend itself using his clever inventions against besieging Romans (although tragically the Romans won anyway).  Interestingly also, he came very close to inventing the calculus, something not finally attained until 1,900 years later (Newton and Leibniz).            Euclid                        Archimedes         Go on to the next section:  Society and Culture of the Roman Republic   Miles H. Hodges