Listed 8 sub titles with search on: Biographies for destination: "KARDIA Ancient city TURKEY".
General of Alexander the Great.
Eumenes of Cardia, secretary to Alexander the Great, and after his death one of
the most distinguished generals among his successors. The accounts of his origin
vary considerably, some representing his father as a poor man, who was obliged
to subsist by his own labour, others as one of the most distinguished citizens
of his native place. (Plut. Eum. 1; Corn. Nep. Eum. 1; Aelian, V. H. xii. 43.)
The latter statements are upon all accounts the most probable : it is certain,
at least, that he received a good education, and having attracted the attention
of Philip of Macedon on occasion of his visiting Cardia, was taken by that king
to his court, and employed as his private secretary. In this capacity he soon
rose to a high place in his confidence, and after his death continued to discharge
the same office under Alexander, whom lie accompanied throughout his expedition
in Asia, and who seems to have treated him at all times with the most marked confidence
and distinction, of which he gave a striking proof about two years before his
death, by giving him in marriage Artonis, a Persian princess, the daughter of
Artabazus, at the same time that he himself married Stateira, the daughter of
Dareius. (Arrian, Anab. vii. 4.) A still stronger evidence of the favour which
Eumenes enjoyed with Alexander is, that he was able to maintain his ground against
the influence of Hephaestion, with whom he was continually at enmity. (Arrian,
Anab. vii. 13, 14; Plut. Eum. 2.) Nor were his services confined to those of his
office as secretary: he was more than once employed by Alexander in military commands,
and was ultimately appointed by him to the post of hipparch on leader of one of
the chief divisions of cavalry. (Arrian, Anab. v. 24; Plut. Eum. 1; Corn. Nep.
Eum. 13.)
In the discussions and tumults which ensued on the death of Alexander,
Eumenees at first, aware of the jealousy with which as a Greek he was regarded
by the Macedoniian leaders, refrained from taking any part; but when matters came
to an open rupture, he was mainly instrumental in bringing about a reconciliation
between the two parties. In the division of the satrapies which followed, Eumenes
obtained the government of Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, and Pontus : but as these
provinces had never yet been conquered, and were still in the hands of Ariarathes,
Antigonus and Leonnatus were appointed to reduce them for him. Antigonus, however,
disdained compliance, and Leonnatus was quickly called off to Greece by his ambitious
projects. In these he endeavoured to persuade Eumenes, who had accompanied him
into Phrygia, to join; but the latter, instead of doing so, abruptly quitted him,
and hastening to Perdiccas, revealed to him the designs of Leonnatus. By this
proof of his fidelity, he secured the favour of the regent, who henceforward reposed
his chief confidence in him. As an immediate reward, Perdiccas proceeded in person
to subdue for him the promised satrapies, defeated and put to death Ariarathes,
and established Eumenes in the full possession of his government, B. C. 322. (Plut.
Eum. 3; Diod., xviii. 3, 16; Arrian, ap. Phot.; Corn. Nep. Eum. 2.) Here, however,
he did not long remain, but accompanied the regent and the royal family into Cilicia.
In the following spring, when Perdiccas determined to proceed in person against
Ptolemy, he committed to Eumenes the chief command in Asia Minor, and ordered
him to repair at once to the Hellespont, to make head against Antipater and Craterus.
Eumenes took advantage of the interval before their arrival to raise a numerous
and excellent body of cavalry out of Paphilagonia, to which he was indebted for
many of his subsequent victories. Meanwhile, a new enemy arose against him in
Neoptolemus, governor of Armenia, who had been placed under his command by Perdiccas,
but then revolted from him, and entered into correspondence with Antipater and
Craterus. Eumenes, however, defeated him before the arrival of his confederates,
and then turned to meet Craterus, who was advancing against him, and to whom Neoptolemus
had made his escape after his own defeat. The battle that ensued was decisive;
for although the Macedonian phalanx suffered but little, Craterus himself fell,
and Neoptolemus was slain by Eumenes with his own hand, after a deadly struggle
in the presence of the two armies. (Plut. Eum. 4-7; Diod. xviii. 29-32; Arrian,
ap. Phot.; Corn. Nep. Eum. 3, 4; Justin, xiii. 6, 8.) This took place in the summer
of 321 B. C.
But while Eumenes was thus triumphant in Asia, Perdiccas had met with
repeated disasters in Egypt, and had finally fallen a victim to the discontent
of his troops, just before the news arrived of the victory of Eumenes and the
death of Craterus. It came too late : the tide was now turned, and the intelligence
excited the greatest indignation among the Macedonian soldiers, who had been particularly
attached to Craterus, and who hated Eumenes as a foreigner, for such they considered
him. A general assembly of the army was held, in which Eumenes, Attalus, and Alcetas,
the remaining leaders of the party of Perdiccas, were condemned to death. The
conduct of the war against them was assigned to Antigonus; but he did not take
the field until the following summer (B. C. 320). Eumenes had wintered at Celaenae
in Phrygia, and strengthened himself by all means in his power, but he was unable
to make head against Antigonus, who defeated him in the plains of Orcynium in
Cappadocia; and finding himself unable to effect his retreat into Armenia, as
he had designed to do, he adopted the resolution of disbanding the rest of his
army, and throwing himself, with only 700 troops, into the small but impregnable
fortress of Nora, on the confines of Lycaonia and Cappadocia. (Plut. Eum. 8-10;
Diod. xviii. 37, 40, 41; Corn. Nep. Eum. 5.) Here he was closely blockaded by
the forces of Antigonus; but, confident in the strength of his post, refused all
offers of capitulation, and awaited the result of external changes. It was not
long before these took place: the death of Antipater caused a complete alteration
in the relations of the different leaders; and Antigonus, who was anxious to obtain
the assistance of Eumenes, made him the most plausible offers, of which the latter
only availed himself so far as enabled him to quit his mountain fortress, in which
he had now held out nearly a year, and withdraw to Cappadocia. Here he was busy
in levying troops and gathering his friends together, when he received letters
from Polysperchon and Olympias, entreating his support, and granting him, in the
name of the king, the supreme command throughout Asia. Eumenes was, whether from
interest or from real attachment, always disposed to espouse the cause of the
royal family of Macedonia, and gladly embraced the offer: he eluded the pursuit
of Menander, who marched against him by order of Antigonus, and arrived in Cilicia,
where he found the select body of Macedonian veterans called the Argyraspids,
under Antigenes and Teutamus. These, as well as the royal treasures deposited
at Quinda, had been placed at his disposal by Polysperchon and Olympias: but though
welcomed at first with apparent enthusiasm, Eumenes was well aware of the jealousy
with which he was regarded, and even sought to avoid the appearance of commanding
the other generals by the singular expedient of erecting a tent in which the throne,
the crown and sceptre of Alexander were preserved, and where all councils of war
were held, as if in the presence of the deceased monarch. (Plut. Eum. 11-13; Diod.
xviii. 42, 53, 58-61; Polyaen. iv. 8.2; Justin. xiv. 2.) By these and other means
Eumenes succeeded in conciliating the troops under his command, so that they rejected
all the attempts made by Ptolemy and Antigonus to corrupt their fidelity. At the
same time he made extensive levies of mercenaries, and having assembled in all
a numerous army, he advanced into Phoenicia, with the view of reducing the maritime
towns, and sending a fleet from thence to the assistance of Polysperchon This
plan was, however, frustrated by the arrival of the fleet of Antigonus, and the
advance of that general himself with a greatly superior force. Eumenes in consequence
retired into the interior of Asia, and took up his winterquarters in Babylonia.
(Diod. xviii. 61-63, 73.)
In the spring of 317 he descended the left bank of the Tigris, and
having foiled all the endeavours of Saleucus to prevent his passing that river,
advanced into Susiana, where he was joined by Peucestes at the head of all the
forces of Media, Persia, and the other provinces of Upper Asia. Still he did not
choose to await here the advance of Antigonus; and leaving a strong garrison to
guard the royal treasures at Susa, he took post with his army behind the Pasitigris.
Antigonus, who had followed him out of Babylonia, and effected his junction with
Seleucus and Pithon, now marched against him; but having met with a check at the
river Copratas, withdrew by a cross march through a difficult country into Media,
while Eumenes took up his quarters at Persepolis. He had many difficulties to
contend with, not only from the enemy, but from the discontent of his own troops,
the relaxation of their discipline when they were allowed to remain in the luxurious
provinces of Persia, and above all from the continual jealousies and intrigues
of the generals and satraps under his command. But whenever they were in circumstances
of difficulty or in presence of the enemy, all were at once ready to acknowledge
his superiority, and leave him the uncontrolled direction of everything. The two
armies first met on the confines of Gabiene, when a pitched battle ensued, with
no decided advantage to either side; after which Antigonus withdrew to Gadamarga
in Media, while Eumenes established his winter-quarters in Gabiene. Here Antigonus
attempted to surprise him by a sudden march in the depth of the winter; but he
was too wary to be taken unprepared: he contrived by a stratagem to delay the
march of his adversary until til had time to collect his scattered forces, and
again bring matters to the issue of a pitched battle. Neither party obtained a
complete victory, and Eumenes would have renewed the combat the next day; but
the baggage of the Macedonian troops had fallen into the hands of the enemy, and
the Argyraspids, furious at their loss, agreed to purchase its restoration from
Antigonus by delivering up their general into his hands. Tile latter is said to
have been at first disposed to spare the life of his captive, which he was strongly
urged to do by Nearchus and the young Demetrius; but all his other officers were
of the contrary opinion, and Eumenes was put to death a few days after he had
fallen into the hands of the enemy. (Plut. Eum. 13-19; Diod. xix. 12-15, 17-34,
37-44; Corn. Nep. Eum. 7-12; Justin. xiv. 3, 4; Polyaen. iv. 8.3, 4.) These events
took place in the winter of 317 to 316 B. C. (1)
Eumenes was only forty-five years old at the time of his death. (Corn.
Nep. Eum. 13.) Of his consummate ability, both as a general and a statesman, no
doubt can be entertained; and it is probable that he would have attained a far
more important position among the successors of Alexander, had it not been for
the accidental disadvantage of his birth. But as a Greek of Cardia, and not a
native Macedonian, he was constantly looked upon with dislike, and even with contempt,
both by his opponents and companions in arms, at the very time that they were
compelled to bow beneath his genius. This prejudice was throughout the greatest
obstacle with which he had to contend, and it may be regarded as the highest proof
of his ability that he overcame it even to the extent to which he was able. It
must be borne in mind also, if we praise him for his fidelity to the royal house
of Macedonia, that this same disadvantage, by rendering it impossible for him
to aspire to any independent authority, made it as much his interest as his duty
to uphold the legitimate occupants of the throne of Alexander. He is described
by Plutarch (Eum. 11) as a man of polished manners and appearance, with the air
of a courtier rather than a warrior; and his oratory was more subtle and plausible
than energetic. Craft and caution seem indeed to have been the prevailing points
in his character; though he was able also to exhibit, when called for, the utmost
energy and activity.
(1) In the relation of these events, the chronology of Droysen has been followed.
Mr. Clinton (who places the death of Eumenes early in 315 B. C.) appears to have
been misled by attaching too much importance to the archonships, as mentioned
by Diodorus.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Eumenes. Of Cardia, served as private secretary to Philip and Alexander; and on the death of the latter (B.C. 323) obtained the government of Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, and Pontus. Eumenes allied himself with Perdiccas, and carried on war for him in Asia Minor against Antipater and Craterus. On the death of Perdiccas in Egypt, Antigonus employed the whole force of the Macedonian army to crush Eumenes. Notwithstanding the numerical inferiority of his forces, Eumenes maintained his ground against his enemies for some years, till he was surrendered by the soldiery to Antigonus, by whom he was put to death, 316. He was a great general and statesman, and had he been a native Macedonian would probably have occupied a more important position among the successors of Alexander.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Hieronymus, (Hieronomos). Of Cardia, accompanied Alexander the Great to Asia, and after the death of that monarch (B.C. 323) served under his countryman Eumenes. He afterwards fought under Antigonus, his son Demetrius, and grandson Antigonus Gonatas. He survived Pyrrhus, and died at the advanced age of 104. Hieronymus wrote a history of the events from the death of Alexander to that of Pyrrhus, if not later.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Hieronymus, (Hieronumos), of Cardia, an historian who is frequently cited as one
of the chief authorities for the history of the times immediately following the
death of Alexander. He had himself taken an active part in the events of that
period. Whether he had accompanied his fellow-citizen Eumenes during the campaigns
of Alexander we have no distinct testimony, but after the death of that prince,
we find him not only attached to the service of his countryman, but already enjoying
a high place in his confidence. It seems probable also from the terms in which
he is alluded to as describing the magnificent bier or funeral car of Alexander,
that his admiration was that of an eye-witness, and that he was present at Babylon
at the time of its construction. (Athen. v. p. 206; comp. Diod. xviii. 26.) The
first express mention of him occurs in B. C. 320, when he was sent by Eumenes,
at that time shut up in the castle of Nora, at the head of the deputation which
he despatched to Antipater. But before he could return to Eumenes, the death of
the regent produced a complete change in the relative position of parties, and
Antigonus, now desirous to conciliate Eumenes, charged Hieronymus to be the bearer
of friendly offers and protestations to his friend and countryman. (Diod. xviii.
42, 50 ; Plut. Eum. 12.) But though Hieronymus was so far gained over by Antigonus
as to undertake this embassy, yet in the struggle that ensued he adhered steadily
to the cause of Eumenes, and accompanied that leader until his final captivity.
In the last battle in Gabiene (B. C. 316) Hieronymus himself was wounded, and
fell a prisoner into the hands of Antigonus, who treated him with the utmost kindness,
and to whose service he henceforth attached himself. (Diod. xix. 44.) In B. C.
312, we find him entrusted by that monarch with the charge of collecting bitumen
from the Dead Sea, a project which was frustrated by the hostility of the neighbouring
Arabs. (Id. xix. 100.) The statement of Josephus (c. Apion. i. 23) that he was
at one time appointed by Antigonus to the government of Syria, is in all probability
erroneous. After the death of Antigonus, Hieronymus continued to follow the fortunes
of his son Demetrius, and he is again mentioned in B. C. 292 as being appointed
by the latter governor or harmost of Boeotia, after his first conquest of Thebes.
(Plut. Demetr. 39.) Whether he was reinstated in this office when Thebes, after
shaking off the yoke for a while, fell again under the power of Demetrius, we
are not told, nor have we any information concerning the remaining events of his
long life; but it may be inferred, from the hostility towards Lysimachus and Pyrrhus
evinced by his writings at a period long subsequent, that he continued unshaken
in his attachment to Demetrius and to his son, Antigonus Gonatas, after him. It
appears that he survived Pyrrhns, whose death, in B. C. 272, was mentioned in
his history (Paus. i. 13.9), and died at the advanced age of 104, having had the
unusual advantage of retaining his strength and faculties unimpaired to the last.
(Lucian. Macrob. 22.)
The historical work of Hieronymus is cited under various titles (ho
tas ton diadochon historias gegraphos, Diod. xviii. 42; en tei peri ton epigonon
pragmateiai, Dionys. i. 6), and these have sometimes been regarded as constituting
separate works; but it seems probable, on the whole, that he wrote but one general
work, comprising the history from the death of Alexander to that of Pyrrhus, if
not later. Whether he gave any detailed account of the wars of Alexander himself
is at least doubtful, for the few facts cited from him previous to the death of
that monarch are such as might easily have been incidentally mentioned ; and the
passage in Suidas (s. v. Hieronumos), which is quoted by Fabricius to prove that
he wrote a history of that prince, is manifestly corrupt, Probably we should read
ta ep' Alexandroi, instead of ta hup' Alexandrou, as proposed by Fabricius. Nor
is there any reason to infer (as has been done by the Abbe Sevin, Mem.. de l'Acad.
des Inscr. vol. xiii.), that his history of Pyrrhus formed a distinct work, though
lie is repeatedly cited by Plutarch as an authority in his life of that prince.
(Plut. Pyrrh. 17, 21.) It was in this part of his work, also, that he naturally
found occasion to touch upon the affairs of Rome, and he is consequently mentioned
by Dionysius as one of the first Greek writers who had given any account of the
history of that city (Dionys. i. 6). But that Dionysius himself did not follow
his authority in regard to the expedition of Pyrrhus to Italy is clear from the
passages of Plutarch already cited, in which the statements of the two are contrasted.
Hieronymus is enumerated by Dionysius (de comp. 4) among the writers whose defective
style rendered it almost impossible to read them through. He is also severely
censured by Pausanias for his partiality to Antigonus and Demetrius, and the injustice
he displayed in consequence in regard to Pyrrhus and Lysimachus. Towards the latter
monarch, indeed, he had an additional cause of enmity, on account of Lysimachus
having destroyed his native city of Cardia to make way for the foundation of Lysimacheia.
(Paus. i. 9.8, 13.9.) There can be little doubt that the history of Alexander's
immediate successors (the diadochoi and epigonoi), which has descended to us,
is derived in great part from Hieronymus, but it is impossible to determine to
what extent his authority was followed by Diodorus and Plutarch.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Hecataeus, (Hekataios), tyrant of Cardia, is first mentioned as one of the friends of Alexander the Great, and was selected by that monarch immediately after his accession (B. C. 336) to undertake the perilous duty of putting down the threatened revolt of Attalus in Asia. He crossed over to that continent with a considerable force, with which he joined the army of Parmenion; but after consulting with that general, he deemed it inexpedient to attempt his object by open force, and caused Attalus to be secretly assassinated. (Diod. xvii. 2, 5; comp. Curt. vii. 1.3.) As we find no mention of Hecataeus during the operations of Alexander in Asia, it must be presumed that for some reason or another he did not accompany him in this expedition. (See, however, Curt. vii. 1.38.) Nor do we know ally thing of the steps by which he raised himself to the sovereignty of his native city; but it appears that he must have done so long before the death of Alexander, as we are told that his fellow-citizen, Eumenes, frequently employed his influence with the king, though ineffectually, to induce him to expel Hecataeus, and restore freedom to Cardia. (Plut. Eum. 3.) He seems to have enjoyed a high place in the confidence of Antipater, as he was chosen by him as his deputy to Leonnatus, to invoke the assistance of the latter in the Lamian war (B. C. 323). Leonnatus sought on this occasion to effect a reconciliation between Hecataeus and Eumenes, but without success; and the latter, mistrusting the projects of Leonnatus, secretly withdrew to join Perdiccas. The name of Hecataeus is not again mentioned. (Diod. xviii. 14; Plut. Eum. 3.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
