1. Family-Education-Early Years

Contemporary to the Macedonian kings Phillip II (359-336 BC) and Alexander the Great (336-323 BC), like all the Diadochoi, Antigonus Monophtphalmus was born in 382 BC and lost his life in the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC.¹ His father was called Philip² and he had three brothers, but only the names of the two are known (Demetrius, Ptolemy).³ His family belonged to the Macedonian aristocracy and he was raised in the wider area of Pella, the capital of Macedonia.⁴ Hence, he was very well educated and had studied Euripides, Homer, tragic and lyric poetry, rhetoric and philosophy.⁵

His father lost his life during the defeat of the Macedonian army by the Illyrian invaders, which left Macedonia without a king in 359 BC. Antigonus experienced the transformation of Macedonia into the greatest military power in the Eastern Mediterranean under Philip II. He participated in Philip’s campaign to Thrace (341-339 BC), when he lost his eye during the siege of Perinthus, thus he remained known as monophthalmus, the one-eyed.⁶ His decisive contribution in the restoration of Macedonia is testified by the fact that on the eve of the Asia Minor expedition in 334 BC, he occupied one of the most essential positions in the Macedonian army as the commander of the 7,000 hoplites of the Greek Alliance. It is possible that he had been involved in the formation of the Alliance in Philip’s time.⁷ Around the period of the siege of Perinthus he married Stratonice, widow of his brother Demetrius, who gave birth to his elder son Demetrius Poliorcetes in 337/6 BC.

2. In Alexander’s time

Antigonus served Alexander the Great (336-323 BC) as a commander of the Greek Alliance force in the Battle of the Granicus River (334 BC)⁸ and soon after he followed Alexander to the south of Ephesus. Then, he occupied Priene,⁹ while Alexander was heading from Ephesus to Miletus. In addition, he must have taken part in the siege of Halicarnassus and he might have joined Alexander in his campaign to Lycia, Pamphylia, Pisidia and Phrygia. He was definitely present in the councils during Alexander’s campaign in 334/333 BC. In the spring of 333 BC he was appointed governor of the Greater Phrygia, a region in the centre of Asia Minor, crossed by all the major roads. After Alexander’s departure from Phrygia, Antigonus besieged Kelainai, the capital of Greater Phrygia, and joined Alexander just in time to reinforce the army with his army of 1,500 mercenaries before the Battle at Issus (333 BC), enabling Alexander to march towards the Phoenician territories and seize Tyre. Presumably he conquered Lydia as well.¹⁰ From there Alexander moved against Egypt and then returned to Asia Minor for the final confrontation with Darius III (336-330 BC). At the same time, Antigonus occupied Lycaonia,¹¹ hence opening the south route which led from Ephesus to Kelainai, Ikonion and even farther to the Cilician Gates, ensuring Alexander access to Macedonia and communication with the Asia Minor satrapies.

3. Coming to power and ruling Asia

After Alexander’s death in Babylon (323 BC), Antigonus’ absence from Phrygia gave Perdiccas the opportunity to take precedence over him on the matter of succession. Antigonus' authority over Phrygia, Lycaonia, Lycia, Pamphylia and west Pisidia was recognized. However, Perdiccas ordered him to conquer Cappadocia and Paphlagonia along with Macedonian Leonnatus and give them to Eumenes, whom he clearly intended for Antigonus’ counterweight in Asia Minor.¹² Moreover, when Eumenes tried Antigonus on false accusations,¹³ Antigonus escaped to Europe, in the end of 321 BC,¹⁴ only to return to Asia Minor with 3,000 men on Athenian ships. He was supported by Asander, the satrap of Caria, Menander, the satrap of Lydia and the Ionian cities led by Ephesus.¹⁵ Upon Antigonus’ arrival in Asia Minor, the First War of the Successors (321-321 BC) broke out, which concluded with the confrontation of Eumenes and Antigonus at Nora in Cappadocia, where Eumenes was defeated.¹⁶ Nevertheless, when Antipater died in 319 BC the rivalry between Antigonus and Eumenes was revived, spreading also to Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander, and Lysimachus, who all competed for the regency. As a result, the second and the third Wars of the Successors broke out (319-315 BC and 314-311 BC respectively), which led to the treaty (311 BC) which divided Alexander’s empire among the four dynasts and rendered Antigonus the most powerful of all as the governor of Asia and ally with many states in mainland Greece.

The violation of the treaty in 311 BC by Seleucus, who invaded Babylon in 311/310 BC, provoked upheavals in the Upper Satrapies and the North Asia Minor. Only in 308 BC did Antigonus succeed in suppressing them. In the same period, his son Demetrius Poliorcetes reoccupied the Cilician and Carian cities detracted by Ptolemy prior to his return to Egypt and in 307 BC he led wars on the Greek mainland.

The victory of Demetrius over the Ptolemaic fleet at the sea battle of Salamis in Cyprus permitted Antigonus and his son to assume the royal title first among the successors in 306 BC. Thus, the royal power was institutionalised and defined as hereditary.¹⁷ In the last years of his reign, Antigonus devoted himself in the administrative organisation of his realm. Demetrius’ attacks against Ptolemy and the Rhodians climaxed with the siege of Rhodes (305-304 BC), which was eventually raised with negotiations.¹⁸ In mainland Greece the submission of the north and central Peloponnese was a prerequisite for the new congress at Corinth.¹⁹ Internationally, the coalition of 314-311 BC was renewed due to the initiative of Lysimachus, Cassander, Ptolemy and Seleucus, in order to eliminate Antigonus and Demetrius. The Antigonids were defeated in the Battle of Ipsus (301 BC) and Antigonus was killed.²⁰

4. Administration

The flexible administration policy of Antigonus is worth mentioning. It derived from a combination of the Achaemenid tradition and the administration principles of Philip II (359-336 BC), which was adopted to a great extend by the Seleucid administration later.²¹ The Antigonid realm was organized into relatively small administration units ruled by military officers. By 302 BC a typical, albeit precocious, Hellenistic state has been formed. The earlier practices of Philip II are reflected on the reinforced role of the army, the expansion of the dominant class, the cession of revocable royal and newly-established land to its members, the foundation of cities and the population transfer into the conquered regions. The Persian institutions can be traced in the variety of the provincial administration, the subdivision of the empire in satrapies and the presence of landowners and dynasts, either indigenous or of prominent Persian families, who had personal associations with the king and his court. Finally, a series of defensive works on strategic locations, such as Sardis, Kelainai, Tyre, Babylon and Susa aimed at deterring the revolts of the commanders.²² The epigraphical evidence testifies that from 324 BC until his death in 301 BC, Antigonus respected the autonomy of the Greek cities. He did not establish garrisons and by allying himself with the most powerful cities (Rhodes, Samos, Kalymnos, Skypse, Astacus, Chalcedon) he tried to restrain their activities in an international level.²³ In the same framework, some cities united to form synoecisms (i.e. Teos, Lebedos, c. 303 BC, Antigoneia-Alexandria Troas).²⁴ Finally, many Greek cities in Asia Minor organized themselves into two confederations, with Ilion and Panionion as their cult centres respectively.²⁵ Antigonus took the initiative in founding the Nesiotic League in the Aegean.²⁶ He also established new Greek cities and military colonies in Asia Minor and in Syria/Palestine (Nicaea, Antiocheia, Apameia Kibotos, Apameia at Orontes, Seleuceia in Pieria et. al.).²⁷ We also have a clear picture about the administration employees, the protocol for the reception of the envoys and other visitors at Antigonus’ court, the drafting of resolutions, regulations and matters of correspondence.

Concerning the financial policy, the excessive revenue which derived from confiscating the treasuries of Ecbatana, Susa, Cilician Kyinda, as well as from personal looting and gifts, was administered with the creation of treasuries. The most important was the treasury at Kyinda. Finally, a portable treasury covered the regular expenses, required for the court, the army, the military campaigns and the foundation of cities.²⁸

5. Evaluation

Antigonus is considered as a competent military man, governor and ruler. His military action reveals an intelligent, assertive and composed general, who represented the only hope for maintaining Alexander’s empire undivided but at the same time induced its fragmentation. Antigonus was interested in improving the technological means there were available, as it is evident by the fortifications, the advanced siege machines and methods or the risky building of ships bigger than the pentecontors on the eve of the siege of Tyre.

His political thinking was obviously influenced by the years close to Philip II in his youth, when he was introduced in diplomacy, bribery and violence as means for ascending to power. From 320 BC, when he was 62 years old, until his death in 301 BC, Antigonus dominated over the Eastern Mediterranean and succeeded in establishing the Antigonid dynasty. His policy was based on pragmatism, while his greatest achievement was the organization of an administration system, which laid the foundation for the Seleucid kingdom, particularly due to an extensive network of newly-founded cities in Asia Minor.²⁹

Finally, it is widely believed that Antigonus was very interested in cultural matters, even though he had no time to devote.³⁰ Among the intellectuals in his court were the greatest artists of the period, like Apelles and Protogenes, who painted his portraits.³¹ A remarkable portrait of Antigonus by Apelles was displayed in the Asclepieion at Kos.³²

It would have been unfair to accept the negative criticism about his strong ambition, obviously reflecting a strong dislike by his contemporaries during the last years of his reign.³³ It is indisputable that he managed to excel with his military and administrative skills in a period full of important political and military leaders. By assuming the royal title first among the successors and by setting an example himself, he contributed in the formation of the Hellenistic kingship which focused on the leader’s excellence and bravery. He was the founder of many cities and he invented the political system which enabled the Greek cities to survive in the Hellenistic states until the Roman occupation. It is not a coincidence that he was worshipped in his lifetime, like Alexander. Admittedly, Antigonus was one of those men who shaped the Hellenistic world of the 3rd and the 2nd cent. BC.