Question

aleksandros · Post by **aleksandros** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:28 am

I know Phillip besieged Perinthus but fell short from conquering it. What about the status of that city and Byzantium. Did they go under macedonian influence subsequently after the battle at Chaeroneia? If not why didnt Alexander pay any attention on these cities?
I think they meant a lot since Perinthus is mentioned in Alexander's letter.
I d love you to talk me out of my inquiry.

aleksandros · Post by **aleksandros** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:38 am

anyone?

Paralus · Post by **Paralus** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:11 am

As far as I recall, Philip failed in the capture of Selymria, Perinthus and Byzantium.

The seige of Byzantium produced allied action by Athens, Chios, Cos and Rhodes - amongst others. Of course, Artaxerxes intervened at Perinthus and Demosthenes sought to have the King divert money to Athens. This eventually brought Philip around to the negotiating table as the last thing he needed was the Persians active in the Aegean with Islander support. Philip had not only managed to reconcile the former belligerents of the "Social War" (the revolt of Athens' maritime "Confederacy") but had brought Persian intervention.

So he negotiated a settlement with Byzantium and Perinthus as well as Athens' allies (in this action):

Frontin. Stratagems, 1.4.13(a):

The Chersonese happened at one time to be controlled by the Athenians, and Philip was prevented from capturing it, owing to the fact that the strait was commanded by vessels not only of the Byzantines but also of the Rhodians and Chians; but Philip won the confidence of these peoples by returning their captured ships, as pledges of the peace to be arranged between himself and the Byzantines, who were the cause of the war.

Diod. 16.77.3:

Consequently in alarm at the coalition of Greeks, Philip abandoned the seige of the cities and concluded peace with the Athenians and the other Greeks who were opposed to him.

I recall nothing during Alexander's time that altered these arrangements. It is likely that some form of defensive alliance was concluded. As well, Diodorus has incorrectly included Athens in this arrangement. That, demonstrably, did not occur until after the disaster at Chaeronea. It is possible that Diodorus has assumed Athens negotiating on behalf of her erswhile confederates.