Battle of Pydna in the context of "Antigonid dynasty"

⭐ In the context of the Antigonid dynasty, the Battle of Pydna is considered…

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Battle of Pydna


The Battle of Pydna took place in 168 BC between Rome and Macedon during the Third Macedonian War. The battle saw the further ascendancy of Rome in the Hellenistic world and the end of the Antigonid line of kings, whose power traced back to Alexander the Great. The battle is also considered to be a victory of the Roman legion's manipular system's flexibility over the Macedonian phalanx's rigidity.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Battle of Pydna in the context of Antigonid dynasty

The Antigonid dynasty (/ænˈtɪɡnɪd/; Ancient Greek: Ἀντιγονίδαι) was a Macedonian Greek royal house which ruled the kingdom of Macedon during the Hellenistic period. Founded by Antigonus I Monophthalmus, a general and successor of Alexander the Great, the dynasty first came to power after the Battle of Salamis in 306 BC and ruled much of Hellenistic Greece from 294 until their defeat at the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC (Third Macedonian War), after which Macedon came under the control of the Roman Republic.

The wars of the Diadochi witnessed the fall of the Argead dynasty in Macedon resulting in a power vacuum, which the Antigonid and Antipatrid dynasties sought to occupy. The Antigonid family first rose to power when Demetrius I Poliorcetes, son of Antigonus I, ousted Cassander's governor of Athens in 306 BC giving his father control over a land spanning from the Aegean Sea to the Middle East. Despite the subsequent instability and loss of the Asian territory, the family managed to maintain its power in mainland Greece and the islands, with Antigonus II Gonatas ultimately solidifying Antigonid rule over Hellenistic Macedon –a territory also known as the Antigonid Empire. Antigonus III Doson further expanded Macedonian influence in southern Greece reestablishing the Hellenic Alliance with himself as the president. Under Philip V, Antigonid Macedon first came into conflict with Rome, which had become a decisive power in the eastern Mediterranean. In the second century BC, the last Antigonid king, Perseus, became known as the champion of Greek resistance against Rome, albeit Rome's control over Antigonid Greece began to steadily expand, culminating in the fall of the dynasty in 168.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Battle of Pydna in the context of Third Macedonian War

The Third Macedonian War (171–168 BC) was a war fought between the Roman Republic and King Perseus of Macedon. In 179 BC, King Philip V of Macedon died and was succeeded by his ambitious son Perseus. He was anti-Roman and stirred anti-Roman feelings around Macedonia. In 172 BC, a Roman commission visited Perseus and required of him concessions which meant the extinction of his independence. Upon his refusal to comply with the demands they returned home and Rome declared war.

Most of the war was fought in Macedon as well as neighbouring Thessaly, where the Roman troops were stationed. After an inconclusive battle at Callinicus in 171 BC, and several years of campaigning, Rome decisively defeated the Macedonian forces at the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC, ending the war.

↑ Return to Menu

Battle of Pydna in the context of Antigonid Macedonian army

The Antigonid Macedonian army was the army that evolved from the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedonia in the period when it was ruled by the Antigonid dynasty from 276 BC to 168 BC. It was seen as one of the principal Hellenistic fighting forces until its ultimate defeat at Roman hands at the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC. However, there was a brief resurgence in 150-148 during the revolt of Andriscus, a supposed heir to Perseus.

Starting as just a mere handful of mercenary troops under Antigonus Gonatas in the 270s BC, the Antigonid army eventually became the dominant force in Hellenistic Greece, fighting campaigns against Epirus, the Aetolian League, Sparta, Athens, Rhodes and Pergamon, not to mention the numerous Thracian and Celtic tribes that threatened Macedon from the north.

↑ Return to Menu

Battle of Pydna in the context of Perseus of Macedon

Perseus (Greek: Περσεύς, romanizedPerseús; c. 212 – 166 BC) was king of the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedon from 179 until 168 BC. He is widely regarded as the last king of Macedonia and the last ruler from the Antigonid Dynasty, as his defeat by Rome at the Battle of Pydna during the Third Macedonian War effectively ended Macedonia as an independent political entity.

↑ Return to Menu

Battle of Pydna in the context of 168 BC

Year 168 BC was a year of the pre-Julian Roman calendar. At the time it was known as the Year of the Consulship of Macedonicus and Crassus (or, less frequently, year 586 Ab urbe condita). The denomination 168 BC for this year has been used since the early medieval period, when the Anno Domini calendar era became the prevalent method in Europe for naming years.

↑ Return to Menu

Battle of Pydna in the context of Cotys IV

Cotys IV (Ancient Greek: Κότυς, Kotys) was a king of the Odrysians in Thrace from before 171 until after 166 BC. He was the son of Seuthes V and succeeded either his father or another king, Amadocus III, who was captured by the Macedonians in 184 BC (it is unclear whether Amadocus III and Cotys IV ruled the same political formation and whether kingship was unitary). While the survival of a specifically Odrysian state past the mid-3rd century has been doubted, Cotys IV is described as an Odrysian by Polybius and Livy, although the term may have been used in a less than specific sense.

During the Third Macedonian War (171-168 BC), Cotys IV was initially an ally of the Macedonian king Perseus, sending a force of a thousand cavalry and a thousand infantry to his ally, which contributed to the initial Macedonian victory over the Romans at Callinicus in 171 BC. However, following an attack on Cotys' kingdom by another Thracian ruler, Autlesbis (of the Caeni?), and the Attalid commander Corrhagus, allies of Rome, Cotys and his force were allowed to return to defend their homelands by Perseus, who gave them half of the promised pay. Nevertheless, Cotys IV was able to assist Perseus again at the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC, although the allies were defeated by the Romans, and Cotys and his forces followed Perseus in his flight from the battlefield. When Perseus embarked for Samothrace, the Thracians, possibly including those of Cotys, refused to follow and returned to their homes. Later Perseus planned to flee from Samothrace to Cotys, but had to surrender to the Romans. Cotys' son Bithys (the same name is usually spelled Beithys in Thracian inscriptions) had been left a hostage at Perseus' court and ended up among the Macedonian royal captives of the Romans at Carseoli. Cotys sent envoys to the Roman senate to ransom his son, claiming he had been forced to support Perseus. The Roman senate pardoned his actions and released his son without taking the ransom. The grateful Cotys now became a Roman ally. The lenient treatment of Cotys IV by the Roman government in 167 BC is attributed to its desire to secure a useful ally in the region, given both past experience and potential current threats. A decree from Abdera usually dated to c. 166 BC shows Cotys, apparently bolstered by this new alliance with Rome, expanding his territory and encroaching upon Abdera's. This is generally considered to be the last mention of Cotys IV in the source material, but doubts have been raised regarding the date of the Abdera decree and whether anyone but a Sapaean Cotys could have encroached upon Abdera. It is not known when Cotys IV ceased to reign or who succeeded him: his son Bithys is not securely attested as ruler, unless perhaps mentioned under the orthography "Byzes" in c. 146 BC; a certain Teres (V or VI) is attested as reigning in 148 BC, but he may have belonged to a different branch of the dynasty or to a different Thracian kingdom. The name "Cotys" appears among both the so-called Odryso-Astaean and Sapaean kings of Thrace, which may indicate descent from Cotys IV (particularly for the former), but there is no absolute proof for such a link.

↑ Return to Menu