The factors disclosed by Arkesilaos’ struggle are such as to make clear the sources of the conflict. Whether or not Schafer is right in distinguishing three political elements at Cyrene, the King’s brothers and their Libyan allies, the aristocracy, and the royal family supported by the new colonists and the mercenaries,[112] the reason for the secession of the King’s brothers to found a mixed settlement with the Libyans at Barka, may well have been that it was they who supported the extensive agriculture based on corn-growing, cattle-rearing and horse-rearing, carried on in conjunction with the permanently settled natives, whereas the King sought to develop a more intensified cultivation and the more efficient utilization of land.
It is easy to suppose that the settlement of newcomers by Battus II under the slogan of “the distribution of land”(ἀναδασμὸς γῆς),[113] which was not in this case a revolutionary programme, led in course of time to a demand on the part of the Cyrenean peasants for the cancellation of debts (ἀποκοπὴ χρέων), but of this we have no confirmation. The fact that Arkesilaos III, son of Battus III, in his revolt against Demonax’ reforms, mobilized mercenaries from overseas by the slogan of “the distribution of land”, has caused Schafer to deduce that his action was directed against the Cyrenean peasantry whose farming had remained backward and did not utilize the full potentialities of their lands. But it is unnecessary to read into Arkesilaos III’s formula more than a demagogic slogan meant to attract mercenaries, and it is preferable to distinguish between the extensive farming of the aristocracy, with which Arkesilaos was struggling, and the plight of the smallholding peasantry.[114]
Did Demonax inaugurate democracy in Cyrene? The institution of three phylae meant, no doubt, an expansion of the citizen-body in harmony with the new situation created by the rise of population under Battus II, nor need the accuracy of Herodotus be doubted when he writes that “Demonax placed all other affairs in the hands of the people.”[115] But the question is, in what measure did “the people” include all the free inhabitants of the country? — and to this we have no answer. All that can be said is, that a sharing of citizen-rights without reference to ownership of land is hardly credible in the conditions of the period.
One event in the life of Cyrene perhaps belongs to the reign of Battus III (544-530), namely, the erection of the Temple of Zeus, the city’s greatest shrine, on the eastern hill.[116] The date of the building, one of the largest temples in Greece, ranking with the Parthenon and Temple “G” at Selinus in Sicily, is a subject of controversy. Inscriptions evidence that it existed in the 5th century,[117] and its first scientific excavator, Pesce[118] dated it to that century. Dinsmoor[119] on the other hand was of the opinion that it was built shortly after 540 B.C. and Chamoux put the erection at about 520.[120] The column-contractions of the peristasis, indeed, suggest the earlier date.
The size of the project, at all events, is appropriate to the period of renascence that may well have begun with the reforms of Demonax, and perhaps symbolized the renewed harmony (ὁμόνοια) of the Cyrenean polity under the protection of Zeus, the guardian of social justice. If this suggestion is correct, the chronological limits for the Temple’s construction would fall between 550 and 514. Between 550 and 525 the small shrine of Opheles (a healing deity who bestowed prosperity) was rebuilt in enlarged form; in the last quarter of the century the Agora was lengthened from east to west, and a new portico erected along its north side. By this time, apparently, the small temple of Apollo already existed at the south-western corner of the area, and the west limit of the Agora was enclosed by a new portico.
The son of Battus III, Arkesilaos III, who reigned from 530/525-514,[121] attempted to set aside the political settlement of Demonax, but faced with revolt, fled to Samos, while his mother Pheretimé found refuge with Evelthon the ruler of Salamis in Cyprus.[122]
Meanwhile Cambyses had gained control of Egypt and Arkesilaos, inclining like other Greek kings and absolute rulers to rely on Persian support, became his vassal. Gathering an army, after a consultation with Delphi, he reconquered his kingdom and immolated his aristocratic opponents by burning down their refuge, “the great tower of Aglomachus”. Thereupon, realizing that his deed ran counter to the explicit warning of the Pythia, “not to bake the pots in the kiln, but to send them beyond the frontiers, but if you do the first, do not enter a place surrounded on two sides with water” — transferred his quarters to Barka, ruled by the Libyan Aladdeir, whose daughter he had wedded.[123] His mother Pheretime remained at Cyrene and there exercized rule,[124] but Arkesilaos and his father-in-law were assassinated by their enemies at Barka, forcing Pheretime to flee to Egypt. Her flight brought about the intervention of Persia (514/513); Barka was besieged and taken by the Persian general Aryandes, and its inhabitants deported to Bactria.[125] It is not clear from the existing account whether Cyrene suffered from the Persian expedition; on this Herodotus is at variance with Menecles of Barka, who wrote of a Persian occupation. Decapitated statues and damaged monuments dated in the mid-6th century B.C., found in a quarry east of the present city, may indeed be the result of Persian vandalism.[126]
From this time onward and perhaps till the end of this dynasty, the Battiads ruled Cyrene as Persian vassals, and as early as the reign of Darius son of Hystaspes (i.e. from 519 approximately) Egypt received from Cyrene, Barka, and the neighbouring regions of Libya, a tribute of 800 talents and 120,000 artabae of com.[127]
It is only at this point that the relationships between the Cyrenean cities and Cyrene itself begin to become a little clearer. Barka was founded, as we have seen, in the reign of Arkesilaus II,[128] but archaeological evidence shows that a settlement already existed near her harbour (the future Ptolemais, today Tolmeita) from the end of the 7th century.We further know of a Libyan king at Barka, and that the town paid its own tribute to Darius, hence it was a distinct political unit, which began to strike its own coins in the later years of the 6th century.[129] These cease, apparently, with the Persian capture and the subsequent vengeance of Pheretime, but reappear after a short period under Battus IV;[130] by the end of the 5th century Barka is the country’s principal city.[131] In 484 another Persian attack was made upon the town by the Persian general Arsamis. Several historians have seen the event as an erroneous duplication of the Persian siege after the death of Arkesilaos III,[132] but Polyaenus knew of two such attacks, and the alleged second coincided with a revolt in Egypt. Robinson, moreover, noted another cessation of Barka’s coinage at this time, and that when it reappears about the year 460, it bears a resemblance to the coinage of Cyrene.[133]
114
Cf. Chamoux’s view,
116
For various datings of the temple’s erection, see Goodchild,
119
Dinsmoor,
120
This writer, judging by the proportions of the building’s peristasis, and other details, such as the corner-triglyph contractions, concluded, after personal examination, in favour of the earlier date.
123
A Greek inscription apparently from Barka (
125
For the chronology, Mitchell, (note 112), who points out that as there is no evidence that Arkesilaos fled to Samos in Polykrates’ time, his accession and flight are more probably to be dated about 525.
128
It is difficult to accept Diodorus’ statement (I, 68) that Apries’ attackwas directed against Barka. A settlement may already have existed there, but it would have been entirely composed of Libyans.