hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith) 16 16 Browse Search
Diodorus Siculus, Library 4 4 Browse Search
Demosthenes, Exordia (ed. Norman W. DeWitt, Norman J. DeWitt) 1 1 Browse Search
Strabo, Geography (ed. H.C. Hamilton, Esq., W. Falconer, M.A.) 1 1 Browse Search
Titus Livius (Livy), Ab Urbe Condita, books 8-10 (ed. Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D.) 1 1 Browse Search
Titus Livius (Livy), Ab Urbe Condita, books 26-27 (ed. Frank Gardner Moore, Professor Emeritus in Columbia University) 1 1 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). You can also browse the collection for 339 BC or search for 339 BC in all documents.

Your search returned 16 results in 15 document sections:

1 2
Arses, Narses or OARSES (*)/Arshs, *Na/rshs, or *)Oa/rshs), the youngest son of king Artaxerxes III. (Ochus.) After the eunuch Bagoas had poisoned Artaxerxes, he raised Arses to the throne, B. C. 339; and that he might have the young king completely under his power, he caused the king's brothers to be put to death; but one of them, Bisthanes, appears to have escaped their fate. (Arrian, Arr. Anab. 3.19.) Arses, however, could but ill brook the indignities committed against his own family, and the bondage in which he himself was kept; and as soon as Bagoas perceived that the king was disposed to take vengeance, he had him and his children too put to death, in the third year of his reign. The royal house appears to have been thus destroyed with the exception of the above-mentioned Bisthanes, and Bagoas raised Dareius Codomannus to the throne. (Diod. 17.5; Strab. xv. p.736; Plut. de Fort. Alex. 2.3, Artax. 1; Arrian, Arr. Anab. 2.14; Ctesias, Pers. p. 151, ed. Lion; Syncell. pp. 145, 39
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith), (search)
Artaxerxes Iii. or Artaxerxes Ochus also called Ochus, succeeded his father as king of Persia in B. C. 362, and reigned till B. C. 339. In order to secure the throne which he had gained by treason and murder, he began his reign with a merciless extirpation of the members of his family. He himself was a cowardly and reckless despot; and the great advantages which the Persian arms gained during his reign, were owing only to his Greek generals and mercenaries, and to traitors, or want of skill on the part of his enemies. These advantages consisted in the conquest of the revolted satrap Artabazus [ARTABAZUS, No. 4], and in the reduction of Phoenicia, of several revolted towns in Cyprus, and of Egypt, B. C. 350. (Diod. 16.40-52.) From this time Artaxerxes withdrew to his seraglio, where he passed his days in sensual pleasures. The reins of the government were entirely in the hands of the eunuch Bagoas, and of Mentor, the Rhodian, and the existence of the king himself was felt by his subje
Brutus 5. D. Junius Brutus Scaeva, magister equitum to the dictator Q. Publilius Philo, B. C. 339, and plebeian consul in 325 with the patrician L. Furius Camillus. He carried on war in his consulship against the Vestini, whom he conquered in battle, after a hard contest, and took two of their towns, Cutina and Cingilia. (Liv. viii 12, 29; Diod. 18.2.)
fortunate consequences of a war of the Amphictyons, and he succeeded at least in persuading the Athenians not to send any deputies to that extraordinary meeting. (Dem. de Coron. p. 275; Aeschin. c. Ctesiph. § 125, &c.) The Amphictyons however decreed war against Amphissa, and the command of the Amphictyonic army was given to Cottyphus, an Arcadian; but the expedition failed from want of spirit and energy among those who took part in it. (Dem. de Coron. p. 277.) The consequence was, that in B. C. 339, at the next ordinary meeting of the Amphictyons, king Philip was appointed chief commander of the Amphictyonic army. This was the very thing which he had been looking for. With the appearance of justice on his side, he now had an opportunity of establishing himself with an armed force in the very heart of Greece. He set out without delay, and when the Athenians received the news of his having taken possession of Elatea, they were thrown into the deepest consternation. Demosthenes alone di
Gisco 2. Son of Hanno, and probably the father of Hamilcar, the adversary of Agathocles. He is mentioned by Diodorus (16.81) as being in exile at the time of the great defeat sustained by the Carthaginians at the river Crimissus (B. C. 339). According to Polyaenus he had been banished, as implicated in the designs of his brother Hamilcar to possess himself of the sovereign power (Polyaen. 5.11, see also Just. 22.7); but it appears that he had previously distinguished himself, both by his courage and skill as a general, and after the disaster just alluded to the Carthaginians thought fit to recal him from exile, and send him, at the head of a fresh army of mercenaries, to restore their affairs in Sicily. But though he succeeded in cutting off two bodies of mercenary troops, in the service of Syracuse, he was unable to prevent the destruction of Mamercus of Catana, and Hicetas of Leontini, the two chief allies of the Carthaginians; and shortly afterwards the ambassadors who had been se
HAMILCAR 3. One of the commanders of the great Carthaginian army, which was defeated by Timoleon at the passage of the Crimissus, B. C. 339. (Plut. Tim. 25.) The fate of the generals in that action (for the particulars of which see TIMOLEON) is not mentioned; but it seems probable, from the terms in which Plutarch shortly after speaks of the appointment of Gisco to the command (Ibid. 30), that they both perished.
Hasdrubal 3. One of the commanders of the great Carthaginian army which was defeated by Timoleon at the river Crimissus, in B. C. 339. [TIMOLEON]. Plutarch, the only author who mentions the names of the Carthaginian generals, on this occasion (Timol. 25) does not tell us what became of them.
2, 13, 16-20; Diod. 16.68-70, who, however, erroneously places the departure of Mago before the surrender of Dionysius.) Hicetas was now unable to prevent Timoleon from making himself wholly master of Syracuse ; and the latter, as soon as he had settled affairs there, turned his arms against Leontini; and would probably have succeeded in expelling Hicetas from thence also, had not the Carthaginian invasion for a time required all his attention. But after his great victory at the Crimissus (B. C. 339), he soon resumed his project of freeing Sicily altogether from the tyrants. Hicetas had concluded a league with Mamercus, ruler of Catana, and they were supported by a body of Carthaginian auxiliaries sent them by Gisco; but though they at first gained some partial successes, Hicetas was totally defeated by Timoleon at the river Damurias, and soon after fell into the hands of the enemy, by whom he was put to death, together with his son Eupolemus. His wife and daughters were carried to Sy
Mamerci'nus 10. TIB. AEMILIUS TIB. F. TIB. N. MAMERCINUS, consul B. C. 339 with Q. Publilius Philo. Aemilius, invested his colleague with the dictatorship, for the purpose of depriving the curiae of a great part of their power. (See Dict. of Ant. s. v. Publiliae Leges.) Livy attributes the appointment of Publilius by Aemilius to disappointment on the part of the latter, who had been refused a triumph by the senate; but respecting the real reason for this step, see Niebuhr, Hist. of Rome, vol. iii. p. 146, &c. (Liv. 8.12.)
Mamercus (*Ma/merkos), tyrant of Catana, at the time when Timoleon landed in Sicily, B. C. 344. He is termed by Plutarch a man both warlike and wealthy. After the defeat of Hicetas at Adranum by Timoleon, Mamercus joined the latter and concluded a treaty of alliance with him. But when Timoleon had not only made himself master of Syracuse, but defeated the Carthaginians in the great battle of the Crimissus (B. C. 339), Mamercus became apprehensive that his object was nothing less than the complete expulsion of all the tyrants from Sicily, and in consequence concluded a league with Hicetas and the Carthaginians to oppose his progress. They at first obtained a partial success, and cut to pieces a body of mercenaries in the Syracusan service; but Hicetas was defeated by Timoleon, and soon after fell into his hands; after which the Corinthian leader marched against Catana. Mamercus met him in the field, but was defeated with heavy loss, and the Carthaginians now concluded a peace with Tim
1 2