), of Cardia,
an historian who is frequently cited as one of the chief authorities for the history of the times immediately following the death of Alexander
He had himself taken an active part in the events of that period. Whether he had accompanied his fellow-citizen Eumenes during the campaigns of Alexander
we have no distinct testimony, but after the death of that prince, we find him not only attached to the service of his countryman, but already enjoying a high place in his confidence.
It seems probable also from the terms in which he is alluded to as describing the magnificent bier or funeral car of Alexander
, that his admiration was that of an eye-witness, and that he was present at Babylon at the time of its construction. (Athen. 5.206
; comp. Diod. 18.26
The first express mention of him occurs in B. C. 320, when he was sent by Eumenes, at that time shut up in the castle of Nora, at the head of the deputation which he despatched to Antipater.
But before he could return to Eumenes, the death of the regent produced a complete change in the relative position of parties, and Antigonus, now desirous to conciliate Eumenes, charged Hieronymus to be the bearer of friendly offers and protestations to his friend and countryman. (Diod. 18.42
; Plut. Eum. 12
But though Hieronymus was so far gained over by Antigonus as to undertake this embassy, yet in the struggle that ensued he adhered steadily to the cause of Eumenes, and accompanied that leader until his final captivity.
In the last battle in Gabiene (B. C. 316) Hieronymus himself was wounded, and fell a prisoner into the hands of Antigonus, who treated him with the utmost kindness, and to whose service he henceforth attached himself. (Diod. 19.44
.) In B. C. 312, we find him entrusted by that monarch with the charge of collecting bitumen from the Dead Sea, a project which was frustrated by the hostility of the neighbouring Arabs. (Id. 19.100.)
The statement of Josephus (c. Apion.
1.23) that he was at one time appointed by Antigonus to the government of Syria, is in all probability erroneous.
After the death of Antigonus, Hieronymus continued to follow the fortunes of his son Demetrius, and he is again mentioned in B. C. 292 as being appointed by the latter governor or harmost of Boeotia, after his first conquest of Thebes. (Plut. Demetr. 39
.) Whether he was reinstated in this office when Thebes, after shaking off the yoke for a while, fell again under the power of Demetrius, we are not told, nor have we any information concerning the remaining events of his long life; but it may be inferred, from the hostility towards Lysimachus and Pyrrhus evinced by his writings at a period long subsequent, that he continued unshaken in his attachment to Demetrius and to his son, Antigonus Gonatas, after him.
It appears that he survived Pyrrhns, whose death, in B. C. 272, was mentioned in his history (Paus. 1.13.9
), and died at the advanced age of 104, having had the unusual advantage of retaining his strength and faculties unimpaired to the last. (Lucian. Macrob.
History of the Epigoni
The historical work of Hieronymus is cited under various titles (ὁ τὰς τῶν διαδόχων ἱστορίας γεγραφώς
, Diod. 18.42
; ἐν τῇ περὶ τῶν ἐπιγόνων πραγματείᾳ
, Dionys. A. R. 1.6
), and these have sometimes been regarded as constituting separate works; but it seems probable, on the whole, that he wrote but one general work, comprising the history from the death of Alexander
to that of Pyrrhus, if not later. Whether he gave any detailed account of the wars of Alexander
himself is at least doubtful, for the few facts cited from him previous to the death of that monarch are such as might easily have been incidentally mentioned ; and the passage in Suidas (s. v. Ἱερώνυμος
), which is quoted by Fabricius to prove that he wrote a history of that prince, is manifestly corrupt, Probably we should read τὰ ἐπ᾽ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ
, instead of τὰ ὑπ᾽ Ἀλεξάνδρου
, as proposed by Fabricius. Nor is there any reason to infer (as has been done by the Abbé Sévin, Mém.. de l'Acad. des Inscr.
vol. xiii. p. 32), that his history of Pyrrhus formed a distinct work, though he is repeatedly cited by Plutarch as an authority in his life of that prince. (Plut. Pyrrh. 17
It was in this part of his work, also, that he naturally found occasion to touch upon the affairs of Rome, and he is consequently mentioned by Dionysius as one of the first Greek writers who had given any account of the history of that city (Dionys. A. R. 1.6
But that Dionysius himself did not follow his authority in regard to the expedition of Pyrrhus to Italy is clear from the passages of Plutarch already cited, in which the statements of the two are contrasted. Hieronymus is enumerated by Dionysius (de comp.
4) among the writers whose defective style rendered it almost impossible to read them through.
He is also severely censured by Pausanias for his partiality to Antigonus and Demetrius, and the injustice he displayed in consequence in regard to Pyrrhus and Lysimachus. Towards the latter monarch, indeed, he had an additional cause of enmity, on account of Lysimachus having destroyed his native city of Cardia to make way for the foundation of Lysimacheia. (Paus. 1.9.8
There can be little doubt that the history of Alexander's
immediate successors (the διάδοχοι
), which has descended to us, is derived in great part from Hieronymus, but it is impossible to determine to what extent his authority was followed by Diodorus and Plutarch.
On the importance of Hieronymus, see Heyne, De Font. Diodori,
p. cxiv. in Dindorf's edition of Diodorus; and concerning Hieronymus in general, Vossius, de Historicis Graecis,
p. 99, ed. Westermann; Sévin, Recherches sur la Vie et les Ouvrages de Jerome de Cardie,
in the Mém. de l'Acad. d'Inscr.
vol. xiii. p. 20, &c. ; and Droysen, Hellenism.
vol. i. pp. 670, 683.