A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

BATT US.
croachments on the Libyan tribes, the latter, under
Adicran, their king, surrendered themselves to
Apries, king of Egypt, and claimed his protection.
A battle ensued in the region of Irasa, B. c. 570,
in which the Egyptians were defeated,-this being
the first time, according to Herodotus (iv. 159),
that they had ever come into hostile collision with
Greeks. (Comp. Herod. ii. 161; Diod. i. 68.) This
battle seems to have finished the war with Egypt;
for we read in Herodotus (ii. 181), that Amasis
formed a marriage with Ladice, a Cyrenaean woman, daughter perhaps of Battus II. (Wesseling,
ad Herod. 1. c.), and, in other ways as well, cultivated friendly relations with the Cyrenaeans. By
the same victory too the sovereignty of Cyrene
over the Libyans was confirmed. (Comp. Herod.
iv. 160, where their revolt from Arcesilaus II. is
spoken of.) It was in this reign also, according to
a probable conjecture of Thrige's (~ 30), that Cyrene began to occupy the neighbouring region with
her colonies, which seem to have been numerous.
(Pind. Pyth. iv. 20, 34, v. 20.) The period of the
death of Battus II. it is impossible to settle with
exactness. We know only that his reign lasted
beyond the year 570 B. c.; and it is pure conjecture which would assign the end of it, with Thrige,
to 560, or, with Bouhier and Larcher, to 554.
(Thrige, ~ 29; Larcher, ad Herod. iv. 163.)
4. ARCESILAUS II., son of Battus II., was surnamed "the oppressive" (Xahe,rds), from his attempting probably to substitute a tyranny for the
Cyrenaean constitution, which had hitherto been
similar to that of Sparta. It was perhaps from
this cause that the dissensions arose between himself and his brothers, in consequence of which the
latter withdrew from Cyrene, and founded Barca,
at the same time exciting the Libyan tribes to revolt from Arcesilaus, who, in his attempt to quell
this rebellion, suffered a signal defeat at Leucon or
Leucoe, a place in the region of Marmarica. IHe
met his end at last by treachery, being strangled by
his brother or friend, Learchus. His wife, Eryxo,
however, soon after avenged his death by the murder of his assassin. His reign lasted, according to
some, from 560 to 550 B. c.; according to others,
from 554 to 544. (Herod. iv. 160; Diod. Exc. de
Virt. et Vit. p. 232; Plut. de Virt. Mul. pp. 260,
261; Thrige, ~~ 35, 37.)
5. BATTUS III., or "the lame" (XwAO's), son of
Arcesilaus II., reigned from B. c. 550 to 530, or,
as some state it, from 544 to 529. In his time,
the Cyrenaeans, weakened by internal seditions,
apprehensive of assaults from Libya and Egypt,
and distressed too perhaps by the consciousness of
the king's inefficiency, invited Demonax, a Mantinean, by the advice of the Delphic oracle, to settle
the constitution of the city. The conflicting claims
of the original colonists with those of the later settlers, and the due distribution of power between
the sovereign and the commonalty, were the main
difficulties with which he had to deal. With respect to the former point, he substituted for the old
division of tribes an entirely new one, in which
however some privileges, in regard to their relation
to the UHeploecol, were reserved to those of Theraean
descent; while the royal power he reduced within
very narrow limits, leaving to the king only certain selected lands, and the enjoyment of some
priestly functions (TrEAve ca Kal pwaodvas), with the
privilege probably (see Herod. iv. 165) of presidency in the council. We hear nothing more

BATTUS. 477
recorded of Battus III. The diminution of the
kingly power in his reign is not to be wondered at,
when we remember that the two main causes assigned by Aristotle (Polit. v. 10, ad fin. ed. Bekk.)
for the overthrow of monarchy had been, as we
have seen, in full operation at Cyrene,-viz. quarrels in the royal family, and the attempt to establish a tyrannical government. (Herod. iv. 161;
Diod.. c.; Plut. 1. c.; Thrige, ~ 38; Miller, Dor.
iii. 4. ~ 5, iii. 9. ~ 13.)
6. ARCESILAUS III., son of Battus III. by
Pheretime, reigned, according to Thrige (~ 39),
from 530 to about 514 B. c. In the early part of
his reign he was driven from Cyrene in an attempt
to recover the ancient royal privileges, and, taking
refuge in Samos, returned with a number of auxiliaries, whom he had attached to his cause by the
promise of a new division of lands. With their
aid he regained the throne; on which, besides
taking the most cruel vengeance on his enemies,
he endeavoured further to strengthen himself by
making submission to Cambyses, and stipulating
to pay him tribute, B. c. 525. (Herod. iv. 162 -165, comp. iii. 13, 91, ii. 181.) Terrified, however, according to Herodotus (iv. 164), at the discovery that he had subjected himself to the woe
denounced against him, under certain conditions,
by an obscure oracle (comp. iv. 163), or, more probably, being driven out by his subjects, who were
exasperated at his submission to the Persians (see
iv. 165, ad fin.), he fled to Alazir, king of Barca,
whose daughter he had married, and was there
slain, together with his father-in-law, by the Barcaeans and some Cyrenaean exiles. (Herod. iv
164, 167; see Thrige, ~~ 39-41.)
7. BATTUS IV. is called " the Handsome" (d
Ka6ds) by Heracleides Ponticus. (See Thrige, ~ 38,
n. 3. ~ 42.) It has been doubted by some whether
there were any kings of the family after Arcesilaus
III., but this point seems to be settled by Herodotus (iv. 163) and by Pindar. (Pylt. iv. 115.)
The opinion of those, who suppose the names of
two kings to have been omitted by Herodotus between Arcesilaus I. and Battus " the lame," has
been noticed above. Of Battus IV. we know nothing. It is not improbable, however, that he
was the son of Arcesilaus III., and was in possession of the throne at the period of the capture of
Barca by the Persians, about 512 B. c. (Herod.
iv. 203.) At least the peaceable admission of the
latter into Cyrene (Herod. 1. c.) may seem to point
to the prevalence there of a MIedizing policy, such
as we might expect from a son or near relative of
Arcesilaus III. The chronology of this reign is
involved in as much obscurity as the events of it,
and it is impossible therefore to assign any exact
date either to its beginning or its end. (See Thrige,
~~ 42-44.)
8. ARCESILAUS IV., son probably of Battus IV.,
is the prince whose victory in the chariot-race at
the Pythian games, B. c. 466, is celebrated by
Pindar in his 4th and 5th Pythian odes; and
these, in fact, together with the Scholia upon them,
are our sole authority for the life and reign of this
last of the Battiadae. From them, even in the
midst of all the praises of him which they contain,
it appears, that he endeavoured to make himself
despotic, and had recourse, among other means, to
the expedient (a favourite one with tyrants, see
Aristot. Polit. iii. 13, v. 10, 11, ed. Bekk.) of
ridding himself of the nobles of the state. Indeed