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

CLEOMENES.
party. Archidamus had thus become the rightful
heir to the throne of the Proclidae, and he was
invited by Cleomenes to return; but no sooner
had he set foot in Sparta than he was assassinated.
This crime also is charged upon Cleomenes by the
Achaean party, and among them by Polybius.
The truth cannot now be ascertained, but every
circumstance of the case seems to fix the guilt
upon the Ephors. Cleomenes had everything to
hope, and the Ephors everything to fear, from the
association of Archidamus in his councils. Cleomenes, it is true, did nothing to avenge the crime:
but the reason of this was, that the time for his
attack upon the Ephors was not yet come; and
thus, instead of an evidence of his guilt, it is
a striking proof of his patient resolution, that he
submitted to incur such a suspicion rather than to
peril the object of his life by a premature movement. On the contrary, he did everything to appease the party of the Ephors. He bribed them
largely, by the help of his mother Cratesicleia, who
even went so far as to marry one of the chief men
of the oligarchical party. Through the influence
thus gained, Cleomenes was permitted to continue
the war; he took Leuctra, and gained a decisive
victory over Aratus beneath its walls, owing to the
impetuosity of Lydiadas, who was killed in the
battle. The conduct of Aratus, in leaving Lydiadas
unsupported, though perhaps it saved his army,
disgusted and dispirited the Achaeans to such a
degree, that they made no further efforts during
this campaign, and Cleomenes was left at leisure
to effect his long-cherished revolution during the
winter which now came on. (B. c. 226-225.)
Having secured the aid of his father-in-law,
Megistonus, and of two or three other persons, he
first weakened the oligarchical party by drafting
many of its chief supporters into his army, with
which he then again took the field, seized the
Achaean cities of Heraea and Asea, threw supplies
into Orchomenus, beleaguered Mantineia, and so
wearied out his soldiers, that they were glad to be
left in Arcadia, while Cleomenes himself marched
back to Sparta at the head of a force of mercenaries,
surprised the Ephors at table, and slew all of them,
except Agesilaus, who took sanctuary in the temple
of Fear, and had his life granted afterwards by
Cleomenes. Having struck this decisive blow, and
being supported not only by his mercenaries, but
also by the remains of the party of Agis, Cleomenes met with no further resistance. He now
propounded his new constitution, which is too
closely connected with the whole subject of the
Spartan polity to be explained within the limits of
this article. All that can be said here is, that he
extended the power of the kings, abolished the
Ephorate, restored the community of goods, made
a new division of the lands, and recruited the body
of the citizens, by bringing back the exiles and by
raising to the full franchise the most deserving of
those who had not before possessed it. He also
restored, to a great extent, the ancient Spartan
system of social and military discipline. In the
completion of this reform he was aided by the philosopher Sphaerus. The line of the Proclidae
being extinct, he took his brother Eucleidas for his
colleague in the kingdom. In his own conduct he
set a fine example of the simple virtue of an old
Spartan.
From thi's period must be dated the contest betCwoon the Achaeans and Cleomenes for the supre

CLEOMENES. 795
macy of Greece, which Polybius calls the Cleomenic
war, and which lasted three years, from B. c. 225
to the battle of Sellasia in the spring of B. c. 222.
For its details, of which a slight sketch is given
under ARATUS, the reader is referred to the historians. Amidst a career of brilliant success, Cleomenes committed some errors, but, even if he had
avoided them, he could not but have been overpowered by the united force of Macedonia and the
Achaean league. The moral character of the war
is condensed by Niebuhr into one just and forcible
sentence: -" Old Aratus sacrificed the freedom of
his country by an act of high treason, and gave up
Corinth rather than establish the freedom of Greece
by a union among the Peloponnesians, which.
would have secured to Cleomenes the influence
and power he deserved." (IHistory of Roeme, iv.
p. 226.)
From the defeat of Sellasia, Cleomenes returned
to Sparta, and having advised the citizens to submit to Antigonus, he fled to his ally, Ptolemy Euergetes, at Alexandria, where his mother and
children were already residing as hostages. Any
hope he might have had of recovering his kingdom
by the help of Ptolemy Euergetes was defeated by
the death of that king, whose successor, Ptolemy
Philopator, treated Cleonmenes with the greatest
neglect, and his minister, Sosibius, imprisoned him
on a charge of conspiracy against the king's life.
Cleomenes, with his attendants, escaped from
prison, and attempted to raise an insurrection
against Ptolemy, but finding no one join him, he
put himself to death. (B. c. 221-220.) His reign
lasted 16 years. He is rightly reckoned by Pansanias (iii. 6. ~ 5) as the last of the Agidae, for
his nominal successor, Agesipolis III., was a mere
puppet. He was the last truly great man of
Sparta, and, excepting perhaps Philopoemeir, of all
Greece.
(Plutarch, Cleonz., Arat.; Polyb. ii. v., &c.;
Droysen, Gesclhichte dcler Hellenissmus, vol. ii. bk. ii.
c. 4; Manso, Sparta, vol. iii.) [P. S.]
CLEO'MENES (KAeo0iiqs), Spartans of the
royal family of the Agidae, but not kings.
1. Son of the general Pausanias, brother of
king Pleistoanax, and uncle of king Pausanias, led
the Peloponnesian army in their fourth invasion of
Attica, in the fifth year of the Peloponnesian war.
(B. c. 427.) Cleomenes acted in place of his
nephew, Pausanias, who was a minor. (Thucyd.
iii. 26, and Schol.)
2. Son of Cleombrotus II., and uncle and guardian of Agesipolis III., B. c. 219. (Polyb. iv. 35,
~ 12; AGESIPOLIS III., CLEOMBROTUS II.) [P.S.]
CLEO'MENES, a Greek of Naucratis in Egypt,
was appointed by Alexander the Great as nomarch
of the Arabian district (vodpos) of Egypt and receiver of -the tributes from all the districts of
Egypt and the neighbouring part of Africa. (a. c.
331.) Some of the ancient writers say that Alexander made him satrap of Egypt; but this is incorrect, for Arrian expressly states, that the other
nomarchs were independent of him, except that
they had to pay to him the tributes of their districts. It would, however, appear that he had no
difficulty in extending his depredations over all
Egypt, and it is not unlikely that he would assume
the title of satrap. His rapacity knew no bounds;
he exercised his office solely for his own advantage.
On the occurrence of a scarcity of corn, which was
less severe in Egypt than in the neighbouring

I