Demetrius III Eucaerus

Template:Short description Template:Redirect Template:Featured article Template:Use dmy dates Template:Infobox royalty

Demetrius III Theos Philopator Soter Philometor Euergetes Callinicus (Template:Langx, surnamed Eucaerus; between 124 and 109 BCTemplate:Sndafter 87 BC) was a Hellenistic Seleucid monarch who reigned as the King of Syria between 96 and 87 BC. He was a son of Antiochus VIII and, most likely, his Egyptian wife Tryphaena. Demetrius III's early life was spent in a period of civil war between his father and his uncle Antiochus IX, which ended with the assassination of Antiochus VIII in 96 BC. After the death of their father, Demetrius III took control of Damascus while his brother Seleucus VI prepared for war against Antiochus IX, who occupied the Syrian capital Antioch.

The civil war dragged on; Seleucus VI eliminated his uncle, whose heir Antiochus X counterattacked and drove Seleucus VI to his death. Then the twins Antiochus XI and Philip I, brothers of Demetrius III, attempted to avenge Seleucus VI; it ended with the death of Antiochus XI and the interference of Demetrius III on the side of Philip I in a war against Antiochus X that probably lasted until 88 BC. In 89 BC, Demetrius III invaded Judaea and crushed the forces of its king, Alexander Jannaeus; his near victory was cut short by the death of Antiochus X. Demetrius III rushed to Antioch before Philip I could take advantage of the power vacuum and strengthen his position relative to Demetrius III.

By 87 BC, Demetrius III had most of Syria under his authority. He attempted to appease the public by promoting the importance of the local Semitic gods, and he may have given Damascus the dynastic name Demetrias. By late 87 BC, Demetrius III attacked Philip I in the city of Beroea, where Philip I's allies called on the Parthians for help. The allied forces routed Demetrius III and besieged him in his camp; he was forced to surrender and spent the rest of his life in exile in Parthia. Philip I took Antioch, while Antiochus XII, another brother of Demetrius III, took Damascus.

Background, family and early lifeEdit

File:Antiochus VIII.jpg

Coin of Antiochus VIII, father of Demetrius III

The Seleucid Empire, based in Syria, disintegrated in the second century BC as a result of dynastic feuds and Egyptian interference.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn A long civil war caused the nation to fragment as pretenders from the royal family fought for the throne.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn This lasted until about 123 BC, when Antiochus VIII provided a degree of stability which lasted for a decade.Template:Sfn To maintain a degree of peace, Egypt and Syria attempted dynastic marriages,Template:Sfn which helped Egypt destabilise Syria by supporting one candidate to the throne over another.Template:Sfn In 124 BC, the Egyptian princess Tryphaena was married to Antiochus VIII.Template:Sfn Five sons were born to the couple: Seleucus VI, the twins Antiochus XI and Philip I, Demetrius III and Antiochus XII.<ref group="note">Ancient sources do not mention the name of Demetrius III's mother, but it is generally assumed by modern scholars that she was Tryphaena, who was mentioned explicitly by Porphyry as the mother of Demetrius III's siblings Antiochus XI and Philip I.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn

In 113 BC, Antiochus VIII's half-brother Antiochus IX declared himself king; the siblings fought relentlessly for a decade and a half.Template:Sfn Antiochus IX killed Tryphaena in 109 BC.Template:Sfn Antiochus VIII was assassinated in 96 BC;Template:Sfn this date is deduced from the statement of the first century historian Josephus, who wrote that Antiochus VIII, who assumed the throne in 125 BC, ruled for twenty-nine years, and is corroborated by the third century historian Porphyry, who gave the Seleucid year (SE) 216 (97/96 BC) for Antiochus VIII's death.<ref group="note">Some dates in the article are given according to the Seleucid era which is indicated when two years have a slash separating them. Each Seleucid year started in the late autumn of a Gregorian year; thus, a Seleucid year overlaps two Gregorian ones.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Following the death of his brother, Antiochus IX took the Syrian capital, Antioch,Template:Sfn while Seleucus VI, established in Cilicia, prepared for war against his uncle.Template:Sfn In modern literature, Seleucus VI is considered the eldest son,<ref group="note">It was customary to name the eldest son after the dynasty's founder Seleucus I, while a younger son would be named Antiochus.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn and Demetrius III is considered younger than Antiochus XI and Philip I.Template:Sfn However, almost nothing is known about the early life of Demetrius III, who might have been the eldest son himself.Template:Sfn According to Josephus, before assuming the throne, Demetrius III lived in the city of Knidos.Template:Sfn

ReignEdit

Antiochus IX did not take Damascus following the death of his brother; he was probably focused on the threat of Seleucus VI and could not spare the resources for an occupation of Damascus. This eased Demetrius III's elevation to the throne; he took Damascus in 96 BC.Template:Sfn The earliest coins struck in the name of Demetrius were produced in Damascus in 216 SE (97/96 BC);Template:Sfn only one Damascene obverse die is known from 216 SE (97/96 BC), indicating that Demetrius's reign started late that year, giving him little time to produce more dies.Template:Sfn The only ancient works of literature dealing with Demetrius III's career are those of Josephus and the Pesher Nahum, a sectarian commentary on the Book of Nahum.Template:Sfn Historian Kay Ehling noted that Josephus's account is a condensed summary and the actual course of events surrounding Demetrius III's seizure of power needs to be reconstructed.Template:Sfn Thus, interpreting the numismatic evidence is instrumental for the problematic chronological reconstruction of Demetrius III's reign.Template:Sfn

Name and royal titularyEdit

Demetrius (translit. {{#invoke:Lang|lang}}) is a Greek name that means "belonging to Demeter", the Greek goddess of fertility.Template:Sfn Seleucid kings were mostly named Seleucus and Antiochus; "Demetrius" was used by the Antigonid dynasty of Macedonia as a royal name, and its use by the Seleucids, who had Antigonid descent, probably signified that they were heirs of the latter.Template:Sfn Hellenistic kings did not use regnal numbers, which is a modern practice; instead, they used epithets to distinguish themselves from similarly named monarchs.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Demetrius III's most used epithets are Theos (divine), Philopator (father loving) and Soter (saviour);Template:Sfn the aforementioned epithets appear together on all his Damascene and Antiochene coins.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn In Cilicia, two epithets were used in conjunction: Philometor (mother-loving) and Euergetes (benefactor).Template:Sfn The coins from Seleucia Pieria bear three epithets together: the ones appearing on the coins of Cilicia, combined with the epithet Callinicus (nobly victorious).Template:Sfn Theos Philopator Soter served to emphasise Demetrius III's descent from the line of his grandfather Demetrius II who bore the epithet Theos; Soter was an epithet of Demetrius III's great-grandfather Demetrius I,<ref group="note">It is also possible that Demetrius III was claiming to be the saviour of Damascus, protecting it from the Judaeans, Nabataeans and the Itureans.Template:Sfn</ref> while Philopator represented his devotion to his deceased father Antiochus VIII.Template:Sfn With Philometor, Demetrius III probably sought to emphasise his Ptolemaic royal Egyptian descent through his mother Tryphaena.Template:Sfn

Eucaerus is a popular nickname used by the majority of modern historians to denote Demetrius III, but it is a mistranscription of the nickname given by Josephus in his works The Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews. The earliest Greek manuscripts of Josephus's works contain the nickname Akairos in three places. Eucaerus appeared as a later development, and is attested in the Latin versions of the manuscripts.<ref group="note">Eucaerus also appears in the tables of contents written in the sixth century for the older Greek manuscripts. Those tables are actually summaries of the main text;Template:Sfn they sometimes contain discrepancies with the main work.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn It was probably a copyist, thinking that Akairos was a mistake and trying to correct it, that led to the appearance of Eucaerus.Template:Sfn Eucaerus translates to "well-timed", while Akairos means "the untimely one".Template:Sfn Josephus did not explain the origin of Akairos.Template:Sfn Such popular nicknames are never found on coins, but are handed down only through ancient literature;Template:Sfn neither Eucaerus or Akairos was used by Demetrius III on his coinage.Template:Sfn Josephus is the only source for the nickname; in the view of historians David Levenson and Thomas Martin, Eucaerus should not be used to refer to Demetrius; instead, Akairos, or one of his official epithets should be used.Template:Sfn

Manner of successionEdit

According to Josephus, Tryphaena's brother Ptolemy IX of Egypt installed Demetrius III in Damascus following the death of Antiochus XI Epiphanes in 93 BC; this statement cannot be correct as the date given by Josephus contradicts the numismatic evidence from Damascus.Template:Sfn Despite the chronological error, several arguments justify the theory of a collaboration between Ptolemy IX and Demetrius III;Template:Sfn according to Ehling, the assumption of the epithet Philometor (mother loving) was meant to highlight Demetrius III's relation to his uncle Ptolemy IX.Template:Sfn Two main reconstructions of Demetrius III's rise to power exist:

Demetrius III started his reign in Damascus: the numismatist Oliver Hoover viewed the ascendance of Demetrius III in the context of the war of sceptres, a military conflict between Ptolemy IX and his mother Cleopatra III, who was allied with Alexander Jannaeus of Judaea. This war took place in Coele-Syria and ended in 101 BC; Ptolemy IX was defeated and retreated to Cyprus. However, Hoover noted that Josephus synchronised the retreat of Ptolemy IX with the death of Antiochus VIII in 97/96 BC; such a synchronisation is perceived as imprecise by many scholars, but Hoover suggested that Josephus consciously associated the two events. According to Hoover, Josephus's account regarding Ptolemy IX's installation of Demetrius III in Damascus indicates that the Egyptian monarch did not evacuate Syria after the conclusion of his war with Cleopatra III, or that he perhaps invaded a second time to help Demetrius III following the death of his father. Ptolemy IX probably hoped to use his nephew as an agent in the region; if Demetrius III was installed by his uncle in Damascus in 216 SE (97/96 BC), then Josephus's synchronisation between Ptolemy IX's departure and the death of Antiochus VIII is correct.Template:Sfn

File:Demetrios III of syria.jpg

Coin of Demetrius III from Seleucia Pieria

File:Demetrius III akairos.jpg

Damascene coin of Demetrius III. Atargatis depicted on the reverse.

Demetrius III took Antioch before Damascus: Ehling proposed a different reconstruction of events; he contested the dating of Antiochus VIII's death to 96 BC based on Demetrius III's earliest dated coins and argued in favour of 215 SE (98/97 BC) for the former's death and the latter's succession.Template:Sfn Ehling's argument agrees with the view of the numismatist Arthur Houghton,Template:Sfn who noted that the volume of coins minted by Seleucus VI, the immediate successor of Antiochus VIII, before his takeover of Antioch in 95 BC, surpassed any other mint known from the late Seleucid period.Template:Sfn This led Houghton to suggest 98 or 97 BC instead of 96 BC for the death of Antiochus VIII as one year was not enough for Seleucus VI to produce his coins.Template:Sfn Hoover rejected the new dating, noting that it was not rare for a king to double his production in a single year during military campaigns, which was the case for Seleucus VI, who was preparing for war against his uncle Antiochus IX.Template:Sfn The academic consensus prefers 96 BC for the death of Antiochus VIII.Template:Sfn

Ehling's construction of Demetrius III's early reign has Demetrius III declaring himself king immediately after the death of his fatherTemplate:Sfn with the help of Ptolemy IX, who, in the view of Ehling, probably supported his nephew with money, troops and ships.Template:Sfn Demetrius III landed in Seleucia Pieria, whose inhabitants were known for being Ptolemaic sympathisers, and was crowned king.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Demetrius III next took Antioch and spent a few weeks in the city before the arrival of Antiochus IX.Template:Sfn Demetrius III then marched on Damascus and made it his capital in 97 BC.Template:Sfn Ehling's argument is based on coins bearing the epithets Philometor Euergetes, which were attributed by some numismatists to Antioch,Template:Sfn but are likely Cilician.<ref group="note">The coins Ehling agreed to their Antiochene origin are: a coin with the number 390 in the CSE (Coins of the Seleucid Empire in the Collection of Arthur Houghton) and the number 434 in the SMA (The Seleucid Mint of Antioch)Template:Sndplus a bronze coin coded CSE 391.Template:Sfn The numismatists Houghton, Catherine Lorber and Hoover attributed CSE 390 (SMA 434) to Tarsus,Template:Sfn and CSE 391 to Seleucia Pieria; the latter probably had the epithet Callinicus inscribed but some letters are missing due to damage.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Since all the Damascene coins of Demetrius, which ceased production when the monarch lost his throne, carried dates from 216 SE (97/96 BC) to 225 SE (88/87 BC), and the coins bearing the epithets Philometor Euregetes from Antioch bear no dates, then it is logical, in the view of Ehling, to assume that the Antiochene issues preceded the Damascene one.Template:Sfn Ehling explained the change of royal titulary from Philometor Euergetes Callinicus in the north to Theos Philopator Soter in Damascus as a sign of a break between Demetrius III and Ptolemy IX; the Syrian king cast aside the epithet Philometor, which emphasised his mother's Ptolemaic ancestry, and instead invoked his father's heritage by assuming the epithet Philopator.Template:Sfn On the other hand, the majority of numismatists date Demetrius III's Antiochene coins to the year 225 SE (88/87 BC).Template:Sfn Template:Sfn

PolicyEdit

File:Demetrias Damascus.jpg

Coin from Demetrias

File:Demetrios III Eukairos. 97-87 BC.jpg

Demetrius III wearing the radiate crown

Demetrius III seems to have been content with leaving the struggle against Antiochus IX and his heirs to his brothers; he took advantage of the chaos in the north to consolidate his authority in Damascus.Template:Sfn Drawing his legitimacy from his father, he appeared on his coinage with an exaggerated hawked nose in the likeness of Antiochus VIII.Template:Sfn Coins from a city named Demetrias, bearing on their reverse a portrait of the Tyche of Damascus, are evidence that Demetrius III might have refounded Damascus and given it the dynastic name Demetrias.<ref group="note">It is not certain that the founder was Demetrius III; it could have been Demetrius II or Antiochus VIII.Template:Sfn The historian Alfred Bellinger rejected the identification of a king's portrait on one of Demetrias' coins with Demetrius III or that he refounded it.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Damascene coins mention the city as "holy"; it must have been a privilege bestowed upon it by Demetrius III who possibly also conferred the right of asylum on his capital.Template:Sfn

Seleucid kings mostly depicted Greek gods on their coinage,Template:Sfn but Demetrius III ruled a contracted realm, where the local cults gained more importance as the Seleucids no longer ruled a heterogeneous kingdom.Template:Sfn Local cults came under royal patronage as Seleucid kings attempted to gain the support of their non-Greek subjects.Template:Sfn On his royal silver coins from Damascus, the supreme Semitic goddess Atargatis appeared on the reverse,Template:Sfn while municipal coins continued to use the portraits of traditional Greek deities.Template:Sfn The radiate crown, a sign of divinity,Template:Sfn was employed by Demetrius III on some of his coins; this can be an indication that he ritually married Atargatis.<ref group="note">Historian Nicholas L. Wright proposed the hypothesis regarding the connection between the Seleucid radiate crowns and Atargatis. He considered it likely, but difficult to prove, that a radiate crown indicates a ritual marriage between the goddess and a king.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Marrying the supreme goddess indicated that the king considered himself the manifestation of Syria's supreme god and Atargatis' partner, Hadad.Template:Sfn The practise was started at an unknown date by Antiochus IV (died 164 BC), the first king to employ the radiate crown, who chose Hierapolis-Bambyce, Atargatis's most important sanctuary, to ritually marry Diana, the manifestation of Atargatis in Syria.Template:Sfn

As was typical for a Seleucid king, Demetrius III aimed to acquire as much territory as possible and sought to expand his domains in Syria.Template:Sfn The city of Gadara was conquered by Alexander Jannaeus in 100 BC,Template:Sfn but the city freed itself and reverted to the Seleucids after the defeat of the Judaean king at the hands of the Nabataeans,Template:Sfn an event that happened in 93 BC at the latest.<ref group="note">The Nabataean king Obodas I defeated the Judaeans at some point before 93 BC; this is deduced from the account of Josephus, who stated that following the defeat, Alexander Jannaeus was caught in a civil war that lasted six years. Since this civil war ended only with the intervention of Demetrius III, who lost his throne in 87 BC, then the year 93 BC is the terminus ante quem for the defeat.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Gadara was of great strategic importance for Demetrius III as a major military hub for operations in the south; controlling it was vital to the war effort against the Judaeans.Template:Sfn

The struggle against Antiochus XEdit

File:Syria under the Seleucids 92 BC.svg

Divided Syria Template:Circa

In 95 BC, Seleucus VI entered Antioch after defeating and killing Antiochus IX,Template:Sfn whose son Antiochus X fled to Aradus and declared himself king.Template:Sfn In 94 BC, Seleucus VI was driven out of the capital by Antiochus X;Template:Sfn the former escaped to the Cilician city of Mopsuestia where he perished during a local uprising.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Antiochus XI and Philip I avenged Seleucus VI,Template:Sfn and Antiochus XI drove Antiochus X out of the capital in 93 BC.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Antiochus X was able to regain the city and kill Antiochus XI the same year.Template:Sfn In the spring of 93 BC, Demetrius III marched in support of his brother Philip I;Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Demetrius III might have marched north earlier to support Antiochus XI in his final battle.Template:Sfn

According to Josephus, Demetrius III and Philip I waged a fierce war against Antiochus X;Template:Sfn the language of Josephus indicates that Antiochus X was in a defensive position rather than planning massive campaigns against his cousins.Template:Sfn In 220 SE (93/92 BC), no coins were produced for Demetrius III in Damascus; this could mean that he lost control over the city.Template:Sfn It is possible that either the Judaeans or the Nabataeans took advantage of Demetrius III's departure to help his brother and occupied the city;Template:Sfn the King regained Damascus in 221 SE (92/91 BC).<ref group="note">According to Hoover, the account of Josephus regarding the installation of Demetrius III in Damascus by Ptolemy IX following the death of Antiochus XI might actually be a conflation of two actions by the Egyptian king; an initial support in 216 SE (97/96 BC), and a second one in 221 SE (92/91 BC).Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Antiochus X's date of death is unknown; traditional scholarship, with no evidence, gives the year 92 BC,Template:Sfn then has Demetrius taking control of Antioch and ruling it for five years until his downfall in 87 BC.Template:Sfn Those traditional dates are hard to justify; using a methodology based on estimating the annual die usage average rate (the Esty formula), Hoover proposed the year 224 SE (89/88 BC) for the end of Antiochus X's reign.<ref group="note">The Esty formula was developed by the mathematician Warren W. Esty; it is a mathematical formula that can calculate the relative number of obverse dies used to produce a certain coin series. The calculation can be used to measure the coin production of a certain king and thus estimate the length of his reign.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn It is estimated that only one to three dies were used by Demetrius III for his Antiochene coins, a number too small to justify a five-year-long reign in Antioch;Template:Sfn no literary sources specify the year 92 BC as the date of Demetrius III's occupation of Antioch,Template:Sfn and none of his Antiochene coins bear a date.Template:Sfn

Judaean campaignEdit

Following the defeat of Alexander Jannaeus at the hands of the Nabataeans, Judaea was caught in a civil warTemplate:Sfn between the king and a religious group called the Pharisees.Template:Sfn According to Josephus, Alexander Jannaeus' opponents persuaded Demetrius III to invade Judaea as it would be conquered easily owing to the civil war.Template:Sfn Josephus gave two accounts regarding the numerical strength of Demetrius III; in Antiquities of the Jews, the Syrian king had 3,000 cavalry and 40,000 infantry. In the Jewish War, Demetrius III commanded 3,000 cavalry and 14,000 infantry. The latter number is more logical; the number given in Antiquities of the Jews could be an error by a copyist.Template:Sfn

The date of the campaign is unclear in Josephus's account.Template:Sfn 88 BC is traditionally considered the date of Demetrius III's Judaean campaign, but numismatic evidence shows that coin production increased massively in Damascus in 222 SE (91/90 BC) and 223 SE (90/89 BC).<ref group="note">Hoover considered the apparent increase a result of a poor sample coverage, and thus not an actual evidence for an increase in production.Template:Sfn</ref> This increase indicates that Demetrius was securing the necessary funds for his campaign, making 89 BC more likely as the date of the invasion.<ref group="note">Coins of Demetrius made of lead, were probably minted during the preparations for the campaign; it is possible that Demetrius III did not have sufficient bronze to mint.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn The political situation in Syria in 89 BC helped Demetrius III initiate his invasion of Judaea; Antiochus X was in Antioch while Damascus was firmly in the hands of Demetrius III and there is no indication of a war with his brother Philip I.<ref group="note">Historian Edward Dąbrowa preferred the traditional dating; in 88 BC Demetrius III was in control of most of Syria following the death of Antiochus X and had Philip I as his only rival, making him an attractive choice for the Pharisees.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Template:Sfn

The motives of Demetrius III are not specified in Josephus's account;Template:Sfn the historian gives the impression that Demetrius III helped the Pharisees free of charge, which is hard to accept. The Syrian king's help must have been conditioned on political concessions by the Jewish rebels.Template:Sfn Evidence for Demetrius III's motives is provided by the Pesher Nahum,Template:Sfn which reads: [Interpreted, this concerns Deme]trius king of Greece who sought, on the counsel of those who seek smooth things, to enter Jerusalem;Template:Sfn the academic consensus identifies "Demetrius king of Greece" with Demetrius III.<ref group="note">The historian Isaac Rabinowitz rejected this identification and preferred Demetrius I.Template:Sfn The arguments of Rabinowitz were rejected by the historian Hanan Eshel, who noted that Demetrius I controlled Jerusalem, and did not need to seek its entry.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn The motive leading Demetrius III to attack Judaea might not have had anything to do with the call of the Pharisees. If Alexander Jannaeus took advantage of Demetrius's absence in 93 BC to wrest control of Damascus, then the invasion was probably in retribution against Judaea.Template:Sfn It is also possible that Demetrius wanted to take advantage of Judaea's human resources in the struggle against his rivals to the Syrian throne. Finally, the Syrian kings, including Demetrius III's father, never fully accepted the independence of Judaea and entertained plans to reconquer it; the campaign of Demetrius III can be seen in this context.Template:Sfn

Demetrius III was the first Seleucid king to set foot in Judaea since Antiochus VII (died 129 BC);Template:Sfn according to Josephus, the Syrian king came with his army to the vicinity of Shechem (near Nablus), which he chose as the site for his camp.<ref group="note">An interesting find from Khirbat Burnaṭ, near modern Asira ash-Shamaliya, just north of Nablus, is a coin of Demetrius, which are rarely found in Palestine, most of them in the north. The coin from Khirbat Burnaṭ is the only specimen found that far south.Template:Sfn</ref> Alexander Jannaeus marched to meet his enemy; Demetrius III tried to persuade Alexander Jannaeus's mercenaries to defect as they were Greeks like him, but the troops did not answer his call. Following this failed attempt, the two kings engaged in battle; Demetrius III lost many troops but decimated Alexander Jannaeus's mercenaries and gained victory.Template:Sfn The Judaean king fled to the nearby mountains and according to Josephus, when the 6,000 Judaean rebels in Demetrius III's ranks saw this, they felt pity for their king and deserted Demetrius to join Alexander Jannaeus. At this point, Demetrius III withdrew back to Syria.Template:Sfn

The account of Josephus indicates that Demetrius III ended his Judaean campaign because his Jewish allies deserted him, but this is hard to accept; Josephus probably inflated the numbers of Judaeans in the Syrian army, and Demetrius III still had enough soldiers to wage wars in Syria after he departed Judaea. It is more likely that events in Syria forced Demetrius III to conclude his invasion of Judaea.Template:Sfn Probably in 88 BC, Antiochus X died while fighting the Parthians, and this must have forced Demetrius III to rush north and fill the power vacuum before Philip I.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Demetrius III may have feared that his brother would turn on him and try to take Damascus for himself; if it was not for the death of Antiochus X, Demetrius III would probably have conquered Judaea.Template:Sfn

Height of power and defeatEdit

File:Demetrius III of syria.jpg

Coin of Demetrius III from Antioch with the epithets Theos Philopator Soter. Zeus depicted on the reverse.

According to Josephus, following the conclusion of his Judaean campaign, Demetrius III marched on Philip I.Template:Sfn During this conflict, which is datable to 225 SE (88/87 BC), soldiers from Antioch were mentioned for the first time in the ranks of Demetrius III, indicating that he took control of the Syrian capital in this year.<ref group="note">Ehling considered it possible that the coins from Antioch with the epithets Theos Philopator Soter date to 225 SE (88/87 BC).Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn No bronze coinage was minted in the name of Demetrius III in Antioch as the city began issuing its own civic bronze coins in 221 SE (92/91 BC); Demetrius III issued silver coins in the Syrian capital as silver coinage remained a royal prerogative.<ref group="note">The numismatist Edward Theodore Newell used the traditional date 92 BC for the death of Antiochus X and the start of Demetrius III's reign in Antioch;Template:Sfn he believed Demetrius III tried to gain Antioch's loyalty by allowing it to mint its own civic bronze coins.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Most of the kingdom came under the authority of Demetrius III; his coins were minted in Antioch, Damascus, Seleucia Pieria and Tarsus.<ref group="note">The numismatist Joseph Hilarius Eckhel attributed a coin from Sidon to Demetrius III; in fact, this piece belongs to Demetrius II.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn

According to Josephus, Demetrius III attacked his brother in Beroea with an army of 10,000 infantry and 1,000 cavalry.Template:Sfn Philip I's ally, Straton, the tyrant of the city, called on Aziz, an Arab phylarch (tribal leader), and the Parthian governor Mithridates Sinaces for help;Template:Sfn the allies' archery drove Demetrius III to take cover in his camp, where he was besieged and eventually surrendered after thirst took its toll on his men.<ref group="note">This account is probably taken from Strabo, who in turn might have counted on the work of Posidonius.Template:Sfn</ref>Template:Sfn

AftermathEdit

The year of Demetrius III's defeat is most likely 87 BC; the date of Demetrius III's last coin from Damascus is 225 SE (88/87 BC).Template:Sfn According to Josephus, Demetrius III was captured and sent to Parthia, where he was treated by the Parthian king with "great honour" until he died of illness. Josephus wrote that the Parthian king was named Mithradates,Template:Sfn likely Mithridates III.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Demetrius III was probably childless;Template:Sfn in Damascus, he was succeeded by Antiochus XII, whose first coin was minted in 226 SE (87/86 BC), indicating an immediate succession.Template:Sfn Philip I released any captive who was a citizen of Antioch, a step that must have eased his entry into Antioch, which took place soon after the capture of Demetrius III.Template:Sfn