Listed 2 sub titles with search on: Information about the place for wider area of: "ODRYSAE Ancient country BALKANS" .
ODRYSAE (Ancient country) BALKANS
Odrysae (Odrusai), a people seated on both banks of the Artiscus, a river of Thrace,
which discharges itself into the Hebrus (Herod. iv. 92). Their territory, however,
must undoubtedly have extended considerably to the W. of the Artiscus; since Pliny
(iv. 18) informs us that the Hebrus had its source in their country ; a fact that
is corroborated by Ammianus Marcellinus (xxvii. 4, 10). They appear to have belonged
to that northern swarm of barbarians which invaded Thrace after the Trojan War
; and their names are often found interwoven in the ancient myths. Thus the Thracian
singer Thamyris is said to have been an Odrysian (Paus. iv. 33.4); and Orpheus
is represented as their king (Conon, ap. Phot.).
A rude and barbarous people like the Odrysians cannot be expected
to have had many towns; and in fact we find none mentioned either by Thucydides
or Xenophon. The first of their towns recorded is Philippopolis, founded by Philip
II. of Macedonia, as there will be occasion to relate in the sequel; and it may
be presumed that all their towns of any importance were built after they had lost
their independence.
The name of the Odrysae first occurs in history in connection with
the expedition of Dareius Hystaspis against the Scythians (Herod.). Whilst the
Persians oppressed the southern parts of Thrace, the Odrysians, protected by their
mountains, retained their independence; and the strength which they thus acquired
enabled Teres to incorporate many Thracian tribes with his subjects. He extended
his kingdom to the Euxine in spite of a signal defeat which he sustained in that
quarter from the Thyni (Xen. Anab. vii. 2. 22); and the dominion of his son Sitalces
embraced the greater part of Thrace; having been bounded on the N. by the Danube,
and extending from Abdera on the W. to the Euxine on the E. (Thucyd. ii. 96-98).
Indeed, so powerful was this monarch that his alliance was eagerly courted both
by the Athenians and Lacedaemonians at the breaking out of the Peloponnesian War
(Thucyd. ii. 29; Herod. vii. 137 ; Aristoph. Acharn. 136-150). The expedition
which he undertook in B.C. 429, at the instance of the Athenians, and of Amyntas;
pretender to the throne of Macedonia, against Perdiccas II., the reigning sovereign
of that country, is also a striking proof of the power of the Odrysians at that
period; as the army which Sitalces assembled on that occasion amounted, on the
lowest estimate, to 150,000 men, of which one-third were cavalry (Thuc. ii. 98;
Diod. xii. 50). For the latter force, indeed, the Odrysians were renowned, and
the extensive plains of the Hebrus afforded pasture for an excellent breed of
horses (Thuc. l. c.; Polyb. xxiv. 6; Liv. xliv. 42). With this army Sitalces overran
Chalcidice, Anthemus, Crestonia, and Mygdonia; but the non-appearance of the Athenian
contingent, coupled with the approach of winter, obliged him hastily to retire
after a month's campaign. In B.C. 424 Sitalces fell in an engagement with the
Triballi, and was succeeded by his nephew Seuthes I. Under his reign the Odrysians
attained the highest pitch of their power and prosperity. Their yearly revenue
amounted to 400 talents, besides an equal sum in the shape of presents and contributions
(Thuc: ii. 97, iv. 101). But from this period the power of the Odrysians began
sensibly to wane. After the death of Seuthes we find his dominions divided among
three sovereigns. Medocus, or Amadocus, who was most probably his son, ruled the
ancient seat of the monarchy; Maesades, brother of Medocus, reigned over the Thyni,
Melanditae, and Tranipsae; whilst the region above Byzantium called the Delta
was governed by Teres (Xen. Anab. vii. 2. 32, vii. 5.1). It was in the reign of
Medocus that Xenophon and the Ten Thousand passed through Thrace on their return
from the Persian expedition, and helped to restore Seuthes, son of the exiled
Maesades, to his dominions. We gather from this writer that Seuthes exercised
only a subordinate power under Medocus, with the title of Archon, or governor,
of the Coast (vii. 3.16). Subsequently, however, he appears to have asserted his
claim to an independent sovereignty, and to have waged open war with Medocus;
till they were reconciled and gained over to the Athenian alliance by Thrasybulus
(Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 25; Diod. xiv. 94). When we next hear of the Odrysians, we
find them engaged in hostilities with the Athenians respecting the Thracian Chersonese.
This was under their king Cotys I., who reigned from B.C. 382 to 353. It was in
the reign of the same monarch (B.C. 376) that the Triballi invaded their territories,
and penetrated as far as Abdera (Diod. xv. 36). When Cersobleptes, the son and
successor of Cotys, ascended the throne, the Odrysians appear to have still retained
possession of the country as far as the coast of the Euxine. But a civil war soon
broke out between that monarch and Berisades and Amadocus, who were probably his
brothers, and to whom Cotys had left some portions of his kingdom. The Athenians
availed themselves of these dissensions to gain possession of the Chersonese,
which appears to have been finally ceded to them in B.C. 357 (Diod. xvi. 34).
But a much more fatal blow to the power of the Odrysians was struck by Philip
II. of Macedon. After nine or ten years of warfare, Philip at last succeeded (B.C.
343) in conquering them, and reducing them to the condition of tributaries (Diod.
xvi. 71; Dem. de Chers.). The exact nature of their relations with Philip cannot
be ascertained; but that their subjugation must have been complete appears from
the fact of his having founded colonies in their territory, especially Philippopolis,
on the right bank of the Hebrus, and in the very heart of their ancient seat.
Their subjection is further shown by the circumstance of their cavalry being mentioned
as serving in the army of Alexander under Agathon, son of Tyrimmas (Arrian, iii.
12.4). But a still more decisive proof is, that after Alexander's lieutenant Zophyrio
had been defeated by the Getae, the Odrysians were incited by their king, Seuthes
III., to rebel against the Macedonians (Curt. x. 1. § 45; Justin, xii. l.). After
the death of Alexander, Seuthes took the field against Lysimachus, to whom Thrace
had devolved, with an army of 20,000 foot and 8000 horse, -a sad falling off from
the forces formerly arrayed by Sitalces (Diod. xviii. 14; Paus. i. 9.6). The struggle
with Lysimachus was carried on with varied success. Under Philip V. of Macedon,
the Odrysians were still in a state of revolt. In B.C. 211 that monarch assembled
an army with the ostensible design of marching to the relief of Byzantium, but
in reality to overawe the malcontent chieftains of Thrace (Liv. xxxix. 35). In
183 we find Philip undertaking an expedition against the Odrysians, Dentheletae,
and Bessi. He succeeded in taking Philippopolis, which the inhabitants deserted
at his approach, and where he established a garrison, which was expelled shortly
after his departure (Liv. xxxix. 53; Polyb. Ex. Leg. xlviii.). It may be assumed
from Livy that on this occasion the Odrysians were supported in their revolt by
the Romans (xlii. 19, xlv. 42). After the fall of the Macedonian kingdom, the
Odrysians appear to have been treated with consideration by the Romans, who employed
them as useful allies against the newly-conquered districts, as well as against
the other Thracian tribes; amongst whom the Bessi had now raised themselves to
some importance. After this period the history of the Odrysians is for some time
involved in obscurity, though they were doubtless gradually falling more and more
under the Roman dominion. In the year B.C. 42 their king Sadales, who had no children,
bequeathed his kingdom to the Romans, and possession was taken of it by Brutus
(Caes. B.C. iii. 4; Dion Cass. xlvii. 25; Lucan v.54).
Augustus seems to have left the Odrysians the appearance of independence,
In the year B.C. 29, in return for the friendly disposition which they had shown
towards the Romans, they were presented by M. Crassus with a territory hallowed
by the worship of Bacchus, which he had conquered from the Bessi (Dion Cass. li.
25). In the year B.C. 20, Rhoematalces, who was administering the kingdom as guardian
of the three infant sons of the deceased monarch Cotys IV., succeeded, with the
assistance of the Romans under M. Lollius, in reducing the Bessi (Id. liv. 20).
A few years afterwards, the Bessi again rose under their leader Vologaeses, a
priest of Bacchus, and drove Rhoematalces into the Chersonese; they were, however,
soon reduced to submission by Lucius Piso; Rhoematalces was restored; and it would
appear, from Tacitus, that under his reign the Odrysians acquired the dominion
of all Thrace (Dion Cass. liv. 34; Tac. Ann. ii. 64). This apparent prosperity
was, however, entirely dependent on the Romans, by whose influence they were governed.
Thus, after the death of Rhoematalces, we find Augustus dividing his kingdom between
his son Cotys and his brother Rhascuporis (Tac. l. c.; Vell. Pat. ii. 98). Again,
after the murder of Cotys by Rhascuporis, Tiberius partitioned the kingdom between
the children of Cotys and Rhoematalces, son of Rhascuporis, at the same time appointing
a Roman, Trebellienus Rufus, as guardian of the former, who were not of age (Tac.
Ann. ii. 67, iii. 38). But, in spite of their subjection, the spirit of the Odrysians
was not subdued. Two years after the event just recorded, they rose, in conjunction
with the Coeletae, against the Romans, as well as against their own king Rhoematalces,
whom they besieged in Philippopolis. This rebellion, which was undertaken by leaders
of little distinction, and conducted without concert, was soon quelled by P. Velleius
(Tac. Ann. iii. 39). A more formidable one took place A.D. 26, which Tacitus ascribes
to the unwillingness of the Thracian tribes to supply the Roman army with recruits,
as well as to the native ferocity of the people. It occasioned the Romans some
trouble, and Poppaeus Sabinus was rewarded with the triumphal insignia for his
services in suppressing it (lb. iv. 46-51). At length, under the reign of Vespasian,
the Odrysians were finally deprived of their independence, and incorporated with
the other provinces of the Roman empire (Suet. Vesp. 8; Eutrop. vii. 19).
In the preceding sketch those circumstances only have been selected
which illustrate the history of the Odrysians as a people, without entering into
the personal history of their monarchs. The following is a list of the dynasty;
an account of the different kings who compose it will be found in the Dict. of
Biogr. and Mythol. under the respective heads. 1. Teres. 2. Sitalces. 3. Seuthes
I. 4. Medocus (or Amadocus) with Maesades. 5. Seuthes II. 6. Cotys I. 7. Cersobleptes,
with Amadocus and Berisades. 8. Seuthes III. 9. Cotys Il. 10. Cotys III. 11. Sadales.
12. Cotys IV. 13. Rhoematalces I. 14. Cotys V. and Rhascuporis. 15. Rhoematalces
II. 16. Cotys VI.
The manners of the Odrysians partook of that wildness and ferocity
which was common to all the Thracian tribes, and which made their name a byword
among the Greeks and Romans; but the horrible picture drawn of them by Ammianus
Marcellinus (xxvii. 4.9) is probably overcharged. Like most other barbarous nations
of the north, they were addicted to intoxication, and their long drinking bouts
were enlivened by warlike dances performed to a wild and barbarous music. (Xen.
Anab. vii. 3. 32) Hence it is characteristic that it was considered a mark of
the highest distinction to be a table companion of the king's; but whoever enjoyed
this honour was expected not only to drink to the king, but also to make him a
present (lb. 16, seq.) Among such a people,we are not surprised to find that Dionysus
seems to have been the deity most worshipped. They had a custom of buying their
wives from their parents, which Herodotus (v. 6) represents as prevailing among
all the Thracian tribes. (Odrusai), a people seated on both banks of the Artiscus, a river of Thrace,
which discharges itself into the Hebrus (Herod. iv. 92). Their territory, however,
must undoubtedly have extended considerably to the W. of the Artiscus; since Pliny
(iv. 18) informs us that the Hebrus had its source in their country ; a fact that
is corroborated by Ammianus Marcellinus (xxvii. 4, 10). They appear to have belonged
to that northern swarm of barbarians which invaded Thrace after the Trojan War
; and their names are often found interwoven in the ancient myths. Thus the Thracian
singer Thamyris is said to have been an Odrysian (Paus. iv. 33.4); and Orpheus
is represented as their king (Conon, ap. Phot.).
A rude and barbarous people like the Odrysians cannot be expected
to have had many towns; and in fact we find none mentioned either by Thucydides
or Xenophon. The first of their towns recorded is Philippopolis, founded by Philip
II. of Macedonia, as there will be occasion to relate in the sequel; and it may
be presumed that all their towns of any importance were built after they had lost
their independence.
The name of the Odrysae first occurs in history in connection with
the expedition of Dareius Hystaspis against the Scythians (Herod.). Whilst the
Persians oppressed the southern parts of Thrace, the Odrysians, protected by their
mountains, retained their independence; and the strength which they thus acquired
enabled Teres to incorporate many Thracian tribes with his subjects. He extended
his kingdom to the Euxine in spite of a signal defeat which he sustained in that
quarter from the Thyni (Xen. Anab. vii. 2. 22); and the dominion of his son Sitalces
embraced the greater part of Thrace; having been bounded on the N. by the Danube,
and extending from Abdera on the W. to the Euxine on the E. (Thucyd. ii. 96-98).
Indeed, so powerful was this monarch that his alliance was eagerly courted both
by the Athenians and Lacedaemonians at the breaking out of the Peloponnesian War
(Thucyd. ii. 29; Herod. vii. 137 ; Aristoph. Acharn. 136-150). The expedition
which he undertook in B.C. 429, at the instance of the Athenians, and of Amyntas;
pretender to the throne of Macedonia, against Perdiccas II., the reigning sovereign
of that country, is also a striking proof of the power of the Odrysians at that
period; as the army which Sitalces assembled on that occasion amounted, on the
lowest estimate, to 150,000 men, of which one-third were cavalry (Thuc. ii. 98;
Diod. xii. 50). For the latter force, indeed, the Odrysians were renowned, and
the extensive plains of the Hebrus afforded pasture for an excellent breed of
horses (Thuc. l. c.; Polyb. xxiv. 6; Liv. xliv. 42). With this army Sitalces overran
Chalcidice, Anthemus, Crestonia, and Mygdonia; but the non-appearance of the Athenian
contingent, coupled with the approach of winter, obliged him hastily to retire
after a month's campaign. In B.C. 424 Sitalces fell in an engagement with the
Triballi, and was succeeded by his nephew Seuthes I. Under his reign the Odrysians
attained the highest pitch of their power and prosperity. Their yearly revenue
amounted to 400 talents, besides an equal sum in the shape of presents and contributions
(Thuc: ii. 97, iv. 101). But from this period the power of the Odrysians began
sensibly to wane. After the death of Seuthes we find his dominions divided among
three sovereigns. Medocus, or Amadocus, who was most probably his son, ruled the
ancient seat of the monarchy; Maesades, brother of Medocus, reigned over the Thyni,
Melanditae, and Tranipsae; whilst the region above Byzantium called the Delta
was governed by Teres (Xen. Anab. vii. 2. 32, vii. 5.1). It was in the reign of
Medocus that Xenophon and the Ten Thousand passed through Thrace on their return
from the Persian expedition, and helped to restore Seuthes, son of the exiled
Maesades, to his dominions. We gather from this writer that Seuthes exercised
only a subordinate power under Medocus, with the title of Archon, or governor,
of the Coast (vii. 3.16). Subsequently, however, he appears to have asserted his
claim to an independent sovereignty, and to have waged open war with Medocus;
till they were reconciled and gained over to the Athenian alliance by Thrasybulus
(Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 25; Diod. xiv. 94). When we next hear of the Odrysians, we
find them engaged in hostilities with the Athenians respecting the Thracian Chersonese.
This was under their king Cotys I., who reigned from B.C. 382 to 353. It was in
the reign of the same monarch (B.C. 376) that the Triballi invaded their territories,
and penetrated as far as Abdera (Diod. xv. 36). When Cersobleptes, the son and
successor of Cotys, ascended the throne, the Odrysians appear to have still retained
possession of the country as far as the coast of the Euxine. But a civil war soon
broke out between that monarch and Berisades and Amadocus, who were probably his
brothers, and to whom Cotys had left some portions of his kingdom. The Athenians
availed themselves of these dissensions to gain possession of the Chersonese,
which appears to have been finally ceded to them in B.C. 357 (Diod. xvi. 34).
But a much more fatal blow to the power of the Odrysians was struck by Philip
II. of Macedon. After nine or ten years of warfare, Philip at last succeeded (B.C.
343) in conquering them, and reducing them to the condition of tributaries (Diod.
xvi. 71; Dem. de Chers.). The exact nature of their relations with Philip cannot
be ascertained; but that their subjugation must have been complete appears from
the fact of his having founded colonies in their territory, especially Philippopolis,
on the right bank of the Hebrus, and in the very heart of their ancient seat.
Their subjection is further shown by the circumstance of their cavalry being mentioned
as serving in the army of Alexander under Agathon, son of Tyrimmas (Arrian, iii.
12.4). But a still more decisive proof is, that after Alexander's lieutenant Zophyrio
had been defeated by the Getae, the Odrysians were incited by their king, Seuthes
III., to rebel against the Macedonians (Curt. x. 1. § 45; Justin, xii. l.). After
the death of Alexander, Seuthes took the field against Lysimachus, to whom Thrace
had devolved, with an army of 20,000 foot and 8000 horse, -a sad falling off from
the forces formerly arrayed by Sitalces (Diod. xviii. 14; Paus. i. 9.6). The struggle
with Lysimachus was carried on with varied success. Under Philip V. of Macedon,
the Odrysians were still in a state of revolt. In B.C. 211 that monarch assembled
an army with the ostensible design of marching to the relief of Byzantium, but
in reality to overawe the malcontent chieftains of Thrace (Liv. xxxix. 35). In
183 we find Philip undertaking an expedition against the Odrysians, Dentheletae,
and Bessi. He succeeded in taking Philippopolis, which the inhabitants deserted
at his approach, and where he established a garrison, which was expelled shortly
after his departure (Liv. xxxix. 53; Polyb. Ex. Leg. xlviii.). It may be assumed
from Livy that on this occasion the Odrysians were supported in their revolt by
the Romans (xlii. 19, xlv. 42). After the fall of the Macedonian kingdom, the
Odrysians appear to have been treated with consideration by the Romans, who employed
them as useful allies against the newly-conquered districts, as well as against
the other Thracian tribes; amongst whom the Bessi had now raised themselves to
some importance. After this period the history of the Odrysians is for some time
involved in obscurity, though they were doubtless gradually falling more and more
under the Roman dominion. In the year B.C. 42 their king Sadales, who had no children,
bequeathed his kingdom to the Romans, and possession was taken of it by Brutus
(Caes. B.C. iii. 4; Dion Cass. xlvii. 25; Lucan v.54).
Augustus seems to have left the Odrysians the appearance of independence,
In the year B.C. 29, in return for the friendly disposition which they had shown
towards the Romans, they were presented by M. Crassus with a territory hallowed
by the worship of Bacchus, which he had conquered from the Bessi (Dion Cass. li.
25). In the year B.C. 20, Rhoematalces, who was administering the kingdom as guardian
of the three infant sons of the deceased monarch Cotys IV., succeeded, with the
assistance of the Romans under M. Lollius, in reducing the Bessi (Id. liv. 20).
A few years afterwards, the Bessi again rose under their leader Vologaeses, a
priest of Bacchus, and drove Rhoematalces into the Chersonese; they were, however,
soon reduced to submission by Lucius Piso; Rhoematalces was restored; and it would
appear, from Tacitus, that under his reign the Odrysians acquired the dominion
of all Thrace (Dion Cass. liv. 34; Tac. Ann. ii. 64). This apparent prosperity
was, however, entirely dependent on the Romans, by whose influence they were governed.
Thus, after the death of Rhoematalces, we find Augustus dividing his kingdom between
his son Cotys and his brother Rhascuporis (Tac. l. c.; Vell. Pat. ii. 98). Again,
after the murder of Cotys by Rhascuporis, Tiberius partitioned the kingdom between
the children of Cotys and Rhoematalces, son of Rhascuporis, at the same time appointing
a Roman, Trebellienus Rufus, as guardian of the former, who were not of age (Tac.
Ann. ii. 67, iii. 38). But, in spite of their subjection, the spirit of the Odrysians
was not subdued. Two years after the event just recorded, they rose, in conjunction
with the Coeletae, against the Romans, as well as against their own king Rhoematalces,
whom they besieged in Philippopolis. This rebellion, which was undertaken by leaders
of little distinction, and conducted without concert, was soon quelled by P. Velleius
(Tac. Ann. iii. 39). A more formidable one took place A.D. 26, which Tacitus ascribes
to the unwillingness of the Thracian tribes to supply the Roman army with recruits,
as well as to the native ferocity of the people. It occasioned the Romans some
trouble, and Poppaeus Sabinus was rewarded with the triumphal insignia for his
services in suppressing it (lb. iv. 46-51). At length, under the reign of Vespasian,
the Odrysians were finally deprived of their independence, and incorporated with
the other provinces of the Roman empire (Suet. Vesp. 8; Eutrop. vii. 19).
In the preceding sketch those circumstances only have been selected
which illustrate the history of the Odrysians as a people, without entering into
the personal history of their monarchs. The following is a list of the dynasty;
an account of the different kings who compose it will be found in the Dict. of
Biogr. and Mythol. under the respective heads. 1. Teres. 2. Sitalces. 3. Seuthes
I. 4. Medocus (or Amadocus) with Maesades. 5. Seuthes II. 6. Cotys I. 7. Cersobleptes,
with Amadocus and Berisades. 8. Seuthes III. 9. Cotys Il. 10. Cotys III. 11. Sadales.
12. Cotys IV. 13. Rhoematalces I. 14. Cotys V. and Rhascuporis. 15. Rhoematalces
II. 16. Cotys VI.
The manners of the Odrysians partook of that wildness and ferocity
which was common to all the Thracian tribes, and which made their name a byword
among the Greeks and Romans; but the horrible picture drawn of them by Ammianus
Marcellinus (xxvii. 4.9) is probably overcharged. Like most other barbarous nations
of the north, they were addicted to intoxication, and their long drinking bouts
were enlivened by warlike dances performed to a wild and barbarous music. (Xen.
Anab. vii. 3. 32) Hence it is characteristic that it was considered a mark of
the highest distinction to be a table companion of the king's; but whoever enjoyed
this honour was expected not only to drink to the king, but also to make him a
present (lb. 16, seq.) Among such a people,we are not surprised to find that Dionysus
seems to have been the deity most worshipped. They had a custom of buying their
wives from their parents, which Herodotus (v. 6) represents as prevailing among
all the Thracian tribes.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Odrysae: Perseus Encyclopedia
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!