#Arrhidaios

[jeannereames]

How important was it, really, that Alexander didn't have more brothers? He had Karanos, and it there's the gossip that ATG or his mother killed the boy. Philip Arridhaios apparently wasn't seen as a direct challenge and ATG kept him around. But if Philip had more healthy male offspring around Alexander's age, would that have threatened his hold on power, the partition of the empire or even the military campaigns themselves (the brothers becoming generals for example)?

Philip’s (Lack of) Sons

So, first I need to correct the bit about Karanos. He didn’t exist. Justin gave baby Europē a sex-change. No historian reports two children for Kleopatra Eurydikē, and Justin alone names a boy. We get two children when modern historians try to reconcile Justin and Diodoros/others. But Justin gets things wrong a lot. So, where Justin disagrees with other historians, I’ll go with the others (especially if it’s more than one). Justin wasn’t simply epitomizing Pompeius Trogus; he had his own agendas and themes, so he changed things when it suited him.

Therefore, “Karanos” = Europē,* born just a few days (maybe a week or two) before Philip’s murder.

The wives and children of Philip are reported in a fragment from Satyrus preserved in Athenaeus (13.557b-c). Of his (living) children, we have four girls (Kynannē, Kleopatra, Thessalonikē, and Europē), and only two boys (Arrhidaios and Alexander).

I specify living because ancient accounts don’t usually list children who died young unless it somehow impacted events. So, the murder of Europē, which led to the suicide of Kleopatra Eurydikē, means Europē got a mention whereas if she’d died of some childhood disease, we’d probably not hear about her.

Ergo, it’s possible Philip did sire other children who simply didn’t survive long enough to make it into the histories—especially if they’d been born (and died) in his earlier years. In Dancing with the Lion, I invented a son (Menelaos) by the shadowy Phila of Elimeia, who died young, specifically to illustrate that point.

The two-to-four ratio of boys to girls suggests Philip fathered girls more than boys. Would more boys have endangered Alexander’s place? Certainly, if they were around his age. But not if they were notably younger—another point I make in Dancing with the Lion: why Alexander is less upset by Philip’s seventh marriage than his mother. The chance that Kleopatra Eurydike might bear a male child threatened Olympias’s position far more than Alexander’s. Even some of my colleagues seem to forget that. While yes, sons and mothers did form a political unit at polygamous courts, that doesn’t mean that threats to the mother’s status necessarily entailed threats to a son’s. Philip’s marriage to Kleopatra Eurydikē was just such a case. Any son she produced would’ve been so far behind Alexander in achievements (and thus, a shot at the throne), that the marriage was no threat—which is why he attended the wedding. That makes events at the wedding very curious indeed! And convinces me that we don’t even begin to have the whole story there.

I made up some things in Rise (no spoilers), precisely because we don’t know and I had to come up with something that didn’t make Alexander into a reactionary rube. Too often people point to him as a “hotheaded youth” who made a mountain out of a molehill at his mother’s instigation. Folks, he was eighteen or nineteen. Hotheaded (always), but not some little kid to jump at shadows and Mommy’s tales. Something truly threatening generated that level of reaction from him (and beyond what Diodoros relates at the wedding). It wasn’t fear of being replaced by an as-yet-not-even-conceived infant brother--unless Philip had other reasons to replace him, and there weren’t any … on the face of it.

Anyway, I want to end by pointing to the Big Pink Elephant in the room that way too many people seem to forget….

AMYNTAS PERDIKKA was Alexander’s chief rival, not Arrhidaios or a fictional infant brother. Amyntas was older than Alexander, the only son of Philip’s older brother Perdikkas (III), who’d been king before Philip. Amyntas didn’t become king when his father died in battle precisely because he was only about a year old, while Philip was c. 23/24, and the kingdom was in crisis. Being a baby was also why Philip didn’t kill him. He needed an heir until he could father his own.**

So despite being the eldest Argead after Philip and the legitimate son of a former king, Amyntas spent his life as “the spare.” Imagine the resentment that would have generated. It’s not an accident that Alexander had him killed inside six months of taking the throne. And it’s probably in that time frame that Amyntas would’ve staged a bid for the throne himself. After all, not only was he an Argead, with military experience, he was married to Philip’s eldest child, who was already pregnant, showing he was fertile. He had a really good claim.

Such a clearing out of competing Argeads was standard for any new king’s first year or so. It’s what whittled down available Argead males from the five sons (and progeny) of Alexandros I to just three at Philip’s death, a hundred years later: Amyntas, Alexander, and Arrhidaios. Alexander wasn’t unique in house-cleaning. Philip had killed his three half-brothers upon taking the throne, keeping only Amyntas, his nephew. This was so typical it’s of note that Alexandros II not only didn’t get rid of Perdikkas (III) or Philip (II), but kept around his half-brothers too. It was the exception, not the rule (perhaps because all of them were still too young to be a threat?).

So basically, given Argead patterns, the survival of male siblings/cousins depended on a couple things:

The age of the sibling(s)/cousins. Siblings and half-siblings who were notably younger were likely to be spared if they didn’t appear to offer an immediate threat. After all, the new king needed an heir until he could father his own.

The apparent competence of the sibling(s)/cousins. Arrhidaios is our best evidence for this: Alexander took him with him to Asia to keep an eye on him—prevent his use as a stooge in a coup—but he otherwise kept him alive.

The king’s personal relationship with the sibling(s)/cousins. This is obviously very hard to determine, as our sources may not tell us, or not tell us honestly, but even if it’s hard, that doesn’t mean we should neglect it as a possible motivating factor. It may, in fact, explain why Alexander II (Philip’s older brother) didn’t kill his siblings. He may have loved them (and them, him). While we can’t say from the evidence, we also shouldn’t dismiss that as a possible motivating factor.

Here's an earlier posts about Amyntas, btw.

AMYNTAS PERDIKKA

* The names themselves are a give-away. “Europē,” like “Thessalonikē” was bestowed in celebration of Philip’s military victories. By contrast, “Karanos” (which means generic “chief”) isn’t a royal Macedonian name at all. Bill Greenwalt talks about the name’s significance in one of his articles, but I can’t now recall which.

** There is some question as to whether Amyntas was ever king, however briefly, due to a reference to an “Amyntas IV.” But many of us believe that was part of a challenge to Alexander later, not proof that Amyntas was king briefly, and Philip his regent.

[charleneferlay]

Drawing Philip II of Macedon

After my first post on drawing Alexander, I'd like to talk about his father!

Here is the amazing portrait by @elfinfen:

More to read below!

Let's start with his face: I asked for a olive skin tone and dark hair. In the novel, Philippos is usually described as having very tanned skin, so his skin may get much darker than this at the end of summer.

You may have seen several pictures of Philip II. Here are some, just in case:

Philip in the 2005 movie, with brown hair.

Philip by J. F. Oliveras, with brown hair.

Unknown artist, Philip with black/brown hair:

There are a lot more pictures of him online, but all of them share two traits: Philip is missing an eye (more below) and he's got hair ranging from brown to black. Compared to him, Alexander usually has hair ranging from light to dark blond, sometimes light brown.

The truth is, we have no idea what Philip's hair color was. The frescoes in the tombs of Macedonia show us Macedonians with all hair colors, so Philip could have been blond, or have russet hair. I think the reason why he is usually pictured with darker hair is to set Alexander appart from him... but in the biographies I read, there was no hint that they didn't look like each other!

So why is my Philippos very dark haired? Since Alexandros is the son of Philippos and Zeus, I wanted to set him appart. In my story, all of Philippos' daughters, as well as his son Arrhidaios, his nephew Amyntas and his illegitimate son Ptolemaios look a lot like him. Some have straight hair, or some variations, but when the narrator meets the (dead) brothers and half brothers of Philippos, they also look so strongly like him that no one can doubt they are of the same family. This is almost a caricature, but it can be explained because Philippos' family has divine blood, descending from Herakles. There's a "type" in the family that runs strong, and they all look like each other... except Alexandros, who looks like his half siblings Hermes, Appolo and Artemis.

Now, moving to the eye: that is the result of an arrow wound in 354BC. The eye was removed surgically. We don't really know how the wound looked like, but since eye injuries ick me a lot, I asked the artist to make it a very clean wound. In Gemmel's story The Lion of Macedon, it seems like it didn't heal nearly as well.

You may have noticed that my Philippos' armor has the same shape as the one on the last picture. This is because we (and many other artists) use the same source for Philip's armor:

This is "Philip II's armor", now in the Museum of the Royal Tombs of Aigai in Vergina, Greece.

I'm using a recreation by Hellenic armors:

Now, the twist is that while this armor comes from a tomb which was named after Philip II, it is probably not his tomb but that of his son Arrhidaios. My source for that is @jeannereames, who knows way more about Alexander&Folks than I do, so if she thinks it's Arrhidaios' tomb, who am I to disagree? Still, I decided to use this armor as a reference, because it's pretty and because I didn't have a better one to use.

In my version, Philippos wears a scarf around his neck. There are two reasons for that: first, armor on skin isn't a nice feel, so I wanted to have some clothe visible to make it look like more comfortable. For this armor, I decided to go with a roman like scarf (picture from x-legio).

The second reason for the scarf is to link Philippos' picture with Alexandros:

Basically I needed to add some beige to Philippos to get the same color palette of dark red / bronze / beige.

Another link between those two pictures is the left eye. The first time I described Philippos' eye color was in the spin off, where he described himself:

I had been a small child, dark haired with forgettable brown eyes – my brothers had inherited my mother’s beautiful, deep blue irises, and I the boring muddy shade of my father [...]. Teenagerhood had ambushed me while I was stranded in Illyria; it had hit violently, spraying pimples all over my face, stretching hairy legs until they looked like knees holding sticks together, and I had a soft, ridiculous black fuzz over my upper lip.

Needless to say, I was suddenly overcome with nostalgia for Illyria, where people simply did not go naked in front of others.

A few things about this part: blue eyes were actually not favored in Ancient Greece and I have no idea if Illyrians liked to be naked or not. In between this scene and now, I changed my mind, and Philippos' eyes turned to dark blue, to share Alexandros' left eye's color. What didn't change, however, is that young Philippos describes himself as a pretty ugly teen, and though he's grown into a very confident king, in this scene with Kleitos, he is obviously not depicting himself as much prettier:

[For context, Philippos and Kleitos are discussing Philippos's relationship with one of his page, Hippostratos, while P&K have been lovers for 20years. Philippos just broke up with Pausanias, with whom he was getting along very well, except Pausanias was getting too old for that.] "He's really not the sharpest spear, that boy," Philippos mumbled [...]. "I could have told you that," Kleitos said with a smirk. "But you wouldn't have listened, right? Whenever you get rid of a boy you like, you always move to idiots who bore you to death." "What a friend you are." [...] "Oh no, believe me, I do pity you," Kleitos joked. "Your life is always so complicated compared to mine..." "Your choice," Philippos reminded you. "I've never forbade you to..." "Nah, you know, there's only one man I want." "I am really wondering why," Philippos laughed, "old and ugly as he is." "Because I'm young and pretty?"

In a later scene, after Philippos is wounded (and taking too much poppy milk to deal with the pain), he has a rather bitter conversation with the main character, Orestis/Hephaistion, who brought him a message from Pausanias, who is trying to get his former lover back:

"What does he want?" Philippos repeated. "Lands? A command? A high born spouse?" I blinked, surprised. "He told me he wanted to be with you, that's all." The laugh that followed was bitter, almost a bark - and then it turned into a great wave that shook the king with acidic mirth, until he rose his head again. "That is the most absurd thing I ever heard. Who would want to be with that? I used to be ugly, and now I need a fucking slave to get out of my bed. I'm too old for this bullshit... and even if I weren't, they come, they go, they don't care about what I feel about them and I don't care about what they feel about me. It's pointless." "He said he loves you." "Love? Was that love, when he told you to spread the rumors that killed Hippostratos?"

Okay Philou, we get it, you think you're really not pretty.

But are you? Are you really ugly?

(People usually agree that he's really handsome on this painting lol.)

At some point of the story, Hephaistion gets to see Philippos at fifteen, and his description of him is like that:

If Philippos had been at Mieza with us, and not a prince, he would have been one of those boys who, for a hopeful stare aimed at Pausanias, would have been laughed at for a full week. He was tall for his age, with too long limbs and the air of a newborn foal. With pimples all over his cheeks and a rather weak shin, heavy eyebrows, and a rather big nose, he looked like the can of boys who will try anything and everything to get his beard faster - and I had to admit, he looked much better with one.

... basically because the beard hides the acne scars and, with the right cut, strengthen the jaw and the shin. So while Philippos was probably an average teenager moaning that he is ugly (well, everyone is ugly compared to dashing Pausanias and Hephaistion in the book, even Alexandros moans that he's not pretty enough), as an adult he does know how to make the best of what he has, and actually has a fair share of charm (and the best and worst sense of humor, you DON'T want to get one of his jokes aimed at you). Oh, and the diadem of a king, which, according to Alexandros:

Hephaistion: "I don't get why Pausanias is so obsessed with him. I mean, with his eye, he is not exactly..." Alexandros : "Pretty? He is the king." Hephaistion: "So? Does being a king make you prettier?" Alexandros: "Obviously."

I'll be leaving you with a second commission drawn by the amazing Kloh.eh, of Philippos at fiften:

One funny thing about this pic is that according to the artist, this is the first time someone came to her to ask for a not-pretty character XD But I love him that way, and it seems my readers on AO3 also like that he's a rather bland teen!

[ryotarox]

Greek drachma of Aegina. Obverse: Land Chelone / Reverse: ΑΙΓ(ΙΝΑ)and dolphin. The oldest Aegina chelone coins depicted sea turtles and were minted ca. 700–550 BC. ギリシャのエギナのドラクマ。表面 ランド・チェローネ／裏面 ΑΙΓ(ΙΝΑ)とイルカ。最も古いエギナのチェローネ硬貨はウミガメを描いたもので、紀元前700年〜550年頃に鋳造された。

Silver tetrobol (4/6 of drachma) from Massalia. Obverse: Artemis wearing stephane. Reverse: ΜΑΣΣΑ[ΛΙΗΤΩΝ] (of Massalians), lion standing right. マッサリア産銀貨テトロボル（ドラクマの4/6）。表面： アルテミスはステファンを身に着けている。裏面： ΑΜΣΑ[ΛΙΗΤΩΝ]（マッサリア人の）、右に立つライオン。

Tetradrachm from Olympia. 105th Olympiad, 360 BC. Obverse: Head of Zeus. Reverse: The nymph Olympia, inscription: ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑ. オリンピアのテトラドラクマ。第105回オリンピア紀元前360年 表面 ゼウスの頭部。裏面： オリンピアのニンフ、銘：ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑ。

Silver Drachma of Philip III Arrhidaios, minted at Babylon. Obverse: Head of Herakles. Reverse: Zeus Aëtophoros. バビロンで鋳造されたフィリッポス3世アルヒダイオスの銀製ドラクマ。表面： ヘラクレスの頭部。裏面： ゼウス・アエトフォロス

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ancient drachma - Wikipedia

ドラクマ - Wikipedia

ドラクマ（ギリシア語: 単数形 δραχμή、複数形 δραχμές または δραχμαί、英語: Drachma）は、古代ギリシアおよびヘレニズム世界で広く用いられた通貨の単位。同時に近代に入ってから復活し、ユーロが導入される前のギリシャで用いられていた通貨単位でもあった。

ドラクマという名前は「つかむ」という意味の動詞「ドゥラットー（ギリシア語: δράττω）」に由来している。これはもともとドラクマが手のひらいっぱいの量の金属塊にあたる6ゴーコスに相当したからである。オボロイ（単数：オボロス）は、紀元前11世紀以降使われていた通貨単位である。 紀元前5世紀以降、アテネでつくられた四ドラクマ硬貨は、アレクサンドロス大王以前のギリシア世界でもっとも広く用いられた硬貨であった。このコインでは、表にかぶとをかぶったアテナ女神の胸像が彫られており、裏にはアテナの使いフクロウの像が彫られていた。通常この硬貨は、フクロウを意味するグラウカイ（ギリシア語: γλαῦκαι）と呼ばれていた。この裏面は、ギリシアの1ユーロ硬貨の意匠にも用いられている。 アレクサンドロス大王の東征の後、ドラクマ硬貨は大王の征服した中東諸国で広く流通するようになった。ディアドコイたちの諸国でもこれは引き継がれ、プトレマイオス朝エジプトでも用いられていた。イスラム教以前の中東諸国で用いられていた通貨単位であったディルハム（アラビア語: درهم‎）もドラクマの名に由来するものであることがわかっている。ディルハムはモロッコとアラブ首長国連邦ではいまだに用いられている。アルメニアのドラムという通貨単位もまたドラクマに由来するものである。 ドラクマは、紀元前3世紀以降ローマ領の地域でも流通した。ドラクマは長期にわたって広大な地域に流通したため、現代の貨幣価値への換算は難しいが、紀元前5世紀の1ドラクマは、1990年の25ドルに相当するという研究がある。研究者たちは、ローマ帝国の初期には1ドラクマは労働者の一日の賃金であったという。 ドラクマ銀貨が、ローマ帝国の領域内で広く用いられたことは、新約聖書にドラクマの名が現れることからもわかる。たとえば『ルカによる福音書』15:8がドラクマ銀貨に言及している[1]。また『マタイによる福音書』17:27[2]で、イエス・キリストの一行が、神殿税として魚から取り出すのもドラクマ銀貨であると考えられる。

聖書の貨幣 - Wikipedia

銀貨30枚 - Wikipedia

マタイによる福音書第26章15節に現れる語（ἀργύρια、argyria）は単に「銀貨」というだけの意味であり[10]、学者たちの間でイエスの代価として使われた銀貨は何であったかについて意見が分かれている。 ドナルド・ワイズマンはその候補として、ひとつは一般にティルスのシェケル銀貨（Tyrian shekel）と呼ばれるティルスのテトラドラクマ（銀品位94％、14グラム）、もうひとつはアウグストゥスの肖像を刻んだアンティオキアのスタテル銀貨（銀品位75％、15グラム）を示唆している[11]。 この他、プトレマイオスのテトラドラクマ銀貨（銀品位25%、13.5±1 グラム）ではないかとする説もある[12]。 2016年12月12日の銀スポット取引の終値 1トロイオンスあたり17.06ドルを用いると、「銀貨30枚」の価値は185ドルから216ドル程度となる。

[spocktheestallion]

when i was little i used to watch military history documentaries with my dad and he would tell me all about the different tanks the allies and axis powers used and how different artillery guns worked and how our great uncle would operate them and take me to the air force museum to tell me all about the different planes and how the engines worked and the battle of gallipoli and now he listens to me tell him all about how i think the belief that phillip ii is buried in tomb 2 at vergina is actually a mix up and it’s actually his son phillip iii arrhidaios and ancient egyptian makeup and the rise of fall of cremation’s popularity in iron age greece and how a lot of our perceptions of ancient greece are actually just classical athens being projected all over the greek world and how there’s actually no evidence for any kind of royal family or monarchy in minoan culture like arthur evans originally posited and the role cats played in ancient egyptian iconography and the accuracies/discrepancies in the beloved 1999 action/adventure feature film “the mummy” starring rachel weisz and brendan fraser. but also how ancient troy lies where the battle of gallipoli took place. anyway time is a flat circle and i love my dad. or whatever.

He’s just like me fr (forcing my parents to sit through lectures on my history special interests)

[amntenofre]

'Ipet-Sut' ("Karnak"), the highly sacred Precinct of the God Amon-Ra at 'Uaset'-Thebes: the Central Bark Shrine of Amon-Ra (dated to the reign of Philippos Arrhidaios, 323-316 BCE)

[mikeford2477]

This beautiful ancient silver drachm arrived today. It is of Philip III of Macedon in the style of Alexander III ‘The Great’. Kingdom of Macedon, Philip III Arrhidaios AR Drachm. In the types of Alexander III. Magnesia ad Maeandrum, circa 323-319 BC. Head of Herakles right, wearing lion skin headdress / Zeus Aëtophoros seated left, holding sceptre; ΦIΛIΠΠOY to right, monogram in left field. Price P56; Müller -. 4.22g, 18mm. Available for sale now. Inbox to discuss. #ancient #coins #kingsofmacedon #silvercoins #ancientcoins #numis #numismatics #coincollector #coincollectors #coincollecting #alexanderthegreat #drachm #herakles #hercules #zeus #history https://www.instagram.com/p/ByXbtbrgyGR/?igshid=16e5w9z8aa9sb

[whyarealltheseusernamesscar-blog]

Philip the II of Macedonia

Ancient greek civilization is well known throughout the world. The famous city-states of Athens, Sparta, and Thebes have for centuries inspired steps forward for humanity. The most famous Greek is Alexander the great, a Macedonian king that conquered all of the Middle East and the eastern parts of the Mediterranean. However, the man who played even a greater part in his empire was his father, Philip II of Macedonia. Through cunning and realpolitik, he managed to secure Greece and establish the League of Corinth. The organization was a collection of states that were unified by a central government, setting the stage for his son’s conquest of Asia Minor and the Middle East.

Philip inherited a broken kingdom. The kingdom of Macedonia was weakened by previous wars and attacks from all sides by various enemies, such as the Athenians, Paionians and Thracians. He paid tribute to the Paionians and Thracians, and then crushed the army of Athens. Free from his enemies, Philip trained and reformed the army of Macedon to prepare for future conquests.

The next step for Philip was the involvement of Macedonia in the Sacred War. The conflict involved the Phocians, Sparta, Athens, and Pherae against Thebes, Macedon and several small tribal areas. By refusing to pay tribute to the Amphictyonic League, a collection of cities in charge of the Oracle, the Phocians started a war amongst the city-states of Greece. Although the Phocian side was stronger than the decentralized tribes, Philip managed to defeat the various armies and divided and conquered. He inflicted severe losses, and the Phocian army at the battle of Battle of Crocus Field, with six thousand dead and three thousand prisoners who were drowned shortly after the battle for plundering the Oracle. With a stronger army and more land and resources, Philip position was secure. All the states save Macedonia were weak, and they sued for peace. This all foreshadowed the inevitable domination of Greece by Philip.

With the rest of Greece under submission, Philip conquered fringe states and secured all those still resisting. In 337 B.C he created the League of Corinth, establishing a military unification of Greece with the intent of soon invading Persia. However a year later he was assassinated and left his son to complete his legacy. Although he may not be remembered, Philip II set the scene for the great conquest of Alexander, and the fame of Greece for centuries to come. It isn’t always those who worked that are credited in history. No matter who you are, you will always have to be grateful for your forefathers, but some more than others.

Map of the Kingdom of Macedon and its expansions at the death of Philip II in 336 BC. (data from R. Ginouvès and al., La Macédoine, Paris, 1992)

Based on R. Ginouvès et al., La Macédoine, Paris, 1992.

Philip II of King of Macedon, a Hellenistic-era sculpted bust, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek

Link to other website: http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/PhilipofMacedon.html

References: Philip II of Macedonia: Ian Worthington, Yale University Press, ISBN 0300164769, 9780300164763

Jump up ^ Dio Chrysostom Or. 49.5

Jump up ^ Homosexualities by Stephen O. Murray,University of Chicago Press,page 42

Jump up ^ The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC by D. M. Lewis, 1994, page 374, ISBN 0-521-23348-8: "... The victory over Bardylis made him an attractive ally to the Epirotes, who too had suffered at the Illyrians' hands, and his recent alignment ..."

Jump up ^ A special instrument known as the Spoon of Dioclese was used to remove his eye.

Jump up ^ Ashley, James R., The Macedonian Empire: The Era of Warfare Under Philip II and Alexander the Great, 359–323 BCE., McFarland, 2004, p.114, ISBN 0-7864-1918-0

Jump up ^ Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History, 16.91-95

Jump up ^ Dr. Laurence T. Stevens, "The Assassin Who Launched The Hellenistic Age" in Jane Trent (ed.) "Is History Made By Accident?"

Jump up ^ http://www.aigai.gr/en/

Jump up ^ National Geographic article outlining recent archaeological examinations of Tomb II.

Jump up ^ [http://www.tekmeria.org/index.php/tekmiria/article/view/216/336 Hatzopoulos B. Miltiades, �The Burial of the Dead (at Vergina) or The Unending Controversy on the Identity of the Occupant of Tomb II. ��Tekmiria, vol. 9 (2008)]

Jump up ^ http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/remains-of-alexander-the-greats-father-confirmed-found-141009.htm

Jump up ^ See John Prag and Richard Neave's report in Making Faces: Using Forensic and Archaeological Evidence, published for the Trustees of the British Museum by the British Museum Press, London: 1997.

^ Jump up to: a b Musgrave J, Prag A. J. N. W., Neave R., Lane Fox R., White H. (2010) The Occupants of Tomb II at Vergina. Why Arrhidaios and Eurydice must be excluded, Int J Med Sci 2010; 7:s1–s15

^ Jump up to: a b c Antonis Bartsiokas; et al. (July 20, 2015). "The lameness of King Philip II and Royal Tomb I at Vergina, Macedonia". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 112: 9844–9848. doi:10.1073/pnas.1510906112.

Jump up ^ New Finds from the Cremains in Tomb II at Aegae Point to Philip II and a Scythian Princess, T. G. Antikas* and L. K. Wynn-Antikas, International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

Jump up ^ Backgrounds of early Christianity By Everett Ferguson Page 202 ISBN 0-8028-0669-4

Jump up ^ The twelve gods of Greece and Rome By Charlotte R. Long Page 207 ISBN 90-04-07716-2

Jump up ^ "Γενικό Επιτελείο Στρατού: Εμβλήματα Όπλων και Σωμάτων". Hellenic Army General Staff. Retrieved 24 July 2014.

[atanapotinija-moved]

I'm sorry for jumping in, especially since this post is almost two years old, but I am extremely tired of the villanization that Olympias has faced and continues to face.

First and foremost, we don't know what Arrhidaios suffered from or how severe his condition was, other than that it manifested itself when he was a toddler.

Second, it was widely believed in antiquity that the father's seed determined and formed the nature of his children. Surely they couldn't blame Philip II for having a "weak" seed, right? He was most likely (certainly) embarrassed by his son Arrhidaios, which could explain the accusations that Olympias poisoned him. After all, only such a rumour could have debunked the accusation that Philip II had a "weak" seed.

Finally, Plutarch suggests that Olympias poisoned Arrhidaios. And we know Plutarch hated Olympias.

All of this to say that maybe we shouldn't fall prey to the misogynistic Greek male narrative about women.

Olympias’ relevance to Fate and Iskandar and Faker’s stories part 1

Both Alexander and Faker were raised by Olympias, and that’s why they are the kinds of people that they are, and why they lived the lives they had to live. Although Faker never met him when he was young, she was raised with the intent to protect him and to be devoted to him her entire life. That was her sole purpose as given to her by Olympias. So to understand both of those characters… you have to understand the environment that living with Olympias was. The deeply entrenched familial drama of Alexander the Great.  

Where to even start with Olympias… 

I’ll skip talking about the massive amount of mystery/mysticism surrounding Alexander that there’s no way he could’ve escaped for now. But to sum up: the amount of mysticism surrounding his entire life was so deeply entrenched that there was fundamentally no way he could have lived his life with human expectations or treatment. From the time of his conception to even now, he was considered a sort of demigod. 

So let’s talk about Olympias and the conspiracies surrounding her and her general type of personality for a moment. 

Olympias was a princess before she married Philip II. She was the eldest daughter of Neoptolemus I of Epirus. Her marriage to Philip II was largely political, but it’s said that Philip II was in love with her when he met her on an island where the two of them were engaging in the rites of the Mysteries of Cabeiri, two cthonic deities related to Hephaestus. 

Olympias had two children with Philip II – Alexander III and Cleopatra. However, Philip II had a child from a previous marriage, a son named Philip III Arridaeus. Alexander was fond of Arridaeus, his half-brother. To cement Alexander’s position as the only rightful heir to the throne, as he was prophecied to be, Olympias allegedly poisoned Arridaeus at one point and left him intellectually disabled and unfit to rule. This did not diminish the relationship between Alexander and Arridaeus, as he was still fond of his brother despite Olympias’ actions, and took him along on his campaigns to protect him from being used as a political tool and to keep him safe.

Philip II took another wife referred to as Cleopatra-Eurydice. Eurydice was the niece of the general Attalus. Eurydice and Philip II had a daughter (and possibly a son), and Olympias grew fearful that her power would be threatened. Olympias was not well-liked. She was known to be a member of the orgiastic Cult of Dionysus who introduced snake-worship into the rites, and was known to sleep with snakes in her bed. 

Many people were assuming that with Philip II’s new marriage to Eurydice that he would have a new, proper heir to the kingdom of Macedon, which infuriated Alexander as well, to the point of one episode at the new marriage’s wedding banquet, during which Attalus openly begged the gods for a lawful successor to the throne which so aggravated Alexander that he threw his cup at Attalus’ head and yelled “What am I then, a bastard?”. Philip II rose up to go and kill Alexander but was so drunk that he tripped and fell, prompting Alexander to reply “See there, the man who makes preparations to pass out of Europe into Asia, overturned in passing from one seat to another.” 

After this, Alexander and Olympias went into voluntary exile (but an exile nonetheless, not permitted to return). After six months, a family friend helped mediate the situation and allowed both Alexander and Olympias to return home. But Olympias was still not well-received, and Alexander as the proper heir was still not guaranteed. As a Persian satrap offered his daughter to marry Arridaeus, Olympias and several of Alexander’s friends believed that this was a move intended to make Arridaeus the heir to the throne. Alexander sent a messenger named Thessalus to protest and say that the daughter should be married to a proper heir, like Alexander… and when Philip II found out about this, he grew angry, 1) saying Alexander deserves better (!?!) 2) exiling four of Alexander’s friends and having Thessalus brought back in chains. 

In this same year Philip II had his and Olympias’ daughter Cleopatra married to Olympias’ brother Alexander I of Epirus to ally himself. As the situation mounted against Olympias and lead to her isolation, coincidentally, the incident with Pausanias (a former member of Philip II’s personal bodyguards who had been disgraced by being raped during an argument with another general, Attalus, and resulted in Philip II failing to punish Attalus for his crime) was escalating and it’s said that Olympias had a personal hand in Philip II’s assassination by Pausanias, supposedly providing horses for Pausanias to escape on. 

As Alexander took the throne and launched his conquest, Olympias was the queen-regent de facto of Macedon in his absence along with Antipater, and was very well disliked, to the point where Antipater sent a very long letter full of complaints to Alexander (to which Alexander, despite his cordial but souring relationship with his mother, remarked “One tear from my mother would cancel a thousand letters like that”). 

During the Wars of the Diadochi after Alexander the Great’s death, Olympias attempted to continue her control of Macedon, but the general Cassander captured her after several campaigns. She was to be executed, but he called forth all of the families of those whom she had killed and Olympias was stoned to death in public and left to rot, being ordered to not have a funeral. 

So where to even go from here…. 

It is apparently that in Fate’s rendition of Olympias that she is very power-hungry and cunning, willing to do anything to ensure Alexander’s success and her control over Macedonia. Fate!Iskandar even has his natural enemy denoted as his mother, Olympias. 

To have a life that is so hell-bent on being successful that failure is not an option is torment. To have somebody actively killing your other family members in order to cement your success will no doubt have an effect on how you grow up. 

In the Alexander Romance, Olympias’ behind-the-scenes actions are still present, as her snake-worship is romanticized to that of a coupling with an Egyptian Magus-King Nectanebo under the guise of her conceiving a child with the Libyan god Ammon (rather than Philip II), and Alexander’s complicated family drama is still present, with Alexander killing Nectanebo and Nectanebo confessing that he is his biological father as he dies. 

Basically …………… No matter where you go ……….. Alexander’s family is fucked up. Both Philip II and Olympias share the blame. I will write later about how there was no way for Alexander to live a normal human life later but I need to express how politically charged all of the family drama was and how much like murder and humiliation was surrounding so much of it from the start. 

[jeannereames]

Well, well, well ... more evidence that Tomb II is not Philip II, but (probably) Philip Arrhidaios and Hadea Eurydikē.

Maybe it's time to dust off my "Who's Buried in Philip's Tomb?" public lecture. Anybody at a department with money to bring in a guest lecturer and Macedonian specialist? :-)

[jeannereames]

Do you think that Alexander was truly liked by those around him, in a personal level? True friendship. Not really Hephaistion but also like Ptolemy, Seleucus, Roxanne, Arrhidaios, those who grew up with him or were his closest circle. Or was it all cynical politics?

Found it! That was weird. Appearing/disappearing asks?

Did the people around Alexander like him?

Did the people around Alexander like him? Hephaistion did. But the rest?

The asker refers to his personal circle, but I want to address this more broadly. I’ll return to his personal circle at the end.

First, we must beware of that pesky “shading” by later authors as part of their attempts to use Alexander’s career for commentary on their own time. They meant to show how success and power spoilt him and made him into a tyrant. That said, I believe he was well-liked overall. Yet things did change over time.

He began as king of a (relatively) small kingdom in northern Greece where all a Macedonian had to do before addressing him was to take off his hat—didn’t even use the title “King.” By his death, he’d taken over in a tradition that depicted rulers as “King of Kings” and “King of the Four Quarters” [e.g., the Whole World], even a god-king (Egypt). Going from (little) Macedonia to (enormous) Asia naturally cut down on his availability to soldiers and even his own Companions/Hetairoi—which pissed them off. Partly, it was simple logistics. He had too many responsibilities, and too many people wanted a piece of his time. Yet after Darius’s death in 330, he also added layers of court ceremonial to better align with ancient near eastern royal expectations and secure Persian respect.

That alienated his own people (maybe more than he expected). However exaggerated I believe the objections to his adoption of Persian custom, there’s little doubt it wasn’t well-received by traditionalists who preferred their kings approachable. Now, be aware: that approachability was more curated than our sources admit, as these sources inflated shifts to serve their own themes. Macedonian kings had bodyguards for a reason, and certain aspects of divine charisma were associated with their physical person (see below). The average citizen could NOT just wander up to one for a chat. Even so, elaborate Persian ceremonial was quite alien to Macedonia.

Nor was such ceremonial required of Macedonians in 330; our sources note that Alexander was essentially running two parallel courts with differing expectations. Nonetheless, the Macedonians took exception to the changes, offended to see “their” king “succumb” to foreign ways. He was getting uppity. They may also have feared it would trickle down to them eventually, even if it hadn’t yet.

Kleitos the Black’s exact words to Alexander in their infamous, alcohol-fueled spat is 99% invented. (Except maybe the line from Euripides; I’m least suspicious of that.) Some of it involved a play mocking officers who’d died recently at the Marakanda massacre as a means to absolve Alexander, who hadn’t been present, but whose failure to clarify the chain of command got them killed. I suspect that was a lot of it. But as with all “straw that broke the camel’s back” fights, it quickly escalated into a litany of complaints. Some of those were about the changes at the court. And Kleitos didn’t survive the encounter.

Alexander’s remorse appears to have been genuine. And the fact the army was ready to convict Kleitos of treason after-the-fact, said a lot about their empathy for the king. Nonetheless, after that, NOTHING was the same for his inner circle. In the right circumstance, he might kill you. And the army would absolve him of it.

Yet the army didn’t regard every negative act by Alexander as forgivable. They were not willing to overlook the murder of Parmenion. If they could understand/see themselves getting worked up enough to kill even a good friend when drunk, the cold, calculated removal of a potential (not even demonstrated) political threat was something else again. Especially a threat who’d served Alexander (and Philip) with such distinction.

E.g., nuance is required when assessing soldierly opinion.

A couple more things suggest Alexander was—overall—beloved:

1. At the battle of Granikos, he was elected the ancient equivalent of MVP; an award made by soldiers. He accepted, then never allowed his own name to be in the running again. Yet it was an award from the soldiers, and means he was respected not just as a leader, but as a fighter.

2. During both so-called “mutinies,” the soldiers didn’t want to kill him, they only wanted him to change his policies. If there’s some doubt the first actually occurred, the second at Opis certainly did. Yet when he showed the soldiers what it would mean to reject him (he replaced them), they came crying for his forgiveness. They didn’t say, “Good riddance” and head home.

3. On his deathbed, the Macedonian soldiers clamored so to see him that his top officers had to knock down a palace wall in order for them to parade through and say a final goodbye.

Now, that’s soldiers. What about his Companions/Hetairoi? At this high level, liking or disliking also involved personal advancement and family position—as the asker alluded to.

Those willing to “play ball” (so to speak)—go along with Alexander’s changes—had a whole new world opened. This wasn’t just his personal circle but included figures such as Krateros who understood what side his bread was buttered on. I’m not sure how much love was lost between him and Alexander, but they certainly respected each other. There were others who fell into this category, such as Koinos and Kleitos the White. Non-Macedonians/Greeks too, who may have seen him as a road to higher office than they’d held under Darius, or perhaps just to survival. Although I do think Poros and Alexander had a Moment; Poros remained loyal even after it served him to do so, despite his own son’s death at the Battle of Hydaspes. Something actually clicked with those two, I believe.

As for those who grew up with him—Hephaistion, Perdikkas, Leonnatos, Seleukos, Lysimakos … it seems they did like him, even if they didn’t always like each other. Seleukos was responsible for Perdikkas’s murder, in the Successor Wars later. There were others, but those names float to the top again and again. Similarly, although older, Harpalos, Ptolemy, Erigyios, and Laomedon all got themselves exiled for his sake. And Alexander never forgot it. The man who brought news to Alexander of Harpalos’s first flight (due to embezzling) was initially arrested for a false report. Alexander simply didn’t believe his friend had betrayed him.

 And it wasn’t just those men. The tale of Alexander drinking a medical potion given him by his doctor Philip—despite a missive from Parmenion warning him about Philip—became famous as a tale of trust. And sure enough, the drought cured the king, so ATG’s trust was well-placed. A later story about Alexander locking up Lysimachos in a cage with a lion in punishment is almost certainly bogus (with overtones of Roman-era stuff). Other evidence suggests great affection for his men. That’s perhaps why Philotas’s failure to inform him about a conspiracy endangering his life came as such a blow.

One may wonder if some of those guys, like the talented—and older—Krateros, didn’t want to replace him as king? Certainly after his death, they did vie to be kings.* Periodically, I run across some misguided person arguing that Philotas and/or Parmenion wanted to take his place, hence the conspiracy. It’s even embedded in our ancient sources, which didn’t understand Macedonian kingship (were thinking on Roman models).

But those men couldn’t be kings. They weren’t Argeads, and it mattered. (Such supposition also assumes they were part of the real conspiracy, rather than Philotas simply being an arrogant dumbfuck who failed to report it.)

The Argeads had Royal Charisma. Charis is a gift from the gods: literally. It can be beauty and grace, sure, but at its base, it simply means “favor.” The difference between a king and a tyrant was that the former had charis by descent. The men who became tyrants (or tried and failed) all believed they had it too, but by their own demonstrated aretē and timē. That’s why they were never just popular Joe Blow off the street. They were Olympic victors, winning generals, etc.  All were also aristocrats and fully intended to establish their own royal dynasties…but failed.

Until the Hellenistic Age. The Successors were just tyrants who made it work. Some (like Seleukos) even created mythological origins for themselves. Daniel Ogden has a good book on the creation of this myth: The Legend of Seleucus: Kingship, Narrative and Mythmaking in the Ancient World. If you’re curious about how all those things go into charis, I recommend it.

It’s not enough to be competent. One also needed the gods’ blessing. Charisma. That’s why Alexander’s officers might compete with and snipe at each other…but not with/at him.*

As for figures such as Roxane or Oxyathres (Darius’s brother who joined ATG’s court after Darius’s murder), it’s impossible to know what their opinion of him would have been. We have zero reliable evidence. It would seem Sisygambis (Darius’s mother) genuinely liked him. But again, this may have served later narratives, so I wouldn’t swear to it. She might have just made the best of a bad situation.

So! The final vote is that he seems to have been more popular/well-received than not … for a rather ruthless ancient world conqueror. Ha. I think that’s part of his eternal fascination. He’d be far less interesting if he’d simply been a monster.

Also, I forgot, but I did a separate post a while back on a related topic: Did Alexander's Companions Like Each Other

————————

* It took some years before the Successors started using the title “King” (Basileus). Antigonos Monophthalmos was the first, if I remember right, around the same time Alexander IV was murdered by Kassandros—and he didn’t claim the title himself. It was given him by Athens. Up to that point, they’d all simply called themselves “governors” and/or “regents.” Even if they might have been privately considering how to become kings in their own right, the charisma of Macedonian kingship belonged to the Argeads. Getting rid of Alexander IV (quietly), then Olympias’s murder of Philip III Arrhidaios and Hadea Eurydike left no Argeads. Then Alexander’s empire could become “spear won” territory.

[jeannereames]

Can I please ask you about the rise of Antipater and what justifies Philip's & Alexander's trust on him? His backstory seems very obscure for the immense power and senior position he achieved within Macedon & the royal house. Can I also question why he never tried to marry into the royal family all this time even though his son shamelessly vied for the throne?

Antipatros (Antipater), Son of Iolaos

Antipatros was regent across four reigns (Perdikkas III, Philip II, Alexander III, and Philip III Arrhidaios/Alexander V), and possibly five (Alexander II). That’s almost unheard of. So yes, his influence was massive.

Aside from being a statesman, he also wrote a history about the reign of Perdikkas III (Philip’s older brother), and two books of letters, some of which were to Aristotle, his close friend. He acted as executor for Aristotle’s will after the latter’s death in 323 (yes, same year as Alexander). He seems to have had an intellectual-philosophic bent and was almost twenty years older than Philip. There’s a funny story in Athenaeus (I believe), wherein Philip and Parmenion were playing a game of droughts. Yet when Antipatros entered the room, Philip shoved the gameboard under his chair—like a naughty boy. It seems Philip’s older brother Perdikkas had a more philosophical bent himself, which may have paired well with Antipatros—perhaps why Antipatros wrote a history about him (not Philip). If Philip certainly seems to have trusted Antipatros, he doesn’t seem to have been as close to him as to Parmenion.

If Waldemar Heckel is correct, Antipatros and Antigonos Monophthalmos were allies, and Parmenion was his/their adversary. As the allyship with Antigonos depends on ties in the Successor Wars, it’s unclear how far back it went however. Alexander’s death scrambled older partnerships. Eumenes was supposedly a friend of Krateros, but they fought on opposite sides, and it was Eumenes’s tricky tactics that got Krateros killed. That said, I can see Parmenion and Antipatros at political odds, being the two most prominent men at Philip’s court. And, of course, Antipatros famously clashed with Olympias, and with Eumenes (Philip’s, then Alexander’s secretary).

Antipatros had at least ten kids with (probably) more than one wife. Seven of those were boys, only three girls. Yet as I’ve frequently pointed out, girls are rarely mentioned unless they played a role in history, and all three we know of did: Phila, Nikaia, and (of course) Berenike of Egypt, one of Ptolemy’s wives. I’m betting on more girls we just don’t hear about. The unnamed wife of Alexander of Lynkestis might have been Nikaia or Berenike, but she could easily have been someone else entirely.

If Kassandros eventually became king, it doesn’t seem Antipatros was too fond of him. Given that Kassandros was younger than Alexander, but Antipatros notably older than Philip, we may wonder if most of his older kids were female. His father’s name was Iolaos, but Kassandros was supposedly his eldest son … which is odd, as in most cases, a man named his eldest son after his own father. If not hard-and-fast, it was extremely common. That Antipatros had a much younger son named Iolaos, this could suggest there was an older boy who died, either in war or disease—so Antipatros then named a new son Iolaos, leaving Kassandros as (now) eldest. Several of the daughters also seem to have been older than him.

Anyway, let’s go back to Antipatros’s own father, Iolaos. Given the naming patterns, I want to point out that an Iolaos was regent for Perdikkas II, back during the Peloponnesian War. That’s quite possibly Antipatros father, as Antipatros was born c. 400. (We happen to know his death year from the Marmor Parium: 319 BCE, at 81-ish. Image of the inscription below.)

We’ve good reason to suppose Antipatros was regent for Perdikkas III before Philip, so we may be looking at a family “dynasty,” of top advisors for the king. I’m skeptical that Alexander was ever truly worried about Antipatros’s loyalties, but if he was, that might be why: his family had been throne-adjacent so long, he thought it time he sat in it, especially if Alexander was off Great-Kinging it in Persia. Certainly, that family prestige seemed to drive Kassandros.

As for Antipatros not trying to marry into the family…we don’t know that he didn’t. I suspect one BIG reason Alexander didn’t marry before leaving Macedon is that both Antipatros and Parmenion had convenient daughters of an age to offer him a bride, and he was disinclined to be that much under either’s thumb.

Antipatros was a very capable general, if not quite on Krateros’s level—one reason he courted Krateros after Alexander’s death, offering him Phila, Balakros’s widow. (Balakros had been a satrap in Cilicia.) And of course, after Krateros died on the battlefield, Phila went on to marry Demetrious Poliorketes, so she became the “mother” of the Antigonid Dynasty.

Anyway, fun fact, Antipatros—despite his very “traditional” mindset—considered Phila exceptional and sought her advice in politics, as if a son. I suspect he’d have handed over the regency to her in a heartbeat, if that had been an option. Instead, he was stuck with Polyperchon … just the-hell-not Kassandros!

A quite interesting historical novel could be written from Antipatros’s point of view, covering the reign of four Macedonian kings, although from a purely European (not Asian) point-of-view. That, in itself, would make a fantastic way to differentiate such a novel from “all the others” (including mine). Not unlike The Shadow King by Harry Sidebottom about Alexander Lynkestis. I’ve not yet read that one, but I bought it and will at some point. I like new takes.

[jeannereames]

Hello! I wanted to ask – in polygamous courts in Macedon and the Hellenistic world, were there any formally defined hierarchies when it came to royal wives (or female relatives) or any official titles that any of them were given to denote their precedence and importance? Or was it more unofficial and undefined? I was reading about Demetrius Poliorcetes’s daughter Stratonike, who had the title of queen (šarratu) but was also formally known as “principal wife” (hirtu) during her husband Antiochus’s reign, as seen in the Borsippa Cylinder. The chapter said that this was unique among the Seleukids, so I wanted to understand if there was any precedent for a formal title like this, or if it was more specific and singular for Stratonike?

(the chapter was “Seleukid Women” by Marek Jan Olbrycht in “The Routledge Companion to Women and Monarchy in the Ancient Mediterranean World”, for reference!)

Thank you for taking the time to answer so many asks! I’ve learned a lot from your blog!

First, you're welcome. I'm glad people do actually read these posts!

To answer your question on terminology and royal wives... It seems that, starting with Alexander I (Greco-Persian War and pre-War era), the Macedonians borrowed a number of ideas from the Persian court, polygamy probably one of them. Alexander I, with 5 boys, may have had more than one wife; we simply aren't told. Perdikkas II apparently did have two wives. Archelaos is tagged by the Greeks (who were routinely confused by Macedonian polygamy) as a bastard, the son of a slave or concubine. More likely, he's simply the son of the first wife, of lesser status than a later wife, who gave him the son who initially inherited...and who Archelaos had murdered.

Similarly, in other situations, it seems the status of the mother did have an impact on which son was tagged as heir.

Up through Philip II, they aren't called "queens" any more than the king is actually addressed as "King So-and-so." Yet at least he IS called "king" (basileus) in third person. The wives are just "the king's wives," not "basilissa" (queen).

The change occurs after Alexander's death and especially after the last of the Argeads are eliminated (Philip III Arrhidaios & Alexander IV)...when a lot of things changed of necessity.

By then, the Successors had been exposed to Asian courts and Asian ruling patterns, and of course, Seleukos kept his Persian wife Apama, who had a great deal of influence (as Persian women did, and he was sensible enough to take advantage of). I'd also suggest that Kassandros, the first Macedonian king to use the title for himself (not in 3rd person), was especially keen to elevate his WIFE, an actual daughter of Philip--e.g., an Argead--so "queen" was useful.

As for the "chief wife" title, Persian Great Kings DID have a "chief wife," who was mother of the heir. And they were picky about it, too. The Great King could have as many concubines as he wanted, plus apparently some other wives--from wherever he found them--but the Chief Wife had better be Persian, and enjoyed special prerogatives. If you'd like to look into this before the Hellenistic period, I'd recommend the following three books:

Maria Brosius, Women in Ancient Persia, 559-331 BC

Amelie Kuhrt, The Persian Empire: a Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period

M. A. Dandamaev and V. G. Lukonin, The Culture and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran

Hope this helps a bit.

[jeannereames]

Would Alexander have really married Cleopatra Eurydice? He seems to have respected her enough despite her relation to Attalus- some sources say when removing her statue from the Philippeum he transferred it to another respected place in Heraion. Did they get along personally? How would their marriage have changed matters, if at all?

Okay, first, I believe we have a confusion/conflation of Eurydikes. The one from the Philippion is Philip’s mother, wife of Amyntas III. Her statue was never removed out by Alexander, so I’m unsure what the asker is referring to? The statues were lost over time, but we have the statue bases, and descriptions of the monument. See especially Elizabeth D. Carney, “The Philippeum, Women, and the Formation of Dynastic Image,” in W. Heckel, L. Tritle, and P. Wheatley (eds.) Alexander’s Empire: Formulation to Decay (Claremont, CA, 2007) 27-70. For Eurydike herself, see Olga Palagia, “Philip's Eurydice in the Philippeum at Olympia,” in E. Carney and D. Ogden (eds.), Philip II and Alexander the Great (Oxford 2010) 33-41.

“Eurydike” became a dynastic name, so it keeps popping up among Argeads (and later). Philip’s mother was Eurydike, as was his daughter, wife of Philip III Arrhidaios: (Hadea) Eurydike. Also Kleopatra, niece of Attalos, took the name Eurydike when she married Philip. But she was never in the Philippeon. Philip’s only wife represented there was Olympias, mother of his heir, Alexander. Amyntas III and Eurydike appeared as his parents.

We have no idea if Alexander shared more than a few words with Attalos’s neice. Given her uncle’s hostility towards him, he would likely have minimized contact. Also, timing was against it. Alexander left on the heels of the marriage, was gone 6 months to a year, then likely kept his distance after his return. While Macedonian women were not as sequestered as in Athens, men and (respectable) unrelated women still didn’t mingle freely. If he did interact with her, it would have been when visiting the women’s rooms to see his sisters, with plenty of women present. If marrying a dead father’s widow had precedent, an affair with the wife of one’s living father was another thing. Alexander knew his mythology, and would’ve had no desire to be Hippolytos.* After he took the throne, he had to leave relatively quickly to settle affairs in the south…and she was (likely) dead before he returned.

As for the marriage… this was suggested by my colleague, Tim Howe: “The Giver of the Bride, the Bridegroom, and the Bride,” in T. Howe, S. Müller, and R. Stoneman, Ancient Historiography on War and Empire (Oxbow, 2017) 92-124. Nothing in the ancient sources says Alexander planned such a marriage BUT marrying the wife (especially if young) of the former king wasn’t novel in Macedonia; Archelaos did the same. It was accepted practice generally.

The titbit that might suggest Alexander did plan to wed Kleopatra-Eurydike … Olympias murdered her.

Now, ignoring Justin’s account of a son Karanos, which is wrong (for reasons I don’t have time to go into), Kleopatra-Eurydike’s child was a girl (Europa). That means Kleopatra had no power in the women’s rooms after Philip’s assassination. So why the hell would Olympias kill the infant (and her, by extension)? Revenge alone?

Possibly. Revenge, especially for a slight to timē (personal honor), was a perfectly respectable reason to kill someone. “Turn the other cheek,” or “When they go low, we go high,” is a very Christianized view. But an even better revenge would have been to let her live to raise an extra daughter under the king her uncle had insulted and schemed to replace. Philip had 3 prior adult/almost adult daughters. A 4th, well over a decade from marriageability, was a day late and a dollar short. She could expect a miserable existence in the Pella palace where she was no threat to Olympias.

Unless Alexander planned to marry her in a diplomatic solution to suppress Attalos’s faction, and secure Parmenion’s support. (Attalos had married Parmenion’s daughter.) I strongly suspect Philip’s final marriage was not the midlife-crisis love match Plutarch/Diodoros present, but an attempt to deal with push back in his latter years. Alexander may have decided that marrying the girl was the best way to deal with it too.

And if Alexander did plan to marry her, she was a threat to Olympias’ influence. This isn’t necessarily jealousy. Olympias may have decided that wooing the snake wasn’t sound policy. Remember that Alexander was barely twenty and Olympias would have been between 36 and 38, with oodles more political experience. While sure, her move was self-serving, it also may have been sound policy to keep her son from the match. (Two things can be true at once.)

Alexander need not have publicly declared an intention to marry his father’s widow; he had bigger fish to fry in the immediate aftermath. Yet if he’d discussed it privately, his mother may have moved to eliminate the possibility while he was out of the country. The brutality of the murder certainly suggests a vengeance theme.

Incidentally, while the death of Europa at Olympias’s hands (and Eurydike’s subsequent suicide) is not securely dated in our sources—except that Alexander wasn’t in Pella—it almost certainly occurred in the first months after Philip’s death, during Alexander’s first trip into the Greek south, to shore up support for the Persian invasion and re-ratify the Corinthian League.

As for how their marriage may have changed things…it would almost certainly have put Alexander under the thumb of Attalos-Parmenion. We can see, in the appointments of his two sons, that Parmenion alone held great sway in Alexander’s early years—but at least he wasn’t an in-law. For once, Olympias and Antipatros were likely on the same side. (Antipatros and Parmenion weren’t precisely friendly.) If, as I suspect, Philip made that marriage for political reasons, it suggests the Attalos faction—whatever that entailed—was strong enough to force Philip’s hand before leaving on a probable long-term campaign. That means Attalos was powerful. And a 20-year-old Alexander was no match for him, even if adolescent arrogance may have made him think he was. Olympias may also have decided/suspected that the Attalos-Parmenion tie wasn’t as strong as Alexander feared—which proved to be true. When push came to shove, Parmenion allowed Attalos to be eliminated on Alexander’s order.

Arrian glosses over all this. I wish we had the first two books of Curtius, who likely covered the story of Alexander’s accession in more detail. It would provide more clues. Attalos sorta comes out of nowhere at the end of Philip’s life. Although Diodoros’ account of his reign is so truncated we don’t know the marshals under Philip well, so he may have been around longer than it seems.

————-

* Alexander knew his mythology. Theseus’s second wife, Phaidra, was reportedly cursed to conceive a passion for her (more age-appropriate) son-in-law, Hippolytos. Yet Hippolytos had pledged his virginity to Artemis, offending Aphrodite, who was behind the curse. When Hippolytos rebuked poor Phaedra’s advances, she suicided, leaving a note implicating Hippolytos (for rape). As punishment, Theseus asked his father Poseidon to kill his son. While out in his chariot, a sea monster spooked the horses, he fell out the back but got tangled in the reins, and they dragged him to death. A variation exists in which Aisklepios brings him back from death but Hades is so offended/(worried) by this power, he asks his brother Zeus to strike down Aisklepios by lightning…which he does. One of the few cases of a god dying. (They’re immortal, yes…but can be killed; it’s just that few things can kill one. Being fried by lightning will do it.)

[jeannereames]

Aside from Hephaistion, who did Alexander consider to be his friends? Is there anyone who’s been noted as someone he was close to or fond of? Were they around his age, or older, like someone like Kleitus?

No doubt Alexander’s circle changed across his lifespan. Hephaistion appears to have been a constant, and a few others, but we get mention of new friends and acquaintances now and then, also fallings-out, or deaths.

First, we should note that each Macedonian prince was accorded an “official circle” called syntrophoi (σύντροφοι), selected by the king. It means “those who were raised together with,” e.g., schooled with Alexander. His cousin Amyntas would have had the same. (I’m thinking Arrhidaios probably didn’t, but he might have, depending on his actual mental capacity, which isn’t clear.)

If we can’t be 100% certain who were Alexander’s syntrophoi, we can make a few guesses. Perdikkas, Leonnatos, Marsyas, Hektor, Lysimachos, and Seleukos all seem likely—maybe even Kassandros (although he was younger). Probably Hephaistion, although one of the places Sabine Müller and I disagree is when he met Hephaistion. She thinks they met only as adults, whereas I think Hephaistion was a syntrophos. (I won’t go into why; I simply note it.)

The ruins of the palaistra near Mieza turns out to be much bigger than we expected, suggesting there were a lot of boys sent to study with Alexander—more by far than I included in the novel. But I’d already written Dancing with the Lion by the time that excavation occurred, and I’m not sure I’d change it even if I had known, as 100 kids is a lot to keep track of! I did note the size in the Historical Note, however, at the end of book 2. Obviously if there were even 50 (never mind the possible 100), they weren’t all close to Alexander. Probably most weren’t.

Some not syntrophoi, but important to his circle, include Krateros, Philotas, Nikanor, and Ptolemy, all of whom would have been about 10-ish years older, and may have been syntrophoi (at least some) of Alexander’s older cousin Amyntas. Erigyios, Laomedon, Harpalos, and Nearchos, despite my making them Alexandros’s age in the novels, were all almost certainly older, and perhaps by some years (more than Ptolemy and Krateros). Kleitos would have been like a big brother to Alexander, too, but not a syntrophos.

Now, OF those assigned syntrophoi, who were his actual friends? Good question. Keep in mind this is just my own opinion, based on my sense of things from the sources.

In addition to Hephaistion, he seems to have been genuinely fond of Hektor (Parmenion’s youngest). I think he also liked Lysimachos, and Perdikkas. Despite the hatchet-job Ptolemy (et al.) did on Perdikkas’s reputation in the Successor Wars, after Hephaistion’s death, Perdikkas occupied the highest position still at court (with Krateros his most trusted person away from court). I’m not sure if he were actual friends with Krateros, or simply recognized him as an excellent general, Parmenion’s natural successor. If they were close at some point, I can’t imagine the friction with Hephaistion made it easy to continue. For that matter, I’m not sure Hephaistion and Krateros weren’t originally at least friendly, if not friends. The tension seems to bloom late in the campaign after Hephaistion’s rise. Another possible friend was Marsyas, who had more of a literary career than a military one. But like Ptolemy later, he could have exaggerated his importance to Alexander for prestige.

There were also people in-and-out of his personal circle who weren’t Macedonians, or soldiers. We hear less about them. And we should remember that people’s personal circle does change across time. I think most people do probably count only a handful of people as consistent, long-term friends. That’s what makes them special.

Alexander’s unique place as crown prince, then king…then simply the most powerful person in his world, would have complicated enormously who he could call a friend.

It’s why I find his attachment to Hephaistion so fascinating—a unicorn—as it seems to have been both sincere and to have weathered his rise to power. It’s also why I think his own death followed so quickly on Hephaistion’s. It’s lonely at the top. A cliché, but very true. He got lucky enough to have a trusted partner who he brought along from the beginning. When that partner died, he was rudderless. Even if he trusted Perdikkas…Perdikkas wasn’t Hephaistion. Nobody was. That emotional devastation was heightened so much more simply due to his position.

[jeannereames]

You mentioned that we lack contemporaneous Macedonian sources for the study of Alexander. And a bit earlier, you said your first pick to read would be Marsyas, and second Ptolemy. Why is that?

My understanding if that Marsyas provides a more comprehensive history of the kingdom of Macedonia, but from an “Alexander-centric” point of view, wouldn't Ptolemy be more interesting?

Ah...but I am an Macedoniast first! And an Argead specialist, too. (Argead = dynasty up through Alexander III to Arrhidaios/Eurydike and Alexander IV.)

I'm as interested in the kingdom before Philip and Alexander, as I am in court studies of Philip and Alexander.

So yes, Marsyas's more comprehensive view of Argead Macedonia would be of greater interest to *me*. It would also, I think, provide a better way to evaluate how Philip and Alexander changed the kingship. Governments don't remain static. How can we use the career of the man who most altered Macedonia in order to understand kingship? Yet his career is the one for which we have the lion's share of information.

Who wouldn't want a history that included Alexander I, Perdikkas II, Archelaos...etc.? Even (maybe especially) more about PHILIP'S first 5-10 years? And not from damn Theopompos or Trogus, or Demosthenes's published orations.

I want a MACEDONIAN view, dammit.

Would Ptolemy give that? Maybe. But he was more concerned with presenting himself as the new king of (Ptolemaic) Egypt.

I'd rather have Marsyas. And perhaps also a certain Antipatros' history of the deeds of Perdikkas III. This may be "that" Antipatros...but it might be a different person too (Antipatros of Magnesia).

Gimme some Macedonian history written by a (contemporary) Macedonian!

[jeannereames]

Happy Halloween! 🎃👻🎃👻🎃

I have a question on the potential of assassination, specifically of Hephaestion? Was there anyone close to him that would have the means or motive to kill him? Or anyone who gained greatly from his death?

(I believe I read you say that his death was caused by eating too soon after being incredibly sick, but ignoring him not being killed!)

Sorry for any bad English, I'm sick in bed avoiding school work 🤒🤧🤒🤧🤒 📝📖😱

No, I don’t think Hephaistion was deliberately poisoned. I wrote about it in prior post, HERE.

Another, a little more cheeky, HERE.

Like Alexander, Hephaistion would have had (and did have) plenty of enemies. Ancient Greek and Macedonian society was honor-based, and could be violent at the drop of a hat: witness the crossing of swords between Hephaistion and Krateros in India.

That said, poison was widely regarded as a woman’s weapon, one beneath honorable men. Hence the Successor Era (and almost certainly untrue) accusations that Antipatros conspired with others to poison Alexander had the additional insulting overtones that he couldn’t come after Alexander “like a man,” and was, thus, unfit to be regent for the kings Philip III Arrhidaios and Alexander IV.

That doesn’t mean nobody might have wanted to eliminate Hephaistion, or Alexander, but I wanted to underscore the cultural baggage of a poisoning accusation.

For me, the main reason I don’t think he was murdered (by poison) is simply that Alexander himself didn’t seem to think he had been. Alexander blamed (and executed) the doctor for malpractice—not murder. Given how anxious the king had become, I consider that the best evidence that Hephaistion’s death didn’t seem especially suspicious. He apparently died of natural causes.

What those natural causes were…that’s trickier. We have two basic accounts. In one, he died of a flare up in the fever disease he’d contracted, although he had seemed to be getting better. In the other, he more or less caused his own death by ignoring doctor’s orders and eating food (and drinking a LOT of wine) when he shouldn’t have.

Now, which of those you believe probably says a lot about your prior opinion of Hephaistion. 😉 Is the former whitewashing? Or is the latter intentional slander against his memory?

I’m more inclined to the latter, in part because it seems to have come from a hostile pamphlet that circulated after Hephaistion’s and Alexander’s deaths by one Ephippos of Olympus, On the Death (or Funeral) of Alexander and Hephaestion. The original is lost, so it’s only speculation what was in it, but the vulgate, and Plutarch used it, while Arrian did not. Arrian’s account is missing any hint of boiled chickens and a gallon of wine. Of course, one could also say that Arrian concealed the truth to rehab Hephaistion’s memory.

So make of it all what you will, but I do think it important to note that these are two accounts that we shouldn’t try to reconcile. It’s possible that the hostile account exaggerated a real event in which he ate solid food against doctor’s orders, and died of a perforated intestine, internal bleeding, and sepsis. But if so, the death was unduly rapid. More likely, that particular version was an example of what Thomas Africa considered a “moralizing” death rather than an actual (or accurate) account of what happened (or his symptoms).

To me, it seems more likely that he died of typhoid or malaria. His doctor thought he was recovering, but he suffered an unexpected relapse and died quickly. Alexander’s rage stemmed from being led to believe he was getting better when he wasn’t.