#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]

Alekos of nowhere, prince of nothing

“How do I look?” Kleitos smiles, teeth white in the midst of his black beard. “Fantastic,” he answers. “And to my brother,” I ask, “how will I look?” “Not fantastic, I guess,” my almost-uncle jokes. “You look like war.”

This short fic was initially posted on AO3! I have a lot of thoughts about the relationship between Arrhidaios and other members of his family, which usually don't fit into my main novel.

Under the cut: Alexandros and Arrhidaios after the battle of the Granicus.

Note: The scene takes place soon after Alexander crossed to Asia, right after the battle of the Granicus. While we don't get to see the battle in this fic, I picture it like Steven Pressfield did in his book The Virtues of War, in which every Persian that matters tried to have a go at killing Alexander.

***

The field parts for my horse. Boukephalas, my black monster, wide chested, covered in blood, sweat and dust.

A field of soldiers. Men packed as close as barley before the reaping. My men, cheering, their hands reaching out to touch my blood-soaked clothes and my armor. One shoulder piece is hanging at an odd angle, half cut from the rest by a sword slash to the chest; the crest, on my helmet, has been shaved by another. Their fingers brush against my thigh, soiled red by my own blood.

Red, red, red everywhere, and their voices deafen me.

I let Boukephalas carry me. He doesn’t prance, my brave companion; he’s too spent for that after the battle we had, and cut from half a dozen light cuts.

Victory.

My first battle against the Persians. Mine, no one will deny it. I listened to my officers and they fought well, but it’s my body throbbing from the hit of a mace, my blood that has dried in dark rivulets along my spear arm. I am the king, I made no secret of it – to me they rode, the magnificent lords of Persia, dozens of them rushing at me. Kill the king and the battle is done. Duel after duel I fought, friends falling all around me, friends saving me at every heartbeat.

Kill the king.

Praise the king.

And I think: father, are you proud? I am one step further to avenge you, one step further toward the throne room, that throne room of the King of kings where one can fit the whole palace of Pella.

Dark clouds above. I raise my eyes to the skies. I dream of rain, to clean the blood sticking to my face. Father, I think again, though this time it is not my mortal father I think of. Are you pleased? Am I worthy at least of the divine blood rushing in my veins?

 I am lightheaded, riding through a sea of hands and faces alight with savage happiness.

***

I reach the center of my camp.

I am a sack, a heavy sack full of blood and bones and flesh. I am so tired it takes Hephaistion and Kleitos both to help me slide down Boukephalas. My legs don’t carry me; what mad energy spurred me forward, forward, forward has deserted me. Have I lost too much blood? Ares clothed me in bloody purple. How much of it is mine?

I walk into my tent, weighting on my most trusted companion and the man I love like an uncle. There I crash in a chair and then fumble with the strap of my helmet. Fingers (not mine) untie all one can untie to get me out of my armor. Servants flock, like gulls on the corpses of dead fishes.

“How do I look?”

Kleitos smiles, teeth white in the midst of his black beard.

“Fantastic,” he answers.

“And to my brother,” I ask, “how will I look?”

“Not fantastic, I guess,” my almost-uncle jokes. “You look like war.”

Yes.

That is because, I am war. I am born for it, am I not, Father Zeus? You could have chosen a philosopher or an artist, but no: you made me as the son of Philippos. Tell me, do you like your new sword, now that you have abandoned your last one, broken and dead and betrayed at the very door of Asia?

I smile, and I feel empty.

I let the servants clean my skin. I am war, but there are places I will not go bearing the face of Ares. It is enough that the cuts remain on my spear arm, on my thighs, enough that my skin is turning into thunderous shades of purple.

“Enough,” I order.

I won’t get more presentable than this. Someone presents me with a cup full of kykeon – thick wine mixed with barley, honey and spices. I swallow the mixture with a grimace. I need the energy; the black juice of the grapes is so strong, despite everything else, that warmth shoots straight to my head.

I push the cup away.

“Tell my brother he may see me now.”

***

I am half naked when Arrhidaios is led into my tent, my physician checking my wounds. I wish I could hide the battlefield of my body from my brother – but that would be denying his bravery, and I will not take it away from him.

Arrhidaios doesn’t hide. He doesn’t know how, and this is why my father protected him with secrecy – why he made me swear, long before his death, that I would always stand between my brother and the world.

Arrhidaios doesn’t hide. Horror and fear and sadness shape his plump face. The face of Philippos of Makedon, rounder because of the layer of fat, and with eyes like windows baring his soul. It is always strange to see my father’s face with such innocence and openness. To see this face shocked by violence, shocked by my wounds.

But then, I remember, a long time ago, Arrhidaios begging our father to stay home. I don’t like it when you go to war, Pappas, please, war is dangerous, why do you keep going to war?

“I am well,” I greet him, to keep the tears out of his eyes. “Arrhi, dear, I am well.”

His huge steps swallow the space between us. Arrhidaios is the biggest man in our family. Tall, wide, he can make me disappear in the circle of his arms. Everything about him is soft. His belly, his chest, his arms. He is no warrior, travelling with my baggage train like a woman; I don’t care. I won’t tell anyone, and I can’t let him hug me like that too often, but I like that feeling of warmth.

In my world, everything is always sharp and tough, even Hephaistion; everything except my half-brother.

“You are bleeding,” he whimpers against my hair, sticky with sweat after hours under the helmet.

I nod and fall back into my chair. “Yes, but the physician says it’s nothing dire. Would you mind…”

“Yes, yes of course, Alekos.”

I smile a tired smile. People say Arrhidaios is dumb. Half-witted fool, they snicker behind my back. They should see him now. My brother is not bright, this is true. His mind is not a burning flame jumping from one thing to the other, like mine was when I was a child. It is more like an ox.

Moving slowly, but moving somewhere.

I wait as Arrhidaios prepares his tools. He absently hums a wordless song, an Illyrian song no one in the family knows the lyrics of. My grandmother sang it, a long time ago, to children who didn’t speak her language.

My brother is a healer. Not a very good one, granted. He has a good memory but slow hands. When he doesn’t hum, he repeats under his breath all the instructions he learnt by heart, from the books I sent him from Mieza, and then from the teachers my father paid for him when Arrhidaios asked for them. Whatever he wanted, my father always paid for – painting and sculpting lessons, toys, singing birds and a loom, music instruments and pet rabbits.

Today, none of my wounds require much competence. I lay back in my chair as Arrhidaios takes his time sewing one cut shut, applies salves and wraps bandages around me. He is slow, yes, but one would be hard pressed to find a kinder hand.

You look like war, Kleitos said.

Yes. I am war, and to most people, that is all I will ever be.

But to Arrhidaios?

“I don’t like when you fight,” he says, quiet and sad, taking my scared hand in his, soft, so soft. “I don’t like it when so many people want to harm you.”

He doesn’t ask me not to go. He asked Philippos so many times, and our father never listened; but then, why should I? The men of our family rarely die on the battlefield. It’s assassination I must fear, not fellow warriors rushing at me with their eyes full of Ares.

“I know. But don’t worry, we have them running. No one is going to try for a while now. We’ll be going down the coast to our fellow Hellenes cities. We’ll go to the theater together, would you like that?”

“Only if it’s a comedy,” Arrhidaios answers. “I don’t like to see you cry.”

I chuckle. “The tears the tragedies get from us are good tears.”

“Still tears,” he mumbles. “I want you to laugh, Alekos.”

“You are kind, but I do laugh, dear.”

“No,” he rebukes me. “Your eyes are always sad. It’s not a real laugh if your eyes remain sad.” He squeezes my hand. “Comedies. I want them funny and I want you to be happy.”

“Fine. Comedies, then. Comedies in every city we’ll visit, just for my dearest brother, and songs and jugglers. Hymns to happiness and spring and love.”

“Thank you,” he says, and then he rewards me with a very inappropriate bear hug. “I love you Alekos.”

And I love you too, dear. Because of all the men that follow me now, he is the only one who wants nothing from me. No glory, no loot, no power, no women, no honors.

Just I, Alekos of nowhere, prince of nothing.

[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���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��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��、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。

[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. 

[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

[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)

[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? :-)

[charleneferlay]

Bucephalus rates Alexander novels

Hollywood pic of Bucephalus, who probably had a cropped mane and looked more like a Spanish pureblood than a Frisian.

Hello mares and foals! These past months, a nice lady read way too many books about Alexander. Here are my advices about which books to avoid and books you should read.

Keep reading below the cut!

MUST READ

I am the great horse (Katherine Roberts): The tale of Alexander told from MY POV so obviously the best book, Five stars.

Bucéphale (Pénélope Jossen): 32 pages of Alexander being very cute with me, that's 100% of the book this author knows her priorities, five stars.

MAYBE

Dancing with the Lion: Becoming: The story of Alexander the Great, before his rise (Jeanne Reames): I have no POV in this and had to read it twice to decide that Hephaistion's horse having a personnality is worth some stars. I am not sure about the part where Hephaistion is riding me, I don't want people to think I can actually be nice. I'll give it two stars because we see a lot of horses.

The lion's cub (L. M. Zorn): I am the one who started the love story between Alexander and Hephaistion so it does deserves some stars, also Hephaistion has named horses and I like to have friends!

Lord of the two lands (Judith Tarr): I have no POV in this and the only horse that shows up has bad manners, but it has a cat and for some reason you humans like cats.

The Lion of Macedon (David Gemmell): One star for me getting an origin story but I'll take it back because it's a FALSE origin story.

The virtues of war (Steven Pressfield): I don't show up a lot but when I do I'm the best, that deserves one star.

AVOID A choice of destinies (Melissa Scott): I have no scene in this and die offscreen at the beginning of the book, NO STAR.

Hisutorie (Hitoshi Iwaaki): This is a manga about Eumenes so of course I don't show up a lot. I am very puzzled by Alexander and Hephaistion being the same person and I have to give zero star to Alexander being the most stupid Alexander I ever carried on my back.

Memnon (Scott Oden): I have ONE scene in this. ONE. No point in reading this book.

The golden mean (Annabel Lyon): A book told from Aristotle's POV who, for some reason, isn't paying any attention to me. To me! He's too busy teaching Arrhidaios to do human things, I guess. Zero stars.

The twin soul of Alexander (Lawrence M. Scheier): The boys spend so much time getting laid they don't have any left for ME. I get that having a herd and grooming your mares is important, but so am I!

Archias the exile hunter (The Issos incident and The Siege of Tyr) (Robert Fabbri): Those are short stories but if the author had time for Hephaistion to look pretty, he had time to make me look good! He didn't, zero stars!

I DON'T KNOW

A fire from heaven (Mary Renault): I don't even remember if I show up in this.

Alexander, child of a dream (Valerio Manfredi): I don't know if I show up in this because the woman reading the book did not finish it, according to her it was "the worst Alexander book she ever read" or at least, the most badly written.

Note from the human who actually read those book: The only book on this list that I DON'T recommend is the one from Manfredi. The others are not always well written, but I found something great in each.

If I had to name one favorite, it would be Dancing with the lion, since it's the only one I read twice from the beginning to the end.

[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]

Following up on your answer to that person’s question about Barsine, if Herakles was Alexander’s son, why did he ignore him? Maybe I’m wrong, but I haven’t gotten the impression from what I’ve learned about Alexander that he’s indifferent to family, especially a baby that’s his.

Aaaaand this is precisely why I’m still not 100% sold that Herakles was his.

Herakles of Macedon, Alexander's "Forgotten?" Son

Although as Monica (D’Agostini) reminded me, the baby would have been only about four when ATG died, so at that age, it was quite traditional for children to remain with their mother—and he’d sent Barsine to Pergamon, the Aeolian area where her family had a great deal of power and land. Typically, very young children were left out of historical accounts without a particular reason to mention them. One would think the birth of a healthy prince would count, but we hear about Alexander’s own birth only because notice of it coincided with two other pieces of good news for Philip (and because he became so important later). We don’t hear about Arrhidaios’s birth, much less any of the girls. Even the last is mentioned only because of how she died at Olympias’s hands.

Similarly, we know about Roxane’s pregnancy and stillbirth/miscarriage from the (very late) Metz Epitome. And we know Statiera died in childbirth from a tossed off comment in Plutarch and Justin. Arrian doesn’t mention either of these. That’s caused some to dismiss them both as fabricated, but the problem is we wouldn’t expect the campaign/military-focused Arrian to talk about them. Curtius does at least talk about Statiera, but because she fits into his narrative of an (early) clement ATG, he doesn’t attribute her death to childbirth but exhaustion—in part because a pregnant Statiera would conflict with how he’s presenting Alexander at that point in his narrative, suggesting that maybe he didn’t keep his hands off another man’s wife.

Monica thinks Barsine stayed with Alexander all the way into Baktria and was probably sent to Pergamon either when she became pregnant or after the baby was born. I’d bet on the former, to get her the best medical care. Remember Barsine’s age; she was older than Alexander—possibly approaching 40. Her daughter by Memnon was old enough to be married to Nearchos at Susa—which is why, after Alexander’s death, Nearchos brought Herakles forward as a candidate for king. The daughter may have been as young as 14/15, but that still makes her mother 35+ in 324. Barsine was married to Mentor before Memnon, although perhaps not for very long. Alexander probably didn’t want her trying to have a baby at the back of nowhere at her age, regardless of how many she’d already had. Artabazos “retired” around that same time, so perhaps they traveled back west together. (I’d have to check whether he stayed at the court.)

But the histories don’t reveal any of this. It’s pieced together from the age of Herakles at his death and mention of Barsine being given to Alexander as a mistress after Issos, plus the later prominence of her family—although that could have owed to long-standing guest-friendship between Artabazos and the Macedonian court. IOW, Barsine likely got her position as mistress because of her family’s earlier connection to the Argeads, and in turn, her position as mistress led to Artabazos’s elevated treatment later.

So that’s one likely scenario. But there are a few others. Barsine may have been a cover for Alexander’s affair with Statiera. As we know, Statiera (probably) died in childbirth but the baby couldn’t have been Darius, and therefore almost had to be Alexander’s. After she died (right before Gaugamela), Alexander may have left all the women in Babylon. He certainly didn’t drag Darius’s daughters off to Baktria. If that were the case, timing-wise, Herakles couldn’t be Alexander’s.

Or it's possible Barsine was Alexander’s mistress (not just a cover) even as he also had an affair with Statiera. No expectations existed for Alexander to have only one mistress at a time. I find it unlikely that he took up with Statiera until after he’d received at least the first letter from Darius, making it clear Darius wouldn’t negotiate for his family. So he may have started with Barsine, then took up with Statiera too, but also kept Barsine. Barsine's knowledge of Persia would have been invaluable to him. As for bringing Barsine to Baktria but not Darius’s daughters, they were much younger and perhaps less tough. Certainly they were less experienced politically, compared to the older, bilingual Barsine. So, I can see reasons for bringing her and not them.

The problem is simply that, when it comes to the women traveling with Alexander’s army, we are told so VERY little, from which we are then forced to infer so much. Ergo, disagreement easily ensues over how to interpret the titbits. That’s a large part of why I was open to hearing Monica’s alternative theories. (Well, that and the fact it’s not central to anything I’ve published, so any course-correction isn’t personal—ha.)

The difficulty is just that, after she’s brought to Alexander following Issos, we hear nothing about Barsine again until her daughter is selected for Nearchos’s wife. Then not again till Alexander’s death when Nearchos champions her son (and fails). Then not again until after Arrhidaios and Alexander IV are both dead, and Polyperchon tries to put Herakles forward but is bribed/talked out of it by Kassandros, so instead he kills both the 18-year-old Herakles and Barsine.

The problem is, we wouldn’t necessarily expect to hear about Barsine and Herakles, so that silence isn’t especially significant. That’s why an argument from silence is problematic. Alexander may, in fact, have taken an interest in his son, but wanted to keep him away from court until he was older, especially if he wasn’t legitimate. Alexander was all-too-accustomed to the politics of polygamy and recognized that bringing him to Babylon could make him a target, especially if he wasn’t old enough yet to travel with his father (under his father’s eye and protection). Alexander NOT taking a big interest in him would, ironically, act as protection.

Also, we don’t actually know where Barsine and Herakles were when Alexander died, except apparently not in Babylon. Alexander might have seen the boy earlier, however, once he was back in the west. Barsine could very well have met him to Ekbatana, as the Persian Royal Road goes from Sardis north until east of the Tigris, when it swings south towards Susa. But Persia had a LOT of roads, not just that one, and a road forked off the main trek to the capital of Ekbatana in Media. Easy travel. ATG was to have held a major festival there with athletic contests and all sorts of things, but everything got overshadowed by Hephaistion’s death.

Of more import is why he was passed over at Alexander’s death. I actually find this to be the one REAL sticking point in arguments about his parentage, but it cuts both ways.

Given that nobody knew if Roxane’s baby would be male, and the mental infirmity of Arrhidaios (enough that Perdikkas was appointed regent, as for a child, of a man in his mid-30s!), not choosing Herakles presents a problem. Any Argead male could inherit. Some have pointed out the resistance to Roxane’s son to explain resistance to Herakles too; not only was he part Persian, but the son of a mere mistress, not wife. I find that a weak argument. Barsine was half Greek (her mother was Greek, sister of Mentor and Memnon of Rhodes), making Herakles less than half Persian. If anything, the son of the thoroughly Hellenized Barsine would have been preferable to the unborn child of “barbarian” Roxane, legitimate or not.

If there were doubts about him AS Alexander’s son, however, that could explain why Nearchos’s suggestion was ignored. Except if he’d expected that to be a problem, it seems unlikely Nearchos would've put him forward. Perhaps years later, when Polyperchon tried, a cuckoo could have been slipped in, but in 323, that would've been harder. Also, the fact Kassandros paid off Polyperchon to kill Herakles, the last surviving Argead—didn’t just claim he wasn’t Alexander’s son—suggests Kassandros believed he was Alexander’s son.

Yet it's still a puzzle to me why Herakles was passed over, a healthy male child, in favor of the mentally incapable brother and unborn baby. Perhaps if we had more of Diodoros’s book 18, as well as Arrian’s account of what happened immediately after (the book exists in only in a few tantalizing fragments)—or for that matter Nearchos’s own account!—we’d get a better idea of what transpired in Babylon that July.

[jeannereames]

Certainly! Here’s a refined version of your question in polished English:

Dear Dr. Reames,

I hope this message finds you well. I would like to ask about Barsine.

After the capture of Damascus by Parmenion, he presented Barsine’s Macedonian servant to Philotas and Barsine herself to Alexander as spoils of war. I wonder if Philotas might have felt inferior or resentful over receiving only a servant, while Alexander was given an aristocratic Persian like Barsine. Furthermore, might Barsine be a secondary character in your third book? It would be fascinating to explore her perspective.

Barsine

So, I saved this one as I wanted to use it as an example of how scholars can change their minds when presented with a convincing enough argument.

Previously, I’ve maintained that Barsine’s son Herakles was not Alexander’s child. My chief reasons for this were 1) that Alexander seemed to have had little/nothing to do with him during his lifetime, and 2) he was not seriously considered after Alexander’s death, despite being a healthy Argead male when any Argead could inherit the throne. Nearchos put him forward, but that idea was quickly dismissed. The infantry wanted Arrhidaios and the Cavalry + Hetairoi wanted the unborn baby of Roxane, if male. If Herakles was a healthy son of Alexander, bastard or not, he would seem to be a better choice than Arrhidaios, at the very least.

I’m still not entirely placated on that last point, but after reading Monica D'Agostini's forthcoming chapter on Barsine, then having a long chat with her at the recent ATG conference in Omaha, I’ve changed my mind about Herakles. And (more to the point) the significance of Barsine. She hasn’t been my focus, and I’m not nearly as well-versed in the Diadochi era as Monica is, so several points she made won me over.

But I think this is a good “object lesson,” if you will, in how scholarship is an evolving animal. Scholars SHOULD be open to changing their minds when new evidence or new (better) arguments present. I keep telling Monica she should write a full-scale paper/monograph on Barsine and her family (Artabazos, etc.), but she has other things to do. Maybe she’ll come back to it eventually.

The collection with her chapter in it should be out early in 2025. I’ll be sure to post about it when it is.

Now, to the question … the way the ancient sources tend to phrase things places all agency with the men—not the women. I rather suspect Barsine had a say in where she landed. Given the fact her father and brother were both still fighting with/for the Great King, she may have wanted a position that exerted some influence on Alexander if (when) the war ended—and he won. If not entirely clear just then that he would, after Issos, it would have been a wise move to ingratiate herself (and thereby, her family) to him. If he did lose and she returned to Persian hands, she always had the excuse of having been a captive.

Keep in mind that she also likely knew him from when her family (and Memnon) had resided in exile from Artaxerxes Ochus (prior Persian king) at the Macedonian court of Philip. They might now be on opposite sides, but she had the previous status of guestfriend. (This is also why Artabazos was later treated relatively well.) So I’d like to think this was as much Barsine’s choice as being “given” to Alexander. Just as any liaison later with the Persian Queen may have been initiated by rather than forced on her, in order to secure protection for her family. Persian women were much more accustomed to having a say in things. But it’s no surprise if the Greek sources (written by men for men) describe it as Parmenion giving Barsine to Alexander and encouraging him to take her as his mistress.

As for Philotas being jealous…no. Alexander was king, and as such, would have had his pick of the high-status Persian women. At the time, he decided to honor Statiera as Darius’s wife so set her aside as untouchable (no doubt until he was clear Darius wouldn’t bargain for her); the girls were young yet for marriage—as was he. Barsine was the most prestigious available Persian woman. And he knew her already. Philotas wasn’t in line for her, probably not even if Alexander had turned her down.

And yes, Barsine will have a role in the novels—more of one, after talking with Monica, than I’d originally foreseen. I have a very good idea now of how I want to employ her.

[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!

[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!

Terminology for Royal Wives

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?

Did Alexander Mean to Marry Kleopatra Eurydike?

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.)