Monthly Archives: August 2013

The Babylonian Conference in 323 B.C.

For the other posts in this series, click here

The Ishtar Gate

The Ishtar Gate

After Alexander’s death the Macedonian army was divided over who should take charge of his empire. The phalanx supported his half-brother, Arrhidaeus, but this was opposed by the ‘most influential of the [late king's] Friends and… Bodyguard’ (Diodorus Bk 8. 2). They joined forces with the Companion Cavalry and sent Meleager to the phalanx to order it to submit to their will.
.
Meleager, however, had other ideas. Upon meeting the phalanx, he took its side; moreover, he incited the soldiers against the senior officers.
.
The phalanx rewarded Meleager’s treachery by making him their leader before marching against the senior officers. Diodorus tells us that Alexander’s Bodyguard withdrew from Babylon and prepared for a fight. It was averted, however, by doves, who managed to bring the two sides together.
.
Thus started the Babylonian conference. From the outset it was agreed that Arrhidaeus would become king. His name was duly changed to Philip. But Philip III, as he now was, suffered from a mental illness of some sort and was unfit to rule by himself. In light of this, Perdiccas - to whom Alexander had given his ring - was made his regent. It was also decided that the most senior of Alexander’s officers would take over the various satrapies ‘and obey the king and Perdiccas’ (Ibid).
.
Diodorus doesn’t quite give us the full picture of what happened at the conference. For example, while Perdiccas was indeed the sole regent, it was decided that he would share power with Craterus. Meleager, meanwhile, was made his deputy. I owe these facts to Russel M. Geer who translated this Loeb Classical Library edition of Diodorus that I am using.
.
Something - or rather, someone - else that Diodorus omits to mention is Alexander’s widow, Roxane. She was pregnant with their child at the time of his death. If she had given birth to a daughter, I imagine that Philip III would have been removed (i.e. killed) sooner rather than later and that the Successors would then have begun the post-Argead carve up. As it was, Roxane gave birth to a son, Alexander IV, and the Successors were forced to become caretakers - looking after the boy’s empire until he came of age and inherited it. Or rather, if he did.
.
Diodorus records that after the conference Perdiccas ‘took counsel with the chief men’ (Bk 8. 3) before announcing who he was giving the satrapies to. Here is the list:

  • Antigonus Monophthalmus - Pamphylia, Lycia and ‘Great Phrygia’
  • Antipater - Macedon and ‘adjacent peoples’
  • Arcesilaus - Mesopotamia
  • Archon - Babylonia
  • Asander - Caria
  • Eumenes - Paphlagonia and Cappadocia ‘and all the lands bordering on these, which Alexander did not invade’
  • Laomedon of Mitylene - Syria
  • Leonnatus - Hellespontine Phrygia
  • Lysimachus - Thrace ‘and the neighbouring tribes near the Pontic sea’
  • Menander - Lydia
  • Peithon - Media (i.e. Media Major; Atropates was given north west Media) and neighbouring lands next to Taxiles and Porus
  • Peucestas - Persia
  • Philip - Bactria and Sogdia
  • Philotas - Cilicia
  • Ptolemy - Egypt
  • Stasanor - Aria and Drangine
  • Tlepolemus - Carmania

Perdiccas confirmed the eastern satraps (or kings in the case of Porus and Taxiles) in their positions. I’m listing these men separately as I don’t regard them as successors of Alexander.

  • Atropates - (north west or Lesser) Media
  • Oxyartes - Paropanisadae
  • Phrataphernes - Parthia and Hyrcania
  • Porus - Allowed to retain his kingdom
  • Taxiles - Allowed to retain his kingdom
  • Sibyrtius - Arachosia and Gedrosia

In his notes, Geer states that Diodorus’ list agrees with that given by Arrian, Curtius and Dexippus, except as follows:
.
Arrian

  • Antipater and Craterus - Macedon

Dexippus

  • Rhadaphernes - Parthia and Hyrcania
  • Neoptolemus - Carmania

In the case of Dexippus, are these men but Phrataphernes and Tlepolemus under different names? Unfortunately, I don’t know.
.
One final point; there is one source here whom I have not used - Justin. Geer describes his list of who got what at Babylon as being ‘very innacurate’.

Categories: The Wars of the Successors | Leave a comment

The Sources Speak: Diodorus on Ptolemy Pt 1

An index of the other posts in this series can be found here

Ptolemy I Soter

Ptolemy I Soter

Introduction
Now that I have finished my series of posts on the Wars of the Successors I would like to look at how some of them are represented in the individual sources from the beginning of the source writer’s narrative until the subject’s death or 301 BC when Diodorus’ history of the successor period ends. My first subject is Ptolemy Lagides.
.
A Surprise
As I am already reading Arrian for my Letters posts, I thought I would start this series of posts with another source - Diodorus Siculus.
.
To begin then; when I opened up the Index to Book VIII of his Library of History this morning, I expected to see any number of references to Ptolemy. Much to my surprise, however, Diodorus mentions him only twice. In April 325, Alexander attacked the city of Harmatelia (AKA Harmata). The Brahminic army fought with weapons smeared with a deadly drug. Here is Diodorus’ description of its effect - not for the faint hearted!

The power of the drug was derived from certain snakes which were caught and killed and left in the sun. The heat melted the substance of the flesh and drops of moisture formed; in this moisture the poison of the animals was secreted. When a man was wounded, the body became numb immediately and then sharp pains followed, and convulsions and shivering shook the whole frame. The skin became cold and livid and bile appeared in the vomit, while a black froth was exuded from the wound and gangrene set in. As this spread quickly and overran to the vital parts of the body, it brought a horrible death to the victim.

Depending on how you look at things, you could say that this was an early form of chemical warfare.
.
Ptolemy’s Deadly Injury
Diodorus doesn’t tell us how many Macedonians were injured fighting the Brahmins’ army, only that ‘some of [his] forces were’. One of those wounded, though, was Ptolemy. Here are two interesting snippets of information that Diodorus has to say about him.

  1. … Alexander was not so much concerned [for the other wounded], but he was deeply distressed for Ptolemy… who was much beloved by him
  2. [Ptolemy] was loved by all because of his character and his kindnesses to all

(1) I am quite sure that Alexander was concerned for all his injured men and that Diodorus, rather crassly, is suggesting otherwise simply to foreground the king’s love for Ptolemy. If I’m right, it is the same kind of simplification that Oliver Stone makes in his film of Alexander for the sake of the story. Nothing new under the sun, as they say!
.
(2) In case you are wondering, Diodorus doesn’t use Ptolemy as a source for his work! Actually, this was my second surprise. Given how close Ptolemy was to Alexander, I would have thought his memoir would have been required reading for historians.
.
According to Livius, Diodorus’ source is Cleitarchus. The latter’s source is said by the chart to be soldiers in the Macedonian army itself. If this is so, it would give credibility to Diodorus’ second statement above, which does seem rather over-the-top otherwise.
.
The King Has Healing Hands
How did Ptolemy survive his horrible injury? According to Diodorus, Alexander himself came to the rescue.

The king saw a vision in his sleep. It seemed to him that a snake appeared carrying a plant in its mouth, and showed him its nature and efficacy and the place where it grew. When Alexander awoke, he sought out the plant, and grinding it up plastered it on Ptolemy’s body. He also prepared an infusion of the plant and gave Ptolemy a drink of it. This restored him to health.

It’s easy to be cynical about these kind of dreams that we read so much about in antiquity but if there is a god or gods why wouldn’t they use them to communicate with their people? Admittedly, Diodorus doesn’t say that that is what happened here; I am just assuming that the dream did not come from Alexander’s subconscious. Although, now that I think about it, perhaps he was once told about the plant and its healing powers, so that now, in his dream, as he worried over his dying friend, he remembered it again.
.
Otherwise, I can only wonder why Diodorus uses the dream trope to explain Alexander’s knowledge. I presume it must add something to his character as he is generally favourable to the king. Unfortunately, I just don’t know enough about the matter to say.
.
One final point - Arrian, whose chief source is Ptolemy, does not mention this incident. Did Ptolemy decide not to mention it (and if so, why, as it shows he had Alexander’s close friendship), or was it Arrian who chose to omit it?
.
Ptolemy the General
Ptolemy’s second appearance in Diodorus’ History follows on from the first. Upon reaching ‘the frontiers of Oreitis’ Alexander ‘divided his force into three divisions and named as commander of the first, Ptolemy’. The son of Lagus was given orders to ‘plunder the district by the sea’. Leonnatus and Alexander himself led the other two divisions and the country was laid waste to.
.
And that for Ptolemy, as far as Diodorus is concerned, is that. We won’t meet him again until the Wars of the Successors, which the Diodorus covers in Books XI - XII. So that is where we will go next.
.

  • My edition of Diodorus is the Loeb Classical Library (1963). The quotations can be found in Book VIII pp. 415-21
Categories: The Sources Speak | Tags: | Leave a comment

A Letter to Arian (11) Three Cities, and one G. K. Chesterton

roman_writerMy dear Arrian,
.
A few letters ago, I said that Alexander was such a complex person, he didn’t need a Homer to tell his story for him, ‘his life was poem enough’. I will confess that I was very pleased with this turn of phrase; it was very neat, and it was mine. But now, let me tell you about a writer named G. K. Chesterton who is very dear to my heart. He wrote many books on a wide variety of subjects, including one about a man of great renown called Francis of Assisi. And in that book, he said of Francis that ‘he was a poet whose whole life was a poem’*. I read this book a few years ago; the phrase must have stuck in the back of my mind somewhere! I hope you did not have similar trouble with the writers who came before you!
.
After the Battle of Gaugamela, you bring Alexander to Babylon. What did that city mean to you, Arrian? For me, when I think of Babylon I think of a place of great wealth and hedonism. The source of this view is the religious tradition which I come from; it is a tradition which, though it existed in your day, was still young so I doubt you know it. Anyway, you pass over Alexander’s stay in Babylon with such speed that it is impossible for me to glean your thoughts; yet, for love of you and Roman history, I would greatly like to know what - if anything - you thought.
.
Alexander went from Babylon to Susa where he found the treasure that Xerxes stole from Greece. When I read this, I sighed - how I would have liked to have seen the fabulous works of art that he must have amassed! But you know what, I can! The principle museum of my country now exhibits a great many such works; not only from Greece but all over the world. I don’t know if they are as grand as what Alexander saw, but they are certainly more numerous. It is very funny how we sometimes fail to see that which is right in front of us.
.
Now, it is one thing to make best use of the tools you are given but another entirely to be able to use them innovatively. Alexander’s creation of two cavalry companies under the command of two Companions ‘who had distinguished themselves’ seems to me to have been a little master stroke, for in one go he not only weakened the tribal foundation of the Macedonian army - always a dangerous alternative power base to the king - but did it in such a way that no one could disagree with. After all, who could complain about being led by men who had proven themselves on the battlefield?
.
Finally, we come to Persepolis. There is a tradition, I am sure you know of it, that says Alexander was inspired to burn the Royal Palace down by Ptolemy’s companion, Thaïs. If the reason for the absence of her name in your account is because you believe that Alexander was at fault rather than her**, then I applaud your honesty. You love Alexander as much as I but are not afraid to say he was wrong where need be. Thank you for not avoiding the complexity of his character.
.
Your friend,
.
φιλέλλην

The above picture is from Ancient History
.
An index of all the letters can be found here
.
* See the video below at 15:53ff

** And not as a result of ignorance arising from the fact that Ptolemy diplomatically omitted her name

Categories: Letters to Arrian | Tags: , | Leave a comment

Alexander at Siwa

For the other posts in this series, click here
.
According to Quintus Curtius Rufus

.
“From Memphis Alexander sailed upstream and penetrated into the interior of Egypt where, after settling administrative matters without tampering with Egyptian traditions, he decided to visit the oracle of Jupiter Ammon. The journey that had to be made could scarcely be managed even by a small band of soldiers lightly armed: land and sky lack moisture; the sands lie flat and barren, and when they are seared by the blazing sun the ground swelters and burns the feet and the heat is intolerable.

Siwa Oasis

“Alexander was… goaded by an overwhelming desire to visit the temple of Jupiter - dissatisfied with elevation on the mortal level, he either considered, or wanted others to believe that Jupiter was his ancestor.
.
“After four days in the desert wastes, [the Macedonians] found themselves not far from the site of the oracle. Here a number of crows met the column, flying ahead of the front standards at a slow pace, occasionally settling on the ground, when the column’s advance was relatively slow, and then again taking off as if they were going ahead to show the way.
siwa2“At last the Macedonians reached the area consecrated to the god which, incredibly, located though it is among the desert wastes, is so well screened on all sides by encircling tree branches that the rays of the sun barely penetrate the shade, and its woods are sustained by a wealth of fresh water springs.
siwa3
“… as the king approached, he was addressed as ‘son’ by the oldest of the priests, who claimed that this title was bestowed on him by his father Jupiter. Forgetting his mortal state, Alexander said he accepted and acknowledged the title, and he proceeded to ask whether he was fated to rule over the entire world. The priest, who was as ready as anyone else to flatter him, answered that he was going to rule over all the earth.
.
“Alexander… offered sacrifice, presented gifts both to the priests and to the god, and also allowed his friends to consult Jupiter on their own account. Their only question was whether the god authorized [sic] their according divine honours to their king, and this, too, so the priest replied, would be agreeable to Jupiter.”

The Temple of Amun at Siwa

The Temple of Amun at Siwa

from Curtius 4:7. 5-6, 8, 15-16, 25-26, 28
.
Nota Bene
If you haven’t seen Michael Wood’s documentary on Alexander, made for the BBC in 2005, I thoroughly recommend it to you as a matter of course. Wood visits Siwa and says that the oracle’s shrine is ‘perhaps the only place on earth where you can trace [Alexander's] footsteps right up to the door’.

Categories: Mapping Alexander | 1 Comment

Alexander Revisited: The Indian Forest to Cleitus’ Death

For the previous posts in this series, click here.
.
Scenes Covered

  1. The Indian Forest
  2. Bagoas’ Dance
  3. Alexander and Ptolemy
  4. The Death of Black Cleitus

The Indian Forest
The intermission over, we rejoin Alexander in the middle of what seems like monsoon season deep in an Indian forest. The caption informs us that it is 327 BC.
.
In the last post, I said that Alexander’s conversation with Ptolemy atop the Hindu Kush took place in 326 BC. I obviously got that wrong. Or did I? Here are all the captions from Alexander’s arrival in Babylon onwards:

  • Babylon, Persia 331 B.C.
  • Northeastern Persia, 329 - 327 B.C.
  • Macedonia - 10 Years Earlier [i.e. 337]
  • Sogdia, Northeast Persia - 10 Years later [i.e. 327]
  • Macedonia - 9 Years Earlier [i.e. 336]
  • Hindu Kush - 10 Years Later [i.e. 326]
  • India - 327 B.C.

As you can see, unless I have made a mistake somewhere, it appears that not for the first time, Oliver Stone has got his dates mixed up slightly.
.
India
As the Macedonians trudge through the forest, the elder Ptolemy tells us how hard it was to conquer India. The land was ‘without a center’ he says; kings ‘conspired against one another.’ and there existed ‘[a] labyrinth of tribes urged on by zealots and philosophers to die by the thousands for their strange gods’.
.
I would be very interested to know what the Indian political and religious situation was actually like in the late fourth century BC. Was it really as fractured as Oliver Stone is making Ptolemy suggest? My instinctive reaction is that the comprehensiveness of the difficulties faced by Alexander are too much of a ‘perfect storm’ to be taken seriously as historical fact. However, beyond knowing that within a few years Chandragupta united the country under his rule, I am ignorant of Indian history so would welcome others’ thoughts on the matter.
.
One thing that I do know, however, and which is worth keeping in mind when watching films or reading about Alexander, is that he did not enter the territory of modern day India. Alexander’s eastward journey ended at the Hyphasis (Beas) River, which is in modern day Pakistan.
.
Knowledge
I found the short scene where Alexander examines the monkey to be a very touching one; it felt very authentic. Given that Hephaestion was an intellectual (as indicated by his correspondence with Aristotle) it made perfect sense for him to be the one who worked out that monkeys were not ‘men with hairy skins’ but animals. His contention, though, that they were animals who ‘imitated men’ neatly pointed to the limit of his knowledge.
..
I also appreciated the nod to Alexander’s interest in learning new knowledge by showing him sitting with the Indian teachers. Nothing to do with knowledge, but I have to ‘break a lance’ for the scene where Craterus comes to the soldier dying of a snakebite. Craterus’ distress was palpable and deeply affecting. It was a short scene with few words but it didn’t need any more and was really well acted.
.
Discordant Notes
Firstly, The elder Ptolemy informs us of the naked men ‘who spent hours at a time staring and doing nothing’ as if they were unusual. But surely he met a similar person in Corinth in 336 - Diogenes of Sinope.
.

Secondly, the elder Ptolemy also says ‘… with the local water putrid we drank the strong wine’. Is this the same Ptolemy who comes from Macedon where drinking strong wine is regarded as de rigueur?!
.
Bagoas’ Dance
Francisco Bosch, who played Bagoas, is a ballet dancer by profession so it is not a surprise that Oliver Stone gave him a dance scene. When Roxane danced for Alexander, we got an insight into her character by her use of knives and the way her character ‘divided’ into multiple persons - all indicative of her being a submissive princess yet still a tigerish woman (in private, as the sex scene showed).
.
As with Roxane so with Bagoas. His dance is overtly (one might say rather too obviously) sexual, clearly indicating his desire to have Alexander for himself. This is confirmed in his proud glance at Roxane at the start of the dance. It is Bagoas’ bad luck, however, that when he starts to look proud - and why shouldn’t he, he is a very good dancer - one just thinks ‘yes, but you are still a eunuch and at the mercy of all of Alexander’s officers’.
.
Bagoas’ duet with the second dancer seemed to me to be a kind of ‘imagining’ of his relationship with Alexander. In that respect, the scene offered very little that we didn’t know already after their earlier sex scene. What really made the whole scene for me, though, is what is going on in the court while Bagoas is dancing: Alexander getting steadily more drunk (as indicated by the Paul Greengrass camera), and Black Cleitus’ frowning over his cup.
. .
Thaïs?
In my last post, I said that I thought Ptolemy’s companion, Thaïs, was dead. Since then, two people - here on the blog (thank you, Sheri) and elsewhere (thanks to @oresteshighking’s scribe), have mentioned that she appears at Bagoas’ dance. Unfortunately, and despite my best efforts, I was unable to to make a screen capture on my computer of Ptolemy and his companion so I did the next best thing and took a picture with my mobile phone. With apologies for the poor quality of the picture, therefore, here is Ptolemy and the woman who is said to be Thaïs.

Ptolemy - and Thaïs?

Ptolemy - and Thaïs?

Unfortunately, she doesn’t have a speaking part in this scene so is not named on screen. Neither is she mentioned in the credits at the end of the DVD or on IMDB. We can’t, therefore, be certain that she is Thaïs; however, given that one does not need to interpret Ptolemy’s words on the Hindu Kush as indicating that Thaïs is dead - making it likely that any woman he is seen with will be her - and because the woman above does look rather Greek, I am very happy to accept that she may well be our elusive hetaira. My grounds for doing so may be a little weak - especially in regards her appearance - but Thaïs intrigues me as a person so I pretty much want it to be her!
.
Wine Time
After the dance, Alexander rather needlessly antagonises his older Macedonian soldiers (i.e. Black Cleitus), and embarrasses Roxane and his hosts by kissing Bagoas. He proposes a toast to Dionysus. I liked the shot of the drunk Macedonian being carted away behind him. He’ll wake up tomorrow with a headache but it will go soon enough when he discovers what happened after he passed out.
.
Having made his toast, Alexander then downs the wine. I have to say, he appears to only do so with some difficulty. Now, I know that some people think that he didn’t drink as much as others say, but I will admit to being a little disappointed at the effort that he had to put into draining his cup.
.
Roxane
Alexander catches up with Roxane on her way out of the hall. She tells him that in Persia he is regarded as a great king, but here, “they hate you.” Do they? Did I blink and miss the scene where the Indians demonstrated this fact? When the camera switches to two senior Indian leaders, they look perfectly content to me.
.
Roxane then follows in Parmenion’s and Ptolemy’s footsteps by asking Alexander to ‘take us back to Babylon’ where he is strong. Roxane may well have been taking lessons in politics but it doesn’t make much sense for her to talk about going back to Babylon as she has never been there before.
.
Alexander and Ptolemy
Upon Roxane’s departure, a group of Alexander’s Persian subjects invite him to join them. He is interrupted on the way by Ptolemy - which makes a certain amount of historical sense - who, I have to say, sounds just a little drunk. He still has enough in him, though, to warn Alexander about the dangers of drinking too much.
.
Earlier on, I quoted the elder Ptolemy on how the Macedonians turned to strong wine when the local water was found to be putrid. Just before that line, he says, “Our quest for gold and glory evaporated as we realized there was none to be had. Tempers worsened. We massacred all Indians who resisted.” For his part, Ptolemy must have realised after their conversation on the Hindu Kush that Alexander was not interested in gold, anymore. It seems he has kept that information to himself. Now, Alexander tells him that Dionysus frees him from himself. This must have set alarm bells ringing in Ptolemy’s heart: they are now following a king who would not only never stop exploring the world but who appeared to have given himself over to dangerous Dionysus.
.
Before Ptolemy can say anything, however, Black Cleitus stands up and sarcastically proposes a toast to Bagoas and the ’30,000 beautiful Persian boys’ who will form Alexander’s army in the future. It’s the beginning of the lowest point of Alexander’s life.
.
The Death of Black Cleitus
.
Alexander’s argument with Black Cleitus is a good piece of knockabout but really steps up a gear when Cleitus asks Alexander how he can compare himself to Herakles; Alexander leans forward angrily and asks aggressively, “Why. Not?” Colin Farrell delivers that line with really great force. No wonder that the Indians decide now would be a good time to return home.
.
What is less good is, first of all Cleitus’ reference to Alexander’s ‘fairy god’. Did Oliver Stone run out of proper insults for Cleitus to give and so decide upon that gratuitous and unlikely one? Maybe Cleitus did not believe in the gods but given his conservative views I find that very unlikely. Secondly, how on earth is Cleitus able to slip away from Craterus, Nearchus and Perdiccas (?) seconds after leaving the hall? And why does it take them several more to re-enter it after he does? This is one of those irritating moments that sometimes occurs in films where logic takes second place to the needs of the narrative.
.
A third, and more serious problem, is the fact that in the film we see too few examples of what Cleitus is complaining about. True, there is plenty of ‘eastern pomp’ on show, but less bowing down and sycophants quaking (one man does bow down to Alexander when he is talking to Ptolemy but the moment is over very quickly). Indeed, I can’t think of any character who is worthy of being called a sycophant. Cleitus names Hephaestion, Nearchus and Perdiccas (not Ptolemy, interestingly enough) but there is really no proof of them being so. Gary Stretch puts in a powerful performance as Cleitus, a man who is as much sad as he is angry about what he sees as Alexander’s descent into error, but he would have been greatly helped if the script had backed up his words.
.
One final point. We already know that Hephaestion supported Alexander in all his deeds, not least his desire to integrate Macedonian and barbarian with one another. We see a clear example of this support at 10:22, which is a wide angle shot of the gap between where Alexander and Cleitus are sitting. Standing halfway between them, in a red coat and - more significantly - dusty brown trousers is Hephaestion.

Categories: Alexander in Film | 6 Comments

The Search for Alexander’s Tomb

Daily Mail headline: Alexander's Grave Discovered?

I’m not very good with screen captures on the computer, so here’s one from my mobile phone


The Daily Mail
reports
that Alexander the Great’s tomb may have been found near Amphipolis in Greece.
.
The basis of its report is the discovery of,

… a marble-faced wall dating from the [Fourth Century BC]. The structure measures an impressive wall measuring 500 metres long and three metres high, which archaeologists believe could contain a royal grave.

Could this be Alexander’s grave? Well, it might be, but only in the way that a homeless man might be a millionaire. Yes, he might be, but, on the balance of probabilities, it is very unlikely that he is.
.
If Alexander was buried in Macedon the internment would not have taken place before AD 215 as this is when Caracalla travelled to Alexandria and became the last known person to see his body. That’s fine; maybe Caracalla, or one of his successors, sent the body back to Macedon. But if they had would they have reburied Alexander in a 500 year old tomb? The Romans greatly admired Alexander, I think the emperors would have had a new one built for him.
.
Further to that, if they did take him back to Macedon, why does no Roman or Greek writer mention this momentous event? I know we have lost many ancient texts but the silence on this point of those which have survived is deafening.

By the fourth century, Alexander’s tomb was believed to be lost. In 1993, however, Robert Bianchi wrote that,

… creditable Arab commentators, including Ibn Abdel Hakam (A.D. 871), Al-Massoudi (A.D. 944), and Leo the African (sixteenth century A.D.) all report having seen the tomb of Alexander…

Frustratingly, though, he adds that none of the men ‘specify its exact location’. It seems certain to me, though, that if Alexander’s tomb is to be found anywhere - with or without his body - it is in Alexandria.
.
So, if Alexander is not buried at Amphipolis, who might be buried there? A quick look at Wikipedia’s article on Amphipolis tells me that Brasidas was buried there in 422 BC ‘with impressive pomp’. If that is too early, though, it also says that Laomedon, one of Alexander’s successors, was also buried there.
.
The problem with Laomedon is that I don’t get the impression he was quite important enough to get what appears to be a very grand burial mound. So, the answer to my question is ‘I don’t know’. I will just have to wait and see what the archaeologists discover..I remain as certain as an amateur can be, though, that it won’t be Alexander.
.
To their credit the archaeologists at the site are being a lot more level headed than the Daily Mail’s headline writer, saying no more than that they hope to find, ‘a significant individual or individuals’ in the tomb. Greek politicians have come in for a lot of stick for their (mis)handling of the Greek economy, but I applaud the culture ministry for warning ‘against ‘overbold’ speculation that archaeologists are close to uncovering the king’s remains.’

Categories: Of The Moment | 1 Comment

The Fates of the Successors

Read the previous posts in this series here

When - Who - Where - How

Also includes the women and epigonoi who, though not Successors, played a direct part in the succession struggle. If you see any mistakes or omissions in the list below, let me know in the comments box and I will update it.

The Three Fates

The Three Fates

.
322
Leonnatus - Lamia - Killed by an allied Greek army during the march to Lamia
320
Craterus
- Border of Asia Minor/Cappadocia - Trampled underfoot by his horse during battle
Laomedon - Last seen: Caria - Fate Unknown
Neoptolemus - Border of Asia Minor / Cappadocia - Killed in a duel with Eumenes
Perdiccas - Egypt - Assassinated by Peithon and Antigenes and other senior officers
319
Alcetas
- Pisidia, Asia Minor - Committed suicide after being defeated in battle by Antigonus
Antipater - Macedon - Died in his bed (of old age)
318
Arrhidaeus - Last seen: Cius, Asia Minor - Fate Unknown
Nicanor - Piraeus - Executed on Cassander’s orders
White Cleitus - Thrace - Killed by Lysimachus’ soldiers
317
Adea Euridike - Pydna - Forced to commit suicide by Olympias
Nicanor son Antipater - Macedon - Executed on Olympias’ orders
Philip Arrhidaeus - Pydna - Executed on Olympias’ orders
317/6
Antigenes - Gabene - Executed on Antigonus’ orders
Eumenes - Gabene - Executed on Antigonus’ orders
316
Aristonous - Pydna - Murdered on Cassander’s orders
Olympias - Pydna - Executed on Cassander’s orders
Peithon
- Ecbatana - Executed on Antigonus’ orders
313/12
Asander - Last seen: Caria - Fate Unknown
310/09
Alexander IV - Amphipolis - Assassinated on Cassander’s orders
310/09
Polemaeus - Cos - Executed on Ptolemy’s orders
309
Herakles - Macedon - Assassinated on Polyperchon’s orders
303
Polyperchon - Messenia - Died in his bed (of old age)
301
Antigonus Monophthalmus - Ipsus - Killed during the Battle of Ipsus
297
Cassander - Macedon - Died in his bed (possibly/probably of tuberculosis)
Philip IV (epigonoi) - Macedon - Died in his bed (possibly/probably of tuberculosis)
294
Alexander V (epigonoi) - Dium - Assassinated on Demetrius Poliorcetes’ orders
Antipater I (epigonoi) - Thrace - Executed on Lysimachus’ orders
284
Agathocles (epigonoi) - Thrace - Executed on Lysimachus’ orders
283
Ptolemy I Soter - Alexandria - Died in his bed (probably of old age)
282
Demetrius Poliorcetes (epigonoi) - Apamea - Died in his bed (of various factors, incl. alcoholism)
281
Lysimachus - Corupedium - Killed during the Battle of Corupedium
281
Seleucus I Nikator - Thrace - Assassinated by Ptolemy Keraunos
.
Requiescant in Pace

Categories: The Wars of the Successors | Leave a comment

The Mieza Book Club “Orestes: The Young Lion” (Chapters 20 - 25)

  • New to the Mieza Book Club? Read the Introduction here
  • Minutes of the previous meetings can be read here
Orestes: The Young Lion by Laura Gill

Orestes: The Young Lion by Laura Gill

.
Chapters 20 - 25
We are now halfway through Laura Gill’s book Orestes: The Young Lion. Agamemnon is dead and Orestes is about to flee from his home.
.
For The Record

  • Amyntas of Pella and Amyntas of Aegae were not late to this meeting but did spend too long at the bar talking to the barman; in accordance with club rules, they lost the right to contribute to the discussion.
  • Please note, the transcript contains “spoilers”.

.
Peucestas
Club Secretary
.
Minutes
.
Seleucus So, chapters 20 - 25. A jolly tense time for Orestes. Serious things happen in these chapters, and it all starts with the murder of the tracker. I liked the suddenness of it; the fact that it really was ‘that easy’.
.
Leonnatus I agree that Gill’s handling of it was impressive. I have to say, though, I found Orestes’ assertion that because it is it easy to kill a man, life is, therefore, cheap, not only illogical but a fundamentally depressing moment. Indeed, I had to stop reading for a good half hour at that point and take a walk in the garden. Still, it gave me an excuse to smoke a little of my Old Hundredth.
.
Seleucus Silver linings, dear boy, silver linings.
.
Leonnatus Well, indeed. Obviously, I got over it quickly enough; tears are for women, stoicism is for chaps.
.
At this point, Amyntas of Pella said we should put Leonnatus’ assertion to the vote as some might find it controversial in this day and age. The members agreed. It was passed 9 - 0 ( the barman was picking up empty glasses from the table and also voted).
.
Leonnatus I am glad you all agree. The reason I found Orestes’ assertion to be fundamentally depressing was because his words were not the kind a chap says then forgets. Rather, they are the kind that sit upon a fellow’s soul and influences how he behaves in the future. Of course, when the words are positive, all is well, but I should not like to be the subject of a king who thinks that life is cheap.
.
Theban Al You make a good point, Leonnatus; but remember, Orestes is only twelve; there’s plenty of time for him to grow up, psychologically as well as physically.
.
Leonnatus Yes, that is true, although is not the child the father of the man?
.
Theban Al To a point; but again, remember that although Orestes speaks unwisely, the fact that he feels pain over what happened surely shows that he is not a budding psychopath. Obviously, it is not nice to see him in pain, but still, it gives us hope that he’ll grow up ‘alright’.
.
Harpalus In terms of violence, we certainly had a rough ride this time round. Chapter Twenty saw the tracker get brained, then in Twenty-One Orestes himself is beaten up rather soundly by the second tracker.
.
Seleucus I’m sure I do not need to propose a vote on who winced when Orestes’ wound was cauterised.
.
Loud murmurs of approval from the members; no dissenting voices.
.
Meleager I must confess I had no idea a wound could be closed that way.
.
Harpalus That is just what I was going to say! Good God, it must have hurt.
.
Meleager And poor old Timon! When Orestes saw him lying there, I thought, ‘hello, the old boy has been stabbed; he’s not going to make it to the end of the book’.
.
Peucestas You must have been very relieved when it turned out that he was not badly injured.
.
Meleager Rather. However, ever since then, I have been fighting the urge to turn to the back of the book to see if he is mentioned. I think he will be killed off. He is like the wise man that appears in fantasy novels to guide the hero. But one day, Orestes won’t need him - or he’ll need him at a critical moment - and Timon will be cut down because ultimately the hero must make it on his own.
.
Seleucus By George, Meleager, you have thought about this; although, is there a necessity for the wise man figure to die? But that’s another matter. I agree that he will get killed off at some point.
.
An open discussion (i.e. everyone talking at once) on this point ensued. After I had brought the meeting to order, we took a vote on ‘will Timon be killed?’ It ended 4 - 4.
.
Harpalus Moving on to the next chapter [i.e. Chapt. 22], I was very interested by what Spheros the soldier had to say about the ‘terrors’ that reside in his head. Unless I have read it totally wrongly he is talking about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
.
Peucestas That is how I read it.
.
Harpalus Well! At first, I was very surprised by Spheros’ admission: An Ancient Greek suffering from PTSD - whoever thought of that? But the more I thought about it, the more I thought, ‘why not?’; yes, they led hard hard lives, and were no doubt mentally tougher than us as a result, but they were not supermen; they cried just like we do; of course they could suffer from stress. This is why fiction can be so valuable. It may be made up but it can contain truths that history books miss. Or that I miss when reading history books!
.
Meleager What did you make of Strophius’ attempt to heal Orestes of his PTSD?
.
Harpalus You mean the religious rite?
.
Meleager Exactly so.
.
Harpalaus Well, I suppose like any good rationalist, I feel sorry that Orestes didn’t have a therapist to talk to. Having said that, I would be surprised if the saying, ‘a problem shared is a problem halved’ does not predate the Age of the Enlightenment. But even if it doesn’t, I think one would have to be a fairly mean minded sort of fellow to denigrate what Strophius does just because one does not believe in the existence of the Greek gods. The point is - and it is the only relevant point, here - he was helping Orestes according to his measure. That is to say, according to his lights. One can never ask a chap to do more than that.
.
Seleucus I can’t imagine anything more irrational than looking down on people simply because they think differently to us. Of course, their views may turn out to be deficient, but that is another matter.
.
Leonnatus If I can go back to the palace courtyard in Krisa, and this is related to the PTSD issue, I wanted to speak to the anxiety that Orestes’ feels after cheeking the self-important scribe. I wish I had made notes before then to back up my point but it was here that I thought, ‘Orestes is living under a cloud of constant anxiety now; not just in his waking moments but dreams, too. The lad will be lucky to avoid a nervous breakdown at this rate’.
.
Peucestas I know what you mean. In that light, the appearance of Anaxibia and Strophius was very well timed. Although when the bard started singing the song of Agamemnon’s death I shook my head!
.
Leonnatus You say Strophius’ appearance was welcome but I harbour reservations about him. I didn’t like how he took Orestes’ ring. That just spells trouble.
.
Meleager Now that you mention it, he was behind Pylades’ marriage to Elektra, wasn’t he? He clearly has his eye on the main chance - Agamemnon’s throne. In other words, he is nicer than Aegisthus - a lot nice, to be fair - but still a politician. Orestes needs to be careful!
.
Seleucus Speaking of being careful, perhaps now is the moment to discuss Orestes and Aktaia, the ‘pretty attendant’…! Well, who saw that coming?
.
Peucestas Oh, Seleucus.
.
Meleager There was no need for that!
.
Seleucus What? Oh! I apologise. Please let that be recorded, Peucestas. Pun most certainly not intended.
.
Leonnatus I shall speak to this issue. Firstly, I congratulate Ms Gill on her interpretation of the scene, for aren’t sex scenes supposed to be really difficult to write? Writing one involving a twelve year old boy and thirteen or fourteen year old girl must be even harder on account of the current belief that sex between juveniles - teenagers - is wrong.
.
Seleucus I see what you are saying there, and maybe it was hard for her. If it was me, though, I would reply, ‘I am a writer, my sole duty is to write this scene truthfully. I have no duty to worry about society’s opinions, so therefore, it can go hang’. It would be a first class fool who thought that a writer believed everything that they wrote about. Ms Gill would be a blood crazed maniac if that were so. Well, maybe she is but we cannot extrapolate that from her book.
.
Harpalus Moreover, do we - as a society - really think that sex between juveniles is wrong? I mean, many of us may say that it is, but we don’t raise our voices when companies sell clothing that sexualises children; or when our underage daughters wear skimpy clothing to wear when they go out with their friends; or when schools give students advice about sex and gives them contraceptives; or when newspapers publish photographs of topless women and men’s magazines of hardly dressed models; or when Hollywood films sex scenes that have no narrative value but plenty of shots of the nude actors, and so on. We say one thing but do another.
.
Seleucus Yes, it is hypocritical.
.
Harpalus Deeply so, deeply so. Western civilisation should be honest and either say, ‘we stand for a sexualised society from childhood to death’, or, ‘we stand for a society where sex has its place but not before time and not at the cost of anyone’s dignity’
.
Seleucus Which would you propose as the better course?
.
Harpalus The latter.
.
Seleucus In light of that, what do you think of Gill’s sex scene?
.
Harpalus Well, building upon what you said a moment ago, I think she writes it very truthfully, and very sensitively.
.
Seleucus Very well. Now, you have proposed a society where we - at the very least - tread carefully when telling young people about sex. Would you restrict access to, or withhold this book from, your twelve, thirteen or fourteen year old?
.
Harpalus Absolutely not! Orestes is literature. It tells us not only a story but something about the human condition. It is vital that anyone who is able reads it, and other books like it. Permitting our children to wear sexualised clothing, giving them condoms ‘just in case’, or buying so called “lads’ mags” is not only not vital but asking for trouble - which we affect to be surprised at when we get.
.
Peucestas I agree with you in regard clothing and lads’ mags but with condoms, the fact is that after adolescence, children are liable to have sexual encounters with one another. That is not something we can or should ignore. Orestes shows how easily it can happen. Surely giving them condoms is simply a pragmatic way of dealing with the possibility/probability.
.
Harpalus Pragmatism is sometimes overrated. It is pragmatism that brings about Agamemnon’s murder.
.
Peucestas But also Timon’s decision to accompany Orestes north.
.
Harpalus True, so the key is to discern, ‘when is pragmatism the best course, and when is it not?’ rather than simply use it hypocritically. Certainly, we should look after our weaker brethren, that is to say, the one whose resistance to sex is small, but we should do nothing that suggests to him that while we say one thing - “You are too young for sex” - we mean another - “Here is a condom, anyway” which really means ‘I don’t want you to have sex but I’m prepared for you to have it, anyway’.
.
Seleucus And all this from two scenes that are over nearly as quickly as they begin!
.
Leonnatus Just like sex for no few men, I hear!
.
Laughter among the members; pipes relit and beer sipped.
.
Seleucus Indeed! We must round things up now. I wanted to highlight the mention of the priestess’ snake tattoos. I always imagined tattoos as belonging to barbarians; I didn’t know Greeks went in for them.
.
Meleager My favourite scene was in Chapter Twenty - the escape from the Royal Palace. I’m very glad that Gill did not just have Orestes make a mad dash for it but had to organise it properly. Well, I know Timon did, but you take my point.
.
Peucestas On that note, I was impressed by the advice that Doryklos. Very simple, very detailed, very true. Reminded me of Tolkien in a way.
.
Leonnatus The recalcitrant fisherman made me laugh!
.
Seleucus Another occasion when Gill sells us a dummy. I never expected the first tracker to be killed so quickly and I never expected the fisherman to throw the gold back at Timon. I really thought he would grumble but take them!
.
Theban Al I would like to say something about accents. Spheros has an Arcadian accent. Whenever I go abroad the one thing I never consider is that other countries, just like us, have regional accents. It was a lovely piece of verisimilitude.
.
Peucestas On that point, gentlemen, we are out of time. Thank you for this discussion. Whose round is it?
.

Mieza. Aristotle's 'classroom' and some English chaps' library

Mieza. Aristotle’s ‘classroom’ and some English chaps’ library

 

  • Orestes: The Young Lion is available to buy in various formats. Here it is at Amazon.
  • If you know of a book that the Mieza Book Club should read, let us know in the comments box

Categories: The Mieza Book Club | Leave a comment

Alexander Revisited: Philip’s Wedding Party & Atop the Hindu Kush

For the previous posts on Alexander Revisited click here
.
As you can see from the title to this blog post, I am covering just two scenes in the film today. This is because an intermission follows the Hindu Kush scene so it forms a natural break for both the film and me. I’m not sure why Oliver Stone felt the need to have an intermission on a DVD but I don’t mind as it gives us the opportunity to admire some ancient Greek works of art (or copies of the same). And listen to Vangelis’ evocative music, which reminds us very well indeed of Alexander’s nobility.
.
In the last post I said that I would not use the word ‘ravage’ to describe an act done by one person to another. Well, perhaps not surprisingly, I have since seen it used in that context and it fitted perfectly. We live and learn.
.
Scenes Covered

  1. Philip’s Wedding Party
  2. Alexander and Ptolemy atop the Hindu Kush

Philip’s Wedding Party
Pausanias
‘Macedonia - 9 Years earlier’ and it is party time in Pella as Philip celebrates his forthcoming marriage to Attalus’ niece, Eurydice. And everyone except Alexander is having a wonderful time. The reason for his sadness, of course, is he knows that as and when Eurydice gives birth to her first son, he will replace Alexander as heir to the throne of Macedon. We know, of course, that things were not quite that simple in real life, but this is a film and films have to simplify their stories in order to fit them on the screen.
.
Although I love the movies one thing I will never get used to is the way they habitually include dialogue or scenes that seem not to make any sense at all in terms of the narrative. For example, after chiding Alexander for his self-pitying, Philip tells Pausanias to go away; ‘you bore me’ he tells him. Seconds later, however, we see him raping the young man before sending him away to be assaulted by others. How can Philip be so dismissive of Pausanias one minute and then hateful enough to brutally attack him the next?
.
It could be that his dismissiveness is an act, designed to gain Pausanias’ trust in order to facilitate the rape, but if so the film is guilty of bad story telling. You can’t introduce one idea (Philip’s dismissive attitude) then turn it round (his hatred) without explaining why the change took place. It might be that we will see the reason for Philip’s switch later on. If we don’t, though, the script writers are guilty of a mistake. Either that or I am because I have missed the scene where Philip’s behaviour was explained.
.
One thing I will give Oliver Stone credit for, though, is the perfect casting of Nick Dunning as Attalus. We don’t know what the real Attalus was like but Stone’s is a nasty, sneering nobleman with a fatal amount of pride poisoning his soul. Dunning captures the physical appearance of such a man perfectly.
.
By the way, if you would like to read about what really happened between Philip and Pausanias (and Attalus), Diodorus Siculus is your man. His account is available to read here. As you’ll see, Philip never raped Pausanias - his worst crime was not to take Pausanias’ complaint against Attalus seriously. If Diodorus is to be believed (and we must be wary), Attalus is the real villain of the piece.
.
Attalus’ Intemperance
Once Pausanias has been sent away, Attalus proposes a toast; firstly, to ‘Macedonia and Greece, equals in greatness!’. Would any Greek or Macedonian have ever actually said that? Well, maybe, although I find the statement hard to reconcile with their constant attempts to beat each other up. More to the point, why would Attalus bother making that toast upon the marriage of two Macedonians? Perhaps when he wasn’t ruining people’s lives he was just a very polite man.
.
His third toast, to Eurydice, “a Macedonian queen we can be proud of!”, his malevolent expression towards Alexander, and the final toast, ‘… to their legitimate sons!” took my breath away. You’ve got 99 problems, son, and Alexander is now each and every one. Also, it’s notable how it is Hephaestion who launches himself like a rocket at Attalus while Ptolemy tries to restrain Alexander. That’s their rôles in the film explained in a second.
.
Father and Son
The next moment gives me much food for thought. Philip accuses Alexander of being lead by his mother. Alexander angrily denies that this is so. Given how the last scene between them worked out I am not surprised, but had Philip touched upon a truth here? I think he had, to a point. Alexander is obviously worried about what is going to happen to him but he remains loyal to his father; until, that is, he is ordered to apologise to Attalus.
.
Alexander and Ptolemy atop the Hindu Kush
‘Hindu Kush - 10 Years Later’ (i. e. 326 BC). The film is now behind the times. In 326, Alexander was at the Hydaspes River preparing to fight his last major battle, against Porus.
.
The scene opens with a neat mosaic graphic showing Alexander’s progress over the mountain range. A beautiful wide angle shot of the snow capped mountains then appears. Finally, we stand behind Alexander in a rich red cloak staring into the distance.
.
The elder Ptolemy tells us that in the spring, ‘Alexander marched an army of 150,000′ across the passes of the Hindu Kush’. When I first saw this figure, I thought that Stone and his fellow script writers had succumbed to the same temptation to exaggerate as some ancient Greek writers. However, while looking up in Robin Lane Fox’s biography the name of the river that marked the easternmost point of Alexander’s expedition (it is the modern day Beas, known in antiquity as the Hyphasis) I found that while at the Hydaspes River (on his way back from the Hyphasis), Alexander received 35,000 troops from the west, which ‘raised the army’s strength to 120,000′. Not quite 150,000 but close enough. Having said that, when Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush he only had around 30,000 men.
.
As we watch Alexander’s army trudge across the desolate landscape, the elder Ptolemy gives a special mention to the rôle of slaves, the ‘anonymous, bent, working spine of this new beast’ which is a complete sop to modern sensibilities - the real Ptolemy would not have given them a second thought. He then says, ‘[r]avaged or expanded, for better or worse, no occupied territory remained the same again’. That is certainly true in some cases. However, one of my chief impressions of Alexander, is that more often that not he was very happy to let natives continue in their administration of their particular region. Occasionally, he would put Macedonians in charge but that seems to be the exception rather than the rule. This is something I need to look more closely at. If you have a different impression, though, feel free to leave a comment.
.
Alexander and Ptolemy
Alexander and Ptolemy look over the Hindu Kush (The ‘Indian Caucasus’ in Arrian). The king asks his friend, “Have you found your home…?” Ptolemy tells him he thinks it will be Alexandria, ‘Well,” he says, “at least it’s hot. And Thais, she loved it there.’ Eliot Cowan’s delivery captures Ptolemy’s gentle humour, sadness (note the past tense used to describe Thaïs) and longing perfectly. It is my favourite moment in the film.
.
Historically, the scene is all wrong. Thaïs could not have loved Alexandria as when they left it, it had not yet been built. Ptolemy’s use of the past tense when talking about his mistress suggests that she is already dead. Well, this might be correct, but at least one writer in antiquity says she married Ptolemy after Alexander’s death (see my post here). It doesn’t matter, though, for the beauty of the scene in both its words and Eliot Cowan’s acting forgives all its sins.
.
When Alexander tells Ptolemy that he has no home, Ptolemy reminds him that he has Babylon, ‘Where your mother awaits your invitation’. Except that Olympias is in Pella, waiting for Alexander to bring her to Babylon. The reference to her waiting for his invitation only makes sense if she is in Pella but not Babylon.
.
Alexander then goes into full mystical mode, “… each land, each boundary I cross I strip away another illusion.” What are these illusions? Could they be about what he is capable of? That would certainly make sense of his suspicion that death will be the last one to fall away. Despite the fact that he fears he will be confronted by illusions until his death, Alexander says, “Yet still I push harder and harder to reach this home.” I have to admit I am not entirely clear what Alexander is saying here - he has, after all, just told Ptolemy that he has no home. I’m guessing that ‘home’ is a euphemism for his desire to find himself fully, to strip away all of the illusions he has about himself. What do you think?
.
“We must go on Ptolemy. Until we find an end.” Poor Ptolemy; now he knows: ‘an end’ means ‘the end’ - death. Death, that is, for Alexander; but if for him, then so for everyone. Unless, of course, something is done about it.

Categories: Alexander in Film | Tags: , | 4 Comments

The End of the Wars of the Successors

Read the previous posts in this series here
.
Welcome to the last post
in this series on the wars of Alexander the Great’s successors. The 42 year fight for control of his empire began with his death in 323 BC and continued on and off until the death of the last Successor, Seleucus, in 281. We know next to nothing about the sixth war so I am including it in this post rather than give it its own.
.
This post, as with the others in the series is based on the timeline I wrote while reading Robin Waterfield’s Dividing the Spoils (though any mistakes you find here are mine). You can find his book at your local bookshop or at Amazon. It’s cheaper at the latter, of course, but why not support your local high street by going the extra mile for knowledge and purchasing or ordering it there. Either way, I thoroughly, thoroughly recommend it.

.
288 – 281 The Fifth and Sixth Wars of the Diadochi

.
Year / Principle Combatants / Location / Victor
.
281 Seleucus vs Lysimachus - Corupedium – Seleucus wins

Outcome

  • The end of the diadoch era
  • Successor kingdoms become settled: Antigonids (Macedon), Ptolemies (Egypt), Seleucids (Babylon and the east)

THE FIFTH WAR OF THE DIADOCHI
288
.
Demetrius Prepares
We left the last post with Demetrius ready to embark on his invasion of Asia Minor. He had huge ships with many banks of oars, and a great army - 100, 000 men - under him. Who could possibly stop him?
.
The Anti-Antigonid Alliance
Ptolemy and Lysimachus, of course, were already in alliance against Demetrius. To bolster their forces, they asked Pyrrhus to join them. It’s true, he had lately signed a peace agreement with Demetrius but we know how seriously the successors took those. Thus, it went into the bin, and Pyrrhus went to war. I don’t blame him for this - if Demetrius had defeated Lysimachus in Asia Minor and Ptolemy in Egypt he certainly would not have let Pyrrhus continue to rule Epirus.
.
One name has hitherto been left out - Demetrius’ partner, Seleucus. He must have been as alarmed by his friend’s build up for war as everyone else because he threw in his lot with the alliance as well.
.
The stage was set, then, for another great battle between Antigonid forces and a successor alliance. It didn’t quite turn out that way, though.
.
Saboteurs
In the lead up to the expected battle, Ptolemy sent men into southern Greece to turn the cities there against Demetrius. The king of Macedon responded by sending his son, Antigonus Gonatas, to deal with any trouble.
.
An Old Trick Reused
Up north, Pyrrhus walked out of his tent and told his men that the great Alexander had appeared to him in a dream and promised him his help. With a spring in their step, the Epirote army marched to Macedon from the west, while Lysimachus entered the country from the east.
.
Demetrius Is Compromised
Demetrius himself had not yet finished his preparations for the invasion of Asia Minor and was still building up his army in eastern Macedon, ignorant of the fact that Pyrrhus had turned against him. He had problems, though; it seems Demetrius was no more popular a king in Macedon than he had been in Cilicia, and troops were deserting. When word got to the eastern camp that Pyrrhus was now their enemy, even more men melted away. Demetrius was in trouble.
.
And very soon after he was not only in trouble but also deposed - by the senior officers of his army who were working safe in the knowledge that the army had turned against the king. Macedon was subsequently carved up between Pyrrhus in the west and Lysimachus in the east. Another duel kingship.
.
Aftermath
Demetrius fled to Cassandreia (eastern Macedon on the Thermaic Gulf). His wife, Phila, was old and saw no point in running; she committed suicide with poison.
.
Of Phila, Waterfield writes that,

Her marriage to Demetrius had been long and apparently stable, despite his tempestuous career. She was clearly a formidable woman; even when she was young, her father had consulted her on official business, and she came to have her own court, Companions, and bodyguard, as well as cults in Athens and elsewhere. She was an early prototype of the powerful and independent queens of the later Hellenistic period.
(Waterfield, p. 193)

Everyone knows about Cleopatra VII; classicists know about Livia and Olympias (I don’t think the man in the street would be very aware of them); they also know about Hypatia. But who knows about Phila? I have to admit, before reading Dividing the Spoils, I didn’t. It seems that here is a woman well worth spreading the word about.
.
Demetrius Resurgent
288 - 86
From Cassandreia, Demetrius fled south to southern Greece where he joined his son. There, he spent the next two years rebuilding his army.
.
286
.
Athens
Demetrius still harboured dreams of invading Asia Minor. But before he could do so, he was forced to turn his attention to Athens, which had once more turned against him. The previous year it had persuaded one of the garrison commanders and some of his men to defect; now, it got rid of the rest in battle.
.
Demetrius put the city under siege. Athens appealed to Pyrrhus for help. Before he could come, Ptolemy’s navy appeared. Not wanting to be bogged down by a siege, Demetrius made an agreement with both - Athens would be left ungarrisoned but Demetrius would be allowed to keep those garrisons he had previously established at Piraeus and elsewhere in Attica.
.
Asia Minor (I)
Demetrius was now - finally - able to realise his plan for the invasion of Asia Minor. At first, it went very well. Miletus surrendered first, giving him a landing point.
.
Euridike and Ptolemy Keraunos
While in Miletus, he was met by one of Ptolemy’s wives - Euridike. She handed her daughter, Ptolemais, to whom Demetrius had been betrothed back in 298, over to him and they now married. As Waterfield notes, ‘the marriage was no kind of rapprochement with Ptolemy’ (p. 194). Euridike had fallen out with Ptolemy and knew that her prospects, and those of her son, Ptolemy Keraunos, (Thunderbolt), were not good if she stayed in Egypt. Yet still, she wanted the best for her son - maybe if Ptolemais married Demetrius, that would be the way for him to achieve power. By the way, I don’t think Ptolemy Keraunos was with Euridike at this time; after leaving Alexandria, he went to Lysimachus’ court, where his sister, Lysandra, was married to Lysimachus’ son, Agathocles.
.
Asia Minor (II)
Demetrius’ successful expedition continued. Ephesus fell, as did Lydia and Caria. Waterfield suggests that these ‘rapid successes’ (p. 195) are explained by the cities welcoming Demetrius in.
.
In response to the invasion, Lysimachus sent Agathocles into the region. Once there, he successfully drew Demetrius further and further inland, taking back the territory that Demetrius had just ‘conquered’ as he did so. I’m surprised he wasn’t given the title of ‘the mop’.
.
Agathocles’ strategy broke Demetrius’ supply lines. His fleet was either captured or forced to flee. Demetrius’ men once more started to desert him. He was nonplussed, though - he intended to recruit more in Media. In other words, Demetrius was haemorrhaging men but thought that he could still take on - and defeat - Seleucus. As Waterfield says, he seems by now to have been ‘decidedly unbalanced’ (p. 195). There are certainly echoes of Hitler in his Berlin bunker moving around non-existent German armies on the map here.
.
Agathocles continued to play Demetrius for a fool until the latter had crossed the Taurus Mountains. He was now in Cilicia - Seleucus’ territory, and therefore his problem. Seleucus gave Demetrius all the attention he now deserved and did nothing about him until 284. This is not much of an end for a man who had been such a great soldier. In 284, though, it would get worse.
.
A Tale of Two Ptolemies
285

Ptolemy II Philadelphus
Ptolemy was now in his late 70s / early 80s and undoubtedly feeling the weight of his years. To ease the succession and give himself time to enjoy his twilight years, Ptolemy followed in the footsteps of Seleucus in 294 - 3, and Antigonus in 306 and declared that his son, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, joint-king. Under Ptolemy II one of the most important literary translation works in history would be completed - the Septuagint.
.
Lysimachus vs Pyrrhus
As Ptolemy headed into a kind of semi-retirement, Lysimachus proved he was still up for a good fight by turning on Pyrrhus. To this end he formed an alliance with Athens, which needed a lift after failing at the cost of some lives to remove Demetrius’ garrison from Piraeus.
.
Pyrrhus was definitely in a spot. His two best allies - Aetolia and Ptolemy - were no longer reliable. Aetolia had been effectively bribed by Lysimachus; Ptolemy didn’t want to anger Lysimachus in case he needed him against Seleucus. In the absence of friends, Pyrrhus did the next best thing, and formed an alliance with an enemy, in this case, Antigonus Gonatas.
.
Demetrius’ Sad End
284
.
Demetrius spent two years in (or around?) the Taurus Mountains. By 284, though, it seems that he was threatening to break out. Seleucus responded with a containment operation; there was no need to go to war for as long as Demetrius’ men were deserting him.
.
Demetrius had other ideas. In between bouts of sickness he pushed for a ‘decisive battle’ (Waterfield, p. 196) but ‘it was insanity; he had too few men’ (Ibid). The end of the affair eventually came in a very poignant fashion.

The two armies were up close by… Seleucus is said to have walked bareheaded himself up to Demetrius’ lines to appeal to his men to lay down their arms. Recognizing that Seleucus was doing his best to spare their lives, they finally abandoned Demetrius.
(Ibid)

We have seen numerous battle being averted during the course of the wars of the successors but never one ending like this. Indeed, I don’t recall any battle in antiquity being resolved in this way.
.
Seleucus captured Demetrius and sent him to live in Apamea, under close guard. Finally seeing that his time had passed, Demetrius abdicated as king of - ? - and named Antigonus Gonatas as his successor. A hollow crown, indeed.
.
The Deeds of Lysimachus
While Demetrius was closing out his active career, Lysimachus was fighting for control of sundry territories in Asia Minor. Along the way, he had his two stepsons executed for (allegedly) killing their mother. He also had time to invade Thessaly, and expel Pyrrhus from western Macedon (not a very hard task as many of Pyrrhus’ men defected).
.
Defeat to Lysimachus marked the end of Pyrrhus as a player in the east. He turned to the west. In the following years he would win three notable victories against the Romans, but only at the cost of many men. And that, as Waterfield says, ‘is why we use the term “Pyrrhic” for a victory that amounts to a defeat’ (p. 200).
.
With his power at an all-time high, Lysimachus named his son by Arsinoë (Ptolemy’s daughter by Euridike) his heir, rather than Agathocles, his son by Nicaea. Agathocles took umbrage at this and launched a coup. It was not successful. He was caught and executed. This led to unrest within Lysimachus’ kingdom, and the flight of many people from his court.
.
Departures from the stage
283
.
Ptolemy
This year, Ptolemy died. He would be the last of that select band of successors who died in their beds. The others are:

  • Antipater
  • Asander*
  • Cassander
  • Polyperchon

I am pretty sure they are the only ones. If they aren’t, feel free to let me know in the comments box.
.
* Fate not known for certain; drops out of the historical record
.
282
.
Demetrius
Demetrius lasted two years in Apamea. A doctor’s report would read that he died of the cumulative effect of drink and illness. In a way, though, you could also say that he died of a broken heart. Sadly, though, not for his late wife, but thwarted ambition.
.
Seleucus vs Lysimachus
‘The chaos within Lysimachus’ realm attracted Seleucus’ (Waterfield, p. 202) so he set out from home and marched towards into Asia Minor, wintering beneath the Taurus Mountains - in Lysimachus’ kingdom but meeting no opposition from him.
.
281
THE SIXTH WAR OF THE DIADOCHI

.
The Battle of Corupedium
.
Seleucus resumed his march in late January, and met Lysimachus’ army at Corupedium, near Sardis. Unfortunately, there is no extant history of the battle. However, we do know its outcome - a decisive win for Seleucus. Lysimachus died on the field. The way was open for Seleucus to march into Macedon and claim the kingship there for himself.
.
Which is exactly what he did. But on a dusty road in Thrace, Ptolemy Keraunos stabbed the last surviving diadoch to death. Seleucus was not only the last of the Successors but also the one who had come closest - perhaps even closer than Antigonus? - to reuniting Alexander’s empire under his own rule.
.
Why did Keraunos murder Seleucus? Seleucus had, after all, given him a refuge after he and his family fled from Lysimachus’ court following the execution of Agathocles. Well, it probably just came down to power. Keraunos fancied Macedon for himself, so removed the man who was stopping him from having it. Such was ever the way of the diadochi and epigonoi.
.
What it meant though was that Seleucus’ death, the wars of the Successors were over. Antigonus Monophthalmus, though he never knew it, Ptolemy and Seleucus had won.
.
Epilogue
.
Ptolemy Keraunos became king of Macedon but would only sit on the throne for two years before being killed in battle against Celtic tribes. Fighting between would-be monarchs followed until Antigonus Gonatas managed to establish himself as king in 276.
.
As Gonatas had already made a deal with Antiochus I that both would respect each other’s sphere of influence in Europe and Asia, the Hellenic kingdoms now had a chance to settle down at peace with one another.
.
Well, almost; there was still the issue of Phœnica and, it seems, wider Syria, and it would not be long before the Seleucids and Ptolemies would come to blows over control of that land. But what happened there is another story.
.
Successors killed between 288 - 281
Agathocles (epigonoi) Thrace? - 284
Demetrius Poliorcetes (epigonoi) - 282
Lysimachus - Corupedium - 281
Ptolemy I Soter - Alexandria - 283
Seleucus I Nikator - Thrace - 281

Categories: The Wars of the Successors | Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com. Customized Adventure Journal Theme.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 62 other followers