Though Alexander was a historical figure, his history was heavily influenced by earlier myth. Also much of his history became a sort of new myth which influenced the history of later mythical figures. Think of parallels for such a legendary figure from our earlier readings. Make note of any specific recurring themes/story patterns and be ready to share specific parallels. Also Alexander, like many other such figures of myth and history, has been both heroicized and villainized--both of which approaches may be affected by personal bias and thus cause a distortion in the "reality". As you read the various historical accounts, do you tend toward hero or villain in your opinion? If so, why do you feel that way? If not, what keeps you from feeling strongly either way?
Mensch & Romm present a number of historical and biographical sources. We will be reading part of an ancient novel or romance about Alexander on March 6. That will give us a chance to see how Alexander's history transformed into an even more fictionalized version than we see in the historical accounts.
Jordann Markowitz
ReplyDeleteIn modern times we always think of the eldest son being the natural successor of a king. Would Alexander have been so worried about Cleopatra having a son to replace him because there was a precedent in that time of younger sons becoming the leaders through trickery?
Sara Welish
ReplyDeleteOn page 47, Mensch and Romm retell the anecdote about Alexander taking medicine from his doctor after being informed that the doctor might be involved in an assassination plot. By ignoring the tip is Alexander being arrogant and careless with his life?
Katie Burke
ReplyDeleteIt mentioned that Alexander's mother, Olympias, slept with snakes. It also mentioned that they were part of a religious thing. What was this and were these snakes poisonous?
Erin Bradley
ReplyDeleteThroughout Alexander's campaign one of his advisors, Parmenio is constantly giving him advice. Alexander is always doing the opposite. Is this character made up? Is he just a literary tool to make Alexander look good? Or did he once give bad advice and since then everyone always assumes that he gave any and all of the bad advice?
Maeve Tischbein
ReplyDeleteThere are multiple descriptions of Alexander preforming sacrifices in the names of various gods (more than in any of the other texts we've read at any rate). Was this a common ritual in the ancient world or is it a characteristic more closely related to the strategies of Alexander?
Shannon Potts
ReplyDeleteThroughout the beginning of Alexander's life, it seems that Philip is more than just eager for greatness in his son, he almost seems cowardly and impatient in the situations described with Alexander present even though the description of his actions while at war (without Alexander) would suggest otherwise. For instance, he gives up on the horse that Alexander "tames" as a young child, and puts him in front of the best Greek fighters while Philip himself is in front of the worst. Could this just be a way to make Alexander look better, or might this be an example of comflicting sources?
Is there any archaeological evidence to corroborate either of Diodorus' accounts of Phillip's assassination? Are we sure that he was assassinated?
ReplyDeleteKrysta Brown
Doug Ritchey
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to point out the idea of being 'destined' for greatness. Being born on the day of 3 other great events, and with Alexanders early success in battle and horse breaking, his father Philip claimed that Alexander was destined for greatness. Alexanders success was similar to that of Polycrates, who also could not lose in anything he participated in, however Polycrates saw his uncontrollable success as being destined to die horribly. Why would the success of both of these characters be interpreted so differently?
Andrew Gordon
ReplyDeleteAlexander seems to be a very noble leader, especially concerning the treatment of forces he has already conquered. When Darius flees the battle, Alexander treats his wife, mother and children like royalty. How does Alexander come to act with such admiration for others in the realm of war? Does he see it as beneficial for making new alliances, or is he just a new breed of leader?
Steve
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that Alexander is portrayed as somewhat of a godly figure, given some of the descriptions about him in his early life and birth. Yet, he is also shown as not liking the "pleasures of the body" and was supposedly not very prideful (unless I read that wrong). What could be the point of showing a godly figure as being somewhat modest?
AR
ReplyDeleteJordann,
Good question. The reason for the threat is that Cleopatra was a Macedonian of royal blood, so her son would have pure Macedonian royal blood. Olympias, Alexander's mother, was of royal or noble blood but was from Epirus, not Macedon. Secondly, Alexander's relationship with his father seems to have always been troubled perhaps because of Alexander's love of his mother, whom his father exiled.
Sara,
Good question. There are at least two ways to understand the story. Arrian (our source here) clearly wants us to see it as positive--Alexander trusted his friends and was not afraid of death. However, the sources about Alexander are mixed and in a less favorable source it might easily be interpreted as you suggest.
Katie,
Olympias, according to several sources, was an initiate in the mysteries of Dionysus, an ecstatic cult religion that could involve association with wild animals such as snakes and various orgiastic practices (Dionysus was equated with Osiris and Greek cult practice was influenced by Egyptian and near eastern mystery religions). I am not sure whether any of the snakes would have been poisonous. Do note that the idea of handling snakes is mentioned in the New Testament, the sacred text of the later mystery religion Christianity.
Erin,
The character is real, and because we have several sources presenting him similarly it is probably true that they often butted heads because Parmenio was Alexander's senior general. Parmenio had tons of experience and success as a major general under Philip. Surely he would have chafed at being subject to someone he remembered as a boy. Alexander on the other hand would not have wanted to be seen as the dutiful follower of the old general but as a king in his own right. Alexander later executed Parmenio's son for conspiracy and then sent an assassin to kill Parmenio before he could take any revenge. Different accounts of this story are more or less favorable to Alexander but it is often marked as one of his "bad" acts. I think that you may be right to suspect the truth of every story about Parmenio and Alexander disagreeing. They probably disagreed often though; still, the actual disagreements need not have been exactly as they are reported, since they may be based on second hand stories or simply written as they "probably" occurred.
Maeve,
You are absolutely right that Alexander sacrificed a lot (and built altars) and that the historical sources often record these events. Because of the general belief in the divine, piety (or lack thereof) is an important part of historical and fictional characterization in the ancient world. Acts of piety or impiety can also foreshadow later success or failure in the narrative. Pay close attention to which gods Alexander reveres: Zeus-Ammon, Heracles, and Athena are three of his favorites. Does this mean anything to you?
Shannon,
You are right to be suspicious about Philip's image in those stories. Most of the early life stories are excerpted from Plutarch's Life of Alexander the Great. Remember Plutarch likes praise history. He wants to elevate Alexander; and, since his father Philip was so great, he needs to show how much better Alexander was. Plutarch thus often follows the more favorable sources or tells the stories in a more favorable way, emphasizing the glorious aspects rather than the problematic, vicious, or outright evil acts.
A tomb discovered in Macedonia has been said to be either Philip's or that of Arridaeus (Alexander's half brother). I am not sure if anyone has tried to see any evidence of murder.
See here for more on the tomb:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergina
Doug,
Excellent job noticing the prophecies and other narrative devices for foreshadowing. Note that these come from Plutarch who as we have seen prefers to write laudatory rather than critical history. Arrian too generally praises Alexander. Some of the passages from Diodorus and Curtius Rufus are not so favorable to Alexander.
According to some versions Alexander did die horribly, poisoned by friends whom he had betrayed. Other sources glorify his death and portray him as dying at his height of power and fame much like Tellus and the two young men Cleobis and Biton from Herodotus (Solon's answers to Croesus).
AR
ReplyDeleteAndrew,
Why do you think he acts as he does with Darius' family? Remember that he later marries Darius' daughter. I think it is meant partly to validate his role as an equal or rather superior to the Persian king and to show his clemency or mercy. Only one who is truly superior can display mercy. Alexander often does show mercy. But he can just as well slaughter and enslave thousands. (Consider Tyre for example) Why?
Steve,
My impression is that Plutarch's early life descriptions are meant to make him seem glorious, heroic, or even godly. The references to his self-control and humility play into Plutarch's exaggerated characterization of Alexander as a sort of philosopher king, living up to the ideals of Plato and Aristotle.