by Amanda
Alexander’s appearance the fact that he shaved was subsequently imitated
by many others – that was how rulers of major Hellenistic monarchies had
their likenesses presented in countless portrayals, especially on coins.
With this effective promotion of self-image, Alexander became the first
ever person in Western culture known by name to have started a fashion
trend.
The impression Alexander made on contemporaries comprised a
mixture of contradictory stimuli. The energetic gait, muscular and athletic
physique, and hoarse voice all contributed to the image of a tough,
masculine warrior and leader of men. This contrasted with his smooth face;
the hair combed back, the impression of moist slightly bulging eyes and
fair complexion, all of which were in the 4th-century cultures of
Macedonia and Greece associated with gentleness and effeminacy. When
to this he added the upward gaze and characteristic turn of the neck,
Alexander’s appearance and posture must have given him an electrifying,
charismatic aura.7 However strong the impression Alexander made on his
contemporaries, he was not considered outstandingly handsome in his
lifetime. It was in a later tradition started in the 2nd century AD that he
became a model of male beauty, reflecting a general idealisation of the
Macedonian ruler that was far greater than the reality of his times.8
6 Chrysippos, ap. Ath., 13.18; Polyaen., 4.3.2. Dover 1978, pp. 71, 87, 144; Lane
Fox 1973, pp. 40-41; Stewart 1993, pp. 74-75, 78-86, 150-157.
7 Plu., Alex. , 4.1-2; Plu., mor. , 53c, 335b; Plu., Pyrrh. , 8.1-2 ; It. Alex. , 15.
Bosworth 1988, pp. 19-20; Stewart 1993, pp. 73-74.
8 App., BC, 2.151; Arr., An. , 7.28.1; Apul., Fl. , 7. Stewart 1993, p. 73.
46
Chapter II
It must have been sometime between the finishing of his education and
338 (a year of intensive war and politics) that an anecdote passed on by
Athenaeus from Alexander’s contemporary Theophrastus and regarding
the Macedonian royal couple’s problem with Alexander’s upbringing took
place. It was then that a worried Olympias ascertained that her teenage son
lacked interest in the opposite sex. Theophrastus explained this lack of
interest as a consequence of Alexander’s excessive drinking. Alcoholic
abuse was indeed characteristic of Macedonian aristocrats, including his
father Philip. A lack of libido, however, was most certainly not a typical
Macedonian trait. With Philip’s approval, Olympias recruited a ravishing
Thessalian hetaira called Callixeina (perhaps referred to elsewhere as
Pancaste) to seduce the heir to the throne. We cannot be sure, however,
whether she, or his mother’s requests were able to change Alexander’s
lifestyle.9
While Alexander pursued his studies under Aristotle’s instruction at
Mieza, Philip made use of Athens’s military standstill following the Peace
of Philocrates and continued Macedonia’s expansion north. In 342 he
completed the subjugation of Epirus by installing Olympias’s brother
Alexander on the throne. In a sense as if making use of this situation, he
also conquered and annexed to Epirus the Greek cities of Cassopia,
situated between the Ambracian Gulf and the Adriatic.10 That same year,
342, Philip started another campaign in Thrace against Cersobleptes, from
whom he had already taken the town of Crenides and the gold yielding
mountains of Pangaion. In fighting lasting until 340 Philip’s annexations
of Thracian territory reached Mount Haemus (Stara Planina) and the Black
Sea coast. Philip’s sway over Thrace was augmented with garrisons and
newly formed cities, the most important of which was Philippopolis, and
through the installation of a Macedonian strategos (general) as the new
ruler of this land that was conquered by Macedonia but not incorporated
into it.11
The Peace of Philocrates was resented by many in Athens. In 342 this
resentment led to an undeclared war with Macedonia simultaneously
waged on several fronts. Swift Athenian intervention prevented Ambracia,
an important city in western Greece, from falling into Philip’s hands. In
the Thracian Chersonese a unit of mercenaries supporting a newly formed
party of Athenian cleruchs and commanded by the general Diopeithes
9 Ath., 10.45 after Theophrastus (F578); Ael., VH., 12.34. Odgen 2009, p. 209.
10 Diod., 16.72.1; D., 7.32. Hammond 1994, pp. 120-122; Corvisier 2002, pp. 167-
170.
11 Diod., 16.71.1-2; D., 82, 35; Arr., An. , 1.25.2. Cawkwell 1978, pp. 116-117;
Hammond 1994, pp. 122-125; Corvisier 2002, pp. 184-186.
The Heir to the Throne
47
attacked Cardia, which was allied to Philip. As a result they captured a
Macedonian envoy. Another Athenian army attacked Philip’s Euboean
allies in Oreos and Eretria. These local conflicts strengthened in Athens
the arguments of the anti-Macedonian party led by Demosthenes, who was
striving to create a league of Greek states against Philip and
unsuccessfully trying to gain financial support of the Persian ruler
Artaxerxes III. Probably already in 342, when broad negotiations
concerning trade, combating piracy as well as rights to the town of
Potidaea and the disputed Island of Halonnesos in the north Aegean had all
failed, the prospect of war became inevitable and only a pretext was
needed to start it.12
Open hostilities erupted in 340 when Philip decided to attack the city
of Perinthus, which had refused to support him in his war with Thrace and
was politically gravitating towards Athens. The element of surprise and
the advantage of Macedonian siege technology were to ensure a rapid
victory. However, quite unexpectedly, the Perinthians put up stiff
resistance. By the time Macedonian battering rams broke through the
defensive walls new fortifications had been set up deeper within the city,
which was shaped like an amphitheatre on the side of a mountain.
Entrance into the Marmara Sea via the Hellespont was guarded by an
Athenian squadron and the Macedonian fleet was too weak to force its
way through and impose a blockade on the city. Thus Perinthus was able
to constantly receive supplies from the sea. The Byzantines provided the
beleaguered city with arms and their very best soldiers. Also the Great
King instructed his satraps in Asia Minor to supply Perinthus with food,
money, arms and mercenaries. 13 As the siege was protracting, Philip
decided to simultaneously attack Byzantium – the largest city on the trade
route between the Black Sea and the Aegean through which a fleet sailed
annually to deliver vital grain to Athens. In September 340 the first thing
Philip did was to unexpectedly seize the entire grain fleet of 230 ships
before it met up with its escort. This brought him handsome profit but also
meant open war with Athens, which was indeed soon afterwards officially
declared. The Athenian squadron, commanded by the famous general
Phocion, together with reinforcements from Chios, Rhodes, Kos and
Persian Asia Minor came to Byzantium’s aid. This second siege also
12 Cawkwell 1978, pp. 118-135;
Griffith 1979, pp. 510-516; Hammond 1994, pp.
125-132; Corvisier 2002, pp. 236-247.
13 Diod., 16.74.2-76.4 (our principal source here; Diodorus probably follows
Ephorus); Plu., Alex. , 70.5; Plu., mor. , 339b; D., 11.5; Arr., An. , 2.14.5; Paus., 1.29.10; Theopomp., FGrH, 115 F222; Did., In D. , col. 10.34-62. Cawkwell 1978,
pp. 135-136; Griffith 1979, pp. 567-573.
48
Chapter II
ended in failure. This no doubt gave a great sense of satisfaction to the
Macedonian king’s enemies but had little effect on the future course of the
war.14
When setting out with his army on the campaign in the Marmara Sea
basin, Philip was on this occasion able to leave Macedonia under the
charge of his successor. Alexander’s studies under Aristotle’s instruction
at Mieza were now finished, he was sixteen years old, and in ruling
families boys of that age were considered to have reached adulthood.
Alexander could therefore now be entrusted with running affairs of the
state. Statements made by the Athenian orators Isocrates and Aeschines
confirm that at least since 342 or perhaps even since 346 Alexander was
considered to be the official heir to Macedonian throne, though at such an
early age he did not yet have any serious responsibilities. That did not
happen until he finished his studies in 340. That was when control of the
country was symbolically handed over to Alexander together with his
father’s royal seal, which gave the young prince the right to issue edicts.
Of course in his ‘independent’ actions Alexander could rely on the
guidance of his father’s carefully selected advisors, among whom the most
important was Antipater – over a dozen years Philip’s senior, he was a
highly talented servant of four generations of Argead rulers. It was during
this regency the Alexander won his first military victory in quelling the
anti-Macedonian rebellion of the Maedi, a Thracian tribe inhabiting the
Strymon Valley. This ended a whole campaign to expel the Thracian
population from their chief city and replace them with settlers from other
regions. Thus Alexandropolis was founded, the first of many towns
allegedly founded by Alexander. In naming the colony the way he did
Alexander was following the example of the naming of Philippopolis,
showing that he was striving to equal and later outmatch his father’s
achievements. If, quoting from an anonymous source, Stephanus of
Byzantium is right in stating that Alexander was 17 when the city was
founded, it would have been towards the end of his regency in 339.15
14 Diod., 16.76.3-772; D., 11.6; 12.53; 18.76, 244, 302; 50.6, 19; Aeschin., 3.256;
Plu., Phoc. , 14; Theopomp., FGrH, 115 F292; Philoch., FGrH, 328 F54, 55; Just., 9.1. Cawkwell 1978, pp. 136-140; Griffith 1979, pp. 573-591; Ashley 1998, pp.
142-144; Corvisier 2002, pp. 247-248.
15 Plu., Alex. , 9.1; Isoc., Ep. , 4 and 5; Aeschin., 1.167-169; St. Byz., s.v.
Alex£ndreiai. Wilcken 1967, p. 58; Griffith 1979, p. 558; Hatzopoulos 1986, p.
288; Bosworth 1988, pp. 21, 245-246; Greenwalt 1989, p. 40; Hamilton 1999, pp.
22-23; Heckel 1992, pp. 38-49; Fraser 1996, pp. 26, 29-30 (for identification of the
third Alexandreia of Stephanus of Byzantium with Alexandropolis).
The Heir to the Throne
49
The next time Alexander participated in a northern campaign it was at
his father’s side. According to our main source, Justin’s rather unclear text,
the objective of this campaign was to capture the realm of the Scythian
king Atheas. The opposing armies clashed in Dobruja, probably not far
from the city of Istros (Histria). The Scythians were defeated in a pitched
battle, their elderly king was killed and allegedly 20,000 of them were
captured as were an equivalent number of Scythian horses. It was perhaps
soon after this event that the Greek cities on the west coast of the Black
Sea came under Macedonian rule, for by Alexander’s reign the region was
administered by a certain Zopyrion, whom the sources refer to as the
governor of the Hellespont or Thrace. On their way back home after the
defeat of Atheas’ Scythians the Macedonian army was confronted by a
Thracian or Illyrian tribe called the Triballi. They demanded a share in the
spoils in return for permission to pass through their territory. Philip
refused and a battle ensued in which the booty was lost and the
Macedonian king was wounded in the thigh. As a result Philip would be
lame for the rest of his life.16
2. Chaeronea
The Scythian campaign only for a while drew Philip’s attention away from
the situation in central Greece, where in 339 local disputes over the city of
Amphissa in Locris led to the outbreak of the Fourth Sacred War. The
Thessalians mobilised their forces very gradually. This was perhaps for
fear of Athens and Boeotia reacting. But another reason may have been an
understanding reached with Philip for the Thessalians had requested the
Macedonian king to enter the war. In the autumn of 339 the Macedonian
army seized the city of Elatea, which was situated in Phocis close to the
Boeotian border. This sent a shockwave through the Greek world and
inclined Thebes, which had until then been an ally of Macedonia, to accept
Demosthenes’s offer of making an alliance with Athens in a war against
Philip. From that moment on the new allies swiftly mobilised a citizen
army as well as 10,000 mercenaries – who took up strategic positions
blocking all the mountain passes into Boeotia. Partisan warfare and minor
skirmishes lasted from the end of 339 to mid 338. Then in the summer of
338 Philip managed to dislodge the mercenaries from the mountain passes,
which enabled him to take Amphissa and end the Fourth Sacred War. The
16 Just., 9.1-3, 12.2.6; Luc., Macr. , 10.10; Arr., An. , 5.26.6; Curt., 10.1.44; Did., In D. , col. 13.3-7. Nawotka 1997, pp. 30-31; Hammond 1994, pp. 135-137; Musielak
2003, pp. 54-56. See Bloedow 2002 on Philip’s goals in this war.
50
Chapter II
most significant outcome of this, however, was now the presence of
Philip’s army in Boeotia, where a showdown between Macedonia and a
coalition led by the two most powerful Greek states was certain to ensue.17
After peace negotiations initiated by Philip failed the problem could
only be solved by force. The decisive battle – the largest in Philip’s reign –
took place at Chaeronea in Boeotia. Plutarch states that it happened on the
seventh day of Metageitnion, which would have been sometime in August
or early September. The Greek army took up a good defensive position
between the hills and the Kephissos stream which Philip had to break
through in order to reach lower Boeotia and Thebes. The battlefield was
on flat terrain about 3 km in breadth, which was ideal for hoplite
formations and – as the commanders reckoned – unsuitable for the
Macedonian cavalry. When taking into account that it was part of Greek
military tradition to strive to resolve wars in one pitched battle, which so
far had always been won by citizen hoplite armies, and that now such an
army had taken up such a favourable battle position, the Greek
commanders must have taken up the Macedonian challenge with
confidence. Philip deployed 30,000 infantry and over 2,000 cavalry
against 35,000 Greek infantry and 2,000 horsemen. The Macedonian
army’s inferior numbers and worse tactical position were compensated by
the superior quality of its troops and above all a far superior command.
Philip led the Macedonian phalanx on the right wing and entrusted the left
wing and cavalry to his son and heir accompanied by Macedonia’s best
chief officers. On the Greek side the Athenians held the left wing,
mercenaries and detachments from allied states positioned themselves in
the centre, whereas the Boeotians with the very best hoplites held the right
wing. Owing to the excellent training of his troops, Philip slightly
withdrew the right wing in the first phase of the battle, making the
Athenian hoplites stretch and somewhat break up their battle formation. It
was then that Philip attacked. After some heavy fighting the Athenians
were forced to retreat. However, the battle’s outcome was actually
resolved on the other wing, where the Macedonian cavalry under
Alexander’s command managed to break through Boeotian ranks. Thus the
strongest section Greek line was crushed, which signified the entire army’s
defeat. The Athenians and Boeotians, defeated on their respective wings,
fled for their lives. Only the Sacred Band of Thebes held their ground.
According to Plutarch all 300 soldiers of this elite unit were killed in battle
by Alexander’s men. Much later the famous Lion of Chaeronea was
17 Cawkwell 1978, pp. 140-144; Griffith 1979, pp. 585-596; Londey 1990; Borza
1999, pp.58-64; Hammond 1994, pp. 143-148; Ashley 1998, pp. 149-152;
Corvisier 2002, pp. 249-254.
The Heir to the Throne
51
erected above their grave, in which archaeologists later uncovered 254
skeletons arranged in seven rows. Perhaps only that many soldiers took
part in the battle or maybe the rest of the Sacred Band were just wounded