Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf

by Amanda

  4. The Pixodarus affair

  Plutarch is the only source noting a serious conflict between Philip and

  Alexander caused by a diplomatic offer made by Pixodarus, the satrap of

  Caria and Lycia. This last male member of the Hecatomnid dynasty

  wanted an alliance with the Macedonian king which would most probably

  have implied greater autonomy or even complete independence from

  Persia. The offer was to arrange for a marriage between Philip’s son

  Arrhidaeus and Pixodarus’ oldest daughter, Ada II – she is called Ada II to

  distinguish her from Pixodarus’ sister Ada I, whom he overthrew as satrap

  in 341/340. With these diplomatic negotiations underway Alexander’s

  mother, Olympias, as well as some of his friends started to fear that this

  was a sign of Philip’s intention of now making Arrhidaeus his heir. They

  therefore persuaded Alexander to act. Through the mediation of the actor

  Thettalus, Alexander suggested to Pixodarus that he should marry his

  daughter. When Philip discovered this, he went to Alexander’s quarters

  52 Diod., 17.7; Arr., An. , 1.17.11; Polyaen., 5.44.4-5; Just., 9.5.8-9. Parke 1993, pp.

  178-179; Cawkwell 1978, p. 177; Errington 1990, p. 104; Hammond 1994, pp.

  168-170; Briant 1996, pp. 837-838; Ashley 1998, pp. 160-162; Debord 1999, pp.

  423-426.

  74

  Chapter II

  accompanied by Parmenion’s son Philotas. There Philip berated Alexander

  for besmirching his good name and wishing to associate himself with the

  daughter of ‘a Carian, a barbarian ruler’s slave’. In addition to this the

  king now expelled from Macedonia Harpalus, Nearchus, Erigyios and

  Ptolemy. The king had most probably himself nominated them to be

  Alexander’s advisers but at a critical moment it turned out they had given

  the heir erroneous counsels, that is, ones contrary to the king’s intentions.

  The four men were recalled from exile immediately after Alexander’s

  ascension to the throne and accompanied him on his expedition as

  members of his closest circle of friends. With his Macedonian matrimonial

  plans foiled, Pixodarus remained loyal to the Great King and gave his

  daughter in marriage to the Iranian aristocrat Orontobates. After

  Pixodarus’s death, Darius III nominated Orontobates his father-in-law’s

  successor as satrap of Caria and Lycia.53

  Even if Plutarch is our single source, this story is plausible as it

  contains elements that were typical for Philip’s practice of using marriage

  as means of gaining temporary goals. What does need to be reviewed,

  however, is the traditional dating of the Pixodarus affair to have happened

  in the spring of 336. Although in his biography of Alexander Plutarch

  describes this incident after the far more serious conflict at Cleopatra’s

  wedding, this does not mean the events really followed each other in that

  chronological order. Evidence that this was not so is the presence of

  Olympias in the Pixodarus affair though she was not in Macedonia in the

  period between Cleopatra’s wedding and Philip’s death. Moreover, the

  uncompleted marriage arrangements conducted in parallel with other

  negotiations must have lasted some time. The most probable year would

  have been 337, when Philip was searching for allies in Asia Minor for his

  war against Persia and when the chaos following the death of Artaxerxes

  III could have inclined Pixodarus to search for alternatives to remaining

  loyal to the Persian monarchy.54

  This affair is the first recorded symptom of tension between Alexander

  and Philip, which exploded into a violent conflict at the time of the king’s

  last marriage. It is curious how easily Alexander allowed himself to be

  convinced that Arrhidaeus could become a serious rival to the throne, even

  though objectively speaking no such danger existed. Alexander’s mentally

  retarded half-brother was able to ride a horse, participate in the offering of

  53 Plu., Alex. , 10.1-4; Str., 14.2.17. Debord 1999, p. 59. On Alexander’s friends see

  Heckel 1992, pp. 205-208.

  54 Bosworth 1988, pp. 21-22; Develin 1981, p. 95; Ruzicka 1992, p. 101. The story

  is put in doubt by: Hatzopoulos 1982; Hammond 1996, p. 27; Debord 1999, pp.

  59-62; Corvisier 2002, pp. 267-268.

  The Heir to the Throne

  75

  sacrifices and other ceremonies, such as sitting passively on the throne if

  nothing else was required of him. This, however, was probably the most

  he was able to do and thus the sources do not mention anything he ever did

  independently. Later, after his ascension, it became clear that Alexander

  saw no danger from his half brother because he spared him his life even

  though Arrhidaeus was the only other remaining male member of Argead

  dynasty. It would appear that for reason the atmosphere at the Macedonian

  court in 337 inclined Alexander to feel very insecure as heir to the throne,

  so much so that he could have behaved irrationally.55 Perhaps the failed

  attempt at getting a wife for Arrhidaeus, marrying off one of Philip’s

  daughters to Amyntas IV and the not much later last marriage of Philip

  were giving Alexander and Olympias an impression of Philip’s designs to

  isolate them at the court.56

  5. Cleopatra’s wedding

  In 337, shortly after his return from Corinth, Philip married for a seventh

  time. On this occasion the bride was a Macedonian by the name of

  Cleopatra – though Arrian called her Eurydice – the niece of Attalus, the

  one who later on together with his father-in-law, Parmenion, headed the

  first Macedonian expeditionary force into Asia Minor. The sources relate

  this marriage in the context of growing tensions between Alexander and

  Philip, exacerbated by Olympias, who is usually portrayed as an ill-willed

  and quarrelsome woman. During the wedding feast there occurred an

  incident that created serious rift within Argead dynasty and the

  consequences almost led to an important international conflict. The

  Alexander Romance includes an anecdote that on entering the banqueting

  hall Alexander promised his father to invite him to his mother’s wedding

  when he, Alexander, would give her away to another king. From then on it

  only got worse. An essential part of all Macedonian feasts was the

  drinking of vast quantities of undiluted wine, which inevitably led to

  inebriation. It was in such a state that Attalus raised a toast wishing the

  newly weds to produce future kings that were pure blooded and legitimate

  heirs. Alexander was never so drunk as not to notice even an imagined

  insult let alone one that was real. No doubt expressing the secret opinions

  of much of the Macedonian aristocracy, Attalus was referring to

  Alexander’s mother’s foreign origins and, what was less obvious, to the

  presumed fact that she was an adulteress. A livid Alexander shouted out

  55 Badian 1963; Bosworth 1988, p. 22; Carney 2001, pp. 65-80.

  56 Weber 2009, p. 86.

  76

  Chapter II

  ‘But what of me, base wretch? Dost thou take me for a bastard?’ and next

  hurled his goblet at Attalus, who responded by throwing his cup at

  Alexander. Apart from the markedly unrelia
ble Alexander Romance, none

  of the other sources claim that any of the missiles hit their intended targets.

  We may assume that Attalus at least missed for Philip abruptly rose with

  drawn sword in defence of the former’s honour. The king fortunately did

  no one any harm for according to Plutarch and the Alexander Romance

  anger and the surfeit of alcohol had denied him control of his legs: the

  manoeuvre just ended with him falling flat on his face. Alexander is

  reported to have then mockingly remarked: ‘Look now, men! here is one

  who was preparing to cross from Europe to Asia; and he is upset in trying

  to cross from couch to couch.’ Justin presents a less spectacular version of

  this incident in which the king was physically restrained from killing his

  son and heir by friends. Whichever way it happened, the consequence was

  that Alexander and Olympias immediately left Pella and headed for Epirus

  to the court of Olympias’s brother Alexander. The heir to the throne next

  travelled to an Illyrian kingdom that the sources fail to name.57

  Modern historians have for a long time been trying to politically

  interpret these events. For a while credence was given to Justin’s statement

  that Philip’s marriage took place after he had divorced Olympias. Such a

  version of events suited both Roman and later European views on

  marriage in civilised societies, i.e. that it ought to be monogamous.

  However, save for the unreliable Alexander Romance, this version is

  contradicted by all the other sources. The authors of these two later works

  did not realise that Argead views on marriage were quite different from

  those associated with civilised behaviour in their day and age. Meanwhile

  if only the aforementioned passage from Satyrus suggests that Philip had

  throughout his adult life more than one wife and that perhaps polygamy

  was traditional in Macedonia’s ruling dynasty. Olympias was not Philip’s

  first wife and she had had younger women vying for the king’s attention

  before, but such rivalries had not previously led to conflicts, at least not

  ones to be mentioned in the sources. Therefore neither sexual jealousy nor

  the fact that Philip had married yet another woman while he was at least

  still formally the husband of Olympias could have been the reason for the

  rift in the royal family.58

  As far as is known, the Macedonian court differed from polygamous

  courts in the East in that there was no formal hierarchy among the

  57 Plu., Alex. , 9.5-11; Arr., An. , 3.6.5; Paus., 8.7.7; Just., 9.7.2-6; Satyr., F25 ap.

  Ath., 13.5; Ps.-Callisth., 1.20-21. Excessive wine drinking: Ephippus, ap. Ath.,

  3.91. On the name of Philip’s new wife see Badian 1982a.

  58 Carney 1987; Greenwalt 1989; Ogden 1999, pp. xiv-xvi; Carney 2006, pp. 22-26.

  The Heir to the Throne

  77

  monarch’s wives with no official first wife. In practice, however, the

  mother of the successor to the throne became the most important wife of

  the king. At a relatively early stage it had become apparent that Alexander

  was the designated heir. Indeed, it was Alexander who had been provided

  with an expensive education under Aristotle’s instruction, it was he who

  already as a child had received foreign envoys and as a teenager had

  governed as regent. Besides, he had no competition for in 337 Philip’s

  only other son was the mentally retarded Arrhidaeus. Arrhidaeus’s

  disability had become apparent no later than in his school age and

  therefore he could not have been seriously considered as a successor at

  least since then. Justin claims that after Philip’s death Alexander murdered

  a brother called Caranus but we cannot even be certain that Caranus ever

  existed. He is not included in the list of Philip’s descendants compiled by

  Satyrus from all the sources known to him. Moreover, Justin says that

  Caranus was the son of Philip and Cleopatra. Thus if Pompeius Trogus or

  his epitomiser Justin had not simply invented Caranus, he would have

  naturally been born after the wedding incident. If we accept anthropological

  findings regarding states with a polygamous ruling family, we can assume

  that Macedonia lacked a clear and codified procedure for succession to the

  throne. We only know that the successor had to be a member of the

  Argead family. Unless the throne was taken over as the result of a coup,

  which indeed happened all too often, the successor was usually a son the

  deceased king had nominated to be his heir, though not necessarily the

  eldest son. While Alexander was the only known heir, his position and that

  of his mother Olympias were secure. All this could now change. Philip

  was still only 45 or 46 years old and could well have occupied the throne

  for another 20 years or more. Therefore if Cleopatra bore him a son and if

  Philip so wished, nothing could stop him from nominating this younger

  son to be his heir instead of Alexander. Worse still, Olympias was an

  Epirote whereas Cleopatra was a Macedonian. That the matter of the

  successor’s nationality was important to many among the aristocracy is

  quite apparent in what Attalus said at the wedding feast. Therefore it is

  easy to understand why this particular marriage was so worrying to

  Olympias and her son.59

  Philip’s decision to marry Cleopatra is generally regarded to be an

  aspect of his internal policy. By marrying a Lower Macedonian aristocrat

  whose uncle and guardian was the apparently influential Attalus the king

  59 Badian 1963, p. 246; Hatzopoulos 1986; Carney 1987, pp. 37-48; Greenwalt

  1989; Ogden 1999, pp. 3-4, 18-19, 24; Mirón 2000, pp. 39-44; Carney 2006, pp.

  32-36. The case of Caranus: Just., 11.2.3, 9.3.7; Satyr., ap. Ath., 13.5; Heckel 1979;

  Unz 1985; Carney 2000, p. 77.

  78

  Chapter II

  intended to strengthen his ties with the Macedonian elite. This thesis,

  though popular in modern historiography, lacks substantiation in ancient

  sources. We know nothing about the origins of Attalus and Cleopatra. It is

  only from our general knowledge of Macedonian society that we can

  assume they were aristocrats. However, this does not entitle us to

  speculate as to their exact position within Macedonian society. Events

  following Philip’s death and the ease with which Attalus was removed

  from any position of authority indicate that this aristocrat was far less

  powerful than has been commonly assumed. Moreover, Satyrus’

  biography of Philip cited by Athenaeus and Plutarch clearly state that the

  king married Cleopatra out of love. The moralist Plutarch adds that Philip

  fell in love with her despite his senior age. It is hard not get the impression

  that such unequivocal information from the sources is simply being

  ignored by supporters of the theory that Philip’s marriage to Cleopatra had

  an essentially political objective,60 and that this stems from the opinion

  that Philip (as perhaps all outstanding political figures) was always

  rational, weighing up every single decision in terms of profit or loss. Yet

  with the lack of any powerful arguments to dismiss the information

  provided by Plutarch and Satyrus it is more sensible to accept it. It wou
ld

  not have been the first or the last time a middle-aged man lost all common

  sense and fell in love with a woman young enough to be his daughter.61

  Accepting hypothetically that the motive was love, not political calculation,

  most certainly does not imply the situation was any less worrying to

  Olympias and Alexander. After all, if the king was able to take such an

  extraordinary step as allowing his emotions to decide on yet another

  marriage, one could expect anything of such a man.

  The falling out between Philip and Alexander did not last long.

  Ultimately Alexander was still the only heir to the Macedonian throne and

  a very competent one at that. Philip was certainly aware of the fact that the

  outburst of rage he had provoked and his son’s departure for Illyria did not

  serve the Macedonian state. Experiences from the earlier history of the

  Argead dynasty showed that quarrels between a monarch and family

  members often led to the emergence of pretenders to his throne. That is

  why Philip willingly accepted the excuses provided by the trusted hetairos

  Demaratus of Corinth and through his mediation got Alexander to return

  to Macedonia. A similar reconciliation with Olympias was out of the

  question. Besides, she was at the time actually trying to persuade her

  60 E.g. Hamilton 1965, pp. 120-121; Hamilton 1999, p. 24; Green 1974, pp. 88-91;

  Corvisier 2002, pp. 265-267; Carney 2006, pp. 33-34. On Attalus: Heckel 2009, p.

  27.

  61 Heckel 1986, pp. 295-298; Borza 1990, pp. 206-208.

  The Heir to the Throne

  79

  brother to wage war on Philip in defence of her honour and position.

  Indeed these were certainly more than empty threats as Philip felt it

  necessary to take diplomatic steps to strengthen the bond between himself

  and Alexander of Epirus. The latter already had reasons to be grateful to

  Philip for installing him on the throne in place of his uncle Arybbas, but

  now Philip offered him his and Olympias’s daughter Cleopatra, and

  therefore the Epirote king’s own niece, as a wife.62