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

Home > Fantasy > Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf > Page 43
Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf Page 43

by Amanda


  encountered the heaviest fighting against detachments trying to escape

  from the battlefield and head for their native lands of Parthia, Persis and

  India. In this clash the Macedonians lost 60 men and many were wounded,

  including at least three high-ranking officers: Hephaestion, Coenus and

  Menidas. Once most of the Persian army was in retreat, the Macedonian

  soldiers on the left flank managed to independently repulse the enemy

  from their section before effective help from Alexander arrived, if indeed

  any was sent. In this section the Thessalian cavalry once again played an

  outstanding role. Meanwhile Alexander continued his pursuit of Darius but

  the late time of day, the considerable distance that now separated him from

  the Great King and the other Persian detachments fleeing from the battle

  precluded any chance of success. The Macedonians pitched camp for the

  night by the river Lycus (Greater Zab), some 32 km from Gaugamela.37

  Darius escaped to Arbela and thence he hurriedly headed for safety in

  Media to the east of the Zagros Mountains. The Persian capital there,

  Ecbatana, became the Great King’s residence for the next half year. Darius

  assumed, correctly as it turned out, that Alexander would not follow him

  but go for the prizes resulting from the victory at Gaugamela, i.e. the

  Achaemenid capitals to the west of the Zagros Mountains – Babylon and

  Susa. The Great King was accompanied by the remainder of the Greek

  mercenaries, now only 2,000, as well as the Bactrian cavalry, which was

  led virtually unscathed out Gaugamela by the satrap Bessus. At Ecbatana

  Darius gathered soldiers who had escaped from Gaugamela and prepared

  for another battle, hoping to get reinforcements from eastern Iran. The day

  37 Arr., An. , 3.15.1-5; Diod., 17.60.4-61.3; Curt., 4.16.1-6; Plu., Alex. , 33.9-11; It.

  Alex. , 63; Sachs-Hunger 1988, no. 330, verso 16-18. Lane Fox 1973, pp. 240-241; Devine 1975, p. 382; Bosworth 1980, pp. 309-312.

  234

  Chapter V

  after the battle Alexander’s army advanced post-haste to Arbela, losing

  many Macedonian horses in this murderous march. When they got there,

  Darius was already gone but some of his treasures remained, 4,000 talents

  and the royal insignia. Again there is no credible data regarding the losses

  suffered by both sides at Gaugamela. The ancient authors – especially the

  greatest purveyor of Macedonian propaganda Arrian – clearly exaggerate

  in minimising the number Macedonian losses: from just 100 (according to

  Arrian) to less than 300 (Curtius) or 500 (Diodorus). By contrast the

  figures they give for the Persians killed or captured seem ridiculously high:

  from 40,000 (Curtius) or 90,000 (Diodorus) to 300,000 (Arrian). Arrian

  actually states that over 300,000 Persians were captured.38

  However, an exact figure for how many were really killed or captured

  is not of the greatest historical significance. One of the consequences of

  this decisive battle of far greater historical importance was the access

  Alexander now had to the central and richest provinces of the Achaemenid

  Empire. Moreover, although Darius had not yet given up the fight, for the

  rest of his stay in Iran Alexander would not have to fight any more major

  battles that could have changed the course of events. The Macedonian

  army did not spend much time on the Gaugamela battlefield, probably

  only as long as it took to bury their dead. Before they set off an event

  occurred that Plutarch mentions in one sentence and the other sources

  simply ignore. Plutarch states that after the battle, and presumably before

  the march, Alexander was proclaimed ‘king of Asia’. Although Plutarch

  does not cite his source, there is no reason to doubt that this really

  happened. Literary and epigraphic sources from Alexander’s lifetime and

  the end of the 4th century confirm that he used the title of king or ruler of

  Asia. In Greek sources the word ‘Asia’ had both political and purely

  geographical meaning, in the later sense it signified the Asian continent. In

  the political sense the word ‘Asia’ meant the ‘Kingdom of Persia’. The

  sources are unequivocal about this. One, On the Universe, attributed to

  Aristotle, gives the following definition: ‘All the Empire of Asia, bounded

  on the west by the Hellespont and on the east by the Indus, was

  apportioned according to races among under generals and satraps and

  kings, slaves of the Great King; and there were the couriers and watchmen

  and messengers and superintendents of signal fires.’ Therefore the Greeks

  of Alexander’s day would have understood the ruler of Asia to be someone

  modern historians call the king of Persia. This understanding of the word

  Asia, quite different to ours, is also confirmed in Egyptian hieroglyphic

  sources of the 4th century. In clearly reflected the extent of geographic

  38 Arr., An. , 3.15.5-16.3; Diod., 17.60.4, 17.61, 17.64.1-2; Curt., 4.16.8-5.1.10; It.

  Alex. , 64-65. Bosworth 1980, pp. 312-313; Seibert 1985, pp.95-96.

  King of Asia

  235

  knowledge in ancient times, where real Asia fitted within the bounds of

  the Achaemenid Empire, whereas beyond lay only semi-mythical

  territories such as India or the land of the Amazons. Among the Persian

  king’s titles there was xšāyaθiya Pārsaiy, which means ‘king in Persia’

  rather than ‘king of Persia’ and it was used above all to stress the

  legitimacy of their rule over Parsa, meaning Persis or Fars, the homeland

  of the Achaemenids. However the title most frequently used in

  contemporary Greek and Persian sources was ‘Great King’. Alexander, on

  the other hand, never used this title, at least not in Greek, perhaps because

  of the bad associations it had to Greeks. Instead he chose the less popular

  by no less unequivocal title of ‘king of Asia’.39

  We have no details of how Alexander was proclaimed ‘king of Asia’.

  Perhaps his army proclaimed him as such, which would have had

  exclusively political significance, but it would not have been legally valid.

  It is equally probable that Alexander had a herald proclaim him to be king

  of Asia in front of his army. In both cases the proclamation would have

  been in keeping with the universally practiced doctrine of the victor taking

  over sovereignty, and Alexander was most certainly the victor at

  Gaugamela. He had already made his claim to the entire Achaemenid

  Empire in diplomatic correspondence with Darius. Therefore the

  proclamation at Gaugamela was not unexpected but the victory had raised

  it from the status of mere propaganda to a statement of fact. Perhaps this

  was still a bit premature, considering that Darius still held power in Iran,

  but it was very convincing in the light of what had happened in the most

  recent days.40

  After his victory Alexander made sacrifices to the gods befitting the

  grandeur of the occasion. Those who had distinguished themselves in the

  battle were now awarded gifts. The treasures captured from the Persians

  allowed the king to be very generous to the Greeks and thus stress the

  Panhellenic character of this anti-Persian war. That was why booty taken

  f
rom Darius was given to the Plataeans in compensation for the

  destruction previously inflicted by Xerxes. Croton was awarded by

  Alexander on account of the fact that in 480 its citizen Phayllus had sailed

  in his own ship to aid the Greeks fighting the Persians at Salamis. A gift to

  39 Plu., Alex. , 34.1; Timachides, Chronicum Lindium, FGrH, 532 F1.38; FD

  3.4.2.137; Arist., Mu. , 398a (translation by J. Barnes). For the discussion of the

  issue of Kingdom of Asia (with reference to all relevant sources) see Nawotka

  2004.

  40 Ritter 1965, p. 52; Wilcken 1967, pp. 137-138; Schachermeyr 1973, pp. 277-279;

  Goukowsky 1978, p. 175; Bosworth 1988, p. 85; Wirth 1993, pp. 193-196;

  Hamilton 1999, p. 9.

  236

  Chapter V

  the Temple of Athena in the city of Lindus served to nurture good

  relations with the island of Rhodes. Marking this occasion there is also a

  letter in which Alexander declares freedom to the Greeks and the abolition

  of tyrannies. Unfortunately we do not know the exact addressee though

  letter could only be referring to the situation in continental Greece, where

  Antipater maintained control by continuing Philip II’s policy of supporting

  pro-Macedonian oligarchies and tyrannies. The sources provide no

  evidence that this policy changed after Alexander’s letter. Therefore it

  must have simply been a declaration of goodwill from a monarch who was

  ever more distant from Greek affairs and also one who had ever less

  understanding of the subtleties of politics in Macedonia and Greece.41

  4. Babylon, Susa and Persepolis

  Alexander limited the time spent on the battlefield at Gaugamela to the

  bare minimum for fear of an epidemic breaking out in a place strewn with

  thousands of Persian corpses. Like after Issus, he chose not to continue his

  pursuit of the defeated Persian ruler because he did not wish to risk

  leaving behind unoccupied Achaemenid provinces. Alexander ended the

  chase at Arbela. There is no evidence that after that he returned to

  Gaugamela. It is more likely that from Arbela the Macedonian army next

  marched south towards Babylon, the capital of the richest Persian satrapy

  called Babiruš and one of the capitals of the entire empire. But Persian

  troops who had escaped from Gaugamela had arrived there first. Their

  commander was Mazaeus, previously the satrap of Cilicia and Ebirnari.

  The Babiruš satrapy had been governed by Bupares, whom Arrian names

  as the commander of the Babylonian contingent at Gaugamela. The

  sources make no mention of him after that event, which may mean that he

  was killed in the battle and that Darius appointed Mazaeus, whom he

  trusted, the new satrap of this province. Mazaeus certainly had good

  relations with the local elites as his wife was Babylonian. But this fact

  would have also made him vulnerable to pressure on important issues such

  as whether or not to defend the city and whether to surrender or risk

  destruction.42

  Thanks to the ancient authors and the Babylonian Astronomical Diary

  the chronology of events that occurred during the march to Babylon can be

  41 Plu., Alex. , 34.2-4; Timachides, Chronicum Lindium, FGrH, 532 F1.38.

  Hamilton 1999, pp. 91-92; Blackwell 1999, pp. 109-110; Flower 2000, pp. 112-

  113.

  42 Arr., An. , 3.8.5; Diod., 17.64.3. Berve 1926, no. 221; Frye 1984, p. 139; Jacobs

  1994, p. 162; Briant 1996, p. 868; Heckel 1997, p. 204.

  King of Asia

  237

  quite accurately traced. Already on 8th October 331, that is, barely a week

  after the battle, someone from Gaugamela reached Babylon. The diary is

  damaged in this place, so we do not know for sure who it was. It could

  have been Mazaeus himself or a messenger with news of Darius III’s

  defeat. The distance of 580 km from Gaugamela to Babylon could be

  swiftly covered thanks to the Persian system of stage posts which allowed

  horses to be changed. Alternatively it could have been a messenger from

  Alexander with the first offer to negotiate. Meanwhile the Macedonian

  army marched, most probably down the Royal Road in the direction of

  Susa but after a few dozens of kilometres turning towards the Tigris. After

  four days they reached the town of Mennis, where the soldiers were

  amazed to see for the first time in their lives perpetual flames emanating

  from a grotto (burning natural gas) and a stream of petroleum oil spilling

  out onto the surface. There are two places on the route between Arbela and

  Babylon known in ancient times to have had oil flowing out onto the

  surface and burning natural gas. One is Baba Gurgur near Kirkuk and

  some 80 km from Arbela, but it is the more distant Tuz Khurmatu some

  125 km from Arbela that seems more likely to have been the place where

  the Macedonians saw this phenomenon. In four days Alexander’s rapidly

  moving army would have advanced at least 125 km. Having never seen

  such a substance emerging from the ground before, the Macedonians

  experimented with it. One of their experiments was to pour the oil over a

  young volunteer called Stephanus and setting it alight. The fire then

  proved very difficult to put out and the unfortunate volunteer suffered

  serious burns. Not far from this place the Macedonians crossed over to the

  western side of the Tigris. By 18th October they were in Sippar, 50 km to

  the north of Babylon. From the above information we can estimate that the

  army marched on average some 35 km a day. At Sippar they stayed for

  two days. There can be no doubt that Alexander had started negotiations

  with Mazaeus and the Babylonian elite already before the army reached

  Sippar. In these negotiations he promised that his soldiers would not enter

  the houses in Babylon – by that he may have meant the houses of gods, in

  other words temples. An entry for 20th October in the Astronomical Diary

  states that the Macedonians were at the Gate of Esagila, and the following

  day they sacrificed a bull, no doubt to Marduk. After that Alexander

  entered Babylon and, using the official Babylonian nomenclature, took

  over Darius’s position as ruler of the world.43

  43 Curt., 5.1.11-16; Plu., Alex. , 35; Str., 16.4.1, 15; Sachs-Hunger 1988, no. 330,

  retro. Lane Fox 1973, pp. 244-245; Seibert 1985, p. 96; Bernard 1990, pp. 525-528;

  Atkinson 1994, p. 33; Hamilton 1999, pp. 93-94; van der Spek 2003, pp. 298-299.

  238

  Chapter V

  The ancient authors have preserved colourful descriptions of

  Alexander’s entry into Babylon. First Mazaeus with his children and the

  royal treasurer ( ganzabara) Bagophanes came out to greet him, surrender

  the city and ask for mercy. They were accompanied by priests, magi

  chanting religious songs, Chaldaean soothsayers as well as Babylonian

  notables and cavalry in full, extravagant ceremonial dress, while crowds of

  inhabitants looked on from the city’s walls. The king was offered cattle,

  horses as well as lions and panthers in cages. Mazaeus had flowers

  specially strewn on the road into Babylon and incense was burned on

  silver alters along the way. Alexander entered the city in a chariot

  surrounded by his soldiers marching in battle fo
rmation. The first place he

  headed for was the royal palace and then, having been instructed by the

  priests, he laid an offering to Marduk. This festive entry, despite the

  cheerfulness expressed by the Babylonians, was by no means a

  spontaneous affair. The Astronomical Diary tells us that there were

  negotiations before Alexander entered the city. Indeed, such triumphal

  entries of monarchs who had defeated in war erstwhile rulers of Babylon

  had a long tradition in Mesopotamia. Such a parade was made in honour of

  the Assyrian king Sargon II after he had defeated the Babylonian ruler

  Marduk-appal-iddin II in 710, and in 539 Cyrus the Great entered the city

  in such a fashion after his victory over the Chaldaean Nabonidus. Not

  every conqueror received such a welcome but only those – like Sargon II,

  Cyrus the Great and Alexander – who managed to gain acceptance from

  Babylon’s priestly elite. The public’s expressions of joy at greeting the

  new ruler were part of a ceremony rehearsed only for rightful monarchs.

  And that was how the Babylonian elite perceived Alexander in October

  331.44

  The traditional picture of Alexander in Babylon presented in modern

  historiography is based on a literal interpretation of classical sources.

  Basically Alexander is perceived as the liberator of this great Middle

  Eastern metropolis from a mindless and cruel Persian regime. The

  Babylonians were supposed to hate the Persians for the quelling of their

  rebellion by Xerxes in 479 and the destruction of their temples, including

  the Temple of Esagila and the famous Etemenanki ziggurat (the Biblical

  Tower of Babel), as well as the melting down of the gold statue of Marduk

  into ingots. And that was why Alexander, who had defeated the Persians

  44 Curt., 5.1.17-23; Arr., An. , 3.16.3; Diod., 17.64.4. Kuhrt 1990, pp. 121-126;

  Kuhrt, Sherwin-White 1993, pp. 139-140; Atkinson 1994, pp. 34-36; Briant 1996,

  p. 881; Heckel 1997, p. 206.

  King of Asia

  239

  and promised to rebuild the temple, was so enthusiastically greeted by the

 

‹ Prev