Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf
Page 62
pay for a foot soldier), the second prize was half a talent and third, one
sixth of a talent. Seeing as in this competition each contestant could drink
as much of alcohol as they could at the king’s expense, one can assume
that many soldiers chose to contend. The winner, a certain Promachus,
drank as many as four choes (11 litres!) of wine. But he did not enjoy his
prize for long: he died four days after his incredible feat. The competition
was held in mid winter, which in Fars was particularly cold. That is how
another 35 Macedonian drunkards froze to death by lying comatose on the
snow. Another six managed to crawl to their tents but died soon
afterwards. 25 Therefore, according to Aristobulus, on this occasion the
Macedonian army suffered greater losses than at the battle of Granicus.
3. The weddings at Susa
Winter was not yet over when Alexander’s army set off down the Royal
Road to Susa, which, according to Onesicritus, they reached in March 324,
seven months after their departure from Patala. Shortly before getting
there the army crossed the Pasitigris on a pontoon bridge. Here
Alexander’s land army and Nearchus’ fleet, which had sailed up that river,
were finally reunited. This was a symbolic end to the Indian expedition
celebrated with sacrifices to the gods and games. The officers who had
24 Chares, ap. Ath., 10.49; V. Max., 1.8. ext. 10; Str., 15.1.68; Arr., An. , 7.3; Diod., 17.107; Plu., Alex. , 69.6-7; Luc., Peregr. , 25; Ael., VH, 5.6. Bosworth 1998, pp.
174-183.
25 Chares, ap. Ath., 10.49 (= FGrH, 125 F19); Plu., Alex. , 70.1-2 (also after
Chares); Ael., VH, 2.41.
344
Chapter VII
distinguished themselves the most in the last phase of the expedition
received gold crowns from their monarch. Nearchus was awarded such a
crown for bringing the fleet to port without losses and Leonnatus got his
for the victory over the Oreitans. No doubt it was also on this occasion that
other officers were given wreaths mentioned by the ancient authors in the
later context of covering the debts of the rank and file soldiers. Among
them were Hephaestion, Peucestas, Onesicritus as well as members of the
royal bodyguards. 26
The political end to the Indian venture came
somewhat later in 324 as more news of the disintegration of Macedonian
control over that country started reaching Alexander. Rebellions among
the native peoples, especially in southern Punjab, meant that maintaining
the political state of affairs as they had been in 325 would require another
armed expedition; on account of his experiences from the first expedition
and the plans he now had to conquer Arabia, this was something
Alexander was not prepared to do. Instead he decided to transfer the satrap
Peithon as well as his European soldiers and settlers to northwest India.
Nominal authority over the southern Punjab was granted to Alexander’s
loyal ally Porus thus allowing for the king to have the pretence of
maintaining control and not giving in to the rebels.27
The spring of 324 spent by Alexander in Susa abounded in important
events revealing the intentions, plans and ambitions of the ruler of
virtually the entire civilized world in the final phase of his life. Shortly
after reaching Susa one of the most famous wedding celebrations of
ancient times was held. It was a ceremony that would also become the
subject of an extraordinary debate in modern historical literature. In the
spring of 324 Alexander arranged the marriages of Macedonian and Greek
dignitaries from his circle with Iranian aristocratic women in a wedding
celebration that lasted five days. He himself set an example by marrying
Parisatis and Stateira, the daughters of Artaxerxes III and Darius III
respectively. At the same time he was still married to Rhoxane,
maintaining both the Macedonian and Persian traditions of the royal
polygamy. By marrying members of the two lines of the Achaemenid
dynasty Alexander no doubt intended to strengthen his claim to authority
in Iran. The eventual sons of these two wives would be the grandsons of
Great Kings and therefore they would be able to fully rely on the loyalty of
the Iranian aristocracy. The ancient authors give various figures as to the
26 Onesicritus, ap. Plin., Nat. , 6.100; Str., 15.3.5 ; Arr., Ind. , 42.7-10; Arr., An. , 7.5.4-6. Hamilton 1973, p. 133; Seibert 1985, pp. 186-187; Bosworth 1988, pp.
155-156.
27 Dexipp., ap. Phot., 82 (= FGrH, 100 F8.6); Arr., Succ. , ap. Phot., fr. 1.36; Curt., 9.8.9-10. Bosworth 1983, pp. 38-44.
The Last Years
345
number of marriages that were made during wedding ceremony: 80 or 87
(Arrian), 90 (Aelian), 92 (Chares) or 100 (Plutarch). Aelian and Plutarch
may have rounded off the number given by Chares, who, having been the
marshal at Alexander’s court and therefore in all probability personally
taken part in the wedding preparations, is naturally the most reliable source.
Hephaestion had the special distinction of marrying Drypetis, the sister of
the wife of Alexander, who wished his children to be the cousins of the
children of his closest friend. Craterus was also married to a member of
the Achaemenid dynasty, Amastris, a niece of Darius III. The mass
wedding was conducted according to Persian ritual. Alexander paid for the
dowries of all the brides and he also paid ordinary soldiers who married
Asian women. Allegedly as many as 10,000 such marriages were made
and naturally, whatever the actual number, some of these would have up to
that moment already been informal partnerships. An insight into how
much was spent by Alexander on the dowries is the information we have
on the fortune of Amastris. After her divorce from Craterus she married
Dionysius, the tyrant of Heraclea, and by her own means she was able to
buy all the furnishings that had once belonged to the exceptionally wealthy
tyrants of Syracuse. The wedding celebrations lasted five days and inside
the giant royal tent the newly weds were provided with richly decorated
couches. The tent itself had a circumference of four stades (720 m). The
canopy was propped up by gilded and jewel encrusted columns 20 cubits
(c. 10 m) high. The wedding guests included numerous ambassadors, other
foreign guests and officers. The envoys and other foreign guests are said to
have offered on this occasion gold crowns worth the sum value of 15,000
talents. Chares also provides a long list of artists employed to entertain the
banqueters. Knowing Alexander’s generosity we can be certain that the
very best artists of the day performed.28
This ceremony and later events, especially Alexander’s prayer on the
Opis (see Chapter VII.4), as well as Plutarch’s reflection on the subject (in
the words: ‘He himself, crowned with garlands, was the first to raise the
marriage hymn as though he were singing a song of truest friendship over
the union of the two greatest and most mighty peoples; for he, of one maid
the bridegroom, and at the same time of all the brides the escort, as a
father and sponsor united them in the bonds of wedlock.’) all gave grounds
for the
formulation of a controversial academic theory on Alexander
striving to unite the various peoples of his vast empire. Alexander did not
28 Chares, ap. Ath., 12.54; Diod., 17.107.6; Arr., An. , 7.4.4-8; Plu., Alex. , 70.3; Plu., mor. , 329d-f; Ael., VH, 8.7; Just., 12.10; Memn., FGrH, 434 F4.5-6. Lane Fox 1973, p. 417; Heckel 1992, pp. 86-87, 125; Hamilton 1973, pp. 133-134; Hamilton
1999, p. 195; Ogden 2009, pp. 206-207.
346
Chapter VII
live long enough to see his great plan fulfilled but it allegedly did come
closest to realisation in the Hellenistic kingdom in Bactria.29
Other scholars are right to criticise this theory for the Susa weddings
only concerned Macedonians, Greeks and Iranians, whereas more recent
studies regarding Central Asia in Hellenistic period give a far less
optimistic account of Bactria as a place of supposed union between diverse
peoples. Another theory argues that the intention was to ‘fuse’ together
just two nations, the Macedonians and the Persians or at least just their
social elites.30 But this theory has also been attacked by the minimalists –
scholars who have reduced the significance of Alexander to an episode in
military history. These historians stress that Macedonians and Iranians
were never treated as equals and point out that at meetings the
Macedonians were always given more privileged positions closer to the
king. Currently there is a prevailing tendency to interpret the Susa
weddings as a means for the Macedonians to take over from the Iranian
elites their dominant position in Persian society. After all, merely a few
Iranians were co-opted into government. Moreover, all the marriages
followed the same pattern: the brides were Iranians, which in ancient times
always meant the weaker side. There are even interpretations that the Susa
weddings were merely the realisation of the right of conquest, the victors
took the women of the vanquished to stress their victory over them.31
In terms of historical criticism of Tarn’s idealistic interpretation of
events the pendulum has probably swung too far in the opposite direction
for the ancient sources do not allow us to assume that marriage was forced
upon the Iranian princesses. Likewise the commonly held view that almost
all arranged marriages broke up soon after Alexander’s death is only a
modern-day assumption. In reality we do not know anything about the fate
of the vast majority of marriages; what is certain is that some ended in
divorce and two – this between Alexander’s secretary Eumenes and
Artonis, the daughter of Artabazus and that between Seleucus and Apame,
the daughter of Spitamenes, the eastern Iranian leader of resistance against
Alexander – lasted many years. The son of Seleucus and Apame was
Antioch, the second ruler of the Seleucid dynasty. Marriage of the king’s
29 Plu., mor. , 329e. Tarn 1948, ii, pp. 399-499; Hammond 1996, pp. 264-265.
30 Berve 1938; Wilcken 1967, pp. 207-209; Schachermeyr 1973, pp. 479-487;
Lane Fox 1973, p. 418. Critics of Tarn: Badian 1958a; Wilcken 1967, p. 208;
Bosworth 1980a. On Bactria: Holt 1988, p. 9.
31 Bosworth 1980a; Bosworth 1988, pp. 156-157; Stewart 1993, pp. 90-92; Billows
1994, pp. 30-33; Brosius 2003, pp. 176-178.
The Last Years
347
secretary Eumenes with Artonis ended only with Eumenes’ death.32 The
marriages in Susa were not a departure from Alexander’s general policy
towards Iran but a continuation of a series of events intended to establish
ties between the new monarch and the Persian aristocracy. This was a
policy that had been practiced since almost the very beginning of the
campaign and now at Susa it would also included accepting Iranian elites
into the army (which will be dealt with later in this chapter). Now his
Greek and Macedonian companions were to marry into the inherited
privilege and status of Iranian aristocratic families. Even if it was
impossible for the Macedonian and Iranian elites to merge completely, it is
clear that Alexander arranged the marriages in Susa to establish blood ties
between the two most important nations in his empire.33
It was also during Alexander’s second stay in Susa that he promised to
settle the individual debts of all soldiers who recorded them on a list.
Some of the sources mention a similar episode occurring on the Opis but
they are most probably referring to the same event, only moved forward in
time. Although this was almost certainly intended to be a gesture of
friendship and solidarity with brothers in arms, its reception was mixed,
which illustrated the atmosphere of mistrust that had loomed over the
Macedonian army ever since the Hyphasis incident. The soldiers were
reluctant to put their names on the list, fearing that the king simply wanted
to find out which individuals were living beyond their means. Alexander
therefore allowed the soldiers to put in claims without having their names
entered on a list. As a consequence of this decision the treasury was
inundated with claimants; according to the sources the total sum of money
paid to the soldiers’ creditors was from 9,870 to 20,000 talents. There can
be no doubt that normal army pay was not enough to cover the financial
needs of many soldiers who gambled or spent money on other pleasures,
but one can doubt that these soldiers could have incurred a debt amounting
to 20,000 talents, which was the equivalent of three years’ pay for an army
of 100,000 men. As there was no effective means of verifying the soldiers’
claims or the authenticity of those presenting themselves as their creditors
there must have been many cases of abuse and blatant cheating. Plutarch
writes about a certain Atarrhias, who was actually caught cheating.
Atarrhias bore the scars of the many battles he had fought, so Alexander
32 Plu., Eum. , 1.7, 19.2; Nep., Eum. , 13.4. Olbrycht 2004, pp. 47-48; Meeus 2009, pp. 236-237.
33 Allen 2005, p. 150; Ogden 2009, p. 207.
348
Chapter VII
took this opportunity to show magnanimity and pardoned the veteran for
his misdemeanour.34
After his return from India the process of orientalization at Alexander’s
court intensified, which contemporaries interpreted to be a symptom of the
king’s increasing fondness for excessive luxury. The contemporary
historian Ephippus of Olynthus wrote Alexander would hold audiences in
a formal Persian garden ( paradeisos) seated on a gold throne. Another
Alexander’s contemporary Polycleitus maintains the king slept in a golden
bed. Ephippus also mentions couches with silver legs, which were, no
doubt, intended for the hetairoi. At banquets Alexander was dressed in
purple robes and wore special slippers as well as Ammon’s horns. In
keeping with Persian custom he travelled in a chariot, dressed in Persian
attire and used the Great King’s insignia – the sceptre, the bow and the
spear. To the Greek observer these were the garments and insignia of the
gods Ammon, Artemis and Hermes. Moreover Alexander would also wear
a lion skin in imitation of his ancestor, Heracles. In the chambers where he
resided myrrh and other incens
e was burnt.35
The royal court was not the only institution to be orientalized. There
was also a major revolution in the army and it started in its most elite
formation. The Companion ( hetairoi) cavalry, the traditional preserve of
the Macedonian aristocracy, suffered serious losses during the march
across the Makran Mountains. These losses were now made up by
horsemen from the Iranian elites, including Rhoxane’s brother, Itanes, as
well as the sons of the satraps Artabazus, Mazaeus and Phrataphernes. The
Iranian levy must have been quite considerable as a fifth hipparchy was
formed (previously the number of hipparchies had been reduced from
eight to four) and put under the command of the Bactrian Hystaspes. To
many Macedonians these changes came as major shock. R. Lane Fox
rightly compares this situation to what the Victorian elites would have felt
if Indian Sepoy had been accepted into Grenadier Guards. The
Macedonian infantry was also to receive bad news. At more or less the
same time 30,000 Iranian youths arrived at Susa. They had been recruited
in 327 and for three years underwent training in how to fight the
Macedonian way. Now they pitched camp outside the city and demonstrated
their ability and discipline in using Macedonian arms. Alexander greeted
them graciously and, what is worse, called them ‘ epigonoi’, in the sense
that they were the successors to the current phalanx. Worse still, he
34 Arr., An. , 7.5.1-3; Diod., 17.109.2; Curt., 10.2.9-11; Plu., Alex. , 70.3-6; Plu., mor. , 339b-c; Just., 12.11. Bosworth 1988, p. 158; Hamilton 1999, pp. 195-196;
Nawotka 2003, p. 125.
35 Ephippus, ap. Ath., 12.53; Polycleitus, ap. Ath., 12.55.
The Last Years
349
described them as a counterbalance to his Macedonian veterans. No doubt
at this early stage this was just an expression of future intentions rather
than a statement of military fact for there are no records of the ‘ epigonoi’
participating in any battles. Nevertheless, this development touched a raw