Soldier, Priest, and God
Page 42
54. The double New Year: the Akitu festival (ABC 283), and the Nisannu festival, attended by Antiochus II (AD 2–245 A obv. 12–13) and by Antiochus III (AD 2–204 C rev. 14–19). Perhaps not in 245: Van der Speck (1993), 72.
55. The ceremony for Nabopolassar: ABC 26.78–96. Some such ceremony performed for Alexander: Pallis (1927), 174–83, followed by Bosworth (1980) ad Arr. An. 3.16.5, with refs., to which add Altheim (1953), 66, to the scholars rejecting the ceremony. A possible location: Wiseman (1991), 231. Alexander “was seated on the throne of royalty,” as at ABC 1 3.12 (Mušezib Marduk); 1 4.33 (Šamaš-šuma-ukin); 2 15 (Nabopolassar); 5 obv. 11 (Nebuchadnezzar), 13 rev. 6 (Seleucus II), 13 rev. 9 (Seleucus III). His installation was immediate; AD 1–330 rev. 11, referring to him as šar kiššati. Variations on his name: Aleksandari, or Aleksandaru, as at Boiy (2004), 48. Nabû: George (1996), 375.
56. The inaugural sacrifice: App. 1a #25. The palace: Wiseman (1985), 55–60. Water-cooled: Dalley (2013), 62–63.
57. Hdt. 1.181–82 lists those who may ascend the ziggurat.
58. The Greeks presumably responded to an innovation found in the Babylonian calendar, a seventy-six-year cycle for reconciling the movements of the sun and moon. Callipus of Cyzicus, a pupil of Aristotle, introduced this innovation in Greece, as at G. Lloyd (2001), 176–78. In the Persian Empire, the Babylonian calendar had already spread; see Stern (2011), 99–114. Earlier kings in Mesopotamia, like Greek kings and magistrates, controlled the calendar by manipulating intercalation, by fiat, or both. Intercalation: Parpola (1970), 2.285, 2.504–5. Fiat: Brown, (2000), 195.
59. For an illustration of the relation between the heavens and acts of extispicy, see Gurney and Finkelstein (1957), no. 73.110–17.
60. Tour guides and sights: George (1992), passim. The shrine of Anahita: Berossos FGrH 680 F 11. Gardens at Nineveh: Dalley (2013).
61. The Macedonian sacrifice: AD 1–330 rev. 13–15.
62. Maintenance of Esangil: Boiy (2004), 110–11. Persian neglect of temples fell short of the now rejected view that they attacked Babylonian temples (Arr. An. 7.17.1–4, DS 2.9.9), and that Alexander wished to rebuild Esangil in particular (Str 16.15, DS 17.112.3); see Van der Spek (2006), 24–25. The standard set by Cyrus: ANET 315–16. The ziggurat had not been destroyed: Messerschmidt (2015), 241, in the course of a discussion of controversy about this point, 236–41. Financial disputes between the priests and Alexander: Arr. An. 7.17. A complication: rerouting of funds through tithes collected by individuals, not the temple, as at CT 99.5.15–17.
63. Kings’ quarrels with priests: Waerzeggers (2010), 54 n. 282 with refs. The same conflict under the Neo-Babylonians: Dandemaev (1979), 591. Defeating the priests by appointing them: Frame (1991), 79, and Beaulieu (1989), 126. By creating new posts, at least in Assyria: Löhnert (2007).
64. The food fight aboard ship: Chares FGrH 125 F 9.
65. Bitumen and other uses of naphtha: Forbes (1964), 1.1–124. Hacksilber in the east: Le Rider (2001), 170–71. Babylonian example: C. Thompson (1999). The lack of darics in the east: Lewis (1989), 227–34. Lack of sigloi in Mesopotamia before the fourth century BC: Carradice (1987), 89–90. There is no evidence for Susiana in this period, but for the lack of currency in neighboring Persis see Joannès (1994), 142–44.
66. Arr. An. 3.16.4 mentions two of the four appointees; Curt. 5.1.43 mentions the other two. Mazdai’s remark: Plu. Alex. 39.9.
67. Massive donatives in Babylon: Curt. 5.1.45. Olympias on luxury: Plu. Alex. 39.7.
68. The alternative to Babylon as capital: Susa (Str. 15.3.9–10). Babylon reportedly the chief capital of Cyrus: X. Cyr. 8.6.22. For Alexander’s regular provincial revenue, no good figures are available, since those in Herodotus date from more than a century before, but Holt (2016), 181–93, shows that other reported payments to Alexander, minus reported expenditures, netted some 150,000 talents over thirteen years. The only ancient source to estimate Alexander’s income, Pompeius Trogus, said that the royal treasures, plus other revenues, amounted to 30,000 talents a year (Justin 13.1.9). Only 8,000 a year: Berve (1926), 1.312. Complications involved in such estimates: Holt (2016), 8–19. Comparatively slight Macedonian revenues engrossed by Antipater: Arr. An. 1.16.5, SEG XII (1955), 314. Harpalus may at first have followed Alexander to Ecbatana, as at Berve (1926), no. 143, in which case he moved to Babylon in 330.
69. The thirty-four days of relaxation: Curt. 5.1.36, 5.1.39.
70. The ziggurat: Choga Zanbil. Dimensions: Travlos (1960), 71–72; F. König (1965), no, 21, 28a.
71. The chief buildings in Achaemenid Susa: Potts (1999), 323. Horns on temples: 284, 346.
72. The entry into Susa: Arr. An. 3.16.6–9, Curt. 5.2.12–15. Possible resistance: Kaboli (2000), interpreting numerous Macedonian spearheads and arrowheads in the vicinity. Vandalizing the statue: Razmjou (2002).
73. Statues of the two tyrannicides restored by Alexander, apparently in 325/4: Arr. An. 3.16.7–8, 7.19.2; Pl. NH 34.70, although other sources date the restoration of the statues to the time of the Diadochi; hence Bosworth (1980) ad loc. holds that Alexander only promised to restore the pair.
74. Opulence and grandeur: Arist. De Mundo 398a, comparing the Persian king to a god; Ath. 5.206d-e; and Esth. 1:6–7, with Perrot (2013), passim.
75. The temple of Inshushinak, which largely survived until the nineteenth century AD: Harper (1992), 122–27. Mesopotamian statues in the temple: Beran (1988); Foster (1993), 304–7.
76. Similar problems for the interpretatio graeca, but in an Egyptian setting: Van Lieven (2016).
77. Sacrifice in Susa: App. 1a #26.
78. Susa appointments: Arr. An. 3.16.9. Parmenio’s house: Plu. Alex. 39.10.
79. Sisygambis: Curt. 5.2.18–22, whereas DS 17.67.1 reports no weaving incident. Atkinson (1994) ad. loc. adduces evidence for weaving by Persian women, but not by queens or princesses. The objection to manual labor is akin to her earlier, but more polite, objection to being in the situation of a slave (Curt. 3.12.24).
80. In the winter of 334/3, Antipater helped Coenus and Meleager recruit 3,000 Macedonian infantry and 300 cavalry (Arr. An. 1.29.4). In mid-333, Antipater sent another 6,000 Macedonians and 9,000 others (Curt. 3.7.8). By the end of the year, Antipater added 5,000 more infantry and 800 cavalry (unless the source for this report, Plb. 12.19.2, confused them with the troops sent earlier). The next winter, Antipater added 500 Thracian cavalry and 400 Greek mercenaries (Arr. An. 3.5.1). Not all these troops arrived in time for the battle of Issus, but if even only half did, they accounted for a large part of the Macedonian and total force. For total reinforcements, see Seibert (1986), 848. The last installment: DS 17.49.1; Curt. 4.6.30, 7.1.37–40. Alexander had been waiting for these troops for a year (Arr. An. 2.27). Consequent depletion of Antipater’s and Macedon’s manpower: Bosworth (1986), 5–9.
81. Adapted from Tamid 31b–32a. Besides references to Gen. 1–2 in the first two questions, the answer to no. 2 refers to Ps. 103.11–12. No. 4: Mishnah Afot 4.1. Of the two answers to no. 5, the second, practicing humility, was proposed by Rashi. Cf. the somewhat similar accounts at Plu. Alex. 64 and Epit. Mett. 78–84, with ten questions but set in India, and the very different account at Ps.-Call. Α 3.6, also set in India. Shorter and less informative accounts: Arr. An. 7.1.5–2.1, Str. 15.1.61–65.
Chapter 7
A Vacant Throne
1. Some 40,000: Curt 5.8.3, listing 37,300 without mentioning royal guards. DS 17.73.2: 30,000, but no cavalry mentioned. Arr. An. 3.19.5: a mere 9,000, far too low in the light of Darius’s decision to resist rather than flee.
2. The misconception of the Caucasus: Baeton FGrH 119 F 2a, with miscalculation of the distance from the Caspian to India (F 26). Prometheus ended up buried in the Hindu Kush, a part of the Caucasus (Arr. An. 5.3.3).
3. The intercession: App. 2 #15, attributing Greek gestures to the principals. The preceding campaign: Curt. 5.3.3–9. A version without supplication, except perhaps (δεηθῆναι) by Sisygambis to Alexander: Ar
r. An. 3.17.1–6.
4. The battle at the Gates: Arr. An. 3.18.1–10, without religious aspects, vs. Curt. 5.3.17–4.33, with an omen, a council, and an unperformed burial.
5. The omen and council at the Gates: App. 1a #27, App. 3 #18. A similar story, but involving a Lycian guide, inspired the suppositious oracle at App. 1b #16. Combat: Curt. 5.4.20–34, but enemy suicides as at Arr. An. 3.18.9.
6. The total haul, including Susa: up to 170,000 silver talents, as at Holt (2016), 188–89, at fifty-eight pounds per talent, or some 7,000 tons of silver, equaling, at $15 an ounce, some $3.5 billion. De Callatuÿ (1989), 272, revisited in (2011), 21, estimated only 2,000 tons of silver and 90 tons of gold for all treasures together, but at a silver-to-gold ratio of 13 to 1, the values of the metal is still well over $1 billion. Persian workers at Persepolis paid in weighed bullion: Joannès (1994), 142–44.
7. The deaths of the priests: Boyce and Grenet (1991), 3.116, quoting AVN 1.3.3–11 to this effect. The report in this Pahlavi text that Alexander burned the Avesta is less credible, since there is no evidence for manuscripts in the fourth century; Ciancaglini (1998), 71–72, 76, rejects the possibility that religious writings of the Magi were burned rather than Avesta manuscripts. The reuse of the casket: Pl. NH 6.108.
8. The council meeting: App. 3 #19. No general destruction: Sancisi-Weerdenburg (1993). Similarly, the Macedonians destroyed the outer precincts of Halicarnassus (Arr. An. 1.24.6, DS 17.27.6) but did not destroy the monuments there (Pl. NH 35.172). Other views: an act of folly at Green (1991), 319, following the reasoning attributed to Parmenio at Arr. An. 3.8.11; partly drunken folly at Badian (1985), 485, following DS 17.72.2–4; an attempt to intimidate Darius at Borza (1972), 244, following DS 17.70.1, 71.3, speaking of hatred toward Persepolis; an act of religiously motivated revenge at Antela-Bernárdez (2016), 45–46, following Arr. An. 3.18.12, DS 17.72.5–6.
9. Greco-Macedonian sacrifice at the Persian capital: App. 1a #28. Many Persian gods, including some that were originally Elamite: Fort. 1316.101.28.
10. Sights at Pasargadae: Stronach (1978), 44–50; 107–13 with pl. 60; 138–45.
11. The scant attention given to this episode in the Alexander historians: Arr. An. 3.18.10, Curt. 5.6.10. Str. 15.3.7 reports the trip but only briefly, the rest of the section dealing with events from the return visit in 324.
12. The coronation ceremony at Pasargadae: Plu. Arta. 3.1–2. Anahita’s status: A2 Sa, Ha, Sd, all mentioning her as well as Ahura Mazda and Mithra. Her temple at nearby Estakr would be important for the Sassanids, as at Bivar and Boyce (1998). The Plutarch passage may derive from Ctesias; see Lenfant (2004), 145, 178–80.
13. The satraps of Persis: Orxines, Berve (1926), no. 591, replacing Phrasaortes (Arr. An. 6.29.2). Regarding the cuneiform inscription on the tomb, Onesikritos FGrH 134 F 34 was surely wrong to claim that the inscription was written in Persian characters translating Greek words. A similar meaning for the inscription: Aristios FGrH 134 F 1. Alternatively, the inscription was not on the tomb but nearby, as at Stronach (1978), 26.
14. Babylonian aspects of the tomb: Arr. An. 6.29.4–11, Curt. 10.1.3–33.
15. The visit to the tomb: Aristoboulos FGrH 139 F 51. Alexander’s instructions to the priests may be deduced from his anger when he returned to Pasargadae in 324, as at Arr. An. 6.29.4–11, Curt. 10.1.30–38.
16. The contrary view: Badian (1996), 17, holding that Alexander was effectively crowned by wearing Persian dress. The Persian dress he wore was not, however, strictly royal. The purple chlamys was aristocratic and Macedonian, for he shared it with his generals; the kausia was Macedonian. Several sources say that he wore a Persian diadem (Ephippos FGrH 126 F 5, DS 17.77.5, Curt. 6.6.4), yet Persian princes wore diadems, just as the king did (X. Cyr. 8.3.13, Plu. Frat. amor. 488d). The remaining item, the chiton, was perhaps royal by virtue of the white stripe (X. Cyr. 8.3.13, Curt. 6.6.4); on the terms for “white,” see Collins (2012), 387. For the upright tiara, see n. 45 below. Another contrary view: Briant (1996), 697, holding out the possibility that Alexander worshipped Persian gods in Anatolia, and thus gained legitimacy among Persians; rejected by Fredricksmeyer (2000), 143–45, also disallowing Alexander’s worship of local gods in Anatolia.
17. Arrival of the mercenaries sent by Antipater: Curt. 5.7.12.
18. The Persian council: App. 3 #48. The cavalry: Arr. An. 3.19.5, Curt 5.8.3. At Arr. An. 3.19.4, however, Darius plans merely to flee, a plan that no council was likely to have reached.
19. Bactrian satrap as heir apparent: Sancisi-Weerdenburg (1980), 129–30, followed by Lenderling (2005), 214. A list of governors, many of whom became king: Rawlinson (1912), 149–50.
20. The winter march through the Zagros: Curt. 5.6.12–20. Better conditions: 5.7.12.
21. The statues at Ecbatana: Paus. 1.16.3, 8.46.3, returned to Greece by one of Alexander’s successors, Seleucus, but not by Alexander. The donative: Arr. An. 3.19.5.
22. The new policy announced at Ecbatana: Arr. An. 3.19.5–8, Plu. Alex. 42.5. At Curt 6.3–6.4.1, Alexander dealt with army grievances at an assembly at Tabae, an illustration of this author’s greater interest in this kind of meeting.
23. The Thespian inscription: IG vii 3206. The number of men dismissed: at a maximum, 7,000 allies (as at DS 17.7.4), plus allied reinforcements totaling 16,000 (as at Ch. 6, n. 80), but surely much smaller, because of the assignment of some men to garrisons and the reenlistment of others. A further 1,500 Thessalians and the total is very roughly 10,000.
24. The council meeting at Ecbatana: App. 3 #20, located by Curtius (6.3–6.4.1) in Tabae. In Curtius, however, Alexander makes no concessions to the generals, any more than he does to the troops.
25. The narrative of the pursuit of Darius: Arr. An. 3.20.1–21.1. Curtius reports that the news about Darius came in stages (5.13.3, 5.13.6–7), plus other differences and complications noticed at Bosworth (1980) ad. Arr. An. 3.21.1.
26. The narrative through Darius’s death: Arr. An. 3.21.1–10, but with details taken from Plu. Alex. 43.1–5 (the force of 60 and the cloak) and Curt 5.13.7 (the interpreter) and 5.13.23–24 (the wagon).
27. The system was one of qanats, by which the underground pipes were developed from natural underground channels. In the era of Darius I, this system came into use at the Kharga oasis, where Darius built a shrine. Perhaps it was imported from Iran, as at Goblot (1963), 503–5. Alexander’s use of the system: Plb. 10.28.
28. The burial in the wastelands: App. 1a #29.
29. The treacherous suppliants: App. 2 #16.
30. The burial of Darius: App. 1a #30. Stealing Darius’s money: DS 17.74.5. Paying the sutlers: Pl. NH 35.110. Paying for luxuries: Plu. Alex. 54.2.
31. For the claims of Bessus, see n. 19 above. Lenderling (2005), 214, cites ABC 8 chr. 8, obv. 3–4, where the name of Bessus must be supplied, and the possibly lacunose ABC 8.112–13. Naveh and Shaked (2012), no. 1a, does not make clear which Artaxerxes is mentioned in the text.
32. Ancient views of the Verkana expedition: to capture fugitives (Arr. An. 3.23.1) and to protect adjoining territory (Curt. 6.4.1).
33. The three-way split of the forces: Arr. An. 3.23.2, Curt 6.4.2.
34. Measuring the underground river: Curt. 6.4.4–7, Arr. An. 3.23.4, neither acknowledging that the usual method for tracing an underground river was to use chaff, as at J. BJ 3.511–15.
35. Exaggerating Artabazus’s ties to Philip through Pammenes: Lenschau (1949), failing to remark that Artabazus suspected Pammenes of treachery. Mercy for tribesmen: Arr. An. 3.24.2–3. No mercy for horse thieves: Plu. Alex. 44.2–3, Fort. Alex. 341b.
36. Caspian sacrifices: App. 1a #31. Caspian appointments: Autophradates, Berve (1926), no. 189 and Amminapes, no. 55.
37. Funeral of Nicanor: App. 1a #32.
38. The narrative of the rebellion: Arr. An. 3.25 (including forty men and the long march), Curt. 5.4.25–32 (only the march).Would-be suppliants denied a chance to beg before they were enslaved: Arr. An. 3.25.7, Curt. 6.6.33.
40. The supplication: App. 2 #17. The drill: Ath. Mech. 10.11–12. This device would not have impressed defenders manning stone walls, as at Halicarnassus.
41. Brunt (1976), 497–99, explains the choice of route by Macedonian fear of further rebellion in Areia. Engels (1979), 186–91, explains the choice by the need for food and fodder following the unsuccessful pursuit of Shatibrzana. Lane Fox (1973), 282, emphasizes Alexander’s distrust of the Persian satrap to the south.
42. Zarin, old Persian Zranka, as at Db 1.6, or modern Dāhān-e Gholāmān: Scerrato (1966a), (1966b). According to (1979), 733, the cult site is not Zoroastrian. Books from Harpalus: Plu. Alex. 8.3.
43. The Euergetae and Cyrus: Arr. An. 3.27.4–5, Curt. 7.3.1–3, neither describing the encounter with the Persian conqueror.
44. Some Persian elements in the mixed array that was Alexander’s dress: Badian (1985), passim, summarized at 491 n. 2. Literary sources: Ritter (1965), ch. 1. Visual sources: Tuplin (2007a), 77–78. When Alexander began to wear Persian dress is unclear: Hyrcania at DS 17.77.4–7; Parthia at Plu. Alex. 45.1–4; Sogdiana implied at Arr. An. 4.7.4. Effeminate belt: Curt. 3.3.18, Plu. Alex. 51.5. Arrian on the clothes: An. 7.29.4. Plutarch (Alex. 45.1–4) and Diodorus (17.77.4–7) add that Alexander wished to dress in some fashion that would put foreigners at ease. A Persian companion: Plu. Alex. 43.1, Curt. 6.2.10.
45. No upright tiara for Alexander: Plu. Alex. 45.2, Fort. Alex. 329f. The upright tiara versus other tiaras, which did not designate the Persian king: Hdt. 7.61, X. An. 2.5.23, Cyr. 8.3.13, Klitarchos FGrH 137 F 5, Phylarch. FGrH 81 F 22. The upright tiara was not indispensable, for it is missing from extant Persian art, as noted by Tuplin (2007a).
46. The council meeting about Philotas: App. 3 #22. Curt. 6.7–11 allows an institutional role to the companions while reporting rivalries among them, and introduces the issue of Alexander’s being the son of Amon (6.9.18, 6.10.23).