In Search of the Lost Testament of Alexander the Great

by David Grant

  125.Arrian 4.18.4 for Menidas’ recruiting campaign in Macedonia and 7.23.1 for his return. Attalus was never heard of after his capture from a siege of the last Perdiccans lasting sixteen months; see Diodorus 19.16.5. His death is not specifically attested. He had already married Perdiccas’ sister Atalante; Diodorus 18.37.2. Asander was present in Babylon and at Medius’ party according to the Pamphlet; detailed discussion in chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers.

  126.See Stoneman (1991) p 12 for discussion and Romance 1.32 for Alexander’s relationship with Serapis. Also Atkinson (2009) p 233 for a discussion and opinion on the dating and origination of Serapis. Diogenes Laertius Diogenes 63 claimed that Diogenes the Cynic referred to Serapis yet this is a late composition and does not prove the early use of the name or its existence in Babylonia.

  127.Plutarch Isis and Osiris 27-28 (361f-362e) for the shipping of the statue from Sinope to Alexandria, and footnote 7 from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1940, for discussion on its origins. The sculptor may have been the celebrated Bryaxis of Athens. Ptolemy allegedly had a dream vision of the statue which sounds like a veiled mandate for its theft.

  128.Vrettos (2001) p 34 for the temple in the Egyptian quarter.

  129.Romance 3.32 for the reference to Great Serapis and its link with Alexandria. Also mentioned at 1.21; see Stoneman (1991) p 110.

  130.See Anson (1996) pp 501-504 for discussion.

  131.For Oserapis see Bosworth A to A (1988) pp 168-170 and Atkinson (2009) citing Goukowski (1978). Following the text in Eidinow-Kindt (2015) p 319 for the description of Oserapis.

  132.See chapter titled The Precarious Path of Pergamena and Papyrus for examples. Following Bosworth (1971) p 120 for ‘strikingly similar’ in resemblance. As an example of the use of contemporary terminology, Curtius used testudo at 5.3.9 and implied its shield formation again at 5.3.21 and 7.9.3

  133.See Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris 27-28 for examples of other gods the Greeks claimed were identical to Egyptian deities. In fact Serapis was claimed to be none other than Pluto.

  134.Discussed in De Polignac (1999) p 6. A tradition circulates that the Sumerian deity Enki (Babylonian Ea) was titled ‘Serapsi’ (‘king of the deep’) but there is little, it seems, to substantiate this.

  135.However evidence has been found to prove that Ea, alternatively the Chaldean-named Sarm-Apsi, ‘king of the deep (sea)’, who was also great in learning and magic, had a temple in the city. For the Chaldean god see Cumont (1911) p 73. Also Bosworth (1971) pp 120-121. Arrian 7.14.5 for the references to the temple of Asclepius in Ecbatana.

  136.Following Bosworth (1971) p 120 for the incorporation of elements of Greek religion and the argument that the new Serapis would have lost is resemblance to Bel-Marduk; Bosworth, however, sees this as an argument that the Journal entry is ‘early’ for any comparison to have been made.

  137.Plutarch 73.8.

  138.Plutarch 73.7-9 and more briefly Arrian 7.24-25 described that Alexander and his friend, whilst playing ball (possibly the game of sphaira), beheld a man seated on the king’s throne, in silence, wearing the royal diadem and robes. He claimed the god Serapis had come to him and bid him sit on the throne. Alexander had him ‘put out of the way’ as advised by his seers. Arrian 7.17.5 and 7.18.1-3 for reference to Aristobulus’ reporting of portents and seers.

  139.Arrian 3.3.6 reported that Aristobulus claimed they were guided by two ravens; see discussion in Robinson (1953) Preface p xiii. Strabo 17.1.43 for crows.

  140.Diodorus 17.103.7-8 for Ptolemy’s poisonous wound in India. Further discussion in Heckel (1992) p 26.

  141.Plutarch 2.5-6; Olympias’ Bacchic behaviour also implied at Athenaeus 13.560 (from Duris); discussed in Carney (2006) p 96 ff.

  142.See the references to Glycon in Lucian’s Alexander or the False Prophet, discussed in Costa (2005) p 129. For the Alexandrian serpents see Carney-Ogden (2010) p 126. Carney-Ogden (2010) pp 126-127 for the snake-fringed aegis. Plutarch 2.6 and Justin 12.16.1-4 for Olympias and the serpent and Alexander’s more than human conception. Here the Pharaoh Nectanebo was the true father of Alexander and visited Olympias disguised as Ammon; Romance 1.1-12 for the full account of Nectanebo. Carney (2006) p 97 for Plutarch’s treatment of Olympias though he himself was an initiate of the cult of Dionysus (Moralia 611d-e).

  143.Diogenes Laertius Demetrius 76 for the curing of Demetrius’ blindness; the reference to five books comes from Artemidorus Oneirokritikon 2.44 9 (On the Interpretation of Dreams), though these books are not mentioned by Diogenes Laertius. Harris (2009) p 155 footnotes 186 for discussion on sources behind Demetrius of Phalerum’s association with Serapis.

  144.Demetrius of Phalerum was ousted from Athens in 307 BCE by Demetrius Poliorketes; he headed first to Thebes and around 297 BCE to Egypt. Pearson (1960) p 260 for discussion on the prayer to Serapis.

  145.For the dating of Demetrius’ Peri Tyches see discussion in Bosworth-Baynham (2000) p 299; Demetrius stated the fifty-year rise of Macedon, which would logically date from Philip II’s reign from ca. 360 BCE, suggesting it was written around 310 BCE. Polybius gave further guidance stating that Demetrius published some 150 years before the end of the Third Macedonian War culminating in the battle at Pydna in 168 BCE. It is a very loose triangulation but suggests Demetrius’ work was one of the first treatises to deal with Alexander in a meaningful philosophic way.

  146.For the fatal snakebite see Diogenes Laertius Demetrius of Phalerum 78, Cicero In Defence of Rabirius Postumus 9.23. Plutarch Moralia 48e-74f (How to tell a Flatterer from a Friend 28 69c-d) for the reference to ‘near Thebes’; full text in Fortenbaugh-Schütrumpf (2000) pp 75-77.

  147.Plutarch Sayings of Kings and Commanders 189D, full text from Fortenbaugh-Schütrumpf (2000) pp 81-82.

  148.Plutarch 74.1-2 and 75.1, translation by I Scott-Kilvert, Penguin Classics edition, 1973. The portentous signs are scattered through Plutarch 73-76 and appear less vividly in the accounts of Arrian 7.16-17, Diodorus 17.116-117, Justin 12.8.3-6. A lacuna in Curtius’ final chapter has swallowed his detail.

  149.‘Whitewashed’ quoting Heckel-Yardley (2004) Introduction p XXIII.

  150.Suetonius Domitian 21.1.

  151.Plutarch 74.2 for the fear of assassination, 77.2 for the lack of suspicion at Babylon. The portentous signs are scattered through Plutarch 73-76 and appear less vividly in the accounts of Arrian 7.16-17, Diodorus 17.116-117 and Justin 12.8.3-6. A lacuna in Curtius’ final chapter has swallowed any comparable detail.

  152.Plutarch 69.7 reported that Calanus, before climbing onto his funeral pyre, told Alexander he would soon meet him again in Babylon.

  153.Green (1970) p 258.

  154.The detail of pre-death portents straddles all traditions: Arrian 7.16.7 for the divine hand in Alexander’s death and 7.18.2 and 7.18.5 for Pythagoras’ diving to reveal livers with no lobes. Also 7.24-25, and Aristobulus was mentioned five times as a source for superstitious episodes. More portentous episodes at Diodorus 17.115.5, Plutarch 73-74, Justin, 12.13. Curtius’ account surely contained the detail too, but a lacuna exists in the opening of his final chapter. The half-child half-beast Scylla-like creature appears at Metz Epitome 90-95 and the Romance 3.30; the seer Philip saw this as an ill omen for Alexander.

  155.Diodorus 19.55.8, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1947. Quoting McKechnie (1995) p 418 on ‘philosophical corps’. Diodorus 17.112.5 for allusions to his soul.

  156.Citation from Ifrah (2000) pp 158-161. Herodotus 7.113-114.

  157.Collins (2008) for full discussion of magic in the ancient Greek world, Introduction p xiii for defixiones and epoidai.

  158.From Ovid’s Metamorphoses book 5, Ino and Athamas, line 444. Hades was later referred to as Plouton (the Roman Pluto) and Hades came to denote the place, rather than the person who ruled the underworld. Lucan De Bello civili book 6 has a son of Pompey consulting a witch on the outcome of the forthcoming battle against Caesar.

  159.Collins (2008) Introduct
ion p xiii for discussion of On the Sacred Disease from the Hippocratic corpus and p 53 for the commercial centre of witchcraft, following Aristophanes’ Clouds.

  160.For magnetic stones and Thales of Miletus see Collins (2008) pp 8-9 and p 46 for the Athenian court for inanimate objects.

  161.Detail of the nekyomanteia in Ogden (2001) pp 167-195.

  162.Aristotle History of Animals books 7-10 feature demons working in conjunction with the influence of stars. Plato Laws 933a-e as an example.

  163.Collins (2008) p 143 for the Twelve Tables described in Pliny 28.10. The ‘evil charm’ could also mean a slander or abusive curse.

  164.Discussed in Collins (2008) p 148, and Tacitus 2.69.3, translation from Collins (2008). Momigliano (1977) p 136 for Ammianus’ references to magic.

  165.Arrian 7.25.6, Plutarch 76.

  166.Nearchus was an advisor to the young Demetrius at Gaza in 312/2 BCE according to Diodorus 19.69.1 and Medius served at Salamis in 307/6 BCE; see Diodorus 20.50.3 and Plutarch Demetrius 19.1-2.

  167.Notable exceptions being Hammond (1988) and (1993), and Robinson (1953) Preface p x which ingeniously regarded the Journal extract as a surviving fragment of Strattis’ On the Deaths of Alexander. The comparison with Dictys encouraged by Bosworth A to A (1988) p 181.

  168.Discussed in Bosworth (1971). A useful summary of arguments is given in Atkinson (2009) p 143. The Ptolemaic link came from Wirth in 1986; see Atkinson (2009) p 143 for detail.

  169.Heckel (1993) summarises the Journal arguments well and the quotations from Heckel are drawn from here. In this review of Hammond’s work on sources, Heckel pointed out that the pre-eminent modern Alexander scholars: Badian, Bosworth, Samuel and Pearson, had discredited the Journal convincingly.

  170.Quoting Bosworth (1971) p 136; author’s italics.

  171.Lane Fox (1980) p 410.

  172.Tarn (1948) p 43.

  173.The corpse was likely moved from Memphis to Alexandria in Cleitarchus’ day once the Sema was built; Pausanias 1.7.1 claimed Ptolemy II Philadelphos brought the body from Memphis to Alexandria. Cleitarchus’ wrap-up discussed in detail in chapter titled Babylon: the Cipher and Rosetta Stone.

  174.Arrian 7.27.3 and Plutarch 77.5 respectively.

  175.Curtius 10.5.5, Arrian 7.26.3, Diodorus 17.117.4.

  176.Curtius 10.10.5-6.

  177.Chugg (2009) p 5 refutes the use of the first personal singular in favour of the first person plural, and in other translations ‘we’ is used; as an example the translation by John C Rolfe of 1946 published by the University of Michigan. Nevertheless it was not unusual for an author to use the plural ‘we’ when referring to his own efforts and this does not convincingly argue that Curtius was paraphrasing Cleitarchus, for example. Polybius in particular switched between singular and plural where emphasis demanded it and in particular to stress the veracity of either eyewitness reporting or personal vouching for facts; discussion in Marmodoro-Hill (2013) pp 199-204.

  178.Discussed in the chapter titled Comets, Colophons and Curtius Rufus.

  179.Diodorus 20.81.3 based on the translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1954. See Tarn (1939) p 132 for a discussion on whether Diodorus 20.81.3 drew from the Romance and Letter to the Rhodians, as proposed by Ausfeld. Heckel (1988) p 2 suggested Hieronymus was the source.

  180.Romance 3.32.5-7 and Metz Epitome 101-102. Arrian 7.27.3 for his recounting the tradition of Alexander’s attempt to disappear into the Euphrates.

  181.Hieronymus as a source of Will references is discussed in chapter titled Wills and Testaments in the Classical Mind, Babylon: the Cipher and Rosetta Stone and Rhodian rhetoric in The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers.

  182.For Olympias’ pogrom see Diodorus 19.11.8 and 19.35.1, Justin 14.6 (slaughter of nobility but no revenge for conspiracy mentioned); Curtius 10.10.18 suggested rumours were ‘soon suppressed by the power of people implicated by the gossip’. Thus rumours abounded early and before Cassander had the last of Alexander’s family murdered.

  183.Plutarch Demosthenes 28.4 and Moralia 849b (Life of Hyperides) for Hyperides having his tongue cut out, 849f for his proposing honours for Iolaos. Some editions of the Moralia contained the spuriously assigned Lives of the Ten Orators.

  184.Plutarch 77.1-2 and reinforced by Curtius 10.10.18-19. Olympias’ pogrom is also recorded in detail by Diodorus 19.11.809 and 19.51.5. If we give six months either way in latitude to Plutarch’s ‘five years’ from June 323 BCE then the whole of 318 BCE becomes a candidate for rumours reaching Greece.

  185.Arrian Events After Alexander 1.21.

  186.Demosthenes termed Archias’ acting ‘unconvincing’ when confronted by him at his death. Plutarch Demosthenes 29, Plutarch Moralia 846f, 849d. Arrian Events After Alexander 1.13-14 for his role hunting down ‘exiles’.

  187.Heckel (2006) p 140 for Holcias’ possible background.

  188.Diodorus 20.27.3.

  189.Diodorus 19.51; Justin 14.6.6-12.

  190.Diodorus 20.27.1-20.28.29 and 19.105 for the relief.

  191.Curtius 10.18-19, reiterated in Diodorus 17.118.2 and Justin 12.13.10.

  192.Heracles’ reemergence under Polyperchon discussed in chapter titled The Tragic Triumvirate of Treachery and Oaths and Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius.

  193.Full discussion of Heracles’ identity and Polyperchon’s role in promoting him in chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius. Arrian 3.5.2-3 for the identification of Ephippus in Egypt and Athenaeus 3.120c-d and 4.146c-d for the drinking references.

  7

  THE DAMAGING DIDACTIC OF CLASSICAL DEATHS

  Were ‘deaths’ accurately chronicled in the ancient world?

  Nothing was more colourfully narrated in Greek, Hellenistic, and Roman-era histories than the deaths of tyrants, kings, emperors, and their nemeses: recalcitrant politicians.

  The epitaphic allegations attached to them, being posthumous commentaries by nature and often linked to rumours of political intrigue and assassination, were all the more easily manipulated for didactic effect.

  We take a look at the most notorious of cases to help us appreciate how conflicting claims attached to Alexander’s death were able to exist side-by-side in the mainstream accounts, and why his alleged intestacy was so readily accepted.

  ‘I, who crossed all the inhabited earth, And the uninhabited places, and the places of darkness, Was unable to evade fate.

  A small cup can yield a man to death, And send him down among the dead with a drop of poison.’1

  Greek Alexander Romance

  ‘I shall make just as pretty a cupbearer as you – and not drink the wine myself. For it is the fact that the king’s butler when he offers the wine is bound to dip a ladle in the cup first, and pour a little in the hollow of his hand and sip it, so that if he has mixed poison in the bowl it will do him no good himself.’2

  Xenophon Cyropaedia

  ‘It is possible to provide security against other ills, but as far as death is concerned, we men live in a city without walls.’3

  Epicurus Vatican Sayings

  The sacred medical oath of Hippocrates of Kos commenced with: ‘I swear by Apollo the physician, and Asclepius, and Hygeia, and Panacea, and all the gods and goddesses…’, and its fourth paragraph pledged: ‘I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.’ The deities must have been mortified, for Persia, Greece, and then imperial Rome, saw the oath abandoned to aconite, arsenic and antimony, the toxic salt and pepper (and eyebrow cosmetic) of emperors, tyrants and kings.4

  Although it is ascribed to Hippocrates, the oath likely has its roots with the Pythagoreans’ own moral code, the so-called Golden Verses, whose original and less poetic geometric pledge put great store in a numerical triangle, the Tetraktys.5 The ‘father of medicine’ and the ‘father of numbers’ had a fascination with death, Hippocrates with its prevention, and Pythagoras with its mitigation through the transmigration of the soul. Both sought harmony, whether in the
four humours of the body or with the number four itself; for Hippocrates imbalance was dyskrasia, and for Pythagoras it was simply discordant, for he was the first music therapist and master of the quadrivium.6 Each had influential or even mystical associations by Alexander’s day, and more significantly to our investigation, they both shared uncertain, though legendary, deaths.

  If Wills were manipulable, so was death itself, and so we need to contemplate how the closing pages of traditional biographies were crafted. Death has mutated into a didactic digression too many times for us to question its penchant for doing so. Sometimes deliberate, at other times accidental, the metamorphosis is only magnified with time and fame. Alexander was born into an era when death was a lesson on life, or according to Seneca, life was a lesson on death: ‘It takes a whole life to learn how to die.’7 And when Alexander departed, he bequeathed the class one more exploitable episode.

  THE MANY-FRAYED STRANDS OF LEGENDARY EPITAPHS

  Many legendary figures suffered posthumous reconstructions, and from the Homeric past through to Athens’ Golden Age, colourful examples are not difficult to find. Empedocles the ‘purifier’, a cosmogenic philosopher from Sicily who put his ideas into verse and became known as the ‘wind-forbidder’, is said to have jumped into the fire of Mount Etna to ensure his apotheosis. Once charged for stealing the discourses of Pythagoras, who clearly influenced his ideas, Empedocles was trying to arrange a heavenly disappearance after a banquet but was apparently betrayed by one of his distinctive brass-soled slippers he misplaced on the climb up. This was not the finite conclusion it suggests, for he, like Pythagoras, believed in reincarnation.8 With no volcano at hand, the Romance captured Alexander’s attempt at a similar vanishing act by using the River Euphrates (T1, T2). Where Empedocles gained a cult, Alexander gained the ill-timed intervention of Roxane, his pregnant wife. The Romance compilers (though this particular detail may be Pamphlet-derived) were not so original in their imagery and most elements can be found in earlier tales whilst much was regurgitated later, in Suetonius’ biographies of the Roman Caesars, for example, or more pertinently, in the Scriptores Historiae Augustae.9