In Search of the Lost Testament of Alexander the Great

by David Grant

  184.Plutarch Eumenes 15.3-4, Nepos 8.1-4 for the separation of Eumenes’ troops. Eumenes’ claim that he could gather his commanders in three to four days, suggesting as Roisman (2012) p 27 noted that the bulk of the army was close to Gabiene.

  185.Diodorus 19.39-40.

  186.Diodorus 19.82.3 for the ranks at Gaza. In musth, a sexually heightened state, males can become highly and uncharacteristically aggressive.

  187.Samansiri-Weerakoon (2007) for elephant consumption. Diodorus 18.68.3 for Polyperchon’s lack of supplies to see through the siege of Athens and Diodorus 19.49.2-3 for the death of the starved elephants at Pydna.

  188.Roisman (2012) pp 98-99 for discussion of elephant logistics and Engels (1978) p 155. Engels (1978) p 16 for the average daily march of the army.

  189.Herodotus 7.187, Diogenes Laertius 8.18 for the daily ration of 1 cheonix of grain in the Persian army.

  190.Engels (1978) p 14 for mule and camels porterage figures and p 19 for pack animal estimates. Whilst Engels proposed one pack animal per fifty men, this is still significant and discounts baggage, any machinery and the tools of camp followers. Engels (1978) p 124 for the calorie and protein requirements of each soldier. The Persians had a history of eating camels and horses; Herodotus 1.133 and 4.143 ff.

  191.Polyaenus 4.6.11 for the desert description and water cask numbers; also Diodorus 19.37.1-6, Nepos 18.8.4-9, Plutarch Eumenes 15.8-13.

  192.Engels (1978) p 38 for crop consumption of the army on the march and pp 56, 38 and 27 for the foraging area; also discussed in Engels (1980) p 330; pp 145-149 for charts showing total weights of provisions required and army personnel sizes.

  193.For Alexander’s repayment of debt see Curtius 10.2.8, Diodorus 17.109.2 and quoting Justin 12.11.2-4. For the talent per man see Arrian 7.12.2. Whilst not necessarily restricted to infantry, it seems likely that they, and not the better-paid cavalry, accumulated the majority of the debt.

  194.The roles of Nearchus and Menander discussed further in later chapters. Menander had been governor of Lydia since early in the campaign; see Arrian 3.6.7. He was reconfirmed at Babylon: Diodorus 18.3.1, Justin 13.4.15, Curtius 10.10.2, Dexippus FGrH 100 F8.2, Arrian Events After Alexander 1.6. Nearchus had likewise governed Lycia and Pamphylia early in the campaign, Arrian 3.6.6, Justin 13.4.15, whilst Nearchus’ activity post-Babylon is unattested until he reappeared in the region of Telmessus in Lycia in 320/319 BCE; Polyaenus 5.35. Justin 13.4.15 alone granted Nearchus Lycia and Pamphylia at Babylon, which might once again be compression with earlier detail.

  195.Discussed in Anson (1988) p 475; Diodorus 19.29-2-3 gave a description of the make up of Antigonus’ mixed army. As pointed out by Roisman (2012) p 25, fresh recruits did not have baggage waggons to lose.

  196.Plutarch Eumenes 16.1-3 for the planned and reported treachery at Gabiene; Antigenes was mentioned but his subsequent fate suggests Teutamus led the intrigue, see Heckel (2006) p 262 for discussion of ignaris ducibus suggested Antigenes’ ignorance. For the possible strategos role see Heckel (1992) p 333.

  197.Plutarch Eumenes 16.4-5; Diodorus 19.41.1-2, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1947. Eumenes is not directly credited with the plan, however it seems highly likely he was its architect when considering his other psychological ruses. Xennias’ role is captured in papyrus PSI 12: 1284 See Goralski (1989) pp 95-96 for full transcription of the fragment and Bosworth (1978) for full discussion. Homer refers to Ares as ‘Enyalius’ in the Iliad. Sekunda (1984) for the origins of Alalalalai.

  198.Diodorus 19.40-43 for the battle and 19.43.5 for the Silver Shields blaming Peucestas’ performance for the defeat. Plutarch Eumenes 16.5.5 for Peucestas’ performance at Gabiene: ‘lax and ignoble’ translated from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1919.

  199.For explanation of purgoi in Homer see Van Wees (1994) p 4. Xenophon 3.1.36, 4.19-20, 4.19.28, 4.19.43; Anson (2013) p 50 for detail.

  200.Polyaenus 4.6.13 suggested 300 losses compared with 5,000 for Antigonus; in fact Polyaenus reported Eumenes’ soldiers were in high spirits at the end of the first day of battle until they learned of the loss of their baggage.

  201.Justin 14.3 for the ‘2,000 women and a few children’; Plutarch Eumenes 18.1 for the Silver Shields’ responses.

  202.Kebric (1977) p 22, in contrast, sees Duris as generally laudatory to Eumenes, regarding his claim that he was a poor waggoner’s son as a means to emphasise his achievement. The use of Duris is somewhat backed up by Plutarch’s Comparison of Eumenes with Sertorius 2.3-4 in which he alleged the same.

  203.Nepos 11.1, Plutarch Eumenes 18.2 for the instructions to guard Eumenes. Diodorus 19.42-44 and Plutarch Eumenes 16-18 for the outcome of battle at Gabiene; the pleas to spare him at Plutarch Eumenes 18.6, Nepos 10.3, Diodorus 19.44.2. Plutarch Eumenes 18.3 and 18.2 for the Silver Shields’ claims to their baggage. Justin 14.3, possibly drawing from Duris, claimed Eumenes attempted to flee and only when captured again did he demand the right to deliver his final scathing speech. There is some confusion again between the accounts of Diodorus and Plutarch. The ‘surrounded Silver Shields’ in Plutarch’s account are in the camp of Eumenes arguing the merits of fighting on. Additionally, the speech provided to them by Plutarch refers to the ‘three nights’ the captive wives with the baggage train had been ‘sleeping with the enemy’ which suggests a protracted period before Eumenes was finally given up to Antigonus.

  204.Nepos 13 for Eumenes’ age. Anson (2004) p 35 footnote 1 for age discussion.

  205.Anson (2014) p 125 for discussion on the fate of Amphimachus and Stasander. See discussion of Stasander’s role and identity in chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers. Quoting Plutarch Eumenes 19.2, also Polyaenus 4.6.15, Diodorus 19.48.3-4; the remaining Silver Shields included those who betrayed Eumenes, so Teutamus might have been with them; Heckel (2006) p 262. Arrian related that Megasthenes spent time with Sibyrtius in Arachosia when visiting the court of Chandragupta.

  206.Polyaenus 4.6.15, Diodorus 19.48.3, Plutarch Eumenes 19.3 and Justin 14.3.3-4 and 18 for the various fates of the disbanded Silver Shields. Bosworth (2002) p 235 theorised that the troops recruited from Carrhae, and with which Antigonus successfully stormed the citadel of Babylon in 311 BCE comprised brigade veterans. Roisman (2012) p 16 believes that Antigonus sent the Silver Shields to aid Sibyrtius and counter the rising power of Chandragupta, the Indian ruler. Disputed by Roisman (2012) p 237. But if they were that effective, why send them away?

  207.Diodorus 19.35.5 for those under siege at Pydna.

  208.Diodorus 19.49-52 for Olympias’ end and quoting from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1947 and from Justin 14.6, translation by Rev. JS Watson, 1853. Justin 14.6.1-13, Polyaenus 4.11.3 for further detail. Carney (2006) pp 104-105 for Olympias’ burial and Aeacid reverence and Diodorus 17.118.2 for her corpse remaining unburied; Olympias’ possible tomb discussed further in chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius.

  209.Plutarch Eumenes 18.1 for the title given Eumenes: ‘pest from the Chersonese’.

  210.Following Anson (1980) for Alexander and Perdiccas shielding Eumenes from the full Macedonian prejudice. See Anson (2004) p 233 for Eumenes’ open admittance of his ‘handicap’ referencing Plutarch Eumenes 1.3, Diodorus 18.60.3-4, Nepos 7.1-2.

  211.Plutarch Demetrius 31; we know that Craterus amicably passed on his Persian wife Amastris to Dionysius of Heraclea.

  212.Nepos 13, Plutarch Eumenes 19.1-2.

  213.Plutarch Eumenes 1.3 and Arrian 7.4.6 for references to Eumenes’ marriage to a daughter of Artabazus. The sources conflict on her name. Plutarch Eumenes 7.1 for Pharnabazus’ support for Eumenes; he was the son of Artabazus. The identity of Eumenes’ wife discussed in chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius.

  214.For Philip II see Aelian 7.12; for Lysander see Diodorus 10.9.1 and Plutarch Lysander 8.4.

  215.Plutarch Moralia 182a or Remarkable Sayings of Kings and Commanders, Antigonus, translated by W Hinton, Little Brown and Co., Boston, 1878
.

  216.Plutarch Eumenes 10.3, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1919.

  217.According to Nepos 1, Eumenes was secretary to Philip for seven years before the king’s death. Alexander’s campaign headed south after the battle at Issus in 333 BCE leaving Antigonus to suppress remnants of Persian resistance. Nearchus headed to join Alexander in 331 BCE and Antigonus assumed control of a larger region including Phrygia, Lycia and Pamphylia in-between. Thus Eumenes could have only had perhaps two years of contact with Antigonus in the early campaign. See Diodorus 18.3.1 for detail.

  218.‘Offstage’ was a term used by Errington (1969) p 234. Bagnall-Derow (2004) p 1 for the decree of Priene. Arrian 2.1.3-3.2.7 for Pharnabazus’ activities in Asia Minor. Curtius 4.1.34-35 and 4.15.13 recorded his campaign to mop-up remnants after the battle at Issus and his subsequent role in supporting battles in Cappadocia, Lycaonia and Paphlagonia. This included three battles as well as skirmishes. Arrian 2.13.2-4 for the 8,000 escapees after Issus fleeing to Tripolis.

  219.Tarn (1948) p 110 made the point that there was a bottleneck in the Royal Road where Cappadocia pressed upon it from the north. Engels (1980) p 331 for the description of the Royal Roads. Herodotus 5.52-53 for the number of relay stations and related distances.

  220.Hornblower (1981) p 75 for Polyaenus’ Macedonian descent. Polyaenus’ book 4 focused on Antigonus’ deeds. Polyaenus 4.6.1-20 for the list of Antigonus’ stratagems.

  221.Quoting Plutarch Moralia (Sayings of Kings and Commanders) 182a. See Anson (2004) p 189 for the timing of Eumenes’ death. Anson concludes it was January 315 BCE. Diodorus’ 19.44.2-4 accounts suggested very late 316 BCE though the delay between his capture and execution is not stated.

  222.Heckel (2006) p 32 and p 234 (Ptolemy 2), p 224 (Antigonus’ nephew, Polemaeus), p 156 (Marsyas) for the possible identity of Antigonus’ siblings. Diodorus 19.62.7-9 for the actions of Antigonus’ nephew Dioscorides and 19.74.1-2 and 19.87.1-3 for Telesphorus, possibly a third nephew; see Diogenes Laertius 5.79.

  223.A full discussion of Antigonus’ personality and physique in Hornblower (1981) pp 211-226. Plutarch Demetrius 28.3 for an example of Antigonus’ voice and character.

  224.For Antigonus’ use of Asiatic cavalry see discussion in Anson (1988) p 475.

  225.See discussion in Billows (1990) p 317. For Antigonus’ stubborn streak see discussion in Hornblower (1981) pp 216-222. It was Plutarch who claimed that Antigonus would not let anyone in on his plans. The origins of castrametation discussed in Anderson (1970) p 59 ff.

  226.Diodorus 18.62.4-6 and Diodorus 18.63-64.

  227.Diodorus 18 73.1.

  228.See discussion in Billows (1990) p 318; as an example Polyaenus 4.6.12, Diodorus 19.29.1, 19.26.7.

  229.As examples, Polyaenus 4.6.19 in which Antigonus had a soldier announce the (false) arrival of allies before Eumenes’ ambassadors; Eumenes in turn lit fires outside Gabiene to suggest he had a defensive battle order; Plutarch Eumenes 15.4-7 and Diodorus 18.38.1-4.

  230.Diodorus 19.29.1, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1947.

  231.Devine Gabiene (1985) for full discussion of the battle and tactics.

  232.Diodorus 18.50.1-3. Diodorus 19.56.5 for the income statement and 19.22.1 for his status.

  233.Diodorus 19.7.3 and 19.18.1 made it clear that Eumenes, empowered by the ‘kings’, had previously ordered Xenophilus not to provide Antigonus with funds from the Susa treasury. Diodorus 19.48.5-8 for the removal of Xenophilus.

  234.Diodorus 19.18.1 for Antigonus extending Seleucus’ satrapal control to include Susiane, and Diodorus 19.48.6-8 for his stripping of the Susa treasure.

  235.Herodotus 7.27; also Athenaeus 12.514f. The vine stood with a golden plane tree in the chamber of the Persian King.

  236.Diodorus 19.46.6 for the 5,000 talents from Ecbatana and entering into Persia; 19.48.6 for the total of 25,000 talents.

  237.Diodorus 19.46.1-4, Polyaenus 4.6.14 for Peithon’s execution. Diodorus 19.55.2 for Antigonus’ journey with the treasure to Babylon. Diodorus 19.48.8 for the sum of 25,000 talents in total removed by Antigonus from various treasuries. Following Billows (1990) pp 240-241 for discussion of Antigonus’ empire strategy and p 257 for the use of Sardis (Polyaenus 4.9.4) and Pergamum (Strabo 13.623 and Pausanias 1.8.1) as treasuries.

  238.Diodorus 19.55.2-3 for Antigonus’ arrival in Babylon and treatment of Seleucus; Diodorus 19.55.4-6 and 19.56.1 for his flight to Egypt and confirmation of Seleucus’ knowledge of the removal of Peithon and Peucestas. Diodorus referred to Babylon but nevertheless termed it the ‘country’ (19.55.3) suggesting Seleucus governed the whole province not the city. Appian Syrian Wars 53 claimed Seleucus punished a hegemon without Antigonus’ permission, leading to the rift.

  239.Diodorus 19.61.5 for the commencement and length of the siege of Tyre.

  240.Diodorus 19.62.8-9 for the complement of Antigonus’ navy and 58.2 for its construction.

  241.Quoting Diodorus 21.1.2 and Diodorus 20.113 for Ptolemy’s retreat back to Egypt from Sidon upon hearing false reports that Antigonus was advancing south.

  242.Diodorus 20.112 for Cassander’s troop losses; he had sent a previous contingent under Prepelaus. Diodorus 20.113.1 for the false letter proclaiming Antigonus’ victory over Seleucus and Lysimachus, on which basis Ptolemy stopped his advance at Sidon.

  243.Plutarch Demetrius 29.1-2 for Antigonus’ fall. For his mood and usual countenance see Plutarch Demetrius 28-29. For the Chaldean prophesies see Diodorus 19.55.6-9. For Antigonus’ state of mind before Ipsus see discussion in Hadley (1969) pp 142-152. For Hieronymus’ use of logoi see Hadley (1974) p 56.

  244.Diodorus 19.55.7.

  245.The saying was attributed to Plato by General Douglas MacArthur’s farewell address to the cadets at West Point in May 1962, yet the quote cannot actually be traced to any of the writings of Plato. It could be read in G Santayana, Soliloquies in England, Scribners, 1924 p 102, Soliloquy 25, Tipperary, in a section which reads: ‘Yet the poor fellows think they are safe! They think that the war is over! Only the dead have seen the end of war.’ Santayana does not attribute the saying to Plato or anybody else for that matter. Yet the attribution again appeared on the wall of the Imperial War Museum in London.

  246.Plutarch Demetrius 28.2. Heckel-Jones pp 14-15 for sarissai lengths; Polyaenus 2.29.2 suggested they had lengthened to 16 cubits or 24 feet by 300 BCE before being reduced in length gain after.

  247.Plutarch Demetrius 28.3, Diodorus 20.110-113 for a description of the army and numbers, which vary somewhat.

  248.See discussion in Billows (1990) p 181 and Diodorus 21.1.1-4 for remnants of the account of the battle.

  249.Plutarch Demetrius 28.2, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1920.

  250.Plutarch Demetrius 29.1-2, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1920.

  251.Sources frequently mentioned that horses loathed the smell of elephants and would not readily approach them. See Plutarch Demetrius 29.3 for the line of elephants thrown in Demetrius’ way.

  252.Plutarch Demetrius has Antigonus aged ‘little short’ of eighty in 306 BCE. Porphyry of Tyre in FGrH 260 F32 claimed he was eighty-six when he died. Also Pseudo-Lucian Makrobioi 11. Diodorus 20.113.5 for his reference to the ‘kings’. For the lifespan of the time see RA Gabriel and KS Metz, The History of Military Medicine, Volume 1, From Ancient Times to the Middle Ages, Greenwood Press, 1992, p 28.

  253.Plutarch Demetrius 29.4-5; Diodorus 21.1.4b for the royal honours paid.

  254.Following Billows (1990) p 315 for the propaganda failure of Ipsus.

  255.Reiterating the observation made in Billows (1990) p 319 and quoting Plutarch Demetrius 30.1 for the carving up of the empire after Ipsus as if it were a ‘great carcass’.

  256.Pliny 35.90 and 96 recorded the paintings; discussion in Billows (1990) p 312. See discussion in Billows (1990) p 10; Antigonus was sensitive about his single eye though he joked about it. Plutarch Moralia 11b or On the Educa
tion of Children 14; Pliny 35.90 cited by Hornblower (1981) p 223.

  257.Cicero De Natura Deorum 2.87.

  258.Plutarch Phocion 29.1-2.

  259.Polybius 31.2.11.

  260.‘To live well is to live concealed’, Ovid Tristia 3.4.25.

  261.See Hornblower (1981) p 234 for details of Hieronymus’ exile from his homeland. Also Diodorus 19.44.3-4 for his wounds.

  262.Hornblower (1981) p 10 for discussion. Diodorus cited Hieronymus in action at 18.42.1,18.50.5, 19.44.3, and 19.100.2, in each case confirming him as historian of the wars.

  263.Diodorus 19.96.4 ff and Plutarch Demetrius 7.1 for the Nabatean campaign and 19.100.1-4. Mumiya is Persian for asphalt. Billows (1990) p 288 for the harvesting of papyrus for ship cables (Pliny 13.73) and the frankincense trade, as described in Theophrastus On Plants 9.4.8.

  264.Plutarch Demetrius 39.3-7 for Hieronymus’ role at Thebes.

  265.See chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers for fuller discussion of Hieronymus’ role at Nora. Diodorus 19.94-100 for the Syrian expeditions and 19.98-99 for Hieronymus’ description of the asphalt extraction from the Dead Sea and 19.100.1-2 for Hieronymus’ role in its collection. For his position as Harmostes at Thebes see discussion in Hornblower (1981) p 10 and p 12, Plutarch Demetrius 39.3-7 for that role in the interests of Demetrius and for detail of the Boeotian rebellion.

  266.Diogenes Laertius Zeno of Citium. Polybius 5.10.10 for Antigonid claims to Argead descent and 8.36 for Persaeus’ role at Corinth. Statues in the portico of Antigonus Gonatas (or Doson) on Delos began with Heracles. The name of Antigonus Monophthalmos’ wife, Stratonice, was uniquely attested within the royal family.

  267.Following the logic presented by Brown (1947) pp 694-695 for Hieronymus’ treatment of Gonatas. Following Carney (2002) p 108 for the association of Gonatas with the Great Tumulus at Vergina; discussed in chapter epilogue titled The Return to Aegae. This covered five smaller earlier tumuli housing the tombs of the kings. Carney-Ogden (2010) pp 119-121 for Tomb III discussions. Adams (1991) p 28 for the format of the Great Tumulus. Plutarch Pyrrhus 26.6 and Diodorus 22.12 for the earlier looting by Gallic mercenaries.