by David Grant
176.Arrian 4.1.5. Spitamenes refused to attend a conference in Bactria. See Heckel (2006) p 254 for discussion. Curtius, 7.6.14-15 for his continued resistance and for his siege of the Macedonian garrison, Arrian 4.3.6, 5.2.3. For his ambush of the Macedonian forces see Arrian 4.5.4-9. Then he fled to Bactria; see Curtius 7.9.20. He attacked a Macedonian fort; see Curtius 8.1.3-5, Arrian 4.16.5. For his betrayal by the Massagetae see Arrian 4.17.7, Curtius 8.3.1-16, Strabo 11.11.6. Diodorus Introduction to book 17, contents part 2, for the 120,000 Sogdian casualties.
177.Diodorus 19.48.1-2 for Antigonus’ decision not to remove Stasanor. For his career in the East under Alexander, Arrian 3.29.5, 4.18.1, 4.18.3, 6.27.3, 6.27.6, 7.6.1-3, Diodorus 18.3.3, 18.39.6, Justin 13.4.22-23. The career of Spitamenes and Alexander’s (and Persian) actions against the nomadic Massagetae suggested the region’s (and bordering provinces’) abilty to provide effective fighters.
178.For Philotas’ appointment to Cilicia at Babylon, Diodorus 18.3.1, Justin 14.4.12, Arrian Events After Alexander 1.5, Dexippus FGrH 100 F8 2. Photius’ text uniquely placed Philoxenus in Cilicia but this appears a corruption. See Heckel (1988) pp 71-75 for discussion and suggestion that his Antigonid support might explain his being passed over at Triparadeisus. Also see Arrian Events After Alexander 24.2; Justin 13.6.16 for references to Philotas’ loyalty to Craterus. Cilicia went to Philoxenus: Arrian Events After Alexander 1.34, Diodorus 18.39.6. For Philotas’ attempt to lure the Silver Shields away from Eumenes, Diodorus 18.62.4, and for the outcome 18.62.5-18.63.5. Arrian Events After Alexander 24.2 termed Philoxenus ‘undistinguished’.
179.Heckel (2006) pp 225-226 for the carers of Polydorus and Polydamas; the latter had carried the orders for Parmenio’s execution.
180.Athenaeus12.548e for Polydorus’ association with Antipater. Diodorus 19.59.3 for Ariston’s actions after the death of Craterus (or even after the death of Eumenes). Heckel (2006) p 213 for discussion of Philip (8).
181.Justin 12.14.1-3 for Philip’s collusion with Iolaos.
182.Philip (though Philotas in Diodorus 19.14.1, probably a corruption, see Heckel (2006) p 214) had been satrap of Bactria and Sogdia and was moved to Parthia at Triparadeisus; Diodorus 18.3.3, Dexippus FGrH F8 6, Diodorus 17.31.5-6. For Philip the physician and the earlier accusations of poisoning see Arrian 2.4.9-10, Plutarch 19.5-10, Curtius 3.6.4-17, Justin 11.8.5-8, Valerius Maximus 3.8 extract 6, Seneca de Ira 2.23.2. Following Heckel (2006) pp 214-215 for the rationale for implicating Philip the physician. For Philip who became satrap of Parthia at Triparadeisus, see Heckel (2006) p 214, and p 215 for Philip the engineer. Heckel (1988) p 44 and (2006) p 137 and for a possible identification of Heracleides.
183.Plutarch Alexander 77.1-2. Plutarch 77.3-4. By then Antigonus was referred to as ‘king’ but this does not necessarily mean the rumours circulated after 306 BCE when he was formally crowned. By Plutarch’s day the differentiation between when Antigonus was considered a dynast and king was probably blurred.
184.Only Nepos 5.1 cited Seleucus amongst Perdiccas’ murderers, but Antigonus, clearly not present, was mentioned too. This could be a corruption of Antigenes, commander of the Silver Shields, or alternatively Nepos was summarising events at Egypt with Triparadeisus where Seleucus did appear alongside Antigonus. Moreover this was some weeks later and he could have journeyed west from Babylon upon hearing of the failed attack on Egypt (chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius for explanation of Seleucus in Babylon). Arrian Events After Alexander 1.33 for Seleucus’ role in saving Antipater from the crowd at Triparadeisus. He is not mentioned alongside either Peithon or Arrhidaeus. In fact Seleucus is not associated with Perdiccas’ campaigning from Babylon to his death in 320 BCE in any of the sources. Diodorus 18.36.6-7 for the aftermath of the battle with Perdiccas and the nomination of Peithon and Arrhidaeus as supreme commanders and guardians of the kings.
185.Diodorus 19.12.1 for Eumenes’ overture to Seleucus in Babylonia.
186.Heckel (1988) Introduction p1 footnote 1 for a list of extant texts housing the Liber de Morte including the Armenian Romance text, and pp 34-35 for a comparison list of conspirators. The possible attachment of Europius and Seleucus’ ethnic discussed in Heckel (2006) p 246 and Heckel (1988) pp 40-41. Moreover this reference sits amongst the named Somatophylakes in the list of attendees given in by the Metz Epitome. In another recension of the Romance, Seleucus is indeed placed on the guilty roster; Stoneman (1991) p 29 and p 150 footnote 120, for explanation of the ‘ϒ’ recension. Other examples of manuscript corruption would certainly accommodate the deterioration and loss of the onoma, the personal name, and patronymikon of the father. As an example, Arrian gave Leonnatus four different patronyms through his account; discussed in Heckel (1978) pp 155-158.
187.Diodorus 18.39.3-4, Arrian Events after Alexander 1.33, Polyaenus 4.6.4 for Seleucus’ defence of Antipater at Triparadeisus. Heckel (1988) p 41 for the 320 BCE terminus post quem; a proposed date for Triparadeisus at which Seleucus was ‘first’ confirmed in Babylon, as the pamphleteer could not have anticipated the appointment before.
188.Full discussion on Seleucus’ original Will grant in the chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius.
189.Diodorus 19.11.8-9 for Olympias’ pogrom and Diodorus 19.51.5 where the pogrom is again referred to and it is implied that Olympias was ‘revenging Alexander’s death thus suggesting the Pamphlet was by then possibly first circulating.
190.Plutarch Alexander 77.1-2 linking Olympias’ pogrom to the conspiracy rumours; also Diodorus 19.11.8-9. As Carney (2006) pp 85-96 points out, the mistreatment of the bodies of the dead featured prominently in the Iliad; 22.395-404 for Achilles’ maltreatment of Hector, 23.20-3 and 24.14.21 as the most notable examples.
191.Diodorus 19.11.5 for the length of his reign; Justin 14.5.10 stated ‘six years’. Aelian claimed Eurydice chose the rope. Diodorus 19.52.5, Athenaeus 4.155a (using Dyllus) for Cassander’s burial honours. Alexander died 10/11 June 323 BCE and Arrhidaeus was proclaimed king a week or so after; six years and four months later in mid-October 317 BCE.
192.Diodorus 18.58.3-4 for Eumenes’ advice to Olympias not to make a move until the war in Asia had been decided.
193.Diodorus 19.12.1 for the envoys to Seleucus and Peithon and Seleucus’ response.
194.Diodorus 19.57.1-3 for the envoys to Antigonus from Ptolemy and Lysimachus demanding their share of Asia Minor and Syria. Also detailed at Justin 15.1.
195.Metz Epitome 118.
196.Arrian Events After Alexander 1.3-4 for Arrian’s interpretation of Perdiccas’ role.
197.Nepos 5.1 alone included Seleucus in the list of Perdiccas’ murderers. This section of the Romance Will is corrupted, placing Perdiccas in Egypt and a Phanocrates as governor from Babylon to Bactria. We would imagine Phanocrates ought to be Perdiccas; a Persian would not have been granted such a pivotal role.
198.Arrian 4.18.3 for Atropates’ reinstallment in Media and again at 7.4.1. Arrian 7.4.5 for Perdiccas’ marriage to his daughter. Diodorus 18.3.3, Justin 13.4.13 for his reconfirmation in Lesser Media at Babylon.
199.See chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius for Perdiccas’ plans for Alexander’s body.
200.Metz Epitome 110 for the instructions to Perdiccas and Antigonus and 117 and Romance 3.33.15 for Antipater’s governorship west of the Halys.
201.Peithon son of Agenor was appointed satrap of ‘lower’ India bordering the Indus; Arrian 6.15.4; reconfirmed by Justin 13.4.21 in his account of Babylon. Heckel (2006) p 196 sees a move to the Cophen satrapy as per Diodorus 18.3.3, Dexippus FGrH 100 F8, a region reconfirmed as Triparadeisus in Diodorus 18.39.6, Arrian Events After Alexander 1.36, Justin. Diodorus 18.3.3 for his installation in the region between Parapamisus and the Indus. Peithon appeared in Syria in 314/313 BCE advising Demetrius; Diodorus 19.69.1, 19.82.1.
202.Metz Epitome 117 for the grant of Syria to Peithon. The son of Antigenes was mentioned in Arrian’s Indike 15.10; Heckel (2006) p 194 for the possible identification
(Peithon 1). Diodorus 19.56.4 for Antigonus installing Peithon son of Agenor in Babylonia.
203.Antigenes was granted Susiane at Triparadeisus (Diodorus 18.39.6, Arrian Events After Alexander 1.34) and the Will suggested all lands between Babylon and Bactria should retain the same governors.
204.Heckel (1978) p 155 for Leonnatus’ various patronyms at Arrian 3.5.5, 6.28.4, Events After Alexander 1a.2, Indike 18.3.
205.For Aristonus’ identity and roles on campaign Arrian 6.28.4; this may have come from Nearchus’ list of trierarchs of the Hydaspes-Indus fleet; see the Indike 18.4 and Arrian Events After Alexander 1.2-3. Curtius alone cited him protecting Alexander in the Mallian campaign 9.5.15-18 and again at the assembly in Babylon at 10.6.16 ff. Heckel (2006) p 50 for explanation of Ptolemy’s omission and Errington (1969) pp 233 and 242 for a similar argument. For his Successor War roles, Arrian Events After Alexander 24.6 (Vatican Palimpsest/Codex 6) for his leading the Perdiccan invasion force to Cyprus and for activity and support of Olympias see Diodorus 19.35.4 and 19.50.3-19.51.1.
206.Arrian Anabasis 7.5.6 suggested the Bodyguards each received a gold crown, yet only the Somatophylakes Leonnatus, Peucestas and Hephaestion were named. Nearchus and Onesicritus were also named in the honours list. See Heckel (1988) p 50 for discussion of other possible corrupted references to Aristonus.
207.Aristonus supported Polyperchon and the Olympias faction after Antipater’s death, see Diodorus 19.35.4, 19.50.3-8, 19.51.1, Diodorus 19.49-51.1 for Aristonus’ murder and his control of Amphipolis.
208.Diodorus 19.51.1 for Aristonus’ high standing amongst the Macedonians.
209.A wider discussion of the Syrian satrapal grant in chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius.
210.Quoting Stoneman (1991) Introduction p 12 for ‘clotted officialese’. Metz Epitome 110 for the roles of Perdiccas and Antipater. Heckel (1988) pp 12-14 for full discussion referring to Recension A of Pseudo-Callisthenes and Heckel-Yardley (2004) p 285 for a full translation of the Metz Epitome version of the Rhodian ‘interpolation’. Bosworth-Baynham (2000) p 213 agrees the Rhodian issue could have formed part of the original Pamphlet Will. See Stoneman (1991) pp 152-153 for a translation of the Romance version of the Letter to the Rhodians. The Letter to the Rhodians is concurrent in Pseudo-Callisthenes A. Fraser (1996) p 212 for the boule and demos and discussion on the Latin manuscript in which the letter appeared separately. Discussed in further detail in chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers.
211.Bosworth-Baynham (2000) p 213.
212.Berthold (1984) p 39 on Rhodian government.
213.Diodorus 20.81.2 and discussed in Berthold (1984) p 38. Polybius 33.16.3 and Strabo 14.2.5 amongst others reiterated the same sentiment though without stating the date or Hellenistic period they were referring to. Rodgers (1937) p 262 for the renting out of Rhodian trieres.
214.Berthold (1984) pp 42-43 on Rhodes’ expansion and state governance and pp 48-49 for the continuation of the Rhodian coinage weight after Alexander adopted the Attic standard. Rhodes had seceded early from the Delian League controlled by Athens, remaining neutral for example in the Peloponnesian War.
215.O’Neil (2000) p 425 for discussion of the law codes imposed and Billows (1990) p 220 for the League of the Islanders.
216.Arrian 2.20.2 for Cypriot assistance at Tyre. Diodorus 19.62.4, 20.47.3, Pausanias 1.6.6 for Menelaus’ early role in Cyprus before his removal after the battle at Salamis in 306 BCE.
217.Berthold (1984) p 34 for discussion of Rhodian independence from Caria. The arrests of the Rhodian brothers Demaratus, Sparton and Harpalus’ treasurer, probably by Philoxenus, demonstrated the reach of Alexander’s authority over Rhodes.
218.For a description of caltrops at the battle of Gaugamela see Curtius 4.13.36. Also see Lindian Stele Votive 38 and discussion in Higbie (2003) pp 134-5; 234-235 for Persian votives. Spiked iron caltrops were used to maim horses and protect ground littered with them against cavalry charges. In legend, Danaus had fifty daughters, one of whom was Lindos and worshipped on Rhodes taking her name for its city; Diodorus 5.38 and Strabo 14.2.6 for the legend that Danaus had founded the sanctuary of Athena Lindia on his way to Egypt.
219.Discussed in Stewart (1993) p 220, and Lindian subtext at p 237. More detail about the cult on Rhodes in Brandt-Iddeng (2012) p 255. Lock (1977) p 100 and Tarn 1 (1948) p 59 for the Lindian inscription. Also Shipley (2000) p 37 and Tarn 1 (1948) p 59 for inscriptions on Rhodes.
220.Metz Epitome 118-119.
221.Arrian Events after Alexander 1.39 for Attalus’ attack on Cnidus, Caunus and Rhodes where he was repulsed; Diodorus 18. 37.3-4 for his rounding up orphaned Perdiccans.
222.See Casson (2001) p 32 for grain discussion and Egyptian supply.
223.Quoting Brandt-Iddeng (2012) p 255 for Rhodes’ long-standing alliance with Ptolemy.
224.Romance 3.33.9; see Stoneman (1991) p 154 for translation and Heckel (1988) pp 12-13 for discussion. Ptolemy’s executor role reiterated in Lucian’s Dialogues of the Dead 13.
225.Metz Epitome 116, Romance 3.23.
226.Diodorus 19.58.1-6 for the state of Antigonus’ naval power.
227.Diodorus 18.43.1-2 for Ptolemy’s annexation of Coele-Syria.
228.Metz Epitome 109.
229.Romance 1.46.
230.Ismenas the son of either Oceanus and Tethys or Asopus and Metope and who settled on the banks of the Rriver Ismenus in Boeotia. For examples see Plutarch Demetrius 1.6 for the musician of Thebes and for the 4th century BCE statesman by the same name, and Xenophon Hellenika 2.31 for another Ismenias; the name also appears in Plato Meno 90a as well as Plato Republic 336a. Romance 1.46, Pausanias 9.10.6, Ovid Metamorphoses 3.169, Callimachus Hymn 4 to Delos 77, Diodorus 4.72.1, 31.12.6. Aelian 12.57 for the portents at Thebes.
231.Herodotus 5.58-61. Plutarch Lysander 29.
232.Arrian 2.15.2-5 for the reference to the son of Ismenias, an envoy from Thebes and his lineage. Plutarch Pelopidas 5.1 for Pelopidas’ membership of Ismenias’ party. Ismenias was put to death at Sparta (Pelopidas 5.4), an outcome that possibly endeared him to Philip, if the same man. Also Diodorus 15.71.2-3 and Plutarch Pelopidas 27.1, 27.5 for Ismenias’ repuation and relations with Pelopidas. Aelian 1.21; Ismenias dropped a ring as his excuse for kneeling to the Persian king.
233.Plutarch 13.5, Moralia 181b, Justin 11.4.9 and Arrian 2.15.3-4 for Alexander’s later regret for such harsh treatment of Thebes. Diodorus 17.13.3. Arrian 1.8.8 for his defence of Alexander’s actions by outlining the list of Theban treachery when aligning with Persia.
234.Athenaeus 434 a-b for Ephippus’ remark. Diodorus 17.10.3, translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1963.
235.Justin 10.4.5-6 for Heracles’ birth in Thebes.
236.Diodorus 19.54.1 for the list of cities that pledged support for the rebuild. Diodorus 19.61.3 for Antigonus’ demand that the reconstruction of Thebes be reversed. Diodorus 19.61.1-3 for Antigonus’ proclamation. Aelian 3.6 for Crates’ prediction.
237.Metz Epitome 120; the Romance 3.32 stated 50 talents of coined gold; that suggests a gold to silver ratio of 1:20 when the actual ratio was between 1:10 and 1:12 in the early Hellenistic period.
238.The Metz Epitome translation in Heckel (1988) p 17 claimed 1,000 talents for the temple of Hera at Argos. The Romance has Alexander’s armour plus 50 talents, see Stoneman (1991) p 155 for translation. Bosworth-Baynham (2000) p 221 cites 150 talents. Variations in the texts range from the ‘Temple of Hera’ to ‘the first fruits of war for Heracles’.
239.Homer Iliad 4.50-52
240.Pausanias 10.10.5 for the proposed lineage of the Argives and see discussion in chapter titled The Rebirth of the Wrath of Peleus’ Son. The essence of the story was captured by Euripides in his Heracleidae. See Diodorus 12.75.5-6 for the significance of the legend to Argos. The Return of the Heracleidae is also known as the Dorian invasion when the scattered sons of Heracles come home to claim their rightful ancestral lands, including Sparta; see Pausanias 4.30.1 a
nd Herodotus 8.73
241.Diodorus 19.63.1-5 for the confrontation at Argos.
242.Romance 3.32
243.See chapter titled The Tragic Triumvirate of Treachery and Oaths for the value of 1 talent vs infantry remuneration.
244.Metz Epitome 104-105, Romance 3.32.12-13 for the rumour of Alexander’s death causing a troop uproar.
245.The discord at Babylon was captured; Metz Epitome 104-106 and 113, Romance 3.32. Cleitarchus could have of course embellished what they read in the Pamphlet when developing his book conclusion.
246.Roman contamination discussion in Tarn (1948) pp 378-398.
247.Arrian 7.27, Plutarch 7.27 for Aristotle’s involvement.
248.Theophrastus Enquiry into Plants 9.16.2 and for hemlock 9.16.8.
249.Quoting Green (2007) p 2. As Champion (2014) p 4 noted of the last eleven Argeads, they were either assassinated or executed.
250.For Olympias’ death on Cassander’s orders, Diodorus 19.51.5, Justin 14.6.6-12, Pausanias 1.11.4, 25.6, 9.7.2 (for stoning to death); Carney (2006) pp 81-85 for discussion of the various accounts of her death.
251.Quoting Curtius 10.10.18-19. The theme of ‘fearful historians’ is reiterated in the Vulgate texts by Diodorus 17.118.2, Justin 12.13.10.
252.Diodorus 19.61.1-4, Justin 15.1.
253.The anonymous verse was quoted at Polybius 23.10.10 and 15 and allegedly repeated by the later King Philip V of Macedonia preparing to face Rome in the 149th Olympiad, so 183/182 BCE.
254.Tarn (1949) p 297.
255.Bosworth (2002) p 217 for the dating discussion according to the Babylonian Chronicle.
256.Diodorus 19.105.3-5 for the extracting of Thesalonice and Justin 15.2.2-5. Pausanias 9.7.2 for the murder of Roxane and Alexander IV.
257.Quoting Grainger (2007) p 116. For the death of Heracles, Diodorus 20.28, Justin 15.2.3, Pausanias 9.7.2 and for its dating Carney-Ogden (2010) p 118 and Wheatley (1998) p 13 and footnotes; it may have been 308 BCE. Diodorus 20.37.3 for Cleopatra’s leaving Sardis to join Ptolemy and her execution.