It is often said that Alexander should have married before leaving for Asia
in order to secure his posterity, but this seems a rather simplistic way to
look at the succession problem his generals encountered at their king's
untimely death.
Remains the matter of succession upon Alexander's death. The boy would have
been made king alright, and the Successors had one worry less, but who would
rule in his name pending his coming of age? Since he presumably lived in Pella, it seems
evident that his mother or Antipater
would rule in his name. Can we eliminate the interference of powerful Olympias?
I'm afraid not.
So how could east meet west in this case? Even
if the army truly accepted the regency by the boy's mother, I
fail to see how she could have commanded that group of weathered generals in Asia . Even highly skilled and seasoned Antipater,
who had not participated in any of his kings' campaigns in Asia
and had never been there, had only a slim chance. Each of Alexander's generals in Babylon
would stake his claim, meaning that the Succession War could not have been avoided
after all. It might only be shortened since young Alexander IV would have come of age in six years or so.
No comments:
Post a Comment