Another aspect of Alexander’s personality?

Life is full of surprises and Alexander’s life is no exception. Our best sources are extant books by Arrian, Diodorus, Curtius, Plutarch, and Justin, but contemporary documents are far more difficult to find (see: Eyewitness accounts of Alexander's life). Alexander’s Royal Journals carefully kept by Callisthenes and Eumenes have not survived, except for some rare fragments whose origins cannot be verified with certainty.

Browsing through Robinson’s book, The History of Alexander the Great and the Ephemerides of Alexander’s Expedition, I was intrigued by the few lines that survived Ephippus’ writing. 

Ephippus of Olynthus was a historian and contemporary of Alexander. It is unclear whether this man is the same as Ephippus of Chalcis, mentioned by Arrian as one of the superintendents Alexander installed in Egypt. The reason to link both names is that the city of Olynthus is part of Chalcis. Otherwise, our Ephippus may well have lived at the king’s court or shortly after his death. 

He is known as the author of a lost pamphlet “On the death (or funeral) of Alexander and Hephaistion,” as mentioned by Athenaeus of Naucratis, who lived about the end of the 2^nd/beginning of the 3^rd century AD. The document held an account of the burial of Hephaistion and Alexander as well as of the king’s death. 

Robinson is quoting Athenaeus in several separate issues, shedding a different light on Alexander than what other, usually Greek, sources tell us. 

According to Ephippus, Alexander spent one hundred minas on a dinner with his friends, i.e., sixty or seventy of them. It seems the author is reacting to some critics about Alexander’s expenses compared to those of the Persian king, who spent four hundred talents for his 15,000 invites. Converting the currencies, however, both expenditures come to the same amount per capita.

Another observation made by Ephippus is that the Macedonians never understood how to drink in moderation, but drank a lot of wine at the beginning of a feast. The case of Proteas of Macedonia, who was a sturdy guy, is highlighted because he drank a great deal all his life. Alexander, Ephippus said, once ordered a six-quart cup of wine, and after a drink, toasted Proteas, thereby extending a challenge to him. Proteas took the cup, sang praises to his king, and drank the rest of the wine under the wide applause of those present. A little later, Proteas ordered another such cup, toasted the king, and took a drink. Alexander then (accepting the challenge) took it but could not hold it, falling back on his cushion and dropping the cup from his hands. The king fell ill and died. 

This scene inspired Oliver Stone in his Alexander movie during a scene played in India. However, this is not how the king died, and the text puts serious question marks behind the assumption that Ephippus lived at Alexander's court at the time of his death. The truth about Alexander’s death, for me, lies elsewhere as I discussed on previous occasions (see: A personal approach to the cause of death for Alexander).

Regarding the luxury of Alexander, Ephippus tells us that the king had a golden throne, and couches with silver feet “on which he used to sit and transact business with his companions”. These couches are known from the Susa wedding party, but the link is not made in this text. 

Ephippus continues by stating that Alexander also wore “sacred vestments”, such as the purple robe, cloven sandals, and horns of Ammon as if he were a god. At times, he would imitate Artemis, wearing her dress while driving his chariot. Alexander also had a Persian robe and displayed the bow and javelin of the goddess above his shoulder. Sometimes, he dressed as Hermes, and sitting with his friends, he wore the god’s sandals and the petasus, holding the caduceus in his hand. In everyday use, he would appear wearing a purple riding cloak and a purple tunic with white stripes, and the Macedonian causia holding the royal diadem. Referring to Heracles, Alexander would wear a lion’s skin and carry the god’s club. 

To my own astonishment, Ephippus also says that Alexander used to have the floor sprinkled with perfumes and fragrant wine, while incense and myrrh were burnt in his presence. If this is true, I presume it would happen only while the king resided in one of the Persian palaces? The bystanders are said to remain silent out of fear of his violence, “with no regard for human life.” 

Athenaeus further quotes Ephippus, saying that Alexander arranged a festival for Dionysus at Ecbatana. He does not tell us when this sacrifice occurred but I would assume it was in 324 BC, maybe around the death of Hephaistion. 

The local satrap Satrabates had invited all the troops (just try to picture the scene!) for his lavish feast, and many speeches of praise and flattery were made to impress Alexander. As in Samarkand, some of these praises turned into insolence. However, with the king’s complicity one of his armorers totally went overboard by having the herald announce that he, Gorgus, would shower the son of Ammon with 3,000 gold coins; and whenever Alexander would besiege Athens, he would add 10,000 full suits of armor and as many catapults and other missiles needed for the war. 

Such words clearly illustrate how preposterous and absurd these flatteries of Alexander were! Freedom of speech? 

Shifting through Ephippus' lines, it is difficult and even impossible to determine what is correct and what is not. As always, opinions are divided. Ephippus’ version of the facts is examined in detail by Antony Spawforth in his article The Pamphleteer Ephippus, King Alexander and the Persian Royal Hunt.

To our immortal hero, Alexander. Στην υγειά σας!

How about crowning Alexander with a gold wreath on his birthday? In Greek antiquity, gold wreaths symbolized glory, power, and immortality – three qualities that certainly apply to Alexander! 

These wonderful creations were imitations of laurel, myrtle, olive, ivy, or oak worn during symposia and in processions. I elaborated on the subject in my earlier blog post: Wreaths and crowns of leaves or gold. They also accompanied important people to their burial site, as is the case of Philip’s tomb in Aegae. The gold wreath stood for the king's victories in battle and his immortality. 

Each type of leaf came with its own significance. For instance, oak leaves representing wisdom were used in Philip’s days. They also were symbols of Zeus, as were olive branches. Gold wreaths could also be dedicated to the gods at their respective sanctuaries. 

After Alexander’s death, these wreaths became more popular. They were the result of a high level of craftsmanship since the thin gold sheets had to be shaped into life-like leaves and flowers to produce an extremely fragile piece. 

By the late 2^nd /3^rd century, they were exclusively reserved for the aristocracy, as recorded by Athenaeus of Naucratis. He was an Egyptian-born Greek writer, who mentioned that guests at luxurious dinner parties in Alexandria wore such gold wreaths. 

Let’s invite ourselves to Alexander’s birthday party and raise our wine beaker to his eternal glory. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

Boarding a cruise ship in antiquity

Archimedes and his “Eureka” are common knowledge, but few people know that he designed an enormous cruise ship, the Syracusia.

It happened during the reign of King Hieron II of Syracuse, who in 240 BC ordered Archias of Corinth to execute the plans. The design was a very ambitious one, and we may wonder how on earth anyone in antiquity could possibly build the biggest and largest vessel ever. Money clearly was not an issue for it seems that even the best was good enough! What’s more surprising is that the project was completed in one year-time by 300 craftsmen.

Athenaeus gives us a very detailed description of the Syracusia and its cargo. She could carry 1940 passengers, soldiers, and crew, and boasted plush stables for twenty horses, each with its own stall. Next was a storage room for the horses’ fodder and the quarters reserved for the riders and their slaves.

Figures from antiquity are not always reliable, but it is generally accepted that the Syracusia had a length of 110 meters, which is more than twice the largest merchant ship in those days.

Wood from the Etna was implemented, and the doors were made of cypress and citrus wood. Hemp had been imported from Iberia to make the cables, whereas pitch and more hemp came from the Rhone Valley. As soon as one deck of the ship was completed, it was covered with slabs of lead. 

The upper deck was supported by three-meter-high Atlantes or Telamones, replacing regular columns (see: The Valley of Temples at Akragas). The very top of the ship was a promenade reserved for the guests who could wander through gardens filled with different species of trees and flowers. These were watered through well-hidden lead pipes. Individual sections of this deck were made more comfortable with shaded roofs or tents covered with branches of ivy and vine. The layout inevitably led the guests to the Temple of Aphrodite paved with agate. It was furnished with statues, and its walls were covered with frescoes. The entire ship was further adorned with statues and vases, painted walls, and fancy earthenware. Ivory and precious marble were lavishly used.

The second deck served as lodging for the passengers and counted 142 cabins all paved with mosaics. Together, these individual pavements told the whole story of the Iliad. The guests could enjoy the comforts of a bathroom and a gymnasium, relax in a common dining room or withdraw in the serene setting of the library and drawing room. The entertainment of the passengers was guaranteed!  

An onboard kitchen was a must, and Athenaeus confirmed that there were ovens and mills. Freshwater was stored near the head of the ship in a cistern that could hold as much as 78,000 liters. This water tank was caulked with pitch and covered with tarpaulins. Another cistern contained seawater to store the cook’s fish supply. This one, in turn, was coated with lead. Nothing is said about the service on board, the people responsible for the maintenance and the cleaning.

The Syracusia also had its own army on board,  which, according to the sources, varied between 200 and 400 men. They were housed on a special deck in front of the ship where a giant catapult was mounted. This machine could shoot a stone weighing ninety kilograms to a distance of 200 meters. Eight towers, each manned with two archers and four men in full armor further assured the defense of this unique vessel against any possible attack. The ship was additionally equipped with four wooden defense towers. The crew to steer this oversized ship probably was handpicked. It is said there were twenty banks of rowers. The entire ship was protected by a surrounding palisade making enemy boarding impossible. 

All the components of the Syracusia were beyond normal proportions as Archimedes clearly thought out of the box! Besides, this is one example where his famous screw was successfully implemented to pump out the bilge water.

The number of provisions on board was equally huge. Athenaeus once again provides the facts and figures: 90,000 bushels of grain, 10,000 amphorae of Sicilian salt fish (is this the famous garum?), some 500-600 tons of wool (for what purpose?), and 20,000 talents were spent on “other cargo”. All these goods were stored in the lowest deck.

To ensure safe anchoring, the Syracusia counted eight iron anchors. Unfortunately, these were used only once because that huge ship made only one single trip across the Mediterranean to Alexandria in Egypt. It is important to realize that only a few ports were large enough to receive this size of vessel. As far as I know, besides Syracuse, only Rhodes, Pergamon, and probably Portus/Rome offered the necessary space and maneuverability for the Syracusia. 

In the end, all King Hieron could do, it seems, was to present the Syracusia as a gift to Ptolemy III Euergetes. It was eventually renamed Alexandreia. Otherwise, nobody knows what happened to this proud colossal ship afterward.

[The picture of the mosaic representing the Death of Archimedes is from NYU Mathematics]

An insight into Ancient Greek Music

What ancient Greek music truly sounded like remains generally shrouded in mystery. Only occasional finds and inscriptions shed some light on the matter.

As developed earlier in the post Another reconstruction of ancient Greek music, I inserted a soundtrack composed by David Creese, a classist from the University of Newcastle.

Today, I traced what is called the “pre-final edition” of the first choral performance with aulos of a composition by Athenaeus’ of his Delphic Paean from 127 BC and another one written by Euripides for his chorus in Orestes from 408 BC.

The explanation is given by Armand D'Angour, whom I quoted in my earlier post Reconstructing ancient Greek Music, an impossible task?  Enjoy!

Archimedes, the most illustrious citizen of Syracuse

If one name is immediately associated with Syracuse, it certainly is the mathematical genius Archimedes (ca 287-212 BC). Yes, we all know he was Greek but never realized that he actually lived and died in Sicily, which was then part of Magna Graecia.

It is unclear whether he was a close friend or a relative of King Hieron II of Syracuse (c.308-215 BC). Still, we know that the king sponsored Archimedes’ trip to Alexandria to study at the renowned Library. Here he seems to have met his friend Conon of Samos and Eratosthenes of Cyrene, whom he mentioned in the introduction of two of his works. 

Archimedes was working for Hieron II and his son Gelon II constructing devices such as catapults, burning mirrors, and an iron claw, a sort of crane with a grappling hook that could lift the ships out of the water and make them capsize and sink. He is also famous for inventing an orrery, i.e., a mechanical model of the solar system. The sun is at its center, and the earth rotates around it. The device could predict solar and lunar eclipses. Archimedes established the relationship between the circumference and the diameter of a circle. 

His best-known invention happened while he took a bath and noticed that the water level rose when he stepped into the tub. This led to his theory to calculate the volume of an object, and he was so excited about his discovery that he ran out of his house, stark naked, shouting “Eureka!” I found it! Vitruvius says that Archimedes applied this principle when King Hieron II asked him to determine whether the votive crown he had ordered for a temple was indeed made with pure gold he had supplied. He suspected the goldsmith to add some cheaper silver. A charming anecdote, no doubt, but it may not be entirely accurate as the calculations are far more complex than that.

Another invention called the Archimedes’ screw has been used successfully over the centuries and still is in those places where water has to be moved from a lower level to higher grounds or canals. His system, consisting of a revolving screw inside a cylinder, even applies to moving coal or grain. There are, however, discussions that tend to attribute the invention to the Babylonians who used the principle to irrigate their Hanging Gardens.

As written down by Athenaeus of Naucratis, history tells us that King Hieron II asked Archimedes in 240 BC to build a large ship to carry huge supplies. It also should be used in war as well as for pleasure. It was, in fact, a catamaran weighing 4,000 tons for which timber from Mount Etna was used together with rosewood and ivory from Africa and rope from Iberia – nothing less! It could transport 600 people and was enhanced with a temple dedicated to Aphrodite, a gymnasium, and even a garden! Because of its size, the ship that was appropriately called the Syracusia would leak considerably through the hull, but Archimedes’ screw could pump the excess bilge water out. As the boat was far too big to anchor in most harbors, Hieron II generously sent it to Ptolemy IV Philopator in Egypt loaded with wheat when Egypt was struck by famine.

It should be noted that Hieron II perfectly realized the advantages of taking side with Rome rather than resisting it, and his sixty-year-long reign brought the city great prosperity. This especially shows in the colossal altar used to sacrifice to Zeus. As many as 450 bulls could be offered in one day. It is still there for us to see, nearly 200m long and 23 meters wide, making it the most enormous altar ever known. Initially, it was 15 meters high until the Spaniards reused the stones to fortify the harbor of Syracuse iin 1526. We also owe this king the construction of the largest theater of the Greek world of his days that could hold 15,000 people. When Hieron II died in 215 BC, his successor decided to choose the Carthaginians' side, who were threatening Rome at the time. This event had unfortunate results for our dear Archimedes.

 

During the Second Punic War, the Romans, after a two-year-long siege, finally took possession of Syracuse. The leading general, Marcus Claudius Marcellus, had issued clear instructions that whoever found Archimedes should treat him kindly and not harm him. Yet an inpatient soldier noticing that the old man refused to meet his general killed Archimedes, totally absorbed in his mathematical diagram. Apparently, the soldier had not realized that he was addressing Archimedes – this is at least what Plutarch tells us.

Not a single trace is left of Archimedes in today’s in today’s Syracuse, except for a square in the heart of Ortygia that is named after him, Piazza Archimede. Recently a tiny science museum has opened there, entirely dedicated to the city’s famous citizen exhibiting many interactive displays and models that illustrate some of his inventions and theories like the Stomachon, a 14-piece composition puzzle; a sphere contained by the cylinder; and the burning mirrors. These are all very intriguing and very much worth the visit.

[Drawings taken from Wikipedia]

A plea in favor of Bagoas

It is obvious that history has not been handling the subject of eunuchs with kindness. The Persians were very familiar with the very concept, and so were the Macedonian kings like Philip II and Alexander the Great. Firstly, there is Hermias, the eunuch and pupil of Aristotle who, with help from King Philip II, became the Persian satrap of Ionia (Asia Minor). Secondly, there is Alexander who held Cyrus the Great of Persia in high esteem and who was influenced by Xenophon’s “Cyropaidia” containing a true praise for eunuchs. This, at least, shows that  Alexander was familiar with eunuchs and could comprehend their promotion to high and important posts in the Persian empire as is documented by Bagoas’ namesake who carried the title of Chiliarch and proclaimed himself Great King by poisoning the incapable ruling King Ochus, better known as Artaxerxes III of Persia.

Writers like the old (and negative) W. Tarn, but also Arrian would have liked to simply leave Bagoas out of their history books, solely because a eunuch did not fit the idealized image of Alexander they wanted to project. Others have tried to create another Bagoas, a kind of Persian prince so that they would not have to accept that a eunuch and loverboy of Alexander could occupy a place among his most prominent and influential courtiers. They preferred the image of a slave and body-servant of the king (as used in the Alexander movie by Oliver Stone). Not only Christians but also the Romans had great prejudices toward the concept of eunuchs and lots of superstitious misunderstandings were circulating. In their endeavor not to damage the image of Alexander, most of the writers contributed to erasing as many traces of Bagoas as they could!

But let’s have a look at “our” Bagoas. He was introduced and presented to Alexander by Nabarzanes, previously one of the Commanders of the Persian King, together with other gifts since he wished to prove his goodwill by surrendering to Alexander after the death of King Darius. According to Curtius, these events happened in Hyrcania in July/August 330 BC. Curtius is very clear about this, while Arrian, who wrote for the Roman patricians of the Antonine period, hardly mentions Bagoas in his otherwise so carefully documented history (we hardly find any trace of him).

I’m convinced that Alexander didn’t take Bagoas only for his good looks or for the fact that he was a eunuch. He had refused handsome young boys and men that were presented to him on previous occasions – whether or not with a certain disgust. Andrew Chugg (see: Alexander’s Lovers) considers that since Bagoas had been the personal attendant to King Darius, he could prove the truthfulness of Nabarzanes’ story. He also assumes that he probably spoke Greek and as such could act as a translator, which was one of the many talents a good eunuch should possess and which may be one of the reasons why he was so easily admitted among Alexander’s entourage. Curtius writes: “… was still young and a favourite of Alexander’s because he was in the flower of his youth, but, though he equalled Hephaistion in handsomeness of form, he did not match him in charm, since he was not at all manly” (proof that Hephaistion definitely was manly, a trait that is often being questioned!). When Curtius speaks of Bagoas, he uses the word “spado”, which matches our word for the eunuch, as opposed to “castrati” (totally castrated).

Andrew Chugg has found Bagoas to be mentioned seven or eight times by ancient writers from four different sources. The best-known story is, of course, the one about the dance and singing competition in Gedrosia where Bagoas turned out to be the winner and was rewarded with a loving kiss by Alexander. Not only Plutarch relates the story, but also Athenaeus referred to Dicaearchus, another pupil of Aristotle - a rather trustworthy source of information.

New to me is learning that in India, Bagoas was listed among the 33 trierarchs (commanders of the triremes, i.e. ships with three rows of oars). This list was composed by nobody less than Nearchus, the fleet commander and one of Alexander’s generals. The title was purely honorific and had nothing to do with actual sailing the ships down the Indus River. Other trierarchs were, for instance, Eumenes, Alexander’s secretary, his doctor Critobulus, his friend Medius of Larissa, etc. But then Waldemar Heckel in his “Who’s who” mentions that this Bagoas might be different from the one close to Alexander and he refers to a Persian satrap of the same name, perhaps from Lycia.

Last but not least, there is the story of Bagoas being involved in the arrest of Orsines when Alexander upon his return to Babylon discovers the mismanagement of several of his Persian satraps. After the death of one of these satraps, Phrasaortes, a certain Orsines took over and exploited his power, murdering his countrymen and stealing the amounts of money from the temple. He is the one who, although indirectly, is being held responsible for the plundering of the tomb of Cyrus the Great. At that time, Bagoas occupied the highest rank at the Persian Court (!). Alexander probably asked him to serve as an interpreter and maybe even asked for his advice to establish if Orsines spoke the truth or was credible. On previous occasions, Alexander had left the condemnation of “criminals” to the local rulers and he could very well have done the same this time by leaving Bagoas in charge.

Finally, there is a short piece of text from the time that Alexander was still underway to Ecbatana in 324 BC which is told by Aelian in his “Varia Historia”:”: “He [Alexander] had dinner on the twenty-seventh [17th October 324 BC] with Bagoas – the distance from the palace to Bagoas’ house was ten stades [+/- 1800 meters] – and on the twenty-eight he slept”. Andrew Chugg concludes that at that time Bagoas was being held in high esteem by Alexander, i.e. seven months before the king’s death and immediately before the death of Hephaistion. Bagoas was rich and independent enough to maintain a household of his own, which doesn’t match at all with the image of an influential courtesan. There is no doubt about Alexander’s generosity towards Bagoas simply because organizing a dinner for the king meant an expense of at least 40 kilograms of silver (Dixit Plutarch).
 

Our historical Bagoas carried out many important diplomatic and governmental obligations like for instance escorting the Sacae (Scythian tribe) and the execution of unfaithful satraps. He must have been very talented, capable, and influential – and then there were his dances, of course.

From all these bits and pieces, I would conclude that Bagoas must have occupied the highest rank after King Alexander and his Chiliarch Hephaistion. We’ll definitely have to welcome him with more consideration and reverence next time we talk about him. To me, he truly is “one of the boys” together with Alexander and Hephaistion!

[pictures of Bagoas taken from Oliver Stone's movie "Alexander"]

The many wives of Philip II of Macedonia

In antiquity, women had no say at all. They had absolutely no rights and were treated as common goods, to be sold or bought, negotiated, or given in marriage at will. I always have dreams of living in antiquity, but definitely not as a woman!

But here I am confronted with Philip II of Macedonia, the womanizer – or that is how history likes to present him. I’m still fascinated by Ian Worthington’s book, presently reading the chapter about Philip’s Marriages as Policy. It starts with Philip’s wedding plans with Eurydice, previously called Cleopatra. I didn’t know that Cleopatra's father and brother had died and that her guardian was Attalus (a Macedonian nobleman), who adopted the girl as his niece. She was thus an adoptive niece and not a true relative, although from pure Macedonian blood. And then there is the plausible fact that this marriage of Philip with Eurydice, for once, was not a political move, but one of true love – at least as far as Philip is concerned, of course.

The only source to mention all of Philip’s wives and the reason for the marriages is fragments from a biography written in the 3rd century BC by a certain Satyrus, a philosopher from Aristotle’s school, which was quoted much later by Athenaeus, a writer who lived in the 2nd century AD. According to Worthington, the list/sequence is not entirely correct, but generally speaking, all of Philip’s marriages can be tied to his wars, and Worthington feels this should be the correct order. The names and sequence given by Satyrus are as follows:

- a)Audata (2), an Illyrian, who gave him a daughter Cynane;

- b) Phila of Elimea (1), sister of Derdas and Machatas, meant to secure control over Amphaxitis;

- c) Nicesipolis (5) of Pherae (when he wanted to appropriate Thessaly), by whom he fathered a daughter Thessalonike; and

- d) Philinna of Larisa (3) (also while he wanted to appropriate Thessaly), who gave birth to Arrhidaeus;

- e) Olympias (4) served to acquire the kingdom of the Molossians (Epirus), the mother of Alexander;

- f) Cleopatra (7), sister of Hippostratus and niece of Attalus, with whom Philip had fallen in love and who bore him a daughter, Europa.

Yet, this list is missing Meda of the Getae tribe, wife number (6). The figure between parentheses corresponds to the chronology that Ian Worthington (see: Philip II of Macedonia) feels is correct based on Philip’s military campaigns.

After a good twenty years of ruling and fighting, Philip managed to bring peace and unity to Greece, and he is getting ready to cross to Asia. Worthington’s theory is that Philip wanted to have one or more successors to secure the Macedonian kingship before leaving. The simple-minded Arrhidaeus is of no use, and there is too much at stake to rely only on Alexander – even if he leaves him behind in Macedonia to look after his interests and to keep a close eye on the newly signed Corinthian League. So much could go wrong while he is away!

Aside from Olympias, little or nothing is known about the other wives. They supposedly all lived at the Royal Palace of Pella, probably each in their own quarters to avoid possible (and probable) conflicts and quarreling with one another. Nicesipolis seems to have died shortly after giving birth to her daughter, and as far as the other wives are concerned, your guess is as good as mine. Justin, however, tells us that Philip had many children, of whom some died in battle and others by accident or of natural causes, but, strangely, we have so little information about them – hardly a name. As to Philip’s marriage with Eurydice, who was much younger than he, Worthington assumes that the other women may no longer be able to produce a healthy heir, or were simply too old already. And yes, let’s not forget that Eurydice was a full-blood Macedonian! We all know how Alexander reacted to this wedding!

The story becomes even more interesting when I learn that Attalus, just to be closer to King Philip, decides to adopt Eurydice as his own daughter just before the wedding takes place. To have the King as father-in-law makes him much more important, doesn’t it?

When it comes to marriages, they were a high-stakes game in those days! Not only was Attalus himself married to a daughter of Parmenion, but so was Coenus, another of Philip’s generals (Parmenion’s three sons, Nicanor, Philotas, and Hector, all fought later on in Alexander’s army). Attalus and Parmenion left together at the head of the shock troops that Philip sent to Asia ahead of his own planned invasion. All these events lead us to believe that Philip pulled the strings of an entire network, arranging intermarriages among his generals. In fact, it was a whole clique, of which Alexander was unfortunately excluded – to his greatest sorrow, I dare say. Although he obviously was recognized as the official heir to the Macedonian throne – probably so since he was fourteen and Aristotle was brought to Macedonia and certainly since he carried the seal of Macedonia at sixteen while his father was fighting on the eastern front; and again later on when he successfully led his cavalry against the Theban Sacred Band at Chaeronea – he had no place in Philip’s closest entourage of which he was excluded. This may have been reason enough for Olympias and Alexander to consider murdering Philip…?

A lot of stuff to think about! So much intrigue at the court! Enough for Louis XIV to find some inspiration here, and Henry VIII with his six wives could be looked at mildly, although Philip never divorced any of his wives or chopped their heads off. What an incredible mess!

As a side note, the huge and extravagant wedding party in Susa comes to my mind, which Alexander arranged in 324 BC for about one hundred of his generals and friends to marry girls from the widespread Persian aristocracy. The idea was not exactly a new one, was it?