Travelling in the opposite direction of Alexander the Great

It is 330 BC when Alexander is marching through the heartland of Persia. That same year, a very little-known Greek merchant named Pytheas started an astonishing voyage of his own in the opposite direction. There was much more happening on planet Earth than Alexander’s campaign in the east.

This Pytheas made such a name and fame that contemporaries and authors ended up moving his story to the lands of myths and legends that were discussed in belief and unbelief for centuries.

Our merchant from Massilia (modern Marseille, France) was also known as a skilled navigator, mariner, and astronomer. His treatise On the Ocean, unfortunately, has not survived but has been quoted extensively throughout antiquity by people like Diodorus, Eratosthenes, Strabo, Polybius, and Pliny the Elder. Each one of them interpreted and judged Pytheas in his own way, often reaching contradictory conclusions. Truth and fantasy went hand in hand and were so intertwined that nobody will ever be able to get to the bottom of the fact, I’m afraid.

Pytheas’ book was a kind of maritime log loaded with astronomical, geographic, biological, oceanographic, and ethnological observations that still catch the attention of modern scholars. The log also contained practical information with descriptions of the coastal landmarks and even astronomical notes.

The travel account was written in Greek around 325 BC. At that time, Nearchus was sailing from the Indus to the Persian Gulf to be reunited with Alexander, who had survived his death march through the Gedrosian Desert.

Pytheas traveled through uncharted territory as well. Besides, we can only speculate about the route he took from his hometown, Massilia. After sailing through the Pillars of Hercules (modern Strait of Gibraltar), he then proceeded along the Atlantic coastline of Spain and France. He probably crossed the English Channel somewhere in French Brittany. Britain was a well-known source for tin, amber, and gold that was exported via Gaul to the Mediterranean world. 

Once in Britain, the intrepid navigator probably continued along the coast of Wales and onward to Scotland. Here, Pliny mentions Pytheas’ arrival at the Orcades Islands, north of Britain. These islands are generally recognized as the Orkney Islands.

More challenging was his route onward, which is thought to have taken him as far north as Iceland and the Arctic Ocean, where the giant Hyperboreans from Greek mythology lived. Modern scholars do not agree about Iceland, which Pytheas called Thule, as mentioned by Strabo, but believe that the merchant reached Norway instead. In any case, he experienced the nearly continuous daylight typical at this high latitude during the summer months. 

Just one day sailing out of Thule, he reached what he called the “Congealed Sea” – a way to tentatively describe the frozen Arctic Ocean. Strabo describes the place as a sea lung, where neither earth, water, nor air existed but where all things were suspended together.

On his way back, Pytheas may have traveled down the east coast of Britain, past “Kantion,” which may refer to the Kentish peninsula. There is evidence that he continued along the northern coastline of Europe, maybe meeting the Germanic people and perhaps venturing to Heligoland (Helgoland), a valuable source of amber. Some scholars argue that Pytheas sailed to the Baltic Sea as far as the Vistula River, now in Poland. It is not known when he arrived back in Massilia, but it is generally accepted that it was before 320 BC when his book was first cited by the writer Dicaearchus, a student of Aristotle.

It makes me wonder whether Alexander was aware of this travel expedition when he planned his own conquest of the western Mediterranean and the territories beyond. Julius Caesar likely used the book to acquire information about Britain and further northern areas. Copies of Pytheas’ work probably sat on the shelves of the great libraries of Alexandria and Pergamon, where it could and would be studied freely.

Whatever ancient and/or modern scholars may think of Pytheas, we cannot dismiss the fact that he went on a journey to explore the world by direct observation, not unlike the young British young men who went on the Grand Tour in the 18th century.

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"]