The story around Alexander’s copy of the Iliad

Throughout history, it transpires that Alexander liked to present himself as the new Achilles. His Companions jokingly said it was because he slept with Homer's Iliad under his pillow. 

Page from the Iliad found in Egypt, 
APM Amsterdam

This statement may be far-fetched, but Plutarch confirms that Alexander kept his copy of the Iliad in a jeweled casket. It was the king’s proud possession since the precious scrolls were given to him by his earlier teacher, Aristotle, who had commented on the script. 

Ironically, the luxurious box may have belonged to the Persian King Darius. After the Macedonians were victorious at the Battle of Issus, it fell into Alexander's hands, who considered it worthy to hold the scrolls of his beloved Iliad. 

What history does not provide is a detailed description of the box and what King Darius kept inside. 

It is everyone’s guess if the casket was made of wood and inlaid with precious stones, or perhaps made of gold with intricate decorations. 

As to its contents, it may well have held the translation of the ancient Persian Avesta, the sacred text of Zoroastrian belief written originally in Avestan, an old eastern Iranian language that dates back to 1400 BC. Zoroaster was the first to teach humanity the doctrines of Heaven and Hell, the Resurrection of the body, the Last Judgment, and Eternal Life. These principles spread among mankind to be picked up eventually by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The Avesta must have been key to Darius’ ideology, and these ancient texts were his most prized possession. 

Zoroastrian Temple of Fire, Yazd, Iran

Nothing more is heard about Darius’ Avesta. I find it hard to believe that Alexander would have discarded these texts. The wrath of the gods was something to reckon with. Besides, he always respected people’s beliefs, and there is no reason to simply dispose of the Avesta. There were enough men in his entourage who understood and spoke Persian to recognize the content. Our history mentions Leonnatus by name when he visits the Persian Queen Mother in Issus to reassure her that her son, King Darius, was still alive, although not victorious. Alexander may well have given the Avesta texts to Queen Sisygambis, why not? 

However, some tales take a life of their own. In the first centuries of the Abbasid Empire in Persia (750-1258), it was believed that Alexander had stolen all the Persian books, which had to be translated back from Greek into Arabic to make them available to the Persians once again, who by now had adopted the Arabic script.

While in the West, the ancient world collapsed with the Fall of Rome in 476 AD, the knowledge of antiquity survived in the Eastern Roman Empire. The Abbasid Caliphs largely contributed to preserving the knowledge of the ancient Greeks.  Their work, except poetry and history, was translated initially into Syriac and later into Arabic as spoken at their court. As a result, the well-known works on geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, and most of Aristotle’s oeuvre were saved.  Without the arduous efforts of their skilled translators, not even the Renaissance could have saved our Greek heritage. 

The Abbasid and Persian angle of perception of the facts was obviously different from ours, and led them to believe that Alexander had simply stolen the Persian books. Other sources argued that they were burned in Persepolis when Alexander set the Palace ablaze.

Saving documents and books in antiquity

Nowadays, saving our documents and information on our computers is very obvious. Before the digital era, we relied on typewriters and printers to distribute our pamphlets, advertisements, letters, and books. 

It is hard to imagine that in antiquity nothing of the kind existed, but then the needs were entirely different. Public information, laws, decrees, and other important notices were inscribed on stone slabs or posted on walls in conspicuous places throughout the city, and eventually shared with other cities.  

Exchanging documents and letters over longer distances, as during Alexander’s campaigns, required writing on papyrus, a lightweight material that could be easily transported. His correspondence with Antipater, Olympias, Aristotle, Sisygambis, governors, and generals all over his ever-growing empire required an active exchange of news and information.

Eumenes and Callisthenes, serving as Alexander’s secretaries, must have been very busy and very organized. We tend to forget that they also kept copies of Alexander’s correspondence, official documents, and perhaps private letters as well. This becomes apparent when Eumenes’ tent went up in flames after a conflict that arose as Nearchus was preparing the fleet to sail the Southern Sea. 

Alexander had exhausted his own treasury and had to borrow money from his friends, including Eumenes, to finance Nearchus’ expedition. His secretary was to contribute 300 talents, but being stingy, he gave only 100 talents. Alexander did not accept Eumenes’ excuse that it was not without difficulty and decided to set his friend’s tent on fire. He expected Eumenes to rush his money out, and thus admit he had been lying. The plan went wrong, and the tent burned down entirely, leaving a clump of smelted gold and silver worth one thousand talents. In the process, Alexander’s archives were reduced to ashes. It is Plutarch who tells us that Alexander asked several governors and generals to send Eumenes copies of the papers that had been destroyed. This proves that Alexander did indeed keep a record of his correspondence! 

We so often read of papers and books that have only partially survived or are only known second-hand or not at all, except for the title. This situation is inherent to the mindset of the time and to the degradation of the natural support used (papyrus). 

Papyrus is a vegetal product and a very practical writing support, but it is also fragile. It has been calculated that papyrus documents had a lifespan of a maximum of one hundred years. This may have suited the needs at the time, but the chances of having them still around two thousand years later are very slim. 

Chances of survival were greater if there were many copies of a text, like, for instance, for theater plays. Yet, professional writers were expensive, and the costs were borne by the author. In Roman times, wealthy citizens could afford to have certain scrolls copied for their own use, but they would hardly survive after the Fall of the Roman Empire. 

Under exceptional conditions, some scrolls or bits of papyrus, however, reached us. The most telling example is the scrolls that survived the fire in Herculaneum after the volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Only recently have we been able to decipher their content without having to unroll the brittle carbonized scrolls (see: Reading the papyrus scrolls from Herculaneum). 

Another situation developed in Egypt. The garbage dump in Oxyrhynchus that served as fuel to the local population in the 19^th century appeared to contain a huge amount of hitherto unknown papyrus texts ranging from the Ptolemaic era to the Muslim conquests in the 7^th century AD. The papyri consist of private letters and public documents, such as a variety of official correspondence, theater plays, records, sales, wills, and inventories. The deciphering of the papyri is ongoing, as only a handful of scholars are capable of recognizing where the bit of papyrus text belongs. 

When parchment was introduced in the 2^nd century BC, documents stood a better chance of survival, although even animal skins had their limits. However, parchment was extremely expensive to make. 

With the passage of time, interest and taste evolved and changed. Treatises, studies, analyses, and even books and poems went out of fashion and vanished altogether. 

As the writing supports were decaying, it is not surprising that documenting Alexander’s life is a nearly impossible task, despite the second-hand recordings by Arrian, Diodorus, Curtius, and Plutarch, who could still access some original documents (see: Eyewitness accounts of Alexander’s life).

[Top picture Derveni papyrus 340 BC, Thessaloniki Museum.
Bottom picture from Archaeology News, Digs & Discoveries] 

Equality of women and men in ancient Persia

The thought alone causes most people to frown their eyebrows and stare at me in utter disbelief. Who says this? 

Well, obviously not our Greek and later Roman historians for whom the Persians were the enemy. Persian sources, however, describe their women as enterprising, independent, and resolute. This has been widely researched by Robbert Bosschart in his book All Alexander’s Women on which I commented repeatedly (see: Persia’s historical memory of Alexander). An updated version, his 5^th edition is now available on Amazon. 

His study, based on the in-depth research published by such experts as professors Amélie Kuhrt, Maria Brosius, Jozef Wiesehöfer, Wouter Henkelman, and others is concentrated on the clay tablets found at Persepolis (see: Fire over Persepolis) and saved by the fire as mentioned in his chapter Biographical/Geographical Notes: 

“An unintended consequence of these fires was the preservation of clay archive tablets, cooked and hardened. About a hundred Treasury Archive texts from Persepolis, recording royal payments in silver in 492-458 BC were made available between 1948 and 1965. Other texts, published in 1970, were written in Aramaic. This coincided with the biggest windfall: the discovery of over 8,000 texts, dated between 509 and 493 BC and found on tablets in the Persepolis Fortification Archive. They deal with the royal administration of food commodities. About 7,000 are written in the Elamite language of Susa, with some incrustations of Old Persian. Another thousand were written in Aramaic, but there is also one in Greek, one in Frygian, and a few in Neo-Babylonian.” 

He further underscores how and where women are mentioned performing tasks we would expect were those of men:

 … “the archive tablets routinely register travel rations of wine, beer and grain issued to royal women for extensive journeys throughout the empire on their own behalf. And … to commoner women ... For example, one tablet (… dated to 493 BC), registers a journey by a woman employee from Susa, Mizapirzaka, who has to carry a letter to Persepolis. The text adds that she carries a personal seal (…) that authorizes her to claim provisions at the waystations.” 

Until recently, the ruling opinion was that the Greeks doubted how women “could obtain and exercise power in the Achaemenid monarchy.  How could an empire be ‘well ruled’ if women were influential and even exercised power over the king himself?”…

.. “with the publication, around 1970, of numerous tablet texts from the Persepolis Fortification site … Dr Maria Brosius identifies a particular category of women officials who carry the title of Arashara.  … specifically mentions four Arasharas by name: Dakma, Harbakka, Matmaba and Sadukka. Meat rations are rare, so the issuing of 4 complete sheep to each of these women supervisors confirms their important payment level. …

At least ten more tablets refer to the salary of Arasharas, showing that these highly qualified women were better paid than male personnel of lower professional rank. …

[Achaemenid, maybe Arashara statuette

from Bosschart's book]

750 measures of wine among 65 employees; three Arasharas receive 30 measures each, whereas a male scribe at the same workplace gets only 20. On another tablet we even see an Arashara being issued 50 measures. The sliding scale of payment in order of professional qualification (and not by gender distinction) … distributes wine rations: two men who are called ‘manual workers’ get 10 measures each; two other men who are “doorkeepers” by profession, get 20 measures each; and the Arashara is allotted 30 measures. The highest payment (in grain) of all the tablets in the archive also goes to an Arashara: 75 quarts per month…

… an exceptionally high number of Arasharas worked at the service of queen-mother Irdabama. The circa 7,000 archive texts that have been translated so far mention some 150 places in the region of Persepolis (and in a few cases, beyond) where royal ladies had storehouses or workshops. Usually the personnel working there was overseen by Arasharas.”

...

"The tablets show women in a wide range of occupations in Persepolis: woodworkers and stoneworkers, artisans, winemakers, furniture makers, treasury clerks, storekeepers, carriers, grain handlers. A tablet dated to 502 BC refers to ‘Indukka, mother of Tuku’, stating that she is “the chief of the merchants”. It registers the amount of tax she has paid -in silver- on “the business deal that she has managed”.

 

… “Irdabama regularly orders greater amounts of foodstuffs to be delivered at the palace from her own … storehouses … Irdabama has more personnel working at her various factories. On top, she can direct the royal treasury to make payments in silver” …

As Alexander traveled in the company of Queen-mother Sisygambis from Issus to Susa the equality of royals and commoners must have become apparent. His close company with Barsine undoubtedly confirmed and enhanced the role of women. Dr. Maria Brosius further writes:

“Persian queens were much more than consorts, or than queen-mothers supposedly ruling a palace harem. They had a huge influence in decisions about whom to promote, whom to punish, whom to execute, or whose life to spare. Sisygambis, queen-mother of Darius III, also wielded such power, even after her son had been replaced on the throne by Alexander the Great. He pointedly upheld her status as the most prominent woman in the empire, and treated her as if she were his own mother.” 

There is little doubt about the real meaning behind the mass-wedding in Susa as arranged by Alexander in 324 BC (see: Susa with its unique glazed brick walls). Lacking time and knowledge, he could not personally choose the brides-to-be for his Companions and close friends but Sisygambis could and did. The brides, many of them princesses in their own right, were selected with care, and probably well-prepared by Sisygambis for their new role as wife of one of Alexander’s marshals. Their independence would inevitably trickle down to their children and children’s children. What an ambitious vision! 

Alexander always led by example. His wedding with Stateira, the eldest daughter of King Darius III, and Parysatis, the youngest daughter of King Artaxerxes III was celebrated at the same time as that of 90 court members. Each of the newlywed couples received a dowry from the king and on this happy occasion, Alexander granted a gratuity to his Macedonians who had taken Asian wives during his campaigns. He paid out of his own pocket for the proper education of their children. 

The Susa celebration was Alexander’s first step towards uniting West and East, not limited to Greece and Persia but encompassing the entire then-known world. He laid the basis for one single world in which everybody was equal, East or West, man or woman. What we call today an emancipated woman existed for 2,500 years, not as a dream but a reality! So much time has been lost on the subject! 

Alexander was a visionary, but none of his generals or friends understood his vision. The one exception was Hephaistion, but he died shortly after the wedding, poisoned no doubt. As a result, Alexander’s plans were muffled and erased from history. 

When the king died one year later, his world died with him. Had Alexander lived long enough, we would all speak Greek. What’s more, for 2,500 years our world would have been one where men and women lived on the same foot, with the same rights and the same status. 

Alexander’s Oriental Afterlife

This is the title of one of the many intriguing chapters in Robbert Bosschart’s book “All Alexander’s Women”. Beyond the widespread descriptions of Alexander’s life in our Western literature, the author hunted for Eastern sources. There are two key figures to consider, Ferdowsi and Nizami (see: Timeline of Main Arabic/ Persian Sources writing about Alexander). 

Ferdowsi is a Persian poet from the 10^th century who is still very much revered in Iran today, famous for his Shah-Nama, one of the longest epic poems in the world. It tells the (partially mythical) history of the Persian Empire from its creation until the end of the Sassanid rule in the 7^th century. 

The other prominent figure is Nizami, known as the greatest romantic poet in Persian literature. He lived in the 12^th century and described Alexander as a philosopher king and sage. 

It is not surprising that the Persians looked at Alexander from a very different angle as highlighted by R. Bosschart. Here are a few such examples, excerpts from his book: 

The vast popularity attained by the Alexander Romance over the centuries means that thousands of local storytellers have entertained millions of listeners in countless places with a marvelous or terrifying Alexander, made to measure for the taste of the audience.

But their tales were based on a very limited number of source texts. That is, whatever version of the Life and Deeds they might have heard or read, plus some (snippets of) local literature. For example, the 170 fake Alexander letters that circulated in Egypt from Ptolemaic times; or, in Persia, one of the contradictory Alexanders described in Ferdowsi’s Shah-Nama.

By the time this oral folklore became fixed in writing (a process that took obscure propaganda hacks and famous poets quite some centuries), an astonishing variety of Alexanders were living a fascinating afterlife. Most of them, just as an entertaining or educational sample of literary fantasy; but at least in two cases, with a profound social-political significance.

I am referring to the way in which the storytellers of Egypt and Persia appeased the bad conscience of their patriotic audience over the fact that their nation, with its ages-old, proud civilization, had submitted so meekly or even zealously to that young barbarian Alexander. Their solution was simple: they converted him to a ‘hidden’ son of a respectively Egyptian or Persian monarch, so that he could be welcomed back in ‘his true homeland’ as a liberator with full birthright to the throne.

…

The marriage of the daughter of Persia’s previous king to Alexander is a historical fact. During their negotiations after his first defeat, Darius III tells Alexander he can marry «one of my daughters». Years later, Alexander moreover receives the public approval of queen-mother Sisygambis to marry her granddaughter, the princess Barsine/Stateira.

But in his literary afterlife, the bride always is another princess: the insignificant Roxane, in the multiple versions based on the pseudo-Kallisthenes; or the magnificent, ‘divine’ Buran-dokht in a Persian tradition. However, in all these fantasied romances without exception, the reason why he marries her is the plea of the routed king Darius, who, with his dying breath, asks him to do so.

Only in the Persian version, Darius/Darab adds another petition to his deathbed plea. In Ferdowsi’s Shah-Nama, the routed king whispers in Alexander’s ear: «…Ask for my daughter’s hand in marriage; look after my children, my family, and my veiled wise women».

Who or what these wise women would be —so important that the High King in his last words before his death desperately wants to make sure they will be respected by the future ruler—, Ferdowsi sees no need to explain: he is sure that the (Persian) audience will understand.

This signifies two things. One: that wise women in the age of the Achaemenid empire were highly considered, and their rights were deemed worthy of the maximum protection. And two: as this oral tradition has been created to justify, to the eyes of a Persian audience, events in Alexander’s deeds which they recognized but needed to get explained, it follows that they knew that Alexander had wise Persian women at his side, and respected women’s rights. After all, such national sagas like the Shah-Nama and the Darab-Nama were intended as a reminder so that the Persians would not forget their glorious past.

… we are presented with an Oriental legend. Or rather, an embroidered version of a historic fact known to every Persian in the Achaemenid empire — and to many Jews, who revered Cyrus the Great because he had freed them from slavery in Babylon and sent them home to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem.

The fact is that in 530 BC Cyrus went to war against queen Tomyris of the Massagetai — and lost.

…

Tomyris sends a herald to Cyrus with her message: «Stop this war effort, because you cannot know if in the end it will do you any good. Be content to rule in peace over your own kingdom, and let me reign in mine. But of course, you will refuse my advice».

Cyrus indeed refuses to listen to her wise words, attacks – and dies on the battlefield. Now, it is a well-known theme that Alexander always tries to (and succeeds in) surpassing the feats of Cyrus. So here the Jews —who maintained good relations with Alexander throughout his reign, acting as loyal subjects— award him another victory: Alexander comes out a winner where Cyrus failed.

This is the beginning of a literary tradition – later represented so brilliantly by Nizami’s Iqbal-Nama— that describes Alexander as a philosopher king, Seeker of Knowledge, a sage whose only real aim is to learn wisdom.

...

Persia’s historical memory, as explained by the saga “Darab-Nama”, also remembers Alexander’s decision to promote mass-marriages for the better integration of conquerors and conquered into one realm. This is how the story in this popular saga was told to audiences all over Persia: 

Alexander and his army happen upon an island of women, and thousands of these invade the camp «searching for men». Alexander first suspects that they may be hostile, but soon understands they only want to make love —and then fears that his own men will “go berserk”, causing even worse problems. So he allows his wise chancellor –whose name is given as Plato— to apply a miracle-working solution.

Alexander and his wise chancellor Plato receive queen Sabaterah.

She reigns over an island where only women live, who all want

sex with men. Plato will ensure that they become legal spouses.

(Miniature from a 1720 AD manuscript of the Darab-Nama)

[Graciously shared by Robbert Bosschart]

Plato calls upon the women and asks them: «By the will of God, and so be all the Angels your witnesses, will you give yourselves in legal union to the men that will enter your city?» They agree. The storyteller concludes: «When the women were trying to seduce the men, it was the work of the Devil; but as soon as they were conveniently and legally married, it became God’s work, and Alexander could no longer be held responsible for any problems arising of their arrival».

Clearly, this is a remembrance of the mass-marriages (in reality, the legalization of de facto marriages) that Alexander organised in parallel with his double wedding at Susa in 324 BC. Out of his own purse, as Arrian reports in VII, 4, 8, he paid dowries for the Persian and other Oriental women who had taken up with his officers and soldiers, so they could be legally married. The list totalled some 10,000 dowries, and the classical sources say that Alexander disbursed over 10,000 talents of silver for them; an amount equivalent to 150 million dollars of today. It is understandable that these marriages, converting thousands of concubines into legal wives, left an indelible memory among the Persians.

Just as important was Alexander’s pledge that he would care for their offspring. Arrian notes in passing that he promised his veterans that their children from Oriental partners “will be educated as Macedonians”. But Diodoros tells more: he registers (in his Book XVII, 110, 3) that Alexander has set up a specific fund and appointed the necessary teachers to ensure that the 10,000 children his men have had with “women who were taken in war” will be educated “as is the right of free men”.

In Book XVIII, Diodoros adds that Alexander had decided to apply his integration policy on a much broader scale: «…he intended to establish cities and to transplant populations from Asia to Europe and in the opposite direction from Europe to Asia, in order to bring the largest continents to common unity and to friendly kinship by means of intermarriages and family ties».

Alexander’s intermarriage policy found lasting approval in Persia, as shown by the positive comment in the Darab-Nama on the “miraculous solution” devised by Plato.

For over a thousand years, Persian audiences have been listening again and again to this story in theaters, bazaars, harems and taverns. They must have agreed: after all, no storyteller makes a living by irritating his public.

How important was Barsine?

The question is actually double: How important was Barsine for Alexander? And how important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? 

Authors from antiquity have not spent much ink on her, and she is only mentioned when she comes to the foreground, which isn’t often.  

Barsine was the daughter of Artabazus II, satrap of Hellespontine Phrygia in northwestern Turkey. Artabazus’ first wife was from Rhodes and was the sister of two capable generals, Mentor and Memnon. 

Artabazus revolted against the newly appointed Persian king, Artaxerxes III Ochus. Artaxerxes had ordered the dismantling of his mercenary army, which the satrap did not accept. Artabazus and his family (including Memnon) went into exile and found refuge at the court of Philip II in Pella. Barsine, who was fluent in Greek, must have met the younger Alexander during their stay. We don’t know the nature of their encounters or conversations, but we may safely assume that Alexander inquired about life and customs in Persia. After all, he impressed the Persian envoys at a young age as he questioned them pending his father’s return to the Palace. 

Three years later, Artabazus reconciled with the Persian king, and he returned to Persia, taking Barsine and his family with him. That happened in 343 BC, about one year after Aristotle arrived on the scene to teach Prince Alexander. Over the years, the entire company probably met the philosopher along with other distinguished visitors to the Macedonian court. 

Barsine married her uncle Mentor, a Greek mercenary general in Persian service, while she still was young. Mentor died soon afterward, leaving her with a daughter. In those circumstances, Memnon took her as his wife that same year, 338 BC. He already had several sons from a previous marriage. We can safely assume that Barsine’s opinion in these matters didn’t count. What’s more, she became a second mother to her husband's (teenage?) sons. Just as Mentor, Memnon led an army of mercenaries for the Great King. Having a lovely wife familiar with the Greek language and culture, no doubt, added to his prestige. 

In 334 BC, when Alexander, now king of Macedonia, faced the Persian army at the Granicus River, Memnon fought on the enemy’s side. Although the battle was lost, the general’s capabilities were recognized by Darius, and he was appointed as commander of the Persian fleet in the Aegean. This honor may be a questionable trust because, in exchange, Barsine had to stay at King Darius’ court with her father, Artabazus. 

A year later, during the siege of Lesbos Memnon fell ill and died. Barsine was widowed for a second time. 

Around that time, Alexander had reached Issus where he defeated Darius in November 333 BC. When Parmenion rode to Damascus to take hold of the Persian treasury, the baggage train, and the women of the aristocrats, he met Barsine and brought her to Alexander. 

Her relationship with Alexander lasted five or six years. I wonder whether she traveled with Darius’ mother, wife, and children, who had been taken in Issus. Alexander was constantly on the move, conquering the eastern Mediterranean and Egypt and marching to Babylon and Susa, where he finally installed the Persian Royal Family. Barsine stayed at Alexander’s side, and we can only guess which quarters she occupied when the army was on the road. 

During that time, Artabazus remained faithful to Darius until the Great King was murdered by Bessus, who then proclaimed himself the new king of Persia. Artabazus refused to submit to Bessus and left, taking his mercenaries with him. He joined Alexander, who rewarded him with the satrapy of Bactria. Here he was reunited with Barsine. 

She is mentioned again by ancient historians about 327 BC at the end of Alexander’s campaign in Sogdia. However, it is unclear in which order the events unfolded precisely. 

The fact is that Barsine became pregnant and gave birth to Heracles. Alexander never recognized his son, his first-born, although he must have loved him, giving him the name of his ancestors. Is it possible that Alexander resented Barsine for having Heracles without his consent? She and little Heracles stood in his way for his bigger plans, meaning to marry Princess Stateira as – probably – agreed with Sisygambis. Barsine must have known of those plans, so she had no excuse. 

It is, in any case, a strange coincidence that Alexander almost immediately married Roxane, the daughter of a local chieftain. This was not love at first sight, as most authors claim. It was a purely political move to end the three-year wars through Bactria and Sogdia. 

Artabazus requested to be relieved of his duties in Bactria because of his old age. Alexander accepted his resignation and Artabazus left for Pergamon taking Barsine and the little boy with him. Artabazus seems to have produced an elegant way to retire, and, at the same time, he created the best solution for Barsine since there was no longer a place for her at Alexander’s court. She had to say goodbye to the snow-topped mountains of the Hindu Kush after sharing so many miles with the Macedonian troops and her great love.

Barsine met Alexander again in 324 BC when she attended the mass wedding at Susa. Her daughter from Mentor married Nearchus. Two of her sisters were also given in marriage to Alexander’s companions, but the sources (Plutarch and Arrian) are at odds with each other about the names. 

Hardly a year later, Alexander died in Babylon. I wonder whether Barsine was still in nearby Susa, close enough to say her goodbyes to the man she once loved? If she returned to Pergamon after the wedding, she could never make it to Babylon in time. 

She and Heracles quietly spent the next decade in Pergamon. In 310 BC, Cassander as king of Macedonia, summoned Alexander IV, Alexander’s 14-year-old legitimate son with Roxane, to Pella to be poisoned. 

The news traveled fast and eventually reached Pergamon, as poor Heracles was now at the center stage in the drama of the Succession War. Initially, general Polyperchon had been defending the cause of the now 17-year-old Heracles, but in 309 BC, he fell into Cassander’s vicious trap. Cassander made many great promises of money and power in exchange for eliminating Heracles. For one hundred talents, Polyperchon tricked Heracles into accepting an invitation for dinner and poisoned him. Barsine, who had traveled with her son, was murdered shortly afterward, although some sources pretend she was murdered simultaneously. Sadly, Heracles didn’t even receive a proper burial in the cemetery of his ancestors, and neither did Barsine. 

Now about my questions formulated at the beginning of my post. How important was Barsine for Alexander? Well, she was important enough to keep her at his side for about six years. All this time, she managed not to get pregnant. Barsine knew that Alexander dearly wanted and needed an heir during those years of intimacy. She also knew that his plan was to marry a Persian princess. Barsine spoiled this by wanting a child of her own. Alexander had his principles and stuck to them. Nobody, not even sweet and gentle Barsine, was allowed to interfere. His sudden marriage to Roxane may be seen as a statement toward Barsine. Historians say Alexander fell in love with Roxane because of her beauty. In my mind, her beauty may be a nice bonus, but it was not the main reason. 

How important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? Barsine was a beneficial source of information about the Persian court, Persian habits, and culture. After all, she had lived at least three years at the court of King Darius. Speaking Greek was an important asset to avoid misunderstandings. Alexander was an excellent judge of character, and having met Artabazus at Pella, he knew that he was a man of his word and could be trusted. Artabazus was loyal to Alexander. Having his daughter at the king’s side was a warranty that worked both ways. Barsine and her father contributed to Alexander’s larger plan. The birth of Heracles disturbed this goal – something Alexander never could or would accept. Barsine no longer fit his purpose in the new world he was building.

Hecatompylos, where Darius’ pursuit ended

After a neck-breaking day and night march over difficult terrain, Alexander finally caught up with Darius at Hecatompylos, near modern Damghan (see: Alexander in hot pursuit of Darius). The exact location has been pinpointed at Shahr-e Qumis in north-central Iran.

Once the body of Darius was sent to Queen Sisygambis for proper burial, Alexander allowed his men a well-deserved rest. Those troops that had not been able to keep up with his excessive speed also regrouped. The army was now two days away from the border of Hyrcania, approximately 200 kilometers from the Caspian Gates. In the wider area supplies were available in great number allowing the soldiers to catch their breath for the fertility of Hyrcania was legendary.

[Picture from the Archaeology News Network]

After the king’s death, the area became part of the Seleucid Empire and from 247 till 224 BC Hecatompylos turned to be the capital of the ruling Parthian Empire. It flourished until it was hit and destroyed by an earthquake in 856 AD and Hecatompylos (meaning one hundred gates) was never rebuilt.

In recent decennia, new archaeologist projects went underway with the main purpose to put Hecatompylos back on the map. It is a tall order since today the wide plains of Shahr-e Qumis are absolutely deserted. The picture published in the Archaeology News Network is not inviting at all and it is hard to imagine how such a great city like Hecatompylos could ever have flourished on the spot. It is a huge field covered with shards resembling an abandoned pottery workshop. This area alone measured seven by four kilometers, which by deduction suggest that the population of Hecatompylos would have counted some tens of thousands. The figure may, however refer to the city’s heyday when it was part of the Seleucid Empire or when it was the capital of the Arsacid dynasty by 200 BC.

Whatever the case, we may expect a great deal of surprises and hopefully a huge amount of monuments ranging from the days of Alexander all the way to the 9^th century AD.