A few words about Syedra

Syedra was discovered as recently as 1994, but excavations only slowly exposed parts of this ancient port city, a good 20 kilometers south of modern Alanya on the coastal road to Anamur and Tarsus beyond. In antiquity, the city was either part of Cilicia or Pamphylia.
 

I read the name Syedra while visiting the Archaeological Museum of Alanya, before knowing where to look for it. I was struck by its mosaics, clearly Roman and belonging to the 3rd century AD.
 
Archaeological excavations have revealed standard elements of the town, but none show signs of in-depth study. The structures are listed as a street lined with columns, shops, several staircases, remains of a town hall (Odeon?), a temple, a theater, and several cisterns that provided water to the city.
 
On the upper terrace that holds the Acropolis stands a building tentatively identified as a Heroon. Its walls with traces of frescoes welcome the visitor at the end of the colonnaded street. It is not known to whom this shrine was dedicated.
 
Important sections of the city walls display the remains of entrance gates, for instance, on the southwest and western side; the latest being the strongest, which is recognized as the main access to the city.
 

[Picture from Daily Sabah]

Another interesting feature is the Roman Bathhouse, where a large floor mosaic depicts the Twelve Labors of Heracles with life-size human figures. It was excavated in late 2020 and dated to the 2^nd century AD. The rectangular mosaic with an apse-like recess at one end measures 21.95 x 7.92 meters, which would typically fit the layout of a Caldarium. 
 
The reports also mention a statue of Nike, the goddess of victory, that I have not seen at the Museum of Alanya at the time of my visit.
 
By the end of 2025, a huge Stadium from the 2nd or 3^rd century AD was discovered, when Syedra reached its height. It is about 190 meters long and 16 meters wide and can accommodate 2,000-3,000 people. Since it was cut into the solid rock, it remained hidden till now.
 
Researchers also mention some 40 inscriptions on Syedra’s walls providing information about sports and entertainment.
 

At the Museum of Alanya, I had noticed a large inscription in which Septimius Severus praised the city for its bravery and loyalty in resisting the pirates that constantly raided the eastern Mediterranean (see: Exploring Olympos, next to Chimera). In the text from 194 AD, the Roman Emperor underscores Syedra’s “goodwill towards the Romans”.
 
The city also has two Necropolises, one to the northwest and the other to the south, which one day may reveal more important information about its citizens and their burial practices.

Sadly, excavations have not been structured so far, and even the intrepid visitor will have a hard time imagining the layout and monuments that graced this commercial hub and bustling harbor during the twenty centuries of its existence. Syedra was founded in the 7^th century BC and remained inhabited until the 13^th century AD.

Kastabala, Hellenistic Hierapolis

It happens quite frequently that two or more cities go by the same name. That can be very tricky if we don’t pay attention. 

I actually stopped in my tracks when I saw a picture of the ancient city of Hierapolis built at the foot of a 35-meter-high hill crowned with a medieval tower. Hierapolis, as I know it, stands next to the famous Pamukkale hot springs, roughly 140 kilometers east of Aydin. Clearly, these are two different sites. 

[Picture from Turkisch Archaeological News]

In my earlier blog, Hierapolis, stepchild of Pamukkale, I developed the fascinating remains of Hierapolis/Pamukkale. The other city was known originally as Kastabala and changed its name to Hierapolis or Hieropolis in Hellenistic times. It lies much further to the East in Cilicia, on the Ceyhan River, halfway between Adana and Gaziantep. Alexander crossed the Ceyhan River after his illness in Tarsus on his way to Issus. 

As a matter of convenience, I’ll call this eastern city Hieropolis to avoid confusion. It was famous for its sanctuary of Artemis Perasia, where priestesses allegedly walked barefoot over hot coals during their rituals. The origins of Kastabala, however, go back some 2,700 years, and thus must have existed in Alexander’s time. 

Archaeological excavations in Hieropolis started in 2009 and so far have exposed mainly Roman remains of city walls, a 200-meter-long and 11-meter-wide colonnaded street, an Agora, public baths, temples, and a theater. This theater has been dated to the 1^st century AD and could seat 5,000 people. As so often, it would be the place for citizens’ debate and intellectual exchange. The Acropolis of Greek Kastabala is probably hidden underneath the medieval castle. 

[Picture from ZME Science]

This year, 2025, five fine theatrical masks were unearthed, among which one represents an elderly philosopher. In all, 36 masks have been retrieved. They typically blend Eastern and Western elements and will eventually contribute to restoring the theater stage to its former glory. 

Given the cultural heritage of the site, it makes sense that the reliefs — some depicting tragic heroes, others comic performers — embody a place where Greek drama, Roman architecture, and Anatolian myth intertwined. 

Does age matter?

Writing about Alexander over the years, I have been handling chronological dates for his whereabouts in the correct time frame. There is, however, another approach to consider and that is Alexander’s age. 

We know he became king at the age of twenty and started his invasion of Asia at the age of twenty-two. He died a month short of his 33^rd birthday. All his marches, sieges, battles, and fighting are condensed within this last period of roughly ten years. 

A comparison with any modern monarchy is impossible because there are hardly any kings left and they no longer go to war at the head of their army. To compare Alexander with young men his age today is out of the question also simply because life and the circumstances of living are too far apart. 

Alexander has been taught by Aristotle but again this kind of education cannot be identified with the teaching of a young man in our modern world. I believe that even Philip, although he intended to do what was best for his son, underestimated the vastness of Aristotle’s knowledge. Alexander was meant to rise above Philip because he understood how to draw from Aristotle’s vast database (to use modern terminology) and merge it expertly with his innate infallible instinct - his genius. 

However, Philip may well have realized the potential of his 16-year-old son when he entrusted him with the seal of Macedonia while campaigning against Byzantium. The young prince honored his assignment as Regent by successfully putting down the Maedi revolt on the country’s northern border. 

Two years later, Philip put his son in command of his cavalry at the Battle of Chaironeia. Alexander did more than his share and annihilated the entire Theban Band, all three hundred of them! 

We don’t know how much time the young prince spent among the soldiers growing up in Pella, but I think it is safe to assume it was a lot. Leading the small contingent against the Maedi and the cavalry in Chaironeia speaks volumes. An army has that instinctive flair to recognize a true leader, one they can and will trust. 

This trust would only grow when Alexander became king after his father was murdered. In the next two years, he successfully led his troops against the Illyrians and the Thracians to secure his northern borders, sacked the city of Thebes in retribution for its betrayal, and confirmed his position as Hegemon of Greece as per the Treaty of Corinth. Alexander could never have contemplated his campaign in Asia without the full trust and commitment of his army. 

He crossed the Hellespont shortly before his 22^nd birthday and fought the Persian army for the first time at the Granicus River. Later that summer, he marched to Sardes and took Ephesos, Priene, Miletus, Didyma, and Halicarnassus. Alexander spent the following winter in Lycia, after which he conquered Phaselis and Perge. 

When he was 23 years old, he headed north to Sagalassos and from there to Gordion, where he cut the knot. Crossing Cappadocia, he returned to the shores of the Mediterranean. At Tarsus, he fell sick with a fever, which incapacitated him for several weeks. By the end of the year, he was engaged in the Battle of Issus, his first personal confrontation with King Darius. 

In two years, Alexander fought two major battles (see: The Battle of the Granicus and The Battle of Issus, where Alexander and Darius faced each other for the first time), besieged two cities, Miletus and Halicarnassus, and occupied all the major ports in Asia Minor. In our modern world, this means that he crossed all of Turkey. 

At the age of 24, he laid siege to two more cities, Tyre (building a mole in the process) and Gaza. His reception in Egypt was that of a liberator, and he was soon acclaimed as their new Pharaoh - a title that automatically made him a god in the eyes of the Egyptians. At the western end of the Nile Delta, he founded his first Alexandria, a city that still exists and prospers today! 

Many more sieges and battles were to follow in Central Asia and India. We almost take them for granted, despite that every siege and every battle came with its own technicalities and challenges. Alexander faced many hardships as he traveled through deserts, waded through countless rivers, and crossed mountains as high as those of the Hindu Kush! 

The three years Alexander spent in Sogdiana and Bactria, from his 27^th to his 30^th birthday, were an uninterrupted succession of skirmishes and fights in guerrilla wars he was totally unfamiliar with. The events culminated with his victory at the Battle of the Hydaspes against the Indian King Porus. By then, he and his men had covered some 28,000 kilometers, creating many new Alexandrias in the process. 

Although Alexander is usually depicted sitting on his horse, we have to keep in mind that he moved at the pace of his foot soldiers. Riding bareback was not comfortable, not for the rider and not for the horse (see: No saddles and no stirrups for Alexander’s cavalry). 

It is impossible to imagine anyone covering such a distance on foot. It would imply walking an average of 2,800 kilometers a year, ten years in a row! Let us keep in mind that many of his troops were veterans of his father’s days, men in their fifties, sixties, and even seventies! Not a leisurely trip for the fainthearted. 

Speaking of walking: how many pairs of shoes, boots, and sandals would the Macedonians have worn out? Providing new ones for some 40,000 men or more would have implied production on an industrial scale! Maybe we should believe the sources suggesting that the soldiers fought and walked sections of the route barefoot?

Sadly, Alexander died far too young, and so did Hephaistion, but men like Ptolemy and Seleucos lived to the ages of 84 and 77, respectively. Age clearly is not everything!

Healthcare knowledge roughly 300 years before Alexander

Alexander’s medical knowledge is based on the teaching he received from Aristotle. Sophisticated medicine did, however, exist much earlier. Hippocrates of Cos, for instance, lived only one hundred years before their time. The Hippocratic Oath, which may have appeared only after the physician’s death, has survived until today (see: A healthy mind in a healthy body – in early antiquity). This oath was, in fact, a religious document established to ensure that a doctor operated within and for community values. The oath was sworn by Apollo, Hygeia, and Panacea, promising to respect their teacher, not to administer poison or abuse their patients; quite importantly, they swore to keep the confidentiality between doctor and patient. 

[Fragment of a clay tablet from the Library of Ashurbanipal. Kouyunjik (ancient Nineveh), Neo-Assyrian, British Museum]

Three hundred years before Alexander and Aristotle, King Ashurbanipal of the Neo-Assyrian Empire kept the Nineveh Medical Encyclopaedia in his Library. These clay tablets held thousands of remedies and descriptions of the symptoms, which Alexander may have shared with the doctors traveling with the army. His men's lives were precious, and attending to their health and well-being was a priority (see: Alexander caring for the wounded and the dead). 

Plants were most certainly used in early civilizations since their medical effects were recorded around 2000 BC in Mesopotamia. The help of the gods was invoked for more complicated diseases requiring the performance of certain rituals or magic. Throughout antiquity, medicine mainly implied using plants, which were either applied to the affected body part or taken internally as potions. The ancient Egyptians also had a thorough knowledge of medicine, as documented by Herodotus. He reports that each part of the body requires specific treatments. It seems that physicians were actually specialized to treat one particular ailment of any sick patient. 

Anyway, in Mesopotamia, as the collection of medical texts grew over the centuries, the extensive Library of King Ashurbanipal was created in the 7th century BC. Scribes had gathered enough information to compose a medical dictionary, which may well be the first standardized, systematic handbook on therapeutic medicine. 

This Encyclopaedia was divided into twelve sections. The subjects moved from the head, through the torso, to the legs and feet. Each tablet constituted the equivalent of a chapter in our modern books, but some subjects are spread over more than one tablet, and there are 50 tablets in total. These tablets counted at least 250 lines. A note was added at the end of each tablet that referred to its place in the series. 

Today’s merit of this Library is to better understand how people looked at diseases and the best way to treat them in ancient times. Basically, they knew two types of specialists, one corresponding to our modern doctors and the other that could best be described as an alternative healer. 

This precious information collection has only been revealed in recent years because the tablets had been smashed to pieces in 612 BC when Nineveh fell into the hands of the Persians, Medes, and Babylonians. They divided the region between them afterward. Piecing the broken tablets back together was and is a tedious task as only a handful of people can decipher the cuneiform writing and thus reconstruct the texts. 

Once again, it is amazing, to say the least, that such precious knowledge remained hidden from us for 2,600 years! Where would our medical science be if we had continued elaborating and improving on the knowledge from the reign of King Ashurbanipal? Not only was it known to Alexander through Aristotle (and possibly to other physicians) but also to other key figures like King Philip’s doctor who operated on his eye, and Alexander’s own physician Philip of Acarnania (see: Alexander’s near-fatal dip in the Cydnus River at Tarsus)? So much information from antiquity has been sadly lost to us.

A few words about Alexander’s mints and coins

Coins with the image of Alexander were widespread and accepted throughout his empire and kept circulating in large numbers long after his death.

Research has revealed that the coins with Alexander's effigy started circulating much later than initially accepted. Until then, the currencies of Philip and Darius were familiar together with those minted by individual cities. We had to wait until after Alexander's victory at Issus in 333 BC to find the first mints to be established in Macedonia, Cilicia, and Phoenicia.

[Map of Alexander's mints (from Meadows 2014, map 1)] 

Frank Holt has made an excellent analysis of the Alexander coins in his book, The Treasures of Alexander the Great. The first coins were silver ones minted in Sidon and Tarsus between October 333 and September 332 BC. Gold coins emerged after his conquest of Tyre in July 332 BC. New mints were established in Asia Minor later on, apparently after his return from India.

During Alexander's lifetime, the known mints striking his coins were spread over 25 different locations such as:

Pella and Amphipolis in Macedonia

Lampsacus and Abydos on the Hellespont

Colophon, Magnesia, Miletus, Teos and Sardes in Asia Minor

Side and Tarsus in Pamphylia
Salamis, Citium, Amathus, Paphos on the island of Cyprus 

Myriandrus, Aradus, Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre on the eastern Mediterranean coast

Alexandria in Egypt

Damascus and Babylon further inland

Each of these mints had its own assigned type. Some produced only one kind of currency, while others could generate a wide scale ranging from small coins to drachms and tetradrachms. It is important to realize that the Alexander coins were minted according to the standard Attic drachma of 4.3 grams and that his tetradrachms weighed 17.2 grams. They helped to spread his image throughout the length and breadth of his empire, from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia.

The silver collected from the Royal Persian treasuries contributed widely to the production of the tetradrachms. It has been estimated that between 333 and 290 BC (which is well after Alexander's death in 323 BC), approximately 60 million tetradrachms were produced, together with 66 million drachms and 12 million gold staters! Just imagine the vast amount of money's impact on the economy!

After the king's death, his successors kept the same currency system in place, although they gradually replaced Alexander's image with their own – still in Alexander-style.

The Numismatic Museum of Athens has a wide range of coins on display to pick our choice from. This trio of tetradrachms, for instance, displays the figures of Philip II on top and underneath in Alexander-style Lysimachos (left) and Ptolemy (right).

In comparison, Seleucos I, here depicted on a coin from the Antalya Museum, carries a more pronounced lion skin still entirely in the Alexander tradition.

Once the Diadochi became king in their own right over their newly delimited territories, their own effigy replaced the Alexander-inspired image, and the reverse of the coins rightfully carried the inscription, Basileus.

For a long time, coins carrying Alexander's image kept circulating because his veteran soldiers were used to receiving their payment in tetradrachms! 

Triumphal Arch south of the Cilician Gates

Following the Via Tauri after crossing the Cilician Gates, Alexander was informed that the governor of Tarsus no longer wished to hold the city for Persia and was ready to give up the town. Afraid that the satrap would plunder the city on his way out, the people got scared and called for Alexander’s help.

[Picture from the Archaeology News Network]

At that time, the Macedonians were marching near Anazarbus, which after the first century AD the Romans renamed Caesarea. Eventually, the city grew to be much larger than Ephesos.

Anavarza, as the Turks called it today, has been constantly excavated in the last decades and revealed a double-columned highway, 2.7 kilometers long (see: A double highway in antiquity). So far, 1,360 columns have been unearthed and re-erected together with the entrance gate. This arch, which was built to commemorate the Roman victory over the Persians in the 3^rd century AD, was in a very poor state.

The picture published recently by the Archaeology News Network proves, however, that the restoration project was well done. The 14-meter high gate is 28 meters long and 5.40 meters wide, a correction of the previous dimensions giving a height of 10.5 meters and a width of 22.5 meters (see: More news from Anavarza, Roman Caesarea) – an impressive landmark anyway.

About the Death of Alexander the Great

Alexander's death is shrouded in mystery. From antiquity until today, scores of historians, admirers, archaeologists, authors, and philosophers have written about it, and each and every one has developed their own theory and their own point of view.

It is useless to retell the story – or the many versions of the story – as I certainly cannot add anything sensible to that. Like everybody else, I have, however, my own thoughts and own reflections on the matter.

Alexander's death most certainly was first recorded in his Royal Diaries, but is the account that reached us truly reflecting what was written down at that time, or has the original report been manipulated to suit his courtiers and successors? That is hard to tell, certainly 2,500 years onwards.

We have a very detailed, day-by-day account of Alexander's whereabouts and health during the last days of his life. I find this rather strange, as it sounds more like a justification than an actual report of the events. Alexander's life has been in the balance before, but not so many details were reported, or at least have not survived. The first time the troops feared for the king's life was at Tarsus after he plunged into the cold waters of the Cydnus River, and the remedy of his doctor, Philip, was being questioned by Parmenion, in those days his trusted general. We have no day-to-day account of Alexander's condition at that time, although it must have been quite critical nonetheless, as it kept him pinned down for several weeks.

Another life-threatening experience was during his attack on the Malian town in India when Alexander was hit by a poisonous arrow while scaling the city wall. The soldiers had been slow to follow their king, exposing him to the full force of the enemy's attack. Alexander had to be carried away, and for three days, he fought between life and death. At the cost of enormous superhuman efforts, he eventually showed himself to his troops and even hoisted his battered body on the back of a horse to prove to them he was still alive. No day-to-day account of his eating and drinking patterns has been recorded, and none of the worries and treatments by his doctor have been documented. All we know is that he floated down the Indus in full view of his men. He needed much rest to help the healing process, but the march to the mouth of the Indus went on as planned.

So, why this detailed list of activities in Babylon? If Alexander had been straightforwardly sick, there was no need to document his eating, drinking, or sleeping patterns during the days preceding his death.

The question that arises more often than not is, was Alexander poisoned? Attempts to take his life had occurred before. The first one mentioned in our sources is Philotas' attempt to at least cover up the plot to kill Alexander in 330 BC. In Central Asia, the king survived the Pages' conspiracy, said to be planned by Callisthenes. There may have been more attempts to take his life that are not necessarily recorded, and the next occasion may have arisen here in Babylon.

If Alexander was indeed poisoned, which I doubt, then Hephaistion would have died of poisoning also. Had his dear friend still been alive, the murderer(s) would have had less chance and could expect the full wrath of Hephaistion? He was not only Alexander's most intimate and dearest friend but also the second-in-command, the only one ever to be promoted to the title Chiliarch and, as such, the obvious person to replace and take over from Alexander. Many people must have envied his privileged position.

With Hephaistion no longer in the way, the main question is, however, who would or could benefit from eliminating the king? It is not only about killing Alexander but also about providing a good and approved replacement. So, who would be eligible? Not Ptolemy, since he withdrew soon enough to his beloved Egypt and didn't interfere much in succession. Not Nearchus, who was happy to keep his admiralship of the navy. Not Peucestas, who made an effort to learn the Persian language and must have been quite happy in his role as satrap. Not Seleucos, who had married the daughter of Spitamenes – the only marriage that survived the big Susa wedding. Not Eumenes, who faithfully served King Philip and Alexander as secretary and archivist for years. Not Craterus, who was halfway to Macedonia with strict orders to replace Antipater. According to some sources, Antipater has been named as a possible beneficiary, as he sent his son Cassander to Babylon in his place, carrying a very potent poison. If so, the poison was not very potent since it took Alexander almost ten days to die. Besides, Antipater did not hold Cassander in high esteem, for he did not allow him to recline with his guests during the Symposia but had to sit like a little boy on a chair at the end of his father's couch. When Antipater died, Polyperchon was appointed as his successor and not his own flesh and blood. That tells enough. Perdiccas may be a suspect as he helped Roxane poison Alexander's Persian wives after the king's death, but that may be simply because he was still a Macedonian in heart and soul. Besides, in my honest opinion, I think he was far too loyal to Alexander to harm him in any way.

Cassander, however, may have acted on his own, seizing the opportunity of being delegated to Babylon. Not impossible. Although he had shared the early years at Mieza with Alexander and his Companions, he stayed behind when Alexander went east, probably as persona non grata. He must have resented this denial. Fueled by his father's attitude, he developed a deep grudge against Alexander and his clique. Life at the Babylonian court was totally alien to Cassander. He cannot have operated without inside help, possibly that of his younger brother Iollas, one of the king's Pages. All this is based on speculations, although eight years later, Olympias accuses Cassander of murdering her son – perhaps not entirely unfounded.

At the time of Alexander's death, all of Alexander's Bodyguards and other powerful men like Aristonous, Leonnatus, Lysimachos, Meleager, Pytho, Stasanor, Asander, Olcias, Philip the physician, and Peithon were present in Babylon. Still, none of them really stood out to replace Alexander. If we follow Pseudo-Callisthenes, only Ptolemy, Perdiccas, Peucestas, Lysimachos, Asander, and Olcias are beyond suspicion. Whatever the plan, either it was ill-conceived, or whoever was supposed to gain from it was facing unexpected opposition from the other contenders. After all, the Succession War lasted almost forty years, and even the rising star of Antigonus Monophthalmus only made waves many years later.

Suppose Alexander had indeed been killed with poison without involving his Bodyguards and his other faithful generals (I cannot imagine they were not). Why don't we hear anything about an investigation to find the culprit? This was certainly the case when Philotas' plot was discovered and after the Pages' conspiracy. These were, of course, led or instigated by Alexander. Still, in his absence, the army certainly expected that much from their commanders, and there was no way anyone could avoid the Macedonian legal machine.

Another possible cause of Alexander's death could be his excessive drinking, which would immediately make any investigation superfluous. The heavy drinking is at least what the Royal Diaries, in all their elaborate details, want us to believe. However, some twenty-five years after the facts, Aristobulus casually remarks that Alexander sat for hours over his wine for conversation. The drinking theory, however, has been widely developed in the Alexander Romance. On one such occasion, Alexander is spending a drinking night with twenty other guests, toasting to their health in turn with unmixed wine, creating the ideal circumstances for the poisoning theory. But as we know, the Alexander Romance must be taken with a large pinch of salt, maybe a shovel full.

Less often highlighted but genuine are the prophecies made by the Chaldean diviners who advised Alexander not to enter Babylon. Their warning was recorded on cuneiform tablets and predicted Alexander's death in these words "When in the month Ajaru, during the evening watch, the moon eclipses, the king will die. The sons of the king will vie for the throne of their father, but will not sit on it" (see: Alexander the Great and the Magi). Alexander is not mentioned by name, just as "king." We no longer believe in prophecies in our modern world, but maybe we should. After all, facts and figures do not explain everything.

Alexander dying of exhaustion and the consequences of his near-fatal wound in India is not a heroic way to end his life, which evolved between myths and reality from the beginning. But why did he not name his successors if he was suffering from his chest wound? Was he hoping and waiting for Roxane to give birth to a boy? His Persian wife, Stateira, is also said to be pregnant, meaning that it was not beyond reason for Alexander to want to live long enough to see his heir(s). Another possibility is that he was in denial and did not take his declining health seriously, which is very much unlike Alexander. His succession, I think, was a problem even for him. He was surrounded by capable men and generals, but none had the vision of his greater world. The only one who ever shared that insight with him was Hephaistion, and he was dead.

When Alexander gave his signet ring on his deathbed to "the strongest," he may have meant just that: the man who would be strong enough to keep his empire together, but they had to work it out for themselves. A poor legacy, one may say, but under the circumstances, this was the best he could do, for even had he indeed named Perdiccas, as some sources pretend, he probably lacked the capabilities and vision to pursue Alexander's goals. Well, time has given us the answer, and Alexander was right one last time.

The Philotas Affair – Part II – His judgment and execution

(Continued from The Philotas Affair – Part I – How the plot was revealed)

The following morning, all soldiers are called to assemble under arms. The corpse of Dymnus is brought in, although out of sight of the army, and finally, Alexander appears with a grave and sad look on his face. This is no small matter. He has to conduct the investigation and present the case before his Macedonians, following the prevailing laws. Alexander’s speech is worthy of any plea held by the most accomplished lawyer – a masterpiece in the art of rhetoric (see: Alexander’s eloquence).

He starts by telling his soldiers how closely he escaped death. He shares his deep sorrow at having fallen victim to a conspiracy led by Parmenion, the eldest of his friends who enjoyed so many favors and so much prestige. His tool was his own son, Philotas, together with Peucolaüs and Demetrius, and Dymnus, whose body is then made visible to the crowd. Laments and sounds of indignation arise.

At this point, the informants Nicomachus and Cebalinus, together with Metron, are brought forward, and Alexander praises them for their courage as they go straight to his tent to warn him of the conspiracy. Philotas in an effort to keep the matter quiet, must have had good reasons to do so, Alexander says. He then reads aloud a letter Parmenion had sent to his sons, Nicanor and Philotas, and which Alexander had intercepted. In this letter, Parmenion advised them to look out for themselves, “for thus we shall accomplish what we have planned”. A sentence that had no meaning would have had the conspiracy not been disclosed. Alexander takes his plea a step further by confiding his hitherto personal skepticism about Philotas who had joined Amyntas (Alexander’s uncle who was under age when his father was killed on the battlefield, upon which Philip was chosen as Macedonia’s new king; with Philip’s death he could have claimed the throne) to make an impious plot against his life. He tells his soldiers how these acts have torn him apart, working on their sentiments.

Alexander proceeds by reminding his troops that he had put Philotas in command of his elite cavalry, entrusting his life, his hopes, and his victories to him. He had elected his father, Parmenion, to rule over Media with all its richness, a position that demanded integrity and respect for his king. Now his trust had been broken as he had fallen victim to such a shameful scheme!

We should remember that at this time, Parmenion is in Ecbatana, holding the army’s supply line and guarding the huge treasury reaped from the Persian cities of Susa, Persepolis, and Pasargadae with a number of troops that equaled Alexander’s own manpower. Parmenion enjoyed great prestige while he served under Philip and led Alexander’s left wing in many decisive battles at the head of the foreign cavalry and mercenaries. It is obvious that an uprising or a coup led by Parmenion would have colossal consequences for Alexander!

Philotas is then brought forward with his hands tied behind his back to stand trial before the army. One can imagine the reaction of the Macedonians who had seen this great general having dinner with the king only the night before, standing there as a wretched prisoner. Sensing that the army started to feel sorry for Philotas, General Amyntas held a harsh speech against the culprit, followed by Coenus, who spoke even more vehemently, accusing him of being a traitor to the king, his country, and the army.

The last person to speak was Philotas. Maybe he was dazed by the seriousness of the accusations, maybe he was truly weak after being questioned and/or tortured, and in any case, he burst into tears and fainted. When he was back on his feet, Alexander looked intently at him and reminded him that the Macedonians were about to pass judgment on him, upon which he left the assembly. Philotas is on his own now.

It is clear that Philotas also reaped the fruits of Aristotle’s teaching at Mieza, as his plea is as well constructed as Alexander’s. He starts working on the soldiers’ emotions right away by saying that it is easy to find words when innocent, but difficult for a wretched man as he stands before them in fetters. He cleverly highlights the fact that none of the conspirators has named him, neither Nicomachus nor Cebalinus, but despite that, the king believes him guilty and the leader of the conspiracy. Dymnus, when he confided in Nicomachus, named several men of great importance but left him out – how could that put him in charge?

In the depths of his own despair, Philotas presents his own defense by saying that he can only be found guilty for keeping silent about the matter when it was reported to him. Besides, Alexander pardoned him and gave him his right hand to restore their friendship. What made the king change his mind overnight? He, Philotas, went to bed and was awoken by his arrestors from a sound sleep, not the sleep of someone whose conscience is tormented. After all, the report about the plot was revealed by a young boy who could present no proof or witness of his information, hence he believed that it was a lovers’ quarrel. And, supposing that he was really guilty of conspiracy, why would he have concealed the information for two days when he could easily have killed Cebalinus right away? After speaking with him, he nevertheless had entered the royal tent alone wearing his sword, and yet he put off the deed?

His tone turns when he admits that he does not have the power of divination and pities those who have to live under a man who believes himself to be the son of Zeus – a serious hint towards Alexander’s latest godly descent, which he obviously resents. He recalls the letter that Parmenion had sent to Alexander in Tarsus, warning him that his doctor was ready to poison him with the potion to cure his illness – a warning Alexander ignored. So why would Alexander believe him when he announces the plot reported by Cebalinus? What should I have done, he asks the assembly, when the king both dismisses a warning and accuses me of not warning him?

But the assembled soldiers give vent to their frustration about Philotas' haughty conduct towards them and even accuse him of pretending not to speak or understand their very own Macedonian language. Tempers flare up high at this stage and they shout that the traitor deserves to be torn to pieces. At this crucial moment, Alexander reappears and adjourns the council to the next day.

Again, he meets with his friends, who recommend that Philotas should be stoned to death in compliance with Macedonian law. Maybe that would be too simple, who knows, for Hephaistion, Craterus, and Coenus want to get to the bottom of this affair and wish for a confession by torture. After they set out to execute the torture, Alexander waited for the outcome in his tent till late that night.

As the appropriate instruments are laid out, Philotas admits immediately that he planned the murder, too afraid, probably, to undergo the torture, but Craterus is not impressed. They use fire and whiplashes till Philotas can no longer endure the suffering and concedes to tell everything he knows.

Meanwhile, unrest arose among those Macedonians more or less closely related to Philotas, who feared for their lives as well. The commotion reaches the royal tent, and Alexander makes a proclamation by which he remits the law providing the punishment of those related to the guilty party.

After yet another plea, and to cut a long story short, Philotas confesses to the conspiracy. He even includes his father in the plan. Parmenion, being seventy years old, could not wait too long to take charge, and that is why they decided to promptly carry out the design. By now, the torturers agree that all their questions have been answered, and they return to Alexander, who issues the order for Philotas’ words to be made public the next day in his very presence.

Philotas is put to death, either stoned or speared, together with all those who had been named by Nicomachus. Parmenion had to be eliminated as well, and Alexander writes a letter to three generals in Parmenion’s entourage (Cleander, Sitalces, and Menides) with orders to put him to death.

Well, this is basically Curtius’ (probably dramatized) version of the facts, although it is not entirely shared by Arrian, Diodorus, and Plutarch. Their rendering of the conspiracy and the torture varies, and it is unclear whether Philotas was only guilty of negligence or merely ignored Cebalinus’ information in the hope that the plot would succeed, which would work in his favor. In any case, Curtius gives an excellent assessment of the general mood in the Macedonian camp that remained seriously divided after this.

To remember that this treachery was brought to a good end – at least for Alexander – Alexandria in Drangiana is renamed Alexandria Prophtasia, appropriately meaning “Anticipation” since Alexander anticipated the widespread consequences of the plot and acted before others could attack him.

[Pictures from Oliver Stone's movie Alexander are from Movie Screen Shots and The World of Alexander the Great]