Alexander the Great or not?

Some time ago, I saw that Christie’s offered a Hellenistic terracotta statue for sale representing Alexander the Great or one of his successors. Unfortunately, the link is no longer available for this story was quite interesting. This approximately 60 cm high statue has been dated to the late 4th-early 3rd century B.C. and might have served as a model for a large-scale bronze.

What I found so special about this statue, is that it was dressed in the short Greek chlamys but also wore a loin cloth or “Persian Girdle” underneath. I have never seen anything like this before, or maybe I never paid attention but … a Persian Girdle? A few days later, as I was watching the movie “Alexander” for the 100th time or so, it stroke me that Alexander and his companions wore a similar girdle when arriving in Babylon and exploring the Royal Palace! Alexander’s girdle was a golden one and the others wore red. I was absolutely flabbergasted. I thought I knew the movie by heart but this detail had eluded me all this time. Where had Oliver Stone found the very reference or idea? I went through “The Making of Alexander” with all the advice given by Robin Lane Fox but couldn’t find any information. Anyone out there with some good idea? Please let me know.

Now coming back to the terracotta statue at Christie’s, some lucky collector bought it for several thousands of dollars. Some people have all the luck, it seems for Christie's doesn't even allow the very picture of this statue to be published. Sorry folks!

It goes without saying that Christie’s did a good job analyzing the statue. Alexander or whoever it may be stands in the classical pose resting on his left leg and with a stretched left arm that might have held a lance. It is rather detailed with the chlamys draped over his shoulders and pinned down on the right shoulder, exposing the right side of his torso and the famous girdle. He wears comfortable short ankle boots. His head is slightly turned to the right, the curly hair with the characteristic anastole held in place with a headband. All in all, a lean and muscular figure that creates enough confusion to debate whether or not this is Alexander the Great.

Personally, I find there is something wrong with the proportions, but it may be that the ultimate statue had to fit in some niche or was meant to be put up high above eye level. Looking him straight in the face I could recognize some features that would fit Alexander, but not when seen in profile. But then I wonder who among his generals would wear a Persian girdle underneath his chlamys. The only one I could think of is Seleucos… who else?

Funeral Games by Mary Renault

Funeral Games (ISBN 0-375-71419-7) is the third novel Mary Renault wrote, after Fire from Heaven and The Persian Boy – the first about Alexander’s boyhood and the second about his Asian conquests till his untimely death in 323 B.C.

As is generally the case in any trilogy, this book is the least appealing, not only because the hero, Alexander, is no longer the red thread running through the pages, but mainly because it does not add anything to the character of Alexander. What he left to posterity right after his death was only a void that nobody knew how to fill. Alexander’s legacy in the long term is enormous. It is the kind of ripple mark effect that has not yet come to a standstill. We owe Hellenism to him and our entire Western culture to Hellenism and, thus, to Alexander.

The story starts right after Alexander died in Babylon, and the disbelief and bickering of his generals. Nobody knows what to do; each general pretends to know best but is utterly incapable of taking full charge. Ultimately, they agree to give the kingship to Alexander’s simple-minded half-brother Arrhidaeus, pending the outcome of Roxane’s pregnancy, not knowing whether it will be a boy. But even when the boy is born and is appropriately given the name of Alexander IV, the leadership of Alexander’s empire continues to fall apart.

The leading figure in the Wars of the Diadochi events around the succession is played in Mary’s novel by Eurydice, who was betrothed to Arrhidaeus, who took the title of King Philip III. Eurydice was the daughter of Amyntas, son of King Perdiccas III, and the elder brother of Philip II. Since Amyntas was only an infant when Perdiccas died, the throne went to Philip, Perdiccas’ younger brother. If the person of Eurydice really existed as painted by Mary is a possibility, not a historical fact. It makes for good reading and navigates us through the plots and envy that ruled the forty years after Alexander’s death.

I find this a sad story, not only because Alexander is no longer in the picture but because of the intrigues between the great men surrounding him and the disintegration of all he stood for. In her comments, Mary remarks that Macedonia returned to the feudal way of life from before King Philip’s time, i.e., the only way it knew how to survive. I think she pointed to the sore spot there. It took the world eons to recover, and in my eyes, Macedonia sadly never recovered.

Anyway, one should read this book to make the story complete, but I find it much less than Mary’s two previous novels, which are absolutely superb.

Also available as an e-Book.

The Persian Boy by Mary Renault

After Fire from Heaven, one would automatically expect Mary Renault to write a sequel to the years of young Alexander, and she did, yet in a most unexpected way. Instead of picking up the story of Alexander when he leaves for Asia, she skips over right to the heart of Persia from where his conquests are followed from afar by a eunuch called Bagoas, The Persian Boy (ISBN 0394751019). In fact she starts the book telling Bagoas’ life from the very beginning, making it an interesting reading on castration and the general role of eunuchs in that part of the world.

I know many people read this book for that purpose only or for what we call nowadays a homosexual relation. In ancient Greece neither the word nor the concept were known. Sex was simply sex without the fringes and the constraints that Christianity and other religions brought forward. It may be useful to point out here that in antiquity eunuchs were not only slaves serving the pleasure of their master, but that they also could occupy high placed positions often that of a valuable “contact person”. As a simple example, I’m thinking of another eunuch Bagoas (often mentioned more elegantly as Vizier) who assassinated King Artaxerxes III to rule himself through puppet kings – a proof, if needed, of the power some eunuchs could acquire. If we believe Andrew Chugg in his book Alexander’s Lovers (and there is no reason not to believe him) our Persian Boy may well have acted as special envoy or master of ceremony at Alexander’s Persian Court since he was familiar with all the finesses of the Persian protocol.

Whatever the reader’s opinion on this matter, to me Mary Renault’s book is about Alexander the Great. Bagoas is brought to him as a gift by Nabarzanes who in exchange is hoping to be looked upon mildly by this new ruler since he was closely involved in the murder of King Darius in Parthia in the year 330 BC.

I marvel at Mary’s dexterity in comparing and differentiating Persian customs from the Macedonian ones, as Bagoas discovers this new world around him. In his eyes, the Macedonians are perceived as Barbarians with their lack of respect for the person of the king as initial focal point and their overall lack of social graces. For us Westerners, as we have been raised with the concept that our civilization started in Greece, it comes as a surprise to learn that there is an other version to the story – in this case to history, for here we are looking towards the West from the East. It is quite interesting to witness Alexander’s eagerness to learn, which I think is a very honest and true trait of his character, but also the subtle and styled way in which Bagoas is introducing his master to Persia – a land that must have looked to the new conquerors like the New World to our Pilgrim Fathers setting sail for the Americas.

Unlike in Fire from Heaven, this book is no longer focusing exclusively on Alexander’s relationship with Hephaistion, which by the way takes another dimension as both men become more mature, but as can be expected on his relationship with Bagoas. Yet Mary Renault manages to keep up with Alexander’s campaigns as he marches on over the Hindu Kush to Bactria, crossing India’s wide streams and ultimately the death march through the Gedrosian Desert back to Babylon. The daily events become all very personal and make the reader very much part of life in and around the royal tent. It is fascinating to look on to the battles and the internal conflicts from the sideline where Bagoas keeps himself without losing the context of all the historic events as they occur. Their description is so vivid that you can almost taste the dust and feel the cold!

A true masterpiece, worthy of Mary Renault. I would even add worthy of Alexander the Great.

Also available as e-Book

Alexander's Lovers by Andrew Michael Chugg

Yes, I got all excited reading Alexander's Lovers (ISBN 1411699602), not because of some spicy details about Alexander’s intimate life, but the way Chugg consulted all the available ancient bits and pieces of lost chronicles besides the more complete works of Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus, Curtius, etc, and he also takes the viewpoints and critics of today’s writers in consideration. He is a very analytical writer as I found out reading about his search for The Lost Tomb of Alexander the Great and he really can deliver his story.

He starts off with a concise biography of Alexander the Great and concludes with a short epilogue about the fate of his family.

The essence of the book covers all the people Alexander established a personal and private relation with: Hephaistion, Bagoas, Barsine, Roxane, Stateira and Parysatis, even the Queen of Amazons and Massaga. Chugg’s deductions and conclusions are his own, of course, but they shed an entirely new light on the personalities of Hephaistion and Bagoas in particular. We will never know for sure how great a man Alexander’s closest friend and probable lover Hephaistion was, but I am convinced there is more unsaid than told about his personal and professional achievements. As to Bagoas, very little is known about the role eunuchs played in antiquity for the only picture we have is that of harem stories during the Ottoman Empire and even those pictures have been erroneously interpreted.

I read this book from cover to cover, and relished on Chugg’s detailed and thorough research of the available sources. It is absolutely worthwhile and a must for any fan of Alexander the Great!

Also available as an eBook (ASIN: B007OXZU60)

The Lost Tomb of Alexander the Great by Andrew Chugg

Had "The Lost Tomb of Alexander the Great" (ISBN1-902699-62-9) by Andrew Michael Chugg not been on sale, I would not have bought it, for I think it is quite absurd to be looking for Alexander’s tomb in the first place. It is a needle in a haystack, and your guess is as good as mine. However, as I read on, I became impressed by Chugg’s systematic way of handling this subject, and I don’t regret my purchase.

Chugg has done a lot of research, not only among the writers from antiquity but also from the times of Christian and Islamic occupation in Alexandria, and from the days of French and English explorations and digs.

He starts picking up the trail of Alexander’s body to Egypt and his entombment in Memphis, followed by the transfer to Alexandria. Then he tries to figure out the layout of old Alexandria, including the harbor, the Pharos (lighthouse), the Library, and evidently the Royal Palace, including the Soma where Alexander's body was deposed. Follows a list of all those who have seen Alexander the Great, including Julius Caesar, of course, or those who have written about these visits. With the rise of Christianity and later Islam, facts become vaguer, and most recordings are ‘hearsay’. He keeps looking for the remains of the Royal Palace and the Soma and those of Alexander’s Tomb and his body throughout the centuries.

The book is stuffed with pictures, drawings, and maps, allowing you to follow his explanations and to make up your own mind, which I like. Most interesting is the overlaid map of Mahmoud Bey el-Falaki, who thoroughly investigated Alexandria in 1865-66, looking for whatever remains he could find.

The conclusion of Andrew Michael Chugg is that Alexander’s body may very well have survived all the odds and that we should look for it … in Venice, Italy. I’ll tell you no more. Find out for yourself and follow this author's argumentation step by step.

It reads like a thriller, no less.

Alexander’s Macedonian soldiers – short of memory?



Ian Worthington definitely is an authority when it comes to writing about Alexander the Great and everything around him. I just got another proof of his thorough and detailed work with his book Philip II of Macedonia. My comments and critics have been published earlier on this blog, but I just came across some highly interesting aspects of Philip’s tactics.

This is the year 345 BC when Philip has been King of Macedonia for fourteen years and just crushed down the n’th Illyrian revolt. His reign seems to be an endless struggle campaigning year after year against the stubborn tribes along his frontiers, who seem to be in a constant state of war. According to the tone of Justin’s report, Philip is utterly fed up by the Illyrian’s repeated rebellion and his patience has run out.

He has decided to act on this once and for all by moving entire groups of population from one end of his Macedonian Empire to the other (Ataturk didn’t invent anything new, did he?). In the process, he erases whole towns to build others at choice locations. Justin compares this transpopulation to a goat herder moving his flock from summer to winter pastures, but Philip’s resettlement plans are far from random or fickle. On the contrary, his move is carefully planned. He transplants entire cities and peoples from and to regions that need to be populated or depopulated – like playing a huge game of chess. There is no panic. We see no marching soldiers, no plundering, no abduction or rape, but a silent exodus of frightened people compelled to leave their homes and fatherland for ever. Some tribes are being resettled on his borders to serve as a bulwark against possible enemy invasions, others populate military colonies at the far edges of Macedonia, while others still, prisoners-of-war, are being fanned out to populate his cities. This is Philip’s way to consolidate his kingdom, creating one people out of this entire cocktail of hot-headed clans and tribes. This is how cities like Astraea, Dobera, Kellion and Melitousa on the Illyrian border, or Kavadarci (Tikvetch) in Paeonia are born; and how the newly acquired lands of Chalcidice that became vacant after the fall of Olynthus are now occupied by Macedonians to safeguard Philip’s upcoming expansion campaign to the east. None of his subjects will have taken this in gratitude, but they had no choice for Philip ruled with an iron fist. For all we know, his subjects were utterly frightened, afraid that worse might happen to them if they showed any sign of disagreement.

By now, Alexander is a young lad of eleven years old, and this entire operation cannot have escaped his attention for years later after having killed his last enemy in the faraway lands of Bactria, he does exactly the same and herds all the loose tribes together into new cities, often strongholds or forts, where at the same time he settles his veterans no longer apt for service.

But returning to Philip, and this is where I’m getting excited, I read that these new cities served at the same time as military training grounds where the local and imported young boys could be initiated to Macedonian tactics and weaponry. While defending the borders of their local area, they would acquire enough experience to join Philip’s pool of first-class soldiers. With his farsighted vision, Philip also orders to drain the swampy terrains to provide more land for agriculture, while some pasturelands are converted to arable farming. He builds dikes to keep rivers and canals in their bedding, and even constructs roads that would be available under all weather conditions. Macedonia’s economy is booming. Typically, the majority of these projects are being executed by the army, which becomes highly experienced in all engineering tasks – a huge asset during Philip’s later campaigns. And, of course, Alexander the Great was to benefit largely from this during his own march east.

What really catches my attention is the intertwining of all these different tribes, originally all different peoples. No comments about the effect of this melting pot have reached us; maybe nobody criticized Philip’s action or dared do so. Only Athens could have complained, and Demosthenes certainly hasn’t missed any occasion, but after all Athens was happy as long as Philip stayed out of their way. So here I find myself confronted with the question why the Macedonian soldiers in Alexander’s army didn’t accept his initiative of training young Persian boys to include them in the army. After all, Alexander did exactly what his father had done before him, only on a larger scale for the Illyrians and the Thracians were as strange to Philip’s soldiers as the Persians were to Alexander’s. It is no surprise that the Macedonians could not share or understand Alexander’s visions; even today, many scholars scratch their head over the reasons and true circumstances of Alexander’s actions, but what role did historians truly play? Maybe already in antiquity? Were the Macedonians so short of memory that they forgot their earlier acceptance of Philip’s policy, or is there more to the story? Was Philip such an autocrat that nobody could or dared to contradict? Was Alexander too young in the eyes of his men to impose such a drastic intrusion from what they saw as outsiders? Or was it simply Alexander’s genius they couldn’t grasp and which still disturbs scholars today? Who will tell?

Bronze Statue of Alexander for sale?

Believe it or nor, a beautiful bronze statue of Alexander the Great has been offered for sale. An original work from the 4th century BC, 65 cm high, exactly the size that would fit in any of our living rooms, wouldn’t it? All it takes is finding the asking price of seven million euro. Who wouldn’t be interested?

[photo Associated Press]

Well, in this case, the Thessaloniki police were interested first as it arrested two men near the town of Kavala who were trying to sell this statue for about a year. Among other artifacts, police also found two bronze heads of a boy and a young man, for which the suspects asked between 4 and 6 million euros. In comparison, Alexander was a cheap giveaway.

According to the information gathered by Costas Kantouris, writer for Associated Press, the Alexander statue appears to come from the workshop of Lysippos, nobody less than Alexander’s dedicated sculptor. Further tests at the Thessaloniki Archaeological Museum will confirm if this is an original or a contemporary copy, as Lysippos’ workshop must have produced many copies of the master’s work. As far as the boy’s head is concerned, they suggest that it was part of a larger Roman sculpture dating back to the 1st century BC.

Unfortunately, there is little or no information about the origin of the artifacts, although Turkey seems to be a plausible source.

Useless to add that I am totally flabbergasted. There are not too many statues of Alexander the Great around; we mainly have heads, and even those are pretty much damaged one way or another. The bronze statues of Alexander I know of are small ones and are not too convincing about their likeness, except the one at the British Museum (see my heading) of course, but look at this one! Any Alexander fan will recognize the great man at first glance! Wow!

Fire from Heaven by Mary Renault



Fire from Heaven (ISBN 0582101344) was one of the very first books that I read on the subject of Alexander the Great, here depicted in his early years up to his accession to the throne of Macedonia. It is a novel, of course, but it is what we call a historic novel as the entire story is based on facts that have come to us through ancient writers. Consequently, the greater part of Alexander’s life is fiction and we should not look too closely at the details, but, all in all, Mary Renault manages to describe the décor and circumstances in which Alexander grew up with a great feeling of trueness since they are interwoven with historical facts.

Although Mary visited Greece only once in her life, she manages to describe the landscape and daily life very vividly and makes you feel part of the events. It is amazing to discover that she wrote this book when she was well into her sixties (1969), to be followed three years later by the controversial Persian Boy. In her later years, Mary Renault, to be pronounced as Ren-olt, managed to create her own Greek world based on what she read in ancient literature and the details she found in statues and on painted vases about all facets of life in those days.

Whether you know about Alexander or not, you witness a vivid and lively account of daily life in Macedonia in the fourth century BC and more specifically at the Royal Court. Both Alexander’s parents show themselves each with their own character, King Philip II the womanizer but highly successful warrior and leader of the peoples in and around Macedonia; Queen Olympias with her dark furies and mysterious Dionysus rites and very possessive of her son. We witness how Alexander struggles within himself with this heritage, but also how he finds comfort in Hephaistion’s unwavering trust and devoted friendship.

Historians have a tendency to shrug their shoulders and smile pathetically when you mention this book, but it is one of the rare occasions to come so close to what could have been Alexander’s true life in his early years. The only author from antiquity mentioning anything about his boyhood is Plutarch, all the others start with Alexander’s deeds after Philip’s murder when he became King of Macedonia and set out to conquer Asia. Based on the very scarce information available, the efforts of Mary Renault are even more recommendable.

Personally, I dare say that this story is very close to the truth – at least, that is my personal opinion. When I visited Pella for the first time many years ago, I had the feeling of a déjà vu thanks to her book. It was amazing to discover how skillfully she brought the ruins to life!

Also available as e-Book.

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 came 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?

Immortal Alexander the Great.

This is what I’ve been waiting for, the exhibition about Alexander the Great with artifacts from the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg! The dates are set, from 18 September 2010 till 18 March 2011 in Amsterdam. Make sure to take note!

Most of us will never get all the way to Russia, but Amsterdam is not so far away and can easily be reached by train, road and even by plane. I don’t know about you, but I’m terribly excited at the very thought of seeing all these gems for myself.

When Alexander left his homeland Macedonia in the spring of 334 B.C. he most probably didn’t know how far his conquests of the Persian Empire and other countries to the east would take him, not even in his wildest dreams. Needless to remind you that he left an everlasting impact on that part of the world, Persia, Afghanistan, Bactria, India, etc. There definitely was a world before Alexander, but more so after Alexander, and it is called Hellenism.

The recent exhibition in Mannheim already showed Alexander’s legacy in that part of the world, with the Buddhism in its wake. It is rather unexpected to find yourself confronted with a Greek heritage so far away from mainland Greece and so many centuries after Alexander’s conquests!

All the details about visiting hours, admission fees, guided tours and access information can be found at Immortal Alexander the Great. Enjoy!