Into the Land of Bones, Alexander the Great in Afghanistan

Into the Land of Bones, Alexander the Great in Afghanistan by Frank L. Holt. ISBN 0520279933. What a book! I even read it twice, for there is so much information in there that I couldn’t grasp it all at once.

  

The subtitle “Alexander the Great in Afghanistan” may sound a little confusing as that country did not exist in Alexander’s day, but the land and its people were very much the same. Frank Holt retells the story of Alexander’s conquests in the area. He projects them against the successive occupations by the English in the 19th century, by the Soviets in the 20th century, and by the Americans in this century. It turns out that all the armies and their leaders faced the same problems.

Alexander the Great spent three years campaigning in Bactria, as Afghanistan was called then, trying systematically to eliminate one warlord after another to see new warlords taking over behind his back as soon as he moved away. His fighting was the bloodiest ever, and he lost more men in these two years than he had since he left Macedonia seven years before.

Even the English got a taste of it when they went into the First Afghan War in 1838. Four years later, they had yet to reach their goal and only one European survived the disastrous expedition. The Second Afghan War was fought from 1878 to 1889, but the success of the British – like that of Alexander two thousand years earlier - was short-lived, and as General Roberts rightfully put it in those days: Afghanistan should be left alone.

This is quite a statement, but nobody listened. Nobody learned from Alexander’s experience (I will not call it a mistake, for what would have been right?), and nobody learned from the British either. The Soviets tried it in 1979 while the Americans entrusted the mujahideen warlords with their money and munitions for their bloody crusade. Eventually, the Afghans rebelled, the Soviets moved out, and the Taliban took over, bringing “law and order.” On 9/11, the world was taken by surprise, and another superpower landed in Afghanistan.

It is a unique experience to follow Frank Holt as he goes back and forth in time, considering Alexander’s options and scrutinizing his actions, comparing them to what the British and the Soviets did so many centuries later. The landscape has not changed, and the people have not changed. Its warlords still rule Afghanistan, and their subjects live on as they lived for centuries, attending their own business and mistrusting all foreign intrusion.

This book is as much the history of Alexander the Great as it is the history of more recent times, making it so captivating. It is definitely worth reading, although sad to realize that we have not learned anything over the past two and a half thousand years since Alexander fought there.

Also available as eBook

Seleucos Nicator, in the wake of Alexander

Here I was in Syria, visiting Apamea. The Cardo Maximus is at least two kilometers long, flanked by rows and rows of columns. Initially, there were 1200 of them, now about 400 still standing – an awe-inspiring view.

I hear that Seleucos (later called Seleucos Nicator, i.e., the Victorious) built this city and named it after his wife, Apame. During the mass wedding party that Alexander the Great organized in Susa in 324 B.C. as a symbolic fusion between east and west, between Macedonians and Persians, Apame, the daughter of Spitamenes the Bactrian, became Seleucos' bride. It seems to have been one of the few successful marriages, for she accompanied her husband on all his expeditions, even as far as India – even though traveling cannot have been very comfortable in those days.

For those who don't know, Seleucos was one of the generals in the army of Alexander the Great. Upon Alexander's death in 323 B.C., he and his fellow generals got caught up in a series of succession wars that went down into history as the Wars of the Diadochi. Those were very confusing times when every general tried to get the best or most prosperous tracts of land since Alexander had not appointed any successor (his son with Roxane, the later Alexander IV, was not born yet, and Heracles, his son with Barsine, was, in fact, a bastard son). The initial division of Alexander's Empire among his generals, in which Seleucos was appointed satrap of Babylon, lasted only a short time. Less than a year later, despite his best intentions, Perdiccas was murdered by his own generals, Seleucos, Peithon, and Antigenes, when he invaded Egypt. Ptolemy, retaining Egypt for himself, came to terms with the murderers by granting them, respectively, the provinces of Babylon, Media, and Susiana.

After that, Seleucos managed to stay more or less out of further conflicts and successive Diadochi Wars, and finally included Persia and Media in his conquests. He even made an alliance with King Chandragupta of India. The Diadochi Wars were over by now, but Alexander's generals' fierce fighting and endless greed were still causing more wars. Seleucos defeated Antigonus Monophthalmus in the Battle of Ipsus and killed Lysimachos on the battlefields of Lycia in 281 B.C. Soon afterward, Seleucos died too, assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunus, son of Ptolemy I of Egypt, at one time one of Alexander's generals. Brother in arms with Ptolemy for so many years, he is killed by his son in later life. How glorious can one's life be?

If Alexander could have foreseen his own untimely death, I'm sure he would have provided arrangements for his succession. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Yet, there certainly was no room in his mind for the constant wars and futile bloodshed that unfolded.

Between all this fighting and conniving, Seleucos still found time (and money) to expand and structure his Empire. After using Babylon as his kingdom's capital, he moved it to Antioch-on-the-Orontes, today's Antakya in Turkey. He was at ease in this part of the country that he built another marvelous city further inland (initially started by his rival and enemy Antigonus Monophthalmus). He called it Apamea in honor of his wife. It thus became one of his main cities. But he didn't stop there, of course. He also built Laudetia, now Lattakia, the Syrian port on the Mediterranean, which he named after his mother (to keep things in the family), and later on, he founded Seleucia-on-the-Euphrates (named after himself!) as his Empire by then reached from the Mediterranean all the way to the Indus! Alexander's example definitely was not lost on him.

Well, this is what the books have to say. Now I am finding myself in Syria, driving up to Apamea. The first thing I see is a high, flat-topped hill crowned with many towers connected with city walls – 16 km long, they say. Well, well,… The bus drives uphill and stops at the northern end of the Cardo Maximus, at the Antioch Gate, so I can walk down the road to the other end of the city. I'm immediately drawn to the Cardo with all those impressive columns, of course, but I can't help turning around to take a closer look at the rubble behind me, where the very gate is supposed to be. Now that's a surprise! A surprise I am the only one to notice, though, for this gate is Hellenistic! Once you have seen the Hellenistic towers in Perge (inside the Roman walls), you can't miss recognizing them even in ruins – like in Side and Sillyum, all in today's Turkey. And now I find them here, of all places! If ever I expected this! Seleucos had quite a master to follow in his footsteps!

Alexander's achievements did indeed leave an everlasting imprint on his entourage and on his generals. This is what the birth of Hellenism truly means. Even in his boldest and most daring dreams, Alexander the Great could not have envisaged this to happen. Still, it did – and this proves how Alexander has changed history in geography, economy, army tactics, and architecture! The Romans copied him, and so did the Persians, the Indians, the Italians of the Renaissance, the British with Christopher Wren – you just name it! Nothing was left unchanged; nothing was ever the same. As I often say, there was a time before Alexander and the world after Alexander. We owe him so much. We owe so much to his Hellenization!

Alexander never ceases to amaze me, for here again, I saw what he accomplished and instigated others to do so many years after his death! Isn't that amazing?

Alexander the Great and the Magi

What have they in common, you’ll ask. Well much more than you would expect, provided you allow yourself to think about Magi in general and not about The Magi from the Bible who followed their star to Bethlehem.

Magi were known as Wise Men from Mesopotamia, particularly famous around Babylon by their local name of Chaldeans, were reputed among others for their knowledge in astrology. In those days there was no distinction between astronomy and astrology, both forms of star observation went hand in hand. By studying and analyzing the celestial heavens, these Wise Men could, for instance, predict major events to important people. This knowledge was already mentioned by Herodotus in the 5th century B.C. who defined the Magi as a priestly caste from upper Mesopotamia.

The Magi we are familiar with, are the Three Wise Men who visited the Lord Jesus, but this fact is based on a simple and non-explicit quotation by the evangelist Matthew, who stated that they came from the east, which is evident geographically speaking, and brought expensive gifts of myrrh, frankincense and gold with them. Nowadays there is a discussion going on whether there were three Magi or more for Matthew only mentions three gifts, which has been interpreted as each Magi carrying one gift, while evidently there could have been ten or thirty of them offering these three gifts.

Now we all know that Alexander the Great always looked for his omens. So, when he was in Babylon in 331 B.C, he came into contact with these Magi, the Chaldeans as Arrian called them, i.e. the priests of Marduk or Bel, for “in all matters of religious ceremonial he [Alexander] took their advice, offering sacrifice to Bel in particular, according to their instructions”. Alexander even gave them the money and instructions to rebuild the famous Temple of Bel.

After his campaigns to the East, through what is now Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, Alexander returned to Babylon in 323 B.C. and was met by the Chaldeans outside the city walls. They advised him not to enter Babylon, as it was considered a bad omen. Arrian tells us this story “… Alexander, after crossing the Tigris, was met by some Wise Men of the Chaldeans, who drew him aside and begged him to go no further, because their god Bel had foretold that if he entered the city at that time it would prove fatal to him”. Plutarch relates a similar story in which Alexander got the news through his naval commander, Nearchus: “As he [Alexander] was upon his way to Babylon, Nearchus … came to tell him he had met with some Chaldean diviners, who had warned him against Alexander’s going thither”. Alexander complied but as time went by he lost his patience and decided to enter Babylon after all - his destiny was already sealed. It was written in the stars and Alexander died shortly afterwards in Babylon. The diviners must have known this but it remains a guess whether or not Alexander was fully aware that he would die if he ignored the warning.

By ancient writers, we usually refer to our western historians, but what about the literature in the East. There are, for instance, the Enuma Anu Enli records of celestial omens, which archaeologists have recovered from the Assyrian Library in Nineveh. The authors were Chaldeans, who left us tablets detailing the movements of the planets and how they disclosed the fate of mankind. These astronomers had the duty to warn authorities when they discovered that some major event was going to happen. They had done so before, for instance, at the approach of the decisive Battle at Gaugamela, that engaged Alexander the Great against King Darius III of Persia "The son of the king will become purified for the throne but will not take the throne. An intruder will come with the princes of the west; for eight years he will exercise kingship; he will conquer the enemy army; there will be abundance and riches on his path; he will continually pursue his enemies; and his luck will not run out."

Now among these tablets of Enuma Anu Enlil there is also one predicting Alexander’s death: "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."

It is plain to see that these Magi knew about births and deaths. Why then are we so reluctant to accept knowledge and proven facts reaching back thousands of years? Just because they have not been scientifically proven? Just because we look at these stories as tales from old times and naïve peoples? We still may learn so much from our past, if we simply would allow ourselves….

All this reminds me of a clay tablet at the British Museum in London that was found in Babylon, Iraq. It tells us about meteorological and astronomical phenomena that were observed on the 29th day of the lunar month (the second month) in the year 323-322 B.C. Written in cuneiform script, it is a record of the death of Alexander, although he is simply mentioned as “king”. No western record of that ultimate moment has survived so far. Here too we could make some effort to read more about our history through the available legacies in the east. Why should we pretend that our Roman, Greek or maybe Egyptian sources are the only reliable ones? The Magi are not part of a fable. Why are we willing to believe that they came all the way to Bethlehem to pay tribute to the King of the Jews but would not have been able to predict the life and death of Alexander the Great and that of other kings?

We still have a long way to go…

Alexander the Great exhibition in Mannheim

I am dying to share my Mannheim experience, where I visited the exhibition on Alexander the Great. It is one of the best I've ever seen; very well-planned and organized, with bilingual labels in English and German.

At the very entrance, I was immediately welcomed by an entire Alexander committee: the Alexander head from Munich, the one found at the Villa Hadriani now in Bad Homburg, the so-called Erbrach head from Berlin, the one from Alexandria now at the Glyptothek of Copenhagen, a small incense burner from Brussels which I never managed to see here (kept in the catacombs!), and the head from Dresden. A most gracious bronze of Alexander riding Bucephalos from Naples was found in Pompeii, surrounded by several bronze statuettes in typical Hellenistic pose, resting on his (lost) spear. Besides plaster copies of Aristotle and the Azara Hermes, there were plenty of Alexander coins, medals (including Philip and Olympias), a beautiful attic vase representing Achilles, some jewelry, etc. I spent at least a full hour in that first room alone!

When at last, I managed to let go of Alexander, I moved to the next room with several maps. Firstly, the world was known to Alexander through Aristotle with a reconstruction of the map by the geographer Hekataios, followed by maps of what the world looked like after Alexander’s conquests and maps by the Arabs in our early Middle Ages. Against the long wall, a huge map of Alexander’s conquests was mounted with push buttons for the location of the battlefields and the cities he built on his way east. Next to it, there was a kind of Google map tracing his steps while zooming in on the terrain here and there as he marched through mountains and valleys – very impressive!

Most exciting, though, was the 15-foot sarissa that visitors were allowed to handle. This is quite an experience, so heavy, so difficult to handle! I now could clearly see the joint halfway where the sarissa could be taken apart for transport and the counterweight butt at the bottom end with its sharp point. There were also two bronze helmets to try on. I never realized they had a leather lining, but then it was so evident that the soldiers could never have tolerated the steaming heat or blistering cold of the very metal on their heads, of course. I was very much surprised by the weight on my head, and the Macedonian helmet, although rather comfortable compared to the Pilos one, created a kind of resonance, a surround noise like an echo, and I wondered how deafening this must have been on the battlefield. Wow! A showcase at the far end then contained elements of the full armor with breastplate, different types of helmets (Phrygian, Chalcidicean, Greek, etc.); greaves, lead catapult stones, decorative elements from shields and horse harnesses including a round plate representing a war elephant worth of Porus, etc.

Inevitably, I was to come across the Alexander Mosaic, here as an oil painting by the Italian Michele Mastracchio, who created this scene shortly after its discovery in 1831. It may not be the best copy, but interestingly he filled in the blanks that are lost in the original scene.

The next section is about the Persian Empire, Foe, and Fascination – and how fascinating it was! The visitor is received by a lively Persian guard in glazed bricks from the Palace of Susa, and to the left is an amazing relief of an Achaemenid nobleman dating from the days of Darius I. Further, small items like Assyrian bracelets with animal heads, appliqués, and crowns in pure gold; an alabaster vase with an inscription in four languages (old Persian, Babylonian, Aramaic, and Greek) reading “Xerxes, the Great King”; a terracotta statue of a wealthy lady; clay tablets; several reliefs from Persepolis; a bronze cup inlaid with gold and silver figurines; cylinder seals; bronze bowls and libation cups; rythons inlaid with silver and gold; all wonderful pieces!

Then follows the subject “vision of the others”, i.e., how the Greeks saw the Persians and how the Persians perceived the Greeks. To me, this might well have been Alexander’s vision of the Persian Empire before he conquered it. From the Greeks’ point of view, we mainly see the Persian life depicted on the vases, while the Persians express their perception of the Greeks rather on coins and cylinder seals. And then there are the gift-takers from the reliefs on the walls of Persepolis.

In the adjacent room, Alexander arrives in Babylon. Very helpful is the large-scale model of the city along the Euphrates with the canal surrounding the city walls, the Procession Way that Alexander must have used, the many temples, and the Ziggurat with the Temple of Marduk/Bel. To give the visitor an idea of Babylon’s blue-glazed brick walls, there is a striding lion from the Museum of Vienna and a mythical griffon from the Museum of Berlin, a very select choice. Without the Chaldean priests, Babylon would not have been what it was. There is plenty of proof of their influence with the many clay tablets predicting the future, including those foretelling the outcome of the Battle at Gaugamela. But there are more tablets in cuneiform writing containing chronics, astronomical calendars, texts of law, tables of multiplication, mathematical problems with geometric drawing, and even a zodiac calendar with the stars! Then a series of terracotta heads, men, women, satyrs, musicians, and Eros figurines; and small terracotta statues in Greek tunics, except one wearing a Babylonian(!) robe. Last but not least, definite signs of truly Greek influence on a roof tile from the 3rd-2nd century BC and a frieze fragment probably pertaining to a theater built in Babylon many years after Alexander’s death, around 1st-2nd century AD. And don’t miss the tiny glass vases, which are said to be Parthian but look very Roman!

To show how Hellenism took over in the East, there are several good examples: a terracotta of Europe seated on a steer; limestone and terracotta statuettes of Heracles; a cylinder seal with a surprising Heracles; an alabaster lady in Greek tunica; a delicate marble Aphrodite from Dura Europos; medallions of a Parthian king (reminding me of Charlemagne) and a winged goddess; fragments of capitals, plaques, and metopes, all very Greek indeed.

Big surprise, a Chinese warrior – or isn’t it? I have to look twice at this larger-than-life-size figure that reminds me very much of the terracotta warrior found in the graves of X’ian. What is this doing here? Well, believe me, or not, it is a Parthian warrior found in the Temple of Shami, southwest Iran, dating back to the 1st century BC/1st century AD, and on loan from the Museum of Tehran. Well, well!

Coins, coins, and more coins! Alexander and his Seleucian successors knew how to make the economy boom. Striking here is the imitation of an Athenian tetradrachma from Bactria, representing Athena on one side and the owl on the reverse. It seems so out of place! And all this leads us to Alexander’s legacy in Bactria, the homeland of Roxane. Here we see two small cavalrymen, one bronze in Median dress and one gold in Kushan dress (the successors of the Greek-Bactrians). There is also a tiny Alexander who lost his horse, but it’s him for sure. The story goes that it was part of a miniature set imitating the life-size bronze group representing Alexander with the 34 men he lost at the Battle of the Granicus; the original was made by Lysippus and sent to Dion, where it stood till the Romans took it to Rome in 146 BC. Bactria would not be complete without examples of the finds from Ai-Khanoum, with many terracotta heads. From a later period, there are terracotta heads found at the Oxus Temple in what is now Tajikistan, a true mixture of Greek and Bactrian. One of the faces still carries fresh traits of paint, and it was as if I were looking at Osama Bin Laden, of all people! The same goes for the heads found in Khalchajan, amazingly real! Some statuettes are in bad condition, broken into a thousand pieces and lovingly restored, but they definitely show their Greek roots. Another showcase contains wonderful pieces of furniture made out of ivory with clear Hellenistic influences, as seen also in the remains of a sword and elements of a flute. More terracotta household items, inlaid stonework and vessels, jewelry in gilded silver and pure gold, glass vases and beakers as those found around Bagram, ceramics, and medallions with pure Greek goddesses and figurines. Through the Kushan dynasty, the influence is still very much alive till halfway through the 4th century AD. If only Alexander could have known this!

The exhibition ends with the subject “Buddhist art in Bactria and Gandhara” with several small pieces more Bactrian than Greek if you ask me. Still, the two Buddha statues are absolutely exquisite. There is also a smaller relief with scenes from Buddha’s life, where he is surrounded by figures in very Greek outfits. Here also, I find several heads of men and women in white limestone. The heads in the next showcase look very much alive as they are made of painted terracotta. They come from Kara-Tepe in Uzbekistan and are just a little smaller than life-size, but they show such expression that you wouldn’t be surprised to encounter them in today’s streets!

What I like less is the series of twelve drawings made by a certain Gerard de Lairesse around 1680 of Alexander’s triumphal entry in Babylon, or the huge majolica tiles composition of the famous Alexander Mosaic made at the explicit request of Emperor Friedrich Wilhelm in 1843 – both too idealistic to my taste. Even the artistic and refined miniatures of Alexander, illustrating medieval books on parchment and paper, do not appeal to me. It is like making a modern statue or a modern painting, stating that this is Alexander – no way!

This visit was so captivating that I went around three times, spending at least seven hours visiting the exhibition over two days. The audience here was amazingly quiet - even the tour guides spoke in a near whispering voice in order not to disturb, making the visit such an enjoyable one.

[Since I was not allowed to take pictures, my illustrations are just an indication of the artifacts that are exposed in Mannheim, yet they are very closely related]

Why Alexander the Great?

People repeatedly ask me: Why are you so interested in Alexander the Great? Why Alexander? What makes him so unique? As it sounds foolish to say, "I don't know," I seriously thought about the matter.

As can be expected, the answer is not simple. The same as when being asked, "Why do you love your wife or your husband?" There is no clear-cut reason; in fact, there are several or several combinations. So too when it comes to my friend, Alexander the Great, for I consider him a friend, someone I know intimately, although he lived two thousand three hundred years ago!

To say the least, he is a fascinating figure. We know his actions rather well from what has been written by ancient historians, but not his personality, which modern historians try to unravel to the bone sometimes, with the most absurd assumptions. In my mind, however, this is the most intriguing side that keeps me digging ever deeper.

I can't remember when or how exactly my passionate interest in Alexander the Great started. I may not have heard of him until my early years in high school, and that is about when I craved everything Greek and Roman.

The walls above my bed were filled with pictures from calendars showing remains of temples and theaters from all over the ancient world – I knew them by heart and still do.

Those were the days when Ben-Hur raced from one movie theater to the next, with me in his wake! I lost track of how many times I watched the movie. It was not only the story, but the setting, the landscapes, the chariots, the circus, the furniture, the ships and galleys, the uniforms and marches of the Roman soldiers, the hair-dresses and outfits of the ladies, the superb music by Miklos Rosza, etc. To me, it simply meant a trip back in time.

Alexander must have popped out somewhere amidst all those events, a hero if ever the world has seen one. Imagine a sixteen-year-old man receiving the seal of Macedonia from his father to rule the country in his absence. Imagine him again at twenty when his father is assassinated, and he has to take charge of Macedonia and all of Greece as well. Philip II was the Hegemon of all Greeks according to the treaty signed in Corinth a few years earlier. If Alexander wanted to walk in his father's footsteps, i.e., to free the Greek cities of Asia Minor from Persian rule, he needed that title. With it came the contributions from all the participating city-states, including more soldiers. Not even in those days would such a young lad be trusted by the elderly or the politicians, so Alexander had to prove himself. He marched his army north and south through Greece to show his competence with such zeal, speed, and victory that two years later, nobody doubted that he could invade Asia. This was planned by his father and approved by the members of the Corinthian League.

So, at twenty-two, Alexander left Macedonia, appointing his trusted general Antipater as regent. At the same time, he set out with an army of about 40,000 infantry and 5,000 cavalry to cross the Hellespont into Asia. The gods were with him all the way! The Persians didn't take Alexander seriously and did nothing to stop him from ferrying his army across. The first opposition happened in a lost corner of Asia Minor, on the banks of the River Granicus. Darius III, King of Persia, King of Kings, did not even bother to be present in person and delegated the attack to a mercenary, a Greek on top of that, called Memnon. Well, Memnon is defeated, and Alexander marches on, taking one city after another, one port after another, all along the coast of today's Turkey.

Amazingly, it takes King Darius more than a year before facing Alexander in person, this time at the tiny Pinarus River near Issus. The Persian army is enormous compared to the Macedonian, but it is outmaneuvered after the first minutes of the battle. Isn't that enough to trigger your interest, your respect, your admiration for this young man? Who is there today at twenty-three to boost such accomplishments, such leadership, and such audacity? How can I not admire such a personality?

King Darius panics and turns around, leaving the Issus' battlefield head over heels… shame on him! Two years later, both kings will meet again in decisive combat on Persian soil near Arbela, a place we know as Gaugamela. This really does the trick, as far as I'm concerned. It is a fight worthy of David and Goliath, where Alexander, with his 50,000 men, stands up against Darius' troops, the number of which may be exaggerated to 500,000 but must have counted at least 250,000 – five times more than Alexander's! The guts alone! The odds may have been against Alexander, but the gods were not, and here too, he is victorious as Darius once again flees into the backcountry. Tactically speaking, this battle was such a remarkable feat that it is still being taught at West Point Military Academy! And speaking of guts, do you realize that Alexander attacked an empire ten times bigger than his home country?

Well, that's about his campaigns. Alexander did much more than win battles. He took on the organization of the entire enterprise, working out the logistics and constantly moving his equipment and soldiers. Everyone looked up to him for guidance, for he was not a puppet king – far from it! His sheer spirit never ceases to amaze me. I read somewhere that he knew thousands of his soldiers by name. Imagine how that feels when the king knows you personally. The more reason for you to be motivated and do a proper job, as there is pride when he recognizes you among your comrades, knowing how well you fought. How inspiring this must have been! 

At the height of his power, his empire stretched from Greece to India and from Uzbekistan to Egypt. His army must have counted at least one hundred thousand men. One has to add the entire baggage train with its merchants, peddlers, blacksmiths, tailors, stone cutters, shipbuilders, entertainers, carpenters, cooks, masons, road builders, and whores. Alexander managed to take his dismantled ships and catapult towers with him on the road - he introduced the prefab concept eons before the word ever existed - so he could assemble them whenever needed! He moved this mass of people across scorching deserts like the Karakum and the Gedrosian, over snowcapped mountains like the Zagros and the Hindu Kush, and traversed swift-running rivers like the Euphrates and Tigris, the Oxus, and the Indus. I try to picture that crowd of soldiers, horses, followers, and equipment trudging through uncharted territories! It is mind-blowing!

Alexander took it upon himself to organize a form of government adapted to each and every country and people he conquered. He founded cities at strategic trade road crossings. We all know Alexandria in Egypt, but don't forget cities like Khodjend in Tajikistan, Kandahar, Herat, and Ai-Khanoum in Afghanistan, and Samarkand in Uzbekistan, to name just a handful – and those cities still exist and still prosper. His task was absolutely colossal, and he just did it! Of course, he had his generals, engineers, and craftsmen to assist him, but Alexander was the power behind it all! He decided where the city would be built, its layout, which veterans no longer fit for service would settle there, etc.

Alexander was also a visionary, one we would love to have around in our modern times! He welded the world into one country, for had he lived long enough, he would have conquered the Romans and the Carthaginians also. As part of that globalization (another modern concept, we think!), the king assimilated local gods to Greek gods and goddesses, making them recognizable to all. He stimulated intra-cultural marriages (after years away from home, all the Macedonian soldiers had children growing up all over Alexander's new empire). The young boys would receive a Greek education and be trained to join his army. Much to the critics and sorrow of his fellow Macedonians, he adopted specific "Persian ways" not only because the Persians expected that from their king, but that too was part of the fusion of cultures. 

The Macedonians were not ready to comprehend the vastness, the scale, or the grandeur of his conquests as Alexander did. He made excellent use of the dormant treasuries from the Persian Royal cities, minting vast amounts of gold, silver, and bronze coins. He paid his army lavishly, and the men spent the money as lavishly on all kinds of extravaganza and exotics. Trade flourished, and the economy was booming to a level unheard of before or after. The coins had Alexander's image stamped on them, and that was a relatively new concept, for until then, only gods were worthy of such a favor. Alexander's father, Philip II, was among the first to put his features on coinage, and now it was Alexander's turn. This started the habit of putting a king's image on coins, which we still do today! All over the empire, the Alexander coins were known and accepted. It was the dollar of antiquity! And we think we invented the single currency!

Finally, we must contemplate Alexander's legacy, i.e., the impact of Greek fashion, culture, and art on the occupied territories that went into history as the Hellenistic Period. Here it is that from Athens to the Indus, the official language was Greek and remained so for several hundred years until Islam took over and Arabic was introduced. Alexander built the cities according to the Greek pattern with right-angled streets, including familiar buildings like temples, gymnasiums, theaters, and stadiums. Alexander's love of games, sporting competitions, and theatrical contests with playwrights and actors traveling thousands of miles to join him is another tradition that has endured for centuries. Architects and sculptors introduced the Hellenistic style far into the East, and it is still very visible today, as in Buddha's features. And if you are familiar with the treasures of  Ai-Khanoum and Tillya-Tepe, which are still traveling the world with the exhibition on "Afghanistan: Hidden Treasures from the National Museum in Kabul," you know exactly what I mean!   [photo source: Musée Guimet]

Our world would not be what it is today had it not been for Alexander the Great. To me, history is simply divided into two periods: before Alexander and after Alexander, instead of splitting time up into BC and AD as we do in our Western world. Whether looking at city ruins, statues, jewelry, pottery, theatre plays, or ancient writers, I'll always place them in the time frame related to Alexander. It's either something that Alexander could have known or was familiar with, or it's something that he created and shaped in such a way that we can still benefit from it today.

No other man in history has had such an impact on the world as Alexander the Great. Some tried to copy him, like Caesar or Napoleon; others simply set out to conquer the world on their own, like Genghis Khan or the Chinese Emperor Qin, but nobody reached his high standards! Nobody ever will. That is why my life is so centered around Alexander, called the Great, and rightfully so.

Breathtaking, Alexander the Great at Gaugamela

I’m simply out of breath! I just watched, for the hundredth time or so, the Alexander Revisited DVD, which is much, much better than the movie that has been shown in theaters around the world. This DVD version is arranged by Oliver Stone the way he wanted it and starts off straight away with the Battle of Gaugamela. What a performance and what an achievement! I admire Oliver Stone’s eye for detail and how he uses all the information available from antiquity – a shame that most viewers don’t see this or don’t realize it.

As always, I sit here with my eyes wide open, afraid to miss the slightest movement or action in this battle of all battles! I witness how Alexander sets off to the far right with the cavalry in his wake, making sure that Bessus takes on the pursuit, luring him away from Darius. Shrouded in a cloud of dust, Alexander’s infantry moves along, hidden from the Persian eye, a magnificent maneuver. And then, when Alexander swings around to the left, heading straight for the center where Darius is standing, Bessus finds himself unexpectedly confronted with Alexander’s infantry! I believe that only few people notice this – a pity because this is a decisive moment of the battle. I always feel out of breath when all the fighting is finally over. It is a rather sudden and unexpected closure when Darius turns around and leaves the battlefield in panic. Alexander, much to his frustration, has to let him go because Parmenion’s left wing is crumbing down and needs his support. The climax is complete, even on the screen!

After this passage, I stop my DVD. I have to recover from my overwhelming emotions!

In the same context, I watched a program last week about Darius where the question was being raised why he fled from the Battlefield at Gaugamela (as he did at Issus, by the way). Historians generally agree that Darius was not a coward. He is being described as a competent leader who has been victorious in many previous fights, so why did he flee when facing Alexander? Well, watching my DVD tonight, I suddenly realized I found an answer to that question. The fact is that Alexander headed straight for Darius – he was attacking him personally! This was no longer an organized battle of one army against the other, neither was it a fight of Persians against Greeks/Macedonians, it was Alexander himself who attacked the Great King Darius, the King of Kings!

Just imagine how in the middle of all that commotion and dust with so much tension in the air, you are suddenly facing a wild screaming “Barbarian”, ready to cut you into pieces! The adrenaline in Alexander’s blood must have risen to peak level by now. How many men has he slain? How much blood has been shed? The frenzy of battle must have been complete and suddenly out that deafening roar of war appears a most striking figure with waving plumes on his helmet, looking at you with piercing eyes that you can feel before seeing them. There comes Alexander in person, charging at you, the King! That should be enough for any man to flee head over heals, wouldn’t it?

I am so excited by what is happening there and by my own unexpected conclusions that I have to take a break in watching the movie. I’ll have another look tomorrow or so. What a grand pitched battle! Isn’t this a splendid reenactment? And then there is the music that supports this battle and carries it to a climax, it keeps on resonating in my head! I have to catch my breath and come back to my senses before returning to Alexander!

[photographs from the movie Alexander]

Macedonian Warrior by Heckel and Jones

Macedonian Warrior, Alexander’s Elite Infantryman (ISBN 978-1841769509), is a highly informative account of this skilled entity of Alexander’s forces.

Heckel and Jones have made a praiseworthy effort to cover every aspect of infantrymen from the days of King Philip to training, campaigning, marching, and fighting along with the rest of the army that accompanied Alexander the Great for more than ten years. They tell about the enlistment of the men, their appearance and equipment (sarissa, shield, body armor), and the overall conditions of service, i.e., their pay, rewards, promotions, and punishments – not be taken lightly! Most interesting of all is to read about the phalanx, a formation that never failed Alexander. Fascinating to me anyway is the chapter about the splitting up of these infantrymen into pezhetairoi, asthetairoi, hypaspistai (regular hypaspists), argyraspids, hypaspistai basilikoi (royal hypaspists), taxeis and chiliarchia.

This is a relatively small booklet packed with an interesting analysis of every aspect of this force, with referrals to ancient writers and plenty of pictures and drawings to illustrate it all. In the back, we find an excellent glossary of Greek words as well as museums and websites for those who want to dig in further.

In short, a must for everyone interested in the campaigns of Alexander the Great.