In Search of the Lost Testament of Alexander the Great

by David Grant

  80.The lacuna would follow Arrian Events After Alexander 1.8 and before the reference to Roxane. Goralski (1989) pp 10-5 and Heckel (1988) p 61 for the relative satrapal references to Babylon; Photius’ epitomes of Arrian suggest these three sources clearly stated Seleucus inherited the governorship of Babylon at least. The confusion with detail from Triparadeisus is supported in Photius’ positioning Arrhidaeus in Hellespontine Phrygia.

  81.Compare this reconstruction with Diodorus 18.3.3-4 where Archon and Seleucus are mentioned in bordering sentences.

  82.Diodorus 18.3.1 and 18.14.4. At 18.12.1 Diodorus mistakenly named ‘Philotas’ as satrap of the region, but this is usually corrected to ‘Leonnatus.’ Also Arrian Events After Alexander 1.6, Dexippus 82,62B, Curtius 10.10.2, Justin 13.4.16. Photius’ epitome of Arrian Events After Alexander has Arrhidaeus in the region but presumably this is again mistaking or compressing the detail of his appointment at Triparadeisus.

  83.For Leonnatus’ decoration for saving Alexander’s life see Arrian 7.5.4-5.

  84.Leonnatus’ heritage discussed in Heckel (2006) p 147. Plutarch Eumenes 3.5 for Leonnatus’ bid to take the throne.

  85.Curtius 10.7.8 for recognition of Leonnatus’ royal stock and guardianship role, 10.7.20 for his cavalry command and 10.8.23 for a reiteration of the ‘two’ guardians of the king then in Babylon, the third being Meleager, by negotiation.

  86.Heckel (2006) p 150 suggests Leonnatus would have been ‘disappointed’ but goes no further. Many modern historians believe it was a manipulation by Perdiccas. Arrian 1.17.1-2, 1.25.2 for its governance by a son of Harpalus, Calas; Heckel (2006) pp 74-75 and footnote 163 for identity discussion.

  87.Leonnatus and Perdiccas are attested together in chasing Pausanias, Philip’s assassin; Diodorus 16.94.

  88.Arrian 2.12.2 for Balacrus, Arrian 1.17.1,2.4.1, Curtius 4.5.13 for Calas, Arrian 3.6.6 for Nearchus, Arrian 1.17.7 for Asander.

  89.Bithynia was ruled by Zipoetes who formally became king in 297 BCE; no conflict between him and the Macedonians is recorded. The Hellespontine Phrygia region may have still encompassed Bithynia, the Troad and Mysia, as it did after the conquests of Cyrus the Great, when Hellespontine Phrygia controlled the Asian shores of the Propontis from its capital at Dascylium.

  90.Bithynia is not mentioned as a separate territory at this point by the sources. Arrian Events After Alexander 1.37 for confirmation that Lycaonia fell within Antigonus’ mandate from outset.

  91.Plutarch Eumenes 3.3 for Antigonus’ rejection of Perdiccas’ orders. More below on how far east Eumenes governance might have reached.

  92.For Neoptolemus’ opposition see Plutarch Eumenes 5.4, Diodorus 18.29.4-5 and Arrian Events After Alexander 1.27. Quoting Plutarch Eumenes 4.1-2 for reference to Neoptolemus’ presence in Armenia and for his career, see discussion in Heckel (2006) p 174, and for Orontes, Heckel (2006) p 185 citing Dexippus’ corrupt epitome FGrH 100 F8 6 which stated Neoptolemus’ inherited Armenia. Heckel (1988) pp 61-63 for corruptions in satrapal and governor names. It remains unclear whether Orontes, the Armenian satrap under Darius III, ever made terms with Alexander, or whether the province remained unconquered. Orontes fought for Darius III at Gaugamela, see Arrian Anabasis 3.8.5. He escaped and is heard of next in 317 BCE back in Armenia as a friend of Peucestas, whom he may have met in Macedonia originally. See Diodorus 19.23.3. Armenia had not been conquered despite Alexander attempting to install Mithrines after the battle at Gaugamela; Diodorus 17.64.6, Curtius 5.1.44, Arrian 3.16.5. Neoptolemus’ appointment however in 323 BCE suggests plans were afoot for just that, as in Cappadocia. For later references to Orontes see Diodorus 19.23.3, Polyaenus 4.8.3. See Plutarch Eumenes 7.5-8, Diodorus 18.29.4 for the battle with Neoptolemus.

  93.Diodorus 19.23.1-4 for details of the ruse and see chapter titled The Tragic Triumvirate of Treachery and Oaths.

  94.Diodorus 19.57.1-3 for the envoys to Antigonus, also Justin 15.1.

  95.Diodorus 19.57.4 for Cassander’s incursion into Cappadocia. See chapter titled The Tragic Triumvirate of Treachery and Oaths for Antigonus’ possible planned invasion.

  96.Diodorus 18.43.1-2 clearly stated that Laomedon was removed from Coele-Syria, thus enabling Ptolemy to acquire Phoenicia too; reiterated at Justin 13.4. The Will references reinforce it. The Metz Epitome 117 and Romance 3.32 both have Meleager in Coele-Syria rather than all Syria.

  97.McGing (2010) p 98 for an example of Israel being cited as Coele-Syria.

  98.Diodorus 18.6.3 for the geographical digression referring to Syria. That Coele-Syria included Phoenicia is reiterated by Diodorus at 18.43.2.

  99.Arrian 3.8.6 and 5.25.5 as an example of ‘Mesopotamian Syria’ being referred to.

  100.Diodorus 17.64.5 for Menes’ appointment.

  101.Chapter titled Wills and Covenants in the Classical Mind for the Donation of Alexandria by Antony and Cleopatra.

  102.Plutarch Eumenes 3.6 stated Eumenes fled to Perdiccas but no location was given.

  103.Diodorus 18.23.4 for Antigonus’ flight; Plutarch Eumenes 4.1 for the suggestion that both he and Eumenes were together in Cilicia. Diodorus 18.44-45, 50.1 and 18.45.2-47.3 for Alcetas’ actions at Cretopolis and Termessus.

  104.Atkinson (2009) p 40 footnote 61 for Diodorus’ wording concerning the fate of the funeral bier.

  105.Diodorus 18.60.6 for Eumenes’ possession of Alexander’s throne, sceptre, weapons and insignia.

  106.Arrian Events after Alexander 1.43-45 for the seventy elephants left with Antigonus and Antipater keeping the remainder.

  107.Arrian Events After Alexander 1.28 for Perdiccas launching his campaign against Ptolemy from Damascus. Hill-Walton (1991) p 49 for description of the ancient network of roads converging on Damascus. Samaria was garrisoned or settled by Alexander after the siege of Gaza; Curtius 4.8.10. St Jerome Kronographia 1685 for its founding by Alexander and 1721 suggesting Perdiccas refounded it.

  108.Diodorus 20.47.5 translation from the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1954.

  109.Billows (1990) p 297 for Antigonus’ tenure.

  110.Strabo12.8.15 and Livy 38.13.5 for the founding of Apamea. Appian Syrian Wars 57 stated Seleucus Nikator named three cities after her; also Strabo 16.2.4. The Syrian tetrapolis consisted of Antioch, Apamea, Seleucia in Pieria and Laodicea.

  111.Diodorus 18.37.3-4 for Alcetas’ recovery of money from Tyre. Bellinger (1979) p 84 for the observation on Laomedon’s non-involvement.

  112.For Laomedon’s grant of Coele-Syria see Arrian Events After Alexander 1.5, Diodorus 18.3.1, Curtius 10.10.2, Justin 13.4.12, Appian Syrian Wars 52, Dexippus FGrH 100 F8 2. Appian Syrian Wars 52 for reference to the ‘buying’ of the satrapy. Diodorus 18.43.1-2 and Pausanias 1.6.4 for Ptolemy’s hostility. See temporal discussion in Wheatley (1995) pp 433-440. The likely date of Ptolemy’s annexation was 321 BCE and very shortly after the conference at Triparadeisus; Wheatley (1995) for dating discussion.

  113.See Wheatley (1995) p 437 for discussion of the lacuna after Diodorus 18.39.

  114.Diodorus 18.73-74 for Eumenes entering Phoenicia.

  115.Diodorus 19.57.1-2 for Ptolemy’s and Cassander’s envoy and demands to Antigonus.

  116.Arrian Events After Alexander 24.2, Justin 13.6.16 for Philoxenus’ installation by Perdiccas. He was reconfirmed at Triparadeisus: Diodorus 18.39.6, Arrian Events After Alexander 1.34. The ‘Mesopotamian Line’ is referred to in the Metz Epitome 117; for Aristonus’ possible role see chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers and Arrian Events After Alexander 24.6 for the Cyprus affair.

  117.Stewart (1993) pp 294-295, 297, 301 for analysis of the sarcophagus and description of the unarmed man being murdered, thought to be Perdiccas. For the panel on the Alexander Sarcophagus, and Arrhidaeus’ possible portrayal, see discussion by VA Troncoso in Carney-Ogden (2010) p 21 and footnote 53 and doubted in Heckel Sarcophagus (2006) pp 386-388.

  118.Arrian Events After Alexander 1.33 and Polyaenus 4.6.4 focused on money being the central grievance. Arrian Events After Ale
xander 1.33,1.39 for Attalus’ presence at Triparadeisus. Many scholars accept Attalus, the Perdiccan general that commanded the fleet supporting the Egyptian invasion, was present; he later failed to unite with Eumenes. That seems unlikely. He may have managed to send communications to Eurydice but as Alcetas had killed her mother, any Perdiccan support seems unlikely, especially with Peithon and Antigenes present, the murderers of Perdiccas.

  119.The dissatisfaction of Peithon, Seleucus and Antigenes refers to their murder of Perdiccas; discussed in chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers.

  120.Antipater would have benefited from the remnants of Leonnatus’ troops and those of Craterus that had either crossed from Cilicia to Thessaly, or remained in Cilicia.

  121.The similarity between Peithon and the ‘son of Agenor’ seems to have confused Diodorus, or a translator, when referencing Media. If Stasander and Stasanor were similarly confused, rather than strangely ‘swapping’ satrapies, they remained in place too. See further discussion in chapter titled The Silent Siegecraft of the Pamphleteers.

  122.Euripides from Plutarch Demetrius 14.1-3; Antigonus apparently quoted the line to his young son, Demetrius, whom he was encouraging to marry to the older Eurydice, widow of Ophellas of Cyrene and a descendent of the Athenian general Miltiades, for political gain. Apparently Antigonus substituted ‘wed’ for ‘serve’ when whispering the lines to Demetrius.

  123.Quoting Carney (1988) p 385.

  124.Quoting Green (2007) p 11. Blackwell (1999) for further discussion of their roles.

  125.The significance of the lack of patronymic observed and commented on in Carney-Ogden (2010) p 44; Finlay (1973) for the specific grain deliveries 76,000 Attic medimni to Olympias and 50,000 to Cleopatra. Hammond (1985) p 160 for Olympias’ prostates role. Bagnall-Derow (2004) pp 3-4 for the translated list of the grain shipments.

  126.Discussion on the roles of Olympias and Cleopatra in Epirus and Macedonia in Alexander’s final years in Carney (1988) pp 396-397, Blackwell (1999) pp 81-105, Anson (2013) p 35. Plutarch 68.11 went as far as stating Olympias and Cleopatra planned to take over Epirus and Macedonia from Antipater’s control. Diodorus 17.108.7 for Olympias’ involvement in the Harpalus affair. Blackwell (1999) p 86 for Cleopatra’s prostasia and pp 81-105 for full discussion on Olympias’ role and p 88 for the status of women in Epirus. Blackwell (1999) pp 89-91 for the grain shipments. For the death of Alexander Molossus see Justin 12.2.4 and Blackwell (1999) p 90 for Cleopatra’s office as thearodoch. Blackwell (1999) p 103 the possible greater autonomy of the Epirote League states. Anson (2013) p 21 for discussion on the sacral power vested in the Argead clan. Flower (1994) p 190 for evidence of the higher social status of Etruscan women. Carney (2006) pp 91-92 for Olympias’ stance on Dodona. Hammond (1985) p 156 and Thucydides 2.80.5 and the presidential role in Epirus.

  127.Diodorus 19.59.4 reported that Antipater valued Phila’s wisdom and consulted her on policy; she was charged with the defence of Cyprus late in Demetrius’ reign, Diodorus 19.67.1, and she acted as a diplomat for Demetrius to Cassander, Plutarch Demetrius 32.4. For Cratesipolis’ actions at Sicyon, see Diodorus 19.67 and 20.37, Polyaenus 8, Plutarch Demetrius 9. The roles of Phila, Cratesipolis, Cynnane and Olympias are discussed in Carney (1995) p 389. Diodorus 19.16.4-5 for Stratonice’s role in the sixteen-month siege that saw Docimus and Attalus finally captured, probably in Pisidia, though the location is not stated.

  128.Quoting from Bury-Barber-Bevan-Tarn (1923) p 11.

  129.Plutarch 39.11 implied Alexander warned Antipater that Olympias might be planning to kill him and that Alexander kept her away from state affairs.

  130.Quoting S Ruzicka in Carney-Ogden (2005) p 9.

  131.See Heckel (2006) p 90 for discussion of Cleopatra’s age. See Carney (1988) p 398 for Olympias and Cleopatra’s ability to provide offspring. She had two children by Alexander of Epirus according to Plutarch Pyrrhus 5.11: Cadmea and Neoptolemus.

  132.Following the logic of, and quoting, Carney (1988) p 399.

  133.Diodorus 20.37.3-4 for confirmation of her suitors. As Anson (2014) p 153 noted, any approach by Cassander must have been before he murdered Olympias in 315 BCE and thus before he married Thessalonice soon after.

  134.For Craterus’ delay in crossing to Greece see Heckel (2006) p 98 and footnote 258.

  135.Europa (or Caranus) was born just days before Philip died according to Athenaeus 13.557e in mid-summer 336 BCE according to Diodorus 17.2.3. According to Justin 9.7.12 she (or he) was murdered in her mother’s arms by Olympias who forced her mother to commit suicide by hanging, whilst Pausanias 8.7.5-7 claimed mother and daughter were burned in an oven or dragged over a brazier without Alexander’s approval; Plutarch 10.8 confirmed Alexander’s anger at treating her ‘savagely’. The sex of the baby and whether there were more than one is debated: see Musgrave (1991) p 7 footnote 23 for details and Lane Fox (2011) p 385. A full discussion on the significance of Alexander’s sisters is given in Heckel (1988) pp 55-59.

  136.Diodorus 20.37.5 confirmed Antigonus governor of Sardis had been instructed not to let Cleopatra leave.

  137.Diodorus 18.36.6 for Ptolemy being chosen as a guardian to the kings.

  138.Plutarch Demetrius 31.3-32.3 for a concise picture of the various intermarriages post-Ipsus. Ptolemy married Ptolemais to Demetrius Poliorketes (Plutarch Demetrius 32), Lysandra to Alexander V of Macedonia (Cassander’s youngest son by Thessalonice), Porphyry FGrH 695), Eirene to Eunostus king of Soli on Cyprus (Athenaeus 13.576e) and Arsinoe to Lysimachus (Pausanias 1.10.3); Carney-Ogden (2010) p 131 and footnote 63 for detail. Pyrrhus married Antigone, a daughter of Ptolemy, and Demetrius Poliorketes married Deidameia, a daughter of Aeacides, so Pyrrhus’ sister.

  139.Quoting Metz Epitome 115, also Romance 3.32.

  140.Following the argument of Anson (1992) p 39; this is contra Hammond (1985) p 158 who believed Olympias carried the title in Alexander’s absence.

  141.Quoting Bosworth A to A (1988) p 12. Diodorus 18.39.2; Arrian Events After Alexander 1.30-31 for Eurydice’s behaviour at Triparadeisus.

  142.Full discussion of the role of prostasia in Anson (1992).

  143.Arrian 6.30.3 for Peucestas’ ability to speak Persian.

  144.Plutarch 77.6-7 for the death of Stateira and Drypetis.

  145.Sisygambis allegedly died from self-imposed starvation five days after hearing of Alexander’s death, see Curtius 10.5.19-25, Diodorus 17.118.3, Justin 13.1.5; for the Vulgate depiction as Alexander’s second mother, Curtius 3.12.17, 5.2.22, Justin 13.1.5.

  146.Curtius 10.5.23 for Sisygambis’ reflections on the previous pogrom. For Ochus’ pogroms see Justin 10.1-10.3, Valerius Maximus 9.2.7.

  147.See Heckel (2006) p 181 for discussion. Ochus was left at Susa with Sisygambis and his sisters were never heard of again; see Curtius 5.2.17, Diodorus 17.67.1.

  148.Curtius 10.5.23 suggested Sisygambis lamented that she had only one remaining child alive.

  149.Plutarch Eumenes 19.1-2 for Eumenes’ children. Diodorus 19.35.5 for the daughters of Attalus; Heckel (2006) pp 276-277 for discussion (F38-39).

  150.Arrian 7.12.2 for Alexander’s refusal to let the Asiatic children be repatriated to Macedonia. This is reinforced by Diodorus 17.110.3 detailing the fund Alexander left for their upbringing and schooling.

  151.For Heracles’ link to Barsine see Diodorus 20.20.1, 20.28.1, Justin 11.10.3, Plutarch Eumenes 1.3, Curtius 10.6.11, 10.6.13, Justin 13.2.7, 15.2.3, Pausanias 9.7.2.

  152.Heracles’ authenticity discussed in Billows (1990) pp 140-141 citing the initial work by Tarn and Brunt. Also see Tarn (1948) p 330 relating to his earlier article: Tarn (1921). Whereas Errington (1970) p 74 and Brunt (1975) pp 22-34 accepts the child could have been legitimate, Pearson (1960) p 117, Jacoby, Berve, Beloch and Hamilton concluded he was an imposter. Tarn dismisses the boy on a number of principles: his age, and conversation between Polyperchon and Cassander that Tarn concluded alluded to the boy as a ‘pretender’, along with the boy’s previous long-
term obscurity. However these contentions are open to reinterpretation. As it has been pointed out, Tarn took a moralistic stance in his interpretations of Alexander’s career, here defending him from accusations of a liaison (and its outcome) with an unofficial concubine, Barsine. Heracles’ existence and/or his relationship to Alexander was recorded by Diodorus 20.20.1, 20.28, Justin 11.10.3, Dio Crysostom Discourse 64.23, Pausanias 9.7.2 and Appian Syrian Wars 52, Curtius 10.6.11, 10.6.13 and Plutarch Eumenes 1.3.

  153.Diodorus 19.64.3-5 for Cassander’s turning of Polyperchon’s son and Diodorus 19.66.7 for his son’s assassination. See Heckel (2006) p 230 for ‘retirement’. Billows (1990) p 140 for his powerlessness. Following Tarn (1921) p 22 for Polyperchon’s isolation.

  154.Diodorus 19.67.1. For Cratesipolis’ actions at Sicyon, see Diodorus 19.67 and 20.37, Polyaenus 8, Plutarch Demetrius 9.

  155.Antigonus’ likely role in the affair as stated in Tarn (1921) pp 18-21, Tarn (1948) pp 330-337 and re-stated in Billows (1990) p 141.

  156.Diodorus 20.20.1 for Heracles’ being aged seventeen and Justin 15.2.3 has Heracles in his fifteenth year. See discussion in Heckel (2006) p 138. Brunt (1975) p 28 suggests Heracles could have been born as early as 328 BCE. Considering Justin’s poor track record with identities, aged seventeen is more convincing than fourteen; Justin’s confusion (see 14.6.2 and 14.6.13), in which he claimed Heracles and his mother were murdered together, was actually a reference to Roxane and her son Alexander IV who, in 310 BCE, would have been close to his thirteenth year; see Wheatley (1998) p 19 for discussion.

  157.Diodorus 20.20.1-2 for Polyperchon’s reintroduction of the boy and Diodorus 20.28.1 for the reception in Macedonia. Justin 15.2 suggested both mother and son must have travelled to Macedonia as both were later secretly killed.

  158.Tarn (1948) p 332.

  159.Arrian Events After Alexander 1.43 for Cassander urging his father not to ‘get too far from the kings’. Arrian Times After Alexander 1.38 suggested Antigonus took custody of the kings but this should more logically read Antipater as there is no evidence of this, he was after all heading for war with Eumenes, and it was Antipater who took the kings back to Macedonia; however, Antigonus’ custody might be a reference to Heracles based in Pergamum. Cassander urged his father not to ‘get too far from the kings.’ The one time Antipater may have given them up, temporarily, is when confronting Eumenes in a short campaign uniquely mentioned in the Gothenburg Palimpsest; discussed in chapter titled The Tragic Triumvirate of Treachery and Oaths.