Aleksanteri Suuren Myytti

Historiallinen totuus on, että Aleksanterin kuolemaa seurasi välittömästi valtakunnan hajoaminen, joka sinetöi hänen poliittisen ohjelmansa haaksirikon, mutta myyttien tasolla Aleksanterin ja hänen tarinansa maine vain laajeni ja säilyi läpi vuosisatojen. Aleksanterin tarina kiehtoi myös suuria roomalaisia sotapäällikköjä kuten Julius Caesaria ja hänen seuraajaansa Oktavianus Augustusta, jotka kävivät kunnioittamassa Aleksanterin hautaa Egyptin Aleksandriassa. Itse asiassa Aleksanterista oli syntynyt legendoja jo hänen eläessään, ja monia niistä oli levitetty tarkoituksella. Yksi kuuluisammista legendoista on tarina hänen jumalallisesta alkuperästään.

Vasta kuoleman jälkeen Aleksanterin hahmo muuttui varsinaiseksi inhimillisen kunnian ja vallan ruumiillistumaksi. Tämän muutostyön aloittivat oikeastaan jo ne historioitsijat, jotka seurasivat Aleksanteria tämän matkoilla ja joiden liioittelua Aleksanterin täytyi toisinaan hillitä. Aleksanteri ei ollut lainkaan tyytyväinen lukiessaan omista uskomattomista teoistaan kuten norsulaumojen surmaamisesta yhdellä keihääniskulla tai yhteenotoista amatsonien ja taruolentojen kanssa. Puhtaaseen ja suoraviivaiseen  liehittelyyn liittyi kuitenkin melko pian monenlaisia muunnelmia, joilla oli poliittinen tarkoitus. Aleksanteri romaanissa, jota on virheellisesti pidetty Kallistheneen kirjoittamana , Aleksanterin kerrotaan olleen Olympiaan ja faarao Nektaneboksen aviorikoksen hedelmä. Ajatuksena oli liittää Aleksanteri viimeiseen Egyptiä hallinneeseen dynastiaan. Samalla tavalla joissakin iranilaisissa traditioissa suurkuningasta pidettiin Aleksanterin isänä.

Kuva nuoresta, voittamattomasta sotapäälliköstä, joka kuoli kunniansa huipulla, luonnollisesti innoitti kirjoittajia, jotka kertoivat hänen tarinaansa ja loivat myyttejä. Jopa Plutarkhos, joka omisti Aleksanterille osan Rinnakkaiselämänkerroistaan ( Kuuluisien Miesten Elämäkertoja ), huolimatta epäilevästä asenteestaan kaikkeen joka vaikutti taikauskolta tai ihmeeltä, jätti meille lopulta muotokuvan yli-inhimillisestä persoonasta, joka lapsuudestaan saakka paljasti merkkejä suuruudestaan. Koska uskottavammat selonteot, kuten Ptolemaioksen, joka perusti tekstinsä sotaretken alkuperäisiin dokumentteihin, ovat valitettavasti kadonneet, historoitsijat joutuvat nykyään luottamaan Curtius Rufuksen, Justinuksen ja ennen kaikkea Arrianoksen säilyneisiin teoksiin.

Lukijoiden mielikuvitusta kiehtovat kuitenkin eniten fantastisemmat yksityiskohdat, joita tarjosi Pseudo-Kallistheneen kirja. Tämän romaanin sivuilla Aleksanteri horjuu enteiden ja ennustusten välillä, kohtaa hirviöitä, enkeleitä ja outoja hybridiolentoja. Hänen retkensä vie hänet kristallilinnojen luo, valtameren pohjaan läpinäkyvässä “sukellusveneessä” ja jopa taivaaseen griippien selässä lentäen. Aleksanterista tulee sellaisen miehen symboli, joka koettaa ylittää ihmiskuntaa kahlehtivat rajat, kuten kuoleman, jonka sankari yrittää romaanissa turhaan voittaa kastautumalla ikuisen elämän lähteeseen.

Vuosisatojen kuluessa Aleksanteri romaanista syntyy loputtomasti eri versioita sekä lännessä että idässä, missä se käännettiin hajonneen valtakunnan lukemattomille kielille sekä myös niiden alueiden kielille, joita Aleksanteri ei koskaan saavuttanut – lopulta Aasian todellisille rajoille saakka. Jokaiseen kirjan käännökseen tuli mukaan uusia piirteitä ja kerta toisensa jälkeen Aleksanterille annettiin uusia ominaisuuksia, jotka tekivät hänestä ritarin ja oikeuden puolustajan, joka etsi totuutta ja viisautta. Legenda levisi laajalle myös iranilaiseen ja islamilaiseen kulttuuriin. Aleksanteri, nimellä “dhu-´l-Quarnayn” eli “kaksisarvinen” (luultavasti johtuu Ammon jumalan sarvista, jotka kuvattiin rahoissa Aleksanterin päähän) hän esiintyy myös koraanissa hallitsijana, joka vangitsee rautamuurin taakse Googin ja Maagogin kansat. Runossaan Iskandar-name persialainen runoilija Nezami tekee makedonialaisesta valloittajasta oikeudenmukaisen ja viisaan kuninkaan, jota jumala inspiroi.

Keskiajalla Pseudo-Kallistheneen teos saavutti valtavan suosion myös lännessä, missä sen urhea ja ritarillinen keskushahmo, joka on myös anteliaisuuden puolestapuhuja, muuttui trubaduurien ylistämäksi esikuvaksi. Välillä Aleksanteri edusti jopa kristillisiä arvoja ja antoi pohjan kokonaiselle sankaritekojen sikermälle, joka aikakautenaan kilpaili suosiosta Arthurin ja Kaarle Suuren tekojen kanssa. Aleksanterin kuvat esiintyvät usein myös ajan ikonografiassa, toisinaan kuitenkin myös negatiivisessa sävyssä. Erityisesti kuninkaan taivaaseenastumista pidettiin kirkollisessa kulttuurissa demonisen ylpeyden esimerkkinä ja sellaisena se esitetään Tranin ja Otranton tuomiokirkkojen lattiamosaiikeissa. Jotkut raamatunselittäjät, jotka luultavasti sekoittivat Aleksanterin muihin antiikin hallitsijoihin, alkoivat jopa pitää häntä Antikristuksen edeltäjänä. Kirkon ulkopuolella Aleksanterin kuva koristi edelleen kuvitettuja käsikirjoituksia ja salien seiniä, kuten esim. Mantan linnassa, missä Filippoksen poika esiintyy antiikin suurten hallitsijoiden keskellä.

Renesanssiajalla Aleksanterin teot inspiroivat Raffaellon, Sodoman ja Perin del Vagan tapaisia taiteilijoita, kun taas uudella ajalla valloittajasta tuli Racinen ja Metastasion näytelmien henkilö ja valistusajan kirjoittajien kuten Montesquieun ja Voltairen, ylistämä hahmo. Ludwig XVI ja Napoleon ottivat hänet esikuvakseen ja antoivat hovitaiteilijoidensa ikuistaa hänet. Vielä tänäänkin, suurien monarkkien ajan päätyttyä, tämän poikkeusyksilön maine ja hänen lyhyt maineikas elämänsä herättää kiinnostusta ja uteliaisuutta huolimatta viime vuosikymmenien historiantutkijoiden pyrkimyksistä osoittaa hänen persoonansa ja politiikkansa rajat.

Aleksanteri kirjallisissa lähteissä osa 1.

Hävinneet aikalaislähteet

Monet Aleksanterin aikana eläneistä henkilöistä kirjoittivat häntä käsitteleviä teoksia. Aleksanterista kirjoittivat Kallisthenes, joka oli Aleksanterin hovihistorioitsija. Ptolemaios, Aleksanterin henkivartija, josta myöhemmin tuli Egyptin faarao. Nearkhos, joka toimi laivaston komentajana, sekä arkkitehti ja insinööri Aristobulos Kassandrealainen. Vanhimpiin lähteisiin kuuluvat myös Kleitarkhoksen kirjoitukset. Kaikki alkuperäiset kirjoitukset ovat valitettavasti kadonneet, eikä niistä ole enää jäljellä kuin sitaatteja myöhemmissä teoksissa.

Aloitan tämän ensimmäisen osan kertomalla hiukan Aleksanterin kirjeistä ja hovipäiväkirjoista.

Aleksanteri kävi kirjeenvaihtoa useiden henkilöiden kanssa. Aleksanteri kirjoitti mm. äidilleen Olympiaalle, käskynhaltijalleen Antipatrokselle ja kuningas Dareiokselle. Osa kirjeistä säilyi jälkipolville. Myöhemmät kirjoittajat ovat käyttäneet niitä lähteinään. Osa kirjeistä mahdollisesti löytyi Aleksanterin hovipäiväkirjoista, jotka käsittelivät mm. diplomaattisia neuvotteluja. Plutarkhos mainitsee yli kolmekymmentä eri kirjettä teoksissaan. Plutarkhos piti kirjeitä aitoina.

Aleksanteri kirjoitti opettajalleen Aristoteleelle suorasukaisen kirjeen:

Aleksanteri tervehtii Aristotelesta. Julkaistessasi vain suullisiksi tarkoitettuja luentojasi et ole tehnyt oikein. Mikä meitä enää erottaa muista, kun ne opit, joiden hyvää satoa olemme korjanneet, tulevat kaikkien yhteisiksi. Minä toden totta haluan olla muita etevämpi mieluimmin korkeampien asiain tietämyksessä kuin valtani perusteella. Voi hyvin.

-Plutarkhos, Kuuluisien Miesten Elämäkertoja, Aleksanteri Suuri-

Hovipäiväkirjat, efemerides, kertoivat Aleksanterin jokapäiväisistä toimista. Hovipäiväkirjat ovat Aleksanterin kirjurin Eumenes Kardialaisen käsialaa. Plutarkhos ja Arrianos siteeraavat hovipäiväkirjoja kertoessaan Aleksanterin viimeisten päivien tapahtumista. Yleisen käsityksen mukaan Ptolemaios on käyttänyt päiväkirjoja lähteenään kirjoittaessaan omaa Aleksanteri elämäkertaansa. Ptolemaiosta on tästä syystä pidetty luotettavana lähteenä. Tätä oletusta vastaan on kuitenkin esitetty kritiikkiä. Professori Lionel Pearson (1908-1988) esitti, että päiväkirjat olisivat hellenistisellä ajalla tehty väärennös, joka oli laitettu Eumeneen nimiin. Tätä näkemystä kannatti myös professori Peter Brunt. On myös väitetty, että hovipäiväkirjat perustuisivat Babylonialaisiin asiakirjoihin. Erään toisen teorian mukaan ne olivat Eumeneen kirjoittamia, mutta ne oli tarkoitettu propagandaksi ja ne käsittelivät ainoastaan Aleksanterin viimeisiä päiviä.

Plutarkhoksen ja Arrianoksen versiot Aleksanterin kuolemasta eroavat jonkin verran toisistaan.

Daisioksen kuun 18. päivänä. Kuningas nukkui kuumeen takia kylpyhuoneessaan…20. päivä Kuningas kylpi ja uhrasi tavanmukaisen uhrin…24. päivä Kovassa kuumeessa, uhrasi jumalille paareilla alttarin ääreen kannettuna…25. päivä Kuningas siirrettiin paareilla joen toisella rannalla olevaan palatsiin, jossa hän vähän nukkui, mutta kuume ei laskenut…26. päivä Luullen hänen kuolleen makedonialaiset kokoontuivat palatsin porttien edustalle ja vaativat uhkaavasti huutaen kuninkaan ystäviä päästämään heidät vainajaa näkemään. Kun ovet avattiin, he yksitellen vain mekko yllään kulkivat vuoteen ohitse. Kahdenkymmenenkahdeksannen päivän vastaisena yönä hän kuoli. Se, mitä tässä on mainittu, on melkein sanasta sanaan päiväkirjasta

– Plutarkhos, Kuuluisien Miesten Elämäkertoja, Aleksanteri Suuri-

Plutarkhoksen kertoo Aleksanterin sairaudesta päivä päivältä ja kertoo siteeraavansa päiväkirjoja melkein suoraan. Arrianos taas käyttää lähteenään Ptolemaiosta, joka mahdollisesti käytti hovipäiväkirjoja omana lähteenään, sekä Aristobulosta. Plutarkhoksen ja Arrianoksen versiot eroavat Aleksanterin sairauden kronologiassa.

Wondrous Signs Before the Birth of Alexander The Great

Alexander with a horned diadem. Coin by Lysimachus.

Alexander The Great was associated with Hercules, son of Zeus and may have believed himself the son of the Egyptian god Ammon, as well as the mortal king Philip. Stories about Alexander’s birth were embellished in order to fit someone of such an illustrious pedigree. Peter Green, in the second chapter of Alexander of Macedon 356-323 B.C., names some of the prodigious events that attended the conception and birth. These are also described by Plutarch.

1. The temple of Artemis burned, according to tradition, on the night on which Alexander The Great was born. The Persian Magi foretold great disaster fot the Persian Empire.

Plutarch on the birth of Alexander: “Alexander was born the sixth of Hecatombaeon, which month the Macedonians call Lous, the same day that the temple of Diana at Ephesus was burnt..the temple..took fire and was burnt while its mistress was absent, assisting at the birth of Alexander. And all the Eastern soothsayers who happened to be then at Ephesus, looking upon the ruin of this temple to be the forerunner of some other calamity, ran about the town, beating their faces, and crying, that this day had brought forth something that would prove fatal and destructive to all Asia” -Plutarch’s Life of Alexander-

2. His mother Olympias dreamed on the night before her wedding, that she was penetrated by a thunderbolt. Fire spread out in all directions. Plutarch writes: “The night before the consummation of their marriage, she dreamed that a thunderbolt fell upon her body, which kindled a great fire, whose divided flames dispersed themselves all about, and then were extinguished”.

3. Alexander’s father Philip looked inside his wife bedroom and saw her in the embrace of a snake. This was interpreted to be the god Zeus-Ammon, who was considered by some to have been Alexander’s father.

4. Another birth omen of a sort is reported by Plutarch who writes that Alexander’s father Philip received news of the birth of his son in a message containing three pieces of good news. The two others were that his race horse had won in Olympics and that Parmenio had beaten the Illyrians.

Source : N.S. Gill
http://ancienthistory.about.com

Alexander The Great in Egypt

Alexander III of Macedon (356-323 bc), better known to history as ‘Alexander the Great’, spent several months in Egypt as part of his on-going campaign against the mighty Persian  Empire of Darius III. After conquering Persia’s naval bases all along the coastline of Asia Minor and Syria-Palestine, Alexander marched south into Egypt where he remained for some six months. Although generally regarded as little more than an eccentric diversion, Alexander’s Egyptian sojourn was essential to his future plans. He needed a strong coastal base for both strategic and commercial purposes, from which he could not only communicate across the Mediterranean but which could also handle the highly lucrative sea-borne trade network he wanted to divert from Phoenicia. With naval reinforcements following his progress down the coast, his Macedonian army covered the hazardous 130 mile distance in only a week to reach the heavily fortified coastal town of Pelusium in late October 332 bc.

With his reputation going before him, Alexander was met by Egypt’s Persian governor Mazaces. With no armed forces and with no likelihood of any assistance following the defeated Darius’ swift departure back east to Persia, Mazaces simply handed over the treasury’s 800 talents and “all the royal furniture”. In return he was kept on as part of the new administration together with the new governor Cleomenes, who was made responsible for finance and created the royal mint around 331 bc. Cleomenes was a hard-headed, unscrupulous businessman who quickly amassed a personal fortune of 8,000 talents during his career as governor. Yet he remained loyal to Alexander with whom he kept up a regular correspondence, sending him such delicacies as smoked quail by the thousand.  After installing a garrison at the key defensive site of Pelusium, Alexander then ordered his fleet to sail south up the Nile to the traditional capital Memphis (Ineb-hedj) at the apex of the Delta where he himself would arrive by land at the head of his troops. Passing by the ancient religious site of Heliopolis (Iunu) with its vast white temples and obelisks, Egypt made an enormous impression on both the Macedonian troops and their 24 year old leader. Brought up with his formidable mother Olympias’ tales of Egyptian gods, the religiously-minded Alexander must have been completely dumbstruck in a land so steeped in ritual, where priests held enormous power wielded inside temples not built to human scale. Passing by the great pyramids of Giza, still gleaming in their shining white limestone, he finally reached Memphis to a genuinely rapturous reception.

Greek travelers had actually been visiting Egypt for centuries, many of them setting up trading colonies or acting as mercenaries. Others such as the historian Herodotus and philosopher Plato came to study a culture they regarded with awe as the cradle of civilization, their knowledge almost certainly part of Alexander’s education. Yet for almost 200 years Egypt had been occupied by Persia who had incorporated it into the growing empire, and assuming the Egyptian crown by right of conquest the Persian king had ruled in absentia through a satrap, exploiting its vast grain reserves and taxing its people. The Persians showed relatively little respect for the ancient traditions and were deeply unpopular, and the Egyptians’ had rebelled so often parts of the country remained virtually independent.

Alexander was therefore hailed as Savior and Liberator, and as the people’s choice and legitimate heir he was offered the double crown of the Two Lands. Anointed as pharaoh in Memphis on 14 November 332 bc, the culmination of his coronation was the climactic moment when the high priest named him ‘son of the gods’ according to traditions dating back almost 3,000 years. This title deeply affected him, and Olympias’ references to him being the son of Zeus must have filled his mind; indeed, there were even scenes of the king of the gods Amun (‘Zeus’) impregnating selected queens with the heir to the throne! In a world where the gods were perceived as living entities and were considered a part of everyday life, Alexander must now have began to believe in his own divinity as a fact rather than a simple exercise of propaganda.

Always a devout man who began each day with sacrifices to the gods, Alexander had no difficulty worshipping the Egyptian deities. Equating their gods with his own, he worshipped the Egyptian Amun as a form of Zeus. At the Memphite necropolis of Sakkara the new pharaoh offered sacrifices to the Apis bull, cult animal of the creator god Ptah, followed by Greek-style games and literary contests in which performers from all over the Greek world took part in a multi-cultural extravaganza. These kind of events mark the beginnings of Hellenism in their blending of Greek practices and local traditions, and Egypt and Greece would successfully co-exist for the next 3 centuries.

Hephaestion´s relationships

Hephaestion

Little is known of Hephaestion’s personal relationships, beyond his extraordinarily close friendship with Alexander The Great. Alexander was outgoing, charismatic man, who had many friends, but his dearest and closest friend and confidant was Hephaestion. Theirs was a friendship which had been forged in boyhood. It endured through adolescence, through Alexander’s becoming a king, through the hardships of campaigning and the flatteries of court life, and their marriages.

Their tutor, Aristotle, described such a friendship as “..one soul abiding in two bodies”. That they themselves considered their friendship to be of such a kind is shown by the stories of the morning ater  the battle of Issus. Diodorus, Arrian and Curtius all describe the scene, when Alexander and Hephaestion went together to visit the captured Persian royal family. Its senior member, the queen Sisygambis, knelt to Hephaestion to plead for their lives, mistaking him for Alexander, because he was taller, and both young men were wearing similar clothes. When she realised her mistake, she was acutely embarrassed, but Alexander reassured her with the words, “You were not mistaken, Mother; this man too is Alexander”. Their love for each other was no secret, as is borne out by their own words. Hephaestion, when replying to a letter to Alexander’s mother, Olympias, said “..you know that Alexander means more to us than anything”. Arrian says that Alexander, after Hephaestion’s death, described him as “..the friend i valued as my own life”. Paul Cartladge describes their closeness when he says: “Alexander seems actually to have referred to Hephaestion’s as his alter ego”. 

Alexander and Hephaestion enter the tent of the captive royal family of Darius. From a 1696 edition of Curtius.

Their friendship was also a working partnership; in all that Alexander undertook, Hephaestion was at his side. They worked well together; it is possible to discern a pattern, when studying Hephaestion’s career, of Alexander’s constant trust in, and increasing reliance on Hephaestion. By the time of the advance into India, after the deaths of senior generals from the older generation, there had been worrying instances among senior officers of their own generation, of treachery, a lack of sympathy with Alexander’s aims of further integration of Persians into the army, and of sheer incompetence. Time ater time, when Alexander needed to divide his forces, he entrusted half to Hephaestion, knowing that in him he had a man of unquestionable loyalty, who understood and sympathised with his aims, and above all, who got the job done.

Personal relationships of Alexander The Great

Alexander and Hephaestion

Alexander the Great’s lifelong companion was Hephaestion, the son of a Macedonian noble man Hephaestion was Alexander’s closest friend, and held the position of second-in-command of Alexander’s forces until his death, which devastated Alexander. Alexander married at least two women, Roxane, daughter of a minor noble and the Persian princess Stateira, daughter of Darius III of Persia. His son by Roxane, Alexander IV, was born after Alexander the Great’s death and was killed before the boy reached adulthood.

Alexander was admired during his lifetime for treating all his lovers humanely. Plutarch has argued that Alexander’s love of males took an ethical approach, inspired by the teachings of his mentor, Aristotle. He gives several examples of Alexander’s morality in this domain:

When Philoxenus, the leader of the seashore, wrote to Alexander that there was a youth in Ionia whose beauty has yet to be seen and asked him in a letter if he (Alexander) would like him (the boy) to be sent over, he (Alexander) responded in a strict and disgusted manner: “You are the most hideous and malign of all men, have you ever seen me involved in such dirty(sexual) work that you found the urge to flatter me with such hedonistic business?

Plutarch also wrote:

When Philoxenus, the commander of his forces on the sea-board, wrote that there was with him a certain Theodorus of Tarentum, who had two youths of surpassing beauty to sell, and inquired whether Alexander would buy them, Alexander was incensed, and cried out many times to his friends, asking them what shameful thing Philoxenus had ever seen in him that he should spend his time in making such disgraceful proposals.

His moral approach towards sexual relations also extended to relations with prisoners of war: But as for the other captive women, seeing that they were surpassingly stately and beautiful, he merely said jestingly that Persian women were torments to the eyes. And displaying in rivalry with their fair looks the beauty of his own sobriety and self-control, he passed them by as though they were lifeless images for display.

The above quotations would be in line with the thoughts laid about before him by Aristotle, who regarded relationships based purely on carnal relations to be shameful.

Diodorus Siculus writes, “Then he put on the Persian diadem and dressed himself in the white robe and the Persian sash and everything else except the trousers and the long-sleeved upper garment. He distributed to his companions cloaks with purple borders and dressed the horses in Persian harness. In addition to all this, he added concubines to his retinue in the manner of Darius, in number not less than the days of the year and outstanding in beauty as selected from all the women of Asia. Each night these paraded about the couch of the king so that he might select the one with whom he would lie that night. Alexander, as a matter of fact, employed these customs rather sparingly and kept for the most part to his accustomed routine, not wishing to offend the Macedonians “

Curtius reports, “He scorned sensual pleasures to such an extent that his mother was anxious lest he be unable to beget offspring.” To encourage a relationship with a woman, King Philip and Olympias were said to have brought in a high-priced Thessalian courtesan named Callixena.

There is no evidence that Alexander sought intimacy with women outside of marriage, however he did marry three times: to Roxane of Bactria, Stateira and Parysatis, daughter of Ochus. He fathered at least one child, Alexander IV of Macedon, born by Roxane shortly after his death in 323 BC. There is speculation that Stateira could have been pregnant when he died; if so, she and her child played no part in the succession battles which ensued after his death. There is speculation that he may have fathered another child, (Heracles), of a woman said to be his concubine Barsine (the daughter of satrap Artabazus of Phrygia) in 327 BC. Mary Renault’s rebuttal of this theory is worth quoting: “ No record at all exists of such a woman accompanying his march; nor of any claim by her, or her powerful kin, that she had born him offspring. Yet twelve years after his death a boy was produced, seventeen years old…a claimant and shortlived pawn in the succession wars…no source reports any notice whatever taken by him of a child who, Roxane’s being posthumous, would have been during his lifetime his only son, by a near-royal mother. In a man who named cities after his horse and dog, this strains credulity.

Hephaestion

Alexander had a close emotional attachment to his companion, cavalry commander (hipparchos) and childhood friend, Hephaestion. He studied with Alexander, as did a handful of other children of Macedonian aristocracy, under the tutelage of Aristotle. Hephaestion makes his appearance in history at the point when Alexander reaches Troy. There the two friends made sacrifices at the shrines of the two heroes Achilles and Patroclus; Alexander honouring Achilles, and Hephaestion honouring Patroclus. Aelian in his Varia Historia recounts that Hephaestion “thus intimated that he was the eromenos “beloved” of Alexander, as Patroclus was of Achilles.”

No contemporary source states that Alexander and Hephaestion were lovers; historian Paul Cartledge writes that: “Whether Alexander’s relationship with the slightly older Hephaestion was ever of the sort that once dared not speak its name is not certain.” Alexander and Hephaestion were, in Fox’s words, “exceptionally deep and close friends” until Hephaestion’s death, after which Alexander mourned him greatly and did not eat for days. Alexander held an elaborate funeral for Hephaestion at Babylon, and sent a note to the shrine of Ammon, which had previously acknowledged Alexander as a god, asking them to grant Hephaestion divine honours. The priests declined, but did offer him the status of divine hero. Alexander died soon after the receipt of this letter; Mary Renault suggests that his grief over Hephaestion’s death had led him to be careless with his health.

Campaspe

Campaspe, also known as Pancaste, may have been the mistress of Alexander, if so one of the first women with whom Alexander was intimate. She was thought to be a prominent citizen of Larisa in Thessaly; Aelian surmised that she initiated the young Alexander in love.

One story tells that Campaspe was painted by Apelles, who enjoyed the reputation in Antiquity for being the greatest of painters. The episode occasioned an apocryphal exchange that was reported in Pliny’s Naturalis Historia: seeing the beauty of the nude portrait, Alexander saw that the artist appreciated Campaspe (and loved her) more than he. And so Alexander kept the portrait but presented Campaspe to Apelles. Modern historian Robin Lane Fox says “so Alexander gave him Campaspe as a present, the most generous gift of any patron and one which would remain a model for patronage and painters on through the Renaissance”.

The story is memorable, but may have been invented: Campaspe does not appear in the five major sources for the life of Alexander. Robin Lane Fox traces her legend back to the Roman authors Pliny the Elder, Lucian of Samosata and Aelian’s Varia Historia.

Campaspe became a generic poetical pseudonym for a man’s mistress.

Barsine

Barsine was a noble Persian, daughter of Artabazus, and wife of Memnon. After Memnon’s death, several ancient historians have written of a love affair between her and Alexander. Plutarch writes, “At any rate Alexander, so it seems, thought it more worthy of a king to subdue his own passions than to conquer his enemies, and so he never came near these women, nor did he associate with any other before his marriage, with the exception only of Barsine. This woman, the widow of Memnon, the Greek mercenary commander, was captured at Damascus. She had received a Greek education, was of a gentle disposition, and could claim royal descent, since her father was Artabazus who had married one of the Persian kings daughters. These qualities made Alexander the more willing he was encouraged by Parmenio, so Aristobulus tells us to form an attachment to a woman of such beauty and noble lineage.” In addition Justin writes, “As he afterwards contemplated the wealth and display of Darius, he was seized with admiration of such magnificence. Hence it was that he first began to indulge in luxurious and splendid banquets, and fell in love with his captive Barsine for her beauty, by whom he had afterwards a son that he called Heracles.”

The story may be true, but if so, it raises some difficult questions. The boy would have been Alexander’s only child born during his lifetime (Roxane’s son was born posthumously). Even if Alexander had ignored him, which seems highly unlikely, the Macedonian Army and the successors would certainly have known of him, and would almost certainly have drawn him into the succession struggles which ensued upon Alexander’s death. Yet we first hear of the boy twelve years after Alexander’s death, when a boy was produced as a claimant to the throne. Especially since Alexander’s own half brother Philip III Arrhidaeus (Philip II’s illegitimate and physically and mentally disabled son) was Alexander’s original successor. Alexander’s illegitimate son would have had more rights to the throne than his illegitimate half-brother. Heracles played a brief part in the succession battles, and then disappeared. It seems more likely that the romance with Barsine was invented by the boy’s backers to validate his parentage.

Roxane

Ancient historians, as well as modern ones, have also written on Alexander’s marriage to Roxana. Robin Lane Fox writes, “Roxane was said by contemporaries to be the most beautiful lady in all Asia. She deserved her Afghan name of Roshanak, meaning ‘little star’, (probably rokhshana or roshna which means light and illuminating). Marriage to a local noble’s family made sound political sense. But contemporaries implied that Alexander, aged 28, also lost his heart. A wedding-feast for the two of them was arranged high on one of the Sogdian rocks. Alexander and his bride shared a loaf of bread, a custom still observed in Turkestan. Characteristically, Alexander sliced it with his sword.” Ulrich Wilcken writes, “The fairest prize that fell to him was Roxane, the daughter of Oxyartes, in the first bloom of youth, and in the judgment of Alexander’s companions, next to Stateira the wife of Darius, the most beautiful woman that they had seen in Asia. Alexander fell passionately in love with her and determined to raise her to the position of his consort.”

Roxane accompanied Alexander all the way to India, and bore him a child also named Alexander (Alexander IV), 6 months after Alexander the Great died.

Bagoas

Ancient sources tell of another favorite, Bagoas; an eunuch “exceptional in beauty and in the very flower of boyhood, with whom Darius was intimate and with whom Alexander would later be intimate.” Plutarch recounts an episode (also mentioned by Dicaearchus) during some festivities on the way back from India) in which his men clamor for him to kiss the young man: “We are told, too, that he was once viewing some contests in singing and dancing, being well heated with wine, and that his favourite, Bagoas, won the prize for song and dance, and then, all in his festal array, passed through the theatre and took his seat by Alexander’s side; at sight of which the Macedonians clapped their hands and loudly bade the king kiss the victor, until at last he threw his arms about him and kissed him tenderly.” A novel by Mary Renault, “the Persian Boy”, chronicles that story with Bagoas as narrator.

The modern historian Robin Lane Fox, claims that both direct and indirect evidence suggest a “sexual element, this time of pure physical desire” between the two, but as for the consummation of that passion he comments that later gossip presumed that Bagoas was Alexander’s lover. This is uncertain.”. Whatever Alexander’s relationship with Bagoas, it was no impediment to relations with his queen: 6 months after Alexander’s death Roxane gave birth to his son and heir, Alexander IV.