Search

Ancient sources do not reveal a clear picture of what happened in Darius III’s last days, his killing by Persain traitors, and how Alexander seized his corpse. The usual interpretation of these facts by scholarship tends to follow the account of the sources with not much criticism on the facts. However, a close look may drive us to guess if in this concrete case we are not facing a deep misunderstanding and an interpretation graeca of a local tradition and a Persian custom. Following previous works, mainly Briant’s brilliant approaches to Achaemenid rites on Royal Funerals, the aim of this paper is to challenge the usual perception of the facts around Darius III’s death, and how the sources’ account can be reviewed in order to get a deep perspective.

In this great, although old and difficult to find, paper A. B. Bosworth review Tarn's work on Alexander and many of the Historiographical issues on Alexander the Great during most of the XXth Century. THIS PAPER WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN Ancient Society Resources for Teachers 3 (1983). The Director of Karanos wants to thanks the Staff in Ancient Society Resources for Teachers (Macquarie University) for the kindness and managements to re-publish this paper.

This paper explores the literary tradition of the curious chreia that Alexander ordered his men to shave off their beards before battle. The story is represented by various sources from the imperial period but most prominently in the Encomium of Baldness by Synesius of Cyrene. The latter source posits that the story comes from the History of Alexander by Ptolemy, son of Lagus, but this claim cannot be true when Synesius’ version is compared to other extant uses of the chreia. This paper exemplifies some of Synesius’ methods of working, arguing that we need to invest more energy in appreciating the wider tradition of Alexander in late antiquity to understand our earlier texts.

The article sets out by briefly surveying recent scholarship on the Seleukid kingdom and Hellenistic queenship. Two important works that fall into both fields: Women and Monarchy in the Ancient World edited by Beth Carney and Sabine Müller (2021) and Basilissa authored by Christiane Kunst (2022). The discussion, however, concentrates on the first monograph that systematically explores Seleukid queenship: Robin Hämmerling’s Zwischen dynastischem Selbstbild und literarischem Stereotyp. Königinnen der Seleukiden und der Mittelmächte Kleinasiens (2019). By investigating the roles of the sister and the mother of the king as well as inter-dynastic marriages, Hämmerling explores the extent of the basilissa’s autonomous agency. Revisiting the evidence leads the author of the present article to many alternative views, especially concerning the early Seleukid women from Apama over Stratonike to Laodike I-IV . While Hämmerling rightly identifies the sibling marriage among the Seleukids as ritual role play until the generation of Antiochos III, the same arguments should have induced him to challenge the standard claim that there was a radical change beginning with Antiochos the son of Antiochos III. Another shortcoming is the assumption of monogamy as the norm in the House of Seleukos, although the evidence clearly favours polygamy as the prevailing model. But Hämmerling’s main conclusion is confirmed: the political power of the Seleukid queen was limited and confined to some instances of troubled successions; her typical role was to represent the royal family rather than to rule. Yet he omits an investigation into the basilissa title. He follows the traditional view that it could be borne by every woman of the king’s family, whereas the present paper argues that it is mostly attested for only one woman, namely the mother of the designated successor, co-ruling king, or king after his succession. The position of the basilissa was thus to support the smooth dynastic transition at the polygamous court, it did not come with any institutional power.

This paper aims to show that Alexander displayed more confidence in oracles or signs geographically external to Macedonia and Greek peninsula and related to the Asian territory. He mainly worshipped Athena and Zeus, after the stops at Ilium and Siwah, and disdained Apollon, before and after the diabasis to Asia.

The studies on the relationship between religion and Macedonian monarchy have been mainly focused on male rulers. This paper tries to compile and analyse the evidence for Macedonian royal women. This article demonstrates the importance of public religion and patronage for those women through archaeological, epigraphical, and textual evidence. The corpus shows that religious affairs in Macedonia were necessarily entangled with political and cultural aspects, hindering straightforward conclusions about the range and evolution of the royal women in the public religion of Argead Macedonia.

The aim of this paper is to examine the figure of Archelaos I and developments in Macedon during his reign and the 5th century as a whole. Literary accounts point to what might have been an attempt to improve the administration and organization of the kingdom. A careful analysis of the sources is essential to understand the role played by Archelaos I, together with the position that Macedon occupied in the Greek world, in a series of developments during those years which offered the kingdom the opportunity to increase its power.

Elizabeth Donnelly Carney is one of the most renowned scholars on Ancient Macedonia. Carney’s research has contributed to open the studies about Ancient Macedonia to the scope of Gender Studies. Her influence in many modern interpretations concerning the complex relations of power and court network in Argead Macedonia also includes topics like mutiny, social performances (like royal banquets) and court groups (like the Royal Pages). Her scope is wide, and she usually focuses on concrete topics from multiple perspectives. Books like Women and Monarchy in Ancient Macedonia, or the recent Eurydice and the Birth of Macedonian Power (2019) (completing the works devoted to three generations of Macedonian Royal women with her Olympias (2006) and Arsinoë of Egypt and Macedon: A Royal Life (2013)) are now must-to works for world-wide researchers concerning Ancient Greece and Macedon. Among her many skills, the Editorial Board of Karanos wants to remark her kind proximity and her usual predisposition to comment and help, with her experience, to improve discussions, projects and papers with admirable knowledge.

Macedonian kings kept close bonds with the divine sphere. They considered themselves as Heraklids (and, in consequence, they traced back their lineage to Zeus himself) and the kingship kept noteworthy religious functions. Philip II made wide use of this religious side and it became a key element of his public image and propaganda, both inside and outside the kingdom of Macedonia. It was especially important the relation Philip established with Panhellenic shrines, like Delphi and Olympia, in close connection with his aspiration for hegemony all over Greece. Philip also regarded his coinage as useful political tools and the religious motives engraved are very telling about the king's claims and objectives. Originally published in Ancient Macedonia / Archaia Makedonia VI (Papers Read at the Sixth International Symposium held in Thessaloniki by the Institute of Balkan Studies (Greece): Le Bohec 2002a. Published in Karanos by kind permission of the author and the Institute for Balkan Studies.

This paper revaluates key moments in the court politics of Alexander the Great’s reign through the introduction of philia-networks governed by gift-exchange as a template for explaining the relationships between key participants. This approach makes it clear that Alexander initially held a passive role in the political life of his own court and was dependant on others for his succession. These dynamics shifted in the opening years of the Asian expedition as Alexander sought to break these philia-networks, building his own and surrounding his person with philoi of his own choosing.

Olympias of Epirus is one of the main characters in the history of the emergency of Macedonia as an international power with Philip II and Alexander. Nevertheless, despite the many books, papers and studies that had been improving our knowledge about Argead Macedonia in times of the great Macedonian conquerors, the historians of the XIXth and XXth centuries treated Olympias in the same terms of the ancient sources. This uncritical perspective denotes a clear tendency and aims to reproduce gender stereotypes that comes to our own days.

This paper deals with an aspect of Alexander the Great's representation that had not been systematically studied by the modern scholars as yet, the refulgent panoply of the Macedonian king in combat. The author collects the passages where this motif appears, examines the sources and presents some parallels in the Greek literary and iconographic tradition.

This paper deals with the complex situation that lived Athens at the first decades of the Ist Century BC. Between the good and advantageous relations with Rome, that led Athens to big benefits from the control of the Delian markets, and the hard sack of the city by the troops of Sulla in March 86, the city suffered an economical crisis that derived in political instability. The government of Athens finally was hold by some persons who acted like tyrants, in a moment when events and historical context (social conflict and economical crisis) seems to remember the situation that produced the historical phenomenon of the Greek Tyranny.

Alexander was the most prominent Argead and one of the major figures in Second Sophistic literature. The Second Sophistic authors had their own respective images of Alexander, treatment of their sources, and intention to write about him. This paper aims at exploring Lucian's ironic response to the historiographical Alexander images in his time. It will be argued that by ridiculing the current Alexander images in Second Sophistic literature, particularly as provided by Arrian's Anabasis, Lucian did not mean to make fun of the historical Alexander but of his reception and the bias and artifice involved.

The death of Perdiccas, son of Orontes, during his invasion of Egypt is a fact hardly understandable, so that we can find different explanations for this event. The main goal of this paper is to establish a connection between Perdiccas’ death and the importance, meaning of rivers and its crossing for the ancient Macedonians. Indeed, rivers were related to kingship. This fact is reflected in its relationship with kings of the Balkan geographical area (Polyaen. 4.12.3). Thus, we can find passages in which some of most important mythical characters were begotten by a god-river (Asteropaios, Rhesus, Orpheus, etc). Besides, sometimes even the majesty comes from the river, because the kings were crowned into the river or near one (App. Syr. 56; Justin 15. 4.2-7). In fact, the founder of the Argead royal house, Perdiccas I, became king after being saved by a river (Hdt. 8. 138). The strong connection between kings and rivers can be perceived during the crossing, because the Macedonian monarchs, especially Alexander the Great, were responsible of this act. In other words, a true king was able to protect his soldiers during the crossing, given his close link with the water. Perdiccas son of Orontes wanted to become king, therefore the disaster of Nile could be understood like ordeal which showed the will of the river. Perdiccas was not considered a true king, while Ptolemy should become one.

There is no evidence in either Greece or Macedon in the archaic and classical periods that the throne functioned as a symbol of royalty. Thrones were for the gods and their priests. Only the king of Persia used a royal throne and even had portable thrones for his campaigns. This paper argues that after his conquest of the Persian Empire, Alexander the Great adopted the throne as a royal symbol; after his death, his throne became a token of his invisible presence. Philip III Arrhidaeus is known to have used a royal throne after his return to Macedonia. By implication, the marble thrones found in three tombs at Vegina–Aegae are here understood as symbols of royalty and the tombs are interpreted as royal.