Artabazus, Parmenion, & Barsine...The Perfect Persian Plant

[Nicator]

Dear Nicator,

You have my apologies if I have offended you. However, I did not make any statements about your level of knowledge. I was attacking the logic, or illogic as I see it, of your statements. I am not going to bother responding to your points in detail because, frankly, I am not interested in pursuing a fruitless argument. None of your assertions are proof that Barsine acted as a spy: they are arguments in support of your theory that she could have acted as a spy. There is a difference. Until you can point to something in the sources, or provide a new and convincing interpretation of something in the sources, you have no proof. Yet even if you do prove that Barsine, Parmenion and Artabazus were all spies, unless you can show that it affected the course of history, what does it matter?

Alexias,
Ok, we've gotten off on the wrong foot. I am sorry for sniping back at you so vociferously. So, please accept my apologies in return. The point is that the sources are quiet on her status one way or the other. Your arguments are just as valid as mine in that they both rely on assumptions. My assumptions paint a more sinister picture of Barsine and all other historians seem to have a rose tinted picture of her. (Not to merely throw your phrase back at you...not my intention.)

Indeed, even if it did affect the course of history, does any of this matter?

Marcus,
You are the best. And yes, let's move onto some other topic.

[Paralus]

Other than the somewhat dubious nature of Heracles existence...

He is attested as being proposed as an heir by Nearchus. He is later attested as being murdered, at the instigation of Cassadner, by the Macedonian Colonel Klink, Polyperchon.

You said..."Artabazus, along with the other satraps, was ordered to disband his mercenary army by Artazxerxes Ochus when that king ascended the throne. Artabazus refused and there ensued the “war of the Satraps”. In this Artabazus did well until Ochus, well aware of Athens’ frailties, threatened to enter the “Social War” on behalf of her allies in revolt. This resulted in the beaching of ships and the summary recall of Chares and his forces by a thoroughly compliant Athens. Artabazus fought on with Pammenes and 5,000 Thebans until the continuing success of Philomelus, Phayllus and Onomarchus in the Sacred War forced their hand. Defeated, Artabazus fled for refuge at Philip’s court. He can hardly be described as having done so as to spy."

This is very interesting. But erroneous in application, as the era referred to was well before this incident. However, this incident was noteworthy in that Artabazus evidently already had a relationship with Philip and felt confident that he could cools his heels at the court of Philip until the storm blew over [...]
And as I said in previous posts, yes, the whole supposition does rely on familial and political ties and circumstantial evidence. [...] So the question raised here is how 'Persian' was she? Her country was Persia. Her father was Persian and his occupation was foreign dignitary. Her mother was Greek from Rhodes and Rhodes was effectively a Persian holding for 150 years. So, you tell me how Persian she was. And I am not accusing you of being merely 'rose colored' in your viewpoints. So, please...lets not go down that road. As with Marcus, I value our relationship far too much to be sniping back and forth needlessly.

Difficult to know where to begin with all the above. Perhaps best with the terminology, specifically, just what is the occupation of "foreign dignitary"? Artabazus was the son of Phanabazus and Apame. The latter was the daughter of Artaxerxes II Mnemon and so Artabazus is the old boy's grandson. At about the time Philip II was steeling to save Macedonia, Artabazus seems to have inherited "family satrapy" of Hellespontine Phrygia (Dascylium) from his old man. He is attested as having been loyal to his grandfather (via his father one suspects) and took part in the war against the rebel Datames. Artabazus was a blue-blood Persian and the adjective "foreign" can hardly be applied to him within the bounds of the Achaemenid Empire. He can only ever be described so if he'd taken service outside of the Empire - something he is not ever attested as having done.

Artabazus' allegiances change when Artaxerxes III Ochus ascends the throne. We cannot know the reasons for his falling out but, given the problems in Achaemenid royal successions, familial infighting or suspicion is most likely - especially with Ochus indicating his intentions by ordering the disbanding of satrapal forces.

This thread has gone back and forth on supposition both to and fro. My interpretation of the available evidence is stated as such.

Well, again, the basis of this supposition is that Artabazus was a Persian "foreign dignitary" well versed in Greek and as such a spy; his daughter, Barsine, was well educated in Greek and married to two Greek commanders and (leaving out Parmenion just for the moment) gifted to Alexander and so is a spy.

There is absolutely no surpise in the fact that Artabazus was well versed in Greek. His father too was so versed. I would think it only natural that the satrap of Dascylium was well versed in Greek as he'd many a Greek to deal with. Successive satraps and their officials will have been exposed to Greek culture and peoples for generations. Artabazus married a Rhodian Greek. The logical region providing this contact is Thrace / Macedonia and Athens (via her addiction to her Hellespontine habit). Thus it also comes as no surprise that Artabazus seeks refuge in Macedonia: he can hardly have sought it anywhere within the bounds of the Empire. Thus there is no need to postulate espionage to explain the plainly explainable.

By the time of Alexander's invasion Artabazus is no longer a satrap - his Dascylium seat going to Arsites. At this time Artabazus is in the Great King's entourage as a very senior advisor (Arr. 3.23.7). Thus Artabazus had become one of the "most eminent" Persians and was in close attendance on his king. Barsine, meanwhile, is with her husband Memnon and, one thinks, at home in his holdings in the Troad. Clearly she had to be with him for her to be sent as a guarantee of Memnon's loyalty after the Granicus. Nothing in any of this indicates any plan to use either Barsine or her father as a spy.

I think I've seen a good deal of rose colored interpretation of Barsine's status from the other members of pothos, but none so far that have offered any supporting information as to her alleged status as a spy.

That would be because it is you that hypothesises Barsine as a "spy" or "plant"; it is not up to others to support the notion.

[agesilaos]

For whom is Barsine meant to be spying? Darius? Certainly never betrays any evidence of an intelligence advantage during the Gaugamela campaign, the opposite in fact as Alexander's Northerly approach seems to have wrong footed him, cf Marseden 'The Campaign of Gaugamela' (ignore the guff about 'the Mercenary Source' though). Or was it for Parmenion who handed her over? He certainly had the drop on Alexander, not. Either way she seems to have been signally ineffective, or maybe just not a spy.

Of course there can be other reasons for intelligence failure, believing the security agencies or stories on the internet for two, but were she really spying one would expect to see some result; usable as a fictional scenario but not to be entertained too seriously as historical IMHO

Interesting thread for bringing out the details we have on her though.

[Nicator]

Other than the somewhat dubious nature of Heracles existence...


He is attested as being proposed as an heir by Nearchus. He is later attested as being murdered, at the instigation of Cassadner, by the Macedonian Colonel Klink, Polyperchon.

Yes, I was well aware of this. But it's inclusion doesn't make it 100% certain that he actually existed. Therefore, somewhat dubious is appropriate. And...Ha! Colonel Klink...nice!

Difficult to know where to begin with all the above. Perhaps best with the terminology, specifically, just what is the occupation of "foreign dignitary"? Artabazus was the son of Phanabazus and Apame. The latter was the daughter of Artaxerxes II Mnemon and so Artabazus is the old boy's grandson. At about the time Philip II was steeling to save Macedonia, Artabazus seems to have inherited "family satrapy" of Hellespontine Phrygia (Dascylium) from his old man. He is attested as having been loyal to his grandfather (via his father one suspects) and took part in the war against the rebel Datames. Artabazus was a blue-blood Persian and the adjective "foreign" can hardly be applied to him within the bounds of the Achaemenid Empire. He can only ever be described so if he'd taken service outside of the Empire - something he is not ever attested as having done.

Artabazus' allegiances change when Artaxerxes III Ochus ascends the throne. We cannot know the reasons for his falling out but, given the problems in Achaemenid royal successions, familial infighting or suspicion is most likely - especially with Ochus indicating his intentions by ordering the disbanding of satrapal forces.

I think for some reason, I am just not able to get this message across. Any dignitary, foreign or otherwise, is basically tasked with keeping tabs on the opposition. Maybe we're getting hung up on the terminology of the word 'spy' or 'espionage'. Spying is generally indicative of intelligence gathered in a covert fashion. Who's to say that Barsine acted covertly. Who's to say she didn't gather intel for Artabazus but was never able to deliver it (especially if Alexander was aware of her intentions). And by the time she was again within 'earshot' of Artabazus, his position in the new order was significantly changed. My contention is that Alexander was well aware of her status and of the danger of having such a well connected and educated woman in his entourage. Hold your friends close and you enemies closer. There is nothing to say that Barsine was just a bedmate for Alexander. I think the whole point of this post was to bring something out that appears to have been missed. And, I disagree with your analysis of the circumstantial evidence and hence, her status. In fact, Artabazus' closely held consulting role for Darius, only reaffirms the clear and present danger of her position.

As a side note, it seems clear enough that I have made my points about Barsine and I disagree that it is just up to me to prove my points. A well rounded rhetorician would be capable of providing insight to both sides of the story. Seeing as the purported facts seem to go either way, I am within the bounds here to deliver an overlooked interpretation of those few precious facts as they were laid down. But, you can define your own role any way you see fit. This is just a public forum. And I have always valued your posts and replies whenever I can get them. Also, much of the information related above has already given me circumstantial grist for proof. So, although you have indicated quite plainly that you, or anybody else for that matter, have no intention of supplying an affirmation of my post, you have done so anyway.

Agesilaos,
As stated earlier, I'm not as certain about Parmenion here. His death several years on from the time of this incident could be unrelated.

It is interesting to rethink this relationship again though. Barsine was maybe the perfect woman at the perfect time for the young king. He probably liked older women anyway and maybe Barsine reminded him of his mother? This mature woman formerly wedded to two Greek Generals (Memnon for sure...can't remember Mentor's title?) and likely provided interesting bedtime chat. I could just hear the warnings from his trusted staff, Aristander, Hephaestion, and perhaps a few others..."Let her talk all she wants, but by all means, keep your own tongue from wagging." That statement is fiction because it wasn't recorded. But what I am doing is interpretation. I've made that clear enough. We have no written evidence of it...so, the historicity is unfounded. The interpretation of her status, however, is not. All other interpretations of Barsine are 'equally' an-historical. The facts are few, but I've only seen one interpretation of those facts. Now, we have another. Have fun with it!

[Paralus]

Who's to say that Barsine acted covertly. Who's to say she didn't gather intel for Artabazus but was never able to deliver it (especially if Alexander was aware of her intentions). And by the time she was again within 'earshot' of Artabazus, his position in the new order was significantly changed.

That is not at all likely. All the sources are clear that the top rank Persians took their wives and families on campaign as Diodorus (16.35.3) makes plain:

Not only the ladies of the royal house but also those of the King's Relatives and Friends, borne on gilded chariots, had accompanied the army according to an ancestral custom of the Persians...

Curtius actually names some (3.13.13):

The same group contained the wife of Ochus, the daughter of Darius' brother, Oxathres, and the wife of Artabazus, Darius' chief courtier, as well as Artabazus' son, whose name was Ilioneus. [14] The wife and son of Pharnabazus (the man whom Darius had given supreme command over the coastal area) were also taken, as were the three daughters of Mentor, and the wife and son of the renowned general Memnon. Scarcely any courtier's household was unaffected by the catastrophe.

Arrian, who notes that the "wives of Persian peers" (2.11.9) were also captured, only bothers to name those who fell in battle. Amongst these is a certain Bubaces who, just as with Artabazus, was "one of the Persian dignitaries". We can assume that all these noble Persians - peers, Friends and "dignitaries" took their wives and family and that, as Artabazus' were captured, he was there too.

For the proposition to be true that Barsine was taken to Damascus as a spy one has to accept that Artabazus took the field with the royal army banking on defeat. Not only defeat but that the royal headquarters at Damascus would fall into Alexander's hands along with all the other family members of the Persian hierarchy. That having occurred, he then has to ensure that his daughter survives the storming of the royal camp and is gifted to Alexander.

That entire premise is, to me, a nonsense and unsupported by the facts as they are preserved.

My contention is that Alexander was well aware of her status and of the danger of having such a well connected and educated woman in his entourage. Hold your friends close and you enemies closer. There is nothing to say that Barsine was just a bedmate for Alexander.

For this to accepted, there'd need to be evidence of Alexander passing on dis-information to Darius. Nothing so much as a scintilla exists and, as Agesilaos has pointed out, it is Alexander who is "wrong footed" in the lead up to Gaugamela.

As a side note, it seems clear enough that I have made my points about Barsine and I disagree that it is just up to me to prove my points. A well rounded rhetorician would be capable of providing insight to both sides of the story. Seeing as the purported facts seem to go either way, I am within the bounds here to deliver an overlooked interpretation of those few precious facts as they were laid down.

I would disagree with that as well. A good rhetorician might be "capable of providing insight to both sides of the story"; one attempting to provide a new interpretation of the source evidence would indeed provide evidential proof of his interpretation. Most of those who post here do so, whether or not this is "just a public forum".

And I have always valued your posts and replies whenever I can get them.

Awfully glad to hear it. It's been a while.

[Nicator]

Paralus,
Ok, finally someone states something that is not just interesting but, perhaps relevant. Like all replies before you chimed in, the entire counterpoint relies on supposition. Artabazus 'may' have been captured along with the rest of his immediate family. As none of the sources state this, my original assumption was that this was not the case. And if Artabazus was captured and present, then we can bring Parmenion back into the argument, as this would bring much more weight to the collusion theory. Artabazus and Parmenion working together to have Barsine handed over to Alexander to work her magic...hhmmm. Also, if it was the case, then it adds more weight to Barsine's role as a gatherer of intel. Because now, her venerable father would have been nearby to instruct her. This is interesting Paralus. And I must admit, I had not considered it before you made mention of it. Though, I was well aware of the Persian penchant for bringing the family to battle(Wow...what arrogance!). Artabazus could have been there and escaped too. We just don't know. But I like the supposition that he was 'captured'.

After Artabazus married her off to Mentor, a Greek family became her new caretaker. So, Artabazus would not need to be in her immediate presence. And with his importance to Darius, he could have tended to more important matters far and away from southern Asia Minor while Memnon did his thing. But unfortunately, this priceless bit of history only further strengthens my original supposition.

As far as your proposition concerning all the 'pre-planning' on Artabazus' part...that's just weird, and I think, largely irrelevant. None of that is necessary for her to gather intel...especially, after already served this role in some fashion for two former Greek commanders and learning this 'way of life' from her father. And even moreso, if her father were captured along with her. But, it is just as likely that he was not anywhere near the area OR captured.

So, by all means, keep throwing more wood on the fire...my interpretation holds. And, it does not counterpose any of the facts as laid down.

Great to debate you...it has been too long.

[Paralus]

Artabazus 'may' have been captured along with the rest of his immediate family. As none of the sources state this, my original assumption was that this was not the case.

Seems I did not write clearly. What I wrote was "We can assume that all these noble Persians - peers, Friends and "dignitaries" took their wives and family and that, as Artabazus' were captured, he was there too". By this I meant that as Artabazus' wife (and a couple of children) were captured at Damascus, Artabazus clearly accompanied his king - not that he was captured by Parmenion at Damscus. The source material contradicts such a proposition.

Arrian gives a description of the last stages of the pursuit of Darius. Alexander recieves information that Darius is in chains and that Bessus has been "nominated leader by the Bactrian cavalry and all the other barbarians who were companions of Darius in his flight, except Artabazus and his sons, together with the Grecian, mercenaries, who still remained faithful to Darius" (3.21.4). Thus Artabazus was always in Darius' entourage from the defeat at Issos until his surrender after his King's murder.

The point being that Barsine was not ever taken along to Issos as any "spy". She was the daughter of one of the highest ranking Persians and, as with the other grandees' families, she came along. There is absolutely nothing suspicious in her being there and being captured. Nor is there anything untoward in her being taken by (or offered to) Alexander; she'd been the wife of an enemy commander and the daughter of one of the highest ranking Persians outside of the royal family. It might have been as simple as "in your eye".

Plutarch, who provides the backbone of your supposition, goes to great lengths to stress his hero's chivalrous treatment of the Persian women and the royal women. In this he cannot but fail to note what was available to others: that Alexander took this woman as the "gift of war". He therefore feels compelled to explain it against the background of the afforementioned chivalry. I strongly suspect that had there been the merest hint that Alexander did so for intelligence/counter intelligence purposes that Plutarch, never one to pass up such an morsel, will have expounded upon it. Especially as I belive the little explanatory excursus about Barsine is to excuse the not quite so chivalrous taking of a high ranking enemy's daughter.

On the habit of the high ranking Persians taking along family in a campaign, this is not so far removed from Memnon having to send his wife to the King when taking command of those "on the seabaord" - a guarantee. That the Persian high command had to deposit their kin within the King's camp when on campaign with him ensured their loyaty. In battle they fought for those left in the rear camp as much as themselves. Rather disastrous when matters don't go to plan though.

[Nicator]

Seems I did not write clearly. What I wrote was "We can assume that all these noble Persians - peers, Friends and "dignitaries" took their wives and family and that, as Artabazus' were captured, he was there too". By this I meant that as Artabazus' wife (and a couple of children) were captured at Damascus, Artabazus clearly accompanied his king - not that he was captured by Parmenion at Damscus. The source material contradicts such a proposition.

Arrian gives a description of the last stages of the pursuit of Darius. Alexander recieves information that Darius is in chains and that Bessus has been "nominated leader by the Bactrian cavalry and all the other barbarians who were companions of Darius in his flight, except Artabazus and his sons, together with the Grecian, mercenaries, who still remained faithful to Darius" (3.21.4). Thus Artabazus was always in Darius' entourage from the defeat at Issos until his surrender after his King's murder.

Well, now I know why I naturally assumed Artabazus was not captured with the royal women and family at Damascus. But this is still kind of irrelevant. Though it would help explain any instructions given to Barsine to provide this intel, it's not necessary. This was an intelligent & educated woman that would have been doing this automatically to help her country whenever and wherever possible.

Much has been made about the source material and as yet, none of the counterpoints related have, in any way, counterposed my original supposition. In my eye, yes. In your eye, she was something else...but also 'supposed'. Yes, Darius was wrong-footed at Guagamela. But I think it would be laughable to presume Barsine could adequately transcribe logistics or tactical troop movements (strategic direction as far as place of destination would not be beyond the realm of possibilities though). So, this would not be her role. But I think it's equally laughable to assume that all women of this era were blind deaf and dumb to their husbands 'goings on's'. Too much stress is placed on putting the women of this era into a little guilded box and pretending they don't exist beyond the home and bed-chamber. And this particular woman was far from typical. Her pedigree of Persian heritage and marital history was without equal. While Memnon waged his war, the camp would have been abuzz with chatter concerning the war's goings on. Likewise, it is naive to consider Memnon as 'quiet' about his military exploits or that Barsine absorbed none of it from the hallways and banquet halls. Many (maybe all) men bounce their days activities off the wife at night. If he had no reason to be careful about what he said, then he'd not exercise too much caution in that regard. And the sources are unanimous concerning the loyalty of the Greeks to the Great King throughout this whole affair.

Anyway, I feel comfortable here with a supposition that is one step away from the evidence and extrapolated as such. But concocting an entire story is fantasy. Alexander could not have fully trusted this woman because he was too intelligent for that. She was a High-born Persian with direct ties to the Persian high command. And for most of her adult life, she'd shared the bed of the 'other' enemy, i.e...the Greeks. There is no reason to suppose that she would suddenly switch loyalties and give herself over to Alexander (at least not immediately). That is a stretch that I'm simply not willing to partake in.

I see many many examples of Green and others extrapolating information from the sources that are not explicitly stated...though implicitly plausible, if not obvious. My contention falls under that realm of argument in that this has been overlooked because none of the sources state it outright (though, if you don't see the implications of the circumstances concerning Barsine, then this argument can go no further).

[Paralus]

But I think it would be laughable to presume Barsine could adequately transcribe logistics or tactical troop movements...

In which case, as a military spy, she was useless.

[...] (strategic direction as far as place of destination would not be beyond the realm of possibilities though).

And so she was well placed to let Darius know that Alexander headed south and thence to Egypt. Something he was informed about by the many still loyal to him in the area.

There is no reason to suppose that she would suddenly switch loyalties and give herself over to Alexander (at least not immediately). That is a stretch that I'm simply not willing to partake in.

Loyalty likely had little to do with it. I'd suggest Alexander simply partook and forsook: other conquests awaited (so many peoples; so little time....).

Much has been made about the source material and as yet, none of the counterpoints related have, in any way, counterposed my original supposition. In my eye, yes. In your eye, she was something else...but also 'supposed'.

Not supposed on my behalf and I've not gone beyond what's available in the source material.

[Nicator]

But I think it would be laughable to presume Barsine could adequately transcribe logistics or tactical troop movements...


In which case, as a military spy, she was useless.

Well, I'm not necessarily stating she was being used or expected to provide this type of intel.

And so she was well placed to let Darius know that Alexander headed south and thence to Egypt. Something he was informed about by the many still loyal to him in the area.

I'm not sure what you are stating here? I never stated that there was actually actionable intel coming from this Persian plant. This is going beyond the source material. This type of statement is going into the realm of fantasy.

Nicator wrote:
There is no reason to suppose that she would suddenly switch loyalties and give herself over to Alexander (at least not immediately). That is a stretch that I'm simply not willing to partake in.


Loyalty likely had little to do with it. I'd suggest Alexander simply partook and forsook: other conquests awaited (so many peoples; so little time....).

...again, more supposition extrapolated from the facts. You are just like me but you have taken the 'company line' instead of the riskier viewpoint that hasn't yet been supposed. Only, you don't see it for some reason.

[Paralus]

But I think it would be laughable to presume Barsine could adequately transcribe logistics or tactical troop movements...


In which case, as a military spy, she was useless.

Well, I'm not necessarily stating she was being used or expected to provide this type of intel [...] I never stated that there was actually actionable intel coming from this Persian plant. This is going beyond the source material. This type of statement is going into the realm of fantasy.

Then I'm at a loss.

Per recorded history, Barsine was given to Alexander as a gift, schooled in Greek, and was likely acquainted with Alexander from his childhood. She was probably a very strong woman. This seems likely enough, having outlived two extremely capable Greek commanders for husbands. That fact alone, would indicate that this woman was well versed in military power plays and more than capable of weaving intrigue. But, accordingly, these combined elements were just a little too convenient and...perfect for a spy. She simply could not be trusted. She was likely placed at Alexander's side for the sole purpose of getting information on him.

Alexander headed up the largest invasion of the Persian Empire in its history. If Barsine was a "Persian plant" and "spy" then she can hardly have been delicately placed in harm's way at Damascus so as to gather information on his dietary habits or sexual proclivities. Darius needed military intelligence and operational intelligence. You yourself noted "that this woman was well versed in military power plays".

Loyalty likely had little to do with it. I'd suggest Alexander simply partook and forsook: other conquests awaited (so many peoples; so little time....).

...again, more supposition extrapolated from the facts. You are just like me but you have taken the 'company line' instead of the riskier viewpoint that hasn't yet been supposed. Only, you don't see it for some reason.

No supposition whatsoever. As you noted at the very beginning of this thread ...

Whatever happened behind the scenes during those months, she was eventually left behind, albeit...with child, while Alexander marched on.

To have Alexander mangle Caesar's famous line: I captured, I copulated, I decamped.

As is almost universally the case, the simplest solution is near certainly correct. Barsine was captured as a spoil of war - along with many other family members of the "Persian peers", Friends and royal relatives - and was used as such. Plutarch's comforting explanations aside.

But, like attempting rational discussion with those who claim the Apollo landings were faked in Nevada and a studio backlot (I do not claim that you are one!), this will likely get us nowhere.

[marcus]

To have Alexander mangle Caesar's famous line: I captured, I copulated, I decamped.

Oh, bravo, sir!

ATB

[Nicator]

Paralus,

Nicator wrote:
Paralus wrote:
But I think it would be laughable to presume Barsine could adequately transcribe logistics or tactical troop movements...


In which case, as a military spy, she was useless.


Well, I'm not necessarily stating she was being used or expected to provide this type of intel [...] I never stated that there was actually actionable intel coming from this Persian plant. This is going beyond the source material. This type of statement is going into the realm of fantasy.


Then I'm at a loss.

Alexander headed up the largest invasion of the Persian Empire in its history. If Barsine was a "Persian plant" and "spy" then she can hardly have been delicately placed in harm's way at Damascus so as to gather information on his dietary habits or sexual proclivities. Darius needed military intelligence and operational intelligence. You yourself noted "that this woman was well versed in military power plays".

I would never suggest that Barsine was expected to deliver military intel. That's something that even a modern woman wouldn't be relied upon to provide. (Unless she was a militarily trained individual...No offense ladies.) Sure, Darius needed good military intel concerning troop movements and strength...etc. But just as certainly, he would not expect to get that from Barsine. Alexander's motivations, professional proclivities, relationships, internecine issues, and habits were another matter. This she would be ideal for. These subtle things could be extremely useful for organizing diplomatic meetings by affording Darius bargaining power, potential for wedging conflict between the general staff, and perhaps schedules for assassination attempts. Of course, Darius was unable to understand Alexander on any exacting level as evidenced from his failed attempts at diplomacy after Issus. Hence, my feelings that Barsine was either ineffective at gathering useful intel or unable (perhaps because Alexander would have been well aware of her standing and purpose).

I meant 'intrigue' by military power plays. For sure, she'd seen enough of that to fill a sizable chest by the time she'd fallen into Alexander's hands. As mentioned before, I am not insinuating she was pre-prepared beforehand. That's a weird supposition and totally unnecessary.

..again, more supposition extrapolated from the facts. You are just like me but you have taken the 'company line' instead of the riskier viewpoint that hasn't yet been supposed. Only, you don't see it for some reason.


No supposition whatsoever.

Sure you have. If it was not stated outright, then it's supposition. Your supposition is firmly in the 'accepted' storyline. Thus, not easily recognizable as such. All we really know about her is her parentage, former husbands, and family connections. Precious little. My contention, as stated before, is that her pedigree was too great to be taken for a mere concubine. Yours is that her pedigree was irrelevant. More good points though Paralus. Keep em' coming.

[artemisia]

I just want to add, that Alexander named this boy of Barsine with the most important and honourable name in his opinion - his ancestor Herakles, who was worshipped as god in Makedonia (inscription from the palace in Aigai "Herakles Patroos"). This name is program as well as his coins, and maybe he wanted him even to be his successor. And perhaps he sent Barsine back to Pergamon because of the expected hardships of the future campaign, which also costed the live of his first child by Roxane. Of course Pergamon was a very secure und Greek place to rear the child far away from possible dangers.

[marcus]

And perhaps he sent Barsine back to Pergamon because of the expected hardships of the future campaign, which also costed the live of his first child by Roxane. Of course Pergamon was a very secure and Greek place to rear the child far away from possible dangers.

Well, we don't know what caused the death of Roxane's first child. It might well have been the rigours of the journey, but it might have been any number of things.

However, that doesn't mean that Barsine and Heracles weren't sent to Pergamon to spare them the rigours of the Eastern Campaign, I agree.

ATB