POLL: Alexander - good or bad?

[dean]

Hello,

Yes- I don't recall cross generation marriages or relationships being tradition in other societies.

In the Egyptian it certainly wasn't the case and the Achaemenian neither- Darius marries his sister- Statira- if I am not mistaken- so there are similarities between the Achaemenian and the Egyptian- and more recently and British royal family- preserving the blue blood I guess.

Greeks practised polygamy-and it may have been Philip's downfall this one..

Having said all that- when discussing such matters I am tempted to look for a different term than "married"- I don't think that their concept of "marriage" was the modern one- that of falling in love and other such lovey dovey stuff

But back to your point- about Olympias- I think that Alexander in early years had an unusually close relationship with her- I don't mean incestuous- just very very intimate but here I go hypothesising again. We'll never know the truth. His leaving the kingdom in a kind of self-imposed exile with his mother to Epirus after the Attalus brawl does indicate how close they were thpugh-

An Oedipus complex? Come on, Freud analysed the classic Hamlet in search of traits of an Oedipus complex in Mr Shakespeare and asserted that it was clear- Hamlet's repressed desire and inability to kill Claudius and to bed Gertudes was proof enough for him- how people love to play with psychology!! It is a modern pastime. I think this is even more ridiculous with Alexander.

Renault suggests that Philip's desire to take youthful Alexander to the gardens of Midas- Mieza was simply to distance the boy from his mother- it certainly is an interesting point of view and indication of her powerful influence over him.

Best regards,
Dean.

[amyntoros]

Hi Dean,

Renault suggests that Philip's desire to take youthful Alexander to the gardens of Midas- Mieza was simply to distance the boy from his mother- it certainly is an interesting point of view and indication of her powerful influence over him.

Renault isnGÇÖt the only writer to suggest this and I donGÇÖt disagree. However, itGÇÖs the nature of OlympiasGÇÖ influence that constantly comes under the microscope, as in this thread. Winthrop Lindsay Adams (yep, quoting him once again!) made a very sensible comment in his book:

GÇ£The old view was that Alexander inherited his passionate nature and emotions from Olympias and his brains from Philip. Aside from the fact that genetics donGÇÖt work that way, any cursory study of PhilipGÇÖs life would reveal that he was passionate in the extreme, and that OlympiasGÇÖ intelligence and capability were manifest throughout her life. It does serve a purpose, however, in that it points out the dichotomy and dynamic tension of AlexanderGÇÖs childhood; He was continually pulled between these two strong personalities. They were the polarities of his life.GÇ¥

I find much truth in this statement, although IGÇÖm not so sure it is an old way of thinking. Many people still see OlympiasGÇÖ relationship with both Alexander and Philip as being excessively emotional in that her problems with Philip originated from sexual jealousy, and that she influenced Alexander against his father because of this. Not to mention (as is being discussed here) that she is sometimes seen as being GÇ£immoderatelyGÇ¥ devoted to her son and vice-versa. ThereGÇÖs much evidence that Olympias was a coolly calculating woman who did what she felt she had to do in order to see her son ascend to the throne. This was of paramount importance to her, and reason enough for Philip to want to get Alexander out from her clutches. He wanted his son to concentrate on getting the best education in order to continue to prove himself worthy of becoming king, while Olympias would surely have insisted to Alexander that he was to inherit even if he was as GÇ£half-wittedGÇ¥ as they say Arrhidaeus was. Even though there is some appearance of women in Macedonia having more freedom than in the rest of Greece, a womanGÇÖs status and any semblance of independence still depended on the males in the family GÇô first father, then husband, and then, especially in the case of royalty, her son(s). If Olympias was to continue to enjoy an elevated status at the Macedonian court she needed to ensure that the succession was AlexanderGÇÖs, and IGÇÖm sure her every deed and thought was calculated on seeing her son become king. When Alexander was gone, she did the same for her grandson(s) to the best of her abilities.

I think the family dynamics were all about power and not any oedipal nonsense. After Alexander became king he would have always remembered what his mother had done for him and reciprocated accordingly. (Yes, I know he never brought her to Asia, but did any of the Companions have their mothers brought to court either? Before or after AlexanderGÇÖs death?) For instance, if Olympias did kill Cleopatra and her child, she did it to protect Alexander from any future claims to his throne, IMO. Alexander would have recognized the reasoning behind her actions. To me, the devotion between mother and son is logical and hardly excessive under the circumstances.

Best regards,

[marcus]

I think the family dynamics were all about power and not any oedipal nonsense. After Alexander became king he would have always remembered what his mother had done for him and reciprocated accordingly ... For instance, if Olympias did kill Cleopatra and her child, she did it to protect Alexander from any future claims to his throne, IMO. Alexander would have recognized the reasoning behind her actions. To me, the devotion between mother and son is logical and hardly excessive under the circumstances.

Couldn't agree more. I have no doubt that, if Olympias killed Cleopatra, then Alexander displayed exactly the right amount of "anger"; I also have no doubt that he probably didn't like it; I also have no doubt that he was extremely glad that she'd done it, because it got rid of a whole load of potential complications.

ATB

[dean]

Hi Amyntoros,

That Philip wanted to Alexander to win the right to be king and Olympias on the other hand was effectively saying I don't care how good or bad you are- but you will
be king one way or another no doubt provided him with two poles or extremes difficult to "marry" in his childhood when most susceptible.

How right you are. We do tend to accept the generalization- that Alexander "inherited" his political sense from Philip and that his emotional life came straight from Olympias- yet perhaps Alexander was a little if not a lot spoilt, over protected by Olympias- Leonidas going through Alexander's things to make sure Olympias hadn't left any goodies for the young prince is a good indication of this.

No doubt that the desire to secure power for Alexander was at the root of Olympias sinister actions with regards to Philip's new wife- and child- Alexander learned that these actions were necessary and upon his accession didn't think twice about having the same done with several others-

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned- the image that we have of Olympias as the angry and dangerous woman- snake handler and all round angry lady maybe a result of considerable distortion in the sources. We will never know. Her implied response to Philip setting her aside for a younger wife seems more in line with an attitude that we wouldn't really expect from a woman of her time- in the polygamous society that she lived in or would we expect her to be bitter about it? Were his other wives angry and embittered? I think not.

However, after Attalus' comments at the celebration- about a legitimate heir- I can well understand the alarm bells going off in Alexander's mind.

Best regards,
Dean

[Coral]

Many people still see OlympiasGÇÖ relationship with both Alexander and Philip as being excessively emotional in that her problems with Philip originated from sexual jealousy, and that she influenced Alexander against his father because of this. ........ ThereGÇÖs much evidence that Olympias was a coolly calculating woman who did what she felt she had to do in order to see her son ascend to the throne. This was of paramount importance to her, and reason enough for Philip to want to get Alexander out from her clutches.

Olympias didn't seem to have serious problems with Nicesipolis or Philip's Thracian wife, who came after her, and which would have happened if it was simply sexual jealousy. And why wouldn't the sexual jealousy extend to the men in Philip's life? I agree that it was all about power. With Cleopatra, Philip was highly enamored and she was young, therefore, she was probably going to produce a horde of children soon. Plus she had the backing of a very powerful Macedonian family - all of this would have made Olympias very uneasy about her son's, and therefore her, future prospects. I also feel that she was extremely ambitious, and perhaps desired to be the "power behind the throne" once her son was King. (Renault way of thinking). Much as he loved his mother, Alexander was too strong a personality to ever allow this and poor Olympias had to content herself with vitriolic letters and complaints for a decade or more till his death.

Interesting to think what kind of person ATG would have been, if he had been born a woman - an "incomplete" man - in those days!

[Vanessa Howard]

Born a woman - hard to imagine isn't it? Even a woman of Olympias's considerable skill and ambition floundered on the limitations and danger of being a mere wfe and mother. Poor Cleopatra. Far better to be a hetaera perhaps? Thais lived to a ripe old age as well as becoming a Queen and consort...

[marcus]

Thais lived to a ripe old age as well as becoming a Queen and consort...

Don't think she was ever a queen, was she? Or even, technically, a consort? Merely the mother of Ptolemy's children.

ATB

[Vanessa Howard]

Hi Marcus

Athenaeus claims they married also Cleitarchus - she did bear Ptolemy two sons, Lagus and Leontiscus and a daughter, Eirene. I've read she kept the honorific title 'Queen of Memphis' after Ptolemy took other wives. I don't think Thais's goal would have been marriage - status perhaps and the hope of succession for her sons and in that she failed - as it was another wife, Berenice, whose son became Ptolemy II.

Best

Vanessa

[marcus]

Athenaeus claims they married also Cleitarchus - she did bear Ptolemy two sons, Lagus and Leontiscus and a daughter, Eirene. I've read she kept the honorific title 'Queen of Memphis' after Ptolemy took other wives. I don't think Thais's goal would have been marriage - status perhaps and the hope of succession for her sons and in that she failed - as it was another wife, Berenice, whose son became Ptolemy II.

Indeed - I wasn't suggesting that they didn't marry, but being married was different from being a "consort" or a "queen", and I don't believe it would be correct to call Thais either of those. But "wife", very much so.

ATB