Cassander (and Olympias)

Discuss the wars of Alexander's successors

Moderator: pothos moderators

Alexias
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 am

Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Alexias »

I have been reading Agnes Saville's "Alexander the Great and his Time" (1955). She says that Alexander didn't take Cassander to Asia with him because of Cassander's poor health. This gave him an inferiority complex, and partly accounts for his eradication of Alexander's family. I couldn't find any proof of Cassander's poor health so suspect this is just embroidery.

I did come across this though from Plutarch, about the omens before Alexander's death:
On hearing of this, Alexander put the man out of the way, as the seers directed; but he began to be low-spirited, and was distrustful now of the favour of Heaven and suspicious of his friends. He was particularly afraid of Antipater and of his sons, one of whom, Iolas, was his chief cupbearer; the other, Cassander, had only recently come to Babylon,
Why would Alexander be afraid of Antipater and his sons, or does it mean distrust rather than fear? Or is it just Plutarch subscribing to the theory that Alexander was poisoned.

Can anyone recommend a useful book on Antipater and his family?

I also found this from Pausanias:
PYRRHUS OF MACEDONIA, HISTORY

[1.11.3] Down to Alcetas, son of Tharypus, Epeirus too was under one king. But the sons of Alcetas after a quarrel agreed to rule with equal authority, remaining faithful to their compact; and afterwards, when Alexander, son of Neoptolemus, died among the Leucani, and Olympias returned to Epeirus through fear of Antipater, Aeacides, son of Arybbas, continued in allegiance to Olympias and joined in her campaign against Aridaeus and the Macedonians, although the Epeirots refused to accompany him.

[1.11.4] Olympias on her victory behaved wickedly in the matter of the death of Aridaeus, and much more wickedly to certain Macedonians, and for this reason was considered to have deserved her subsequent treatment at the hands of Cassander; so Aeacides at first was not received even by the Epeirots because of their hatred of Olympias, and when after wards they forgave him, his return to Epeirus was next opposed by Cassander. When a battle occurred at Oeneadae between Philip, brother of Cassander, and Aeacides, Aeacides was wounded and shortly after met his fate.41
Does anyone know why the Epirotes hated Olympias when she was one of their own?
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Paralus »

I'm afraid that Saville's claim that Kasandros was left behind because of the poor state of his health might rank up there with Worthington's claim that Alexander was furious and at odds with Philip because the latter was departing for Persia and leaving him in Macedonia. Thus he must have participated in his murder. For a person so ill, Kassandros fared rather well in the struggles after Alexander's death. All we know is that he died of some disease which Pausanias describes as either "dropsy" or diabetes (ὑδέρῳ) going on to say that this produced "worms while he was yet alive" (9.7.2). The result of too much improperly cooked camp meat and a lack of Combantrin one supposes....

On Olympias, Pausanias describes her as hated by the Epirotes. More to the point is that the Epirotes appeared to have had enough of Aiakides' messing in Macedonian affairs and so engaging the Epirotes in ongoing wars they had little taste for. They rebelled against Aaikides and while on campaign and returned to Epirus where they overthrew him and allied themselves with Kassandros (Diod. 19.36.1-5). A "hatred" for Olympias might be inferred as her rescue was Aiakides' intent but it is more likely that the Epirotes simply wished to be left well enough alone of Macedonian politics. They would seem to have shrugged that off by Pyrrhos' time.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
Alexias
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 am

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Alexias »

Thanks. Agnes Saville also says, several times but without offering any evidence, that Cassander would not allow any positive biography of Alexander to be published. I think she may just be extrapolating that backwards because Ptolemy didn't get round to writing his memoirs until he was an old man. It would have been difficult for Cassander to impose a ban outside of Greece and maybe Thrace, and I wouldn't have thought his influence would have extended that far in Egypt. But it would make him an unlikely candidate for building a tomb to Alexander's mother.
User avatar
Taphoi
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 931
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:32 pm
Location: Bristol, England, UK
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Taphoi »

Alexias wrote:Thanks. Agnes Saville also says, several times but without offering any evidence, that Cassander would not allow any positive biography of Alexander to be published. I think she may just be extrapolating that backwards because Ptolemy didn't get round to writing his memoirs until he was an old man. It would have been difficult for Cassander to impose a ban outside of Greece and maybe Thrace, and I wouldn't have thought his influence would have extended that far in Egypt. But it would make him an unlikely candidate for building a tomb to Alexander's mother.
Who has suggested that Cassander might have built a tomb for Olympias? It is quite a preposterous suggestion. He hated her grimly. Besides it was not his responsibility. It was the responsibility of her family and in particular the responsibility of her grandson, the recognised sole king of the Macedonian empire.
Best wishes,
Andrew
Alexias
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 am

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Alexias »

Taphoi wrote:Who has suggested that Cassander might have built a tomb for Olympias? It is quite a preposterous suggestion. He hated her grimly. Besides it was not his responsibility. It was the responsibility of her family and in particular the responsibility of her grandson, the recognised sole king of the Macedonian empire.
Best wishes,
Andrew
My apologies. So much has been said it is difficult to remember the details.
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Paralus »

Taphoi wrote:Who has suggested that Cassander might have built a tomb for Olympias? It is quite a preposterous suggestion.
I sometimes wish that Maccullochella peelii would attack a lure with such fervour. Seems to be something of a raw nerve and over-reaction there. What is preposterous is that Kassandros was somehow pressured by the royal family - Alexander IV, Kleopatra and, most creatively, Aiakides - to allow the building of the huge Kasta monument for his hated enemy. Either way, I think such belongs on the Sphinxes thread where it has already occupied far too many words.

Alexias, this Agnes Saville seems quite at home making statements without evidence. While Ptolemy and Kassandros were allies of convenience for good parts of the years down to Kassandros' death, nothing at all supports the notion that Kassandros could ever have prevailed upon the ruler of Egypt to stay his quill.
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
Xenophon
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:16 am

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Xenophon »

Taphoi wrote:
Who has suggested that Cassander might have built a tomb for Olympias? It is quite a preposterous suggestion. He hated her grimly. Besides it was not his responsibility. It was the responsibility of her family and in particular the responsibility of her grandson, the recognised sole king of the Macedonian empire.
In the words of John McEnroe, tennis great, "You cannot be serious!!"

This grandson would be Alexander IV, aged 7 when he and his Bactrian mother fell into Cassander's hands following the surrender of Pydna. They were imprisoned in Amphipolis, and Alexander was stripped of all Royal priveleges, until Cassander had them murdered in 310/309, when he was aged 13.

He had neither the means nor the opportunity to create a tomb for anyone, and the suggestion that he had the Kasta Hellenistic tomb built, or persuaded Cassander to build it into the side of the mound, for Olympias, is simply not viable.......

As to her 'family', just whom do you have in mind as potential tomb builder at that time?

Much later, when her family went into exile from Epirus and settled at Pydna, the evidence suggests she had some sort of tomb/memorial built there [see Edson, whose work you have unsuccessfully attempted to debunk]



Alexias wrote:
Why would Alexander be afraid of Antipater and his sons, or does it mean distrust rather than fear?
To suggest an answer to this, distrust/fear may amount to the same thing and they certainly go hand in hand. One possible reason is that following the murder of Philip, Antipater had been instrumental in supporting Alexander for the throne, at a time when all was uncertain and there were other possible candidates, which indicates the extent of his power and influence. Subsequently, during Alexander's 10 years or so Oddyssey in the East, he had been effectively sole ruler of Macedon. That Alexander certainly felt it time for a change is shown by his summoning Antipater to Babylon in person along with reinforcements, to be replaced as ruler of Macedon by Craterus.....

Like the later "Warwick the Kingmaker" who wielded a great deal of power in the English Wars of the Roses, Alexander may have felt Antipater was "an over mighty subject."
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by agesilaos »

Alexias, the trouble with the Antipatrid/Alexander animosity story is that there is little evidence for it in the undoubted actions we have reported, though much in the comment and interpretation.

For instance, Alexander is suspicious of Antipatros and his sons yet Iollas remains his cup-bearer, similarly Antipatros is allegedly hanging back in Macedon in fear of his life so he sends his eldest son and heir alone to Court ! Krateros is never mentioned as asserting the authority Alexander allegedly gave him to take command.

Arrian, Anab VII 12,
He ordered Craterus to lead these men back, and when he had done so, to take upon himself the government of Macedonia, Thrace, and Thessaly, and to preside over the freedom of the Greeks. He also ordered Antipater to bring to him the Macedonians of manly age as successors to those who were being sent back. He despatched Polysperchon also with Craterus, as his second in command, so that if any mishap befell Craterus on the march (for he was sending him back on account of the weakness of his health), those who were going might not be in need of a general. A secret report was also going about that Alexander was now overcome by his mother's accusations of Antipater, and that he wished to remove him from Macedonia. This report was current among those who interpret royal actions more jealously the more they are concealed, and who are inclined to construe fidelity into something bad rather than to accept it as real; a course to which they are led by appearances and their own depravity. But perhaps this sending for Antipater was not designed for his dishonour, but rather to prevent any unpleasant consequences to Antipater and Olympias from their quarrel which he might not himself be able to rectify. For they were incessantly writing to Alexander, the former saying that the arrogance, acerbity, and meddlesomeness of Olympias was exceedingly unbecoming to the king's mother; insomuch that Alexander was related to have used the following remark in reference to the reports which he received about his mother: that she was exacting from him a heavy house-rent for the ten months. The queen wrote that Antipater was overweeningly insolent in his pretensions to sovereignty as well as in the service of his court, no longer remembering the one who had appointed him, but claiming to win and hold the first rank among the Greeks and even the Macedonians. These slanderous reports about Antipater appeared to have more weight with Alexander, since they were more formidable in regard to the regal dignity. However, no overt act or word of the king was reported, from which any one could infer that Antipater was in any way less in favour with him than before.
The Nicomedian clearly found the accounts of the rupture both biased and unsubstantiated, he may have researching his study of the early Diadochoi when he wrote this, but will have had access to many more sources than we possess in any case; if we are to praise his source selection and treatment throughout the ‘Anabasis’ then we have to take this judgement seriously too (of course one can reject his treatment of Alexander, but that would be perverse).

Kassandros’ animosity towards Alexander’s family is a common trope but even that is just a much down to circumstances than any bitter hatred, Mary Renault notwithstanding; Kassandros named one son Alexander, which is not a family name, for instance. Nor did he have many options when dealing with Olympias, whose actions would have drawn retribution from a saint; Alexander IV could not be permitted to become a focus of opposition, and, indeed, he was so beloved of the Macedonians that he was put out of the way without a murmur beyond the lip-service clause in the Peace of the Dynasts, his removal like that of Herakles was inevitable in an era of Realpolitik. Like Lysimachos he was not survived long by a dynasty leaving his reputation in the hands of his enemies, Not that that means we should see him as some badly done by saint, rather just as ruthless/effective as the other Diadochoi. :lol:
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Taphoi
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 931
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:32 pm
Location: Bristol, England, UK
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Taphoi »

For the record, the political situation in the period 316BC - 310BC was finely balanced. Whereas Cassander controlled Macedon, he was a minor player relative to Antigonus, who made it clear that he regarded Alexander IV as the king. Cassander's position was also therefore that Alexander IV was king and would potentially become his actual overlord when he came of age in 309BC (I doubt that Cassander decided upon regicide until he actually perpetrated it.) Above all the Macedonian army still demanded that the heirs of Alexander and Philip should succeed to the throne (as they had with gritty determination since Alexander's death). Events show that Cassander was under threat of invasion and the succession of Alexander's other son, Heracles, should he harm Alexander IV. And Antigonus made good his threat by backing Polyperchon's invasion as soon as the death of Alexander IV was confirmed in 309BC. It came within a whisker of succeeding.

Of course it was possible for the Royal Family to use their still considerable political leverage to get Cassander to acquiesce to their construction of a tomb for Olympias and it would have been a priority for them to show that they still had such leverage. They would have been able to get contributions from all the generals (which is a possible explanation for the ANT monograms on the peribolos itself). Cassander probably did not think it was worth trying to prevent them. Until he saw that the tomb was of such magnificence as to suit a goddess rather than a mere queen and realised that it meant that her family would never really forgive him for her killing and that he and his family would be in mortal peril, should Alexander IV come of age and seize control of the army.

To say that Cassander must have built the tomb because he was in charge in Macedon is rather like saying that Queen Elizabeth II must have built the tomb for Diana Princess of Wales. A complete non sequitur.

Best wishes,

Andrew
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by agesilaos »

An analysis worthy of Agnes Saville, herself, nay it surpasses her, she merely uncritically accepted what was in the sources and extrapolated backwards, this simply ignores swathes of evidence and invents an entire milieu; if this is ‘for the record’ then it must be for one by Bernard Cribbens or Charlie Drake (‘Please Mr Custer’ probably has as much historical bearing). :twisted:

Calling Kassandros ‘a minor player’ is like claiming the same for Churchill in the Second Big Show; Kassandros was behind the succession of coalitions which formed to oppose Antigonos, Macedonia also remained inviolate; Antigonid forces penetrated the kingdoms of every other player. Controlling the source of Macedonian manpower was a big deal.

Antigonos demonstrated his devotion to Alexander IV by having documents dated by his own strategia rather than the boy’s reign, going so far as to post-date his ‘accession’ to the date of Philip III’s death, effectively denying the reign of Alexander IV. When venturing into the turbulent and muddied waters of the Diadochoi one needs more than a simple faith in their pronouncements.

It is always a good move to strip your future overlord of all his privileges and hold him under close confinement while exercising power, just look at the fate of Roger Mortimer when Edward III came of age
Accused of assuming royal power and of various other high misdemeanours, he was condemned without trial and ignominiously hanged at Tyburn on 29 November 1330, his vast estates forfeited to the crown. His body hung at the gallows for two days and nights in full view of the populace.(wikipaedia for speed).
Nor was the Macedonian military baying for the accession of a mongrel brat, perhaps you can supply one instance of a mutiny against Kassandros, there were a number against Alexander III!

I am sure that others will want to correct some of the remaining falsehoods and misinterpretations, I would not wish to hog it all for myself. A Parthian shot though, when using Analogy it is best that they bear some semblance to the archetype; see Churchill and Mortimer above; Betty II has no power comparable to a Macedonian king, nor as far as I recall did the strumpet Spencer murder 100 of her friends, overturn the grave of Princess Margaret, sordidly murder Edward VIII and Mrs Simpson…get the picture? :lol: :lol:
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Taphoi
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 931
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:32 pm
Location: Bristol, England, UK
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Taphoi »

agesilaos wrote:An analysis worthy of Agnes Saville, herself, nay it surpasses her, she merely uncritically accepted what was in the sources and extrapolated backwards, this simply ignores swathes of evidence and invents an entire milieu; if this is ‘for the record’ then it must be for one by Bernard Cribbens or Charlie Drake (‘Please Mr Custer’ probably has as much historical bearing). :twisted:
Rhetorical twaddle worthy of Falstaff.
agesilaos wrote:Calling Kassandros ‘a minor player’ is like claiming the same for Churchill in the Second Big Show; Kassandros was behind the succession of coalitions which formed to oppose Antigonos, Macedonia also remained inviolate; Antigonid forces penetrated the kingdoms of every other player. Controlling the source of Macedonian manpower was a big deal.
Cassander was a minor player in that he could command armies barely a fifth the strength of Antigonus.
agesilaos wrote:Antigonos demonstrated his devotion to Alexander IV by having documents dated by his own strategia rather than the boy’s reign, going so far as to post-date his ‘accession’ to the date of Philip III’s death, effectively denying the reign of Alexander IV. When venturing into the turbulent and muddied waters of the Diadochoi one needs more than a simple faith in their pronouncements.
He did all this long after Alexander IV's death and after he had declared himself a king (since Alexander's family had been exterminated) in order to secure the succession of his family. The arch-royalist Ptolemy did the same, despite having ruled in the name of Alexander IV, erected statues of him, issued decrees in his name etc etc.
agesilaos wrote:It is always a good move to strip your future overlord of all his privileges and hold him under close confinement while exercising power, just look at the fate of Roger Mortimer when Edward III came of age
Accused of assuming royal power and of various other high misdemeanours, he was condemned without trial and ignominiously hanged at Tyburn on 29 November 1330, his vast estates forfeited to the crown. His body hung at the gallows for two days and nights in full view of the populace.(wikipaedia for speed).
Despite your studied irony, Mortimer's situation shows exactly how a Regent can believe in the possibility that his usurpation of power and murder of a close relative of the underage king might be forgiven on the grounds that he had acted honourably.
agesilaos wrote:Nor was the Macedonian military baying for the accession of a mongrel brat, perhaps you can supply one instance of a mutiny against Kassandros, there were a number against Alexander III!.
I have supplied the reference to the rebellion against Cassander that followed immediately upon his murder of Alexander IV: that led by Polyperchon, but backed ultimately by Antigonus. It attracted huge numbers to the banner of Heracles. (The language of "mongrel brat" is by the way overtly racist and you should perhaps be more careful not to imply that the sentiment is your own.) On the Macedonian army's attitude to non-Argead kings:
Curtius 10.7.6-7 wrote:Hence with relentless roaring [the army] insisted that they should suffer no sovereign save such as had been sired into the succession and thus they bade that Arrhidaeus be summoned. Meleager promptly propelled him into the palace out of hostility and hatred towards Perdiccas and so the soldiers saluted him as their sovereign under the pseudonym of Philip.
Best wishes,

Andrew
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by agesilaos »

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really ought to read some history. As for the 'mongrel brat' that is hoe those ultra liberal Macedonians saw Alexander IV, try reading the reasons why they chose Philip, apparently you have a copy of Curtius, nor was Polyperchon's attempt to install Herakles backed by any Macedonian army, it was a political move from Antigonos which was so close to sucess that Polyperchon had the boy's throat cur and joined Kassandros :lol: :lol: :lol:

With such political acumen you may well be up for the next Chancellor of the Excequer :lol: :lol:
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Paralus »

Taphoi wrote:Cassander was a minor player in that he could command armies barely a fifth the strength of Antigonus.
On that basis there was only ever one player in these years: Antigonos. All others, based on army size, are minors including the supposed "arch royalist" Ptolemy whose force at Gaza (gathered "from all sides") amounted to 18,000 foot and 4,000 cavalry - an army in which "some were Macedonians and some were mercenaries, but a great number were Egyptians" (Diod.19.80.4). Not even comparable with Kassanros' forces - particularly Macedonians. On what source basis do you conclude that the forces available to Kassandros were "barely a fifth" that available to Antigonos?
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by agesilaos »

He did all this long after Alexander IV's death and after he had declared himself a king (since Alexander's family had been exterminated) in order to secure the succession of his family. The arch-royalist Ptolemy did the same, despite having ruled in the name of Alexander IV, erected statues of him, issued decrees in his name etc etc.
Nope, while Seleukos was satrap Babylonian documents were dated by the regnal years of Alexander IV but as soon as Antigonos took over in 315 the dating formula changes to the years of his ‘generalship’, until he in his turn was ousted in 311 and Seleukos re-instated dating by Alexander IV until his assumption of the diadem. The same pattern is seen on the Idumaean ostraca, from which area the Antigonids were forced in312; all well before the murder of Alexander IV. ‘Facts, facts, facts!’

Diodoros gives us the story of Herakles in Book XX
20 1 Meanwhile Polyperchon, who was biding his time in the Peloponnesus, and who was nursing grievances against Cassander and had long craved the leadership of the Macedonians, summoned from Pergamon Barsinê's son Heracles, who was the son of Alexander but was being reared in Pergamon, being about seventeen years of age. 2 Moreover, Polyperchon, sending to his own friends in many places and to those who were at odds with Cassander, kept urging them to restore the youth to his ancestral throne. 3 He also wrote to the Federal League of the Aetolians, begging them to grant a safe conduct and to join forces with him and promising to repay the favour many times over if they would aid in placing the youth on his ancestral throne. Since the affair proceeded as he wished, the Aetolians being in hearty agreement and many others hurrying to aid in the restoration of the king, in all there were assembled more than twenty thousand infantry and at least one thousand horsemen. 4 Meanwhile Polyperchon, intent on the preparations for the war, was gathering money; and sending to those Macedonians who were friendly, he kept urging them to join in the undertaking.
and
28 1 Meanwhile Polyperchon, who had collected a strong army, brought back to his father's kingdom Heracles, the son of Alexander and Barsinê; but when he was in camp at the place called Stymphaeum, Cassander arrived with his army. As the camps were not far distant from each other and the Macedonians regarded the restoration of the king without disfavour, Cassander, since he feared lest the Macedonians, being by nature prone to change sides easily, should sometime desert to Heracles, sent an embassy to Polyperchon. 2 As for the king, Cassander tried to show Polyperchon that if the restoration should take place he would do what was ordered by others; but, he said, if Polyperchon joined with him and slew the stripling, he would at once recover what had formerly been granted him throughout Macedonia, and then, after receiving an army, he would be appointed general in the Peloponnesus and would be partner in everything in Cassander's realm, being honoured above all. Finally he won Polyperchon over by many great promises, made a secret compact with him, and induced him to murder the king. 3 When Polyperchon had slain the youth and was openly co-operating with Cassander, he recovered the grants in Macedonia and also, according to the agreement, received four thousand Macedonian foot-soldiers and five hundred Thessalian horse.4 Enrolling also those of the others who wished, he attempted to lead them through Boeotia into the Peloponnesus; but, when he was prevented by Boeotians and Peloponnesians, he turned aside, advanced into Locris, and there passed the winter.
This reads as quite a serious attempt to install Herakles, but if he was so close to regaining power why would Polyperchon swap for 4,500 troops and a Peloponnesian sinecure? If the Macedonians were so keen to see the boy king why do they acquiesce in his murder without demur? Why if Polyperchon has brought the pretender to ‘his father’s kingdom’ does he halt and camp in Epeiros? Never part of Alexander’s Empire.

Why repeat the tropes from the confrontation with Olympias; Macedonian fickleness and Kassandros’ uncertainty of their loyalty? Considering these factors it reads more like an exaggeration of a failed Antigonid ploy (Antigonos held Pergamon, his complicity can hardly be doubted).

Kassandros was much wiser than Mortimer who demonstrates that misjudgement in treating a future overlord proves invariably fatal.
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
User avatar
Taphoi
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 931
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:32 pm
Location: Bristol, England, UK
Contact:

Re: Cassander (and Olympias)

Post by Taphoi »

agesilaos wrote:...while Seleukos was satrap Babylonian documents were dated by the regnal years of Alexander IV but as soon as Antigonos took over in 315 the dating formula changes to the years of his ‘generalship’, until he in his turn was ousted in 311 and Seleukos re-instated dating by Alexander IV until his assumption of the diadem. The same pattern is seen on the Idumaean ostraca, from which area the Antigonids were forced in312; all well before the murder of Alexander IV.
If Antigonos is dating by his "generalship", then he still acknowledging that there is a king and it is just a matter of taste that he chose one formula over another. There is nothing to show that Antigonos usurped the crown until he actually did in about 306BC, six years after the murder of Alexander IV. In fact we are told that all the generals insisted that Alexander IV should take over the rule when he came of age at their meeting in 311BC. You are citng facts-facts-facts that don't support your point-point-point (just as with your reference to Mortimer, which supports my interpretation rather than yours).
agesilaos wrote:...This reads as quite a serious attempt to install Herakles, but if he was so close to regaining power why would Polyperchon swap for 4,500 troops and a Peloponnesian sinecure? If the Macedonians were so keen to see the boy king why do they acquiesce in his murder without demur? Why if Polyperchon has brought the pretender to ‘his father’s kingdom’ does he halt and camp in Epeiros? Never part of Alexander’s Empire.
Obviously, something was going on to pressurise Polyperchon that we do not know about, because it is not in the sources. I would speculate that Cassander had managed to round up a group of Polyperchon's relatives from Macedonia and threatened to execute them if Polyperchon did not comply. Else he might have threatened to torch Polyperchon's homeland of Tymphaea. Perhaps also Heracles was proving difficult to manage. Teenage kings are wont to threaten people when they don't get their way, which would not have been advisable in the case of Polyperchon. Cassander would have ruthlessly exploited any minor tension between Polyperchon and Heracles.
agesilaos wrote:Why repeat the tropes from the confrontation with Olympias; Macedonian fickleness and Kassandros’ uncertainty of their loyalty? Considering these factors it reads more like an exaggeration of a failed Antigonid ploy (Antigonos held Pergamon, his complicity can hardly be doubted).
It was a fully fledged popular rebellion with the backing of the most powerful Macedonians and it should have succeeded all else being equal. Cassander probably only managed to quell it at the last minute before a decisive battle through a combination of vicious and ruthless threats and sowing dissension between Polyperchon and Heracles.
agesilaos wrote:Kassandros was much wiser than Mortimer who demonstrates that misjudgement in treating a future overlord proves invariably fatal.
I would not say wiser, but rather more ruthless, more desperate and completely lacking in moral scruples. More to the point, Alexander IV and his mother and aunt evidently did not take as much care to hide their views on Cassander and their perspective on the killing of Olympias as Edward III did in respect of the murder of his father by Mortimer. The beautiful proof of how careless they were is the scale and magnificence of the Amphipolis Tomb. I fear that they did not understand that they were thereby resolving Cassander's risk-benefit dilemma in favour of their murder.

Best wishes,

Andrew
Post Reply