Hi Andrew,
It is probably wrong to suppose that Bagoas did not fight in Alexander's wars. It was quite normal for Persian Royal Eunuchs to fight in wars. Alexander dealt with a Eunuch commander at Gaza. The other Bagoas was a general in the war against Nectanebo in Egypt before he became Chiliarch. Xenophon, who personally collaborated with Persian Royal Eunuchs, wrote that despite Persian Royal Eunuchs being physically weaker than other men "steel is a great leveller and makes the weak man equal to the strong in war", clearly implying that eunuchs fought in hand-to-hand combats. It is important not to let the silly modern stereotype that Eunuchs were all fat harem attendants get the better of our judgement of the evidence.
Although I was familiar with the stories of Batis and the earlier Bagoas, I didn't realize eunuchs fought in the Persian army. Thanks for the Xenophon quote. With the benefit of hindsight - why not? I'm not entirely convinced that Alexander's Bagoas fought in the army - although I think its very possible. He was pretty much given to Alexander as a 'gift' by one of the men who had killed Darius. Do you really gift soldiers of the Persian army? He sounds like his status at the time he met Alexander was closer to that of a slave. Of course, that doesn't preclude that he got the necessary training and joined the ranks afterwards.
Note that you didn't get to be a trierarch purely through being Alexander's lover, because Roxane is not in the list!
I have to address this. One feels the odds would have been stacked against her being female. Patriarchy, few records of female commanders, no other females in the list etc... to point out the obvious. I know of one female trierarch under Xerxes from Lydia. But still, the Persian army was not exactly a bastion of gender-blind meritocracy. Further, it doesn't necessarily follow that the Macedonians would have allowed women in high army positions (however honorific) just because there were precedents under Persian Great Kings. I know there is record of Alexander's Illyrian half-sister fighting in battle. But the Illyrians were virtual barbarians weren't they?
There is also record of Macedonians getting a bit too excited upon seeing a military display by a unit of female soldiers, who had to be quickly removed from out of sight lest they be raped by their Macedonian male comrades. I know the sources say that a satrap organized this for Alexander's amusement. But I think it's entirely possible that this was a genuine army unit that had to be explained away in some manner to a baffled Macedonian/Greek/Roman audience. All in all, I just don't feel Roxanne had the same opportunities in a military sense as Alexander's male lovers did.
The counter examples are legion in both ancient and modern times. There's Alexander's own lyre-playing, Nero's various performances, Commodus and his gladiatorial exploits, Madonna and her shows, Condoleezza Rice with Aretha Franklin.
About important people and public performances, I am quite open to the suggestion. However, I can't draw parallels between most of your examples and that of Bagoas. Alexander was given a humiliating public telling off by Phillip for behaving like a female prostitute and he never played the lyre in company again, Nero was widely regarded as crazy, Madonna is only a high-ranking person because she's an entertainer by profession and Condi... agh... I can't believe you even brought that up! Some of us like to pretend the Bush era never happened.
It was a set of games - i.e. on the model of the Olympic events. Olympic victors were rather high status individuals in the Greek world and Alexander himself is reported to have considered (and dismissed) the possibility of competing (however an earlier Macedonian monarch did compete).
About the earlier Macedonian king competing in the Olympics - I think high-ranking individuals sent chariots to race. I didn't think they actually physically participated themselves. They were the patrons.
So, I have to agree with Amyntoros that the description of Bagoas competing for a prize does rankle with the idea that he was a very wealthy individual. But then, I don't want to discount sentimental or romantic reasons for him to perform for Alexander. Yeah, what a sop.
Hi Alexias,
I think that you are assuming here a) that the Indians had ships capable of river warfare and that they engaged in such, and b) that there were any cities close to a wide river, with a tendancy to flood, that needed attacking by water. With the army on both sides of the river, it's unlikely that there was any water-borne fighting.
I think most large Indian cities were deliberately located next to big rivers. The rivers were basically the lifeblood of the cities in terms of agriculture, travel and trade. India was densely populated, so the chances of coming across a city during river travels would have been high. I'm not sure about their naval capablities at the time but I know there were warships called 'bajras' in much later times that could do some serious damage. Some are still around, but no longer utilized for military purposes of course.
We know that eunuchs fought and hunted but that they lacked the strength of full men. Given that Bagoas was a young man, a eunuch, and a dancer, he is likely to have been slightly built. How long would he have lasted as a soldier in hand to hand combat?
I don't see any clash between being a dancer and being a warrior. It may be possible that Bagoas was competing against (other?) army boys/men. Or would they have been professional dancers?
The point of the Carmanian incident though was that Alexander kissed Bagoas in public. Is he likely to have risked treating an army officer as a boy in front of men he might have been leading in battle? They are hardly likely to have much respect for him if Alexander did. Even if they had affection for him, they are more likely to have considered him a mascot.
I don't know that Alexander showing his affection to his male or eunuch lovers in public would have been seen as demeaning to them. If the Athenian account of bearded high-ranking Macedonian men openly making love in drunken parties at Phillip's palace is anywhere near accurate, a kiss would have hardly contributed to loss of respect.
Yes, it would have been unthinkably shameful for Alexander to kiss Roxane in public, especially with affection as he obviously did Bagoas. To expose her to the sexual glances of other men would have been effectively saying 'here you are, come and get it' (sorry, that's crass), but he would have been seen to be saying that she was a harlot and available to any man. Within living memory, it was bad manners for a husband to kiss his wife in public with affection, other than a perfunctionary peck on the cheek, which I doubt Roxane would have even got. As the king's wife, her reputation had to be utterly beyond reproach. To every man except her husband a woman had to be an untouchable virgin. A different set of mores!
With regards to Roxanne's public visibility, I'm not sure all societies had the same view regarding this. Yes, the thought of the Queen producing another man's child as the Royal heir was intolerable. But Persian royal women did interact with other men, how sexual these men's (or the women's) glances, is anyone's guess. Darius' mother, for example directly interacted with Alexander and Hephaistion. All were heavily involved in palace intrigue and factions with other high-ranking men. Some satrapies were ruled by women. Royal women had their own estates. I have already mentioned the Lydian trierarch. All of these positions would require a degree of interaction with other men. I remember Iranian academics being highly annoyed at the wedding scene in Stone's movie for having Roxanne in a face veil. Apparently this practice did not exist in Iran or Central Asia back then and presents an altogether misleading picture of the role of Persian Royal women.
While the queen was expected to be visible and engaged, I agree with you that she would have been expected to maintain her Queenly bearing during all public engagements (just like the King, Princes, Princesses and nobles). I think the kiss to Bagoas was during an informal moment with a festive atmosphere where most people were probably drunk. It can be argued that even then it took a bit of encouragement from the army ie Alexander didn't originally intend a public display of affection. The clash here would have been between the highly formal Persian royal protocols and the rather more rowdy Macedonian (drunken) army behaviour.
Hi Agesilaos,
Bagoas cannot have held any command over European troops without it being mentioned as a grievance at Opis; in fact the complaints are that Persians have entered Macedonian units towhit the named individuals in the Agema and al arger proportion in the Fifth Hipparchy; were Bagoas in the military he must have been mentioned not least because the complaint that Alexander allows the barbarians to kiss him but not his own troops is clearly a retrospective jibe at Bagoas' kiss.
I may have read this paragraph wrongly. I thought the kiss referred to the Persian practice of proskynesis? It was a socially-tiered process. Higher-ranked individuals were allowed to kiss the Great King's face. Surely, that would be a more politically charged grievance?