Did Alexander have another brother?

[marcus]

Salvete, Pothosians.

Before I went on holiday I said that I had an intriguing question to pose. So, finally, here we go:

Photius, in his description of Arrian Successors, has the following:

[35] Of the upper provinces, Mesopotamia and Arbelitis were given to Amphimachus, the king's brother; …

Now, in the context, the "king" in this case can only be Arrhidaeus/Philip III. So, what is the relationship between Arrhidaeus and Amphimachus; and, by extension, between Amphimachus and Alexander (if any)?

1. Amphimachus might be another son of Philinna, by another man, in which case he is Arrhidaeus' half brother, but no relation to Alexander the Great. (If so, however, then it calls into question those who have always vigorously defended Philinna against the slanderous accusations that she was no "legitimate" wife of Philip's.)

2. Amphimachus might be another son of Philip II and Philinna, in which case he is Arrhidaeus' full brother, and a half brother to A the G. So why has there been no other mention of him?

3. Amphimachus might be another son of Philip by another woman, making him half brother to both Arrhidaeus and A the G.

Whichever the case is, I can say for sure that I had not come across this chap before, and I am not aware of him appearing in the record anywhere else.

So, has anyone else come across him before? Are there other references to him? Have I totally misunderstood my reading of Photius (although I have read and re-read it a number of times to check that I have read it correctly). Whatever the story is, I find it most intriguing, and would love us to be able to get to the bottom of it.

Cheers all.

[athenas owl]

Great question.

Somewhere in the back of my brain, someone somewhere in antiquity wrote that Philip II had had many sons or something like that. Illegitimate maybe, or dead before they could matter. Perhaps Amphimachus might have been one of them. And if he was he may have died before Arrhidaeus and so forgotten in the general melee. This would have made him the half brother of both Arrhidaeus and Alexander.

Perhaps he was very young and legitimate, but I can not see this. if the objection to the half Persian boys, Alexander IV and Heracles was so strong, why not go for a brother older and "100% Macedonian" if he existed.

Maybe Philinna was important enough a marriage that as a young widow, with a son, that Philip married her anyway. How important was Thessaly to Philip and when. Perhaps her standing was high enough that a first marriage didn't matter.

Or perhaps Philip divorced her and married her off to someone else, as her son was not considered king "material" because of his affliction, whatever it was. And from this second marriage she had Amphimachus. I'm thinking of Craterus and Amestris as an example. Or maybe some wife of Ptolemy, without looking I can not keep up with his marriages and possible divorces. Though, Lysmichas, too, speaking Amestris, moved on, divorcing her (what happened to Nicea?) to marry Arsinoe. So perhaps this is an aspect of Macedonian marriages, at least in the nobility or royalty, though I am using those terms loosely. Phila, daughter of Antipater, certainly had no "problem" being married off, bringing children from her previous marriages with her.

I'm sure we don't have a clear understanding, I know I don't, of the place of women in Macedonian society. I do think it was higher than the Athenian model by a long shot and their worth more, regardless of children.

Or maybe he got it wrong, I think Heckel discusses this.

[Paralus]

The most likely answer - always assuming that Photius correctly summarised Arrian - is the first. It is likely that Philinna was of a high ranking Thessalian family and therefore the marrige of her to Philip was of material gain to Philip. He is not attested as marrying willy-nilly for simple lust - particularly at this stage. The tradition in Justin is a hostile one and might be so for any number of reasons - not the least of which could be Diadoch politics or Thessalian for that matter (not all were happy with Philip's "swallowing up" of that state into greater Macedon).

Either way the statement is explicit. As well, Amphimacus is, evidently, an avowed "royalist" in the crucial and defining second Diadoch war. Antigonus, legalising his ambition by representing himself as the "strategos of Asia", is attempting to erradicate the former "Perdiccans" led now by Eumenes. Eumenes is clearly commanding the "royal forces" under the authority of not only the kings but of their guardian Polyperchon and of Alexander's mother Olympias. Eumenes, at the battle of Paraetecene, has Amphimachus stationed on his left wing with his satrapal guard amongst those others whom he considered loyal:

Diod. 19.27.4:
After them (Eudamus and Stassander) he stationed Amphimachus, the satrap of Mesopotamia, whom six hunndred horsemen followed, and in contact with these were the six hundred horsemen from Arachosia, whose leader formerly had been Siyrtius, but, because of the latter's flight, Cephalon had assumed command of them.

[Paralus]

Maybe Philinna was important enough a marriage that as a young widow, with a son, that Philip married her anyway. How important was Thessaly to Philip and when. Perhaps her standing was high enough that a first marriage didn't matter.

Thessaly was, at this time, most important to Philip. Philip had secured the northern and north-western frontiers of the state. He had secured the Thraceward region via warfare and alliance with Olynthus. Most (if not all) of this later work was aimed at Athenian interests in the northern Aegean. The Social War, the death knell of real Athenian power, kept her from defending said interests.

That secured, Philip needed some foothold in Greece proper; some legitimate position of influence. The (third) Sacred War provided the perfect opportunity. Without going into the detail of all the alliances and subplots, the Pheraeans allied themselves with the “temple robbing” Phocians. Larissa, the other large centre of Thessaly and nominator of the archon or tagos of the Thessalian league, opposed them. Philip, married to both Philinna (Larissa) and Necesipolis (Pherae) had an ready made trigger for intervention. When the call came Philip immediately backed Larissa. Once Philip had triumphed at the battle of the Crocus Field , he was proclaimed archon of the Thessalian League. He now – literally – had a seat in Greek affairs.

Perhaps he was very young and legitimate, but I can not see this. If the objection to the half Persian boys, Alexander IV and Heracles was so strong, why not go for a brother older and "100% Macedonian" if he existed.

The dates of Philip’s marriages to both Philinna and Necesiplois are a matter of debate. Working on the age of Arrhidaeus (old enough to marry in the Pixodarus affair) it is likely around 357. Necesipolis is likely the same time.

It is highly likely, as I wrote above, that Philinna was of a well born family. These were both political marriages. Philip married a niece of Jason of Pherae (Necesipolis) and then Philinna of Larissa. It is extremely difficult to see just what material gain there will have been for Philip in marrying a whore or dancing girl. That tradition, extremely hostile, most likely has its roots in the Diadoch wars involving the puppeteering ( a new word I suspect) of Arrhidaeus.

As you’ve noted, Philinna was a widow at the time of her marriage and had a son from her former marriage. This, to me, makes it even more likely that she was of noble Larissan stock. If there has been no error in transmission, and Amphimachus is correct, then this likely is the fellow. In this case Amphimachus, related to Arrhidaeus through his mother, is not in direct line of descent. Arrhidaeus, sired by Philip, is. Amphimachus, one would think, was therefore no real contender for Alexander’s vacant throne.

[amyntoros]

It is highly likely, as I wrote above, that Philinna was of a well born family. These were both political marriages. Philip married a niece of Jason of Pherae (Necesipolis) and then Philinna of Larissa. It is extremely difficult to see just what material gain there will have been for Philip in marrying a whore or dancing girl. That tradition, extremely hostile, most likely has its roots in the Diadoch wars involving the puppeteering ( a new word I suspect) of Arrhidaeus.

Carney says much the same in Women and Monarchy in Macedonia.

Philinna, a Thesalian from Larissa, bore Philip II a son, Arridaeus, later called Philip ... A number of ancient sources consider Philinna anything but respectable. Plutarch (Alex 77.5) calls her an obscure and common woman. Justin (9.8.2) terms her a dancing girl (salatrix) and a Larissan whore (scortum) (13.2.11). Athenaeus (13.578a) preserves a fragment of Ptolemy, son of Agesarchus, that also speaks of her as a dancing girl and includes her on a list of notorious royal mistresses.

Athenaeus' list (13.557c) paints a different picture of Philinna and her connection to Philip. It seems to categorize Philinna as a wife, not as a mistress or a concubine, and certainly puts her relationship to Philip in a political context. Athenaeus has Philip claiming the Thessalian nation by begetting children by two Thessalian women.

Although it is difficult to see why sleeping with a Thessalian whore would have endeared Philip to the Thessalians, whom he certainly wanted to conciliate, it seems reasonable to conclude that Philinna came from a respectable family, perhaps even the distinguished Aleuadae, and was a wife of Philip, not a mistress. Philinna was apparently a widow with a young son at the time of her marriage to Philip. The negative tradition about her probably derives from assorted layers of propaganda in the period after the death of Alexander, from the fact that she was not from a royal dynasty, and from Greek misunderstanding of polygamy.

Best regards,

[Paralus]

Carney says much the same in Women and Monarchy in Macedonia.

Trust you Mother. It appears I shall have to add Carney's book to my current list at Amazon. That will be after they credit me for the double supply of the last order!

Although it is difficult to see why sleeping with a Thessalian whore would have endeared Philip to the Thessalians, whom he certainly wanted to conciliate, it seems reasonable to conclude that Philinna came from a respectable family...

Well indeed! I find myself in total agreement. The marriage was contracted for Philip's benefit. It proved its worth in short time. There simply is no benefit to be gained from marriage to a "whore" saddled with a "whore's son". Implying concubine staus does not really improve matters.

That the archon of the Thessalian League was normally nominated by Larissa is pertinent. One is hardly likely to nominate a candidate married to or comporting oneself with a known Larrissan whore.

[smittysmitty]

Nice one Marcus! good pick up that one, I've got to say .

A puzzling statement indeed - just to add my own two bob's worth on the matter; the name Amphimachus, although mentioned in the Homeric epics, doesn't really have a dynastic association with the Argeads. Most Argeads tended to inherrit ancestral names, and Amphimachus doesn't register. That's not to say he wasn't of course.

Assuming this isn't a typo of sorts made by Photius, after all he does mess up with claiming Phillina to be a Thracian - most other things sound pretty good.

If he was indeed a brother of Arrhidaeus, I'd say it was the result of an earlier liason before Philip, or perhaps even after Philip II death. Just can't imagine another Argead being around and not rating a mention.


just my thoughts.

Cheers!

[marcus]

... Philinna was a widow at the time of her marriage and had a son from her former marriage. This, to me, makes it even more likely that she was of noble Larissan stock. If there has been no error in transmission, and Amphimachus is correct, then this likely is the fellow. In this case Amphimachus, related to Arrhidaeus through his mother, is not in direct line of descent. Arrhidaeus, sired by Philip, is. Amphimachus, one would think, was therefore no real contender for Alexander’s vacant throne.

This did seem to me to be the most likely situation. I can't see that Amphimachus can have been the result of a post-Philip union by Philinna, as he would therefore have been born after 336, and was therefore not old enough to be entrusted to two satrapies following Alexander's death. Therefore it seems more likely that Philinna was a widow, with a young son, when she married Philip. If she were high-born, and a widow, then lack of virginity was not going to put Philip off an important dynastic marriage. And assuming that her previous husband would have been of high rank, too, then Amphimachus would have proved to be a good hostage in his own right.

I cannot see that Amphimachus can have been any blood relation of Alexander's through Philip, or Arrhidaeus would not have been the only alternative in 323BC.

Wouldn't it be fantastic to know more about this?

ATB

[Paralus]

Assuming this isn't a typo of sorts made by Photius, after all he does mess up with claiming Phillina to be a Thracian - most other things sound pretty good.

If he was indeed a brother of Arrhidaeus, I'd say it was the result of an earlier liason before Philip, or perhaps even after Philip II death. Just can't imagine another Argead being around and not rating a mention.

Yes, always assuming that Photius hasn't messed up. He'd had to have messed up the "brother of the king" phrase though.

Amphimachus would have to be prior to Philip: he was fighting at Paraetecene and a post Philip birth would have him as a precocious teen on Eumenes' left wing - with a satrapy to boot.

It is possible that Philip divorced Philinna but it is an easier and more logical solution to see Amphimachus as the son Philinna supposedly already had at the time of her marriage to Philip.

[marcus]

Nice one Marcus! good pick up that one, I've got to say .

Thanks. I was pretty gobsmacked when I found the reference, I must say!

A puzzling statement indeed - just to add my own two bob's worth on the matter; the name Amphimachus, although mentioned in the Homeric epics, doesn't really have a dynastic association with the Argeads. Most Argeads tended to inherrit ancestral names, and Amphimachus doesn't register. That's not to say he wasn't of course.

Although, of course, we do know of the continuation of Homeric names in Thessaly, Macedonia and Epirus (especially) through the Classical period. Therefore, although not a dynastic Argead name, it could easily be a Thessalian or Macedonian name. This might well fit in with the theory that Amphimachus was born of an earlier union of Philinna's, perhaps within the Thessalian elite.

Just can't imagine another Argead being around and not rating a mention.

Exactly. Why is Arrhidaeus the only alternative in 323 if there's another blood relation knocking about?

ATB

[marcus]

Philinna was apparently a widow with a young son at the time of her marriage to Philip.

Hi Amyntoros,

Does Carney give a reference for this? Perhaps the reference is this one from Photius?

[BTW, are you finding the Concordance useful? Have you had occasion to use it?]

ATB

[Fiona]

Nice one Marcus! good pick up that one, I've got to say .

Yes, it was a great question. I didn't post, not having anything useful to add, but I just wanted to say that I've been following this thread with interest, it's been good to read.
Fiona

[amyntoros]

Philinna was apparently a widow with a young son at the time of her marriage to Philip.

Hi Amyntoros,

Does Carney give a reference for this? Perhaps the reference is this one from Photius?

[BTW, are you finding the Concordance useful? Have you had occasion to use it?]

Yep, it's the Photius reference. Here's Carney's note on the subject (page 276):

Note 45. Arrian, in his narrative of events after Alexander's death (FGrH 156. F 1.35), refers to a certain Amphimachus as the brother of the king (Philip Arrhidaeus). Amphimachus was old enough to be awarded a satrapy at Triparadeisus in 321 (Berve 1926: 2:32; Greenwalt 1985b: 71) so he cannot have been a son of Philinna's by a marriage contracted after the death of Philip in 336, and he cannot have been a son of Philinna's by Philip, of course. Philinna must therefore have been a widow when Philip married her.

Oh, the Concordance is definitely useful and will become more so as time goes by, I’m sure. Didn't use it for this thread though because if a debate is about a named character my first thought is to run to Heckel's Who's Who.

Best regards,

[marcus]

Yep, it's the Photius reference. Here's Carney's note on the subject (page 276):

Note 45. Arrian, in his narrative of events after Alexander's death (FGrH 156. F 1.35), refers to a certain Amphimachus as the brother of the king (Philip Arrhidaeus). Amphimachus was old enough to be awarded a satrapy at Triparadeisus in 321 (Berve 1926: 2:32; Greenwalt 1985b: 71) so he cannot have been a son of Philinna's by a marriage contracted after the death of Philip in 336, and he cannot have been a son of Philinna's by Philip, of course. Philinna must therefore have been a widow when Philip married her.

Cool. Glad to know there isn't another reference that I'd missed!

Oh, the Concordance is definitely useful and will become more so as time goes by, I’m sure. Didn't use it for this thread though because if a debate is about a named character my first thought is to run to Heckel's Who's Who.

Indeed, although I recall that I looked for Amphimachus in Heckel and he wasn't there. Anyway, glad the Conc. is helpful - I've done some updating, but not enough to issue another version ... yet.

ATB