Alexander and debt

[agesilaos]

One thing that has been troubling me is the statement that, Alexander was in debt when he left for Asia. Plutarch (Alx 15) says there were only 70 Talents set aside for supplies (Aristoboulos), he had only 30 days worth of supplies laid in (Duris) and that he owed 200T. Arrian (VII 9 vi) says he was left 500T of Philips debt and contracted 800T of his own with only some cups and 60T in the treasury, he does not cite his sources, but it comesin a speech and is probably vulgate.My problem with all this is that the silver mines at Phillipoi were producing 1000T a year and that represented only a fraction of the KingdomGÇÖs total income. We can work out the cost of the expedition using the rates of pay recoverable from Arrian and inscriptions; a citizen hoplite received 30 Dr/month, a mercenary 10, light troops 7 and cavalry 70, approximately. Now allowing for Alexander paying for all the league troops and giving the balkan mercenaries the Greek rate even for the advance party his total outlay is only 233.8 T/year or 19.5T roughly per month. So why the debt?

[dean]

Hi Karl,Nice to hear from you.With regards what you are saying, it does seem a little strange why there should be so much financial doubt in the beginning of Alexander's reign.The quote that I remember regarding the episode that most clearly sticks in my mind is when Alexander's asked what he will be taking on the expedition- he replies, his hopes! He also as I recall, gave away his properties to friends. Obviously in Alexander's mind there was little doubt as to his having any problem financial or otherwise.Renault I think succintly puts into perspective Alexander's expedtion in Fire From Heaven when she says that Alexander's army were, in the light of the Persian army merely a bunch of "young guns" who were going to be lucky to even make it across the Hellespont. Just shows you!!Anyway, Karl, I very much look forward to further discussion regarding this valid point you have made. All the best, mate,
Dean.

[xxx]

Takes a lot more than what you pay your army to run a country...

[agesilaos]

There was alot more income than the mines at Philippi, it is just that only that income is quantified; in Diodorus. Nor are ancient states that expensive to run; labour costs are not borne by the State, there is no welfare, no NHS, no ministry of Ag and Fish, no State Education. For Macedon defence expenditure would be the largest item on any budget and it is dwarfed by the State income.

[xxx]

What about bribes, supporting spies, paying the nobility et al? Also the expensive tastes of the Argead royal house alone just in art? Apelles did not come cheap and there are ancient references repleat with the many many portraits done of the King and his son, by multiple artists to be sure. His sculpture did not come cheap and neither did Antipater or the rest of his staff. Argead Kings were required to be generous. If they weren't they ended up dead in a hurry. They maintained multiple households and in Philip's case quite a few, and they wouldn't have bneen held cheaply. Food alone would have amounted to quite a bit of expenditure. He didn't just pay the army - he had to clothe and outfit them and feed them and 'reward' exceptional skill. Even when they weren't 'technically' bringing in booty all the time. The Argeads did not go on pirating expeditions purely for the fun of it. In the ancient Macedonian world, you spent it as fast as you earned it. The sacking of Thebes was not just punishing a rebellious city - it was booty in slaves.There is in point of fact, no reason to say the young King was strapped unless he was. He was always generous in his burying of the dead, and Philip's burial and games would have been very expensive. Philip also liked to gamble, and well, we know how fast the pockets empty...and a King never says no to a challenge...

[davej]

KArl did you work your figures out on ATG expiditionary force alone? And what about the fleet? For all the use it was. Good to here from you. I have alwasy beleived he was heavily indebted but have never had time to crunch the figures.

[smittysmitty]

To whom were they indebt too, and who was going to ask to be repaid? let alone ask for interest!.There is nothing to suggest in either reign of Philp or Alexander that they experienced financial hardship! there actions and achievments would suggest the opposite.Macedon had become a financial superpower second only to Persia. Philips spend-thrift persona depicted by Athenian orators during his reign, was a means of reinforcing the belief that he was a barbarian; as for Alexander, perhaps his contemporaries attempt to agrandise his achievments by suggesting he was financially destitute. The ol' rags to riches scenario! Made sumth'n outta nuth'n!Which of course was hardly the case. He acquired, the best military as well as economic nation known in Europe at the time.
just my thoughts!

[agesilaos]

Indeed Demosthenes says that Athens' annual income rose from 130T to 400T which is dwarfed by the income from the Philipi mines.On the question of naval expense I confess to fudging it but alowwing that Alexander was paying for the Allied ships that would be a further 160 T with an additional 60T or so for the smaller Macedonian elements. Still only scraping the surface of his income. And I should think the league would have to pay for her own ships and soldiers.Interestingly both Duris'thirty days of supplies and Aristoboulos' 70T work out as two ways of expressing the same thing; and surely show that after thirty days Alexander was going to be living of the land. Note that only fourteen days supplies can be carried before the supply column consumes more than it carries, so Alexander was counting on a decisive battle early on.Onesicritos' 200T may represent the wages of the expedition which he or Plutarch has garbled into a debt. Conversly it may represent coin borrrowed on the surety of bullion, as the troops would need coin.Arrian is not working from his main sources in the speech where he mentions this debt and i would tend to reject it offering a similar rationale to Smitty for how it arose.

[amyntoros]

Do you think the celebrations before departing for Asia could have seriously shrunk the treasury? Diodorus talks of the tent that could hold a hundred couches, lavish sacrifices, dramatic contests, and a nine day festival where Alexander "entertained great numbers in person besides distributing to his entire force sacrifical animals and all else suitable for the festive occasion..." When Alexander had conquered Persia this type of lavish celebration wouldn't have made much impact in his finances, but at this early stage perhaps it was a little too extravagant? Somewhere there is mention that Alexander routinely threw dinner parties for 60 to 70 people at a cost of one and a half talents. If he really did sacrifice animals and gave "all else suitable" for the *entire* army then the cost could have been tremendous - even more so if it was repeated over nine days.Plus there's this from Athenaeus, Book IV. 166. f-167. c, which implies that Alexander might not have had that much money to begin with:"Concerning the extravagance and mode of life of Philip and his companions Theopompus writes the following in the forty-ninth book of the Histories. GÇÿAfter Philip had become possessor of a large fortune he did not spend it fast. No! he threw it outdoors and cast it away, being the worst manager in the world.":-)Linda Ann

[smittysmitty]

Hi Linda,
there is no denial of the extravagant life style led by Philip/Alexander, which is a testament to the economic conditions Macedon was experiencing.The lavish parties etc, are indicative of the wealth at hand, and in regard to the references of land,harbour dues, cities etc being alloted to various Makedones and non Makedones, keep in mind the Argeads had the power to give, as well as take back what was on offer. I doubt very much that Alexander had any major fiscal problems, perhaps as Karl mentions, he may have been short of some spare change (coins) at the time, but the mines, harbours,land etc all belonged to him, all producing
wealth never before seen in Europe.just my thoughts.
cheers!

[agesilaos]

Of course Theopompos is to Philip as George W is to Osama bin Laden, not exactly a friendly source. 1 1/2 Talents is alot but only 1/666 of the Philipi revenue, nor does it say that Alexander entertained the whole army merely that he distributed sacrificial victims sufficient for them all; a wise precaution when embarking on such a major enterprise.This festival is in Arrian and was a regular one I think at Dium in the honour of Zeus so I doubt its costs would dent Macedon's finances. As a marker to how great these were the Parthenon cost 469T and the temple at Delpi 300, Philip could have paid for both inside a year it took Perikles ten.

[beausefaless]

Greetings Linda Ann,In the relatively short existence of our great nation (USA) we have had only one president in our history that balanced the budget and the debt * in the black*, he was Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the United States (1829-1837). William Jefferson Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States (January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001) came close, he balanced the budget and was working the debt towards the black maybe if he was in office for another term he might have equaled Andy Jackson but we will never know for this is a very difficult feat to achieve. I also give thanks to the allies of their great nations through out our history for their sacrifice brought us to where we are today a great super power, for the good I hope.After Alexander absorbed Persepolis he was on an unequaled huge roll (gold & silver) and I'm not so sure he caused inflation through out the known world. Besides paying his army well and sending money back to Macedonia, by establishing twenty five new mints he made sure his appointed satraps, the few that became corrupted were killed and replaced, had sufficient funds to keep Alexander's empire stay in the black. Let us not forget King Philip's currency was not recognized world wide, but Alexander's was including Arabia, for a few centuries after his death (the golden years). This is one of the main reasons Alexander changed the course of civilization forever.

[amyntoros]

Most interesting Karl - thanks. (Also to Smitty and Andrew.) I've often been curious about monetary details such as campaign expenditures - as in how much did it cost per soldier for the entire period of conquest? However, I've never pursued a line of questioning as it seemed unneccesary - after all, no matter how much Alexander spent, he had all the riches of Asia at his command. Plus there's also the probability that this kind of financial information is impossible to gather. I am surprised, however, to learn of the considerable wealth of Macedonia. I knew that Philip had been responsible for a great increase in Macedonia's fortune, but the yearly income and its comparative worth is much more impressive than I had realized.And I also put aside for ever the momentary image of Alexander throwing the going-away party to end all parties! :-)Linda Ann

[agesilaos]

In fact Philip's issues were recognized in the West at least and seemingly preferred to those of his son as Alexander continued to issue them. Ancient British staters are based on Philippic originals.Similarly Lysimachos' coin types long outlived him supplanting the Philippic issues in the North and West.

[smittysmitty]

Just some additional information for those interested.Several decades prior to Philips succession, Seuthes the king of the Odrysians (Thracians) is said, by Thucydides, to have received about 400 Talents in gold and silver in tribute from the native states as well as Greek cities that lay in his empire. In addition, an equal amount in value was received in the form of presents!That amounts to approx 800 Talents, and I would imagine this is not inclusive of the Gold and silver mines in his possesion.The wealth of Thrace was but one of many contributing to Macedons financial prosperity.
cheers!