Alexander and debt

[beausefaless]

The re issue of Philips coins (333BC) epically in the north Balkans for they were popular. The Athenians looked upon Philip silver, except for Philip's gold, as modern day Americans look upon Canadian coins of today.
But the usual question here, giving this later starting date, is what Alexander did for money from the time of his invasion of Asia in mid-334 and the initiation of his silver coinage ca. 332. The continuance of his father's coinage in both gold and silver could well have been sufficient so long as he was at home. But, although Philip's gold on the Attic standard was acceptable everywhere, his silver on the parochial Macedonian standard was not and its almost total absence from Asia Minor hoards is striking. One must assume that some combination of prepayment to the troops before departure, promise of pay on return. Philip's gold taken along with the invading army, and, of course, requisitioning and looting during the campaign sufficed until Alexander's own silver coinage was instituted. That even before Issus Alexander was sending cash to Macedonia rather than receiving it from home is shown by Curtius's statements that Alexander sent money back to Antipater at least twice on early 333. It thus does not seem at all clear that Alexander needed his own silver coinage before 332.
So my question is how long into his reign Alexander continued striking his father's silver, I say ca. 328.

[agesilaos]

Morkholm in 'The Early Hellenistic Coinage' would agree; I was confusing Philip's gold with his silver, doh; celtic silver staters are based on his gold ones!

[amyntoros]

While doing an unrelated web search, I came across a site with a dissertation on "Athenian Naval Finance in the Classical Period: the trierarchy, its place in Athenian society, and how much did a trieres cost?" Of course it isn't completely relevant to Alexander's naval preparations before the start of the campaign in Asia, but some costs must surely be comparable. I thought it might be of interest. Apologies in advance if this is old news. :-)Unfortunately, I can't give a direct URL. As you navigate through the linked pages on this site, the URL doesn't change. If anyone is interested, go to: http//http://www.classicspage.com/Click on main menu - scroll down to Social History and click on Women - scroll down and click on Trireme Names - scroll down and click on the link regrading Roly Peck's research into how the trireme was paid for.RegardsLinda Ann

[aen]

Karl,
There are two major factors in determining the expense of kitting out for an expedition: the length of time you intend to be away for and distance from home (length of supply line). In this instance both were far greater than anything the Macedonians had prepared for before. Even allowing for the men carrying individual rations, the support train must have been enormous, as no city in Asia Minor had made any offer of a safe haven for resupply once the Macedonians landed on the Turkish coast. And Supply was not just about food; it was a host of things. Then, of course, there was getting there in the first place.
Lane Fox, I recall, puts the running of a trireme at a talent per month, a cost that IGÇÖm sure the Allies contributed too, but I doubt covered in totality. IGÇÖve often wondered if the dismissal of the fleet was a decision reached solely for strategic reasons.
Prior to departure the cost of massing cavalry units in individual places (like, say, Dion and Pella) must have been extortionate. Large stationary bodies of horse cost a fortune to victual and maintain. ItGÇÖs one of the recurring gripes that crop up in texts on pre-mechanised warfare. There would have been a small army within the army just seeing to that. Just try to calculate the tonnage of crap that had to be disposed of every day, the tonnage of fodder that had to be provided, and the cost of getting both of these tasks seen to. Add on the expense incurred by the small city of tanners, saddlers, bridlers, veterinary types, grooms, breakers, and God knows what else that would have accompanied the cavalry. If youGÇÖve ever gone to the races and had a peek at the warren of activity that is the stabling area, youGÇÖll know what IGÇÖm on about. In the case of the Macedonians it would have been the same, but on a spectacularly larger scale. Not cheap.
All the necessities for a moderately sized mobile city were required - we tend to forget that this is precisely what ancient (indeed modern) field armies are. In this instance, it was a mobile city that had to be prepared for self sufficiency for a long time - no dashing back down to Pella to stock up on kit, or sending messages to get the capital to send stuff on.
Finally, perhaps most importantly, because this was not going to be a seasonal expedition but an extended campaign, new manpower had to be bought, hired or compelled into labour to make sure that MacedoniaGÇÖs rural economy didnGÇÖt collapse with the long term disappearance of vast levi

[aen]

Finally, perhaps most importantly, because this was not going to be a seasonal expedition but an extended campaign, new manpower had to be bought, hired or compelled into labour to make sure that MacedoniaGÇÖs rural economy didnGÇÖt collapse with the long term disappearance of vast levies overseas. I think that alone would have required a gigantic outlay. And you can be certain that everyone of the highland types would have talked up the bill for his particular region.
Laters.