Butchery in Baktria

[Jeanne]

I'm being somewhat lazy and hoping someone here remembers the exact name. (g) While up in Baktria and Environs, ATG's army came upon a 'Greek' city, then butchered the inhabitants. (Not a pretty story.) WHAT was the bloody name of the place?Jeanne

[amyntoros]

Do you mean the Branchidae? Curtius calls the people the Branchidae (7.5.28-35) but doesn't name the place. He simply says it was a small town inhabited by the Branchidae.:-)Linda Ann

[smittysmitty]

The Branchidae were guardians and priests of the Temple of Apollo at Dyndima near Miletus. During the reign of Xerxes the Branchidae medised and sacked or as the saying goes , betrayed the Temple of Apollo. Xerxes, pleased with this action, relocated the Branchidae to Bactria.Or so the story goes!.

[zimraphel]

I don't remember if the name was given, but if you have the Michael Wood documentary on Alexander, Wood visits the place in the third episode, "Across the Hindu Kush."

[Jeanne]

That's it! Thanks, Linda. :)In my ATG course, we're going to be doing Hague-style trials for "war crimes." Not the political actions, like the Philotas affair and such, as we'll discuss those in another context, but stuff like the razing of Thebes, the actions at Tyre and Gaza, burning Persepolis, etc. I wanted to use that one, for Baktria. The students will get a chance to be both prosecution and act as Alexander and present a defense. And to serve of the jury, too, and hand down a verdict. (g)

[calesstheness]

Yes, I do wonder myself about the name of the town that was massacred.
All i know is that its a small town.
Seemingly the only account of the incident was the report and dispatches from Calisthenes. Here, it was said and it seems, Arrian choose to be silent. He did not give an account of it, nor his views and researches. Only Calistheness wrote about it, seemingly compelled to report, and this time he seemed to grapple with his own self for the reason and justification of that massacre. Annihilating an entire town, - old men, women and children unspared in an attempt to "erase" the whole town from sight, perhaps from human memory. They destroyed every structure and levelled every stacked stone into heaps of rubble. Temples included. Even the sacred groves which was a replica and patterned after Didyma, was uprooted and burned.
For the ancestors of these people where the Priests of the Branchidae family who soldout to the Persians 150 years ago and handed the posession of the famous temple of Didyma in exchange for their lives.
The greek soldiers and perhaps the greek nation felt it was betrayal of unforgivable degree.
Calisthenes justified it with some difficulties, struggling within himself, and reasoned "the purpose of this expidition and Alexander's mission is to right Persian Wrongs"...The unnamed town is in Uzbekistan, Central Asia.
It once stood northward past the Oxus River, along the silk road between Termez and Samarkand. Alexander and his troops ran into it in the heat of summer while in hot pursuit of Bessus.

[calesstheness]

It must be a great spectacle to see modern man stage or perhaps attempt a trial of Alexander and his men for their war crimes. It's a difficult effort as I think evidences at hand by the prosecution is somewhat sketchy?But then, granting all other elements are supplied for, by what standards of justice is Alexander and his men held accountable for?
And by whose Laws violated?

[Taphoi]

It is to be hoped that the information required by your students effectively to mount the defence of Alexander will be made available. It has been my impression in recent years that key facts and background in the Thebes/Tyre/Gaza/Branchidae episodes are somehow overlooked and that there is an inclination to apply modern morals and ethics to a world in which the people would have found them not just inappropriate, but actually comical. Is it reasonable to expect Alexander to have behaved comically in the eyes of his followers in order to win the approbation of modern moralists? I think not.
Regarding the Branchidae, it is clear from the sources that Alexander put their fate to a vote of the army. This was the correct judicial process in Macedonian law. It was not a formality. The Macedonian Assembly sometimes acquitted the accused as happened for example with Amyntas in the Philotas affair. Whereas it is a modern ethic that the crimes of parents do not descend onto their children, this would have been seen as comical by many Greeks: Greek tragedy is full of curses descending through dynasties for ancient crimes. It was a religious thing.
Regarding Thebes, the city had murdered Macedonian representatives at the beginning of its second revolt against Alexander. The fate of the city was decided by a vote of the Corinthian League, not by Alexander personally. This again was the correct judicial process. Thebes itself had in the preceding decades applied the same punishment to some of the cities around it and it was the delegates from these states that pushed for the razing of Thebes: poetic justice if you like. It is clear, however, that Alexander might have intervened to commute the punishment. He did not, but satisfied himself by protecting shrines and certain Theban citizens. It is clear that he subsequently regretted this, but he was relatively new to the throne and overthrowing a vote of the League and thereby undermining the law was probably not an attractive option. He could not afford at the time to seem weak. He was only magnanimous when he could afford to be.
Regarding Gaza, there is a fragment of Hegesias, which explains that the defenders (perhaps the eunuch commander personally) sent an assassin, who pretended to surrender to Alexander, but then pulled out a knife and tried to kill him. Alexander was wounded, but not seriously, because he managed to twist aside. This was why the city received harsh treatment and the eunuch was dragged behind Al

[Taphoi]

Regarding Gaza, there is a fragment of Hegesias, which explains that the defenders (perhaps the eunuch commander personally) sent an assassin, who pretended to surrender to Alexander, but then pulled out a knife and tried to kill him. Alexander was wounded, but not seriously, because he managed to twist aside. This was why the city received harsh treatment and the eunuch was dragged behind AlexanderGÇÖs chariot.
Regarding Tyre, the city pretended to surrender, then refused when Alexander called their bluff by asking to be admitted. The city murdered AlexanderGÇÖs heralds in violation of the laws of war. It poured red-hot sand on the assailants, which got between armour and skin and flayed them alive. This was regarded as a war crime by the Greeks, rather as the use of poison gas is deprecated today, because it is so horrific.
Perhaps you could pass this information on to your students in order that they should be able to reach a balanced judgement. Best wishes, Andrew

[agesilaos]

This incident is only attested in Curtius and the contents of Diodoros, making it almost certain that it comes from Kleitarchos and is the product of his imagination rather than anything else. I should think that he found the story of the Branchidae in his father's Persikka; in Herodotos the Didymeion is sacked by Darius I; and then imagined what would happen to them should Alexander discover them Pace a previous post there is no trial by the army as at Thebes he endevours to evade responsibility by asking the Milesians among the army but they cannot agree a course of action so he decides matters himself and massacres the lot treacherously.

[Taphoi]

It's in Strabo and I think Plutarch's Moralia and Ammianus Marcellinus too. On balance it is probably historical and probably was mentioned by Callisthenes. Best wishes, Andrew

[amyntoros]

You raised my curiosity to find out more, and, yes, it is very briefly mentioned in Strabo, and is also in the Moralia, Vol VII, 557.B. Plutarch's comments are again brief and admonishing of Alexander, but the footnotes are most interesting. The translators are Phillip H. De Lacy and Benedict Einarson, and the book doesn't tell which one wrote this footnote, but apparently there is a fragment from Aelian that also tells the story.Aelian, Frag. 54. Hercher: "The men of Dindyma in the territory of Miletus, to gratify Xerxes, betrayed the temple of the local Apollo to the barbarians, and the dedications, which were extremely numerous, were pillaged. The traitors, fearing the vengeance of the laws and of the Milesians, begged Xerxes to reward that detestable treason by removing them to some place in Asia. He consented, and in return for his wicked and impious plunder, allowed them to dwell in a place from which they would no longer be able to set foot in Greece, and where they and their progeny would be relieved of the fear that possessed them. Having thus obtained the land under by no means happy auspices, they raised a city, gave it the name Branchidae, and fancied themselves secure not only from the Milesians but from Justice herself. But the providence of God did not sleep; for when Alexander had defeated Darius and taken possession of the Persian empire, he heard of their evil deed. In his abhorrence for their posterity he slew them all, judging that of the wicked the offspring are wicked, and razed the falsely named city, and its people vanished from the earth.So we *do* have it on record that the city was named by the Branchidae after themselves. :-)Best regards,Linda Ann

[Jeanne]

The goal is to get them to think critically on both sides of the equation, and to think in terms of the ancient world, not the modern. Every student will have the opportunity to write both as the prosecution and as Alexander, and to sit on the jury to make the decision.Given the time constraints of the class as well as the fact many of the students will not have much (if any) familiarity with Alexander's campaigns, one can't expect too much detail. They're students, not professionals, or even amateur enthusiasts. ;> One of the first things one has to learn as a professor is what one can reasonably expect. If I can get them to evaluate the evidence from both sides, and use ancient mindsets (as far as they can achieve them) rather than modern, I'll have succeeded in my goals. The idea is to think of projects and learning opportunities that enthuse the students and get them to think for themselves, not just spit out potted answers on a midterm that they can buy off the internet. (G) This idea I actually owe to James Romm at Bard. He came up with it first and I liked it, so I'm snitching it. LOL!

[Jeanne]

(For an answer to this, see my reply to Andrew below yours; I tried to answer both of your concerns there. )

[Jeanne]

(For an answer to this, see my reply to Andrew below yours; I tried to answer both of your concerns there. )