Butchery in Baktria

[calesstheness]

Amyntoros, Kudos...
You Rock....and roll.
::D

[Dr. Pal]

Dear Dr. Chugg,GÇ£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.GÇ¥I agree wholeheartedly. I also see a lack of precision in matters concerning ancient religions in the works of most of the post-Tarn writers. It is easy to sermonize about Alexander in the East without carefully considering the history of the eastern religions. For this, I feel, it is often necessary to go beyond the European sources.Regards,Dr. Pal

[yiannis]

If I can add some more to Alexander's defence, the Tyrians have thrown the bodies of the dead to the sea. That was the worst crime in the eyes of Greeks because if not properly burries, the dead could not find rest in the underworld.
Remember the Athenian admirals, that were put to death upon their victorious return to Athens, because they failed to collect the bodies of the dead from the sea (even amid seastorm)?Btw, I was under the impression that the Bracchidae incident was a myth. Is it verified as a fact?

[Taphoi]

Thanks Dr Pal. I think the fragment of Aelian quoted by Linda (which seems to come from the Suda) shows that some Greeks thought it was right to have killed the Branchidae. Conversely, Plutarch says, "Not even the greatest admirers of Alexander, among whom I count myself, approve his wiping out the city of the Branchidae and his general massacre of young and old, because their great-grandfathers had betrayed themple near Miletus." However, Plutarch's essay, in arguing against punishing descendants for the crimes of their ancestors, affirms that this had been considered divine law. It looks to me as though Alexander found himself in a dilemma in the case of the Branchidae. He resolved it by referring the matter to the Macedonian Assembly. Tragically, the Assembly sided with religious law out of repugnance for the heinous crime. Was this a war crime? By modern standards certainly, but how just would it be to hold Alexander responsible for the religious law endorsed by his society? Replying to Yiannis, Tarn argued that the Branchidae incident was a myth, but his arguments are very unconvincing. The best modern opinion (and mine) is that it is historical. Best wishes, Andrew

[Dr. Pal]

Dear Dr. Chugg,
Personally I have greatly benefited from TarnGÇÖs work but his portrayal of Alexander as an unblemished figure is certainly incorrect. I have tried to focus on another religious aspect which was not totally unknown to Tarn - that there was a socio-religious divide between the Greeks and the Persian ruling elite - the Persian Royalty had a much greater dependence on the landed gentry. For this one has to go back to the clash between Darius and Gomata. The Greeks mainly supported Gomata and I have identified Gomata with Gotama the Buddha. Tarn (and also Toynbee) saw the close links between Hellenism and Buddhism. In relation with the Branchidae affair you have written about curses descending through dynasties for ancient crimes and it is not impossible that in the eyes of Alexander and his armymen Persepolis stood as a symbol of Darius-I and Xerexes who opposed Gaumata. I think Alexander had a strong dislike for the priestly religion of the Brahmins. This was pointed out by Tarn and its roots may even go back to Siwa. After Siwa it appears that there was some kind of a mission that guided Alexander and his followers.
Regards,

[amyntoros]

Andrew - a brief question out of interest. How can you tell that the Aelian quote seems to have come from the Suda? Is that the only place that fragments from Aelian can be found? Linda Ann