PIXODARUS

[nina]

HI, FORUM READERS, HAVE BEEN READING THE BIO OF PHILOTAS AND CAME ACROSS THE NAME "PIXODARUS" COULD YOU PLEASE GIVE ME MORE INFO ON THIS? I DON'T RMEMBER READING ANYTHING ABOUT THIS BEFORE. AND MARCUS, THANKS FOR ALL THE INFO ON THE NEW BIOS YOU'VE BEEN WRITING. NINA

[jona]

Pixodarus was satrap of Caria. On hearing about Philip's plan to invade Asia (early 337??), and knowing that Persia was divided, he proposed to marry his daughter to a son of Philip, who said she could marry to Arrhidaeus. Alexander felt offended and told Pixodarus that he wanted to marry his daughter too, and created a minor diplomatic crisis.Jona

[nina]

MANY THANKS JONA, TRYING TO LEARN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. WAS READING ABOUT PHILOTAS BEING THERE DURING THIS PROBLEM AND THAT ATG MIGHT HAVE HELD IT AGAINST HIM. BUT DIDN'T KNOW AND THANKS FOR HELPING TO EXPLAIN. NINA

[nina]

HI JONA, JUST GOT A CHAPTER OF YOUR BOOK SO I CAN READ A LITTLE. MUCH THANKS AGAIN. THIS COMPUTER WAY IS REALLY THE INFORMATION AGE. COME VISIT IN THE U.S.A. SOMETIME. MANY THANKS NINA

[ruthaki]

And I think the girlie turned out to be only about 8 or 10. Philip was so angry at Alexander's interference that he came down heavy on him and his Companions. They were lucky to get off with their lives and I think a few of them were exiled for awhile. It's been awhile since I read this story. Anyone got the details handy??

[ancientlibrary]

Second significance: Pixodarus was the
younger brother of Ada. He deposed her from
her position as satrap of Caria, sending Ada to
the inland fortress of Alinda, where she stayed
until Alexander tore through the region. Before
that, however, Pixodarus died..More detail: Ada was the sister of Artemisia, the
sister-wife and successor to Mausolus, the
enegetic Carian leader now remembered for his
contribution to funerary terminology. After
Artemisia died, Ada succeeded to the position
together with her brother-husband Hidreus (or
Idreus), but, like Artemisia ruled alone after her
husband's death. To become satrap,
Pixodaurus had called upon the Persian
Orontobates, and then died, leaving Caria in
purely Persian hands when Alexander arrived
on the scene. .Alexander restored the now-aged Ada as satrap
and was in turn "adopted" by him, ie., she
foreited her dynastic claim. Plutarch tells a story
(three places, I recall) about Alexander refusing
pastries Ada sent him..
Anyway, the moral of the story is that Alexander
was prevented from marrying Pixodarus'
daughter, but later got his sister for a mom, and
Pixodarus as his uncle instead of his
father-in-law. Given the Carian penchant for
brother-sister marriage, however, Pixodaurus
also became Alexander's mother's
brother-in-law, among other things.

[marcus]

There is a story that, when Philip went to confront Alexander about his meddling, he took Philotas with him. It's unclear whether this was because he was holding Philotas up as an example of what a dutiful son should be like, or whether Philotas had told Philip what was going on and was displayed as his accuser. Certainly some writers like to use the latter as an explanation of why Alexander later 'had it in for' Philotas. All the bestMarcus

[glaukias]

Heckel says that due to that Pixodarus affair, Ptolemaios, Nearchos, Harpalos and Erigyios (Arrian adds Laomedes) were sent into exile and didn't return until after Philipp's death
Greetings,
Anja

[agesilaos]

Sadly that is not what Arrian says, he says 'Harpalas had first been sent into exile while Philip was still on the throne, because he was loyal to Alexander; Ptolemy son of Lagus was exiled on the same account, with Nearchus son of Androtimus, Erygius son of Larichus and Laomedon his brother , since there was a lack of confidence between Alexander and Philip after Philip took Eurydice to wife and disgraced Olympias the mother of Alexander.' III 6 v earlier at I 23vii in a discussion of Carian affairs he notes Pixodorus' deposition of Ada and his death and nothing about this marriage affair.The version linking the marriage brokering and the exiles is only in Plutarch Alx. 10. Diodorus XVI 74 ii again merely notes Pizodarus' siezure of power.The whole marriage episode is dubious not least because the scenes are played out in private and the only protagonist, Ptolemy known to have written a history seems not to mention it. It is a good story but poor history.Alexander had better reasons for hating Philotas, towhit the power and influence wielded by his father Parmenion and his own possibly justified posturing.

[marcus]

Hi Karl,The fact that Ptolemy omits mentioning it (or appears to) isn't necessarily peculiar, depending on when his history started; and if he mentioned his exile (which isn't necessarily the case, as he wasn't the only source that Arrian used) there might have been reasons why he didn't mention the reason for the exile.If the story isn't true, it strikes me as being a strange story to have been invented by anyone. Which of course doesn't mean that it *is* true, but for my money I'd cautiously accept it rather than dismiss it. All the bestMarcus

[abm]

Hi Karl,If a source says that Ptolemy said something we more or less know that he did say that. We must never forget, however, that the sources we have, selected their material and we can not assume that Arrian has copied everything Ptolemy said. Thus I don't think it is possible to know what Ptolemy didn't say. Whatever the value of Arrian may be, his silence does not mean that something didn't happen, only that he didn't care to mention it and the same goes for Diodorus. The question of Perdikkas and the ring is a case in point. It is mentioned in many sources and only Arrian omits it. Although this has lead some scholars to disbelieve that Pedrikkas got the ring, this is not sound methodology.regards,abm

[marcus]

Ultimately it all comes down to guesswork, and to a large extent we have to apply a test of probability to it all. With Perdiccas getting the ring and the Pixodarus affair, they are both *likely* events; therefore Ptolemy's silence need not mean anything.With, say the story of the Amazon queen, even if we didn't have Plutarch's comment which denies it (the one about Lysimachus saying "where was I?"), it's not really a very likely tale (which doesn't in itself that it isn't true, but it certainly requires a much more healthy dose of scepticism).All the bestMarcus