How many wounds did Alexander get, is there a list or refere

[conan]

Hey guys this is my first post!Does anyone know how many injuries he sustained over his campaigns?There was a history program on TV a few years back now, in it, it stated he recieved 21 wounds altogether. These included a catapult bolt in the shoulder (ouch!) and an arrow just below the arm pit resulting in a pierced lung (said to be the most serious he recieved). The program said that in eastern sources it is said the arrow was poisoined and that Alexander was never the same after this. Also he sustained many nastey wounds to his thigh's and lower legs - due to being the first to meet the enemy's spears in a charge.How accurate are these statements anyone know?Cheers

[kenny]

Hi ConanWelcome and to be honest myself I have no idea of the exact amount. Only it has been stated Alexander was wounded by every type of weapon known at that time.I think we all know of the Malian arrow to the lung.One injury I heard was by some high flying bird that dropped rocks onto there pray apparently one dropped a stome on Alecanders head. Maybe a myth.But one I did find interesting was a bolt through the shoulder that apparently caused Alexander to carry his head cocked.On that line does anyone have further details regarding him carrying his head cocked. Apparently a characteristic adopted by Jim Morrison also an Alexander fan.Kenny

[heinrich]

As far as I can recall, Alexander was wounded during the Illyrian campaign and at the Granicus; fell ill in Tarsus; was wounded near Issus, at Gaza, shortly before he reached the Jaxartes, and during the siege of Cyropolis; suffered from dissenteria near the Jaxartes; was again wounded during the siege of Massaga and was almost mortally wounded when he stormed the city of the Mallians. I may have missed something.There's a catalogue somewhere in a speech by Plutarch, but I don't remember where.The Mallian wound is discussed by Bosworth in *Alexander in the East*.HM Granicus

[amyntoros]

The catalogue of wounds is in Plutarch's Moralia, 327 A - B. 'On the Fortune or the Virtue of Alexander.' (Plutarch isn't quoting Alexander here - this is part of what he *thinks* Alexander would say to Fortune.)". . .But my body bears many a token of an opposing Fortune and no ally of mine. First, among the Illyrians, my head was wounded by a stone and my neck by a cudgel. Then at the Granicus my head was cut open by an enemy's dagger, at Issus my thigh was pierced by the sword. Next at Gaza my ankle was wounded by an arrow, my shoulder was dislocated, and I whirled heavily round and round. Then at Maracanda the bone of my leg was split open by an arrow. There awaited me towards the last also the buffetings I received among the Indians and the violence of famines. Among the Aspasians my shoulder was wounded by an arrow, and among the Gandridae my leg. Among the Mallians, the shaft of an arrow sank deep into my breast and buried its steel; and I was struck in the neck by a cudgel, when the scaling-ladders which we had moved up to the walls were battered down; and Fortune cooped me up alone, favouring ignoble barbarians and not illustrious adversaries with such an exploit. But if Ptolemy had not held his shield above me, and Limnaeus taking his stand before me had not fallen, a target for ten thousand shafts, and if my Macedonians had not overthrown the wall with spirit and main force, then that nameless village in a foreign land must needs have become the tomb of Alexander." Best regards,Amyntoros

[marcus]

It has long been on my "to do list" to go through the sources and to check whether Plutarch's list is complete or not - there might, after all, be some minor scratches and abrasions that Plutarch doesn't care to mention. Whether I'll ever get round to it remains to be seen ... until that time the Pl. list is as good as any! :-)All the bestMarcus

[flash]

added to it all the mental anguish of command, and the loss of Hephaestian, I'd say no one I know could have lasted half as much. Alexander was a man's man afterall.

[shaun]

Hello,
I have read your posts with interest.
In fact, this topic/question is the same I chose for my doctor's thesis to get my degree.
I have a complete list of all the injuries (major and minor) suffered by Alexander (or anybody else in the sources), that are mentioned in QCR, Arrian, Diodor, Justin and PLutarch. In my work I try to discuss these injuries and mentionings as to their medical background. The first part is about the above question and is long from being finished. But nevertheless I might be able to provide you with some information.
I will be moving soon, actually tomorrow, and won't have email "up north" for awhile (I really doubt t-online being fast), but I promise I'll answer your emails asap.Anja

[xxx]

Actually, there are a few mistakes by Plutarch on his list (he was a bit prone to exaggeration in this particular piece and confuses some injuries, i.e. the ones in Illyria for the ones in Cyropolis)for those who read the history of the wounds carefully.Alexander would have been wounded many more times than this, however, only interesting wounds, particularly those gained by valor would have been mentioned. The 'stupid' wounds, accidents, et al would not

[kenny]

HailAs rule we never agree however your point about Plutarch getting the list of injuries wrong is good and relevent to all the posts and views totally based on the sources.I think It fair to say we can discount or dispute mostof what the sources. And we can definately discard most of what was supposed to have been said and done in private.RegardsKenny

[amyntoros]

Kenny everyone's view of Alexander comes ultimately from the sources, including yours - every modern book and film at some point goes back to the extant histories for their original information on Alexander.So what do we have left if we discard *most* of the sources - each individual's decision as to what little bit they choose to believe about Alexander? That's what it would amount to - "I believe this bit and I believe this bit and the rest can be disregarded."If we ignore the majority of the little information that we have then there would be no point in discussing Alexander. Everyone could make him into what they choose and Oliver Stone's film wouldn't have caused any controversy 'cause there'd be no concensus on Alexander in the first place.The sources need to be analyzed and examined, that goes without saying, but if we arbitrarily discount most of the sources then we'd all be just *inventing* our own Alexander.Best regards,Amyntoros