Descendants to Alexander the Greath

[Lars Lundstrom]

Does anybody know of any descendans to Alexander the Greath or his relatives?

[ruthaki]

I believe there are people up in northern Pakistan who claim to be descendants of some of the soldiers he left to man the garrisons there. Isn't there something about this in the movie "The Man who would be King" ???

[flash]

I think what your thinking of are the black Kifirs, they also claim they are decendants of Dyonises, living now some where in Afgahanistan?! They still wear Greek costumes and dance the greek dances..........george

[marcus]

But Alexander himself left no descendents that we are aware of ... unless it were to turn out that his liaison with the Amazon queen was true, or that the suggested liaison with Cleophis really happened.
ATB
Marcus

[kenny]

The Odds Must BE For
I would gamble my bottom dollar,There are people today with Alexanders blood.At a time of boozy nights and surely the abundance of women.Plus there been co contraception Im sure Alexander sowed his seed more than the recorded children, I guess its law of averages.I mean your in your 20s women every where throwing themselves at him.Its gotta be more impossible that he didnt have other children,Unless of coarse ALexander was not into women and more into men. That I would doubt.Kenny.There are recorded encounters with the famous ones Im sure there were many more.

[Nax]

While I'd like to think the Big A would've been everywhere with all kinds of babes, the truth is, he's noted for NOT doing so much sex play & I also think that, no matter what we'd like to think today, the indications are there that he preferred Hephaestion & Bagoas to any of his wives, cuz there sure isn't a lot of stories about THEM having a whole lot of kids. What else would it mean that he was only conquered by H's thighs??? Since I can't see Alexander as passive, maybe it means cux Hephaestion couldn't have kids so they had to marry and get em another way LOL Also, I don't know about there not being contraceptives, cuz I think they they had abortificants & I think the Arabs knew about animal husbandry & maybe they passed on the info

[amyntoros]

Hi Kenny, Well, it depends much on whether you believe Alexander was like his father in all ways, or whether he tried hard *not* to be in some circumstances. Philip was certainly famous for "spreading it around" and your rakish description fits Philip to a tee! However, almost everything written about Alexander says he was very self-controlled in sexual matters and that he saw it as a weakness. Some examples: Athenaeus: The Deipnosophists XIII.603 C "For, passionate as this king was, he was in like measure self-controlled when it came to the observance of decency and the best form." Plutarch: Alexander 21 "As for the other prisoners, when Alexander saw their handsome and stately appearance, he took no more notice of them than to say jokingly, GÇÿThese Persian women are a torment for our eyes.GÇÖ He was determined to make such a show of his chastity and self-control as to eclipse the beauty of their appearance, and so he passed them by as if they had been as many lifeless images cut out of stone." Plutarch: Alexander 22 "He also used to say that it was sleep and sexual intercourse which more than anything else, reminded him that he was mortal; by this he meant that both exhaustion and pleasure proceed from the same weakness of human nature." Curtius 10.5.31-32 ". . . then, too, his kindness towards almost all his friends, goodwill towards the men, powers of discernment equaling his magnanimity and an ingenuity barely possible at his age; [32] control over immoderate urges; a sex-life limited to the fulfillment of natural desire; and indulgence only in pleasures which were socially sanctioned." Best regards, Amyntoros

[amyntoros]

Nax just reminded me and I forgot to address this. There certainly *were* contraceptives and abortifacients in ancient times. There are quite a few articles to be found on the subject and plenty of records in Greek and Roman writings.Best regards,Amyntoros

[beausefaless]

Deleted

[marcus]

Hi Amyntoros,While I agree with you, and of course one cannot argue with what those sources say, how about this:Curt. 8.6.3 "They [the Royal Pages] would take turns spending the night on guard at the door of the king's bedchamber, and it was they who brought in his women by an entrance other than that watched by the armed guards."Now, as it happens, in the context it could be read that this was what they did for *all* the kings (ie. including Philip), and it could be that Alexander was the exception ... but one could read it as meaning Alexander specifically.ATBMarcus

[abm]

very good point, Marcus. My general principle is that we need good arguments to reject facts in the sources, and this quote from Curtius is a 'fact'. When it comes to Alexander's sexual behaviour in general, however, we are already dealing with interpretations. Such concepts as moderation and self-restraint were very important in ancient thought and ancient authors had no problem with making kings examples of how to behave and how not to behave (cf. Plutarch's quite explicit statements in the introduction of the Lives of Alexander and Demetrius for instance). In certain instances it is very clear that Alexander's sexual behaviour also worked in this way; allow me to quote Waldemar Heckel:GÇ£There is at least one case were omission is as obvious insertion: the failure to mention AlexanderGÇÖs sexual relations with Barsine. Now we know that Curtius was aware of the relationship, since he mentions BarsineGÇÖs child by Alexander at X 6.11. But he does not tell us that Barsine was the first woman with whom Alexander had been intimate (Plut. Alex. 21.7, from Aristoboulos) nor does he describe their meeting after her capture at Damascus (cf. Justin XI 10.2 GǪ). (GǪ) But the omission was deliberate. Curtius had just praised Alexander for his self-control (continentia) with respect to the Persian princesses and their mother (GǪ) (III 12.21-23). (GǪ) Curtius would have stultified his entire argument if had proceeded, in the following chapter, to recount how Alexander was overcome with desire for the beautiful captive, Barsine, and how he fathered on her the child Hercules! For it was AlexanderGÇÖs continentia, and condemnation of sexual impropriety in general, at least early in the campaign (cf. Plut. Alex. 22), which mattered more than the status of the woman.GÇ¥ [W. HECKEL, GÇÿNotes on Q. CurtiusGÇÖ History of AlexanderGÇÖ, Acta Classica 37 (1994), pp. 67-78, on p. 72]Thus, while I'm not saying we can simply dismiss the sources stating that Alexander was very moderate etc. in his sexual life, I think we should be very careful with them. This also why I think we should not keep focussing mainly on Alexander's campaigns if we want a better understanding of him, but also on such questions as Alexander's image in the age of the Diadchoi, imitatio Alexandri in later hellenistic times and in Rome, philosphical influences in the sources etc. A lot of work has also been done regarding these topics, but a lot more remains to be done there.regards,abm

[kenny]

Companions HailI doubt very much that the Ptolemy let alone the sources knew Alexanders nocternal behaviour. The sources do say that Darius wife lost a baby.That Darius wife became pregnant during her stay with Alexander. I hear you Andrew.I can just imagine Alexander and Hepheastion on the pull. All those haremes and a concubine for everynight of the week. Are we to take seriously that Alexander never made use of this acquisition as many state he made use of the Male hooker Bagoas.Common sense says he got his share.Kenny

[marcus]

Well, Kenny, there are reasons why we shouldn't necessarily believe that Alexander did acquire a harem of 265 concubines - one of them being the portrayal of Eastern degeneracy that Curtius was trying to put across. There is nothing to suggest that Bagoas was a 'hooker', as you call him. You really should try to exercise a little more objectivity.All the bestMarcus

[Marilyn]

"Thus, while I'm not saying we can simply dismiss the sources stating that Alexander was very moderate etc. in his sexual life, I think we should be very careful with them..."
Sure. But at the same time, we have to be careful of arguing from our OWN paradigm. I mean, we have to be careful to NOT argue from the assumption that OUR norm is theirs. Kenny mentions how the peasants were hets & all, but I bet thats from the recent spate of articles published all over the internet from a PARTICULAR view with the INTENT to "prove" Alexander'se heterosexuality. Yet scholars've stated that the originating author has failed to consider ancient writings that make the opposite argument.
This writer also seems to be trying to apply Athenian mores to Macedonians & I can't see "proof" for that.Someone on Pothos once said that our objectivity is what we have to bring to the study of Alexander, but most of us don't- we want to create Alexander in whatever image we prefer. & its not just gays that do this. Heterosexuals are as determined to "prove" Alexander a het than gays are to proves he's gay or "bi" but neither of these terms really applies.Based on what IS & IS NOT in the sources, I'm still
inclined to believe he was generally less rigid in his thinking, less inclined to mess around & MORE inclined towards "fidelity" than most, that he married for political reasons as was expected rather than "love", that, as several have posted, his emotional life was "focused on men rather than women", & that, sorry, but I'm not convinced yet of the Heracles as his kid scenario, especially since reading some of the arguments against it on this & other sites..

[amyntoros]

Dang Marcus! Do you know how long I've been looking for that Curtius quote? I *knew* I'd read it once and I wanted it for the source file on Alexander's Sexuality. I couldn't remember where I'd read it and couldn't find the darn thing anywhere - and you didn't notice or tell me it was missing from the file either! I also find it fascinating for a different reason: Given the time-frame (just before the pages' conspiracy) Curtius is most likely talking about Darius' former tent, don't you think? Now if there was a back door that wasn't watched by armed guards, then surely that was how the pages planned to kill Alexander - by sneaking in where no one else could see them. I do wonder if they actually thought they were going to get away with the murder? And it implies that the front entrance to Alexander's bedchamber was also "guarded" by regular soldiers as well as the pages, which is in itself interesting and not specifically mentioned elsewhere. If that was the norm, would Alexander really have trusted to an unprotected back door? I find it a most curious and intriguing quote. And I know I've gone way off topic here, but what the heck! ATB Amyntoros