Alexander IV

[Theseus]

How despicable is it what Cassander did to Roxane and Alexander's son years after Alexander's death?! I just got done reading Andrew Chugg's book Alexander's Lovers and the part about Roxane. It's such a shame that Alexander IV was not able to be king. The people wanted him to have his Father's kingdom when he came of age and Cassander didn't want to lose his power so had Roxane and Alexander IV murdered.

I know this type of thing happened so much back in those times, but I just wonder if Alexander IV had lived what things he would have done? Would he have been like his Father? Would he have been as courageous or had the same vision?
In my opinion, Alexander III was murdered because not many Macedonians had the same vision as him to live equally with what they thought were barbarians and also that Antipater and Cassander were about to be taken out of "power" now that Alexander was closer to home and receiving letters from Olympias about what they have been up to. It's just too bad someone didn't remove Antipater and Cassander before they could accomplish all the murders they had arranged. What would the world have been like if certain things happened differently? I know the possibilities are too numberous to fathom.

[Vergina Sun]

I agree that it was incredibly despicable what Cassander did to Roxane and Alexander IV (even though Roxane allegedly poisoned Stateira and her unborn son).

I can't help to think though, could anyone - even Alexander - rule such a vast and multicultural kingdom? I recall a historian (I can't remember which) saying that he couldn't see Alexander mellowing out and ruling his kingdom. Conquering is what he did. I don't think even Alexander could have been able to keep the kingdom in peace for too long. The kingdom might have needed to be broken up into separate kingdoms anyway.

We must also accept that in that in that day and age, the people would probably not want a "barbarian" ruling them. I hate to say it, but Alexander IV might have been killed either way. Maybe it was better that he died young. It would be better than turning paranoid and worrying all the time about someone trying to kill you.

I also don't see Alexander IV being as strong and courageous as his father. Some may disagree, but to me, there will never be another Alexander the Great. Not even his son could come close to his greatness. Perhaps he would have the same vision, but I can't imagine anyone else doing anything similar to what Alexander did. I doubt the world has seen or will ever see another like him - past, present, and future.

[Theseus]

I agree that it was incredibly despicable what Cassander did to Roxane and Alexander IV (even though Roxane allegedly poisoned Stateira and her unborn son).

I can't help to think though, could anyone - even Alexander - rule such a vast and multicultural kingdom? I recall a historian (I can't remember which) saying that he couldn't see Alexander mellowing out and ruling his kingdom. Conquering is what he did. I don't think even Alexander could have been able to keep the kingdom in peace for too long. The kingdom might have needed to be broken up into separate kingdoms anyway.

We must also accept that in that in that day and age, the people would probably not want a "barbarian" ruling them. I hate to say it, but Alexander IV might have been killed either way. Maybe it was better that he died young. It would be better than turning paranoid and worrying all the time about someone trying to kill you.

I also don't see Alexander IV being as strong and courageous as his father. Some may disagree, but to me, there will never be another Alexander the Great. Not even his son could come close to his greatness. Perhaps he would have the same vision, but I can't imagine anyone else doing anything similar to what Alexander did. I doubt the world has seen or will ever see another like him - past, present, and future.

I know that some of the places Alexander had conquered were rebelling soon after he left them. It would have been very difficult to run that huge of an empire especially that the Persians were viewed as barbarians and not equals. The elder generals and soldiers didn't like taking some of the Persian customs as their own. I do wonder if some of them knew that Alexanders days were numbered and just did look the other way when his murder was being planned and carried out.

There never has been or ever will be any one that can come close to achieving what Alexander the Great did. I just wondered what his son was like and how they would have been similar. Yes we will never know, but I just wanted to ponder it out loud. I know some considered Alexander IV their king and he did for a time have some of those advantages and even some depictions of him as Pharaoh exist in Egypt.

I always enjoy your comments Vergina. Thanks for replying.

[Paralus]

IWe must also accept that in that in that day and age, the people would probably not want a "barbarian" ruling them.

Well indeed. One of the things that is clear in the "infantry revolt" at Babylon is that the infantry preferred a mental deficient of "pure" stock to a half-barbarian bastard.

[Semiramis]

Didn't daddy Phillip take the kingdom from a child too young to rule? What happened to Darius' young son, the one Alexander saw in the Persian harem? It seems that if you're too young to rule, you're too young to keep your position and perhaps your life.

I can't help to think though, could anyone - even Alexander - rule such a vast and multicultural kingdom?

Achaemenids did OK with their vast and multi-cultural kingdom. Alexander didn't really extend it that much in terms of percentage of territory cf total territory. The edges are the hardest to hold on to I think.

We must also accept that in that in that day and age, the people would probably not want a "barbarian" ruling them.

I thought you were speaking about Alexander the Great there for a second... from the Persian point of view.

[amyntoros]

I know that some of the places Alexander had conquered were rebelling soon after he left them. It would have been very difficult to run that huge of an empire especially that the Persians were viewed as barbarians and not equals. The elder generals and soldiers didn't like taking some of the Persian customs as their own. I do wonder if some of them knew that Alexanders days were numbered and just did look the other way when his murder was being planned and carried out.

Predicated, of course, on the belief that Alexander III was murdered. Not every historian or Pothosian accepts the murder theory, myself being one of those who continues to believe it was an illness that killed him.

Best regards,

[Vergina Sun]

Didn't daddy Phillip take the kingdom from a child too young to rule? What happened to Darius' young son, the one Alexander saw in the Persian harem? It seems that if you're too young to rule, you're too young to keep your position and perhaps your life.

I can't help to think though, could anyone - even Alexander - rule such a vast and multicultural kingdom?

Achaemenids did OK with their vast and multi-cultural kingdom. Alexander didn't really extend it that much in terms of percentage of territory cf total territory. The edges are the hardest to hold on to I think.

We must also accept that in that in that day and age, the people would probably not want a "barbarian" ruling them.

I thought you were speaking about Alexander the Great there for a second... from the Persian point of view.

I sometimes get defensive of Alexander's greatness too. Anyway, Alexander the Great probably wouldn't have had much of an inclination to sit back and rule. He would have conquered and fought until he did die.

[Paralus]

Possibly the least favourite of Alexander's pastimes was the administration of empire. If you are constantly fighting you have little time for this rather annoying business.

Alexander planned to continue fighting and conquering: it was what he was good at. More to the point, he loved it. Administration was for others. The empire at the time of his death had already begun the process of fragmentation that would continue apace afterwards.

The Acahemenids had an imperail administration that had stood the test of centuries. This is much of the reason that Alexander attempted to co-opt it to his own service. Iranian nationalism threw spanners in those works as did, aparrently, Macedonian corruption - unless it transpired in Egypt.

[Theseus]

I know that some of the places Alexander had conquered were rebelling soon after he left them. It would have been very difficult to run that huge of an empire especially that the Persians were viewed as barbarians and not equals. The elder generals and soldiers didn't like taking some of the Persian customs as their own. I do wonder if some of them knew that Alexanders days were numbered and just did look the other way when his murder was being planned and carried out.

Predicated, of course, on the belief that Alexander III was murdered. Not every historian or Pothosian accepts the murder theory, myself being one of those who continues to believe it was an illness that killed him.

Best regards,

I guess I forgot to write "in my opinion" sorry about that. No one knows what killed Alexander because we weren't there. I have said that before. I know there are those who side on the illness being the culprit and other's poisoning. I wasn't trying to offend anyone.

[Theseus]

I thought maybe some of you may like to read this about Alexander IV. It has a picture I was referring to earlier showing Alexander IV in an Egyptian relief.
http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander01 ... er_iv.html

[marcus]

I know that some of the places Alexander had conquered were rebelling soon after he left them. It would have been very difficult to run that huge of an empire especially that the Persians were viewed as barbarians and not equals. The elder generals and soldiers didn't like taking some of the Persian customs as their own. I do wonder if some of them knew that Alexanders days were numbered and just did look the other way when his murder was being planned and carried out.

Predicated, of course, on the belief that Alexander III was murdered. Not every historian or Pothosian accepts the murder theory, myself being one of those who continues to believe it was an illness that killed him.

Best regards,

I guess I forgot to write "in my opinion" sorry about that. No one knows what killed Alexander because we weren't there. I have said that before. I know there are those who side on the illness being the culprit and other's poisoning. I wasn't trying to offend anyone.

Oh, I assumed you were talking about Alexander IV! Shows how complicated it all gets, doesn't it!

ATB

[amyntoros]

Predicated, of course, on the belief that Alexander III was murdered. Not every historian or Pothosian accepts the murder theory, myself being one of those who continues to believe it was an illness that killed him.

Best regards,

I guess I forgot to write "in my opinion" sorry about that. No one knows what killed Alexander because we weren't there. I have said that before. I know there are those who side on the illness being the culprit and other's poisoning. I wasn't trying to offend anyone.

Heck no - no offense taken! Sometimes a theory is predicated on another theory, as with the murder of Alexander, and I just wanted to point that out. No more, no less.

[Theseus]

Predicated, of course, on the belief that Alexander III was murdered. Not every historian or Pothosian accepts the murder theory, myself being one of those who continues to believe it was an illness that killed him.

Best regards,

I guess I forgot to write "in my opinion" sorry about that. No one knows what killed Alexander because we weren't there. I have said that before. I know there are those who side on the illness being the culprit and other's poisoning. I wasn't trying to offend anyone.

Oh, I assumed you were talking about Alexander IV! Shows how complicated it all gets, doesn't it!

ATB

sorry, Well some of this can probably apply to both of them can't it? Alexander IV dissapearing from history and what little is known that led up to that point. Was it murder? Was it illness? Cassander having a part in it? I guess we'll never know for sure.

[ruthaki]

I've been reading through these posts with a great deal of interest because one of the major players in my novel "Shadow of the lion" is Alexander IV. I did as much research about him as possible (there's not much known) before beginning what I'd thought would be a juvenile historical about his short, tragic life. However after a year of writing I decided to start over and make it multiple point of view because the story is too complicated and political for a kid's book. I feel very close to this child. I have tried to imagine his life, and what it was like living with the shadow of such an illustrious father (who he never knew), spending most of his life in army camps with a lot of Macedonians who disapproved of him being named joint-king with Arridaios, his half-wit Uncle.
Then, being put in the company of two homicidal women -- his mother and his grandmother --, used as a pawn by the Successors, never living a 'normal' child's life, and eventually imprisoned (so-called 'house arrest') but the cruel despot Kassandros, one of his father's enemies, only to be disposed of on the eve of when he could rightfully claim the throne. A real Homeric tragedy.

[amyntoros]

Then, being put in the company of two homicidal women -- his mother and his grandmother ...

Olympias and Roxane are reduced to being "homicidal women"? I take it you won't be showing them in a positive light in your novel?

Best regards,