alexanders succession

This moderated forum is for discussion of Alexander the Great. Inappropriate posts will be deleted without warning. Examples of inappropriate posts are:
* The Greek/Macedonian debate
* Blatant requests for pre-written assignments by lazy students - we don't mind the subtle ones ;-)
* Foul or inappropriate language

Moderator: pothos moderators

Post Reply
chris
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:55 am
Location: Sutton Coldfield

alexanders succession

Post by chris »

It puzzles me why Alexander didn't appear to give more thought to his succession. I know the circumstances surrounding his death are uncertain, but he must have known he could have died at any time, in battle or by some other means.Does it not seem out of character? Chris
User avatar
nick
Somatophylax
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 5:32 am

Re: alexanders succession

Post by nick »

Hi Chris -My personal theory would be that Alexander was determined to marry himself into the Persian Royal line - which he did in the end with Statira and Parysatis. But he was apparently not eager to marry into the Macedonian nobilty. Hence the delay - which proved disastrous in 323 BC.That leaves the question open why he didn't marry Statira right in 330 BC, after Gaugamela and with all the Persian power centers already conquered (except Bactria). Did he feel it was required to recover the whole extent of the Persian realm before sealing his kingship with a marriage? (Statira's age was not the problem.)The next question is: why suddenly marry Roxane? Maybe as a sort of insurance before the army was marching into unknown India? I would say - but others might dispute that - that Roxane's family must have had certain strong ties with the Persian Royal line. On gaugamela.com I have argued that 200 years of intermarriages between Persian noble or royal families had created a very tight cobweb of family relations inside the Persian ruling class.Regards -
Nick
chris
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:55 am
Location: Sutton Coldfield

Re: alexanders succession

Post by chris »

Hi Thanks Nick. Fascinating stuff.Regards,Chris
susan
Somatophylax
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: alexanders succession

Post by susan »

I think the marriage to Roxane may have been influenced by Barsine's pregnancy - who if Diodorus is right, must have given birth to Heracles around 327, about the same time. It seems that Barsine was unacceptable to Alexander as a legitimate wife and mother of an heir as she was not royal - so, I think Roxane must have been royal enough to satisfy this criterion. However, if this is the case it's surprising that it isn't mentioned in the sources. There is the alternate view that this marriage was the price he paid for being able to get out of Central Asia and move on to India without another revolt.
The marriage to Roxane stirred up strong emotions among many of Alexander's court - both Macedonian and Persian, and Alexander would not have embarked on it lightly. If it had just been for emotion, he could have taken Roxane in the same sort of relationship as Barsine - who had a recognised position but was not married to him and could not bear a legitimate heir - so the possibility of a legitimate royal heir must have been the important issue.
RegardsSusan
jan
Strategos (general)
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 2:29 pm

Re: alexanders succession

Post by jan »

I really like that, Susan, as when he was young he would not compete with any but a royal in a race. So if he is so particular about competing with only kings, why would he not also be certain that an heir apparent would be through a marriage with a royal. I believe you are quite correct.However, when he was pressed as to who should succeed him, on his deathbed, he did assert his choice of only the strongest. That would certainly have elminiated his children for the moment, would not it have?And it strikes me odd that since he had known the history of Achilles having to draw the lot of a short and glorious life and his imitating Achilles so often that he should have known he too would live only a short life. Seems he was a bit shortsided when it came to his successors. Most likely, he realized how little it would matter to any but his most inner circle. He had been urged to marry while still in Greece but he refused to marry then. He seemed not to want the responsibility of a wife and children. His mother and his friends made it obvious to him that they had wanted an heir who was a Macedonian but he simply would not give in to their wishes.So it does make one wonder at why he waited until he had finally defeated Darius before he even entertained thoughts of cohabitation and successors.Perhaps his own childhood and all the complications with Philip marrying Cleopatra when she was so young had an adverse effect upon him. It is tempting to believe that he did not want a Macedonian heir before it was time. Yet he never returned to assure Macedonians their rule over Asia.Unemcumbered, he has noone to consider but himself and his troops, so in a way he did the right thing for himself. However, he continued to always send gifts and cattle back to Greece. It is as if they never left his thoughts at all. Interesting.
Tre

Re: alexanders succession

Post by Tre »

Hello Jan:Alexander did not marry a Macedonian before leaving on his expedition for a very good reason - he did not want a child held against him as ransom for good behavior by either his mother or the powers that be. Both Antipater and Parmenio had available daughters as I recall, and had he chosen one over the other, you can imagine the unpleasantries that would have ensued.As for Roxane, I am of the opinion he married her to help calm the region after determining her family was sufficently powerful enough to do this in his stead.I believe Alexander had rested his hopes on Hephaistion as running things should something happen to him (logically, he would never have thought Hephaistion who was protected would perish first, but there's always that nasty fate thing that keeps coming up) and when it did, he was in a hurry to have his heirs but, alas, a long life was not afforded to him. But to be fair, even if he did sire a child before leaving Macedon, the boy would only have been 13 and probably would not have survived the so-called friends of Alexander. Alexander handed his ring to Perdiccas, that was his choice, b but apparently the so-called friends disagreed with that. The death bed line of 'To the Strongest' or 'To the Best' is probably pure fiction. Regards,Tre
susan
Somatophylax
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Alexanders succession

Post by susan »

There's a theory that the death bed line was "Kratero" rather than to Kratisto" ( forgive the word endings, I'm on lesson 3 of ancient Greek) - leaving the regency or empire to Krateros who was the logical choice, and that Perdiccas misinterpreted it to his own advantage.I think Alexander was way past planning for the succession anyway by then; it was certainly not the death that he would have wished for. The worst fate for heroes was that they would die in their beds.On a lighter note, my son James is today in the Mosque of Nebi Daniel in Alexandria, paying his respects.Susan
agesilaos
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2180
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: LONDON

Re: Alexanders succession

Post by agesilaos »

The 'Kraterou' theory is all part of Renault's rationalisation of the tradition and probably bogus. Alexander's insouciance vis-a-vis the succession is common among the Great, Caesar, Napoleon, etc all neglected things after them, since without them nothing mattered it is lesser men like Octavian who plan successions.I agree with Tre that the marriage to Rhoxane was the diplomatic price for ending the Sogdian Revolt, but I would go further and argue that the Persian Marriages were more about pacifying the Empire while he headed West than producing a 'legitimate' heir. Alexander supplanted the Achaemenids he did not succeed to their throne. The princesses were important because of their blood-ties which as Nick says would have been extensive; he is not linking himself to the family of both Ochos and Darius as much as to the families of their supporters among the nobility.Alexander is not concerned with producing heirs, the pregnancies are the result of the fact that ancient marriages had to be consumated. There is a story that Roxane bore a still born child in India which to Englishmen brought up on Henry VIII's obsession with begatting an heir might cast the dual marriage in that light, however I think this is mistaken; Roxane has another child out of the celebrations following the crossing of Gedrosia or out of consolation for the death of Hephaistion. Alexander knew enough about arguments over the succession not to deliberately create friction/faction. I suspect that any half-bred child would have been considered unnacceptable for the Imperial diadem, though potentially useful in the regions as a tie to His blood.Alexander did not expect to die he is like the man who has all the symptoms of a disease but does not think he has it so long as he avoids the doctor's. His illness was mortality and the record is clear that he did not accept that he was infected.
When you think about, it free-choice is the only possible option.
Linda
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:57 pm

Re: alexanders succession

Post by Linda »

Hi SusanI am not entirely clear about the relative claims of legitimate and illegitimate heirs in Macedonia, but is it possible that Barsine becomes pregnant because of the Alexander's marriage to Roxanne, rather than the other way around? As the mother of Alexander's child she would have more status than a childless mistress, and so she and her family would not feel neglected due to the marriage. A balancing act on Alexander's part.
Post Reply