Alexander's generals

[S]

Greetings Marcus,Of course it speaks volumes- to the fact that they may have had one of three things:
1) great love for Hephaistion and may have truly felt grief or
2) great dislike and wanted to divert attention from that fact or
3) great love or respect for Alexander and wanted to express their commiseration and share Alexander's grief and lossThis is fairly typical human response when someone dies, and is even more apparent when someone of status dies. And it cannot be denied that Hephaistion had status.What the sources do not tell us, is who felt what except in a few instances..Regards,
Sikander

[marcus]

Indeed, except that your (2) is explicitly stated (Plutarch? at least), and if I recall correctly indicating that there were more than a few who felt that way.I don't deny that there's a lot of "six and two threes" (as my Yorkshire relatives say) about the whole thing; I just happen to have signed up to the anti-Hephaistion camp :-)For now - who knows, I might change my mind in a few months... (again)All the bestMarcus

[S]

Greetings Marcus,I realize Plutarch mentions #2- but consideration might be given to the fact that it was notable *because* it was unusual. In other words, why mention others giving honour if it was common and not unusual? And in the culture, I also see some currying of favour might have been at play.. after all, Hephaistion's death might open a few doors to influence.The same holds true with noted arguments- it must be considered that their notablity was due to their rarity. Not because Hephaistion was a pacifist by any means, but because , holding a unique position, he might well have been aware of the necessity to help hold things together rather than wreak havoc?And of course, one then must consider Plutarch's sources, also, as well as Plutarch's interpretation of same. I just do not see the evidence for Hephaistion being notably "nasty" any more so than any of the others, including Alexander. By the same token, I see evidence that he was competent in his duties and more loyal than many. I *do* see evidence of the nature of the warrior culture, which included Hephaistion, in *all* the leaders present, including the development of factions, cliques and intrique.. as evident after the death of Alexander. Regards,
Sikander

[alejandro]

Hello Sikander,I agree that there is no proof that Hephaistion was GÇ£nastierGÇ¥ than the rest (I even said that jealousy could explain why he was almost always involved in disputes with his fellow colleagues), but the question is whether he was a GÇ£nasty piece of workGÇ¥ as someone put it , and I think that we can be quite convinced that he was perfectly capable of organizing machinations, gossiping and even torturing GÇ£friendsGÇ¥ if needed (Philotas, anyone?). In any case, as you say, everyone of the big guys would have been willing to do the same thing as they were all both capable and ambitious soldiers, so probably the GÇ£labelGÇ¥ of GÇ£nasty piece of workGÇ¥ would fit everyone of them, not only Hephaistion. Now the GÇ£rankingGÇ¥ of nastiness is a complete matter, and agreement about it is (maybe) impossible.RegardsAlejandro

[alejandro]

Hi SikanderI just remembered an interesting argument raised by Heckel regarding these matters.
According to him, Hephaistion was extremely skilfully GÇ£puppeteeredGÇ¥ (sorry, canGÇÖt think of a proper verb) by Alexander. That is, Hephaistion was basically used to be the face of AlexanderGÇÖs most resisted policies (e.g., adoption of Persian outfits), thus becoming the target of resentment while Alex remained rather untouched by the negative feelings. It was also a priceless weapon to generate discord (or rather, some degree of distrust without affecting tactical/strategic goals) amongst the big guns due to his acknowledged special status. Heckel implicitly says that Hephaistion was so loyal to Alexander because he was not especially dear to the Krateros, Perdikkas or Ptolemies, and so he did whatever Alexander asked him to in order to remain under his protective arm. I donGÇÖt remember the exact phrase, but Heckel reflects something on the lines of GÇ£isolated amongst lions, Hephaistion was willing to do anything Alexander asked him to doGÇ¥.I have to admit that I donGÇÖt remember the actual evidence that Heckel provides to support his case, but I also have to admit that his argument is really appealing to me. Away from the romantic idealization of Alexander-Achilles and Hephaistion-Patroklos, Heckel presents a totally RealPolitik-based perspective on this relationship (though I do think that it evolved from an originally teen-romantic one into the adult-RealPolitik one). I really admire how the same GÇ£toolGÇ¥ can be so effective in so many different areas (from advancing oneGÇÖs policies to keeping powerful and ambitious noblemen at bay), and how Alex actually encouraged HephGÇÖs dependence on himself, further increasing the effectiveness of the tool. Truly a RealPolitik master-class!I am not saying this is what actually happened, but it is an argument that (at least for me) makes sense.Even more, if it were true, the (so far) apparently elusive title of GÇ£nastier piece of work in courtGÇ¥ would be awarded, without any hint of doubt GǪ to Alexander himself!Kind regardsAlejandro

[alejandro]

Hi AndrewI totally agree with your point. Yet another example of Alexander's greatness!BestAlejandro

[S]

Greetings Miguel,Yes, my point entirely: that, under certain circumstances, and only judged by today (since their culture supported machinations, etc)these men could *all* be classified as "a nasty piece of work". What I find interesting is that Hephaistion comes under fire specifically, for doing what each of those men were probably also doing- and I do feel Alexander deserves some examination as to how he used Hephaistion- thus perhaps placing Hephaistion in an almost impossible position. Regards,
Sikander

[xxx]

The negative comments on Hepahistion's personality stem from Plutarch and of course we know he used Chares as a source. So what happened to Chares when Hephaistion was promoted? ;-)Sometimes it don't pay to die early and leave wounded egos behind, especially the kind that write...The sad fact of the matter was, the friends were absolutely loyal to the King. but unfortunately they did not feel the same way about each other. That was a weakness of Alexander's command strategy. It reminds me of a famous dog trainer who had a female client who wanted her four intact male pitbulls to live in harmony in her house. The only way it was possible was to unite them against a common enemy in defense of the client. God help anyone who walked through the door uninvited. But if she died, well, the pack dynamics change and it's whoever is left after the savaging that gets to eat the scraps of what's left...

[Halil]

The torture of Philotas is often sited as an example of Hephaistion's nastiness even though others were also doing the torturing. Krateros is a prime example: we are told in the sources that he had been trying to turn Alexander against Philotas ever since Egypt and yet no accusation of spitefulness (Green) or "nastiness" (as in the present discussion) is made against him. A clear case for his machinations against Philotas could be built and yet this topic is rarely even of interest to anyone. Now I am not for a moment about to suggest that Hephaistion was an angel, but might not Philotas's appeal to Hephaistion for mercy have been made not to the "nastiest piece of work" in the room, but to the one who was most likely to have been merciful? Just a thought, guys, don't roast me for it

[Halil]

An aside to this: we often complain about the ancient historians introducing rhetoric into their histories, since this rhetoric is often unhelpful in conveying facts and even more often leads us down the wrong path concerning the real incidents beneath the historian's added words. Here we have a modern example from Heckel:
GÇ£isolated amongst lions, Hephaistion was willing to do anything Alexander asked him to doGÇ¥.
Lions? Isolated? Anything? Hardly, on all counts.

[Halil]

To Alejandro:
I may owe Heckel an apology since I've tried to find this quote in his works and can't, but I was just doing a quick scan so maybe I missed it. Could you give a pointer to where this "isolated among lions" statement comes from?
Cheers
Halil

[alejandro]

Hi HalilI didnGÇÖt know that Philotas appealed to Heph for mercy. I think, however, that anything done during the torture was kept secret, and hence what is written about it is rather literary embroidery. But of course, it is just my opinion.Also, even if it is true, there could be other reason for PhilotasGÇÖs appeal to Heph: if convinced, he would be a good advocate before Alex due to their special relationship.Kind regardsAlejandro

[alejandro]

Hi SikanderPlagiarizing a famous comic characterGÇÖs catch phrase: GÇ£Great powers bring great responsibilitiesGÇ¥, and in this case we can say that HephaistionGÇÖs actions, because of his being so close to Alex (big power), were more severely scrutinized than those of the other big names (big responsibility), even when GÇ£everyone would have done the same in the same circumstancesGÇ¥ (Notice, for example, that when Alex stops the quarrel between Heph and Eumenes, it is said that Alex publicly reprimanded Heph saying GÇ£I made you what you areGÇ¥. Though severe, I feel its intention is not to humiliate Heph as to remind him of something that probably Alex had told Heph many times: GÇ£you have to be the best among the best, and yet still youGÇÖll be despised and enviedGÇ¥).I remember that someone in the forum once labelled Hephaistion as AlexanderGÇÖs GÇ£spin doctorGÇ¥ (and I do sympathize with the concept), but this position usually means doing the dirty work without getting any of the rewards (for those in the UK, you can easily notice that Tony Blair maintained his political power, but first Peter Mendelssohn (sp?) and then Alastair Campbell had to leave the government after some spin-doctoring backfired). If you add to this a pinch of jealousy due to the special relationship between A & H, then you get a truly explosive cocktail.Regards,Alejandro

[alejandro]

Hi HalilAs I mention in the previous message, I donGÇÖt remember the exact phrase and (unfortunately) havenGÇÖt the book with me anymore (my loan was not renewed).It could well be the case that no literal mention of GÇ£lionsGÇ¥ or GÇ£isolationGÇ¥ was made, but thatGÇÖs the flavour of the phrase anyway.Unfortunately I cannot be more precise.RegardsAlejandro

[Halil]

Hello AlejandroThanks for the clarification of the Heckel phrase. I must admit I didn't check on it at first as it seemed a familiar phrase to me too, but then I thought I'd better check because I was interested on where and why he'd used it. A mystery then - does anyone know where this quote is from?It's a good lesson though that even when we think we know something, we may not have the recall we'd hoped for. Just like the ancient historians... ;)CheersHalil