pothos.org

Posted: **Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:01 pm**

Hello,

Supposedly Alexander sent a letter to Greece asking for his own recognition as a god. It seems that in neither of our two main sources- Curtius or Arrian do we find any mention of this request, only in Plutarch and Aelian. Also, around the same time had Alexander sent a request for Hephaestion to be recognised as a god but this time to Siwa- he had been turned down.

Envoys had been sent from Greece addressing Alexander as a god- according to Arrian.(amongst which was Cassander) I can't find any more info on the letter in my books, but in the back of my head I can remember reading that some Greek or other had replied, if he wants to be called a god so let it be!

The letter to Greece seems to be a controversial topic- and I don't see why Arrian or Curtius would have not mentioned it- it isn't an insignificant detail and tells us volumes of the king's mental frame at the time if it is true. I mean it does go against the grain of the beliefs of those times in Greece of a man receiving divine status. I suppose that it would have provoked ridicule in the court amongst the Macedonians. Could the appearance of the theoroi or sacred envoys in Babylon be a good indication of the proof that Alexander did send the letter?
My copy of Arrian mentions that Balsdon and Wilcken debate the issue yet I don't have access to either of their work, if anyone has a copy of their writing on the subject it would be great to read a short summary.
Best regards,
Dean

Posted: **Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:42 pm**

dean wrote: My copy of Arrian mentions that Balsdon and Wilcken debate the issue yet I don't have access to either of their work, if anyone has a copy of their writing on the subject it would be great to read a short summary.

Hi Dean,

I don't have time to copy out all of what Wilcken says, but a pertinant paragraph begins:

We are ill-informed how the affair was managed. That the initiative proceeded from Alexander is certain; but we do not hear in what shape it reached the Greeks. It can scarcely have been a command, but more probably a desire which he either expressed or caused to be expressed to the Synhedrion, and which, however formulated, was indubitably equivalent to a demand. The Synhedrion may then have communicated the desire to the several members of the league; for actually no uniform league cult was created, but the individual states by popular decree received the king among the gods of their community. What form they chose, whether as god or as son of a god (see Demosthenes*), was obviously entirely left to them.

Ulrich Wilcken (trans. G.C.Richards), Alexander the Great, 1967 edition, p.213

(* Demosthenes said "as Son of Zeus or of Poseidon if he wished")

Sorry I don't have time to give you more; but this gives you the main thrust of Wilcken's argument, at least.

I have a Balsdon article which I assume is the one that is meant; but would need more time to dig it out. Presumably he says pretty much the same as Wilcken.

ATB

Posted: **Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:21 pm**

Hello,

Cheers mate for the time taken- much appreciated...

It seems that there is no doubt whatsoever that the demand/petition was made by Alexander- I was under the impression that with it being absent in Curtius&Arrian- then there would have been certain doubt.

With Demosthenes' comment there can be little doubt. What would be Alexander's motives?This together with the razing of the temple of Asclepius, I think, indicates his losing the plot. I have a feeilng that at this stage, to put it bluntly, that he spent more time drunk than sober and this will have had certain effects on his behaviour to say the least.
Above all in the increasing sense of paranoia that he seems to be going through with regards to superstitious signs and omens in the last few days in Bablyon.

He even by passes his destination of Babylon at the Chaldeans warning of some dire consequence(love it how they successfully hid the fact that they hadn't acted upon his orders to reconstruct the temple and kept the cash) , just imagining Alexander hanging around in the marshes around Babylon till it was OK to come out.

Well anyway, thanks again,
Dean

Posted: **Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:22 pm**

Hi Dean,

I was a little slow with this response and I see that youGÇÖve already drawn some conclusions. I had this post two-thirds written, however, so I figure I might as well finish and post it anyway.

Ernst Fredricksmeyer has an article, AlexanderGÇÖs Religion and Divinity in BrillGÇÖs Companion to Alexander the Great (which I still have out on Interlibrary Loan). In the article, FredriksmeyerGÇÖs cites all the literary references to Alexander being proclaimed a god on the mainland. This makes it easy for me to find the sources (except for one from the Moralia that I'm missing), unlike your previous question regarding a quote in Renault which IGÇÖve been unable to locate, as yet.

Anyway, AlexanderGÇÖs letter isnGÇÖt mentioned in many of the references below, but it is presumed that the Assembly meetings discussed were in response to said letter.

Hyperides, Against Demosthenes 31-2. But when the Areopagus postponed its statement on the grounds that it had not yet discovered the truth, you conceded in the Assembly that Alexander might be the son of Zeus and Poseidon too if he wished . .

Dinarchus, Against Demosthenese 94. [94] I am not citing other instances of his continual change of policy or of the pernicious speeches which he has consistently made. At one time he made a proposal forbidding anyone to believe in any but the accepted gods and at another said that the people must not question the grant of divine honors to Alexander . . .

Diogenes Laertius. 6.63 (Diogenes.). The mistress of kings he designated queens; for, said he, they make the kings do their bidding. When the Athenians gave Alexander the title of Dionysus, he said, GÇ£Me too you might make Sarapis.GÇ¥

Polybius 12.12b.3 (On the writings of Timaeus). On the other hand, he commends Demosthenes, and the other orators who flourished at that time, and says that GÇ£they were worthy of Greece for speaking against the divine honours given to Alexander; while this philosopher, for investing a mere mortal with the aegis and thunderbolt, justly met the fate which be-fed him from the hands of providence.

PlutarchGÇÖs Moralia. 219 E-F. (Sayings of Spartans.) Damis, with reference to the instructions sent from Alexander that they should pass a formal vote deifying him, said, GÇ£We should concede to Alexander that, if he so wishes, he may be called a god.GÇ¥

PlutarchGÇÖs Moralia. Volume X. 842 D. (Lycurgus.) And when they were proclaiming Alexander a god, GÇ£What sort of god,GÇ¥ he said, GÇ£is he when those who come out of his temple have to sprinkle themselves with holy water?GÇ¥

Aelian, Varia Historia 2.19. When Alexander had defeated Darius and taken over the Persian empire he was very proud of his achievement. Feeling himself raised to the level of divinity by the good fortune which had now overtaken him, he sent an introduction to the Greeks to vote him divine honors. This was ridiculous; he could not acquire on demand from the rest of mankind what nature had not endowed him with. The cities passed various decrees, and the Spartans resolved as follows: GÇ£Since Alexander wishes to be a god, let him be a god.GÇ¥ In laconic fashion and in accordance with their own tradition the Spartans deflated AlexanderGÇÖs madness.

Athenaeus 6.251 B. Epicrates of Athens, according to Hegesander, when he went on the embassy to the Persian king, accepted many bribes from him, and never scrupled to flatter the king so openly and boldly that he would declare the Athenians ought to choose annually, not nine archons, but nine envoys to send to the king. I wonder, for my part, how the Athenians could have let him go without bringing him to trial, seeing that they fined Demades ten talents for proposing a decree naming Alexander a god, and actually put to death Timagoras because when ambassador to the Persian king he made obeisance to him.

Valerius Maximus 7. 2. ext. 13. Demades too had a wise saying. When the Athenians were unwilling to decree divine honours to Alexander, GÇ£Take care,GÇ¥ he said, GÇ£that in guarding the heavens you donGÇÖt lose the earth.GÇ¥

IGÇÖm not too surprised that the letter isnGÇÖt mentioned by Arrian. Even though he didnGÇÖt try to whitewash Alexander completely and although he chose his sources carefully as to what he believed was the truth, he wasnGÇÖt above ignoring evidence to an extent if he didnGÇÖt like it for some reason. The Philotas affair is a good example GÇô Arrian couldnGÇÖt omit such an important event in its entirety, but he did reduce it to just a few brief lines instead.

IGÇÖve seen similar done by modern authors GÇô in fact I noticed it recently in FredricksmeyerGÇÖs article (see above). He discusses the various patron gods of Alexander, but when he comes to Apollo he fails to mention the purported manhandling of ApolloGÇÖs priestess at Delphi. He could have tried to explain it away GÇô I presented my own argument in a recent thread because I donGÇÖt believe Alexander would have committed such an offence to the god GÇô but in this article thereGÇÖs nary a word about the visit! In fact, Fredricksmeyer believes that Alexander applied Philip's oracle to himself and in the footnotes he states that Alexander never obtained an oracle from Delphi! So he must have his reasons for failing to mention the incident with the priestess - and Arrian must have had his for omitting the letter to the Greeks.

As for Curtius, there are a couple of large lacunas in book ten and after only a brief surviving fragment on the mutiny at Opis we move straight to the death of Alexander. Curtius may well have mentioned the letter to the Greeks when discussing the embassies that came to Alexander at Babylon, but as this portion of his work is missing we will never know.

Best regards,

Posted: **Wed Sep 06, 2006 10:31 pm**

Hi Dean,

dean wrote:Hello,

Cheers mate for the time taken- much appreciated...

No problem. It didn't take long ... but the longer passage would have done!

It seems that there is no doubt whatsoever that the demand/petition was made by Alexander- I was under the impression that with it being absent in Curtius&Arrian- then there would have been certain doubt.

This seems to be the case, although of course I was only citing Wilcken, and then only a fairly short paragraph. That bit is preceded by a couple of pages of discussion, which doesn't have much in the way of references. Thank goodness for the assiduity of Amyntoros, eh, and her excellent resource centre!

ATB

Posted: **Fri Sep 08, 2006 6:38 pm**

Hello Amyntoros,

The whole impressive series of quotes that you have kindly listed leave no doubt in my mind that the request, be it in whatever form it was made, was made. And I can only envisage that the general feeling in Greece was, GÇ£weGÇÖre not going to see him back for a while yet, so if he wants to be a god, then yeah, great, let him be a god.GÇ¥ Also with his orientalizing there probably was the feeling that he had become what he set out in the beginning to hit most hard at.

It is curious to see how the Spartans in particular are quick to use the request to GÇ£take a shotGÇ¥ at ATG

Reading over the passages in Arrian and Plutarch- with the exception of Curtius- it is incredible the variety of bad omens that we find in these last closing pages of both books. As you say with regards to the request for deification there could possibly be a lacuna in his text the same could be regarding the bad omens- none of which seem to appear. (Most surprising considering CurtiusGÇÖ agenda.) The bad omens must have circulated because they are to be found in detail in both Arrian and Plutarch.

Arrian and Plutarch both agree on the episodes of:

1:The Chaldeans warning not to enter Babylon at the time of his passing.
2: The seer PeithagorosGÇÖ reading of a sacrifice and finding no lobe on the victimGÇÖs liver.
3: The man who according to Plutarch was called Dionysus and came from Mesenia, said coincidentally that the god serapis(coincidentally because it was this god whose temple AlexanderGÇÖs friends wanted to take Alexander to when he became critically ill.) had loosed his chains for he was a criminal and told him to sit on the kingGÇÖs throne.

In Plutarch- I love the story about the Ravens that Alexander sees fighting over the city walls of Babylon
But especially- the story about the greatest of the kingGÇÖs lions being killed by a donkey shortly before his death.

Also in Arrian we have the story of Alexander sailing through the canals near to Babylon and his hat falling into the water- whereupon a Phoenecian or GÇ£Seleucus?GÇ¥ jumps into the water to fetch it back placing misfortunately the hat upon his head.

Maybe I have missed a few of the GÇ£bad luckGÇ¥ stories out but it is strange how all of these coincide with AlexanderGÇÖs increased bouts of drinking especially after HephaestionGÇÖs death- presaging his own.

Best regards,
Dean

pothos.org

Request to Greece

Request to Greece

Re: Request to Greece