Alexander's height

[Gina]

I know what I'm about to ask has no relevance to the discussion at hand but right now I'm stumped. I'm writing a sci-fi novel and for the life of me, I can't find any info on exactly how tall Alexander the Great was. Can any of you help? It would be appreciated.Thanks,
Gina

[smittyzback]

I place him at somewhere between 5feet 7inches to around 5feet 10 inches lol,. I don't think i've ever read anywhere about his height, but I would imagine he was not amongst the taller of men for the time or else some of the sources would have mentioned it.
I believe, Darius and Porus are mentioned as being quite tall( probably 6 foota's +), but I just can't imagine ATG being a 6 foot + person.
Please excuse the imperial measurements, I still can't adjust to centimeters :(I', 5' 8" so I reckon he was 5feet 8 inches lol. Sounds good to me.Cheers!

[tre]

Hello Gina!We know Alexander was not tall. Arrian comments that he was 'somewhat less than average height' and Curtius says Hephaistion was greater in physique and has another refer to Alexander as "If only your stature was equal to your ambition".The expert on Alexander art, Andy Stewart says he was 5'7" with a perfect body, I would somewhat disagree. There are many who believe the armor found in Tomb II (those who believe this is the tomb of Philip Arrhidaeus) is Alexander's and I've been told by someone who had access to the actual pieces that they would fit a person quite small, say 5'2". However, I do not believe this armor was Alexander's for various reasons.He was a consummate and successful warrior, that would preclude him from being that small. So he was probably 5'5" - short enough that people noticed but not so short that he would be impaired by his height. One must remember, back then, 6 footers were quite the exception in Greece and 5'7" would not have been considered short. One must take Curtius' comments on his physique with a grain of salt - Alexander may not have been tall, but he was certainly quite thickly built.As a friend put it to me "He probably never thought he was short, just that other people were tall." :-)Regards,Tre

[susan]

Probably around 5'4" - 5'5". People then , as now, would have liked their leaders to be tall so they would comment even if he was only average size. I doubt if he was much shorter; just maybe surrounded by taller companions.

[karen]

Tre wrote:
"There are many who believe the armor found in Tomb II (those who believe this is the tomb of Philip Arrhidaeus) is Alexander's and I've been told by someone who had access to the actual pieces that they would fit a person quite small, say 5'2"."I've wondered since seeing pics of the armour, how big a man did it seem to have been designed for, which of course you can't tell from photos sans dimensions. Finally, I have an answer -- thanks Tre, and your friend!That the armour seemed to be someone's who was quite small seems to me like strong evidence that it was Alexander's and thus the tomb was Arrhidaios's (which is why I was wondering). Because who else in the Makedonian royal family could have owned it? No sources say *Philip II* was small. And Arrhidaios didn't fight and thus had no need of armour -- nor was ever said to be small himself, in the sources.My guess is that when Kassander re-buried Arrhidaios, for appearances' sake he cast about the palace for some old pieces of royal-quality armour that were no longer being used, and found an old helmet of Philip's (hence its earlier style) plus the pieces that Tre's friend identified as small, which had been Alexander's. And the estimate of 5'2", which is an estimate, after all, is simply three inches off.Another intriguing possibility; we know for a fact that Alexander led a campaign before he was full-grown -- against the Maedi as regent, age 16. (Men don't stop growing completely until age 19-21.) How long before that he actually *started* fighting, history doesn't know. Perhaps he had the armour made for himself when he *was* 5'2", and it was available to Kassander because Alexander had left it behind in the palace, having outgrown it...Love & peace,
Karen

[Nicator]

Hi Gina,My guess would be at least 5'7", but no more than 5'11". This judging by the Alexander busts, and also from seeing other ancient busts in the Archaeological museum in Athens. If he were much smaller than 5'7" is unlikely that he could have been effective as a warrior, no matter how stout he may have been. It is not accurate to state that ancient Greeks were shorter than moderns. The average height of humans has not changed significantly over such a comparitively short history. The remains of ancient Greeks when they weren't cremated into ash, attest people of significant stature...well over 6'0". Humans weren't bred for height (and other desirable characteristics) like horses. I've posted on this before, and the obvious association human height is countries with shorter people tend to have poor diets, whereas, taller people have nutrient rich diets. That's why we see chinese people come from their homeland with heighths between 4'5" - 5'7", but rarely taller. Their children typically grow significantly taller, and their children again outgrow their parents. Within several generations their heights might be something like 5'5" - 6'2". These are personal observations, and should be taken with that in mind. later Nicator

[Tre]

Problem being, human height is extremely difficult to attest to in remains that old, alas. I would buy the argument Makedonians were taller than the Athenians on average, but a man of 5'7" would have been well into average height, 5'11" being quite tall. Arrian seems almost pained to tell us in fact, that he was not quite average height. Six footers would have been the exception rather than the rule. A man slightly shorter than average would have been rather dangerous to fight because he could get under shields without exposing himself as a shorter man might. Alexander gives every indication that he was also unusually quick which certainly helped.Regards,Tre

[Tre]

Arrhidaeos would certainly have had his own armor. He was King of the Macedonians - Armor was both ceremonial as well as for battle. It would be unthinkable he wouldn't have his own set for state occasions. It should also be mentioned Alexander would have had several - not just one and the helmet found in Tomb II is of Alexander's type as pictured on the Porus medallion. While I have been told some scholars are certain it is Alexander's helmet because it is the only iron one ever found and Curtius makes a big deal about how it was so finely polished it shined like silver, it is by my logic, impossible to determine that. We have no idea how many Macedonians were outfitted with iron helmets of this type.Regards,Tre

[marcus]

I agree, Tre - of course Arrhidaios would have had his own armour.And I'm also not sure Arrhidaios didn't fight. I'm not aware that there's anything that says he didn't... but I'm not so hot on what the sources say about the Successor period (however, I'm sure there's no mention of it in Curtius Bk 10). But you'd probably know better than I on this.All the bestMarcus

[susan]

It's not at all clear from the sources what Arrhidaeos' mental & physical state was; he was apparently easily led, mentally, and not up to the fray of full-blooded Macedonian dynastic politics - but you've only got to look at the others who fell by the wayside in this struggle - Olympias, Cleopatra, Perdikkas to see that this didn't mean he was incapable. In any case if you had Alexander as a brother you might not want to appear as a fully-capable rival claimant. I think he did have armour - they were a warrior people, they'd never have accepted a king who didn't at least look something like the part, even if it only superficially; and as history is written by the victors, he had no-one to put his side.Susan

[yiannis]

When it comes to his height it is obvious that him being short or tall it is relevant to the height of his contemporaries. Here're a few relevant pieces that I found:"Despite apparent meat and protein consumption, osteological evidence suggests that the most ancient Greeks were short in stature and the
probability remains that their food intake pattern was based more upon grains, fruits, legumes, nuts, and both domesticated and wild vegetables "
(Vickery, 1936, pp. 74-84. 88-89). An article on the modern Greeks compared to ancient:
http://www.fikas.no/~sprocket/snpa/chapter-XII14.htm
and: http://www.geocities.com/dienekesp2/morphological/In general (and without me being able to produce any evidence) my understanding is that an average height in Greece would be something like 1,60-1,65m. The Greeks considered the Ethiopians (Africans) "short". The Macedonians' diet was consisted mostly of meat and dairy products so they might 've been taller than Southern Greeks. I guess Alexander would be something like 1.60m in height, but of course this is merelly my guess and I can't adequally support it.

[jan]

Adding one more opinion, I just read that Philip is 5'2" tall, so I surmised that Alexander could be as much as 5'3" or5'4", unless Zeus had an input which made him even taller. !

[jorgios]

well, 5foot 8 inches was amongst the taller men of Alexander's time. It was likely that he was fairly short, given that Phillip was only 5 foot 2 inches.

[Tre]

That is only if you believe the bones in Tomb II are his (and there have been several estimates on the size of the body the bones represent from 5'2"-5'6").In fact, no ancient source has claimed that Philip was a small man and I tend to believe feelings being what they were at the time, that this would not have found its way into print. Indeed if one accepts the current prevailing theory that he and Cleopatra are in Tomb I (have you seen the wall paintings?), the bones of a large man were found within.

[Gina]

Wow! I din't think Alexander's height would involve so much discussion. It's great! Thank you all for giving me so much information. Just one more thing, I've read on the net that Philip gave Alexander's sister, Cleopatra in marriage to Olympias' brother, to placate the anger in him when he divorced Olympias. What was Olympias' brother's name? And what happened to Cleopatra after Alexander died? Thanks so much again.Gina