Novel Questions
Pathways explored
Over the past few weeks my quest to explore the relationship between Sisygambis and Iskander has progressed down two pathways, each interesting and unexpected in different ways.
A small digression first. It must be remembered that most of our historical records about Alexander the Great have been written from the Greek point of view and rarely have survived from the Persian point of view. It is a historical truism that history is written and re-written by the victorious sides in any form of conflict, whether it be military, economic, political or technological conflict. The Greek accounts that have survived all must be seen as "tainted" in this respect. Their portrayal of royal women in Persia can be seen to have been coloured by the ideological position of Greeks vesus Persians on the role of women (in the upper classes of society)in addition to failures of collective memory when different historical records of the same event are compared.
The first pathway was to understand the economic role of women in the Persian royal households. The traditional view one has is a particularly nefarious one; a brood of royal mares fighting within the confines of a royal harem to gain the favour of the king and become the mother of the annointed successor. There is, however, a movement within historical studies to shed the confines of classical thought and reveal a more complex picture of women in society. I am indeed indebted to Elizabeth Carney (1996) for revealing a new and intriguing picture of the relationship between "Alexander and Persian Women". I must say that my respect for her insight has increased as I have read and thought about the original material (in English translations of course).
The theme of Carney's work is that Alexander had a complex and difficult task in managing his role with the Persian royal and satrapal women. The royal women were captives in one sense, the relationship with Stateira (wife of Darius III) is at best unclear,and they were ultimately also his links to establishing his legitimacy with royal Persian lineage through marriage. The satrapal women (Barsine and Roxanne) were the only two women known to have borne children from Alexander yet their roles as non-royals was unclear. It must have been a very subtle play to keep both the greeks and the Persians happy with his treatment of these women.
(By the way, if you are interested in reading more about royal women in the Macedonian royal court, I must commend Elizabeth Carney's works on women and monarchy in Macedonia (2000) as well as her most fascinating biography of Olympias (2006) not only as mother of Alexander the Great but also as a political woman with pan-hellenic influence even after his death.)
The importance of the Kings' wife and mother in the daily life of the Persian royal court is emphasised in the studies of Maria Brosius (1996, 2006). That royal women were responsible for the welfare and safety of the royal family should come as no surprise to readers. However, this is the most telling line for me:
"As owners of large estates, orchards and centres of manufacture for which they employed their own workforces, royal women enjoyed considerable economic independence" (Brosius, 2006 pp.43) To put this in context; the royal women were typically members of the ruling families that supported the Persian King, were able to dine with the king and thereby were able to discuss and influence decisions, and through their ability to travel and economic independence were able to provide invaluable information to the King.
The picture of royal women as chattels is questionable given the other roles and responsibilities that modern scholarship has uncovered through historical sources. More likely, these women could have been partners and allies in the best sense of these meanings but also had the potential to become enemies and subversive elements at times. One can imagine the thoughts of Greek merceneries who not only saw the great wealth of the Persian nation but also that some significant portions were held by women!
This raises some very interesting questions for the proposed novel. What was the economic position of Sisygambis? Did she own estates in various parts of the Persian empire? Where specifically were they? (One must suppose that some landholdings existed in the traditional areas of her family but there may have been others in other parts of the empire). To what extent were these passed from mother to daughter and what was the mechanism for doing so? Details they may be but important ones for understanding and recreating their daily life and concerns.
If they did own these landholdings and manufacturing centres, how were they managed when the king's wife and mother accompanied him into battle (as appears to have been the custom)? Was this a custom to protect the women or to ensure their loyalty during the times of battle. Were their fortunes tied so closely to that of the king? Were they expected to be killed if the king lost the battle or to be used as hostages? None of these trivial matters are evident in my readings to date.
The second pathway started with a question posed in the earlier blog; what was the role of the royal women in the religious affairs of the state? In particular, given the reputed role of Olympias as a religious celebrant, is it not possible that Sisygambis played a similar role in the Persian Empire?
Thankfully in the course of the past three weeks I have discovered some wonderful insights into this question. The more concise source is Maria Brasius (2006). When Darius I captured the throne (in 522BC) he proclaimed that his rule was achieved with the support of Ahuramazda, "The Wise One" (Brasius, 2006 p.16). Darius I was the representative of Ahuramazda on earth. The Zoroastrian religion (i.e. the religion based upon the teachings of the prophet Zoroaster) is one characterised by the dualism between good and evil, between Ahuramazda (the God of goodness) and Ahriman (the God of evil). Zoroastranism was the principal religion of the ruling class (both the royal family and the satraps) certainly from the time of Darius I (Brazius, 2006 pp: 68-69).
It is noteworthy that when Darius I built Persepolis to signify his victory it became the centre of the Zoroastrian religion with its own temple. When Alexander the Great burned Persepolis he actually destroyed the Great Temple of Ahuramazda. It is believed that most of the sacred Zoroastrian sacred texts were burnt in that fire thereby earning Alexander the title of Iskander the Destroyer. What a powerful image this must have created in the minds of those who believed in the forces of good and evil; those who destroyed the sacred temple of Ahuramazda must logically be the followers of Ahriman!(It should also be noted that it would be politically and religiously hazardous to suggest in modern day Iran that destruction of the sacred texts may have been more easily accomplished at the time of the conversion of the Persian nation to Islam in the mid 600's AD. There is evidence of book burnings at the time as some believe no book otherthan the Quran is needed.)
[As an aside, I also noted what may be a linguistic coincidence but something that I want to follow. Acting under the divine guidance of Ahuramazda, the King was supposed to act correctly in moral terms between the forces of good (OP arta) and evil (OP drauga). What has struck me is that in the Greek Orthodox religion, the host or bread symbolising the body of Christ and offered at communion is called artos]
The search for more information on Zoroastrianism has led me on a merry journey. By pure chance (is that ever possible really) I had purchased and lightly read Gore Vidal's (1981)epic novel "Creation" a few months ago, a novel that used the fictional character of Cyrus Spitama, grandson of the Prophet Zoroaster, to explore Zoroastranism at the time of Darius I. Just a few days ago, I also stumbled across a historical journey backwards from today to peel back layers of understanding of Zoroastrianism in the distant past (Kriwaczek, 2002). The book entitled "In Search of Zarathustra" is a wonderful explanation of how Zoroastrianism has developed and morphed over time with some extraordinary and surprising events taking place. More on this extraordinary book when I have finished reading it.
The closest we get to Zoroastrianism today is the living group of Parsees who live mainly in the Indian state of Gujarat. They are the descendants of the Zoroastrians who fled Persia when the Islamic Arab forces conquered the country between 636 and 651 AD. The fortunes of the Parsees rapidly improved when the British East India Company established operations in Bombay certainly by late 1686 AD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsi). From my knowledge of Indian business groups, I know that the Tata family and other prominent industrialist families are Parsees. What I did not know is that Zubin Mehta (orchestral conductor) and Freddy Mercury (lead singer in rock band Queen) are also Parsee!
Back to the question of Sisygambis and her links to Zoroastrianism; what do we know? It appears that she must have been actively a follower as a member of the royal family but there is no indication so far on whether the royal family was personally involved in the rites or whether this was the job of some priestly class (which is more likely the case)? A fascinating journey that still has a way to go.
Exploring Alexander's motivations
During the course of this background research on the novel, a number of questions about Alexander the Great have begun to trouble me.
The problem is that most contemporary discussions of Alexander the Great have focussed on the man, his leadership style and military exploits! It is interesting to read of the key battles, to analyse the strategic choices made prior to combat and the tactical decision making during the battle. More than most people (as a person trained in business strategy) I revel in understanding the role of battle hardened veterans, innovation in military formations (the phalanx), feints and traps as tactical weapons in addition to focus, mass and force all in the context of exploiting the geographical features of the battlefield. I despair at the lack of understanding the political motives and economic imperatives driving the land based armies!
However, what is missing is the more complex notion of competing political alliances and institutional aspects of the struggle for leadership and acendancy. We have such a simple understanding of Alexander the Great's battles. Too often they are portrayed as the battle between the Greek and the Persian ways of life. In it's most simplistic form this is the battle between the Greek nation states (implied in this is the notion of democracy though neither Sparta nor Macedonia could have been called democracies, even in the Athenian sense) and the Persian empire (a heterogeneous collective of states ruled from the centre). [As an aside, I just thought how the Star Wars films were very much in the same vein].
However, it is instructive to think about the different explanations of the Cuban Missile Crisis (Allison, 1971) to present a clearer picture. Graham Allison's study of the Cuban Missile Crisis showed how equally valid and interesting explanations could be written from very different perspectives: one from the viewpoints of two superpowers (the US and USSR), one from the viewpoint of different government agencies within the US government (such as the State Department, Attorney General's, and the various branches of the Pentagon, even the CIA), and finally one looking at the individuals involved in the decision-making (President John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Dean Rusk and Robert McNamara).
What is missing from our contemporary understanding is the middle level of interpretation, the battles between the various factional groups of Persians and the battles within the Greek (not simply Macedonian) factions. It's fair to say that these would be coalitions of interests capable of moving through shifting alliances at different times of Alexander's leadership and rule. On both the Greek and the Persian side, one can suspect the motives and interests of different factional groups. The marriage of the Greek leadership to the Persian noblewomen can be seen as an attempt to forge a political alliance between Greek and Persian interests. What this meant for the economic interests can only be imagined! I cannot imagine a person like Alexander the Great choosing these marriage alliances without a notional understanding of the political and economic consequences.
Though this is a theme introduced in the earlier blog, I have been thinking a lot about what may have motivated Alexander to begin the transition from being the leader of a Greek army using revenge and a sense of destiny to drive deep into the heart of the Persian Empire. With the destruction of Persepolis, however, that mission was well and truly accomplished. The amount of treasure removed from Persepolis and sent back to Macedonia was reuted to be very large. Why did Alexander choose to continue to drive through the eastern frontiers of the Persian Empire?
One idea advanced by some is that Alexander sought to plant the seeds of Greek culture into the Persian landscape. He created cities along the way and some of these remain to this day. The Seleucid Dynasty founded by the successors to Alexander was relatively shortlived over a period of 100 years though the Greaco-Bactrian empire in modern day Afghanistan continued for another 100 years (Brosius, 2006 p.81). I suspect it is more likely these Greek cities (many of them called Alexandria) were more likely ways of enabling Alexander to settle groups of Greek soldiers who were happy not to return to their homeland and allowed him to establish a pseudo-military presence in the conquered satrapies.
Why did Alexander not return to Macedonia? Why was he prepared to live in Persia and what were his thoughts about establishing a legitimate succession plan? The coincidence that haunts me is the relationship between Barsine (the royal consort in some ways) becoming pregnant with child and what seems to be a sudden decision to marry Roxanne (the daughter of a Bactrian satrap). Both would not have been considered suitable wives in terms of being the Queen in the Persian manner of arranging marriages.
In addition, there is the decision to train the Persian youth in the Greek manner of fighting. These were established before Alexander's Bactrian campaign and little is known how this was done. Yet, when he needed them, after the apparent rebellion in the Indian campaign and following that journey through south-eastern Iran, he was able to release the Greek Macedonian soldiers and replace them with Persian troops. They may not have been battle-hardened troops and he still needed to win their personal loyalty but they were a viable substitute. They were never really put to the test though!
The interesting question is one of replacement of the retiring Macedonian troops. Many of his troops were relatively old men and had fought alongside Alexander for many years, despite his own youth. If Macedonia was unable, or possibly unwilling, to supply the troops he needed what was he supposed to do? Alexander had worked with his troops since he was a teenager. He had not returned to Macedonia since leaving on this campaign. Was that a flaw in his model of governance or were his hands full ensuring consolidation of military gains and reverting to a peacetime status? (If you think that's easy, just reflect on the US position in Iraq at present!)
Closing Greetings
Since the last blog, we have celebrated a number of special days. Of course I want to wish you all a Happy New Year (according to the Gregorian calendar I presume).
However, let's not forget that Iranians celebrate the winter solistice Shab-e Yalda, literally meaning re-birth of the sun. Unlike the Islamic Arabs, whose calendar is based upon the moon, the Persian calendar and celebrations was originally based upon the sun (as is the Western or European calendar ... I believe). Just one more little thing to add to the list of things to learn and remember. Whicg calendar was used at the time of Alexander?
For Christians, it is also useful to remember that the birth date of Jesus is more accurately in early January according to some sources. We celebrate Christmas Day just a few days after the winter solistice. Is this a mere coincidence? Is it a mere coincidence that the revered Magi who attended the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem may have actually been members of the class of Zoroastrian priests (Brasius, 2006 p.66)? Mithra was the god of light and part of the deity system of Zoroastrianism. Was the story of the Magi attending the birth of Jesus a homage from an older religion that symbolised the new prophet?
Cannot help thinking of the implications of Mithraism which was a significant force in the Roman Empire. One of the sacred rituals was the slaying of the bull and the fertlisation of the soil. Could this possibly be the origins of bull fights in Spain? Are there similar rituals in Ancient Persia? Where did the Hindu rituals of not killing bulls spring from? Too much for one day.
As dawn breaks over the sky and the sun conquers darkness where I live, I bid you adieu!
Bibliography:
Allison, Graham T. "Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis" Little, Brown & Co. 1971
Brosius, Maria "The Persians: An Introduction" Peoples of the Ancient World series, Routledge 2006
Brosius, Maria "Women in Ancient Persia" Oxford Classical Monographs, Clarendon Press 1996 (reprinted 2002)
Carney, Elizabeth "Olympias: Mother of Alexander the Great" Women of the Ancient World series, Routledge 2006
Carney, Elizabeth "Alexander and Persian Women" American Journal of Philology Vol 117 No 4 1996 pp:563-583
Carney, Elizabeth "Women and Monarchy in Macedonia" University of Oklahoma Press 2000
Kriwaczek, Paul "In Search of Zarathustra: The First Prophet and Ideas that changed the World" Phoenix - an Orion Books imprint, 2003
Vidal, Gore "Creation: A Novel" Random House 1981 (republished Vintage International in a restored edition 2002)
Over the past few weeks my quest to explore the relationship between Sisygambis and Iskander has progressed down two pathways, each interesting and unexpected in different ways.
A small digression first. It must be remembered that most of our historical records about Alexander the Great have been written from the Greek point of view and rarely have survived from the Persian point of view. It is a historical truism that history is written and re-written by the victorious sides in any form of conflict, whether it be military, economic, political or technological conflict. The Greek accounts that have survived all must be seen as "tainted" in this respect. Their portrayal of royal women in Persia can be seen to have been coloured by the ideological position of Greeks vesus Persians on the role of women (in the upper classes of society)in addition to failures of collective memory when different historical records of the same event are compared.
The first pathway was to understand the economic role of women in the Persian royal households. The traditional view one has is a particularly nefarious one; a brood of royal mares fighting within the confines of a royal harem to gain the favour of the king and become the mother of the annointed successor. There is, however, a movement within historical studies to shed the confines of classical thought and reveal a more complex picture of women in society. I am indeed indebted to Elizabeth Carney (1996) for revealing a new and intriguing picture of the relationship between "Alexander and Persian Women". I must say that my respect for her insight has increased as I have read and thought about the original material (in English translations of course).
The theme of Carney's work is that Alexander had a complex and difficult task in managing his role with the Persian royal and satrapal women. The royal women were captives in one sense, the relationship with Stateira (wife of Darius III) is at best unclear,and they were ultimately also his links to establishing his legitimacy with royal Persian lineage through marriage. The satrapal women (Barsine and Roxanne) were the only two women known to have borne children from Alexander yet their roles as non-royals was unclear. It must have been a very subtle play to keep both the greeks and the Persians happy with his treatment of these women.
(By the way, if you are interested in reading more about royal women in the Macedonian royal court, I must commend Elizabeth Carney's works on women and monarchy in Macedonia (2000) as well as her most fascinating biography of Olympias (2006) not only as mother of Alexander the Great but also as a political woman with pan-hellenic influence even after his death.)
The importance of the Kings' wife and mother in the daily life of the Persian royal court is emphasised in the studies of Maria Brosius (1996, 2006). That royal women were responsible for the welfare and safety of the royal family should come as no surprise to readers. However, this is the most telling line for me:
"As owners of large estates, orchards and centres of manufacture for which they employed their own workforces, royal women enjoyed considerable economic independence" (Brosius, 2006 pp.43) To put this in context; the royal women were typically members of the ruling families that supported the Persian King, were able to dine with the king and thereby were able to discuss and influence decisions, and through their ability to travel and economic independence were able to provide invaluable information to the King.
The picture of royal women as chattels is questionable given the other roles and responsibilities that modern scholarship has uncovered through historical sources. More likely, these women could have been partners and allies in the best sense of these meanings but also had the potential to become enemies and subversive elements at times. One can imagine the thoughts of Greek merceneries who not only saw the great wealth of the Persian nation but also that some significant portions were held by women!
This raises some very interesting questions for the proposed novel. What was the economic position of Sisygambis? Did she own estates in various parts of the Persian empire? Where specifically were they? (One must suppose that some landholdings existed in the traditional areas of her family but there may have been others in other parts of the empire). To what extent were these passed from mother to daughter and what was the mechanism for doing so? Details they may be but important ones for understanding and recreating their daily life and concerns.
If they did own these landholdings and manufacturing centres, how were they managed when the king's wife and mother accompanied him into battle (as appears to have been the custom)? Was this a custom to protect the women or to ensure their loyalty during the times of battle. Were their fortunes tied so closely to that of the king? Were they expected to be killed if the king lost the battle or to be used as hostages? None of these trivial matters are evident in my readings to date.
The second pathway started with a question posed in the earlier blog; what was the role of the royal women in the religious affairs of the state? In particular, given the reputed role of Olympias as a religious celebrant, is it not possible that Sisygambis played a similar role in the Persian Empire?
Thankfully in the course of the past three weeks I have discovered some wonderful insights into this question. The more concise source is Maria Brasius (2006). When Darius I captured the throne (in 522BC) he proclaimed that his rule was achieved with the support of Ahuramazda, "The Wise One" (Brasius, 2006 p.16). Darius I was the representative of Ahuramazda on earth. The Zoroastrian religion (i.e. the religion based upon the teachings of the prophet Zoroaster) is one characterised by the dualism between good and evil, between Ahuramazda (the God of goodness) and Ahriman (the God of evil). Zoroastranism was the principal religion of the ruling class (both the royal family and the satraps) certainly from the time of Darius I (Brazius, 2006 pp: 68-69).
It is noteworthy that when Darius I built Persepolis to signify his victory it became the centre of the Zoroastrian religion with its own temple. When Alexander the Great burned Persepolis he actually destroyed the Great Temple of Ahuramazda. It is believed that most of the sacred Zoroastrian sacred texts were burnt in that fire thereby earning Alexander the title of Iskander the Destroyer. What a powerful image this must have created in the minds of those who believed in the forces of good and evil; those who destroyed the sacred temple of Ahuramazda must logically be the followers of Ahriman!(It should also be noted that it would be politically and religiously hazardous to suggest in modern day Iran that destruction of the sacred texts may have been more easily accomplished at the time of the conversion of the Persian nation to Islam in the mid 600's AD. There is evidence of book burnings at the time as some believe no book otherthan the Quran is needed.)
[As an aside, I also noted what may be a linguistic coincidence but something that I want to follow. Acting under the divine guidance of Ahuramazda, the King was supposed to act correctly in moral terms between the forces of good (OP arta) and evil (OP drauga). What has struck me is that in the Greek Orthodox religion, the host or bread symbolising the body of Christ and offered at communion is called artos]
The search for more information on Zoroastrianism has led me on a merry journey. By pure chance (is that ever possible really) I had purchased and lightly read Gore Vidal's (1981)epic novel "Creation" a few months ago, a novel that used the fictional character of Cyrus Spitama, grandson of the Prophet Zoroaster, to explore Zoroastranism at the time of Darius I. Just a few days ago, I also stumbled across a historical journey backwards from today to peel back layers of understanding of Zoroastrianism in the distant past (Kriwaczek, 2002). The book entitled "In Search of Zarathustra" is a wonderful explanation of how Zoroastrianism has developed and morphed over time with some extraordinary and surprising events taking place. More on this extraordinary book when I have finished reading it.
The closest we get to Zoroastrianism today is the living group of Parsees who live mainly in the Indian state of Gujarat. They are the descendants of the Zoroastrians who fled Persia when the Islamic Arab forces conquered the country between 636 and 651 AD. The fortunes of the Parsees rapidly improved when the British East India Company established operations in Bombay certainly by late 1686 AD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsi). From my knowledge of Indian business groups, I know that the Tata family and other prominent industrialist families are Parsees. What I did not know is that Zubin Mehta (orchestral conductor) and Freddy Mercury (lead singer in rock band Queen) are also Parsee!
Back to the question of Sisygambis and her links to Zoroastrianism; what do we know? It appears that she must have been actively a follower as a member of the royal family but there is no indication so far on whether the royal family was personally involved in the rites or whether this was the job of some priestly class (which is more likely the case)? A fascinating journey that still has a way to go.
Exploring Alexander's motivations
During the course of this background research on the novel, a number of questions about Alexander the Great have begun to trouble me.
The problem is that most contemporary discussions of Alexander the Great have focussed on the man, his leadership style and military exploits! It is interesting to read of the key battles, to analyse the strategic choices made prior to combat and the tactical decision making during the battle. More than most people (as a person trained in business strategy) I revel in understanding the role of battle hardened veterans, innovation in military formations (the phalanx), feints and traps as tactical weapons in addition to focus, mass and force all in the context of exploiting the geographical features of the battlefield. I despair at the lack of understanding the political motives and economic imperatives driving the land based armies!
However, what is missing is the more complex notion of competing political alliances and institutional aspects of the struggle for leadership and acendancy. We have such a simple understanding of Alexander the Great's battles. Too often they are portrayed as the battle between the Greek and the Persian ways of life. In it's most simplistic form this is the battle between the Greek nation states (implied in this is the notion of democracy though neither Sparta nor Macedonia could have been called democracies, even in the Athenian sense) and the Persian empire (a heterogeneous collective of states ruled from the centre). [As an aside, I just thought how the Star Wars films were very much in the same vein].
However, it is instructive to think about the different explanations of the Cuban Missile Crisis (Allison, 1971) to present a clearer picture. Graham Allison's study of the Cuban Missile Crisis showed how equally valid and interesting explanations could be written from very different perspectives: one from the viewpoints of two superpowers (the US and USSR), one from the viewpoint of different government agencies within the US government (such as the State Department, Attorney General's, and the various branches of the Pentagon, even the CIA), and finally one looking at the individuals involved in the decision-making (President John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Dean Rusk and Robert McNamara).
What is missing from our contemporary understanding is the middle level of interpretation, the battles between the various factional groups of Persians and the battles within the Greek (not simply Macedonian) factions. It's fair to say that these would be coalitions of interests capable of moving through shifting alliances at different times of Alexander's leadership and rule. On both the Greek and the Persian side, one can suspect the motives and interests of different factional groups. The marriage of the Greek leadership to the Persian noblewomen can be seen as an attempt to forge a political alliance between Greek and Persian interests. What this meant for the economic interests can only be imagined! I cannot imagine a person like Alexander the Great choosing these marriage alliances without a notional understanding of the political and economic consequences.
Though this is a theme introduced in the earlier blog, I have been thinking a lot about what may have motivated Alexander to begin the transition from being the leader of a Greek army using revenge and a sense of destiny to drive deep into the heart of the Persian Empire. With the destruction of Persepolis, however, that mission was well and truly accomplished. The amount of treasure removed from Persepolis and sent back to Macedonia was reuted to be very large. Why did Alexander choose to continue to drive through the eastern frontiers of the Persian Empire?
One idea advanced by some is that Alexander sought to plant the seeds of Greek culture into the Persian landscape. He created cities along the way and some of these remain to this day. The Seleucid Dynasty founded by the successors to Alexander was relatively shortlived over a period of 100 years though the Greaco-Bactrian empire in modern day Afghanistan continued for another 100 years (Brosius, 2006 p.81). I suspect it is more likely these Greek cities (many of them called Alexandria) were more likely ways of enabling Alexander to settle groups of Greek soldiers who were happy not to return to their homeland and allowed him to establish a pseudo-military presence in the conquered satrapies.
Why did Alexander not return to Macedonia? Why was he prepared to live in Persia and what were his thoughts about establishing a legitimate succession plan? The coincidence that haunts me is the relationship between Barsine (the royal consort in some ways) becoming pregnant with child and what seems to be a sudden decision to marry Roxanne (the daughter of a Bactrian satrap). Both would not have been considered suitable wives in terms of being the Queen in the Persian manner of arranging marriages.
In addition, there is the decision to train the Persian youth in the Greek manner of fighting. These were established before Alexander's Bactrian campaign and little is known how this was done. Yet, when he needed them, after the apparent rebellion in the Indian campaign and following that journey through south-eastern Iran, he was able to release the Greek Macedonian soldiers and replace them with Persian troops. They may not have been battle-hardened troops and he still needed to win their personal loyalty but they were a viable substitute. They were never really put to the test though!
The interesting question is one of replacement of the retiring Macedonian troops. Many of his troops were relatively old men and had fought alongside Alexander for many years, despite his own youth. If Macedonia was unable, or possibly unwilling, to supply the troops he needed what was he supposed to do? Alexander had worked with his troops since he was a teenager. He had not returned to Macedonia since leaving on this campaign. Was that a flaw in his model of governance or were his hands full ensuring consolidation of military gains and reverting to a peacetime status? (If you think that's easy, just reflect on the US position in Iraq at present!)
Closing Greetings
Since the last blog, we have celebrated a number of special days. Of course I want to wish you all a Happy New Year (according to the Gregorian calendar I presume).
However, let's not forget that Iranians celebrate the winter solistice Shab-e Yalda, literally meaning re-birth of the sun. Unlike the Islamic Arabs, whose calendar is based upon the moon, the Persian calendar and celebrations was originally based upon the sun (as is the Western or European calendar ... I believe). Just one more little thing to add to the list of things to learn and remember. Whicg calendar was used at the time of Alexander?
For Christians, it is also useful to remember that the birth date of Jesus is more accurately in early January according to some sources. We celebrate Christmas Day just a few days after the winter solistice. Is this a mere coincidence? Is it a mere coincidence that the revered Magi who attended the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem may have actually been members of the class of Zoroastrian priests (Brasius, 2006 p.66)? Mithra was the god of light and part of the deity system of Zoroastrianism. Was the story of the Magi attending the birth of Jesus a homage from an older religion that symbolised the new prophet?
Cannot help thinking of the implications of Mithraism which was a significant force in the Roman Empire. One of the sacred rituals was the slaying of the bull and the fertlisation of the soil. Could this possibly be the origins of bull fights in Spain? Are there similar rituals in Ancient Persia? Where did the Hindu rituals of not killing bulls spring from? Too much for one day.
As dawn breaks over the sky and the sun conquers darkness where I live, I bid you adieu!
Bibliography:
Allison, Graham T. "Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis" Little, Brown & Co. 1971
Brosius, Maria "The Persians: An Introduction" Peoples of the Ancient World series, Routledge 2006
Brosius, Maria "Women in Ancient Persia" Oxford Classical Monographs, Clarendon Press 1996 (reprinted 2002)
Carney, Elizabeth "Olympias: Mother of Alexander the Great" Women of the Ancient World series, Routledge 2006
Carney, Elizabeth "Alexander and Persian Women" American Journal of Philology Vol 117 No 4 1996 pp:563-583
Carney, Elizabeth "Women and Monarchy in Macedonia" University of Oklahoma Press 2000
Kriwaczek, Paul "In Search of Zarathustra: The First Prophet and Ideas that changed the World" Phoenix - an Orion Books imprint, 2003
Vidal, Gore "Creation: A Novel" Random House 1981 (republished Vintage International in a restored edition 2002)
posted by ozunani at 8:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home