Iskander and SisygambisIntroductionThis is the untold story of Iskander of Macedon (Alexander the Great)and Sisygambis, Queen Mother of Darius the III. In what has to be one of the most intriguing of historical references, Sisygambis is mentioned very few times in the historical records of Alexander the Great but what an impression she makes.
Sisygambis the Queen Mother of Darius III makes her first appearance after the defeat of Darius III at the battle of Issus in 333BC. In "The History of Alaxander" by (Quintus Curtius Rufus,3-12-1 to 24) we are first acquainted with Queen Mother Sisygambis when she mistook Hephaestion (Alexander's closest childhood friend) as the feared Iskander and then asked for forgiveness from Alexander when it was pointed out. From the very beginning it appears that Alexander treated Sisygambis with the greatest respect, according her the status of a lady and the respect for a queen mother.(See also Plutarch, 7-21).
Remarkable as that may be, the most striking image is that of Sisygambis dressed in the clothes of mourning upon hearing of the death of Alexander and starving herself to death within five days. The image of an elderly woman who had survived the defeat and death of her son Darius III then facing a blank wall and willing herself to die upon the death of Alexander the Great is one that incredibly etches itself upon the canvas of the imagination (Quintus Curtius Rufus,10-5-17 to 23).
In between these two events, a decade had passed. Iskander matured from a military man of twenty three years of age to a King and Emperor of thirty three years of age. He had transformed from a Macedonian Greek King to the ruler of the known classical world between Greece and Egypt on the western frontiers to Afghanistan and India on the eastern frontiers. To the south lay the Indian Ocean and to the north lay the Caspian Sea. The bulk of the original Macedonian warriors had been released from their duties and sent back to their homeland. In their place was an army of persian youth schooled in the manner of Greek military principles. More importantly, Alexander had in place the structures for managing the Empire with him as the King and Emperor. He had in fact left behind the notion of being a Greek King and created a new role as Emperor of the Graeco Persian empire.
If only he had lived, what would we now think of Alexander the Great. Instead of a youth with curly hair, stories of his horse Bucephalus, the story of the Gordian Knot and the military triumphs would we have had stories of a King and Emperor who reconciled the centralised might of the Persian Empire with the democratic impulses of the Greek nation states? Would we have have reconciled the battle between East and West that echoes even today in contemporary history?
In my view, all that does not matter. What matters is that we have enough evidence that such a transformation was taking place and, given that it was taking place, we must ask ourselves how Alexander the Great was being transformed into Iskander the Graeco Persian Emperor? In the transformation, most importantly, we must ask who was providing him with the advice into the mind and power politics of the Persian elite that allowed him to form the alliances transforming him from conqueror from ruler.
Much has been written of Olympias the Queen Mother, one of the many wives of Phillip of Macedon and reputed father of Alexander of Macdeon (Carney, 2006). Though many stories have been told and re-told of the parentage of Alexander, all the historical evidence points to the fact that Alexander maintained a strong relationaship and loyalty to his mother after the death of his father. Does it matter whether Alexander was truly the son of Philip of Macedon, the offspring of a snake that penetrated his mother and resulted in his conception, or even the son of another hero? Perhaps it may help explain the psychology of what drove Alexander to seek greater glory and fortune.
More interesting however is the tantalising evidence of great respect and communication between Sisygambis and Alexander, the type of relationship that characterises one between mother and son without the Freudian angles or the Oedipus complex. Was there in fact a relationship of trust and support between Alexander and Sisygambis? Was the death of Alexander such a blow that Sisygambis knew her death was imminent irrespective? Did Sisygambis play a significant role in advising Alexander of the politics between the royal families and their systems of patronage in support in the Persian Empire? Was she the person advising him on the importance of building alliances through marriage, alliances that in a sense transformed Alexander of Macedon into Iskander the Emperor?
The hypothesis of this book is quite simply that Alexander of Macedon built a relationshop of trust and advice with Sisygambis Queen Mother of Darius III, a relationship akin to that between a son and mother but unlike the one between Alexander and Olympias Queen Mother and wife of Philip of Macedon. There is no historical evidence that this was in fact the case. In fact, it would be very unusual if such evidence was there and so contrary to the norms of what was written about the lives of great men at the time that we would inevitably treat it with suspicion. (Nevertheless, there is evidence that women in Ancient Persia played a more significant role in the royal courts and everyday life than is apparent in Classical Greece (Brosius, 1996). On the basis of plausibility and as a means of explaining how Alexander achieved such a great transformation, we must yet pursue such a thought.
The Greatness of Alexander in historical terms has always been portrayed in terms of his military prowess and exploits. There are a number of wonderful texts and books that detail the military strategy of Alexander in the battlefield (Fuller, 2004 reprint). Yet, surely the Greatness of Alexander is in the Empire that he managed to hold together that is unparalleled even today across the Middle East.For over a decade he managed to put into place a structure of governance and institution building that may have fragmented on his death but nevertheless survived for a number of centuries afterwards. A remarkable achievement!
So, the central tenet of this idea for a historical novel is the relationship between Sisygambis and Iskander, told from the viewpoint of Sisygambis. It is the story of how the Persian Empire accepted its defeat at the hands of Alexander and remarkably transformed a Greek conqueror into a Persian ruler. It is the story that Greek historians across the centuries have never been able to grasp or possibly accept because it would make Alexander the Great more than a Greek hero but a complex military and political ruler of an Empire even the Greeks were unable to create in later years.
Plot and ContentThe Plot of any novel is simply the storyline used to tie together the people, places, events and perspective (being the four elements of the content) of the situation one is writing about.
The Plot in this instance starts at a time when Alexander of Macedon has achieved the first significant defeat of the Persian Empire within the borders of the Empire itself, in 333 BC at the battle of Issus. This was not the first time the Persian Empire had been defeated (Green, 1998; Bradford, 2004) as the heroic stand of the Spartans at Thermopylae in 480BC will attest. The retreat of the ten thousand Greek mercenaries from the heart of the Persian empire after the death of their patron Cyrus (Xenophon, 1950) also suggests there were weaknesses in the military capability of the Persian Empire prior to Alexander's incursion and excursion.
The Battle of Issus marks the time when Alexander of Macedon truly began to mature as a military warrior and also marks the time when he captured the women of the Persian Royal family. It is the time when he matured as a military leader and shows quite clearly his ability to see military exploits as more than ends in themselves but as part of a political strategy as well.
This then is the story of the evolving relationship between Alexander of Macedon and Sisygambis Queen Mother of Darius III. Starting as a captive and in a sense a hostage, Sisygambis must be seen as forging a relationship with Alexander in the beginning but a relationship that cannot reach it's potential until Darius III is killed by his own men in 330 BC. It is also important to understand that Stateira, wife of Darius III, died in 331 BC in circumstances suggesting some controversy.
It may well be that the burning of Persepolis in 330BC marks the turning point in the relationship, when Alexander of Macedon becomes Iskander the Destroyer in the eyes of the Persian population and must transcend that political disaster. That's when I postulate a significant shift in relationships between Alexander the Greek to becoming Alexander the Great. It marks the time when Alexander recognises that his future lies in capturing the remainder of the Persian Empire rather than simply leaving after avenging the burning of Athens.
From this point on Alexander begins his transformation from a Greek conqueror to a Persian Emperor. There is a subtle but increasingly important shift that commences here, and this probably should be seen as the time when Sisygambis moves from building trust to advising her newly acquired "son" into the subtleties and complexities of becoming a Persian Emperor.
There are a number of events that mark the ebb and flow of a relationship. Surely Sisygambis would have been horrified at the marriage of Alexander to Roxanne and that would have marked a shift in her strategy as well. The return of Alexander to Babylon after the India campaigns would have been the point when she worked hard to consolidate his power and yet, at the very point of achieving success, Iskander was either poisoned or died a natural death. Either way, her patron was dead and her plans were undone.
There lies the essence of the plot or the storyline. In between, we should see Sisygambis not merely as a Queen Mother but also as a person in her own right, probably with landholdings of her own and with a strong understanding of the religion and politics of state. The burning of Persepolis was a disaster for Zoroastrians, as it has been suggested their holy texts were burnt at the time and the enmity against Alexander endures to this day. Unlike Olympias, who is always portrayed as having a strong religious affiliation, perhaps we need to invest Sisygambis with a sense of religion derived from her position in Persian society.
Now we need to move to the four elements of content, namely people, places, events and perspective.
People -
As this is the story of Sisygambis and Iskander, they must become the main characters. It is likely that the two protagonists here are treated differently in the story as will be revealed in the Perspective.
Beyond this, there is a major cast of characters that need to be developed for the story. Lurking always in the background is Olympias, mother of Alexander. However, she will never appear as a physical entity but always as a shaping influence "back home". We will need at some stage to explore the relationship between Alexander and his sister Cleopatra as this will help explain different attitudes between women in Greece and in the Persian court.
There must be room for Hephaestion, often portrayed simply as Alexander's boyhood friend and also male lover. Somewhat unfairly, this tends to overlook his military capability and diplomatic skills. If boyhood friendship is fairly or unfairly portrayed as homosexual love, then Hephaestion plays an even more significant role in the story of Iskander. That Hephaestion died in similarly mysterious circumstances to Alexander some eight months beforehand is part of the story. that he was married to the Drypteis, the daughter of Darius III, at the request of Alxander is another reason for giving him more than a walk-on role in the story.
In 327BC Alexander married Roxanne, the daughter of one of the rebel chiefs in modern day Afghanistan. As she had the only legitimate son of Alexander and was officially the first wife of Alexander, she plays an important role. That she apparently had a hand in the murder of Stateira (daughter of Darius III) who became a wife of Alexander in 324BC, makes her story also important.
There is one more woman who must be brought forward from the shadows of history because she also appears to play a role well understood in the ancient world but possibly missed in contemporary Western society. Barsine, daughter of the respected satrap Artabazus and some ten years older than Alexander, had lived in the royal court of King Phillip at a time when her father had sought refuge there. She spoke both Persian and Greek fluently. For five years, between 333BC and 328BC she was the bilingual mistress of Alexander and was known to be pregnant with child, a son Heracles, when Alexander married Roxanne.
Having spoken first of the women should not be interpreted as saying the women are more important than the men. The intention is to show that women certainly influenced his decision making.
The cast of characters for the males is certainly larger. Beyond Hephaestion lies a significant network of male characters, each having more than a single role to play in the story of Alexander the Great.
That Alexander was a leader of men with a direct line of communication with the men in his army is unlikely to be challenged. That would certainly have been the case in the early years of his campaign through the western provinces of the Persian Empire. The historical records suggest a series of concentric networks, the seven Bodyguards composed of the most trustworthy (Leonnatus, Lysimachus, Pithon) and the Companions (Laomedon) who formed the elite cavalry and backbone of many field military campaigns. Then there are individuals such as Ptolemy, Craterus and Perdiccas who figure prominently in the records.
Beyond the Greeks (or should I say Macedon Hellenes) there were Persians such as Artabazus and Oxathres who achieved positions of trust and honour both in the military and administrative aspects of managing Alexander's Empire. There are many others who need to be identified in this position, Persians who formed the backbone of the new reality emerging as a consequence of Alexander's conquests of various parts of the Persian Empire.
Places -
The story needs to revolve around a select group of places, often cities but also locations of battlefields, that create a sense of identity and geography.
Issus must be considered a critical starting point as it has become the place where Alexander of Macedon meets Sisygambis, Mother of Darius III. It is at this meeting where Alexander shows a combination of respect for the Queen Mother, diplomatic skill and the compassion that is often overlooked in the accounts that portray him as a bloodthirsty and cruel conqueror.
Between Issus in 333BC and Guagamela in 331BC (where Alexander defeated Darius III for the second and most decisive time) there are important military events, such as the siege of cities and the creation of new city centres (most notably Alexandria in Egypt). These were however city based campaigns. Issus and Gaugamela were military battles fought in the open plains. In addition, they represent a time when the royal women were captives and Darius III was still the ruler of the Persian Empire. After Guagamela the political and military landscape changed. With it we can hypothesize the relationship between Sisygambis and Alexander shifted to a new plane.
The battle at Gaugamela represents end of the western campaigns in the Persian Empire. From there, Alexander rapidly advanced to take the important cities of Babylon, Susa, Persepolis and Pasargardae in the heart of the Persian Empire. These cities were considered to be the administrative heart of the Empire but had considerable symbolic meaning as well. Almost immediately afterwards we have the death (murder) of Darius III in 330BC.
It took another three years for Alexander to capture and take control of the eastern provinces (satrapies) of the Persian Empire from the Caspian Sea through to modern day Afghanistan. The Rock of Sogdiana marks the climax of the eastern campaign and the change in status of Alexander. Here he married Raxanna, daughter of Oxyartes (Satrap of Bactria). Many of his friends had died in these campaigns and we can mark a change in the man known as Alexander the Great.
Then between 326BC and 323BC, Alexander conducts the Indian campaigns, faces the revolt of his seasoned troops and finally returns to Susa in the Spring of 324BC. The events in India seem like a blur and it is upon the return from this campaign that Alexander, in Pasargadae and Susa, takes the steps that indicate his need to establish continuity and integrate the Greek and Persian sides. At Pasargadae the tomb of Cyrus was restored. At Susa Alexander oversaw the marriage of his closest commanders to Persian women of noble birth.
In 323BC, Alexander dies in Babylon. With his death comes the unravelling of the Empire into individual territories. Alexander had not established an administrative and political structure to survive his death in a unified manner.
Events -
There are many events which can serve to illustrate and elaborate on the life of Alexander of Macedon. What is it that people remember generally about the life of Alexander? They tend to be things like Alexander taming Bucephalus in Macedon, Alexander leading the men into victory at Issus and Gaugamela, Alexander allowing Persepolis to burn in revenge for the burning of Athens, Alexander marrying Roxanne in Bactria, and finally the suspicious nature of his death in Babylon.
In this story, built around the hypothesized relationship between Alexander and Sisygambis, we can identify known events from the historical record and hypothesized events that add credibility and colour to the storyline.
The battle at Issus is the opening event, one where Alexander meets Sisygambis for the first time and one where one suspects Alexander's respect for Sisygambis as a Queen Mother is established. Something about her demeanour, her respect and dignity must have struck a chord with Alexander. Similarly, one suspects that the good humour with which Alexander covered up the well intentioned mistaken identity gaffe allowed Sisygambis to respect Alexander. Remember, Alexander had already sent in one of the companions, Leonnatus, to reassure Sisygambis that her son, Darius III was alive. From that point on, the Persian royal women were hostages. That they became protected hostages says a lot for Alexander and Sisygambis. Had Sisygambis treated Alexander with disrespect then we may have witnessed a different outcome. However, clearly something special special was established here.
It is also said that in the historical records that Sisygambis was annoyed that her son, Darius III, had retreated and left the royal women exposed to the mercy of the Greeks and Macedonians.
For the next two years, it is likely that Sisygambis and the Persian royal women travelled with Alexander as he moved through the coast of the Mediterranean through modern day Syria, Lebanon, the Holy Land and into Egypt. he destroyed the city of Tyre but also established the city of Alexandria in Egypt. They were hostages and as such offered a protective cover for Alexander's party. It is also known that Darius III offered his daughters in marriage to Alexander as a means of establishing political alliances and securing his borders. That Alexander refused such offers is well known. Why Darius III chose to allow Alexander to cut through the lands of the western provinces of the Persian Empire is not well established.
The battle at Gaugamela is another pivotal point in the developing relationship. If Sisygambis was to run away from Alexander, then she and the Persian royal women had the opportunity to do so when the Persian cavalry momentarily caputred the baggage camp. Instead it is said she sat there without changing expression or showing any desire to escape. The moment was lost but by then it is also true that Darius III, for the second time, had saved his own skin rather than die heroically in battle. It may also be that Sisygambis was unwilling to face her son as the King's wife, Stateira, reputed to be one of if not the most beautiful woman in Persia, had died mysteriously in childbirth. Was that a shame that she was unwilling to face up to or something else? We will never know but can provide our own conjectures.
The time between the battles at Issus and Gaugamela is one of the royal women being hostages, of being treated with respect but ones where one suspects the barriers of language slowly came down allowing mutual respect to be achieved. It is known that Alexander provided Greek tutors to the royal women. One could be cyinical and say this was done with the intention of keeping an eye on them and indeed that may be the case. However, one can also hypothesize that Alexander wanted to understand the nature of the political alliances supporting the kingship of Darius III and who better than Sisygambis the Queen Mother with her inside knowledge of the families and networks supporting the King.
The next big event has to be the burning of Persepolis. It is likely to have been a pivotal event for Alexander. Prior to entering Persepolis Alexander had taken the cities of Babylon and Susa. There he had been welcomed and captured a substantial portion of the Royal Treasury. Darius III no longer had access to the money needed to buy the mercenaries or shore up the political support he needed. It would all depend upon the strength of his connections, of their loyalty to him individually. That was not to be however and the taking of the royal cities and their palaces was a great turning point.
There are two aspects to taking over Persepolis. First the general looting that was allowed. The destruction was enormous and it is said in Persian history that sacred documents of the Zoroastrians were destroyed at the time. Perhaps that was inevitable. Less excusable and forgivable was the fire that destroyed the great hall of Xerxes, the Persian King who had sacked and burnt Athens one hundred years previously. The story of Thais, courtesan from Athens and companion to Ptolemy, daring Alexander to punish Persians for the sack of Greece during a banquet when the wine flowed freely is now well known. That Alexander allowed it to happen is part of the legacy that still allows modern day Persians to call him Iskander the Destroyer.
In this we can only hypothesize what may have happened between Alexander and Sisygambis. Remember that Persepolis was her home and she would have regretted the sacking of Persepolis but understood its necessity. She would have found the thought of burning the Hall of Xerxes unforgivable and politically unacceptable. One can imagine her berating Alexander as only an adopted mother can do, telling him of the vile behaviour that preceded this act of unmanly cowardice and of the political consequences of this act of revenge. At a time when he stood at the threshhold of power, of being the King of the Persian Empire, he had shown himself to be driven at best by revenge and at worst by the heady effects of wine women and song!
In the background we must also recognise the women who had become his mistress after the battle of Issus, Barsine. She was the daughter of Artabazus and had lived in the royal court at Macedon. She would have discussed the politics of the Persian Empire with Alexander as her father was a satrap and knew what was happening. That Artabazus had sought refuge at the royal court of Macedon when Phillip was King of Macedon established a prior connection and trust. What role she played in bringing Alexander to understand his new reality is unclear. However one can imagine and postulate Sisygambis and Barsine joining forces to show Alexander an alternative future for him as ruler of a the Persian Empire in contrast to simply being the sword and arm of revenge for the Greek city states of Athens and Sparta.
The killing of Darius III by his own courtiers is an event that seems almost inevitable as one reads the histories. It was not a matter of if he would be killed but of when and by whom as long as he chose not to surrender to Alexander. Perhaps the humiliation would have been too great. Perhaps it was never a possibility. Sisygambis would unlikely have shifted alliances at this time. her own son had abondoned her, not once but twice and she now considered him dead, certainly as a leader if not as a person.
The big event that must shape the story is the surprising marriage of Alexander to Roxanne, the daughter of Oxyartes. What a shock this must have been to Sisygambis, let alone to Barsine. This far Alexander had assiduously avoided marriage. He had not secured his right to the Persian historical lineages through marriage, as was commonly the case in the Persian Empire. (That he did later by the way). He had kept an older mistress and she was ready to bear her first child to him, a son as it turns out who was named Hercules after Alexander's hero. In a sense, Alexander's marriage to Roxanne is another turning point of significance in the transformation of Alexander of Macedon to Iskander the Persian King!
With this marriage Alexander not only secured a wife but just as importantly he secured the eastern parts of his Empire (in Bactria, known today as Afghanistan) by appointing Oxyartes as the satrap for the region. Just like Basine's father played an important role in the military and civil rule of the Persian Empire so we can see Oxyartes playing a similar role. With the marriage however, the ground rules of engagement with Alexander would have changed for Sisygambis. Now she could legitimately push for him to marry as a means of building the political alliances needed to hold the Empire together.
Yet, one more event is needed to that probably pushed Alexander down the pathway that Sisygambis would have been suggesting. That was the increasing reluctance of the original Macedonian warriors to fight with Alexander in the eastern provinces. They had achieved their goals. They wanted to return to their homes and families. Yet in doing so, they were inevitably forcing Alexander to consider his own fortunes and ambitions.
The troops had rebelled in India and forced the return of Alexander to Susa. The main event that however characterises the transformation of Alexander into Iskander is the marriage ceremony where Alexander took two new wives and arranged for all of his inner circle to marry Persian wives. This signalled a number of change: recognition that the future of the Persian Empire was now going to be in the hands of a joint Greek Persian elite, the release of the Macedonian veterans to return to their homeland and with it the introduction on 30,000 Persian troops schooled in the Greek way (Plutarch, 7-47; Fox, pp.421-422), and finally the replacement of Darius's satraps with trusted Greeks who had sufficiently adapted to take over command in the satrapies.
For Sisygambis this event must have been the culmination of many years of planning and discussion with Alexander. The royal women had been left behind in Susa to learn Greek and Greek customs (Fox, pp418) while Alexander had conducted the eastern campaigns in Bactria and India. She must have been pleased. Imagine, from being the hostage Queen Mother of Darius III she now had her grand-daughter installed as a legitimate wife of Alexander.
While it would be tempting to focus on events such as the death of Hephaestion in Hamadan, the building of a new expeditionary force in Babylon or on the mysterious feast in Babylon where it Alexander may have been poisoned, these are not events that add to the story of the relationship between Sisygambis and Iskander. Instead we must turn to the final image of Sisygambis being informed not only of the unexpected death of Alexander but also of the events immediately after. She may have realised that all was lost, that her protector and sponsor was now dead and that she would become an inevitable casualty. She may have heard about the death of her grand-daughter Stateira at the hands of Roxanne. She may have simply grieved at the loss of such a remarkable man. Whatever the cause, she must have thought of many things during the five days it took for her to starve and will herself to death while facing a wall.
Perspective -
The question of perspective must be faced squarely. We all read and interpret history with preconceived notions and ideas. For some, Alexander has been nothing more than a bloodthirsty and treacherous tyrant. he destroyed cities, he burnt Persepolis and he murdered his own soldiers when they disagreed or mocked him. For others, Alexander is the individual who built numerous new cities (Alexandrias all the way from Egypt in the west to Afghanistan in the east), helped spread the Greek civilisation not only within his borders but also in places as far away as Sri Lanka in the east and Spain in the west, and developed a new approach to managing empires. For some Alexander has been cast in the light of a regent who may have been homosexual or bisexual (Renault, 1988) and I would not be surprised to hear of Alexander's story being cast in the light of the Gods of Olympus toying with man. Surely somewhere in the psychology literature someone has portrayed Alexander as a person driven to overcome the ambivalence he feels about his father, Phillip of Macedon, and escaping the dominance of his mother, Queen Olympias.
Generally speaking one reads of Alexander the Great from the perspective of the Greek civilisation. He was a Greek who fought the might of the Persian Empire and one hundred years after Xerxes razed Athens achieved revenge at Persepolis. He was a man who united the Greeks to fight a common enemy and then proceeded to build a great Empire from the carcass of the Persian Empire. After the archeoligal discoveries at Vergina in 1977 there has been a resurgent interest in the achievements of Alexander of Macedon and how hellenism was carried as far as the Punjab in India.
The perspective I have is somewhat different from that of the traditional Hellene or philhellene. You may have guessed from my name or my handle that I am an Australian of Greek ethnic origin. What is not apparent is that I studied and worked in Iran during the 1970's. It was quite interesting to be studying in Iran when OPEC cartel raised prices significantly and the Shah of Iran was on the one hand suppressing political dissent and on the other fostering economic development. At the same time the Junta in Greece had just been thrown out by a revolt of the students at the Athens Polytechnic and mishandling of the Turkish situation in Cyprus.
My perspective is also different in that I have not been trained as a historian, as a military strategist or as an archeologist. There goes most of the written literature in the study of Alexander the Great. My background is in the study and practice of general management, leadership, compaptitive strategy and economic development strategies. For me, the military victories in the field are important but they are only part of the story.
My interest is in how Alexander the Macedon transformed over time into Iskander the Emperor, particularly how he became a person who started by leading a force from the Greek city states apparently seeking revenge and tranformed into the person who was beginning to takes the reigns of power of an Empire that spanned from Egypt in the west to the Punjab in the East. I am particularly interested in how he was changing his approach to managing the Empire. Originally, as he swept through the regions the pattern he seemed to follow was appointing the local (often Persian) satraps together with a Greek military leader to secure the satrapy. At the time of his death, he was instituting sweeping governance reforms with his military companions being married into the ruling families and then being appointed to positions of governance across the Empire.
As a military leader, Alexander the Great is unquestionably a person of stature in the history of the world that has been handed down to us. The focus on his military exploits however downplays his political and administrative skills. It is time we explored those aspects of his leadership in addition to the military aspects. It is time we understood or at least hypothesized how Alexander believed he could make the transition from leader of a military force to ruler of the Empire.
The legacy he left was unquestionable. Despite his death in Babylon, whether it was from natural causes or from poisoning, enough of his intention survived such that a hellenic legacy lingered for as long as five hundred years in some parts.
The perspective I am developing is that a large group of people assisted in this transformation of Alexander of Macedon into Iskander the Emperor. That Alexander was exposed to Persian culture in the royal court of Macedon is well known. His relationship with Barzine is well documented after her capture in Babylon. Where we go from documented evidence in the history books to hypothesis is in introducing Sisygambis, Queen Mother of Darius III as a force in his development. Not only is it hypothesised that Sisygambis was given the role of honoured Royal Mother but that in fact she played a role in educating Alexander about the economic, administrative and political governance of the Persian Empire as well as developing with him a pathway to achieving long-term survival as Emperor of the Empire. As a royal herself, the wife of an Emperor and the mother of another, she was well placed to provide that advice.
In taking this perspective, I'm not seeking to take a feminist perspective of history or seek to redress the inequities of historical reporting. Nor am I trying to downplay the achievements of Alexander the Great as a member of the Greek pantheon of heroes (despite the irony inherant in doing so). What I am trying to do is turn away from the clash of cultures approach to Greek and Persian history as an explanation of events and instead explore the commonalities of culture, family and politics that allowed Alexander to make the transition. There are strong indications he had no real interest in returning to Macedon.
In all of this, there are personal torments that I'd like to explore within Alexander. One would have to believe it would be easy to fall in the shadow of his parents, both King Phillip of Macedon and Queen Olympias. Yet, he managed to emerge from this process of childhood development not unscathed I believe but possibly tempered in such a way as to seek an alternative legacy that was uniquely his. Having rejected his father's approach to using marriage as a convenient form of political alliance building in the early years of his life he nevertheless turned to that in the last two years of his life. What were the processes of going through that and then accepting the changes? Then there is the case of his mother, Queen Olympias who may have unfairly been potrayed in history as a wild religious person. Surely she had a strong hold on her son and may have affected his relationships with other women. At what stage did Alexander step out of his mother's shadow and develop his own approach to women?
Finally, there is another aspect of his personal transformation and transformation of the Persian Empire that needs to be explored, that in some way haunts me in the readings. Alexander the Great was called Iskander the Destroyer by the Zoroastrian community. As he sought to establish his companions into positions of power, how did he manage the relationship with the dominant religious community in the heartland of Persia? How closely was Sisygambis connected to the symbols of Zorioastrian religion and could she have played a part in bridging the gap here. My research to date has not uncovered anything of significance here. One suspects that an exploration of the historical records of the Parsi community in India is needed to gain insight and glean historical facts.
StyleEvery story is written in a particular style. The ancient epics appear to have been written as long poems. The Epic of Gilgamesh (George, 1999)is one of the earliest literary works that has survived and that appears to be dated anywhere between 1000BC (in Akkadian text) and 2100BC (in Sumerian text). Better known are The Odyssey and The Iliad believed to have been written by Homer between the eighth and seventh century BC (Fagles, 1996) both of which would have been well known to Alexander of Macedon. The Tale of Genji (Tyler, 2001), a portrait of court life in medieval Japan, is widely reputed to be the one of the earliest novels and is dated to the 11th Century AD. Plays were already an important tradition in literature when Alexander was being educated, with Greek playrights such as Sophocles and Euripides playing an important part in a classical education.
Originally my thoughts were to write this as a historical novel, specifically as historical fiction because there is so much we don't know about Sisygambis and much of the story is speculative at worst and hypothetical at best. However, as I began to write an outline of the period and especially given the sparsity of historical evidence, my thoughts moved to a non-traditional structure for the novel. Novels are typically written with characters interacting in specific settings at particular points in time. This works well in most circumstances. In this instance, we would have to in effect invent so much that the task became daunting. What we know of the daily life of royalty in Persia at the time is quite limited.
Instead I thought of concentrating on key events that critically shaped the relationship between Iskander and Sisygambis, allowing for some continuity in between. One of the problems is that Iskander was involved in many actions and activities at times when he was not physically in close contact with Sisygambis. This especially affects the period when Alexander was campaigning in the far east of the Empire as well as an earlier period when Alexander went into the desert in Egypt. It would be inconceivable that Sisygambis was always part of the baggage train that followed the army at all times.
The structure of the novel needs to be in four parts to reflect the historical reality and hypothesised stages of development of their relationship:
• Initially Sisygambis is a Hostage Queen and we would see the relationship of trust developing between her and Alexander on the foundation of the respect of a son for a mother. It is very much a transference of filial respect based upon Alexander's relationship with Olympias, his own mother. Between Issus and Gagaumela the relationship would become closer, initially on the basis of mutual respect and then as Alexander sought to discuss the offers from Darius III. One would expect that Barsine would initially be placed in a difficult role between the two parties, being bilingual Persian and Greek, but that she would in fact become a key intermediary between the two protagonists.
• From the capture of Babylon to the aftermath of the burning of Persepolis, I would expect an acceleration of the relationship almost to a stage of continual communication as Alexander sought advice from a number of parties. With the death of Stateira, wife of Darius III, Sisygambis would have been somewhat freer to pursue alternative political goals. (There is a difficult piece to interpret in the earlier phase as it is stated that Stateira died in childbirth. If it was not Alexander, then who with whom had Stateira formed a relationship. Most importantly had she actually died or possibly been murdered in order to remove the shame to the Royal family?) One could easily hypothesise that by the time Alexander had embarked on the campaign into the eastern parts of the Empire, the groundplans for his return had already been agreed upon with Sisygambis and the inner circle of advisors.
• While Alexander was re-capturing the parts of eastern Empire that were not loyal to him, Sisygambis was in Susa with the younger daughters of Darius III, her grand- daughters. It would not be unusual to believe that in addition she was playing her part in running her own private property or land owned by Darius III while acting as advisor to Alexander via other means. There is a historical record of letters between Alexander and Olympias his mother, as well as letters from other people across the conquered lands. In this phase while Alexander was away from the heart of the Empire, I am suggesting that the narrative is carried forward by a series of letters between the two, capturing major events and transitions as well as the mundane facts of everyday life for them.
• Finally we will have to deal with the return of Alexander to Susa and Babylon, the many aspects of deciding who would marry whom, arranging for the negotiations and discussions that would allow this to happen but still keep it a secret from those affected until all had been arranged, while at the same time re-shuffling the administration of the Empire. What role did Sisygambis play in consoling Alexander about the death of Hephaestion and how did she deal with Roxanne, now the legitimately married wife of Alexander while possibly nursing her own ambitions? This phase ends with Sisygambis willing herself to die by starvation after the death of Alexander. What a wonderful ending monologue this is going to be!
All of these will inevitably have Sisygambis as the strongest and most frequent voice. The story is told through her eyes, with all the bias and prejudice this may entail.
Concluding CommentsWhen I originally started thinking of writing this outline, I had no idea it would be so long. All we have nevertheless is a germ of an idea that has been fleshed out in terms of basic structural elements. I am humbled at the thought that I still need to write a precis for each of the sections of the book before actually going to the next stage of writing the book in detail.
On either side of me I can almost feel the presence of Sisygambis and Alexander smiling at the thought that, finally, someone may have grasped the essence of their relationship. It was not one they chose to broadcast widely. To have done so would have jeopardised the lives of the royal women captured at Issus. Keeping it all quiet and low key was essential to their long-term success. Though some will feel that defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory by the untimely death of Alexander, I suspect they would feel differently.
Bibliography:Quintus Curtius Rufus "The History of Alexander" Translated by John Yardley, Penguin Classics 2004 printing
Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander" Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Revised by J.R. Hamilton, Penguin Classics 1971 edition
Bradford, Ernle "Thermopylae: The Battle for the West" Da Capo Press, 2004
Briant, Pierre "From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire" Eisenbrauns 2002
Brosius, Maria "Women in Ancient Persia (559-331 BC)" Oxford Classical Monographs, Clarendon Paperbacks 1996 (2002 Reprint)
Carney, Elizabeth "Olympias: Mother of Alexander the Great" Routledge Press 2006
Fagles, Robert "The Odyssey by Homer" and "The Iliad by Homer" Penguin Books, 1996
Fuller, J.C. "The Generalship of Alexander the Great" Da Capo Press Reprint edition 2004
George, Andrew "The Epic of Gilgamesh" Allen Lane The Penguin Press 1999
Green, Peter "The Greco-Persian Wars" University of California Press, 1998
Heckel, Waldemar "Who's Who in Age of Alexander the Great: A Prosopography of Alexander's Empire" Blackwell Publishing, 2006
Lane Fox, Robin "Alexander the Great" Penguin Books 1973 reissued in 2004
Phillips, Graham "Alexander the Great: Murder in Babylon" Virgin Books 2004
Plutarch "The Age of Alexander - Nine Greek Lives by Plutarch" Translated by Ian Scott-Kilvert Penguin Classics 1973
Time Life Books "A Soaring Spirit: Time Frame from 600 - 400BC" 1987
Tyler, Royall "The Tale of Genji by Murasaki Shikibu" Penguin Classics 2001
Xenophon "Anabasis - The Persian Expedition" Translated by Rex Warner, Penguin Classics 1950
Historical FictionRenault, Mary "The Persian Boy" Vintage Books, re-issue 1988
