Paralus wrote:
What neither writer records is Cassander ordering Olympias stoned to death. Diodorus does not record the method of death only that soldiers were ordered to do so first and then the relatives successfully did the job. Trogus records that the job was accomplished by sword - and not "hacked to death".Given that neither record that stoning was to be the manner of death, Trogus is, in my view, more likely. Moreover, Cassander wanted it done quickly and out of sight of "the Macedonians" as he was suspicious of their fickleness (witness the first group which did not carry out the task). Hence the description of breaking into the royal quarters to kill the Queen.
As you say, Diodorus does not record the form of execution, leaving us with the two alternatives of Pausanias (stoning) and Justin/Trogus (sword blows), which is essentially hacked to death [see below]. Had the execution been carried out by the soldiers first sent, then I would agree with you that sword might be considered more likely, but the actual deed, upon which our sources agree was carried out fairly spontaneously, was most probably performed by the outraged relatives of Cassander's supporters murdered by Olympias ( some 100 or so victims). Such a mob would be unlikely to be armed with swords, even if many of them were soldiers or ex-soldiers, because they were presumably not expecting to carry out the execution. That tends to favour stoning. However, as I said previously, whichever method was used, an assault by multiple assailants in either case would lead to severe skeletal trauma - which is simply not present on the Kasta skeleton.
If that is correct then I'd imagine the classic scene of Caesar's murder. The sword wounds would likely centre around the thorax / abdomen and back. We lack the rib bones (and shoulder bones) that would show these wounds (as with the cremated individual). On the other hand, it would not be unexpected to find strokes to the head / face and the hip area (possibly thigh) and none are evidenced. We might also expect the arm to have worn the odd stroke as reflex would see these used as protection no matter how stoic the frightful old girl was.
I don't think this analogy applies, and rather falls into the category of 'special pleading'. Caesar was murdered by daggers - short thrusting weapons - concealed beneath clothing. In Justin's scenario Olympias is murdered by sword "blows" i.e. hacked to death. This would be so for several reasons. Firstly, the swords in question would have been the machaira/kopis or xiphos, both weapons weighted at the end and optimised for cutting/chopping blows rather than thrusts, and which were machete-like in use. Secondly, the multiple assailants will have crowded around, and the majority of the blows must of necessity been downward cuts ( the most frequent type of blow in all cases). Any fatal blow in such circumstances must be to the head. You are quite right that in addition we would expect blows to the long limb bones, especially the arms. As you rightly point out, these invariably occur in such circumstances due to instinctive throwing up of the arms. In legal jargon these are called "defensive wounds". In addition, Where a mob kills someone there are invariably superfluous blows struck after death, often to the point of mutilation, and we should expect to see evidence of violence from head to foot.
Even had thrusting weapons been used, these would have caused skeletal damage - quite small nicks to bones are again easily discerned, and apparently nothing of this sort is present.
Agesilaos wrote:
Just name your sources for this assertion and we will then judge whether are indeed guilty of ‘positivist fallacy’.
I assume you mean methods of execution in Macedon ? Many modern sources refer to stoning as "The traditional Macedonian method of execution" e.g. Richard Gabriel in "The Ancient World" p.60, and this is just what we would expect. In a primitive society, or peasant village, stoning is convenient because the means are usually readily to hand, and it involves everyone, thus spreading any guilt. It is used the world over in such societies to this very day and was and is the most common form of execution. A quick check ( I don't have time for more) of our Alexander sources reveals a dozen or more executions. In some instances we are merely told the victim was "put to death" with the means unspecified. The two most common methods where specified are stoning and spearing, the latter invariably in an army context, hence clearly a military form. The majority of victims are stoned to death. In some cases there is uncertainty or disagreement between sources, such as Philotas or Olympias. My suspicion is that in such cases the actual form is unknown and the author has made a 'best guess', knowing that stoning or spearing were the most common.
For the record this seems to me to be a conflation of the two versions of the execution of Philotas in Arrian (javelin) and Curtius stoning, I will let the members come to their own conclusions but please reply, Xenophon it gets a tad tiring when you flounce from every thread and then will not engage on another.
I don't 'flounce' from every thread. Rather I am forced to withdraw rather than go on endlessly and interminably round and round in circles. I respond whenever something new is posted.
I did miss the 'as soon as possible' for the first failed attempt and will not wriggle that was my error but do read the surrounding material and if you cannot see that Kassandros moved from Macedon after the execution of Olympias I will have to refer readers to your interpretation of a former comment of mine
For the 'n'th time, I didn't say that Cassander necessarily moved south prior to Olympias' execution. What I said ( more than once now - see previous page) was:-
On what basis do you assert that Cassander did not depart for the south with his army until after the death of Olympias ? As I said, we have no information on his immediate movements. Olympias’ death might easily have occurred after his departure, especially if, as was his wont, Cassander was moving fast trying to surprise Alexander as he had Olympias.
Evidence for your statement is still not forthcoming, and I don't think anything can be inferred from Diodorus' sequence of events, which is clearly out of strict chronological order in places. My point is that we cannot say one way or the other, not that it is overly important.
I agree with Zebedee:
I think we're done here?
I don't believe anything further can usefully be said, unless someone has something new to add........