Hello Taphoi,Taphoi wrote:
This is an argument from silence, when there is actually no silence. In addition to Arrian's mention of the trierarch, whose designation ho pharnoucheos is likely a corruption of Bagoas the Eunuch, there is also Curtius's mention (7.9.19) of an effeminate youth, who was Alexander's lover, in the context of Sogdiana and this too must be be Bagoas.
Furthermore, excluding Bagoas from India would not serve to undermine his influence, since he is independently cited in a shortlist of Alexander's greatest flatterers by Plutarch.
Best wishes,
Andrew
About Euxenippos :
Besides the fact that I believe that Bagoas was not with Alexander at that time, I don't think that Curtius would have talked that way about Bagoas. When Curtius talked about him he was always scornful. On the contrary, he didn't seem hostile to Euxenippos. He simply said that he was not as charming as Hephaistion because he was less manly than him.He also seemed to introduce the young man as if he was new to the story and as if he never had spoken of him before.
I disagree with you on the subject of Euxenippos /Bagoas, but nevertheless I find your book extremely interesting.I've read many books in French and in English about Alexander and your book brings really something new on the subject and I particularly liked the way you describe Alexander and Hephaistion's relationship.I don't like when people psychoanalize Alexander too much and you never do that.Oliver Stone did and the result was not good.
About the flatterers :
I think that Bagoas joined the band of flatterers Medius, Agnon, Agesias and Demetrius in the end of 325 BC. It seems that In the last years of his life Alexander was an easy prey for the flatterers. At least that's how Ephippus of Olynthus portrayed him but he was one of his detractors.