pothos.org

the throne it might as well be him.GÇÿAntipater chose the Argeads over his son, Cassander did the reverse.GÇÖTrue, but see the previous paragraph and above on the consensus.GÇÿI believe Cassander to have been Alexander?s age. He was probably the eldest son from a new wife. It would be expected if he had no male heirs still living, he would remarry. In a warrior society, it was not unexpected that you might lose your first batch of son(s).GÇÖThis is at least as conjectural as what I said; there is no evidence that Antipater had more than one wife (whether serially or at the same time).
GÇÿHard to say he was the favorite son however. Only Antipater would know that. However, he might have been the most useful being with his father and not with Alexander and less likely perhaps to question his father?s ambitions.GÇÖ
This is interesting, but I would need to know what what these ambitions of Antipater were, according to you, to assess this.
GÇÿWhile children and mothers in polygamous relationships would be rivals, it does not mean that children and mothers from monogamous relationships would have a lesser bond.GÇÖNo, but they could, and at least for them it wasnGÇÖt that important as in a polygamous situation to have a strong bond with their mother.GÇÿOr rather, Demetrius was ?invited to intercede? and wanted to kill Alexander and take the Kingship.GÇÖ This is not supported by the sources.
GÇÿI doubt Phila had no role in such a situation.GÇÖShe probably played some role in the entire affair, but there is nothing to suggest that Phila had a specific role in the murder or even that the fact that Demetrius was married to Phila was somehow material to reason for the murder.GÇÿPlutarch?s writings are peppered with judgementsGÇÖIndeed, and I was saying that his judgement thus proves that at least one person antiquity held that view and that it is thus not a modern conception which would be impossible in Antiquity.GÇÿoften contradictory ones depending on which piece you?re comparing to anotherGÇÖIGÇÖm not quite a Plutarch specialist, but I donGÇÖt think one can really accuse him of major inconsistencies in his moral views and again, consistent or not, it does prove that the view was possible in Antiquity. There are inconsitencies of fact, but these are mostly caused by the need of giving a certain image of a person in order to support his moral view.GÇÿAs long as we realize Cassander was a ?introduced? malignant tumor that would not have happened at any

other time.GÇÖI donGÇÖt see why it wouldnGÇÖt have happened at any other time. One way to lower the risk on cancer is to live a healthy life, and the ongoing amphimetric strife within the royal house wasnGÇÖt really healty. This could lead at one time or another to a similar GÇÿtumorGÇÖ. The fact that Alexander eliminated all his male rivals and had the bad luck to die young, before he had a legitimate heir speeded things up.GÇÿIn effect, had not that marriage been made Cassander would have been a dead man and he knew that. Without Antigonus?s support against Polyperchon, Cassander would never have been King. He would be obliged to his sister for that bit of good fortune. It is not at all surprising however, that the peace with the Antigonids was not going to be long lasting. In Demetrios? position, why not use Phila? The obligation remained. That obligation did not remain after the death of Cassander. Apparently, like most car warranties, when ownership changes, so does the coverage.GÇÖI donGÇÖt see why Cassander would have been a dead man without that marriage. He didnGÇÖt need it to get Antigonos support against Polyperchon. A war in Europe between Polyperchon and Cassander would be very useful to Antigonos, to avoide being caught up himself in a war on two fronts if Cassander connected with Eumenes. Of course Phila might have played a role in this, but there is nothing to say that it was crucial one. Moreover, the other successors except Eumenes were also on CassanderGÇÖs side, thus even without AntigonosGÇÖ support he stood a fair chance. In the case with Demetrius the obligation wasnGÇÖt that strong, since Demetrius position wasnGÇÖt that strong.GÇÿIn another post you mentioned Diodorus? statements that Cassander attemped to marry Cleopatra. I would doubt that for many reasons.GÇÖI would like to hear those reasons, because I donGÇÖt see them and thus IGÇÖm inclined to accept Diodorus explicit statement. We cannot just reject our sources; they are all we have.GÇÿAs to his ambitions going outside of Greece, again, one can?t quite make that judgement without knowing the man personally, but it is certainly not out of the question. Ones ambitions often do not mirrir ones capabilities.GÇÖThere is an almost general consensus that there was opposition between those Successors who aimed at ruling AlexanderGÇÖs entire empire, and those who were prepared to settle with a part of it. The sources mostly use the expression GÇ£h+¿ t+¦n hol+¦n h+¿gemoniaGÇ¥ for the entire empire, and cl

and claim that this was the aim of all the Diadochoi. Recently H.S. Lund, Lysimachus. A Study in Hellenistic Kingship, London 1992, pp. 51-52 pointed out that is not justified to accept this for Antigonos and not for his opponents: GÇ£Since the idea that all AntigonusGÇÖ opponents sought only to acquire a limited territory seems to derive more fom hindsight than any testimony in the ancient sources, the validity of such a working method, based as it is on a circular argument, is questionableGÇ¥. Except for Shipley [in GÇ£The Greek world after Alexander, 323-30 B.C. (Routledge History of the Ancient World), London 2000] nobody really admitted that Lund probably had a point. Most scholars have even ignored it and stick to old view. The roots of the old view are apparently so deep that even Lund was prepared to make an exception for Cassander and Ptolemy. There are however three passages in Diodorus attributing this aim to Cassander (XVIII 49.2, XX 37.4 and XX 110.5) and one where he states that Antigonos feared CassanderGÇÖs ambitions in Asia (XIX 69.1). Moreover in 314/3 Cassander did send an invasion fleet to Caria. Completely arguing his aim to gain the entire empire would take a whole book, but I think the evidence IGÇÖve just quoted is very strong.GÇÿYou might find it interesting to compare who is buried in Tomb III, historical accounts of the death of Alexander IV and what would have happened had the Prince died of natural causes, and comparing it to the parallels in the poisoning propaganda that followed the death of Alexander.GÇÖThis certainly is an interesting question, but I donGÇÖt really see what you mean.regards,abm

Hello Alexander:I have to make this quick - the computer is most unhappy this evening. And at the risk of not making everyone crazy (but true, they don't have to read it)You seem to misunderstand much of what I say or miss the context - sorry about that.On Diodorus - not among the most stellar of sources. I can easily see where Cassander not killing Cleopatra could be construed as a marriage invitation of some sort. But simply, he had no reason at the time to kill her. As for why he wouldn't marry her, well, age, Olympias and her children to name a few.As for Cassander's choices - had he not killed Olympias, Roxane and Alexander IV he would be dead. I don't see where you think he had some sort of choice. To live a normal life? Impossible. You must have a much more civilized view of the ancient world than do I. Olympias had the same choice - defend herself and her grandson or Cassander was going to do same. People don't have choices because of circumstance, unless of course, they choose to die, which was not a conscious viable option for either, even if one had to die in the end.As for Antipater's ambitions, that's for another time.The last paragraph boils down to if Alexander IV had died of natural causes, it would not have mattered, because Cassander would have been blamed for poisoning him anyway, because that's how ancient history 'works.' You can backtrack that by commenting on the burial not at all matching the historical accounts and therefore how far can we trust them, the poisoning of Alexander story which was not the case, PR of the Diadochi vs. that of the Antipatrids and Argeads, etc. etc.As for Barsine on your other post, watch the timing of the children and marriages and a pattern emerges of 'apologia'and 'kinship.' This will be my last on Cassander.Regards,TreBTW I quote Bosworth on Demetrios.