Was Clietus death really so bad

[iskande-32]

Hi folks, its long been said Alexander killing Clietus was an atrocity, Well was it.Put the situation in todays times, Perhaps I was a great friend of maybe Andrew, We went for a night out on the booze and got drunk, today we would argue maybe even get into a terrible fight where we would be blooded and bruized the next day with sore heads wed make up and be friends.Imagine if we were armed with spears or swords im sure one of us would end up getting spiked and the next day the survivor would regret killing his friend, is this not basically the same thing.My wife and I get in to argumens and my wife resorts to the rolling pin,we love eack other but god forbid we ever had swords or sarisas in the house. LOLWe all sumumb to drink and regret what we said and did imsure Alexander did but in those days how can u say sorry and be ok with your friend if you run him through.Definately a bad insident but not an evil deed im sureregardskenny

[marcus]

Hmmm. You *appear* to be arguing that, because this sort of argument/fight might happen to anyone (and, let's face it, often does) it lessens the 'badness' of the deed. I can't agree with that, and would even argue that the fact there were weapons handy makes it worse than a playground scrap because people who've been brought up with and trained in the use of weapons ought to be even more conscious about their potential for harm. (The fact that Alexander and Cleitus were drunk is no excuse.)However, I don't agree that the killing of Cleitus was 'evil' per se. It was a tragedy, certainly - if Alexander had been sober and had slain Cleitus for speaking out then perhaps it would have been evil. As it is, the episode should be viewed within the context of the time, place and a whole host of other things - at least in the context of what had happened since the death of Darius - not as an incident in isolation.This would never be totally satisfactory, because we have no idea what Alexander's own thoughts were - but to view the incident in the context of Alexander's assumption of the Persian kingship, his necessary integration of Persians into the administration, the incredibly hard fighting they had been subjected to in Baktria and Sogdia, the paranoia that Alexander might have been feeling as a result of the growing discontent from his officers over his actions, etc. etc. offers sufficient explanation for us to gain some understanding of why it happened - and see it as something tragic rather than evil.All the bestMarcus

[alejandro]

Hi KennyI may be a bit cynic about this issue, but maybe you should be more specific about what you mean by Kleitos' death being "not so bad": you may ask "not so bad" ... for whom?I am almost sure it was pretty bad for Kleitos himself :)But even for Alexander, you have to distinguish between "Alex the man" and "Alex the king".I agree with you that Alex the man would have been devastated by having murdered an old friend (or an acquaintance, or whatever, the true relationship is not clear to me, though some degree of mutual affection seems to have been present).But as a king, it may well have been politically useful. Alex SEEMS (and I stress the verb in order to avoid being called a fact-twister or a complot-theorist) to have followed a policy of substitution of Philip's marshals for his own ones: Attalos and his kin immediately after Philip's murder, Parmenion and Philotas once in Asia (Hektor's and Nikanor's natural deaths being an unexpected gift), his maintaining of Antipatros and Kassandros in Macedonia (though other reasons can also be raised), his nomination of Antigonos Monophthalmos and Balakros as satraps in Asia Minor. All these acts led to a new military elite composed mainly of "Alex's men": the Hephaistions, Perdikkases, Koinoses and the like. Kleitos himself was on his way to become satrap of Bactria (I think) by the time of his death. I am not saying that Alex planned to kill him but, from the point of view of the policy ASSUMED to be followed by ATG, it wasn't "too bad" (actually, not bad at all).Again, I don't claim this to be true, but certainly it is striking how the Attaloses, Parmenions and, eventually, Kleitoses were brushed aside by the younger lions. I just wonder: how many "old guys" were married to Persian noblewomen in Susa? My memory is weak, but probably not many (true, there were not many left by then, but still ...).Sorry again if you feel this to be a "too blunt" way to tackle something like a murder, but this is not a new approach either. This argument I read from somewhere (maybe Bosworth?), and I just found it appealing.Kind regardsAlejandro

[ruthaki]

I believe it was a tragic, drunken brawl gone wrong. Today they might call it a "crime of passion". The reputed reaction of Alexander when he sobered up and realized what he'd done attests to the fact that he had not 'meant' it to happen and do believe he regretted it totally. These men were trained to kill and their weapons were at the ready. It only took a moment for either one of them to 'lose it' and the fatal attack happened. It could have just as easily been Cleitus killing Alexander. A real tragic 'accident', not a planned killing.

[beausefaless]

I totally agree, and if Cleitus had slain Alexander, do you think he would have been killed on the spot or shortly after?

[marcus]

Depends on what you mean by "shortly after", Andrew. I imagine there would have been a few seconds of drop-jawed incredulity, followed (therefore "shortly after") by the rather sickening sound of a multitude of spears and daggers entering Kleitos, simultaneously and from various directions. :-)All the bestMarcus

[alejandro]

Hi RuthI totally agree. This is exactly what I meant under the GÇ£Alex as manGÇ¥ viewpoint.However, since the title of the thread was GÇ£Was Kleitos death really so bad?GÇ¥, I thought interesting to look beyond the purely human/emotional aspect into the governmental/political one.Kind regardsAlejandro

[iskander_32]

When I say was it so bad what I meant was it an atrocity or and evil crime?I think not.Kenny

[jan]

Marcus, A while back you asked me about the ability to assess Alexander's height by the measurement of an artifact in the Persepolis. I skirted the issue then, but I just want to say that I wrote full explanation to Linda Ann today on Alexander-Macedon yahoo groups site. I don't want to bore the members of Pothos with it. As far as whether killing Kleitos is that serious, it is stupid to think otherwise as so many note that Kleitos is unarmed. Kleitos had saved Alexander's life for him at the Battle of Granicus. Alexander himself is said in some books I have read to be concerned about Kleitos's sister who was his wetnurse. Yes, it is a serious tragedy about which Alexander exhibits sincere and true remorse. I do not think it should ever be diminished as Kleitos is a good friend to the family and is like family to ATG. Also, I have read that some even consider him as brother to ATG, probably due to the wetnurse.

[marcus]

Hi Jan,You're absolutely right that Cleitus' death was darned serious - in fact, whether or not they were 'like brothers'. Definitely very tragic - I don't know why Shakespeare never turned it into a play! :-)All the bestMarcus

[marcus]

By the way, Jan, on the height issue - I'm not on the Yahoo group, unfortunately, and I don't have the time to get involved in more and more discussion sites.I guess I'll have to miss you answer to my question, then. Unless you or Linda Ann can be bothered to reproduce it on Pothos.All the bestMarcus

[maximus]

Kenny i may be only thirteen but killing a man is surly evil. Well maybe not "evil", but certainly wrong. How can you justify killing a man who had saved Alexander's life at the Granicus risking his own life and in the end killing Rheomithres? This man lead thousands of soldiers for Alexander followed him blindly through hell and back! He killed him because in the end Alexander got drunk and commited an atrocity. People get drunk all the time and get more aggressive, but even under the influence of alchohol Alexander would still have had the sense not to kill one of his own generals. Alexander was probably paroid and the alchohol brought this paranoia into the open.

[beausefaless]

Maximus,
Alexander was king (The Big Kahuna) and lifestyles of the rich and famous 2300 years in the past was a different ball game with rules of life and death in their favor. With this in mind, taking the life of fellow human would be no different than killing lion or deer. Clietus knew better than to *insult* Alexander and when you were king and continue to allow your subjects to mock and debunk your authority, like it or not, that was the way of life. I'm sure Alexander felt some remorse when he became sober but life went on. Clietus was wrong to rank the King!