pothos.org

As usual, I'm reading four or five books at once and thought I'd start a thread to discuss some details before I forget about them. First up is a book by Winthrop Lindsay Adams, University of Utah - Alexander the Great: Legacy of a Conqueror. Adams, unknown to me before this, studied under N.G.L. Hammond, and also under Harry Dell (who would later teach both Bill Greenwalt and Frank Holt). This is a volume of The Library of World Biography series, and as such is intended for the general reader, meaning, unfortunately, that it does not have footnotes or a modern bibliography.

Now, as new biographies go, I generally prefer the hostile accounts, not because I lean towards this direction myself - I think I'm firmly in the middle, neither idealizing or demonizing Alexander - but because I often find the authors' attempts to justify their opinions rather amusing. After all, how many "straight" biographies of Alexander can we read before (horrors!) our eyes begin to glaze over? So far, Adams' book has proved to be a mostly impartial rendering, and I might have become bored by it if it were not for the fact that every few pages there is a statement which is intriguing enough to keep me reading. Here's one, shortly after describing Alexander's visit to Delphi: 'He was beginning to acquire, by one means or another, the trappings of a reputation and an image carefully crafted to overawe. He already had adopted a motto for his reign from the Iliad. This was Helen's description of the king of Mycenae, and a Greek hegemon like himself, Agamemnon; "Both a good king and a strong spear fighter." Again, the identification obviously reinforced Alexander's position and image.' Does anyone know anything about this so-called motto? It doesn't register with me as being from the sources, so could it be archaeological? Or have I missed it in my readings? Seems to me that any reference that reinforces Alexander's fondness for the Iliad would have been brought up in one of this forum's discussions as to whether Alexander truly saw himself as the new Achilles, or whether this was an invention of the historians. Just do not recall this motto at all. . . Continued . . .

And another quote, on the desctruction of Thebes:'Alexander left the decision to the Greek allies, presumably to the League of Corinth itself. The League voted to carry out what the Greeks called an andropodysmos, a "breaking of the people" in which every man and boy over thirteen years of age was killed, the women and children were sold into slavery, and the city was razed to the ground. It is precisely what Thebes had done twice to Orchomenos, its rival in Boeotia, and once to Plataea, its neighbor. To his credit (and he is rarely given credit for this), Alexander did not carry out the killings. But the population, some 30,000, were sold into slavery and the city destroyed except for the temples and the house of the poet Pindar.'I rather like this one, especially the "rarely given credit" part. I firmly believe that Alexander knew he had no choice but to destroy Thebes if the rest of Greece were to be kept under control during his absence in Asia; and in turning the decision over to his Greek allies he was simply seeking *public* justification - he must have known all along what the League's decision would be. That he didn't carry out the killings (although he does later in certain Asian cities) demonstrates some restraint on his part and reinforces the opinion that it was a purely political decision and not one made in anger or out of arrogance. I'm not trying to absolve him, by the way - truth is I've never considered Thebes to be an "atrocity" in the first place. Sometimes decisions have to be made which will resonate throughout history as such, but are simply political or military necessities at the time. (Coventry in WWII anyone?) Anyway, the above paragraph caught my attention because I had not previously realized that the League *had* voted to have every man and boy over thirteen killed, nor that Alexander had disregarded this. As Adams says, it isn't usually brought to our attention. Best regards,Amyntoros

And another quote, on the desctruction of Thebes:'Alexander left the decision to the Greek allies, presumably to the League of Corinth itself. The League voted to carry out what the Greeks called an andropodysmos, a "breaking of the people" in which every man and boy over thirteen years of age was killed, the women and children were sold into slavery, and the city was razed to the ground. It is precisely what Thebes had done twice to Orchomenos, its rival in Boeotia, and once to Plataea, its neighbor. To his credit (and he is rarely given credit for this), Alexander did not carry out the killings. But the population, some 30,000, were sold into slavery and the city destroyed except for the temples and the house of the poet Pindar.'I rather like this one, especially the "rarely given credit" part. I firmly believe that Alexander knew he had no choice but to destroy Thebes if the rest of Greece were to be kept under control during his absence in Asia; and in turning the decision over to his Greek allies he was simply seeking *public* justification - he must have known all along what the League's decision would be. That he didn't carry out the killings (although he does later in certain Asian cities) demonstrates some restraint on his part and reinforces the opinion that it was a purely political decision and not one made in anger or out of arrogance. I'm not trying to absolve him, by the way - truth is I've never considered Thebes to be an "atrocity" in the first place. Sometimes decisions have to be made which will resonate throughout history as such, but are simply political or military necessities at the time. (Coventry in WWII anyone?) Anyway, the above paragraph caught my attention because I had not previously realized that the League *had* voted to have every man and boy over thirteen killed, nor that Alexander had disregarded this. As Adams says, it isn't usually brought to our attention. Best regards,Amyntoros

I have to say that I've never come across this motto before. I think it's a bit of artistic licence on the part of Adams, to be honest. I mean, it would be appropriate, but I can't think of any source that says that he adopted it as a motto.Thumbs down on the rigorous use of historical skills there, I think! Even my Year 8s wouldn't do anything like that (well, they might, actually, considering my Year 12s certainly do!).ATBMarcus

I have to say that I've never come across this motto before. I think it's a bit of artistic licence on the part of Adams, to be honest. I mean, it would be appropriate, but I can't think of any source that says that he adopted it as a motto.Thumbs down on the rigorous use of historical skills there, I think! Even my Year 8s wouldn't do anything like that (well, they might, actually, considering my Year 12s certainly do!).ATBMarcus

Hello,
i don't recall ever having read the motto that you mention in the Iliad- nor that Alexander wanted to use the motto for "propoganda" purposes.
One thing is for sure- the Iliad meant a lot to him or at least that is what he wanted us to think. The way it seems that he related to Achilles- who was one of his ancestors.
Thebes was the vehicle Alexander used to subjugate Greece- and was just 21 at the time if my sums are right. Pretty scary if you think about it.Anyway, sorry I don't have much more to contribute here- but just like to mention that on the way to work i am currently listening to the Da'Vinci code- on an audio book- and I know this doesn't have anything to do with your thread other than it came from a book-but I was surprised to learn from the Davinci code, that the ancient greeks highly respected anagrammatists- giving the art a very aloof title that ended in magna(can't remember the rest of the title- it is getting late and my mind is not quite as alert as it should be.)Anyway my faithful collins dictionary confirms that the word anagram comes etimologically from greek.
Anyway, take care,
Dean.

Hello,
i don't recall ever having read the motto that you mention in the Iliad- nor that Alexander wanted to use the motto for "propoganda" purposes.
One thing is for sure- the Iliad meant a lot to him or at least that is what he wanted us to think. The way it seems that he related to Achilles- who was one of his ancestors.
Thebes was the vehicle Alexander used to subjugate Greece- and was just 21 at the time if my sums are right. Pretty scary if you think about it.Anyway, sorry I don't have much more to contribute here- but just like to mention that on the way to work i am currently listening to the Da'Vinci code- on an audio book- and I know this doesn't have anything to do with your thread other than it came from a book-but I was surprised to learn from the Davinci code, that the ancient greeks highly respected anagrammatists- giving the art a very aloof title that ended in magna(can't remember the rest of the title- it is getting late and my mind is not quite as alert as it should be.)Anyway my faithful collins dictionary confirms that the word anagram comes etimologically from greek.
Anyway, take care,
Dean.

I would agree, except . . . well, Adams seems to be very well "connected" (if that's the right word) in the world of Alexander studies. In his preface he lists Harry Dell as his mentor and Gene Borza as a friend; tells of conversations over the years with several scholars; and lists many other's who have influenced his work (Heckel, Carney, Roisman, etc.). At this point I'm inclined to believe that Adam's scholarship is worthy, otherwise he could expect much criticism from his peers. I figure I'll maintain that stance until it is proved otherwise, hence my question here. The so-called motto *could* have been found on an inscription, I suppose. I wouldn't know of it though.Best regards,Amyntoros

I would agree, except . . . well, Adams seems to be very well "connected" (if that's the right word) in the world of Alexander studies. In his preface he lists Harry Dell as his mentor and Gene Borza as a friend; tells of conversations over the years with several scholars; and lists many other's who have influenced his work (Heckel, Carney, Roisman, etc.). At this point I'm inclined to believe that Adam's scholarship is worthy, otherwise he could expect much criticism from his peers. I figure I'll maintain that stance until it is proved otherwise, hence my question here. The so-called motto *could* have been found on an inscription, I suppose. I wouldn't know of it though.Best regards,Amyntoros

G'day Amyntoros."The so-called motto *could* have been found on an inscription, I suppose. I wouldn't know of it though."And that would be the case due to lack of annotation, footnoting or bibliography. I've not read the book and so cannot comment on the historical veracity thereof. I can though say that there are many other "accessible" monographs in print that are terribly well annotated and contain fulsome bibliographies (Athanasios makes mention of 'Persian Fire" GÇô Tom Holland, whose book "Rubicon" is also an absolute belter).Accessibility is no excuse for lack of attribution or proper (required) annotation. What you say with respect to a possible inscription is possible. Without any proper reference to that conjectured source though, one has to conclude the bloke is doing a "Hollywood": based on a true story; dialogue is what might have been said. I'm with Marcus on this one.Paralus.

G'day Amyntoros."The so-called motto *could* have been found on an inscription, I suppose. I wouldn't know of it though."And that would be the case due to lack of annotation, footnoting or bibliography. I've not read the book and so cannot comment on the historical veracity thereof. I can though say that there are many other "accessible" monographs in print that are terribly well annotated and contain fulsome bibliographies (Athanasios makes mention of 'Persian Fire" GÇô Tom Holland, whose book "Rubicon" is also an absolute belter).Accessibility is no excuse for lack of attribution or proper (required) annotation. What you say with respect to a possible inscription is possible. Without any proper reference to that conjectured source though, one has to conclude the bloke is doing a "Hollywood": based on a true story; dialogue is what might have been said. I'm with Marcus on this one.Paralus.

Amyntoros, does he cite a source for Alexander sparing the males over 13 despite the League vote?Thanks in advance,
Karen

Amyntoros, does he cite a source for Alexander sparing the males over 13 despite the League vote?Thanks in advance,
Karen

Adams certainly is a respected scholar in the field of Ancient Macedonian studies, but most of his research deals with the period after Alexander, so that's probably why you've never heard of him (He got his PhD with a dissertation on Cassander, not the most popular Macedonian around here). The choice not to write footnotes is certainly the publisher's and not his.As for the motto it would seem very strange if there would be an inscription mentioning this: that's not the kind of information we normally get from inscriptions. I haven't read the book yet, and not being a native speaker of English, I'm in doubt here, but couldn't the passage mean that this is a motto that would fit Alexander's actions quite well, since he was trying to be a good king and a good warrior, without implying that Alexander really used it himself?regards,abm

Adams certainly is a respected scholar in the field of Ancient Macedonian studies, but most of his research deals with the period after Alexander, so that's probably why you've never heard of him (He got his PhD with a dissertation on Cassander, not the most popular Macedonian around here). The choice not to write footnotes is certainly the publisher's and not his.As for the motto it would seem very strange if there would be an inscription mentioning this: that's not the kind of information we normally get from inscriptions. I haven't read the book yet, and not being a native speaker of English, I'm in doubt here, but couldn't the passage mean that this is a motto that would fit Alexander's actions quite well, since he was trying to be a good king and a good warrior, without implying that Alexander really used it himself?regards,abm