pothos.org

From a smaller player to a larger player, Seleucus's rise was quite extraordinary but also very well deserved for he proved himself to be not just a brave soldiers but a capable administrator and ruler.
Hello, I am researching Seleucus and in the course of my studies I came across a comment by a historian who said that Seleucus's promotion to the head if the companion cavalry, soon after Alexander's death, is sudden and points to him being rewarded for a role he along with some others of the Diadochi might have played in the possible murder of Alexander.
How plausible does this sound to you and is there any further evidence for this line of thinking?

I don't know much about Seleucus, but it would appear that he was promoted to the companion cavalry because he supported Perdiccas. He was already commander of the Silver Shields, so already an experienced and trusted commander of Alexander's. To support the line of enquiry that he murdered Alexander you would need to ask whether there is any evidence that Perdiccas murdered Alexander. He didn't really have any need to as he was already the second most powerful man in the empire, but he (and others of the high command) may have wished to stop the planned campaigning in Arabia etc.

Seleucus was later involved in Perdiccas's overthrow, so that would argue for opportunism and ambition on Seleucus's part, but not being quite powerful enough to take overall control after Alexander's death.

Not at all an expert here, but the more I read of Alexander's life, especially towards the end of his life, the more I am convinced that he was done away with some how. He was wasting a lot of money on grand schemes of no practical value. His aspirations towards Arabia were also unappealing. Also, he had become more aloof, dispotic and paranoid. A manic depressive drunkard. The diadochi may have very well engineered his death. And the words that are credited to Alexander may actually have been the secret rallying cry of the Diadochi themselves. Get rid of the mad king first and then "to the strongest" goes the kingdom. What do you guys think?

Seleukos, at the time of Alexander's death, was commander of the hypaspist agema, a position Hephaistion had held at Gaugamela. Hence we see him termed ἑταίρων/hetairon at Hydaspes where he is contrasted with the somatophylakes Ptolemy, Perdikkas and Lysimachos who all share the galley with Alexander when crossing the river. In the final stage of the Babylonian Settlement he becomes chiliarch and thus commander of the Companion cavalry. In essence, he succeeds Perdikkas in that role and has been rewarded by the regent for his support.

I see no evidence he was involved in any plot to kill Alexander. Which historian is this?

The best resource I've ever come across on Seleukos is the biography written by John D. Grainger and the first volume of Grainger's history of the Seleucid Empire. Both are carefully researched and easy to read.
As far as Alexander being assassinated it's evident that he didn't believe he'd been poisoned. He was ill for days, desperately weak, but still lucid. If he thought he was being murdered heads would have been rolling.

But Alexander's murderers might have thought of that themselves. If he were to die suddenly at a banquet, people will immediately think he was poisoned.

However, if it is a poison that is administered slowly, perhaps even in the guise of water or a medicine, and if the king deteriorates slowly, Alexander himself might confuse it with symptoms of a natural disease like malaria.

Therefore, Alexander would not be suspicious and the very fact that he is not suspicious will quell any charges of murder from anyone else. It is something to think about, isn't it?

Alexander had a fever: poisons don't cause a fever. In order to argue for a slow poisoning, you need to find a poison that could induce a fever and be able to explain why no one noticed that he got worse each time he had the 'medicine'. And argue that the doctors were involved.

As far as Alexander being assassinated it's evident that he didn't believe he'd been poisoned. He was ill for days, desperately weak, but still lucid. If he thought he was being murdered heads would have been rolling.

Exactly, Autolykos. Welcome and thank you for the book recommendations.

Apparently, white hellebore does cause fever. Fever is body's immune response to a perceived invader and so some types of poisons do induce fever. Yes, the poisoner would have to know how much to give and how often, but when planning to kill a king, they would probably have done their research and trials. Again, I am just drawing out a scenario here, nothing conclusive, of course.

Seleukos' "rise to power" is quite explicable without all this nonsense regarding poisons. As is Alexander's death.

Wow, you are a pretty rude person, no wonder the forum is dead with people like you lurking here. A lot of this history is very ancient and open to interpretation anyway. To discuss and politely offer opinions is not nonsense.

Ngs, it is all very well to toss ideas about but you need some evidence to build a viable hypothesis. At the time of Alexander's death there does not appear to have been any suspicion of poisoning, and the idea of poisoning only arose a few years later when Olympias, Antigonus, Perdiccas, Cassander and the rest were trying to blacken each other's reputations and trying to paint themselves as his legitimate successor. Seleucus' rise to power, like Ptolemy's and Antogonus'. contained an element of luck, ambition, and circumstances. They partially rose to power because the principal players at Alexander's death, Antipater, Craterus and Perdiccas, were all dead within a couple of years of Alexander's death and the most shrewd and ambitious rose to fill the void.

Ngs wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2023 12:02 pm Wow, you are a pretty rude person, no wonder the forum is dead with people like you lurking here. A lot of this history is very ancient and open to interpretation anyway. To discuss and politely offer opinions is not nonsense.

It might, and probably does, read as fairly direct. As Alexias has explained, the notion of Alexander's poisoning arose from the propaganda presses of the Diadochoi. As did much more. The basis comes from the Leber de Morte: the purported last will of Alexander which also contains the detailed conspiracy to murder the king. I'd suggest a read of Ptolemy and the Will of Alexander (Alexander The Great In Fact and Fiction, Oxford, 2000, 207-241) where this is discussed at length. Many forged documents circulated in the years following Alexander's death. The letter Eumenes forged alleging the death of Kassandros comes immediately to mind (Diod. 19.23.2-3). This fits the profile well as well as promoting its beneficiary, Ptolemy.

There are always accusations of conspiracies and they are not always untrue. The pages' conspiracy is one such and for which the evidence is provided. We know that Parmenion conspired against Attalos and had him murdered to conciliate Alexander and ensure his own position (a precedent he would later regret). For this we have a document circulated at the height of the Diadoch Wars, the enmity of Olympias and Diod 17.118.2; Just. 12.13.10-12.14. Alexander might well have been murdered - Antipatros was very touchy regarding such allegations. Such supposes close and very silent communication and organisation between the marshals in Babylon and Antipatro in Macedon. I doubt it.

Either way, absolutely nothing whatsoever links Seleukos to any such plot. At eh time of his return to Babylon with Alexander, he commanded the hypaspists agema - the king's foot guard, member of whom also guarded the king in camp. While there is very little doubt Seleukos conspired and participated in the murder of the overreaching regent, Perdikkas, that does not implicate him in any murder of Alexander.

Apologies if the one line dismissal of such came across rude.

Parmenion conspired against Attalos and had him murdered

. Interesting. I wasn't aware of that.

Actually, if you are looking for a conspiracy theory, in reading the different, later, versions of Alexander's death, an interesting player is Peithon, one of Alexander's Bodyguards. He seems to play a more prominent role in the early days than Seleucus, conspired in Perdiccas's overthrow, was made satrap of Media, became too powerful and was done away with by Antigonus. He didn't last long in the Successor wars.

A grasping individual was Peithon. Antigonos well knew what danger he represented and had him eliminated. Unlike Peithon, Antigonos hadn't gained the station of somotophylax and had been left guarding the rear of the great anabasis. Gaining "preferment" under Alexander was real coin in the time of the Diadochi.