Paint Your Chariot With Pride! Reboot of Alexander conquers Arabia timeline
- Thread starter Daeres
- Start date
Then it is something like that
A bit less impressive, but nevertheless quite overwhelming
Don't worry, the fact that i've had any interest at all is pleasing .
Sorry that it's been a while since the last update, had a serious case of the busies. I will try to get the next one done by the end of Monday.
As for other questions, I don't want to give away too many spoilers about stuff. But I will say that Brennos, who I stated was driven back from the Balkans, hasn't vanished and that many Gauls is going to end up somewhere. As for Rome and the Argeads, considering Rome's attitudes towards any power it sees as its equal, you can bet that there will be conflict.
Oh, and i'm doing my best to get a picture of Lee Marvin's face photoshopped onto that picture of Darius III from Pompeii I used as the initial logo. Just cause I can
.Sorry that it's been a while since the last update, had a serious case of the busies. I will try to get the next one done by the end of Monday.
As for other questions, I don't want to give away too many spoilers about stuff. But I will say that Brennos, who I stated was driven back from the Balkans, hasn't vanished and that many Gauls is going to end up somewhere. As for Rome and the Argeads, considering Rome's attitudes towards any power it sees as its equal, you can bet that there will be conflict.
Oh, and i'm doing my best to get a picture of Lee Marvin's face photoshopped onto that picture of Darius III from Pompeii I used as the initial logo. Just cause I can
Oh, and i'm doing my best to get a picture of Lee Marvin's face photoshopped onto that picture of Darius III from Pompeii I used as the initial logo. Just cause I can
it's so important i quoted it
Makedon Ascendant: The Early Argead Period
Chapter 4: Alexander V
The death of Alexander IV in 288 BCE was met with widespread lamentation across the breadth of his domains. Sacrifices were made, hair was shaved, donations made to conspicuous hellenic-aligned temples. He had successfully consolidated what his father had conquered, maintaining peace and good governance in Asia. But there was still work to be done; the administration of the Empire was only in its teething stages, Macedon remained in the hands of Ptolemy Keraunos, the relationship with Egypt was unclear, and many other things besides. Into this pregnant moment stepped Alexander V, who took the Kingship of Asia unopposed.
From the very beginning it was clear that he possessed a unique and inquiring mind and a charming personality. Some take the relative lack of military ventures during his reign as a sign that he lacked the military talents of his father and grandfather, I do not believe that this evidence is enough to state it so confidently but I do agree that he was not as keen a strategist and tactician as his predecessors. Nonetheless, Alexander V was one of the most intelligent men of antiquity, and has often been compared to Aristotle as a polymath. And an Empire in the teething stages of syncretism that contained so many cultures was fertile ground for such a man.
Readers must beware to not assume that Alexander V was therefore some panacea Emperor, wise and just and witty and perfectly moral. He was above excess, and rarely cruel, but he was not afraid of making harsh decisions or manipulating people and he could be cruel if he saw no other choice. He also had very human faults, one often reported in the literature of antiquity was that “upon a given hour not spent at court, one would find Alexander Nikator in either his private study at a (papyrus) scroll or in the bedroom ‘at court’ to his wife or a lover of his choice”. However, this was done in private and did not seem to have harmed his credibility with the Empire at large.
He was known to history as Alexander Nikator, ‘Victor’, as he was able to finally return Macedon to direct Argead control and end the Succession Wars. This was achieved through an unusual sequence of events, a lucky streak that was not to hold true for all of his descendants. At the time of his coronation in 288 BCE, there was a limited detente between Ptolemaic Egypt and the Argead Empire in place, and this policy was maintained. As long as Egyptian grain was traded with Argead cities and merchants, why not let Egypt alone? A quote attributed to Alexander V in the Old Testament is ‘A fool king is he who would burn Asia to be Pharoah for a day’. Brushfire warfare was continuing with Macedon under the kingship of Ptolemy Keraunos, but this amounted to little more than freebooting and piracy. Besides, Alexander had serious work to begin.
The satrapies of the Argead Empire had remained identical in structure to those of the Achaemenids before it, but Alexander V considered this foolish; a rebellious satrap should not have the ability to challenge the resources of the King of Asia, as Ptolemy Soter had done. Thus the process began of dividing the pre-existing satrapies into smaller entities, doubling the number of satrapies in the Empire. This was not an instantaneous change, but was rolled outwards from the Imperial heartlands in Babylonia year by year. This required a great deal of resources to manage, as the Royal Road remained the most vital artery of communication and needed both manpower and horsepower to maintain. The sheer number of specially bred horses required to keep the Royal Road open would have been staggering.
This was not the only important change that was made, the Emperor’s chosen heir would now hold an official administrative rank within the governance of the Empire; ‘Crown Prince’. Whether this was intended to hold military rank is unknown, but seems highly likely. At any rate, the first Crown Prince of the Argead Empire was Phillip. This tradition would continue for the entire period of the Empire’s existence. The Crown Prince ‘spoke the King’s words, dealt the King’s justice, gave the King’s kindness’. More elaborate detail can be given to all of these reforms, but other works do the subject far more justice than I ever could; what should be clear as one looks at all of this is that Alexander V knew his own limitations.
The new satrapal system was just being introduced into Anatolia when rumours began to sweep East of terror and fire in Hellas and Macedon. This was the Spring of 280 BCE, and it is likely that frantic messages were already being sent to Alexander V to inform him of the march of Brennos and his Gauls. Ptolemy Keraunos in Macedon and Leonnatus in Epirus both sent embassies to call for aid; as much as Ptolemy Keraunos was a usurper, unjustly sitting in the throne that was rightly Argead, Alexander V was obliged to defend his ancestral homelands. The reaction was swift; Alexander V immediately began to muster a Royal army; working from the evidence we have, this muster consisted for the most part of Macedonians, Hellenes, and subject peoples who had been trained in the art of the sarissa spear; in other words, phalangites. Additional contingents included Persian cavalry, Iranian archers of all sorts, and some highly specialised professional units. This marks the first known appearance of ‘Kataphraktoi’ in Argead armies, though it seems unlikely that this was genuinely the first use of them.
Whilst this army was assembling, Antigonos Gonatas the satrap of Pergamon/Lydia headed an advance force that supplemented the forces gathered by Leonnatus and Ptolemy Keraunos. These then formed the defences of Epirus, Macedon and Thrace respectively. As the Hellenic League had already sent the bulk of its armed forces to Italy in its conflict with Rome, they were unable to contribute much. Nonetheless, it was a moment in which there was a palpable sense of a united Hellenic cause, and some volunteer contingents did join the army of Antigonos Gonatas. All of this of course, would come to naught if the Gauls were not driven back, and thus by the end of winter the mood was anxious.
Sure enough, the horde launched assault after assault against the forces arrayed against them in 279 BCE. This force was enough to push both Antigonos Gonatas and Leonnatus steadily backwards, albeit in good order; only Ptolemy Keraunos had managed to hold the line. Meeting a large number of Gauls in open battle, the ‘Battle of Pella’ (which was not fought near the city of Pella at all but was effectively fighting to defend it) had two major results; first, the slaughter of a large Gaulish force, and secondly the death of Ptolemy Keraunos in battle. Given that he had died with no surviving heir, this was an opportunity to acquire the Macedonian throne, and the elephant in that particular room was Alexander V; grandson of Alexander III, King of Asia, Macedonian speaker, grand administrator, head of an Empire of continental reach, his resume was more than sufficient.
For now, Alexander V’s priority was the defeat of the Gauls, and thus he appointed a temporary regent of Macedon when the news arrived of Ptolemy Keraunos’ death; this was Ariston, the son of Autodikos. Alexander was forced to wait out the winter in Macedon, which enabled him to introduce a great deal of exoticism to his ancestral homeland. The propaganda of the Argeads at this time was consistently that they were the masters of exotics, not seduced by them, and this was clearly an attempt to reconcile Macedonians and Hellenes to the fact that the Argeads controlled all of the world’s places associated with decadence, opulence and effeminacy. By the start of the campaigning season of 278 BCE everything was in place for a counterattack against the Gauls. This began in grand fashion; the advance of the Royal Army was enough to force the withdrawal of the Gauls, and they were harried back through Illyria in a series of heavy skirmishes. Alexander had been intending to finish Brennos off permanently, but an outbreak of plague among his army forced the pursuit to be broken off. Nonetheless, Brennos had suffered enough of a defeat to try and find an alternate target, and was never to trouble Macedon, Thrace, Epirus and Hellas again.
Upon his triumphant return to Macedon, Alexander V was crowned King of Macedon, being the first of the Argeads to actually be crowned King since Phillip III around 40 years previously. It is from this time that his own steles and other sources refer to him as Alexander Nikator, ‘Victor’. He had well earned it. The victory stele erected in Macedon as a result of this successful campaign is where the relatively precise makeup of his army is sourced from, as the contingents of the Royal Army are listed upon it. This moment has been considered by both ancient and modern scholars as the apogee of the Argead Empire; whilst later chapters of this book will dispute that claim, it is not hard to see why a moment so filled with prestige for the Argead dynasty would have resonated so much with those who came later.
End of Author A
Resurgam! A History of the Roman Republic
Enter Brennos
In 278 BCE, Brennos was a very angry man indeed. He had been overawed by the Argead Imperial state, hounded from his fertile hunting grounds in the Aegean, and one can almost sense the teeth of this larger than life figure grinding together in frustration. As with most Gaulish chieftains, kings and warlords, he was elected by the chiefs under his control; that support could vanish at an instant if he proved himself unworthy, and jackals must surely have begun snapping at his heels. However, all was not yet lost; the riches of Delphi may have remained unplundered, but Hellas and Macedon were not the only rich places of Europe; from his camp in Illyria the next obvious target was the newly emerging power of Rome.
Brennos was clearly determined not to let this prize out of his grasp, as he spent the next four years bending the Gaulish-influenced tribes of Illyria to his will, among others in the area. Alliances and marriages were made, war was made on those who rebelled. Had Brennos chosen to stay, he had laid the very beginning of what could have been a mighty Kingdom of his own. As it was, Rome was now fixed his mind, no other prize would do. At least, that is what later Roman chroniclers would have us believe. What is clear is that the calculating and predatory instincts assigned to ‘Brennus’ by the Romans seem to reflect something of the real character of the man.
By the campaign season of 274 BCE, Brennos felt he was ready; Illyrian pirates raided the eastern coast of Roman territories. These caught Rome just as it was in the throes of war against the Hellenes of South Italy and of Hellas itself, and was a great shock to all concerned. Then the rumours of the approach of Brennos’ Gauls began to spread from Venetia, and panic began to spread through the Roman state; this was not the first Brennos to have marched on Rome. Now Rome found itself on a war of two fronts, and in a struggle for its very survival. The Romans imagined the smoke of burned cities and the stench of dead bodies were already among them.
Chapter 4: Alexander V
The death of Alexander IV in 288 BCE was met with widespread lamentation across the breadth of his domains. Sacrifices were made, hair was shaved, donations made to conspicuous hellenic-aligned temples. He had successfully consolidated what his father had conquered, maintaining peace and good governance in Asia. But there was still work to be done; the administration of the Empire was only in its teething stages, Macedon remained in the hands of Ptolemy Keraunos, the relationship with Egypt was unclear, and many other things besides. Into this pregnant moment stepped Alexander V, who took the Kingship of Asia unopposed.
From the very beginning it was clear that he possessed a unique and inquiring mind and a charming personality. Some take the relative lack of military ventures during his reign as a sign that he lacked the military talents of his father and grandfather, I do not believe that this evidence is enough to state it so confidently but I do agree that he was not as keen a strategist and tactician as his predecessors. Nonetheless, Alexander V was one of the most intelligent men of antiquity, and has often been compared to Aristotle as a polymath. And an Empire in the teething stages of syncretism that contained so many cultures was fertile ground for such a man.
Readers must beware to not assume that Alexander V was therefore some panacea Emperor, wise and just and witty and perfectly moral. He was above excess, and rarely cruel, but he was not afraid of making harsh decisions or manipulating people and he could be cruel if he saw no other choice. He also had very human faults, one often reported in the literature of antiquity was that “upon a given hour not spent at court, one would find Alexander Nikator in either his private study at a (papyrus) scroll or in the bedroom ‘at court’ to his wife or a lover of his choice”. However, this was done in private and did not seem to have harmed his credibility with the Empire at large.
He was known to history as Alexander Nikator, ‘Victor’, as he was able to finally return Macedon to direct Argead control and end the Succession Wars. This was achieved through an unusual sequence of events, a lucky streak that was not to hold true for all of his descendants. At the time of his coronation in 288 BCE, there was a limited detente between Ptolemaic Egypt and the Argead Empire in place, and this policy was maintained. As long as Egyptian grain was traded with Argead cities and merchants, why not let Egypt alone? A quote attributed to Alexander V in the Old Testament is ‘A fool king is he who would burn Asia to be Pharoah for a day’. Brushfire warfare was continuing with Macedon under the kingship of Ptolemy Keraunos, but this amounted to little more than freebooting and piracy. Besides, Alexander had serious work to begin.
The satrapies of the Argead Empire had remained identical in structure to those of the Achaemenids before it, but Alexander V considered this foolish; a rebellious satrap should not have the ability to challenge the resources of the King of Asia, as Ptolemy Soter had done. Thus the process began of dividing the pre-existing satrapies into smaller entities, doubling the number of satrapies in the Empire. This was not an instantaneous change, but was rolled outwards from the Imperial heartlands in Babylonia year by year. This required a great deal of resources to manage, as the Royal Road remained the most vital artery of communication and needed both manpower and horsepower to maintain. The sheer number of specially bred horses required to keep the Royal Road open would have been staggering.
This was not the only important change that was made, the Emperor’s chosen heir would now hold an official administrative rank within the governance of the Empire; ‘Crown Prince’. Whether this was intended to hold military rank is unknown, but seems highly likely. At any rate, the first Crown Prince of the Argead Empire was Phillip. This tradition would continue for the entire period of the Empire’s existence. The Crown Prince ‘spoke the King’s words, dealt the King’s justice, gave the King’s kindness’. More elaborate detail can be given to all of these reforms, but other works do the subject far more justice than I ever could; what should be clear as one looks at all of this is that Alexander V knew his own limitations.
The new satrapal system was just being introduced into Anatolia when rumours began to sweep East of terror and fire in Hellas and Macedon. This was the Spring of 280 BCE, and it is likely that frantic messages were already being sent to Alexander V to inform him of the march of Brennos and his Gauls. Ptolemy Keraunos in Macedon and Leonnatus in Epirus both sent embassies to call for aid; as much as Ptolemy Keraunos was a usurper, unjustly sitting in the throne that was rightly Argead, Alexander V was obliged to defend his ancestral homelands. The reaction was swift; Alexander V immediately began to muster a Royal army; working from the evidence we have, this muster consisted for the most part of Macedonians, Hellenes, and subject peoples who had been trained in the art of the sarissa spear; in other words, phalangites. Additional contingents included Persian cavalry, Iranian archers of all sorts, and some highly specialised professional units. This marks the first known appearance of ‘Kataphraktoi’ in Argead armies, though it seems unlikely that this was genuinely the first use of them.
Whilst this army was assembling, Antigonos Gonatas the satrap of Pergamon/Lydia headed an advance force that supplemented the forces gathered by Leonnatus and Ptolemy Keraunos. These then formed the defences of Epirus, Macedon and Thrace respectively. As the Hellenic League had already sent the bulk of its armed forces to Italy in its conflict with Rome, they were unable to contribute much. Nonetheless, it was a moment in which there was a palpable sense of a united Hellenic cause, and some volunteer contingents did join the army of Antigonos Gonatas. All of this of course, would come to naught if the Gauls were not driven back, and thus by the end of winter the mood was anxious.
Sure enough, the horde launched assault after assault against the forces arrayed against them in 279 BCE. This force was enough to push both Antigonos Gonatas and Leonnatus steadily backwards, albeit in good order; only Ptolemy Keraunos had managed to hold the line. Meeting a large number of Gauls in open battle, the ‘Battle of Pella’ (which was not fought near the city of Pella at all but was effectively fighting to defend it) had two major results; first, the slaughter of a large Gaulish force, and secondly the death of Ptolemy Keraunos in battle. Given that he had died with no surviving heir, this was an opportunity to acquire the Macedonian throne, and the elephant in that particular room was Alexander V; grandson of Alexander III, King of Asia, Macedonian speaker, grand administrator, head of an Empire of continental reach, his resume was more than sufficient.
For now, Alexander V’s priority was the defeat of the Gauls, and thus he appointed a temporary regent of Macedon when the news arrived of Ptolemy Keraunos’ death; this was Ariston, the son of Autodikos. Alexander was forced to wait out the winter in Macedon, which enabled him to introduce a great deal of exoticism to his ancestral homeland. The propaganda of the Argeads at this time was consistently that they were the masters of exotics, not seduced by them, and this was clearly an attempt to reconcile Macedonians and Hellenes to the fact that the Argeads controlled all of the world’s places associated with decadence, opulence and effeminacy. By the start of the campaigning season of 278 BCE everything was in place for a counterattack against the Gauls. This began in grand fashion; the advance of the Royal Army was enough to force the withdrawal of the Gauls, and they were harried back through Illyria in a series of heavy skirmishes. Alexander had been intending to finish Brennos off permanently, but an outbreak of plague among his army forced the pursuit to be broken off. Nonetheless, Brennos had suffered enough of a defeat to try and find an alternate target, and was never to trouble Macedon, Thrace, Epirus and Hellas again.
Upon his triumphant return to Macedon, Alexander V was crowned King of Macedon, being the first of the Argeads to actually be crowned King since Phillip III around 40 years previously. It is from this time that his own steles and other sources refer to him as Alexander Nikator, ‘Victor’. He had well earned it. The victory stele erected in Macedon as a result of this successful campaign is where the relatively precise makeup of his army is sourced from, as the contingents of the Royal Army are listed upon it. This moment has been considered by both ancient and modern scholars as the apogee of the Argead Empire; whilst later chapters of this book will dispute that claim, it is not hard to see why a moment so filled with prestige for the Argead dynasty would have resonated so much with those who came later.
End of Author A
Resurgam! A History of the Roman Republic
Enter Brennos
In 278 BCE, Brennos was a very angry man indeed. He had been overawed by the Argead Imperial state, hounded from his fertile hunting grounds in the Aegean, and one can almost sense the teeth of this larger than life figure grinding together in frustration. As with most Gaulish chieftains, kings and warlords, he was elected by the chiefs under his control; that support could vanish at an instant if he proved himself unworthy, and jackals must surely have begun snapping at his heels. However, all was not yet lost; the riches of Delphi may have remained unplundered, but Hellas and Macedon were not the only rich places of Europe; from his camp in Illyria the next obvious target was the newly emerging power of Rome.
Brennos was clearly determined not to let this prize out of his grasp, as he spent the next four years bending the Gaulish-influenced tribes of Illyria to his will, among others in the area. Alliances and marriages were made, war was made on those who rebelled. Had Brennos chosen to stay, he had laid the very beginning of what could have been a mighty Kingdom of his own. As it was, Rome was now fixed his mind, no other prize would do. At least, that is what later Roman chroniclers would have us believe. What is clear is that the calculating and predatory instincts assigned to ‘Brennus’ by the Romans seem to reflect something of the real character of the man.
By the campaign season of 274 BCE, Brennos felt he was ready; Illyrian pirates raided the eastern coast of Roman territories. These caught Rome just as it was in the throes of war against the Hellenes of South Italy and of Hellas itself, and was a great shock to all concerned. Then the rumours of the approach of Brennos’ Gauls began to spread from Venetia, and panic began to spread through the Roman state; this was not the first Brennos to have marched on Rome. Now Rome found itself on a war of two fronts, and in a struggle for its very survival. The Romans imagined the smoke of burned cities and the stench of dead bodies were already among them.
This is an EXTREMELY good timeline so far. I really like it, both the time line itself and the way it is written and it is also very detailed, so I really like this timeline
Subscribed.
Subscribed.
I'm aiming to get another update done in the next week, which will focus on Brennos' attack on Rome but will also deal with the other half of Alexander V's reign of the Argeads.
The update after that will be dealing with the end of the Early Argead Period, along with a more full look at what happened during the War of Magna Graecia that is this timeline's equivalent of Pyyrhus' war with Rome.
I fear I have been a dreadful tease with regards to Pyyhrus, so I'm going to assume people might want a separate update dealing with what happened to him after he went to India?
The update after that will be dealing with the end of the Early Argead Period, along with a more full look at what happened during the War of Magna Graecia that is this timeline's equivalent of Pyyrhus' war with Rome.
I fear I have been a dreadful tease with regards to Pyyhrus, so I'm going to assume people might want a separate update dealing with what happened to him after he went to India?
Resurgam! A History of the Roman Republic
Tempestas
The initial panic of the Romans at the approach of the Gauls was soon replaced with their usual cold pragmatism; the Sibylline prophecies were consulted, all of the pigs within the city were sacrificed, a dictator was appointed and a new legion was raised, heralds were sent to the consuls in Southern Italy so that they would conclude a speedy peace with the Hellenes there. The dictator was one Marcus Valerius Corvus; an experienced magistrate and previous dictator, though now aged Corvus was the most qualified man to try to save Rome from its apparent peril. The alliance with Carthage was called upon, as Rome lacked a navy to defend itself from the piratical raids afflicting its eastern shores. The consular armies were recalled (with the consuls, it was an all-inclusive deal) to assemble at Arretium, whilst Corvus went with his Master of Horse and the new legion to assemble with Veneti forces. The stage was set for the first epic showdown between Brennos and Corvus, boar against raven and eagle.
As the legion made its way northwards, it would have begun to run into an increasing number of refugees from the north; Brennos' forces had already begun to pillage Venitia and the horde had defeated all armies sent to stop it. What remained of the Veneti tribes' armies met up with the Romans and prepared to counter-assault. Many Cisalpine Gauls also joined with the Romans, as they were not aligned with Brennos' tribes; one imagines the fingers crossed behind the backs of the various leaders as they hammered out agreements, not to mention the Romans. The gathered army then set north again once more, now with more of a multicultural affair about it. And it was in mid-spring 274 when the two adversaries met, and Brennos first encountered the warriors of the city he aimed his spear at. The Romans were seeking to relieve Patavium, the most important Veneti centre in Italy, Brennos had wheeled off with the majority of his army to face the incoming foe.
The Romans assembled in typical manipular fashion, incorporating the Veneti (in particular their fine cavalry) on the flanks. Along with the Roman legion itself, there was also an accompanying legion of Socii; in this case, mostly made up of Picenes, Sabines and Etruscans. And there were also those Gaulish tribes that had allied with Rome; many of these were in the vanguard of the army as shock troops, but many others were kept in reserve. Roman sources claim Corvus to have been severely outnumbered, as seems inevitable with all accounts of defensive heroism against 'barbarian hordes', but it is reasonable to assume that the Roman army was outnumbered to some degree.
The first move was made by Brennos'; he sent some of his cavalry forward to goad the enemy, but discipline was kept by all. After some waiting, the 'Army of the Boar' then advanced; the skirmishers of both armies engaged with bows, javelins and slings. Then the main body of Brennos' army was issued with a general charge. Their charge was answered by a combination of fellow Gauls, Roman Hastati, and Italians. As the infantry began to clash, the cavalry wings of both armies then engaged; sources agree that the Veneti and Italians came off the better, but then disagree as to what they did next; some sources believed that they had then charged the enemy flank but had been driven off, others say that Corvus then withdrew his cavalry into reserve as it was too lightly armed to make an impact in a protracted fight against infantry. What they also agree on is despite inflicting heavy casualties, the allies began to lose ground and the Romans had been forced to commit their Principes. But just as it looked as though the Triarii might have to join in, as if by a miracle Brennos' army began to withdraw.
At first there was no adequate explanation, until it was realised that the defenders of Patavium had sallied and driven off the forces left behind to besiege it. Brennos was unwilling to continue the battle while a hostile enemy operated at his rear. A remarkable delivery indeed, and a timely one; the allied army had been close to being completely surrounded. Worse was to follow, as Corvus fell ill (as the elderly are wont to do). And to improve matters, the Veneti from Patavium revealed that Brennos had a significant portion of his total forces away during the battle, sent north to harry the lands of the Cisalpine Gauls. The army then quartered in Patavium, to await the arrival of the Consular armies and their associated Socii. This then occurred at the beginning of the Italian summer. Despite the odds, some of the Cisalpine Gauls had remained loyal even with Brennos threatening their lands, and thus it was with an army tripled in size that Corvus could attempt to end the threat of Brennos once and for all.
The allied army then headed north, towards Mediolanum. They reached it two weeks later to find out that the town had already been completely sacked, and that they had been outmanoeuvred; Brennos had already crossed the river Po, and was heading towards Arretium pillaging all the way. As there was no army between Brennos and Rome, Corvus had no choice but to force march the army south as quickly as possible. This was done, but caused the deterioration of his health to accelerate, and he was almost completely bedridden when they caught up to the Gauls at the river Rubicon, where Brennos was forced to give battle.
Brennos was now glutted on Veneti, Gallic, and Italian blood. His army was now reunified, and had additional reinforcements from Illyria as well. Destroy Corvus' army, and the gates were open for Rome herself to come under assault. The final, deadliest stage of the conflict was now at hand. No quarter was likely to be given on either side, the stakes were simply too high. Far from the almost ritualised warfare that dominates much of antiquity, this was a real struggle for survival.
The accounts of this battle are too mythologised to actually make real tactical sense out of it, unfortunately. What they describe is a ferocious struggle that lasted for hours, with scores of men dying on either side, a battle that seemed more suited to epic than to actuality. But when the fighting was over, the result is clear; Rome had won, but at a terrible cost. The butcher's bill was a field full of dead Romans, Italians, Gauls and Veneti. Not only that, but Corvus himself had died at some stage during the battle, almost certainly by pushing his body to the point of total collapse. The military strength of Rome was so reduced by the conflict that it was left unable to undertake a major war for a generation afterwards. And for all that Rome had suffered, the Cisalpine Gauls had been left utterly devastated, not to mention the damage dealt to the Veneti as a people. But Rome was safe, and Brennos was dead.
The Romans took measures to secure Northern Italy in the immediate aftermath; colonies were planted along the Arno and the Po between 273-269 BCE, much of the remaining Cisalpine Gauls were brought into the fold as allies of Rome, the defences of Sena Gallica were increased, a military colony of Gauls and Romans was founded to guard the entrance to North-East Italy named Corvum. In essence, Rome's borders had moved up to the Alps, bordered on the east by Illyria and bordered to the West by the Ligurians. The aforementioned Ligurians, seeing their chance, subsequently raided Roman attempts to settle in the Po Valley that they felt had threatened them. They were driven off repeatedly but not pursued, Rome lacked the strength to fight another large conflict at the time. In the event, several of the Cisalpine tribes moved out of Italy, displacing groups such as the Rhaetians and affecting the balance of power north of the Alps, but many Gauls remained in Northern Italy, and the process of their Romanisation increased apace.
The character of the Roman state was now set on a new path; it had become truly internationally aware, anxious both to analyse powerful threats beyond their borders and to acquire new allies. They were open to those who they considered loyal, but even more close-minded to the truly foreign or the powerful. Not only that, they had appeared on the world stage for the first time; they had fought the Spartans, Corinthians and Athenians to a standstill, along with the rest of the Hellenes of Italy, and had then defeated a horde that even Alexander V Nikator had only been able to drive away. Also, a preview of what was to come happened in the form of the adulation heaped upon the dead Corvus; from that point onwards, Triarii always wore a Raven upon their shields, a new colony was named after him, and some of the Veneti began to worship him as a domestic God. The darker implications of all this would not become obvious for a long time.
Appropriately, Rome's new figure of hatred was no longer Gauls, who were now either friends or dead at the Rubicon (carefully ignoring the plentiful living and unfriendly Gauls in Hispania, Gaul, Illyria and Belgica). Instead, all that was 'Punic' became despised; their Carthaginian allies had been widely believed to have stabbed them in the back, having provided no armies to help them in their hour of need and only engaging with their navy when the remnants of Brennos' army were already defeated and limping across the Adriatic. This was a resentment that festered, and would eventually come to dominate the next stage of Rome's evolution.
Makedon Ascendant: The Early Argead Period
Chapter 4
Alexander Nikator, although now 'master of Europe and Asia', had a problem. That problem was the Ptolemaic state in Egypt, despite the long-lasting detente. Ptolemy II was now its Pharoah, and had been ruling successfully for some time. Whilst military action was possible, the resources of Egypt were not insignificant and produced enough revenue to at least seem respectable next to the stupendous riches of Alexander's own domains. Empire after Empire had not known what to do with Egypt, and it rarely seemed amenable to being part of someone else's state. The resources of the Argeads were supreme and infinite! But they weren't infinite. And it was already managing the largest Empire in the Near East's history. The most intelligent answer would therefore be to use diplomacy to create an amenable state of affairs between the two Empires. Alexander could afford to be generous after all.
The negotiations were conducted on Cyprus, an Argead possession but one with an air of neutrality. They dragged on for some weeks, as the commercial aspects of the treaty were very delicate. At last, a final version was completed, and was signed in the city of Marion. Fortunately for historians, the text of the agreement has mostly survived (although not from an original version); the Argead Empire was defined in legal form for the first time, being 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Alexander the Great, as their Spear Won Land all between Makedon and the Great River Indus is theirs.' This slightly poetic version is not the full extent of the definition, all of the regions that they lay claim to are listed. Likewise the Ptolemaic Kingdom, which was stated as being 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Ptolemy Saviour, as their lands Nile from Delta to Source' (a somewhat fanciful claim). Again, the precise territory controlled is listed in full, though there are some southern possessions that are questionably accurate. And finally, the Epirote Federation was also defined, having won recognition and renown by its taking part in the defence against Brennos; 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Leonnatus, as their lands the homesteads of the Molossians', again with a list of precise locations claimed as Epirote.
The commercial rights of Argead merchants in Ptolemaic Arabia and Egypt were given a hearing, as well as the equivalent rights of Ptolemaic access to the Phoenician cities, the Indus ports, and Babylonia. The vital Egyptian grain trade was reaffirmed, doubly important as Alexander was beginning the first big wave of new city building in Argead territory since Alexander the Great. A gift of frankincense was given to Alexander, which was returned with a gift of Asian elephants and lapis lazuli. And finally, the Treaty was sealed with marriage. What was not stated openly, but which all subsequent commentators realised, was that in addition to the reasons already discussed the Hellenic states with Mediterranean territory were concerned with the growing aggression of Carthage. This would result in the first official diplomatic contact between the emerging Roman state and the Argead Empire in 272 BCE.
In 275 BCE, Alexander returned to Babylonia, satisfied that his ancestral homeland was both loyal and secure. He did not return empty handed, as he brought back many Macedonian settlers. His great plan was now to enhance the infrastructure of the Empire, which he first began by the creation of great logistical staging points across various regions of the Empire. These were called 'Charax Cityname', for example 'Charax Agalaia' in Syria named after his second wife. These were designed to be the assembly points for fully sized Royal Armies and to have the resources to do so at relatively short notice. He also created fully-formed cities, such as Agalaia on the Euphrates that served as a counterpart to the older Zeugma, and Eurydikaia in Pontus to honour the Eurydicean branch of the royal family. Some of the cities were subject to direct Imperial authority and not to a satrap, which was a canny move designed to remove the power of satraps to rebel.
In order to found these new cities, he mostly used Macedonians, Hellenes and some Persians. But he also moved certain populations, particularly to Arachosia which had been much reduced by its original conquest and by subsequent brutal reprisals directed at rebellions. The city of Argeaopolis was designed to be inhabited primarily by Aramaic speakers from Syria for example. He also moved some Arab populations, hoping to facilitate trade links. These were not generally punishments, especially since the new arrivals might enjoy higher status in their new homes than they had previously and because they were supported by Egyptian grain. Some Chaldeans were moved into Arachosia too to form the basis for a civil service there. Anatolians, Indians, Bactrians, Phoenicians, and more besides; almost no culture group in the Empire was left untouched. All in all, it ended up thoroughly confusing the linguistic and cultural map of west Asia!
The next phase of Alexander's reign began in the 260s BCE; the threat of Carthage continued to grow, and so the Argead Empire had begun to wage a 'cold war' against it; the size of the Empire's Mediterranean fleet was vastly increased, and an alliance was signed with Syrakuse. Additionally, the Romans continued to receive favour from Alexander V. The Carthaginians retaliated with threatening moves towards the Greek colony of Athenais on Sicily, covert diplomacy with the Phoenician cities, and naval aggression. This culminated in the city of Byblos having its leadership gutted after it was found to be colluding. This soured relations with many of the Empire's most vital shipbuilding cities. The conflict rumbled through the entire decade but didn't boil over; Carthage became distracted by troubles with the Mauretanians and Numidians, and Alexander V distracted by Ashoka Maurya.
The Mauryan Empire had now expanded to take in almost the entire Indian subcontinent, along with the West of Burma. The alliance between the Mauryans and Argeads had lasted for almost half a century, having been reaffirmed several times with marriage and gifts. There was also a limited intellectual exchange between the two Empires. But given Ashoka's talent for conquest and apparent lust for battle, Alexander was concerned that his rich cities, the gold mines of the Indus and the lapis lazuli mines of Arachosia would be tempting targets. He sent several more diplomats than usual to the court at Pataliputra: the account of one Apollodoros sent as ambassador there has come down to us and provides us with an interesting look at the workings of the Mauryan Empire at its height. At any rate, the anxiety eased and never escalated into a breakdown in diplomatic relations (but is unlikely to have vanished completely) once Ashoka converted to the Buddhist way. Alexander's opinion on Buddhism is unknown, there are no recorded opinions of the subject that are either surviving or even referenced as having existed. What is known is that a few members of the royal family did become intrigued by Buddhist teachings, they tend to euphemistically referred to in contemporary records as 'workers of the wheel'.
Alexander inaugurated the 250s BCE with signing a treaty of alliance with the Bosporan Greek cities; this secured greater shipments of Black Sea grain, thus starting another wave of city building. Greek immigration through Western Asia continued apace, as the Argead state continued to offer incredibly favourable deals to immigrant families. By 252 BCE, perhaps half of all Arachosian households were in fact Greek, mostly Arcadian and Thessalian. This had only compounded the demographic issues in much of mainland Hellas, which had dominated the foreign policy of the Hellenic League for the past two decades; the acquisition of colonial territory had become their primary goal. With the alliance between the Bosporan states and the Argead Empire, further expansion in that direction seemed hopeless. They then turned their attentions towards another region with significance to the Hellenes; Sicily.
The Hellenic League then began to expand their interests on Sicily at an enormous rate. In particular, Athenais continued to go from strength to strength, with funding and colonists pouring in from from Hellas. But with its expansion the Carthaginians were once again roused, especially since the North-East of the Island became ever more densely populated by Hellenes. It was clear that the combination of interests on Sicily would lead to war, the Romans sought to control Sicily, the native Hellenes wanted to defend themselves from Carthaginian expansion, the mainlanders wanted to expand, and the Carthaginians found all of the others to be a threat. None of Alexander V's talent or charm could prevent this chain of events from reaching its natural conclusion. And in the end, he may not have wished to; defeating Carthage in a war made sense pragmatically and ideologically.
The final hostilities that lead up to the First Punic War started when Athenais in Sicily was finally threatened with direct military action from the Carthaginians, in 249 BCE. They called upon the power of Rome, the Hellenic League and the Argead Empire to defend them, and all answered; the Argead Empire put their Mediterranean fleet to sea, the Hellenes assembled a marine expedition and the Romans mustered Consular Legions. The envoys pleading for withdrawal were ignored; the Barcids and their allies were in control, and they would settle for nothing less than the defeat of all three powers on Sicilian soil. This was a major committal of force ; Rome's first major war for a generation and its first fought outside Italy, Argead Empire's first conflict in Western Europe and Africa, the Hellenic League's first campaign in Sicily since the initial founding of Athenais. Alexander V may not have been considered a great Warrior-king, but his preparations were both meticulous and purposeful. Specially purposed transport ships were constructed, whilst the major part of the Mediterranean fleet sailed for Sicily. Supplies were gathered, troops were mustered and drilled, passage and port were bought. The Argead Empire had been under Alexander's peaceful reign for almost thirty years, but the last decade of Aleander V Nikator's rule would leave the Western Mediterranean on fire.
Tempestas
The initial panic of the Romans at the approach of the Gauls was soon replaced with their usual cold pragmatism; the Sibylline prophecies were consulted, all of the pigs within the city were sacrificed, a dictator was appointed and a new legion was raised, heralds were sent to the consuls in Southern Italy so that they would conclude a speedy peace with the Hellenes there. The dictator was one Marcus Valerius Corvus; an experienced magistrate and previous dictator, though now aged Corvus was the most qualified man to try to save Rome from its apparent peril. The alliance with Carthage was called upon, as Rome lacked a navy to defend itself from the piratical raids afflicting its eastern shores. The consular armies were recalled (with the consuls, it was an all-inclusive deal) to assemble at Arretium, whilst Corvus went with his Master of Horse and the new legion to assemble with Veneti forces. The stage was set for the first epic showdown between Brennos and Corvus, boar against raven and eagle.
As the legion made its way northwards, it would have begun to run into an increasing number of refugees from the north; Brennos' forces had already begun to pillage Venitia and the horde had defeated all armies sent to stop it. What remained of the Veneti tribes' armies met up with the Romans and prepared to counter-assault. Many Cisalpine Gauls also joined with the Romans, as they were not aligned with Brennos' tribes; one imagines the fingers crossed behind the backs of the various leaders as they hammered out agreements, not to mention the Romans. The gathered army then set north again once more, now with more of a multicultural affair about it. And it was in mid-spring 274 when the two adversaries met, and Brennos first encountered the warriors of the city he aimed his spear at. The Romans were seeking to relieve Patavium, the most important Veneti centre in Italy, Brennos had wheeled off with the majority of his army to face the incoming foe.
The Romans assembled in typical manipular fashion, incorporating the Veneti (in particular their fine cavalry) on the flanks. Along with the Roman legion itself, there was also an accompanying legion of Socii; in this case, mostly made up of Picenes, Sabines and Etruscans. And there were also those Gaulish tribes that had allied with Rome; many of these were in the vanguard of the army as shock troops, but many others were kept in reserve. Roman sources claim Corvus to have been severely outnumbered, as seems inevitable with all accounts of defensive heroism against 'barbarian hordes', but it is reasonable to assume that the Roman army was outnumbered to some degree.
The first move was made by Brennos'; he sent some of his cavalry forward to goad the enemy, but discipline was kept by all. After some waiting, the 'Army of the Boar' then advanced; the skirmishers of both armies engaged with bows, javelins and slings. Then the main body of Brennos' army was issued with a general charge. Their charge was answered by a combination of fellow Gauls, Roman Hastati, and Italians. As the infantry began to clash, the cavalry wings of both armies then engaged; sources agree that the Veneti and Italians came off the better, but then disagree as to what they did next; some sources believed that they had then charged the enemy flank but had been driven off, others say that Corvus then withdrew his cavalry into reserve as it was too lightly armed to make an impact in a protracted fight against infantry. What they also agree on is despite inflicting heavy casualties, the allies began to lose ground and the Romans had been forced to commit their Principes. But just as it looked as though the Triarii might have to join in, as if by a miracle Brennos' army began to withdraw.
At first there was no adequate explanation, until it was realised that the defenders of Patavium had sallied and driven off the forces left behind to besiege it. Brennos was unwilling to continue the battle while a hostile enemy operated at his rear. A remarkable delivery indeed, and a timely one; the allied army had been close to being completely surrounded. Worse was to follow, as Corvus fell ill (as the elderly are wont to do). And to improve matters, the Veneti from Patavium revealed that Brennos had a significant portion of his total forces away during the battle, sent north to harry the lands of the Cisalpine Gauls. The army then quartered in Patavium, to await the arrival of the Consular armies and their associated Socii. This then occurred at the beginning of the Italian summer. Despite the odds, some of the Cisalpine Gauls had remained loyal even with Brennos threatening their lands, and thus it was with an army tripled in size that Corvus could attempt to end the threat of Brennos once and for all.
The allied army then headed north, towards Mediolanum. They reached it two weeks later to find out that the town had already been completely sacked, and that they had been outmanoeuvred; Brennos had already crossed the river Po, and was heading towards Arretium pillaging all the way. As there was no army between Brennos and Rome, Corvus had no choice but to force march the army south as quickly as possible. This was done, but caused the deterioration of his health to accelerate, and he was almost completely bedridden when they caught up to the Gauls at the river Rubicon, where Brennos was forced to give battle.
Brennos was now glutted on Veneti, Gallic, and Italian blood. His army was now reunified, and had additional reinforcements from Illyria as well. Destroy Corvus' army, and the gates were open for Rome herself to come under assault. The final, deadliest stage of the conflict was now at hand. No quarter was likely to be given on either side, the stakes were simply too high. Far from the almost ritualised warfare that dominates much of antiquity, this was a real struggle for survival.
The accounts of this battle are too mythologised to actually make real tactical sense out of it, unfortunately. What they describe is a ferocious struggle that lasted for hours, with scores of men dying on either side, a battle that seemed more suited to epic than to actuality. But when the fighting was over, the result is clear; Rome had won, but at a terrible cost. The butcher's bill was a field full of dead Romans, Italians, Gauls and Veneti. Not only that, but Corvus himself had died at some stage during the battle, almost certainly by pushing his body to the point of total collapse. The military strength of Rome was so reduced by the conflict that it was left unable to undertake a major war for a generation afterwards. And for all that Rome had suffered, the Cisalpine Gauls had been left utterly devastated, not to mention the damage dealt to the Veneti as a people. But Rome was safe, and Brennos was dead.
The Romans took measures to secure Northern Italy in the immediate aftermath; colonies were planted along the Arno and the Po between 273-269 BCE, much of the remaining Cisalpine Gauls were brought into the fold as allies of Rome, the defences of Sena Gallica were increased, a military colony of Gauls and Romans was founded to guard the entrance to North-East Italy named Corvum. In essence, Rome's borders had moved up to the Alps, bordered on the east by Illyria and bordered to the West by the Ligurians. The aforementioned Ligurians, seeing their chance, subsequently raided Roman attempts to settle in the Po Valley that they felt had threatened them. They were driven off repeatedly but not pursued, Rome lacked the strength to fight another large conflict at the time. In the event, several of the Cisalpine tribes moved out of Italy, displacing groups such as the Rhaetians and affecting the balance of power north of the Alps, but many Gauls remained in Northern Italy, and the process of their Romanisation increased apace.
The character of the Roman state was now set on a new path; it had become truly internationally aware, anxious both to analyse powerful threats beyond their borders and to acquire new allies. They were open to those who they considered loyal, but even more close-minded to the truly foreign or the powerful. Not only that, they had appeared on the world stage for the first time; they had fought the Spartans, Corinthians and Athenians to a standstill, along with the rest of the Hellenes of Italy, and had then defeated a horde that even Alexander V Nikator had only been able to drive away. Also, a preview of what was to come happened in the form of the adulation heaped upon the dead Corvus; from that point onwards, Triarii always wore a Raven upon their shields, a new colony was named after him, and some of the Veneti began to worship him as a domestic God. The darker implications of all this would not become obvious for a long time.
Appropriately, Rome's new figure of hatred was no longer Gauls, who were now either friends or dead at the Rubicon (carefully ignoring the plentiful living and unfriendly Gauls in Hispania, Gaul, Illyria and Belgica). Instead, all that was 'Punic' became despised; their Carthaginian allies had been widely believed to have stabbed them in the back, having provided no armies to help them in their hour of need and only engaging with their navy when the remnants of Brennos' army were already defeated and limping across the Adriatic. This was a resentment that festered, and would eventually come to dominate the next stage of Rome's evolution.
Makedon Ascendant: The Early Argead Period
Chapter 4
Alexander Nikator, although now 'master of Europe and Asia', had a problem. That problem was the Ptolemaic state in Egypt, despite the long-lasting detente. Ptolemy II was now its Pharoah, and had been ruling successfully for some time. Whilst military action was possible, the resources of Egypt were not insignificant and produced enough revenue to at least seem respectable next to the stupendous riches of Alexander's own domains. Empire after Empire had not known what to do with Egypt, and it rarely seemed amenable to being part of someone else's state. The resources of the Argeads were supreme and infinite! But they weren't infinite. And it was already managing the largest Empire in the Near East's history. The most intelligent answer would therefore be to use diplomacy to create an amenable state of affairs between the two Empires. Alexander could afford to be generous after all.
The negotiations were conducted on Cyprus, an Argead possession but one with an air of neutrality. They dragged on for some weeks, as the commercial aspects of the treaty were very delicate. At last, a final version was completed, and was signed in the city of Marion. Fortunately for historians, the text of the agreement has mostly survived (although not from an original version); the Argead Empire was defined in legal form for the first time, being 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Alexander the Great, as their Spear Won Land all between Makedon and the Great River Indus is theirs.' This slightly poetic version is not the full extent of the definition, all of the regions that they lay claim to are listed. Likewise the Ptolemaic Kingdom, which was stated as being 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Ptolemy Saviour, as their lands Nile from Delta to Source' (a somewhat fanciful claim). Again, the precise territory controlled is listed in full, though there are some southern possessions that are questionably accurate. And finally, the Epirote Federation was also defined, having won recognition and renown by its taking part in the defence against Brennos; 'The Inheritance of the Sons of Leonnatus, as their lands the homesteads of the Molossians', again with a list of precise locations claimed as Epirote.
The commercial rights of Argead merchants in Ptolemaic Arabia and Egypt were given a hearing, as well as the equivalent rights of Ptolemaic access to the Phoenician cities, the Indus ports, and Babylonia. The vital Egyptian grain trade was reaffirmed, doubly important as Alexander was beginning the first big wave of new city building in Argead territory since Alexander the Great. A gift of frankincense was given to Alexander, which was returned with a gift of Asian elephants and lapis lazuli. And finally, the Treaty was sealed with marriage. What was not stated openly, but which all subsequent commentators realised, was that in addition to the reasons already discussed the Hellenic states with Mediterranean territory were concerned with the growing aggression of Carthage. This would result in the first official diplomatic contact between the emerging Roman state and the Argead Empire in 272 BCE.
In 275 BCE, Alexander returned to Babylonia, satisfied that his ancestral homeland was both loyal and secure. He did not return empty handed, as he brought back many Macedonian settlers. His great plan was now to enhance the infrastructure of the Empire, which he first began by the creation of great logistical staging points across various regions of the Empire. These were called 'Charax Cityname', for example 'Charax Agalaia' in Syria named after his second wife. These were designed to be the assembly points for fully sized Royal Armies and to have the resources to do so at relatively short notice. He also created fully-formed cities, such as Agalaia on the Euphrates that served as a counterpart to the older Zeugma, and Eurydikaia in Pontus to honour the Eurydicean branch of the royal family. Some of the cities were subject to direct Imperial authority and not to a satrap, which was a canny move designed to remove the power of satraps to rebel.
In order to found these new cities, he mostly used Macedonians, Hellenes and some Persians. But he also moved certain populations, particularly to Arachosia which had been much reduced by its original conquest and by subsequent brutal reprisals directed at rebellions. The city of Argeaopolis was designed to be inhabited primarily by Aramaic speakers from Syria for example. He also moved some Arab populations, hoping to facilitate trade links. These were not generally punishments, especially since the new arrivals might enjoy higher status in their new homes than they had previously and because they were supported by Egyptian grain. Some Chaldeans were moved into Arachosia too to form the basis for a civil service there. Anatolians, Indians, Bactrians, Phoenicians, and more besides; almost no culture group in the Empire was left untouched. All in all, it ended up thoroughly confusing the linguistic and cultural map of west Asia!
The next phase of Alexander's reign began in the 260s BCE; the threat of Carthage continued to grow, and so the Argead Empire had begun to wage a 'cold war' against it; the size of the Empire's Mediterranean fleet was vastly increased, and an alliance was signed with Syrakuse. Additionally, the Romans continued to receive favour from Alexander V. The Carthaginians retaliated with threatening moves towards the Greek colony of Athenais on Sicily, covert diplomacy with the Phoenician cities, and naval aggression. This culminated in the city of Byblos having its leadership gutted after it was found to be colluding. This soured relations with many of the Empire's most vital shipbuilding cities. The conflict rumbled through the entire decade but didn't boil over; Carthage became distracted by troubles with the Mauretanians and Numidians, and Alexander V distracted by Ashoka Maurya.
The Mauryan Empire had now expanded to take in almost the entire Indian subcontinent, along with the West of Burma. The alliance between the Mauryans and Argeads had lasted for almost half a century, having been reaffirmed several times with marriage and gifts. There was also a limited intellectual exchange between the two Empires. But given Ashoka's talent for conquest and apparent lust for battle, Alexander was concerned that his rich cities, the gold mines of the Indus and the lapis lazuli mines of Arachosia would be tempting targets. He sent several more diplomats than usual to the court at Pataliputra: the account of one Apollodoros sent as ambassador there has come down to us and provides us with an interesting look at the workings of the Mauryan Empire at its height. At any rate, the anxiety eased and never escalated into a breakdown in diplomatic relations (but is unlikely to have vanished completely) once Ashoka converted to the Buddhist way. Alexander's opinion on Buddhism is unknown, there are no recorded opinions of the subject that are either surviving or even referenced as having existed. What is known is that a few members of the royal family did become intrigued by Buddhist teachings, they tend to euphemistically referred to in contemporary records as 'workers of the wheel'.
Alexander inaugurated the 250s BCE with signing a treaty of alliance with the Bosporan Greek cities; this secured greater shipments of Black Sea grain, thus starting another wave of city building. Greek immigration through Western Asia continued apace, as the Argead state continued to offer incredibly favourable deals to immigrant families. By 252 BCE, perhaps half of all Arachosian households were in fact Greek, mostly Arcadian and Thessalian. This had only compounded the demographic issues in much of mainland Hellas, which had dominated the foreign policy of the Hellenic League for the past two decades; the acquisition of colonial territory had become their primary goal. With the alliance between the Bosporan states and the Argead Empire, further expansion in that direction seemed hopeless. They then turned their attentions towards another region with significance to the Hellenes; Sicily.
The Hellenic League then began to expand their interests on Sicily at an enormous rate. In particular, Athenais continued to go from strength to strength, with funding and colonists pouring in from from Hellas. But with its expansion the Carthaginians were once again roused, especially since the North-East of the Island became ever more densely populated by Hellenes. It was clear that the combination of interests on Sicily would lead to war, the Romans sought to control Sicily, the native Hellenes wanted to defend themselves from Carthaginian expansion, the mainlanders wanted to expand, and the Carthaginians found all of the others to be a threat. None of Alexander V's talent or charm could prevent this chain of events from reaching its natural conclusion. And in the end, he may not have wished to; defeating Carthage in a war made sense pragmatically and ideologically.
The final hostilities that lead up to the First Punic War started when Athenais in Sicily was finally threatened with direct military action from the Carthaginians, in 249 BCE. They called upon the power of Rome, the Hellenic League and the Argead Empire to defend them, and all answered; the Argead Empire put their Mediterranean fleet to sea, the Hellenes assembled a marine expedition and the Romans mustered Consular Legions. The envoys pleading for withdrawal were ignored; the Barcids and their allies were in control, and they would settle for nothing less than the defeat of all three powers on Sicilian soil. This was a major committal of force ; Rome's first major war for a generation and its first fought outside Italy, Argead Empire's first conflict in Western Europe and Africa, the Hellenic League's first campaign in Sicily since the initial founding of Athenais. Alexander V may not have been considered a great Warrior-king, but his preparations were both meticulous and purposeful. Specially purposed transport ships were constructed, whilst the major part of the Mediterranean fleet sailed for Sicily. Supplies were gathered, troops were mustered and drilled, passage and port were bought. The Argead Empire had been under Alexander's peaceful reign for almost thirty years, but the last decade of Aleander V Nikator's rule would leave the Western Mediterranean on fire.
I love you. This TL is so damn good, and I'm glad it's back.
The way Brennus 2.0 in Rome worked out was quite novel. Rome won, however, Rome was crippled. I can actually foresee Rome becoming an Argead client state (might be troublesome later) and Carthage actually being the nemesis of the Argeads
The way Brennus 2.0 in Rome worked out was quite novel. Rome won, however, Rome was crippled. I can actually foresee Rome becoming an Argead client state (might be troublesome later) and Carthage actually being the nemesis of the Argeads
The First Punic War, by Alaric: A New Translation
Now it came to pass, after that Alexander the son of Philip the Macedonian, who first reigned in Greece, coming out of the land of Cethim, had overthrown Darius king of the Persians and Medes. He fought many battles, and took the strong holds of all, and slew the kings of the earth.
And he went through even to the ends of the earth, and took the spoils of many nations: and the earth was quiet before him. And he gathered a power, and a very strong army: and his heart was exalted and lifted up. And he subdued countries of nations, and princes: and they became tributaries to him. And after these things, he was cast down upon the sand, and knew that he should die.
And he called his servants the nobles that were brought up with him from his youth: and he made them the stewards of his son who was yet an infant, while he was yet alive. And Alexander reigned seventeen years, and he died.
And at first his servants made themselves kings every one in his place: And they all put crowns upon themselves after his death, but the seed of Alexander took their strong holds and gathered again the nations of the earth. And where his hand did not fall, the evils of the world multiplied and grew.
And there came out of Alexander's vine a splendid flower, Alexander the Victorious, the son of king Alexander begat by king Alexander, and he reigned in the eighty-sixth year of the kingdom of the Macedonians.
Carthage, the Hellenes, the Argead Empire and the Romans. Two of the number were new powers, anxious for their safety and hungry for battle. The Carthaginians were an ancient people with strength newly-found, reacting against the sudden ascendancy of all that was Hellenic. The Argeads were growing long in the tooth, but all of the world that mattered was theirs. Proud peoples and stern warriors all. Hard-fought were the battles, deep drinking were the bloody swords, many-dug were the graves.
The triremes and other warships of the Hellenes slipped out into Homer's 'wine dark sea', facing sailors with heart and skill to match their own. The Romans, sons of wolf and eagle and raven, bit fiercely in the earliest days of what would become their Empire but they had no warships with which to match the prowess of Carthage. So in the spring days of the war, the Romans had to rely upon the broad sails of their Hellene allies. The eagle warriors of Rome landed on Sicily, and immediately made for the high lands of Agrigentum. There they met the Carthaginian general Hannibal Gisgo, not to be mistaken for the more famous Hannibal that was called the Thunderbolt. For the time he was old, being perhaps sixty years old, and yet he tenaciously defended the city with the help of his son Hanno and all their men, who arrived in the flank of the besieging Romans at the worst possible moment. The Romans had been cut off from their supplies from Syrakuse, but equally Hannibal and his garrison had been starving for months and they pleaded for relief even though Hanno might have starved the Romans and defeated them without the need for battle.
It was thus that caused the meeting of Hanno's army and the Roman Consular armies. Few tales have survived of the course of the battle, what is known is that the Carthaginians were defeated with great loss, and that Hannibal was captured along with the city of Agrigentum. The Romans, wishing to carry cities by reputation as much as by their swords and spears, did not subject the city to sack or slavery. This did not sit well with many of their warriors as the hatred for Carthage had grown deep and vicious in this generation. But at a stroke the majority of the island and its plentiful grain had become enthralled by the Romans. The next year, in 248 BCE, the Argead fleet set out and defeated a Carthaginian fleet at Vulcano, and their sea-bourne warriors occupied Melita which became their Empire's Westernmost possession.
Unfortunately the year then went poorly for the eagle warriors of Rome, as a counter-attack pushed them back from Western Sicily, which was followed by the greater part of their first fleet being sunk by a great storm. Their position remained strong-rooted but the Carthaginian spear had found a fulcrum. The Romans then began construction on an entire new fleet, their determination earning both wonder and fear from their allies and enemies alike. The Hellenic League landed troops near Segeste, in the rear of the Carthaginian advance, but reinforcements from Africa happened upon them in poor order and the Hellenes were driven back with much slaughter.
But the next year began more promisingly for the allies in two ways; firstly, the Romans were able to once again push forward into the territory of Carthage, and secondly the Royal army assembled by Alexander known as the Victor arrived in good order. Some of their men had been lost to pox and weather on the crossing, but nonetheless the Argead army made its presence known forthwith. The main body landed on Sicily and began to closely co-operate with the Roman Consuls, whilst another detachment landed on Sardinia. On land, the allies were thus ascendant. But on sea, fortune had turned against them, with successive defeats on both the Hellenic League's and Argead Empire's navies forcing them back to port in Magna Graecia. For as long as Carthage retained control of the seas in this manner, it was only a matter of time before yet more reinforcements were landed. This was what seemed promised to happen at the beginning of campaigning in 246 BCE. But the craftiness of Alexander Victor was in abundance, and was to change the course of the war.
The untapped affluence, armada and arms of Egypt lay on Carthage's eastern borders, and Alexander convinced Ptolemy Well-Loved that Carthage and her navy could deal as much harm to his own realm as to the Argead. To sweeten the deal, Leptis Magna and the coast that led to it were promised to Ptolemy. And thus Carthage now found itself four-times beset by foes. Reinforcements that been intended to relieve Sicily had to instead be directed to Leptis Magna after the Egyptians crossed the border. But at sea the Carthaginians remained strong; the Romans construction of new ships could not match their numbers and they had cause to be cautious with the danger their fleet might be in. This left the task of sea-victory to the Argeads and Hellenes. On Sicily, the landing of Hamilcar the Thunderbolt began to shore up the Carthaginian's defences, as he conducted irregular warfare with great intelligence and decisiveness. But inexorably, the Romans Hellenes and Argeads continued to occupy the remaining strong holds of Sicily.
The breakthrough much sought for came the next year, in 245 BCE, when the Ptolemaic fleet under their broad sails arrived on Sicily. The advantage that the allies had gained on sea was seemingly assured. With renewed vigour did the allies subdue strong holds, and soon only a tiny fraction of the island was in the hands of Hamilcar. He then resolved that if he received no reinforcement for the next year then he would parley with the allies for peace as the situation would be irretrievable. He was determined to stand fast, and with ambush-craft destroyed supplies and isolated battalions of his enemies.
At the spring of 244 BCE, Carthage seemed on the brink of defeat; the greater part of Sicily was firmly under their enemies control, their fleets were now outnumbered, Sardinia had been occupied along with Melita, and Egypt had successfully laid low their strong hold at Leptis Magna. With desperation, they cast their last dice and aimed to launch a full scale fleet action against the allied fleets in an attempt to destroy them. They caught the Argead fleet in their jaws as it was passing Melita, and having committed their reserves achieved a local superiority of numbers. The battle was close-fought, and both sides distinguished themselves. But in the end, the Carthaginians prevailed, destroying much of the enemy fleet and capturing several of their ships. At a stroke, the largest navy of the allies had been crippled, and much needed morale was restored to the Carthaginian cause. The Romans, weary of the long struggle that had taxed their newly-refound strength, and the Argeads, sensing opportunity, resolved to make peace and contacted Hamilcar. The negotiations were lengthy, and the ceasefire was temporarily broken in 243 BCE after a blind encounter between Roman eagle warriors and Carthaginian sellswords.
But an agreement was agreed, by moon and sun and eagle. The Treaty of Agrigentum signed in June 243 BCE allowed citizens of captured Carthaginian cities free passage to the territory of Carthage, but Hamilcar's small holdout territory was preserved as the soil of Carthage. Agrigentum, and all of the conquered territory to its East, West and North were given over to the Romans. The Hellenic strong holds on Sicily were to remain sovereign and free, a condition the Hellenic League insisted on. Additionally, the Southern coast of the island was given over to them for the purpose of colonisation. As compensation for partitioning Sicily rather than making it over to Rome fully, the Argeads made a boon of Sardinia to Rome. And Melita was to remain under Argead control, as a naval base, granting them wide-vision of the situation in the Western Mediterranean. The keen avoiders of diplomacy and rhetoric were the Egyptians; their war with Carthage raged on. But Carthage could with renewed focus turn their gaze upon fighting Egypt, and the rapid advance of Egypt soon ground to a halt.
The weary armies of Rome, Hellas and Argaia were thus able to return to their homes at last, all of whom had gained much from the conflict. But the seeds of further conflict had been planted in the Treaty, as much as the seeds of peace; Rome was still anxious for security, and the Hellenes continued to mistrust the Romans. And now they shared borders twofold, in Italy and in Sicily. Additionally, some in Rome's upper circles felt uncomfortable at their relationship with the Argead Empire; they felt enthralled, vassal-made, and felt chastened at their eventual reliance on Argead armies and navies to prevail in their conflict with Carthage. This then gave rise to the battle for the heart of the Republic that then followed; 'pro-Hellenes' versus 'anti-Hellenes'. The awesome nature of their victory against Carthage gave much prestige to the Hellenic League, but in not a great time at all it would be realised that it only served to mask their own problems. And chief among them, Sparta was dying.
And what of Carthage? The Barcid family, the Thunderbolts, fell out of favour for a time as it was their hardline attitudes that caught them in the net of their enemies. But when Hamilcar defeated a sellsword revolt, in the 'Mercenary War', and then pushed the Ptolemies back to within the walls of Leptis Magna, his family regained some favour. They saw that for all Carthage's riches, they hadn't the raw power to defeat all of their enemies at once, and pursued a forked course of action; on the one hand, they sought to try to cause divisions between the powers of the Mediterranean, and on the other they relentlessly pursued avenues of conquest for Carthage. Hamilcar was the master of the realm, by virtue of his success and popularity. He was therefore able to ally himself with Hasdrubal 'the Fair' and launch an expedition into Hispania in 237 BCE. By force of arms and diplomacy, he laid low all of the strong holds of the peninsular and completed the conquest of Hispania in 227 BCE. And the Carthaginians stoked their hatreds, and gathered their strength, and waited.
Now it came to pass, after that Alexander the son of Philip the Macedonian, who first reigned in Greece, coming out of the land of Cethim, had overthrown Darius king of the Persians and Medes. He fought many battles, and took the strong holds of all, and slew the kings of the earth.
And he went through even to the ends of the earth, and took the spoils of many nations: and the earth was quiet before him. And he gathered a power, and a very strong army: and his heart was exalted and lifted up. And he subdued countries of nations, and princes: and they became tributaries to him. And after these things, he was cast down upon the sand, and knew that he should die.
And he called his servants the nobles that were brought up with him from his youth: and he made them the stewards of his son who was yet an infant, while he was yet alive. And Alexander reigned seventeen years, and he died.
And at first his servants made themselves kings every one in his place: And they all put crowns upon themselves after his death, but the seed of Alexander took their strong holds and gathered again the nations of the earth. And where his hand did not fall, the evils of the world multiplied and grew.
And there came out of Alexander's vine a splendid flower, Alexander the Victorious, the son of king Alexander begat by king Alexander, and he reigned in the eighty-sixth year of the kingdom of the Macedonians.
Carthage, the Hellenes, the Argead Empire and the Romans. Two of the number were new powers, anxious for their safety and hungry for battle. The Carthaginians were an ancient people with strength newly-found, reacting against the sudden ascendancy of all that was Hellenic. The Argeads were growing long in the tooth, but all of the world that mattered was theirs. Proud peoples and stern warriors all. Hard-fought were the battles, deep drinking were the bloody swords, many-dug were the graves.
The triremes and other warships of the Hellenes slipped out into Homer's 'wine dark sea', facing sailors with heart and skill to match their own. The Romans, sons of wolf and eagle and raven, bit fiercely in the earliest days of what would become their Empire but they had no warships with which to match the prowess of Carthage. So in the spring days of the war, the Romans had to rely upon the broad sails of their Hellene allies. The eagle warriors of Rome landed on Sicily, and immediately made for the high lands of Agrigentum. There they met the Carthaginian general Hannibal Gisgo, not to be mistaken for the more famous Hannibal that was called the Thunderbolt. For the time he was old, being perhaps sixty years old, and yet he tenaciously defended the city with the help of his son Hanno and all their men, who arrived in the flank of the besieging Romans at the worst possible moment. The Romans had been cut off from their supplies from Syrakuse, but equally Hannibal and his garrison had been starving for months and they pleaded for relief even though Hanno might have starved the Romans and defeated them without the need for battle.
It was thus that caused the meeting of Hanno's army and the Roman Consular armies. Few tales have survived of the course of the battle, what is known is that the Carthaginians were defeated with great loss, and that Hannibal was captured along with the city of Agrigentum. The Romans, wishing to carry cities by reputation as much as by their swords and spears, did not subject the city to sack or slavery. This did not sit well with many of their warriors as the hatred for Carthage had grown deep and vicious in this generation. But at a stroke the majority of the island and its plentiful grain had become enthralled by the Romans. The next year, in 248 BCE, the Argead fleet set out and defeated a Carthaginian fleet at Vulcano, and their sea-bourne warriors occupied Melita which became their Empire's Westernmost possession.
Unfortunately the year then went poorly for the eagle warriors of Rome, as a counter-attack pushed them back from Western Sicily, which was followed by the greater part of their first fleet being sunk by a great storm. Their position remained strong-rooted but the Carthaginian spear had found a fulcrum. The Romans then began construction on an entire new fleet, their determination earning both wonder and fear from their allies and enemies alike. The Hellenic League landed troops near Segeste, in the rear of the Carthaginian advance, but reinforcements from Africa happened upon them in poor order and the Hellenes were driven back with much slaughter.
But the next year began more promisingly for the allies in two ways; firstly, the Romans were able to once again push forward into the territory of Carthage, and secondly the Royal army assembled by Alexander known as the Victor arrived in good order. Some of their men had been lost to pox and weather on the crossing, but nonetheless the Argead army made its presence known forthwith. The main body landed on Sicily and began to closely co-operate with the Roman Consuls, whilst another detachment landed on Sardinia. On land, the allies were thus ascendant. But on sea, fortune had turned against them, with successive defeats on both the Hellenic League's and Argead Empire's navies forcing them back to port in Magna Graecia. For as long as Carthage retained control of the seas in this manner, it was only a matter of time before yet more reinforcements were landed. This was what seemed promised to happen at the beginning of campaigning in 246 BCE. But the craftiness of Alexander Victor was in abundance, and was to change the course of the war.
The untapped affluence, armada and arms of Egypt lay on Carthage's eastern borders, and Alexander convinced Ptolemy Well-Loved that Carthage and her navy could deal as much harm to his own realm as to the Argead. To sweeten the deal, Leptis Magna and the coast that led to it were promised to Ptolemy. And thus Carthage now found itself four-times beset by foes. Reinforcements that been intended to relieve Sicily had to instead be directed to Leptis Magna after the Egyptians crossed the border. But at sea the Carthaginians remained strong; the Romans construction of new ships could not match their numbers and they had cause to be cautious with the danger their fleet might be in. This left the task of sea-victory to the Argeads and Hellenes. On Sicily, the landing of Hamilcar the Thunderbolt began to shore up the Carthaginian's defences, as he conducted irregular warfare with great intelligence and decisiveness. But inexorably, the Romans Hellenes and Argeads continued to occupy the remaining strong holds of Sicily.
The breakthrough much sought for came the next year, in 245 BCE, when the Ptolemaic fleet under their broad sails arrived on Sicily. The advantage that the allies had gained on sea was seemingly assured. With renewed vigour did the allies subdue strong holds, and soon only a tiny fraction of the island was in the hands of Hamilcar. He then resolved that if he received no reinforcement for the next year then he would parley with the allies for peace as the situation would be irretrievable. He was determined to stand fast, and with ambush-craft destroyed supplies and isolated battalions of his enemies.
At the spring of 244 BCE, Carthage seemed on the brink of defeat; the greater part of Sicily was firmly under their enemies control, their fleets were now outnumbered, Sardinia had been occupied along with Melita, and Egypt had successfully laid low their strong hold at Leptis Magna. With desperation, they cast their last dice and aimed to launch a full scale fleet action against the allied fleets in an attempt to destroy them. They caught the Argead fleet in their jaws as it was passing Melita, and having committed their reserves achieved a local superiority of numbers. The battle was close-fought, and both sides distinguished themselves. But in the end, the Carthaginians prevailed, destroying much of the enemy fleet and capturing several of their ships. At a stroke, the largest navy of the allies had been crippled, and much needed morale was restored to the Carthaginian cause. The Romans, weary of the long struggle that had taxed their newly-refound strength, and the Argeads, sensing opportunity, resolved to make peace and contacted Hamilcar. The negotiations were lengthy, and the ceasefire was temporarily broken in 243 BCE after a blind encounter between Roman eagle warriors and Carthaginian sellswords.
But an agreement was agreed, by moon and sun and eagle. The Treaty of Agrigentum signed in June 243 BCE allowed citizens of captured Carthaginian cities free passage to the territory of Carthage, but Hamilcar's small holdout territory was preserved as the soil of Carthage. Agrigentum, and all of the conquered territory to its East, West and North were given over to the Romans. The Hellenic strong holds on Sicily were to remain sovereign and free, a condition the Hellenic League insisted on. Additionally, the Southern coast of the island was given over to them for the purpose of colonisation. As compensation for partitioning Sicily rather than making it over to Rome fully, the Argeads made a boon of Sardinia to Rome. And Melita was to remain under Argead control, as a naval base, granting them wide-vision of the situation in the Western Mediterranean. The keen avoiders of diplomacy and rhetoric were the Egyptians; their war with Carthage raged on. But Carthage could with renewed focus turn their gaze upon fighting Egypt, and the rapid advance of Egypt soon ground to a halt.
The weary armies of Rome, Hellas and Argaia were thus able to return to their homes at last, all of whom had gained much from the conflict. But the seeds of further conflict had been planted in the Treaty, as much as the seeds of peace; Rome was still anxious for security, and the Hellenes continued to mistrust the Romans. And now they shared borders twofold, in Italy and in Sicily. Additionally, some in Rome's upper circles felt uncomfortable at their relationship with the Argead Empire; they felt enthralled, vassal-made, and felt chastened at their eventual reliance on Argead armies and navies to prevail in their conflict with Carthage. This then gave rise to the battle for the heart of the Republic that then followed; 'pro-Hellenes' versus 'anti-Hellenes'. The awesome nature of their victory against Carthage gave much prestige to the Hellenic League, but in not a great time at all it would be realised that it only served to mask their own problems. And chief among them, Sparta was dying.
And what of Carthage? The Barcid family, the Thunderbolts, fell out of favour for a time as it was their hardline attitudes that caught them in the net of their enemies. But when Hamilcar defeated a sellsword revolt, in the 'Mercenary War', and then pushed the Ptolemies back to within the walls of Leptis Magna, his family regained some favour. They saw that for all Carthage's riches, they hadn't the raw power to defeat all of their enemies at once, and pursued a forked course of action; on the one hand, they sought to try to cause divisions between the powers of the Mediterranean, and on the other they relentlessly pursued avenues of conquest for Carthage. Hamilcar was the master of the realm, by virtue of his success and popularity. He was therefore able to ally himself with Hasdrubal 'the Fair' and launch an expedition into Hispania in 237 BCE. By force of arms and diplomacy, he laid low all of the strong holds of the peninsular and completed the conquest of Hispania in 227 BCE. And the Carthaginians stoked their hatreds, and gathered their strength, and waited.
The Death of Alexander V
From a Babylonian Stele
'Upon the [death] of Alexander [who was] Victorious, the lamen[tations] of the [illegible follows] forty days, with sacrifices offered to [temples] on each of those days of the most magnificent sort. Here stands the account of [the events] that will stand the test of [time], standing for the grief of all [subjects] of Alexander's Spear [Won Land].'
An Introduction to Argead Literature
'The death of Alexander V changed the nature of literature in the Empire for two reasons; the first was the genuine grief of the population over the death of a well-beloved sovereign, and the second was the amount of time and money spent by his son and successor Phillip IV into the arts. The use of Alexander V's death as a dramatic event continued well after the end of the Empire he ruled, used to illustrate themes of the bittersweet, the mortality of life, the ending of a golden age (already a large theme in Hellenic literature), and in later more critical circles the idea that even a rich life devoted to pleasure and pleasing others must one day come to an end. He became partially mythologised, though not as much as his grandfather Alexander 'the Great', and much modern historical work has been attempting to move away from the view of Alexander V as a 'panacea Emperor'. From a literary expert's point of view however, Alexander V in death was certainly responsible for a great flourishing of the arts and drama in Western Asia, and for that we must certainly be grateful.'
Greek Philosophers in the Hellenic League
'The early Skeptics gained much ground in opposition to the philosophies underpinning the Argead Empire; the Argead Empire as they saw it was founded upon a certainty over observation and truth. They, on the other hand, believed that humans can know nothing. They were also opposed to the growth of the Alexander cult, and are believed to have been responsible for its near-invisible presence in Attika. Having said all of this, the oft-repeated anecdote is that the arch-skeptic head of the Academy, Archaelaus of Aeolis, wept for the death of Alexander V. This quote is often used to demonstrate irony or hypocrisy, but it could be said that the Skeptic opposition to the Argead Empire did not run as deep as it is claimed.'
Phillip IV: Inadequate Successor or Unfairly Tarred?
Those ancient historians who favoured the Argead Empire tended to treat Phillip IV with quite some disdain; not so much tarnishing his reputation as much as damning him with faint praise and pointing out how much less martial and talented he was compared to his forefathers. In this essay I seek to redress the balance, to truly determine what Phillip IV was like as Emperor of Alexander's Spear Won Land.
Upon Alexander V's death in 240 BCE, Phillip had already been Crown Prince for some time and had ably governed the eastern satrapies of the Empire. In particular he had won celebrated victories over the infamous Saka, the perennial menace of the Empire's northern borders. He was already an experienced administrator and general by the time of his accession to the throne. He was also not the only son of Alexander V, who could easily have favoured another of his children to succeed him. So, the man regarded as the most able administrator of the Argead Empire in its entire history clearly thought him up for the job. If this was not sufficient credentials, he was also known to have conducted a friendly relationship with Ashoka of the Mauryan Empire; Phillip was a man with important international connections. This is hardly the resume of a paper tiger.
So, what are the features of his reign that are usually brought up as inadequacies? First and foremost is the growth of powerful groups that began to affect his decision making, sometimes quite badly. This must be conceded, even if I believe these groups to have been severely over analysed for their relative historical importance. Next is his focus on the arts rather than martial affairs and foreign policy, and this I most definitely reject; what is missing from his reign are large scale wars, such as Alexander IV's wars, or Alexander V's participation in the First Punic War. For those military fetishists expecting glorious warfare from their ancient history, this must be a real let-down. But arguably the fact that the Argead Empire, an entity spanning two continents and many diverse cultures, was able to rest on its laurels for a while is actually a result of highly successful foreign and military policy! And what is lastly brought up is the chaos that followed, which brought an end to the relatively balmy Early Argead Period.
This last topic is the most complicated, as the civil war that followed his death is hard to pin to exactly one cause. It also depends on one's opinion on child-rearing; if you posit the cause of the war as the horrendous personality of Phillip's chosen successor Bagoas, then perhaps Phillip was indeed at fault. But if you judge that the real cause was the power structure of the Empire, the growing size of the Royal Family, and expectations of what an Emperor should be, then these are trends that began long before Phillip's birth and were not his responsibility. Personally I feel the blame lies somewhere in the middle, but that certainly doesn't leave Phillip as being responsible for all of the ills of the Argead Empire.
So, by contrast, what did Phillip IV do to benefit the Argead Empire? Why do I believe this outweighs the problems with his reign? From a cultural point of view, Phillip's investment in the arts was tremendous, but assuming that art appreciation is a little too subjective I will instead concentrate on concrete achievements. As mentioned before, he avoided major wars with all of the powers on the Empire's borders, with the exception of tribal groups. I believe this was deliberate and not simply due to luck; the Carthaginians had not been so dreadfully damaged by the Punic War that they were unable to threaten the Empire. Additionally, he was able to maintain friendly relations at Rome in the face of growing opposition to the Argeads in the Roman Senate, further improve ties with the Mauryans, and was probably the Emperor with the most genuinely warm relationship with Egypt. The reigns of subsequent Emperors show how easily and quickly things could develop otherwise.
From a Babylonian Stele
'Upon the [death] of Alexander [who was] Victorious, the lamen[tations] of the [illegible follows] forty days, with sacrifices offered to [temples] on each of those days of the most magnificent sort. Here stands the account of [the events] that will stand the test of [time], standing for the grief of all [subjects] of Alexander's Spear [Won Land].'
An Introduction to Argead Literature
'The death of Alexander V changed the nature of literature in the Empire for two reasons; the first was the genuine grief of the population over the death of a well-beloved sovereign, and the second was the amount of time and money spent by his son and successor Phillip IV into the arts. The use of Alexander V's death as a dramatic event continued well after the end of the Empire he ruled, used to illustrate themes of the bittersweet, the mortality of life, the ending of a golden age (already a large theme in Hellenic literature), and in later more critical circles the idea that even a rich life devoted to pleasure and pleasing others must one day come to an end. He became partially mythologised, though not as much as his grandfather Alexander 'the Great', and much modern historical work has been attempting to move away from the view of Alexander V as a 'panacea Emperor'. From a literary expert's point of view however, Alexander V in death was certainly responsible for a great flourishing of the arts and drama in Western Asia, and for that we must certainly be grateful.'
Greek Philosophers in the Hellenic League
'The early Skeptics gained much ground in opposition to the philosophies underpinning the Argead Empire; the Argead Empire as they saw it was founded upon a certainty over observation and truth. They, on the other hand, believed that humans can know nothing. They were also opposed to the growth of the Alexander cult, and are believed to have been responsible for its near-invisible presence in Attika. Having said all of this, the oft-repeated anecdote is that the arch-skeptic head of the Academy, Archaelaus of Aeolis, wept for the death of Alexander V. This quote is often used to demonstrate irony or hypocrisy, but it could be said that the Skeptic opposition to the Argead Empire did not run as deep as it is claimed.'
Phillip IV: Inadequate Successor or Unfairly Tarred?
Those ancient historians who favoured the Argead Empire tended to treat Phillip IV with quite some disdain; not so much tarnishing his reputation as much as damning him with faint praise and pointing out how much less martial and talented he was compared to his forefathers. In this essay I seek to redress the balance, to truly determine what Phillip IV was like as Emperor of Alexander's Spear Won Land.
Upon Alexander V's death in 240 BCE, Phillip had already been Crown Prince for some time and had ably governed the eastern satrapies of the Empire. In particular he had won celebrated victories over the infamous Saka, the perennial menace of the Empire's northern borders. He was already an experienced administrator and general by the time of his accession to the throne. He was also not the only son of Alexander V, who could easily have favoured another of his children to succeed him. So, the man regarded as the most able administrator of the Argead Empire in its entire history clearly thought him up for the job. If this was not sufficient credentials, he was also known to have conducted a friendly relationship with Ashoka of the Mauryan Empire; Phillip was a man with important international connections. This is hardly the resume of a paper tiger.
So, what are the features of his reign that are usually brought up as inadequacies? First and foremost is the growth of powerful groups that began to affect his decision making, sometimes quite badly. This must be conceded, even if I believe these groups to have been severely over analysed for their relative historical importance. Next is his focus on the arts rather than martial affairs and foreign policy, and this I most definitely reject; what is missing from his reign are large scale wars, such as Alexander IV's wars, or Alexander V's participation in the First Punic War. For those military fetishists expecting glorious warfare from their ancient history, this must be a real let-down. But arguably the fact that the Argead Empire, an entity spanning two continents and many diverse cultures, was able to rest on its laurels for a while is actually a result of highly successful foreign and military policy! And what is lastly brought up is the chaos that followed, which brought an end to the relatively balmy Early Argead Period.
This last topic is the most complicated, as the civil war that followed his death is hard to pin to exactly one cause. It also depends on one's opinion on child-rearing; if you posit the cause of the war as the horrendous personality of Phillip's chosen successor Bagoas, then perhaps Phillip was indeed at fault. But if you judge that the real cause was the power structure of the Empire, the growing size of the Royal Family, and expectations of what an Emperor should be, then these are trends that began long before Phillip's birth and were not his responsibility. Personally I feel the blame lies somewhere in the middle, but that certainly doesn't leave Phillip as being responsible for all of the ills of the Argead Empire.
So, by contrast, what did Phillip IV do to benefit the Argead Empire? Why do I believe this outweighs the problems with his reign? From a cultural point of view, Phillip's investment in the arts was tremendous, but assuming that art appreciation is a little too subjective I will instead concentrate on concrete achievements. As mentioned before, he avoided major wars with all of the powers on the Empire's borders, with the exception of tribal groups. I believe this was deliberate and not simply due to luck; the Carthaginians had not been so dreadfully damaged by the Punic War that they were unable to threaten the Empire. Additionally, he was able to maintain friendly relations at Rome in the face of growing opposition to the Argeads in the Roman Senate, further improve ties with the Mauryans, and was probably the Emperor with the most genuinely warm relationship with Egypt. The reigns of subsequent Emperors show how easily and quickly things could develop otherwise.
