625991

8/18/2019 625991

1/7

Roxane and Alexander IV in Epirus

Author(s): Grace H. MacUrdy

Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 52, Part 2 (1932), pp. 256-261

Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/625991

Accessed: 16-04-2016 01:28 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted

digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about

JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press, The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies arecollaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Sat, 16 Apr 2016 01:28:56 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

8/18/2019 625991

2/7

ROX NE ND LEX NDER IV IN EPIRUS

THE writers who discuss in detail the history of Macedonia during the

years of' The Kings,' Philip Arrhidaeus and Alexander IV (323-317 B.c.),

state or assume that Roxane, the widow of Alexander the Great, fled to

Queen Olympias in Epirus with her little son, after the death of Antipater,

or else that she was sent or taken there by Polyperchon at the time when

Queen Eurydice was putting Cassander in Polyperchon's place as her

husband's prime minister. The stay of the mother and son in Epirus and

their return with Olympias when she entered Macedonia to fight at Evia

with Eurydice and Philip Arrhidaeus for the kingdom are mentioned by

such authorities as Grote,1 Niese,2 Beloch,3 Kaerst,4 Staehelin 5 (Berve,6

also, refers to Kaerst and Staehelin for this part of Roxane's history),

Klotzsch,7 and Tarn.8

I am convinced that there is no good ancient authority for the story

and that the passages which are cited to prove it in general indicate just

the opposite :-namely, (I) that Polyperchon kept inviting Olympias to

come back to Macedonia and take charge of the little king (-r6 Trat8iov

TrapaharETv), with all her former prestige and honour restored to her,

(2) that she refused the invitation, since she distrusted Polyperchon and

since Eumenes, whom she consulted by letter, advised her to await some

decisive turn of the war, (3) that Polyperchon kept the child-king and his

mother with himself, as a o0puvp6prpa rif pacrtthEias,9 and did not surrender

them to Olympias until she actually returned with her cousin, King

Aeacides of Epirus, at the head of an army to conquer Eurydice and Philip

in the battle on the border. Polyperchon with his troops supported her cause

and Olympias was for a short time restored to royal power in Macedonia.

I will cite from Staehelin's article on Roxane in Pauly-Wissowa to

illustrate the inferences made from the passages cited. Staehelin writes:

' After Antipater's death in 319 she felt herself no longer secure under the

weak prime-minister and fled with Alexander to Epirus, where the old

Olympias was then residing (Diod. 18, 57, 2; Plut. Eumenes 13, Pyrrhus 4)).

It was probably from Epirus that she, together with Olympias and Philip

Arrhidaeus, addressed an urgent letter to Eumenes, in order to arouse him

to war against the coalition hostile to the prime-minister Polyperchon

(Heidelberg epitome in Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 313).'

The first passage adduced by Staehelin (Diod. 18, 57, 2) states that

Polyperchon ' wrote also to Olympias, Alexander's mother, who was staying

1 History of Greece, Io, p. 302.

2 Geschichte der griech. und makedon. Staaten, 2, 237,

250.

3 Griech. Gesch. 4, i, p. io6 and note 2.

4 R.E. I, sp. 1435, s.v. Alexander IV.

5 R.E. 2, sp. I155, s.v. Roxane.

6 Alexanderreich, II, p. 237, s.v. Roxane.

7 Epirotische Geschichte, 102, and Register, s.v.

Olympias (Vormtinderin ihres Enkels Alexander,

? 19 .

8 CAH. 6, 480.

9 Plut. Alex. 77 (of Perdiccas).

2 56


8/18/2019 625991

3/7

ROXANE AND ALEXANDER IV IN EPIRUS 257

in Epirus because of her hostility to Cassander, telling her to come back to

Macedonia at once, and take over the guardianship of Alexander's son

(rrapaAapo0oa -r6 'AAEdv6vpou rrat8iov) and act as his guardian until he should

come of age and himself take over (rrapaoaPETv) the royal power which was

his by inheritance.'

There is nothing here to indicate that the child was sent or was to be

sent to Epirus. This invitation is a repetition of an earlier one mentioned

in Diod. I8, 49, 4, in which Polyperchon requests Olympias, who is living

in Epirus because of her hostility to Antipater, to come to live in Macedonia

as guardian of the boy and with royal status : rlv rrti~2ptav -tro 'A E?6Wvpov

vioO, rrat6bs 6vros, -rrapaAaPETv Kiai 81a~rpiElV Iv MMKEGOVia T-rV va(altlKwV 'XOUaav

Trpooradciav.1o

Staehelin's second passage is Plut. Eumenes 13. In this there is

no mention of Roxane, or of Alexander IV, or of Epirus. Eumenes is

said to have received letters from Macedonia from those who feared the

growing power of Antigonus, from Olympias, who begged him to come to

the rescue of the child, as his life was threatened, asking him to come home

and take charge of the little king (-r6 'AhEs vipou Trrt6iov TrapahtaEiv); and

from Polyperchon and Philip the king, bidding him remain and fight

against Antigonus with the force at his command in Cappadocia and with

money which they assigned him. It is clear from the letter of Olympias

that the child is in Macedonia, in danger from Eurydice, and not safe

in Epirus with his grandmother.

The third passage referred to by Staehelin is Plut. Pyrrhus 4.

Here the sister of Pyrrhus, whom Demetrius married, Deidamia, is

said to have been called in her girlhood the wife of Alexander, son of

Roxane. From this it is evidently inferred by Staehelin that Alexander

was betrothed to Deidamia in Epirus. As he was but five or six years old

at the time in which he is supposed to have resided there, there can be no

question of a marriage, and for a betrothal between children of that age

the presence of the boy cannot be regarded as necessary. Moreover, we

know that Olympias brought Deidamia with her to Macedonia when she

and the girl's father, King Aeacides, invaded that country at the request

of Polyperchon. Olympias took the little girl with her to Pydna, as well

as the boy Alexander and his mother Roxane (Diod. i9, 35, 5), and the

betrothal doubtless took place during the brief time of Olympias' sup-

remacy in Macedonia before Cassander's return from Peloponnesus and

her own retreat to Pydna. Since we know that Deidamia was in Mace-

donia and have no evidence that Alexander was in Epirus, it seems reason-

able to suppose that the betrothal took place in Macedonia.

The passage in the Heidelberg epitome to which Staehelin refers

relates that when Antigonus was stretching out his hand for more

power and seeking as well the name king (-r6 ~iS ptacnaEials voua), the

'Kings', Olympias, Philip Arrhidaeus, and Roxane asked aid from

Eumenes by sending him royal letters. (oi pacnsTS, to0 Er'pvouS oiS o ialtsv,

10 Cf. also Diod. 18, 65, I: 6 b6 NiK

8/18/2019 625991

4/7

258 GRACE H MACURDY

7r TE O2U'AITrrTi Kal 6 'Appiaaio' 6 $iAtrrrrog Kati 'PCo4avrl 81ax ypapla&vrcov

pacAiKCOv.

Philip Arrhidaeus was certainly not in Epirus at the time when these

letters were written and there is nothing to show that Roxane was. Indeed

it does discredit to the brains of the crafty old politician, Polyperchon, to

suppose that he would let the 'Kings,' Philip and the little Alexander,

out of his grasp so long as he could keep them. He steadily followed the

policy that Cassander on leaving Asia urged upon his father Antipater,

pat vr6ppco Trv paaiXEcv a&rroXcopEyv (Arr. Succ. I, 42).

The passages so far cited by Staehelin to prove the residence of Roxane

and her son in Epirus prove nothing of the kind. Further on in his article,

however, he cites a passage the misinterpretation of which, in my opinion,

has contributed most to the growth of the fictitious story.

'In the year 317 Roxane was brought back to Macedonia with the

young king and with Olympias by Polyperchon and the Epirote king

Aeacides ' (Diod. 19, 11, 2).

The Greek of this passage is as follows :--UoXvrEpXCo v 8 ~i'vactv

ijepotolE rrpooc36paEvos AiaKiG8lv Trbv 'HTrE1PC0TrJV Kal KCaTfiEV 'OUvrwidTa(C bPa-r

Toi 'AAE&v8pov raiOs [T T'f -rl v caoAliAv. The words have been under-

stood to mean, 'Polyperchon was bringing back Olympias together

with the child to Macedonia.' Against this rendering I would point out

that the same expression is used by Diodorus when he tells of Polyperchon's

design of putting on the throne of Macedonia Heracles, the son of Barsine,

who had never been in Macedonia (20, 20, 2-3; 28, I). (I) Ka-rayEIV T-r

P1Epa(K1OV EITri Tlv -TraTpcqav paiaEiav. (2) avvKac-rtaya-yCA)1 TO PEIiOV K.T.??-

(3) Ka-Tryov Erril T-rv -rpcaTpCV 3paaxicav 'HpaKX~a. Moreover, the word

paacltia with almost no exception in Diodorus and elsewhere means royal

power, not the country ruled over; e.g. in the case of Philip Arrhidaeus

Diodorus says of the efforts of the infantry to have him made king --i v ydp

-rTv Wr3 'v p'&Aay6 'ApptSGaiov . .. Trpofijyv i?T1i T-riv act Aiav (Diod. 18, 2, 2).

The K&Ooaos Of Barsine's son is only in a general sense a ' restoration ';

it is not a return of the young man to his native land, or to a land in which

he had lived. In Diod. 19, 11, I, the projected KaOo6oS of Olympias to

Macedonia is mentioned, but in 19, I, 2, the meaning is ' Polyperchon

was attempting to restore Olympias together with the little boy to royal

power.' (I read KarTiYEV, following F.) There has been no mention what-

ever of the previous sending of the boy to Epirus, and the 'Kings' are

particularly mentioned as being with Polyperchon in Phocis (Diod. 18,

58, 2) before he advanced into Attica and Peloponnesus to compel the Mega-

lopolitans 'to acknowledge the authority of the Kings' (Diod. 18, 68, 3).

Grote, who holds that Roxane and the young king had been with Olympias

before this time, says, ' After the two defeats Polyperchon appears to have

evacuated Peloponnesus and to have carried his forces across the Corinthian

Gulf into Epirus to join Olympias.' There is no proof of this, and so far as I

am aware no one has followed Grote in this supposition, but his theory

has at least the merit of showing a possible way of getting the young king,

who was with Polyperchon on this campaign, into Epirus with safety.

No one has suggested any other means of doing this, nor has anyone


8/18/2019 625991

5/7

ROXANE AND ALEXANDER IV IN EPIRUS 259

accounted for the willingness of Polyperchon to give over the young king,

his last hope of power, into the hands of Olympias before she returned to

Macedonia, where he could keep an eye on her.

The words KaT-i-yEV -rri T-rv ptoUEidav are then only a general

expression for the 'restoration of Olympias-and the boy too-to royal

power.' In the case of Olympias the restoration is also a Kieobos in the

usual sense, and this influenced the form of the expression, just as in the

case of Heracles the fact that the kingship is spoken of as his by ancestral

right, -riv wTrarp6cav pactidav, is reflected in KaTrfiyEv. (See note at end on

use of KoT-r/yEv in Diodorus, etc.)

The passages which I have just discussed are the only ones which

are given by the various authorities when they give authorities at all.

I think it is clear from an examination that none of them support

the theory that Roxane and her son fled to Epirus either in 319 (Kaerst,

Staehelin, Klotzsch, Berve) or in 318 (Niese, Grote), or in 317 (Beloch,

Tarn). There is, however, another passage, which I believe none of these

writers quote, which does make the assertion that Olympias returned

from Epirus, bringing the son of Alexander. This is Polyaenus' version

(4, 8, 3) of the information contained in the false letter written by

Eumenes with the design of turning the sentiment of the soldiers from

Peucestes to himself. Fortunately the full account of the proceeding is

given in Diod. 19, 22 and 23.

A comparison of Diodorus and Polyaenus shows clearly that Polyaenus

has quoted from the common source (Hieronymus) sketchily and care-

lessly, as is his wont, while Diodorus has preserved the logical sequence

in his narrative. Melber 11 notes that it is characteristic of Polyaenus'

manner of excerpting from his sources that he has here omitted the

absolutely important part of the letter, and Knott 12 gives various examples

of his carelessness and inaccuracy in quoting. I give here first the Greek

of Polyaenus' statement about Olympias and afterwards that of Diodorus.

(I) cb 'O`vprri&s E ' HTrEipoU KaTE??oiTOva y6v v6IoV &yoa TV6vO 'AXsbXvbpov

Kvpics (supplied by Woelflin from Diod. PEPaics or piaics, MSS. readings)

MaKESOVias EXEl TTj aaiXdEiaV [&vaipE0EvTOs] Kaacacv~pov.

(2) 1v 8E 6 voos TC)V yEypap4iVAoV 8i' TOr jiT V 'AAEIavbpov rrax8iov 'OAvprri&s

rrapaXaapoo'aa KEKO61IlaTO Kal T iv MaKKEsoviaS ao'ltEiMa KVpiCoS, &vaipSCvTroS

Kaoacv~pov, TToXvTrlEpXcv SE K.r.X.

The sense of the fictitious letter as given by Diodorus is logical and

consecutive. Olympias has assumed the guardianship of the son of

Alexander and thereby (Kal) has got legal possession of the throne of

Macedonia; she has put Cassander to death and Polyperchon has crossed

into Asia to join Antigonus with the great part of the royal army. Poly-

aenus, as Melber points out, omits the heart of the letter, namely, that

Polyperchon is bringing an army and elephants and is already in the neigh-

bourhood. Further, Diodorus stresses rrapaoapoocoa, the taking over the

child, the word regularly employed by Diodorus for the taking over of

11 Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie, Neue Folge, Bd.

14, Heft 2 (1884), p. 634.

12 Commentationes Philologae lenenses, vol. 3, PP. 53,

79 (1884).


8/18/2019 625991

6/7

260 GRACE H MACURDY

responsibility and surely emanating from his source. Cf. inter alia, Diod..

i8, 49, 5; 57, 2, and Trpa886vai in 18, 65, I. Also Plut. Eumenes, I3,

wrapadapEiv. Polyaenus has botched the whole passage and has under-

stood Trapaiapoi-aa in the sense of ducens secum, a rare meaning of the word

in earlier time, though it is not infrequent in late Greek. (Cf. Plut. Symp.

sept. sap. p. 149 c, and Alex. I o; Gospel of Matthew, 4, 5 and 27,.

27; Polyb. 17, 8, 7.)

This loose rendering of the original by the notably careless and inexact

Polyaenus, who is primarily interested in the anecdote and in person-

alities, cannot be upheld against the full and logical statements given in

the twenty-second and twenty-third chapters of Diodorus 19.

If my view of the worthlessness of the statement in Polyaenus 4, 8, 3

is correct, there remains no evidence that Roxane and her son were ever

in Epirus. What we know about them is as follows. They were brought

to Macedonia by Antipater, who also brought the other king, Philip Ar-

rhidaeus, and his wife Eurydice (Arrian, Succ. I, 44; Diod. 18, 39, 5).

After the death of Antipater the new regent Polyperchon took counsel

with his friends, and by their advice invited Olympias to leave Epirus

and come to live in Macedonia as guardian of the little king and with

the rank of royalty (Diod. 18, 49, 4; 65, Io). When Polyperchon realised

that war between him and Cassander was inevitable, he took steps to win

the friendship of the Greek cities and also wrote again to Olympias, hater

of Antipater and of his son, urging her to come without delay to assume

charge of the child-king and act as his guardian until he should come of

age and receive the royal power (Diod. 18, 57, 2). Olympias, distrusting

his motives, wrote to ask Eumenes in Asia whether she would better leave

Epirus and take up with the proposal of such a doubtful character as

Polyperchon. Eumenes advised her to stay in Epirus until the war should

take a decisive turn (Diod. 18, 58; Plut. Eumenes, 13; Nepos, Eumenes,

6). She follows this advice and Polyperchon remains the guardian of

the little king (Diod. 18, 62 and 65; 68, 2), whom he takes with him on

his Peloponnesian campaign against Megalopolis. After his defeat he

returns to Macedonia, still having the little king with him, and induces

Olympias and her cousin, King Aeacides of Epirus, to enter Macedonia,

giving her the promise to set her as guardian of the child on the throne

of Macedonia (Diod. 19, I I; Justin, 14, 5). In the battle at Evia Olym-

pias and the Epirotes and Polyperchon are triumphant over Eurydice and

Arrhidaeus, and the two latter are put to death by Olympias with great

cruelty (Diod. 19, I I; Justin, 14, 5). On the arrival of Cassander from

Peloponnesus, Olympias flees to Pydna, taking with her among others

Roxane, Alexander IV, and the little Deidamia, the Epirote princess

whom Olympias has chosen for the future wife of Alexander, her grandson

(Diod. 19, 35, 5; Justin, I4, 6). After the terrible siege of Pydna was over

and the old queen Olympias had been killed by Cassander, he decided

to kill Roxane and her son, that there might be no legal heir to the throne

on which he intended to sit, as he had married a daughter of the great

Philip (Diod. 19, 52, 4). He kept them in Amphipolis for some years

and then, alarmed by the talk current in Macedonia to the effect that


8/18/2019 625991

7/7

ROXANE AND ALEXANDER IV IN E PIRUS 26

Alexander was getting old enough to be king, he had them killed, greatly

pleasing by the act not only himself, but also Lysimachus, Ptolemy, and

Antigonus, who had nothing now to fear from the succession of the young

king (Diod. 19, 105).

It is clear from Arrian, Diodorus, and Plutarch that the possession

of the two Kings was of the highest importance to the various regents,

Perdiccas, Antipater, and Polyperchon, and that Alexander IV even as

an infant accompanied Perdiccas on his campaigns. It was the policy of

Polyperchon, who was looking out for the interests of himself and his

son Alexander, to keep the Kings under his control, and his influence over

the weak-minded Philip Arrhidaeus appears in the trial of Phocion at

Pharygae in Phocis, where Polyperchon set the gold canopy above the

head of the king and led him with his own hand to sit on the throne, and

then gave orders to have Dinarchus seized, tortured, and killed, after-

wards giving audience to the Athenians. When Hegemon said that Poly-

perchon himself was a witness to his loyalty to the people, Polyperchon

in rage ordered him to stop lying about him to the king, and Philip sprang

up and threatened to run Hegemon through with his spear.

The tale shows how completely Polyperchon had this king under him

until Eurydice, the strong young wife of Philip, took a hand in affairs

and detached her husband from Polyperchon and made alliance with

Cassander. Polyperchon, who trusted no one, would never give over,

even to one who hated Cassander as bitterly as did Olympias, the other

king and his mother, on whom his remaining power rested. So in

addition to the lack of evidence for the flight of Roxane and her child to

Epirus, we have the character and policy of Polyperchon as a strong

presumptive argument against its probability. I submit, therefore, that

historians in repeating the story until it has become part of the current

account of the life of Roxane and her child have not sufficiently examined

the evidence for it.

GRACE H. MACURDY.

NOTE ON

KardryEIV ~Tl Tlv aaoAEiav.

These words (and K6o806o), SO often occurring in

Diodorus and other writers who narrate the struggles

for the Macedonian kingship, do not necessarily

imply return from exile outside Macedonia. In

the case of Amyntas III we know that he was not

driven out of the country. Cf. Diod. i4, 92, 3:

gftrrT-rEv 1K ris rr6?EcoS (where Dindorf's emenda-

tion to xcpas, against all the manuscripts, is quite

wrong and entirely contrary to the sequence of the

narrative), Xen. Hell. V. 2, 13: Kai 'A~vTrav 68

i:,aoav6p1ece drTroXopov-r& TrE K TV Tr6?ECV A Kai 6ov

OO1K KTrTETTCOK6T0a fiBTJ 1K -Tr&arl) MaKESovias; and Isocr.

Archid. 46. Beloch thinks (GG. I, 102) that during

this struggle between Amyntas and Argaeus, Amyntas

may have maintained himself in Aegae, while

Argaeus was driven to the north-east of the country:

Amyntas is said to have been restored, KaTraXeEiS

(Diod. loc. cit.), by the aid of Thessalian troops.

In the second attempt of Argaeus to get the

throne the Athenians assisted him (Diod. I6, 2, 6,

and 16, 2, 3 and 5: Ka-rryoV id -rhv caaolEiav

'Apyatov). Argaeus probably had not left Macedonia,

except to meet the Athenian troops at Methone.

When he demands that the people of Aegae

acknowledge his K66oSos and be rijs acTroo paaIheiasc

dpXqyo'S, he is demanding acknowledgment of his

restoration to the throne. Pausanias, concerning

whom the phrase is used, we know had been driven

out of Macedonia by Iphicrates and was ' brought

back by Thracian supporters. Cf. also Diod. 12,

50 (of Amyntas, son of Philip). The phrase was a

usual one in that harassed kingdom. Thucydides

uses it with paItXEia in the dative-phf e(wtrrrrov -r6v

dSEX(PV aTOrcO woh~plOV oVTla KO Tay'Ocyo iTrI T|1 Bo'1Ei

(Thuc. 2, 95, 2). With the change of case to the

accusative it came to be the general expression for

Restoration to the Kingship without specific reference

to the previous residence of the claimant.

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Sat, 16 Apr 2016 01:28:56 UTC

Documents

625991