8   could be killed:Plutarch reports that Alexander killed Glaucias, the doctor who was attending Hephaestion at the time of his death.

  9   a Roman statesman:I assume, along with most scholars, that the Quintus Curtius who wrote History of Alexander the Greatis the same person as the senator and consul Curtius Rufus discussed by Tacitus ( Annals1.20.3–21.3).

10   to see Roman patterns:At 10.9.1–6, Curtius explicitly contrasts the experience of the Macedonians, whose empire was wrecked by lack of leadership, with that of the Romans in the era of the principate. Paul McKechnie has documented the case against Curtius in “Manipulation of Themes in Quintus Curtius Rufus Book 10,” Historia48 (1999), pp. 44–60, arguing against the position of Errington in “From Babylon to Triparadeisos.” Elizabeth Baynham has also done much to reveal Curtius’ shortcomings in Alexander the Great: The Unique History of Quintus Curtius(Ann Arbor, Mich., 1998).

11   Alexander’s top naval officer, spoke next:The order of speakers and the content of their speeches are reported differently by Justin and Quintus Curtius. I have here followed the very convincing amalgam of the two made by Bosworth in the first chapter of Legacy of Alexander.

12   accompanying the army:There is no evidence of Arrhidaeus’ activities during the Asian campaign until this moment, but presumably he had stayed in Alexander’s entourage throughout. Alexander would not have left his half brother at home in Macedonia, where he might serve as a rallying point for his rivals.

13   this seems a Roman fantasy:Curtius had lived through the succession dramas at Rome following the deaths of Augustus and Caligula, and the memories of these seem to have influenced his account of the Babylon crisis. The urgency with which Alexander’s generals would later seek a royal bride shows that the throne was off-limits to any who were not part of the Argead house.

14   a task that by custom:The role of the assembled army in the selection of monarchs is a matter of dispute among scholars, and unfortunately most of the evidence comes from the post-Alexander era. Most agree that even before this point the Macedonians summoned an army assembly to acclaim a new monarch, at the least; some would give the assembly greater powers.

15   on several occasions:As mentioned by Plutarch at Eumenes6.3, though unfortunately without elaboration.

16   Years before, in India:The episode is described by Curtius (8.12.17–18) and also referred to obliquely by Plutarch ( Alexander59.5).

17   A full-scale battle loomed:Curtius (10.7.18) even reports that javelins were hurled within the throne room and wounds were incurred, though this is not confirmed by other sources.

18   Meleager explained to King Philip:This exchange, and the details of the arrest attempt and its aftermath, are described by Curtius (10.8.1–7).

19   like a hollow sham:The atmosphere among the mutineers is vividly described by Curtius 10.8.8–9.

20   an impassioned speech:The content of the address is preserved by Justin 13.3.9–10.

21   a paralytic state:The grim suggestion was first made, to my knowledge, by N. G. L. Hammond in Alexander the Great: King, Commander, and Statesman, 2nd ed. (London, 1989), p. 305 n. 174. Dr. David W. Oldach of the University of Maryland School of Medicine gave “ascending paralysis” as part of his diagnosis of Alexander’s death, largely on the basis of the report of non-putrefaction (“A Mysterious Death,” New England Journal of Medicine338, no. 24 [June 11, 1998], p. 1766).

22   a further stratagem:This episode and the lustration that follows are described by Curtius 10.9.7–19.

23   thirty staunchest supporters:The manuscripts of Curtius actually give the number three hundred, but this is often changed to the more plausible thirty by editors of the Latin text. In the Greek texts on which Curtius was relying, the difference of a decimal place would be indicated by a single small slash, easily misread or miswritten by scribes.

24   one, more likely both:Plutarch says the victims were Stateira and “the sister,” which if correct would mean Stateira and Drypetis, Hephaestion’s widow. But he may have gotten his genealogy confused and referred to Parysatis, Stateira’s cousin and close friend, as her sister. That at least is the view of Carney in Women and Monarchy.

25   History knows the pair:The custom of assigning Roman numerals to kings who bear the same name arose in medieval England. The ancient world distinguished such kings by the use of patronymics, for example, “Alexander son of Philip.”

26   It was resolved:There is no clear information as to how the idea of the satrapal division arose. Diodorus (18.2.4) indicates it came from the general will of the army; Curtius (10.10.1) says that a meeting of the leadership, convened by Perdiccas, resolved on this step, and also notes that some of his sources claimed that the dead Alexander had called for it in his will (10.10.5). It is also unclear whether the Bodyguards wanted to leave Babylon to become satraps or were coerced into doing so; I have assumed the former, in contrast to Bosworth ( Legacy of Alexander, pp. 57–58).

27   Ptolemy wanted Egypt:Again, my assumption is that the distribution of the satrapies was desired by the Bodyguards, not forced on them (see previous note), but this cannot be proved. Under this scenario, Ptolemy, as most powerful Bodyguard after Perdiccas, would have demanded the best satrapy, which was undoubtedly Egypt. Another view, however, regards Ptolemy’s appointment to Egypt as a kind of banishment inflicted by Perdiccas.

28   some modern scholars:The debate over the authenticity of the last plans can best be followed in the discussion by Brian Bosworth, in chapter 8 of From Arrian to Alexander: Studies in Historical Interpretation(Oxford, 1988). Bosworth himself believes the plans are genuine.

29   wanted these plans quashed:The intention of Perdiccas to void the plans, and his fear of arbitrarily contravening the wishes of Alexander, are both reported by Diodorus (18.4.2–3). The plans themselves are reported by Diodorus at 18.4.4–5, our only source for them.

30   Most were never contemplated again:I say “most” because of the possibility that the Great Tumulus at Aegae, a vast mound of earth covering tombs that may well include that of Alexander’s father, was built as a fulfillment of the king’s last plan to memorialize Philip with a tomb greater than the pyramids. The excavator of the mound, Manolis Andronikos, made this suggestion in his book Vergina(p. 229).

Chapter 3: The Athenians’ Last Stand (I)

  1   had defined themselves:Some scholars reject the idea that Athenian politicians in the age of Alexander were defined primarily as “pro-” or “anti-Macedonian,” or even the idea that political parties in the modern sense existed in Athens (see especially Hansen, Athenian Democracy, chap. 11). I do not mean to reduce Athenian politics to a two-party system, but I think it is beyond question that policy toward Macedon was the central issue of the day and that positions of political leaders were defined by the two poles of opposition and collaboration.

  2   would have been first:Plutarch relates that Demosthenes came forward to speak in the Assembly when none else would, in the dreadful moment in 339 when the city first realized it faced attack by Philip ( Demosthenes18.1–2).

  3   green Athenian recruits:Though Lycurgus had instituted an obligatory two-year training for military-age Athenian youths, and a whole generation had been through that training by 323 B.C., there had been no land warfare during that time in which the army could gain experience of battle. Philip seems to have played on their inexperience at Chaeronea, feigning a retreat that drew them into a disorderly advance, then suddenly reversing course and attacking.