Dan Gorman

44546335

Why did Alexander set out to invade Persian territory?

From his succession of the throne following the death of his father, King Philip II, in 336 BC, to

the mysterious circumstances surrounding his own death in 323 BC, the mythos that entwined itself

throughout every aspect of Alexander III of Macedons life may only be surpassed by the mythos that

would later become Alexander the Great in the centuries following his death. It is with the

aforementioned statement that I offer a rejection of the mythos that hinders the ascertaining of historicity

within the stories regarding the life of Alexander the Great and his achievements therein. Whilst the

majority of scholarship on the subject of Alexanders decision to invade Asia Minor tends to play into the

mythos surrounding Alexanders campaign, I offer an approach of simplicity, focusing mainly on what

was occurring around Alexander before his departure into foreign land, and therein attempt to attach the

legacy and kingly inheritance left behind by Philip II for his son and successor, Alexander III of

Macedon, to the reasoning as to why he set out to invade Persian occupied territory.

Whilst the exact numbers and amounts included within may vary slightly, nearly all of the ancient

sources addressing the issue agree on but one area of Alexanders invasion into Persian territory Philip

II, upon his passing, had left Macedonias treasury all but empty, but not before accruing massive debts of

which remained unpaid upon Alexanders succession. According to Plutarch, upon Alexanders adoption

of the throne of Macedonia, not only were the treasuries left severely drained, the kingdom itself was

faced with the stark reality of an imminent collapse under the weight of the substantial debt that had been

accrued throughout the preceding years1. With regards to the kingdoms dwindling economic resources,

and furthermore the foreboding sense of strain attached to the looming and ill-financed venture into Asia

1
Plutarch, Moralia 4.1.3.

1
Dan Gorman
44546335

Minor, Plutarch evokes Aristobulus recounting of a mere 70 talents to fund the proposed invasion of the

Persian ruled territory, whilst similarly recalling Onesicritus claim of a combined debt amounting to

some 200 talents, and furthermore, Duris assertion of enough supplies to last all but thirty days2. Arrian,

under the guise of an encouraging speech purportedly spoken by Alexander himself, relays of an

inheritance of less than sixty talents in the treasury left by King Philip, before describing the combined

debts of some five hundred talents3. Quintus Curtius likewise cites this speech by Alexander, and like

Arrian, evokes Alexanders claims of an inherited debt of five hundred talents and a treasury containing a

mere sixty talents4. Clearly, as transliterated by the aforementioned sources, in Philips passing Alexander

had received control of a state facing an imminent monetary collapse, and with this, to ensure the

continuality, the protection, and the expansion of the Macedonian state, dramatic, and needless to say

desperate, action would appear as the only feasible path to pursue. With his fathers army at his disposal

and the appeal of freely flowing Persian gold5, Alexanders decision to invade Persian territory may

have, at least in part, received influence from the sting of the financial ruin he was facing at home, of

which he owed wholly to Philip.

Coupled with the pressure of restoring Macedons finances was the already existing sense of

resentment harbored by Alexander during the years preceding Philips passing. It may be ascertained that

with the well documented resentment of which Alexander felt towards his father, his own kingship

therein, and furthermore his decision to invade Persian held territory, may have been ultimately been

influenced by his want to succeed where his father failed, or to simply surpass his many achievements

whilst creating his own legend. These observations become particularly apparent when, according to

Plutarch, Alexander mocked Philips ability to accomplish his forthcoming invasion of Asia successfully6,

implying that he himself would be much better suited to the task. Furthermore, as it appears in Plutarchs

2
Plutarch, Alexander 15.
3
Arrian, Anabasis 7.9.6.
4
Quintus Curtius, History of Alexander 10.2.24.
5
Plutarch, op. cit., 4.1.3.
6
Plutarch, op.cit., 9.

2
Dan Gorman
44546335

Alexander7 and as explained by E.A. Fredricksmeyer, Alexander was growing increasingly unhappy as

the sense of frustration he felt in regards to his fathers ever-amounting achievements overshadowing his

own potential likewise grew8. Following Alexanders mocking of Philip, we are told that Alexander and

his mother left Macedon, and although returning eventually, as pointed out by E. Badian, there is

insufficient evidence to support a reconciliation between both Alexander and Philip9. The feelings of

anger of which Alexander felt towards his father resonated well beyond Philips death, with, according to

Arrian, just the thought of Philips achievements overshadowing his own, even once established in his

own right, evoking violent outbursts from Alexander10, thus presenting itself as an ongoing issue for

Alexander, and one that he would never quite be able to fully separate himself from.

With the aforementioned evidence considered, and furthermore the mythos surrounding

Alexanders reign respectively set aside for the briefest of moments, I believe it ascertainable that

Alexanders invasion of Asia, and moreover his whole reign, to have been highly influenced by a standard

of which he set upon himself to outdo his father, thus paving the way for more of a psychological

approach than a purely literately one. Philip II left Alexander with the burden of resolving Macedons

critical financial problems, and when attached to the unresolved feelings of resentment of which

Alexander felt for his father, one may begin to understand the context under which Alexander invaded

Persian held territory - as a financial necessity, and further still, as somewhat of a personal necessity.

7
ibid., 5.
8
E. A. Fredricksmeyer, Alexander and Philip: Emulation and Resentment, The Classical Journal 85, (1990), 308.
9
E. Badian, The Death of Philip II, Phoenix 17, (1963), 245.
10
Arrian, op. cit., 4.8.6-7.

3
Dan Gorman
44546335

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arrian, Alexander the Great: The Anabasis and the Indica, trans. M. Hammond, Oxford Worlds
Classics, (Oxford, 2013).
Plutarch, Lives: Alexander, trans. B. Perrin, Loeb Classical Library, vol. 11 (Cambridge, Mass., 1986).
Plutarch, Moralia, trans. F. C. Babbitt, Loeb Classical Library, vol. 4 (Cambridge, Mass., 1936).
Quintus Curtius, History of Alexander, trans. J. C. Rolfe, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.,
1946).

Badian, E., The Death of Philip II, Phoenix 17, (1963), 244-250.

Fredricksmeyer, E. A., Alexander and Philip: Emulation and Resentment, The Classical Journal 85,

(1990), 300-315.