Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T07:14:43.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE SPECTRE OF ALEXANDER: CASSIUS DIO AND THE ALEXANDER-MOTIF*

For R. D. (Bob) Milns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2017

C. T. Mallan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the opinion of Cassius Dio, Septimius Severus' capture of Nisibis and annexation of the province of Mesopotamia were not among the emperor's more worthwhile ventures. The costs were great and the yields slight. Our knowledge of the campaign is sketchy, although we do have a narrative outline supplied by Dio's eleventh-century epitomator, John Xiphilinus. Xiphilinus preserves the following anecdote, which takes place after Severus and his army had crossed the Euphrates and were starting to feel the effects of thirst and heat. The epitomator says:

κεκμηκόσι γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῆς πορείας καὶ τοῦ ἡλίου καὶ κονιορτὸς ἐμπίπτων ἰσχυρῶς ἐλύπησεν, ὥστε μήτε βαδίζειν μήτε λαλεῖν ἔτι δύνασθαι, τοῦτο δὲ μόνον ϕθέγγεσθαι, ‘ὕδωρ ὕδωρ’. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἀνεϕάνη μὲν ἰκμάς, ἐξ ἴσου δὲ τῷ μὴ εὑρεθέντι ἀρχὴν ὑπὸ ἀτοπίας ἦν, ὁ Σεουῆρος κύλικά τε ᾔτησε καὶ τοῦ ὕδατος πληρώσας ἁπάντων ὁρώντων ἐξέπιε.

(Dio Cass. 75[75].2.2 [Xiph.])

For when they were already wearied by their march and the hot sun, they encountered a dust-storm that caused them great distress, so that they could no longer march or even talk, but only cry, ‘Water, Water’. And when some little vapour did appear, on account of its strangeness it meant no more to them than if it had not been found at all, until Severus called for a cup, and filling it with the water, drank it in full view of all.

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 64 , Issue 2 , October 2017 , pp. 132 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Caillan Davenport, Helen Tanner, and the anonymous reviewer for their feedback on this article. An earlier version was delivered at the Classical Association Conference on 9 April 2016 at the University of Edinburgh, and I thank the audience for their comments on that paper, and the Classical Association for partially subsidizing my conference expenses.

References

1 Dio Cass. 75[75].3.3 (Xiph.). All translations from Dio are from the Loeb edition of Cary, E., Dio's Roman History (London, 1914–27)Google Scholar, sometimes adapted. For all references to Dio where the book divisions of U. P. Boissevain conflict with the traditional book divisions, the traditional divisions are placed in square brackets. If a quoted passage of Dio derives from one of the epitomes, the identity of the source will be placed in brackets following the citation and the following abbreviations will be used: (EVV) = Excerpta de Virtutibus et Vitiis; (Xiph.) = Xiphilinus, Epitome.

2 For Xiphilinus and his methods of work, note Millar, F. G. B., A Study of Cassius Dio (Oxford, 1964), 195–203 Google Scholar; Brunt, P. A., ‘On Historical Fragments and Epitomes’, CQ 30.2 (1980), 489–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mallan, C. T., ‘The Style, Method, and Programme of Xiphilinus' Epitome of Cassius Dio's Roman History ’, GRBS 53.3 (2013), 617–32Google Scholar.

3 Arr. Anab. 6.26.1–3; cf. Curt. 7.5.10–12; Frontin. Str. 1.7.7; Polyaenus 4.3.25; Plut. Vit. Alex. 42.

4 E.g. Arrian placed the anecdote in the context of Alexander's ill-conceived march through the Gedrosian desert, but he knew of other traditions (Arr. Anab. 6.26.1). Curtius places the story in the territory of the Sogdians (Curt. 7.5.1). For some general comments on these sorts of ‘floating’ anecdotes, see Saller, R., ‘Anecdotes as Historical Evidence for the Principate’, G&R 27.1 (1980), 69–83 Google Scholar, esp. 74.

5 Smilda, H. (ed.), Index historicus (Berlin, 1926), 24–5Google Scholar, s.v. Alexander (6) (= Boissevain, U. P., Cassii Dionis Cocceiani Historiarum Romanarum quae supersunt, Volumen IV [Berlin, 1926])Google Scholar.

6 According to the index of van Niejenjuis, J. E. (ed.), Appianus Historia Romana, Vol. III Index nominum (Leipzig, 1992), 541 Google Scholar (s.v. Alexander Magnus).

7 E.g. Bosworth, A. B., ‘Mountain and Molehill? Cornelius Tacitus and Curtius Rufus’, CQ 54.2 (2004), 551–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Damon, C., ‘Déjà vu or déjà lu? History as Intertext’, PLLS 14 (2010), 375–88Google Scholar; Levine, D. S., Livy and the Hannibalic War (Oxford, 2010), 82–163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pelling, C., ‘“Learning from that violent schoolmaster”: Thucydidean Intertextuality and Some Greek Versions of the Roman Civil War’, in Breed, B. W., Damon, C., and Rossi, A. (eds.), Citizens of Discord. Rome and its Civil Wars (Oxford and New York, 2010), 105–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pelling, C., ‘Intertextuality, Plausibility, and Interpretation’, Histos 7 (2013), 1–20 Google Scholar.

8 Following the useful definitions of Green, P., ‘Caesar and Alexander: aemulatio, imitatio, comparatio’, AJAH 3 (1978), 2 Google Scholar: comparatio is an apparent act of imitatio, described or interpreted by a third party. For the distinction between aemulatio, imitatio, and comparatio Alexandri, see Green (above) and the critique in Welch, K. and Mitchell, H., ‘Revisiting the Roman Alexander’, Antichthon 47 (2013), 81–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For this other approach (i.e. the question of imitatio and aemulatio), see the thorough treatment of Kühnen, A., Die Imitatio Alexandri in der römischen Politik, 1. Jh. v. Chr.–3. Jh. n. Chr. (Münster, 2008)Google Scholar; and, for a more historiographical approach, Spencer, D., The Roman Alexander. Reading a Cultural Myth (Exeter, 2002), 165–203 Google Scholar.

9 SHA, M. Ant. 2.1–2.

10 Hdn. 4.8.1–6, 4.9.3–4.

11 Note the miscellany of anecdotes collected at Dio Cass. 78[77].7.1–8.3. For the most thorough discussion of this, see Kühnen (n. 8), 176–86; Baharal, D., ‘Caracalla and Alexander the Great: A Reappraisal’, in Deroux, C. (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History VII (Brussels, 1994), 524–67Google Scholar. See also Ceauşescu, P., ‘La double image d'Alexandre le grand a Rome: essai d'une explication politique’, StudClas 14 (1974), 166–7Google Scholar, on the possibility that the Constitutio Antoniniana may have been inspired by Alexander's supposed desire for a universal empire in the style of Tarn's ‘brotherhood and unity of mankind’, but this seems to be more an anachronistic fantasy.

12 Millar (n. 2), 215; Baharal (n. 11), 528; Kühnen (n. 8), 181.

13 Cf. SHA, M. Ant. 5.8; Hdn. 4.8.3–4.

14 For the connection between Alexander and Ilium, and the cult to Alexander at Ilium, see IK 3 (Ilion), no. 122, with Habicht, C., Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte (Munich, 1956), 21–2Google Scholar; Dreyer, B., ‘Heroes, Cults, and Divinity’, in Heckel, W. and Tritle, L. A. (eds.), Alexander the Great. A New History (Malden, MA, 2009), 223–4Google Scholar.

15 For Dio's attitudes toward Caracalla, see Davenport, C., ‘Cassius Dio and Caracalla’, CQ 62.2 (2012), 796–815 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Scott, A. G., ‘Cassius Dio, Caracalla, and the Senate’, Klio 97.1 (2015), 157–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for a restatement of the traditional view that Dio's portrayal of Caracalla is generally representative of those of the Senate as a whole.

16 Note Arr. Anab. 1.11.7–12.1; also Diod. Sic. 17.17.2–3, for Alexander's desire to honour Achilles and the other Greek heroes at Troy.

17 See further Gleason, M., ‘Identity Theft: Doubles and Masquerades in Cassius Dio's Contemporary History’, ClAnt 30.1 (2011), 62–5Google Scholar.

18 Dio Cass. 75[74].6.2a (EVV).

19 Dio Cass. 75[74].6.1–2 (Xiph., EVV).

20 Defeat of Pescennius Niger: Dio Cass. 75[75].7.1–8 (Xiph.). Cf. Hdn. 3.4; Amm. Marc. 26.8.15. For the source connection between Herodian and Ammianus, note Kelly, G., Ammianus Marcellinus. The Allusive Historian (Cambridge 2008), 236 Google Scholar.

21 Men. Rhet. 2.377.9–10; cf. Men. Rhet. 2.426.23–4. See also T. S. Duncan, ‘The “Alexander Theme” in Rhetoric’, Washington University Studies 9.2, Humanistic Series (1922), 319–20.

22 For examples, see studies noted below in n. 24.

23 Verg. Aen. 1.279.

24 E.g. Ceauşescu (n. 11); Stoneman, R., Legends of Alexander the Great (London, 1994), xxv–xxxiiiGoogle Scholar; Spencer (n. 8); Whitmarsh, T., ‘Alexander's Hellenism and Plutarch's Textualism’, CQ 52.1 (2002), 175–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Baynham, ‘Barbarians 1: Quintus Curtius’ and Other Roman Historian's Reception of Alexander’, in Feldherr, A. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Historians (Cambridge, 2009), 290–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Two references to Alexander the Great appear in Zonaras' narrative of the middle Republic, but they fall outside the scope of this article. The first describes the ambitions of Perseus, who desired (foolishly) to surpass the deeds of Alexander (Zonar. 9.22), yet ended up losing his kingdom (Zonar. 9.24). The second is applied to the newly developed conceit of the Roman populus following Paullus' victory over Perseus, who begin to act as though they had defeated Alexander himself. We may note that the tenor of these references is consistent with Dio's application of the Alexander-motif in the Imperial books.

26 The setting for the story is Caesar's quaestorship in Lusitania. Dio Cass. 37.52.2; cf. Suet. Iul. 7.1. Plut. Vit. Caes. 11.5–6 provides a variation on the same theme, but has Caesar reading about Alexander. For comments, see Pelling, C., Plutarch. Caesar (Oxford, 2011), 3–4, 183–4Google Scholar.

27 For Pompey's imitatio Alexandri, see Welch and Mitchell (n. 8), 83–9; cf. Kienast, D., ‘Augustus und Alexander’, Gymnasium 76 (1969), 437–8Google Scholar; Green (n. 8), 4–6; Zanker, P., The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus, trans. Shapiro, A. (Ann Arbor, MI, 1988), 10 Google Scholar.

28 Dio Cass. 56.36.3.

29 Dio Cass. 45.1.2.

30 For Scipio, see Livy 26.19.6; Dio Cass. F 57.38. For Seleucus, see Justin. 15.4.2–9. For Alexander, see Plut. Vit. Alex. 2. For discussion, see Ogden, D., ‘Alexander, Scipio and Octavian: Serpent-siring in Macedon and Rome’, SyllClass 20 (2009), 31–52 Google Scholar; Kienast (n. 27), 434; Zanker (n. 27), 50–1.

31 Hence Octavian's witticism about wishing to see ‘a king, not a row of corpses’ (Dio Cass. 51.16.5).

32 Dio Cass. 53.30.1–2; Rich, J. W., Cassius Dio. The Augustan Settlement (Roman History 53–55.9) (Warminster, 1990), 165–6Google Scholar.

33 See Curt. 10.5.4; Diod. Sic. 17.117.3; Justin. 12.15; Metz Epit. 112.

34 Plut. Mor. 305A–B. An almost identical rationale is given by Josephus (AJ 1.348).

35 For the late 20s, note the treatment of Gruen, E. S., ‘Augustus and the Making of the Principate’, in Galinsky, K. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Augustus (Cambridge, 2005), 38–40 Google Scholar.

36 Dio Cass. 78[77].8.3 (Xiph., EVV); Cf. Arr. Anab. 7.27.1; Plut. Vit. Alex. 77.

37 Dio Cass. 40.17.3–18.3. That Zeugma was the crossing point for Alexander the Great and his army, see Plin. HN 34.43.150.

38 Dio Cass. 68.26.41 (Xiph.). That the site of the battle was conventionally associated with Arbela is noted (and corrected) by Arrian (Anab. 6.11.4–6).

39 Cf. Florus 1.11.3; Plut. Vit. Crass. 19.3, who, like Dio, include a similar series of portents at Zeugma during Crassus' crossing, but does not mention the connection of the site with Alexander the Great.

40 Dio Cass. 68.29.4 (Xiph.).

41 For Dio's attitudes on imperial expansion, see 52.37.1 (speech of Maecenas); Ober, J., ‘Tiberius and the Political Testament of Augustus’, Historia 31.3 (1982), 320–1Google Scholar; Swan, P. M., The Augustan Succession. An Historical Commentary on Cassius Dio's Roman History, Books 55 and 56 (Oxford, 2004), 12–13, 379–80Google Scholar.

42 Dio Cass. 75[75].3.3 (Xiph.).

43 Dio Chrys. Or. 4.4; App. B Civ. 2.149. On the problematic nature of philotimia, see Pelling (n. 26), 434–5, on Plut. Vit. Caes. 58.4. For Plutarch's use of Alexander as a standard point of comparison for many of his Greek and Roman Lives, see Stadter, P. A., ‘Parallelism in Three Dimensions’, in Humble, N. (ed.), Plutarch's Lives. Parallelism and Purpose (Swansea, 2010), 200–8Google Scholar.

44 Kuhn-Chen, B., Geschichtskonzeptionen griechischer Historiker im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Untersuchungen zu den Werken von Appian, Cassius Dio und Herodian (Frankfurt-am-Main, 2002), 168–9Google Scholar.

45 Welch and Mitchell (n. 8), 98.

46 Plut. De Alex. fort. 1.11 [= Mor. 332C–E]. For further, nuanced discussion on this theme and the programmatic differences between Plutarch's On the Fortune or Virtue of Alexander and the Life of Alexander, see Whitmarsh (n. 24).

47 Diod. Sic. 17.38.4–6.

48 Tac. Ann. 2.73. For this passage, see Bosworth (n. 7), 559–63; also Syme, R., Tacitus (Oxford, 1958), 492 Google Scholar; Goodyear, F. R. D., The Annals of Tacitus, Books 1–6, Volume II. Annals 1.55–81 and Annals 2 (Cambridge, 1981), 416–17Google Scholar.

49 For the figure of Alexander in Dio Chrysostom's Kingship Orations, see Jones, C. P., The Roman World of Dio Chrysostom (Cambridge, MA, 1978), 117–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moles, J. L., ‘The Kingship Orations of Dio Chrysostom’, PLLS 6 (1990), 299–300, 337–50Google Scholar.

50 Note the discussion of this ideal in Davenport, C. and Mallan, C., ‘Hadrian's Adoption Speech in Cassius Dio's Roman History and the Problems of Imperial Succession’, AJPh 135.4 (2014), 645–50Google Scholar.

51 Dio Cass. 80[79].18.1–3 (Xiph.). For discussion of this episode, see Millar (n. 2), 214–18.

52 Lucan, Phar. 10.18–48, with the stimulating discussion of Tracy, J., Lucan's Egyptian Civil War (Cambridge, 2014), 90–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 See Dio Cass. 68.26.41 (Xiph.), 68.29.1–30.1 (Xiph.). For the source connection, see Stadter, P. A., Arrian of Nicomedia (Chapel Hill, NC, 1980), 139–41Google Scholar; cf. Wirth, G., ‘Arrian und Traian: Versuch einer Gegenwartsdeutung’, StudClas 16 (1974), 203–6Google Scholar.