Brooklyn Daily Eagle - October 9, 1902

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle - October 9, 1902, page 20

Battle of Issus 333 BC - Mosaic detail

Alexander the Great fighting the Persian king Darius III in the battle of Issus 333 BC. Detail from mosaic from the House of the Faun, Pompeii. Displayed at Naples National Archaeological Museum, Naples, Italy. Click here to see the whole mosaic!


The portrait of Alexander is one of his most famous. Alexander's breastplate depicts Medusa (Pan-Hellenic symbol from Greek muthology), the famous Gorgon, and his wavy hair is typical of royal portraiture as established in Greek art of the fourth century B.C. He is portrayed sweeping into battle at the left, on his famous horse, Bucephalos, and focusing his gaze on the Persian leader.

Alexander Mosaic - Pompeii

Alexander Mosaic dating from circa 100 BC. It is found at House of the Faun in Pompeii. Displayed at Naples National Archaeological Museum. It depicts the battle of Issus between the armies of Alexander the Great and Darius III of Persia. Artist is unknown.

Dimensions: 582 cm × 313 cm (19ft in × 10ft 3 in in)

Reconstruction of the mosaic depiction

Attributed shield of Alexander the Great

Attributed shield of Alexander the Great

Alexander the Great round shield designed by Marto from Toledo, Spain. The same shield was used in the Oliver Stone's film 'Alexander' (2004) by actor Colin Farrell.

In the central part of the shield is depicted head of medusa, which in Greek mythology was a monster (Gorgon), generally described as having the face of a hideous human female with living venomous snakes in place of hair. Medusa was beheaded by the hero Perseus, who thereafter used her head as a weapon, until he gave it to the goddess Athena to place on her shield. Head of Gorgona was Pan-Hellenic symbol, also used by ancient Macedonians. It was depicted on Alexander's chest armor at the Alexander Mosaic (Battle of Issus) found at Pompeii.

What's new in Alexander studies (2004)

What's new in Alexander studies by Waldemar Heckel. Published in magazine Amphora (Volume 3 - Issue 1 - Spring 2004)

Visit of Alexander to the mount of Sri Pada

VISIT OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT TO THE SACRED MOUNT OF ŚRI PADA: FACT OR FICTION?

by S.S.M. Nanayakkara

Sri Pada or Adam's Peak as it was known to the early West was in the limelight from times before the recorded history of the island. Legends surrounding the sacred mount existed prior to the Christian era. It is axiomatic that worship of deities in high places is indulged in by mankind from times of remote antiquity. Indeed, high inaccessible places were held in awe and veneration from the time of man's primordial religion - worship of nature. The cult persisted in the pagan world up to the early Greek and Roman times and even later, thus Mt. Olympus in Greece was dedicated to the Greek pantheon.

Even to this day, Chomolungma (Tibetan for Goddess Mother of the World), a peak in the Himalayan range and several other peaks en route to Everest and Mt. Everest itself are held sacred by the Tibetans and Nepalese. It is recorded that Norkay Tensing and his sherpa clansmen who accompanied Edmund Hillary in his successful expedition to Mt. Everest in 1953, offered a sacrifice of food to the mountain goddess Chomolungma invoking her blessings for success of the expedition. Hillary himself buried a small crucifix given him by the leader, Colonel John Hunt. Tradition is hard to die!

Alexander's visit

By the time that Macedon's illustrious son, Alexander the Great, Greek warrior king and empire builder, is believed to have visited Śrī Pada (circa 324 B.C.), the peak was already held in veneration. After his subjugation of the Persian empire and the dependencies thereof, Alexander led his forces on to India beyond the Indus to the ancient city of Taxila. He was at last countered by Porus the Indian king and his cohorts of battle trained fighting elephants. These huge beasts were unfamiliar to the Greek cavalry to which they presented a forbidding and formidable obstacle. The terrified horses stampeded and started to scatter out of control in utter panic. On the representation of his generals, fearing mutiny by the army Alexander decided to come to terms with Porus.

After his skirmish with the Indian king, the restless Alexander decided to detour the southwest coast of India and explore further south where he had heard of the fabulous isle of Sri Lanka known to the early Greeks as ‘Taprobane'. Here reports of the sacred mount of Śrī Pada, then dedicated to the Hindu deity Saman and known as ‘Samanthakuty', attracted his attention. The peak with its proud pinnacle commanding an enchanting prospect was too much of an attraction for the pleasure-bent Alexander to resist.

Ancient artefacts

Ashraff, the 15th century Persian poet and chronicler, describes this odyssey of Alexander to Śrī Pada in his work ‘Zaffer Namah Skendari'. After landing in the island and indulging himself and his retinue in orgies and revelry he explores the wonders of the island. Here Alexander is known to have sought the assistance of the philosopher Bolinas, a celebrated Greek occultist and magician, to climb the sacred peak then supposed to be zealously guarded by various deities.

Among the artefacts devised to ascend the almost inaccessible peak were massive iron chains affixed to stanchions of the same metal secured to the bare rock face. The chains were secured to the stanchions with rivets of iron and bronze. Remains of these artefacts still exist. Early pilgrims to the peak sought the assistance of these chains to hoist themselves up to the summit.

The view of Sri Pada from a distance

The belief that Alexander visited Śrī Pada existed before Ashraff. Ibn Batuta the romantic 14th century pilgrim traveller from Tangiers in Morocco who sojourned in the island visiting the sacred mount, refers to a grotto at the foot of the peak with the name ‘Iskander' inscribed on it. This ‘Iskander' and ‘Skendari' of Ashraff are identical, both names refer to none other than the celebrated Alexander the Great himself. Notes Batuta in his memoirs:

"The ancients have cut steps of a sort on the vertical rock face, to these steps are fixed iron stanchions with suspended chains to enable pilgrims clamber up to the top with ease and minimum risk. The impression of the Almighty's foot is observed upon a black and lofty rock in an open space on the summit."

Apart from scanty and much belated Arab sources, history is strangely silent for over seventeen centuries on the visit of Alexander to the island and his journey to Śrī Pada. Neither the Great Dynastic Chronicle ‘Mahawamsa' or any other historical record of significance refer to it. Alexander's exploits were centered mainly in and around Persia and the Persian empire, the legends and folklore of the early Persians were, as a matter of course, handed over to their Arab posterity.

Commenting on the ancient artefacts on Śrī Pada, the Englishman Robert Percival, who served with the British garrison in Colombo in the early nineteenth century, notes:

"The iron chains on the rock face of Adam's Peak have the appearance of being planted there at a very early date, who placed them there or for what purpose they were set up there it is difficult for anyone to know. The beliefs and superstitions of the natives present difficulties. Whatever it is, all evidence indicates that the Peak was in the limelight long before the recorded history of the island."

Courtesy: The Island Saturday Magazine (Colombo) of 4 January 2003

Pankration, Game of all Powers

PANKRATION
(Pancration, Pancratium, Pankratium)

Known as the "Game of All Powers".

The Greek race is certainly well-known for its athletic and military achievements in the Pre-Christian era. In truth, we must credit them for both the word "athlete" and the ideal it expresses. It was also the Greek soldier who would represent the standard for the rest of the world to follow for centuries. The contribution of the Greeks to the evolution of the martial arts, as we presently know them, is now certainly evident. Fighting systems that have originated in both Eastern and Western parts of the world may indeed be linked to this ancient combat form.

Over 2000 years ago, the ancient Greeks had developed a brutal, all-out combat form which they named Pankration (pronounced pan/cray/shun or pan-crat-ee-on depending on the dialect). The term is derived from the Greek adjectives pan and kratos and is translated to mean "all powers" or "all-encompassing." First introduced into the Olympic Games of 648 BC (the same year as the horse race), Pankration would soon become the most popular and most demanding of all athletic events. It would be well to note that a subdivision, "Boy's Pankration", was added in the 2nd century BC, which indicates the popularity of the sport. Also, before we go any farther into the history, it should be noted that some historians trace Pankration's origin to the Indian Vajramushti system. There is controversy here, because Pankration and the Pyrrhic dance, a Greek armed and unarmed war-dance similar to modern karate kata, both predate Indian statues depicting temple guardians in poses similar to those used in fighting systems to follow.

In the palaestra , the Greek wrestling school, Pankration was allocated a separate room to train. It was known as the Korykeion, which was equipped with punching and kicking balls, called korykos, which hung from the ceiling beams. The smaller balls were used for punching and the larger ones for kicking, which hung about 2 feet from the floor. Pankration was taught similar to modern day karate, as it was presented in steps or stages until the student had become proficient in the movements and their combinations. After reaching a certain stage, the practitioner would then be allowed to engage in "loose play", as it is called in fencing.

Pankration integrated every physical and mental resource - hands and feet, mind and spirit - in the closest simulation of no-holds-barred competitive fighting that any culture has ever allowed. The object was, as in boxing, to force an opponent to acknowledge defeat, and to this end almost any means might be applied. Though rules were enforced by officials with a switch or stout rod, a whipping must have been more desirable than being killed, for the rules were often broken. Serious injuries and fatal accidents did occur, but they were rare, rarer probably than in ancient Greek boxing. Facing one another, much as in the position taken by wrestlers, Pankratiast's, as they were called, tried to bring one another violently to the ground. There was much preliminary sparring. Hands were bare and generally held open, although the clenched fist was used for hitting. Only biting and gouging were prohibited. Anything else went, although the tough Spartan contingent allowed these, too, in their local athletic festivals. As in Greek boxing, there were no rules against hitting a man when he was down. The techniques included a murderous mixture of Hellenic boxing and wrestling, hook and uppercut punches, full-powered kicks, elbowing and kneeing, joint locks, as well as numerous submission chokeholds. Such throws as the flying mare and various foot and leg holds, although too risky for Greek wrestling proper, were freely employed. A Pankratiast would sometimes throw himself on his back to accomplish a throw, known today as Sacrifice Throws. In this same family of throw, known as the Stomach Throw, the Pankratiast would grab his opponent by the shoulders or arms and throw himself backwards, planting his foot in his opponent's stomach, pulling him over his head. This throw is known today as TomoeNage. This technique may have been used by the ancient Egyptians, as this technique is depicted in the tombs of Beni-Hassan.

Kicking was an essential part of Pankration, especially rising kicks to the groin or stomach, and powerful leg sweeps meant to take an opponent off his feet. Kicks above the belt were used sparingly, with blows aimed to the head or face only when one's adversary was on the ground and too weakened to block or catch the attacker's foot. Due to this unique tactic alone, some combative experts credit Pankration as the first comprehensive unarmed fighting system on record. In other words, the first total martial art known!

Pankration bouts were extremely brutal and sometimes life-threatening to the competitors. Rules were minimal in number. In addition, there were no weight divisions and no time limits. The fighting arena or "ring" was no more than twelve to fourteen-feet square to encourage close-quarter action. As was mentioned earlier, referees were armed with stout rods or switches to enforce the rules against biting and gouging. The rules, however, were often broken by some participants who, realizing they were outclassed by a heavier and stronger foe, would resort to such measures to escape being seriously maimed. The contest itself continued uninterrupted until one of the combatants either surrendered, suffered unconsciousness, or, of course, was killed. Because of the high purses and honors, and the fact that there were no weight classifications, these events were generally monopolized by the "heavy weights".

As a historical note, it should be noted in this history that Plato objected to this style of fighting, because he said that it "did not teach men to keep their feet". I suppose you could "bounce" the pro's and con's of this around as long as their is time on earth.

Although knockouts were common, most Pankration battles were decided on the ground where both striking and submission techniques would freely come into play. Pankratiast's were highly-skilled grapplers and were extremely effective in applying a variety of takedowns, chokes, and punishing joint locks. Strangulation was most feared during ground combat, and was the leading cause of death in matches. A fighter would immediately raise his arm in defeat once his opponent's forearm had secured a firm grip across the windpipe or carotid artery. The Eleans especially commended strangling as a means of defeating the opponent. Their favorite stranglehold was called the "Ladder Trick". The aggressor would jump on his opponents back, wrap his legs around the body and his arms around the neck. An experienced Pankratiast would realize when his opponent had an effective grip and would acknowledge defeat.

The feats of the ancient pankratiast's became legendary in the annals of Greek athletics. Stories abound of past champions and masters who were considered invincible beings. Arrichion, Dioxxipus, and Polydamos are among the most highly-recognized names, their accomplishments defying the odds by besting multiple armed opponents in "life and death" combat, and battling and killing lions when human competition was no longer a feasible challenge. It is also theorized that the famed strongman Hercules was the first Olympic victor in Pankration. Another fact, with reference to Dioxxipus ( a friend of Alexander the Great), won the Olympic crown by default in 336 BC because no one would compete against him. Later as Alexander marched in conquest across the world, his armies carried with them elaborate tents, that were like collapsible amphitheaters. In these they practiced and played athletic games, among them Pankration. Exhibitions of superhuman strength were frequently witnessed by the awe-struck Greek people. Practitioners displayed the power of pneuma (Gr. inner energy) by breaking stones and planks with their bare fists and driving their hardened feet through forged war shields.

The Romans would later adopt Pankration into their particular athletic contests, but their modifications would degrade it to a mere blood sport. The fighters were now armed with the dreaded caestus, a weighted and spiked glove which reigned blows with deadly results. In Rome it was not unusual for such public brutality, as it was the rule rather than the exception, to quench the spectator's thirst for gore. This alteration, however, diminished the skill and aesthetic value that the Greek race had come to admire in their athletes. Rarely, if ever, did a true Greek Pankratiast participate in the savage gladiatorial arenas of Rome, even though they were often tempted by higher purses and positions within the powerful Roman empire.

Pankration was basic to the majority of the Greek warriors who served under Alexander the Great, during his invasion of India in 326 BC Many authorities now contend that this dispersal of Pankration techniques throughout the subcontinent laid the foundation for countless Asian martial arts which evolved soon thereafter, including Chinese kung fu, Okinawan karate, and Japanese jiu-jitsu. This theory has been the subject of a raging controversy for the past twenty years.

Source: Aibudo

Other Peoples Games, W. L. Adams (2003)

Other Peoples Games: The Olympics, Macedonia and Greek Athletics - Winthrop Lindsay Adams (2003)

Classical Greece by Dr. Richard Baldwin

Dr. Richard B. Baldwin is a Professor of History in Gulf Coast State College, Panama City, Florida, USA.

ALEXANDER THE GREAT

This chaos in Greece would end with Philip II (382-336) when Macedonia, whose inhabitants were related to the Greeks but nonetheless were considered by them to be barbarians, became a centralized powerful state under Philip II who became king in 359. He created a powerful army by combining the renowned Macedonian cavalry of nobles with the Greek phalanx (infantry), a formation that he and Alexander would conquer the world with! Epaminondas, the famous Theban general, had instructed a young Macedonian hostage--Philip (to secure the Theban/Macedonian alliance)--in the art of warfare. Using an infantry armed with pikes (sarissa) up to 5 meters long (Philip had lengthened them from the standard 8 feet and fitted them with a heavier iron point) that were used for thrusting at the enemy rather than throwing, the phalanx would stand firm and immovable against the enemy's front line while the cavalry attacked in wedge-shaped formations on the flanks. Once the cavalry had broken the enemy ranks, the phalanx moved forward to complete the victory.

At Chaeronea in 338 BC Philip defeated the combined forces of Athens and Thebes, killing 1,000 and taking another 2,000 captive, with his 18 year old son Alexander commanding part of the army! Philip treated Athens kindly despite Demosthenes (384-322) who had been delivering speeches against Philip (Philippics) since 351. But Greece was now his, and in 337 at a conference in Corinth he was elected general and leader of a confederacy of the Greeks, the League of Corinth, the purpose of which was to invade Persia, ostensibly to avenge the 480 BC invasion of Greece by Xerxes and to free the Greek cities of Asia, but actually Philip was in debt and could not maintain his army without fresh wealth (therefore his plan to attack Persia).

But in 336 as he was about to set out for Asia Minor, he was assassinated by a young man with a grievance. Thus Philip's son Alexander (356-323) came to the throne of Macedonia at age 20! Aristotle had tutored him for three years (beginning at age 13) in philosophy, rhetoric, geography, geometry, astronomy, biology & medicine (the last two being his favorite subjects).

After quelling a Greek rebellion, he conquered Asia Minor in 334 BC with 35,000 men (he kept a copy of the Iliad annotated by Aristotle with him as he went: Did he see himself as a second Achilles?). Then he conquered Palestine & Egypt [founded city of Alexandria after the Egyptians made him pharaoh for liberating them from the Persians.] and then went after Persia.

“Alexander's first major victory over the Persian king and general, Darius III, took place at Issus in southeastern Asia Minor in 333 B.C." Darius had around 75,000 troops to Alexander's 35,000. Darius took a position facing south with the sea on his right and the slopes of Mount Amanus on the left. He and the Immortals were in the center with his cavalry on his extreme right, hoping to overwhelm Alexander's left with a cavalry charge. Alexander was on the right of his line of troops with his general Parmenio commanding left and center. Alexander's tactic was like his father's: have the left flank advance more slowly than the right, drawing the enemy out to the breaking point. As the enemy thought the left flank was weakening and send more troops there, Alexander would break through the weakened area and cause panic as they would surround the enemy. As it happened, the Persians panicked and Darius III fled the field. He would meet Alexander again.

In the meantime, Alexander freed the Ionian poleis and replaced their Persian-imposed oligarchies with democracies. He "then moved down the eastern Mediterranean coast, overcame resistance at Tyre and Gaza (332) [where he was severely wounded in the shoulder, and all the men were killed and the women and children sold into slavery], induced submission of the Jews of Palestine, and was welcomed in Egypt as a conquering hero. There he founded the city of Alexandria, destined to become one of the greatest cities of Hellenistic civilization. Then he moved further eastward, decisively defeated the armies of Darius at Gaugamela [Persians would lose 30,00 dead to the Greek 100-500;in 331; he set fire to the palace of Xerxes at Persepolis just as Xerxes did to the Athenian acropolis], and took possession of the wealth of the eastern cities [ca. 180,00 talents of silver, not counting gold, jewels--enough in coins alone to run the Athenian empire for 200 years!]. When Darius was murdered by the Persian princes, Alexander proclaimed himself "King of Asia" and quickly accustomed himself to the divine honors paid an oriental monarch" (Perrin The New Testament 4).

By 330 discontent was growing among his troops: they were tired of fighting & marching so far from home. He began irrational after a minor plot to kill him was uncovered and he killed Parmenio and Kleitus, two of his generals. They also thought Alexander was behaving too much like a Persian by--wearing Persian dress, appointing Persians to positions of high authority, but allowing Persians to prostrate themselves on the ground when they greeted him (Greeks only did so before gods!), and by taking a Persian bride (Stateira, daughter of Darius), and arranging for 80 of his officers & 10,000 of his soldiers to marry oriental women. Later he would fall in love with and marry the Bactrian princess, Roxane, daughter of Oxyartes.

By 326 BC Alexander crossed Bactria (Afghanistan) and pushed across the river Indus. As they got deeper into India, the troops finally refused to go further than the Hyphasis River. On the return home they experienced many hardships from heat, hunger and thirst. Then Alexander experienced an almost fatal wound during the conquest of the Mallians on the way back which was to make the return even more difficult for Alexander (although it also reveals his great prowess in battle).

Alexander finally reached Babylon in 324 BC with only 25,000 of the 86,000 who began the march home. Then as he was about to circumnavigate Arabia, he died at age 32 of fever in 323 BC. Thus, Alexander died of wounds and exhaustion 13 years after successful campaigns over an area from Greece to India established him as the finest general of the ancient world.

This ends the Classical Age of Greece (and the Hellenic Period)

One cannot underestimate the impact of Alexander the Great. “Alexander was a brilliant military strategist, but there was more to his dream than military conquest. He had been tutored by Aristotle and saw himself as the apostle and emissary of the classical Greek culture. Attached to his general staff were historians, ethnographers, geographers, botanists, zoologists, mineralogists, and hydrographers. His vision was ‘one world’ (Greek oicumene), or one great ‘world city’ (Greek cosmopolis). Alexander's conquests ‘spread Hellenism in a vast colonizing wave throughout the Near East and created, if not politically, at least economically and culturally, a single world stretching from Gibraltar to the Punjab [with]...Greek koine [‘common’ or vernacular] as a lingua franca.

"The extent to which Alexander went in his attempt to create a ‘single world’ can be illustrated by two points. First, he wed Persians, including Statira, the daughter of Darius II, and Parysotis, the daughter of Artaxerxes II Ochus [and Roxana, the daughter of a Bactrian named Oxyartes of Balkh in Bactria (then eastern Persia, now northern Afghanistan)]; then he induced eighty of his officers to marry local women; in the spring of 324 B.C. during a ‘feast of fraternization’ he gave gifts to 10,000 of his men for marrying Persian women! Second, he built a network of almost thirty Greek cities throughout the empire, a building program that was expanded by later Hellenistic rulers. These became enclaves of Greek culture. Here gymnasia, baths, and theaters were built, and the upper classes spoke koine Greek, wore Greek dress, absorbed Greek learning, adopted Greek customs, and took part in Greek athletics. Palestine, the land of the ancient Hebrews (now known as "Jews from the word Judah) was no exception to this phenomenon. Furthermore, the process of Hellenization continued through the beginning of the Roman Empire (27 B.C.) and beyond, for the Romans perpetuated Greek culture" (Perrin 5).

Temple of Alexander in Bahariya Oasis

For some years, Egypt was under the control of the Persian King, and while other outside forces had ruled Egypt over the years, the Persians seem to have had few friends in Egypt. In fact, Egyptian elements had already mounted revolts, weakening the Kings hold over the country when Alexander the Great arrived at Egypt's border in the Sinai during October of 332 BC. The Egyptians, apparently seeking any relief from the Persian ruler, seem to have almost welcomed Alexander with open arms, so his armies met little resistance. Soon, he arrived with his army in Memphis, where he made an offering to the Apis bull and was crowned king of Egypt. He took as his Egyptian throne name, Setp n Ra Mery Amun.

Alexander's visit to the Western desert Siwa Oasis to consult with the Oracle of Amun, where his kingship was made divine as the son of Amun, is well documented. But apparently, this great warrior who was also one of histories grandest politicians, gained considerable respect in other areas of the Western Desert as well. Some Egyptologists believe that he may very well have traveled through the Bahariya Oasis on the way back to his new capital, Alexandria, on Egypt's northern coast. This oasis prospered considerably during his rule, and counted among its population many Greeks.

The temple of Alexander the Great located in the Bahariya Oasis has the distinction of being the Macedonian ruler's only known temple in Egypt. The temple was built during Alexander's lifetime and dedicated to Amun and Horus.

Ahmed Fakhry never found the stela of Tuthmose II that he was searching for when he stumbled across the temple in 1938, but this discovery, very near the (then unknown) Valley of the Golden Mummies, most certainly made up for that failure. It was to be Fakhry's last day in the Bahariya Oasis and he was exploring a spring called Ain el-Tabinieh, about three miles west of El Qasr (Bawiti), that had been mentioned by Sir Gardner Wilkinson in 1837. Here, he discovered a mound surrounded by stones that he thought might be a New Kingdom temple.

He recorded the location of the ruins, but with his funds depleted, he was forced to leave the Oasis. He would return in 1942 with enough resources to complete the excavation, and it was not until then that he discovered the true nature of his find from blocks carved with the cartouches of Alexander the Great. Later, from 1993 to 1994, Zahi Hawass, the current chairman of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA), re-excavated the site, including several rooms that had never been cleared. Some excavation of the temple appears to be ongoing, though it is now open to the public1.

The temple proper is fairly large by any standard, and certainly one of the largest in the Bahariya Oasis, with at least 45 chambers built of mudbrick and encased in sandstone. Located only three hundred yards from the Valley of the Golden Mummies, a necropolis that was probably situated purposefully near the temple, the entrance to the temple was on the south end of the structure, accessed through a gate.

Just outside the temple, a red granite altar was discovered. It should be noted that red granite is not found in any of the western oasis, so it must have been carried a great distance to the temple through the vast desert, presumably by donkeys.

Just to the right of the entrance to the temple is a scene that depicts, unfortunately, only the lower half of two individuals facing each other. It is probable that one of these individuals is Alexander the Great, dressed as a traditional Egyptian pharaoh, making offerings to a principle Egyptian deity.

However, on the lower register on the north wall of the second room which was covered by debris, Alexander is revealed. This relief, which retains some of its original colors, depicts Alexander offering two vessels that may contain Bahariya wine as an offering to Horus and Isis. The god, Horus, and the goddess, Isis, both hold a scepter on one hand an the ankh symbol in the other. In the background a priest wearing a long robe stands, holding incense and an unknown tool, and an offering table bearing bread, meat, cucumbers, pomegranates and other fruits, along with vessels for ointments is also displayed.

In another carved relief, Alexander makes an offering of incense to the god, Amun, who is followed by various goddesses, one of which is probably Mut, Amun's consort. In this scene, the governor and high priest of the Oasis stand behind the pharaoh with offerings of incense. Just visible in the depiction is an offering table laden with bread, meat, vegetables, wine and flowers.

Surrounding the temple complex were auxiliary storage rooms and houses that were probably used by guards and priests. There is, on the east side of the temple, a building that was possibly used for administrative purposes. Only two of the buildings chambers were roofed with large limestone blocks, originally inscribed with Greek graffiti which is now lost.

One of perhaps the most interesting artifacts found in the temple complex is a bronze statue of a royal lady who Zahi Hawass believes may have been the wife of Alexander the Great. A small statue of a priest of Re was also discovered in one of the temple corridors. but a number of smaller artifacts were discovered in and about the temple, including Greek, Roman and Coptic pottery shards, painted vases, fragments of bronze statues, Greek amulets, and coins from the 5th and 6th centuries, AD. Some of the pottery discovered with rectangular marks and human figures appear to be of Semitic origin from Asia, while other shards and lamps are from the Coptic Period and later. These discoveries have led Egyptologists to believe that Christians probably inhabited the temple until about the 12th century AD, and some chambers may have been occupied as dwellings into the Middle Ages.

Source: The Nile Pharaon

Alexander the Great Marathon - 2012

Posters from the 7th International Marathon "Alexander the Great", Pella - Thessaloniki 01.04.2012.

Lion Hunt - Mosaic

According to many scholars, hunters from the mosaic are Alexander the Great and Craterus.

Mosaic from ancient Pella, Macedonia, Greece.

Alexander the Great Marathon

The Alexander The Great Marathon (Greek: Μαραθώνιος Μέγας Αλέξανδρος) is an annual marathon race which is held between Pella and Thessaloniki, Greece, in Mid-April.

First held in 2006, the race begins at the birthplace of Alexander the Great and finishes in what was the last capital of Ancient Macedonia, Thessaloniki. It received IAAF Bronze Label Road Race status in 2010, and it is an AIMS-certified race. In addition to the marathon race, the day's events include popular fun runs over five and ten kilometres.

Mark Philippoussis - Australian tennis pro

Mark Anthony Philippoussis (Greek: Μαρκ Φιλιππούσης; born 7 November 1976) is an Australian tennis player. He turned professional in 1994. His father is Greek, while his mother is of Italian ancestry. His career-high singles ranking was World No. 8.

His father Nick Philippoussis is Macedonian Greek immigrant living in Melbourne, Australia. Because of his Greek ancestry from Macedonia, Mark on his right arm tattooed face profile of Alexander the Great.

Mark Philippoussis at the Australian Formula One Grand Prix in Melbourne earlier this year

The Philippeion - Ancient Olympia

The Ruins of the Philippeion

The Olympia site had great religious significance and was the location which Alexander's father Philip II chose to begin building a temple-like structure called the Philippeion as a votive offering to the gods after his victory at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 BC. Inside, located on semi-circular plinths, were placed gold and ivory statues of the Macedonian royal family including Alexander (materials usually reserved for the gods) in honour of the dynasty of Macedonian kings. The building was reportedly completed by Alexander.

The Philippeion was a circular structure of stone and marble which featured a colonnade of 18 Ionic columns around the porch or peristyle and an inner colonnade of 9 Corinthian half-columns around the wall and a roof of carved marble tiles and crowned with a bronze poppyhead.

So anyone honoring the statue of Zeus in his temple had only to walk a very short distance in order to also gaze upon the figure of Alexander.

Reconstruction of the Philippeion

Bust of Alexander - British Museum

Marble portrait (bust) of a young Alexander the Great. From Hellenistic era, between 2nd and 1st century BC.

Found in Alexandria, present-day Egypt. Displayed in the British Museum, London.

Μαρμάρινο πορτραίτο (προτομή) του Μεγάλου Αλεξάνδρου. Από την ελληνιστική εποχή, μεταξύ του 2ου και του 1ου αιώνα π.Χ.

Βρέθηκε στην Αλεξάνδρεια, Αίγυπτος. Εκτίθεται στο Βρετανικό Μουσείο.

Influence of Cyrus upon Alexander

CYRUS THE GREAT AND HIS INFLUENCE UPON ALEXANDER THE GREAT

by Alexandros Kallistos

Cyrus the Great was much admired by Alexander and this admiration illuminates many of Alexander's actions in the Orient. He was a successsful military leader and a tolerant ruler. A better understanding of Cyrus helps us to understand Alexander.

One of the historical figures most admired by Alexander the Great is also most often overlooked; he is Cyrus the Great. Alexander revered and respected the achievements of Cyrus. He visited his tomb and took stern measures against those who had allowed it to be desecrated.

Even a brief look at the life of Cyrus will at once reveal to you why Alexander so admired Cyrus as their careers display a salient parallel. Both were born princes and became kings in small outland kingdoms and both sought through conquest to enlarge them. Some outstanding differences shall at once occur to anyone who studies this parallel.

To quote Charles Freeman in his book, "The Greek Achievement" - "In scope and extent his achievements ranked far above that of the Macedonian king, Alexander ("the great") who was to demolish the empire in the 320's but fail to provide any stable alternative."

There is ample opportunity for debate in this statement, but there is indeed, some truth in it. Cyrus created the greatest empire the world had ever seen and his successors added to it; this cannot be said of Alexander. There are certainly extenuating circumstances in the short life of Alexander, but the fact remains that he did not create an empire; the great conqueror, conquered.

In past years Alexander has been lauded as an enlightened ruler with a vision of the brotherhood of man, but here too it must be pointed out that he was following the previously written and implemented policies of Cyrus which had been in place for years.

Cyrus must be credited with creating the first human rights document in history. The stone cylinder now in The British Museum clearly states his policy of toleration of individual cultures and religions. He presents himself as a liberator rather than a conqueror and is scrupulous in his public support of all the many religions which he encounters. It was Cyrus The great who freed the Jews from their many years of slavery in Babylon and sent 40,000 of them back to Israel with lavish gifts to enable the building of a great temple to their God.

It can be argued that it is only through this apparent and magnificent benevolence that it was possible to rule so vast and diverse an empire, but whether it was benevolence or pragmatism, it was very much admired throughout the world and emulated, not innovated, by Alexander.

As Westerners we receive our early knowledge of the Persian Empire from the most hostile of sources, the Greeks and therefore, our perception of this culture is based upon highly biased information. Despite their understandably antagonistic disposition towards the Persians, the Greeks were impelled to grant a grudging admiration to the governance of Cyrus. Xenophon's "Cyropaedia" was well known through the world into the Roman Era. Publius Fabius Scipio is said to have had a copy of it with him at all times. It is impossible that Alexander was unfamiliar with this work and it would appear that his attempt at governing his great empire was based upon a foreknowledge of Cyrus through Xenophon and others. Again we see Alexander as not innovating a government based upon a concept of humanitarianism. but rather taking over an established system of governance which had proven to be eminently successful over the years.

An understanding of the life and works of Cyrus the Great at once illuminates many of the acts of Alexander which seem so problematic without this background. In many cases actions which appear so contra to traditional Greek culture are so indeed, as Alexander in the Orient is not emulating the ideas of his Greek teachers; he is following diligently in the footsteps of Cyrus the Great. Once again the pragmatist Alexander has astutely recognized a good thing and commandeered it.

If, through the millennia, Alexander scholars have swallowed whole the concept of his enlightened and anti racist benevolence, the cause is their own racial bias which prevents them from seeing Cyrus as the originator of all the humanitarian ideas accredited to Alexander.

Cyrus was not just a great conqueror, he was a great and innovative ruler. The original and unprecedented governmental structure which he created endured long past his time and past the time of Alexander. It was the genius of Cyrus which created this tolerant style of governance and it was the genius of Alexander which allowed him to transcend the cultural imperatives of his day and accept Persian ideas, something the Greeks never forgave.

The links to the left of this page will provide you with most of the knowledge we have of Cyrus the Great. Until quite recently there has been a scarcity of ancient Persian writings available and few translations published. Our primary sources are spare. We have been fortunate to have found in the ruins of Persopolis a large number of inscribed clay tablets. Originally of unbaked clay they would not have survived but for Alexander's burning of the city founded by Cyrus. The flames baked them hard.
The tomb of Cyrus the Great one of the remains at Pasargadae (present-day Iran), visited by Alexander the Great in 324 BC.

Macedonian Lion - MD Banner

Banners: Macedonian Lion (Lion of Macedon) - Macedonia Documents

Alexander and cult of Achilles

"At Achilles tomb, O fortunate youth, to have found Homer as the herald of your glory!"

Alexander the Great, 334 BC
(Cicero, Pro Archia 24)

A Hero’s Hero – Alexander and Achilles

Alexander conquered most of the known world of his time. His empire stretched from Macedonia to Persia to Egypt to the North-Western border of India. He was a legend even during his time. There was speculation about whether he was god or demon, because of the kind of superhuman feats he performed. He himself believed that he was the son of Zeus-Ammon, a thought that was probably reinforced and kindled by his courtiers. It probably started as a mere whim in the oasis of Siwah, however, it later took roots in the depths of his being, and his self-aggrandizement blinded him to the reality that after all he was merely human. And it is this fact, that he was after all a mere human being that makes him stand out; that makes you take notice of his unbelievable achievements. Here was a man, who walked in flesh and blood, a man who went on to conquer the whole world before he was thirty-two.

Alexander III the Great before the Tomb of Achilles, Giovanni Paolo Pannini, ca. 1718-1719 (Baroque)

Such has been the impact of Alexander’s influence on the world that his legend lives on. Even today, 2300 years after his death. He appears as a character in epics and fables across various cultures in Asia and North Africa, sometimes as a god, sometimes as a two-horned demon, and sometimes as a beast. In India, he is popularly referred to by the name ‘Sikandar’, and his name is synonymous with being the best, the ace, the invincible. There is a proverb in Hindi, which loosely translates to ‘The one who wins is called Alexander’. Whether you view him as a hero or a bloodthirsty villain, who brought death and destruction to wherever he went, you will find it difficult to argue against his magnetism. His magnetism is probably a result of his skills as a warrior, his leadership, his unbending will and determination, his unbridled curiosity, his passion to be the best, his passion to emulate his hero, Achilles!

Alexander was tutored by none other than Aristotle, the great Greek philosopher. Aristotle was persuaded by Alexander’s father, King Phillip, to leave Athens and come to Macedonia to tutor his son. Athens, at that time was the high ground of Greek culture and the Athenians took great pride in their urban way of life, their literature and poetry, their sophisticated taste, and above all, their democracy. They looked down upon the barbaric and upstart autocrat Phillip, from pastoral Macedonia, even though he had emerged as the ‘Hegemon’, sort of leader of leaders among Greek city states. The fact that Aristotle still chose to go to Macedonia, against possible public opinion to the contrary, in my view, points to the importance attached to money and status. Even in those days, even for a philosopher such as Aristotle! I might be wrong, but that’s just my hypothesis. Anyway, I digress! Let’s come back to Alexander and Achilles.

Aristotle brought with him, Homer’s Iliad, and Alexander fell in love with it. The character that fascinated him and captured his imagination was Achilles, the great Greek warrior. When Achilles took part in a battle, victory was assured, and when he turned away, defeat was inevitable. Aristotle told Alexander to be like Achilles, the undaunted, the spectacular, the invincible. It is said that young Alexander was so fascinated with the Iliad that he carried it around with him wherever he went and even slept with the book under his pillow; a habit that he carried into his youth. He always looked for opportunities to emulate Achilles – in war, in love, in the call of duty, in everything.

In war, Alexander was death incarnate. Alexander’s name was enough to strike terror in the hearts of the enemy and I believe that the battles that he won towards the later part of his military career was largely due to this fear. Like Achilles, who was a guarantee for victory in any battle that he fought, Alexander led his troops from the front and set an example for his Companions and his army. Like Achilles, Alexander was fearless and went into any challenge with the belief that he could win. He suffered many near-fatal wounds in his 11 year-long military campaign. Like Achilles, Alexander had a quick and wild temper. He set fire to the town of Thebes, as a punishment for their revolt, much like Achilles and his army did to the Asian city of Troy. Alexander, in a fit of rage, once tied the body of an African who was fighting for the Persians, to his chariot and drove it around the castle that the African was protecting. Readers of Iliad will be able to draw a comparison with the way Achilles tied Hector’s body to his chariot and drove it around the city of Troy.

In large-heartedness, Alexander always looked to set an example to others. After defeating the Persian king Darius in the Battle of Issus, Alexander got hold of a lot of Darius’ wealth and his family including his mother, wife, and daughters. Alexander treated Darius’ family with respect, likening Darius’ mother to his own mother and gave orders to his army that the women were to be shown respect befitting their royal status. Like Achilles, who, protected Briseis during the battle of Troy.

Capriccio of Classical Ruins with Alexander the Great Opening the Tomb of Achilles, Giovanni Niccolo Servandoni (1695-1766)

In love and companionship Alexander could be blind, very much like Achilles, who loved his companion Patroclus more than his own life. Alexander knew of the deep bond between Achilles and Patroclus, and wanted to have a Patroclus of his own. He found Hephaestion at Aristotle’s academy, who he struck a deep friendship with. Alexander and Hephaestion were like soul mates and their relationship was always more important to Alexander than the relationship with his wives and mistresses. After Hephaestion’s death, Alexander went in deep mourning, to the extent that his army thought that he would die too. Very much like Achilles mourned the death of his beloved Patroclus at the hands of Hector. The relationships between Achilles and Patroclus and also Alexander and Hephaestion has been a source of a lot of debate in recent years. Were they friends or were they homosexual lovers? The problem with this debate is that we are viewing these relationships with the lens of our culture, however, in Ancient Greek culture there were no words to distinguish homosexual and heterosexual. Homoeroticism was quite common in ancient Greece, as common as heterosexual relationships.

Alexander, all his life, tried to emulate Achilles, in everything that he did. The historical existence of Achilles has not been proven yet and he remains a character in a play, however, Alexander was real. Alexander walked the earth in flesh and blood. Alexander was human. Yes, a complex human with the capacity to show extreme cruelty and extreme compassion, but he was still only a human. A human who chose to live like a hero.

Source: Lined with Gold

Alexander Visiting the Tomb of Achilles, Oil on canvas, 18th century. By Antonio Joli, Crocker Art Museum

Alexander the Great in front of the tomb of Achilles, Hubert Robert (1733 -1808), around 1754

Pannini, Giovanni Paolo - Alexander III the Great before the Tomb of Achilles - Baroque - Mythology - Oil on canvas

Alexander before the tomb of Achilles by Johann Heinrich Schonfeld, 1630

Alexander the Great at the Grave of Achilles, Aert Jansz. van Marienhof, oil on canvas

Kesik tepe: perhaps the tomb of Achilles

Alexander’s pothos, a painful restlessness

ALEXANDER'S POTHOS

Written by irina

I wanted to understand what made Alexander break so many unwritten laws of the Greeks and adopt all those strange customs of the Asians, that amazed and upset his generals and soldiers. It seems that the Greek word "pothos" might be a clue in this matter.

Pothos means desire, longing for, regret, want. When you first look at this translation you may be surprised to find want, desire and regret all in the same word. But if you try to think about it, you will find this makes sense. Within most of us is a need to learn, to develop, to achieve our potential. It is this painful restlesness that pothos expresses.

Never satisfied...

Alexander was this kind of person; a restless spirit, never satisfied with what he had, always longing for more. He was thirsty for knowledge, amazed at the great spectacle of the world. His face shows passion and energy. He is impulsive and has the will to win. He wants to expand his horizons and live his life to the full. He has a very complex personality, a mixture of light and shadows, impulsivness and calm, selfisness and a great need to be loved, blamable vices and incredible virtues.

The Greeks hate disorder and everything that can't be rationally explained. Alexander is tempted by everything that is unknown, he likes the risk. Unlike the Greeks Alexander was highly imaginative.The Greek soul lacked those feelings that express the restlesness and the will to reach unbounded territories and explore new and unknown things.

Travels

The famous traveller of the Greek antiquity, Odysseus, travelled unwillingly and all he wanted was to return home. Reading the Odyssey we find the same word, pothos; the same desire (but not to descover new, unknown things); Odysseus just misses his home land. To have the whole world, even to have immortality is meaningless if you don't have a place to come to, if you don't belong somewhere. Odysseus's journey is a voyage of self discovery. To have a better knowledge of yourself is one of the most cherished ideas of the Greeks. It was even the most important point in Socrates' philosophy: "Know thyself". Knowledge was virtue, and only by knowing one's self, one can become a better person.

Both Odysseus and Alexander want to have a better knowledge: Alexander wants to know and conquer the world, Odysseus wants to return home, to himself. You may believe that they share the same feeling. And yet this is not very exact. Odysseus was away from home (he had been punished by the gods), he didn't travel willingly; while Alexander wanted to do this, he could not rest at home, he wanted more, he felt he deserved more. (And what Phillip once told him is very significant: "My son,look for yourself another kingdom, Macedonia is too small for you.")

Alexander had inside him that urge to win and was this together with a supreme self-confidence that led him to victory.

Greek contact with Eastern gardens

GREEK CONTACT WITH EASTERN GARDENS

But sometimes a mighty impulse came from outside. The raids of Alexander the Great opened to the Greeks the whole of Asia and all its elaborate garden culture. Before then individual persons had extolled the marvels of Oriental parks, and the Greeks of Asia Minor, living so near to Persians and other Oriental peoples, were far ahead of the Mother Country in the love and care of gardens. Darius I. had praised a satrap for transplanting fruits into Asia Minor from the other side of the Euphrates. After the Persian wars there arose a lively interest in parks, even in Greece itself. If it is true (as Plutarch alleges) that the satrap Tissaphernes laid out a very lovely park in honour of Alcibiades and gave it his name, he could obviously get no result from his courtly flattery unless he could assume that Alcibiades would feel an interest in the park and an affection for it. Xenophon, too, describes the Persian paradises that he saw on his march, with the confessed intention that his fellow-countrymen should have a pattern before them which they could and must imitate.

Alexander himself brought his passionate love of hunting from his wild forest-home to the countries he conquered. In India he found groves and woods shut in by walls, well watered, with plenty of big game, but he shot his lions from a raised platform. The paradise of Bazisda was so rich in game that four thousand head could be brought down to serve as a feast for the whole army. On his return from India Alexander crowned his men with ivy, and as this plant did not grow in the parks of Babylon, he ordered it to be transplanted. Harpalus, to whom he had entrusted the care of the park, had no success with ivy, though he did wonderfully well with the acclimatisation of Greek plants, making the lime, and after much trouble even the box, at home there.

Alexander throughout took pains that the parks should be well looked after, and when he found at Pasargadae on his way back that the tomb of Cyrus in the royal paradise had been neglected and robbed, he punished severely the Magi, the hereditary guardians. With the wish to see the gardens of Semiramis, at the foot of the mountain of Bahgistan, he made a detour on his march from Celonæ to the Crack Willows of Nyasa. The king loved, as Oriental princes did, to do his business in the paradise. He received his generals there, he sat on a golden throne with his counsellors on silver-footed stools. And when he came sick to Babylon, he had himself carried to the great park on the far side of the Euphrates that he might die there.

The successors of Alexander always felt that they were the heirs of great princes of the East, and loved to cultivate the luxury of gardens and fine parks. They tried for the joys of acclimatising foreign plants on a large scale. The Seleucids planted the cinnamon in Syria, the anemone and spikenard in Arabia. Finally Egypt, being now just as accessible to Greece as Western Asia was, contributed a new splendour to the wide parks and gardens with her own experience of flowers, now some thousands of years old. The Greeks were astonished to find fresh flowers growing the whole year through, and under the Ptolemies cultivation was encouraged by the extravagant demand for flowers at their festivities. No longer were people content to have them for head or breast, but the hall itself had to be dressed out with flowers in the Egyptian style. At a great feast which Ptolemy Philadelphus gave in the winter he had flowers spread over the floor of his tent in such glorious abundance that it really looked like a heavenly meadow.

Besides the Oriental influence, there was another thing that encouraged the gardening art—the development of large towns in the Hellenic world. It was difficult for the inhabitants, with the ground walled round and thickly built over, to get to any open land. So, as they became richer, they were impelled to seek Nature, who had become more and more of a stranger, by bringing her into the towns and making town gardens handsome and large. It was not really a new thing for the Greeks; but it was carried out now on a large scale.

In Alexandria the public gardens and royal gardens together occupied one-fourth of the whole area of the town ; they were all connected with each other, and situated both inside and outside the walls. Especially do we hear of the garden of the Museum, where scholars were wont to walk, of the Great Gymnasium, and of the grove of the Dicasterion which was in the middle of the town. South of it was the Paneion, a curious place : there was an artificial hill with corkscrew paths to go up by, and from the top one enjoyed a panorama of the town. Nothing is said about trees there, but the pleasant walk is an argument for them, since similar places of a later time and even in our own day are always provided with shade on the slope whereby we climb to see the view.

In the suburbs and the outer parts of the towns abundance of the most beautiful gardens lay. Strabo saw near the Necropolis many gardens in which family tombs were to be found.

In another way also the Oriental fashion affected and extended Greek usage. At one time the Greeks set up a grove round the specially honoured graves only, in order to protect a sacred spot from desecration, and in the classical period such graves were in the gymnasiums or the parks, or other places where the Greek games were held. Also the resting-place of Athenian victors, the Ceramicos, which Cimon moved from the Dipylon to the Academy, was planted with avenues of trees. Although it is stated that Herodes Atticus lies buried in the stadium, we must not look for his grave in the racecourse itself, but in the park grounds on the hill which belonged to the stadium, inasmuch as people named the whole estate after the game-place, as in the case of gymnasiums.; and in the Academy at Athens a monument was set up to Philiscus the sophist. It is even uncertain whether Plato is buried in the gymnasium : it is far more likely that by Academy, where the grave was found. Diogenes Laertius meant Plato’s own garden. The pupils who later paid Heroic honours to their great master will have kept the grave in the garden of the school. About the grave of Theophrastus this is quite certain, for (as was mentioned before) he enjoined on his friends to keep a suitable place in the garden for his own tomb. Thus we see how the philosophers set an example for family graves.

No wonder that in Hellenistic times the rich devoted some specially-cared-for bit of their lovely parks to the purpose of a family burying-ground, or else made themselves graves in their own separate plot. Later on—but there is no proof of it till the fifth century A.D.—a word was coined for graves that had gardens round them, the word Cerotaphion.

Antioch was even more renowned for lovely gardens than Alexandria. The town had a wonderful site. The main street was a long continuous portico, with houses on one side, and on the other side gardens that extended right to the foot of the mountain : they contained all manner of summer-houses, baths and fountains, which, however, did not appear on the hill, “so as not to destroy the impression of regularity.” A second street reaches to the Orontes. In front of the West Gate the road passes through a wonderful suburb called Heraclea; farther on one gets to the famous park called Daphne after 7.5 kilometres of vines and roses on the south of Antioch. From this park the whole great estate took the extra name of Epidaphne. This too was originally a sacred grove which enclosed the Τερτνος the asylum with the temple of Apollo and Artemis. The great shady park had a circumference of eighty stadia. The springs here were more abundant than the earth had ever beheld, and the wonderful cypresses, three hundred in number, were, according to tradition, planted by the Seleucids.

Later generations could not say enough of the beauty of the baths, the portico, the places of amusement. The crowds found excellent hostels where vines grew even in the rooms, while in the gardens were wafted to them the aromatic odours of the flower-beds. Daphne is praised as the fairest spot on earth.

Syria is reported to have developed the art of gardening with special success. Pliny, too, reports that the Syrian gardens are the most perfect. Next to Daphne the park most admired was that at Batnæ: the Emperor Julian visited it, but found only a useful fruit-garden, and in the middle of it flower-beds and vegetables. Round about there were other trees planted in regular order, and the emperor specially praises a fine cypress-grove full of well-formed trees.

But it was not only the Greeks in Asia who thought it important to adorn their towns with gardens : in the much smaller places in the Mother Country there was an attempt to follow their example. In descriptions of Greek cities which we get from Heracleides in the third century much is said of gardens, and he especially praises Thebes, which is the best of all. In summer-time the quantity of water and the greenness of the hills made a wonderful impression.

In Hellenistic times the private house seems to have been a very modest affair in comparison with public places. It is true that Demosthenes grumbles that private buildings are better than public, but this is only in relation to past times. There may no doubt have been certain individual gardens on a larger scale, such as those of Plato and Epicurus: in the fourth century a man of means made himself a garden when his neighbour gave up his ground, but this would be an exception. One need only look at the plan of a town like Priene, that was newly founded in the fourth century, to see how incredibly small were the Greek dwelling-houses ; but all the same it is to these that we must look for the chance of developing fine court gardens at a later time.

The Greek house is really a court-house, i.e. the living-rooms face on the open court, on one side of which is a hail supported by pillars. Out of this originated the peristyle found later on in all the good houses, a court with a portico all round it. In most private dwellings that have as yet been dug up this court is paved, so that it cannot have been planted with flowers, although the Homeric Age did know garden courts. But what was possible for a royal palace was for a long time to come beyond the possibilities of the modest dwellings of private citizens.

Greek houses in Priene

In Priene itself all the courts are paved. The statues discovered in the courts of certain well-to-do houses, especially in that house in the Theatre street where a bearded Hermes and a lion in terra-cotta were found in what seems to be their old place, lead us to believe that there were also pot plants between the statues, put there to make the court a pleasant place in which to stay. Another house at Priene may possibly have had a strip of garden, for there is a pretty portico opening on to a narrow strip which most likely was planted as a garden terrace. And the so-called House of the Priest at Olympia distinctly proves that in rather larger places the court was planted, for here traces are shown by excavation. It is obvious that as the affluence of the upper class and their love of private life increased, the peristyle (expansible at need as it had no roof like that of the Roman atrium to limit its size) would be made use of for plants. We can see this development and also its contrast with the Italian atrium house which entirely forbids the possibility of such gardens, and can really understand it when we study Pompeii ; but this is to stray too far into the days of the Roman Empire. Still, as we might expect, Hellenism had already converted the peristyle into a fine garden court, and what excavations cannot yet tell us we must get from literature.

FIG. 56. THE FARNESE BULL—A PARK GROUP

In the time of the Diadochi, when the great influence of the East was again making itself felt, these court gardens on which the state rooms opened were set up very luxuriously. Even a temporary erection (apparently put up just for a feast), as for example the Great Tent of Ptolemy Philadelphus, erected by him outside the city of Alexandria, was supplemented with fine garden courts. The huge dining-room, arranged with all imaginable expense for three hundred guests, opened out on the peristyle. The walls of the portico were hung round with rugs and choice skins, but the open space in the middle was planted with box and myrtle and other shrubs, and flowers bloomed gaily between. Up to the tent marched a procession, with various chariots representing the triumph of Bacchus. On one of these Semele the mother of the god was carried. She lay in a wonderfully devised grotto overgrown with ivy and other creepers, with doves fluttering around her. In the actual grotto were two streams flowing with milk and honey. Then above the colossal statue of Bacchus was a canopy of vine and ivy and autumn fruits.

Grottoes of every sort and kind were made. Pliny tells of a plane, a tree which liked to have its roots near a spring, that it grew in Lycia to such a huge circumference that a grotto was made in the hollow trunk, decked out with pumice and moss, so large that eighteen people could dine in it. And in a park such artificial grottoes were often made, Even in a modest park (described by Alciphron) in the neighbourhood of a Greek town, possibly Corinth, there stood an ivy-clad rock grown over with laurel and planes and encompassed with myrtle. At intervals nymphs were stationed, and behind them stood Pan gazing at the nymphs. With all this ornament one may safely guess at grottoes inside the rock. The rest of the garden arrangements at this villa are quite modest—only groups of cypress, myrtle and a small flower-garden.

To what an imposing park may we fly in fancy if we would behold a grotto-hill in the lands of a wealthy Rhodian, on whose summit there stands a work of art like the Farnese Bull (Fig. 56)! Only when one tries to imagine it thus is it possible to see how this work (which in the Museum appears in spite of its huge size to be capricious, unrestful and even bewildering) acquires life and significance, for here the grotto-like plinth is shown by the artist as it emerges from the greenery around it. All the outside detail—herdsmen, animals—can be understood in the proper natural surroundings, where, though the eye sees them not, the central group is strikingly exalted beneath the open sky.

Such gardens, of which this is only one type, were used by the rich as a background and theatre for their gluttonous feasts as well as for their daily life. They had become indispensable to Hiero II., who probably links up with an unbroken tradition of princely gardens in Sicily. Like most Eastern monarchs, he conducted all State business in the garden, nor would he part with it even on the water. He had had built a gigantic pleasure- ship that was to exhibit to the eye both his magnificence and his glory as a warrior, and on this ship he put a garden. The vessel was built by Archias of Corinth, and Archimedes contributed very remarkable devices to it, On the upper deck a gymnasium and walks proportionate to the dimensions of the ship were arranged. Here were beds containing all sorts of plants confined by strips of lead. The walks were shaded by ivy and vines, their roots getting nourishment from pots of earth, which were watered in the same way as the beds. In addition to all this there was an Aphrodision, its floor interlaid with precious stones and agate. It was profusely decorated with pictures and statues, but it had only room for three chairs, Another equally elegant garden house had a small select library. Where the two basins, of which we are also told, were placed, cannot be determined. One that was filled with sea-water and contained fish must be supposed to be open and on the upper deck, probably in connection with the garden.

It is quite evident that Hiero made in the scanty space of a ship’s deck a little garden of costly workmanship. The Greek architect has made use of all the constituents of the garden as we know it. And incomparably the greatest are gymnasiums and promenade paths. These “peripatoi “ again show the connection, not of the paths alone, but of all that portion of the garden designed for pleasure-walks. The beds in their leaden frames can have held only flowers and such plants as have short roots ; ivy and vines, whose roots strike deeper, were put into tall pots. The pergolas made by these give the shade required, which otherwise, in the lack of lofty trees, the ship could not have enjoyed. Two fine pavilions and a fish-pond complete the whole, showing once more the intimate alliance between gymnasium and pleasure-garden. The first must be thought of as a small place, perhaps surrounded by a light portico and lying among the flower-beds.

In this manner we obtain a picture of the way in which the private gardens and parks of princes and other great men in the wide tracts of country now open to them were laid out. Unfortunately we have no definite description of a villa garden extant at that time; here, too, we have to reach our conclusions by working backward from the days of Roman emperors, where the streams flow more abundantly, and so we arrive at the Greek culture which was the mistress of Rome.

It is only in very late Greek authors that we find in a natural return to the past a description of gardens, that is to say in the love-stories of the rhetorical sophists and romancers, who flourished from about the second to the sixth century A.D. But though these tales come from so late a time, they are really imitations of a kind of poetry that began in the Alexandrine Age with the Idyll. Just as the idyll takes the open country for its background, so does the romancer love to take the garden. The constant repetitions and stereotyped phrases of such descriptions point to prototypes from a much earlier art, and from another side lead us to look at later imitations in the Byzantine epoch, indicating that garden culture, with its unbroken tradition from the antique world, has been further preserved in the Byzantine Middle Age. To be sure, the garden in Greek love-stories presents an unusual scene. It is not the public park, neither is it the seat of a magnificent prince ; it is the rural farm-garden, and only now and then can we see the rare traces of a larger scope of interest. Such farm-gardens did as a fact always exist in Greece : the classical example being the garden of Alcinous.

As conditions must always be determined by reasons of utility, there has been little change at any period. Longus* does certainly call that garden a paradise which Daphnis made with the aid of his foster-father Lamon, watering it and getting it ready with all possible care and pains for the visit of their landlord ; and the word paradise generally implies at this date an ornamental garden rather than a garden for useful products - in other words a park. In the story it is “after the fashion of kings,” one stadium in length [185 metres], with a lovely view over the plain, whence one can look down on travellers and on the sea and the ships as they go by, and so the view is really a feature of the garden.

Longus knows very well that such a site as this is demanded in a Hellenistic garden, and even in Homer the garden of the Phæacians stands high or else on the slope of the hill. In the middle rises a temple, and beside it an ivy-clad altar to Dionysus, and this gives an artistic unity to the picture which is absent from the garden of Alcinous. The greater part of it is naturally occupied with fruit-trees, in kinds not much more numerous than Homer's, and between the trees are vines. The garden is enclosed by rows of cypresses, laurels, firs and planes, all planted at equal distances and entangling their higher branches one with another, with ivy also growing like the vines between the other trees. Flowers, too, are not forgotten : there are always the same kinds : roses, violets, hyacinths, narcissi. Like Homer, Longus requires of his garden that it shall bring forth flowers at every time of the year. In spite of the insistence on park-like surroundings, this is distinctly a garden for use of the same nature as that other one which Longus thus describes : “ I have called my own a garden, wherein I may rest in the leisure of old age; it yields a harvest according to the season of the year: in spring roses, lilies, hyacinths, and both kinds of violets ; in summer pears, and all the apples ; and now the vine, the fig, the pomegranate, and the green myrtle. One might fancy it was a sacred grove.”

And just as it appears in the story, so is it described by the theoretic writers of that day, whose works are collected in the Geoponica. Close by the house, we learn from this, is the proper place for a garden, not only for the enjoyment of its beauty, but that its sweet smell may fill the air and make the home healthy; for, as we learn elsewhere, the neighbourhood of a garden is most necessary for health, as it helps a convalescent to recover.

Plants must not be mixed up or put in without order as though the differences added to their beauty, as some say, but the individual ones must be carefully separated from one another, in order that the larger kinds may not rob the smaller of their nourishment. Between trees may be set lilies, roses, violets and crocuses ; these by their look, their scent, and their uses, are most pleasing; moreover, they increase the revenues of the place and supply food for bees. So order in arrangement is the first requisite, that same order displayed by Egyptian gardens thousands of years ago, and in Homer’s sterner pictures. The garden of Alcinous is the pattern for the romances ; with passion they cry, “ Blest were the Phæacians, not because they sprang from gods, but in that before all else they prized their gardens.” Thus begins one description, and the phrase, “ I feel as if I were in the garden of Alcinous,” often occurs.

Most of the stories show a kind of architectural unanimity in laying special emphasis on the middle part. In Longus this is a temple and an altar, and in most of the others there is water set up in different ways. Sometimes it is a fountain splashing into a square basin of clever design appearing among the flowers. This water acts like a mirror, showing us two gardens, the real one and its reflection. A portico runs all round the garden, and between the flowering and shady trees are set ivy and vines trained on sticks : the flowers, here again the same kinds, in their loveliness vie with the songs of the birds.

Though the gardens are described as very much alike, the water shows a pleasing variety : first we get a foaming brook, swifter than the wind, then perhaps a crystal bath wherein the lovers bathe ; forth from this dance from shell to shell tiny cascades with flower-petals floating on their waters—a constant scene of beauty.

From this type of romance, which for centuries to come was to reach deep down into the Byzantine Middle Ages, there is nothing to be gained in the way of garden tradition. We learn nothing new, only that the Byzantine gardens developed in the same direction as the Hellenistic. And in particular features we may trace the recurring strong influence on Byzantium of the East, and particularly of Persia and Mesopotamia. In all the earlier accounts we notice simplicity and moderation, something of the imperishable Greek feeling for the golden mean, appearing in climes far distant. But after that the love for the glories of Asia presses to the front ever more insistently, to find its satisfaction in the multiplication of ideas, the glittering pomp of costly possessions and the creation of elaborate masterpieces.

A reconstruction of the Acropolis, by Bohn. Like all Greek religious sanctuaries it had a precise boundary. Here, the boundary was a wall. The start of the Panatheniac Way, which led to the Delphi, can be seen.

* Longus was a Greek author who, in the 2nd or 3rd century BC wrote Daphnis and Chloe 'the first pastoral romance and one of the most popular of the greek erotic prose romances... his descriptions of gardens and landscapes and the alternating seasons show a notable feeling for nature' [Encyclopedia Britanica, 15th edition]