Alexander's Veterans and the Early Wars of the Successors by Joseph Roisman

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 403 (10). Hence the book is liberally festooned with “could have,” “may have,” “might have,” “must have,” “most likely,” “probably,” “imply,” “may mean,” and the like. But such cautions come with the classicist’s territory, and indeed their absence is regretted when Carney moves outside her realm of expertise, stating as a fact the imaginative speculation that it was Caligula who imported the two statues of Arsinoë and Ptolemy ii now in the Vatican collection, and that he dedicated to his dead sister a third in the collection, a copy of the Arsinoë statue but supposedly with Drusilla’s likeness (130). This is in fact the second “biography” of Arsinoë, coming after G. Longega’s now outdated and generally inaccessible Arsinoë II (Rome 1968). But it offers much that its predecessor did not, and perhaps its most valuable contributions are only tangentially related to Arsinoë, such as the illuminating information on topics like Macedonian marriage customs or the expectations of royal wives in hellenistic courts, doubtless familiar territory for the specialist but a treasure-trove of fascinating information for the lay reader. I have only one reservation (and it is a trivial one), that sometimes Carney goes too far in her desire to accommodate the novice, leading to not particularly helpful later analogies. Likening Arsinoë’s union with Lysimachus to the merger of Verizon and AT&T (32) is beneficial only to someone, unlike myself, versed in the corporate practices of modern America. And to appreciate the analogy between the position of Arsinoë’s mother Berenice i, who outlived her husband and saw her son succeed, and that of Anne Boleyn (21), presupposes a fairly sophisticated knowledge of Tudor Britain transcending Anne’s famed acephalic exit. But this is a tiny mole on an otherwise splendid cheek. Arsinoë is an eminently successful contribution to its series. Carney’s scholarship shines throughout, and her writing style is clear and appealing. The result is an informative and richly engaging book. Arsinoë should be well content with her chronicler. University of British Columbia/ Anthony A. Barrett University of Heidelberg Alexander's Veterans and the Early Wars of the Successors. By Joseph Roisman. Austin: University of Texas Press (Fordyce W. Mitchel Memorial Lecture Series). 2012. Pp. xiv, 264. At first glance, Joseph Roisman's monograph on the early wars fought by Alexander the Great’s successors might appear to be yet another entry into the field of studies that focus on the volatile careers of Alexander’s generals in the immediate wake of the conqueror’s death. But while Roisman does indeed deal with the history of the unstable years from 323 b.c. down to the death of Eumenes of Cardia in 316, his focus is not on the “great men” such as Ptolemy, Seleucus, and Antigonus, but rather, as his title states, on the ordinary men, the rank and file of Alexander’s army. The experiences of Alexander’s Macedonian veterans after the death of their leader can be difficult to recover from the ancient historians, who consistently viewed the events of these years through the lenses of the leading commanders. The material fortunes and the behaviours of the troops can be at least partially reconstructed by following the accounts of their leaders; an understanding of their psychology, their motivations, and their concerns is considerably harder to tease out of our sources. Roisman clearly recognizes the challenges of the sources, devoting his entire first chapter to a critical discussion of Hieronymus of Cardia, whose history influenced that 404 PHOENIX of Diodorus, on whom we rely for much of our knowledge of these years. Roisman calls attention particularly to Hieronymus’ tendency to adopt an elitist stance that results in an account favouring the ambitions and actions of the leading generals and suppressing any suggestion of independence of thought or selfless motivation among the soldiers. Thus, when commanders and troops are in disagreement, Hieronymus’ perspective is that it is the army that is misbehaving; when leaders and soldiers are aligned in their purpose, it is the generals who look good, while the army’s role is simply to offer love and respect to their commanders. Roisman also notes the clear sympathy Hieronymus...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.