Alexande he Unde ake : Pe sians, Bac ians, and a aphoi
Ma c Mendoza
ABSTRACT
Alexande ’s amous ban o he exposu e o he co pses in Bac a has been long s udied. Mos ly he discussion
has ocused on he e aci y o he accoun and his compliance wi h he Zo oas ian i es. The analysis o
he easons ha led Alexande o he ban has hi he o been e y supe icial, only ou lining he appa en ly
excep ional cha ac e o ha ac ion. This pape ies o pu his p ohibi ion in o ab oade con ex . Fo his
pu pose, alook a he p e ious ac ions o Alexande in ela ion o he o eigne s’ co pses mus i s be ak-
en. Also, he ex emely nega i e concep ion o he unbu ied in he Hellenic cul u e, eligion, and poli ics
needs o be p ope ly assessed. Only a e his analysis, he signi ica ion o he p ohibi ion can be igh ly
app ehended and in eg a ed in o he wide con ex o Alexande ’sconques , and no ega ding i as ame e
king’swhim. This Bac ian episode s ands o agood example o how he Macedonian campaign pu ace o
ace con lic ing eligious p ac ices.
KEYWORDS
Bac ia; Exposu e o co pses; Alexande ; S asano o Soloi; Fune a y i es; Religious sc uples.
INTRODUCTION
‘Now in ea ly imes he Sogdians and Bac ians did no di e much om he nomads in hei
modes o li e and cus oms, al hough he Bac ians we e ali le mo e ci ilized; howe e , o
hese, as o he o he s, Onesic i us does no epo hei bes ai s, saying, o ins ance, ha
hose who ha e become helpless because o old age o sickness a e h own ou ali e as p ey
o dogs kep exp essly o his pu pose, which in hei na i e ongue a e called ‘unde - ake s’,
and ha while he land ou side he walls o he me opolis o he Bac ians looks clean, ye
mos o he land inside he walls is ull o human bones; bu ha Alexande b oke up he
cus om. And he epo s abou he Caspians a e simila , o ins ance, ha when pa en s li e
beyond se en y yea s hey a e shu in and s a ed o dea h. Now his la e cus om is mo e
ole able; and i is simila o ha o he Ceians, al hough i is o Scy hian o igin; ha o he
Bac ians, howe e , is s ill mo e like ha o he Scy hians. And so, i i was p ope o be
in doub as o he ac s a he ime when Alexande was inding such cus oms he e, wha
should one say as o wha so o cus oms we e p obably in ogue among hem in he ime
o he ea lies Pe sian ule s and he s ill ea lie ule s?’ (S abo XI, 11.3).
The ea men o he dead is one o he mos de ining ea u es o any cul u e. As an ine i able
phenomenon in human exis ence, e e y cul u al sys em has o espond o and esol e all he
di e en ques ions and issues ha dea h p omp s. The isual exp ession o he na u e o he
wo ld o he he ea e and he p ope ansi ion o i is embodied by a icula ion o ase ies
o i ual and une a y p ac ices ha a e cha ac e is ic o each cul u e, based on a heological
discou se gene a ed o explain he unce ain ies abou wha is o come. The e o e, he ea -
men o he phenomenon o dea h can become an idiosync a ic elemen o each people, and
because o i s c ucial impo ance, i e ol es slowly o e ime. Achange in he i ual may mean
STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1, 65–87
66 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
an imp ope ansi ion o he he ea e by he indi iduals ha come in i s wake, o pe haps he
possibili y ha no all ances o s ha e been able o make ap ope ansi ion. No only would he
epe cussions o his ha e an impac on he deceased and hei pa icula wo ld; i would also
exe adi ec in luence on he ealm o he li ing. The e o e, he encoun e be ween di e en
cul u al sys ems, and hus une a y sys ems, may be an elemen o con lic . The assessmen
o he o he ’sp ac ices, i hey a e e y di e en o one’sown, can be ex emely nega i e, as
hey can be judged as displays o impie y, dis espec o shee abomina ion.
The Hellenic wo ld’scon ac wi h he Achaemenid Empi e p omp ed he clash be ween
di e en cul u al adi ions, in une a y ma e s as well. Whe he o no he Achaemenid
Pe sian i ual adhe ed o he dogma o he p ophe Zo oas e has spa ked opposing pe spec-
i es, e en based on he e y same e idence. Gi en his complex p oblem, in his a icle, we
shall es ic ou sel es o he posi i e e idence, wi hou en e ing his deba e, which would
go a beyond he scope o his s udy.1 The e o e, we shall cen e ou a en ion on he Hellenic
isions o he une a y p ac ices in he Achaemenid Empi e and, mo e conc e ely, hose o
i s eas e nmos con ines.
The oldes eco d conse ed om aG eek au ho can be ound in Aeschylus’ agedy The
Pe sians in ela ion o he ul ima e a e o he body o Da iusI. The desc ip ion is clea and
ells ha he G ea King was bu ied in a omb/ umulus (Aeschylus, Pe s. 220–230, 681–693).2
Sho ly he ea e He odo us de o ed a ew lines o une a y i es in his desc ip ion o Pe -
sian cus oms:
‘So much Ican say o hem om my own ce ain knowledge. Bu he e a e o he ma e s
conce ning he dead which a e sec e ly and obscu ely old: how he dead bodies o Pe sians
a e no bu ied be o e hey ha e been mangled by bi ds o dogs. Tha his is he way o he
Magi, Iknow o ce ain; o hey do no conceal he p ac ice. Bu his is ce ain, ha be o e
he Pe sians bu y he body in ea h, hey embalm i in wax’ (He odo us I, 140.1–2; c . He o-
do us III, 16; S abo XV, 3.20; Cice o Tusc. I, 45.108).
In his b ie pa ag aph, He odo us discusses wo di e en ypes o une als: exposu e o he
co pses and bu ial (wi h wax embalming). The la e mus no ha e upse he G eeks’ minds,
since hey also applied his ea men .3 In ac , bu ial seems o ha e been he mos common
p ac ice among he Pe sians who did no belong o he p ies ly class ( he Magi), as He odo us
al eady clea ly no es.4 Based on his au ho ’swo ds, one can guess ha he migh ha e been
old abou his i e o , e en, ha e been awi ness o i applied o aMagus, bu he ne e da ed
o ex apola e his p ac ice o he en i e Pe sian popula ion.
1 Wi hou adoub , he mos e en de ende o Achaemenid Zo oas ianism was Ma y Boyce (see,
e.g., Boyce 1982; 1988; 2001). In con as , Wideng en 1968, 166–174 has exp essed his disag eemen .
Howe e , he majo i y o au ho s ake amo e p uden s ance, leaning owa ds ei he side wi hou
excessi e con ic ion. On he his o iog aphical posi ions, see Kellens 1997; 2012; B ian 2002,
894–895; Ga cía Sánchez 2009, 219–220, n. 2. Gi en he app oach o his pape , he compendium
by De Jong 1997 is pa icula ly use ul.
2 On he scenic elemen s, see Lembke– He ing on 2009, 16–17, 99.
3 E en he applica ion o wax would no seem s ange. Plu a ch a es s o he use o wax o honey
among he Spa ans: Plu a ch, Ages. 40.4. See Ashe ie al. 2007, 171.
4 He odo us VIII, 24.1 o e s ano he example o he Pe sian bu ials. A e Xe xes’ ic o y a The mo-
pylae, he had 19,000 o his 20,000 ic ims bu ied in o de o downplay he numbe o dead in he
eyes o he opposing a my. Howe e , Macan 1908, 388 sees his concealmen as somewha un iable.
He conside s i ac ea ion o he G eek sou ces.
67MARC MENDOZA
Ano he au ho wi h conside able con ac wi h he Achaemenid Empi e was Xenophon,
he mos celeb a ed membe o he Ten Thousand. E en hough he does no men ion any Pe -
sian bu ial in he Anabasis, he does in he Cy opaedia. The e, he desc ibes he en ombmen s
o Ab ada as, he king o Susa and his wi e (Xenophon, Cy . VII, 3), and o Cy us he G ea
(Xenophon, Cy . VIII, 7.25). Any e e ence o he exposu e o co pses is missing. In u n, C -
esias explains Da ius’ o de o his own omb o be buil in amoun ain (C esias, Pe s. F 13.19;
b ie e in F 13.23). I is qui e elling ha his physician, who supposedly li ed in he cou o
A axe xes II, did no men ion ei he he exposu e o he co pses anywhe e, es a ing his
way he excep ional na u e o he p ac ice, as ga he ed om He odo us. In any e en , wha
is ce ain is ha his i e was no obse ed by he Achaemenid mona chs. We can guess ha
he p ac ice was no sp ead beyond he cle gy in Pe sia, and in consequence, he possibili ies
o empi ical expe ience would ha e been qui e minimal.5
ALEXANDER AND THE DEAD PERSIANS
Alexande he G ea ’sconques s ands as aunique chance o wi ness he une a y adi ions
o he land o me ly con olled by he Pe sian Empi e. One o he mos impo an poin s is
he way he Macedonian king ea ed allen enemies, whom he was ca e ul o gi e he ap-
p op ia e une a y honou s– o a he o he mos p ominen among hem. In G anicus, he
bu ied bo h he Pe sian gene als and he G eek me cena ies om he opposing Pe sian anks
(A ian, Anab. I, 16.6).
6
Likewise, a e his ic o y in Issus, Alexande ga e Sisygambis and he
o he cap u ed women pe mission o bu y he mos p ominen Pe sians in hei own way
(Cu ius III, 12.13–14; Diodo us XVII, 40.1; Plu a ch, Alex. 21.4).
7
Be o e he ba le o Gaugamela,
he con e ed g ea une a y honou s on Da ius’ wi e, wi hou skimping on expenses, bu -
ying he ollowing he na ional i uals (Cu ius IV, 10.23; Diodo us XVII, 54.7; Plu a ch Alex.
30.1; Plu a ch Mo . 338e).8 Se e al mon hs la e , Alexande did he same o King Da ius III
himsel by sending his body om Pa hia o Pe sia o be bu ied in he oyal nec opolis wi h
he same honou s as his o e unne s on he impe ial h one (A ian Anab. III, 22.1, 5–6; Jus-
in XI, 15.14–15; Diodo us XVII, 73.3; Plu a ch Alex. 43.5–7; Plu a ch Mo . 332 –333a).9 Finally, i
is wo h men ioning he e e ence he Macedonian king showed be o e he omb o Cy us
in he win e o 325/324 BC.When aced wi h he p o ana ion o his sepulch e, Alexande
o de ed i ebuil , along wi h exempla y punishmen o he p esumed pe pe a o s o he
c ime (A ian Anab. VI, 29.4–30.2; Cu ius X, 1.30; Plu a ch Alex. 69.3–4; S abo XV, 3.7–8; c .
Gunde son 1982, 190–196; Boswo h 1988a, 46–55; Boswo h 1988b, 153–154; Shahbazi 2003,
27; A kinson– Ya dley 2009, 98–99).
The i s conclusion ha can be d awn om hese examples is ha he Pe sian nobili y and
oyal y du ing Alexande ’s ime s ill p e e ed bu ial, mos likely including wax embalming
(De Jong 1997, 437; Boyce 1982, 182).10 The a e o he co pses o o he deceased indi iduals is
5 Fo la e e e ences, see De Jong 1997, 438–439.
6 He kep he cap u ed G eeks p isone s o along ime (A ian, Anab. I, 29.5); see Boswo h 1980,
126–127.
7 A kinson 1980, 249 assumes ha bu ial was common in ancien Pe sia.
8 On he ci cums ances o he dea h, see Welles 1963, 275, n. 73; Hamil on 1969, 78–79; A kinson
1980, 393.
9 On he si e o he king’sbu ial, see Schmid 1970, 107; Boswo h 1980, 345; B osius 1996, 101–104;
Sis i 2001, 529.
10 A chaeologically speaking, he oyal ombs a e well known; see Schmid 1970, 79–118.
68 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
unknown, bu i seems un easible ha all o hem would ha e been gi en his laye o i ual
wax be o e being bu ied (Boyce 1982, 182; De Jong 1997, 437). Mo eo e , we canno igno e
he ac ha he Achaemenid a my was made up o con ingen s om di e en peoples wi h
hei own pa icula une a y cus oms. Thus, his i s conclusion can only be con iden ly
asce ained o high -bo n na ional Pe sians.
On he o he hand, he openly espec ul ea men o he dead enemies ha Alexande
ad oca ed di e ed om wha he G eeks had displayed du ing he G eco -Pe sian Wa s (c .
De Jong 1997, 236–237). In Ma a hon, Pausanias could no ind any sign o he si e whe e he
anquished may ha e been bu ied, e en hough he A henians claimed ha hey had done
so. Pausanias concluded ha hey mus ha e placed all he bodies anonymously in acommon
ench (Pausanias I, 32.5). Howe e , his disposal o he bodies migh no ha e been ca ied ou
immedia ely. The Lacedaemonians we e able o see he deceased membe s o he Pe sian a my
when hey a i ed in A hens one day a e he ba le (He odo us VI, 120).11 In Pla eae, appa -
en ly no ini ia i e was aken o pe o m une a y i es o he allen membe s o he Pe sian
a my. We can deduce om He odo us ha he bodies we e exposed o he apine o he local
inhabi an s– in addi ion o o he ‘ e min’– o long enough un il hei bone emains we e piled
up once hey we e o ally s ipped o hei lesh (He odo us IX, 83; Macan 1908, 767–768).12 In
con as o hese eiled ac ions o inac ions,13 Alexande did no hide himsel when he paid
g ea honou s o he mos celeb a ed o his allen enemies, especially Da ius and his wi e.14
FURTHER EAST: EXPOSURE AND PROHIBITION
The no able excep ion o his appa en ly concilia o y policy seems o be Bac ia. When Al-
exande eached he capi al o ha sa apy, Bac a/Za iaspa, he allegedly banned he local
p ac ice o exposing he co pses as a une al ce emony. The in o ma ion on his episode
appea s solely in S abo’sele en h book, who elied on Onesic i us o his passage. S a-
bo’saccoun (quo ed a he beginning o he pape ), w i en wi h asense o mo bid cu iosi y,
shows a o ally dis o ed and hype bolic image o wha Alexande and his men migh ha e
ound upon hei a i al. While he e is s ill some discussion abou he exa a quaes io o he
Pe sians’ and hei nobili y’sa ilia ion wi h Zo oas ianism (see no e 1), he e a e many ewe
11 On he Spa ans’ jou ney and he plausibili y o hei seeing he Pe sian co pses, see Macan 1895,
376; Sco 2005, 404–405, 613.
12 Jacoby 1944, 44–45 opened he doo s o possible eligious honou s among he locals nea he ba -
le ield o ea n he a ou o he allen he oes. None heless, he did no dis inguish be ween he
G eek and he o eign dead. When he ba le was waged be ween Hellenic a mies, he exis ence o
acommon p ac ice o u ning o e co pses be ween sides is documen ed, so ha hey could ecei e
ap ope bu ial; see in a.
13 Du ing he expedi ion o he Ten Thousand, G eek soldie s mu ila ed some oes’ bodies igh a e
he ba le o Cunaxa (Xenophon Anab. III, 4.5). The objec i e was e o ising he es o he Pe sians
o gain some ime o leeing. Xenophon, one o he expedi ion’sleade s, s esses ha i was an ini-
ia i e o he soldie s hemsel es (αὐτοκέλευστοι), wi hou any p e ious o de om hei o ice s.
14 The case o Bessus ce ainly seems o con adic his s a emen . Acco ding o some sou ces, Da ius’
assassin and usu pe o he oyal h one was impaled and his body was le o all o see (Cu ius
VII, 5.40; c . Diodo us XVII, 83.7–9; Plu a ch Alex. 43.6). Ne e heless, i is s a ed ha Bessus was
no o mally condemned by Alexande himsel , bu by wo local assemblies in Bac a and Ecba ana
(A ian Anab. III, 30.5, IV, 7.3; Cu ius VII, 10.10). His punishmen con o ms o ha in lic ed by Da ius I
on o he usu pe s: DB II 32, 33, III 43, 50. Some de ails o he episode, such as he o de o shoo
down any bi d ha app oached Bessus’ co pse, migh sugges aZo oas ian inspi a ion (see in a).
69MARC MENDOZA
ese a ions abou he Bac ian land. The egion o Eas e n I an and Cen al Asia was mos
likely Zo oas e ’shomeland. This eligion’s oo s in he egion we e olde and s onge han
anywhe e else, and pe haps so was he obse ance o i s laws o pu i y.
The exposu e o co pses as he une a y p ac ice p e e ed by Zo oas ian dogma can clea -
ly be ound in i s ex s, especially in he Vidē dā (V, passim, VI, 44–51, VIII, 4–13). Acco ding
o his doc ine, he body o he deceased becomes ahighly con amina ing elemen o he
elemen s o na u e (especially i e, ea h, and wa e ), when a acked by he o ces o Ang a
Mainyu, he malign en i y o he Zo oas ian belie sys em (Vidē dā VII, 1–9; Hu e 2009).
The solu ion is o mo e he emains o a ela i ely isola ed spo in o de o p e en he e il
in luence on he li ing and a oid con amina ing na u e.15 A ha si e, he body is exposed o
he ac ion o bi ds and o he beas s, which s ip he co pse o i s lesh, hus elimina ing he
elemen ha gene a es he pollu ion. The co pse is ied down o a e he animals om mo ing
he emains and sp eading he pollu ion. The ‘decon amina ion’ pe iod las s app oxima ely
one yea . A e ha ime has elapsed, he bones a e collec ed and deposi ed in ossua ies (as‑
odanas o uz ‑danas) (Vidē dā V, 13, VI, 4–5, VII, 79–80; c . Jus in XLI, 3.5). Despi e his clea
a icula ion o he p ocedu es o dealing wi h co pses, he suppo e s o he heo y o Zo-
oas ian Achaemenid mona chs ha e a gued ha ombs and wax embalming we e used as
aba ie o p e en he body om con amina ing he soil– and, hus, ul illing he une a y
p esc ip ions.16 Wha is qui e clea is ha c ema ion was o ally excluded, gi en he high alue
a ached o i e in he I anian wo ld.17
A chaeology is no e y use ul in his case. In o ma ion on his geog aphic and ch ono-
logical con ex is i ually non -exis en . In any e en , he sca ce cu en in o ma ion e eals
ha he p ac ices we e any hing bu uni o m, showing g ea e complexi y han e idenced by
he Wes e n au ho s, who likely ocused on he mos sensa ional p ac ices. The e a e ma e ial
es imonies o he exposu e o co pses, and o o he une a y ea men s as well, in ela ion
o he di e en peoples who mo ed abou p e -Islamic Cen al Asia.18
Wi h his con ex , i is impossible o con e ull c edibili y on Onesic i us’ desc ip ion.
F om a eligious s andpoin , illing he ci y s ee s wi h co pses is inconcei able. The high
deg ee o con amina ion a ibu ed o he dead body when i was being a acked by he o ces
o Ang a Mainyu is p ecisely wha led co pses o be o ally isola ed om he es o socie y
and na u e. The e o e, om he s andpoin o he p ac i ione o Zo oas ianism, i would
make no sense wha soe e o subjec he li ing o he dange s o hese pe nicious en i ies.
Howe e , Onesic i us was no exac ly desc ibing his une a y p ac ice. The ex explains ha
hose exposed we e s ill ali e a he s a o he i ual, al hough hey we e se iously ill o e y
old. Simila cus oms a e a ibu ed o o he peoples in G eek sou ces.19 Howe e , S abo’sown
15 The men in con ac wi h dead bodies a e also isola ed and hey li e in he A mesh -gāh, he place
o he unclean: Vidē dā III, 14–21. On he pu i ica ion i es, see Vidē dā IX.
16 Hu 2004 ca ego ises he a chaeological eco d o bu ials and how hey could i wi h Zo oas ian
dogma; c . De Jong 1997, 435.
17 S abo XV, 3.14 claims ha i someone h ew aco pse on o he i e, he/she was condemned o dea h,
a es imony which la gely ma ches wha is p esc ibed in Vidē dā VIII, 73–80. On bu ial, see Vidē dā
III, 8 and 12. See also Boyce 1975, 109–129; De Jong 1997, 432–434.
18 Fo he Hellenis ic pe iod, see G ene 1984, 59–79; Mai s 2006, 58–65. Fo adiach onic s udy o
he a chaeological e idence o exposu e in he egion, see G ene 1984, 225–276.
19 Wi hou sea ching any u he , in S abo’spassage i sel , his p ac ice is also a ibu ed o he Cas-
pians. The Hy canians a e he ones ha a e associa ed wi h his p ac ice he mos o en (Plu a ch,
Mo . 499d; Cice o, Tusc. I, 45.108; Sex us Emp., Py hon. III, 227; Po phy y, Abs . IV, 21; Eusebius, P aep.
I, 1.1 D). Po phy y and Eusebius also epo ed on he Caspians and Bac ians. Plu a ch assigns i

70 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
pa ag aph may conceal he solu ion o his s ange desc ip ion: he himsel explains ha i is
acus om o he Scy hians (c . He odo us I, 216.2–3; Plu a ch Mo . 499d). The a ied in o ma-
ion we ha e on he dea h o he elde ly o he ill is associa ed wi h nomadic peoples o hose
li ing whe e esou ces a e sca ce.
20
The isks o he ibe’ssubsis ence o he bu den ha
hey could cause o anomadic people we e he easons impelling hem owa ds his p ac ice.
Ye hese ex eme si ua ions could no be expec ed in he capi al o asa apy ha was as
ich as Bac ia.21 A ha ime, Bac a was a ully de eloped ci y wi h along his o y behind i ,
and i was a i al axis in he No h -Eas e n domains o he Achaemenid Empi e. I s poli ical
and economic i ali y would ende he applica ion o ap ac ice like he one desc ibed s ange.
Ne e heless, i is plausible ha he isola ion o he dying people began some ime be o e his
dea h because he e il beings ushed upon he dead body di ec ly a e he dea h (Vidē dā
VII, 1–5).22 Some illnesses we e also seen as ab and s amped by Ang a Mainyu on he bodies
(Vidē dā II, 29 and 37). So, in o de o a oid his con amina ion, i does no seem unlikely he
applica ion o hese p e en i e measu es (c . Aga hias, His . II, 23).
23
Howe e , his p ecau ion
would exclude he p esence o hose dying people inside he ci y walls as well. In any case,
his does no mean ha he animals began o ea hem be o e hei dea h, ei he . The e o e, as
Boyce concluded (Boyce– G ene 1991, 6–8), his in o ma ion is mos likely o be in e p e ed
as an un o una e misapp ehension ha mixed up he exposu e o co pses (which was ne e
done inside he ci y walls) wi h he abandonmen o homicide o he weakes om o he
peoples – including o no p e -mo em isola ion.24 The e o e, his image o a‘ci y o bones’
o Bac a mus be o ally disca ded.
The a chaeological eco d o he egion, as men ioned abo e, shows a a ie y o i uals
b oade han wha can be deduced om he w i en sou ces. The e o e, once again, i should
o he Sogdians (Plu a ch, Mo . 328c) and Aga hias o he Sassanid Pe sians (Aga hias, His . II, 23).
This la e passage is he only one ha p ese es adesc ip ion o he p ocedu e and unde lines he
impo ance o he isola ion o he dying man. See De Jong 1997, 238–243, 444–446.
20 The ‘Ceians’ in S abo’spassage a e he inhabi an s o he Cycladian island Ceos. S abo claims ha
hei law is o make hose who each he age o 70 d ink hemlock (S abo X, 5.6). Despi e his, i is
easible o hink ha his was agene alisa ion made by S abo– o his sou ce– based on aspeci ic
episode ha he himsel desc ibes. Unde siege om he A henians, he di e h ea o amine led
he ci y’sinhabi an s o decide o le hei elde ly die in o de o ensu e he su i al o he o he s,
e en hough ul ima ely he A henians li ed he siege be o e his d as ic measu e was e e pu
in o p ac ice. Claudius Aelianus a ibu es asimila p ac ice o he De ices in eas e n Pe sia, who
killed hose o e he age o 70 by sac i icing he men and s angling he women. In he same pas-
sage, he also includes he Sa dinians (Aelian, VH. IV, 1). Re e ing o he De ices, S abo epo s
amo e de ailed accoun o hei une a y adi ions– cannibalism included (S abo XI, 11.8 and
XV, 1.56). He odo us also claims ha some nomadic Indians killed he ill people and a e hei lesh
a e wa ds (He odo us III, 99.1–2; c . III, 38.3–4). In amo e u opian ein, he e is he desc ip ion
o some islande s by Iambulus, who a e eaching ace ain age – 150 yea s old, o a e somehow
su e ing om ape manen impai men – ook aplan ha subme ged hem in o adeep sleep un il
hey gen ly slipped away (Diodo us II, 57.4–5).
21 Nume ous ancien au ho s a es o he p o e bial weal h o he Bac ian e i o y: Cu ius VII,
4.26–31; Ammianus XXIII, 6.55–59, Pliny, NH. VI, 18, S abo XI, 11.1–5.
22 I hank Albe o Can e a Gle a and F an z G ene o hei commen s on his poin .
23 On pu i ica ion i es and seclusion, see Vidē dā IX, 33–35.
24 Boyce 1977, 145–149 e e s o p ac ices among con empo a y Zo oas ians in which dogs play akey
ole in he ansi ion be ween li e and dea h. This ole, which ne e implies o e ing he deceased
as ood o he animal, may be ye ano he possible explana ion o he misunde s anding. Howe e ,
i is unclea how old hese adi ions eally a e.
71MARC MENDOZA
be ques ioned whe he all he social componen s o Bac ia pa icipa ed in his p ac ice. In
his case, he ex seems o imply ha i would no ha e solely been limi ed o he p ies ly class
like in Pe sia and would ha e had ab oade ange, al hough i is di icul o disce n whe he i
encompassed he en i e popula ion. Likewise, we igno e whe he his hypo he ical dis inc ion
was go e ned by e hnic, socioeconomic, eligious o o he ac o s. Wha does seem plausible
is he his o ici y o Alexande ’sp ohibi ion– wha e e i s ac ual ex ension and na u e.
Ab ie men ion o he pe iod a e he dea h o Alexande in a ex by Po phy y discusses
he sa ap S asano o Soloi and he exposu e o co pses:
‘[…] he Hy canians pu hem ou o bi ds and dogs while s ill ali e, he Caspians when
hey a e dead. The Scy hians bu y ali e wi h he dead, o slaugh e on he une al py e,
hose whom he dead mos lo ed, and he Bac ians eed hei old people ali e o he dogs.
S asano , ice oy o Alexande , unde ook o s op his p ac ice, and almos los his powe ’
(Po phy y Abs . IV, 21).
S asano o Soloi, aCyp io by bi h, was one o Alexande ’sCompanions (S abo XIV, 6.3).25
A e ha ing se ed as he sa ap o A ia and D angiana since 329 and 328, espec i ely (A i-
an Anab. IV, 7.1, 18.1–3; Cu ius VIII, 3.17; c . Boswo h 1995, 38–39; Heckel 2006, 341, n. 693),
he was assigned he sa apies o Bac ia and Sogdiana in he Pa i ion o T ipa adisus in 321
(Diodo us XVIII, 39.6; A ian Succ. 1.35; c . Klinko 2000, 68–71). S asano did no pa icipa e
di ec ly in he con lic be ween An igonus and Eumenes, al hough he seems o ha e aken
he la e ’sside by sending him oops unde he command o S asand os, who had succeed-
ed him in A ia and D angiana (Diodo us XIX, 14.7). Despi e his suppo o Eumenes, when
An igonus made anew pa i ion in 316 a e his ic o y, he did no da e o emo e S asano
om his pos since An igonus judged ha S asano ’scomplici y in suppo ing his i al had
been wi hou di ec in e en ion because o he p i ileged posi ion he had ea ned among
he locals (Diodo us XIX, 48.1–2). F om hen on, he a e o his Cyp io sa ap is unknown,
al hough i is ai ly ce ain ha his ule me i s end wi h Seleucus’ conques (Jus in XV, 4.11;
Plu a ch Deme . 7.2; Diodo us XX, 53.4; O osius His . III, 23.43; Appian Sy . 55; c . Schobe
1981, 140–193; Mehl 1986, 134–137, 156–193).
Al hough he abandonmen o he weakes is men ioned again in Po phy y’spassage, in-
asmuch as i has been p e iously disca ded o Bac a, we ha e o assume ha he eal issue
was ela ed o he une a y i e o exposu e. I S asano s o e o abolish his cus om when
he was appoin ed as he sa ap o Bac ia -Sogdiana, his means ha he p ac ice was esumed
a e Alexande le he e i o y, pe haps due o he laxness o he subsequen sa aps. The
a emp o eins a e Alexande ’sp ohibi ion migh ha e spa ked a eac ion om he local
popula ion. I we bea in mind he si ua ion in 316, when An igonus was incapable o eplacing
S asano because o his popula i y among he locals, one op ion may be o hink ha he could
ha e ied o eins a e his p ohibi ion agains exposu e as soon as he eached he pos in 321.
Gi en he up ising o he Bac ians, he may ha e hen back acked and li ed he p ohibi ion
again. In his way, a e ha ing endange ed his ca ee , S asano migh ha e adop ed amo e
concilia o y, ole an policy wi h his new subjec s, simila o he ack aken by Peuces as in
Pe sia. Fu he on, we shall a emp apossible econs uc ion o his episode.26
25 On S asano , see Billows 1990, 448–449; Heckel 2006, 255; Ya dley– Whea ley– Heckel 2011,
113; Mendoza 2017.
26 On he ci cums ances o his p ohibi ion, see Mendoza 2017, 48–52. I is e en possible o conjec u e
akind o ab ica ion o he con lic based on sel -in e es .
72 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
Se ing aside Bac ia, Alexande ’sexpedi ion only came upon one mo e case o local ex-
posu e o co pses: he O ei ai.27 This people, loca ed be ween Ged osia and he mou h o he
Indus, we e e hnically I anian (c . A ian Anab. VIII, 25.2; Goukowsky 1976, 262). Diodo us
epo ed on he p ac ice o exposing co pses oo, being an idiosync a ic ai ha se hem
apa om he neighbou ing peoples (Diodo us XVII, 105.1–2). Ne e heless, he e is no wo d
abou Alexande banning ha une a y ea men he e as well. This appa en a bi a iness
may be ac ually due o he amoun o ime Alexande and his men spen in each place, hus
di ec ly do e ailing wi h he mo i es ha may ha e led o ha p ohibi ion. Thei jou ney
h ough he coun y o he O ei ai was ela i ely b ie , li le mo e han awhi lwind conques
on hei way back om India.28 In con as , he campaign in he zone o Bac ia and Sogdiana
las ed mo e han any o he leg in he campaign– o e wo yea s. A empo a y nuisance is
easily bo ne, bu i i las s o e ime, i becomes asou ce o dis ess. And his was no less he
eeling ha i mus ha e a oused in Alexande ’sHellenic con ingen .
THE UNBURIED IN HELLENIC CULTURE
The ea o being le unbu ied was p ominen among he G eco -Macedonian soldie s, and as hei
enemies we e awa e o his ea , i was aweapon ha hey ied o wield. Thus, du ing he siege o
Halica nassus, he A henians in he Pe sian anks, Ephial es and Th asybulus, sugges ed declining
he eques om he he ald sen by Alexande o ga he he co pses o he allen Macedonians.
Memnon o Rhodes s ood agains i and hei p oposal ended up being ejec ed (Diodo us XVII,
25.6).
29
Asecond episode occu ed du ing he Macedonian a emp o c oss he Pe sian Ga es (Cu -
ius V, 4.3; Diodo us XVII, 68.4; P i che 1985, 247–249; Mendoza 2019, 247–252). Gi en he la ge
numbe o casual ies in lic ed by A ioba zanes’ soldie s, Alexande was o ced o lee o asa e
dis ance. When assessing wha ac ion o ake nex , he king weighed he op ion o aking asa e
de ou ha would ake se e al days, bu ins ead chose o isk c ossing he Pe sian Ga es. He did
so no o lea e he dead soldie s unbu ied and a oid dishonou ing hem, and wi hou ha ing o
eques he enemies he emo al o he bodies, which would ha e been an amoun o admi ing
de ea . In 330, when Pa menio was execu ed, Cleande did no p o ide his consen o bu y him
o ea o c ossing Alexande , bu ea ing amu iny, he ul ima ely ag eed o (Cu ius VII, 2.32).
Denial o bu ial, jus like ha hin ed in he las ins ance, was apoli ical message, as also
seen in he case o Clei us he Black. A e being mu de ed by he king, Clei us’ co pse was
bu ied only h ough he media ion o Alexande , since his s a o ice s ad oca ed denying
him his une a y honou (Cu ius VIII, 2.12). I seems a he e y leas i onic ha some would
s and o dispensing he same une a y ‘ i es’ o he sa ap o Bac ia as he locals in he egion.
Mo e han he mu de i sel , Alexande ’sac en ailed a iola ion o some o he mos elemen-
a y Macedonian cus oms.30 The whole episode did no hing, bu u he s oke he ea s o he
27 S abo XV, 1.62 also makes a e y b ie e e ence o co pses h own o be de ou ed by ul u es in
Taxila. The sou ce o his in o ma ion is A is obulus. C . Sex us Emp. Py hon. III, 227.
28 The ac ha his men ion by Diodo us is he only one ha ela es he O ei ai o his p ac ice de-
mands some cau ion abou he eliabili y o his s a emen ; c . Welles 1963, 423, n. 14; Goukowsky
1976, 262; P andi 2013, 173. On he campaign and he sou ces, see Hamil on 1972.
29 P andi (2013, 38) no ed ha hese de ails, unknown o o he sou ces, may come om aG eek au ho .
The episode is ye ano he oppo uni y o exal he noble na u e o Memnon. See also Goukowsky
1976, 186.
30 Ca ney (1981, 154) no es ha i ep esen ed coe cion o he ee speech o he Macedonian a is oc-
acy, he dep i a ion o a ial be o e he a my, and he up u e o he di ine law o hospi ali y.
73MARC MENDOZA
adi ionalis o ice s ega ding he po en ial d i owa ds he ‘ba ba isa ion’ o he cou and
he a my. The ac ha dep i al o bu ial was iewed as apunishmen , as we shall see below,
implied conside ing Clei us a ai o , bu e ed behind he legalisa ion o Alexande ’sc ime
by he Macedonians. Howe e , Alexande e used ha pos humous punishmen o Clei us–
mos likely wi h he episode o Pa menion in mind– o s a e o e en mo e easons o he
discon en o some o his o ice s and new a gumen s o pu o wa d hei g ie ances abou
pu po ed ba ba isa ion. The si ua ion spa ked by ha dea h was al eady augh enough;
denying he basic igh s o any Macedonian would only u he complica e i .
The conside a ions on he meaning o he lack o bu ial we e no new in he ime o Al-
exande , and ins ead had al eady appea ed much ea lie in he G eek wo ld. The denial o
bu ial had been wielded as a h ea e en back in Home ’spoems. The mos ea ed a e a e
dea h was o he co pse o become he odde o bi ds, dogs, and o he beas s. Fo his ea-
son, in he Iliad, i is acommon menace o in imida e he oes wi h u he dishonou once
hey would ha e allen.31 Despi e he no able ime span be ween he T ojan Wa – o a leas
he composi ion o he poems ha ecoun i – and he 4 h cen u y, he in luence o epics on
Alexande is undeniable.32 The ea o being le unbu ied su i ed h oughou he cen u ies
like an almos inhe en ea u e o G eek cul u e, and he e o e he e is ample es imony o
i s use as coe cion and punishmen o e ime.
Wi hin he Hellenic wo ld iew, he co pse was simul aneously pu e and pollu ing, wi h
an e ymological ie o he concep o sac edness as well (Chan aine– Masson 1954; Ga -
land 1985, 46–47). The deceased pe son became agene a o o miasma,
33
bu i he p ope
i es we e adminis e ed, i u ned in o some hing wo hy o e e ence.34 The e o e, i s , an
unbu ied co pse was dange ous due o i s inhe en pollu ion, making i a h ea o he cosmic
o de , so e en a ec ing he gods hemsel es.
35
Fo his eason, i is easy o app ehend why
ci ies enac ed laws on he obliga ion o bu y any dead pe son inside hei bounda ies.36 The
e ec on he di ine sphe e explains why he s a us o di ine law was g an ed o he du y o
bu y he deceased. Disobeying his basic ule could lead one o become he a ge o he gods’
w a h (Home Od. XI, 71–80; Sophocles Aj. 1130–1131, 1330–1345; Sophocles An . 75–80, 745–750;
Eu ipides Supp. 563). The opening dialogue be ween Apollo and Thana os in Eu ipides’ Alces‑
is may p o ide insigh in o how his u y would ha e aken i s cou se (Eu ipides Alc. 1–77).
Adme us had managed o a oid his own dea h, bu in exchange, he had o o e ano he li e,
31 Home , Il. I, 3–4, II, 391–393, IV, 234–237, XI, 450–455, 816–818, XIII, 231–234, 829–832, XV, 347–351, XVI,
833–836, XVII, 125–127, 149–153, 240–241, 254–255, 272–273, 556–559, XVIII, 175–180, 270–272, 282–283,
XXII, 38–43, 66–76, 86–89, 331–354, 508–514, XXIII, 19–23, 179–191, XXIV, 209–213, 405–415.
32 Alexande isi ed he ombs o he Home ic he oes (A ian, Anab. I, 11.5–12.1; Jus in XI, 5.12; Diodo us
XVII, 17.3–18.1; Plu a ch Alex. 15.7–8; S abo XIII, 1.26; Malalas VIII, 1.193; Aelian VH. IX, 38, XII, 7)
and he emula ed Achilles. Alexande ’s e e ence o Home ’soeu e is excep ionally exempli ied
by he anecdo es abou he Iliad unde his pillow (Plu a ch Alex. 8.2) and he golden ches in which
he la e s o ed his copy (Plu a ch, Alex. 26.1). C . Cohen 1995; Ca lie 2000.
33 Fo he co pse as miasma, see Pa ke 1983, 32–48.
34 Pe haps he clea es example is he pu i ica ion o Cly emnes a wi h i e in Eu ipides O . 39–40:
‘I is now he six h day since he body o his mu de ed mo he was commi ed o he cleansing i e’.
35 The mos illus a i e s o y o wha could happen i abody was no duly bu ied is ound in Sophocles’
An igone, in which i ends up in luencing he en i e ci y (Sophocles An . 999–1030). The co pse as
an elemen o in ec ion also a ec s he gods: Eu ipides Alc. 22–23: [Apollo] ‘Bu Imus lea e his
Palace’sdea oo , o ea pollu ion soil me in he house’; Eu ipides Hipp. 1437–1439: [A emis] ‘And
now a ewell! ‘ is no o me o gaze upon he dead, o pollu e my sigh wi h dea h -scenes, and e
‘en now Isee hee nigh ha e il’.
36 In A ica: Aelian, VH. V, 14.
80 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
Ob iously, cau ion is mos ad ised when eading his pa ag aph. Ra he han y o ex-
ac p ecise his o ical in o ma ion on each egion om i , i mus be ega ded as a he o ical
exposi ion ha s esses he mos aliena ing cus oms o Hellenic s anda ds ha Alexande
migh ha e o ace and e e o allow he ou come o asocial and e i o ial s abilisa ion.55
Needless o say, all he changes we e one -way; ha is, he ‘ba ba ians’ we e always he ones
who had o adap hei cus oms o accommoda e he G eeks. Wi h he ela i e excep ion o
India– hey could ha e easily bo ne locals wo shipping o he gods –, he emaining examples
di ec ly e e o p ac ices ha would s and in opposi ion o he ypically G eek li es yle. Fo
he A achosians, he meddling was essen ially economic– al hough i would also ha e im-
plica ions on he social and poli ical o de –, bu o he Hy canians, Sogdians, Pe sians, and
Scy hians he in e en ion would ha e aken place wi hin a amily/domes ic se ing.
The e is no need o u he emphasise he impo ance o bu ial in he Hellenic wo ld, bu
ce ainly, his undamen al igh would ha e been endange ed one way o ano he in h ee o
hese cases: Hy canians, Sogdians, and Scy hians. Sub e ing amily models was an amoun
o sub e ing he e y li es yle i sel . Those o he cus oms would ha e pu such deeply - oo ed
amily ins i u ions as espec o pa en s a isk om he G eek s andpoin . Ca e o pa en s
in old age and p ope une al honou s we e he o sp ing’suna oidable du y. I he a he
had commi ed ce ain c imes agains he son– e.g., p os i u ing him (Aeschines I, 13) o no
eaching him any ade (Plu a ch Sol. 22.1) –, he i s du y could be li ed, bu he second could
ne e be e aded. Dep i a ion o bu ial was no aques ion o be se led wi hin he amily, bu
an inalienable igh ha only he poli ical au ho i ies could deny as an ac o punishmen , en-
ailing an ex eme s ipping o igh s.56 The e o e, Alexande ’ssocial model was a away om
cul u al sync e ism. Local adi ions could be ole a ed as long as hey did no con adic he
essen ial pa adigms o Hellenic socie y and cul u e. Being so, he exposu e o co pses shook
he mos p ima y supe s i ions and he unde pinnings o he social o de in he G eek wo ld,
and he e o e i was di icul o be allowed unde his model.
55 Ne e heless, Plu a ch’ss a emen s we e no o ally o iginal. Many o hem can be aced back
o p e ious w i e s. The laxi y o he Hy canian ma iage was a ibu ed o he Massage ae and/
o he Scy hians by He odo us (I, 216.1). The killing o he elde s ela ed wi h o he peoples in he
sou ces has been al eady add essed; see no es 19 and 20. The Pe sian nex -o -kin ma iage was
awell -known mo i by he G eek au ho s, especially inside he oyal amily: He odo us III, 31–32;
C esias Pe s. F 13,55, F 44; S abo XV, 3.20; Cu ius VIII, 2.19; Plu a ch, A . 23.3–6, 27.9; Aelian NA. VI,
39; Vale ius Max. IX, 2, ex . 7; see B osius 1996, 45–47; De Jong 1997, 427–432; B ian 2002, 93. On
he Scy hian cannibalism, see He odo us I, 216.2–3, IV, 26.1, c . IV, 106. On he A achosian ag icul-
u e, see B ian 2002, 444–445, 808. I he e is ahis o ical basis o all hese alleged p ac ices o
hey a e jus alis o opoi is beyond he scope o his pape ; c . De Jong 1997, 440–441; Ashe ie al.
2007, 217 and 600–601. I is clea ha Alexande was no esponsible o ha supposed sudden
change o cus oms, no ma e wha Plu a ch claimed. On his passage om Plu a ch, see Gilley
2009, 220–228. I hank Albe o Can e a -Gle a o his use ul ema ks on his ma e .
56 Likewise, he pa en s’ c imes and punishmen s could be ‘inhe i ed’ by he child en, see e.g., Pla o
Leg. IX, 856d; Plu a ch Mo . 558 –560a. Fo his eason, some imes amily membe s we e also con-
demned o exile: OGIS 8, A20–25. The amilies we e ega ded as accu sed, as can be ead in he
p e ious epig aphic documen om E esus and in he amous case o he A henian Alcmeonids:
He odo us I, 61.1, V, 71.1, V, 72.1; Thucydides I, 126.11–12; A is o le A h. 2.2. Ano he celeb a ed case is
ha o A hmius o Zeleia, who was condemned o ha ing aken he Median gold: Demos henes IX,
42, XIX, 271, XXV, 30; Aeschines III, 258–259; Dina chus II, 24–25; Ael. A is ides I, 369; Plu a ch Them.
6,4. See o he cases in Demos henes XXI, 113, XXII, 34, XXIII, 62, XXIV, 200–201, XLIII, 58, XLVIII, 2;
Andocides I, 74–76.

81MARC MENDOZA
Mos likely, new p ac ices sp ead mo e easily among he local nobili y han among he
lowe classes, since no majo social o poli ical bene i could be go om– no achie ed by–
he la e . We should also wonde o wha ex en hose new cus oms we e o ce ully imposed
in ac by he new Macedonian powe o he eli e. I is en i ely easible ha he e was some
deg ee o olun a y adop ion by he p ominen local amilies in o de o win he a ou o
he new domina o s and main ain hei s a us quo, especially by o ging ma i al alliances wi h
hem. Plu a ch’spassage seems o lean in his di ec ion oo, since he ne e speaks abou adi ec
imposi ion o hese p ac ices– al hough i mus be admi ed ha any nega i e ema k would
ha e been likely concealed gi en Plu a ch’sapp oach o ha essay. Ensu ing compliance wi h
hese new cus oms among he bulk o he popula ion would be complica ed because some
o hem mos ly ook place ‘behind closed doo s’– especially in u al communi ies, whe e
Macedonian implemen a ion should ha e been mo e enuous. The only possibili y o mo e
igo ous and e ec i e coe cion would ha e been o p ac ices wi h amo e public p ojec ion,
such as, p ecisely, he exposu e o co pses.
I has been posi ed abo e ha he exposu e o he deceased migh ha e been a egula
p ac ice among he common olk, bu no i m conclusion can be eached o he nobili y. In
any e en , he p ocesses p omp ed by he applica ion o he une a y ban a e o be dis in-
guished. Fi s , he e migh be ab oade p ope p ohibi ion a ec ing he common olk, who
did no ge back any subsequen di ec bene i . Fu he mo e, he p i ileged mino i y migh
ha e possibly emb aced a‘ olun a y’ con e sion o he cus oms, which migh ha e en ailed
o hem ase ies o social and poli ical ad an ages in hei ela ionship wi h he new he
-
gemonic powe . E en hough he local eli e migh ha e al eady had hei own dis inc i e i e
(see abo e), i s membe s migh ha e equally adop ed ha b and new isually dis inc public
display as asignal o hei p i ileged posi ion in ela ion o he new domina o s. Ne e heless,
i should no be neglec ed ha he eli e’simpo ance and powe was oo ed in he in luence
hey could exe o e hei coun ymen. Thus, hey had a oided losing hei ascendancy and
so become i ele an o he Macedonian in e es s. Eli es, in consequence, aimed a inding
amos needed equilib ium o emain ele an ac o s in hei lands.
The double -dealing which he local nobili y migh ha e simul aneously engaged in wi h
hei compa io s and conque o s may lay behind he eme gence o in e nal con lic s, such
as he one su e ed by S asano o Soloi. The sa ap migh ha e eins a ed he p ohibi ion
when he ook on he pos in 321, p obably as aconcilia o y ges u e owa ds he un uly G eek
colonis s (Mendoza 2017, 48–52). Howe e , a he same ime, i mus ha e also signalled he
onse o indigenous discon en . The local nobili y, o hei own bene i , migh ha e played
apassi e ole in o de o a oid comp omising hei u u e, wi hou ei he ac i ely appeasing
o suppo ing he up ising. Wi h ha s ance, hey sough o s ake hei claim o hei new
de e mining ole in he s abilisa ion o he coun y o he new go e no , as he necessa y
media o s be ween he Macedonian adminis a ion and he locals. The ac ha con ol was
la e egained and p esumably he banned p ac ice was es o ed e lec s ha hey ul ima ely
achie ed hei objec i e.
Pe haps, by con incing S asano o he unsui abili y o ha policy and/o becoming he
media o s in he con lic ha he p ohibi ion p omp ed, no only did hey manage o keep
undamaged ha bene icial sys em, bu no doub imp o ed hei posi ion wi h bo h he Hel-
lenic uling class and he local lowe classes as well. On one hand, S asano could sal age he
si ua ion, and maybe he gained in his way he es eem o his local subjec s, as well as he migh
ha e igh ened his bonds wi h he egional leade s, while assessing he impo an ole he la e
we e bound o play o his e ec i e con ol o e Bac ia. As shown abo e, S asano ended up
ha ing as ong, consolida ed posi ion which u ned him in o an independen so e eign de ac o.
82 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
On he o he hand, he local eli es migh ha e p o ed hei ‘commi ed’ bene ac ion owa d
hei ellow coun ymen by ha ing exposu e es o ed. Mo eo e , hey we e back in asi ua ion
in which he clea isibili y o he indi idual’ssocial a ilia ion wi hin ag oup could be based
on speci ic p ac ices, such as une a y i es. The egional uppe class migh ha e emb aced
a olun a y Helleniza ion, consolida ed h ough ma i al alliances and seizing any a ailable
chance o dis inguish hemsel es om he o he locals. Failu e o bu y co pses was s ill
abe an in G eek se le s’ eyes, bu he memo y o he up ising unques ionably quie ened
many o hei complain s o a ime. Pe haps, some kind o spa ial delimi a ion was ag eed
on, wi h he likely media ion o he local eli e, o acili a e communal li ing. Likewise, hei
sociopoli ical use ulness o he Macedonian powe – and la e S asano ’sown– and would
ha e discou aged new a emp s o ban his p ac ice.
In conclusion, e en hough i was g ounded upon eligious sc uples, he p ohibi ion on
exposing co pses had an eminen ly poli ical and social applica ion. The shaping and s abilisa-
ion o he conque ed and colonised egions play akey ole in unde s anding he mo i a ions
behind Alexande ’sand S asano ’sp ohibi ions (and es o a ions). The app oach o eligious
p inciples wielded by he powe s - ha -be was always p agma ic, and unde no ci cums ances
was i ahind ance o he implemen a ion o he policies ha we e he mos bene icial o hei
in e es s. The need o se le down he unwilling G eek colonis communi y likely p omp ed
bo h p ohibi ions, bu S asano was o ced o e ac , coun e ed by alocal powe who was
la e able o domain and use i o his own bene i .
SOURCES
Ael. A is ides = Aelius A is ides: O a ionsI. T ansl. M. T app. Loeb Classical Lib a y 533. Camb idge, Mass. 2017.
Aelian NA. = Claudius Aelianus: On Animals II, Books 6–11. T ansl. A.F. Schol ield. Loeb Classical Lib a y 448.
Camb idge, Mass. 1959.
Aelian VH. = Claudius Aelianus: His o ical Miscellany. T ansl. N.G. Wilson. Loeb Classical Lib a y 486. Cam-
b idge, Mass. 1997.
Aeschines = Aeschines: Speeches. T ansl. C.D. Adams. Loeb Classical Lib a y 106. Camb idge, Mass. 1919.
Aeschylus Pe s. = Aeschylus: Pe sians. Se en agains Thebes. Supplian s. P ome heus Bound. T ansl. A.H. Som-
me s ein. Loeb Classical Lib a y 145. Camb idge, Mass. 2009.
Aga hias His . = Aga hias Scholas icus: The His o ies. T ansl. J.D. F endo. Co pus on ium his o iae Byzan inae
2. Be lin 1975.
Andocides = Andocides. In: Mino A ic O a o sI. An iphon. Andocides. T ansl. by K.J. Maidmen . Loeb Classical
Lib a y 308. Camb idge, Mass. 1941.
Ammianus = Ammianus Ma cellinus: His o yII. Books 20–26. T ansl. J.C. Rol e. Loeb Classical Lib a y 315.
Camb idge, Mass. 1940.
Appian Sy . = Appian o Alexand ia: Sy ian Wa s. In: Roman His o yIII. T ansl. B. McGing. Loeb Classical
Lib a y 4. Camb idge, Mass. 2019.
A is o le A h. = A is o le: A henian Cons i u ion. In: A is o le, A henian Cons i u ion. Eudemian E hics. Vi ues
and Vices. T ansl. H. Rackham. Loeb Classical Lib a y 285. Camb idge, Mass. 1935.
A ian Anab. = A ian o Nicomedia: Anabasis o Alexande I–II. T ansl. P.A. B un . Loeb Classical Lib a y 236,
269. Camb idge, Mass. 1976–1983.
A ian Succ. = A ian o Nicomedia: E en s a e he dea h o Alexande . In: Pho ius: The Biblio heca. T ansl. N.G.
Wilson. Duckwo h. London 1994.
A henaeus Deipn. = A henaeus o Nauc a is: The Lea ned Banque e sVI. Books 12–13.594b. T ansl. S.D. Olson.
Loeb Classical Lib a y 327. Camb idge, Mass. 2010.
83MARC MENDOZA
Cice o Tusc. = Cice o: Tusculan Dispu a ions. T ansl. J.E. King. Loeb Classical Lib a y 141. Camb idge, Mass. 1927.
C esias Pe s. = C esias: His o y o Pe sia. T ansl. L. Llewellyn -Jones, J. Robson. London 2010.
DB = Da ius’ Insc ip ion o Behis un. In: The Sculp u es and Insc ip ion o Da ius he G ea on he Rock o Behis ûn
in Pe sia. T ansl. L.W. King, R.C. Thompson. London 1907.
Demos henes = Demos henes: O a ions I–III, V. T ansl. C.A. Vince, J.H. Vince, A.T. Mu ay. Loeb Classical
Lib a y 155, 238, 299, 346. Camb idge, Mass. 1926–1939.
Dina chus = Dina chus. In: Mino A ic O a o sII. Lycu gus. Dina chus. Demades. Hype ides. T ansl. J.O. Bu .
Loeb Classical Lib a y 395. Camb idge, Mass. 1954.
Diodo us = Diodo us Siculus: Lib a y o His o y II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X. T ansl. C.H. Old a he , C.L. She man,
C.B. Welles, R.M. Gee . Loeb Classical Lib a y 303, 377, 384, 389, 390, 422. Camb idge, Mass. 1935–1963.
Diogenes Lae . = Diogenes Lae ius. Li es o Eminen Philosophe sII. Books 6–10. T ansl. R.D. Hicks. Loeb
Classical Lib a y 185. Camb idge, Mass. 1925.
Eu ipides Alc. = Eu ipides: Alces is. In: The comple e G eek d ama. All he ex an agedies o Aeschylus, Sophocles
and Eu ipides, and he comedies o A is ophanes and Menande , in a a ie y o ansla ions. T ansl. E.P.Col-
e idge, Eds. W. J. Oa es, E. O’Neil, J . New Yo k 1938.
Eu ipides Hec. = Eu ipides: Hecuba. In: Eu ipides: Child en o He acles. Hippoly us. And omache. Hecuba. T ansl.
D. Ko acs. Loeb Classical Lib a y 484. Camb idge, Mass. 1995.
Eu ipides Hipp. = Eu ipides: Hippoly us. In: The comple e G eek d ama. All he ex an agedies o Aeschylus,
Sophocles and Eu ipides, and he comedies o A is ophanes and Menande , in a a ie y o ansla ions. T ansl.
E.P.Cole idge, Eds. W.J. Oa es, E. O’Neil, J . New Yo k 1938.
Eu ipides O . = Eu ipides: O es es. In: The comple e G eek d ama. All he ex an agedies o Aeschylus, Sophocles
and Eu ipides, and he comedies o A is ophanes and Menande , in a a ie y o ansla ions. T ansl. E.P.Col-
e idge, Eds. W.J. Oa es, E. O’Neil, J . New Yo k 1938.
Eu ipides Supp. = Eu ipides: Supplian Women. In: Eu ipides: Supplian Women. Elec a. He acles. T ansl. D.
Ko acs. Loeb Classical Lib a y 9. Camb idge, Mass. 1998.
Eu ipides T . = Eu ipides: T ojan Women. In: Eu ipides. T ojan Women. Iphigenia among he Tau ians. Ion. T ansl.
D. Ko acs. Loeb Classical Lib a y 10. Camb idge, Mass. 1999.
Eusebius P aep. = Eusebius o Caesa ea: P epa a ion o he Gospel. T ansl. E.H. Gi o d. Ox o d 1903.
He odo us = He odo us o Halica nassus: The His o ies I–IV. T ansl. A.D. Godley. Loeb Classical Lib a y 117,
118, 119, 120. Camb idge, Mass. 1920–1925.
Home Il. = Home : Iliad I–II. T ansl. A.T. Mu ay. W.F. Wya . Loeb Classical Lib a y 170, 171. Camb idge,
Mass. 1924–1925.
Home Od. = Home : Odyssey I–II. T ansl. A.T. Mu ay, G.E. Dimock. Loeb Classical Lib a y 104–105. Cam-
b idge, Mass. 1919.
Hype ides = Hype ides. In: Mino A ic O a o sII. Lycu gus. Dina chus. Demades. Hype ides. T ansl. J.O. Bu .
Loeb Classical Lib a y 395. Camb idge, Mass. 1954.
Jus in = Ma cus Junianus Jus inus: Epi ome o he Philippic His o y o Pompeius T ogus I–II, T ansl. J. Ya dley,
W. Heckel, P.Whea ley. Ox o d 1997–2011.
Lucian Philops. = Lucian o Samosa a: Philopseudes/The Lo e o lies. In: Lucian, The Dead Come o Li e o The
Fishe man. The Double Indic men o T ials by Ju y. On Sac i ices. The Igno an Book Collec o . The D eam o
Lucian’sCa ee . The Pa asi e. The Lo e o Lies. The Judgemen o he Goddesses. On Sala ied Pos s in G ea Houses.
T ansl. A.M. Ha mon. Loeb Classical Lib a y 130. Camb idge, Mass. 1921.
Lycu gus = Lycu gus: Agains Leoc a es. In: Mino A ic O a o sII. Lycu gus. Dina chus. Demades. Hype ides.
T ansl. J.O. Bu . Loeb Classical Lib a y 395. Camb idge, Mass. 1954.
Lysias = Lysias. T ansl. W.R.M. Lamb. Loeb Classical Lib a y 244. Camb idge, Mass. 1930.
Malalas = John Malalas: Ch onicle. T ansl. E. Je eys, M. Je eys, R. Sco e al. Byzan ina Aus aliensia 4.
Melbou ne 1986.
OGIS = O ien is G aecis Insc ip iones Selec ae I–II. Ed. W. Di enbe ge . Leipzig 1903–1905.
84 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
Onasande = Onasande : The Gene al. In: Aeneas Tac icus, Asclepiodo us, and Onasande . T ansl. Illinois G eek
Club. Loeb Classical Lib a y 156. Camb idge, Mass. 1928.
O osius His . = Paulus O osius: Se en books o His o y agains he Pagans. T ansl. A.T. Fea . Li e pool 2010.
Pausanias = Pausanias: Desc ip ion o G eece I, II, IV. T ansl. W.H.S. Jones, H.A. O me od. Loeb Classical Lib a y
93, 188, 297. Camb idge, Mass. 1918–1935.
Pla o Leg. = Pla o: LawsII. Books 7–12. T ansl. R.G. Bu y. Loeb Classical Lib a y 192. Camb idge, Mass. 1926.
Pla o Phd. = Pla o: Phaedo. In: Eu hyph o. Apology. C i o. Phaedo. T ansl. C. Emlyn -Jones, W. P eddy. Loeb
Classical Lib a y 36. Camb idge, Mass. 2017.
Pla o Rep. = Pla o: RepublicI. Books 1–5. T ansl. C. Emlyn -Jones, W. P eddy. Loeb Classical Lib a y 237. Cam-
b idge, Mass. 2013.
Pliny NH. = Gaius Plinius Secundus: Na u al His o yII. Books 3–7. T ansl. H. Rackham. Loeb Classical Lib a y
352. Camb idge, Mass. 1942.
Plu a ch Ages. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Agesilaus. In: Plu a ch: Li esVII. Agesilaus and Pompey. Pelopidas
and Ma cellus. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 87. Camb idge, Mass. 1917.
Plu a ch Alex. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Alexande . In: Plu a ch: Li esVII. Demos henes and Cice o. Al‑
exande and Caesa . T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 99. Camb idge, Mass. 1919.
Plu a ch A . = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o A axe xes. In: Plu a ch. Li es XI: A a us. A axe xes. Galba. O ho.
Gene al Index. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 103. Camb idge, Mass. 1926.
Plu a ch Deme . = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Deme ius. In: Plu a ch: Li esIX. Deme ius and An ony. Py hus
and Gaius Ma ius. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 101. Camb idge, Mass. 1920.
Plu a ch Lys. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Lysande . In: Plu a ch. Li esIV. Alcibiades and Co iolanus. Lysande
and Sulla. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 80. Camb idge, Mass. 1916.
Plu a ch Mo . = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Mo alia IV, VI, VII, X. Loeb Classical Lib a y 305, 321, 337, 405. T ansl.
F.C. Babbi , W.C. Helmbold, H.N. Fowle , P.H. De Lacy. Camb idge, Mass. 1936–1959.
Plu a ch Nic. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Nicias. In: Plu a ch. Li esIII. Pe icles and Fabius Maximus. Nicias
and C assus. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 65. Camb idge, Mass. 1916.
Plu a ch Phoc. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Phocion. In: Plu a ch. Li esVIII. Se o ius and Eumenes. Phocion
and Ca o he Younge . T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 100. Camb idge, Mass. 1919.
Plu a ch Sol. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Solon. In: Plu a ch. Li esI. Theseus and Romulus. Lycu gus and
Numa. Solon and Publicola. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 46. Camb idge, Mass. 1914.
Plu a ch Them. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Themis ocles. In: Li esII. Themis ocles and Camillus. A is ides
and Ca o Majo . Cimon and Lucullus. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 47. Camb idge, Mass. 1914.
Plu a ch Thes. = Plu a ch o Chae onea: Li e o Theseus. In: Plu a ch: Li esI. Theseus and Romulus. Lycu gus and
Numa. Solon and Publicola. T ansl. B. Pe in. Loeb Classical Lib a y 46. Camb idge, Mass. 1914.
Po phy y Abs . = Po phy y: On abs inence om killing animals. T ansl. G. Cla k. London 2000.
Sex us Emp. Py hon. = Sex us Empi icus. Ou lines o Py honism. T ansl. R.G. Bu y. Loeb Classical Lib a y
273. Camb idge, Mass. 1933.
Sophocles Aj. = Sophocles: Ajax. In: Sophocles: Ajax. Elec a. Oedipus Ty annus. T ansl. H. Lloyd -Jones. Loeb
Classical Lib a y 20. Camb idge, Mass. 1994.
Sophocles An . = Sophocles: An igone. In: Sophocles: An igone. The Women o T achis. Philoc e es. Oedipus a
Colonus. T ansl. H. Lloyd -Jones. Loeb Classical Lib a y 21. Camb idge, Mass. 1994.
S obaeus Flo . = Ioannes S obaeus: Flo ilegium III, book IV. Biblio heca Teubne iana. Ed. A. Meineke. Leipzig
1856.
S abo = S abo: Geog aphy. I–VIII. T ansl. H.L. Jones. Loeb Classical Lib a y 49, 50, 182, 196, 211, 223, 241, 267.
Camb idge, Mass. 1917–1932.
Suda = Suda [online]. Accessed on Oc obe 10 h 2021 om URL: h ps://www.cs.uky.edu/~ aphael/sol/sol -h ml/
Thucydides = Thucydides: His o y o he Peloponnesian Wa I–III. T ansl. C.F. Smi h. Loeb Classical Lib a y
108, 109, 110. Camb idge, Mass. 1919–121.
85MARC MENDOZA
Vidē dā = Vendidad (Vidē dād) o Laws agains he Demons. T ansl. J. Da mes e e , Ed. J.H. Pe e son [online]
Accessed on Oc obe 8 h 2021 om URL: h p://a es a.o g/ endidad/ d_eng.pd
Vale ius Max. = Vale ius Maximus: Memo able Doings and SayingsII. Books 6–9. T ansl. D.R.S. Bailey. Loeb
Classical Lib a y 493. Camb idge, Mass. 2000.
Xenophon Anab. = Xenophon o A hens: Anabasis. T ansl. C.L. B ownson, J. Dille y. Loeb Classical Lib a y
90. Camb idge, Mass. 1998.
Xenophon Cy . = Xenophon o A hens: Cy opaedia. T ansl. W. Mille . Loeb Classical Lib a y 51, 52. Camb idge,
Mass. 1914.
Xenophon Hell. = Xenophon o A hens: Hellenica I: Books 1–4. T ansl. C.L. B ownson. Loeb Classical Lib a y
88. Camb idge, Mass. 1918.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ashe ie al. 2007 = D. Ashe i– A.B. Lloyd– A. Co cella– O. Mu ay– A. Mo eno: Acommen a y on He odo us
Books I–IV. Ox o d.
A kinson, J.E. 1980: Acommen a y on Q. Cu ius Ru us’ His o iae Alexand i Magni. Books 3 and 4. Ams e dam.
A kinson, J.E. 1994: Acommen a y on Q. Cu ius Ru us’ His o iae Alexand i Magni Books 5 o 7.2. Ams e dam.
A kinson, J.E.– Ya dley, J. 2009: Cu ius Ru us. His o ies o Alexande he G ea . Book 10. Ox o d.
Badian, E. 1958: Alexande he G ea and he Uni y o Mankind. His o ia 7, 425–444.
Billows, R.A. 1990: An igonos he One ‑eyed and he c ea ion o he Hellenis ic s a e. Be keley.
Boswo h, A.B. 1980: Ahis o ical commen a y on A ian’sHis o y o Alexande 1. Books I–III. Ox o d.
Boswo h, A.B. 1988a: F om A ian o Alexande . S udies in his o ical in e p e a ion. Ox o d.
Boswo h, A.B. 1988b: Conques and Empi e. The Reign o Alexande he G ea . Camb idge.
Boswo h, A.B. 1995: Ahis o ical commen a y on A ian’shis o y o Alexande 2. Commen a y on Books IV–VI.
Ox o d.
Bowie, A. 1997: T agic Fil e s o His o y: Eu ipides’ Supplices and Sophocles’sPhiloc e es. In: C.B.R. Pelling
(ed.): G eek T agedy and he His o ian. Ox o d, 39–62.
Boyce, M. 1975: AHis o y o Zo oas ianismI. The Ea ly Pe iod. Leiden.
Boyce, M. 1977: APe sian s onghold o Zo oas ianism. Ox o d.
Boyce, M. 1982: AHis o y o Zo oas ianism 2. Unde he Achaemenians. Leiden.
Boyce, M. 1988: The Religion o Cy us he G ea . In: A. Kuh – H. Sancisi -Wee denbu g (eds.): Achaemenid
His o yIII. Me hod and Theo y. Leiden, 15–31.
Boyce, M. 2001: Zo oas ians. Thei eligious belie s and p ac ices. London.
Boyce, M.– G ene , F. 1991: AHis o y o Zo oas ianism 3. Zo oas ianism unde Macedonian and Roman ule.
Leiden.
B ian , P.2002: F om Cy us o Alexande . Ahis o y o he Pe sian Empi e. Winona Lake.
B osius, M. 1996: Women in Ancien Pe sia, 559–331 BC.Ox o d.
B own, T.S. 1949: Onesic i us. As udy in Hellenis ic his o iog aphy. Be keley.
Bu s ein, S.M. 2012: Whence he women? The o igin o he Bac ian G eeks. Ancien Wes & Eas 11, 97–104.
Ca lie , P.2000: Home ic and Macedonian Kingship. In: R. B ock– S. Hodkinson (eds.): Al e na i es o
A hens. Ox o d, 259–268.
Ca ney, E. 1981: The Dea h o Cli us. G eek, Roman and Byzan ine S udies 22, 149–160.
Chan aine, P.– Masson, O. 1954: Su quelques e mes du ocabulai e eligieux des G ecs. La aleu du
mo agos e de se de i es. In: Sp achgeschich e und Wo bedeu ung. Fes sch i Albe de B une . Be n, 85–107.
Cohen, A. 1995: Alexande and Achilles– Macedonians and Mycenaeans. In: J.B. Ca e – S.P.Mo is (eds.):
The Ages o Home . AT ibu e o Emily Townsend Ve meule. Aus in, 483–505.
De Jong, A. 1997: T adi ions o he Magi. Zo oas ianism in G eek and La in li e a u e. Leiden.

86 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVII/1
Duc ey, P.1968: Le ai emen des p isonnie s de gue e dans la G èce an ique, des o igines à la conquê e omaine.
Pa is.
F ed icksmeye , E.A. 1958: The eligion o Alexande he G ea . PhD Thesis, Uni e si y o Wisconsin.
Ga cía Sánchez, M. 2009: El g an ey de Pe sia. Fo mas de ep esen ación de la al e idad pe sa en el imagina io
g iego. Ba celona.
Ga land, R.1985: The G eek way o dea h. I haca.
Ge ne , L. 1936: Quelques Rappo s en e la pénali é e la eligion dans la G èce Ancienne. L’An iqui é Clas‑
sique 5, 325–339.
Gilley, D.L. 2009: Damn wi h Fain P aise. AHis o ical Commen a y on Plu a ch’sOn he Fo une o Vi ue o
Alexande he G ea 1. PhD Thesis, Uni e si y o Missou i.
Goukowsky, P.1976: Biblio hèque his o ique. Li eXVII. Pa is.
G eenwal , W. 1986: Macedonia’sKings and he Poli ical Use ulness o he Medical A s. In: Ancien Mace‑
donia 4. Thessaloniki, 213–222.
G ene , F. 1984: Les p a iques uné ai es dans l’Asie Cen ale seden ai e de la conquê e g ecque à l’islamisa ion. Pa is.
Gunde son, L.L. 1982: Quin us Cu ius Ru us. On his His o ical Me hods. In: W.L. Adams– E. Bo za (eds.):
Philip II, Alexande he G ea , and he Macedonian He i age. Washing on, 177–196.
Hamil on, J.R.1969: Plu a ch, Alexande . Acommen a y. Ox o d.
Hamil on, J.R.1972: Alexande among he O ei ae. His o ia 21, 603–608.
Heckel, W. 2006: Who’swho in he Age o Alexande he G ea . P osopog aphy o Alexande ’sempi e. Malden.
Hol , F.L. 1995: Alexande he G ea and Bac ia. The o ma ion o aG eek on ie in Cen al Asia. Leiden.
Hol , F.L. 2005: In o he land o bones. Alexande he G ea in A ghanis an. Be keley.
Ho nblowe , S. 1996: Acommen a y on Thucydides 2. Books IV–V. 24. Ox o d.
Hu , D. 2004: A chaeological e idence o Zo oas ian une a y p ac ices. In: M. S ausbe g (ed.): Zo oas ian
Ri uals in Con ex . Leiden– Bos on, 593–630.
Hu e , M. 2009: The Impu i y o he Co pse (nasā) and he Fu u e Body ( an ī pasēn). Dea h and A e li e
in Zo oas ianism. In: T. Nicklas– F.V. Rei e e – J. Ve heyden (eds.): The Human Body in Dea h and Resu ‑
ec ion. Be lin, 13–26.
Iliakis, M. 2013: G eek me cena y e ol s in Bac ia. ARe -App aisal. His o ia 62, 182–195.
Jacoby, F. 1944: Pa ios Nomos. S a e Bu ial in A hens and he Public Ceme e y in he Ke ameikos. Jou nal o
Hellenic S udies 64, 37–66.
Kap an, D. 2013: Déja Vu? Visual Cul u e in Wes e n Asia Mino a he Beginning o Hellenis ic Rule. In: E.
S a ianopoulou (ed.): Shi ing social imagina ies in he Hellenis ic pe iod. Na a ions, p ac ices, and images.
Leiden, 25–50.
Kellens, J. 1997: Les achéménides dans le con ex e indo -i anien. In: P.B ian (ed.): Reche ches écen es su
l’Empi e achéménide. Topoi O ien Occiden . Supplémen 1. Lyon, 287–297.
Kellens, J. 2012: Les Achéménides e l’A es a. In: A. Agud– A. Can e a– A. Fale o– R. El Hou ,M.A. Manzano–
R. Muñoz– E. Yildiz (eds.): Sép imo Cen ena io de los Es udios O ien ales en Salamanca. Salamanca, 551–558.
Klinko , H. 2000: Die Sa apien egis e de Alexande ‑ und Diadochenzei . S u ga .
Kuh , A. 2010: The Pe sian Empi e. Aco pus o sou ces om he Achaemenid pe iod. London.
Lembke J.– He ing on, C.J. 2009: Pe sians. In: P.Bu ian– A. Shapi o (eds.): The comple e Aeschylus 2. Pe sians
and o he plays. New Yo k, 3–109.
Macan, R.W. 1895: He odo us. The ou h, Fi h, and Six h Books. London.
Macan, R.W. 1908: He odo us. The Se en h, Eigh h, and Nin h Books. London.
Mai s, R.R.2006: E hnic iden i y in he Hellenis ic Fa Eas . PhD Thessis, Uni e si y o Camb idge.
Mehl, A. 1986: Seleukos Nika o und sein Reich. Lou ain.
Mendoza, M. 2017: S asano o Soloi and he go e nmen o Bac ia du ing he wa s o he Diadochi. Ana‑
basis 8, 44–70.
Mendoza, M. 2019: La impiedad de Alejand o. Alcalá de Hena es.
87MARC MENDOZA
Mikalson, J.D. 1983: A henian popula eligion. Chapel Hill.
Na ia, L.E. 1998: Diogenes o Sinope. The man in he ub. Wes po .
Pa ke , R.1983: Miasma. Pollu ion and pu i ica ion in ea ly G eek eligion. Ox o d.
Pea son, L. 1960: The los his o ies o Alexande he G ea . New Yo k.
Pédech, P.1984: His o iens, compagnons d’Alexand e. Callis hène, Onésic i e, Néa que, P olémée, A is obule. Pa is.
P andi, L. 2013: Diodo o Siculo: Biblio eca s o ica, Lib oXVII. Commen o s o ico. Milano.
P i che , W.K. 1985: The G eek S a e a Wa IV. Be keley.
Schmid , E.F. 1970: Pe sepolisIII. The Royal Tombs and O he Monumen s. O ien al Ins i u e Publica ions 70.
Chicago.
Schobe , L. 1981: Un e suchungen zu Geschich e Babyloniens und de Obe en Sa apien on 323–303 . Ch .
F ank u am Main.
Sco , L. 2005: His o ical commen a y on He odo us, Book 6. Leiden.
Shahbazi, A.S. 2003: I anians and Alexande . Ame ican Jou nal o Ancien His o y 2, 5–38.
Sis i, F. 2001: Anabasi di Alessand o. Vol. 1. Lib i I–III. Milano.
S eine , G. 2009: An ígonas. Una poé ica y una ilosoa de la lec u a.2 Ba celona.
Ta n, W.W. 1933: Alexande he G ea and he uni y o mankind. London.
Unde hill, G.E. 1900: Acommen a y wi h in oduc ion and appendix on he Hellenica o Xenophon. Ox o d.
Welles, C.B. 1963: Diodo us o Sicily. Vol. 8: Books XVI, 66–95 and XVII. Camb idge.
Wideng en, G. 1968: Les eligions de l’I an. Pa is.
Ya dley, J.– Whea ley, P.– Heckel, W. 2011: Jus in: Epi ome o he Philippic his o y o Pompeius T ogus. Vol.
2: Books 13–15. The successo s o Alexande he G ea . Ox o d.
Ma c Mendoza
Uni e si a Au ònoma de Ba celona
Despa x B7/129
Facul a de Filoso ia iLle es, Edi ici B
Campus UAB s/n
08193 Ce danyola del Vallès (Ba celona)
ma [email protected]