The Truth about the Hypnotic Effect of Ancient Alexandria

Image generated by Bing Image Creator by Designer.

It is difficult to believe that Alexander, when he traced the streets and boundaries of the city to which he gave his name, Alexandria,[1] would be standing as a focal point of ancient and modern culture well over two thousand years later. Grief is the experience of ‘distress at a loss and experiencing it in a more or less overt way.’[2] Lebel and Ronel state that there are three main manifestations of normative mourning: (1) idealising that which has been lost; (2) feelings of guilt and shouldering responsibility for the loss and (3) searching for meaning.[3] Lofland includes ‘irrational’ behaviour as one of the symptoms of grief.[4]

The following article will seek to assess whether the modern world is grieving for the Alexandria of the past. If so, the history of Alexandria can be defined as a history of what has been lost. Three case studies will be used to discuss whether the history of Alexandria is the history of what is lost: (a) lost indigenous voices; (b) the Library of Alexandria and (c) the tomb of Alexander the Great.

Lost Indigenous Voices

The Western world has tended to have a Graeco-centric view of Alexandrian history. This perspective has pervaded into pop-culture, as evidenced by the films about Cleopatra VII produced in the twentieth century, such as Carry On Cleo and two films both named Cleopatra, one starring Theda Bara and the other Elizabeth Taylor. Critics are typically concerned with the ‘beauty’ of the actress playing her. Lower says although ‘neither voluptuous nor beautiful, this Cleopatra was nevertheless sexually alluring’[5] and Rachleff says Elizabeth Taylor has ‘the most beautiful face since Eve’.[6] Despite admitting that Cleopatra was likely non-white, Rachleff says that it would ‘not be fair for Hollywood to undo our most precious historical legends’.[7] The real Cleopatra’s ethnicity is lost, but the uncomfortable impression that these critics give is that ‘beauty’ is associated with whiteness.

Non-white voices are generally absent from our history of Alexandria. Herodotus’ writing on Egypt indicates a Greek interest in Egyptian culture dating back to the 5^th century BC,[8] but Alexandrian poetry gives the impression that ‘Egyptians did not exist at all’, and where they are mentioned, they are depicted as muggers.[9] Theocritus calls Egyptians ‘deceitful scoundrels’ and ‘nasty rascals all as bad as each other’ who had a national ‘style’ of thievery.[10] Where they discuss indigenous people, the scant ancient sources offer a bigoted ethnic profile of a people who are otherwise silenced.

Overinvestment ‘in the myth of the origins of European culture’ in the 19^th and 20^th centuries’[11] has contributed to the difficulties concerning ethnicity. Western scholars have tended to assume that the Hellenistic court was the exclusively the realm of a ‘Graeco-Macedonian elite.’[12] It is unsurprising that such a narrative predominated during the period of decolonisation. This model is derived from Polybius’ account, who refers to courtiers by Greek names, such as Hermeias and Deinocrates, the latter of which Polybius says was a courtier by nature because he ‘gave one the impression of being a capable man, but his capacity was but counterfeit and pinchbeck.’[13]

The real Cleopatra’s ethnicity is lost, but the uncomfortable impression that these critics give is that ‘beauty’ is associated with whiteness.

Identification by name is the best method we have for identifying Egyptians. By inferring ethnicity from the names written on papyrus sources, the working theory is that Greek names point to ethnic Greeks, Egyptian names to ethnic Egyptians.[14] This is complicated by the fact that many people took two names, an Egyptian and a Greek,[15] particularly in the administration and the army.[16] According to O’Neill, ethnic Macedonians are overrepresented whereas ethnic Egyptians are underrepresented in the data based on names.[17] The tendency of ethnically Egyptian officials to use their Egyptian name in their private life and their Greek name when writing in an official capacity has contributed to their lack of visibility in the available evidence.[18] It is difficult for moderns to account for indigenous lives if they do not seem to exist according to our evidence.

It is possible this was an intentional feature of Ptolemaic policy. As Pàmias says, Ptolemaic propaganda intended to legitimise sovereignty of non-Greek subjects and ‘reinforce the self-image’ of the regime.[19] One method was the Dionysus Procession, which connected the Ptolemies to Alexander and through him Dionysus, positioning themselves as the descendants of the god.[20] Items were brought from across Greece and beyond including Macedonian women,[21] Corinthian amphoras[22] and Spartan mixing bowls.[23] The fact that the procession was about ‘shouting out Greek superiority’ over the Egyptians[24] is made clear by the inclusion of non-Greek elements in the processions. This included Indian women bound like prisoners of war.[25] The domination of Greek people over non-Greeks is the intention here.

The exclusionary modern perspective is enabled by the ancient sources, but it is a product of contemporary denial of the demise of lost and idealised empires, both modern and antique.

The Library of Alexandria

Bagnall says the Library of Alexandria has a ‘grip on the minds’ of modern people.[26] This is true, and is an example of the irrational behaviour mentioned in the introduction.

Some examples of modern scholarship demonstrate this. For a start, Green makes the highly questionable remark that Alexandria was the most important and enduring Hellenistic city as ‘it still flourishes today’.[27] The city’s decline, partly caused by the centralisation of power in Cairo under a policy of ‘Egyptianisation’, beginning in the 1950s,[28] puts this into questions. Green says ‘the heritage of Alexandria has survived unbroken’, completely ignoring a period of over a thousand years where, as he says himself on the same page, it was little more than a backwater.[29] He then says that although Alexandria has declined in the modern era because all of its ‘non-Islamic’ inhabitants have left, it may survive this period of decline.[30] The uncomfortable undertones of Green’s article are repeated when he says Ptolemy had to import Greek intellectuals because there was ‘no local talent’, which cannot have been true given the long intellectual history in Egypt.[31]

Bagnall and Chepesiuk also make irrational comments regarding the library. The former says the ancient institution has ‘bequeathed the image of itself’ to us today and that ‘every one of our great contemporary libraries owes something to it.’[32] Both say that the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, a modern replica of the Ptolemaic library, means that the ‘dream’ of its ancient predecessor is still with us.[33]

The team of architects behind this project was somewhat diverse, at least in terms of nationality, with members from Norway, Austria, and the United States.[34] Kapeller uses flowery and arcane language to describe his team’s vision for the library, saying the fact the building is a ‘universal shape’ (a circle) means it is ‘rooted in the ancient past’ and reaches ‘out into the future.’[35] The architects had ambitions beyond the construction project, saying that the new library ‘could help to put Alexandria back on the map, where it belongs, as one of the most interesting cities in northern Africa’.[36]

The new library seeks to aspire to a misguided and irrational idealisation of a flawed ancient institution. The reality is the ancient library was a propaganda tool used by a non-indigenous colonial power to culturally dominate Egypt.[37] In addition, the modern library fails to embody the ideal it compares itself to. Farouk Hosni, the Egyptian culture minister who ‘spearheaded the initiative to rebuild the Bibliotheca Alexandrina’, has been criticised for allowing a decline in Egyptian literature and national annual book publications,[38] censorship, and suppression of freedom of expression during his tenure. Claims ‘that valuable antiquities were destroyed during construction’ and that the library is ‘an expensive gimmick that will do little to improve education’ began to circulate even before it opened in 2002.[39] Today, Alexandria ‘exists largely as a memory’ of supposedly more successful and cosmopolitan eras in its history.[40]

Plutarch tells us that the library burned down by accident when Julius Caesar was ‘forced’ to repel an enemy attack with fire.[41] Gellius also mentions the fire, claiming that seven hundred thousand books were destroyed,[42] as does Seneca, who says the figure was only forty thousand.[43] Lucan, who mentions the fire described in the other accounts, does not say it destroyed the library.[44] The sources provide differing information on the destruction. Heller-Roazen is right that the events of the library’s destruction are ‘difficult to establish with any certainty’.[45] The uncertainty about the demise of the ancient library spurs the imagination of romanticists. They fill the void in our knowledge about the library with tales of lost knowledge and tragedy.

Desperate attempts to politicise the new library, such as the laying of the cornerstone by then Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, and UNESCO Director-General Federico Mayor,[46] leave no doubt that the death of the modern library will be easier to understand. As in the rest of Egypt, social, political and leisure spaces have been ‘closed down or strictly monitored’ and citizens’ lives are mediated ‘by class differences and social segregation.’[47] The Bibliotheca Alexandrina, state controlled from the start,[48] is likely to fade into history by the hand of an authoritarian regime. It is no accident that library was placed under the supervision of the Egyptian Ministry of Education.[49]

The Tomb of Alexander

Lofland says that those in mourning literally ‘seek the lost person’, potentially hallucinating, fantasising or simply remembering their presence.[50] The search for Alexander’s tomb (or tombs, as he was buried three times[51]) is a search for something that is lost.

Bianchi provides us with two examples of irrational searches for Alexander’s resting place. The first is that of Stellio Komotsos, a Greek waiter who lived in in Alexandria who spent his disposable income on efforts to dig up Alexander’s tomb.[52] He spent many years digging in many places across the city. Having retired by 1993, he claimed to have aggregated a vast quantity of information on the tomb, which he was willing to sell for a pension and a new Mercedes.[53] Komotsos appears to be a mercenary with little interest but personal gain. There is a contradiction between Komotsos’ years of feverish searching on the one hand and his abrupt surrendering of his life’s work in return for a car. This contradiction suggests irrationality in Komotsos’ behaviour, either in the fact that he miscalculated the value of a pension and a car relative to the value of his life’s passion or in the futility of his years of searching. Either way, his efforts show that the interest in finding the tomb of Alexander the Great is not confined to a scholarly elite as amateurs are willing to expend absurd amounts of time, energy and money to that end.

The second example is Liani Souvaltzi, a Greek national affiliated with the Institute of Hellenistic Studies. Souvaltzi claims she has evidence that Alexander’s tomb can be found in the Siwa Oasis,[54] despite the fact that most competent authorities agree it is somewhere in Alexandria.[55] Her claim is based on the unsubstantiated assertion that Alexander wanted to be buried near Amun, supposedly his divine father, whose oracle lived in that region. Souvaltzi’s search has alienated her from Egyptologists and ordinary Alexandrians.[56] Part of this is a combination of the fact that she claims to have located the tomb via ‘mystical guidance’[57] and that she is an ‘ultra-patriot of extreme political views.’[58] According to her, whoever discoveres Alexander’s remains would rule a ‘stable and prosperous realm’, which Bianchi astutely links to the dispute between the Hellenic Republic and the Republic of North Macedonia over who has a right to the name ‘Macedonia.’[59]

Bianchi refers to the media attention given to Liani Souvaltzi and her work was ‘exceeded only by that surrounding the O.J. Simpson trial’.[60] Senior officials from Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, a busy institution given the antiquity of that country, were present at the Souvaltzi’s press conference.[61] International publications were in attendance, echoing the attention paid to the opening of the Bibliotheca Alexandrina. Support came from across the world, with Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Oman pledging $65 million in cash. $4 million was donated by Italy and various equipment and materials were sent from Norway, Germany, Japan, and elsewhere.[62]

The search for the tomb is related to the appropriation of Alexander’s corpse by Ptolemy. Strabo provides a simplistic version of Ptolemy’s appropriation of Alexander’s body, saying that Ptolemy took the body to Egypt ‘motivated by greed and desire’.[63] Diodorus Siculus says Ptolemy buried Alexander at Alexandria,[64] whereas Pausanias says Memphis.[65] Aelian relates an exciting story where Ptolemy steals the body and then creates a decoy ‘clad in royal robes and a shroud of enviable quality,’ which was discovered by Perdiccas whilst the real body made its way to Egypt.[66] The key point about Alexander’s body is that ownership of it made Ptolemy out to be his successor.[67]

The search for the tomb is a search for closure that may never be satisfied, but the significance of the contributions that continue to be made by looking for it cannot be understated.

Liani Souvaltzi and the presence of high-profile Egyptian and international officials at the Siwa Oasis demonstrate that the politicisation of Alexander’s corpse, which began shortly after his death, is still an active phenomenon. The obsession the tomb of Alexander will only end when it has been discovered – i.e., when we have closure.

This is not to say that the search is entirely without merit. In 1805, a large green sarcophagus was transported from Egypt, where it had been lifted from the remains of the French fleet by the British, to the British Museum.[68] Although there was little evidence, it was believed to be the sarcophagus used for Alexander the Great.[69] In reality, it had been made for Nectanebo II,[70] but the most important part of this discovery was that it came with the Rosetta Stone, which was crucial to the deciphering of hieroglyphics. More recent searches have produced smaller discoveries, such as one conducted by the Polish Center of Archaeology which uncovered two unprecedented Roman sites in Egypt, one a marble odeum (small theatre) and the other a bath complex.[71]

The search for the tomb is a search for closure that may never be satisfied, but the significance of the contributions that continue to be made by looking for it cannot be understated.

Studying what has been Lost

Lofland says that many scholars view grief as a ‘non-fatal disease.’[72] This disease has infected the scholarship and general reception of Alexandria. Today, we are in denial regarding the indigenous voices of Egypt under Ptolemaic ruling, idealise culturally imperialistic institutions like the Library of Alexandria, and desperately seek for closure by finding lost ancient sites like the tomb of Alexander. Dean says grief is a universal and potentially harmful human experience.’[73] The harm inflicted upon the history of Alexandria by this irrational grieving process is deep, but there is a silver lining. Many discoveries have been unwittingly made in the attempt to bury Alexandria – or resurrect its corpse. The ‘large and populous Greek city’ of Alexander’s dreams[74] may be lost, but it still occupies a dominating position in the modern psyche. The history of Alexandria is a study of what is lost.

Edward Cross

Sources:

Primary:

• Aelian, Historical Miscellany, tr. Wilson, N.G., Loeb Classical Library 486, (Cambridge, Mass., 1997)
• Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander, Volume I. Books 1-4, tr. Brunt, P.A., Loeb Classical Library 236, (Cambridge, Mass., 1976)
• Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander, Volume II. Books 5-7, tr. Brunt, P.A., Loeb Classical Library 269, (Cambridge, Mass., 1983)
• Athenaeus, The Learned Banqueters, Volume I: Books 1-3.106e, tr. Olson, S.D. (ed.), Loeb Classical Library 204, (Cambridge, Mass., 2007)
• Athenaeus, The Learned Banqueters, Volume II: Books 3.106e-5, tr. Olson, S.D. (ed.), Loeb Classical Library 208, (Cambridge, Mass., 2007)
• Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, Volume VIII. Books 16.66-17, tr. Welles, C.B., Loeb Classical Library 422, (Cambridge, Mass., 1963)
• Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, Volume IX. Books 18-19.65, tr. Geer, R.M., Loeb Classical Library 377, (Cambridge, Mass., 1947)
• Gellius, Attic Nights, Volume II. Books 6-13, tr. Rolfe, R.C., Loeb Classical Library 200, (Cambridge, Mass., 1927)
• Lucan, The Civil War (Parsalia), tr. Duff, J.D., Loeb Classical Library 220, (Cambridge, Mass., 1928)
• Plutarch, ‘Alexander’ in Lives, Volume VII, tr. Perrin, B., Loeb Classical Library 99, (Cambridge, Mass., 1919)
• Plutarch, ‘Caesar’ in Lives, Volume VII, tr. tr. Perrin, B., Loeb Classical Library 99, (Cambridge, Mass., 1919)
• Polybius, The Histories, Volume III. Books 5-8, tr. Paton, W.R.; Walbank, F.W. & Habicht, C. (eds), Loeb Classical Library 138, (Cambridge, Mass., 2011)
• Polybius, the Histories, Volume V. Books 16-27, tr. Paton, W.R.; Walbank, F.W. & Habicht, C. (eds), Loeb Classical Library 160, (Cambridge, Mass., 2012)
• Pseudo-Callisthenes, Alexander Romance, tr. Stoneman, R., Penguin Classics (London, 2003)
• Seneca the Younger, ‘Tranquillitate Animi’ in Moral Essays, Volume II, tr. Basore, J.W., Loeb Classical Library 254, (Cambridge, Mass., 1932)
• Strabo, Geography, Volume V. Books 10-12, tr. Jones, H.L., Loeb Classical Library 211, (Cambridge, Mass., 1928)
• Strabo, Geography, Volume VII. Books 15-16, tr. Jones, H.L., Loeb Classical Library 241, (Cambridge, Mass., 1930)
• Strabo, Geography, Volume VIII. Book 17, tr. Jones, H.L., Loeb Classical Library 267, (Cambridge, Mass., 1932)
• Theocritus, Idylls, tr. Hopkinson, N. (ed.), Loeb Classical Library 28, (Cambridge, Mass., 2015)

Secondary

• Afsaruddin, A., ‘The Great Library at Alexandria’ in The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 49, No. 3, (Hoboken, N.J., 1990) pp.291-292
• Bagnall, R.S., ‘Alexandria: Library of Dreams’ in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 146, No. 4, (Philadelphia, Penn., 2002) pp.348-362
• Bianchi, R.S., ‘Alexander’s Tomb… Not!’ in Archaeology, Vol. 48, No. 3, (Boston, 1995) pp.58-60
• Bianchi, R.S., ‘Hunting Alexander’s Tomb’ in Archaeology, Vol. 46, No. 4, (Boston, 1993) pp.54-55
• Chepesiuk, R., ‘Dream in the Desert: Alexandria’s Library Rises Again’ in Vol. 31, No. 4, (Chicago, 2000) pp.70-73
• Chugg, A., ‘The Sarcophagus of Alexander the Great?’ in Greece & Rome, Vol. 49, No. 1, (Cambridge, 2002) pp.8-26
• Clarysse, W., ‘Greeks and Egyptians in the Ptolemaic Army and Administration’ in Aegyptus, Anno 65, No. 1/2, (Milan, 1985) pp.57-66
• Dean, J.C., ‘Grief and Attachment’ in Journal of Religion and Health, Vol. 27, No. 2, (New York, 1988) pp.157-165
• Dillery, J., ‘Alexander’s Tomb at “Rhacotis”: Ps.Callisth. 3.34.5 and the Oracle of the Potter’ in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 148, (Bonn, 2004) pp.253-258
• El Chazli, Y., ‘Alexandria, City of Dispossession’ in Middle East Report, No. 287, Cities Lost and Remade, (Tacoma, Wash., 2018) pp.22-24
• Erskine, A., ‘Culture and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The Museum and Library of Alexandria’ in Greece & Rome, Vol. 42, No. 1, (Cambridge, 1995) pp.38-48
• Green, P., ‘The Politics of Royal Patronage: Early Ptolemaic Alexandria’ in Grand Street, Vol. 5, No. 1, (New York, 1985) pp.151-163
• Heller-Roazen, D., ‘Tradition’s Destruction: On the Library of Alexandria’ in October, Vol. 100, Obsolescence, (Cambridge, Mass., 2002) pp.133-153
• Holland, B., ‘Cleopatra: What kind of woman was she, anyway?’ in The Classical Outlook, Vol. 76, No. 3, (Hamilton, Oh., 1999) pp.97-101
• Kapeller, C., ‘The Architecture of the New Library of Alexandria’ in The Massachusetts Review, Vol. 42, No. 4, Egypt, (Amherst, Mass., 2001) pp.573-584
• Lebel, U. & Ronel, N., ‘The Emotional Reengineering of Loss: On the Grief-Anger-Social Action Continuum’ in Political Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 5, (Columbus, N.C., 2009) pp.669-691
• Lofland, L.H., ‘The Social Shaping of Emotion: The Case of Grief’ in Symbolic Interaction, Vol. 8, No. 2, (Salford, 1985) pp.171-190
• Lower, C.B., ‘The Shakespeare Plays on TV: Antony and Cleopatra’ in Shakespeare on Film Newsletter, Vol. 6, No. 2, (Baltimore, Md., 1982) pp.2, 7
• Moyer, I.S., ‘Court, “Chora”, and Culture in Late Ptolemaic Egypt’ in The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 132, No. 1, Classical Courts and Courtiers, (Baltimore, Md., 2011) pp.15-44
• O’Neill, J.L., ‘Places and Origin of the Officials of Ptolemaic Egypt’ in Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 55, H. 1, (Stuttgart, 2006) pp.16-25
• Pàmias, J., ‘Dionysus and Donkeys on the Streets of Alexandria: Eratosthenes’ Criticism of Ptolemaic Ideology’ in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 102, (Cambridge, Mass., 2004) pp.191-198
• Rachleff, O., ‘Prospects of Cleopatra’ in Vision: A Journal of Film Comment, Vol. 1, No. 1, (New York, 1962) pp.26-27
• Rutherford, I., ‘Greek fiction and Egyptian fiction’ in The Romance between Greece and the East, Whitmarsh, T. & Thompson, S. (eds), (Oxford, 2013) pp.23-37
• Stephens, S., ‘Fictions of Cultural Authority’ in The Romance between Greece and the East, Whitmarsh, T. & Thompson, S. (eds), (Oxford, 2013) pp.91-102
• Whitmarsh, T., ‘The romance between Greece and the East’ in The Romance between Greece and the East, Whitmarsh, T. & Thompson, S. (eds), (Oxford, 2013) pp.1-20

[1] Arrian Anabasis of Alexander 3.2.1-2; Diodorus Siculus The Library of History 17.52.

[2] Dean 1988, p.158.

[3] Lebel & Ronel 2009, pp.670-671.

[4] Lofland 1985, p.172.

[5] Lower 1982, p.2.

[6] Rachleff 1962, p.26.

[7] Rachleff 1962, p.26.

[8] See Herodotus Histories Book 2 for his exploration of Egypt; Stephens 2013, p.91.

[9] Erskine 1995, p.43.

[10] Theocritus Idyll, 15.46-50.

[11] Whitmarsh 2013, p.5.

[12] Moyer 2011, p.16; cf. O’Neill 2006, p.16.

[13] Polybius 23.5.

[14] Clarysse 1985, pp.57-58.

[15] Clarysse 1985, pp.57-58; Moyer 2011, p.22.

[16] Clarysse 1985, p.64.

[17] O’Neill 2006, p.18.

[18] Clarysse 1985, p.60.

[19] Pàmias 2004, p.191.

[20] Erskine 1995, p.43; Pàmias 2004, pp.191-192.

[21] Athenaeus 198e.

[22] Athenaeus 199e.

[23] Athenaeus 198d.

[24] Erskine 1995, p.44.

[25] Athenaeus 201a.

[26] Bagnall 2002, p.361.

[27] Green 1985, p.151.

[28] El Chazli 2018, pp.22-23.

[29] Green 1985, p.153.

[30] Green 1985, pp.153-154; cf. El Chazli 2018, p.22 who makes a similar point but in a less problematic way.

[31] Green 1985, p.156.

[32] Bagnall 2002, p.361.

[33] Bagnall 2002, p.362; Chepesiuk 2000, p.70.

[34] Kapeller 2001, p.574.

[35] Kapeller 2001, p.574.

[36] Kapeller 2001, p.584.

[37] Erskine 1995, p.38.

[38] Al-Jazeera, Profile: Farouk Hosni – Egypt’s candidate for the top Unesco job is a controversial figure (accessed: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2009/9/22/profile-farouk-hosni on 5/5/2022).

[39] Wood, P., Library reopens 1,700 years on, BBC News Online (accessed: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2331635.stm on 5/5/2022).

[40] El Chazli 2018, p.22.

[41] Plutarch Caesar 49.

[42] Gellius 7.17.

[43] Seneca the Younger Tranquillitate Animi 9.5.

[44] Lucan The Civil War 10.486-546.

[45] Heller-Roazen 2002, p.148.

[46] Chepesiuk 2000, p.70.

[47] El Chazli 2018, p.24.

[48] El Chazli 2018, p.24.

[49] Chepesiuk 2000, p.72.

[50] Lofland 1985, p.180.

[51] Bianchi 1993, p.54.

[52] Bianchi 1993, p.55.

[53] Bianchi 1993, p.55.

[54] Bianchi 1993, p.55.

[55] Bianchi 1995, p.58.

[56] Bianchi 1993, p.55.

[57] Bianchi 1995, p.60.

[58] Bianchi 1995, p.60.

[59] Bianchi 1995, p.60.

[60] Bianchi 1995, p.58.

[61] Bianchi 1995, p.59.

[62] Chepesiuk 2000, p.71.

[63] Strabo 17.1.8.

[64] Diodorus Siculus The Library of History 18.28.2-3.

[65] Pausanias 1.6.3.

[66] Aelian Historical Miscellany 12.64.

[67] Erskine 1995, p.41.

[68] Chugg 2002, p.10.

[69] Chugg 2002, p.12.

[70] Chugg 2002, pp.25-26.

[71] Bianchi 1993, pp.54-55.

[72] Lofland 1985, p.174.

[73] Dean 1988, p.157.

[74] Plutarch Alexander 26