Alexander the Great: Conqueror of Death

According to scholar Ernst Badian, no man has been more written about than

Alexander the Great. I would like to humbly contribute yet another perspective on

Alexander’s character in regards to his leadership, divinity, and sexuality. A theme

throughout this essay is that of illusions, and to what degree Alexander embraced some

and rejected others, in order to facilitate his goals. His quest, or rather what motivated it,

is the primary focus of this essay. I will show that due to the unique context and

circumstances of his life Alexander the Great was motivated by a deep suppression of

death anxiety that manifested in an ‘immortality-project’ on an unprecedented scale.

Ernest Becker’s thesis called The Denial of Death essentially states that it is the

unique human awareness of our inevitable demise that prompts us to engage in heroic

projects in order to outlast ourselves symbolically.1 It is noteworthy that these processes

are typically subconscious. Ultimately, civilization is an elaborate manifestation of our

collective quest to overcome death. At minimum, constant death threats, whether to our

body or our identity, invoke a defense mechanism that causes us to cling to illusions such

as religion or nationalism that provide comfort. These so-called heroic ‘immortality

projects’ are designed to provide meaning and significance to our lives. Terror

Management Theory, which is built on this premise, manages the awareness of death

through a two-part anxiety buffer that includes a cultural world-view and self-esteem.2 It

is from the cultural clash of conflicting worldviews that the Greeks derived the notion of

Barbarians.

1
Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death. (New York City: Free Press, 1973) #
2
Florette Cohen Et. Al., "Fatal Attraction: The effects of mortality salience on evaluations of charismatic,
task-oriented, and relationship-oriented leaders." Psychological Science 15.12 (2004) 4.
 Becker says that it is terrifying to admit that fundamentally the purpose of one’s

actions is to earn self-esteem and that “this is why human heroics is a blind drivenness

that burns people up.”3 Alexander greatly admired Diogenes’ seemingly inexplicable

internal source of self-esteem, and indifference towards the great king. Were he not

compelled by the mission set upon him, Alexander wished he could be as content as

Diogenes simply by the light of the sun.4 Ironically though, Diogenes did attract notoriety

and thus self-esteem from his extreme cynicism. Alexander, in contrast, in a sense

acknowledged that had he not been destined to manifest life’s will to power5 he might

enjoy the complacency of Diogenes. Thus, despite appearances, no one is exempt from

these death denying functions and processes. Alexander, being born into royalty and

neglected as a child would have to accomplish extraordinary deeds to earn his self-

esteem. As for the mediocre masses, less destined for ‘greatness’ than Alexander, they

grudgingly work within the roles society constructs for them and vie for promotions.6 But

it is important to note that Alexander’s benefactors and supporters were vicariously

taking part in his mission for the same reasons. Namely that it constitutes a contribution

to a legacy that is greater than oneself.

Initially Alexander was motivated on one level by a desire to exceed Philip II’s

(his (so-called) father) legacy of hegemony7 and on another to revenge against Persia for

the Persian Wars brought upon Greece.8 However, I would like to focus on a more

contentious aspect of Alexander’s quest – that of the ‘unity of mankind’ thesis. The

3
Becker 6.
4
Plutarch. Plutarch Lives, VII, Demosthenes and Cicero. Alexander and Caesar (Loeb Classical Library).
(London: Loeb Classical Library, 1919) sec. 17.
5
cf. Nietzsche’s concept of ‘Will to Power’
6
Becker 6.
7
Paul Cartledge, Alexander the Great: The Hunt for a New Past. (New York: Macmillan, 2004) 135.
8
Aubrey De Selincourt, Arrian the Campaigns of Alexander. (London: Penguin Books, 1976) 127.
argument that Alexander wanted to unify mankind comes from Tarn’s interpretation of

Plutarch and the Greek concept of Homonoia. It was the notion of oneness and

cosmopolitanism amongst all Greek, in a time when there was still much factional

fighting.9 Alexander chose to extend it to all peoples though, and judge people based on

virtue and vice whether Greek or not.10

Tarn argues that Alexander sought cultural and physical amalgamation of races in

order to “unite the whole world under his beneficent rule,”11 but Badian dismisses the

source as merely being rhetorical.12 Badian’s critique of Tarn is constructive, but he

seems to get tied down in semantics, arguing that Alexander cannot be both ‘ruler and

partner in Asia.’13 It is not a stretch to accept Tarn’s ‘dreamer’ at least in part, since we

need only imagine that Alexander could yield to the truth; that the differences between

races, cultures, and the sense of ‘others’ were illusory. Such a blasphemous idea would

surely be met with fierce opposition, and was back in Macedon. Regardless, in rhetoric

and action Alexander showed that he realized this, albeit the murderous tyrant that he

was.

Cartledge also affirms that Alexander neither believed in the ‘abstract’ concept of

unification, nor was he a high-minded philosopher14 and that the interracial marriage

adopted from his father Philip was merely a political strategy.15 It is true that Alexander’s

oft ignoble actions to do not perfectly match this proposed noble vision. But there is little

9
Henry M De Mauriac, "Alexander the Great and the Politics of "Homonoia"." Journal of the History of
Ideas 10.1 (1949) 106.
10
E. Badian, "Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind." Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 7.4
(1958) 433.
11
Badian 433.
12
Badian 434.
13
Badian 432.
14
Cartledge 193.
15
Cartledge 155.
doubt that Hitler ‘the dreamer’ existed despite the lunacy of his ‘purification of races.’ It’s

not implausible that Alexander believed in a benevolent ‘fusion of races’ and used it as a

rhetorical trick to gain power. Nobody ever said and immortality project was easy.

Certainly by this Alexander would ensure both his personal symbolic immortality and the

collective immortality through the spread of Hellenic culture.

Only an extraordinarily forceful commander could have executed such a radical

mission, assuming Tarn was right. The rationale for Alexander’s use of force, and Freud

confirms it, is that people have “an extreme passion for authority” and wish “to be

governed by unrestricted force.”16 But even still, Plutarch says that he used coercion only

where persuasion would not suffice.17 Becker says that people will identify with leaders

who offer the chance to be a part of something great.18 Moreover, he noted that “man is

not a herd animal, rather a horde animal, led by a chief” and that this explains the

“uncanny and coercive characteristics of group formation.”19 To look the chief in the face

is a dangerous enterprise and, as Freud says, explains the “paralysis” of an inferior

subject to a superior one.20 For Alexander, the consolidation and reform of entire societies

under his own ideology was a way for him to project his symbolic self beyond his

physical limitations. Likewise, people experience a longing for “magical protection” and

“participation in omnipotence”21 and this can explain the reactions of those who

Alexander subdued. To return to Hitler, through similar charisma to Alexander he

convinced millions to support his insane conspiracy. The common thread is that the

people embraced the illusion of the transcendent goal of their leader in order to satiate
16
Becker 132.
17
Plutarch sec. 329C.
18
Cohen 3.
19
Becker 132.
20
Becker.
21
Becker.
their own death anxiety and supplant their own inadequate immortality projects with a far

greater one.

Alexander used his divinity to elevate his power. Cartledge says what we call

Greek religion was more cult acts and superstition as opposed to dogma and faith.22 In the

ancient Greek world, gods were essentially the anthropomorphization of unexplained

forces and powers.23 Thus, as Alexander was a force to be reckoned with, it was not

unreasonable to think of him as a god, or a hero (demigod) in this sense. The desire to

institute an orderly system amongst all people was instilled in Alexander sine he was a

child and his mission was imbued with religious connotations.24 The question of

Alexander’s ‘divinity’ should be easily settled, and usually is, by Plutarch’s assertion that

Alexander was not deluded by his deification, but rather used it to subjugate others.25

Here, it is useful to reference a principle called the Thomas theorem that states what we

define as real is real in its consequences.26 Indeed, Plutarch writes that Psammon the

philosopher in Egypt instructed Alexander that he who gains mastery and rule over

mankind is divine.27 The fact that others believed Alexander was a god made it true in

effect. Alexander rejected the illusion of personal divinity but seized its power

nonetheless to pursue his mission.

Otto Rank observes that man years to feel one with humanity and one can only

really live by erecting a god-ideal just outside oneself.28 To this effect Alexander did yield

to a higher power in a sense with his penchant for oracles and omens. This seemed to be
22
Cartledge 238.
23
Cartledge.
24
Plutarch sec. 342A.
25
Plutarch sec. 28.
26
Dorothy Swaine Thomas and William Isaac Thomas. The Child in America: Behavior Problems and
Programs. (London: A.A. Knopf, 1938) 571-572.
27
Plutarch sec. 27.
28
Becker 152.
an illusion that he bought as it expunged the threat of death. Similarly, Becker describes

how Freud was tempted to yield to ‘transcendant powers’, trending toward anxious little

beliefs. In Freud’s own words, “my own superstition has its roots in suppressed ambition

(immortality)…”29 Examples for Alexander include his sentiments after murdering

Cleitus,30 the omen to avoid Babylon,31 and the cutting of the Gordion knot.32 I argue that,

like Freud, Alexander’s superstition was necessary for his self-esteem. It is particularly

the event at Gordion and the prophecy for Alexander’s Asiatic kingdom that persuaded

Rostovtzev to speculate, as a reason greater than his Heraclean pedigree, that “Alexander

ranked himself higher than ordinary mortals.”33 Granted that Alexander had reason to

think this, I offer a more rational explanation; that Alexander esteemed himself through

the esoteric teachings of Aristotle.

Aristotle educated Alexander not only in politics but in more profound

philosophy. In a letter Alexander scorned Aristotle for publishing their secret doctrines,

but Aristotle rebuts that such writings are of no use to the uninitiated.34 Can we infer that

the knowledge imparted was what Strauss saw in Plato?; that there exists a natural right

of the wise and powerful to rule; that relative morals are merely a convention and natural

right supersedes them35; that religion is a noble lie and that the worship of idols was

imagined only; and finally that these truths must be obscured from the masses because it

threatens them.36 We may see confirmation of Alexander’s belief in natural right when

29
Becker 106.
30
Plutarch sec. 52.
31
Plutarch sec. 73.
32
Plutarch sec. 18.
33
de Mauriac 9.
34
Plutarch sec. 668.
35
Leo
Strauss, Natural Right and History. (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1959) 107.
36
Strauss 208-209.
upon his death bed his friends asked: “To whom do you leave the kingdom?” and he

replied: “To the strongest.”37 Locke says that when one is trying to achieve a noble work

secrecy and deception is legitimized to avoid “persecution or endanger the public

peace.”38 Alexander said that he wished himself smarter than others rather than more

powerful. Regardless, in relating natural right and immortality, we refer to Becker when

he says “the masses look to the leaders to give them the untruth that they need.”39

Therefore, for Alexander to accomplish his epic immortality project we would need to

transcend as many illusions as possible. De Mauriac writes that Alexander became a

‘god’ so he could achieve Homonoia.40 In contrast, for the masses to participate in

Alexander’s project, they would have to embrace as illusions as possible.

A note or two on the relationship between sex and mortality offers some

interesting insights. Cartledge says that Alexander placed sex (specifically heterosexual

sex) low in his priorities.41 He quotes Alexander saying “sex and sleep, alone make me

conscious that I am mortal”42 Cartledge hypothesizes that Alexander is suffering from a

repressed Oedipal complex.43 I would suggest that this was one way Alexander shunned

reminders of his mortality because it was a distraction from his quest. Freud too

admittedly neglected sex later in life in order to focus his energy on his own immortality

project.44 Fittingly, in Tom Holt’s Alexander at the World’s End one of the characters

joked that Alexander copulated with countries rather than women, birthing cities rather

37
Diodorus. Diodorus Siculus: Library of History, Volume VIII, Books 16.66-17 (Loeb Classical Library
No. 422). (London: Loeb Classical Library 1963) sec. 117
38
Strauss 208-209.
39
Becker 135.
40
de Mauriac 12.
41
Cartledge 230.
42
Cartledge.
43
Cartledge.
44
Becker 44.
than children.45 Indeed, Alexander named (at least) 8 cities after himself.46 It is somewhat

ironic that Alexander should deny efforts to secure his physical legacy and focus on his

symbolic one. Another way Alexander may have suppressed his awareness to his

mortality is through his alcohol abuse.47 To this effect, Becker quotes a Persian poet “I

drink… only to forget myself for a moment.”48

Ulansey argued that the conquests and death of Alexander the Great

revolutionized the way we look at the death. Prior to Alexander, identities were linked to

the community such that the community (or polis) was not only a crucial organizational

system but an entity unto itself.49 Individuals were merely instantiations of the polis, and

they overcame death anxiety by identifying with the community, which would live on

after them.50 Perhaps Alexander’s method then was to denounce all the illusions in favour

of the greatest one; that we are all one people under ‘god.’ Following in the tradition of

Diogenes, Alexander undoubtedly thought himself a ‘citizen of the world.’51 For Tarn’s

conclusion states that Alexander gave rise to “man as an individual.”52 Thus, we may

surmise that given Alexander’s extraordinary circumstances and strength of will he would

become the first to launch an immortality project on a world scale, thereby rocking the

foundations of society and our illusions of mortality.

45
“As is tolerably well known by now, Alexander had no sex-life whatsoever and my theory is that he got
his fun doing to countries what normal people do to women, cities being the tangible outcome.” –
“Euxenus” in Tom Holt’s Alexander at the World’s End, as quoted in Cartledge
46
Sources on this are contentious. Cf. Fraser, P.M. Cities of Alexander the Great. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1996. Review:http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/american_journal_of_philology/v119/119.1br_fraser.html
Also cf. Cartledge 27.
47
Cf. J.M. O’Brien., Alexander the Great (alcoholism), British Journal on Alcohol and Alcoholism 16
48
Becker 9.
49
Emanuele Castano, and Mark Dechesne. "On defeating death: Group reification and social identification
as immortality strategies." European Review of Social Psychology 16 (2005) 242.
50
Castano 242.
51
"Diogenes." Sir Thomas Browne. (19 Dec. 2008)
52
Castano 243.
 Although it is purely anecdotal, it is interesting to quote the 2004 film Alexander

where the titular character laments his realization of the truth: “I've come to believe the

fear of death drives all men.”53 With Philip II’s assassination and conspiracies looming

around Alexander during his entire reign, he was never lacking in reminders of how close

death lurked. Viewing Alexander through this death-defying lens allows us to understand

better our own actions and motivations. When will we die? How will we be remembered?

For an ego the size of Alexander’s, a memorial in Macedon alone would have been

embarrassing. It would seem that, if we forgo speculation on Alexander’s philosophizing,

his actions and reception thereof are more explainable by a subconscious and ostentatious

attempt to transcend individual and cultural death. In analysis of such an ancient

personage we have a tendency to make him in to what we want. If my analysis is

misguided then I am as guilty as other scholars who have applied many anachronisms and

ideologies to the history of Alexander. For Alexander’s actions and the stories told about

him are so transcendent that they elude traditional scholarship.

Bibliography

53
cf. Alexander the Great (2004) movie, by Oliver Stone
Badian, E.. "Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind." Historia: Zeitschrift für

Alte Geschichte 7.4 (1958): 425-444. 3 Dec. 2008

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/4434588>.

Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York City: Free Press, 1973.

Cartledge, Paul. Alexander the Great: The Hunt for a New Past. New York: Macmillan,

2004.

Castano, Emanuele, and Mark Dechesne. "On defeating death: Group reification and

social identification as immortality strategies." European Review of Social Psychology

16 (2005): 221-255. 28 Nov. 2008 <http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/10463283.html>.

Cohen Et. Al., Florette. "Fatal Attraction: The effects of mortality salience on evaluations

of charismatic, task-oriented, and relationship-oriented leaders." Pyschological Science

15.12 (2004): 846-851. 4 Dec. 2008

<https://www.msu.edu/course/psy/101/altmann/cohen04.pdf>.

De Mauriac, Henry M.. "Alexander the Great and the Politics of "Homonoia"." Journal of

the History of Ideas 10.1 (1949): 104-114. 17 Dec. 2008

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/2707202>.

"Diogenes." Sir Thomas Browne. 19 Dec. 2008

<http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/greece/hetairai/diogenes.ht

ml>.
Diodorus. Diodorus Siculus: Library of History, Volume VIII, Books 16.66-17 (Loeb

Classical Library No. 422). London: Loeb Classical Library (Translated by C. Bradford

Wells), 1963. 18 Dec 2008

<http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/17A*.html>.

Plutarch. Plutarch Lives, VII, Demosthenes and Cicero. Alexander and Caesar (Loeb

Classical Library). London: Loeb Classical Library, 1919. 18 Dec 2008 <

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Alexander*/home.ht

ml>.

Selincourt, Aubrey De. Arrian the Campaigns of Alexander. London: Penguin Books,

1976. <http://www.google.com/books?id=o2Nr-

P5HArMC&dq=campaign+alexander+arrian&printsec=frontcover&source=bn>.

Strauss, Leo. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1959.

Thomas, Dorothy Swaine, and William Isaac Thomas. The Child in America: Behavior

Problems and Programs. London: A.A. Knopf, 1938.