A Fanciful Solution for Philip's Murder.

Historical romances are always challenges for the novelists.

Differently of a personage created in a novel, a historical personage it has to contain the personality characteristic by which it is known in history.

Dialogues and daily attitudes, even so not necessarily historical, must follow a standard based on the historical information that we know regarding that specific historical personage.

The murder of Philip of the Macedonian is a mystery still unsolved for which many possible hypotheses already had been ventilated. The historians speculate about what could have changed the behaviour of Philip in relation to Alexander and Olympias after the battle of Chaeronea in which Alexander himself detached without even having had this recognition by his father.

Three main reasons are pointed and among those two of them offer much little consistency considering the previous attitudes of Philip with regard to his son.

Now the same review a bit expanded in Portuguese:

Romances históricos são sempre desafios para os novelistas.

Diferentemente de um personagem criado em uma novela, um personagem histórico tem que conter as características de personalidade pelas quais é conhecido na história. Acho que o autor conseguiu isto com certa maestria.

Diálogos e atitudes cotidianas, embora não necessariamente históricos, devem seguir um padrão esperado em função das informações históricas que conhecemos à respeito daquele personagem histórico específico.

O assasinato de Felipe da Macedônia é um mistério ainda insoluvel para o qual muitas hipóteses possíveis já foram ventiladas. Os historiadores especulam sobre o que teria mudado o comportamento de Felipe em relação à Alexandre e Olímpia após a batalha de Queronéia na qual o próprio Alexandre se destacou sem até ter tido o reconhecimento do pai.

Três razões principais são apontadas sendo que duas delas oferecem muita pouca consistência haja vista as atitudes anteriores de Felipe com relação ao filho.

Tudo começou a partir do anúncio do 5º casamento de Felipe a ser realizado com Cleópatra filha de uma familia aristocrática da Macedônia, sobrinha de um bravo e popular general de nome Atalo.

A primeira razão seria o fato de Felipe estar realmente enamorado de Cleópatra e tenha ficado privado de seus sentidos com a paixão desenfreada. Convenhamos uma razão pouco consistente ainda mais levando-se em conta de que Felipe não era homem de misturar casamento com mera convivência e não havia razões para repudiar Olímpia o que não havia feito quando casara pela 4ª vez.

A segunda razão seria uma forte pressão do turbulento baronato da Macedônia que exigia um herdeiro de puro sangue Macedônico. Como se sabe Olímpia era do reino de Epiro.

A terceira razão e a mais verossímel seria a desconfiança, infundada ou não, de Felipe em relação à cobiça de Alexandre pelo trono da Macedônia que o levaria a estar envolvido em tramas contra o rei ajudado por sua mãe Olímpia. Não confiando em Alexandre seria difícil confiar-lhe a defesa do reino enquanto estivesse na sua próxima campanha contra os Persas ou até messo destacar-lhe um posto importante em seu exército. Mesmo sem provas o risco era enorme e Alexandre e Olímpia teriam que ser afastados.

A partir deste ambiente algumas especulações podem ser feitas para o assassinato de Felipe e em quase todas elas Alexandre é um provavel suspeito.

Demóstenes e o próprio Dario III sáo apontados como conspiradores da trama de assassinato

A versão mais aceita envolve o aproveitamento por conspiradores ligados a Alexandre e de fatos anteriores tensos entre o assassino Pausânias e o próprio Felipe. Pausânias um ex-amante de Felipe teria sido embebedado, achincalhado e violentado por grupos de amigos de Atalo. Queixando-se a Felipe este não teria acolhido os reclamos por justiça de Pausânias, esperando que o assunto se esvaisse por si só. Irado e com sede de vingança Pausânias seria objeto fácil do aproveitamento dos conspiradores

Não concordo que um novelista seja livre para inventar desenlaçes para qualquer evento histórico não resolvido. Aparentemente, Apostolous escolheu a versão anteriormente citada, apresentando-a como a definitiva, mas isentando Alexandre de qualquer participação. A autora, como artifício válido de sua narrativa, incluiu na sua versão dois personagens fictícios Miriam e Simão que como amigos palacianos de Alexandre ajudam a decifrar o mistério, mas o que causa surpresa é a ativa participação de um deles, Simão, nos eventos históricos.

Este tipo de atitude pode levar a idéias erradas nos leitores com pouco conhecimento dos personagens ou eventos históricos retratados acabando por fazer o leitor acreditar que o desenlace seja historicamente comprovado. O curioso, é que a prática é muito comum e romancistas históricos consagrados como Valerio Massimo Manfredi a utiliza em seu romance "Alexandros", em 3 volumes, quando coloca o secretário particular de Felipe II e amigo de Alexandre, Eumênio, com um papel importante no retorno de Alexandre do exílio, ao fraudar uma suposta carta de Alexandre ao pai, documento e ação sem qualquer registro histórico.

Os dois personagens Mirian e Simão, judeus, parecem um tanto deslocados no ambiente macedônico e Ariedeu, meio irmão de Alexandre, foi retratado mais idiota e incapaz do que realmente deve ter sido.

Romances históricos tem a minha preferência, mas sempre levando em conta as resalvas não-históricas e jamais deve ser apresentado como documento histórico.

Everything started from the announcement of 5th marriage of Philip to be carried through with Cleopatra son of an aristocratic family of the Macedonian, niece of a brave and popular general named Attalus.

The first reason would be the fact of Philip to be really in love with Cleopatra and has been private of its directions by the wild passion. Let us agree that this argument has no consistency at all if we take in account of that Philip was not a man to mix marriage with mere concupiscence and he did not have reasons to repudiate Olympias what he had not made when marries for the 4th time.

The second reason would be one strong pressure of the turbulent barony of the Macedonian who demanded a heir of pure Macedon blood. As it is known
Olympias was of the kingdom of Epiro.

The third most likely reason was the Philip's belief, justified or not, that Alexander was involved in a plot about his overthrow helped by his mother. Without trust Alexander it would be difficult to him living Macedon in Alexander's hand while out for the campaign against the Persians. Even without proves the risk was enormous and Alexander and Olympias would have to be moved away.

From this environment some speculations can be made for the murder of Philip and in almost all Alexander is included as probably suspected.

Demosthenes and also Dario III are pointed as conspirators on the murder plot.

The version most accepted involves the exploitation by the conspirators of some tense previous facts between Pausanias, the Philip murder, and Philip himself. Pausanias, a former-lover of Philip, would have been got drunk and after that raped by groups of friends of Attalus one of Philip generals and whose niece Philip has married. Pausanias went after the facts straight to Philip making charges against Attalus but was not listened. Pausanias revenge would be easy object for the exploitation of the conspirators.

I do not agree that a novelist is free to invent ends for any not decided historical event. Apparently, Apostolous choose the Pausanias case presenting it as the definitive one, but clearing Alexander of any participation. The author romanced the version including two fictitious personages Miriam and Simeon palace friends of Alexander that helps him to decipher the mystery and participating actively of it.

This type of attitude can misled the readers with little knowledge of the characters or historical events portrayed making him believe that the historical outcome is proved.

Historical romances have my preference, but always making clear the non-historical facts and never to be presented as a historical document.

On page 2, we have Alexander the Great's mother sitting at her spinning wheel, treadling away and spinning flax. In 360 BCE. Spinning wheels were much later, even in Greece which is close enough to India that I can suspend reality for the book's sake. But treadles weren't until the late 1500's, early 1600's. Again I am happy to suspend reality and go with it. Only four pages later the flax (which creates linen) magically turns into a lapful of wool (which is, you know - wool). Thereafter, I found myself questioning everything Mr. Doherty was putting on the pages. I couldn't even convince myself that it was an alternate universe. I gave up before the murder even occurred. ( )

Anna Apostolou (Also known as Paul C. Doherty) has asked a fantastic question. While we know it was the disgruntled Pausanias who killed the one eyed King Philip II of Macedon, we don't know exactly who pulled the strings of his killer. Was it the wicked Queen Olympias- his scheming ex-wife and mother of Alexander? Or was it his heir- the cocky young Prince Alexander himself? Could it have been his sworn enemy- the powerful King Darius of Persia? Who gained the most from King Philip's death? Anna Apostolou creates a brother and sister team, Jewish twins Miriam and Simeon, (close friends of Alexander) to work on solving the mystery. Alexander insists he has nothing to do with it, and instructs Miriam to find out for him.

While some have complained that boorish, womanizing, King Philip isn't even killed until sixty pages into the book, I found this refreshing. By then, I had actually grown to like Philip. This itself was amazing, because I've disliked him in every other historical fiction featuring Alexander the Great that I've read. I was also glad to see Alexander's, often overlooked, half brother Arrhidaeus continuously throughout the story. (The half-wit later known to some as Philip III of Macedon did actually rule for a short time after Alexander the Great's death.) I applaud how the author left clues along the way, and allowed Miriam to figure out what happened, but still GREATLY surprised me in the end with what was discovered by Miriam. I never even saw it coming! Anna Apostolou's answer is fascinating- and seems exactly like something that would have happened. Very clever indeed!

I'm looking forward to the next story about Alexander the Great and his friends Miriam and Simeon- A Murder in Thebes (St. Martin's Minotaur Mysteries). Not everything is tied up nicely. I want to know what will happen to Olympias. Will she continue to scheme? Will Alexander's newly returned companions support him on his future campaigns? Does anything come of Miriam's affection for Alexander, and what does Simeon think of it?

Historical fiction about Alexander the Great that I also recommend: The Alexander the Great trilogy by Mary Renault Fire from Heaven, The Persian Boy, Funeral Games; Melissa Scott's historical fiction about Alexander the Great turning towards Rome A Choice of Destinies; and Judith Tarr's Alexander the Great historical fiction told from an Egyptian point of view Lord of the Two Lands ( )