Philip II and Alexander the Great: Father and Son ... - Historia Antigua

CASSANDER AND THE LEGACY OF PHILIP II AND ALEXANDER III 119
two imposing royal tombs at Aigai, the traditional Argead burial
site.
In a recent examination of the issues connected with Tomb III of
the Great Tumulus, Adams takes the following three points for
granted: 44
1. Tomb III is Alexander IV’s burial site.
2. Cassander was the man behind Alexander’s burial ceremony.
3. Alexander IV’s burial neither was, nor can be considered,
secret.
Accordingly, Adams also acknowledges that Tomb III contradicts
those passages in Diodorus and Justin that allude to Cassander’s secrecy
in hiding the young prince’s corpse and that of his mother. From these
premises, and despite fi nding no confi rmation in the sources, Adams
further suggests that Alexander IV was secretly buried shortly after
his murder, as in this way Cassander hoped to succeed in covering up
the action he himself had ordered. Moreover, he maintains that some
years later, in any case before 306/5 (considered the fi rst year of
Seleucus I’s rule, after the end of Alexander IV’s reign, in the fragmentary
Babylonian Chronicle 45 ), Cassander had to declare the death of the
young prince offi cially, perhaps also under the pressure of public opinion
already unoffi cially informed on the event. In Adams’ opinion, Cassander
arranged a full-honor burial ceremony for Alexander IV’s remains
for that occasion and so constructed Tomb III. 46
Although archaeologically plausible (Tomb III is slightly more
recent than Tomb II 47 and can be dated about the end of the fourth
century), Adams’s reconstruction seems to me to be not only completely
bereft of historiographic evidence, but also scarcely supported
by convincing historical arguments. In effect, in the last years of the
fourth century, Cassander had to confront massive political and
military aggression carried out by Demetrius Poliorcetes, whose
maneuvers culminated in the refoundation of the League of Corinth
in accordance with which all Greek cities were to ally against Cassander
in a Panhellenic crusade. 48 In this context, any offi cial act regarding
Alexander IV’s death would have proven counterproductive,
as it would have given a massive fi llip to the impressive Antigonid
propaganda machine. In all probability this was already disseminating
anti-Cassander rumors and it was undoubtedly intent on denying
legitimacy to his rule in Macedonia along the lines sponsored
by Monophthalmus in the so-called Tyre proclamation in 315. 49 In
the light of this, I believe that the identifi cation of Cassander as the
man behind the building of Tomb III becomes highly questionable, as