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

162 RECEPTION OF FATHER AND SON
too often unsuccessful in balancing rival domestic interests. 35 Since
Philip never fundamentally reformed the structure of his kingdom,
the future of Macedon remained in the balance at the time of his
assassination.
Whether Philip realized the need for structural political reform
cannot be known, but clearly, as Alexander’s own successes mounted
in Asia, he did realize that such reforms had to come, and soon, for
his conquests to have any hope of long-term stability. Of course, his
famous orientalization brought on its equally famous reactions among
the Macedonians. One thing that should not be overlooked here is the
emotionalism unleashed as Alexander adopted the dress and customs
of the east in exchange for stability. Alexander’s fundamental alteration
of established mores was viewed as betrayal by most Macedonians, as
was the incorporation of outsiders into what they understood as a
national “household.” Imagine, for a moment, a head of a household,
having obtained meteoric success, deciding to build a huge new
house, and then decorating every room of it in a radical new fashion,
only thereafter to invite strangers, whose clothes, food, music, and
even gods were new to the old family, to reside in the new home
alongside the original members, and I think you can appreciate how
the Macedonians felt after Alexander embraced Persian norms. Even
most of those who would have understood the need to live by very
new standards would have felt pangs of nostalgia and realized a sense
of loss. “Progress,” alas, always comes at a cost.
Since Errington, much has been written about the importance of a
consensus of Macedonian nobles in the running of the state and
dynastic affairs, and indeed the infl uence of those hetairoi who were
appropriately situated at critical points in the unfolding of Macedon’s
history is consistently chronicled in our sources. 36 The infl uence of
the lucky few who happened to be in the right place at the right time,
or of those whose established auctoritas demanded respect from all
lest dire consequences be realized, only grew with the size of the
Argead kingdom. This was not so, however, because of some acknowledged
constitutional role, but because, in lieu of any formalized political
infrastructure, the hetairoi continued to give the king greater
reach: they allowed the household to grow to a monstrous size and
temporarily delayed the need for institutional change. The tragedy of
the Argead house is that even though Alexander realized the need for
reform, it had not proceeded far enough to save the “house” from
collapse before his extraordinary life came to an end. Once Alexander’s
Argead heirs were removed, there no longer existed an acknowledged
owner of the national “estate.” To make matters worse, Alexander
(even though there existed no immediately viable successor to his