From Alexander to Jesus

Conclusion

Conclusion It is the narrowest of corridors, which leads from humanity to Divinity. A precious few have made that transition successfully, and kept their status over time. To judge by modern-day parallels: Michael Jordan is sometimes called “God” for his marvelous athletic skills and leadership qualities. Elvis Presley, a mere King, nonetheless has an active cult in North America with branches worldwide. But how long will basketball and rock ’n’ roll be played? Will they survive Jesus’ 2000 years (and counting), or even Alexander’s near-millennium in Augila? This book has covered a wide stretch from the early beginnings of Alexander’s career, to some late and far-flung tellings of his myth. We have seen how the young Macedonian framed his life after the venerable precedents of Greek Myth, which were often, at the same time, his family traditions. Emulating Dionysus, Perseus, Achilles and, not least, Herakles, Alexander lived his life as a character of Myth. To him, I have argued, the distinction between the spatium historicum and spatium mythicum would have appeared unnatural and strange. In hindsight the mythologization of Alexander, by himself and by others, appears a natural response to changing circumstances, rather than the result of a wellexecuted master plan. Alexander may perhaps have suborned the priests of Siwah to acknowledge his status as Divine Son, but he cannot have planned in advance such circumstances as the discovery of Prometheus’s cave, the strange yet familiar legends told at Aornos, or his special reception as the third Son of Zeus by the Indian kings. The sources are quite clear in their assertion that Alexander’s perception of himself tended more and more towards superhuman status the further east his campaign took him. Yet it is this very evolutionary process which had such an enormous impact on 147 posterity. Following Alexander’s precedent, one could easily perceive how man became God. The crossing, or rather abolition, of the dividing line between myth and history opened the way for a host of emulators. The most obvious and immediate successors were the various proponents of ruler cult in the Hellenistic world. The example of Seleukos encapsulates Alexander’s influence. In the new reality created by Alexander’s great adventure it became acceptable, nay necessary, for a prominent individual with Royal aspirations to present himself as the son of a God, and to enjoy honors and cult as one of the Divine. On the road to Divinity, Alexander led the way by personal example. His precedent not only revealed how a mortal could assume the technical aspects of Divinity—this had long been the tradition of the Pharaohs—but at the same time also demonstrated the crucial contribution of a concomitant mythic cycle. This new understandingproveda powerfulweapon,to be wieldedin turn by othernewcomers to the competitive field of cultic religion in their war against the venerability and prestige of the Gods and Heroes of yore. But Alexander was much more than a neatly mythologized man-turned-God. He, or at least his figure as perceived by later generations, also offered humankind a positive vision of the future. We have seen in the story of his meeting with the Amazon Queen how Alexander came to be regarded as a harmonizer, an abolisher of the inherent enmity between Greek and Barbarian. His union with the representative of the ultimate “other” also gave rise to new hope: their mixed progeny would incorporate the best qualities on either side. The same attitude is manifest also in Plutarch’s De Fortuna (329b), where Alexander rejects Aristotle’s advice on how to treat the Barbarian, adopting in its stead his own optimistic and universal ideal. This ideal, if it ever existed fully in his mind, was never realized by Alexander— understandably so, considering his premature death. Yet even this purely historical happenstance was interpreted by Plutarch in a way that is highly reminiscent of Jesus. Like the Galilean Messiah, the Macedonian King’s soul was yanked back by the Divinity which had sent it to earth, before the Mission was complete.1 Like Charles Ross Weede, observers during the early centuries of Christianity will have noted that Alexander and Jesus died at about the same age. That was, of course, coincidence . But in a history devoid of Divine Providence, coincidence becomes a powerful agent. Alexander’s contribution to the formation and development of Christianity goes further still. As is well known, his military and political achievements drew the East into the political sphere of...