Argead Dynastic Assassinations from Alexander I to the Sons of Gygaea (347) - The 'Myth' of Intra-Dynastic Violence

<p dir="ltr">This thesis aims to bring a new interpretation to the numerous Argead assassinations that occurred from 454- 347. In current scholarship, the prevailing opinion is that these were the result of intra-dynastic violence. The cause for this violence is somewhat debated, and it is usually attributed to various branches of the Argead family tree feuding with one another, or the polygamy of Macedonian kings resulting in numerous sons with claims to the throne. Whichever theory is preferred, the core idea is the same: that the Argeads were locked in bitter conflict with one another. This thesis attempts to show that this idea is a myth.</p><p dir="ltr">It is my belief that this notion is founded upon a poorly evidenced Argead family tree that is long overdue a revision. I will propose an amended version of the Argead lineage, and in doing so show that a number of key figures previously assumed to be part of the royal bloodline were in fact non-Argead. In doing so, I shall show that the idea that the various lines of the Argeads were in constant conflict with one another is untenable. I shall then address the theory that suggests the violence was a result of disputing half-brothers, addressing each example on a case-by-case basis. I shall argue that this theory is also poorly evidenced and, in doing so, further my argument that intra-dynastic violence among the Argeads is a myth. Finally, I shall address each of the assassinations that are generally regarded as being a result of Argead-on-Argead violence and suggest a different explanation. In doing so, I hope to bring a new interpretation to the Argead dynasty that views them not as being locked in violence with one another, but in a near constant struggle with outside powers.</p>