The character of Alexander is a mingling of good and bad features; however, there is a kind of illogical anti- Alexander attitude in the studies of the Shāh-nāmeh which is in contrast with the popularity of Alexander in both oral tradition and formal literature. In the Shāh-nāmeh, Alexander is the son of Darab and a descendant of Iranian kings and is entitled to the crown. His story is narrated in about 2408 couplets in detail. The Shāh-nāmeh episode of Alexander has been interpreted by Nöldeke and others as a “face-saving” stratagem aimed at lessening the dishonor of defeat by an alien invader. Although the idea that Iranians may have concocted this story in order to soften the blow of foreign conquest is plausible, this plausibility is not the same thing as proof. A similar story according to which Alexander is the son of an Egyptian king exists in Egyptian versions of the story of Alexander. Since these similar tales existed among two peoples whom Alexander vanquished and then sought to conciliate, it could be equally assumed if these two tales were made up by Alexander’s own propagandists. Alternatively, these tales may have been fabricated by the Greco-Persian and Greco-Egyptian nobilities of the post-conquest societies of Iran and Egypt which sought to bridge the gap between the worlds of their fathers with those of their mothers. All of these scenarios, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive, are plausible. The article discusses these different interpretations by drawing on the known historical details of Alexander’s invasion of Iran.
Send comment about this article