ABSTRACT
Cyrus the Great obviously served as a role model for Alexander concerning his new position as a king of the newly conquered Persian empire. Thus, the visit of his tomb at Pasargadae was styled as an act to honour Cyrus’ memory and create the impression that Alexander continued his regal tradition. On the other hand, Xerxes served as the negative counterpart of both Cyrus and Alexander. Emphasising the panhellenic flavour of the Macedonian propaganda, Callisthenes styled the act of Alexander crossing the Hellespont as a kind of anti-Xerxes. It is the question how Darius I was treated within the Macedonian propaganda. Only Onesicritus gives a hint that Alexander may have visited his tomb at Naqsh-e Rostam. This chapter aims at looking behind the layers of Greek and Roman perspectives from the outside and also behind the layers of panhellenic propaganda in order to examine the attitude of the Macedonian nobility towards Persia and Achaemenid culture. Therefore, it will be taken into account that the Macedonian court society had been influenced by Persia ever since Amyntas I gave earth and water to Darius in about 510 bc. His son Alexander I was Xerxes’ ally and even issued regal coins showing the Macedonian rider wearing a Persian akinakes. Thus, the Argead concept of rulership owed much to the Persian example. The Persian court could not have been that strange and unknown to the Macedonian nobility. Persian nobles had lived at the court of Philip II. Thus, the chapter tries to explore where the theme of Macedonian lack of understanding concerning the Persian culture comes from.
