ARCHELAUS AND THE THRONE

Abstract

The philosopher Plato claims that the Macedonian king Archelaus was the illegitimate
son of Perdiccas II and a slave, and that he allegedly killed all the legitimate
heirs to the throne and used force to seize the royal power in Macedonia. Though this
story was well known in ancient times, modern scholars dispute it, either fully or partially;
nevertheless, all attempts to prove that it is unfounded are based on assumptions
and a conjecture of circumstantial arguments. The reanalysis of our sources, as well as
a comparison with suitable examples concerning the succession of royal power in Macedon
point out that succession issues in Aegae were not, however, completely clear-cut;
that the silence of Thucydides concerning the transfer of power, until he had introduced
Archelaus as king, though not decisive, may nevertheless be indicative; that the position
of Archelaus in terms of succession was complicated, regardless of whether he was
a legitimate son; and finally, that, if nothing else, the story of Plato deserves much greater
scrutiny and should by no means be disregarded due to academic inertia, as is usually
the case.