Ancient philosophy. Some thoughts about Aristotle and Alexander of Macedon /part 3/
The facts casting doubt on Aristotle's leading role as a mentor in Alexander's life and fate should not be immediately and categorically rejected in favor of other ancient accounts of the close relationship between Aristotle and Alexander. Rejecting Aristotle's impact on Alexander in full should not be necessary. Alexander's discipleship and Aristotle's insistence demand such great antique writers such as Dionysius Galikarnaski, Eratosphen, Quintinian, Plutarch, and Dion Chrysostom, and especially Diogenes Laerts.
However, to exalt the relations of the two great men to the degree of some absolute ideal, too, should not. Finally, it is also necessary to consider as too unreliable many commemorative allegations with their frequent ambiguity and incomplete demonstrability. Plutarch in Alexander's biography brings different names in connection with rumors of poisoning Alexander. Such a rumor was carried by King Antigonus, a former commander of Alexander. This question is being discussed by such prominent historians and writers of antiquity as Pliny, Ariane, Dion Cassius, the Byzantine historian of the 12th century Zonaura. They also spoke that the poison was sent by Antipatrom by Aristotle's advice. And they even called the properties of this poison that was made for Alexander as if to instigate Aristotle. The poison was made up of ice water dripping from a rock near the city of Nonaquida, which is stored only in the donkey's hoof, because such other vessels can not withstand its chilliness, lust. Plutarch suggests that for the majority of the writers at the time, it was all a fiction.
We absolutely can not believe such serious writers as Pliny Senior, Ariane, or Dion Cassius in any way. On the other hand, the monstrosity of the very fact of Alexander's poisoning by Aristotle unintentionally forces the truth of such a message to be questioned. Aristotle was, among other things, a physician and a botanist, and who, besides him, could have attributed such poisoning recipes? From all of these reflections remain a very unpleasant feeling of unconcern, disagreement when it is possible to say neither simply "Yes" nor simply "No". A monster story, no doubt here, is hidden. But what? Some historians and philologists spoke that this fiction could only have political significance, as the heirs of Alexander were deeply angry with each other and able to make each other the most incredible slanders.