1.    Theory.

         a.    Isocrates, Letter 3, to Philip, section 5: 338-7 B.C. (adapted from the Loeb).

Be assured that unsurpassable glory, worthy of the deeds you have done in the past, will be yours when you compel the barbarians – all but those who have fought on your side – to be serfs (helots) of the Greeks, and when you force the king who is now called Great to do whatever you command. For then there will be nothing left for you to do except become a god. And to accomplish all this from your present status is much easier for you than it was for you to advance to the power and renown you now possess from the kingship you had in the beginning.

Now, while all who are blessed with understanding ought to set before themselves the greatest of men as their model, and strive to become like them, it is particularly appropriate for you to do so. For since you have no need to follow outside examples, but have before you one from your own house, do we not have the right to expect that you will be spurred on by this, and inspired by the ambition to make yourself like the ancestor of your race? I do not mean that you will be able to imitate Heracles in all his exploits, for even among the gods there are some who could not do that; but in the qualities of the spirit, in devotion to humanity, and in the good will which he cherished towards the Hellenes, you can come close to his purposes.

But if there is one man so superlatively excellent (or several, but not enough to make up the whole citizen-body of a city) that the goodness and ability of all the rest are simply not to be compared with his (or theirs), such men we take not to be part of the state, but to transcend it. To judge them worthy of mere equality with the rest would be to do them an injustice, so far superior are they in virtue and in political capacity. We may reasonably regard such a one as a god among men. In that case clearly legislation, the aim of which we have been discussing, is not relevant, since legislation must refer to equals in birth and capacity; and there is no law which can govern such exceptional men. They are themselves law, and anyone who tried to legislate for them would be snubbed for his pains.

        a.    Plutarch, Life of Lysander, 18.17.2-3 (adapted from the Loeb).

Lysander was at this time more powerful than any Greek before him had been, and was thought to cherish a pretentious pride that was greater even than his power. For he was the first Greek, as Duris writes, to whom the cities erected altars and made sacrifices as to a god, the first also to whom songs of triumph (paeans) were sung. One of these has been handed down, and begins as follows:–

"The general of sacred Hellas
who came from wide-spaced Sparta
will we sing, O! io! Paean."

The Samians, too, voted that their festival of Hera should be called the Lysandreia. He always kept the poet Choerilus in his retinue, to adorn his achievements with verse, and he was so pleased with Antilochus, who composed some verses in his honour, that he filled his cap with silver and gave it to him. And when Antimachus of Colophon and a certain Niceratus of Heracleia competed with one another at the Lysandreia in poems celebrating his achievements, he awarded the crown to Niceratus, and Antimachus, in frustration, never allowed his own poem to be published.

                i.    Plutarch, Life of Dion 45.3 - 46.2 (adapted from the Loeb)

He marshalled his own hoplites in person, together with those citizen-troops who kept running up and forming ranks with them, dividing his commands and forming companies in column, so that he could make a more formidable attack from many points at once. When he had made these preparations and prayed to the gods, and was seen leading his forces through the city against the enemy, shouts of joy and loud battle-cries mingled with prayers and supplications were raised by the Syracusans, who called Dion their saviour and god, and his foreign troops their brothers and fellow-citizens.

    ii.    Diodorus 16.20.5-6 (adapted from the Loeb).

Dion, having accomplished the finest of all his deeds, preserved the burning houses by putting out the flames, and, by restoring the circuit-wall to good condition, he both fortified the city, and by walling off the enemy, blocked their exit to the mainland. When he had cleansed the city of the dead, and set up a trophy of victory, he offered sacrifices to the gods for the deliverance of the city. An assembly was summoned, and the people, as an expression of their gratitude to him, elected Dion general with absolute power, and accorded him honours suited to a Hero. Dion, in harmony with his earlier conduct, generously absolved all his personal enemies of the charges outstanding against them, and having reassured the populace, brought them to a state of general harmony. The Syracusans, with universal praises and with elaborate testimonials of approval, honoured their benefactor as the one and only saviour of their native land.

          3.    Closer to home: Philip II.

            a.    Pausanias 5.20.10 (adapted from the Penguin translation)

There is a small Doric temple which they still in my day call the Sanctuary of the Mother, preserving its ancient name. There is no statue of the Mother of the Gods in it, but figures of the Roman kings stand there. The Sanctuary of the Mother is inside the Altis wall, and so is the round building called the Philippion, on the pinnacle of which is a bronze poppy that ties together the roof beams. This building is on the left by the exit by the Council-house, built in fired brick with columns standing around it; Philip built it after the fall of Greece at Chaeroneia. (Statues of) Philip and Alexander are there, and Philip's father Amyntas, all by Leochares in ivory and gold, like the portraits of Olympias and Eurydike.

For indeed even whole nations and cities, with all their people, assuming the mask of flattery, disparage the stories about the gods, mere men, transforming men like themselves into the equals of the gods, blown up with vainglory, and voting them extravagant honors; at one time they enact by law at Cynosarges the worship of Philip the son of Amyntas, the Macedonian from Pella, with his broken collar-bone and maimed leg, with one eye knocked out, at another they proclaim Demetrius a god in his turn; and where he dismounted from his horse on entering Athens is now a sanctuary of Demetrius Kataibates, while his altars are everywhere.

… besieged, and he rebuilt the acropolis, exacted 20,000 staters from the citizens, plundered the Greeks, destroyed the altars of Zeus Philippius, and waged war on Alexander and the Greeks; he deprived the citizens of their arms …

While it was still dark, the multitude of spectators hastened into the theatre, and at sunrise the parade formed. Along with lavish displays of every sort, Philip included in the procession statues of the twelve gods wrought with great artistry and adorned with a dazzling show of wealth to strike awe in the beholder. Along with these there was a thirteenth statue, suitable for a god, which was of Philip himself, so that the king put himself on display enthroned among the twelve gods … (the account of his assassination follows) … 16.95: Such was the end of Philip, who had made himself the greatest of the kings of Europe in his time, and because of the extent of his kingdom had made himself a throned companion (sunthronos) of the twelve gods.

Alexander took three days to reach Ephesus; on his arrival he recalled everyone who had been expelled for supporting him, stripping the small governing clique of its power, and restored democratic institutions … The people of the town, freed from their fear of their political masters, were eager to put to death the men who had been responsible for calling in Memnon, and everybody else who had either ransacked the Temple, or helped to smash up the statue of Philip which stood there …

    1.    Birth stories.

        a.    Plutarch, Life of Alexander, 2 (adapted from the Penguin translation).

On the night before the marriage was consummated, the bride dreamed that there was a crash of thunder, that her womb was struck by a thunderbolt, and that there followed a blinding flash from which a great sheet of flame blazed up and spread far and wide before it finally died away. Then, some time after their marriage, Philip saw himself in a dream in the act of sealing up his wife's womb, and upon the seal he had used there was engraved, so it seemed to him, the figure of a lion. The soothsayers treated this dream with suspicion, since it seemed to suggest that Philip needed to keep a closer watch on his wife. The only exception was Aristander of Telmessus, who declared that the woman must be pregnant, since men do not seal up what is empty, and that she would bring forth a son whose nature would be bold and lion-like. At another time a serpent was seen stretched out at Olympias' side as she slept, and it was this more than anything else, we are told, which weakened Philip's passion and cooled his affection for her … The reason for this may have been … because he believed that she was the consort of some higher being.

According to Eratosthenes, Olympias, when she sent Alexander on his way to lead his great expedition to the East, confided to him and to him alone the secret of his conception, and urged him to show himself worthy of his divine parentage. But other authors maintain that she repudiated this story and used to say, "Will Alexander never stop making Hera jealous of me?"

However this may be, Alexander was born on the sixth day of the month Hecatombaeon, which the Macedonians call Loüs, the same day on which the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus was burnt down. It was this coincidence which inspired Hegesias of Magnesia to utter a joke which was flat enough to have put out the fire: he said it was no wonder the Temple of Artemis was destroyed, since the goddess was busy attending to the birth of Alexander …

            a.    Strabo, Geography 14.1.22 (adapted from the Loeb)

Alexander, Artemidorus says, promised the Ephesians to pay all the expenses (of rebuilding the Temple of Artemis), both past and future, on condition that he should have the credit for this on the inscription. But they were unwilling, just as they would have been far more unwilling to acquire glory by sacrilege and a spoliation of the temple. And Artemidorus praises the Ephesian who said to the king that it was inappropriate for a god to dedicate offerings to other gods.

            b.    Plutarch, Moralia 360 d (adapted from the Loeb)

Lysippus the sculptor was quite right in his disapproval of the painter Apelles, because Apelles in his portrait of Alexander had represented him with a thunderbolt in his hand, whereas he himself had represented Alexander holding a spear, the glory of which no length of years could ever dim, since it was truthful and was his by right.

He (Apelles) also painted Alexander the Great holding a thunderbolt, in the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, for twenty talents in gold. The fingers have the appearance of projecting from the surface and the thunderbolt seems to stand out from the picture – readers must remember that all the effects were produced by four colours; the artist received the price of this picture in gold coin measured by weight, not by count.

Callisthenes dramatically adds that, although Apollo had deserted the oracle among the Branchidae from the time they had robbed the temple, when they sided with the Persians in the time of Xerxes, and although the spring had also ceased to flow, yet at Alexander's arrival the spring began to flow again, and many oracles were carried to Memphis by the Milesian ambassadors to do with Alexander's descent from Zeus, his future victory in the Arbela region, the death of Darius, and the attempts at revolution in Lacedaemon. And he says that the Erythraean Athenais also gave out an oracular utterance concerning Alexander's high descent; for, he adds, this woman was like the ancient Erythraean Sibylla, Such, then, are the accounts of the historians.

… on the fourth day of the beginning (of the month) … so that we should [pass the day on which King Antiochus] was born in … reverence [ … To each person participating in the festival] shall be given [a sum] equivalent to that given for [the sacrifice and procession for Alexander]. And so that [King Antiochus and] Queen Stratonike [might know of the resolutions of the League of] Ionians concerning the honours, two [ambassadors shall be appointed … ]

    1.    The "Alexander Romance", Book 1.34 (adapted from the Penguin translation)

The Alexander hastened with his army towards Egypt. When he reached Memphis, the Egyptians put him on the throne of Hephaestus as King of Egypt.

After these events Alexander suddenly found himself passionately eager to visit the shrine of Ammon in Libya. One reason was his wish to consult the oracle there, as it had a reputation for infallibility, and also because Perseus and Heracles were supposed to have consulted it … But there was also another reason: Alexander longed to equal the fame of Perseus and Heracles; the blood of both flowed in his veins, and just as legend traced their descent from Zeus, so he, too, had a feeling that in some way he was descended from Ammon. In any case, he undertook this expedition with the deliberate purpose of obtaining more precise information on this subject – or at any rate to say that he had obtained it … It was with deep admiration that Alexander surveyed the Temple and its site. He put his question to the Oracle and received (or so he said) the answer which his heart desired. Then he began his return journey to Egypt.

The oracle of Ammon has been almost abandoned, though it was held in honour in early times; and this fact is most clearly shown by those who have recorded the deeds of Alexander, since, although they add numerous forms of mere flattery, yet they do indicate some things that are worthy of belief. At any rate, Callisthenes says that Alexander conceived a very great ambition to go inland to the oracle, since he had heard that Perseus and Heracles had done so in earlier times … this last assertion is flattery and so are the next: that the priest permitted the king alone to pass into the temple in his usual dress, but the rest changed their clothes; that all heard the oracles from outside except Alexander, but he inside; that the oracular responses were not, as at Delphi and among the Branchidae, given in words, but mostly in nods and tokens, as in Homer, "Cronion spoke and nodded assent with his dark brows" – the prophetes having assumed the role of Zeus.

When Alexander had crossed the desert and arrived at the shrine, the High Priest of Ammon welcomed him on the god's behalf as a father greeting his son. Alexander's first question was to ask whether any of his father's murderers had escaped punishment. At this the High Priest commanded him to speak more guardedly, since his father was not a mortal. Alexander therefore changed the form of his question and asked whether the murderers of Philip had all been punished, and he added another inquiry concerning his own empire, and asked whether he was destined to rule over all mankind. This, the god replied, would be granted to him, and he also assured him that Philip's death had been completely avenged, whereupon Alexander dedicated some magnificent offerings to the god and presented large sums of money to his priests.

This is the account which most writers have given of the oracles pronounced by the god, but Alexander himself in a letter to his mother says that he received certain secret prophecies which he would confide to her, and to her alone, after his return. Others say that the Priest, who wished as a mark of courtesy to address him with the Greek phrase, 'O paidion' (O, my son) spoke the words because of his barbarian origin as 'O, pai Dios' (O, son of Zeus), and that Alexander was delighted at this slip of pronunciation, and hence the legend grew up that the god had addressed him as 'O, son of Zeus'.

    1.    Arrian 4.11ff.

I will now relate a widely accepted story about Callisthenes' opposition to Alexander in this matter of prostration. Alexander had arranged with the sophists and the Persian and Median noblemen at his Court that the subject should be brought up one day at a party. The discussion was begun by Anaxarchus, who declared that Alexander had a better claim upon them to be considered divine than Dionysus or Heracles. The reason for this was not merely his brilliant and successful career, but also the fact that neither Dionysus nor Heracles was connected with Macedon: Dionysus belonged to Thebes, and Heracles to Argos – the latter's only connection with Macedon was through Alexander, who had his blood in his veins. This being so, there would be greater propriety in the Macedonians paying divine honours to their own King. In any case there was no doubt that they would honour him as a god after he had left this world; would it not, therefore, be in every way better to offer him this tribute now, while he was alive, and not wait till he was dead and could get no good of it?

Those who were, so to put it, 'in the know' expressed their approval of what Anaxarchus said, and were only too willing to begin prostrating themselves forthwith; but the Macedonians – or most of them – who were present, strongly dissented, and said nothing. Suddenly Callisthenes intervened.

'For my part,' he said, 'I hold Alexander fit for any mark of honour that a man may earn; but do not forget that there is a difference between honouring a man and worshipping a god. The distinction between the two has been marked in many ways: for instance, by the building of temples, the erection of statues; the dedication of sacred ground all these are for gods; again, for gods sacrifice is offered and libations are poured; hymns are composed for the worship of gods, while panegyrics are written for the praise of men. Yet of all these things not one is so important as this very custom of prostration. Men greet each other with a kiss; but a god, far above us on his mysterious throne, it is not lawful for us to touch, and that is why we proffer him the homage of bowing to the earth before him.

    Again, for the worship of gods we perform the ceremonial dance and sing the song of praise. There is nothing surprising in this, for even the gods are worshipped by varying forms of ceremonial; and heroes and demi-gods, remember, have, again, their own peculiar, and quite different, rites. It is wrong, therefore, to ignore these distinctions; we ought not to make a man look bigger than he is by paying him excessive and extravagant honour, or, at the same time, impiously to degrade the gods (if such a thing were possible) by putting them in this matter on the same level as men. Suppose some fellow or other, by some quite unjustified vote or show of hands, were brought to enjoy royal honours: would Alexander tolerate it? Of course he would not. By the same reasoning there are much better grounds for the gods' resentment against men who invest themselves with divine honours, or allow other people to do it for them.

    Now Alexander deserves his reputation of being incomparably the bravest of the brave, the most kingly of kings, the worthiest to command of all commanders. And you, Anaxarchus – you who are admitted to Alexander's presence for the express purpose of instructing him in the truth – you, above all people, should have been the first to speak as I am speaking; you should have stopped the mouth of anyone who dared argue on the other side. To take the lead in the way you did was a disgraceful thing: you ought to have remembered that you are not the attendant and adviser of Cambyses or Xerxes, but of Philip's son, a man with the blood of Heracles and Aeacus in his veins, a man whose forefathers came from Argos to Macedonia, where they long ruled not by force, but by law.

    Again, not even Heracles was accorded divine honours by the Greeks while he was alive – nor when he was dead either, until the command to do so was given by an oracle of Apollo at Delphi. Well, here we are in a foreign land; and if for that reason we must think foreign thoughts, yet I beg you, Alexander, to remember Greece; it was for her sake alone, that you might add Asia to her empire, that you undertook this campaign. Consider this too: when you are home again, do you really propose to force the Greeks, who love their liberty more than anyone else in the world, to prostrate themselves before you? Or will you let the Greeks off and impose this shameful duty only on the Macedonians? Or will you make a broad and general distinction in the matter, and ordain that barbarians only should keep their barbarous manners, while Greeks and Macedonians honour you honourably as a man, according to the traditions of Greece?

    It is said that Cyrus, son of Cambyses, was the first man to receive the homage of prostration, and that this humiliating custom thereafter became an accepted thing in Persia. So be it; none the less you must remember that the great Cyrus was cured of his pride by a tribe of Scythians – poor men but free; that Darius was humbled by Scythians too, as Xerxes was by Athens and Sparta, and Artaxerxes by the Ten Thousand of Clearchus and Xenophon. And now Alexander has robbed another Darius of his pride – though no man has yet bowed to the earth; before him.'

This speech vexed Alexander profoundly, but not they Macedonians, who found what he said very much to their mind. Alexander was aware of this, and told the Macedonians accordingly to forget the matter: the need to prostrate themselves would not in future arise. For a moment there was silence; then the senior Persian officials rose from their seats and one by one grovelled on the floor before the King. Leonnatus, a member of the Companions, thought one of them bungled his bow, and burst out laughing at his attitude, which was, indeed, hardly dignified. Alexander was angry – but his anger passed and he was afterwards willing to make friends again.

One more story on this subject is on record. Alexander sent round a golden loving-cup, passing it first to those with whom the agreement about the act of prostration had been made. The first to drink rose from his seat, prostrated himself, and then received a kiss from Alexander. The rest followed suit; but Callisthenes, when his turn came, first drank, then rose to his feet, and then, without prostrating himself, walked up to Alexander and offered to kiss him. Alexander, at the moment, was talking to Hephaestion, and did not trouble to observe whether or not Callisthenes had properly performed the act of obeisance, but one of the Companions – Demetrius, son of Pythonax – mentioned the fact that he had omitted to do so before going up for his kiss. Thereupon Alexander refused to allow him to kiss him. 'Well then,' Callisthenes exclaimed, 'I must go back to my place one kiss the poorer.'

Aristotle seems to have come near the truth when he said that Callisthenes possessed great eloquence, but lacked common sense. But at least in the matter of proskynesis he behaved like a true philosopher, not only in his sturdy refusal to perform it, but also in being the only man to express in public the resentment which all the oldest and best of the Macedonians felt in private. By persuading the king not to insist on this tribute, he delivered the Greeks from a great disgrace and Alexander from an even greater one, but at the same time he destroyed himself, because he left the impression that he had gained his point by force rather than by persuasion.

Chares of Mytilene says that on one occasion at a banquet Alexander, after he had drunk, passed the cup to one of his friends, who took it and rose so as to face the shrine of the household; next he drank in his turn, then performed proskynesis to Alexander, kissed him and resumed his place on the couch. All the guests did the same in succession, until the cup came to Callisthenes. The king was talking to Hephaestion and paying no attention to Callisthenes, and the philosopher, after he had drunk, came forward to kiss him. At this Demetrius, whose surname was Pheido, called out, "Sire, do not kiss him; he is the only one who has not made his proskynesis to you." Alexander therefore refused to kiss him, and Callisthenes exclaimed in a loud voice, "Very well then, I shall go away the poorer by a kiss."

⁵⁵Once this rift between them had occurred, it was easy for Hephaestion to be believed when he said that the philosopher had promised him that he would perform proskynesis to Alexander, and had then broken his word.

With all the preparations made (for the invasion of India), Alexander now believed that the time was ripe for the depraved idea he had conceived some time before, and he began to consider how he could appropriate divine honours to himself. He wished to be believed, not just called, the son of Jupiter, as if it were possible for him to have as much control over men's minds as their tongues, and he gave orders for the Macedonians to follow the Persian custom in doing homage to him by prostrating themselves on the ground. To feed this desire of his there was no lack of pernicious flattery – ever the curse of royalty, whose power is more often subverted by adulation than by an enemy. Nor were the Macedonians to blame for this, for none of them could bear the slightest deviation from tradition; rather it was the Greeks, whose corrupt ways had also debauched the profession of the liberal arts. There was the Argive Agis, who, after Choerilus, composed the most execrable poems; Cleon of Sicily, whose penchant for flattery was a national as much as a personal defect; and the other dregs of their various cities. These were given preferential treatment by the King even over his relatives and the generals of his greatest armies, and these were the men who were opening up the road to heaven for him, publicly declaring that Hercules, Father Liber and Castor and Pollux would make way for the new divinity!

Accordingly, one festive day, Alexander had a sumptuous banquet organised, so that he could invite not only his principle friends among the Macedonians and Greeks, but also the enemy nobility. The king took his place with them but, after dining for only a short time, he withdrew from the banquet. Following a prearranged plan, Cleon now launched into a speech of admiration for Alexander's fine achievements, and then he listed all that the King had done for them. The only way to thank him for this, said Cleon, was to openly acknowledge his divinity – of which fact they were well aware – and to be prepared to pay for such great benefactions with incense that cost but little. The Persian practice of worshipping their kings as gods was as much a matter of prudence as piety, he said …

    1.    The reaction to the decree:

        a.    the Spartans: Plutarch, Moralia 219 e, "Sayings of Spartans" (adapted from the Loeb: compare Aelian, V.H. 2.19.)

When Alexander sent instructions (to Sparta) that they should pass a formal vote deifying him, Damis said: "We grant that if Alexander wants to be called a god, he can be."

            i.    Dinarchus, Against Demosthenes 94, c. 323 B.C. (adapted from the Loeb).

At one time he (Demosthenes) made a proposal forbidding anyone to believe in any but the accepted gods and at another he said that the people must not question the grant of divine honours to Alexander …

… you conceded in the Assembly that Alexander might be the son of Zeus and Poseidon too, if he wished …

Now we might well reflect what, in our opinion, the outcome would have been, had these men failed to do their duty in the struggle. Must we not suppose that the whole world would be under one master, and Greece compelled to tolerate his whim as law? In short that Macedonian arrogance, and not the power of justice, would lord it among every people … The practices which even now we have to countenance are proof enough: sacrifices being made to men; images, altars and temples carefully perfected in their honour, while those of the gods are neglected, and we ourselves are forced to honour as heroes the servants of these people. If reverence for the gods has been removed by Macedonian insolence, what fate must we conclude would have befallen the rules of conduct towards men?

Returning to Babylon Alexander found Peucestas back from Persia with 20,000 Persian troops … Successive delegations from Greece also presented themselves, and the delegates, wearing ceremonial wreaths, solemnly approached Alexander and placed golden chaplets on his head, as if their coming were a ritual in honour of a god. But for all that, his end was near.

        a.    Arrian 7.20.1 (adapted from the Penguin translation)

Report has it that Alexander had heard that the Arabs worshipped only two gods, Uranus and Dionysus, the former because he is seen to contain within himself not only the stars but the sun as well, the greatest and clearest source of blessing to mankind in all their affairs, and the latter, Dionysus, because of the fame of his journey to India. Alexander accordingly felt that it would not be beyond his merits to be regarded by the Arabs as a third god, in view of the fact that his achievements surpassed those of Dionysus; or at least he would deserve this honour if he conquered the Arabs and allowed them, as he had allowed the Indians, to retain their ancient institutions.

Now Alexander alleged as cause of the war (against the Arabians), Aristobulos says, that the Arabians were the only people on earth who did not send ambassadors to him, but in truth he was reaching out to be lord of all. When he learned that they only worshipped two gods, Zeus and Dionysus, who supply the most crucial necessities of life, he took it for granted that they would worship him as a third if he mastered them and allowed them to keep their ancestral independence. Accordingly, he adds, Alexander busied himself with the canals, and also thoroughly inspected the tombs of the kings and potentates, most of which are situated among the lakes.

E. Badian, "A King's Notebooks", Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 1967, 183-204.

"The Deification of Alexander the Great", Centre for Hermeneutical Studies Colloquy 21, Berkeley, 1976.

"The Deification of Alexander the Great", in Ancient Macedonian Studies in Honour of Charles F. Edson, ed. H.J. Dell (Thessaloniki, 1981), pp. 27-71.

"Alexander the Great: Between two Thrones and Heaven", in A. Small, ed., Subject and Ruler: the Cult of the Ruling Power in Classical Antiquity, J.R.A. Supplementary Series No. 17, Ann Arbor, 1996, 11-26.

J.P.V.D. Balsdon, "The Divinity of Alexander", Historia vol. 1, 1950, 363-388.

A.B. Bosworth, Conquest and Empire: the Reign of Alexander the Great, Cambridge, 1988.

M.A. Flower, "Agesilaus of Sparta and the Origins of Ruler Cult", Classical Quarterly, vol. 38, 1988, pp. 123-134.

E.A. Fredricksmeyer, "Three Notes on Alexander's Deification", American Journal of Ancient History, vol. 4, 1979, pp. 1-9.

"On the Background of the Ruler Cult", in Ancient Macedonian Studies in Honour of Charles F. Edson, ed. H.J. Dell (Thessaloniki, 1981), pp. 145-156.

P. Green, Alexander of Macedon, 356-323 B.C.: a Historical Biography, 1974, Berkeley, 1991.

J.R. Hamilton, "The Origins of Ruler-Cult", Prudentia 16 (1984) 3-16.

N.G.L. Hammond, Alexander the Great: King, Commander and Statesman, 3rd edition, London, 1994.

Philip of Macedon, London, 1993.

L.J. Sanders, "Dionysius I of Syracuse and the Origins of Ruler Cult in the Greek World", Historia, vol. 40, 1991, pp. 275-287.

W.W. Tarn, Alexander the Great, Cambridge, 1948.