Davenport, Quinlan Connor
ABSTRACT: This thesis began with the question: What did Alexander believe he would find in India? Throughout the research and writing of this thesis, a variety of potential answers to this question have been found. Alexander may have believed in the fantastical, as the Greeks did not distinguish mythology as such, the mythological was as real as the sciences. It seems Alexander did believe in Dragons, but he may not have believed in the Pygmies. Alexander may have had a more realistic view, of the subcontinent, as after conquering Persia, he obtained access to the Persian records of the province. Alexander may have believed that beyond India was a wasteland, a desert, and earth encircling ocean, or the edge of the world. The answer to this question may not be possible to discover, but the rhetorical exercise can illuminate much about not just the man and his conquests, but of Greek society and their understanding of the world. This thesis also addresses the connections between ancient Greek and Indian society, primarily the connection between philosophical developments. This philosophical connection may have been through trade, through Persia, or from an older Dionysian conqueror; the method by which this was established remains unknown, but the existence of this connection is near certain. The most interesting development in the answer to this question came out of this philosophical connection, coming from the comparison of belief in death and the afterlife from these two cultures. When Alexander conquered Egypt he styled himself a Pharaoh, and when he had conquered Persia, he adopted the Persian Empire and the structure of the Empire. In the Orient, Alexander used the beliefs of the cultures he conquered to present himself as a god-king. The god-king model did not sit well with the Greek part of his empire, so Alexander followed the models of Dionysus and Herakles for his own deification. Alexander would present a story of his demi-god nature and a path toward deification. By incorporating the Indian philosophy, when Alexander conquered India, he conquered death.
ABSTRACT: The Marian Reforms of 107 BC and the factors that led to an apparent radical break with tradition and likely a violation of Roman Law, and the exploration of the politics surrounding the lasting Reforms particularly with regard to the admission of the proletariat in the army and the reorganization of the military are known and well discussed in scholarship. However, the politics that allowed a Novus homo, namely Gaius Marius, to pass such reforms in light of direct or absence of open opposition by aristocratic factions is more ambiguous. The actual mechanisms and forces that facilitated the change led by or accredited to Marius are the main aspects under consideration, as well as, the political and social factors that allowed the longevity of these Reforms initiated by Marius to exist even after his decline, disgrace, and death. The manner of the investigation made use of the biographical analysis and textual analysis as the Life of Marius by Plutarch provided a wealth of information on the professed character of Marius though the nature of the text itself dictates caution in terms of the supposition of veracity. Moreover, close readings of Sallust especially pertaining to his writings of The Jugurthine War as the narrative declared by Sallust portrays a unique antagonist to Rome that eventually provided the political necessity for a man, such as Marius, to rise to prominence and yield a sense of practicality for the Reforms proposed. Furthermore, other ancient sources, though written outside of the temporal considerations to the Reforms, still reflected certain social trends or political events that were either in the process of beginning or continuing in the time of Marius. Other sources served to ground this work in the context of the Reforms and their immediate and essential contribution to the Roman society, military, and state.
