1. We know that over time Hephastion will become an important commander, how will your Hephastion behave as a commander? what will be his main qualities and what are the main differences between him and Alexander in terms of command?

2. I noticed that in the first book Cleitus doesn't get along very well with Hephastion, how do you see them both getting along with joint command of the most prestigious unit in the army?

For other readers, these questions are about Dancing with the Lion, the novels, not the historical people. While my characters are informed by my academic work, I obviously have to flesh them out for the books.

(My) Hephaistion is a reluctant but highly competent commander. I foreshadowed this in Rise when he takes command early in Alexandros’s self-imposed exile. Alexandros is too emotionally numb to do, so Hephaistion steps in. And he’s good at it. That’s the first hint of where he’ll excel: logistics and organization. But as soon as Alexandros is ready to resume leadership, Hephaistion is happy to hand it over. He’s simply not ambitious. People can be good at something without necessarily wanting to do it (regularly).

In the novels, Hephaistion won’t have much in the way of command initially because Alexandros has numerous older commanders who he inherited from Philippos. It wouldn’t be politically astute to just demote or get rid of these men. In his first few years in Asia, he did appoint several to fill satrapies in areas he’d conquered, men such as Antigonos, Balakros…even Nearchos. Nearchos doesn’t become his admiral until much later in the campaign when he’s recalled east from his assignment on the coast (Lycia/Pamphylia). Although in Nearchos’s case, he was there because Alexander (the historical man) trusted him. Alexandros (the character) will assign him there to keep an eye on the other powerful men who Alexandros doesn’t trust as much.

It won’t be until these replacements happen that we’ll see Hephaistion gradually move up. His first big assignment occurs in Sidon (slightly skewed in the novel from the histories, which are presented as a moral tale meant to mimic popular Roman myths of [et al.] Cincinnatus).

In general, he accepts commands because incompetence annoys him. In that, he and Alexandros are much alike. But while Alexandros will charm his way into “helping” you, Hephaistion will just rip whatever it is out of your hands and do it himself…faster. So, I don’t see him as a beloved commander, but do see him as a respected one, at least by the men he commands—who directly benefit from his competence (and fairness).

In terms of his skill-set, it’s the same as the historical man’s: organization/logistics and diplomacy. (My) Hephaistion is not, however, the person Alexandros sends when he wants to charm somebody. But he is the person Alexandros sends when he needs a commander who can effect a quick (and accurate) assessment of interpersonal dynamics and any weaknesses (or strengths) of an opponent. He’s not easy to fool.

Moreover, if he may not be the soul of charm, he also isn’t a bull in a China shop; he can be perfectly polite, if reserved. He can also be sneaky in a butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-my-mouth way—also not unlike Alexandros. In book 3, King, he’ll function as Alexandros’s spy at one point, precisely because he can convincingly play pretty-but-dumb. This, again, was foreshadowed in book one, Becoming, where he tricks Kassandros at the very beginning by pretending to be what Kassandros took him for: a backwoods bumpkin. (That’s still one of my favorite scenes in book 1, and among the few I wrote way back in 1988/89 that’s still in the published version.)

Anyway, Hephaistion is diplomatic in the sense that he “reads the room” well and doesn’t often lose his cool (or his temper). When he decides to go after somebody, it will be entirely pre-meditated, and usually devastating. In that, he’s completely different from the hot-tempered Alexandros (and most of their friends). But it works well for him in command because the soldiers, and later officers, serving under him can’t easily rile him up. (Krateros is another matter, but more on that later.)

As for the second half of your question: Kleitos and Hephaistion will never be bosom buddies because they’re such different personalities, but over time, Kleitos has revised his opinion of Hephaistion. When the latter first arrived in Pella, Kleitos thought him a spoilt fancy-boy, which drove Hephaistion’s reactionary responses. At that point, he’s still young enough to be triggered. As he ages, and grows in confidence, he’s less easy to provoke. Kleitos also comes to recognize his skill as a fighter. Hephaistion will never be an especially gifted battle commander, nor is he “warm” enough that men will follow him through hell and high water the way the will Alexandros, or Parmenion, or Krateros. But he is a leader rather than a “boss,” which goes a long way. He learned that from Alexandros, and it’s also in his basic nature. He won’t ask people to do what he won’t do himself. But he also won’t chit-chat with you while you’re both doing it. 😆

Thus, Kleitos comes to respect him. At the end of Rise, note that Hephaistion has beaten Kleitos in Single Combat, even if he didn’t win overall first place. That little victory goes some way towards Hephaistion being able to let go of his long-nursed resentment towards Kleitos. He’s proven himself to himself, which matters most.

Title: Olympos Asleep (5/17 - this chapter has a scene that bumps it up to M) Chapter title: Earth Mother, Mountain Mother

I’m sure they figured out how to work together because they had to, but Alexander’s point in naming them both was to appeal to two different factions in his army at that point in time, so working together was a necessity, and I’m quite sure Alexander talked to both before naming them. As I alluded to in my other post about the Philotas Affair and Krateros, I think Alexander’s goal was to rein in Krateros’s ambition, but without making it seem too much like a slight or a hard lean to the left. By appointing Kleitos, he had an older office of Philip’s era, BUT someone he trusted as the brother of his wet nurse and who’d saved his life before. By appointing Hephaistion, he got to advance someone in alignment with his new policies, and who he could also trust.

As for Kleitos’s death, I’m sure it shook up EVERYBODY, including Hephaistion. It showed that, in his cups, Alexander had a terrible temper and nobody was safe. But I suspect some (perhaps including Hephaistion) figured Kleitos had sorta asked for it. IF we can believe that he really was hauled out of the drinking chamber and came back in, then there’s antagonism on both sides. Doesn’t excuse Alexander, and certainly, what led up to the quarrel: a play mocking of dead commanders at the Marakanda/(Samarkand) debacle in order to soothe Alexander’s bruised ego, was tactless at the very least. Kleitos had reason to be furious. But Kleitos walked into the den to beard the lion and got mauled.

I suspect Hephaistion recognized as much. So did his other new men. One of the things Hephaistion seems to have been exceptionally good at was reading the Alexander Weather Vane: what he could say, when, and how. But Kleitos’s death would’ve only underscored the necessity in doing that.