View Poll Results: Alexander? Great or Bait without his fathers tactics?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Alexander the Great

    15 50.00%
  • Alexander the Bait

    5 16.67%
  • Alexander the Ordinary

    10 33.33%
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 59

Thread: DEBATE: Alexander the Great

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skirata View Post
    Anyone else take this out of context and lol?
    I will rep you so hard for that.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    ❒ Taken ❒ Sinqle ✔ Doing Me
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Nah, he would have been just as strong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skirata View Post
    Anyone else take this out of context and lol?
    It's near impossible to keep it in context.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWMOEVdXR2o
    OFWGKTA
    <18:16>From [Midnight1] : whats up with kills? is he that bad of a bish?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    7,183

    Default

    Philip II was probably one of the most effective leaders in History.


    He had the very tactic that got Alexander so far so fast: assmililate, not destroy.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York, United States of America
    Posts
    758

    Default [Alexander III of Macedonia or, The Slave to Hubris]

    Hello.

    Here is one of my essays that is relevant to the topic of this particular thread:
    ________________________________________________



    Alexander III of Macedonia or, The Slave to Hubris

    By Conrad Jalowski

    Greatness is not achieved through the imposition of will, coercion or through processes of subjugation. Greatness consists of benevolence, friendship, sagacity and the incessant acquisition of knowledge. Therefore, greatness is not of megalomania or of the ascension of hubris as in the mold of the Macedonian conqueror but of the Aristotelian concept of megalopsychia or a "magnanimity of the soul".

    Alexander III was a military genius as he won on such occasions as at the Battle of Lyginus, Battle at the Granicus River, Battle of Issus, Siege of New Tyre, Siege of Gaza, Battle of Guagamela, warfare with the Scythians and petty princelings or tetrarchs and the Battle at the Hydaspes River, however, he had many faults:

    (1.) Alexander III of Macedonia was unsatisfactory in the administration of his vast domain: the eastern border [around Bactria, Ferghana, Sogdiana, Arachosia] was already devolving into chaos, and internal fissures emerged between Macedonian hegemony and subjugated cultures even before his death in Babylon on 323 B.C.E.

    (2A.) Alexander III never subjugated or integrated the regions in Anatolia such as Cappadocia [The region of Cappadocia was first invested by Perdiccas for his lieutenant Eumenes of Cardia during the Diadochian Conflicts between the Separatists and Royalists in the beginning phase of the "Wars of Succession"], Bithynia, Pontus, Greater Armenia and Lazica.

    (2B.) The Macedonian supply lines were stretched to great limits and were maintained only at a great cost by Antigonus I 'Monopthalmus'. The supply lines stretched from a) Macedonia Proper [Thessalonica, Amphilochia, Pella and Pelagonia], b) the Macedonian subject states such as Thessaly, Thrace, the territories of the Phocians, the lands of the Locrii, etc and c) members of the Macedonian controlled 'Amphictyonic Council' [A synhedrion or a council representation and body] through Hellespontine Phrygia and the Taurus Mountains in Anatolia and passing through key zones of administration and centers of gravity at the regions of Susa, Ecbatana and Babylon to the far reaches of Tapuria, Traxiane, Hyrcania, Bactria, Ferghana, Sogdiana, etc. In addition, the circulating network of supplies, communication and manpower had to be safeguarded from autonomous and hostile regions that were not fully under Macedonian hegemony such as:

    (North of Assyria and Mesopotamia):
    -------------------------------
    a.) Atropatene,
    b.) Adiabene,
    c.) Gordyene

    [Such regions were not fully integrated into a cohesive form under central Macedonian administration. Rather, such regions were a mixed conglomerate of allied and subservient states as well as autonomous and inimical tribal units and groups.]

    (The Bactrian Region):
    -------------------------------
    a.) To safeguard supply caravans and the transport of resources from Scythian incursions,
    b.) Inimical "tetrarchs" or princelings not yet fully broken or subjugated,
    c.) The natural accumulation of vagrants and other dissatisfied groups.

    (3.) Alexander III's chimerical or fanciful desire for the "Brotherhood of Man" or an amalgamation of Persian and Greek elements resulted in the development of tension and enmity between two separate cultures. Alexander III of Macedonia did not truly desire a harmonious synthesis of humanity but rather an encompassing domain under his autocratic/despotic rule.

    (4.) Alexander III increasingly became uxorious, avaricious and was consumed by hubris and delusions of grandeur. He indulged in bacchanalian revelries and demonstrated a lack of moderation and self-restraint. The riches of the East had dulled his intellect and enflamed his senses; from the teachings of Aristotle and a desire for excellence in the Homeric tradition he became a drunken despot consumed by his vulgar passions. Alexander's delusions made him believe to be a descendent of Zeus [Jove] and the nymph Aeagina through the mortal offspring/descendents of the Olympian god such as Aeacus, Achilles, Neoptolemus, etc.

    (5A.) Alexander III of Macedonia left a legacy of death and destruction in his wake: the Wars of the Diadochoi or the Epigonoi resulted in such climactic battles as Paraitacene, Gabiene, Gaza, Salamis, Rhodes, Ipsus and Corupedium in the phases of a) 322-320 B.C.E, b) 319-315 B.C.E, c) 314-311 B.C.E and d) 309-281 B.C.E. Perhaps the legacy of Alexander III was a fragmented and fissiparous or divisive realm with the successor states and other separatist realms: the Antigonid [323-146 B.C.E], the Antipatrid, the Ptolemaic [323-30 B.C.E], the Seleucid [312-63 B.C.E], the Attalid Pergamene Kingdom [281-130 B.C.E], Graeco-Bactria through the revolt of the satrap Diodotus I [250-125 B.C.E] and the Indo-Greek Kingdom [180 B.C.E-10 C.E] through the conquests of Demetrius I 'Aniketos' [180-175 B.C.E].

    (5B.) In the eventual outcome, Rome claimed Macedonia [the battles of Cynoscephalae on 197 B.C.E and Pydna on 168 B.C.E and crushed the revolt led by Andriscus or the pseudo-Perseus which lasted from 149-148 B.C.E]; dissolved the Achaean Confederation with the sack of Corinth on 146 B.C.E; Pergamum of the Attalid Dynasty was left to Rome on 133 B.C.E by the last Attalid dynast in which the rebellion of Aristonicus was crushed on 130 B.C.E; Mithridates VI Eupator Dionysius of Pontus failed to defeat the Romans during the Three Mithridatic Wars; Tigranes II Eupator of Armenia submitted to the Roman Republic; the Seleucid monarchy [Arche Seleukia] was sown its dissolution by Pompey 'the Great' in which the last competing dynasts to the Seleucid throne [1. Antiochus XIII Asiaticus, 2. Seleucus Kybiosaktes, 3. Philip II Philorhomais and 4. Antiochus I of Commagene] were disgraced and disposed of; and the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Hellenistic Egypt submitted to Rome on 30 B.C.E.

    (5C.) In the East, the Arsacids of Parthia took over the eastern possessions of the Seleucids and subjugated most of the former territories of the Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom such as Tapuria, Traxiane, Hyrcania, etc. Alexander III did not integrate his vast empire into a centralized and cohesive socio-political unit with a coherent outlook. Instead, he utilized the satrapial system and failed to maintain his empire from domestic turmoil and foreign incursions.

    (Conclusion): Therefore, although Alexander III of Macedonia was a military genius he did not possess sound political judgment and did not harbor a coherent outlook on the required administration of his vast domain which was dissolved upon his death by the Diadochoi or Epigonoi and by foreign elements. In addition, Alexander III was despotic and inflexible and in the later phases of his Asiatic conquests he was driven by licentious passions or frenzied and furious emotions that consumed and reduced him to a senseless individual obsequious or servile to petty delusions.
    Last edited by Conrad_Jalowski; 04-04-2010 at 02:14 AM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The great white north.
    Posts
    4,444

    Default

    All arguments have been made invalid by the application of Conrad.

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conrad_Jalowski View Post
    Therefore, although Alexander III of Macedonia was a military genius he did not possess sound political judgment and did not harbor a coherent outlook on the required administration of his vast domain which was dissolved upon his death
    Your conclusion does not make sense. If he wasn't a good leader, then why didn't his vast domain dissolve while he was in power? His successors were not great powerful leaders like he was so it caused his vast domain to dissolve.

    Anyway, I think Aristotle played a greater role on Alexander being a great leader than his father ever did.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In my old shoebox
    Posts
    601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hans7 View Post
    Your conclusion does not make sense. If he wasn't a good leader, then why didn't his vast domain dissolve while he was in power? His successors were not great powerful leaders like he was so it caused his vast domain to dissolve.

    Anyway, I think Aristotle played a greater role on Alexander being a great leader than his father ever did.
    The empire was already falling apart, but because of the great victories alexander made, those werent seen. When alexander died, and his follow up failed or atleast didnt do as good as alexander, all the things that already were going bad collapsed to a crucial point.
    ''Just a small guy standing between giants.''

    ''Only 1 man in a thousand is an leader, the other 999 follow woman.''

    http://bbs.evony.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=137439&dateline=12685  80799

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York, United States of America
    Posts
    758

    Default

    Hans7 please read my comprehensive post for your post is petty, generalized and basic.
    Last edited by Conrad_Jalowski; 04-04-2010 at 06:13 AM.

  9. #19

    Default

    Alexander died rather young and with no heir since his son at that time had not even been born yet so it is rather unfair to say he failed as a ruler for having his empire divided. Besides Greece had been governed by independant city states so the idea of a structure to support a vast empire was probably pretty foreign to them. Greece was after all the birth-place of democracy.

    In any case if you want to hold Alexander responsible for failing as an emperor he still achieved one thing by spreading Greek culture to the rest of the known world which lasted for another 200 years before they were absorbed by the Republic if Rome.
    Killing people never solves anything but it keeps them out of your hair while you think of an alternative.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Some place in England.
    Posts
    5,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conrad_Jalowski View Post
    Hans7 please read my comprehensive post for your post is petty, generalized and basic.
    You just owned by Conrad.

    +Rep (hopefully)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •