David J. Lonsdale
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199608638
- eISBN:
- 9780191731754
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608638.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
By the time of his death in 323 BC, Alexander the Great had added the Persian Empire to Macedon's European territories, thus controlling most of the world as known to the ancient Greeks. In Chapter ...
More
By the time of his death in 323 BC, Alexander the Great had added the Persian Empire to Macedon's European territories, thus controlling most of the world as known to the ancient Greeks. In Chapter 1, David J. Lonsdale examines Alexander's campaigns from the early conflicts in Greece and the Balkans through his conquests in Persia, his expedition into India and his eventual return to Babylon. Alexander at times applied non‐military instruments of what we today would refer to as grand strategy, showing sensitivity to religious, cultural, and societal factors, and at other times acted with brute force, slaughtering inhabitants, or selling them into slavery. He proved himself successful in set‐piece battles as well as irregular warfare, often engaging the enemy indirectly and with inferior numbers. In the end, his success depended on his ability to combine the tactical, operational, and strategic and grand strategic levels of war.Less
By the time of his death in 323 BC, Alexander the Great had added the Persian Empire to Macedon's European territories, thus controlling most of the world as known to the ancient Greeks. In Chapter 1, David J. Lonsdale examines Alexander's campaigns from the early conflicts in Greece and the Balkans through his conquests in Persia, his expedition into India and his eventual return to Babylon. Alexander at times applied non‐military instruments of what we today would refer to as grand strategy, showing sensitivity to religious, cultural, and societal factors, and at other times acted with brute force, slaughtering inhabitants, or selling them into slavery. He proved himself successful in set‐piece battles as well as irregular warfare, often engaging the enemy indirectly and with inferior numbers. In the end, his success depended on his ability to combine the tactical, operational, and strategic and grand strategic levels of war.
A. B. Bosworth
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780198153061
- eISBN:
- 9780191715204
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198153061.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
Few events are as important and contentious as the demographic effect resulting from Alexander's conquests. It is accepted that Macedonia was far weaker by the end of the 3rd century than had been ...
More
Few events are as important and contentious as the demographic effect resulting from Alexander's conquests. It is accepted that Macedonia was far weaker by the end of the 3rd century than had been the case under Philip and Alexander, but what caused the debilitation has been intensely disputed. One theory is that Alexander's demands for reinforcements, in particular the demands he made between 334 BC and 330 BC, drained the military resources of Macedonia and were ultimately responsible for her decline over the following century. This chapter explores the question concerning the strength of Alexander's army at the time of his death, along with the military situation between 323 BC and 319 BC, when Macedonian reserves were stretched to the full. The impact of the campaigns of those years, which were arguably more destructive — for Macedon — than the entire reign of Alexander, is discussed.Less
Few events are as important and contentious as the demographic effect resulting from Alexander's conquests. It is accepted that Macedonia was far weaker by the end of the 3rd century than had been the case under Philip and Alexander, but what caused the debilitation has been intensely disputed. One theory is that Alexander's demands for reinforcements, in particular the demands he made between 334 BC and 330 BC, drained the military resources of Macedonia and were ultimately responsible for her decline over the following century. This chapter explores the question concerning the strength of Alexander's army at the time of his death, along with the military situation between 323 BC and 319 BC, when Macedonian reserves were stretched to the full. The impact of the campaigns of those years, which were arguably more destructive — for Macedon — than the entire reign of Alexander, is discussed.
Ernst Fredricksmeyer
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780198152873
- eISBN:
- 9780191715136
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198152873.003.0005
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter argues that Alexander the Great's kingship of Asia, as proclaimed in 331 BC, did not mean, as is often thought, the Persian kingship, but was a unique creation of Alexander himself. In ...
More
This chapter argues that Alexander the Great's kingship of Asia, as proclaimed in 331 BC, did not mean, as is often thought, the Persian kingship, but was a unique creation of Alexander himself. In addition, Alexander's Persian innovations after the death of Darius in 330 were not primarily designed, as is widely believed, to establish Alexander as Great King, but rather were meant to reform Alexander's kingship by addition of the Persian component, and to establish Alexander, ultimately, as an absolute monarch. According to Plutarch, by Alexander's conquest of Darius at Gaugamela in October 331, the empire of Persia was thought to be completely destroyed, and a few days later, at the nearby village of Arbela, Alexander was proclaimed ‘King of Asia’. Although Plutarch is the only source to provide this information, it is accepted by virtually all historians as historical. Only Franz Altheim and Paul Goukowsky are known to have rejected it.Less
This chapter argues that Alexander the Great's kingship of Asia, as proclaimed in 331 BC, did not mean, as is often thought, the Persian kingship, but was a unique creation of Alexander himself. In addition, Alexander's Persian innovations after the death of Darius in 330 were not primarily designed, as is widely believed, to establish Alexander as Great King, but rather were meant to reform Alexander's kingship by addition of the Persian component, and to establish Alexander, ultimately, as an absolute monarch. According to Plutarch, by Alexander's conquest of Darius at Gaugamela in October 331, the empire of Persia was thought to be completely destroyed, and a few days later, at the nearby village of Arbela, Alexander was proclaimed ‘King of Asia’. Although Plutarch is the only source to provide this information, it is accepted by virtually all historians as historical. Only Franz Altheim and Paul Goukowsky are known to have rejected it.
Elizabeth Baynham
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780198152873
- eISBN:
- 9780191715136
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198152873.003.0008
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
One of the more intriguing documents in the extant corpus of ancient literature on Alexander the Great of Macedon and his death is Liber de Morte, a fictitious account of his last days and will, ...
More
One of the more intriguing documents in the extant corpus of ancient literature on Alexander the Great of Macedon and his death is Liber de Morte, a fictitious account of his last days and will, which was originally appended to a late Latin history known as the Metz Epitome. References to such a document are found in two major historical sources. Quintus Curtius, the Roman historian, claims that an alleged testament of the king had purported to distribute his empire amongst his generals, but he emphatically rejects the validity of its existence and the tradition. According to Diodorus Siculus, Alexander admired the Rhodians so much that he deposited his will with them. Historically, this seems unlikely in view of Alexander's treatment of the island; he had installed a garrison on it and at his death the Rhodians removed their Macedonian overlords.Less
One of the more intriguing documents in the extant corpus of ancient literature on Alexander the Great of Macedon and his death is Liber de Morte, a fictitious account of his last days and will, which was originally appended to a late Latin history known as the Metz Epitome. References to such a document are found in two major historical sources. Quintus Curtius, the Roman historian, claims that an alleged testament of the king had purported to distribute his empire amongst his generals, but he emphatically rejects the validity of its existence and the tradition. According to Diodorus Siculus, Alexander admired the Rhodians so much that he deposited his will with them. Historically, this seems unlikely in view of Alexander's treatment of the island; he had installed a garrison on it and at his death the Rhodians removed their Macedonian overlords.
Phiroze Vasunia
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199212989
- eISBN:
- 9780191594205
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199212989.003.0017
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines Sikandar (1941), an Indian film about Alexander the Great, and situates it within broader contexts of colonialism and nationalism. It considers how cinema's engagement with the ...
More
This chapter examines Sikandar (1941), an Indian film about Alexander the Great, and situates it within broader contexts of colonialism and nationalism. It considers how cinema's engagement with the historical past provides responses to political pressures, through such devices as narrative, representational strategy, and the use of tradition. In evaluating the film about Alexander (directed by Sohrab Modi and starring Prithviraj Kapoor as Sikandar), the chapter considers the broader socio‐political contexts in which the film was made, and also locate it within Indian historical writing on the ancient Greeks. The choice of Alexander was not entirely arbitrary, and the Macedonian figure offered Indian intellectuals a vehicle through which they could speak about specific contemporary issues raised by anti‐colonial struggles and aspirations to nationhood.Less
This chapter examines Sikandar (1941), an Indian film about Alexander the Great, and situates it within broader contexts of colonialism and nationalism. It considers how cinema's engagement with the historical past provides responses to political pressures, through such devices as narrative, representational strategy, and the use of tradition. In evaluating the film about Alexander (directed by Sohrab Modi and starring Prithviraj Kapoor as Sikandar), the chapter considers the broader socio‐political contexts in which the film was made, and also locate it within Indian historical writing on the ancient Greeks. The choice of Alexander was not entirely arbitrary, and the Macedonian figure offered Indian intellectuals a vehicle through which they could speak about specific contemporary issues raised by anti‐colonial struggles and aspirations to nationhood.
A. B. Bosworth
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780198153061
- eISBN:
- 9780191715204
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198153061.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
The winter of 317/16 BC witnessed what is arguably the most momentous campaign in the entire period after the death of Alexander the Great. Two massive coalition armies led by Eumenes and Antigonus ...
More
The winter of 317/16 BC witnessed what is arguably the most momentous campaign in the entire period after the death of Alexander the Great. Two massive coalition armies led by Eumenes and Antigonus the One-Eyed manoeuvred delicately and skilfully in the desolate terrain of central Iran, and the two great battles they fought were recorded by a participant (Hieronymus of Cardia) who was an intimate both of Eumenes and the Antigonids. That account was used by Diodorus, and his narrative of the campaign is one of the most detailed and colourful in his entire encyclopaedic history. This chapter revisits the campaign in Iran and addresses some of the critical issues which determined the strategy and outcome.Less
The winter of 317/16 BC witnessed what is arguably the most momentous campaign in the entire period after the death of Alexander the Great. Two massive coalition armies led by Eumenes and Antigonus the One-Eyed manoeuvred delicately and skilfully in the desolate terrain of central Iran, and the two great battles they fought were recorded by a participant (Hieronymus of Cardia) who was an intimate both of Eumenes and the Antigonids. That account was used by Diodorus, and his narrative of the campaign is one of the most detailed and colourful in his entire encyclopaedic history. This chapter revisits the campaign in Iran and addresses some of the critical issues which determined the strategy and outcome.
Michael Flower
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780198152873
- eISBN:
- 9780191715136
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198152873.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
In 335 BC Alexander of Macedon laid siege to the city of Thebes, which was in revolt, and razed it to the ground. Contrast the treatment of Thebes with that of Plataea. After his victory at Gaugamela ...
More
In 335 BC Alexander of Macedon laid siege to the city of Thebes, which was in revolt, and razed it to the ground. Contrast the treatment of Thebes with that of Plataea. After his victory at Gaugamela in 331, Alexander ordered the rebuilding of Plataea, which had been destroyed by Thebes in 373, because of her services to Greece in 479 BC. Thus, Alexander destroyed one famous Greek city and rebuilt another. Alexander's motive in destroying Thebes was to deter future revolts. The razing of Thebes and the restoration of Plataea were part and parcel of the same policy, and that policy was panhellenic. This chapter discusses panhellenism as an ideology during the time of Alexander the Great, some of his actions that relate to a panhellenist programme, and panhellenism after the burning of Persepolis.Less
In 335 BC Alexander of Macedon laid siege to the city of Thebes, which was in revolt, and razed it to the ground. Contrast the treatment of Thebes with that of Plataea. After his victory at Gaugamela in 331, Alexander ordered the rebuilding of Plataea, which had been destroyed by Thebes in 373, because of her services to Greece in 479 BC. Thus, Alexander destroyed one famous Greek city and rebuilt another. Alexander's motive in destroying Thebes was to deter future revolts. The razing of Thebes and the restoration of Plataea were part and parcel of the same policy, and that policy was panhellenic. This chapter discusses panhellenism as an ideology during the time of Alexander the Great, some of his actions that relate to a panhellenist programme, and panhellenism after the burning of Persepolis.
A. B. Bosworth
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780198153061
- eISBN:
- 9780191715204
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198153061.003.0002
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
No previous event in Macedonian history was anything like as turbulant as the Babylon Settlement. There had been succession crises aplenty, but all had been significantly different. Reigning kings ...
More
No previous event in Macedonian history was anything like as turbulant as the Babylon Settlement. There had been succession crises aplenty, but all had been significantly different. Reigning kings left living sons. They may have been immature boys (like Archelaus' son, Orestes), but at least they were there — there was a plethora of males of the Argead house. So problems arose from an oversupply of potential kings. What is more, the succession to the throne was played out within the boundaries of Macedon, in the traditional heartland of the kingdom. Alexander himself came to power in the old capital of Aegae, with the entire nobility around him and the armed forces united in Macedonia. His accession may have been bloody, but the circumstances did not favour a protracted crisis. Rivals and potential rivals who were close at hand were quickly eliminated, and he was able to achieve recognition in Macedon and stamp his authority on the League of Corinth within a matter of weeks.Less
No previous event in Macedonian history was anything like as turbulant as the Babylon Settlement. There had been succession crises aplenty, but all had been significantly different. Reigning kings left living sons. They may have been immature boys (like Archelaus' son, Orestes), but at least they were there — there was a plethora of males of the Argead house. So problems arose from an oversupply of potential kings. What is more, the succession to the throne was played out within the boundaries of Macedon, in the traditional heartland of the kingdom. Alexander himself came to power in the old capital of Aegae, with the entire nobility around him and the armed forces united in Macedonia. His accession may have been bloody, but the circumstances did not favour a protracted crisis. Rivals and potential rivals who were close at hand were quickly eliminated, and he was able to achieve recognition in Macedon and stamp his authority on the League of Corinth within a matter of weeks.
A. B. Bosworth
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780198153061
- eISBN:
- 9780191715204
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198153061.003.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
The period after the reign of Alexander the Great is generally regarded as a depressing anticlimax. It was characterized by destabilisation and virtual anarchy, as the great king's marshals fought ...
More
The period after the reign of Alexander the Great is generally regarded as a depressing anticlimax. It was characterized by destabilisation and virtual anarchy, as the great king's marshals fought for the empire which he had allegedly left to the strongest of them. The army which he had led into Asia was dissipated in a sequence of futile civil wars, and the elite Macedonian troops were progressively reduced by combat, much of it against fellow Macedonians. Out of the conflict emerged a number of kingdoms, created by the ambitions of individual satraps, which gradually coalesced into hereditary dynasties.Less
The period after the reign of Alexander the Great is generally regarded as a depressing anticlimax. It was characterized by destabilisation and virtual anarchy, as the great king's marshals fought for the empire which he had allegedly left to the strongest of them. The army which he had led into Asia was dissipated in a sequence of futile civil wars, and the elite Macedonian troops were progressively reduced by combat, much of it against fellow Macedonians. Out of the conflict emerged a number of kingdoms, created by the ambitions of individual satraps, which gradually coalesced into hereditary dynasties.
Sviatoslav Dmitriev
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195375183
- eISBN:
- 9780199896721
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195375183.003.0002
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, World History: BCE to 500CE
Chapter 2 shows that Philip’s Macedonian peace served as a framework for his own military alliance, the League of Corinth. Philip reorganized all the other Greek alliances in the name of freedom, ...
More
Chapter 2 shows that Philip’s Macedonian peace served as a framework for his own military alliance, the League of Corinth. Philip reorganized all the other Greek alliances in the name of freedom, posing as the protector of freedom for individual cities in Greece. Having inherited this system, Alexander (the Great) started a new trend, using “freedom” and “autonomy” to define the status of individual Greek cities in return for their loyalty to him. This chapter also examines the development of particular aspects of the status of Greeks cities during Alexander’s reign, which would survive into the Hellenistic and Roman periods. My examination shows that neither the obligation of the city to pay tribute (with or without other contributions) nor its obligation to accept a garrison was relevant to its status as a “free” and “autonomous” city.Less
Chapter 2 shows that Philip’s Macedonian peace served as a framework for his own military alliance, the League of Corinth. Philip reorganized all the other Greek alliances in the name of freedom, posing as the protector of freedom for individual cities in Greece. Having inherited this system, Alexander (the Great) started a new trend, using “freedom” and “autonomy” to define the status of individual Greek cities in return for their loyalty to him. This chapter also examines the development of particular aspects of the status of Greeks cities during Alexander’s reign, which would survive into the Hellenistic and Roman periods. My examination shows that neither the obligation of the city to pay tribute (with or without other contributions) nor its obligation to accept a garrison was relevant to its status as a “free” and “autonomous” city.
