pothos.org

Personally, I think the "to the strongest" episode is as much a fairy tale as any of the stories told about Alexander. But that's just me. As for the phenomenon for "Alexander admiration"? I understand what you're getting at, but all the same I don't find it unreasonable for even...

Paralus, at the risk of veering off the topic of the conversation, I was hoping to ask you this: What is your opinion of Theopompus' passages, above? Do you think it's a case of his exercising criticism over concepts he didn't approve of; or a case of his manufacturing a picture that he knew the Gre...

Hydaspes might qualify... if deliberately trying to mislead your opponent via maneuver counts as "rumours" and "misinformation". That certainly meets the criteria for today's official "deception" doctrine, but I don't know that either the example or "rumours" ...

I see no reason why Philip could not have waited, and let Alexander fight in the battle without letting him also be a commander. Again, how about because it was appropriate, or at least was not inappropriate, to the culture we're discussing? No offense intended, but I simply don't see how this is s...

You and I seem to be talking about two different things. I'm not talking about Alexander being present on the battlefield. I've acknowledged in my reply to Amyntoros that this could be considered reasonable. I'm talking about the decision, as I perceive it, to allow Alexander to command the left wi...

I disagree. I think this decision was and would have been questionable in any time period and any culture. I beg to differ. Times change and cultures/societies differ. I agree that it doesn't make sense to endanger both monarch and heir in the same battle, but I recognize that different societies h...

Accursed, I think you make very valid points... given a 21st century perspective. You're trying to apply that perspective in a 4th century BCE militaristic society complete with "heroic lineages" and combat-based cults of personality, though, and the two don't fit. On a simply cultural lev...

Eh, don't get me wrong. My opinion is what it is largely because of what battle we're talking about. I think there's a difference between "leading the left wing" in a battle such as Gaugamela, where the commander there was responsible for the timing between feeding units into the defensive...

I agree with Paralus on this one. Trying to deduce a specific rank or command role for Alexander at Chaeronea is like so much splitting hairs. I'm fairly sure that, as already stated, Alexander's role in this battle was largely another step in his "royal apprenticeship", as it were. As hei...

Yeah, like I said, it's just a feeling that I have. :) I can see Ptolemy & co. "forgetting" to mention that their quick march in the late afternoon caught the enemy with his pants down. In a weird way, I think this ties into the tale about Parmenion urging caution: a kind of perverse j...

Personally, I think Arrian's numbers are right (if not the exact unit breakdown; that is, I think there were 20,000 infantry... but not all of them were mercenary hoplites), as is his description of the Persians' disposition. It's nothing but conjecture, but I think Alexander figured he had nothing ...

Agesilaos, I don't know; I think you're too quick to merely flip Alexander worship over and go with the extreme opposite. ... it would be as well to remember that in all of the major battles there was a conference of the commanders ... The one battle he seems to have planned himself, that at the Hyd...

Well, mostly because there is no point to conquering the southern Greek poleis off the bat if there is no strategic gain attached to it.

I guess I could be wrong, but I think Alexander, ambitions and all, was a bit more pragmatic than that.

Yes, think about it. Either Alexander was insane or he knew that he was not ever due to face such numbers. First, a quick caveat: I don't think Xerxes showed up in Greece with anything resembling 1.7 million troops. Personally, I favor the idea that each of the 29 (IIRC) named infantry commanders i...

It was no more strategically logical than any other region conquered by Argead dynasts. I beg to differ. The conquest of Thrace gave Macedon a good deal of control over a rather strategic spot in that part of the world. The Hellespont, access to the Black Sea and all that. You seem to imply, had th...