Tyre siege.

This moderated forum is for discussion of Alexander the Great. Inappropriate posts will be deleted without warning. Examples of inappropriate posts are:
* The Greek/Macedonian debate
* Blatant requests for pre-written assignments by lazy students - we don't mind the subtle ones ;-)
* Foul or inappropriate language

Moderator: pothos moderators

bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

Thanks for all the feedback with these two sieges...Im one on the readers Following Persepolis the Alexander story crosses over..Turnsback on itself and basically as a military enerprise loses quite a lot of its momentum.

Upto Gaugamela I would say it was strategically straight foreward..Open terrain with a few Sieges some messy but its fare to say Alexander had a clear view what he was doing and what was in the way.

When he starts venturing east it becomes Rocky,The Unknown Terrain weather and of coarse the resolute stubborness of those peoples.

I would say Pir Sar and The Sogdian rock gave his nature some kind of foundations and foot notes of conquest...Better than chasising hill fighters.Getting Army sections massacred and rebelion once he had gone away.

The war ans the ways in my opinion do not suite generals and conquerors as they dont give in...You can beat the hell out of these armys but if they keep getting up then Irritation and confusion swets in...Forcing extreme tactics as Alexander did with some of his latter slaughters.

I am one of the minority who maybe thinks the Beas mutiny was a blessing for Alexander////It meant he could do what Alexanders propoganda says he would never do....Turn Back

The Russians wanted out and now the Coalition are getting out within four years dressing it up as some kind of hand over to the Afghans. Akin to Alexander getting out and passing it all to Porus a very magnaminous gesture but hardly selfless.

I ask anyone in Pothos..Was Alexander ever going to win and was it going to get worse the further he pressed on away from his home bases,,, Who we know were behaving like miniature kings whilst Alexander was pressing east.

I take Alexander to be the greatest of Generals and Commanders and if he really did mean to press on then to me that makes him second rate...Great Commanders and generals knowhow far to stretch as Did Hadrian When he realised his extremities and that for a Roman Empire far more resourseful of peoples and Manpower than the Macedodonian Empire.Proving point the Alexander Empire fell apart because it was far to big for any one man to hold.
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

Sorry for any typo errors and mistakes Im not as eloquent with keyboards and spelling as Im sure mosth Pothonians are
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by marcus »

bessusww wrote:I am one of the minority who maybe thinks the Beas mutiny was a blessing for Alexander////It meant he could do what Alexanders propoganda says he would never do....Turn Back
You should read Waldemar Heckel's most recent analysis of the Hyphasis Mutiny. In it he argues that Alexander himself wanted to turn back, and that he manipulated the situation so that it was the Macedonians who provided the impetus and he didn't have to "admit defeat". It's a persuasive argument.

His argument appears in The Conquests of Alexander the Great, and I think it's also in Alexander the Grea: A New History (although I might be wrong about that - I'm not at home so am doing this from memory.

ATB
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
User avatar
spitamenes
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:51 pm
Location: St.Louis, U.S.

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by spitamenes »

bessusww wrote:I am one of the minority who maybe thinks the Beas mutiny was a blessing for Alexander////It meant he could do what Alexanders propoganda says he would never do....Turn back
I have never even looked at it that way before. It seems plausible. I have always had the more narrow view that he simply wanted to march to the ends of earth. But how far they traveled, and into virtually unknown parts, had to of made them all think the world was simply endless. I couldn't imagine hearing the stories from the local tribes of how there is yet another great knigdom just east of here, with far more soldiers than the last, especially when you've been told the outer ocean was just over the next peak so many times. He might have simply realized it was time to turn back, and needed a scapegoat. But then again,.. what is ever simple about Alexander?
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

Spitamenese Marcus

Of carse a scape goat thats worked very well ans Alexanders legend prospers. Im sure he needed to turn back and that the Soldiers mutiny forced him what a get out of jail card that was.

He did stop at Beas but he conquest went on all the was down the Indus to the delta.And the Makran in my opinion was a thought out rather danderous recon job..He could have returned the easy way ut carried on .

And to sa the Mutiny made him change bach..The Second mutiny protesting against the macedonians beenpernsioned off and replaced didnt have the effect Beas had. It also fproved that all the hardship They had gone through the Macedoniaon Soldiers were ready for more and would keep following him to the corners of hell.

The Close friends and commanders were not too keen they wanted there share of the cake and slave girls feeding them grapes...And exactly because the love and adoration of thesoldiers...Who ever wrote the histories and counts could in no way seem to have any blood on there hands following Alexanders Murder.

Maybe Macedonia would put upit.But how many Macedonian soldiers would follow Ptolemy and the restif they were suspeceted of Alexandes murder
User avatar
spitamenes
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:51 pm
Location: St.Louis, U.S.

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by spitamenes »

I've always just thought Alexanders view was, as long as they weren't headed due east, then the soldiers would,for the most part, be satisfied. So the only way Alexander could quench his hunger for conquest would be to take a long, drawn out route back to the west. But looking at it in the veiw you stated, Bessusww, it seems more logical, more human I guess. I'm on board with ya.
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by marcus »

bessusww wrote:Of carse a scape goat thats worked very well ans Alexanders legend prospers. Im sure he needed to turn back and that the Soldiers mutiny forced him what a get out of jail card that was.
The thing to do is to read Alexander's speech to his troops. Heckel's contention is that Alexander was emphasising the dangers and difficulties of going beyond the Hyphasis, precisely to make the soldiers not wish to continue.

The Opis Mutiny is not quite as you describe. Yes, the soldiers were complaining about being sent away, but not necessarily because they wanted to carry on. Their complaint was that Alexander was dispensing with their services and preferring to use barbarians for his future conquests, and so they saw being sent home as a rejection. It wasn't being sent home that was the problem; it was their perception of his *reason* for sending them home.

Doesn't detract from the sense of your argument, however.

ATB
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by marcus »

bessusww wrote:He did stop at Beas but he conquest went on all the was down the Indus to the delta.And the Makran in my opinion was a thought out rather danderous recon job..He could have returned the easy way ut carried on .
Returning the "easy" way was not Alexander's style. Also, he couldn't claim to have subdued all those lands unless they were, indeed, subdued. Marching across the Makran was necessary in order to dig wells and leave supply dumps for the navy, which was sailing to the Persian Gulf. Also, legend had it that Semiramis had faced disaster crossing the desert, so he also wanted to beat her record.

Therefore one cannot define his reasons for crossing the Makran with only one reason, as there were a number of reasons why he felt he had to do it. Leaving supply dumps was one of the most critical, so one thing we cannot say is that it was pointless.

ATB
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

Absolutely Marcus.

Of coarse he needed to care for the Navy traveling along the coast..It was also a strategic expedition. As far as if the makran can be resoursed and supplied in a Logistics was its a much quicker way to get back up there If after getting back to basics,Sorting out his trusted band of thieving Satraps.

He was into a huge scheme of things if we believe the Huge harbours built and fleets etc. With his money power and with time to consolodate.He could make a bigger empire with the creation of an administerative centre.

Carthage would be the toughest but a real key point as was Troy to the Greeks...Rome was in its infancy and at that time would never hold anything the Macedonian Persian Money could finance.

Its pretty fair to say Alexander could basically sit In Babylon and bank roll world conquest...He would only have to take to the field in some dodgy battle situations that would need his own area of expertise.

But alll that would depend on having generals and Commanders he could really trust and thats a tall order. Ghenghis Khans Monghul Armies splintered off and created a huger Mongol empire.

Going back to Makran once consolidated and in a better position..The Makran route properly supplied would be a much quicker way to re invade...Better than getting choked up and ambushed in the Hindu kush.
User avatar
spitamenes
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:51 pm
Location: St.Louis, U.S.

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by spitamenes »

bessusww wrote: Going back to Makran once consolidated and in a better position..The Makran route properly supplied would be a much quicker way to re invade...Better than getting choked up and ambushed in the Hindu kush.

Bessusww,
Are you saying the trip through Makran was not only a way back, but also a recon of the area? Or was there enough known about the area to have already realized its value in a route to re invade at a later date?
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

Spitamenese

I cant really say what the knowledge of Makran was..But I assume he would have some local knowledge the same as afhganistan. All im saying from what I read of his troubles there and trouble even today. Looking at the map the precarious trip across Makrak is strategically swifter.

Yes im saying Alexander may also be recon oitering as he went...I think its all a measure of Generals Greatmanship..The great ones think outside norm.Generally getting things right...We all could argue Alexander and I agree he was lucky but I feel he was taking a logistical risk.

Didnt Napoleon once say about luck..That Great Generals create thier own luck..Im pretty sure Alexander did many times.

Fortune Favours the Bold its all Alexander. He could have got ambushed and slaughtered on his way out then we would be equating Alexander to George Armstrong Custer or the Retarded General that got British Troops staughtered by the Zulus at Iskanwana.

Im pretty trying to say that in my eyes Alexander was more than a self glory battle warrior..He was cool calm collective.Very mindful of situations and a little bit cunning....Im trying to break away from the Romantasised Alexander
User avatar
spitamenes
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:51 pm
Location: St.Louis, U.S.

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by spitamenes »

One thing I'm not completely understanding is, with the Makran being as inhospitable as it was, a wasteland basically. How were they able to leave supply drops for Nearchus' navy? He came out with a fraction of his army than what he started with. Wouldn't they have at the very least divided the supplies between the army and the navy? I haven't read about the makran in quite awhile but I believe I remember upon Alexander and Nearchus meeting when the trip was through, Alexander was expecting bad news. But that apperently wasn't the case. Am I missing something?
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

I think the idea was to forrage and look for locals with bits and bobs..I recall they came to no end of trouble.

Camp washed away with rain floods. I think they got lost and wandered away from the coast...I thnk probably they did take it for granted and were ill prepared..The Makran hugging the coast does not look that far,,,They must have assumed they were well stocked up when they set off.

I dont think anyone would set off into the unknown dessert without feeling they were setting off with enough supplies to meet there needs...But somewhere in is became unraveled...They ate there supplies and resorted to eating the Animals.

Something did go wrong and as we can say Alexander got throughit lucky...But I think hell have gained enough Knowledge for future use and to do it right in future
User avatar
spitamenes
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:51 pm
Location: St.Louis, U.S.

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by spitamenes »

I wouldn't doubt if the locals sent him into the Makran with the intentions of doing away with Alexander all together. It would be worth a shot if they knew he was headed back from where he came anyway. Misinformation is by no means unknown tactic in those times and surely the locals knew how inhospitable the area was. What I don't believe is he was punishing his troops for the mutiny.
bessusww
Pezhetairos (foot soldier)
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: Tyre siege.

Post by bessusww »

No I never believed he was punishing his troops for mutiny...Those troops helped him to turn back and save face in the process.

Just like Bessus handily killing Darius...Sometimes I think alexander would put his hand in cow dung and it would still come out smelling of roses.

Throughout his career...Only the Perswian Gates and Makhran could have been classed as stupid...Persian gates was a silly walking into a trap...Makran a risky gamble
Post Reply