Significance

[Tyche]

Hey guys! This is my first post, so I'm kinda nervous, but here goes. How significant do you reckon Alexander the Great was? I mean, he was famous for never loosing a battle, but his Empire was harfly the greatest ever, structurally, and can he be considered to have any longterm impacts beyond the founding of some cities?

Thanks guys!

[agesilaos]

How about religious intolerance and the mess in the middle east as legacies? That's on the very long-term, the hellenisation of the East including Judaea, leads to Christianity though whether Joshua bar Joseph is a Hellenised Jew reacting against a moribund Priesthood or a traditional Jew reacting against a Hellenised Temple, kinda depends

[Efstathios]

the hellenisation of the East including Judaea, leads to Christianity though

I do not think so. Historically speaking, apart from the fact that there were greek cities like Dekapolis, and that the second language in Judaea was greek, Jesus' teachings were based on the old testament. The teachings of some greek philosophers such as Socrates, are considered by some as precursors to christianity, but that is another matter. No influence by greek philosophy is apparent at the years leading to Jesus' era, if that is what you are trying to say. On the contrary, the jews were very attached to the old testament.

[agesilaos]

Efstasios, there is plenty of Greek influence on the Old Testament, much of it is the product of the Hellenistic era, Daniel especially; but I don't think this is the place for a theological discussion, other than on the potential divine claims of Alexander, that is. I was merely answering a request for an essay answer with a debating point. There are two ways to answer questions of significance, viz what the person/event influenced directly and immediately , and how the world would be different had the event not happened; needless to say there is infinite scope for fun with the latter approach

[Alexias]

Apart from any historical impact Alexander had, his portraiture had a big impact on the history of art as resemblances to him can be traced in many Hellenistic portraits. It could also be said that he introduced the portait of the individual rather than the ideal. And if anyone wants an essay title, how about 'Alexander the Great and the history of hero worship'?

[Efstathios]

It could also be said that he introduced the portait of the individual rather than the ideal. And if anyone wants an essay title, how about 'Alexander the Great and the history of hero worship'?

The Persian empire already had the great king, so it wasn't something foreign to them. So did the egyptians. The question here would be if Alexander was ever worshiped as a hero in Greece at the years leading to the Roman occupation, and by how many.

[agesilaos]

The Persians, despite some ancient comment otherwise did NOT worship the Great King, as Zoroastrians they worshipped the one God Ahura Mazda, the polytheistin the West, both Greek and Roman did not understand that, any reverence was therefore directed at the office as God given rather than at the incumbant; in Europe we had something similar in the Divine Right of Kings - a divinely appointed monarch but a mortal none the less. Some pharaoh's were worshipped but there the pharaoh was seen as the agent of the divine ensuring by his religious compliance the annual Nile flood, although even the monolithic Egyptian culture changed over its 2,000 year history!

That said, there had been cults of personality before Alexander, Lysander was worshipped during his lifetime and Sokrates certainly attracted a cult like following, nor would I be too certain that those portraits of Alexander are not just as idealised as those of Rameses, say (The famous Golden Mask of King Tut, is actually his step mother Nefertiti, by the way) it took the Romans to have a warts and all approach and the imperial apogee would be Nero; one can only presume that as in I Claudius, Gaius Caligula is told that he sets the standard of sanity for the whole Emp-p-p-pire, so Nero was told the same re-beauty

See that can of worms over there? Could we just slip the lid back on and walk away? This is heading in a messy direction I fear and it's probably my fault

[Alexias]

Sorry, I think there may have been a misunderstanding. I wasn't talking about the actual worship of Alexander as a divine hero by his contemporaries.

I was talking about Alexander's effect of the history of art, and the essay title was meant to refer the generalised worship of a hero eg how does Alexander fit into the history of hero-worship from Achilles to the Duke of Wellington? It wasn't a serious question though.

That said though, I came across this today in London: a statue erected by George IV in 1832 in honour of the Duke of Wellington.

DSCI0322 - Copy.JPG (208.65 KiB) Viewed 4372 times

Now, don't tell me that doesn't owe quite a bit to portraits of Alexander (And Apollo and Greek art generally)

[agesilaos]

This looks like the Achilles at Hyde Park, in which case the resemblance is entirely deliberate, the sculptor figured that as an ancestor of Alexander, Achilles would resemble him. It was at the time a controversial piece, as he also equipped him with an heroic set of genitals (based on those of his servant apparently; rum lot the Victorians), they were recast as the fig-leaf we see now.

[Alexias]

It is the Achilles.