help!!

[kiki keeks]

here is the question...
what are the changes in the greek world owing to the conquests of alexander the great?

[arhidia]

alexander didnt change the greek world. he changed the ancient known world, into greek, therefore influencing today's modern world. alexander changed the ancient world where he used the greek language, greek education, greek architecture, greek games, etc.. etc... etc...
that flourished throughout the east for centuries after his death.

[macedonian]

He lived in Hellenic period but was Macedonian. It is wrong to say that he was at war with the Greeks because Greeks didn't exist. Instead there were various tribes like Dorians, Athenians, Macedonians Thracians, Illirians (his mother was from Epir).
He wanted to create a brotherhood of nations and forced his solders to marry Persians - he was nor narrow minded and nationalistisc but open.
Today Dorians became Greeks, Ancient Macedonians either desapeared or mixed with the later tribes, Thracians and Illirians same creating the Nations of Greeks, Macedonians, Bulgarians and Albanians.

[Paralus]

Oh, what crap "arhidia".Next thing you'll be telling me he brought the "brotherhood of man" to the world - especially the Mallians.Read some and grow up.

[Paralus]

Please "Macedonian", don't carry on like a dill. Of course Alexander was at war with the Greeks (Hellenes). And of course the Greeks saw Alexander (as his father before him) as a "barbarian" of the 'Macedones'. Demosthenes GÇô in his "Philipics" GÇô played on this very theme."He wanted to create a brotherhood of nations".Yes, whatever you think. Not even Tarn could argue that convincingly today.Do some reading.

[arhidia]

you are the uneducated, anti-greek that is becoming evident more so on this website.if he wasnt of greek origin, what the hell was he?
there were ancient Greek kings in Macedonia 400 years before Alexander the Great. the ancient greeks were always at war with each other, this includes the spartans, athenians, thebans, macedonians, trojans, etc .. etc .. did he not spread hellenism to the east? what are you telling me? 300 years after his death his empire flourished of 'greekness'. its written in black and white.go to Greece today, visit the ancient sites, see the ancient inscriptions, (which happen to be all in greek) then come and talk to me. even in modern day FYROM there is a an ancient greek city called 'Heraklea' built by Phillip II and named after 'Heracles' the greek god.modern day idiots called the FYROM with their slavic bulgarian langauge have nothing to do with the ancient macedonians who were greek. they have created a fictional country and a fictional language as well as a fictional bridge to the ancient macedonians who were greek, and idiots like you beleive them.

[arhidia]

bulgarians didnt exist either.greek is the modern day word for Hellenicget it through your thick skull.and us greeks still call ourselves Hellenes (Ellines)greece will one day be called Hellas = Ellas - Hellenes = Ellinesgreek is a derived langauge from the ancient language of greek.Macedonians are and will always be Ellines, not slavicbulgarian.

[Paralus]

Arhidia,Apologies for the gratuituos "grow up" line.One should never type whilst angry - particularly when the focus of that anger is not the person being typed to.I shall take my own advice forthwith.

[Paralus]

"you are the uneducated, anti-greek that is becoming evident more so on this website."if he wasnt of greek origin, what the hell was he? there were ancient Greek kings in Macedonia 400 years before Alexander the Great."Assuming that is directed to me, I would have to state that no, I am not "anti-Greek", whatever that may be.I have no interest in the ethnic origin of ATG other than to point out how other contemporary Greeks saw him (and his father before him).Yes Greek culture followed him throughout the Persian Empire. I would argue that would be a by-product rather than the object (in the same way cricket followed the English about their Empire - bad analogy I know).In fact, the ruling elite of all the Hellenistic Kingdoms very much resembled a "transplant". The Ptolemies in their "compound" (for want of a better description) in Alexandria would be a good example. To get on, one had to read Greek - to become "Hellenised" GÇô as did the Jews in the bureaucratic classes if the Seleucid Empire."they have created a fictional country and a fictional language as well as a fictional bridge to the ancient macedonians who were greek, and idiots like you beleive them."Again, I'm not into "fictional" countries and I'm not sure who it is you say I believe. The FYROM would in any case equate to the "wild hill tribes" of the Illyrians of antiquity. As to being an "idiot", well given my gratuitous "grow up" and "what crap" lines, I'll take that as thouroughly deserved (see previous apology). The ancient Greeks saw the Macedonian monarchy as an anachronistic throw-back to an earlier less "civilised" age. The Macedonians spoke a different dialct. It should be remembered that the ancient Greek city states looked on the Aetolians and Acheans as only part civilised and not really "Greek". We all of course know otherwise and it is the same with ATG.What leads you to believe I'm "anti-Greek"? I'd be genuinely interested to know what I may have posted that is "anti-Greek".

[marcus]

Might I respectfully suggest that people remember that discussing the modern ethnic/political debate about Macedonians is not permitted on this forum. It amazes me how a simple question (albeit probably a request for essay help, which we also discourage) has deteriorated so rapidly. The person who asked the original question has probably fallen asleep already!All the best

[Paralus]

Suggestion noted Marcus.I did though, attempt to steer clear of that...eventually.

[marcus]

Hi Michael,Well, it wasn't really you I was aiming it at, because you were, as you say, trying to steer away from that; but thanks for the acknowledgement.All the bestMarcus

[Paralus]

Hi Marcus.Yes, I think the point is largely irrelevant. The concoction of the "Hellenic League" by Philip was entirely political GÇô to enable him to claim to be the leader of "the Hellenes". Something his son followed him in.Just watched the Director's cut of Alexander The Great. Comments hereabouts suggested it made more sense than the theatrical release. I'd agree that's most likely true.I can though, now see why I ordered another bottle of shiraz whilst watching at the cine-lounge. The dialogue between Hephaestion and Alexander in Babylon most likely did it:"To free the peoples of the world and make them one. Such an achievement would go beyond Achilles!"I know Stone likes to take a point and run with it as a theme, but such a view sits too close to the Alexander Romance for my liking. The treatment metered out to Aspendus would indicate this "freedom" to be a very relative thing. The Tyreans may also have begged to differ.It's a pity the film went in this direction.The conflation of Gaugemela and Granicus annoys as well. For the life of me I can't understand Alexander and the companion cavalry (seemingly) riding halfway to Babylon before turning to strike at the gap presented in the Persian line. As I've said before, it probably looks sexier.The Gaugemela battle scene still disappoints. A better overview of the echeloned Macedonian line would have helped as would a clearer depiction of the desperate holding action of Parmenio's left wing amid what must have been appalling carnage.I shall now watch "Kingdom of Heaven" which I have not seen as yet. Others in the forum describe as reasonable.

[arhidia]

if you are not interested in the ethnic origin of the Great Man then why bother???contemporary greeks did not want a single power ruling all of greece. especially the athenians, however Phillip II did have allies in various parts of the greek world. Phillip II dream was to unite all greeks and free the greek cities in Asia Minor that were under Persian rule. How can Hellenism which flourished for years after ATG be a "by-product". are you kidding me? there were greeks in persia long before ATG. there were greek cities in the mideast, Northern Africa, the Black Sea and Europe long before ATG. the only difference with Alexander is that he forced Hellenism upon those who he conquered during his reign. "The ancient Greeks saw the Macedonian monarchy as an anachronistic throw-back to an earlier less "civilised" age. The Macedonians spoke a different dialct"if true, this does not mean they were not greek. you are obviously referring to Demosthenes who saw the macedonians as a threat to Athenian greatness. One man calls them 'barbaric' an all of a sudden the modern world calls the ancient macedonians non-greek? come on!!Phillip managed to gather representitives from all of the Greek city states in Corintho,(League of Corinth) except Sparta, and these representitives swore to recognise Phillip as the leader of all Greeks. Whould the proud Greek cities accept a barbarian as their leader? Macedonians spoke a greek dialect. Alexander spoke a Greek dialect - simply as the Athenians had a different Greek dialect to the Greeks of Sicily and other Greek colonies. Alexander had an army of 30,000 greeks conversing in greek outside his tent. This is evident in the modern greek world. I cannot fully understand the Greeks of Cyprus, or the Pontian greeks who were slaughtered from their homes in modern day turkey in 1922, or the Cretans for that matter. this does not mean they are not greeks.The name Alexander (Alexandros in Greek) is a compound name coming from the Ancient Greek word 'Alex' (protector) and the Greek word 'Andros' (man). Alexandros can be translated in English as "Protecting Man" or "Defending Man". the modern greek langauge has similarities to koine. again we can thank alexander for this language that flourished. anyway, calling you anti-greek was an assumption i had by reading one of your earlier posts. i apologise for that.

[Paralus]

"Phillip managed to gather representitives from all of the Greek city states in Corintho,(League of Corinth) except Sparta, and these representitives swore to recognise Phillip as the leader of all Greeks. Whould the proud Greek cities accept a barbarian as their leader?"I was not arguing ATG's ethnic background. I have no axe to grind for any side of that debate. I was merely attempting to show how other Greeks perceived himYes there is a strong argument to show that the city states resented rule of all by the one (Athens, Sparta and Thebes all failed in that endeavour). The resentment against Macedonian rule though was especially strong. It was portrayed as an outside hegemon GÇô whether for base political purposes or really believed.The Greek city states had absolutely no choice but to attend when summoned to Corinth. They had just been annihilated at Chaeronea. The only leader that could possibly chosen at the "League" meeting was Philip. It wouldn't have mattered had he Theban, Thessalian or Macedonian. The dead on the Boeotian battlefield were a stark reminder of the fate of resistance. Indeed, Alexander (in one of his more murderous actions) amply demonstrated this two years later.Again, I make no "barbarian" argument one way or the other: simply to point out the fact that the city states of Greece had had their time. The choice was Philip or be reduced (Olynthus).Sparta is a special case. The city was an emasculated version of its heyday (thanks to Epominondas) and my view is that Phillip was quite happy to allow the argumentative, overly proud and aggressive little state to be a thorn in the side of those Peloponnesian states with pretensions to being more than they were (a lesson he probably took from the Theban statesmen/general).Yes Alexander took Greek culture with him GÇô the athletic contests, the comedy and poetic contests and the gymnasiums etc. Being a little cynical though, I believe had it to serve a purpose GÇô keeping the army morale and identity etc. I believe once the diadochoi had settled their fiefdoms, Greek culture more resembled a "transplant" growing around the ruling elites and bureaucrats. Interesting that the dialect that spread was not Macedonian but Attic Koine. Language follows the traders?Apologies again for intemperate language GÇô most unlike me. Dearly love to know which post appeared "anti-Greek" as I've too long an interest and pursuit of Greek history to be other than an "Helline-o-phile". (Bi