Just One Of The Boys?

[kennyxx]

With reference to the way Alexander was as a commander. We often hear the Phrase lead by example which I feel is right, But the notion Alexander was just one of the boys and treated his men basically as equals.

I wonder if this is the case and indeed can it work. In the British Army I guess we got the seargent Major attitude. Shouting and balling and bein pretty disrespectful etc and indeed in most armies, You Orrible Little Man Syndrome.

I just wonder how indeed Alexander was as a trainer and leader of men I doubt one of the boys attitude as its fair to say his command would have been pretty feable if his soldiers were his mates. I find that kind of relationship in busness very un productive. So I guess Alexander must have seperated himself and been somewhat of a task master.

We all wonder what it would be like seeing Alexander. Would we like him in person and how would he traet and communicate with us as soldiers. Is it hie personality and charisma Alone that made his soldiers love him.

Kenny

[dean]

Hello,

Alexander was in the front line- and as he allegedly said, at OPIS- he took many a blow and had the scars to prove it- the men perhaps loved him for that. He wasn't looking for special priviliges and actively sought the "hard life" over an easy Epicurean set up.

I don't think that he was pals with his soldiers and I think that any military structure based on "being matey" and "pally" with your subordinates is as doomed to failure as the Titanic.

Anyway, I think that he was of the opinion of Xenophon, talking about the effect Cyrus had, when he said that leaders must cast a spell over their followers- and leave them spellbound.

Numerous episodes rocked the boat- the murders of Cleitus and Parmenion, the introduction of prostration,etc etc, when perhaps his men would have seen a man who was made of flesh and blood after all.

Best regards,
Dean

[rocktupac]

I respectfully disagree. There are many examples of Alexander winning the compassion of his troops, although admittedly that doesn't necessarily mean he was friends with them, it does show their comfort level around him. Comfort which may only be earned or gained through serving together: as soldiers and friends.

There are also accounts of Alexander being able to personally address every man in his army. If he were not somewhat friendly with most of them it would be hard to imagine a man, with as many thoughts on his mind as Alexander, to have memorized their names and individual accomplishments.

I think his men did want a friendly relationship with their king, afterall, most of them grew up with Alexander from boyhood and knew his strengths and weaknesses. At the mutiny in Opis, Alexander's troops lamented about not being looked upon and "loved" as the Persian troops were. If they did not at least expect his friendship this would not have bothered them so greatly. They were already in a powerful position but still desired the admiration of their king perhaps fearing they were losing touch.

[Paralus]

There is nothing at all unusual about Alexander’s “leading from the front” or "by example". In fact, this is the norm rather than the exception for the time and there runs a long list of generals and statesmen who lead armies into the field before Alexander. Many of whom died on those fields.

Pericles lead armies into central Greece as well as leading and the Athenian fleet into battle. Kimon died having lead one too many Athenian fleets to war. Alcibiades was not idling in the admiralty whilst the Athenian fleet re-took the Hellespont. Possibly the two most important (from a Greek perspective) would be Epaminondas and Pelopidas, arguably the two greatest Greek generals, both died in the field.

It was little different in Macedon. Alexander’s father, Philip, also lead his armies “from the front” and his brother, Perdiccas III, fell leading the Macedonians against the Illyrians.

It is difficult to believe that – without a “companionable” prod – Alexander knew of the exploits of individuals within his army of invasion. I find it hard to credit that he could retail stories of individual hypaspists or phalangites without there being a source such as a Craterus, Amyntas or Coenus.