Analys Tyre and There after.

[iskander_32]

In reply to one on my earlier posts,,, One particular dimwit stated Alexander been somewhat justified in his war of vengeance up until Tyre then thereafter,, None was justified and it tountamount to attricities.The same naive cheekturner felt Alexander stay where he was done a treaty with Darius and lived in tranquility with there Persian neighbours.In retrospect maybe the Persians hundreds of years before should have stayed within the boundaries of Persia, Instead of creating the huge empire comprising of many subdued nations, what im saying is that everything outside Persia can ce called an atrocity,, So can people stop singling Alexander out as if he was unique and the worse kind.Pacifists etc find it very easy to single out Alexander mainly becauese I feel he was so succesful and at the same time some people appreciate the good side and apreciate the legend.Darius did have the choice to stop the Atrocities anyway,,, Alexander by letter invited Darius to yield to Alexander or to Fight,,, Darius at the same time can share the blame as he chose to fight!If Alexander had done a deal, can we honestly assume the Persians to honour it,,, I think not.Finaly moderator, Within this forum there are some people I like respect and accept there views; Marcus,Andrew, Sikander and a few more, How do I access the E Mail directory to write to these people. There are people in here I dont want tpo waste my time talking to so could you help.Regards
Kenny

[Linda]

I think you have insulted most of the moderators. Couldn't you have written that post, justifying why Alexander was right to continue his war, without the insults? Then we could have all learned something, instead of just getting annoyed/amused (delete as appropriate).

[S]

Greetings Kenny,While I thank you for the kind comment, I am now probably going to go on the "bad" list (laughing)First, while I might not agree with all the views expressed by the numerous posters here, I respect the dedication, years of study and willingness to join in open discussion offered by everyone. Over the years, we have fashioned a forum where the majority of people have mutually agreed to avoid personal insults and while we all fail sometimes, once we are reminded of this we try to adhere to civilized discourse. Each person has access to information that another may not have, so sharing is important.Second, I agree with you that people sometimes fail to look at Alexander in the context of his own time, world and culture as well as the overall global culture of the day. Alexander, for his time and place, was operating in the way rulers operated: conquest and plunder, wealth through conquest, the illusion of "safety" through expanding borders and accumulating power via wealth. On the other hand, examining Alexander from our own time reminds us of what we must not allow to happen again: global regime building at too much cost for too little gain. The unfortunate fact is, no person- no group of persons- can control vast amounts of territory without using oppression, force and eventually violent suppression due to the nature of humans. Alexander would either have 1) become a despot to retain absolute control, leading eventually to his assassination
2) had to cede certain territories to others to rule, seeing them slip from his control and return to being smaller kingdoms
3) create a complex web of small kingdoms ruled by those he appointed and allow them their own powers, which would have eroded his own control or
4) become a lenient, benevolent ruler who would then be overrun by those hungering for power, leading to his assassination
5) accept the fact the few if any Makedonian kings died of peaceful old age, do what he could in the time allotted and accept a young death..cont...

[S]

cont..."Old violence is not too old to beget new values". The study of Alexander is valuable in the sense that we need to understand not just Alexander, but those who followed him. Unfortunately, we are not that removed from Alexander's time, though we can perceive its flaws. While we deride Alexander and those like him, the truth is, for most people, power and wealth are still alluring, seductive- men and women still dream of world conquest, their desire for power and wealth overrrides any sense of justice, equality, decency, or honour. We still have too many men and women who secretly dream of being an Alexander... and the people who pay the price are those in the way of that dream. This is not to say Alexander was bad in and of himself. He *meant* to do well, as much as his world view allowed. He *meant* to be a man of honour, strength, courage- but he was also a man of his times, and he sent many to death and more to slavery.... it is likely he *had* to, in a sense- the establishment of his power and authority was critical- but it is still true that power corrupts. I know of no one who is immune to this corruption, whether king or commoner, wanax or warlord, pope or president. I know few people who are not attracted to,fascinated by, those *with* power and wealth and condone or excuse behaviour in the powerful that they would reject in someone of their own class, status or circle.Alexander tried to stand above others (for his time and culture) in many ways and we can admire all the positive things about him. But we must not reject those voices that remind us of the other side of
Alexander. Still, in listening to those voices, we mustn't become cynical of any good deed, any good action. They remind us that Alexander *did* fight against his own weaknesses, did *try*.. and each person can emulate that aspect, can reach beyond, be better than we thought possible, more noble, to have honour and integrity.And these are some of the reasons we come to this forum: history (the long *and* short view), human nature, hero worship, self-exploration, the unknown attraction, and more. All are legitimate, all deserve acceptance, respect and civil discussion.Regards (with an apology for the long post),
Sikander Can be reached at philoalexandros@hotmail.com
Subject title: Attn- Sikander

[jona]

"In retrospect maybe the Persians hundreds of years before should have stayed within the boundaries of Persia."Yes, of course. No one denies that the Persians could be cruel. If you would join a mailing list like Arta, which is dedicated to the Achaemenid empire, you will find comments like that. If you'd consult a website about the pharaohs, or Carthage, or Rome, or Charlemagne, you would find similar remarks. But this website happens to be dedicated to Alexander, so there's no need to write about the cruelty of Cyrus or Darius I, or Hannibal, or Caligula, or Charlemagne."So can people stop singling Alexander out as if he was unique and the worse kind."No one here calls Alexander worse than others. But as you say, we do single him out, because we are studying the guy from Macedonia. You can't blame Pothos for being a website on Alexander.Jona

[jona]

"One particular dimwit stated Alexander been somewhat justified in his war of vengeance up until Tyre then thereafter, none was justified [...]."I have tried to mention evidence and arguments. To repeat: a war has an aim, and the justification of violence depends on the answer to two questions - is the aim acceptable and is the amount of violence, in relation to this aim, acceptable?As to the first point, Alexander's aim was "to punish Persia", something that was deliberately left undefined at the beginning of the campaign. But conquering Asia Minor could be presented as a quid pro quo. It appears that this was Parmenio's point of view. Alexander choose to demand more; as it turned out, he had success, but success is not a justification of war.As to the second point, after capturing Tyre and securing the Aegean from a Persian invasion, the war against the east was no longer a necessary war. Macedonia was safe. Continuing the war could only be justified as a "preemptive war", but preemptive wars have always been debatable."The same naive cheekturner"... there is actually nothing naive in thinking about the morality of violence. Perhaps it is withworthwile to read Aristides' speech "Against Plato, in defense of oratory", which clearly discusses how civilization depends on the control of violence."felt Alexander stay where he was done a treaty with Darius and lived in tranquility with there Persian neighbours."The central issue in diplomacy ancient or modern is: can you trust the other one? Will he keep his word? Can you do business? There is very strong evidence (which you have already read in my previous message) that the great king had a moral code to be truthful. To the best of my knowledge, no Persian king has ever broken his word.I mentioned four types of evidence to argue why I believe that Darius could not break a promise; just show me that this evidence does not or is insufficient to support my claim. In the interest of truth, I will gladly admit that I was wrong.You have called ne a "naive cheekturner" and a "dimwit"; I prefer to hear arguments.Jona

[iskande-32]

SikanderYour points are always valid and I apreciate all your points,, I can always discuss and debate such opinion,, But its toatlly different from someone tolally in thje business of Putting down and fishing for bad points.Linda in the opening post the Insult was not in the plural maybe you are a little paronoid ifd so I apologise for iritating that part of your personality.Maybe a positive point to goiung beyond Tyre was the liberation of Egypt those guys really welcomed Alexander as to call him Pharoah,,, No Persian conquerers were recieved as much.And it is relevent to bring aspects of Persian conquest to the fold or Is that too broad in the fact that It measures Alexander Against what was before or after,,, Or are you selective Jonah as to who or what you label atrocities.Sikander is most definatelly correct when so called experts single Alexander out without putting him or the times he lived into context.
kenny

[jona]

"Linda in the opening post the Insult was not in the plural."So, these words were singular and specifically directed at me. You now admit that you tried to insult me. I will continue to discuss with you, because you make interesting statements, but it really helps if you give arguments and stop calling me names. (Having a different opinion is not a misdemeanor; insulting people is.)"Maybe a positive point to goiung beyond Tyre was the liberation of Egypt those guys really welcomed Alexander as to call him Pharoah,,,"There is no hard evidence for this. A coronation is mentioned in the Alexander Romance, which is not exactly the most reliable of all sources. What we know for certain is that Alexander used Egyptian titulary, and that there were several titles. This is not uncommon in Egypt; it means that he was recognized as the man in charge but was not recognized as king."No Persian conquerers were recieved as much."Incorrect. Cambyses and Darius were recognized as pharaohs. The inscription by Uzahor-Resenet is quite clear about this."Or are you selective Jonah as to who or what you label atrocities."Over here, yes. This is a discussion group about Alexander and I prefer to stick to the topic. That does not mean that I am unware of other atrocities, but I discuss them somewhere else.Jona

[marcus]

Hi Jona,Just sticking my oar in for a moment ...I think the important thing, on the one hand, is to accept that everyone committed 'atrocities', from the Sumerians onwards, so Alexander was not alone. This I know you are not disputing, Jona.On the other hand, it is only fair to accept that, according to our modern values, Alexander *did* perform atrocities. It's also fair to say that for many ancient commentators some of his actions were pretty brutal, so it's not, strictly speaking, *only* our modern sensibilities that are 'offended' (and therefore to be qualified and/or ignored).I refer once again to Richard I, who slaughtered 2,000 Moslem prisoners after the siege of Acre in 1192/3. He had extremely 'good' practical reasons for doing so, and the act didn't perceptibly change the way in which he was viewed, by Christians and Moslems alike, as a chivalrous and honourable knight ... but no-one could have denied (even in the brutal 12th century) that this was an atrocity.I don't know whether this is adding anything at all to the debate ... :-)All the bestMarcus

[beausefaless]

Greetings Kenny, Many people don't want to hear things other people say that they don't agree with, no big deal, welcome to democracy. Was Alexander correct to make an example after the fall of Tyre and continue on with his conquests, *yes*, his army felt the same or Alexander would have had a mutiny there instead of India. Any king (Darius) who cuts off the hands of soldiers sentences them to a slow death, remember no welfare and prosthetics, King Darius was a *jerk*, a skunk of the lowest order! Any man who forfeit's his family (only cares to save his own hide) to any possible atrocities is a first class low life and no pacifist will tell me different. This type of person has no honor and should be hunted down to the ends of the earth as Alexander did pursue. In ancient times leaders were measured by their heroics and accomplishments on the battlefield and more battles the better, respect is the rule of life, a good part of Rome's history thrived on this philosophy.Do to your selection I re-evaluated Julius Caesar's position on the top 100 commanders list and moved him up ten spots. There's a couple of people that have a skillful intelligentsia to push your button, don't let them bother you as I did, their not worthy of your goat. (horse, cat or dog for that matter) Controversy is healthy for any democracy you just got to fine-tune it.All the best,Andrew

[jan]

Andrew, I don't intend to ignore you. I just think that Kenny should not have called someone a dimwit for any reason at all. Nobody has ever assaulted Kenny for his "abuse" of the English language, and I don't appreciate his attitude as posted here today. Specifying only certain key members are being his friends is a bit unwise, making this "his" private forum. That is why I posted my question today to know what is the purpose of an open forum, to be a community for all or for just a select few.

[beausefaless]

I completely agree, there are times I find myself dubbing certain individuals with a negative this is a talent I'm well equipped but sometimes not proud of. I have a lot to learn but I fear there's not enough lifetime as I realize I'm far from perfect. As a young person, before private and public schooling, I've had an infatuation for ATG due to my mother being avid studier of ancient Macedonian and Greek culture. So, I have learned and decided to stay away from certain people's message thread as they have chose to do the same with me. This will always be a open forum and if the rules get out of hand, these types of posts will be deleted.

[iskander_32]

Andrew HailThanks for your remarks ans comments,, I admire your way to maybe be more mature than me,, That you ignore and hold your tongue.I dont make this forum my own nor choose who I like,,, As I have said many times Alexander means a great deal to me and no matter who I insult and if i think a post is rediculous I will say so,, To be honest is why I would choose to speak directly to peoples within this forum directly and ignore those I feel idiotic.It is a free world of free choice and I will speak as I feel correct I wont hide nor run.Sikander, Andrew and Marcus I would discuss and debate with the best of them,, But the Idealiogy of Pasifism aint my tree.I work hard and have 2 children and in todays enviroment,,, I would trust more to the Alexandrian way to protect my children than a person who tries to negotiate and stalls with people who aint interested in any type of equilibrium.hail AndrewKenny

[iskande-32]

Hail JanFair enough you can have a little swipe at my English,,, I admit its not academically up to scratch,,, I got a modest education at school probably not a high book worm standard as your self.Irespective you still know exactly what I mean and what Im saying,,, So such flipent sarcasm is wasted.In real life IU can do much more than read write and spell,,, Jan I wonder if you worked out how to attach a plug.
Regards
Kenny