Alexander

[Michael]

We should not forget that Alexander was called the Great by his own people, not for his benevolence or for doing anything extraordinary. What he did was conquor the greatest known empire of it's time, The Persian Empire. It should also be remembered that had Darius III, and I emphasize the III, been a warrior like many of his ancestors, or had the commander in chief of the Persian Armies not died before the battle of Issus, Alexander would have never had a chance to advance beyond the Bosphorus Straits. A couple of lucky events and a weak Darius the III, enabled Alexander and his cohorts to forge their way into decaying Persian Empire, an empire that was experiencing fractacide and internal strife. Similarily, the Arabs 900 year later were able to do the same thing, however this time the Arabs truly changed the course of history and today we are seeing the ramifications of their conquest. It should be noted that the Persian Empire of Cyrus lasted over 900 years; from Cyrus' Achamenians to the Parthians and Sassanians, however Alexander's Empire only lasted 7 years.

[marcus]

Hi Michael,The problem is, Alexander *wasn't* called 'The Great' by his own people, if by that you mean his contemporaries or those who followed directly afterwards. It isn't until the late Roman Republic when we first hear him called that.Similarly, it's a fallacy to talk about the Parthians and Sassanids as being a continuation of Cyrus' empire - they were completely different, and separated not only by Alexander but also by the Seleucid Empire, which continued (admittedly not comprising the full extent of the previous empires) until 160-odd BC.You're right that Alexander's empire only lasted for 7 years (although one could argue that, as he was still fighting for it in 326/5, it lasted even less than that!); but whatever arguments one might have for the defeat of Darius, the Achaemenid Persian empire ended in 330BC with the death of Darius III (329 if you're generous and regard Bessus as an acknowledged king).All the bestMarcus

[kenny]

Michael.Here we go again a guy walking in with sweep[ing statements dismissing everything Alexander did and excusing the Persian weekness.As Marcus said it was the Romans that labeled Alexander the Great,,, So its doubtful these warlike and very succesful conquerers would label Alexander as such if he were as you say lucky.I would say every famous Roman General From Caesar to the more recent ones held Alexander in god like esteem and I think People like. Caesar,Hannibal,Augustus,Scipio,George Patton ,Napoleon,the list goes on arein a better position to judge Alexanders achievements and military distinction,, Than a guy called Michael that just wants to make a name for himself.As Marcus said indeed the empire lasted forv as long as Alexander lived as his self centred narrow minded generals carved it up in a blood lust.Its fare to say had he lived the empire would have been longer.Finally Michael maybe his empire did crumble,, But Alexanders legacy and influence lasts to this day.So the next time you want to diss Alexander leave your big red nose outside, comic relief is passed.Kenny

[pam]

Michael, maybe you've heard of this little town in Egypt called ALEXANDRIA; it's been there for 2300 years and I would consider that a lasting effect. Also, considering Egypt, if it were not for the Greek language (spread throughout the region because of Alexander) we would not have the roseta stone and all the meaning of the hyroglyphs would be lost to us. The spread of hellenism brought many lasting results, too numerous to go into for me at this time. Also of interest is a post on this forum titled 'Battle of Gaugamela'; this links to an interesting essay about the lasting effects of Alexanders conquest.

[pam]

Sorry about the double post. My computer was acting up and gave me a 'web site not responding' message so I refreshed it and bingo - double post!Also, usually when I come to the forum I am automatically logged in but that didn't happen this time. When I tried to post my message it wouldn't let me because I wasn't logged in. To make a long story short (too late - I know); I don't see anywhere that I CAN log in. So I had to use Pamm instead of Pam. Any helpful suggestions?

[doorgunner]

I find your post objectionable on a number of levels, Michael, but let me just touch upon what I believe to be the most powerful legacy, albeit indirect, of Alexander of Macedon, aka, the Great. The Apostle Paul states, "...but when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law..." (Galatians 4.4). Alexander's conquests Hellenized the ancient Near East, making the language of high culture, commerce and diplomacy Greek, much as English is today. This is why the New Testament was written in Koine Greek, so that it might be intelligible to both Jew and Gentile. The subsequent conquests of the Roman Empire fused the Western World into a brilliant network of administrative outposts that included the Hellinized world of Alexander's empire, linked by the most technologically advanced "highway" system up to that time. Because of Hellenism and the Roman road, the Gospel of Jesus Christ advanced throughout the region, laying the religious foundation that underlies Western Civilization. As a Christian I believe God used Alexander to bring about "the fullness of the time" mentioned by Paul above. In other words, I see him as an instrument of divine intervention in human history. Moreover, without Alexander's defeat of the Persian Empire and the concomitant Hellenizing of the areas he conquered, I wonder if Greek culture would have become one of the great pillars of Western society that it became. Imagine a world without Aristotle, Plato, Democritus, Pythagoras, et al. Maybe it would have made no difference that Alexander lived, but Macedonian imperialism ensured that these names would be revered from Egypt to Asia Minor to Eastern Europe long enough for the Romans to carry it as far west as Spain and the British Isles. Though the geographical empire lasted only a mere seven years, the more important conquest of culture and religion lives on to this day.

[marcus]

I might just add that it's a bit harsh to say that he wasn't called Great "for doing anything extraordinary" - conquering such huge territory in such a short time, defeating at least two much bigger Persian armies, taking Halicarnassus, Tyre and Gaza, and so on ... are hardly 'ordinary'.All the bestMarcus

[alejandro]

sorry, but the site doesn't place my reply to Leonard below his message!

[alejandro]

Hi LeonardIGÇÖve heard this argument about Hellenism facilitating the spreading Christianity very often and, though appealing, I have some doubts about it.It is very true that a common language/dialect as koine would have been a useful vessel for dissemination of ideas in the extensive area going from Massalia in the west to the Hydaspes in the east.However, by the time of Jesus ChristGÇÖs birth, Judea, Phoenicia, Asia Minor, Greece, Macedon and Egypt GÇôbasically, the area covered by the Hellenistic kingdoms- were all part of the Roman Empire.My concern is as follows: how wide was the use of koine within the empire? And Latin? I would expect that Latin would have gradually replaced koine especially in those activities that involved dealing with Romans (administration, taxation, military). Is it the case that koine became a sort of GÇ£middle-classGÇ¥ language? (i.e., assuming peasants continued using their local languages and high-classes switching to Latin, with traders and businesspeople using koine in their inter-regional transactions).Interesting to notice, I do think that koine would have played a very important role in spreading Christianity throughout the non-Roman parts of the Seleucid Empire.Am I completely wrong about this?Kind regardsAlejandro

[doorgunner]

Hi, Alejandro:Your point is well taken. I may have overstated the role Koine Greek played at the time of the birth of Christ, and I think you are correct when you say it was more a language of the middle class than that of the military, government, and so forth of the Roman Empire. Take a look at the trial of Jesus before Pontius Pilate. Pilate spoke to the crowd in Latin: "Ecce homo" ("Behold the man"). The word "Koine" means "common." I remember from my Greek classes many moons ago that Xenophon's Anabasis was written in Koine Greek, and I believe Josephus wrote in Koine also. There are others I can't remember, but I do remember that it was the language accessible to the greatest number of people living in the Roman Empire around the turn of the millennium. Note also that in Acts 17 Paul appeals to the Greeks in Athens by referring to their own gods and poets. He knew Greek, Latin, and Aramaic. Paul was a scholar who attended a rabbinical school, and whose mission it was to bring the gospel to the Greeks (read=Gentiles). Of course, people still retained their national languages or there would have been no need for the speaking of tongues at Pentecost. Ciao.

[luis1972]

Sigh............ it never ends.Jona leaves (good riddance) and another one takes his place.Thanks for the laugh, Michael.