Equal to Demosthenese with the Mouth

[kennyxx]

With respect to ALexanders intelligence and definate ability with Oration and his mouth.We Always hear about the Orataory skills of Demosthenese. But Alexander had the gift of that particular trait maybe more so. He was so clever at upping his boys and getting them to see it his way. I wonder if the speaches were his or written for him. If they are his then his genius has many tentacles.The Quip to Philip at the Wedding, about couches was very fast and straight to the bone. Maybe a scenario for pundits would be Demosthenese and Alexander in proper debate I wonder who would win the crowd over.Kenny

[kennyxx]

SEcond to this post. With all the other plots etc to get rid of people that Alexander may or may not have been involved with.The mystery to me is why he never got rid of The Gob Dimosthenese or at least had him under close arrest with the army under close scrutiny.This guy was the biggest mouth piece and trouble stirer for Alexander. The original pocket liner and instigator of rebelion. Yet Alexander left the guy alone with a free reign to do as he liked.Surely Alexanders fifth column knew his doings. For me Demosthenese would have been amongst the Parmenions, Philotas etc to do something about?Why Did Alexander leave the guy alone?

[kennyxx]

SEcond to this post. With all the other plots etc to get rid of people that Alexander may or may not have been involved with.The mystery to me is why he never got rid of The Gob Dimosthenese or at least had him under close arrest with the army under close scrutiny.This guy was the biggest mouth piece and trouble stirer for Alexander. The original pocket liner and instigator of rebelion. Yet Alexander left the guy alone with a free reign to do as he liked.Surely Alexanders fifth column knew his doings. For me Demosthenese would have been amongst the Parmenions, Philotas etc to do something about?Why Did Alexander leave the guy alone?

[Paralus]

G'day Kenny!I'm not so certain about the crowd (winning over and all). Demosthenes would have won the debate hands down. When it came to rhetoric and talking the Athenians had a mortgage and, in late fourth century Athens, Demosthenes held the mortgages.As far as outright winning is concerned, Alexander (a crater or two on and severely put out at the continuing conniving crap) would simply have run Demosthenes through: running away (literally or at the mouth) or not.Paralus

[Paralus]

G'day Kenny!I'm not so certain about the crowd (winning over and all). Demosthenes would have won the debate hands down. When it came to rhetoric and talking the Athenians had a mortgage and, in late fourth century Athens, Demosthenes held the mortgages.As far as outright winning is concerned, Alexander (a crater or two on and severely put out at the continuing conniving crap) would simply have run Demosthenes through: running away (literally or at the mouth) or not.Paralus

[Efstathios]

Demosthenes was a professional rhetor.So i guess he would win.But it really depends on the audience.If we are talking about Athenians then yes Demosthenes would win,but if we are talking about a more neutral audience then Alexander may have had a chance.But again, Dmosthenes was a professional rhetor,so... I think Alexander wrote his own speeches.He had the proper backround in order to do it.He used the attic dialect fluently when he was adressing his army and without any preparations. Alexander's speeches have one other characteristic.They sort of come from the heart.Like Pericles' speeches. As to why he didnt get rid of Demosthenes: It is another fine example ,or proof if you like, that Alexander commited these murders because he had no other choise or because he was completely drunk.He ordered Parmenion's death because he knew that Parmenion may have gone against him after the execution of his son.And Parmenion had command of enough army to cause Alexander big trouble.I think that this was maybe the toughest decision that Alexander had to take.Also,the execution of Philotas was conducted after a trial under Macedonian rules,and the decision came from this court.If the court had decided that Philotas was innocent based on proof i dont think Alexander would want him executed.But the proof were against Philotas,so Alexander complied with the verdict.I dont think that Alexander had influenced the verdict in any way.And maybe he even specificly instructed the court to make a decision freely not based on what he would want. So that would explain why he didnt harm Demosthenes in any way.Also it is notable that Alexander respected the democratic goverment of Athens,and the fact that he let Demosthenes influence the people against him just contributes to that.

[Efstathios]

Demosthenes was a professional rhetor.So i guess he would win.But it really depends on the audience.If we are talking about Athenians then yes Demosthenes would win,but if we are talking about a more neutral audience then Alexander may have had a chance.But again, Dmosthenes was a professional rhetor,so... I think Alexander wrote his own speeches.He had the proper backround in order to do it.He used the attic dialect fluently when he was adressing his army and without any preparations. Alexander's speeches have one other characteristic.They sort of come from the heart.Like Pericles' speeches. As to why he didnt get rid of Demosthenes: It is another fine example ,or proof if you like, that Alexander commited these murders because he had no other choise or because he was completely drunk.He ordered Parmenion's death because he knew that Parmenion may have gone against him after the execution of his son.And Parmenion had command of enough army to cause Alexander big trouble.I think that this was maybe the toughest decision that Alexander had to take.Also,the execution of Philotas was conducted after a trial under Macedonian rules,and the decision came from this court.If the court had decided that Philotas was innocent based on proof i dont think Alexander would want him executed.But the proof were against Philotas,so Alexander complied with the verdict.I dont think that Alexander had influenced the verdict in any way.And maybe he even specificly instructed the court to make a decision freely not based on what he would want. So that would explain why he didnt harm Demosthenes in any way.Also it is notable that Alexander respected the democratic goverment of Athens,and the fact that he let Demosthenes influence the people against him just contributes to that.

[Paralus]

G'day again Kenny!Because, like the Spartans, Demosthenes was largely irrelevant.After Chaeronea, Demosthenes was severely weakened. The position of Macedonian sympathisers GÇô Phocion for example GÇô was impregnable. Indeed, it took until the restoration of the democracy after Antipater's death before Phocion was "dealt with".No matter Alexander's proven ability at court politics, intrigue and murderous manipulation, he could in no way foresee (in 336) the north pole that Demosthenes would make for Harpalus' south pole of silver in 324 (even given he's a citizen of the city of Themistocles).As well, at the "final" settling of affairs with Athens (before his departure to Asia) GÇô and remembering that the city was seconds away from rising with Thebes GÇô Alexander sought certain citizens from Athens, not all of whom were produced. Negotiations eventually settled the issue. It has been argued this was because Athens still had by far the largest fleet in the Aegean and that Alexander needed this. His father most likely saw it this way. Alexander did not. At most he availed himself of twenty triremes: this from a city that at the time of Chaeronea had near three hundred triremes at her disposal (operational funds permitting). These were mere hostages.Alexander needed a quiescent Athens in his rear. Quashing the recently arrogant and formerly "medizing" Thebes was one thing. Doing the same to Athens was untenable.Again the question arises: had Athens manned two hundred triremes and sailed into the Thermaic Gulf as Philip marched on Chaeronea, would we be discussing this?It's still difficult to read Demosthenes' polemics (Philemics?) urging Athenian patriots to "take the field" ala Marathon. Athens had not put a citizen hoplite army (or any other for that matter) into the field GÇô and particularly central Greece GÇô since the disaster at Delium in 424 during the Peleponnesian War. You'd reckon they'd learnt.A great orator Demosthenes. Pity he was a poor reader of history and a worse tactician.
Paralus

[Paralus]

G'day again Kenny!Because, like the Spartans, Demosthenes was largely irrelevant.After Chaeronea, Demosthenes was severely weakened. The position of Macedonian sympathisers GÇô Phocion for example GÇô was impregnable. Indeed, it took until the restoration of the democracy after Antipater's death before Phocion was "dealt with".No matter Alexander's proven ability at court politics, intrigue and murderous manipulation, he could in no way foresee (in 336) the north pole that Demosthenes would make for Harpalus' south pole of silver in 324 (even given he's a citizen of the city of Themistocles).As well, at the "final" settling of affairs with Athens (before his departure to Asia) GÇô and remembering that the city was seconds away from rising with Thebes GÇô Alexander sought certain citizens from Athens, not all of whom were produced. Negotiations eventually settled the issue. It has been argued this was because Athens still had by far the largest fleet in the Aegean and that Alexander needed this. His father most likely saw it this way. Alexander did not. At most he availed himself of twenty triremes: this from a city that at the time of Chaeronea had near three hundred triremes at her disposal (operational funds permitting). These were mere hostages.Alexander needed a quiescent Athens in his rear. Quashing the recently arrogant and formerly "medizing" Thebes was one thing. Doing the same to Athens was untenable.Again the question arises: had Athens manned two hundred triremes and sailed into the Thermaic Gulf as Philip marched on Chaeronea, would we be discussing this?It's still difficult to read Demosthenes' polemics (Philemics?) urging Athenian patriots to "take the field" ala Marathon. Athens had not put a citizen hoplite army (or any other for that matter) into the field GÇô and particularly central Greece GÇô since the disaster at Delium in 424 during the Peleponnesian War. You'd reckon they'd learnt.A great orator Demosthenes. Pity he was a poor reader of history and a worse tactician.
Paralus

[Paralus]

G'day Efsthathios."He ordered Parmenion's death because he knew that Parmenion may have gone against him after the execution of his son. And Parmenion had command of enough army to cause Alexander big trouble. I think that this was maybe the toughest decision that Alexander had to take."Of course one died with the other. The reason Parmenion had "salted" the army with his sons, sons in law, nephews and whoever else was due to the deal forced on Alexander after Philip's murder. A deal forced by Parmenio. Essentially, I'll rid you of my son in law Attalus and pledge the lowland barons as long asGǪ..It was no tough decision on Alexander's part. The only tough bit was waiting some six or so years to be in a position where Parmenio no longer mattered. Something the old general never realised 'till the knife split his ribs. He surely recognised the modus operandi as his eyes closed.As to Philotas, the charge was concocted and the proceedings began in Egypt. For once Plutarch has it correct. Having access to varied sources, and acknowledging that the "vulgate" sources were well known to his readers, he presents a recounting that shows Philotas knowing nothing. It is only later that Philotas is impugned by his "enemies" as having known of the conspiracy amongst "another thousand charges". Plutarch cannot (having shown Philotas not guilty) have his idealised Alexander shown to be a murderer. (Space does not permit, but a fuller discussion can be found in "Alexander The Great in Fact and Fiction" Ch 2 "Conspiracies [E Badian] Oxford, 2000).Alexander increasingly influenced and stage managed any decision of the Macedonian army "assembly". Eventually to the stage that after he sulked in his tent (ala Achilles) following the inexcusable murder of Clietus, he was eventually roused by the fact that the Macedonian army "assembly" had GÇô posthumously GÇô found Clietus guilty of treason!A decision GÇô Alexander's "grief" not withstanding GÇô that was never reversed. A man of due process.Paralus.

[Paralus]

G'day Efsthathios."He ordered Parmenion's death because he knew that Parmenion may have gone against him after the execution of his son. And Parmenion had command of enough army to cause Alexander big trouble. I think that this was maybe the toughest decision that Alexander had to take."Of course one died with the other. The reason Parmenion had "salted" the army with his sons, sons in law, nephews and whoever else was due to the deal forced on Alexander after Philip's murder. A deal forced by Parmenio. Essentially, I'll rid you of my son in law Attalus and pledge the lowland barons as long asGǪ..It was no tough decision on Alexander's part. The only tough bit was waiting some six or so years to be in a position where Parmenio no longer mattered. Something the old general never realised 'till the knife split his ribs. He surely recognised the modus operandi as his eyes closed.As to Philotas, the charge was concocted and the proceedings began in Egypt. For once Plutarch has it correct. Having access to varied sources, and acknowledging that the "vulgate" sources were well known to his readers, he presents a recounting that shows Philotas knowing nothing. It is only later that Philotas is impugned by his "enemies" as having known of the conspiracy amongst "another thousand charges". Plutarch cannot (having shown Philotas not guilty) have his idealised Alexander shown to be a murderer. (Space does not permit, but a fuller discussion can be found in "Alexander The Great in Fact and Fiction" Ch 2 "Conspiracies [E Badian] Oxford, 2000).Alexander increasingly influenced and stage managed any decision of the Macedonian army "assembly". Eventually to the stage that after he sulked in his tent (ala Achilles) following the inexcusable murder of Clietus, he was eventually roused by the fact that the Macedonian army "assembly" had GÇô posthumously GÇô found Clietus guilty of treason!A decision GÇô Alexander's "grief" not withstanding GÇô that was never reversed. A man of due process.Paralus.

[Efstathios]

Hail Michael.As you would imagine i completely disagree with you. All of the sources agree that there were two consipiracies that Philotas might have been a part of.The first was in Egypt,where Alexander didnt believe that Philotas was involved,and let the matter go. And we have the second conspiracy in December of 330 bc.The conspiracy was a fact.Someone wanted to kill Alexander.Except from the boys' testimony there was a letter from Parmenion to Philotas that was used as evidence.But that letter didnt really prove anything.But it was enough,this and the former charge of Philotas being in a conspiracy against the King back in Egypt,and the boys indicating Philotas,in order for the court to make a verdict. Philotas was tortured and confessed.But of course we cannot take into account a confession in this way.Then he was stoned to death. But it is notable that Alexander forgave him the first day that he was informed that he might have been involved in it.And then Crateros insisted on Philotas being guilty and Alexander decided to assembly a Macedonian trial.And if we take into account that Alexander also didnt believe that he was part of a conspiracy back in Egypt we can see that maybe his intentions were not to have him killed. Also it is notable that Philotas was way too talkative after the tortures.He wouldnt have to analyse why he and his father wanted Alexander dead, especially if he was innocent.A simple declaration would do it.Philotas had no real gain from telling Hephaestion (who was interrogating him) that Parmenion and him wanted to murder Alexander back in Egypt but couldnt do it back then because the persians would have benefitted from Alexander's death.If Philotas was innocent a simple declaration would stop the tortures anyway,and he wouldnt go into any details.

[Efstathios]

Hail Michael.As you would imagine i completely disagree with you. All of the sources agree that there were two consipiracies that Philotas might have been a part of.The first was in Egypt,where Alexander didnt believe that Philotas was involved,and let the matter go. And we have the second conspiracy in December of 330 bc.The conspiracy was a fact.Someone wanted to kill Alexander.Except from the boys' testimony there was a letter from Parmenion to Philotas that was used as evidence.But that letter didnt really prove anything.But it was enough,this and the former charge of Philotas being in a conspiracy against the King back in Egypt,and the boys indicating Philotas,in order for the court to make a verdict. Philotas was tortured and confessed.But of course we cannot take into account a confession in this way.Then he was stoned to death. But it is notable that Alexander forgave him the first day that he was informed that he might have been involved in it.And then Crateros insisted on Philotas being guilty and Alexander decided to assembly a Macedonian trial.And if we take into account that Alexander also didnt believe that he was part of a conspiracy back in Egypt we can see that maybe his intentions were not to have him killed. Also it is notable that Philotas was way too talkative after the tortures.He wouldnt have to analyse why he and his father wanted Alexander dead, especially if he was innocent.A simple declaration would do it.Philotas had no real gain from telling Hephaestion (who was interrogating him) that Parmenion and him wanted to murder Alexander back in Egypt but couldnt do it back then because the persians would have benefitted from Alexander's death.If Philotas was innocent a simple declaration would stop the tortures anyway,and he wouldnt go into any details.

[Efstathios]

Demosthenes was not irrelevant at all to Alexander.Demosthenes caused Alexander much trouble 2 times before he started the campaign to Asia. And dont forget that while the Spartans were at first irrelevant to him, afterwards when he was in Asia Sparta revolted.And Antipater defeated them.And Alexander didnt punish them by ordering Antipater to wipe out the city.He respected Sparta's history as he respected Athens' history,and not because these cities were irrelevant to him. "and remembering that the city was seconds away from rising with Thebes GÇô Alexander sought certain citizens from Athens, not all of whom were produced. Negotiations eventually settled the issue." He had the chance to get Demosthenes in his hands without sending his people in Athens and ordering his assasination or anything, but again he let it go.And the fact that Alexander didnt take many triremes from the Athenians,and thus he could have treated Demosthenes in any way he wanted,just contribute to the fact that he didnt want to harm Demosthenes,as he didnt harm Athens and as he didnt harm Sparta.Because he was not a cold blooded murderer.And anyway the Athenians that took part in his army were not as many.He could have done what he wanted anyway. "Again the question arises: had Athens manned two hundred triremes and sailed into the Thermaic Gulf as Philip marched on Chaeronea, would we be discussing this" But they didnt.Because ,A)Alexander had shown his power already and they wouldnt take that risk and B) because no matter how good Demosthenes was in rhetoric,in the end the Athenians thought about their city's well being first.

[Efstathios]

Demosthenes was not irrelevant at all to Alexander.Demosthenes caused Alexander much trouble 2 times before he started the campaign to Asia. And dont forget that while the Spartans were at first irrelevant to him, afterwards when he was in Asia Sparta revolted.And Antipater defeated them.And Alexander didnt punish them by ordering Antipater to wipe out the city.He respected Sparta's history as he respected Athens' history,and not because these cities were irrelevant to him. "and remembering that the city was seconds away from rising with Thebes GÇô Alexander sought certain citizens from Athens, not all of whom were produced. Negotiations eventually settled the issue." He had the chance to get Demosthenes in his hands without sending his people in Athens and ordering his assasination or anything, but again he let it go.And the fact that Alexander didnt take many triremes from the Athenians,and thus he could have treated Demosthenes in any way he wanted,just contribute to the fact that he didnt want to harm Demosthenes,as he didnt harm Athens and as he didnt harm Sparta.Because he was not a cold blooded murderer.And anyway the Athenians that took part in his army were not as many.He could have done what he wanted anyway. "Again the question arises: had Athens manned two hundred triremes and sailed into the Thermaic Gulf as Philip marched on Chaeronea, would we be discussing this" But they didnt.Because ,A)Alexander had shown his power already and they wouldnt take that risk and B) because no matter how good Demosthenes was in rhetoric,in the end the Athenians thought about their city's well being first.