pothos.org

Alexander Needed Helenes. Like The Christians needed Jesus and Christianity. An excuse to go plundering and waring Against the Eastern MUslims.For a Time a propogandal excuse for war.Kenny

You stated earlier the Macedonians were the victors over persia, and it was a Macedonian Empire. You stated this in the context of it meaning that the other Greeks did not do much to help alexander, and I think we all realize more greek mercenaries fought agaisnt Alexander on the side of persia that fought with Alexander. THus, did Alexander really need the other Greek polises to defeat Persia and india? I do not think so. If anything, they were hostages to keep the other greeks from rebelling while he was gone, and I think he would rather have been king of Asia than Greece, for memnon's threat was irrelevant with his asian iterests.

Bob, You are obviously reading the opinions of Borza and Badian and disregarding the many other scholars who clearly associate the Macedonians as among the oldest Greek peoples -Dorians.You take only selected quotes from Arrian and ignore others such as Alexander Son of Phillip and the Hellenes except the Laconians. Keep in mind that even Borza stated and I will give you the quote upon request that he accepts Hammonds conclusion that the Makedone were Proto (original) Hellenes. I question why your obsession with this matter.An agenda ? Now I suggest you read Herodotus.He clearly states that the Makedon were in fact Hellenic in origin the family from which the Dorians who went south originated.IT WAS THE ATHENIANS WHO HERODOTUS CLAIMS WERE HELLENIZED PELASGIANS ( why not challenge there Greekness)
Of course you can dismiss Herodotus however, the Pella inspription from the time of Phillip clearly confirmed by the liguist that it was a crude form of Doric and the inscription was from a lower class women not a Hellenized aristocracy.Since Doric was only spoken in Sparta and some other states and there is no evidence of Spartans Hellenizing Macedonia then the general conclusion was the Macedonian diolect was a crude Doric diolect as opposed to Attic spoken by the Aristocracy. Did ATG conquer the Persian Empire to spread Hellenism? Of course not.Did the Spanish conquistadors conquer the America's to spread Spanish culture or did the British conquer India to spread British civilization? the answer to above is all a big no.However in all cases the native culture language of the conqueror was imposed on the conquered. ATG was no different.the Macedonians imposed their version of GREEKNESS on their subjects not the Athenian or Spartan version.The Macedonian version was more in tune with the original Homeric version .

G'day Jim.I quite like Ernst Badian (and Brian Bosworth for that matter amongst others), but that's neither here not there.I think your question on motive is acceptable. I mentioned in another post these questions had arisen in another thread. In "Confusion" we have the following: "This is my confusion. Was Alexander's country "Macedonia" or "greece". [http://www.pothos.org/forum/showmessage ... geID=24401]. This later becomes: "However, (Arrian) implies in a great many places that the Macedonains were NOT Greeks (which now has me even more confused.)" [http://www.pothos.org/forum/showmessage ... geID=24528].As we'd say in Australia, "this one's got form".And, as I said earlier, it may well be innocent information gathering. What it isn't though is inconsistent in subject matter.In any case, having read your post, I hear a veritable Aristophanean chorus of fat ladies bursting into song....Paralus

First of all, Jim is right,there are also many other quotes from Arrian where he presents Alexander saying on his speeches that Macedonia was part of Greece.Yesterday i started reading Arrian again, and especially the second and third books,and found at least 2 quotes which suggest that. On the other hand,after the mistranslation of Arrian's quote (that which talked about racial rivalry),i cannot know which other quotes may be mistranslated in the english version.I would like to see pothosians though to comment on my seperate thread i made about Arrian's quote. Is there one version of Arrian in english,or more?If someone can look and see if this particular quote is same in 2 or 3 different english translations of Arrian,then i think the whole translation must be revisited.It is unacceptable such mistakes being made about such a matter.I belive that if i dig into more quotes from the english version i will find more mistakes.Or maybe that was the only one.Nevertheless,after what i have seen,all the works from Arrian,Plutarch,Diodorus e.t.c must be checked out for errors in translation. I will also give notice of this matter to some publishers and historians here in greece to see what happens.But first i want from you to look at this with clear and objective mind and tell me if the quote is same in other translations too,or if i am missing something in the whole picture...

Double post sorry, erased the second one...

I quite like Ernst Badian (and Brian Bosworth for that matter amongst others), Badian's view of both Alexander and the Macedonians is flawed.While prior to Badian ATG was portrayed as the great promter of brotherhood of man may have been a little idealistic Badians view of ATG as the pure genocidal maniac is twisted to the far opposite extreme.
Badian's claim that the macedonians have a hidden identity but blended into a Greek culture like the Jews did in Germany is on the verge of retardation.The Macedonians were not immigrants in their own land and had no motive to secretly speak their language to avoid prosecution via assimulation.But Badian claims the Epiroti were Greek but not the Macedonians blah blah In addition the Arrian writes about the campaign of ATG and not the ethnic origin of the Macedonians.Greek writers well before Phillip almost 700-800 yrs before Arrian's time firmly concluded the Hellenic origin of the Macedonians Also Arrian uses Greek and Macedonians in his writings the way other Greek writers use Athenians and Greeks.Why , it is taken for granted that Macedonians or Athenians were Greek--since Greeks included almost 200 different states and sub groups it would be aburd to name them all so the specific state Macedonia so athens in focus to seperrate them from the rest. The Macedonians were mentioned as part of the Greek family in 720 BC via Hesoid Herodotus states the Macedonians were Greek peoples from Pindus while the Athenians were hellenized pelasgians. All the archeology in ancient Macedonia shows Greek writing symbols ect

"While prior to Badian ATG was portrayed as the great promter of brotherhood of man may have been a little idealistic Badians view of ATG as the pure genocidal maniac is twisted to the far opposite extreme."I'm assuming we are referring here to Badian taking the sword (pardon the pun) to the Tarnian fantasy through his piece "Alexander and The Unity of Mankind"? If so, then I think terms such as "ruthless killer", "paranoid" and the like may be found, but I can't recall "pure genocidal maniac". Pardon me, but whilst the good professor has a view, I don't read it as Alexander being a fourth century BC Stalin. Yes, he can be considered the "B GÇô side" of the Tarn hit single "Brotherhood of Man and equality of All". A notion, as presented by Tarn and his adherents, as nonsensical as calling ATG a "pure genocidal maniac". There is, very rarely, too much that is cute, cuddly and take home to mummy about conquerors and imperialists. By virtue of their nature they kill, destroy and exercise raw power. Athens in the fifth century (Melos, Samos and Mytilene) is a stand out example.Again this is not to state ATG was Pol Pot but, nor is to say that he was Martin Luther King Jnr.I shall need to be more careful which historians I mention in future. And there I was actually implying agreement with the sentiment of the post GÇô as well as the questioning of motive:"In any case, having read your post, I hear a veritable Aristophanean chorus of fat ladies bursting into song...."Perhaps a bit obtuse. One wonders the response had I firmly disagreed!Paralus.