pothos.org

I'm in the middle of writing a paper on this and would appriciate your views. Personly I condider the truth to be that Alexander war more interested in personal honour then founding an empire to ruleover later. This veiw is not always shared however with peaple beliving his motovatins were revenge and punishment. I intend on including all veiw points I can find and would apriciate hearing differnt thoughts on the mater

I think the main problem with this is that the sources tend to concentrate on the military action and any intrigues around Alexander that his administrative measures get lost in the wash.He was driven by personal ambition to go further than anyone before he had plans of Napoleonic grandeur and certainly expected to rule an empire, though vicariously as he stormed to new conquests. But the establishment of cities to spread culture and exploit the natural resources of his lands, the careful duopoly in satrapal government where the satrap is frequently not the man in charge of the troops and the way his political settlements evolved from establishing democracies and autonomy from sheer expedience to an attempt to establish governments for the systemmatic exploitation of the Empire and its subjects including the later decrees issued to the Greeks, eg On the Exiles shouts of an interest in more than personal honour, sadly not a dramatic enough one for our sources.

I am afraid much to the disgust of a lot of people on the Forum I am going to say yes. I firmly beleive that he was only interested in conquest. He never really stopped to consolidate his gains. He raised a new army to replace him Macedonian army and was planning to invade Arabia, and possibly Italy too!. more then he could ever hope to control. It took ages for Rome to evolve into a word controlling state. I do not think Alexander really thought about what he was going to do when he finished conquering.

Hi Dave,It's all right - I agree with you (to a large extent). Actually, I think it is rather too simplistic to say "was he only interested in military conquest?" because, for the most part, conquest was the only way he could fulfil his actual ambition... which was to surpass all others. So yes, it was his only interest, but as a means to an end. I don't think, however, that he had no interest in the government and consolidation of his empire, but again this was a necessary to generate the wealth, manpower, and to ensure the logistical continuity that future conquests required.A very brief answer, I know, but time doesn't allow me to write a long essay!All the bestMarcus

Well in the first place, he was going across to Asia Minor to drive out the Persians from the Greek colonies there. And before Philip died, he had been approached by the deposed shaman-pharoah Nectenabo to help drive the Persians out of Egypt. I can't recall ever reading anything about his intentions to invade Italy or Arabia. Yes, he could have conquored India and likely kept on going toward China, but I believe at the time of his death, because he had agreed to turn back from the East, he had plans to invade the other parts of North AFrica, beyond Egypt. He had a great curiosity and quest for achievements which drove him to extreme lengths.