pothos.org

SORRY IF RUFFLED A FEW FEATHERS WITH THE FIRST POSTING BUT CAN ANYONE TELL ME THEN WHICH CIVILIZATION COMES CLOSEST TO ALEXANDER'S IDEA OF "UNITY OF MANKIND" IF THERE IS ONE. BY THE WAY, I KNOW ALEXANDER WAS NOT A RACIST. REGARDS

I'm not sure that's the answer you were asking for, but Alexander was much into the Cyrus the Great project of peaceful unity inside the cradle of the rising Persian Empire!
Alxander had 4 examples in his life: Dyonisos, Achilles, Herakles, and Cyrus!
So, i think that the civilization you are talking about is the persian itself...better i say, the persian under Cyrus the Great! After his death, all crashed down in the way we know!

I agree with Francesco's interpretion. The Persian empire was an giant cohesion of many cultures. Even in the heartland of the empire in modern day Iran/Iraq the Medes and Persians lived together. The only flaw to this problem is Egypt. Egypt had revolted many times, the most recent to Alexander's time was around the same time as the Corinthian war.
One "peaceful cohesion" was in my opinion Egypt itself. During the Hellenistic age Greek and Egyptian cultures mingled together. Alexandria was a great center of learning. If you ever get the chance to see photographs from under Alexandria you can see beutiful artwork with a wonderful mixing of Egyptian and Greek artwork.

Dear Fransesco and John,While I agree with your statement regarding Cyrus (Kurash)whose religious ideas were based on amity I would request you to go a little further back and consider Nebuchadrezzar who saw a Brotherhood of Man earlier and definitely influenced Alexander. Again part of what you consider as the Persian empire was actually India. I think one of the greatest weaknesses of the Encyclopedia Iranica is the failure to recognise this. Remember Alexander's victory over the Indians in South East Iran? This was the territory of Moeris.I have also maintained that the four-lion emblem of the Government of India is a legacy of Alexander (http://www.geocities.com/ranajitda). Of course this does not imply that the present government India is motivated by Alexander's ideal.With best regards,Dr. Pal

An excellent resource that cites Mesopotamian belief in *Unity of Man* is John Gray's "Near Eastern Mythology". I believe Alexander recognized and esteemed the greatness of warrior-kings of his past, over and above Cyrus (i.e. King Shalmaneser, son of Assur-Natsir-Pal, of the Assyrians). Yes, Gray's book is inspiring in regards to the evolution of hero-king-god!!!!

ALL OF THE ABOVE COULD BE POSSIBLE BUT I DON'T BELEIVE SO. WHY DID HE NOT MENTION THEM IN HIS SPEECH AT OPIS? HE KNEW OF THESE LEADERS. HE WANTED SOMETHING MORE. SOMETHING LIKE THE U.S. WHERE THERE ARE NUMEROUS RACES AND RELIGIONS? REGARDS

I refer to Gray's text because he discusses in detail and length the ideologies of kings of antiquity; specifically, the concept of the king being the representative of man and the image of Theos in protection of the community; additionally, the Mesopotamian belief system perceived their kings to the medium of fertility, watering the tree of life (who was fertility goddess of Ishtar), thus a so-called *sacred marriage* occurs and "fertilizes-fathers" a nation (be it unified cultures under a proto-pater). Wow, did I make sense with all of this information, and did I answer the question?Cheers!Alexander's Amazon Queen

All of this depends, of course, on whether you believe that Alexander had any thoughts whatsoever about the "unity of mankind".:-)All the bestMarcus

VERY INTERESTING AMAZON QUEEN! BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK HE WOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT DEMOCRACY? WHY DID HE NOT LISTEN TO ARISTOTLE ABOUT THE GREEKS BEING THE ONLY CIVILIZED PEOPLE AND EVERYONE ELSE BEING A BARBARIAN MARCUS ? ALL THE BEST

First of all, we don't know whether Aristotle did teach this to Alexander. He probably did, because it was a fairly standard Greek philosophy, and I do not imagine that Aristotle thought of it after he had finished teaching the boys at Mieza.However... there is a big difference between an intangible philosophy / bigotry, and political reality - and, at the end of the day, Alexander was faced with having to rule a vast empire, peopled with hundreds of different national and ethnic groups.He didn't have to have any hifalutin ideas of unity to see reality for what it was, and organise his administration etc. accordingly.All the bestMarcus

WHY THEN DID HE ALWAYS LEAVE A GARRISON AND A GREEK/MACEDONIAN IN CHARGE OF GOVERNING THE CONQUERED TERRITORY? DID HE FEEL THAT THEY WERE SUPERIOR OR DID HE FEEL MORE SECURE WITH ONE OF HIS OWN? REGARDS

Dear Thalestris-Alexandros,

My writing has made me so unpopular in India that I have been debarred by the Government of India from entering the National Library where I first read GrayGÇÖs book. It was an eye-opener.

I think it was Badian who maintained that Alexander could not have spoken about the GÇÿunity of mankindGÇÖ because this was in fact ZenoGÇÖs idea which Tarn had mistakenly implanted on Alexander. Tarn was aware that to talk about Alexander in the East one has to know the cultures of the Eastern peoples. Badian, on the other hand assumed unashamedly that one could form opinions exclusively on the basis of the Greek and Roman authors. Like Green terms like Buddhism were anathema to Badian. Tarn explained Prophthasia as AlexanderGÇÖs intuition which I think is ingenious but totally false. Prophthasia was indeed linked to Prophets, not only Zoroaster and many of these Prophets preached Unity of Mankind centuries before Geno. The contribution of NebuchadrezzarGÇÖs Babylon in this respect is beyond any doubt. After the decline of Kuh-e Khwaja(Prophthasia) Babylon became the religious centre of the world. Nebuchadrezzar expelled some Jews from Palestine but Jewish Prophets like Jeremiah hailed him as a saviour. He is not only one of the greatest heroes of the Old Testament, he influenced Gotama also. AlexanderGÇÖs respect for Cyrus and Nebuchadrezzar and his association with Calanus who was Asvaghosa shows the true background of AlexanderGÇÖs dream of the Brotherhood of Man. I think it was well nigh impossible for any sensible thinker to not to be influenced by these ideas.Regards,Dr. Pal

Well stated, Dr. Pal! I follow your persuasive argument and continue to believe that Alexander esteemed the Babylonian and Persian hierarchs, and pursued their idealistic dreams of *unity of mankind*.Blessings!