Interesting stuff.

>This is long and i want to elaborate on this:

A/ Polemical, but i've mentioned this before and i'm surprised this has been talked about. Macedonians were not Greek, simply because both Greeks and Macedonians did not see Macedonians as Greek. This is NOT a political claim on my part. Greeks went bonkers over ethnicity (what was barbarian), and it is only because of them that i can firmly state this here. Isocrates was explicit in describing what he called a panhellenic crusade against the barbarian Persians led by a king (Philip) who claimed an Argive ancestry, but >ruled over "a non-kindred race" who were "outside Greece completely"

But here there are several issues about identity here. Greece as we know it was unknown in antiquity. The civilisation was made up of leagues of enclosed Polis's, each one of which was a tight set of peoples, rules, regulations, taxes, etc etc, each with a strong and individual identity. A lot of the interps of Alexander date to 19th C, when nationhood and race were dominating thought. If Alexander spoke Greek, then that is of great importance, I am not sure, but I think he did. The idea that the n coast of the Aegean was 'barbaric' is also questionable. Democratus for example came from Abdera, a colony and academy on the N coast, just beside Thrace. There were many more similar colonies that had been in the area for centuries, into the Black sea etc. Greece was not just Athens by a long shot. In fact, during Philip IIs rise and push south, he formed alliances with polis's inside Greece against Athens, and various other alliances like that. So each Polis switched and changed regularly. There was no united Hellenic army.


B/Alexander can still claim that he fought for the glory of Greece, but sources make it clear that these claims were made to impress Greeks whose loyalty were questionable -- any rebellion was "restrained rather by fear than by any good-will". If Alexander made a panhellenic declaration, his Macedonians (who formed the majority of his army at Gaugamela) would probably run off, as i would if i were Macedonian and i think they did! I tend to liken this to the way the Manchurians subdued the Chinese under the Qing dynasty and needed something to impress the "conquered".


Again, it depends what you consider 'Greece' was or means...Aristotle etc considered philosophy, learning, mathematics, architecture etc to be fundemental to 'their' ideals. So it was not necessarily a racial thing, or even a language thing, but a question of learning and rational thought. Alexander, with a teacher like Aristotle, could well have considered that it was rational thought and philosophy that he represented, rather than 'Culture' as being tied to Athenian racial groups. By the time Alexander and Philip had conquered Athens, they wouldn't have needed to pander to Athenian sensibilities any more. They ruled the place, and the later Seleucid rulers would do so for years to come. The fact that Alexander instigated the movement that lead to Alexandria & its library, altho not directly setting it up, suggests that his side kick soldiers were also learned men who respected education.

C/Aristotle was employed by philip for political purposes. This apparently tied the Argive dynasty with both the academy and a powerful relative of Aristotle's (some Hermias of Atarneus). It is clear that the Macedonian hetairoi had trouble with "court philosphers" from the time of Philips brother and therefore preferred a Greek from the Chalcidice, whose father served as court physician and would know his place. Even then he was installed at Mieza, a safe distance from the capital.

Which academy?

Aristotle himself was born at Stageira, a colony of Andros on the Macedonian peninsula Chalcidice in 384 BC

D/We have no direct evidence of Aristotles effect on Alexander, accounts of which have been overlaid with romance. Statistically, Alexander placed very little power in the hands of Greeks, and his policy towards them was marked with extensive caution to say the least. They, in many cases, were not welcome. It is conceivable, though not proved, that hellenism was an indirect and i can think of numerous examples were this kind of cultural diffusion has happened.

Agreed. Its quite normal.

Ps. This belongs to history! I'm sorry if it does[/]

tsk tsk!

Dave L





Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2005 11:24AM by Dave L.