Deconstructing MYTH of Aleksandar's Supposed "Brotherhood of Mankind"

[momce]

interesting Alexander excludes the greeks from his prayer I found that very interesting

[makedonche]

TM
Excellent reading, well found, look forward to more!

[TrueMacedonian]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...431728622.html

Babylonian Dreaming
by Peter Green

Late in the afternoon of June 11, 323 B.C., Alexander III—King of Macedon, world-conqueror, self-styled Lord of Asia—died in Babylon at not quite 33 years of age: whether of an unidentified disease (helped by war wounds and alcoholism) or as the result of deliberate poisoning is unknown. There were certainly many who wished him gone. During his last few months, he had purged a majority of his provincial governors—in some cases with good reason—and his always lurking paranoia saw treachery everywhere.

The previous season, after 11 years of campaigning, his battle-weary troops, faced in India with the prospect of a never-ending pursuit of conquest and Homeric glory, had mutinied and forced him to turn back. Undeterred, Alexander at his death was planning fresh conquests: first of the Arabs, then of the whole North African coast as far west as the straits of Gibraltar, and after that back home, picking up Spain, Sicily and Italy on the way.

Thus to paranoia was added megalomania. Alexander designed for his father, Philip, a tomb rivaling the Great Pyramid. He devised plans for racial mingling that involved the wholesale transfer of populations. The most conspicuous symbol of this project had been the mass weddings at Susa in 324, in which large numbers of Alexander's officers were married off to Persians. He also issued a proclamation demanding recognition of himself as a god. None of this, to put it mildly, appealed to the Macedonians he led, but his power and charisma were such that no one dared put up any concerted resistance, while huge cash bonuses from the looted Persian treasuries helped keep his seasoned veterans quiet.

It is thus a striking fact, and one that neither James Romm's "Ghost on the Throne" nor Robin Waterfield's "Dividing the Spoils" sufficiently stresses, that the moment Alexander was dead, almost literally overnight, every single one of his plans was shelved. The campaigns were canceled, the monuments were never built and the Macedonians almost to a man abandoned their Persian wives, along with the whole idea of racial fusion. Nothing shows more starkly what a gulf separated the visionary leader from those he led.

For fair use only


It is indeed quite interesting this racial fusion and plans of massive migrations. When I picked up Romm's book and read Green's review it made me think about this topic with indigen. I also read something from Pierre Briant which I hope to find in my pile of papers and post on here.

[indigen]

Q1: Who were the ruling class and military elite in this "kozmoplitska" Alexandria?

Q2: How similar do you think Alexandria, which is said to have emerged from a strategic Persian military garrison site (like the many other Alexandrias), was in the period from 332/331-323 to the Metropolis it came to be under Ptolemaic Dynasty?

A1- Macedonians.
A2- However the differences the point being is simple. This city was a product of Alexander himself. Here's what Peter Green wrote of it in Alexander the Great pages 275-6.

"Brotherhood of Mankind" = "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам")

Duly noted like I said in a previous post. However, the fact is Alexander was Cosmopolitan and spread it in his own virtuos way.

I think you are avoiding to admit your own misconceptions about Alexander's so called "Unity of Mankind" (which, as I clarified for you, in RoM circles is presented as "shirenje na KOZMOPOLITIZAM", and I gave you an example of that from a Macedonian source. I have to ask why you keep BEING OFF TOPIC and harping back to some other common garden variety of Western cosmopolitanism that Alexander was supposed to have been on a mission to spread, in your view? Why don't you start a new topic and elaborate on the "planned cosmopolitanism" that Aleksandar was supposed to have spread?

As for Alexandria, it was not even finished by the time of Aleksandar's death. When Ptolemy took over Egypt, he found the appointed (by Aleksandar) administrator very unpopular and the populace on the verge of overthrowing him (so the extant sources may say).

The practical military objective of having some towns in an alien population (or land/country) populated by a mixed group of people and serving as a strategic outpost, which logically is less likely to revolt against the Macedonian garrison and more likely to support its upkeep, as implemented by Filip II and Aleksandar III (and his Succesors, no doubt) being presented as some mission for "cosmopolitanism" is ABSURDLY UNBELIEVABLE. IME, it was the strategic and military necessity and lack of Macedonian manpower that these outpost cities and towns were established in the way they were.

---------

Reiterating some of the points for final clarification:

So that we have no further misunderstandings, the following would be a better clarification: [In RoM circles] "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам") = "Brotherhood of Mankind" [i.e. the same "Brotherhood of Mankind" that W. Heckel says is "an idea which has been thoroughly discredited and is discussed today merely as a footnote to Alexander scholarship."]

Eugene Borza:
The conclusion is inescapable: there was a largely ethnic Macedonian imperial administration from beginning to end.

----------

The following Macedonian excerpt is an example of the type of "kozmopolitizam" I had in mind amongst RoM circles and not some common garden variety Western cosmopolitanism you may have swirling in you brain:

Големиот македонски цар планирал да создаде светска држава, чија територија ќе се простира од местата каде што изгревало сонцето, па се до оние предели каде што тоа заоѓало; држава, во која нема да има граници меѓу одделните народи, кои, со тек на времето, ќе се обединат во еден единствен "светски" народ.

Во овој случај, генијалниот дух на Александар Македонски, поради својата пројава на беспримерен, не само за древноста, туку и за денешнината, космополитизам, го заслужува вниманието на научниците-социолози.

Во процесот на тоа обединување меѓу народите, Александар Македонски, меѓутоа, барал да се зачува потполната рамноправност помеѓу различните етноси, без да се даваат привилегии на ниту еден народ, вклучувајќи го тука и македонскиот.

Ѓорги Поп Атанасов - Библијата за Македонија и Македонците

http://my.opera.com/ancientmacedonia/blog/?id=1582448

---------------

Newsgroups:alt.culture.macedonia,alt.news.macedoni a, soc.culture.australian,
soc.culture.bulgaria, soc.culture.canada, soc.culture.greek, soc.culture.usa
From: "Josif Grez"
Date: 2000/07/07
Subject: Re: Macedonians !!

This is what is found in the literature:

(1)Ancient Macedonians were not greeks. Thousands of quotes by prominent scholars can attest to that. Ancient Greek chroniclers can attest to that.
The action of Greeks themselves can attest to that. Epigraphic evidence can attest to that; epitaphs, inscriptions, tombstones etc., etc., etc..

(2) Macedonia was not a Greek land. Countless of quotes are available to verify that.

(3) Ancient Macedonians spoke Macedonian. The evidence comes from the mouth of Alexander the Great himself.

(4) Macedonian names were not Greek names, even though some names were found in use by the Greeks too. There are inscriptions that eloquently support this thesis. Macedonian names were in large extent different than the Greek names.

(5) There was no unification of the greek city-states by Philip. It was a military conquest. It was a war that Greeks lost and were enslaved by the Macedonian kings for centuries.

(6) There was no hellenization policy with Alexander.

(7) Macedonians did not spread hellenizm anywhere. They spread, if that was possible, only Macedonizm.

(8) Greeks spread propaganda and fabrications only. Greece needs to wake up and smell the reality in today’s Europe. Lies will go only so far, and then reality hits you in your face.

These are the things you should be puzzled about.

Clowns and half illiterate zombies to mend the front will not cut the mustard anymore.

Good day
Josif

[TrueMacedonian]

Q1: Who were the ruling class and military elite in this "kozmoplitska" Alexandria?

Q2: How similar do you think Alexandria, which is said to have emerged from a strategic Persian military garrison site (like the many other Alexandrias), was in the period from 332/331-323 to the Metropolis it came to be under Ptolemaic Dynasty?

A1- Macedonians.
A2- However the differences the point being is simple. This city was a product of Alexander himself. Here's what Peter Green wrote of it in Alexander the Great pages 275-6.

"Brotherhood of Mankind" = "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам")

Duly noted like I said in a previous post. However, the fact is Alexander was Cosmopolitan and spread it in his own virtuos way.

[indigen]

Was Alexandria a cosmopolitan city?

Not in context of the topic title, which you have misinterpreted intentionally or unintentionally and thus the useless discussion.

Deconstructing MYTH of Aleksandar's Supposed "Brotherhood of Mankind"...or, as it is propagated in RoM circles, "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам").

Take the following into consideration:
"Brotherhood of Mankind" = "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам")

So that we have no further misunderstandings, the following would be a better clarification:

[In RoM circles] "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам") = "Brotherhood of Mankind" [i.e. the same "Brotherhood of Mankind" that W. Heckel says is "an idea which has been thoroughly discredited and is discussed today merely as a footnote to Alexander scholarship."]

Eugene Borza:
The conclusion is inescapable: there was a largely ethnic Macedonian imperial administration from beginning to end. Alexander used Greeks at court for cultural reasons, Greek troops (often under Macedonian commanders) for limited tasks and with some discomfort, and Greek commanders and officials for limited duties. Typically, a Greek would enter Alexander’s service from an Aegean or Asian city through the practice of some special activity: he could read and write, keep figures or sail, all of which skills the Macedonians required. Some Greeks may have moved on to military service as well. In other words, the role of Greeks in Alexander’s service was not much different from what their role had been in the service of Xerxes and the third Darius.

If one wishes to believe that Alexander had a policy of Hellenization-as opposed to the incidental and informal spread of Greek culture-the evidence must come from sources other than those presented here. One wonders-archeology aside-where this evidence would be.

We have seen that not only has the idea of World Brotherhood been put to rest and the idea of a Fusion of Persian and Macedonian ruling classes made doubtful, but that the value of Greeks to Alexander for policy reasons cannot be sustained by evidence. In short, there is no World Brotherhood, no Fusion, and no evidence of a policy of Hellenization, if that Hellenization were intended to be accomplished through the medium of ethnic Greeks.

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org

Waldemar Heckel:
The appeal for “Concord” (Homonoia) gave rise to the idea that Alexander was trying to promote a “Brotherhood of Mankind”, an idea which has been thoroughly discredited and is discussed today merely as a footnote to Alexander scholarship.

The following Macedonian excerpt is an example of the type of "kozmopolitizam" I had in mind amongst RoM circles and not some common garden variety Western cosmopolitanism you may have swirling in you brain:

Големиот македонски цар планирал да создаде светска држава, чија територија ќе се простира од местата каде што изгревало сонцето, па се до оние предели каде што тоа заоѓало; држава, во која нема да има граници меѓу одделните народи, кои, со тек на времето, ќе се обединат во еден единствен "светски" народ.

Во овој случај, генијалниот дух на Александар Македонски, поради својата пројава на беспримерен, не само за древноста, туку и за денешнината, космополитизам, го заслужува вниманието на научниците-социолози.

Во процесот на тоа обединување меѓу народите, Александар Македонски, меѓутоа, барал да се зачува потполната рамноправност помеѓу различните етноси, без да се даваат привилегии на ниту еден народ, вклучувајќи го тука и македонскиот.

Ѓорги Поп Атанасов - Библијата за Македонија и Македонците

http://my.opera.com/ancientmacedonia/blog/?id=1582448

Q1: Who were the ruling class and military elite in this "kozmopolitska" Alexandria?

Q2: How similar do you think Alexandria, which is said to have emerged from a strategic Persian military garrison site (like the many other Alexandrias), was in the period from 332/331-323 to the Metropolis it came to be under Ptolemaic Dynasty?

[Soldier of Macedon]

How many times do you attack/question people's motivations on threads here. I do the same.

Next time you see me do that in the same manner as yourself, let me know.

I want Macedonians to empower themselves to consider their heritage and culture without fear of attacks from others, whether Macedonian or outsider.

Good, but there are other ways. You knew how you're post would be received, so you can continue arguing that your comment relating to Plutarch being a "Ramkovist" has relevance, or we can move on from it.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Absolutely.

[TrueMacedonian]

...or as it is propagated in RoM circles, "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам").

Was Alexandria a cosmopolitan city?

[indigen]

Deconstructing MYTH of Aleksandar's Supposed "Brotherhood of Mankind"...or, as it is propagated in RoM circles, "Spreading of Cosmopolitanism" (aka "ширење на космополитизам"). This unfounded assumption is mostly spread by anti-Macedonian, anti-patriotic and anti-nationalist sell-outs, traitors and kosmopоliti (граѓаноиди) but there is also a misguided, and mostly well-intentioned, minority element that is trying to suck up to old fashioned Western liberalism, too.

Waldemar Heckel:
The appeal for “Concord” (Homonoia) gave rise to the idea that Alexander was trying to promote a “Brotherhood of Mankind”, an idea which has been thoroughly discredited and is discussed today merely as a footnote to Alexander scholarship.

-------------

Alexander the Great
Historical Sources in Translation
By: WALDEMAR HECKEL, University of Calgary J C YARDLEY, University of Ottawa
--------------

About the Authors
Waldemar Heckel is Professor of Ancient History at the University of Calgary. He was a founding editor of the Ancient History Bulletin and is the author of numerous books and articles, including The Last Days and Testament of Alexander the Great (1988), The Marshals of Alexander’s Empire (1992), and The Wars of Alexander the Great (2002).

J. C. Yardley is Professor of Classics at the University of Ottawa and a past President of the Classical Association of Canada. His publications include translations of Quintus Curtius’ History of Alexander, Livy 31-40, and Justin’s Epitome of Trogus. His latest work is Justin and Pompeius Trogus (2003).

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/book.asp?ref=0631228217&site=1

From Back Cover
“..Waldemar Heckel, one of the foremost Alexander scholars in the world, provides an introduction and commentary outlining Alexander’s career, and discussing the sources, both extant and lost. He also supplies a bibliography of the most significant modern works on Alexander..”

Quotable Quotes:
Macedonian Background (page 7)
Waldemar Heckel: Macedonians and Greeks: Language, Culture, Attitudes
“It is clear from the extant historians that the lost sources made a CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN MACEDONIANS AND GREEKS – ethnically, culturally and linguistically – and THIS MUST BE AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF CONTEMPORARY ATTITUDES.....”

Alexander And The Macedonians
The “Opis Mutiny”
Waldemar Heckle: “At Opis on the Tigris River, Alexander prepared to dismiss a large number of his Macedonian veterans, bringing into the camp at the same time new recruits from the Iranian satrapies known as the Epigoni. This, although it was not the only cause of discontent, triggered an angry reaction within the camp, one which Alexander suppressed by arresting and executing the most outspoken of the mutineers, as well as by offering words of conciliation.

The appeal for “Concord” (Homonoia) gave rise to the idea that Alexander was trying to promote a “Brotherhood of Mankind”, an idea which has been thoroughly discredited and is discussed today merely as a footnote to Alexander scholarship.

Here we are confronted not with dreams of unity but with the reality of opposition within Alexander’s army.”(Page 266)

For fair use only.

For the record, this was the original post and was not aimed at anybody in particular on this forum! For those that it is aimed at, they should know how to interpret the message and where to find verifying evidence should they need to.

The first three responses I got were neither innocent nor seeking info but were dismissive and were attempting to give credence and validity to dubious sources that anti-Macedonian propagandists such as N. Martis use to underpin their Greek propaganda.

TM: “But Alexander believed that he came by divine will to be the common governor and mediator of all. Conquering by force of arms those he could not bring together by reasoned persuasion, he brought men from everywhere into a unified body, mixing together, as if in a loving-cup, their lives and characters and marriages and social customs. He commanded them all to think of the inhabited world as their fatherland, of the encamped army as their acropolis and guard, of good men as their kinsmen, and only of evil men as foreigners.

Plutarch - On the Fortune Versus the Virtue of Alexander the Great

I think Plutarch says differently.”

TM: “I love you too indy. But what about Plutarch's quote?

Here's another one from Plutarch;

Indeed, the much esteemed Politeia of Zeno, the founder of the Stoic school, can be summed up with this one main point: that we should not live our lives divided up into cities or nations, each having its own particular standard of justice, but rather we should think of all men as countrymen and fellow citizens, and that there should be one common life and world order, like that of a herd grazing together in a common pasture. Thus Zeno wrote, creating a dream or phantom image of a well regulated, philosophical society. But it took Alexander to translate the theory into practice. (De Alex. Mag. fort. aut. virt. 329a-b)

I guess Plutarch says differently again. Don't be mad at me. Get mad at Plutarch”

Sf: “I wouldn't pay much attention to Plutarch. He's a Ramkovist.”

IME, you got the answers you deserve!

FYI, sf., it is not often that I engage in threads that I did not start and is generally a response to issues relating to Macedonian Australians or someone (person of some political standing or purporting to represent Macedonians in Diaspora) making ideologically flawed statements that I feel need to be challenged, contested or outright dismissed. UMDovina organisation is one such case where I might engage in ideological discussion from time to time. Thus your claims about people being "able to feel free to explore our heritage and culture" and that I somehow inhibit them by acting (in your view) like a "political commisars to agitate them with slogans" is UNFOUNDED and DEFAMATORY. Neither you or anybody else is forced to read my posts and if they are not to your standard or taste, please don't read them and don't respond to them. There are also forum options where you can place individual posters on ignore and I suggest you look into using them.

[sf.]

OK. Let's run this down quickly because it's becoming tiresome.

Your opening paragraph in this thread basically said, "I'm going to present an argument from history, and anyone who disagrees is either a traitor or a lackey to western philosophy." You confirmed this attitude again in post #22. So you stimied any discussion from the start, as evident in your retarded blast at the very first response by TM citing Plutarch. See, you didn't need my post to be provoked. You set it up as such from the start. (The funny thing is that a few more people challenged your notion, but you didn't go calling them traitors.)

My comment was on your attitude. I don't really disagree with the historical argument that you presented, and my qualification re cosmopolitanism actually supports your view. But you're so blinded by some stupid hatred, and prejudices that you've created in your own mind, that you could not see this. Every post of mine is treated as hostile.

You've got a serious chip on your shoulder and you're taking it out on the wrong people.

As I stated earlier, people here, given the propaganda we've been subjected to, need to be able to feel free to explore our heritage and culture. They don't need political commisars to agitate them with slogans. I'll ask you to afford them this respect.

[indigen]

Now that is a sensible approach to the topic and should've been the leading post in this thread.

I don't think so but it is something that will expose your ignorance.

I want to address the idea of cosmopolitanism, as relating to Alexander's special case.

Why?

Here's the definition from dictionary.com:

There are other definitions apart than those listed and if you ever read the historical sources - Arrian, QCR, DS, Justin, Plutarch (Life of Alex.) - you would know that Alexander was a Macedonian King creating a Macedonian Empire.

Here are some examples of Alexander's aims and that of the Macedonians of his era:

Eugene Borza: "The conclusion is inescapable: there was a largely ethnic Macedonian imperial administration from beginning to end."

Polybius:Speeches of Chlaeneas the Aelolian and Lyciscus the Acarnanian at Sparta (211 BC)
Loeb Edition VOLUME IV Book IX
BOOK IX. 28.1—29.4
Speeches of Chlaeneas the Aetolian and Lyciscus the Acarnanian at Sparta (211 BC)

28.”...Men of Lacedaemon, I am convinced indeed that no one would venture to deny that the slavery of Greece owes its origin to the kings of Macedon...He was succeeded by Alexander. That king again, because he thought there was left in Thebes a little spark of the Greece that once was, destroyed that city in the manner that you all, I take it, know.

29. “And as for the successors of Alexander, need I tell you in detail how they treated the Greeks? For no one is so indifferent to facts as not to have heard how Antipater after his victory over the Greeks at Lamia treated the unhappy Athenians as well as the other Greeks in the harshest manner, going so far in his wanton and lawless violence as to appoint and send round to the different cities exile-hunters to catch those who had opposed or in any way offended the royal house of Macedon. Some forcibly driven out of the temples and others dragged from the altars perished by torture, while those who escaped were expelled from the whole of Greece...”

ARRIAN: “...the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian.”

Book II – Battle of Issus, in Arrian’s “The Campaigns of Alexander - Penguin Classics Edition”


“Darius’ Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, already in retreat, while the Macedonians, in their turn, with Alexander’s triumph plain before their eyes, were determined to equal his success and not forfeit the proud title of invincible, hitherto universally bestowed upon them. The fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian.” [p.119]

Alexander: "...the whole inhabited world for the Macedonians" [Plutarch]

Alexander was by now becoming anxious that the MACEDONIANS might refuse to follow him any further in his campaigns. He therefore quartered the main body in the country and allowed them to rest, but pressed on with the best troops, consisting of twenty thousand infantry and three thousand cavalry, and marched into Hyrcania. He then addressed this picked force and told them that up to now the barbarians had watched them as if they were in a dream, but that if they merely threw the whole country into disorder and retired, the Persians would fall upon them as if they were so many women. He went on to say that he would allow any of them who desired it to go back, but he called on them to witness that at the very moment when he was seeking to conquer the whole inhabited world for the Macedonians, he found himself deserted and left only with friends and those who were willing to continue the expedition. These are almost the exact words which he used in his letter to Antipater, and he says that after he had spoken in this way, the whole of his audience shouted aloud and begged him to lead them to whatever part of world he chose. Once he had tested the loyalty of his troops, he found no difficulty in winning over the main body, indeed they followed him with a will. [Plutarch
the Age of Alexander, book 7.47]
Reference: Plutarch the Age of Alexander edited by Ian Scott-Kilvert and published by Penguin Books.

Alexsander III of Macedon: Macedonian way of life and Macedonian language

Quintus Curtius Rufus: The History of Alexander
The Trial of Philotas.
[Part1, book 6.10.34-36]
..................................................

Alexander fixed his gaze on him. 'The MACEDONIANS ARE GOING TO JUDGE YOUR CASE,' he said. 'PLEASE STATE WHETHER YOU WILL USE YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE.'

‘Besides the MACEDONIANS,' replied Philotas, 'there are many present who will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you.’

Then the king said: 'Do you see how offensive Philotas finds even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases-ONLY REMEMBER HE IS AS CONTEMPTUOUS OF OUR WAY OF LIFE AS HE IS OF OUR LANGUAGE.' So saying, Alexander left the meeting.

Justin 13.5: Alexander intended to lead an expedition to level Athens to the ground!

Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus.
translated, with notes, by the Rev. John Selby Watson.
London: Henry G. Bohn, York Street, Convent Garden (1853).

http://www.forumromanum.org/literatu...h/trans13.html

Book XIII


Justin 13.5.1-8
5 While these transactions were passing in the east, the Athenians and Aetolians proceeded with all their might to prosecute the war which they had begun in the life of Alexander....

This being reported to Alexander, he gave orders that a thousand ships of war should be raised among his allies, with which he might carry on war in the west; and he intended to make an expedition, with a powerful force, to level Athens with the ground. The Athenians, in consequence, collecting an army of thirty thousand men and two hundred ships, went to war with Antipater...

"The truth of the matter seems to have been that Alexander distrusted his Greek allies so profoundly - and with good reason - that he preferred to risk the collapse of his campaign in a spate of rebellion rather than entrust its safety to a Greek fleet." Green

Newsgroups: alt.news.macedonia, soc.culture.greek, soc.culture.bulgaria, alt.culture.macedonia,
From: "Josif Grez"
Date: 2000/02/23
Subject: Re: Quintus Curtius Rufus


One, who is genuinly interested in history,....should keep in mind that the Greeks with Alexander were notable for their absence from any great battle. Alex., simply did not trust them and subsequently [after 2 years into the conquest] got rid of them. They were dismissed; he no longer needed these "hostages" any longer.
Josif

Quintus Curtius Rufus: Battle of Issus [Book 3.10.1-10]


[1] When the two armies were already in sight of each other but still out of javelin-range, the Persian front raised a wild, fierce shout. [2] The Macedonians returned it, the echo from the mountain tops and vast forests making them sound more numerous than they were: surrounding woods and rocks always return any sound they receive with increased volume. [3] Alexander went ahead of his front standards and kept motioning his men back with his hand so that they would not hurry too much in their excitement and be out of breath when they entered battle. [4] Riding up to the line, he would address the soldiers with words that suited their various dispositions.

The Macedonians, who had won so many wars in Europe and who had set out to conquer Asia and the furthest lands of the East as much at their own instigation as at his – these he reminded of their long-standing valour. [5] They were the liberators of the world; they would one day traverse the bounds set by Hercules and Father Liber to subdue not only the Persians but all the races of the earth. Bactria and India would be Macedonian provinces. What now lay before their eyes was minimal, he said, but victory gave access to everything. [6] It would not be fruitless labour on the sheer rocks and crags of lllyria and Thrace: they were being offered the spoils of the entire East. And they would scarcely need their swords: the whole enemy line, wavering In panic, could be driven back just by their shields. [7] Alexander also referred to his father, Philip, conqueror of the Athenians, and recalled to their minds the recent conquest of Boeotia and the annihilation of its best-known city. He reminded them of the river Granicus, of all the cities they had stormed or which had capitulated, of the territory that now lay behind them, all of it subdued and trampled beneath their feet.

[indigen]

The provocation was originally not mine. I highlighted the aforementioned statement and ridiculed the attitudes of the writer.

How many times do you attack/question people's motivations on threads here. I do the same. I want Macedonians to empower themselves to consider their heritage and culture without fear of attacks from others, whether Macedonian or outsider. If I can shift this attitude, then yes, my statement will eventually have contributed to the 'substance of this thread.'

You and your mate were trying give credence and validity to a dubious source that is used by our national enemies to deny our heritage and claim it as theirs and I don't take that very kindly. Secondly, I feel that those that responded combatively to my original post must have felt slighted, i.e. "si ja imaat muvata na kapata"! :-)

[sf.]

The provocation was originally not mine. I highlighted the aforementioned statement and ridiculed the attitudes of the writer.

How many times do you attack/question people's motivations on threads here. I do the same. I want Macedonians to empower themselves to consider their heritage and culture without fear of attacks from others, whether Macedonian or outsider. If I can shift this attitude, then yes, my statement will eventually have contributed to the 'substance of this thread.'

[Soldier of Macedon]

Ironic with provocative intention. Do you think that comment contributed to the substance of this thread?