League of Corinth - The Facts.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The League of Corinth was created by Phillip II of Macedon during 338bc, after the devastating Macedonian victory over the Greeks during the battle of Chaeronea.

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=681

The purpose of creating such an entity was two-fold; to soldify Macedonian control over the Greeks, and to obligate the Greeks to provide a (token) force of soldiers for the Asian expedition. Isocrates had unwittingly provided Phillip with the avenue he needed to coerce the Greeks, through the pretext of 'revenge' against Persia for wrongs committed years prior.

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1585

Most of Greece had entered the league, the Spartans being the largest exception, as Justinus put it:

......they considered that a settlement imposed by the victor instead of being agreed on by the states concerned meant enslavement, not peace.

One of the terms that the league had to abide by was the following:

http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexande...ander_t43.html
I will not break the agreements with Philip the Macedonian

Each city-state had elected delegates proportionate to its military and naval strength, and decided on all matters of federal government, including foreign policy. Greece was indeed unified, and Macedonian garrisons were sent in to ensure that the 'unity' remained along with the Macedonian yoke. The Macedonian occupation of Greece was completed with the establishment of the league.

As a foreigner, the Macedonian king was not represented on the League's council and he did not have an official voice in deliberations and decisions. Macedonia was not a part of this league, which was, realistically, an instrument of Macedonian domination over the Greeks. This in itself is proof that Macedonia and 'Greece' were two distinct entities, if the latter would qualify as one.

Shortly after the creation of this entity, Phillip announced his plan of invading Asia to the league's council, and requested their military assistance. The council could hardly refuse the request of its creator and master, and Phillip was 'appointed' commander-in-chief of the league's forces that would take part in the invasion. The Greek contribution of soldiers to Alexander’s Asian campaign was neither significant nor dependable. Nor were they comparable to the tens of thousands (some estimates at 50,000) of Greeks that fought for the Persians against the Macedonians.

The league broke up after Alexander’s death (323) and was unsuccessfully restored for a short time by Demetrius I (302).

So much for Greek 'unity'.

[NikodimMKD]

SoM, just curious. When you state the facts, are you quoting direct ancient sources or are you quoting modern authors' interpretations of the events?

[Risto the Great]

Nikodim, are you really just curious?
If you were a little more than "just" curious, you would look up the ancient sources and find that your curiosity would be satiated. And that SoM is accurately describing the historical event.

So why don't you comment on the topic instead of ducking and weaving. Ducking and weaving is a very "Greek" thing to do about history ... and you do it well.

[Soldier of Macedon]

SoM, just curious. When you state the facts, are you quoting direct ancient sources or are you quoting modern authors' interpretations of the events?

Nikodim, I challenge you, to challenge what I wrote above, bring all your facts and quotes, modern and ancient.

Fair challenge?

Come on, prove to the readers that I am wrong, that I am just some internet warrior who hasn't even read up on the sources. Here is your chance, you can do it on behalf of your maggotsontheweb, heck, you can even go and consult those bananas first if you wish.

[NikodimMKD]

I just asked a question as to your references. That's all. I'm no historian or have a PhD in ancient history, but it sounds like you do. So think whatever you want to think.

[Dejan]

You're a f**king joke nikolaiki

[Soldier of Macedon]

Modern historians have varied opinions concerning the origins of the ancient Macedonians, but they nearly all agree on the obvious, such as the virtual state-prison of Greece that was cemented by the Corinthian League. Here are some excerpts in support of what I wrote in the initial post of this thread.

Waldemar Heckel, The Conquests of Alexander the Great, Cambridge, New York, 2008.

The age of Alexander the Great marks a turning point in world history. The defeat of the Greek city-states (poleis) by Alexander's father, Phillip II, at Chaeronea in 338 BC and the consequent formation of the League of Corinth, which forged an alliance of Greek states under the Macedonian king as hegemon or supreme military commander (and director of foreign affairs), put an end to the deliberating, internecine wars of the fourth century............Indeed, from this point on, the Greek world was destined to subordinate its cherished system of independent poleis to a series of alliances (often reincarnations of this same league) and the overarching authority of kings.

R. D. Milns, Alexander the Great, London, 1968.

The Macedonian king was not represented on the League's council and hence had no voice in its deliberations or decisions. But he was Hegemon (commander) of the League's military forces and only he - or his deputy - could initiate military action by the League; and he could also call on the League for aid against any recalcitrant member............Though the League was intended to give the Greeks much-needed stability and peace, it was definetly an instrument of Macedonian domination and as such was deeply resented by the larger states with a long tradition of imperialism.

Ulrich Wilcken, Alexander the Great, Berlin, 1931:

The creation of this 'Corinthian League' was not a product of the Panhellenic idea, but of Phillip's policy of raising the power of Macedonia. To realise this helps to explain the fact that this solution by Phillip of the Greco-Macedonian question, in spite of his efforts to give it a shape which offended Greek susceptibilities as little as possible, was coldy received in wider circles than he had expected. The Greeks regarded the hegemony of Phillip as, after all, a foreign domination; they did not look upon the Macedonians as Greeks.

Peter Bamm, Alexander the Great, London, 1968.

The regime established by Phillip II after his victory was mild in the extreme - he simply formed the cities of mainland Greece into the League of Corinth and contended himself with the status of 'captain-general' - but Macedonian garrisons occupied well-fortified strongholds at every important strategic point in Hellas.

Michael Zahrnt, Macedonian Background, edited by Waldemar Heckel and Lawrence A. Tritle, Oxford, 2009.

With the Corinthian League Phillip created a legal basis for his hegemony in Greece and thus sealed Macedonia's rise under international law..........Although this peace had been imposed by the victor and was a means of consolidating his supremacy and securing his hegemony in Greece, he had skillfully veiled it in the form of a koine eirene (my note: "common peace"), acceptable to all states, which many had tried in vain to establish in Greece for fifty years.

Peter Green, Alexander of Macedon, California, 1974.

Simultaneously, the league was to form a separate alliance with Macedonia, though Macedonia itself would not be a league member. This treaty was to be made with 'Phillip and his descendants' in perpetuity.......Phillip's Panhellenism was no more than a convenient placebo to keep his allies quiet, a cloak for further Macedonian aggrandizement. Most Greek statesmen recognized this only too well..........The brutal truth of the matter was that the Greeks, for the most part, knuckled under because, after Chaeronea, they had no alternative. Nor was Phillip deceived by their specious professions of loyalty.

The independence of the Greek states was over, they were now subordinate to the Macedonian king, and Macedonia ran the show from that point onwards. Peace is not something that should be 'imposed', couple that with Macedonian garrisons and you have the occupation of Greece. The cold hard fact is that Greek unity was granted through subjugation at the edge of a Macedonian sword, and kept in check in the same manner.

[Risto the Great]

Yes indeed.
And this is why the Greeks MUST convince themselves that the Ancient Macedonians were in fact modern Greeks.

... amongst other silly wishful things.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Most Modern Greeks aren't ancient Greeks let alone ancient Macedonians.

[Pelister]

The cold hard fact is that Greek unity was granted through subjugation at the edge of a Macedonian sword, and kept in check in the same manner.

Well argued SoM. This kind of stuff should be archived for future reference.