06-15-2010, 11:29 PM
Quote:To begin with, it is not merely my supposition at all, but the opinion of others too. Alexander II, the elder brother of Philip, who reigned less than two years...
The issue was your categoric statement of uncontested fact that "Anaximenes tells us that Alexander II..." As well, Brunt would disagree at less than a year.
Apologies for glazed eyes but such statements, given that some "glazed eyes" may not be familiar with the furious academic debate that has existed about this, should not go uncontested; particularly when based on evidence as: "[Theopompus] tells us that Philip’s guards were called ‘pezhetairoi’. Theopompus was also known for his wild stories, so he is hardly a reliable source."
I agree, though, that the discussion on sources could merit a paper or a dozen.
Quote:Instead of leaping about - from Philip's "reforms" to the Successors, let us get back on track, and begin by describing the Macedonian 'army' before Alexander II/Philip's reforms..... hopefully the subject of my next post, if we don't digress further !! :wink: :lol:
Not so fast: the original thread was the "Argead Macedonian army". Whilst we might consider what, if any regular, army existed prior to Philip as being Argead, the thread from which it was moved was discussing the late army of Philip and of Alexander. I will be interested to read what you have none the less.
Paralus|Michael Park
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu