![]() Instead, he titled himself as ‘king of Asia’. He did not rise to the throne of Cyrus, did not use the title ‘king of kings’ (so explicitly Plut., Demosthenes 25.3), did not take a dynastic name, and never announced himself successor of Darius III. Nor was his political program limited simply to succeeding the Achaemenids. ![]() While it is true that he was mainly a leader and conqueror, in many situations – chiefly from 330 – he attempted coalition-based solutions that he attained through diplomatic means. A biased picture of Alexander as a limited, brutal invader is contradicted by sources. ![]() Neither position addresses the heart of the matter. ![]() To some he remains a ruthless conqueror with little understanding for the traditions of the peoples he conquered, whereas others see him as a conscious successor of the Achaemenids. An assessment of Alexander’s policies toward Iranians and generally Asians run a full gamut. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |