Alexander The Not-So-Great???

[Athitis]

I was in the official civ3 site downloading the fansite kit, when I decided to check the civ profiles. Paying almost no attendion to the american civ (first civ's page to pop out) i selected the Greeks. After having read the whole text, I couldn't believe what the people of Firaxis were saying about the Greeks. They don't take anything seriously and the content is offensive, at least for me. It lacks seriousness. It even has a link to a site named "History House-an irrelevant history magazine(!!!)" that's completely out of place. Having checked the other civs, the content on their pages was just as it should be.

I don't know what to say. Plz spend a couple of minutes or so and read the civ description (and the text of the link it provides). And tell me your opinion. Am i mistaken...?

[Panzer]

Hmmm, the style is definitely different. I wouldn't be surprised if the descriptions weren't written by one person.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

The Greeks and the Egyptians were the first two Civs written, and at that time I was writing them with a definite ear towards humor. The later civs were almost exclusively pulled from the Civilopedia texts. Since we went roughly chrolonogically, The Americans were basically the last civ to be written.

I would have liked to lampoon all of them, but it ended up taking a lot longer than I expected.

Dan

[Athitis]

You did? Strange. When I visited the Civ3 site before the game was released, the description was completely different. Basically the description texts are the same ones like in civilipedia....but what the link has to do in the description? it leads to a less-than-serious site with-not-so-hilarious content.

[vmxa1]

Athitis, you repeated yourself. The man said he did it and meant it as a joke. If it is not funny to you thats fine, but really it is only a game, let it go.

[Athitis]

Yes u right. sry!

[Lucarse]

Hey Everybody, Alexander was freaking Macedonian!!!.

He only employed greek mercenaries and they made up only 30-40% of his total armies.

Does the description mention this?.

[MarkG]

/me refuses the temptation to answer on whether Alexander was a freaking non-Greek Macedonian

[Ethelred]

Well Mark, to the other Greeks of the time Alexandre's father was a barbarian and not a Greek. So I can see why people might be confused.

[Athitis]

In fact Alexander WAS Greek. The Macedonia was(is) greek it just didn't follow the same evolution with the southern city states (Athens, Sparta etc). However he *is*Greek. Even the ancient Geeks allowed him to participate in the Olympics by proving his Greek origin.

The land of the Macedonia north of Greece has nothing to do with him.

[MarkG]

oh well...

Originally posted by Ethelred
Well Mark, to the other Greeks of the time Alexandre's father was a barbarian and not a Greek. So I can see why people might be confused.

http://history.macedonia.gr/faq.htm#13

the fact that a single time, a single macedonian was referred by a single athenian as a barbarian at a time of war does not mean that that was the general belief for the all the macedonians....


it is as if i call you an idiot, and someone after lots of years finds this thread he will argue that apolytoners thought Ethelred as an idiot

[Lucarse]

I dodn't want to tell you mighty greeks how to suck eggs but....

At the time of Alexander 356-323 BC 'Greece' was a set of 'states' who were almost at perpetual war with each other (Sparta Thrace, Macedon and the several Agean nations).
'Greece' at this time was mainly confined to the Peloponnse.

And as for Alexander taking part in the Olympics are you on acid? when did he do this?, at 16 he succeded his father phillip and went straight to war with the thracians (after beating those guys up he turned towards greece who paid him off) then after a breather he went after the persians... so i guees between this he put on a tracksuit and did the decathlon?.

The only phrase you could use to describe this area at the time would be Hellenistic but that is more of an economic and cultural term.
This state of affairs lasted right upto the point where 'Greece' as the country was annexed by the Roman Empire. (it may interfere with your ideology but there are the facts)

So in the terms of modern Greece yes he is 'greek' but at the time of Alexander the distiction was much more pronounced.

I have the greatest respect for greek culture having studied it in depth for many years as part of my MA and i certainly am not trying to be little it, but i have to point out the world was slightly different in them days.

'My words are backed by an education'

[MarkG]

without a rant...

At the time of Alexander 356-323 BC 'Greece' was a set of 'states'

with the same language, gods, names, culture, etc, etc, etc....

who were almost at perpetual war with each other

not always and of course they were united in common causes(persian wars)....

when did he do this?, at 16 he succeded his father phillip

actually, he was 20(336BC, born in 356BC)

and it wasnt Alexander the Great that took part in the Olympics, but Alexander I (ruled 498-454BC)

[Lucarse]

As far as being united for common causes, the unity always came at a price, usually monetary.

Lets not forget the battle of marathon, how late were Greek 'allies' the spartans? answer : very!

And I stand corrected i mixed up the first military command under alexander and the point where he was declared regent after the assinantion of Phillip II.

anyway he was from Macedon. nyah pokes tongue out

'My words are backed with random dates'

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by MarkG


the fact that a single time, a single macedonian was referred by a single athenian as a barbarian at a time of war does not mean that that was the general belief for the all the macedonians....

Well I will buy it that the contemporary Greeks didn't call Phillip a barbarian. However, he is STILL called Phillip the Barbarian much of the time. I am only saying that I can see why others are confused about it.

However if you had posted a link for THIS Macedonian site about Phillip you would see a somewhat different point of view.

http://www.mymacedonia.net/history/philip.htm

it is as if i call you an idiot, and someone after lots of years finds this thread he will argue that apolytoners thought Ethelred as an idiot

I have been called an idiot here allready. You are too late.