Why was Alexander the Great so successful? (with Adrian Goldsworthy)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ก.ค. 2024
- Dr. Adrian Goldsworthy and I discuss the incredible careers of Alexander the Great and his father Philip II. Dr. Goldsworthy's "Philip and Alexander: Kings and Conquerors" is available wherever books are sold. See adriangoldsworthy.com for much more on military and Roman history.
Subscribe to the Toldinstone Podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Check out my other channels @toldinstone and @scenicroutestothepast
0:00 Introduction
1:00 Without Philip, no Alexander
5:16 The problems of sources
12:16 Managing those problematic sources
21:10 How Philip II transformed Macedon
26:52 The invention of the Macedonian Phalanx
35:22 The motivations of the Persian crusade
45:42 Why Alexander's army was superior
55:30 Alexander's most impressive victory
1:00:02 Macedonian siege warfare
1:05:38 Alexander's forgotten victories
1:13:42 Would Alexander have conquered China?
1:18:33 Alexander's plans for the future
1:27:10 Comparing Alexander with Julius Caesar
I think what I enjoyed most about Dr. Goldsworthy's book on Phillip and Alexander, was that he had the courage to tell the reader just how little we know for sure about these people. I don't doubt that Alexander and his father really were talented generals and leaders who achieved great things, but it's still important to acknowledge that the fog of history and the dubious source material obscures quite a bit of the certainty of what was really going on. As mentioned in the interview, we don't even know where Phillip was or what he was doing for years at a time.
If the I telnet survives they will have every detail on us, to the most mundane Metadata to our GPS location etcetera.
Well that was wonderful! Goldsworthy is as eloquent a speaker as he is talented a writer; his genuine enthusiasm and emotion is simply delightful. Congrats on scoring such a big guest!
Oh cool I have a shelf full of this guy’s books
I got his "The Complete Roman Army" in my teens and it's one of the things that got me into my fascination with classical history.
Same
Me too!!!
Great
Same
Something I always liked in Total war was the massive advantage troop experience gives, which is very true to history as Adrian makes clear when speaking about the effectiveness of the Macedonian Army. Fearless soldiers are terrifying, and can rout armies effortlessly.
A fantastic historian. His books about the Roman army at war and ancient warfare in general, Caesar, the end of the Western Roman Empire are great. His fiction work is also sublime - well worth a read, Flavius Ferox is an excellent protagonist.
Thanks for the recommendation. I loved the interview; I’ll check out his fiction as well.
I will also thank you for the recommendation, in order to feed the algorithm.
Dr Goldsworthy is a wonderful orator
Yes
This was an amazing conversation, thanks. Another look at the ancient concept of “luck” might be worthwhile.
Yes! Heard that they believed skill did so much but luck and the gods did the rest. I think it was Goldsworthy who recounts Caesar bragging about his luck
Shipley's _The Greek World After Alexander_ (Routledge, 2000) has a whole section on Hellenistic Religion and Philosophy which will almost certainly interest you. It discusses how _fortuna_ was seen as both an abstract notion akin to luck and/or fate, as well as a goddess to be worshipped. It's a strange combination that is hard for the modern mind to wrap around- or for mine at least. That whole book is a goldmine for getting an insight into how the Hellenistic world functioned and its mind set; although it does presuppose a working knowledge of the key people, places, and events of that world.
Fortune was immensely important. I agree, it would makes a fascinating thing to dig into!
What a pleasant surprise. Two of my favorite historians!
loved this podcast and loved the civil discourse on history. A breath of fresh air
I found this to be an incredibly interesting and informative conversation, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I am half Greek and really like listening to western historians views on Alexander. The man Adrian Goldsworthy seemed like he wanted to give a very sincere account of events and I like how he was very insistent on emphasizing in his writings when a detail wasn't an absolute fact or couldn't be proven or was a historians speculation. Of course there is nothing wrong with speculation, Alexander naturally prompts that so much, but it seems he wanted to indicate very clearly what was fact and what was speculation. I would highly recommend to others.
Brilliant interview. I really enjoyed Dr Goldsworthy's book "The Fall of the West". In that he again honestly acknowledged the many gaps we have in our knowledge of the era.
I'm glad to hear someone recognising that author's styles can change radically between works, its something we see nowadays but often its assumed that ancient writers won't change much between one book and another.
What a gift this is. I just started reading his Fall of Carthage - I would love to listen to y'all discuss Hannibal.
That was an amazing interview, thank you!
Ooh, for once I read the book in question before the pod cast!
Incredible episode. Truly a stimulating conversation. Thank you for this
Glad I finally got to make time for this!
What a fun hour and a half. Thanks, Garrett.
Absolutely brilliant episode. I learned & I laughed. Such a great author.
Enjoyed this very much. Thanks
I knew the basics about Alexander and what not. But when I read this book, something about Alexander captured me. Since Goldsworthy’s book was the first official thing on Alexander I’ve read, I’m sure his book had a large influence on how I came to see Alexander. It’s truly mind blowing and the book itself was actually extremely entertaining, not some dry drivel spouting off dry facts and dates. I read it in April of this year and it was a blast through and through. I was a delight to get to hear the author himself talk about one of my favorite topics of antiquity.
Amazing guest I have read so many of his books! Cant wait to listen to this.
This is great stuff, thank you!
Thanks for posting this fascinating interview with Prof. Goldsworthy. Having read with great enjoyment and instruction several of his earlier books, I am delighted to have a look behind the scenes for the production of his new biography of Philip and Alexander -- and, of course, my appetite whetted to read it.
I can’t express how much I enjoy your podcasts, this one in particular. Excellent in every way!
I could’ve listened to 8 hours of this
This was an absorbing and thought provoking podcast. Love it
Great listen. Adrian was insightful and entertaining
Thank you. Great guest.
This was epic! So many new facts and insights - great podcast!!!
Goldsworthy is one of the best if not the best and most engaging contemporary historian writing on the classical Roman and Greek world.
I found Dr. Goldsworthy to be insightful. Glad that you gave him this opportunity to discuss his biography.
Great video. I'll definitely read the book!
Great to see Goldsworthy on your podcast too. Had him back this week myself, and e is a joy to talk to
Thank you so much for this wonderful conversation. I'm a great fan of Rome and it's history.(especially Julius Caesar and Augustus) And also other ancient history.
So I'm very grateful, because I have learned so much, by watching this channel and by reading Adrian Goldsworthy's books.😊🙏
This one is very fascinating thank you very much
Very interesting conversation thank you
I loved every second of this
Great interview.
Lovely. I read his book: “Phillip and Alexander - Kings and Conquerors”
Absolutely wonderful
just purchased the book PHILIP AND ALEXANDER,on Audible , after listening to this great conversation, thank you very much for the depth of your interview.
Great conversation! I have a great desire to add the book to my heap of unread literature 😉
I attended an interesting lecture back in the 1980s at a Jesuit school, comparing Alexander with Armenius (German tribes chieftain). Ancient Greeks, like the Germanic peoples, were very free people who preferred local polities rather than unified empires. Armenius briefly unified the Germanic tribes but his effort did not last long and the Germanic people returned to autonomous tribes much like Native American tribes. Alexander did the same, briefly unified the Greeks, but upon his death they immediately collapsed back into locally autonomous polities closely following the former national boundaries.
"much like Native American tribes"....
No, the native American tribes had numerous cultural and language differences compared to the Germanic speaking tribes.
Someone prickled at that. The problem is it doesn't rebut the point made.
I enjoyed this podcast very much.
Wow! Can't believe I missed this, I loved Goldworthy's books!
Awesome discussion
balancing your mind between fictional information and non-fictional can sometimes be difficult. I think it's wise that the Adrian is capable of writing novels on the side and is able to see a distinct line of separation when it comes to non-fiction 20:23
Fascinating stuff
I'm listening to his biography of Augustus right now. Great author and guest!
Well done indeed perfect guest !
Great podcast
I forgot the name of the battle, but the most impressive of Alexanders victories in my opinion is the one where he gets surrounded on all sides by some tribal enemy. He first completely baffles them with highly coordinated and disciplined maneuvers, then surprises them with a sudden feigned attack, and uses the enemies confusion and disorder to retreat over a river. Also the first recorded instance of artillery being used against troops if I recall correctly.
That was during the Balkan campaign.
Awesome
Well I didn’t expect this! Philip, of whom I knew little, struck me as far more interesting and innovative, constructive and a fully functioning person whereas Alexander - especially those last years where Goldsworthy explains constant war “was all he knew” (how to do) was really one-dimensional. Brilliant, ok, but limited. Laying waste to all before you isn’t as impressive as then ruling wisely, competently or even just maintaining sufficient administration for what you have conquered. Alexander may or may not have had such abilities, we don’t know, he apparently never tried.
But Philip truly is a fascinating character, flawed as all men are, but far more resourceful and inventive than I ever knew, Dr Goldsworthy provided a wonderful introduction to him!
Fantastic get! 👍
I have a few of his books and had no idea he sounded like the brit from the last samurai. I love it!
Now that is *the* question I always wondered about! Thank you 🌺
(I prefer as podcast from the RSS Feed while doing exercises 🏋️♀️)
What a wonderful perspective on the careers of two gigantic figures
Europe had never seen a man like Philip II.
History loves a winner.
With my book St George and the Dragons I faced the same problem: of the man himself we know nothing. What we have are the legends about him and the context they grew up in.
Hegemony Gold: Wars of Ancient Greece. If you watched this video you will love this game.
Its Amazing We know anything at all about a person from that era. Even if it isnt completely accurate
I like the Mr. Beast interpretation of Alexander by Goldsworthy, folding his profits from one campaign into funding the next campaign. Alexander’s version of Squid Games was straight fire.
His father was Philip II who invented the 6 meter sarissas, a Macedonian phalanx formation and his tutor was Aristotales.
What a coup! I loved caesar, life of a colossus
BABE wake up Toldinstone has new Alexander content
lol
😅
For centuries, sraying in power, indeed staying alive sometimes, was the first priority for rulers.
Please also put in metric values where measurements are mentioned
'They're a mess like most of us" god that one hits hard lol
I'm wondering what Adrian Goldsworthy thinks of the Michael Woods documentary "In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great"???
An Amazing Documentary!
I think Aristotle’s teachings and influence guided a system of governance that through altruism made life better for most.
What is your take on the Landmark History series edited by Kurt Raaflaub; the series Editor is Robert Strassler.
I’m struck by how sad it is how he used up the men from the army his father built. He really didn’t seem to care all that much about them. Makes the cynicism of the Diadochi more understandable.
Amazing interview! Though I think one crucial question not answered here is "how did the Macedonians HOLD their conquests?" It's one thing to besiege a town and win and conquer them and take it over. But it's quite another thing to go hundreds of miles east of that town and not have them restore their previous government once you're gone. I assume Alexander garrisoned each town--and yet where would he get so many men? He surely couldn't divert TOO many of his soldiers away from the phalanx and into a leadership role in each mud brick town in the Persian Empire that he conquered--otherwise he would have had dramatic reductions in his army's size by the time he got to Babylon. So how did he do it? Clearly whatever he did was very successful: the fact of Bactria's existence alone proves that his conquering had staying power even far from home, for centuries. I just can't wrap my mind around HOW he did it.
P.S. I love the Alexander Romance! In all its many versions. Especially the one where Alexander's dad was secretly an Egyptian magician.
Can I asked how many man do Alexander have and how long is the supply chain gonna be for him to fight all the way to India if I not wrong is 5000-7000km away? Considering he had enemies within and without, do u think it is even possible for him to go so far?
There is no greater tool for conquering, than the need to conquer.
A great example of how the US totally underestimated the Japanese during the early years of World War II is the Cruiser Astoria during the Battle of Savo Island. The Japanese had penetrated the picket lines at night and surprised the US Navy guarding the transport ships supplying Guadalcanal. The cruiser USS Astoria was lit by Japanese spotlights and began to be struck by shells. She began to return fire when the Captain ran to the bridge and ordered the officers to cease fire. He did not believe the Japanese were capable of pulling off an operation this successful and believed they were receiving friendly fire from US ships - somehow. Needless to say, the USS Astoria was sunk.
Perfect example of the mindset that caused the US to be caught absolutely flat-footed at the start of the war.
accurate information, even if there isn't very much information, is way better than more speculative information in greater amount. Each era could fill in the speculation, but the original accuracy is something that can only be preserved
Hey this is excellent but I would like to offer constructive criticism: when interviewing it is good practice to not constantly “mhm” into the mic at every pause of the guest’s dialogue. It can be extremely annoying to some people, especially when the mic picks up the lower notes and brings them to the front.
It would be better to be quiet and use mhms and the like as a signal you want to jump in and add something.
Otherwise this is great and this is easy to fix
Its not all the time but there are a couple of moments in the interview where it was kind of overwhelming
Explore Golgumbaz,Deccan india!
Summary?
Hey Garrett Ryan, it’s me, Garrett Rye. We have very close names.
I’m sure Goldsworthy knew an immense amount of information on the topic before he undertook this project, but I’m curious exactly how much of the info in the book he learned during the arduous research phase
Considering he's a Roman historian rather than a Greek one, a lot I guess. He says in his book that, coming in as an outsider, he was able to approach this with a fresh mind and not be bogged down in preconceptions.
Was the Alexander really the son of Philip?
In the book "letter of King" It is claimed that he wasn't the son of him.
Macedon taking over an empire in the days of Phillip would be like Macedon taking an empire now
I was hoping he would've dicussed if he think Alexander had something to do with Phillips death.
I think he tried to avoid speculating abt too much
I think one can extrapolate some of the experience of the soldiers after you have read the Anabasis of Cyrus.
You mean Xenophon ?
Kyrou Paideia you mean?
Lol this is sped up, very nice❔
Logistics.
I get the feeling that if Phillip had invaded Persia, he would have accepted something like the offer of half the kingdom. He seemed more practical than Alexander.
Because he was great....
1:13:34 That's so amess! Because it is you who doesn't seem to have a clue.
Obviously when you have weak individuals who can't do it on their own, you help them.
When there is a group of utterly normalcy healthy people, you know that they can take care of themselves and the more they act like they feel you give them special treatment the more it's obvious that they are just testing you in a powerstruggle and you got to cut them loose if they become too much of a bother.
That's just simple logic and humanitarian.
Demosthenes was mostly right about Macedonia. It certainly never was anything as powerful as it had been under Philip or Alexander.
You do not have to say “mhm” every 10 seconds. Let him talk
Alexander was the “hold my beer” kind of guy.
I think he would have been forced to turn west since his men wanted to go home. So perhaps we would be forced to go conquering closer to home. Perhaps......
Alexander's life is a direct refutation to the claim by Yoda that "wars not make one great".
Yoda was saying that fighting in wars doesmn't make a person admirable, so his pithy one liner holds up against Alexander as well.
that guy would look great with a hitler/chaplin moustache.