>300 vs 2 million
How did they do it?
300 Spartans [spoiler]plus 1000 Thebans and 2500 other Greeks[/spoiler]
grinding
Pecs
>>75957
Yes.
The magic of hollywood
>>75957
No.
>>75957
By keeping it 300, like the Romans
>>75957
It was more like 5000 vs 200,000 max the defenders had a very good defensible position homeland advantage and a group of elite soldiers
>>75957
Xerxes didn't look like that.
>>75991
Spartans were cowards
>>76069
>Implying it wasn't 300 bitches
>Implying they weren't the Trojans
>>76085
Also, have you ever seen the pass in question? You could stall any number of troops indefinitely there.
>>76130
Next you'll be telling me the immortals weren't demons
>>75957
>How did they do it?
did what? They lost at Thermopylae
retard propoganda made people believe it was a victory
Do what? You realize that they lost right?
>>76085
on the last day it was down to 300 Spartans and a few hundred Thespians though
>>76085
>5000 vs 200,000
Still a huge disparity
>>75991
Thespians, not Thebans
>>75957
How did they lose and die, you mean?
>>76275
whats impressive is the Battle of Salamis or Battle of Plataea
the only thing impressive about hotgates is how propaganda works and how gullible people are to believe it was something glorious.
If you know little about greek warfare nad majority of your knowledge comes from the movie 300, ofc you will find it impressive, I suggest you to research it more.
Even Victor Davis Hansen, a guy famous for his euro centrism and circlejerking admits hotgates is overrated.
>>76275
It would have been embarrassing if they didn't hold it for at least that long, rather than impressive, considering the terrain.
This isn't even one of the most impressive last stands in history.
>>76018
kek
>/his/ being logical and rational
Whew lad, this is a surprise. I always cringe when the average idiot says "Woooooow hurr hao did doze 300 brave spartanz win against millionz of persians?" which is pretty much OP, but /his/ knows better...
>>75957
They lured them into the hot gates where their nummers count for nothing
>>75957
They didnt
Have you watched the movie? They all died
>>75957
they didn't, they lost
>>76461
He got his ass whopped.
>>76507
We made him look like a right mug desu senpai
>>76018
underrated comment.
>you have all my keks
>>76673
who are you quoting?
>>76258
Pretty sure there was like a 1000 other Thebans who the Spartans forced to stay with them because the Thebans had yet to prove themselves true warriors. I counted the Thespians underneath the other Greeks. There was more Thespians than Thebans. The Thespians stayed on their own accord.
>>76085
>200,000 Persian soldiers
Faux historical bullshit time huh? At most there was 40-60,000 Persian soldiers.
>>76275
>three days
Try a month, pussies.
>>75957
Very carefully.
>>75957
Steroids and CGI
>1 vs 30
How did he do it?
>>76018
holy shit nice comment here let me suck your dick
>>76895
>According to historian Arrian, Ariobarzanes had a force of 4000 infantry and 700 cavalry who faced a Macedonian force of over 10,000. Encyclopædia Iranica suggests a number of defenders of just 700 (or 2000 elsewhere) men
oh u iran
>>77000
You fucking gayass homo.
You had trips and you wasted on that?
>>76966
>400 bullets
Pssh
Madness.
>>75957
They didn't. They were killed to the last man and only briefly delayed Xerxes' advance.
>>76874
Pull that out your ass? Persians regularly fielded armies >100000
>>76895
I doubt the numbers, but
>"[The Persians]...Fought a memorable fight... Unarmed as they were, they seized the armed men in their embrace, and dragging them down to the ground... Stabbed most of them with their own weapons."
>>77075
>regularly field armies of >100000
Stop bullshiting, Herodotus. There's a reason why you are known as the Father of Lies.
>>75957
Those well-oiled abs were worth 50,000 men
>>76874
actually the 200000 was probably the total number of soldiers in the entire empire
>>75957
They didn't.
>>77075
If you think the entire Persian military would logistically be concentrated against the Greeks, you are insane. They had to maintain troops at bases and garrisons or muster points across the empire in various provinces to maintain civil order and stability.
Did Xerxes take a massive invasion force with him to invade Greece? Yes. Did he send his entire fucking army and all of his men against the entirety of the rearguard lead by Leonidas at Thermopylae?
No. Did he have to garrison soldiers in various points in Macedonia, Greece, and Antolia? Yes he did. Modern estimates even say "between 70,000 to 300,000" men for the entire expeditionary military force. But that doesn't mean the Greeks fought 300,000 men and the majority were pulled out when Xerxes left, including the garrison forces in aforementioned Thrace and Macedonia.
The Persian army defeated at Marathon was also implied now to possibly be outnumbered by the combined Greek forces.
>>77075
The accepted number seems to be between 700 and 2000. As another anon pointed out, the Persian Gate was a battle site in a very small and tightly bunched ravine and gully leading to plains where Persepolis is situated behind it several miles eastwards.
There is no way Persian calvary played any major role in the month long delaying action by the Persians and most accounts say they hurled missiles, rocks, and arrows at the Macedonian and Greek soldiers, inflicting huge causalities.
Remember, this is after all three major battles that Darius III and Alexander fought and Persian forces were broken and low on manpower. Ariobarzanes was literally scrapping together scattered remnants of the regular army and the Companions for that final stand.
They were badly outnumbered in any case.
>>77423
This is the main battle site where the Persian Gates are located.
>>75957
The Battle of Thermopylae was just a delaying action that had little real impact on Xerxes army. The main engagement was at Salamis, where there were tens of thousands of Greek sailors.
And even that was only an indecisive victory for Greece. The Persian land campaign lasted a full year longer until General Mardonius was killed in battle.
>>76018
will of god
>50 thousand versus 1,000,000
>pitched battle in a wide open field
How did he do it?
>>76018
As the picture shows, he clearly has the birds on his side, and there are several hundred billion of them.
>>77645
>1,000,000
Not well against 700 apparently.
>>77645
>50,000 vs 1,000,000
hurrdurr ur estimitz r clearly conservitif it was alexandr alone aginst 1,000 billion dirty tusken raiders
>>76018
Do Iranians have any great victories against overwhelming forces?
>>77778
/pol/tard detected
>in before samefag
>>77797
nice meme memelord
>>77821
Parthians won cause Crassius decided it was a good idea to march a shitload of men in heavy army through a desert with little supplies
![latest[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/wzMBVEl.jpg "latest[1].jpg")
>>77745
>Do Iranians have any great victories against overwhelming forces?
Sure, though I'm not too familiar with their history.
First one that springs to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carrhae
>>76130
That film is racist as fuck, imagine the uproar if the Iranians made a film depicting the founding fathers of America as homosexual demons.
>>77929
90% of great battles on history were won because one guy made the classic mistake of not doing a single intelligent thing
>>77745
Carrhae, as someone else mentioned
Iran-Iraq War
The Naderian Wars
Both Sasanian-Roman Wars under the rule of Shapur I
>>77745
>>77821
>>77929
>>77998
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Edessa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Barbalissos
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Carrhae_%28296%29
Iranians have plenty of wins against Romans and Byzantines but finding specific ones where they were massively outnumbered like at Edessa, Samara or Carrahe are harder.
>>77008
Iranica is an american project.
>>77929
Hey you have to understand the context, he was desperate to show up Caesar with his own edgy military victories. Caesar was just as rash in Gaul, he happened to be fighting a less organized enemy.
>>78075
You don't know the start of it
http://iranpoliticsclub.net/history/300/index.htm
>This reminds me of American Ku Klux Klan, Neo Nazis and Aryan Brotherhood who claim they are White Aryans! These illiterate morons do not have a shred of racial and anthropological knowledge! American White Supremacists are of the White "Anglo-Saxon" race and by no means they are Aryan! On the other hand mostly Northern Iranians are of the White "Aryan" Race. So these bozos call themselves Aryans, which are not, yet they call us Rag Heads whom we are the true white Aryans! These idiots still assume that we are Arabs! Typical Redneck illiterate Americans! What do you expect?
Since my thread failed to garner any attention and since we're on the topic of Persian battles:
Who was the best Persian Emperor of the Sassanids?
>500 vs 1
>how did he do it
>>78132
It doesn't help that we have plenty of greek and roman written documents, but very few persian ones and they mostly don't care about numbers or actual details as they care about making it fabulous and epic.
>>78223
Finnish Memes
>>78075
>the founding fathers as homosexual demons
If I recall correctly from this history course few semesters ago.
1] the Spartans were very well disciplined and trained for war starting at a very young age.
2] I believe they used intel that the other army was coming and they knew to hold them off at this cliff passageway or some shit. Basically using a chokepoint man for man they outperformed the enemy.
I loved hearing about the phalanxes and how farmers were the soldiers and they had to wait for summer.
![iranf14[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/K4gdRMO.jpg "iranf14[1].jpg")
Iranian F-14s kicked loads of ass against Iraq.
The US did everything in its power to sabotage them as its staff left the country, but they managed to get them working anyway, and used them for everything from bombing to acting as makeshift AWACS platforms.
The Iraqi air force became so scared of them that just painting them with an F-14's radar would make them dump their bombloads and run away.
Course, you can argue that this is just superior equipment, but that never stops us from jerking off about europeans gunning down loads of natives. And in any case, operating those complex and expensive jets while the US does everything it can to sabotage you is no small feat.
>>78231
No, it has to do with the fact that the Arabs and later Turkic and Mongol incursions into traditional Persian heartlands of Iran and Iraq destroyed all written records.
Although most of what Persian Emperors attested to their military victories are usually corroborated and confirmed by Greek and Byzantine sources from their times.
>>78262
>1) the Spartans were well disciplined and trained for war starting at a very young age.
So were the Persians.
>>78285
Plus it's not like the Iraqis were flying biplanes. They had soviet jets AND covert US support.
>>78220
>In rekting the romans
Shapur I who defeated three (3) roman emperors
>In rekting the romans even more but then failing like a bitch
Koshraw II or Parviz, who occupied most of the eastern roman empire but was ultimately defeated by Heraclius and assasinated by his own son in a coup d'etat
>Overall best
Koshraw I or Anushirvan who apart from being the rival of Justinian and rekting romans (though not on the level of the other two) also conquered Yemen and kinda reformed all the empire with better administration, laws etc. Your classic lawgiver king. Still remembered in iranian tradition as a pretty good and just ruler.
Imo it's the 3rd one but the 3 emperors thing of Shapur makes him pretty flashy
>>78285
The F-14 is a badass jet.
>>78357
>No, it has to do with the fact that the Arabs and later Turkic and Mongol incursions into traditional Persian heartlands of Iran and Iraq destroyed all written records.
That's exactly what I said, just not the cause because everyone with knowledge or common sense knows it, and saying "muslim" in this place is starting a fire.
>>78373
What about Shapur II who was crowned while still in utero and has one of the longest recorded reigns of any ruler in history?
>>78357
>So were the Persians
Most of the guys in Xerxe's (or Darius) army were not persian at all. People forgets this often.
>>75957
Can we all agree spartans are meme warriors?
>>78262
>>78442
Persian training:
>The training of the Iranian nobility was arduous. As a youth, the Iranian was schooled-in companies of fifty-in running, swimming, horse grooming, tilling the land, tending the cattle, making various handicrafts, and getting accustomed to standing at watch; he would be trained in the arts of the chase (both afoot and on horseback), archery, throwing the spear and javelin, and of sustaining forced marches in unfriendly climate. >At twenty he started his military profession which lasted till the age of fifty as a foot soldier or a rider. The elitist groups were trained for both tasks.
>Thus, Darius says proudly: "Trained am I both with hands and with feet. As a horseman I am a good horseman. As a bowman I am a good bowman both afoot and on horseback. As a spearman I am a good spearman both afoot and on horseback".
>>76018
10/10 m8
>>78435
Worthy of mention of course, but anon asked for the best and I don't think you can defend he is better than the other three.
The Persians capitalized on cavalry and quick offensive tactics, as most of near-by Mesopotamian and Anatolian civilizations they conquered were mostly and geographically flat, making the use and specialty of cavalry very important with how one would take over clay. And they didn't really care about regular infantry (which most of which in the campaign were likely foreign troops send as tribute by their subjugated nations), as their purpose was traditionally to serve as support to their cavalry in their previous campaigns.
Greece, however, is mostly mountainous -- especially Southern Greece (Boeotia, Attica, Peloponnese) where most of the relevant historic Hellenic shit occurred and also where most of the battles were fought in the war -- that isn't friendly to the necessities needed for a nation / region to develop a socially emphasized horse culture, and therefor, the numbers and expertise for a nation's military to develop cavalry (except the Thessalonians and Macedonians -- both of which sided with the Persians once they knocked on their door-step). So instead, most city states focused their military-might on heavy-infantry and / or naval power.
Once the Persians got to Boeotia, the terrain restricted their cavalry use, making them mostly rely on their ground-troops (which were lightly armored and more geared to mobile offensive tactics) that put them in a shit-odds in facing up against a rival infantry force that were renown for being heavily armored and emphasized always sticking together in tight-formation -- who were also on the defense and specifically picked a tightly enclosed spot that they knew gave them an advantage before the Persian arrival.
>>78491
doesn't explain how Alexander stormed into Persia and btfo the entire fucking empire inside 5 years
>>78373
>>78435
>>78486
Shapur I defeated 3 Roman Emperors and inflicted some of the most painful military defeats and embarrassments to the Roman Empire in its entire existence.
Shapur II reigned for over 70 years, was basically a baby in his mother's womb during his coronation, and presided over the first golden age of the Sassanid Empire.
Also criminally underrated is Kadevh I, Khosrau Parviz's father and Khosrau II Parviz's great-great grandfather. Not only was this guy a fantastically prestigious military commander and general, he reigned twice, for fuck long times, and blew the fuck out of the White Huns hard while fighting and later settling peace agreements with the Byzantines while being Justin (or was it Justinan's?) rival.
>>78373
>tfw sassanids were overrun by muslims
World would have been better with no islam and zoroastrianism sticking around
>>78511
Because Alexander is Macedonian and both he and his dad focused heavily as much on cavalrymen as they did refining the Hoplite with the sarissas.
Also as pointed out, Alexander never actually fully rivaled the Achaemenid Empire at its peak and greatest extent when he defeated it and he had his own set backs of humiliation like at the Battle of the Persian Gate. And the same Greek/Macedonian/Hellenstic focus on Hoplitse would get BTFO by Iranian cataphracts, archers, and Roman legionaries about century later.
>>78540
Kavadh was both Justin and Justinian's counterpart, though I would not say rival. Relations with the romans were not that bad while Kavadh ruled, as Procopius says, and Khosraw I was about to be adopted by Justin (it didn't happen though. Khavad was also philo-mazdakite, if not mazdakite himself.
PD: Only Khoshrau II is Parviz though I suppose you know this and it's a typo
![Army1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/R3hbKKe.jpg "Army1[1].jpg")
>>78511
Probably because he was the greatest military mind in recorded history, leading an army capable of complex tactical evolutions while wielding sarissas, which is a feat never accomplished before or since. Later phalanges could field a formation which, like its predecessor, was both invincible and irresistable from the front, but lacked the discipline to perform fluid maneuvers with such a seemingly inflexible formation, a feat which no one but Phillip II accomplished. This was, in turn, supported by heavily armored cavalry centuries before heavily armored cavalry became a thing.
Macedon fielded an army of unprecedented strength commanded by a leader of unprecedented brilliance. Don't sell it short by scoffing at their opponents.
>>78540
>>78486
>>78435
>>78373
>>78075
So the best are:
Ardashir - Founder
Shapur I - first successor and beating three Roman Emperors
Shapur II - longest reign + golden age
Kadevh I - reigned twice, removed Huns
Khosrau I - one of the last great Emperors; last golden age of Persia plus major administrative and economic reforms
Khosrau II - great military commander, almost rebuilt the Persian Empire to its glory like in the Achaemenid days but lost in the end
>>78223
Took credit for all finnish kills in his sector. His commander went along because people need heroes.
>>78598
The same Hoplite focused army would get btfo without Alexander, because he would have adapted the army to changing conditions.
Keep in mind that he died at 33 years old. His career only lasted 12 years.
The only real setback Alexander suffered he brought on himself by choosing to march through the desert on the way back from India.
Persian gates were still a total and decisive victory for Alexander.
>>78655
Good mention too for Bahram Chobin (technically not Sassanian as he was not from the family). He was a general during Hormizd IV (son of the first khoshrau, father of the second) and basically saved Iran from the Turks and removed them like a champ.
But then Hormizd wanted to remove him from his position so Bahram revolted and became king. Khoshrau II also revolted at the same time but Bahram was stronger and Khoshrau had to flee to Constantinople to seek help.
>>78704
m8 there is Alexander and then there is everybody else. Caesar himself wept at the sight of Alexander's statue.
>>78776
>The same Hoplite focused army would get BTFO without Alexander
>because he would have had adapted the army to changing conditions
Groundless speculation.
>>78704
>Don't start this shit. Hannibal, Caesar, Cyrus the Great, Trajan, etc...are better then him.
I'd like to hear more about why I am wrong.
>>78776
>The same Hoplite focused army would get btfo without Alexander, because he would have adapted the army to changing conditions.
They were phalangites, not hoplites, right?
>>78776
>Persian gates were still a total and decesive victory for Alexander.
After losing several thousand men to a few hundred to less then two thousand near dead guys throwing rocks, it was a humiliation, regardless of victory.
And Ariobarznes gets immortalized in Persian culture to this day thanks to said last stand.
>>78834
I'd like hear why he's the greatest first.
>>78817
>m8 there is Alexander and then there is everybody else. Caesar himself wept at the sight of Alexander's statue.
Hannibal didn't think he was as good as Alexander either, IIRC. Though he considered himself #2. (With good reason seeing how he walked all over superior Roman armies over and over for his entire career)
>>78810
Yeah he's up there, but I think Kavadh is top tier, if nothing for the fact he gets rid of a corrupt prime minister/vizier, settled a peace with both Justin and Justinian and dabbled in proton-communism for awhile.
>>75957
A better question would have been if the Spartans and co. weren't betrayed by that faggot cripple how long could they have held out?
>>75957
>How did they do it?
Because Greeks were white back then and Persians were not.
Whites pretty much always beat non-whites in war, and I'd love to see any of you limpdick mods or janitors try to ban me for stating simple facts.
as an Iranian I love this thread.
I wish the arabs, muslims, turks and mongols didn't try to destroy our culture and history as they did.
Also I hate the Qajar faggots.
>>78832
It's not groundless at all you daft cunt. Alexander rebuilt his army from the ground up multiple times, creating new divisions and deploying his forces in different formations. Macedonians, Greek mercenaries, Persian cavalry, Indian skirmishers, and more were all incorporated into his army. Anything he saw used effectively in battle he would have adapted in superior form by the next fight. If anyone had a shot at winning with lopsided odds it was Alexander.
>>78924
>Iranian shitting on Islam
Hope you like getting V&
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kQwMbJpBTs
>>78929
>It's not groundless at all
Yes it is, you no limits fallacy abusing autistic man-child. The tactical inflexibilty of both Hoplite formations and phalangites are inferior to the Legionaries.
>Huheuheuh if Alexander was still around he'd beat anyone heheheheheheh amirite guys?
>>78863
>several thousand men
[citation needed]
If Thermopylae taught you anything it should be the significance of a strong position. Keep in mind that Alexander never fought a single defensive battle in his entire campaign. He almost always had the worse position relative to the opposition. And he always found a way to win. There was no need for moral victories or heroic defeats.
>>77232
Dont forget to mention that Egypt was actively revolting throughout this time period.
>>78966
I don't live in that shithole senpai
>>78911
>A better question would have been if the Spartans and co. weren't betrayed by that faggot cripple how long could they have held out?
Movies aren't real life.
Especially not that movie.
>>77645
Your numbers dont quite jive with arrians HIGH estimates
>>78924
You were not lucky with monarchs, specially with all those turkic dynasties. Even the great ones like Abbas or Nadir were also pretty cruel and brutal.
>>79000
>losses:
>heavy
>Persians are recorded as not even losing a single man in the first day of fighting alone in both Greek, Macedonian and Roman sources
Retard
>>78980
>The tactical inflexibilty of both Hoplite formations and phalangites not led by Alexander are inferior to the Legionaries
Fixed that for you Roman nuthugger
If Alexander lived another 40 years there would have been no such thing as the Roman Empire.
>>79013
>calling your motherland a shithole
Jesus Christ, have some shame
>>79017
Late on the second day of battle, however, as the Persian king was pondering what to do next, he received a windfall; a Trachinian named Ephialtes informed him of the mountain path around Thermopylae and offered to guide the Persian army.[87] Ephialtes was motivated by the desire of a reward.[87] For this act, the name of Ephialtes received a lasting stigma, his name coming to mean "nightmare" in the Greek language and becoming the archetypal traitor in Greek culture.[88]
[87] - Herodotus VII, 213
[88] - Tegopoulos, entry for Εφιάλτης
>>79045
>heavy
looking for a number boss, not an adjective
>>79045
>Persians are recorded as not even losing a single man in the first day of fighting alone in both Greek, Macedonian and Roman sources
and yet in a few weeks they lost the pass with everyone holding it
delays never mattered to Alexander. He spent half a year besieging Tyre for god's sake
>>76157
Is this the only way into Greece or smth
>>79100
>in a few weeks
>inflicted embarrassing losses where entire platoons were lost in the first fight in the first day for over a month while massively out numbered
Nice attempt at revisionism though.
>>79064
There is no conceivable way the Imperium Romanum gets off the ground with a united Macedonian empire still existing circa 250 BC, which would have been the case if Alexander had lived long enough to conquer the Arabian peninsula and raise a blood heir. Hell it might not have happened if either of his sons had survived into adulthood. So basically you have Cassander to thank for Rome and the rise of Christianity.
>>79033
The safavi weren't "turkic" in the sense you think. Persianate culture was so strong that most invaders were persianized than the other way.
But yeah, super unlucky for ~2000 years give or take some of the based Sassanids and Seculids (who were fkn greek). No wonder most of us resort to random acts of Zoroastrianism and shit.
>>79081
I really love my heritage. I hate the regime in the country.
>>79047
>If Alexander lived another 40 years there would have been no such thing as as the Roman Empire.
Hellenophiles actually believe this.
>>79064
Azeris are turkic on my book as long as they speak turkic m8, you can be turkic and 100% iranian, no problem. Ismail while not being the most turkic man genetically (one just has to look at the portraits made by the painters) wrote his poetry in turk. In general early Safavids also relied hard on turkem specially for the military (though Abbas changed this).
>>79135
Can you give me a rundown of Persian casualties in the war up until that point m8?
I think it's safe to say they were 'heavy'.
>>79168
Why not?
>>79107
they couldn't go by water because triremes were shitting all over the persians so basically the quickest way was through the buttsex path of spartans
>>79166
No, the Safavids were ethnically Iranian from day one. The earliest attested to and verified ancestor was a Persian ambassador and low level sufist master to the Turks.
>>79178
Azeris are ethnically Iranian, you stupid mother fucker. Their language got turned Turkish, mother fucker. There is reason why Azeris are referred to as "donkeys" in Iran to this day for turning their back on their Iranian kin.
The Safavid dynasty was Azeri and Kurdish, ethnically Iranian. Not Turkic, Turkish.
>>79168
Rome would have been another Macedonian vassal state, nothing more.
It is one of the great 'what ifs' of history.
>>79218
>>79047
Alexander fanboys are the dumbest people in existence.
>>79206
Chill man
Anyway look how sad this list gets after the Sassanids. The names turn muslim and turkic and we never get our heritage back.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kings_of_Persia#Argead_.28Macedonian.29_dynasty_.28330.E2.80.93309_BC.29
>>79166
>I really love my heritage. I hate the regime in the country.
It's still your homeland, and deserves a healthy modicum of respect regardless of who is running its government.
>>79047
>If Alexander lived another 40 years there would have been no such thing as the Roman Empire.
>Muh Alexander
>Muh Hoplites
>Muh Phalanges
>>79263
The Sassanid dynasty had descendents living up to the 15th century. There were plenty of short lived Persian and native Iranian dynasties before the Turks came and until the Safavids showed up.
Honestly
Hannibal > Alexander
>>78169
That's hilarious.
He has to admit that the Hollywood is a bit justified in adjusting the Immortals for a modern day audience, however.
>>79271
It's a garbage state filled with racists, morons and shitpackers. There is no liberalism (in the classic sense, not political one), there is no free speech and free thought, no rights or equality, nothing.
That region cannot sustain or handle democracy because it has never had it. I wasn't raised this way, so, for me I think the government and its agents are cunts... and most of the people too as they're uneducated, underfed, close-minded and generally sickly. It sucks.
>>79299
elaborate and explain pls
I know the general population was persian and iranic, for sure, and the rulers didn't really erase persianate culture... it's just a shame we've had so many garbage-tier rulers.
>>79320
One argument is that Alexander was literally a genocidal maniac and has been whitewashed by the annals of history. Hannibal wasn't so much - he was a based general and commander.
>>77040
>Baby's first trips
Who gives a shit, it's just numbers.
>>76673
Lurk more, reddit.
>>79263
>>79206
The origin of the Safavids thing may be complicated from a western perspective (an uninformed westener expects the leader of a turkmen group to be a turkmen). But it's actually kinda simple and basically what the iranian said. Dunno where he saw that kurdish thing though. First time I hear it.
Phillip II > Alexander
>>79276
Seleucus was an mere infantry general in Alexander's army, and even that was sufficient to make him a king after Alexander died.
Gives you some idea just how godly this man was. His underlings became supreme, empire founding monarchs after his death.
>>79382
fuck you man
it's h i s t o r y
>>77645
If those numbers are true, I actually super want to know how he did it. I'm not that historically gifted, but did he pull a Genghis with cavalry and Mongol-esque trickery, or was it some Macedonian bullshit-war-magic?
>>79352
>It's a garbage state filled with racists, morons and shitpackers. There is no liberalism (in the classic sense, not political one), there is no free speech and free thought, no rights or equality, nothing.
>That region cannot sustain or handle democracy because it has never had it. I wasn't raised this way, so, for me I think the government and its agents are cunts... and most of the people too as they're uneducated, underfed, close-minded and generally sickly. It sucks.
Generalizations are never true. Some of the brightest thinkers have ever come out of Iran (Hafez, Rumi, Ferdowsi, al-Khwarizmi, et al.). Even today, Iranians form a disproportionate amount of scientists, engineers, etc.
As for the repressed nature of civil liberties, it is due to people with your mindset that it is still like this. Instead of giving up on your people, help make the situation better; for example, you can teach there, or you could start a grass roots movement. Complaining about a problem and renouncing affiliation with it doesn't suddenly make it go away, it requires effort. If more people like Mossadegh lived in Iran, it would be a drastically different place today.
I'm Persian and have a lot of respect for Alexander. I just wish he didn't fucking burn Persepolis' library.
>>79467
M8 Seleucus got lucky as hell
>>75957
they all died tbf
>>79352
desu all iranian's I've met (and none of them was a persian-american, they were all from the islamic republic) were charming people
>>79352
>One argument is that Alexander was literally a genocidal maniac and has been whitewashed by the annals of history
This is completely backwards. If anything he has been blackwashed by the slanderers in Athens and elsewhere. Cassander's effect on history still influences badly informed novices like you. Alexander was probably the most humane world-conqueror in history. He would have considered modern military engagements a compendium of atrocities. The cowardice of contemporary 'commanders' and soldiers would have disgusted him.
>>79455
>getting stabbed by your male concubine
>>79516
Sources conflict greatly on the burning of Persepolis.
Some say Alexander burned it for revenge, or a woman convinced him to do it when he was drunk. Some say that it was his soldiers, frothing at the chance to get payback for Athens, as well as some gold for themselves, and he tried to put out the fires along with his men.
I personally think it would be somewhat out of character, as Alexander had a great deal of respect for the Achaemenids, visiting Cyrus' tomb (he was a fan of Cyropaedia), adopting Persian customs and dress, etc.
Plus, it doesn't help that the sources are all Greek, either.
>>79630
I see, thanks for the information.
Hellenization was a good thing, anyways.
>>79516
He was a genocidal lunatic. More comparable to Hitler and Chenggis than most wanna give on.
>>79511
>Generalizations are never true. Some of the brightest thinkers have ever come out of Iran (Hafez, Rumi, Ferdowsi, al-Khwarizmi, et al.). Even today, Iranians form a disproportionate amount of scientists, engineers, etc.
I know, we're good, industrious people. That's why this regression pisses me off. Also pisses me off that the muslims and arabs take credit for the "islamic golden age" - something that never really happened in an organized way and was by and large pushed for by Iranians and some Turkics.
And I'm not a Shah supporter whatsoever but Mossadegh wasn't a "great" guy exactly. My gramps explained the background to his moves and it was shady. There are no good guys in Iran's recent past, just layers of dickheads.
>>79560
I say this will all respect to Iranians in Iran... as long they understand basic human rights (for afghans in Iran, for gays, bahaii, apostates, the poor, women, etc.) and the basic tenets of liberalism I'm totally cool with them. But the people you and I meet and circlejerk about are the top x%, the educated, the open-minded. In the backwater deserts of Iran there are shit people too, with servants and this and that. Sucks.
>>76018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuGn2AALYHU
>>79706
good post, I agree.
>>79467
Ptolemy was the biggest winner of them all though
>>79630
We will never know the truth of it. A popular misunderstanding is that Alexander showed up, looted everything, and then burned it down. That is false. He spent an entire winter in Persepolis. He burned it down on the way out and great regretted his actions later, especially upon returning there after the march back from India.
One thing that may have influenced his decision was the fate of a large number of Greek slave craftsman, who were able to flee Persepolis just before Alexander arrived.
Meeting Alexander on the road, they were a dreadful sight. Many of them had been mutliated by their Persian masters to prevent them from escaping: these would have one or both feet missing. Others had had their eyes cut out, their fingers taken off, and so on. After having had his wounded forces cut up in their tents by the Persians who had come up from behind him, Alexander's feelings can be imagined. In the moments before he set fire to Persipolis, he may have remembered his dead comrades and the mangled troop of Greek slaves.
He settled the latter as best he could in one of his new cities.
>>79630
All that can be explained by realpolitik, Alexander was an intelligent and flexible man. He did the same in egypt and virtually everywhere. He was completely capable of plundering Persepolis for vengeance and for better morale of his soldiers, while keeping the "achaemenid heir" mask.
Even if we decide he had perfect good intentions and he didn't have anything against persians, his troops did. It was necessary to destroy Persepolis and, if he did it by accident, that's what would be out of character since he was too intelligent for that and before everything else he was a greek leading the greeks in a vengeance war against persians.
>>79674
>He was a genocidal lunatic.
This is plain nonsense. Alexander abhorred senseless slaughter. Almost all the massacres perpetrated by his army were a direct result of him being injured or incapacitated and unable to check the vengeance-taking of his forces.
>>78717
[Citation needed]
>>79778
Probably had something to do with him being the most intelligent and capable of Alexander's officers after Krateros and Hephaestion, who were both dead shortly after Alexander.
>>79899
>him being the most intelligent and capable of Alexander's officers
probably didn't hurt that he commissioned the histories either though
>>80003
I'll take his account over the ones polluted by Cassander m8.
Perdiccas showed his incompetence in the clearest possible way.
>>76018
>>75957
Just like most of greek history, a myth.
>yfw you realize Alexander spent 12,000 talents on the funeral of Hephaestion, something like 3.5 billion dollars in today's money
to put that in perspective Darius offered Alexander 10,000 talents to fuck off and leave his Persian empire intact
>>80103
He must've given Alexander some ridiculous head
>>80103
Like I said, he's a lunatic nutjob narcissist megalomaniac.
Had he done his deeds 500 years later, with better records, he'd be likened to Tamerlane.
>>79846
He also realized the need for his new Persian-Zoroastrian subjects to feel safe. Burning the capital city kind of shits all over that.
>>78540
Khosrau II is single-handedly responsible for 9/11. If he hadn't embarked on a completely pointless mini-world War with the Byzantines the Arabs wouldn't have been able to wipe out both of them shortly afterwards. 9/11 literally happened because that guy was bored one day.
>>80164
If that's your interpretation of a god, then I pity you
Alexander considered Hephaestion more than a friend, like an alter-ego, or an extension of himself.
>>80103
12000 Talents = 14,400,000 Ounces
14,400,000 Gold = $16456935822.73 USD
>>80233
silver talents m8
>>80335
Oh, only around a billion dollars then
>>80386
it's been estimated at somewhere between 1.5 and 3.5 billion
the conversions are a nightmare
>>79579
>Alexander was probably the most humane world-conqueror in history.
Nice bullshit.
>>76018
toppest of keks
>>80643
Show me evidence to the contrary and I'll prove you wrong.
Alexander was an angel compared to a mindless butcher like Khan
>>80819
So your only evidence is comparing him to one of the most bloody conquerors in history as a claim to verify he was "the most", not one of even, but the MOST humane in history?
Kill yourself.
>>80848
Name a more humane conqueror. I'm waiting m8
>>80872
Cyrus the Great.
As well as being a better statesmen, ruler, and administrator on top of that.
>>80926
Living an additional 30 years after your conquests are done really helps.
And I wouldn't call him a world conqueror either. Alexander was the first to have that vision. He wanted to exceed the accomplishments of Cyrus.
>>81004
Not being a drunken ragging faggot also helps.
>And I wouldn't call him a world conueror either.
45% of the world's population was under Persian rule. He also established the first TRUE global empire that spanned three continents.
Yes I can call him that and unlike Alexander, Cyrus had a humble personality and believed the Empire did not need to extend its boarders nor did he want to build multiple capitals. There's a reason why the Cyropedia was famous among enlightened readers and people like TJ are Cyrus fans while the Greeks talk about him being the greatest model of an autocratic and monarchistic ruler for centuries.
>He wanted to exceed the accomplishments of Cyrus.
Thankfully, he failed at that.
>>81068
Alexander had a singular vision and he realized it. If he'd lived another twenty or thirty years it would be apparent what a brilliant statesman and monarch he was. He was not only a world conqueror but a world uniting force. He engaged in a policy of racial fusion which was unique in history. His personal accomplishments as a general and solder far outstrip those of Cyrus, which were immense. Cyrus was his model monarch as well, there's no debating that. But there's a reason people in every land throughout history have heard of Alexander. His deeds were legendary, but his vision was greater still. At the time of his death, he was sent to launch a campaign to conquer the Arabian peninsula, after which he would undertake to circumnavigate Africa.
Alexander's empire also spanned three continents, so I'm not sure what you're on about there.
>>79218
Please tell me what happened when Pyrrus of Epirus invaded Italy? Pyrrus was a god-tier general Hannibal and Scipio both put him up there with Alexander when asked yet he got his shit fucked up so bad we still use the word "Pyhrric victory" today. Phalanxes cannot contend with trained swordsmen, Alexander steamrollered the Persians because their infantry were spear levy-tier. Greeks never once beat the Romans in a war and they fough many between 280 BC and 168 BC
>>80103
Money had a totally different value back then anyway. Although it sounds interesting it's a pointless fact anyway. Besides, can anyone elaborate on how Alexander gave "free money" for the people in conquered areas? To keep the economy and spending going
>>78881
Zama would like to have a word with you
>>81260
He had already reached his limits, remember he got turned back in India.
>>79877
the Canadians are all over these threads with their revisionism
>>81260
>If he had
>If
Stop with this.
>His personal accomplishments as a general and solder far outstrip those of Cyrus, which were immense.
No he doesn't. Cyrus lead the Persian Revolt against his grandfather, while Media was one of the greatest Imperial powers in the Near East right after his own father had died; Alexander had his army and the main plans for the invasion of the Achaemenid Empire handed to him on a platter by men all personally trained and vetted by his own father.
Cyrus defeated the Median Empire, the Babylonian Empire, and the Lydian Empire despite consistently being out-numbered, while with less resources, and won thanks to his wits and skill as a general and strategist.
Alexander has nothing on that.
>But there's a reason people in every land throughout history have heard of Alexander.
Cyropedia is one of the most well documented records and historical accounts of any ruler in history. Cyrus is known in the Old Testament, New Testament, and the Koran. He is also seen as a liberator by the Jews just as the Cyrus Cylinder forms the backdrop of the Charter of Human Rights at the UN Headquarters in New York City.
As for personal legacy:
The Babylonians respected Cyrus, the Lydians loved him, the Greeks still even in the days of Alexander venerated Cyrus as the greatest example of a ruler and leader, and your precious Alexander worshiped him.
Cyrus is one of the most influential men in history. And on top of that, he's one of the most humble and humane men to have ever founded or ruled an empire.
>Alexander's empire also spanned three continents
Yes but his conquest of Persia and the total size of the Macedonian Empire is smaller the the Achaemenid Empire.He failed to get anywhere near the Caucaus region like Cyrus did, he did not annex as much territory or recover the boundaries of Achaemeneid conquests in India and Hindu Kush, and the Macedonian presence in Egypt did not penetrate outside the Kingdom, unlike the Persians.
>>81260
>maximum extent of Macedonian empire
>5.2 million square kilometers
>maximum extent of Achaemenid Persian empire
>8.5 million square kilometers
>>81380
He continued to use Macedonian tactics from Alexander's day 60 years later. Alexander make significant innovations on his father's tactics in less than 6 years. Pyrrhus, like Perdiccas before him, misused his elephants, and they became a liability.
>>81455
Nonsense. It was the army that refused to go on, because they had lost enthusiasm in the monsoons after a long and largely unrewarding Indian campaign. Alexander wanted to press on, and very nearly did without the Macedonians.
>>81533
>Alexander's conquest is barely 2/3rds of what the Achaemeneids conquered
Macedonians on suicide watch
>>81440
>He lost one battle after his superiors pulled the plug on him
Hannibal was let down by Carthaginian administration, they didn't have the heart for a protracted war and the Romans were relishing it. So when Carthage said "fuck it, get out of there and come back to Africa" the Romans stormed in straight after and didn't give him a chance to prepare.
Alexanderfags are literally autistic, defeat Rome? My ass.
>>81533
>Cyrus reign: 30 years
>Alexander reign: 13 years
>>81872
>Cyrus: greatest model of a king and viewed as such to this day
>Alexander: homosexual fairy
>>81665
Xanthippus beat the romans why coundt hannibal? Oh yea thats right SCIPIO AFRICANUS, THATS WHY
>>78924
In about the third week of March 633 (beginning of Muharram, 12 Hijri)
Thus Khalid entered Iraq with 18,000
warriors, the largest Muslim army yet assembled for battle.
, Khalid set out
from Yamamah. But before doing so he wrote to Hormuz, the Persian governor of the
frontier district of Dast Meisan:
Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya, and you and your
people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the
consequences, for I bring a people who desire death as ardently as you desire life.
>persian le no
>khalid(ra) beat ur leaders in personal combat, gahmeria
> second Persian army had
been cut to pieces by this new and unexpected force emerging out of the barren wastes of
Arabia. Each of the two Persian army commanders had been an illustrious imperial
figure, a 100,000 dirham-man. And not only these two, but two other first-rate generals
had been slain by the enemy. It was unbelievable! Considering that this new enemy had
never been known for any advanced military organisation, these two defeats seemed like
nightmares-frightening but unreal.
>He addressed the men. He started by praising Allah and calling His blessings upon the
Holy Prophet. Then he continued:
"Do you not see the wealth of the land of the Persians? Do you not remember the poverty
of the land of the Arabs? Do you not see how the crops in this land cover the earth? If the
holy war were not enjoined by Allah, we should still come and conquer this rich land and
exchange the hunger of our deserts for the abundant eating which is now ours."
>Never before in its long history had the empire suffered
such military defeats, in such rapid succession, at the hands of a force so much smaller
than its, own armies, so close to its seat of power and glory.
>>81931
fun fact: Arabs exaggerate about enemy numbers they defeat almost as badly as the Greeks do
>>81465
There is no evidence to suggest the Phillip had ever intended to conquer the Persian empire, and certainly he never dreamed of marching as far east as India. The original goal of his campaign was to retake and liberate the Greek states which had fallen under Persian dominion. It was Alexander who envisioned something greater. Nothing was handed to him on a platter. He raised his own troops to augment the forces left by his father, and still had to borrow 800 talents in order to set out. On top of that he had to put down the domestic revolt that ensued as soon as Phillip was killed.
Alexander marched over the Hindu Kush. He took Tyre, the Aoronos, the Sogdian Rock and many other fortified places, which makes him the greatest siege master in history. All those Empires you mentioned were naturally assimilated into the Persian Empire which he conquered as a whole. Alexander almost never enjoyed numerical superiority.
Alexander is mentioned in the Bible, in the book of Daniel. Michelangelo depicts him in the fresco of the Sistine Chapel ceiling. He also figures heavily in the Koran as Dhul-Qarnayn, the Two-Horned One, a great conqueror who built a massive wall to contain the nations of Gog and Magog. Alexander was also a Jewish folk hero, and his image is the only one of a non-Jewish figure to be discovered in ancient synagogue (see image).
The Persians were largely despised in Egypt, but that was not Cyrus' fault. Alexander on the other hand was revered as a god there, his body being interred for centuries after death. One of the later Ptolemys melted down his gold sarcophagus to print emergency coinage and was later executed by an outraged mob.
Cyrus benefited from a long and prosperous rule. Alexander dropped dead almost immediately after returning from India. It's not really a fair comparison, because Alexander never had the chance to preside over his massive empire. He was a roving monarch who governed from his war-tent.
>>78924
>Parties
of desperate Persians and Arabs were isolated from one another, surrounded,
overpowered, disarmed and driven back to the battlefield like flocks of sheep. As each
group was brought back, it was herded to the river, and every man was beheaded in the
river bed or on the bank whence his blood ran into the river.
> The pursuit by the Muslim
cavalry, the capture and return of the Persian and Arab warriors, and their killing in the
river went on for the rest of that day and the whole of that night and the whole of the next
day and part of the next. 1 Every vanquished warrior who fell into the victors' hands was
decapitated. Khalid was keeping his pledge! Not till sometime on the third day was the
last man killed.
> Qaqa turned to Khalid and said, "If you kill all the people of the earth their blood will not flow as long as this river is dammed. The earth
will not absorb all the blood. Let the water run in the river. Thus you shall keep your
pledge." Others added, "We have heard that when the earth absorbs some of the blood of the sons
of Adam, it refuses to accept more."
>As the Persian army fled from the battlefield, Khalid launched his cavalry after it. "Do
not kill them" , he ordered the cavalry. "Bring them back alive." 3 The bed of the river was
soaked with blood ... but the river was not "running with blood" as Khalid had pledged!
>These writers tell us that the river actually ran with blood; that there was a mill downstream of the battlefield powered by the water of this river; that so much blood flowed in the river that for three days the mill was grinding not with water but with
blood! Tabari, coming to the end of his account of this battle, mentions the mill, "... as related by Shuaib, who heard it from Mugheerah." there was a mill down-stream, powered by the water of this river; this mill was used for grinding corn for the army of Khalid for three days; and the water was red. stay mad perisan
>>81986
>There is no evidence to suggest the Phillip had ever intended to conquer the Persian empire
Why are you lying?
>The original goal of his campaign was to retake and liberate the Greek states which had fallen under Persian dominion.
Why are you lying?
>Nothing was handed to him on a platter.
Why are you lying?
>Alexander marched over the Hindu Kush.
So did the Persians.
>He took Tyre, the Aoronos, the Sogdian Rock and many other fortified places
So did the Persians under Cyrus.
>which makes him the greatest siege master in history
No it doesn't.
>All those Empirse you mentioned were naturally assimilated into the Persian Empire
All those Empires I mention were at their peak against a newly emerged Persia and unified against them. Defeated multiple regional powers that held sway over almost entirety of civilizations > defeating one power.
>Alexander almost never enjoyed numerical superiority.
He enjoyed it several times.
>Alexander is mentioned in the Bible
Not as often or as important as Cyrus and in fact Alexander is never directly named unlike Cyrus, who is mentioned 23 times.
>he also figures heavily in the Koran as Dhul-Quarnayn, the Two-Horned One, a great conqueror who buiilt a massive wall to contain the nations of Gog and Magog.
That's Cyrus again.
>Alexander was also a Jewish folk hero.
No he wasn't.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1120-alexander-the-great
>and his image is the only one of a non-Jewish figure to be discovered in ancient synagogue
Cyrus rebuilt the Solomon Temple and returned the Jews or rather allowed them to return to Judea. And he is the only attested historical figure to be referred to and titled as the anointed one.
>Alexander on the other hand was revered as a god there
That's because Macedonians like their decadent Greek kin believe in defification on a literal level which rings with Egyptian beliefs that their Pharaohs are gods, which the Persians never believed in. You are full of shit on so much.
>>81931
I like how you miss out the part where Persia was already completely destroyed from a cataclysmic war with the Byzantines five years earlier. I'd like to see the Arabs try forcing the Palaestinian Roman limes in 300 AD
>>75957
Pharynx Formation
>>81986
>Cyrus benefited from a long and prosperous rule.
Cyrus was entirely at war and never once had peace when ascending as the King of Kings, constantly fighting the Medians, Lydians, Babylonians, Egyptians, and raiders from Central Asia and other Iranic tribes from the start to end of his reign.
He was always on the front lines yet was a better administrator, humane ruler, leader of men, and dignified figure in human history then Alexander ever will be or ever would be. The Empire Cyrus had founded was already larger then what Alexander would make centuries larger.
Cyrus > Alexander.
>>82232
Don't forget half the population of Iran itself was cut in half from a plague that raged from 627 to 633 right before and right after Yadzegerd, a 12 year old boy, came to power.
>>81068
not hard to spot the persian
>>82301
yeah the arabs got super lucky.
>>76018
He was a God.
t. Jung
>>82306
Let's play this game:
>Alexanderfag
Not hard to spot the pederasty lover.
>>81898
it's hard to have an honest intellectual discussion with muslims around
>>82289
Why is Cyrus so underrated?
>>79199
>butt sex path of Spartans
Keks.
Alexander and Macedonian fags BTFO
>>82367
Why did white people stop wearing the Caesar cut? It's literally a gangster haircut.
>>82404
Because knowledge about Persia is limited in its appeal to mainstream western society, sadly.
>>82212
This is reddit-tier argumentation dude, I'm not going to bother with you.
>>82289
>He was always on the front lines yet was a better administrator, humane ruler, leader of men, and dignified figure in human history then Alexander ever will be or ever would be.
According to what metrics, you preposterous shill? Cyrus was honored and respected by his people, surely, but Alexander was revered like a god by his. He had an entire fictional Romance to his credit in addition to his actual accomplishments because of the desire to idolize him.
You're spewing personal opinions while I'm delivering nothing but facts. This isn't an argument. I'm the only one making relevant points.
>>82340
[citation needed]
Modern Islamic revisionist scholarship naturally prefers to identity the Two Horned One as a Persian conquer rather than a Greek one. Two-Horned one is itself a reference to the Ram's horns which identitfy Alexander with the god Amun:
>It is well known that already in his own time Alexander was portrayed with horns according to the iconography of the Egyptian god Ammon.
Since the Renaissance it has been clear to scholars that Alexander was an idol-worshiper, and therefore an attempt has been made in Islamic circles made to trade the pagan conqueror for a more religiously acceptable one.
>>81965
fun fact you got conquered and ur ruling class to this day are sayyids, and you worrship Ali(ra) and hussien(ra) as gods you build masjids for them and make dua to them and cut ur self for them and even better the last five of ur imams san the last one of course, took somaili wives, hhaha the shahaba may have overblown the numbers but u guys lost so bad u turned into vid + non-even arab here proud metis nation
https://youtu.be/DrtV4lIosiE
>>75957
I'm pretty sure there was like 6000-10000 Greeks at Thermopylae, still got their shit #rekt too
>>82212
>relevant point
>no it isn't
>relevant point
>no it isn't
and here I almost forgot I was on 4chan
>>76018
>>82598
Thanks for the concession, faggot.
>>82598
>You're spewing personal opinions.
No, I am not
>While I'm delivering nothing but facts.
Lies.
>shill
Ironic ad hominem is noted.
[citation needed]
Other then the fact even the fucking wikipedia article directly correlates passages attested to to Cyrus with those in the Koran to him suddenly now magically fall to Alexander? You just want to poison the well now because most historical and modern Islamic scholars have correctly deduced it is a reference and blatant one to Cyrus and never was about Alexander.
Keep shoveling your bullshit all you want, its not going to fly.
>>82598
>no rebuttal to being called out on your bullshit about Alexander in the Bible
>no rebuttal to Cyrus' accomplishments
>constantly blubbering and bullshiting with faux claims and bringing up what ifs
> In Arabic translations of the Old Testament, the word "Dhul-Qarnayn" (Hebrew: Ba`al Haqqərānayim בעל הקרנים) appears once in the Old Testament, in the Book of Daniel 8:20:
>[15]أَمَّا الْكَبْشُ الَّذِي رَأَيْتَهُ ذَا الْقَرْنَيْنِ فَهُوَ مُلُوكُ مَادِي وَفَارِسَ
Translation: The ram that you saw, the one with the two horns, represents the kings of Media and Persia.[16]
Keep lying buddy.
>>82808
dont debate with radical nationalist reason is a alien to the,
>>82598
>According to what metrics, you preposterous shill?
Who are you calling a shill, you mongoloid?
>Cyrus was honored and respected by his people
Cyrus is literally titled as The Father and his only equivalent in terms of reverence and sheer idolism is Moses to the Israelites. Cyrus is the Father to the Iranians and especially more so the Persians to this very day.
>Alexander was revered like a god by his
This means nothing also in terms of any tangible relevance. Also Caesar is more relevant in Western culture then Alexander, retard as is Augustus for that matter.
>He had an entire fictional Romance to his credit
So this is your counter to Cyrus being representation of what it means to be the pinnacle of a ruler and king in human society? Not impressed
>You're spewing personal opinions
I stated fact. The Two-Horned man has three more likely candidates being representative of actual historical figures in history to stop Gog and Mog:
- Cyrus the Great
- Darius the Great
- A Lakhmid prince
The parallels of Cyrus's expansion of the Persian Achaemenid Empire are perfectly corroborated and match the narrative claims of the Two-Horned Man's expansion unlike Alexander's southern and eastern routes. Then Darius who actually is well known for building many fortresses and castles against bands of Scythians.
On top of all that, Cyrus's actual historical character that has been attested to in direct and third party sources have had him as near faultless, humble, and nigh on perfect where as Alexander is marred by rages, alcohol, and black wrath.
Then finally, the Two-Horned is allegorically stated to have had a length rule and duration in safeguarding the world; which again correlates with Cyrus, which does not with Alexander.
So get the fuck over it.
>>83100
Who should they fight if not each other? Arabs? Turks?
>>83119and get btw like the last time no tanks.
>>82808
They don't magically fall to Alexander, they have belonged to him since antiquity. Try to apply yourself and exercise a little reading comprehension. Alexander was recast in Arabian folklore as an Islamic conqueror who spread the world of Allah before Muhammad himself. This was of course fabrication, and it came to light with the scholarly revelations of the Renaissance. Since then the literature has changed, not because of any new facts, but because Alexander is not quite as acceptable as a Muslim hero anymore.
>>82859
Alexander appears in the bible as I stated, and it is only natural that there would be more references to Cyrus than him because Cyrus had far more dealings with the Jews than Alexander. There is some wonderful literature about how Alexander was first hated by the ancient Jews, both for his paganism and his imperial rule, but over time they came to respect him on account of his unparalleled success despite being a heathen.
I never attempted to downplay any of Cyrus' accomplishments you insufferable buffoon. I simply believe Alexander's were more impressive. How can I possibly revere Alexander on one hand and slander Cyrus on the other? That would be ridiculous. Go back, read my posts, and find one negative remark I've made about Cyrus.
Amun was an Egyptian god. In point of fact he was a local deity who was elevated to a status similar to that held by Zeus in Greek theology, which is why he came to be be identified as Zeus-Amun. In the 29th dynasty and the 31st dynasty, the Persian great King also held the title of Egyptian Pharaoh. Alexander inherited this title just before defeating Darius for the last time.
He was then known as Setepenre Meryamun Alexander III (Chosen of Ra, Beloved of Amun); and thence began his association with the god Zeus-Amun. The coins struck during his lifetime were supposed to depict Heracles, but they bore the likeness of Alexander.
>>79189
>>79047
>>79218
Rome got whooped by the Punic peoples and switched from large hoplite formations and phalanxes to smaller maniples with their own subgroups and their subgroups (centuries, deca-somethings).
This gave the Romans maximum maneuverability.
Couple that with the Gladius and scutum which covered nearly there whole body they were an unstoppable force.
Now heres where the Romans really won.
They were always well fed, well rested, their camps were fortified, they had an incredible marching ethic, and they were always aggressive.
Macedonians would need to be
Masters of logistics
Have an army line so long it stretched for miles so the Romans couldn't outflank them
Have a well defended camp at all times
Be well fed and well rested at all times
Be physically fit all around no slackers
Be extremely well trained in close quarters combat if the Romans did manage to break the pike line
Have the ability to counter the Roman's counter phalanx tactics (angling shields, throwing pilum, and closing in virtually untouched)
The Macedonians did not have a standardized army regiment for training or logistics so we cant just assume that one would be made.
The Macedonians did not have any nor did they develope any counter tactics for heavy infantry which they never faced (persian armies were just collections of large groups of tribesmen all speaking a different language, gaugamela must have been a strategic nightmare for the Persians).
The Macedonians did not go the extra mile when it came to fortification (they could be attacked at any time by the Romans but the Romans would be safe all the time).
Macedonians were just peasants levied to be pikemen which takes little skill, sure they became battle hardened vets but after a what, 13 year campaign?
Romans were battle hardened right out of training and they trained constantly when on campaign.
Roman families had upwards of 12 kids 8 of made it to adulthood.
>>83033
Both men were revered, defied even, but deification is more flattering to Alexander, because Greeks did not have a long history of idolizing their kings as gods.
How can Caesar be more relevant when Alexander was Caesar's model and inspiration? You're truly grasping at straws now. Alexander was responsible for Hellenizing the territories formerly controlled by Persia, including Egypt and parts of modern day Pakistan. Western history itself is divided into Hellenic (pre Alexander) and Hellenistic (post Alexander). Many of the cities he founded are still standing today, most prominently Alexandria, which your beloved Caesar partially destroyed along with its splendid library.
The Romance is indicative of the scope of his legend. Many primitive tribes and peoples created their own legends about Alexander, or applied existing legends to him. Alexander essentially became a mythological figure, and was revered as such for nearly a millennium, when more realistic accounts resurfaced. As in most cases, the fact is more interesting than the fiction.
The depiction of Alexander as a drunken lunatic is chiefly the legacy of that miserable demagogue Demosthenes, whom Phillip repeatedly humiliated. Alexander inherited the Athenian's hatred of his father, and when he had the Athenian philosophy Callisthenes put to death for plotting against his life, his reputation was doomed to eternal slander.
"More likely"? According to who? The sources you choose to accept?
It's quite probable that at different times the title has referred to different men. In the time of Muhammad it would have almost certainly referred to Alexander. You cannot seriously maintain that Islamic scholarship is at a higher level today than it was during the golden ages of the Abbassids. Islamic accounts of history have changed so radically over the centuries because of contact with the outside world and social upheavals. It's classical scholarship versus modern scholarship. I don't buy the latter
>>83851
Romans lost over 80,000 men at Cannae and then raised another army nearly just as big.
The Roman warmachine (Republic-early Imperial era) had a virtually endless supply of battle ready legionaries at any given time.
And Macedonia would have caught the Romans in their early Republican days so its safe to assume that the Romans would have employed the aforementioned.
>>83887
>>83851
All in all, Rome would have smashed Macedonia.
Macedonia was nothing without Alexander.
Even with Alexander Rome would have won out simply because of their battlefield superiority, not to mention they dominated the seas after the second Punic war.
Alexander would have had to have crossed the Alps to get to Rome and we all know how that turns out, even for a general skilled at fighting Romans.
Romans just take a beating and endure, they can tank every enemy.
>>83851
Later generations of Macedonians would have been tougher and more refined in their skills. It's fair to imagine their tactics would have evolved as well, assuming that Alexander or some similarly gifted heir had been alive to lead them.
Macedonians were notoriously poor at defense, which is probably part of the reason Alexander never bothered with it. But being outflanked was par for the course when Alexander took the field. In point of fact he exploited these long lines, stretching them out until they thinned, and then punching straight through the gap with his companion cavalry. That might not have been as effective if the Roman commander didn't occupy the center of his formations, as the Persian King did. Alexander always took the right wing, as was tradition in Macedon.
Alexander was a master of logistics, but it's hard to see anyone else being as competent as him. As far as dealing with fortified targets, no one in the ancient world was better.
Fitness wise you have to calculate general Greek military prowess. The Silver Shields for instance were still extremely effective despite most of them being over 60 years old.
The phalanx was already becoming outdated as a key formation in Alexander's day. He adopted his father's tactic of using it as a placeholder to fix the enemy center while the cavalry ran back and forth, crashing down on the flanks as they began to show weakness.
Heavy infantry would likely have been fixed in place and harassed, either by the light skirmishers or the singers, while Alexander worked around them.
I wouldn't place too much trust in Roman tactics and fitness. There were multiple occasions where entire legions were wiped out in an afternoon because of incompetence and poor leadership.
If Macedon had gone to war with Rome, it would have been no earlier than 310 BC, which puts Alexander around 50. Phillip was assassinated at 46, so that's still fighting fit in the ancient world
What would the Romans have fielded then?
