pothos.org

Hi Valeria,

val wrote:Thanks Marcus and Yauna for the corrections.
About Olympias whereabouts during Philip’s murder I wasn’t completely sure; so I checked Bosworth’s Conquest and Empire (unfortunately I don’t have the sources with me right now, just a few books) and it said ...

The sources themselves are really of little help, anyway.

I just checked Conquest and Empire and, yes, Bosworth does say that Olympias returned after she heard of Philip's death. I couldn't find a specific mention in Hammond, King, Commander and Statesman and I confess I haven't looked in The Genius yet.

So I was wrong to say that it is "generally agreed" that Olympias was back in Macedonia at this time. However ... I do refer everyone to Heckel's Who's Who, wherein he states (note 477) that the idea of Olympias not being back in Macedonia, especially for the marriage of her daughter to her brother, is perverse.

So don't thank me for the correction yet! Still plenty of controversy over that episode. I suppose we can at least say, for the purposes of this thread, that it isn't an inaccuracy in the film.

ATB

I thought all greek cities were ruled by Macedonian kingdom. I do´nt know if the greeks of Italy where free by the time.

Yauna wrote:I thought all greek cities were ruled by Macedonian kingdom. I do´nt know if the greeks of Italy where free by the time.

Indeed they were. And they would remain so until Rome - Pyrrhus' not so thinly disguised ambitions or not.

Paralus wrote:

Yauna wrote:I thought all greek cities were ruled by Macedonian kingdom. I do´nt know if the greeks of Italy where free by the time.

Indeed they were. And they would remain so until Rome - Pyrrhus' not so thinly disguised ambitions or not.

Indeed they were free, that is. Alexander never conquered the cities of Magna Graecia, nor did they voluntarily place themselves under his rule. They might well have considered themselves to have some relationship with him, due to their ties with their own foundation cities; but they weren't part of Alexander's empire.

ATB

And i wonder what would have happened if Alexander decided to march to the west.Would they pose resistance? Or would they surrender to Alexander but under terms? I believe the later, as they wouldnt want to confrod Alexander, after he conquered the entire Persian Empire and beyond.SO maybe they woud put their terms, like for good taxes, keeping their own political systems, e.t.c.And i think that Alexander would have respected them.

marcus wrote:Indeed they were free, that is.

And here was me thinking that language was my specialism.

I will stand moderately corrected: it could be read that my sentence - "Indeed they were" - was in answer to Yuana's first sentence. That, though, would be an error. "They were" was in reference to Yuana's "...they where (sic) free...". Which, of course, is an error in and of itself.

I do believe we enjoy this - at least occasionally - Marcus. Does that then not make us ageing, pedantic flatulence?

Efstathios wrote:And i wonder what would have happened if Alexander decided to march to the west.Would they pose resistance?

They will, I believe, have resisted as long as they felt they had alliances in place to do so. They certainly summed up both Alexander of Epirus and Pyrrhus (dispatching the former and turning away from the later) and some allied themselves with the Sicilian Greeks and Carthage against Rome.

By the time of his death, the Greeks of Asia Minor - indeed Greeks per se - were viewed by Alexander in no different light to the rest of his subjects. Greeks they may well be but subjects - no different to other subjects of the empire - was their status. The League of Corinth fiction, in the casualty ward after Persepolis, was put into palliative care by his claim of divinity and sent to the morgue by the “Exiles Decree”. The burial - albeit after his death, although Alexander will have reacted no differently - was carried out by Peithon, when Greek mercenaries marched homeward from their Alexandrias of freedom and fusion in the east and were summarily massacred.

The Greeks of the west will have received little different treatment. Their levies will most likely have seen themselves posted to Alexandrias-in-Africa or Gaul.

As well, there is the assumption that Alexander will have taken Arabia and the west with his Macedonian levies. Not true. At the time he was due to depart for Arabia; Macedonians were very much the Spartiates in a Peloponnesian host: a small and declining minority. There were very few more to come from the homeland as well (as Lamia would show). It is estimated that Alexander’s anabasis had drawn some 30-33,000 Macedonian infantry into Asia. Many were dead and 10,000 more were to be superannuated home. It is likely that only some 8-10,000 or so will have remained in Babylon had Alexander’s plans seen completion.

Had he led his army out of Babylon in 323, you can rest assured that it would be, in great part, Iranian/Asian. These, “trained in the Macedonian fashion”, will have faced the Greeks of the west at some Magna Graecia Gaugamela in place of the 15,000 or so Macedonian regulars that held that position against Darius’ army.

marcus wrote:More of a 'problem', as I see it, is where things were conflated unnecessarily. I haven't understood why there was a need to conflate the Pages' and Philotas Conspiracies. In the Director's Cut we actually see the hypaspists going to arrest Dimnus, and Dimnus committing suicide (which was left out of the theatrical version) ... another thing to consider, therefore, is which version we are looking at!

I found out that we're considering the Director's Cut, however, can you think of any "historical inaccuracy" which was in the theatrical version but edited out from the Director's Cut? I can watch both versions, but as some of the scenes have been transposed to different places in the film it may not be that easy to track the edits.

And you have such a good memory . . .

ATB

Paralus wrote:

marcus wrote:Indeed they were free, that is.

And here was me thinking that language was my specialism.

I will stand moderately corrected: it could be read that my sentence - "Indeed they were" - was in answer to Yuana's first sentence. That, though, would be an error. "They were" was in reference to Yuana's "...they where (sic) free...". Which, of course, is an error in and of itself.

Indeed.

I do believe we enjoy this - at least occasionally - Marcus. Does that then not make us ageing, pedantic flatulence?

I'm afraid I couldn't resist it. Of course I knew immediately what you meant, but was in a devilish mood last night.

Hi,

I was just listening to Oliver Stone talking about Alexander as he goes into India and totally trying to elevate the man- saying that as opposed to other conquerors he didn't want to exploit the natives- just simply to explore.

I can't believe that a man who had just spent a considerable amount of money on a project involving a historical figure could be so naive on the commentary- just listening to it you can't help but see that many inconsistencies that it is alarming..

Of course with one Oscar under his belt and other commercial successes he could be allowed to make the film- but listening to the commentary you become increasingly aware that the man is a relative newcomer to studies on Alexander. He makes comments as fact, that have no basis as such whatsoever- and seems to think that nobody is going to notice-

Best regards,
Dean

dean wrote:Hi, I was just listening to Oliver Stone talking about Alexander as he goes into India and totally trying to elevate the man- saying that as opposed to other conquerors he didn't want to exploit the natives- just simply to explore. . . but listening to the commentary you become increasingly aware that the man is a relative newcomer to studies on Alexander. He makes comments as fact, that have no basis as such whatsoever- and seems to think that nobody is going to notice-

Ah, Dean, Dean, Dean . . . Aren't there people on this forum who are not newcomers to the study of Alexander who also try to elevate the man and believe that he never wanted to exploit the natives? And aren't we always arguing about the facts? Pick five long-term Pothosians who are currently posting and try to picture what their movie about Alexander would look like, if they had the opportunity to make one. I'm willing to bet that your movie would be different from most, as would mine. And I can think of plenty of members who wouldn't like my movie at all.

Best regards,

amyntoros wrote:I found out that we're considering the Director's Cut, however, can you think of any "historical inaccuracy" which was in the theatrical version but edited out from the Director's Cut? I can watch both versions, but as some of the scenes have been transposed to different places in the film it may not be that easy to track the edits.

And you have such a good memory . . .

ATB

Ah, you know how to get on my right side - a little flattery goes a very long way with me.

Sorry to disappoint you, though, because I can't off the top of my head. The business with the pages' conspiracy/Philotas affair was more pronounced in the Director's Cut, because of the scene of Dimnus committing suicide.

I don't think there were any added inaccuracies, though - but the DC was probably more 'true' because of the more commonsense editing! Similarly, I don't think any inaccuracies were removed ... and I'm sure that if they were it wasn't because they were spotted as inaccuracies.

ATB

I confess, I bought the Director's Cut. The good: some events were better explained and made more sense; the bad: Alexander was way gayer.
I haven't been a member of Pothos that long but I have been reading the posts for months. We couldn't ever agree on what type of movie to make and that's what makes this site so interesting--we all reject the status quo.

amyntoros wrote: I'm willing to bet that your movie would be different from most, as would mine. And I can think of plenty of members who wouldn't like my movie at all.

Possibly so, but, I just know that many would absolutely adore mine though. So much to get their teeth into...

Oops! Age and creeping dyslexia...not to mention senior moments.

The verb should have been abhor.