8 ms·
The Reign of Alexander III of Macedon
- Mobil1 2y ago[dead]
- 082349872349872 2y ago> Instead, Alexander repeatedly come up with relatively simple solutions that he knows, from experience and intuition, his army can execute. > "Real artists ship." —SPJ I once heard a coach claim that given a student with the heart of a champion, they'd podium after having been taught but two actions. (note the importance of two actions: pure strategies don't dominate)
- ggm 2y agoI am sure Yogi Berra wouldn't agree but the verb "to podium" is a neologism I want to help root out and destroy. I sometimes wish we had our winning athletes stand on herms, not a podium. At least the herms are decorated (usually, now chiselled off) I do realize english is a fluid language and adapts to suit it's needs. I do not believe in appeals to dictionary authorities, I just don't LIKE "to podium" as a verb
- flir 2y agoVerbing weirds language, but for some reason it also funs language. (j/k)
- ggm 2y agoIt's particularly common in the balling arena. Sporting appears to verbalise like nobody else can. They probably medal in it.
- BostonFern 2y agoits needs
- mikhailfranco 2y agoBut if an amoeba pretended to win the Olympics, would they pseudopodium ?
- aebtebeten 2y agoIn the amoeba Games, they keep a watchful eye on the winners during the anthems, lest they wind up with a single very large medalist, after phagocytosis. (I remember someone —Lambert Meertens?— trying very hard to come up with non-applicable "pure" mathematics word problem involving how to best arrange an ameboid tournament, but of course it was all just a thin disguise —mathematical Groucho Marx glasses!— on top of a very lucrative applied problem: optimal reduction of an operator tree into an accumulator)
- cryptonector 2y agoI'd settle for TFA using `who`/`whom` properly :)
- GuardianCaveman 2y agoI don’t understand your comment. What are actions?
- monkeydreams 2y agoThe fact that a champion does rather than holds back or tries to execute complex plans, is the point. They don't overthink - they just go in and give it 100%.
- 082349872349872 2y ago> What are actions? Tactics; ways to attack. (probably an unspoken assumption is that the two actions taught would both start in the same way, so one launches the attack, sees which* line gets closed, and continues in the line which has been opened. Even if you don't have the speed to properly determine the open line for the continuation, it's still possible to successfully run the pair as a mixed strategy and expect to find an opening stochastically) * the same coach believes the most beautiful action is "feint direct, direct": at first you pretend to straightforwardly touch, but should your opponent fail to defend (because they're expecting a more complex action and are waiting to see where you're really going to attack), you go ahead and turn the "feint" into a real score.
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago> "Real artists ship." —SPJ Many of the most prolific artists of all time are now forgotten by the masses. The choice of "artist" is particularly perplexing here because the implied sentiment seems to apply primarily to industry and not to artists.
- brazzy 2y agoBut all the artists that never completed a work because they always thought "it's not perfect yet" are forgotten, by everyone.
- llm_trw 2y agoYet there are plenty of one hit wonders that are remembered. Tolkien being an example.
- KineticLensman 2y agoThat’s two hits: the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Also several academic pieces in his professional field. Not including the material subsequently published by his son and estate.
- antupis 2y agoAnd The Lord of Rings was first published as separated books.
- 082349872349872 2y agoBack in the day, it only took one hit, and after that one could drive off of Skyline Blvd in a sports car, or retire to a horse farm, or run a SF nightclub, etc. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34566920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34566920
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago[dead]
- ctchocula 2y ago> I once heard a coach claim that given a student with the heart of a champion, they'd podium after having been taught but two actions. Out of curiosity, for which sport?
- 082349872349872 2y agofencing (specifically épée, but I find the principle valid for just about any direct competition, including team sports)
- asimpletune 2y agoIf you’re interested in Prof. Devereux’s work on Ancient Greece you should check out this podcast he was on where he discussed his views on misperceptions of Sparta https://youtu.be/VngbinpNGIE?feature=shared https://youtu.be/VngbinpNGIE?feature=shared
- eru 2y agoIf you prefer the written word, see https://acoup.blog/category/collections/this-isnt-sparta/ https://acoup.blog/category/collections/this-isnt-sparta/
- asimpletune 2y agoActually, I think it’s valuable to see him defend his views when pressed to do so. Of course you should read the article as well, but the interview is invaluable. His blog is shared on HN a lot, but this was the first time I ever saw the man himself asked to actually account for why he believes the evidence supports his conclusions. Also the article in question, from the interview, was this one https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/07/22/sparta-popular-culture-united-states-military-bad-history/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/07/22/sparta-popular-culture-... but they edited the title after he did that podcast. It used to be “Spartans Were Losers: The US Military’s Admiration of a Proto-Fascist City-State is Based on Bad History.”
- 082349872349872 2y agoWhen I grew up, during the Cold War, the US admired Athens, and ascribed admiration for Sparta to the Other side.
- bell-cot 2y agoGiven that Athens was (usually) democratic-ish, vs. Sparta was a militaristic monarchy, and the Soviet block was very heavily militarized during the Cold War... Not an expert, but my understanding is that Soviet education & propaganda idealized Sparta. Edit: I was unaware of the US military admiring Sparta...but developing an admiration for the ideals of your previous #1 Enemy, whose nation collapsed from within...yeahhh. Perhaps a few service academy instructors need to further explain "Do Not Copy Losing Strategies" to their Military Thinking 101 classes?
- Simon_ORourke 2y agoAnother quality post by Bret Devereaux, the man single-handedly puts out some of the best content on the Internet these days.
- nextaccountic 2y agoI love this article https://acoup.blog/2022/03/03/collections-how-the-weak-can-win-a-primer-on-protracted-war/ https://acoup.blog/2022/03/03/collections-how-the-weak-can-w...
- nindalf 2y agoIf we’re sharing our favourite article by Bret, then I need to praise his article on why there wasn’t a Roman Industrial Revolution - https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus... Part of this is speculation, obviously. We can’t know for sure because the Industrial Revolution only happened once. But he makes such a compelling case that I can’t think of any counter arguments.
- w0de0 2y agoI’m sure to be in the minority in finding this fellow’s writing poorly edited and roundly devoid of incisive insight. I’m being droned at by a textbook whose author has an italics fetish (lest I miss his point in a deluge of exposition - emphasis need not be emphasized were it not drowning). It’s inevitable one learns, but I long to read a scholar with a little style and rather more respect for his audience’s basic knowledge. Informed and informative, yes; erudite or pithy, he is most certainly not. Given a Gordian Knot this author would spend four years quite precisely untying it, never once noticing the sword he daily affixes to his hip.
- automatic6131 2y agoWhilst I appreciate the allusion to the Gordian Knot, you're still just... mistaken. I have no idea how you can read this and think that Bret doesn't a) have style (more than a little, even!) and b) a respect for his audience's basic knowledge. "Devoid of incisive insight"? Are we reading the same thing? "Poorly edited" - okay, yeah occasionally I've caught a grammatical or spelling error but everyone makes these - even big newspapers - when you put out enough words. It's well edited, but short of perfect. Not the same as poorly though, not even in the same league.
- w0de0 2y agoI may very well be mistaken. By poorly edited I mean there is much heedless verbosity, rather than many grammatical errors. An under-appreciated job of the editor is trimming and tightening, chasing out the dry chaff.
- red_admiral 2y agoI've always found Bret to have a very distinctive style - one might call it "nerdy" if one had to pick one word. Not just that he talks about LotR and Star Wars, but also the way he talks/writes. If you don't like his style, fine, you're allowed to dislike it, _de gustibus non est disputandum_. But I'm genuinely curious if you have a point of more substance behind this claim. As to basic knowledge - I think the Fremen Mirage series in particular is getting at an important point that should be basic knowledge, but is not; popular culture gets this backwards in so many ways. I think you are making a valid point with your Gordian Knot analogy, but I personally think that's a much better failure mode than pulling out the sword as your default answer to any problem. Bret has this thing about needing to prove even outright fascist claims factually wrong before denouncing them for any other reasons, but I still prefer that many times over to the "if an argument supports our side, who cares if it's true?" approach.
- thom 2y agoI very much appreciated the Landmark Arrian, which has extensive footnotes and images of terrain etc. They also do an edition of Xenophon’s Anabasis (another story a Greek army frolicking in Persia). https://thelandmarkancienthistories.com/Arrian.htm https://thelandmarkancienthistories.com/Arrian.htm
- johngossman 2y agoThanks, I've been eyeing that. Edited by Romm, author of the absolutely brilliant "Ghost on the Throne" about the succession fight after Alexander died.
- hoseja 2y agoI wonder if the good professor will cover Olympias, hmm.
- arisAlexis 2y agoAnyone looking at the map of the time can understand why he was called the great, no matter if that would be right or wrong morally.
- NKosmatos 2y agoComplimentary map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great#/media/File:MacedonEmpire.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great#/media/Fil...
- cryptonector 2y agoExactly. It's "the Great" because of what he did, not whether it was moral or right or whether he inherited the war machine that made it possible. Phillip built a war machine that could subjugate all of Greece. Alexander used it to do just that[*] and then to take over all of Persia (and then some) large as it was. Phillip had not ordered this. Phillip probably talked about this, but he was gone before Alexander started the war against Darius -- Alexander could have stopped short. At the very least Alexander had no fear, and Persia's size, and the size of Darius' army did not hold him back in any way. [*] Well, "subjugate" -- he let the city states have a great deal of autonomy. And either because the Thebans destroyed Sparta, or because Alexander destroyed Thebes, or both, the wars in Greece stopped.
- j9461701 2y ago> Alexander has a lot of failings, and we’re going to get to them. But he was unnaturally composed and at least when it came to doing violence (and getting others to do violence effectively) he was highly competent, almost absurdly so. I suppose my question is: How do you know this? Alexander was surrounded by hand-picked men his father had groomed for decades in some cases. Offering council on every part of war fighting, from tactics to strategy to logistics. Isn't it entirely possible Alexander simply went with the flow of wiser, more experienced men telling him what to do? Earlier in the article the author mentions alexander's perfect track record of logistical balancing. Surely that, if nothing else, is far better attributed to his officer corps then him? They'd been doing this successfully for 20 years before he took over, they had lots of practice at it and all Alexander had to do was not upset the apple cart. Or another example - one man cannot organize a cavalry detachment mid-battle and send it to aid a failing flank. That takes the work of many dozens of officers, and well trained soldiers drilled to follow orders even under intense stress. Of course this is all speculation on my part, as we simply can't know due to the mythologizing of the man and his life. But it's a question I find interesting to ponder.
- fch42 2y agoOne may rightfully ask whether Alexander just "went with the flow" as you phrase it, or to use a different term, "was lucky to be at/in the right place at the right time". Or even "lucky to have died before his luck ran out". Let's keep in mind though that having great resources at your disposal, and a large circle of experienced and capable advisors at hand, does not necessarily create a lasting form of "action alignment" between those. It is interesting in this context that none of his advisors or "immediate staff" ever strongly challenged Alexander in his lifetime. They deferred to him till the last moment, only to basically be snubbed off by his famous "whoever's strongest" last words. Only then did they go for each others' throats. It is of course possible, given historical records and "history is written by the victors", that his portrayal as integrative figure is flawed and more incorrect than not. The behaviour of the diadochs, the "infighting of the inner circle" which he apparently had contained in his lifetime, yet broke out immediately after, that make it likely that he brought some forms of "interpersonal skills" to the table which neither his father, nor his "successors" possessed in equal measure. (my opinion)
- throwaway13337 2y agoI think the key idea here is that Alexander like many contemporary 'greats' in tech share some characteristics: - He was set up to succeed. - He executed well because of his nature. - He had at least some very heavy moral failings. Our view of history continues to be reshaped by contemporary values. The author goes into detail on how Alexander has changed in this way but all history seems to change in this way. I'm glad the author highlights these view changes. There's a common style of thought now that can be summarized as 'the environment made the person so why praise/revere/punish them?'. In history terms, that means Great Man theory is dead. My view is that environment should be acknowledged but we, ultimately, must place blame or praise on the person somewhere as, at least, a myth of society. With a value system that does not see individuals to blame or praise, we lack in ourselves the will to try to be better. The myth seems to be key to the orderly continuation of civilization.
- gottorf 2y ago> that means Great Man theory is dead > must place blame or praise on the person somewhere as, at least, a myth of society I think there is value to that kind of myth, but I find that the Great Man theory has a lot of power (more than just as mythology) when put in terms of the but-for key figure; as in, would the environment of the times have resulted in the actions that historically took place if it wasn't for the "great man" involved? Had Churchill not existed, would the environment of the times have supplied another great wartime leader to follow Chamberlain? Did the shame of the Weimar Republic necessarily produce a figure like Hitler and all that unfolded thereafter, or was he a unique personality without whom things would have been very different?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- costco 2y agoI haven't read nearly as much as the author but having read the Peter Green book on Alexander a while ago, I agree with the general premise of the article but have a few reservations. Maybe I'm wrong, I read the parts of the book talking about the specifics of battles faster because I thought it was monotonous. I guess the biggest thing is, if Philip II was so smart, why was it Alexander who became Lord of Asia and not him? Oh right, because as even Machiavelli (otherwise a fan of Philip II) notes in the Discourses, he got killed because he didn't avenge Pausanias after he was raped despite multiple complaints. So much for the pragmatic genius. And it's not like Philip invented the idea of the phalanx, though yeah he was a pretty incredible military organizer. Did Philip even have the ambition or desire needed to conquer Persia? Would he have had the tolerance needed to actually rule these areas that Alexander demonstrated (i.e. marrying Roxane despite it upsetting "old guard" generals, keeping in place a lot of the local government structures/making deals with people like Porus) or would he have insisted on violent rule that would have created conditions ripe for rebellion? Alexander had to fight in insane conditions against armies with elephants in India. And he won. Yes he inherited a lot, but I think he's more versatile than implied here.
- turndown 2y ago> if Philip II was so smart, why was it Alexander who became Lord of Asia and not him? … So much for the pragmatic genius. Phillip II went from captive in Thebes to overlord of Greece. In Ancient Greece where there were many small city-states this involved a lot of gaining control 1 by 1, via diplomacy and war. This takes a long, long time. About 23 years, as it turns out. > Did Philip even have the ambition or desire needed to conquer Persia? Of course he did. He founded a pan-Hellenic league and installed himself as its leader. The League of Corinth’s first act was to declare war against Persia. He had a large Macedonian force already in Asia Minor when he died. The invasion of Persia was already underway when Phillip died. > Would he have had the tolerance needed to actually rule these areas that Alexander demonstrated (i.e. marrying Roxane despite it upsetting "old guard" generals, keeping in place a lot of the local government structures/making deals with people like Porus) or would he have insisted on violent rule that would have created conditions ripe for rebellion? Marrying someone to establish an alliance was a day one strategy for Phillip II. Macedonian royalty were expected to have multiple wives. Phillip never insisted on brutality when he could have his way peacefully. Considering Alexander was the one who leveled Thebes I don’t really think setting up a wise, peaceful son vs violent, foolish father archetype is accurate.
- talkingtab 2y agoSomewhat off topic, but the most interesting part of the article for me is this: 'the first two stages being “Paradigm Invocation,” where the student ‘knows’ something they’ve been told, but not why it is or why it is significant (“Alexander was a military genius!”), and then “Paradigm Rejection, where the student, having learned that some paradigms are incomplete or even wrong, turns on them rather too completely' It seems to me that many discussion, even the comments on this page, have to do with paradigms. We all have such intense opinions and reactions and the discussions are often not productive. I suspect that it is because the paradigms of the participants are completely different. And as a corollary, perhaps we use paradigms because doing detailed analysis is overwhelming. I had friends who had been in Nepal for a couple of years and could not cope with the overwhelming number of choices they faced in a US grocery store. Seventeen kinds of laundry detergent? I had a paradigm, aka a brand of laundry detergent. And to make things worse, perhaps paradigms are dependent on your own circumstances? Biden vs Trump? Two paradigms caused by two very different set of circumstances? [edit: add 'for me' in the first sentence]