3 ms·
You don't seem to be disagreeing with the article, which concludes that Alexander was in fact a great general whose successes are not due solely to the army he
by Sniffnoy 2y ago
You don't seem to be disagreeing with the article, which concludes that Alexander was in fact a great general whose successes are not due solely to the army he inherited from Philip?
- costco 2y agoThere's stuff like this littered throughout the article: > Alexander invents no new tactics and employs only one clever ruse in this whole set of battles. And ascribing a lot to Philip's people like Antipater. Which I dispute.
- Sniffnoy 2y agoMost of what you wrote above doesn't appear to bear on those particular points.
- eru 2y ago> There's stuff like this littered throughout the article: > > Alexander invents no new tactics and employs only one clever ruse in this whole set of battles. Yes? That doesn't mean Alexander ain't a great general. And our author very much says so.