Greece -- History; Greece -- Politics and government; Imperialism
The fact was that by founding cities Alexander lessened enormously his
military and administrative difficulties. For every city took from his
shoulders responsibility for maintaining order, collecting taxes, and
dispensing justice in the territory assigned to it--necessary tasks,
now that a European state was arising in Asia, which could be performed
otherwise only by the creation of a bureaucratic system of officials.
This, however, was a non-Hellenic institution for which Alexander had
naturally no liking. In the future he saw the whole world--that of
Asia which he had already conquered and that of the Far West which he
meant to conquer--honeycombed, like Greece itself, with a multitude
of city-states, each a separate cell with a town in its centre, each
possessed of a general assembly and a council, magistrates of its own
choosing and laws of its own making or adoption, each the home of free
men speaking the Greek language, fostering Greek art and letters, and
fighting with Greek arms and tactics. It was a grand vision, which
failed of realization in Alexander's time and thereafter; but it set
forth an ideal toward which future generations moved for over five
centuries.
It is clear that Alexander never lost faith in the absolute supremacy
of Hellenic culture. Certainly the place of unlimited authority which
he reserved for himself above the world of city-states and their
law-bound citizens, was the one prescribed for the ideal wise man,
the man of supreme political ability, by Aristotle his tutor. That
Aristotle thought of a different _pambasileus_ for each city-state and
Alexander of a single "absolute monarch" for all, is a non-essential
difference, and it is simply in the institutions which Alexander found
necessary to translate the idea of the philosopher into the world of
reality that Hellenic practice and custom were violated.
These outlandish institutions, however, Alexander employed as means
for the better dissemination of Greek life and thought, without being
conscious, perhaps, that they were destructive of the spirit which they
were intended to preserve.
On the other hand, it is indisputable that Alexander revised his
tutor's, and his own youthful, opinion as to the worth of the Asiatics.
What he came to think of Semites and Egyptians we do not know; and it
may be that he continued to regard them as naturally servile and,
hence, condemned them to remain forever hewers of wood and drawers of
water for the Hellenic or Hellenized citizens in whose cities they
were to live. But as to the Medes and Persians and the kindred Iranian
stocks of the Far East, the views of their conqueror changed radically
when he came really to know them, and to appreciate fully the magnitude
of the task which he had undertaken.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account