Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Results 321 to 340 of 340

Thread: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

  1. #321

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Reading Alexander the Great Failure and finding my opinion of Alexander shifting even further to the negative. I thought he was an overrated, unhinged narcissist before, but seeing what Philip did to build up the kingdom of Makedonia and forge the army and diplomatic setup that Alexander was able to inherit makes him seem even less "Great". Sure he was a capable enough tactician and strategist, but he wasn't the statesman his father was, and he literally picked up all the things his father had fashioned and used them for the plans that had already been made.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lusitanio View Post
    Can someone tell me some good books about Carthage history? It would be good if they were digital and even better if I could download them for free x)
    I asked our resident expert, who said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Trarco
    There are a lot of classical bibliography about Carthage, modern Italian and Spanish specialized papers, and some interesting online thesis that have even inspired some of the new Punic governments. However, the traditional general books are always the best option to introduce you in the history of Carthage. So, he shouldn't have problems to find Carthage (LANCEL,S.), Karthago (HUSS, W.) or The Carthaginians (HOYOS, D.). Other good books about the general Carthaginian history (although I don't know if they are online) are: Tiro y las colonias fenicias de Occidente (AUBET, MªE), Fenicios y cartagineses en el Mediterráneo (BLAZQUEZ, J.M., ALVAR, J. y WAGNER, C. G.), “Carthaginian imperialism in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries”, Imperialism in the Ancient World (WHITTAKER, C. R).
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; June 08, 2018 at 11:25 AM.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  2. #322

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Reading Alexander the Great Failure and finding my opinion of Alexander shifting even further to the negative. I thought he was an overrated, unhinged narcissist before, but seeing what Philip did to build up the kingdom of Makedonia and forge the army and diplomatic setup that Alexander was able to inherit makes him seem even less "Great". Sure he was a capable enough tactician and strategist, but he wasn't the statesman his father was, and he literally picked up all the things his father had fashioned and used them for the plans that had already been made.
    Grainger reckons Alexander was out of his depth when presented with governmental and admin challenges and tasks. im not too sure tbh. what undermines Grainger's argument imho is the brevity of Alexander's rule. we simply dont have large enough sample: he died shortly after the conquest and hadnt really had a chance to prove his mettle as a statesmen. that said, he did show his brilliance in swiftly reconfirming his position at the head of the League upon Philip's death. he also reorganised/purged many satrapies upon return from India and showed the strategic vision and long term planning (reconciliation with and co-opting of the natives) even if he was bent on military glory and conquest. in short, i thought Grainger was too harsh on Alexander and some of his charges/arguments werent well substantiated. an interesting read, nevertheless.

  3. #323

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarkiss View Post
    Grainger reckons Alexander was out of his depth when presented with governmental and admin challenges and tasks. im not too sure tbh. what undermines Grainger's argument imho is the brevity of Alexander's rule. we simply dont have large enough sample: he died shortly after the conquest and hadnt really had a chance to prove his mettle as a statesmen. that said, he did show his brilliance in swiftly reconfirming his position at the head of the League upon Philip's death. he also reorganised/purged many satrapies upon return from India and showed the strategic vision and long term planning (reconciliation with and co-opting of the natives) even if he was bent on military glory and conquest. in short, i thought Grainger was too harsh on Alexander and some of his charges/arguments werent well substantiated. an interesting read, nevertheless.
    Out of his depth implies that he cared - I don't think he did. He was an overgrown boy with attention deficit problems, being king meant he had the luxury of only doing whatever he felt like. Boring things like running a comprehensive administration just didn't appeal to him like fighting.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  4. #324

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Out of his depth implies that he cared - I don't think he did. He was an overgrown boy with attention deficit problems, being king meant he had the luxury of only doing whatever he felt like. Boring things like running a comprehensive administration just didn't appeal to him like fighting.
    yes, not sure he didnt care but preference for action was certainly his thing. its hard to judge on the basis of Grainger's work alone though. he isnt positioning himself as objective either, imho, and the book is written in response to the general trend in the west that seems to glorify Alexander. Grainger's work approaches the topic from the opposite extreme. reminds me of Hitchens' polemic - The Trial of Henry Kissinger. as far as conquerors (no nation builders) go, Ptolemy's phrase from the Stone's Alexander sums it up pretty well, imho: "what failure? his failure towers over other men's successes."

  5. #325

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarkiss View Post
    yes, not sure he didnt care but preference for action was certainly his thing. its hard to judge on the basis of Grainger's work alone though. he isnt positioning himself as objective either, imho, and the book is written in response to the general trend in the west that seems to glorify Alexander. Grainger's work approaches the topic from the opposite extreme. reminds me of Hitchens' polemic - The Trial of Henry Kissinger. as far as conquerors (no nation builders) go, Ptolemy's phrase from the Stone's Alexander sums it up pretty well, imho: "what failure? his failure towers over other men's successes."
    It's consistent with a lot of other things I've read about Alexander - whether making my own observations of what's reported, or reading between the lines. Such as the petulant and vindictive retreat through the Gedrosian desert after turning back in India, which seemed little more than a jerk move trying to kill his own men for defying him.

    The real "Great" was Philip, his father, who built all the things Alexander made good use of. And towered above him as a king and statesman.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  6. #326

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    It's consistent with a lot of other things I've read about Alexander - whether making my own observations of what's reported, or reading between the lines. Such as the petulant and vindictive retreat through the Gedrosian desert after turning back in India, which seemed little more than a jerk move trying to kill his own men for defying him.

    The real "Great" was Philip, his father, who built all the things Alexander made good use of. And towered above him as a king and statesman.
    agreed, as a state-builder Philip certainly did. as a conqueror, Philip would have probably stopped at Darios' offer (if it was ever made) to split the empire and spent his time consolidating and solidifying whats been 'spear-won'. Alexander's youth (among other things and qualities) on the other hand, pushed him relentlessly on and on and on until his men could take no more... the greatest land-grab in history, though we'll never know if he ever truly cared of what will become of it once he is gone.

  7. #327
    Lusitanio's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    50

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Thanks Quintus and the resident expert! I will have a look to those great books!
    About Alexander, there are some theories that he actually lost the battle in India against Porus. But because the greek historians wanted to make in something like invencible, they wrote that Alexander was admired by how Porus army fought and made him is ally.
    In fact, Egyptologist and philologist E. A. W. Budge, in his epic volume, The Life and Exploits of Alexander, has given a vivid account of the Macedonian’s misadventure in India. According to Budge, “In the Battle of Hydaspes the Indians destroyed majority of Alexander’s cavalry. Realising that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined, the Macedonian king requested Porus to stop fighting. True to their traditions, the magnanimous Indian king spared the life of the surrendered enemy. A peace treaty was signed, and Alexander helped Porus in annexing other territories to his kingdom.”

  8. #328

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarkiss View Post
    agreed, as a state-builder Philip certainly did. as a conqueror, Philip would have probably stopped at Darios' offer (if it was ever made) to split the empire and spent his time consolidating and solidifying whats been 'spear-won'. Alexander's youth (among other things and qualities) on the other hand, pushed him relentlessly on and on and on until his men could take no more... the greatest land-grab in history, though we'll never know if he ever truly cared of what will become of it once he is gone.
    Indeed, I think you're right, Philip would have gone for more realistic goals and accepted that sort of offer. I could imagine him ruling over all of Greece, parts of Illyria and Thrace, with all of Asia Minor as well. That would make a sensible unit that could be ruled over by one king, and a rich one too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lusitanio View Post
    Thanks Quintus and the resident expert! I will have a look to those great books!
    About Alexander, there are some theories that he actually lost the battle in India against Porus. But because the greek historians wanted to make in something like invencible, they wrote that Alexander was admired by how Porus army fought and made him is ally.
    In fact, Egyptologist and philologist E. A. W. Budge, in his epic volume, The Life and Exploits of Alexander, has given a vivid account of the Macedonian’s misadventure in India. According to Budge, “In the Battle of Hydaspes the Indians destroyed majority of Alexander’s cavalry. Realising that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined, the Macedonian king requested Porus to stop fighting. True to their traditions, the magnanimous Indian king spared the life of the surrendered enemy. A peace treaty was signed, and Alexander helped Porus in annexing other territories to his kingdom.”
    I think he lost the battle of the Jaxartes against the Skythians as well. Notice he never advanced beyond the river into their territory afterwards?
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  9. #329
    Lusitanio's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    50

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    I think he lost the battle of the Jaxartes against the Skythians as well. Notice he never advanced beyond the river into their territory afterwards?
    Yes, you're right QS.
    And more, When Alexander ventured in India, it was divided into several kingdoms. Alexander thought of making settlements with the kings of these kingdoms instead of fighting a war. Prince Ambhi (King of Taxilla) complied and decided to extend a hand of friendship to Alexander, other leaders refused. Ambhi’s kingdom extended from Indus to Hydaspes (Jhelum), after that kingdom of Prince Porus began. Historically Porus and Ambhi were grave enemies, Alexander took advantage of this situation and seeked Ambhi’s help to defeat Porus, Ambhi agreed.

    But there is a hole in the Greek story:
    Why did Alexander and Puru agree to share spoils?Alexander had bought over Ambhi the King of Taxila to his side and in the war against Puru, Ambhi’s forces supported Alexander. Ambhi had offered to help Alexander on condition he would be given Puru’s kingdom. After the war however, Alexander allowed Puru to not only keep his own kingdom but also to usurp Ambhi’s. Does it sound counter-intuitive? Handing over an ally’s kingdom to a defeated enemy’s!! How stupid was Alexander?Fresh recruits from Macedonia were routine matter for his army and there was a system for replacement of weary troops. So, what really happened that forced him back from the borders of Indian sub-continent. According to the Greeks, Alexander was apparently so impressed by Puru he gave back his kingdom plus the territories of King Ambhi of Taxila who had fought alongside the Macedonians. This is counter-intuitive. Ambhi had become Alexander’s ally on the condition he would be given Puru’s kingdom.
    So why reward the enemy, whose army had just mauled the Macedonians?Moroever, Alexander was not known to be benevolant to his defeated enemies. Alexander’s post-Hydaspes charitable behaviour, as per Greek accounts, is uncharacteristic and unlikely. For, in battles before and after, he massacred everyone in the cities he subdued.
    The only logical explanation is:
    Puru ended up with more territory after the war and usurped Ambhi’s kingdom after the war. It is not possible unless Ambhi who was an ally of Alexander was defeated. Puru retained his land after the battle: thus implying that the war between Alexander and Porus was most likely inconclusive and ended in a truce.When Macedonians realised they were dealing with an enemy of uncommon valour. Sensing defeat they called for a truce, which Puru accepted. The Indian king struck a bargain – in return for Ambhi’s territories, which Alexander’s Failed Invasion of India would secure his frontiers, Puru would assist the Macedonians in leaving India safely.The theory that Alexander’s army receded due to home-sickness seems to be an over-simplification of a situation where he did not have the courage to go further. Greek army had a system of turnover where fresh recruits used to regularly come from Greece and tired ones would go back.“Following Alexander’s failure to gain a position in India and the defeat of his successor Seleucus Nikator, relationships between the Indians and the Greeks and the Romans later, were mainly through trade and diplomacy. Also the Greeks and other ancient peoples did not see themselves as in any way superior, only different.” This statement by Russia’s Marshal Gregory Zhukov on the Macedonian invasion of India in 326 BCE is significant because unlike the prejudiced colonial and Western historians, the Greeks and later Romans viewed Indians differently. All this is glossed over by Western historians, in whose view the one victory over King Porus amounted to the “conquest of India”. But the Greeks made no such claim.

  10. #330
    Morrowgan's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    687

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    One could make the argument that Philip succeeded because the wars between Athens, Thebes and Sparta have weakened each side considerably. And having the ideal base for conquering Persia is no guarantee that such an endeavour would succeed.
    Member of the Beyond Skyrim Project

  11. #331

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by Morrowgan View Post
    One could make the argument that Philip succeeded because the wars between Athens, Thebes and Sparta have weakened each side considerably. And having the ideal base for conquering Persia is no guarantee that such an endeavour would succeed.
    Look at the position he started in. Numerous rival claimants for the Makedonian throne, chaos in the country itself, a large proportion of their historical territory under foreign occupation or independent, no allies or clout outside Makedonia itself. Add to that no army worth speaking of and a dubious financial position.

    He didn't even have a home base, never mind one for conquering Persia.
    It began on seven hills - a historical house-ruled Romani AAR
    Heirs to Lysimachos - a semi-historical Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
    Philetairos' Gift - a second attempt at an Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  12. #332

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Good reading in French and totally accessible online (legally):

    Décors, images et signes de l'âge du Fer européen, XXVIe colloque de l'AFEAF, thème spécialisé (Decorations, images and signs of the European Iron Age, XXVIe AFEAF symposium, specialized theme)
    https://www.persee.fr/issue/sracf_11..._2003_act_24_1

    Les Princes de la Protohistoire et l'émergence de l'État (The Princes of Protohistory and the Emergence of the State, chapter in French, English, Spanish or Italian)
    http://books.openedition.org/pcjb/277

  13. #333

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Who built Petra? The guy travels to all megalitic sites all over the world, and says Nabatu only inhabited the place..
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha5z8CXvMfg
    Last edited by bordinis; June 11, 2018 at 03:18 AM.

  14. #334

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by bordinis View Post
    Who built Petra? The guy travels to all megalitic sites all over the world, and says Nabatu only inhabited the place..
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha5z8CXvMfg
    Do you mean Al-Khazneh?

  15. #335

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Phillip also succeeded because absolute monarchy > absolute democracy. The Athenians made decisions slower and with less consistency, changing strategy between trying to be Phillip's allies and trying to check him. Of course, this was helped by the ambiguity of his actions. Giving the impression he was making concessions sometimes when in fact he wasn't.

  16. #336

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    The book: The Eastern Celts - The Communities between the Alps and the Black Sea. Gustin & Jevtic, 2011.

    Here two chapters legally available:
    The La Tène culture in central Croatia The problem of the Eastern border of the Taurisci in the Podravina region
    https://iza2.zrc-sazu.si/sites/defau...izdar_2011.pdf

    The Celtic presence in Thrace during the 3rd century BC in light of new archaeological data
    https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.ed..._during_th.pdf

  17. #337

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    As an East Celt lover(for whatever unthinkable reason--I can't explain it), thanks for these. I added the first link to my growing pdf library, but I can't seem to get access to the second one linked. I get an "access denied" page when I try to access it with a "request has expired" message, all written in XML code.

  18. #338

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Quote Originally Posted by Genghis Skahn View Post
    As an East Celt lover(for whatever unthinkable reason--I can't explain it), thanks for these. I added the first link to my growing pdf library, but I can't seem to get access to the second one linked. I get an "access denied" page when I try to access it with a "request has expired" message, all written in XML code.
    Here a link for 7 days. I put the document here:
    https://we.tl/FU47GLANRP

  19. #339

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    Does anybody know the book "Deities and Dolphins : The Story of the Nabataeans" by Nelson Glueck? Is it any good?

  20. #340
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    1,620

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum Bibliography

    On academia.com you may find the whole text of the book "Army and Power in the Ancient World". It's not very new but there's a bunch of interesting articles - for me it was especially "The Role of the Army in the Exercise of Power in Early India" as it touches upon a topic I had no idea before.

Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •