The Greatest General in History? Alexander - To the Ends of the Earth 

General S. Patton I guess the car accident didnt kill you?

It was amazing! And the end with Romans on the horizon was absolutely bombastic, I had chills!

Then we will watch in the shade!

General S. Patton well patton, you are dead

True

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

This is great to hear!

sounds like plagiarism

@@JM-bl3ih Lol. 😭🤣🤣

@@JM-bl3ih its 11...

@@JM-bl3ih When it comes to this period, everybody is "plagiarizing" - including Epic History. She was 11 years old - it is not necessary to put forward some novel ideas about how Zoroastrian Avesta influenced Alexander at Opis or some such. Even talking about well established facts as presented by sources is enough for schoolmates to marvel.

Just in time before I have to go to bed!

Why you guys do not collab? KnG + Epic will be so epic!

Just before my night shift! :D

Love your videos!Keep going on posting

This video has only one mistake Alexander not create the Hellenistic world but Skopjenistic.The entire world admits that his homeland was Skopje

heheheh without TV and internet they walked all night and day :) or by horse

They had to, they didn't do it out of courtesy, they feared Alexander and they thought it'd be a good idea to become an ally to him or else ... .

Probably some slight propaganda too - since a lot of the ambassadors came from Roman provinces and the surviving histories are from the Roman era.

In general it is incredible just how interconnected the world really was back then. Even moreso impressive was how much more connected the world was before the Mediterranean Bronze Age Collapse, far before the time of Alexander.

The collapse was a travesty to both foreign relations and to trade for sure! The irony is that Macedonia was a client state of Persia during the second Greco-Persian war, although this was surely hushed up during Alexander's anti-Persian march through Asia Minor haha!

i hope so. would love it too.

IKR

I thought this as well. I hope so

That would be sick, but they made 4 videos for an 8 year campaign. And the Romans lasted for hundreds of years!

Imagine Alexander survived and attacked Rome

Thanks! I hope you get to check out the new Napoleon series too.

Did i not mention the Napoleon series too? Brother watched it about 10 times. Every vid on this channel is outstanding. Truly an EPIC description of history. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to experience history though your perspective. If there was a vid every day i would not see the light of day haha. Brilliant!!!

You got Chinese historigroaphy

Dan D Absolutely wrong! The modern country of the FYROM (the Former Yugoslav Republic of "Macedonia") actually corresponds to ancient Paeonia, NOT to ancient Macedonia, which was -and still is - a part of Greece! In addition, FYROMians are Slavs and Albanians, hence NOT real Macedonians, who were - and are - Greeks! FYROM simply stole and use the Greek word "Macedonia". *"The so-called Republic of 'Macedonia' [FYROM] is located in what was ancient Paeonia."* (Paul Cartledge, University of Cambridge, UK) *“Paeonia, roughly where the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is today.”* (Timothy Howe, Jeanne Reames, “Macedonian Legacies”, Regina Books, 2008, p.239) “Ovid was lax in his geography, not least over *Paeonia (in fact roughly coextensive with the present Slav republic of Macedonia).”* (Ovid [Author], Peter Green [Translator], “The Poems of Exile”, University of California Press, 2005, p.319) “Besides the former kingdom of Macedon [Greece], the Roman region included the territories *of Paeonia where the contemporary FYR Macedonia rests.”* (Ridvan Peshkopia, “Conditioning Democratization”, Anthem Press, 2015, p.189) *"Macedonia was - and still is - a territory of northern Greece.* The Ancient Macedonians were *of Greek origin and spoke a broader rougher dialect of Greek."* (Stephen Batchelor, “The Ancient Greeks for Dummies”, 2008)

+Dan D They don't have the same legacy, fyrom has Bulgarian legacy, Macedonia and the rest Greece have Greek legacy

+Dan D The ''Real'' Macedonia is already Greek land !!! The true Macedonia is in today's Northern Greece !!!! The territory of the Ancient Greek Kingdom Macedonia, of Alexander the Great... is in today's Northen Greece !!! North of Greece... between Serbia, Bulgaria and Albania... there is a Small Newborn Slavic country...which want to be named as ''Republic of Macedonia''... but this Slavic country...has Nothing to do with the Ancient Greek Kingdom of Macedonia, of Alexander the Great. This Slavic country has No any Historically, Culturally and Geographically connection with the Ancient Greek Kingdom of Macedonia, of Alexander the Great, which as i said... is in today's Northern Greece. This Slavic country is just a Communist Construct of 1930... a Mix of Bulgarians, Albanians and a small number of Serbians, Turks and Roma and they have Slavic-Bulgarian Language, Names, Toponyms and Culture. In the territory of this Slavic country there were lived in antiquity the Ancient Paeonians... enemies of the Ancient Greek Kingdom of Macedonia... !!!! 0:13 You can see it... the true ancient Macedonia of Alexander the Great was in today's Northern Greece !!!!

Except Persia.

Crankzzzripper no, what about WW2

Crankzzzripper caesar

Omg so the Rome's look at Alexander victories and his capability when Alexander died they knee that Alexander empire is weak and Yep the Rome began expanding they're empire

_Rome next ? ; )_ If you want to satiate your thirst for the moment, you might want to check this video of Invicta, one of the collaborators of this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HOk6ppoQrkw.html

Julius Caesar ''cried'' at the statue of Alexander, before he even started his military career. At the end of his life, Caesar became greater than Alexander.

Still, Caesar was the only one who came so close to reach Alexander's greatness and if you consider that Caesar wasn't the son of a King and managed to almost become King himself. You realize that he was also a brilliant being...

Caesar was arguably the most successful, if you take into account their backgrounds and context. Alexander was the heir of a vast kingdom, with supporting generals and barons, and a professional standing army at his disposal to do whatever he wished to do. Caesar, on the other hand, was a parent of Marius and son in law of Cinna. He had to leave Rome because of the proscriptions of Sulla, and as far as I'm aware he wasn't rich. He had to dive into politics supporting the Populares cause to complete his objectives. He had to deal with political strife and two other great rivals: Marcus Crassus, who was probably the richest man in Rome at the time, and Gnaeus Pompeus, great general that served under Sulla and had just came back to Rome from a war in the East against Mithridates in which he was successful. If you take into account that Caesar had to conquer the most of Gaul and venture in foreing territory in Britain just to make his name, he had the harder path. Plus, Caesar lived longer. His only mistake was not being as smart as Octavian when dealing with the Senate.

They are both great in their own way, they are up there with Napoleon, Charlemagne, Ghengis Khan and many others :p but Alexander will always be my favorite, he did what Julius Ceasar did maybe even more maybe less, but remember he was only 20 when he started and died at 32. How old did Julius get... Imagine Alexander reaching the age of 55

+The Equalizer I am actually inclined to agree with that, well Caeser definitely was the more competent politician who could stabilise his empire whilst Alexander's fell apart. Their qualities as generals are probably incomparable though both overcame great odds.

Europe centric

@@nik2903 Hell yeah, Europe was and is the greatest collection of badass civilizations and empires

@@nik2903 Hell yeah, Europe was and is the greatest collection of badass civilizations and empires

manipulated fakee european history Alexander deafeted against Porus. that's why he never come to north india Porus was the Legend 🔱🇮🇳🇦🇫

Nailed it 😎

👏👏👏👏 You earned it

WheresWallace4883 so was everyone back then.

@RAJU PEDDADA Where is Scipio. Grant & Patton shouldn't be on this list. That's BS.

Like the Zulu King Shaka.

Straight ego trippin...

He was surpassed by the likes of Cyrus the Great. He was a wannabe, there was no need to be ruthless.

They have a series covering all the Wars of the Successors.

u probably already know that they have done a "blow-by-blow account of the Waterloo campaign" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nDZGL1xsqzs.html

Yup, this is definitely part of my plans. There are currently two pictures hanging on the wall in my house and two of them are of Napoleon...

Your wish has come true

I would love to backhand the living piss out of you

Historia civilis

That would be great. It could also have a sort of tie-in to this series to when Gaius Julius allegedly found a bust of Alexander the great and wept as the macedonian king had already conquered the known world by the same age.

Well, he failed because of that one tiny village...

but Alexander's body was never to have been found since.

My $$$ is on it being in Egypt somewhere. I read not too long ago that some lady believed that she found it at Siwah, and just about all the pieces seemed to fit together. But right before they could get hard evidence either way, they had to stop their excavation because of the rise in Macedonian nationalism at the time, and this would have caused it to scale far higher than it already was at. I don't know if this is 100% accurate or not, but either way it's super intriguing. At least to me.

BAD POETRY WITH: Phillis Wivers If that was true then a war between Greece and this Slavic Macedonia would begin.

What? If they found his body that would happen? What specifically do you mean there?

Thank you!

Thanks, much appreciated!

Owen Easter same here man

Nothing like a smoke and some history

cancer is a good thing

Right.

Absolutely and then do one on Christianity.

@RAJU PEDDADA Absolutely! Cyropaedia of Xenophon is just one example.

Tous

History is a lie

malamatinas1 Who matter? They have Russian

Mariano Sanchez what???

malamatinas1 I think he is trying to say they have the Russian Empire.

David Halabi no only The Russian Empire. Only Russia

I’m talking about the people of fyrom that claim Alexander was Slavic and not Greek The funny part is that the Slavic tribes invaded the south Balkans 1000 years after Alexander’s death.

Alexander took great pride in his Greekness.

Keep it quiet, FYROMians might hear you... :D

Δημήτριος Κοσμάς Ahhhh... FYROMians... *"Apparently these radical Slavic factions decided to live with their myths and lies for the constant amusement of the rest of the world!"* (T.J. Winnifrith, British academic, "Shattered Eagles, Balkan Fragments", Duckworth, 1995)

Philip and Alexander were Greeks, descended from Heracles, wished to be recognised as Greeks, as benefactors of the Greeks, even as Heracles had been.

Cat Owl Exactly. Alexander the Great: "Now you fear punishment and beg for your lives, so I will let you free, if not for any other reason so that you can see the difference between *a Greek king* and a barbarian tyrant, so do not expect to suffer any harm from me." (Kallisthenes, Historia Alexandri Magni, 1.37.9-13)

Roxana was a Sogdian noblewoman, not Bactrian. Roxana’s father was a Sogdian lord, not Bactrian. www.livius.org/articles/person/roxane/

Roxana was Jealous and evil. Jealous Roxana murdered the Persian princess Stateira, Alexander the Great's wife, with a baby on her stomach. When Alexander died, Stateira and Roxana were pregnant, but Roxana was jealous of Stateira. After Alexander the Great's death, Roxana poisoned Stateira, she murdered Stateira with a baby. And Stateira died 1 day after Alexander the Great's death with a baby on her stomach.

" After the death of Alexander (11 June 323), Roxane murdered Stateira II. This suggests strongly that the Persian princess was pregnant, because otherwise, she would not have been a threat to Roxane. " www.livius.org/articles/person/statira-barsine/

Sources and citation needed. No historian say that the small kingdom was harder to defeat. Your logic is revolting. You should rename yourself Mr Sick Revolting Piss.

I live in Punjab and trust me, Alexander didn't win here. There are no signs of him having had a solid ground established here or of a victory.

@@sillabear6679 There are lot of citation from the Greek historian of what happened in the battle. It was his toughest battle according to Plutarch and Arrian but there is no Indian source but these things have skeptics some believe that Alexander actually lost the battle, there are hard reasons for that.I'll cite the Greek sources where Alexander let Porus rule the land and gave him few more countries to rule but the skeptics say why would Alexander give his land to Porus if he won the battle. The accounts given by Arrian and Plutarch are our only insights to the surrender of Porus after the Battle of the Hydaspes. Both Arrian and Plutarch used the writings of Aristobulus, a close confidant of Alexander, who wrote about the ethnological and geographical details of Alexander’s campaigns. Also, Arrian chiefly used the lost military history of Alexander, written by his bodyguard and general Ptolemy, who later became the pharaoh of Egypt. Both historical accounts basically give us the same events. When Porus was taken prisoner; and Alexander asked him how he expected to be used, he answered, “As a king.” For that expression, he said, when the same question was put to him a second time, comprehended everything. And Alexander, accordingly, not only suffered him to govern his own kingdom as satrap under himself, but gave him also the additional territory of various independent tribes whom he subdued, a district which, it is said, contained fifteen several nations and five thousand considerable towns, besides abundance of villages - Life of Alexander, Plutarch When Alexander heard that Meroës was bringing Porus to him, he rode in front of the line with a few of the Companions to meet Porus; and stopping his horse, he admired his handsome figure and his stature, which reached somewhat above five cubits. He was also surprised that he did not seem to be cowed in spirit, but advanced to meet him as one brave man would meet another brave man, after having gallantly struggled in defence of his own kingdom against another king. Then indeed Alexander was the first to speak, bidding him say what treatment he would like to receive. The report goes that Porus replied: “Treat me, O Alexander, in a kingly way!” Alexander being pleased at the expression, said: “For my own sake, O Porus, thou shalt be thus treated; but for thy own sake do thou demand what is pleasing to thee!” But Porus said that everything was included in that. Alexander, being still more pleased at this remark, not only granted him the rule over his own Indians, but also added another country to that which he had before, of larger extent than the former. Thus he treated the brave man in a kingly way, and from that time found him faithful in all things. - Anabasis of Alexander, Arrian Now, just because something’s written doesn’t mean it’s true. unfortunately, we will never know what really happened whether Alexander won or not or why he gave his land to Porus etc.

Eddie J you won't be able to expand his empire more it will collapse into civil war

Yes, how many tens of thousands more people could he have killed? :^)

@Lord Ufzag the Magnificent Yeah... it's one of those times where it would be fascinating to see what would have happened if he had lived longer, however if you were living outside the Macedonian borders at the time his death must have been a god send.

Lord Ufzag the Magnificent Tens of thousands? More like millions. Who knows where else his conquests would've taken him. I always figured a guy like that was destined to die an early death anyway, you can't risk your own life in battle THAT much and expect to make it past 40.

Yeah, in retrospect I should have said more like hundreds of thousands into the millions.

The music is from Filmsto.

Ohh what a moron i am .. Thank you and keep the good work !

Yeah right, I don't think considering all the armies and tribes he's beaten another one would have proved too much problem. The mutinies of his army are well documented and after traipsing all that way from their homes and families pretty understandable. Sure Chandragupta had victories against the Seleucid Empire but that was a shadow of Alexander's army and they eventually allied together didn't they?

Buddy if the eastern part of the world was so great you wouldn’t be shitting in holes and eating with your hands. Grow up. Shut up.

Actually d courage of king porus and mutiny in his army due to porus made him to flew back

Demetrius conquered much of northern India

The Brainsurgent I’d rather be a lawyer than use the word ‘lol’ and regurgitate the same old uneducated rubbish about Alexander. Go educate yourself by actually reading a book rather than relying on RU-vid. I highly recommend ‘Alexander the Great’ by Robin Lane Fox.

The Brainsurgent I have read the ancient sources, and more often than not they are astutely warped for political reasons (successors) or from Roman propaganda. Modern historians, such as Robin Lane Fox and David Grant, have been able to uncover some of these factors from modern research of nearly 1,500 manuscripts still in existence. Furthermore, you are talking and thinking from a modern perspective, yet choose to rationalise someone who lived 2,300 odd years ago. You obviously haven’t researched the customs of the Macedonian court or have little understanding of the time. Alexander would have been DEAD before his first year was out if he was the despot you assume! No Macedonian army would have put up with what you described about him. In fact, they loved Alexander, and this is evident throughout the campaign. I will not present you with facts to prove this, as it is up to you to do your own research.

I think you've got my intentions wrong with regard to Alexander. I'm not attempting to portray him as something similar to a 'saint', because he did do things that would be completely outrageous in the modern world. He did commit atrocities, in particular with the Greek minority around modern Afghanistan, but I think you've agreed with me more than you realise in reverse. On the other hand, if you compare him to Genghis Khan or Caesar, what makes Alexander unique is how tame he actually was when compared with conquerors of an even later age. I think he is outstanding, not because he didn't do some horrific acts on occasion, but because he stands out for many uniquely positive things that were often unheard of. I'm not saying because of that we should ignore the darker side of Alexander, but because the Romans are our main historians we have to be cautious on both fronts too. You are correct about the variability of our basic historians, but we also have to take into account that they were writing for a Roman audience. I would argue that the potentiality for Alexander to be even 'greater' than the Romans portray him is pretty high; considering that no Greek king could have equated to being superior than a Roman emperor. Robin Lane Fox's 'Alexander the Great' and David Grant's 'The Last Testament of Alexander the Great' are excellent reading, because they don't simply rehash over the history, but critique the agendas and politics around the publishers that were woven into the story. Ultimately I agree with you that we have refrain from idealising conquerors, but what I would also like to mention is that Alexander has the right for his audience to understand the politics and customs of Macedonia to take into account. This is not me 'idealising him', or trying to make him better than he was, but bringing fairness where it is due. When Macedonian courtship and politics are considered it is much harder to rationalise him as a butcher and psychopath. A psychopath would never have been able to stabilise a foreign government or develop relations and friendships with previous enemies. Furthermore, a psychopath would never have shown feelings of mourning or regret in the examples that Alexander gave to history. Lastly, I would comment that Alexander was only as ruthless as he needed to be; which was very minimal in comparison to the norms of Macedonian kingship. For one he spared his brother Philip III Arrhidaeus, who would have been much safer to kill regardless of the fact he was apparently half-witted (since he was next in line for the throne). On the other hand, yes, he did have to punish to be taken seriously; though unfortunately any weakness in Macedonian kingship, even old age, meant you were put to the sword. These are things people don't take into account...

I would never ask anybody to prostrate themselves before me or anybody affiliated with me. That's your story in another realm it will be another story different there's one thing that's not a story all of this is a lie and not real

Actually this famous qupte was said by zhukov to appease your countrymen,but in reality alexander crushed porus.

Napoleon wasn't real .

@@tsarnature6587 but didn't dare to advance in the mainland of INDIA because of MAGADHA Kingdom... later those areas won by Alexander in India were taken by Emperor CHANDRAGUPTA MAURYA who crushed Selucas

@@iamshango3005 nice one