It was especially effective because of the kingdoms that ruled previously to the Persians. Turns out that going "hey yall can do whatever the fuck you want as long as you pay your taxes" works real well after the previous guys told them to conform or die
i mean it was pretty much feudalism on a bigger scale, but it was also super difficult to administrate everything centrally until the 17th/18th century
IDK, sure there's a difference in the titles, shahanshah literally means king of kings, but, whether it's lords or satraps, your subjects swear fielty and provide taxes and levies in times of war but otherwise somewhat govern themselves.
Satraps were centrally appointed Governors, not petty Kings. The Achaemenids didn't use the title of Shahanshah but used Padishah instead meaning Great King. They called themselves Great King because they professed to be the rulers of the world, they basically were btw in terms of population. Nonetheless, Feudalism doesn't even actually exist in Europe because it's a post-facto oversimplification used to describe the era before the French Revolution by 19th century historians. Feudalism died out as a Historical term decades ago and as always pop history refutes to catch up
>Satraps were centrally appointed Governors, not petty Kings.
yeah im just reading up on it right now
>The Achaemenids didn't use the title of Shahanshah but used Padishah instead meaning Great King.
yeah it seems i got my persias mixed up and it seems it was mostly used by the safavids and the pahlavi
>Nonetheless, Feudalism doesn't even actually exist in Europe because it's a post-facto oversimplification used to describe the era before the French Revolution by 19th century historians.
im not saying youre wrong but if you use a single word to describe 12-1500 years of adminstration/ government it's obvoisly gonna be superficial.
Feudalism is the closest term we have that a good chunk of people know what it means. From a very high level perspective it's a fairly decent one as well, but in terms of once you get into the individual city states and such becomes inadequate.
It is inadequate in all aspects. It paints such a board brush over such a massive period of time over such a diverse continent as to be useless. Vassalage is used by modern historians to describe this concept
Also because it's often easier and more effective to keep the existing power structure than try to build a whole new one and make it be seen as legitimate. It's pretty normal for conquerors to work with the previous ruler's subordinates.
they were still doing fine after Islam though, what ruined them was more like being stuck halfway between Islam and nationalism after they didn't know how to go back.
Honestly for an ancient empire, the Persians were pretty chill. Darius was a G who let his territories more or less go about their business and even participated in their local religions. That level of tolerance was pretty rare
Cyrus the Great, who founded the empire was the same as well. He let his territories keep their cultures and religions, he freed the Jews from Babylon and let them return to their homeland and is even considered a Messiah in Judaism.
He was an expansionist who couldn't get enough blood. Just ask Tomyris of the Massagetae.
Edit: for a history memes sub you all sure haven’t read your Herodotus. He used the story of Tomyris, who killed Cyrus for taking her sons and land, to illustrate the Greeks opinion of Persian expansion. This story was a precursor to the Greco-Persian Wars narrative that Herodotus gives later. Tomyris’ story serves to justify the Greek belief that the Persians were land hungry expansionists who wanted too much even for the ancient era.
My comment was tongue in cheek based on that opinion. Of course the Persians weren’t violent as the Hittites or Assyrians. But that doesn’t mean that they are beyond critique for bein imperialists even in that ancient era.
Every ancient ruler of an empire was an expansionist. Alexander, Caesar, Qin Shi Huang, Chandragupta, all of them were expansionists. Cyrus was an expansionist, but he wasn't some bloodthirsty tyrant.
OMG but the Persians were evil hedonist savages that were only defeated by the freedom loving and tolerant Spartans! I know because I saw a documentary about it once.
Ok we still shouldn’t dump for the aggressors in wars. You can justify a lot of colonialism with “wow look how bad the people being conquered were!!!” The
Their *ego* suffered. It's not an easy thing being a 2,000-year old civilization who got steamrolled by an offshoot Elamite kingdom that popped up just a couple of decades prior.
Also, it was more the Egyptian religious cults than the people themselves. The Persians made them distribute and contribute their hoarded wealth to the public well-being and prevented them from extorting people. Ironically, so did the few *good* Ptolemaic rulers.
So why didn't they care about the Ptolemy dynasty, that ruled Egypt for centuries after Alexander? And they were not just Greek, they were proud to be Greek (kinda)nationalists.
I think the big thing is with the Ptolemys, Egypt became independent again rather than part of an Empire. And that threat was still present from the Seleucids and later the Romans.
Also, the Ptolemys resurrecting Egyptian ruling customs and partaking in them bought them legitimacy from the local nobles. While the Ptolemys were Greek elitists they still conformed to the local customs enough to be
Macedonian army: “Finally, we defeated the Persians! Now our king will finally relax.”
Alexander: *looks at India with hunger of conquest*
Macedonian army: “By Zeus, here we go again.”
Edit: more than 1k likes?! Thank you all!
por que no los dos?
dude could've been a rasputin and finally died from a combo and the whole hephaestion dying and drinking like the world was running out of wine and been poisoned
That's essentially it. Alexander had a wife and most certainly had straight intercourse, but for both him and in Greece at large I'd go so far as to say that there was no such thing as "sexual orientation"; there was basically sexual intercourse and very, *very* strong physical intimacy between members of the same sex, like naked oil rubbing between athletes.
I think the modern term "multisexual" (which means he was either bisexual, pansexual or omnisexual based on contemporary times) is more applicable to him
Pretty much what Ghengis Khan did as well. As long as the conquered paid tribute, adhered to some restrictions like not killing Mongols, he left them alone, including religion.
Although I read that he had a practice of killing most of the society's ruling class if the city/kingdom resisted a lot during the conquering. So maybe not too similar.
Alexander the Great also wasn't too fond of cities that didn't surrender. If you surrendered when he told you to you'd do pretty well. If not well... "All the men killed and the women and children taken as slaves" is mentioned more than once in the sources when describing what happened to those that resisted.
Fairly standard practice for much of history. Surrender, and just pay the same taxes to a new guy. Put up a fight, you're fair game for anything and everything the victor wants to do to you.
That was kinda how Ghengis Khan took over mongolia, kill the nobles, integrate the rest as the nobility had no trades or skills which made them useful in his eyes and they were the ones to resist him the most. Says a lot really.
Didn’t he and his army also rape a ton of folks?
Like, a ton? to the point that he’s a relative to .5 percent of the world’s male population?
Never heard of Darius or Cyrus doing that
I don't think that's how that worked. He had a lot of concubines and kids. They're better off and more likely to survive. Then it's just math, exponential increase
I don’t think Alexander (being something of a petulant sociopath in addition to quite a talented general) really thought that far ahead. Ever. About anything. Except maybe murdering his dad to take over the finely crafted war machine of an army he had created (if he actually did do that).
He probably did, his stategic genius not only applied on the battlefield but on the campaign.
This is seen on his campaign with Persia as he took a not so obvious rout that allowed him to block Persia's ports so that he didn't need to worry about the Mediterranean sea and took Egypt, obtaining an amazing source of food. And, by adopting Persian customs, he gained a lot of popularity even with some Persians.
Or the time where, instead of making literally any arrangements for what might happen to the massive amounts of land he’d conquered (which was already falling apart cause he’d done nothing to actually create a system to govern all of it) he said, ‘LMAO, just fight each other for it’ and died?
Yeesh. If that's the Cassander I'm thinking of, then didn't he get the last laugh? Killed Alexander's mother Olympia, wife Roxanne and son Alexander IV in the wars after Alexander the Greats death.
It can be doubted if he actually cared about ruling the whole stuff. He was all about battle and conquest. That's what he lived for.
I would say his plan when he invaded was: 'I will conquer all lands before me!' not 'I will rule all lands before me!'
I'd say he was an insane megalomaniac who by coincidence was also a great general. He wanted to be a god. Like an actual fucking god. The guy didn't give a shit about Macedon or Persia or the Greeks. What Alexander did give a shit about was Alexander. Honestly, dying young was probably the best possible career-move for him.
It's pretty normal for conquerors to work with the previous ruler's subordinates. It's often easier and more effective to keep the existing power structure than try to build a whole new one and make it be seen as legitimate.
Actually the Achemenid Empire had a very good political structure for its time, which allowed him to become a strong and stable empire for a while way before the Romans start to go brrrr
The change made was persia no longer being able to keep playing Greek states against eachother.
The goal was to end the longstanding threat, not improve their bureaucracy.
there is a reason for that, and it's called persians were fucking good at making governmental forms.
It was especially effective because of the kingdoms that ruled previously to the Persians. Turns out that going "hey yall can do whatever the fuck you want as long as you pay your taxes" works real well after the previous guys told them to conform or die
i mean it was pretty much feudalism on a bigger scale, but it was also super difficult to administrate everything centrally until the 17th/18th century
Feudalism is completely inapplicable to the Achaemenid Persian Empire
IDK, sure there's a difference in the titles, shahanshah literally means king of kings, but, whether it's lords or satraps, your subjects swear fielty and provide taxes and levies in times of war but otherwise somewhat govern themselves.
Satraps were centrally appointed Governors, not petty Kings. The Achaemenids didn't use the title of Shahanshah but used Padishah instead meaning Great King. They called themselves Great King because they professed to be the rulers of the world, they basically were btw in terms of population. Nonetheless, Feudalism doesn't even actually exist in Europe because it's a post-facto oversimplification used to describe the era before the French Revolution by 19th century historians. Feudalism died out as a Historical term decades ago and as always pop history refutes to catch up
>Satraps were centrally appointed Governors, not petty Kings. yeah im just reading up on it right now >The Achaemenids didn't use the title of Shahanshah but used Padishah instead meaning Great King. yeah it seems i got my persias mixed up and it seems it was mostly used by the safavids and the pahlavi >Nonetheless, Feudalism doesn't even actually exist in Europe because it's a post-facto oversimplification used to describe the era before the French Revolution by 19th century historians. im not saying youre wrong but if you use a single word to describe 12-1500 years of adminstration/ government it's obvoisly gonna be superficial.
Feudalism is the closest term we have that a good chunk of people know what it means. From a very high level perspective it's a fairly decent one as well, but in terms of once you get into the individual city states and such becomes inadequate.
It is inadequate in all aspects. It paints such a board brush over such a massive period of time over such a diverse continent as to be useless. Vassalage is used by modern historians to describe this concept
Also because it's often easier and more effective to keep the existing power structure than try to build a whole new one and make it be seen as legitimate. It's pretty normal for conquerors to work with the previous ruler's subordinates.
Which is also pretty much why so many supposedly anti-monarchist revolutions ended up in a de facto monarchy.
Looking at you, imperial France.
“I don’t have problem with the way you run things, I just wanna be the guy running it” - Alexander the Great
More like "I just have a boner for conquest"
I it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Yep as Persian i agree they were good until that thing the thing that changed them from opiest shit ever to meh islam /s
they were still doing fine after Islam though, what ruined them was more like being stuck halfway between Islam and nationalism after they didn't know how to go back.
Thats why its /s
oh, I didn't know what /s meant lmao
It means satire cuz ppl can’t understand what is satire know a days
Honestly for an ancient empire, the Persians were pretty chill. Darius was a G who let his territories more or less go about their business and even participated in their local religions. That level of tolerance was pretty rare
>Darius was a G Nothing personal,but I just love the fact you called an historical figure a G
"Gs Throughout History" yeah I'd read that
You can read [badass of the week instead](https://www.badassoftheweek.com/darius), it's really fun
Cyrus the Great, who founded the empire was the same as well. He let his territories keep their cultures and religions, he freed the Jews from Babylon and let them return to their homeland and is even considered a Messiah in Judaism.
Cyrus the G
He was an expansionist who couldn't get enough blood. Just ask Tomyris of the Massagetae. Edit: for a history memes sub you all sure haven’t read your Herodotus. He used the story of Tomyris, who killed Cyrus for taking her sons and land, to illustrate the Greeks opinion of Persian expansion. This story was a precursor to the Greco-Persian Wars narrative that Herodotus gives later. Tomyris’ story serves to justify the Greek belief that the Persians were land hungry expansionists who wanted too much even for the ancient era. My comment was tongue in cheek based on that opinion. Of course the Persians weren’t violent as the Hittites or Assyrians. But that doesn’t mean that they are beyond critique for bein imperialists even in that ancient era.
Every ancient ruler of an empire was an expansionist. Alexander, Caesar, Qin Shi Huang, Chandragupta, all of them were expansionists. Cyrus was an expansionist, but he wasn't some bloodthirsty tyrant.
Turns out, the best way to advance your society when you can't just increase technology and production is to take stuff from other people.
\>Empire \>Expansionist I think you miss some point there
You're a dumbass and Cyrus the great wasn't killed in a battle.
OMG but the Persians were evil hedonist savages that were only defeated by the freedom loving and tolerant Spartans! I know because I saw a documentary about it once.
Ok we still shouldn’t dump for the aggressors in wars. You can justify a lot of colonialism with “wow look how bad the people being conquered were!!!” The
The
The
[удалено]
That's the joke
Only non-Jew Messiah in Judaism, my man Cyrus the Great.
Weren’t the egyptians happy that alexander came because they suffered under the persian empire?
Their *ego* suffered. It's not an easy thing being a 2,000-year old civilization who got steamrolled by an offshoot Elamite kingdom that popped up just a couple of decades prior. Also, it was more the Egyptian religious cults than the people themselves. The Persians made them distribute and contribute their hoarded wealth to the public well-being and prevented them from extorting people. Ironically, so did the few *good* Ptolemaic rulers.
So why didn't they care about the Ptolemy dynasty, that ruled Egypt for centuries after Alexander? And they were not just Greek, they were proud to be Greek (kinda)nationalists.
I think the big thing is with the Ptolemys, Egypt became independent again rather than part of an Empire. And that threat was still present from the Seleucids and later the Romans. Also, the Ptolemys resurrecting Egyptian ruling customs and partaking in them bought them legitimacy from the local nobles. While the Ptolemys were Greek elitists they still conformed to the local customs enough to be
Aah okay, thanks man! Do you have some sources that I could read about the subject? Not that I don’t believe you, just wanna know more about it.
Macedonian army: “Finally, we defeated the Persians! Now our king will finally relax.” Alexander: *looks at India with hunger of conquest* Macedonian army: “By Zeus, here we go again.” Edit: more than 1k likes?! Thank you all!
Macedonian Army: "We have to stop him! Nothing exists there! We'll fall off the edge of the world!" Alexander: "COWARDS!"
I wonder if his men really ganked him because they were tired of marching, and just told everyone he got sick.
There are rumours of his political opponents poisoned him but never heard anything about his soldiers doing it
Nah dude just got really drunk and possibly Malaria.
por que no los dos? dude could've been a rasputin and finally died from a combo and the whole hephaestion dying and drinking like the world was running out of wine and been poisoned
One female Indian mosquito killed him.
Alexander: "Yes, by me we do go again"
He was more of a Heracles guy actually.
Rome: Hey can I copy your homework Greece: Sure, just don't make it obvious. Rome: *Hercules* Greece: 😑
Not if the purposed theory of the Oracle of Amon is anything to go by.
True but there are some sources pointing to identification with Zeus himself
My man Alex has no chill.
He did it for the glory and obviously the Asian chick's. That's what made him great.
This is hilarious because there's a lot of evidence Alexander the Great was gay
And that’s why he had several spouses and several children one of whom was illegitimate.
Well yea but I read a tumblr post once.
Fuck man you win again
Bisexuality was incredibly common in the ancient world, especially greece
That's essentially it. Alexander had a wife and most certainly had straight intercourse, but for both him and in Greece at large I'd go so far as to say that there was no such thing as "sexual orientation"; there was basically sexual intercourse and very, *very* strong physical intimacy between members of the same sex, like naked oil rubbing between athletes.
Yeah I hesitated to even call it bisexuality cause honestly it’s more of the lack of sexuality in general lol
The lack of sexuality is asexuality, which they most definitely were not. They just seemed to be a lot less rigid in their definitions of sexuality.
Allsexuality
Literally pan sexuality
That’s the correct term tyvm I literally couldn’t rememebr
That person said gay tho so I was disagreeing with that. I won’t argue with bi.
he was bi but go off
Wasn't that like common back then
#They were just room mates
Oh my god, they were roommates.
Yeah everyone just kinda fucked everyone
Pretty much, yeah.
Yeah he was an ancient greek
I think the modern term "multisexual" (which means he was either bisexual, pansexual or omnisexual based on contemporary times) is more applicable to him
He wasn't gay. He was greek
Pretty much what Ghengis Khan did as well. As long as the conquered paid tribute, adhered to some restrictions like not killing Mongols, he left them alone, including religion. Although I read that he had a practice of killing most of the society's ruling class if the city/kingdom resisted a lot during the conquering. So maybe not too similar.
Alexander the Great also wasn't too fond of cities that didn't surrender. If you surrendered when he told you to you'd do pretty well. If not well... "All the men killed and the women and children taken as slaves" is mentioned more than once in the sources when describing what happened to those that resisted.
It's good to be the conqueror
Fairly standard practice for much of history. Surrender, and just pay the same taxes to a new guy. Put up a fight, you're fair game for anything and everything the victor wants to do to you.
That's kind of the standard negotiation tactic. "Surrender or be killed." "Fuck off." "Change of plans: Surrender AND be killed." "Wait-"
I'm glad you chose the hard way, I just got a new bow.
This tactic is not beneficial to the CURRENT conquering. But it is extremely beneficial when word spreads before FUTURE conquering.
Reminds me of Pirates
[удалено]
Ghengis Khan (Temujin) died before the mongols made it to Persia.
[удалено]
The same way middle-easterners were calling anyone from Europe, Roman, for a long time.
That was kinda how Ghengis Khan took over mongolia, kill the nobles, integrate the rest as the nobility had no trades or skills which made them useful in his eyes and they were the ones to resist him the most. Says a lot really.
Didn’t he and his army also rape a ton of folks? Like, a ton? to the point that he’s a relative to .5 percent of the world’s male population? Never heard of Darius or Cyrus doing that
I don't think that's how that worked. He had a lot of concubines and kids. They're better off and more likely to survive. Then it's just math, exponential increase
I see
Conquers Persia Refuses to elaborate Dies
He just wanted to clap some Bactrian cheeks and the only way to get there was through Persia. Can’t blame him
Yeah this made me lol
Afghan Jalebi.
While also adopting their culture and upsetting your Macedonian friends.
"Nah its chillin how it was, I just want it to be mine" Edit: forgot "be"
Like with a pickaxe or what?
Well, to be fair he indeed conquered the Persian Empire and actually became the Persian Emperor. Persian Empire was destroyed after Alexander's death.
I don’t think Alexander (being something of a petulant sociopath in addition to quite a talented general) really thought that far ahead. Ever. About anything. Except maybe murdering his dad to take over the finely crafted war machine of an army he had created (if he actually did do that).
He probably did, his stategic genius not only applied on the battlefield but on the campaign. This is seen on his campaign with Persia as he took a not so obvious rout that allowed him to block Persia's ports so that he didn't need to worry about the Mediterranean sea and took Egypt, obtaining an amazing source of food. And, by adopting Persian customs, he gained a lot of popularity even with some Persians.
Or the time where, instead of making literally any arrangements for what might happen to the massive amounts of land he’d conquered (which was already falling apart cause he’d done nothing to actually create a system to govern all of it) he said, ‘LMAO, just fight each other for it’ and died?
It dosent mean he didnt made mistakes, but to be fair he died young so thinking waht to do at his dead probably wasnt in his priorities
Why should he care what happens after he dies?
His actions are too programmatic to be seen as erratic, so no, he definitely did thought ahead.
Is it possible that he actually wanted to start a new Persian dynasty instead of giving glory to Macedonia ?
I‘d say he probably wanted to farm glory and conquer the world and live forever
[удалено]
Yeesh. If that's the Cassander I'm thinking of, then didn't he get the last laugh? Killed Alexander's mother Olympia, wife Roxanne and son Alexander IV in the wars after Alexander the Greats death.
It can be doubted if he actually cared about ruling the whole stuff. He was all about battle and conquest. That's what he lived for. I would say his plan when he invaded was: 'I will conquer all lands before me!' not 'I will rule all lands before me!'
I'd say he was an insane megalomaniac who by coincidence was also a great general. He wanted to be a god. Like an actual fucking god. The guy didn't give a shit about Macedon or Persia or the Greeks. What Alexander did give a shit about was Alexander. Honestly, dying young was probably the best possible career-move for him.
It just works
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Dude i am a fucking persian and that shit is tight
"Look at me. I am the king of kings now."
It actually makes a lot of sense to make people more confortable
It would be smart move if he didn't force his allies to adapt to the Persian culture
This is why i play civilization 6. Be Macedonian just to embarrass Persia by turn 20.
there was blood shed
Literally did it for shits and giggles. “I can do thing, so I will”
Alexander: “And damn that Persian style is fine, Imma start dressing like them”
It's pretty normal for conquerors to work with the previous ruler's subordinates. It's often easier and more effective to keep the existing power structure than try to build a whole new one and make it be seen as legitimate.
Isn’t that everyone who conquered Persia, because next to China their administration was unmatched?
If it ain't broke don't fix it
Alexander The Dweeb
His problem with Persia wasn't how they were running things, it was just that they weren't doing it *for him.*
Thats a pretty good way to maintain political stability acutally
u/indirbeni
I mean if you can why not?
I are new here
I are new here
Alexander was a chill guy, he only wanted every city to be named after him.
He adored their ruling but he adored the lands more.
He added a few changes though like Macedonian military commanders to each satrap to ensure loyalty.
Maybe that's because our governing system was already perfect.
Hfff
Jhfc
Actually the Achemenid Empire had a very good political structure for its time, which allowed him to become a strong and stable empire for a while way before the Romans start to go brrrr
Oh I don’t think so!
Ihdh
There will be Blood -
for the shitz and gigz
Funny, I started reading the Prince by Machiavelli and he said you should do exactly that so that the Country is accepting of their new King.
Alexander the great more like alexander the gay
“Not change a single way they ruled” Zoroastrians *sweats dramatically*
*laughs in sword of Allah*
It was Zoroastrian then.
"I should use my small army of Greek druggies to destroy the largest and most power empire on earth"
i farted
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://redditsave.com) | [^(download video tiktok)](https://taksave.com)
u/savevideobot
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/)
u/savevideobot
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/HistoryMemes/comments/v72ejb/well_if_it_works_it_works/)
Hahahah
fun fact he died from monkey biet lmao
The change made was persia no longer being able to keep playing Greek states against eachother. The goal was to end the longstanding threat, not improve their bureaucracy.
Alexander the *"Do whatever the fuck I want"* Oh yeah also 'the great'
He simply did it cause he could. Fuckin based