ANCIENT 336B GREEK AUTHENTIC SILVER ALEXANDER THE GREAT TETRADRACHM COIN MACEDON

When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

ANCIENT 336B GREEK AUTHENTIC SILVER ALEXANDER THE GREAT TETRADRACHM COIN MACEDON:
$295.00

ANCIENT AUTHENTIC GREEK SILVER COIN. \"ALEXANDER THE GREAT KING OF MACEDON\".COIN MEASURES APPROXIMATELY: 26MM IN DIAMETER AND WEIGHT: 16.84 GRAMS. GOOD CONDITION. SEE PHOTO.\"CHECK MY PHOTOS THEY ARE PART OF MY DESCRIPTION\"
Alexander the GreatThe GreekAlexander the Great was truly great, but was he everything he thought he was? There are many wild stories detailing his vanity, violence, his insatiable conquest, and his extraordinary ability to lead the armies of Greece into victory. But what makes the man tick? Everyone knows he was an incredible conqueror, but how many realize that he lost his mind not long before he died? Yet, before Alexander, there was his father, Phillip II of Macedon, who was born to King Amyntas III and Eurydice I in 382 B.C., and was kidnapped by the Thebans and held hostage. He was with them for years and learned much about Greek military strategy during his hostage, all of which he absorbed with great intent, for he knew the day would come when he would wield that knowledge against his enemies. Years later he escaped and returned to Macedon in 364 B.C. His brothers perished in military campaigns, making him the King of Macedon in 359 B.C. It was said that Phillip\'s first intention was to unite the men in Macedon and to build an army, for they were fierce, sturdy and loyal, and in fact he did.-This is partly because Philip was a master of diplomacy as well as a master of military tactics, where he even appointed himself as the peace-keeper of Greece\'s constantly feuding city states. and soon after he forged a mighty army to expel Persians from Greek cities in western Asia Minor. Philip, however, was assassinated in 336 B.C. well before he completed his vision of conquest and rule over Greece and Persia, but this is where the legendary story of his son Alexander comes in.
ALEXANDER SON OF PHILLIP II: born in 356 BC in Pella, the ancient capital of Macedonia, Alexander seemed destined for conquest and to hear to cries of victory. He was trained in many disciplines by Aristotle. At the age of 16 his father King Philip had assembled a large Macedonian army and invaded Thrace, leaving Macedonia in his son\'s leadership during his absence, however the Thracian tribe of Maedi rebelled against Phillip. Alexander swiftly assembled an army and defeated and captured their stronghold, renaming it after himself: Alexandropolis. In 338 B.C. Alexander won a decisive victory against the Theban Secret Band at Chaeronea, where the victory is thought to be from his own bravery which saved the tide of the battle against the Theban Elites. In 336 B.C. Phillip II was assassinated by Pausanias for reasons that bewilder historians to this day, as no record of why this happened was recorded, although some speculate that the discord between Phillip and Alexander grew so great that after Alexander fled with his mother Olympia, it was he who hired Pausanias to kill him. There are many theories none of which have any evidence. The child turns into a man and conquers, and with his father\'s death becomes the ruler of the greatest army ever united to date. And Alexander plans to use them in the full.
ALEXANDER BECOMES ALEXANDER THE GREAT: The prodigal son turned betrayer? Who knows. The prodigal son turns conqueror? Yes! Alexander became the king and planned to live his father\'s vision: The conquest of Persia. The Achaemenid Persian Empire was not a culture to start fighting casually, as they were far from regular warriors, but they never succeeded in their two conquests of Greece, for more information rad my articles \"The Origins of the Persians and the Battle of Marathon Against Ancient Greece \" and \"Lacedaemonians and Athenians: Battles at Thermopylae and Salamis.\" The Greeks demonstrated their ability to fight and win even in odds of over 10:1, which are truly extraordinary odds. And it all began when he was twenty-two years old. Alexander met the armies of Darius III 333 B.C. at Issus and defeated his some 200,000 men (possibly much more) with his army of 30,000 Greeks and mercenaries. Without missing a step, Alexander continued forward into Persian territory and two years later met Darius in 331 B.C. at Gaugamela. Now Darius was definitely prepared for battle at Gaugamela (on map below). In fact, this battle is almost funny, because by all standards Darius III\'s army should have won. This is because Darius had painstakingly chose the battlefield to favor his army and his chariots, and Gaugamela was supposed to be the perfect area for high speed hit-and-runs and high defense in favor if his army. Yes, the Persians had chariots, a lot of them, which were still a bit of a novelty in this age. Not only that, but they had what could only be described as \"scythe-like\" blades sticking out on their wheels to cut any enemies nearby to bits. It would have truly been a horrible way to die. The ground at Gaugamela was flat, but he was not satisfied, so he ordered his men to flatten the field even more. I add this in hopes to demonstrate just how much preparation went into Darius\' plans not just to be victorious against the Greeks led by Alexander, but to kill them all effortlessly. This was revenge, after all.
-Alexander immediately sized up the Persian\'s tactical advantage and countered by ordering his cavalry to shift to the right hoping to move his enemy away from its flat field. Darius III failed to foresee the consequences of his hastiness and of his brute strength strategy, making the same mistake that his predecessors Xerxes and Darius I made each in their own attempts to invade Greece at Marathon and Salamis. Brute strength does not work against the Greeks!!! Darius ordered his troops to follow the Greeks in full force and they all found themselves on rocky territory where the chariots were useless and hard to traverse, and the line of chariots thinned as they all struggled to maintain their formation over the rough terrain. Seeing the thinned lines, Alexander led a charge into the Persian army\'s rear and crushed them from behind. And just as Darius fled at the Battle of Issus, Darius again fled, handing victory to Alexander yet again. Alexander\'s elite army was outnumbered over 6:1 by the Persians and yet Alexander lost only 100 men in the battle here at Gaugamela. It is astonishing that such odds can be so easily overcome, but further analylis of the past kings of Persia and of Darius III shows that they all repeated the same mistakes against the Greeks, for all three of the kings (Darius I, Xerxes, and Darius III) used their large numbers against the Greeks to win, and in all three wars (though many more battles) were utterly lost with very little deaths to the Greek soldiers. At Marathon, it is said that there were over 120,000 Persians on the beach alone and less than 8000 untrained Greeks, yet in their battle there over 8000 Persians died to only 100 Greeks dying, a ratio of 800:1 in the Greek\'s favor. The odds are staggering, yet the Greeks never seem succumb to brute force. Perhaps because they themselves were masters of brute force? Their armies always had superb strategy though, which shows that the Greek way of thought at the time was truly unique.
You can see Alexander on his horse on the left above where the pciture was ruinedfrom old age, and Darius II on the right in the large chariot wearing the traditionalPersian attire and hat.
If you are not completely satisfied with your purchase, you may return it for a refund.