0
Philip never conquered Greece. With various methods, he brought the Greeks together and united them under Macedonian hegemony through the formation of the Pan-Hellenic league of Corinth.
After the Peloponnesian Wars, the Greeks who had a history of disunity were even more disjointed. Athens had been defeated by Sparta, and Sparta was in turn defeated by Thebes which was the leading political power in Greece. Philip took advantage and built up his military and reinforced his alliances. Demosthenes of Athens who held a personal grudge with Philip after being snubbed at the Macedonian royal court spoke against the threat from Macedonia to Athenian hegemony.
[10] When, Athenians, will you take the necessary action? What are you waiting for? Until you are compelled, I presume. But what are we to think of what is happening now? For my own part I think that for a free people there can be no greater compulsion than shame for their position. Or tell me, are you content to run round and ask one another, "Is there any news today?" Could there be any news more startling than that a Macedonian is triumphing over Athenians and settling the destiny of Hellas?
Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1930.
Also, while the Athenian allies may have had an advantage in quality, Philip had a greater advantage in numbers. The Macedonian Army was larger and more modern. The phalanx infantry formation used by the Thebans to defeat Sparta was improved by the Macedonians with longer spears and ranks of sixteen instead of eight. After an enemy had been broken up by the Macedonian phalanx, the Macedonian heavy cavalry charged in for the kill.
On the battlefield of Chaeronea, Macedonia and its Greek allies met with the Athenians and their allies from the Greek city states....
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
What else can I help you with?
What cultural features did all Greeks share?
A language and gods and goddesses. There were leagues which oversaw religious and cultural matters, the most notable of which was the Delphic (or Great Amphictyonic) League. The Olympic Games was a religious festival in which the Greek city-states participated. Macedonia was not considered Greek. Philip II king of Macedonia was denied entry to the Olympics and had to fake up an ancestry linking him to an ancient Greek hero to get in. His soldiers could not speak or understand Greek easily, and Philip and his son Alexander the great had to have interpreters when they gave orders/briefings in Greek to combined Greek/Macedonian groups.
Why was Alexander the Great easily able to capture the Persian Empire?
It was not easy, taking ten methodical years to do. He captured the eastern Mediterranean ports to eliminate the Persian navy threat to Macedonia and Greece, and then defeated the Persian armies, then captured the outlying provinces to the east.
True or false in the 300s BC Macedonia easily defeated the Greek city-states?
True - the 330s.
Why were Cortez and Pizarro able to conquer the Incas and Aztecs fairly easily?
Cortez and Pizarro were able to conquer the Incas and Aztecs fairly easily due to several factors. These factors include superior military technology such as firearms, steel weapons, and armor, as well as the strategic use of horses, which were unfamiliar to the indigenous peoples. Additionally, the Spanish benefited from alliances with indigenous groups who were enemies of the Aztecs and Incas, as well as the devastating impact of European diseases like smallpox, which decimated the native populations. The Spanish also exploited internal divisions and political instability within the Aztec and Inca empires to their advantage.
Why did the ancient Greece become a seafaring people?
The geography of Greece caused the Greeks to be sea traders in many ways. For a few ways I think u should read my report. In one one case Greece is surrounded by water on three sides. That means Greece is a pininsula. Another way is that if they needed resources they could easily just go up 2 Shqiperia. But if they needed things they didnt have any other choice but 2 go and look towards the sea. And on the c they could also fish so if I was in Greece I would look towards the c.
How do you xxplain why the rest of Greece was so easily conquered by Phillip of Macedon and the Macedonian Army?
Greece wasn't "conquered" by Macedonia it was united under Macedonian Hegemony. Philip II wanted to unite the Greek city-states under his leadership so that he could spearhead a campaign to conquer Persia. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. As the eminent historian, J.B. Bury writes, "Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon". Thr Corinthian League, under the brilliant leadership of Alexander the Great, would go on to conquer the mighty Persian Empire and build an Empire spreading the Greek language, culture and civilization, stretching from Greece through Egypt to India. There were a number of factors for Philip's success. Firstly, Philip had modernized his army and changed army tactics and weaponry, making his army the strongest fighting force in all of Greece. Secondly, Greece was divided in a number of small, internally divided and always quarreling city-states and Philip (who only used military force when briberies, subterfuge and diplomatic means had failed) had no trouble playing one against the other. There was only one State - Sparta - that stated it would fight the Macedonians tooth and nail if they tried an invasion of Sparta. Philip and later Alexander then decided to leave Sparta alone.
How was Philip ii able to conquer Athens so easily?
Philip II united Greece under Macedonian Hegemony.Philip II, king of the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedonia located in the northern Greek peninsula, united the Greek city-states under his hegemony so that he could lead a campaign to conquer Persia. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. As the eminent historian, J.B. Bury writes, "Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon".Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great, was able to unite Greece through a combination of diplomatic and military skills along with good fortune. His tactical and strategic skills may be most important, yet it should be noted that he made use of favorable alliances when most advantageous to Macedon. The disunity of Greek city-states further contributed to their demise and Philip's success. After Philip II's assassination, his famous son Alexander the Great would take the united Greek army on to conquer the Persian empire all the way to India.
Why did Spaniards easily conquer the Philippines?
bongga sila,
In what year did the Macedonia easily defeated the greek city-states?
300s B.C
How was Spain able to conquer the Philippines easily?
spain was able to conquer the philippines easily because the had not enough teamates to gather around and make plans for it """but they werent able to survive from the spains.
What cultural features did all Greeks share?
A language and gods and goddesses. There were leagues which oversaw religious and cultural matters, the most notable of which was the Delphic (or Great Amphictyonic) League. The Olympic Games was a religious festival in which the Greek city-states participated. Macedonia was not considered Greek. Philip II king of Macedonia was denied entry to the Olympics and had to fake up an ancestry linking him to an ancient Greek hero to get in. His soldiers could not speak or understand Greek easily, and Philip and his son Alexander the great had to have interpreters when they gave orders/briefings in Greek to combined Greek/Macedonian groups.
Why was Alexander the Great easily able to capture the Persian Empire?
It was not easy, taking ten methodical years to do. He captured the eastern Mediterranean ports to eliminate the Persian navy threat to Macedonia and Greece, and then defeated the Persian armies, then captured the outlying provinces to the east.
In the 1500s how did Spain conquer the Philippines so easily and expand its empire in the East?
The Filipinos were not united and were easy for the Spanish to conquer. e2020 right?.... hope everyone passes.
How did Washington feel about strong alliances?
He felt as a general that he could easily conquer British Canada
Is it true or false that Macedonia easily defeated the Greek city?
Which Greek city - there were over 2,000 of them. He certainly defeated Thebes and Athens.
True or false in the 300s BC Macedonia easily defeated the Greek city-states?
True - the 330s.
How do you use conquer in a sentence?
The climber knew it would take all of his strength to conquer the mountain. Until the 20th century, larger countries would routinely conquer smaller or weaker ones.
