Changes

The most well-documented period of ancient Greek history and probably the best -known era of all Greek history, modern and ancient, is the Hellenistic Period (323-31 BC). The Hellenistic Period was marked by well-detailed sculpture, monumental architecture, excellent literature, and the overall expansion of Greek/Hellenic culture to the Near East. The ancient kingdoms of Egypt and Babylon took on an increasingly Greek character during the Hellenistic Period, but perhaps somewhat ironically the “Greekness” of those who brought Hellenic culture to the east was often questioned.

In order to understand the origins of ancient Macedon and the Macedonian people, it is important to understand how they were related to the Greeks of Athens, Sparta, and the other traditional Greek city-states. The Kingdom of Macedon, sometimes known as Macedonia, was located in what is today the northern part of the nation-state of Greece, but in ancient times its place in the Hellenic world was often dubious. Like the Greeks of the city-states, the Macedonians were descended from Indo-European tribes that migrated to the Balkans in the late Late Bronze Age, particularly the Myceneans and the Dorians. Most modern scholars believe the ancient Macedonian language was a dialect of Greek, <ref> Hammond, N. G. L. “Macedonians.” In <i>The Oxford Classical Dictionary.</i> Third Edition. Edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pgs. 905-6</ref>, which is certainly a critical element of ancient culture’s identities, but it was not the only factor. More importantly than language, though, the Macedonians shared many cultural affinities and attributes with the Greeks of the city-states.

The Macedonians enjoyed banquets/<i>symposia</i> just like the other Greeks, <ref> King, Carol J. <i>Ancient Macedonia.</i> (London: Routledge, 2018), p. 12</ref> but more importantly their burial methods reflected those of the Bronze Age Myceneans, who were essentially the ancestors of the classical Greeks. The Macedonians interred their deceased nobles in large tumulus style tombs that employed vaulted roofs to help them survive the tests of time. <ref> Saatsoglou-Paliadeli, Chryssoula. “In the Shadow of History: The Emergence of Archaeology.” <i>Annual of the British School at Athens</i> 94 (1999) pgs. 363, 357</ref> he tomb style is also a reflection in the religious similarities between the Macedonians and the city-state Greeks: the Macedonians for the most part worshipped the same gods as the Greeks and followed the same rituals, with some local variations. <ref> Hammond, p. 905</ref> Later, the similarities between the Macedonians and the Greeks of the city-states became even more numerous, but early in classical Greek history there were also some notable differences.

Little is known about the early Argead kings, other than they claimed descent from the Greek city of Argos. The early Argead kings’ large tumulus style tombs indicate they possessed considerable resources and access to labor, but details are lacking. Herodotus and the first century BC Greek historian Diodorus both included Macedonian king-lists in their works, although Herodotus’s list was written before the later Argead rulers came to power.

Based on what is known from the later Argead kings, modern scholars believe the early Argeads established a succession policy whereby rule passed from father to son on the basis of primogeniture. Blood ties were also apparently a very important an essential aspect of royal Macedonian ideology, as only men of pure Argead descent were allowed to claim the throne. <ref> King, pgs. 52-55</ref> Although the ideological basis for Macedonian kingship was straightforward and seemingly simple, there were some inherent problems.

Due to the lack of codification and rampant factionalism, Macedonian kings often had their careers end at sword point. Archaelaus Archelaus came to power by assassinating the son of Perdiccas and marrying the boy’s mother, and in turn he was later murdered during a hunt. <ref> King, pgs. 50-51</ref> Besides Archelaus, Amytas II, Pausansias, Alexander II, and most famously, Philip II, all died in assassination plots that were hatched from within the Macedonian nobility. Despite the often violent way in which power changed hands in ancient Macedon, the state prospered and grew, primarily due to the strength of its military.

Nearly all of the ancient Greek states exhibited at least a fair amount of martial prowess. The Spartans are best known for their rigorous military training and courage in the face of great odds, but the Macedonians were just as brave, more innovative, and ultimately more successful in the long-term. Whereas the Greeks of the city-states either relied on hoplites or marines, cavalry was the backbone of the Macedonian military. From the origins of the Macedonian state, horse borne nobles known as <i>hetiroi</i>, which was also a term for the king’s closest companions, led armies into battle against the Illyrians, Thracians, Epirots, and the Greek city-states to the south. The rank-and-file of the Macedonian army were infantry who for centuries fought in the hoplite style of the city-states, but later adopted new methods that eventually changed the face of warfare in the Hellenic world. Philip II and his generals introduced a new, longer spear used by the infantry known as the <i>sarissai</i>. The <i>sarissai</i> was fifteen to eighteen feet long, which gave the soldiers an advantage over the shorter spears used by hoplites, but most importantly , Macedonian infantry fought in a diamond -shaped phalanx, making hoplite attempts to penetrate their formations nearly impossible. <ref>King, pgs. 107-12</ref> The combination of cavalry, <i>sarissai</i> spears, and the diamond phalanx made the traditional hoplite soldier obsolete, allowing the Macedonians to roll through the Greek city-states one after another.