The spread of culture in the Hellenistic Period

The word “Hellenistic” means “of or pertaining to things Greek”, and particularly to Greek culture.

The Hellenistic period is generally taken to be from the death of Alexander the Great (in 323 BC) to the first century BC, when the whole of the Greek world had been subsumed within the Roman Empire. It is therefore a relatively short interim period between classical Greece and the might of Rome. However, that connection was of vital importance in the development of European culture.

The ancient Greeks of the mainland and islands were very cultured in many ways, and were highly advanced in the fields of poetry, drama, art, music, architecture, education, politics, philosophy and religion. However, Greek culture was largely based on the city state, and the Greek people were not naturally outward looking, either in terms of trade or conquest. This all changed when Alexander the Great got going.

Alexander was not a native Greek but a Macedonian, but he received an education that was very much in the Greek model, being tutored by Aristotle at one stage. In cultural terms he was a virtual Greek. His conquests of Persia and Egypt therefore took Greek influences with him, and the cities he founded (usually called “Alexandria”) were Greek colonies in all but name.

However, there is no evidence that Alexander had a conscious wish to export Greek culture eastwards. The Hellenization of the east was more accidental than deliberate, and occurred mainly because Alexander’s empire allowed trade routes to flourish throughout the region.

The most famous Alexandria was undoubtedly that on the coast of Egypt, and this became, in the Hellenistic period, a major centre of Greek culture. Apart from its architecture, including the lighthouse that was one of the “Seven Wonders”, its library became the largest in the world until its final destruction in the 7^th century AD. It was reportedly founded by another of Aristotle’s pupils.

However, the main reason why Greek culture spread far beyond its own borders was the expansion of the Roman Empire. Whereas the Greeks were masters of culture but reluctant conquerors, the Romans were the opposite. Having no notable cultural background of their own, they were more than happy to absorb and adapt the culture of the people they took into their Empire.

Rome’s first encounter with the Greek world would have been via its colonies, such as Syracuse which was conquered in 212 BC. However, in this case the import of culture got off to a bad start, in that one of the victims of the taking of Syracuse was Archimedes, the mathematician.

Mainland Greece started to come under Roman control from 146 BC onwards, that being the date of the Battle of Corinth, although the total destruction of that city was hardly a highlight of cultural enrichment.

Later conquests were conducted less violently, so that cultural life in Greece was able to continue under Roman rule. Many Greeks also travelled to Rome and other parts of the Empire, taking their language and culture with them.

That high-born Romans were greatly impressed by what they found is evident from the cultural conquest referred to by the Roman poet Horace, when he wrote: “Captive Greece took her fierce conqueror captive, and introduced the arts to rustic Latium”. This was especially so in the realm of education, in that the somewhat haphazard methods of instruction used by Romans were brought face to face with organised Greek schools. Greek teachers came to Rome and the Romans willingly sat at their feet.

Indeed, so popular were the Greek teachers, who taught in their own language, that many upper-class Romans came to regard Greek as a superior language to Latin, which was relegated to being the language of the common people. It took the efforts of poets such as Horace, Virgil and Ovid to rescue Latin as a literary language, although it is notable that Virgil’s “Aeneid”, his greatest work, took Greek myth as its subject matter, extending the story of the Trojan War to tell how Rome was founded by one of its heroes. Virgil was also the master of the “eclogue”, a form of pastoral poetry first developed in Hellenistic Greece.

The Roman theatre was heavily influenced by that of Greece. Indeed, many plays performed on Roman stages were direct translations of Greek plays. Roman theatre design copied that of the Greeks, based on the semi-circular arena, and the Roman circus, for chariot racing, developed from the Greek hippodrome.

Greek music was also extensively copied and imitated, even down to the notation method used for writing and playing.

In philosophy, the two schools of thought that had most influence on Romans were both Greek in origin, namely Stoicism and Epicureanism. The former, with its emphasis on virtue as its own reward, an afterlife of sorts, and resolution in the face of adversity, spoke to the Roman mind, and continued to be developed well into the 2^nd century AD.

Greek religion also found a ready audience among the Romans, who adopted not only some Greek religious practices, such as divination, but also some of their gods and heroes, including Apollo and Heracles (renamed Hercules). Other Roman gods were identified with Greek equivalents, such as Jupiter/Zeus, Neptune/Poseidon and Minerva/Athena. The Greeks had a whole host of stories about their gods, which the Romans did not. Greek mythology therefore became the foundation for Roman mythology.

In the realm of architecture, Greek ideas were also exported to the world via the Romans. In particular, examples of the three Greek orders of architecture, Doric, Ionic and Corinthian, are found in countless buildings throughout the Empire, although later architects refined and adapted Greek ideas to suit their own needs.

The Greeks were great town planners, and their ideas of creating substantial public buildings and open spaces found their way into Roman thinking. For example, the “agora” of the Greek city became the “forum” in Roman hands, where the populace could gather in one place to exercise democracy or, in the Roman world, be harangued by orators.

In virtually every aspect of Greek culture, the Hellenistic period saw its wholesale exportation to the civilized world via the Romans. Because the Roman Empire was so extensive, Greek influence therefore spread throughout western Europe, northern Africa and the Middle East. After the fall of Rome, the influence continued in the succeeding Byzantine Empire, and in many of the languages of Europe.

Today, we can still see many signs of Greek culture in our cultural life, such as the words we use for theatrical concepts, including “scene”, “orchestra” and, indeed, “theatre”, and even in names of American honour societies that comprise (usually) three Greek letters.

It can therefore be seen that the Hellenistic Period, despite not contributing much that was culturally original in its own time, was crucially important in the spread of Greek culture throughout the civilised world.

© John Welford

Alexander the Great's major battles

Alexander the Great, born in 356 BC, was a warrior from a very young age, fighting his first battle, at Chaeronea, when only 18 years old. He spent virtually the whole of his short life as a campaigner, waging war firstly to defend the Kingdom of Macedonia and then to build an empire that was unrivalled at its time.

The Battle of Issus

The Battle of Issus (333 BC) probably counts as Alexander’s first major battle in his campaign against the Persians, whose forces, led by Darius III, outnumbered those of Alexander, although traditional estimates of Darius’s army comprising more than half a million men are probably gross exaggerations. Alexander had crossed the Hellespont into Asia Minor with a force of no more than 35,000 men, although he had probably doubled this number by the time of the battle, whereas Darius could certainly have commanded at least 100,000.

Alexander won the battle by making good use of his cavalry to form a mobile attack force that could pick off weaker elements of the Persian army and then retreat. The battle was decided when a direct assault on the Persian centre led to Darius fleeing the battle, leaving his wife, mother and children behind. These family members then became hostages; they were well treated by Alexander, but proved to be valuable bargaining chips in future dealings with Darius.

The Battle of Gaugamela

The next major battle between the two sides was in October 331 BC. The battle was fought at Gaugamela, although it is sometimes known as the Battle of Arbela. The modern Iraqi city of Mosul is not far away. Again, ancient sources have distorted the figures, but it is probable that Alexander had around 30,000 troops as against Darius’s 50,000. Alexander’s tactic was to encourage the Persian cavalry to attack his flanks, so that he could advance towards the centre, commanded by Darius himself. He also devised a trap to render useless the Persians’ new weapon, namely the battle chariot.

As at Issus, Darius proved to have little personal courage, and he once again fled the field. He retreated to Persepolis, the Persian capital, to rebuild the army, and was later murdered by Bessus, the ruler of Bactria, who then proclaimed himself King of Persia.

The Persian Gate

Alexander’s progress into Persia (modern day Iran) was through the Zagros Mountains, and it was at a pass known as the Persian Gate that he fell into an ambush led by the Persian general Ariobarzan. Alexander only had about half his army with him, and was taken totally by surprise by the ambush, which initially inflicted heavy losses, despite Ariobarzan only having about 700 men under his command. The action held the Macedonians at bay for about a month, but eventually Alexander was able to outflank the Persians and defeat them with a surprise attack of his own. There are stories that Alexander was shown the path through the mountains by a shepherd boy.

The Batte of the Hydaspes River

Alexander’s last major battle was at the Hydaspes River (now known as the Jhelum) in 326 BC. This was against the Indian King Porus, and occurred after Alexander had finally defeated the Persians and was advancing into India. For once, Alexander had a significant battle force under his command, probably as many as 55,000 men, but the opposing forces, although smaller, included about 200 war elephants, calculated to sow terror in the hearts of troops from far-off Europe.

The two armies were separated by the swift Hydaspes River. Alexander moved upstream to cross the river and return on the Indian bank, but gave the Indians the impression that the bulk of the army had stayed behind. Porus therefore only sent a small force to oppose them, and this was easily routed. He then realised that a greater force was needed and advanced with the bulk of his army, leaving the way clear for the rest of the Macedonian force to ford the river and attack the Indians from both sides.

Alexander appreciated that the war elephants were a powerful weapon, especially as they really did “frighten the horses”. He therefore adapted his tactics so that the cavalry were kept as far away from the elephants as possible.

Victory was assured, but at much greater cost than the Macedonians were used to. Alexander faced something of a mutiny, and this was therefore the furthest point of his conquests. He spent the rest of his campaign (only three more years before his death from disease at the age of 32) consolidating his empire in Persia and Mesopotamia.

Later generals learned much from studying Alexander’s battle tactics, particular his reliance on using fast cavalry units to outflank the enemy, the element of surprise, and his ability to change tactics at short notice when the occasion so demanded. Despite his youthful years, Alexander was certainly one of the cleverest generals ever to grace a battlefield.

© John Welford