Why didn't Alexander the Great conquer Sparta?

Some say that Alexander the Great was Archid, or Herculede, and the Spartans were also Hercules. So Alexander respected his relatives.

Before his father, Alexander Philip II, he wrote a letter to the Spartans saying: "You had better join our Greek alliance against the barbarians, for if I invade your territory, your glorious city will have nothing."

The Spartans answered him with one word: if

I think that's why. To invade Sparta, you must overcome sellacia, a very narrow passage between mountains. In Selassia, the Spartans organized a technological lake in order to flood the passage in the event of an invasion. That is why even if the Thebans defeated la Cadmont Phalanx twice, they did not invade Sparta, but in order to control the entry and exit of spartan troops, a new urban megacity was developed about 20 miles north of Selassia.

While I applied for thoughtful people, some people thought my post didn't answer that question. Then unfortunately, I have to remind them that spartan first and last invasion was in 222 BC, when Antigonus Dothan invaded during the Battle of Selassia

And this is only possible through treason

Thus we have come to a critical juncture where the coming great conflict will determine the future of the Greek [Greek] world and, perhaps without the adversaries realizing it, it will be the tombstone of ancient classical Hellenism.

On the one hand, King Antigonus Dosson of Macedon was a professional soldier and war was a part of his life. His joy and pleasure are closely related to armament. Treating his army as a pawn on a chessboard, a tried general who pays and demands to carry out his orders. A man who considers his administration to be supernatural and ascends to the position of God, and therefore demands that he be worshipped as a god!

Cleomenes III, on the other hand, the king of the lacedaemonians, the most capable civilized world of his time, enjoyed a high reputation everywhere as a military leader, but was also the leader of the social revolution. He did not believe in mercenaries, but in the army of free citizens. He did not budge, but tried to promote the social revolution. It has nothing to do with the rulers of the Hellenistic world. He is a leader who wants freedom and equal rights for all. It was the man who terrorized the establishment of his time, the man who was provoked by the wealthy aristocracy, the absurdity in the eyes of leaders who had experienced the suffering and labor of thousands of impoverished and oppressed people. He is a model of human tragedy at the time of the collapse of the classical world. The man who is trying to find a way out in a new combination, a world of politicians.

Antigonus would arrive in Serrasia, north of Laconia, with an army of thirty thousand, not counting the auxiliary troops, unlike Cleomenez, who had twenty thousand, but they were also forced to do the work of his auxiliary forces. The Macedonian army is analyzed as follows: Phalanx of ten thousand Macedonians. Three thousand cavalry and three hundred cavalry Galatians and Agriatics, three thousand three hundred Machaeans, a thousand great men. They were followed by the Viotians, Acananinians, and Illyrians, led by the famous pirate Demetrios Farios, who, as an ally of the Romans, crossed the Macedonians and plundered the Ionian Sea. (The Romans would "settle" him in their own way within a few years.)

Cleomenes has the advantage of choosing a location and choosing the most suitable location. Selassia is the stronghold at the entrance to the Orotas Valley. The two roads from argos and arcadia to laconia intersect at this point, as on one side parnonas and taigetos rise, while Cleomenes decides to fight there. In every way, Cleomeini's position is advantageous.

Historians of antiquity and modern times have said that if the battle had been postponed for two days, it would never have happened. Antigonus should have left Macedonia in as haste as he had, as the news of the Invasion of the Illyrian tribes had actually taken effect. This is both Plutarch's view and part of Polybius's view. But Antigonus left with a small part of his army, and the rest was left to Alatos, who would continue the war until the final autumn, where the final battle might take place elsewhere. But we may or may not talk about history because we need to look at what ultimately happened, not what happened.

The reality is that the Battle of Selassia left its mark on the history of the Aegean world. And because the Aegean played a decisive role in the sense of globalization at the time, Selassia was a decisive moment on a global scale, indirectly but clearly leading to the Greco-Roman conquest

answer. It is logical for adversaries not to know the importance of this particular conflict to the future, as in 338 BC. In the Battle of Caronia, they could not foresee its importance. For after the Battle of Caronia, our classic world degenerated, and Selassia we are coming to an end! Crucially, Cleomenes fought because he didn't have enough time, because a lack of allies, materialism, and wealth put pressure on him. Instead, Antigonus tried to use a patient strategy to weaken Cleomene's smaller power, as his wealth was enormous and he had the contributions of many allies.

Polybius could not refuse to write that Antigonus admired Cleomeni's strategy and fortifications. He went on to say that Antigonus had not for days been unable to find an empty and impossible place to take advantage of. According to historians written by Plutarch, Antigonus's victory was based on the deployment of part of his army in the deep valleys of the gorgilos torrents that flowed into the Oinounta River. This passage inserts nightfall, waiting for slogans, among the Spartans, divided into two parts, one on eve Hill, led by Euclid's cleomenes brothers, and the other on olympus Hill, led by Cleomenes himself. Cleomenes briefly failed to see illyrians and acarnanians, and summoned Damotles to ask him if he could control all of the army background points. Damotles assured him that everything was fine, and Cleomenis had no doubts, for he knew that no one had betrayed him before that. But Damotes was paid by the Antigonus to cover up the Macedonian invasion, at least as the historian Plutarch believes. Polybius agreed that the section gave victory, but did not say betrayal.

Macedonian phalanx - a large sarisophore phalanx fought during the Hellenistic period

Cleomenes affirmed his back and attacked, forcing Antigonus to retreat about a kilometer. After exhaustion and pain, Antigonus held up a sheet, which was a signal that the Illyrians suddenly appeared and began to withdraw from Euclid (those Illyrians should have been safe to avoid, since Damotlers had previously been assured by Cleomus). Then he sent a section to fight the Illyrians. The Illyrians were under considerable pressure as the Macedonian cavalry hesitated without orders. The situation was saved by Philopie, who took the initiative and defeated Euclid with his men. The Macedonian phalanx then created a rift in the front line, separating the two hills. Cleomenis, who was still fighting, was unable to help his brother and watched him get lost. Plutarch wrote, he said: "Dear, my dear brother, you have always been brave, spartan children are jealous, women are unforgivable. ”

Cleomenes then found himself in the mountains, everywhere. Polybius writes that despite the massacre of Euclid and his division, the battle alternated in a matter of hours. The battle continued until nightfall. Cleomenez's army was all on the battlefield! He managed to escape and reached Sparta with several cavalrymen. Polybius wrote that few of Cleomenez's twenty thousand people survived, and that may be right. Revolution, the illusion of Cleominis is erased!

Resources:

Polybius: History

So suspicious of my sincerity, Alexander the Great had only one way to overcome Selassia: treason. That was why he did not invade Sparta.

I think everyone knows that Alexander never used treason and treason in his achievements, instead he attacked darius's traitors!!!!!!!!!