What were the differences between the ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks ?

Question

What were the differences between the ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks ?

Answer 1

You mean what were the differences between the ancient macedonians and the rest of ancient Greeks right?

Macedonians,just like the other greek city-states,(spartans,Thebans,athenians) they have diferent regimes and they did focus in diferent things.

Athenians were more "elited" and they focus on science.Spartans were Athletic and they focus on personal strength

Athenians were the only that had democracy as a regime.

But they had one common.even if they fought each other for "who's gonna be the leader" they were united against the persians....Alll the Greeks united against persians

Answer 2

Not a lot as far as the people were concerned. Macedonia was regarded as a backward part of Greece.

However, if you are asking why the Macedonians were victorious over the rest of Greece, it was because of Technology. The Macedonians developed better weapons and techniques while the rest of Greece was content to sit back and depend on what they had. You know the sort of thing.. "if it was good enough for Achilles, it is good enough for us now".

The Greek phalanx depended on the self supplied Armour of the heavy Hoplite. Such Armour had to be affordable by the average (reasonably wealthy) citizen. That meant it was not particularly complex or technologically advanced.

The Macedonians studied this armour and the consequent tactics and made a few changes. The shields are smaller and lighter than with a traditional hoplite phalanx, the sarissa (spear) is twice as long as the traditional spears. They also made use of cavalry to a greater degree than had ever been done before.

The Tactics changed to suit. For one thing, the unit size increased. This basically meant that when the phalanx confronted each other, the one with the greatest number usually won. Discipline was high, much higher than in the rest of the Greeks that would quite often leave the battlefield before the battles were over so they could visit their homes.

Another thing they did was to reduce the baggage train. The phalanx carried with it a fairly minimal baggage train, with only one servant for every ten men. This gave it a marching speed that contemporary armies could not hope to match — on occasion forces surrendered to Alexander simply because they were not expecting him to show up for several more days.

Answer 3

The Macedonians are a blend of Greeks and Slavs, who came to the area during medieval times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of...

Answer 4

Geography?  Time?

Answer 5

Macedonian was a city state in Greece. The people thought that they were directly related to Hercules and Alexander the Great was from their.  

Answer 6

Not much really..they all belived in the same gods and the same mythology.they all spoke greek and wrote greek,they all where city states of greece every city state had a king,except for athens who where governed by archons(initialy they had kings) "cliethenes" saw to that which bought about the idea of democracy.each archon was elected by the people.to be an archon  you would have to be edcuated  a soldier who rose  in the ranks as a leader .a land onwer and some times a money lender .ALL greek city states wared on each other at many diffrent times for many diffrent reasons from land disputes to ridiculous things as how to pray to a certian diety  many where mere skirmishes..some where major battles like the Peloponisian wars where they last many years and even reignited after years of truce.which the main army,s where SPARTA AND ATHENS.many other city states sided to the state they saw gains.some changed mid stream..in the end of the Peloponisian wars  SPARTA ,won  but athens  still remanined as its own soverinty. THE MACEDONIAN city state..was viewd as a backward society compared to most greek city states which developed in many facets of the Arts but the macedons where mostly content with thier goats and defending them selves thier learned state of the arts did not start to flourish till phillip the second came to the throne...he saw that greeks had to be united..as one country under one king..(but greeks in general dont like that) even up to this day(look at modern history we done away with our king  we prefer the democratic vote).BUT never the less phillip saw that greece needed unity..its true he changed many tactics of war the calvary was instrumental to most of his victorys but also macedonian soldier was lighter and could move more quicker than the tradtional greek soldier one aspect was the ASPITHA(shield) intial aspitha,s where as big as the man it protected and one bravenes of a soldier was that he could bare the whieght of the aspitha.let alone fight with weapons and other armour...THE GREEK HOPLITE was a fighting machine .as far as ONE on ONE was concerned BUT in skirmishes he was lost the hoplites where usally bought in last in to the battle..one could assimulate the greek hoplite as a medievial knight who was a very heavy fighting. machine which where alwasy the last ones to go in to battle . and just like the knights of the medevil period the greek hoplites had to buy thier own armour.most hoplites where of wealthy families as most knights where.  ANY way phillip developed the phalanx BUT  his son ALEXANDER   the great ...  perfected it. also the long spear called a SARRISA.. double in length it could DECIMATE an enemy soldier from a distance with out "contact" and not to mention the thrust power which under charge it would litratley cut a man in half...IN general PHILLIPS ARMY WAS more mobile and hence more victorys as to the cumbersome HOPLITES ..the decsive war to unite all greeks under ONE KING was at CHISSRON RIVER in THESSALY.. THE MACEDONIANS won. and they where the new rulers of one united greece PHILLIP the second beign the FIRST UNITED RULER OF GREECE....... BUT THE UNION WAS IN ESSENCE ONLY AS FAR AS POLOTICS GO.many greek city states still resented  to be under one king.but att he same time saw the idea of beigng UNITED WAS good thign as well. SO THEY PUT UP WITH IT ON BOTH SIDES and kept thier sqaubllings to dark alleys attacks..BUT EVEN BEFORE PHILLIP UNITED THE GREEKS they united as ONE TO THE THREAT OF THE PERSIANS not once but 3 times EVEN THOUGH THEY STILL HAD WARING FANCTIONS BETWEEN THEM SELVES  ....but LET IT BE SAID the ONLY GREEK CITY STATE  PHILLIP COULD NTO BEAT WAS THE SPARTANS..but they did come to greeces aid against the persians AND where also united UNDER PHILLIPS CONTROLL OF GRECCE but he was not in controll of them... NOT EVEN THE ROMANS COULD BEAT THE SPARTANS FOR A VERY LONG TIME....So phillips army now had the advantge of a smaller shield more calvary use and a lighter soldier in battle with the development of the phallanx and to double in numbers later... which would be a key element in the art of war.and the decive win would be  NUMBERS althougth DARUIS HAD HUGE NUMBERS he was whiegted with his charriots and his main army the IMORTALS WHERE HEAVLY DICIPLINED : IE they would only respond to one order: that was thier down fall. as the NEW ARMY of ALEXANDER the great.was very mobile and was pre.informed of what to do.and to make thier own decision when the chips where down. but their main objective was to keep the phalanx  toghter.. SOIN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION...i would say that the diffrence between each of them was that..the macedonian city state  gave unity to greece and a better art of war..AND  the rest of the greek city states gave ..macedonia the ARTS and and A HIGHER EDUCATION in to SOCIETY.AND IN TO POLOTICS... but every thing else  they had was very much the same..

Answer 7

Macedonia is in Greece. Together with the regions of Thrace and—sometimes—Thessaly, it is often referred to informally as northern Greece.

Answer 8

Not a lot. Basically geographic location.