@@build.betteryou first of all sorry about bad dictation English is not my first language when u think about alexander u think about a dude that passed turkey and conquered every thing till india well there are soo many different theories about him not being real or he was acually persian and war was civil or he was real but he didnt conquer all persia too many proofs as well for example Persepolis couldnt burn on fire chemically and persepolis acually was used few hundred years after him or indiand dont have such thing as puros the ways that he moves doesnt make sence or how he won the battle grunicus when he was lost acually every thing like his troops morals less numbers out dated phalanx no knowledge of terrain (this only was ONLY one of his battles )too many problems wit his other battles or how even a small masedonia gathered 60k soldiers or a few hundred problems from Babylonian tablets that the historians acually got misunderstand alexander with a person who was acually from syria that he sets persian paces on fire befor entering babylon and they thought that this person was alexander cuz the name of birth place of both persons are like exactly same (pala or something) other thing is about darius III that they think he wasnt real too cuz he doesnt have coins genealogical tree on persian tablets nor a tomb and persians sorces deny his existence only place that he existed was when they wanned to mintion alexander and soo many other confusing thing about his name that doesnt mach babylonian tablets other thing that seleucids have nothing abselutly nothing a few buildings that are for ashkanied dynesty not seleucids and some moveble objects like coin (they ruled 200 years for god sake) and one more important thing is that the closest record of alexander is about 200 years after him we dont have any greek record of him at his time other thing about his army ,in his army he had or greek or macedonian on the tablet BM 36761 come the word(hanayeed) and at the other side of the tablet comes (yamana)in the tablet BM36304 comes(haniye) and at the other side comes(makadon)in here we have 2 names yamana and makadon the question is that re those even mesedonian or greece? on the bisoton that was writen by darus I wich he was involved in cival struggle comes the word ( yamana) and (makadon) so we should find out that yamana and makadon are both were in persia after he conquered macedonia he wrote a diffrent tablet wich is in his tom and come 1 new name (SKODRA) there are tooooo many thing about alexander that doesnt make any sence this was only 1% of his problems that i toled u if u want more just tell me
An*
so, this is nothing compared to the armies of China.
What about Cannae?
no. 3
Its in there
You are just talking about Western battle fields. Battle of Changping, 260 BCE 450000 vs 600000
Do you think that those numbers could be realistic?
@@build.betteryou Look it up.
no such thing as alexander bod
Elaborate
@@build.betteryou first of all sorry about bad dictation English is not my first language when u think about alexander u think about a dude that passed turkey and conquered every thing till india well there are soo many different theories about him not being real or he was acually persian and war was civil or he was real but he didnt conquer all persia too many proofs as well for example Persepolis couldnt burn on fire chemically and persepolis acually was used few hundred years after him or indiand dont have such thing as puros the ways that he moves doesnt make sence or how he won the battle grunicus when he was lost acually every thing like his troops morals less numbers out dated phalanx no knowledge of terrain (this only was ONLY one of his battles )too many problems wit his other battles or how even a small masedonia gathered 60k soldiers or a few hundred problems from Babylonian tablets that the historians acually got misunderstand alexander with a person who was acually from syria that he sets persian paces on fire befor entering babylon and they thought that this person was alexander cuz the name of birth place of both persons are like exactly same (pala or something) other thing is about darius III that they think he wasnt real too cuz he doesnt have coins genealogical tree on persian tablets nor a tomb and persians sorces deny his existence only place that he existed was when they wanned to mintion alexander and soo many other confusing thing about his name that doesnt mach babylonian tablets other thing that seleucids have nothing abselutly nothing a few buildings that are for ashkanied dynesty not seleucids and some moveble objects like coin (they ruled 200 years for god sake) and one more important thing is that the closest record of alexander is about 200 years after him we dont have any greek record of him at his time other thing about his army ,in his army he had or greek or macedonian on the tablet BM 36761 come the word(hanayeed) and at the other side of the tablet comes (yamana)in the tablet BM36304 comes(haniye) and at the other side comes(makadon)in here we have 2 names yamana and makadon the question is that re those even mesedonian or greece? on the bisoton that was writen by darus I wich he was involved in cival struggle comes the word ( yamana) and (makadon) so we should find out that yamana and makadon are both were in persia after he conquered macedonia he wrote a diffrent tablet wich is in his tom and come 1 new name (SKODRA) there are tooooo many thing about alexander that doesnt make any sence this was only 1% of his problems that i toled u if u want more just tell me
@@diakoshiralizadeh5531 Honestly, I would rather burn myself alive than see you try to type again.
FFS, BC, none of this BCE bollox.
Both have the same meaning