Alexander Plutarch's Influence On Alexander The Great

Alexander’s empire stretched from the Aegean Sea to the Indus River. (Doc. 3) The land he controlled had many different terrains and would have been different to obtain, but Alexander’s desire to control the “whole world” consumed him. Even when he controlled a large amount of land, he still wanted to gain more and more. (Doc. 2) With a feather-plumed helmet and himself on a horse in the very front of every battle, Alexander made himself an easy target for enemies. (Doc. 6) This is a brave and courageous gesture he made every battle and he knew the dangers of doing that, but still did it anyway. Alexander’s vast land he conquered connected many of these cities and eventually created the Hellenistic Era. In the city of Persepolis, Alexander took over and added it to his collection of cities he now controlled. (Doc. 4) Both saying positives and negatives about Alexander, the document remain

Father: Although I believe Alexander has true belief in his own divinity, I can accept that he exploits it to use as propaganda to gain loyalty within the Persian Empire. Propaganda is necessary, although many Macedonians do not see the correlation to Alexander’s divinity. Without this dramatized status there is no blind following from the Persians. Alexander proved himself

Many people fail to realize that Alexander has had a definite affect on us today, although not as great as he would have had on people of the past. In most parts the world today, Alexander The Great is considered a legend; however, in some places, Alexander is considered a god. One of the most notable people in history, Alexander has reached an iconic status in our world today. He possibly may have even been referred to in the Quran (Surah 18:89-98). There are still many stories told about him including folktales, and movies. In modern Iran, Alexander is still known as an evil king who nearly destroyed the ancient Persian culture and religion. Although the effect of “Alexander Mania” has died down since the time of his reign, you can still see the mark that he has left on today’s world.

Great men have lived on the face of the earth and left marks of their prowess and legacy that men of the present and even the future find it hard to emulate; a good example of such men is Alexander the Great. This paper seeks to explain further Alexander’s military genius and its positive impact on military impact over the past centuries. The paper also gives a well thought analysis why Alexander was so much successful in his wars and conquests. His big empire spread all the way from Gibraltar to the Punjab and in his leadership made Greek the lingua franca of his new World (Cary, M, 1932).

Plutarch (45-120 AD), a Greek biographer and moral philosopher, is the author of Life of Antony: an ancient source chronicling the life and dealings of Mark Antony (83-30 BC). Part of a larger collection of biographies focused on prominent Roman and Greek figures, the Life of Antony was intended as a character study (Fear, 2008). Plutarch was exceedingly intrigued by the ways in which the personalities, integrities and shortcomings of legendary men influenced the path of history. Life of Antony is infamous for its amalgamation of history and myth (Kimball, 2000). In the modern sense, Plutarch would not be considered a true historian. However, the source gives notable insight into significant figures in Antony’s life in particular Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt (69-30 BC). It is considered the principal ancient source of Cleopatra’s life (Fear, 2008), detailing the effect Plutarch believed Cleopatra to have on Antony.

The documents, “Life of Alexander” by Plutarch, and the account of the Jewish rebellion in Maccabees provide different perspectives on life in the Hellenistic world. Plutarch’s account presents a more positive view of the world after Alexander’s conquests, one where cultural exchange was encouraged and conquered peoples and their nations were benefited from their integration into the Greek empire. He begins with listing specific examples of how Alexander taught other cultures more civilized ways of life, such as how he “taught the Arachosians to till the soil”(Plutarch, 434). Plutarch’s position is that these civilizations are better off with Greek influence now being present in their culture. He notes that “Those who were vanquished by Alexander are happier than those who escaped his hand”(Plutarch, 434). This was because Alexander rejected the ideas of previous Greek leaders and did not treat non-Greeks are lesser subjects and encouraged the mixing of culture and people. (Come

For centuries, Alexander the Great has held an eminent place in history. Arguably one of the greatest men the world has ever known, the Macedonian King accomplished many great feats in his short, but glorious life. During his reign, Alexander played several roles in the process of conquering the Persian empire, and in the assessment of his character, aspects of Alexander's capabilities of both strengths and weaknesses must be explored in him as a person, a statesman and a leader.

In Life of Alexander, Plutarch employs extensive methods to depict Alexander as a man of both great ambition and self-control, despite Alexander’s degeneration of character by the end of his life. In the modern world, the regression from just conqueror to unrestrained tyrant is completely congruent with the contemporary concept of ambiguous morality. In the ancient world, however, everything is expressed and understood in clear constructs; therefore, one’s character cannot change within a lifetime—it can only be revealed. The history of Alexander the Great is well-known, so Plutarch has to address common knowledge and beliefs while persuading the audience to believe in his portrayal of Alexander. Plutarch establishes Alexander as a great ruler whose out of character actions are made sensible with reinterpretations of situations and are neutralized with stories proving his positive traits. Through these methods, Plutarch successfully resolves the issue of Alexander’s conflicts in character and is able to create a convincible and consistent character.

In the quote, Alexander was described as being an honorable man. He was known to fill his men confidence. He was bold and brave and did not let fear get in his way.

Alexander was born in July 356 B.C. to Philip II and his third wife, Olympias. The parents were far from a happy couple, and Alexander was raised primarily under the influence of his mother. At the age of thirteen, he was sent to study with Aristotle—an education that was for the most part formal. Aristotle promoted the belief that non-Greeks were naturally slaves, thus encouraging the prince's thirst for conquest. Ultimately, however, Alexander would reject this belief, at least implicitly, as he attempted to cooperate with the Persians even as he subjugated them.

His dictatorial traits are further seen in the way that he extended his territory and as a result extended his term in office as a consul. Although Caesar was a good leader, it was his faults that brought him to an end; Whereas, Alexander the Great was killed because of jealousy and his good deeds. This was to a point that Alexander was considered to be almost equal to a god especially to the Romans who gave him the title “Great”. He was a great speaker and his speeches were motivated by the hope for good authority and the spread of western civilization. In his greatest speech ever as addressed to both the Greeks and the Asians, he meant to pave way for a new dawn, after a period of war. This great speech

At a young age, Alexander believed his destiny was to exact revenge on the Persians for the burning of Athens 7, but as his campaign became longer and longer, his ideals changed and his vision for the ‘new world’ came into existence. His vision for a united Macedonia, along with conquered countries being absorbed into the empire, came with the prospect of global trade routes, intermingling of the Persian and Macedonian cultures and people, and interracial marriage between royalty of Persian and Macedonian empires 8. His vision was far more ambitious than what the Macedonian leaders had sought after: he attempted to combine the two greatest powers in the known world to create an even greater power 9. He was an idealist because where his predecessors had aimed to keep the Macedonian race ‘pure’ and rule all empires, including the Persians; Alexander sought to include the massive Persian population into the empire, utilizing their unique skills and culture, which would only benefit the kingdom as a whole 10. His many attempts to integrate the Persian people into his own included using Persian soldiers in his ranks, promoting interracial marriage, and even marrying 2 foreign princesses to better consolidate his vast empire 11. While his many attempts ultimately failed and the fragile alliance between the Persians and Macedonians fell apart, his

Alexander the Great is remembered as a conquering man who built one of the largest empires. Some describe him as a man with a vision of world harmony. Others see him as a blood thirsty man with a mental illness. One thing that cannot be argued is that he and his empire are fascinating studies. From his rise to power to his mysterious death is interesting, but even after he died the story is fascinating. Due to his death, his empire was divided and a long power-struggle began starting with his generals. Each account has its own story of war and betrayal. These days must have been hard for those in power; they never knew who they could trust. Only the ones who were skilled in the strategy of war and ruthless enough to maintain their power

In the second part, "Alexander the Great and Heroic Leadership", he details the life and conquests of Alexander the Great. He was a son of Philip II of Macedon whom Philip II had a great influence on Alexander and his methods as a soldier and commander. Throughout Alexander 's childhood, he was well educated in many areas suitable to a young royal. Alexander 's education included learning to sing and play the lyre, hunt and ride and how to debate, and to appreciate epic poetry, mostly as it related to Homer. On the eve of his march into Asia he was certainly one of the best-informed men in the Greek world. Alexander would become known worldwide for being the leader who did what no other could do before or since conquer states and entities on several continents and create a kingdom greater than any other. He was conquest of the Persian Empire and he marched with his men toward India. He

Alexander III of Macedon, widely known as Alexander the Great, is opinioned by some people to have been a ruthless man who only had a thirst for conquest , but according to others he was a man of intellect and “statesmanlike vision” (Hammond Preface). In N.G.L. Hammond’s book The Genius of Alexander the Great, as stated in the preface, he tries to refrain from writing based on his own opinion of Alexander, and instead analyzes the few surviving narratives on Alexander’s achievements in an unbiased manner. He portrays the conquests, struggles, and greatest achievements of Alexander’s career, such as the building of his empire that stretched from the eastern Mediterranean coast through Asia Minor and the