Alexander III, known as Alexander the Great, is a name that the majority of people have come across, even thousands of years after his death. He was given the name “Alexander the Great” because of all his contributions in making the Persian empire veer in a completely different direction in such a short amount of time. Great amounts of people believe that he was deserving the that title. I, however, think that he should not have been awarded that title. I believe that he was not deserving of “the great” because he was cruel, his empire didn’t last, and all his actions were very extra and unnecessary. One reason that Alexander should not have been privileged with the title “the great” is because his actions proved him as a cruel person. According to documents B, C, and D, he fought brutal and gruesome battles, also taking the time to kill mass amounts of the citizens in conquered cities. In those same documents, there was also evidence of treating his own troops …show more content…
He failed to name an heir to continue the empire he created. Consequently, his empire only lasted 10 years after his death, which is information supported by document E. And since his empire didn’t end up surviving, the mass killings of innocent and fear-struck civilians from document C and the maltreatment of soldiers in document D were therefore almost pointless. And following the death of Alexander, his conquered areas started to fight against one another. Which concludes that Alexander fought during his lifetime, then caused even more fighting after his death. Also, it proves that he lacks the skill of being able to keep an empire organized enough for it to continue past death. This only demonstrates his strong suit, war, and how otherwise he just had the power of a normal man. Since he was considered a normal man in more areas than he was “the great”, I believe that he didn’t deserve that description to begin
I think Alexander the Great was not great because he made bad decisions, was cruel to his men, and he was very greedy. So do you think Alexander the Great was great? Or do you think he doesn't deserve the title “Great”. What truly makes someone “great”? Everyone has their own opinion, but I think he
Was Alexander the Great really great? To earn the title great, he must have done something astounding. Alexander the Great had fulfilled many goals in his life which made him one of the world's most impactful leaders, resulting from his education, his amazing military training, which lead to his many strategic accomplishments, and through transforming the Greek culture. First, Alexander received education in science, geography, and literature by Aristotle. He also learned many military techniques. Second, Alexander accomplished what no others could, he conquered the Persian Empire in just 3 years, which stood for 2 centuries. Third, Alexander impacted the Greek culture and started a new age, the Hellenistic age, this was a time of peace when
One reason that Alexander doesn’t deserve to be called great is that, he slaughter thousands of people. In document C, it states that, “Two thousands men of military age were crucified.” The evidence shows that many people were killed while he was growing his empire. Also, the evidence shows that he is mean because many people were killed in the fighting.
Alexander the Great truly does deserve the word great in his name. He was fantastic leader, who conquered thousands of square miles, defeated one of the best military’s at the time. He was devoted to his work, he was an honorable and hard-working leader who cared about his army and people greatly.
Alexander should not have been called great, because of the many people he killed, and the land he
Only a small number of people in the world have ever earned the title, "Great". Alexander III of Macedonia is one of lucky few. Alexander the Great started his reign in Macedonia at the age of twenty after his father was assassinated. He then proceeded to expand his kingdom to the largest in the world. So, just how great was he? Alexander the Great was an undeniably brilliant military strategist, yet you could still argue that he doesn't deserve his title because of his cruel treatment of his conquered people and massive ego. This paper will cover his greatness, not-so-greatness, and why he can be a little bit of both.
Was Alexander the Great really as great as he sounds? Since he is such a famous person in history, people tend to think he is great but I think not. According to the background essay, “Alexander was born 356 BCE.” It also states, “his father and mother prepared him for kingship by hiring the philosopher Aristotle, to teach him academic subjects.” because of that Alexander developed a high opinion of himself. Was Alexander the Great actually as great as he sounds? Alexander was not great because he killed 100,000 people, he was very greedy, and was brutal and often tortured people.
Many historians have argued about Alexander the Great and if he deserves to be called great. Being 20 years old, Alexander the Great conquered most of the Persian Empire. His father, Philip II, was assassinated and Alexander III ruled over his father's Macedonian Empire. He and his army was called invincible but Alexander gets struck down by a disease called malaria in Babylon. How Great was Alexander the Great? Alexander is worthy to be called “Great”because he helped spread the Greek culture and he was selfless.
Secondly, Alexander wasn’t great because he was ruthless. In Document E it states, “Estimated enemy soldiers and civilians killed in four major battles was 100,000” (Doc. E). The documents proves that Alexander wasn’t great because that was only the number of enemies of Alexander, and it didn’t include his own soldiers he forced to go into 4 major battles, probably killing thousands of soldiers each battle. He also went and killed innocent civilians who had nothing to do with the fighting, but were still killed in the battle. In addition, Document B stays, “...Alexander then threw his calvary in a circle around the entire force, and ordered the infantry to lock shields, to group tightly and to advance as a phalanx…” (Doc. B). This fact proves
Alexander the great created a long lasting impressing legacy for himself, his warriors, and his great empire. Alexander was born in 356 B.C.E. in Macedonia, just 20 years later he became the King of an empire because of his father's early death (BGE). Alexander conquered many of the world’s greatest empires ever know, and doing so at a very young age! He created one of the strongest most feared empires seen (Docs A & E). So, how great was Alexander the Great? He showed many signs and characteristics of leadership and remarkable achievement throughout his life and his rule in Macedonia. Alexander was great for three big reasons, he created a strong and feared empire, had a long lasting legacy, and he was a smart strategic leader.
Alexander the Great, born of King Philip of Macedonia, was one of the greatest conquerors of history. In my opinion, Alexander was a great leader and warrior. For example, in Document B, Alexander used strategy to win over a battle. The strategy he used was complicated, but well thought out; Alexander moved his troops in all different directions to keep Porus puzzled, and took his cavalry to various points along the river bank where he would create a war cry so that Porus would parallel the movements on the other sides of the river until he no longer responded. Now Porus elephants were boxed in, and the elephants trampled their own men because they had no driver's upon them. In this way Alexander won a battle, and through his cleverness, he
Alexander has too much integrity making him seem rude. Document D says, “Alexander was himself steering the trireme (a warship with oars), when a strong gust of wind fell on his broad-brimmed Macedonian hat, and the band that encircled it. The hat, being rather heavy, fell into the water. However, the band was carried along by the wind and was caught by one of the reeds growing near the tomb of one of the ancient kings….One of the sailors swam off towards the band and snatched it from the reed. But he did not carry it in his hands because it would get wet while he was swimming. He therefore put it around his own head and brought it to the king. Most of the biographers of Alexander say that the king gave him a talent* as a reward for his zeal. Then he ordered his head to be cut off because the prophets had explained that....he should not allow the head that had worn the royal head band to be safe.” That isn’t the only person Alexander has killed. This proves that Alexander the Great was not actually great because killing people for silly reasons is not a good
I think Alexander deserves the title of Alexander the Great. He was 20 years old when he launched his invasion into the Persian Empire. The evidence I will use are these documents. The legend of the helmet, document D. The battle of Porus, document B. Alexander's empire compared to the Roman Empire, document A, E. I think Alexander was great, because of the size his empire and how little time it took him to make.
Alexander was an outstanding ruler of Greece in his short amount of years that he ruled. “Alexander became king when he was only 20 years old and after his father Philip was assassinated in 336 B.C.E.” (BGE). Alexander was Creative, also how he made some remarkable achievements and how he had concern for others. Was Alexander Great or Not Great? Three reasons that show that are his empire was at it’s greatest was 2,000,000 sq. miles, the way he puzzled his enemies at war and how he adapted many other cultures to his empire.
Alexander III of Macedon, more commonly known as Alexander the Great, is one of the most legendary figures in our history and in the history of the world. His conquests and endeavors echoed far and wide, bringing about new eras and ideas to the world. Alexander earned his place in the world’s history and is worthy of the title ‘The Great’ because of his military prowess, his idealism and his legacy.