Alexander The Great Dbq Essay

Alexander the Great was not great because he made bad decisions. One bad decision he made was, in the legend of the helmet (Document D), his men offer him the helmet with water inside. Instead of not accepting it so his men could have

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

Alexander the Great was king of the Macedonians and one of the greatest generals in history. As a student of the Greek philosopher Aristotle, Alexander was embedded with lasting interests in philosophy, politics and warfare. As king, he settled problems by immediate action, making quick decisions and taking great risks. His armies overcame these risks by sheer force and by the ingenious tactics instilled in them by Alexander. He and his armies conquered the Persian Empire, which stretched from the Mediterranean Sea to India and formed much of what was then considered the civilized world. Through his conquests, Alexander helped spread Greek ideas, customs and laws throughout Asia and Egypt and adopted a uniform

In document E it states that, “It took eleven years to build his empire.” The evidence shows that he had a big ego that made him build his empire in little time. Also, he just want it yo have a bigger, and strong empire. Additionally, in document A it states that, “In 334 BCE, Alexander crossed from Macedonia to Asia with an army of about 40,000 people.” Alexander big self-admiration made him take thousands of people to battle, and don't care what happen to them. He should had think about the lives he was going to loss while fighting. Alexander will never fit the honor of amazing because of his huge self-worth, and because he was

Alexander was truly great leader, he ended up dying at around age 32 from malaria. He conquered 2,000,000 square miles in 10 years, people from different places acknowledged his ideas and kept it for a long period of time. His people and army loved him, he wanted to make his empire the greatest there was. The numbers didn’t matter to him, he had the confidence and courage to fight for his kingdom and make it the best. Alexander the Great deserves his title for his hard work and devotion to his

Alexander was a complex, inscrutable man of passion and iron-will . The King possessed a keen intellect, with an ability to make quick decisions. He had supreme courage and excellent leadership skills , which contributed significantly to his greatness as a

Who was Alexander the Great? Was he really great? Alexander was he king of the massive empire of Greece. He was the king of Macedonia and was 20 when he got his fathers empire. He expanded his empire from Egypt to India. Sadly died about 10 years after he got the empire. Alexander was great for these reasons, his remarkable achievements, his selflessness, and Tenacious.

Alexander the Great was well known for his amazing achievements. Alexander’s father died when he was only 20 years old, so he became the king. He was born in Macedonia in 356 B.C.E., in a kingdom near the northern edge of Greece (BGE). When he died he had conquered 70 cities within 10 years (Doc E). Alexander thought so highly of himself that he thought he could conquer Persia, Asia Minor, Egypt, and many other places (BGE). Was Alexander the Great as intelligent and encouraging as people said he was? He was great for these 3 reasons he founded many cities, he was brave, and he spread Greek culture throughout many different places!

Some people say Alexander the Great was a good leader, others think otherwise. I will show you that Alexander the Great was in fact not a great leader and ruler over his empire. Alexander was a ruthless and brutal leader to put it in the simplest terms. Alexander was a very severe leader for many reasons. Alexander the Great had everything handed to him because his dad was King Philip II. He had conquered many lands and had a well-trained army, and to his detriment Alexander inherited them directly from his dad after he was assassinated. Overall, Alexander the Great was not that Great.

Alexander III of Macedon or Alexander the Great became king of Macedonia when he was about fourteen years old, and thus began his reign of terror and destruction. Alexander’s worthiness of his title, “Alexander the Great” has been highly debated. Historians have opposing views on whether Alexander is deserving of such a hyperbolic title. Alexander was an excellent military leader who conquered many lands and created an empire, however despite his victories his empire came crashing down only ten years after his death. This begs the question how great was Alexander the Great?

One reason that Alexander was not as great as he sounds is because he killed 100,000 people in only 4 major battles. As said in document E, Alexander killed many, many people in order to take over their land. That shows how rude he can be, killing people for what he only really cares about, their land. According to document C, “Alexander ordered that all except those who sought sanctuary (safety in temple) were to be slain.” Document C also stated “Seven thousand Tyrians died… and the number would have been far higher had it

The clearest evidence of this lies in Document C, entitled Alexander of Macedon by Peter Green and published by the University of California Press in 1991. This excerpt describes one of the many brutal rampages that Alexander’s troops embarked on, this time against Tyre, under their leader’s orders. His commands were “executed with savage relish” and even the men of Sidon, who had been rivals with the Tyrians for centuries, were “horrified by what they now witnessed”. Those who sought refuge were slayed, buildings were burned down, thousands of men at military age were crucified, and even survivors that surrendered were eventually enslaved. Therefore, Alexander was undoubtedly a relentless and power-hungry military leader that would have done anything in order to further himself and his plans. Moreover, Document B, written by Lucius Flavius Arrianus in 130 CE, also, though unintentionally, displays Alexander’s cruelty. Taken from Arrianus’s book called The Campaigns of Alexander, the story was supposed to be a recount and positive reflection of Alexander’s accomplishments, given that it was written by a Greek philosopher and historian. However, it, instead, is even further proof that Alexander was anything but great. The document narrates Alexander’s last major battle against Porus on the eastern bank of the Hydaspes

Does that not seem to you like betrayal and rejection of his own people? Alexander could never have had it both ways. As the conquerors we will never accept the customs of the conquered. Political move it may have been, but it was the wrong one. At the trial of the royal pages conspiracy, it was stated to Alexander that he abhorred the customs of his own country. Thus it was the king of Persians, not of the Macedonians that they wanted to kill13. Alexander has simply become so far removed from his own people that some do not even see him as their own king. The plot against his life was to pursue him as a deserter in accordance with the conventions of war14. When a sailor rescued Alexander’s crown from the sea and placed it on his own head to keep it dry and out of harm’s way, he was rewarded handsomely for the rescue. When it was pointed out by another to Alexander that the crown had been on another’s head, regardless of the situation he had the same man promptly executed on the belief that it was a bad omen. With the adoption of Persian luxury came outright abuse of power and skewed

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 was great because he leaded his men into a fighting zone but he prepared it to attack his enemy. It is true that Alexander had some bad points. For example “they scooped up with difficulty what they could and hurried back to Alexander then, just before they reached him, they tipped the water into a helmet and gave it to him. Alexander, with a word of thanks for the gift, took the helmet and , in full view of his troops, poured the water on the ground.” (Doc D).