Alexander The Great Essay-Alexander The Great Is A Villain

To start off, Alexander the Great was great because he was a military genius. In document B, it explains how he tricked Porus into thinking that he was going to attack when he was not. When Alexander actually attacks, Porus will not be prepared. Alexander the Great

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

Alexander the Great is a villain because he killed hundreds of thousands of people, including his own family and friends. While many people get mad at their family

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.

There are many leaders in the world, but a great ruler is passionate, honorable and one who can inspire even in the most hopeless circumstances. Alexander the Great was a great ruler. Alexander the Great was a ruler that was not only inspiring, but he was fearless, smart, bold and courageous. Alexander the Great inspired his soldiers to crave more. He has inspired people since the day he started ruling. What is inspirational about Alexander the Great is that he inspired his troops to the point that they did not question him when they were outnumbered three to one in a battle, they trusted him with their lives and were willing to die for him (Alexander the Great: man behind the legend).

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

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.

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.

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

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

The story of Alexander the Great begins, as one might expect, with his father. Alexander was the son of Philip II, King of Macedonia, who had already made a name for himself. Philip became king to a land surrounded by foes on every side in 359 B.C., but by 356 B.C. he had squashed most of them and built the strongest army in the world (Savill 4). His father was an accomplished ruler who was not willing to sit by and let his land be beset by those who would see it harm. Philip used his army to expand his territory into Greece, first by subduing the northern regions, which included the Athenian port of Amphipolis. He then set his eyes to Athens and Thebes, defeating them at the battle of Chaeronea (Stoneman 18). This battle would be described as some as the end of Greek freedom. After the battle, Philip created the League of Corinth, a treaty of sorts, that basically said Greece was under Philip’s control. Philip had conquered Greece, and he now set his eyes on Persia. He would not make any progress towards his conquest, as he was assassinated in 336 B.C. by one of his bodyguards. Some would argue that Alexander may have had a part in his assassination

He was a self-confident man who only wanted to conquer for self-pleasure. Alexander is the reason that corruption and peculation were treated with casualness during this time. His pleasure was when his peoples were loyal to him and that was all that was necessary for his approval. It was because of him that Macedonia lost its manpower through the strenuous battles he continuously fought. He left it as a weakened kingdom. His empire is given so much credit but it was only based on rapid military conquest and died right after his death (Stoneman 92-94). It is believed that Alexander conquered to rule, not to blend cultures. Heavy drinking led to disastrous incidents and hastened his death. An example of such a disaster was the burning down of Persepolis in a drunken revel. This is not an attribute of a good leader. He also lacked long-range planning and neglected his kingdoms future by exhausting himself in warfare while he delayed fathering a royal successor. His selfishness is proved by his act of casually killing any threats to the throne at the beginning of his reign (Sacks 15).

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

Alexander the Great was born to King Philip II, around 356 B.C. in Macedonia. Alexander witnessed his father rule Macedonia as the king and having had one of the greatest philosophers at the time, Aristotle as his teacher it’s no surprise that Alexander from a very early age showed characteristics of a leader. When Alexander managed to tame the horse, Bucephalus his father pointed out even as a child his ambition is far too great, “My son, seek thee out a kingdom equal to thyself; Macedonia has not room for thee” (Plutarch 317). Alexander didn’t experience struggles or opposition when he rose to power, in fact he had inherited his position when his father was assassinated. However, there is no concrete evidence whether Alexander the great had anything to do with the death of his father.