Alexander The Great Leader

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

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).

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority” (Acton Institute 1). Alexander the Great was and absolute ruler that had both influence and authority; he abused both which is why many of his subjects followed him out of fear and not loyalty. Rulers are defined by how they use their power, the decisions’ they make; and how those decisions will affect the people. In my essay, I will analyze two viewpoints’ made by two professors and their viewpoints about Alexander III and whether or not he was deserving of the title “The Great”.

Just how great is this man? He gained this title by hard work, dedication, and perseverance. He turned many separate places into one that worked together for the remainder of his life and shaped culture. Alexander of Macedon is truly great.

How great was Alexander the Great? Alexander was not great because he killed thousands of innocent people, and his empire did not last long. He was brutal to the people of Tyre. For example, in Doc.

Alexander had been taught many things from a very young age such as academic subjects, politics, sports, and warfare which made him think very highly of himself. His father Philip of Macedonia made an extremely strong army and took over many Greek polises and wanted to take over the Persian Empire. This struck Alexander’s aspiration to take over the Persian Empire as well. Alexander then inherited his father’s kingdom at the age of 18 after his father

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.

After all the deaths and land stolen from others, his empire did not even last that long after he died. In Document E it states “Alexander’s empire held together… 10 years”. For how many death there where in his battles, it is not reasonable for him to take all that land. The part that does not make sense is that nobody in his empire took over. Alexander’s drive for battles sacrificed “Enemy soldiers and civilians… 100,000 killed” (Document E). That is so many family members hurt or killed. He ran four major battles from Europe to Asia to India and all through Africa. After he died his Empire just gave up on all the land they fought for.

This document proves the fragility of his empire, when only ten years after his death his empire fell. If Alexander sought a better life for his people why did his empire fall only eleven years after his death, “great” leaders leave behind a legacy that improves the lives of their people, Alexander was not one of these

As stated in document A, “in 334 BCE, Alexander crossed from Macedonia to Asia with an army of 40,000.” That sounds like he is going to try to take over land and will not give up until he gets that land. According to document C, because the city Tyre, did not surrender, he built a bridge to get to the island. The city held out for 7 months but Alexander continued to destroy it, and the city’s people because he was so angry they were up for the battle. Alexander the great also took over 70 cities as said in document E. As you can tell, he was very greedy and seemed as if he could not help it but to keep destroying cities and taking over land. In conclusion, Alexander was overall very greedy and decided to take over land for no purpose other than he wanted

Greatness… What does that mean? Many people have been called great, but did they deserve the name? I think greatness can be defined by great accomplishments, courage, and concern for others. I think that Alexander does deserve to be called great. Alexander the Great shows great accomplishment in a map that shows all of the land that he conquered, which is a huge achievement.

Alexander the Great was able to consolidate his power because of his legitimate claim to the throne and because of his mother’s ability to discard any rivals that may have got in the way for Alexander’s

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.

In all honesty, Alexander the Great had some sort of greatness to him. He managed to spread Greek culture to multiple places, expanding the ways of the Greek as far as Southwest Asia and the near East, the Greeks absorbed the culture of the Eastern people while their own was taken in by others. Then with Alexander conquering the many lands around him, from Persia to Syria, Palestine and Egypt, his empire grew in power considerably. Not to mention the man had never lost battle in his lifetime, dodging death with only the false belief of himself being the son of a god until he had fallen ill and passed away. Given these points, they show something that would be considerable of greatness.

The Empire of Alexander lived on past the death of its founder, but soon fragmented into numerous smaller kingdoms ruled by his generals. The Macedonian homeland came under the control of the line of Antigonus I Monophthalmus, a general and satrap under Alexander. The line of Antigonus would rule Macedon into the middle of the second century BC, when the kingdom was overcome by a myriad of problems, both internal and external. The reasons for the decline and eventual annexation of the Kingdom of Macedon include the weakening of the Macedonian army, the chaotic political order in Macedonia, and the rising might of Rome. The downfall of the Kingdom took nearly 40 years to achieve, and thus no single reason may be looked to as the cause of Macedon’s annihilation as an independent country. However, the combination, primarily, of those three things as they will each in turn be highlighted, brought about the undoing of homeland of history’s greatest general.