How Did Alexander's Move To Power

Alexander the so-called ‘Great’ was a legendary conqueror who in his short lifetime was able to overthrow the Persian Empire, the most powerful kingdom at that time. He was born in 356 BCE to King Philip and Queen Olympia of Macedonia. Alexander’s warring career jumpstarted at the age of 20 in the year 336 BCE, due to the assassination of his father in which he inherited his father’s kingdom. Over the span of 11 years, Alexander and his small fleet of men of about 40,000 took over and ruthlessly conquered the Persian Empire. Sadly, this conquest was short-lived by Alexander’s sudden death in the year 323 BCE, in which his unstable kingdom with a lack of a structured governmental system quickly broke apart in the period of 10 years. Therefore, because of the cruel and the disorganized nature of the way Alexander the ‘Great’ conquered and maintained the Persian Empire, he does not deserve to be referred as ‘Great’.

This is demonstrated in the chart compiled from various sources when it says that Buddhism in India was most directly influenced by Greek art and ritual. It states that Greek art and ritual were strong in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Lastly it also states that the Hellenistic period in the Middle East and Western Asia remained 300 years after his death. (Doc E). Hellenistic, defined as the spread of cultures, shows that Alexander did indeed blend and spread different cultures around him and this blend stuck around long after his death. Even a man living in the same place as his ancestors did when they were gifted with Alexander’s army and blend of cultures can see Alexander’s appreciation of cultures. “... was a very great man, brave and dauntless and generous to his followers … we worship the same gods. This is why we believe the Greeks are our first ancestors.” (Doc F). This man, thousands of years later and thousands of miles away, feels the effect of the Greeks on his culture because of Alexander’s love and respect for other

Moreover, Hammond claims that local militias who wished to join Alexander’s army became citizen soldiers, illustrating that regardless of nationality, by fighting along Alexander would incorporate one into his illustrious empire. Eventually, the army became a way that fused cultures and mixed background together. The more territories the army conquered, the more Alexander’s empire grew, and by giving incentives to recruits such as incorporating them into the newly formed empire would help Alexander’s ultimate goal of conquest through Asia. The result of Alexander’s ambition for territorial expansion thus reflected upon the constant need for troops and also a reflection of how diverse cultures and background were consequently integrated into Alexander’s empire.

Alexander the Great expanded his empire from Greece, down to Egypt, and across to India. Alexander's empire was truly remarkable because it was so large and enveloped many different cultures. It also ranged across multiple

The era between 350 and 310 BC marked a dramatic change in the Western World from the first, classical Hellenic Age of the Greeks, to the second, Hellenistic Age of the Greek Civilization. This classical period was considered the height of Greek civilization and deemed “The Golden Age” of ancient Greece. The polis (Greek city-state) was the center of Greek political life for the majority of this period. The poleis were small, independent, and self-sufficient; however, too politically divided to survive the blow of the Peloponnesian war. In 338 BC, Greece was concurred by Macedonia and the polis had lost their independence. “The abiding devotion to the polis […] greatly diminished during the fourth century” (Perry 45). The mentality of Greek citizens changed because of their defeat; they were now an individualistic, rational and secular society. People were no longer viewing the law as “an expression of sacred traditions ordained by the gods” but now saw it as merely mortal, obedience to the law faded, leading to a weakened society (Perry 46). The pride and duty of the polis mentality dwindled and emotional and political ties to the city weakened. Subsequently, Alexander the Great’s conquests, in 330 BC, moved the Greek civilization beyond the polis, to the Near East. For the first time, Greeks had to define their existence as part of a much bigger, more complex and alienating world. The death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC marked the end of the Hellenic age and the

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).

It’s the month of June in 323 BCE and our fearless leader Alexander the Great has suddenly passed away. The question has arisen of what will become of his vast empire? Yesterday, I attended a debate between the generals, counselors, economists, and philosophers of our Polis on our current situation. Team Athena argued in favor of returning the land to the rule of the indigenous populations while Team Hermes argued that we should continue Greek rule over the conquered territory. After listening to both sides, I felt Team Athena provided a more persuasive, logical, and practical argument that would benefit Greece’s security and future, yet also being fair to those who were conquered, all the while employing logos and pathos.

In the ancient world warfare consisted of hand to hand combat, until Philip the King of Macedon introduced cavalry into battle. Using this to his advantage, his son Alexander The Great, set out to conquer the Persian Empire. With great success Alexander’s empire stretched from Turkey to Pakistan. The conquered cities within the empire were greatly impacted by Alexander’s values. As a result, the conquered cities were forced the adjust to Greek and Macedonian culture.

Alexander legacy was the Hellenization of Persia and Egypt, two of the great civilizations at the time. To be Hellenized is to strongly convince by the Greek. He used his great military tactics and skill as a general by conquering Persia an Egypt. Alexander created the largest empire. In the beginning of taking over Persia and other civilizations, he replaced them with Macedonians and Greek leaders so that he can leave the officials there in place. Generals such as Hannibal, Napoleon and Caesar was influenced by all of Alexander’s actions and military work. All of Alexander actions led to his great legacy and it was important to him because he spread the Greek knowledge in all the civilizations he conquered. The Greek knowledge has survived through the years and influenced many other civilizations until

The men in his army, families, historians, philosophers, poets, scientists and others traveling with Alexander carried their Western customs with them and he made sure to place Greek and Macedonian people in charge of his conquests along the way. As a result, Western culture mixed with Eastern culture to create a new culture throughout Alexander’s Empire.

After Alexander the Great’s father was killed, Alexander was forced to assume his role as king of Macedonia. Enemies of his empire thought this would be a perfect time to strike the Macedonian Empire but Alexander was prepared, taught by great military minds he was able to create one of the largest empires of the ancient world.

In the Ancient World, Alexander III is viewed as a great leader.As a boy, Alexander’s dad, King Philip III, was the king of Macedonia from 323 BC till 317 BC. While King Philip III was ruling Macedonia, Alexander was taught by philosophers ,such as Aristotle, and trained to become a vigorous leader. Later on, King Philip III died of unknown causes and Alexander III took over at the age of 20, inheriting his father’s kingdom Alexander became a renowned,strong leader. Alexander was a great general who feared nothing. He rode into battles in front of his soldiers and marched into unknown lands. He had great intelligence and battle strategies thinking of the enemies' next

The death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC marks the beginning of the Hellenistic Period and covers 300 years to the invasion of Egypt by the Romans. The word Hellenic refers only to the Greeks, but the term Hellenistic refers to `the Greek-influenced societies that arose in the wake of Alexander's conquest' (Sacks, 105). The Hellenistic world extended from Greece all the way to Afghanistan and resulted in the beginning of the mass spreading of Greek culture. Its central characteristics were the mass empires created by Alexander and his successors, the mingling of Greek and other cultures and the diffusion of religions

In Susa, he appointed Abulites (Persian) as satrap of Susa and appointed his companion Mazars garrison commander. (A 173) Mazaeus, who had been satrap of Syria under Darius and commander of the Persians at the battle of Gaugamela, was made satrap and allowed to produce coinage. (B 173) However, Apollodorus of Amphipolis commanded the garrison and Asclepiodorus collected the taxes (Arr. 3.16.4). To cover all possibilities Alexander left Nicias and Amphipolitan with garrisons. (B174) The garrisons were Alexander's watchdogs and looked out for Macedonian interest. In this he created a checks and balances system. Alexander showed that qualified Persians were able to compete with his Macedonians for leading positions in his administration in Asia.

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