Tyre: What Makes Alexander Great?

Alexander doesn't have concerns for others. According to Doc A, he made his army go on with him when they were tired and Alexander still made them go on with him. In Doc C, Alexander didn't have concerns for the civilians in Tyre, because he killed many of them. He killed, crucified and sold them into slavery. Alexander also made his army do what they didn't want to do, like ordering his army to marry Persian women and taking Darius's daughter as his

While people may think that heroes have some bad things in their past, no hero has ever done what he did. According to A Hero’s Hero, “Here was a man, who walked in flesh and blood, a man who went on to conquer the whole world before he was thirty-two.”(1). A hero's job is to protect the world, and Alexander’s job was the opposite. He conquered the world, he didn’t protect it. Even more so is just how much he conquered, and what he had to do to conquer it. According to Alexander the Great, “A great conqueror, in 13 short years he amassed the largest empire in the entire ancient world — an empire that covered 3,000 miles.”(1). When a person conquers over 3,000 miles of land, one really cannot say that they are still a hero. Just think of what he had to do to get that much land… genocide. He had to inflict mass genocide amongst Asia. The blood that was spilled while the land was being taken over was ridiculous. And when a person does all of this, it’s hard to say that he’s a

Throughout his life, he conquered many places, including the empire of Persia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, etc. He went on and on conquering many lands along with his troops. In fact, he travelled with builders, engineers, poets, scientists, etc. These specialized workers were one of the reasons he was successful in battles. Alexander brought them along for entertainment, and they also supported the army with carriages, supplies, built camps, and support for wounded soldiers. When attacking, his army led battles from the front which define their courage, and he ensured that his men were well-fed and rewarded them so that they were motivated. Alexander may be cruel at times. For instance, he killed lots and lots of men who were traitors in his army. Along with that, he treated his adversaries with respect while conquered people were freed when he’s generous, but killed when he’s disrespected. Alexander the Great defeated the powerful empire of Persia and extended his empire from Greece to India, making it the largest empire of the ancient

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.

When the Peloponnesian war happened between Athens and Sparta, the Greeks were weakened enough to be taken over by the Macedonians. Philip II thought it was a great idea to take over the Greek city states and fight against the Persians. Once Philip II died, a new Macedonian king was brought to heir. The heirs name was Alexander the Great. There is two different standpoints on Alexander, was he great or was he bad? We should all believe that Alexander does deserve the title Alexander the Great because he has done many good things. The reasons are that Alexander showed mercy to the people he conquered, Alexander left the people's culture alone but tried to spread Greek culture, Alexander was interested in others cultures, and that Alexander

Alexander should not have been called great, because of the many people he killed, and the land he

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

There is a legend where he and his army are in the desert, and instead of drinking the precious little water reserved for him, he poured in out onto the ground (Doc D). This gesture inspired his army and kept them going through the hard times. You could argue his greatness by saying that he was a general who knew how to keep his troops going through remarkably difficult and trying times. Another legend says that at sea one day, Alexander lost his crown in the wind and a sailor swam out to retrieve it. In order for it to stay dry, the sailor had to keep it on his head. The man was given a reward for saving the crown but then was put to death because the only head that the crown could ever touch must be royal (Doc D). One could use this document to argue that Alexander was even cruel to his own people. The truth is that there are two sides to every story. If you define someone as one thing, you are bound to get debates about whether or not that one thing was true throughout their life.

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

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 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

First, Alexander stood out from many other rulers because of his 2,000,000 sq. miles of conquered land. Evidence of the is “ Size of Alexander’s empire at his death (sq. miles) 2,000,000.” (Doc E). That alone shows one of his many remarkable achievements. Another remarkable achievement that Alexander had was he found an astonishing number of cities throughout his time of being the ruler. (Doc E). That evidence shows that Alexander was great because that shows that he was willing to go farther than any other ruler to be that one and make himself stand out.

Alexander the Great was a ruthless villain because he mistreated many people. He mistreated people by selling 30,000 of them as slaves, and and killing 6,000 people. I think this is uncalled for and in unnecessary. When you show that much anger and frustration for no reason, you will be remembered in a negative way. This proves my point on Alexander the Great

While Alexander was a military leader and did conquer many lives, he is said to be merciful and respectful towards those he conquered. For instance in History Alive it is stated that “The Macedonians sent a message that any citizen of Thebes who wanted to could join Alexander’s troops and share the peace that all of Greece enjoyed.” This introduces a view that Alexander was a peace-loving leader that didn’t wish to start wars or cause the deaths of thousands. It also indicates that under Alexander’s rule the Thebans would thrive and be peaceful and still enjoy life as they believed they would with independence. It is even said that he granted mercy to many surviving Thebans, including a woman who had not been sorry for murdering one of his own soldiers.

Alexander III of Macedon or commonly known as Alexander the Great was the conqueror and king of the Persian Empire which is the Ancient Greek kingdom of Macedon. He was born on the 20/21st July 356 BC in Pella, the ancient capital of Macedonia. While in reign from 336 to 323 B.C, he united the Greek city-states and led the Corinthian League. He also became the king of Persia, Babylon and Asia as well as created Macedonian colonies in the region and was a member of the argead dynasty. Unfortunately he died around the 10/11th June 323 BC in Babylon at 32 years of age which was classified as middle aged back then.