Alexander the Great: An Analysis Alexander the Great is a Villain, because he Killed his Brother and Father and he Conquered Kingdoms just because he said he could. Alexander the Great is a Villain, because he Killed his Brother and Father. He is a villain because he killed many people, including his brother and his Father, King Philip II. It is not right for Alexander to kill someone for no reason, especially his own relatives. Here is a very helpful source called “History for Kids” “Many people suspected that Alexander and his mother had plotted to have Philip killed, but no one knew for certain” ALEXANDER BECOMES KING OF MACEDONIA (1). This proves that Alexander and his mom did plan the king’s death on purpose, which rules out the possibility that Alexander killed his father on accident. This also proves that the people of Macedonia knew about the murder, but didn’t tell the king about it. It seems as if the people were more loyal to Alex, then the king. Alexander the Great is also a villain because not only did he kill his Family, but he killed innocent people as well. This is an …show more content…
Killing people is not great, conquering kingdoms is not great, Alexander is not great. Here is a line from the article “ALEXANDER THE NOT-SO-GREAT” “He wept when there were no more kingdoms to conquer” (1). This proves that ATG didn’t conquer kingdoms because he could. He also enjoyed it! It’s flat-out saying that he likes to kill. If he liked to do it so much that he wept, that is a definite villain trait. Something else awful about Alexander the Great is that he was only the king of Macedonia for 2 years, before going to conquer Greece. From the chart “Alexander the Great: Hero or Villain?” it says he “Left 2 years after taking over to conquer lands and never returned home again” (Villain column). This confirms that Alexander cared more about concurring and gaining new land than his
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 should not have been called great, because of the many people he killed, and the land he
Alexander was an outstanding ruler of Greece in his short amount of years that he ruled. “Alexander became king when he was only 20 years old and after his father Philip was assassinated in 336 B.C.E.” (BGE). Alexander was Creative, also how he made some remarkable achievements and how he had concern for others. Was Alexander Great or Not Great? Three reasons that show that are his empire was at it’s greatest was 2,000,000 sq. miles, the way he puzzled his enemies at war and how he adapted many other cultures to his empire.
Do you ever wonder if Alexander the great was great? Alexander was great because he’s a military genius and an inspiring leader, and he speared culture. Alexander the great wasn’t always great. He did stuff in little time too.
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.
According to Doc F, Alexander's empire only lasted 10 years without an heir because Alexander didn't leave an heir. He thought he was very strong and would not die but he did die in June of 323 BCE. Alexander's generals split up the land and then it began to fall into pieces because there was no heir. According to Doc A, he wasn't able to keep his army to keep going on with him. His army rebelled to go on any further and so Alexander wasn't able to control his army. He made his soldier's keep on going. According to Doc B, he tortured many people and killed and crucified people without hesitating. Lastly, in Doc C, Alexander was able to get more lands easily because the people surrendered without a fight. Alexander had a big ego that made him stronger but made him kill more people instead of doing other things. For example, Alexander could have made the people live instead of killing them.
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
A lot of individuals argued if Alexander the Great was great or not great. Alexander the Great was great to his empire and did everything he could to expand his empire. Alexander was born more than 300 years before Jesus was born. He was only 20 when he launched his first invasion of the Persian Empire. The death of Darius was important to Alexander’s conquest to Persia since it would make it easier to rule his people. Alexander’s army was the one that told him to stop and it caused him to march back and it was not even his enemy after eight years of conquest and combat. Alexander the Great was great because he was courageous for his people and intelligent to create ideas to protect his people. Although some may argue that Alexander doesn’t
Alexander killed thousands of people, taking over cities with violence for power you don’t need is not something you would do if you were great. In document C it says “The remaining survivors, some 30,000 in number, he sold into slavery. Two thousand men of the military age were crucified.” This shows that Alexander was not great. He used violence against people, to overcome cities he did not need just for more power. He destroyed homes and took away lifes. So many people were caused to have a painful and violent death because of Alexander. In document E it gives the estimated amount of enemy soldiers and civilians killed in just four major battles, 100,00.
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).
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 the great created a long lasting impressing legacy for himself, his warriors, and his great empire. Alexander was born in 356 B.C.E. in Macedonia, just 20 years later he became the King of an empire because of his father's early death (BGE). Alexander conquered many of the world’s greatest empires ever know, and doing so at a very young age! He created one of the strongest most feared empires seen (Docs A & E). So, how great was Alexander the Great? He showed many signs and characteristics of leadership and remarkable achievement throughout his life and his rule in Macedonia. Alexander was great for three big reasons, he created a strong and feared empire, had a long lasting legacy, and he was a smart strategic leader.
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 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
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?