Preview

The Pros And Cons Of Alexander The Great

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2940 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Pros And Cons Of Alexander The Great
It was once said by Alexander the Great that "there is nothing left to conquer". For many this quote can sum the career of Alexander as a magnificent King, commander and statesman. He achieved what no other had done in his time, but one must see both the positives and negatives of Alexander the Great as King, commander and statesman. As commander, Alexander without a doubt conquered territories on a superhuman scale and in doing so he fought many battles and defeated kings to achieve this. Though his achievements led to a stressed relationship between himself and his fellow Macedones and created a love-hate relationship between the two. This love-hate relationship followed into the aspect of Alexander being king. Alexander 's decisions and …show more content…
Alexander held a giant wedding ceremony at Susa where 10,000 of his generals and noble men married Persian women of nobility. Whilst Plutarch somewhat contradicts Alexander 's vision of mixing Persians with Macedonians. Green takes Plutarch 's views and argues that by Alexander mixing the nobility of Macedon and Persia; it would then allow the intergration of Persians and Macedonians all over the empire. Curtius accounts Alexander married daughter of Darius, Roxanne for love and not for policy .Curtius 's account of Alexander which states that he has the contingency to be false, but if he is correct, the marriages could be viewed as way to eliminate tension and create equality between Persians and Macedonians. Tarn argues that Alexander acted in the brother hood of mankind in this decision, though this argument is countered by the fact that Arian tells us of Alexander purposely aligning his generals and influential men to Persian women with nobility questions Tarn 's idea of racial fusion. Since Tarn 's proposal, Badian has dismissed his idea by showing the poor interpretation Tarn used to draw the conclusion of Alexander 's policy to racial fusion . After Alexander 's death, many of his generals and troops divorced their Persian wives, clearly showing their opposition towards Alexander vision of racial unity throughout his new empire. But despite this …show more content…
Badian states "His military and political greatness is beyond question, and he retained his masterly touch in these fields to the end." However as king there were flaws in his rule which led to great insecurity amongst his men, and his paranoia cannot be ignored. But to this day Alexander still has an influence on our popular culture and his life is still admired and studied by everyday people to the highest intellectuals. As a combination of statesman, king and commander "Alexander 's wider vision made him at the same time something more and something less than the greatest king of Macedonia"

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Alexander knew that the offspring of these marriages would be rejected within both cultures, but he knew that this would only create loyal subjects that would have no choice but to serve him. Although, after his death, most of these marriages would only end up being rejected. But, Alexander only had the goal of achieving the perfect empire in which the Greek culture would far surpass the others. And of course becoming the only king in the world, this being due to his huge amount of ego. But, he did help improve the conquered empires, by which the Greeks had brought with them their art, literature and a bit of their own language. Which, heavily influenced those within the empires. It helped improve their education and even their literacy skills in their daily lives. The influence of the Greeks even went as far as taking over the former Persian Empire and replacing it under the same laws and policies that the Greeks abided by. The Greeks also in stowed their beliefs in their Gods. While, not much is known today about what laws Alexander exactly put into to place, there is still evidence of his spreading of the Greek culture. Thanks to Alexander, most of what is known today is due to the influence he and his army had upon those they conquered. He had modeled the other governments after his own, while spreading his culture along the way. And although, he is mostly known today through his military accomplishments, he still managed to reform and educate the people of his…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander the great wasn’t Alexander the fake. Alexander great was only 20 when he started to rule Macedonia(BGE). Around 336 B.C.E is when Alexander the great started to rule in place of his father Philip and rule Macedonia(BGE). When Alexander started to rule his main goal was to take down Persia and he succeed on doing that. Even though Alexander was able to take down Persia was he actually great? Alexander had great courage, leadership, and intelligence. These are shown by him being able to take out the strongest empire at the time, He was able to make one of the big empire and sustain it for 10 years after his death, and he was able to unify everyone he conquered with greece.…

    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    I think that it mean that Alexander the “Great” wasn’t that great to men back then.And he wasn’t nice to women and children.…

    • 321 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Alexander was great because he conquered a country in the years 333BC, 332BC, 331BC, 331BC, 330BC, 327BC, 324BC and 323BC. This demonstrates that he was great because he used tactics that would defeat enemies. An example of a tactic he used is phalanx. Phalanx means “a body of Macedonian infantry drawn up in close order with shields touching and long spears overlapping”. This was good because he could easily besiege cities which helped him take over the Mediterranean. My own research shows that Alexander the Great took power over the countries Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, northern Afghanistan and Iraq. This shows how Alexander the Great was so prodigious.…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander was a great leader even though some people commonly think that he was a sword wielding tyrant. Alexander was a great leader because he respected the beliefs of other people, had a great respect for knowledge, and he was a superior strategist in battle. He was so great that he was almost able to conquer the whole known world.…

    • 461 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander the Great was, in many ways, an amazing ruler. He was not afraid to take a chance on someone or something that everyone else had given up on, and he was prepared to risk his safety to help his men. Alexander also proved to his men that he was strong and that he was prepared to die for his cause.…

    • 684 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Alexander portrayed by Arrian in his The Campaigns of Alexander, is an interesting and complex Alexander, a character that slowly grows, matures and evolves throughout his adventures in new lands. Arrian is able to give an in depth description of the battles Alexander took part in as well as the lands he traveled to, while at the same time describing Alexander’s character. He is able to describe how Alexander goes from an over-confident youth, with great dreams of grandeur, to an adult who remains almost the same but more wise, and then finally a sad shadow of his former self who finally dies in depression.…

    • 829 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander The Great Dbq

    • 243 Words
    • 1 Page

    Many people think that Alexander the Great was truly great because of all his accomplishments, but not all of the things he did were great. He did lots of cruel things to people and animals just because he wanted to gain more power. Alexander has killed approximately 100,000 people only in four major battles (Alexander’s Legacy Doc E). Alexander was a prince who was born in macedonia of 356 BC. Alexander was very arrogant. He was taught by a philosopher Aristotle. He taught him subjects like, politics, sports, and warfare. Philip, Alexander’s father built the macedonian army into a deadly fighting machine, this sparked alexander’s interest and was eager to to lead the army. And Alexander got his chance to lead at the age of 20, because Philip…

    • 243 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The not so great part was married to 3 women, killing most of his men, and as a theory, killing his dad too. Those things didn’t matter a lot to them though. Alexander the Great died by a fever that was never cured in June, 323 B.C.E. He was allied with many cities and conquered many cities. He took some troops on the way. He got lots of supplies to continue his journey and weapons too. Shortly before he died he was supposedly asked to whom his empire should and their answer was said “to the strongest man.” His generals fought over his land and it ended up dividing up into multiple…

    • 576 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander The Great Dbq

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Alexander the Great like most heroes in history have traits that makes it possible for him to be able to do great things. Alexander of Macedonia was a 20 year old leader who got his empire from passed down from family, Macedonia and city-states in Greece. Alexander decided to attempt to conquer the entire Persian Empire, from Egypt to India, In this process he did things historians question made him great or not. Alexander the Great was great because of his intelligence, empathy for others and leadership.…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander The Great Flaws

    • 969 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Alexander the Great was a war leader, who fought countless battles over his life to gain control of Greece. Alexander sought out to bring a Hellenistic Culture to the new world. But the main underlying problem with Alexander the Great was the fact that he was politically weak, he knew how to fight battles but wasn’t competent enough to necessarily run an empire. He was a cocky leader mainly due to his warlike valor, “founding dozens of new cities named after himself”, (Pollard 199). Alexander the Great did not just want to just rule the Greeks, he wanted to build essentially a whole new world. Many of his most trusted soldiers had thought that, “he has gone too far, and mutinies at tributaries began to take place”, (Pollard 197). This is a prime example that Donald Trump must realize when running the United States. As good as Alexander the Great was at fighting battles and taking over territories, he was just not adequate enough to successfully rule the nation as a whole. Shortly after Alexander died it, “brought on the collapse of the regime he had personally held together”, (Pollard 199). Overall, Alexander the Greats short reign as leader had some bright spots, but he wasn’t the type of person you would like to head a…

    • 969 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Persian empire at its peak has long been seen as one of the largest wholes during the classical era, and few have rivaled its size. The land that Alexander the Great was able to conquer, however, was one of the few that served as an appropriate challenge. Around the time of 338 B.C.E through 323 B.C.E., Alexander's collected mass was a whole. Of a Greek origin, Alexander was taught by Aristotle, the great philosopher, and it can be inferred that he used the strategic methods learned, among other things, to assist him during his expansion. It was short lived, however, when he died of an unknown cause at an early age of thirty-three. Even though his empire crumbled, his legacy lived on. Multiple cities, strongly influenced by Alexander, erected,…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander the Great

    • 660 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The effects of Alexander's conquests and politics on the West are well documented. His might secured Greece (and perhaps Europe) from a mounting Persian threat, setting the stage for the later Roman conquest and absorption of Hellenistic civilization. Had Alexander failed at Issus, Granicus, or any number of other critical battles, it is entirely possible that Persians rather than Athenians would have dictated Western thought. Moreover, until his premature death, Alexander held in his hands a power than no man, before or since, has known: the power to bring peace and stability to the known world, uniting it under one banner. This notion traveled forward through time, from Greeks to Romans, and from Romans to Europeans. His lessons of organization, acceptance, and political integration have informed the decisions of countless leaders since, and, most notably, his image has carried forward through time to become one of the most memorable figures in history: Alexander the Great, the man who sought to be a god.…

    • 660 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    After the assassination of Alexander II, the liberal ministers resigned, and conservatives took their posts. This, coupled with the shock of his father’s demise, influenced Alexander III, and…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    After the death of King Darius III, Alexander began to introduce his ‘Policy of Fusion’. He believed that if the two traditions (Macedonian and Persian) could be “blended and assimilated”, his authority would be more securely established and would rest on good will rather than on force, according to ancient historian Plutarch. This tell us that Alexander did not want to destroy the Persia that Darius and his ancestors had set up and replace it with a Macedonian ruling. Quoting Plutarch, “He understood that the sharing of race and customs is a great step towards the softening of men’s heart”. Alexander knew that if he were to change Persia to a Macedonian ruling, the Persians would not have obeyed nor trusted him. He instead opted to combine the Macedonian and Persian kingship, an act that he knew would gradually earn the trust of the Persians. He changed his lifestyle by adopting Persian customs.…

    • 845 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics