Monday, September 29, 2014

Alexander the Great


   1.
           King Alexander was a man of influence as he ruled a very powerful empire of Macedonia. He has a reputation that he left behind known as being “Great.” Alexander had a very big impact on the empire he ruled. He controlled it pretty well, expanded it to a great size, and spread the culture around in his daily life. But to what extent do we exaggerate the term “great”? Alexander was a great leader, great statesman, and a great commander, but the way he ran his empire could have been a little forceful. I totally agree that he does deserve the title given to him of being great, although, I do believe he is praised more than he deserves. He was undefeated because he never lost a battle, but Alexander also only ruled for 13 years, a very short reign. (Dearborn, 11). He also was given a kingdom by inheriting it from his father, and it was all set out for him, but then again you could argue that with his great skills he took over in a tough time, and handled it very well. Alexander deserves to be called great because he smashed the Persian army, which had been never done before at that time. This was a very monumental event, because it gave him confidence as a person and it gave his empire a great reputation. Without King Alexander, much of Greek culture would have not spread.

Alexander explored and conquered more territory to expand his empire. As he took over other areas, the influence he brought spread over these areas. He was also a great learner, because on his journey, Alexander took note of other countries’ tactics and battle techniques, mixed it with his own, and created a greater army for him. He observed that India used elephants as carriers rather than horses. He realized in battle that the elephants were more effective and quickly got rid of his horses and replaced them with elephants. His battle tactics improved and Alexander became more powerful. Alexander III is a very inspiring man to modern people in a way that they follow him and his tactics as a military general. He was a tenacious man who after hard battles kept moving his troops forward, never turning back until his army forced him. The fact that King Alexander had a small army, yet many victories, should blow your mind, because it is a very rare when your small army is defeating the most powerful empires around the world.                                                                                          

2. 
Alexander is considered one of the greatest military leaders of all time because of his accomplishments. He is an inspiration to many other leaders. Many people look at Alexander as a fierce, scary leader. Alexander did have a good side though. He wasn’t all about fighting and killing. He was more about bringing his empire as a whole.  His goal as a king was to bring together all the different groups of people living in his empire. He prayed that the Persians and Macedonians would one-day work together. Sadly, Alexander died at the height of his power. After his death, nothing was the same as it had been under Alexander. The Persians and Macedonians never really united. The Greeks fought for their independence and ended up winning it for Macedon. After Alexander died, it opened up a civil war between the Macedonians. Later, Macedonia fell under the Turkish Empire. They never had that true hero anymore to come save the day like King Alexander. Alexander spread Greek Culture throughout the Persian Empire. He respected others customs and allowed them to continue. Alexander’s values and accomplishments just absolutely show that he is great. It is easy to see how the empire fell apart after Alexander wasn’t under rule. It just emphasizes how important and effective he was in what he did. Even though he didn’t bring all of Macedon together, it is easy to see the sudden swift in power from when he was under rule to after he died. While Alexander ruled it made him look better as a leader, because he had everything under control. After Alexander died, he looked even better because no one could fully take over the throne, and keep the empire stable. Alexander also created the Hellenistic Age. As a king, he embraced other cultures such as dressing in Persian styles. During his reign trade and travel increased in his empire. He also spread Greek art and architecture. The cities in his empire that weren't in Greece all had Greek art, because of the influence Alexander brought upon them.                   

 3.
      Napoleon Bonaparte was a very influential leader.  He in similar ways had the same lifestyle as Alexander. He grew up, ended up going to a Military Academy at a very young age of 15. From there, Napoleon grew up in a military lifestyle and he worked his way up in the ranks. Within eight years, Napoleon decided to leave and go towards politics. He became a great leader at the age of 23. Napoleon was a very great military leader. He was a self-centered person and always wanted more, so he became the ruler of France and had a pretty good run while he was at it for only a short time of about 14 years. Napoleon was a short man, but that didn’t stop him from anybody. He took over France in 1802, and in the short amount of time he ruled, he actually made a significant difference.  Napoleon invaded at the time, the powerful Spain and also took over Portugal. He became insanely powerful at the time.  Napoleon Bonaparte handled France in a tough time.  He took a torn country that had fallen apart and created equality and stability within it.  As he secured military victories, he headed back and was looked at it from France as their savior and their hero.

 I believe that time does somewhat impact someone’s popular perception. Napoleon only ruled for about 14 years, yet completed so much for the torn country. He became powerful in such a small time frame. Although, people like King Alexander and Napoleon are great, not because the big picture looks great. They are great, not because they did a lot in a short time. They are great, not because they acquired so much territory. Figures like them are great because of how they change lives. Alexander saw a path where he would defeat the most powerful empire, and he accomplished that task. Napoleon saw a country that needed help and he brought them together and created a stable, well run country. But the way they ran their country or empire or how they got to the end the result could be a bit questionable, they still completed what they needed to do to change and influence lives of modern times. Time and distance doesn’t just base off someone’s ability. They are just the bonuses you can add to the list. I think what really matters is how they started off and how they really impacted others and influenced their empires.




Works Cited
"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. Ancient Sculpture Gallery, 2013. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/AlexandertheGreat.html>.
Bennett, Matthew. "Alexander (III) the Great." The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ancient & Medieval Warfare. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998. 11. Print.
Emmons, Jim Tschen. "Alexander the Great." Http://ancienthistory.abc-clio.com. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. <http://ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/575648?terms=alexander+the+great>.
Giotto, Mr. "Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age." Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. Penfield, 2014. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. <http://www.penfield.edu/webpages/jgiotto/onlinetextbook.cfm?subpage=1653418>.
Hesse, Hermann. Siddhartha. New York: New Directions, 1951. 11+. Print.
Rawlinson, George, M.A. "History of Macedonia." History of Macedonia. The Colonial Press. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/Rawlinson.html>.
Ushistory.org. "Alexander the Great." Ancient Civilizations. Independence Hall Association in Philadelphia, 2014. Web. 21 Sept. 2014. <http://www.ushistory.org/civ/5g.asp>.
Worthington, Ian, Professor. "How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. University of Missouri-Columbia, 1999. Web. 28 Sept. 2014. <http://www.utexas.edu/courses/citylife/readings/great1.














6 comments:

  1. You did a very good job of being specific and going specific examples that proved your points. If I didn't think that Alexander deserved to be called great but I was on the edge then your argument most likely would've persuaded me

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good job on backing up your points! I could tell you did lots of research for each question to give it a great answer. Your sentences flow very nice like your going down a slide. Also good job on citing where you got your information.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I really like your point in the third answer saying that people are great because they change lives. I had always considered greatness to explain their accomplishments or how good they were at certain things, but I liked your idea of saying greatness is based on how they affect other people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I liked the first paragraph that explained what you thought, and the second paragraph tells what he did. Second paragraph was very in detail, very good, good quotes and citing as well. Good comparrison between Napoleon and Alexander, very sound argument.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sridhar are you saying that Alexander spread his empire so the empires will unite them but in your essay you say that Alexanders empire fell. So Sridhar tell me is Alexander great because of his empire or because it fell

    ReplyDelete
  6. In your 1rst paragraph, you gave good examples on how Alexander was good and bad but you could have been more specific on how he was either great or not great.

    ReplyDelete