Alexander the Great

       1. I believe that Alexander deserves the title great because of his military success, because of how he shaped the culture in such a way that would have never happened without him, and because of the way he treated people that he conquered. Alexander's empire had what was undoubtedly the best military at his time.  They conquered the Persians, fought their way across the East through Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan,  Pakistan, and into parts of India and the only reason they stopped was because the soldiers refused to go any further forcing Alexander to turn back, and when they were doing so they never lost a battle. Although Alexander was occupied with expanding his empire rather than making it better he still deserves to be great partly due to his military accomplishments. Alexander did not govern his empire well at all but, I believe that even if he did attempt to govern his great empire then it would have been too big and too diverse to do so. There would be wars over the different ethnic groups that he tried to join together and therefore his empire would have broken apart. In a way, it was better for him not to try to govern his empire and join them all together. When he conquered all this land he spread Greek culture and allowed it to mix and blend with other cultures in his empire. Alexander created the Hellinistic age by allowing the customs of places he conquered to continue instead of throwing them out and replacing them with Greek customs. Alexander conquered these people and let them have a chance at a good life instead of turning them into slaves. For the most part, he treated the people he conquered with respect. At the Battle of Issus when Darius retreated he left his mother, wife, and daughter behind. When Alexander captured them he treated them very well. Alexander became very close with the mother of Darius. The mother of Darius became one of Alexander's most trusted advisors and was right next to Alexander when he died. Although Alexander was responsible for the death of thousands of people, didn't govern his empire very well, and didn't care much about his soldiers feelings, I believe he still deserves to be called Alexander the Great.
     
       2. You can learn a lot from who they consider great. If an empire thinks of someone like Alexander great then they would most likely value military and power like Spartans rather than education and the arts like Athenians would have. Athenians would have thought that someone like Archimedes or Aristotle were great while Spartans would most likely think that someone like Alexander was great. If Alexander was the ruler of an empire that had the same values asAthens then they would not have thought of him as great and most likely gotten a new king into power. I think that if Alexander wasn't the ruler of Macedon or an empire that had the same values as Macedon then I don't think Alexander would've ever gotten the chance or had the support to be called great.

       3. Time and Distance have a major impact on the way people view things. Greeks that Alexander ruled over definitely had a different view on Alexander than we do in the United States today. Greeks most likely thought of Alexander as a harsh ruler who was only concerned with gaining power but Macedonians probably thought of Alexander as a great king who made their kingdom better and did things with the best intent for his kingdom. People in the South back when he abolished slavery probably thought of Abraham Lincoln as someone who was trying to due away with their way of life and cause them to lose everything while people in the North loved him and thought of him as one of the most successful presidents there ever was. In this case the distance caused a difference in how people viewed the same thing. In todays age I would think that a major part of the South thinks of Abraham Lincoln as one of the best presidents ever unlike Southerners back when Abraham was alive thought of him. Time is the cause of the change in the perception of Abraham Lincoln in this case.

Sienkewicz, Thomas J. Encyclopedia of the Ancient World. Pasadena, CA: Salem, 2002. Print.
"How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.
Fullman, Joe. Ancient History. London: DK, 2011. Print.
 Farndon, John. Ancient History. Great Bardfield, Essex: Miles Kelly, 2005. Print.
Emmons, Jim T. "ABC Clio." ABC Clio. N.p., n.d. Web.
Bialo, Ellen. "Alexander the Great." ABC Clio. N.p., n.d. Web.
"Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age." Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.
"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014.
"Alexander." Alexander. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

1.             Alexander was known as a great military genius, yet he overused his power and was a megalomaniac. He was obsessed with his own power. He was tutored by Aristotle in his earlier years of life. The Greeks worshiped him, they showed proskynesis towards him, even though he was only 18/19 years old. In the years of his reign he never lost a battle, but he was only in power for a short period of time. He died at the hight of his power, and he never got time to obtain a downfall. In the “abortive war or Agis III of 331” Alexander took things out of hand. He was constantly recruiting more and more soldiers, even though he left Macedonia behind with very few reinforcement soldiers, so when he wanted more soldiers he threatened to take them form other countries. He used money to get things, and to solve his problems. He didn't necessarily earn his “greatness”, he inherited (Tim Cooke 142-143) it from his father Phillip II. His father brought Macedonia this far, but Alexander did do a fine job of keeping it that far if not farther. Alexander took the position as king after his father was murdered without question. After he took this position he murdered his fathers baby son, son through Cleopatra, and later informed people to murder his uncle Attalus. (Lesley Adkins, 43) His father gave Alexander a mandate to pursue the plan for punishing Persia. Alexander did as he was told and defeated Persia, but he also went beyond that. He left Macedonia behind with his Antipater in charge and was off to take over Persia. He defeated more than just Persia, but when he fought in foreign countries he behaved very poorly. He relied on money, he was an alcoholic, he was constantly wanting more soldiers, and he was just reckless. He was a pothos, meaning he was longing for, and was never content with what he had. (from the perspective of Professor Worthington) In my opinion that isn't great leadership quality because he only cared about himself, not the well-being of others around him. After the battle of “Issos in 333” Commander Darius decided to go towards Media, but Alexander did not agree. Alexander decided to go to Egypt even though Darius did not. Alexander didn't try and pressure Darius into it though. Alexander wanted the money in Egypt so he left Darius alone. All of this led to another battle for Alexander. Alexander looks at things that are directly in front of him, he doesn't quiet see the big picture of things, causing him to make decisions that solve the current problems, but causes much more room for later problems to come.
2.               What a country is revolving around has much to say about the things they value. Macedonia revolved around expanding their land, and fighting to do so, to win over the land. Due to that it shows they value the expansion of their land. They find it important to expand. Macedonia was large in size in the beginning. It was made up of a large plain surrounded by mountains and hills. (Lesley Adkins, 145) After defeating Greek, during the battle of Chaeronea (338 BC),  Phillip II gained control of Greece. His son Alexander defeated Persia in the short amount of years in his reign. They focus much on expanding and winning land. The Macedon's value land and land expansion. If I were to say my mom was great because she gets me a lot of food, then I would be saying that I value food. In Athens they revolve around military, meaning they value protection of there people. Say my parents put me in a great school, and made me always study, that would mean they value my education. People in Ancient Greece found Alexander to be "great". He did do many great things, but they worshiped him. They thought he was amazing and treated him like he was a god to them. Alexander was smart, good with the military, and a hard worker, but due to the fact that they loved him so much they missed the fact that he only cared about himself. They way they viewed Alexander as great is telling us that they value a person who will take action, and and work hard, but it also showed that they don't see the bad in people and they don't see how a person could be selfish. A person calling something "great" is basically saying they love everything about it. They are saying its perfect and "I love it". What someone thinks is great has much to say about what they value as a whole.
3.            In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Adam and Eve did as God told them not too. They ate from the garden of good and evil so that they could see evil. God gave us a second chance and sent His son (Jesus Christ) to earth to save all of our sins. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not parish but have eternal life." (John 3:16) We are forgiven. Jesus paid it all, all to him we owe. When Jesus was on earth he lived a perfect life, he never sinned. Yes, He was tempted but yet He never once sinned. People thought He was a lier and they hated Him for it. They treated Him so terribly it was like they hated Him. They beat Him, wiped Him, mocked Him, and crucified Him. Yet He still loves and forgives us all. When Jesus was on the cross people were fighting to have His clothes, and He prayed for them to be forgiven as he was dying slowly in pain. Over the years more and more people have started to believe that He is the son of God, but there are still so many people who do not believe. People's perspective of Jesus have changed over years and He is still the same perfect Jesus. He died rose again three days later, ascended into heaven, and the Holy Spirt was left on earth to live inside our hearts. God is three in one. In the bible it says "Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ was revealed in a human body and vindicated by the Spirit. He was seen by angels and announced to the nations. He was believed in throughout the world and taken to heaven in glory." (1 Timothy 3:16) When you except Jesus as your Lord and Savior you are being recreated. It is a spiritual change, you are reborn in Jesus Christ. People made a rumor that Jesus didn't actually die and resurrect, but that He was stolen, and released on the day He claimed to have rose from the dead. The jewish religion believes that, they believe we are waiting on the first coming of Jesus Christ, while Christians believe we are waiting on the second coming. Alexander was well loved in his time, but now people are starting to realize that some stuff he did was not great. As people are also starting to believe Jesus is God. Over the years our opinions changed as well did our perspective on people. Yes, time and distance do impact someones "popular perception". 

Sources: 

Adkins, Lesley, and Roy Adkins. Handbook to Life in Ancient Greece. New York: Facts On File, 1997. Print.

"Alexander the Great." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014

Cooke, Tim, and Peter Levi. The New Cultural Atlas of the Greek World. London: Brown Reference Group, 2009. Print.

How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014.

 "Now Are We In Christ Jesus." Kenneth Copeland Ministries. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014.

The Holy Bible: New International Version, Containing the Old Testament and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible, 1978. Print.

Alexander's Legacy

   
         Alexander the Great or Alexander III was a brilliant military tactician and general. He's inspired leaders such as Hannibal the Carthaginian, Pompey, Caesar, and Napoleon and for good reason too. At its peak, his empire has stretched from Greece and Egypt to as far away as India. Although his leadership decisions might not have been the best, there is no doubt that Alexander can be considered great.

         His path to greatness started long before he was a king, when he was still a boy at Philip II court in Macedonia. Even at a young age, it would have seemed that Alexander was destined for greatness. Plutarch writes that at the age of 12, Alexander tamed Bucephalus, a horse none of Philip's men could tame, simply by using his powers of observation. (Mercer, 16-18) Alexander realized that the horse was afraid of its own shadow, and quickly after he moved the horse from the sun, he was able to tame it. Alexander would then go on to ride Bucephalus to all of his major battles. Then, at the age of 13, his father wanted Alexander to get an education so he got Aristotle to teach the young prince. From Aristotle, Alexander learned to think logically which led him to becoming a military genius. (Mercer 18-20) All of these adventures during Alexander's upbringing help him become the leader he is known as today.

        His path to greatness then resumes at the age of 21 when Alexander becomes king after his father's death. Alexander had large plans to fulfill his father's dreams of conquering Persia, and after two years of preparation he began his conquest. He plunged into Persia and after crushing the Persian at the battles of Granicus and Issus he moved into Egypt. He moved through Egypt in likewise fashion and was actually welcomed by the Egyptians for freeing them from the rule of the Persians. They even made him the Pharaoh and called him the son of Zeus. He feels pretty powerful at this point and decides to keep on going. He takes over Babylon and continues into India. In India, he still continues to fight until 326 BC, where his army mutinies at the Hyphasis River after harsh weather conditions. He is forced to turn back and when he does, he is at the height of his power. He believes he is so divine that the Macedonians should worship him. Ironically though, it is at this height of power where Alexander dies, not by a sword or a spear, but by a fever.  Thus ends the eventful but brief life of Alexander III.

        Alexander's last (and perhaps his greatest) accomplishment was his legacy. Part of his legacy was the creation of the Hellenistic culture. The Hellenistic Culture was a fusion of different cultures from regions that Alexander took over. While Alexander was still alive, he was spreading his culture to the places he went and he also adopted some aspects of the other cultures. For example, while he was in Persia, he married a Persian woman and encouraged members of his army to do the same. This helped spread cultures and also created a bond between the two regions. The creation of the Hellenistic culture was important because it allowed unified cities and it allowed people to communicate and travel throughout the Hellenistic world. Another part of Alexander's legacy was the way people viewed him, and in his case it was quite great. He managed to do the unthinkable. He conquered near all of Europe and a large part of Asia. He was even able to create a culture to unify his empire. After all of his adventures and accomplishments there's no wonder people call him the Great.

        This leads to another question, what does it mean to be great?, and more specifically, what can one learn about the values of Society based on their views of greatness? In Macedonia's case, the people were tired of being looked down upon by the other city states. Macedonians knew that the only way to get the other regions to respect Macedonia was to take action; to make Macedon great. So that's exactly what Philip II did. Philip II used this proudness to turn a group of peasants into a highly trained group of soldiers and together they took over most of Europe. After his father died, Alexander continued this philosophy as he conquered Persia and it led him to be seen as great in the eyes of the Macedonians at the time period and for many years to come.

        For Macedonians back then, being courageous in battle and taking over new lands instilled a new sense of nationalism for them which made rulers like Philip II and Alexander III seem so great, but war isn't exactly as well received in all societies. For example, think back to everyday life now. If the president of the United States announced that we would be invading Canada, just because we can, there would be mass rioting all over the US. Not to mention all the uproar that would come from other countries as well. That just goes to show that how great something appears to be is directly depended on the values of the society looking at it, and that one can learn a lot about a society based on what they view as great.

        Another thing that can affect society's view is time. Time plays a major in how people see things. Time can distort or even rewrite history altogether, and that's just what happened to Alexander's legacy. After he died, many writers took it upon themselves to write down the actions of Alexander the Great. In these works, many of Alexander's life goals and achievements become fantasized. For example, one writing titled Alexander Romance featured fantastic adventures such as getting carried around in a basket flown by eagles, encountering a tribe of headless men, and becoming a mermaid just to name a few.

        Another way time has distorted peoples' views on Alexander is by his credibility. Almost all of the works about Alexander the Great focus on how he was such a great leader and general when in reality he wasn't all that perfect. According to an essay by Ian Worthington, Alexander "was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of his own men and for the unnecessary wholesale slaughter of native peoples". On top of that, he is a "megalomaniac, who believed in his own divinity". Perhaps Worthington's account of Alexander was a little more accurate and could possibly shed some light on how great "The Great" really was. Whatever the case is though, there is no doubt that time has greatly affect Alexander III image today. As Winston Churchill once said, "History is written by the victors." and for Alexander that is exactly what happened.

Works Cited
"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.
Emmons, Jim Tschen. "Alexander the Great." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 25 Sept. 2014
Mercer, Charles E. Alexander the Great. New York: American Heritage Pub.; Book Trade Distribution by Meredith; Institutional Distribution by Harper & Row, 1963. Print.
Robertson, John, Joshua Cole, Thomas M. Saftley, and Carol Symes. "The Greek World Expands, 400-150 B.C.E." Perspectives from the Past: Primary Sources in Western Civilizations. By James M. Brophy. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. 142-45. Print.
Worthington, Ian. "How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., 1999. Web. 18 Sept. 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.