Alexander the so-called ‘Great’ was a legendary conqueror who in his short lifetime was able to overthrow the Persian Empire, the most powerful kingdom at that time. He was born in 356 BCE to King Philip and Queen Olympia of Macedonia. Alexander’s warring career jumpstarted at the age of 20 in the year 336 BCE, due to the assassination of his father in which he inherited his father’s kingdom. Over the span of 11 years, Alexander and his small fleet of men of about 40,000 took over and ruthlessly conquered the Persian Empire. Sadly, this conquest was short-lived by Alexander’s sudden death in the year 323 BCE, in which his unstable kingdom with a lack of a structured governmental system quickly broke apart in the period of 10 years. Therefore, because of the cruel and the disorganized nature of the way Alexander the ‘Great’ conquered and maintained the Persian Empire, he does not deserve to be referred as ‘Great’. To start, the idea of cruelty can be defined as losing one’s humanity by ruthlessly performing …show more content…
This definition perfectly depicts the battle strategies that Alexander the ‘Great’ used in war. Peter Green’s research out of UCLA is useful in illustrating Alexander’s homicidal tendencies (Document C). Green’s work describes the terrible effect Alexander had on the citizens of Tyre, mercilessly taking the lives of 7,000 people through the burning of their buildings, selling 30,000 citizens into slavery, and crucifying 2,000 men. This terrible act even alarmed the Sidonians, who were allies to Alexander and enemies to the citizens of Tyre. Also, according to the records of the philosopher and historian Lucius Flavius Arrianus written in the year 130, Alexander used the strategy of confusing the elephants of a prince named Porus to win his last major battle, however, though Porus’s army was trampled and killed by the elephants, the same fate was bestowed upon Alexander’s men.
Alexander The Great Alexander The Great no doubt left his mark on history like the many kings before him. One thing he was known for was his hatred for representative government and the belief that zeal for Orthodoxy should be cultivated by every tsar. By the end of his reign Alexander III had also amassed a large amount of territory from him conquests of Persia and Egypt, his kingdom ranging from the Mediterranean to the border of India. Alexander
As stated in an account about Alexander's reign by Lucius Flavius Arrianus: "Unlike any other previous battle, Porus' elephants were now boxed in, and the damage inflicted by them fell on friend no less than foe, with men trampled under as the beasts twisted and turned" (Document B). Despite the fact that Alexander won every battle, he often lost a great portion of his men in order to achieve that. This kind of strategy is not what a person entitled to be "great" should use, since, before having to take away the lives of innocents, one would come up with other plans that prioritized sparing the largest number of lives
A third reason why History is always written by victors is that Alexander the Great was a person who many conquered territories in his lifetime. For example, “Now he was king of the whole of Persia, Greece, Egypt, Phoenicia, Palestine, Babylonia, Assyria, Asia Minor and Persia all these were now part of this empire” (Chapter 12 Page #77 Paragraph 2 line 1).Alexander the Great had conquered many territories making him powerful. Nevertheless, Alexander did not just want that territory he wanted more so he wanted to rule new and undiscovered land to become more powerful. Another reason why Alexander the great fits into the topic history are always written by victors “Alexander was determined to be a true ruler of Egypt the sort they were used
Alexander was a good general, he won lots of wars, and had great strategies. The article states,”He realized that he could not cross at the point… When Alexander saw this, he[decided] move his troops in all different directions so that Porus would keep puzzled,”(Arrianus, Document B). Alexander had a good idea, if Porus and Alexander went head on head it would be even but, if Alexander could attack Porus from all different sides he has an advantage. The article says,”At night he would take most of his cavalry to various points along the river bank where he would create a clamour, raise the war cry and produce all other such noises as would come from men preparing to cross river,”(Arrianus, Document B). Alexander made the noise so Puros would get his men ready for war but, Alexander figured out Porus movements, and he could then send his troops to attack Porus. Alexander was a great conquer because he had so many great strategies when he went into war, helping him expand his vast
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 the Great once said, “There is nothing impossible to him who will try,”(“Alexander The Great”). Alexander is fearless because he wasn’t afraid to do anything. An example of Alexander being fearless was that he kept trying to conquer more and more land which ties back to this quote. According to “Background Essay,” Alexander the Great was born in 356 BCE in a kingdom on the edge of Northern Greece called Macedonia. Alexander developed a rather high opinion of himself including the growing belief that he himself was a god. Alexander fought his way through lands controlled by Persia- across the Asia Minor, down the Mediterranean coast, into Egypt, and then east to Mesopotamia. There he created a huge Persian army at Gaugamela,”(“Background
Alexander the great was a military genius here is why. In Document B it states that "Alexander got him into the habit of making these corresponding movement. This actually went on for quite a long time Porus no longer reacted." Alexander used this as a way to get Porus to not react any longer so he disbelieved that Alexander was going to start the
Alexander the Great, Macedonian King (365-323 B.C.), was the son King Philip II and Queen Olympias, who was one of the best kings at that time. He was known conquering the Mediterranean and Persian Empire. Alexander was called the “Great” because of his military mindset and dexterous skills in conquering lands (Mark1). As a young boy, he was put through school and was tutored by a Greek Philosopher, Aristotle (History1). He was also taught to fight and ride by Leonidas of Epirus (Mark1). Then at the age of eighteen, as a prince, he took charge of the Companion Cavalry and helped his father in defeating the Athenian and Theban armies at Chaeronea (History1). Alexander the Great, conqueror of the Persian Empire, was noted for his leadership,
Alexander the Great is arguably the greatest general and military strategist to have ever lived. He never lost a battle, and before his thirtieth birthday, he had conquered from Greece to India. His military conquests paved the way for Hellinization, the spread of Greek culture, throughout the world. Though Alexander’s reign was short, he left an indelible mark on not only his kingdom but on the world to come. He was an inspiration for Napoleon and Caesar. His name marks dozens of cities across the globe. None of this would have been possible, though, if he hadn’t defeated King Darius III and the Persian Empire. The greatest of Alexander’s
With the events occurring by the Hydaspes River, they can really show how he used horrid contrivance. “When Alexander saw this, he [decided
Alexander the Great was known to be a fierce man, whose main focus was his thirst for conquest to expand his empire, but according to Hammond, Alexander was a “statesmanlike vision”, whose charming personality and intellect earned him the appreciation and respect of his subjects (Hammond, Preface). To his advantage Alexander used intellect and personality to overcome nationalism and racism to build his great empire, proving his devotion and leadership qualities. In N.G.L. Hammond’s book, The Genius of Alexander the Great, Hammond refrains from writing about Alexander’s achievements, conquests, and struggles throughout his career from a biased point of view. Hammond’s main purpose for writing this book is to evaluate the life of Alexander in
The greatest conquering king in the world; King of Macedonia and conqueror of Persia, Alexander the Great is considered to be one of the greatest military geniuses ever. With his amazing diplomatic skills and military genius, Alexander led Macedonia “to conquer most of the known world”. Though he only lived to a relatively young age of thirty-three, Alexander made use of his time from his first task as a leader stifling a rebellion to his last conquering the Persians and Indians. Alexander’s conquests created a whole new era of Greek inspired culture known as the Hellenistic Era. From his amazing prowess as a youth, to his conquests as an adult, and to his influence on the world after his death Alexander the Great left his mark on the world.
Alexander the Great is, arguably, the most famous secular figure in history. His magnetism in life was rivaled only by his magnetism in death, and the story of his career has evoked vastly different interpretations in his age and ours. Young romantic hero or megalomaniac villain? Alexander III of Macedon conquered all who stood before him, but usually in order to free the lower class. He did more to spread the Hellenistic culture than anyone before or after him. My credibility comes from much studying of his lifestyle, and analysis of many contradicting biographies. With this speech, I hope to display to you most of his feats and battles, as well as the vast quantity of folklore that surrounds his life.
Alexander III of Macedon or commonly known as Alexander the Great was a King of Ancient Greek kingdom Macedon and a member of the Argead dynasty. He spent most of his ruling years on an extraordinary military campaign through Asia and northeast Africa and by the time he was 30 he had created one of the largest empires of the Ancient world, stretching from Greece to Egypt and into northwest India. Alexander is thought to be by most people as the greatest military command that ever lived however this wasn’t always the case. Many historians argue that Alexander was in fact the opposite to what he perceived to be. This essay will essentially focus on the good and bad side of Alexander’s campaigns and through the study of various sources we will be able to determined the real truth behind his leadership.
Alexander the Great (356-323B.C.) was one of the greatest warrior leaders of the ancient world. As the son of Philip II of Macedon (382-336B.C.), he acquired his father’s sizeable empire following his father’s assassination. Though Alexander was only 21 at his succession of Philip’s empire, he commanded authority among older generals, and gained respect from his peers as a leader.His strategies, the overall designs of achieving success in battle, combined with his tactics, the individual movements in battle, demonstrated his brilliant understanding of the operational level of war (the level above the tactics of the battlefield but below the strategy of the entire war ). By the end of his reign, Alexander had established an empire that included the Persian Empire, and stretched over 3,000 miles from Western Greece to modern day eastern Pakistan and northern India. Alexander the Great’s insight and understanding of the operational level of war is what made him a military genius.