Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Alexander the Great
Why Alexander was truly 'great'
Dictionaries have since provided evidence as valued source for definition of the word great, it therefore defined great as getting powerful, superior or character in terms of quality, eminent as well as noble. It is true to say that Alexander was powerful as well as very eminent not failing to mention the large empire he managed to build. As the saying goes that every all that glitters is not gold so was Alexander. Despite the fact that Alexander managed to achieve all that he did he could not be fit the definition of the word Great on the grounds of humanity.
I do not think that a great person can always be pushing his people into situations (war) for his personal ambitions and gain. For the reasons of bad a temper, I don't think one who is known to be great should mastermind the killing of tens of thousands of his people. Neither do I think that great people should take away their friend's lives for a reason or another. If this truly befits...
Going back to the dictionary description of the word great, it is beyond no reasonable doubt that Alexander never befitted the definition of the word great; instead he was a ruthless greedy fellow who was determined to nourish his desires to develop into more powerful man. Truly in his times he was among the powerful men of all times but at the expense of his own people. They say that responsibility accompanies power everywhere but for Alexander, he did neglected responsibility and instead of taking good care of his empire, he opted for continuous wars outside his empire for the purpose of enlarging it.
According to A.B. Bosworth (1986), Alexander became the greatest conqueror in just thirteen years as he managed to gather together the leading empire in the whole prehistoric world. The empire that Alexander managed to put together could cover as wide as 3,000 miles. It is proper to note that he did all this minus the assistance of the…
Reference
A.B. Bosworth, 'Alexander the Great and the Decline of Macedon', JHS 106 (1986). Retrieved on 16/10/2013 http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2004/2004-01-31.html
N.G.L. Hammond, 'The Macedonian Imprint on the Hellenistic World', in Hellenistic History and Culture, ed. P. Green (Berkeley & Los Angeles 1993). Retrieved on 16/10/2013 http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft0000035f;chunk.id=0;doc.view=print
Many people did not like him because of his tactics, but he spread Greek culture around the world and helped the world modernize and become more global and more interested in trade and culture between nations. However, most experts agree that Alexander was one of the greatest leaders ever. The Columbia Encyclopedia notes, "Incontestably, he was one of the greatest generals of all time and one of the most powerful
Both points-of-view may be absolutely correct, but neither really addresses the issue of whether or not Alexander was truly great. Perhaps the best way to evaluate Alexander's greatness is to look at the lasting effects that he had on civilization. First and foremost, Alexander conquered the known world. "Before Alexander world civilization had been dominated by eastern cultures - Persians, Egyptians, and Babylonians. Alexander shifted the spotlight once and for all.
Thus, when stricter regulations should have been implemented, they were not, and the avoidable became utterly unavoidable. The president Hoover's initial reaction was to allow the market to fix itself, thus going alongside his lassiez-faire beliefs. Yet, he was forced by Congress to act, but did so minimally (Wilkison 1). Thus, it was not long before the nation was in demand of a more hands on president who was
Alexander the Great and his life. The writer focuses on presenting a historical biography of his birth, life and accomplishments while pointing out the things he was most well-known for. There were five sources used to complete this paper. He conquered much of the world before he hit his mid-twenties. He traveled the globe collecting thousands upon thousands of admirers, standing at the ready to address his every need. As
When meeting the narrator to explain himself, Sylvio clarifies this behavior by saying that he "likes" the main character. The author then uses this meeting as a platform to reveal Sylvio's true story and nature to the reader. In contrast to the soldiers, Sylvio's character demonstrates a large amount of depth and critical thinking. His emotions do not rule his actions, which is one of the traits that make him
Economists Explain the theory of Social Darwinism. What elements of truth are in the theory? How do you refute it? The theory of Social Darwinism is simply asserts that only the fittest survive in the wild or in society as it exists today. Thus, this theory was based heavily on the ideas of Charles Darwin and his views on plants and animals in nature. Thus, this theory specified that the weak