Alexander The Great: Hero Or Villain?

526 Words2 Pages

After reading the source of “Alexander the Great”, I believe the source material does praise him. Alexander the greats whole motive was to spread Hellenism, the spread of green ideas and traditions throughout the Western Mediterranean and near east. According to the source material provided he ended up accomplishing just that throughout all his conquests. Alexander the great had a very strong personality which caused all the successor kings to revered to Alexander as their founder, and all minted coins had his image. Alexander was so successful as a leader that the results of his actions caused the green culture to evolve and mix with other cultures.
Alexanders vast empire did not last because although he fathered a successor, that child was not born when Alexander died. All Alexander was interested in was his rapid military conquests. His empire was a prize for the taking due to the murder of Roxanna who was a threat by the generals. The war lasted for decades and tore Alexanders empire apart. Some historians have criticized the reason as to why Alexander’s empire did not last. However, …show more content…

As a hero, for example, many historians consider him the greatest military leader of all time, frequently learned about the cultures he conquered, founded more than 20 cities (many named Alexandria), helped to preserve Greek culture posthumously with the spread of the culture to these areas which rose in wealth, and the first major victory against Theban troops equals victory for Philip and claims all of Greece. As a villain, for example, he neglected his own kingdom, local leaders in his place abuse power and ignored peoples’ needs, believed he could accomplish great things and an empire beyond what his father created, demanded and received the utmost allegiance and obedience from his advisors, but often brutal towards them, and he neglected to designate a legitimate heir thus his vast empire crumbles after his

Open Document