More handpicked essays just for you.
How leadership changes society
Relevance of leadership in todays world
Relevance of leadership in todays world
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Alexander the Great is portrayed as a great hero and savior among his people, but Alexander the Great did more harm than good while expanding his empire.
Alexander the Great conquered then destroyed the Persian capital city of Persepolis (Mark). The Persian people had previously enslaved many territories of Greece, including Macedonia, during the Greek-Persian War. Knowing the Persians took the fight to Greece back in the Greek-Persian War, Alexander decided to take the fight to them (Shentov). Diodorus Siculis has first person account of the siege of Persepolis, “ The Macedonians spent the whole day in pillage but still could not satisfy their inexhaustible greed. As for the women, they dragged them away forcibly with their jewels, treating as slaves the whole group of captives. As Persepolis had surpassed all other cities in prosperity, so she now exceeded them in
…show more content…
misfortune… As the others followed their example the whole area of the royal palace was quickly engulfed in flames.” Alexander did not only take over their empire but he destroyed the Palace of Persepolis. This palace was known for its valuable art and history of the Persian people. There was no need for Alexander the Great to burn down Persepolis. He already conquered it, killed all the men, taking the women, and stealing most of Persians valuables which was majority silver. For this reason, Alexander the Great did more harm than good from destroying villages and palaces with no reason behind it. Alexander the Great was the strongest leaders of his time, but he wasn’t.
A leader is a team player and Alexander the Great was the opposite of that. He was greedy and didn’t care about the future of his empire. Alexander the Great did not attempt to create a son which would be the heir to his empire and when Alexander the Great reigned he did not create any form of a government. When Alexander the Great died his last words were, “I foresee a great funeral contest over me”. After his death with no one in control and no government in place Alex the Greats Empire collapsed and his land he conquered split up into new kingdoms. These kingdoms fought over power (Galloway). Alex the Great spent a majority of his life creating a huge empire just to have it break up, so all the pain he caused to the territories he took over were almost pointless. He was so focused on being the best he never considered the fact that his legacy would die after him. Hence, Alexander the Great caused more harm than good to his people due to his overwhelming greed and not basing his decisions on the preservation of his
empire. Alexander the Great may have done some actions that were unnecessary to the success of his empire, but overall Alexander the Great did more good than wrong while expanding his empire. Besides destroying cities and burning them to the ground, Alexander also created around twenty new cities. One of these cities, Alexandria, that Alexander the Great founded, later advanced to a city with into a port, schools, theater, and one of the greatest libraries of its time (Live Science). Alexander the Great did burn cities to the ground but he also founded and revolutionized cites in his empire. Alexander the Great also created a variety of different trade routes in his empire. One of the cities in which Alexander the Great founded named became a major destination in the Silk Road. This trade area was opened to the merchants and all buyers benefited from the Persian’s riches in gold and silver (Marx). In conclusion, Alexander the Great did more good to his people during his expansion of his empire through opening up trade and revolutionizing the cities he founded. In conclusion, Alexander the Great is portrayed as a great hero and savior among his people, but Alexander the Great did more harm than good while expanding his empire. He did more harm through unnecessarily destroying things in which he already claimed, through his greed, and through his nonexistent plan over his territory after he passed away.
In conclusion, Alexander the Great wasn’t great because he didn’t care for other people, didn’t show leadership or any smarts. Many may say that he was an amazing person who did incredible things with the support of the people. However, if you look closely at his actions you could clearly see his reasoning of greed and power. He killed many innocent people to make his dream of controlling the world come true. Before giving someone a title or name it’s important that we make sure it makes sense and fits their
Alexander believed in a strong national government and he feared a weak government that the people could overthrow. If we lived in Syria or any other war-torn country right now, it would be the complete opposite because Alexander’s views are different from theirs. Though he had changed his views a few times, it seems that his final opinion was one that he truly believed in. In our country now, his
Darius had an advantage over Alexander the Great, he had more troops, better resources, and he chose the battle field. Although Darius had the advantage he was not as smart as Alexander. Alexander had good communication with his troops; he planned according, in addition he was well organized before the battled. He did not stray away from his plan he stuck to it. Alexander troops were heavily armed they moved in formation, and they were shield with their long spears they stayed close together and moved in formation. In addition he did not have all his troops engaged in the battle at once he planned an awesome attack strategy that won him and his troops the war.
In the countries who believed Alexander was the son of the devil or the devil himself, will say he is not ‘great’ but a demon who did evil. The countries who were on his side would say he was the greatest conqueror to live. He began as a Macedonian cavalry commander at eighteen, king of Macedonia at twenty, conqueror of Persia at twenty-six and explorer of India at thirty [Foner and Garraty]. The amount of large scale accomplishments he managed to finish in a span of six years is astonishing. Alexander’s tomb was the largest tourist attraction in the ancient world. The tomb was even visited by Julius Caesar, Pompey, Caligula, and Augustus. Alexander the Great’s accomplishments set a bar in which provided a standard that all other leaders would match their careers too. Many leaders after Alexander could not reach the standard left by him [Foner and
Alexander the Great:An Analysis Thesis:Alexander the Great is a villain because Alexander the Great murdered and tortured people for no reason,he also took over cities against their own will. Alexander the Great is a villain because Alexander the Great murdered and tortured many people. This man came to civilizations and Alexander the Great took them under his rule,if one did not follow one were tortured. He also killed people just as a warning that Alexander the Great actually wasn't dead. According to Alexander the not so great Paragraph 3 page 2 “Persians also condemn him for the widespread destruction Alexander the Great is thought to have encouraged to cultural and religious sites throughout the empire.”
Alexander the Great is undoubtedly one of the most famous leaders and Kings in our history. This one man miraculously led his armies into countless battles and created an empire nearly as large as the Roman Empire. Men and women all over the world have clearly heard of the amazing things that Alexander accomplished in his times; however, the question of whether his deeds were heroic or villainous still remains. To answer this question, Alexander the Great was unmistakably a villain.
Alexander the Great is great because of his remarkable achievement which helped to create a long lasting legacy. Alexander started to build his empire in 334 BCE after taking the new role as the king. It only took eleven years to build an empire that was large and lasted several years. In addition, the empire Alexander created stretched over 2,200,000 square miles becoming bigger than the United States (Alexander’s Empire Doc. A) (Alexander’s Legacy Doc, E). This proves that Alexander the Great is great because although the process was eleven long years to make a strong empire, Alexander wasn’t willing to give up and
Alexander The Great was a very influential person in history. The reason that he is so recognized is because of how much he achieved at a young age. When he was a child, his father, Philip II of Macedon employed Aristotle, the famous philosopher to teach Alexander strategy, math and art as well as chess. By the time he was 20 he was extremely educated and really good at chess. When his Father was assassinated in 336 B.C.E, Alexander took his place in the army and started his conquest of much of the early world. Alexander was great because of his leadership, Integrity and courage.
Alexander the Great is hailed, by most historians, as “The Great Conqueror” of the world in the days of ancient Mesopotamia. “Alexander III of Macedon, better known as Alexander the Great, single-handedly changed the nature of the ancient world in little more than a decade. Alexander was born in Pella, the ancient capital of Macedonia in July 356 BCE. His parents were Philip II of Macedon and his wife Olympias. Philip was assassinated in 336 BCE and Alexander inherited a powerful yet volatile kingdom. He quickly dealt with his enemies at home and reasserted Macedonian power within Greece. He then set out to conquer the massive Persian Empire” (Web, BBC History). It is important to note, which will maybe explain his brutal actions, that Alexander was only twenty years old when he became the king of Macedonia. “When he was 13, Philip hired the Greek philosopher Aristotle to be Alexander’s personal tutor. During the next three years Aristotle gave Alexander training in rhetoric and literature and stimulated his interest in science, medicine, and philosophy, all of which became of importance in Alexander’s later life” (Web, Project of History of Macedonia). “In, 340, when Philip assembled a large Macedonian army and invaded Thrace, he left his 16 years old son with the power to rule Macedonia in his absence as regent, but as the Macedonian army advanced deep into Thrace, the Thracian tribe of Maedi bordering north-eastern Macedonia rebelled and posed a danger to the country. Alexander assembled an army, led it against the rebels, and with swift action defeated the Maedi, captured their stronghold, and renamed it after himself to Alexandropolis. Two years later in 338 BC, Philip gave his son a commanding post among the senior gener...
With my highly skilled army of about sixty-thousand men, I entered Persepolis and assumed control of its palace. I find myself in the heart of Persia. From the Persian treasury at Persepolis I seized a wondrous amount of money. It is a well deserved payback, and I must resort to the tradition of vengeance for what the Persians did when Xerxes invaded Greece some hundred and fifty years ago. Alexander turned the city over to his troops, who stormed through its streets, slaughtered men, plundered their property and stripped women of their jewellery.
...f the conquered territories to remain relatively unchanged, Alexander was able to subdue potential unrest before it occurred. However, Alexander’s rule was not without discord though. Many Machiavellian actions for the good of the empire were seen as unsavory to a select few. While this created some distrust, Alexander’s power and governing expertise were enough to overcome these adversities. Because of the characteristics mentioned above, Alexander the Great is as close to a true Machiavellian ruler as humanly possible.
Hamilton does a very good and descriptive job of how Alexander soon showed his power when the large city of Thebes revolted in 335. Alexander stormed the city with mighty force and took 30,000 people as slaves. An important point the book discussesnext is when Alexander begins...
...here are few people in history that can claim the military prowess, uncanny political maneuvering, and the overall lasting effect of the dissemination of a particular culture such as Alexander. Alexander’s exploits led to the spread of the Greek culture throughout Asia and Africa. They even went so far as to impact the Romans who dominated Hellenistic Egypt. He left in his wake and expansion of territory and commerce, with expanded trading ports and the exportation of the Greek political system. Christianity emerged with the Hellenization of the Jews and spread throughout Hellenized gentile communities. It seems impossible to catalogue every impact of Alexander’s empire. In the end, I have to conclude that Alexander does ‘fully deserve’ the title of “the Great.”
To shed light on Persepolis’ significance as a political, religious, and cultural center of its era, this essay examines the
Persepolis was the ceremonial and symbolic capital of the Achaemenid Empire. It was designed to exemplify the kings’ power and showcase the empire’s grandeur. Representatives from subject nations would travel to Persepolis to pay homage to the king and show their admiration for the empire through gifts and tributes. This is reflected in the architecture and layout of Persepolis. Sources A to F convey the role of Persepolis in conveying the power and image of the king.