What caused such a powerful, enormous empire to fall so quickly after the death of their fearless leader, Alexander. Alexander’s ruling, both excellent and negative, affected the downfall of his empire shortly after his death. The fall of this empire came about due to three key reasons. Alexander’s Empire fell apart so quickly after his death because the Macedonians, among others, were disloyal to Alexander, Alexander’s many devastating flaws of treating his enemies along with his friends with no mercy, and the excellent, unique, and powerful way of Alexander’s ruling represents an extremely difficult challenge of replacement. The fall of Alexander’s empire was brought about by the Macedonians, among others, being disloyal to Alexander. …show more content…
Alexander brought in numerous young men into the military from many nations to fight for him. This thoroughly annoyed the Macedonian leaders resulting in anger with Alexander for adding the boys, “who thought that Alexander was contriving every means in his power to free himself from future need of their services”(Arrian 2). Despite Alexander trying to help his empire, people did not trust him and were disloyal to him. Distrust among his men was displayed when the Macedonians disagreed with Alexander’s way of ruling. The Macedonians were also annoyed when they, “thought that Alexander was becoming altogether Asiatic in his ideas, and was holding the Macedonians themselves as well as their customs in a position of contempt”(Arrian 2). Alexander’s men’s doubt in his abilities results in a reason for the empire's downfall. When his own leaders did not carry out the plans that Alexander had for the empire after he died, they displayed their distrust in him. Prior to the plans of Alexander had been read out, “the Macedonians, although they approved highly of Alexander, nevertheless saw that the plans were extravagant and difficult to achieve, and they decided not to carry out any of those that have been mentioned”( Diodorus 1). Alexander’s leader’s distrust in his plans evidently shows their disloyalty and doubt. The fall of Alexander’s empire, displayed clearly through the Macedonian people and his other leaders, developed from the doubt in his plans. Alexanders many faults caused distraught among the Macedonians and his other generals by treating his victims, along with his friends, with no mercy or compassion.
Alexander's harsh ruling was shown when he destroyed the city of Thebes without the slightest thought of compassion, and sold the Thebans into slavery (Bialo 1). The harsh rule of Alexander compromised his empire. Alexander’s tactics were shown by critics who point out the slaughtering of thousands of native people. “These critics ask whether a man who slaughtered indigenous peoples, who risked the lives of his soldiers for his selfish reasons, who fierce temper led him to kill his friends… can really be called great”(Spielvogel 78). Alexander choosing to pursue his conquest despite allowing his men to suffer displays his selfish leading. A final example of Alexander's faults deals with an encounter with one of his personal friends. “Alexander, blind with rage, snatched a spear from the nearest guard and ran him through the heart”(Renault 180). The lack of self control and discipline represents possible errors through ruling with his rash decisions. The flaws of Alexander the Great severely hindered his ruling capability and caused the fall of his empire due to several uprisings in Greece (Bialo …show more content…
1). Alexander’s sheer greatness was an incredibly difficult match to follow. The accomplishments and abilities of Alexander were an unlikely match to replicate. A certain aspect of Alexander’s greatness was his military virtuoso, energy and spontaneous changing in battle (Spielvogel 78). Alexander’s unique ruling enabled the expansion of his empire and caused a great amount of distraught among his successors. Another aspect of Alexander’s greatness is expressed by many as, “his military ability, extensive conquests, and creation of a new empire alone justify calling him Alexander the Great. Other historians also praise Alexander’s love of Greek culture and his intellectual brilliance” (Spielvogel 78). The name recognized by many as Alexander the Great signifies a small token of remembrance of his outstanding rule. The complex and distinguished rule of Alexander caused the fall of his empire soon after his death. The fall of Alexander’s empire was brought about due to three main reasons.
The first of these reasons was caused by the unloyalty of Alexander’s men. The Macedonians along with several other leaders doubted Alexander and did not carry out several of his plans following his death. Also, Alexander’s several devastating faults of his disregard to his friends and enemies. Finally, Alexander’s strength as a ruler and excellent military strategy resolved in the downfall of his great empire. Alexander’s military success displayed his ingenious strategies, along with his spontaneous thinking. All of this ensued the collapse of Alexander the Great’s magnificent empire after his
death. Works Cited Arrian. The Anabasis of Alexander, together with the Indica. Trans. E. J. Chinnock. London: George Bell and Sons, 1893. Print. Bialo, Ellen. "Career of Alexander the Great." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras, ABC-CLIO, 2018, ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/1185181. Accessed 28 Jan. 2018. Diodorus. Library of World History, Book 18. Trans. M.M. Austin. www.livius.org Accessed December 2013. Web. Renault, Mary. The Nature of Alexander. Library of congress cataloging, 1976. Spielvogel, Jackson, J. Western Civilization, A Brief History. 9th ed., I, Boston: Cengage Learning, 2014. Print.
Diodorus and Plutarch portray Alexander with extreme amounts of arrogance because of his extravagant ideas and goals, but in Arrian’s pieces, Alexander is shown as a barbarian because of his inheritance of Persian culture.
Many small government officials took pieces of land, changing the laws and affecting the citizens in big ways. Ten years later, the empire fell apart, leaving people with many burdens. Alexander left his empire after he died in a big mess, hoping someone could help him. This was unsmart because even though death might not be expected, it is always important to create a will with as much at stake as there was in Alexander’s situation. In summary, Alexander was not smart because he wasn’t able to think ahead to help his empire stay strong.
The son of Philip II, Alexander the Great, will become the conqueror of the western world. Alexander received the Macedonian empire when his father passed, he was only twenty at the time. As soon as he had the power of the Macedonian army, several lightning fast campaigns led them into the west and north. Next, he compelled the city-states that rebelled against the League of Corinth. This action demonstrated how Alexander punished disloyalty [Martin 244]. Alexander was able to keep his rule on the territories he conquered by rewarded the cities who recognized his powers and punished the individuals that betrayed his trust or ambitions. The power he possessed depended on his superior force and his unwillingly desire to use it [Martin 245]. The
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.”
Having a bad day can seem daunting, perhaps causing feelings like nothing can go right regardless of what you do. This seems to be the case in “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day.” No matter what Alexander does, the day just doesn’t get better. From breakfast all the way to bed time, Alexander is miserable. Many things that Alexander experiences are avoidable through a better outlook on life and proper parenting.
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...
Alexander was very loyal to his country and parents. When he was still a young teenager, his father gave him the task of ruling the small region of Pella. This allowed Alexander to prove to his father that he could be a competent ruler. When Alexander and his father, Philip, fought Macedonia, Philip was surrounded. Alexander bravely jumped in and saved his father from sure death. Alexander demonstrated loyalty to his mother by staying with her through her exile from Philip. This showed how much pulling and tugging went on to win Alexander’ favor that enviably killed Phillip by not knowing who to be loyal to. Upon their return three years later, Alexander’s mother requested to be allowed to rule with him, once Alexander became king. She knew that would be the only way she could regain power. When Alexander turned twenty, his father was brutally murdered by Alexander’s friend. This demonstrated once again how loyal Alexander was to his father, and how difficult a decision it was to pick sides between his father and mother.
Few historical figures stand out in the same degree as that of Alexander the Great. He was a warrior by 16, a commander at age 18, and was crowned King of Macedon by the time he was 20 years old. He did things in his lifetime that others could only dream about. Alexander single-handedly changed the nature of the ancient world in just over a decade. There were many attributes that made Alexander “Great.” He was a brilliant strategist and an inspired leader; he led by example and was a conqueror at heart. In looking at his early childhood, accession to the throne, conquests, marriage, and death one can see why Alexander the Great is revered in historical contexts as one of the greatest figures of all time.
Although Alexander the Great of Macedonia’s actions as a conqueror mark him as a great leader to many, they are marred by an arrogance which is what gives him the label of a bad leader. This cocksure behavior increased as the years went on and led to the intolerable pride Alexander carried marking him as an unsatisfactory leader from the present perspective. Alexander acted brashly just to earn glory and did not consider the consequences of if he had been injured. In The Battle of Gaugamela it mentions Alexander leading his army “with Alexander himself at the head of them, vigorously pressed the assault” (Arrian, The Battle of Gaugamela). This action of his is a cry for glory, not for Macedonia, but just for Alexander.
Alexander the great is known as one of the most ruthless and greatest leaders the world has ever seen. In less than ten years, Alexander conquered cities from Greece all the way to modern day India. Not only did he defeat and conquer cities throughout the known world, but Alexander would also leave his mark spreading and influencing Greek society wherever he went. His leadership and conquests united the East and the West as a whole like no one up to that point had done before. His impact on culture and society when meshing his Greek background with his conquered cities became something truly unique. In 323 B.C. when Alexander passed away, he not only left behind a vast thriving empire, but also a legacy that would be remembered throughout history.
Was he was a bloodthirsty monster obsessed with war, or romantic visionary intent on creating a multiethnic world…” (Hunt 118). Through Hanson offers many views on a lot of topics but he focuses mainly on Alexander visionary ideas. One of these ideas were why he destroyed certain city states, which started with Thebes because the refused not to join his army and opt out for independence instead (Hanson 53). Hanson commented on how a king should expand his kingdom and also prevent conflicts in doing so.
Alexander began his military campaign and his rule much where his father left off. Whether or not it was his aim, this created a sense of normality for the men that was part of his father’s regime. Alexander’s position as a warrior-king who stood side-by-side among his men also served to create respect among his peers. Gradually, as Alexander conquered more Persian land, he began to adopt the policies of Persian rulers. Alexander’s change in policy extended beyond just political roles, he gave consideration to the local gods in many of the lands that he conquered. Eventually, Alexander brought people in from the conquered nations to serve under him.
First one must consider source material on Alexander the Great’s life and times. This material, as with most historical information, must be carefully weighed and scrutinized. There is evidence that there were many various sources of primary documents written during Alexander’s life and over the decades that followed; however, none of these sources have survived fully intact. Most of the material that survived from the time Alexander lived or the decades following his death only survived in part or is quoted in other writings. We find that many later writers use the original sources in their own writings, but this in itself presents more questions on the reliability of the sources that we have today.
(Alexander the Great - Hero or Villain?) Some of these deaths he caused when he and his army “went on some ‘killing sprees’ to smaller towns and killed or enslaved everyone in the town”. (Alexander the Great - Hero or Villain?) Alexander really was a villain because he deliberately caused the death of 250,000 people. Some of these victims were innocent, and Alexander only killed them to gain more power and wealth. He might have even killed these people just because he was bored. Killing nearly 250,000 people just to gain more power is almost a definition of being a
Have you ever wondered why Alexander from Macedonia is called Alexander the Great. According to history, it is because he is the most glorious general in the history who conquered Persia, Greece, Egypt and Babylon in a very inexperienced age. He became the commander of Macedonian armies at age eighteen and the king of Macedonia at age twenty. After six years of preparation, he conquered the great Persian empire. Unfortunately, he died at age thirty-three. He would have conquered many lands if he hadn’t died at a such young age. He was a legend and an icon for great kings like Charlemagne, Julius Caesar, and Pompey. World’s most famous generals tried to compete with him but they couldn’t accomplish. After years, his tomb