Huston Morring
9/24/14
G Block
Alexander Great or Not?
1) Does Alexander deserve to be called “Great”?
9/24/14
G Block
Alexander Great or Not?
1) Does Alexander deserve to be called “Great”?
Alexander was Great if you consider him from an army general perspective. Alexander was a fearless military leader, he would go to war with anyone and he would never lose. He was a leader for 13 years and never lost a battle. Yes as a military general he can be considered great, but he was not just a general he was a king which has many more responsibilities. He is in charge of the city state not just the army. In his 13 years as king he was almost never in Macedonia. He did not take care of any aspects of Macedonia except for the army. Alexander was responsible for 10's of 1000's of his men's deaths because he wanted to fight so much. During his time in other countries he killed many innocent native people. He was a raging alcoholic when he was away in other countries he would drink way to much. he was very superstitious and when he had to much to drink he would believe his friends were spies from other countries and order people to go kill them. Overall as a person Alexander was not so "Great". He never took care of his country all he cared about was taking over other countries. He didn't care about his people all he cared about was if they could fight. He didn't make and changes in Macedon except for in the military area.
2) What can one
learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?
One can learn many things about the values of society. Societies considered hospitality very important back then. Travel was much longer back then without all the technology we have now. People traveling relied a lot on peoples hospitality for them to have a place to live. If one was not very hospitable they would end up making others have to sleep on the streets. Alexander was not Hospitable at all he was not a friendly man. Even though he was rarely home he would never let a stranger stay in his house. One can learn that it is very important to be hospitable in a society. if you are not hospitable and u treat someone badly that can come back to haunt you. First people will not like you much if you are not hospitable. Second if you are not hospitable to someone then they are not going to be hospitable to you. The main thing people can learn about the values of society is that you can not be great at just one thing. You must be Great at all things if you want to be great.
One can learn many things about the values of society. Societies considered hospitality very important back then. Travel was much longer back then without all the technology we have now. People traveling relied a lot on peoples hospitality for them to have a place to live. If one was not very hospitable they would end up making others have to sleep on the streets. Alexander was not Hospitable at all he was not a friendly man. Even though he was rarely home he would never let a stranger stay in his house. One can learn that it is very important to be hospitable in a society. if you are not hospitable and u treat someone badly that can come back to haunt you. First people will not like you much if you are not hospitable. Second if you are not hospitable to someone then they are not going to be hospitable to you. The main thing people can learn about the values of society is that you can not be great at just one thing. You must be Great at all things if you want to be great.
3) Do time and
distance impact someone’s popular perception?
Time and distance can make huge impacts on someones popular perception. In 1938 Hitler was on the cover of Times Magazine as the man of the year. He may have been thought of as great back then, but definitely not today. Within five years of being man of the year he was committing suicide after the holocaust, World War 2, and Killing Millions of innocent people. You may think differently but in my opinion Hitler was not so great. Time and distance have had the same affects on Alexander as they have Hitler. In Alexanders time he was considered perfect. The best man in the world. He was an amazing army general he took over most of Greece, Persia, tiny part of Africa, and Asia in his time and never lost a battle. Now we look at Alexander as not such a great leader. He may have been a great general bu that is not the only importance of being a king. you also have to take care of the country and Alexander did not do a great job with this. he was practically never in Macedon and never fixed anything in the country. The only thing he cared about was conquering more land. Most importantly as a king you must take care of your people and Alexander did a bad job with this. He didn't care any about his people he just wanted people that could fight. So to answer the question, yes time and distance can definitely have a big impact on ones popular perception.
Time and distance can make huge impacts on someones popular perception. In 1938 Hitler was on the cover of Times Magazine as the man of the year. He may have been thought of as great back then, but definitely not today. Within five years of being man of the year he was committing suicide after the holocaust, World War 2, and Killing Millions of innocent people. You may think differently but in my opinion Hitler was not so great. Time and distance have had the same affects on Alexander as they have Hitler. In Alexanders time he was considered perfect. The best man in the world. He was an amazing army general he took over most of Greece, Persia, tiny part of Africa, and Asia in his time and never lost a battle. Now we look at Alexander as not such a great leader. He may have been a great general bu that is not the only importance of being a king. you also have to take care of the country and Alexander did not do a great job with this. he was practically never in Macedon and never fixed anything in the country. The only thing he cared about was conquering more land. Most importantly as a king you must take care of your people and Alexander did a bad job with this. He didn't care any about his people he just wanted people that could fight. So to answer the question, yes time and distance can definitely have a big impact on ones popular perception.
Works Cited
"Alexander the Great." Ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.
"Germany: Man of the Year." Time, Jan. 1939, Man of the Year. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
Grossman, Mark. World Military Leaders: A Biographical Dictionary. New York: Facts On File, 2007. Print.
"How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
Pomeroy, Sarah B. Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. Print.
Robinson, Charles Alexander, and Lorna Greenberg. Ancient Greece. New York: F. Watts, 1984. Print.
"The Value of Hospitality." The Value of Hospitality. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.
I agree with your points he couldn't have been a very good king if he was never actually in Macedonia where his government was.
ReplyDeleteIn your first paragraph you said if "Alexander was Great if you consider him from an army general perspective" why didnt you consider him in a more complex perspective?
ReplyDeleteYou talked about him as a military leader mostly, just needed more info on him as a social person. niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee braaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
ReplyDelete@ Mahip Kalra I didn't mean i looked at him from that view point. I meant like if you are looking at Alexander from the point of him as an army general he is great. If you look at him from other perspectives he was not so great.
ReplyDeleteIn the 2nd question do you think that citizens still liked him even though he wasn't hospitable?
ReplyDelete