9/26/14
1) Does Alexander deserve to be called great?
No I think that Alexander doesn't deserve to be called great in any sense but being a good general. He was a very great general, he was a quick thinker and had vast knowledge of battle strategies. This was because his personal tutor was Aristotle (M. Schlesinger jr., 21), who was the greatest thinker of their time. Although he was a great general he had many flaws. Including greediness, his total disregard for other human life, and his temper. He was greedy because he never wanted to stop conquering land. After taking over most of the surrounding empires he wanted to invade india, he would've succeeded in this if his troops hadn't stopped supporting him because they were worked very hard. We know that he didn't care about anyones lives but his people and him because during all his wars, and battles, he killed any single person that got in his way. In other words he didn'tcare who died, as long as he got what he wanted. A perfect example of this was when he killed his uncle for saying "whilst he fights women, I fight men!", this was wildly uncalled for. He wasn't great also because his temper controlled him, "Alexander the Great was prone to fits of savage tempers and in later life he succumbed to megalomania", megalomania is a condition in which one thinks that they control every facet of everything, in todays world there are some megalomaniacs, some being part of a regime, and some dictators, like Kim Jong Il, Hitler, stalin, Mussolini. After knowing all of this would you still believe that alexander is great? I hope not, because anyone that who is a greedy, angry, control freak, is no one that I would describe as great.
2) What can one learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?
To me the values of society are all about, your character, your ability to lead, and your selflessness. Alexander only had one of these traits. Yes, Alexander was a fantastic military leader, but that was his only good trait. His motives were flawed, and his greed and temper was out of control. We know his motives were flawed because all he cared about was money (M. Schlesinger jr., 87). He was very greedy, Him and his men after the battle of Persepolis were said that "The Macedonians spent the whole day in pillage but still could not satisfy their inexhaustible greed." this shows that he was a good military strategist, but he was a horrible leader. All Alexander cared about was land. One could compare Alexander to Hitler, Hitler wanted everyone to be a certain way, he had a "perfect race" in mind, blond hair blue eyes. Alexander wanted everyone to be greek in a way. Even though Macedonia was technically not a greek place. Alexanders society thought he was great, but that was a biased opinion, any other society at the time would've greatly disapproved of Alexanders actions. Just like no other country approved of what Hitler did. Throughout Alexanders life he has killed family, friends and tens of thousands of people. He has led his army to victory, but this empire he created dint last long, because it lacked leadership. Alexander didn't have a plan for after he conquered all of this land, it lacked leadership. Leadership being the most important quality in a society, one quality which alexander only excelled in on the battlefield.
3) Do time and distance impact someone’s popular perception?
Because Alexanders reign was so long ago theres no really good way to know what his people thought of him but there are some very good theories. I think that at the time Alexander seemed a lot worse because in present day we have worse things to compare him to, Hitler, stalin, napoleon. For example we think of hitler as a horrible person, most people outside of Germany do, but some germans don't feel that way. To relate this to Alexanders time period, the persians probably hated what Alexander was doing, but probably every Macedonian was okay with Alexander taking over most of the east. Yes, I think that both time and distance impact ones perception on Alexander, because if your not part of his country, you most likely would not like what he did, and if you are decades after Alexander you wouldn't like what he did. This is also a main reason that alexander was called great, the only people that would give him that nickname is himself or his people. If no one else really liked him or what he did, and his people called him great, isn't that opinion biased? Theres too much evidence saying that Alexander as a whole person was not great.
Works Cited
Worthingson, Ian, Professor. "How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. Professor Ian Worthington, n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014. <http://www.utexas.edu/courses/citylife/readings/great1.html>.
"Alexander the Great." Ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.ushistory.org/civ/5g.asp>.
"Why Alexander the Great Is Not History's Greatest Leader." Military History Monthly. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www.military-history.org/intel/alexander-the-great-historys-greatest-leader.htm>.
"Alexander's Legacy (Overview)." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 1 Oct. 2014.
"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/AlexandertheGreat.html>.
Wepman, Dennis. Alexander the Great. New York: Chelsea House, 1986. Print.
I feel like this describes him, but it seems to be your opinionated description
ReplyDeleteI really like how you said that thing about how Alexander having that condition called megalomania and relating that condition to other dictators like Hitler.
ReplyDeleteYou said under the second point that he was a horrible leader yet contradicted that in your first paragraph when you said he was a great general. Overall however, I defiantly agree with your opinion.
ReplyDeleteI see what your values are and what you believe about greatness, but what does the society's values and perceptions seem to be??
ReplyDeleteYou had very good points and you explained them well.
ReplyDeleteI liked that you explained why Alexander was greedy and selfish, you gave good examples about why he didn't care about his troops and only about himself. Also, i liked how in the last question you talked or compared about how our perception about Alexander is and how people in his time thought about him. And lastly, on the second question,i feel like you talked a little too much about how Alexander was and that you should have a talked a bit more on explaining the question.
ReplyDelete@CroLofty- i appreciate your question, but i feel i have answered that question by saying that his only good trait was leading on the battlefield, and saying that he was greedy, and kinda had anger management, and that he lacked leadership.
ReplyDeleteI really like how you brought a real life example into your third question and you compared Alexander to Hitler.
ReplyDeleteMy research states that Alexander's father tutored him in battle strategy and warfare, not Aristotle
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei didn't mean that aristotle taught hi war strategy but he was more intelligent which helped him in battle strategy for being tutored by aristotle.
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you related Alexander to Hitler and mentioned the blonde hair blue eyes part. I also liked the 3rd answer when you talked about how different it can be living in the country rather than hearing about it in a different country.
ReplyDelete