Alee Clayton
Coach Ward
B Block
Defining a Legacy
1.)
Alexander may have done many things to make himself seem great such as build Macedonia to be known as a better place, or have many cities named after him, or never loose a battle as a leader, but he doesn't deserve to be called great. Having a great outcome doesn't mean you did a great job, it is how you accomplish the task you have or had, and how you take the outcome and grow from it. Alexander had potential to be one of the greatest leaders known to man, but Alexander didn't have the mind set to allow himself to. Once he started doing great things he quit being the guy he was and became a guy of ego and "fame". Alexander would be great if all that was significant in being a leader was winning battles, but the way he won his battles and what he did after is what held him back from being great.
As Alexander became more and more “worshiped” and as he won more and more battles he started to become arrogant and not approach situations in the best way he could. Alexander started out as an awesome leader, but didn't have the power in his mind to stay that way. He let his head get to him and become "cocky." In many wars Alexander fought, he did not apply his best thoughts to the veterans/soldiers, as in he only put his thoughts into consideration. It was almost as if he just wanted to be done with the battle and call it a win. When Alexander had big defeats it would allow his ego to escalate to become over bearing for himself to handle. After Alexander won big battles he would start to change his appearances to somewhat mock the city or country he had defeated. Alexander would get mad and react horribly if he didn't complete the task he wanted to or if someone got to the task first. He thought since he was the leader he should be the one to accomplish everything and he was the only one allowed to accomplish it. This arrogance is what made Alexanders troops turn away from him. During the end of Alexanders rein he became a drunk and didn't focus on his tasks. Alexanders own countrymen and troops turn away from him toward the end of his rein. If his troops are turing away from him he shouldn't be considered great. When he died most of his countrymen didn't look up to him as a leader anymore, they considered him selfish. Although he never lost a battle and had great accomplishments, I don't think he should be called great.
As Alexander became more and more “worshiped” and as he won more and more battles he started to become arrogant and not approach situations in the best way he could. Alexander started out as an awesome leader, but didn't have the power in his mind to stay that way. He let his head get to him and become "cocky." In many wars Alexander fought, he did not apply his best thoughts to the veterans/soldiers, as in he only put his thoughts into consideration. It was almost as if he just wanted to be done with the battle and call it a win. When Alexander had big defeats it would allow his ego to escalate to become over bearing for himself to handle. After Alexander won big battles he would start to change his appearances to somewhat mock the city or country he had defeated. Alexander would get mad and react horribly if he didn't complete the task he wanted to or if someone got to the task first. He thought since he was the leader he should be the one to accomplish everything and he was the only one allowed to accomplish it. This arrogance is what made Alexanders troops turn away from him. During the end of Alexanders rein he became a drunk and didn't focus on his tasks. Alexanders own countrymen and troops turn away from him toward the end of his rein. If his troops are turing away from him he shouldn't be considered great. When he died most of his countrymen didn't look up to him as a leader anymore, they considered him selfish. Although he never lost a battle and had great accomplishments, I don't think he should be called great.
2.)
In Macedonia people considered greatness by the power of the military. When Alexander brought a strong military to the country everyone considered him great. Alexander started conquering cities and naming them after him and his men and troops looked up to that. You can assume from their views of great, they value power and strength over other countries and that they value having a strong military. In America we consider greatness as thriving as a whole, or uniting the people in every aspect of life. When America defines greatness we would define it as succeeding by having a strong economy, if people weren't in poverty, if the government is running smoothly, if our army is strong, if we have good relationships with other countries, all of those come together to make America great. If everything in our country is running smoothly then we would consider that great. This shows that America values strength and being well rounded as a whole, this shows we value the people of in our country and that we care about them. With all the different prospectives of greatness on a country, there will be many ways you can see what they value, whether it is power, strength, overachieving, not "caring", or if they are going with the flow and relying on other countries to help them.
Over time the perspective on someone definitely changes. As time goes on it allows people to form different opinions because it gives them time to think about everything they have done, and every action they had made whether it is good or bad. After anything happens your perspective on it changes maybe for the better or maybe for the worst. This is because after something happens to you that is important you tend to think about it. If you think about everything that happens in the time period of the event you will realize you didn't understand or catch everything that happened. When someone important dies you think about it for days, weeks, months, or years. There is no way that if a known person dies you won’t think about what they did to contribute to their community, and how they contributed. You will think about how they treated people and how they reacted to the way people treated them: you think about the person having a positive or negative influence on the community that they lived in. Thinking of someone who has died can allow you to change the way you think about them, so when someone well known dies everyone will think about them and what they did on this earth and how they changed it to make it a better place. I think that over time the overall perspective will change but not necessarily for the better, it can change for the worse.
When Hitler was alive many people would have considered him great because he was presented as a humble man and a man of God. During World War 1 he was looked up to for his bravery, he never let anyone see his weak side. After World War 1 he started to become more none and slowly became "the man in charge." In World War 2 Hitler took control of the the army and lead it, and his troops looked up to him. His troops would have considered him great. We all know now Hitler is not considered great because of the Holocaust, he was the reason the Holocaust started. Hitler thought that Jews were against Germany and so he decided he wanted them to be gone, of course he had total control of everyone living under him so he made that happen. Hitler forced the Jews into concentration camps, gas chambers, or they were shot. Over 1.5 million Jewish people were killed during this time. With Hitler being the main cause if this, we would not consider him great. This shows that time and distanced can and most likely will change the perspective on a person.
Works Cited
"Adolf." Hitler's Rise to Power. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www2.dsu.nodak.edu/users/dmeier/Holocaust/hitler.html>.
"Alexander the Great." - New World Encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Alexander_the_Great>.
"Eastern Illinois University Homepage." The Holocaust. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www.eiu.edu/~eiutps/newsletter_holocaust.php>.
Fagg, Christopher. Atlas of the Ancient World. New York: Crescent, 1979. Print.
"How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014. <http://www.utexas.edu/courses/citylife/readings/great1.html>.
"THE MACEDONIAN ISSUE." MIT. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://web.mit.edu/hellenic/www/macedonia.html>.
The link between Hitler to Alexander was good because Hitler was first thought of to be a hero. Like Alexander Hitler was a respectable man of the military and a fairly good leader. However great despicable acts of cruelty have clouded the image of the once brave man who helped to reform Germany.
ReplyDeleteOn question one about how great alexander really was you gave some very factual information to back up your reasonings. In question two i thought it was very good that you used macedonia as your place of example. The reason i liked that was because macedonia is where alexander is from. I liked how in question three you gave an example of a person who was first thought of to be a hero then over time he was thought of very poorly.
ReplyDeleteI think your first paragraph did a great job of talking about how Alexander might have accomplished many great things, but he was not necessarily Great. You really listed a lot of his accomplishments in life span but also a lot of bad things that he caused to happen. Choosing Hitler was a very smart and good and interesting person to link Alexander to as well.
ReplyDeleteI like how you discussed the more arrogant Alexander became the less people started to like him. You did a good job of talking about how people during Alexander's time valued military and he had tons of military skills. Good job Alee
ReplyDeleteI liked how you compared Hitler and ALexander, it was a really good connection. Most people think of him as terrible but I liked how you named some good qualities about Hitler.
ReplyDelete