Does Alexander
deserve to be called “Great”?
While quite handy on the battlefield, Alexander of Macedon does not deserve to be remembered as a great human being. At the young age of twenty-three, Alexander inherited an overwhelming amount of responsibility; he was now the king and commander of a large empire, giving him a significant amount of control over many lives; a responsibility he failed to respect. Even as a child, Alexander projected a great desire to not only see the world, but to conquer it-- a goal encouraged by both the war-based Macedonian culture he grew up in, and the many military advances made by his father, Philip II. Luckily for the young king, he ascended the throne at an opportune time for conquering; his subjects and advisers where just as ready to conquer the powerful Persian Empire as he was. This allowed Alexander to charge into battle with his people's support, beginning the defeat of the empire-- but not before he stopped a rebellion in Thebes, killing over six thousand and condemning the rest to slavery. After showing all of Greece what happens when Alexander of Macedon is defied, the man himself proceeded to conquer Persia, destroying many important cultural and religious sites, along with quite a few cities. Not only was Alexander destructively violent on the battlefield, he also carried dangerous aggression into his personal life, killing those who opposed him in fits of rage reminiscent to childhood tantrums (such as his response to being asked to return to Greece), and regularly drinking himself to violence. This selfish nature also appeared in his dealings with his own people-- not only did he fail to consult them before expanding his conquest from Persia, his constant battling significantly depleted both Macedon's military defense and treasury. Because of his selfishness and lack of responsibility, Alexander does not deserve to be remembered as "great", despite doing things many would consider great, such as expanding both his empire and spreading Greek culture throughout Asia.
What can one
learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?
A great deal can be gleaned from studying the values of a society-- for example, the city-state of Sparta placed a great deal of importance on physical strength, whereas Athens preferred strong intellectuals. These views directly influence the politics and social structure of both societies; in Sparta, high-ranking military officials lead the government and were members of the upper class, while in Athens, those with the necessary intellect were chosen to head the government, and were able to rise in social standings.
Approaching this question from an entirely different angle, an outside perspective can allow their personal views of greatness to warp their perception of a society; for example, when settlers first came to the Americas, they regarded Native Americans as savages. But, if they had not held modern technology in such high esteem, perhaps they would have recognized the value of Native American life, increasing chances of cooperation between the two cultures instead of waging war between them.
Approaching this question from an entirely different angle, an outside perspective can allow their personal views of greatness to warp their perception of a society; for example, when settlers first came to the Americas, they regarded Native Americans as savages. But, if they had not held modern technology in such high esteem, perhaps they would have recognized the value of Native American life, increasing chances of cooperation between the two cultures instead of waging war between them.
Do time and
distance impact someone’s popular perception?
Time and distance do impact a person's popular perception, especially in current society, where information is readily accessible via. the internet. This is proven not only by the contents of this article (most of the research for which was done online), but also by modern perceptions of historical figures; namely, Christopher Columbus. For a long time, Columbus was celebrated as the founder of a new world, one of the most influential figures in American History. Despite this, it is now considered just as important to remember the culture the explorer destroyed-- that of the Native Americans. The reminder of what was essentially genocide on the part of European explorers, and later Americans, greatly influences the popular perspective of the man some might say began it. However, the bad things done by people (however inexcusable) helped shape the world today as much as the good ones, reminding those of us living in the present to not make the mistakes of our predecessors, and to strive to ensure that our legacy is not negatively impacted by the time separating us from future generations.
Works Cited
Ansari, Ali, Prof. "Alexander the Not so Great." BBC News. BBC, 14 July 2012. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18803290>.
Brophy, James M. Plutarch. Perspectives from the Past: Primary Sources in Western Civilizations. New York: W.W.
Norton
, 2012. 142-44. Print.
Davison, Michael. The Glory of Greece and the World of Alexander. New York: Abbeville, 1980. Print.
Griffith, Guy T. "Philip Ll (king of Macedonia)." Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica, 22 June 2006. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.
Plutarch. The Internet Classics Archive | Alexander by Plutarch. Alexander. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. The Internet Classics Archive | Alexander by Plutarch. Web. 28 Sept. 2014. <http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/alexandr.html>.
Salowey, Christina A., and Rowena Wildin. Great Lives from History: The Ancient World, Prehistory - 476 CE. Hackensack, NJ: Salem, 2004. Print.
On question one your reasonings for why he doesn't deserve to be called great are very factual and you made some very good points. In question two i also liked how you approached the question from a completely different angle giving us a different perspective making us understand your reasonings a lot easier.
ReplyDeleteI liked how you took the main thing that he is known for for being great and turned it around and made it obvious that he wasn't great. Good facts and very clear opinion.
ReplyDeleteYou said that when Alexander was young he wanted to conquer the world. Do you consider that a bad thing or do you consider that his isnpiration?
ReplyDeleteBoth. I think that Alexander (as well as the society he lived in) considered world domination and the acquisition of power in general to be a good thing. However, I do not believe that any one person should have that much power and control over others, and I find it slightly unsettling that people like Alexander are so megalomaniacal they either feel they can handle that much responsibility or don't really care how the people they preside over feel. Basically, I understand that in Macedon it was considered to be a good thing, but I think it's important we look at questions and viewpoints like this from a modern perspective, or, even better, as many individual perspectives as possible.
DeleteI really liked how you had a comparison to Christopher Columbus-- I would never have thought of that! I also liked how, in that comparison, you talked about how he really wasn't a good person looking back on it, similarly to Alexander.
ReplyDeleteHey Bankston! What stood out for me was that you mentioned stepping back and viewing answers from different perspectives which I think is important when creating an argument. I thought you supported your answers with good information and clever wording.
ReplyDelete