Vicki McLendon

9-23-14

Mr. Ward

 Alexander the "Great"

What truly makes someone great? Is it what they accomplish and materialist or is it what they leave behind? Alexander the great was considered great by some because he accomplished much starting at a young age. But was Alexander really that great? Often times when Alexander was in foreign countries he would get drunk and have many people needlessly killed. When Alexander didn't get his way he often pouted and hid in his tent. Alexander concurred with violence, a modern day dictator. He changed cultures and forced many people to comply to his army and to Asian cultures. 

Does Alexander deserve to be called great?

Alexander did many unorthodox and questionable deeds and doesn't deserve to be called great. Alexander was a drunken who often killed for no reason. He never seemed to think about the consequences to his actions. He was quick to aggression, slow to conciser. Alexander was impulsive, he always wanted more and enjoyed fighting in battles. Alexander did gain much land for his

 country but, he never took the time to build the up country's

 economy and stability before conquering new land. After Alexander died, so did Ancient Alexandria. Life is fleeting so all that will be left of you after you die is the impact you made and lives you changed. To me, if your legacy isn't for the betterment of lives it is would be hard to be remembered as"great".

What can one learn about the values of a society based on their view of greatness?

You can learn very much about a society by whats its morals and views of greatness are. If someone is know as great you can tell that the things he did were acceptable and valued in those times. Now if someone acted as Alexander the great did it wouldn't be accepted. Alexander is a good example of how the times change views of acceptability. In the times of Alexander, you can infer that there was much war and that diplomacy was not widely practiced. Now we conciser someone to be great by how they have helped to shape the world, not by how much land they own, or how many people they have killed. In the times of Alexander, we can see that someone's impact didn't matter, only their possession and social status.

Do time and distance impact someones popular perception?

Time greatly impacts a person's opinion on someone or an event. Sometimes when a loved one dies their predecessors only remembers the good that the deceased did. The opposite can sometimes be true all the same. After time and distance sometimes we tend to focus on either the good a person did or the bad the person did. An example of time changing the perception of someone is Vincent Van Gogh. While Van Gogh was alive, no one would buy his paintings and he was though of as an insane drunkard. Less than a year after his death, his paintings were first put into museums, People started to take interest in his work soon after he had passed and he died thinking he was a failure. Now, Van Gogh is though of as one of the greatest painters who every lived.

Works cited:

"Alexander the Great (356-323BC)." BBC History. BBC, n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.

"Alexander the Great." Us History. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

"Alexander the Great." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. ABC-CLIO, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.

"Alexander the Great's Greatest Acomplisments." Historychannel.com. History Channel, 13 July 2013. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.

"Vincent Van Gogh: Later Years." Vincent Van Gogh Gallery. Van Gogh Gallery, n.d. Web. 02 Oct. 2014. For the information on Van Gogh

Alexander is Great

Maggie Mitchell

Mr. Ward

B Block History

Alexander The Great

1) Does Alexander deserve to be called “Great”? 

I believe Alexander does deserve to be called "Great". During Alexander's childhood years, Aristotle was Alexander's teacher. This was a very big deal in this time period. He learned many things an average child would not learn. At age 13, he decided to take on the task of taming Bucephalus, a horse in Macedonia that no one else could tame. He became successful and proved at this young age, that he was fearless and brave. 

Alexander grew up with his father as king and followed up in his footsteps. When Alexander was 16, his father left for war and Alexander was left in charge of Macedonia until his father returned. Alexander proved to the people of Macedonia that even at only 16 years of age, he was capable of running Macedonia. When his father died, Alexander jumped to control by taking over the kingdom. He was 20 years old. His father left him with the plans and his powerful army to invade Persia. Alexander put those plans into actions and invaded the Persian Empire in 334 B.C. This invasion was only the beginning of Alexander's plan. 

Although he put many of his troops in danger and sacrificed many lives, it is said that Alexander had never lost a single battle and he was "considered one of the greatest military geniuses of all time". Alexander conquered Greece in 336B.C., invaded India in 327 B.C., conquered the Punjab, took over Western Asia, invaded Egypt, and took over Tyre and Gaza. He was also the true founder of the Hellenistic culture which brought ancient cities together in common language and currency. 

Alexander's greatest accomplishment, in my opinion, is killing his nemesis Darius the 3rd, King of Persia. Alexander had no sympathy for Darius and only would accept the entire kingdom of Persia in trade of sparing Darius's life. Darius sent a letter of truce that offered several western provinces of the Persian Empire, but Alexander refused until the whole Empire would be passed over to his possession. Alexander ended up at war with Darius and it resulted in Darius's death. The Macedonians burned the royal palace in Persepolis, completing the end of the ancient Persian Empire. Alexander's kingdom spanned from Greece to India. 

Although these are all great accomplishments, Alexander also displayed signs of being ruthless. In Thebans, Alexander and his army stormed in and killed everyone in sight, including children and women. 6,000 Theban citizens died and 30,000 more were sold as slaves. In the Greek War,18,000 Greeks perished at the battle site Granicus, and 2,000 survivors were set to work as slaves afterwards. According to Macedonia, they only lost 120 men in this battle. This displays that although Alexander was great, he had some qualities about himself that were not great. In my opinion, war is not the answer to a problem now, but war was a way to solve problems in that time period.

2) What can one learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?

People can learn about the values of a society by examining which things they put first versus which they put last. Typically, in this Alexander's time period, the kings decided for the people what would be best for the people. Some cultures believed that war defined greatness, while others believed that peace defined greatness. Alexander believed that war was the answer, therefore Macedonia was set to believe that war was greatness. 

Fighting, conquering, killing, possessing a lot of land, and expanding his kingdom were valued by Alexander. As a result, these values were important to the people of Macedonia as well. They believed that the more land you have, the greater you are. The more people you kill, the greater you are. The more you did, the more stories there were about you, and the more stories there were about you, the greater you became. 

Alexander conquered many cities and his army became larger with every city he conquered. The bigger his army grew the harder it was to defeat him. The harder it was to defeat Alexander, the more powerful he became. The more powerful he became, the greater he became to everyone. In other cities art was valued. The better your art was, the greater you were. 

Alexander started off with just Macedonia but conquered from Greece to India in just thirteen years. To his people and others who believed that war was greatness, Alexander was incredible. However, there are some that believed that war was not the only option. Although these people did believe Alexander was great, they did not think as highly of him as a city that valued war. 

After his death, Alexander left behind the Hellenistic culture, which was a way for all the lands to have common currency, language, and culture. The Hellenistic culture stayed around long after Alexander was gone and created a common way for societies to function. As time moved on people started to change and new kings came into Macedonia.  With new leadership came different beliefs and values, and the people changed their beliefs and values too. 

3) Do time and distance impact someone’s popular perception?

Yes, time and distance do impact someone's popular perception. The first name I thought of was Rosa Parks. Most historians date the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement to December 1, 1955. This was the day when an ordinary woman named Rosa Parks (Montgomery, Alabama) refused to give up her bus seat to a white passenger. 

During that time, white passengers had priority to take the seats while the black passengers were expected to stand if a white person wanted a seat. Rosa Parks was sitting on a bus alone in a seat, when a white man came up to her and asked for her seat. She refused to give her seat up simply because her feet hurt. At this time, it was outrageous for her to do that. Rosa was arrested and fined for violating a city ordinance. 

As word spread about her seemingly simple refusal, her act moved others to action. They may have perceived her refusal as more than her just being too tired to give up her seat.

In 2014, we look back on this and see this treatment and her arrest as an awful act of racism, but in 1955 this was seen as justice for not having white skin and for saying no to someone with white skin. People all around heard about this story and this act is thought to have started the Civil Rights Movement. Rosa Parks is still remembered and celebrated for what she did that day.

This change in perception also relates to Alexander the Great. During his time, war was common, but now it is considered as a last resort, and generally not entered into without just cause. Historically, stories traveled throughout cities and regions. It could be that the stories were all true, but most likely they changed along the way. Alexander the Great was most likely made out to be greater than he actually was. We do not have Alexander around to see what actually happened either. 

It seems to me that Alexander was truly great for his time, and over time he became more and more of a legend. Alexander was looked up to in his time and other time periods where war was valued, but in today's world he would not be perceived as great as he was then. When you hear the name Alexander the Great, you still assume that he did amazing things, without knowing who he actually was. In my opinion he is great for his time, but if he was around in our current society, my perception might change.

citations : 

"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.

"Hellenistic Greece." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.

"Alexander vs. Darius." Alexander vs. Darius. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

"Martin Luther King Jr." - Biographical. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

"Rosa Parks Biography." -- Academy of Achievement. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

Connolly, Peter, and Hazel Dodge. The Ancient City: Life in Classical Athens & Rome. Oxford: Oxford 

UP, 1998. Print.

Souza, Philip De, and John France. War and Peace in Ancient and Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Alexander the Great

Richard Davis
9/25/14
Ward History

Alexander the Great

          Alexander the Great was a one the most revered leaders of all time. Many other famous rulers considered him the measure of greatness, compared themselves to him, or imitated his style. Famous leaders who visited his tomb include Pompey, Caligula, Julius, and Augustus Caesar.  Alexander the Great was very different compared to other leaders because not only was he a  politician,but he was also a great general, and an educated later. He was a strict, but just leader and decimated those who did not agree with him. Being a great tactician played a very major part in why  he was able to conquer and acquire the Greek city states, and the later Persian, and Egyptian acquisitions. He had also gained combat experience prior to his rule, as a teenager aiding his father in battle. He was a well educated leader having been taught by the likes of Aristotle. Who introduced, and exposed a young Alexander to Greek culture. Alexander the Great was a well rounded leader, and one of the few men who fit the title of "Great."
         Alexander was a jack of all trades who was very skilled in almost all fields he worked in, especially in the art of battle. Alexander was a very impressive tactician who had gained experience on the battlefield as a teenager, directing some of his father's troops, against the Greeks. It helped that his troops had also mastered, and perfected the phalanx technique. He showed his great intellect on the battlefield, with his careful planning, and phenomenal improvisation on the battlefield. During the Battle of Issus against Darius III, Alexander faced a Persian army much larger than his own, and lead his troops into battle. Darius sat behind his troops as it was a safer choice. Very similar to the Battle of Thermopylae, this war was fought between a mountain, and shoreline. Alexander used the terrain to his advantage by having his phalanx charge through Darius III's troops straight for Darius himself, and while it proved ineffective it still was a fairly well thought out plan.

Roman Mosaic of Alexander charging Darius.

          Alexander proved to be a decent politician, who helped mesh cultures, and diversify his army. Darius fled the scene after Alexander trampled his troops, and left his mother, wife, and two daughters. However, Alexander treated them kindly, and Darius III's mother became one of his chief advisors. People did not exactly view Alexander as a great politician during his time, but he implemented a lot of new, and innovative ideas. He merged Asian and Greek culture, and created Hellenistic culture. He also tried to introduce a universal language, and created a new dialect of Greek which would help communication throughout the empire. Alexander may not have been considered "Great" then, but that is because people did not understand how practical, and innovative these novel ideas were. This just goes to show that perspective plays a huge role in how people view someone.
          Alexander was most likely not considered as great as he is now, mainly because he was only view as a good general. He was very successful in terms of war, he killed many enemies, and dominated on the battlefront. This is probably why Roman leaders who came after him viewed him as great, and probably why he was used as a benchmark for chivalry during the Middle Ages since war was glorified during these periods of time. Alexander gained recognition later on when his novel ideas became the norm. The Roman Empire used Latin as a universal language, but many years ago during Alexander's time other cultures may have viewed this as repressing their cultures.
          Alexander was great back then, but he is even greater now, having left his legacy in history, and having his stories told, and researched today. Alexander the Great had few flaws, the main one being he was an alcoholic, but he still remained a great leader, general, and politician. He introduced new ideas, blended cultures, and improved Greek society in many ways. While he may have been unjust in sacking Thebes for their opposition he did it to prevent further chaos from within his empire. Alexander did die at the height of his power, so what he would, or could of done will remain unknown to us. However, the legacy he left behind, and the ideas he introduced definitely earn him the title Alexander the Great.

Works Cited:

"Alexander of Macedonia." Alexander of Macedonia. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

Giotto, J. "Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age." Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2014.

History.com Staff. "Alexander the Great." History.com. A&E Television Networks, 2009. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

Ralph, Philip L., Robert E. Lerner, Standish Meacham, and Edward M. Burns. World Civilizations. 8th ed. Vol. 1. N.p.: n.p., 1988. Print.

Alexander the Great

Alexander the Great deserves to be called “great” because of his intelligence, leadership, and overall accomplishments. Alexander the Great was the son of King Philip II of Macedon and Queen Olympia, so his family was very powerful. At age 11, Alexander was tutored by the famous Greek philosopher and scientist, Aristotle. With Aristotle, Alexander learned philosophy, government, politics, poetry, drama, and the sciences in three years.

One of Alexander’s many great accomplishments was taming the untamable horse, Bucephalus. He did this at only age 12 and rode Bucephalus to every battle. At age 16 while his father was out at war, Alexander, a prince, was made into the acting king. Within a year Alexander led his first attack on a rival tribe. Alexander also led the cavalry and helped his father defeat the Athens and Thebes forces. By the time Alexander was 20 years old, after Philip II was assassinated, Alexander was made into the King of Macedon. As king he managed to conquer the Persian Empire when he just 25 years old. One of his greatness accomplishments was building up the largest empire in the world at the time in only 13 years. Even after all the years since Alexander's rule, I think he should still be called great because all of his accomplishments in the past has effected places in the modern world.

                                                     Works Cited

"13 Basic Facts About Alexander the Great." About. Web. 26 Sept. 2014. <http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/alexander/a/Alexander_2.htm>.

"Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography." Alexander the Great (Alexander of Macedon) Biography. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/AlexandertheGreat.html>.

"Alexander the Great." History.com. A&E Television Networks. Web. 26 Sept. 2014. <http://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/alexander-the-great>.

"Alexander the Great." Ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association. Web. 26 Sept. 2014. <http://www.ushistory.org/civ/5g.asp>.

Bio.com. A&E Networks Television. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.biography.com/people/alexander-the-great-9180468#synopsis>.

"HISTORY OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT." HISTORY OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT. Web. 26 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/plaintexthistories.asp?historyid=aa02>.

Mercer, Charles E. Alexander the Great. New York: American Heritage Pub.; Book Trade Distribution by Meredith; Institutional Distribution by Harper & Row, 1963. Print.

"World Biography." Alexander the Great Biography. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.notablebiographies.com/A-An/Alexander-the-Great.html>.

Fran Hudson

October 1, 2014

Alexander "the Great" Research Project

Does Alexander deserve to be called great? 

Alexander does not deserve to be called "great" because he was a very poor leader. Alexander was defined as great for what he did in only a thirteen year period, 336 B.C. through 323 B.C. When he was only twenty years old, he became Macedonia's new military commander and king when his father, King Phillip II, was assassinated at Alexander’s sister’s wedding. Alexander was a cruel dictator, not a great king. He had a belligerent personality and always wanted complete control over all his people. He murdered anyone, including his friends and advisors, who objected to his ideas or just made him mad. According to The Independent,  Alexander spent most of his life, including his childhood, drinking alcohol. The article claims Alexander was insecure due to his father’s sarcastic and unpredictable personality and that alcoholism was the cause of his death, not fever. When Alexander was drunk one night, he killed his friend, Cleitus, who once saved his life in battle. Alexander was self-centered and thought very highly of himself naming almost all of his cities after himself. Perhaps because his mother, Olympias, told Alexander he was the son of the god Zeus instead of Phillip. Alexander bullied his army into marching and conquering more and more territory for eleven years. When they finally refused to go any further, at the Hyphasis River, Alexander immaturely sulked for two days. According to Mr. Giotto's Site, on the way back to Babylon, Alexander selfishly took a deadly path that killed a majority of his men who many haven’t seen their families in over a decade. Not only did Alexander have terrible leadership qualities as the military commander, he never was a true king for his people back at home. After only two years of being king, he left with the military showing no signs of coming back. He left most of his responsibilities as king with Antipater, Macedon's guardian. People gave Alexander his epithet for being a great conqueror, but he wasn't a good leader and was responsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths of his own men.

What can one learn about the values of society based on their views on greatness?

            People’s views on greatness depend on what their values are. Macedonians didn't value literature or architecture like the Greeks. They valued fearlessness and power. These values were why Macedonia viewed their kings as great. Their kings used clever tactics in battle, like the Phalanx formation, and were bold and courageous. People viewed King Alexander III as great before he was even king because he made great accomplishments at a very young age. Society was first impressed by Alexander when he was eight and had tamed a wild horse that even his father’s grooms couldn't tame. Young Alexander also had opportunities that typical children didn't have such as being educated by the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, and learning to command troops. On the contrary to Macedon, Greek societies valued beauty in architecture and literature. Examples of these values are the Parthenon temple and Euclid’s, The Elements. Egyptians viewed Alexander as great during the Hellenistic Period because he founded the city Alexandria which contained valuable resources such as a trading port, the Alexandrian Library, and a culture center. Greatness can be viewed in many ways, but societies’ values will tell what they think is true greatness.

Do time and distance impact someone's popular perception?

Yes, time and distance does impact someone’s popular perception. Time and distance gives opportunities to reflect on historical events and what happened or historical people and their actions. “The life of Alexander the Great has inspired people from antiquity to modern times.” People’s perceptions of Alexander the Great have definitely changed over time. Alexander’s army didn't want to keep marching and conquering more territory when Alexander was pushing them keep going. His army could only travel by foot and use weaponry such as spears and shields. His military and citizens viewed Alexander as a bully and cruel. Today, more people view Alexander as an accomplished and successful military commander. Alexander conquered and expanded his empire 3,000 miles without the help from modern technology, like tanks and guns. This is impressive for modern civilizations that have modern technology. One example of a person whose popular perception has been impacted by time and distance is Nelson Mandela. When Mandela was imprisoned for fighting against apartheid in South Africa, people viewed him as rebellious and crazy. Over time, Mandela gained supporters from all over the world for his cause to resist apartheid. When he was released from jail, 28 years later, people viewed him as courageous and powerful. These examples prove that time and distance impact popular perception because using time to see different viewpoints does change how people think about greatness.

  

Works Cited

"Alexander the Great." ABC CLio Solutions. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. ABC-CLIO eBook Collection. Web. 22 Sept. 2014. <http://ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/575648?terms=Ancient%20Cities%20during%20Alexander%20the%20great&webSiteCode=SLN_HANC&returnToPage=%2fSearch%2fDisplay%2f575648%3fterms%3dAncient+Cities+during+Alexander+the+great&token=AA58ACBAB26B27B1F694A804483D2ADB&casError=False>.

"Alexander the Great." Ancient Civilizations. UShistory.org, n.d. Web. 21 Sept. 2014. <http://www.ushistory.org/civ/5g.asp>.

"Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age." Mr. Giotto's Site. SchoolWorld, n.d. Web. 21 Sept. 2014. <http://www.penfield.edu/webpages/jgiotto/onlinetextbook.cfm?subpage=1653418>.

Beck, Roger B. World History: Patterns of Interaction. N.p.: Houghton Mifflin School, 2006. Print.

Brophy, James M. Perspectives From the Past. 5th ed. N.p.: Norton and Company Inc., 2011. Print.

Denison, Simon. "Was Alexander a great alcoholic?" The Independent. N.p., 2 Aug. 1992. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/was-alexander-a-great-alcoholic-1537664.html>.

Green, Peter. Alexander of Macedon 356-323 B.C.:A Historical Biography. New York: University of California Press, 1992. Print.

"Nelson Mandela." World History: A Modern Era. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. ABC-CLIO eBook Collection. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. <http://worldhistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/315233?terms=Nelson+Mandela>.

Worthington, Ian. "How 'Great' Was Alexander?" The Ancient History Bulletin. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2014. <http://www.utexas.edu/courses/citylife/readings/great1.html>.

  Is Alexander Great?  Alexander is Great. He was an amazing general, leader, and politician.  To understand Alexander's greatness we must consider unique circumstances he grew and thrived under.  He was a taught by none other than Aristotle on the fine arts such as reading, writing, and arithmetic.  He was taught in the art of war by his father, who had conquered Greece. By age sixteen Alexander the Great already played a major in the battle at Chaeronea. (World Military Leaders p 12) After his father was assassinated, Alexander the Great went on to destroy Persia and conquer the eastern Mediterranean sea board. He then conquered a large part of know Asia.  This progress was only hindered by three things;
1. was a mutiny at Asia's eastern frontier
2. a mutiny was caused by the integration of Asian troops into Alexander's army
3. he lost a large number of men in the Makran dessert.  
 In spite of all this Alexander never was defeated. 
Map of Alexanders Conquests

What can one learn about society  from its definition of greatness?  Greatness is the ability to rise above the average person, it is to be the best at something, and in some cases it is to be the best at everything. In the case Alexander the Great he was the best warrior, diplomat, and king.  He fought for thirteen years and was not defeated once. He treated the leaders and soldiers he captured with mercy. He even bowed down to other peoples gods to please the religious leaders.  In Napoleon's case he was the greatest french general to ever live. He was an amazing king, and a tenacious leader.  He captured all of Europe, parts of Africa, and even when he was forced to give up his crown his people still loved him.  Society is easily able to admit the greatness of  Alexander the Great and Napoleon.   Societies view of greatness is not always fair though.  Hitler is, by society's definition  great, he conquered all of Europe.  He rebuilt Germany from the ground up, and rebooted the worlds economy; yet he is remembered as the one the world worst tyrants.

Can time and distance change a persons reputation?   It can but not always for the best outcome.  In the case of Julius Caesar's was a tyrant and a murderer. but we are taught that he was a great leader since he implemented a few of the ideas we use in the American government.  Though he was actually a tyrant he is remembered, wrongfully, as a great leader.  There are also some cases in which the outcome is good.  In Alexanders case he was a leader, he cared for his people, and he was a political genius and military genius.  He was a true man by the definition of Macedonians.  He entertained the Persian diplomats and conversed at or above their level of thinking at age seventeen. He was and still is considered a great leader to day as he rightfully should be.

Citations: "Alexander the Great." Book/encyclopedia of the Ancient Greek World. N.p.: n.p., 2005. 14-18. Print.
Sienkewicz, Thomas J. "Alexander the Great." Encyclopedia of the Ancient World. Pasadena, CA: Salem, 2002. 228-29. Print.
Grossman, Mark. "Alexander the Great." N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Print.
"Alexander the Great." Military Commanders:. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014.
"Napoleon Bonaparte." Napoleon Bonaparte. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.
"Alexander the Great." Ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014.
"Julius Caesar." Julius Caesar. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.
"Economy of Nazi Germany." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Sept. 2014. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.
BBC News. BBC, n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.
"The Internet Classics Archive | Alexander by Plutarch." The Internet Classics Archive | Alexander by Plutarch. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014.
"King Philip II - Alexander The Great - Father of Alexander - Husband of Olympias - Phillip." King Philip II - Alexander The Great - Father of Alexander - Husband of Olympias - Phillip. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014.

Alexander The Great Alana Cox

Alana Cox

September 19, 2014

Block B

Alexander The Great

1) Does Alexander deserve to be called “Great”?  

Alexander was more known for his fighting and ruthlessness, kind of like the Spartans. He was not really admired by his people. He was an inspiring leader though. Ranking or social status did not matter to him. He acted ruthless to anyone he came up against. He was especially mean to people opposing him.He was despised by many of the subjected Greeks. His conquests created legends by which the other kings and rulers would go by to measure their careers and how they were doing. He could think a lot about his plan of attack, or he just made up a plan on the spot of how they were going to attack. If it were not for his father, Alexander would not have accomplished as many things that he has. He saw how the Indians would use elephants and he was really interested in that so he got some elephants of his own. They were a lot more effective when other large animals come around, they do not freak out like horses do. Since he was not the kindest he could be he got many of his loved ones killed. His army was only good because of his fathers reorganization, reformed, and strengthened army. Two years after he conquered his land, he abandoned his people to go conquer other lands. Because of him going to leave and conquer, his kingdom was neglected. He never selected a designated heir so his empire crumbled after he died. When he would go to other places to conquer land he would drink and get drunk and that ended in a lot of casualties. After Alexander died, there was not a friendly discussion about who would take over Alexander’s empire. So in conclusion, I do not think that Alexander The Great is as great as he thinks he is or deserves the title of "great".

2) What can one learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?

One can learn that if society changes, so will their views of greatness. When Alexander was alive and well, he was one of the most popular rulers in Greece. Alexander was in charge of Greece and because he was so "great" people thought that he was going to be great and rule his kingdom, but those poor people were sadly mistaken. It really depends on who you think is great. Society bases everything on greatness. It's like a scale and how people measure everything. If it's whats high on the charts and popular, then people are going to love what ever it is and want one if they can have one. If it's low on the greatness scale, then a very small amount of people are going to take interest in it. Alexander was great in some peoples eyes, but in others he was not. In a way the world is like high school to. If you are popular and have a lo of friends, then that means ,most of the time, that you are loved by many. If you are not popular or have a lot of friends, no one wants to talk to you. So basically if you are known by many, and you end up becoming a great leader then society will look up to you. I don't really know much about politics and government and all that stuff, but to some people President Obama is the greatest person to walk the face of the earth, but that number is very small compared to the number of people that hate him and want him dead. He is a large part of society and he is known and he is pretty popular in the United States, but he is not loved by many. I think that more people like Mrs. Obama more than they like their own president. The values of society that are based on society are going to change when something becomes popular or looses its popularity.

3) Do time and distance impact someone’s popular perception?

Time and distance do affect how people view other people. Martin Luther King Jr. is a prime example. When Mr. King was still alive, he was not loved by all. He was not loved by many actually. Then in the Civil Rights movement, he tried to bring justice to all the colored people and help them have rights and be equal. It’s funny, because now Mr.King is the best known man from the Civil Rights movement. When Alexander was alive he was not loved or liked by many either, but that was mainly because of how he treated people. Alexander did not really help out many people, but  Mr. King was a lot nicer than Alexander because he did not go around killing his enemies or threatening people. Even when he had  many attempts of murder on him he never tried to get revenge on the people who tried to kill him first. Mr. King is a great example of a great person or someone who deserves to be called great. Time and distance impact everything, not just someone' popular perception.

Alexander the great

1.      Alexander deserves to be called great simply because, he was one of the most successful military generals in the history of the world. Alexander was a successful soldier because of the massive amount of land that he conquered and ruled, the many important battles the he won,the fact that he invaded many of the rival empires around him, and the spread of Greek culture throughout his empire. In just 13 short years Alexander created the biggest empire in the ancient world. Alexander was king of Macedonia from 336 BC to 323 BC. People questioned his greatness based on how he ruled as a king. But the real reason that Alexander is known today is through his great accomplishments as a general. Alexander was ruthless and didn't care what was in between him and reaching his goals. He fought with intensity and had no fear. He also had no respect for any of his enemies. One showing of his greatness was the pursuit of The Persian king, Darius the 3rd. Alexander saw the Persian king  as a threat so he chased him constantly, engaging in many battles with him until one of his men was able to kill Darius the 3rd. Other examples of Alexander's greatness, were the battles that he won. The major battles won by Alexander were; the battle of Granicus, the battle of Chaeronia in 338 BC, the battle of Issus, the Indian campaign, the battle of the Persian gate, the siege of Gaza, and the seize of Tyre in 333 BC. All of these battles were against other empires or had something that Alexander desired on the line, such as land or power. And in these battles, Alexander's powerful army and skill overpowered the enemy. His many victories showed his greatness. He invaded Greece, Persia, Egypt, and India, giving him the largest empire of the ancient world. He overpowered his rival empires, which again showed his greatness. The final great thing that he did was spreading Greek culture through his empire by teaching people about Greek language, arts, and lifestyle. Alexander accomplished enough to be called great.


2.        There are many things that a person can learn about the values of society, but it all depends on what they think greatness truly is. Greatness can mean  different things depending on the persons views of greatness, but the popular idea of greatness has always been money, power, or fame. Alexander's society valued money, power, and fame. If there is a person that views greatness as money, power, or fame, then they will find that society centers around their view of "greatness. However, if there is a person who views greatness as being a good person, knowledge, love, or happiness, then they will find that society doesn't value their views of greatness as much as other things. So, what a person learns about the values of society all depends on their views of greatness.

3.       Time and distance are always a factor on the popular perception of people when it comes to Alexander the great. As time and distance becomes further from the day of Alexander, it becomes harder to understand why or why not Alexander was great. This can chance peoples opinion of Alexander and make him either more popular or more hated. The views on what greatness truly means might change as time gets more distant from the Ancient age, and the people might not agree that what people thought made him great in the past might not really be so great. The point is, things can always change over time, and the popular perception can always be impacted.

Works Cited

"ABC-CLIO." Corporate. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Sept. 2014. <http://www.abc-clio.com/>.

"ANCIENT ANATOLIA AND ASIA MINOR." ANCIENT ANATOLIA AND ASIA MINOR. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Oct. 2014. <http://www.ancientanatolia.com/>.

Beck, Roger B. World History: Patterns of Interaction. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell, 2005. Print.

Bio.com. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.biography.com/>.

DuBois, Jill, Xenia Skoura, and Olga Gatsaniti. Greece. New York: Benchmark , Marshall Cavendish, 2003. Print.

Durando, Furio. Ancient Greece: The Dawn of the Western World. New York: Stewart, Tabori & Chang, 1997. Print.

"EyeWitness to History - History through the Eyes of Those Who Lived It." EyeWitness to History - History through the Eyes of Those Who Lived It. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://eyewitnesstohistory.com/>.

"History of Macedonia and the Macedonian Nation." History of Macedonia and the Macedonian Nation. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Oct. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/>.

"History.com." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. <http://www.history.com/>.

Mercer, Charles E. Alexander the Great. New York: American Heritage Pub.; Book Trade Distribution by Meredith; Institutional Distribution by Harper & Row, n.d. Print.

"Military History - Warfare Through the Ages." About. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://militaryhistory.about.com/>.

Spaulding, Oliver Lyman, and Hoffman Nickerson. Ancient and Medieval Warfare. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1993. Print.

World Military Leaders. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO Interactive, 1999. Print.

Alexander the Not-So-Great

          Does Alexander deserve to have the epithet of "great"?

           
 Alexander was a king for Greece over the span of two years, then left on an eleven year conquest. He left a man named Antipater in charge with a minuscule army to fight an ongoing war. He was ruthless, showed no mercy, and almost constantly drunk, yet was romanticized as a hero. Why is this?

                Alexander the Great is (and was) credited with being the flame of the Hellenistic Period; spreading culture and civilization throughout his vast empire of southeastern Asia. Which was correct—but he once he had established his empire, he died abruptly and did not leave any governing structure for it. Therefore, following his death, his empire disintegrated. [Not to leave out that Alexander was not a brilliant military strategist, which he was, as well as his being known determination and courage. However, I still do not believe he deserves his epithet, despite being intelligent and a brilliant leader.]

             In the earlier years of Alexander’s conquest, he set out to follow what his father intended to do: conquer Persia. To paraphrase pages on this (Alexander the Great, by Robin Lane Fox): "He completely succeeded in his attempt, but not before allowing Darius (the ruler of Persia at that time) to regroup his army and create a much bigger bloodshed than necessary on both sides" (Fox 224-225). He [Alexander] was prone to drunken rampages and needlessly giving away the lives of his own men. When retreating on a path and heading a different way would have taken longer but prevented many deaths, he chose to continue through the desert and ended up with a smaller army in result.

            While chasing Darius and his army, Alexander began to adopt that of Persia’s culture and style, as well as claiming himself a god, enforcing that his soldiers begin to call him as one. He decided that he would then abandon the “veteran” soldiers on his conquest and integrate new, Persian soldiers into his army, much to the veterans' chagrin.

                 What this says about Alexander: in my opinion, he does not deserve the title of 'great,' because of his drunken, so-called superior demeanor, decisions, and attitude with his soldiers.

*****

                    What can one learn about values of society based on their views of greatness?

          Different societies view "greatness,"-- or a hero's legacy-- differently. In turn, what that says about about those societies is varied. For example, ancient Macedonia's values were different than that of Greece's: they put their empire before anything else, while Greece valued histories, sciences, and education generally above their empire. Alexander himself, as he carried forth his conquest over Asia, was taking the Macedonian name and expanding it [the empire], which started to improve the Macedonian army in itself. They came to value their strong, efficient military they hadn't previously had, and this said something new about them. Because this is what the Macedonians were now backing up (enforcing), this tells us that they were a somewhat strong, united people to protect themselves and their home. One can learn, simply from hearing the Macedonians had a high regard for their empire and military, what kind of people they were. This can go for any people: what they regard highest, "put their money behind," and in turn, that says something about them.
          For another example, the United States. We, as American citizens, generally value materialism. This says the U.S. values and collects more material items than other countries, and therefore a higher priority to maintaining, obtaining, and protecting those materialistic items. Which, compared to other places, makes Americans seem more material-based and therefore "greedy" or close-minded.

*****
                      Do time and distance impact someone's popular perception?

          I believe that yes, distance and time impact one's perception. The most obvious example here is Alexander the Great--while he was not (is not) deserving of his epithet, in my opinion, many choose to skim over the more unwanted, gruesome facts. After Alexander passed, many fables were spun about his greatness, his death, but they were all untrue. He never really became a mermaid, obviously! But many people choose to romanticize heroes (that lived and died long before they did), because it's so easy to enlargen or "puff up" someone to make them seem better than they actually are. It's quite common, not just for Alexander, but other nineteenth/twentieth century characters, such as Joseph Stalin. I make this comparison for several reasons; of course Stalin himself was not a good person internally, but he was extremely intelligent.
          To provide a brief background context on Stalin: he was appointed secretary for the Communist Party in 1922, and slowly started consolidating power so people would have to go to him for anything; once previous leader Lenin died, he basically had control over the Soviet government and signed a contract with Adolf Hitler. These two people, Alexander and Stalin, have almost nothing in common, except for being 'romanticized,' or thought of as a man who did nothing but help others, and a man who left a wake of complete terror and destroyed Russia.
          It's been about fifty-eight years since Stalin's reign, and since then, people have been realizing his true ruthless intentions, yet also how he formed Russia into a "world superpower," modernizing it and defeating Nazism. This can be said--in a different way--about Alexander. He lived about 2,300 years ago, killed people needlessly, constantly drunken and made terrible decisions--yet he also was the flame for the Hellenistic period, integrating cultures, and uniting Greece.

Works Cited

"Alexander Romance." Encyclopedia Britannica. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2014. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/14218/Alexander-romance>.

Ansari, Ali. "Alexander the not so Great: History through Persian eyes." BBC. N.p., 4 July 2012. Web. 19 Sept. 2014. <http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18803290>.

Bialo, Ellen. World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. N.p.: n.p., 2014. ABC-CLIO eBook Collection. Web. 19 Sept. 2014. <http://ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/1185181?terms=alexander%20the%20great&webSiteCode=SLN_HANC&returnToPage=%2fSearch%2fDisplay%2f1185181%3fterms%3dalexander+the+great&token=3A678D1387C57B100F66A831B74121CA&casError=False>.

Fox, Robin Lane. Alexander the Great. New York: Penguin, 1986. Print.

Gandeto, J. S. "Differences Between Ancient Macedonians and Ancient Greece." History of Macedonia. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2014. <http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/gandeto.html>.

"Joseph Stalin-Biography." Bio. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. <http://www.biography.com/people/joseph-stalin-9491723#communist-party-leader>.
Kohls, L. Robert. "The Values Americans Live By." ClareMontMckenna. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2014. 

Thayer, Bill. "Life of Alexander the Great." Penelope UChicago. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014. <http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Curtius/home.html>.

Worthington, Ian. "How 'Great' Was Alexander?" The Ancient History Bulletin (1999): n. pag. Print.

Alexander the Great Project

1) Does Alexander deserve to be called "Great"?

Alexander deserves to be called great in many ways, he was a young man when he became king but, he was "great" as people would say. Alexander to me is considered great because he was a great king and warrior. When Alexander became king his first objective was to strengthen his community. As a king he found many great treasures on his expeditions. One being he had found about half a billion dollars, this was more income of Athens in there 300 year age. Another good thing that makes him great was that he was very patient. Alexander wanted to kill Darius and take his crown, but before rushing headlong to him he was patient and secured his position in his plan. Another big reason for Alexander being so great was that he defeated many cities like Persia, India, and even the Indus River. His fathers plan he concluded and also made it better. Alexander is overall pretty great in my mind and i think he deserves his name. In the end of Alexander won many victories and kept fighting. He won spurs of wars and inherited a magnificent army with his greatness.


2) What can one learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness?

One can learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness by, the thought of life without the greatness, how would their life be if the greatness was gone? They can learn from that because they would think of how their life would be different and how their life would have changed overtime. Greatness in life and society is an important thing to live by because greatness brings you happiness. Macedonia was a great community and they lived in a great place they had feature they needed, It was ruled by Alexander the Great and taken over by the Ottoman Empire but imagine if Alexander never became king how would their greatness of society and values change without their wonderful, great king Alexander? 
Alexander died from fever on day 1 of the fever, it had just arrived. by day 9-10 he had passed away. The Macedonians king had passed away and was gone. It was a terrible time for their community. 


3) Do time and distance impact someone’s popular perception?

In the Pella region Alexander the Great the later king of Macedonia was born on July 20, 356 B.C. When his father died Alexander was wanted the throne to be his with any means necessary. The Macedonian army was garnered up with much support of Alexander. Back then this most likely gave him fame and affection because he was making his troops better which made his army better which made his community better and much more feared then when his father was ruling. In this time of 2014 this would cause controversy against our world and community. There would be many that say it was wrong and many who would say it was right, and i'm sure this happened back then too but in today's day people are picky and want perfection. So necessarily the time and distance do impact someones popular perception back then it was good and in the present now it would have many mixed emotions.



Citations:

"Alexander the Great." Ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2014.
http://www.ushistory.org/civ/5g.asp

Wepman, Dennis. World Leaders Past & Present Alexander The Great. N.p.: Chelsea House, 1986. Print. (pg.81 & 87)

Bio.com. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.
http://www.biography.com/people/alexander-the-great-9180468

"MACEDONIA." Macedonia Map / Geography of Macedonia / Map of Macedonia. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2014.
http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/europe/mk.htm

"The Death of Alexander the Great, 323 BC." The Death of Alexander the Great, 323 BC. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/alexanderdeath.htm

"Alexander of Macedonia." Alexander of Macedonia. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/alexandergreat.htm

Bennett, Matthew. The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ancient & Medieval Warfare. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998. Print.(p.11