Thursday, September 29, 2016

Alexander the Great Who Wasn't That Great


     Alexander the Great Who Wasn't That Great




       Despite his name being "Alexander the Great", he actually wasn't that great of a person. He had no sense of responsibility and selfishly did what he wanted. He was not admired and respected by the citizens of his empire and he also never credited the people who helped him to get to the point that he got to. Alexander just focused on himself and taking land and that was it. He was from Macedonia, a country north of Greece. He was raised by his father king Philip II. Philip built an army and took over Greece. Then he was assassinated and Alexander took over at the age of 20. Then, he became what many people today would say is a "great man". However, I disagree with those people and I believe that Alexander was definitely not a great person.
The Killing of Cleitus by Andre Castaigne
       He had no responsibility for his empire. All he did was what he wanted to do and not what he needed to do. He conquered and conquered but never helped his empire develop. He wanted to fight, and that is what he did, but that was not what was good for his empire. He also was very reckless and drank too much wine and even killed many of his own soldiers. For example, the killing of Cleitus, a Macedonian official. Alexander and Cleitus were both drinking with the rest of Alexander's troops and then people started singing a song making fun of Macedonian officers, such as Cleitus. Cleitus was offended and talked back to Alexander. Alexander, who was drunk, got very angry. According to the Encyclopedia of the Ancient World, "Although his bodyguard initially restrained him, a drunken Alexander flew into a rage, and seizing a spear from a guard, he stabbed Kleitus (Cleitus) and killed him." (Kleitus the Black). That was Alexander's biggest wrongdoing and his biggest regret. Cleitus had just recently saved Alexander's life. Also, because of all of this death that Alexander brought to his own soldiers, even people on his side did not like him very much.

        Alexander was actually not very well liked when he was alive. Most people would disagree with this and say "Well, if Alexander wasn't liked by his soldiers and citizens, then why was he given the name 'Alexander the Great'?". People just acted like they admired him just because they were afraid of him. People surrendered to accepting him as "great" because those who rebelled were killed or punished. Take Thebes, a Greek city, for example. Before Alexander's conquest through Persia, the people of Thebes decided to try to take back Greece. Alexander squashed them and completely destroyed the city. He did this to scare other city states out of rebellion. However, Demosthenes decided not to listen. He decided to speak against Alexander openly and "Demosthenes and all the members of his party who had opposed Macedonian ambitions were sentenced to death."(Demosthenes). So, Alexander did not gain supporters, he just scared people into accepting and honoring him, like a bully at school. 

King Philip II of Macedon

       Alexander did what Philip would have done. He just didn't have to put that much work into taking over Persia. Philip built an army. Alexander just simply inherited everything from his father king Philip II. Alexander got his army from Philip, and even used a lot of the same battle strategies that Philip used. Philip used the phalanx, a battle formation that had 9,000 people who all had very long spears that stretched out to be 13 to 14 feet long to take over Greece. This was the main component that helped Alexander take over Persia. Alexander's army took over Persia, not Alexander. However, Alexander advertised that he took over Persia and his army just came along for the ride. He could not have done it without his soldiers, yet he did not give credit to a single one of them. Cleitus noticed this and said "'It is by the blood of the Macedonians and these wounds, that you are grown so great...Shall one man claim the trophies won by thousands?'"(Plutarch). He also reminded Alexander that he had just recently saved his life. If Cleitus was not there to help him Alexander would have died right there and everything would have been over. If that had happened, Alexander would have been known as that guy that tried to build an empire but failed. All that he advertised was how good he did and not how good others did, such as when Cleitus saved his life, which would make him look greater than he really was. 

      Many people today would disagree with this statement, but Alexander was not that great of a guy. He betrayed and killed his own people just because of a disagreement they had. He did not take very good care of his empire and he also selfishly took all of the glory of his army to make himself look greater. He forced his citizens to accept him, and many people did in fear, which is why people today think that he was well respected. For those reasons I think that Alexander the "Great" was not that great of a person.

Works Cited

“Demosthenes.” Encyclopedia of Ancient Literature, Second Edition, Facts On File, 2014,Ancient and Medieval History Online, http://online.infobase.com/hrc/search/details/30142?q=demosthenes.
Emmons, Jim Tschen. "Alexander the Great." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras, ABC-CLIO, 2016, ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/575648. Accessed 27 Sept. 2016.
"Alexander the Great." Britannica School.Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 7 Apr. 2015.http://school.eb.com/levels/high/article/106078#. Accessed 27 Sep. 2016.
“Kleitus the Black.” Encyclopedia of the Ancient Greek World, Third Edition, Facts On File, 2015, Ancient and Medieval History Online, http://online.infobase.com/hrc/search/details/369771?q=cleitus.
Watts, Tim J. "The Hellenistic Age." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras, ABC-
CLIO, 2016, ancienthistory.abc-clio.com/Topics/Display/15. Accessed 27 Sept.
2016.
"Plutarch: Alexander the Great Kills Clitus, Life of Alexander." World History: Ancient
and Medieval Eras, ABC-CLIO, 2016, ancienthistory.abc-
clio.com/Search/Display/1902567. Accessed 27 Sept. 2016.
Sacks, David. “Phalanx.” Encyclopedia of the Ancient Greek World, Third Edition, Facts
On File, 2015, Ancient and Medieval History Online,
http://online.infobase.com/hrc/search/details/223981?q=phalanx.
Medina, Jose. “Alexander the (Not So) Great.” Alexander the (Not So) Great, 14 Feb.
2014, www.odgersberndtson.com/en-ch/insights/alexander-the-not-so-great.
Accessed 27 Sept. 2016.


Posted by at

7 comments:

  1. AnonymousSeptember 30, 2016 at 6:47 AM

    Zachary’s Blog
    1.I thought the point he made about Alexander not focusing on his empire was very interesting and it changed my perspective on him in a good way.
    2. Zach made a point about Alexander being irresponsible, which i disagree because to my understanding a leader has to have responsibility over his troops to conquer as much as Alexander did.
    3. Zach should’ve mentioned and agreed with something alexander did in his legacy or career. So his perspective on him would have been more diverse and not as biased. I thanked if he agreed in some way about something Alexander accomplished, his argument would be stronger.

    ReplyDelete
  2. NatalyVergaraSeptember 30, 2016 at 6:59 AM

    I found it interest how you talked about how his people were forced to view alexander as great. And, how they didn’t actually think he was great but, out of fear the called him great. Also how you talked about him betraying his people and always took all the credit.
    My research showed me that Alexander killed Cletius because he praised Philip not Alexander.
    I think it would have helped support your claim about him being selfish if you talked about how he made his men march to death so he could avenge Darius escaping when he took over persia, and wouldn’t give them many breaks. Also it would have been helpful if you connected you words to the picture, I often forgot they were even there.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownSeptember 30, 2016 at 7:01 AM

    Ian Krajna

    1. I thought the quote by Plutarch was very interesting, as it showed how Alexander was attempting to take credit for the work of thousands.
    2. My research found that each phalanx was composed of a group of 16 by 16 of people and that sarissas were 18 feet long.
    3. I wish you would have mentioned the burning and murder at Persepolis, for when Alexander told his troops to kill any men they saw and to loot the houses, it showed destruction and cruelty for no reason other than the fact that they had control of the city, so they could do what they wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  4. UnknownSeptember 30, 2016 at 7:05 AM

    1. I thought that it was interesting when you said Alexander the Great made people follow him through fear.
    2. My research showed that Alexander the Great didn’t simply inherit his dad’s army, but he actually had to work for it.
    3. I think that you should have mentioned more about how he didn’t manage his empire well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousSeptember 30, 2016 at 7:22 AM

    1. I thought it was interesting how Plutarch quoted Alexander's life.
    2. Alexander didn't just inherit his dad's army.
    3. I think you should have mentioned the burning of the Persepolis.

    ReplyDelete
  6. UnknownSeptember 30, 2016 at 7:28 AM

    The surprising point you made about how Cleitus recently save Alexander’s life and how Alexander killed him in a blind drunken rage really stuck out.
    My research about Alexander’s army really complemented yours, and also the fact that Alexander fulfilled his father’s wish to conquer Persia.
    I wish you would’ve added more about how Alexander managed culture not focus most of your blog on the killing of Cleitus and how he conquered Persia, one more topic away from the idea of killing would’ve made your blog golden.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)