Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of courage
Alexander the great conquest essay
Alexander the great influence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of courage
Why Ruthless? There are a big confusion and contradiction between the terms feared and loved when it comes to their denotation and counter impact on each other in defeating and manipulating the action of the other. When a king rules his people with love, the tension between people and spread of fear will decline. However, a prince should keep his people always and may lose his power over the people eventually. On the other hand, when a prince is feared the people’s love won’t be present. So, if a king cannot be both loved or feared, the best option to go with is to make oneself be feared because in any society there are a variety of conditions or situations that exist together …show more content…
He was a very influential and feared leader in the world at that time and he expanded his empire throughout the middle east, African and Asia. He also was a great commander who conquered and overthrew every kingdom which was around him including the Persian empire and Egyptian empire. Alexander the great was very transparent in his belief as a military commander where he takes down every region around him and put them under his rule and gets involved in every war. We can infer from this that he was a fearless warrior and he won’t let himself down for anyone who is not obeying his law and try to be independent of the empire.” According to Plutarch, among Alexander's traits were a violent temper and rash, impulsive nature, which undoubtedly contributed to some of his decisions. Although Alexander was stubborn and did not respond well to orders from his father, he was open to reasoned debate.” (Wikipedia)The stubborn behavior of Alexander the great is one of the great characters that made him successful and runs his empire peacefully. Furthermore, he ruled his empire by giving the generals some power to protect the cities he conquered. So, Alexander the great preferred fear to unite all the states around him and become one and he was able to do it …show more content…
He was a distress in ancient Rome by the people and was a terror figure. The people who were surrendered and ruled by Hannibal feared him to death that they can even think about overthrowing him from his place. “In his view armies fought until it became clear to the political leadership of the losing side there was nothing more to be gained by further combat.” (Gabriel) he is really feared by opponents and his people because of his firm position about war. This makes his people fear him a lot because he has no mercy until someone commits and surrender. Consequently, there weren’t any opposing tribes that they were under his
Alexander began his military campaign and his rule much where his father left off. Whether or not it was his aim, this created a sense of normality for the men that was part of his father’s regime. Alexander’s position as a warrior-king who stood side-by-side among his men also served to create respect among his peers. Gradually, as Alexander conquered more Persian land, he began to adopt the policies of Persian rulers. Alexander’s change in policy extended beyond just political roles, he gave consideration to the local gods in many of the lands that he conquered. Eventually, Alexander brought people in from the conquered nations to serve under him.
Alexander is now recognized as one of the greatest leaders to ever live. Alexander took the throne at the age of twenty. Alexander’s leadership is one that many leaders try to imitate. The key component in his ability to lead was having the trust of his men . His men trusted in him that he had the best interest not only for them but also for his kingdom as a whole. With this trust in place, Alexander was able to take his men into any city without. Alexander was also not shy of battles. During battles he would mostly lead from the front where he was easily recognizable and a target for the enemies . His bravery set an example for his men, and in return Alexander was always rewarded with a victory. His ruthlessness matched with his tolerance is one of the most ironic yet admirable trait he had. Alexander was known for his ruthless behavior when it came to battles with other kingdoms. He held nothing back and punished all who fought against him . That being said, Alexander rarely would hur...
Alexander the Great obviously believed his traditions and ways were the best because he saw other cultures that he conquered as backwards and wished to convert all the races and cultures in the world to his own way of thinking. The quote “[he desired to give] all the races in the world... one rule and one form of government, making all mankind a single people” could be perceived as Alexander striving for unity of the world (Plutarch, Excerpt from writings). Alexander’s idea of unity comes from the standpoint that Alexander’s way to govern a country is the best way and wanted to standardize all of the nations of the world into his narrow perspective. This small-minded view of the world does not promote knowledge and learning but instead
Was he was a bloodthirsty monster obsessed with war, or romantic visionary intent on creating a multiethnic world…” (Hunt 118). Through Hanson offers many views on a lot of topics but he focuses mainly on Alexander visionary ideas. One of these ideas were why he destroyed certain city states, which started with Thebes because the refused not to join his army and opt out for independence instead (Hanson 53). Hanson commented on how a king should expand his kingdom and also prevent conflicts in doing so.
loved,”. Being loved and loving can make a strong leader go soft when they need to be indomitable. Also in Source B, “Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated”. Even when fear is spread throughout, rulers must show them slight empathy. Even though this seems to contradict each other the source is still stating that it is still beneficial to be aggressive.
In conclusion, Alexander the Great wasn’t great because he didn’t care for other people, didn’t show leadership or any smarts. Many may say that he was an amazing person who did incredible things with the support of the people. However, if you look closely at his actions you could clearly see his reasoning of greed and power. He killed many innocent people to make his dream of controlling the world come true. Before giving someone a title or name it’s important that we make sure it makes sense and fits their
Machiavelli in his famous book “The Prince” describes the necessary characteristics for a strong and successful leader. He believes that one of the most important characteristics is to rule in favor of his government and to hold power in his hands. Power is an essential aspect of Machiavelli’s theory, and a leader should do whatever it takes to keep it for the safety of his country because “the ends justifies the means.” To attain and preserve the power, a leader should rather be feared than loved by his people, but it is vital not to be hated. As he states, “anyone compelled to choose will find far greater security in being feared than in being loved.” If a leader is feared, the people are less likely to revolt, and in the end, only a threat of punishment can guarantee obedienc...
Alexander of Macedon, also known as Alexander the Great is one of the most well-known conquerors in history. When a historian wants to know if a ruler really was great, then he compared the ruler to Alexander, but no one really questions whether or not Alexander was truly “great.” He had many great accomplishments in his rule, but he also had numerous times where he was not the best of people. Buried beneath all of his inflated accomplishments is the hard truth that Alexander really was not all that great. He rarely showed mercy to the people that he conquered, he had little regard to the well-being of his troops, and he was very strict when it came to what religion the conquered people would follow.
He was only ready to lead a military. Alexander failed to expand an empire and he fell and made his empire fall with him. Not only that, but he also ruined one of the greatest kingdoms. For all of these reasons he is a villain. He had no idea what to do with his empire. All he did know was how to lead a military. Would you really want someone who only knew how to run an army, lead you? Would you want to live in a place where you and your home doesn’t matter? That’s what would happen if Alexander was your leader. Do you really want that? We can’t let this happen to us today. People like Alexander are villains, we can’t let them ruin our culture. If we let such a villainous person be such powerful person, then history will repeat itself and we will end up just like
Alexander the Great was a terrible ruler for many reasons. When he was ruling, he went and conquered non-stop. As a result, people didn’t have a leader because he wouldn’t stick around to help lead people -- he moved on to the next civilization. According to Alexander the Great, “He moved quickly to gain control of the rest of Greece, although he was not yet 20 years old.” This proves he is a villain because he didn’t help any of his people because they had nobody to lead them. Also, according to Abc’s Study Suggests Alexander Not So Great “There is no doubt that Greek culture became deeply entrenched in the major cities under his rule, many of which he named Alexandria, but the story in the hinterlands, where "most people lived" is still unclear, Stewart says”(24). This proves he was not a leader because the place where most people lived didn’t have anything left. He could have killed the culture that was there because nothing says
To Be Feared History as revealed that power under the hands of the few has the potential to be the most destructive and also the most unifying force in the world. Many leaders have resorted to peace or fear when unable to balance the two. The option of fear is clearly the best option due to the fact that it ensures the longevity of a ruler’s reign and important relationships. Therefore, Based on the example of Antony in Julius Caesar as well as examples of many other successful leaders throughout history, “It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both” because fear guarantees protection of a ruler’s reign and relationships (Machiavelli 1).
Alexander the Great was a student of Aristotle, a philosopher, which means he was intelligent enough to read. Alexander the Great impacted greek culture in numerous amounts of ways, from making the arming strong to spreading the greek language and even help with the finding of Alexandria. The armies that Alexander the Great built up strengthen the defense of the greeks. Alexander the Great was involved in war a lot and he wouldn’t give up until he made sure that his people were safe. Even though Alexander the Great wanted to conquer more cities, he knew that his troops were drained.
In The Prince, Machiavelli explains several principles for a leader to follow and establishes that is better to feared than loved if one cannot balance both. A ruler that is well-loved is not always respected and can easily lose control of his people, especially when others have devious motives. By drilling fear and avoiding hatred from one’s subjects, a leader is able to stay in power and at the same time still have the respect of his people. As a leader there will always be adversities, and doing what is best for the state of affairs should always come first. There is nothing worse than obtaining the detestation of the people, and ultimately losing control of power. When it comes to leadership, one was must be feared, but also gain the respect of those around him. When a ruler is worried about their constituents, this allows vulnerability to seep in and control their thoughts. An individual in power does not need love to oversee and direct others, however, there is nothing wrong with being admired and respected as a leader.
His ruthlessness allowed him to vastly expand his empire across oceans, and to different coastlines. His loyalty to his army, friends and symbols was a part of his rule that gained him respect from the variety of people that he ruled over and encountered. His ability to change his course of action for the situations he was in and adapt for his own gain proved to help him militarily and strategically as well. Alexander is unique figure of history that took his circumstances and allowed them to take him to a level that an ordinary person could
The quote, derived from Machiavelli’s thoughts; “it is better to be feared than loved,” is supported by Beowulf in Beowulf and by Hrothgar in Grendel through their actions. Leaders have many choices to make; one of the most important choices is to decide if he prefers to be loved or feared by his followers. The main purpose of being a leader is to lead your followers into victory, rule your subjects and have a prosperous kingdom. So the question appears; is it better to be loved or feared.