Alexander The Great Research Paper

There are a plethora of historical figures in history, but some of these figures are more acknowledged and discussed about than others. One of these prominent historical figures include Alexander the III, also known as Alexander the Great. There is no question that Alexander is famous for his undefeated streak during his military campaigns. However, many historians are in constant debate over whether or not Alexander was truly a military leader that deserved to be a highly prominent figure in history. They dispute over whether or not he is entitled to his nick name of Alexander the Great. Some historians argue that Alexander’s constant victories on the battle field provide more than enough reason for Alexander to be deemed great. The opposing

He demonstrated his ability to be a successful commander through multiple occasions and battles. One of these battles includes the Battle of Granicus River. In Plutarch’s Life of Alexander, Plutarch recalled that when Alexander and his soldiers came across the Granicus River, his soldiers were extremely afraid to cross over the river banks since they feared that the river was too deep and the banks were too rough for them to climb. Alexander demonstrated to his fellow soldiers that they had nothing to fear since he crossed over the river himself and successfully climbed up the river banks. He was able to inspire his men to continue to fight even though they demonstrated a lack of motivation and courage. Furthermore, he showed his perseverance and determination as a commander when he and the Macedonian soldiers faced against Darius and the Persian army. According to Arian in The Anabasis of Alexander, Alexander has only 160 naval ships while Darius had almost double the amount with 300 naval ships. Despite this huge setback with the lack of naval strength, Alexander still emerged victorious in the battle against Darius. It is evident that Alexander has to have great military skills to be able to train his soldiers well enough to defeat a much larger enemy. The soldiers have to be a strong cohesive unit, and that isn’t possible without a commander who possesses great

He could have easily sent out his men to test out the safety of the river first and cross over when he found out that it was safe enough. However, he decided to cross over the river before any of his men, which demonstrated that he was a courageous leader and did not prioritize himself over the other soldiers. Although this instance appeared as if Alexander forced his men to continue into battle, regardless of their own will, this was definitely not the case. Plutarch also stated that Alexander permitted his men to rest in quarters whenever they were tired. He allowed his men to leave when they wished and did not force anyone to continue on the expedition if they were unwilling. This information reveals that the claim that Alexander was selfish is unfounded and that he clearly was a good commander who respected his soldiers’ freedom. In addition, Alexander may be viewed as stubborn since he persisted to fight against Darius despite his possession of a smaller army. As in many cases, however, stubbornness and bravery are viewed interchangeably. Conceding as a result of lack in naval power would not ensure Alexander's or his army's safety. If he were to give up instead of battling head on, Alexander may have been captured by the Persians and all of his soldiers could possibly be slain or be put under a tyrannical