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

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

3. Do time and distance impact someones' popular perception?

1.  I believe Alexander did deserve to be called great.  He may have only focused on his army and not so much on his kingdom, but he also did so much for his empire.  His father was assassinated on the day of his sister's wedding and Alexander then announced that he was to be king.  He inherited the Macedon Empire at the age of 20.  He inherited a loyal country and a very devoted army.  Very soon after he obtained the empire, he took on his father's mission to take over Persia, and after he took over Persia he wanted to do so much more and obtain so much more than just the Persian empire.  He planned on doing this but he did not want to leave Macedonia in complete chaos when he left. Alexander wanted to conquer the whole world. (Wepman, 34-36, 39)  He may have only been looking to expand but he was able to make many new cities and changed cultures and made a new culture.   Alexander created so many new cities with at least 70 that have his name intertwined within them, like Alexandria (Wepman, 73).  Alexander created a new culture called Hellenism, and laid the foundations for the new Hellenistic world of territorial kingdoms.  Hellenism fused Oriental and Greek cultures together to create one.  Hellenism was spread throughout the east and the west of Alexandria as well as started to change cultures in those places as well.  Many generals looked up to Alexander to copy his tactics and compare themselves to him, one general that did this was Julius Caesar. During the Hellenistic period Alexander's vision, military skills, and Greek cultures changed the Mediterranean world in many different ways.  His military was made up of Macedonians and Greeks from the League of Corinth.  He had a relatively small infantry of about 30,000 men and a calvary of only about 5,000 men

.  Even with his smaller army he had success after success.  He had so little time to prove how great he really was but from what accomplishments and success he had creating the Hellenistic world and expanding his empire at such a young age,  I believe that he deserves to be called great.

2. One can learn about the values of society based on their views of greatness by taking everything that Alexander did by expanding his empire, and yes killing many people to do so, and apply it to their own lives and situations.  Some people may not believe in killing many others or expansion of an empire and all they want is a good, and loyal king, whereas some others may believe it is better to expand and bring people together and create new cultures and new lives for people even if it means to kill others in the process.   People can learn that it is ok to expand and create new ways of living and new cultures, you don't just have to sit around doing the same thing for your whole life, you can change things to try and make it better.  Society can be all about change if you let and if you don't thats fine but I believe that people can learn a great deal about society from Alexander and his greatness with how he changed society in Macedonia and his empire to make it different, to invite other people into it, and show everyone how versatile a society can be.  Alexander was considered great not only for his military strengths but for what he did with his orientalism and how he changed Greek culture and made new cities, and how he expanded his empire.  

3. I believe that time and distance do effect someone's perception of popularity, I believe that people believe that Alexander was such a great general because he was before his time in military skills. Because many generals looked up to him and compared themselves, and even tried to copy some of his tactics, I believe that the timing made him seem more popular and powerful.  Alexander did things, and used tactics nobody was even remotely thinking about doing, and because of this many of his opponents were not ready for what he had so therefore he always won.  He also did not live long enough to see if other people would catch up with him or maybe even defeat him.  He had a drive and determination to do something so extravagant and unbelievable that no one had a way to stop him from his goal.  With his short term as king, he never got to see what it would be like when the military aspect of things caught back up with him or to even see if his empire would stay together as a whole.  I firmly believe that time and distance has a lot to do with peoples perception of popularity.

Works Cited

Green, Peter, and Peter Green. Alexander of Macedon, 356-323 B.C.: A Historical Biography. Berkeley: U of California, 1991. Print.

Stobart, J. C., and R. J. Hopper. The Glory That Was Greece: A Survey of Hellenic Culture and Civilization. New York: Hawthorn, 1964. Print.

Wepman, Dennis. Alexander the Great. New York: Chelsea House, 1986. Print.

Emmon, Jim Tschen. “Alexander The Great.” World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web.  

Walbank, Frank. W. “Alexander The Great.” Britannica School High, 2014. Web.

Alexander the Great.Getty Images.History Study Center. Web.

Plutarch. “Alexander.” The Internet Classics Archive, 2014. Web.