Alexander the "Great"
From an early age Alexander watched his father, King Philip II, conqueror Persia and accomplish great things. When he was twelve he showed great equestrian skills so his father knew he would be a great solider. He was tutored by Aristotle to make him the most knowledgeable as he needs to be to rule. When his father passed away he took on a great responsibility at age twenty when his father was murdered. His fathers death caused a lot of rebellion in among the conquered countries. Does Alexander really deserve to be called great? I personally do not think he does because he passed away at thirty three years old, and never got to finish what he started. Even though he conquered a lot of territory and a very large army, he wasn't a very good king.
One can learn that there is more to the city than cool architecture, like their rights, how women are treated, and more. Alexander was rarely in his kingdom. He was always traveling and conquering more land. I don't think a man that can't even rule his own kingdom should be taking over other kingdoms. He was as a young girl. Men had all the rights in the polis. They could go anywhere in the city-state, they could vote, and had educationown as a great soldier more than he was a king. If he was in his kingdom he would notice that women had no rights and that slaves were higher in the classes then women. Women weren't aloud to vote or leave the house with out a man. They
also couldn't have jobs.
Time and distance does have an impact on someones personal perception. The distance that Alexander went to conquer all that land may have impressed people in his kingdom. It took eleven years to take all the land that he did. I can imagine why it took so long to conquer all the land because he conquered territory on a super human scale. He must have had a very precise plan because it didn't take Alexander long to have the largest territory in Ancient Europe. The picture below is Alexander's army and how they kept all the approaching soldiers back.
From an early age Alexander watched his father, King Philip II, conqueror Persia and accomplish great things. When he was twelve he showed great equestrian skills so his father knew he would be a great solider. He was tutored by Aristotle to make him the most knowledgeable as he needs to be to rule. When his father passed away he took on a great responsibility at age twenty when his father was murdered. His fathers death caused a lot of rebellion in among the conquered countries. Does Alexander really deserve to be called great? I personally do not think he does because he passed away at thirty three years old, and never got to finish what he started. Even though he conquered a lot of territory and a very large army, he wasn't a very good king.
One can learn that there is more to the city than cool architecture, like their rights, how women are treated, and more. Alexander was rarely in his kingdom. He was always traveling and conquering more land. I don't think a man that can't even rule his own kingdom should be taking over other kingdoms. He was as a young girl. Men had all the rights in the polis. They could go anywhere in the city-state, they could vote, and had educationown as a great soldier more than he was a king. If he was in his kingdom he would notice that women had no rights and that slaves were higher in the classes then women. Women weren't aloud to vote or leave the house with out a man. They
also couldn't have jobs.
Time and distance does have an impact on someones personal perception. The distance that Alexander went to conquer all that land may have impressed people in his kingdom. It took eleven years to take all the land that he did. I can imagine why it took so long to conquer all the land because he conquered territory on a super human scale. He must have had a very precise plan because it didn't take Alexander long to have the largest territory in Ancient Europe. The picture below is Alexander's army and how they kept all the approaching soldiers back.
It seems that in your second paragraph you are talking about Athens, but Athens was not Alexander the Great's kingdom? also, I really liked your writing style.
ReplyDeleteThe photos are good visual aid for your writing.
ReplyDeleteYour view on Alexander the Great was very different from mine! It was really interesting to read this, great job!
ReplyDelete@SK8 i wasn't trying to specifically talk about Athens but i understand how it might sound like that. Thank you!
ReplyDelete@KatherineHunter Thank you! I tried to make it so when you see the picture and read it you could kind of imagine Macedonia.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about him being a good general but not a good king.
ReplyDelete@AryaYedla thank you! I thought yours was very interesting too!
ReplyDelete@WyattRobinson thank you!
ReplyDelete