Alexander was a stupendous man. He achieved so many feats during his short lifetime, but did he really deserve to be called "great"? All of the achievements in his life were plans that his father had already made before he died. I believe that Alexander's greatness came mostly from his father because King Philip II had already built up the army, made the plans to take over the Persian Empire, and the empire split into three separate parts after Alexander's death.
King Philip II had created one of the strongest and most feared army's anyone had ever heard of. When Philip II became King of Macedonia, the country was on the verge of collapse. He quickly showed his diplomatic and military skills by completely turning the country around. King Philip's army defeated Greece and quickly took over. After he conquered Greece, he went to his daughters wedding but was stabbed to death by one of his guardsmen. Before King Philip II died, he made extensive plans to conquer the Persian Empire. His son, Alexander, would become King and fulfill these plans later on. After Philip's death, the army would go on and conquer several more countries creating one of the most feared empires in the world.
Alexander took over the position as King after his father died. Alexander continued his fathers plan and went on to conquer the Persian Empire. His army was beginning to rebel, so they turned back and went home. Once they were back in Macedonia, Alexander became extremely sick with an unknown virus. He passed away a couple hours later. After Alexander's death, the empire split into three sections. Alexander may have been a good military leader, but this proves that he wasn't a very strong political leader. Had he been a better political leader, the Empire might not have fallen after his death.
I believe Alexander's greatness came from his father because he had already built up the army, made plans to take over the Persian Empire, and the empire split into three separate parts after Alexander's death. Alexander achieved many great things in his life time, but I believe it was mostly from his father. Greatness should only be given to those who have earned it.
"Philip of Macedon Philip II of Macedonia Biography." Philip of Macedon Philip II of Macedonia Biography. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
"How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]." How "Great" Was Alexander? [P.1]. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
Your argument is well supported and interesting. I don't know how to format citation but if you have any don't forget to cite them correctly.
ReplyDeleteI understand the argument because you supported it by giving lots of good information.
ReplyDeleteI like how you put one paragraph on Phillip and the other half on Alexander to show the differences in which one had more greatness than the other. Your arguments are very solid and true. Citations are correct.
ReplyDeleteI like how you put one paragraph on Phillip and the other half on Alexander to show the differences in which one had more greatness than the other. Your arguments are very solid and true. Citations are correct.
ReplyDeleteYou can make your essay stronger by adding a person that was great in their time and relate it to Alexander.Like for mine i put Gandhi, but other than that,job well done.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your argument! I like the way you divided up your information.I saw a couple grammatical things you might want to check on, but otherwise, you had a really clear, strong, argument!
ReplyDeleteGood job on including Alexander the Great's father Phillip the II.Good job on adding another person to the one person topic.Citations are correct.
ReplyDeleteYour arguement was clear and supportive. Loved the way you contrasted Phillip and Alexander. The only thing that I might change is the way the conclusion ends. Maybe make it a bit more universal? It's very minor, but your paragraphs are solid.
ReplyDelete