• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Was Alexander really great?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Was Alexander really great? The death of Alexander in 323BC, greatly affected many people throughout Greece and Macedonia. He had gained a lot of respect during his reign, which had earned him the title 'Alexander the Great', however it is important to consider to what extent was this due to the use of propaganda. All of the sources, which are available to us, portray Alexander as a heroic and victorious leader; nevertheless we must remember that the writers of these sources are probably extremely biased towards him. Alexander was only 31years old when he died and had achieved much more than many other leaders in his short lifetime. When he was just 20 years old Alexander invaded Persia and his first battle was at River Granicus in 334BC. ...read more.

Middle

This also describes the equipment that Alexander and his troops were using which gave them an immediate advantage over the Persians. In Plutarch's version of the Battle of River Granicus he states:- "It is said that 20000 foot soldiers and 2500 horsemen died on the Persian side, while according to Aristoboulos, losses among Alexander's men amounted to 34 dead of whom 9 were foot soldiers." I expect that Plutarch has over exaggerated, as these figures are rather unbelievable however they do highlight the fact that these sources are most probably biased to create more support for Alexander. Determination is a necessary requirement for a great leader and in the Alexander Romance description of the Battle of Issos in 333BC we are informed of Alexander's great determination. ...read more.

Conclusion

This shows that Alexander was a good speaker and tried to boost his soldiers' morale by making speeches, which congratulated their efforts. Overall I think that all the sources of Alexander, which are available to us, portray him as a great and victorious leader. However this is probably because when Alexander was alive he had created a very respectable image of himself, which made him more popular among his people. There is no doubt that Alexander was a successful leader and his victories prove this, he was very young when he died and had achieved much more than most previous leaders, however we must remember that the sources from which we obtain this information about Alexander are presumably quite biased as the writer would have wanted to make it seem that they were close to Alexander and that their account was personal. Nicola Phillips Classical civilisations summer 2003 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE War Poetry section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE War Poetry essays

  1. The popular myth of the Battle of Britain quickly emerged during the early part ...

    This interpretation does differ greatly from earlier interpretations. It does say that the myth was alive, but it does not agree with it. He writes this articles to keep the memory of the Battle of Britain. He shows other sides of the story, because there know is no need for the myth.

  2. Why did Britain win the Battle of Britain?

    Furthermore, The RAF had a lack of qualified pilots and a lack of planes. A lot of the RAF's strength had been used up in France. So in stepped Lord Beaverbrook, the newly appointed minister for air production. He began to turn things around by reorganizing airplane production and repair units.

  1. The Battle of Britain.

    Another one of its strengths is that there is less censorship and sensitivity so it is easier to find out the true story. This interpretation has less of a propaganda purpose and more of an informational purpose on telling people the true reality of World War II.

  2. Marathon 490 BC

    The fact that at Sardis the retrains had sacked and burnt their temples meant the Persians were going to do the same here; they did. c)After 7 days of fighting at Eretria a few prominent leaders of Eretria betrayed the city and let the Persians in, this was Eretria's fall.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work