Character Analysis of Alexander the Great free essay sample

History has asked us to study and interpret past events and from that research we should learn from the mistakes of man or use the knowledge to improve our current lives. Throughout the study of history we have hard evidence and we also get folklore, or tales of events that represent that of a game of telephone. The ultimate goal of a historian is to accurately depict events and translate them as they occurred. With modern news and technology our future descendents of this planet will have no problem gaining a vast understanding of how we lived and the historic events that took place. This however is not true of past and present historian’s analysis of one of the greatest leaders in the history of the ancient world. Alexander, son of Philip the II, king of Macedon is brought to light with many different opinions. Was this man the ruthless ruler that brought down empires and siege cities while killing innocent in droves? Was he a gracious man of honor that sought to unite the ancient world? Perhaps he was a mad man who thought of himself as a God and his conquest was sought in vein. These are some of the questions that I asked myself while researching this one man’s life. There is a plethora of hard evidence that all historians and journalist agree on about his conquest and his life, but when it comes to his character the discrepancies are remarkable. â€Å"To some, he is perceived as a blood-thirsty megalomaniac who should be ranked in the annals of history with Stalin and Hitler, while to others he is a visionary devoted to harmony among races and a united world. Many see him as a man motivated by a need to explore the world while others are convinced that he was only out to plunder the riches of the east† (Borgia 1). To know a man is to know where he came from, who he was surrounded by and what influenced him the most. At a young age he possessed the skills of greatness. â€Å"From the time Alexander was a boy he was fearless. When no one else could tame the giant horse Buchephalus, Alexander succeeded† (Brown 1). His father saw the warrior in the young boy and told him that he should seek out a larger empire as Macedonia was too small for him. Alexander’s parents, Philip the II and Opympias wanted the best education for their son and so they sought out three of Macedonia’s greatest teachers to educate the young boy. His first teacher was the harsh Leonidas†¦ Leonidas was a strict disciplinarian who instilled in Alexander his Spartan nature which became famous during his Persian Indian expeditions† (Nosotro 2). We know that Leonidas was so strict that he would check his belongings to make sure that he did not have any luxuries, because of this he was not a favorite of Alexander. On the other side of it, because of Leonidas background and his Sparta past, Alexander learned skillful war tactics that would help him later in life. The second teacher in his life was Lysimachus, â€Å"Lysimachus taught Alexander to play the lyre, and taught him an appreciation for the fine arts of music, poetry, and drama† (Nosotro2). This is where we begin to see the impression the stories of Homer had on Alexander’s life. He reveled in the life of Achilles and it is well know that he later went on his long conquer with the idea that he himself was an extension of Achilles leading his men. This perception of the great Achilles also came from his mother, â€Å"She claimed to be a descendent of Achilles, the warrior hero of Homer’s Iliad† (Brown 1). Perhaps the most important figure in his early development was that of Aristotle. As his parents wished for him to have the greatest education they hired Aristotle to mentor the young Alexander. â€Å"Under Aristotle, Alexander learned philosophy, ethics, politics, and healing, all of which became the utmost importance for Alexander in his later life† (Nosotro 2). It is important to know that these teachings of ethics and politics were essential for how he created a respectful nature to his defeated enemies after battles. The relationship between Alexander and Aristotle was broken when differences in opinions concerning foreigners was present. Aristotle saw them as barbarians, while Alexander sought to unite the Macedonians and foreigners† (Nosotro 2). Alexander also had many friends that he held for his life, the most important of which was Hephaestion. They became friends in childhood and remained that way until Hephaestion’s death shortly before Alexanderâ€⠄¢s own fate. â€Å"During life the two had portrayed themselves as Achilles (Alexander) and Patrochus (Hephaestion), and it was generally accepted that this was a genuine and deeply-felt friendship† (Borgia 2). We know of this as after the death of Hephaestion, Alexander became depressed and mad with grief for months. To get a better idea of how Alexander matured at a young age into one of the history’s greatest conquerors we must also look at his parents. â€Å"Philip was ruthless and tough and extremely successful in his undertakings. Some suggest that his great success left Alexander with a need to do even greater things just to prove his self worth† (Borgia 2). There seemed to be a distance between father and son and it is documented that Alexander had a better relationship with his mother, Olympias. The blame for this could be that Philip had more than six wives but the biggest issue he took with his father was the marrying of Cleopatra. â€Å"At the age of 19†¦Taking his mother’s side, Alexander fell into a heated quarrel with his father and ran away to another section of the kingdom† (Nosotro 2). It is not proven but shortly after Philip is assassinated at the wedding of Alexander’s sister, and it may have been Olympias who had a hand in the planning. Now at the age of twenty, Alexander is heir to Macedon and is proclaimed King. Before all of that, Alexander got his first taste of warfare at the young age of 16. Alexander was appointed Regent while his father was waging war in Thrace. Alexander took the opportunity to subdue a rebilling people called Maedi and founded a small colony which he named Alexandropolis† (Borgia 3). At such a young age he had all the makings of following in his father’s footsteps. He was soon made a general in Ph ilips army and played a huge part in defeats of enemies that were never conquered before. This started the conquest of Alexander as King of Macedon after the assignation of his father a few years later. The history of his conquest is regarded as a thirteen year successful campaign that not only showed advanced war tactics but the use of his background in philosophy to conquer great empires. â€Å"In the spring of 334 B. C. , Alexander left Macedonia with an army of 30,000 foot soldiers and 5,000 cavalry. Stopping at Troy, Alexander vowed to carry on the legacy of his hero, Achilles. His life’s great crusade had begun. He would never see home again† (Brown 2). One of the wars waged against Thebes is taken by some historians as proof that Alexander was ruthless and barbarian like. The Macedonians stormed the city, killing almost everyone in sight, women and children included. They Plundered, sacked, burned and razed Thebes, as an example to the rest of Greece† (Nosotro 3). The flip side of the history is that Athens and Thebes wanted to rebel against Macedonia and it was Alexander who needed to remind them that he was king of all Macedon. After the siege of Thebes, he made a packed with Athens to maintain stability. An interesting event happened when he went to Athens. He wanted to meet with the Oracle at Delphi. â€Å"Alexander visited the oracle at Delphi, despite it being a day when giving prophecy was forbidden. In his attempts to drag the priestess to the place where she gave her oracles, she screamed, â€Å"My son, you are invincible! † That was all that Alexander wanted to hear† (Nosotro 3). This is very interesting and can be interpreted in a few ways. First, he was the King and ruler, so was it right for him to seek the oracle on a forbidden day? Most would say it was Alexander seeing himself above all, even the gods and his actions were wrong. The other point is that Alexander pressed and got what he wanted, proof that he was more than just a mere mortal king. We see Alexander begin to think of himself as a God. Another important battle waged against the Persian King Darius III, shows another side to Alexander. â€Å"He faced the 600,000 men of Persia’s King†¦ Alexander’s great daring as a battlefield genius won the day. Darius fled, stranding his mother, wife, and daughters. Alexander treated the women kindly† (Brown 2). This showed the wisdom of the young conqueror as rather than taking the women hostage to show animosity towards Darius, he showed respect to him and mercy towards the people of Persia. Alexander did catch up with Darius later defeating him at the battle of Gaugamela. He captured Darius’ capital city and proclaimed himself â€Å"lord of Asia†. His conquests lead him to places that welcomed him, â€Å"He proclaimed himself liberator, not conqueror. But cities that resisted were shown no mercy. Defeating the Phoenician city of Tyre†¦Alexander sold the women and children into slavery. In Egypt, he was crowned Pharaoh. There he founded Alexandria† (Brown 2). Just looking at this evidence shows a lot about the man. It almost seems that he believed that after all that he had done, that all cities should wave the white flag and not resist, because if they did he was sure to win and show no mercy. This may be the reason why Egypt crowned him, either out of respect or fear, either of which are great attributes to carry as a leader. Although after many battles his soldiers were inspired and worshipped him, they wondered when the battles would end. â€Å"The Macedonian soldiers were also offended when Alexander adopted Persian ways, wearing â€Å"barbarian† clothes. He even married an Asian Princess, Roxanna of Bactria† (Brown 2). Some point to this as a political move to unite Asia, and doubted that the marriage was out of love. If it was political it shows that his wisdom was far beyond his years and his teachings early in life were well used. The soldiers at this point had it with the conquest and wanted to go home. It was not in Alexander’s nature to stop at any point, he seemed destined to continue until all was conquered. This eventually led to the killing of one of his generals. â€Å"In time he declared himself God† (Brown 2). We see now that Alexander is starting to become unraveled as a person. To actually believe that he is God himself is a strike against his sanity. In 326 B. C. â€Å"his soldiers refused to go any farther. Alexander took to his tent to pout. Legends say that he wept because there were no more worlds for him to conquer† (Brown 2). Alexander finally agreed to go home, but what life would come of him when he got there? This is a man who believed so much in his unity of the world and with nothing else to fight for, his destiny was uncertain. On his return home and a stop in Babylon his body had given out on him and he died via fever at the age of thirty-two. So was this man a ruthless ruler, based on my research I don’t see a man who was out to dominate the world and rule in as a dictator. I see a man who was bread to be a warrior, leader and uniter who is one of the most brilliant military generals of all time. He accomplished so much in such a short period of time and when possible was very merciful in his conquest. He, as all men do, had his character flaws. He was obsessed with Achilles to the point of emulating him. He believed he was above all and God like. The simple fact that he wept when there were no more wars to fight say’s that he was self indulged in a life of war. It is indeed terribly frustrating that almost every aspect (no matter how seemingly insignificant) of Alexander’s life is subject to such widely varying interpretations with very different conclusions† (Borgia 3). History will undoubtedly continue to try and find the definitive person that is â€Å"Alexander†, but it will always c ome down to the ideas of the individual historian researching him. Sometimes we have to just process what we read and interpret it in our own way. Perhaps the enigma of Alexander’s character will always lead to many different interpretations.