The Making of a Good or King: Comparing Clovis to Alexander
Kings and Emperors are indeed multi-faceted people. Many possess good qualities like military knowledge, courage, and fairness. Some possess negative traits such as inflated egos, propensity for violence, and mistrust. Some rulers have an ability to adapt or change. Most often, a ruler in ancient history embodied a combination of these qualities. Looking at the reigns of the ancient rulers, one sees evidence of how these attributes make a good ruler, affected their reign, and, in turn, the lives of their subjects.
Comparing two rulers, Alexander of Mesopotamian and Clovis, King of the Franks, the similarities are unmistakable. Each one demonstrated vast military knowledge and courage. During military offensives, Clovis pillaged neighboring villages in pursuit of treasure. Alexander was a military genius and trained …show more content…
2). After the battle, the Frank soldiers, following Clovis’ lead, converted to Christianity. Alexander demanded respect and obedience and used fear tactics to gain respect. After a military campaign at Opis in Babylonia, Greek military veterans rose up to oppose their discharge and perceived disrespect. Alexander killed thirteen and regained control. Declaring that his conquests and rulings were all for the good of his subjects (Arrian, p. 266), Alexander proclaimed “From all this which I have labored to win for you…I have nothing of my own” (Arrian, p. 266). That calmed the mutineers. Of course, an intelligent emperor never underestimates the power of a good guilt trip. Before invading a region, Alexander appealed to area priests in an attempt to gain the people’s favor. Owing to this planning, many times, invaded cities hailed the emperor as a conquering hero as he rode into the city. Clovis’ methodology, on the other hand, consisted of conquering, killing, and taking the treasures of his enemies. By sparing their lives, the conqueror displayed
Kings and Emperors are indeed multi-faceted people. Many possess good qualities like military knowledge, courage, and fairness. Some possess negative traits such as inflated egos, propensity for violence, and mistrust. Some rulers have an ability to adapt or change. Most often, a ruler in ancient history embodied a combination of these qualities. Looking at the reigns of the ancient rulers, one sees evidence of how these attributes make a good ruler, affected their reign, and, in turn, the lives of their subjects.
Comparing two rulers, Alexander of Mesopotamian and Clovis, King of the Franks, the similarities are unmistakable. Each one demonstrated vast military knowledge and courage. During military offensives, Clovis pillaged neighboring villages in pursuit of treasure. Alexander was a military genius and trained …show more content…
2). After the battle, the Frank soldiers, following Clovis’ lead, converted to Christianity. Alexander demanded respect and obedience and used fear tactics to gain respect. After a military campaign at Opis in Babylonia, Greek military veterans rose up to oppose their discharge and perceived disrespect. Alexander killed thirteen and regained control. Declaring that his conquests and rulings were all for the good of his subjects (Arrian, p. 266), Alexander proclaimed “From all this which I have labored to win for you…I have nothing of my own” (Arrian, p. 266). That calmed the mutineers. Of course, an intelligent emperor never underestimates the power of a good guilt trip. Before invading a region, Alexander appealed to area priests in an attempt to gain the people’s favor. Owing to this planning, many times, invaded cities hailed the emperor as a conquering hero as he rode into the city. Clovis’ methodology, on the other hand, consisted of conquering, killing, and taking the treasures of his enemies. By sparing their lives, the conqueror displayed