Comparison Between Alexander And The Greatness Of Alexander's Conquest

1396 Words 6 Pages
Alexander and the Greatness of his Conquest
After the great Peloponnesian wars, the kingdom of Macedonia had been strengthening to become a force to overcome the Greek city states. Macedonia was under the control of King Philip II. Philip now reigned over all of Greece. He requited the Greeks to join his empire and his plan to take over and invade the Persian Empire. Before King Philip could begin his invasion of Asia, he was assassinated. Referring to the information provided by Harrap, “Philip, now master of the Greek mainland, was appointed general of the Greeks for an invasion of the Achaemenid Persia, but was assassinated at his daughter’s wedding in 336 B.C.” (Harrap, et al, 2011,1). Upon his death, he left his son, Alexander, to the
…show more content…
With as much power that Alexander held, it still was not enough for him. In his attempts to strengthen the empire even more, he made his determination to continue eastward into India clear. At this point, his soldiers were dreadful and exhausted. This was the first time that his troops disobeyed his command. If they had not refused, Alexander may have had plots for world domination. Nonetheless, he and his troops returned to Babylon. Whenever they returned, his went to work on his future plans. He had plans for more campaigns, whether his troops did or not. In reference to the textbook, “But in June 323 B.C.E., weakened by wounds, fever, and probably alcohol consumption, he died at the age of thirty-two” (Duiker, 2013, 103). With his death occurring right after a banquet, some historians leave the cause of death up for debate. According to the “Alexander the Great” section in Chambers Biographical Dictionary, “...he was taken ill after a banquet, and died eleven days later”(Harrap, et al, 2011, …show more content…
Within just the twelve years of his conquest, Alexander was, “Dominating lands from west of the Nile to east of the Indus, he brought the Persian Empire, Egypt, and much of the MIddle East under his control and laid the foundations for the Hellenistic World” (Duiker, 2013, 103). He roughly ruled an area of 1000 miles by 2000 miles. This would be near two million square miles. Leading one of the largest Empire takeovers of all time in such a short period of time, how could one not label him as great? The peoples that he took over, even considered him a great. Either way that it is viewed, his greatness was only short lived. Andra Cicarma, author for The Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies, noted that Alexander’s great empire had come to failure not long after his death. From the article, it reads, “Two decades after the disappearance of the Macedonian, three major states formed, later known as the Hellenistic kingdoms: Egypt, Macedonia, the Seleucid Empire, ruled by the so-called Diadochos, the first followers of the conqueror”(Cicarma, 2015, 29). Without the control of Alexander, his empire was no longer considered great, for it was no longer his empire, nor did he leave any heir to the

Related Documents