Alexander III Of Macedon: A Heroic Analysis

1267 Words6 Pages
Throughout history, Alexander III of Macedon, or more commonly referred to as Alexander the Great, is known as the paradigm of a military genius, pioneer of globalization, and for spreading Hellenism throughout the Greek and Far East world. However, two of the above statements that personify Alexander I believe to be misleading. Without question, Alexander will serve as a template for military leaders with his remarkable military record, deliberate tactics, and charisma that allowed for him to muster troops to fight for him. However, Alexander should not be seen as the archetype for globalization and for spreading Hellenism throughout the known world. Furthermore, Alexander was a destroyer of already established cultures, an overzealous…show more content…
Temple defines heroic virtue as “arising from some great and native excellency of temper or genius transcending the common race of mankind in wisdom, goodness, and fortitude.” Temple’s definition of the virtues of a hero were deemed credible during his time, and provide basis to the argument I am providing to vilify Alexander the Great. Taking Temple’s definition apart piece by piece, he claims that a hero’s “transcendent virtue and goodness” will benefit all of mankind in the institutions of “law, orders, and governments” and will be beneficial to a “civil society.” Temple also notes that fortitude was the “operation of the defense” of the hero’s own nation, and to “civilize barbaric people, and to relieve them from other cruelties and oppressions.” With Temples definitions clearly defined, one can argue that Alexander the Great is not the heroic character much of history claims him to be. Alexander did in fact conquer other ‘barbaric individuals’, with the intent of ‘Greekizing’ these individuals. However, Alexander instituted no orders and no governmental capacity in the areas he conquered, using his own appointed governors to allow Alexander to rule an imperialized empire. One of the most important points in Temple’s definition of the hero is that he must be one who is “constructive rather than destructive” which Alexander was the latter of the two. As noted above in Allen’s analysis of Alexander’s life, the “Great Conqueror” was indeed a conqueror, and destroyed people, lands, and enslaved swaths of women and children. The construction of a civilized, unified, area, one that Alexander maybe envisioned, never revealed itself during the life of Alexander. With the teachings from Greek philosopher Aristotle, Alexander was raised Greek, and therefore envisioned

More about Alexander III Of Macedon: A Heroic Analysis

Open Document