Alexander fears that other family members will try to steal the throne from him “... And orders the execution of Amitus, his older cousin.” (Rayborn 3) Alexander stops at nothing for power, even if it means killing family. What makes Alexander’s order even weirder is that his cousin didn’t want the throne. Alexander was a villain because he kills family and did what had already been done. Alexander was a villain because he left the government undeveloped. Alexander focused more and conquering land than developing the land.
This quote is wrong because the leader could be more experienced in war and killing people, than the army. The army might be weaker than the leader, sure the leader knows what they are doing but the army might not know. Alexander the Great is a villain because when his army had some down time they went off on killing sprees, Abandoned his kingdom, and lied and took advantage. Alexander the great, is a villain because he had his army go on killing sprees when they had down time and went to small city-states or civilizations and killed and
He exemplified the ways of both a hero and a villain. However, it is my opinion that he is a villain. I believe this because he could be an extremely violent leader and because he never fully reigned over one of the places he conquered/ruled. He is a villain because he murdered thousands of people and soldiers from different nations. Alexander tortured many of his victims and then he killed them.
His empire was nothing compared to these massive long lasting empires. Alexander the Great did not deserve his tittle as great because he gained power by fear, killed innocent people, and his empire did not stay together long. Alexander the Great started conquering land at the age of 20, and in the process killed thousands of innocent people, used a fear tactic to gain his power, and built a massive empire that did not last very long. Some may see him as great, but if you look a little closer at the details Alexander did more harm then good trying to unite everybody. In conclusion, these three factors are proof that Alexander was not as excellent as historians try to prove him to
Many people believe Cassius is the evil master mind behind the death of Julius Caesar, however every one blames Brutus, but it was Cassius. Cassius is responsible because he got everyone involved through manipulation. People cannot blame one man for the actual death of Caesar, but one can blame the man that set it up. A man such as Cassius is a man that leads to trouble. He takes pleasure
Macbeth was considered a tragic hero because Macbeth had many people follow him he also had a down flaw that led to his death but went down heroically. Macbeth 's great downfall that proved was a tragic hero was stated as, “ I will not yield to kiss the ground before Malcolm 's feet and to be baited with the rabble 's curse” (5, 8, 28) this quote taken from the story explains that even though Malcom is trying to kill him Macbeth claims he won 't yield nor beg because Macbeth thinks he has won the fight. Macbeth had a very high social rank before he murdered king Duncan to start with even though he was a general for king Duncan to begin with. Macbeth is said to be a very dynamic character
Attila also killed many people during his reign, simply out of greed. Attila killed many people during his lifetime, he killed these people out of greed and revenge, not for protection for self-defense. Regardless of how power is gained, it should always be used for the betterment of the region which is being ruled. Using power for self-gain is not right and only hurts the people that are supposed to be benefitting from your
Some people might argue that Odysseus is a hero because he won the Trojan War for the Greece and ended the ten-year long fight. But, yet he killed many of the innocent that lived in Troy without any thought about the children or women. It shows in the book that they slaughtered everyone in Troy and didn’t give any of them proper burial, which was mean that the people that died can’t move on. This shows that he is a cold-hearted killer that doesn’t care about any others
He had killed him, because he was fighting for his beliefs and ideas. It can be inferred that the sniper was devastated. This shows that ideas and beliefs are not worth fighting for, because fighting for beliefs in a rough war-like manner can harm others and it can harm yourself. The story showed how the sniper harmed his brother and how the sniper harmed himself internally. Fighting for ideas and beliefs too fanatically can lead to something like this.
If Grendel were truly destined to be a killer monster, he would not have tried to keep himself from fighting back in the first place. Finally, even after Grendel had finally given in to his urges, and he begins to frequently raid the hall to kill men, he still practices self-control. Grendel knows that he could kill Hrothgar’s entire village in one night, and it would be very easy for him to do so. But Grendel restrains himself, and he even went so far as to kill fewer people during the times when the wars had caused the population of the village to decrease. “The army of the Scyldings was weakened, decimated…He (Hrothgar) couldn’t protect his own hall…I cut down on my visits, conserving the game, and watched them.” (Pg.