Alexander had a cruel and a somewhat good side at times. Alexander the Great wasn’t really a great leader/king after all. Even though he had conquered many lands at his time, that doesn’t mean that he should have been given the title “the Great.” A king respects his people and doesn’t do cruel actions in order to get what he wants, even though his father was a king, that doesn’t mean that he should have become one too; his father had achieved a lot but never got the same title that Alexander got.
Alexander was a selfish person, who was hard to please, even when people were doing everything for him since he was their king. Alexander was given water since he was very thirsty because they were crossing the desert and the followers had gone to get water just for him, and instead of drinking it, he poured the water on the ground (Document D). Alexander could have gave it to one of the thirsty followers and not pour it on the ground. Alexander was only thinking about
…show more content…
Also, Alexander drank and that made him make poor judgemental calls, which led to more bad stuff. Alexander had ordered that all those who were in sanctuary or even thought about it were to be killed (Document C). This shows that he hurt people, even those who were in the temple to keep safe, were to be killed. He had also set policies saying that his soldiers can’t be married to local woman, and that shouldn’t have been his choice to make, it should have been the people’s choice because that’s what a great king does, he listens to his fellows questions and askings. His thinking was cruel and all the power that he got from conquering cities and not losing any battles made him think that he was the most powerful man in the world, and that led to all the bad judgemental calls that he had made and at some point regretted that he made