Alexander the Great PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Alexander the Great PDF

Description

Throughout time, Alexander the Great has been viewed and interpreted in a multitude of different ways, demonstrating the mysterious and complex nature of his character and the way in which the understanding of his legacy has changed. For some, Alexander is synonymous with the military hero while others view his legacy as a tragic tale of egotism and self-destruction. With the expansion of his empire throughout his life and the Hellenisation of cities he conquered, Alexander paved the way for a multifarious legacy to develop over time, and thus, it is necessary for him to be “assessed in various ways”, as stated by Nigel Guy Wilson. However, Alexander’s inability to produce an heir led to the downfall of Macedon following his death, as well as civil wars between his generals which fractured the empire. Alexander’s legacy is present in various aspects: generalship, administration, cultural diffusion and religious impact, all of which are interlinked and interpreted in different ways. Thus, an image has been created of “Alexander the immortal hero of legend and folklore”, through changing representations of Alexander’s legacy. Ancient and modern scholarship and sources on Alexander present a variety of differing and conflicting representations, which in turn shape the way in which his legacy has developed over time. The multifaceted nature of Alexander highlights a difficulty in trying to vindicate the truth as to who the ‘real’ Alexander is, as he is presented in a romanticised, literary way as well as a historical and tangible way. Ancient sources on Alexander’s life are extremely limited, and consist of five main historians: Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, Plutarch, Justin and Arrian. The writing of Arrian is particularly notable as it has been evaluated to be the best source, despite Arrian’s heavy bias towards Alexander and the fact that he is furthest removed from the events themselves. Modern historians also face numerous challenges when working with source material from antiquity, such as political bias and fragmentary documentation present in ancient sources. Worthington summarises the shortcomings of source material regarding Alexander, as despite modern efforts to reconcile differing narratives, “we will never truly get to the historical Alexander”. Alexander is primarily known for his success in generalship and the military, explicitly evident in his conquest of Persia, which translates throughout time in the development of his legacy. During Alexander’s reign, he implemented a plethora of military reforms, but was famed for his loyalty and companionship with the rest of his army, often placing himself at the forefront of the battlefield and uniting all of the Macedonians. Initially, in the years immediately following Alexander’s death, the kingdom of Macedon fell into turmoil as a civil war broke out between the Diadochi, thus forming three major dynastic kingdoms, the Seleucids, the Ptolemies and the Antagonids, all of which adopted elements of Alexander’s military tactics. Following the Hellenistic period, those in the Roman era viewed Alexander’s military conquests with admiration rather than resentment. This is manifested in Pompey “the Great” (106-48 BC) a notable Roman general, who Pliny compared to Alexander due to his military skill. He rose to power 200 years after Alexander’s death and modelled himself upon Alexander from boyhood, adopted his mannerisms and attempted to recreate his conquests in the east. Furthermore, Plutarch states that Julius Caesar was moved to tears by Alexander’s success, knowing that he had only achieved a fraction of what Alexander had accomplished. Similarly, Napoleon Bonaparte lamented that he could not conquer as much of the world as Alexander. The painting “Alexander’s Entry into Babylon” by Charles Le Brun during the reign of Louis XIV highlights that the French king regarded Alexander as a role model. Additionally, it was Alexander’s generalship and loyal, eager temperament which made him so inspirational to modern military commanders. As stated by Arrian, his “impetuosity in battle and passion for glory” was what influenced his successors. Alexander’s promotion of the loyalty of his army was evoked by John Adams, second president of the United States,

who cited Alexander as an example to boost the morale of the US Military Academy. Even Adolf Hitler was inspired by Alexander, who had two tapestries depicting Alexander in his office. Thus, Alexander’s military legacy was initially focused upon explicit tactics and strategies and slowly developed into a general, motivational source of inspiration. As stated by Wilson, as the “greatest and most famous figure in Greek history”, Alexander created a model of militaristic expansion and success in a universal legacy that was able to transcend time in various forms. Furthermore, Alexander’s economic and administrative legacy is largely demonstrated through physical forms, such as coinage, the cities he had founded and the government of these cities. Alexander’s most immediate legacy, the expansion of his empire, was a direct testament to his ambition and goal to surpass the success of his father, Philip II of Macedon. The Hellenistic period, 300 years following his death and dominated by a number of successors, reflected Alexander’s administrative ability. The cities Alexander founded acted as permanent markers for his conquests, as many of them continued to flourish in the years following his death. These cities primarily reflected Greek architecture, with strong defensive walls designed to withstand siege equipment, which is testament to Alexander’s great military skill and knowledge. The cities represented a physical proliferation of Greek culture, as they were all united by the Greek language and the common currency. The perennial memorial of Alexander’s economic impact is his coinage, which he implemented in Pella, Amphipolis and as far east as the Levantine coast. By creating a standardised currency throughout his kingdom, Alexander was able to regulate trade and economic activity through Macedonia, the rest of Greece and Egypt. As stated by Bosworth, Alexander linked systems in the East and West, and thus transformed the isolated regions into a united market, which was further strengthened by the implementation of a common Greek language. As a conqueror, Alexander displayed courtesy and compassion, as evident after the battle of Issus with his gracious treatment of Darius’ family, as well as vengeance, displayed in his harsh treatment of the Tyrians. Thus, whereas the Persians had condemned him with pessimistic nomenclature: “Alexander the Barbarian” and “Alexander the Accursed”, his policies of companionship and equality for all races were ultimately emulated by Caracalla in 212CE, who gave Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the Empire. Similarly, the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt was a Hellenistic kingdom indirectly founded by Alexander as it came about in the aftermath of the civil war following Alexander’s death. Due to the fragmentation of the kingdom and Ptolemy I’s personal ambition, the kingdom was able to maintain power for the ensuing 300 years. The city of Alexandria, founded in 332BC by Alexander himself, became an important hub for sea trade, paving the way for further economic growth. Despite the various rulers that have come and gone in the consequent millennia, Alexandria has maintained its prestige and to this day, it remains a significant centre for cultural and economic development. In contemporary times, Alexander remains a symbol of political legitimacy, which was evident in the conflict over nationalism between Greece and the Republic of Macedonia, which both claimed a close connection to Alexander. A poll of Greeks in 2002 designated Alexander as the “greatest Greek of all time”, as he served as an icon of patriotism and Hellenic pride. The cultural legacy of Alexander is characterised by a romanticised and literary interpretation of Alexander’s conquests, conveyed through ancient and modern sources including poetry, books, films, artwork and statues. It was fiction like this that was largely responsible for proliferating Alexander’s reputation across the world in the millennia following his death. A major literary text on Alexander is the Alexander Romance, a Greek work written by a Hellenised Egyptian in the 2nd century AD, which intertwines historical fact with fictional dialogue. Translated into over twenty languages during the medieval period, the Alexander

Romance has been altered according to societal and cultural changes over the course of over 1200 years, highlighting the ways in which different contexts lead to alternate representations of Alexander’s legacy. The popularity of the Alexander Romance is a prime example of “fascination with such an enigmatic man”, as the text was composed not to promote factual understanding, but rather an emotional and personal response to his achievements. However, with the revival of classic scholarship during the Renaissance, historical accounts displaced the Alexander Romance. The Hellenisation of Indian culture also extended to the sciences, where Greek studies of astrology profoundly affected Indian understanding of a spherical earth. This is evident in the city of Ai Khanoum in modern day Afghanistan, where Greek astronomical instruments were found. Additionally, in modern western culture, Alexander’s legacy often navigates a tension between admiration and condemnation, which reflects the inherently biased nature of interpretations of his character and achievements. Additionally, modern portrayals of Alexander, especially in film, are often incredibly historically inaccurate and created for entertainment purposes, highlighting how the purpose of Alexander’s legacy has changed over time. For example, Alexander’s campaign in India was appropriated in the Indian film Sikandar (1941), which portrays a youthful Alexander held in high regard by the nobility of King Porus, thus asserting Indian nationalism. On the other hand, Shakespeare condemns Alexander’s ruthless conquests in Hamlet, denouncing him as a role model. However, documentaries such as Michael Wood’s series “In the footsteps of Alexander the Great” display a contemporary interest in vindicating the truth surrounding Alexander’s achievements, despite the difficulty in evaluating source material. As a consequence, it can be concluded that the cultural and literary legacy of Alexander is primarily concerned with societal interpretation, and is largely influenced by the artistic and poetic form. Finally, Alexander’s philosophical and religious legacy has developed over time, as a result of the unification and Hellenisation of cities he had conquered. The cultural interactions brought about by Alexander through his expansion into India gave rise to Greco-Buddhism, which instituted the anthropomorphic representation of Buddha. In 332BC, Alexander was appointed Pharaoh of Egypt, a symbolic position as a priest anointed him “son of the gods”. He was thus immortalised in Egyptian culture through replications of his image all throughout Egypt as well as his Greek name translated into hieroglyphs. Furthermore, Despite the fact that Christianity was only formally established 300 years after Alexander’s death, in early medieval times, a coin depicting Alexander was worn by Christian women in southern Europe as it was believed to bring them happiness on their wedding day and in their marriage. Early Islamic scholars also believed that the “Two-Horned One” in the Qu’ran was referencing Alexander. Additionally, Alexander was portrayed as a quasi-holy man in Talmudic literature, and he also had a legacy as a philosophical subject in Cynic and Roman philosophy. Thus, it is evident that Alexander had great religious influence despite not having direct connections to all of these religious bodies. Thus, it can be concluded that Alexander the Great’s legacy has undergone major changes throughout time, as a result of the multifarious and complex nature of Alexander himself. Ultimately, Alexander’s legacy is still fluid as it is ultimately impossible to come to a concrete conclusion about the political, military, administrative, cultural and religious influences that Alexander had. From the immediate aftermath of Alexander’s death, to the medieval period and finally contemporary society today, Alexander’s legacy has evolved from a tangible, literal interpretation to a more figurative and vague depiction. Thus, as stated by Cartledge,“The hunt for a new Alexander is a vital part of living history today”....