HIST151 Alexander the \"Great\" Summary, Professor Julie Rancilio at KCC PDF

Preview

Summary

Professor Julie Rancilio at KCC
I got an A on this and in her class
Summary of John Green's Alexander the "Great" World History Crash Course video...

Description

1. 2. 3. 4.

Does John Green of Crash Course World History think Alexander was "Great?' If so, why and if not, why not? Do you think Alexander was "Great"? Why or why not? Is there a problem with using the term "Great" to describe someone historically? Is greatness a question of accomplishment, of impact, or are people great because the rest of us decide they're great? What is your definition of "greatness?" Who do you think is "Great" and why

The answer must be a minimum of two paragraphs long, be robust, and you must reference the material we have learned that week. You also can and should bring in other relevant information, both ancient and modern, as well as from other subjects, areas, and disciplines to give your answer more depth of thought and meaning. But, remember to cite all information from outside sources, when appropriate. Use the textbook, the Crash Course Video: Alexander the Great, and your lecture notes. Make sure that you do citations for all of your sources (i.e. ideas, direct quotes, statistics, etc.). You must cite any ideas even if you paraphrase the information in your own words. The citations should be parenthetical citations done right in the text. (Rancilio) (Green) (Bentley et. al)

From what I gathered by listening to John Green talk about Alexander the Great, he does see Alexander as “Great.” Of course, Green acknowledges the misdeeds Alexander committed and does not condone or praise such behavior, but he finds Alexander to be great in other ways. One being that Alexander conquered vast areas; his Hellenistic Empire stretched from Greece all the way to India (Bentley et. al). And in these regions consisting of cosmopolitan cities, Alexander integrated societies and economies (Rancilio), even giving way to a new commonly spoken language: Greek (Green). Green also elaborates upon the idea that it is society’s power of admiring a popular being and attempting to mimic their legacy that leads to the title of being “Great.” Personally, I think Alexander was Great especially because of the last reason I just introduced. Being largely interested in psychology and the literal mechanisms behind occurring phenomena, I found Green’s democratic popularity definition of “greatness” intriguing. This is so because this is the only way he indirectly describes being “Great.” One’s accomplishments and effect on those around them are definitive principles, but the population deciding who we are to divert awareness to is more encompassing of all possibilities. Alexander the Great did as he pleased, and the rest of the neighboring world followed in his footsteps because they looked up to him (Green). Continuing on the topic of historically describing an individual as “Great,” I feel as though there is not a problem in doing so. Using Green’s three definitions of great - achievements, impact, and extraordinary legends - there are many historical figures that may be grouped into one or more of that criterion. While there may be a slight gendered stereotype to who is dubbed “Great” (Green), women are able to be admired just as much as men are. Besides this minor inequality, individuals were called “the Great” for a reason, albeit possibly a heinous reason, society recognized some sort of importance. And as I have previously mentioned, I believe that

people are determined to be great because the rest of us decide they are such. This exact definition of greatness is one that resonated with me because it shows the bigger picture. All persons with the moniker “the Great” were not given such a title by themselves, but the people around them that they ruled or governed alongside. Whether it be for what they did in their lives or how they changed other lives, the one thing for sure is that these doings will be brought to the attention of the public and they will then choose to honor or disapprove of the “great” being. It reminds me of democracy; a deliberated greatness by the people, for the people....