Analysis Of The Leadership Of Alexander The Great

Alexander the Great could be described as a general or king. He was also a leader. Alexander expanded the advanced technology found in the Greek culture and invaded cities-states. Alexander made his army extremely smart and advanced through the use of engineers and the introduction of longspears to his army. Alexander was very tactile, and he conquered a lot of the world quickly. Alexander was not an exceptional man. He was greedy, power hungry, and very well-pampered.

Alexander was very power-hungry. Alexander took over all of India’s land and was likely to take over more if he had his army not refused to continue. He also planned to force his culture on other conquered civilizations, building large mock cities and libraries that included his cultures information. Alex would kill anyone who disagreed with him. Ian Worthington writes, “Thus in 335 he issued an execution order for Philotass and Parmenion, two senior generals who had been critical of Alexander’s increasing favoritism towards Oriental Practices.” This quote confirms my claim that Alexander was not open to criticism. All of the above traits are indicative of someone who is power hungry. Alexander had an insatiable appetite. Alex wanted control of everything. Everyone should know who he is, what his beliefs are, and where they came from. Alex would abuse the military and push his soldiers to the limit, making conquest after conquest until his soldiers gave up. Alex then had to give up and leave the army. The Hellenistic Era was the result of Alex’s conquests. Alex was also receiving everything he required from his father Philip 2 before his 336 death. Alex felt that he was invincible and set about spreading his Hellenistic Era through the Eastern World. This is a clear example of Alex’s disregard for who he had slaughtered to obtain his goals.

Alexander was loved. Alexander was loved and cared for by his father, Philip II, who died in 336. Alex was nothing if it wasn’t for his father. Ian Worthington says that Alex wouldn’t have the ability to become a ruler and lead the Hellenistic Era. This statement is true. Alex’s harsh and impulsive ways would probably not make him an ideal leader for a city in turmoil. However, Alex rose to power without having to worry about such a city.

Alexander was power hungry and greedy. Alex was not able to handle opposing views. He wanted to control everything. Alex also had a greedy streak, wanting to be the center of all culture. Alex was loved by his father and given an ready-to-go civilization by him after his passing. Alex was considered a leader and a ruler. Many people ignore the bad and terrible things that he did. Alex was a man who was somewhat obsessed with everything.



Makhi is a 34 yo educational blogger who is passionate about writing and exploring new content ideas. She has a degree in English from the University of Utah and is currently working as a teacher in a public school in Utah. Makhi has been published in numerous online journals and has been featured on national television networks.