Does Alexander The Great Infact An Influence Character In History?
To be quite honest before this lesson I had always held the assumption that Alexander The Great was similar to that of Caesar; mainly in the sense that he was a general who gained power through conquest. Yet, to my surprise, I now know that Alexander was infact the son of a king, Phillip the second. Knowing this, I now view this discussion question a bit differently. There is no doubt that Alexander The Great was infact an influence character in history, but I wager his father deserves more credit than what common history gives him. The empire Alexander created both militarily and politically would, in my opinion, never occurred with the earlier conquest, and alliances his father set up. Simply put, the military and resources Alexander needed to begin his trek across the known world to the Greeks would have never happened without the alliances with the other powers Philip the second secured through political married and then latter conquest. Alexander very well could have amassed a military through the ways his father did, but the point is he did not have to do that in the beginning. Naturally, he would recruit new members to the military with ever conquest, but I believe saying this to answer a question on how Alexander created his empire’s army would be trival. However, the question itself is dually worded. The empire's military, as least for the beginning part of its creation would have been allotted to Alexander through what his father archived.