An example is from Alexander's legacy “Estimated enemy soldiers and civilians killed in four major battles.” Did he have to kill that many people in four major battles? He could have killed the soldiers but civilians died too, and that’s just wrong and cruel! The next example is from Destruction of Tyres “ [soldiers] ranged through the city on a ferocious manhunt.” That means even though the civilians did nothing, he wanted everything to be destroyed and ferocious manhunt means bad things are going to happen to Tyre. Does that sound like a good king? This is the first reason that explains why Alexander was a dictator. …show more content…
An example is from a map called Alexander's empire it shows that his soldiers walked 8,000 to 12,000 miles. If he was a good leader why did he make his army walk 8,000 to 12,000 miles? That shows that he did not really care for his army. Another example is from the legend of the helmet “they were struggling on under necessity of reaching water.” Well, if Alexander was such a good leader why did he make his army go to a desert with almost no water? He is lucky that a lot of people did not die due to that. Some may say that Alexander dropped the water just to get on the same level of his army, but again why did he bring his army if there was no water in a desert it's just common sense. This is why Alexander was a