He feels strong emotions and goes with them entirely. Agamemnon is in power, not because he was elected by the people or put there by a king, but purely because he was able to bring the most to the war. He had the most material items and troops so he was placed in command. The people did not necessarily want him to rule. This makes his position very unsolidified.
They didn’t like all the vicissitude that Caesar was endeavoring to make to their country. They considered Caesar’s power as a disregard and disrespect to authority, tradition, and Roman rules. Caesar had many occasions to challenge Roman commanders and many of their opponents, which lead to many civil wars. But his decision to cross Rubicon was against the Roman law. Julius Caesar’s zeal and overconfidence that he became invincible in both Rome and battle, because his soldiers resected and doted him; he mentally conceived that he could pursue whatever he wanted.
I think that the idea that he does not deserve his reputation is solely for argument, because some people love the feeling of making other people angry. So Alexander made some mistakes and maybe he killed people, just because he had the authority, but no one is perfect and you can’t argue that he does not deserve this title because he made these mistakes. Every human person has made mistakes because no one human has any faults in their history. If you look at other great leaders, they all had a weakness and eventually led to their downfall, but just because they had weaknesses does not mean that they should not be honored for their accomplishments. I think that ‘defaming’ Alexander the Great does not prove the ‘no’ side in any way, because he did many things to help his empire and even though he was the cause of many deaths to the native people of their homelands, he did what he thought was best for his people.
That is why there is so much confusion around this topic being the fact that Claudius was a horrible person, but was actually a very good king, because he possessed the abilities that are needed to succeed in such a setting. Like for example why would he kill his own brother, just so that he could have the thorn, like is it that important to him, just to have a little bit of power, that he would have already had if it wasn’t for his brother. The worst part is that he was probably a better king then his
Iago, to everyone else, seems like an honest and good man who will do everything in his power to help those around him succeed, but is really just power-hungry, two-faced and manipulative. He is, however, clever, cunning and philosophical, which can be accepted as positive traits. It is these traits that enable him to gain an insight into human nature, and ultimately exploit it, destroying the lives of those around him. Cassio is a character whom the audience don't know much about, but from the story they can understand that he loves his job as a lieutenant, and cares a lot about his reputation. This becomes clear after he is fired from his position, as he says to Iago; "Reputation, reputation, reputation!
In the years since Kaiser Wilhelm II reign ended, historians have been in constant debate about the level of importance his position and authority had on German politics from 1890 to 1914. The Kaisers personality had a large impact on his leadership and the way he lived his life. He was an intelligent man, who used his ability to charm to get his own way. He had many hobbies and held great pride in all of these, which was also reflected in the other aspects of his life. However, he was also heavily sensitive to criticism and was prone to have extreme mood swings making him incredibly difficult to work with as this made him a liability.
Julius Caesar was one of the most influential and memorable leaders in all of recorded history; he may have been the greatest man of all time. Caesars self-promotion style enabled him to have a swift rise to power; Caesar didn’t always follow the rules, and there's no denying that he left a trail of enemies in his past, but his rise to power was spectacular at that. Unlike many Roman Leaders, Caesar proved to his people that he was the best that could have been; fighting in the front lines with his army showed that he was confident as well as a great tactician. His urge for such a quick rise to power brings forth the question of whether his intentions were all for the good of Rome. It was no coincidence that Caesar ended up with the power and position, with him planning and constructing his future using his nature of a tactician for creating a tactical pathway.
Nevertheless, could be really unsocial and unsustainable when it has to work in stable situation, because mainly his peers and subordinates they will not accept or tolerate that style for long periods of time. According to Amok his style could be title as Directive and Pacetting, which means that entails command and control behavior that at times became coercive. It also involves leading by example and personal heroics. The advantages of these styles are that it fuels innovation, productivity and growth but on the other side ultimately could erode organizational performance, demolishing trust and undermine morale. This type of style can be observd in Alex when he mention that he had been hired to shake up the product team and launch the product quickly.
Facing Brute, Caesar believed him easily. Caesar was so credulous that he relaxed his vigilance. On the other hand, after he got many great achievements, he became arrogant and conceited. He din not care augur’s prediction, and he think protection by guard is a sign of weakness. All in all, Caesar’s failure is the limitation of age and ruling class.
"Why, there was a crown offered him: and being offered him, he put it by with the back of his hand" (I,II). Caesar's act was served to satisfy the citizens of Rome but he knew his power and authority was limitless. Rome will always be persuaded by Caesar because Caesar has ultimate authority. Brutus is using logos to convince Rome that the death of Caesar was for their good. Brutus is using an example of anaphora to convince the people