Should Alexander The Great Be Considered “The Great”? Ubaid Thoophany 5/11/15 Alexander the great should be considered the great because of all the great things he did. He made his kingdom overpowered, and built a name for himself and his people, which is a very brave and hard thing to do. First off, he ruled his kingdom Macedonia, well and helped it by making the right choices for his empire. Also, he fought in many wars with such bravery to prove himself worthy and determined to be known as “The Great”.
The greek beliefs and lifestyles must have been that powerful for the romans to base their whole lives around it and have it impact the reason they were so great. So props to the greeks , they conquered Rome in the
They were intended to persuade his critics and reassure his supporters that he was doing all that was possible to protect the Republic. Publishing summaries of his campaigns was one of the best ways to record his successes, which were numerous, so that literate and wealthy citizens could hear of his accomplishments. His rhetorical audience would be all Roman citizens. However, the ones who would learn of his actions first would obviously be the Senate, considering it was the ruling body
Their traditional rules, about festivals and sanctuaries, were there to be obeyed without question.” This exemplifies that the Greek gods were of high importance and held the power to determine and undermine the way Spartan society, military and religion was practised in everyday life. Their worship emphasized the attributes most relevant to the city's ideals. The Dioscuri, Castor and Polydeuces, were twin gods who play an important part in Spartan society and worship as they were known and associated as young men and their pursuits of horsemanship, athletics, warfare and protectors of guests
Another just as important contribution was the development of a constitution. The idea of everyone having equal treatment was as well an ingenious idea that was created by them that would later influence democracy. Many other important things were also contributed to democracy but those were just the minimal and the basic few. The Greeks contributed a lot to democracy. An impeccable example of this is that, “Athenian leader Cleisthens introduced a constitution or plan to govern.”(Mejia’s notes).
An initial aristocratic tone, though often modified, had demonstrated continued validity even in democratic centers such as Athens. Greek aristocrats could agree on the need for wise political service and devotion to political life. Some of their ideals had extended to a wider group of citizens and underwrote the intense political loyalties of the city-states. At the same time, other political trends had modified aristocratic rule, particularly through the advance of democracy. Greek political and economic control had spread widely along the eastern and northern coasts of the Mediterranean, and around the Black Sea.
Greek revolutionary workers did lots of work to promote their ideals into the minds of all Greeks; the president of the revolutionary government, Alexander Mavrocordato, talks about Greece’s freedom and it’s sovereignty in his “Declaration to the Christian Powers”, with its own government and peaceful operations. As the president of his government, he would want to portray the status of Greece in a good light to appear stable and not a target for other countries, especially Russia, and to instill pride in the citizens in the fact that their revolutions were a success (Doc 10). He and many others worked to make the Greeks feel that this revolution was their ticket to saving their culture. They work to bring together their people so that they all have a common goal towards their freedom. Other people worked to spread ideas of nationalism through poetry and other literary means.
Success for Roman Emperors, in a more general sense, often boiled down to their popularity amongst the people of Rome itself with their relationships there setting the precedent for how they were received elsewhere. Rome was an incredibly diverse and cosmopolitan city and its citizens were from all branches of the Roman social hierarchy. Therefore, in order for an Emperor to enjoy success in Rome they had to form relationships with different social groups, which for the purpose of this essay will include: the Plebeians, Freedmen, Equestrians and Senators. To successfully create good functional relationships, each social group had differing interests in what the emperor could offer them, and it is by the extent to which each emperor was able to give different social groups what they wanted, one can judge the successes of each emperor. For the plebs, they were seemingly most interested in money and games; the freedmen wanted social respectability and to be included more into Roman society; Equestrians and Senators both sought autonomy and power, more individualism and respect from their emperor.
By initiating this extensive program of establishing buildings and repairing temples it provided a great deal of positive propaganda for Augustus, as the general public received attractive environments to worship, live and work in. In addition to this Shotter states that the buildings were an expression of auctoritas is Augustus’ city and a way of showing his patronage to Rome . This technique resulted in the support of the people by their own accord, as stated by Dio, which dismissed any sense that they had been persuaded against their will , thus he accomplished another part of his plan and moved even closer to creating his near immaculate public image. A building that was not part of Augustus’ building program was Agrippa’s Pantheon, a temple that was built by Agrippa in 27Bc to honor the God’s . Agrippa constructed the building as a part of his public repairs and improvements, Augustus is known for boasting that “he had found the city of brick but left it of marble”, what he fails to mention is this would not have been possible without the great assistance provided by Agrippa.
General Washington could be classified with multiple leadership styles including leadership by example, a transformational leader or even a servant leader. He is considered by many to be one of the most influential leaders of all time and certainly was one of our greatest presidents. Looking first at his leadership style of leading by example, he knew that he had to set the way for the people of the United States to follow for years after his presidency and establish a norm for how the country should be governed. He has high expectations of the young country, and it was said that he “…carried a vision into his presidency and sought to ensure a well-ordered government based on both laws and reason. He believed that through using reason and being open to various viewpoints, citizens could arrive at proper laws and policies to ensure peace, prosperity, and happiness for the country (McNeilly, 168).” Washington was intelligent enough to know the importance of a strong leader in the early years of this new country.