Alexander The Great Analysis

The reading “Alexander the Great” by J. Kelley Sowards it talks about how Alexander had a sense that he was meant for something greater than his life in Macedonia, as the son of a king her had the idea of manifest destiny which was said to explained his “instinct for the unusual, the cryptic, the dramatic in political and religious, as well as in strategic and military decisions.” (pg. 71 MWT) Though many studies and reading it is said that even though Alexander conquered much of his world, he did not complete his life long quest and visions of our world. Alexander believed that it was imperative to record his deeds so with in his ranks he had two scholars named Callisthenes and Aristobus which keep books or dairies about Alexander’s triumphs
Like how Aristotle said that anyone not of Greek descent are barbarians and are slaves by nature and that they have no qualities that entitle them to be free men, and Plato said all barbarians are enemies by nature and it is proper to wage war upon them even to the point of enslaving or extirpating them. While other advisors like Eratosthenes said that people should be divided according to good and bad qualities for example how there are bad Greeks and refined “barbarians” like the Indians and the Arians. But they never keep their philosophies consistent like know Plato might make an exception to people of wisdom like an Egyptian priest. But Alexander called anyone who was of a great society and wished to be his kinship which contradicted some of his teaching, but helped his overall reputation. After the death of Alexander the great, a man named Zeno who is the founder of the Stoic sect brought to life a principle first thought of by Alexander that “all the inhabitants of this world of ours should not live differentiated by the respective rules of justice into separate cities and communities, but that we should consider all men to be of one community and one polity, and that we should have a common life and an