Does Alexander Deserve The Title The Great?

After Alexander the great died, he was given the title "the great" due to his success in conquering Europe. People thought he made many great to change Europe. Was that really the reason he was given the title the great? What goals do you have to achieve in order you can receive the tile of "the great"? Someone great should be a leader that contributed to the society greatly and made a significant achievement to change the world and make the way we live today better. He should be someone who is respected by others and also pays respect to others. One should be also kind hearted. Alexander did succeed those goals therefore, should not receive the title "the great".

What makes Alexander great? He had conquered all the civilizations that were
known back then which were also known as the whole world back then. He had great military tactics and a brilliant general. So what makes him deserve the title "the great"? What did he do to make this world better? He may have changed the world significantly, but does it really mean he made it better? When he conquers other countries, is he really doing other countries a favor? If someone comes along today and tries to take over the entire globe, that person will be most hated by everyone. No one wants to be attacked or invaded. That is the reason countries back then defend themselves with the army and still today. After being invaded, countries will after to adapt to a new culture, the culture Alexander wants the entire kingdom to adopt. Alexander didn't' respect the culture existed before the invasion. He forced people to adopt his Hellenistic culture which was a fair bit of different cultures, but many crucial parts would be still missing from the Hellenistic culture to satisfy the people. The Persians didn't accept him as their new leader and his attempt to change that was not very successful. Alexander captured rebels instead of accommodating was the rebels wanted. He executed governors who had abused authority in his absence. He was definitely not too kind of a man if you were not acquainted with him. A good leader should never use the jail or execute anyone to solve their problems. Many hated and poor leaders or dictators did the same to get their problems out of the way. During invasions, he killed massive amounts of people that only wanted to defend their land and their country. Someone that is successful in killing a large amount of people in order to gain control of a piece of land is not someone that made a significant achievement.
An example of an achievement will be establishing an empire and find the best way to improve it which was what Herod the great did to earn his title. He initiated construction at Jerusalem, Jericho, and Caesarea of theaters, amphitheaters, and hippodromes . Alexander's actions may have made significant changes to the world back then and today, but his goals were not too different from Hitler's which was to conquer the world. Hitler today was not respected by anyone and definitely not today. Although he killed many people in a much more cruel way than Alexander, but their purpose was similar, to dominate land. It is not worth the lives he had killed. It was not only the army of who he was fighting against that was killed and injured, more than half of Alexander's army died at the journey through the desert of Gedrosia. No one considers a murderer "great". Alexander sympathizes for those people that he killed? It does not mention anywhere that Alexander did anything in memory those people and not even his own people that were killed. Many people say it was because of him uniting all those cities that initiated development in Europe. It is true that after the unification, economical and cultural development did boast. Alexander should
not get full credit for that though. He was dead after the unification of the kingdom and did not ever get a change to rule the kingdom. His half-brother, Philip III Arrhidaeus should get credit for it since he is the ruler after Alexander's death . Alexander did not receive his title while he was alive. Alexander the great received his title long after he was dead. The people who gave him the title did not know him while he was alive. Those people have very little idea of what kind of a person Alexander was. This title was given to him because the historians or other people that found out about him after his death admired and respected him for the miracles he done. That does not mean he was well respected by many people when he was alive.

Alexander the great was not the ideal ruler. He was in fact a good general, and was brilliant in commanding his troops successfully in defeating his enemies. However, the title "the great" does not suite him. What he did influenced the world, but he did not do anything to change it. He did many cruel things that what made him absolutely sickening to many people back at his time and definitely today. He did not respect the cultures of the countries he had conquered. Alexander used military actions to capture rebels to solve his problems. A good leader should never solve a situation by capturing rebels instead of accommodating their needs. He executed people that made mistakes or he was not in favor of. These were all actions similar of a typical and insane dictator that wants to take over the world. Giving Alexander the title "the great" was not only a mistake. He should be grouped along with the other insane dictators that also existed.