Alexander the “Great”?
Warrior. Madman. Hero. Murder. Visionary. Drunkard. Such are but a few adjectives to describe one of the most highly regarded warriors of Ancient history: Alexander the Great. But is Alexander deserving of the “Greatness” that has been applied to him through posterity? The man conquered the known world, but were his victories truly of his own doing or was he simply a bloodthirsty madman? The man ruled an empire unlike any the world had ever seen or since has been accomplished, but was he a capable administrator or just an incompetent fool?
Your study groups will be assigned a role and develop arguments and questions based on the following perspectives:
⦿ Click Here to read a short comparative summary of the legacy of Alexander the Great.
⦿ Click Here to decide on a list of historical interpretations of Alexander.
⦿ Click here to read a discussion between two great historians who disagree over the legacy of Alexander.
⦿ Your study groups will be assigned the following perspectives, and you will prepare a written argument (this must be typed) to present to the assembly, and you will debate Alexander’s legacy based on the historical record:
• Machiavellians - CON Alexander (not so Great)
• Jacobins - CON Alexander (not so Great)
• Praetorians - CON Alexander (not so Great)
• Stosstruppen - PRO Alexander (totally Great)
• Cavaliers - PRO Alexander (totally Great)
• Conquistadors - PRO Alexander (totally Great)
After you have prepared your arguments, email a typed list of the main arguments that you prepared for your group debate to firstname.lastname@example.org