Offering by Sky
*Kneels before the shrine*
To Alexander the Great, who was truly great I give: four pottery jars filled with wine, three filled with mead, and five loaves of bread two chickens and I give him one cat to wander about the shrine for company. Please accept my offerings as a token of respect and love.
*kisses the floor*
Offering by Greenlee
May your immortal soul find it's natural rest...shining bright as all great ones do.
Blessed Be
Offering by Kalliston
To My Friend, Alexander;
How lucky you are, my lord, to have a friend like Beryl.
Offering by iskander_32
Indeed Alexander was the greatest man ever to walk, Regardless of critics, no man ever achieved more, Alexander was as near to be a god on this earth than anyone else.
I pay homage to Alexander as a christian would jesus. I am not 15, much older and feel I know our lord and king.
Offering by Alexander-Von Tylon
*Kneels before the shrine with sword laying across both arms*
I come before you greatest warrior and leader to pay my respects and hope that there are more men like you on the battle field. You have been a great role model for me as an Mandalorian Commander.
Please accept this sword and this chest of Golden Tokens, and a cup of my blood as a token of my appecation to you as a great leader and warrior.
*Bows to the shrine*
Offering by Hephaistion Amyntoros
*preforms proskynesis*
To you, without whom I'd be nothing...
I offer my heart, for it knows your's and together they beat as one.
My life, it is of little consequence to me without you.
My fidelity, sworn to you before and resworn here.
My soul, so that it can remain entwined with yours as we move forward on the Journey.
These things of little importance,
I offer here, once again, to you.
Offering by Jonathan
To the greatest man who ever lived. I'd gladly give my life for him.
Offering by The greatest Military Commander - Rob
In recorded history of man there has never been a century without a war. Throughout history many great men have led armies. Armies and commanders have fought for many reasons. It is impossible to look at the history of man, without looking at war. A successful army needs to have a great commander. Who then is the greatest commander? They must be someone who has won many battles and is famous even today. They must have experienced the hardship of their soldiers and have knowledge of military tactics and strategy. There is only one commander who has done this and more. Alexander the Great was the greatest military commander because he was wounded eight times and kept fighting while treating his soldiers well, and he had remarkable strategy which gave him a large empire and a perfect battle record.
Many commanders in history have done remarkable things. Names like Julius Caesar, Hannibal, Genghis Khan, Napoleon Bonaparte, Robert E. Lee and Erwin Rommel all could be the greatest commander. Some of them did things Alexander did not like Napoleon who won more battles than
Alexander, but Alexander remains the greatest because he equaled and surpassed their accomplishments. Alexander was the base from which these men judged themselves as Patha Bose, an author on Alexander’s leadership, states “In the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, he [Alexander] was the model for the greatest generals of the era such as Fredrick the Great, Prince Eugene, Napoleon Bonaparte, Horatio Nelson, the duke of Wellington, and… the duke of Marlborough” he goes on to say “Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant attributed their military success to Alexander strategies and tactics.” According to the video War & Civilization, Julius Caesar cried because he could not match Alexander and Napoleon said you could not study war with out looking at Alexander.
Many commanders have put themselves in harms way during a battle. Alexander did this and in doing so got eight wounds. He was wounded by every weapon they had at the time. He was hit by a cleaver, a sword, a catapult, a stone, a dart and an arrow many times (Nicholas 16). According to Cummings, an Alexander biographer, at the siege of Millians Alexander was hit by an arrow and it went into his lungs. It was his last wound, but he survived and it was not what killed him (372). He was also hit by an arrow that went through his leg and broke his fibula as written by Arrian, a Roman govern with access to primary documents about Alexander (200). Alexander was not only wounded by missiles. He was hit by hand held weapons as well. He was hit by a cleaver at the battle of Granicus in 333 and responded by killing the man who hit him (Cummings 129); Alexander was also wounded by a sword.
The wounds Alexander received show two very important things. First, it shows that he was a commander who was involved in the battle. Alexander did not sit back and command the army; he was up front and leading it. Many commanders have remained in the back of the army, but Alexander led from up front. A great commander knows what is happening in every part of the battle and Alexander knew this. Secondly, he shared the experience of his troops. He fought in the heat and the cold. By understanding his soldier’s experiences he understood them. This made Alexander an excellent commander because he could knew his soldiers and could motivate them to fight. He had experienced their hardship and knew how to treat them.
Alexander treated his soldiers better than most commanders have. He shared the spoils of war with them. The conquest of lands like Persia gave up a lot of wealth. This wealth was given to the troops and land was often given to soldiers as well. He treated his soldiers like family, and would talk too many of them. Alexander also gave soldiers time off and let older soldiers go home. He would also hold Olympic style games in many parts of the empire especially after important victories (Arrian 64). He did this to give the soldiers entertainment and to make them happy.
Military commanders must have soldiers to fight wars. Alexander knew how to keep his troops happy. This made him great. He understood that his soldiers did the fighting and won the battles, thus they should get the reward. Many of the great commanders of history have not understood
this and they were often disliked by their troops for this. A sign of greatness is when a commander can feel for and reward the men under him.
Additionally, Alexander was a master of military tactics and strategy. He often faced armies larger than his. For example at Gugamela, Alexander had about 40,000 men up against the approximately 240,000 troops of Darius (Arrian 160). Alexander was outnumbered by 200,000 men, but won the battle.
Alexander was a great commander in battle. His tactics won him many victories. He was a bold commander and knew how to take risks like at Gugamela where he charged with his cavalry into the middle of the Persian line to attack Darius. He did this so that he could take the King and
force his enemy to retreat. He did not get the king, but won the battle (Arrian 169). This was a bold plan because his flanks were about to be overran and this would have cost him the victory. In battle Alexander also knew how to see weakness in his enemy. At Granicus, Alexander had seen the Persian commander place his cavalry in the wrong position and Alexander took advantage of this and won the battle (Cummings 127). Here again this shows Alexander's great tactical skill.
Plus Alexander had great skill in Sieges. At the siege of Tyre he created a land bridge from the main land to an island while protecting the bridge from the Persian navy with towers (Arrian 133). He built all of this to take one city. In the siege of Millian Alexander risked his own life to take the city (Cummings 372). Alexander fought many other sieges and won with bravery and creativity.
Alexander was also a master at logistics. He took his army deep into enemy lands, but always found ways to supply it. As War & Civilization states, he never used animals to pull supplies because they ate more than they could carry. He always tried to remain close to water so a navy could supply his army and when he moved away he had supplies carried by the troops or gave money to the local people to supply his army. The logistical skills of Alexander made sure nothing went to waste and that they were well supplied.
Alexander was the greatest military commander because he was smart in battle and great with supplies. His army was often outnumbered, but he was a bold commander and won because of it. Unlike other commanders who have been outnumbered and lost, Alexander did not. The distinguished ability of Alexander in battle was also shown in sieges. Many great commanders have lost because their strategy for sieges did not work, but not Alexander his worked. He was also great because he always had supplies for his army. Even without trucks, trains, or airplanes he kept his
army well supplied.
Alexander's tactics and strategy gave him the largest empire conquered by one man. He beat everyone he faced. Alexander's empire brought together most of the known world. The world was not the same when he was done.
This empire was made up of land from Egypt. He also conquered Persia which was the largest and strongest empire the world had ever seen. It would have included all of today's Middle East as well as Turkey. Alexander moved to India and took large parts of land there. He even conquered land in Afghanistan. These lands were filled with countless people and many war like tribes. He conquered all this by himself. In other words, unlike the Roman or British empires which were larger, but were
conquered by many rulers Alexander conquered his empire under his reign. John Keegan, one of the most respected military historians of this century, put the conquests of Alexander in terms easier to understand:Imagine a Highland Napoleon. Imagine a Bonny Prince Charlie with European ambitions who, having won back Scotland from King George II, sets off at the head of his clans not just to conquer England- a mere preliminary- but to cross the Channel, to meet and beat the French army on the River Somme, then journey south into Spain to besiege and subdue its principal fortresses, return north to challenge the Holy Roman Emperor, twice confront and defeat him at the head of his own forces, seize his crown, burn his capital, bury his corpse and finally depart eastward to cross swords with the Tsar of Russia or the Sultan of Turkey. Imagine all this done compressed into, say, 1745-56, between the princeling's twenty-second and thirty-third birthdays.
(13)
His empire and conquests were never matched. He led his kinsman to new places and took a small army very far. He was also very young to have conquered so much. Once again demonstrating his greatness.
The empire that Alexander built shows that he was a high-quantity commander. He beat many hard foes and did it over and over again. He built the empire by himself. Many great commanders have tried to build empires, but have failed. His ability to build a gigantic empire in a military fashion shows what type of commander Alexander was. He also kept this empire together by his military ability. He placed commanders and soldiers to hold the land he took. Many commanders have conquered land, but did not hold on to it. Alexander built and held on to an empire like no other commander in history.
In building a large empire, Alexander never lost a military encounter. He fought many battles and sieges and never lost. In battles like Gugamela and Issus he beat the superior forces of Persia; he won many small battles in India as well. Even after years of war and being miles away from home Alexander and his army kept on winning.
Alexander was not only undefeated in battle, but in sieges as well. He always won sieges whether they were long and hard fought like at Tyre or short like at Millian. He was also wise in his choices for sieges. One time he decided not to siege a small town in the mountains in India because it was too costly (Eadie 1998). Alexander's skill and ability to see how sieges would go made him very hard to beat.
The fact that Alexander never lost a battle shows what type of commander he was. Even the great commanders of history lost. Unlike many commanders Alexander won in every type of environment. From the marshes of the Nile delta to the deserts of Iraq to the Mountains and jungles of India Alexander fought. No commander has ever been so successful in such a variety of conditions. Alexander also faced every possible type of war equipment and strategy. He fought chariots to camels to elephants and from swords to spears to arrows to rocks; every the time Alexander emerging victorious. All the different conditions Alexander faced and he never lost, this shows that he was the greatest military commander. Alexander the Great was the greatest military commander because he was wounded eight times and also knew his soldiers well and he had remarkable strategy which produced a large empire and a battle record in which he never tasted defeat. The wounds that Alexander got show his ability to lead his army in the heat of battle and to share the pain of war with his soldiers. His soldiers loved him for this and the rewards that Alexander gave them helped him build a strong army. The army Alexander created was led skillfully in battles and sieges and he showed tactics and strategy that were incredible. This should be enough to show that he is the greatest, but there is more. His empire was huge and he ruled it with his military leadership. In conquering this empire he never lost a battle or siege. The accomplishments of Alexander are huge. He is the greatest military commander of all time. He beats all other commanders who have fought, killed and died in war. Much of what the world is today is due to war, thus the study of military leadership is key to understanding the present world environment.
Work Citied
Arrian. The Campaigns of Alexander. London: Penguin, 1971.
Bose, Partha. Alexander the Great’s: Art of Strategy. Toronto: Gotham,
2003.
Cummings, Lewis, V. Alexander the Great. New York: Grove, 1968.
Hobbes, Nicholas. Essential Militaria. Toronto: McArthur, 2003.
Keegan, John. The Mask of Command. London: Pimlico, 1999.
War & Civilization: First Blood. B. Eadine. Videocassette. TLC Video,
1998.
