Alexander, the King of Macedonia and conqueror of the Persian Empire (356–323 BC ) has fascinated historians, novelists and film makers, who spent their creativity, time and money to project him as a great hero. Why have historians invariably created a great image of a conqueror and placed him on a high pedestal?

Sometimes a conqueror becomes a hero because of the nation’s quest for an idol to worship. On the other hand, racism can make a hero out of an invader who defeats or crushes inferior races. At times religion idealises a victor who fought for the glory of his faith.

In the same way perhaps, Alexander qualifies for his historic fame and glory. It depends on the various interpretations of historians who wish to create an infallible image and make him a great hero. For the Greeks, he is a national hero. The racist and cosmopolitan who believe in a multicultural and multi-religious society regard him as racially superior.

Historians writing about the greatness of conquerors attribute to them diverse qualities. The conqueror would be like a military general, perfect in the art of warfare, innovative in tactic and victorious in wars with his faultless strategy. They do not tire of praising his bravery, boldness and courage displayed in the battlefield as a skilful warrior. However, there is no condemnation of killing, bloodshed and its impact on the life of those families who lost their loved ones, belongings and homes. Neither is there disapproval of the slaughter of civilians, enslavement of women and children, burning of cities, and the plundering and looting of war booty. There is no comment on how the title of ‘great’ was earned and what price did the common people pay for victories of these conquerors.

Traditional historians regard Alexander as one of the greatest generals, who built a vast empire after achieving military success. The question remains as to why he invaded the Persian Empire? He became a great emperor by conquering and occupying land on which he had no claim. A study of his life and career shows that he was somewhat deluded about his greatness, and was perhaps an alcoholic and a megalomaniac. He traced his ancestry to Achilles and Hercules, the Greek heroes, based on which he claimed divinity.

After his conquest of Egypt, he assumed the title of pharaoh, who was regarded no less than a god by the Egyptians. He was determined to model his life on that of the glorious Achilles. It is said that while marching towards Persia to fight a battle, Alexander paid homage to Achilles by visiting his tomb in Troy and running up to it to lay a wreath. When the Persians were defeated, he occupied the cities and burned Persepolis, imitating the Greeks burning the city of Troy.

Alexander’s alcoholic and megalomaniac nature became evident when he killed his childhood friend Cleitus in a drunken brawl.

More From This Section

The rise and fall of the communist party of Pakistan

From Leninism to Entryism to socialist sectarianism — an impactful outline of the CPP

Tête-à-tête: Saying ‘no’ to nay-sayers

“The thing about being successful is that you need to take it in your stride,” says Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy.

Magic Lantern: The mysteries of the pulse and a doomed love

The evil hakim, who plumbed the mysteries of the heart with the changing pulse, cured her.

Past present: Signs for those who observe

The decline and fall of the Mughal Empire mirrors the weakening of the Pakistani state.


Comments are closed.

Comments (31)

Rajeev Nidumolu
September 1, 2013 12:19 pm

Alexander was a conquerer just like Chengiz Khan . But Mongols under him conquered and ruled far more territory than Alexander. No one calls Chengiz Khan the great. The reason is that the history has been written by Europeans with Eurocentric views . The intellectual prejudice originates from historical interpretation that Greek and Roman civilization were precursors for western dominance

BISWAJIT ROY
September 1, 2013 12:23 pm

And add to his greatness Alexander was given a mortal blow by the Indian frontier king Purus which eventually taken toll on his life but thanks to western media Alexander made an Unbeatable conqueror. Genghis Khan would qualify for the true title of undefeated conqueror in true and unbiased sense.

Logic
September 1, 2013 1:13 pm

Does the same logic hold for Muslim conquers in india

raw is war
September 1, 2013 2:11 pm

unlike many barbaric leaders, he was not a arsonist. He never killed wantonly anybody. In fact we can learn a lot of things from his leadership style. They can be applied to modern day management- unlike Genghis khan and lots of Islamic invaders.

Tariq
September 1, 2013 3:18 pm

Reflection on the intelligence level of human beings. Petty murderers get death, incarceration or lynching. Engineers of mass bloodshed of humans get titles of 'Great' and Nobel Peace Prizes. Petty thieves go to jail; fantastic thieves get to be rulers of countries.

AbbasToronto
September 1, 2013 3:41 pm

Alexander died of a disease no different from HIV/AIDS at the young age of 33.

He left no trace and no children, befitting his un-productive same sex unions in the great tradition of ancient Greeks.

showz_Up
September 1, 2013 3:57 pm

I think this has more to do with the European centric view of history by (mostly European) historians. Gengis Khan conquered Europe but he is regarded as a barbarian and not "Great" because Europeans were at the receiving end of his brutality.

Dasmir
September 1, 2013 5:12 pm

I thought this was an article about Alexander the conquerer of islamabad!

Dhanus Menon
September 1, 2013 5:34 pm

The same way Pakistanis idolize the invaders from Afghanistan and Arab lands. This the same way how the all Islamic empires spread.

aslam minhas
September 1, 2013 7:35 pm

Olympia, the mother of Alexander had made him believe that he was a descendant of Gods. She also kept snakes in her bed (probably) to keep away her polygamous husband Philip away but also to claim some divinity as snakes were taken as godly. Some say that Alexander's relationship with his mother was more than what it appeared. As was perhaps Nero to her mother. In the Persian battle, Alexander got injured. When he saw the blood, he cried: 'It is not Ichor that the gods bleed with' or words to that effect. He was disappointed to learn about his mortality. Great article that provokes readers.

NDChawla
September 1, 2013 8:56 pm

No purpose is served by putting up such an article.

Tariq K Sami
September 1, 2013 10:09 pm

Alexander's mother his wife and his children were all killed by his Generals soon after his death. Talk about some Life Insurance Plan for your family. How totally clueless and irresponsible.

Raj
September 1, 2013 10:14 pm

I guess the same question can be asked of Mohammed too?

Badar
September 2, 2013 12:17 am

Alexander embarked upon a killing spree due to his demons. Some of them discussed in this article. However, he was no great. There is no solid conclusion by author. What exactly you wanted to discuss?

Shamima
September 2, 2013 1:04 am

Alexander also appears in the Holy Book as ' Zulqarnain', Lord of the East and West who subjugated the people Gog and Magog. I never quite understood the significance of this story. Can somebody enlighten?

SRK
September 2, 2013 2:23 am

@Dhanus Menon: What about Indonesia - the largest Islamic country at present, and Malaysia, when were they invaded and by whom?

SRK
September 2, 2013 2:26 am

@Dasmir: You are misinformed, his real name is Zea-lander.

Agha Ata
September 2, 2013 5:06 am

One needed to be a Diojones to handle Alexander. :)

Akil Akhtar
September 2, 2013 5:17 am

We need to stop using the word great with his name and instead treat him the same way Europeans treat all the conquerors of Europe, with disgust.

Bharat
September 2, 2013 7:55 am

@Dhanus Menon: actually if yoyu read the Iranian expat magazines, the persians actually hate the arabs and dislike the afghans

KASHIF
September 2, 2013 9:32 am

There were even greater Muslim heroes....tell the world about them too.

Fatima Noor
September 2, 2013 9:53 am

A well-thought of article and very beautifully narrated. It's usually boring to read history but this is a well articulated description.

Rajeev Nidumolu
September 2, 2013 10:31 am

@BISWAJIT ROY: Alexander sustained his mortal wounds in battle of Multan in Punjab

Dahir
September 2, 2013 11:14 pm

Very true.there is nothing great in depopulating entire cities.many cities in Sindh which did not submit to muhammad bin Qasim were similarly treated;men bearing arms were killed and their families enslaved including that of king dahir.large scale destruction of places of worship in India was the reason Islamisation of the subcontinent remained incomplete but many of these people like ghori and ghazni fill people with pride in Pakistan and Afghanistan.as amitabh bachchan sings in a Hindi film, wo sikandar Kay tha jisne Julm se jeeta jahan pyar se jeete Dillon ko wo jhukade asman

Tariq
September 3, 2013 12:26 pm

Let us make a vow to stop referring to any and all people using such terms as, 'the great', 'the magnificient', 'the conquerer', 'the wise' etc. And while we are at it, let us also stop using the prefixes: 'highness', 'majesty', 'honourable', 'venerable' etc. No matter what the title or status of a person, their excrement smells as bad or worse than that of the average fellow in the sreet.

bobi
September 3, 2013 1:29 pm

@Badar: you are right the writer seems unclear himself like most of todays pseudo intelectuals, or this is a pointer to what will follow......

dada
September 3, 2013 6:02 pm

Why are Muslim BA (Hon.) and Madarassa graduates do not talk about the local heroes such as Raja Puru, Prithwiraaj Chauhan, Guru Govind Singh Ji, Banda Bahaddur, Shivaji, the great? Why so much mumbo-jumbo about Alexander , the Greek. We can understand enslaved ex Pagans of Europe whose real history was wiped out by barbaric Romans and who were fed only stories of their oppressors (romans) talking about Alexander, Ceaser etc, but why desi Muslims?

Alexander did not give the roots of most of ino-European words, they are Sanskrit roots. Alexander did not formalized the grammar of Indo-European languages, it was sage Panini who formalized Sanskrit grammar. Shake Shalivahan reached beyond Moscow driving out Huns. That is why even Ukranian and Baltics are searching their roots in India. Aryan Invasion theory has been debunked on many grounds but enslaved desis are still holding on it, though their western masters have dropped it in dustbin.

Allexander is just a media myth like Gabbar Singh of Sholey. Good for dialogbazi.

dr vimal raina
September 3, 2013 8:11 pm

History has always categorized rulers who conquered or rampaged from West to East as great emperors and warriors and those who rampaged from East to West as barbarians.

Dahir
September 3, 2013 10:29 pm

@KASHIF: Yes. Timur was one of them.he made mountains of skulls.

Dahir
September 4, 2013 1:01 am

@Rajeev Nidumolu: No.he died in 323 bc in iraq and the said battles in Pakistan were 327 bc let's keep up the standards of discussion

Qalam-o-Dawaat
September 4, 2013 6:49 am

It is much easier to criticize someone after their time has passed. Even easier when the criticism serves no purpose what so ever in bettering the situation of our world today. As they say the time is not of rhetoric anymore but actions that can better the world of tomorrow.

Explore: Indian elections 2014
Explore: Indian elections 2014
How much do you know about Indian Elections?
How much do you know about Indian Elections?
Cartoons
E-PAPER
Front Page