The Instigator
RomanLegionary
Pro (for)
The Contender
Ariek
Con (against)

Alexander the Great is Overrated

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Ariek has forfeited round #1.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2018 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 612 times Debate No: 109901
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

RomanLegionary

Pro

Alexander the Great began his career upon his father, Philip the Great, being assassinated. After a few years of reducing unrest, he began his invasion of Persia, something his father had wanted to do. As soon as the Persians found out about this, Memnon suggested that they use the scorched earth tactic, as he was the only Persian competent enough to understand the threat that Persia was going to face. This brings me to my first point, the Persian leadership was not competent at the time. If the Persians had listened to Memnon and were not too prideful to understand when an army has a good chance against theirs, they would have successfully stopped the invasion of Alexander.

During the conquest, Alexander made constant blunders. In every battle he put himself in immediate danger and even refused to do scouting before the battle of the Persian gate, resulting in him losing lots of soldiers. I would also like to point out that the poor leadership wasn't the only issue with the Persians, the majority of their army were poorly equipped slaves with poor morale.

After the conquest of Persia, his pride was shown to be a weakness after his overall defeat in India. I will be talking about some of the mistakes he made during his campaign in India. First of all, as soon as he was not up against the Persian king, his campaign was an overall failure. Second of all, due to his riskiness during battle, he was shot by an archer and died from the poisoning he got from that a bit later. Lastly, after his failure, he didn't try to return home while keeping as many soldiers as possible considering his poor supply; he walked through a desert and lost a lot of his soldiers just to prove he was better than a commander who lost his army in that desert.

Good luck
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by KostasT.1526 2 years ago
KostasT.1526
@RomanLegionary
I guess that makes things right. Anyway, I am interested in the debate.
Posted by RomanLegionary 2 years ago
RomanLegionary
@Kostas

Sorry for the confusion. http://articles.latimes.com...

Because I wasn't able to find websites supporting what I heard on youtube videos about Alexander when I looked it up, I am guessing I misinterpreted the info in articles such as the above. I apologize for wasting your time and not double checking my facts on Google before posting this debate.

By the way, due to Alexander's soldiers being in poor supply, he had to leave India, which is.what I meant. It is true though that if Alexander got less lucky in that battle, he would have been killed.
Posted by KostasT.1526 2 years ago
KostasT.1526
@RomanLegionary
I am indeed interested in the sources that suggest Alexander having been hit and poisoned by an archer during battle. Truth is, I have not encountered this viewpoint before.
As for the battle in India, perhaps it is my misunderstanding of your following statement: "his pride was shown to be a weakness after his overall defeat in India". If him losing the battle was not what you intended to point out, I will have to say that your claim cited above is really confusing.
Posted by RomanLegionary 2 years ago
RomanLegionary
Kostas

I have heard from numerous sources (tell me if you would like to see them) that Alexander did die because of the arrow. I know as well that he Didn't lose the battle. Thank you for the feedback though, I will try to look over such things in future arguments.
Posted by KostasT.1526 2 years ago
KostasT.1526
First of all, I would like to point out that neither did Alexander die of poisoning due to him having been hit by an archer, nor did he lose the battle in India.
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
I find some of your arguments abstract, and I would appreciate an elaboration. Despite the above, I am intrigued.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.