“The Greats”…

Day Twenty-Five

1// Read Plutarch’s Life of Alexander the Great, Parts One and Two — Compare and contrast Alexander to Cyrus, especially in terms of their character. What stories of Alexander, or themes of his early life, remind you of stories we have read of Cyrus?

• Alexander and Cyrus have some similar qualities, but show them in different ways.
• Cyrus is known a benevolent leader with a reputation for establishing unity. Many people respect and admire Cyrus for these reasons and thus he has a supportive following. He learned to be courteous, kind, and loyal. In Xenophon’s account, Cyrus mentions… “When I became rich, I realized that no kindness between man and man comes more naturally than sharing food and drink, especially food and drink of the ambrosial excellence that I could now provide. Accordingly, I arranged that my table be spread everyday for many invitees, all of whom would dine on the same excellent food as myself. After my guests and I were finished, I would send out any extra food to my absent friends, in token of my esteem.” Also… “There is a deep–and usually frustrated–desire in the heart of everyone to act with benevolence rather than selfishness, and one fine instance of generosity can inspire dozens more. Thus I established a stately court where all my friends showed respect to each other and cultivated courtesy until it bloomed into perfect harmony.” These excerpts show Cyrus’ nature as a generous and thoughtful human being. He wanted to be a source of inspiration for good deeds toward humanity.
• Alexander shows strength as a captivating and genuine person. People were drawn to Alexander for these qualities and respected him beyond being Philip’s son. In Plutarch’s account of Alexander he describes an instance… “He once entertained the envoys from the Persian king who came during Philip’s absence, and associated with them freely. He won upon them by his friendliness, and by asking no childish or trivial questions, but by enquiring about the length of the roads and the character of the journey into the interior, about the king himself, what sort of a warrior he was, and what the prowess and might of the Persians. The envoys were therefore astonished and regarded the much-talked‑of ability of Philip as nothing compared with his son’s eager disposition to do great things.” There is an authentic and honest nature exposed by Alexander in these moments.
• Both leaders show an original and dependable nature in their dispositional traits. They were effective in drawing people toward them and were able to be great leaders because they were first true to themselves. Their qualities are admirable and aided in developing their comrades and associates.

Day Twenty-Six

1// Read Plutarch’s Life of Alexander the Great, Parts Three through Seven — Select three stories from the Life of Alexander that seem especially implausible. How do you think these stories got started and were passed down to Plutarch four hundred years later?

#1 | Concerns of Alexander’s Conception and Birth

Details about the relationship between Philip and Olympias seem questionable. There are several takes about the stability of their relationship and visions of what Alexander would come to be after birth. It seems realistic that Olympias and Philip would both dream about their son in concepts of being strong, bold, and courageous. The story gets muddy when Plutarch presents stories of how Olympias was involved with “spells and enchantments.” He describes her in one account as a woman addicted to “superstitious ceremonies, who affected these divine possessions more zealously than other women, and carried out these divine inspirations in wilder fashion, used to provide the revelling companies with great tame serpents, which would often lift their heads from out the ivy and the mystic winnowing-baskets, or coil themselves about the wands and garlands of the women, thus terrifying the men.” It seems random that these stories were crafted. The only real background we have of Olympias is that she is an orphan, and that’s not any peculiar detail that would suggest she practices any superstitious ceremonies. As a matter of fact, the advice she gave to Alexander on his expedition seems standard for any mother to her son. Olympias simply urges he have “purposes worthy of his birth.” None of the information about Olympias or her relationship with Alexander encourage the validity of the tales of superstition and serpents.

#2 | The Wild Horse

Since when does Alexander know how to console and train horses? This story details a wild horse that was to be sold to Philip but none of his attendants could tame him. Suddenly Alexander emerges to influence and charm the horse, calming him and ultimately riding him for a short period. “Then, with a little pressure of the reins on the bit, and without striking him or tearing his mouth, he held him in hand; but when he saw that the horse was rid of the fear that had beset him, and was impatient for the course, he gave him his head, and at last urged him on with sterner tone and thrust of foot. Philip and his company were speechless…” I won’t assume that Alexander never learned to ride horses, but that doesn’t make him a horse whisperer. Usually if a horse is displaying adverse behavior it has to do with an injury, or some irritation from his tack or girth, or possibly some forthcoming storm or other loud noise. I just doubt slightly that the horse had a bad attitude, and was calmed just because he was touched by Alexander the great. Stories like this help to complete ideas about the strength and wisdom of Alexander. It is a fairly easy story to tell, so it may have just been passed down simply to embellish Alex’s talents and skills. Everyone wants to believe in the qualities of a great leader and additions of little miracles here and there never hurt.

#3 | Coming for Aristotle

Since Philip had paid Aristotle to be Alexander’s teacher, it seemed a little out of the ordinary that Alexander would write Aristotle about the work that was published. Alexander learned many things from Aristotle, not only his “ethical and political doctrines, but also those secret and more profound teachings which philosophers designate by the special terms “acroamatic” and “epoptic,” and do not impart to many.” Seeing that Alexander learned his greatest lessons from Aristotle, it seems implausible that he would be upset about Aristotle publishing work regarding the doctrine of his mastery. Plutarch describes this situation as a moment for Alexander to claim his status as a leader and a scholar, but to challenge his own teacher seems out of character for Alexander being so respectable. Stories like this make sense to promote because a leader should be bold and audacious. The legacy of Alexander should be rendered in instances like this where he challenges important authority, and they respond without retaliation. These stories resonate with fans of leaders because it shows they aren’t afraid and know their strengths and weaknesses.

2// The posting for the dean was removed…

However I could imagine that Alexander would make a good dean because of his skills leading in Asia. If I had to be prepared to be dean of a college, I would try to get experience motivating large groups of people and style flexing for different personalities. Also I would need to know the ins and outs of running a university soundly and making effective decisions for the staff and student body.