Alexander is considered one of the most important men in Western history. However, as historians we must ask ourselves, is Alexander truly Greek, or is his reign more like that of the imperial rule of the Near East? As a monarch, Alexander's character fits best within the context of imperial domination of the Near East. This is evident because: Alexander had complete control over his empire, he was often portrayed as more than a man, and he received and retained his position of power through his birthright. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay One of the ways in which Alexander more closely reflects Middle Eastern politics is the fact that he was something of an authoritarian. For example, in the passage it says "he often responded haughtily and angrily to his generals." (Plutarch 2) This shows that despite the fact that his generals did not always agree with him, Alexander was still able to continue his actions as planned. This is very different from Greek leaders who were often subject to scrutiny and opposition from other statesmen who did not agree with their plans. Another reason why Alexander is more closely associated with the domination of the Near East is that he was often portrayed as more than a man. . An example of this is when he states "it was no wonder that the temple of Artemis was burned, since the goddess was busy bringing Alexander into the world." (Plutarch 1) This is an example of how even at birth; Alexander was considered something special and even superhuman. Another example of Alexander's personality is that many statues were created in his likeness during and after his reign. (Plutarch 1) This not only demonstrates the great influence of Alexander, but it is also a big step from the Greeks who refused to create statues in homage to people because they felt it was an affront to the gods . The final example of how Alexander was seen as more than a man is how he is described as "never frail or ill." (Plutarch 1) All of these examples from the passage create the character of Alexander as someone who was superior to everyone else. This is a huge contradiction to the Greek idea of ​​the citizen, according to which all citizens are founded on the basis of equality. However, Persia and other Near Eastern cultures were more generally authoritative, such as the reign of Alexander. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay The final way in which Alexander relates more closely to the Middle East than to According to the Greeks, he obtained his position of power through his birthright and was able to maintain it throughout his life. Alexander was a monarch who gained his kingship because his father Philip II was king before him. (Plutarch 1) For the most part, the Greeks were strongly opposed to any type of monarch who would threaten their freedoms as citizens. The next example is that Alexander was able to maintain his position throughout his life. In contrast, all forms of Greek civil servants were subject to elections after a certain time. They would have scoffed at the idea of ​​a ruler for life. This is how Alexander's ascension by birthright distinguished him from the Greeks. These are the three ways in which Alexander's example is more like the Near Eastern example than the Greek example..