Lee Jek Ann

English 187

9 September 2014

Comparison and Contrast Essay

Alexander the Great vs Julius Caesar

Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar were one of the

historical figures that brought very much influences to the ancient

civilizations. Their achievements can be compared to the one who

conquered the half of the world, Genghis Khan. One came from the

Ancient Greece; the latter one came from the mighty Ancient Roman

era. In order to understand these two powerful men, we will

compare and contrast their personal backgrounds, the talents, and

motives behind their conquering and their political abilities.

Both of these men came from a strong background. Let

talk about the background of Alexander The Great. During his youth,

he learnt the way of life under the guidance of a famous

philosopher, his name is Aristotle, who was also the student of Plato.

After his predecessor, Philip 2, who was the king of Macedon of

Ancient Greece was assassinated; Alexander succeeded his throne

and became Alexander 3 of Macedon. Alexander got a very solid

foundation from his father as he left him a very strong army and a

lot of strategic Greek areas. For Julius Caesar, he was born from a

family that had noble and patrician roots, for instance, his uncle was

Roman general and statesman called Gaius Marius. He was

educated under the teaching of Marcus Antonius Gnipho, who was

well known for his good usage of both Latin and Roman and his

powerful memory. Julius Caesar also learned about Roman Laws and

public speaking, which later became his huge advantages in the

political arena.

Next, we will discuss their mighty talents. Both of them

were natural born military geniuses. Alexander the Great fought

numerous battles, but he remain undefeated and considered to be

one of the most successful military commanders other than Genghis

Khan and Sun Tzu. For example, Alexander the Great defeated

larger Persian armies in the Battle of Gaugamela. During his Indian

Campaign, he faced a challenge he had not taken before, which is to

defeat elephant armies. Although his army consisted of cavalries

and footmen, he utilized his wisdom to win the battle and eventually

conquered parts of India.

Julius Caesar was a brilliant military strategist too. He was the first

Roman General that defeated an army of barbarians called Gaul and

stepped foot on the land of British during the Gallic Wars. He even

extended the Roman territory to the Asia Minor and Egypt just like

what Alexander did. In addition to that, he defeated Pompeys

armies, which were more fit and larger in amount in the Roman Civil

War.

There must be reasons behind the whole campaign led by

these two men. Obviously, they had the desire to conquer the

whole world. However, what made them differences were their

motives behind their expansion. Remember, Alexander The Great

was taught with the philosophy of Aristotle, thats why he expanded

the Macedon territory so as to introduce a new philosophy, a cultural

diffusion, which he spread the Greek culture to the East. It resulted a

new Hellenistic civilization. At that time, Greek cultural influences

reached its peak in Europe, Asia and Africa. However, Julius Caesar

was not as generous as Alexander the Great did. His hunger for

power drove him to launch so many campaigns in order to gain the

support of the armies, control the military power and also to secure

his political position as a consul. Not just that, he fought a ton load

of wars because he tried to imitate what Alexander did, which was

creating his own empire.

Both of them were super powerful military tacticians, but

in term of political abilities, Julius Caesar was a way better politician

compared to his Greek counterpart. Caesar expanded the Roman

territories so that he could win not just the support of armies, also

the support of people in Rome. Caesar victories in Gallic War

advanced him to the point, which the government of Roman

Republic feared of his growing power. Even his old partner, Pompey

felt threatened by Caesars achievement. Pompey then allied with

Senate of the Rome so that he could eliminate Caesar once and for

all. A civil war erupted. Unfortunately, the war ended with Caesars

victory. From that time, Caesar became a dictator and this lead to

the objection of Senate of Roman Republic. Actually, Caesar already

had the desire to become the emperor of Roman Empire but he was

assassinated later. His legacy was continued by his successor,

Augustus Caesar. Augustus turned Roman Republic into Roman

Empire, fulfilling what Julius could not finish. Alexander the Great

was entirely different from Julius Caesar. Although Alexander was

already a king of Ancient Greek of Macedon in his early year, he

spent most of his time not on securing his empire and the political

arena, but on his military campaign, expanding his territories. After

his death, a series of civil wars broke out in his conquered region as

he did not put much effort to win the politicians heart and he did

not have the strength to ensure a very large empire until thousand

years. After that, his empire was torn apart as the result of internal

conflicts among his next generations and generals.

In conclusion, Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar had

their own strength and weakness. From their stories, we know that

nobody is 100% completely perfect in this world, even for these two

great men. However, their achievements are included in our history

textbook. This gives us the opportunity to learn their past. What we

can do is to absorb their good qualities, forbid the rotten ones so we

will alert ourselves not to do their mistakes in the next future.

Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandera_the_Great

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar

http://www.ducksters.com/history/ancient_rome/julius_caesar.php