This week I read On Alexander from Plutarch because I thought it would be interesting to read Plutarch's account of Alexander the Great. What stood out to be was the almost mythical story of alexander just taming his horse so easily that his father cried knowing that his son was destined for greatness. Plutarch is trying to reinforce with that tale that Alexander was a man who was fated to achieve what he did, it was his destiny. It shows that everyone worshipped and looked up to Alexander, that he was the warrior king that people were waiting for, he was more a god than a man, it supports the precedent that Alexander was a leader everyone liked. What I would like to learn more about is if there are any surviving slanders of Alexander, all the sources I've seen have been positive.

I picked The Ideal State because I wanted to read and understand more about the human being and the virtue of the ideal state, which I believe is in this reading. One read that jumped out to me was how Socrates saw the human mind and things around him, and how he taught and made his students think about the good and the bad. The author probably wanted us to be more conscious of our state of life and how things happen to us. Aristotle wanted us to be well in this world to be good and be happy without harming our brotherhood. This document contradicts our other reading because there was so much abuse in the government system ruled by the oligarchy telling people what they should or, to do. In our readings, there were so many outrageous injustices to citizens where they oppressed the less fortunate folks. I want to find out and learn more about Greek culture, mythology, history, etc. 

I chose the reading " The ideal State/Aristotle" because of curiosity to what he would deem would be necessary for an ideal state and what kind of people should be in such a state. When it comes to the topic of Aristotle associated certain behaviors and characteristics that defined a group of people thus would justify any mistreated or oppression of said group. In the ideal state he believes in what would he do with such people who exhibit unsavory characteristics? I am also curious to role of women in his ideal state since he mentions family. However, does it mean that women in his ideal state are solely meant for procreation and that role should be enough to give them purpose. I found to be the most interesting part of the passage was on what makes government character. the reading states, " the citizen should be molded to suit the form of government under which he lives. For each government has a peculiar character which originally formed and which continues to preserve it. The character of democracy creates democracy, and the character of oligarchy creates oligarchy; and always the better the character, the better the government." Aristotle is championing the education of the youth and disapproving of the concept of individuality. The reading also states, " when everyone looks after his own children separately, and gives them separate instruction of the sort which he thinks best; the training in things which are of common interest should be the same for all. Neither must we suppose that anyone of the citizens belongs to himself, for they all belong to the State, and are each of them a part of the State, and the care of each part is inseparable from the care of the whole." Aristotle is championing community in regards to the state. Aristotle ideal state focuses heavily on the education and rearing of the youth and how important it is for the parents to bear them so that they be at their best use to the states. Children born defective are useless to the state. The author is clearly showing the dystopian world of Aristotle and how it will go about. The author also goes to show how this dystopian state would work and it actually has real-life implications and not something completely unrealistic. I wonder what was Aristotle motivation behind his ideal state and what made him think about such a concept?

The reading I picked this week was On Alexander by Plutarch. The reason I chose this reading, besides making it my presentation, is because Alexander's life does not stop to fascinate. This was evident during class lecture. The passage that jumped out was “Seek another kingdom, my son, that may be worthy of thy abilities; for Macedonia is too small for thee…” These words by his father, Phillip seems like an omen to the young Alexander's endeavors. Alexander was destined to continue what his father started and make it greater. Plutarch seems very biased on his portrayal of Alexander. He seems to want to convince readers that Alexander was not short of grit and ambition and basically gives him many virtues in an almost romanticized way.

The reading I picked for this week was, On Alexander by Plutarch. I found this reading interesting because it highlights the key moments of Alexander the great. One detailed that stood out to me was when alexander mastered the horse Bucephalus, by noticing that the horse was just scared of its own shadow when others thought it was uncontrollable. I think what the author was trying to show Alexander's intelligence, courage, and leadership by thinking outside the box and noticing what others didn’t. In my opinion this document shows that in this time bravery, intelligence, and leadership was valued. They expected their rulers to be great and liked to see them as hero's. This document supports our previous readings as it shows how their rulers were expected to be intelligent, strong and wise. Alexander was what it meant to be great and he earned his respect by his achievements. I’d like to learn more about Alexander’s relationship with Aristotle and how his education helped succeed. 

The reading I chose to pick was the death of Alexander by Plutarch. The particular detail that jumped out at me as I read through it was the part where the rumor of who Alexander is said to put in charge after his death. What I think the author was trying to communicate is addressing the rumors and speculations in regards to Alexander’s untimely death. It happened so suddenly and there was not an exact root to the cause of what caused him to die so suddenly. What people can expect and assume was the possibilities of what led to it in accounts to what he last did before meeting his death.  What I think this document from the time and place it comes from is about the last moments of Alexander’s life and also given recognition all that has accomplished in just 12 years in power which was quite remarkable and impressive.  

The reading that I chose to focus on this week is Arrian's Speech of Alexander the Great, the reason I chose this reading is to see what words or speeches Alexander the Great had that made people adore him. Off the bat, it is clear why many followed Alexander in his conquest and it was merely because his speeches and words would give off immense motivation and collaboration. As one reads the text, one sees that Alexander's pride is set to the side, and he asserts that he AND everyone in his army were the reason they conquered the lands they did. In the second paragraph, Alexander states "The results of your efforts hitherto, or about myself as your commander, there is no more to say. But let me remind you: through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont.." As cited in this quote, Alexander addresses the crowd and speaks highly of them, saying that the victories are all because of the armies' courage and endurance. I'm certain this is why Alexander was praised highly as the Great especially when he mentions that he is their commander instead of putting himself on a pedestal like a king or tyrant would. However, I wonder if this was how Alexander genuinely felt toward his people or whether he was just good at persuading a crowd. The text also made me wonder whether if there were to be a newfound commander or leader who held the same speech patterns as Alexander, would people in our modern-day society easily follow them. Or are our society and people too liberal that we aren't prone to follow anyone anymore?

The reading that I picked was ‘The Ideal State’ by Aristotle. The reason that this reading interested me is because it had some details about when men and women should begin making families, and when it is considered too late. The reasoning behind the statements caught my attention. The detail that jumped out to me as I read through the passage was the fact that man is at the peak of their intelligence at the age of 50. Four to five years after this age they should cease to start making families. I believe the author was trying to communicate that before and after a certain age the offspring produced by man and women are weak and not well developed. This document is telling us that during this time and place it was important to develop strong men and women to become members of society. This contributes to the ideal state that Aristotle is writing about. This reading by Aristotle seems to support the many other philosophical writings by Aristotle that make the reader think. I would like to find out more about how Aristotle used science to further explain philosophical concepts in history.

I picked Plutarch’s Death of Alexander because I was curious to read his account of the king’s death. Plutarch notes the various bad omens that Alexander received as he was approaching Babylon, the place where he would soon meet his demise. One of the most colorful of these anecdotes occurred after Alexander and some of his friends had just finished playing ball and went to put their clothes back on. When they walked into the throne room, to their surprise, they found a stranger dressed in the royal diadem and robes sitting on Alexander’s throne – seemingly in a daze. When he came to his senses, the man said he was imprisoned due to some charge brought against him, but the god Serapis had freed him and instructed him to put on the robe and diadem and sit on the royal throne. Whether it happened or not, the meaning of the anecdote is clear, a sign of the imminent death, or potential deposing, of Alexander himself. In terms of the big picture, this passage shows us the way the ancients retroactively came up with bad omens to precede major ill-fated events, that acted as a sort narrative device in modern terms. I would like to find out if this omen is specific to Alexander's story, or whether it’s a cliché.

This was kind of weak in my opinion. I did not walk away from it feeling like I learned that much more or that many new things from this piece. It is interesting though, Plutarch gives the sense that there was some sort of ill omen hanging over the head of Alexander and/or the city of Babylon. Plutarch in the very beginning gives a sense that perhaps a plague of some sort may be lingering inside of the city based on his description of seeing the ravens at the outside walls upon Alexander's arrival. As for the setting I almost get the feeling the World is all used up, Alexander is used up, his troops are all used up and they must depart from one another by neccessity. I cannot really explain how this is specfically conveyed it is just the general mood of the document.