Given Alexander the Great's unmatched military capabilities, it's possible he would have been successful as a ruler. However, ruling demands different skills than conquering, and the strife that followed his death suggests maintaining control of his vast, diverse empire would have been challenging.
If Alexander had lived longer, it's certainly possible that he would have been as successful a ruler as he was a conqueror, but it's also difficult to say for sure. Alexander the Great was a masterful military tactician and struck fear into his enemies, but he also faced mutinies and revolts within his own forces. His short life didn't give him much time to prove his abilities as a long-term ruler, especially given the size and diversity of the territories he'd acquired.
Furthermore, the period following his death saw much strife and contention among his generals and their descendants who tried to seize control of different parts of his empire. This suggests that while Alexander was unmatched in achieving military conquests, maintaining control and harmony among these regions were altogether a different challenge.
However, Alexander demonstrated some political acumen, like adopting Persian customs to consolidate his control over the Persian Empire. But, we must remember that ruling an empire demands constant strategic planning, administrative oversight, and diplomatic relationships, which provide different types of challenges than wartime leadership.
#SPJ2
b. Professional relationships developed during planning translate into better cooperation during emergencies.
c. Public safety agencies can unite to oppose the event.
d. Response agencies can agree on whether or not the event requires the use of an ICS structure
a. True
b. False
Answer:
the answer is false
Explanation:
enlightened one
savior of the Islamic faith
leader of the Zulus User: What African nation remained independent of European rule?
Sudan
Ethiopia
South Africa
Algeria