About 330 BC ago, the Roman Empire began and died out around 1453 AD. It lasted about seven years before the death of Alexandre the Great. “The popularity of the legend of Alexander as the narrative of the height of achievement for a masculine warrior-hero served as one of his most enduring and powerful legacies to later ages” (Martin, Ancient Greece, 252). Alexandre had so many success which the Romans took noticed of and used it to conspiracy their expansion. Although many of the sources of Rome’s expansion was first presented as a sage of premediated wars of conquest (Ancient Rome, 67), when it comes to military, the Romans glean many of their military scheme from Alexander the Great. Although they had some influential ideas from Alexandre …show more content…
The navy aspect of the Roman’s military was considered to be the most powerful, inspiring and admiration branch of their military. The Romans navy watched over the Mediterranean Sea to prevent the opponents that would attack the Roman’s ships. They were able to use their navy to transport and supply their troops to other part of the Mediterranean Empire. “The long-term consequences of Alexander’s expedition simultaneously brought the Greek and Near Eastern worlds into more direct contact than ever before” (Martin, Ancient Greece, 223). Alexandre conquest was able to spread out through the Mediterranean region, and he was able to get sheer control of the sea and its city. “His goal then became to lead a united Macedonian and Greek army in his quest to defeat the Persian Empire” (Martin, Ancient Greece, 242). He siege their ports and was able to eliminate all trades and supplies. Alexander was a man who was very confident in what he did. He always believed in himself and that was one way he stood out from the Romans. “What,” the advisor asked, “do you have left for yourself?” “My hopes,” Alexander replied (Martin, Ancient Greece, 245). Those hopes helped built a heroic image of himself not only as a warrior but as also helped gave him the title, “The …show more content…
Alex had interest of subjects that was relevant to politics, and history (Martin, Ancient Greece, 236). The contrast is that the Roman Empire had more of the constituency. “Rome’s expansion also meant that many of Italy’s small farmers” (Ancient Rome, 67), Romans integrated Italy behind it to expand their Empire so they had a lot more people siding with them, besides that, the Romans were willing to fight for their empire and conserve it. As Martin stated, “Many historians use the label “imperialism” to characterize Rome’s expansion of its power through war” (Ancient Rome, 65). The Roman Empire was not built overnight, it was built slowly and substance people were assimilate into it over a period of time. In contrast to that, Alexander’s empire was built very quickly because he was quick to go after something he believed in when he saw it (Martin, Ancient Greece, 247). There were few individuals that shared his success, and that died with him; his inheritors divided the empire among themselves after the death of Alexander the