Was Alexander The Great a cruel emperor?

That so depends on what is your point of view. To his friends and cohorts – of course not. To his enemies – real or perceived you betcha.

“Cruel” is a difficult word to qualify in reference to Alexander the Great. He was forward-thinking in his attempt to get the different cultures in his empire to mix and learn from each other. He took an Indian (or perhaps some other MIddle-Eastern) bride, so he actually practiced what he preached. But, he was conquering these other nations.

If you go by Oliver Stone’s movie, Alexander’s advisers wanted him to bleed the countries under his rule dry, but he refused. Still, it was a movie, so take that with a grain of salt.

He wasn’t overly brutal, didn’t actively enslave conquered peoples, didn’t massacre more than most generals at least, promoted a wealth of different cultures in his empire, was bi. In most cases, he was a pretty fair ruler, by the standards of his time period, at least.

Please don’t accept movies as factual, if you want to know about history, read something. Movies aren’t factual because Hollyweird thinks the word documentary means BORING

“Cruel” is relative, as others have pointed out. But especially as far as Alexander was concerned, it’s certainly not the first word that comes to mind. He was way ahead of his time, and was the only ruler who treated his conquered enemies as citizens, even forcing his generals to marry Persians (which of course was for political reasons). He managed to combine military might with diplomacy, and annexed the largest possible amount of land with the least possible amount of bloodshed. Which I think is why he was considered that “great”. He also showed great respect for the enslaved populations, their customs and their gods, which was something no other leader (even 20th c ones) ever did. Compare this 2500-year-old statement to the average GWBush speech:

“Now that the wars are coming to an end, I wish you to prosper in peace. May all mortals from now on live like one people in concord and for mutual advancement. Consider the world as your country, with laws common to all and where the best will govern irrespective of tribe. I do not distinguish among men, as the narrow-minded do, both among Greeks and Barbarians. I am not interested in the descendance of the citizens or their racial origins. I classify them using one criterion: their virtue. For me every virtuous foreigner is a Greek and every evil Greek worse than a Barbarian. If differences ever develop between you never have recourse to arms, but solve them peacefully. If necessary, I should be your arbitrator. You must not consider God like an autocratic despot, but as a common Father of all; so your behavior may resemble the life siblings have in a family. On my part I should consider all equals, white or blacks, and wish you all to be not only subjects of the Commonwealth, but participants and partners. As much as this depends on me, I should try to bring about what I promised. The oath we made over tonight’s libations hold onto as a Contract of Love”

(25 centuries later, Bush was talking about an “axis of evil” and how it was ok to kill people who happened to be muslims, even if they were unarmed civilians)

Alexander the Great conquered and ruled the known world of his day. Of course he was cruel and heartless. How else do you think you can run an empire?

Every emperor was cruel before we had the Geneva Conventions. Wars were far more brutal. Civilians got slaughtered deliberately.