Business

I disagree with the point that Alexander entirely picked up the pieces of king Philip's rule. Alexander did things that Philip did not dare to do such as going to war with Persia. I would say that Alexander is more of a courageous king than his father and proved to be more beneficial and heroic to his people. Alexander led a stronger army to conquer many countries that were close to and far away from Macedonia. He managed to cross continents to invade countries that had strong armies and kings. In other words, Alexander reached great heights that his father Philip didn't have the courage to reach. He only dreamt of reaching these heights.

Alexander was a great warrior who led an army to conquer Babylon, Egypt and Phoenicia. But he didn't stop there, he managed to have a war with Persia where he killed Darius and invaded the whole empire. This was something that Philip always wanted to do but couldn't get done. He then managed to conquer most of Asia starting from India when Philip never touched that zone. In nature, Philip was a very "straight to the point" kind of king who always picked the easy way out and preferred to take no risk whatsoever. Alexander on the other hand, risked his life and the lives of his people to get what Macedonia always wanted and that was more territory. An expansion was what Alexander wanted.

To sum up, Philip was a great ruler of Greece but Alexander was a greater ruler because he went to maximum heights for his country. People will remember his name for many years to come for all his conquests and wars with the many countries he ran into.