The main source of information for this paper should be from the source below:
Michel Austin, ed., The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest: A Selection of Ancient Sources In Translation.
– Alexander the Great(1-25)
– Creating royal legitimacy(26-59)
– Economy, commerce, demography(101-35)
– Community,religion, and culture(136-57)
– Greece,macedon, and the Aegean(33, 60-76, 78-79, 87-88)
– Greece,macedon, and the Aegean2 (33, 60-76, 78-79, 87-88)
– Early Ptolemaic Empire(254-84)
– Ptolemaic empire: ethnicity,religion,economy, and culture(285-326)
– Seleucid and Bactrian empires(51, 57-58,158-79)
– Ethnicity, religion, economy, and culture (180-207)
– Antiochus IV, Maccabean Revolt, and Fragmentation(208-23)
– Attalids, Bithynians, and Pontus(224-54)
I attached pdf files of the neccassary readings below. You dont need to read all of them. just skim the ones which you think are neccassery for the topic that was chosen. use quotes if possible. theres a pdf file of the template and detailed directions for the paper uploaded aswell. also a copy of the draft is uploaded. the length of the draft was 4-5 pages and cited in chicago style. so the final version should be 8-10 pages. If you have any questions, let me know. I am also willing to pay extra if you think its neccassary. I also need to used primary sources.
This is the feed back of the draft aswell as what needs to be fixed.
Your second sentence is confusing – “The latter” what? You’ve only mentioned Alexander. Your introduction in general is superficial and oddly worded, and most of the information can (and should) be condensed into a few concise statements. As it is right now, it looks like you’re just spouting facts to fill space. Watch your grammar and wording, some words are combined with hyphens that should not be (“time-fighting”), and much of your wording is clunky or confusing:
The kingdom of Macedon was not just “famously referred to” as such, it simply was Macedon. Likewise, Alexander’s empire should be referred to as such: an empire, not a kingdom. “During this particular period, the Hellenistic empire grew into three-hold politically, economically, and culturally.” This sentence makes no sense. What do you mean by “three-hold?” “Given that Alexander had died without living an empire” Do you mean to say here that he died without securing an heir for his empire? You don’t talk much about the Roman invasion at this stage, I hope you will elaborate on their part in the final version, since your thesis is so concerned with Rome as the ultimate downfall of the Hellenistic empires.
Your citations themselves look good, but you haven’t dealt with any primary sources – you need 2 secondary sources (which you have, but haven’t deeply discussed) and 5 primary sources for the final version. We really want you to grapple with the primary source material to help solidify your arguments.
- Home Of Essay Experts
- ✓Good grades guaranteed
- ✓Quality papers
- ✓Competent and qualified writers
- ✓Timely delivery
- ✓100% plagiarism_free
- ✓Cheap price fit for your budget