Alexander the Great was one of the old leaders of Macedonia and by extension one of the greatest military minds in history (Burgan, 2010). He was the king of Macedonia and Persia and during his tenure he managed to found the largest empire in the entire ancient world. Alexander the Great was brilliant, charismatic, ruthless and diplomatic, and therefore inspired loyalty in his men who would follow him anywhere. However, he died before realizing his dream of bringing unity between the Greeks and Asians (Freeman, 2011). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay On the other hand, Charlemagne was a medieval emperor who ruled over much of Western Europe (Collins, 2011). He had the mission of uniting people of different backgrounds into one kingdom and later converting them to Christianity. Charlemagne was a military strategist. However, his reign was mainly characterized by war as he was determined to achieve his goals (Collins, 2011). In 1800, Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the Romans by Pope Leo III, and thus his main role was to encourage and facilitate the Carolingian Renaissance and the cultural revival of European countries. However, he died in 1814, although he had ensured the survival of Christianity in the West (Collins, 2011). Both the empires of Charlemagne and Alexander the Great were successful. However, Alexander the Great was a better leader than Charlemagne. Unlike Charlemagne, Alexander the Great had the advantage of being trained and educated in relevant aspects of cultural diversity, political and military matters mainly by excellent tutors such as Aristotle (Burgan, 2010). Furthermore, Alexander had acquired and learned many basic leadership concepts while accompanying his father on several occasions regarding military campaigns. His brilliant and charismatic leadership skills were demonstrated when he ascended the throne at just 20 years old, after Philip's assassination (Freeman, 2011). Furthermore, Alexander the Great managed to formulate an efficient and innovative winning strategy better than that of Charlemagne (Freeman, 2011). For example, Alexander the Great led to found his kingdom with a military personnel whose number did not exceed 40,000 men. This meant that he had to effectively manage and strategically employ his forces to counter the overwhelming numbers opposing him. However, he managed to use terrain, mobility, tactics, and weapons such as the formidable Macedonia Phalanx to overwhelm his opponents (Burgan, 2010). Therefore, Alexander the Great's brilliance and leadership skills are demonstrated by his ability to overwhelm his opponent despite the limited number of his military personnel. In contrast to Charlemagne, Alexander the Great encouraged and supported his followers for their superiority and exceptional effort. Furthermore, he motivated them and spoke to them in a way believed to bring greater success in the future. For example, he routinely identified individuals to pay special attention to and recalled the actions of past and fallen heroes who had demonstrated acts of courage (Freeman, 2011). As a charismatic leader, Alexander the Great recognized individual contributions and consequently inspired and gave them hope for greater future excellence. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Finally, unlike Charlemagne, Alexander the Great was able to foster group identification more effectively. He created a cunning mechanism to keep his military personnel engaged (Freeman, 2011). Furthermore, his effective oratory skills facilitated and, 2010).