Analysis

My artifact can be connected to Sekandar because of who the coin is connected to; Khalaf Ibn Ahmad. In my chosen passage, Sekandar sends off a letter with his seal and Khalaf Ibn Ahmad’s coin inscription can be interpreted as such. This artifact is so closely tied to the ruler and associated with him which is what a seal does as well. 

Khalaf Ibn Ahmad was the ruler of Persia as Sekandar became. Khalaf Ibn Ahmad was also known to be greedy and became an enemy of most of the forces from the Islamic East (Al-Dulaimi and Al-Dulaimi). He waged many wars just like Sekandar and in the end it drove his people to hate him. He can definitely be connected to Sekandar in this way because it was Sekandar’s greed that drove him forward as he continued his journey to conquer all of Persia. He made many enemies as well because of all the people he defeated and the land he took over. My argument is that Sekandar is a literary monster and Khalaf Ibn Ahmad may share some of Sekandar’s qualities that make him so. He too tried to expand his rule when he was in power and extended his control to neighboring cities (Al-Dulaimi and Al-Dulaimi). Khalaf Ibn Ahmad used tax money to do this which can be seen as selfish as he used his people’s hard earned money for his own pursuits. He took over Kerman, Quhistan, Busheng, Meru, and Nishapur (Al-Dulaimi and Al-Dulaimi), we can see the similarity between him and Sekandar in this regard. 

My secondary artifact of Alexander the Great supports my argument because he is depicted as a warrior. The most likely use of the puppet is to be in shows/plays and it tells us that Alexander is characterized as a warrior to the general public. He was involved in fights, wars, and the brutality we see through Sekandar and Khalaf Ibn Ahamad.