Even if he died at the age of 32, he had always been a successful and genius statesman, commander and contributor to the socio-cultural life rather than brutal warrior so that he became Alexander the Great. Being a successful statesman is not a surprising feature of Alexander the Great since he bound such a vast land together as an empire with his genius mind with no brutality but tolerance. Firstly, Alexander was a genius in terms of politics because his decisions which are consulted wise men or which are taken by himself was generally successful. For example, when Alexander vanquished the Persian ruler Dorius and took the Iran, the existence of Iran princes disturbed him and he was confused about whether to
Herodotus’ account of Thermopylae is one of the most accurate and contemporary records we have on the battle, and the skills the Spartans implemented throughout. He outlines three main reasons how the Spartans were ‘successful’ in their attempt to stall the Persian invasion. The first reason is that their military experience and skill outmatched the Persian infantry, Herodotus states that Xerxes “had in his army many men, indeed, but few soldiers” while this is contrasted with the homoioi of Sparta who had years of training and were trained heavily in their Agoge, where the weak were punished and the strong praised. Herodotus shows us how their ‘victory’ showed ow fearless they were in battle as they battled over the body of Leonidas four times with finally succeeding against massive odds with their “valour” in fighting. Spartan’s role in the infamous battle of Thermopylae was one of great importance; I have stated before how they were ‘successful’, the reason I used this word is because they were successful in their objective in stalling the Persian invasion.
In regards to almost every failure and success incurred by the state of Rome, the deciding factor was almost always the military at the core. To put it short, it was the use of effective and successful doctrines and strategies that made the victories of Roman militaries as pervasive as they were. It is argued by many that the success of the Roman Empire, considered by many to be the greatest empire in history, was due to its military power. This paper will trace the history of the Roman Military from the early periods of Rome to its many reformation with later emphasized the tactics used by the famous Legions of Rome. Beginnings Davis 2 Under the Etruscan Ruler Tarquin, in mid-700 B.C., the Roman army was formed.
The Ancient Roman Military’s Keys to Success Mitt Romney, a very influential politician of our time, once said that one must “insist on a military so powerful no one would ever think of challenging it.” Although Romney is a modern politician, the idea of military dominance is ancient, dating back to the time of Ancient Rome. The Romans knew that their empire would only be successful with an intimidating and powerful army, and upon being threatened, decided to reform their military so it would become one of the greatest in history. Ancient Rome was successful militarily because of the size, organization and discipline, and tactics and strategy of their infantry forces. Like every other great empire, Rome didn’t simply become great overnight. From 650 BC to 509 BC, an Italian tribe referred to as the Etruscans dominated the Northern Italy, including Rome.
Caesar’s military prowess and his reforms crafted him into the extraordinary person that historians all recognize as great. When Caesar created the First Triumvirate alongside Pompey and Crassus, he was allotted the Roman lands of Cisalpine Gaul, Narbonese Gaul, and Illyricum in addition to four legions of about five thousand soldiers each (Source 1). Caesar immediately put his army to use by invading, and eventually conquering all of Gaul. Although his army was physically smaller and often outnumbered, his superior fighting tactics allowed his army to defeat the Celts. Another beneficial factor towards Caesar’s conquest was the disunity of the Gallic tribes, which was reminiscent of the Greek city-states.
He had conquered territories that were unlikely for his time. He did this without modern technology or weaponry, troop movements were made largely on foot and communications were done face to face. At twenty years old, he already inherited an empire of Macedon after his father, Philip’s assassination. In thirteen short years, his empire stretched for three thousand miles. Alexander was a philosophical idealist who strived to create unity in attempting to integrate Persians and Orientals into his administration and army.
Why did Parliament win the Civil War? The First Civil War lasted several years and it was not clear who was to win. In the end however, Parliament did succeed, and the King failed. The generals were a major factor, they inspired there army to fight well and bravely and had to work out the tactics that were to be used. Oliver Cromwell became the most important general on the Parliamentarian side and Prince Rupert on the Royalist side.
The Battle of Granicus Alexander the great was not called the great for no reason. He was a powerful leader and amazing general. His abilities are shown not just though his personality but through his military tactics and battle logistics. The battle that takes this to all extremes and has a variety of aspects that can be focused on is the battle of Granicus. This battle shows not just how alexander won the battle but all the factors that helped him.
With special reference to the battles of Issus and Gaugamela, to what extent does Alexander’s generalship deserve the praise which Arrian gives? Alexander III of Macedonia is one of the most celebrated military commanders to have ever lived, conquering most of the known world despite the fact he only ruled for twelve years and eight months. Arrian, a man who produced what is widely considered to be the fullest account of Alexander’s campaigns (although not without fault in the minds of some historians) known as the ‘Campaigns of Alexander’ or ‘Anabasis’, over 400 years after his death, writes: ‘In arming and equipping troops and in his military dispositions he was always masterly. Noble indeed was his power of inspiring men…..and…of sweeping away their fear by the spectacle of his own fearlessness….his ability to seize the moment for a swift blow, before his enemy had any suspicion of what was coming, was beyond praise.’ (Arrian, 7, 29) Arrian is certainly well placed to deal with Alexander’s military achievements and abilities having himself been a member of the Roman army, while he also had access to the first hand accounts of two of Alexander’s leading officers, Aristoboulus and Ptolemy. Alexander, most commonly known as ‘Alexander the Great’, such were the extent of his conquests, was also something of a mythical figure, with many people believing him to be of a divine nature (including Arrian and Alexander himself) – could this have clouded Arrian’s judgement with regards to the extent of the praise he bestows upon the subject of his study?
Marlborough at Ramillies Marlborough at Ramillies Marlborough at Ramillies by 2LT John C. Flanagan SFC Booth AOB 10-94 Executive Summary John Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough, is undoubtedly one of the greatest military commanders ever. Even though he commanded his armies in the early eighteenth century, there are many things we can learn from him. One way to gain this knowledge is by examining the Duke's leadership at the battle of Ramillies through the Principles of War. Marlborough at Ramillies 1 The Age of Reason was "a time when the ordinary officer preferred anything to fighting, [but] Marlborough . .