Introduction
Alexander the Great took over the throne after the assassination of his father, Phillip II. He secured Macedonia, put down the Greeks’ rebellion, and later focused his leadership on Egypt, India, and Persia. This was a difficult concept brought upon by his father, but he had to be determined to achieve the invasion using various strategies. All the tactics deployed by Alexander played a crucial contribution to the development of innovations and technology that have allowed the emergence of different civilizations, especially in western countries. His strategies provided a better background for innovating the tactics used by militaries and the advancement of weapons in the modern world.
For instance, he inherited some of the skills from his father, who was the leader of a well-trained and versatile army. Researching Alexander the great will be beneficial in making me understand his background and the motive behind his greatness, especially the contribution of technology. Besides, I have chosen Alexander for his significant contributions to the world regarding the art of war, as he is considered to be the greatest conqueror in the world. Alexander would go on to find cities and conquer an empire that would extend from Getae to Kashmir, and his tactics would go on to influence Rome. Renewed tactics used in most militaries today stem from those of Alexander the Great.
Thesis Statement
The ancient technology used by the military across the world was different from the modern innovations used because of the depictions and reliance on Alexander the great strategies. Moreover, the modernization of military technology in most regions of the world has evolved due to the methods derived from Alexander. Therefore, this research paper will provide the strategies used by Alexander, resulting in an enhanced military organization and innovative weapons in the modern world. Furthermore, the paper will present a positive argument through the use of primary and secondary materials to prove the positive significance of Alexander the great to his contribution to the current military technology.
The Ancients Greek Wars
In Greece, two influential city-states emerged to dominate the region. While Sparta easily rose as the typical city that hosted military operations, Athens emerged to be a naval power, introducing a strict code of behavior with effective military training for every citizen of the male gender. This led to the birth of a country full of military personnel since every member who was a citizen was required to safeguard the city they live in in the occurrence of war.
However, a Spartan male was equipped with enough knowledge that enabled him to have more literacy on what is expected of him, such as enduring pain during battles and overcoming them in battle not as an individual but through the aid of unity (Bosworth, 1993). In the modern world, the military organization has copied this tactic, especially in Russia. They are known for using teenagers to join the army for a certain period before proceeding with other careers.
More so, the intense training and knowledge equipped the boys became obvious when the Persians attacked Greece under the authority of Darius I and his son (Yenne, 2010). The male soldiers who joined the army were provided with additional equipment to protect them in the form of the helmet covering most of their faces and leaving out a space for the mouth, nose, and eyes. Alexander later noticed that the protection did not give the soldiers an opportunity for a peripheral view.
He replaced it with a Phrygian helmet that provided more visibility and capability of hearing. This helmet technology has evolved, and soldiers nowadays have to wear helmets when going to war as compulsory attire. Advancement of the Helmets is witnessed in the air force which has more advance and expensive helmets that help them navigate the fighter jets and have a 3600 view when going to war (Yenne, 2010). Alexander also organized the army in an orderly formation where each soldier was given a shield that protected himself and the neighboring person.
An Organized and Disciplined Army
Another strategy deployed by Alexander the great was ensuring he had an organized and disciplined military, an idea that he inherited from his father. After inheriting his father’s throne, he instantly introduced a sequence of reforms in his military (Yenne, 2010). Initially, he would collaborate with his father to form an army that any other leader across the world has ever witnessed. This was because previous wars such as Peloponnesian and Persian had illustrated that the ancient ways were no longer effective; hence depending on them would cause a defeat from the enemies. He is a military leader known for taking over a poorly disciplined group and transforming it into a tough army that was hard to conquer.
Most historians link the development of his ideology to when he was a hostage in Thebes, witnessing their dishonorable sacred band (Richardson, 2017). Furthermore, he also increased the size of his army and expanded the cavalry, which became more than just an army of warriors who were just citizens. He also created a group of skilled engineers who innovated barricade weaponry such as catapults and towers. Later he would utilize the siege towers with an unfortunate consequence at Tyre.
In addition, Alexander formed an army that resulted in a big victory for the Greeks hence giving more assurance in his security system. In return, a new tactic was formed called the phalanx, where a group of individuals was expected to join each other in a line of construction (Engels, 1978). This tactic promoted more protection for the soldiers since they were more shielded and armored since they could create a barrier to safeguard themselves.
Despite the success of the phalanx, its nature required regular drilling that forced the army to remain obedient and observe patience since anyone who violated the structure of the formation was subjected to punishment. This is experienced in the modern army, which must observe the highest level of discipline, and at times they are not supposed to ask their commanders questions. Still, they follow the instructions given to them by their seniors. This methodology is dated back to Alexander the Great, whose army had to observe loyalty to demonstrate the authority and power of Macedonia by their leader.
When he took over from his father, he aimed to restructure his army since he believed it was the first step towards winning any battle when countered by the enemies. So, he re-organized the phalanx and gave a unit of soldiers with a commander who was to be in charge of each group (Bosworth, 1993). This concept created a good communication flow from the junior staff to the senior team in the military rank, making it easier for him to make decisions that will benefit the country and conquer other regions that they battled. His system of organization is practiced by most of the states in the world, and it has proved to be working in most nations, and it was well utilized during world war I and II.
Tactics and Weapons
The next strategy deployed by Alexander was changing the primary weaponry to the Sarissa from the hoplite giving the tool more advantage compared to the short spears. However, the advancement of this weapon created some challenges since it demanded more skills and strength to handle and execute actions (Richardson, 2017). Therefore, he facilitated an idea that saw his soldiers going to war with a backup plan of carrying small swords double-edged, making it easier to fight an enemy in proximity.
When going to war, this was a disadvantage to the phalanx since it only performed well in unbroken and flat regions. Despite the challenge, Alexander insisted his troops must equip themselves with all the weapons he led by example, and he used it with remarkable success (Anderson, 2020). The advancement of weapons in the military is experienced in the current world despite the fewer territorial fights. These advancements in weapons technology have helped combat the rising cases of criminal activities in different parts of the world, such as the Boko haram, al-Shabab, and al-Qaeda. For Alexander, additional archers and lighter that were more advanced by his engineers served their purpose when they were overwhelmed and not on battlefields.
The senior troops acted as the flag bearers of battles that were considered more demanding since they were to lead by example and needed to operate the advanced weaponry. In such scenarios, the junior army was not heavily armed to serve the special purpose of pushing back the enemies. Their ability to war was categorized according to their physique and skills through the necessity of special training. From this concept, the modern military acquired the ideology of having special forces in their troops with different specifications, such as the air force and the navy (Anderson, 2020). therefore, Alexander’s greatness is demonstrated to the organization of the modern military through his tactic and weaponry because the specialized troops each have dedicated weapons that they use
Cavalry
Cavalry was a tactic used by soldiers to fight when mounted on horses. The main striking force of the army was positioned on both the left and right flanks, creating an easy breakthrough across the rival lines. It proved to work well during the Gaugamela, Issus, and Granicus (Engels, 1978). It was categorized into two partitions known as the prodromoi and the companion to work in a more versatile and flexible manner.
The companion was the most significant partition, further divided into numerous teams of men carrying a little armor and a lance. Alexander had a simple tactic that helped him lead his troops into war with the help of pezhetairoi, who would attack the midpoint of the enemies from a sloping position. At the same time, the cavalry would punch holes and attach the borders. The cavalry was considered to be utilized in a designed manner to remain an offensive weapon for attacking the opponent’s army. In the modern world, the tactic Alexander has been emulated by armies in the world through vigorous and effective training to achieve the success of using cavalry, especially during street demonstrations.
Moreover, Alexander ran his troop from a majestic camp where his guides of the war would have the chance to assemble in a large tent. The pavilion also contained the personal statements of the king, an armory, and a vestibule. The region was guarded day and night by the special army, who worked in shifts (Bosworth, 1993). Although the meetings from the tent provided a background for giving suggestions to the king, the decision that he would conclude was final, and nobody was allowed to object but to follow. The world has copied this system where every country has military barracks that are heavily guarded since they host the commanders of the troops and act as a storage of armories required during wars.
Crossing the Hellespont
Alexander deployed another efficient strategy when he entered Asia. He was accompanied by over 6000 Greek infantries who were to be used in maintaining and conquering the garrison army. In return, the young king of Asia supplemented him with over 2000 hypaspists, 8000 pezhetairoi, and 11,000 phalangists as an essential for crossing the Hellespont (Anderson, 2020). In addition, Alexander, being the leader, had to provide the infantries with mercenary training accompanied by the ability to speak various languages. This was because of the battle that he was going to encounter with Darius III at Gaugamela.
The battle depleted his troops, and he saw the necessity of adding more troops to have a successful foundation of winning over his enemies. For this reason, he was open to welcoming new and young soldiers who would want to join his army which was considered the most powerful during his reign. The addition of the recruits into the group made the troop stronger and more unconquered by any army. In the modern world, recruits are allowed to join militaries on different levels with the same idea of Alexander enhancing the strength of the troops.
Alexander’s Leadership
Despite all the skills and discipline portrayed by the troops, such as that of Macedonia, they could function efficiently without the leadership qualities of Alexander. According to Strauss (2013), he stated the excellent characters of Caesar, Hannibal, and Alexander were displayed in the form of good leadership, including tactics, terror, agility, audacity, and judgment that was witnessed during their tenure in authority. Especially Alexander, demonstrated all the listed qualities and further depicted some sense of respect to his enemies since he was not afraid of them. He states that he does not fear any troop of armies that are led by a lamb; he is only afraid when he observes an army of lambs being guided by a lion and approaching him (Richardson, 2017).
Among his recognized abilities was foretelling the tactic used by his enemies against his army, giving him a better opportunity to win overall battles as experienced in Gaugamela. During the period of his regime in Persia, he avoided bringing Darrius close to him since he only focused on conquering the enemies. Besides being the leader in all wars and the highest in command, he respected everyone on the different levels of command, both from his side and the enemy side, whenever they met to solve their differences.
Appreciation of Culture
Alexander the great was an ingenious name, as suggested by his name, which shows his greatness. He equipped himself with all the tactics at his disposal, including the least expected such as reading and understanding the other people’s cultures such as tragedy and homer, and not leaving out philosophy. When he went to Asia, he was accompanied by a group of history writers, scientists, and philosophers to help him with critical thinking. Furthermore, to understand the culture, he appreciated it by carrying with him several books, and when he finished acquiring knowledge from them, he did send for more books from Greece. This showed his general appreciation of art and literature. He also supported several artists who used to paint numerous portraits, pictures, and sculptures of him.
He also grasped and familiarized himself with the culture of his rivals, thus making him marvel at their art. When he arrived in Babylon, he facilitated an immediate construction and implementation of a headquarter in Nebuchadnezzar. They were the hanging grounds for those who needed to be punished for their wrongdoing. He entered Babylon through the gates of Ishtar because he had gotten stories about it and wanted to know more about the gates. The action was symbolic and important because the people saw him of Babylon as a conqueror. The modern military troops further adopted his concept to improve their knowledge of enemies by reading various literature and knowing the people they are encountering. Besides his tactics, there was various conquest that also provided skills and methodologies for the troops.
Conquest of The Achaemenid Empire
This was the first empire founded in Persia by Cyrus, and it later extended from eastern Europe and the Balkans to Indus in the east. The empire was efficiently governed through an administration that used straps in a centralized bureaucratic manner similar to the governance of provinces in the modern world. When Alexandra was crossing to Asia, a crowd of different satraps was waiting for him in Zelea town.
This led to an emergence of a fight at the river banks that was famously known as troy, currently referred to as turkey in the modern world. Fighting on the river banks was with a purpose that he had anticipated earlier while his enemies could not predict, similar to his thoughts. He maximized his benefit in the fight against Persians who had a large military and deadly chariots by making them powerless by sticking on the muddy and soft soil of the rivers. This enabled him to attack the enemies with abruptness by drilling a hole in the center using the formation of the wedge and positioning his infantries to counter the Persians.
After defeating the Persians, their king decided to limit and cut off the supply routes and chain of the Greeks. He then composed a large army and joined it with Alexander’s at the village of Isus in the south. However, battling at the river banks of Pinarus, the king had deceptively not examined his prior downfall. For Alexander, he was forced to drive his troop into a battle on an unfavorable battlefield. However, he still innovated tactics of engaging his infantries with the confidence of holding a defensive stand.
His tactic surprised Darius, who had planned to attack the army of the Greeks (Bosworth, 1993). The loyal companions of Alexander ambushed the left part of the Persian troops on top of the hill by eliminating their military on a restricted terrain that forced them to retreat since they were reducing in numbers rapidly. The tactic of this battle is considered to have a great contribution towards showing the modern army how to rearrange themselves on the battlefield while installing some confidence in them.
Siege of Gaza and Tyre
Alexander had noticed that before expressing forth against his opponents, he was required to safeguard his chain of supply (Engels, 1978). Phoenicia, Egypt, and the coastal territories of Palestine were his main targets. Alexander’s first step was to propose a peace treaty among his target cities. However, Tyre being the largest city in Phoenicia, rejected his proposal demanding that his opinion was impartial in wars. More so, Alexander was not ready to concede, and therefore he began his prolonged obstruction towards the Tyre city by building bridges that led to its islands.
This tactic led to the downfall of Tyre since Alexander moved towards the south to establish the siege of Gaza (Anderson, 2020). This was after the persistence of Alexander to conquer Gaza, which had refused to collaborate with his ideologies. The fall saw the reign of Alexander in Egypt, where he was regarded as a savior. All this conquest played a significant role that is deployed in the military today.
Conclusion
In summary, Alexander’s ideologies and his army proved to be very strong. The major contribution of his strategies to the military was technology. His troop being the first to implement technology during combat and warfare are some of the major motives that have facilitated the advancement of technology in the military across all parts of the world. His concept did not just contribute to the innovation of military technologies but also better strategies for forming and leading the troops in a more organized and effective formation. Therefore, it is evident from this research paper that most of the innovations that were used in the ancient Greek military by Alexander are implemented by the military system in the current world in a more innovative way through the demonstration of powerful weaponry and more professional organizations of troops.
References
Anderson, J. K. (1961). Ancient Greek Horsemanship. University of California Press. Web.
Richardson, E. (2017). Alexander the Great. Cavendish Square Publishing, LLC.
Bosworth, A. B. (1993). Conquest and empire: the reign of Alexander the Great. Cambridge University Press.
Engels, D. W. (1978). Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army. Univ of California Press.
Yenne, B. (2010). Alexander the Great: lessons from history’s undefeated general. St. Martin’s Press.