Alexander the great’s military organization from the passages was very diverse and one nation did not get along with the with other nations within the army, Alexander uses the military structure to unite by placing foreign soldiers in army formations with the Greek soldiers, Alexander tried to change the relationship between the Greeks and the Persians by having a big feasts, sharing drinks, and singing with one another. What can we learn about Alexander the Great’s military organization? Alexander’s military organization was very mitch matched in the sense that when he conquered a new nation he would simply add the members of that nation's army to his own, this caused many of the soldiers to become enraged with Alexander. The
Lasting 500 years with the republic and roughly a thousand and five hundred more with the Roman empire, the Roman Army was an extremely effective fighting force. Creating new tactics, some still used to this day, the ancient Romans were able to conquer most of Europe, northern sections of Africa and parts of the Middle East. With a complex chain of command, adaptability, formations and equipment, the Roman armies were the best for their time. In the beginning of the first Roman army, the Romans followed the Greek Phalanx formation, a rectangular formation made up of heavy infantry units. In the 4th century the Romans changed the Phalanx formation and renamed it the Triplex Acies, or triple line (Ricketts, Colin).
It was made up of 10 cohorts (About 480-500 men each), which there were 4 cohorts in the front lines and the rest in the second and third lines. The Roman Legion was a powerful tactic, as for it destroyed almost every Phalanx tactic known, and it was very good at attack and defense within the Legion(s). The Legion consisted of enough men that it could be helpful on both flat and rocky terrain. It is very open to arrows and flammable items, but defended almost everything else. The Roman Legion was very powerful, but was defenseless to big attacks, such as a war elephant or catapults.
There was need to additional manpower in the Roman army, so the Romans themselves opened their door to barbarians. Heather indicates that “from the mid-third century, the army was so short of Roman manpower that it jeopardized its efficiency by drawing ever increasingly on ‘barbarians’.”(Heather, 2005) Heather does not say that the number of barbarians in the Roman army has increased; however, he states that “barbarian recruits now sometimes served in the same units as citizens, rather than being segregated into auxiliary forces.”(Heather, 2005) According to Drake, the Roman Army included a great degree of barbarians or soldiers from the barbarian origins. He states that “There were hardly any barbarian peoples known in the age of Justinian who were not represented in his armies.”(Drake, 2006) Drake considers the early Roman army more disciplined than the late Roman army saying that barbarians’ active participating in the army caused “additional discipline problems.”(Drake,
The real reason that Alexander wanted to conquer the Persian Empire was not only retaliation or revenge, but also as a test of his true abilities. In addition to this, Alexander also wanted to commence the invasion because it was what his father had been planning to do for quite a while. Arrian shows that Alexander thought of his invasion not as a personal grudge but purely business as usual. This act doesn’t fit with the motto of revenge especially since it’s shown that Alexander has extremely little respect for Darius. Arrian said “They think Darius is dead and they are mourning him.’ On hearing this Alexander sent Leonnatus, one of his Companions, to them, telling him to explain that Darius was alive, that he had left his arms and robe in the
Caesar had entertained this design from the beginning against his rivals, and had retired, like an expert wrestler, to prepare himself apart for the combat. Making the Gallic wars his exercise-ground, he had at once improved the strength of his soldiery, and had heightened his own glory” (Lives). This drive for war and conquest in the name of glory was a very Roman attribute that Plutarch’s audience respected. Plutarch further caters to his audience by drawing parallels between Caesar and Alexander’s
Octavian played little role in both battles as he was young ( around 18-20 years of age) and unexperienced with combat tactics. Both assassinated of Caesar, Brutus and Cassius committed suicide after their defeat leaving the republicans with neither leaders nor army. Following the defeat, Octavian received Spain, Sardinia and Africa while Antony kept Italy and Gaul and Lepidus in Africa. The triumvirs agreement expired and had to form new agreements in 37bc. The terms required Octavian to send twenty thousand legionaries to Anthony for the Parthian campaign and Anthony was required to give one hundred and twenty ships for Octavian
Hence, Livia’s alleged power-play was mirrored by that of Agrippina the Younger in her zeal to have Nero as successor to the deceased Claudius. Suetonius provides yet more evidence of the way in which imperial women (as mothers or empresses?) jostled for power in the form of Messalina sending assassins to kill Nero so that Britannicus would inherit the Principate from his father, Claudius. Even if Suetonius’ account is fictitious, it was still considered plausible enough to be spread around as gossip as this may have reflected a very real fear that members of the imperial family were using their authority and esteem to secure positions of power for
154). If we clarify this idea, feeding and maintaining this large army had been embodied with the help of domestic producers. Development of the domestic market certainly, attracted the people who were living the around, even the out of the borders of Roman Empire. This strategy helped the Roman Empire to extend its borders, and propagandize Roman style. Thus, based on Campbell’s point it should be said that this process of militarization had enormous influence on the Romanization process.