King Karl 's : The Forgotten Tactician

A common phrase is “History is written by the victors”. Perhaps that is the reason why King George III of England is remembered as being the mad king who lost the American colonies. However, there is more to the king than what the rebel colonists made him out to be. King George’s reign of nearly 60 years was full of hardships and setbacks, yet he was a hard worker who was kind and looked out for the welfare of his empire.

Alexander should deserve his title as “Great” because he was a strategical and intelligent leader supported by the many battles he has won. The famous philosopher Aristotle taught Alexander which would support how Alexander was so intelligent; he was taught by one of the most intelligent people at that time in history. Alexander was merely 14 when he began to fight in his father’s army, 18 when he was general, and 20 when he became king. (Doc. 1) He had about six years of learning strategies and military tactics from his father, who took over Greece. In battles, he was heavily outnumbered but managed to still win each one. (Doc. 1) Each battle he won slowly expanded his empire until it reached from Greece to India (Doc. 3) In battles, Alexander led from the front of his army, inspiring his men to fight and to not be afraid. (Doc. 6) This movement from Alexander created a sense courageousness throughout the army if Alexander was not

Alexander the Great is without doubt one of the greatest military leaders of history. Not only did Alexander of Macedon conquer enormous areas of the known world but also he demonstrated dynamic leadership and masterful strategy on a large scale and tactics on the battlefield. During his life, he ruled the largest empire the world had ever seen, which stretched from ancient Greece to India. The son of King Phillip II of Macedon, Alexander was educated by the philosopher Aristotle and first led Macedonian troops at age 18. Many times Alexander was worshipped as a god in some of the countries he ruled. He had a huge impact on world history spreading the seeds of western culture and philosophy across the world and has legends and stories

In 356 B.C.E., a boy named Alexander was born. He grew up to be a great child, with his dad being the king of Macedonia,but, when Alexander was very young, his father had been assassinated so he had to inherit the power (BGE) . By that time, his father had taken over Greece and was planning on going east to conquer Persia, which Alexander had taken over as the new king. After many rough wars, Alexander had finally taken over Persia, and was known as Alexander the Great (BGE, Doc A). Even after Alexander had taken over Persia, he kept pushing all the way east until his army had to tell him to stop. So, was Alexander as excellent as people say? Alexander was excellent because he had leadership, courage, and had many remarkable achievements over his time. By these measures, Alexander was great because of his military strategies, his strive to spread Greek culture,

When we think of Alexander the Great, we think of an outstanding war hero. When we think of Napoleon Bonaparte, we think, again, of an outstanding war hero. If a random person were asked who either of these rulers was, their first response would be a fact about war. Alexander and Napoleon share similarities in their warfare, and how they used it to conquer and establish new lands. Alexander the Great’s strong perseverance and incredible battle strategies led to increase his power over his empire. Napoleon used his intelligence and skill of manipulation to earn respect and support from the French people, which gained him great power. Both men had similar qualities attaining leadership but their strategies to reach this were very

Alexander the Great, born of King Philip of Macedonia, was one of the greatest conquerors of history. In my opinion, Alexander was a great leader and warrior. For example, in Document B, Alexander used strategy to win over a battle. The strategy he used was complicated, but well thought out; Alexander moved his troops in all different directions to keep Porus puzzled, and took his cavalry to various points along the river bank where he would create a war cry so that Porus would parallel the movements on the other sides of the river until he no longer responded. Now Porus elephants were boxed in, and the elephants trampled their own men because they had no driver's upon them. In this way Alexander won a battle, and through his cleverness, he

In The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki we are introduced to multiple kings who are different in many ways. Each one of these achieve their leadership roles in different ways and are held to different standards. Some of these kings include King Frodi, King Hegi, and of course King Hrolf Kraki.

Alexander the Great was undoubtedly one of the greatest military leaders of all time. Alexander’s strategy was to use terror and kindness to conquer an empire. The towns and cities that resisted him would burn to the ground and their people sold into slavery. The towns and cities that surrendered would keep their government officials, and Alexander would help them rebuild damaged property. This strategy allowed him to never lose a battle.

King Philip's War, war that hollowed Native Americans against English pioneers and their Indian partners that was one of the bloodiest clashes in U.S. history. The war is named for Metacomet, the Wampanoag boss who received the English name Philip because of the well disposed relations between his dad and the Mayflower Pilgrims. The war preceded in the most northern spans of New England until the marking of the Treaty of Casco Bay in April 1678.

One point of evidence that Alexander was great was he was a military strategist. For example, “When Alexander saw this, he moved his troops in all different directions so that porus would keep puzzled.¨(Doc. B) He used different strategy to keep his

It was 1930 at the railhead on Fort Bragg; they had completed loading the equipment on the big black iron monster of a train, and covering them with heavy black tarps, which they secured to the flatbeds. Colonel Lambert was no longer running the combat train; he remained back in Washington D.C. with his command, the 3rd Infantry Regiment. With the Army of the Potomac less than thirty miles out of the capital it was time for him to return to his duties. He placed Major Reese Sales in charge of this particular mission; it was of the highest importance and no doubt would make a huge difference in the fight against General Magnus and his Army. There were only a few people aware of the cargo that was being transported north, the Major of course, Colonel Lambert, Brigadier General Clayton – who’s idea it was, and the post commander of Fort Bragg.

“I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep; I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion.” Alexander the Great is the smartest and fiercest military leader that has ever lived. His military wisdom and fierceness led him to being a great leader of Greece, conquering all of Asia Minor, conquering the Persian empire, and ruling the biggest empire the world had ever seen before 334 BC. This led him to being a great Greek leader, being a fierce conqueror, defeating the Persian empire, and being a man of solid character.

Military strategy forever had been battles of attrition, men throwing themselves at each other until a winner was determined, this form of battle was replaced in Europe during the 16th and 17th century. The change in military strategy took place mostly in Europe, and the countries at the forefront of this were the Swedish empire and the Netherlands. The Swedes and Dutch changed many military strategies and practices which were in place for thousands of years and changed the standard for militaries. They helped to show the first realistic application of David versus Goliath, using smart tactics paired with a smaller army to destroy militaries of greater size. The two smallest nations in Europe took control and led the world in military innovations in the 16th and 17th century through competition and loss. The Swedes and Dutch managed to create fluid militaries which were able to overpower larger armies through deception and agility. The Swedish and Dutch nations during the 16th and 17th century gained military strength through the reformation of tactics, reorganization of the military, improvisation of weapons, and as a result changed the image and action of the military forever. The idea of a military revolution was first explored by a man named Michael Roberts in the 1950s. Roberts said that if the Swedish Empire and the Netherlands had not developed as they did, military strategy and organization would have not evolved for much later.

If anyone throughout history deserves to be titled ‘The Great’, it would be Alexander III of Macedonia. His endless pit of ambition mixed with his military tactics made him one tough opponent. His intuition mixed with a little bit of rebellion made him ready for any challenge standing in his way. He was also a skilled politician, often extending his hand in an attempt to avoid battle.

     Medieval tactics were essential for an attack or siege of a castle. Many tactics and strategies helped develop much-improved version of an attacking artifact, like weapons and sieging machinery. The knights of Medieval England which were the cavalry, improved as the years went by, but never actually had any tactics or strategies. The usual knight would just go out there and fight. The knights were the counter offensive against a small siege, but they were ineffective against a large siege of a castle. A siege was very essential for medieval warfare. Siege was like the most important part of an attack; that is if you’re attacking a castle.