Why Were Attila The Hun 's Military Tactics Effective?

Hunic tribes began their chapter in history with unorganized and separate attacks during the late 300s in Central Asia and different parts of Europe such

This second edition of DeVries and Smiths’ book, Medieval Military Technology, encompasses many of the weapons, fortifications, vessels, machines, and armour developed throughout the medieval period, to provide a brief cultural history of the relationship between military technology and medieval society. DeVries and Smiths’ purpose in compiling this book was to lay out their argument in a way to which the reader can understand the purpose of medieval military and its relationship to society. The central

The issue of conflict in the roman empire was very prominent and it ultimately was one of its factors for its downfall. “The Nystrom Atlas Of World History, Herff Jones Education Division” (Document 2) exhibits multiple tribes like the Visigoths, Vandals, Alans, Sueves, Anglo-Saxons, and the Huns who all invade the western Roman Empire. These invasions of Rome cause not only conflict with the tribes but also caused

Current militaries have benefitted from the principles of ancient Greek and Roman warfare by studying the ancient battles, tactics, and use of supplies to develop effective military plans. Current militaries study and debate historical turning points of the ancient battles to understand how the leaders planned and executed battles. The empires’ growth was due in part to the might and successes of their military. The strength of their militaries came from many factors including their use of armor, weapons, and military tactics. The empires’ leaders used these three advantages to create the superior armies of their time.

The conflict between Greece and Persia is one of great battles, these often discussed military forces in history are so great many films tell their tales. The conflict between these two civilizations great army’s, specifically, their differences in which they were comprised is what will be discussed in this paper. The Greek army utilized many great strengths, as well did Persia, never the less only one was ultimately victorious.

Fagan, Garrett G. "Lecture 1 Why Study Battles? What Is War? the Ancient World." Great Battles of

Logically, it makes sense that the army with the most advanced technology would win battles against a less equipped one. However, in his paper titled “Weapons, Technology Determination and Ancient Warfare,” Fernando Echeverria Rey brings to light the paradox of this idea in ancient warfare, as well as undermine the modern idea of ‘technological determinism’ by claiming that it does not have an ancient equivalent. His argument approaches the study of ancient warfare from different perspectives as he “[offers] alternative ways to explain technological and tactical change in warfare” (Echeverria 2010: 24). Echeverria Rey makes strong points for his arguments and supports his ideas clearly. While

This investigation focuses on the question and topic of, how effective was Attila the Hun’s military tactics against the Roman Empire? Why one would consider this question is it will help us understand how much of an effect this weakened the Roman Empires leading to this destruction. Specifically, one will be looking at his different tactics or strategies with things such as the Hun’s bows, their formations, and their use of cavalry. Along with a few other specifics. The focus will be on the time period of 445 CE to 453 CE, the time period of which Attila ruled the Huns as their sole ruler. After the time Western Empire. How this task will be accomplished is through the research of The Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun by Wess Roberts and

The exact origin of the Huns is not exactly known, but history shows that the Huns lived in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. They were present between the 1st century and the 7th century. The Huns were nomads of the Central Asian Steppes. They appeared right after the Xiong Nu dynasty disappeared. The

People always fear the day when they acquire “in-laws”; Tacitus on the other hand embrasses and admires his. Tacitus’, Agricola, was written to provide readers with a perspective on the history of Roman conquest, expansion, and behavior towards “barbarians”. It is written in Tacitus’ point of view, as well as many experiences told in the view of his father-in-law, Agricola. The Romans faced many challenges along their path of reaching their goal of conquering territory. We learn about the type of people they come in contact with and the attitude the Romans feel towards these new people they encounter. Within the Agricola, we see just how powerful the Roman army can be when it is lead by one of the greatest leaders they have ever had- Agricola.

Our proud Canadian army, have brought us magnificent glory upon our country. We have defeated the Huns’ stronghold at Vimy ridge. Through our effort we have reclaimed a key territorial location in this war since we can now observe our and enemy position due to the high ground. Our assault have occurred beginning on Easter monday and lasted until yesterday, a quick decisive battle. We have strategized with a very detailed plan so that every Canadian soldier had a specific task in defeating the Huns’.

As a former general and having lived during the wars, the information he presents here is more likely to be reliable than a historical works such as Aristotle’s or Plutarch’s that are written centuries later. J. A. S. Evans agrees that Thucydides had a thought on history similar to this as he denounces Herodotus’ style, claiming that he thought his own work was more valuable than Herodotus and more accurate . However to what measure that Thucydides’ work is true or reliable is questionable, which W. P. Wallace notes that Thucydides did not explain his opinion on sources or where they came from . The reader has to rely on Thucydides being able to critically choose his sources well. His sources could be anything from a soldier who was there to a common man. This extract is Thucydides presenting his theory of why Agis’ left wing was overpowered and is a well-informed suggestion based on his own knowledge and observations and what he has been told by others, whether they are reliable sources or not. This extract provides insight into the ways of battle and war among the Greeks and helps to provide a better understanding of what a battle may have been like for a

Where the Huns originated from has been a hot Topic for centuries. Some Historians believe they came from either China, Mongolia, or far eastern Russia. According to —- “The Huns, especially those who migrated to the west may have a combination of central Asian Turk, Mongolic, and Ugric stocks”. Mundzuk, the father of Attila, was brothers to both king Octar and Rugila who ruled over the Hunnic empire in the fifth century. Two relatives ruling was common among the Huns, it was not required, but it has appeared many times over Hunnic history. The year of Attila’s birth is not known, but many historians estimate it to between the 390s and the the beginning of the 5th century.

Defeat of the Grand Strategy of Rome The Gothic uprising of 376 A.D. was a turning point in the history of the Roman Empire. It was the beginning of the end for the Roman Empire in some sense of how had stood for the past 400 years. By looking at the events on both sides of the Danube that led to the devastating defeat of the Romans at The Battle of Adrianople and the composition and layout of the Roman border, the implications of what this turning point caused can be examined, such as its effects on the concept of the “Grand Strategy”. The concept of a grand strategy is an idea that can be applied to any peoples.

You might wonder to yourself who Attila the Hun is when you hear his name. Attila was a ruler for the Hun army in the year 434 AD. Besides being the ruler, he was just like any other person who was a Hun. He was normal height for a Hun, which was short. Attila’s eyes were small and he had a snub nose.