How Modern And Ancient Military Conflict Differs History Essay
Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional academic writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.
Published: Mon, 5 Dec 2016
How does modern military conflict differ from ancient military conflict? What accounts for these differences?
Ancient warfare began before history was recorded to the end of the ancient period. Ancient warfare was more centered on organization than technology. During Ancient warfare, mass was the key element for battles. Modern warfare is the methods, concepts, and technology that came out of World War II. As a result total war created the need to develop war policy with changed the awareness of tactical, operational, and strategic information. Ancient and modern warfare are different from the make-up of the armies, the tactics and weapons, and the transition to total warfare.
In Ancient Warfare, the beginnings of modern armies began to rise. There were four main ways the armies were in ancient times, infantry, cavalry, chariot and naval. Infantry was the beginning of armies. It allowed for many countries to win by accumulated mass. Then the use of horses allowed for cavalry to be created. Further development created the use of the chariot as a device both of transportation and of battle became the central weapon. The naval power also began during ancient times as the method to control the seas. There are several types of modern warfare. It also includes a similar setup that ancient warfare used. The types of modern warfare are: asymmetrical, biological, chemical, electronic, ground, guerrilla, psychological, naval, and nuclear. Asymmetrical warfare is also known as terrorism. Biological warfare is fought by using germs. Chemical warfare is the use of toxic substances. Electronic warfare is cracking the enemyâ€™s code or jamming their systems. Ground warfare includes the infantry, armor and artillery. Guerrilla warfare if fought with irregular troops. Psychological warfare is used to instill fear and terror to support the achievement of national objectives. Naval warfare is fought on a larger scale in the oceans and nuclear warfare uses nuclear weapons.
The development of technologies created what is known as modern warfare today. With these technologies tactics, strategy, and weapons were also developed. During ancient times, the ancient strategy focused broadly on two goals. To convince the enemy that continued war was more costly than submitting, and make the most gain from war as possible. Forcing the enemy to submit generally consisted of defeating their army in the field. Once the enemyâ€™s force was routed, the threat of siege, civilian deaths, and the like often forced the enemy to the bargaining table resulting in gaining simple profit. In modern warfare, the goals are simply to stop one from controlling the entire world. The use of tactics in ancient times depended on the sizes and skill levels of both armies, the unit types of both, terrain and positional advantages of both armies, and the weather. In a modern sense, the battles are always fought no matter what the opposition has, the terrain, nor the weather. Ancient weapons consisted of the bow and arrow, the sling; pole arms such as the spear and javelin; hand-to-hand weapons such as swords, spears, clubs, maces, axes, and knives. Catapults, siege towers, and battering rams were used during sieges. Modern weapons consist of more missile type weapons such as the gun. There are also grenades, mines, missile launchers, and many other systems.
During Ancient times, Greek warfare was a limited and ritualized form of conflict. Armies of hoplites would meet on the battlefield and decide the outcome in a single day. During the Peloponnesian War, however, the fighting lasted for years and consumed the economic resources of the participating city-states. In modern times, the United States underwent total mobilization of all national resources for the Second World War. Previously untouched sections of the nation mobilized for the war effort. Academics became technocrats; home-makers became bomb-makers, massive numbers of women worked in heavy industry during the war; union leaders and businessmen became commanders in the massive armies of production.Â The great scientific communities of the United States were mobilized as never before, and mathematicians, doctors, engineers, and chemists turned their minds to the problems ahead of them.
There is a big evolution from ancient warfare to modern warfare. Ancient warfare was mostly centered on organization, such as the use of the phalanx, and modern warfare focuses on technology and the use of information. During ancient times, the goals of the civilization were to have personal gain of simple profit and in modern times the goals are to stop one person from controlling the entire globe. Also ancient warfare focused on hand-to-hand combat while modern warfare focuses on the use of missiles and information. There was also the transition from limited warfare to total warfare to develop technologies need for a countries goal. Overall, ancient and modern warfare are different from the make-up of the armies, the tactics and weapons, and the transition to total warfare.
OVERALL GRADE: 86.5/100
CONTENT: 40/50 You did an average job explaining some of the differences between ancient warfare and modern warfare. But, you got some of it wrong. Also, you did not adequately tell me WHY these differences occurred. I realize that this paper was written in a 2 hour time period, but I certainly hoped that you would have done a slightly better job at organizing your thoughtsâ€¦Remember, this type of writing is relatively simple. Step 1: come up with your thesis (opinion). Step 2: state three facts that support you thesis. Step 3: conclude your paper by telling me your opinion, again, and quickly reviewing your supporting arguments.
Spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc: 46.5/50
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: