Affecting of Changes in Technology the Conduct of Warfare - Essay Example

Essay: How did changes in technology affect the conduct of warfare in the ancient world? History holds the evidence of rise and fall of empires. The ancient world before Christ had witnessed promulgation of several empires and their fall. Technology is one of the manmade tools of selection that has very harshly carved the course of history. A comparison between the Egyptian Empires of the New Kingdom (1552-1069 BC), with the Greek Empire of Classical Period (500-323 BC) suggests a great deal of obvious differences, yet there are some peculiar similarities between the two empires. Both the empires, during their respective reigns were greatly involved in warfare. Battles were primarily fought for two reasons that include defense and expansion. Egyptians had to face invasions from their neighboring dominions, while for Greeks; Persian Empire was their major threat. Raising armies and developing state of the art weaponry was essential for the survival of both the empires. The changes in the technology paved the way to glory for both the empires in their respected periods of history. The main emphasis of this discussion will be on the technological analysis of the empires from the ancient world. The New Kingdom of Egypt and the Classical Ages of Greek Empire will be discussed here in detail. It was the Seventeenth Dynasty that brought an end to the rule of Hyksos, and paved the way for the Egyptians to take charge of the land. Once the center was under the control of the Egyptians, the era of the New Kingdom commenced. Three dynasties ruled Egypt during this phase of the Ancient Egypt; they include the Eighteenth Dynasty, the Nineteenth Dynasty and the Twentieth Dynasty (McDermott, 2004). Until the Second Intermediate Period, there was no organized army of the Egyptians. During the times of war, the governors of the states were ordered by the kings to arrange men for the battle. The New Kingdom of Egypt was the era of reconstruction, innovation and expansion. During this period the Egyptian Kingdom attained its maximum size (Shaw, 1991). It was economically more stable considering the commerce and trade that brought in gold and ivory in return of the agricultural produce. Unlike, the Middle Kingdom, the New Kingdom did not focused on the common man, however, during this period the social order was kept intact. Pharaohs were once again the center of all attention, and a major chunk of man power was assigned to build new pyramids, and burial places for the kings (Healy, 1992). The reign of Hyksos over the deltas of Nile taught Egyptians a number of things. Their rule in the region inspired the future rulers of the New Kingdom to adapt their policies and technologies associated with the warfare (Spalinger, 2008). To avoid the mistakes of the past, the rulers of the New Kingdom established a permanent organized army. The main reason behind organizing military was to snub the incursions from the borders, in the past incursions from the north-eastern and western borders have had created problems for the Egyptians. Moreover, this army was also responsible for the grandeur of the Egyptian expansion in the ancient world. The decision of establishing a permanent standing army demanded a lot of investment, which was fortunately available to the Egyptian kings of that period. A single division of the Egyptian army was composed of twenty companies, and each company was made up of five platoons, each platoon comprising of 50 soldiers. The basic units of the army were complemented with elite forces and a band of charioteers. History has also documented the use of foreign mercenaries by the Egyptian army; most of these men were prisoners of war, who were offered freedom in exchange to taking up arms against the enemies of the New Kingdom. Regular training and drills for the soldiers have also been documented in history (Spalinger, 2005). On the other hand Greece during the Hellenistic era had relatively less organized army as compare to the Egyptians of the New Kingdom. However, there were several improvements in the Greek military. The driving forces behind the development in the Greek military were the Persian invasions during the rule of Darius and Xerxes. After receiving several losses, the Greek army, eventually turned out victorious in protecting its land 490 B.C. From a non-standing and unorganized army, the Greeks were successful is developing a firm force. The two main cities of Greece at that time were Athens and Sparta. Athens was more renowned for its policy making, liberal minds and philosophy (Martin, 2013). While the Spartans were a race of warriors, every man Spartan male above the age of 20 was a warrior. The contrast between the two cities was based on the difference between the modes of ruling. Athens promoted democracy, while Sparta was conservative, and it was ruled by two kings at the same time (Sage, 2002). The differences among the two great city states of Greece lead to a 27 year long conflict between the two, in for of the Peloponnesian War that was eventually won by Sparta in 404 BC. The political approach of the Greeks was a lot more liberal than that of the Egyptians (Levi, 1965). The Egyptian rulers or the pharaohs depicted themselves as warrior rulers, for instance Ramesses II, while as for the Greeks; the rulers preferred a more humanist personality (AncientMilitary.com, 2011). However, this does not mean that the Greek rulers of the Classical Greece were not involved in warfare; they had the authority to command the army whenever they wanted to. The social status of the members of the armed forces was kept pretty much in control, in both the empires. Even the army men of the top ranks were not provided with any specific protocols (Levi, 1965). In Egypt, governors appointed by the rulers were supposed to order and organize the armies, while in Greece politicians were to administer the different state matters, restricting armies to their barracks (Martin, 2013). The social status of women in Egypt was far superior to the one compared to the status of the Greek women during the Hellenistic Period. The economy of both empires greatly relied on trade and commerce, but for the Egyptian the fertile deltas of Nile were a great blessing, which earned plenty to support the state. Meanwhile, Greece was only a business hub, that did not of had much to produce, the main generation of revenue was carried out via sea trade, This is perhaps one reason that why the Greeks had one of the best armies. Warfare was another healthy source of income for both the empires, a great some of gold and jewels were collected in form of spoils and booty. Soldiers were often presented with titles and golds for their bravery in the battle field. The military reforms proposed by the pharaohs were not limited to organizing soldier in numbers; it also dealt with technological developments in the art of warfare. A number of key modifications and inventions took place during this glorious phase of the Ancient Egypt. As suggested earlier the rule of Hyksos induced the need of development in the art of warfare on the Egyptian side (AncientMilitary.com, 2011). There were modifications in the design of old weapons, and some of the new war crafts adapted from the foreign regimes. Chariots was one of the abundantly used war vehicles during those days, most of the armies at that time used chariots to attack and slit pass the enemies ranks, however, the chariots designed by the Egyptians were built for a different purpose (AncientMilitary.com, 2011). They were used to target the opponents from a long range while on the move. These chariots were lighter in weight, and they were driven by two horses. These chariots could accommodate only two people at a time, one was obviously the charioteer who controlled the vehicle, and the other person on the chariot was an archer equipped with Composite bows. The Egyptians were so fond of these chariots that their construction was commissioned by the government (AncientMilitary.com, 2011). The composite bows were specially designed for taking down enemies from longer range. They were hard to make, and they were even difficult to maintain. Bows and arrows were the main strength of the Egyptian army (Bradford, 2001). They were used to demolish the opponents’ fronts from a distance, before entering into a man to man battle. In the beginning composite bows were provided to most of the archers in the Egyptian army, however, since it was hard to manage these bows, there use was limited to archers on chariots, while the regular bows were given to the field archers (Shaw, 1991). For infantry, there were modifications the blades. Copper blades that were used by the previous two kingdoms of the Ancient Egypt were replaced by much finer bronze blades. A sword named “Khapesh” was introduced by the Egyptians during this period. These swords were perfect for slashing as well as for stabbing the opponents (Healy, 1992). There were also some modifications in the old axe designed based on the lessons learnt from Hyksos. Although, the Egyptian army was never fond of using axes, they preferred swords (Bradford, 2001). Apart from offensive tools, there were also changes in the armor design (AncientMilitary.com, 2011). The armor of superior ranked army officers was replaced with a bronze armor. The use of small shields was also introduced for the foot soldiers. According to the archaeological evidences, there have been some proofs that support the idea that iron was in Egyptian possession, however, there are not many documents that could propose a wide use of iron in making weapons or other tools (Nicholson & Shaw, 2000). Bronze remained the most extensively used material in Egypt during the New Kingdom. This is because bronze was easy to use, as compared to iron. Meanwhile, during the days of the Classical Greece, iron was a commonly use metal for making of tools and weapons (McDermott, 2004) . The spear used the hoplites was equipped with a four sided pointed iron blade. Unlike the Egyptians, the Greek feet soldiers were allowed to purchase extra armor for themselves if they could afford to buy (Cartwright, 2013). The Egyptian navy was an inseparable part of the army. Ship building was a common trade for the Egyptians, considering the natural geography of the terrain. Ships were built for the purpose of trade as well for the battle. During the New Kingdom, most of the ships were designed under the reign of Queen Hatshepsut. Later on Ramesses the third spent an extensive amount of money for developing the Egyptian navy in order to contain the Sea People (Gabriel, 2002) . However, the main purpose of these ships was surveillance and transportation of the troops. The unique dual motion quality of the Egyptian ships provided them speed and advantage over other navies, since these ships could sail as well as they can be rowed. The names of the Egyptian navy’s ships were “Keftiu” and “Kebentiu” . Like the Egyptians, the Greeks were also masters at sea, and similarly their geographical location, and the proximity to the Mediterranean Sea, actually helped them in gaining command over the sea. The Greek navy ships were designed for battle on sea, they were light yet powerful and speedy, and their strong structures offered them the strength of disabling the enemies’ ships. The most commonly used ships by the Greek navy were called trireme (Martin, 2013). The Egyptian empire of the New Kingdom achieved the greatest size during the reign of Ramesses the second. The battle of Kadesh, which is one of the most celebrated events in the Ancient Egypt’s history, was fought under Ramesses the second (Sanchez, 2004). The battle involved more than five thousand chariots; this encounter did not brought any decisive results, as the battle ended in a stalemate with a peace treaty between the Hittites and the Egyptians. This war consumed most of the wealth in the Egyptian treasury. Egypt did not remain the same after the battle of Kadesh, it was often under the attack from the neighboring settlements. The glory of the New Kingdom continued to fade away as its enemies never stopped their incursions into the Nile delta. The collapse of the New Kingdom under the reign of the Twentieth Dynasty is considered as the catalyst for the end of the Bronze Age. The Classical age of the Greek empire lasted until the 323 BC (Bradford, 2001). Though there were several developments in Greece as an empire, but there was a lot to come. This empire was to be led by one of the greatest rulers of all time, Alexander the great. The technologies and philosophies of the classical age were to be spread all over the world, and the Greek empire flourished to its greatest extent. War was a necessary for both the empires; their survival was highly dependent on the technology and the war crafts that they used for offence and defense. The Greeks were the masters of iron, while the Egyptians were limited to bronze. Both the armies managed strong naval forces, considering their access to sea. Warfare was one of the major sources of generating revenue for both the countries; however, the expenses in war did exceeded the gold that was collected as a result of victory. Bibliography AncientMilitary.com, 2011. Egyptian Weapons. [Online] Available at: http://www.ancientmilitary.com/egyptian-weapons.htm [Accessed 15 August 2014]. AncientMilitary.com, 2011. The Military of Ancient Egypt. [Online] Available at: http://www.ancientmilitary.com/ancient-egypt-military.htm [Accessed 15 August 2014]. Bradford, A. S., 2001. With Arrow, Sword, and Spear: A History of Warfare in the Ancient World.. s.l.:Greenwood Publishing Group.. Cartwright, M., 2013. Ancient History Encyclopedia: Greek Warfare. [Online] Available at: http://www.ancient.eu/Greek_Warfare/ [Accessed 15 August 2014]. Gabriel, R. A., 2002. The great armies of antiquity.. s.l.:Greenwood Publishing Group.. Healy, M., 1992. New Kingdom Egypt. s.l.:Osprey Publishing. Levi, M. A., 1965. Political power in the ancient world. .. s.l.:New American Library. Martin, T. R., 2013. Ancient Greece: from prehistoric to Hellenistic times.. s.l.:Yale University Press. McDermott, B., 2004. Warfare in Ancient Egypt.. s.l.: Sutton Publishing.. Nicholson, P. T. & Shaw, I. eds., 2000. Ancient Egyptian materials and technology.. s.l.:Cambridge University Press.. Sage, M., 2002. Warfare in ancient Greece: a sourcebook.. s.l.: Routledge.. Sanchez, G., 2004. Variation of Representation in the direction of the Battle of Kadesh. JSSEA, Volume 31, pp. 129-149. Shaw, I., 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Buckinghamshire, UK: Shire Publications Ltd.. Spalinger, A. J., 2005. Warfare in ancient Egypt. A Companion to the Ancient Near East, pp. 229-241. Spalinger, A. J., 2008. War in ancient Egypt: The new kingdom.. s.l.: John Wiley & Sons. Read More