Alexander and His Failures

Maxwell Shuman

When looking at the many civilizations which we have studied so far this semester I think that some of the most useful lessons can be learned from their failures. Alexander the Great showed exemplary leadership in his great conquest throughout the Mediterranean region and into Asia. By conquering so far and so quickly, Alexander held lots of power and a major sphere of influence under his domain. In order to keep this power and god-like image, he would often leave the current power structures of nations in power as long as they were under his greater domain. By doing this he was able to gain a large empire, which was incredibly diverse with many varying ideas of Alexander’s role in his own empire. An example of this is the fact that the Persians saw Alexander as they had seen each of their kings in the past: as a god. As a god-like figure in their eyes, Alexander was untouchable and was not expected to interact with the common men whatsoever. In a different light, the Greeks saw Alexander as an incredibly motivating warrior king who was ever-willing to give his life for his brothers in arms. Given this more grounded state, Alexander was not only expected to interact with his fellow soldiers, but he was one of them. This dichotomy of leadership across the empire led for a major dissent when Alexander perished to an early death leaving his vast empire with no heir or overarching governmental structure. According to the journal “Readings in Greek History” compiled by Nagle and Burstein, “[Alexander’s] chief generals warred for more than forty years before a new political system arrived in Asia” (267). Although Alexander was highly successful during his tenure, I believe he made one crucial mistake which cost him and his successors the entire empire.

I believe that the biggest learning point from Alexander’s campaign was the fact that he did not invest in the future of his empire. I think that this is a major learning point for us as future officers in the United States military. Here at the academy it is easy to brush over the many faculty and staff who work to make midshipmen into promising young officers. I believe that these people provide the entire resolution made from the failures of Alexander the Great. The military often will send their most qualified and promising LT’s and Capt.’s to the service academies in order to invest in the future of the United States military. By doing this the military is doing its part to not only ensure that the military has a promising future, but also the entire United States. I think that the idea of investing for the future and doing what one can for others is a major reason for why many of us are in the Military in the first place and will do us a lot of good to remember the positive and negative outcomes from the trials of people like Alexander the Great.

Word Count: 482 without quote, 500 with.

The Validity of Crusading

Maxwell Shuman

During the Middle Ages death and agony played a large role in worldly matters and the survival of nations. Due to the constant war and plague which continually cursed the entire Mediterranean from the Middle East to Western Europe, there was little time for civilizations to truly settle in. Following the attacks of the Seljuk Turks in Byzantium, the war between Christians and Muslims grew exponentially and led to the Crusades. I believe that there was some validity to the Christian crusade for the capture of Jerusalem, however, when looking at the bigger picture it is much more complicated. The Crusade was valid in the sense that in the time prior to the crusade Christians were persecuted and massacred in the thousands by Muslims in the holy city. To go along with this, their places of worship were either destroyed or used as stables. Contrary to the validity of the taking of Jerusalem, however, I do not believe that the Christians necessarily have a greater claim to the holy city than that of Jews and Muslims. Being that all three religions of the book claim Jerusalem to be the Holy Land, it is important to understand their stance on violence and, in turn, a crusade killing thousands of people. In the bible, one of the most famous passages from the gospel of Matthew states that “if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.” A common interpretation of this goes along with Jesus’ preaching of mercy and love for all human life. With this view in mind, a crusade to kill thousands of people who have wronged you does not seem entirely justified.

I believe that while there is bad blood between the religions and persecutions both ways have taken place, this does not give one another the right to ruthlessly attack and kill thousands of innocent people because of their religious beliefs. Looking further back in history it was not terribly long ago that both religions were brand new and were eventually accepted by the Roman Empire as a legal religion within the republic. With this in mind, I think that the crusade to smite men of a different religion is wrong and should not be the sole reason for such a terrible event. The only reason which gives the crusade validity is that fact that Christian pilgrims to Jerusalem were massacred and treated like dirt while on a holy mission. If it were the opposite and Christians had massacred Muslims who were on pilgrimage to Mecca then a crusade against Christians would not be outrageous either.

Word Count: 419

USNA v. Sun Tzu

Maxwell Shuman

In Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, he uses a repeating set of a fundamental five tenets to get across the best way to achieve victory in war. It seems that the overarching philosophy which Sun Tzu employ’s that the winner and the loser of a battle is predetermined and can be seen in the way which different campaigns make a plan and train for victory. While Sun Tzu goes into detail on the actual strategies of war and battle I think that the most applicable part to what we are taught at the naval academy falls under the umbrella of chapter one, “Making of Plans.” A large part of war and preparation here at the academy is that of basic leadership characteristics. In his first fundamental of the making of plans Sun Tzu talks of “The Way” and the overall idea that a group must be bought in and committed to a cause. This can be translated to life here at the academy as we are taught each and every day that if we do not work together to accomplish a goal, our efforts will fall to shambles on the ground. An example of this is the Herndon Monument climb at the end of plebe year. This event takes hundreds of plebes stacked on top of one another to complete and if even one decides that they do not want to help anymore, the entire pyramid could collapse upon itself.

In another respect some of Sun Tzu’s perspective is contradictory to that of the Naval Academy. Sun Tzu goes on to discuss the Way of war which he claims to be a way of deception. I think that when it comes to wartime strategy this could be useful against a common enemy, however here at USNA it is rare that deception or deceit would be accepted as a “good” strategy. Instead, the academy preaches honor and honesty as major tenets for future Navy and Marine Corps officers. I think that when it comes to the development and training of men and women in the military it is important to teach and preach the ideals of integrity so that they may not go back on this and cut corners in the future.

While Sun Tzu’s philosophy in The Art of War is highly touted and in some ways is very reflective of the strategies military’s today use, I think the Naval Academy does a good job adding on to his outlook to create for an officer who will lead sailors and marines effectively in today’s wars.

Word Count: 426

Christianity as a Threat to Rome

Maxwell Shuman

In today’s society the idea of polytheism seems odd and altogether childish; however, in the time of Ancient Rome polytheism was the custom. Whether or not citizens of the ancient empire worshiped all of the roman pantheon, they at the very least acknowledged the existence and power of the other deities. Worship and listening to the omens of the gods is at the center of politics, war strategy and many other major aspects of roman life. For many Romans the idea of Christians within their empire worshiping only one God went against nearly everything which their empire is built upon. With this in mind, I think that the fear which many Romans have towards this unknown religion is valid as it could pose major implications of the future of the structure of the empire. I do not think, however, that the Romans have a right to stamp the religion out.

In the minds of the Romans, Christians posed a threat to undermine the structure of everything Rome is built on. Christianity poses a threat to the roman way of life as it takes away the godly aspects of daily life such as demigod kings, oracle prophesies, and many other basic tenets of the ancient way of life. By taking away such entities in roman daily life would only turn Rome against itself. An everyday example of this is the many coin which held the faces of gods and eventually those of emperors in power. This is only allowed as the roman pantheon is so large that emperors, who are rumored to have the favor of the gods themselves, are seen as deities in their own right. With a monotheistic religion such as Christianity, a human in power could never be elevated to such a height as God. This would in turn take away power from the emperor and decrease his right to rule over an empire the size of Rome.

I do not believe that the Romans have a right to “stamp out” any religion as it is not a proper solution for ruling an empire to just get rid of people based on their beliefs. In his letter to Emperor Trajan, Pliny seems to be of the mind that Christians can be shifted in their beliefs saying: “I think that it is still possible for it to be checked and directed to better ends,” as well as, “it is easy to infer from this that a great many people could be reformed if they were given an opportunity to repent.” With this in mind, it is evident that there is another way than to simply stamp out other religions.

I believe that the Romans have a validity in their fear of what Christianity has the potential to do to their empire; however, I do not believe that they have a right to stamp the religion out as a whole.

Word Count: 480 (440 without quotes)

A Comparison of Democracy

When comparing a democracy of the past to today’s society it is easy to pick out where things are different and how the many changes and assets of our democracy create for a more optimal government. Whether it is in the three branches of government or the representation process of congress, the distinctions are clear. I believe it to be more important to look for the similarities in the two democracies and find out what aspects of our government evolved from that of Athens. These similarities also go to show the advancement and forward thinking Athenians possessed in their bold venture of democracy. I think that the most significant similarity between American and Athenian democracies is the presence of a small “executive committee” called the boule which decided the topics which would be discussed in the assemblies. This similarity is incredibly important as it proves that there was some order to the Athenian assembly which allowed the democracy to perform as a structured unit.

While their respective voting systems are different on a variety of issues, the fact that a small committee presents general proposals and decisions proves the early forming of a congress or higher congregation used to create an agenda in the democracy. According to an encyclopedia on ancient history, the boule’s represented all the districts under the Athenian democracy with individuals serving yearlong terms while limited to two non-consecutive years. In the American democracy of today, politicians are limited to two year terms when serving in the House of Representatives and six year terms when serving in the senate. By applying these limits to the small committee of agenda makers, it ensures not only that new ideas are constantly flowing but, also that the assembly does not get over concentrated with similar arguments each session. In a “pure democracy,” such as the one in Athens, it is crucial that this executive committee be active as without such presiders the assembly has potential for a major downfall. An example of how the Athenian boule and assembly created major influence in their democracy was the initial passing and later vetoing of metics who have earned merit being allowed to become citizens. If the electorates of the boule had not brought this case back to the assembly, it likely would have gone through for good. Similarly, in the congress of today, there are numerous congressional sessions and arguments before a final vote is decided. An example of this is the debate and legislation of minimum wage. While federally it has been in place since 2009, minimum wage is renegotiated in state congresses and has changed as recently as this year in Minnesota.

In conclusion, without an “executive committee” to preside over a congregation such as an Athenian assembly or the American government, governments would not be able to create a variety of ideas and ensure that the right decision is made or is discussed to the right end.

Works Cited:

Cartwright, Mark. “Athenian Democracy.” Ancient History Encyclopedia, Ancient History Encyclopedia, 1 Oct. 2018, www.ancient.eu/Athenian_Democracy/.

“Minimum Wage Laws.” United States Department of Labor, http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm#stateDetails.

Blog Post #1

Maxwell Shuman

Professor Sagstetter

12 September 2018

While tyranny is a term that very clearly carries a negative connotation in today’s society, the word has not always been dictated with such disgust. In the era of the pre-democratic world, tyrants were elected as people to break up the hereditary lines that many countries had gained too much power and were no longer ruling with efficiency. Over time, this word has come to describe the likes of Adolf Hitler, Genghis Khan, and Henry VIII. With characters such as these, it is not altogether shocking that the real meaning behind the word changed slightly. According to Richard M. Reinish II, author of “Autonomy on the Road to Tyranny,” tyranny in America has come to describe actions that would have liberties taken away from American citizens which are guaranteed to them in the Constitution of the United States. When approaching the term from a broader outlook, Reinish states that tyrants are “citizens who left nations whose traditions kept them from being all they could be” (Reinish 55). In a modern sense, I feel that this is a facile assessment of the effects that tyranny can have on a population when compared to the dramatic stigma with which it is often associated. According to Dictionary.com, tyranny is defined as “arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power.” Comparing these two points of view on the subject I believe that they are both somewhat along the right path that tyranny is an imbalance of power. However, where I slightly disagree with their statements is that I think tyrants are often originally beloved by at least a section of society and are ushered in during a period of need for an organization or political entity.

I think that the combination of these definitions aligns with the ancient definitions in some respects, but is lacking in others. Tyrants in the ancient world certainly ascertained a good amount of power and were given nations to rule; however, rights for the majority of people were far more limited than in today’s society and therefore were not taken or encroached upon to the magnitude that tyrants have in the modern age. Moreover, I believe that tyranny has gained a harsher connotation in the modern world, not because of worse treatment, but rather the change in the progression of human rights and a tyrant’s inability to recognize these rights.

Works Cited:

Reinish II, Richard M. “Autonomy on the Road to Tyranny.” Modern Age. Winter Edition. (2018): (55-62). Print.

“Dictionary.com.” Dictionary.com, September, 2018.