Alexander the Great, hailed by the West as the head of the four great military gods, but put it into the Warring States period, the result may be very different. Take the Battle of Jeddaspur as an example to reveal Alexander's true military face. The article will reinterpret this battle from multiple angles, not only Alexander's tactical mistakes, but also compare the thoughts of the Chinese and Chinese events in the same period, and show the fate that Alexander may encounter in the Seven Heroes of the Warring States.
Alexander the Great is known as the first of the four great military gods of the West, but if he is in the Warring States Period, can he still shine?The Battle of Jeddaspur revealed Alexander's weaknesses and military blunders and gave us space to think.
First of all, Alexander used the tactic of "striking the east and attacking the west" in this battle, but in fact it was a failed sneak attack. In the face of the rookie Indian army, Alexander succeeded by chance, but his contempt for the enemy was exposed. In China during the same period, the generals of the Seven Heroes of the Warring States had a deep understanding of the terrain and had already achieved surprising victories through ambushes and other means.
Alexander's strategy of dividing his forces also exposed problems. After selecting the location for crossing the river, he disguised a part of the army as the main force and divided 5,000 troops to form a second attack wave, but the actual main force was only 150,000 people. Such a military layout was simply self-defeating in the Warring States Period, and was far from the wise division of troops among ancient Chinese generals.
Crossing the river in the middle of the night was one of Alexander's fatal mistakes. During the midnight crossing, they discovered that the place where they came ashore was actually just an island in the middle of the river, making the crossing difficult. At the same time, the scouts of the Indian army had already spotted the enemy troops crossing the river, but they missed the opportunity to attack because of the improper way of transmitting information.
Alexander's decisions on the battlefield were even more shocking. He chose to face off head-on on the preset battlefield in India and face off against the mighty Elephant Legion. This kind of tactical decision was unimaginable among Chinese generals during the Warring States period, because they had already learned to lure the enemy to their predetermined battlefield in order to achieve surprising results.
At the Battle of the Jedaspur River, Alexander's military prowess was not fully displayed. In contrast, China's Warring States generals had already mastered subtle tactics such as ambushes and inducements, which made Alexander's steps difficult and even crushing in this era.
Looking back at the campaign, Alexander exposes a number of fatal problems. First of all, he failed to do a good job of battlefield reconnaissance, which led to the river-crossing troops wasting a lot of time when they strayed into the island in the middle of the river. Secondly, the strategic purpose was not clear, and Alexander's performance appeared hesitant compared to the generals of the Warring States period who were good at winning by surprise. In addition, the mistake of dividing the troops led to a reduction in the main force, which made the whole battle unfavorable to Alexander.
In China during the same period, military thinking was already maturing day by day. In 714 B.C., Zheng Zhuang Gong set up an ambush to lure the enemy in the Beirong WarIn 632 BC, during the Battle of Chengpu in Jin and Chu, the Jin people had already begun to lure the enemy to their preset battlefield to fight;In 506 BC, Sun Wu led the Wu army to raid thousands of miles and directly attacked the capital of Chu. These examples prove that the Chinese generals of the Warring States period not only had a deep understanding of the terrain, but were also adept at using tactics flexibly to achieve the goal of surprising victory.
In general, Alexander the Great may have faced even more serious challenges during the Warring States period, and possibly even suffered a crushing defeat. The generals of China's Warring States period, with their superb military wisdom and flexible tactics, may have made Alexander an unsung hero in this era.
This article presents a unique view of history through an insightful analysis of Alexander the Great's performance at the Battle of the Jedas Spurg and a comparison of it in China during the Warring States period. The author's unique perspective and in-depth interpretation give the reader a new understanding of Alexander's military talents.
First of all, the article provides an exhaustive revelation of Alexander's military mistakes, especially a series of problems in tactical choices and battlefield decisions. By pointing out Alexander's flaws in the campaign, the article urges readers to be objective and not bound by conventional ideas when examining history. This objective and profound historical interpretation makes Alexander the Great, a figure known as the god of war in the West, present a more real and full-fledged side.
Second, by placing Alexander in the Warring States period China for comparison, the article succeeds in highlighting the military differences between different civilizations. In contrast, the generals of the Warring States period in China used tactics flexibly and were adept at winning by surprise, which contrasted sharply with Alexander's performance at the Battle of the Jedaspur River. Such a comparison makes the reader feel the differences in military wisdom between various civilizations more intuitively, and enhances the persuasiveness of the article.
One of the highlights of the article is the inclusion of the book "This is War" recommended by the author in the commentary, which provides readers with a broader perspective of military knowledge through the analysis of more than 20 classic war examples in ancient and modern China and foreign countries. This extension of knowledge makes the point of view of the article more in-depth and powerful. At the same time, the recommendation of this book also provides a useful reference for those readers who are interested in military affairs and history.
Finally, the conclusion of the article neatly summarizes the entire content, highlighting the challenges that Alexander may have faced during the Warring States period. This kind of ending not only echoes the question at the beginning of the article, but also leaves the reader with deep food for thought. On the whole, this review not only provides a full and in-depth analysis of the article, but also provides readers with more room for thinking through comparison and recommended bibliography, which is an article worthy of in-depth thinking and discussion.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!