Portfolio Reflection

Military/Police
Andrew Farquharson
History 134
August 15th, 2016

Military power has been a defining feature of nations, tribes, villages, empires, and
dynasties throughout history. So many nations have risen and fallen due to wars and revolutions
that it can almost be said that violence is a part of human nature. Be it the desire to conquer vast
lands, as in the case of Alexander the Great and of Clovis, or the ambition to take back a place
precious to oneself, as in the case of Muhammad, reasons to battle one another have existed all
throughout the time humans have been a part of Earth. Its no surprise then that many consider
warring inevitable, and that applying caution and negotiation only delays what will come to be.
So then, is there a reason to strive for a peaceful world, and can humans overcome their
instinctive nature to be afraid of people not similar to themselves in order to live in harmony?
There are certainly many reasons to be pessimistic, as will be detailed, but humanitys ever
growing history will be the exact reason that large scale violent conflicts cease sometime in the
future.
Alexander was quite the military genius. That has been said many times to the point of
oversaturation, but the fact remains that he never lost a battle and conquered a large portion of
the civilized world at that point in history. Glory was the one thing Alexander wanted above
all else (Fitzwilliam). Alexander led armies that killed thousands mainly because he had the
ability. While the spoils of his victories helped his armies and nation in the short term, it would
be fool hardy to suggest that the expansion of Macedonia was a long term benefit. After
Alexanders death, there were immediate internal conflicts and the nation he had forged cracked
into many separate pieces. What was the purpose of his struggles, then? Would he have gone out
of his way to have such a militaristic approach to expanding his empire if he had known that it
would crumble? History is a lesson: a lesson of intentions, movements, experiments, and human

production (Postma). In Alexanders case, it seems to be a harsh lesson for those to come:
theres a point where one bites off more than he can chew.
If people were perfect and could learn from past humans experiences without fail, it
might be that large scale expansion using violence and war would never have happened again. Or
at least, power hungry people might try to rule over a smaller, more manageable area. Frankish
power passes to Clovis, who churns with greater ambition than his father, and who takes power
by brutal force (The Rule of Clovis). Clovis was a man who simply sought power for powers
sake. He set up a small dynasty of rulers during 5th and 6th century Europe. Although what he had
gained in terms of land stayed united longer than Alexanders area, it did eventually crumble.
Clearly we need careful reflection about, and search for, enduring patterns and critical turning
points in the past, for these are the historical facts that everyone needs to know (McNeill).
Clovis may not have ever learned of Alexander the Great, but one must wonder how Clovis
would view his achievements. Would knowing that its possible to conquer enormous amounts of
land by waging wars encourage him, or would the knowledge that Macedonia was doomed to fail
because of Alexanders actions make him hesitate?
For Muhammads case, its a bit different. While being a religious leader and founder of
Islam, he was a General and in 630, the Islamic community took back Mecca (Muller). The
Prophet of Allah was a fine leader, but that may have been the problem. Using a religion as
backings for the military and as a tool for conquering cities and nations was not unique to
Muhammad, but it certainly is effective. When people believe they are doing absolute good in
the eyes of God, it is very easy to motivate them to battle. Regardless, Muhammad set the tone
for the Islamic empire, and besides the next four Caliphs expanding the borders of the nation he
founded to its bursting point, he taught future Muslims that the church and state should be one

and the same. How could a religion have longevity if its followers could not protect themselves?
Militaristic is a way one could would describe the Islamic State. While its doubtful that
Muhammad could have the foresight to envision such a group of people (and while not all
Muslims conform to its views), its unlikely that ISIS would have gained such a large following
without the war-torn history of Islams origins.
Theres not just bad things about militarism, though. Right now, the world today is safer
than it ever has been, and its doubtful that will be changing any time soon. The long history of
bloodshed and violence have laid the foundation to hopefully never have to go through it again.
With so many people advocating for peace and using a vast history of militaristic failures to their
advantage, its only a matter of time before enough people are educated to effectively end violent
conflict between nations. There is still a long time to go, but technology is also advancing at an
astounding rate, and being able to talk and understand anyone else on the planet will allow
humans to grow closer to each other and help people truly feel sympathy for one another. The
basic skills and instincts needed to survive have been lost to technology and the reliance on
electrical power (Taylor). Some may see this as a disadvantage, but technology has allowed us
to share in the human experience with everyone. Instincts for survival are the very thing that
cause violence between people, and it would actually be more beneficial in this era to try and
suppress animal-like motivations. Theres a long way to go before large-scale conflicts are put to
an end, but laying the groundwork for future generations without violence and militarism is the
most important mission for everyone alive today.

Bibliography
Beyond the Movie: Alexander the Great. Dir. Helen Fitzwilliam. Perf. Ron David, Robin Lane Fox and Paul
Cartledge. 2004. Television.
Islam, the Quran, and the Five Pillars All Without a Flamewar: Crash Course World History #13. Dir. Stan
Muller. Perf. John Green. 2012. Video. 15 August 2016.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpcbfxtdoI8#aid=P8jxIIaFpyA>.
McNeill, William H. "Why Study History." 1985. American Historical Association. Article. 15 August 2016.
<https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-andarchives/archives/why-study-history-(1985)>.
Postma, Michael. What Can History Teach Us Today? n.d. Article. 15 August 2016.
Taylor, Nicole. Ocelot Scholars. 2013. Discussion. 15 August 2016.
<http://ocelotscholars.org/discussions/ice-age.html>.
The Rule of Clovis. History Channel, n.d. Video. 15 August 2016.
<http://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/videos/dark-ages-the-franks---clovis-part-2>.