Alexander the Great: Master of Physical Security and Security Risk Management

Alexander the Great is widely regarded as one of history's greatest military commanders. His conquests of vast territories across Europe, Asia, and Africa remain the stuff of legend. However, Alexander's success on the battlefield was not only due to his tactical genius but also to his effective use of Physical Security (PHYSEC) and Security Risk Management (SRM) principles.

PHYSEC Principles

Alexander recognised the importance of PHYSEC in warfare. He understood that secure bases and fortifications were essential to protect his troops from enemy attacks. He used natural barriers such as rivers, mountains, and cliffs to protect his troops and prevent the enemy from accessing his position. He also used engineering skills to construct fortified walls and trenches to protect his troops.

During his campaign in Persia, Alexander constructed a series of fortified camps along the Tigris River, which allowed him to hold off a much larger Persian force. He also built a fortified city at Alexandria, which served as a secure base for his troops during his campaign in Egypt. These fortified positions allowed him to hold off enemy attacks, secure his supply lines, and rest his troops.

Alexander also recognised the importance of advanced weaponry and armour in PHYSEC. His soldiers were equipped with high-quality armour, such as bronze breastplates, helmets, and shields, which protected them from enemy arrows and swords. He also employed advanced weaponry, such as catapults and ballistae, which allowed him to attack his enemies from a distance and take advantage of the natural terrain. For example, during his siege of Tyre, he used catapults to launch boulders at the city's walls, while his ships attacked the city from the sea.

SRM Principles

Alexander also used SRM principles to assess, mitigate, and manage risks and threats to his troops. He carefully assessed the risks and threats associated with military campaigns by gathering intelligence on his enemies, evaluating their strengths and weaknesses, and making strategic decisions based on his assessment of the risks.

Before his famous victory at the Battle of Issus, Alexander learned that the Persian king, Darius III, was planning to attack him from the rear. He responded by leaving a small force to guard his rear, while the bulk of his army engaged Darius' troops head-on. This allowed him to neutralise the threat from the rear and secure a decisive victory.

Alexander also took measures to reduce the risks associated with military campaigns. He built fortified encampments, secured supply lines, and established communication networks. During his campaign in India, Alexander built a series of fortified outposts along his supply lines to protect his troops from attacks by local tribes. He also used diplomacy, negotiation, and alliances to minimise the risks of conflict and gain strategic advantages.

Conclusion

Alexander the Great's success on the battlefield was due in large part to his effective use of PHYSEC and SRM principles. His ability to assess risks, mitigate threats, and protect his troops through the use of fortified positions and advanced weaponry, allowed him to conquer vast territories and defeat some of history's most formidable enemies.

By applying these principles to his military campaigns, Alexander set an example for future military commanders and established a legacy that continues to inspire military strategists today. His mastery of PHYSEC and SRM remains a testament to the importance of physical security and risk management in achieving military objectives.

Protect your organisation from physical security threats with our expert risk management solutions. Our experienced security consultants will identify potential risks and implement effective measures to safeguard your people, assets and operations. Contact us today to learn how we can help you secure your business.

Previous
Previous

Training and Awareness: The Key to Effective Physical Security Risk Management in New Zealand 

Next
Next

Understanding the Threat Landscape: Identifying Physical Security Risks in New Zealand