Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf

Home > Fantasy > Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf > Page 32
Microsoft Word - front-1-4438-1743-0.rtf Page 32

by Amanda


  were also fighting out of national pride and to show who the better

  professional in the field was. In this clash the Greeks proved to be at least

  no worse than the Macedonians. Even the Alexander’s arch apologist

  Arrian states that over 120 soldiers of the Macedonian phalanx perished,

  which is more than the total number of Macedonian losses he records for

  other battles such as Granicus (115) or Gaugamela (100). Bearing in mind

  94 Plb., 12.19-21 (after Callisthenes); Arr., Ann. , 2.8.9-11; Diod., 17.33.2; Curt.,

  3.11.2-3; Plu., Alex. , 20.8; It. Alex. , 35. Hammond 1996, pp. 103-104.

  95 Arr., An. , 2.9.4.

  96 Arr., An. , 2.10.3, 2.11.2; Callisth., FGrH, 124 F35 (= Plb., 12.18.11); Diod., 17.33.3; Curt., 3.11.13-15; It. Alex. , 35.

  From Abydus to Alexandria

  171

  that Arrian always minimises the figures for Macedonian casualties, it is

  safe to presume that the actual number of Macedonian phalangites lost at

  Issus was somewhat greater than 120. Moreover, throughout Alexander’s

  reign we can be certain that it was in this battle the Macedonian phalanx

  faced its greatest challenge and came closest to defeat.97

  On the right flank Alexander with his Macedonian cavalry very

  quickly attacked the local infantry and cavalry, intending this way to break

  their resolve to fight. Without doubt he was consciously heading straight

  for Darius’s chariot to kill or capture the enemy’s commander and thus

  resolve the war with one blow. The strategic consideration was sure

  strengthened by heroic principles of Alexander imitating or rivalling his

  mythical ancestor Achilles in striving for glory in single combat with the

  enemy leader. In order to protect the Great King’s chariot the elite Persian

  cavalry moved forward commanded by Darius’s brother Oxyathres and

  including distinguished Iranian aristocrats, of whom the sources mention

  Sabaces – the satrap of Egypt, Arsames, Atizyes, Bubaces and

  Rheomithres. We know that the fighting with this elite force was ferocious;

  all the above mentioned Persian aristocrats perished and Alexander was

  wounded in the thigh. According to a romantic tale invented by his

  chamberlain, Chares, this wound was inflicted by none other than Darius

  himself. It is difficult not to get the impression that Darius had made a

  tactical mistake in concentrating too much cavalry on the right flank,

  where on account of the lack of space it could not effectively make use of

  its numerical superiority. On the other hand, he had not deployed enough

  soldiers to effectively secure his left flank, which was where Alexander

  directed the main thrust of his attack. The Macedonian cavalry was

  gradually prevailing over the enemy and posing an ever greater threat to

  the Great King. Then all of a sudden the horses of the Royal chariot,

  wounded by Macedonian spears, took fright and refused to respond to the

  driver’s bridles. For a while it looked as if they would throw the Royal

  passenger off the chariot and into enemy hands. This moment of extreme

  peril for the Great King is depicted in the famous Alexander Mosaic,

  found at the House of the Faun in Pompeii. The Alexander Mosaic is

  reportedly a second-century copy of a masterpiece painted, according to

  Pliny, at the end of the 4th century by Philoxenus of Eretria for King

  Cassander of Macedonia. It is said that at a critical moment Darius himself

  took hold of the reigns and restored enough control over the horses so that

  at least a second chariot could be brought up for him to board. The

  situation was still extremely dangerous. In order to escape enemy capture

  97 Arr., An. , 2.10.4-7. Bosworth 1980, p. 214.

  172

  Chapter IV

  the Great King next mounted a mare that had been specially kept tethered

  behind the chariot and, casting away his Royal insignia, he rode away

  from the battlefield. The escape was not an act of cowardice. Darius had

  more than once proved his valour, and even in this battle he incurred a

  wound whilst fighting. Nor did he leave at the very start of the fighting as

  Arrian claims, but only after the situation on the battlefield made it

  apparent he was in direct danger of being captured or killed. According to

  Iranian beliefs, grave responsibilities rested on the monarch’s shoulders

  when commanding a war. For such situations were not only an armed

  conflict between men but also a cosmic one where the Persian side

  represented the forces of truth, goodness and light, whereas the enemy

  represented the forces of lies, evil and darkness. Therefore in such a

  struggle the Great King should not die or, worse still, get himself captured;

  in such cases it was better for a monarch to retreat in order to be able to

  continue the struggle at a later stage.98

  Though consistent with the Zoroastrian principles of political theory,

  regrettably, Darius’s escape could not have had a positive affect on the

  logic of the battlefield. The Persian cavalry that had so far fought valiantly

  in defence of the King now began to withdraw from the battlefield too.

  Alexander could not immediately give chase for the situation in the centre

  and on the left wing demanded immediate intervention. There the ever

  weaker position of the Macedonian forces could still turn the battle in the

  Persians’ favour. A determined attack was now launched on the flank of

  the mercenary hoplites, who had up to that moment been successfully

  bearing down on the Macedonian phalanx. But despite what Arrian says, a

  resurgent Macedonian phalanx did not ultimately defeat the hoplite

  mercenaries. Instead it must have been, as Curtius writes, that on seeing

  their employer, the Great King leave the battle ground, they too started to

  withdraw in an ordered fashion. This is confirmed by the fact that in

  battles over the next three years there appeared some complete

  detachments of several thousand Greek veterans of the Battle of Issus.

  News of Darius’s escape and the retreat of the mercenaries spread

  throughout the Persian ranks and led to the breaking up of other

  detachments, including the cavalry on the left wing. By dusk the entire

  98 Plb., 12.22.2 (after Callisthenes); Arr., An. , 2.10.3, 2.11.4-8, 2.12.1; Diod.,

  17.33.5-34.7; Curt., 3.11.7-11; Plu., Alex. , 20.8-9 (quoting Chares: FGrH, 125 F6); Plu., mor. , 241b-c; Just., 11.9; Ael., NA, 6.48; It. Alex. , 35; Ps.-Callisth., 1.41.

  Atkinson 1980, pp. 229-237; Bosworth 1980, pp. 215-216; Bosworth 1988, pp. 61-

  62; Nylander 1993, pp. 149-151; Hammond 1996, pp. 108-109; Briant 1996, pp.

  239-242; Lendon 2005, pp. 136-138. Alexander Mosaic: Plin., Nat. , 35.110.

  Stewart 1993, pp. 130-150; Cohen 1997.

  From Abydus to Alexandria

  173

  great Persian army was in full retreat. Alexander triumphed in this first

  major battle for the control of Asia thanks to his courage, determination

  and tactical genius, which compensated for the strategic shortcomings, for

  in that particular respect, in the autumn of 333, the enemy proved to be

  superior. It should also be stressed that the Battle of Issus was primarily

  and almost single-handedly won by the Macedonian cavalry, which was

  better t
rained and better armed than its Persian opponent.99

  It was only once he was certain of victory on all sections of the front

  that Alexander sought to capture Darius. But by then the Great King had

  covered a lot of ground moving rapidly and changing horses on the way.

  Moreover, the chase was hampered by crowds of fleeing Persian soldiers.

  Alexander is said to have pursued the Great King for 60 stades (11 km),

  but now it was dark and, seeing the futility of advancing any further,

  Alexander decided to turn back. As a consolation prize he had the Great

  King’s chariot and his royal insignia: a bow, a shield and an outer garment

  called the kandys.100 As happened so often in ancient battles, the reported

  numbers of losses on the losing side were disproportionately higher than

  the losses on the victor’s side, though of course we should not treat

  literarily the ancient authors’ rhetorical descriptions of piles of killed

  Persians, their bodies covering the entire field or of mountain ravines

  being filled with corpses. Undoubtedly, as well as a given author’s sense

  of fantasy, the figures provided in the sources reflect Macedonian

  propaganda. The most frequently cited figure for the number of Persians

  killed is 100,000 or 110,000 (Arrian, Diodorus and Curtius) as opposed to

  270-450 Macedonians killed. Justin reduces the number of Persian

  casualties to 61,000. No doubt the figures given by the anonymous

  historian on the Oxyrhynchus papyrus are much closer to the truth: 1,200

  Macedonians killed, 53,000 Persians killed and a number of Greek

  mercenaries killed which we do not know because that bit of papyrus is

  damaged. We cannot accept that Darius’s army incurred the extremely

  heavy losses described in the sources as several of its most important units,

  including the Persian cavalry and the Greek infantry, left the battle in an

  orderly fashion and therefore could not have been slaughtered like routed

  soldiers. The high number of wounded Macedonians (4,500) given by

  Curtius probably accurately reflects the consequences of a battle whose

  99 Diod., 17.34.7; Curt., 3.11.11-16; Arr., An. , 2.11.4-7; Just., 11.9; It. Alex. , 35.

  Lane Fox 1973, pp. 173-174.

  100 Curt., 3.11.26, 3.12.1; Arr., An. , 2.11.5-7; Plu., Alex. , 20.10; POxy. 1798 (=

  FGrH, 148), fr. 44, col. iii; Ps.-Callisth., 1.41.

  174

  Chapter IV

  fate for a long time hung in the balance and in which the victorious side

  also incurred heavy losses.101

  While Alexander was still pursuing Darius, the rest of victorious

  Macedonian army with ease captured the Persian camp and found there the

  families of the Persian aristocrats as well as servants. The property of the

  defeated enemy was plundered, whereas the hapless Persian women were

  given to the Macedonian army rabble to be humiliated and raped. Only

  tent or rather portable palace of Darius and his family were spared this

  unseemly fate. Alexander’s men secured it from the other soldiers as their

  victorious leader’s rightful property. Though most of the Persian baggage

  train with the servants and treasure chests had been sent on to Damascus,

  3,000 talents were found at the Persian camp after the battle. After

  returning from his unsuccessful chase Alexander enjoyed a bath in

  Darius’s gold tub and next attended a banquet in the Great King’s captured

  tent, where, according to Plutarch, on beholding all the items of luxury he

  is said to have commented: ‘This, as it would seem, is to be a king’. The

  ‘itinerant’ nature of the Persian state gave this tent a very important status

  as the mobile residence of the Great King. Therefore its capture was also

  symbolically very significant. As 200 years earlier Cyrus the Great had

  sealed his victory over the king of the Medes, Astyages, by capturing his

  tent and throne, so now the capturing of Darius III’s tent by Alexander was

  seen as a portent of the imminent defeat of the entire Achaemenid

  monarchy.102

  However, Alexander’s most valuable trophy was not Darius’ property

  but his family, which, according to Persian custom, accompanied him even

  to where the fighting was. The Macedonians had captured Darius’s mother,

  Sisigambis, his wife, Stateira, his daughters Stateira and Drypetis as well

  as his son, Ochos. The sources relate a romantic tale, originally ascribed to

  Callisthenes, regarding Alexander’s first contact with Darius’s family. He

  is said to have discovered that the family was in the Persian camp when he

  entered the Great King’s tent and heard the Persian women lamenting

  Darius’s death – for that is what they believed at the time. The

  Macedonian victor wished to console them with the news that Darius had

  actually escaped and was still alive. First he instructed Mithrenes to tell

  them this news, but then, realising that the sight of a Persian traitor might

  be too painful for them, decided to send his hetairos Leonnatus, who also

  101 Arr., An. , 2.11.8; Diod., 17.34.8-9, 17.36.6; Curt., 3.11.27; Just., 11.9.10; POxy.

  1798 (= FGrH, 148), fr. 44, col. iv. Bosworth 1980, p. 216-217.

  102 Arr., An. , 2.11.9-10; Diod., 17.35.2-36.1, 17.36.5, 17.37.2; Curt., 3.11.19-23;

  Plu., Alex. , 20.11-13; POxy. 1798 (= FGrH, 148), fr. 44, col. iii; Just., 11.10.1-5.

  Briant 1996, pp. 200-201, 267-268.

  From Abydus to Alexandria

  175

  spoke Persian, instead. The following morning Alexander personally

  visited the distinguished captives. In keeping with Persian custom the

  women performed a ceremonial bow ( proskynesis) before their new ruler.

  Unfortunately they mistook the new ruler to be Hephaestion, who was

  standing next to Alexander and visibly taller than him. When the eunuchs

  explained the mistake to the women, a panic stricken Sisigambis is said to

  have fallen to Alexander’s feet apologising profusely for this obvious

  insult to his majesty. This gives Alexander’s biographers the opportunity

  to present him raising the women to her feet with the words: ‘Never mind,

  Mother. For actually he too is Alexander.’ The Macedonian king allowed

  the distinguished captives bury their fallen compatriots with honours and

  ensured that they lived in conditions no worse than they had enjoyed at the

  court of the Great King. Moreover, he promised to find worthy husbands

  for Darius’s daughters and an appropriate education for his son. The

  ancient authors stressed that Alexander showed due respect and propriety

  towards his defeated enemy’s daughters and wife, even though she was

  considered to be the most beautiful woman in the whole of Asia. This was

  not a consequence of his homosexuality but of virtue and self-restraint. It

  reflected Alexander’s famous comment about Persian women being

  ‘torments to the eyes’ in the sense that their ravishing beauty hurt him

  because of his self-imposed temperance. Nevertheless in this case

  Alexander’s behaviour seems to reflect his (or his advisors’) deep

  understanding of the Oriental ideology of authority. The women of the

  ruling house also symbolised the state and in that sense they could transfer

  the legitimacy of power from the defeated ruler to
the victor. The victor,

  on the other hand, should not only prove himself militarily but also show a

  kingly respect for his opponent, particularly his mother. Therefore

  Alexander’s dignified treatment of Darius III’s family was another step

  towards his aim of gaining recognition among the Persian elites as the

  rightful successor of the Achaemenid dynasty. 103 The first was after

  Granicus, when he tried to win over the Iranian aristocrats.

  The following day the bodies of fallen Macedonian soldiers were

  buried with honours. Those who had distinguished themselves in battle

  received rewards and Alexander personally visited the tents of wounded

  soldiers, thought he himself was still suffering from the wound inflicted

  during his fight with the Persian cavalry. This way he not only

  103 Arr., An. , 2.11.9, 2.12.3-8; Diod., 17.37.3-38.7; Curt., 3.12.1-26; Plu., Alex. , 21; Plu., mor. , 338d-e; Fragmentum Sabbaiticum, FGrH, 151 F1.5; Apion, ap. Gel., 7.8.1-3; Just., 11.9; It. Alex. , 35, 37; Ps.-Callisth., 1.41. Keaeney 1978; Bosworth

  1980, pp. 220-222; Bosworth 1988, pp. 63-64; Brosius 1996, pp. 21-22; Nawotka

  2003, pp. 123-124.

  176

  Chapter IV

  strengthened the bond with his army but also created for posterity a heroic

  image of someone able to overcome physical injury in order to remain

  fully active. It was also then that he appointed Balacrus, one of his

  bodyguards, satrap of Cilicia. To commemorate the great victory at Issus,

  the town closest to the battlefield, was renamed the ‘city of victory’ –

  Nicopolis. With time, however, Issus reverted to its original name. Shortly

  after the Battle of Issus the Tarsus mint issued Alexander’s first coins in

  Asia. These were large silver coins (tetradrachms), one of which equalled

  four days of pay for a Macedonian or mercenary foot soldier. They bore

  the images of the gods Zeus and Heracles, which were popular images on

  coins in both Macedonia and Cilicia. The remarkable resemblance

  between the Zeus on Alexander’s tetradrachms and the image of Baal on

 

‹ Prev