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