Aspects of Greek History (750–323BC)

by Terry Buckley

  As a great slaughter was taking place and because the strength of the Persians was proving hard to withstand, Parmenion sent some of his cavalry to Alexander, urging him to bring help as soon as possible. These carried out their orders swiftly, but upon discovering that Alexander had gone far from the battlefield in pursuit, they went back having failed to give him the message.

  (Diodorus 17.60.7)

  The Diodorus version of the unsuccessful appeal seems more convincing, since it would be extremely difficult to identify Alexander in the dust and the confusion of battle (Quintus Curtius 4.15.32–33; D.S. 17.60.4), let alone reach him when he was already in full pursuit of Darius. The different version of Arrian and Plutarch probably derives from Callisthenes, who displays an anti-Parmenion bias throughout his work (an example of which can be seen in Plutarch, Alexander 33.10).

  The final encounter in the battle was the clash between Alexander and the Companion Cavalry, returning from their pursuit of Darius, and the Parthians, Indians and Persians as they were fleeing. This tough and difficult encounter resulted in the death of 60 of the Companion Cavalry (A.A. 13.15.1–2). There has been an attempt to identify this group with the Indians and the Persians, who had broken through the Macedonian phalanx and attacked the baggage animals (according to Arrian); it is argued that they were now attempting to escape in the direction of the main Persian flight, when they met the returning Alexander and the Companion Cavalry. This seems unlikely, for Arrian does not mention any Parthians among the original group, and he states that only ‘some Indians and Persian cavalry’ broke through, most of whom were killed by the Macedonian second line of battle (A.A. 3.14.5–6). It is far more likely that these were Darius’ cavalry squadrons, including the elite squadron of the Royal kinsmen, who had been stationed on the Persian centre and centre-right and were eventually broken by the Macedonian phalanx. As they fled from the battlefield, they ran into Alexander and the Companion Cavalry, as they were returning to help Parmenion.

  This was possibly Alexander’s greatest victory against Darius. At the battle of Issus, the battlefield had favoured Alexander – a fact recognized by Darius:

  For some had persuaded Darius that, with regard to the battle of Issus, he had lost it due to the narrowness of the battlefield, and Darius agreed wholeheartedly.

  (Arrian, Anabasis 3.8.7)

  Alexander had now proved without the slightest shadow of doubt that he could defeat the Persians on any battlefield. His positioning and arrangement of his flank-guards and his staged introduction of them into the battle reveal that Alexander had no equal as a field commander in the mastery of tactics. In particular, his use of the ‘v’-shaped wedge, which brought about the collapse of the Persian centre-left, Darius’ flight and the Macedonian victory, was outstanding in its originality and marked a major advance in the art of warfare. Alexander had truly won the kingdom of Persia by right of conquest.

  Bibliography

  Bosworth, A. B. Commentary on Arrian’s History of Alexander, vol. 1, pp. 114–27 (Granicus); pp. 198–219 (Issus); pp. 285–313 (Gaugamela).

  Brunt, P. A. Arrian’s Anabasis, vols 1 and 2 (Loeb), Introduction and Appendixes.

  Burn, A. R. ‘Notes on Alexander’s campaigns, 332–330’, JHS 72.

  ——‘The generalship of Alexander’, Greece and Rome, vol. 12.

  Fuller, J. F. C. The Generalship of Alexander the Great, pt 2, ch. 6.

  Griffith, G. T. ‘Alexander’s generalship at Gaugamela’, JHS 67.

  Hammond, N. G. L. Alexander the Great: King, Commander and Statesman, 2nd edn, ch. 2, 4–6.

  ——‘The Battle of the Granicus River’, JHS 100.

  Hornblower, S. The Greek World 479–323 BC, ch. 18.

  Marsden, E. W. The Campaign of Gaugamela, ch. 4.

  Tarn, W. W. CAH vol. 6, ch. 12, sects 3, 4 and 7.

  GLOSSARY

  agora

  A market-place; the civic centre of any town, very similar in function to the Roman forum.

  apoikia

  A colony; but it was also a totally independent settlement, which had its own government and whose inhabitants were citizens of the colony and not of its mother-state.

  archon

  This was the name given to the top public officials in Athens before the advent of full democracy in the fifth century. There were the ‘eponymous archon’, who gave his name to the Athenian year; the ‘polemarch’ (war-leader), who was in charge of the army; the ‘basileus’ (king-archon), who was in charge of the state religion; and the six ‘thesmothetai’, who had judicial responsibilities.

  archontes

  These were Athenian officials who were resident in the cities of the Athenian Empire; it was their role to ensure that local politics reflected Athenian interests, that the ‘phoros’ was collected and despatched to Athens, and that the Athenian ‘proxenoi’ (see below) were protected. They were often in charge of small garrisons of troops and were widely spread throughout the Empire.

  Areopagus

  The aristocratic council in Athens, membership of which was restricted to ex-archons after their year of office. Ephialtes removed its political powers in 462/1.

  Atthidographers

  The collective name given to those historians who wrote an ‘Atthis’,a history of Athens.

  Boule

  A Council; in Athens, after the reforms of Cleisthenes (508/7) the Boule consisted of 500 citizens. It had two main tasks: first, to prepare the agenda for the Ecclesia; second, to supervise the administration of the state.

  cleruchy

  This was a settlement of Athenian citizens who, while retaining their citizenship, were sent out to take over a confiscated portion of allied territory.

  Common Peace

  This name was given to a series of peace treaties in the fourth century, in which the terms were applicable to all Greek states and not just those who had been in conflict. The first one was the King’s Peace (also known as the Peace of Antalcidas) in 386. These Common Peaces were Persian-backed and allowed the Persians’ favoured Greek ally (Sparta in the 380s and 370s, Thebes in the 360s) to impose their will on Greece, using as a pretext their position as ‘protectors’ of the Peace.

  decarchy

  A ruling oligarchy of ten men. These pro-Spartan decarchies were set up in the cities of the Athenian Empire by the Spartan commander, Lysander, in the last phase and in the immediate aftermath of the Peloponnesian War (431–404).

  deme

  Local communities, about 140 in number, which became the basis of political organization in Athens after the reforms of Cleisthenes. Each deme had its own Assembly and officials, including an elected ‘demarch’ (deme-leader); they also had to maintain a register of citizens, since membership of a deme was a necessary requirement for citizenship – every citizen was identified by his deme name as well as his father’s name.

  demos

  This term has a wide variety of meanings: first, the whole adult male citizen body; second, the common people or the poorer citizens, thus being differentiated from the rich, the aristocracy, etc.; third, the democrats who were in opposition to those who supported other constitutions, usually oligarchs; finally, the Athenian people in the Ecclesia.

  dokimasia

  A preliminary investigation of an incoming public official with regard to his eligibility to take up a public office.

  Ecclesia

  The Assembly; the meeting of adult male citizens. It was the sovereign body of state in Athens, regularly meeting four times a month.

  Ephor

  Five Ephors were elected annually from the whole Spartan citizen body and, by the fifth century, were the most powerful institution in Sparta.

  episcopos

  An overseer; these were Athenian visiting commissioners who were sent out to the cities in the Empire to investigate internal problems and then to report back their findings to the Athenian people. They were also involved in the establishm
ent of democratic constitutions among the allied cities.

  euthuna

  The examination of a public official’s record and financial accounts at the end of his year of office.

  Gerousia

  The Spartan council, consisting of the two kings and 28 elders, which prepared the agenda for the Spartan Assembly, acted as a criminal court and was influential in the formation of Spartan foreign policy.

  harmost

  A controller; a Spartan officer who was sent with a garrison to control cities that had revolted from the Athenian Empire.

  hegemon

  The leader; this term is usually applied to a state which held the leadership (‘hegemony’) over a number of subordinate allied states.

  Heliaea

  The People’s courts. From Solon to Ephialtes this institution was the Athenian Ecclesia meeting in a judicial capacity as a court of appeal. After Ephialtes’ reforms its 6,000 jurors (‘dikasts’) were granted primary jurisdiction. Because of the pressure of legal work, the Heliaea was broken down into smaller panels of jurors known as ‘dikasteria’ (singular –‘dikasterion’).

  Helots

  The Helots were Greek state-owned serfs who lived in Messenia and Laconia. They had been conquered by the Spartans, and were compelled to farm their land and pay a portion of the agricultural produce to their absentee Spartan landlord, thus allowing the Spartans to devote themselves to the arts of war.

  hoplite

  Heavily armed Greek soldiers whose strength and effectiveness lay in fighting in a closely packed formation or phalanx. As these warriors had to supply their own armour and weapons, the hoplite army was mainly recruited from the middle classes.

  medism

  The term applied to individuals who supported pro-Persian policies, and to states which accepted Persian rule.

  ostracism

  This was the banishment of a prominent citizen from Attica for ten years. The Athenian Assembly was given the opportunity every year to decide if it wished to hold an ostracism and, if it decided to hold one, citizens voted for the candidate of their choice by writing his name on a piece of pottery (‘ostrakon’). The candidate with the highest number of votes recorded with his name was ostracized.

  Perioeci

  This term means ‘those who live around’, and refers to the non-Spartan and non-Helot inhabitants of Laconia and Messenia in the Peloponnese. These communities possessed internal autonomy, but their foreign policy was controlled by the Spartans and they were obliged to supply troops for Spartan campaigns. They were important to the Spartan military state, since they supplied the traders and manufacturers – the Spartans were forbidden to engage in such economic pursuits.

  phoros

  Contribution or tribute; when the Delian League was founded in 478/7, those allies who did not supply ships paid phoros as their ‘contribution’ to the war effort against Persia. However, when the Athenians turned the League into an Empire, it was this ‘tribute’, supplied by the vast majority of the subject-allies, which was the financial basis of the Athenian Empire.

  phrourarch

  A garrison commander; such men were in command of garrisons of Athenian soldiers, who were stationed in allied territory. They also had political duties and thus were one of the means by which the Athenians controlled their empire.

  polis (plural: poleis)

  An independent, self-governing, Greek city-state, each one possessing its own citizenship, law code, coinage, festivals, etc.

  proxenos

  A citizen of one state who served as a representative of another state, while still residing in his own state.

  satrap

  This was the name given to a Persian provincial governor, who was in charge of a ‘satrapy’ (province). Although they owed allegiance to the Persian king, they had and exercised a great deal of independence.

  strategos

  A general; ten generals were elected annually by the Athenian people, and the ‘strategia’ (generalship) was open to re-election. Apart from their military duties, the generals were very influential in the shaping of the policies of the Athenian Assembly.

  synoecism

  This is the name given to the joining of several communities into one city-state (‘polis’).

  thetes

  The lowest class of the four Athenian economic classes, as laid down by Solon, which supplied the rowers for the Athenian imperial fleet.

  trireme

  The standard warship of the fifth century, which had three banks of rowers and was equipped with a ram in the bows.

  tyrant

  This term was originally used in the seventh century to describe an individual who had seized power unconstitutionally, but did not necessarily reflect the nature of the rule. However, by the fifth century, it had gained its pejorative meaning of an autocratic, brutal ruler.

  zeugitai

  Literally, ‘those who possessed a team of oxen’; they were the third of Solon’s economic classes, and served as hoplites in the Athenian army, since they could afford to pay for their own armour and weapons.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY

  Anderson, J. K. (1974) Xenophon, London: Duckworth.

  Andrewes, A. (1952) ‘Sparta and Arcadia in the early fifth century’, Phoenix 6.

  ——(1953) ‘The generals in the Hellespont, 410–407’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 73.

  ——(1956) The Greek Tyrants, London: Hutchinson.

  ——(1962) ‘The Mytilene Debate’, Phoenix 16.

  ——(1966) ‘Government in Classical Sparta’ in Ancient Society and Institutions (dedicated to V. Ehrenberg), Oxford: Blackwell.

  ——(1971) Greek Society, London: Penguin.

  ——(1971) ‘Two notes on Lysander’, Phoenix 25.

  ——(1978) ‘The opposition to Pericles’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 98.

  ——(1982) The Cambridge Ancient History vol. 3.3, 2nd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  ——(1992) The Cambridge Ancient History vol. 5, 2nd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Austin, M. M. and Vidal-Naquet, P. (1973) Economic and Social History of Greece, London: Batsford.

  Boardman, J. (1980) The Greeks Overseas, 2nd edn, London: Thames & Hudson.

  Boersma, J. S. (1970) Athenian Building Policy from 561/0 to 405/4, Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

  Bosworth, A. (1993) ‘The humanitarian aspect of the Melian Dialogue’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 113.

  ——(1980) Commentary on Arrian’s History of Alexander, vol. 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  Bradeen, D. W. (1960) ‘The popularity of the Athenian Empire’, Historia 9.

  Brunt, P. A. (1953–54) ‘The Hellenic League against Persia’, Historia 2.

  ——(1965) ‘Spartan policy and strategy in the Archidamian War’, Phoenix 19.

  ——(1976) Arrian’s Anabasis, vols. 1 and 2, London and Cambridge, Mass.: Loeb.

  Buckler, J. (1980) The Theban Hegemony, 371–362, London and Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

  Burn, A. R. (1952) ‘Notes on Alexander’s campaigns’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 72.

  ——(1965) ‘The generalship of Alexander’ in Greece and Rome, vol. 12, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  ——(1984) Persia and the Greeks, 2nd edn, London: Duckworth.

  Bury, J. B. and Meiggs, R. (1975) A History of Greece, 4th edn, London: Macmillan.

  Cartledge, P. (1977) ‘Hoplites and heroes’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 97.

  ——(1979) Sparta and Lakonia, London and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  ——(1987) Agesilaos and the Crisis of Sparta, London: Duckworth.

  ——(2002) ‘Spartan wives: Liberation or licence’, Classical Quarterly 31; reprinted in Whitby, M. (ed.) Sparta, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

  Cawkwell, G. L. (1972) ‘Epaminondas and Thebes’, Classical Quarterly 22.

  ——(1975) ‘Thucydides’ judgement of Periclean strategy’, Yale Classical Studies 28.

/>   ——(1978) ‘The peace of Philocrates again’, Classical Quarterly 28.

  ——(1978) Philip of Macedon, London and Boston: Faber & Faber.

  Connor, W. R. (1971) The New Politicians of Fifth-Century Athens, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

  ——(1984) Thucydides, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

  Crawford, M. and Whitehead, D. (1983) Archaic and Classical Greece, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Davies, J. K. (1993) Democracy and Classical Greece, 2nd edn, Hassocks: Harvester.

  Dover, K. J. (1973) Thucydides, Oxford: Greece & Rome New Surveys in the Classics, vol. 7.

  Ehrenberg, V. (1968) From Solon to Socrates, 2nd edn, London: Methuen.

  Ferguson, W. S. (1953) Cambridge Ancient History vol. 5, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Finley, M. I. (1975) The Use and Abuse of History, London: Chatto & Windus.

  ——(1981) Economy and Society in Ancient Greece, London: Penguin.

  ——(1985) ‘The Athenian demagogues’, Past and Present 1962, reprinted in Democracy Ancient and Modern, 2nd edn, London: Chatto & Windus.

  Flower, M. (2002) ‘The invention of tradition in Classical and Hellenistic Sparta’ in Powell, A. and Hodkinson, S. (eds) Sparta: Beyond the Mirage, Swansea: Classical Press of Wales.

  Forrest, W. G. (1960) ‘Themistocles and Argos’, Classical Quarterly 10.

  ——(1968) A History of Sparta 950–192 BC, London: Hutchinson.

  ——(1972) The Emergence of Greek Democracy, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

  French, A. (1979) ‘Athenian ambitions and the Delian Alliance’, Phoenix 33.