Weapons and Tactics of Alexander the Great James Cunningham, Sam O'Connell and Marshall Pease
Alexander s Army
How was the Macedonian Army able to become so powerful? -The discovery of gold in Amphipolis gave Philip the money to be able to reform the Macedonian army meaning they could have the latest weapons and armour so were often better equipped than their opponents. Also, the Macedonian army was all equipped with similar equipment so could work well together efficiently,while the Persian armies weapons were varied as they all came from different cultures where they used different weapons so wouldn t be able to work as efficiently together. However, as time went on this would begin to happen to Alexander the Great's army as he took more cultures and replaced veterans with newer troops from all over his empire more variation began to happen. -The highland area of Macedonia provided the right environment for many powerful horses to bred to be used in Alexander s renowned cavalry. -Alexander would capture many slaves in war who would be sent to Macedonia and other territories to work on farms and keep businesses going for families while the men would go to war. This would mean more men could come to war as they knew their business would be maintained.
Creation of the Macedonian Army Phillip reformed Macedonia using the discovery of gold to reform the army. He put the chieftains of Macedonia as officers and in the companion cavalry and made sure they were always fighting or drilling meaning his army would be stronger, work more effectively together and there weapons and this would prevent the chieftains from revolting.
Why was Alexander s army so effective? A long term factor in Alexander s success would have been the Greece had been at war for at least a century and a half; meaning the Greek s were used to warfare, practiced to it and hardened by it. This would mean they would work effectively together as they would have had experience compared to many of the Persians.This proven further by the fact Philip had learned his warcraft in the Theban Army under Pammenes, the leader of the Sacred Band of Thebes. The Macedonian army was effective army as it was a standing army meaning it was permanently mobilised so it could deal with problems quicker- Phillip banned the use of wheeled transport and limited the number of camp servant to 1 for every 10 infantry man and one for each calvary meaning the army could have improved speed of march, the army was very tough: women were not allowed into the camp keeping the men from being distracted ; some cavalry were placed behind the army to kill anybody who tried to run away; soldiers were made to wash in cold water; even the officers had to march, up to 30 miles a day, carrying 30 days supply of flour; they were allowed only one attendant for every ten men; they were taught to manage on very little food, and on campaign were expected to live off the land.; long periods were spent training and manoeuvring; this was especially crucial for the cavalry, which Alexander commanded, which was able as no other cavalry of the time to wheel round and change the direction of attack catching many enemies off guard.
Formation of the Army source- Arrian 1.12-16 3.12-3.13 Alexander used a several different types of troops including: heavy infantry, light infantry and cavalry. Most of what Alexander had learnt about war came from Phillip and the Macedonian warrior culture which he came from, which could be the reason Alexander took the forefront in battle. They were also suffering a great deal at the hands of light armed troops, who mingled with the cavalry Arrian 1.16 shows Alexander s troops worked effectively together
Cavalry sources- Arrian 1.13-1.16 and Plutarch 33. Alexander would generally fight with the cavalry which played a vital role in the battles fought in Asia. The most prestigious cavalry was the companion cavalry which included the royale squadron. Many modern experts believe the companion cavalry was the best in the ancient world as it was known for the shock tactics which was relying on the bulk of cavalry and intimidating the opponents into running so the cavalry could get amongst them and cut them down. The companion cavalry was on the right wing as they were mobile so could conduct charges against masses of infantry. The companions cavalry's primary weapon was a xyston which was a 3 metre double edged lance, when one side broke they were able to swap to the other side. They also carried a short sword a secondary weapon. The macedonian army, also contained the Thessilian horsemen who were renowned for their efficient manoeuvrability meaning they would typically guard the left flank from enemy cavalry which would allow the decisive attack on the right. For example at Gaugamela the Thessalian cavalry withstood the attack of the Persian cavalry even though they were greatly outnumbered. They carried javelin,a short sword and horse archers. Alexander,also had the Greek cavalry at his disposal who carried javelins, a short sword and a small shield which was odd for cavalry at this time, however they weren t considered as effective as the Thessilian or Companion cavalry. The Persians were now being struck in their faces by lances from all sides, both men and horse, and they were being pushed back by the cavalry Arrian 1.16
The sarcophagus depicts Alexander on horseback in the battle of Issus and glorifies both Alexander and his cavalry. It is believed to have been commissioned by a Persian nobel, Mazaeus in the 4th century bc, it reflects Alexander s reputation of the best cavalry ever seen. The sarcophagus may idealise the image of Alexander on horse back or it could reflect the reputation of the master of the best cavalry the world had ever seen. Arrian, 3.14 - For a short time there was hand-to-hand fighting, but when the cavalry around Alexander and Alexander himself pressed strongly on the Persians, thrusting them back and striking their faces with spears, and the dense, Macedonian phalanx, bristling with pikes, had already engaged them, Darius himself,... was the first to turn and flee;... Depicts a horseman hunting a wild boar.(potentially Alexander.)
Phalanx sources- Arrian 1.13-1.16 and Plutarch 33. The core of the army was made up Phalanx who would engage in close combat, Alexander used the Macedonian Phalanx which had been developed by Phillip it consisted of: a line-up of several battalion blocks called syntagmata, each of its 16 files called lochoi numbering 16 men, for a total of 256 in each unit. Each syntagma was commanded by a syntagmatarch, who - together with his subordinate officers - would form the first row of each block. The Macedonian phalanx was highly trained unlike the Greek and Persian ones and had a lot of experience fighting together meaning having this small emotional bond between troops meant they would fight better. Phalangite: Carried a 18ft-long Sarissa (a long pike) which had to be wielded with 2 hands. It was useless alone, but in a phalanx was very effective. They each also carried a short sword used for close combat and a small shield. They are thought to have worn light armour consisting of a helmet and greaves. The phalanx was usually used to hold the enemy back while the heavy cavalry broke through the ranks of the enemy. The phalanx wore light armour and were trained to endure long and fast forced marches this meant their charge could catch enemies unaware as it was so fast and cause shock waves over throwing enemy lines. The Phalanx when they charged would yell the battle cry Alalalai meaning to raise a war cry. However, this light armour meant the phalanx was weak on its sides and rear....the infantry raced at full speed towards the enemy, and the infrantry phalanx rolled forward like a wave -Plutarch 33
Specialist troops sources- Arrian 3.12-13 Light infantry can be divided into specialist groups: -Agrianes: were javelin throwers armed with several javelins, a short sword and a light shield. They were equipped with no armour because mobility was important for them as they weren't supposed to engage head on. They were often positioned to the right of the companion cavalry, they were useful when the phalanx wasn t effective and speed was necessary, Arrian mentions they played an important role in the the battle of Gaugamela. -Archers: used a large bow and arrows with heavy tips meaning they couldn't be used at very long range. They also had a shield and short sword. Arrian mentions archers in book 3.12 in his account of Gaugamela, however they are not mentioned anywhere else if they did exist they probably would have have been archers from Crete. Arrian - Alexander s men were already beginning to get the upper hand partly through their strength and experience, but particularly because they were fighting with the cornel wood spears against lighter and shorter weapons.
Heavy Infantry sources- Arrian 3.12-13 Hypaspists (shield bearer): Hypaspists were the elite infantry force of Alexander, they were highly valued in sieges, close combat missions and missions requiring physical endurance; 3000 hypaspist accompanied Alexander to Asia Minor. Probably equipped with: a shorter, more mobile spear used for thrusting; a large, round shield and a short sword. The amount of armour varied depending on the situation. If stamina and mobility were key, they would wear little more than a helmet and cloak. However during times of siege they would have heavy body armour.
Greek Hoplites The Macedonian army included Greek heavy infantry provided by the League of Corinth and hired mercenaries. These infantrymen would have been equipped as hoplites with the traditional hoplite panoply consisting of a thrusting spear (doru), bronze-faced hoplon shield and body armour. In appearance, they would have been almost identical to the hypaspists. In battle, the Greek hoplites had a less active role than the Macedonian phalangites and hypaspists. At Gaugamela, the Greek infantry formed the defensive rear of the box formation Alexander arranged his army into, while the Macedonians formed its front face. Nevertheless, they performed a valuable function in facing down attempts by the Persian cavalry to surround the Macedonian army and helped deal with the breakthrough of some Persian horsemen who went on to attack the baggage.
Weapons Phalangite Shields - This image depicts a shield most likely used by the Hypaspists (shield bearers). This would have been covered with a sheet of bronze with the inside being either wood or leather. It would have been held up by the forearm and strapped to the shoulder for extra support. This shield displayed the Vergina Sun which was a royal symbol. Xiphos (short sword) - The secondary weapon of most soldiers. The blade was double edged with a length of about 55cm. It was usually made from bronze and iron with a wooden hilt. Helmets and armour - There was lots of variation between the armour, with each type of specialist troop having their own armour best suited for the role they played. Rank also played a part in the choice of armour. For example Agrianes. This image depicts Alexander in his. According to Arrian Alexander's army was effective because their weapons were longer and heavier.
Artillery and siege engines During the time of Alexander the Great, torsion-powered artillery was in use. This meant the power came from the tension caused by the rope being stretched and twisted around the frame. One of these was an oxybeles (literally meaning bolt shooter), which shot a small bolt another weapon was a lithobolos which could launch up to 80kg rocks (essentially a catapult). They were often used to shower a city but could do damage to the walls if this was needed. Alexander was also one of the first generals to use them in open combat in order to maneuver the enemy where he wanted them. Catapults were also used to fire rocks at city walls. Alexander also had siege towers at his disposal. They were 50m made of wood but were covered in animal skins for protection. Their most famous use was in the siege of Tyre when Alexander built a 1km causeway and sent his siege towers across to get over the wall. A simpler form of getting over walls was also used, ladders.
Persians
Persian Tactics The Persians used a wide range of tactics across their battles. Persian attacks primarily had four stages involving archers, infantry and cavalry. The archers, who wielded longbows, would fire waves of arrows before the battle, attempting to cut the enemy numbers down and disorganised them prior battle. The cavalry would then attempt to run into the enemy and cut off the generals from the soldiers. Infantry would then proceed to attack the disoriented soldiers, subsequently weakened from the previous attacks. Greek sources claim the Persians wore no armour and this is probably likely as the Greeks had no reason to belittle their achievement. Darius would also allow Alexander to cross certain territories unopposed in order for Alexander to go to battle sites of Darius choice. This would give him an advantage as he could choose terrain which best suited his troops. For example he could get the high ground to make it easier for his archers.
Battle of Gaugamela tactics The Persian army during this battle consisted of around 100,000 troops split into around 8 different units. Eg. Infantry, archers To the right a small diagram of the battle formations used by both the Persians and Macedonians can be seen. Even though the Macedonians had a smaller force they had highly trained professional troops, compared to the Persian large number of less well trained civilian troops who were poorly armed, this probably contributed to their defeat. In this battle the Persians attempted to perform a scorchedearth policy, this is a tactic still used nowadays, it involves an attempt to destroy anything the enemy may be able to use whilst it is still advancing this was meant to stop the Macedonians in their tracks.
Persian Troops and Armour Main source - Herodotus The Persians had a mixture of cultures and peoples mixed without much integration and there was no uniform language and not much unification. The Persians had low quality armour and weaponry, instead relied on sheer numbers to defeat the enemy in opposed to performance. In the way of troops the Persians had: The Immortals the most renowned Persian unit said to be 10,000 strong and heavily armoured and well trained named this due to the fact when a member died he was immediately replaced by another. They had two separate cavalry units one armoured for projectile attacks and great speed the other less armoured but used for shock attacks. The Sparabara were the frontline troops well trained and were described as fearless; they would use large wicker and animal hide shields for defense and a two foot long spear for offence. The only armour they had consisted of scale armour beneath their robes and no helmet. The Archers are renowned as some of the best at the time, using the Sparabara for defence they would unleash volleys of arrows upon enemy forces, lightly armoured and equipped with close range weapons incase hand to hand combat was needed. Cavalry was sometimes reinforced with chariots (scythed) used to quickly blitz and dispatch enemy troops.