Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Discuss Philip's achievements and Macedonia pre-Alexander

Moderator: pothos moderators

User avatar
Paralus
Strategos (general)
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Post by Paralus »

A PM will have done lad: no need to have your email all over the net!!

Got it now how 'bout you do an edit and remove it? (Yes: I know I'm a recidivist old fart but those who don't need to...??)
Paralus
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους;
Wicked men, you sin against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander.

Academia.edu
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4764
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Post by marcus »

Paralus wrote:A PM will have done lad: no need to have your email all over the net!!

Got it now how 'bout you do an edit and remove it? (Yes: I know I'm a recidivist old fart but those who don't need to...??)
I've done it for him - I agree it's not a good idea for people to leave their email addresses all over the place!

ATB
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
Nicator
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 704
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 3:27 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Post by Nicator »

marcus wrote:
Paralus wrote:A PM will have done lad: no need to have your email all over the net!!

Got it now how 'bout you do an edit and remove it? (Yes: I know I'm a recidivist old fart but those who don't need to...??)
I've done it for him - I agree it's not a good idea for people to leave their email addresses all over the place!

ATB
Thank you very much!
:wink:
Later Nicator

Thus, rain sodden and soaked, under darkness cloaked,
Alexander began, his grand plan, invoked...

The Epic of Alexander
Nicator
Hetairos (companion)
Posts: 704
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 3:27 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Post by Nicator »

Paralus wrote:
Nicator wrote:I forget where I read that...Fuller maybe?
Read which?
Nicator wrote: Regardless, there is 'perhaps' some bit of truth behind it as the phalangytes appeared to be relegated to 2nd class roles with the elevation in status given to the cavalry under ATG. This I would qualify by pointing out that this is how the rank and file foot soldier likely came to see themselves after a time.
The notion that Alexander "elevated" the cavalry is a nonsense. It is clear that Philip, over many years, had expanded the hetairoi to the numbers of 336/5. In exactly the same way he'd expanded the numbers of the pez-hetairoi. It was a good part of this army that took the field (with allies and mercenaries) at Chaeroneia. The fact that Philip deployed only some 2,000 cavalry on the day of battle has little to do with his available numbers and much to do with the battlefield and the strategic deployment of the Greeks. The Greeks deployed the classic hoplite army in a line that anchored both wings on natural features which denied the Macedonian king the use of his cavalry: Philip would need to frontally assault and dislodge them. The result is known.

Yes, in Asia on wider plains, the cavalry was the "assault arm", but never forget it was always accompanied by infantry in combined attack. Thus one might utterly dispense with Stone's headlong charge to the right and then switch to the centre at Gaugamela.



Nicator wrote:ATG is attested to having utilized archers and slingers extensively. I haven't read that concerning Philip, though, my knowledge of Philip is not nearly as extensive as ATG.
Aside from the stones recovered at, for example, Methone. Don't mistake the poor source tradition for absence of such troops.
...read which referring to the cavalry being transferred to the main offensive weapon under ATG, thus switching the roles. After conducting some research I think it may have been one of those sources that is blatantly pro-ATG. The idea I think that can be surmised is that the type of tactics conducted at Guagamela was new and hitherto unheard of in the Greek world. And the cavalry was 'forced' to be the main assault weapon...not by choice but by necessity. During the previous Greek/Persian engagements, cavalry would have been utterly useless because of the confined spaces and rocky/mountainous landscape on Greek soil. This put the Persians at a distinct disadvantage. But this battle would take place on Persian soil and the wide open space gave advantage to the army with the superior cavalry. So, in Asia, the cavalry became the offensive force to be reckoned with because of the need for speed and the distances involved. Philip, perhaps never had to contend with such an issue.

Beyond that, there was an incident where ATG was injured and had to be carried by his men for a time. Certain infantry units became jealous and made a stink about ATG only allowing other units to carry him. Sorry, don't remember the specifics on this incident anymore. But it seems like it was a spat between mounted and foot units. Someone remember this bit?
Later Nicator

Thus, rain sodden and soaked, under darkness cloaked,
Alexander began, his grand plan, invoked...

The Epic of Alexander
User avatar
marcus
Somatophylax
Posts: 4764
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Philip II of Macedonia: Greater than Alexander

Post by marcus »

Nicator wrote:Beyond that, there was an incident where ATG was injured and had to be carried by his men for a time. Certain infantry units became jealous and made a stink about ATG only allowing other units to carry him. Sorry, don't remember the specifics on this incident anymore. But it seems like it was a spat between mounted and foot units. Someone remember this bit?
Curtius 7.6.1-9
[1] Meanwhile a group of Macedonians had gone off to forage out of formation and were surprised by some barbarians who came rushing down on them from the neighbouring mountains. More were taken prisoner than were killed, [2] and the barbarians retired once more to the high ground, driving their captives before them. These bandits numbered 20,000, and the weapons they used in combat were slings and arrows. [3] Alexander laid siege to them and, while he fought in the forefront of the battle, he was hit by an arrow, the head of which was left firmly lodged in his leg. [4] Dismayed and alarmed, the Macedonians carried him back to camp.
The barbarians were also aware that he had been removed from the fight, since they had a full view of the conflict from their high position on the mountain. [5] So the next day they dispatched an embassy to the king, which Alexander ordered be given an immediate audience. Then, unwinding his bandages but concealing the extent of his wound, he showed the barbarians his leg. [6] After they were told to be seated, the envoys declared that the Macedonians were no more saddened at the news of the king's wound than they were themselves and, if they had found the culprit, they would already have surrendered him, since it was only the sacrilegious who fought against gods. [7] Furthermore, they continued, they had now because of his wound been constrained to surrender to him. Alexander gave them assurances, took back the Macedonian prisoners, and accepted their surrender.
After this he moved camp, and was carried on a military litter, [8] but who should carry this was disputed by the cavalry and the infantry. The cavalry, with whom the king usually went into battle, thought it was their prerogative, while the infantry, since it had been usual for them to carry their wounded comrades, kept complaining that a job that was rightfully theirs was being filched from them just at the time when it was the king who needed carrying. [9] Since the quarrel between the two sides was so acrimonious, and the choice both difficult for him to make and sure to cause offence to the losers, the king ordered them to take turns in carrying him.
This happened when the army was en route to Maracanda.

The fact that Alexander was wounded is mentioned in Arrian, Curtius, Plutarch (Alexander, and "De Fortuna"), the Itinerarium Alexandri, and one of Seneca's Epistles; but Curtius is the only one who mentions the argument over who should carry his litter.

ATB
Marcus
Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago
At Amazon US
At Amazon UK
Post Reply