THE STRENGTH OF THE PERSIAN ARMY AT ISSOS

[Paralus]

Wikepedia says "The Hypaspists led by Alexander, on foot, delivered an assault during this time across the riverbed on the Cardaces and managed to punch a hole through the Persian line."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus

And there is precisely the reason why you should give away Wiki. Alexander was not on foot, rather he was with the Companion cavalry (Arrian 2.8.9; 10.2; 11.5-6). Wiki, I'm afraid, is not a reliable 'source'.

Is this "Persian left wing flank guard" the armed levies that Agesilaos is talking about?
Where can I read this account? If so, I assume that the front ranks of the armed levies participated in the battle but then ran away causing the ranks behind them to also run.

The armed 'levies', I'm assuming, are those numberless hordes of Arrian's lazy and soft Asians stationed behind the front line of some 110,000 infantry. That the 20,000 on the Persian left are not specified might see them as part of this 'lazy levy' I suppose. Once the front right broke and started leaving the field, those behind had also to cut and run as troops fell back onto and through them.

2)Can you also recommend an account of the battle of Issos so that I can get a better sense of how the armed levies behaved at Issos?

The account we're discussing is Arrian's (2.7.1 - 2.11.10).

[Hando]

I see, we normally count everyone on the field, though; nor did the levies have much option, with the front rank units breaking and running through them flight was the only thing open to them; the flanking force was very easily contained but drew off some troops.

To Agesilaous, thank you again.
1)When you say "with the front rank units breaking and running through them..." by front rank I assume you mean the front rank of the armed levies?
Wikepedia says "The Hypaspists led by Alexander, on foot, delivered an assault during this time across the riverbed on the Cardaces and managed to punch a hole through the Persian line."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus

If so, I assume that the front ranks of the armed levies participated in the battle but then ran away causing the ranks behind them to also run.

2)Can you also recommend an account of the battle of Issos so that I can get a better sense of how the armed levies behaved at Issos?

[Hando]

I see, we normally count everyone on the field, though; nor did the levies have much option, with the front rank units breaking and running through them flight was the only thing open to them; the flanking force was very easily contained but drew off some troops.

To Agesilaos, when you say the flanking force, is this the armed levies that you are talking about? If so, did the armed levy attack the Macedonians across the river?

And where can I read this account?

[agesilaos]

The best account is that in Arrian, since modern reconstructions are ultimately based upon that; it can be supplemented by Polybios' criticism of Kallisthenes in Book XII of his history, online at LacusCurtius. The best discussion of the movements before the battle is Donald Engels 'Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army', although Paralus will bemoan the scant notice given to carts!

The 'flank force' are the allegedly 20,000 strong body of troops Dareios pushed accross the river to occupy the slopes of the mountains on Alexander's right. They were light infantry so would be part of the armed levies/servants, they were faced off by 300 cavalry and maybe 1,000 Agrianes and archers, they were obviously not as numerous as claimed but their lack of effect speaks to a lack of martial worth too.

Wiki seems to be based on Hammond who similarly has Alexander lead the hypapists on foot based on autopsy of the river bed which was too rocky for a cavalry charge, I will have to check but I am pretty sure Hammond plumped for the wrong Turkish river, making his observations somewhat moot

[Hando]

The 'flank force' are the allegedly 20,000 strong body of troops Dareios pushed accross the river to occupy the slopes of the mountains on Alexander's right.

So this flank force of light infantry/armed levies crossed the river but did not attack Alexander's right. Instead it was Alexander's right which initiated contact by attacking them?

[Paralus]

So this flank force of light infantry/armed levies crossed the river but did not attack Alexander's right. Instead it was Alexander's right which initiated contact by attacking them?

Arrian, 2.9.4:
Having also marched the archers, part of the Agrianians and some of the Grecian mercenaries up to his right in the front, he extended his phalanx beyond the wing of the Persians. But when those who had been posted upon the mountains did not descend, a charge was made by a few of the Agrianians and archers at Alexander's order, by which they were easily put to the rout from the foot of the mountain. As they fled to the summit he decided that he could make use of the men who had been drawn up to keep these in check, to fill up the ranks of his phalanx. He thought it quite sufficient to post 300 horsemen to watch the men on the mountain.

You'll find a rather free (in both senses) translation of Arrian here.

[Hando]

You'll find a rather free (in both senses) translation of Arrian here.

Thank you Paralus. Now I read Arrian's description of the battle of Issos.

[Hando]

I see, we normally count everyone on the field, though; nor did the levies have much option, with the front rank units breaking and running through them flight was the only thing open to them; the flanking force was very easily contained but drew off some troops.

Agesilaos, I think I now understand your comment above. The levies in the first part of your comment above, who broke rank and ran away were the armed levies on Darius' left who were posted opposite Alexander's right? When Alexander charged them with his cavalry and engaged them in hand to hand combat, they broke rank and ran away.

On the other hand, the "flanking force" you talk about in the second part of your comment above are not these same armed levies, but a different group of armed levies who were posted up on the mountain and threatened Alexander's right flank. These in turn ran up the mountain and were "very easily contained" when Alexander sent a small force of archers and Agrianians. Am I correct?

[agesilaos]

Not quite, the troops that broke were the Greek mercenaries and the kardakoi, the main battle line, then the cavalry on the persian right broke along with those on the mountain.

[Hando]

Not quite, the troops that broke were the Greek mercenaries and the kardakoi, the main battle line, then the cavalry on the persian right broke along with those on the mountain.

So where were the armed levies? Behind the front lines of Greek mercenaries and the Kardakoi? I've read Arrian and I thought the armed levies were on Darius' left flank on the mountain facing Alexander's right.
When you said "I see, we normally count everyone on the field, though; nor did the levies have much option, with the front rank units breaking and running through them flight was the only thing open to them; the flanking force was very easily contained but drew off some troops."
When you said "with the front rank units breaking and running through them..." by front rank I assumed you meant the front rank of the armed levies.

[Hando]

I also came across Jona Lendering's comment on Romanarmytalk.com that he thinks the Persians were outnumbered at Issos. This contradiction is confusing.
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/19-greek-m ... ander.html
He says he arrived at this conclusion independently without having read Delbruck. What are your opinions on his comments on romanarmytalk in the above link?

Also, according to Wikepdia in his book Alexander de Grote, Lendering says Darius was deserted by his troops at Gaugamela? Does he mean the deserting troops were first confronted by Alexander in battle and then broke rank or that they ran away without a fight?

[agesilaos]

The levies are both behind the fontrank units, Mercenaries Kardakoi and cavalry AND on the mountain; it was the flight of the mercenaries and Kardakoi that swept them away, those on the mountain seem to have fled up the slopes and escaped.

Jona gets the fact that Dareios' troops deserted him at Gaugamela, rather than the other way round as per our Greek sources, from a Babylonian astronomical diary; it is a moot point as to which version is the more propagandist.

Which thread is Jona's comment in?

[Hando]

Which thread is Jona's comment in?

Jona's comment is in the thread/link below. Forum member Aryaman2 said that Delbruck claimed the Persians were outnumbered. He said "The Persians were outnumbered by the army of Alexander. This was the provocative conclusion of Delbruck in his study of the battle of Issos. His basic premise is, of course, all reports of Persian numbers are given by the enemy, so they are greatly exagerated...."
Jona responded by saying "I did not read Delbrück, but in my own book on Alexander, I have reached more or less the same conclusion: not all Persian could be deployed. Engels is, in my view, excellent..."
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/19-greek-m ... ander.html

[Hando]

Jona gets the fact that Dareios' troops deserted him at Gaugamela, rather than the other way round as per our Greek sources, from a Babylonian astronomical diary; it is a moot point as to which version is the more propagandist.

Sorry, but I'm not clear on which version you think is more propagandist? The Babylonian astronomical diary or the Greek sources?

[agesilaos]

You cannot decide which I think more propagandist for a very good reason; I can't decide myself! Pushed to it i would probably credit the Babylonian version on the grounds that Dareios had already been defeated and was not in the area when it was written.

I would have to disagree with Jona, as I have calculated the numbers that could be present and they are substantial, however the only forces in the Persian army with any combat value were the cavalry and the mercenaries. If the Persians were so few one has to ask why Alexander delayed for so long in Cilicia instead of attacking a force one third of his strength, also Dareios was prompted to move onto the offensive by supply problems, which would not affect the small force Jona posits. The defensive position adopted bt the Persians can equally well be explained by the fact that they thought they were following up a fleeing enemy and were surprised to find the Macedonians advancing on them; Dareios would then have to wait for his infantry to come up, he may have been riding ahead with just the cavalry when newws of Alexander's attack reached him; he sent the cavalry ahead to screen the deployment of his infantry. That he found time to fortify the weaker parts of the riverbank can be explained by Alexander's slow and deliberate advance, with frequent halts.