Elephants and Infantry

[Nicator]

Hello all,While pondering the effects of Hydaspes on warfare after Alexander, the thought occurred to me that not only did the use elephants become commonplace, but the nature of infantry battle also shifted. For Alexander, the infantry was primarily used as a holding force, and afterwards for the successors, it became a striking and pinning force. I wonder if this battle may have been a catalyst for that change as well. Of course, it may have been that things were just returning to the way they used to be, that is, before ATG took over. Certainly, Epaminondas used the infantry as a striking and pinning force. Also, just as likely, it was a combination of events which caused this return to old methods. Horse were terrified of Elephants, and with the increased use of these large beasts, it only made sense to use infantry against them. Also, cavalry commanders were likely more difficult and costly to train. It may also shed light on just how good Alexander was as a commander that he was able to pull off a victory at this most difficult and dangerous battle. Thoughts please...Nicator

[Kit]

Hi Nicator,I think that the Macedonian Army of Phillip & Alexander's era marked a high point in ancient military history. The closest anyone has come, until the modern era, to a true balance of differing forces; cavalry and infantry perfectly complimenting one another(with specialist troops thrown in for good measure).I believe you are right about infantry being the natural response to elephants (I wonder why camels weren't used more as they also scared horses?). I'm sure that elephants were used mainly for 'awe' purposes, much like Darius was trying for with his chariots.regardsKit

[maciek]

Hi!I think that the camels except their smell are no such good weapon as the elephants. They are not so strong and huge - it would be much easier to kill camel then elephant, maybe that's why they didn't use them for battles. I also think that crucial for Alexander's victories in the battle field were use of combined arms. Also I think that it had to be a brilliant commander which could control (or detailed planed) whole battle of combined arms. After Alexander only Pyrrus was good enough to make a good use of all kinds of weapon in one battle. Some of diadochs and their successorGÇÖs couldn't even use tactic enough so they had to comeback to more traditional way of fighting. I think that Eumenes was good enough to become so good general but he finished his career too quickly.Regards
Maciek