How did Alexander do it?

[Vidgange]

Wow what a great thread! Apparently I should hang out more around here! Thanks for a great read!

[Harte]

Alexander was indeed an innovator. Note that he invented the ragtime band, according to oral tradition.

Harte

[+DieChecker]

Alexander was indeed an innovator. Note that he invented the ragtime band, according to oral tradition.

Harte

I thought it was the bag-pipes?? :yes: :yes:

[Peter B]

The ability to "read terrain" is a fairly common ability among the best military leaders through out history... Especially important in "the old days" where artillery was a short range system (like archery or guns- up until the 1860's)...

Practically every commander knew the quality, training, equipment and fitness of their troops - except for the real bad/clueless commanders - and practically all that was left was weather and terrian... The really good commanders could make the terrain work for them - such as in using unpassible terrain to anchor/secure a flank, marshy/swampy ground to hinder enemy cavalry, rough ground to break up a units cohesion, etc...

As an example: A big aid in defeating Napoleon at Waterloo was because Wellington - at a key point - deployed the bulk of his infantry on the backside of a ridge line (away from the enemy)... This kept them out of artillery range and the French were unable to scout them out for weaknesses just before the disasterous cavalry charges on the last day....

Just a minor point about Wellington and the reverse slope thing. My understanding is that the British infantry were still well within range of the French artillery, but the hill effectively screened the infantry. The thing was that the roundshot fired by the cannons remained lethal even after hitting the ground - because they were fired with a very flat trajectory they'd bounce a couple of times before eventually losing their energy. Bouncing cannon balls were dangerous to the enemy on flat ground, but it was very unlikely that they'd be able to hit troops on the far side of a hill - any cannon ball which cleared the top of the hill would also pass over the heads of troops standing behind the hill.

Nevertheless, it shows Wellington's skill in making use of the local terrain. More significantly in this regard, Wellington had scouted out the Waterloo position as a good place to fight a battle a few days beforehand, so he showed commendable skill in managing the retreat of the British-Allied army such that it arrived there in good enough shape to fight a battle.

What makes this skill all the more powerful is that generals prior to about the 18th or 19th century were unlikely to have had any serious maps of the areas they were operating in, and obviously had no other means of scanning the ground from the air, instead having to rely on what they could see and what information scouts could provide them.

Another example is one of the best, but almost unknown, Roman generals of the late Republic - Lucius Licinius Lucullus. Lucullus's great victory was against the Armenian King Tigranes, in which the Roman army of mostly infantry defeated a larger Armenian army of mostly heavy cavalry, by outmaneuvering it. Lucullus sent a portion of his army up to face the Armenians frontally, distracting them, while another force of infantry marched around a large hill, out of sight of the Armenians, emerging in the rear of the Armenian army.

[scorpiosonic]

Interesting thread, thanks for the info.

(Esp. to Peter B and Kmt.)

Another good General is Theucydides, "War is a hard task-master, it reduces men to the level of their conditions, and destroys their beliefs in the institutions that make civilization possible."

Edited September 12, 2014 by scorpiosonic

[kmt_sesh]

Interesting thread, thanks for the info.

(Esp. to Peter B and Kmt.)

Another good General is Theucydides, "War is a hard task-master, it reduces men to the level of their conditions, and destroys their beliefs in the institutions that make civilization possible."

I'm a big fan of Thucydides' historical account of the Peloponnesian War. Herodotus is generally considered the "father of history" and we probably couldn't have had Thucydides without Herodotus, but in my opinion Thucydides is a more polished and observant historian.

As for a general, I'm not sure. He was sacked and ostracized for military incompetence, after all. His Spartan rival, Brasidas, proved the better general. Then again, the Athenians sacked and ostracized all kinds of generals if things didn't go perfectly, so one never knows.

[kmt_sesh]

Kinda-sorta on the subject, we're very excited at the Field Museum about a temporary exhibit we'll be getting next fall (2015) on ancient Greece. It will feature around 500 artifacts ranging in date from prehistoric times to Alexander's time. Click the link for an article on it:

http://chicago.cbslo...m-in-fall-2015/

Enough said on the subject. This is one you'll want to see if you happen to be in Chicago next fall.

[questionmark]

I'm a big fan of Thucydides' historical account of the Peloponnesian War. Herodotus is generally considered the "father of history" and we probably couldn't have had Thucydides without Herodotus, but in my opinion Thucydides is a more polished and observant historian.

As for a general, I'm not sure. He was sacked and ostracized for military incompetence, after all. His Spartan rival, Brasidas, proved the better general. Then again, the Athenians sacked and ostracized all kinds of generals if things didn't go perfectly, so one never knows.

And even if they did, someone had to be kicked out every year and who is more hated than a general by those who served under him?

Many people don't understand the procedure, during the general assembly, held once a year, people were asked to vote on whether they felt that somebody should be expelled from the city. If they voted yes (don't recall any instances when they did not... but could have happened) a minimum of 6000 citizens had to assemble and each got to put a shard of pottery with a name written on it (called ostraka) in a vat. Whoever had most votes was kicked out... and that regardless of how many votes he got.

[kmt_sesh]

My favorite account of ostracism involves Aristides "the Just." This vote was taken in 482 BCE (or thereabouts, if memory serves). Aristides was entering the general assembly and came across one Athenian of the lower class who, like many of his station, could not read or write. Aristides asked if he could help the man by writing down on his ostracon the name of the person he wished to be ostracized, and the man replied: "Yes, please write Aristides." Nonplussed, Aristides didn't identify himself but asked the man why he was choosing that name. The man explained that he was sick of hearing Aristides being called "the Just."

It's one of those things that if it wasn't true, really should have been. Human nature being what it is, Athenians were given to abusing the ostracism system. It was a common political tool to remove rivals for ten years or so.

[Peter B]

My favorite account of ostracism involves Aristides "the Just." This vote was taken in 482 BCE (or thereabouts, if memory serves). Aristides was entering the general assembly and came across one Athenian of the lower class who, like many of his station, could not read or write. Aristides asked if he could help the man by writing down on his ostracon the name of the person he wished to be ostracized, and the man replied: "Yes, please write Aristides." Nonplussed, Aristides didn't identify himself but asked the man why he was choosing that name. The man explained that he was sick of hearing Aristides being called "the Just."

It's one of those things that if it wasn't true, really should have been. Human nature being what it is, Athenians were given to abusing the ostracism system. It was a common political tool to remove rivals for ten years or so.

Tom Holland quotes this story in his book "Persian Fire", about the Persian invasions of Greece. He points out that if the story is true its only possible source was Aristides himself - showing that even a man with the title "The Just" couldn't help talking about himself.