Ancient army numbers

[Macedon]

And that Persian and Indian heavy cavalry armed with long spears even managed to break through the line of Macedonian phalangites (pezhetairoi) at the point of contact of taxis (one taxis = "paper strength" of 2048 phalangites - according to: http://www.ne.jp/asahi/luke/ueda-sarson/...Notes.html) under command of Simmias and taxis under command of Polysperchon:

(...) Simmias and his brigade were not yet able to start with Alexander in pursuit, but causing the phalanx to halt there, he took part in the struggle, because the left wing of the Macedonians was reported to be hard pressed. In this part of the field, their line being broken, some of the Indians and of the Persian cavalry burst through the gap towards the baggage of the Macedonians; and there the action became desperate. For the Persians fell boldly on the men, who were most of them unarmed, and never expected that any men would cut through the double phalanx and break through upon them. When the Persians made this attack, the foreign prisoners also assisted them by falling upon the Macedonians in the midst of the action. But the commanders of the men who had been posted as a reserve to the first phalanx, learning what was taking place, quickly moved from the position which they had been ordered to take, and coming upon the Persians in the rear, killed many of them there collected round the baggage. But the rest of them gave way and fled. The Persians on the right wing, who had not yet become aware of the flight of Darius, rode round Alexander's left wing and attacked Parmenio in flank. (...)

A quite extraordinary and valiant achievement.

What exactly do you think is written here? There is no melee described again. The taxeis of the Macedonians were advancing in phalanx. Because of the pressure felt by the missiles hurled on them by the cavalry, the phalanx lost its cohesion creating a gap that was exploited by the Persians... They rode through it and attacked the Greek camp. Was it an outcome of a melee battle that had resulted into the flight of the Macedonians in that part of the phalanx, there would be pursuit of the men in flight and further fighting on the spot as the gap would widen, the phalangites being attacked from the flank. At Cunaxa, we have the almost same thing as the Greeks this time deliberately opened their lines allowing for the Persian cavalry against them to ride through without any reported casualties at all and again rush to the Greek camp.... There is no "break" reported in that text as would an English speaker understand... To you guys, "to break" means both to create a gap in the enemy line AND to put them to flight. The Greek text says no such thing. It only talks of the opening being created. If you know some ancient Greek, Pete, I could provide the Greek text. Dense bodies of heavy infantry were always vulnerable to frontal attack of cavalry, not because there was any melee, but because they were attacked without being able to either retaliate or march at ease. This is good use of cavalry on Darius' part.

And you forgot that Alexander's infantry practically didn't take part in that "skirmish" (according to George) and that supposedly all his cavalry except of 1800 Companions didn't charge but at best did some skirmishing (which typically doesn't inflict many casualties unless continuing for a very long time).

So we are left with 1800 Companion cavalrymen killing 834 Persians per minute (or 1668 per 2 minutes) for 6 hours (360 minutes) without any rest. I think they must have been robots.

And don't forget about another "non-propagandistic" figure - over 300,000 captured. So apart from killing 1668 per minute (or roughly one killed per 2 minutes by each of Macedonian Companions - and average Macedonian Companion killed 167 during entire battle), they also captured a similar number.

167 Persians captured by each 1 of Macedonian Companions! :mrgreen:

And further 167 killed by each 1 of Macedonian Companions! :mrgreen:

? Why would the rest of the cavalry not actively pursue? Why would the phalanx not advance to trample those poor lines of footmen trapped, commanded to stay, falling on one another... A pursue is no battle, it is pure slaughter, especially on a terrain where the throngs of unhappy men cannot find any safety, like that around Arbela... You can grin all you want, since you like finding parallels in WWII, you will be thrilled to know that capturing such numbers of men is nothing really that difficult. I have written of a number of ways to explain such numbers of losses. Again, I hold them as highly improbable but nevertheless possible.

He clearly describes only the Macedonians as assaulting squadron by squadron. Are you claiming the Macedonians rode in and hurled their "javelins" and retreated?

And mighty javelins killed more per minute than German machine guns at the 1st day of the Somme! :mrgreen:

I do not remember commenting on this silly remark... It would be better if anyone of you guys actually made the effort to read before you try to judge but then you do not read ancient Greek and maybe your ignorance on certain details has to do with the freedom most translators give themselves... Anyways... You sure have read this one.. 3.15.2.2.

"ἐς βάθος τε γὰρ οἷα δὴ ἰληδὸν τεταγμένοι
ἀνέστρεφον οἱ βάρβαροι καὶ ἀντιμέτωποι τοῖς ἀμφ’
Ἀλέξανδρον ξυμπεσόντες οὔτε ἀκοντισμῷ ἔτι οὔτ’ ἐξ-
ελιγμοῖς τῶν ἵππων, ἥπερ ἱππομαχίας δίκη, ἐχρῶντο, (5)
ἀλλὰ διεκπαῖσαι πᾶς τις τὸ καθ’ αὑτόν, ὡς μόνην
ταύτην σωτηρίαν σφίσιν οὖσαν, ἐπειγόμενοι ἔκοπτόν τε
καὶ ἐκόπτοντο ἀφειδῶς, οἷα δὴ οὐχ ὑπὲρ νίκης ἀλλο-
τρίας ἔτι, ἀλλ’ ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας οἰκείας ἀγωνιζόμενοι."

I may comment on this VERY important text that alone answers most claims both of you make. What this text says is : "arrayed deep in squadrons, they turned about and facing those about Alexander, they attacked without hurling their javelins, nor by performing turn-abouts with their horses, as is customary in cavalry fight, but all fell upon them, since this was their only chance to save themselves and pressing forward they slashed and were slashed without mercy, not because the victory belonged to the enemy, but striving for their own survival."

The word "iledon" means "in squadrons" even if your translation reads otherwise, Michael... "exeligmois (plural)" means that each file in the squadron turned about 180 degrees, effectively returning to whence it came. A second exeligmos would be performed to again attack. The term is very often encountered when we are addressing infantry evolutions and is translated as "countermarch". It is a pity that terms that have to do with tactics are usually translated VERY freely... The least I expect is that you keep that in mind and try to be less sure regarding how you interpret ancient Greek texts.

It would be interesting to know what your translations make of this quote... This is where the 60 companions fell, in the very end of the battle... Only because Alexander did not follow one of the basic rules of ancient military tactics. "Do not deprive the enemy of all escape, fighting against men in despair is not a sound choice".