The Makedonian phalanx -- why such depth?

[Paullus Scipio]

Although we are getting off the topic of the depth of Alexander's phalanx, your Post raise a number of points that merit a detailed response. The easiest way for the reader to follow this is if I quote you in full, and interpolate my own comments.....
Paralus/Michael wrote:

Firstly it needs to be stated that the reason Alexander extended and lessened the depth of his phalanx is, indeed, due to his requirement to fill the field.
What is your source for this? None of the sources you refer to say this, nor would Alexander (or any other competent commander for that matter) ‘stretch’ a line to fill a front/geographical location – for your comment implies that Alexander halved the Phalanx’s usual depth simply to match Darius’ frontage, which would have been insane. A competent commander would simply take steps to secure his flanks, rather than try to match fronts – a case in point being Alexander’s next clash with Darius at Gaugemala. Further, if it be correct that the Greek Allies/Mercenaries did not form part of the front line, Alexander had ample troops to fill the field without thinning them so much ( though I think there are some grounds for believing the Greeks were in the Phalanx too -see post)
but Secondly, Polybios' material – capriciously edited though it is – preserves salutary details of Kallisthenes original account (propaganda and all). These details – aside from a few minor differences – tallies with Ptolemy / Arrian – even unto the “fissures filled with Persian dead” over which the Macedonians pursued the Persians. It is, to me, reasonably plain that Ptolemy has followed Kallisthenes in this description.

Agreed !....though Arrian, Curtius and indeed Ptolemy may have had other sources too.

Polybios, in his righteous outrage at what he perceives as foolish historians, makes several errors and these you have followed. Whilst you suggest that his criticism of Kallisthenes can, for these purposes, be ignored it is, unfortunately, the root of his error.
Actually I haven’t followed Polybius’ errors regarding Callisthenes. Rather they are irrelevant to the case in point, namely that Polybius categorically states that a Macedonian phalanx is 16 deep in ‘open’ order, and that “X” number of men ( in this case 32,000) occupy a front of “Y” distance

To begin with Polybios’ concern is how one fits the numbers of men from each army into the field width given. His first credulous error is believing the numbers – in the order of 600,000 – for the Persian array.

Agreed !

This is plain propaganda and it says something about Polybios’ critical nature that he did not recognise it. His next manifest error is to total, in holier than thou fashion, the numbers of the Macedonians even accounting for those on “other special duties”. These he gives as 42,000.
Which I agree is also manifestly incorrect for the Battle of Issus…. Although our major sources don’t give exact figures, it is possible to deduce that Alexander’s Phalanx consisted of 2,000 Hypaspists, six Taxeis of Asthetairoi/Pezetairoi each approximately 2,000 strong (12,000) and perhaps as many as 7,000 Greek Allies and Mercenaries, giving a total Phalanx strength of 20-21,000 at Issus.
This then becomes Polybios’ Macedonian line of battle which must be fit into the field of Issos. This is utter bunkum.
Agreed – Polybius bases his whole criticism of Callisthenes on incorrect numbers – but these patently incorrect numbers for Issus apparently also come from Callisthenes.There are broadly two sets of possible figures for Alexander’s army crossing into Asia – Plutarch records Aristobolos as giving 30,000 foot and 4,000 horse; Arrian “not much more than” 30,000 foot and 5,000 horse ( derived from Ptolemy’s figures); Diodorus (who gives a detailed breakdown) 32,000 foot and 5,100 horse. The other broad figure is Anaximenes via Plutarch again at 43,000 foot and 5,500 horse and Callisthenes via Polybius 42,000 foot and 4,500 horse. Doidorus tells us that all these ultimately derive from Alexander taking an accurate count on landing in Asia. The discrepancy between the two sets of figures can be accounted for when it is remembered that an ‘advance force’ originally sent by Philip was already in Asia, which probably numbered around 10,000 and probably included a Taxis of Macedonian pezetairoi and some cavalry. This advance force had seen action against the Persians under Memnon prior to Alexander’s arrival.

There are three accounts of this battle: Arrian, Curtius and Diodorus. Diodorus is formulaic and cursory. Curtius, derived from the same “vulgate” tradition is full and Arrian’s is quite full as well. Polybios provides Kallisthenes’ set up to the battle narrative; as I noted it is, to all intents, Arrian / Ptolemy’s. Curtius and Arrian are clear on the make up of the Macedonian battle line:
Quote:
First, upon the right wing near the mountain he placed his infantry guard and the shield-bearers, under the command of Nicanor, son of Parmenio; next to these the regiment of Coenus, and close to them that of Perdiccas. These troops were posted as far as the middle – the position of the heavy infantry. On the left wing first stood the regiment of Amyntas, then that of Ptolemy, and close to this that of Meleager. The infantry on the left had been placed under the command of Craterus; but Parmenio held the chief direction of the whole left wing (Arrian 2.8.2)

Quote:
Alexander set his phalanx - the strongest element in the Macedonian army - at the front. Parmenion's son, Nicanor, held the right wing and next to him stood Coenus, Perdiccas, Meleager, Ptolomaeus and Amyntas, all leading their respective units. On the left wing, which reached as far as the sea, were Craterus and Parmenion, but Craterus had been instructed to take orders from Parmenion. The cavalry was deployed on both wings, the Macedonians reinforced by the Thessalians to the right, the Peloponnesians on the left (Curtius 3.9.7-8)


The Macedonian battle line – as at Granicus and at Gaugamela – was made up of the national levy of Macedon; this was the force, plus cavalry and its attendant light armed (Agrianes, archers and Thracians) that then filled the available space on the field.
…and there is a strong possibility that the Greek Hoplite Allies/Mercenaries, something less than 7,000 because of detachments, formed part of the Phalanx, even though they are not directly referred to….but both Curtius and Arrian have Alexander riding along the front of the Phalanx/Army and addressing Greeks/Mercenaries as well as Macedonians. If the Greeks were 'in reserve', then Alexander had enough troops to extend without halving the depth of his Phalanx....

Alexander, the night prior, had occupied the southern pass onto the field. Even after a forced march he ordered his army to rest where they were armed for battle.

Not quite –Curtius has Alexander bid them to be armed and ready “at the third watch” that is, some hours before dawn. Arrian has him set off “just before daylight”.

This will be because he saw the enemy occupied the plain below and he did not wish to be caught “naked” so to speak. The next day he moves – in column – from the pass into the plain.

…during the night sometime, actually – see above.

When the plain – a triangle widening as he progressed – opened enough he formed from column into battle order 32 deep. This with the enemy ahead and in occupation of the plain with his cavalry deployed across the river. The following advance – with its constant stops to dress the line – was carried out “closed up for action” as the enemy is at hand. It would be foolish for it to be otherwise.

This is simply incorrect – the Phalanx marched/moved/ manoeuvred in ‘open’ order, as Polybius tells us, and also the manuals. ‘Close’ order is only adopted when contact is imminent, around a 100 yards or so from the enemy.

So we approach the Pinarus, finally, eight deep and occupying some 1,371 metres of a field some 2,590 metres wide

How do you arrive at these figures? If the most commonly identified location of the battle is used it was around 3 miles/4.8 kilometres wide at the river between sea and hills. The 20-21,000 man Phalanx would occupy a frontage of 2,500 yards -2,625 yards, whether in ‘open’ or ‘close’ order…..
This, then, leaves room for the cavalry and any light armed that were not deployed before the phalanx.
Agreed!

Plainly there were not 42,000 foot in the battle line. Polybios in his fevered and sanctimonious assault on Kallisthenes has dropped the sarisa.
Also agreed !