Persia/Parthia

annis · Post by **annis** » Thu March 8th, 2012, 4:44 pm

I really enjoyed Memnon ( and Scott Oden's earlier novel Men of Bronze, set in ancient Egypt). Memnon also makes an appearance in Christian Cameron's novel about Alexander the Great, God of War, as a worthy opponent. It's interesting to speculate whether Alexander could have been stopped in his tracks if Darius had let Memnon have his head - he understood Macedonian tactics in a way the Persians couldn't, and was a real threat to Alexander's advance.

Shield-of-Dardania · Post by **Shield-of-Dardania** » Fri March 9th, 2012, 1:34 am

If I recall correctly (sorry I forgot to bring that book with me, again), at the time Memnon proposed his counter-strategies, Darius III was not yet on the throne. It was his predecessor, Atrocious Artaxerxes (Artaxerxes II Occhus). I think it was Darius III who promoted Memnon to Chief Commander.

My guess is that, if Darius III had managed to restabilise the Persian centre politically, Memnon would have led the Persian army to, at the very least, a checkmate with Alexander's Macedonia. He was only about 10 - 15 years older than Alexander, so at the time of Alexander's death Memnon would only be fourty seven at the most, still a fairly reasonable age for a chief commander.

It was a time of disarray in Persia. Had the empire been in a better state of organisation, their army would have found a way to cope with Alexander's, the way they did most of the time later with Rome, and subsequently with Byzantium.

Justin Swanton · Post by **Justin Swanton** » Fri March 9th, 2012, 3:56 pm

Memnon may have had a Greek's understanding of the strengths of the Macedonian army, but I think it highly unlikely he could have found an effective counter to them.

His best asset at Granicus was the 5000 Greek hoplites under his command. Careful analysis shows (I'll back this up if you wish) that the Greek hoplite phalanx was no match for the Macedonian phalangite phalanx in good terrain. Add to that the decisive superiority of Alexander's Companion cavalry against its Persian counterparts and Memnon was left hanging in mid-air.

Historically, nothing, not even Rome's legions, ever beat the Macedonian phalanx frontally. Rome only got round them by getting around them - drawing them into rough terrain that broke up their cohesion, or moving in on their flanks and rear, something they managed once the introduction of the small-group maniple system (originally invented by Hannibal incidentally) gave their army more flexibility.

annis · Post by **annis** » Fri March 9th, 2012, 7:58 pm

I'm no military expert, but my understanding is that neither Artaxerxes III, nor Artaxerxes IV nor Darius III really allowed Memnon to conduct a campaign against the Macedonians along the lines he wanted to follow, suspicious of giving too much control into the hands of a foreign mercenary. Darius III did eventually concede that Memnon's strategies were the right way to go, but the time he made Memnon Supreme Commander it was pretty much too late to make a difference - Memnon died soon after.

Certainly Persia, with its great resources, shouldn't have been defeated by a relatively small Macedonian force - as you say, it was a lack of organsiation and cohesion that led to their downfall and organisation was Alexander's forte- plus he always had the almost uncanny ability to see several steps ahead of anyone else in the game of war. Agreed that Memnon may not have been able to defeat Alexander in direct combat, but some of his other suggested strategies aimed at cutting off support and supplies could conceivably have had a significant impact on Alexander's advance.

Just thought I'd add a couple of other titles here, look to be self-published with some of the common issues attached - I haven't read them myself, but they do fit the subject:
Peter Darman, The Parthian and Parthian Dawn.

Shield-of-Dardania · Post by **Shield-of-Dardania** » Sat March 10th, 2012, 2:27 pm

You're not bad, Annis, really. You would give Condeleeza a run for her money.

I tried sneaking into Memnon's head for a bit.

Agreed, it might not be a good idea to take on the Macedonians in a frontal battle. Like someone said, someone who seems invincible only remains seemingly invincible for as long as you don't defeat him. Then, one day you do, and hey pronto, now he's mortal! Stating the obvious, yep, but sometimes the obvious needs to be stated too. Now, this is perhaps something Memnon might have considered.

Have a token Persian force pick a fight with the main Macedonian army somewhere in Persia. In a way that takes up quite a bit of their time, effort and resources. Not to mention their supplies too. Somewhere you could pin them down, the way Memnon did at Halicarnassus. Well, at least according to Scott Oden he did. Starve them of food and water as much as you could.

As Alexander is bogged down, phalanx and all, in Persia, send a well armed sea fleet, with an elite commando amphibian force on board, to invade the Macedonian capital Pella and raze it to the ground. As Alexander is distracted, another well armed Persian force can move in and tear his forces up to bits in Persia, using the age old harrass, hit and run tactics of ancient Persian warfare.

Better still, get Alexander at sea as he rushes back to save Pella from destruction or conquest. A sizeable well equipped Persian navy with battle hardened soldiers from all over the empire, led by Memnon, Pharnabazus or both, could have crushed him in the Bosphorus or the Aegean, considering that Alexander never fought any significant battle at sea.

Shield-of-Dardania · Post by **Shield-of-Dardania** » Sat March 10th, 2012, 2:49 pm

Sorry, repeat post, deleted.

Justin Swanton · Post by **Justin Swanton** » Sat March 10th, 2012, 3:28 pm

[quote=""Shield-of-Dardania""]You're not bad, Annis, really. You would give Condeleeza a run for her money.

I tried sneaking into Memnon's head for a bit.

Agreed, it might not be a good idea to take on the Macedonians in a frontal battle. Like someone said, someone who seems invincible only remains seemingly invincible for as long as you don't defeat him. Once you do, he's done. Stating the obvious, yep, but sometimes the obvious needs to be stated too. Now, this is perhaps something Memnon might have considered.

Have a token Persian force pick a fight with the main Macedonian army somewhere in Persia. In a way that takes up quite a bit of their time, effort and resources. Somewhere you could pin them down, the way Memnon did at Halicarnassus. Well, at least according to Scott Oden he did.

As Alexander is bogged down, phalanx and all, in Persia, send a well armed sea fleet, or even better an amphibian force, to invade the Macedonian capital Pella and raze it to the ground. As Alexander is distracted, another well armed Persian force can move in and tear his forces up to bits in Persia, using the age old harrass, hit and run tactics of ancient Persian warfare.

Better still, get Alexander at sea as he rushes back to save Pella from destruction or conquest. A sizeable well equipped Persian navy with battle hardened soldiers from all over the empire, led by Memnon, Pharnabazus or both, could have crushed him in the Bosphorus or the Aegean, considering that Alexander never fought even once at sea.[/quote]

Ummm....a few problems here. Let's look at the options:

1. Have a token Persian force pick a fight with the main Macedonian army somewhere in Persia.

That means (if I understand correctly) ceding Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine and Egypt to Alexander. This implies giving up the Persian fleet as it would no longer have a base (this is in fact what happened to it). How would this token force pin the Macedonians down? They might try holding it up at a mountain pass (as in Bactria) but even that wouldn't buy much time.

2. Invade Macedonia with the Persian fleet and take Pella.

This means controlling Asia Minor's Aegean coast. Mounting a naval operation of this size would mean crossing over as short a distance of water as possible (deep sea navigation did not exist at the time and ships were vulnerable to storms). Even with Asia Minor under his control, the mighty Xerxes could not do it. He created a bridge across the Hellespont, over which his army marched, and used his ships to supply his troops on their overland route to Greece.

Sending a small force by ship would not work as the Greeks would undoubtedly have combined with the Macedonians to drive it out. Persia, not Macedonia, was Greece's great, traditional enemy.

3. Fight Alexander at sea.

Even if Alexander had decided to return to Macedonia, and even if the Persian fleet still had a base to operate from, fleets at this time rarely engaged in naval battles (Salamis was the great exception). If it wanted to, one fleet could very easily give the other the slip, as Roman and Carthaginian history proves.

Did Darius have any options? He might have tried employing some Gallic mercenaries. They were a much rougher crowd than the Gauls who later fought Julius Caesar. They would work themselves up into a frenzy then charge a phalanx pell-mell (this is slightly later than Alexander's time). The first few ranks would get impaled on the phalangites' sarissas (long lances), after which the ranks behind would walk over the immobilised sarissas, now embedded in the bodies of their comrades, and chop up the hapless phalangites. Rather heavy in casualties but very effective.

Shield-of-Dardania · Post by **Shield-of-Dardania** » Sat March 10th, 2012, 4:32 pm

Sorry, I meant the Persian Empire, actually, which would still include all those places you mentioned as provinces of 'Persia', and Anatolia was the place I was thinking of. The islands off the Anatolian coast would make a suitable base also, for a sea battle or invasion, I reckon. We're talking about the earliest stages of Alexander's entry into Asia now.

The rule, or leadership, of Macedonia over Greece wasn't completely without opposition. Athens itself, as well as Thebes and Sparta, just to name a few, were constantly in and out of alliance with Persia. The Greeks mostly had a natural distaste for centralised rule, they'd have much preferred to remain as autonomous city states. They even fought among themselves, like in the Pelopponesian Wars, for instance. This was what a Memnon-led Persian army could have exploited, incite a rebellion against Macedonia, for example.

Charging the phalanx like you suggested would have been one option, albeit a costly one. Come to think of it, you'd still get some guys impaled on some sarissa, whether you charge them or you get charged by them. So, why not?

But I believe you could still do enough damage to break up the phalanx - or whatever else is being used as the enemy's core - by surrounding them with cavalry and raining volley upon volley of arrows on them from all sides, with your cavalry changing position frequently. Flank and rear attacks would need to be a staple part. The idea being, to be always mobile and agile, i.e. to not be there each time the phalanx comes. This was what the Persians were good at, they inherited it from their steppe nomad ancestors. I mean, Attila was still doing it, quite succesfully for a while too, against the Romans seven and a half centuries later.

annis · Post by **annis** » Sat March 10th, 2012, 10:32 pm

Posted by Shield-of-Dardania

You're not bad, Annis, really. You would give Condeleeza a run for her money.

Wooo- thanks, Shield, I think.. However, given that I'm a left-wing, unionist, anti-war type, I don't think Condi and I would have too much in common

Manda Scott · Post by **Manda Scott** » Sun March 11th, 2012, 12:48 pm

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to alert you to my own book - but it's not out yet, so few people have seen it...

Rome: The Eagle of the Twelfth starts in Parthia and moves throughout the region as we head towards the loss of the Eagle and the attempt to recover it.

Out in May in Hardback and on Kindle.

Manda