MACEDON , 401—301 B.C.

 

CHAPTER XII .

ALEXANDER: THE CONQUEST OF PERSIA

I.

ALEXANDER’S EARLY YEARS

 

ALEXANDER III, son of Philip II and the Epirote princess  Olympias, was born in summer 356, and was twenty when in 336 he succeeded to the throne of Macedonia. Though both his parents claimed Greek descent, he certainly had from his father, and probably from his mother, some Illyrian, i.e. Albanian, blood. When his son was thirteen, Philip invited Aristotle to Macedonia to be his tutor; and, so far as his character was influenced by others, it was influenced by Aristotle and Olympias, by a philosopher who taught that moderation alone could hold a state together and by a woman to whom any sort of moderation was unknown. Olympias was proud and terribly passionate, with an emotional side which made her a devotee of the orgiastic worships of Thrace; but she kept her son’s love all his life, and, though he inherited from Philip the solid qualities of capacity for affairs and military talent, his nature was largely hers, though not his mind. For if his nature was passionate, his mind was practical; he was found, when a boy, entertaining some Persian envoys by questioning them about the routes across Asia. For physical pleasures, except hunting, he cared little; but he read much poetry, and shared Euripides’ dislike of the professional athlete. His heroes were his traditional ancestors Achilles and Heracles, and he kept under his pillow a copy of the Iliad which Aristotle had revised for him. Aristotle taught him ethics and metaphysics, and some politics; later he wrote for him a treatise on the art of ruling, and another on colonization. He also gave him a general interest in philosophy, scientific investigation, and medicine. The last two bore fruit in Alexander’s care for his army’s health in Asia and in the great contributions he made to the knowledge of geography, hydrography, ethnology, zoology, and botany; the first is illustrated by the philosophers who accompanied him to Asia, and by the treatise on kingship written for him by Xenocrates, while his admiration for Heracles may have been quickened by the Cynic teaching which was already making of Heracles the ideal king, labouring incessantly for the good of mankind. In appearance, Alexander was fair-skinned, ruddy, and clean-shaven; Lysippus’ portrait-statues rendered famous the inclination of his head to the left side and the soft, upturned eyes. For the rest, he was at his accession easy to persuade but impossible to drive; generous, ambitious, masterful, loyal to friends, and above all very young. His deeper qualities, for good or evil, remained to be called out by events.

At sixteen he had governed Macedonia in Philip’s absence and defeated a Thracian rising; at eighteen he had commanded Philip’s left at Chaeronea, and broken the Sacred Band of Thebes. At nineteen he was an exile. Relations between Philip and Olympias had long been strained, for Olympias was not the woman to tolerate Philip’s harem; and the trouble came to a head when, in 337, Philip married Cleopatra, niece of his general Attalus. Philip, it was said, doubted whether Alexander were really his son—possibly a story spread by Attalus’ friends; and at the wedding feast Attalus requested the company to pray for a legitimate heir to the throne. Alexander flung his cup in his face, took his mother, and fled to Illyria. Philip banished Alexander’s friends, including Harpalus prince of Elymiotis and Ptolemy son of Lagos, both related to the royal house, and Nearchus, a Cretan settled at Amphipolis; finally Demaratus of Corinth acted as peace-maker, persuading Philip to recall his son and Alexander to return.

Next year Philip was assassinated. It was the official belief at the Macedonian court that the assassin was in Persian pay; it is possible enough. Antipater’s attitude absolutely acquits Alexander of complicity. Olympias may have been privy to the plot; but the only evidence against her is Antipater’s subsequent enmity to her, for our tradition on the subject derives from Cassander’s propaganda later. Some in Greece believed that the conspirators meant to set on the throne Alexander son of Aeropus of Lyncestis; were this true, Olympias is acquitted. Aeropus’ younger sons were certainly among the conspirators, but the eldest cleared himself for the time by being the first to hail Alexander as king. The usual confusion consequent on a change of ruler threatened; but Philip’s generals Antipater and Parmenion declared for Alexander, and the new king acted with determination; he secured the army, put to death all the conspirators who did not escape to Persia, and executed Attalus for treasonable correspondence with Athens; he had no further trouble. Olympias is said to have murdered Cleopatra and her infant on her own account. It was her last public action in Macedonia while Alexander lived; though devoted to her, he was determined that she should not interfere in affairs, and in 331 she retired to Epirus.

Alexander had still to establish his position outside Macedonia; Philip had had no time to consolidate the League of Corinth, and the Greeks regarded their treaties with him as terminated by his death. Athens was rejoicing over his murder, Ambracia expelled his garrison, Aetolia recalled her exiles, there was excitement in Thebes and the Peloponnese; even in Thessaly the anti-Macedonian party for a moment seized power. Northward the Balkan peoples were flaming up; Macedonia might find herself between two fires. Alexander turned first to Greece, as more necessary to him and more dangerous; in late summer 336 he hurried south, turned Tempe, which the Thessalians were holding, by cutting steps—‘Alexander’s ladder’—up the flank of Ossa, and regained control of Thessaly without fighting. He was elected head for life of her league in Philip’s place, and thus secured her all-important cavalry; for Thessaly was a country of horse-breeding landowners ruling a serf population, and cavalry was her natural arm. Greece was not prepared for resistance; he overawed Thebes, forgave Ambracia and Athens, and at a congress of the League states at Corinth was elected general of the League in Philip’s place for the invasion of Asia, Sparta of course still abstaining: among the provisions of the new Covenant were that all League states should be free and self-governing and that their internal constitutions should not be interfered with. On his way back to Macedonia he visited Delphi.

In spring 335 he turned against the Triballi, a people whom pressure from the advancing Celts had driven eastward across the Isker into northern Bulgaria, whence they were threatening Macedonia. Alexander took the coast road eastward from Amphipolis, turned Rhodope, went north, roughly, by Adrianople, and after a sharp fight crossed the Haemus, probably by the Kajan or Koja Balkan pass, though the Shipka is possible. He broke the Triballi in a battle, and reached the Danube somewhere between Sistovo and Silistria; but the Triballi had sent their families to an island in the river called Peuke, and, though some Byzantine warships joined him, he could not take it, while the Getae, famous for their belief in immortality, were gathering on the northern bank to aid the Triballi. Between warships and log canoes he got 5500 men across the Danube, dispersed the Getae, and burned their town; this bold action caused the Triballi and their neighbours to surrender, and brought him an embassy from their enemies the Celts of the upper Danube, who swore alliance with him in a form still used by the Irish Gaels 1000 years later—‘We will keep faith unless the sky fall and crush us or the earth open and swallow us or the sea rise and overwhelm us’; they added that, of the three, they onlyfeared the skyfalling. Alexander now heard that Cleitus of Illyria had allied himself with Glaucias of the Taulantini (south Illyria), invaded Macedonia, and captured the border fortress, Pelion; while the Autariatae of southern Serbia were ready to fall on his flank as he went west. But his friend Longarus of the Agrianes on the upper Strymon, whose, people furnished some of his best troops, undertook to hold the Autariatae, and Alexander, notwithstanding the great distance to be covered, reached Pelion before Glaucias joined Cleitus. He meant to blockade it; but Glaucias closed in on his rear, and he was not strong enough to fight on two fronts. His own audacity and his men’s discipline extricated the army from its dangerous position; then he turned and thoroughly defeated Cleitus. News from Greece prevented him doing more, but seemingly Illyria did not trouble him again; possibly fear of his Celtic allies counted for something.

A report had reached Greece that Alexander was dead, and the threatened defection was serious. The Theban democrats, exiled by Philip, had returned and seized power, and were attacking the Cadmea; Aetolia, Arcadia, and Elis were inclining to support them. Athens had voted help to Thebes; and though she had made no actual move, and had refused a subsidy of 300 talents offered by Darius, Demosthenes, it seems, had personally accepted the money—a dubious act, which was freely misconstrued—and with it was providing Thebes with arms. Alexander was afraid of a possible combination of the four chief military states of Greece—Thebes, Athens, Aetolia, and Sparta. But he showed, for the first but not the last time, that his speed of movement was worth an army; his campaign had already been sufficiently strenuous, yet fourteen days after the news reached him at Pelion he stood under the walls of Thebes, having collected the contingents of Phocis and Boeotia on the way. His presence checked any further developments, and the other Greeks waited on the event. He himself hoped Thebes would submit; he wanted a peaceful and contented Greece behind him and waited for overtures, but none came; Thebes meant to fight. Naturally he intended to take the city if accommodation failed; that Perdiccas began the attack without orders is immaterial. The Thebans sallied out but were defeated, and Alexander’s men entered the city with the fugitives, whom the Phocians and Plataeans massacred in revenge for their former wrongs. Alexander nominally left Thebes’ fate to the League, but the only delegates with him were Thebes’ enemies; Phocis and Boeotia indeed voted the city’s destruction, but the responsibility lies with Alexander. Thebes was razed, the temples and Pindar’s house alone being left; Macedonia’s partisans and other classes were released, and some Thebans escaped to Athens, but many were sold as slaves—perhaps 8000, if the recorded price be true. Orchomenus and Plataea were fully restored, and the Boeotian cities divided up Thebes’ territory. Thebes suffered what she had inflicted on Plataea and Orchomenus, and what other Greek cities had suffered at the hands of Greeks; but that does not acquit Alexander, and it is said that his own conscience troubled him later. But the blow produced its effect; every Greek state hastened to submit, and he showed general clemency; and though he demanded the leading statesmen from Athens, he withdrew the demand on the appeal of Phocion and Demades, the irreconcilable Charidemus alone being exiled; for he greatly desired a contented Athens. He retained Philip’s garrisons in Corinth, Chalcis, and the Cadmea.

 

II.

THE PREPARATIONS FOR INVADING PERSIA

 

In autumn 335 Alexander returned to Macedonia to prepare for the invasion of Persia, and for this purpose recalled Parmenion from Asia, whither Philip had sent him in 336 with an advance force. Parmenion’s successor was defeated by Memnon, who commanded Darius’ mercenaries, but retained the all-important Dardanelles bridge-heads. Darius seems to have thought that Parmenion’s recall and Memnon’s success had removed any possibility of invasion; he made no preparations, and did not even mobilize his fleet or appoint a commander-in-chief on the coast.

The primary reason why Alexander invaded Persia was, no doubt, that he never thought of not doing it; it was his inheritance. Doubtless, too, adventure attracted him; and weight must also be given to the official reason. For officially, as is shown by the political manifesto which he afterwards sent to Darius from Marathus, the invasion was that Panhellenic war of revenge which Isocrates had preached; and Alexander did set out with Panhellenic ideas: he was the champion of Hellas. Later tradition indeed asserted that he had read, and was influenced by, Isocrates’ Philippus. But Isocrates had envisaged the conquest of Asia Minor only; and certainly Alexander did not cross the Dardanelles with any definite design of conquering the whole Persian empire. There is a story that Aristotle once asked his pupils what they would all do in certain circumstances, and Alexander replied that he could not say until the circumstances arose; and, so far as can be seen, he intended at first to be guided by events, and naturally found that each step forward seemed to lead inevitably to a fresh one. To discuss the morality of the invasion, and to call Alexander a glorious robber, is a mere anachronism. Of course, to the best modern thought, the invasion is quite unjustifiable; but it is equally unjustifiable to transfer our own thought to the fourth century. Greeks certainly objected to barbarians—‘lesser breeds without the Law’—attacking themselves, but the best thought of the time saw no reason why they should not attack  barbarians whenever they liked; Isocrates warmly advocated it, saying barbarians were natural enemies, and Aristotle called it essentially just and told his pupil to treat barbarians as slaves. It was to be left to Alexander himself to rise to a higher level than Aristotle.

In the spring of 334 Alexander crossed the Dardanelles, as commander-in-chief of the army of Macedonia and the League of Corinth, with something over 30,000 foot and over 5000 horse. He left Antipater with 12,000 foot and 1500 horse as his general in Europe, to govern Macedonia and Thrace, supervise the Greeks, and keep Olympias quiet, a more difficult task. Of Alexander’s infantry, 12,000 were Macedonians, viz., the phalanx, 9000, in six territorial battalions, and the hypaspists, 3000, in three battalions; and 12,000 were Greeks, composed of allies (League hoplites) and mercenaries (partly peltasts). The remaining infantry were light-armed: Agrianian javelin-men, Cretan archers, and Thracians. Generally speaking, the League infantry was used mainly for garrisons and communications; but the Cretan archers, who were not League troops, were as indispensable as the Agrianians themselves, and their loss of four commanders successively in battle shows how heavily they were engaged. The phalanx was a far more flexible body than the later phalanx, and their spears resembled those used by the Macedonian lancers. The hypaspists probably differed somewhat in armament, but shared the heavy infantry work; one of their battalions, the agema, was Alexander’s guard. Of the cavalry, the most important body was the Companions, drawn from the Macedonian upper classes, and divided into eight territorial squadrons; a little later they were 2000 strong. The 1800 Thessalians ranked next; there were also some Greek allied horse, who acted with the Thessalians, four squadrons of Macedonian lancers, and small bodies of Paeonian and Thracian horse. The advance on traditional Greek warfare was to lie in the combination of arms, and more especially in the use of a mass of heavy cavalry, acting in small tactical units, as the striking force; Alexander always struck with the Companions from the right, to cover the infantry’s unshielded side. But though he usually led the Companions, he led other corps if occasion required—twice the phalanx, twice the hypaspists, and once the archers.

His officers were as yet largely Philip’s. Parmenion was second in command; his son Philotas commanded the Companions, and another son, Nicanor, the hypaspists. Five of the phalanx-leaders were prominent later: Craterus, Perdiccas, Coenus, Amyntas, and Meleager. Cleitus ‘the Black’ commanded the first squadron of the Companions, called the Royal; Harpalus’ cousin Calas commanded the Thessalians, and Antigonus, the future king, the Greek allies. Of Alexander’s Staff, the so-called Bodyguards, thirteen names are known, but many were appointed later; Ptolemaeus, Arybbas, Balacrus, and probably Demetrius, were among the original members. Beside the Staff, Alexander had about him a body of men of high position to whom the name Companions properly belongs and after whom the Companion cavalry was called, probably about 100 in number; these acted as an informal council, and formed his general reserve both for special duties and for filling all high offices, whether military or administrative, such as satrapies. They included his personal friends Hephaestion and Nearchus; the future kings, Ptolemy son of Lagos, Seleucus, and Lysimachus; and a few Greeks like Demaratus, Stasanor, and Laomedon, who could speak Persian and was to have charge of the prisoners; but Cassander remained with his father Antipater, and Harpalus, who was physically unfit for service, accompanied the army as a civilian.

The army had a siege-train, and engineers for constructing pontoons and siege-machines, the chief engineer being Diades, who invented (or improved) portable siege-towers and rams on wheels. There were sappers, well-sinkers, and a surveying section (bematists), who collected information about routes and camping grounds and recorded the distances marched; their records, which were checked by Alexander, for long formed the basis of the geography of Asia. There was a baggage train; as for commissariat, supplies were collected in each district as conquered and used for the next advance. The secretarial department was under Eumenes of Cardia, who wrote the Journal, the daily official record of the expedition, probably checked by Alexander. There was a corps of Royal Pages, lads training to be officers, who watched before Alexander’s sleeping quarters; and several philosophers and literary men accompanied the expedition. Aristotle himself retired to Athens, but sent with Alexander in his stead his nephew Callisthenes of Olynthus, philosopher and historian; there were also Anaxarchus a Democritean, and his pupil Pyrrhon, who founded the Sceptic school, and the historians Aristobulus and Onesicritus a Cynic. With them were geographers, botanists, and other scientific men, who among other things collected information and specimens for Aristotle; but many of these, with poets and artistes, came out later. More important, however, than the professed literary men was Ptolemy son of Lagos, for to the use by later writers of his history, based on the Journal and other official material, we owe the best of our knowledge of Alexander’s career.

Putting aside independent tribes and dynasts, and temple states, Asia Minor, as Alexander found it, was divided between two different land-systems: the Greek cities of the coast and the Iranian and native baronies of the central plateau. Each Greek city ruled its own ‘city-lan’, which was often cultivated by the native pre-Persian inhabitants, living in villages; sometimes these were serfs, bought and sold with the land, as the Phrygians at Zelea; sometimes hereditary occupiers paying taxes to the city, as the Pedieis at Priene; sometimes their villages had even a kind of corporate organization, as the Thracians at Cyzicus. Outside the city-lands the whole soil was King’s land, often granted out to great landowners, who lived each in his stronghold, ruling his domain, which was cultivated by the native inhabitants of the villages, always apparently serfs. As regards the natives, therefore, the Greek system was somewhat more liberal, a matter of importance when we come to the city-foundations of Alexander and his successors. But for the moment, to Alexander, the King’s land with its land-tax was the important matter, for he was bankrupt. He had only 70 talents in his treasury, and his subscription toward the new temple at Delphi was only 2100 drachmae; he owed 1300 talents, while the army’s pay required 200 talents a month, with another 100 for the Graeco-Macedonian fleet of the League. The story that, before starting, he gave away all the royal domains in Macedonia to his friends, retaining only his hopes, is untrue, for King’s land does not vanish from Macedonian history; but he did bestow some estates, the gift to Ptolemaeus the Bodyguard being known.

The Persian army was conditioned by the Persian land-system, which obtained not only in Asia Minor but in northern Syria and Armenia, and probably throughout all Iran. The Persians had abandoned their native system of warfare, which had consisted in disordering the enemy by archery fire and then charging him with cavalry; and the Persian archers had become a subordinate arm. The empire had plenty of good cavalry, for each landowner maintained a cavalry troop of retainers; but infantry meant either half­armed serfs, with no interest in fighting, or hill tribesmen, brave but undisciplined. Some attempt had been made to form a professional heavy infantry, called Cardaces; but the empire had really come to depend for infantry on Greek mercenaries. The course of Alexander’s battles, and the large number of mercenaries still available for him to recruit, show that Darius most certainly had not the 50,000 Greeks of tradition; but Memnon probably had at least 20,000, a large force, though many would be peltasts.

 

III.

GRANICUS AND ASIA MINOR

 

While Parmenion brought the army across the Dardanelles, Alexander, in imitation of Achilles, landed at Ilium, sacrificed in the old temple of Athena, and brought away the sacred shield which was to save his life. He declared Ilium free, restored democracy, and abolished the tribute paid to Persia; then he rejoined his army, and marched up the coast past Lampsacus, to meet the force which the coastal satraps, Arsites of Hellespontine Phrygia and Spithridates of Lydia, with Mithrobarzanes of Cappadocia and Atizyes of Phrygia, had hastily collected to oppose him. Tradition gives them 20,000 cavalry and 20,000 Greek mercenaries; but Alexander’s small losses at the Granicus show that there were certainly not 20,000 well-trained Greeks there. The greater part of Memnon’s 20,000 Greeks had in fact been assigned to the fleet, while strong bodies garrisoned Miletus and Halicarnassus. The satraps and the barons with them had their own cavalry, strength unknown, a small body of Greeks still with Memnon, who had joined them, and some native infantry. Memnon proposed to retire before Alexander, waste the country, and wait for Darius; that he also advised carrying the war into Greece is unlikely, for he did not do this when later he had the power; it represents what the Greek mercenary commanders hoped. Arsites however refused to allow his satrapy to be laid waste. The Persian leaders had in fact a very gallant plan; they meant if possible to strangle the war at birth by killing Alexander. They massed their cavalry on the steep bank of the lower Granicus, put the Greeks behind them, and waited. It has often been explained since that this was not the way to hold a river-bank; but that was not their intention.

Alexander’s army was in what became his regular battle-order; on the left, Parmenion with the Thessalian, Greek, and Thracian horse, then the phalanx, then the hypaspists; on the right, himself with the Companions, lancers, Paeonians, Agrianians, and Cretans. Parmenion advised caution; but Alexander saw the disparity of strength, and rejected the advice. The ensuing battle was fought mainly by his right wing. He ordered some cavalry across, and then charged through the river himself, conspicuous by the white wings on his helmet. The Persian leaders concentrated on him and threw away their lives freely in a desperate attempt to kill him; at one moment they almost succeeded, and Cleitus’ promptitude alone saved Alexander from Spithridates’ scimitar. Finally the Persians broke; their men, armed only with javelins, were unequally matched with Alexander’s heavy cavalry, who (except the lancers) used short spears. The rest of the army had crossed, and Alexander surrounded the Greeks and killed all but 2000, whom he sent in chains to forced labour in Macedonia as traitors to the League; among them were some Athenians. Eight Persian notables of high rank were killed; Memnon escaped. Alexander lost 25 Companions and 90 other arms; and he emphasized the fact that he was general of the League by sending 300 Persian panoplies to Athens, with a dedication from ‘Alexander and the Greeks, except the Spartans’. He left Calas as satrap of Hellespontine Phrygia, with a force of Greek allies, to secure the Dardanelles crossing; gave the vacant command of the Thessalians to Alexander the Lyncestian; and turned southward towards Ionia.

The Persians ruled the Greek towns by means of tyrants or friendly oligarchies, with occasional garrisons—precisely the method which Antipater, in Alexander’s interest, was using in Greece. Alexander in Asia adopted the opposite method, the support of free democratic government. Partly this was due to circumstances: Persia’s foes were his friends. But it must also have been due to conviction, for he never altered his policy when he could have done so. Consequently we get here, for the first time, the opposition between the two ways of treating Greek cities, the way of Antipater and the way of Alexander, which was to divide the Macedonian world till 301. Alexander now gave out that he had come to restore democracy; and in city after city the democrats overthrew the pro-Persian government. He himself occupied Ephesus; Priene admitted Antigonus; troops were detached to secure the Aeolian towns; Sardes was surrendered by the governor Mithrines. Alexander made Asander satrap of Lydia, and garrisoned Sardes; but he restored to the Lydians the right to be judged by their own native laws. At Miletus however the garrison closed the gates and stood a siege. The Persian fleet, said to be 400 strong, at last appeared off the city; but the fleet of the League, 160 ships, anticipated it by three days and blocked the harbour. The Persians offered battle; Parmenion advised Alexander to fight, and offered to lead the fleet himself. But Alexander would not risk the moral consequences of defeat; he said he would not throw away his men’s lives, but would conquer the Persian fleet on land. Miletus he took by assault; 300 mercenaries escaped to an island, and he gave them terms and took them into his service. He already saw that the purely Panhellenic policy of Granicus would not do. The Persian fleet retired to Halicarnassus, and Alexander dismissed his own, except the Athenian contingent; it served no purpose, and he had no money.

At first sight it looks as if, with the Persian fleet commanding the Aegean, Alexander was engaged in a mere gamble; Memnon, who was soon after appointed commander-in-chief of the fleet and the coast, might cut his communications at the Dardanelles, or raise Greece. But in fact Alexander, in this critical decision, showed fine judgment. His communications were not seriously endangered; galleys, with limited cruising powers and helpless at night, hardly ever prevented troops crossing the sea. To raise Greece was, he judged, impossible. Memnon might raise Sparta; but Sparta was as unpopular as Macedonia, and could be dealt with by Antipater. To raise Greece meant first winning Athens, the only city which might form a large combination; and Alexander judged the situation at Athens correctly. Moreover, he held as hostages 20 Athenian ships and his Athenian prisoners, while in the allied troops he virtually had hostages for every state in the League. But there was more than this. In deciding to conquer the Persian fleet on land, he did not merely mean depriving it of bases; it might seize a base, as it did at Mitylene. But his proclamation of democracy had shaken the Greek half of the fleet to its foundations; for each city’s squadron was manned from the poorer democrats, and would slip away home when its city was freed. And, thanks to Ochus, the Cyprians and all the Phoenicians except Tyre were disaffected. Memnon’s hands were tied; possibly the Tyrian was the only really loyal contingent he had. Alexander judged that if he secured the coast cities the fleet would die of dry rot; and it did.

He next entered Caria, where he was welcomed by Ada, Idrieus’ widow and Mausolus’ sister. She had been dispossessed of her authority by her brother Pixodarus; she adopted Alexander as her son and put her fortress of Alinda into his hands. But Alexander was held up by Halicarnassus, where Memnon himself commanded the garrison; with him were Orontopates, satrap of Caria, Pixodarus’ successor, and some Macedonian exiles. Alexander had to bring up his siege-train and attack Halicarnassus in form. The besieged fought well; in various sallies they burnt part of the siege-train, and killed Ptolemaeus the Bodyguard and other officers; and when the town finally became untenable, they fired their magazines and escaped, Memnon to the fleet, Orontopates to the fortress of Salmacis. Alexander restored Ada to her satrapy and left Ptolemaeus son of Philippus, a squadron-leader of the Companions, with 3200 mercenaries to reduce Caria, where Orontopates still held several places. The Carian satrap, possibly with help from Agis of Sparta, made a good fight; he was de­feated shortly before Issus by Ptolemaeus and Asander, but the reduction of Caria was not completed till 332.

Winter had now begun. Alexander sent home the newly married men of the army on furlough, a most popular measure; detached Parmenion with the heavy cavalry, the allies, and the siege and baggage trains, to await him in Phrygia; and himself with the rest of the army undertook a winter campaign in the mountains of Lycia and Pisidia. It became his usual practice to attack hill tribes in winter, when the snow confined them to the valleys and made them manageable. He first entered the Milyad, received the surrender of the Lycian towns, and was welcomed by Phaselis in Pamphylia. There he heard that Darius had offered Alexander of Lyncestis the crown of Macedonia and 1000 gold talents to kill him; whether the report was true or not, the Lyncestian could not be left in command of the Thessalians. Craterus’ brother Amphoterus made his way to Parmenion through the hill tribes with a native guide, and the Lyncestian was arrested and imprisoned.

Alexander made Nearchus satrap of Lycia and Pamphylia, garrisoned Phaselis to protect it from the Persian fleet, sent part of his force to Perge by the famous Climax or Ladder—rock-steps cut in the hill—and went with the rest by the direct way along the coast. Here the cliffs of Mount Climax came down to the sea; with a north wind it was feasible to go by the beach, but with a south wind the sea made this impossible. The wind, which had been south, shifted at the right moment, and he had a swift and easy passage, though the men had to wade; the shifting of the wind was regarded as a sign of divine favour, like Cyrus’ passage of the Euphrates. He received the adhesion of Perge, Aspendus, and Side, and then entered the mountains of Pisidia, making for Termessus, the fortress which commanded the passes from Phaselis into the Milyad. To attack it without siege-engines was however, he saw, impossible. He fought his way north through the tribes, and took and razed Sagalassus and some forts; but he did not reduce Pisidia, though he nominally added the western half to Nearchus’ satrapy; eastern Pisidia he never saw. Leaving the hills, he marched by Lake Buldur to Celaenae. Its Carian garrison agreed to surrender, if not relieved by a certain day; he left Antigonus as satrap of Phrygia with 1500 mercenaries to watch Celaenae, which surrendered, and in spring rejoined Parmenion at Gordium. Here was shown the chariot of Gordias, founder of the old Phrygian monarchy, with the yoke lashed to the pole by cornel-bark in an involved knot; local legend said that the man who untied the knot would rule Asia. The story that Alex­ander cut the knot with his sword is famous; but it is poorly attested, and hardly even expresses Alexander’s character. The men on furlough now rejoined, bringing 3000 Macedonians and 650 horse as reinforcements; and ambassadors came from Athens to request the return of the prisoners. Alexander would not part with his hostages while the Persian fleet was in being; he told the Athenians to ask him again when things were more settled.

They were by no means settled as yet, for Memnon with the fleet was showing considerable activity; he had partisans in every city, and a fair force of Greek mercenaries. The oligarchs had put Chios into his hands, and he was besieging Mitylene. Some believed that he would cross to Greece; but this is improbable, for he was doubtless well-informed as to the policy of Athens. Probably his aim was to recover what cities he could and perhaps capture the bridge-head at Abydos, thus compelling Alexander to detach troops which he could not spare. Then Memnon died. Whether this meant much to Alexander cannot be said, for Memnon’s capacity has to be taken on trust, and his nephew, Artabazus’ son Pharnabazus, who succeeded him, knew his plans. Mitylene surrendered, on terms that she was to become Darius’ ally according to the Peace of Antalcidas; Pharnabazus garrisoned the city, set up a tyrant, and levied a war contribution. He also recovered Tenedos and the rest of Lesbos, and set up a tyrant in Methymna. Alexander was forced to take measures to counter him, and sent Amphoterus and Hegelochus to the Dardanelles to collect ships from the allied cities and reform the fleet. The decision however came from Darius, who was at last collecting an army; he confirmed Pharnabazus’ command, but also sent Mentor’s son Thymondas to bring him the mercenaries from the fleet. Thymondas shipped them to Tripolis in Phoenicia, and they joined Darius, leaving Pharnabazus crippled; he had only 1500 men left, and his fleet began to break up.

From Gordium Alexander proceeded to Ancyra (Angora), and there received envoys from Paphlagonia, now independent; they asked him not to invade their country, and offered formal submission. Alexander, whose aim was to meet Darius, had no intention of invading Paphlagonia; he added the country nominally to Calas’ satrapy, and turned south. Ariarathes, the independent Persian dynast of northern Cappadocia, was not disturbed, and though Alexander marched through southern Cappadocia he made no attempt to conquer it; he left as ‘satrap’ one Sabiktas, possibly a local baron commissioned to do what he could, and pushed on towards the Cilician Gates. Properly held, the pass was impregnable. But Alexander hurried on in advance with the hypaspists, Agrianians, and archers, and reached it long before he was expected; the defenders had a panic, and he captured the Gates without the loss of a man. Through the Gates he descended into Cilicia, and hearing that the Persians meant to destroy Tarsus he galloped straight there with the cavalry and reached it in time. Here his exertions, or a bath in the Cydnus when heated, brought on a severe fever. His friend and physician, Philippus of Acarnania, was about to administer a draught when a letter arrived from Parmenion warning Alexander that Philippus had been bribed by Darius to poison him. Alexander, whose confidence in his friends was as yet unshakeable, handed Philippus the letter to read while he drank; Philippus read it and merely remarked to Alexander that he would recover provided he followed his advice.

 

IV. 

THE BATTLE OF ISSUS

 

Alexander, after his recovery, sent Parmenion forward to occupy the passes—Kara-kapu leading from Cilicia into the little plain of Issus, and the ‘pillar of Jonah’ leading out of that plain towards Syria; whether he also occupied the Syrian Gates beyond Myriandrus is uncertain. Alexander himself took over the Cilician cities, and campaigned for a week in the foot-hills of Taurus to secure his flank; then, hearing that Darius was at Sochi in Syria, beyond the Syrian Gates, he left his sick and wounded at Issus, joined Parmenion, crossed the Jonah pass, and entered Myriandrus. For some reason unknown his intelligence was at fault; he believed Darius to be still at Sochi.

Darius was not at Sochi. He had waited some time, and had concluded that Alexander, of whose illness he was ignorant, meant to halt in Cilicia; against the advice of the Macedonian exile Amyntas he decided to go and look for him. He sent his war­chest and encumbrances to Damascus, crossed the Amanus by the Amanic Gates while Alexander was crossing the Jonah pass, and came down on Issus, where he butchered Alexander’s sick and wounded and learnt that Alexander had gone on to Myriandrus. He had come right across Alexander’s communications, and could compel him to fight with his face toward his base. The Persian command at once saw that a drawn battle was to them as good as a victory. They took up a position on the river Pinarus (probably the Deli, the distance from hills to sea being less than today) with their back to the Amanic Gates, their right resting on the sea and their left on the hills, and waited.

Darius’ army consisted of no more than his home and household troops (i.e. his guard and the Persian cavalry and archers), with the Greeks, Cardaces, and some light-armed. It did not number 600,000 men, and did not include 30,000 Greeks. When two Greek cities fought, each knew the other’s approximate strength; but to the Macedonians a Persian army was guesswork, and both camp gossip and literary men made flattering guesses, such as seemed appropriate to the territorial extent of the Persian empire. Alexander’s Staff doubtless got true figures later from the sur­rendered satraps, but the silence of Ptolemy, i.e. of the Journal, shows that they never gave them out; the moral effect on the army of the belief that it had broken a vast host was too good to forego. Persian numbers and losses are throughout unknown; but the right way to regard Darius’ armies is to remember that the greatest force raised by Antigonus when king of Asia west of Euphrates was 88,000 men, partly Europeans, and that in 302-301, when every state was making a supreme effort, Macedonia, Greece, Thrace, Egypt, and Asia west of India, with mercenaries, pirates, and Illyrians, had some 230,000—240,000 men under arms, of whom probably half were Europeans. Darius’ army at Issus was somewhat larger than Alexander’s, but not too large to cross the Amanus in one night, and there were enough Greeks to handle one wing of the phalanx severely, but not to defeat the phalanx; as at least 10,000 Greeks got away, there may have been some 12,000 altogether. The Greeks under Amyntas and Thymondas were placed in the centre, with the Cardaces on either side; their front was palisaded where the banks were easy; they had only to hold the line, and Alexander’s career was ended. The cavalry under Nabarzanes the chiliarch was massed on the right as a striking force. As Alexander was also expected to strike with his right, the archers were put on the left in front of the Cardaces, while on the extreme left the light-armed were thrown well forward along the foothills, to attack Alexander’s flank and rear and prevent him charging. Darius and his guard were behind the centre. It was a good enough plan, had the infantry been all Greeks; but the Persian command had to use what it had got.

Alexander could not believe that Darius was behind him till he had sent a ship to report; then he hastened to secure the Jonah pass, camped, and next morning advanced towards the enemy (Oct. 333), deploying from column into line as the plain opened out. His army was smaller than that which had fought at Granicus. Many of the allies had been left with Calas, and 4700 mercenaries in Caria and Phrygia; allowing for the known reinforcements, and for losses and garrisons, he may have had from 20,000 to 24,000 infantry in action; but he probably had 5000 horse. Out of bow-shot he halted to rest the men. His line was in its usual formation; but on the right the lancers were next the hypaspists, with himself and the Companions before the lancers, a deep column of horse. The mercenaries and allies were behind the phalanx. Behind the lancers, to meet the threat of the advanced Persian left, was a flanking force, including the Agrianians; these began the battle by driving the Persian light-armed up the hill and out of action. With this danger removed, Alexander set his line in motion, and once within bow-shot he himself charged. The archers and Cardaces crumpled up before him; Darius turned his chariot at the sight and fled. But his guard stood, and gave Alex­ander a battle, and meanwhile the phalanx was in trouble; in cross­ing the river it had lost its cohesion, and the Greeks had thrown themselves at the gap. It was a battle of the two peoples. Part of the phalanx suffered heavily, and one battalion lost its commander; but the hypaspists swung round on to the exposed left flank of the Greeks and compelled them to retire. On Alexander’s left Nabarzanes had charged across the river and driven back Parmenion’s cavalry, but not decisively enough to take the phalanx in flank; and on the news of Darius’ flight he too retired, and the retreat became general. Alexander is said to have lost 450 killed, and was himself wounded. The Persian loss was doubtless out of proportion, as that of the vanquished usually was; but they had a fair line of retreat, and as the battle was fought late in the afternoon, darkness must have soon checked the pursuit; they only lost five notables, while part of the army escaped into Cappadocia, brought it over to Darius, and possibly even attacked Antigonus. Two thousand Greeks rejoined Darius later. The main body, 8000 men under Amyntas, got away in good order; but they had seen enough of Darius. They marched back to Tripolis and sailed to Egypt; there Amyntas was killed trying to conquer the country, and his army subsequently took service with Sparta, to fight again at Megalopolis under a better king.

Balacrus the Bodyguard was now made satrap of Cilicia; Menes succeeded him on the Staff, and Polyperchon, the future regent, got the vacant battalion of the phalanx. Darius’ chariot and bow were captured, and his splendidly appointed tent gave the Macedonians their first glimpse of oriental luxury. ‘This, I believe, is being a king’, said Alexander, as he sat down to Darius’ table; and it was not entirely sarcastic. As he dined, he heard the wailing of women, and learned that it was Darius’ mother, wife, and two daughters, who had been captured and were weeping for his death. He sent Leonnatus to tell them that Darius was not dead, and that they were quite safe; they would have the same rank and treatment as heretofore. He himself never set eyes on Darius’ wife, or allowed her beauty to be alluded to before him; but he showed kindness to Darius’ mother, and ultimately married one of the daughters. Later writers never tired of embroidering the theme of Alexander’s treatment of these ladies; their praise of what he did throws a dry light on what he was expected to do.

 

V. 

THE ADMINISTRATION OF ASIA MINOR

 

Alexander’s arrangements in Asia Minor may here be considered. The conquest of that country was only half finished, and Alexander did not wait to complete it. Calas perhaps subdued the Mysians, but he had not the force to conquer Bithynia and Paphlagonia; whether he attempted Paphlagonia is uncertain, but later he invaded Bithynia, which was never conquered by anybody, and was killed. Southern Cappadocia again obeyed Darius; Ariarathes probably annexed it after Gaugamela. Lycaonia was nominally part of the Phrygian satrapy, but whether Antigonus conquered it till much later is uncertain. Pisidia was still independent; Balacrus of Cilicia tried later to conquer eastern Pisidia and met his death. Alexander at present only controlled the central plateau west of Cappadocia and the south and west coast­lands, with the through route into Cilicia; the north was open for an Iranian reaction, which duly came.

The Persian satraps, as Alexander found them, combined all powers, military and civil, and could coin; and the Persian financial system had a military basis. In the eastern provinces Alexander was to attempt to separate the three powers, civil, military, and financial, but in Asia Minor he constituted no separate civil authorities; all the satrapies embraced unconquered territory, and his satraps were primarily Macedonian generals with troops. But he made the great innovation of depriving them of the control of finance, and setting up separate financial superintendents. Possibly the Persian military subdivisions of the satrapies, called ‘chiliarchics,’ were maintained and utilized as smaller fiscal districts, under subordinates responsible to the financial superintendent for the satrapy. Whether the limits of his financial provinces coincided with the satrapies is unknown; at any rate there was in Asia Minor a double authority in each satrapy. The coinage Alexander kept in his own hands; the business of the financial superintendents was to collect and manage the taxes, which involved the management of the King’s land; and as everything outside the city and temple territories was King’s land, they obviously exercised much of the civil power. The financial basis of the Persian empire was that the peasants and serfs on the King’s land—the ‘King’s people’—paid their taxes (in theory) to the King, in cash or in kind. Probably however the great landowners actually collected the taxes from their domains and paid the satraps a fixed amount, and the satraps deducted their costs of administration and remitted the balance to the King; there were thus endless opportunities for oppression and leakage. Alexander altered all this; his financial superintendents had to collect the taxes direct from the peasants and remit them to the Treasury, and also see to the assessment, which was retained unaltered on the ancient customary basis. The superintendents presently introduced the Greek system of granting cultivation leases. Probably however the only King’s land as yet directly managed by Alexander’s officials was that in the coast provinces of the west and south; the great landowners of the plateau for the present remained undisturbed, Alexander merely claiming their domains and taxes as overlord. Philoxenus was appointed over the taxes for the whole of Asia Minor north of Taurus; probably he was the superior of, and co-ordinated, all the provincial superintendents.

The Greek cities had also paid taxes (tribute) to the king. The Persian rule, though apparently not severe, was naturally unpopular; and Alexander’s proclamation of democracy at once brought over to his side every city where the tyrant or garrison was not strong enough to prevent it. At Zelea the citizens captured the citadel and expelled the tyrant, thus earning Alexander’s pardon for having, before Granicus, aided the Persians under duress; Lampsacus was similarly pardoned, it is said on the appeal of the historian Anaximenes; Erythrae came to an agreement with its garrison, and raised money to send away the mer­cenaries and destroy the citadel-fort; many simply opened their gates. In every city in which he or the people restored democratic government he abolished the hated tribute. The liberated cities became his free and independent allies; at Mitylene and Tenedos, for instance, the treaty of alliance was engraved and set up; Miletus made Alexander its eponymous magistrate for 334—3; Ilium perhaps named a tribe after him. As allies, they probably became members of the League of Corinth. There is nothing to show that Alexander restored the Ionian League or formed the Ilian; these sectional Leagues belong to the rule and the policy of Antigonus. The effect of this liberation can be seen in the series of treaties with other cities at once made by Miletus with a view to restoring her commercial prosperity; and the cities continued to coin on any standard they pleased.

But the restoration of democracy and recall of the exiled democrats did not quite end matters. Aristotle had said that a king must hold the balance even between parties; and Alexander wanted the support, not of a faction, but of united cities. When therefore the restored democrats inevitably began to murder their opponents, he at once interfered; he did not intend to permit reprisals. At Ephesus he not only stopped the slaughter as soon as the tyrant and his son had been killed, but punished the democrats by refusing to abolish the tribute; he ordered however that it should be paid, not to himself, but into the treasury of Artemis, whose temple was being rebuilt, i.e., the punishment was to make the Ephesians pay for their own temple. He had been born on the night that the old temple was burnt, and he greatly desired to have his name on the new one as founder, but the Ephesians refused, though he offered to bear all expenses of rebuilding; he did how­ever enlarge the area of the temple’s right of asylum. His action at Chios, which had been betrayed to Memnon, was similar; after the people had a second time overthrown the Persian sympathizers, and Alexander had decreed the restoration of the exiles and demo­cratic government, he ordered that a commission should revise the laws and submit the revision to himself, and he garrisoned the city until the Chians ‘should be reconciled together’; presently he ordered that the imprisoned pro-Persians should be released on payment of a fine, and that no one in future should be accused on the ground of Persian sympathies. The two exceptions he made were of tyrants and traitors. Thus he ordered that those who had actually betrayed Chios to Memnon, and had escaped, should be outlawed from every city of the alliance and, if taken, should be tried by the council of the League; while all the tyrants he took were handed over for judgment to their respective cities.

One other preliminary matter Alexander hastened to settle was the boundary between city land and King’s land, in places where (like Priene) this was disputed; here he drew the bounds by his own fiat. It was vital to him, for till after Issus he was in financial straits, and the taxes from the King’s land were his only source of revenue. But once the preliminary settlement of the disturbed affairs of the cities was over—and this was a war measure—he neither claimed nor exercised any further authority, beyond what the League gave him, and sent no more orders or rescripts, save the formal documents which accompanied the tyrants handed over for judgment; and the cities were of course not under his satraps. The limits he imposed upon himself are shown by his refusal to interfere with the working of the severe city-law of Eresus against the descendants of tyrants, and by his arbitration of the old boundary dispute between Samos and Priene without employing his powers; while the temporary garrison at Chios (and doubtless those elsewhere) was called, as it was, a ‘defence force,’ to avoid objectionable implications. Possibly after 330 the cities gave him, as was courteous, his royal title, as Delphi did in 329; but this has no bearing on their position. In fact, his Greek allies had a greater measure of freedom than those of fifth-century Athens, though later he was naturally confronted with the same problem as she had been:—How were you to exercise authority, when necessary, over free but weak allies? Meanwhile, as allies, the cities took part in the war. They did not apparently furnish troops, but Chios, and doubtless all the maritime cities, supplied ships; while for the tribute was substituted a ‘contribution’ of smaller amount, which officially counted as voluntary. These matters probably did not exceed the competence of the Commander-in-Chief of the League. In one case at least, Priene, even the contribution was remitted; if this was done because Priene allowed him to put his name as dedicator on her new temple of Athena Polias, possibly he paid it himself. The contribution, being an extraordinary and temporary war-measure, was doubtless paid into the war-chest direct and not through the financial superintendents, who had nothing to do with the cities.

All the Greek cities of Asia Minor, however, did not become his allies. He took no notice of the cities on the northern coast, which he never visited, it being useless to the Persian fleet; Cyzicus was the furthest ally in this direction. So Cius remained subject to the Persian dynast Mithridates, and Heraclea to its diplomatic tyrant Dionysius; with Chalcedon and Sinope he had no relations; the story that he restored democracy at Amisus is impossible, though there may have been a revolution in his name. In the south he was confronted with cities which (except Phaselis) were not of pure Greek character and speech, and coined on the Persian standard; and no clear rule appears. Phaselis and Selge became allies, but Side was garrisoned. Aspendus, which made an agreement with him and broke it, he punished like a subject town; it was fined 100 talents, placed under the satrap of Lycia, and ordered to pay tribute. At Mallus, where the democrats rose in his favour, he remitted the tribute, i.e. treated it as a Greek town; but Soli, which had aided Darius, he fined and garrisoned, though afterwards he remitted the fine and restored democracy, i.e. apparently full Greek rights. The native towns of Asia Minor were of course subject to satraps or fortress-governors; even at Sardes the people had no definite constitution, though they could act as a body for the purpose of commercial arrangements with other towns.

 

VI. 

TYRE AND EGYPT

 

It was probably after Issus that Alexander first thought definitely of conquering the Persian empire. The alternative was to follow Isocrates’ advice and hold Asia Minor; this meant a defensive war, for Persia was bound to try and recover the sea­provinces. With Phoenicia and Egypt known to be disaffected, Alexander inevitably decided for the offensive, as his temperament dictated. He did not follow Darius; his immediate objective was Phoenicia and the ruin of the Persian fleet. He refounded Myriandrus, terminus of an important trade-route, as an Alexandria (today Alexandretta), and advanced to Marathus, which with Aradus was peaceably put into his hands; thence he detached Parmenion and the Thessalians to take Damascus. It was occupied without fighting and much booty secured, including Darius’ baggage and war-chest; Alexander’s financial troubles were now over. Parmenion also captured the families of many prominent Persians, and some Greek envoys to Darius; Alexander released the Thebans and the Athenian, but imprisoned the Spartan, as Sparta was threatening war. At Marathus he received a letter from Darius, asking him as king to king to release his family, and offering friendship and alliance. In reply Alexander sent the political manifesto already referred to. It began by emphasizing the wrong done to Macedonia and the rest of Hellas by Xerxes’ invasion; it was to avenge this that Alexander, as Commander-in-Chief of the League, had crossed the Dardanelles, but not till after Ochus had begun war against Macedonia by invading Thrace and aiding Perinthus. Moreover, Persia had procured Philip’s assassination, and was attempting to raise Greece and destroy the League’s peace, and was subsidizing Sparta; while Darius, having assassinated Arses, was not even the lawful king. In conclusion, it claimed that Alexander was already king of Asia; if Darius wanted anything he must write as a subject to his lord. This claim was only put in to induce Darius to fight; but it shows what was in Alexander’s mind. He did not really claim to be king of Asia till after Darius’ death, or at least not before Gaugamela; otherwise he must have treated the satraps in arms as rebels, which he did not yet do. Besides, he knew that he had not yet met the levy of the empire.

Leaving Marathus, he received the surrender of Byblus and a hearty welcome from Sidon. Envoys from Tyre met him and offered a general form of submission; as a test, he asked leave to enter the island city and sacrifice to his ancestor Heracles (Melkart). The Tyrians were really loyal; they were not yet satisfied that Alexander would ultimately be victorious, and they were satisfied that Tyre was impregnable, as after its thirteen years’ siege by Nebuchadrezzar they had a right to think. They replied that they were not receiving any strangers in the city, either Persians or Macedonians, but that there was a famous shrine of Melkart at Old Tyre on the mainland which would satisfy the requirements of his piety. Alexander at once prepared for a siege; he is said to have told his men that the fall of Tyre would mean the final dissolution of the Persian fleet, a prophecy which was fulfilled before Tyre fell. The city stood on an island half a mile from the coast, and Alexander set about building a mole to it from the mainland. Progress at first was easy; it was when the deep water near the island was reached and the workers came within shot of the walls that trouble began, while winter gales and the Tyrian warships alike hindered the work. Alexander got two siege-towers out to the end of the mole, their sides protected against blazing arrows by coverings of skins; but the besieged prepared a fire-ship, fitting long yards to the masts with baskets of inflammable matter depending from the ends. They weighted down the stern to raise the bows above the mole, grounded her successfully, and set her on fire; the crew swam away, and the yards burnt through and discharged their cargoes on to the towers, which also took fire. The arrows from the Tyrian warships prevented any rescue, and the besieged, swarming out in boats, tore down the mole. Alexander began to build it again much broader, to avoid a similar mishap; but he saw that without a fleet he must fail, and went personally to Sidon to collect ships.

His success at Sidon surpassed his hopes. The news from Phoenicia had finally disintegrated the Persian fleet, and Pharnabazus was stranded in the islands. Alexander was joined at Sidon by all the Phoenician squadrons except the Tyrian, and some ships from Rhodes, Lycia, and Cilicia; soon after came the Cyprians, led by Pnytagoras of Salamis; in all he collected 220 warships, from quinqueremes to small vessels. Azemilk, the king of Tyre, brought his own squadron successfully into his city; but Alexander was far stronger now than Tyre at sea. He collected engineers to help build new machines, shipped part of the hypaspists on his fleet, took command of the Phoenician wing himself (the prerogative of the Great King), sailed to Tyre, and offered battle; but his force was too great, and the Tyrians refused to come out. He stationed Pnytagoras north of the mole to blockade the northern harbour, and the Phoenicians south of it, where his headquarters were, to blockade the southern. As soon as his new machines were ready—towers, rams, and catapults—he placed some on the mole, some on Sidonian transports or war­ships lashed together in pairs, and attacked the wall.

The Tyrians however were ready for him. They had raised towers on the walls, whose fire worried the ships, and had made near approach to the island impossible by dropping rocks into the sea. Alexander brought up merchant ships to sweep for the ob­stacles; the Tyrian warships attacked them and cut their anchor­cables. He covered the sweepers with warships; Tyrian divers cut the cables under water. Then he anchored the sweepers by chains; the Tyrians had no reply, and he got the rocks out. As a last resource, the Tyrians manned 13 warships, attacked the Cyprian fleet when the crews had landed for dinner, and destroyed Pnytagoras’ flagship and other vessels; but Alexander, who was watching, manned some Phoenician ships, rowed round Tyre, and cut off two of the returning squadron. The way was now open for a great combined assault. Part of the wall fell, and Alexander brought up the two transports which carried the storming party and bridges; on one was Coenus’ battalion of the phalanx, on the other himself with a battalion of the hypaspists; their operations were covered by fire from the fleet. Both ships got their bridges placed successfully, and Alexander and Coenus captured their sections of the wall, while the Phoenicians and Cyprians forced the two harbours. Then the Tyrians broke; the Macedonians, embittered by the Tyrians having murdered their comrades taken prisoners, could not be held in; and the rest was massacre. Eight thousand fighting men were killed, and, as at Thebes, many men, women and children sold as slaves. Some were saved by the other Phoenicians, and a few found asylum in the temple of Melkart, among them some Carthaginian religious envoys, whose presence started a legend that Carthage had been preparing to help her mother-city. This horrible business of selling captives was the strict legal right of the victor, which Alexander exercised twice again, at Gaza, and at Cyropolis (where his men had been murdered); but it is to his credit that his expedition apparently produced hardly any effect on the world’s slave-markets. Tyre fell in July 332, after holding out for seven months. Its capture was possibly Alexander’s greatest feat of arms; and he offered his sacrifice to Melkart after all, surely the most costly that that deity had ever received. Tyre became a Macedonian fortress, and Sidon again took the lead in Phoenicia, which dated a new era from Issus.

Before Tyre fell, Alexander received Darius’ reply. Darius now offered 10,000 talents ransom for his family, and as the price of peace the hand of his daughter and the cession of everything west of Euphrates, i.e. nearly all the country which ultimately became hellenized. The story went that Alexander put the offer before his generals, and Parmenion said that were he Alexander he would accept; Alexander replied that he too would accept were he Parmenion. The story may indicate the first rift between Alexander and the old Macedonian party, who desired only what of Asia could be governed from Europe; but it is more probably untrue. Alexander’s reply to Darius was a refusal to negotiate. Darius in fact offered hardly anything which he had not already, except Egypt; and Egypt could not be saved in any case. Once Tyre had fallen, Alexander did not wait to settle Syria; he left Parmenion to supervise the country from Damascus, and advanced towards Egypt by the immemorial route through Palestine; Egypt, once it was his, would be an impregnable bastion which he could hold from the sea. Nothing delayed his march till he reached Gaza, which resisted desperately, and cost him a severe wound before he could take it. The story that he visited Jerusalem and sacrificed in the Temple belongs to legend.

He reached Egypt late in November 332. The Persian satrap hastened to submit, for the temper of the people was unmistakable: they saw in Alexander their avenger. He went upstream to Memphis, very wisely sacrificed to Apis, was accepted as Pharaoh, and returned to the coast. There, on the shore near the village of Rhacotis, he traced out the lines of what was to be one of the greatest cities of all time, Alexandria; it was subsequently laid out by Deinocrates, the man who proposed to carve Mount Athos into an heroic bust of Alexander. Alexander’s immediate object was to create a great trade emporium to replace Tyre in the Mediterranean; but, looking at the position chosen, he may already have given some thought to a sea which was not the Mediterranean. There now came to him his commanders from the Aegean, Amphoterus and Hegelochus, who had settled the last Persian resistance in the islands; Pharnabazus had escaped, but they had recovered Lesbos, Tenedos, Chios, and Cos, garrisoned Rhodes, and captured and brought with them the tyrants Pharnabazus had set up and those Chian oligarchs who had betrayed their city to Memnon. Alexander imprisoned the Chians at Elephantine; the tyrants he sent back that their respective cities might deal with them. Amphoterus was ordered to secure Crete against Agis, and to take in hand the pirates who had aided Pharnabazus; but this was never done, for the war with Sparta diverted Amphoterus’ fleet to Greece.

Alexander himself with a few followers, perhaps including Callisthenes, now made his famous expedition to the oracle of Ammon (oasis of Siwah). Ammon had for centuries ranked, with Delphi and Dodona, as one of the three great oracles of the Greek world; Pindar had written a hymn for him, and the Athenians had recently built him a temple, and in connection with this had perhaps already renamed the sacred trireme Salaminia Ammonias; and Alexander consulted Ammon as naturallv as he had consulted Apollo of Delphi, the two visits being coupled in the tradition. Cambyses’ attempted expedition to Siwah also weighed with him; for he had begun to beat the bounds of his future empire in proper Oriental fashion, and henceforth he does everything which any Persian king had done. He certainly did not go to Ammon to be recognized as a god for the Greek world; to suppose that he was yet thinking of divinity is an anachronism, to suppose that he arranged a comedy beforehand with the priests an absurdity. He did not however take either of the regular routes, from Cyrene or Memphis; and this fact enabled his journey to be worked up into an adventure. He went along the coast to Paraetonium, where he received and accepted Cyrene’s offer of alliance, and thence struck across the desert. The guide lost his way, and in the tradition the party made the last stage guided either by two snakes or by the birds returning to the oasis, as Columbus met American birds before sighting land. Alexander entered the shrine alone, and refused to divulge what the oracle told him, except that he was pleased; later he disclosed that Ammon had told him to what gods to sacrifice when in trouble, as Apollo told Xenophon. It is certain however that the priest greeted the new Pharaoh as son of Ammon; he could do no other, for every Pharaoh was officially son of Amon-Re. It was also part of the regular Amon-ritual that the priest in Pharaoh’s name asked of the god rule over all living, and the god granted this; from this ritual arose the story that Ammon had given Alexander (as he gave many other Pharaohs) ‘the’ dominion over the whole world. Whether Alexander actually went through the ritual is unknown; but in any case it was of no importance outside Egypt. He returned to Mem­phis by the usual route, and for years nothing more was heard of the matter.

At Memphis he arranged the government of Egypt on enlightened lines. He retained the native officials, and instead of a satrap appointed two native governors for Upper and Lower Egypt. His financial superintendent, Cleomenes of Naucratis, was not to collect the taxes direct from the peasantry, but through the smaller native officials, as was customary; doubtless the native governors were to protect both officials and peasantry against extortion, with an appeal to Alexander. One of the governors however declined to act, and Cleomenes subsequently became the real power in the country; conceivably Alexander enlarged his authority. A small army of occupation was left, but under three commanders; Alexander was impressed with the natural strength of Egypt and the ease with which a strong general might revolt, and the same idea occurred to his friend Ptolemy. He also appointed a commander and other officials for ‘the mercenaries.’ As he cannot have settled mercenaries there himself, with Gaugamela still to fight, these must represent Darius’ garrison, who had sometimes received allotments of land; probably the fourth­century Pharaohs had made similar settlements. The story that Alexander sent an expedition to the Upper Nile to discover the cause of the annual flood is probably unfounded, for the cause was already known to Aristotle. In the spring of 331 he returned to Tyre, and settled Syria, appointing a Macedonian satrap with a financial superintendent; he also received envoys from Athens, Chios, and Rhodes. As the Persian fleet no longer existed, he withdrew his garrisons from the two islands, and granted Athens the return of her prisoners; it was politic to conciliate her, with Sparta threatening war. Parmenion had been ordered to bridge the Euphrates at Thapsacus, where Mazaeus, the ex-satrap of Cilicia, was holding the further bank with cavalry and the remaining 2000 Greeks, as the advance-guard of Darius’ army.

 

VII.

THE BATTLE OF GAUGAMELA

 

The Persian command had been making a serious effort to get together an army that might have some chance of defeating Alexander. It was a hopeless task to improvise in a year and a half a force fit to meet a professional army commanded by a genius; but they made a creditable attempt, though they could not take the most necessary step of all, the removal of Darius from command in the field. The levy of the empire was called up, and the best of the cavalry re-armed with spear and shield instead of javelins. Their difficulty was infantry. Greek mercenaries could no longer be obtained; the Cardaces had been a failure; they had learnt that Alexander would simply ride through archers. Their obvious course was to avoid a pitched battle, and try to wear Alexander down with their fine cavalry; but as the dignity of the Great King demanded a formal encounter, and they could not win that with cavalry alone, they had perforce to fall back on the only weapon left them against the phalanx, the long-neglected scythed chariots. Efficient drivers, drilled to act together, could not be trained quickly; still, when chariots did succeed, their success was terribly complete; doubtless some remembered how Pharnabazus by the aid of two chariots had once destroyed 700 Greek hoplites.

In July 331 Alexander joined Parmenion and crossed the Euphrates at Thapsacus, Mazaeus falling back before him as he advanced. He crossed the Tigris unopposed, turned southward, and moved towards the village of Gaugamela, 18 miles N.E. of Mosul, where, as he had learnt from prisoners, Darius had taken position. The Persians had selected a perfectly flat plain, levelling any obstacles before their line, in order to give the chariots every chance. Their order of battle was subsequently captured. Darius was in the centre, with the 1000 Persian cavalry of the guard, the Indian horse from the Paropamisus, and the Carian settlers. The left centre included the Cadusians and the rest of the Persians, horse and archers; the left wing was formed of the excellent eastern horse, Bactrian, Sogdian, and Arachosian, with 1000 mailed Sacaean horsemen, Darius’ allies from the Jaxartes, thrown out before them. The right centre included the Medes under Atropates and the Parthian horse under Phrataphernes; the right wing was formed of the best of the western horse, Armenians, Syrians, and the Cappadocians, later so famous, under the dynast Ariarathes, Darius’ ally. It was thus a mixed line of cavalry and infantry, with a powerful striking force of cavalry massed on each wing. The 2,000 Greeks were behind the centre, and with them some infantry, Babylonians and hill-men, probably worthless, and fifteen elephants from Arachosia. Judiciously posted, the elephants might have prevented Alexander charging, as untrained horses will not face them; but probably they could not be put in line, the Persian horses also not being trained to them. In front of the line were drawn up the scythed chariots, on which so much depended; the course of the battle shows that there were nothing like the stereotyped 200 of tradition. It was a larger army than that of Issus, large enough to make Alexander certain that both his flanks, at least, must be turned. Bessus, satrap of Bactria and Sogdiana, of the blood royal, commanded on the left; with him was Barsaentes, satrap of Arachosia. Mazaeus commanded on the right.

Alexander is said to have had 40,000 infantry and 7000 cavalry. The latter might be accurate, for he had two new formations of mercenary horse, under Menidas and Andromachus. But the former must be exaggerated; the only new infantry formation mentioned is Balacrus’ javelin-men, and his known formations do not approach 40,000. Doubtless he had been recruiting mercenaries, though only 4000 under Cleander are mentioned. But his system of reinforcements is obscure; probably he received an annual draft of recruits from Macedonia, and before his death he and his satraps had enlisted the whole available supply of Greeks; these perhaps about sufficed to meet losses and supply his armies of occupation, leaving his field force roughly a constant quantity. His first line was shorter than usual; Parmenion on the left had the Thessalians and half the allied horse, then came the phalanx and hypaspists, on the right the Companions. Craterus’ battalion was on the left of the phalanx that day, and next him Amyntas’, commanded (he being absent recruiting) by his brother Simmias. As Alexander expected to be outflanked, he drew up a deep column behind each wing, who were to form front outward if required; on the left, half the allied horse, the Thracian horse, and Andromachus’ squadron; on the right, the lancers and Paeonians, Menidas’ horse, half the Agrianians, half the archers, and Ole­ander's mercenaries. The army therefore formed three sides of a square. Before the hypaspists he threw forward the rest of the Agrianians and archers and Balacrus’ javelin-men, as a screen against the chariots. The rest of the mercenaries formed a second line behind the phalanx, with orders, if the army were surrounded, to form front to the rear and complete the square. Behind were the baggage and prisoners, guarded by the Thracian foot.

Alexander gave his army a good dinner and sleep; but the Persians stood to arms all night, a needless strain on the men. Having made all his dispositions, he himself went to sleep and slept well into the morning. The day was 1 October 331. As he led his army out, he found that the Companions were opposite the scythed chariots; he therefore inclined to the right, bringing the chariots opposite the hypaspists. The battle opened on his right with the Saca horse riding round his flank and attacking; Menidas met but could not hold them, and Alexander sent in the Paeonians and Oleander's mercenaries; Bessus in reply sent in the Bactrians. At this point the scythed chariots made their charge. But the Agrianians and javelin-men, thrown well forward, broke the charge up, transfixing and tearing down horses and drivers; few chariots reached the line, and the hypaspists opened their ranks to let them pass through; the damage done was not great, and all were finally brought down. Meanwhile in the fight on the flank Alexander had gained the better position, for he was holding the enemy without using the Companions. Finally he threw in the lancers; their shock gained so much ground that Bessus, to restore the battle, had to send in all his cavalry that remained, and still the Companions were intact. The Persian line had begun to advance, but the left centre now stretched out to support Bessus, and a gap opened; Alexander at once ordered his infantry to advance, and with the Companions charged the gap, followed by the nearest battalions; the weakened Persian line broke, and, as at Issus, Darius turned and fled.

On the left, meanwhile, Mazaeus had outgeneralled Parmenion, and the battle was going badly for Alexander. The weaker flanking column on this side was driven in by the Cappadocians, and the Thessalians, attacked both in front and flank, were in trouble. Craterus and Simmias had to support them with their battalions of the phalanx, and when Alexander’s order to advance came, both were fully involved and could not move; but the other battalions went forward, and a gap opened between Simmias and Polyperchon. Into this gap the Persian cavalry of the guard flung themselves, followed by the Parthians and some Indian horse; they rode right through the phalanx from front to rear, cutting it in half; for the moment Mazaeus must have thought he was victorious. But the Persians were out of hand, and instead of taking the phalanx in rear they rode on through the mercenaries, made for the baggage, drove off the Thracians, and began to free and arm the prisoners; the mercenaries in turn re-formed and drove them off. Parmenion however lost his nerve, and sent a message to Alexander for help. It reached him just after Darius fled; he turned the Companions and rode back. On his way he met the returning Persians and Parthians, and barred their retreat. A desperate fight followed, and Alexander lost 60 Companions; finally the Persians broke through, and he rode on to the help of Parmenion. But he was no longer needed. Darius’ flight had become known, the Persian line was in disorder, and Mazaeus’ cavalry had lost heart; the Thessalians with fine courage had come a second time; and when Alexander joined them he had little to do but order a general pursuit. On the other wing Bessus and the Bactrians retired as a unit, undefeated, sullen, and ready for mis­chief; the Greeks also got away intact; but the rest of the army broke up. Alexander’s views of what constituted a victory were those of Nelson; men might drop and horses founder, but he kept up pursuit till dark, rested till midnight, started again, and never drew rein till he reached Arbela, 62 miles from the battlefield. He was determined that the enemy should never reform as an army.

 

VIII.

THE DEATH OF DARIUS

 

Gaugamela uncovered the nerve-centres of the empire. Alexander rested his army, marked out the sites of two cities, Alexandria near Arbela (Erbil), and Nikephorion, the city of victory, and advanced on Babylon, where Mazaeus had taken refuge. The city was not defensible, the great walls having long since been destroyed, and Mazaeus thought he had done enough for a king who ran. He came out to meet Alexander, and was received with the honour that was his due. The Babylonians welcomed Alex­ander; he reversed Xerxes’ acts, restored all native customs, and made Mazaeus satrap, his first appointment of a Persian. He did not however give him the military command, but appointed a Macedonian general to the satrapy as well as a financial superintendent; and henceforth, whenever he appointed a Persian satrap, he divided the three powers, civil, military, and financial, the Persians never having military power. But in one way Mazaeus’ position was unique; he was the only satrap permitted to coin, doubtless for the convenience of Babylonian trade. At Susa Alexander deposited Darius’ family, and appointed another Persian satrap. He sent Mithrines, who had surrendered Sardes, as nominal satrap to Armenia (which however was never conquered), and Menes the Bodyguard to Phoenicia to take command of his sea-communications between Phoenicia and Europe and arrange for any support Antipater might require against Sparta. The Staff vacancies occasioned by Arybbas’ recent death and Menes’ appointment were filled by Leonnatus and (probably) Hephaestion. Amyntas now returned, bringing large reinforcements.

For the invasion of Persis Alexander as usual divided the army, sending Parmenion with the Greeks, baggage, and siege-train by road, while he himself entered the hills, it being mid-winter. He reduced the Uxii, one of the pre-Aryan tribes displaced by the Iranians and living by brigandage, and so came to the formidable pass into Persis called the Persian Gates, strongly held by the satrap Ariobarzanes. His frontal attack was repulsed; he left Craterus to hold the defenders’ attention, and with a mobile force and three days’ food struck into the snow-hills, relying on a prisoner as guide. He took tremendous risks, but came down successfully on the enemy’s rear; caught between two fires, Ariobarzanes gave way. Alexander pushed on with all speed for Persepolis, and reached the great palaces on their rock terrace before Ariobarzanes had time to carry off the treasure. Between Susa, Persepolis, and Pasargadae, he secured at least 180,000 talents in coin and bullion, beside vast booty in kind, such as gold and silver plate and purple dye; such wealth seemed fabulous to the Greek world. At Persepolis, against Parmenion’s advice, he deliberately fired Xerxes’ palace, as a sign to Asia that E-sagila was avenged and Achaemenid rule ended. The well-known story of Alexander’s feast, with Thais inciting him to the burning, is legend, invented for the dramatic effect: it had needed Xerxes and his myriads to burn Athens, but now an Athenian girl could burn Persepolis. Alexander stayed at Persepolis till in spring 330 he received the news of Sparta’s defeat; then, after appointing a Persian satrap of Persis, he entered Media, occupied Ecbatana, and there in the gold and silver palace sat down to take stock of an altered world.

So far he had been Alexander of Macedon, general of the League for the war against Persia. That task was ended; as an empire, Persia would fight no more; the League had no concern with the new Great King establishing his marches. He therefore sent home the Thessalians and all his Greek allies, and probably remitted the ‘contributions’ of the Asiatic Greek cities. As to his own position, Mazaeus’ appointment shows that he had already made up his mind. Aristotle had taught him that barbarians were naturally unfitted to rule; he meant to see. Aristotle had said they must be treated as slaves; he had already learnt that here Aristotle was wrong. He had seen the immemorial civilizations of Egypt and Babylon; he had seen the Persian nobles in battle; he knew that barbarians, like Greeks, must be classified according to merit, and that the best ranked high. But one other thing which Aristotle had taught him was sound; it was as difficult to organize peace as to make war, but it must be done, or military empires must perish. He had conquered the Persians; he now had to live with them, and reconcile them both to his rule and to the higher culture which he represented. That culture too had its rights; but he hoped to spread it, not by force, but by means of the cities which he would found. But then the cities also must be an integral part of the empire, and not mere enclaves. How he was to unite in one polity Greek cities, Iranian feudal barons, and tribes who practised group-marriage and head-hunting, he did not know. But he knew the line he would take; he was not to be a Macedonian king ruling Persia, but king of Macedonians and Persians alike; he was to mediate between the Greek and the barbarian,—in Plutarch’s phrase to mix them as in a loving-cup. No one had thought of such a thing before; no one living (unless Hephaestion) could as yet understand what he meant. Here be­gins Alexander’s tragedy; the tragedy of an increasing loneliness, of a growing impatience with those who could not understand, of a failure which nevertheless bore greater fruit than most men’s success.

He now appointed Persian satraps for Media and Media Paraetacene, and emphasized the new position of things by one great change; Parmenion’s cavalry had gone home, and Parmenion, Philip’s man, was left in Media with some Thracians and mercenaries as general of communications. His first task was to collect all the treasure and hand it over to Harpalus. Harpalus had done something before Issus which made him fear Alexander’s anger, and had fled; Alexander, with his usual loyalty to his friends, had forgiven, recalled, and reinstated him. Philoxenus was presently transferred from his financial office to the command of the sea­communications between Asia Minor and Greece, and Harpalus became head of the civil service, i.e. of all the financial superintendents everywhere, responsible only to Alexander.

Darius after Gaugamela had escaped to Ecbatana, and had been joined by Bessus and his Bactrians, Barsaentes of Arachosia, Satibarzanes of Aria, Nabarzanes, Artabazus, and others, including the 2000 Greeks; but on Alexander’s approach they had left Ecbatana and retired towards Bactria. Eastern Iran had always been somewhat distinct in feeling from western, and it did not recognize Gaugamela as decisive. Alexander now heard that Darius was collecting reinforcements and decided to follow him (midsummer 330). Having decided, he acted with amazing speed. Exactly what he did cannot be ascertained; but apparently the tradition made him cover the 400 miles to Damghan in eleven days, excluding rest days, based on a belief that he could maintain the extraordinary average of 36 miles a day. He covered the 200 miles from Ecbatana to Rhagae (Rei near Teheran) by forced marches; there he learnt that Darius had passed the Caspian Gates, and rested his men. He then did the 52 miles to the Gates (so it is said) without a halt. There Mazaeus’ son came into his camp with news: Bessus, Barsaentes, and Nabarzanes had deposed Darius and held him prisoner. Nabarzanes as chiliarch must have led the charge of the Persian guard at Gaugamela, and all three probably felt that they personally had not been defeated. The only comment to be made on their action is that it was too late; they should have done it after Issus. Darius had twice deserted brave men who were dying for him. That Bessus was not man enough for the work he undertook is immaterial; had he succeeded, history would have justified him as a patriot.

Alexander recognized the need for yet greater haste; he took the Companions, lancers, Paeonians, and some infantry, with two days’ food, and started for Bessus’ camp. He was hampered by the infantry; but he had the 2000 Greeks in mind. Even so he marched 36 hours with one brief rest, but found Bessus gone; he heard however that the Greeks, and Artabazus, had left him. He pushed on for another 16 hours and reached a village where Bessus had halted the day before; there he learnt of a short cut, but across desert. The infantry could do no more; he decided to chance the truth of the news about the Greeks, dismounted 500 horsemen, put phalangites on their horses, and started across the desert. They suffered from thirst; a little water was found for Alexander, and he refused to drink; the weary troopers bade him lead where he would and they would follow. They rode 50 miles that night, and at dawn, near Damghan, they saw the dust-cloud which meant the fugitives. Bessus was in no condition to fight; Barsaentes and Satibarzanes stabbed Darius and left him dying, and they rode for their lives. A Macedonian gave Darius a cup of water; he died before Alexander came up. It was Alexander’s one piece of mere good fortune; he was saved the embarrassment of dealing with his rival. He covered the body with his purple cloak, and sent it to Persepolis for burial. Darius ‘great and good’ is a fiction of legend. He may have possessed the domestic virtues; otherwise he was a poor type of despot, cowardly and inefficient. The wonderful loyalty of his satraps up to Gaugamela was devotion to the Persian idea, called out by the presence of the foreign invader.

 

 

CHAPTER XIII

ALEXANDER: THE CONQUEST OF THE FAR EAST