Slag van Issus

jo BK zt dT cI RY Jl WD YT Mo AM WC Es RQ Nh tG

Die Slag van Issus, op 5 November 333 v.G.J., was Alexander die Grote se tweede stryd teen die Persiese leër en die eerste direkte verbintenis met koning Darius III, naby die dorp Issus in die suidelike hedendaagse Turkye. Dit was 'n groot oorwinning vir Alexander, wat die Achaemenidiese Ryk verslaan het en Darius III van die slagveld laat vlug het.

Voorspel

Na die dood van sy vader en sy opkoms na die Masedoniese troon, was Alexander se eerste orde om sy vader se droom, die verowering van die Persiese Ryk, na te jaag. Met die verskoning dat hy wraak soek vir die inval van Griekeland deur Darius I en Xerxes, steek Alexander die Hellespont oor na Klein -Asië. Toe hy suidwaarts beweeg, verslaan hy die Persiese magte by Granicus en Halicarnassus. Sy volgende groot konfrontasie sou in Issus in November 333 vC wees. Hierdie stryd sou die eerste van twee ontmoetings tussen Alexander die Grote en koning Darius van Persië wees; beide sou eindig in 'n nederlaag van die Persiese magte.

Toe Alexander verneem van die teenwoordigheid van Darius in die landbouryke land rondom Issus, het hy vinnig suidwaarts van Gordium deur die Cilician Gates na die hawestad Issus verhuis. Alhoewel die geveg self verder suid sou wees op 'n smal vlakte tussen die Middellandse See en die Amanusberge, was die hawe 'n basiskamp vir Alexander se magte. Daar het hy 'n aantal gewondes en siekes gelaat om te herstel. Later, toe Darius sy troepe marsjeer om Alexander by die Penarusrivier te ontmoet, het die Persiese koning by die Griekse basiskamp gestop waar hy die herstellende Masedoniese soldate gemartel en tereggestel het en die regterhand van diegene wat toegelaat is om te lewe, afgesny het. Hierdie daad sou 'n verdere aansporing vir Alexander se leër wees om die Perse te verslaan.

Die twee leërs het mekaar by die Penarusrivier ontmoet; die weer was reënerig en koud.

Met die fokus op sy ontmoeting met Alexander, verhuis Darius noord van Babilon na 'n gebied oos van die Issusrivier. Die historikus Ruth Sheppard, wat haar ramings op antieke bronne baseer, het Darius met 'n geskatte leër van tussen 300,000 en 600,000 sowel as 30,000 Griekse huursoldate, terwyl meer moderne getalle van 25,000 tot 100,000 is met slegs 10,000 Griekse huursoldate. Hoewel hy dit oorweeg het om daar vir Alexander te wag, het Darius van plan verander in die hoop om Alexander van sy basis by Issus te skei en hom daardeur te isoleer. Alexander het suid van Issus na Syrië opgeruk, maar nadat hy die teenwoordigheid van Darius by Issus bevestig het, draai hy terug na die noorde. Darius beweeg verder suid na die smal strook land wes van die Amanus, en plaas sodoende sy magte in die nadeel. Die twee leërs het mekaar by die Penarusrivier ontmoet; die weer was reënerig en koud. Die gebied het Alexander egter 'n duidelike voordeel gebied, omdat dit nie net die mobiliteit van Darius verminder het nie, maar ook sy eie troepe kon versprei.

Plutarchus, in sy Die lewe van Alexander die Grote, het gepraat van hierdie voordeel en die oorwinning wat dit binnekort sou bring as hy sê:

Fortuin was nie vriendeliker teenoor Alexander in die keuse van grond nie, as dat hy versigtig was om dit tot sy voordeel te verbeter. Omdat hy baie minderwaardig was, het hy sy regtervleuel baie verder uitgestrek as die linkervleuel van sy vyande, en het hy self daar in die voorste geledere geveg, en die barbare op die vlug geslaan.

Slag

Ongelukkig vir Darius het hy die advies van Charidamus, een van sy vertroude Griekse generaals, geïgnoreer wat Darius aangesê het om sy magte te verdeel en hom (Charidamus) alleen teen Alexander te laat veg. Darius ignoreer hierdie voorstel vir wat sommige as ego en aansien beskou. Hy kon nie verloor teen hierdie jong Griekse opstandeling nie. Nadat hy geïgnoreer is, het Charidamus die fout begaan met 'n paar slegte opmerkings oor Perse. Darius, wat Grieks gepraat het en die kommentaar perfek verstaan het, was beledig en het onmiddellik sy generaal laat teregstel - iets wat baie as onwys beskou, omdat Charidamus by een van Darius se bekwaamste generaals beskou is.

Hou jy van geskiedenis?

Teken in vir ons gratis weeklikse e -pos nuusbrief!

Die hele geveg het nie goed gegaan vir Darius nie. Ten spyte van die voordeel van getalle, was hy en sy manne spoedig in die verdediging en kon hulle nie beweeg soos hulle sou wou nie. Darius se linkerflank word belemmer deur die riviervallei, berge aan sy linkerkant en die see aan sy regterkant.

Alexander, aan die ander kant, kon sy vertroude falanksformasie gebruik. Sy regterflank strek tot by die berge en sy linkerkant na die see. Hy het drie bataljons regs en vier links met swaar infanterie in die middel. Nadat hy die vorming van Alexander gesien het, het Darius sy kavallerie beweeg om Alexander se regterkant aan te val met die hoop om deur sy regterflank te breek. Alhoewel dit belemmer word deur die rivieroewer en voorraad deur Darius opgerig, beweeg Alexander en sy metgesel -kavallerie vinnig deur die linkerflank van die Darius. Pogings om Alexander oor die Pinarus terug te dryf, het misluk. Historikus Arrian in sy Die veldtogte van Alexander gesê:

Darius se Grieke het geveg om die Masedoniërs terug in die water te stoot en die dag vir hul linkervleuel te red, op hul beurt, met Alexander se triomfplan voor hul oë, was vasbeslote om sy sukses gelyk te maak en nie die trotse titel van onoorwinlike, tot dusver universeel, te verbeur nie aan hulle geskenk.

Alexander en sy magte draai na die Persiese sentrum waar hy Darius gewaar. Alhoewel Darius se broer Oxathres probeer het om Alexander se aanklag te blokkeer, het hy misluk. Darius het eers in sy strydwa en toe te perd uit die stryd gevlug. Ondanks 'n ernstige bobeenwond sou Alexander hom agtervolg tot die aand, maar met leë hande terugkeer. Intussen het Alexander se linkerflank, onder leiding van Parmenion, probleme gehad met Darius se regterkant. Toe die Persiese magte egter hul leier sien vlug, vlug hulle ook; baie is in die massa -uitgang doodgetrap. In totaal het die Perse 100 000 voetsoldate en 10 000 kavalleries verloor terwyl Alexander slegs 1 200 verloor het. Hierdie getalle is, soos voorheen, Griekse ramings. Moderne ramings is redeliker as Darius ongeveer 20 000 en Alexander 7 000 verloor. Die Perse het so haastig vertrek dat daar baie plundering op Alexander en sy manne wag. Plutarchus het gesê:

… Die tent van Darius, vol pragtige meubels en kwaliteite van goud en silwer, het hulle (sy soldate) gereserveer vir Alexander self, wat, nadat hy sy arms afgesteek het, homself gaan bad het: 'Laat ons ons nou reinig van die swoeg van die oorlog in die bad van Darius.

Daar is egter meer as goud en silwer agtergelaat - Darius se ma, sy vrou en twee dogters is in Darius se tent gevind, maar Alexander het hulle belowe dat hulle geen skade sou berokken nie. Plutarch skryf:

... (Alexander) het hulle laat weet dat Darius nie dood was nie, en dat hulle geen kwaad hoef te vrees van Alexander, wat slegs oor hom oorlog gevoer het nie; hulle moet self van alles voorsien word wat hulle van Darius ontvang het.

Alhoewel Darius die terugkeer van sy gesin wou hê en Alexander die helfte van sy koninkryk belowe, het Alexander geweier. In plaas daarvan daag Alexander hom uit om te staan en te veg, en hulle sou 'n tweede keer by Gaugamela ontmoet waarheen Darius weer sou vlug, maar hierdie keer sou hy sy eie sterf - Bessus.

Sedert 340 vC was 'n botsing tussen Masedonië en die Persiese Ryk onvermydelik. In daardie jaar beleër die Masedoniese koning Filip Perinthus en bedreig die lewensbelange van Griekeland en Persië (duidelike deurreis deur die Bosporus en Hellespont). Die Perse het gereageer deur troepe na Europa te stuur. let op [Diodorus, Wêreldgeskiedenis 16.75.2.] Dit was die eerste keer sedert Xerxes dat die Perse in die weste ingegryp het, en die Masedoniërs beskou dit as 'n onvergeeflike aggressie. Philip het eers sy agterkant verseker nadat hy die Vierde Heilige Oorlog uitgelok het, hy het die Grieke in Chaeronea (338) verslaan en hulle in die Korintiese Liga gedwing. Nou was hy gereed om oos toe te slaan.

Ongeveer dieselfde tyd sterf die Persiese koning Artaxerxes III Ochus, wat die Persiese Ryk sonder sterk opvolger laat. Sy seun Artaxerxes IV Asses moes die opstand in Babylon (Nidin-Bel), Egipte (Chababash) en Armenië (Artašata) die hoof bied. Vir die Masedoniërs was alles nou gereed vir die aanval - behalwe dat koning Filippus in 336 (meer) vermoor is, min of meer eietyds met die dood van Asses en die toetreding van Artašata, wat bekend gestaan het as Darius III Codomannus.

In 334 val Philip se seun en opvolger Alexander Asië binne, wat weens die Persiese burgeroorlog nog steeds swak verdedig is. Hy het die plaaslike heffings by die Granicus verslaan, wat hom in staat gestel het om Anatolië te verower. Die enigste Persiese mag wat weerstand gebied het, was die vloot, onder bevel van Memnon en Pharnabazus, wat uit Fenisiese skepe bestaan het. Om die vloot te verslaan, het die Masedoniërs besluit om die Fenisiese hawens aan te val. In die herfs van 333 vC het hulle deur die Cilicianhek Cilicië binnegegaan.

Inhoud

Alexander III van Masedonië (356–323 v.C.), veral bekend as Alexander die Grote, was 'n eertydse koning van Masedonië wat van 336 v.C. tot sy dood regeer het. Hy word algemeen beskou as een van die grootste militêre taktici en strateë in die geskiedenis [1] en word vermoedelik onoorwonne in die geveg. [2] [3] Hy was bekend vir sy militêre leierskap en charisma en het altyd sy leërs persoonlik gelei en die stryd aangeneem. [4] [5] Deur die Persiese Ryk te verower en Griekeland, Egipte en Babilon te verenig, het hy die grootste ryk van die antieke wêreld gesmee [6] en die verspreiding van Hellenisme in Europa en Noord -Afrika bewerkstellig. [7]

Alexander het sy ekspedisie begin om die Persiese Ryk in die lente van 334 vC te verower, [8] nadat hy die strydende Griekse state verslap het en sy militêre mag gekonsolideer het. [9] Gedurende die eerste maande van die Masedoniese deurgang na Persiese Klein -Asië het Darius III - koning van Persië - die teenwoordigheid van Alexander se 40 000 man grootliks geïgnoreer. Die Slag om die Granicus, wat in Mei geveg is, [8] was Persië se eerste groot poging om die indringers te konfronteer, maar het Alexander 'n maklike oorwinning tot gevolg gehad. In die volgende jaar het Alexander die grootste deel van Wes- en kus -Klein -Asië ingeneem deur die kapitulasie van die satrapies op sy pad te dwing. [10] Hy gaan die binneland in en reis noordoos deur Frigië voordat hy suidoos na Cilicië draai. Nadat hy in Oktober by die Cilician Gates verbygegaan het, is Alexander vertraag deur koors in Tarsus. [11] Darius het intussen 'n leër van tot 100,000 byeengebring (sommige ou bronne dui op oordrewe syfers van meer as 600,000) [12] en het dit persoonlik oor die oostelike hange van die Amanusberge gerig. Vroeg in November, toe Alexander van Mallus via Issus oor die Golf van Issus beweeg, het die twee leërs per ongeluk aan weerskante van die berge verbygegaan. [13] Dit was beslis tot voordeel van Darius: nou aan die agterkant van Alexander kon hy terugtrek voorkom en die toevoerlyne wat Alexander by Issus gevestig het, blokkeer. [14] Dit was eers toe Alexander laer opgeslaan het by Myriandrus, 'n hawe aan die suidoostelike oewer van die Golf van İskenderun, dat hy van die Persiese posisie geleer het. Hy het onmiddellik sy roete na die Pinarusrivier, net suid van Issus, teruggevind om die mag van Darius langs die noordelike oewer te vind. [13] Die Slag van Issus het gevolg.

Darius se aanvanklike reaksie was verdedigend: hy het dadelik die rivier opgehou om die vyand se kruising te belemmer. 'N Kernvoorhoede van verraderlike Griekse huursoldate en Persiese koninklike wag is gevestig soos gewoonlik vir Persiese konings, en Darius het homself in die middel van hierdie voorhoede geposisioneer, sodat hy effektief bevele na enige deel van sy groot leër kon stuur. [15] 'n Groep Persiese ligte infanterie is spoedig na die voetheuwels gestuur, want daar word vermoed dat Alexander van regs af weg van die kus sou kom. 'N Massa kavallerie onder bevel van Nabarsanes beset die Persiese regs. [16]

Alexander het 'n versigtige en stadige opmars gemaak, met die bedoeling om sy strategie te baseer op die struktuur van die Persiese mag. Hy het 'n flank van sy metgesel -kavallerie aan die regterkant gelei, terwyl die Tessaliese kavallerie na links gestuur is as 'n toonbank van die berede eenheid van Nabarsanes. [17] Aangesien hy bewus was van die belangrikheid van die voetheuwels aan sy regterkant, het Alexander 'n groep lichte infanterie, boogskutters en kavallerie gestuur om die verdediging te verdring wat Darius daar gestasioneer het. Die onderneming was suksesvol - die Perse wat nie vermoor is nie, moes noodgedwonge hoër in die berge skuiling soek. [17] [18]

Toe Alexander binne die raketafstand van die vyand was, het Alexander die bevel gegee om te laai. [17] [19] Hy was die spits van die aanval van sy swaar gewapende metgesel -kavallerie, wat vinnig diep snye in die Persiese linkerflank gemaak het. Die Masedoniese linkervleuel, onder bevel van Parmenion, [18] is intussen deur Nabarsanes se groot kavallerie teruggedryf. Die sentrale falanks van die Masedoniërs het die rivier oorgesteek en in botsing gekom met die afvallige Griekse huursoldate wat Darius se voorhoede voorgesit het. Namate die metgesel -kavallerie verder in die Persiese linkerkant ingedruk het, het die gevaar ontstaan dat Darius die gaping tussen Alexander en die res van sy leër sou ontgin. Toe hy tevrede was dat die linkervleuel kreupel was en nie meer 'n bedreiging was nie, het Alexander die situasie reggestel deur die metgeselle te beweeg om die Persiese senter in die flank aan te val. Omdat die Persiese voorhoede nie die ekstra druk kon hanteer nie, moes hy van die rivieroewer terugtrek, sodat die Masedoniese falanks hul opmars kon voortsit en die druk op die linkervleuel van Parmenion kon lig. [19]

Toe hulle besef dat die aanslag van Alexander's Companion -kavallerie onstuitbaar was, het Darius en sy leër gevlug. Baie is dood in die gejaag, vertrap deur diegene wat saam met hulle gevlug het of met hul perde ineengestort het. [20] Sommige ontsnap na streke so ver as Egipte, en ander herenig met Darius in die noorde. [21] Die begin van die duisternis het die jaagtog beëindig nadat ongeveer 20 km (12 myl) Alexander sy leër herroep het en die dooies gaan begrawe het. Darius se familie het in die Persiese kamp agtergebly. Daar word berig dat Alexander hulle goed behandel het en hulle verseker het van Darius se veiligheid. [21] [22] Darius se koninklike strydwa is in 'n sloot gevind, net soos sy boog en skild. [21]

Antieke bronne bied uiteenlopende ongevalle aan tydens die Slag van Issus. Plutarchus en Diodorus Siculus beraam ongeveer 100,000 Persiese sterftes, in teenstelling met die 450 Masedoniese sterftes wat deur Quintus Curtius Rufus aangemeld is. [23] In elk geval is dit waarskynlik dat meer Perse gesterf het toe hulle gevlug het as in die geveg [24] Ptolemeus I, wat saam met Alexander gedien het tydens die geveg, vertel hoe die Masedoniërs 'n kloof oor die lyke van hul vyande oorgesteek het tydens die agtervolging. [23] [25]

Die Masedoniese verowering van Persië duur voort tot 330 vC, toe Darius vermoor is en Alexander sy titel as koning ingeneem het. [26] Alexander sterf in 323 vC, nadat hy onlangs teruggekeer het van veldtogte in die Indiese subkontinent. Die oorsaak van dood bly 'n onderwerp van debat. [27] [28]

Vorige werk Redigeer

Albrecht Altdorfer word beskou as een van die stigters van Westerse landskapskuns. [29] Hy was 'n skilder, etser, argitek en graveerder en die leier van die Donau -skool vir Duitse kuns. Soos blyk uit skilderye soos Saint George en die draak (1510) en Allegorie (1531) word 'n groot deel van Altdorfer se werk gekenmerk deur 'n gehegtheid aan uitgestrekte landskappe wat die figure daarin verdwerg [30] Die Slag van Alexander by Issus illustreer hierdie faset van sy styl. Met verwysing na St George en die draak veral die kunshistorikus Mark W. Roskill sê dat "die bykomstige materiaal van landskap [in Altdorfer se werk] word gespeel en ornamenteel uitgewerk sodat dit weerklink met die gevoel van 'n gesekwestreerde en onherbergsame omgewing". [31] Geïnspireer deur sy reise deur die Oostenrykse Alpe en die Donau, [32] het Altdorfer 'n aantal landskappe geverf wat glad nie figure bevat nie, waaronder Landskap met 'n voetbrug (c. 1516) en Donau -landskap naby Regensburg (c. 1522–25). Dit was die eerste "suiwer" landskappe sedert die oudheid. [33] Die meeste van Altdorfer se landskappe is in 'n vertikale formaat gemaak, in teenstelling met die moderne opvatting van die genre. Die horisontale landskap was 'n vernuwing van Altdorfer se Vlaamse tydgenoot Joachim Patinir en sy volgelinge. [34]

Altdorfer het ook baie godsdienstige kunswerke geproduseer, in weerspieëling van sy vroom katolisisme. Sy mees algemene onderdane was die Maagd Maria en die lewe en kruisiging van Christus. Soos in Die Slag van Alexander by IssusHierdie skilderye bevat dikwels groot majesteit en gebruik die lug om simboliese betekenis oor te dra. Hierdie betekenis is nie eenvormig in Altdorfer se korpus nie - byvoorbeeld, die gesig van die ondergaande son dui op verlies en tragedie in Pyn in die tuin, maar dien as 'die embleem van krag en heerlikheid' in Die Slag van Alexander by Issus. [35]

Larry Silver van Die kunsbulletin verduidelik dit Die Slag van Alexander by Issus is beide soortgelyk aan en in direkte kontras met Altdorfer se vorige werk: "In plaas van die vreedsame landskap van toevlug vir Christelike gebeurtenisse of heilige figure, bied hierdie paneel presies die teenoorgestelde: 'n slagveld vir een van die belangrikste epogmakende ontmoetings uit die antieke geskiedenis. Tog ten spyte daarvan sy globale of kosmiese dimensies, die Slag van Issus steeds lyk soos Altdorfer se vroeëre, kontemplatiewe liminale landskappe van toevlug, kompleet met kronkelende pieke, watermassas en verre kastele. "[36]

Alhoewel die Slag van Alexander is tipies van Altdorfer in sy grootte en deurdat dit oorlog uitbeeld, sy Triomftog - 'n 1512–16 verligte manuskrip in opdrag van Maximiliaan I van die Heilige Romeinse Ryk - is beskryf as 'n konseptuele antesedent. [37] Die Optog is parallel met die Triomf van Maximilian, 'n reeks van 137 houtsnitte wat gesamentlik uitgevoer is deur Altdorfer, Hans Springinklee, Albrecht Dürer, Leonhard Beck en Hans Schäufelein. [38]

Invloede en kommissie Redigeer

Altdorfer se belangrikste kontemporêre invloed was Matthias Grünewald (c. 1470–1528). Die kunshistorikus Horst W. Janson het opgemerk dat hul skilderye 'dieselfde' onstuimige 'verbeelding toon'. [39] Elemente van Die Slag van Alexander by Issus - veral die lug - is vergelyk met die van Grünewald Hemelse gasheer bo die maagd en kind, wat deel uitmaak van sy meesterstuk, die Isenheim -altaarstuk. Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472–1553), ook verbonde aan die Donau -skool, was 'n ander belangrike invloed vir Altdorfer. Volgens Roskill gee werke van Cranach uit ongeveer 1500 ''n prominente rol aan landskapomgewing, en gebruik dit as agtergrond vir die verbetering van stemming vir portrette en vir beelde van kluisenaars en visionêre heiliges', en lyk dit asof hulle 'n 'voorbereidende rol' speel vir die begin van suiwer landskap. [40] Altdorfer het 'n groot deel van sy styl, veral in sy godsdienstige kunswerk, te danke aan Albrecht Dürer (1471–1528) [41] Larry Silver skryf dat Altdorfer se "gebruik van oortuigende Duitse landskappe in kombinasie met hemelse verskynsels vir sy godsdienstige vertelling" is " stewig gebind "aan 'n tradisie" volgens Albrecht Dürer. " [42]

Willem IV, hertog van Beiere in opdrag Die Slag van Alexander by Issus in 1528. [43] Altdorfer was destyds ongeveer 50 en woon in die Vrye Keiserlike stad Regensburg. [44] As gevolg van meer as 'n dekade se betrokkenheid by die stadsraad van Regensburg, word Altdorfer op 18 September 1528 die pos van burgemeester aangebied. in Beiere vir my rustige hoogheid en genadige Heer, hertog [William]. " [44] William wou waarskynlik die skildery hê vir sy nuutgeboude somer Lusthaus ("plesierhuis") op die terrein van sy paleis in München, ongeveer 97 km suid van Regensburg. [43] [44] [45] Daar sou dit hang saam met sewe ander skilderye met 'n soortgelyke formaat en onderwerp, insluitend Ludwig Refinger se Die materskap van Marcus Curtius, Melchior Feselen's Die beleg van Alesia deur Caesar, en die skildery van Slag van Cannae deur Hans Burgkmair (1473–1531). [46] [47] Nog agt, wat elk 'n beroemde vrou uit die geskiedenis uitbeeld, is later by die stel gevoeg, waarskynlik op bevel van die hertog se vrou, Jacobaea van Baden. [47] Altdorfer's Susanna en die ouderlinge (1526) was een hiervan. [48]

Vroeëre uitbeeldings Redigeer

Vroeëre uitbeeldings van die Slag van Issus is min. Slag van Issus, 'n fresko van Philoxenus van Eretria, is waarskynlik die eerste sodanige. Dit is ongeveer 310 vC geskilder vir Cassander (ongeveer 350–297 vC), wat een van Alexander die Grote se opvolgers was. [49] Alexander en Darius - elk binne 'n lanslengte van die ander - word afgebeeld onder 'n wilde stryd van berede en neergeslaan soldate. Terwyl Alexander 'n aura van onwrikbare vertroue handhaaf, word vrees in Darius se gesig gegraveer, en sy strydwa het al omgedraai om sy perde te teug en te ontsnap. [49] Die Romeinse skrywer en natuurfilosoof Plinius die Ouere het beweer dat Philoxenus se uitbeelding van die geveg 'minderwaardig was as niemand'. [49] Sommige moderne kritici meen dit Slag van Issus was miskien nie die werk van Philoxenus nie, maar van Helena van Egipte. Een van die min vroulike skilders wat moontlik in die antieke Griekeland gewerk het [50] [51], het na bewering 'n skildery van die slag van Issus gemaak wat in die tyd van Vespasianus in die Vredestempel gehang het. [52]

Die Alexander Mosaic, 'n vloermosaïek wat dateer uit ongeveer. 100 vC, word geglo dat dit 'n "redelik getroue" afskrif van Slag van Issus, [49] alhoewel 'n alternatiewe siening van mening is, kan dit eerder 'n kopie wees van 'n werk wat geskilder is deur Apelles van Kos, [53] wat verskeie portrette van Alexander die Grote gemaak het. [54] Dit meet 5,82 m × 3,13 m (19 ft 1 in × 10 ft 3 in) en bestaan uit ongeveer 1,5 miljoen tesserae (gekleurde teëls), elk ongeveer 3 mm (0,12 in) vierkant. Die mosaïek is onbekend. Aangesien die mosaïek eers in 1831 herontdek is, tydens opgrawings van Pompeii's House of the Faun, [55] kon Altdorfer dit nooit gesien het nie. Dit is later verplaas na die Napels National Archaeological Museum in Napels, Italië, waar dit tans woon.

Beskrywing Redigeer

Die Slag van Alexander by Issus is geverf op 'n kalkhoutpaneel van 158,4 cm x 120,3 cm, [56] en beeld die oomblik van Alexander die Grote se oorwinning uit. Die vertikale formaat word bepaal deur die beskikbare ruimte in die kamer waarvoor die skildery in opdrag is - elkeen in William se stel van agt het dieselfde grootte. Op 'n onbekende datum is die paneel aan alle kante afgekap, veral aan die bokant, sodat die lug oorspronklik groter was en die maan verder van die hoek van die toneel af was. [57] Die toneel word vanuit 'n onmoontlike oogpunt benader - eers op 'n meter van die stryd styg die perspektief geleidelik op om die seë en kontinente op die agtergrond te omvat en uiteindelik die kromming van die aarde self. [58] [59]

Duisende perde- en voetsoldate gedompel in 'n see van spiese en lansies vul die voorgrond. Die twee leërs word gekenmerk deur hul kleredrag, hoewel dit anachronisties is: terwyl die manne van Alexander hulself en hul perde in swaar harnas dra, dra baie van Darius se tulbande en ry naakte berge. [60] Die lyke van die talle gevalle soldate lê onder die voete. 'N Voorkant van Masedoniese krygers in die middel stoot teen die verbrokkelende vyandelike mag, wat die slagveld heel links vlug. Die Persiese koning sluit hom by sy leër aan op sy strydwa van drie perde, en word nou agtervolg deur Alexander en sy uniform geklede kavallerie. [47] Die stuk soldate loop af op die saggies skuins slagveld na die kampterrein en die stadsbeeld by die water, en trek na die bergagtige opkoms in die middel van die toneel.

Anderkant is die Middellandse See en die eiland Ciprus. [61] Hier word 'n oorgang in kleur gemaak, van die bruines wat in die onderste helfte van die skildery heers, na die aquas wat die boonste helfte versadig. Die Nyl kronkel in die verte en leeg sy sewe arms in die Middellandse See by die Nyldelta. [61] Suid van Ciprus is die Sinai -skiereiland, wat 'n landbrug vorm tussen Afrika en Suidwes -Asië. Die Rooi See lê daarbuite [61] wat uiteindelik saamsmelt - soos die bergreekse links en regs dit doen - met die geboë horison.

'N Heftige lug wat vasgevang is in die tweespalt tussen die ondergaande son en die sekelmaan, oorheers meer as 'n derde van die skildery. [57] Die reën-swaar wolke wat onheilspellend om elke hemelse entiteit draai, word geskei deur 'n golf van kalmte, wat die kontras versterk en die hemele met 'n onaardse gloed toedien. [62] Lig uit die lug stort op die landskap: terwyl die westelike kontinent en die Nyl in die sonlig bad, is die ooste en die toring van Babel in die skaduwee bedek.

Die onderwerp van die skildery word verduidelik in die tablet wat uit die hemel hang. Die bewoording, waarskynlik verskaf deur William se hofhistorikus Johannes Aventinus, [63] was oorspronklik in Duits, maar is later vervang deur 'n Latynse inskripsie. Dit vertaal:

Alexander die Grote verslaan die laaste Darius, nadat 100 000 infanterie en meer as 10 000 kavalleriste in die geledere van die Perse gedood is. Terwyl koning Darius met meer as 1 000 ruiters kon vlug, is sy ma, vrou en kinders gevange geneem.

Daar is geen datum vir die geveg saam met hierdie slagoffers nie. In die onderste linkerhoek is die monogram van Altdorfer-'n 'A' binne 'n 'A'-en die onderste rand van die tablet is ingeskryf met 'ALBRECHT ALTORFER ZU REGENSPVRG FECIT"(" Albrecht Altdorfer van Regensburg het [hierdie] gemaak "). Klein inskripsies op hul strydwa en tuig identifiseer onderskeidelik Darius en Alexander. [64] Elke leër dra 'n vaandel wat sy totale sterkte en sy toekomstige ongevalle weergee. [43] [60]

Analise en interpretasie Redigeer

Anachronisme is 'n belangrike komponent van Die Slag van Alexander by Issus. Deur die manne van Alexander in die 16de-eeuse staalwapens en die mans van Darius in Turkse gevegskleed aan te trek, trek Altdorfer doelbewuste parallelle tussen die Masedoniese veldtog en die hedendaagse Europees-Ottomaanse konflik. [44] [59] [64] In 1529 - die jaar waarin die skildery in gebruik geneem word - beleef die Ottomaanse magte onder Suleiman the Magnificent die Oostenrykse stad Wenen, [64], dan ook die hoofstad van die Heilige Romeinse Ryk en noem ' die goue appel 'deur die Sultans. Alhoewel die Oostenrykse, Duitse, Tsjeggiese en Spaanse soldate baie minderwaardig was, kon hulle die vyand terugtrek en die Ottomaanse opmars in Sentraal -Europa stop. Dit is waarskynlik dat die onderliggende allegorie van die skildery geïnspireer is deur die beleg van Wene, gegewe die ooreenkomste met Alexander se oorwinning by Issus. Sommige kritici gaan verder, wat daarop dui dat die insluiting van anachronisme moontlik 'n element van Altdorfer se opdrag was. [47] [59]

In sy Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, historikus Reinhart Koselleck bespreek Altdorfer se voorstelling van tyd in 'n meer filosofiese lig. Nadat hy onderskei het tussen die oppervlakkige anachronisme wat in die slagoffers op die weermagbaniere voorkom en die dieper anachronisme wat in die kontemporêre konteks van die skildery ingebed is, beweer hy dat laasgenoemde tipe minder 'n superpositie van een historiese gebeurtenis bo 'n ander is en meer 'n erkenning van die rekursiewe aard van die geskiedenis. Met verwysing na Koselleck voer Kathleen Davis aan: ". Vir [Altdorfer] lyk die Perse uit die 4de eeu soos Turke uit die 16de eeu, nie omdat hy nie die verskil ken nie, maar omdat die verskil nie saak maak nie. Alexanderschlachtmet ander woorde 'n voorbeeld van 'n premoderne, ontydelik gevoel van tyd en 'n gebrek aan historiese bewussyn. Die historiese oorlegsels van Altdorfer dui op 'n eskatologiese visie op die geskiedenis, 'n bewys dat die 16de eeu (en ook die sewentiende en agtiende eeu) in 'n statiese, konstante tydelikheid opgesluit bly wat die toekoms prolepties versadig, soos altyd 'n herhaling daarvan. In so 'n stelsel kan daar geen gebeurtenis as sodanig: afwagting en aankoms word saam ingesuig in die swart gat van die heilige geskiedenis, wat nie tydelik is nie, omdat die tyd daarvan in wese ongedifferensieerd is. "[65]

Dit verskyn saam met die anachronisme in Die Slag van Alexander by Issus is 'n werklike gebrek aan historisiteit. Altdorfer toon minimale huiwering om die historiese integriteit van die skildery te verwaarloos ten spyte van die heroïese styl, ondanks die moeite wat hy gedoen het om die stryd te ondersoek. Dat die Persiese weermag tot twee keer die grootte van die Masedoniese weermag was, is nie duidelik nie, en die relatiewe posisie van die soldate, soos berig deur ou bronne, is buite rekening gelaat. Volgens kunskritikus Rose-Marie Hagen, "was die kunstenaar slegs getrou aan die historiese waarheid toe dit hom pas, toe historiese feite versoenbaar was met die eise van sy komposisie." [60] Hagen neem ook kennis van die plasing van vroue op die slagveld en skryf dit toe aan Altdorfer se "passie vir uitvinding", [60] aangesien die vrou van Darius, sy ma en sy dogters vir Darius in die kamp gewag het, nie in die dik van die stryd. [66] Maar volgens die regte vorm het Altdorfer die aristokratiese dames in hul gevederde toke "soos Duitse hoflike dames laat lyk, geklee vir 'n jaggeselskap": [60]

Altdorfer se belangrikste verwysingspunt in sy navorsing was waarskynlik die van Hartmann Schedel Neurenberg Kroniek (Schedelsche Weltchronik), 'n geïllustreerde wêreldgeskiedenis wat in 1493 in Neurenberg gepubliseer is. Schedel was 'n dokter, humanis, historikus en kartograaf, en sy Kroniek was een van die eerste boeke wat op die drukpers verskyn het. Met 'n groot vertroue in die Bybel, word dit vertel van die sewe eeue van die menslike geskiedenis, [67] van die skepping tot die geboorte van Christus en eindigend met die Apokalips. [68] Die statistieke van Altdorfer vir die slag van Issus weerspieël dié van Schedel. Verder kom die foute in die kaarte van Schedel oor die Middellandse See en Noord -Afrika ook voor Die Slag van Alexander by Issus: die eiland Ciprus is merkbaar groot, en beide die bergopgang in die middel van die skildery en die reeks langs die Nyl bestaan nie. [61] Sedert die Kroniek Alexander se oorwinning oor die Perse beskryf in terme van die nabyheid aan Tarsus en die vermelding van Issus weglaat, is dit waarskynlik dat die stadsbeeld by die see eerder die voormalige stad as die laasgenoemde is. Issus in die 16de eeu was klein en relatief onbekend, terwyl Tarsus bekend was omdat dit 'n belangrike sentrum vir leer en filosofie in die Romeinse tyd was. Daar word ook gesê dat Tarsus die geboorteplek van die apostel Paulus is, wat die teenwoordigheid van die kerktorings in die uitbeelding van Altdorfer kan verklaar. [61] 'n Ander bron was moontlik die geskrifte van Quintus Curtius Rufus, 'n 1ste-eeuse Romeinse historikus wat opgeblase syfers voorstel oor die aantal gedood en gevange geneem en die grootte van die leërs. [60]

Die hemelruim het 'n openlike metaforiese betekenis en is die middelpunt van die simboliek van die skildery. Alexander, identified by the Egyptians and others as a god of the sun, finds his victory in the sun's rays and the Persians are routed into the darkness beneath the crescent moon, a symbol of the Near East. [69] Considered in terms of the painting's contemporary context, the sun's triumph over the moon represents Christendom's victory over the Islamism of the Ottomans. [35] Eschatological meaning, probably inspired by prophecies in the Book of Daniel, is imbued in the heavenly setting. In particular, Daniel 7 predicts the rise and fall of four kingdoms before the Second Coming these were thought to be Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome at the time of the painting's creation. Altdorfer saw the Battle of Issus as a principal indicator of the transition of power from Persia to Greece, and thus as an event of cosmic significance. [35] [57] The battle also marked a progression toward the end of the world – an important theological concern in the 16th century, given that the last traces of Rome were diminishing with the papacy. As a member of the Regensburg council and a practising Catholic, Altdorfer frequently interacted with the Church and was surely aware of this trend of eschatological thought. Schedel, too, had calculated that the final age of the seven he identified was nigh. [67] It may therefore be inferred that the sky's expression of the momentous event at Issus was intended to be of contemporary relevance as well. [57]

The Battle of Alexander at Issus remained part of the royal collection of the Dukes of Bavaria for centuries. By the late 18th century, it was regularly featured in public galleries at the Schleissheim Palace. The painting was one of 72 taken to Paris in 1800 by the invading armies of Napoleon I (1769–1821), [70] who was a noted admirer of Alexander the Great. [60] [71] The Louvre held it until 1804, when Napoleon declared himself Emperor of France and took it for his own use. When the Prussians captured the Château de Saint-Cloud in 1814 as part of the War of the Sixth Coalition, they supposedly found the painting hanging in Napoleon's bathroom. [72]

The Battle of Alexander at Issus and 26 others taken in the 1800 invasion were subsequently restored to the King of Bavaria in 1815. [70] Five of the paintings in William IV's original set of eight – including The Battle of Alexander at Issus – later passed from the royal collection to the Alte Pinakothek art museum in Munich, Germany, where they remain the other three are in the National Museum of Fine Arts in Stockholm, having been looted by the Swedish army in the Thirty Years War of 1618–1648. [73] Susannah and the Elders is the only other work by Altdorfer in the Alte Pinakothek.

Contextually, the painting forms part of the Northern Renaissance, a resurgence of classical humanism and culture in northern Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries. The Renaissance induced a new kind of social individualism which Altdorfer expressed through the heroic emphasis on Alexander and Darius, and which is reflected in the specifics of the painting's commission and by the subjects of its companion pieces: "During the Renaissance people no longer saw themselves solely as members of a social group, as the citizens of a town, or as sinners before God in whose eyes all were equal. They had become aware of the unique qualities that distinguished one person from another. Unlike the Middle Ages, the Renaissance celebrated the individual. Altdorfer may have painted row after row of apparently identical warriors, but the spectators themselves would identify with Alexander and Darius, figures who had names, whose significance was indicated by the cord which hung down from the tablet above them." [47]

Altdorfer was not only a pioneer of landscape, but also a practitioner of early incarnations of the Romanticism and expressionism which impacted the arts so greatly in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Kenneth Clark writes of Altdorfer and contemporaries Grünewald and Bosch, "They are what we now call 'expressionist' artists, a term which is not as worthless as it sounds, because, in fact, the symbols of expressionism are remarkably consistent, and we find in the work of these early 16th-century landscape painters not only the same spirit but the same shapes and iconographical motives which recur in the work of such recent expressionists as van Gogh, Max Ernst, Graham Sutherland and Walt Disney." [74] According to art critic Pia F. Cuneo, "Altdorfer's construction of landscape on a cosmic scale" in the Battle of Alexander at Issus, and his "spiritual and aesthetic affinities with Romanticism and Modern art (in particular, German Expressionism)", "have been especially singled out for praise". [75]

The Battle of Alexander at Issus is typically considered to be Altdorfer's masterpiece. Cuneo states that the painting is usually "considered in splendid isolation from its fifteen other companion pieces, based on the assumption that it either metonymically stands in for the entire cycle, or that its perceived aesthetic predominance merits exclusive focus." [75] German writer Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel (1772–1829) was one of many who saw the painting in the Louvre and marvelled, calling it a "small painted Iliad". [72] Reinhart Koselleck comments that Altdorfer's depiction of the thousands of soldiers was executed with "a mastery previously unknown", [65] and Kathleen Davis describes the painting as "epochal in every sense". [65]

The Grand Master: Alexander’s Genius in the Battle of Issus

King Darius planned on fighting Alexander on the wide Syrian plains.This tactic would have allowed Darius the opportunity of surrounding Alexander’s greatly outnumbered army.

Darius decided to rest his troops at the Pinarus river during his pursuit of Alexander. Alexander learned of Darius’s location and immediately executed his strategy of fighting Darius on the plains of the Pinarus, which was shut in by the mountains and sea.

Statue of Alexander the Great. By Carole Raddato / CC BY-SA 3.0

This tactical move prevented Darius from surrounding the Macedonian’s outnumbered army and Alexander’s eventual probable defeat.

Battle of Issus

The Battle of Issus happened in 333 B.C was Alexander the Great’s second battle against the Persian army and his first direct engagement against King Darius III, King of Persia. The battle transpired near the village of Issus wherein Alexander defeated the Persian Army thereby causing Darius III to flee the battlefield. In history, the Battle of Issus has gone down as one of the most pivotal battles to occur.

Battle of Issus. Darius III portrayed (in the middle) in battle against Alexander in a Greek depiction. By Berthold Werner / CC BY-SA 3.0

Upon hearing that Darius III along with his Persian army was approaching the agricultural rich land surrounding Issus, Alexander the Great immediately called together his team of advisors to discuss strategy and tactic. The agreement was to advance to meet the Persians in battle – but not immediately.

Battle of Issus Movements – Persians in Red & Macedonians in Blue.

Because of the delay in action, Darius advisors’ assumed that Alexander did not intend to continue further into Asia. Darius was convinced by his advisors that his troop could easily take over the Macedonian forces. Unfortunately, the Persians were entirely wrong. Darius’s location in a flat and wide open field was the perfect position for his massive cavalry. Had Darius and his troop remained in their original position and not pressed forward, he may have won the battle.

Darius III of Persia

Macedonian soldiers who were injured and ill were left in the port which served as recovery camp. As Darius’s troop advanced forward to meet Alexander at the River Penarus, he stopped at the camp and tortured and slaughtered the recuperating Macedonian soldiers. Word of the massacre reached Alexander, probing him to send the Hetaeri, the elite Macedonian cavalry, to investigate what truly happened.

The Hetaeri returned to Alexander confirming the reports about the slaughter as well as with information about Darius’s current location at Issus. Alexander the Great immediately took action and began rallying his forces – leading his invincible army out to meet Darius III.

Hetaeri – A heavy cavalryman of Alexander the Great’s army, By Marsyas / CC BY-SA 3.0

At Issus, Darius sent 30,000 cavalry with 20,000 light infantry across the Pinarus River. He sent another 20,000 Persians to corner Alexander on the rear. Meanwhile, Alexander brought the Hetaeri along with the cavalry of Thessalians and Macedonians in his own command to the right. The Peloponnesians, under the command of Parmenio, veered to the left.

Darius moved his cavalry to the right pushing the Macedonian left to the seaward side of the battlefield. Alexander responded by moving his Thessalian troop to meet the Persians. He moved slowly and precisely as if he had all the time in the world while waiting for his army to conduct a strike in the distance.

The other Macedonian troops quickly engaged in battle as soon as the Persian forces were within range leaving the Persians helpless against the Macedonian’s full cavalry force. Alexander then moved his men to the center to prevent the Persians from breaking through the line.

From afar, Darius III watched as his forces slowly crumble against the Macedonian force. The Persians, led by Darius retreated.

King Darius Learned From the Battle of Granicus

Battle of the Granicus.

The Pinarus had steep banks in its upper and middle course. The Persians used this as an obstacle to defend their front in the same manner that they did at the Granicus.

The mistake that Darius made at the Battle of Granicus was not repeated at the Battle of Issus. Darius’s best troops, the Greek Mercenaries, were positioned in front of the center of the battle. The cavalry was on the right of the Greek mercenaries at the lower part of the Pinarus river.

Initial Positions of Forces.

At Granicus, Darius mistakenly placed his cavalry in front next to the steep bank of the river Granicus which prohibited his cavalry from charging Alexander’s army.

The banks of the Pinarus river were flat and the stream did not form an obstacle. The ground was level enough for a cavalry approach. Darius’s remaining troops were placed behind this front. Darius positioned himself in his impressive chariot in the center in back of his Greek mercenaries.

Alexander Demonstrates His Military Genius

The Macedonian Phalanx in a perfect position. it would never have looked like this in battle, and Alexander showed that in an interesting and engaging way.

Ulrich Wilken points out in his book, Alexander the Great, that the Pinarus was one of Alexander’s most memorable battles. Alexander began the battle, using the oblique formation, by charging with his heavy cavalry over the Pinarus and attacking the left wing of the enemy.

The Persians began to weaken from the terrific impact Alexander made with his heavy cavalry. However, Alexander’s phalangites were thrown back while they attempted to climb the steep bank of the river. The Greek mercenaries immediately recognized this weakness and threw themselves fiercely into the battle at the edge of the river.

Alexander s Attack.

Subsequently, both the Macedonians and Greek mercenaries fought each other fiercely, demonstrating their ethnic prejudices towards each other. Fortunately for the Macedonians, assistance was provided them from the nearby phalangites and Alexander himself.

Apparently after overcoming the left wing of the Persians, Alexander had executed the decisive turn and was successfully attacking the Persian center. This decided the battle of Issus. Darius, recognized Alexander’s successful defeating of his main force and retreated northwards in a frantic escape.

Painting of the battle of Issus by Jan Brueghel the Elder

Darius’s Escape Caused Great Disaster to His Army

The Persian cavalry continued to fight steadfastly until they learned of Darius’s escape from the battlefield. Then they turned around and commenced a frantic run for their lives. Alexander’s army pursued the fleeing Persians with a vengeance.

The historian, Ptolemy, who rode beside Alexander, recorded that in their pursuit they passed by a ravine, which was filled to the top with the dead bodies of the enemies.

Alexander the Great proved to the world his superior military mind in defeating Darius’s vastly numbered army. He did this by deciding to fight Darius on the plains of the Pinarus which prevented Alexander from being surrounded by King Darius’s heavily numbered army.

The victory at Issus marked the realization of Alexander’s dream of Persian domination.

MyIndiamyGlory

Alexander, having won all the kingdoms west of Greece up to Bacteria (Persia), proceeded to India, defeated many kings and finally met his foe Porus in Punjab. Alexander entered into a pact with Ambhi, a sworn enemy of Porus with whom he attended Taxila as a student.

Alexander defeated Porus and in appreciation of his valor, Alexander gave the kingdom back to Porus and left Selecus Nicator as his representative in India. This is utter lie. Facts lie below.

Strabo, the Greek historian wrote: “Generally speaking, the men who have written on the affairs of India were a set of liars…Of this we became the more convinced whilst writing the history of Alexander.”

“After Alexander’s failure to gain a position in India and the defeat of Seleucus Nicator, relationships between the Indians and the Greeks and the Romans later, was mainly through trade and diplomacy. The Greeks and other ancient peoples didn’t see themselves as in any way superior, only different.”

This statement by Russia’s Marshal Gregory Zhukov on the Macedonian invasion of India in 326 BCE is significant because unlike the prejudiced colonial and Western historians, the Greeks and later Romans viewed Indians differently.

For instance, Arrian writes in Alexander Anabasis that the Indians were the noblest among all Asians. In fact, Arrian and other Greeks say the Indians were relentless in their attacks on the invaders.

They say if the people of Punjab and Sindh were fierce, then in the eastern part of India “the men were superior in stature and courage”. All this is glossed over by Western historians, in whose view the one victory over king Porus amounted to the “conquest of India”.

But the Greeks made no such claim. Greek contemporary writers describe the Battle of Hydaspes (Jhelum) as the hardest fought of all Alexander’s battles.

Frank Lee Holt, a prof of ancient history at the University of Houston,writes in his book, Alexander the Great and the Mystery of the Elephant Medallions: “The only reference in Arrian’s history to a victory celebration by Alexander’s army was after the battle with Porus.”

Alexander’s army did not indulge in celebrations after the Battle of Gaugamela where they defeated 200,000 Persians. No wild festivities were announced after the Battle of Issus where they defeated a mixed force of Persian cavalry and Greek mercenaries.

The fact they celebrated after the Battle of Hydaspes suggests they considered themselves extremely lucky to survive after the clash with the Hindu army, with its elephant corps.

According to the Greeks, Alexander was apparently so impressed by Porus that he gave back his kingdom plus the territories of king Ambhi of Taxila who had fought alongside the Macedonians.

This is counterintuitive. Ambhi had become Alexander’s ally on the condition he would be given Porus’ kingdom. So why reward the enemy, whose army had just mauled the Macedonians?

The only possible answer is at the Battle of Hydaspes, the Macedonians realised they were dealing with an enemy of uncommon valour. Sensing defeat they called for a truce, which Porus accepted.

The Indian king struck a bargain in return for Ambhi’s territories, which would secure his frontiers, Porus would assist the Macedonians in leaving India safely. Alexander’s post-Hydaspes charitable behaviour, as per Greek accounts, is uncharacteristic and unlikely.

For, in battles before and after, he massacred everyone in the cities he subdued. Description of the War: The Greek force, after having lost several thousand soldiers fighting much smaller Indian mountain cities, were terrified at the prospect of fighting the Paurava army.

They had also heard about the havoc that Indian war elephants were supposed to create among enemy ranks. The modern equivalent of battle tanks, the war elephants also scared the wits out of the horses in the Greek cavalry.

According to the Roman historian Marcus Justinus, the battle was savagely fought. Puru challenged Alexander, who charged him on horseback.

In the ensuing duel, Alexander fell off his horse and was at the mercy of the Indian king’s spear (and this is where legend meets history) when Puru perhaps remembered his promise to his rakhi sister (probably a Trojan horse sent in by the Greeks).

He spared the Macedonian’s life, and Alexander’s bodyguards quickly carried off their king. The Greeks may claim victory but if Alexander’s troops were so badly mauled by the petty regional fiefdoms, how could they have crushed the comparatively stronger army of Puru?

An unbiased re-examination suggests the Greeks had lost the battle. In his epic, The Life and Exploits of Alexander the Great, a series of translations of the Ethiopic histories of Alexander, E.A.W. Budge, Egyptologist, orientalist and philologist,has given a vivid account of same.

According to Budge, in the Battle of Hydaspes, the Indians destroyed the majority of Alexander’s cavalry. Realising that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined, the Macedonian requested Puru to stop fighting.

True to Hindu traditions, the magnanimous Indian king spared the life of the surrendered enemy. A peace treaty was signed and Alexander helped Puru in annexing other territories to his kingdom.

Featured image courtesy: Quora.

Note: The above article is an exact (with very minor changes) reproduction of a twitter thread on Puru and Alexander by Aabhas Maldahiyar.

History Minds

The Battle of Issus in 333 B.C. was one of the greatest for Alexander the Great. As told from the Macedonian point of view it was a victorious, though violent, battle from which the Macedonians continued to carry their title of invincible. In history it has certainly gone down as one of the pivotal battles of antiquity.

As soon as news arrived that Darius of Persia was approaching the Macedonian forces, Alexander the Great immediately called together his advisors to discuss their options. The consensus was to advance to meet them in battle, though not immediately. Ever the strategist, Alexander was not quick to action.

Darius’s advisors claimed that the Macedonian slow response to their advance signaled that Alexander did not intend to continue further into Asia. They convinced him that the Persians could easily overtake the Macedonian forces the Persians should press forward, his advisors claimed. Had Darius remained in his original position, which was a flat and wide open battlefield, perfect for his numerous cavalry, he may have won the battle. Based on this advice, Darius advanced to Issus where he found Alexander’s rear detachment.

The Hetaeri returned to Alexander confirming that reports of the slaughter were true. The cavalry unit also reported that Darius was presently occupying Issus. Alexander immediately sprang to action and began to rally his troops. In typical fashion, Alexander cited other battles in which the Macedonians had been victorious. He compared the luxury-loving Persians who fought as slaves, to the free Macedonians who fought with their hearts dedicated to the battle – endowing them with a pre-nation patriotism that stood out against the forced conscription of the Persians. After his men ate a hearty meal, Alexander led the army out to meet Darius.

At Issus, Darius sent 30,000 cavalry and 20, 000 light infantry across the Pinarus River. He dispatched another 20,000 men went to Alexander’s rear. Meanwhile, Alexander brought the cavalry, composed of the Thessalians, Macedonians and the Hetaeri, on the right under his own command. The Peloponnesian troops made up the Macedonian left, under the command of Parmenio, a trusted advisor and general from the days of King Philip, Alexander’s father.

Darius then moved his cavalry to his right, threatening the Macedonian left on the seaward side of the battlefield. Darius continued to move his men around throughout the battle, though it seemed to his detriment. Alexander quickly responded by moving the Thessalian troops to meet the Persians. He led his forces slowly, but precisely, in order to give the appearance that he had all the time in the world, until the armies came within striking distance.

The Macedonians quickly fell into battle with the Persians as soon as they were within range. Their swift pace decreased casualties and left the Persians helpless. The Persian left fell almost immediately against the Macedonian cavalry forces. Alexander then moved his men to the Macedonian center to maintain stability and keep the Persians from breaking through the line. Alexander’s swift success encouraged the troops in the weakening center, and they began to fight harder.

Darius watched his forces from afar, preferring to remain outside of the battle. When the Macedonian cavalry became too much for them, the Persians retreated with Darius leading the way.

Alexander pursued Darius until the sun died that day. Although he did not capture him, Alexander and the Macedonian forces had decimated the Persian army at the battle of Issus.

Arrianus, Flavius. “The Battle of Issus.” The Art of War in World History: from Antiquity to the Nuclear Age. Ed. Gerard Chaliand. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.

Battle of Issus - History

Displaying image 421 van 467 images in History.

The Battle of Issus shown on the Alexander Mosaic (c 100 BC) in the House of the Faun in Pompeii (Wikimedia Commons). It is believed to be a copy of a painting by Alexander&rsquos contemporary Apelles of Kos. Alexander is shown on the left on his horse Bucephalus. The mosaic representing the battle of Alexander the Great against Darius III, perhaps after an earlier Greek painting of Philoxenus of Eretria. This mosaic is now in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale (Naples).

The Battle of Issus (or the Battle at Issus) occurred in southern Anatolia, in November 333 BC. The invading troops, led by the young Alexander of Macedonia, defeated the army personally led by Darius III of Achaemenid Persia in the second great battle for primacy in Asia. After Alexander's forces successfully forced a crossing of the Hellespont (the Dardanelles) and defeated the Persian satraps in a prior encounter, the Battle of the Granicus, Darius took personal charge of his army, gathered a large army from the depths of the empire, and maneuvered to cut the Greek line of supply, requiring Alexander to countermarch his forces, setting the stage for the battle near the mouth of the Pinarus River and south of the village of Issus.

Eventual accounts tell of bodies piled within the waters high enough to dam its flow and that the river ran red with blood. So while Alexander is known to have repeatedly emphasized the importance of maintaining contact with the beach to his sub-commander on the left (seaward) flank, it is safe to assume a lot of action that day along all the water course in its 2.5 km travel through the small narrow rough hilly coastal plain that prevented the Persians, with their greater numbers, from outflanking the attacking Greeks.

Initially, Alexander chose what was apparently unfavorable ground to an attack across (rough, briar choked, uphill) which was in fact a feint meant to pin and hold the Persian forces. This surprised Darius who mistakenly elected to hold position while Alexander then led the true attack personally on the right while instructing the Macedonian phalanx trained infantry, his main body, to make contact and just hold the main Persian army in check thus in essence he advanced to take up a defensive posture. Meanwhile Alexander personally led the more elite Greek Companion cavalry against the Persian left up against the hills, and cut up the enemy on the less encumbering terrain generating a quick rout. After achieving a breakthrough, Alexander demonstrated he could do the difficult and held the cavalry successfully in check after it broke the Persian right. Alexander regrouped, then turned the body into the right flank of the Persian center, butchering Darius' body guard and under generals, provoking a panic and flight by that emperor himself, and causing a general rout. Any subsequent pursuit of Darius was delayed and generally impeded by the fleeing Persian troops and camp followers, although he managed to follow Darius' chariot until after dark some 24 to 25 km before giving up the chase.

Views: 15,194
Added: 11 years ago.
Topic: Macedonia (800s BC-146 BC)

Slag

Alexander ordered a general advance. The tight formation of the Macedonian infantry phalanx lost cohesion moving forward over rough ground and crossing the stream. Darius's infantry were able to penetrate gaps in the bristling barrier of spears and to cut and stab at men in the exposed core of the phalanx. But on the left the Thessalian horsemen performed well against the strongest concentration of Darius's cavalry, while on the right, Alexander led a charge of the companion cavalry that swept all before it. Wheeling in from the flank, Alexander's horsemen bore down upon the rear of the enemy infantry who were driven onto the anvil of the Macedonian phalanx. Darius and his entourage fledthe battlefield to avoid capture. Much of the infantry was trapped and cut down where it stood, while large numbers of fleeing cavalry and skirmishers were pursued and massacred.

Cavalry fight on the beach

On the Persian right wing, victory had already been achieved. Alexander's cavalry, which consisted of horsemen from the Greek allies and the Thessalian riders, had crossed the shallow delta of the Pinarus, but had had been blocked by the Persian horsemen, which were superior in numbers and were commanded by Darius' chiliarch, Nabarzanes.

They had now come within javelin-range when the Persian cavalry made a furious charge on the left wing of their enemy for Darius wanted the issue decided in a cavalry engagement since he presumed that the phalanx was the main strength of the Macedonian army. note [Curtius Rufus, History of Alexander of Macedonia, 3.11.1 tr. J. Yardley.]

Within a few minutes, one of the Thessalian squadrons had been annihilated. The Persians started to push back the other Thessalian riders and the Greek allies, into and across the river. Parmenion ordered them to regroup, but the enemies came across the river in great numbers, and were already winging to the left to attack the Macedonian phalanx in the rear. The regrouped Thessalians and Greek allies had to prevent the destruction of the infantry, and could count on the support of the small reserve that Alexander had, with this purpose in mind, placed behind his lines. However, it was a matter of time until the Persian cavalry would surround the reserve and reach the phalanx, which was already forced back by the Greek hoplites.

Experience and Execution

Alexander’s success came down to experience and execution.

Both commanders had sound plans. Alexander, however, had more expertise in the field and so did his men. They were able to execute their maneuvers more effectively.

Once the battle got going, Alexander was able to seize the opportunities he needed. He adapted to Darius’ moves, countering each one.

Issus was a close call for Alexander. His enemy got behind him, and his left flank almost collapsed. He pulled victory out of desperate circumstances, once more proving why he was the Great.

General Sir John Hackett, ed. (1989), Warfare in the Ancient World.