historians who claim that it was used to bind two separate parts of the shaft
are right: the sleeve’s length (16 cm) was just not long enough. Perhaps
the sleeve was put on a single dogwood shaft to give the rider a better grip
on the spear. Like the heavy infantry sarissa, the cavalry equivalent had an
iron tipped stub serving as a reserve spearhead if the front part of the spear
was broken, which happened quite frequently in battle. Moreover it
provided a counterbalance so that the cavalryman was able to hold 60% of
the spear (counting from the tip of the spearhead) in front of him, which
meant that he had a better chance of spearing an opponent before being
struck himself. We do not know when Philip II equipped his cavalry with
sarissai. Some historians presume that they were first used at the Battle of
Chaeronea. Apart from the sarissa, riders also had slightly curved swords
used for cutting and javelins. The hetairoi, fitted in armour and holding
long spears, should not be compared to a European cavalry in the Middle
Ages, for in antiquity two basic pieces of equipment later considered to be
indispensable were quite unknown: the saddle and the stirrups. Without
these not only controlling a horse was much more difficult than in later
times but also the rider’s stability on the horse left a lot to be desired. This
of course made the training of riders a very long and difficult process, but
it also affected the method of fighting. The Macedonians were the first in
71 Garlan 1994, p. 687; Hammond 1996, pp. 31-32; Hanson 1999, p. 150; Lush
2007, pp. 16-17.
34
Chapter I
the west to successfully master cavalry charges with lances where the
momentum of the charging horse greatly increased the weapon’s impact.
However, the hetairoi could not use their sarissai like a medieval lance
which was aimed at the easiest target, i.e. the opponent’s chest and
stomach, for without a saddle the recoil from the impact could easily
knock the charging rider off his horse. To avoid this, Macedonian riders
aimed their sarissa at the opponent’s head. Though this was a much more
difficult target to hit, if correctly executed, it greatly reduced the risk of
being thrown off one’s horse.72
The 4th century brought to Greece a cavalry renaissance, for in
preceding centuries it had been a completely marginalised part of the
armed forces. Poleis, at least the larger ones, now expanded their old
cavalry units or founded quite new ones. In Athens the number of riders
was increased to 1,000. However, the Greek cavalry still by and large
played secondary roles: carrying out reconnaissance, protecting the
phalanx flanks during battle and chasing the defeated enemy. The great
reformers of the Boeotian army Pelopidas and Epaminondas had
experimented with using the cavalry to attack the flanks of enemy
phalanxes and that could not have escaped Philip’s notice. But it was only
when Philip became king that the cavalry started being used to attack and
break up enemy infantry formations on a large scale, and later this method
of warfare was further developed with great success by Alexander. The
Macedonian cavalry attacked in a wedge formation, which was an idea
adopted from the Scythians either directly or via the Thracians. The
hetairoi’s basic tactical unit, called the ile, comprised 136 cavalrymen who
when attacking formed a wedge of sixteen ranks in which the number of
riders in each rank was follows: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
15 and 16. Such a configuration enabled the cavalry unit to effectively
search for weak points in the enemy’s infantry formations. It also made a
difference in the midst of the battle’s chaos and noise when normally the
commanding officer’s verbal orders or signals could go unnoticed by the
riders. With the commanding officer at the front of a wedge shaped
formation the hetairoi could always see him and therefore even in the
thick of battle they were able to tactically retreat and carry out other
manoeuvres.73
72 Markle 1982, pp. 89-91; Manti 1983; Manti 1994; Lane Fox 1973, pp. 74-75;
Borza 1990, pp. 203-205; Mixter 1992, pp. 25-27; Hammond 1996, pp. 30-31.
Corvisier 2002, pp. 107-108; Worthington 2004, p. 12; Carney 2006, pp. 65-66;
Sekunda 2007, pp. 331-332.
Childhood, Family, Macedonia
35
However, the greatest breakthrough in 4th-century western warfare
concerned military engineering and siege techniques. The first ever war
machines in Greek history were used by Pericles in 440/439 during the
Athenian siege of Samos. They included a battering ram and special sheds
( chelonai) to protect the soldiers beneath the walls. Siege machines were
also used during the Peloponnesian War, though here they did not prove to
be very successful. More often than not cities were forced to surrender
after a long blockade or alternatively a traitor was found to open the gate.
Thus even the armies of great military powers frequently needed many
months to defeat a relatively small city-state; the most spectacular example
was the two-year (429-427) siege of Plataea by the Peloponnesians and
Thebans. The taking and not only besieging of enemy fortresses was
begun by the tyrant of Syracuse Dionysius the Elder in the long lasting
war against the Carthaginians in Sicily. In 397, during the famous siege of
the island’s main Punic fortress Motya, he successfully used siege towers.
This machine he had in fact copied off the Carthaginians, who had
preserved the Near Eastern techniques of siege warfare. It was also during
this siege that catapults, a Greek invention, were for the first time used.74
Though Dionysius’ military engineering achievements had been
known in Greece since around 375, the large scale application of these
methods was first begun by Philip II. Already in 357, at the start of his
reign, he captured Amphipolis using battering rams to destroy part of the
city’s walls. In his next important siege – Olynthus 349/348 – he used not
only battering rams but also machines throwing projectiles. During
excavations in this town archaeologists have discovered many large
bronze spearheads measuring 6.6-7 cm. Some bear Philip’s name and were
therefore without a doubt fired by the Macedonian king’s soldiers. These
had been the heads of 1.8 m-long spears with an approximately 2.5 cm
diameter that could be fired some 300 m from a catapult which did not
resemble later machines of that name. This original catapult, referred to in
some sources as the oxybeles, was more similar to the medieval crossbow
and, indeed, it fired bolts.75 It was after the capture of Olynthus that the
greatest advances in siege warfare were made. At the 340 siege of
Perinthus Philip had at his disposal battering rams, bolt firing machines,
city wall scaling ladders and siege towers that were 36 m tall, therefore
higher than the cities fortifications. At that stage the towers were probably
not yet mobile. Instead they were transported in parts and reconstructed
close to the enemy fortress walls. At the next battle, that of Byzantium,
74 Diod., 12.28.2-3, 13.54.7, 14.49-53.
75 Aen. Tact., 32.8; Diod., 16.8.2. Marsden 1977; Snodgrass 1999, pp. 116-117.
36
Chapter I
Philip’s army now had improved siege machines constructed by Polyeidus
of Thessaly. Undoubtedly these would have already included stone
throwing catapults which utilised the energy accumulated in coiled ropes
lines made from human hair.76
6. Alexander’s childhood and school years
Extant ancient sources provide surprisingly little information on the first
13 years of the future great conqueror’s life. What we have are chiefly
anecdotes mainly preserved in the works of Plutarch. The obvious purpose
of these anecdotes was to illustrate Alexander’s personality and his
philosophical virtues, which were incidentally compatible with the method
Plutarch had formulated himself: ‘For it is not Histories that I am writing,
but Lives; and in the most illustrious deeds there is not always a
manifestation of virtue or vice, nay, a slight thing like a phrase or a jest
fall…’77 At the same time, however, events that we would consider to be
noteworthy are frequently left out. For example, we know Alexander had a
sister called Cleopatra but we do not know the date she was born and
historians can only speculate that it was either in 355 or 354. Cleopatra
was to play an important role in Macedonia’s history after her brother had
set off on his expedition to the East.78
No doubt soon after his birth Alexander was handed over to a wet
nurse, a well born Macedonian woman by the name of Lanice. It is
possible that the honour of feeding the royal son led to a very strong
family tie with Argead dynasty because three of her sons served
Alexander, two of whom fell at Miletus. Lanice’s brother Cleitus the
Black became one of Alexander’s closest companions, who saved his life
at the Battle of the Granicus only to be later, in 328, speared to death by
Alexander when the latter was in a drunken rage. Historians agree that in
his childhood Alexander was very much under his mother’s care and that
he had inherited from her his characteristic impulsiveness, whereas from
Philip level headedness. Alexander’s rivalry with his father has frequently
been used as an example to stress how close he was to his mother. These,
however, are mere speculations and historical sources do not allow us to
make such assumptions. On the other hand Olympias may have been
76 Diod., 16.72-76; Ath. Mech., 10.5-10 and Vitr., 10.13.3 (both after
Agesistratos). Marsden 1977; Ferrill 1997, pp. 170-175; Hanson 1999, pp. 155-
160; van Wees 2000, p. 403; Worthington 2008, pp. 31-32.
77 Plu., Alex. , 1.2. Unz 1985, p. 171; Hamilton 1999, pp. xxxviii-xxxix.
78 Satyr., ap. Ath., 13.5. Carney 2000, pp. 75-76.
Childhood, Family, Macedonia
37
instrumental in appointing various teachers for Alexander, among them
Leonidas, who was for a time her son’s main tutor, and Lysimachus from
Acarnania, a land neighbouring to Epirus. We know the professional
specialisations of some of the teachers, for example his teachers of music,
but of course there also had to be teachers who were experts of grammar,
arithmetic, rhetoric and astronomy. The names of these teachers are given
in the Alexander Romance but they are not confirmed in other sources and
are therefore not utterly credible. Though sources do not mention this, an
obvious part of the Macedonian prince’s education, as of every Macedonian
aristocrat’s education, would have been horse riding and use of weapons.79
Leonidas was a stickler for discipline and it was in such a spirit that he
educated the young Alexander. One day he rebuked Alexander for using
sacrificial incense too liberally saying that he would be able to make such
offerings of incense only once he had conquered the lands from where it
came. Alexander took this incident to heart and later from among the
things he had plundered in Gaza he allegedly sent his teacher 500 talents
of incense and 100 talents of Myrrh, urging him to show the gods
magnanimity.80 With regard to Lysimachus there is a tale that he
introduced the fashion for Alexander and his circle to adopt the names of
Homeric heroes. Lysimachus called himself Phoenix after Achilles’
companion; Alexander became Achilles and his father Peleus. We do not
know whether it was Lysimachus who instilled into Alexander his
fascination with Homer but it is certain that Homer was Alexander’s
favourite author. Indeed, more than once in his life Alexander tried to
achieve things equal to those achieved by Homer’s heroes – Achilles in
particular. It is possible as well that Alexander’s admiration of Achilles
was fostered by his mother Olympias who counted Achilles among her
ancestors.81 Alexander had quite a thorough education in literature, he
knew Euripides by heart and had read other tragic authors, as well as the
dithyrambic poets Telestes and Philoxenus, the historian Philistus and
certainly other authors too. Most of this literature must have been read
79 Curt., 8.2.8-9; Plu., Alex. , 5.7-8; Arr., An. , 4.9.3-4; Just., 12.6; Ps.-Callisth., 1.13.4. Berve 1926, no. 462; Wilcken 1967, pp. 53-54; Hamilton 1965, p. 117;
Hamilton 1974, pp. 29-32; Hamilton 1999, p. 16; Lane Fox 1973, pp. 45-46;
Carney 1987, p. 42; Carney 2000, pp. 64-65; Fredricksmeyer 1990, p. 301; Heckel
1992, pp. 34-37.
80 Plu., Alex. , 25.6-8; Plu., mor. , 179e; Plin., Nat. , 12.62.
81 Plu., Alex. , 5.8, 8.2; Plu., mor. , 327f ; Hom., Il. , 9.168-169. Berve 1926, no. 481; Dascalakis 1965, p. 170 ; Hamilton 1999, p. 14; Carney 2006, p. 6; Thomas 2007,
p. 97.
38
Chapter I
during his school years rather than in adult life when he was so preoccupied
with politics and military affairs.82
Although they are far from coherent with one another, all the stories of
the young prince’s upbringing indicate that from the earliest years his
parents devoted a lot of attention to it. In the case of Philip, who made all
the most important decisions in the palace and state, this would suggest
that from the start he envisioned Alexander to be his successor instead of
his other son Arrhidaeus, who was born almost at the same time as
Alexander. This could be associated with the fact that the mental
retardation of Arrhidaeus was noticed early in his childhood and this made
the Philip’s other son quite unsuitable as a candidate to the throne.83
Ancient sources include anecdotes showing Alexander to have been a
boy of great physical dexterity, emotionally mature well above his age,
interested in the outside world, ambitious and aware of his own
importance. He excelled in running but, despite the insistence of his father
and colleagues, refused to compete in the Olympic Games on account of
the fact that unlike him the other competitors would not be monarchs.
Indeed a later legend has him competing in a chariot race at Olympia
again
st the sons of other kings and satraps. Such tales served to foretell
Alexander’s negative attitude to sport or rather his disregard for
sportsmen. When later looking at statues of Olympic and Pythian victors
displayed at Miletus Alexander asked: ‘and where those men of such
magnificent bodies were when the barbarians besieged your town?’ His
biographer Plutarch interprets Alexander’s reservations regarding sport as
an element of the perceived image of a philosopher king who valued the
fine arts, literature and philosophy more than athletic challenges.
Alexander’s intellectual maturity and early plans (or perhaps just dreams)
of conquering Asia are illustrated in an anecdote about how at the
Macedonian court, at a time when Philip was absent, emissaries of the
Great King were received by Alexander. He was said to have amazed the
ambassadors by not asking questions – as most people his age would have
done – about the legendary wealth, the hanging gardens and other wonders
of the Achaemenid court, but about the network of roads, the distances to
places and the position held by the Great King in battle formations.
Finally, Alexander’s ambitions and urge to act are expressed in the
concern he is said to have shown on receiving news of his father’s
victories that as a consequence there would be nothing of significance left
for him to later conquer. The most famous incident related by biographers
82 Plu., Alex. , 8.3 ; Nikobule, FGrH, 127 F2.
83 Carney 1987, p. 42.
Childhood, Family, Macedonia
39
from Alexander’s childhood, one illustrating his ability to control men and
beasts as well as to succeed where others failed, is his taming of a horse
called Bucephalus. This magnificent black Thessalian stallion had been
offered for sale to Philip by a man called Philoneicus, but the horse would
not allow itself to be mounted. Later legend even has it devouring human
flesh. However, Alexander, who had cleverly noticed that the horse’s wild
behaviour resulted from the fact that it was afraid of its own shadow, was
able to calm the animal down, mount it and then ride it. The onlooking