The Sieges of Alexander the Great (ISBN 184884060-8) is an interesting book although not one that really sticks to your mind. It handles not so much about Alexander’s strategies but takes a close-up look at his siege technology: catapults, rams, ladders, siege towers, sappers and even his naval siege equipment. A matter of detail, one may think but details that really matter and demand serious consideration.
It never occurred to me, for instance, that the ladders used for a siege could not be higher than three-four meters simply because that was the maximum height of the trees used for their construction. By logical deduction this means that in case of such an attack the city walls cannot have been higher than those three-four meters, unless the wall had been breached and the ladders were used to climb over the debris. In my mind, any city wall would be at least three to five stories high – probably due to common images I have of medieval towns – but that would imply a height of seven to twelve meters which the Macedonian ladders could not reach. That explains why catapults and siege towers were so important, I understand now.
English describes a number of interesting siege details, referring mainly to the texts of Arrian and Curtius Rufus. He analyzes the exact meaning or bearing of their story adding comments made mainly by other modern writers like A.B. Bosworth, David Engels (Logistics) or Aurel Stein. Not very original, is it? What I miss however is a map of Alexander's conquests, not that I don't know the story but it would have been helpful to pinpoint the sites of the sieges all along the route.
In my opinion however, English often is too black-and-white in his conclusions. On one hand he praises Alexander because he is the first ever to use this or that military equipment or technique, while on the other hand he condemns him without mercy if he fails to act as a “perfect” commander. This is the case for instance at Tyre when Alexander is building the first mole to connect the island to the mainland and is being attacked by the enemy fleet - a failure according to English, for Alexander should have expected and prevented such an attack. My personal belief is that Alexander most certainly will have considered this possibility but has not acted on it for reasons unknown to us. We have no way knowing what was going on in Alexander’s mind, have we? English also likes to repeat previous remarks or conclusions, which I find annoying for I feel as if I were treated like a child. Well, my modest opinion, of course, for all in all this book is not unpleasant reading.
In my opinion however, English often is too black-and-white in his conclusions. On one hand he praises Alexander because he is the first ever to use this or that military equipment or technique, while on the other hand he condemns him without mercy if he fails to act as a “perfect” commander. This is the case for instance at Tyre when Alexander is building the first mole to connect the island to the mainland and is being attacked by the enemy fleet - a failure according to English, for Alexander should have expected and prevented such an attack. My personal belief is that Alexander most certainly will have considered this possibility but has not acted on it for reasons unknown to us. We have no way knowing what was going on in Alexander’s mind, have we? English also likes to repeat previous remarks or conclusions, which I find annoying for I feel as if I were treated like a child. Well, my modest opinion, of course, for all in all this book is not unpleasant reading.
The Sieges of Alexander the Great is in fact the second book of a trilogy by Stephen English. In Book 1, The Army of Alexander the Great, he takes a close look at Alexander’s army, and in Book 3, The Field Campaigns of Alexander the Great, he analyzes his battlefields.
Also available as e-Book (click here)
Also available as e-Book (click here)
No comments:
Post a Comment