Responses to Alexander
anonymous
January 14 2010, 07:15:48 UTC
Thank you for mentioning this book as I found it fascinating to read. Oliver Stone's Afterword was interesting as he did take on board a lot of the criticism, though his 'history' was still a bit shaky - Eumenes a school friend and done for plunder?!!
I also enjoyed your essay though from my own research I tend towards an early entry for Hephaestion as a Somatophylkes - because it wasn't mentioned may have been a lapse in Arrian's part or because he felt it was known to so many already it didn't need reiterating. I was surprised, on your breakdown of Hephaestion's commands, to see that you missed his sole command during the siege of Atis' city that lasted 30 days whilst Perdiccas was bridging the Indus.
As military history is more my line I would also like to say that Alexander always co-assigned missions - sensible military tactic so that if one Staff officer fell there was one to take command; it wasn't just Hephaestion. Alexander had many warhorses but few officers who could be trusted to do other things, that you rightly point out, are as integral to the army as actual combat.
I would be interested in what you think of J E Lendon's suggestion that the co-assignments were due to an elite regiment always being paired with a lower status one?
I also enjoyed your essay though from my own research I tend towards an early entry for Hephaestion as a Somatophylkes - because it wasn't mentioned may have been a lapse in Arrian's part or because he felt it was known to so many already it didn't need reiterating. I was surprised, on your breakdown of Hephaestion's commands, to see that you missed his sole command during the siege of Atis' city that lasted 30 days whilst Perdiccas was bridging the Indus.
As military history is more my line I would also like to say that Alexander always co-assigned missions - sensible military tactic so that if one Staff officer fell there was one to take command; it wasn't just Hephaestion. Alexander had many warhorses but few officers who could be trusted to do other things, that you rightly point out, are as integral to the army as actual combat.
I would be interested in what you think of J E Lendon's suggestion that the co-assignments were due to an elite regiment always being paired with a lower status one?
Regards
Khepri 2
Reply
Leave a comment