commanders - history's greatest military leaders (dk publishing) (2011)

8/15/2019 Commanders - History's Greatest Military Leaders (DK Publishing) (2011)

1/362

H I S T O R Y ’ S G R E A T E S T M I L I T A R Y L E A D E R S

COMMANDERSR .G. GR A N T


2/362


3/362


4/362


5/362

HISTORY’S GREATEST MILITARY LEADERS. G. RANT


6/362

foreword 6

heroes of the ancient world1500 bce – 500 CE

Greece and the Ancient Empires 12

leaders of the ancient empires 14 ancient greek commanders 16 alexander the great 18

Ancient Rome and its Enemies 24

commanders of the punic wars 26hannibal 28 rome from republic to empire 32julius caesar 34from zenith to decline 42tribal warriors 44

Ancient Asia 46

ancient asian generals 48

knights andnomads500 – 1450

Early Middle Ages 54

byzantine commanders 56 arab and turkish commanders 58the christian west 62

charlemagne 64

vikings and normans 68

Era of the Crusades 72

royal crusaders 74frederick barbarossa 76muslim warriors 80the iberian reconquista 84

Asian Conflicts 86

nomadic warriors 88timur 90 japanese samurai 94

Late Medieval Europe 96the hundred years war 98national heroes 104

masters ofinnovation1450 – 1700

The Muslim World 110

ottoman leaders 112mogul leaders 114

East Asian Warfare 116

japanese daimyo 118china and korea 122

CONTENTS

First published in Great Britain in 2011 byDorling Kindersley Limited

80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL

A Penguin company

Copyright © 2010 Dorling Kindersley Limited

2 4 6 8 10 9 7 5 3 1CD262 - 09/10

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmittedin any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,

photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the priorwritten permission of the copyright owner.

A CIP catalogue record for this

book is available from the British Library

ISBN 978-1-4053-3696-3

Printed and bound in Singapore by Star Standard

Discover more at


7/362

the EarlyGunpowder Era 124

conquests of the americas 126hernán cortés 128the italian wars 132the dutch revolt 136spanish sea battles 138

Bible, Pike, and Musket 140

commanders of the thirty years war 142

gustavus adolphus 144the british civil wars 148

admirals of the anglo-dutch wars 154michiel de ruyter 156

rulers and

revolutionaries1660 – 1850

Europe in the Age of Louis XIV 162

generals of louis xiv’s wars 164duke of marlborough 166royal commanders 170

18th-Century Warfare 172

european army commanders 174frederick the great 176

colonial wars 180the american revolutionary war 184george washington 186

warfare in asia 192

French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars 194

generals of the french revolution 196napoleon bonaparte 198napoleon’s marshals 204napoleon’s adversaries 206duke of wellington 208

Naval Warfare 212

18th-century admirals 214horatio nelson 216

War in the Americas 220

rebels in the americas 222us commanders 1800–1850 224

agents

of empire1850 – 1914

European Wars 230

the crimean war 232nation-building wars 234helmuth von moltke the elder 238

The American Civil War 242

confederate commanders 244robert e. lee 246

union commanders 250ulysses s. grant 252

frontiers and colonies 256

native american warriors 258 african leaders 262imperial commanders 264the boer war 268

Naval Warfarein the Age of Steam 270

naval commanders 272

modern

commanders1914 – present

World War I 280

british commanders 282french commanders 284other allied commanders 288german commanders 290naval commanders of wwi 294

A World in Turmoil 296

rebels and revolutionaries 298interwar military strongmen 302

World War II 304

german generals 306soviet commanders 310

allied commanders 314bernard montgomery 316us army commanders in europe 320george s. patton 322us commanders in the pacific 328

air commanders 330

naval commanders of wwii 334Post World War II 336

post-war commanders 338revolutionary fighters 340 vo nguyen giap 342commanders in the israeli wars 346post-cold war commanders 348

index and Acknowledgements 352


8/362

FOREWORDMilitary commanders have been a diverse collection of individuals and their job has altered radically overtime through the impact of technological innovation and social and political changes. The men profiledin this book range from all-conquering warriors to cautious dedicated career soldiers, from the rulers ofkingdoms and empires to ordinary citizens thrust by circumstance into the forefront of war. Some weremen who delighted in combat and slaughter, while others were often sickened by their own trade andwould agree with the Duke of Wellington that “next to a battle lost, the greatest misery is a battle gained”.

Military command has always been, in all historical situations, a complex task. It is true that, during

the American Civil War, President Lincoln described General Grant as indispensable simply because“he fights”. But this does not mean the conduct of battles is the sole essence of generalship. The militarycommander has to look to the morale and training of his soldiers, and see that supplies are provided forthe men, their animals, and their machines. He must gather and sift intelligence before preparing coherentplans and clearly communicating them to his subordinates. If he is cunning, he will ensure that battle isonly joined when his army has the advantage – a general who repeatedly wins close-run victories againstthe odds is not doing his job properly. Bold risk-taking fighters, from Alexander the Great throughRichard the Lionheart to George Patton, have always caught the eye, but some of the most successful

commanders have been of an altogether different temperament – the intellectual and cultivated Moltkethe Elder, for example, or the cool and diplomatic Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Writing in the 1960s, Israeli general Moshe Dayan expressed nostalgia for “the good old days” when, atthe approach of battle, “the commander got on his white horse, someone blew the trumpet, and off hecharged towards the enemy.” Certainly it was possible for Alexander the Great to lead from the front,charging the enemy at the head of his Companion cavalry. Even a more level-headed commanderof the ancient world, such as Julius Caesar, would have been close enough to the action to shout

encouragement to his fighting men. A location just behind the fighting zone remained the normalbattle position for a commander into the 19th century, when it was still just possible to survey a whole


9/362

battlefield with the aid of a telescope. But the increasing size of armies, the growing power and rangeof weapons, and new means of communication, such as telephone and radio, imposed remoteness onthe field commander. By the early 20th century the German general, Alfred von Schlieffen, could foresee

a future in which “the warlord will be located… in the rear, in a house with spacious offices… seated ina comfortable chair, in front of a large desk.” He could not have predicted that by 2001 it would be possiblefor an American general to command operations in Afghanistan from a headquarters in Florida.

The managerial complexity of modern military command, regretted by General Dayan, has often made itdifficult to identify the individual to be credited as the commander of a particular operation. There wasno doubt whatsoever that Hannibal led the Punic army campaigning in Italy in the third century BCE, orNelson the British fleet at Trafalgar in 1805. But at Passchendaele in World War I, Canadian General

Arthur Currie held command under British General Herbert Plumer, who himself was under FieldMarshal Douglas Haig. In selecting entries for this book, an attempt has been made to identify hands-oncommanders of armies and fleets, excluding both those too bureaucratically high-placed for fieldcommand and those too lowly to qualify. Military commanders who were also political leaders – themajority, in fact, up to the 18th century – are included, but political leaders who interfered in militaryoperations, without being military commanders in their own right, are not.

Respect for military commanders as role models has declined in recent times. Heroes such as Alexander

the Great and Julius Caesar, once universally admired, have been the subject of revisionist biographiesfocusing on their massacres and lust for power. Yet the men surveyed in this book showed many and variedhuman qualities, including moral fortitude, decisiveness, resilience under pressure, physical courage, humaneconcern for the welfare of their soldiers, and the ability to shoulder a great burden of responsibility. Oursocieties may yet find that, in the future, they need the martial virtues more than they expect.

R. G. Grant


10/362


11/362

1500 BCE – 500 CE

HEROES OF THE ANCIENT WORLD


12/362

HE CAMPAIGNS OF THE GREATEST GENERALS of ancient times – Alexander of

Macedon, Hannibal, Julius Caesar – have provided lessons in strategy and tactics

to be studied and admired through millennia. At a time when no army enjoyed

a technological advantage, the human factor in warfare was paramount. It wasthe commander’s ability to provide leadership, maintain morale among his troops, and seize

the initiative on the battleeld that determined the narrow margin between defeat and victory.


often aspired to imitate this model. Egyptianpharaohs had themselves depicted as solo

charioteers slaughtering their enemies withbow or mace. But in practice large armiescalled for more detached management. Theruler’s war chariot was more likelyto function as a commandplatform behind the frontline, screened off fromattack by an entourageof elite troops.

The technology

available for commandand control was basicand largely unchanging.Communication wasby messenger on footor horse. The Greekauthor Xenophon notedthat a Persian rulergenerally positionedhimself in the centre ofthe line of battle because“if he has occasion todispatch any necessary r ider along the lines,his troops will receive the message in halfthe time”. Signals by trumpets or by agscould deliver additional basic battleeld

The rst organized warfare known to historytook place among the Mesopotamian city-

states (in present-day Iraq) some 4,500 yearsago. Rulers such as Sargon of Akkad andEanatum, king of Lagash, commanded smallbut effective armies that fought for controlof neighbouring states and scarce resources.As other societies capable of large-scaleorganization emerged in various regionsof the globe – around the shores of theMediterranean in Egypt, Greece, and Rome,in the Indus Valley, the river valleys of China,

and central America – states expandedthrough warfare to create empires whoserulers commanded impressive armies. Thepharaohs of New Kingdom Egypt (c.1570– 1070 ) led armies that numbered in tensof thousands, while the Persian emperors(c.500 ) reportedly deployed severalhundred thousand men. These gures were nodoubt exceeded in ancient Chinese warfare.

LINES OF COMMUNICATIONLarge armies raised fundamental problems ofcommand. In simpler tribal societies the warleader was the bravest and strongest ghtingman – a warrior who led his men weaponin hand. The rulers of the civilized empires

orders, but these had to be simple andprearranged. Devolution of command was

essential. Generals of the Roman empirebeneted from experienced subordinatesat lower levels of command – for example,centurions – who could be relied upon

to execute plans faithfully and showinitiative if required.

FRESH CHALLENGESAlthough commanders in theancient world were aware of

the importance of logistics,out of necessity armies oftenlived off the land when oncampaign. A commander whowaged campaigns over longdistances had to overcome theobstacles presented by pooror non-existent road systems.Some empires, includingAssyria, Persia, and Rome, builtimpressive networks of roadsand bridges. From 500 to

500 commanders often faced the furtherchallenge of coping with warfare that wasasymmetrical – that is, fought betweenarmies and cultures with sharply different

10

Sumerian helmetThis helmet dates from c.2600 BCE andwas found in excavations of the ancientMesopotamian city of Ur (in present-dayIraq). Forged from gold sheet, the ornate

curving relief mimics hair.

T

H E R O E S

O F T H E A N C I E N T W O R L D


13/362


approaches to combat. The large, complexforces of the Persian empire were puzzled bythe small, compact citizen armies of Greekcity-states. Generals of ancient Rome hadto learn to ght Celtic and Germanic tribalwarbands in Europe, and Parthian andSassanian mounted archers in Asia.

RECIPE FOR VICTORYSome of an ancient commander’s roles werereligious – he had to make sacrices andread omens before battle. But sophisticatedpractical traditions of military command alsoevolved, based on accumulated experience ofwarfare and reection upon the performance

of famous generals. Much of this was passeddown by word of mouth and by example –learning on the job – but a substantialliterature of military history and theory alsothrived. Analytical works such as the Chinesethinker Sun-tzu’s Art of War (c.500 ) andthe Roman writer Vegetius’s De Re Militari (c.400 ) displayed penetrating insights intothe fundamentals of warfare. But the artof generalship probably gained more fromwritten accounts of actual conicts, suchas the Greek historian Thucydides’ accountof the Peloponnesian Wars or Julius Caesar’scommentaries on his campaigns. Throughstudy of such works any adept commander

might be expected to know how to conducta siege and arrange infantry and cavalry forbattle, to grasp the importance of surprise andof reconnaissance to avoid being surprisedoneself, or to know how crucial it was tomaintain supplies to one’s own army anddeny them to the foe. Only an exceptionalcommander, though, would have the moraland intellectual qualities to translate suchknowledge into victorious campaigns.

Tutankhamun in battleThis scene from Tutankhamun’s painted chest, 14thcentury BCE, shows the pharaoh in his war chariot firingarrows at his enemies. The inscription calls him “thegood god… who tramples hundreds of thousands”.

11

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E


14/362


15/362

the city-states of Greece and in 338 theysuccumbed to conquest by a new breed ofwarrior from the north – the kings of Macedonia.

Riding to battle at the head of their cavalry“Companions”, the Macedonian rulers alsorecruited and trained disciplined infantry forces.They found in Greece a cultural mission to fueltheir desire for conquest. Philip of Macedonbequeathed to his son, Alexander the Great, theambition to attack and destroy the mighty Persian

empire, a process that would carry Greek cultureto central Asia and northern India.

Dying young, Alexander failed to leave aunied empire, but his successor dynasties,including the Seleucids in Asia and the Ptolemiesin Egypt, commanded armed forces on a trulyimperial scale dur ing their internal squabbles.It was not until the 2nd century that therise of a new Mediterranean military power, theRoman Republic, rendered the Greek military

tradition obsolete.

Modern archaeology and research into theinscriptions found on the monuments of ancientEgypt make it possible to begin to reconstructthe strategy, tactics, and weapons of warfarefrom the 15th century . Under rulers suchas Thutmosis III (ruled 1479–1425 ) andRamesses II (ruled 1279–1213 ), Egyptianarmies campaigned from Syria in the north toNubia in the south. Records show that Thutmosiswon history’s rst recorded battle at Megiddo

(c.1457 ), thanks to a carefully worked-outbattleplan. The kings of Assyria, whose empirewas based in northern Mesopotamia, took theexercise of military power to a new levelbetween c.900 and 600 , adding cavalry tochariots and perfecting the art of siege warfare.But the Achaemenid Persian rulers surpassed alltheir predecessors, conquering Mesopotamia,Egypt, and Anatolia (present-day Turkey) in the6th century , thanks to the superb large-scale

military organization created by Cyrus the Great.The resistance of the Greek city-states to

control by the expanding Persian empire ledto the dispatch of a Persian punitive expeditionto Greece in 490 , followed by a full-scaleinvasion under Xerxes I ten years later. Thecity-states, including Athens and Sparta,succeeded in uniting for long enough to resistthe invaders, largely through their super iorityin naval warfare – as demonstrated at the battle

of Salamis in 480 BCE. They were also effectiveon land because of their highly motivatedarmoured infantry spearmen, or hoplites.

NEW EMPIRESAfter defeating the Persians, the Greeksfell to ghting one another in a series ofwars that chiey set the naval power ofAthens against the land power of Sparta.Over time these conicts fatally weakened

ROM AT LEAST 3,000 years ago western Asia and the eastern

Mediterranean was an area fought over by competitive

empire-builders. The rulers of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, and

Persia evolved highly organized, complex, professional armies

of impressive size capable of campaigning over long distances. In Greece, by

contrast, city-states developed small tight-knit citizen forces. The success of

the Greeks in combat against the Persians in the 5th century was one

of the turning points of European history.

Hoplite headgearThe Corinthian helmet, named after theGreek city-state of Corinth, was worn byhoplites who valued maximum protectionfor head and face more than all-round vision.

Greek hoplitesAncient Greek infantry, known as hoplites(from hoplon , the type of shield they used),fought in a tight phalanx formation, stabbingoverarm with their spears from behind a wallof shields. This impenetrable formation leftlittle scope for variety in battlefield tactics.

F13

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E


16/362


17/362

GREECE AND THE ANCIENT EMPIRES

King Croesus. Cyrus seized Croesusand his capital, Sardis, in c.545 BCE.Babylonia, a resurgent empire inMesopotamia, was next – after his

victory at Opis in 539 BCE, Cyrusdeclared himself “king of the fourcorners of the world”.

Cyrus’s army was a multinationalforce of great size. It included Arabsand Armenians, and used camels as

posted far from the centre of power

as satrap (governor) of Armenia. But arash of poisonings engineered by thepalace courtier, Bagoas, cut a swathethrough the ruling elite and openedhis path to imperial rule in 336 .

When Alexander invaded theAnatolian empire in 334 BCE, Dariuscould be excused for treating this as

PERSIAN KING

BORN Unknown DIED 530 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Conquests of Media,

Lydia, and BabyloniaKEY BATTLES Sardis c.545 BCE, Opis 539 BCE

Founder of the Achaemenid Persianempire, Cyrus the Great ranks as oneof history’s greatest conquerors andstate builders. According to theGreek historian Herodotus, whenCyrus became ruler of the Persiansin 559 , they were dominatedby their Iranian neighbours, the

Medes. He not only threw off thisoverlordship, but in 549 BCE tookthe Medean capital, Ecbatana. Asking of the Persians and Medes, hethen attacked Lydia,a rich Anatolianempire ruled by

PERSIAN KING

BORN Unknown DIED 330 BCEKEY CONFLICTS War against Alexanderthe GreatKEY BATTLES Issus 333 BCE, Gaugamela(Arbela) 331 BCE

Sometimes military commanders aretruly unfortunate in the opponentsthey encounter. This was undoubtedlythe case for Dar ius III, whose defeats

at the hands of a military genius,Alexander of Macedon, broughtAchaemenid rule in Persia to aninglorious end.

TAKING ON ALEXANDER Known to us primarily from Greeksources, Darius has inevitably beenpresented in the most pitiful light, yet there is strong evidence at leastfor his physical courage. As a youngman he distinguished himself in

single combat against a champion putforward by the Cadusii, an Iranianmountain tribe in rebellion againstthe empire. His route to the Persianthrone was tortuous, for he was onlya minor scion of the royal family,

well as horses. The army was alsocapable of considerable engineeringfeats, such as the canal to divert thecourse of the Euphrates during theBabylonian campaign.

PUBLIC IMAGE

Unlike the Assyrian kings who usedtheir reputation for massacre toterrorize enemies, Cyrus projected animage of tolerance. For example, hissympathetic treatment of the defeatedLydians was widely publicized. But itwas essentially because of his recentvictories that Babylon surrenderedalmost without a ght. Herodotusrecords that Cyrus died on campaign,ghting the Massagetae in central Asia.

Tomb of Cyrus the GreatCyrus was buried at Pasargadae (in present-day Iran), the original capital of his empire.His tomb is a stark memorial to his greatness.

The Alexander MosaicThis Roman mosaic from Pompeii

shows Darius III (right) being drivenaway from the battlefield – possiblyat Issus – by his charioteer, as he isthreatened by the spear-wieldingAlexander of Macedon (left).

According to the chronicles of later Greekhistorians, the Persian Immortals wereelite troops who provided an imperialbodyguard for Cyrus and his successors.Although the Persians did not leave recordsof their military structure, it was thoughtthat the Immortals always numbered10,000 troops – if one man died he wasimmediately replaced, thus sustaining theillusion of immortality.

DARIUS III

CYRUS THE GREAT

a local difficulty to be handled by theregional satraps. When he did respondto the invasion, advancing with hisarmy into Syria in 333 BCE, he seemed

to have manoeuvred Alexander intoa disadvantageous position, emergingbehind the Macedonians on thecoastal plain at Issus. Darius drewup his army in a strong defensiveposition then tried an outankingmove – tactics that might havesucceeded against a lesser foe. The

Persian forces were shattered, however,and Darius had no option but to eethe battleeld to avoid capture.

Darius’s second great battle against

Alexander at Gaugamela (Arbela)proved just as disastrous (pp.22–23).Fleeing to Ecbatana, Darius intendedto raise another army to continuethe ght, but a rebellious subordinate,Bessus, satrap of Bactria, heldhim prisoner andkilled him.

PERSIANIMMORTALS

KEY TROOPS

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E

15


18/362

triremes (warships) to meet thelarger-scale Persian attack he foresawwould follow. He devised the strategywith which Athens and its alliedcity-states met the invasion: the

ATHENIAN COMMANDER

BORN 524 BCE DIED 459 BCEKEY CONFLICTS First and Second Greco-Persian WarsKEY BATTLES Marathon 490 BCE, Artemisium480 BCE, Salamis 480 BCE

Described by the Greekhistorian Thucydides as a“natural genius”, Themistocleswas the man most responsiblefor the repulse of the Persianinvasion of Greece in 480 BCE.A prominent politician in democraticAthens, Themistocles took militarycommand in times of crisis. Heserved in the defeat of the Persians atMarathon in 490 BCE, and persuadedthe Athenians to build a eet of

Spartans carried out a delayingaction on land at Thermopylae, while

the Athenians led the naval defenceat Artemisium. Unable to commandthe quarrelsome allies, Themistoclesused persuasiveness and cunning toimpose his own strategy, inducingthe Athenians to abandon their cityas indefensible and the allies to allow

him to position the eet atSalamis, where enclosed waterswould give the advantage to

his nimble tr iremes. Plyingthe Persian king, Xerxes,

with misinformation, hetempted him to sendhis ships into a preparedtrap. Victory at Salamis

saved Greece, but littlethanks was given to Themistocles.

He was eventually driven into exileby his political enemies, ending hislife, ironically, at the Persian court.

THEBAN GENERAL

BORN 410 BCE DIED 362 BCEKEY CONFLICTS The Theban WarsKEY BATTLES Leuctra 371 BCE, Mantinea362 BCE

Of the many commanders who

fought in the wars between Greekcity-states, the Theban, Epaminondas,was the most inspired innovator. TheSpartans had long been the dominantmilitary power in Greece when theyfaced Epaminondas on the battleeldat Leuctra in 371 BCE. Greek-versus-Greek encounters were traditionallytrials of strength between bodies ofhoplite infantry formed up in lineseight ranks deep. However, at LeuctraEpaminondas massed his hoplites on

The death of EpaminondasEpaminondas died from a wound that hesustained at the battle of Mantinea. His lastwords are said to have been: “I have lived longenough, for I die unconquered.”

ANCIENT GREEK COMMANDERSFIGHTING ON SEA AND LAND, whether

against the Persians or against one another, the

ancient Greeks earned a formidable reputation as

skilful and tenacious warriors. In the city-state era, up to

the 4th century BCE, their citizen armies were led by

commanders who were “rst among equals” – leaders

who often fought on foot alongside fellow-citizens. The

rise of the Macedonian king, Philip II, and his son,

Alexander (later, the Great), transformed Greek warfare

and political life. After Alexander’s conquests, Hellenistic

commanders had large, complex professional armies at

their disposal and sought imperial power as their goal.

EPAMINONDAS

THEMISTOCLES

the left of his line in a powerful bodysome 50 lines deep, while his centreand right avoided combat, screenedby cavalry and lightly equippedskirmishers. The Thebans crushedthe Spartan right and weighed intothe rest of the enemy line from theank with devastating effect.

GROWING OPPOSITIONEpaminondas then pursued a subtlestrategy of undermining Spartanpower by freeing the subject statesfrom which Sparta drew its slaveworkforce. His success inevitably ledto the formation of alliances to opposehim. In 362 BCE Epaminondas facednot only Sparta but Athens and thePeloponnesian city of Mantinea. Hegambled on a pitched battle outside

Mantinea, where a repeat of hisstrategy at Leuctra was successful oncemore, and the enemy was driven fromthe eld. Epaminondas himself wasfatally wounded leading the advancinginfantry and died soon after the battle.

CAMPAIGN Greco-Persian WarDATE September 480 BCELOCATION Straits of Salamis, Greece

When Persian ruler Xerxes occupied Athens

in 480 BCE, the Greek fleet lurked nearby atSalamis. Themistocles initiated a plan todestroy the Persians’ numerically superior

navy. He sent an agent to Xerxes to makehim believe the Greek fleet was about to

withdraw. Thinking his enemy on the run,

Xerxes sent part of his fleet to attack theGreek anchorage and the rest to block theescape route to the west. As the Persian

ships entered the enclosed waters of theSalamis strait, they were surprised by theGreek triremes with a series of savage

ramming attacks. The Persians lost around200 warships in the encounter.

SALAMIS

KEY BATTLE

Voting tabletAn Athenian citizen scrawled Themistocles’sname on this piece of pottery, voting for hisexile from the city of Athens.

16

H E R O E S

O F T H E A N C I E N T W

O R L D


19/362

PYRRHUS OF EPIRUS


failed to reduce the most stoutlydefended Carthaginian strongholdsand alienated local Greeks throughdictatorial policies. In 275 BCE hereturned to southern Italy for yetanother round against Rome. AtBeneventum, ghting an enemy thatwas no longer shocked by elephants,the most he could claim was a draw.Short of money and troops, Pyrrhusreturned to Greece, where he seizedthe throne of Macedon. However, hiscampaigns were brought to an abruptend during street ghting in the cityof Argos. An old woman threw a tiledown on his head from a rooftopand a soldier severed his unconscioushead from his shoulders.

KING OF MACEDON

BORN 382 BCE DIED 336 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Third Sacred War,

War against AthensKEY BATTLE Chaeronea 338 BCE

Macedonia was a backwardkingdom on the northern fringeof the Grecian world when Philipcame to the throne in 359 BCE. Aruler of exceptional energy andvision, he created a world-beatingarmy as the vehicle for his ambitions.Its strike force was the Companion

KING OF EPIRUS AND MILITARY

ADVENTURER

BORN 319 BCE DIED 272 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Pyrrhic WarKEY BATTLES Asculum 279 BCE, Beneventum275 BCE

cavalry, a body of Macedonianaristocrats who formed the king’spersonal entourage and were usuallyled by him in battle. There was alsoan aristocratic Macedonian infantryelite, equipped like Greek hoplites,but the majority of Philip’s infantry

were light-armoured professionalswith long spears known as “sarissas”.Operating in a phalanx of greatdepth, they were trained to carryout disciplined manoeuvres. In thecourse of expanding his kingdom,

ONE MORE SUCH VICTORY

AND I AM FINISHED!PYRRHUS OF EPIRUS, AT THE BATTLE OF ASCULUM, 279 BCE

Gold victory medalStruck at Tarsus, Turkey, in the 2nd centuryBCE, this medal bears Philip’s portrait. Thebeard and furrowed brow signify maturity.

War elephantThe Greeks discovered the value of war

elephants through their encounters withthe armies of Persia and northern India.

Worthy leaderHannibal is said to have described Pyrrhusof Epirus as second only to Alexanderthe Great as a militarycommander.

Philip also co-opted light horsemanfrom Thessaly into his forces. TheGreek city-states proved incapableof resisting Philip’s forces, althoughhis campaigns cost him an eye in thesiege of Methoni.

SEEKING REVENGEAt Chaeronea in 338 BCE Philipdecisively defeated the armies ofAthens and Thebes. He assumedleadership of the Greek cities and hadhimself authorized to lead a campaignof revenge against the Persian empirein the name of Greece. His advanceguard had already crossed into Asiawhen Philip was assassinated by oneof his bodyguards at Aegae.

Pyrrhus of Epirus was a Greekmilitary adventurer who fought forwealth and power in the unstableMediterranean world of the post-Alexander era. As a young man hetook part in the struggles betweenAlexander’s successors – the MacedonAntigonids and the Ptolemies ofEgypt – switching sides as it suited

his interests. His campaigns in Greece,where he was established as king ofthe small state of Epirus, created areputation that travelled far.

In 281 BCE Tarentum, a Greek cityin southern Italy, asked Pyrrhus tohelp defend it against the Romans,whose expansionist republic wasthreatening the independence ofall the region’s cities. Pyrrhus, whowould have barely heard of Rome,doubtless sensed an opportunity foreasy victories and personal conquest.He arr ived in Tarentum in 280 BCEwith 25,000 men and 20 elephants – these animals already commonplacein battles fur ther east, but previouslyunknown in Italy. At rst the strength

of his cavalry and theshock effect of his

elephants gave him

a comfortable winover the Romansat nearby Heraclea.But the following

year, at Asculum, hewas victorious only

at the expense of hugelosses. This is the battle

that gave rise to the term“Pyrrhic victory”.

AN IGNOBLE ENDAt this point, Pyrrhus wasdistracted from the struggle withRome by a new invitation, toaid the Greek cities of Sicilyagainst the Carthaginians. Hecampaigned on the island forthree years and had himselfproclaimed king of Sicily, but

PHILIP II OF MACEDON

1 5 0 0 B C E 5 0 0 C E

17


20/362

AN CI EN T GR EE K CO MM AN DERS

KING OF MACEDON AND EMPEROR OF

PERSIA BY CONQUEST

BORN 356 BCE DIED 323 BCE

KEY CONFLICTS Conquest of Persian Empire,Invasion of IndiaKEY BATTLES Chaeronea 338 BCE,Granicus 334 BCE, Issus 333 BCE, Gaugamela(Arbela) 331 BCE, Hydaspes 326 BCE

Arguably the most successful militarycommander of all time, Alexanderof Macedon conquered an empireextending from Greece to India ina life that lasted a mere 32 years.

His father, Philip II, ensured that hewas blooded in war at an early age.At the battle of Chaeronea, the keyencounter in Philip’s campaign toestablish Macedonian dominanceover the Greek city-states, the18-year-old Alexander was awardedcommand of the left wing of Philip’sline of battle. He came through thetest with ying colours, the rst toforce a breach in the enemy line.

Alexander inherited from hisfather the ambitious project for aninvasion of the Persian empire. Assoon as his hold on the Macedonianthrone was secure, he campaigned inthe Balkans and Greece to quellopposition before leaving for Asia.

ATTACKING PERSIA Alexander’s infamous destruction ofthe rebellious city of Thebes was therst of many examples of his ruthless

use of terror to deter potential revolt.By 334 he was ready to cross theHellespont into Persian-ruled Anatolia,heading an army consisting of some40,000 infantry and 5,000 cavalry.The expedition was carefully prepared,

TIMELINE

THE BATTLE OF GRANICUS

Alexander at IssusIn a relief from c.320 BCE, Alexander

(left) is shown wearing thelion’s-head helmet of his”ancestor” Heracles.

A city foundedThe building of the Egyptian city of Alexandria,fancifully depicted here by a Renaissance artist,was decreed by Alexander in 331 BCE. He founded16 cities bearing his name, most of them in Asia.

ALEXANDER THE GREAT

Meanwhile the Persians delivered apotentially deadly strategic counter-punch, employing Greek mercenaryforces to thrust through the Aegean

towards Greece and Macedon itself.

DEFEATING DARIUSWhen Alexander’s army marchedinto Syria in the winter of 333 ,it was reasonable for the Persianemperor, Darius III, to believe thatthe Macedonians were falling into atrap, for his much larger forces were

advancing westwards to crushthe invaders. But Alexander

was condent that if he couldbring the Persians to battle,he would defeat them. The two

armies met on the plain at Issus.Darius adopted a prudent defensive

posture; Alexander gambled onall-out attack. The super ior

aggression of theMacedonian cavalry,led by Alexander in

person, carried theday, driving in the

Persian left ank.Darius ed to avoidcapture, his army

totally shattered.Alexander found the whole

eastern Mediterranean opened

with siege equipment in supportand supply ships shadowing the army’smoves along the coast. At the RiverGranicus in Anatolia, Alexanderencountered an army assembled bythe local Persian governor. It wasnearly his last battle for, recklesslyleading the cavalry charge across theriver, he was surrounded by enemiesand almost killed. His boldness

nonetheless carried the day.The fate of the expedition lookedmost uncertain for a time. Some ofthe Greek cities of western Anatoliaproved less than enthusiastic aboutbeing liberated by Alexander’s army.

18

■ 340 BCE Aged 16, Alexande r rulesMacedon as regent in the absence of his father,Philip II; he crushes an uprising in Thrace.

■ 338 BCE At the battle of ChaeroneaAlexander heads the decisive cavalry chargethat leads to the defeat of Athenian andTheban forces by the Macedonian army.

■ 336 BCE Alexande r succeeds to theMacedonian throne after the assassinationof his father.

■ 335 BCE He has the city of Thebes razedto the ground as a punishment for rebellingagainst his authority.

■ 334 BCE Advancing with his army intoAsia, Alexander’s personal leadership wins a

victory in his first encounter with the Persiansat the battle of Granicus (May).

■ 333 BCE Advancing across Anatolia intoSyria, Alexander, though vastly outnumbered,defeats the Persian ruler, Darius III, at thebattle of Issus (November).

■ 332 BCE To halt Persian naval operationsin the Mediterranean, Alexander continuessouth along the coast to capture their ports.His progress is delayed by hard-fought siegesof Tyre and Gaza. He eventually enters Egypt,

where he founds the city of Alexandria (331BCE

).

■ 331 BCE Marching east from Egypt intothe heart of the Persian empire, Alexanderencounters Darius III for the second time atGaugamela (October). The Persians are routed.

■ 330 BCE Alexander occupies the Persianceremonial capital, Persepolis, which isdestroyed by fire. He claims the successionto the Persian throne on the death of Darius.

■ 329–327 BCE A lexander campaigns inSogdiana and Bactria in central Asia, taking aBactrian bride, Roxana.

■ 326 BCE Alexander invades northernIndia and defeats Parvataka (King Porus) at thebattle of the Hydaspes (July). Alexander wishesto advance further into India but his veteranMacedonian troops refuse to go any further.He is badly wounded during the siege ofMultan (December).

■ 325 BCE Alexander sends a fleet to explorethe Persian Gulf while leading his army backto Persia overland.

■ 324 BCE Alexande r faces down a mutinyby the Macedonian veterans at Opis.

■ 323 BCE His constant campaigning endswhen he dies of a fever in Babylon (13 June).

H E R O E S

O F T H E A N C I E N T W

O R L D


21/362


up to conquest. Pressing south intoEgypt, he was greeted as a successorto the pharaohs. For most leadersthis would surely have been themoment for consolidation after analready impressive triumph. Alexanderthought only of total victory overPersia. He forced Darius to givebattle at Gaugamela (pp.22–23),where the Macedonian cavalry

again achieved a victoryagainst great numerical odds.

RULING STYLEAlexander continued tocampaign, asserting hisauthority over thePersian empire’sprovinces further tothe east. His relationswith his followers,changed by the scaleof his success, becameintermittently fraught.His style of commandhad always been likethat of a tribal warbandleader. He foughtshoulder to shoulderwith his companions,and ate and drank withthem (the latter to excess). Yet his style of leadership

– as an “equal” withsenior authority – satuneasily alongside thetriumphant Alexander’s pretensions.He claimed descent from the godHeracles and the legendary heroAchilles. There were plots, rows, andmutinies. Alexander had his second-in-command, Philotas, executed, and

19

THE COMPANION CAVALRY

KEY TROOPS

Godlike featuresAn idealized marble portrait of Alexanderdepicts him as the god Apollo. ThisRoman copy is based on a Greek original,dating from around the time of his death.

killed another close companion,Clitus the Black, during a drunkenargument with him.

Nothing sated Alexander’s thirstfor military adventure. In 326 heinvaded northern India, overcomingstiff resistance at the battle ofHydaspes, where the Macedonians

learned to counter Indian warelephants. Losses in the battle

were severe and, soon after,Alexander’s army refusedto follow him any further.The soldiers forcedhim to turn backalong the Indus tothe sea. En routeAlexander suffereda severe woundwhile leading anattack on Mallinear the RiverHydraotes.He nallyarrived backin Persia in325 after aharrowing desertmarch unwiselyundertaken. Hismind was still full ofplans for fresh campaignsinto Arabia and north

Africa, but his body hadrepeatedly taken viciouspunishment. Scarred

with the marks of his numerouswounds, Alexander succumbed toa fever. He died at the palace ofNebuchadnezzar II in Babylonwithout having secured thesuccession to his empire.

The Macedonian aristocracy formed an elitebody of horsemen known as the Companioncavalry. Numbering several thousand, theyformed the royal entourage and were led into

battle by the king in person. Each horsemanwas equipped with a long lance and a kopis – a short curved sword – and wore a metalcuirass and helmet. The Companion cavalryoccupied the place of honour on the right ofthe line of battle, while light cavalry fromThessaly were positioned on the left. Alexander

used the Companion cavalry as ashock force to deliver a killer blow,typically aiming to charge into the

flank of the enemy line and targetthe centre where the opposingcommander was stationed.

A MEDIEVAL ARTIST’S IMPRESSION OFALEXANDER’S COMPANION CAVALRY

Bronze weaponDating from the 4thcentury BCE, this typeof arrowhead wouldhave been used byAlexander’s forces.

HE DISPELLED THEIR FEAR IN THE MIDST OF

DANGER BY HIS OWN FREEDOM FROM FEAR.ARRIAN, THE ANABASIS OF ALEXANDER, C.145 CE


22/362

Alexander plunged into the river with 13 cavalry squadrons.He was now advancing through a hail of enemy missilestowards a steep and heavily defended bank, while negotiating

a current that swept his men off theirfeet and pulled them under. His

leadership seemed foolhardy and

reckless rather than prudent. Yet he

persisted and with great effort and

hardship reached the opposite bank of

the river, which was wet and slippery

with mud. He was at once forced into

a chaotic battle, man against man…

ALEXANDER:

LEADER AND LEGEND

ALEXANDER WAS AN INSPIRATIONAL leader of men. The Roman histor ianPlutarch described how, during ahard desert march, some soldiersbrought Alexander scarce water ina helmet. In full view of the armyhe refused to drink, declaring that heintended to share the sufferings ofhis men. The army responded byproclaiming that it would followsuch a king anywhere.

Alexander thoroughly understoodthe effectiveness of such theatricalgestures in winning the support ofhis men when conditions were hard.He made the ordinary soldier feelthat he identied with their hardships,while at the same time stirring theirpride with a consciously cultivated

image as their heroic and exceptionalleader. He is also descr ibed as taking

ALEXANDER’S NATURAL PLACE inwar was at the head of his cavalry.This style of command, leading fromthe front, was imposed on him byhis society and culture. The rulerof Macedonia was the leader of awarband, required to prove himselfand dominate his followers by theevidence of his ghting prowess.

But Alexander’s boldness went

beyond this basic requirement. Byleading a charge across the RiverGranicus, to attack an enemy in astrong position, Alexander seriouslyput at risk his army’s key asset:himself. He was nearly killed in the

melee, and was only saved by thetimely intervention of a companion.Ancient historians often criticizedAlexander for his impetuousness andhis unnecessary r isk-taking, thoughsometimes they excused these faultson the grounds of his relative youth.

Yet Alexander was also an acute judge of the psychology of warfare,recognizing that condent boldness

would usually triumph in the face ofan over-cautious enemy. Shock andsurprise were key elements in hisstrategy and tactics, as he wrong-footed opponents through his speedand unbridled aggression.

AN CI EN T GR EE K CO MM AN DERS

“His life was one longdream of glory.”

The Life of Alexander ( C.100 CE ) byPlutarch , in which the historian describesthe opposed crossing of the River Granicus

by Alexander and his cavalry in May 334 BCE .

Iskander (19th century) by Abai Qunanbajuly.This Kazakh poem reflects the high, even idealized,

repute of Alexander in central Asian cultures.

His soldiers shouted out to Alexanderto lead them forward boldly…declaring that they would not regardthemselves as weary, or thirsty, or as

mortals at all, so long asthey had such a king.

special care with morale-buildinggestures after battles, conductingelaborate funeral ceremonies anddistributing rewards to soldiers whohad performed well in combat. Thefact that he usually had wounds ofhis own gave greater force to the

bond between the army and itscharismatic commander.

The Life of Alexander ( C.100 CE ) byPlutarch , which describes an incident

that took place during the pursuit ofDarius III after the battle of Gaugamela.

20

ROMAN COPY OF A 3RD-CENTURY BCE

GREEK BUST OF ALEXANDER

H E R O E S O F T H E A N C I E N T W

O R L D


23/362


Defeating great beastsIn the battle of Hydaspes, fought in India in326 BCE, Alexander triumphed over Indianruler Parvataka (known as King Porus),defeating his army of war elephants.

Much country waswasted, so thatevery spot was filledwith fire and devastation

and… the number of persons killed reached manymyriads. By the destruction of these tribes, all theirneighbours were terrified and submittedto Alexander.

“No mortal on earth excelledor equalled him.”

ALEXANDER NEVER HESITATED to use maximum force to achievehis aims. He showed no specialrespect for human life and saw littledistinction between civilians andcombatants. He could show mercywhen it was politically desirable,

but terror was also a weapon in his

arsenal. His campaigns in theIndus Valley in 325 BCE have beencharacterized by some historians as“genocidal”, but to Alexander suchlaying waste was no more than asuitable punishment for those whoresisted his progress, and a practical

means of imposing his authority.

Anabasis of Alexander (2nd century CE )

by Arrian , part of the historian’s finalassessment of Alexander’s career.

Library of History (60–30 BCE ) by

Diodorus Siculus , on Alexander’scrushing of the Orietae tribe duringthe Indus campaign in 325 BCE .

21

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E


24/362


25/362


26/362

25


27/362

Discipline was mostly excellent and lower levelofficers could be trusted to display resolution andinitiative. Engineering skills were at a premium,seen in the construction of roads and defensivefortications all across the empire in peace andwar, as well as in siege works on campaign.Strategically the Romans were bold andaggressive in their expansionist phase, makingample use of terror to ensure the submissionof their enemies. At a later stage they adopted

a subtle diplomatic approach, as they becamedependent on alliances and the incorporationof “barbarian” troops into their ghting forces.

ROME’S OPPONENTSThe enemies the Romans encountered – whennot ghting one another – were varied indeed.In the 3rd century the Car thaginians, basedin north Africa, challenged the rising RomanRepublic in the Punic Wars, a conict that began

as a contest for control of Sicily and ended asa ght to the death between two civilizations.Extending its power next into the eastern

Mediterranean, Rome proved its superiorityto the states that had succeeded to Alexander’sempire, but was often beaten by the armies ofwestern Asia – Parthians and Sassanids – whichdepended chiey on mounted warr iors. Inwestern Europe Celtic and Germanic tribesput up stiff resistance to Rome, inicting the

occasional severe defeat. Mounting incursionsby migrating Goths, Vandals, and the erce Hunseventually put the western Roman empireunder impossible strain.

Roman commanders did not lead from the frontin the reckless manner of Alexander of Macedon,but they did generally share most of the risks andhardships of their men. Emperor Constantius, in355 , wrote that a commander should “inspireby example without being rash” and “go as abrave man to lead other brave men”.

Commanders directed sieges and engineeringworks in person, as well as carrying out theessential religious functions of sacrice and the

reading of omens. In battle their position was justbehind the front line, ready to intervene wheretroops needed encouragement or support. In thewords of a 1st-century writer, the general’schief duty was to “show himself to those indanger, praise the brave, threaten the cowardly,encourage the lazy… bring aid to the wearied”. Tenacity was probably the most striking qualityof Roman leaders. A commander might beforgiven for losing a battle after an honourable

ght, but he was expected to regroup his forcesand renew the campaign until he eventually won.

THE POWER OF THE LEGIONSThe close bond that often developed betweenRoman legionaries and their immediatecommander, rather than the central government,was one of the causes of the repeated coups andcivil wars that scarred Roman history. Power inthe Republic and the empire ultimately rested

with the legions.Tactically Roman armies were limited to asmall range of battleeld manoeuvres drilled intothe troops, enlivened by the occasional ambush.

OME DEVELOPED one of the most efficient ghting forces

in the ancient world, its army evolving from a citizen militia

into regular professional legions. High command was mostly

entrusted to aristocratic amateurs – powerful politicians but

only part-time soldiers, often without training or much military experience.

Despite this haphazard system, commanders as inspired as Scipio Africanus

and Julius Caesar emerged in the course of Rome’s endless warfare against

enemies ranging from Carthaginians to Parthians to Celtic tribal warriors.

Roman swordAt the height of Rome’s power in the 1stand 2nd centuries CE Roman centurionsused short swords like this gladius ,designed for stabbing in close combat.

R 25

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E

Fighting on horsebackDefeats at the hands of Hannibal’s cavalry ledRome to strengthen its own mounted troops.By the 2nd century BCE its cavalry force wasmade up of a mixture of wealthier Romancitizens (equites, or knights), contingentsfrom Rome’s allies, and mercenaries.

26


28/362

COMMANDERS OFTHE PUNIC WARS

IN THE 2ND CENTURY BCE the Roman

Republic and Carthage – a city-state in north

Africa – vied for dominance of the western

Mediterranean. From 264 to 241 BCE they fought for

control of Sicily in the First Punic War. The Romans won,

but Carthage wanted revenge. In 218 BCE the Second Punic

War began. Carthaginian general Hannibal crossed the

Alps into Italy and defeated the Romans three times in

major battles. Yet Rome fought on. In Scipio Africanus the

Romans found a military genius to match Hannibal and,

in 202 BCE, forced the Carthaginians to surrender. In a

Third Punic War Carthage was utterly destroyed in 146 BCE.

CARTHAGINIAN GENERAL

BORN c.270 BCE DIED 228 BCEKEY CONFLICTS First Punic War,Mercenary WarKEY BATTLES Siege of Drepanum 244–241 BCE,The Saw 239 BCE

Father of the famous Hannibal,Hamilcar was the commander ofCarthaginian forces in Sicily duringthe last crucial phase of the First PunicWar. From 247 BCE he waged a skilfulcampaign with inadequate forces. Hesucceeded in tying down Romantroops around Drepanum and wasstill undefeated when a Carthaginiannaval catastrophe ended the war.

Hannibal negotiated passage for his

mercenaries to Carthage but, deprivedof his leadership and denied their pay,

ROMAN CONSUL AND DICTATOR

BORN c.280 BCE DIED 203 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Second Punic WarKEY BATTLE Tarentum 209 BCE

Quintus Fabius Maximus, known asCunctator (delayer) because of hiswar strategy, was an unlikely Romanhero of the long struggle againstHannibal in the Second Punic War.

A member of Rome’s aristocraticelite, Fabius had a minor militaryreputation won as consul in 233 BCE,when he crushed the Ligurians, atribal people from northern Italy

and southern Gaul, and drove theminto the Alps.

If Fabius played any part in the FirstPunic War, it has not been recorded.But when Hannibal destroyed anarmy led by Consul Gaius Flaminius

in June 217 BCE, it was to thesexagenarian Fabius that thepanicking Romans turnedfor leadership. He wasmade dictator, a six-monthappointment that carriedextraordinary powers tocope with an emergency.

Taking command ofthe Roman army, Fabiusimmediately adoptedthe delaying approachfor which he is famed,shadowing Hannibal’sarmy and harassing his

these tough soldiers soon mutinied. Joined by Libyans and Numidians,they threatened to destroy Carthage.

Hamilcar was by far the mosteffective Carthaginian general inthe brutal suppression of the uprising,known as the Mercenary War.Atrocities were common on both

sides – Hamilcar is said to haveexecuted 40,000 rebels after thebattle of the Saw. He spent the nal years of his life invading Hispania(Spain) and endowing Hannibal witha mission of revenge against Rome.

Thoughtful leaderFabius Cunctator was an unusuallymild-mannered military commander,with a gift for long-term strategicthinking rather than the cut andthrust of the battlefield.

Father and sonThe young Hannibal (in a blue sash) swearseternal enmity to Rome as his father looks on,as imagined by an 18th-century artist. Few

Carthaginian historical sources survive to givea contemporary view of such events.

foragers, but refusing pitchedbattle. Understandably, his tacticdid not satisfy most Romans,since it meant the army doing

nothing while Hannibalplundered fertile terrain.

Discontent soon found afocus in Fabius’s second-in-command, Marcus MinuciusRufus. After a humiliatingepisode in which Hannibalgave Fabius the slip undercover of darkness, Minuciusrestored some Roman pridewith a successful attack onCarthaginian forces outsideGerunium. Although only askirmish, it conrmed thegeneral opinion that Fabius

was the wrong man forthe task. At the end of hissix-month dictatorship he wasnot reappointed and his tactics

were abandoned. Theresult was the

defeat at Cannae in 216 (pp.30–31),probably the worst military disasterin Roman history.

Fabius’s military genius was nowevident to all. He was elected as aconsul for the next two years, andwas to play a leading role in restoringRoman morale and rebuilding thearmy. The war against Hannibal wascontinued by others on the lines thathe had laid down. Denied the chanceof a decisive victory in battle, theCarthaginians’ position weakenedover time and Rome grew stronger.

FINAL TRIUMPHElected consul for the third time in209 BCE, Fabius achieved a last victoryin the recapture of the major southern

Italian city of Tarentum, lost toHannibal three years earlier. He neverled an army again, although he didlater oppose Scipio’s plan to invadeAfrica – for tunately for Rome, hiscaution did not prevail.

HAMILCAR BARCA

FABIUS CUNCTATOR

26


O R L D


29/362

COMMANDERS OF TH E PUNIC WARS28


30/362

CARTHAGINIAN GENERAL

BORN 247 BCE DIED 182 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Second Punic War

KEY BATTLES Cannae 216 BCE, Zama 202 BCE

Hannibal Barca was introduced towarfare at an early age, learningmilitary wisdom from his father,Hamilcar. As a youth, he foughtin the Carthaginian campaignsin Spain, which were effectivelya Barca family enterpr ise. Heinherited supreme commandof the army in Spain in 221 BCE.

Roman sources also tell that heinherited his father’s burningdesire to avenge Carthage’sdefeat by Rome in the FirstPunic War (264–261 BCE).

INVADING ITALY Whether or not Hannibaldeliberately provoked warwith Rome by attacking thecity of Saguntum in 219 BCE,the daring invasion of Italy

that followed was well prepared, withthe route across Gaul and over theAlps scouted in advance. Hannibaltook the Romans by surprise – theyhad assumed that he would stay inSpain and await their counterattack.The journey was hazardous in the

Numidian horsemen, who drove theRoman cavalry into ight. An auraof success began to gather abouthim, and local Celtic tribesmenocked to join his forces. TheRomans intended to stamp onthis invasion before it wentany further. They shifted an

army north to confrontHannibal at the RiverTrebia, but the Romanleaders were tactically

naive and over-optimistic.

S S

extreme. Along the way Hannibal’sarmy was harr ied by local tribes. Thecrossing of the Alps was tough formen and animals, especially for

Hannibal’s war elephants. Only afraction of the forces that had leftSpain nally reached northern Italy.A rst clash at the River Ticinorevealed the quality of Hannibal’s

HANNIBAL

HANNIBAL’S ARMY KEY TROOPS

Hannibal on the moveThis representation of Hannibal by a 16th-century Italian artist attempts to capture theexoticism of a commander from Africa. The typeof elephants he used is disputed, though theymay have been a small African forest species.

Punic armourThis gold Carthaginian breastplate,dating from around the time of Hannibal,would have been worn by a seniorcommander for ceremonial display.

Hannibal’s force in Italy was an amalgamof mercenaries from Carthage’s northAfrican allies or tributary states and fromSpain. Each group had its speciality, whethersturdy Libyan foot soldiers, nimble Numidianhorsemen armed with javelin and spear,slingshot skirmishers from the BalearicIslands, or Spanish hill tribesmen withdistinctive short swords. This multiculturalarray was united by a common allegiance toits charismatic general, who was supportedby a number of lieutenants drawn from

the Carthaginian aristocracy, includingHannibal’s own relatives.


O R L D

AN CI EN T ROM E AN D IT S EN EM IES 29


31/362

TIMELINE

Hannibal drew them into anattack across the r iver, then crushedtheir wings with his cavalry, whileconcealed troops emerged to strikethe advancing Romans from the rear.The Roman legionary infantry hadto smash through Hannibal’s centreand abandon the battleeld to escapebeing massacred.

The Romans failed to learnfrom this reverse. The following year

Hannibal moved rapidly south intoEtruria. For a second time a Romanarmy hastened north to give battle.Hannibal selected the perfect site foran ambush where the road passed

point onwards, Hannibal’s campaignlost its clarity of purpose. He hadachieved his original objective: thehumiliating defeat of Rome. Butsince the Romans would not make

peace, Hannibal was left to campaignaround southern Italy for years,making alliances and capturing orlosing cities, winning indecisivebattles, and somehow keeping hisarmy united. The last chance of atruly decisive victory was lost whenhis brother, Hasdrubal, commandinga fresh invading army, was killedin northern Italy at the battle ofMetaurus. Afterwards his head wasthrown into Hannibal’s camp.

In 203 BCE, after 16 years in Italy,Hannibal was recalled to defendCarthage against a Roman invasion.He faced Scipio Africanus at Zamawith an army of raw recruits, whilethe invaluable Numidian cavalrywere now ghting for the Romans.Hannibal was defeated, and Carthagewas forced to make peace onhumiliating terms. Hannibal spentthe remainder of his life eeing

Roman vengeance around theMediterranean. In his last battle in190 BCE, he commanded the Syrianeet of Antiochus III against Rhodes.Finally, Hannibal chose suicide ratherthan submit to Roman captivity.

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E

Cavalry tacticsThe encounter at the River Trebia in December218 BCE was Hannibal’s first significant victoryin his Italian campaign. His cavalry played amajor part, provoking the Romans with asuccession of attacks on their boundaries.

between steep hills and the shoreof Lake Trasimene. The Romansmarched into the trap and weremassacred as Hannibal’s army moveddown from the heights, catching

them with their backs to the lake.After this crushing defeat, FabiusCunctator took charge, signallinga change of tactics. By refusingto be drawn into battle, Fabius leftHannibal with the task of keeping

his army and its animalssupplied with food and

fodder for an extendedperiod in hostile terr itory. At

the end of the campaigning seasonHannibal faced being trapped for thewinter on a plain that his troops hadalready stripped bare of supplies. Heescaped only by slipping past Fabiusand his army at night, reportedlycreating a diversion using cattlewith torches tied to their horns.

FRUITLESS VICTORY In the summer of 216 BCE Hannibaland the Roman leadership, eager forbattle, engaged at Cannae (pp.30–31).

This proved the greatest triumph ofHannibal’s career, but its aftermathhas puzzled histor ians, for Hannibalmade no effort to occupy anddestroy the city of Rome, although itlay open to attack. Indeed, from that

OF ALL THAT BEFELL THE ROMANS

AND CARTHAGINIANS, GOOD OR

BAD, THE CAUSE WAS ONE MAN ANDONE MIND HANNIBAL.POLYBIUS, THE HISTORIES, LATE 2ND CENTURY BCE

■ 237 BCE Nine-year-old Hannibalaccompanies his father, Hamilcar, on campaignin Spain; he reportedly vows to fight Romewith “fire and steel”.

■ 221 BCE Hannibal takes command of theCarthaginian army in Spain after the death ofhis brother-in-law, Hasdrubal the Fair.

■ 219 BCE Hannibal besieges and capturesthe Spanish city of Saguntum, an ally of Rome;the Romans respond with a declaration ofwar on Carthage.

■ 218 BCE Marching from Spain throughGaul, Hannibal leads an army across the Alpsinto northern Italy. He defeats the Romans in askirmish at Ticinus (November) and in a largerencounter at Trebia (December).

■ 217 BCE Hannibal loses the sight of an eyethrough an infection. He successfully ambushesthe army of Roman consul Flaminius at LakeTrasimene (24 June), killing some 15,000Roman soldiers.

■ 216 BCE Ro man forces suffera catastrophic defeat atCannae (2 August), butHannibal chooses notto march on Rome,

instead establishinghimself at Capua.

■ 212 BCE Hannibal seizesthe city ofTarentum,although aRoman garrisonholds out inits citadel.

■ 211 BCE Hannibal

advances to the wallsof Rome but is forcedto withdraw south after failing to break theRoman siege. Capua falls to the Roman forces.

■ 207 BCE Han nibal’s brother, Hasdrubal,leads reinforcements to join him in Italy,but is defeated and killed at the battle ofthe Metaurus.

■ 203 BCE Hannibal is recalled from Italyto north Africa, where Roman general ScipioAfricanus is threatening Carthage.

■ 202 BCE Scipio’s army defeat s Hannibalat the battle of Zama (19 October); theCarthaginians are forced to accept punitivepeace terms.

■ 195 BCE Forced into exile by his politicalenemies in Carthage, Hannibal becomes ageneral in the service of Antiochus III, theSeleucid ruler of Syria.

■ 190 BCE The Romans defeat Antiochus IIIat the battle of Magnesia; Hannibal moves on

to avoid falling into Roman hands.

■ 182 BCE While at the court of King Prusiasof Bithynia, Hannibal commits suicide, takinga fatal dose of poison to avoid being handedover to the Romans.

HANNIBALBUST FOUND

AT CAPUA

COMMANDERS OF THE PUNIC WARS30


32/362

legionary infantry. He saw that thistactic offered the potential to springa trap. Opposite the legionar ies hepositioned Spanish and Gallic footsoldiers – erce tribal ghters butno match for the Romans – in closecombat. On each ank of theselightly clad troops he placed hisdisciplined Libyan infantry, wearingRoman-style armour and packedin dense formation. Both sides had

their cavalry on the wings.RESOUNDING VICTORY When battle was joined, the Romaninfantry beat a path forwards into theCarthaginian centre, where Hannibalhad positioned himself. The opposingheavy cavalry fought on the wing nextto the r iver, the Carthaginians underHasdrubal breaking through to theRoman rear. On the other wingHannibal’s swift Numidian horsemen

chased the cavalry of Rome’s Italianallies from the battleeld.

The Romans still appeared to bewinning the battle in the centre, butas the legionaries pressed forwards,Hannibal ordered his Libyans toturn inwards and squeeze the nowdisorganized Roman infantry fromthe anks. The legions were alreadybeing crushed by this attack whenHannibal’s victor ious cavalry charged

in from the rear, completing a doubleenvelopment. Few Romans escapedthe ensuing slaughter. Hannibal’sbattleplan passed into history andwas admired by later commanders.

LOCATIONApulia, southeast ItalyCAMPAIGN

Carthaginian invasionof Italy, during the

Second Punic Wars (218–201 BCE)DATE 2 August 216 BCEFORCES Carthaginians c.56,000;Romans c.86,000CASUALTIES Carthaginians c.6,000–8,000killed; Romans c.48,000 killed, c.20,000

taken prisoner

At the start of August 216 BCE Hannibal’s army faced a much largerforce of eight legions led by theRoman consuls Lucius AemiliusPaulus and Gaius Terentius Varro.Hannibal had captured a key supplydepot at Cannae, near the RiverAudus (Ofanto), hoping to drawthe Romans into attacking him.The Romans needed no urging to

give battle, condent that they werestrong enough to defeat the invader.

TAKING POSITIONSOn the morning of 2 August theRoman forces crossed the Audusand took up a conned positionbetween the river and high ground.Although Hannibal could see thatthis might prevent his superiorcavalry outanking the Roman line,

he also crossed the river and formedhis army for combat.Hannibal knew that the Romans

would try to win the battle in thecentre through the strength of their

HANNIBAL ATCANNAE

HASDRUBAL MARHABAL

PAULUS VARRO

HANNIBAL

Cannae

A u fi d u

s

A u fi d

u s

KEY

Hannibal’s infantry

Hannibal’s cavalryHannibal’s camp

Roman infantryRoman cavalry

Roman camp

① Hannibal’s infantryadopts a crescent formation,drawing the Roman infantryinto the centre

② On the left Hasdrubalrouts the Roman cavalry,then sweeps around therear of the Roman lines

⑤ Carthaginian infantryadvances to close the trap

around the Romans

⑥ The densely packedRoman infantry is encircled

and slaughtered

③ In the centreHannibal orders hisinfantry to executea controlled retreat

④ The cavalryof the Romanallies is drivenfrom the field

0 km

10.5 0 miles

10.5

N


O R L D


33/362


34/362



35/362

ACTIUMKEY BATTLE

ROMAN EMPEROR

BORN 23 September 63 BCE DIED 19 August 14 CEKEY CONFLICTS Roman Civil Wars

KEY BATTLES Philippi 42 BCE, Actium 31 BCE

Known as Octavian in his youth, theEmperor Augustus was the adoptedson of Julius Caesar. Only 19 yearsold when Caesar was killed in 44, Octavian was not expected toprove a major player in the ensuingpower struggle. In 43 heformed the second triumvirate (analliance of three men) with Marcus

Aemilius Lepidus and Caesar’sright-hand man, Mark Antony.His decision to join Antony in hiscampaign to avenge Caesar’s deathput him in a subordinate role. Whenthe pair faced Caesar’s assassins, Brutusand Cassius, at Philippi in 42 BCE, hismilitary inexperience was only tooevident. He escaped capture when hiscamp was overrun by Brutus, but putup a determined defence whileAntony routed the enemy.

Over the following years Octavian’sruthlessness and single-minded pursuitof power proved more crucial thanhis command skills, which could besupplied by deputies such as Agr ippa.

Augustus in gloryThe Gemma Augustea , a cameo carved forAugustus, shows him as Jupiter, with the

god’s emblematic eagle at his feet. On hisright sits the goddess Roma.

Octavian’s increasing rivalry with

Antony culminated in a public quarrelin 33 and the tr iumvirate endedthe next year. His conduct of thecivil war after Antony and Cleopatra’sdefeat at Actium and the annexationof Egypt in 30 showed implacablewillpower, organizational ability, anda clear grasp of overall strategy.

A NEW TITLERepublican forms were kept up, but,

in effect, this victory made Octaviansole ruler of the Roman empire. Hewas awarded the title “Augustus”,meaning “revered” In 27 BCE.

Augustus’s throne had been wonin war and rested on the support ofthe army. He turned the legions intopermanent formations with a strongsense of identity, while ensuring theywere mostly employed far from Romeand were well rewarded. Augustus’sfour decades of absolute rule brought

expansion of the Roman empire andmuch ghting at the periphery, buthe no longer campaigned in person.However, this did not stop him takingcredit for his legions’ victories.

Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa was a close

companion of Octavian (the futureEmperor Augustus) from childhood.A more gifted combat commanderthan Octavian, Agrippa was hisright-hand man during the wars thatfollowed Caesar’s death. He initiallycampaigned on land, but in 37 the threat posed by Sextus Pompeius, youngest son of Pompey the Great,turned him into a naval commander.

A SUPERIOR FLEET

Based in Sicily, Sextus had controlof the Roman eet, which he usedto blockade the Italian coast. Agripparesponded by turning Lake Avernus(near present-day Naples) into a navalbase, linked to the sea by a canal. Inthis safe harbour he built a new eetand trained crews in the use of heavyon-board artillery, including rock-throwing catapults and the arpex,

which hurled a grappling iron.In 36 Octavian led an armyto Sicily, backed by Agrippa’s eet.Sextus sent out his own eet to give

battle, but Agrippa outmanoeuvredhim and trapped him against theshore at Naulochus. Sextus’s eet wasalmost totally destroyed. Agrippa wenton to command Octavian’s ships in

battle raged, Cleopatra was able to slip awayto sea with her treasure-laden transport ships.

Antony abandoned the battle to join her,leaving his warships to be harried into

surrender. Octavian pursued the fugitivesto Egypt, where both committed suicide.

the blockade of Antony andCleopatra at Actium, winning adecisive victory. He continued toserve Augustus to the end of his life,

ghting in campaigns that stretchedacross the far-reaching corners of theempire – against the Cantabrians inSpain, the Cimmerians in Crimea,and the Pannonians on the Danube.

Thoughtful commanderBusts of Agrippa show a stern, resolute,

and reflective commander. His loyalty toOctavian and his devotion to duty never

wavered, and he adapted his battle skillsto naval warfare with seeming ease.

CAMPAIGN Roman Civil WarDATE 2 September 31 BCELOCATION Ionian Sea, off Western Greece

The battle of Actium was the climax of the

struggle between Mark Antony and Octavianfor control of the Roman world. Forces

commanded by Antony and the Egyptianqueen, Cleopatra, were blockaded by Octavian

on land and by Agrippa at sea.Running short of supplies,Antony led his fleet out of

harbour in an attempt tobreak through the

blockade and forge a

passage to Egypt, butAgrippa’s nimble wargalleys savaged

Antony’s largerquinqueremes. As

ROMAN GENERAL AND ADMIRAL

BORN c.63 BCE DIED 12 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Roman Civil WarsKEY BATTLES Naulochus 36 BCE,Actium 31 BCE

AGRIPPA

AUGUSTUS

THE TWO FAULTS THAT AUGUSTUS

CONDEMNED MOST STRONGLY IN A

MILITARY COMMANDER WERE HASTE AND RECKLESSNESS.

SUETONIUS, THE TWELVE CAESARS, 121 CE

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E

ROME FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE34


36/362

Glorious CaesarThis 18th-century neoclassical statue ofCaesar reflects his status at that time as aninspiration to European kings and generals.He is crowned with a laurel wreath, symbolof military triumph.

Rhine. In 55 and 54 BCE he evensailed across the Channel in punitiveraids on the Celtic tribes of Britain.These campaigns were his personalproject – he had no mandate fromRome to wage aggressive war in Gaul.Part of his motivation was nancial.The plunder enabled him to pay offhis immense debts and to reward theloyalty of his legionaries. But Caesaralso wanted to build a reputation as

an outstanding general to bolster afuture claim to political power, andhe wrote eloquent memoirs of hiscampaigns. However, his victorieswere accompanied by massacres andenslavement – a deliberate use ofterror to subdue resistance.

GALLIC DEFIANCEThe Gauls responded to the mountingthreat to their independence withlarge-scale revolts. In the winter of54–53 BCE an uprising of the Belgictribes led to desperate ghting.Caesar then confronted the evenlarger revolt of an alliance led byVercingetorix of the Averni tribe.With no real superiority over theGauls, Caesar needed outstanding

ROMAN GENERAL AND DICTATOR

BORN 13 July 100 BCEDIED 15 March 44 BCEKEY CONFLICTS Gallic Wars, Roman Civil War

KEY BATTLES Alesia 52 BCE, Pharsalus 48 BCE,Zela 47 BCE, Thapsus 46 BCE

According to Caesar’s biographer,Plutarch, the general was “the equal,as a soldier and a leader of men, ofany commander that has ever been”.Born into a patrician (elite) family inRome, as a young man Caesar servedwith the Roman army in Asia, buthe was not driven by purely military

ambitions. He came to generalship asan essential element in a high-yingRoman political career. In 59 BCE, onthe back of a successful governorshipin Spain, Caesar was elected consuland persuaded by the two most

powerful men in Rome, Pompeyand Crassus, to join them in

an unofficial triumviratedominating Roman

politics. The following year he was

appointedproconsulresponsible for

territories thatincluded Transalpine Gaul (roughlypresent-day France and Belgium). Itwas an appointment that promisedglory and prot, an opportunity that

Caesar grasped to the full.

A GROWING POWER

Rome ruled only the south ofGaul, protecting its interests throughalliances with the Celtic tribes thatcontrolled the rest. These tribes wereoften at war with one another and

with Germanic tribes pressing fromthe east. It was a uid situation thatprovided Caesar with pretexts forpiecemeal military intervention thatin time built up into a full-scalecampaign of conquest.

In his rst year as proconsul, Caesardefeated the Helvetii, a tribe that wastrying to migrate from Switzerland,and crushed Germanic forces ledacross the Rhine by the warrior-kingAriovistus. In the ensuing years Caesarextended his military operations everwider, from the Atlantic to the

JULIUS CAESAR

CAMPAIGN Roman Civil War

DATE 9 August 48 BCELOCATION Thessaly, Greece

At Pharsalus Caesar defeated his great rival

Pompey despite being heavily outnumbered.He used his infantry against Pompey’s

cavalry, ordering them to thrust their spearsinto the horsemen’s faces. This routed the

cavalry and was followed by a vigorous anddecisive infantry push that drove thePompeians from the field.

PHARSALUSKEY BATTLE

HE TOOK OVER 800 CITIES AND

TOWNS BY STORM, SUBDUED 300TRIBES, AND KILLED A MILLION MEN.PLUTARCH, LIFE OF CAESAR, 75 CE


O R L D



37/362

TIMELINE

1 5 0 0 B C E

5 0 0 C E

Roman crested helmetCaesar’s legions would have worn helmets likethis bronze replica, which has guards to protectthe cheeks. Roman helmets had a horse-haircrest for decoration or to denote rank.

Assassination of Julius CaesarCaesar was murdered on the Ides of March(15 March) in 44 BCE by a group of republicansenators outraged by his adoption of the postof dictator-for-life. The assassination triggereda fresh round of civil wars.

qualities to gain victory – speed ofmovement, calculated risk-taking,endurance, and the ability tomotivate his men under pressure.After the siege of Alesia in 52 BCE,Gallic resistance was crushed.

By 49 BCE, when his extended10-year proconsulship drew toan end, Caesar controlled Gaulas a celebrated commander ofloyal, battle-hardened legions.He was in a strong position toclaim high political office. Butin Rome, Pompey, the only manto rival Caesar’s reputation as ageneral, was plotting his downfallwith the Senate’s backing. WhenCaesar led troops across the RiverRubicon, the border with Gaul, hewas raising the standard of revolt.

FACING POMPEY Pompey boasted that he could easily

recruit enough legions to crush theintruder, but Caesar was aggressiveand decisive. In a lightning two-month campaign he occupied thewhole of Italy. Pompey withdrewacross the Adriatic to Macedonia,where he could build up his forces

protected by alarge eet. It was anintelligent move that forced Caesarto take an outrageous r isk to recoverthe momentum of his campaign. In January 48 BCE he ferried part of hisarmy across to Macedonia. He couldnot rely on supplying or reinforcing

his men by sea against an enemywith naval superiority. Pinned downby six months of attritional warfareoutside the port of Dyrrachium,Caesar’s legions were weakened byintermittent ghting, food shortages,and disease. In July Caesar succeeded

in disengagingto march off intonorthern Greece, but

his situation lookeddesperate. Instead of

maintaining a policyof attrition, however, Pompey

allowed himself to be tempted into adecisive pitched battle at Pharsalus inThessaly, where Caesar’s superiorgeneralship carried the day. EvenPompey’s subsequent death inEgypt did not bring an end toeither the civil war or Caesar'scampaigning. Caesar fought inEgypt to aid Queen Cleopatra,

who became his mistress, in herstruggle to take the throne. Hecrushed Pharnaces, king of Pontus,at the battle of Zela, which gave riseto his famous boast: “Veni, Vidi, Vici”(“I came, I saw, I conquered”). In thenorth African expedition against thePompeians in 46 BCE, a desperatestruggle to establish an army on landended in triumph at the battle ofThapsus. Caesar regarded his nalvictory over Pompey’s son at Mundain Spain in 45 BCE as possibly thehardest-won of his career.

COIN SHOWING CAPTURED GALLIC ARMS

■ 80 BCE Serving with the Roman army inAsia, Caesar is awarded the Civic Crown forbravery during the siege of My tilene.

■

c.72 BCE Caesar is elected as a militarytribune and possibly even serves againstSpartacus in the Slave War.

■ 61–60 BCE Caesar is sent to govern partof Spain, where he carries out punitive actionsagainst local tribes.

■ 59 BCE Caesar is appointed consul,forming a political alliance of three men (thetriumvirate), with Crassus and Pompey.

■ 58 BCE Made proconsul of Gaul, Caesar

defeats the Celtic Helvetii at Bibracte and theGermanic Ariovistus at the Vosges.

■ 57 BCE Caesar defeats the Belgic Nerviitribe at the battle of the S ambre.

■ 55 BCE Caesar bridges the Rhine for thefirst time. He also mounts an expedition acrossthe English Channel to land in Kent.

■ 54 BCE A second, larger-scale invasion ofBritain reaches north of the River Thames, butfails to establish a permanent Roman presence.

■ 53 BCE Crassus is killed at Carrhae whileinvading Parthia, terminating the triumvirate.

■ 52 BCE Vercingetorix leads a rebellion ofGallic tribes; Caesar is checked at Gergoviabut triumphs at the siege of Alesia.

■ 49 BCE Caesar crosses the Rubicon intoItaly, initiating a civil war against Pompey.

■ 48 BCE Crossing the Adriatic, Caesar isworsted at Dyrrachium but crushes Pompey

at the battle of Pharsalus. Caesar pursuesPompey to Egypt, where the latter is killed.

■ 47 BCE Caesar secures the Egyptian thronefor Cleopatra VII; he also defeats Pharnaces,king of Pontus, at the battle of Zela.

■ 46 BCE A military expedition to Tunisiaalmost ends in disaster at Ruspina, but Caesarrecovers to defeat Pompey’s supporters at thebattle of Thapsus.

■ 45 BCE Caesar achieves his final victory

over supporters of Pompey at Munda in Spain;he becomes dictator-for-life.

■ 44 BCE Caesar is assassinated in Rome ashe prepares to embark on a campaign againstthe Dacians and Parthians.

ROME FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE36


38/362

CAESAR:DARING TACTICIAN

“He inspired an incredibleloyalty and affection in

his troops.”The Life of Caesar ( C.110 CE ) by Plutarch. The Greek historian contrasts Caesar with

Alexander the Great in Parallel Lives.

Caesar crosses the RubiconWhen Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49 BCE he committed treason. A law prohibited anygeneral from traversing the stream with anarmy – to do so made war inevitable.

BUST OF CAESAR, 27–20 BCE,AFTER A CONTEMPORARY LIKENESS


O R L D



39/362

If Caesar’s troops gave ground hewould often rally them single-handedly,catching individual fugitives by the

throat and forcing them round to face

the enemy again, even if they werepanic-stricken…

“Caesar was powerful inspeech and action, audacious

in every way.” The Civil Wars ( C.150 CE ) by Appian.

A Greek born in Alexandria, Egypt, Appian

wrote extensively on Roman history.

A critical and noreserves were available,Caesar snatched a

shield from a soldier [and] made his way into thefront line… His coming gave them fresh heartand hope; each man wanted to do his best underthe eyes of the commander-in-chief,however desperate the peril.

THIS PASSAGE DESCRIBES the battle

of the Sabis in which Caesar routedthe Belgian Nervii tribe on thebanks of the River Sambre in 57 BCE.While making camp, the legionswere surprised and nearly overrunby tribal warriors attacking out ofthe forest. Caesar and his legioncommanders rallied their men to

ght in improvised formation

around their standards. The Nerviiwere defeated with heavy losses.Caesar would not usually expect tond himself in the front line of abattle, but it was normal for himto be close behind, encouraging thetroops by his presence and urgingthem to give their best.

Commentaries on the Gallic Wars

( C.50 BCE ) by Julius Caesar. Caesar wrotehis account of his campaigns in Gaul in

the third person.

It is a disputable point which was the more remarkablewhen he went to war: his caution or his daring

commanders - history's greatest military leaders (dk publishing) (2011)

Documents