Re: Ancient army numbers

[Macedon]

And it is important that Arrian did think that these casualties were substantial, not average, for a melee action that involved 2,500 Hetairoi among others.

How do you see 2,500 hetairoi (Companion Cavalry) at Gaugamela?

The battle of Gaza saw many cavalrymen killed - as many as 500philoi of Demetrius if the cavalry-centric description of Hieronymus is correct. This from some 2,900 on this wing. Now, it won't do to argue that this is Macedonian against Macedonian because that is not correct ("no less than fifteen hundred horsemen of all kinds"). The losses accorded to to "the Great's" cavalry are court pap. Clearly, at Gaugamela, the Macedonian cavalry lost more than those recorded; Arrian's narrative says as much.

Arrian 3.15.2:
...and Hephaestion himself, as well as Coenus and Menidas, was wounded.

Diod.17.61.3:
Hephaestion was wounded with a spear thrust in the arm; he had commanded the bodyguards. Perdiccas and Coenus, of the general's group, were also wounded, so also Menidas and others of the higher commanders.

Now, we may argue about Hepaestion, but Heckel is surely correct that he led the somatophylakes (= agema of the hypastists). Even if not we have two certainly attested infantry leaders in Coenus (the asthetairoi) and Perdiccas who are wounded in this "skirmish" of cavalry.

I remain to be convinced George.

??? Well... let's see....

First, about Gaza... the casualties reported are "more than 500 men, most of whom were cavalry"... This probably means some 300-350 men. These are the casualties that the defeated side sustained, the side that broke and fled.... Fortunately, the cavalry soon regrouped and covered the retreat, else the casualties would be much more. The cavalry that took part in the fight (along with the rest of the wing, elephants, light infantry etc) is adequately described and mainly are lancers. Also, the "pantodapoi" are not cavalry of all sorts, but cavalry of other "places", more like allied cavalry, but this is a small detail. Yet, this can only be concluded if one compares the use of this word in Diodorus which can have the meaning of "all sorts" but when used for troops, it most always clearly means "of other places/nations etc". Now, Demetrius has at least 1,500 lancers in his numbers and his enemies array against him the strongest 3,000 of their own cavalry. Diodorus clearly says how the first attack was with the xyston lance and then with drawn swords. The battle is described as particularly vigorous and still... the side that breaks into flight only loses the most part of the 500+ casualties... Where exactly do you see this battle clashing with what Arrian suggests? Now... would Demetrios actually have been the victor you might claim that the casualties were somewhat disproportionate, although it is a fact that BOTH sides had xystophorous whereas at Gaugamela the Persians had none. Yet, he wasn't, so I guess you could maintain instead that the casualties were very few...

Now, about Hephaesteon... the text actually reads :

"Ἡφαιστίων μὲν εἰς τὸν βραχίονα ξυστῷ βληθεὶς ἐτρώθη", which is translated as :

"Hephaestion was wounded by a xyston spear that was hurled on his arm." The text is very clear. It was no hand to hand thrust, it was a xyston that was thrown at him...

Moreover, the somatophylacae are not counted among the hypaspistae. They are a small group of men that are supposed to be closest to Alexander and protect him always. In battle, they were not always beside him. They could even lead other units.

Now, I cannot understand your point here. Why cannot infantry be wounded during a cavalry skirmish against them? I fail to see the logic here... Unless you thought that cavalry only skirmished against cavalry which of course never was nor is the case.

Does this answer to these points? As for the companions, yes, at that point in time, Alexander would still have 8 squadrons of hetairoi which would make more than 1800 and less than 2500.