Armour on the Alexander movie?

[FlorivsVirilis]

Hi guys,

I think as most of you can tell, I am more knowledgeable of the Romans than of the Greeks and Macedonians, and relatively new to Hellenistic warfare. However, I have developed a keen interest in the Macedonian army and the armies of the Peloponnesian war/s.

If I get the grades to get into uni, however, we are given assignments on certain areas, but are given freedom with what aspect of that specific area we study. Alexander the Great is one of those 'modules', and I have decided to collect as much info as I can on the Macedonian soldiers of Alexander as I would like to do a study on their battle tactics and equipment.

I was watching Alexander revisited the other day, and dare I say it, to me, the armour seemed pretty good - however, being Hollywood there will definitely be inaccuracies. To what extent (if any) were the Phalangites, peltasts, companions etc. portrayed accurately concerning equipment? And if they were not, what would be a more fitting appearance for them?

Thanks, I look forward to your help

Virilis/Lorenzo

[Dan Howard]

Post some screen shots and people can critique specific examples. Hollywood armour doesn't serve any real purpose except to make the characters look cool. Arrows and swords go straight through it.

[FlorivsVirilis]

Post some screen shots and people can critique specific examples. Hollywood armour doesn't serve any real purpose except to make the characters look cool. Arrows and swords go straight through it.

Will do. Thanks.

http://www.ancientbattles.com/Alexander_...AtG_02.jpg here is a screen of a unit of companions led by Hephaistion (note the Persian cavalryman on the right).

http://www.ancientbattles.com/Alexander_...AtG_01.jpg Alexander during the battle of Gaugamela.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPO6p2ijgFg) the battle of Gaugamela as shown in the film (sorry I can't find any stills of the phalangites)

- Virilis/Lorenzo

[john roberts]

The outfits of the Macedonians and their auxiliaries were excellent. In a making-of documentary I saw costume designers for the film with illustrations by Angus McBride cut from several Osprey books pinned over their desks. This is far more effort than most movie productions go to to ensure authenticity. I can't say about the Persian equipment.

[Mythos_Ruler]

I'd have to say the movie was pretty good in the costume department. Some of the helmets looked a bit chintzy, but were usually based upon real archeological examples. The Persian equipment wasn't too bad either. The costuming and all the "background" details seem to all have been done very very well. They did their research. One thing is the Macedonian tunics which I think were supposed to be red, but in the movie were instead white (to show the blood better, apparently, but that's a silly reason to me).

As Dan said arrows and swords seem to cut through armour like tissue paper, which is one of my pet peeves about Hollywood movies. Battles would not have lasted for hours if armour was so useless in real life. One of the more comical scenes in the movie is when in the Gaugamela battle the cloud of Persian arrows rains down and slaughters a whole formation of heavily armoured Macedonian troops. If this had been the case in real life, Darius would not have had to come to grips with the Macedonians at all, instead just showering them with arrows from afar.

[Robert Vermaat]

Best classical battle in any movie, in my opinion.

[Paralus]

Best classical battle in any movie, in my opinion.

Well done I must say if a little confused on screen. That confusion comes from the film's conceit: Persia fell in the one battle of Granikos, Issos and Gaugamela all rolled into one. The headlong charge of Alexander and his cavalry out to the right before turning to charge Darius is pure Hollywood. The infantry that are still with him by the time he makes this turn is even more so. Aspis bearing troops sans dory (royal hypaspists??) then emerge in timely fashion from the phalanx just when Alexander returns from his rightward Melbourne Cup run whilst Monophthalmos leads the centre from Phryghia… but enough of the silly stuff (and let’s no go to the soliloquies).

The arms and armour of the Macedonian army are, by Hollywood standards, very good. The number of muscled cuirasses might be exaggerated (and it can be difficult to tell given camera angles, shields and distance). The make up of other cuirasses are a matter of guesswork and the variety is what one would expect.

Whilst I’ve no doubt that “speiras” or units of the phalanx (16x16) may have “fallen in” to line as blocks, I doubt they ever left the gaping corridors shown in the film between each other (unless this is something to do with Lane Fox’s view of how the infantry found room to “step aside” for the chariots). The echeloned units are possibly exaggerated for effect: I’d think files echeloned and units angled somewhat right (as a scene actually shows).

On rough figures only (without getting into phalanx evolutions and fighting depths et al) the Macedonian phalanx comprised some 12,000 troops (min) and thus had near to 47 lochoi or speirai. The advantage of the phalanx was its uniform hedge of sarissae. One would need to be careful how deep one unit was placed in relation to the next. With the inevitable breaking and loss of front rank sarissae, staggering at a metre or more each unit may well invite disaster. Perhaps better each file off the rear of the shoulder to his right?

In any case, the phalanx broke and presented a gap when the hypaspists and the lead right units followed the king in something akin to a “wedge”. This “charge” broke the line and rolled left (much like Issos) whilst the leftmost phalanx units were left rooted to the spot by the Persian right. Although the Macedonian phalanx was not shattered, as Michael Schmitz in AW V-1 observes, this seemed to have more to do with the distinct lack of tactical nouse displayed by the immediate Persian command than undoubted Macedonian discipline.

Discipline was, though, shown by the evolution that Arrian so frustratingly refers to as “fabricating’ or making a “wedge” (embolon poiesas) of the cavalry and the “phalanx” near to him. As it was on the far left where the infantry and cavalry staved off disaster.

Although we are in no way informed, this discipline must have been evidenced by the infantry at Granicus for it is impossible that even half the Persian numbers of cavalry we have been given could be defeated by their Macedonian counterparts. As with Issos they crossed a river to do it though I know not whence Michael Schmitz finds them eight deep in his article. Arrian, the only author to give a decent battle array, only mentions Alexander marching in battle array with his “hoplites” (obviously the phalanx) in “double phalanx” (1.13.1). He then enumerates them – although confusing units or, more likely his sources – in a fashion similar to (though not the same as) Issos.

[rgcotl]

last few moths i have worked on this movie stuffs i have some more thigs from this movie but i havent time for upload it anywhere

alexander linothorax


parmenion movie armor


crateros movie armor


antigonus movie armor


leaonatus movie armor (also this one was shown in batles BC as an alexander armor)


alexander movie alexander helmet


soldier movie helmet


parmenion and leonatus helmet


crateros helmet


another soldier helmet


companion cavalery (and cleitus hero ) helmet

[Kai]

I know it is not for the Greeks, but still the armour worn by the heavy cavalry from the Upper Satrapies (or so I figured they are supposed to be) is a really nice example of flawed greatness in the movie. It is great, because it is a perfect reconstruction; it is fundamentally flawed, because it is a perfect reconstruction of Scythian early 5th century armour found in the Ukraine :roll:



On a more general note, sadly no-one took a look at the Alexander-mosaic for the Persian armour, which was Greek inspired - to have the Greek armour in again...

[richard robinson]

I could not fault the armour in the movie. I enjoyed eagle cam. Yes some things were possibly out of context but it was mostly possible.....
it was that sutton hoo lyre that was in persepolis that blew it for me
and the thai elephants- though brilliant messed with my sense of terrain and "it is so good"
and that tiresome mother figure..it makes me shudder ....what that poor boy went through

richard

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Pity you all missed the giant movie props auction in which Boeotian helmets went by the box of 40 for about 100 US$ !

M.VIB.M.

[Forty-One]

Pity you all missed the giant movie props auction in which Boeotian helmets went by the box of 40 for about 100 US$ !

M.VIB.M.

For sale. Genuine [strike]Booy[/strike] [strike]Byotioi[/strike][strike] Boyo[/strike] Greek helmet worn by Alexander the great in his famousest battles. $25,000 (please specify head size when ordering).

[Macedon]

I loved the costumes in the movie, I agree that muscled cuirasses should have been rarer, but overall it was the best effort I saw in a movie to be historically right in that department.

My objections were also in the manner the battle formations were depicted. I hated the intervals between the syntagmata, the phalangites were depicted to fight in open instead of close order, which resulted in a very funny battle sequence, with the Persians easily coming to grips, passing through the gaps between the spear-points, sarisophoroi running out of line to hit at the skirishing opponents against them, an utterly unrealistic image that might look more interesting on screen but makes the battle degenerate into a skirmishing melee... The volleys of arrows decimating the phalanx were also beyond reason. As for the cavalry, no ranks, no wedges, no nothing, just a few horsemen riding around in loose order with infantry hidden in the dust. Another bonus was the Royal squadron in which Darius was posted. Instead of the Royal friends on horseback, we have some infantry, a line of camels, error after error...