Re: Ancient army numbers

[Paralus]

This is what is admittedly suggested by the sources. Yet, I do not see the advance happening at an angle. This would disturb the formation, especially a complex one as seems to be the case at Gaugamela. When the cavalry fight began, the squadrons would certainly have moved to whichever direction and at whatever angle necessary, but not the infantry of the line. I generally consider movement at an angle to the frontage of a unit impossible for sizable units let alone formations and I have never seen it suggested in any military manual, even though some re-enactors think it is possible.

I'll try again. Imagine the Macedonian line being something like a half to 60% of the Persian battle line. The Persian line is like this text: horizontal. The Macedonian line forms up at a forty-five degree angle (for simplicity). The Macedonian right (apex given its refused right flank guard) is the ile basilikoi. This line then advances at that forty-five degree angle (Arrian and Curtius are clear on this advance to right) until the ile basilikoi is about to leave the area prepared for the chariots. Alexander is now opposite the Persian left and his own left is now far outflanked by the Persian right. The advance, as Arrian notes, happened with Alexander "leading his men in column". When the Persian left has extended itself so far as to provide a gap - which will have been just to the right of the left wing but nowhere near the centre - Alexander "wheels" and charges with the phalanx.

That wheel, if we stick with the forty-five degrees, now sees him drive into the Persian line at ninety degrees to his previous line of advance. In other words, forward and towards the Persian centre which is some distance away. The object is to break and roll up the line towards the centre. The phalanx, advancing in column, faces to shield (left) and advances frontally (obviously at the same angle of attack as Alexander), the result being all moving towards the Persian centre. This is the vignette that Plutarch preserves in his - as usual - poor battle description (such things did not spark his interest).

Personally, I believe the "break" ( at Simmias' battalion) was incidental if it occurred. It may well have been rooted to the spot given the furious attack mounted by Mazaeus on the Persian right. Tactically and practically, Mazaeus' outflanking charge around the outflanked Macedonian left is far, far more logical.