Athene's Prophecy (Gaius Claudius Scaevola Trilogy) (13 page)

Gaius smiled in triumph, "Since eternal motion is motion without a contrary, it follows eternal motion must take place in a void."

Timothy simply stared at him, then added, "If the medium supplies the contrary force, that is logical."

"Not only that," Gaius said in a superior tone, "it is correct."

"You're rather sure of yourself," Timothy nodded. "So, go learn something else. We shall work our way through some of Alexander's battles, and tomorrow we shall start with the battle of the Granicus. Find out something about it."

Chapter 9

"So," Timothy smiled as Gaius hurriedly concealed a piece of papyrus, "you are ready to analyze the battle. Start with the background. Why fight there?"

"Alexander had to," Gaius replied. "There was no point in invading and then declining battle. The Persians, though, had a choice. Memnon, a Greek you may note, recommended the Persians ignore Alexander's army and deprive him of supply by taking all food into fortified towns and use the superior Persian fleet to starve him."

"And if you had commanded the Persians? What would you have done?"

"A bit of both," Gaius shrugged. "There's no harm in starving them and harassing them before a major battle.
Even Greeks
can be out of sorts if they think the world's against them, that things aren't going right, that . . ."

"We get the picture," Timothy nodded. "So, suppose you are overruled and you have to fight. Analyze the Persian deployment."

"I have trouble here," Gaius replied, "because the accounts don't make sense. I suspect the Persian numbers were exaggerated and there are hints the numbers of men on the two sides were fairly close."

"Then, for the purposes of this exercise, assume they're about equal."

"Taking up position on a high bank beside a swollen river is good," Gaius noted. "Ignoring the high hill on the left flank is not so good."

"But the Macedonians initially attacked through the centre."

"And Alexander was nowhere to be seen. He used to lead attacks, so the key to his tactics would lie with where he was."

"But this was the first time the Persians had come up against Alexander," Timothy protested.

"But Alexander had fought before," Gaius said. "It's like the first example you gave me. The commander should find out all he could about Alexander before the fight."

"Yes, he should," Timothy said. He was quite surprised that Gaius had recalled and learnt from the first military lesson. "So, comment on Alexander's deployment."

"Given that Alexander will control the crucial attack through the right," Gaius replied, "it makes good sense to leave the next most able commander, Parmenio, on the left."

"So you're lined up. Do you attack through the centre? Do you send your phalanxes into the swollen river?"

"I'd follow the alternative strategy," Gaius shrugged. "I'd camp, and cross at first light, before the Persians got up. As I understand it, the Persians were light on infantry, so they'd camp away from the river, where it'd take time to assemble them. That," he added, "was Parmenio's advice, but Alexander chose to ignore it."

"And why was that?"

"Most likely because the advice came from Parmenio. Alexander was something of an egotist."

"Fancy that!" Timothy muttered. "And what about you? You prefer to fault the greatest of Greek soldiers rather than believe he saw the Persians retiring for the night!"

"There's no evidence the Persians weren't ready for battle, apart from comments from Greek commentators."

"And we can't possibly believe them," Timothy said sourly.

"Not when we see what was supposed to have happened next."

"So, the battle starts. The Macedonians attempt to cross the river. Comment."

"The Persians have the high ground," Gaius offered. "We don't know what happened, but crossing a river can't have been rapid, and a phalanx probably does not work that well in a river so the Persian archers, slingers and javelin throwers should have made an impact. For all we know, they may have. From what I can make out, this Greek attack really made little penetration."

"And the key part?"

"Alexander took cavalry upstream, crossed, and came in from behind the hill on the Persian left flank, catching the Persians in the rear. The accounts say that the Persians mainly defended the river crossing with cavalry, and they had to divert cavalry to meet this threat, but taking away that cavalry from the river supposedly relieved pressure on the Macedonians crossing the river."

"Supposedly?" Timothy almost sneered. "What makes you think that? You've not exactly got a lot of military experience yet!"

"Neither have you," Gaius retorted, "but I know cavalry don't fight at their best in the middle of a river. I don't know what really happened, but I would expect the Greek mercenaries to be at the front, trying to stop Alexander's phalanxes."

"Any further comment?" Timothy was a little stung by his lack of experience being pointed out.

"The Persians made a feint on their right flank that fooled nobody, and then did next to nothing, although this may be nothing more than faulty reporting. But if they weren't going to attack, they should have kept cavalry as a reserve."

"Elaborate!"

Gaius paused. It suddenly occurred to him that his attitude so far had annoyed Timothy. Yes, Timothy's sneering attitude had goaded him, but maybe he had gone overboard. Still, he had to say something, so he continued. "The strategic decision is, given your position and strength, do you attack, defend, withdraw, or, as Memnon advised, evade and harass. The Persians could have attacked through the right flank with cavalry to get at the Macedonian rear; effectively the mirror of what Alexander was trying to do. But they didn't . . ."

"You may not realize this," Timothy said, "but as far as we can tell, this was the very first time anybody used cavalry as a primary attacking weapon. Anyway, go on."

"Another strategy might have been to defend, let Alexander blunt himself, then counter-attack, but if they were going to do this, they should have kept their mobile forces and lighter more mobile infantry in reserve."

"Explain!"

"The Persians had mounted archers who could strike from a distance. They could ride around Alexander's cavalry and effectively take them out of the battle. If Alexander turns his back on them, they have free shots at the back of the Greek cavalry, while if Alexander chases them, the Greeks fight without cavalry elsewhere. As it was, with no scouts on the top of the hill, they failed to detect Alexander's move. Worse, once he came around the back of the hill, Alexander had the Persians at a disadvantage in that they were fighting on two sides. If the Persians could deploy reserves, Alexander might have had the same problem."

"Anything else the Persians could have done?"

"They should have had a small squad of their best mounted archers to seek out Alexander himself. Instead, he killed their leaders, then the Persians started to flee, and once that started, as you said, the battle was lost."

"Any other comments about the battle?"

"The Persian cavalry had skilled bowmen but these should have fought from a distance and not let themselves get into a slugging match."

"So, as far as we can tell," Timothy said dryly, "you can recite history. One day, when you command, reflect on how easy it is to comment like this, and how hard it is to do things properly at the time."

"I guess," Gaius said. He then began to feel a little guilty about his previous attitude so, after a few moments, he said, "Look, on thinking about it a little more, maybe you were correct and I was wrong."

"Oh?" Timothy's expression was one of pure surprise. "About what?"

"About Alexander's urge to fight, and the comment about the cavalry and the river," Gaius replied. "My initial thought was that nobody in their right mind would counter an approaching phalanx trying to cross the river with cavalry lined up along the bank, so I assumed that was wrong."

"But?"

"Another possible explanation is that on approaching the Granicus, Alexander would have already discussed how he would fight the battle and where everyone would line up, and Parmenio may have offered his opinion then. That, in my opinion, was the best strategy at that point, but if Alexander saw the Persian cavalry deployed like that, he would know his opponent had made a very bad mistake, so he should fight immediately, while the mistake was still in play."

"The Persian cavalry contained a lot of archers," Timothy pointed out.

"Yes, and they had archers in their infantry," Gaius added. "The point is, the great advantage of cavalry is that they are mobile. Lining them up on a river bank and having infantry behind them completely negates that advantage."

"So, Alexander wasn't as bad as you thought?"

"I never thought Alexander was bad," Gaius replied. "But even you won't disagree that he was bloodthirsty. The Greek mercenaries surrendered, and he set about slaughtering almost twenty thousand of them."

"Yes," Timothy agreed. "There were many aspects of Alexander's life that were not exactly admirable."

* * *

"Yesterday," Timothy said, "we discussed Alexander's first major battle of his invasion of Asia." He paused, and seemed somewhat apprehensive.

"We did," Gaius finally said, to break the silence. "I had not forgotten."

"I didn't think you had," Timothy muttered, "but I want to raise the morality of the invasion."

"I see," Gaius said irritably. "Back to another moan on the issue of slavery."

"No," Timothy said. "That's not it at all, at least not in the sense you're thinking."

"Then what sense?" Gaius snorted, then he noticed what appeared to be a more fearful look on Timothy's face. "All right, I can see I'm not going to like this, but I promise, you can say what you like, provided it's not a moan about your perceived personal hardships."

"Then," Timothy said, as he took a deep breath. "Why do you think Alexander wanted to invade other people's lands?"

"Revenge for Persian attacks, and glory," Gaius said, then added caustically, "He seemed to be another one of those who thought he was divine, and before you remind me, I know. It's a bad habit, he wasn't, neither are the others, but I can't do anything about it."

"So to claim glory, he killed, and killed, and killed," Timothy said. "Do you think killing is glorious?"

"In war, it's necessary, although, as I noted yesterday, there was no need to kill all the mercenaries after they had surrendered and sued for peace," Gaius said flatly. "You can't fight a war without killing, and there's no way to stop war, at least no way I can see, except . . ."

"Except?"

"Strictly speaking, if Rome conquered everybody, there'd be no more war," Gaius smirked.

"And Rome has never had internal wars? Civil wars?"

"You're right," Gaius replied. "It has, but that doesn't make them desirable."

"And you're right. There'll be many more wars, but that doesn't make them desirable either. You are correct that in war, killing is necessary, but is it desirable? Is it glorious?"

"Given the fact that war has started, it is highly desirable to kill them before they kill you," Gaius shrugged. "Further, as a General, it's your duty to finish off the enemy with the fewest casualties on your own side. The men trust you to do that."

"That's once you are in battle, but is it desirable to try to find peace first?"

"Most definitely, however the soldier doesn't start wars, and finishing them that way is usually outside the boundaries permitted by his orders."

"So, is it glorious?"

"Some seem to think so," Gaius replied, a little evasively.

"Your enemy are probably farmers, forced by their lords to fight. They have little skill, and their only enthusiasm for the fight is that they think their wife and daughter might get raped if they lose. Is killing them glorious?"

"Probably not," Gaius said, "but if they take the field, what's the option?"

"Be a better general, out-manoeuvre them, and force them to surrender rather than merely wade through them, slaughtering all and sundry?" Timothy suggested.

"I don't disagree," Gaius said, after a pause, "but a General's first duty is to his own men. I can't risk their lives."

"Of course not," Timothy said, "however being a better General tends to save your own men's lives as well as your enemy's."

"I agree with the suggestion that the General should be as competent as possible."

"Well, that's good to hear," Timothy said, a little sourly. "Now, consider this. Your actions will lead to a number of deaths, including your own soldiers, those of the others, and you will then occupy their territory. Justify that."

"I'm afraid that's the way things are," Gaius shrugged.

"I know," Timothy said, "but is that justification?"

"An obvious justification is if you are attacked. Your citizens could have their property destroyed, their women raped, and their citizens . . ." Gaius paused, as he could see where this was going.

"Enslaved," Timothy added dryly. "Any other circumstances you can justify?"

"If the
Princeps
orders the army to march," Gaius said slowly, "and if an officer refuses, then he will be executed, somebody else will take his place, so there's not much point in refusing."

"Quite correct," Timothy agreed. "There's no point in refusing orders, getting yourself and your family exiled or killed, and the order still being carried out. Now, what is the justification for Rome invading another country?"

"In many cases," Gaius said simply, "Roman occupation leads to a far better life for all the citizens."

"From the Roman point of view?" Timothy asked.

"From the point of view of being able to trade, and to live under law," Gaius replied.

"Suppose Rome invades because they can get more loot? They steal, at least in the sense that they exploit a resource and thus take the opportunities from the locals, making Romans rich and the locals poor."

"Obviously that happens, however, I don't see that I can do much about that either. All I can say is that provided taxes are paid, Rome encourages people to own their own land and resources, and that's in the provinces as well. Romans are encouraged to work for their own benefit."