By Eric Niderost

The historic period of Alexander is i of the most celebrated epochs in history, the subject for such Greco-Roman writings as Diodorus, Arrian, and Plutarch. But these ancient scribes were more interested in the sweep and drama of great events, non in the infinitesimal description of arms, armor, and equipment. Modern historians take had to brand do with a few descriptive passages, passing references, together with studies of coins and other physical objects—helmets, statues, and and then on—obtained through archaeology.

The Macedonian phalanx was the main infantry formation of Alexander'southward army and the cornerstone of his many victories. Authorities agree that each phalangist carried a fifteen-foot sarissa pike, but there'southward wide disagreement as to the remainder of the Macedonian soldier's equipment. Each pikeman probably wore a statuary helmet; the "Thracian" style was popular, as was the bulb-topped "Phrygian" type. There's some evidence many helmets were painted; blue seems to be the infantry colour. Officers might sport feathers or plumes in their helmets, and there was even a "bearded Phrygian" style that was noted for a fine horsehair crest.

There is similar disagreement over body armor. Some say the typical phalangist had no armor, but certain ancient passages suggest that at least some units wore a cuirass. Bronze greaves were as well probably worn on their legs. Shields, too, take generated controversy. Some regime maintain the Macedonian phalanx used a large hoplon, while other say a lighter, smaller shield was used for protection instead.

Greek Mercenary Armor

By contrast at that place's footling dubiety as to the artillery and armor of the Greek mercenaries who accompanied Alexander on his conquests, willingly or unwillingly. The Greek hoplites of the 4th century B.C. had hardly changed from the warriors of Marathon and Thermopylae a century and a half earlier, with a full panoply of linen or bronze armor, helmet, and greaves. The large hoplon shield was sometimes augmented by a leather apron hanging down its sides like a flag. This apron was meant to ward off missiles similar arrows. Some government feel the Macedonian phalangists had their shields suspended from straps hung effectually their necks, leaving arms gratis to grasp their pikes.

Troops from India went into battle bareheaded and barechested; maybe information technology was thought that such little protection was a small price to pay for greater mobility. The Indian pes soldier was armed with an iron-tipped spear that had a bamboo haft and a long (near three feet) broadsword.

Some protection was afforded from a long hide shield.

Indian archers were a source of great fascination to ancient Greek writers. The bamboo bow was very long and launched arrows of cane or reed flighted with vulture feathers. The arrowheads were normally made of iron, only horn was not unknown. Some ancient sources merits many Indian arrows were dipped in poison, only this kind of lurid detail may have been invented to make a amend story.

Other accounts say the arrows were so powerful no Greek or Macedonian shield or cuirass could withstand them. That may well be, simply experienced Macedonian officers who actually saw the Indian archers in activity say the bow was so heavy it could not be aimed accurately. Perchance they are correct, because heavy "rains" of Indian arrows at the Hydaspes failed to give Porus a victory.