Descrição
THE BATTLE OF RAPHIA, 217 BC
The only recorded battle between Indian and African War Elephants
The Battle of Raphia was the final battle of the Fourth Syrian War (219-217 BC). Five Syrian Wars were fought between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms for the possession of Coele-Syria from 274 BC to 195 BC. In that year a conciliatory treaty was at last signed between Ptolemy V and Antiochus III, leaving the Seleucid king in possession of Coele-Syria, albiet temporarily: hostilities broke out again in 170 BC, starting a 6th Syrian War!
After days of minor skirmishes, on 22 June 217 BC the great armies of Ptolemy IV Philopator, king of Ptolemaic Egypt (with his sister-wife Queen Arsinoe), and of the Seleucid king Antiochus III the Great finally met at Raphia , near modern Rafah on the Egyptian/Palestinian border.
Raphia was one of the largest and most famous battles of the ancient world. About 70.000 Ptolemaics clashing against about 68.000 Seleucids, with cavalry and war elephants on both sides, in a spectacular and bloody display of Hellenistic strategy. But Raphia was not just a crucial battle between two of the greatest armies in helleistic warfare. Raphia is also remembered as the only recorded instance in history, in which African and Indian War Elephants locked tusks in combat on the batlefield.
At Raphia the Ptolemaic Elephant Corps consisted of 73 Elephants, most of them – but possibly not all – African. In fact, Ptolemy IV ‘s herd might still have included just a few of the younger Indian elephants his father Ptolemy III, had managed to capture from the Seleucids in a successful campaign 29 years earlier. The Seleucid Elephant Corps was far superior in both numbers and strength, with 102 Indian Elephants.
Both armies deployed their War Elephants on the wings of their battle lines, immediately in front of their cavalry and infantry formations. Antiochus deployed 60 of his Elephants on his right wing (facing Ptolemy’s 40) , and 42 on his left wing (facing Ptolemy’s 33).
As typical in most Hellenistic battles when both opposing armies were equipped with War Elephants, the battle opened with the two Elephant Corps charging and clashing against each other, in a sort of “living tanks‘” battle, in which Elephants often engaged in individual duels, while their crews in the towers tried to kill their opponents with their Sarissas (long pikes), javelins and bows and arrows.
Antiochus made the first move, ordering a charge of the 60 Elephants on his right wing against the 40 on Ptolemy’s left. According to the ancient historian Polybius, in this fight the smaller African Elephants of Ptolemy, also numerically inferior, were repulsed by the larger and stronger Indian pachyderms of Antiochus.
Both armies’ elephants being equipped with towers, height as well as bulk was important: the men on the taller Seleucid Elephants could therefore strike down at the lower Ptolemaic beasts, the mahouts being as usual their prime targets. Since Sarissas were approximately 16 ft long, we may imagine that before two beasts actually interlocked for their duel the men in each tower tried to spear the opposing mahout and soldiers in a kind of joust. Inferior in both numbers and strength, the African pachiderms were soon pushed back in panic, disrupting the lines of the Ptolemaic infantry deployed behind them, and causing significant disorder in their ranks.
Polybius’ description of the fighting of the elephants is vivid and may well reflect the account of an eye-witness:
“A few only of Ptolemy’s elephants ventured to close with those of the enemy, and now the men in the towers on the back of these beasts made a gallant fight of it, striking with their pikes at close quarters and wounding each other, while the elephants themselves fought still better, putting forth their whole strength and meeting forehead to forehead. The way in which these animals fight is as follows. With their tusks firmly interlocked they shove with all their might,each trying to force the other to give ground, until the one who proves the strongest pushes asidethe other’s trunk. And then, when he has made him turn and has him in the flank, he gores him with his tusks as a bull does with its horns. Most of Ptolemy’s elephants, however, declined the combat, as is the habit of African elephants. For, unable to stand the sight and smell and the trumpeting of the Indian elephants, and terrified, I suppose, also by their great size and strength, they at once turn tail and take to flight before they get near them. This is what happened on the present occasion; and when Ptolemy’s elephants were thus thrown into confusion and driven back on their own lines, Ptolemy’s guard gave way under the pressure of the animals.“
Antiochus therefore easily routed Ptolemy’s left wing, where Ptolemy himself had taken up position, and pursued them off the field. But Ptolemy escaped and eventually managed to get round to the back of his phalanx and restore order by personally riding to the center of the fight and encouraging his phalanx to attack.
The African Elephants on Ptolemy’s right wing refused to engage the Indian elephants across from them, but a daring Ptolemaic commander led his cavalry and infantry around the Indian elephants and hit Antiochus’ flank. Meantime Antiochus, at the head of his cavalry, had been pursuing the defeated Ptolemaic left too far and he did not return quick enough. By the time he was back it was too late : Ptolemy had defeated the enemy in the center and on the right. The Seleucid whole line was in retreat and he was forced to retire to Raphia. So, despite the disappointing performance of his African elephants on both wings, Ptolemy finally prevailed in the battle, thanks to a combination of personal courage, superior daring and skill of his commanders , endurance and maneuvering of his infantry , and some luck too! Antiochus’ Indian elephants had been succesful in their particular assignments , to defeat the African elephants. But their success did not translate in an overall victory.
According to Polybius, the Seleucids suffered a little under 10,000 infantry dead, about 300 cavalry, but only 5 elephants (3 in action and 2 by wounds). 4,000 men were taken prisoner. The Ptolemaic losses were 1,500 infantry, 700 cavalry and 16 elephants. Quite surprisingly, Polybius also mentions that Antiochus, though defeated, managed to capture most of the surviving elephants of Ptolemy. However , this is contradicted by an Egyptian inscription commemorating Ptolemy’s victory at Raphia which records the precise opposite, stating that Ptolemy “took all the elephants”. If this is correct, as it would seem more likely, Ptolemy had not only smashed the projected invasion of Egypt, but in the process he had collected a very large number of elephants to add to his own stock.
THE ELEPHANTS
As to the types of Elephants fighting at the battle of Raphia, Antiochus’ elephants were all Indian elephants (Elephas maximus), brought from India.
As mentioned above, most, if possibly not all, of Ptolemy’s elephants, instead were African, though there is an ongoing academic debate about their specific type. Any Elephants had become exctinct in Egypt since the first half of the third millenium, so the Ptolemies had established a number of Elephant Hunting Stations in Eastern Sudan, Ethiopia and Eritrea, from where they sourced most of their pachiderms to be trained as war elephants in the Ptolemaic Army. However, which species these African Elephants belonged to, is not precisely known. The most widely held theory is still that Ptolemy’s elephants were African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis), a separate species, though a close relative to the much larger African Bush (i.e. savannah) Elephant (Loxodonta africana). In ancient times African Forest Elephants or a now exctinct species of a similar size, called North African Elephant (Loxodonta africana pharaohensis) – were quite common in several areas of North and, possibly, East Africa, which was then much abundant in forest habitats than today.
African forest elephants are smaller than both Indian elephants and African bush Elephants. Since a typical African Bush Elephant would be definitely larger than an Asian one, the smaller forest elephant would be a better fit with Polybius’ descriptions. However, recent DNA research has revealed that the small number of surviving elephants in one of the areas from where the Ptolemaics were mainly sourcing their elephants are in fact Loxodonta africana, albeit belonging to a population of more diminutive African bush elephants, which are still found in Eritrea today.
ORGANIZATION and WEAPONS
The General Officer commanding an Elephant Corps was called Elephantarch by the Greeks and Magister Elephantorum by the Romans.
Theoretical standard organization of an Elephant Corps in hellenistic armies was as follows:
The largest Elephant unit was a “Brigade”, called Phalanx and commanded by a Phalangarch. It had a paper-strength of 64 Elephants and was based on 2 “regiments”, called Keratarchies, of 32 elephants each.
Internal sub-units within each “regiment” were as follows:
Elephantarchy:16 elephants;
Ilarchy:8 elephants;
Epitherarchy:4 elephants;
Therarchy:2 elephants;
Zoarchy:1 elephant.
An Ilarchy of 8 elephants in a single rank is believed to have been a normal tactical unit in the battle line.
A typical War Elephant crew consisted of a mahout, or driver, riding on the beasts’ neck and two or three soldiers in a wooden or leather tower, secured to the back and sides of the elephant by chains , ropes or thick leather straps. Archeological evidence also sometimes shows shields hanging from the tower’s sides for additional protection. All clothing, arms and armour for both Ptolemaic and Seleucid armies were of hellenistic style. Mahouts may well have retained their traditional native dress: Indian for Seleucid mahouts, African for Ptolemaic ones. Weapons were typically a sarissa for one of the soldiers and bow and arrows and javelins for the rest of the crew in the tower. Mahouts only carried their Ankhus (elephant goad), their professional tool to handle the elephant, and occasionally a few javelins. Protection of the Elephant’s tough hide was further increased by heavy blankets covering the sides of the beast. Additional protection may have included metal or heavy cloth or leather head- pieces (frontalia), laminar armour made by circular bands of leather or metal around the neck and legs, and occasionally scale armour on the chest and belly. Each Elephant had its own name. It is known that Antiochus had one called Patroclus and one called Ajax.
Avaliações
Ainda não existem avaliações.