Siege of Megalopolis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Siege of Megalopolis
Part of: Diadoch Wars
date Summer 317 BC Chr.
place Megalopoli / Greece
output Siege failed
Parties to the conflict

Representative of the Macedonian kingdom and supporter of the demo

Megalopolis oligarchy

Commander

Polyperchon

Damis

Troop strength
according to Diodor:
20,000 Macedonians
4,000 Greek allies
1,000 cavalrymen
65 elephants
according to Diodor:
15,000 men
losses

unknown

unknown

The siege of Megalopolis occurred in the summer of 317 BC. Chr. The people of Megalopolis (now Megalopolis in Greece) defended an attack by the regent of Alexander Reich , Polyperchon decreases.

As a confrontation in the second Diadoch war , the battle is one of the historical events in the age of the Diadochs , which followed the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC. Followed. For the first time in war history, war elephants were used on the European continent.

background

Since the death of Alexander in 323 BC Its generals, called "successors" (Diadochi), found themselves in a relentless struggle for supremacy in its world empire. Since 319 BC They waged the second diadoch war, in which the coalition between Cassander and Antigonus Monophthalmos fought against that of the regent Polyperchon with the defender of the kingdom of Eumenes . While the war between Antigonos and Eumenes was being fought in Asia, the regent Polyperchon and Kassander fought in Europe, that is, in what was then Greece .

When the war broke out, Kassander in Europe could count on the oligarchic regimes in the Hellenic Poleis as supporters. These had once been installed by his father Antipater after the Lamian War (323–321 BC) and now felt obliged to his son, although Polyperchon was the successor appointed by Antipater as regent of the Alexander Empire. In order to weaken Cassander, Polyperchon therefore proclaimed the freedom of the Hellenic cities by promising them the evacuation of the Macedonian garrisons if they took his side. Indeed, the proclamation immediately had its effect and in several cities democratic movements rose against the oligarchs and overthrew them. In Athens , too , the ruler Phocion was overthrown by the democrats; However, he still managed to hand over the strategically important port of Piraeus to the commander of Munychia , Nikanor , who was loyal to Cassander , which he received in the spring of 317 BC. Brought the death sentence on the part of his hometown.

Polyperchon intended to get Munychia as well as Piraeus under his control and moved with the imperial army from Macedonia to Attica . Among other things, he also brought war elephants with him, which had once been brought to Europe by Antipater and were now to be used on this continent for the first time. Arriving in front of Piraeus, Nikanor not only refused to give up or change sides, but also allowed the Cassander, who arrived with 35 ships and 4,000 warriors from Asia Minor, to enter the port. A protracted siege was now inevitable. Because of his superior military forces, Polyperchon believed he could split them up to deal with two military hotspots at the same time. Although almost all cities in the Peloponnese have chosen his side, the influential megalopolis remained on the side of Cassander. Polyperchon entrusted his son Alexander , equipped with enough troops, to continue the siege of Piraeus and moved on to the Peloponnese with the rest of the troops to subdue Megalopolis.

The siege

The ruler in Megalopolis at that time was Damis, who was a veteran of the Alexander train . It is unclear whether he was a citizen of the city or a Macedonian. However, he is likely to have been installed in his office by Antipater, which is why he prevented the emergence of a democratic movement in Megalopolis after his death and now kept the city on the side of the son of his former master. Upon hearing of the approach of the Polyperchon, the citizens evacuated their property behind the city walls, granted foreigners citizenship and declared slaves to be free so that they could take part in the defense of the city.

After Polyperchon had reached the city, he had two camps built, one for his Macedonian warriors and one for those of the Greek federal troops. He then had movable siege towers built from wood that were higher than the city walls. While he was leading these to the walls, his miners undermined the walls of Megalopolis and thereby brought three defense towers and parts of the wall to collapse, so that three breaches were made in the defenses. Taking advantage of these loopholes, the Macedonians launched an assault on the city on Polyperchon's orders. The defenders, however, repelled the intrusion of their enemies at all three breaches and secured them with wooden palisade walls, from which they shot down the attackers with catapults and archers, inflicting heavy losses on them. Polyperchon then canceled the attack and withdrew his men into the camps. For the following day he intended to let his elephants run against the wooden palisades, which could hardly withstand the impact of these animals.

During his participation in the Alexanderzug, Damis had, however, gained experience in fighting elephants, which should now prove useful to him. During the night, unnoticed by the enemy, he had the area in front of the three palisades groomed with nails and iron hooks. He left the walls themselves unmanned, knowing that the psychological effect of elephants running up front could have a negative effect on their own men. Instead, he positioned his archers and catapults on the intact stone walls that flanked the palisades, from which they could take the elephants and their guides into the crossfire. His plan worked when the next day the elephants trampled the palisade as intended, but at the same time inflicted severe wounds on their limbs and panicked. Wedged in the narrow gaps, they became easy targets for the archers on the walls, who could kill several of the animals. Her body mass now filled the breaches with a natural protective wall. The surviving animals ran in panic over their own men and inflicted further heavy losses on Polyperchon's army.

consequences

Now Polyperchon dared no further attack on Megalopolis, although he and his troops remained camped outside the city for the time being. News of his failure quickly spread throughout Greece and several cities that had sided with him the year before switched back to Kassander. To turn the tide, Polyperchon sent his Admiral Kleitos the White with the fleet to the Hellespont to secure it and to gain a strategic advantage against his enemies. But in the battle of Byzantion , Kleitus was also defeated, which in fact dealt the cause of Polyperchon the fatal blow. Almost in a hurry, he withdrew to Macedonia in order to secure the country from Kassander. This now also received support from the royal family, when he received from Queen Eurydice on behalf of her husband, King Philip III. Arrhidaios , who was offered the reign. Although Eurydice and Philip III. Immediately murdered by her rival, Queen Mother Olympias , but that too could not stop the triumphant advance of Kassander.

In the fall of 317 BC Finally the democrats of Athens were overthrown again and Kassander was able to install an oligarchic regime under Demetrios of Phaleron . Polyperchon tried to stop the advance of his opponent by blocking Thermopylae to the south. But this bypassed him by sea and landed in the spring of 316 BC. BC on the Macedonian coast and included Olympias in Pydna . After its end and that of Eumenes in Asia after the battle of Gabiene in the winter of 316 BC. The second Diadoch war was decided. Polyperchon was able to retreat to the Peloponnese with a small following, where he continued to resist Kassander for the next few years.

source

  • on the siege report see Diodor , Bibliothéke historiké 18, 70, 1–71, 6.

literature

  • Robert Malcolm Errington : Diodorus Siculus and the Chronology of the Early Diadochoi, 320-311 BC , in: Hermes 105 (1977), pp 478-504
  • John M. Kistler, Richard Lair: War Elephants (2007), pp. 54-57

Individual evidence

  1. For dating see Errington pp. 487–496.