WI: Achaemenids adopted the Macedonian phalanx, reformed their army?

SunKing105

SunKing105

IOTL, the Achaemenids, while far from the undisciplined skirmishers that popular perception paints them as, could've done a lot better in military matters. They did not focus on heavy infantry as much as other peoples such as the Greeks, Carians, Egyptians and others had, and being a vast multiethnic empire, numbers were often a crucial component. While they did attempt something to this end IOTL, they still had a heavy reliance on Greek mercenaries for their heavy infantry component. So what if a certain Achaemenid ruler attempted to copy the Late Classical reformers, such as Iphicrates, Epamonidas, and most famously, Philip II, by training a professional soldier-caste of ethnic Persians, using a modified form of the Phalanx, incorporating elements found among the Greeks and Macedonians IOTL, probably by independent development, as I don't think they'd be keen on imitating the Macedonians. And actually, furthermore, why didn't something like this happen IOTL? I guess there was no need, but that could be provided by a failed Alexandrian invasion, perhaps the next King of Kings thinks, "By Ahura Mazda, that upstart Greek almost ended my empire, I'm gonna need more reliable troops!" What would be the impact, and would it allow them to survive any potential invasions by the Macedonians? What would be the impact and influence among other neighboring peoples, do men like Porus and Chandragupta get influenced by Achaemenid armies? What new military inventions can occur? The Achaemenids do have a vast empire and treasury to fund projects like this, we just need the impetus, and a plausible POD...
 
Last edited:

isabella

SunKing105 said:
IOTL, the Achaemenids, while far from the undisciplined skirmishers that popular perception paints them as, could've done a lot better in military matters. They did not focus on heavy infantry as much as other peoples such as the Greeks, Carians, Egyptians and others had, and being a vast multiethnic empire, numbers were often a crucial component. While they did attempt something to this end IOTL, they still had a heavy reliance on Greek mercenaries for their heavy infantry component. So what if a certain Achaemenid ruler attempted to copy the Late Classical reformers, such as Iphicrates, Epamonidas, and most famously, Philip II, by training a professional soldier-caste of ethnic Persians, using a modified form of the Phalanx, incorporating elements found among the Greeks and Macedonians IOTL, probably by independent development, as I don't think they'd be keen on imitating the Macedonians. And actually, furthermore, why didn't something like this happen IOTL? I guess there was no need, but that could be provided by a failed Alexandrian invasion, perhaps the next King of Kings thinks, "By Ahura Mazda, that upstart Greek almost ended my empire, I'm gonna need more reliable troops!" What would be the impact, and would it allow them to survive any potential invasions by the Macedonians? What would be the impact and influence among other neighboring peoples, do men like Porus and Chandragupta get influenced by Achaemenid armies? What new military inventions can occur? The Achaemenids do have a vast empire and treasury to fund projects like this, we just need the impetus, and a plausible POD...
Click to expand...
Considering the structure of the Persian Empire and army, no way. And a failed invasion by Alexander would NOT change anything as Alexander would need to be stopped at the first main battle by Memnon, or at the worst at the second by Darius himself. In both cases that would reinforce the Achaemenid perception of their own superiority.
 

Galba Otho Vitelius

The Macedonians (Alexander and the Successors) trained Persians to fight in phalanxes so this was far from impossible.

In terms of the effects, my impression is that the conquest of the entire Persian Empire was an unlikely event that could have been prevented by any number of things. Persian heavy infantry would have been one of those things, but not necessarily the most important. The normal Persian strategies worked defensively against earlier Greek invasions and in the later wars against the Romans.
 

tus3

isabella said:
Considering the structure of the Persian Empire and army, no way. And a failed invasion by Alexander would NOT change anything as Alexander would need to be stopped at the first main battle by Memnon, or at the worst at the second by Darius himself. In both cases that would reinforce the Achaemenid perception of their own superiority.
Click to expand...
Why not the third battle at Gaugamela?
Also the Macedonian Pike Phalanx has some obvious flaws, like vulnerable flanks and an inability to fight in rugged terrain, so I doubt it would be necessary an improvement over their current Greek mercenaries depending on the circumstances and their enemies.
 
Last edited:

Awkwardvulture

A sort of heavy swordsmen or axemen could be recruited from the Daylmaites of the Gilan region, the Sassanids recruited them, so why not have the Achamenids see the need for heavier infantry recruited from that region?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top