Darius- coward or ?

[dean]

Hello,

Darius fled the battlefield twice- that I think is the image most of us have of this Persian king- the coward.

However, as a young man he was applauded for his bravery in single-combat hardly the behaviour of a "coward" and he also rerouted Alexander at Issus- probably giving him the "fright" of his life.

I guess that the idea of Homer's code of honour- the idea of glory, dying on the battlefield- didn't have much take on Persian soil and the maxim "live to fight another day" was much to the fore in his thoughts even if it did mean leaving your wife and kids behind- let's just get the Hell out of here!!!. His values seem to be the antithesis of Alexander's-

Anyway, I was just wondering if he really was the inept, caitiff we see in the Mosaic or????

How would you define Darius?

[kennyxx]

Dean Hail

Maybe im wrong here. But I think Darius was the usual Persian King. They were never involved in the action so I suspect he really didnt envisage mixing it with Alexander.

The Persian kings are known for sitting at the back or as Xerxes did watched Thermopalea from a hiil top on his throne.

I cant really voich for Darius 1st or Cyrus but I would guess they were the same. The idea Darius did single combat can be interpreted ina way of a fixed fight. Whoever fought Darius in single comabat would really expect to lose. If you watch the film Gladiator. We see the bad boy practicing in the woods with his sword he looke pretty impresive against his fall guys.

I really do think Darius expected. A to win at Issus he even took his family to watch. And im pretty sure he thought hed win at Gaugamella. He made the correct adjustments and even had the terrain to do the job.

I think the Macedonian way was as you say lead from the fron and personal glory. Wether cowardice or not im pretty sure Darius crapped himself when he saw Alexander heading his way. I believe it wasnt live to fight another day. Following Gaugamela Darius would have known he coulnt fight another day. So I would say cawarcice on both counts.

Only my opinion.

Kenny

[marcus]

Hi Kenny, Dean.

The Persian kings are known for sitting at the back or as Xerxes did watched Thermopalea from a hiil top on his throne.

I cant really vouch for Darius 1st or Cyrus but I would guess they were the same. The idea Darius did single combat can be interpreted in a way of a fixed fight. Whoever fought Darius in single combat would really expect to lose.

It's unlikely that Darius' single combat was fixed in any way - he wasn't King of Kings then, of course, and as far as we know it was a single combat against the enemy's champion. They were out to kill each other, no doubt about it.

I believe it wasn't live to fight another day. Following Gaugamela Darius would have known he couldn't fight another day.

Except that Darius still had a large number of Greek mercenaries with him, and as far as we know from the sources he was expecting fresh levies from the East - he only knew the game was up when he discovered that those levies weren't coming. So Darius, even after Gaugamela, had every intention of continuing the fight.

ATB

[kennyxx]

Marcus Hail

Whatever the story with Darius Fighting a champion. I wonder with all the commanders through the times just how many would be up to one on one combat.


Achiles and Hector style. Im sure Alexander would be up for some. If in the scenario Alexander challenge Darius do you think Darius would take the Gauntlet. We talk commanders and Warriors we know Alexander was a warrior trained hunting lions etc.

I doubt Darius would fight although he would have a great height advantage.My money would be on Darius staying out of the action in his chariot behing the immortals.

Kenny

[dean]

Hello,

Yes Kenny, speaking about a one on one- Darius would probably be nearly twice the height of Alexander or not far off.

Alexander would have certainly been up for the single-combat scenario like you say, the temptation to emulate Achilles on any occasion would have been too strong even if it meant buying it in the process. It was on the battlefied where he believed glory was won and that there was nothing more noble than dying there-

Homer ran in his veins....

Best wishes,
Dean

[kennyxx]

Dean Hail

I doubt Darius hiegth would have been an advantage. I was always aware of how tough Alexabder was. I imagined the arrow through the rib cage and into the lung. And having it cut out in days before Anasthetic and the Bull terrier determanation Alexander had.

The nncident where Alexander was crippled with disentry. Climbed on his horse and lead a battle.

The old adage I think relates to Alexander I feel you could hit the guy full on with a baseball bat and hed still get up and come at you.

I remember a huge Italian boxer called Carmen Basilio. he was a giant. But Joe Loise Knocked the guy out cold. Im sure Darius would not do one to one with Alexander. None of the gunpowder generals would either. I think people Like Attila the Hunn Ghenghis Khan and maybe Hannibal would have.

Kenny

[philalexandros]

I think that this a quite an interesting topic, and interesting to discuss. Darius's actions seem to confuse me alot. Even if he thought that victory would be his and realised it wouldn't, i just can't understand what made him make up his mind to leave the battlefield. Alexander would never have done that. I guess it comes down to mind games in the end. The men look to the commander and leader of the army for courage, it did have a massive effect at Issus when for the second time Darius fled. His men lacked the vigour for the battle.

[marcus]

Whatever the story with Darius Fighting a champion. I wonder with all the commanders through the times just how many would be up to one on one combat.

Achiles and Hector style. Im sure Alexander would be up for some. If in the scenario Alexander challenge Darius do you think Darius would take the Gauntlet. We talk commanders and Warriors we know Alexander was a warrior trained hunting lions etc.

I doubt Darius would fight although he would have a great height advantage.My money would be on Darius staying out of the action in his chariot behing the immortals.

Hi Kenny,

Well, I suppose there's also a question of whether it's actually sensible for the king to be fighting duels. Darius could do it when he was merely a provincial governor; as King of Kings it was, simply put, too risky for him to get involved in something like that. We have to remember, also, that the Great King was so raised on a pedestal that the very idea of fighting single combat would be ludicrous to Darius and to his entire court and command structure.

Macedonian culture was very different, with the king very much more "down to earth". Therefore the idea of the king fighting in the thick of battle, and duelling, would be no surprise. Even so, it was terribly risky, as we know, and there were plenty of times when, had Alexander just been a little less fortunate, the whole expedition would have been over, and 50-odd thousand men would have been left at the mercy of their enemies.

ATB

[marcus]

I think that this a quite an interesting topic, and interesting to discuss. Darius's actions seem to confuse me alot. Even if he thought that victory would be his and realised it wouldn't, i just can't understand what made him make up his mind to leave the battlefield. Alexander would never have done that. I guess it comes down to mind games in the end. The men look to the commander and leader of the army for courage, it did have a massive effect at Issus when for the second time Darius fled. His men lacked the vigour for the battle.

We also have to bear in mind that we only have sources that have come to us from Greek originals. There are plenty of unanswered questions, for example:

1. Was Darius really the first to flee, and did he really do so at such an early stage?
2. Was it really his decision to flee, or was he forced from the battlefield by his officers?

As is so often said, history is written by the victors; as far as this actually is true, the Greek sources cannot have known exactly what was going on in the middle of the Persian lines; and, if truth be told, once Darius was dead there wasn't really anyone who could say exactly what happened from his point of view.

We just need to be a little cautious about accepting the story exactly as it's come down to us.

ATB

[kennyxx]

Marcus The descision to flee/

As you say fleeing as part of a strategy to fight another day is rubbish, Particually following Issus. Following the total colapse of the Persians and the massacres following. You would really be sacrificing a lot of soldiers. Secondly the departure of Darius as we know didnt spell curtains for the Persians as we know they were on top of Parmenion who was in dire danger of been crushed. We know wether or not Alexander meant to chase Darius he HAD to go help Parmenio and to save been beaten as a whole.

Going on that evidence it was irespective wether Darius went or stayed. The Persians still pressed the Macedonian left.

Just my opinion. Darius was no fighter nor a warrior. He was in danger and scarpered.The rhetoric of Macedonians was the Persians led soft and privaledged lives and i doubt Darius could fight his way out of a paper bag. Its very much like the oiks we have as royalty. Can you imagine out tree talking prince Charles scrapping. Its a joke.

I am in no doubt Darius was a coward and fled in shear terror gfor his own skin. Not giving a second thought to the soldiers getting routed and stompen on by chasing Macedonians/

Kenny

[kennyxx]

Marcus Hail

Maybe Darius fleeing was a cleverly disguised ruse. Pretend to flee knowing the Macedonian left was falling.

Draw off Alexanders cavalry. Let the Persians envelope the Macedonian cavalry. Then About rurn and charge Alexander back on his heels. Darius was a genius also maybe and that was his plan.

Just an Idea.

Kenny

[dean]

Hello Kenny,

It is an interesting theory- kinda a simulated retreat- as Alexander used in the Graniccus or ??? Can't remember- but I kinda think that he knew he was up against a tough cookie and decided to do a runner.

I don't think that Darius was stupid- he caught Bagoas- red handed and made him drink his own medicine- Michael Wood in the footsteps of Alexander paints a picture of a man who was reviled by fortune.

As Marcus timely reminds us we have no Persian perspective and the chronicles of war of the time are all written with Greek ink- wouldn't it be great to have the ephemerides of Darius III? Darius was the champion of Ahura Mazda put on earth to save men from the three great enemies- maybe he was thought too valuable a player to lose.
After Gaugamela- the spiked chariots- the elephants- the thousands of men from every corner of the Persian empire- Darius must have thought that "fate" for lack of a better word had "completely" abandoned him.
It is interesting to ponder what wouldhave happened if Darius had had an injection of faith in his star and placed himself on the front line, what might have happened?
Like you say Kenny, the image of Thermoplyae and the Persian king as a mere spectator is a sorry one compared to Alexander's- with not one but two white feathers on his helmet to distinguish himself from other soldiers. That is spirit!!!

Best regards,
Dean

[kennyxx]

dean Hail

I would like to make refernce to the story that Darius fought a combat witha Warrior. I seen it somewhere but whats the source. If there is really no actual testimony from the Persian side then is it a Greek story. To go with the proponatatist like exagerating the Persian forces to make the Greeks look good.

Then maybe the same sources invented the Darius duel to make Darius look pretty tasy as well. I would bet my bottom dollar that Darius didnt deafeat in armed combat a warrior challenge. Darius had no taste for combat and as you say watched from relaitive or what he thought safety. Only it didnt look quite so safe with Alexander coming down his wind pipe.

I would say I was about an inch taller than Alexander and seen my fare share of scraps. But if I had to face him with a sword Id insist on a wqualizer. Something that fired bullets.because man to man id get torn up.

Kenny.

Although id have a little practice if he promised not to kill me lol

[amyntoros]

This morning, as with some kind of six degrees of separation, I located the source for DariusGÇÖ single-handled combat. While searching for information on Waldemar HeckelGÇÖs last Alexander symposium (I want to know when the book is to be published) I came across HeckelGÇÖs original review of Maxwell OGÇÖBrienGÇÖs book. In it he tells how OGÇÖBrien relates and documents Dareios IIIGÇÖs victory over a Kadousian champion. I pulled Alexander the Great: The Invisible Enemy off the shelf; checked the index; checked the page; checked the reference; checked the online Diorodorus Book 17 and here we are:


Diordorus 17.6.1-3
[1] Dareius's selection for the throne was based on his known bravery, in which quality he far surpassed the other Persians. Once when King Artaxerxes1 was campaigning against the Cadusians, one of them with a wide reputation for strength and courage challenged a volunteer among the Persians to fight in single combat with him. No other dared accept, but Dareius alone entered the contest and slew the challenger, being honoured in consequence by the king with rich gifts, while among the Persians he was conceded the first place in prowess. [2] It was because of this prowess that he was thought worthy to take over the kingship. This happened about the same time as Philip died and Alexander became king. [3] Such was the man whom fate had selected to be the antagonist of Alexander's genius, and they opposed one another in many and great struggles for the supremacy. These our detailed narrative will describe in each case. And we may now proceed with our story.

(Btw, OGÇÖBrienGÇÖs book is now $109.67 new from Amazon! Yikes! Thankfully there are still a few used copies available starting at $14 GÇô and a few more inexpensive copies can be found via the Addall search engine. And, no, IGÇÖm not being paid to promote this book!) My edit, later in the day: ItGÇÖs just been pointed out to me that new paperback copies are available at a price of $37.95! ThatGÇÖs a relief!

Best regards,

[dean]

Hello, thanks Amyntoros for that quote, I was trying to discover where it might have come from using Holmstead's History of the Persian Empire but to no avail....

A review of "The invisible Enemy"-?

I have only read the book once but the slant of the it seemed to me to be very interesting and also the impressive second to none bibliography.

Well, apart from the drinking angle, what most interested me was the snippets from Homer, Euripides and other poets of Alexander's day. Many of whose lines Alexander would have known by heart- much as we know many a line from Shakespeare-

So, I would be very interested to read the review you mentioned.

I guess the only snag with addressing the "problem" of Alexander with drink is that you tend to discount other factors that could have intervened in his behaviour. He was subject to the human condition so therefore there was a whole spectrum of possibie factors that could have governed his behaviour-(the greatest being of course his parents) not only that of the vine. In every person anyway there are slight or great fluctuations in mood, behaviours etc-

in my opinion Alexander handled stress in a superhuman way but he needed an escape valve that I guess alcohol provided but there must have been other release valves, some of which may have been hunting or unleashing the unecessary massacres that ensued- for example that of the Branchidae.

Well, anyway it was a jolly good book and J O Brien is a cool dude for me.

Best regards,
Dean