In ancient times, during the war there were "live tanks" - elephants. They had three uses: they served as a barrier against enemy cavalry, attacked enemy infantry ahead of their own, and broke into fortifications 1 . As you know, elephants were specially tamed. Probably the first people to learn how to do this were the Indians .2 According to Strabo, elephants are so easily tamed that they are even trained to throw stones at a target .3 Some elephants carried their drovers, who had fallen or were weak from loss of blood, from the battlefield; they saved the fighters who fell between their forelegs, covering them with themselves and protecting them.

Elephants had combat gear. On their backs, a turret was installed, which could accommodate up to four fighters armed with bows and javelins. A drover was sitting on the animal's neck. Sometimes the elephant was protected by a shell, its back was covered with a colored blanket, sharp iron tips were put on its tusks, and a bell was hung around the animal's neck to intimidate the enemy .4 The elephants were grouped in groups, which were interspersed with 5 infantry units . In battle, elephants were trained to use their body weight as well as their fangs, and they were also trained to grab enemies with their trunks, throw them to the ground ,and trample them underfoot. 6
The first war elephants known to the West came from India, where they received special training. Later, the kings of Egypt from the Ptolemaic dynasty organized the military training of African elephants. Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285 - 247 BC) and Ptolemy III Euergetes (247 - 221 AD) paid special attention to their catching and training. On the western shore of the Red Sea, the city of Ptolemais-Okhotnaya was a center for collecting elephants, which were then delivered to Egypt by barges .7 In Africa, the Carthaginians also caught future war elephants.

It is known from the monuments of Eastern literature that the use of elephants as a military force took place long before Europeans were familiar with this branch of the military. "The king's victory depends mainly on elephants,"says the Indian Arthashastra. The West came face to face with war elephants during the campaigns of Alexander the Great, and not as an "exotic curiosity", but as a formidable weapon that required the use of new tactics and means of struggle .9 At the Battle of Gavgamela, Darius ' Persian army had 15 elephants. They were brought there by the Indies 10 . Elephants and war chariots covered the center of the army and its left wing. Alexander the Great managed to capture them 11 . Diodorus reports that in India the general took possession of other such elephants .12 The Assakens, who opposed Alexander in India, had 30 thousand infantry and 2 thousand cavalry with 30 war elephants .13 And the first real clash of the Macedonians with these "tanks" took place in 326, during the battle of Hydaspes between Alexander and the Indian king Por, who had about 4 thousand cavalry, 300 chariots, 30 thousand infantry and dozens of war elephants .14
How did they operate there? On the battlefield, in the first line of troops there were elephants, in the second - infantry, part of which was also lined up at intervals between the animals. The infantry also stood on the flanks, then in both directions the cavalry was located, in front of which the chariots were placed. The Macedonian infantry, advancing on the elephants, hit them and the drivers with javelins, and the Macedonian cavalry maneuvered, then attacking, then retreating. When the elephants were pushed back and driven into a narrow place, they jostled and trampled people, causing terrible damage to their infantry. Wounded elephants roamed the battlefield randomly, charging at anyone. Finally, the animals were tired, exhausted, and began to move back, "like ships that are coming."

1 W. Tarn. The Hellenistic Military and Naval Developments. N. Y. 1966, p. 95.

2 "Culture of ancient India", Moscow, 1975, p. 385.

3 Strabo. XV, 43, 705.

4 Liv. XXXVII, 40; Plut. Eum., 14.

5 J. Kromayer, G. Weith. Heerwesen und Knegsfuhrung der Griechen und Romer. Miinchen. 1928, S. 141.

6 "Hellenistic technique", Moscow, 1948, p. 276.

7 Ibid., p. 275.

8 "Arthashastra", p. 2; VII. 11.

9 M. Gorelik. Walking fortresses. "Around the world", 1976, N 1, p. 42.

10 Arr. III, 8, 6.

11 Ibid. Ill, 15, 6.

12 Diod. XVII, 86, 2 - 3.

13 Arr. IV, 25, 5.

14 Diod. XVI1, 87, 2; Curt. VIII, 13, 6 - 7.

page 213

reverse"15 . The main role in the battle was played by the fact that Alexander's soldiers cut off the legs and trunks of elephants with axes .16 At the same time, the elephants in their fearsome military garb made a strong impression on the Greeks, especially when they began to trample people and pierce them with their fangs .17 Slow to attack on their own, the elephants significantly strengthened the ranks of the combatants as a barrier . With skillful handling, they broke through the formation of any infantry. But managing them required high skill and skill.

When one of the commanders of Alexander the Great's army, Seleucus, later became king, he ordered the breeding of war elephants, and the latter were not only a special branch of the army, but also a symbol of the Seleucid dynasty. 19 After becoming the master of Central Asia, Seleucus attempted to repeat Alexander the Great's Indian campaign around 305 BC, but when he invaded India, he encountered a powerful anti-Greek revolt [20] led by Chandragupta, the founder of the Mauryan Empire, which was formed and expanded by the satrapies and states founded or retained by Alexander. Chandra Gupta had 600,000 infantry, 30,000 chariots, and 9,000 elephants . Taking advantage of the tense situation in the West, where there was a fierce struggle of the Diadochi for power, he began to liberate the territories captured by Alexander, and then ceded to Seleucus .22 The details of Seleucus ' campaign against Chandragupta are unknown. But after him, Chandragupta forged an alliance with Seleucus, marrying his daughter and giving him 500 war elephants. This allowed Seleucus to march on Antigonus, his main enemy.

When Seleucus entered Cappadocia to take part in the Battle of Ipsus, he had 480 war elephants with him. This number was 6 times higher than that of Antigonus 23 . The battle began with a mutual cavalry charge, led by his son Demetrius on the side of Antigonus, and his son Antiochus on the side of Seleucus. Demetrius managed to disperse the horsemen of Antiochus, but he did not pay attention to what was happening behind him. And Seleucus ordered the elephants to be placed as a barrier, so that Demetrius, when he returned, could not join up with his infantry. And when the gray giants blocked the way back, Antigonus ' phalanxes were left without cover, which Seleucus immediately took advantage of and pushed them back. 24 Soon Antigonus ' army was defeated, he himself was killed, and Demetrius fled .25
In 275 BC, Antiochus won an "elephant victory" in Phrygia over the Galatians, who invaded Asia Minor. Despite the fact that the Galatians outnumbered the Syrians in numbers, excellent cavalry, and better weapons, they could not take advantage of this advantage, as the enemy used 16 elephants hidden behind the infantry ranks. The Galatians saw these animals for the first time, were horrified and trembled. Intoxicated with intoxicating drinks, the elephants gave free rein to rage: they caught up with the enemy, trampled him, pierced people with tusks, and the fugitives were hit by the arrows of archers sitting on the backs of animals in towers. In honor of the victory, Antiochus ordered a monument to be erected on this site with the image of an elephant.

At the same time, the Romans also became familiar with elephants as a military force. In the Battle of Heraclea (280 BC), the Roman legions faced the Greek phalanx of Pyrrhus 7 times, and the outcome of the battle was still unresolved 26 . Here, elephants were brought out against the Roman cavalry. The horses immediately sped away with the riders, not even having time to approach the enemy. Elephants began to destroy the ranks of the fleeing elephants, and none of them probably would have survived if the Roman soldier Gaius Minucius had not managed to wound one of the elephants. The latter, rushing about, detained other animals, and some of the Romans escaped 27 . The same armies met again in 279 near Ausculus. Pyrrhus had 19 elephants. At first, the Romans pushed Pyrrhus back to places that were not safe.-

15 Arr. V, 15, 7.

16 Curt. VIII, 14, 30.

17 Diod. XVII, 87, 5; 88, 1.

18 P. Schachermeyr. Alexander der Grosse. Wien. 1949, S. 347.

19 W. Tarn. Alexander the Great. Vol. II, pp. 95 - 97.

20 "World History", vol. II. M. 1956, pp. 544-545.

21 Plin. VI, 21 - 22.

22 G. M. Bongard-Levin. India of the Mauryan Era, Moscow, 1973, pp. 59-60.

23 I. G. Droizen. History of Hellenism. T. P. M. 1893, p. 305.

24 I. G. Droizen. Decree, op., pp. 307-308; P. Cloche. La Dislocation d'un empire. P. 1959, p. 217.

25 Plut. Demethr., 30.

26 T. Mommsen. History of Rome, Vol. I. M. 1936, p. 375.

27 Plut. Pyr., 17.

page 214

passable for his cavalry, to the wooded banks of the rapid river, from where the elephants also could not attack the enemy line. Night interrupted the battle. On the following day, when Pyrrhus decided to move the battle to the plain in order to engage the elephants, he reinforced the most vulnerable positions with sentries in advance, and, placing javelin throwers and archers between the elephants, moved a tightly closed phalanx against the enemy. The infantry covering the elephants chased away the Roman charioteers, showering them with arrows and stones and cutting the traces of their chariots. After that, the elephants went on the attack and crushed the legionnaires 28 . Thus, at the cost of great sacrifices, the "Pyrrhic victory"was won.

Pyrrhus met the Romans for the third time in 275 BC at Beneventum on the Field of Aruzino. After a hot struggle, the outcome of the battle was again decided by the elephants, but this time in favor of the Romans. Pyrrhus gathered together a group of the most ferocious elephants and marched in the darkness of the night to occupy the heights commanding the field. The paths had to be found by torchlight, the warriors got lost, and a lot of time was lost. And when it was light, the Romans saw their enemies coming up the ridge. Immediately the consul moved forward and overturned the front ranks of the attackers. Many of Pyrrhus ' soldiers were killed and several elephants captured, which allowed the Romans to move the battle to the plain. Pyrrhus ' other elephants stumbled across the braziers that had been set up beforehand. The animals were pelted with flaming arrows and turned back. Maddened with fear and pain, they rushed through the ranks of their own troops, dragging everyone with them. And one elephant, hearing the howl of a wounded baby elephant, came running and made an additional commotion. The Romans broke into Pyrrhus ' camp, killed two elephants, and captured eight others. These animals were the most important decoration of the triumph with which the Consul Curius Dentatus returned to Rome. 29

Finally, in the last battle of Pyrrhus with the Romans, at Argos, his "tanks" played a fatal role. As Pyrrhus approached the city walls in the deep darkness, he found the gates open. The king's warriors rushed through, but the massive carcasses of the elephants did not fit through the narrow gate. I had to remove the towers from their backs, and then put them back up in the dark. It took a long time. The Argosians, hearing the noise, hurried to take up their fortified positions. The battle broke out in the darkness. You couldn't tell which was your own and which wasn't. The largest elephant, falling across the gate, blocked the way of reinforcements 30 . Another elephant searching. the wounded driver, who had fallen from his back, was driven by a mixture of enemies and friends. When he found the driver's body, he picked it up with his trunk, turned back, and began to throw it down and trample on everyone he met. I. was killed in this battle. Pyrrhus himself 31 .

Another theater of operations where war elephants took part is Africa. During the First Punic War, an expedition was sent against Carthage under the leadership of Consul Marcus Regulus. In the battle, the Phoenician cavalry and 100 elephants simply crushed most of the Romans .32 The same role was played by "live tanks "when the Carthaginian commander Hamilcar suppressed a rebel mercenary mutiny with the help of 70 elephants. 33 In the Second Punic War, Hannibal led 37 elephants against Rome, among his other forces . After the most difficult crossing of the Alps, only one of these animals survived, which was ridden by Hannibal himself. In Italy, he had no" live tanks".

In 217 BC, a battle between Ptolemy IV and Antiochus III took place in Kelesirium at Raffia. Polybius has left us a vivid record of the actions of the elephant companies that were brought into action from the very beginning: "And so few of Ptolemy's elephants faced an opponent. They were excellent for fighting tower fighters, stabbing and hitting each other hand-to-hand with javelins, but elephants fought even better, fighting with all their strength and colliding in oncoming combat. For this is the way these animals fight: when they are entwined and their tusks are pressed against each other, they push with all their might and stamp on the spot, until one overcomes the other and pushes him aside with his muzzle; and as soon as one pushes the other sideways, he wounds him with his tusks just like a bull "with horns." Most of Ptolemy's elephants cowardly evaded the enemy.

28 T. Mommsen. Op. ed., p. 379; Plut. Pur., 21.

29 Plut. Pyr., 25; I. G. Droizen. Edict. soch. Vol. III. M. 1893, p. 92; T. Momzen. Op. ed., pp. 386-387.

30 Plut. Pyr., 26.

31 Plut. Pyr., 32.

32 Polyb. 32, 9; 33, 9 - 10; 34, 1 - 8.

33 Polyb..75, 2 - 3; 76, 9; 78, 11.

34 T. Mommsen. Op. ed., p. 543.

page 215

This is what African elephants usually do. They can't stand the smell or the sound of Indian elephants, and I think that when they see them, they are struck by their size and strength, and they take to flight as soon as they see them. Thus it was that the elephants were now driven back in disorder, and the guard of Ptolemy fell back under their pressure, while the troops of Antiochus, having passed the elephants, attacked Polycrates and his horsemen from the flanks and rear. At the same time, the ranks of Greek mercenaries that were between the rocks attacked the Ptolemaic Peltasts, who had already been thrown into confusion by the elephants, and drove them away. " 35
War elephants also played an important role in the victory of Flaminia over the Macedonians at Kinoskephalos (197 BC).36 ; when the Romans defeated the Syrians at Magnesia (190 BC), when elephants trampled their own army 37 ; at Thapsus (46 BC), where the" live tanks " of the Republicans, frightened by the flight of missiles, turned back, rushed at their own and then became the prey of Caesar's legionaries.

In general, the main task of war elephants was to fight enemy cavalry, and when attacking infantry, their use did not give important results if the infantrymen did not succumb to psychological influence .38 In general, the elephant attack against infantry was successful only when the foot soldiers tried to meet it, rallying in a phalanx. Such an accumulation of fighters was a convenient object for the action of "tanks" and ended disastrously for the defenders. The scattered formation gave the infantry an advantage. Even simple means of defense, such as boards studded with nails, were sufficient to stop the elephants. Usually, such primitive means against elephants were used in the course of siege warfare .39
Attempts were also made to use animals to force the city's fortifications, previously weakened by digging. A typical example in this regard is the siege of Megalopolis in 318 BC by Polysperchon, who threw elephants to storm the city. But an old and experienced soldier who had served Alexander the Great threw planks of nails into the ditches. The elephants that ran into them, maddened by pain, caused confusion in the ranks of the attackers and brought them 40 deaths . If the animals encountered a curtain of fire, they were more likely to be more dangerous to their own troops than to the enemy. And after the adoption of the Roman tactics of manipulation, based on the use of advantages of both civilian militia and a professional army, the attacks of war elephants became generally ineffective. "Live tanks" have lost their former significance and turned out to be unprofitable also due to the huge costs of their maintenance, training and care specialists .41 And if in the East the gray giants were used in battles even later, in the West they were now attracted only as participants in circus games.

35 Polyb. V, 84.

36 Polyb. XVIII, 25, 4 - 7.

37 T. Mommsen. Edict op. pages 697-699. .

38 W. Tarn. The Hellenistic Military.., p. 95.

39 Ibid., pp. 96 - 97.

40 Diod. XVIII, 1, 69 - 72.

41 "Hellenistic technique", p. 278.

page 216

Permanent link to this publication: