The Macedonians lived in the middle, wooded part of the Balkan Peninsula. Macedonia occupied an area of 30 thousand square meters. km with a population of about 500 thousand people. There were few cities in Macedonia. The bulk of the population were peasants - landowners, most of whom were free. Along with small peasant landownership in Macedonia in the 5th century BC. e. there was a large landholding of the military-tribal aristocracy.
Macedonia was rich in timber, which, with the development of trade, was exported to Greece. Mining developed, and with it the production of weapons. The occupation of the population of the sea coast by fishing contributed to the development of the fleet.
The main occupation of the population was agriculture and cattle breeding. The development of horse breeding in Macedonia was the basis for the creation of cavalry as a branch of the military, which did not exist in Greece.
The process of decomposition of the clan system in Macedonia began much later than in the rest of Greece. Slavery was at the stage of patriarchal slavery for quite a long time. Politically, the country was fragmented. The tribes that inhabited Macedonia were at enmity with each other. Only in the 5th century BC. e. The process of political centralization, which began in Lower Macedonia, where slavery and trade were more developed, intensified. The fight against the tribal nobility of Upper Macedonia took a whole century, but subsequently the northern tribes were subordinated to the central government.
Macedonia's growth was determined by its economic development and political centralization. During the Peloponnesian War, a favorable external political situation developed for Macedonia, which allowed the Macedonian government to subjugate a significant part of the regions in the northern part of the Balkan Peninsula. Ultimately, by the middle of the 4th century BC. e. Macedonia became the most powerful state in the Aegean Sea basin. By this time, its new capital had grown at a short distance from the sea - Pella.
The government of Macedonia was headed by tsar, which relied on the military-tribal aristocracy, which turned into royal warriors ( hetayrov), as well as large slave owners and traders. The remaining unruined peasantry, interested in eliminating inter-tribal strife and limiting the arbitrariness of the military-tribal aristocracy, supported the policy of centralization of Macedonia.
Under the king there was council of aeters one of the most noble and wealthy Macedonians, who decided the most important issues of domestic and foreign policy.
The unification of Macedonia and the creation of the Macedonian state was completed during the reign of the king Philip II(359-336 BC). Philip lived in Thebes for quite a long time as a political hostage and knew well the state of the Greek states and their military art. Domestic policy during Philip's reign was aimed at completing political centralization, streamlining finances and carrying out military reform.
Organization of the army of ancient Macedonia
Unlike the Greek militia and mercenary armies in Macedonia in the middle of the 4th century BC. e. a permanent, regular army was created, which numbered 30 thousand infantry and 3 thousand cavalry. The infantry was recruited mainly from Macedonian peasants, the cavalry from the landowning nobility. For the recruitment of infantry, the country was divided into 6 districts, for the recruitment of cavalry - into 16 districts. Each district fielded one military unit: for infantry - “ small phalanx”, for cavalry - “ silt" The territorial division was also reflected in the organization of the Macedonian army: residents of one district staffed one unit of one or another type of troops, which increased the cohesion of the army.
The infantry of the Macedonian army was divided into light, medium and heavy. The light infantry was recruited from the poorest strata of the peasantry and from dependent tribes - the Thracians and Illyrians. Medium Infantry Warriors ( hypaspists) resembled Greek peltasts, but did not have darts, since the preparation of the attack was entrusted to light troops. In battle, the hypaspists were the link between the attacking wing of the cavalry and the phalanx of heavy infantry, and also developed the success of the cavalry. The medium infantry included argyraspidae(selected part), which had silver-bound shields. Heavy Infantry ( sarissophora or phalangites - hoplites) was the support of the battle formation. In addition to these types of infantry, the Macedonian army included spear throwers.
The cavalry was divided into heavy ( cataphracts), average ( dimahi) and light. The heavy cavalry delivered the main blow. The middle cavalry was prepared for battle on horseback and on foot. The light cavalry did not have defensive weapons; they started the battle, and then provided the flanks and rear of the battle formation. Cavalry as a regular branch of the army was first created in Macedonia. The Macedonian cavalry had a solid organization and strict discipline; each fighter occupied a certain place in the ranks, which he could not leave without the permission of his superior. The cavalry in the Macedonian army played an important role - it was the means of the main attack in the battle and attacked the enemy infantry mainly in the flank.
Heavy cavalry (getairs) and heavy infantry (gyraspists) formed the privileged core of the army - the guard.
This division in cavalry and infantry (into heavy, medium and light) was very important in battle: it increased the tactical maneuverability of the army as a whole. The heterogeneity of the troops served as the basis for the tactical division of the army.
The heavy infantry were armed with sarissas, the length of which gradually increased from 2 to 6 m. Six ranks were armed with these pikes, so that the phalanx was covered with a pike wall. Sarissophora also had swords. The small Greek shields were replaced by large rectangular shields. All warriors wore helmets. Light infantry were armed with a bow, sling and javelin. Light horsemen carried bows, short spears and javelins. The heavy cavalry was armed with sarissas, swords or curved sabers. The riders sat on blankets or cushions - a kind of saddles without stirrups.
The main part of the army was the huge, heavy Macedonian phalanx, numbering 16-18 thousand fighters. The phalanx had 8, 10, 12 and even 24 ranks in depth; The greater the depth of the phalanx, the shorter the length of its front. The movement of such a phalanx required a lot of preparation. It is no coincidence that the Macedonian army paid great attention to combat training, especially to the training of command personnel. Much attention was paid to the organization of the fleet, which in the second half of the 4th century BC. e. numbered 160 triremes. At the same time, fortresses were built and roads were laid. Siege technology received significant development.
Unification of Greece led by Macedonia
Political, economic and military reforms carried out during the reign of Philip II strengthened the internal position of Macedonia. The Macedonians captured the entire Thracian coast from Pydna to the Hellespont. Having captured Thrace, the Macedonian government intervened in Greek affairs at the first opportunity. The reason for the intervention was the war provoked by Philip between the Thebans and Phocians. During this war, the Macedonian army sided with the Thebans, defeated the Phocians and occupied Thessaly; Thus, the Macedonians strengthened themselves in Northern Greece.
The successes of Macedonian policy were in the hands of the Greek oligarchy, which saw in Macedonia the force that could put an end to the political and economic fragmentation of Greece. It became obvious that the old political forms - the fragmentation of Greece into numerous enemies at war with each other policies- have outlived their usefulness. Political fragmentation was beneficial only to the external enemy - Persia, which found itself in control of the Aegean Sea. Internecine wars also hampered the economic development of Greece.
In such an internal and external political situation in Greece, the idea of unifying the policies became very popular. But different principles and forms of unification were put forward.
Representatives of the oligarchy justified the need for a military dictatorship, which, in their opinion, could only “bring order to Greece.” The strong Macedonian state was supposed to unite the Greek city-states. On this basis, a Macedonian group arose in Athens, fighting for the unification of the Greek states under the hegemony of Macedonia, whose government was to introduce a military dictatorship in Greece.
A teacher of eloquence was a supporter of the military dictatorship and a conductor of Macedonian policy in Athens Isocrates, who proved the need for a pan-Greek war with Persia. "There",- said Isocrates, - “a rich, luxurious country awaits us, where we can find happiness, freedom and abundance, and along with wealth, unanimity and harmony will return to homes and communities.” Thus, Isocrates, dreaming of renewing the fight, set aggressive goals; they were the main incentive for starting the war.
Military dictatorship, military colonization and Persian wealth were the means that, according to representatives of the Macedonian group, were supposed to lead Greece out of the political crisis. The war was supposed to help supporters of the military dictatorship send to the east all the restless elements who were the support of the anti-Macedonian group that defended the democracy of the Greek slave owners.
The dictatorship of the Macedonian king would mean the end of Athenian democracy. This fact determined the consolidation of the democratic forces of Athens. The leader of the anti-Macedonian group was the famous orator of antiquity Demosthenes, who became Philip's main opponent.
The anti-Macedonian group, in its fight against the “Macedonian barbarian” (Philip), relied on the mass of medium and small slave owners, on Athenian gunsmiths and traders who did not want to let go of the Black Sea market. This group opposed the military dictatorship of the Macedonian king and demanded the preservation of a democratic constitution
In speeches against Philip (“ philippics”) Demosthenes argued that the “Macedonian barbarian” would not save Hellenic culture, but would destroy the last remnants of Greek independence. Demosthenes also spoke out for the unification of Greece, but only through the creation of a Greek federation, for which, however, the basis was too narrow. The rivalry of the poleis, discord within democracy itself, slave uprisings, Macedonian politics, which used bribery and weapons - all this prevented the creation of a Greek federation.
The Macedonian group in Athens became increasingly stronger and was the conductor of Macedonian policy. In 346 BC. e. The Philocratic Peace was signed between Macedonia, Athens and their allies, which was the first event in the unification of Greece for the “happy war” with Persia. But the peace treaty did not exclude the struggle between Athens and Macedonia.
In 342 BC. e. The Macedonians captured Euboea, Epirus and Aetolia. All of Northern Greece was in their hands. This worried Athens. The Greeks quickly prepared for war. War broke out in 339 BC. e. The Macedonian army invaded Central Greece, destroyed Amphisa and took a position near the city of Eretrea in Northern Phocis, which threatened Thebes. Boeotia joined the anti-Macedonian alliance. The coalition was led by Athens.
In August 338 BC. e. in Boeotia at Chaeronea a major battle took place. The Greek army numbered about 30 thousand people. The Macedonian army was the same, but it had better organization and weapons. Its left wing was commanded Alexander- Philip's 18-year-old son. The strike of the Macedonian phalanx, while simultaneously enveloping the right flank of the Greek battle formation, decided the outcome of the battle. The Greeks could not withstand this blow and were defeated. The Macedonian army showed its superiority over the Greek army.
After the victory at Chaeronea, the Macedonian army moved to Thebes. Athens at this time was preparing for resistance. Having dealt with Boeotia, Philip offered Athens peace and alliance. As a result of negotiations at the end of 338 BC. e. a union of all Greek states (with the exception of Sparta) was formalized. An “eternal” defensive-offensive alliance was concluded with Macedonia. The unification of Greece under the hegemony of Macedonia was aimed at waging aggressive wars in Asia.
The first condition for waging a successful war with Persia was the end of internecine wars, and they were prohibited. By agreeing to freedom of navigation, Macedonia at the same time ensured dominance over the straits. Preparing the war with Persia, Philip achieved the adoption of a decree according to which the Greeks were prohibited from being hired to serve the enemies of Macedonia.
Having secured hegemony in Greece, Macedonia in 336 BC. e. started a war with Persia. The vanguard of the Macedonian army moved to Asia Minor under the command of Parmenion, who crossed the Hellespont. Philip was soon killed, and his young son Alexander, who received a good upbringing and education, became king of Macedonia. His tutor for several years was the greatest Greek philosopher Aristotle- a man of encyclopedic knowledge. Under his leadership, Alexander became one of the most educated people of his time. From the age of 16, he took part in his father’s campaigns and received good practical combat training.
After the assassination of Philip, the anti-Macedonian party began to act energetically in Greece. In festive clothes, with a wreath on his head, Demosthenes appeared at a meeting of the Athenian council and congratulated him on the death of the “tyrant”. “Well, this boy, Alexander, is not scary for us,” he said. The Thracians, Illyrians and other tribes also showed an intention to settle old scores with Macedonia. Unrest began in the Macedonian army located in Asia Minor.
In this difficult situation, Alexander found support among the bulk of the Macedonian peasantry and among the Eters - the nobility of the Macedonian court. First of all, order was restored in the army, where, under the leadership Attala an uprising was being prepared. After this, the Macedonian army quickly invaded Greece, and Alexander renewed the treaty with the Hellenic League. Then a campaign was undertaken north as far as the Danube and into Illyria.
During these campaigns, the anti-Macedonian party, which was subsidized by the Persians, strengthened in Greece. Demosthenes received 300 talents from the Persians to fight Macedonia. A rumor was spread that Alexander had died in the fight against the Illyrians, and this was the reason for the uprising that Thebes began. The rebels besieged the Macedonian garrison in Kadmeia (the Kremlin of Thebes).
Having learned about the uprising in Greece, Alexander moved the Macedonian army from Illyria to Boeotia, and after 14 days it was already near Thebes. Thebes was besieged and then taken by a double blow: from the field - by the arriving troops, from Cadmea - by the Macedonian garrison. The city was destroyed to the ground, about 30 thousand captives were sold into slavery by the Macedonians. Calm has come to Greece.
Returning to Macedonia, Alexander organized preparations for a campaign in Persia. The Macedonians spent the entire winter of 335/34 BC on this. e.
The phalanx is the main striking force of the army of Alexander the Great
Reform of the army led by Alexander the Great
The organization of the Macedonian army during the reign of Alexander remained essentially the same. The structure of the army was only improved and the combat training of ordinary soldiers and commanders was improved. The phalanx of heavy infantry of the Macedonian army consisted of 16,384 people. It was built 16 ranks deep, with 1,024 people in each rank. The front of the phalanx was a kilometer long.
The phalanx had a clear organizational structure. At the head of each unit of the phalanx was a commander. The lowest division was “ sucker” - one person in front and 16 people in depth. The following units consisted of 2, 4, 8 and 16 suckers.
A column of 16 people along the front and 16 people in depth (256 people) was called syntagma and was the smallest combat unit; 16 syntagmas were small phalanx, 4 small phalanges formed large phalanx. When special stability was required, the left wing of the phalanx moved behind the right. With this formation, the phalanx had 512 people along the front and 32 ranks in depth. If in combat terms the Macedonian phalanx was dismembered, then in tactical terms it was a single whole. In combat, no intervals were allowed between units. Inside the phalanx, the warriors stood so close to each other that they were unable to turn around. An increase in the depth and density of the phalanx sharply reduced its mobility and flexibility. She could not operate on rough terrain. The phalanx had neither support nor reserve, but it had enormous striking power
The guard (gyraspists) was strengthened to 6 thousand people. The gyraspists were armed with long pikes and large shields. The gyraspists were lightly armed and could operate in both closed and open formations.
The Greeks had insignificant cavalry, and it did not decide the outcome of the battle. The Macedonian cavalry played a very important role in the battle, and its actions determined the outcome of the battle. The cavalry attacked in a rectangular, diamond-shaped or wedge-shaped column. The cavalry in the Macedonian army was an independent branch of the army.
The basis of the battle formation of the Macedonian army was a phalanx of heavy infantry, relying on which the cavalry maneuvered and struck. The right wing of the battle formation usually consisted of medium infantry, guards and heavy Macedonian cavalry, the left wing - of light infantry and allied (Thessalian) cavalry. The main combat mission was assigned to the right wing.
Most of the light infantry and light cavalry were located in front of the battle formation. The light troops were entrusted with starting the battle, fighting elephants and enemy war chariots. Sometimes part of the light infantry and cavalry was located in the second line, behind the flanks; part of the troops guarded the convoy and the camp.
The Macedonian army advanced with ledges from the right flank. The heavy cavalry, commanded by Alexander, supported by heavy infantry, delivered the main blow; Hypaspists (medium infantry) were sent into the breakthrough and built on their success. Heavy infantry completed the defeat of the enemy. Light cavalry pursued the enemy. Thus, each component of the battle formation had its own tactical task. In general, the battle formation of the Macedonian army maneuvered well on the battlefield.
The idea of Epaminondas in the Macedonian army was developed to a combined combination of infantry and cavalry actions, i.e., two types of troops. But this required long-term training of privates and command personnel, and high combat training of units. Army control became more complicated; it now began to be distributed between individual branches of the military (infantry and cavalry) and individual units of the battle formation.
During the preparation for the war with Persia, the Macedonian army paid much attention to the creation of siege equipment. With the help of siege engines, the Macedonians destroyed fortress walls and took cities by storm. The Macedonian army widely used various devices for crossing rivers and building bridges.
An important issue in preparing the campaign was the organization of the military rear of the Macedonian army. The convoy followed directly behind the army, and during stops it was located in a fortified camp and was carefully guarded. The convoy contained military equipment, siege engines and assault weapons, artisans with their tools for various works, representatives of Greek science to study new countries, and traders. The wagon train behind the army often carried booty, including prisoners. As a result, the military rear of the army turned out to be cumbersome and often hampered the movement of the army.
The conquest of Alexander the Great: forces and plans of the parties
The huge Persian despotism arose as a result of the conquest of the territories of various tribes and their unification. It was a politically fragile state that united peoples at different stages of social development. Satrapies turned into independent components of despotism, the connection between which became increasingly weakened. The Persian despotism was experiencing a deep internal crisis and was on the eve of collapse. As a result, the Persian army and navy had many weaknesses, in particular, they did not have a unified command.
In the second half of the 4th century BC. in Persia there was a collapse of the ruling elite and the growth of the liberation movement among individual peoples that were part of the despotism. A strong anti-Persian movement began in Egypt at this time. Revolts against Persian despotism broke out in many areas of Persia. All this was a consequence of the exorbitant increase in taxes, the arbitrariness of the Persian bureaucracy, and the separatist aspirations of the satraps. The decline of trade, crafts, agriculture and cattle breeding complemented the overall picture of decomposition. The Persian state became an easily accessible target for Greco-Macedonian colonial expansion.
If at the end of the 5th century BC. e. The Persians rushed to Europe with the aim of enslaving new peoples and consolidating their dominance in the Mediterranean, then in the second half of the 4th century BC. e. The Persian policy was aimed only at preserving their possessions in Asia Minor and dominance at sea. This was facilitated by the increasing political fragmentation of Greece, which the Persians sought. The Peace of Antalcis was a major success of Persian policy.
“King Artaxerxes considers it just”- the contract stated - “so that all the cities of Asia Minor belong to him, and from the islands - Clazomene and Cyprus. All other cities, large and small, should be given autonomy, except Lemnos, Imbros and Skyros, which still remain under the control of Athens.”. This treaty cemented the political fragmentation of Greece. Persian policy was reactionary in nature, since it prevented the creation of large state associations in Europe, the need for which was urgently dictated by economic development.
In the second half of the 4th century BC. e. in the Mediterranean basin there was a process of development of productive forces, industry and trade. The political fragmentation of Greece hindered this development. It was these circumstances that determined the success of the Macedonian policy in Greece, which was aimed at unifying the Greek city-states. But Macedonia's foreign policy was reactionary. “United Greece is embarking on a campaign against the ancient enemy of the Hellenic people - Persia. A happy war with Persia will open up space for the entrepreneurial spirit and free Greece from the mass of poor people, giving work to the wandering elements that threaten the very existence of the Hellenic state and culture.”(Isocrates, Panegyric, 168.).
By war with Persia, representatives of the reactionary oligarchy hoped to divert the attention of the Greek slave-owning democracy from their internal politics and strengthen the position of the reaction. Isocrates demanded to move “war to Asia, and Asia’s happiness to itself”.
These are the economic and political foundations of this war, which was determined, first of all, by the desire of the Greek-Macedonian slave owners to eliminate the centuries-old powerful rival - the Persian despotism - from the Mediterranean Sea, Asia Minor and the eastern trade routes, to seize new lands, wealth, slaves and thereby strengthen the military dictatorship in Greece. On the part of the Greco-Macedonian Union, it was a war of conquest. Persian slave owners fought to preserve the slave-owning despotism that oppressed the peoples of Asia Minor and Central Asia. Thus, it was a war over who should rob and oppress more, that is, an unjust war of slave owners on both sides.
The Macedonians carried out comprehensive political and military preparations for the war with Persia. The Philocratic peace was the first event of political preparation for the “happy war” with Persia. This was warmly welcomed by Isocrates. “Let the army, inspired by the patriotic idea,”- he wrote, - “will make Greece the owner of the inexhaustible treasures of the East, the center of world exchange”. But the anti-Macedonian group sharply opposed the Macedonian king, all of whose thoughts and actions, according to Demosthenes, were aimed at one goal - the destruction of Greek freedom and Hellenic education. “In the cunning plans of the Macedonian”, - said Demosthenes, - “There can be no doubt. The only goal that Philip strives to achieve is to rob Hellas, to take away its natural wealth, trade and strategic points. Philip takes advantage of discord and disagreement among the Hellenes themselves.”(Demosthenes, Speech against Philip, III, 39).
The rear of the Macedonian army - its main base - turned out to be fragile. It was necessary to ensure the campaign of the Macedonian army in Persia in a strategic sense. The situation for the invasion of Persia was favorable. Firstly, the Greek colonies in Asia Minor provided support for the organization of an intermediate base. Secondly, the Greek mercenaries, who made up a significant part of the Persian army, did not represent a reliable force in the war against the Macedonian army, which had many Greeks in its ranks. Thirdly, the Greeks had a wealth of experience in military operations in Persia, in particular, the experience of the “campaign of ten thousand” under the command of Xenophon. Alexander and his commanders carefully studied the works of Xenophon and especially his Anabasis. Finally, the Macedonian army was a regular army, a significant part of which was well-trained regular cavalry, which was of great importance in the fight against the irregular cavalry of the East.
One more fact should be noted. Alexander's father Philip lived as a political hostage for eight years in Thebes in the house of Epaminondas and perfectly studied the theory of military affairs. Philip passed this knowledge on to his son, who was able not only to perceive, but also to develop Epaminondas’ ideas further. The use of historical experience and achievements of military theoretical thought was the most important moment in preparation for war.
Persia potentially had a large military force, but it was a militia made up of warriors from various tribes and peoples under despotic oppression. The vastness of the territory made it difficult to assemble these militias. In addition, the internal political situation of the Persian despotism negatively affected the state of its army: it did not have a strong rear. The heterogeneity of individual units and their weak cohesion were the main shortcomings of the Persian army. The bulk of the troops were irregular militia.
The advantages of the Persians were primarily the presence of large funds and a strong fleet (over 400 large ships). Darius III Kodoman had the opportunity to maintain a significant army of mercenaries (up to 20 thousand people), most of which consisted of Greeks. The Persian fleet dominated the Mediterranean Sea, which facilitated the defense of the straits.
In terms of territory and population, the Persian despotism was five times larger than Macedonia and Greece combined. Consequently, the human resources that Macedonia could have were several times less than the human resources of Persia. But the superiority of the Macedonian conquerors lay in their incomparably higher mobilization readiness, which was determined by the presence of a standing army. Good training of regular troops, extensive combat experience, unity of command - all this favorably distinguished the Macedonian army from the Persian irregular army.
30 thousand infantry, 5 thousand horsemen and 160 ships were prepared for the campaign in Persia. Thus, despite the potential numerical superiority of the Persians and the enormous territorial size of the Persian state, the campaign of the Macedonian conquerors was not an adventure. The difficult internal political situation of Persia and the low combat capability of its army created the preconditions for the success of the Macedonians.
The plan of the Macedonian conquerors was to fight on land, since the Persians had too obvious superiority at sea. It was decided to capture the western and southern coasts of Asia Minor and cut off the Persian fleet from the land army. After the destruction or isolation of the Persian fleet and the creation of a base on the coast, it was planned to invade deep into Persia, defeat the Persian army and capture the political center of the country - Babylon. To ensure the main base (Macedonia and Greece), it was decided to allocate a strong strategic reserve, which was supposed to maintain order in Greece and defend the coast in the event that the Persian fleet tried to land troops.
The Persians did not have a unanimous opinion on the issue of the war plan. There was a struggle between the Greek Memnon- the best military leader of the Persians - and the satraps of Asia Minor, who proceeded from local interests. Memnon proposed not to accept battle with the Macedonian army and retreat deep into Persia, destroying everything in its path. He believed in leaving strong garrisons on the coast, assigning them the task of stubbornly defending important points. The fleet was supposed to land troops in Greece with the aim of raising an uprising against Macedonia. Memnon sought to gain time to gather militias.
The Asia Minor satraps insisted not to give up Asia Minor for plunder and to prevent the invasion of the Macedonian army. But the Persian command did not take any measures to prevent the Macedonian army from crossing the Hellespont. The defenders refused to use the strong water line in the most favorable conditions, that is, with complete dominance of the Persian fleet at sea. Memnon's proposal was accepted to land troops in Greece with the aim of organizing an uprising against Macedonia there, as well as to strengthen the most important points on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea and occupy them with strong garrisons.
At the insistence of the Asia Minor satraps, the Persian command began to concentrate its troops towards the coast of Asia Minor in the direction of the Hellespont in order to counter the Macedonian army. Thus, the purposeful actions of the Macedonian conquerors were opposed by a half-hearted plan dictated by the local interests of the satraps of Asia Minor.
The beginning of Alexander the Great's campaign to the East
Undertaking a campaign in Persia, Alexander left as governor in Macedonia Antipater, which had at its disposal significant forces numbering about 14 thousand people; these forces constituted a strategic reserve and ensured the stability of the rear of the Macedonian army.
During the campaign in Persia, a kind of headquarters was created in the Macedonian army, which, along with the military, included scientists, which was of great importance for collecting intelligence data, studying and developing lands still unknown to the Greeks.
The formal reason for the start of the war was the Greek demand to return the statues of gods captured by the Persians during the Greco-Persian Wars. Back in 338 BC. e. At a pan-Greek meeting in Corinth, it was decided to take revenge on the Persians for the sacrilege they committed against Greek temples.
The strategic content of the first period of the war was the struggle of the Macedonian army to separate the Persian army and navy, destroy the bases of the Persian fleet, ensure the dominance of the Greek fleet in the Aegean and Mediterranean seas, establish the Macedonians on the Asia Minor coast and, thereby, reliably provide the rear and communications of the Macedonian army.
In the spring of 334 BC. e. The Macedonian army under the command of Alexander crossed the Hellespont and. The Persians, despite the superiority of their fleet, did not prevent the crossing of the strait.
The main stages of the first period of the war were: battle on the Granik River and the first defeat of the Persian army; the struggle of the Macedonians for dominance on the coast of Asia Minor with the aim of destroying the Persian fleet bases there; the battle of Issa and the second defeat of the Persian army; the capture of Phenicia, whose fleet made up the majority of the Persian fleet; campaign in Egypt with the aim of strengthening the position in the Mediterranean basin.
The Macedonian army marched straight from the Hellespont to Sardis, the center of the second satrapy. On the third day after leaving Arisba, the Macedonians saw a Persian army on the right bank of the Granik River. This happened at the crossing point with the Granik River on the road from Lampsak to Edremit near the village of Tepekaya (modern name). Battle on the Granik River in 334 BC. e. The Persian satraps insisted on giving battle without allowing the Macedonian army to penetrate deeply. This first battle took place on the small river Granik, which flows into the Propontis (Sea of Marmara); here the Persian army took up a defensive position.
In the battle on the Granik River, the Macedonian army had 30 thousand infantry and 5 thousand cavalry. The Persians had approximately 20 thousand Greek mercenaries and 20 thousand horse and foot archers.
Thus, the number of armies of the two opponents was approximately equal, but the Macedonian army was better armed, organized and trained.
The Persians occupied the high right bank of the Granik River. Persian horse and foot archers were lined up in front: infantry in the center, cavalry on the flanks. Behind them, on the heights, stood a phalanx of mercenaries. The Persian cavalry was supposed to throw the Macedonians who were crossing back into the river. The Greek mercenaries had the task of attacking the infantry if they managed to cross. Thus, the Persian command decided to use the natural obstacle to increase the defensive strength of their troops. The use of terrain for tactical purposes was a new moment in the development of military art. The Persian command, noticing Alexander on the right wing of the Macedonian army, gave the order to reinforce its left wing with cavalry.
The Macedonian army marched to the Granik River, ready to deploy for battle: in order to reconnoiter the enemy forces, a detachment of heavily armed horsemen and lightly armed infantrymen moved ahead; Behind the vanguard were the main forces: in the center was a double phalanx of hoplites, on its flanks - cavalry; The main forces were followed by a convoy.
The scout reported to Alexander that the Persians were standing on the opposite bank of the river, apparently ready for battle. Alexander personally conducted reconnaissance and decided to immediately attack the Persians. One of the military leaders, Parmenion, warned Alexander against such a decision, pointing out the unfavorable conditions of the terrain - it was necessary to overcome the steep bank of the river under the influence of the enemy. Parmenion suggested camping on the river bank; this would force the Persians to withdraw their army for the night and enable the Macedonians to easily cross the river in the morning. But such slowness in action, according to Alexander, could encourage the enemy and have a negative effect on his troops. Therefore, he ordered the Macedonian army to form up for battle.
The battle formation of the Macedonian army consisted of three main parts: the right wing, where there was heavy cavalry (hetaira), reinforced by archers and spearmen, the center - a phalanx of heavy infantry, and the left wing - Thessalian and allied cavalry. The light infantry deployed in front covered the entire battle formation. The right wing was commanded by Alexander, the left by Parmenion. The main blow was delivered by the right wing. In addition to Parmenion, Arrian lists 14 private commanders, which indicates the independent actions of the units of the Macedonian army.
The first stage of the battle is the repulsion by the Persians of the attempts of the vanguard of the Macedonian army to cross the Granik River.
Alexander ordered the vanguard, reinforced by mounted scouts and a detachment of infantry, to begin crossing on the extreme right flank of the battle formation. The Persians repelled the first attempt to cross the river, hitting the Macedonian detachment from the high right bank with arrows and darts. Having a large numerical superiority at this point, the Persians almost completely destroyed the vanguard of the Macedonian army.
The second stage of the battle is the advance of the right wing of the battle formation of the Macedonian army and the defeat of the Persian cavalry.
Seeing the failure of his vanguard, Alexander personally led the right wing of his army into battle, and it entered the river to the sound of trumpets and a battle song. A “cavalry battle” ensued, as Arrian calls it. As soon as the Macedonians began to push back the Persian cavalry, a phalanx of infantry and the left wing of the Macedonian army began to cross the river. The Persians suffered heavy losses from the lightly armed Macedonian infantry mixed with cavalry. The right wing of the Macedonian army achieved the first success, then the center of the Persian line faltered, followed by the horsemen of the right flank. The mercenary infantry, which stood in the second line on the heights, did not support the first line, which allowed the Macedonians to defeat the Persian army piece by piece. The Persian horse and foot archers began to flee, but the Macedonians did not pursue them far.
The third stage of the battle is the destruction of the mercenaries of the Persian army.
Alexander decided to attack the Greek mercenaries with a phalanx from the front, and cavalry from the flanks and rear. Of the 20 thousand mercenaries, only 2 thousand were captured, the rest were destroyed. The Macedonians declared the captured Greeks traitors, chained them and sent them to Macedonia for hard labor.
Alexander showed great care for his wounded, visited them personally, and talked with almost everyone. The dead were buried with military honors on the battlefield, where a grave mound was built. Parents and children of killed soldiers were exempt from land taxes, all personal duties and property contributions. Alexander ordered copper statues of heroes to be cast and installed in the temple.
The Macedonian army achieved great success in the first battle with the Persians. The victory on the Granik River opened up a direct path for the Macedonians to the Tigris and Euphrates valley - to the center of Persian despotism. But it was decided to reliably consolidate this victory by creating an intermediate base on the coast. The Macedonian army moved through Pergamum towards Sardis.
In the battle on the Granik River, the Macedonian army, having good interaction between the military branches and components of the battle formation, acted taking into account the terrain and the characteristics of the enemy’s battle formation. The attacking wing consisted of cavalry, which fought alongside the hypaspists. The battle formation of the Macedonian army was built taking into account the maneuver. This was a new moment in the development of military art. The battle on the Granik River, as Engels notes, is the first example in military history; when regular cavalry played a decisive role in the battle.
It should be noted that Alexander exposed the right wing of his battle formation to the danger of defeat in parts by not supporting the vanguard in a timely manner.
There was inconsistency in the actions of the Persians. The Greek mercenaries did not support the Persian cavalry, which attacked the enemy infantry at a very advantageous moment - during its restructuring from marching to battle formation.
The struggle for dominance on the Mediterranean coast
After the victory on the Granik River, the cities on the Asia Minor coast surrendered to the Macedonians without resistance. The Greeks of Asia Minor were waiting for the Macedonian army as a deliverer from the Persian yoke. Only Miletus, whose garrison consisted of Greek mercenaries, resisted. The entire Persian fleet was located not far from Miletus. But the Macedonians got ahead of the Persians, taking up a strong position with their fleet near Miletus. The city was cut off from sea and land and was taken by storm.
After the fall of Miletus, the Persians gathered all the forces remaining in Asia Minor in Halicarnassus. Their fleet also departed there. The Macedonian fleet could not fight on the high seas with the large Persian fleet, so Alexander returned most of the ships to Macedonia, and the Macedonian land army besieged Halicarnassus.
Making extensive use of siege technology, the Macedonians made breaks in the walls and broke into the city, but the Persians, with the help of the fleet, managed to remove their army from it.
Having captured Halicarnassus, the Macedonian army firmly established itself on a section of the coast of Asia Minor stretching over 400 km, which became an intermediate base for the Macedonians.
The Persian fleet, deprived of its ports, was forced to go south, that is, move away from Greece, the main base of the Macedonian army. The departure of the Persian fleet actually meant that it ceased to play the role of an important force in the fight against the Macedonian conquerors.
In the winter of 334/33 BC. e. The Macedonian army occupied Caria, Lycia and Pamphylia without resistance, that is, the entire southwestern part of Asia Minor. Then the Macedonians rose north to Greater Phrygia, and from there descended to the south, completing the conquest of the Persian possessions in Asia Minor. Thus, as a result of the first year of the war, an intermediate base was created and communication was ensured, connecting the Macedonian army with the main base - Macedonia and Greece.
To strengthen their position in Asia Minor, the Macedonians took a number of measures:
- firstly, they strengthened the most important strategic points (cities, ports) occupied by strong garrisons that made up the closest strategic reserve;
- secondly, they placed their own military leaders at the head of the conquered provinces, who were obliged to create warehouses with supplies of food, weapons and equipment; the Macedonian garrisons were also subordinate to these commanders;
- thirdly, the Macedonians left the local government of the conquered provinces intact, prohibiting an increase in taxes compared to what the residents paid to the Persians.
Despite significant strategic successes, the political and military position of the Macedonian conquerors was still not strong enough. Memnon even made an attempt to carry out a landing in Greece, but it was not successful, since Antipater promptly occupied the coast of the Peloponnese. In Babylonia, the Persians gathered a large army and moved it to Syria. In Greece itself, anti-Macedonian sentiments intensified: Athens sent its envoys to Darius, and the Spartans rebelled, but Antipater suppressed the uprising of Sparta and other policies that joined it. The strategic reserve fulfilled its task, providing deep rear support to the active Macedonian army.
In the spring of 333 BC. e. The Macedonians captured Cilicia. Here they received information that large Persian forces were concentrated in the northern part of Syria. Two paths led to the place of concentration of the Persian army through mountain passes, 50 km apart from each other. Alexander decided to use the southern mountain pass and moved his army along the coastal road through Issus to the Persian location.
When the army reached Myriander, it became known that the Persian army took advantage of the northern mountain pass, went behind enemy lines and occupied Issus, interrupting Macedonian communications. The Macedonian army found itself in an open operational direction (an operational direction is understood as a direction in which the army as a whole acted or could operate; this term is not used here in the modern sense of the terminology of operational art, which arose and took shape in the machine period of war - in the 20th century), leading deep into Persia.
Having clarified the information received by intelligence, Alexander gathered his military leaders to “inspire courage in them.” “The deity himself fights best for us,” he said, “having given Darius the idea of moving his army from the vast plain and locking it in a narrow place, where there will be enough space for us to stretch out our phalanx, and the enemies, who are unequal us neither body nor spirit, their mass will be completely useless in battle. The Macedonians, who had long been trained in the art of war and danger, will fight against the long-pampered Persians and Medes, and most importantly, free people will engage in battle with slaves; the Greeks will fight here with the Greeks not for the same prize: those who stand for Darius - for a fee, and an insignificant one, but those who are with them will voluntarily fight for Greece” (Arraan, book II, VII.).
It can be assumed that Alexander deliberately not only did not use the northern mountain pass to approach the enemy, but also left it unoccupied when moving south, thereby jeopardizing the communications of his army. This risky maneuver of the Macedonian army was intended to create an advantageous situation in the battle, paralyzing the numerical superiority of the enemy with favorable terrain conditions. It is more likely that the Macedonian commander made a mistake by not ensuring his communications, which the Persians took advantage of by cutting it off. The Macedonian army found itself in a critical situation. Alexander sought to justify this mistake of his, saying that he acted this way allegedly deliberately in order to weaken his numerical superiority.
Battle of Issa in 333 BC.
The Persians occupied a position beyond the Pinar River with a total length of up to 4 km. The right bank of the river was steep, and where it seemed accessible, the Persians built a rampart. When information was received about the approach of the Macedonian army, Darius moved forward light infantry and cavalry and, under their cover, began to build his battle formation. The Persian army was positioned in two lines. In the first line in the center were Greek mercenaries and a detachment of the Persian king, and detachments of the best Persian warriors were placed on the flanks.
Against the left flank, a strong detachment of Persians was advanced forward to a height that occupied a flanking position in relation to the Macedonian army. The second line housed most of the Persian army in a deep formation. Having completed the formation of the battle formation, Darius gave the sign to the advanced troops to retreat beyond the Pinar River. He ordered the withdrawn cavalry to be built on the right flank near the sea, and sent part of the cavalry to the left wing towards the mountains. The location of the Persians was crowded, as a result of which they were not able to use their numerical superiority. Having decided to give battle, Alexander sent reconnaissance to Issus and organized the guard of the army. At dawn, the Macedonian army set out towards Issus.
Alexander gathered all his military leaders, explained to them the situation of the upcoming battle, showed that the enemy was not able to use the mass of his soldiers due to the terrain conditions, and pointed out the low moral qualities of the Persian army. In order to instill in his commanders confidence in success, he reminded them of the victory on the Granik River and the successful actions of Xenophon with 10 thousand Greeks in Asia.
The battle formation of the Macedonian army consisted of three main parts: the right wing - the heavy cavalry under the command of Alexander, the center - the hoplite phalanx and the left wing - the cavalry of the Peloponnesians and the rest of the allies under the command of Parmenion. Noticing that almost the entire Persian cavalry was against the weak left wing of the Macedonian army, Alexander ordered the Thessalian cavalry to secretly move from the right wing to the left. Parmenion received the task of coming close to the sea and repelling attempts by the Persian cavalry to cover the left flank of the Macedonian battle formation. On the right wing, a ledge forward, was a detachment of scouts and archers. A strong Macedonian detachment stood with a ledge back and half a turn to the right in front of the height occupied by the Persians. Then the right wing of the battle formation was further strengthened and lengthened at the expense of the center, as a result of which the front of the Macedonian army turned out to be longer than the front of the Persian army.
The first stage of the battle is the offensive of the Macedonian army and the counterattack of the Persians.
Alexander ordered a slow advance in closed ranks so that the phalanx would not break apart. Approaching arrow range, the right wing of the Macedonians quickly rushed towards the inactive Persians. The left wing of the Persian army was overturned. But in the center the Macedonian phalanx did not advance so energetically; During the crossing, Greek mercenaries counterattacked it, throwing Macedonian heavy infantrymen who were crossing into the river. On the left wing, the cavalry under the command of Parmenion was attacked by the Persian cavalry, which had crossed the Pinar. There was a hot battle along the entire front.
The second stage of the battle is the encirclement and destruction of the mercenaries of the Persian army, the retreat of the Persian cavalry of the right wing and the pursuit of the defeated Persian army.
The right wing of the Macedonian army, having overthrown the enemy's left wing, turned left against the mercenaries, threw them back from the river, cut them off from the rest of the Persian army and, in cooperation with the phalanx, surrounded them. When it became clear that the left wing and center of the Persians were defeated, the Persian cavalry of the right wing began to retreat. The maneuvering of the Macedonian cavalry ensured success in the center, but led to a loss of time. The pursuit of the defeated enemy began too late; Night fell, and this saved the Persians from complete destruction. The losses of the Macedonian army were small.
The battle formation of the Macedonian army maneuvered well, while the masses of Persian infantry and cavalry were clumsy, and the deep formation did not allow them to use their numerical superiority. The outcome of the battle was decided by a flank attack by the heavy cavalry, which took advantage of the success of the riflemen and light infantry, who captured the crossing over Pinar on the right flank of the battle formation of the Macedonian army. Such maneuvering in battle became possible due to the dismemberment of the battle formation and the presence of experienced private commanders. Interaction was established between the components of the battle formation.
For example, the attack of the heavy cavalry was supported by two phalanx units. The presence of cavalry and light infantry made it possible to organize a tactical pursuit of the defeated Persian army. The organization of pursuit was a new phenomenon at that time in the history of military art, associated with the development of cavalry as a mobile branch of troops.
The political and military situation for the Macedonian conquerors changed for the better. After the victory of the Macedonian army and its establishment on the coast, decomposition began in the Persian fleet; The Phoenicians, who made up the majority of the naval crews, feared a possible attack by the Macedonians, fled to their homes. Dominance in the Aegean Sea finally passed to the Greek-Macedonian fleet. The activities of the anti-Macedonian party in Greece have died down.
Siege of Tire in 332 BC
The tribes of Bactria, Sogdiana and Khorezm were the indigenous inhabitants of this territory. Irrigated agriculture was developed here, and therefore cities began to emerge early. Thus, in the first half of the 1st millennium, the city of Bactras was founded - the center of a large tribal union. In addition, there were many other fortified cities and villages. Usually villages were located on the tops of hills. The fortifications had the shape of a rectangle or square and were a powerful wall. Many fortifications were built on inaccessible cliffs, where large food supplies were concentrated in anticipation of long-term defense.
The warlike cattle-breeding tribes of the Sakas and Massagetae, famous for their highly mobile cavalry, roamed the steppes.
Bactria and Sogdiana were at the junction of important trade routes. To ensure Macedonian dominance in the eastern part of the Persian despotism, it was necessary to conquer these satrapies. It took the Macedonian conquerors another three and a half years to solve this problem.
To establish a foothold in Bactria and Sogdiana, ensuring Macedonian dominance at the junction of trade routes - this was the strategic goal of the third period of the war.
At the first stage of this period of the war, the Macedonian army had the task of finishing off the remnants of the Persian army with energetic pursuit, seizing the remaining wealth of the Persian king in Ecbatana, and then establishing itself in Media, Hyrcania and Parthia, which, when solving the next strategic task, were to become the closest rear of the Macedonian army.
The Macedonian army remained in Persepolis for four months. During this time, it was strengthened by the arrival of reinforcements from Macedonia, local formations of the conquered regions and mercenaries. In the spring of 330 BC. e. The Macedonian army moved to Ecbatana. The cavalry covered 1000 km in 15 days and captured the last treasures of Darius, who fled to Hyrcania. A strong garrison was left in Ecbatana. Macedonian cavalry and lightly armed infantry pursued further the remnants of the Persian army. The Macedonians traveled 400 km to the city of Regi in 11 days. Pursuing the enemy, they passed the Hyrcanian Gate. It soon became known that Darius had been killed by the satrap of Bactria, Bessus.
Now the Macedonians had to take possession of Hyrcania. The Macedonian army, divided into three parts, invaded this satrapy from different directions, with the goal of uniting in Zadrakarta. Having captured the mountain passes from Media and Parthia, the Macedonian army secured communications for its further campaign.
The invasion of Bactria was the content of the second stage of this period of the war. In 329 BC. e. The Macedonian army moved to Susia, Artaxana and further to Bactra. The first two cities capitulated without a fight. Moving further, the Macedonians founded new cities - Alexandria - which were fortified points with strong garrisons along communications. However, the immediate rear of the Macedonian army turned out to be unstable: the conquered tribes rebelled against the Macedonians; Artaxana became the center of the uprising. Communications of the Macedonian army were interrupted.
In order to restore their messages, the Macedonian army turned back, in two days the cavalry covered over 130 km and suddenly for the rebels they found themselves under the walls of Artaxana. The rebels were defeated and communication was restored. Leaving strong garrisons in Artaxans And Alexandria (Herat), the Macedonian army again moved into Bactria. She crossed the Parpansida mountain range (Hindu Kush), laid out a new fortification on communications - Alexandria - and moved to Drapsak. After resting in Drapsacus, the Macedonian army approached Bactra and took it by storm. But this was only the beginning of the invasion of a foreign country.
The third stage is the invasion of Sogdiana and a two-year struggle with freedom-loving tribes who stubbornly defended their independence.
In the same year, 329 BC. e. The Macedonian army crossed the Oxus (Amu Darya) river, over one kilometer wide, with great depth and fast flow. There was no wood to build the bridge. The Macedonians sewed bags from leather, stuffed them with straw and dry vines, and used them as rafts when crossing. In 5 days, the Macedonian army crossed to the right bank of the Oxus River and invaded Sogdiana.
The Macedonians occupied Maracanda (Samarkand) - the main city of the satrapy. Then the Macedonian army reached the Yaxartes (Syr Darya) river, on the banks of which a strongly fortified city was later founded Alexandria Extreme (Khojent). But to gain a foothold in Sogdiana, it took two years of persistent struggle with the tribes fighting for their independence.
During the preparation of the Macedonian army for a campaign against the Scythians, the local population raised a large uprising, as a result of which the Macedonian garrisons in seven cities located in the valley of the Jaxartes River were destroyed. A detachment under the command of Spitamenes besieged the Macedonian garrison in Maracanda. The Scythians concentrated on the right bank of the Jaxartes. The Macedonian army found itself in a difficult situation. Its main forces moved to Baghi, the nearest rebel city. Alexander sent one of the detachments to Kipopol with the order to position himself under the walls of the city, surround it with a continuous line of fortifications and install siege engines so that the inhabitants, while defending their city, could not provide assistance to the city of Baghi.
The fight against the Macedonian conquerors was led by Spitamen, a talented cavalry commander of Sogdiana, who relied on an alliance with the Scythian tribes. The population of Sogdiana steadfastly resisted, attacking small enemy units, their foragers and small garrisons. The strongholds of the inhabitants of Sogdiana were fortifications built on inaccessible rocks.
The assault on Baga was carefully prepared. “Riflemen, slingers, together with infantry or from towers, throw a cloud of arrows at the besieged and force them to leave the fortifications; they put up ladders; The Macedonians climbed the walls"(Arrian, book IV). This is how Gaza was taken.
Then the cavalry moved forward and surrounded two more cities. Dividing the rebels, the Macedonian army captured all seven cities. But she could not move against the army of Spitamenes, since she was pinned down by large Scythian forces, concentrated on the right bank of the Jaxartes and firing at the Macedonian army across the river.
The Scythians challenged Alexander: “You do not dare, Alexander, to fight the Scythians; if you dared to attack them, you would feel how different they are from the Asian barbarians.”(Arrian, book IV). The Macedonians installed machines for throwing large arrows across the river and began to fire at the Scythians. Under the cover of this shelling, the river was crossed by archers and slingers, who pushed back the advance detachments of the Scythians and ensured the crossing of the phalanx and cavalry. A battle ensued on the right bank of the Yaxartes River.
A detachment of allied cavalry and four sils of mounted sarissophorans were sent against the Scythians. The Scythians withstood this onslaught of a detachment of Macedonian cavalry, surrounded it and showered it with arrows. Light infantry was sent to support the cavalry. Now the Scythians retreated without losing sight of their enemy. The first stage is the battle of the vanguard of the Macedonian army.
Three small phalanxes of hetairas and mounted riflemen were sent to help the advance detachment. But the Scythians successfully repelled the attacks of the Macedonian army. Then Alexander led his entire cavalry into the attack, overthrew the Scythians and organized pursuit. The Scythians were saved, according to Arrian, by heat, thirst and “unhealthy water,” from which Alexander himself fell ill. Reference to nature is a common technique for justifying the failures of great commanders, and is widely used subsequently. In fact, remembering the fatal experience of Cyrus, Alexander did not dare to go deeper into the lands of the Scythians.
The actions of the Macedonian army against the mobile forces of the Scythians were characterized by a gradual build-up of forces for the strike, while at the same time not allowing their troops to be destroyed piecemeal. Support for the fighting units was provided in a timely manner, and tactical cooperation between them was not disrupted. The timely cessation of the persecution of the Scythians also played a positive role, saving not them, as Arrian portrays, but the Macedonian army, which the Scythians could lure deep into their territory and destroy.
Only now were the Macedonian conquerors able to move large forces to Maracanda against the rebels commanded by Spitamenes. But Spitamen, having correctly assessed the situation, did not accept the battle, lifted the siege of Maracanda and retreated to unite with the Scythians... He was pursued by a strong Macedonian detachment.
Having united with the Scythians, Spitamen began to attack the Macedonians without getting involved in a serious battle; this forced the Macedonian army, having built a long square, to begin retreating. To reduce damage from enemy arrows, the Macedonian detachment stopped near a forest on the banks of the Politamet (Zarafshan) River, where the battle took place.
The commander of one of the Macedonian cavalry, without the knowledge of the commander of the entire detachment, began to cross the river. The infantry followed him in disorder. The archers of Spitamen and the Scythians destroyed those who crossed and with arrows from the front struck those who tried to cross the river. At the same time, the horsemen of Spitamen and the Scythians rushed into the river and attacked from the flanks of the enemy, who was trying to escape on one of the islands of the river.
The first stage of the battle on the Politamet River is the reflection by Spitamen's detachment of the Macedonians' attempt to cross the river.
The second stage of the battle is the encirclement and destruction of the Macedonians on the island.
The detachment of Spitamenes and the Scythians struck the Macedonians mainly with arrows. Some of the Macedonians were ambushed by the Scythians, and all the Macedonian commanders were killed; only 40 horsemen and 300 infantry managed to escape.
Thus, the mobile cavalry of Spitamenes and the Scythians, who did not get involved in battle, but lured the enemy, making extensive use of ambushes, destroyed a large detachment of the Macedonian army.
Significant forces of the Macedonians rushed to help their detachment, but were late, although they covered 280 km in three days. Having buried the dead soldiers, Alexander organized the pursuit of the detachment of Spitamenes and the Scythians, but again did not dare to go deep into Scythian territory and returned to Bactra, where the Macedonian army wintered. Here fresh reserves approached her, making up for the losses of the summer campaign of 329. The number of mercenaries in the Macedonian army increased.
Throughout the winter, the Macedonian army prepared for a new campaign and at the same time continued to fight popular uprisings in Bactria and Sogdiana. At this time, the nature of the struggle of the local population changed: instead of taking active action, the rebels tried to hide in hard-to-reach places. But the Macedonians captured the points and themselves built a large number of fortifications, in which there were strong garrisons.
From the point of view of military art, the fortification system is of interest. Thus, in the area of the city of Margiana, six “cities” were built - fortified points: “two facing south, four facing east, a short distance apart for mutual assistance”(Curtius Rufus, book VII, X.). Thus, a system of individual fortifications was considered more effective than a large fortified city with a strong garrison.
The persistent struggle of the ancestors of modern Uzbeks and Tajiks, who had a talented leader Spitamenes and good combat-ready cavalry, forced the Macedonians to spend a lot of time mastering Bactria and Sogdiana. Only in 327 BC. e. The Macedonian army began a campaign in rich India.
The war with the warlike freedom-loving peoples living on the territory of our country required much more effort from the Macedonian army than the fight against the Persians. But still, the Macedonian army managed to gain a foothold in Bactria and Sogdiana - at the junction of trade routes. Its success was facilitated by the fragmented nature of the resistance, the betrayal of the local nobility, and weak assistance to Spitamen from his allies - the Scythians. Despite the fact that the Macedonians had a number of advantages, victory was not easy for them. The Macedonian army suffered significant losses. Alexander was wounded several times.
Trek to India
The strategic content of the last period of the war was the attempt of the Macedonian army to conquer rich India. But in preparing for a campaign in India, Alexander had to deal with internal opposition from the top of his command, take into account the disintegration of the army, a change in its previous composition due to large losses and the inclusion of new contingents from the Persian satrapies and the growth in the number of mercenaries.
In 327 BC. e. The Macedonian army moved to India. Grueling campaigns and stubborn resistance from the tribes of Central Asia had a negative impact on the condition of the army. By this time, an opposition had formed within it, which began to oppose Alexander’s aggressive plans. The activities of the opposition had a negative impact on the army and corrupted discipline. However, the first stage of the campaign in India brought some success to the Macedonian army. The political situation in Northern India was favorable to achieving the immediate goals: the two most powerful leaders - the Hindu kings Taxil and Por - were at enmity with each other. Taxilus owned the lands between the Indus and Hydaspes rivers, Porus - between the Hydaspes and Ganges rivers.
First of all, it was decided to conquer the lands on the right bank of the Indus River. For this purpose, the Macedonian army headed to Bactra, crossed the Hindu Kush and on the tenth day entered the territory of the Paropamissads. Here Alexander summoned Taxila and the closest Indian leaders and concluded an alliance with them.
From Kofen (Kabul) to the Indus River, the Macedonian army moved in two columns: the right column headed straight to the Indus River with the task of preparing a crossing across the river, the left, led by Alexander, along the northern bank of the Kofen (Kabul) River. On the sixteenth day after leaving Bactra, the Macedonian army concentrated on the right bank of the Indus River in the place where the city of Attoka is currently located. With the assistance of Taxila, a large number of ships were assembled here, on which the Macedonians built a bridge across the Indus River.
The Macedonian army crossed the river without hindrance and entered the lands belonging to Taxila, where they met with a friendly reception. Taxila's possessions were expanded at the expense of the territories of his neighbors, as a result of which the Macedonian army strengthened: 5 thousand Hindu warriors joined it. Thus, a new intermediate base was created for the march deep into India.
The Hindu leader Porus was preparing to resist the Macedonian conquerors. He concentrated a strong army near the Hydaspes River: about 30 thousand infantry, 3 - 4 thousand horsemen, 300 war chariots and about 100 elephants. The Macedonian army, together with its allies, numbered up to 30 thousand people, of which 6 thousand were heavy infantry and 5 thousand cavalry. The Hindus had a general numerical superiority in war elephants, while the Macedonians had stronger cavalry.
The Indian army under the command of Porus, blocking the path of invasion into their country, camped on the left bank of the Hydaspes River. The Macedonian army concentrated on the opposite bank. Alexander ordered the ships to be transported by land from the Indus River, dismantling them in parts. Then measures were taken that were supposed to mislead the enemy regarding the time and place of the crossing. A strong detachment of cavalry repeatedly and at different points pretended to attempt to cross the river, forcing Porus to approach these points with his elephants in order to counter the crossing. Convinced that the alarm was false, Porus returned to his camp. Then he stopped reacting to the demonstrations of the Macedonian cavalry, but posted observers along the entire coast. In order to hide the preparations for crossing the Hydaspes River, the camp of the Macedonian army was located opposite the Indian camp in such a way that the enemy could see that ordinary life was taking place in the camp.
150 stadia (14 km) from the location of the Macedonian army camp upstream of the Hydaspes River, a convenient place was chosen for crossing it, covered with forest and bushes and located opposite a large wooded island, which well camouflaged the crossing of troops. In the forest, ships were collected and skins stuffed with straw were prepared.
Part of the forces of the Macedonian army and 5 thousand Indians under the command of Craterus were placed in the main camp in order to show the presence of the entire army here and thereby mislead the enemy. Craterus was ordered to cross the Hydaspes River if Porus, having opposed the Macedonian army that had crossed, left insignificant forces in his camp.
Between the main camp and the place where the river was crossed, mercenary cavalry and infantry were located under the command of three military commanders, who were ordered to organize several detachments. These detachments were to begin crossing the Hydaspes River as soon as it was noticed that the Indians had started a battle.
At night, during a severe thunderstorm, the Macedonian army began to cross the Hydaspes River using ships and skins. At dawn, having passed the island, the Macedonians approached the shore. Observers of the Hindu army reported to Porus that the enemy had crossed the river.
But at this time the landing Macedonian army found itself on the second large island, and not on the left bank of the river. Reconnaissance of the area was not carried out thoroughly. With great difficulty, they managed to find a ford along which 5 thousand Macedonian cavalry and 6 thousand infantry crossed to the left bank of the river.
Having received the first information about the crossing of the Macedonian army, Porus sent 2 thousand horsemen and 120 war chariots under the command of his son to meet them, but did not have time to prevent the crossing. The Macedonians attacked and defeated this detachment of Hindus.
Convinced of the approach of the Macedonian army, Porus moved his army towards the Macedonians, leaving a small detachment to guard the camp. His troops were drawn up in battle formation on a flat sandy place. The first line contained war elephants, the second line - infantry; part of the infantry was lined up in the intervals between the elephants, which were the support of the battle formation. “They also placed infantry on the flanks behind the line of elephants. On both sides of the infantry stood cavalry, and in front of it on both sides were war chariots” (Arrian, book V, XV). The sources do not say anything about the flanks of the battle formation, but the left flank of the Indians, apparently, was located at some distance from the Hydaspes River. Therefore, all of Delbrück’s evidence regarding the mistakes of Arrian and Curtius, who in their presentation of the course of the battle allegedly mixed up the flanks of the battle formations, is groundless.
When Alexander saw the strong center of the enemy's battle formation, he decided to use his superiority in cavalry. He planned to deliver the main blow on the left flank of the Indians, concentrating part of the cavalry against it under his personal command. The rest of the cavalry under the command of Ken was directed against the right flank of the Indian battle formation. In case the Hindu cavalry of the left flank began to move forward to meet the right wing of the Macedonian army, Ken had to attack it from the rear. The Macedonian phalanx of heavy infantry was given the task of attacking the enemy only when his battle formation was upset.
The first stage of the battle on the Hydaspes River is a cavalry battle and the retreat of the Hindu cavalry to the line of elephants.
“Approaching the shot, he (Alexander) ordered about 1000 mounted riflemen to go against the left wing, in order to throw the enemies standing there into disarray with a mass of arrows and the rush of horses, and he himself with the mounted hetairas rushed to the enemy’s left flank and tried to attack him during the confusion. from the side before the cavalry has time to face him” (Arrian, XVI). The left wing of the Indians was pinned down from the front by the actions of mounted riflemen and attacked in the flank by mounted hetairas. To counter the Macedonian cavalry, the entire Hindu cavalry moved forward in order to repel the attack of the Macedonians. “But in their rear, according to the orders received, Ken appeared with his army. Noticing this, the Indians were forced to give their cavalry a double front, with the strongest and best part of it turning against Alexander, and the rest against Ken and his crowd. This circumstance immediately led to confusion in both the ranks and the mood of the Hindus” (Arrian, book XVIII). The Macedonians took advantage of the reorganization of the enemy's cavalry and attacked it. The Hindus were overthrown and retreated in disorder to the line of elephants.
The second stage of the battle is the battle of the Macedonian phalanx with war elephants and the encirclement of Porus' army by the Macedonian cavalry.
“At that time, the elephant leaders brought out their animals against the cavalry, and the Macedonian phalanx moved against the elephants, threw darts at the leaders and shot at the animals themselves from all sides. It was a battle completely different from all previous ones” (Arrian, book V, XVII).
The Macedonian infantry and cavalry managed to disrupt the enemy’s battle formation, and “when the animals were driven into a narrow place, the friends suffered no less harm from them than the enemies, since the elephants crushed them during turns and collisions” (Arrian, book V, XVII). The Macedonian army had the opportunity to maneuver and, depending on the situation, either attacked the elephants or retreated in front of them, hitting them with arrows and darts. “When the animals were tired and their attacks ceased to be ardent (they only screamed, slowly retreating backwards, like ships backing up), Alexander surrounded the entire battle line of the enemies with cavalry and ordered his infantry to close their shields as tightly as possible and attack the enemy phalanx” ( Arrian, book V, XVII). The Hindu army was defeated.
The third stage of the battle is the pursuit of the defeated Indian army.
When the detachments of the Macedonian army, located on the right bank of the Hydaspes River, saw that the enemy was being defeated, they began to cross the river and strengthened the fighters, which finally broke the Indians. The persecution began, during which the Hindus continued to resist. But Porus was soon captured and the battle ended.
The invasion of Northern India was ensured by the creation of a new intermediate base. The strength of the Macedonian army increased due to the allies, who delivered the necessary transportation facilities to the Macedonians. The Macedonian army crossed a large water barrier. By demonstrative actions, the enemy was misled regarding the time and place of the crossing. The crossing of troops was prepared and ensured. The battle was affected by the superiority of the Macedonian cavalry, which maneuvered well and interacted with the infantry. The Macedonian infantry found ways to fight war elephants - a new means of combat.
Horse and foot soldiers of the armies of one of the diadochi - the heirs of the empire of Alexander the Great
Return of Alexander the Great to Babylon
As a result of the victory of the Macedonian army, an alliance was concluded with Porus, after which the Macedonians moved to the Hyphasus River. Alexander intended to cross this river and seize lands as far as the Ganges. But the army was exhausted . “Only a few Macedonians remained alive, and even those who remained were close to complete despair... The hooves of the horses were worn out from long journeys, numerous battles dulled the warriors’ weapons. No one had Greek dress; rags of barbarian and Indian booty, somehow fastened together, covered the scarred bodies of the conquerors... for 70 days terrible rains had been pouring from the sky, accompanied by whirlwinds and storms.”(Curtius, IX, 2; Diodorus, XVII, 94). This is how ancient authors describe the state of the Macedonian army at the moment when it refused to go deep into India. Opposition within the army intensified, discipline fell further, and Alexander was forced to turn back.
The return journey from India proceeded in a highly disorganized manner. For nine months, the Macedonian army sailed on ships along the Indus River and finally reached its mouth. Here the remnants of the army were divided into two parts: one sailed by sea to the mouth of the Euphrates River, the other Alexander himself led through the desert of Gedrosia (modern Baluchistan), where a significant part of it died. Discipline in the army fell, the disobedience of soldiers grew into riots. To maintain morale among the troops, Alexander organized mass drinking parties, which contributed to even greater disintegration of the army.
In 325 BC. e. the remnants of the Macedonian army returned to Babylon, which was considered the capital of the conquered territory. Here in 323 BC. e. Alexander died. During the campaign, which lasted about ten years, the Macedonian army covered over 20 thousand kilometers.
The state that arose as a result of the Macedonian conquests stretched from the Danube to the Indus and included economically and culturally diverse regions. This state united a large number of loosely interconnected conglomerates of population groups in the absence of internal economic, political and cultural unity. It inevitably had to fall apart.
The territory in which the modern Republic of Macedonia is located has a rich and ancient history. In particular, back in the 1st millennium BC. e. there was a so-called Paeonian kingdom. The historical period that interests us came later, in the 5th - 6th centuries. n. e., with the arrival of Slavic tribes on the Balkan Peninsula. In 517, the Slavs devastated Macedonia, Epirus and Illyria. According to Procopius, during the reign of Justinian I they annually invaded the empire. In 550, the Slavs made their first attempt to capture Thessalonica. By the end of the 7th century, the lands of Macedonia, with the exception of Thessalonica and a number of coastal areas where Greeks lived continuously, were repopulated by the local Greek population.
Epirus, Macedonia and the Paeonian kingdom. IV century BC e.
In the second half of the 7th century, part of the Proto-Bulgarians of Khan Kuber penetrated into Macedonia, who also, in alliance with the local Slavs, tried to capture Thessalonica in 685. In the second half of the 9th century. the territory of Macedonia was conquered by the troops of the First Bulgarian Kingdom. Macedonia and neighboring Thrace became the core of the spread of the heretical teaching of Bogomilism, which quickly gained popularity among the Slavs of the Balkan Peninsula. In 970-971, the eastern part of the territory of the Bulgarian kingdom was recaptured by the troops of Byzantium and Svyatoslav Igorevich. Only the regions west of the Iskar River, where the comitopoules David, Moses, Aaron and Samuel ruled, retained independence. The latter soon managed to unite under his rule the entire territory from the Danube to Thessaly. The core of Samuel's state, which historians called the Western Bulgarian Kingdom, was Macedonia, and the capital was Ohrid. In 997, Samuel took the title of king. Throughout his reign, he waged almost continuous wars with Byzantium. He managed to annex Epirus, modern Albania and northeastern Bulgaria, as well as a significant part of Serbia, but in 1014 Samuel’s troops were completely defeated in the Battle of Belasitsa. 15,000 captive Bulgarians were blinded by order of the Byzantine Emperor Vasily II, Samuel's heart gave out and he died. His successors were unable to organize resistance: in 1018 the Bulgarian kingdom fell, its territory, including Macedonia, returned to the Byzantine Empire.
As part of the Byzantine Empire, most of Macedonia was part of the theme of Bulgaria, the administrative center of which was initially the city of Skopje, and from 1150 - Nis. The coastal regions were annexed to the theme of Thessalonica. There was also the theme of Macedonia, which, however, was located in Thrace (center - Adrianople). Entry into Byzantium led to the acceleration of the processes of feudalization in Macedonia, the expansion of conditional land ownership (proniary system) and the increased dependence of peasants. Although the Bulgarian Patriarchate was abolished after the fall of the First Bulgarian Kingdom, the Archdiocese of Ohrid was established in 1019. Its head used the title of “archbishop of all Bulgaria”; most of the bishops of Macedonia, as well as the bishops of Western Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania, were subordinate to him. The first Archbishop of Ohrid was the Slav Jovan from Debar, but later this post was occupied mainly by Greeks. Greek became the official language of the Ohrid Church, and only at the parish level worship was preserved in Old Church Slavonic. Despite the repressions, Bogomilism continued to exist in Byzantine Macedonia, the centers of which were Maglen, Melnik, and Prilep. Joining Byzantium led to an increase in the tax burden: taxes in kind in favor of the state were replaced by cash taxes, land and income taxes were introduced, as well as, later, a property tax. This led to a major uprising by Peter Delyan in 1040–1041, which covered almost the entire territory of Macedonia and western Bulgaria. The next major revolt broke out in 1072 in northern Macedonia and Kosovo, led by George Vojtech and Constantine Bodin.
Macedonia as part of the Bulgarian kingdom of Samuil, X - XI centuries.
At the end of the 11th century, the foreign policy situation of Byzantium became sharply complicated as a result of defeats from the Seljuk Turks and the increasing frequency of raids by the Pechenegs, Oguzes and Cumans. Some of the latter, with the permission of the emperor, settled in Macedonia, where they settled in the area of modern Kumanova. A century later, in 1185, Macedonia was invaded by the Norman troops of King William II of Sicily. At the end of the 12th century, the independence of Bulgaria and Serbia was restored. New states began expanding towards Macedonia. Already in 1189, the Serbs captured Skopje. In the 1190s. Bulgarian boyar Dobromir Khris, having raised an uprising in the Strumica region, created a small independent principality in the southern part of modern Vardar Macedonia. However, the new campaign of Emperor Alexei III in 1202 ended with the defeat of Chryses and the liquidation of his principality. The following year, the army of the Bulgarian Tsar Ivan Kaloyan invaded these lands and conquered all of inner Macedonia. Over the next decades, almost continuous wars were fought between Bulgaria, Serbia, Thessalonica, Epirus and the Nicaean Empire for the possession of the lands of Macedonia. For some time (1207-1214) in Vardar Macedonia there was a semi-independent principality of the sevastocrator Stresa. In 1215, most of the Macedonian lands were annexed by the Despotate of Epirus; in 1224, Epirus managed to capture Thessalonica. However, in the Battle of Klokotnitsa in 1230, the troops of the Epirus despot Theodore Angel were defeated by the army of the Bulgarian Tsar Ivan Asen II, which led to the entry of Macedonia (except Thessalonica) into the Second Bulgarian Kingdom. But already at the end of the 1240s. The active expansion of the Nicaean Empire began, as a result of which Thessalonica and most of southern Macedonia came under its control. In 1258, Serbian troops briefly captured Skopje and Prilep. In 1257, Konstantin I Asen, the son of the boyar Tikha from Skopje, was elected by the boyars as the new king. In the subsequent war, the former king Mitso Asen was defeated and in 1261 fled to the Nicene Empire to Michael VIII Palaiologos. Konstantin Asen managed to recapture Skopje and Prilep. In 1261, Michael VIII Palaiologos took Constantinople and restored the Byzantine Empire. In the same 1261, Constantine Asen attacks Constantinople, but is defeated. In the same 1264, he launched a second campaign against Byzantium. In 1277, dissatisfaction with the tsar resulted in a peasant uprising led by Ivaylo, in which the tsar’s troops were defeated and Tsar Konstantin Asen himself died.
In 1281, King Stefan Milutin occupied all of North Macedonia, which was confirmed by the Serbo-Byzantine peace of 1299. The entry of Macedonia into the Serbian state was completed under Stefan Dusan, who, taking advantage of the civil war in Byzantium, by 1348 captured all of Macedonia, except Thessalonica, as well as Epirus, Thessaly and part of Central Greece. The Macedonian lands became the center of Stefan Dusan's power. His court was in Skopje and Serra. In 1346, the Patriarchate of Pec was established, and Stefan Dusan was crowned king of the Serbs and Greeks. After the death of Stefan Dušan, the Serbian state collapsed. His successor, Stefan Uros V, retained only nominal power. Thessaly and Epirus came under the control of Simeon Sinisha, who proclaimed himself king. Prilep and the western regions of Vardar Macedonia became the core of the state of King Vukašin, brother of Ugleša. The largest role in Macedonia was played by Uglesha and Vukashin Mrnjavcevic, who in 1369 managed to defeat the troops of Tsar Stefan Urosh V and Prince Lazar and consolidate the independence of their principalities. In order to repel the Ottoman threat, Ugleša and Vukašin Mrnjavčević formed a large army and moved towards Adrianople. However, in the Battle of Maritsa on September 26, 1371, their troops were completely defeated, and the brothers fell in battle. This defeat led to the transition of Macedonia to the control of the Turks: Constantin Dragaš and Prince Marko, Vukašin's successor, recognized the suzerainty of the Ottoman Sultan. In 1383, the Turks captured Serres, then Štip, Prilep and Bitola. Thessalonica fell in 1387. The Battle of Kosovo in 1389 was decisive for the fate of Macedonia, after which Ottoman power increased sharply. Already in 1393 Skopje was captured. Finally, in 1395, in the battle of Rovinj in Wallachia, Konstantin Dragash and Prince Marko died, and their principalities ceased to exist. Macedonia finally became part of the Ottoman Empire.
As a result of Turkish expansion in the 15th and early 16th centuries, Macedonia turned from a border province into an internal province of the Ottoman Empire, far from the battlefields. Administratively, the Macedonian lands were part of the eyalet of Rumelia, which, in turn, was divided into sanjaks. The boundaries and number of sanjaks changed frequently. Initially, the territory of Macedonia belonged to the sanjaks of Kyustendil, Ohrid and Pasha. The latter in the 17th century was divided into several smaller sanjaks, in particular Kavala, Selenik and Uskub. The main form of resistance of the Macedonian population to the Ottoman authorities was haiduchstvo. Although in most cases the haiduk detachments were gangs of declassed elements engaged in robbery and robbery, some of them actually carried out partisan actions specifically against Turkish military units and officials, which allowed the haiduks to occupy a significant place in folklore. However, haiduism remained local in nature and could not seriously threaten Ottoman power in Macedonia. The role of the church in the liberation movement in Macedonia was not significant. The Ohrid archbishopric under Ottoman rule maintained its autonomy, and some archbishops tried to pursue an anti-Turkish policy and sought support among European states. However, the influence of the archbishopric steadily declined due to pressure from the Greek clergy of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the restoration of the Serbian Orthodox Church, under whose jurisdiction the dioceses of North Macedonia passed. Growing tensions between the Greek and Slavic clergy led in 1767 to the abolition of the Ohrid Archbishopric.
In 1689, under the influence of the successful actions of Austrian troops against the Turkish army in Hungary and Serbia, a series of mass uprisings broke out in Macedonia. The largest uprising took place in October 1689 in North-Eastern Macedonia under the leadership of governor Karposh. The Haiduks of Karposh, acting in collaboration with the army of Eneo Piccolomini, drove the Turks out of Kumanovo and Skopje. However, already in November, due to the epidemic and the Ottoman counter-offensive, Austrian troops left Macedonia. After long resistance, Kumanovo fell, Karposh was captured and executed. Ottoman power in Macedonia was restored. In the XV-XVI centuries, the ethnic composition of the population of Macedonia changed significantly. Turks moved from Asia Minor to the Macedonian lands, colonies of Jews arose in the cities and the Greeks began to return to the cities. The share of the Greek population in Thessaloniki has increased especially strongly. Part of the Slavic population converted to Islam, forming an ethnic stratum of Torbeshes. After the retreat of Austrian troops from Macedonia and Serbia in 1689, at the call of the Patriarch of Peć Arseniy III, a mass exodus of the Orthodox population beyond the Danube and Sava began. This exodus also affected Macedonia: vast areas of Western Macedonia were depopulated, Albanians gradually began to move to the place of the emigrated Slavs, who by this time had already converted to Islam and were better adapted to living conditions in the Ottoman Empire. Many Slavs who converted to Islam were assimilated by other Muslim peoples and are now part of the Albanian and Turkish ethnic groups. This process most affected the areas of Tetova, Kumanova and Gostivar.
Lands of Macedonia as part of the Ottoman Empire, 16th century.
In the 18th century, the Ottoman Empire was in decline. The central power sharply weakened, anarchy reigned in the state: power passed into the hands of local pashas and beys, while in the western part of Macedonia Mehmed Pasha Bushati and Ali Pasha Tepelensky, natives of Albanian families, who actually did not obey Istanbul and spent the lands under their control and their own foreign and domestic policies. Similar semi-independent formations led by representatives of the Albanian or Turkish aristocracy arose in other regions of Macedonia. In 1839, the Ottoman Empire began implementing large-scale reforms aimed at transforming the country into a modern state (the era of the Tanzimat). These transformations caused the “revolt of the pashas” in 1843-1845. in North Macedonia and Kosovo. The territory of Macedonia was divided between the Kosovo, Monastic and Thessaloniki vilayets. The Tanzimat reforms were of great importance for the transformation of the Ottoman Empire and the revitalization of its socio-economic and cultural development. However, to a large extent, they remained on paper: their implementation on the ground, in particular in Macedonia, which is relatively remote from Istanbul, was incomplete and inconsistent. In particular, in Macedonia the dominance of large landowners remained, and the share of peasants who received land ownership remained small. At the same time, social relations in the village retained a religious overtones: landowners were predominantly Muslim, peasants were Orthodox. Actual power in Macedonia belonged to the local aristocracy, security guarantees were completely absent, armed gangs operated throughout the country, which the few detachments of the Ottoman army and police were unable to cope with, and corruption flourished.
At the same time, Tanzimat opened the Turkish market to Western capital. Already in 1871, the construction of the first Thessaloniki-Skopje railway began in Macedonia, which was later continued through Serbia to Austria-Hungary. In 1894, the railway from Thessaloniki to Bitola was completed, in 1896 - from Thessaloniki to Alexandroupolis and on to Istanbul. From the end of the 18th century, the processes of National Revival and the formation of modern nations began to actively develop among the Slavic population of the Ottoman Empire. In Macedonia, where in the Middle Ages there was no separate Macedonian nationality and the vast majority of the Slavic population did not have a clear ethnic identity, these processes took place mainly in line with the Bulgarian national revival. At the same time, a significant part of the Macedonian Slavs had by this time become Hellenized, adopted the Greek national culture and supported the “Great Idea” of the restoration of the Byzantine Empire. At the end of the 19th century, Serbia's policy in Macedonia intensified, which also led to the adoption of Serbian national orientation by part of the local population. Among the Albanians of Macedonia at the end of the 19th century, an accelerated process of Albanian national revival and the formation of a single Albanian nation took place. As a result, Macedonia became an area of intersection of national agitations of various peoples of the Balkan Peninsula. The Bulgarian national revival was of greatest importance, one of the centers of which was the Macedonian lands. Already in 1837, the first Bulgarian secular school arose in Veles. Then Bulgarian schools were opened in Skopje, Shtip, Ohrid, Bitola, Thessaloniki and other cities of Macedonia. In the early 1860s. Macedonian Slavs were involved in the movement to form an autocephalous Bulgarian Orthodox Church. Unlike the Bulgarian lands proper, however, in Macedonia the Hellenized Church of the Patriarchate of Constantinople retained significant influence among the local population. Therefore, when the Bulgarian Exarchate was established by the Sultan’s decree in 1870, only the Veles, Skopje and Ohrid dioceses came under its authority. The creation of the autocephalous Bulgarian church gave a new impetus to the expansion of the network of Bulgarian schools and educational organizations in Macedonia. However, until the beginning of the 20th century, the process of formation of the Bulgarian nation was not completed, and a significant part of the rural Slavic population of Macedonia remained ethnically unexpressed.
Although, according to historians, in the 19th century the Macedonian people in the modern sense did not yet exist, the question of the existence of prerequisites for its emergence during this period poses a certain problem. If the Bulgarian and Greek historical schools deny the existence of any independent Macedonian ethnic identity, researchers from the Republic of Macedonia, relying on the article “The Macedonian Question” by Petko Slaveykov in 1871, declare the beginning of the formation of a certain ethnic difference between the Macedonian Slavs and the Bulgarians based on belonging to different Orthodox Christians churches. In addition, the spoken language of the Slavic population of Macedonia was somewhat different from the already codified Bulgarian language based on the eastern dialects.
During the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, about 1,000 volunteers from Macedonia took part in military operations against the troops of the Ottoman Empire. Russian troops, however, did not enter the territory of Macedonia, stopping at Kyustendil. Under the terms of the Treaty of San Stefano in 1878, an autonomous Bulgarian principality was formed, including all of Macedonia, with the exception of Thessaloniki and the Chalkidiki peninsula. However, this was strongly opposed by the Western powers, Serbia and Greece. As a result of negotiations at the Berlin Congress on July 13, 1878, a new peace treaty was concluded: the territory of the Bulgarian Principality was significantly reduced, a separate autonomous unit of Eastern Rumelia was formed, and Macedonia remained part of the Ottoman Empire. In accordance with Article 23 of the Peace of Berlin, the Christian populations of Macedonia and Thrace were also to receive self-government within the empire in the future. If the Greek and Grecophile population of Macedonia, as well as Macedonian Muslims, enthusiastically accepted the terms of the Berlin Treaty, which prevented the annexation of Macedonian lands to Bulgaria, the Bulgarian population was indignant. In Pirin Macedonia, the Kresna uprising broke out in October 1878, which, however, was suppressed by the summer of 1879. In accordance with the decisions of the Berlin Congress, a commission was organized to develop proposals for granting autonomy to Macedonia. The commission, however, did not include the Macedonian Slavs, who were considered by the Porte as “Bulgarian rebels” after the Kresna uprising. The project for self-government of Macedonia developed by the commission, however, was rejected by the Sultan in 1880. There were no sanctions from the great powers and the issue of autonomy remained unresolved.
At the end of the 19th century, the claims of the Balkan countries to the Macedonian lands intensified. In addition to Bulgaria and Greece, which have long considered Macedonia their historical territory, Serbia entered the political scene, declaring that the Macedonian Slavs are in fact Serbs. Greece's position was that most of the Slavs living on the territory of Macedonia began to make attempts to identify themselves - Slavs by blood and consciousness - with the ancient Macedonians who were Greek peoples. Thus, the manifestation of “theft of history” and the appropriation of everything Greek by the Slavs living on the territory of Macedonia was not acceptable for Greece. As a result, a struggle developed in Macedonia between Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia to win over the ethnically undefined local Slavic population, mainly through the creation of parallel educational systems and the expansion of the spheres of influence of national Orthodox churches. If at first after the formation of the Bulgarian Principality, due to the resistance of the Ottoman authorities and the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Bulgarian influence in Macedonia decreased somewhat, then in the 1890s, as a result of the warming of Turkish-Bulgarian relations during the reign of Stefan Stambolov and the Greco-Turkish War of 1897 , the Bulgarian national movement in Macedonia intensified again. The number of Bulgarian schools in 1900 reached 781, Bulgarian gymnasiums were established in Thessaloniki, Bitola and Skopje, and new dioceses of the Bulgarian Exarchate were created. However, the Greek national movement also strengthened its position: in 1900 there were already 613 Greek schools in Macedonia, and a quarter of the Macedonian Slavs remained affiliated with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In parallel, the Albanian national movement developed rapidly, one of the main demands of which, in accordance with the program of the League of Prizren in 1878, was the unification of all lands inhabited by Albanians, including Western Macedonia, into a single autonomous entity within the empire. According to the census data in 1895, 2.5 million people lived in the Skopje Sanjak, Bitola and Thessaloniki vilayets, of which 22% were Slavs, 22% Turks, 40% Greeks, 5.5% Albanians, 3.5% - Aromanians and 3% - Jews.
The idea of Macedonism emerged at the end of the 19th century. It was first introduced, in pursuit of Great Serbian political goals, by the Serbian diplomat Stojan Novakovic, who declared in 1888 that the Slavic population of Macedonia forms a separate Macedonian people and is neither Bulgarians nor Serbs. In 1902, in St. Petersburg, students from Macedonia founded the Macedonian Scientific and Literary Partnership, which promoted, in particular, the idea of the identity of the Macedonian nation. In 1903, Krste Misirkov, in his work “On Macedonian Problems,” substantiated the existence of a special Macedonian language and recognized that the Macedonians had their own political interests. The ideas of Macedonism were supported in Serbia, but in Macedonia itself they did not find any wide range of supporters: the majority of the Macedonian Slavs, and, above all, the cultural and political elite, by this time considered themselves Bulgarians.
In the early 1890s. Macedonian students studying in Sofia founded the Young Macedonian Literary Society, which became the core of the movement for Macedonian autonomy. The normalization of Bulgarian-Turkish relations during the reign of Stefan Stambolov led to the dissolution of this organization. However, already on November 3, 1893, radical Macedonian youth founded a new, secret organization in Thessaloniki, which later became known as the Internal Macedonian-Odrinian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO). At its foundation stood Dame Gruev, Ivan Hadzhinikolov, Gotse Delchev and Gyorche Petrov. VMORO was supposed to lead the fight for the liberation of Macedonia and Adrianople (Odrin) Thrace from Turkish rule. The organization managed to create an extensive network of its branches throughout Macedonia and gain significant influence among the population. Combat units (chetas) were also formed, which often resorted to terrorist acts to attract attention to the Macedonian issue and finance the activities of the WMORO. From its very inception, the leaders of the WMORO set as their ultimate goal the annexation of Macedonia and Thrace to Bulgaria. However, political divisions within the organization, the ethnic diversity of Macedonia and the unfavorable foreign policy situation forced WMORO to highlight a more moderate demand for full political autonomy for Macedonia. This made it possible to attract wider sections of the population of different nationalities and religions to the side of the WMORO. However, the level of participation in the activities of WMORO by Muslims (Torbeshi, Albanians and Turks) remained quite low, the organization retained a predominantly Slavic-Bulgarian character.
In parallel with the VMRO, another Macedonian organization arose in Bulgaria in 1895 - the Supreme Macedonian-Odrin Committee (VMOC, Verkhovists). Unlike BMRO, BMOC relied primarily on the support of the Bulgarian government and the Macedonian-Thracian diaspora in Bulgaria. His goal was also the inclusion of these lands into Bulgaria. In their strategy, the Verkhovists placed the main emphasis not on a general armed uprising, but on the operations of small detachments operating from Bulgarian territory, as well as on propaganda among European states. Relations between WMORO and WMOC were quite tense. The VMRO was headed by left-wing democrats and revolutionaries, while the VMOC was oriented towards the ruling circles of Bulgaria. In 1901-1902 The raids of the Verkhovists and clashes between the VMORO detachments and units of the Ottoman army and Muslim self-defense (Bashi-Bazouks) grew into an ongoing guerrilla war. At the beginning of November 1902, the WMORO Congress decided to prepare a general uprising. In the spring of 1903, terrorist actions by the radical wing of the VMORO became more frequent, which caused retaliatory repressions by the Ottoman authorities. European powers intervened in the situation, under whose pressure Istanbul agreed to begin implementing reforms in Macedonia, and Bulgaria dissolved the VMOC. Nevertheless, clashes continued. In accordance with the decision of the WMORO, on Ilin’s day, August 2, 1903, an armed uprising broke out in Macedonia, which went down in history as the Ilinden uprising. The Bitola vilayet became its center. The uprising quickly spread to the Vardar valley and the areas of Lerina, Kostur, Ohrid and Edessa. The rebels captured a number of cities, including Krusevo, where the Krusevo Republic was proclaimed. The four supreme leaders, as well as the population of Adrianople Thrace, also joined the uprising. Bulgaria came out in support of the rebels, but under pressure from the Western powers and Russia, it limited itself to only diplomatic measures. VMORO also failed to get the Macedonian Torbeshes, Albanians, Turks, Greeks and Serbs to join the uprising. This predetermined the collapse of the movement. The Ottoman army and self-defense units, numbering together about 250 thousand people, were sent against the rebels and began to suppress the uprising. According to incomplete information, 201 villages were burned in Macedonia, more than 4.5 thousand Christians were killed. At least 30 thousand Macedonians fled to Bulgaria.
After the suppression of the Ilinden uprising under pressure from the powers, the Ottoman Empire carried out a number of reforms in Macedonia. The bashi-bazouk detachments were disbanded, Christians gained access to all government bodies, and the post of Inspector General of Macedonia was established, whose deputies were appointed by Russia and Austria-Hungary. In 1904, a Bulgarian-Turkish agreement was signed, according to which the participants in the uprising were amnestied, and Bulgaria, in turn, banned the activities of VMRO and VMOC on its territory. In 1941, during World War II, the countries of the Nazi bloc occupied Vardar Banovina and divided it between Bulgaria, German-occupied Serbia and Albania under Italian rule. After the war, the region became part of the SFRY: the southern part of the region became the Socialist Republic of Macedonia, the northern part became part of the Socialist Republic of Serbia. The Anti-Fascist Assembly for the People's Liberation of Macedonia or ASNOM (Maked. Anti-fascist Assembly on Narodno Osloboduvaje na Macedonia) was convened on August 2, 1944 (on the anniversary of the Ilinden Uprising) in the Prokhor Pchinsky monastery, near the city of Kumanovo. ASNOM proclaimed itself "the supreme, legislative, representative and executive highest organ of state power of Democratic Macedonia." The meeting decided to proclaim Macedonian statehood and the Macedonian language, as well as the equality of Macedonian citizens regardless of ethnicity. ASNOM rejected the Independent State of Macedonia, founded by the Bulgarian occupation authorities in 1944. In 1945, the state changed its official name to the People's Republic of Macedonia. In 1946 it officially joined the former Yugoslav federation as a federal republic. In 1963 it was renamed the Socialist Republic of Macedonia.
Vardar Banovina before World War II.
At the time of joining the Yugoslav federation, the republic had its own constitution, collective head, government, parliament, official language, state symbols, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Academy of Sciences and Arts and other prerogatives of the state. In addition, the Socialist Republic of Macedonia had its own small territorial armed forces (Teritorijalna odbrana), as well as a Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The rights of ethnic minorities were guaranteed by the Constitution. The ruling political party is the Union of Communists of Macedonia (Sojuz na komunistite na Makedonija). In 1990, the form of government peacefully changed from a socialist state to a parliamentary democracy. The first multi-party elections took place on November 11, 1990. Kiro Gligorov became the first democratically elected president of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia on January 31, 1991. On April 16, 1991, Parliament adopted constitutional amendments to remove the adjective "socialist" from the official name of the country, and on June 7 of the same year, the new name Republic of Macedonia was officially introduced. Macedonia finally declared full independence after a referendum that took place on September 8, 1991.
The modern territory of Macedonia is close to other Balkan states.
The Republic of Macedonia is the direct successor of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia.
Macedonia is located in northern Greece, on the Balkan Peninsula. The tribes that inhabited Macedonia were not Greeks, they were Thracians. They spoke Macedonian, but their language was heavily influenced by the neighboring Greek language.
The rise of Macedonia began in the 4th century. BC. under King Philip II (359-336 BC). He sought to create a strong state and become the ruler of the world. Having carried out important administrative and military reforms, he strengthened the royal power and created a large, combat-ready army. The Macedonian cavalry was formed from aristocrats, and the infantry from peasants. The famous Macedonian phalanx was built according to the Greek image.
Having transformed Macedonia into a strong Mediterranean state, Philip II began to conquer the Greek city-states. However, Athens stood in the way of Macedonia's further advance into the interior of Greece. The Athenian demos, headed by the famous orator Demosthenes, offered particularly fierce resistance to the conquest intentions of the Macedonian king. In angry speeches - Philippines, delivered at the National Assembly, he spoke out against the aggressive plans of the Macedonian king and called on the Greeks to unite around Athens against the impending threat of conquest.
“In defending ourselves, we must prepare for war. Even if other Hellenes agree to put on the yoke of slavery, we will fight for freedom,” said Demosthenes.
The decisive battle took place in 338 BC. near the city of Chaeronea. Demosthenes, as a simple hoplite, fought with the enemies in the front ranks. The fierce battle continued for a long time. At first, the Athenians began to push back the army of Philip P. However, the well-armed and disciplined Macedonian army turned out to be stronger. After the defeat at Chaeronea, all of Greece came under Macedonian rule, and all Greek states lost their independence.
Having subjugated Greece, Philip II began to prepare for a campaign against the Persian state. However, during the preparation for the campaign, Philip II was unexpectedly killed, according to contemporaries, not without the participation of the Persians. The 21-year-old son of Philip II, Alexander (356-323 BC), ascended the Macedonian throne. King Philip II invited Aristotle to be a teacher for his 13-year-old son Alexander. Over the course of several years, he introduced Alexander to the main branches of science necessary for the future ruler. Aristotle took part in Alexander's first campaigns and gave him the best advice and recommendations.
In 334 BC. Macedonian Greek troops led by Alexander invaded Asia Minor. There was no unity among the Persians. The central government was weak. The local population was dissatisfied with the Persian authorities, so they greeted the Macedonians as liberators from the Persian yoke.
The first real battle between Atexander's troops and the Persian army took place in 334 BC. on the banks of the Granin River. The Persian troops suffered a complete defeat.
In 332 BC. Alexander undertook a campaign in Egypt, which was under the rule of the Persian king. Alexander conquered Egypt without much difficulty, because... Along the way, the main detachments of the Persian troops were defeated.
From Egypt, Alexander moved to the areas of Mesopotamia. The Persian king Darius III gathered a large army from the entire territory of his huge power. The opposing troops converged at the town of Gav-Gamela on the banks of the Tigris. The Persian army suffered a crushing defeat.
The winners captured all the major Persian cities, and they brutally punished those who resisted. For example, after taking the city of Tyre, he ordered the extermination of 8 thousand inhabitants, and 30 thousand were sold into slavery. In order to completely destroy any mention of the Persian state, he plundered and razed to the ground the ancestral capital of the Persian kings, Persopolis.
Having conquered Egypt, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor and Persia, Alexander headed to Central Asia and captured Bactria and Sogdiana. Then he led his army to India. However, exhausted by numerous military campaigns, the Macedonian army refused to continue the campaign and demanded to return home. In 324 BC. with the remnants of the invincible army, the great commander returned to Mesopotamia.
In 323 BC. Alexander suddenly fell ill and died two weeks later at the thirty-third year of his life.
As soon as they buried their master, his generals rushed to divide his great empire among themselves. The power broke up into separate kingdoms, the most famous of which were Syrian, Egyptian and Macedonian.
ANCIENT MACEDONIA - an ancient state of the V-II centuries BC on the Balkan Peninsula.
Gra-ni-chi-la in the south with the Greek Fes-sa-li-ey, in the south-pas-de-de - with Epi-rum, in the za-pa-de and se-ve-ro-za-pa- de - with Il-li-ri-ey, on se-ve-ro-vo-to-ke - with Fra-ki-ey.
In Ancient Macedonia, there were two regions: Upper Ma-ke-do-niya - the internal mountainous region and Lower Ma-ke-do-niya - the seaside -skaya plain.
The question about the et-no-ge-ne-ze of the ancient Macedonian tribes is dis-kus-si-on-nym.
Through the territory of Ancient Macedonia, important trade routes passed through. The country has significant raw materials (timber, metal ores, etc.).
From the 6th century BC in Ancient Macedonia, the great kings from the clan of the Ar-geads, for a long time, the clan's nobility, especially in Upper Ma-ka-do-nii, about-la-da-la significant self-standing.
Under Aleksandr I (ruled around 498-454) at the beginning of the 5th century, Ancient Macedonia was ready to recognize the power of the Ache-me-ni-ds. su-dar-st-va. After the thunder of the Persians of the Greeks (after 479), Alexander I pursued a rapprochement with the Greek countries. themselves and the spread of Greek culture, for which they received the nickname Phil-le-lin. One day, the struggle with the Greek cities of Khal-ki-di-ki for access to the sea led to the ob-st-re-niy from-no-she -niy of Ancient Macedonia with the De-Los Union.
For the predecessors of Alek-san-dr. I Per-dik-ki II (ruled around 454-413) and Ar-he-lai I (ruled in 413-399) ha -rak-ter-na po-li-ti-ka la-vi-ro-va-niya in ot-no-she-ni-yah with the most powerful Greek states - Athe-na- mi and Spar-toy. Under Ar-kh-lai I there was a central government, a military reform began, re-or-ga-ni-zo-va-but-no-noe de-lo, a hundred-li-tsa per-re-ne-se-na from the city of Egi to Pel-lu, located not far from the sea. After the death of Ar-he-lai I, the struggle for power sharply intensified (with the constant involvement of the Greek states states).
In 359, Philip II, the son of King Amin-ty III (ruled around 392-370), came to power. Under Philip II, there was a sharp strengthening of royal power. He carried out a military reform, creating the famous Macedonian fa-lan-gu and increasing the value of heavy military forces. a married horse, na-bi-rav-shay from the pre-sta-vi-te-lei of the Macedonian nobility (ge-tai-rov). Having seized the divine Pan-gay ores in Thrace, Philip II began to mint in a large volume -lo-that and silver-mo-no-you. In the external world, Philip II subsequently carried out the annexation of the neighboring Thracian and Greek ter-ri-to-riy. The defeat of the Chalkid Union (348), the con- clusion of Fi-lo-kra-to-the-world with Athe-na-mi (346), poor conclusion of the 3rd Holy War against Fo-ki-da (356-346) significant, but increased influence Ancient Macedonia on the basis of Balkan Greece. The Greeks' attempt to relinquish their freedom ended with their defeat in the Battle of He-ro-ney (338) . In 338/337, a congress was convened in Corinth, at which a union of Greek polities was formed, Philip II brought about g-shen his ge-ge-mo-nom. In 337, the Co-Rinthian Union decided to start a war with Persia.
After the death of Philip II in 336, his son Alexander III (Alexander Macedon) took over the position of ge-ge-mo -on the Corinthian Union. Continuing his father's warlike campaign, he defeated the Thracian and Illyrian tribes in the north. on, yes, he forged the revolt of the Greeks and destroyed Thebes. In the spring of 334, you marched against the Persians. In the re-zul-ta-te po-be-do-nos-no-go 10-year-non-Eastern march-da, a world-country arose with a price trom in Wa-wi-lo-ne.
After the death of Alek-san-dr. Ma-ke-don-skogo in 323, the struggle of his comrades for power began (wars dia-do -how). For the time being, An-ti-patr, who carried the same message to the Greeks in the Lamian War (323-322) and kept them under the rule of Ma-ke-do-nii. After the death of the lawful heirs of power, Alek-san-dr. Ma-ke-don-skogo - the arch-brother Fi- lip-pa III Ar-ri-dea (killed in 317) and the son of Alek-san-dr. IV (killed in 311/310) the di-na-stia of the Ar-geads was stopped .
In 306, the most powerful dia-do-hi ob-ya-vi-li themselves as kings (An-ti-gon I One-eyed, Pto-le- mei I, Se-levk I Ni-ka-tor, Li-si-mah, Cassander - son of An-ti-pat-ra). In the next period, the kings of Ancient Macedonia became Cassander, Demetrius I Poly-or-ket - the son of An-ti- go-na I Od-no-gla-zo-go, Epirus king Pyrrhus, Li-si-mah, Pto-le-mei Ke-ravn - son of Pto-le-mei I.
In 280-277, Ancient Macedonia, Northern and Central Greece were invaded by the ple-me-na ga-la-tov; in the battle with them, Pto-le-mei Ke-ravn died (279). The son of De-met-ria I Po-li-or-ke-ta An-ti-gon II Go-nat in 277 from-ra-zil na-she-st-vie ga-la-tov and sta-bi- li-zi-ro-val po-lo-zhe-nie in the country (ruled in 276-239). His main goal was the establishment of Macedonian influence in Greece, in which the na-chi-na-games played an ever-increasing role. the army of the Achaean union and the Eto-liy union. Particularly difficult for Ancient Macedonia was the Kre-mo-ni-do-va war (267-261), during the then Athens, Sparta and a number of other Greek states, relying on the support of Pto-le-me-Egypt, I wanted to get away from Ancient Macedonia.
The son of An-ti-go-na II Go-na-ta De-metri II (ruled in 239-229) had to wage a long war against ob-ob -e-di-nyen-nyh forces of This-liy-sko-go and Achae-sko-go union-call (“De-met-rie-va war”). Si-tua-tion in Greece managed to become his successor An-ti-go-nu III Do-so-nu (ruled in 229 -221 years). The strengthening of Sparta under King Cle-o-men III led to the rapprochement of Ancient Macedonia with the Achaean Union and the creation in 224 of El -lin-sko-th union under the he-ge-mo-niy of Ancient Macedonia. In the battle of Sel-la-sia (222), the Spar-tan army was defeated.
The son of Demetrius II Philip V (ruled in 221-179) continued to live as the power of Ancient Macedonia strengthened in Greece, in-tsi-ro-vav for-finished-shu-sya without-re-zul-tat-but the war with the Eto-liy-union (Union-no-che-war-on 220-217). The movement of Ri-ma to the east (capture in 229 of the coastal Il-li-ria) for the sta-vi-lo of Philip V in 215 conclude an agreement with Gan-ni-ba-lom, who at that time was conducting combat operations in the territory of Italy. One-on-the-Rom-la-not-initiated-ro-va-whether you-stood against Ancient Macedonia it is possible to provide support to Kar-fa-ge-nu (1st Ma-ke-don war of 215-205). The desire of Philip V to seize the power of Pto-le-me-ev in the Aegean Sea and southwestern Asia Minor led to military clashed with the koa-li-tsi of the Greek states (Per-gam, Rhodes, Byzantium, Athens and others), which they went to Rome for help. During the 2nd Macedonian War of 200-197, Rome defeated the Macedonian army (Battle of Ki-no-sk- fa-lah 197) and for-sta-vi-li Phi-lip-pa V you-ve-ti your gar-ni-zons from all the Greek cities. At the East Indian Games in 196, the Roman regiment Titus Quinctius Fla-mi-nin announced the freedom of Greece. However, in the next peace period, Philip V tried to restore the economic and military power of the state; This life, after the death of his father, was continued by his son Perseus (ruled in 179-168). In 171, Rome began the 3rd Macedonian War of 171-168 against the rising Ancient Macedonia, which It was believed that the Romans were defeated in the battle of Pid-ne (168).
Ancient Macedonia re-established itself as a single state. Special commission of the Roman se-na-ta once-de-li-la Ancient Macedonia into 4 not-for-vi-si-si-my from each other ok-ru-ga with res-pub-li-kan -Sky device and sign-chi-tel-but og-ra-ni-chi-la their economic activities (prohibition of gold mining thy and silver ores, you are behind the bark forest). After the anti-Roman restoration of An-d-ri-ska (149-148), you yourself for the son of Perseus, Ancient Macedonia was converted into a Roman province.
Began the campaign against Persia.
Emergence of Macedonia
The word "Macedonia" comes from the Greek "μακεδνός ( madednós)", which means "high".
The first Macedonian state was founded in the 8th century BC. e. or the beginning of the 7th century BC. e. the Greek dynasty of Argeads - settlers from the southern Greek city of Argos (hence the name Argeads), who traced their origins to Hercules. The first king of Macedonia was Perdiccas I (according to later data - Karan).
Early kingdom
The mythical founder of the Macedonian state was called Karan, identified with the son of the Argive king Temen Archelaus. According to Justin, 924 years passed from Karan to the last king of Macedonia, Perseus, which forces us to date Karan’s reign to the 11th century BC. e.
Alexander actively used the cultural heritage of the conquered powers, but at the same time introduced the conquered peoples to the culture of Greece and encouraged the study of Greek sciences. And although the newly formed empire collapsed soon after the death of Alexander, its legacy survived and allowed the conquered peoples to enter the Hellenistic era. The population of the Hellenistic countries of Asia even in the 2nd century. n. e. accounted for more than a quarter of the world's population. Koine Greek has been the language of international communication in most countries of the world for more than a millennium.
In 330 BC. e. The commander of Alexander the Great, Zopyrnion, made a campaign in Scythia, as a result of which his thirty thousand army was defeated. Pyrrhus, king of Macedonia and Epirus, in 279 BC. e. defeated the Romans without gaining glory. The relative small number of Macedonians did not allow them to hold back the onslaught of the Roman Republic, and Perseus of Macedon did not provide the expected resistance to the invaders. The road to the capture of Achaia was open.
Decline of the kingdom
In 215 BC e. Macedonia entered the first of three wars against Rome: the loss of the second (197 BC) and third (168 BC) resulted in the overthrow of the ruling dynasty. When Macedonia was conquered by the Roman Republic, the country was divided into four independent republics led by an aristocracy, which paid tribute to Rome. In 149 BC e. In Macedonia, a certain impostor Andriskos appeared, posing as the deceased son of Perseus Philip VI. This led to the Fourth Macedonian War. In 148 BC e. The Romans defeated False Philip. The result was the declaration of Macedonia as a Roman province in 146 BC. e.
Language
The language of the Macedonians, which was in use until the beginning of the 5th century BC. e. and preserved in some areas for several more centuries AD, has come down to us in less than a hundred short records made by Hesychius of Alexandria in the 5th century. This language was quite close to Greek, being its dialect. The Ancient Macedonian language was influenced by Doric Greek, and with the beginning of rapid cultural development and close interaction with other states of Hellas, the difference in languages began to decrease. Due to the extremely scarce linguistic material, many points of view have emerged on the origin of the ancient Macedonian language. Most often it is viewed as:
- a dialect of Greek with elements of Illyrian;
- a dialect of Greek with elements of Illyrian and Thracian;
- a dialect of Greek with elements of a non-Indo-European language;
- a dialect of the Illyrian language with elements of Greek;
- an independent Indo-European language, related to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian.
Origin
Scientists discussing whether Ancient Macedonia was a Hellenistic state or not refer both to the evidence of ancient authors and to linguistic material. The accumulated linguistic and historical material allows us to attribute the Macedonians to the Greek branch of peoples [[K:Wikipedia:Articles without sources (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]][[K:Wikipedia:Articles without sources (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]] .
see also
Write a review about the article "Ancient Macedonia"
Notes
Literature
- Mark Yunian Justin.
- Hammond N.-J.-L. Illyria, Epirus and Macedonia. - In the book: The Cambridge History of the Ancient World. Vol. 3, part 3: Expansion of the Greek world. (chapter on early Macedonia and related areas) - M.: Ladomir, 2007. - ISBN 978-5-86218-467-9
- Shofman A. S.- Kazan: Kazan University Publishing House, 1960-1963.
- Kuzmin Yu. N.: Auth. diss... Ph.D. - Saratov, 2003.
- Burov A. S.: Auth. diss... Ph.D. - M., 1996.
- A. B. Ranovich.. - M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1950. - 264 p.
- Talakh V.N./ Ed. V. N. Talakha, S. A. Kuprienko. - K.: Vidavets Kuprienko S. A., 2013. - 229 p. - ISBN 978-617-7085-01-9.
- Selian E.
Links
- (English)
- (English)
- (English)
- (English)
- - In the project Reconstruction of the “New Herodotus”
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Excerpt characterizing Ancient Macedonia
He extended his luminous hand to my forehead and I felt a strange sensation of a slight “explosion”, after which a feeling appeared that was truly similar to a door opening... which, moreover, opened right in my forehead. I saw amazingly beautiful bodies, looking like huge multi-colored butterflies, coming out from the very center of my head... They lined up around me and, tied to me with the thinnest silver thread, created an amazingly colorful unusual flower... Vibrating along this “thread” a quiet and what It was an “unearthly” melody that evoked a feeling of peace and completeness in the soul.For a moment I saw many transparent human figures standing around, but for some reason they all disappeared very quickly. Only my first guest remained, who was still touching my forehead with his hand and from his touch a very pleasant “sounding” warmth flowed into my body.
- Who are they? – I asked, pointing to the “butterflies”.
“It’s you,” came the answer again. - That's all you.
I couldn’t understand what he was talking about, but somehow I knew that real, pure and bright Good was coming from him. Suddenly, very slowly, all these unusual “butterflies” began to “melt” and turned into an amazing, starry fog sparkling with all the colors of the rainbow, which gradually began to flow back into me... A deep feeling of completion and something else appeared that I could not understand, but just felt it very strongly with all my gut.
“Be careful,” said my guest.
- Careful about what? – I asked.
“You were born...” was the answer.
His tall figure began to sway. The clearing began to spin. And when I opened my eyes, to my greatest regret, my strange stranger was no longer anywhere. One of the boys, Romas, stood opposite me and watched my “awakening”. He asked what I was doing here and whether I was going to pick mushrooms... When I asked him what time it was, he looked at me in surprise and answered and I realized that everything that happened to me took only a few minutes!..
I stood up (it turned out that I was sitting on the ground), brushed myself off and was about to walk, when suddenly I noticed a very strange detail - the entire clearing around us was green!!! As amazingly green as if we found it in early spring! And what was our general surprise when we suddenly noticed that even beautiful spring flowers appeared on it from somewhere! It was absolutely amazing and, unfortunately, completely inexplicable. Most likely, this was some kind of “side” phenomenon after the arrival of my strange guest. But, unfortunately, I could not explain or even understand this at that time.
- What have you done? – Romas asked.
“It’s not me,” I muttered guiltily.
“Well, let’s go then,” he agreed.
Romas was one of those rare friends of that time who was not afraid of my “antics” and was not surprised by anything that constantly happened to me. He simply believed me. And therefore I never had to explain anything to him, which for me was a very rare and valuable exception. When we returned from the forest, I was shaking with chills, but I thought that, as usual, I just had a little cold and decided not to bother my mother until something more serious happened. The next morning everything went away, and I was very pleased that this completely confirmed my “version” of the cold. But, unfortunately, the joy did not last long...
In the morning, as usual, I went to have breakfast. Before I had time to reach out to the cup of milk, the same heavy glass cup suddenly moved in my direction, spilling some of the milk on the table... I felt a little uneasy. I tried again - the cup moved again. Then I thought about bread... Two pieces lying nearby jumped up and fell to the floor. To be honest, my hair started to stand up... Not because I was scared. I wasn’t afraid of almost anything at that time, but it was something very “earthly” and concrete, it was nearby and I absolutely didn’t know how to control it...
I tried to calm down, took a deep breath and tried again. Only this time I didn’t try to touch anything, but decided to just think about what I wanted - for example, for the cup to be in my hand. Of course, this did not happen, she again just simply moved sharply. But I was jubilant!!! My whole insides simply squealed with delight, because I already realized that sharply or not, this was only happening at the request of my thoughts! And it was absolutely amazing! Of course, I immediately wanted to try the “new product” on all the living and inanimate “objects” around me...
The first one I came across was my grandmother, who at that moment was calmly preparing her next culinary “work” in the kitchen. It was very quiet, the grandmother was humming something to herself, when suddenly a heavy cast-iron frying pan jumped up like a bird on the stove and crashed onto the floor with a terrible noise... The grandmother jumped up in surprise no worse than the same frying pan... But, we must give her her due, right away pulled herself together and said:
- Stop doing that!
I felt a little offended, because no matter what happened, out of habit, they always blamed me for everything (although at the moment this, of course, was the absolute truth).
- Why do you think it’s me? – I asked pouting.
“Well, it seems like we don’t have ghosts yet,” the grandmother said calmly.
I loved her very much for her equanimity and unshakable calm. It seemed that nothing in this world could truly “unsettle” her. Although, naturally, there were things that upset her, surprised her, or made her sad, she perceived all this with amazing calm. And that’s why I always felt very comfortable and protected with her. Somehow, I suddenly felt that my last “prank” interested my grandmother... I literally “felt in my gut” that she was watching me and waiting for something else. Well, naturally, I didn’t keep myself waiting long... A few seconds later, all the “spoons and ladle” hanging over the stove flew down with a noisy roar behind the same frying pan...
“Well, well... Breaking is not building, I would do something useful,” the grandmother said calmly.
I was already choked with indignation! Well, please tell me, how can she treat this “incredible event” so calmly?! After all, this is... SUCH!!! I couldn’t even explain what it was, but I certainly knew that I couldn’t take what was happening so calmly. Unfortunately, my indignation did not make the slightest impression on my grandmother and she again calmly said:
“You shouldn’t spend so much effort on something you can do with your hands.” Better go read it.
My outrage knew no bounds! I couldn’t understand why what seemed so amazing to me didn’t cause any delight in her?! Unfortunately, I was still too young a child to understand that all these impressive “external effects” really do not give anything other than the same “external effects”... And the essence of all this is just intoxication with the “mysticism of the inexplicable” gullible and impressionable people, which my grandmother, naturally, was not... But since I had not yet matured to such an understanding, at that moment I was only incredibly interested in what else I could move. Therefore, without regret, I left my grandmother, who “did not understand” me, and moved on in search of a new object of my “experiments”...
At that time, my father’s favorite, a beautiful gray cat, Grishka, lived with us. I found him sleeping soundly on the warm stove and decided that this was just a very good moment to try my new “art” on him. I thought it would be better if he sat on the window. Nothing happened. Then I concentrated and thought harder... Poor Grishka flew off the stove with a wild cry and crashed his head on the windowsill... I felt so sorry for him and so ashamed that I, all around guilty, rushed to pick him up. But for some reason all the fur of the unfortunate cat suddenly stood on end and he, meowing loudly, rushed away from me, as if scalded by boiling water.
It was a shock for me. I didn’t understand what happened and why Grishka suddenly disliked me, although before that we were very good friends. I chased him almost all day, but, unfortunately, I was never able to beg for forgiveness... His strange behavior lasted for four days, and then our adventure was most likely forgotten and everything was fine again. But it made me think, because I realized that, without wanting it, with the same unusual “abilities” I can sometimes cause harm to someone.
After this incident, I began to take much more seriously everything that unexpectedly manifested itself in me and “experimented” much more carefully. All the following days, naturally, I simply fell ill with the mania of “movement.” I mentally tried to move everything that caught my eye... and in some cases, again, I got very disastrous results...
So, for example, I watched in horror as shelves of neatly folded, very expensive, dad’s books fell “organized” onto the floor and with shaking hands I tried to put everything back in place as quickly as possible, since books were a “sacred” object in our house and Before you took them, you had to earn them. But, fortunately for me, my dad wasn’t at home at that moment and, as they say, this time it “blown away”...
Another very funny and at the same time sad incident happened with my dad’s aquarium. My father, as long as I remember him, was always very fond of fish and dreamed of one day building a large aquarium at home (which he later realized). But at that moment, for lack of anything better, we simply had a small round aquarium that could only hold a few colorful fish. And since even such a small “living corner” brought dad spiritual joy, everyone in the house looked after it with pleasure, including me.
And so, one “unfortunate” day, when I was just passing by, all busy with my “moving” thoughts, I accidentally looked at the fish and regretted that they, poor things, had so little space to live freely... The aquarium suddenly shook and, to my great horror, it burst, spilling water throughout the room. Before the poor fish had time to come to their senses, they were eaten with great appetite by our beloved cat, who suddenly, right from the sky, received such an unexpected pleasure... I felt really sad, because I in no way wanted to upset my dad , and even more so, to interrupt someone’s life, even a very small one.
That evening I was waiting for my dad in a completely broken state - it was very insulting and embarrassing to make such a stupid mistake. And although I knew that no one would punish me for this, for some reason I felt very bad in my soul and, as they say, the cats were scratching very loudly inside of me. I realized more and more that some of my “talents” could be very, very dangerous in certain circumstances. But, unfortunately, I didn’t know how to control this and therefore I became more and more worried about the unpredictability of some of my actions and about their possible consequences with results that were completely undesirable for me...
But I was still just a curious nine-year-old girl and could not worry for a long time about the tragically dead fish, although it was entirely my fault. I continued to diligently try to move all the objects that came my way and was incredibly happy about any unusual manifestation in my “research” practice. So, one fine morning during breakfast, my milk cup suddenly hung in the air right in front of me and continued to hang, and I had no idea how to lower it... My grandmother was in the kitchen at that moment and I was feverishly trying to figure out what to do. “to figure it out” so that you don’t have to blush and explain yourself again, expecting to hear complete disapproval on her part. But the unfortunate cup stubbornly refused to come back. On the contrary, she suddenly moved smoothly and, as if teasingly, began to describe wide circles over the table... And the funny thing is that I couldn’t grab her.
Grandma returned to the room and literally froze on the threshold with her cup in her hand. Of course, I immediately rushed to explain that “she just flies like that... and, isn’t it true, it’s very beautiful?”... In short, I tried to find any way out of the situation, just not to seem helpless. And then I suddenly felt very ashamed... I saw that my grandmother knew that I simply could not find the answer to the problem that had arisen and was trying to “disguise” my ignorance with some unnecessary beautiful words. Then I, indignant at myself, gathered my “bruised” pride into a fist and quickly blurted out:
- Well, I don’t know why she flies! And I don’t know how to lower it!
Grandma looked at me seriously and suddenly said very cheerfully:
- So try it! This is why your mind was given to you.
It’s like a weight has been lifted from my shoulders! I really didn’t like to seem incompetent, and especially when it came to my “strange” abilities. And so I tried... From morning to evening. Until I fell off my feet and it began to seem that I no longer had any idea what I was doing. Some sage said that three paths lead to higher intelligence: the path of reflection is the noblest, the path of imitation is the easiest, and the path of experience on one’s own neck is the most difficult. So, apparently, for some reason I always chose the hardest path, since my poor neck really suffered greatly from my never-ending, endless experiments...
But sometimes “the game was worth the candle” and my hard work was crowned with success, as it finally happened with the same “movement”... After some time, any desired objects moved, flew, fell and rose when I I wanted this and it no longer seemed difficult to manage it at all... except for one very disappointingly missed incident, which, to my great regret, happened at school, which I always honestly tried to avoid. I absolutely didn’t need any extra talk about my “oddities,” and especially among my school friends!
The fault of that offensive incident, apparently, was my too much relaxation, which (knowing about my “motor” abilities) was completely unforgivable to allow in such a situation. But we all make big or small mistakes at some point, and as they say, we learn from them. Although, to be honest, I would prefer to study on something else...
My class teacher at that time was teacher Gibiene, a gentle and kind woman whom all the schoolchildren sincerely adored. And in our class was her son, Remy, who, unfortunately, was a very spoiled and unpleasant boy, who always despised everyone, bullied girls and constantly told his mother’s whole class. I was always surprised that, being such an open, intelligent and pleasant person, his mother point-blank did not want to see the real face of her beloved “child”... It’s probably true that love can sometimes be truly blind. And in this case she was truly blind...
On that ill-fated day, Remy came to school already pretty nervous about something and immediately began to look for a “scapegoat” in order to pour out all his accumulated anger on him. Well, naturally, I was “lucky” to be at that moment precisely within his reach and, since we didn’t really like each other to begin with, on that day I turned out to be exactly that hotly desired “buffer” on which he was eager to take out your dissatisfaction with unknown reason.