Artwork

Content provided by The History Network. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The History Network or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

AWA145 - Were Philip and Alexander uniquely competent?

10:25
 
Share
 

Manage episode 289508405 series 1337620
Content provided by The History Network. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The History Network or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

Murray tackles this question from Juan; It seems that Phillip/Alexander’s army was almost invincible but afterwards “Macedonian” style armies seem to be a lot more hit and miss (vs. Romans, Indians, Parthians, Celts etc.). Was this because Philip/Alexander’s troops were uniquely competent/trained or were the commanders after Alexander just not as good? I’m mostly thinking about the pike phalanx but if there’s any information on the light infantry or cavalry troops I’d love to learn!

Like the podcast? Why not become a patron? https://www.patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

  continue reading

303 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 289508405 series 1337620
Content provided by The History Network. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The History Network or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

Murray tackles this question from Juan; It seems that Phillip/Alexander’s army was almost invincible but afterwards “Macedonian” style armies seem to be a lot more hit and miss (vs. Romans, Indians, Parthians, Celts etc.). Was this because Philip/Alexander’s troops were uniquely competent/trained or were the commanders after Alexander just not as good? I’m mostly thinking about the pike phalanx but if there’s any information on the light infantry or cavalry troops I’d love to learn!

Like the podcast? Why not become a patron? https://www.patreon.com/ancientwarfarepodcast

  continue reading

303 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide