Introduction
War elephants were used extensively in the ancient world. To many uninformed or amateur classicists, this may seem strange, but alas I am not joking; in the ancient world elephants were used as soldiers.
Alexander the Great first encountered 20 war elephants at the Battle of Gaugamela, in 331 BCE, under the command of the Persians. The elephants were not actually used for some reason but after the battle Alexander then took them under his command. The next encounter was under the Indian king Porus at the Battle of the Hydaspes river, where the Indian king commanded between 200 and 85 war elephants, although 130 is the likely number. These elephants wreaked considerable damage to Alexanders infantry and thus Alexander saw them in great regard as war tools. After Alexander's death his successors fought over his empire, and it was most unfashionable for a successor king to not have his own elephant corps. Elephants were seen in use by the Carthaginians of North Africa (where the great Hannibal came from), the Epirotes of southern Albania (where the great Pyrrhus came from), and also to a lesser extent the Romans (although they preferred going up against elephants in battle as they were rather good at killing them).
War elephants main role was to either intimidate the enemy, or outright crush them, but they also had other purposes such as ripping down enemy gates and fortresses. War elephants often came equipped with armour, and large towers on their backs with which soldiers could throw javelins or shoot arrows from (although the North African elephant was usually too small to carry a tower or much armour).
It is pivotal to explain that the only main elephants used in the Ancient world were the Asian elephant (from Syria and India), and the African forest elephant from North Africa; but, and this is crucial, new DNA research from the university of Illinois has found that the elephants used by Ptolemy IV at Raphia in 217 BCE were not 'forest' elephants, but 'bush' elephants from Eritrea that were inbred and smaller than usual (a herd of 120 still exists at Gash-Barka. This means that technically every form of main elephant was used in the Mediterranean for war, but only for a fleeting period.
(Red indicates consistent recruitment of war elephants and yellow temporary recruitment)
Biology
I am a master biologist and can accurately display all biological dilemmas, only joking, I got a level 4 at GCSE, but I read actual biologists work and then tell you. There are 2 species of elephant, the African elephant, (loxodonta africana), and the Asian elephant (elephas maximus). There is a subdivision of the African 'bush' elephant, found mostly in southern Africa, and the 'forest' elephant, found in central Africa, and used to be in North Africa and Egypt. In terms of size, the 'bush' elephant, is the largest at between 9ft and 13ft, weighing between 4-7 tons. The Asian elephant is the medium sized, at 6ft 6in - 11ft 6in, and weighing 2-5 tons. The 'forest' elephant is the smallest at the tiny stature (for an elephant) of 6ft 6in to 8ft 2in and weighing between 2-4.5 tons. Male elephants are called 'bulls' and have tusks, whereas female elephants are called 'cows' and have either very small or nonexistent tusks. Elephants are mostly gentle giants, but when roused to defend a child, or when threatened, they can charge at up to 25mph. I unfortunately had to experience this the hard way, when almost knocked over by a charging elephant whilst on safari in South Africa (personally I feel it was best for the elephant because I'd have Mike Tyson'd it big time). Elephants could not realistically be bred in a special breeding programme in the Ancient world because they take 22 months to gestate, and then the baby takes 20 years to grow full sized, all the while eating 1.5% of its on average 5 ton body weight each day.
(The size of African elephants)
Role
Elephants were used for a few main roles.
The first, and largest, was to simply trample and crush enemies. You've just been hit at 25mph by something weighing 4.5 tonnes. Firstly, you have come down with a big case of the deads, but secondly, you weren't just hit by a monster truck, that was an elephant. Elephants are above all else, fast and big, and this means that multiple men can be trampled in mere seconds of a charge. Add to this that the elephant is wearing armour and has men throwing pointy sticks at you, and this truly is a potent combination. The elephant can puncture you with its tusks, crush you with its trunk, or simply kick you away. This means that infantry formations will be disrupted and thus gaps appear to be exploited by the owner of the elephants infantry.
Secondly, elephants are just a tad scary. They are big, loud, and smell bad. Elephants are, on average, far bigger than a human, making them intimidating. When adding height boosters like a large tower filled with people, or plumes of horsehair coming from their helmets, this effect is accentuated. Many barbarian tribes simply routed at the sight of imposing elephants, as they were unaccustomed to them. Elephants can also trumpet with their trunks, very loudly. I don't mean, you've just been delivered home by the police and are getting screamed at by mother, I mean the sound of a jet taking off from 60m (around 112dB). This is considered 'intolerable' on the decibel system, and once again I can say from experience that it is loud. Elephants also produce a very strange smell, and whilst a professional soldier will have smelt this down the latrines (or on himself), the horses of the cavalry are petrified of this stench, and often flee from a great distance without even meeting the elephants. At the Battle of Herclea in 280 BCE, the stalwart Romans were defeated when their cavalry ran off after smelling the 20 Asian elephants of Pyrrhus of Epirus. To sum this up, a boy in the same safari truck as me started to cry after being almost hit by elephants, (although the elephant would have been crying after I'd scrapped it).
Elephants are also a deterrent, much like the modern nuclear weapon. It was considered foolish to attack anywhere that elephants were present, because after not too long, your troops would receive a short, sharp shock, of the largest land mammal in their face. This was the case at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BCE, when the Antigonid cavalry defeated their cavalry opponents, chasing them for a while. When they came back to the battle to outflank the enemy infantry, they found 400 elephants blocking their route, and knowing full well they would likely die, did not attack.
In a smaller capacity, elephants were used against other elephants, because they were good at it. The Asian elephant commonly dominated the smaller African 'forest' elephant deployed against them (or the inbred and small 'bush' elephants of Ptolemy IV at Raphia), due to the sheer size difference. We are also told by ancient scholars that small elephants were rather intimidated by bigger ones, and so feared their size and smell too.
It is notable that Carthaginian elephants were commonly used only to crush enemies, as they mainly fought in Spain against barbarians or against the Romans, both of which were greatly unused to fighting elephants.
Incredibly, elephants were also keen students of engineering, or, they were used in engineering. At the battle of Fort Camel in 321 BCE Perdiccas tried to defeat Ptolemy at Fort Camel by using his elephants to tear down the walls and gates, but Ptolemy grabbed a spear himself and started blinding the elephants, where he was soon followed by his bodyguards. Perdiccas again tried to innovate the engineering world by fording the Nile, which I can say first hand is 2 miles wide at some points and rather deep. Perdiccas set his elephants upstream to dislodge the current, then sent his men across against the weakened current. This worked for a time, until the sand was torn up by the admittedly large mammals standing on it, whence many of Perdiccas' troops drowned (Perdiccas was killed by his troops shortly after).
(Elephant versus elephant at Raphis in 217 BCE, Ptolemaic African on left, Selucid Asian on right)
Equipment
The war elephants of thew ancient world were lavishly equipped. The Asian elephants could afford plenty of armour, and large towers, due to their size. The Selucid elephants at Raphia (as seen above and below), were given lamellar armour, or bands of iron, around their legs, scale armour around their torso, and large plates, scale, or chain-mail on their heads and faces. It is specifically noted that the Selucid elephants wore bright plumes on their helmets, perhaps to appear bigger.
The towers on the elephants were usually filled with between 2-4 men, depending on elephant size. The soldiers would carry long pikes, to dismount other elephant crews, javelins, or bows. The crews main role was anti elephant, but they could also harass enemy formations.
Many African elephants could not afford the luxury of armour or a tower however, because they were too small. This meant that the largest, however, could afford one or the other (usually a tower), but most went for some simple armour of cloth.
The Carthaginians fed their elephants a sweet wine, to make them more erratic and ferocious. This seems silly to many however as a drunk elephant doe not generally listen to what it is told and often gets violent towards anyone, (I am told the police have the same problem with drunk people).
The armour and towers of elephants added to their weight, meaning the 4.5 ton average turns to more like 5.5, meaning the largest elephants could weigh around 7 ton all included.
(An excellent example of an armoured war elephant, from Osprey Publishing's 'War Elephants' which I would highly recommend)
Logistical Nightmare
Elephants eat lots. The standard barley portion for a Roman cavalry horse was 7kg of barley a day. An elephant of the Asian or 'forest' African eats between 135-300kg of fodder and grazing a day. This is 15-30 times more than a horse requires. That is many more times in human soldiers, leading some to question whether they want 100 more infantry soldiers or 1 elephant.
Add to this that armies could have had up to 400 elephants in them and this problem intensifies. 54 Asian elephants made up the equivalent of 1000 cavalrymen. That 1 cavalrymen includes his horse, his squire, and himself. So for an army with 400 elephants, you could have 7,400 cavalry.
Elephants can march well further than humans, which is an upside, but can't do many typical things such as climbing hills. The elephants require steps to be cut in, as their legs bend only slightly. Elephants also freak out at water, when on the water, as seen by Hannibal at the Rhone trying to cross his elephants on turf covered barges, only to see them all jump in the water. This water born fear isn't actually that bad a problem, as elephants trunks can reach the water and breath normally like a snorkel, so it is actually better to let them naturally swim rather than ferry them across rivers.
War elephants also require a plethora of staff on campaign. They require their 'mahout' or driver, several soldiers to crew them, and many grooms to care for the elephants extensive diets and, to put it bluntly, faeces. Among the elephants retinue were lightly armed troops. This was because, elephants are vulnerable to missile weapons such as arrows or javelins, and so to counter this threat missile troops of the elephants own must be with them. We are told that Pyrrhus of Epirus had in 280 BCE had 20 Asian elephants, 3,000 archers and 500 slingers. These troops were dispersed among the elephants to safeguard them from enemy missiles, giving approximately 25 slingers and 150 archers per animal, a large of troops just to keep 20 animals safe.
Shortcomings
When used correctly elephants were massively important to victory in ancient battle, however this isn't very helpful as anything, if used correctly, is effective. Elephants had many drawbacks, and were countered by many things, which over time became common place tactics in the armies of Rome (who defeated all the users of elephants).
Perhaps the biggest counter to elephants were missile troops. Being pelted with sharp sticks fired from a bow or launched as a javelin is a rather good way of upsetting any animal, elephant or human, but this point is accentuated with the beasts. Elephants are seemingly so enraged by being hit that they go berserk. This makes the elephants trample all in its path to reach safety (commonly killing its own troops), and rendering the animals useless. Unarmoured elephants like the ones used by Carthage are especially vulnerable to missiles, and commonly were outright killed by an accurate barrage.
Elephants also do not perform very well at being manoeuvred. Elephants, whilst at top speed, can turn only gradually, meaning a fast rotation is impossible. The Romans exploited this at the Battle of Zama in 202 BCE, where the Romans exposed gaps in their lines for the elephants to run through, all the while hitting them with missiles (I must note that the term 'missile' does not mean a large pointy war head filled with explosives, but a weapon thrown or shot). This disadvantage at Zama also played ion another trait associated with cavalry horses too. Animals don't like to charge at solid objects, because they are not stupid. To an elephant or horse, the tightly packed body of soldiers in front of them may as well be a brick wall, and they see this as most dangerous to themselves, so do not tend to charge. This meant when an open pathway formed right in front of the elephants, they obviously took it.
However simple scenarios that for out purposes shall be called 'man's world is not built for elephants size' also severely impede elephants. At Argos in 272 BCE, Pyrrhus' elephants could not get into the city as they were too tall for the gates. This meant their towers had to be disassembled and reassembled on the other side. Due to the stealth nature of the attack on Argos being at night, the trumpeting elephants woke the defenders, and by sunrise the city was manned at the defences against Pyrrhus. Further calamity struck when Pyrrhus called a retreat from the city, but the largest elephant he had died in the gateway, leaving it blocked. In an almost comedic manner, in the same battle, an elephants 'mahout', or driver, was killed from it back, so the elephant stampeded through his own troops to reach the driver and protect him (an example of the ferocious bonds formed between driver and beast).
Surely it would be stupid of me to suggest that setting live pigs alight and sending them towards the elephants is a suitable counter-measure; wrong. In 272 BCE, again yes, the Romans used flaming pigs to disperse thew Tarentine elephants, and win a battle. Pliny the Elder states that "elephants are scared by the smallest squeal of the hog", which seems stupid because well, elephants are massive, but when we evaluate that horses are scared of camels and elephants, and small elephants are scarred of big elephants, it seems almost believable that all elephants are scared of at least something (that thing being pigs).
Conclusion
To conclude fairly swiftly, elephants can be extremely potent. This is due to their size and speed (of which you will die if hit), and their ability to sew fear in man and horse alike. However elephants were also a logistical nightmare that required massive amounts of food, and were quite easily countered due to the widespread use of skirmishers to throw things or shoot things at the elephants, combined with hilarious shortcomings like not being able to fit through city gates and then waking all the defenders up. As an ancient general would I take 400 elephants or the equivalent in food of 7,400 cavalry? I would most definitely take the elephants for one main reason. The majority of people know Hannibal for taking elephants across the Alps, not for his stunning victories; elephants are remembered in history more than any other type of troop, and rightly so. Max Scourfield.
Comments