Battle of Gaugamela - Size of Persian Army - Modern Estimates

Modern Estimates

Units Low Estimate High Estimate
Peltasts 10,000 30,000
Cavalry 12,000 40,000
Persian Immortals 10,000 10,000
Bactrian Cavalry 1,000 2,000
Archers 1,500 1,500
Scythed chariots 200 200
War elephants 15 15
Total 52,930 87,000

Some ancient Greek historians suggest that the main Persian army numbered between 200 and 300 thousand during the battle; however, some modern scholarssuggest that Darius III's army was no larger than 50,000 because of the logistical difficulty of fielding more than 50,000 soldiers in battle at the time. However, it is possible that the Persian army could have numbered over 100,000 men. One estimate is that there were 25,000 peltasts, 10,000 Immortals, 2,000 Greek hoplites, 1,000 Bactrians, and 40,000 cavalry, 200 scythed chariots, and 15 war elephants. Hans Delbr├╝ck however estimates the number of Persian cavalry at 12,000 because of management issues and Persian infantry (peltast) less than that of the Macedonian heavy infantry and the Greek mercenaries at 8,000.

Warry estimates a total size of 91,000. Welman estimates a total size of 90,000. Delbr├╝ck (1978) estimates a total size of 52,000. Engels (1920) and Green (1990) also estimate the total size of Darius' army to be no larger than 100,000 at Gaugamela.

Read more about this topic:  Battle Of Gaugamela, Size of Persian Army

Famous quotes containing the words estimates and/or modern:

    A State, in idea, is the opposite of a Church. A State regards classes, and not individuals; and it estimates classes, not by internal merit, but external accidents, as property, birth, etc. But a church does the reverse of this, and disregards all external accidents, and looks at men as individual persons, allowing no gradations of ranks, but such as greater or less wisdom, learning, and holiness ought to confer. A Church is, therefore, in idea, the only pure democracy.
    Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772–1834)

    One of the grotesqueries of present-day American life is the amount of reasoning that goes into displaying the wisdom secreted in bad movies while proving that modern art is meaningless.... They have put into practise the notion that a bad art work cleverly interpreted according to some obscure Method is more rewarding than a masterpiece wrapped in silence.
    Harold Rosenberg (1906–1978)