Gajah sahabat manusia

7/31/2019 Gajah sahabat manusia

1/11

From: "radityo djadjoeri" To: "islamlib-owner" ; "mediacare"

; "bizzcomm-milis" Cc: "mudawijaya"

Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 10:51 AM

Subject: [communitygallery] Gajah, sahabat manusia yang nyaris punah

Gajah, sahabat manusia yang nyaris punah

Saya kirimkan artikel menarik tentang penggunaan gajah sebagai 'mesin perang'

(Emory Rowland: Military use of elephants in the Greek and Roman Period). Terkisahdi masa lalu gajah digunakan dalam pasukan perang sejak zaman Yunani hingga Romawi.

Di Alquran tertulis juga tentang pasukan gajah pimpinan Abrahah yang menyerangMekah

(kini masuk wilayah Saudi Arabia), dimana Ka'bah bercokol. Abrahah adalah gubernurAbbysinia (Ethiopia) yang menjajah Yaman hampir seratus tahun lamanya. Tahun

menunjuk angka 571 Masehi, dimana tercatat pula Nabi Muhammad lahir di kota itu pada20 April. Konon tentara Abrahah kocar-kacir karena ada hujan batu yang tiba-tiba

menerjang. Mereka pun kalah perang.

Namun kisah Abrahah itu kini dipertanyakan keabsahannya. Pasalnya di masa itu gajahtak efektif lagi dipakai sebagai mesin perang. Apalagi membawa ratusan gajah Afrika

dari Yaman ke jazirah Arab yang harus melintasi gurun pasir. Seperti kita tahu, gajahmengkonsumsi banyak dedaunan hijau, buah-buahan dan cadangan air berton-ton.

Dibawa melintasi gurun pasir yang kering kerontang? Mana mungkin. Saat dinaiki, gajahjuga harus jalan pelan-pelan.

Sungguh langkah bodoh kalau Abrahah memilih berperang menggunakan gajah. Paraarkeolog musti membuktikan, apakah di Mekah pernah ditemukan tulang-belulang gajah

milik Abrahah?

Menurut catatan ahli sejarah Pliny the Elder (23 SM - 79 M), setelahpertempuran Thapsus (46 SM) gajah tidak lagi efektif sebagai senjata, karena

hanya dengan bersenjatakan terompet dan tombak -- pasukan Caesar berhasil memukulmundur pasukan gajah Metellus Scipio & Cato the Younger. Pada pertempuran

selanjutnya - malah sudah ditemukan senjata anti gajah yang lebih sederhana - yaitu babi.Gajah amat takut pada suara babi. Penduduk

Megara yang dikepung pasukan Persia - menggunakan babi yang dilumuri minyak - dandilepas ke medan pertempuran. Gajah yang ketakutan terhadap suara babi - malah

membuat barisan pasukan jadi berantakan (catatan: diterjemahkan dari artikel tersebut diatas oleh rekan Poltak Holtahero).

Dalam peperangan modern, peran gajah lalu digantikan oleh panser/tank. Untuk 'bersih-

bersih'kawasan dan alat transportasi, peran gajah digantikan oleh traktor dan truk. Namun, di

masa modern, gajah 'terpaksa' dipakai lagi untuk membersihkan puing-puing akibattsunami di Aceh dan Thailand. Nah, itulah manfaat buat kita untuk selalu menyayangi
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/11

binatang. Walau bagaimana pun, binatang menyusui itu adalah sahabat kita dari masa kemasa. Jangan sampai gajah-gajah itu punah akibat keserakahan dan kekejaman manusia.

Buat TNI, daripada import tank yang mahal dan rawan KKN seperti pembelian Scorpion,

mending merawat dan mengembang biakkan gajah-gajah buat armada binatang. Buat

POLRI, rasanya gajah oke juga buat menakut-nakuti para demonstran. Kecuali parademonstran bawa terompet dan didampingi pasukan babi yang dilumuri minyak gorengBimoli, gajah pun akan lari terbirit-birit.

Salam pencerahan,

Radityo Djadjoeri

________________________________________

Military use of elephants in the Greek and Roman Period

by Emory Rowland

The purpose of this work is to determine all of the military uses of the elephant, highlightits effects on the Greek and Roman mind, and offer theories to explain uncertainties

about elephants. This information has been presented largely from the ancient sources'point

of view. This method increases the reader's understanding of the impact that the elephanthad upon the men of antiquity.

Some of the more important ancient sources are listed to provide a background for the

reader. Arrian wrote in the mid second century A.D. as governor of Cappadocia underHadrian. He saw plenty of military action and claimed to imitate Zenophon, the famous

Atheniangeneral. He is a highly qualified source since he had the chance to deal with elephants

face-to-face. Diodorus flourished under Caesar and Augustus. He wrote a world historyfrom the earliest times to Caesar's Gallic War (54 B.C.). His work is not as distinguished

as Arrian's, but nevertheless, valuable. Aelian was a teacher of rhetoric in Rome in theearly third century A.D. He enjoyed a reputation for Attic purity of diction and his works

enjoyed great subsequent popularity. Livy lived from 59 B.C. to A.D. 17. He wrote TheHistory of Rome composed in 142 books. His genius lay in his power of vivid historical

reconstruction, visualizing scenes and people, and conveying his impression bydescription and interpretation. In his presentation of persons and events, he ranks among

the great historians. Ammianus wrote in the mid fourth century A.D. He has been calledthe last of the great historians. Like Arrian, his military career credits him with first-hand

knowledge of elephants. Pliny(the elder) lived in the mid first century A.D. He served as a cavalry officer in Germany.

His Natural History is the sole extant work of his 102 volumes. All of theaforementioned authors seem philologically sound and inclined toward objectivity and

accuracy. *


3/11

*M. Cary, J.P. Denniston, J. Wight Duff, A. D. Nock, W. D. Ross, H. H. Scullard, eds.,The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 101, 284, 11,

510-11, 43, 703-4.

Two species of elephants were in existence during the Greek and Roman period: theIndian and African. Both species have survived to the present day. The back of the Indianelephant is convex. The cows have very small tusks or none at all. The highest point of its

body is thetop of its head and the forehead is slightly indented. The African elephant is distinguished

by its large triangular ears and concave back. The African is divided into two subspecies:the Bush elephant and the Forest elephant. The major difference in the two subspecies

is in the size. The average adult Bush is over eight feet at the shoulder, and the Forest isunder that figure.1 The African elephants were taken from North and East Africa. The

Ptolemies of Egypt exploited this group particularly. Elephants were widespread in Syria,but the myth of a Syrian elephant as distinct from the Indian and African must be

dismissed. There is no evidence of such a difference.2

A variety of methods were employed in antiquity to trap elephants, such as pits, fallingspears, bamboo ring traps, trunk snares, ham-stringing, fire, poisoned arrows, and the

corral.3 Arrian records a method of hunting Indian elephants from which he quotesMegasthenes: "They choose a place that is level and open to the sun's heat and dig a ditch

in a circle wide enough for a great army to encamp within it. They dig a ditch and heapthe dirt up on either side as a wall.

They make shelters for themselves dug out of the wall on the outside of the ditch and

place small windows in them; through these, the light comes in and they watch theanimals entering. Then they leave three or four of their tamest females within the

enclosure and leave only one entrance by the ditch, making a bridge over it; and here theyheap much earth and grass so that the animals cannot distinguish the bridge, and so

suspect any trick. The hunters then hide in the shelters dug under the ditch. And when theelephants approach the ditch and hear the trumpeting of the females and perceive them by

their scent, they rush to the walled enclosure. When the hunters see that the wildelephants have entered, some smartly

remove the bridge."4

A more aggressive method of hunting was used by the Ethiopians to neutralize theAfrican elephant. Diodorus provides an account: "The elephant fighter seizes the

elephant's tail with his hands and plants his feet against its left flank; he has hanging fromhis shoulders an

axe, light enough so that the blow may be struck with one hand and yet very sharp, andgrasping this in his right hand, he ham-strings the elephant's right leg, raining blows upon

it and maintaining the position of his own body with his left hand. The ham-strung beastoften collapses on the spot causing the death of the Ethiopian with

his own; sometimes squeezing the man against a rock or tree it crusheshim with its weight until it kills him."5


4/11

The elephant was used in battle because of its immense size and great

strength. When the Romans encountered the elephants of Pyrrhus "some(Romans) were killed by the men in the towers on the elephants' backs,

and others by the beasts themselves, which destroyed many with their

trunks and tusks and crushed and trampled under foot many more(Zonaras VIII, 3)." Aelian recorded Ctesias as saying that he hasseen "date-palms completely uprooted by elephants."6 Also, Mago's

elephants "trampled to death twenty-two sons of nobles serving in theRoman cavalry (Livy XXX, 18)." Once one of Scipio's wounded elephants

was "crushing a sutler underfoot when a veteran in Caesar's armydistracted the beast which then lifted him in the air with its trunk;

whereupon the soldier kept hacking at the trunk with his sword untilpain caused the beast to drop him."7

Elephants were sometimes equipped with frightening headpieces and

breastplates for defensive armor. Arrian (Jact. 2.4) states thatelephants' tusks were armed with sharp iron, while the poet Silius

Italicus (IX, 581-3) refers to spears fastened to the tusks. Elephantsalso wore clanging bells around their necks in battle. Sometimes

war-elephants carried only a mahout (the keeper/trainer of the elephant, normally imported from India). At times the elephant carried on or

more armed soldiers on its back while some had towers or castlescontaining warriors. The towers were fastened to the elephant's back

by means of ropes or chains which passed around its body on the front,middle, and backside.8

The elephant was a serious fighting machine in antiquity. Elephants

could (and often did) almost solely determine the course of battle.After Antiochas had won an elephant-victory over the terrified Gauls,

he wept and called out, "Shame my men, whose salvation came throughthese sixteen beasts. If the novelty of their appearance had not

struck the enemy with panic, where should we have been?"9 HadAntiochas not possessed his sixteen elephants, he might well have lost

the battle.

These animals had tremendous potential, but were also unpredictablein battle - which is why the Romans did not use the beasts until late;

and when they did use them, it was always in small numbers. Elephantssometimes had to be killed by their mahouts if they got out of hand

in battle. If an elephant was wounded in battle and reversed hiscourse, breaking his own phalanx, the mahout was forced to drive a

chisel down between the beast's ears with a mallet (Livy XXVII, 46-49).Other elephant riders carried knives bound to their right hands in

order to kill the unruly beast with a blow where the head joins theneck (Ammianus XXV, 1.4).


5/11


6/11

in the branches of some trees and separated from one another, thefled. Livy gives an account of an incident in which Hannibal's

elephants broke into a Roman camp causing much confusion until drivenout by fire and how in the Third Punic War, Aemilianus stormed the

Carthaginian camp at Nepheris.13 Camp storming by an elephant army

seems to have been a rare phenomenon which was used successfully onsome occasions.

Elephants were sometimes used in siege warfare. Aristotle writesthat "an elephant, by pushing with his big tusks, can batter down a

wall and will butt with his forehead at a palm until he brings itdown (Hist. Animal. IX.1)." The Macedonians began using elephants to

break into fortified places. Perdiccas did this in his campaignagainst Ptolemy and Polyperchon at the siege of Megalopolis. The

Carthaginians tried to force the Roman trenches outside Panoramuswith elephants. The elephant was generally not very effective at

siege warfare. The usual counter-methods were to pick off the driversand to put down caltrops which lamed the animals.14

Armies used elephants in three other minor ways: execution of

prisoners, fording rivers, and in training horses. Curtis recordsthat thirty prisoners were "trampled to death by the feet of the

elephants of the Macedonian commander, Perdiccas (X, 9.18)." Also,the Carthaginians, under Hamilcar, had some of their prisoners thrown

to the elephants to be trampled to death in the war with themercenaries. When the Macedonians were fighting the Egyptians, the

Macedonian army attempted to cross the Nile, but the men were up totheir chins in water and found the current too strong. So Perdiccas

placed elephants in the river, upstream, to break the force of thewater, while he put cavalry on the downstream side of his men to help

those who were being swept away. Also, the Persian army placedelephants in both sides of the Phasis River as far as they could stand

behind a barrier of stockades and boats in order to help the passageof the Persians against the current.15 Every wise general in the

Graeco-Roman period kept at least a few elephants with the army inorder to train the cavalry for future elephant battles. Untrained

horses would always flee elephants in battle.

Elephants were often held back behind the lines in reserve for acritical moment in battle. This was done especially if the number of

elephants was small. Lucius Scipio kept his sixteen African beasts inreserve rather than have them face Antiochas/ fifty-four Indians.16

The Roman strategy of deploying only a small number of elephants onthe battlefield worked quite well. The normal position of elephants

was in front of the main battle-line or in front of part of it. Theywere not kept too close to the front line in order that they might


7/11

have some room to retreat if necessary and also to allow the infantryample time to open up the line to let them through. The non-elephant

armies developed all sorts of methods of trying to cope with the onslaught of elephants.The military genius, Scipio Africanus, developed the solution to the problem of how an

army should face elephants. He left lanes in his battle-line along which the elephants

could be channeled to the rear and gotten out of the way.17 Scipio foiled Hannibal byusing the tactic at the battle of Zama.

Armies developed anti-elephant weapons. In attack, the aim was to try to surroundindividual beasts, threatening them from the flank and rear. For this, special weapons

might be devised, such as the scimitars and axes used by Alexander. Caesar used slingerswho could aim at the mahout as well as the elephant. During the Sassanid Wars

cataphracts (men armored with iron spikes which prevented the elephants from seizingthem with their trunks) were used. The Romans were said to have deployed iron-pointed

beams mounted on wagons against Pyrrhus. The ingenious Romans also used chariotsdrawn by armored horses, an arrow-firing catapult mounted on a vehicle drawn by horses

or mules, and fire carts. Polyperchon used nail studded frames as moveable barriers atMegalopolis and Ptolemy laid an iron-spiked minefield at Gaza.18

The ancient sources are very clear in indicating that pigs were used

to deter elephants in battle. Pliny writes "elephants are scared bythe smallest squeal of a pig; and when wounded and frightened, they

always give ground (VIII, 1.27)." Aelian says that "it was by thesesquealing pigs, they say, that the Romans turned to flight the

elephants of Pyrrhus and won a glorious victory (1,38)." The mostfrequently told tale concerning pigs as a counter weapon to elephants

may be represented by Aelian and Polyaenus: when Antigonas Gonataswas besieging Megara, the Megarians succeeded in routing the

besiegers' elephants by dousing pigs in oil and igniting them andthen turning them loose against the elephants. One might object that

this is hardly a fair test of the elephant's reaction to pigs per se;but both authors specifically state that the beasts were startled

by the squeal rather than by the fire. The flames were simply a meansof guaranteeing a satisfactory squeal. As a final instance of the

effect of pigs on elephants in battle, it is feasible to examineProcopius' account of events at Edessa. The city was being besieged by Chosroes, and an

elephant with many soldiers on its back was driven up to the citywall and towered over it. The resourceful inhabitants thrust a

squealing pig over the wall and into the face of the loomingelephant. The result was panic and retreat.19 Altogether the pig

seems to have been quite an effective weapon against the elephant,although its use does not appear to have been widespread in the

ancient world.

An important aspect of the war-elephant was its psychological impactupon the opposing force. A certain part of every battle was fought in


8/11

the minds of the armies. Elephants would always inspire confidence inan army in which they were a part, while they would have the opposite

effect upon the enemy-especially if the enemy soldiers had never facedbrilliant armor worn by the beasts added to the fear felt by an enemy

infantryman. Diodorus states that the elephants of an Indian king

were "equipped in an extremely splendid fashion with things whichwould strike terror in war (II, 16)." Ammianus adds his view ofapproaching war-elephants: "With the army, making a lofty show,

slowly marched the lines of the elephants, frightful with theirwrinkled bodies and loaded with armed men, a hideous spectacle,

dreadful beyond every form of horror, as I have often declared. "20

Polyaenus records that "Caesar had one large elephant, which wasequipped with armor and carried archers and slingers in its tower.

When this unknown creature entered the river, the Britons and theirhorses fled and the Roman army crossed over (VIII, 23.5)." In this

case the elephant was the sole reason for the advance. Clearly, theelephant had the ability to provoke fear in the enemy even if in

reality the beast was an unpredictable weapon. Hannibal knew of thispsychological effect as Pliny relates an account which declares that

"Hannibal pitted a Roman prisoner against an elephant, and this man,having secured a promise of his freedom if he killed the animal, met

it single-handed in the arena and much to the chagrin of theCarthaginians dispatched it. Hannibal realized that reports of this

encounter would bring the animals into contempt, so he sent horsemento kill the man as he was departing (VIII, I.16)." Obviously Hannibal

was trying to protect the gruesome reputation of his living weapons.W.W. Tarn states that "there is a modern belief that the elephant was

the tank of antiquity" and that to compare the elephant with a tankis, in his opinion, "quite misleading."21 Tarn, however, is entirely

wrong. The elephant and tank bear in common all of the major uses Ihave outlined: infantry and cavalry attack, defensive screens, camp

storming, and siege warfare. Megasthenes writes that "the elephantcarries four persons, the driver and three bowmen (Strab. XV, 52)."

The tanks of World War I and II often had a crew of one driver andseveral gunners. Although not nearly as heavy, elephants sometimes

possessed armor. Elephants with towers that housed sharpshooters wereeven more like tanks.

Besides the tactical and physical parallels, the early tank had the

same psychological effect as the elephant. A French tank commanderduring World War I gives this account: "We crossed the Soissons road

in columns of half sections.where we moved east and deployed. Thesurprised Germans received us at first with machine-gun fire. A

bullet came through the left visor and wounded my driver on theshoulder. The section by this time opened fire on the enemy who ran


9/11

away panic stricken."22 One would need only overlook the advancedmachinery and technology for this account to sound exactly like an

ancient elephant battle.

Both W. W. Tarn and the editors of The Oxford Classical Dictionary

purport that the common idea that the African elephant was smallerand weaker than the Indian elephant is a "thoughtlessliterary clich" and offer "heavy weights recorded for Ptolemaic

tusks" as conclusive evidence."23 However, Diodorus, Pliny, andothers all agree that the African elephant is inferior in size and

strength. Furthermore, H. H. Scullard refutes the tusk theoryemphasizing that there are actually two subspecies of African

elephants: the common Bush elephant and the smaller Forest elephant.The Forest elephant was the African elephant of the ancient world.

Many have surmised that the battle of Raphia, where Indian andAfrican elephants met, demonstrated that the African is inferior

because of its defeat there. However, the Indians outnumbered theAfricans significantly and therefore it is unfair to cite the outcome

of the battle as a valid test as to which elephant was the bestfighting machine.

When Pyrrhus was asked by Tarentum to help fight Rome, he sent a

force of 25,000 men and 20 elephants from the Greek peninsula. He wasfaced with the problem of transporting the beasts to Tarentum. All of

the ancient sources are silent on this matter. Clearly, the elephantsmust have crossed the Adriatic Sea somehow. This problem has baffled

scholars for centuries. The shortest distance was forty miles across.When Metellus had to transport his elephants across the Straits of

Messina for display in Rome, he constructed a raft made up of largejars which were fastened in such a way that they could not break

apart or clash; this framework was then covered with planks; earthand brushwood were placed on top so that the raft looked like a

farmyard. On this, the elephants ferried across. This method is themost plausible one for Pyrrhus to have used since the Mediterranean

would have been calm during the spring. Also, elephant eyesight isweak in bright sunlight and thus the beasts could have been more

easily tricked into entering the disguised barge. Moreover, theCarthaginians were later to transport their elephants from Africa to

Sicily by sea. The raft method was used to cross rivers and to travelon the Red Sea by Ptolemy.24

The only non-military uses of the elephant were in circuses, games and

religious processions. Occasionally a private individual would ownan elephant for a luxurious mode of transportation. Horrifying

spectacles of carnage were observed by those attending the Romangames. Cicero was repulsed by elephant fights in the arena and


10/11

remarked "What pleasure can a cultivated man find in seeing a noblebeast run through by a hunting spear? (Ad Familiares VII,1.3)."

Despite all the carnage, elephants astounded audiences by kneelingbefore emperors, walking tightropes, and dancing. Representing

symbols of light, forty highly trained elephants escorted Julius

Caesar up to the Capitol with lighted torches in their trunks for histriumph. This type of procession was used earlier in the East.25The elephant, with its many different functions, was an important

shaper of history. This animal decided the fate of many battles inthe Greek and Roman world. The use of elephants in the military

forced the production of counter-weapons and thus stimulatedtechnological developments. The elephant has a place in history,

a large one.

_________________

Elephas maximus - the Asian ElephantThe Asian elephant was used in battle as early as 1100 B.C., but it

was not until 326 B.C., at the Battle of Hydaspes, that the firstEuropean commander encountered elephants in battle. Alexander the

Great defeated an army commanded by Poros at Hydaspes, in modernPundjab, and of the 200 Indian war elephants deployed there Alexander

captured 80 animals which he later incorporated into his own army. Inthe course of his campaigns, Alexander was able to gather as many

as 200 elephants in his army. King Pyrrhus of Epirus defeated theRomans at the battle of Heraclea (280 B.C.), on the Gulf of Tarent,

primarly because of the 26 Indian elephants in his command.

Loxodonta africana oxyotis - the African Plains ElephantAfter the Indian elephant had proven its worth in battle, the Egyptians and Carthaginians

deployed African plains elephants in the same role. The animals were tamed andprepared for battle in eastern Sudan and Tunisia. The plains elephant is much larger and

heavier thanthe Indian elephant. Properly armed and armoured, the plains elephant became a

formidable enemy for infantry and cavalry. The crew of a Carthaginian war elephanttypically consisted of four men, the Numidian Mahout who controlled the animal, and

three Carthaginian soldiers in the tower: officer, archer, and infantryman armed with theSarissa, a lance 5 - 6 m long.

Loxodonta africana cyclotis - the African Forest Elephant

The Numidians used African forest elephants in battle. Many of these animals werecaptured in the woods of the Atlas mountains. These relatively small animals could not

carry a tower, they were ridden by a crew of two or three men. The Mahout controlled theanimal, and the other two men were armed with bow and arrows, or javelins.

_______________________


11/11

Glossary

Adriatic Sea - the sea separating the Italian and Greek peninsulas

Antigonus - son of Philip of Macedon and a commander in Alexander's Army

Antiochas - son of Seleucas, a gneral in Alexander's armyBush elephant - the larger subspecies of the African elephantCaltrop - an iron ball with four projecting spikes: threeon the ground and the fourth

pointing upwardCow - the mature female elephant

Forest elephant - the smaller of the subspecies of the African elephantmahout - the keeper/trainer of an elephant

Phalanx - the classic order of battle for infantryPolyperchon - commander of a brigade in Alexander's infantry

Ptolemies - Macedonian dynasty in EgyptScimitar - curved Oriental sword with an edge on the convex side

Seleucus - Macedonian general who obtained the satrapy of Babyloniasutler - a merchant who traveled with an army and provided food and supplies

Gajah sahabat manusia

Documents

Transcript of Gajah sahabat manusia