08-16-2005, 02:00 PM
I think Gaugameles is one of the very few exceptional battles of history.
Alexander's dispositions in the field is simply brilliant and incidentally could not be achieved without a superbly trained army.
Granted, he was lucky. For instance when the Persians broke his first line and instead of "rolling up" the front, dashed to Alexander's camp to be finally defeated by the Macedonians' second line.
He was also lucky to have Parmenion on his left, holding the ground against all odds --at some point, Parmenion's men saw the Persians behind them.
Contrary to the Persians, when Alexander and his cavalry broke the persian line, they did roll up the front, leading to the flight of the Persians.
(And apparently not the flight of Darius, according to contemporary babylonian chronicles that say that "Darius was abandoned by his army" and not the reverse.)
Darius was a good general and when he saw his front rolled up he knew that there was nothing he could do to save the day.
At Issos he actually outmaneuvered Alexander who was pretty surprised to find him on his back, threatening his lines of communication and slaughtering the wounded and the sick he had left behind.
The Granicus was more than a reckless charge by Alexander and the Companions across the river. It was a calculated affair. Before the famous charge, Alexander sent Cavalry and elite infantry (the Hyspaspists) attack the Persians' left, forcing them to withdraw elements from their centre to support their left. It's only when the center was thus weakened that Alexander charged across and managed to hold his ground long enough for the phalanx to cross the river and deploy. Well explained in here:[url:3txiyyjt]http://www.allempires.com/articles/granicos/granikos.htm[/url]
At the Hydaspes Alexander used again the same tactics, which is to extend the enemy line until a hole appears and then, charge through the hole. He did it partly by deception, under cover of night and bad weather, but then the battle turned into a hellish shock between footsoldiers and elephants. At that point the long pikes of the phalanx made the difference.
As for the city of the Mallians, well... I think this is the proof that even geniuses like Alexander can behave like idiots.
You're not supposed to jump inside an enemy city with three or four buddies while the rest of the army is still outside. That was extremely stupid on Alexander's part and he was rewarded with an arrow in the chest that pretty nearly killed him.
Contrary to Alexander's soldiers, the soldiers of Napoleon were extremely concerned about the importance of having the commander in chief protected, even against himself.
At Wagram, Napoleon was wandering about close to the front lines, seemingly oblivious of cannonballs whizzing by, until a colonel of the Guard respectfully informed His Majesty that if His Majesty did not leave the front lines, his grenadiers would respectfully pick him up and lock him up in an ammunition caisson. At which point His Majesty grudgingly obeyed..
Someone should have told Alexander the same thing.
Alexander's dispositions in the field is simply brilliant and incidentally could not be achieved without a superbly trained army.
Granted, he was lucky. For instance when the Persians broke his first line and instead of "rolling up" the front, dashed to Alexander's camp to be finally defeated by the Macedonians' second line.
He was also lucky to have Parmenion on his left, holding the ground against all odds --at some point, Parmenion's men saw the Persians behind them.
Contrary to the Persians, when Alexander and his cavalry broke the persian line, they did roll up the front, leading to the flight of the Persians.
(And apparently not the flight of Darius, according to contemporary babylonian chronicles that say that "Darius was abandoned by his army" and not the reverse.)
Darius was a good general and when he saw his front rolled up he knew that there was nothing he could do to save the day.
At Issos he actually outmaneuvered Alexander who was pretty surprised to find him on his back, threatening his lines of communication and slaughtering the wounded and the sick he had left behind.
The Granicus was more than a reckless charge by Alexander and the Companions across the river. It was a calculated affair. Before the famous charge, Alexander sent Cavalry and elite infantry (the Hyspaspists) attack the Persians' left, forcing them to withdraw elements from their centre to support their left. It's only when the center was thus weakened that Alexander charged across and managed to hold his ground long enough for the phalanx to cross the river and deploy. Well explained in here:[url:3txiyyjt]http://www.allempires.com/articles/granicos/granikos.htm[/url]
At the Hydaspes Alexander used again the same tactics, which is to extend the enemy line until a hole appears and then, charge through the hole. He did it partly by deception, under cover of night and bad weather, but then the battle turned into a hellish shock between footsoldiers and elephants. At that point the long pikes of the phalanx made the difference.
As for the city of the Mallians, well... I think this is the proof that even geniuses like Alexander can behave like idiots.
You're not supposed to jump inside an enemy city with three or four buddies while the rest of the army is still outside. That was extremely stupid on Alexander's part and he was rewarded with an arrow in the chest that pretty nearly killed him.
Contrary to Alexander's soldiers, the soldiers of Napoleon were extremely concerned about the importance of having the commander in chief protected, even against himself.
At Wagram, Napoleon was wandering about close to the front lines, seemingly oblivious of cannonballs whizzing by, until a colonel of the Guard respectfully informed His Majesty that if His Majesty did not leave the front lines, his grenadiers would respectfully pick him up and lock him up in an ammunition caisson. At which point His Majesty grudgingly obeyed..
Someone should have told Alexander the same thing.
Pascal Sabas
