Skip to main content

Generalship of alexander the great - Battle of gaugamela

Generalship of alexander the great:

Military History The art and science of warfare evolves continually as it creates and shapes the destiny of humanity. Eliot Elwar Alexander the Great’s Generalship in the Battle of Gaugamela.

The battle of Gaugamela demonstrated Alexander’s tactics consisting primarily of shock action maneuvers against Darius’s massive Persian Army.

Alexander’s positioning, combat tactics and the conflicts significance demonstrated his skill as a great commander. By 331 BCE, Alexander the Great of Macedonia conquered all of Greece, Syria, and Egypt before preparing to defeat another Persian Army at Gaugamela. Persian Emperor Darius the Great assembled a huge army designed to crush King Alexander’s Macedonian Army with a massive infantry and enormous cavalry reinforced by sharp shooting Persian archers and specially designed war chariots equipped with blades. Darius III chose the level plain of Gaugamela, near Nineveh’s celebrated ruins in northern Iraq because he wanted the terrain of the prospective battlefield to be fought on smoothed level ground where his many chariots could operate with maximum effectiveness against the Macedonians.

The Battlefield Positioning

Although professional historians debate about the size of the participating armies, Alexander’s Macedonian Army consisted of about 33,000 infantrymen and 7,000 cavalrymen while Darius’s Persian troops consisted of approximately 65,000 infantrymen and 15,000 cavalrymen. Darius employed a conventional battlefield arrangement by placing his lightly armed infantrymen in the center, with his cavalry on the wings. He arranged his war-chariots in front of his army to charge the enemy while his archers showered down arrows on the invaders. He waited for the young aggressive Alexander to make the first move.

Like Emperor Darius, King Alexander arranged his phalanx of heavily armed infantrymen in the center with his cavalry occupying both wings. Since Alexander had smaller numbers, he occupied a narrow front where he placed a fast-moving reserve force of cavalry and light infantry behind every wing. If the large formation of the Persian Army attempted to envelop his small formation, these reserves would rush to reinforce any weak points in his formation.  For many military historians, Alexander’s masterstroke arrived when he shifted the entire balance of his forces to his right wing where he was capable of delivering the decisive blow against the Persians.

The Battlefield Tactics

During the battle, Alexander sent his Macedonian phalanx forward toward the massive Persian Army, but with each wing arranged in a reversed diagonal formation, which was designed to provoke the Persian cavalry into making a pre-mature attack. When they charged, the Persian Army left open vulnerable gaps in the center of Darius’s army, which Alexander’s forces exploited. The long and deadly spears carried by the Macedonians eventually neutralized Darius war-chariots and the Macedonian Greeks channeled into one of several gaps in the Persian front rank where Persian warhorses and cavalrymen were trapped and killed by those in the ranks behind.

When the Persians Army began driving back the Macedonian left flank, Alexander gathered together his reserves into a massive wedge-shaped formation and launched a violent attack toward the gap in the center of the Persian ranks, tearing through defenders and forcing them backward on both sides of the wedge. During this time, Alexander’s left flank was significantly weakened and crumbling fast under the weight of the relentless Persian attack, appearing to offer King Darius a brief, but fleeting glimmer of hope for victory before he painfully realized this battle was lost. Alexander eventually turned and rescued his battered left wing after defeating most of the Persian Army.

Darius took flight and fear rapidly spread throughout the Persian Army, which began a headlong retreat while being cut down to pieces by the pursuing Macedonian Greek warriors. The Macedonian victory meant the conclusion of the Persian Empire founded by Cyrus II the Great and conquered by Alexander the Great, who became the master of southwest Asia.

The Battle’s Significance

King Darius escaped from the battle, together with Bessius, the commander of the left wing of the Persian Army. However, Bessius murder Darius before he could raise another army and Bessius was slain a year later by Alexander’s men. The Macedonian Greeks were now effectively masters of the Persian Empire, with designs on conquering eastern territories in Pakistan and India.

Alexander’s tactics employed shock action to create organized chaos to defeat the Persian Army. Darius believed he was near victory right up to the moment when Alexander delivered the decisive blow. Although this battle only involved foot soldiers and simple weapons, the battle of Gaugamela demonstrated how effective shock action combat can be against any adversary. Alexander’s battle tactics provided an enduring model for commanders across the centuries, who used them to great effect beginning with horse cavalry, armored mechanized cavalry, air cavalry, combined arms warfare of Germany‘s Blitzkrieg, the helicopter air cavalry of Vietnam, and the shock and awe employed by the U.S.-led coalition army of the Second Persian Gulf War.

Literary Sources:

  •     Grant, R.G. and others; Battle; DK Publications, 2005.
  •     Grant, R.G. and others; Warrior; DK Publications, 2007.
  •     Grant, R.G. and others; Weapon; DK Publications, 2010.
  •     Nelson, Eric D., Ph.D.; Ancient Greece; Alpha Books, 2004.
  •     Roberts, Andrew and others; The Art of War; Quercus Publications, 2009.
  •     Zimmerman, Dwight, D.; The Book of Weapons; Tess Press Publications, 2009.
  •     Zimmerman, Dwight, D.; The Book Of War; Tess Press Publications, 2008.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Haunted Beardslee Castle Ghosts and Other Paranormal Activity

Built on haunted Mohawk Valley ground, Beardslee Castle , now a restaurant, has ghosts, poltergeist activity and other inexplicable events. When Augustus and Lavina Beardslee were on a European vacation in the early 1860s, she fell in love with the castles, especially an Irish one. He hired an architect to create a copy of that castle, then brought back the blueprints and Irish stone masons to build it in the Mohawk Valley on land that had already seen its share of tragedy. Also read How to Detect Paranormal Activity One-hundred years earlier, during the French and Indian War, the land housed a French homestead or fort, according to varying references, filled with ammunition. A band of AmerIndians slipped into the fort and accidentally blew it up when sparks from their torches ignited gun powder. Beardslee Castle was the scene of subsequent tragedies. The building and its grounds are haunted. Ghosts of Beardslee Castle People have sensed a strong AmerIndian presence on the grounds and ...

Aries horoscope love compatibility

HOROSCOPE LOVE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN ARIES AND ARIES ARIES AND ARIES:   it may be an intense love affair, but neither of the 2 Aries is satisfied with not having the lead. The Aries female objectively tends to dominate. Yet, Aries male too. Therefore there will be a big opposition to be number one, at least during the first days of the relationship. In the bedroom too, both Aries will engage a fierce struggle to dominate the other. The relationship between two Aries may be good though if each has outside interests and/or a career separate from the other. As a matter of a fact, when their energies are not always in the same room and when each partner can satisfy the natural Aries’ will to dominate, the relationship between two Aries is intensely passionate and less destructive. HOROSCOPE LOVE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN ARIES AND TAURUS ARIES AND TAURUS:   That’s a difficult match. Taurus likes to stay at home, is possessive and jealous, characteristics highly conflicting with Aries’...

Purebred Dogs - What, me resemble my dog?

Purebred Dogs - What, me resemble my dog?  More than meets the eye…. We’ve all seen those articles that infer that a dog owner begins to take on the outward appearance of their dog. I for one, feel I have little physically in common with my dog (a KBT). I’m sure you would agree this premise does not have enough documentation! Certainly I did not choose Maggie because she would resemble me! People own dogs for different reasons and in an earlier article I dealt with choosing your pet based on exercise time, training time, home alone time, grooming time, and physical attributes. Now I’d like to look at the less objective reasons for dog ownership. Are dog owners of the same breed similar? Do you fit the profile of other owners for your breed? Check How dogs and their Owner’s Personalities are Similar where significant research is posted on the similarities among owners of same breeds as compared to other dog breed owners. This site is worth a visit if you own, or if you are...