The Gordion Knot

[Atha]

Hi there folks,A couple of questions for you to debate:Q/ What was the real reason for ATG to head to Gordion? Yes, I know he planned to reunite with his disbanded army there, but it seems strange to have headed so far inland into Anatolia when Darius III was somewhere in Mesopotamia. Knowing the little I do about ATG, speed was a major tool during his reign. It was this [speed] from Illyria to Thebes via Western Greece that prevented any chance of a revolt early on in his reign. He was also responsible for reducing his cavalry by making his soldiers carry a good portion of their own possessions. I find it out of character that he did not seek out the Great King of Persia at the earliest convenience (after freeing and liberating Greek cities along the Asia Minor coastline.Q/ Was he aware of the oracle associated with the knot before his arrival into Gordion, chief town of Phrygia?Regards,
Atha

[nickw]

There are two main reasons for the strategic route through Gordium. Alexander didn't make any strategical mistakes here, that's for sure.Reason 1. At that time the "great war" between Persia and Macedonia, was not raging in Mesopotamia. The central theatre of the war in that year was the Aegean. Darius and Memnon had the bulk of their Greek mercenaries there (later to be shipped to Issus in summer 333 BC). Memnon was on the offensive in the Aegean, the so-called "liberated" cities could be reconquered. This is a brief reply: Bosworth's Conquest and Empire had, I think, a good analysis of the situation that he summerizes as "perplexity". (It is only after Issus that the campaign becomes rather more one-dimensional, targeted at Darius' army itself.)Reason 2. Good stategy is not running towards your foe like a mad dog and trying to battle him. Alexander was in Gordium to secure his supply lines and arrange provisions and logistics for the army, should he continue eastwards. Again, I think Bosworth's analysis is a good one. Jona Lendering also offers a good vision, arguing that before Issus Alexander's movements were rather "defensive" in nature, after Issus "offensive". Though I may not completely agree with Jona's choice of words (offensive vs. defensive) he certainly has a point here too.Regards ---Nick

[Athanasios]

Thanks, Nick.Seems plausible on all counts and VERY interesting to hear your talk of supply lines 'were he to continue eastwards.'Follow my train of thought here: Gordion was one of the strategic posts that linked the route from the Aegean up to the start of the Silk Road. This road went by another name (which slips me now)...What is particularly interesting [for me having graduated in agricultural engineering] is that the route he took on his return from Egypt [the Delta Nile] into Mesopotamia (Fertile Crescent proper) via the Levantine Corridor, i.e. Gaza, Palastine, etc. followed one many scientists believed to have been the migration path of the first humans out of Africa. The fertile delta, along with the lakes in the Levantine Corridor present at the time would have supported and encouraged food storage = civilisation approx. 10.000 - 7.000 millenia B.C. Yes, early humans are noted to be older than this, but I stress my point of food security (grain storage and domestication of animals), which allowed the flourish of the first urban dwellings.Would, given the 'almost' Jekyll-Hyde change in outlook Alex. had post events at Siwah, in which he now is said to assume or have had confirmation of lineage to the Gods, have had any sense of this as he followed this path?? I mean, here was a king that would, in due course, cover [in fast motion] the very migration path of the first people. Would he not have felt God-like? Post Issus and the subsequent execution of Darius III he chose not to return but to continue. Was he not in part inspired to reach the places Dionysus was expected to have reached, i.e. [a certain place in] India, where ivy and vines grew?Any thoughts on this?!Regards,
Atha