pothos.org

Companions a question was posted in Karma asking if Memnons scorched earth policy would have stopped Alexander.I believe not only that it would have held him up a little, I for one dont think Granicus a definitive battle nor was it vital that Alexander took it on, and Im sure he wouldnt have chased the Persians over scorched earth.It is assumed Alexander was always in a rush and keen for battle, Yes he was keen for battle but at the same time very astute.We would have done what he did anyway that was to take the coast of Asia Minor to cover his back to secure his supplies and to neutralise Persian sea power in the area, as we know that is what he actually did with great success.Once secured as he did he focused on hunting darius down and as a result of Alexanders actions were impelled to come to Alexander as they did at Issuss and Gaugamella.Burn policy would have only delayed well not delayed as he would have still done what he actually did do, Alexander had imense fortitude with the example of 6 months to take Tyre.Contrary to popular belief i dont think Granicus was vital or particulally nessessary.Alexander knew the value of consolidation then to make your next move.regardsAlexes desciple

I'm afraid I disagree. When Alexander crossed to Asia he was very low on funds, so it was vital that the army should be able to live off the countryside. A scorched earth policy would have denied the army much-needed supplies.Had Alexander headed straight for the cities of Asia Minor then the Persians would have been able to cut off his communications and the campaign would have been over before it began - Alexander's fleet was no way strong enough to supplant the land-based communication lines.It was also useful for Alexander to have an early, significant victory, from a morale point of view. This doesn't in itself make the Granicus "necessary", but it makes it very desirable!All the bestMarcus