Issus GaugamellaWould anyone Else dare

[kenny]

Its been Stated many times. That by the time Alexander hit Persia. It was ripe for the taking.But I just wonder up until then. Fair enough the Greeks had smashed Persia before After Holding Tactics of Thermopalea etc.But how many commander Comming at issus finding a massive force operating on his lines of Communications would take it on as Alexander did.I am more that sure Philip would have negotiated maybe Im wrong. philip was a great general and better chess player it took him 20 years to mess with the greeks heads then take them.Its often been criticized Darius a coward and ran. But he only did what all the Persian kings did in battle even Cyrus to sit in a vantage point watching.Xerxes Darius the First none were fighters nor warriors In entirely the same situation as darius the 3rd with Alexander comming down there throats I maintain they would have all done the same So I think History should leave trhis Darius alone with that one?regrds kenny

[Efstathios]

I couldnt agree more.All the Persian Kings were always behind the battle (maybe except Cyrus?I dont know about him as i havent read much) seeing it from a safe point.Probably smae thing would have happened with Xerxes and Darius I too. And who said conquering Persia was an easy thing?Who said that empire was not strong?We are talking about several hundreds of thousands of soldiers at the battle of Issus,from all around the persian empire,and well trained.The first army had all the time to be prepared.It was a very harsh fight at Issus and the victory of the macedonians and greeks was mainly due to Alexander's tactics.Then a big advantage of course was the better trained in warfare greek soldiers compairing to the persians,the diferences in armor (as the persians had light armor not suitable to face greek armies at that time),and the fact that the persians would flee in the first sign of defeat,or if their King fled,or if they found things more difficult than they expected. And that's what happened.And not only at Issus,but at Marathon,Thermopylae,and Plataies too.Only the royal guard stayed there to fight till the end.They were the bravest of all,indeed.Bu they couldnt win a whole battle. And it was natural because each one of the persian soldiers was there by force.They didnt want to be there fighting for a King that deprived them of their freedom and kept them there like sheep.They had no choise,if hey resisted they would be executed,so would be their families. Such an army cannot win a fight over another army that is better trained,and the soldiers that consist it love their King and fight for him and for their country. Nevertheless the fight was harsh.Both in Issus and gaugamela.And a major key to success were Alexander's tactics.For example going for the persian King in order to break the will of the enemy. But dont forget something else too.If Alexander wanted something,he would get it.His father may had negociated with the persians.Alexander didnt even consider that.It must be very difficult to put your army in a position that goes like: We move forward and forward,and either we win or die.There is no other alternative.And surely that is a big burden.But he did it.And he won.And never lost a battle.Isnt it magnificent?Maybe he knew the full potential of his army,but still it was a great risk...

[Efstathios]

I couldnt agree more.All the Persian Kings were always behind the battle (maybe except Cyrus?I dont know about him as i havent read much) seeing it from a safe point.Probably smae thing would have happened with Xerxes and Darius I too. And who said conquering Persia was an easy thing?Who said that empire was not strong?We are talking about several hundreds of thousands of soldiers at the battle of Issus,from all around the persian empire,and well trained.The first army had all the time to be prepared.It was a very harsh fight at Issus and the victory of the macedonians and greeks was mainly due to Alexander's tactics.Then a big advantage of course was the better trained in warfare greek soldiers compairing to the persians,the diferences in armor (as the persians had light armor not suitable to face greek armies at that time),and the fact that the persians would flee in the first sign of defeat,or if their King fled,or if they found things more difficult than they expected. And that's what happened.And not only at Issus,but at Marathon,Thermopylae,and Plataies too.Only the royal guard stayed there to fight till the end.They were the bravest of all,indeed.Bu they couldnt win a whole battle. And it was natural because each one of the persian soldiers was there by force.They didnt want to be there fighting for a King that deprived them of their freedom and kept them there like sheep.They had no choise,if hey resisted they would be executed,so would be their families. Such an army cannot win a fight over another army that is better trained,and the soldiers that consist it love their King and fight for him and for their country. Nevertheless the fight was harsh.Both in Issus and gaugamela.And a major key to success were Alexander's tactics.For example going for the persian King in order to break the will of the enemy. But dont forget something else too.If Alexander wanted something,he would get it.His father may had negociated with the persians.Alexander didnt even consider that.It must be very difficult to put your army in a position that goes like: We move forward and forward,and either we win or die.There is no other alternative.And surely that is a big burden.But he did it.And he won.And never lost a battle.Isnt it magnificent?Maybe he knew the full potential of his army,but still it was a great risk...

[Athanasios]

Good analysis, Efstathios.In agreement with you both. Regards,
Atha

[Athanasios]

Good analysis, Efstathios.In agreement with you both. Regards,
Atha

[jan]

My only comment is that Philip and Alexander should not be compared to one another. Each was his own person, and there was nothing that Alexander liked less than to be compared to his father. Kleitos learned that the hard way!

[jan]

My only comment is that Philip and Alexander should not be compared to one another. Each was his own person, and there was nothing that Alexander liked less than to be compared to his father. Kleitos learned that the hard way!

[Athanasios]

Yes, Jan.Alexander most definitely did not like living in the shadow of his father...which takes us back to Diogenes, no?! Surely more than a coincidence!!Regards,
Atha

[Athanasios]

Yes, Jan.Alexander most definitely did not like living in the shadow of his father...which takes us back to Diogenes, no?! Surely more than a coincidence!!Regards,
Atha

[typhoeus]

Further more, you actually see Darius running away in the movie.

[typhoeus]

Further more, you actually see Darius running away in the movie.