Preview

How To Attack Gaugamela

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
334 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
How To Attack Gaugamela
The Macedonian plan of attack was an odd one, and had only been used a few times prior to Gaugamela. Alexander began by ordering his sarissa-armed foot companions forward in a phalanx formation towards the center of the enemy line with the wings echeloned back at a forty five degree angle to entice the Persian cavalry to attack. While the phalanxes fought the Persian infantry, Darius sent a large part of his cavalry and a portion of his regular infantry to attack Parmenion's forces on the Macedonian left. Alexander led his Companion Cavalry to near the brink of his right flank. His strategy was to attract as much of the Persian horseman to the wings as possible in order to form a breach within the enemy line where a decisive blow could then be struck at Darius in the center. Alexander would force Darius to attack, though the Persian king was cautious to be the first to attack after fearing what happened at Issus against a similar formation. Darius, faced with a threat no matter his decision, reluctantly he ordered his horsemen to follow Alexander. Eventually, Alexander saw his chance now, covered by auxiliary troops to fend off the remaining Persian cavalry while Alexander’s force charged into ranks of the preoccupied troops. Alexander’s military genius showed with this maneuver, as it caused a full rout of Darius’ army. …show more content…

While Darius had a significant advantage in numbers, most of his troops were of a lower quality than Alexander's. The bulk of their infantry were lightly armored and their spears not long enough to counter the much longer sarissa. Overall, Alexander’s army had the advantage in almost every way. Gaugamela was a great battle, a battle won by a great

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The pass was about 330 feet in width. Leonities tactics helped him defend the large Persian fleet by creating a battle formation called Phalanx formation in which the men formed a wall of overlapping shields and protruded their spears out from the sides of the shields. This war tactic helped defend the persian attack because since the pass was only 330 feet wide Xerxes couldn't call his army to all attack at once they had to attack in waves so that made it easier for the spartans to hold off the massive persian army. Xerxes attacked greece because Darius originally attacked Greece because the Athenians gave support to the "Ionian Revolt" against Persian rule in Asia Minor. Darius's army was decisively defeated at the Battle of Marathon in the first attempt to invade Greece. After Darius died his son, Xerxes, vowed revenge for his father's defeat at the Battle of…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Two days of battle passed, with the Persians unable to defeat the much smaller army of Greeks. The Persians had lost many men until Greek traitor came to the Persian king with information of huge importance. A local resident named Ephialtes betrayed the Greeks by revealing a small path that led behind the Greek lines. Above the pass of Thermopylae was another path that was known to local people only. It would allow the Persians to come secretly through the mountains and round behind the Greek army guarding the pass below. The Greeks would then be trapped with the Persians in front of and behind them.…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Battle Of Thermoplyae

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages

    When this attack didn’t work Xerxes sent 10,000 men known as the Medes, to attack the Spartans and capture them. The Spartans were positioned along the wall, shoulder to shoulder and shield to shield. This method allowed them to defend themselves and not be captured by the Persians. The Medes were no match for the Spartan soldiers. In the next…

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Gaugamela was the perfect battlefield for Darius’s army and both leaders knew this. But, Alexander decided to take his chances and try to end the war with this battle on Darius’s land. As the Macedonian army set up camp overnight, Alexander was advised by his right-hand man Parmenion to attack Darius at that moment (Grant). It would have been the perfect surprise attack on the Persian army but, Alexander declined and said a surprise attack would be considered stealing a victory, so he decided to be fair and start the battle when Darius was ready (Grant). That night, Alexander went with some of his scouts to asses Darius’s army.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Following the Battle of Gaugamela, Alexander planned on deploying the same tactics used against the Persians during the battle in Issus. In reply, his generals disagreed with repeating that tactic as it would put Alexander in danger, it would leave the left and center unit weaken against Persian, and purpose that Alexander take the fight towards Darius together with his army. Alexander opposed to his general’s idea as he was very firmed on his own belief and reassured his generals that if he is able to immediately take out Darius again like at Issus (Yenne 73). The battle would be over as his non-Persian soldiers would have no motives to fight any more if their ruler had abandoned them. Hence, Alexander and his army marched out onto Gaugamela…

    • 683 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander began his invasion of Persia in 334 BC and he had to leave a large amount of troops in Greece to maintain control over his city states, this caused Alexander to only have 35,000 fighters with him when he began to pillage and take over Persian land. Alexander was greatly outnumbered compared to his Persian foes, never the less, he was able to cut through them. He never lost a battle. Things that may have contributed to his success was Alexander was a strong leader. He was present for every battle and rode with the cavalry on the front lines, with his trusted horse,…

    • 937 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    War turned out to be more expert, more creative, and all the more savage, achieving its pinnacle with the Macedonian pioneers Philip and Alexander. Gaining from the prior Greek techniques and weapons developments, they utilized better hand weapons, for example, the long sarissa lance, utilized better ordnance, effectively marshaled assorted troop units with various arms, completely abused calvary, and supported this up with far better logistics to dominate the…

    • 584 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When he was fighting the Persians he was heavily outnumbered but still managed to defeat the army because he had cornered them and scared the king into running which led to his victory. Also when fighting the Indian kings he used the monsoons and Indian elephants against the opposing militaries. He had his men kill the elephants riders so that they panicked and caused more damage to their own military than to Alexander's. These prove that he was very wise in his military tactics and a huge reason to earn him the status of great.…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Alexander had plans to unite Greece and conquer Persia. He knew it was best to do this, so he tried every play in the book to conquer Persia and surrounding empires. He was skilled in military tactics and battle strategies. His knowledge of good military attacks led him to many conquered empires such as Thebes, Egypt, and eventually, Persia.…

    • 415 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander’s strength is also shown in Document Three. In the legend of The Battle of Hydaspes, Alexander saw that he was outnumbered by the elephant cavalry so he came up with an elaborate plan. The plan confused his opponents, and was very tricky on his part. The plan worked in the end, even though they were overpowered. Alexander shows his strength mentally and physically when he made his plan and when he followed through with his plan against an elephant cavalry. Alexander acted the way he wanted his men to act, which was with wits, and strength in every…

    • 684 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    On the other hand Alexander the Great was not so great because many tactics where inherited from his father,Philip II. Alexander's father had many tactics such as the phalanx, however Alexander decided to improve on his father's idea and make it better and stronger so he could defeat more enemies. The phalanx was his fathers idea but improving on the idea shows that he was intelligent and skilful. This shows that…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Indian campaign of Alexander the Great began in 326 BC. After conquering the Achaemenid Empire of Persia, Alexander launched a campaign into India. To deal with the ever-changing military, cultural, and economic landscape, he planned meticulously, he analyzed every piece of information and formulated as many alternatives as possible, to help the world. He built an empire that was no more than 40,000 men. Toward that end, he used tactics, mobility, and weaponry—including the formidable Macedonian phalanx—to overcome his opponents. he was able to recruit indigenous professionals into his governmental structure and leverage their skill and…

    • 98 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander The Great Dbq

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Document C illustrates how Alexander was able to defeat the Tyre which was a self proclaimed “unconquerable city” because it was built on an island protected with high walls. “ The great city…. Was now utterly destroyed. Her king, Azimilik, and various other notables, including envoys from carthage, had taken refuge in the temple of Melkart, and Alexander spared their lives. The remaining survivors, some 30,000 in numbers, he sold into slavery, Two thousand men of military age were crucified.” (Doc C) Although some might argue he isn't great because the deaths of two thousand military man are quite brutal he did it out of pure leadership in order to finish the battle he started. Alexander stepped up as a leader and was able to lead men into a battle and defeat the unconquerable city. Also In Document C, another battle or march, Alexander shows leadership, “Alexander had ordered that all [expect] those who sought sanctuary were to be slain” (Document C). This shows Alexander was great by leadership because he made the big decision for his troops on what to follow out, even though it was a rough game plan, he stepped up and took charge.…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander's armed force, around 35,000 in number (albeit a few sources say 65,000), crossed the Hellespont (the Dardanelles) from Greece into what is currently Turkey and vanquished a Persian drive under Darius III at the Granicus River. He continued along the east shore of the MEDITERRANEAN…

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    leader, and without his tactics, he would have never been able to conquer all that he…

    • 470 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays