Alexander's Military Strategies: Issus and Gaugamela Battles Analysis

This essay provides an in-depth analysis of Alexander the Great's military strategies during the battles of Issus and Gaugamela. It explores how Alexander leveraged the terrain, his understanding of enemy weaknesses, and his own troops' strengths to achieve victory. The essay highlights Alexander's strategic planning before the battles, including his use of narrow coastal plains at Issus to negate the Persian cavalry advantage and his psychological tactics aimed at demoralizing Darius. It examines Alexander's ability to adapt to changing battlefield conditions, his precision in timing attacks, and his focus on eliminating Darius to cause chaos in the Persian ranks. The essay also provides a comparative analysis of the strategies employed in both battles, demonstrating Alexander's consistent focus on psychological warfare and his ability to outmaneuver a numerically superior foe. The document references sources such as Worthington (2014), Iglesias-Zoido (2010), and Palagia (2016).

Philip II, Alexander the Great,
and
the Macedonian Empire

1
The battle of Issus
Alexander’s strategy started before the battle as he wanted to do battle on the narrow coastal
plains the sea and the Amanus mountain range. The reason being the fact that plain wound
hinders the effective deployment of cavalry on both sides. This made the battle to be between
the infantries where he knew that his phalanx had upper edge over the rivals. However this
strategy was not so effective as Darius lured the invading army onto the spacious northern
Syrian plain. Alexander before the start of the battle occupied a vantage point by the Pillar of
Jonah from where they could see Persian campfire on the below plain. At dawn he led his
armies several miles onto the plain a task that took numbers of hours due to narrow and
difficult terrain and hence prepared for battle. He had given archers duty to of stopping
Persian left wing from overcoming them and Alexander himself took a position behind his
centre together with Macedonian cavalry and allied and mercenary infantry (Worthington,
2014). He made the plan to kill Darius so that he can win the psychological war in the battle.
He concentrated all his strategies to penetrate Persian line and concentrated his attention
solely on Darius. First he moved slowly and ordered for his line to engage with the enemies.
Then at once he and his cavalry launched an attack on the Persian centre toward Darius.
Alexander believed on Parmenion’s experience and skills to hold on the left wing hence he
continued to march towards Darius. Alexander with his cavalry killed the bodyguards of
Darius and hence Darius fled away from the battlefield. This left uncertainty in the Persian
army and hence their army also started to retreat which was taken as an advantage by
Macedonian army. It is said that more people were killed when they were fleeing rather than
the numbers that was killed in the battle (Iglesias-Zoido, 2010).
The battle of Gaugamela
Alexander strategies were highly successful which can be seen before the start of the battle.
This is illustrated from the fact that Alexander marched through east from Tigris so as to
ensure that abundant food and 4 days rest can be available for their soldiers. With his
companion cavalry he moved through the hills to study Persian lines and plain. Darius kept
his troops awake which allowed Alexander to notice their deployments and hence make
strategies (Worthington, 2014). Alexander knew the fact that his army troops numbers were
very much less than that of Darius hence he made a strategy to demoralise psychological
effect of killing or capturing Darius and hence he has stationed himself with his cavalry in
centre facing Darius. Before the start of the war, Alexander encouraged all his men by calling

2
their names and telling them the hardship they have gone through and said that he was no
different from them. When Darius deployed his left wing it opened a gap in the Persian line,
Alexander halt his feigned advance to the right and turned his men to use the gap for
attacking Darius. Soon Alexander realised that the gap was too narrow which allowed Darius
to bring his contingents of Bactrian and Sacae cavalry to block his enemy. Even when this
tactic of Alexander failed it gave him advantage in terms of the fact that his scythed chariot
charge was delayed. Alexander kept his pressure on the powerful Persian left flank. He
ordered Menidas on the right side to launch his mercenary cavalry against the Sacae and
Bactrians people. Even when their casualty numbers kept increases he kept sending Menidas
to block Bactrian Bactarian cavalry. When the chariots attacked then his men shifted either
right or left and hence when they passed, their backs got exposed to arrows. This showed
Alexander’s strategy of precision and split-second timing.
In the meanwhile Alexander plunged through the gap, followed by some of the companions
and slow moving infantry. The attack was so fierce that Darius has to leave the battle field
this news spread like wildfire this broke their spirit (Palagia, 2016). When Alexander
returned after chasing Darius he collided head-on with Persian army in which Alexander’s 60
companions were killed.
In both the battles, Alexander knew that his army’s strength is lower than that of the Persian
army. Due to this he made strategy to take psychological advantage over the rivals. For this,
he in both the battles engaged the powerful sides of the army of Persian army with his best
commanders and Alexander himself gone for killing the Darius.

3
REFERENCES
Iglesias-Zoido, J.C., 2010. The pre-battle speeches of Alexander at Issus and
Gaugamela. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, 50(2), pp.215-241.
Palagia, O., 2016. Alexander’s Battles against Persians in the Art of the Successors. Ancient
Historiography on War and Empire, p.177.
Worthington, I., 2014. Alexander the Great: Man and God. Routledge.
Worthington, I., 2014. By the Spear: Philip II, Alexander the Great, and the Rise and Fall of
the Macedonian Empire. Ancient Warfare and Civilizati.