The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, NapoleonBevan, Wilson Lloyd
History
The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, Napoleon
Bevan, Wilson Lloyd
History; Kings and rulers
Of the details of his proposed invasion nothing is known beyond the
fact that his original scheme must have been considerably modified
as he penetrated farther into Asia. His geographical knowledge of
the interior of the empire could hardly have been sufficient for an
orderly mapping out beforehand of the course he actually took. That was
entirely governed by the extraordinary series of events which marked
the various stages of his expedition. His design was to dethrone
the Persian king and secure possession of the country. To do this
effectively the first step was to conquer Asia Minor, to get under his
control the remoter provinces of Syria and Egypt, and then to advance
on Babylon and Susa. That there was immediate necessity for setting his
army on the march was plain to him, because of the dangerous position
of the Macedonian forces already in Asia Minor. The Persian general,
Memnon, had checkmated Parmenio, who was recalled, and the prospects of
Macedonian success were blighted by the defeat of another Macedonian
general Kallás in the Troad. Before Alexander left his own kingdom,
the authority of the Persian government had been generally restored
throughout the whole of Asia Minor.
In the spring of 334, Alexander marched to the Hellespont with an
army numbering altogether 30,000 infantry and 4500 cavalry. Of these,
12,000 infantry and 1500 cavalry were from Macedon; contingents from
the allies made up the rest. There were besides 160 warships, of
which Athens furnished twenty. Alexander’s chief military adviser
was Parmenio, whom Philip, his father, had declared to be the only
Macedonian general he had discovered in many years. Of the subordinate
officers the most noteworthy were Philotas, who was in command of the
Macedonian cavalry, and Nikanor, who led the álite of the Macedonian
infantry (the so-called Hypaspistæ, or the Bodyguards). During the
absence of the king, the administration of Macedon and of the subject
states was left in the hands of Antipater.
The incompetence of the Persians in aggressive resistance was manifest
from the first. They were far superior to the Greeks at sea, and if
they had made intelligent use of their fleet they could have prevented
Alexander’s army from crossing the Hellespont. Indeed, orders had been
issued the year before to the coast cities that their ships should be
kept in readiness in anticipation of an invasion. But so slipshod was
the administration in the loosely governed provinces of Persia that
their great fleet was unable to put to sea when Alexander reached
the narrow arm of water which divides Europe from Asia. He had no
difficulty in passing; indeed Parmenio was left to superintend this
operation, while the young king visited the cities of the Troad rich
in legendary lore, and made a pilgrimage to the tomb of his reputed
ancestor, Achilles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account