The 8 most impressive battles of Alexander the Great

The Battle of Granicus in 334 BC marked the beginning of Alexander the Great's campaign against the mighty Persian Empire.

As he approached the Granicus River, located in what is now modern-day Turkey, he was met by an army of Persian satraps and Greek mercenaries.

The Persians, confident in their position, took the high ground on the opposite bank of the river, believing the rushing waters would deter any immediate Macedonian assault.

However, Alexander, never one to shy away from a challenge, saw this as an opportunity rather than a hindrance.

Drawing upon his innate military genius, Alexander decided to attack at dusk, a time generally considered unfavorable for battles.

The Persians expected him to set camp and wait till daybreak. Instead, he led a cavalry charge across the river, taking the enemy by surprise.

The Macedonian phalanx followed, pushing through the water and forming up on the other side to engage the enemy's center.

The Persian and Greek mercenary infantry found themselves hard-pressed against the famed Macedonian spears, while on the flanks, Alexander's companion cavalry clashed fiercely with Persian cavalry.

The turning point came when Alexander, leading a group of his companions, launched a daring charge aimed directly at the Persian commanders.

In the brutal melee, many Persian leaders were killed, causing a collapse in the morale and organization of their troops.

In the aftermath of the battle, the Persian forces faced significant casualties, and their Greek mercenary allies were captured. Instead of punishing them,

Alexander, always the strategist, offered them a place in his army, recognizing their value as experienced fighters familiar with the region. 

The Siege of Halicarnassus in 334 BC presented Alexander with a unique set of challenges.

After his decisive victory at the Granicus River, the Macedonian king turned his attention to the coastal strongholds of the Persian Empire, among which Halicarnassus, situated in present-day Bodrum, Turkey, was a prominent and fortified city.

The city's defenses were bolstered not only by its stout walls and towers but also by the combined military might of Persian satraps and Greek mercenaries, led by the experienced commanders Memnon of Rhodes and Orontobates.

Alexander approached the siege with his usual mix of audacity and strategy. Recognizing the strength of Halicarnassus's defenses, he employed a combination of direct assaults and the construction of siege engines, designed to breach the city's formidable walls.

These engines, massive constructs of wood and metal, were moved into position under the cover of protective screens, shielding them from missiles and flaming projectiles hurled by the defenders.

However, the defenders of Halicarnassus were equally determined and resourceful.

They conducted sorties to disrupt Alexander's siege works and even managed to destroy some of his engines with well-placed sallies.

Yet, with each setback, Alexander adapted, displaying an unwavering resolve to capture the city.

As the siege dragged on, the Macedonians dug tunnels to undermine the walls, a tactic that put additional pressure on the defenders.

The climax of the siege came when parts of the city's fortifications were finally breached.

Sensing the inevitable, the defenders set a significant portion of the city ablaze, hoping to deprive Alexander of a fully intact prize.

As flames consumed parts of Halicarnassus, Alexander's forces entered and took control of what remained.

While the city's self-inflicted devastation meant it was no longer the jewel it once was, its fall was nonetheless a crucial step in Alexander's campaign. 

The year 333 BC witnessed one of the most pivotal confrontations between the burgeoning Macedonian Empire and the ancient colossus of Persia: the Battle of Issus.

Set against the backdrop of southern Anatolia's coastal plains, this battle would bring Alexander face-to-face with the Persian king, Darius III.

Upon realizing the gravity of the Macedonian threat after earlier defeats, Darius mustered a vast army, drawing from the vast reaches of his empire.

It was a force that dwarfed Alexander's in terms of raw numbers. However, the chosen battleground near the Pinarus River inadvertently negated the numeric advantage of the Persians.

The narrow plain, flanked by mountains and the sea, restricted the deployment of Darius's larger army, preventing him from fully enveloping the Macedonian forces.

As the two armies clashed, the Macedonian phalanx, a solid wall of spears and shields, advanced steadily against the Persian center.

To their left, Alexander, leading the Companion cavalry, engaged in a fierce contest with Persian cavalry units.

The Macedonian king eyed a breakthrough that would allow him to strike at Darius directly.

The ensuing melee was brutal and intense, with both sides enduring heavy losses.

Yet, it was Alexander's audacity and keen tactical eye that would shift the balance.

Identifying a weak point in the Persian line, he led a daring cavalry charge, aiming to break through and target Darius himself.

The suddenness and ferocity of this charge caused a ripple effect. As Darius's position became increasingly precarious, the Persian king, fearing for his life, chose to withdraw from the battlefield.

His departure sowed confusion and panic in the Persian ranks, turning an already challenging situation into a rout.

Alexander's victory at Issus was monumental. The capture of Darius's family, who were present at the battleground, provided him with valuable hostages.

But beyond the immediate military gains, Issus was a psychological victory. 

Tyre, a prominent Phoenician city, was strategically located on an island off the Levantine coast.

Its maritime prowess and formidable sea walls made it an imposing challenge, even for a commander of Alexander's caliber.

Yet, as with every obstacle he encountered, Alexander viewed Tyre not as an impasse, but as another puzzle to solve on his march toward destiny.

The initial exchanges between Alexander and Tyre were diplomatic. However, when Tyrian leaders refused to allow him to pay homage at the temple of Melqart, negotiations faltered.

Determined to subdue the city, Alexander began what would become one of the most ambitious sieges of antiquity.

Without a fleet to launch a direct naval assault, he devised a bold plan: to build a causeway, or mole, from the mainland to the island city.

Using rubble and timber, work on the mole began, but the Tyrians were not passive spectators.

They used their naval advantage to harry and disrupt the construction, employing fire ships to destroy siege equipment and attacking the workers from the sea.

Despite these setbacks, Alexander pressed on, displaying an uncanny mix of tenacity and ingenuity.

He eventually brought in warships from allied states, countering Tyre's naval dominance.

The culmination of the siege saw Alexander employing siege towers and battering rams, aiming to breach the mighty walls of Tyre.

After enduring numerous assaults and counter-assaults, a section of the wall was finally breached, and Macedonian forces poured into the city.

The ensuing combat was fierce, reflecting the months of resistance and the high stakes for both sides.

Once the dust settled, Tyre was in Alexander's hands. The city's fall had significant repercussions.

It boosted the morale of Alexander's troops, further elevated his stature as a military genius, and effectively neutralized any naval threat to his planned invasion of Egypt. 

After the momentous conquest of Tyre, Alexander's path seemed clear as he moved south along the Mediterranean coast.

Yet, the city of Gaza, perched on a hill and heavily fortified, would challenge him once again in 332 BC.

Although smaller than some of the previous cities he had encountered, Gaza's strategic location as a gateway to Egypt made its capture essential for Alexander's overarching plan of subduing the entire Persian Empire.

The city's defenses were bolstered by its elevation and the leadership of Batis, a loyal Persian commander determined to resist the Macedonian onslaught.

When Alexander arrived, he was met with a city prepared for a protracted siege, its walls bristling with defenders.

Undeterred, Alexander began by launching direct assaults, hoping to use the momentum from previous victories to intimidate and quickly overcome the Gazan defenders.

However, the city's natural defenses and the tenacity of its inhabitants rendered these initial assaults ineffective.

Recognizing the need for a change in strategy, Alexander employed massive siege engines.

Towering siege towers, battering rams, and catapults were constructed to breach the formidable walls of Gaza.

The defenders, however, were resourceful. They dug a moat to impede the progress of the Macedonian siege engines and rained down missiles upon the engineers and soldiers working below.

Yet, as with previous sieges, Alexander's persistence and tactical adaptability began to wear down the resolve of the defenders.

After two months of relentless assault, a portion of the city's wall was breached.

Macedonian forces, led by their indomitable king, stormed the city with a ferocity that reflected the frustrations of the prolonged siege.

In the aftermath, Gaza faced a harsh retribution for its resistance, with many of its defenders sold into slavery and its brave commander, Batis, meeting a grisly end. 

The Battle of Gaugamela, fought in 331 BC, looms large in the chronicles of ancient warfare, often heralded as the climax of Alexander's campaign against the Persian Empire.

On the vast plains near present-day Mosul in Iraq, the Macedonian king faced off against King Darius III of Persia for the second time.

However, this encounter was vastly different from their first at Issus; this time, Darius had carefully chosen the battlefield and had months to prepare, gathering a colossal army that significantly outnumbered Alexander's forces.

Darius's preparations went beyond sheer numbers. He ordered the plain to be cleared and leveled, making it suitable for the deployment of his formidable war chariots, outfitted with deadly scythes attached to their wheels.

He also assembled a diverse force, pulling elite units from every corner of his vast empire, hoping that this multifaceted army would finally halt the Macedonian advance.

Alexander, ever the astute tactician, approached the battle with a combination of caution and audacity.

He angled his forces obliquely to the Persian line, hoping to draw parts of Darius's massive army out of position.

As the battle raged, the Macedonians faced waves of enemy forces, from the scythed chariots to the elite Persian Immortals.

But Alexander kept his composure, looking for that pivotal moment to strike.

That moment came when a gap appeared in the Persian line. Spotting the opportunity, Alexander gathered his Companion cavalry and charged into the breach, aiming directly for the Persian center where Darius commanded.

This audacious move, a hallmark of Alexander's battlefield genius, sowed confusion in the Persian ranks.

Darius, witnessing the might of the Macedonian charge and possibly fearing a repeat of their last encounter at Issus, opted for withdrawal, leaving the field, and effectively the Persian Empire, to Alexander.

Gaugamela was a masterclass in tactical flexibility, showcasing how a smaller, well-commanded force could overcome a much larger adversary.

The aftermath of Gaugamela was profound. The heart of the Persian Empire, including its majestic capitals of Babylon and Persepolis, now lay open to the Macedonians.

This victory was not just another feather in Alexander's cap; it marked the beginning of the end for the age-old Persian Empire and paved the way for the Hellenistic age, where Greek culture and ideas would meld with those of the East. 

As the year 330 BC dawned, the Persian Empire, once the undisputed superpower of the ancient world, found itself in its death throes.

Yet, even as its vast territories steadily fell to Alexander's relentless advance, pockets of fierce resistance remained.

One such episode of defiance was the Battle of the Persian Gate, a confrontation that highlighted the rugged terrain of Persia and the indomitable spirit of its defenders.

Located in the mountainous region of modern-day Iran, the Persian Gate was a narrow mountain pass, akin to the famous Thermopylae in Greece.

As Alexander sought to capture the ceremonial capital of Persepolis and solidify his control over Persia, this pass stood as a significant barrier.

Defending it was a determined Persian force led by the satrap Ariobarzanes, who understood the strategic value of the location and was ready to exploit it to the fullest.

When Alexander's forces reached the pass, they were met with a well-entrenched and prepared enemy.

The narrowness of the pass negated the numerical advantage of the Macedonians, and the elevated positions provided the Persians with a clear vantage point for raining down missiles.

The initial Macedonian assaults were repulsed with heavy losses, a stark reminder that, despite the broader successes of the campaign, local knowledge and terrain could still level the playing field.

Undeterred by the setbacks, Alexander showcased the adaptability that had come to define his military career.

Instead of repeatedly hurling his forces against the fortified pass, he sought an alternative route.

Employing local guides and reconnoitering the surrounding landscape, Alexander identified a mountain path that could potentially flank the Persian defenses.

Executing a night march, a Macedonian contingent managed to navigate the treacherous path and positioned themselves behind enemy lines by dawn.

Caught between the hammer of this flanking force and the anvil of the main Macedonian army, Ariobarzanes's position quickly became untenable.

Despite their valiant defense, the Persians were overwhelmed, and the path to Persepolis was laid open.

The Battle of the Persian Gate serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities of conquest.

While Alexander's larger campaign appeared unstoppable, there were moments of genuine peril, where the outcome hung in the balance. 

The year 326 BC saw Alexander the Great venturing into the uncharted territories of the Indian subcontinent, driven by his insatiable thirst for conquest and exploration.

By this time, he had already amassed a series of spectacular victories and had seen the splendors and challenges of vast lands.

Yet, the Battle of the Hydaspes River, set against the backdrop of the lush plains of Punjab, presented a novel set of challenges, not least of which was the formidable Indian king, Porus.

As Alexander's forces approached the Hydaspes River, they were met with torrential monsoon rains, turning the landscape into a quagmire of mud.

But the elements were the least of his worries. On the opposite bank stood the imposing figure of King Porus, with a well-organized army and a contingent of war elephants, animals that the Macedonians had seldom faced in open combat.

The sight of these behemoths, with their towering presence and the potential to sow chaos in enemy ranks, surely weighed on the minds of Alexander's men.

Recognizing the challenges of a direct confrontation, Alexander once again showcased his tactical brilliance.

He orchestrated a series of feints and diversionary maneuvers, keeping Porus guessing about his true point of crossing.

By exploiting a night of particularly heavy rain and masking the sounds of movement, Alexander and a select force managed to cross the river undetected at a distant point, aiming to strike the Indian army from the flank.

Morning revealed the masterstroke. As Porus mobilized to face this new threat, the battlefield was set.

The Macedonian phalanx, with its long sarissas, moved in disciplined formations, while the Companion cavalry readied for their pivotal charges.

The Indian war elephants, though initially terrifying, proved to be a double-edged sword.

Many were spooked by the unfamiliar noises of battle and turned back into their own lines, causing disarray.

The ensuing battle was hard-fought, with both sides showcasing valor and skill.

Yet, the combined effect of Alexander's tactical maneuvers and the disciplined response of his troops to the elephants turned the tide in favor of the Macedonians.

In the end, a wounded Porus was captured. Displaying his respect for the Indian king's bravery and stature, Alexander not only spared his life but also returned his territories and even granted him additional lands.

The Battle of the Hydaspes River is often hailed as one of Alexander's most challenging and yet brilliantly-executed battles.

It underscored the challenges of intercontinental campaigns and the meeting of two vastly different military cultures.