From the Punjab to Pattala

The campaign in the Punjab saw Alexander, supported by his Indian ally Taxiles, attack Porus, who lived beyond the Hydaspes River. The battle, at the beginning of the monsoon season, involved a division of the Macedonian forces. One part faced Porus at the river crossing, where the current and the elephants in the Indian army made a direct attack virtually impossible. Alexander took a portion of his army and marched upstream. Once across the river, he drew Porus away from his defensive position and defeated the Indian ruler in a battle fought primarily by cavalry, although the Macedonian pikemen inflicted injuries on the elephants, which became a danger to their own troops. After the Hydaspes victory, Alexander advanced to the Hyphasis (Beas), where the army refused to cross in order to march to the Ganges. The whole episode was contrived, since Alexander clearly had no intention of going farther east. His failure to reach the eastern end of the world was thus attributed to the timidity and war-weariness of his soldiers. During the descent of the Indus river system, Alexander received a near-fatal wound at the hands of the Mallians. Once he recovered, Alexander conducted a series of bloody massacres as he sailed to the mouth of the Indus and accomplished his goal of sailing out into the ocean. Although the Indian campaign was by far the bloodiest of the expedition, there was little long-term gain from the conquest.

Persianizing and the Internal Enemy

Not all resistance to the Conqueror came from the peoples who were invaded by the Macedonians. Indeed, there was opposition within the army, particularly among the officer class. The purpose of the expedition had changed from vengeance to accommodation of the defeated, and there were many who saw the promotion of Persian nobles at the court and the integration of barbarian troops in the army as a demotion of the conquerors. Was it for this that so much Greek and Macedonian blood was shed? Furthermore, the king had been transformed into a despot of the Oriental type from a leader who was recognized as primus inter pares. Several conspiracies came to light—that of Alexander the Lyncestian, early in the campaign, and those of Demetrius the Bodyguard (involving Philotas) and the Pages, led by Hermolaus. And then there was opposition to the Persian court practice of proskynesis. The king weathered the storms, but his image was forever tarnished, and some later alleged that he was poisoned by a group of disaffected nobles and generals. Although this was almost certainly a false rumor, it pointed to the dangerous changes that victory had engendered.

Persian Countermeasures

The Macedonian invasion force was not a large one, 50,000 men at the most. And the conquest of Asia Minor was at best superficial, with the largest and most influential cities as the main targets. It would be left for the newly appointed governors—such as Calas, Antigonus, and Asander—to secure those regions that had been bypassed or had made an insufficient show of submission. Furthermore, the fleet had been disbanded after the capture of Miletus, only to be reconstituted some months later, but by then rebels on the Greek mainland (notably the Spartans) had made contact with Memnon of Rhodes and Pharnabazus, who hoped to regain control of the Aegean. Even after the defeat at Issus, there were troops who escaped to Cappadocia and Paphlagonia. Their efforts were, however, disorganized and their numbers insufficient. Cut off from their king, who was retreating eastward, the survivors of Issus were defeated in Lydia. The naval strength in the Aegean simply melted away. In the end, the Spartan rebels could not stand up to Alexander’s regent in Greece.

From the Aegean to Cappadocia

The Persian defeat at the Granicus opened the way for the Macedonian conquest of Asia Minor. Darius III assigned the defense of the coast to Memnon of Rhodes, whose brother Mentor had been an efficient and faithful servant of Artaxerxes III. Hellespontine Phrygia (Dascyleum), whose unsuccessful satrap had committed suicide, was the first Achaemenid satrapy annexed by the Conqueror. On the coast, would-be defectors were hesitant, weighing the chances of the Macedonians against the forces of Memnon. But Miletus fell, and Halicarnassus succumbed to a lengthy siege, despite the fact that Alexander had disbanded his fleet; Ada of Halicarnassus was reinstated as ruler of Caria, and Alexander led a portion of the army into Lycia and Pamphylia. After a victorious campaign there, he reunited with the forces under Parmenion, who had been in winter quarters. In late spring news arrived of Memnon’s death, and the Macedonian annexed Phrygia before moving to Cappadocia and Cilicia. There the Conqueror expected to encounter Darius for what he hoped would be the decisive battle of the campaign.

Introduction

What induced Alexander to embark upon a war of conquest against Persia? How did the peoples he attacked resist him, and why? The undertaking was bequeathed to him by his father, Philip II, whose expedition to the East was cut short by his assassination. The ostensible motives, which were presented in the form of slogans concerning vengeance and Panhellenism, were those that had been promoted in the Greek world since the years that followed the invasion of Greece by Xerxes in 480/79. The target of Alexander’s counter-invasion was the Achaemenid Empire, but the apparent soft underbelly was formed by the states thought to be held in servitude by the Persian king. Indeed, the king’s subjects were generally referred to as douloi, “slaves” of their vainglorious master. But their attitudes toward “liberation” varied according to experience, and although some welcomed the Conqueror, the notion that they welcomed a new master was mistaken.

Return to the West

The return from India was a mixture of disaster (in the Gedrosian desert) and refreshment, as the army made a leisurely march through Carmania. But news of misdeeds on the part of administrators, both Persian and Macedonian, detracted from the overall success of history’s most glorious expedition. Persian nobles, especially those who claimed descent from the Seven, considered themselves more worthy of power than their conqueror, especially during his absence. Greek and Macedonian administrators used the resources of their satrapies for their own debaucheries and luxurious lifestyles. Others, such as the mercenaries in the Upper Satrapies, were deluded by false reports of Alexander’s death in India into thinking they could abandon their obligations with impunity. The king called them to account. Malefactors were purged, but this was not a “reign of terror,” as some have wrongly labeled it. It was condign punishment meted out to traitors and outright criminals. Once affairs had stabilized, Alexander instituted further changes and greater racial integration. There was a predictable reaction: the troops mutinied at Opis, although they were easily overcome. Persian brides for Macedonian nobles were greeted with indifference at best and in some cases with hostility. Later, in October 324, the king’s best friend, Hephaestion, died of illness at Ecbatana. Some eight or nine months later, Alexander himself died. His accomplishments were soon undone by his own officers.

The Levant and Egypt

Alexander’s victory at Issus gave him two options: advance directly into the heart of the Persian Empire, or turn south to deal with Phoenicia and Egypt. The latter was strategically more sound, but some scholars have questioned it. Alexander had to negate the power of the Persian fleet—the Macedonian fleet that had been disbanded in 334 was soon reconstituted but was preoccupied with the affairs of the Aegean—and needed to win over the states that contributed most to Persia’s naval power: Cyprus and Phoenicia. The Phoenicians were divided regarding resistance. The smaller coastal cities or those without adequate defenses against attacks by land—Byblos, Aradus, Sidon, Tripolis—saw little point in resisting. Indeed, the Sidonians had recently suffered at the hands of Persia and were keen to rid themselves of the Achaemenids and their collaborators. Tyre, on the other hand, was an island a safe distance offshore, defended by high, sturdy walls. It opted for resistance or, at least, hoped for neutrality. But the defection of most of the Phoenician and Cypriot navy after Issus made even Tyre’s situation untenable. The city was taken and its inhabitants slaughtered in great numbers. Gaza also resisted but was taken with much bloodshed. Egypt, by contrast, welcomed the invader. It had long struggled to stay independent and had only recently been reincorporated into the Persian Empire. Egypt had few Persian defenders and could find no better alternative to collaboration with the invader. Alexander was recognized as the legitimate pharaoh.

First Clash in Asia Minor

Persian Asia Minor had experienced upheavals since the late stages of the Peloponnesian War. When the Spartans emerged victorious from that contest, with the financial help of the Persian king, they soon set out on a program of liberation. But their leadership was corrupt and their methods of controlling the Greek city-states oppressive—Spartan garrisons were imposed under a commander called a harmost, and boards of ten (dekarchies) ruled the cities. Persia successfully removed the Spartan menace, but the Achaemenids were themselves soon threatened by an uprising known as the Great Satraps’ Revolt. Some of the rebels sought refuge at the court of Philip II of Macedon, who later sent an expeditionary force to Asia Minor in the spring of 336. Although this force of 10,000 accomplished little, it was followed in 334 by a full-scale invasion by Alexander the Great, who defeated the armies of a satrapal coalition at the River Granicus. Although Memnon of Rhodes emerged as the leading defender of Persian interests in the West, many of the empire’s leading commanders fell on the battlefield or soon afterward. It was an ill omen for the future of Achaemenid Asia Minor.

From the Hindu Kush to the Indus

Having settled affairs in Bactria and Sogdiana, Alexander recrossed the Hindu Kush and began his march to the Indus River, subduing as he went the satrapy of Gandhāra. Perdiccas and Hephaestion were sent ahead to bridge the Indus and accept the submission of Taxiles, who lived beyond the river. Taxiles, however, preferred to meet the king in person at Nicaea in Gandhāra. The campaign proved difficult, since the various tribes—the Aspasians, Assacenians, and Guraeans—withdrew into their mountain fastnesses and forced the Macedonians to conduct sieges of their major towns. One final attempt at resistance at Aornus, which was situated by the banks of the Indus, failed, and its capture enhanced Alexander’s reputation for invincibility.

The End of Darius III

Defeat at Gaugamela and the surrender of the Achaemend capitals ended Darius’ hopes for victory and the recovery of his empire. There was some talk of gathering new forces from central Asia, but his political enemies, Bessus and Nabarzanes, were already plotting to arrest the king and turn him over to the Conqueror. If they hoped to save themselves through this action, they had made a serious miscalculation. Some of the nobles remained true to Darius, and after his arrest and murder, they made their peace with Alexander and reaped varying degrees of reward. Artabazus, Phrataphernes, Autophradates, and Amminapes abandoned the fleeing Persian army and sought the Conqueror’s mercy. Bessus was, however, hunted down and eventually subjected to torture and execution. Despite Alexander’s attempt to endear himself to the defeated, he was met with distrust and was soon confronted with a major insurrection in Bactria and Sogdiana, a land well suited to guerrilla warfare.