More than Alexander being a genius, fact is that Darius the third was not a worthy ruler. Had this been Cyrus the great or Darius the first, they had hanged ALexander from some tree. It is easy to win when the king on the other side has a tendency to run. The same happened with the mongols. Mohammad kharazmshah ,who was not an ethnic Iranian by the way, ran for his life and collapsed his army. Giving the victory to Chengiz.
@@ibashcommunists6847 They probably weren't even 100 000 soldiers. You need to understand logistics. how difficult it is to prepare food, water etc for such a large number. They didn't have trucks or trains or any modern machinery back then. Also no can food or refrigerating. 100 000 soldiers is a lot of people to feed if you have the technology of 25 centuries ago.
Alexander is nothing without parmenion! Always remember the betrayed general! Alexander rewarded his loyalty with betrayal! Alexander will never be great in my eyes! He's nothing but a despot whose ego is more important to him than his kingdom, his people, and even his friends and family! What an overrated individual!
This is one of the most decisive battles in human history. Even to this day Alexander's battle tactics are studied by modern generals. He was an absolute genius
Alexander had more luck rather than skills regarding this battle. Darius failed to harass Alexander's long line of supply and during the battle failed to secure his flanks which should be easy with the numbers he had
@asahi toki I think Khalid ibn al Walid is equally overrated. He had high quality nomad troops against mostly raw recruits, as most experienced men of both persia and rome had perished shortly before in Heraclius' war against the persians, which had cost both sides hundreds of thousands of men, had devastated their territories, left them open for invasions from the north and destabilized their own political order. Khalid ibn al Walid was with no doubt a great general, but in fact, I think that Heraclius himself was an even more capable commander, having fought entire campaigns that were much more unfavourable, while Khalid could rely on the high quality and fanaticism of his men as well as the fact that the muslims were willing to send every single man of the arabian peninsula into the slaughter. Khalid came out of nowhere and he basically took the romans and persians by surprise during exactly the right time, when both were so weak - and unable to coordinate with each other against the threat, due to their deep animosities against each other - and distracted that they couldn't put up much of a fight anyway. Against Justinians legions, Khalid and the arabs would have been trashed in a matter of months, becoming merely a footnote in history.
@@Zeerich-yx9po Wrong. Modern generals still read Sun Tsu and follow his philosophies of war in a detailed fashion. Napoleon himself said it... Read of Alexander, Caesar, of all the great generals of ancient times, otherwise you cannot be a great military leader yourself. That does not mean "copy their tactics". It means; Take inspiration from the approaches they take, from the mind games, from their ethics as warriors and the way they lead their armies in a psychological/philosophycal way. Granted, Alexander is a pretty bad example, because he really wasn't a great innovator or something. He was cunning, daring, fast and very brave, but that could turn to your disadvantage very quickly if you find yourself in a situation where caution would be wiser. Exactly that is to be learned from Alexanders campaigns; If there is a favourable moment, do not let it pass, but seize it. Which is exactly what Napoleon did at Austerlitz, for example, while at Friedland, he pulled a Caesar by holding back his reserves, feeding men into the fight at a steady pace and thus strangulating the enemy to death by pressure. The basic truths of warfare don't change. Tactics change every few decades, that was true even in the ancient world, but there still always is much to be learned from any victory and defeat.
@asahi toki haha the old the persians where weak excuse they where in their prime heavely outnumbered alexander and he still won. Khalid is overrated asf and most of the battle numbers are completely exaggerated by Muslim historians. Why say one person's victories are overrated and the other isn't when both have been exaggerated by historians.
@@DavorBa They are just bias bro most of them are iranians or from the middle East they wouldn't say cyrus or khalid is overrated its always anyone who's decisivly defeated them that's overrated.
I love Alexander's reply to Darius' message when he said they should have peace: “Your ancestors invaded Macedonia, and the rest of Greece, and did us harm. Although we had not done you any previous injury. Your envoys corrupted my men and sought to destroy the peace which I established amongst the Greeks. “You killed Arses with the help of Bagoas and gained your throne through unjust means in defiance of Persian custom. In the future, whenever you communicate with me, send to me as the King of Asia - do not write to me as an equal.”
The culmination of the Hammer and Anvil Macedonian deadly stroke. This was Alexander's biggest gamble, and it was pretty close. The Victory at Gaugamela made Alexander the de-facto King of Persia, and changed the course of ancient history til the rise of Rome.
Alexander the great is blessed with a good military mind and probably the best army when it comes to quality and discipline by the standards of their time. I have little doubt that Khalid ibn al Walid was heavily influenced by the idea of the companion cavalry and so Khalid himself created the elite Mobile guard regiment, a powerful light shock cavalry, that relied on speed and precision rather than brute strength.
@@mubarizunmedia6897 Yes Bro. Khalid ibn Al-Walid is one of the most underrated figures in history. Without a doubt in my mind one of the greatest commanders of all time. A true genius who made it possible for islam to flourish after the death of the prophet.
The sheer discipline of the Macedonians to change and adapt quickly on the battlefield is just magnificent. King Philip really made it an army without equal.
@@AeneasGemini I don't know what you read or watch but the professionalism of the army and Philips reforms comes up all the time any serious discussion of Alexander's army.
@@artinrahideh1229 Persians lost almost every war with the Greeks even though they had always more soldiers on the battlefield. I think the Persians soldiers were just not good as Greek hoplites.
@@donttakeitpersonal8704 The Conquest of Asia minor and its Greeks cities by Cyrus the Great, the campaign of Mardonius, The Ionian revolt, Delian league's campaign in Egypt and Cyprus, Corinthian war( this was a diplomatic and political victory), Parthia's war against seleucids and maybe another war(s) that i do not know were all won by Iranians against Greeks. Persian soldiers and armies were never bad or inferior compared to any other army in their normal status. It was their leadership that sucked in some occasions. For example Darius III neither chose a good strategy nor a good tactic. Had he been realistic there wouldn't have been an Alexander the Great( They could have defeated Alexander by aiming at their supply lines and making sure that Alexander's army didn't get a drop of water or bit of food from land of Achaemenids. Also mountain ambushes were highly effective).
@@donttakeitpersonal8704 Hoplites were heavy infantry and they were better protected compared to Persians. This was also noted by Herodotus who said that Persians lost due to their lack of armour in Platea. You are right about a Hoplite being better than an Immortal, but it wasn't like a pistol vs Sniper rifle. It was mostly based on tactics and terrain. I think Persians actually defeated the Greek center at Marathon.
The level of intelligence, maturity, discipline but also improvisational skills, boldness, calm-and-cool under pressure confidence Alexander displayed, and at such a young age, is what separates him from every other general in history. And not just military tactics, but also the way he set up shop in a conquered area to ensure loyalty, happiness among the people, and establishing connections to his other territories. It's a wonder to think what he could have done with the empire were it not for his untimely death.
@@bluey_fan968 A vast, highly experienced and armoured army is still exactly that, even when their king is no great general. Alexander was brave to the point of madness and a genius general beyond any of his time.
@@OytheGreat True but realistically if he faced someone like himself or just a decent ruler like the king who was “King of all Kings” before he was murdered and usurped by the Darius we all know and love for creating are favorite childhood hero and the “hero of heroes”. But murdering whole citizens filled with women and children is to me not great. Don’t say “It’s war” that is not war its murder and you can’t justify it. Alexander is rotten in the ground with the maggots thinking he was the Greatest but once he died all his work proved for nothing as it collapsed for his utter incompetence in governance by failing to name any heir or sire any children to father and past his genius and greatest on to.
@@bluey_fan968 Well yes, of course. But you just proved that he himself was the difference maker. If he faced an equally adept Persian general, the main distinguishing factor wouldn't have been the leadership. But now it was: his men were superior, more battle-hardened and more loyal. But that alone cannot overcome such odds. You need brilliant tactics to offset your huge numerical disadvantage. Alexander did that, time and time again, to conquer cities and beat armies on their home soil. That is why he is so great: because he pulled off miraculous victories over and over and even fought in the vanguard himself.
The battle that made Alexander, the Great, and transformed him into a legend by all those he met, leaving an enduring tradition of romances across the world.
@@jonbaxter2254 True in the US but that's also how the tax and education systems are designed (the former being needlessly complex, the latter never teaching you how to do your taxes), in order to make people reliant on TurboTax and such corporations who lobby to keep taxes overly complex, in order to scrape more money from people.
Up until this point, the Greeks mainly used cavalry for defense. The Thessalians were the masters of this type of defensive cavalry fighting on flanks, using a diamond formation that could fight in either direction. The reason the left flank defended so well time after time was not because of Parminion (who dies shortly after this), but because the Thesallians were an elite cavalry force who specialized in this task. Alexander will later send the Thesallians home and employ eastern cataphracts (mostly Bactrian cataphracts) to fill this role.
That's not entirely true. Even if the Thessalian cavalry would have broke and been routed the Persian cavalry then would have had to deal with the 7,000 heavily armored Greek Hoplites in reserve. They were put in reserve to prevent any outflanking maneuvers. That's why Alexander put them in reserve.
The key difference between a veteran army and raw recruits. Most of these soldiers have been fighting since Phillip's period so they are at the peak of their fighting prowess.
Alexander's "forget the army, make a beeline for the commander" strategy worked amazingly well over and over again, and was so effective in disrupting Ancient warfare hierarchies/discipline/cohesion that I'm surprised more armies didn't employ it more often.
@@AeneasGemini I'm not sure how being vulnerable to the tactics would stop you employing it. You wouldn't send your own commander to do it but nothing stops you sending a bunch of your good troops.
Such tactics were employed the medieval Serbian army. At the battle of Velbuzd against the Bulgarians ending with the death of the Bulgarian Tsar. At the battle of Kosovo in 1389 with the death of Sultan Murad. At the battle of Nicopolis with the capture of the royal standard by the Serbian knights. But is a extremely risky move and most often it ends with the attackers doing their job but being cut down anyway so you can understand why so few would volunteer for such a thing. Because contrary to romantic view, nobody on any side wants to die.
@@VojislavMoranic indeed, these fanboys are just too stupid to get it. But hey, why interrupt your enemies when they're making a mistake? In my opinion, glorify such attitude until it becomes a norm, and exploit it when it becomes popular to your advantage.
One the most pivotal of ancient battles. It cemented the collapse of the Achaemenid Empire and the rise of Hellenistic expansion towards the east and the Persian Mediterranean World.
By far, the best depiction of this battle I've ever seen. It's not perfect though. The infantry were ordered to move first by Alexander, before Alexander began his March to the right (while the more agile infantry and skirmishers hid in the dust cloud that was kicked up by the cavalry). Also, we know that Alexander crossed into Asia with only 9000 Pikemen. The rest of the heavy infantry were from the Corinthian League, various Mercenaries and more infantry from the areas north of Macedonia (Illyria, Thrace, Paeonia, etc). So, of the 37 000 infantry, only 9000 were Macedonians who carried sarrissa pikes. In Alexander's original army, there were 7000 Allied Hoplites. And 5000 Mercenary Hoplites. 3000 were Macedonian Hypaspists. So the other 13000 were various other types of infantry. It dissapointing to always see all those other infantry depicted as pikemen, when only 1/4 of the infantry were pikemen. There were more Hoplites than pikemen in that army, yet seeing Hoplites depicted is very rare (though Alexander did most times intentionally reduce their roles because he didn't trust most of the other Greeks from the Corinthian League that formed a sizable part of his army). At least this time, the second line was depicted as Hoplites. And the Hypaspists were at least mentioned to be the infantry who were at the critical point of the battle, where Alexander slammed from the side with thee companions.
@@williamyoung9401 currently planning a campaign, to launch an invasion into my neighbor's yard to Annex His swimming pool and basketball court... still working out the logistics, Lol...
I'm not a big fan of the 2006, film adaptation of Alexander the Great. However, I do think the way it depicted the battle of Gaugemela was really impressive.
@@Willzy800 there is some resemblance in terms of starategy but also key differences: High ground of Pratzen heights at Austerlitz (Gaugamela was relatively flat & prepared by the Persians), Napoleon arriving first (Alexander arrived after Darius), Napoleon's weak right flank to tempt the enemy in was not personally led by Napoleon & was mostly a stagnant defense (Alexander led his right ruse & it's force was the key blow where Napoleon's left made the key blow).
@@EagleLeader1 Luring the Austrians on to his flank in order to open a gap in the centre and then charging through the centre. Similar to Alexander's half fake attack on the Persian left, the split of the enemy army, and the sudden attack on the Persian centre.
He led the army by being on the battlefield. One cannot deny that events that happen every time he is in a precarious situation, whether by sheer luck or by talent and skill, he was able to survive and exploited it well while his enemies lag behind. It is as if the Gods were on his side. He is a madman with a plan. He is brilliant yet brutal. And don't forget that he can inspire his men in times of almost certain defeats or when the odds were against them.
Fun facts about the battle from Curtius's account: - Alexander did try to pursue Darius again at least until dusk. When he went back to his camp he was ambushed by a group of Persians, he skewered the horseman who got close to him and both groups fought in disorder more violently than the battle and yet again he avoided death - The troops that got into the Macedonian camp actually believed that the battle was over XD and could speak to Sisigambis (Darius's mother) and they told her joyfully that she was finally free and victory was theirs. But interestingly, she simply sat down not utterning any word or showing any emotion. - Alexander freaked out when Menidas told him this news because any word that there were troops on the camp meant that the whole army would retreat and sent the light cavalry to deal with it. Something foreshadowing to what would happen to his secretary years later - If you read this battle from Curtius you'd get an idea how the Macedonians were really struggling from this battle, Alexander's right wind was surrounded as well in fact and many of his horses died. We can't be sure how many Macedonians really died
I love hearing about Alexander the Great. It’s interesting that so many centuries ago all of this took place, yet we still talk about him to this day. I think Alexander’s biggest goal was not to rule, but to die a glorious death and be remembered long after he was gone, he accomplished that. Even though I know he died mysteriously and before he really even had a chance to rule. His name and deeds still live on.
Alexander is one of the greatest Hellenes in history. A great leader in battle or out of it. Not much have been said about his government style and ideas, which it was simply incredible for the time.
@@hellenicsun5792 Greek city states fought eachother, Macedonia was an entirely separate kingdom. A style of government the Greeks found backwards and barbaric like the Macedonians themselves
@@robberbarron7602 That's why they took part at Olympics? Only Greeks could take part...The house of Alexander the Great was Argus capital of Peloponnese. Read some history
What I think is the most impressive part is that how Alexander strongly stood at undeniably the most important part of the battlefield and held Bessus despite being extremely inferior in numbers. Parmenion was also beyond someone's expectations. Very impressive how the Macedonians managed to hold ground tightly in the gaps formed between the Persian and Macedonian cavalry.
That y said bro is the most more importand point of the aaalll battle.and the key of winning.hiii greetings from greece thessaloniki .im half spartan and half macedonian born in vergina the bjrthplace of alexandrer the great i walk eeeveeeryyy day to the road who walk this more most greedy motherfucker of the aaalll world eeeveeer until now and i think about that never again will born like this man . even with half skills who has
This shows the competence of Alexander and his advisors. in his campaign, Alexander is "almost" defeated (for like, ten times) but he always somehow pulls a victory
1 Hellene equals 10 of them, we Hellenes(Corinthians,Macedonians,Athenians,Acheans,Aeolians,Mollosians,Halkidikiotes,Epirotes,Spartans,Peloponnesians,Dorians,Ionians,Cretans,Boeotians,Aetolians and Islanders) have a saying:We dont ask how many they are but where they are?.Lightweight baby🇬🇷💪
I am currently reading Arrian's account of the Battle of Gaugamela. This video was immensely helpful in bringing the story alive. Thank you for posting it.
Bloody grateful for what you did in this video. It seems every reenactment of the battle I see, I get to pick up on new details. Thank you Kings & Generals.
No one else in the history of man kind performed such a great Victory such a Triumph! Invaded in a foreign land in the largest Empire at that time. Gave to the History the greatest epic victory! A triumph of strategic tactics and military innovation, In a ratio of one to at least five men. From Macedonia Greece Alexander the Great the one and only general he was never defeated in battle. Awe to us the Greeks and to the whole world.
I used to have this excellent book called 100 Decisive Battles and reading about Gaugamela was insane. That and Caesar at the battle of Alesia were probably my two favorites. These videos are great. Keep up the excellent work!!
@@kamleshmanjhi1234 it wasn't though. the Achemenid army was no joke. They had around 100.000 highly experienced very capable men from all around the world and even their inexperienced troops were well trained and, for that time and their absurd size, well equipped.
Now that I have some time to watch this Alexander serie, I’m pleased by the quality of the content. This battle in this video is depicted as good as it was so pivotal back then. Can’t wait to watch the next episode!
A great general who was also a great warrior. A strategic and tactical genius who personally led his troops in battle and fought at the tip of the spearhead. And, in the midst of chaos, dust, screaming men, the fog of battle, how he could always personally lead the decisive strike at the moment of truth is a mystery to me. He marched all over the known world, undefeated.
I think Gaugamela is Alexander's most complex battle, certainly the crucial manoeuvre was and is very original. Opposite to other battles were he was the first man to display a battle tactic then followed by other generals (like the attack over the Scythians), the half fake attack on the Persian left, the split of the enemy army and the sudden attack on the Persian centre is a manoeuvre rarely done in military history. Usually a flank attack is performed after the destruction or disbanding of the enemy flank, but in front of a so superior enemy foe, he pinned down the enemy flank and destroyed the enemy cohesion by putting down the command centre, annihilating the enemy in flee, not by encircling or by pure pressure. You must be a genius if you achieve this, a master of maneuvering, and Alexander was it.
Quite a testament to the Macedonian army that they didn't fold when facing such numbers. And also perhaps a miracle Alexander wasn't killed during the fighting
As might be expected of one who modelled himself on Achilles, Alexander was a superb and utterly fearless fighter. Of course there was still risk, but he could handle himself.
He was surrounded by his absolute best and most loyal men so yes there was risk, but in each engagement as long as he had the initiative the odds were very much in his favour
He nearly died eleven times in the campaign, even getting lung shot at one point. No wonder he thought himself a god towards the end. He must've thought no one could kill him.
@@samuellennon1984 He believed that even before the invasion started. Alexander was very religious and superstitious and the Oracle at Delphi told him he's invincible why he was dragging her by the hair...so he believed it.
In 2009 during tensions between Iraqi Arabs and Kurds, my unite took the leadership of both sides to this battlefield and held a big ceremony to try and unit them. If it's true that blood makes the grass grow, then the Macedonians conducted an absolute slaughter here given the waist high flowing grass and brilliant red flower blossoms.
i'm macedonian and i live in australia thank god !!! we dont have a lot to celebrate after 500 years rule of the ottoman empire so i enjoy these youtube clips !!!
Kings and Generals, I showed one of my History Professors your channel and in particular one of your videos. They absolutely love it and in fact played one of them for one of our lectures right before class started. Thank you for reminding my professor and class why they fell in love with history.
I love this series, it’s so clear and thorough. Could the next episode be on the occupation of Babylon. I feel like that next period, before moving on to continue the conquest, is a unique point in history. It was revolutionary to capture such a prize, but to spare the ancient city from being sacked. Then moving to instigate the two cultures. I think that would be an interesting deep dive. Appreciate all you do to educate everyone on our shared history
I was gonna make fun of you with an "Uhm Ackshually" comment, but honestly, I had a rare moment of self-awareness and understand that would be really rude, particularly considering this is a history channel on youtube. If there was ever a place for a correction ... it's sort of here. Thank you for helping me learn something new today.
We can get glimpse of how brutal the chariot attack went down when the phalanx opened gaps from Diodorus: "Some of the chariots did get through to the phalanx, however, and the Macedonians opened up sizeable gaps through which the chariots sped. Some of these were stopped by a hail of javelins, while others rode through and escaped, but some were moving so fast and using the blades of their scythes so effectively that death in many different forms ensued. [5] Such were the sharpness and the destructive force of the tempered blades that many men had their arms sliced off, shields and all. Quite a few others were decapitated, and their heads fell to the ground with eyes still open and facial expressions unchanged, and in some cases the blades lethally tore open men’s sides and brought a swift death."
I always wonder how history would have been different if Alexander had stopped after this battle and consolidated his conquests. Pushing further east was always going to be a strategic disaster, he was massively overstretched.
Xanophon was not a general leading the 10.000 in the battle of Cunaxa. It was an antagonist for the Persian throne, a brother of the king who gathered the mercenaries. The antagonist died early in the battle, before the 10.000 could get involved. After the battle, the Persian king invited the Greek generals in his camp for negotiations and killed them. After that, the 10.000 decided to march home on their own and elected Xenophon as a general to lead them. Xenophon was a philosopher, student of Plato.
Your contents, and mostly your explanatory graphics are remarkably didactic and clear; making it easy to remember, as one recalls the graphics and thus the contents. One of the best history channels on TH-cam ! Thanks a lot!
I like how the entire world is literally killing each other and then there's the parthian cavalry seeing the Macedonian camp and be like : it's free real estate
I'd love to see y'all do a profile on the kings in this series. Like your old video on the diplomatic achievements of Philip II. The personality clashes (albeit filtered through Arrian and Q.C. Rufus) are so cool!
A little detail... When Persians took over Alexander's camp they found there Darius' mother under capture. They said to her "we'll take you back to your son", she answered "no, I know Alexander will win, I'm safe here"
I have a request. After you finish the alexander series can you regroup all the videos about him in one collection of videos? because atm the argument is divided into 2 parts, the late indian war and the first part of his campain, videos are scattered troughout your channel and one day i would really like to rewatch the whole series
The Persian invasion is far from done. People think Alexander gained control of the Persian Empire by winning this battle, but that was not the case. It will take 8 more years to conquer the Persian empire. Another challenger for the throne is going to pop up. The Indus Valley was part of the Persian Empire since the days of Cyrus the Great, who began the conquest of it (Darius the Great finished the conquest). There were 7 Persian Satrapies located in the Indus Valley. Not all of them submitted or payed their taxes, and so Alexander had to go there to force their submition. Also, the area called India back then isn't the same area called India today there was no such thing back then...just lots of seperate kingdoms and small empires. Back then, "India" refered to the area around the Indus River. Today we call it Pakistan. Not knowing this confuses modern people who don't know. The bit of land area (in Modern India) Alexander wanted to conquer to further secure his border, was called Gangaridae (not India). Gangaridae was the area around the Ganges River. They were not refered to as Indians back then, they were refered to as Gangaridae. Soon after, that would begin to change, and create the modern confusion.
@@tylerdurden3722 uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....................... Thats cool dude but........ 1 how is this connected to what i asked 2 who asked, sorry
Persia became a "Superpower" 2 times in history. First as Achaemenid Empire, Second as Sassanid Empire. And both times, it's downfall came swiftly. And there are commons which can be spotted in both events i.e. initially ignoring of enemy mobilization & movement, 2 decisive battles, vast Persian Army outnumbering it's opponents etc. Comparable are: • As Alexander's Army crossed into Anatolia, it was initially ignored by Darius III & he asked local commanders to deal with it. Similarly, as Muslim Army started attacking Mesopotamia in 633, Yazdegerd III & his generals initially thought of it as plundering raids. • Alexander's Army defeated Persian Army at Issus in November. And Saad ibn Abi Waqas also defeated Persian Army at Al-Qaddissiya in November. • Alexander's 47,000 Army decisively defeated ~150,000 Persian Army at Gaugamela, Darius III fled & the empire's fate was sealed. Similarly, the Muslim Army of ~30,000 troops defeated the Persian Army numbering ~120,000 Troops at Nahavand, Yazdegerd III fled & the empire's fate was sealed. • In both invasions, the Superpower fell swiftly. Both Alexander's & Caliphate's Armies moved like a Blitzkrieg March in Persia, as Alexander conquered Persian Empire (334 - 328 BC) in 6/7 years & the Caliphate conquered Persian Empire (633 - 651) in 18 years. • Both Darius III & Yazdegerd III lost support from their Eastern Satrapies, were stabbed to death & their death ended both the dynasty & empire.
Great video. I forgot you were doing a series on Alexander the Great. Glad to have seen this video. Hey when your done with this series maybe you can make a video on Xenophon's adventures in Persia. I'm sure it would be a great watch. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
Thank you very much Kings and generals for creating a new video on The Great Battle of gargamilla for Alexander's conquest though I would like to say once again you have done a great job at demonstrating Alexander the greats tactical mind and strategical mind while he had faced an army of 150,000 with only 40,000 men and had conquered the accommended empire
@@GothPaoki And there are pros and cons to both. If you're in the back, you can direct the battle quickly, and if there is some kind of development that requires your attention and deliberation, it's easier to be informed about it and figure out what to do if you're not swinging swords at the enemy. When you're in the thick of it you sacrifice that for a display of personal bravery, courage, strength, and likely trust in your generals to be able to react in your stead, which is a huge morale booster. Personally I'd say that Alexander was taking a gamble (albeit sometimes a small one) every time he got personally involved in a fight, which is that there would be no change in the battlefield that requires his deliberation and reaction.
Most kings did fight their own battles. In Greek culture its almost unheard-of for a king not to be on the front line, in the right of the Phalanx (the most vulnerable place in a phalanx). Plus, Achilles was a prince, and would have become king had he not died. All the other main characters were kings and princes...and they all fought. E.g. Odysseus was King of Corcyra. Menelaus was King of Sparta. Etc. Even Agamemnon. Who was just one king of many in that coalition army. (the Greeks usually chose a hegemon...in this case it was Agamemnon)
@@firstconsul7286 he was able to react to changes immediately with his companion cavalry, which he led. His sub generals were trusted to lead the phalanx and their job was usually to simply engage asap with the enemy. The more complex dynamic manoevering was done by the cavalry, which he led personally from the front. So actually his approach gave him more instant responsiveness and dynamism.
That movie is off on so many things, but the one thing I LOVE is the fact there aren't any stirrups on the saddles! Every other Hollywood movie gets that wrong! =P
19:09 "Alexander wheeled round towards the gap, and forming a wedge as it were of the Companion cavalry and of the part of the phalanx which was posted here, he led them with a quick charge and loud battle-cry straight towards Darius himself. " ~ Arrian's Alexander Anabasis, Chapter 14, The Battle of Arbela - The flight of Darius Something tells me at that moment, that those particular phalanx battalions on the right, namely the Elimiotid and Orestid battalions of Coenus and Perdiccas was somehow capable of a sudden pike charge without breaking formation. Have you ever wondered why these two battalions have always been placed on the right? Particularly these two commanders? 20:48 Ever since then I have really never understood why Persians and Indians rear who broke through the phalanx didn't attack the rear. In theory however, reading Arrian's account, I learned the Macedonians were deployed in a "double-phalanx". I understood it that if they had attacked rear, the second phalanx behind as reserves in the rear might turn and face them.
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 No you didn't, completely. Citations would include quotations from the said citations of such books or research articles, if you're planning to draw the reader's attention and interest. That would also include links for an immediate and direct research instead of a long extensive one, scouring through different websites, which I don't plan on doing.
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 Ah, yes, read about details of a battle from star tablets by priests and full of gaps. I mean why read them from biographer generals who Plutarch and Arrian (a general himself) use as source.... Btw, you can't even provde a quote and/or a link to the source? Oh, well...
Very simple children of local Nobles from conquered territories were sent to be educated in Persia then they were sent back to their homelands some were from territories that were allowed to have self governance therefore when called upon they were willing to provide assistance and support.
@@mjc4073 the Persian Empire held together many different peoples for 200 years. That was no small achievement. Besides there is no Indication that the fegest of gaugamela was caused by a Lack of coordination of Contingents from different Nations. Besides, the peoples of modern Iran and centralasia which Features prominently in the Battle of gaugamela, had been culturally acquainted even before the Empire was founded.
@@mjc4073 255 years of having different cultures, and no issue, it has nothing to do with it on the other hand cowardly Darius running in front of his men does.
That's not necessarily from the movie. That incident actually occurred. An eagle flew over the Macedonians and towards the Persians, which the Macedonians took as an omen.
Hey guys please do me a favour. Please don't even reply to these illiterate morons who say that King Alexander wasn't Greek. There is not even an argument about that. The don't have to convince us but the whole historians community who disagree with them. There is undisputed evidence that King Alexander was Greek. They just keep saying these stupid things hoping that some one will actually believe them. They are born petty thieves and this is what they know to do better, steal. If they had the ability to create the would already give something to humanity, so since they are incapable of doing so for them it's easier to steal like rats!
Hey guys please do me a favour. Please don't even reply to these illiterate morons who say that King Alexander wasn't Greek. There is not even an argument about that. The don't have to convince us but the whole historians community who disagree with them. There is undisputed evidence that King Alexander was Greek. They just keep saying these stupid things hoping that some one will actually believe them. They are born petty thieves and this is what they know to do better, steal. If they had the ability to create the would already give something to humanity, so since they are incapable of doing so for them it's easier to steal like rats!
🌏 Get Exclusive NordVPN deal here ➡ nordvpn.com/kingsandgenerals. It's risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee! ✌
Can you make long Turkish war
It will be more needed for russians now more than ever
More than Alexander being a genius, fact is that Darius the third was not a worthy ruler. Had this been Cyrus the great or Darius the first, they had hanged ALexander from some tree. It is easy to win when the king on the other side has a tendency to run. The same happened with the mongols. Mohammad kharazmshah ,who was not an ethnic Iranian by the way, ran for his life and collapsed his army. Giving the victory to Chengiz.
@@ibashcommunists6847 They probably weren't even 100 000 soldiers. You need to understand logistics. how difficult it is to prepare food, water etc for such a large number. They didn't have trucks or trains or any modern machinery back then. Also no can food or refrigerating. 100 000 soldiers is a lot of people to feed if you have the technology of 25 centuries ago.
Alexander is nothing without parmenion! Always remember the betrayed general! Alexander rewarded his loyalty with betrayal! Alexander will never be great in my eyes! He's nothing but a despot whose ego is more important to him than his kingdom, his people, and even his friends and family! What an overrated individual!
This is one of the most decisive battles in human history. Even to this day Alexander's battle tactics are studied by modern generals. He was an absolute genius
Alexander had more luck rather than skills regarding this battle. Darius failed to harass Alexander's long line of supply and during the battle failed to secure his flanks which should be easy with the numbers he had
@asahi toki I think Khalid ibn al Walid is equally overrated. He had high quality nomad troops against mostly raw recruits, as most experienced men of both persia and rome had perished shortly before in Heraclius' war against the persians, which had cost both sides hundreds of thousands of men, had devastated their territories, left them open for invasions from the north and destabilized their own political order. Khalid ibn al Walid was with no doubt a great general, but in fact, I think that Heraclius himself was an even more capable commander, having fought entire campaigns that were much more unfavourable, while Khalid could rely on the high quality and fanaticism of his men as well as the fact that the muslims were willing to send every single man of the arabian peninsula into the slaughter. Khalid came out of nowhere and he basically took the romans and persians by surprise during exactly the right time, when both were so weak - and unable to coordinate with each other against the threat, due to their deep animosities against each other - and distracted that they couldn't put up much of a fight anyway. Against Justinians legions, Khalid and the arabs would have been trashed in a matter of months, becoming merely a footnote in history.
@@Zeerich-yx9po Wrong. Modern generals still read Sun Tsu and follow his philosophies of war in a detailed fashion. Napoleon himself said it... Read of Alexander, Caesar, of all the great generals of ancient times, otherwise you cannot be a great military leader yourself.
That does not mean "copy their tactics". It means; Take inspiration from the approaches they take, from the mind games, from their ethics as warriors and the way they lead their armies in a psychological/philosophycal way. Granted, Alexander is a pretty bad example, because he really wasn't a great innovator or something. He was cunning, daring, fast and very brave, but that could turn to your disadvantage very quickly if you find yourself in a situation where caution would be wiser. Exactly that is to be learned from Alexanders campaigns; If there is a favourable moment, do not let it pass, but seize it. Which is exactly what Napoleon did at Austerlitz, for example, while at Friedland, he pulled a Caesar by holding back his reserves, feeding men into the fight at a steady pace and thus strangulating the enemy to death by pressure.
The basic truths of warfare don't change. Tactics change every few decades, that was true even in the ancient world, but there still always is much to be learned from any victory and defeat.
@asahi toki haha the old the persians where weak excuse they where in their prime heavely outnumbered alexander and he still won. Khalid is overrated asf and most of the battle numbers are completely exaggerated by Muslim historians. Why say one person's victories are overrated and the other isn't when both have been exaggerated by historians.
@@DavorBa They are just bias bro most of them are iranians or from the middle East they wouldn't say cyrus or khalid is overrated its always anyone who's decisivly defeated them that's overrated.
I love Alexander's reply to Darius' message when he said they should have peace:
“Your ancestors invaded Macedonia, and the rest of Greece, and did us harm. Although we had not done you any previous injury.
Your envoys corrupted my men and sought to destroy the peace which I established amongst the Greeks.
“You killed Arses with the help of Bagoas and gained your throne through unjust means in defiance of Persian custom.
In the future, whenever you communicate with me, send to me as the King of Asia - do not write to me as an equal.”
That’s awesome, thank you for adding that to the comments!
Powerful reply
Made the video 200% better
Those are Arrian's words, the exact phrasing is probably not authentic, but conveys the gist of the letter.
@@qaidikramuddin thats what my wife says when she's upset
The culmination of the Hammer and Anvil Macedonian deadly stroke. This was Alexander's biggest gamble, and it was pretty close. The Victory at Gaugamela made Alexander the de-facto King of Persia, and changed the course of ancient history til the rise of Rome.
@LeoTheBritish-Eurasian Of Course. Just trying to be modest.
@LeoTheBritish-Eurasian You too Bro. Keep up your love for history.
@LeoTheBritish-Eurasian nah, Alexander is an overrated trash.
Alexander the great is blessed with a good military mind and probably the best army when it comes to quality and discipline by the standards of their time. I have little doubt that Khalid ibn al Walid was heavily influenced by the idea of the companion cavalry and so Khalid himself created the elite Mobile guard regiment, a powerful light shock cavalry, that relied on speed and precision rather than brute strength.
@@mubarizunmedia6897 Yes Bro. Khalid ibn Al-Walid is one of the most underrated figures in history. Without a doubt in my mind one of the greatest commanders of all time. A true genius who made it possible for islam to flourish after the death of the prophet.
The sheer discipline of the Macedonians to change and adapt quickly on the battlefield is just magnificent. King Philip really made it an army without equal.
@@AeneasGemini I don't know what you read or watch but the professionalism of the army and Philips reforms comes up all the time any serious discussion of Alexander's army.
It was a great army but it was pretty much Persians failing to fight correctly and allowing them to win such great battles.
@@artinrahideh1229 Persians lost almost every war with the Greeks even though they had always more soldiers on the battlefield. I think the Persians soldiers were just not good as Greek hoplites.
@@donttakeitpersonal8704 The Conquest of Asia minor and its Greeks cities by Cyrus the Great, the campaign of Mardonius, The Ionian revolt, Delian league's campaign in Egypt and Cyprus, Corinthian war( this was a diplomatic and political victory), Parthia's war against seleucids and maybe another war(s) that i do not know were all won by Iranians against Greeks.
Persian soldiers and armies were never bad or inferior compared to any other army in their normal status. It was their leadership that sucked in some occasions. For example Darius III neither chose a good strategy nor a good tactic. Had he been realistic there wouldn't have been an Alexander the Great( They could have defeated Alexander by aiming at their supply lines and making sure that Alexander's army didn't get a drop of water or bit of food from land of Achaemenids. Also mountain ambushes were highly effective).
@@donttakeitpersonal8704 Hoplites were heavy infantry and they were better protected compared to Persians. This was also noted by Herodotus who said that Persians lost due to their lack of armour in Platea.
You are right about a Hoplite being better than an Immortal, but it wasn't like a pistol vs Sniper rifle. It was mostly based on tactics and terrain. I think Persians actually defeated the Greek center at Marathon.
The level of intelligence, maturity, discipline but also improvisational skills, boldness, calm-and-cool under pressure confidence Alexander displayed, and at such a young age, is what separates him from every other general in history. And not just military tactics, but also the way he set up shop in a conquered area to ensure loyalty, happiness among the people, and establishing connections to his other territories. It's a wonder to think what he could have done with the empire were it not for his untimely death.
Or he simply faced someone incompetent we would never know
@@bluey_fan968 A vast, highly experienced and armoured army is still exactly that, even when their king is no great general. Alexander was brave to the point of madness and a genius general beyond any of his time.
@@OytheGreat True but realistically if he faced someone like himself or just a decent ruler like the king who was “King of all Kings” before he was murdered and usurped by the Darius we all know and love for creating are favorite childhood hero and the “hero of heroes”. But murdering whole citizens filled with women and children is to me not great. Don’t say “It’s war” that is not war its murder and you can’t justify it. Alexander is rotten in the ground with the maggots thinking he was the Greatest but once he died all his work proved for nothing as it collapsed for his utter incompetence in governance by failing to name any heir or sire any children to father and past his genius and greatest on to.
@@bluey_fan968 Well yes, of course. But you just proved that he himself was the difference maker. If he faced an equally adept Persian general, the main distinguishing factor wouldn't have been the leadership.
But now it was: his men were superior, more battle-hardened and more loyal. But that alone cannot overcome such odds. You need brilliant tactics to offset your huge numerical disadvantage. Alexander did that, time and time again, to conquer cities and beat armies on their home soil. That is why he is so great: because he pulled off miraculous victories over and over and even fought in the vanguard himself.
What would have happened in Rome? Maybe nothing?
The battle that made Alexander, the Great, and transformed him into a legend by all those he met, leaving an enduring tradition of romances across the world.
Just remember, Alexander the Great was around the age of 24 during this battle
The sheer force of personality and intellect this man had…my god
24 year old today can't do their tax returns...
@@jonbaxter2254 im 19 and cant even drive lmao
He was actually 25
@@jonbaxter2254 I don't think Alexander could either.
@@jonbaxter2254 True in the US but that's also how the tax and education systems are designed (the former being needlessly complex, the latter never teaching you how to do your taxes), in order to make people reliant on TurboTax and such corporations who lobby to keep taxes overly complex, in order to scrape more money from people.
Still blows my mind how parmenion holds his calvary for so long, literally the reason Alexander’s front wasn’t flanked
That cleary depicts how well trained Alexander's army was
Up until this point, the Greeks mainly used cavalry for defense. The Thessalians were the masters of this type of defensive cavalry fighting on flanks, using a diamond formation that could fight in either direction.
The reason the left flank defended so well time after time was not because of Parminion (who dies shortly after this), but because the Thesallians were an elite cavalry force who specialized in this task.
Alexander will later send the Thesallians home and employ eastern cataphracts (mostly Bactrian cataphracts) to fill this role.
That's not entirely true. Even if the Thessalian cavalry would have broke and been routed the Persian cavalry then would have had to deal with the 7,000 heavily armored Greek Hoplites in reserve. They were put in reserve to prevent any outflanking maneuvers. That's why Alexander put them in reserve.
The key difference between a veteran army and raw recruits. Most of these soldiers have been fighting since Phillip's period so they are at the peak of their fighting prowess.
Alexander's "forget the army, make a beeline for the commander" strategy worked amazingly well over and over again, and was so effective in disrupting Ancient warfare hierarchies/discipline/cohesion that I'm surprised more armies didn't employ it more often.
@@AeneasGemini I'm not sure how being vulnerable to the tactics would stop you employing it. You wouldn't send your own commander to do it but nothing stops you sending a bunch of your good troops.
Yes when reading kingdom they used it constantly and I've always wondered why it wasn't used more often in real life
Such tactics were employed the medieval Serbian army.
At the battle of Velbuzd against the Bulgarians ending with the death of the Bulgarian Tsar.
At the battle of Kosovo in 1389 with the death of Sultan Murad.
At the battle of Nicopolis with the capture of the royal standard by the Serbian knights.
But is a extremely risky move and most often it ends with the attackers doing their job but being cut down anyway so you can understand why so few would volunteer for such a thing.
Because contrary to romantic view, nobody on any side wants to die.
@@VojislavMoranic indeed, these fanboys are just too stupid to get it. But hey, why interrupt your enemies when they're making a mistake? In my opinion, glorify such attitude until it becomes a norm, and exploit it when it becomes popular to your advantage.
He's played enough Total War to know that general sniping is a legitimate tactic
One the most pivotal of ancient battles. It cemented the collapse of the Achaemenid Empire and the rise of Hellenistic expansion towards the east and the Persian Mediterranean World.
You like Achaemenid or Alexander III Empire?
@@RoyalZarak killed by the Mauryas?
@@LakshmiPraveenDiaries I like both. Darius III and Alexander III empires were both awesome in their own respective ways.
@@PYRESATVARANASI 🙂
India conquered probably
The Battle which made Alexander a legend. Enough said.
I've studied this battle countless different ways throughout the years, but nobody covers it like kings and generals..., 👑 ⚔️
Yeah this channel is great!
By far, the best depiction of this battle I've ever seen.
It's not perfect though. The infantry were ordered to move first by Alexander, before Alexander began his March to the right (while the more agile infantry and skirmishers hid in the dust cloud that was kicked up by the cavalry).
Also, we know that Alexander crossed into Asia with only 9000 Pikemen. The rest of the heavy infantry were from the Corinthian League, various Mercenaries and more infantry from the areas north of Macedonia (Illyria, Thrace, Paeonia, etc).
So, of the 37 000 infantry, only 9000 were Macedonians who carried sarrissa pikes.
In Alexander's original army, there were 7000 Allied Hoplites. And 5000 Mercenary Hoplites. 3000 were Macedonian Hypaspists.
So the other 13000 were various other types of infantry.
It dissapointing to always see all those other infantry depicted as pikemen, when only 1/4 of the infantry were pikemen. There were more Hoplites than pikemen in that army, yet seeing Hoplites depicted is very rare (though Alexander did most times intentionally reduce their roles because he didn't trust most of the other Greeks from the Corinthian League that formed a sizable part of his army).
At least this time, the second line was depicted as Hoplites. And the Hypaspists were at least mentioned to be the infantry who were at the critical point of the battle, where Alexander slammed from the side with thee companions.
You and countless other conquerors throughout history, lol.
@@williamyoung9401 currently planning a campaign, to launch an invasion into my neighbor's yard to Annex His swimming pool and basketball court... still working out the logistics, Lol...
Darius could have won if he just used NordVPN
😂😂
Been saying this for YEARS I tells you!
Darius could have won if he knew what he was doing
The 300 had their info used against them as well. That's why I always use nord vpn
@@bluey_fan968 looks like your not fun in parties huh
I'm not a big fan of the 2006, film adaptation of Alexander the Great. However, I do think the way it depicted the battle of Gaugemela was really impressive.
Imho, it's pretty much the only part worth watching, tbh. After that, the movie turns into crap...
@@jlvfr at least the harem dancing scene was quite something.....
@@aegystierone8505 well... yeah, but it wasn't what we wanted in such a movie... well, not quite. ;)
dreadful film.
battle of Indus was ok too. very inaccurate, but still ok.
Although Napoleon is my favorite conqueror/military genius, the Battle of Gaugamela is the most intelligent battle strategy I've read.
Its genius is how simple it is but executed so well timed.
Napoleon's Battle of Austerlitz is a modern version of Gaugamela.
@@centpushups Alexander surmised correctly that by cutting off the head off the snake, the entire command structure falls into chaos.
@@Willzy800 there is some resemblance in terms of starategy but also key differences: High ground of Pratzen heights at Austerlitz (Gaugamela was relatively flat & prepared by the Persians), Napoleon arriving first (Alexander arrived after Darius), Napoleon's weak right flank to tempt the enemy in was not personally led by Napoleon & was mostly a stagnant defense (Alexander led his right ruse & it's force was the key blow where Napoleon's left made the key blow).
@@EagleLeader1 Luring the Austrians on to his flank in order to open a gap in the centre and then charging through the centre. Similar to Alexander's half fake attack on the Persian left, the split of the enemy army, and the sudden attack on the Persian centre.
Thanks Kings and Generals for the such good content and for being great creators to look up to!
Couldn’t have said it any better! Kings and Generals are pure quality content and in fact inspired me to make my history channel.
I agree.
Unbelievable that this content is free, one of the best channels on TH-cam
So many videos captured this legendary battle and it still never gets old.
He led the army by being on the battlefield. One cannot deny that events that happen every time he is in a precarious situation, whether by sheer luck or by talent and skill, he was able to survive and exploited it well while his enemies lag behind. It is as if the Gods were on his side. He is a madman with a plan. He is brilliant yet brutal. And don't forget that he can inspire his men in times of almost certain defeats or when the odds were against them.
Alexander be playing 4D chess while everyone is playing 2D.
But like yourself, he was not alone on the battlefield
Fun facts about the battle from Curtius's account:
- Alexander did try to pursue Darius again at least until dusk. When he went back to his camp he was ambushed by a group of Persians, he skewered the horseman who got close to him and both groups fought in disorder more violently than the battle and yet again he avoided death
- The troops that got into the Macedonian camp actually believed that the battle was over XD and could speak to Sisigambis (Darius's mother) and they told her joyfully that she was finally free and victory was theirs. But interestingly, she simply sat down not utterning any word or showing any emotion.
- Alexander freaked out when Menidas told him this news because any word that there were troops on the camp meant that the whole army would retreat and sent the light cavalry to deal with it. Something foreshadowing to what would happen to his secretary years later
- If you read this battle from Curtius you'd get an idea how the Macedonians were really struggling from this battle, Alexander's right wind was surrounded as well in fact and many of his horses died. We can't be sure how many Macedonians really died
@@something4179 he probably had access to contemporary account as well when he did his research
I love hearing about Alexander the Great. It’s interesting that so many centuries ago all of this took place, yet we still talk about him to this day. I think Alexander’s biggest goal was not to rule, but to die a glorious death and be remembered long after he was gone, he accomplished that. Even though I know he died mysteriously and before he really even had a chance to rule. His name and deeds still live on.
Alexander is one of the greatest Hellenes in history. A great leader in battle or out of it. Not much have been said about his government style and ideas, which it was simply incredible for the time.
How can Alexander be a Hellene if he took over the Hellenes? Lmao
@@robberbarron7602 Hellenes got involved to a lot of civil wars in our history. Just like every nation we have our own demons
@@robberbarron7602 Greeks used to fight between them
@@hellenicsun5792 Greek city states fought eachother, Macedonia was an entirely separate kingdom. A style of government the Greeks found backwards and barbaric like the Macedonians themselves
@@robberbarron7602 That's why they took part at Olympics? Only Greeks could take part...The house of Alexander the Great was Argus capital of Peloponnese. Read some history
What I think is the most impressive part is that how Alexander strongly stood at undeniably the most important part of the battlefield and held Bessus despite being extremely inferior in numbers. Parmenion was also beyond someone's expectations. Very impressive how the Macedonians managed to hold ground tightly in the gaps formed between the Persian and Macedonian cavalry.
That y said bro is the most more importand point of the aaalll battle.and the key of winning.hiii greetings from greece thessaloniki .im half spartan and half macedonian born in vergina the bjrthplace of alexandrer the great i walk eeeveeeryyy day to the road who walk this more most greedy motherfucker of the aaalll world eeeveeer until now and i think about that never again will born like this man . even with half skills who has
The entire series is excellent. Look forward to the remaining videos eagerly.
This shows the competence of Alexander and his advisors. in his campaign, Alexander is "almost" defeated (for like, ten times) but he always somehow pulls a victory
darius: i have u outnumberd 10 : 1
alexander: i like those odds
1 Hellene equals 10 of them, we Hellenes(Corinthians,Macedonians,Athenians,Acheans,Aeolians,Mollosians,Halkidikiotes,Epirotes,Spartans,Peloponnesians,Dorians,Ionians,Cretans,Boeotians,Aetolians and Islanders) have a saying:We dont ask how many they are but where they are?.Lightweight baby🇬🇷💪
@@Eleftherios323 👌
@@Eleftherios323 also Alexander was not greek but slav
@@Lmao69 Fair enough, 80,000 with conservative estimates, 120000 at most.
@@satanwithinternet2753 source: Trust me bro.
I am currently reading Arrian's account of the Battle of Gaugamela. This video was immensely helpful in bringing the story alive. Thank you for posting it.
Bloody grateful for what you did in this video. It seems every reenactment of the battle I see, I get to pick up on new details. Thank you Kings & Generals.
No one else in the history of man kind performed such a great Victory such a Triumph!
Invaded in a foreign land in the largest Empire at that time.
Gave to the History the greatest epic victory! A triumph of strategic tactics and military innovation, In a ratio of one to at least five men.
From Macedonia Greece Alexander the Great the one and only general he was never defeated in battle. Awe to us the Greeks and to the whole world.
The battle of Cannae would like to have a word with you
@@nisarbo3781 yeah hannibal was also a goat
I used to have this excellent book called 100 Decisive Battles and reading about Gaugamela was insane. That and Caesar at the battle of Alesia were probably my two favorites. These videos are great. Keep up the excellent work!!
It is by defeating a generally huge army that made Alexander famous around the world.
@@kamleshmanjhi1234 it wasn't though. the Achemenid army was no joke. They had around 100.000 highly experienced very capable men from all around the world and even their inexperienced troops were well trained and, for that time and their absurd size, well equipped.
Now that I have some time to watch this Alexander serie, I’m pleased by the quality of the content. This battle in this video is depicted as good as it was so pivotal back then. Can’t wait to watch the next episode!
Alexander the Great. Undefeated against impossible odds. Truly changed world history.
Top-notch work K&Gs!
My friend Malay Archer once again did a GREAT job!
Thank you my friend 😄
@@comradekenobi6908 Divide et Impera
I always needed this. This is one of the most famous battles ever!
"I was here at Gaugumela. For the honor......and GLOOOOORY OF GREECE!!! ZEUS BE WITH US!!!
I love how you interact with your audience! It's very warm and friendly!
A great general who was also a great warrior. A strategic and tactical genius who personally led his troops in battle and fought at the tip of the spearhead. And, in the midst of chaos, dust, screaming men, the fog of battle, how he could always personally lead the decisive strike at the moment of truth is a mystery to me. He marched all over the known world, undefeated.
I’ve been rewatching the battle from the movie and watching other channels so happy you dropped your version of it I love your takes
I think Gaugamela is Alexander's most complex battle, certainly the crucial manoeuvre was and is very original.
Opposite to other battles were he was the first man to display a battle tactic then followed by other generals (like the attack over the Scythians), the half fake attack on the Persian left, the split of the enemy army and the sudden attack on the Persian centre is a manoeuvre rarely done in military history.
Usually a flank attack is performed after the destruction or disbanding of the enemy flank, but in front of a so superior enemy foe, he pinned down the enemy flank and destroyed the enemy cohesion by putting down the command centre, annihilating the enemy in flee, not by encircling or by pure pressure.
You must be a genius if you achieve this, a master of maneuvering, and Alexander was it.
Wait till you see the pre-battle and Battle of Hydaspes animated in detail like this one.
Sir they have prepared the battlefield and have gained every single advantage they could!
Alexander; They activated my trap card
Quite a testament to the Macedonian army that they didn't fold when facing such numbers. And also perhaps a miracle Alexander wasn't killed during the fighting
Plot armour
As might be expected of one who modelled himself on Achilles, Alexander was a superb and utterly fearless fighter. Of course there was still risk, but he could handle himself.
He was surrounded by his absolute best and most loyal men so yes there was risk, but in each engagement as long as he had the initiative the odds were very much in his favour
He nearly died eleven times in the campaign, even getting lung shot at one point. No wonder he thought himself a god towards the end. He must've thought no one could kill him.
@@samuellennon1984 He believed that even before the invasion started.
Alexander was very religious and superstitious and the Oracle at Delphi told him he's invincible why he was dragging her by the hair...so he believed it.
Another great episode in a great series. Keep up the good work!
Great episode. Makes me want to watch the movie about Alexander again.
I'm sure Darius can trust that Bessus guy.
Oh big foreshadowing god damn Darius he didnt see it coming
He had his ears and nose sliced off and inpaled for his troubles.
@@THomAs.H.P.76 perhaps it was. Shady things happened in Egypt...perhaps the next video will go into detail.
This is my Favorite battle in history! Thank you so much for covering this!
The epic battle of my beloved Alexander! I intend to visit this battlefield in the future, this video will be very useful in my work, THANK YOU ✌❣
Hi Irena! I'm waiting for your next video!
KINGS AND GENERALS WITH AN ABSOLUTE BANGER OF A DOCUMENTARY 🔥🔥🔥
One of the most iconic and probably most important battle in the history of whole humankind.
As always a great production, well done and thanks for the knowledge of ancient warfare and tactics in general.
In 2009 during tensions between Iraqi Arabs and Kurds, my unite took the leadership of both sides to this battlefield and held a big ceremony to try and unit them. If it's true that blood makes the grass grow, then the Macedonians conducted an absolute slaughter here given the waist high flowing grass and brilliant red flower blossoms.
Alexander the Greatest conqueror of all time
Imagine seeing these Macedonians, what incredible men they must have been
i'm macedonian and i live in australia thank god !!!
we dont have a lot to celebrate after 500 years rule of the ottoman empire so i enjoy these youtube clips !!!
That was freaking awesome. I love everything about your presentation and you make history awesome to watch .
Kings and Generals, I showed one of my History Professors your channel and in particular one of your videos. They absolutely love it and in fact played one of them for one of our lectures right before class started. Thank you for reminding my professor and class why they fell in love with history.
Also thank you for inspiring me to make my History channel Kings and Generals.
@@expandedhistory I recently subscribed to your channel looking forward to seeing your videos.
I love this series, it’s so clear and thorough. Could the next episode be on the occupation of Babylon. I feel like that next period, before moving on to continue the conquest, is a unique point in history. It was revolutionary to capture such a prize, but to spare the ancient city from being sacked. Then moving to instigate the two cultures. I think that would be an interesting deep dive. Appreciate all you do to educate everyone on our shared history
Brilliant video Brilliantly presented and narrated! Thanking you but we want MORE!
"Achaemenian" is a more accurate term than "Achaemenid" for the empire. with that being said, great documentation!
I was gonna make fun of you with an "Uhm Ackshually" comment, but honestly, I had a rare moment of self-awareness and understand that would be really rude, particularly considering this is a history channel on youtube. If there was ever a place for a correction ... it's sort of here. Thank you for helping me learn something new today.
@@thefinal9923 ❤ how humble of you! Totally agree with that ;)
@@stormshadow5283 isn't that more of an arabic term?
@@21stEidein No it's Persian word and it's how we call it.
We can get glimpse of how brutal the chariot attack went down when the phalanx opened gaps from Diodorus:
"Some of the chariots did get through to the phalanx, however, and the Macedonians opened up sizeable gaps through which the chariots sped. Some of these were stopped by a hail of javelins, while others rode through and escaped, but some were moving so fast and using the blades of their scythes so effectively that death in many different forms ensued. [5] Such were the sharpness and the destructive force of the tempered blades that many men had their arms sliced off, shields and all. Quite a few others were decapitated, and their heads fell to the ground with eyes still open and facial expressions unchanged, and in some cases the blades lethally tore open men’s sides and brought a swift death."
This was one of the greatest battles in the history of human civilization and warfare of any age.
Yarmuk eclipses this big time..
THE BATTLE THAT WOULD MAKE ALEXANDER LEGENDARY. CAN'T WAIT FOR OTHER BATTLES LATTER IN THIS CAMPAIGN.
alexander coming back for parmenion always puts a smile on my face ❤️☺️
I always wonder how history would have been different if Alexander had stopped after this battle and consolidated his conquests. Pushing further east was always going to be a strategic disaster, he was massively overstretched.
He was still using Persian infrastructure, they stood for a centuries he just needed to live longer and raise a real heir for political stability
Xanophon was not a general leading the 10.000 in the battle of Cunaxa. It was an antagonist for the Persian throne, a brother of the king who gathered the mercenaries. The antagonist died early in the battle, before the 10.000 could get involved. After the battle, the Persian king invited the Greek generals in his camp for negotiations and killed them. After that, the 10.000 decided to march home on their own and elected Xenophon as a general to lead them. Xenophon was a philosopher, student of Plato.
Wasn’t Xenophon a student of Socrates
@@al-muwaffaq341 Yes he was. As was Plato. You are right!
Your contents, and mostly your explanatory graphics are remarkably didactic and clear; making it easy to remember, as one recalls the graphics and thus the contents.
One of the best history channels on TH-cam !
Thanks a lot!
19:00
Alexander: I'm gonna do what's called a pro gamer move.
I like how the entire world is literally killing each other and then there's the parthian cavalry seeing the Macedonian camp and be like : it's free real estate
I'd love to see y'all do a profile on the kings in this series. Like your old video on the diplomatic achievements of Philip II. The personality clashes (albeit filtered through Arrian and Q.C. Rufus) are so cool!
Only you guys can quench my thirst for history, Thank you for your kindness. Can't explain how grateful I am, Thank you.
A little detail... When Persians took over Alexander's camp they found there Darius' mother under capture. They said to her "we'll take you back to your son", she answered "no, I know Alexander will win, I'm safe here"
Yessssssssss been waiting for this since you teased it out a few weeks ago. WHAT A BATTLE!
I have a request. After you finish the alexander series can you regroup all the videos about him in one collection of videos? because atm the argument is divided into 2 parts, the late indian war and the first part of his campain, videos are scattered troughout your channel and one day i would really like to rewatch the whole series
Seconded. A playlist would be nice
They'll probably put them all into one long video like they have done in the past with other series they've finished.
@@fyeahusa mhhh more like a playlist, one thing is 3 videos like servile wars, other is an entire series. Is better a playlist
The Persian invasion is far from done. People think Alexander gained control of the Persian Empire by winning this battle, but that was not the case. It will take 8 more years to conquer the Persian empire. Another challenger for the throne is going to pop up.
The Indus Valley was part of the Persian Empire since the days of Cyrus the Great, who began the conquest of it (Darius the Great finished the conquest). There were 7 Persian Satrapies located in the Indus Valley. Not all of them submitted or payed their taxes, and so Alexander had to go there to force their submition.
Also, the area called India back then isn't the same area called India today there was no such thing back then...just lots of seperate kingdoms and small empires.
Back then, "India" refered to the area around the Indus River. Today we call it Pakistan. Not knowing this confuses modern people who don't know.
The bit of land area (in Modern India) Alexander wanted to conquer to further secure his border, was called Gangaridae (not India). Gangaridae was the area around the Ganges River. They were not refered to as Indians back then, they were refered to as Gangaridae. Soon after, that would begin to change, and create the modern confusion.
@@tylerdurden3722 uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.......................
Thats cool dude but........
1 how is this connected to what i asked
2 who asked, sorry
Persia became a "Superpower" 2 times in history.
First as Achaemenid Empire, Second as Sassanid Empire.
And both times, it's downfall came swiftly.
And there are commons which can be spotted in both events i.e. initially ignoring of enemy mobilization & movement, 2 decisive battles, vast Persian Army outnumbering it's opponents etc.
Comparable are:
• As Alexander's Army crossed into Anatolia, it was initially ignored by Darius III & he asked local commanders to deal with it. Similarly, as Muslim Army started attacking Mesopotamia in 633, Yazdegerd III & his generals initially thought of it as plundering raids.
• Alexander's Army defeated Persian Army at Issus in November. And Saad ibn Abi Waqas also defeated Persian Army at Al-Qaddissiya in November.
• Alexander's 47,000 Army decisively defeated ~150,000 Persian Army at Gaugamela, Darius III fled & the empire's fate was sealed. Similarly, the Muslim Army of ~30,000 troops defeated the Persian Army numbering ~120,000 Troops at Nahavand, Yazdegerd III fled & the empire's fate was sealed.
• In both invasions, the Superpower fell swiftly. Both Alexander's & Caliphate's Armies moved like a Blitzkrieg March in Persia, as Alexander conquered Persian Empire (334 - 328 BC) in 6/7 years & the Caliphate conquered Persian Empire (633 - 651) in 18 years.
• Both Darius III & Yazdegerd III lost support from their Eastern Satrapies, were stabbed to death & their death ended both the dynasty & empire.
Great video. I forgot you were doing a series on Alexander the Great. Glad to have seen this video. Hey when your done with this series maybe you can make a video on Xenophon's adventures in Persia. I'm sure it would be a great watch. My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
Thank you very much Kings and generals for creating a new video on The Great Battle of gargamilla for Alexander's conquest though I would like to say once again you have done a great job at demonstrating Alexander the greats tactical mind and strategical mind while he had faced an army of 150,000 with only 40,000 men and had conquered the accommended empire
Achilles says "Imagine a king that fights his own battles"
@@AeneasGemini don't forget, badass and experienced guards.
@@GothPaoki And there are pros and cons to both. If you're in the back, you can direct the battle quickly, and if there is some kind of development that requires your attention and deliberation, it's easier to be informed about it and figure out what to do if you're not swinging swords at the enemy. When you're in the thick of it you sacrifice that for a display of personal bravery, courage, strength, and likely trust in your generals to be able to react in your stead, which is a huge morale booster.
Personally I'd say that Alexander was taking a gamble (albeit sometimes a small one) every time he got personally involved in a fight, which is that there would be no change in the battlefield that requires his deliberation and reaction.
Most kings did fight their own battles. In Greek culture its almost unheard-of for a king not to be on the front line, in the right of the Phalanx (the most vulnerable place in a phalanx).
Plus, Achilles was a prince, and would have become king had he not died. All the other main characters were kings and princes...and they all fought. E.g. Odysseus was King of Corcyra. Menelaus was King of Sparta. Etc.
Even Agamemnon. Who was just one king of many in that coalition army. (the Greeks usually chose a hegemon...in this case it was Agamemnon)
@@firstconsul7286 he was able to react to changes immediately with his companion cavalry, which he led. His sub generals were trusted to lead the phalanx and their job was usually to simply engage asap with the enemy. The more complex dynamic manoevering was done by the cavalry, which he led personally from the front. So actually his approach gave him more instant responsiveness and dynamism.
That movie is off on so many things, but the one thing I LOVE is the fact there aren't any stirrups on the saddles! Every other Hollywood movie gets that wrong! =P
Love this series on Alexander. I impatiently wait for each new video. keep em coming!
Μέγας Αλέξανδρος!
Alexender the great
The only conqueror who died undefeated. Which is unbelievable
15:42
The eagle from the movie
WOW! WELL DONE! THANKS FOR SUCH AN AWESOME DOCUMENTARY!
Alexander rolled the dice here. And it ended up being his most decisive victory.
Brilliant! This video came just in time for my battle with Darius in the DEI Alexander campaign!
19:09 "Alexander wheeled round towards the gap, and forming a wedge as it were of the Companion cavalry and of the part of the phalanx which was posted here, he led them with a quick charge and loud battle-cry straight towards Darius himself. " ~ Arrian's Alexander Anabasis, Chapter 14, The Battle of Arbela - The flight of Darius
Something tells me at that moment, that those particular phalanx battalions on the right, namely the Elimiotid and Orestid battalions of Coenus and Perdiccas was somehow capable of a sudden pike charge without breaking formation. Have you ever wondered why these two battalions have always been placed on the right? Particularly these two commanders?
20:48 Ever since then I have really never understood why Persians and Indians rear who broke through the phalanx didn't attack the rear. In theory however, reading Arrian's account, I learned the Macedonians were deployed in a "double-phalanx". I understood it that if they had attacked rear, the second phalanx behind as reserves in the rear might turn and face them.
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 Oh? Provide some citations.
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 No you didn't, completely. Citations would include quotations from the said citations of such books or research articles, if you're planning to draw the reader's attention and interest. That would also include links for an immediate and direct research instead of a long extensive one, scouring through different websites, which I don't plan on doing.
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 yea post the links. I highly doubt what you are claiming
@@rashnuofthegoldenscales4512 Ah, yes, read about details of a battle from star tablets by priests and full of gaps. I mean why read them from biographer generals who Plutarch and Arrian (a general himself) use as source.... Btw, you can't even provde a quote and/or a link to the source? Oh, well...
I've always admired Pyrrhus and his understanding of the importance of reserves but it seems Alexander was aware too in this battle.
Wow. Take my breath away. So glad you guys made this video!
How the hell did Darius' army even manage to issue orders with that many different nationalities within it?
Very simple children of local Nobles from conquered territories were sent to be educated in Persia then they were sent back to their homelands some were from territories that were allowed to have self governance therefore when called upon they were willing to provide assistance and support.
Centuries of practice.
It turns out diversity was not Darius' strength.
@@mjc4073 the Persian Empire held together many different peoples for 200 years. That was no small achievement. Besides there is no Indication that the fegest of gaugamela was caused by a Lack of coordination of Contingents from different Nations. Besides, the peoples of modern Iran and centralasia which Features prominently in the Battle of gaugamela, had been culturally acquainted even before the Empire was founded.
@@mjc4073 255 years of having different cultures, and no issue, it has nothing to do with it on the other hand cowardly Darius running in front of his men does.
Been waiting for this for months!!! So much excitement I need my popcorn!
Waiting for Battle of Hydaspes 🔥🔥🔥🔥
finally I was waiting for this episode. thank you soo much.
Alexander the Great turned on God mode 😄😄
Well done, thank you for yet another high caliber production.
The eagle flying down Alexander's line... Somebody watched Oliver Stone's Alexander
That's not necessarily from the movie. That incident actually occurred. An eagle flew over the Macedonians and towards the Persians, which the Macedonians took as an omen.
Incredible video, helped me understand the battle and tactics so much better! Great job and thank you!
The greatest of them all 🇬🇷🇬🇷
Macedonia defeat United Greece
@@Euro.Patriot source: trust me bro
@@Euro.Patriot almost as if every Greek state at the time was at war with each other 😱😱😱
Hey guys please do me a favour. Please don't even reply to these illiterate morons who say that King Alexander wasn't Greek. There is not even an argument about that. The don't have to convince us but the whole historians community who disagree with them. There is undisputed evidence that King Alexander was Greek. They just keep saying these stupid things hoping that some one will actually believe them. They are born petty thieves and this is what they know to do better, steal. If they had the ability to create the would already give something to humanity, so since they are incapable of doing so for them it's easier to steal like rats!
Hey guys please do me a favour. Please don't even reply to these illiterate morons who say that King Alexander wasn't Greek. There is not even an argument about that. The don't have to convince us but the whole historians community who disagree with them. There is undisputed evidence that King Alexander was Greek. They just keep saying these stupid things hoping that some one will actually believe them. They are born petty thieves and this is what they know to do better, steal. If they had the ability to create the would already give something to humanity, so since they are incapable of doing so for them it's easier to steal like rats!
One of my favourite topic's!
Thank you Kings and Generals Team.
Alexander and his tutor were the two greatest Greeks in history. What a duo.
And his tutor's tutor?
I think he was the greatest!
once more kings and generals depicts just how brilliant Alexander the Great is