What were the main factors which contributed to Alexander conquering the Persians?

[Conan]

Hi guys,

I'm sure this has been discussed here numerous times, so I'm sorry if this seems like flogging a dead horse...

But how did Alexander do it?

Was it fault on the Persian side in the sense of to many levies in too big an army?

Or was it the genius of Alexander and/or the very experienced group of generals and support staff at his disposal, along with the high moral, very effective fighting machine left to him via his father?

After reading about the 3 main battles between Alexander and the Persians I do feel maybe a lot of luck on the side of Alexander had a lot to do with it :-)

[gamegeek2]

-Superior generalship
-Effective logistics (coast conquering to ensure he controlled all ports)
-More professional, well-drilled, and better equipped army
-Well-supported phalanx
-Powerful heavy cavalry arm

[MisterFred]

The main factor that contributed to Alexander conquering the Persians was his willingness to preserve the local ruling class and noblemen - they could remain important in the new realm, generally making room for the Macedonian influx rather than being replaced by them. This allowed the satrapies,walled cities, etc., to merely switch flags from Darius to Alexander without too much risk of being impoverished or killed by the new rulers. Also, don't forget Tyre. Tyre bet on their walls and greater strategic concerns requiring Alexander to leave before conquering them and ended up being thoroughly destroyed.

It's a classic pitch - on the one hand is the open hand of friendship and continued prosperity, in the other Alexander threatened with exceptionally brutal destruction and reprisal.

What I find more amazing than the Macedonian success on the battlefield is the fact that Alexander's victories won him wide swathes of the Persian empire without a difficult and time-consuming occupation and resistance. For that we can credit the Persian system of government, the recent political history of their civil wars, and Alexander's own well-considered political policies.

After all, if the western empire had been anything like the hard-fought morass that Baktria became for Alexander, he never would have made it as far as he did.

I'll leave the tactical discussion to a forum search or anyone who feels like weighing in. But I'll note that the Macedonians knew what they'd be facing, due to Greek mercenary and allied service in Persian territory (especially Athenians in Egypt, Xenophon).

[Brennus]

I agree with MisterFred the recent civil wars did contribute to a large extent and the well crafted Persian system of government played well into the hands of Alexander.

Personally I doubt Alexander's generalship, some of his decisions seemed very reckless and some of his decisions show a lack of concern for his troops wellbeing.

I still think he was a very good general, but not the best antiquity ever produced.

[plutoboyz]

Personally I doubt Alexander's generalship, some of his decisions seemed very reckless and some of his decisions show a lack of concern for his troops wellbeing.

yep, I think he is overatted. whack bunch of levies with Papa's toy? that nothing, compared to many other antiquity general.

[ARCHIPPOS]

Awwwww gee one could easily write a HUGE book on this subject.

[antisocialmunky]

Alcohol.

[Apázlinemjó]

Ambition.

[Megas Methuselah]

Women.