A Brief History
On October 1, 331 B.C., one of history’s most significant battles occurred: The Battle of Gaugamela in which Alexander the Great dealt a decisive defeat to the then largest empire the world had ever seen (at 3.08 million square miles the Persian Empire even surpassed the Roman Empire’s 2.51 million square miles!). Yet, modern representations of this key battle that ended the Persian Empire are not entirely accurate…
Digging Deeper
Also known as the Battle of Arbella, the Battle of Gaugamela was Alexander the Great’s biggest victory. It is ranked among The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World: from Marathon to Waterloo (1851) according to Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy and was the subject of a full episode of the History Channel’s Decisive Battles (2004). The epic battle was also featured as one of two major action sequences in Oliver Stone’s 2004 epic film Alexander. Well, sort of, at least.
In the actual historical battle, Alexander the Great of Macedon with 47,000 Greeks and Macedonians faced off against Darius III of Persia with 34,000-100,000 Persians and Greek mercenaries. The Persian forces included the famed Immortals from 300 and even war elephants. Despite controlling the world’s largest empire to that point in history and having a massive army that also included scythed chariots and archers, Alexander’s military genius and the superiority of the Greco-Macedonian phalanx with their long pikes ultimately won the day and dealt a decisive blow to one great empire, while serving as another step on the rise of another. To that end, the battle was a major shift in human history. Even though Alexander’s empire splintered just over a decade after his death, his successors still Hellenized large portions of ancient Europe, Asia, and Africa over the course of the next three centuries.
It is of course not surprising then that Stone would select such a monumental battle as an opening action showcase for his film. The thing is, however, that in recreating the battle, Stone plays a bit fast and loose with history. For example, not only are the war elephants not depicted in the cinematic version battle, when they do show up later in the movie, the Macedonians act as if they had never encountered them before, which of course is not historically correct. Moreover, Stone actually combines the events of the Battle of Gaugamela with what occurred in the earlier Battle of the River Granicus (334 B.C…yep, three years earlier!). Historically, Alexander was narrowly saved from death by Cleitus the Black. In the incident, Alexander was knocked down and about to be killed by a Persian when just then Cleitus severed the Persian’s arm. Nevertheless, Stone has this sort of near-death experience occur at Gaugamela.
Question for students (and subscribers): But should we be so hard on Stone? Well, here is the most frustrating thing about studying Alexander the Great: the ancient sources themselves are all over the place. For example, the Ancient sources estimate that the Persian army at Gaugamela numbered from 250,000 to 1,000,000. Moreover, they disagree on casualties. According to Arrian, Alexander lost 100 infantry and 1,000 cavalry, but Curtius Rufus claims they lost 300 infantry, while Diodorus Siculus puts the number at 500 infantry. It is even worse when we compare the alleged loss of Persian forces. While Curtius Rufus claims Persian lost 40,000 of its soldiers, Diodorus Siculus jumps the number up to 90,000 and this time Arrian has the most inflated number when he claims over 300,000 Persians were captured. How can they have such disparate statistics. Tragically, the original primary sources on Alexander have been lost to history. As such, what we have to work with come many years later. Both Arrian and Curtius Rufus were Roman historians writing in the first century A.D., over 300 years after the battle took place and even Greek historian Diodorus Siculus wrote in the first century B.C., still centuries after the battle. In other words, what you think you may know about Alexander the Great might not be true! Please let us know what you think in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Proof
We obviously recommend the aforementioned book by Creasy and History Channel documentary and Stone’s film is good for entertainment value as well.
For a good web source, see also http://www.stfrancis.edu/content/historyinthemovies/alexander.htm
For more on the importance of key moments in Alexander’s life, see Arnold Toynbee’s classic Some Problems of Greek History
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="21 http://crackedhistory.com/?p=21">128 Comments
I think that the battle of Granicus was the most interesting battle during Alexander’s career. This was the battle where Alexander almost died. If he had died who knows what today would be like.
All of Alexander’s battles were interesting to me, but if he would have died in the battle of Granicus, so much would be different from that point forward… And I doubt we’d be calling him Alexander the great.
If Alexander the Great would have lost this battle who knows how the world would be today. All the great Greek Philosophers possibly could have never made an impact on the world. We could still be in a very unknowledgeable world.
The combination of all his battles is what made him great. I
also think there is a much darker side to Alexander that we don’t know much
about. Just like George Washington, you never hear about some of the evil this
guy has done (killing some of his own troops). Think about it, it would take a
pretty big bad ass to do what people like George Washington and Alexander the
Great did!
The battle of Granicus for sure was the most interesting battle. It was a prolonged empire thanks to Cleitus. Too bad Alexander had to kill him.
I think that ultimately the way they depict historical scenes is very important. Though some do not realize it, the things that one watches influences them greatly. Today’s generation is very technological and they learn a lot of things off of the internet and movies. If historical scenes are depicted wrong in the cinema world, then it is very likely that kids will not know the truth of what happened.
I think that the battle of Granicus was the most interesting battle of Alexander’s career because he has done so much in this battle to get him where it did. He had an undefeated battle record. Upon his death, Alexander had conquered most of the world then known to the ancient Greeks.
I hate to sound so repetitive but I agree with most of the other commenters in saying that the battle of Granicus was one of his most interesting battles. Alexander was smart and showed true leadership skills, like he has in many other battles. If he would have died it could have upset the flow of how our world went with him still conquering land. Who knows where we would be at today.
This battle changed the history of the known world at that time. As much as I wish that historical era was more accurate, it is monumental that we have any artifacts and writings. Our current history of the last three hundred years, and even today is not completely accurate, and we have plenty of resources.
All of Alexander’s battles were interesting due to his great military mindset, however, the Battle of Granicus was the most interesting in my opinion. If Alexander would have died in that battle, history would obviously be a lot different. We could be referring to him as “Alexander Who Tried”.
Gaugamela was the most interesting battle for several reasons, one reason being that Alexander triumphed over numerically superior forces. Defeating the great Persian Empire, which for years in the aftermath of the Greco-Persian wars had toyed with the Greek peoples, on grounds that militarily favored Darius III must have been such a rush for Alexander, considering that he admired the Persians. Alexander’s military successes perhaps made him feel that he was as great as (or greater than) Cyrus.
His Battle of Gaugamela is probably the most interesting because he showed us his ability to completely annihilate the enemy.
TMK
I think his great battle was Battle of Hydaspes. I liked the strategies
he used with the river.
I think the battle at Taxilla was the most interesting to me. It’s a unique situation when Alexander and Porus (indian king) respect each other. I think it speaks a lot about Alexander’s goal to dominate the most land possible, even if he needs the help of others to do it.
I think the Battle of the Hydaspus River is the most interesting because of the strategy and tactics employed by Alexander. However, the siege of Tyre is one of my personal favorites because of the sheer audacity of Alexander. As for the most important, I believe that the Battle of Issus really did the most to secure Alexander’s hold on Asia and discredit Darius as the “Great King”.
In my opinion the battle of Granicus was not only the most interesting, but the most important for Alexander the Great. If it weren’t for Cleitus the black, Alexander would have been killed and his conquest would have been cut extremely short.
Tactics over numbers; with the enticement of a pincer and forcing a weakened right-center, Alexander managed a classic breakout (which Darius should have seen coming). Gaugamela wins for interesting, hands down.
I believe the battle of Gaugamela was the most impressive
battle of Alexander’s Career. Alexander’s army was not only outnumbered but, was also at a disadvantage fighting the Persians on an open battlefield. His victory over Darius the III marked the end of the Persian Empire and allowed for the spread of Greek culture.
Granicus is the most interesting to me because Alexander the Great almost died. History would have been dramatically different if the battle had a different outcome.
All of
Alexander’s battles seem to be fought on a large scale and with a lot of intensity.
But when it comes to the battle of Granicus it would be interesting to think
what would have happen if Alexander died and his conquest was ended. He would
never have been known as Alexander the Great.
I believe the Battle of Granicus is the most interesting of Alexander the Great’s military career, primarily because if he had died, the course of human history would have shifted in unknown directions and perhaps the world as we know it today would be very different.
I like the fact that Alexander’s army went up against a couple hundred elephants and endured an Indian Monsoon in the Battle of Jhelum and won only for Alexander’s army to give on him before reaching the next battle forcing him to turn back to Greece.
it is intersting to imagine what ways history would be shaped if alexander actually died at the battle of granicus.
It would be nice if every once in a while we got some historically accurate accounts from historians! History that we can count so we don’t have to doubt anything that we hear!
I agree with DaVante on Grancius being the most interesting just because you don’t know what would have happened if Alexander would have died.
I had actually see the documentary prior to this class so I had a lot of good information going in. It is an interesting artcile though.
Had Alexander died at Granicus I feel that he might not be as popular a war hero as he is today. Him winning these battles in a single decade and wrestling control of a huge area of land cemented his legacy a long with other greats like Napoleon.
One can only imagine what history and the world of today would be like if… Alexander the Great would have died at the Battle of the Granicus. — DAVID WARDLE
If Alexander did in fact die at Granicus who knows how that would have shaped history, certainly it would be drastically different for us today.
Interesting article! The things that we learn about other events in history may not be so accurate either, but it was interesting to know that Alexander the Great endured so much and if he were to die at the battle of Granicus then it would have definitely affected his career of conquering land.
I still marvel at the fact that Alexander and Macedonian army annihilated the Persians at the battle of Gaugamela. The Persians were the greatest empire known to man and yet it fell so quickly to an ambitious Macedonian King.
I am curious as to what had made Alexander the Great change in the following years since he has killed Cleitus the Black a few years after he had saved his life. Did the feelings he had for war overcome the feelings he had for his own people?
I wonder what would happen if Alexander the Great did not die as young as he did
This was an interesting article because it not only points out flaws in the movie Alexander which could have so simply been portrayed in the correct way, it tells us which facts are just guesses because there is no proof for certain evidence which has been lost to history.
I find the fact that they used war elephants extremely interesting because they don’t seem to be the normal animals used in war. I think it is amazing how much Alexander was able to conquer in just the thirteen years he was in power.
I think this was the most interesting of his battles for sure.
I find it amazing that Alexander’s army was able to take on such a great empire with relative ease. Alexander really does deserve to be considered one of the best commanders of all time.
It is hard to imagine how the world might have turned out if Alexander the Great had died in the Battle of Granicus, especially in most European countries given the large amount of Grecian influence that Alexander preserved in those areas as a result of his conquests. Would we still know about philosophers like Socrates or mathematicians like Euclid. A world without their ideas could be very different indeed.
What is most impressive about Alexander in my opinion was his victory over Darius. This is where i believe Alexander established himself as more than just a young king. He led his troops with fearlessness and was able to inspire them in a battle they were out numbered according to some sources 4:1. Had Alexander been able to raise his child it would have been interesting to see how his reign would have developed over time.
I am surprised that Alexander chose to fight in such a tough battle despite such terrible consequences.
It is quite impressive that Alexander the Great’s army inflicted more damage on the Persian army than casualties suffered. It makes me question if it was the level of skill or the specific strategic plans of Alexander’s army.
I feel like this happens a lot with history. Many accounts of events, or people, have been lost, destroyed, or unable to be deciphered. Who knows how much more we would know about history and people if these things were discovered. It also makes me question whether something really did happen or if the writer wrote a depiction of it. We go with what we have found and seems most consistent, although with Alexander the Great, seems as though there is not a consistency in regards to the battles. Also, it is interesting how we may have figured out where people were buried, when we cannot identify them. As long as we try and look at the records, then we can just assume. But sometimes I think, what if it’s not actually Napoleon buried there. However, with good records we can hypothesize pretty well where and who they are. With history, sometimes there are more questions than answers.
It is really amazing to see that the death tolls are so different in the separate accounts. Considering that each account was written many years later it is not surprising that the stories differ. Without the primary source however, the world may never know the full truth about this epic battle.
Interesting read. It would be interesting to see
what would happen if Alexander died in the battle.
I think the most interesting thing about this article is that the Battle of Gaugamela occurred on October 1st, which is also my birthday. Who would have thought that their birthday was on the same day that Alexander the Great defeated the Persian empire? Cool.
Alexander the Great is one of the most prominent names in the history of war. Had Alexander died in this battle, I’m not sure that he would have been as highly toughted as he is now. Under his reign, the Macedonians were able to establish control over the most land ever at that time. I still find it a shame that he died fairly early, especially from something as small as a fever. It makes me wonder that if he were to remain healthy and keep his power for more than thirteen years, what other legacies he would have been able to achieve.
I think it is interesting knowing that most of the stories we hear about Alexander might not even be true. I think Alexander was a great war hero, but I think most of his accomplishments were definitely blown way out of proportion.
I’ll bet that even if Alexander had lost the battle of guagamela, he would have still beat the Persians in the long run. The Macedonians were simply more driven and better soldiers.
I always think it’s hard for films to be accurate about battle scenes. Depending on the director’s vision, and how many battles they could have fit into an approximately 2 hour film, some minor battles would need to be cut. The film isn’t accurate, and the accounts available for the battle are not accurate either. But I think the battle in the movie that has the War elephants is also a deciecive battle, especially being fought near India.
Oliver Stone is a good director but again takes events out of context and with a great history in Alexander the Great, it should not be tampered with.
If Alexander has died at Granicus, I imagine the world of knowledge would be very different. We may not have had the same impact of Greek philosophy.
It was amazing what Alexander the Great was able to do in such a short reign. Who knows what history would have looked like without him.
It’s fascinating how much impact Alexander The Great had on history. All of the art, literature, and philosophy that would not have been created had he died at some point during his reign is mind boggling. It’s really amazing what we take for granted today and if you consider even small things that happened in each individual’s life and compare what could have happened if things worked out differently. Alexander The Great’s reign is a great message to never give up, because you never know how your personal actions can change the course of events throughout history.
I think that not all of the information is fully accurate or fully inaccurate. I believe that Alexander was a war hero, but I think that some of the stories are made more fiction in order to make his legacy that much better.
Its unbelievable how much Alexander the Great accomplished in a short period of time. It was very interesting to read about the different battles.
Within Alexander the greats life spand I do agree that Guatemala was one of his most successful battles. But then i believe all of his battles are just as amazing because he was Alexander the Great and conquered a lot before his death at a young age.
Amazing how Alexander the Great’s Greek army killed so many of the Persians even though the size of the army’s was so lopsided. It goes to show how great of a military leader Alexander the Great was.
Who taught Alexander how to be a great military leader? He conquered so many lands. It had to have been amazing.
It seems movies and media trump real history sometimes and then it bleeds into people’s thinking of how those events actually happened. This occurs all the time and it shows how people do not do their research after learning about something.
If Alexander would have died, the state of art philosophy, etc. would be so different today.
It is interesting to see the discrepancies in the numbers. However I don’t think we should be so hard on Stone, after all he was making a film which as we know are hardly ever completely correct historically.
This war seemed to be the most interesting because they even used war elephants. It is unfortunate that Hollywood does not portray these animals to be in the combat. Hollywood tends to give a very misleading viewing of history.
It is sad that films, such as this, are made so historically inaccurate. A lot of people who would not know the story otherwise, base the information they know off of the movie, which messes with their historical facts.
Even if the battle casualties are off, it shouldn’t take away the accomplishment of Alexander the Great.
This battle was very interesting to learn about and it was one of the most crucial battles in Alexander’s career
I love those true underdog stories when the completely outnumbered army beats down on the much greater one. Goes to show how intelligent the commander is.
This is always the problem with human history. It is essentially guessing and estimating unless someone was actually there and recording every moment, which is an uncommon occurrence. It is sad to know that for one of the most decisive victories in history, we only have a fraction of the information we need. But at least the entire battle is not lost to history, that would be the true tragedy!
I think it’s over-dramatic to say we would would not have a knowledgeable world (as read in the comments below). No doubt this event was significant but I don’t believe as important as we may classify it.
It is unfortunate that much of Americans’ history knowledge comes from movies, because they are hardly ever accurate and it gives viewers the wrong perception of important events in history.
Who knows what the world would be like if Alexander has actually died at Granicus.
Historical inaccuracy may drive many, including myself much of the time, but if we were to be truly accurate of phalanx warfare of that time then it would be alot less cinematic I think. Battle scenes would consist of hours of shieldwalls, watching soldiers subbing in and out on the front lines combating exhaustion as much as the enemy. War through-out the ages, even the MOUT operations that make up much of the Iraqi War, is much different than what Hollywood and the old fables actually depict.
In my opinion I believe if he would of lost that battle who knows what the world would know of him as today or what the world would even be like today. Also, the different records of the amount of calvary and infantry aggravate me too.
It’s amazing how Alexander the great and his army killed so many Persians with the odds of the two armies being totally loopized. Just shows who was a better milltary leader then. Also if Alexander the great died during this battle I wonder how much we know about him and what type of world we live in today without his influence on part of the world
i liked the article i think this battle was very interesting to me Granicus is where Alexander died and the whole story was exciting it so many elements to that it kept me wanting to know more and more
It makes you wonder what kind of difference it would have made if Alexander died during that battle.
When it comes to Hollywood, they just tend to take the base idea of a battle or historical time and create their version of what happened. They justify it by just saying “well no one knows what happened for sure” which is relatively true since there are no remaining primary sources on some events.
Alexander the Great’s battles are all significant. If Alexander died in the battle of Granicus, history would be different. Our world today would be different as well. I am really curious to know what would be different about our world today if Alexander did die in that battle. It is crazy to think that just one battle could make our world that much different.
While the cinematic version of the battle of Granicus should have included elephants, it is still pretty cool the way the filmmakers depict the elephants later in the movie.
I find all of Alexander’s battles very interesting and if he would have died at Granicus, then i think it would have changed everything that happened after that point.
It is truly amazing how a few moments can have such a big impact on history. What if Cleitus had not rescued Alexander?
I find that Alexander was very lucky to not have died in the battle of Granicus. If he would have died he would have lost the battle meaning there more than likely would have been a lot of difference in the history stream. I Also believe that Alexander would not have made the history books as much as he does today.
okok
Alexander was an amazing leader. He might have been a little power and land hungry, but he had a lot of incredible victories. He is very lucky to not have died in Granicus.
It makes you think about what would have been different if Alexander hadn’t survived the battle. I can take a guess and say that a lot of things would be very different.
When looking at the casualties, no matter what the actual numbers were, it was an impressive win for Alexander. Looking at those given numbers Alexander’s men had a casualty rate of 1 to every 80 Persians.
Gaugamela was probably Alexander’s most significant battle where his military brilliance truly shined out.
This battle is so incredibly interesting. I personally find this battle interesting because Alexander almost lost his life, had he actually died, history would be very different. It is also incredible that this battle took down such a large empire.
It’s frustrating how different the sources were. As much as I didn’t like the movie, I gotta give credit to stone through working through the various different stories to try to make a good story of what happened. Although you could also say he just created another unreliable source as well…
Although Alexander was victorious in his battles in India, they seemed more damaging and had he continued on it would have been interesting to see if he would have continued to be victorious after Guagamela. Also Alexander and his armies reaction when he did first see war elephants of the Indian battles.
I always find it fascinating that Alexander was saved from death by the very man that he ended up killing in a drunken rage. The Battle of Guagamela is certainly one of the greatest battles in history because it was this battle, in my opinion, that shaped the image of Alexander, and showed his true power. In this battle he was able to conquer the greatest empire at that time, the Persian empire.
I think it is interesting to think what would have happened if Alexander died in the battle. The history of Alexander would be so different.
Alexander’s military genius is shown when he is out numbered by so many but still dominates the battle field. He never losses that many men when going up against massive armies.
The Battle of Granicus was definitely the most defining battle of Alexander’s conquest. He nearly died there and would have been a shame since he would not have become an all time great leader.
The world would have been a much different place in Alexander would have died at the battle of Granicus.
I think that the fact the war elephants did not show in the beginning of the film/war that it takes away from the full affect of the greatness of Alexander’s army. I think the cinematic version would have been better if the war elephants were incorporated sooner.
I think this battle is one of the most well known and eventful battles of Alexander’s lifetime. This is mostly because of how close Alexander came to dying. To think about how different his legacy would have been if he had passed at this battle is remarkable.
If historical sources disagree with how many troops were at each battle or were lost, that can impact Alexanders dominant legacy to a certain extent and shows how other sources might also have exaggerated their outcomes as well.
I think the most interesting aspect of ancient battles has to be the credibility of the death totals. Since historians recorded these battles hundreds of years later they may have exaggerated kill counts, and that does not even factor in the soldiers who died later of their wounds.
I think the most interesting aspect of these battles has to be the kill count totals. Since historians recored these battles down hundreds of years later it is almost impossible to know how many died. Not to mention the fact that soldiers who died of their wounds later might not be counted.
If Alexander would have died then things would have developed so differently.
Gaugamela was the final fight of Alexander Vs. Darius III, and that alone makes it monumental. The scope of the battle is also unheard of; if we take the sources at face value, that is.
After defeating the Persian Empire, you have to think that Alexander’s troops began to loose their motivation. Alexander felt that he needed to continue but could his legacy be greater if he stayed and ruled. It is a question worth asking.
It is sad that most of the time, movies that depict historical events aren’t always true to what really happened, or what historians think happened. Even though history is such a great topic to learn about, many of the information gets lost which results in not knowing the full story.
This was a very decisive victory for Alexander the Great. Defeating the Persians and having control over the largest empire in the world at that time must have been one of his most glorious achievements. Maybe he should have stopped his conquest at this point instead of continuing to fight on. His army only lost morale after this battle, so maybe it would have been wise of him to head back to Macedonia after he had conquered the Persians.
The battle of Gaugamela is a true depiction of how great Alexander’s army and battle strategy was. Defeating the largest empire in the world under the Persians was a great feat and is deserving of one of the most decisive battles in history.
If Alexander had died in this battle, how would the outlook and expansion of his empire change? Alexanders want for more, ultimately did his army more harm then good
I cut Stone some slack with some of his interpretations, but it just seems like he went with the least realistic accounts at every chance he got. Nevertheless, I think the Battle of Gaugamela is the most important of Alexander’s campaign through the East.
This was definitely the most iconic of Alexander’s battles. This is the one that truly capped off his reputation as an all out winner. His brilliance on the battlefield truly showed through here as well. His on the fly strategy, while fighting among his fellow men is unprecedented.
I always find it interesting how the numbers of dead can be so vastly different depending on the source. It really shows how biased much of history is – but by no means degrades how interesting it is!
Overall, it is tough to be hard on Stone considering the vague and conflicting details of the original source material. Considering many of the primary sources were likely loose with factual accuracy for the sake of telling a good story, Stone’s sins may be more easily forgiven.
I was most unimpressed with the 2004 Alexander movie. I actually preferred the 1956 Alexander the Great movie. That’s saying something.
Unbelievable the death tolls could vary so much. I’m sure our view on how decisive battles were would change if we knew the real death tolls.
It is hard to be accurate about the life of Alexander because these sources were from 300 years after his life. If only the primary/original sources were still around would we know the true life story of Alexander. But, it is shocking that even after 300 years, these sources could get the casualty numbers off by so much.
I wish we had more primary sources.
It’s crazy to think how many times in History that a situation like this battle took place where a great ruler was almost killed. Crazy how one small change could alter all of history.
The proof you supplied really makes your article credible
I feel as if battling a war elephant would be one of the most terrifying experiences. Elephants are my favorite animal, but they are very strong beasts that could easily flatten or impale almost any enemy that stands in its way.
We face a problem that we generally do when looking through history. Almost nothing was recorded at the time it happened, and managed tomorrow ur survive today. We lost many historical documents in the fire, at the library at Alexandria.
All of alexanders battles are very interesting, he has alot of the same tactics but adapts to his enviornment so well
When I was younger I thought that war elephants were created out of cinematic creative liberties and that they weren’t a historical aspect of ancient warfare. I was pleasantly surprised to see that they were in fact used. Though, when seeing the animals slain in the movies, I was upset. I love animals and elephants themselves are one of my favorites.
I cannot believe that even though the Persian forces were controlling the world’s largest empire to that point in history, and had a massive army that included scythed chariots and archers. Did not match Alexander’s military genius and the superiority of the Greco-Macedonian phalanx with their long pikes, what ultimately won the day and dealt a decisive blow to one great empire. That just proves what a great leader he really was.
Really wish records were better kept through the ages so we could get a better idea of the numbers in these battles instead of large ranges.
I wish we could have a better idea of the actual numbers since the gap is so large
had Alexander end up dying at granicus it probably would ave changed the whole history and all that followed after. he wouldnt have left such an impression
I wish we had a better understanding of the numbers involved.
I wish we had a better estimate of the numbers of soldiers in the battles because there is such a large gap.
regardless of the true numbers of casualties we still know the ultimate outcome! I have watched stone’s movie he does elaborate and mix a few things up like the battles… but also things with hebastean.
Had Alexander died at the battle of Granicus, there is no way his legacy would be what it is today. Imagine a world where you haven’t heard of Alexander the Great