Alexander : a history of the origin and growth of the art of war from ...

ALEXANDER AND DARIUS. 385He may allow himself to exaggerate here as a harmless speciesof flattery to his hero, whom at other times he is not wontto overpraise. But the loss was enormous. The rule inall old battles is the same. The victors lose little ; the vanquishedare cut to pieces. The elephants and chariots wereall captured. Whatever the relative losses may have been, itis certain that the Persian army was dispersed, as it had beenat Issus.Doubtless the various detachments made their wayto their several homes, there being no head to keep them together.Darius collected some three thousand cavalry andsix thousand foot, and made for the interior.This battle is remarkable for the valor and sldll of thecommander of the victorious army, to whose constancy andintelligence the success was clearly due, as well as for thevacillation and cowardliness of the defeated monarch, despitesome most excellent work by liis subordinates. Never weredispositions better taken to resist the attacks of the enemy atall points ; never on the field were openings more quicklyseized ; never threatening disaster more skillfully retrievedthan here. However great the advance in battle tactics asthe ages roll on, the world will never see more splendid tacticsthan the day of Arbela affords us. Even had Dariusstood his ground, his lines would scarcely have resisted Alexander'sable combinations. Mere inert masses would haveavailed nothing. The Persians still relied on multitudes.Alexander was introducing new tactics. As Frederick taughtthe modern world how to march, and Napoleon showed thatnot masses but masses properly directed were of avail, so Alexanderfirst of all men taught that a battle was not to bewon by weight of masses, but by striking at the right placeand right time.Macdonald's column at Wagram was scarcelycomparable to Alexander's wedge at Arbela. For this wasthe first of its kind.