What Was The Life Of Alexander The Great Really Like_ _ Great Lives _ Odyssey (HQ)

Over 300 years before the birth of Christ, a 22-year-old man embarked on a meteoric campaign of conquest. By its triumphant end, he was undisputed master of an empire that stretched from the Nile to the Indus. To his countrymen, he was the embodiment of glory, a heroic warrior in the classical mold. To his soldiers, an inspiring leader who shared the bitter hardships of constant campaigning with unflagging energy. To his courtiers, he was a descendant of the Olympian gods, worthy of worship as a divine being. In the unfailing pursuit of his destiny, he would shape the history of the world. His name was Alexander. To posterity, he would be Alexander the Great. Alexander the General, Alexander the Builder, Alexander the Statesman, Alexander the God. Behind the achievements and legends was a restless young man, driven by an obsessive, boundless ambition. Alexander the Man was a complex, at times contradictory figure, capable of incredible generosity and savage cruelty. He would plan a campaign in meticulous detail and then risk everything on a do-or-die charge. Alexander was probably one of the greatest generals of ancient times, if not the greatest general. He managed to combine extreme youth, he was only 32 or 33 when he died, with some of the greatest feats that you can imagine a general in those days could ever hope to achieve. To understand Alexander's ambitions and accomplishments, we must first understand the country of his birth and the land of which it was part. The Greek Empire was centered around the city-states of Thebes, Sparta, and especially Athens. Athens was the cultural center, but its thriving business as a trading port and they expanded their influence around the Aegean Sea into Asia Minor, where they founded settlements and towns. Gradually, over the centuries, Athens had come to dominate its neighbors. Its democratic government was taken as a model for the world. Its philosophers and artists were an inspiration to all. Although they would never admit it openly, Athenian civilization was the cultural pinnacle to which other Greek states aspired. But beside the positive things in life, there was also the reverse side of the coin. Athens had often become embroiled in a series of bitter wars. The most notable of these was the Great Peloponnesian War against Sparta. The cost of that particular war had been defeat, dwindling wealth, loss of manpower, and political subjugation. Although, as it turned out, this setback was only temporary, it produced a situation ripe for exploitation by outsiders. The people to exploit it were the Persians. Under the rule of the godlike Great King, the Persian Empire's influence sprawled from Egypt to India. The Great King's territories were divided into dependencies, overseen by a member of the royal family or nobility. The Great King's authority was absolute. His royal palaces lavishly furnished, and the royal treasuries packed with fabulous wealth. The Great King used the disunity among the Greek city-states to expand his domination of Asia Minor, including the Athenian settlements on the Aegean coast. These intrusions were bad enough, but the Athenians had a long historical cause to resent the Persians. One hundred and fifty years before Alexander, the great Persian king Xerxes had swept through mainland Greece. Athens had fallen, its people were humiliated, and its temples desecrated. Although Xerxes was eventually defeated, the sacking of their city left the Athenians with a historical desire for revenge. But revenge needed strength. Real strength demanded a united Greece, because only then could they elect a captain general to lead their armies to liberate Asia Minor. By the year of Alexander's birth, 356 BC, it looked as if a suitable candidate had appeared. The great man was Alexander's father, Philip II of Macedonia. Discover the past with exclusive ancient history documentaries and ad-free podcasts presented by world-renowned historians from History Hit. Watch them on your smart TV or on the go with your mobile device, download the app now to explore everything from the wonders of Pompeii to the rebellion of Boudicca and the mysteries of prehistoric Scotland. Immerse yourself in the captivating stories of this remarkable era by signing up via the link in the description. By a series of diplomatic treaties, intermarriages, military victories, and when necessary political murders, King Philip had united all Macedonia under his rule. From his royal palace at Perla, he had begun a process of modernization within the Macedonian army. His officers were drawn from the nobility of the Macedonian highlands. Rugged, warlike, and fierce, these tribal leaders were experienced fighting men. Macedonia had long been a frontier between civilized Greece and the world beyond. Riding, hunting, drinking, and fighting were the main interests of its tribal rulers. To the sophisticated Athenians, Macedonian society was savage, feudal, uncultured, and primitive. Its laws and religions were barbaric by their standards. Curiously enough, to the Greeks, who lived of course in the south of Macedonia, he was a barbarian. He spoke Greek with an accent, as anyone did who was outside Attica and the Peloponnese. And yet Macedonia that he ruled was very wealthy because he had the gold mines there and he had silver mines. But King Philip was able to mold the raw material of the Macedonian army into a formidable professional fighting force. The military innovations of Philip of Macedon have their roots in a period when he was a teenager. He was exiled from his own country and he spent a period of several years in Thebes, the main city of Boeotia, in the company of Theban generals who had become, who had made Thebes the most important fighting force in the whole of Greece in the first part of the fourth century before Christ. And here in Thebes, the young Philip learnt the new techniques of war, the benefits of training of standing armies, the benefits of uniform equipment for all members of the fighting force, and the benefits of a fighting force which was bonded by close personal ties, so that one man fought beside another, did not yield in the slightest while his partner was still alive. When he returned to his own Macedonia and was in position to seize power from his rivals in the Macedonian royal family, he started to put the principles he had learnt as a teenager into practice. He organised the companions, the traditional supporters of the Macedonian king. He made sure that they had consistent armour and weapons. He made sure they trained regularly. He made sure they had loyalty to him and no other. The annual levies of troops from the population of Macedonia were again organised. 350 years after Alexander's death, Plutarch, the Greek historian, carefully studied surviving documents from Alexander's reign to write an account of his age. Of the birth of Alexander, he wrote, Philip had just taken the city of Trachlea when he received three messages. First, that Parmenio, his general, had defeated the Illyrians in a great battle. Second, that a horse of his had won a race in the Olympic Games. Third, that his son Alexander had been born. He was overjoyed at the news, and even more so when his soothsayer told him that a son who was born at the same time as three victories would be invincible. To the young Alexander growing up at Pala, stories of his father's continuing military successes must have been both an inspiration and a challenge. His tutors placed great emphasis on the development of martial prowess and physical endurance. Alexander and his companions would spend many long hours learning such skills. Already the firstly competitive streak that would spur his ambition on was clear in Alexander's behavior. Only victory was good enough. King Philip wished his son to have the culture of an educated Athenian. Alexander learned to sing and play the lyre. His love of music would later sustain him on campaigns. He learned to read, and his love of poetry would later be reflected in his generous patronage of artists and writers. Alexander also learned the art of public speaking. Again he learned quickly and well. He would be equally at home yarning with his soldiers or formally receiving foreign dignitaries. To complete his education his father even hired a pupil of Plato's Academy. Philip had seen how self-willed his son was, and that although it was difficult to influence him by force, he could be persuaded to do his duty by an appeal to his reason. So he made a point of trying to guide his son by persuasion rather than orders. He considered that the job of educating his son was far too important for the ordinary run of teachers. It needed, in Sophocles' words, guidance and restraint. So he summoned Aristotle. Aristotle was a philosopher with an enthusiastic and wide-ranging intellect. Alexander's natural curiosity was expanded by his tutor. It was to stay with him until his death. Besides his intellectual progress, Aristotle was to be responsible for an even more significant influence on his young pupil. Aristotle introduced Alexander to Homer's epic poem of the siege of Troy, the Iliad. For Alexander, this work had special significance. Achilles, one of his heroes, was an ancestor of his through his mother's family. Alexander identified strongly with this warrior adventurer. Achilles chose a short glorious life and eternal fame over a long peaceful life and obscurity. Throughout his own short glorious life, Alexander would seek to emulate him. He even slept with a copy of Homer's epic under his head on campaign. At the age of 16, Alexander's life changed forever. Infuriated by a plot between Athens and Thebes against Macedonia, King Philip prepared to go on the offensive. Alexander was entrusted with governing Macedonia in his father's absence. Sensing the moment to be right, some of the powerful border tribes in Macedonia rebelled. How could a mere boy hope to subdue them? But they had chosen the wrong boy. Alexander speedily gathered a small strike force. He marched against them before they could organize their troops, and he defeated them. Emulating his father, he established a military outpost and named it not in honor of his father, but of himself, Alexander. It was to prove an ominous fortune. Despite the young man's vanity and pleased by his son's effort, King Philip educated his son to command of the Macedonian heavy cavalry. It was to prove an inspired move. At the Battle of Charonea, Alexander led a thunderous charge at the crucial point of the By the defeat of the Athenian and Theban forces ranged against them, Philip finally united the city-states under his captain generalship. With his borders secured and his enemies at home defeated, Philip now prepared for a more ambitious project, the long-awaited campaign against the hated Persians. As a great king, Philip was blessed with many of the analytical skills which were crucial to survive in those far-off days. Consequently, the young Alexander's military successes and obvious ambition did not produce blind admiration from his father. Philip became convinced that if he marched against Persia, his son might usurp him at home. Equally, Alexander was terrified his father would confer the succession on a future son and deny him his divine right. His mother, Queen Olympias, sided jealously with her son. Philip decided to put her aside and take a new one. At a banquet, at which father and son drank heavily, insults were exchanged and swords drawn. Alexander and his mother left Pella for exile. King Philip, as promised, dispatched his army into Asia Minor, but Alexander was not with them. Deprived of political influence, he could only wait nervously from his unhappy exile. Worse still, the king had taken a new wife who gave birth to a son. Alexander's worst fears seemed to be about to come true. In 335 BC, with his final preparations for his Persian campaign in place, Philip arranged a marriage for his daughter. Naturally, Alexander and his mother were invited to attend the extravagant wedding celebration. It must have been a fraught reunion, but none could have expected the outcome, with the possible exception of two people. On the second day of the marriage festivities, King Philip was brutally assassinated by one of his own bodyguards. In the chaos that followed, members of the army stepped forward, proclaiming that the king was dead and the young Alexander be proclaimed king. Alexander was duly declared king by the army. There is certainly no sufficient evidence to demonstrate in a court of law that Alexander connived with his mother in order to murder his father, though of course one wouldn't expect that because we don't have a court of law that can get at the evidence. The only reason for supposing that Alexander may have connived with his mother is that Alexander and his mother both certainly derived advantage from Philip being killed at the time when he was, because Philip, just two years before his murder, had married a new wife, and that new wife was likely to produce a new heir to the throne, and so Alexander himself was, as it were, a declining asset. Once the alternative heir to the throne came to be as old as Alexander now was, it was likely enough that Alexander would be removed from his current position as the expected heir. So although there is some ground for supposing that it might have been to Alexander's advantage to ensure with his mother that his father was killed, there is no evidence whatever that he was actually involved, though of course it is perfectly easy to argue that as king, as soon as Philip was killed, Alexander was perfectly capable of getting rid of any evidence that there might have been. Once the news of the king's murder spread, the delicate peace he had engineered swiftly collapsed. Widespread insurrections followed as the various states tried to break free. Alexander was swift to march against the rebel states. With astonishing speed, he outmaneuvered his enemies. Wisely, they gave in and recognized his authority. Nonetheless, as soon as he moved north, Athens and Thebes once more plotted against him. The people of Thebes rose up in revolt against their Macedonian garrison. Furious at their treachery, Alexander showed for the first time his ruthless iron streak. Determined to teach the city-states the price of continued resistance, he decided to make an example of one of them. The city of Thebes would suffer the fate that had befallen the city of Troy. It would die by fire and sword. But it was no easy victory. The Thebans fought bravely and well, but their courage brought them no favors from the resolute Alexander. The prisoners were massacred where they stood, and the city was stormed, plundered, and burned to the ground. Alexander's main aim in this was to terrify the rest of the Greek states into submission. In this, he succeeded. War, after all, is merely an extension of politics by other means. As for the people of Thebes, he spared only the priests. The rest, some 20,000, were sold into slavery. The dead numbered 6,000. Never again would Alexander's authority be challenged in Greece. Now that Thebes was merely a smoking ruin, Athens quickly saw sense and paid homage to Alexander. From now on, Alexander would have the tacit support of the city-states as well as their undying hatred. However, with the city-states subdued for the present, Alexander turned his considerable talent to the Persian enterprise. It was to be his life's work. Alexander, we call him the great, and he really earned that title, when you consider he was born in 356 BC. At the age of 20, in 336 BC, when his father Philip was assassinated, he took over Macedonia as the king, and he took over Philip's cause, Philip II, his father's cause, fighting against Persia. Alexander brought the Greeks together in what one might call a holy war against Persia. And it is quite incredible that a young man could have such a charisma that elderly generals would follow him, and they did, and his soldiers. His officers were eager to march in a crusade to liberate Asian Greece and avenge the humiliation of Athens. But none of them could have guessed how far their king would take them in the pursuit of his glory. He would lead them past the edge of the known world. He was, if anything, he was a great attacker. Always he was attached to attack, attack, no matter what the dangers, he would always take these tremendous risks. Alexander's grand strategy was straightforward and direct. His army was compact, mobile, well-trained, and well-led. His enemy's territory and resources of manpower were vast. Alexander could succeed only if he could lure the Persian army into battle on his turn. If he could kill or capture the great king Darius, he could force the succession in his favor, and the Persian empire would be his. With it went the advent of wealth and power. The prospect was daunting, but Alexander never doubted his ultimate victory, a victory which was to flow from his undoubted military genius. Alexander's campaign against the Persian king Darius was a model of precision, sprinkled with innovation and a great slice of luck. Granicus, Alexander outmaneuvered the Persians by a daring night march and river crossing. He then defeated them by tricking them into weakening their center, and then leading a wedge of cavalry into them at the decisive moment. At the battle of Issus, after marching 70 miles in two days in heavy rain, Alexander faced an enemy in a strong defensive position. He personally led a magnificently successful charge against Darius' left wing, and then fought desperately to reach King Darius through the melee. As Alexander's army held on for their very survival, their leader bludgeoned, fought, and hacked his way towards the golden chariot of the great king. Darius, in danger of capture, bolted from the field, and as news of his flight spread, his army was routed. The crowning military victory of Alexander's career was to be fought on October 1st, 331 BC, on the plain of Gargamela. Outnumbered in cavalry by almost five to one, Alexander was able to force Darius to attack him where he wanted. Gargamela shows some of Alexander's great strengths as a general, and perhaps also some of his weaknesses. He has at least one major advantage when he goes into battle. The Persian troops have been kept on guard overnight so that the Greek troops are at least fresher than the Persians. He has, however, two major disadvantages. First of all, he's heavily outnumbered by the Persians, and this leads to the danger of his troops being outflanked and could be fatal. Secondly, the Persians are going to try to rely on their side chariots to go through the centre of the Greek line. Alexander had to solve both these problems, and he does it brilliantly. First of all, he shows his technical acumen by putting flank guards at the side of his armies, so that he can't be outflanked. He also has a second line of infantry behind his first line, who can turn around 180 degrees and face the rear if the Persian troops do get around the sides of his army to try to attack from the rear. As regards the side chariots, he solves this problem by having his troops open their lines as they come through and using specialised javelin throwers to pick them off after they've gone through the lines. However, this only solves his negative problems and doesn't actually help win the battle. To do this, he launches an attack on the right wing. Darius counters this by sending troops from his centre to that part of the battlefield. Alexander typically uses this as his opportunity to attack personally. He leads his cavalry and other troops towards the centre of Darius's line. Darius flees at this point and Alexander pursues him. This shows the man's courage and does show some of the strengths of a battlefield commander, but also shows his weakness, because as he pursues Darius, Alexander's own left wing is being surrounded and is in danger of being wiped out. It's only the fact that the Persian troops find out that their leader has flown and that he's fled the battlefield which leads them to disengage, which saved Alexander's left wing and ultimately won the day. Plutarch later recalled the battle. Alexander spotted his enemy behind ranks of his royal cavalry, drawn up in a deep formation. Darius towered clearly above the men massed to guard the lofty chariot he stood in, but the men panicked at the awesome sight of Alexander charging at them and broke and scattered. The bravest stood fast and were slaughtered in heaps. In this moment of extreme danger, with the horrors of battle all around him, the king abandoned his chariot and his armour, mounted his horse and rode away. Alexander's generalship at Gaugamela is not very different from his generalship in most of his major battles. Most of his major battles were fought in ways in which the Macedonian phalanx was designed to keep the enemy in play, while the Macedonian cavalry was able to puncture the enemy line at points which the general, Alexander himself, believed to be particularly appropriate in the given circumstances of the battle. And so the battle began by the two sides reaching each other and conducting standard infantry warfare. What Alexander was able to do in this and in all his battles was, as cavalry commander, to observe the precise point in the battle at which it would be advantageous to use the cavalry charge. Alexander appears to have done it extremely effectively in all his battles, his land battles, Gaugamela included. Gaugamela was more difficult than many of the others precisely because this was the major force of the Persian king and it was fought in the heartlands of the Persian empire. But Alexander was still able to exploit his marvellous capacity to observe the right moment for cavalry attack. That's what he did at Iwa. This great generalship and an almost insatiable appetite for conquest took Alexander and his troops all over the known world. To North Africa, through great deserts and on to Egypt, were already ancient when Alexander stood and pondered in their shadow. He may well have been thinking of the problems associated with siege warfare. Alexander's genius was not confined to the battlefield. He was also an expert at laying siege to fortified cities. This art demanded great organizational abilities to combine the efforts of engineers, pioneers, soldiers, and in the case of ports, the navy, to successfully blockade and reduce a garrison. At the siege of Tyre, despite strong natural obstacles, well-constructed defences, and dogged resistance, Alexander faced all difficulties with imagination. The island fortress of Tyre was thought impregnable. In a seven-month siege, Alexander assaulted it by land and sea, blockaded it, and constructed a causeway to connect it to the mainland. Despite atrocious weather, which scattered his ships and savage counterattacks from his enemies, Alexander's exhausted men eventually battered their way in. As usual, their king was among the first over the wall. But such conspicuous personal leadership had its own price. In the course of his career, Alexander was badly wounded nine times, and on several occasions his life was only saved by the swift actions of his friends. In his drive to emulate Achilles, he never flinched from risking his person in combat. In battle, he always tried to search out the enemy commanders and engage them, often with deadly results for his opponents. Alexander was never afraid to inspire his men by leading from the front. Inevitably, he suffered through the thrill of being where the danger was. period. The sheer abilities of this young man, who was only going to die at the age of 33, would you believe? He was in the greatest part of the world, as it was then known. He took this army of his troops, of a very small number, basically, 40,000, 50,000, various numbers, and he was facing enemies, literally hundreds of thousands of opponents. And yet he was going to win, win, and win. I wouldn't say he's been the first great soldier of this particular period. He was a certain one who really seized upon the whole idea of propaganda and building his own history as he wanted it to be. On campaign, Alexander took a staff of writers, historians, and poets with him. After all, a new Achilles needed a new Homer. His efforts certainly worked. The stories of his youth and his campaigns kept his memory alive. But the legend of Alexander has made the real Alexander an elusive figure, particularly as each episode of Alexander's life was recorded and possibly finished to show a link with past heroes and a promise of future glories. One of the most famous and enduring stories of the boy Alexander was his taming of the wild stallion who would be his favorite horse for 20 years, Eusephus. The young Alexander watched a succession of riders being thrown by a black horse whose face was marked with a white flag. Only Alexander had the ingenuity to notice that the horse was terrified of its own shadow. Alexander turned Eusephus towards the sun, soothed it, and then leapt on its back. In recognition of his skill, the horse was presented to him and a long association begun. Eusephus carried Alexander across desert, mountain, and river, and through his greatest battle. When the old war horse eventually succumbed, Alexander named an Indian city Eusephus in memory of his faithful, fearless companion. It was by such stories that biographers of Alexander, such as Plutarch, tried to explain his genius. Plutarch recorded that on the occasion of a visit by Persian ambassadors, Alexander talked freely with them and completely captivated them, not only by his pleasant manner, but because he did not bore them with childish questions, but inquired about how far they had traveled, the conditions in Persia, the character of their king, his experience in war, and the military strengths of the Persian army. The ambassadors left convinced that King Philip's celebrated astuteness was nothing in comparison to his son's inquiring intellect and grand ambitions. Other incidents keenly recorded by his biographers supported the belief held by many of Alexander's contemporaries that Alexander was marked out by the gods. Plutarch recorded an account of one such famous event at Gordium in the ancient palace of King Midas. Here Alexander first saw the celebrated Gordium knot. By the legend, the fates had declared that whoever untied this knot would become ruler of the world, but the fastenings were coiled around each other in such a cunning way that the ends were hidden. No man had ever succeeded in untying the knot. Alexander was perturbed as to what he should do, but as a man of action, he soon undid the tangle by slicing through it with his sword. Ancient prophecies, strange omens, miraculous occurrences. As Alexander's conquests progressed and his fame grew, so did the belief among his enemies that he was godlike. Alexander's personal belief in his divinity became an issue that would divide his followers. To his fellow Macedonians, it was an excuse for him to distance himself from them. To the Egyptians, who enthroned him as their pharaoh, his divinity was obvious by his victories. For a successful young man, weighed down by such tribulations and convinced from birth of his right to rule, he was remarkably astute. Constantly surrounded by flattering tongues, the temptations towards rash behavior must have been great. But Alexander was always careful to observe religious protocol and tradition. As he passed through the Persian Empire, Egypt and India, he always protected local temples and honored local gods. Behind his courtesy, there were other reasons to woo the support of priests and nobles in his conquered domain. He was a marvelous statesman because he was going across territories which for centuries had fought against each other. He bound them together by his statesmanship, by being very clever, in many instances leaving the people who were previously in charge, if you like, to run the shop. Because they trusted him and he trusted them and that was the key point to it. And not least, by his coinage, the coins of Alexander the Great, you might call the first international coinage. One of the immediate results of Alexander's victory over Darius at Gorgomela was that he was able to take control of the royal treasuries. Within the palaces and temples of Babylon, Persepolis and Susa, Alexander discovered fabulous wealth. For a general who had started his campaign with enough funds to sustain it for less than a month, the change in his fortunes was incredible. The great king's wealth was used to pay off Alexander's Greek soldiers and then rehire them at huge expense. Despite this, Alexander was still rich enough to indulge in other projects. Like his father, Alexander measured the extent of his territory with settlements named after himself. Alexandropolis was the first but the most famous would be the city of Alexandria, built on an Isthmus by the Nile Delta. Constructed in the shape of a Macedonian cloak, it was planned on a massive scale with broad boulevards, marketplaces, palaces and temples. It was claimed that Alexander himself designed the fortified walls. Alexandria ensured his immortality. But with the restless energy that typified his life, Alexander had moved on almost as soon as building began. Alexandria, Alexandria the Great you might call it, which was the first of his great foundations on the north coast of Egypt, that became one of the most sensitive, one of the most, one of the greatest centers of learning of the ancient world. And there were some 22 or 23 other cities founded throughout the then known world named after Alexander. But Alexandria itself gives us so much that we have today. We talk about museums, we talk about libraries. The great library at Alexandria was famed throughout antiquity. Scholars went there to research. The Museion, the home of the muses, gives us the origin of our word museum. Restlessness was a trait that never left him. It could be argued that he was more interested in conquering new territories than ruling the ones he had. It was certainly true that having embarked on the Persian campaigns, Alexander's interest in the narrow-minded politics of Greece waned. He exhibited no sentimental attachment to his birthplace, and this was clear to his subordinates. As Plutarch wrote, he believed if the traditions could mix and fuse together, his role would be more established when he went far away, as it would be based on goodwill, not force. For this reason he selected 30,000 Persian boys and ordered they should learn Greek and Macedonian battle tactics. But Alexander was first and foremost a soldier. He lived for conquest, and it was this insatiable thirst that drove him and his army ever onwards. The death of Darius and the capture and execution of his successor elevated Alexander to the throne of the Persian Empire, as well as a unified Greece. He was now master of all he surveyed, but Alexander still wasn't satisfied. It was now that he began to talk of his greatest ambition, and when men heard it, they thought he had gone mad. Alexander planned to conquer India with an army of his own creation. The atmosphere among his veterans became more and more strained. There were sporadic mutinies, but Alexander held them together by the force of his charismatic personality, and the great adventure got underway. Even today, India seems far away, this in an age of jets and airline travel. To the ancient Greeks, it was a different world. It's a long distance to cover, if you can imagine having to walk every mile of that distance from Europe to India, you can begin to understand the magnitude of what he achieved. But it was not only that, all the way to India and all the way back, he managed to keep his army together as a coherent fighting force, and that was the thing, more than anything, that made it such a triumph. Not just walk, but fight too. Surely, here was the proof of Alexander's greatness, for not only did he take his army to India, he maintained its cohesion as a fighting force, kept its supply fed and clothed, but at times, it was a superhuman effort. The Indian campaign was the hardest of all Alexander's military ventures. The climate and landscape was savage, untraveled jungles, rivers half a mile wide, burning deserts, freezing mountains. The resistance he met was more determined and fierce. In pitched battles, Alexander's phalanxes faced a new and nightmarish enemy, the Indian war elephant. Even the elements conspired against him. Plutarch's account of the Battle of Jhelum dwells on the difficulties Alexander faced. He was overwhelmed by a great rainstorm with terrible thunder bursts and lightning flashes. Despite a number of his men being struck down by lightning, he continued to advance. The ground had become broken and slippery, impossible for his men to hold their footing on. But Alexander rode on ahead of his cavalry. Porus attacked him with his whole army. Remembering the threat of the elephants and their greater number, Alexander attacked their left. The Indian army was routed and fell back upon their own elephants. The Indians rallied and stubborn fights started. After eight long hours, the enemy was broken. The experience of the battle and the atrocious conditions finally broke the spirit of Alexander's men more surely than defeat. After 17,000 miles, they had reached the end of their endurance. Confronted with their silent ranks, Alexander could not even move them with threats, promises, or bribes. The time had come to go home. Summoning his fleet, Alexander embarked his troops and sailed for the mouth of the Indus. It was almost as if his personal high watermark had been reached. He turned for home, his dream unfulfilled. He began to drink heavily, bored with the ordinary business of policing an empire. The strain of years of leading by example was showing. After one particularly heavy drinking bout, Alexander collapsed with a fever. He held on to life for 10 days. At the end, his distraught followers asked their dying leader to whom he left his kingdom. To the strongest, he replied. He died on June 10th, 323 BC. The legacy of Alexander the Great is still with us because not only did he conquer the whole of the then known world, he founded a new world. Up until the time when he became king, we refer to the period as Hellenic. After Alexander, we call it Hellenistic, and indeed we use that term to describe art and the coinage, all sorts of things. It becomes a chronological indicator and an artistic indicator because he had brought together this world. His legacy as such is the fact that he took Greek culture to the ends of the earth. There were Greek cities founded in Afghanistan. Then, of course, the whole thing fragmented in 323 BC when he died of fever at Babylon. The generals had no one to hang on to. They weren't the statesmen that he was. Some were. Ptolemy went to Egypt and founded a kingdom there. Others fought amongst themselves, gradually killed themselves off. That was the end of the great empire of Alexander. Then, an empire that encompassed the whole of the then known world. The man who left behind an empire dotted with settlements that bore his name was laid to rest in his greatest city, Alexandria. For all his accomplishments, he would be remembered most for his military feats. The Roman emperors Augustus and Julius Caesar would try to emulate him. His strategies would be studied by military tacticians for centuries. His campaigns would be the blueprint for Napoleon's designs on world domination. In the hands of Alexander the Great, the making of war had become an art. World history would never be the same.