Summary

W. Lloyd Bevan The world's leading conquerors

Alexander’s victories were won not only on the battlefield, but through the quick following up of his victories; the enemies’ power of resistance was annihilated by the rapidity with which a defeated army was pursued and never allowed a chance to gather itself together again after it was beaten. These cavalry marches in the rear of a retreating enemy, or the suddenly delivered attacks on a foe preparing to resist, attacks made irrespective of mountains and deserts, were as military achievements no less remarkable than the set battles and the sieges of strongly walled cities and citadels.
Source: Gutenberg

W. Lloyd Bevan The world's leading conquerors

The experiment failed, but it was a brilliant vision—a vision which might have become a reality if the conqueror had lived the normal span of years.
The beating down of all opposition in the enormously extensive empire which the defeat of Darius had laid at his feet had now been accomplished. If Alexander had been a statesman and nothing else, he would have stayed his hand, because the consolidation of the territory he had overrun was a work demanding the time and the talents of the greatest genius.
Source: Gutenberg

W. Lloyd Bevan The world's leading conquerors

But Alexander had not the temper of a Roman proconsul, capable and zealous to solve large political problems. He was young enough to be influenced by the spirit of adventure, and unlike Cæsar and Napoleon, had sometimes no deeply laid scheme in his military exploits.
There was no political or military necessity summoning Alexander to the conquest of India, but there was the irresistible charm of novelty exerted by the unknown, the ambition [41] to penetrate into regions untrodden before by any Greek, and with this feeling of the conqueror the modern world is able to sympathize.
Source: Gutenberg

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature