An invasion in progress
Alexander has just crossed into Asia. Darius III has not yet assembled the royal army; the Anatolian satraps and Memnon must stop the invasion with their regional forces.
Battle
Granicus
May 334 BC
Cross under pressure, widen the fight, isolate the infantry
Military history
How can an army establish a foothold beyond a river defended by Persian cavalry?
In 334 BC, Alexander has just crossed into Asia. Persian satraps block his route at the Granicus with their cavalry; Greek mercenaries wait behind them. The contested crossing becomes a fight along the bank, then a break in the mounted line. This first victory opens western Anatolia to the Macedonians without overthrowing the Persian Empire.
Fight or give ground
The accounts attribute a scorched-earth proposal to Memnon. Arsites refuses to ravage his province: preserving its resources means risking an immediate battle.
Two accounts of the crossing
Arrian and Plutarch describe a defended bank. Diodorus recounts an unopposed crossing at dawn. The map follows the first account without merging the two chronologies.
A disputed diversion
The advance force suffers losses before Alexander arrives. Its fixing effect is clear; the idea that it was deliberately sacrificed remains a modern interpretation.
Explore
Chronological dossier
IssusHow does Alexander win on one wing while his centre risks giving way?Siege of TyreIn 332 BCE, Tyre refuses Alexander entry to its island city. The Macedonian mole comes under fire and is attacked by a fireship. The arrival of allied fleets changes the siege: the harbours are blockaded, siege engines reach the walls by sea, and a combined assault eventually captures the city after seven months of resistance.GaugamelaHow does Alexander reach Darius without losing his army on the wings and in the rear?HydaspesHow does Alexander force a crossing, then face Porus’s elephants?
Military history
Sources
Ancient primary source, non-eyewitness account · Archival heritage edition · Late antique chronicle based on campaign traditionsArrien, Anabase d’Alexandre I.11–17, traduction E. J. Chinnock
I.11.3 : plus de 30 000 fantassins et plus de 5 000 cavaliers ; I.12.6–10 : conseil de Zélée et proposition attribuée à Memnon ; I.13.1–7 : approche, renseignement, avis de Parménion et décision d’attaquer ; I.14.1–7 : ordres de bataille et première vague ; I.15.1–8 : difficulté de la sortie, engagement oblique et mêlée ; I.16.1–7 : rupture, poursuite limitée, mercenaires, pertes et prisonniers ; I.17.1–3 : Sardes.
Structure of the map and main narrative, force composition, decisions, movements, the separate fight against the mercenaries, casualties, and immediate consequences.
View ↗Late ancient chronicle · alternative traditionDiodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque historique XVII.17–21, traduction C. Bradford Welles
XVII.17.3–5 : catalogue de 32 000 fantassins ; le total déclaré de 4 500 cavaliers contredit ses postes, qui en additionnent 5 100 ; XVII.18.2–19.6 : conseil perse, effectifs achéménides et franchissement à l’aube sans opposition ; XVII.20.1–21.4 : combat de cavalerie et rupture ; XVII.21.5–7 : pertes, prisonniers et reddition de Sardes.
The incompatible opening, a second force catalog, another account of the fighting, and a divergent casualty range.
View ↗Late ancient biographyPlutarque, Vie d’Alexandre 16, traduction Bernadotte Perrin
§16.1–3 : passage difficile, courant, boue et treize escadrons de cavalerie ; §16.4–6 : mêlée, combat personnel et intervention de Cleitos ; §16.7–8 : phalange, demande de quartier des mercenaires et traditions de pertes.
A parallel biographical tradition on the defended crossing, close combat, the mercenaries’ position, and the alternative death toll; it is not treated as independent contemporary testimony.
View ↗Specialist academic studyErnst Badian, « Granicus », Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. XI, fasc. 2, p. 187
PDF p. 1 / p. 187 : fin mai, identification au Kocabaş Çayı, basses hauteurs de 3–4 m, effectif perse irrécupérable, berges raides alternant avec des plages de gravier et première vague reconstruite comme appât ; PDF p. 2 : mercenaires, Arsitès et portée immédiate.
Topographical checks, criticism of the reported strengths, a modern reconstruction of the first crossing presented as a hypothesis, and the limits of reconstruction.
View ↗Academic synthesis of the Achaemenid EmpirePierre Briant, « Alexander the Great », Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. I, fasc. 8, p. 827–830
HTML, p. 827, paragraphes 3–5 : débarquement de 334, armée royale pas encore pleinement mobilisée, victoire du Granique et limites de la soumission réelle en Anatolie ; section « Resistance to Alexander », pp. 829–830 : défaite militaire sans effondrement immédiat et résistance à Halicarnasse.
Achaemenid context, Darius’s absence from the Granicus, regional consequences, and rejection of a teleological reading of its strategic significance.
View ↗Specialist academic articleA. M. Devine, « Demythologizing the Battle of the Granicus », Phoenix 40.3, 1986, p. 265–278
p. 276 : confrontation des pertes macédoniennes d’Arrien et de Plutarque, total d’environ 115 chez Arrien ; p. 277 : la première vague interprétée explicitement comme une « feint » et critique de l’amplification héroïque et stratégique du Granique.
Criticism of casualty figures and heroic framing; the modern first-wave-decoy hypothesis retained conditionally and never converted into an attested intention.
View ↗University archaeological and geomorphological surveyReyhan Körpe, « 2022–2024 Granicus Battlefield Survey: New Findings, New Results », Troy Museum Journal, 2025, p. 107–123
PDF p. 1 / revue p. 107–108 : hypothèse d’un champ plus méridional et de Höyükbayırı Tepe ; PDF p. 6 / revue p. 113 : plaine classique marécageuse au IVe siècle, évolution alluviale et absence de mobilier de bataille ; PDF p. 14–15 / revue p. 121–122 : résultats encore provisoires et poursuite des sondages.
Updating discussion of the site, paleochannel, and final rise without converting a survey proposal into a certain location.
View ↗Specialist academic articleN. G. L. Hammond, « The Battle of the Granicus River », Journal of Hellenic Studies 100, 1980, p. 73–88
p. 73, résumé et ouverture : divergence des sources sur l’heure et le but du passage, problème du mouvement latéral et inadéquation partielle entre topographie ancienne et terrain moderne ; n. 34 : contradiction entre le total déclaré de 4 500 cavaliers chez Diodore et les 5 100 obtenus par addition.
Identifying chronological, oblique-advance, and topographical problems; arithmetic check of Diodorus’s catalog, without imposing the article’s cartographic solution.
View ↗