Who is the most overrated general/leader in history?

[Toffee]

Do you have any evidence that all of the strategy and logistical management were done by Parmenion?

[Dokletian]

Do you have any evidence that all of the strategy and logistical management were done by Parmenion?

He was in charge of the whole logistics, even though he shared it with some other generals.

At Gaugamela e.g, Parmenion was commading the left flank and stood against against a superior number of bactrian and parthian cavalry while he created the gap to bait the persian immortals and greek mercenaries to attack the phalanx and cut it off from the remaining main force. This is just one example of how he saved a battle for Alexander.
Of course, it was not only him, who made a the whole campaign and victories possible, there were other people such as Hephaistion, Antipatros, Antigenes etc. .

[Toffee]

Yes he did create the gap, but it was Alexander who exploited said gap. You must understand that one man can not control a whole battle. There are many times when people like Napoleon relied on his Marshalls to aid him in battle. That doesn’t take away the victory from him it’s just simply impossible for one person to do it all. We don’t know what conversations were had between Parmenion and Alexander. Perhaps Alexander had ordered him to mange logistics in a certain way or had specifically deployed his army hoping that Parmenion would draw in much of the Persian army so Alexander could exploit that fact. A great general uses the resources at his disposal, including the talented men under his command.

[Riddlez]

Yes he did create the gap, but it was Alexander who exploited said gap. You must understand that one man can not control a whole battle. There are many times when people like Napoleon relied on his Marshalls to aid him in battle. That doesn’t take away the victory from him it’s just simply impossible for one person to do it all. We don’t know what conversations were had between Parmenion and Alexander. Perhaps Alexander had ordered him to mange logistics in a certain way or had specifically deployed his army hoping that Parmenion would draw in much of the Persian army so Alexander could exploit that fact. A great general uses the resources at his disposal, including the talented men under his command.

There is a difference that is not discussed in either of your sides. Was the creating of the gap actually executed by Parmenion planned by Alexander in advance? The reason Napoleon was so succesful wasn't because he was a great tactical commander. It's a mistake a lot of people make. Napoleon controlled almost nothing as soon as the actual fighting began. That is a myth. Napoleon was successful in his campaigns because of his division system and the fact he was a master in moving divisions through a theatre. Alexander should have been focused on where his army is in contrast to the enemy and the greater movements he should be making an a battle plan on the larger scale. The actual leading of troops is done by the lower ranks of leaders and from  about the 18th century by army staff officers. The force commander only decides on the greater picture. And if they're not doing THAT, well, then they're just inflated offcicers who arent fit to be a general.

[Toffee]

I did actually mention Riddlez that Alexander could have deployed his army to cause a gap in the Persian line but maybe I didn’t word it well so I was misunderstood. Also Napoleon was also good at his battle tactics rather than just his army logistics. Look at Austerlitz where he purposely manoeuvred his opponents into attacking his weakened positions and exploited that similarly to Alexander at Gaugamella.

[Sgt.Winters]

The decisive move in Gaugamela was Alexander's decision to hit the center of the Persian line which was currently engaged by the phalanx. He successfully outmaneuvered the Persian cavalry from their left flank and had his Hypastists/lighter infantry and cavalry draw them away from the battle. This allowed Alexander to filter his Companion cavalry through the gap and hit the weakened center where Darius was. Its believed that Alexander's whole gameplan was to cause enough chaos for Darius to flee (as he was known to do that). Alexander was of course correct in his assumption, and Darius routed shortly afterward with most of the Persian center tailing behind. It is true that most of the heavy lifting was done by Parmenion and Antigonus, who held the center and left phalanxes together, but it is highly likely that without Alexander's tactics, the Macedonians would have been encircled and destroyed.

The phalanx is unique in warfare for its ability to pin nearly any enemy with its pikes/spears and hold them till said enemy is either slowly cut down or outflanked and crushed by another group. Alexander utilized this to the greatest extent possible in nearly ever battle he fought in. In fact, by the time Alexander had routed the Persian main body at Gaugamela, he decided to head back towards his left flank, which had nearly been overrun by Bactrian cavalry and infantry, and subsequently saved Parmenion by smashing the remaining Persian's flanks. This wasn't the only time Alexander had to save Parmenion's ass. During The Battle of the Granicus, the phalanx had been caught up by rough terrain and their tightly packed formation was nearly ruined. Alexander had to kill the Persian leader and his lieutenants on the other side of the river to even salvage the chance of victory, which he did.  Let's just say that Alexander and Parmenion had to rely on each other for victory. Alexander needed the infantry to hold so that he could break the rest of the opposing army, while Parmenion's whole survival was dependent on the decisiveness of the Companions. In most cases, it does come down to subjectiveness, as most records about Alexander are rather scarce and blunt. Some say he was a tactical genius who conquered most of the known world, while others believe he was an egotistical, arrogant, drunken buffoon driven by a mad belief that he was a god.

[KurassierNixon]

It's important to remember Alexander the Great couldn't conquer India which shows how poor of a leader he was when it comes to morale/leading troops. George Washington and leaders like him understood how to make their soldiers go on past their breaking point (Valley Forge). Honestly if Washington or Patton was in charge of Alexander's army in 326 BC there is no doubt in my mind India would be speaking Greek even today.

[Toffee]

It's important to remember Alexander the Great couldn't conquer India which shows how poor of a leader he was when it comes to morale/leading troops. George Washington and leaders like him understood how to make their soldiers go on past their breaking point (Valley Forge). Honestly if Washington or Patton was in charge of Alexander's army in 326 BC there is no doubt in my mind India would be speaking Greek even today.

The situation for Washington and Alexander was completely different. Alexander had been campaigning for years far from home whilst Washington was fighting a war close to the hearts of his men on home soil.

[Riddlez]

Toffee you misunderstand Nixon here. I mean clearly he means that Washington's actual own army or Patton's army would have obliterated the Persians and that they could have conquered india with their own army. Not suprising and hardly historically possible, but it's nice to know that Patton's tanks would have been able to defeat a pre-medieval indian army.

[Olafson]

I don't believe that Washingtons army could have defeated the Persian army in a battle.
Washingtons army was around like what? 15.000 soldiers? The Persian cavalry alone is estimated to be just as strong as Washingtons army. And they also had elephants...

Even if the Persians just had infantry, I bet they would have won by sheer numbers alone.

[Duuring]

American Revolution armies were so tinnnyyyyy

[Olafson]

America was so tinyyyyyyyyyy. And ancient armies were fucking huge.

[Gokiller]

Indeed, Washingtons army of 15,000/20,000 men would be annihilated at battles like Gaugamela.

Patton's tanks would just drive over the Persian army, but oh well. It's a ridiculous comparison anyway.

[Olafson]

Well knowing ancient warfare, if the Persians knew about the tanks beforehand they would probably build some ridicously tall and steep ramp or some shit to trap the tanks.

[Gokiller]

True, true. Guerrilla warfare ftw.