If you allow a novice to answer a novice's ideas, I do not believe (with all due respect to Mr. Green) that Granicus was a two-stage battle. I cannot believe Alexander (who, at the time, did not lack military experience) could throw his men across a river to attack a position easily defendable by the enamy archers, since that would have resulted in immense losses, which he could not afford: he was in a hostile country and could not easily replace the dead and the wounded, and his reputation as a general was not well established and, consequently, the morale of his troops would have been seriously affected by such a foolish action. It is much more likely to think he chose to be cunning. True enough, he is known to have said he did not come to Asia to steal his victory, but that was in a completely different context - the terrain upon which the battle of Gaugamela was to take place did allow his phalanx to take part in the action (it would have been impossible to do so at Granicus!) and, more importantly, while saying this he was in fact delaying the action by some 6 to 10 hours, during which his troops rested, whereas the Persians did not. We all know what the combination of these two factors resulted into. It should not surprise us that certain authors have Alexander run amok and charge like a madman - the mith of his temper, courage and luck had been well established and may have distorted actual facts.