WI No Alexander the Great?

scholar

Banned
The Achaemenids survive longer, and since Greece is unified now maybe it can be more easily conquered.

However, history as been irrevocably changed.
 
First, don't forget that his legacy was build on the 'shoulders of giants' - specifically, his father, Phillipe 2 of Macedon... I heard there is a theory that he was assassinated by his wife or son's demands... so, if he don,t die, it's possible that Philippe, a fine lord and warrior of his own, conquer a nice kingdom north of modern greece - thrace maybe, Illiria, the Balkans?
 
First, don't forget that his legacy was build on the 'shoulders of giants' - specifically, his father, Phillipe 2 of Macedon... I heard there is a theory that he was assassinated by his wife or son's demands... so, if he don,t die, it's possible that Philippe, a fine lord and warrior of his own, conquer a nice kingdom north of modern greece - thrace maybe, Illiria, the Balkans?

He apparently wanted to invade the Achemeads, my guess is he wouldnt take much more than Anatolia since he seemed much more concerned with building a state rather than conquering the world.
 
He apparently wanted to invade the Achemeads, my guess is he wouldnt take much more than Anatolia since he seemed much more concerned with building a state rather than conquering the world.

So in a way, it is maybe not too bad - the alt empire could survive longer...
 
First, don't forget that his legacy was build on the 'shoulders of giants' - specifically, his father, Phillipe 2 of Macedon... I heard there is a theory that he was assassinated by his wife or son's demands... so, if he don,t die, it's possible that Philippe, a fine lord and warrior of his own, conquer a nice kingdom north of modern greece - thrace maybe, Illiria, the Balkans?

Philip had a plan to attack Persia when he died, and it was one of the ways he justified founding the League of Corinth.
 
He apparently wanted to invade the Achemeads, my guess is he wouldnt take much more than Anatolia since he seemed much more concerned with building a state rather than conquering the world.

I agree with you on that- I doubt he'd go much past Ionia, maybe into Phrygia or Lydia, but in no way are we going to see Philip marching into Babylon.
 
I'm not so sure you wouldn't see Phillip II marching into Babylon, but rather he might not permanently occupy it. An Achaemenid Empire shorn of Anatolia is barely weakened at all when you look at the posessions that would remain; Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt, Bactria, Persia, et al. You'd still want to deal a killer blow to stop it simply re-organising.

An interesting consequence of this is that Syria will not be as populated as OTL in all likelihood; Syria seems to have been underdeveloped by the Babylonians and Achaemenids, and its the Seleucids who build a load of cities there. Though of course there's always potential for someone else to do it instead.

You'd almost certainly not get Greek culture spreading to India, Bactria, Arachosia; this has implications for the development of Indian states, culture, and the development of Buddhism.

No Alexandria also has intellectual implications of its own; no Library of Alexandria, no Museon, no intellectual culture fostered there.

With a Macedonian Empire so definitively focused on the West still, you'd probably have all of their European neighbours heavily affected. In particular, I feel that Epirus would feel the presence of such a large Kingdom breathing down its neck.
 
Macedonia eventually takes all of Anatolia, and lots of the coast of the Eastern Mediterranean, with or without Alexander the Great. A native Egyptian Dynasty would eventually form a New-New Kingdom that takes some of Palestine. Armenia eventually becomes independent. The flatness of Mesopotamia causes a fast-turn over of empires, and with Macedonian destruction to the North the area is destabilized, the "New Chaldean Empire"? Persia survives well in it's core region. Parthia, Bactria, and Media all probably have a stake too.
 
Last edited:
So it sounds like Antalonia eventually falling is consensus, though otherwise the Achamedians survive. Not even taking into account the influence on ties b/w India, Persia, and the Mediteranean, the idea of the empire forged by Cyrus surviving for maybe a couple more centuries would have a huge impact on the surrounding regions...
 
The Achaemenids eventually get overthrown and replaced by either an ambitious Persian noble or by a powerful confederacy of barbarian steppe nomads to the northwest of the Empire like the Saka or the Dahae or heaven forbid the Xiongnu! :eek:
 
Regardless I just want to see the Greeks maybe Pryuss kick the crap out of the Romans,

Seriously the world of an hellnized Italy is really intriguing and Plausible what if Latin Culture dosent develop at all could we have a "one civilization" Europe where there is not division between those that take after Rome and those that after Byzantium.

Of course do that we have to deal with the Phonecians and mind you taking from their roots in the near east Modern Europe might not look like Modern Europe at all..
 

Paul MacQ

Monthly Donor
We have no Hellene influence in places Like Bactria a much stronger Persia and Middle East that does not have to have the struggles effect it from the wars of the successors. A longer living Phillip is a giant indeed. And Alexander taking over at an older age or dyeing could be very interesting.

The greater influence of Eastern thought flow on effect with religion. It is a period where the Jewish faith is at an interesting turning point.

A Phillip and maybe another successor other than Alexander turning West and North could be very interesting. Say expanding as far North as to include the Hungarian plan with Anatolia. Unification of the Greek population into this more compact Empire is much more likely to survive, and could see it as an earlier power house when the Romans are encroaching on Greeks cities.
 
Personally, I've always liked the idea of a Persia that devolves sort of like the Zhou Dynasty over in China - where the Achaemenids are like the Zhou, as the recognized Emperors but powerless in practice, and the major satrapies (like Egypt, Syria, Media, etc.) like the warring states, with their satraps becoming so entrenched and powerful that the Shahanshah can't realistically unseat them. Eventually, the Shahanshah fades to such irrelevance that he is overthrown by some ambitious Satrap/King, and the official end of Persia comes, while its successors quarrel with hopes to reunite or even expand upon the earlier empire.
 
^^Including Antalonia and Egypt?

Speaking of which, what do you think happens to Judaism in TTL? I can see them setting up a partially independent kingdom, though paying tribute to and under protection of the newly independent Egyptians.
 
Is this really inevitable? I mean a new dynasty, maybe, but on the same level as becoming the Selucids, or Selucids to Parthians?
I believe it to be inevitable, a native egyptian dynasty in a couple years, Macedonia will be powerful in Anatolia, although you have to be concerned about Greek rebellions that Alexander handled better than would otherwise be expected, the Archaemenid Dynasty was already in decline.
 
You'd almost certainly not get Greek culture spreading to India, Bactria, Arachosia; this has implications for the development of Indian states, culture, and the development of Buddhism.

I'm not sure that Greek culture really had much of an effect on India. The Indo-Hellene societies were very much on the periphery of the Indosphere.
 
Top