AHC: Collapse the Hellenistic post-Alexander world as soon as possible

The world that Alexander the Great built and his generals maintained for the first time saw the creation of a Greek political sphere from Macedon to the Indus, largely upending the rule of the Achaemenid monarchs prior. Surprisingly, the system he and his successors developed would last for centuries politically, and for centuries after, even as the last states that derived themselves from the legacy of Alexander were conquered, the cultural legacy would last another few centuries, and still has great influence even today. The challenge here is to dismantle or render politically impotent the world and order that Alexander and his successors have created as soon as possible, and to erase the cultural traces of Hellenization as well(this was done with the Sassanids in Mesopotamia and Iran-proper, as part of the Eranshahr resurgence) earlier. What would be needed to accomplish this result? The POD is after the Battle of the Persian Gates, meaning the Achaemenids have been militarily defeated, but a loose alliance of chiefs and satraps proclaiming nominal fealty to a "Great King" remain. What would be needed? Earlier and deadlier Diadochi wars? Alexander dying earlier? A resurgent dynasty in Persis, perhaps the Frataraka? Or replacing the Arsacids with another, more hostile nomadic polity? What would be the effects?
 
The world that Alexander the Great built and his generals maintained for the first time saw the creation of a Greek political sphere from Macedon to the Indus, largely upending the rule of the Achaemenid monarchs prior. Surprisingly, the system he and his successors developed would last for centuries politically, and for centuries after, even as the last states that derived themselves from the legacy of Alexander were conquered, the cultural legacy would last another few centuries, and still has great influence even today. The challenge here is to dismantle or render politically impotent the world and order that Alexander and his successors have created as soon as possible, and to erase the cultural traces of Hellenization as well(this was done with the Sassanids in Mesopotamia and Iran-proper, as part of the Eranshahr resurgence) earlier. What would be needed to accomplish this result? The POD is after the Battle of the Persian Gates, meaning the Achaemenids have been militarily defeated, but a loose alliance of chiefs and satraps proclaiming nominal fealty to a "Great King" remain. What would be needed? Earlier and deadlier Diadochi wars? Alexander dying earlier? A resurgent dynasty in Persis, perhaps the Frataraka? Or replacing the Arsacids with another, more hostile nomadic polity? What would be the effects?
Considering who Alexander at that point was already accepted by many as legitimate successor of Darius (thanks to Sisygambis’ adoption) and recognised as Great King, your POD is way too late. Either Alexander is unable to complete his conquest or he must be more successful than OTL, aka living longer than OTL, but that would preserve the unity of his Empire, while reducing the Hellenization of the realm in favor of a major integration between the two cultures.
 
Considering who Alexander at that point was already accepted by many as legitimate successor of Darius (thanks to Sisygambis’ adoption) and recognised as Great King, your POD is way too late. Either Alexander is unable to complete his conquest or he must be more successful than OTL, aka living longer than OTL, but that would preserve the unity of his Empire, while reducing the Hellenization of the realm in favor of a major integration between the two cultures.
The point is not to prevent it, after Gaugamela it was pretty much guaranteed that Macedonians would take at least the western portion of the Achaemenids, Mesopotamia, and most of Iran, and the Persian Gates only confirmed that. There is still going to be a Hellenistic period in this TL, the AHC is to make it as short and uninfluential as possible.
 
The point is not to prevent it, after Gaugamela it was pretty much guaranteed that Macedonians would take at least the western portion of the Achaemenids, Mesopotamia, and most of Iran, and the Persian Gates only confirmed that. There is still going to be a Hellenistic period in this TL, the AHC is to make it as short and uninfluential as possible.
Short and uninfluential at that point is simply impossible, as the OTL breakup of Alexander’s Empire was already one of the worst cases possible. The only way for reducing the Hellenization of that period is more integration with the old Empire, but for getting that you need a longer living Alexander (and that mean also a more stable and longer living Empire)
 
Just don't have Greek migration beyond the Zagros mountains, it's limited to Anatolia, Egypt, Levant and Mesopotamia.
How to Achieve this?

In the Iranian plateau we see a Alexander's general taking over but is quickly overthrown by native Iranian people. Iranian plateau remains a mosaic of small states which would eventually be conquered by a central Asian eastern Iranian people group like parni or some other Scythian group, they form a bulwark against Hellenic culture.

Now is this feasible? Well no but considering how out of the ordinary Alexander's conquests were nothing can be ruled out.
 
Short and uninfluential at that point is simply impossible, as the OTL breakup of Alexander’s Empire was already one of the worst cases possible. The only way for reducing the Hellenization of that period is more integration with the old Empire, but for getting that you need a longer living Alexander (and that mean also a more stable and longer living Empire)
I meant it in relative terms, and I highly doubt that the wars of the Diadochi were a "worst case ever" especially as a stable succession has been the exception to the norm in Macedonian history, and Alexander was basically trying to change the organization and culture of his people overnight. And then Alexander never really had time to focus on administration, and then there is the position of his subordinates and generals to consider, who have gained huge amounts of glory and prestige, have ambitions of their own, and aren't willing to bend the knee to a half-barbarian child.
 
I meant it in relative terms, and I highly doubt that the wars of the Diadochi were a "worst case ever" especially as a stable succession has been the exception to the norm in Macedonian history, and Alexander was basically trying to change the organization and culture of his people overnight. And then Alexander never really had time to focus on administration, and then there is the position of his subordinates and generals to consider, who have gained huge amounts of glory and prestige, have ambitions of their own, and aren't willing to bend the knee to a half-barbarian child.
Macedonian history is a count, Persian another and we are talking about Alexander’s Empire (who would be likely more integrated with Persia). Once Alexander’s heir is an already born son by Stateira instead of the still unborn son of Roxane at the worst Macedonia will separate from the rest of the Empire. Also Alexander’s generals at this point would all have children by their Persian brides as heirs (and Antipater would be already of of the games). Alexander’s death and succession were a “worst case ever” for his Empire. You have forgotten who Roxane choose to become a pawn in the hands of Perdiccas for getting Stateira killed?
 
Macedonian history is a count, Persian another and we are talking about Alexander’s Empire (who would be likely more integrated with Persia). Once Alexander’s heir is an already born son by Stateira instead of the still unborn son of Roxane at the worst Macedonia will separate from the rest of the Empire. Also Alexander’s generals at this point would all have children by their Persian brides as heirs (and Antipater would be already of of the games). Alexander’s death and succession were a “worst case ever” for his Empire. You have forgotten who Roxane choose to become a pawn in the hands of Perdiccas for getting Stateira killed?
But we are trying to end the system Alexander created and the new era he inaugurated, it would just be even stronger if Alexander had a legitimate heir by Stateira and consolidated his empire, rather than having his empire fall apart. And what is the guarantee Stateira will even be carrying a son?
 
Just don't have Greek migration beyond the Zagros mountains, it's limited to Anatolia, Egypt, Levant and Mesopotamia.
How to Achieve this?

In the Iranian plateau we see a Alexander's general taking over but is quickly overthrown by native Iranian people. Iranian plateau remains a mosaic of small states which would eventually be conquered by a central Asian eastern Iranian people group like parni or some other Scythian group, they form a bulwark against Hellenic culture.

Now is this feasible? Well no but considering how out of the ordinary Alexander's conquests were nothing can be ruled out.
Macedonian military presence in the east was too strong to allow any Iranian resurgence, the only way I can see this work if a Diadochi that prioritizes the west more takes over the empire, pursuing ambitions in Greece and the Western Mediterranean, leaving the Iranian plateau a mess of satraps, tribes, and kingdoms. Antigonus seems the best possible choice. The Parni, however, were decidedly not hostile to Hellenism and Hellenistic culture the way I envisioned, taking Greek titles and continuing the customs the Seleucids practices over "free " Greek cities. In particular, I am reminded of the anecdote, when Crassus' head was brought to the Parthian king, and he was in the middle of watching a Greek play, the head was used as a prop.
 
Macedonian military presence in the east was too strong to allow any Iranian resurgence, the only way I can see this work if a Diadochi that prioritizes the west more takes over the empire, pursuing ambitions in Greece and the Western Mediterranean, leaving the Iranian plateau a mess of satraps, tribes, and kingdoms. Antigonus seems the best possible choice. The Parni, however, were decidedly not hostile to Hellenism and Hellenistic culture the way I envisioned, taking Greek titles and continuing the customs the Seleucids practices over "free " Greek cities. In particular, I am reminded of the anecdote, when Crassus' head was brought to the Parthian king, and he was in the middle of watching a Greek play, the head was used as a prop.
Even the Kushan empire as far as possible from the heartlands of the Hellenic homeland was a sponsor and advocate of a form of Hellenism. So indeed, Hellenism is something that is difficult to contain. Personally, I feel you need to find a way to demean the legacy of Alexander the Great while simultaneously ending rapidly somehow the Greek rule in the Mid East. Frankly, I would say it is somewhat ASB to end it early. Otherwise, I do not know which way is best to break it as early as possible. Maybe a break in Greek rule by native rulers who then are themselves rapidly conquered by another people and then another afterwards. This diminishes institutional memory of the Greek conquest, which becomes a less than important historical fact.
 
I wouldn't know if this specific scenario that I thought of in my head would collapse the Hellenistic era but it might drastically shorten it. Have Ptolemy Keraunos' assassination plot against Seleucus end up in complete failure. He is caught and executed. Seleucus annexes Thrace and Macedonia, adding it to his empire. Pyrrhus of Epirus, the co-ruler of Macedon with the late Lysimachus, is pressured to give up his claims in exchange for military assistance in his upcoming war in the Italian peninsula. Seleucus' intentions are to hand over his Asian possessions to his eldest son and successor Antiochus while ruling Macedonia, Thrace and Greece proper. The crown prince and soon-to-be Lord of Asia, Antiochus decides to celebrate his coronation by rebuilding the Babylonian temple Esagila.

While making a sacrifice in dedication to Marduk, the crown prince stumbles on the rubble and falls, hitting his head and dying. With Antiochus dead, Seleucus' plans on a peaceful retirement in the west are completely dashed. Seleucus appoints Pyrrhus as his viceroy in the west, marrying his daughter Phila. Having submitted the Greek cities into accepting Seleucid hegemony, Seleucus leaves a token military presence in Europe and departs to the east to train his other son Achaeus to become a proper successor to inherit his Asian and European possessions. Mid-way to his journey towards Seleucia, Seleucus passes away from old age. The news of the Seleucid king's departure soon reaches every corner of the world. The Ptolemies, long-time rivals of the Seleucids, instigate rebellions in Syria, Anatolia, Greece and Persia that Antiochus, had he lived, could have dealt with some difficulty. Ill-prepared, Achaeus demanded reinforcements from Europe to help crush the Anatolian uprisings but Pyrrhus uses the remaining Seleucid forces in Europe, including Seleucus' Indian war elephants to help subjugate much of southern Italy. He crushes multiple Roman armies and comes close to besieging the city of Rome itself but he is soon distracted by pleas to help liberate the Sicilian Greeks from Carthage and abandons Italy.

Crossing the Straits of Messina, a storm hits and Pyrrhus' ship sinks, drowning the Epirote ruler. The Kingdom of Macedon and Epirus descends into chaos and is unable to withstand the deadly combination of in-fighting and invasion by the combined Gaulish invasion led by Cerethrius, Brennus and Acichorius. Only a united coalition of Greek cities led by Athens, Corinth and Sparta prevented the Gauls from doing the same to free Greece. The Olympus Massif, marking the boundary between Thessaly and Macedonia, would forever mark the boundary between the Greeks proper and the Balkan Gauls. The Textosages would form their kingdom in Macedon. The Tolistobogii would content itself ruling over their Epirote subjects. The Trocmi received possession of Thrace and a small foothold in Asia Minor. Minor tribes would be forced to accept a more tributary status from the major three tribes turned kingdoms.

For the Seleucid Empire, the situation was bad. While Achaeus was nowhere near as adept in military affairs as his older brother or his father, he had succeeded in defeating the rebellion in Syria and had taken southern Syria from the Ptolemies, he had lost complete control of Asia Minor. Tributaries such as the Attalids of Pergamum, Pontus and Cappadocia had declared independence and conquered the territories still loyal to the Seleucids. The Fratarakas of Persia, once loyal administrators of Persia, had declared their independence and seized control of all Seleucid territories east of the Zagros. Making peace with Egypt and his former vassals in Asia Minor, he attempts a reconquest of Persia that ends disastrously. Achaeus is captured and forced to swallow gold. The Fratarakas capture Seleucia and execute the rest of the Seleucids.

The Persian Empire is once again re-born. The Gauls rule the homeland of Alexander the Great. While Greek culture continues to flourish in most of the known world for centuries to come, the time of the Greeks as a militarily ascendant culture is at an end.
 
Even the Kushan empire as far as possible from the heartlands of the Hellenic homeland was a sponsor and advocate of a form of Hellenism. So indeed, Hellenism is something that is difficult to contain. Personally, I feel you need to find a way to demean the legacy of Alexander the Great while simultaneously ending rapidly somehow the Greek rule in the Mid East. Frankly, I would say it is somewhat ASB to end it early. Otherwise, I do not know which way is best to break it as early as possible. Maybe a break in Greek rule by native rulers who then are themselves rapidly conquered by another people and then another afterwards. This diminishes institutional memory of the Greek conquest, which becomes a less than important historical fact.
Bactria had a large Greek population before Alexander, largely as a result of both deportations by the Achaemenids and Greek mercenaries settling there, reinforced by Alexander's conquest and the elevation to an independent kingdom very quickly a realm which would otherwise be a neglected frontier satrapy of the far-flung Seleucids, it is a relatively special case. Regions far closer to Hellas proper, such as Colchis and Armenia, while undoubtedly having many Greek influences, were less Hellenized, though that might be partly due to the relatively remoteness of their location.
 
But we are trying to end the system Alexander created and the new era he inaugurated, it would just be even stronger if Alexander had a legitimate heir by Stateira and consolidated his empire, rather than having his empire fall apart. And what is the guarantee Stateira will even be carrying a son?
The point is who an Empire of Alexander would be less Hellenized than the OTL reigns of his successors as Alexander’s plan was to integrate both cultures and costumes. If his Empire fail in a couple of generations or his heirs end going native (maybe because Alexander died when his son by Stateira is only few years old) you can have some chances to reduce the effects of the Hellenization as Alexander’s real Empire died with him, the reigns of the Diadochi were something different...
Stopping that age or making it irrelevant is pretty unlikely once Alexander died and his generals divided his Empire. Getting Alexander’s heirs by Stateira going more native or rejecting Greek culture (maybe as reaction for the loss of Macedonia) is the only plausible way for lessening the cultural effects of Alexander’s victory
 
Top