AHC: Make a "nearly successful" conqueror succeed

Night Gaul

The archetype of the conqueror is one that dates back to at least Sumerian times, and probably earlier. History has shown numerous examples of successful conquerors who, for good or for ill, changed history forever: Cyrus, Alexander, Chandragupta Maurya, Julius Caesar, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Charlemagne, Genghis Khan, Timur, Babur, Shaka, and numerous others I haven't named.

On the other hand, there are also plenty of would-be conquerors who accomplished a great deal, but failed in the end. Hannibal, Mithridates, An Lushan, Carolus Rex, Napoleon, and quite a few others come to mind.

So, here's your challenge: have a conqueror who lost in the end be victorious.
 
GauchoBadger

GauchoBadger

Muhammad Bin Qasim, Umayyad governor of Sindh,, does not fall from grace in the eyes of the central government in Damascus, and is soon allowed to partake in further conquests across India?

Beside him, there's sundry of figures who could have been immortalized as skilled military leaders but ultimately failed due to developments in other political areas (logistics, intrigue, or just facing off against a more skilled opponent). Some that come to my mind are Xerxes of Persia, shah Khosrau II, tsar Simeon of Bulgaria, Bohemond of Antioch, Manfred of Hohenstaufen in his endeavour towards Italy, Charles of Anjou in his quest to topple the Byzantines in the 13th century, Stefan Dusan of Serbia, Henry V and VI of England...
 
Last edited:

dandan_noodles

Antiochos III crushed the Egyptians at the Battle of Panium in 200, and the kingdom was suffering from an indigenous uprising, but instead of marching into Egypt to take possession of the kingdom, Antiochos bowed to Roman demands to end the war. His next major campaign was in Greece, where he would be defeated at Thermopylae; his army was crushed at Magnesia in Asia Minor not long after. In hindsight, this probably gave up the last chance to keep the Romans out of the Greek East. Individually, the Hellenistic kingdoms couldn't withstand the Romans, but if Macedon, Syria, and Egypt could all be brought under the same umbrella by alliance and conquest, maybe the Romans are stuck in the Western Mediterranean while the Seleukids dominate the East.
 
Eparkhos

Eparkhos

Alexios Philanthropenos is either not betrayed by Konstantinopolis or succeeds in re-establish the Nikaean Empire (*cough* A New Alexiad Redux *cough*) and continues to steamroll across Western Anatolia.
 
Rheinbund

Rheinbund

John Lackland survived a few years meaning Louis Prince of France could have conquered England. The English barons, rebelling against John Lackland and promised Prince Louis to give him the crown of England, being beside the husband of Blanche of Castile, granddaughter of the late King Henry II of England. Accepting this request, Louis landed on the English coast with is proclaimed King of England but not crown because there is no archbishop available to perform the anointing and quickly takes control of the South of the country. As John Lackland died soon after, the English barons, rather than having to deal with an energetic prince like Louis who was likely to hinder them, pronounced in favor of Henry III, son of John Lackland. Louis continued the war, but he was beaten on land in Lincoln on May 1217, then on the sea in August at the Battle of the Five Islands. if John Lackland have survived Louis VIII would have likely won the war and be crowned king of England and France Later.
 
ImperialxWarlord

ImperialxWarlord

My favorite is Majorian not being betrayed and retaking Carthage.

Manuel Komnenos wins at myriokephalon and retakes Anatolia is a close second for me.
 

Kerney

Guthrum's fleet of reinforcements not getting sunk in a freak storm.
Guthrum's second group of reinforcements not getting hosed against a bunch of really desperate peasants.
Guthrum not getting to give Alfred the not yet great a sword in the gut for Christmas by something like 10 minutes.

Guthrum had crap luck.

Henry the 5th living about twenty years so he outlives Charles the 6th and has spare spawn for when Henry the VI is shown to be an idiot. He can also beat up any peasant girls from Lorraine who get in his way.

And get Hannibal some seige equipment and some reinforcements.
 
Dolan

Dolan

Banned
More Trustworthy Italians could potentially result in history going differently.

The Italian Greeks of Rhegion and Taras fulfilling their end of bargain with Athens to provide ships and men to help Athenian expedition, who already intervened on their behalf against the Syrakousai, to finally took over the cities.

The Italian Greeks keeping their end of bargain with Pyrrhos, who already bled and fight for them, with titles and money to hire more mercenaries, enabling Pyrrhos to march to Rome and sack it once and for all.

Hannibal getting the promised men and engineers from his Italian Allies, so he could besiege and sack Rome once and for all.

Basically the Italian cities are the most untrustworthy allies one can get...
 
Last edited:

Dave Shoup

Banned
Conqueror or Liberator?

Bolivar is less an autocratic centralist and more of a democratic federalist and manages to share power, thus preventing Gran Colombia from breaking up in 1830.
 
Last edited:

jocay

Banned
Alexander I of Epirus, uncle to the famed Alexander the Great and Pyrrhus of Epirus, invaded Italy at the request of Taras and did battle with multiple Italic tribes, often succeeding. He even negotiated a treaty with the Roman Republic. His ultimate demise was due to Lucanian treachery and ended up dead at the Battle of Pandosia, marking the beginning of the end of Greek ascendancy in Italy. Had he been more cautious and confronted the Lucanians and Bruttii in more favorable ground, Magna Grecia for the remainder of Alexander I's lifetime would be under Epirote hegemony.
 
The Lethargic Lett

The Lethargic Lett

jocay said:
Alexander I of Epirus, uncle to the famed Alexander the Great and Pyrrhus of Epirus, invaded Italy at the request of Taras and did battle with multiple Italic tribes, often succeeding. He even negotiated a treaty with the Roman Republic. His ultimate demise was due to Lucanian treachery and ended up dead at the Battle of Pandosia, marking the beginning of the end of Greek ascendancy in Italy. Had he been more cautious and confronted the Lucanians and Bruttii in more favorable ground, Magna Grecia for the remainder of Alexander I's lifetime would be under Epirote hegemony.
Click to expand...
On that same note, Pyrrhus of Epirus would probably go a lot further in his aspirations of being a great conqueror like his cousin Alexander if he could be bothered to focus his attentions on one war at a time instead of moving on to the next target whenever he gets an opening victory.
 
Last edited:
SunKing105

SunKing105

If Antigonus Monophtalmus can get his satraps to crush Seleucus before he gets too powerful, or if Antigonus defeats Seleucus in the Babylonian War, Antigonus has a good shot at defeating the other Diadochi and reunifying Alexander's Empire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top