Alexander goes west

Hello! First post here, looking forward to responses.

I was thinking about Alexander the Great the other day, and I guess I understand why he struck out east: Persia was the big dog at the time, long history of rivalry and war between the Greeks and Persians.

Is there any reason for Alexander to conquer westward instead? Or is this, as the saying goes, ASB?
 
I think there is some stuff worth conquering in the West, such as the Greek colonies. I believe Siciliy was particularly prosperous at the time. But they certainly didn't compare with Persia for potential of riches.

One possibility is that he goes West AFTER going East. If he lived longer, Arabia was his first target, but I can see the Mediterranean being next. It would be a fools errand trying to perpetually hold on to North West India, but I'd say it's potentially viable to have an Empire centred on Babylon. He could then hold on to an empire via sea power through the Med, the Black Sea, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. Perhaps an early Suez canal is even possible.
 
Give him fourty years longer , and he would almost certainly have moved against Sicily ,the Etruscans and Carthage.
 
There's nothing to Alexander's west save a powerful thalassocracy and an upstart republic, so why go there?

And it would be easier to conquer the rotting Achaemenids than to face Carthage; I doubt Alex was a naval genius.
 
There's nothing to Alexander's west save a powerful thalassocracy and an upstart republic, so why go there?

And it would be easier to conquer the rotting Achaemenids than to face Carthage; I doubt Alex was a naval genius.

He thought outside of the box when it came to besieging Tyre. ;)
 
I agree much with both posters. Like Tyre, where he built a causeway to defeat an island, he would have likely made a land route. First conquering Arabia, lands west of Egypt were ripe for the plucking, and to the best of my knowledge, past what is now eastern Libya (Tobruk, etc) which was taken by Egypt in past dynasties, the other areas due west were only accessed by sea because of the long distance and difficulties of land based logistics.

Of all people, Alexander proved himself in both distance and logistics by his return from India with the thirst and trials. Bonus points for going in winter, but with this man who knows? I expect Carthage to have at least glimmerings of advance plans of any buildup, as naval powers are especially in tune with intel (the human factor information under deep cover), especially soon after the roll west. Alexander might even try to use Arabia as a feint false campaign, trying it later where it would fall like a bunch of dominoes after the Carthage adventure.

It would only take a couple of months for the whole thing to take place. He might even do it with a large light cavalry (in late winter) and possibly a camel corps plus getting resupply by way of ships some distance from Carthage literally dumping their cargo at night in barrells or bales or amphora just off the coast during wind to shore event, so to miminize risk of attack, like drug smugglers did with canabis in Florida. This is just off the top of my head.

From Carthage, the hive of bees would be sprung, and end battle to the death. Refugees would go to what is now Cartagenia, Spain, Malta, etc. and stir up a storm. The North African route would be the soft underbelly, being the previously protected center of the western colonies (AFAIK), though Berber tribes would be tough past what is mid Tunisia in OTL, knowledge of Arabia being only partial help.

A quick doubling of length of the Empire, and huge kudos from nearly all, even enemies and potential foes. A masterstroke. He would quite possibly make a deal with the Berbers (he paid off the keepers of Khyber pass, did he not?) and settle irrigatable lands like the Romans did later.
 
I imagine if Alexander is alive and plans the conquest of Carthage after subduing the kingdoms in Arabia, he'll look towards using Persians and the local eastern populations in his Empire as his main source of manpower. Prior his death, Alexander was told that 20,000 Persian boys had completed their military training in Macedonian style warfare. I don't think Macedonians or Greeks would make up a major component of his armies by then. He can easily hire Cypriots and Phoenicians to build up a fleet of his own to take down Carthage's.
 
Map

Opps, Cartegena (New Carthage) apparently was only settled after Alexander. Make that one of the other colonies, preferrably island ones.

Here is a map a few centuries later to give some perspective (many of the towns were there during Alexander's time). Note the listing of Ethiopians in the Sahara, which is from the early greek term of all peoples immediately to the south of Egypt being called Aethiopians.

3038-004-3BF0B679.gif
 
He would probably enlist the help of Syracuse in fighting Carthage. Perhaps by giving it full control over the island in exchange for help in the Macedonians conquering N. Africa.
 
Make one wonder in a related tone why he went for Egypt and beyond Persia, really. In a way, it make not as much sense as remaining in Persia for obliterating OR assimilating the OLD ENNEMY of Greece.

The Macedonian kings both seen themselves as greeks I think, no? heir of their greatness? Why not remaining to ensure Persia first shall be no more a threat?
 
Top