Alexander The Great - of Persia

[Tynnin]

Let’s say Philip is recognized as a Persian client king or as a satrap of Macedon and Thrace (yes, I know, what Persian Emperor would allow an upstart to gain such recognition but let’s just run with this). Alexander grows up enjoying a certain sense of amicability with the Persians and hating the migrating tribes of the west because of their constant raids and invasions. He eventually becomes a commander in the Persian army. What next?

But this is just my two cents – anyone else have ideas on how we could get Alexander to be a military leader for the Persian Empire?

 

[Forum Lurker]

Xerxes does not fall for Themistocles' gambit, and instead of a disastrous naval battle at Salamis, forces a fight in open water, slaughtering the outnumbered Athenians. With naval superiority, he then traps half of the Greeks outside of the walls over the Isthmus of Corinth, and takes the Peloponnesus when the Spartan Pausanius Medizes. With control over Greece, Persia is in a position to hold Macedon as a client state.

 

[Othniel]

Well, you could have a Persian invasion of Macedonia which results in conquest when Alexzander is only a few years old. He is seen as having intellicual promise and is raised by the Persian courts. They see he has a grasp for tactics, and bam. General Alexzander the Macedonian of Persia.

 

[Forum Lurker]

That requires an earlier PoD, though. In OTL, by the time Alexander was born Philip had sufficient strength to forestall the Persians, who were rather weakened.

 

[Thande]

Assuming Alexander enjoys conquests as spectacular as in OTL, but working for the King of Kings, where do said conquests take place? Rome perhaps?

 

[Forum Lurker]

First, he subdues the rebellious provinces of Egypt and India. Then, he heads west, to take mainland Greece if it isn't already Persian, and to take Italy if it is. The Persians had a strong relationship with the Phoenicians, so I can definitely see Persia and Carthage ganging up against Rome.

 

[Othniel]

That requires an earlier PoD, though. In OTL, by the time Alexander was born Philip had sufficient strength to forestall the Persians, who were rather weakened.

Technically no, maybe a plauge would be suffient enough to weaken the Macedonian millitary a few months before the invasion.

As for whom to invade,why not Ethopia?

 

[Forum Lurker]

The Meroe-Kush civilization? You could, but compared to Italy they're poor and dangerous. Much better to tangle with the Romans and steal their fertile land than get mauled by the Axumites raiding down from the highlands.

 

[Romulus Augustulus]

He then leads a massive revolt against the Persians, which, after 20 years of epic carnage, ends with the Persian Empire collapsing into around a dozen warring polities. For some reason, technological progress is faster. At this point in this ATL, we have a faster-than-light drive and are engaged in a genocidal war against lobster people from a planet orbiting Sirius.

 

[Tynnin]

You know Romulus you beat me to the punch. I was just thinking along those lines – Alexander eventually leading a faction in a Persian civil war that ends with the collapse of the Persian Empire (though, you're own your own with the genocide wars and light-drive ).

How about this – whenever Alexander comes up someone always asks “would he go West”. I tend to agree with those who say “why would he when all the problems and wealth were to the East”. That being said, I’m going to throw this out there – after a few years of warfare with the migrating tribes, and dealing with revolts in Egypt, Alexander is ordered east into India which eventually leads to an invasion of the Eastern Dynasties (which are in no way prepared as this is the warring states period – or maybe this would unite them?).

 

[Hierophant]

Xerxes does not fall for Themistocles' gambit, and instead of a disastrous naval battle at Salamis, forces a fight in open water, slaughtering the outnumbered Athenians. With naval superiority, he then traps half of the Greeks outside of the walls over the Isthmus of Corinth, and takes the Peloponnesus when the Spartan Pausanius Medizes. With control over Greece, Persia is in a position to hold Macedon as a client state.

Ive always thought that scenario would be interesting. I envision Alexander being raised in Persepolis, where he would recieve an education in some ways the same as OTL, as several Greek philosophers and teachers have been "invited" there. Alexander is wed to one of the Shahanshah's daughters and succedes his father to the Satrap of Macedonia. He expands the Empire into the Balkans, incorporating OTL Bulgaria, Romania, and Yugoslav states. The Empire goes through a time of troubles with revolts in Egypt and barbarian invasions in the East. He crushes the revolt in Egypt, and expands the Empire deep into India. The old Shahanshah dies, the new one attempts to have Alexander assasinated, he loses and Alexander rules and expanded Persian Empire, that is overlayed to a lesser degree with Greek thought.

His son or grandson then faces off against the Rome/Carthage/Syracuse Axis.

Am I the only one who would love to see Scipio Africanus and Hannibal at a battle, on the same side!

 

[Forum Lurker]

I'd be surprised to see Rome ally with Carthage. It would probably take a few serious diplomatic missteps between Persia and the Phoenicians in general. On the other hand, history is filled with really stupid diplomatic missteps, so it's not implausible.

And no, I'm not sure I'd really like to see Hannibal and Scipio on the same side. It sort of takes the fun out of war when one side is ridiculously overmatched.

Unless, of course, you have a Persian/Macedonian commander of Alexander's skill, who's managed to penetrate far enough east to have picked up a little booklet called The Art of War . . .

 

[Hierophant]

Though the Carthaginians and other Punics in the west Med were of phoenician descent, you just cant assume they will be best buds. For one the phoenicians in the levant were vassals of the Persians if im not mistaken. So it was a relationship of master with servant. I also doubt that the Carthaginians would have any problem with fighting the phoenicians. They spoke similar languages but this hasnt kept Prussians from fighting Austrians has it?

Also I think that in the event that Greece falls, Carthage is now numero uno in the west med. Syracuse and the magna graecians are going to be looking for allies against the persians, Rome and Carthage will fill this role. Think about. You have the worlds greatest empire in one corner, and Rome and Carthage in the other. Both sides know that the Persians are intent on ruling all lands, at least the valuable ones and elimating all possible opponents. A Roman-Carthaginian alliance is what I would expect, unless either the Romans or Carthaginians screw it up, which means that as soon as the other is subjugated there turn will be next.

 

[Forum Lurker]

Though the Carthaginians and other Punics in the west Med were of phoenician descent, you just cant assume they will be best buds. For one the phoenicians in the levant were vassals of the Persians if im not mistaken. So it was a relationship of master with servant. I also doubt that the Carthaginians would have any problem with fighting the phoenicians. They spoke similar languages but this hasnt kept Prussians from fighting Austrians has it?

When I was poking around for my TL, I ran across stuff which gave me the general impression that the Carthaginians pretty much thought of themselves as Phoenicians foremost, and "This particular body of Phoenicians" second. Also, the Phoeniciants of the Levant were not vassals, but rather allies; the King of Kings was utterly dependent on them for his navy, and I am aware of no instances in which their cooperation was compelled by military force.

It's true that Syracuse and Magna Graecia will likely ally with Rome. That's what I had them do. If anything, that gives Carthage even less reason to ally with Rome, as their naval dominance is challenged.

 

[vandevere]

Ive always thought that scenario would be interesting. I envision Alexander being raised in Persepolis, where he would recieve an education in some ways the same as OTL, as several Greek philosophers and teachers have been "invited" there. Alexander is wed to one of the Shahanshah's daughters and succedes his father to the Satrap of Macedonia. He expands the Empire into the Balkans, incorporating OTL Bulgaria, Romania, and Yugoslav states. The Empire goes through a time of troubles with revolts in Egypt and barbarian invasions in the East. He crushes the revolt in Egypt, and expands the Empire deep into India. The old Shahanshah dies, the new one attempts to have Alexander assasinated, he loses and Alexander rules and expanded Persian Empire, that is overlayed to a lesser degree with Greek thought.

His son or grandson then faces off against the Rome/Carthage/Syracuse Axis.

Am I the only one who would love to see Scipio Africanus and Hannibal at a battle, on the same side!

I don't care who's on the other side. If Scipio Africanus and Hannibal are on the same side, the other guy's going to lose. Period. And the victors will divide the spoils.

Vandevere

 

[Forum Lurker]

I'd bet on Rommel over the two. That is, of course, assuming he gets to keep his Panzers.

 

[vandevere]

I'd bet on Rommel over the two. That is, of course, assuming he gets to keep his Panzers.

You'll have to get the ASBs to arrange that particular match...

I was referring to whoever's in command of the armies of Persia at the time...

Vandevere

 

[Hierophant]

I think that Carthage would get Egypt, Palestine, and Syria. The Romans would get the Balkans, Asia Minor, Sicily, and Babylonia.

 

[Forum Lurker]

You said "I don't care who's on the other side", not "I don't care which Persian commands the Persian armies."

It's certainly true that they're masterful generals. They do not, however, hold a monopoly on being skilled. A sufficiently talented and trained Persian could hold his own, and in the process further the art of war considerably.