I think Alexander can be a bit overrated when contrasted with someone like Hannibal, in terms of what he had to work with, or Napoleon in terms of scale...but to say he's an incompetent son of fortune is stretching iconoclasm to the point of absurdity imo.

Surely the correct comparison is between what happened at their deaths.

Philip dies - Alexander carried on and things went much as they would had Philip lived - maybe better.

Alexander dies - everything goes to H*** in a handcart.

Philip's officers were undoubtedly a great asset to Alexander. He would have achieved for less w/o having Philip's work to build on - but how did things go when those officers had to manage without him?
 
I dunno about that. India had a massive chunk of the world's population, even larger than today.

And I dunno about whether Chandragupta Maurya was less competent than Alexander. He was the one man in all of history who was able to conquer almost all of the Indian subcontinent in a lifetime. Even the British needed a century to do that.
Uh, the Persian Empire that Alexander conquered had more people than all of India. The Persian Empire still holds the record for the most percentage of the world's population in one Empire.
 
Uh, the Persian Empire that Alexander conquered had more people than all of India. The Persian Empire still holds the record for the most percentage of the world's population in one Empire.

But how much of that population was in the army? I suspect that the armies of India and the Alexandrian army would be about similar, with questions on elephants vs. phalanxes etc. muddling that answer. Overall, this is a fight between two great men, with amazing achievements.

It's much easier to just eliminate Chandragupta Maurya to make Alexander conquering India much more likely.
 
But how much of that population was in the army? I suspect that the armies of India and the Alexandrian army would be about similar, with questions on elephants vs. phalanxes etc. muddling that answer. Overall, this is a fight between two great men, with amazing achievements.

It's much easier to just eliminate Chandragupta Maurya to make Alexander conquering India much more likely.
Eliminate Chandragupta's guru- Chanakya; without him Chandragupta doesn't have the strategy and administrative talent to make him someone that is as big a threat to Alexander.
 
Eliminate Chandragupta's guru- Chanakya; without him Chandragupta doesn't have the strategy and administrative talent to make him someone that is as big a threat to Alexander.

Without Chanakya, the coup against the Nanda Empire won't happen either.

Which should really help things for Alexander.
 
Top