Philip II of Macedon lives longer

samcster94

Banned
What would have happened if this man had lived longer??? By this, I mean nobody kills him and dies of natural causes. I do imagine it'd butterfly away his son's conquests and the Ptolemy dynasty.
 
I imagine he would be able to conquer large parts of Persian Empire but unlike Alexander he would make peace with the Persians.
 
Considering it was Philip who organized the plans for invading Persia, organized the Macedonian Army, and united the Greeks, I imagine he'd have a similar amount of success as his son.

If there's a difference to be found, it's that he'd be more interested in state-building and less interested in conquering for its own sake. Anatolia and the Levant would be annexed, and Egypt probably vassalized. Maybe he'd grab Mesopotamia (or part thereof) as well, but anything past the Zagros is a reach.
 
A longer living Philip II would be a fun scenario...
Assuming things will go mostly like OTL we have some big differences:
1) He will not have trouble in securing the succession and Greece will not rebel against him so his army will depart earlier plus Attalus will stay in his position of power with the army instead of being killed.
2) The succession in Macedonia would be pretty uncertain as he would have at least three possible main heirs: a) Alexander, his son by his fourth wife Olympia of Epirus, b) Amyntas, his nephew and son-in-law and c) Caranus, his son by his seventh wife Cleopatra Eurydice.
3) If Philip had the same kind of campaign of Alexander he will not go for the full conquest of Asia but accept an offer like the one Darius made to Alexander during the siege of Tyrus (aka all the lands at the west of the Halys river plus money and the wedding between one of his daughters and Philip’s heir... well in this scenario Darius can feel safe enough also offering his niece as bride so one beyween Stateira, Drypetis or Amestris will end married to Alexander or Caranus. Likely will be a wedding between Alexander and Stateira as OTL)
 
A longer living Philip II would be a fun scenario...
Assuming things will go mostly like OTL we have some big differences:
1) He will not have trouble in securing the succession and Greece will not rebel against him so his army will depart earlier plus Attalus will stay in his position of power with the army instead of being killed.
2) The succession in Macedonia would be pretty uncertain as he would have at least three possible main heirs: a) Alexander, his son by his fourth wife Olympia of Epirus, b) Amyntas, his nephew and son-in-law and c) Caranus, his son by his seventh wife Cleopatra Eurydice.
3) If Philip had the same kind of campaign of Alexander he will not go for the full conquest of Asia but accept an offer like the one Darius made to Alexander during the siege of Tyrus (aka all the lands at the west of the Halys river plus money and the wedding between one of his daughters and Philip’s heir... well in this scenario Darius can feel safe enough also offering his niece as bride so one beyween Stateira, Drypetis or Amestris will end married to Alexander or Caranus. Likely will be a wedding between Alexander and Stateira as OTL)

One point of disagreement, I'm not convinced that he'd accept those borders - I tend to think that he'd probably go for a Euphrates & Anatolia border. Potentially even going so far as to force the independence of Armenia to act as a buffer state for both of the Empires.

What is interesting is how it all evolves in the long term. Since we're not seeing further campaigning in the short term (except maybe against a Persian retaliation if it ever comes) Greek settlement will be much more dense in the Eastern Med. I can see Philip wanting to dissolve the Hellenic League into simply his own Empire of the Hellenes, which raises questions about where it would be ruled from. Pella seems the obvious one, but I wouldn't put it past Philip to do something like re-founding Byzantion, at least relocating there for all those lovely good reasons. (This timeline may use the term Byzantine Empire in a totally different way!)

The big question is Alexander - we have no Alexandria (at least no guarantee) in this timeline, which is sad, but we also need to consider the inheritance. Alexander at this point I think is the only one to have been a General, and that could win a lot of loyalty, and secures the alliance with Epirus. It may come down to how Alexander and Caranus get along. Alexander may well try and kill Caranus, but alternatively, without the burden of rule, Alexander may just decide he prefers being a General, being sent by Philip to conquer the Black Sea City States, and later asking only that Caranus allows him to take an army to campaign in Italy to continue uniting the Greeks.

Alternatively Alexander slaughters his brothers and relatives, takes the Empire and goes to town with a larger, organised, almost-a-generation-settled system of administration and conquers Persia.

I'd prefer an Alexandrian General, Caranus-King scenario myself, assuming Caranus doesn't grow up to be a lunatic.
 

Derek Pullem

Kicked
Donor
How about this?

Alexander as Phillip's battle general wins all the plaudits in the campaign against Persia. He oversteps his instructions and as per OTL invades Egypt to eject the Persians. Egypt is not in Phillips plans at all preferring to concentrate on his Hellenic Kingdom in Greece, Asia Minor and the Levant. Alexander is dismissed from the army but is offered the position of Pharaoh by a very anxious Egypt. God-King is a position that Alexander can relate to! Alexander then becomes an analogue of the Ptolemies ITTL only much more competent.

Not wishing to trigger a war he cannot win with his father / half-brother he sets his targets on Libya and eventually Carthage. By the time he has built his new army and carried out his plans Phillip is dead but the Hellenic Empire is secure. The Egyptian Empire is also relatively secure and Rome has a free hand in Italy unless the Hellenes or Egypt or both intervene (on which side could be interesting)
 
One point of disagreement, I'm not convinced that he'd accept those borders - I tend to think that he'd probably go for a Euphrates & Anatolia border. Potentially even going so far as to force the independence of Armenia to act as a buffer state for both of the Empires.

What is interesting is how it all evolves in the long term. Since we're not seeing further campaigning in the short term (except maybe against a Persian retaliation if it ever comes) Greek settlement will be much more dense in the Eastern Med. I can see Philip wanting to dissolve the Hellenic League into simply his own Empire of the Hellenes, which raises questions about where it would be ruled from. Pella seems the obvious one, but I wouldn't put it past Philip to do something like re-founding Byzantion, at least relocating there for all those lovely good reasons. (This timeline may use the term Byzantine Empire in a totally different way!)

The big question is Alexander - we have no Alexandria (at least no guarantee) in this timeline, which is sad, but we also need to consider the inheritance. Alexander at this point I think is the only one to have been a General, and that could win a lot of loyalty, and secures the alliance with Epirus. It may come down to how Alexander and Caranus get along. Alexander may well try and kill Caranus, but alternatively, without the burden of rule, Alexander may just decide he prefers being a General, being sent by Philip to conquer the Black Sea City States, and later asking only that Caranus allows him to take an army to campaign in Italy to continue uniting the Greeks.

Alternatively Alexander slaughters his brothers and relatives, takes the Empire and goes to town with a larger, organised, almost-a-generation-settled system of administration and conquers Persia.

I'd prefer an Alexandrian General, Caranus-King scenario myself, assuming Caranus doesn't grow up to be a lunatic.
I can not see Philip so interested in ruling more than the greek part of Asia or dragging the war for too long if he can stop it with a very good peace and a lot of lands who include all the Greek part of Asia so the Halys border would be fine for him.
Alexander and Caranus are unlikely to be ever friendly as Olympias and Cleopatra Eurydice were big rivals and Eurydice’s uncle hated Olympias and Alexander, who being half-Epirote was seen by many as inferior to the fully Macedon Caranus who was more legitimated to rule. Plus here Amyntas is still alive and has a very good claim on the throne (his father was Philip’s older brother and he was briefly king as infant before being replaced on the throne by his regent aka his uncle and future father-in-law) and a daughter (Adea Eurydice) who can very well marry Caranus (and an eventual son can very well marry Europa, the daughter of Philip and Eurydice).
I can very well seeing some arrangements between Amyntas and Caranus about the succession to the kingship in Macedonia because Alexander is pretty unlikely to be able to rule there but I think who Alexander, specially an Alexander who married Barsine/Stateira, will be either killed on order of Philip or will be his main successor as he will inhereit the biggest part of the Empire while Amyntas or Caranus will become King of Macedonia under him...
 
Top