WI Alexander Dies at the Siege of Pellium

Original source here: Arrian's Campaigns of Alexander:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Anabasis_of_Alexander/Book_I/Chapter_V#18

Modern Source: goo.gl/Zjk15W

Alexander's Balkan campaign is incredibly fascinating to me. The argument could be made that Alexander's leadership and generalship was forged in the crucible of this campaign. One thing that the modern historian I linked to believes is that Alexander got incredibly lucky in his Pellium campaign against the Illyrians Cleitus and Glaucias. He essentially blundered into a horseshoe-shaped valley ringed with mountains and the barbarians occupying the heights. English, the historian, seems to believe that if the Illyrian cheiftain had been bolder and had rained down missiles from three sides he could have severely bloodied Alexander's troops. Setting aside the Illyrians were inferior troops to the Macedonian phalanx, this seemed to be the perfect situation to butcher a phalanx. Perhaps we can sweeten the deal and have Glaucias' Taulantians arrive a day early, cut off Alexander's retreat (as they did a day later), and have the barbarians have a full-on battle of encirclement and destruction.

So our POD is Alexander and most of his army is slaughtered in a barbarian ambush/encirclement. The twenty-year old king is dead, with the only other sizeable Macedonian army already holding down the fort across the Hellespont under Parmenion. Macedon is virtually naked, meaning the Illyrian tribes could sweep into its undefended borders and wreak havoc until Parmenion's army could make it back across the Hellespont. And with Parmenion's son Philotas dead along with Alexander's force, Parmenion would doubtless be looking for revenge.

Thebes, already in revolt, could spearhead a wider insurrection of Greek city-states, each one attempting to shake off Macedonian rule. The Persian Empire under Darius remains inviolable.

With a power vacuum in the Balkans where the Macedonians briefly held hegemony, who fills that void? Do the Persians seize the opportunity and launch a third invasion? Does one of the city-states (Thebes?) decide to assert their dominance?
 
Well, first of all, that's unlikely as the Macedonian army had been the best in this part of the world and had demanstrated its ability to win on such terrain; it was forged in the mountainius warfare, that was there they felt at home.

So if the Macedoniand suffered a defeat with Alexander dead, the chances are high that some part of the Macedonian army survived; at this period the Macedonians were tough as coffin nails, best martial qualities on the Earth probably.

But, ye, OK, worst came to worst, and the Macedonian army is annihilated...
The army in Anatolia is preserved and is headed by the excellent general, Parmenion, who automatically becomes de facto the Macedonian ruler. About 10-20 thousand more can be conscripted in Macedonia proper and so Macedonia will be the regional hegemon still. Its power will be diminished comparing with the best days of king Phillip, most of Greece lost for example.
But Macedonia would be a power to be reckoned with, and in 10-20 years might regain its former streangth.
 
Perhaps! I honestly would have to know who all was campaigning with Alexander at Pellium, because I think a mini-Diadochi-style roundrobin of successor wars could happen with the surviving generals, with Parmenion being the favorite. Arrhidaeus would be the logical Argead successor to Alexander, but Parmenion could easily remove him. Everyone else Alexander largely purged when he came to power. So does this mean Parmenion establishes himself as king of Macedon?
 
I would imagine if we're talking bloodlines as the most important factor, it would have to be Arrhidaeus, wouldn't it? I just don't know how long that would last. I have a hard time believing Parmenion would just sit idly by a "half-wit" takes the throne while he has an army and the perfect chance to pull off a Caesar (whether he could sucessfully pull it off remains to be seen).
 
Top