WI: Alexander's bastard

What if Alexander, in his early youth, has a bastard son by a Macedonian woman who ends up being a late teen at his father's death, assuming that Alexander's illness/poisoning isn't butterflied away.

Let's say this son has a startling resemblance to Alexander, ascertaining that Alexander will at least recognize him; this avoids the awkward relationship that existed between Alexander and Philip (who also dies as in OTL).

In OTL, another of Alexander's bastards (by a Persian woman) was four years old at his death, and Alexander, his son by Roxana, was still in the womb. What do you think of the changed dispositions? You have a boy who's been in his father's shadow all his young life, but still has had time to prove himself; he looks much like him, and is nearly as charismatic. His only trouble is the older generals vying for power and influence.

Would they assassinate him, to seize the regencies and coffers of the Empire for themselves, or would they follow him, as they did Alexander?
Don't forget Alexander's mother Olympias in Macedonia, who has had no influence over this bastard grandson of hers; she'll want him out of the way, presumably; and pregnant Roxana, and Alexander's bastard Herakles (a child of four), who can be used as bargaining chips or in claims of legitimacy.
 
So, this son is recognized by Alexander as Alexander's son and presumably, as his heir? If that's the case, guess who just inherited Alexander's Empire. Though imagine he will face problems with a faction centered around Arrhideaeus, though if this boy is anything like Alexander in personality and wit as you say, he would be smart enough (or the inevitable council of "advisors" that gathers around him such as probably Perdiccas, Eumenes, etc.) to eliminate Arrhidaeus before he becomes a problem.

The unwillingness for the diadochi to do away with Arrhidaeus and Alexander IV, and their being careful to not proclaim themselves kings until they were dispensed with, shows how important and influential the Argead line was. Not to mention, to have a teenage, charismatic youth who's recognized by Alexander as his son, and looks like Alexander, with the army, would almost guarantee their (the army's) support for him.
 
I think he at least would have Eumenes' back, being ultra-loyal to the Argeads and such. He invented Chess for chis-sakes!
 
Alright, so what say you (relative) experts on this son's effect on Alexander's personality? Does Alexander soften, or slow down his conquests? Does having a son influence him to turn back to Babylon of his own accord, to consolidate the Empire and ensure the immortality of his line?

What of Antipater and Olympias in Macedonia? Could they conceivably plot together to get Cassander (Antipater's son) to whisk Roxana away from Babylon? Or would they regard this as a long shot, having a half-barbarian baby (however legitimate) compete with the Macedonian god-youth?

Do you see a cult of living divinity (like the system of the Pharaohs) forming up around the Argead line? A cycle of death and rebirth: as soon as the heir comes of age, the great god-king dies and is reborn through him? I seriously don't think that this can last long, however.
 
I don't think this would have any effect on Alexander's plans of conquest. Having a pregnant Rhoxane certainly didn't seem to have any effect on him, as he was planning on invading Arabia, and then Carthage. Alexander was an adventurer first and foremost.
 
I don't think this would have any effect on Alexander's plans of conquest. Having a pregnant Rhoxane certainly didn't seem to have any effect on him, as he was planning on invading Arabia, and then Carthage. Alexander was an adventurer first and foremost.

Remember, though, that in OTL Alexander had his soldiers, who were his boys; like sons, brothers, and fathers to him. Still, no matter what befell him, they would ramble on under another's competent command--and all of Alexander's deputies and general were at the very least competent, evidenced by their titanic struggles for power after his death.

In this time line he has a boy that stands out from the rest: his own flesh and blood, radically unique for it; he has no guarantee that good will befall his own biological son after his death. Cassander is a devious snake to Alexander, as always; his father Antipater, experienced but loyal mostly to the idea of old King Philip, holds ever-important Macedonia. Ptolemy would die for Alexander, but is also the biological son of King Philip; who knows whether he would deal honestly with Alexander's young son, or claim the throne for himself? Seleucus at least supported Alexander's policy of miscegenation, and Perdiccas can be relied upon to do right by Alexander; Hephaestion is no question.
Still, his death would throw the Empire into turmoil; no doubt he would be reminded of his own troubles after Philip's death (Thracian and Illyrian invasions, rebellion of the Greek city-states), and his young bastard is even younger and has maybe 20 or so times more land area to cover in assurances of vassalage and loyalty.
This is why he might slow down and consolidate, with a son's future to consider.
 
Ptolemy was most likely not a son of Phillip II, nor was it a circulating rumor at the time for if it was Ptolemy would have been shrewd enough to use it to his advantage, instead of having to play nice with Perdiccas to get Egypt for himself. And if Alexander was to have believed that Ptolemy was the illegitimate son of Phillip, he would have certainly dispensed with Ptolemy, like he did in time with almost all of his rivals for the throne.


Assuming Alexander lives longer, Antipater will be replaced at some point-Olympias' pleas for him to do so were bound to convince him like they did, sooner or later.
 
And if Alexander was to have believed that Ptolemy was the illegitimate son of Phillip, he would have certainly dispensed with Ptolemy, like he did in time with almost all of his rivals for the throne.

Alexander did have a special magnetism about him; I think he knew that Ptolemy was loyal. However your other points convince me....
Anyway, so you don't think that the emotional impact of having a son would slow his conquests?

Love your TL, by the way.
 
Alexander did have a special magnetism about him; I think he knew that Ptolemy was loyal. However your other points convince me....
Anyway, so you don't think that the emotional impact of having a son would slow his conquests?

Love your TL, by the way.

I can't say for certain that it wouldn't drastically change his plans (he was consolidating in his own way through his adoption of persian royal customs and establishment of cities in key strategic locations). Maybe you can get him to put off his campaign into Carthage, actually, that sounds more doable the more I think about it. His invasion of Arabia actually had a good purpose that could bring vast wealth through the frankinsence and murrh trade, so he'd probably still undertake that.


Thanks. :D
 
Top