In 333 BC, Alexander the Great battled the Achaemenid King of Kings Darius III at the battle of Issus. The battle initally went relatively poorly for the Macedonians, with both the left flank and the center pushed back, but the Hypastpists managed to break through the Kardakes infantry on the other side of the river and punched a hole in the Perisan line, with the Agrianians marching in support, causing Alexander and his companion cavalry to charge Darius III personally. Darius III, seeing his position compromised, fled the battlefield, despite the performance of his left flank. What if Darius III had chosen to remain with his isolated force of chariots and fight, being killed by Alexander's charge. This would throw the empire into chaos, with a civil war and rebellion in the empire quite likely. Would Alexander still fight an ATL Gaugamela? Would places like Egypt, Babylonia, or the Eastern Satrapies rebel themselves, or side with Alexander? Since obviously there wouldn't be the need to chase down Bessus, how would the conquest of the rest of the Achaemenid Empire go differently?
WI: Darius III killed at Issus
- Thread starter SunKing105
- Start date
If Darius is killed at Issus, the Achaemenid Empire collapses a few years ahead of schedule. I doubt there would be anything resembling Gaugamela because that would imply that the satraps would stop killing each other to unite against a single enemy. Sisygambis was devoted to Alexander and treated him as her own son; I'd expect no different. Alexander marries Strateira II a lot sooner and declares himself Darius' successor. Even if he dies in the same year, his heir would be 9-10 years old as opposed to an infant. Alexander redirects his attention to seizing Babylon and leaves the pacification of Egypt to one of his lieutenants.
Wouldn’t that butterfly away some key events like the siege of Tyrus, his elevation to the status of God and the founding of Alexandria? And that could change the locals’ perception of him. More of a “yet another foreigner conqueror” and less of a liberator. Personally I think he would still focus on Egypt first, before going to Babylon.
Stateira at that point was likely way too young for marrying. Alex can surely marry her two or three years before OTL (as Stateira’s younger sister also has reache the right age for marrying at the time of Susa) but is unlikely they can marry before that. But if Alexander married Stateira earlier is likely they would have a living son at the time of Alexander’s death AND a boy already born and by Stateira (but that would work also if the mother was Parysatis) would be a very big game changer as that boy would be the legitimate heir of Persia, with full support of all that aristocracy. Plus with a living great grandson on the throne instead of one (or two?) assassinated granddaughter(s) is likely who Queen Mother Sisygambis will rule as regent for Alexander’s son at least for some time, if not until her death. If she died before Alex’s son had the right age for ruling then Stateira would likely replace her as regent