"What if Alexander the Great Had Lived? An Alternative" Topic

… History of the Macedonian King and His Empire

"In 323 BCE, Alexander the Great was on top of the world. Never a man to sit on his hands or rest upon his laurels, Alexander began planning his future campaigns, which may have included attempts to subdue the Arabian Peninsula or make another incursion into India. But fate had other plans for the young Macedonian king. Alexander died of still unknown causes at the height of his conquests, when he was still in his early 30s. Although his empire was quickly divided, his legacy only grew, and Alexander became the stuff of legends even in his own time. Alexander was responsible for establishing 20 cities in his name across the world, most notably Alexandria in Egypt, and he was directly responsible for spreading Ancient Greek culture as far east as modern day India and other parts of Asia. For the ancient world, Alexander became the emblem of military greatness and accomplishment; it was reported that many of Rome's greatest leaders, including Pompey the Great, Augustus, and Caesar himself all visited Alexander's tomb in Alexandria, a mecca of sorts for antiquity's other leaders…."

See here

link

Armand

For his legacy, it's just as well that he died when he did. The Successors who gave each other so much trouble would have probably been just as troublesome for him. They knew him, and many were not impressed. Don't forget how many of his generals he either killed himself in a drunken rage, or had killed for disloyalty. Nobody was safe.
His body was worn out. Could he have survived marching on Rome or Carthage, just because he wanted to?

Dying young at the height of your success is always the best way to create a legacy / legend. However, I doubt he would've faced the difficulties with his generals as suggested by OFM. For one thing the army was pretty loyal to him personally as shown by how his successors all struggled to establish their legitimacy after his death.

Despite the blandishments of peddlers of alternative history there is only one honest answer to the question of 'What if?' and that is 'We have no idea.'

The Western world would have been Greek-based rather than Roman-based: Better philosophy and worse engineering.
Hail the demigod Alexandros!

The army was pretty loyal to him personally?
Okay. If you want to discount the open mutiny when they refused to go on conquering the rest of India. And probably China too. He would have had to "recruit" a whole new army.

How long would he live? Count out how many times he was wounded and how severely.
Consider how much he drank. He would be right up there with Country musicians from the 70s and 80s.
He was lucky he lasted as long as he did. His body was a fine totem for his generals to fight over. I'll give him that.

Thanks

Armand

One thing is for sure, if Alexander lived, he'd be pretty old now.

I am probably inclined to agree with OFM. I think Alexander was a spent force when he returned to Susa in 324BC. Add to this fact that organizing and controlling the kingdom that he had recently conquered would be immense task in and of itself and I think it is highly unlikely he moves into the middle and western Mediterranean.

I fully agree with John the OFM about the mutiny in India. I have also wondered, was marching the army through Gedrosia punishment for their mutiny in India? I don't know that it can ever be proven, but I did look at the evidence when I was in grad school and he seems to have at least understood how difficult the march through Gedrosia would be.

I agree that he was likely past his prime, and that his health was compromised by excess and injury, but still think he would have not had any issues with getting his armies and generals to campaign around the Mediterranean and Arabia. Going to India again, let alone China, would probably not have featured on his bucket list even though at this remove we can't be sure that he didn't exploit the mutinies to promote his legend of invincibility… "I would've conquered all to the ends of the Earth if my men hadn't let me down."

There is a fascinating essay on this counter-factual topic written by the eminent scholar Arnold Toynbee -- "If Alexander the Great Had Lived On" -- a chapter in "The Impact of Alexander the Great: Civilizer or Destroyer?" (edited by Eugene Borza; Dryden Press 1974) that I recommend highly, if you can find this old book, or the essay online or elsewhere. Toynbee has some startling conclusions and outlines events up to the present day, when we are living "in the time of the reigning (but not, of course, governing) World-ruler Alexander LXXXVI."

I remembered some other takes --

"What If? The World's Foremost Military Historians Imagine What Might Have Been" (edited by Robert Crowley, 1999) is a collection of 20 essays on topics ranging from the ancient world to post-WWII. Really interesting takes and interpretations, including the chapter "Conquest Denied: The Premature Death of Alexander the Great" by Josiah Ober.

Not much on Alexander per se but another erudite look at might-have-beens is "Virtual History: Alternatives and Counterfactuals", edited by Niall Ferguson (Picador, 1997).

And finally, in a purely speculative vein, there are two (at least) collections of sci-fi stories: "What Might Have Been, Vol. 1: Alternate Empires" (12 stories; Bantam, 1989) and "What Might Have Been, Vol. 2: Alternate Heroes" (15 stories, Bantam, 1990). Both books are edited by Gregory Benford and Martin Greenberg and feature stories by many big-league SF and Fantasy writers.

Worth seeking out!

Thanks!

Armand