NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, I've posted this thread topic in another forum with some enlightened intellectuals as members, and this forum seems to also be brimming with the aforementioned individuals, along with the various Cynics, Pessimists and Optimists, The Pessimistic Optimists and the Optimistic Cynics, so I propose!

... a question.

What if Alexander The Great did not pass away from either poison or illness, this is disputed, at age 33? What would he have done? How would he have done it? How would this have changed the world as we know it? Would we still frown upon Polygamy?

Ignore the last question!

I've done a little bit of research, but nothing solid, since of course this is all speculation, but I would very much like to hear all your opinions, so have at it!

Cheers,
The Greek City States of Supville

Well, I've posted this thread topic in another forum with some enlightened intellectuals as members, and this forum seems to also be brimming with the aforementioned individuals, along with the various Cynics, Pessimists and Optimists, The Pessimistic Optimists and the Optimistic Cynics, so I propose!

... a question.

What if Alexander The Great did not pass away from either poison or illness, this is disputed, at age 33? What would he have done? How would he have done it? How would this have changed the world as we know it? Would we still frown upon Polygamy?

Ignore the last question!

I've done a little bit of research, but nothing solid, since of course this is all speculation, but I would very much like to hear all your opinions, so have at it!

Cheers,
The Greek City States of Supville

Hmm...

We'd all be Greek. Wacky fun!

Well, Macedonian, actually, since the Greeks thought of the Macedonians as barabarians. But then, who didn't the Greeks think of as Barbarians.

Anywho...

Wacky fun!

Well I'm not sure that he would've successfuly conquered any more land - more than likely he would've tried to and failed becuase his army was so thinly spread out, eventually, unless he was clever and realised this, and held on to what he "had". I've heard he conquered more land than anyone else, but didn't really rule it, just the generic pillaging, plundering, and moving on.

So his armies were in persia one day, and then somewhere else the next, and persia would basically be, well, free, but pillaged. Sure he was a great military leader, but he wasn't that bothered about ruling land, just conquering it.

I reckon he would've continued conquering until he got too old for it, and then just, well, those conquered lands would just rebuild and carry on as per normal. I'm not sure it would've been that different.

Well I'm not sure that he would've successfuly conquered any more land - more than likely he would've tried to and failed becuase his army was so thinly spread out, eventually, unless he was clever and realised this, and held on to what he "had". I've heard he conquered more land than anyone else, but didn't really rule it, just the generic pillaging, plundering, and moving on.

So his armies were in persia one day, and then somewhere else the next, and persia would basically be, well, free, but pillaged. Sure he was a great military leader, but he wasn't that bothered about ruling land, just conquering it.

I reckon he would've continued conquering until he got too old for it, and then just, well, those conquered lands would just rebuild and carry on as per normal. I'm not sure it would've been that different.

Nah. Ghengis Khan I think had...

'Largest continous land Empire.'

So maybe not most most land, but most land all next to itself.

(This is copied and pasted from the comment I made in the other forum I posted the topic on)

There is no denying the impact Alexander had on the known world. For all his Vices, and there were a few, he single-handedly spread language, science, philosophy and religion from the Hellenic world into Asia and Egypt, where, if you look hard enough you can still notice traces of it to this day. There are some tribes in India and the Middle East where they speak a dialect of Ancient Greek. Greek urns and other forms of art are constantly being discovered in these places as well.

Now, what would have happened if Alexander had fresh troops and good health before attacking China? Well, after an extremely bitter struggle, I believe that an Armstice would have been written, plunging both countries into an uneasy truce. After many years of peace, trade will have thrived and from that, a merging of cultures would have occured, as was part of Alexander's plan from the beginning. But you see, Alexander was bloodthirsty, and although his intentions may have been good, he was by no means a saint.

From there, I'm lost. I don't know what he would have done because I can't see him breaking such a strong peace, but I can't see him NOT either, if you get what I'm trying to say.

So what do you think of this theory? Is it even plausible?

What if Alexander The Great did not pass away from either poison or illness, this is disputed, at age 33? What would he have done? How would he have done it? How would this have changed the world as we know it?
Nothing would have changed.

He would have returned home. All going to plan he would have died of old age, then his empire would have fractured- much like the Mongols after the Great Khan.

Nothing in essence would have changed.

Oddly alexander the greats greatest contribution was simply conquering the land. He conquered the greatest military commanders of his age and left behind a vaguely unified set of states to his generals, who over the proceeding years were replaced by people of varying incompetence.

All of this, in my opinion, is one of the main reasons for the romans early success.

(This is copied and pasted from the comment I made in the other forum I posted the topic on)

There is no denying the impact Alexander had on the known world. For all his Vices, and there were a few, he single-handedly spread language, science, philosophy and religion from the Hellenic world into Asia and Egypt, where, if you look hard enough you can still notice traces of it to this day. There are some tribes in India and the Middle East where they speak a dialect of Ancient Greek. Greek urns and other forms of art are constantly being discovered in these places as well.

Now, what would have happened if Alexander had fresh troops and good health before attacking China? Well, after an extremely bitter struggle, I believe that an Armstice would have been written, plunging both countries into an uneasy truce. After many years of peace, trade will have thrived and from that, a merging of cultures would have occured, as was part of Alexander's plan from the beginning. But you see, Alexander was bloodthirsty, and although his intentions may have been good, he was by no means a saint.

From there, I'm lost. I don't know what he would have done because I can't see him breaking such a strong peace, but I can't see him NOT either, if you get what I'm trying to say.

So what do you think of this theory? Is it even plausible?

Wait, spread language, philosophy, religion?

So nobody had language, philosophy or religion before Alexander arrived?

This is brought up in a book called 'Conquistador' by SM Stirling. In the scenario proposed, Alexander cements his control over Persia, and creates a continuing line of Kings who consolidate east/west culture. This empire becomes the centre of civilization, and bridges Europe and East Asia. Despite some occasional changes, this 'centre' stays, and there is no impetus in Europe to find an alternative route to The East for trade. The end result being, that by this day and age, The 'Old World' has still not discovered the Americas.

Interesting Idea, if not a great book.

Arnold Toynbee had an excellent essay entitled "If Alexander the Great had Lived On", on this exact question in Some Problems of Greek History. It's one of the best pieces of alt history I've ever read....

It's written from the point of view of a modern scholar writting a history of the empire - existant more or less continually since Alexander's conquest of the Europe, India, and China.

The reason he didn't conquer AND control the empires was because he wished to unify them, but at the same time keep their individuality to an extent. He urged his soldiers to take Persian wives, and he did so as well. He merged his army with Persian troops, teaching them the Phalanx formation and using them as the core of his army. He left the capitals unscathed in order to make himself seem more lenient to the population, and at the same time he was utterly awed by the wonders he was seeing.

This is brought up in a book called 'Conquistador' by SM Stirling. In the scenario proposed, Alexander cements his control over Persia, and creates a continuing line of Kings who consolidate east/west culture. This empire becomes the centre of civilization, and bridges Europe and East Asia. Despite some occasional changes, this 'centre' stays, and there is no impetus in Europe to find an alternative route to The East for trade. The end result being, that by this day and age, The 'Old World' has still not discovered the Americas.

Interesting Idea, if not a great book.

Hmm. I can't imagine that someone wouldn't have gone west sooner or later anyways.

Wait, spread language, philosophy, religion?

So nobody had language, philosophy or religion before Alexander arrived?

Hmm... I guess I should have said GREEK language, philosophy and religion, although that sounds bigoted. How about Hellenic culture? How does that sound?

No... that still sounds bad... but like I said, he brought Greek/Macedonian culture to the eastern world with the intent to unite, not destroy, the Romans took care of that...

He had a plan to carve a mountain into his image and have city in one hand and... something else in the other, but cou;dnt find a way to get water up high enough, you never know if he'd lived longer he might have been able to do it, that really would be something.

He had a plan to carve a mountain into his image and have city in one hand and... something else in the other, but cou;dnt find a way to get water up high enough, you never know if he'd lived longer he might have been able to do it, that really would be something.

*cough* Mount Rushmore, anyone?

*cough* Mount Rushmore, anyone?

Pfft, don't get me started...

(Because I don't have anything to comment about)

Hmm. I can't imagine that someone wouldn't have gone west sooner or later anyways.

I agree.

The idea behind Stirling's timeline was that relative prosperity and lack of competition between states reduced the rate at which technology advanced. The incentive for creating vessels that could sail deep into the Atlantic or Pacific wasn't there.

I would imagine realistically, that sooner or later, someone would have found the America's. In this book, they just hadn't yet...

*cough* Mount Rushmore, anyone?
Mt Rushmore ?!?

Is that not THE most underwhelming national monument you have ever seen., what part of a city in one hand said Mount Rushmore to you ?

I'm talking, moving out half your population and feeding them on garlic and beer for 6 months of the year type national monument not a six foot statue of lincoln type monument.

Mt Rushmore ?!?

Is that not THE most underwhelming national monument you have ever seen., what part of a city in one hand said Mount Rushmore to you ?

I'm talking, moving out half your population and feeding them on garlic and beer for 6 months of the year type national monument not a six foot statue of lincoln type monument.

How about mudders milk? I'm pretty sure Alexander made it down to Egypt, so surely he picked up a trick or two?

How about mudders milk? I'm pretty sure Alexander made it down to Egypt, so surely he picked up a trick or two?
They were damn fine builders down there but i have to imagine by the time he got down there most of their major construction expertise had been lost, sad to say but Egypt was really dying by the time Alexander arrived.

I've read speculations that said he was actively planning and rebuilding a new army/force built with Persians (the Macedonians being used up and less replenishable) when he died suddenly, but planning for the conquest of one; Saudi Arabia Peninsula and two go back to India.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure he would have been able to do anything other than consolidate his holdings. His only secure forces were his Macedonians, and they had just been on an extended trek all the way to India. They were exhausted, worn down, and diminished in numbers substantially. His other troops from the Greek states might have provisionally accepted him, but that would have been based largely on the fact that he beat the snot out of their ancient rivals in the Persians, now part of the empire. Put simply, his empire was too fractured along racial and ethnic lines, his state composed of too many competing and formerly warring factions, his infractructure too little (keep in mind that he built no roads on his trip, so it would have taken him years to get from one end of the empire to the other), and his political rivals too many. He was a brilliant military commander and a capable and canny politician, but he did not and probably could not build a Roman Empire.

I say he would have taken India later on but would still never have been as cool or as great as Rommel was to be.

If Arrian is right about the way he was boozing it up then I would say that if he hadn't had died at 33 then the most he would have accomplished would be to die at 34.

That said, it's worth remembering that at the time he died he was going back because his army had mutinied. My suspicion is that he would have been spending what remained of his life going from fight to fight to onto his previous claims in the same sort of way that Charlemagne had ended.

"When Alexander looked at the map of his empire, he wept. For there was no more world to conquer."

For him, the conquering days were over as soon as his army mutinied at Opis.

He would have gone on a whirlwind tour of buggery.

Seriously...

I think he would have likely settled down some and ruled his expanded empire, or at least as much as he could feasibly keep under garrisoned control.
Or, his support would have waned, and his soldiers may have eventually rebelled at such a prolific continued campaign.

Dead, Tyrant......enter New Tyrant....rinse, repeat.

I say he would have taken India later on but would still never have been as cool or as great as Rommel was to be.


Pfft..

Rommel never conquered the known world.

Pfft..

Rommel never conquered the known world.
Give me the New Zealand Division and i'll conquer the World!
Give me two ANZAC Division's and i'll conquer the World!
Give me two Australian Division's and i'll conquer the World!

I have heard all three of them from different sources and dammit i believe him!
The Australians are notorious for stealing our stuff so the middle one seems most appropriate.

Give me the New Zealand Division and i'll conquer the World!
Give me two ANZAC Division's and i'll conquer the World!
Give me two Australian Division's and i'll conquer the World!

I have heard all three of them from different sources and dammit i believe him!
The Australians are notorious for stealing our stuff so the middle one seems most appropriate.


If Rommel had run the show, we may be speaking German now, I'll grant you that.

But we'll never know, becuase it never happened.

Alexander, won.

If Rommel had run the show, we may be speaking German now, I'll grant you that.

But we'll never know, becuase it never happened.

Alexander, won.
Hmmmmm i ain't speaking Greek though.

Hmmmmm i ain't speaking Greek though.


No.

The romans took over, and after that, the British.
Wich is the only reason we dont usually speak French in the US.

No.

The romans took over, and after that, the British.
Wich is the only reason we dont usually speak French in the US.
My money says Poland shall be taking over next.

My money says Poland shall be taking over next.


Thats ok with me.

I dig beer, sauages, and in small doses, saurkraut.

No.

The romans took over, and after that, the British.
Wich is the only reason we dont usually speak French in the US.
Indeed, my apologies.

How about this one? With the Greeks remaining strong in the conquered regions after Alexander, they fend off the Romans. With no 1000+ year dark ages to hold back already advanced Greek and Arabic math systems, humans began space flights to the outer systems 500 years ago! We're living on gaia-formed Mars! :D

EDIT: Oh, and since the Aztecs probably wouldn't have been conquered by the Spanish, they'd be among the most advanced Earth cultures. My wife and son speak Nahuatl! :D