Supposing Alexander didn't die of a fever, and he lived say 20 year longer, how would the ancient world have changed drastically, if at all?
If Alexander the Great Lived Longer
- Thread starter AlternateHistoryFan
- Start date
Nothing came up when you searched for it? That's weird. This is a pretty popular topic, so it has been discussed a fair amount -- that doesn't mean that it can't be discussed again though! 
Another timeline you may want to look at in addition to OnkelWillie's is Endymion's "Blood and Gold." I've tried my hand at this as well, and would like to again at some point -- it's a fun scenario.
There are two schools of thought, basically -- that Alexander keeps conquering and conquering and conquering, or that Alexander for the rest of his life has to fight tooth and nail to keep the conquests he's already won. I tend to favor the first; I think the Arabian coastline would have been added to his empire, and while he would have had to reestablish Macedonian control in places like Thrace that were somewhat loosening from his rule in 323, he could have expanded his empire west towards Carthage and Magna Graecia or east into India (I think a fun scenario is Alexander v. Chandragupta). But there's all sorts of twists you can take on it -- for instance, a good one is the idea that a second invasion of India could become Alexander's "Russia" (having Alexander = Napoleon in this scenario), after which the empire crumbles. Either way the empire surviving intact long after his death is difficult; the Argead dynasty's greatest weakness was its inability to solve the succession without it devolving into civil war. The wars of the diadochi after Alexander's death were a typical Macedonian civil war played out on a much more massive scale.
Another timeline you may want to look at in addition to OnkelWillie's is Endymion's "Blood and Gold." I've tried my hand at this as well, and would like to again at some point -- it's a fun scenario.
There are two schools of thought, basically -- that Alexander keeps conquering and conquering and conquering, or that Alexander for the rest of his life has to fight tooth and nail to keep the conquests he's already won. I tend to favor the first; I think the Arabian coastline would have been added to his empire, and while he would have had to reestablish Macedonian control in places like Thrace that were somewhat loosening from his rule in 323, he could have expanded his empire west towards Carthage and Magna Graecia or east into India (I think a fun scenario is Alexander v. Chandragupta). But there's all sorts of twists you can take on it -- for instance, a good one is the idea that a second invasion of India could become Alexander's "Russia" (having Alexander = Napoleon in this scenario), after which the empire crumbles. Either way the empire surviving intact long after his death is difficult; the Argead dynasty's greatest weakness was its inability to solve the succession without it devolving into civil war. The wars of the diadochi after Alexander's death were a typical Macedonian civil war played out on a much more massive scale.
Hellenized Arabia ? Conquered Italy under some Diadochi rulers ?
Nothing came up when you searched for it? That's weird. This is a pretty popular topic, so it has been discussed a fair amount -- that doesn't mean that it can't be discussed again though!
Another timeline you may want to look at in addition to OnkelWillie's is Endymion's "Blood and Gold." I've tried my hand at this as well, and would like to again at some point -- it's a fun scenario.
There are two schools of thought, basically -- that Alexander keeps conquering and conquering and conquering, or that Alexander for the rest of his life has to fight tooth and nail to keep the conquests he's already won. I tend to favor the first; I think the Arabian coastline would have been added to his empire, and while he would have had to reestablish Macedonian control in places like Thrace that were somewhat loosening from his rule in 323, he could have expanded his empire west towards Carthage and Magna Graecia or east into India (I think a fun scenario is Alexander v. Chandragupta). But there's all sorts of twists you can take on it -- for instance, a good one is the idea that a second invasion of India could become Alexander's "Russia" (having Alexander = Napoleon in this scenario), after which the empire crumbles. Either way the empire surviving intact long after his death is difficult; the Argead dynasty's greatest weakness was its inability to solve the succession without it devolving into civil war. The wars of the diadochi after Alexander's death were a typical Macedonian civil war played out on a much more massive scale.
Thanks for summarizing, Monopolist.
I think who another 20 years of life for Alexander (but really only 5 years will be enough) will change comnpletely the world not for the things who Alexander can do next (and I think who a conquest of Arabia is really likely; after that his attenction will be all for the Magna Graecia (he has an uncle and brother-in-law to avenge, after all) but for what he was already doing in his last years: the almost always overlooked "Weddings of Susa" were in truth the fondaments of his Empire and the union of the Macedonian and Persian elites: marrying all his generals to the daughters of the Persian aristocracy he was the best system for mixing the two worlds. He himsefl married the daughters of the previous two legitimate High Kings of Persia and l think unlikely who Alexander put Roxane as his Queen over the two princesses. I think who, looking also to the other marriages he arranged is clear who Alexander intended make princess Stateira his Queen (and keep princess Parisatys as a spare) and he had all the reasons for doing it: first she was the daughter of his predecessor, King Darius and in Persia traditionally the rulers were legittimated by the royal women; second Alexander was accepted as King in Persia after being adopted by Sisygambis, the mother of Darius III, who was a princess by birth and he married the two princesses to strengthen his power and giving the crown to his adoptive mother's young granddaughter reinforced his ties with her; third Sisygambis had two other granddaughters: Dypretys, Stateira's younger sister, who Alexander selected as bride for Hephaestion, his dearest friend and right hand and Amestris, daughter of Sisygambis' younger son, who was given to Craterus, who Alexander sent back in Macedonia as new regent. And I think who this others two weddings are really telling about the identity of Alexander's intended Queen (you marry your predecessor daughter after his mother's support really helped you to take throne, then you marry her sister to your right hand and her cousin to another who is like your left hand and doing this if you plan to have another woman as your Queen is something really stupid and Alexander was anything but stupid)
Last edited: