Philip II of Macedon

[Derek Pullem]

An Egyptian Phalanx was a remarkable success. I don't think that Persians were somehow inferior to the Egyptians.

Actually Ptolemaic (Egyptian) phalanxes were generally inferior to the veterans / greek mercenary phalangites in a one on one (phalanx) fight. Where possible even the Ptolemy's preferred to use Greeks in the phalanx. It was only a hundred years later that Egyptians formed most of the phalanx at Raphia

 

[Russian]

It was only a hundred years later that Egyptians formed most of the phalanx at Raphia

It was an experiment which was an extraordinary success.
It proved that idea of Alexander the Great to create a phalanx out of Persian boys was not a folly at all.

* By the way Egyptian phalanx at Raphia broke the myth of 'racial' superiority of Greeks and Macedonians.

 

[Hero of Canton]

An Egyptian Phalanx was a remarkable success. I don't think that Persians were somehow inferior to the Egyptians.

It is that obvious, isn't it? My guess is that Phillip II (the most gifted politician of his time) understood that as well.

I would bet on Phillip assassinating her first.
He was a political genius. She was just a woman.

A VERY dangerously competant woman! If it came to it he would not need to have her assassinated, he could just order her executed. It would very likely be necessary to also execute Alexander if he did though. Hmm....interesting ATL would be her execution sparking a Macedonian civil war between Philip and Alexander.

Hero of Canton

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

It was an experiment which was an extraordinary success.
It proved that idea of Alexander the Great to create a phalanx out of Persian boys was not a folly at all.

* By the way Egyptian phalanx at Raphia broke the myth of 'racial' superiority of Greeks and Macedonians.

And it led to a large uprising that lasted twenty years which nearly kicked out the Ptolemies from power in Egypt and almost left the native Egyptians in charge of the country. The Ptolemies made sure that the foreign troops like the Greco-Macedonians were much better armed than the natives and for very good reason.

 

[Derek Pullem]

It was an experiment which was an extraordinary success.
It proved that idea of Alexander the Great to create a phalanx out of Persian boys was not a folly at all.

* By the way Egyptian phalanx at Raphia broke the myth of 'racial' superiority of Greeks and Macedonians.

Well that might be going a bit too far - 25,000 "greeks" and 20,000 Egyptians beat 30,000 "greek" phalangites. It demonstrated that "god is on the side of the big battallions" especially if the Egyptians were facing mainly lightly armed arabs.

Persian phalangites could be trained but it would probably take longer than Darius had (or whoever succeded him after he lost to Phillip) to be effective

 

[Magnum]

While doing research for my Blood & Gold TL, an interesting scenario occurred to me:

WI Philip II of Macedon had not been assassinated in 336 B.C. and instead gone on to invade Persia instead of his son? I know that this has been asked before, but, suppose after winning several victories against Darius III, the Persian King offers him half of his domains (i.e. everything west of the Euphrates) as in OTL with Alexander, and Philip, being the pragmatist he is, accepts (let's say it leaves him with Asia Minor, Syria and the Levant, Egypt and possibly also parts of Mesopotamia). Perhaps he also offers him 50,000 golden talents and the hand of one of his daughters as in OTL.

So, what happens now in this scenario (assuming Philip consolidates his holdings)?

I remember starting a new list on the "List monarchs" game some time ago with exactly this premise. Boy did that get out of hand...

Anyway, as others have stated, I think Alexander is going to pounce on the Persians at the first change he gets and will probably defeat them easily if he doesn't get himself killed. He might even take advantage of a possible persian civil war given that Darius is not going to be exactly popular after his performance in the war.

 

[Russian]

A VERY dangerously competant woman!

I was always wandering why people usually consider Alexander's mother to be something.
She was ambitious that's right. But that's it.
Whatever she tried she failed. The only thing worth mentioning she produced was her son, Alexander the Great.

If it came to it he would not need to have her assassinated, he could just order her executed. It would very likely be necessary to also execute Alexander if he did though. Hmm....interesting ATL would be her execution sparking a Macedonian civil war between Philip and Alexander.

That's why if I were Phillip I would not execute her, I would assassinate her (better poison her or something unsuspecting like traveling accident).
The same goes for Alexander.

And it led to a large uprising that lasted twenty years which nearly kicked out the Ptolemies from power in Egypt and almost left the native Egyptians in charge of the country. The Ptolemies made sure that the foreign troops like the Greco-Macedonians were much better armed than the natives and for very good reason.

That's what I call an excellent example that with good training 'asians', non-Greeks could make a good infantry (phalanx).