Say Pausanias gets cold feet and doesn't kill Philip of Macedon. How do things pan out from there?
WI: Philip of Macedon not assassinated?
- Thread starter Fabius Maximus
- Start date
I would love to read a ATL about this! I guess he would invade Persia himself? Alexander no more the heir of the kingdom?
IOTL Philip was actually making preparations for an invasion when he was killed. I'm guessing he wouldn't conquer the whole of Persia like Alexander did, but any empire he did conquer would be more likely to survive his death.
Commando Howiezter
Banned
Philip might just build the more stable empire that Alexander didn't, albeit smaller. But hey, that means more for Alexander to conquer when he does show up 
. With all the wealth he gain, Philip might finally solve the Macedonian succession crisis, solidify the empire, and create a long lasting superpower. And then, Alexander grows up, and having even more resources then he did OTL, as well as benefitting from Philip's reforms, he might very well take down what he did OTL and then some, very possibly a good chunk of India, maybe Arabia, what with him having access to the manpower of the near east, which is quite significant. He will also, due to butterflies, probably have a clear legitimate son, and his generals instead of fighting each other can conquer even more land even if Alexander is dead. Even if his newest additions fall away, his successor, assuming at least competent, can and will reunify them.
This builds up to a huge empire, and if the generals have to say anything, it will only get bigger. Carthage, Magna Graecia, Italia, the Bosporous, even the far reaches of Ibeira and Gaul (there were Greek colonies there OTL) are not off limits to this superpower. And, if the Romans have showed us anything, is that such empires are possible and can be very successful. Spanning southern Gaul, Iberia, Maurentia, Africa, Magna Graecia, Italia, Macedonia, Hellas, Aegyptos, Persia, India, Arabia....we would most likely see massive extension of the OTL Perisan road, as well as fast advancements in communication technolgy. Islam and Christianity never exists, and either the Pantheon becomes the adopted Religon, or some form of Greco Buddhism does.....
The barbarians will never get the oppurtunity to be strong in OTL, and....
I'm probably getting ahead of myself. This is of course,assuming the best case scenario.....
. With all the wealth he gain, Philip might finally solve the Macedonian succession crisis, solidify the empire, and create a long lasting superpower. And then, Alexander grows up, and having even more resources then he did OTL, as well as benefitting from Philip's reforms, he might very well take down what he did OTL and then some, very possibly a good chunk of India, maybe Arabia, what with him having access to the manpower of the near east, which is quite significant. He will also, due to butterflies, probably have a clear legitimate son, and his generals instead of fighting each other can conquer even more land even if Alexander is dead. Even if his newest additions fall away, his successor, assuming at least competent, can and will reunify them. This builds up to a huge empire, and if the generals have to say anything, it will only get bigger. Carthage, Magna Graecia, Italia, the Bosporous, even the far reaches of Ibeira and Gaul (there were Greek colonies there OTL) are not off limits to this superpower. And, if the Romans have showed us anything, is that such empires are possible and can be very successful. Spanning southern Gaul, Iberia, Maurentia, Africa, Magna Graecia, Italia, Macedonia, Hellas, Aegyptos, Persia, India, Arabia....we would most likely see massive extension of the OTL Perisan road, as well as fast advancements in communication technolgy. Islam and Christianity never exists, and either the Pantheon becomes the adopted Religon, or some form of Greco Buddhism does.....
The barbarians will never get the oppurtunity to be strong in OTL, and....
I'm probably getting ahead of myself. This is of course,assuming the best case scenario.....