WI: The Macedonian empire remained united after Alex the great died?

[Wr1t3r]

What if Alexander the great instituted a way for power to pass down to a single successor continuously, in a stable manner? I personally think that with a unified empire, the spread and influence of Hellenistic culture could have been more extensive and uniform. Alexander's campaigns had already begun the process of Hellenization, blending Greek culture with those of the East. A stable empire could have deepened cultural integration and exchanges, potentially altering the development of arts, science, and philosophy in the region.

 

[Captain Jack]

I think this is a case where the “how” of Alexander’s empire remaining united really dwarfs the rest of the scenario. We can imagine a lot of different scenarios for how Alexander’s empire remains intact after his death (and indeed on how Alexander dying at a different date would impact that). The specific scenario obviously determines much of the consequences.

That said, I do think we’d see more widespread and more intense hellenization of the East. Central Asia and Iran/Persia in particular, but also the empire’s Indian territories, whatever they may be. The Seleucids broadly preferred to rule their Iranian territories through co-opted local elites with hellenization and the placement of Greco-Macedonian settlers pretty sparse. I’m happy to be corrected, but IIRC there’s basically no evidence for significant hellenization and settlement outside of Susiana and Bactria. The secession of Bactria and then the rise of Parthia largely severed the direct connection between the eastern regions and the wider Hellenistic world. An enduring empire means that connection remains open which allow for the continued flow of Greek and Macedonian immigrants and stronger cultural influence. Given how rich Bactria apparently was it seems like it would be a popular destination. Moreover, the imperial government will have a strong incentive to push settlement in the region for both internal and external security given it’s a valuable place out on a distant and vulnerable frontier. I think that means Hellenistic culture in the region will be both more pervasive and more durable (although it wasn’t exactly fragile to begin with).

 

[Wr1t3r]

I think this is a case where the “how” of Alexander’s empire remaining united really dwarfs the rest of the scenario. We can imagine a lot of different scenarios for how Alexander’s empire remains intact after his death (and indeed on how Alexander dying at a different date would impact that). The specific scenario obviously determines much of the consequences.

Didn't I answer ''how'' by saying ''Alexander the great instituted a way for power to pass down to a single successor continuously, in a stable manner'' ?

 

[Evil Crusader]

Didn't I answer ''how'' by saying ''Alexander the great instituted a way for power to pass down to a single successor continuously, in a stable manner'' ?

Not really. Alexander instituting this ASAP, dying like OTL and the rules being respected is very much different from he ruling for another 30 years and instituting the same rules, who get respected, while he has an universally agreed and supported heir, which in turn is yet different from the same rules being chosen in a controversial moment and then upheld through a series of lucky events that ensure stability. Same "how" but three vastly different scenarios, as far as the people involved care (and different ways the Empire develops, too!).

 

[Wr1t3r]

Not really. Alexander instituting this ASAP, dying like OTL and the rules being respected is very much different from he ruling for another 30 years and instituting the same rules, who get respected, while he has an universally agreed and supported heir, which in turn is yet different from the same rules being chosen in a controversial moment and then upheld through a series of lucky events that ensure stability. Same "how" but three vastly different scenarios, as far as the people involved care (and different ways the Empire develops, too!).

After conquering the Achaemenid empire, he spends less time drinking, more time grooming a successor, and doing other things that would institute a way for power to pass down to a single successor continuously, in a stable manner

 

[Evil Crusader]

After conquering the Achaemenid empire, he spends less time drinking, more time grooming a successor, and doing other things that would institute a way for power to pass down to a single successor continuously, in a stable manner

Everybody liked that. (Read: too vague.)

 

[Wr1t3r]

Everybody liked that. (Read: too vague.)

ok, what if he sacrifice 11% of the time he spent drinking, instead spending half of this time on grooming his son for eventually succeeding him, the other half on Ptolemy, in case he (alex) dies before his son is old enough. This less drinking expands his lifespan just barely enough for him to see his 34th birthday. When he dies, Ptolemy takes over, then when Ptolemy dies, Alexander's son takes over.
Edit: Ptolemy or Alex's son, due to this extra guidance make Zoroastrianism the state religion, but incorporate some Greek mythology into it, by infusing Ahura Mazda with Zeus, and abolish slavery like the Achaemenids did.

 

[Evil Crusader]

There's good (useful) detail and there's bad detail.

ok, what if he sacrifice 11% of the time he spent drinking, instead spending half of this time on grooming his son for eventually succeeding him, the other half on Ptolemy, in case he (alex) dies before his son is old enough. This less drinking expands his lifespan just barely enough for him to see his 34th birthday. When he dies, Ptolemy takes over, then when Ptolemy dies, Alexander's son takes over.

This doesn't help us much grok the policies involved or their consequences; it's "bad detail". The useful detail is: what would be those succession rules? How are they framed ideologically? How is Ptolemy actually raised? What do others want and expect of him and what is the rough state of the Empire?

Edit: Ptolemy or Alex's son, due to this extra guidance make Zoroastrianism the state religion, but incorporate some Greek mythology into it, by infusing Ahura Mazda with Zeus, and abolish slavery like the Achaemenids did.

This Is instead "good detail" (meaningful one), but It comes with more challenges. Why Is Ptolemy doing that? What is the actual societal model underlying? How does abolishing slavery intersect with it?

Those are the questions that, when answered, give us a possible scenario (of many!) about the ATL that allows discussion to grow.

 

[Wr1t3r]

what would be those succession rules?

The grandson (through alex's son) who Alex's son finds to be the best successor, will succeed him

How is Ptolemy actually raised?

The same as in OTL

What do others want and expect of him and what is the rough state of the Empire?

Same as in OTL

Why Is Ptolemy doing that?

Because AtG tells him to.

What is the actual societal model underlying?

The Achaemenid and Macedonian empires.

How does abolishing slavery intersect with it?

Whatever you (and whoever else is reading this) thinks it is

 

[Pauh the federalist]

Have alexander name a relative as his successor or have him adopt and then name them successor like Augustus ceaser. Basically have any kind of normal successorship planned out years in advance and clearly documented and circulated instead of him (allegedly) leaving it "to the strongest".

 

[chornedsnorkack]

OTL, Alexander rejected the advice to marry before departing for Persian expedition.
But following the advice and marrying earlier would not have ensured stable single succession either.
How could Alexander groom a successor in a way that would encourage his successors to groom theirs in their turn?

 

[Wr1t3r]

Have alexander name a relative as his successor or have him adopt and then name them successor like Augustus ceaser. Basically have any kind of normal successorship planned out years in advance and clearly documented and circulated instead of him (allegedly) leaving it "to the strongest".

in an earlier comment I said his son would select whichever of his sons he sees as most fit and on and on

 

[Wr1t3r]

How could Alexander groom a successor in a way that would encourage his successors to groom theirs in their turn?

Well, as I said in an earlier comment, Alexander the Great sacrifices 11% of the time he spent drinking, instead spending half of this time on grooming his son for eventually succeeding him, the other half on Ptolemy, in case he (alex) dies before his son is old enough. This less drinking expands his lifespan just barely enough for him to see his 34th birthday. When he dies, Ptolemy takes over, then when Ptolemy dies, Alexander's son takes over. The throne passes down to whichever son of the previous emperor he deems most fit and Ptolemy, due to this extra guidance makes Zoroastrianism the state religion, but incorporate some Greek mythology into it, by infusing Ahura Mazda with Zeus, and abolishes slavery like the Achaemenids did. And Ptolemy grooms Alex's son for when he (ptolemy) dies

 

[RousseauX]

Well, as I said in an earlier comment, Alexander the Great sacrifices 11% of the time he spent drinking, instead spending half of this time on grooming his son for eventually succeeding him, the other half on Ptolemy, in case he (alex) dies before his son is old enough. This less drinking expands his lifespan just barely enough for him to see his 34th birthday. When he dies, Ptolemy takes over, then when Ptolemy dies, Alexander's son takes over. The throne passes down to whichever son of the previous emperor he deems most fit and Ptolemy, due to this extra guidance makes Zoroastrianism the state religion, but incorporate some Greek mythology into it, by infusing Ahura Mazda with Zeus, and abolishes slavery like the Achaemenids did. And Ptolemy grooms Alex's son for when he (ptolemy) dies

His son would be like 1 years old when Alex is 34, and would almost certainly be killed as part of a succession struggle that is endemic to both the Macedonian and Persian monarchies

For context his wife was pregnant with Alexander IV when Alexander died

When he dies, Ptolemy takes over, then when Ptolemy dies, Alexander's son takes over.

This is more or less what was suppose to happen OTL, except it was Perdiccas not Ptolemy who served as regent

 

[chornedsnorkack]

His son would be like 1 years old when Alex is 34, and would almost certainly be killed as part of a succession struggle that is endemic to both the Macedonian and Persian monarchies

For context his wife was pregnant with Alexander IV when Alexander died

That´s not quite almost certain.
Alexander IV had several unlucky breaks:

• He was son of a captive barbarian Roxane - Ptolemy called her out on it
• Roxane was a minor barbarian at that. Her family was not very useful in wars of Diadochi
• He was unborn
• Alexander ended up not leaving a clear designation of regent either

Now just suppose that Alexander takes the advice of Parmenion and takes a respectable Macedonian wife - and has the luck of leaving 1 living baby son in Macedon when departing in spring 334. Who has the luck to survive.
In 323 BC, it is 11 year old son, long acknowledged, of a Macedonian mother. How would the succession struggle go?

 

[RousseauX]

Now just suppose that Alexander takes the advice of Parmenion and takes a respectable Macedonian wife - and has the luck of leaving 1 living baby son in Macedon when departing in spring 334. Who has the luck to survive.
In 323 BC, it is 11 year old son, long acknowledged, of a Macedonian mother. How would the succession struggle go?

That comes with its own problems: because Alexander would be marrying into one of the prominent Macedonian baronial families, which are factionalized and by doing so he's inherently pissing off and leads to future conflicts. The one benefit of marrying non-Macedonian women is that at least you don't create cleavages within the Macedonian elite itself.

the fact that Alexander IV was only half-Macedonian was -not- that big of an issue after 323BC : the one person who tried to exploit it was Meleager's rebellion against Perdiccas, which was swiftly crushed.

In the end Alexander IV was killed not over his ethnicity but because Kassander wanted to be king of Macedon and Alexander's generals had already partitioned the empire and didn't want the inconvenience of an Argead lording over them.

The simple truth is that the rate of survival for child kings in both Persia and Macedon was dubious at best, a child king almost certainly gets killed by one faction or another

 

[Elfwine]

One challenge this empire is going to face is that if you do Alexander->Ptolemy->Alexander's-son->"A grandson of Alexander, right?" is what rulers do with eligible candidates for the throne that were not actually chosen is going to come up for everyone after Alexander.

By saying Ptolemy becomes king after Alexander, and saying this is accepted, what we have as as a consequence is that "potential candidates" in the time of Alexander IV don't have to be descendants of the previous ruler, or even of the Argead dynasty. I don't mean that this means the empire collapses no matter what - Rome managed to endure for centuries despite the same issue as relates to that "legitimate ruler" and "de facto ruler" are basically the same thing, but it is a thing that would shape how things develop from there.

You might see it become in practice all but hereditary primogeniture (Rome, eventually) eventually, you might see some other way to resolve this (though with that the ruler doesn't even have to be of the "right dynasty", something comparable to how the Ottomans avoided civil war after the death of a sultan isn't even feasible) - but that issue, and the attempts to work around it, are going to profoundly impact the empire.

In 323 BC, it is 11 year old son, long acknowledged, of a Macedonian mother. How would the succession struggle go?

Not comfortably, judging by the issues faced by - most recently - Amyntas III, Alexander II, and Perdiccas III.

 

[RousseauX]

One challenge this empire is going to face is that if you do Alexander->Ptolemy->Alexander's-son->"A grandson of Alexander, right?" is what rulers do with eligible candidates for the throne that were not actually chosen is going to come up for everyone after Alexander.

By saying Ptolemy becomes king after Alexander, and saying this is accepted, what we have as as a consequence is that "potential candidates" in the time of Alexander IV don't have to be descendants of the previous ruler, or even of the Argead dynasty. I don't mean that this means the empire collapses no matter what - Rome managed to endure for centuries despite the same issue as relates to that "legitimate ruler" and "de facto ruler" are basically the same thing, but it is a thing that would shape how things develop from there.

You might see it become in practice all but hereditary primogeniture (Rome, eventually) eventually, you might see some other way to resolve this (though with that the ruler doesn't even have to be of the "right dynasty", something comparable to how the Ottomans avoided civil war after the death of a sultan isn't even feasible) - but that issue, and the attempts to work around it, are going to profoundly impact the empire.



Not comfortably, judging by the issues faced by - most recently - Amyntas III, Alexander II, and Perdiccas III.

Ptolmey would off Alexander IV within a couple of years in this scenario

 

[Elfwine]

Ptolmey would off Alexander IV within a couple of years in this scenario

Most likely. If not, I really don't want to see how ugly a war between Ptolmey's son/s (not necessarily working together) and Alexander's son is.

"Male preference primogeniture" has a lot of issues, but it does avoid the near-requirement for bloodshed over the succession.

 

[Wr1t3r]

For context his wife was pregnant with Alexander IV when Alexander died

Now just suppose that Alexander takes the advice of Parmenion and takes a respectable Macedonian wife - and has the luck of leaving 1 living baby son in Macedon when departing in spring 334. Who has the luck to survive.
In 323 BC, it is 11 year old son, long acknowledged, of a Macedonian mother. How would the succession struggle go?

One challenge this empire is going to face is that if you do Alexander->Ptolemy->Alexander's-son->"A grandson of Alexander, right?" is what rulers do with eligible candidates for the throne that were not actually chosen is going to come up for everyone after Alexander.

ok then, what if he names Ptolemy his successor, and spends 11% of the time he spent drinking on preparing Ptolemy for his death, and this less drinking only prolongs AtG's life for 6 or so weaks. And Ptolemy still does what I said with regards to Greek mythology & Zoroastrianism