An open question: Alexander's *true* successor?

[Spec73r]

Hail Basileu!

I'm keen to see everyone's opinions on which of Alexander's successor kingdoms you believe truely deserves to inherit his conquest. (Macedon, Seleucid, Ptolemy, Baktria?)

Please post opinons and specifically why.

Lets please keep this more civil than Raphia ;)

Cheers!

(Personally i'd choose Macedon, but open to suggestions)

[Xautos]

Alexander was from Macedonia according what little histoical evidence exists. as for successor states? none of them were worthy enough to claim it because none of them had the power to overthrow the others and their leaders were only interested in trying to become the next alexander.

[Ëvïlnïck8 ゴゴゴ]

Alexander was an Macedonian and fought his way to be leader of all of Greece.
He then coquered most of the known world.
Im sure that the Greek city states would rather not be under Macedon rule. And since Macedon didnt had the power to keep all hte conqeured lands into its hands most of the land would end up in someone elses hands.
And since no-one had the power to keep all the lands the lands were divided into smaller nations.

[Khorps]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nerA6v7EUM

[EoNightcore]

The Greeks once rule the world.

Alexander did.

He took a Greek army to the far Indus. There was nothing left to conquer. The world was his.

But Alexander is dead. His empire is gone. And so those who succeed the pieces of his empire live in evil days.

The free men of Greece have turned on each other, instead of their proper enemies - those who envy all the Greeks have done. Alexander must weep - if the dead weep.

They who have succeeded his will would weep in his place, for the world turns.

What was no longer is. The Fates spin the web of men's lives. And now, the gods wish the Romans to be great. Their generals have taken up the sword once wielded by Alexander. Brought order where there is chaos. And with it, they have remade the world of men into their image.



None of those kingdoms are worthy of inheiriting Alexander's empire, for none of them could hold most of it. Ha, most of their descendents couldn't even hold their pieces of Alexander's empire, which were lost to foreign empires.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

Well if this vid's to be believed: https://youtu.be/7mGP_UHfmIE?t=2m28s The Seleucids might be as Seleucus shortly before his assassination in 281 BC (11 years before game start) united all the land from Macedon itself all the way to India, basically only missing Ptolemic Egypt from fully uniting Alexander's empire. Seleucus was also the last remaining successor who actually fought with Alexander before his assassination.

[EoNightcore]

Originally posted by richnathaniel9419:

Well if this vid's to be believed: https://youtu.be/7mGP_UHfmIE?t=2m28s The Seleucids might be as Seleucus shortly before his assassination in 281 BC (11 years before game start) united all the land from Macedon itself all the way to India, basically only missing Ptolemic Egypt from fully uniting Alexander's empire. Seleucus was also the last remaining successor who actually fought with Alexander before his assassination.

I stand corrected.

[Spec73r]

great response thanks! I'm also partial to the Seleucids as they controlled Babylonia - Alexander's intended capital

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

That gives even more legitimacy to the Seleucids as Seleucus started as Satrap of Babylonia.

[Xautos]

The man who started that whole Selucid empire was a betrayer but as as much as he betrayed his allies, he relied heavily on his assumed allies to help him establish his kingdom only to end up being assassinated before he could reach europe by ironically by a Ptolemy of the same lineage, considering Seleucus needed their support to set up his own empire anyway. He never managed to challenge Thrace or Macedon at any point.

In the end he was not worthy because he could not be trusted.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

So you'd say Ptolemy and his Egyptian kingdom was most worthy? It lasted longer so that helps.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by richnathaniel9419:

So you'd say Ptolemy and his Egyptian kingdom was most worthy? It lasted longer so that helps.

i never said it were. even so those egyptians didn't last much longer than the other successor kingdoms anyway when the romans were done with them.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

So which one then?

[Xautos]

Originally posted by richnathaniel9419:

So which one then?

not bother reading to the first reply i put out?

Originally posted by Xautos:

Alexander was from Macedonia according what little histoical evidence exists. as for successor states? none of them were worthy enough to claim it because none of them had the power to overthrow the others and their leaders were only interested in trying to become the next alexander.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

You could still say which one you thought was closest to being worthy.

[Lin Huichi]

Alexanders true successor was his little baby boy. None of these upstart general pretenders.